[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] the Russia investigation. It's Matt Whitaker who has been openly hostile toward the Mueller investigation on T.V. and social media. I want to bring in Jeffrey Toobin, a former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst, and CNN political analysts David Gregory and Carl Bernstein. Carl, I want to start with you. We're going to talk about Mueller a lot. I do want to give you a moment to reflect on what we're seeing this morning 12 people killed in a mass shooting. And I've said it many times this morning the deadliest mass shooting in 12 days in the United States and that's the part that should stick with us.
[Carl Bernstein, Cnn Political Analyst, Journalist, Author:] Well, as journalists, I think we need to find some new way to cover these shootings as part of a national pathology. I don't know the answer but I do believe we need to dig deep into, as we have with racial questions in the past. Perhaps we've had commissions, one thing and another, but what is this about that makes us somewhat unique that these events keep repeating themselves in the horrible fashion that they do? And again, I think there's a journalistic challenge but I don't know the answer to it.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, no one does. I mean, we just feel helpless. We just report on it over and over.
[Bernstein:] Well, I think there's a deeper story. I think there's a deeper story. Again, I use the word national pathology. I don't know what that is but I think there is a journalistic task at hand as well, obviously, a task for our leaders, both moral, political, business everyone to start looking at why this is the kind of part of our culture that it is.
[Berman:] Jeffrey, I want to move to the Mueller investigation if I can because the last 24 hours, it's not just another day.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Right.
[Berman:] It is not just another day.
[Toobin:] Right.
[Berman:] The president fired the attorney general of the United States demanded his resignation, but it's a firing and replaced him. The acting attorney general is a man, by all accounts, who was chosen because he is hostile to the Mueller investigation.
[Toobin:] And he's now in charge of the Mueller investigation. And the question is what will he do to manifest to make real his hostility to the Mueller investigation? Obviously, at one extreme, he can fire Mueller. It doesn't appear like he's going to that imminently. But as he, himself Mr. Whitaker has talked about, he could limit the budget, he could limit the jurisdiction, he could limit the kinds of investigatory tools he can use. He can say I am not going to allow you to subpoena the President of the United States. That's my order as your supervisor. So, how Whitaker implements his control of the Mueller investigation is now the is now the big question for him. We know it's going to be different than Rod Rosenstein
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Toobin:] because he has a Rod Rosenstein has been supportive of Mueller from day one.
[Camerota:] And, David Gregory, what we know is that Whitaker does not believe that Robert Mueller has broad, far-reaching powers. He believes it should be a more narrow parameter. He has said as much in an op-ed and in television. So now what?
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, right. That's the important question. And no doubt, he got this job because he passed the most important test, which was supporting the president on television. And the president has said that he wants there's the bigger of the question of the loyalty that this president demands that he wants an attorney general to protect him. Now, look, this is so far down the line this investigation. My initial thought was would the president really want the consequences that would come with shutting down the probe? But this is also a president who threatened to use his Senate majority to resist any check and balance that would come from the House that is now controlled by Democrats. So I can answer my presumed naivety by saying he would do anything. The question is what will Congress do, right? So if there's any attempt to, say, limit or cut off an expansion of the probe or to force the conclusion of the investigation presumably, Mueller has thought about this. And as I talked to lawyers yesterday and this is a question for Jeffrey if he's got a report, and let's say it's ready to go, could he already have the authority from Rosenstein to send that to Congress? Could he have if there's indictments, could he have those under seal? And is Whitaker in a position, potentially, to countermand that? And then, the question about Congress. Republicans in the Senate, Mitch McConnell and others, have said that Mueller should be able to finish his work. In light of the midterm elections, you know, some expansion of the majority in the Senate will they stick to that? That's the leadership test.
[Toobin:] Can I just address one of the very important points that David just raised the report. Under the regulation under which Mueller is appointed, the report goes to his supervisor
[Gregory:] Yes.
[Toobin:] now, Whitaker, the acting attorney general. Whitaker is under no the regulation does not say specifically what he's supposed to do with that.
[Berman:] He can take it home.
[Toobin:] He could take it home
[Berman:] Leave it in the night safe.
[Toobin:] leave it in a safe, and never share it with anyone. Or he could make it public, he could send it to Congress. I mean, this is one of the most critical responsibilities that Whitaker now has as the supervisor of the Mueller investigation. What does he do with this report that he will receive and it may be more than one report? One report, in the some reporting I've done, suggests that there will be a report that Mueller does about obstruction of justice about the firing of James Comey, separate from any report about the Russia part of his
[Berman:] Let me let me
[Bernstein:] Let me make a suggestion on one other aspect here.
[Berman:] Hang on one second. Just one second just one second, Carl. And my understanding also, Whitaker could literally stand in the way of an indictment if he wanted to. If Mueller wanted to indict someone tomorrow or this week, Whitaker could say no.
[Toobin:] Absolutely.
[Berman:] All right. Go ahead, Carl.
[Bernstein:] I think we need to look at this in a larger context of Donald Trump trying to both spy on the Mueller investigation himself and constrain it. And I say that based on some knowledge, not just speculation, because what I was told as were some other people working on these stories before the election that after Election Day, Trump was determined to constrain, bury the Mueller investigation. To look toward what he was going to do in terms of, perhaps, pardons. But his great frustration, as anyone around him will tell you, has been he doesn't know what's going on in the Mueller investigation. He now has unless Whitaker has is going to immediately recuse himself, he now has a spy camera into the investigation.
[Gregory:] Well, you but you also, Carl, have
[Bernstein:] Jeffrey, do you do you think that is right?
[Toobin:] Well, yes, but he is the supervisor.
[Bernstein:] This has been what he has lost and not had. It's one of the reasons that he wanted to fire Comey.
[Berman:] Yes.
[Bernstein:] Comey wouldn't tell him what was going on in the investigation. He now has the ability to know what's going on, including how that office Mr. Mueller is looking at his son-in-law, at his son. So, Trump now is in
[Gregory:] But he may already know a lot of things that are making him upset, you know. I mean, that's
[Bernstein:] Yes. He knows things that are making him upset. But I can tell you that I have heard from people around Trump his frustration is partly he does not know and has not known
[Gregory:] Right.
[Camerota:] As much as he wants.
[Bernstein:] the big aspects of this investigation are about.
[Gregory:] And but let's also point that the guardrails that have been in place, you know, whether it was Don McGahn, his counsel, whether it was the attorney general or whether it was Republican leaders telling him not to fire Mueller. Not to act on any of those impulses. Are those now removed? I mean, the one question I've had is he had the ability to fire Rosenstein before. Remember, "The New York Times" reporting about him suggesting, they said jokingly, about people wearing a wire and resisting the president, et cetera. We know he's wanted to fire Sessions since the very beginning. He what gave him pause or at least those around him was oh, it would have these terrible consequences politically, and he held off.
[Camerota:] After the midterms.
[Gregory:] Now, does he now throw all of that out? Is he not worried about the consequences for himself for 2020? I don't know the answer to that
[Camerota:] Well, I mean
[Gregory:] but he exercised some restraint.
[Camerota:] I think we know of some of the answers that he did it seconds after the midterms.
[Gregory:] Right.
[Camerota:] He did it seconds there were still results coming in.
[Berman:] There still are results coming.
[Camerota:] There still are results coming in. Twenty-twenty is a long way away.
[Toobin:] Well, but the political scenario has changed in a
[Berman:] Yes.
[Toobin:] different way as well. Democrats now control the House of Representatives.
[Gregory:] Right.
[Toobin:] He also has to be concerned about the Judiciary Committee subpoenaing Robert Mueller to testify about what's going on. So
[Berman:] Two months from now. Two months from now, but it will happen if anything
[Toobin:] Yes.
[Berman:] if anything like that goes on. Jeffrey Toobin, Carl Bernstein, David Gregory, thank you very much.
[Gregory:] Thanks.
[Camerota:] Of course, we're staying on top of the breaking news this morning. Another deadly mass shooting in America. Twelve people killed in a Southern California bar. We have many more details, next.

[Paul:] It's 14 minutes past the hour. President Trump is in Paris right now. A short time he and first lady, Melania Trump, of course, left the palace after lunch with their French counterparts. President Trump and the French president Macron held talks earlier today after President Trump had blasted President Macron over NATO payments, he did it over Twitter. President Trump is in Paris with other world leaders to commemorate 100 years since end of the First World War.
[Blackwell:] CNN White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins is live from Paris for us this morning. Kaitlan, good morning. The president set the agenda before he actually stepped onto French soil there.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] He did. It was about three minutes after Air Force One landed here. President Trump had not even gotten off Air Force One yet when he sent the tweet criticizing the French president, Emmanuel Macron, for something he said in a radio interview several days ago, something that clearly bothered President Trump. Now, President Trump, this of course the backdrop of this, just to get the viewers up to speed, announced that the U.S. is going to withdraw from the INF treaty. That is that nuclear arms pact that President Ronald Reagan signed with Russia back in the 1980s. and President Trump decided we're withdrawing from it, the U.S. And President Macron was critical of that, saying the person that is the most victimized from that is Europe and its security. He says they are laid bare from that, and because of that decision from President Trump, he was going to need to build up the European military and make it more robust. That's clearly something that bothered President Trump when he sent the tweet late last night shortly after he landed here in Paris, saying he took offense to that, and then bringing up that NATO spending, something that he has criticized several European leaders of during his two years almost as the U.S. president. Of course, that essentially set the stage for conflict this morning. That tweet right there, "President Macron of France has just suggested Europe build up its own military in order to protect itself from the U.S., China and Russia," clearly saying that "perhaps if Europe should first pay its fair share of NATO which the U.S. subsidizes greatly." That really set the stage for those first talks this morning, meeting one on one, that very awkward interaction where there was no warmth between these two leaders, even though typically there's a lot of backslapping. President Trump once remarked in the Oval Office that he thought President Macron was perfect. That is not what we saw this morning. Instead it was a stiffer interaction, much more wooden, between those two leaders. Now, we are told by sources that they did discuss those comments during the bilateral meeting later one on one and then when their staffs, and that they tried to clear the air there. This afternoon, President Trump is supposed to visit a cemetery where Americans are buried after World War I. But instead the White House has cancelled that, citing the bad weather here in Paris because he was supposed to take a helicopter. So instead, he has got about a seven hour stretch between that luncheon with the French president and before dinner tonight. So we could expect some tweets during that period.
[Paul:] All right.
[Blackwell:] Kaitlan Collins for us there, thank you so much.
[Paul:] CNN national security analyst Samantha Vinograd with us right now. Samantha, good to see you. President Trump, as we said, tweeted on arrival in Paris there about NATO, and then of course you also saw the meeting between President Trump and President Macron. Reconcile those two moments for us and how you where do you go from there?
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] I wish the wi-fi hadn't worked on Air Force One when he landed on the tarmac, because criticizing your host when you arrive for a commemoration celebration definitely sets the wrong tone for meetings going forward. Unfortunately at this point I think Emmanuel Macron was probably expecting President Trump to play his greatest hits when he arrived on European soil. And one of those greatest hits continues to be misrepresenting how NATO spending and how the NATO budget is funded. NATO members are supposed to pay two percent GDP. The U.S. chooses to spend more than two percent of our GDP on NATO spending because we have other priorities around the world. That, again, is our choice. There's something that Macron said that's getting a little bit less attention, though, Christi, that President Trump references in his tweet, which is Macron grouped the United States with Russia and China as threats. Imagine that France, one of our allies in World War I, World War II, and through the present day, is grouping us with Russia and China. Russia just tried to murder someone using chemical weapons on European soil, China is described by the White House itself as one of our rival power, so France is no longer sensibly considering us an ally they can depend on. They're putting us in the same bucket as Russia China.
[Paul:] Is there indication that that is because of the U.S. as a whole or is that a reflection of this administration?
[Vinograd:] I think it seems to be a reflection of this administration. It's worth nothing that according to recent polling, President Trump has a 10 percent approval rating in France. President Obama had dramatically higher numbers than that, so it does seem like French perceptions of the United States have gone down. And there are a lot of policy differences. The Macron- Trump meeting earlier I hope touched on some of those, whether it be Iran policy, whether it be climate change, or any number of issues that we still have so much distance on. I think that Macron and other European leaders are very concerned that we're not reliable and very concerned about the nationalism that President Trump espouses at a time when Macron has been speaking out about the rise of nationalism in Europe. He just met with someone, the president of the United States, who has self-described himself as a nationalist. That definitely is creating a schism.
[Paul:] Correct me if I'm wrong here, but President Macron doesn't exactly have great approval ratings in his country either. I think he's at 20 percent. So with that said, how important is this interaction right now between both presidents?
[Vinograd:] It is interesting, because from a political perspective, and you know that I look at national security, but in a lot of ways President Macron criticizing President Trump could score him some points back home. President Trump is not popular, and President Macron at the beginning of his administration when he was more popular invested a lot in his relationship with Trump. President Trump visited Europe. Macron went to the White House. And then President Trump made disparaging statements about him and trade deals and that sort of thing. So Macron could get some bit of a bump from the President Trump interaction.
[Paul:] Sam Vinograd, always appreciate your insight, thank you.
[Vinograd:] Thanks, Christi.
[Blackwell:] Still no winners in a couple of really important races in the state of Florida. The two major races plagued by voter irregularities still yet to be decided. A live report on what happens next.
[Paul:] And families in the Thousand Oaks community in California are demanding tougher gun control after that mass shooting that killed a dozen people. We'll have more on that.

[Howell:] An amazing medical development to tell you about in the state of Florida. A young woman was paralyzed four years ago, and doctors told her that she would never walk again. But a breakthrough technology has changed all of that. Our senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen has this story for you.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Senior Medical Correspondent:] At age 19, Kelly Thomas a young woman raised on a cattle farm, an avid equestrian was injured in a rollover truck accident.
[Kelly Thomas, Paralysis Patient:] I broke my neck at C7-T1 and got a spinal cord injury.
[Cohen:] She was paralyzed from the chest down. Her doctors told her she would never walk again. But in February, three years after her accident, Thomas defied them all, taking these first steps. How did that feel?
[Thomas:] I cried.
[Cohen:] This small device, put her back on her feet. Surgically implanted, it sends electrical impulses to her spine. They mimicked the signals her brain used to send before her accident. And after seven months, Thomas has made even more progress. She can walk around her house, walk into her bathroom and see her reflection standing in the mirror. She can walk along her front porch or through grass in her yard that's harder to traverse.
[Thomas:] I can walk into the library or walk into dinner with friends. It makes me feel normal again.
[Cohen:] She showed me how. Your simulator is off right now.
[Thomas:] Correct.
[Cohen:] Can you move your legs?
[Thomas:] I can't.
[Cohen:] Now, let's see you turn it on.
[Thomas:] With this setting that I have selected, I can move my leg.
[Cohen:] That's amazing. Her phenomenal accomplishment is reported this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. In the study by researchers at the University of Louisville, four paralyzed patients were implanted with the device. Two of them, Thomas in this man were able to walk again after intense physical training. Another study out this week, this one from the Mayo Clinic, confirms these findings. The researchers report that one of their paralyzed patients also walked after getting a stimulator but with assistance. You were paralyzed. You could not move your legs, and now you can walk.
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Cohen:] What word would you use to describe how that feels?
[Thomas:] It's out of this world it really is.
[Cohen:] Each step is exhilarating and exhausting.
[Thomas:] Come on, feet.
[Cohen:] This is hard work. You don't just turn on the simulator and go.
[Thomas:] That's absolutely right. It's not a quick fix to being paralyzed. Every single step, I have to focus.
[Cohen:] She hopes others one day will experience a similar transformation.
[Thomas:] Nothing's going to be able to stop me in life because I took something that was thought to be impossible and I turned it into possible.
[Cohen:] Elizabeth Cohen, CNN, Lecanto, Florida.
[Howell:] Elizabeth, thank you. And thank you for being with us for this hour of CNN NEWSROOM. I'm George Howell at the CNN center in Atlanta. Let's do it again. Another hour of news right after the break. Stay with us.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Early this morning, crews in Maryland removed a controversial statue, this time the statue of Supreme Court Chief Justice Chief Justice of the United States, Roger Taney, who defended slavery. The move came just hours after President Trump defended statues with links to the confederacy calling them beautiful, saying that the removal rips apart American history and culture. That is not how Florida Congressman Ted Deutch sees it. He wrote, this was never about the statues and the president knows it. And this is what the congressman has said about the Charlottesville protests. Will POTUS look into the eyes of a Holocaust survivor and tell her that even one Nazi swastika flag is OK? Congressman Ted Deutch joins us right now. Congressman, thank you so much for being with us. This was never about statues. What do you mean?
[Rep. Ted Deutch , Foreign Affairs, Judiciary And Ethics Committees:] Well, the president knows this was never about statues. Anyone who watched what happened in Charlottesville last weekend knows that what it was about was hatred, racism, bigotry and anti-Semitism. And for anyone who thought otherwise, including the president of the United States, to look at the video of people shouting racial epithets, chanting about Jews, carrying torches and harkening back to a time in this country that we have moved past, they didn't see we don't see fine people. Only the president saw fine people there. That's why it's time for the United States Congress to hold the president accountable.
[Berman:] How?
[Deutch:] Well, we've seen just over the past few days we've seen building pressure, part of it because others outside of Congress have stepped up. The CEOs who walked away from the advisory councils, those in who had been supporters of the president who have criticized him for the outrageous response to what happened in Charlottesville. Because of that, we've seen some Republican colleagues of mine tweet about their displeasure, even going so far as to perhaps condemn, call into question the moral authority, the president's moral authority.
[Berman:] Well, congressman, you're saying you're saying
[Deutch:] Yes, but
[I -- Berman:] You're saying hold him accountable. There are some Democrats who want to pass some kind of a censure measure in Congress. Is that something you support?
[Deutch:] I do. That's exactly what needs to happen. The point I was getting to, John, is that tweets don't make a historical record. This is as important moment in the history of the United States. When the president look at Nazis and Klu Klux Klan and white supremacists and sees fine people and says all sides are to blame. So we shouldn't rely on tweets. When we go back to Washington, the United States House and the United States Senate should have an opportunity to vote on a censure resolution to hold the president accountable so that our grandchildren and great grandchildren will know that at a moment in history, when the president saw something different than the overwhelming majority of us in the United States, that the Congress, on behalf of the American people, stood up and said, that is wrong, that is unacceptable.
[Berman:] And, congressman, do you think that is of a higher priority now? Would you like to see Congress act on that before something that other members of Congress have called for, which is the removal of any confederate statues from the Capitol?
[Deutch:] Well, as I as I said, I don't I don't think this is about statues. Of course those confederate statues should be removed. But it's because of what they represent, which is what the march in Charlottesville represents, which is hatred and bigotry and anti- Semitism. John, my father earned a Purple Heart when the Nazis put shrapnel into his head in the Battle of the Bulge. How it is that anyone can look at what happened and say that there were fine people marching with nose Nazis is beyond me. And, yes, Congress this is not complicated, John. This is a moment for Democrats and Republicans to come together to make an historical record that the United States Congress and the people we represent are appalled, appalled and disgusted when the president of the United States looks at what happens and tries to provide cover for the anti- Semites and the racists who were marching in Charlottesville.
[Berman:] They were chancing Jew will not replace us. I do want to ask you about a Missouri Democratic senator, Senator Maria Chappelle Nadal, who wrote, I hope Trump is assassinated. Here are some people who now by the way, she ultimately removed that tweet. There are some people who say that this state senator should step down, should resign. How do you see it?
[Deutch:] I it's the first I've heard of it. It's awful. I mean, look, we have we have great disagreements with the president. I've made that clear with today and with you before. But we should never no one should ever call for violence, not against the president, not against anyone. And that's again, that's why what's what happened in Charlottesville and the discussions that we're having right now are so important because we have to stand up to those purveyors of hate, and the racists, the anti-Semites, the white supremacists who marched down the street. We all looked at that and were disgusted. Everyone should be disgusted. Congress needs to go on record making that clear for the American people.
[Berman:] Should anyone who ever holds office say something like that, congressman?
[Deutch:] No one who holds office should ever talk like that. Of course not.
[Berman:] All right, Representative Ted Deutch of Florida, thank you so much for your time today. A wonderful story about your father, as well. Obviously we honor him now and forever. All right, the president lashing out, Republicans digging in. Mitt Romney now with a stunning new statement directly condemning the president's words. How will the party recover?

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. president Donald Trump angers two of his closest allies in his speech to the biggest U.S. gun rights group and now Britain and France are hitting back and blasting the president for his remarks. Also it is Election Day in Lebanon for the first time in nearly a decade, with a record number of female candidates. Also still no relief in sight for the hundreds of people displaced by the continuing volcanic eruptions in Hawaii. We'll talk with an expert about what's going on. Welcome to our viewers here in the U.S. and around the world. We are coming to you live from Atlanta. I'm Natalie Allen. NEWSROOM starts right now.
[Allen:] U.S. President Donald Trump is angering not one but two of America's closest allies. France is upset over comments Mr. Trump made about the November 15 terror attacks in Paris. At least 130 people were killed, hundreds were wounded. Mr. Trump was speaking at a convention for the largest gun rights organization, the National Rifle Association, on Friday when he said this.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] Paris, France, has the toughest gun laws in the world. And we all remember more than 130 people...they died in a restaurant and various other close proximity places. They were brutally killed by a small group of terrorists that had guns. They took their time and gunned them down one by one boom, come over here, boom, come over here, boom. If you were in those rooms, one of those people and the survivors said it just lasted forever. But, if one employee or just one patron had a gun or if one person in this room had been there with a gun, aimed at the opposite direction, the terrorists would have fled.
[Allen:] Francois Hollande, seen here with France's president at the time of the attack, he called Mr. Trump's comments, quote, "shameful." The French foreign ministry issued a statement expressing its firm disapproval and called for the respect of the memory of the victims. In the same speech, Mr. Trump angered Britain, saying it had a knife problem. At one point he compared a London hospital to a war zone, saying the floors were covered in blood from knife attack victims. Elsewhere, Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani is speaking out yet again about the hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels. He created a firestorm earlier in the week when he announced President Trump had paid Michael Cohen for the $130,000 payment made to keep Daniels quiet about her alleged affair with Mr. Trump. In an interview Saturday night, Giuliani repeated his argument that the payment did not break the law.
[Rudy Giuliani, Former Mayor Of Nyc:] The President of the United States did not in any way violate the campaign finance law. Every campaign finance expert, Republican and Democrat, will tell you that if it was for another purpose other than just campaigns and even if it was for campaign purposes, if it was to save his family, to save embarrassment, it's not a campaign donation. Second, even if it was a campaign donation, the president reimbursed it fully with a payment of $35,000 a month that paid for that and other expenses. No need to go beyond that. Case over.
[Allen:] Scott Lucas is a professor of international politics at the University of Birmingham, England, and the founder and editor of "EA World View." Scott, thank you for being with us. We'll talk about Giuliani in a moment. But let's begin with Mr. Trump's speech to the NRA. He has angered our closest allies, furious at comments he made regarding terror attacks on France and England. This as he supported strong gun rights in the U.S. He made no mistake about how strong he now stands with the NRA. What do you make of it?
[Scott Lucas, University Of Birmingham:] Well, we know that Donald Trump was playing domestic politics and he was feeding red meat to the NRA supporters. But what he's done is by using the examples of France and Britain is intervened in frankly what many here consider an ignorant and crass way
[Lucas:] in affairs that concern us over here. In France, there have been steps taken to prevent terror attacks. There is a great deal of concern over that. But the idea that if you just simply arm civilians with no checks and that stops terrorism, I don't think anybody will back the president up on that.
[Allen:] Let's look at Las Vegas. More than 50 people gunned down in this country; massacres happen on average every day in the United States.
[Lucas:] Absolutely. And yet he calls the country where I now live a war zone. He dares to say, in fact, that we supposedly are in no-go areas because of violence, which, on a sunny day here in Birmingham, I can tell you is the furthest thing from the truth. One statistic to eliminate this: Donald Trump is holding out against any gun control in the United States where almost 40,000 were killed by guns in 2016. In the same year, the total number of people that were killed in homicides by guns in the United Kingdom: 26. That's the core issue. But don't expect Donald Trump to address that. Expect him to try to deflect from that by even risking insulting allies at a time when he needs them over issues like the Iran nuclear deal.
[Allen:] It's almost preposterous, trying to make that kind of point when the numbers aren't even close to adding up. It just boggles the mind because just a couple of months ago, he seemed to have sympathy for the Parkland high school students and their issues over guns. And now he was full-on NRA, all about it.
[Lucas:] Yes. And this isn't just Donald Trump. That speech remember, Trump obviously put his touches on it but that speech would have been written for him by advisers. This is not just Trump. This is a group of people who now are all in. Forget the idea about any raising of the limits on owning semi-automatic weapons to 21. Forget about any system of significant checks. They're simply going to say all of this needs to go away after Parkland. And we'll see what affect it has leading up to November. I don't think you're going to see Trump get away with these comments without some type of pushback not only abroad but also at home.
[Allen:] Let's talk about Rudy Giuliani, his latest lawyer, despite being admonished by the president for erroneous comments according to the president about that payment to a porn star, Mr. Trump paying it back, Mr. Giuliani is now oddly standing by what he said, even though those comments blindsided Mr. Trump apparently and his legal team. It's very hard to keep up. What is Mr. Giuliani's role here, is this PR, is this propaganda? What?
[Lucas:] First of all, this didn't blindside Trump. Trump and Giuliani, who are friends from any, decided last week they were going to try to make the Stormy Daniels affair go away. What was distinctive is they didn't consult anyone in the White House. They didn't talk to John Kelly, the chief of staff. They didn't talk to the White House lawyer, Don McGahn. So when Rudy Giuliani came out on Wednesday and started the controversy rather than making it go away by saying Donald Trump knew about the payoff to Stormy Daniels, contradicting what the president has said for months. And then the next day on Thursday, Rudy Giuliani tied the payment to the campaign when he said, imagine if this had come up during the last debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton? What Rudy's done over the last two days and may well be doing today is issuing yet another clarification which is far from clear. Significance: the president's alleged affair with Stormy Daniels is not just simply a personal matter now. It is becoming a political matter and in combination with things like the Russia investigation and all the other controversies, it's something that's eroding his position, at least with those who are not firmly committed to the president, whatever he does or says.
[Allen:] As someone likened to the whole Stormy Daniels saga to the White House twisting itself into a pretzel and it kind of feels like that, doesn't it. But I want to talk about the president's lawyer, involved with Stormy Daniels, Mr. Cohen, the fixer at the center of this. According to "The New York Times," he has often operated in the backwaters of the financial and legal world and those worlds are connected to Ukraine and Russia. Yet again, another road kind of connected to the president that runs through Russia.
[Lucas:] I think it's important to say that the reason for the FBI raid on Michael Cohen's office, hotel, home on April 9th was not because of his legal work because that's protected by confidentiality. It is over his business affairs. And I suspect the connection between the federal prosecutors in New York and the Mueller investigation is that some of those business dealings were for the terrorist organization. One example, key example, Michael Cohen dealing with known figures who are linked with Russian officials on projects such as the Trump Tower Hotel in Moscow, did those business dealings then continue into 2016 and in some way get bound up with the campaign
[Allen:] Scott Lucas, we appreciate you joining us. Thank you.
[Lucas:] Thank you.
[Allen:] Another story we're following, polls open in Lebanon, where, for the first time in almost a decade, people are voting for their next parliament. Prime Minister Saad Hariri is expected to be able to form a new government but he faces pressure from Hezbollah. A new election law is also paving the way for independent candidates. Do they have a chance? CNN's Ben Wedeman has been following the story for us. He joins us live from Beirut. Ben, new laws and thousands of new voters. What could that mean for this election?
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Sr. International Correspondent:] The new law is important because it gets rid of the old winner-takes-all system and replaces it with a form of proportional representation. But for Lebanese voters, the choices are mindboggling. You have almost 600 candidates running for 128 seats in parliament, divided very equally, 64 for Muslims, 64 for Christians. But given that there are so many different, there are 17 recognized religious groups or concessions in this country. It's not quite so cut and dried. So you do have for the first time 800,000 people voting. In this case, there's 77 lists in 15 different districts. So a mindboggling array of choices. But it is believed that, at the end of the day, not much will change. What's different this time is that there are more independent candidates, more people who are running on a non-sectarian program but these new faces in Lebanese politics may not really have much in terms of the actual outcome of the vote. What we have seen is that you have a variety of candidates who, in some cases, some parties are allies in one district, enemies in another. But at the end of the day, as one woman who told me inside this voting station behind me, it's a bit of a theater. And the result won't be much of a surprise Natalie.
[Allen:] That's too bad for all of the people that are running. I heard you say earlier there are more progressive issues this time. But what are the prevailing issues that are most important to people as far as polls, going to the polls?
[Wedeman:] People want basic, good services. You have had instances in Lebanon where you've had garbage piling up in the streets. They want somebody to clear it out of the street. Every day you have three hours of electricity cut. You have high unemployment. You have a 156 percent debt-to-GDP ratio. People want this country to be fixed. Now on the progressive side, yes, this year, for instance, compared to 2009, when there were 12 women running for seats in parliament, now you have 86. Almost 100 candidates are calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality. Many candidates are calling for the legalization of cannabis. But at the end of the day, these are progressive candidates who probably won't win too many seats. So what we're expecting after what you're seeing today is probably more of the same Natalie.
[Allen:] All right. Ben Wedeman covering it for us there in Beirut, thank you, Ben. Part of Hawaii's island paradise is being split apart by volcanoes. Coming up, we'll find out if there's hope in sight for homeowners being chased from their homes by molten lava. Also protesters in Russia chant, "He is not our czar," as Vladimir Putin is set to begin his fourth term as president. Chaos in the streets about that. We'll have a report.

[King:] All right, here's the question, we report, you decide. Just plain honesty or politically calculated honesty. Here's New Jersey's Senator Cory Booker speaking to David Axelrod for his podcast, the AXE FILES. Giving what some would call a revealing answer about his political ambitions and what others might say as a clever disguise for his 2020 intentions.
[Sen. Cory Booker , New Jersey:] I don't know what the future is going to bring, I'm not making predictions. But I want to unleash the fullness of who I am right now and I want to call out injustice where I see it. I think that politicians make a terrible mistake if they're thinking about their aspirations for another office because I think it undermines their integrity where they are. If I start thinking about the future like that or engaging in that stuff, I think it would make me lesser of a senator.
[Kucinich:] I think that's a very good way of saying I'm focus on being the senator from New Jersey right now which we've heard from other people who may or may not
[King:] B? We have a B here. I hear some disagreements Mr. Yang?
[Yang:] No, I would go along. I think that anytime a politician says something like that, they don't just talk off at the top of their heads. They've thought this through and I think that this is sort of a calculated statement.
[King:] But the flip side is, I love my job as senator from New Jersey but I think everyday in the shower, at breakfast, in traffic, while I'm voting on the Senate floor, about running for president. He can't say that even if it's true.
[Colvin:] I'm not allowed and now we'll also go with B here. I think that's what they say when they're running.
[King:] Except, he's thinking in traffic
[Viser:] It was a longer win I mean, we've tried multiple times with Elizabeth Warren with a similar question. And he gave a longer answer than she does. You know, she tends to just ignore it all together and
[King:] And he says in the same interview, I'm a guy who's going to criticize policies that frankly in a lot of states that are important for presidential elections would find that very much of a threat. So he does acknowledge in the interview with David Axelrod that he's probably left of many of those states out there that has views on issues are, not maybe not going to win you on some of the big presidential battlegrounds. But there's only one way to find out.
[Viser:] This is also a major question for Democrats right now. You know, I mean, there is a there starting to be a realization that Trump is very vulnerable, but there's nobody on that horizon that you look to as the frontrunner.
[King:] Senator Warren just spent time with Senator McCaine in Afghanistan
[Viser:] Well, she got some made for T.V. images from that trip.
[King:] All politics is local

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're going to keep families together, but the border is going to be just as tough.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] This is a crisis the president created. And then he said he fixed it. But he didn't really fix it.
[Unidentified Female:] Agencies have no idea what to do with these plus-2,000 kids that we already have.
[Unidentified Male:] We're working to be always in touch with the parents to ensure placement with relatives or appropriate sponsors.
[Gov. Andrew Cuomo , New York:] We should take a look in the mirror. And are we still the United States of America?
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Thursday, June 21, 6 a.m. here in New York. Alisyn is off. Erica Hill joins me now. It's been three weeks with Alisyn. She already needs a break from me.
[Erica Hill, Cnn Anchor:] Well, I didn't want to say anything, but you did give me some pointers ahead of time.
[Berman:] Glad you're here. All right. This is the starting line. The president blinked. Really, in a way we have not seen before, he blinked. After first choosing to separate parents from children at the border, the president reversed course, signing an executive order to keep it from happening. So he stepped in to alleviate the situation he created, a situation, by the way, he had claimed for days he could not fix. Clearly, that was not true. And as you try to wrap your head around that, the most pressing question is what happens to the more than 2,300 children already separated from their parents? One administration officials says pretty much nothing. The government would not work to get them back to their parents. Another now says they will try. Twenty-three hundred children waking up in limbo this morning.
[Hill:] All of this, of course, as the House is expected to vote on two immigration bills today. Now he White House launching its most aggressive effort since health care to unite Republicans on Capitol Hill in hopes of securing funding for the president's border wall. So what exactly is in these bills? Is there any solution for those families separated at the border? We'll get into that. Plus, President Trump didn't have much to say about the immigration crisis at a rally in Minnesota last night, instead praising North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, taking aim again at Senator John McCain. And the president also bragging he's more elite than the elite. There's a lot to discuss this morning. We begin our coverage with CNN's Abby Phillip, who is live at the White House. Abby, good morning.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Erica. President Trump did in fact, reverse course on the administration's family separation policy. But now this policy is going to face some new implementation challenges and also some potential legal challenges. The administration is struggling to explain what happens now; how this policy is going to be implemented; and more importantly, what happens to those families who have already been separated at the border.
[Trump:] We're going to keep families together, but the border is going to be just as tough as it's been.
[Phillip:] President Trump defending his decision to reverse his policy separating families at the border, insisting that his executive order solved the issue created by his own administration.
[Trump:] We don't like to see families separated. At the same time, we don't want people coming into our country illegally. This takes care of the problem.
[Phillip:] But many crucial questions remain, including what will happen to the 2,300 children who have already been separated from their parents? A Health and Human Services spokesman initially telling CNN that the executive order changed nothing for the children already in its care. But the agency later walking that statement back, saying the spokesman misspoke, noting "It is still very early, and we are awaiting further guidance on the matter." The statement leaving open the possibility that the children could be connected with a relative or appropriate sponsor. But the existing sponsorship program does not include any requirements for officials to proactively reunite children with their parents. Although the head of HHS says they try to keep track of them.
[Alex Azar, Health And Human Services Secretary:] They're working always to be always in touch with the parents to ensure placement with relatives or, if the parents are released, to ensure that they can go to the parents, if the parents are appropriate sponsors.
[Phillip:] Government flyers show that the onus is on the parents to track down their children. And an HHS form obtained by CNN cautions parents, "If you do not provide all the information, it's possible that we will not be able to designate the sponsor of your choice for the care of your child." This process further complicated by the fact that the children have been sent to facilities across the United States, like this agency in New York City.
[Mayor Bill De Blasio , New York City:] This policy is so fundamentally broken to begin with that kids are being sent thousands of miles away from their parents.
[Phillip:] President Trump's about-face coming after his administration spent days insisting that they could do nothing to stop the family separations.
[Unidentified Male:] What about an executive action?
[Trump:] Now, wait, wait. You can't do it through an executive order.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] It's Congress's job to change the law.
[Kirstjen Nielson, Dhs Secretary:] Congress and the courts created this problem, and Congress alone can fix it.
[Phillip:] Sources tell CNN that the president was frustrated that even his political allies were questioning his heart and that his abrupt about-face caught even some of his closest aides off-guard. Under the executive order, immigrants who are suspected of crossing the border illegally will continue to be prosecuted, but families will be housed together where appropriate and consistent with the law and available resources. The order also signals the administration's wish to detain children who come with family indefinitely rather than being released within three weeks, a change that would require approval from an appellate court. Approval that experts say will be an uphill battle. So after saying for days that the administration could do nothing about this policy, the president's decision to issue this executive order was made a lot easier by the fact that Congress seems poised to reject two immigration bills that he had been pushing them to pass this week. They are expected to vote on those bills today, John and Erica.
[Berman:] All right. Abby Phillip at the White House, thanks so much. There are a number of important legal questions here, really unanswered legal questions. Will this executive order hold? Can the government keep these families together in detention indefinitely? CNN's Laura Jarrett in Washington with the very latest here. Laura, what have you put together?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, John, officials in the Trump administration for days have said they're simply enforcing the laws on the books. But the law in this area is actually quite complicated. And to understand why, you have to go all the way back to a settlement agreement from 1997, often references the so-called Flores Agreement, and a series of other court rulings even up to last year, that say children can only be held in detention for 20 days. In fact, this is the whole reason families were separated in the first place. So now the Justice Department is planning ask a federal judge to modify that rule to allow parents and children to be detained together until the end of their immigration proceedings. But those could easily extend beyond 20 days. And what if the court doesn't agree? In the meantime, the Trump administration, of course, is hoping Congress will intervene to keep families together more permanently. But the votes on that are anything but certain Erica.
[Hill:] All right. Laura, thank you. President Trump's executive order doing little to ease the anxiety of parents already separated from their children. Well, this comes, of course, as we're also learning more about the so-called tender-age shelters housing babies and toddlers. CNN's Nick Valencia is live in Brownsville, Texas, with more. Nick, good morning.
[Nick Valencia, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Erica. We still have no clarification as to how these families will go about being reunited. An as we understand it, officials in facilities like the one behind me are scrambling to figure it out, as well. And as you could imagine, there's a large amount of skepticism among those that are detained that it will happen at all. It was yesterday that Southern Poverty Law Center connected me with a Honduran migrant, a man who's in detention, a man who had his 3-year- old child ripped away from him. That 3-year-old asked to go to the bathroom, was escorted by two immigration officials. And that's the last time he saw his son. He hopes that officials kept records of the two so that one day they could be reunited. But he's doubtful. He thinks the president's executive order is a good thing, but he says that he believes it or he will believe it when he sees it. Meanwhile, we're getting new images of facilities out of Florida and Virginia, the facilities for some of the younger migrants. It's a P.R. effort by Health and Human Services to show that these children are being held in good conditions. But no matter how good the conditions are, we're waking up this morning with 2,300 child migrants that would much rather be with Mom and Dad Erica, John.
[Berman:] All right. Nick Valencia for us in Brownsville. What happens to those 2,300 children? What happens? How can there not be an answer to that question? Joining us now, CNN political analyst, White House correspondent for "The New York Times," Maggie Haberman. Maggie, I know you had the lead story in "The Times," and I know you were up late revising this story several times, because that answer about the 2,300 children keeps changing. At first we were flat-out told nothing happens.
[Maggie Haberman, Cnn Political Analyst:] That's right. At first we were told nothing happens. Then there was an updated statement that the earlier comments had been a misspeak, that they are looking to try to reunite these families, that that is always the goal. But again, that's a statement. There is no explanation of how this might happen. There's no look at how long this could take, what the process is. You have parents who have been saying all along they're given no information on how to locate their children. And that does not appear to have changed. Look, clearly, the president was trying to get the heat off of himself with this executive order. It raised a ton of additional questions, including why say for weeks that you couldn't do it this way when you then did do it this way? Why say this was not your policy, and yet, this clearly is your policy? He frankly got off a bit easy yesterday, because this was something he didn't need an executive order to end. He could have just told the attorney general and DHS, "Stop doing it this way." It is true that these are the laws of the land, but it is also true that there is no president who has ever enforced them this way, and that is this president's choice. And then the question is going to be how much media attention, I think, remains on this, now that he has signed the executive order? I think that will go a long way. The how much pressure stays on the agencies to try to reunite parents with their kids.
[Hill:] But there's also the question of, because this all seemed to come about so abruptly. I guess finally, it's all weighing on the president, that he doesn't like what he's seeing and the way all this is being portrayed. How could reunification not even be a part of this? I mean, was that is there a sense in your reporting that it didn't even come up?
[Haberman:] My sense in the reporting is that this was done so haphazardly that certainly the question came up, but nobody had an answer. There was just a goal, which was basically get a draft executive order, which the White House counsel, Don McGahn, had serious concerns about, because he knew that this was going to pave the way to a court challenge that he wasn't sure it would sustain. That is clearly part of what the president has decided, which is "We're just going to let the courts figure this out." Remember, this is a president who spent years condemning President Barack Obama for using executive orders to try to navigate his way out of problems because of a difficult Congress that was not moving. This president does have a couple of bills in the GOP-held Congress. Again, GOP-held Congress, his own party. He went to speak to House members the other day. People left with different impressions as to whether he was endorsing one bill or another or anything at all. Until he is actually clear on this one of the hallmarks of Donald Trump, his campaign and his presidency, has been trying to lead different groups, thinking that he agrees with them. And he tried to split this way too fine on an issue that had a huge, painful humanitarian component. And he has been very adept, overall, at telling people, "Don't believe what you're seeing over there. Just believe me." But he finally met a fact he could not tell people not to believe.
[Berman:] I've got to say, your question is a great question. If it was the picture, if it was this picture that finally cause him to switch here, because he didn't like the P.R., how is it that he could not have considered the fact the picture is not going away if you don't reunite these 2,300 kids? I talk about the picture, Maggie. You've done such great reporting on this. What's the tick-tock here? I mean, how did he ultimately come to flip on this?
[Haberman:] There's a lot of questions that still remain. It's not clear who told him that this couldn't be it could only be done by the courts, which someone did. It's also not clear how he finally realized that wasn't the case. We know that his wife and daughter had been putting pressure on him. We also know that let's be clear here House Republicans, again, the House. Less so the Senate. But the House map is daunting for Republicans to keep control of the House. And the one thing this president has been receptive to for a very long time is the idea that, if Democrats take over the House, Mr. President, this will hurt you. And so that was a big part of the case that was made. I think there was also some sense after the Kirstjen Nielsen briefing at the White House the other day with reporters, that did not go well.
[Berman:] He loved it, though. We were told he loved it.
[Haberman:] He loved it. Others did not. And she ended up then becoming the face of this, which people who support Kirstjen Nielsen, such as John Kelly, the chief of staff in the White House, did not appreciate.
[Hill:] There's also the issue of and again, we know how haphazard this was. As you point out. the tick-tock is not even really clear at this point. But in the end, with the legal challenges that are now going to be presented, the president could end up, in some ways, being vindicated saying, "See? Look, I told you. This is now going to get thrown to Congress. And Congress, you have to do something. You have to pass a law to fix this, because look, it's a total mess." Who cares that mess was created by the president?
[Haberman:] He's going to say that, and this is where people who complain about the media and how we do our jobs have a point, which is that that is not true. If he just says, "Look, see, I was vindicated. It is true that the Congress sets the laws of the land. But it is also true that there is a variety of interpretation into how these laws are applied. And he has chosen a very draconian approach. And he has then sought to blame Democrats. Remember, some of this accelerated just because of seasonally, there are border crossings at this time of year. But some of this accelerated because the president blew up at Kirstjen Nielsen in a cabinet meeting in very loud fashion a couple of weeks ago, angered, I think, and humiliated her over the fact that he didn't feel enough was being done to deter at the border. And that is where this comes from. If the president wants to someone, it is pretty clear who he can blame, but he never blames himself, as he admitted recently.
[Berman:] I like the fact you sued the word "choice there." We're trying to do that it was a choice. It was a choice. Own it. Defend it. But it was a choice. Just make it clear.
[Haberman:] Well, that's right. That's right. If this is going to be your policy, then this is your policy. And you can then defend it on the merits or not. But he's not doing that at all. This is his policy. He is saying, "It really isn't my policy. Whatever you're seeing here, that isn't really what you're seeing." And that has been his practice this whole time. Anybody looking at the images of these children or hearing the audio of these children crying, how you can listen to that and not realize how disastrous this is, is shocking, in that it took this many days is very surprising.
[Berman: Camerota:] Is the Ivanka thing real? I mean, I can't count how many times
[Haberman:] No, it is real. It is real. And this and you are correct that we have seen a repeated practice of more often when things didn't happen of them putting out, "Well, she really tried." She was certainly not the only voice who was talking to him about this. But she was one of them. And I think that it took a cacophony of noise to get him to move.
[Hill:] Do we know how long, though? Because to both of your points, as soon as you see those pictures, as soon as you hear that audio
[Haberman:] Right.
[Hill:] You would think it would start emotion. And yet
[Haberman:] I think it's been over the last couple of weeks. Remember, I'm not really sure if Jeff Merkley, the senator from Oregon, had not tried to go into one of these detention centers and not been admitted, I'm not sure how much attention this would be getting. That helped galvanize a lot of the images around.
[Berman:] I think the obfuscation did. I also think the lies did, the fact that they were lying
[Haberman:] That is correct.
[Berman:] about the fact that they didn't choose this.
[Haberman:] Yes, but it was already in motion at that point. And I think at that point, you were already seeing pictures of children and hearing these stories of children who are being taken from their families. I think that it helped keep the attention on. I just think it's worth remembering we're talking about a pretty narrow window of time. We're talking about two weeks or so. I think that it has become politically unsustainable. To your point, the fact that nobody could get on the same page about what this policy even was. Kirstjen Nielsen saying it's not a policy. John Kelly having said this was something he was considering as a deterrent, using that word a year and a half ago. They've created enormous problems for themselves. But it's important not to just make this all sound like, "Oh, and this is just a political problem." There are 2,300 kids who are not with their families who are going to have, most likely, just based on history, terrible psychic scars from all of this. And it is under there are people on different sides of the immigration debate who are going to say, you know, some people who feel very strongly that there needs to be stricter enforcement at the border. That is these are understandable positions. But processing it this way and doing it this way is unimaginable.
[Berman:] If you're trying to prove you have a heart here, and the president has tried to make that statement over the last 12 hours or so, I do not understand how you can't, then, have a plan for the 2,300 children.
[Haberman:] Well, I just also don't understand how you're the president, you can say, "I didn't like the sight and feel of this." I mean, what did you think was going to happen when you were saying, "Cause these separations"? It was not going to be pretty.
[Hill:] Which also brings up a further point of how much did the president understand before he moved forward with this?
[Haberman:] Right. And we're not and we're never going to know the answer. We know that there are some people in the White House that have a clear ideological position on this. He mostly wants to do these things but not be held accountable for them.
[Berman:] All right. Maggie, stick around. Because we have you for a whole other segment. It's interesting. Jeff Zeleny, who was at the rally in Duluth last night in Minnesota, where the president spoke, noted that the president barely brought up immigration. Immigration is one of the things he typically talks about most in a rally. So why was that? What is the president most upset about here? Is it possible that the immigration debate is detracting distracting from what he really wants to focus on?

[Church:] The last major rebel-held area in Syria is bracing for a government offensive. Russian and Syrian jets reportedly pounded the western edge of Idlib province on Tuesday. Meantime, the White House is warning Syria to refrain from any chemical attacks. Its statement reads in part, "Let us be clear, it remains our firm stance that if President Bashar al-Assad chooses to again use chemical weapons, the United States and its allies will respond swiftly and appropriately." The U.N. Security Council meets Friday to discuss the crisis. Separately, leaders from Russia, Turkey and Iran will do the same.
[Staffan De Mistura, U.n. Special Envoy To Syria:] Now the guarantors of this de-escalation area have a special responsibility. And they have a responsibility to find a sustainable formula, which is not impossible, that would spare the civilian population. Hence we will look with great attention and concern and hope to the crucial summit in Tehran on Friday.
[Church:] Now our Jomana Karadsheh joins us live from Istanbul. So Jomana, what are you learning about what's happening on the ground in Idlib right now? And what has been the reaction to the U.S., again drawing a line in the sand when it comes to the use of any weapons?
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Rosemary, as you said, the U.S. is really just drawing a line when it comes to chemical weapons. And when you talk to Syrians and people who have been trapped in rebel-held areas for years now, they say they've really given up on the international community or the United States or anyone, really, to do anything to stop the bloodshed. You know, when they hear these kinds of warnings and threats and comments about chemical weapons, they ask, what about conventional weapons, what about the barrel bombs, what about the airstrikes? These kinds of attacks are claiming the most lives. So they ask, what is the international community going to do about that? And it seems like no one is going to do anything. So right now, you know, you had that warning from President Trump, that tweet. You had various statements from U.S. officials and that's really not having any impact, as is expected. On Tuesday, opposition activists in Idlib reported up to 25 airstrikes. They claim there were Russian airstrikes on the western part of Idlib. They say at least 18 people were killed, most of them women and children. So you have a population right now, Rosemary, that is living in a state of constant fear. As they told, you know, our colleagues, Arwa Damon and her team who were there recently, it feels like they are on death row and just waiting for, you know, for their death penalty to be implemented. So you know, you have more than 3 million civilians, according to the estimates, that are crammed into this part of Syria. Idlib, for more than a year now, has been, you know, relatively safe for most people. So they have been bused from other rebel-held areas that have fallen to the regime; people who refused to remain under regime control because of fear of the region were bused to Idlib. Right now
[Karadsheh:] they have nowhere else to turn to, nowhere safe. As one analyst put it, Idlib has no Idlib.
[Church:] Jomana Karadsheh, bringing us the latest on what's happening on the ground in Idlib. Many thanks to you. A high-level South Korean delegation is in North Korea to discuss plans for their next summit. The two sides are expected to discuss a path toward peace and denuclearization. It comes as relations between the United States and North Korea continue to sour. So let's turn to our Paula Hancocks. She joins us live from Seoul in South Korea with more on this. Paula, what are you learning about this upcoming summit? And how far might the two Koreas go in denuclearizing North Korea?
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Rosemary, we are hoping either by the end of today or tomorrow to have an indication of when this summit will take place, an exact date. At this point, we know that Moon Jae-in will meet with Kim Jong-un middle of September, that sort of time. We're hearing that really the scope of this summit has widened since that relationship between Washington and Pyongyang has started to sour. Just a couple of weeks ago, a planned trip by the U.S. secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, to Pyongyang was cancelled by U.S. president Donald Trump, saying that he simply didn't think enough progress was being made on the road to denuclearization. So there's a broader sense now that this summit between President Moon and Kim Jong-un will be more important. It is more inclusive. It is going to be President Moon almost reverting back to his mediator role, trying to bring Washington and North Korea closer together. Now we know that President Moon had a phone call with President Trump on Tuesday night local time, a 50-minute conversation. They agreed to meet in New York at the U.N. General Assembly. That's later on in September. That will be just after President Moon has met Kim Jong- un. So he will be able to brief President Trump in person. He also had a few positive words to say about Mr. Trump's behavior towards North Korea and towards the talks that are happening at the moment, saying it's his decisiveness that has led to this point. But certainly what we're seeing is more of a push from South Korea at this point than we are from the U.S. Rosemary.
[Church:] Yes, and, of course, South Korea wants to keep President Trump and the United States happy. He's been very careful there. But from the North Korean perspective, how much of this is about squeezing the U.S. out of the picture?
[Hancocks:] Well, we did see a statement today that was posted on the foreign ministry's website in North Korea, saying that what they wanted was a declaration to the end of war. The Korean War back in 1953 ended in an armistice. We've heard from North and South Korean leaders, after their meeting in April in Panmunjom at the DMZ, that they want to try to declare the end of the Korean War by the end of this year. Now that will be one of the key topics at the summit this month as well. But what North Korea's calling for is for Washington to be on board with this, to declare the end of the war as well. North Korea wants a peace treaty. They want things that go with the peace treaty as well. But Washington wants to see denuclearization first. So there is really a very strong split between North Korea and the United States as to which should come first. That's really where the sticking point is at this point Rosemary.
[Church:] All right. Our Paula Hancocks, bringing us up to date on the situation there in Seoul, South Korea. Thanks for that. Frustration growing in Iraq as politicians struggle to form a new government after inconclusive parliamentary elections in May. Many in the oil-rich south are frustrated with poor basic services, water pollution and unemployment. Five people were killed Tuesday during the latest clashes between protesters and security forces in Basra. Prime minister Haider al Abadi says his cabinet will investigate the unrest in Iraq's second biggest city. Many Iraqis are still angry with the political elite, which is widely seen as corrupt. A devastating cultural and academic loss in Brazil may have been preventable. Brazil's oldest and most important museum was gutted in a massive fire Sunday night. Most of the museum's precious and irreplaceable collections are now feared lost forever. As Clare Sebastian reports, many blame the government for years of the neglect.
[Clare Sebastian, Cnn Correspondent:] The rubble still smolders two days after fire ripped through the 200-year-old Brazil National Museum. As firefighters begin their investigation into the cause of the blaze, the finger-pointing is well under way. These protesters blame the government for diverting critical funds away from the museum's restoration.
[Sebastian:] The museum is part of Rio's federal university and most of the protesters are students. University and museum officials say the museum's budget has been repeatedly slashed. Brazil's minister of culture says there was a sprinkler system in place. It wasn't enough.
[Unidentified Male:] This fire has been caused by several years of neglect by the federal government. Our anthropology program suffered absurd budget cuts these two last years.
[Sebastian:] Although the extent of the damage remains unknown, Brazil's oldest and most important historical museum has been gutted. It was home to 20 million artifacts, spanning 11,000 years, most of its collections are now feared lost, including priceless artifacts from the pre-Colombian period. And officials from Rio's civil defense apartment say the building itself is still at risk of collapsing. Employees, researchers and academics shed tears as they stood outside the destroyed museum.
[Unidentified Male:] During the cleanup process and the aftermath, we're going to have the participation of museum employees. It will be a slow process so that we can, who knows, recover a fragment, something that could still have historic value.
[Sebastian:] One museum curator rushed to collect what was left of the meteorite exhibit before it could be swept away with other debris. Brazil's minister of culture says he hopes the building can be rebuilt and some artifacts can still be salvaged. He also wants to start a campaign to encourage collectors to donate or sell their collections to the museum so they can start again Clare Sebastian, CNN.
[Church:] Still to come here on CNN NEWSROOM, the wives of two Reuters reporters sentenced to hard labor in Myanmar are begging for their release. Plus, a dire new prediction about the future of U.S. elections from the former head of security for Facebook.

[Savidge:] Six people are dead after a powerful winter storm tore through part of the country this week; parts of the plains and the upper Midwest hit by one to two feet of snow. That includes places like Duluth, Minnesota where people saw more than 12 inches in just one day. That same system brought severe storms to the south dumping more than a foot of rain across parts of Louisiana and Mississippi. CNN meteorologist Allison Chinchar is live in the weather center. And Allison, no sooner than we see that system leave, a new front moving in behind it?
[Allison Chinchar, Cnn Meteorologist:] Yes, and that's starting in the southeast, where they really don't need any more rain. So Here's a look at the system in question. That's that first system finally starting to exit. So most of the northeast and the mid- Atlantic are seeing an end to their rain. You've got a few light snow showers still remaining around the Great Lakes region. But it's down south. This is where the focus now shifts to because you still have rain chances in the forecast down there after that system pushed through. Look at the total of snowfall. Finland, Minnesota picking up 24 inches. Even portions of South Dakota picking up two feet of snow. But the southern side was all rain. And yes, a lot of reports of eight to ten inches but yes, even one report of 15.5 inches of rain in Mississippi. So it's very obvious, they don't need any more rain. But unfortunately, you have rain in the forecast for the southeast for the next three days. Now, today the focus remains this next system. The low pressure system is sitting over the Gulf of Mexico. That's where it just starts to surge more moisture up basically stretching from Texas all the way over towards Florida. Then that system what it does in the coming days, that's where it becomes important for areas say of the mid-Atlantic, the northeast and the Midwest. Here's what we're talking about. There comes that low as it begins to push off to the north. Really ramping up especially with the moisture and the heavy rain on Sunday. Then by Monday, it pushes off to the east. Places like the Ohio Valley, into areas of the northeast. And Unfortunately, say that you have plans for New York City on New Year's Eve, it looks like right as the ball drops, you're going to be looking at rain showers not only in New York but also cities like Philadelphia, Cleveland, Knoxville, stretching down towards Atlanta, and it's the southern cities where you're really going to have the bulk of that heavy rain. Widespread
[Savidge:] We're not just talking about people getting wet for their celebrations. We're talking about real danger here. Allison Chinchar thank you very much for that. There's a new government finding on coal power plants and it could lead to more toxins in your area. The Environmental Protection Agency proposed new rules on regulating hazardous air pollutants. The new rules would change how the EPA determines the benefits of limiting some emissions. And it could make it tougher for the agency to create new regulations. Essentially, the EPA now says the current formula for the Obama administration just plain costs too much. Environmental activists say the dramatic change first reported in the "New York Times" could do irreparable harm to public safety. Raging wildfires, debilitating blizzards and deadly hurricanes and floods you name it and 2018 had it, brutal in terms of severe weather events. CNN meteorologist Chad Myers has a look back.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] 2018 brought another year of extreme weather and natural disasters to the U.S. Impacts of manmade climate change evident in every region of the country even as the U.S. takes a step backward in fighting this global crisis. Here are the top eight stories for 2018. Number eight, the Hawaii volcano. Kilauea, the most active volcano in the world lived up to its reputation. In early May, it came to life once again.
[Unidentified Male:] This really does look like hell on earth. This is as impressive, as mesmerizing and it's terrifying as it gets. The lava which reach temperatures topping 2,100 degrees destroyed 700 homes.
[Myers:] Number seven the Alaska earthquake. On November 30th, a powerful 7.0 magnitude earthquake struck Alaska. It hit very near Alaska's most populated city of Anchorage causing roads to buckle, knocking out power to 10,000 people.
[Unidentified Female:] This was the worst, most violent quake they had ever felt.
[Myers:] The quake was considered the most significant for Anchorage since 1964. Fortunately, no serious injuries or deaths were reported. Number six, Florida red tide.
[Unidentified Male:] This is an epic event of biblical proportion.
[Unidentified Female:] It is the worst toxic algae bloom in recent memory wiping out dolphins, sea turtles, other marine life by the thousands.
[Myers:] While the process that creates Florida's red tide and green slime are natural, many scientists say the increased agricultural runoff and pollution from the early season subtropical storm Alberto made the problem even worse. Number five, the Maryland flood. On May 27th, storms pounded the Baltimore area.
[Unidentified Female:] Flash flooding has turned this Maryland town's main street into a raging river. Cars have been swept up by the roaring muddy water rushing through Ellicott City, Maryland.
[Myers:] Many there were still rebuilding from their flash flood of 2016. It was considered a once in a thousand year event. It took only two years for history to repeat itself. Number four, it's a term known to meteorologists but this year two storms got everyone talking about it.
[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Bomb cyclone.
[Unidentified Male:] Bomb cyclone.
[Unidentified Female:] Bomb cyclone.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Bomb cyclone.
[Myers:] So what is a bomb cyclone? It's not just a nor'easter, it's a big storm that develops rapidly. There's warm air over the ocean. There's very cold air over the land. And there's a jet stream in between. That allows the storm to rapidly intensify, develop into a nor'easter but a big one, one that loses 24 millibars of pressure in 24 hours. That's a technical term. Certainly not every nor'easter is a bomb cyclone. Two of these nor'easters struck this year. The first in early January, left 19 dead and caused over $1 billion in damage. As the storm worked its way up the coast, it brought the first snow since 1989 in Tallahassee, Florida. And Ice and snow to Charleston, South Carolina. The storm hit the northeast very hard with nearly 9 inches of snow in New York City and a tide over 15 feet in Boston Harbor, big enough to break the record from the benchmark blizzard of 1978. In March another coastal bomb left nine dead and $2 billion in damage knocking out power to over a million at the peak of the storm. Number three in our list is Hurricane Michael. Michael made landfall on October 10th as the strongest storm to hit the continental U.S. since Hurricane Andrew. The category four hurricane was just one mile per hour short of being a Cat 5. The storm claimed 46 lives, most of those killed were in Florida where the Florida Panhandle was devastated. The small town of Mexico Beach was ground zero.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] We have just now flown over Mexico Beach and it's is gone, it's obliterated. It's awful to look at. I've never seen anything like this. Number two is Hurricane Florence. The storm made landfall on September 14th along the North Carolina coast.
[Unidentified Male:] We notice that inner eye wall. There it goes. There goes the lights.
[Myers:] And much like Harvey in Houston the year before, the hurricane stalled for days bringing historic rain, nearly three feet of rain impacted some areas of North Carolina. The storm dumped as much as 10 trillion gallons of water. As much as eight months' worth of rain fell in just a few days. Many rivers in both North and South Carolina saw their all-time record crest. More than 50 people perished in the storm. Increasingly, scientists are concerned that hurricanes like Michael and Florence could be the new normal. Increased heat especially in the oceans can potentially lead to stronger and wetter storms. Perhaps no place in the U.S. has begun to see the consequences of climate change more than California. Years of record drought were replaced suddenly by historic flooding in late 2017. That yo-yo effect laid the perfect foundation for large and destructive wildfires and deadly mudslides. California is number one on our list with floods and fires. In January of this year, heavy rains fell over the Thomas Fire burn scar bringing a wall of debris and mud to communities below. Areas of Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties were the hardest hit. This year's fires were the most destructive and devastating in California history. And they burned in almost every month.
[Unidentified Male:] The term, we hear, it's new normal. It's not new anymore. This is the normal. And it's not a season. It's year round.
[Myers:] The Mendocino Complex Fire that started in July became the largest ever recorded for the state. But the worst came in November when strong winds pushed the Camp Fire into the town of Paradise.
[Unidentified Female:] This is nothing like what we've had before.
[Myers:] There was such panic. Some drivers abandoned their cars as they tried to flee on foot. Some 40,000 people resided in the path of that fire. In the end, 85 died. And nearly the entire town of 14,000 homes burned to the ground.
[Unidentified Male:] A whole town was wiped off the face of the earth.

[Gorani:] A major shocker at the World Cup right now. Just minutes ago, Argentina lost to Croatia three nail. That would make it extremely difficult for Argentina to advance out of their group. On the pitch today, France beat Peru, one nail. Yay. Which moves them into the knockout stage of the World Cup. Russia and Uruguay, so far, are the only other teams to advance. Russia's success certainly is a surprise. They came into the cup as the lowest rated team in the tournament. They have something called a home advantage though, I think Fred Pleitgen has been following the Russian national team and he's in Moscow. Fred.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Hala, we visited their training camp earlier today and what we saw there was a very confident team, obviously bolstered by those two win that they got and a team that believes that they could do great things at the World Cup. And so now does this nation. Here's what we saw.
[Pleitgen:] It's not often that you see Russians this emotional. But the country's been in a football frenzy ever since the World Cup started. Thanks to Russia's Cinderella squad, a team most experts thought would fail miserably, but has outscored its opponents Eight to one so far. Defender Andrei Semyonov told me the team always believed in itself. Nobody believed in us, he says, now everyone does and they're starting to put medals on us. But we don't look at it. We studied our opponents really well and predicted everything. But few observers could have predicted their success. Russia is the lowest ranked team at the World Cup. Wouldn't have even qualified if they weren't the host nation. And many feared the mood at the World Cup would sour and the home team performed poorly. Now, the squad, led by striker Artem Dzyuba is on a roll. Team Russia has already proved all of its critics wrong, well, in all of its matches and already qualifying for the next round. And now both this nation and this team believe they can do great things at the FIFA 2018 World Cup. And with a successful squad, Russians are embracing their nation's role as hosts of the tournament. Striker Fyodor Kudryashov telling me, home field advantage has also helped elevate the team's performance. The fans are the 12th player on the field for us, he said. We feel their overwhelming support and our team goes forward. If there is a knock on the Russians, it's that they haven't played any of the really strong teams so far. But for now, Russia is enjoying the winning streak, hoping their World Cup fairy tale doesn't end any time soon. And, Hala, of course the next game they have will be against the stronger team, it's against Uruguay. And after that, of course, we get to the knockout stages and it's really going to be there that the Russians are going to show whether they are for real or not, Hala.
[Gorani:] Yes, we will be watching. Thanks, Fred. For Shakespeare, it was the sonnet, for Rembrandt and Picasso, a masterpiece painted in oils. But in this day and age, there seems to be only one way to truly honor the special moments in our life.
[Unidentified Female:] Let me take a selfie. The Chainsmokers there capturing the very essence of social media's magnum opus, the selfie. A photographic custom being honored today on National Selfie Day. Selfie is a relatively new term. But did you know the first selfie was taken in 1839 by photographer Robert Cornelius in Philadelphia? Truly a visionary, so who we were to resist the tide of history? This is our HALA GORANI TONIGHT team in London. That's a selfie. One of these team has a super long arm. We reached out to our colleagues at CNN center in the U.S., but unfortunately, they were all having bad hair days. So instead, and keeping with another great internet tradition, here's a picture of a selfie taking cat, and his name is Manny. Manny takes these photos with a GoPro cam, and he's seen here with a close friend. New Zealand's prime minister has given birth, becoming only the second female world leader to do so while in office. Jacinda Ardern and her partner Clarke Gayford posted this snap with their newborn daughter earlier. Is it a selfie? Looks like it could be, actually. She will now take six weeks maternity leave and has handed over her responsibilities to the deputy prime minister, who is now serving as acting prime minister. She follows in the footsteps of the former Pakistani Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, who had a child while in office in 1990. Thanks for watching tonight, everyone. I'm Hala Gorani. Stay with CNN. "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next. I'll see you tomorrow.

[Church:] A very warm welcome back to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church, and this is CNN Newsroom. I want to update you on the stories we've been following this hour. European financial markets are starting the day in negative territory after a bruising Monday on Wall Street, London, Frankfurt, Paris and Zurich, all opening lower. Markets in Asia finish mostly lower, only Hong Kong managed to gain some ground. The Dow plunge 450 points after more attacks on Amazon by Donald Trump. Investors were also spooked by the renewed possibility of a trade war. Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is suspending a plan to relocate some 16,000 African migrants to Western countries. In return, Israel would have given temporary residents permits to the same number of migrants, members of Netanyahu's Right-Wing Coalition, heavily criticized the deal reached with the United Nations. A group in Syria has begun evacuating from Houma, that is a Syrian state media, which says the group deal with the government. Now if it's confirm, it would mean the end of fighting in the Damascus suburbs of East Ghouta and another rebel stronghold gone. One of South Africa's foremost icons in the struggle against apartheid has died, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela's family, she passed away after a long illness. She was 81 years old, Madikizela-Mandela and her former husband, Nelson Mandela, were married for 38 years, the pair worked tirelessly to end white minority rule in South Africa. CNN David McKenzie, joins me now from Soweto in South Africa, David, how are people responding to the news of the passing of Winnie Madikizela- Mandela and what legacy does she leave behind?
[David Mckenzie, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Rosemary, initially, their responded with shock, though she was sick for some time, but really was even a shocked to the family that she died over the [inaudible] that we can end here in South Africa. They are delivering the Marquis to the house here in Soweto for the official commemoration which will be some days away. Winnie Mandela was certainly an icon, one of the last icons said the ruling anti of the anti-Apartheid struggle. The president of South Africa was here at the homestead yesterday as we were throngs of supporters celebrating that were lifting the mood of the nations in mourning. Here is Cyril Ramaphosa.
[Cyril Ramaphosa, President Of South Africa:] People are grieving very, very deeply. The death of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela is a great loss in that she has been one of the strongest women in our struggle, who suffered immensely under the Apartheid regime who was imprisoned, who was banished, who was treated very badly, separated not only from her husband, but from her children as well and her people, but withstanding all these, she remains strong
[Mckenzie:] During the darkest days of Apartheid, Winnie Mandela really was the voice for her late husband late ex-husband and was one of the few senior members of the ANC that manage to keep that flame alive. While many people from here in Soweto and all across the country went into exile, many others like Nelson Mandela went to prison. So, she was a controversial figure, but for now it seems that South Africa is celebrating and mourning their loss.
[Church:] And David, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela was convicted of theft and fraud back in 2003 and was accused of gross human rights violation. She denied those allegations, but was she ever able to clear name?
[Mckenzie:] No, not entirely and certain segments of the South African population see her as a polarizing figure. She certainly wasn't universally as love as Nelson Mandela, but her contribution to the anti-Apartheid struggle is definitely seen as the one of the unsurpassed members of that organization. So, it is a clouded legacy on in some sense, though there is some, you know, arguing hear in South Africa as what should be the prominent aspect of her memory and her legacy that is talked about and rarely people are suggesting that it's those earlier days when she was that strong and vibrant and sometimes fierce voice against the security police of the Apartheid era and the government itself. It late years, she was a thorn in the side of some of the post- Apartheid presidency here South Africa, but she always had a seat in the table and was a member of the parliament here in South Africa until the day she died. Rosemary?
[Church:] David McKenzie, joining us there from Soweto in South Africa with the legacy of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela. Many thanks to you. Well, three months of rolling nationwide Whales strikes are getting under way in France and some commuters already feeling the effects this morning. It's the latest challenge to the French president's plans for label reform. And as Jim Bittermann explains this is not the first time that Unions have taken on the French government.
[Jim Bittermann, Senior European Correspondent, Cnn:] For decades French leaders have tried to reform the nation's economy. And while that have some successes, there had been some spectacular failure as Union, especially at the public sector have pushed back against attempts to change workplace rules. In this case the protest against Jack [inaudible] plans in 1995 went on for weeks, while the country go halt and contributed to the downfall of Prime Minister Allan Juppe. There has been one attempt after another to send out French President Emmanuel Macron was elected at a promised to enact reforms and who began the process shortly after Election Day is taking on the most difficult one yet. Modifying the work rules of the public transportation sector. For economist like Pascal Perri is long overdue. If for no other reason than France is facing a deadline at the end of the year when European Railway Systems must open up the competition, meaning that there could soon be German and Italian trains running on French tracks.
[Pascal Perri, Author, Sncp A French Scandal:] It's a question of competitiveness off, you know, profitability. So, today the government has decided to play its role.
[Bittermann:] Perri, points out that the French Railway System suffered a loss each year and is currently 50 billion euros of debt. But French Railway workers, some of whom are employed under work rules that go back to World War II and the days of coal-fired locomotives are resisting any attempt to tamper with their pay, pensions or benefits. What's more is that they fear the government as it done in other sectors is headed toward privatizing the rail systems, assisted sub- Union leaders they should be entirely free. UNIDENTIFIED MALE Even among the other rail Unions involved. Not everyone would agree with that. But Ponce points out that public employees in other sectors like the ones he mentioned and others like Air France will go on strike in labor actions that could continue well beyond this week. In fact, the leadership of one rail Union is calling for train strikes from April to June at a pace of two straight days for every three days' work and innovative protest that could infuriate rail users and bedeviled the government and so the government and passengers could be in for some trying times ahead. Jim Bittermann CNN, Paris.
[Church:] We turned to London now with the Labour Party is having trouble shaking off a controversy centered on its leader. British media say Jeremy Corbin has deleted his personal Facebook account less than two weeks after he was accused of belonging to social media groups were people had posted anti-Semitic content. CNN's Phil Black, has the details.
[Phil Black, Cnn Correspondent:] Jeremy Corbin, Britain's alternative Prime Minister and man once critics would saving the fortunes at the labor party is now accused by his own colleagues of tolerating bigotry towards Jewish people.
[Unidentified Female:] I think he's been too tolerant and I think he's perhaps been to generous and his interpretation of certain things that are offside.
[Black:] Tolerance and generosity are usually shown towards anti-Semite in mainstream British politics. The Sunday Times investigation found more than 2000 people and anti-Semitic messages posted by Corbin fans on Facebook. Another Times report claims latest membership is fully, because of Corbin's failure to tackle the issue and among those who are banned in the party, is one of labors biggest private donors.
[Unidentified Male:] This is nuts, over party, this is a party which has been hijacked. Why would I remain in a party that has become so manifestly supportive of anti-Semitism, Amanda [inaudible]?
[Black:] And to Corbin's leadership humorous anti-Semitic scandals involving labor politicians, officials and members led to an internal inquiry two years ago. Many of its recommendations have not been implemented.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, you are lying racist.
[Black:] Last week, Corbin admitted to publicly supporting the [inaudible] responsible for this anti-Semitic murals in 2012. He says he should have looked more closely at the artwork.
[Unidentified Male:] We in the labor movement will never be complacent about anti-Semitism.
[Black:] Corbin's critics are not buying that line anymore.
[Unidentified Female:] I think he cares a lot of weakly way, I think people are at the end point of their tolerance and they want to see actions now.
[Black:] Well, on this issue, the party is divided, some Corbin supporters who lead the attacks are unfair.
[Unidentified Male:] But I think this has been exaggerated by Corbin's enemies and the labor party and the conservative party.
[Black:] The comedian, Eddie Izzard, has been appointed to the labor party's national executive committee after his predecessors supported an accused Holocaust denier. In a statement, Izzard said, we must make amends and repair the damage with the Jewish community as Jeremy Corbin has promised to do. On the streets of London's Jewish communities. There is concerned about the scenes hatred within a party many Jews had long supported and what they believe is a significant rise in anti-Semitism across the wider community as well.
[Unidentified Male:] And we've gone through one holocaust, and he's got people on his team, that are denying that there was a holocaust, I mean, how should I feel?
[Black:] AntiSemitism isn't the first significant test for labor and the Jeremy Corbin. But it is proving to be one of the most persistent and damaging to his leadership. Phil Black CNN, London.
[Church:] OK. It is not Woodstock or live aid, but a concert on Pyongyang could still be just as historic. Why the event may help heals strain ties between two nations. We'll be back with that.

[Cuomo:] All right. We got results from the largest study ever about TBI, traumatic brain injury, and football, and the link is stronger than ever to this degenerative disease called CTE. Andy Scholes has more in "The Bleacher Report." We know that Sanjay Gupta looked at this, but this research from Boston University, this is more than guys like us expected to learn, Andy.
[Andy Scholes, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Yes, that's right, Chris. I mean, it's definitely concerning for the game of football. Researchers at Boston University studied the donated brains of 111 deceased former NFL players, and they found that 110 of them were found to have a degenerative brain disease CTE. That's more than 99 percent. In total, CTE was diagnosed in 87 percent of 2002 former football players studied, that included high school and college players. Now, CTE is believed to be caused by repeated trauma to the head. It can only be diagnosed in someone after death. Now, it's important to note that in this study, many of the donated brains came from former players and their families who were worried about CTE while the player was still alive. Lead author of the study said there are many questions that remain unanswered like how common is this and how many years of football are too many. Now, the NFL issued a statement saying these studies are important for advancing science related to head trauma and the league will continue to work with a wide range of experts to improve health of current and former NFL athletes Alisyn.
[Camerota:] That is really valuable that they're beginning to look at all this and try to get some answers. Andy, thank you very much. So what drives President Trump's tweets? Well, we're going to look at his social media habit and the patterns it reveals and what all that tells us, next.

[Harlow:] Russia's ambassador to the United States is calling the case against an accused Russian agent a farce. The ambassador says he will be demanding that this woman, Maria Butina, is released from jail immediately. On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled she was a flight risk, ordered her held without bond until her trial. And our Sara Murray explains how prosecutors say she used sex, lies and guns to infiltrate American politics.
[Sara Murray, Cnn Correspondent:] The young Russian gun lover twice applied for visas to attend the National Rifle Association's
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you very much.
[Murray:] Then the NRA came to Moscow. Butina hosted a gun conference and charmed NRA board member David Keen and his associate, political operative, Paul Erickson. By April 2014, visa in hand, Butina was on her way to Indianapolis for the NRA's 2014 annual meeting. There she snapped a pic with NRA chief executive, Wayne LaPierre, and began blazing a path in U.S. political circles in what authorities allege was a covert Russian operation. Her relationship with Erickson quickly turned romantic. Whether he was duped by his young lover, who used him for political connections or wittingly lured into a spy operation to influence U.S. politics ahead of the 2016 election is unclear. An unlikely match, Erickson is nearly twice Butina's age.
[Paul Erickson, Political Operative:] If you want power, if you want influence, you see a candidate that you like, show up and work for them. Drop everything.
[Murray:] After growing up in South Dakota and graduating from Yale, he sought to make a name for himself in GOP politics. Along the way he crossed paths with now disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and worked at a the Virginia man who
[Maria Butina, Russian Spy:] My story is simple. My father is a hunter. I was born in Siberia. For such places like Siberia or forests of Russia, this is a question of survival. Everyone has a gun.
[Murray:] After graduating from a local university and dabbling in the furniture business, she set off to Moscow to pursue political ambitions. There she launched her gun rights group and linked up with prominent Russian official, Alexander Torshin, who became a staunch ally. By fall 2014, she was trading e-mails with her lover, Erickson, about how to obtain long-term visas. Her Russian handlers wanted her to have a more permanent U.S. foothold, prosecutors said. By summer of 2015, Butina was enrolled in graduate school at American University on a student visa, all part of her cover story, according to prosecutors. By then, Butina already become a fixture at exclusive NRA events, accompanied Torshin to the 2016 annual prayer breakfast and worked with Torshin and Erickson to try to establish back channel communications between candidate Donald Trump and Russian president Vladimir Putin. Erickson's involvement in the alleged Russian operation is murky. Authorities found a note in his handwriting that read, "How to respond to FSB offer of employment." But it's unclear if the Russian intelligence offer was for him, Butina or something else entirely. Recently she grew despondent, lamenting it wasn't safe for her to return to Russia. She graduated from American University in May 2018. But a friend didn't spot her at any commencement celebrations. With school behind her, she was planning a move to Sioux City with Erickson, a man, prosecutors say, she expressed disdain for living with. A day after buying moving boxes, she was arrested. Now U.S. authorities did not explicitly name Paul Erickson in the indictment surrounding Maria Butina nor has he been charged with a crime in relation to the Butina case. He did not respond to CNN's request for comment Sara Murray, CNN, Washington.
[Harlow:] All right. Sara, we'll be watching it. Thank you. Ahead, the president versus Big Pharma. Facing growing pressure from the president, three major drugmakers are lowering some of the prices of some of their drugs. Our Dr. Sanjay Gupta will be here with me to explain what this really means for you at home next.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] And the White House fast-tracking the search for a Supreme Court nominee. The President personally meeting with senators key to approving the next justice. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor::] And I'm Dave Briggs. Happy Friday, everybody, June 29th. It is 5:00 a.m. in the East. We start with sad news, though. This morning's front page in Annapolis, Maryland says it all. A gunman's rampage at the "Capital Gazette" had killed five people, the deadliest day for American journalists since 911. Officials released the names of the employees killed Wendi Winters who worked on special publications; Gerald Fischman, editor of the editorial page; John McNamara, staff writer who covered sports; Rebecca Smith, a sales assistant; and Robert Hiaasen, the paper's assistant editor and brother of famed Miami novelist Carl Hiaasen. We encourage you to visit the "Capital Gazette's" Web site for more on each of the victims. One survivor, "Capital Gazette" staff writer Selene San Felice described her experience to CNN.
[Selene San Felice, Staff Writer, Capital Gazette:] I was working at my desk when I heard the shots, and it took a couple of them for me to realize what I was happening. And I looked at Anthony, the intern, and I said I'm getting out of here. And I grabbed my purse, and I went to the back door, which I was only a couple of steps away from. And it was locked. What happened here was very calculated. I reported on Pulse, when Pulse happened. I am I went to school in Florida, and I remember being so upset hearing about the victims who were texting their families. And there I was, sitting under a desk, texting my parents, telling them that I loved them. And I just I just don't know what I want right now. Our whole lives have been shattered. And so thanks for your prayers, but I couldn't give a
[Briggs:] Police officials say the shooter's intent was clear.
[William Krampf, Acting Chief Of Police, Anne Arundel County Police Department:] This was a targeted attack on the "Capital Gazette." He entered the building with a shotgun, and he looked for his victims as he walked through the lower level.
[Romans:] Overnight, police searched the suspect's home, and we're learning more about a possible motive. In 2011, the paper ran a story about the suspect's guilty plea to criminally harassing an old high school classmate. He filed two lawsuits over that story. Both suits dismissed. The suspect is in court this morning. The "Capital Gazette" reporting, overnight, he has been charged with five counts of first- degree murder. CNN's Brian Todd has more from Annapolis.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Dave and Christine, the man who allegedly opened fire on the "Capital Gazette" newspaper on Thursday afternoon has been identified by multiple law enforcement sources to CNN as Jarrod Warren Ramos in his late 30s. According to our sources, Mr. Ramos did have a complaint with the newspaper, that he filed a defamation claim against the "Capital Gazette" back in 2012 but that that claim was dismissed. Police say there were social media threats directed at the newspaper of a general nature, not directed at any particular person that they know of at the moment. But there were threats via social media directed at the "Capital Gazette," some of them coming as recently as Thursday morning. We have dramatic accounts, also, of from witnesses and from survivors of the police response and of the gunman's movements when he came into the building. According to Phil Davis, who is an employee of the newspaper who survived this, the gunman came in, shot his way through the glass doors, came into a small space there in the newsroom, and started opening fire. Mr. Davis said he could hear him reloading as Mr. Davis was hiding under his desk, as were several other people, and described it as a terrifying experience. We were told by police that the police response was incredibly rapid. That they got to the scene within about 60 seconds, no later than 90 seconds, from when the shooting started. One witness told CNN she was on lockdown at a distance not too far away from the shooting. She said she saw police running in, some of them in their civilian clothes, pulling their Kevlar bulletproof vests on as they ran into the building. Police credited with basically interrupting this attack. A very tragic incident here on Thursday afternoon, five people dead, at least two people wounded. The shooter, we're told, has not been cooperating with police. We're told by one source that they identified him from facial recognition software, at least initially Dave, Christine.
[Romans:] You know, an attack on journalists and attack on a newsroom, just chilling what that means for American democracy.
[Briggs:] Yes.
[Romans:] And this morning, "The Washington Post" saying, newspaper clings to its mission as a polarized nation mines for blame. Searching around for who to blame. Clearly, this suspect has been charged with five counts of murder.
[Briggs:] Yes. Credit to Sarah Sanders for tweeting an attack on innocent journalists doing their job is an attack on every American. But you can see "The Daily News" take here. Their cover, "who is the enemy now?" That based on what President Trump has called the press, the enemy of the people. You remember that, and that is what this is in reference to. That was peppered with reporters' questions, the President was, about the Annapolis newspaper shooting as he arrived back at the White House.
[Unidentified Male:] Any words about the shooting?
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, what about the shooting, sir? Mr. President, can you comment on the shooting?
[Unidentified Male:] Can you talk about the active shooter today?
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, can you react to the shooting in Annapolis? The Annapolis shooting, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] Could you please talk to us about the dead reporters in Annapolis?
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, why will you keep talking about the enemies of the people?
[Unidentified Male:] Any words at all for the families, Mr. President? Why are you walking away? Why won't you come and talk to us about that?
[Romans:] Earlier, the President put out this tweet. He said his thoughts and prayers were with the victims. He thanked the first responders. The first lady called the shooting tragic and evil.
[Briggs:] The simmering feud between the President's supporters and the Department of Justice playing out for all to see on Capitol Hill. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Chris Wray fending off attacks from House Republicans in a fiery five-hour hearing.
[Romans:] Listen to Trey Gowdy who took nearly two and a half years to complete the Benghazi investigation ripping Rosenstein over the length of the Russia investigation.
[Rep. Trey Gowdy , Chairman, House Committee On Oversight And Government Reform:] If you have evidence of wrongdoing by any member of the Trump campaign, present it to the damn grand jury. If you have evidence that this president acted inappropriately, present it to the American people, whatever you got. Finish it the hell up.
[Briggs:] It has gone, what, two years? I know Mr. Gowdy investigated Benghazi for two and a half years for context. Joining us this morning, CNN political analyst Julian Zelizer, historian and professor at Princeton University. Good to see you, sir.
[Romans:] Good morning, Julian.
[Julian Zelizer, Professor Of History And Public Affairs, Princeton University:] Good morning.
[Briggs:] This was a contentious five hours. This one, in particular, stood out, from Jim Jordan pressing Rod Rosenstein. Listen.
[Rep. Jim Jordan , Ohio:] I don't know why you won't give us what we've asked for.
[Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General, Department Of Justice:] Sir, I certainly hope that your colleagues are not under that impression. And that is not accurate, sir, and you
[Jordan:] It is accurate. We have caught you hiding information, Mr. Rosenstein.
[Rep. Eric Swalwell , California:] Mr. Chairman, can we allow the witness to answer? Mr. Chairman, point of order. We can go to Mr. Jordan's press conference and listen to him, but we came here to hear from the witness.
[Rosenstein:] Your statement that I am personally keeping information from you, trying to conceal information
[Jordan:] You're the boss, Mr. Rosenstein.
[Rosenstein:] Actually, that is correct. And my job is to make sure that we respond to your concerns. We have, sir.
[Jordan:] Mr. Rosenstein, did you threaten staffers on the House Intelligence Committee? Media reports indicate you did.
[Rosenstein:] Media reports are mistaken.
[Jordan:] Sometimes. But this is what they said, having the nation's number one law enforcement officer threaten to subpoena your calls and e-mails is downright chilling. Did you threaten to subpoena their calls and e-mails?
[Rosenstein:] No, sir. And there is no way to subpoena phone calls.
[Jordan:] Well, I mean, I'm just saying
[Briggs:] Not sure that Jim Jordan intended that as a laugh line, but the crowd found it humorous, Rosenstein's pushback. House Republicans have given Rosenstein a week to produce these documents related to Hillary Clinton's e-mail investigation and Trump-Russia. Is this about documents or something else in your estimation?
[Zelizer:] No, it's not about documents. It's not about information. It's about discrediting an investigation. And that is what the Republicans are engaged in. And it's working. I think it's been very effective. But the actual substance, I don't think, is relevant to them.
[Romans:] I mean, yesterday, the President of the United States, just before announcing that he would meet with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on July 16th, there would be the summit for these between these two leaders, he says this. He says, Russia continues to say they had nothing to do with meddling in our election. Where is the DNC server and why didn't shady James Comey and now disgraced FBI agents take and closely examine it? Why isn't Hillary-Russia being looking at? So many questions, so much corruption. And "Washington Post," in an editorial, says this morning, either Mr. Trump has lost touch with essential U.S. interests or there is some other explanation for his kowtowing that is yet unknown. The President is essentially acting as a spokesman for the Kremlin there yesterday, saying, no, no, the Kremlin says there is no meddling. At odds with his own intelligence committee, his own Secretary of State. What why is the President doing this?
[Zelizer:] Look, he's been doing it very consistently throughout his presidency. He sees that not as an attack on Russia or what Russia is doing but about his own presidency. And so every time that accusation and that issue comes up, he throws out all kinds of disjointed stories. He denies that there is any kind of meddling, and he urges everyone to move on. And, you know, he could probably solve this much easier and much earlier if he acknowledged what most agree happened and dealt with it so it doesn't happen again in 2018.
[Romans:] Our Fred Pleitgen was just reporting to us that inside Russia, when you watch the, you know, state-sanctioned television
[Zelizer:] Yes.
[Romans:] we watch T.V. in Russia, the storyline among the anchors or the banter is about how it was Russia that helped elect Donald Trump, that Russia gets some credit for electing Donald Trump.
[Briggs:] Well, John Bolton, who is over there in Russia meeting with Putin, a year ago, said it's a true act of war, Russian meddling in our election.
[Zelizer:] Right.
[Briggs:] What is the impact, though, of the President saying Russia says didn't meddle? Ultimately, does it invite them back into our election? Does it undermine the intel community? What's the damage?
[Zelizer:] Well, it certainly doesn't create any pushback, and it is a serious issue. And even if you take President Trump out of the story, no one should want this kind of interference in our electoral process. It is not something that is desirable or healthy. So if the President takes this stand, it hurts every effort to actually deal with the problem and to create pushback against Russia from doing it again or for other countries to try the same.
[Romans:] Right. All right, Julian Zelizer, come back in a few minutes. We got a lot to talk about this morning. Thank you, sir.
[Briggs:] Yes. I want to ask you about a piece you wrote. Democrats might be underestimating President Trump.
[Romans:] All right, the Vice President is in Guatemala with this message about migrants crossing the southern border.
[Michael Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] I say, with great respect to the presidents gathered here, this exodus must end.
[Romans:] And what the White House also says about that order to reunite more than 2,000 families separated at the border.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn:] Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. The U.S. government now shut down for 16 days. So far what we have seen, plenty of rhetoric, political bluster and finger-pointing. What we haven't seen? Any signs of real progress. Now President Trump is warning he will consider declaring a national emergency to build the border wall based on what happens over the next few days. He is meeting with administration officials in Camp David right now. And vice president Mike Pence is having another meeting with Capitol Hill staffers after talks yesterday for about two-and-a-half hours went nowhere. Sources tell CNN today the administration is laying out the justifications for the $5.7 billion wall. But the President himself says no progress is expected at that meeting. And Trump has made it clear he will not back down on his demands for wall funding.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] This is a very important battle to win from the standpoint of safety, number one, defining our country and who we are, also from the standpoint of dollars. This wall will pay for itself many times during the course of a year. The money we are talking about is very small compared to the return. Do you think I like doing this? I don't like doing this. But we have no choice, we have to have it.
[Whitfield:] Let's check in with CNN correspondent Boris Sanchez. So what more can you tell us about these negotiations and even talks at Camp David? What's happening?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hey, there, Fred. Yes. A source indicating that right now Republicans are presenting to Democrats that official justification that you mentioned, basically an explanation of how they plan to spend the $5.7 billion that President Trump has requested for his border wall. Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney suggested that requesting that justification was actually a delay tactic on the part of Democrats. He believes they are attempting to stall these talks. Further, he is frustrated by what he is seeing in these conversations as he told Jake Tapper. The President is also frustrated. Late yesterday, a White House source confirming to CNN that President Trump was inclined to call on a national emergency to be able to secure funds for his long promised border wall. The President confirmed that report this morning, suggesting it was a serious option. Listen to this.
[Trump:] I may declare a national emergency dependent on what's going to happen over the next few days. We have a meeting. Vice president Pence and a group will be going to a certain location that you know where that is, and they will be having another meeting. I don't expect to have anything happen at that meeting. But I think we will have, nor does the vice President, but I think we are going to have some very serious talks come Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.
[Sanchez:] Now, if the President were to declare a national emergency to get his border wall funded, it is almost certain that he would face a number of lawsuits to try to prevent that from happening. Essentially, what this boils down to according to a number of sources is that both sides don't see eye to eye. They disagree on several basic facts. According to a White House source, Democrats simply don't trust some of the statistics being presented by the department of homeland security, Kirstjen Nielsen. An aide to speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi told CNN that secretary Nielsen simply is not credible on these issues. A spokesperson for DHS responded saying these statistics simply speak for themselves. President Trump is expected to return from Camp David shortly. He is there for a pow-wow essentially outlining the administration's 2019 priorities. We will let you know if he says much when he returns to the White House, Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right. Boris, thank you so much. All right. During that 20-minute-long back and forth with reporters on the way back to Camp David, earlier today, President Trump also said this.
[Trump:] I can say this. Everybody is playing games, but I can say this. I think that the Democrats want to make a deal, I really do. I feel that.
[Unidentified Female:] What is the deal? Will you come down?
[Trump:] We will call it something different.
[Whitfield:] So while everyone is quote "playing games," as the President puts it, it is important to remember that you are still paying for government services that are shut down. For example, the agency that handles small business loans is not processing loan applications right now. Residents in Washington, D.C. who are planning to get married may have to wait a little longer. The D.C. court that handles marriage licenses is closed. And perhaps you are in the middle of buying a house. Well, depending on your type of loan, your closing date could be delayed. And of course, it is tax season, so many people are looking forward to those IRS refund checks this time of year. Well, most of the workers at the IRS are off the job. CNN spoke to one of those workers who says his furlough could easily become your problem.
[Terry Scott, Furloughed Irs Employee:] It is going to take the public, those people who are going to be impacted beyond the federal employees to stand up and say enough is enough. Because what we do at the IRS, I mean, anyone that's due a refund, they won't get that refund until we get back to work.
[Whitfield:] So despite those impacts, many Republicans are firmly standing behind the President. Senator Lindsey Graham is fiercely defending the President's call for a border wall. This morning on CBS, he was asked, why not just open the government and then continue negotiations on the border wall? Well, here is how he responded.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I do want to open up the government, but the goal is not to open up the government, the goal is to fix a broken immigration system, to bring reality to this table that ICE is not the problem, it is the solution. The goal is to repair a damaged broken immigration system.
[Whitfield:] All right. Joining me right now to discuss all of this, political reporter for Bloomberg Sahil Kapur and historian and professor at Princeton University, Julian Zelizer. He is also the coauthor of a new book, "the Fault Lines, a history of the U.S. since 1974." Congratulations, Julian on a new book. And good to see both of you. Happy New Year.
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Political Analyst:] Happy New Year.
[Sahil Kapur, Political Reporter, Bloomberg:] Happy New Year.
[Whitfield:] All right. So Sahil, let me begin with you. So the goal, at least according to Lindsey Graham, is not to open the government, but instead to fund the wall. Wasn't all of this about spending to keep a government going in the first place?
[Kapur:] Right. That is generally what these government funding debates tend to be about. But, you know, what we are seeing here is that these 800,000 federal workers have become pawns in an unrelated policy fight for Congress. Immigration is not the issue here when you are talking about government funding. It's simply to keep the lights on, to keep government functioning. And what's happening now is that about half of these 800,000 federal workers are going to continue to have to work, not getting paid for the duration of the shutdown. But your previous guest was right. It's going to take the rest of the American public feeling the negative impacts of the shutdown before, I think, the pressure mounts on the White House to, I think, back down from the wall demand. Because Democrats view this as a binary. They don't view the steel or concrete wall as necessary, and they are adamantly opposed to it. So I don't see a scenario where the Democrats give the President this wall.
[Whitfield:] And before that, Julian, you know, the President already said that, you know, he would consider now declaring a national emergency to fund the border wall and that within the next few days. Listen to what Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff said about all of this.
[Rep. Adam Schiff , California:] I may give that really threatening talk from the President that he doesn't have the power to execute. Look, if Harry Truman couldn't nationalize the steel industry during wartime, this President doesn't have the power to declare an emergency and build a multi-billion-dollar wall on the border. So that's a nonstarter.
[Whitfield:] So Julian, is it a nonstarter, because the President sounded pretty defensive it may exercise this in the next couple days of thinking.
[Zelizer:] Yes. I mean, I think Schiff is being optimistic, overly optimistic. Presidents have invoked emergency power very often since Truman, since the 1970s. We have seen it used repeatedly, including after 911. So I could imagine him using this. I could imagine this is the President's way out, open the government but then move the fight to the emergency power fight. But it will be challenged. It will be challenged in the court. It will be challenged by house Democrats. And I think he's going to have a lot of problems making a convincing case that we are in the middle of anything other than a manufactured emergency.
[Whitfield:] OK. And acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney also took to the airwaves today, and on CNN he talked about the President and this shutdown. Listen.
[Mick Mulvaney, Acting Chief Of Staff:] The President really does believe that you could solve this in 10 minutes. We are asking for $5.6 billion. They are offering us zero. It sounds like we are simply arguing about one variable. Just how much are we going to spend on that barrier, on the southern border, on the steel slat fence, whatever you want to call it? This should be relatively simple.
[Whitfield:] So Sahil, if it's so simple, then what is this all about?
[Kapur:] well, it's simple, the President gets what he wants. But Democrats aren't willing to give him what he wants. So I mean, we are stuck, you know. I think there is no way around that impasse unless Democrats are willing to give the President $5 billion for the wall or the President is willing to back down. But this issue is so central to his political identity. It's the reason for his rise in the Republican Party, immigration and migration in general. It is his answer to voters for their problems on everything relating ranging from jobs, to crime, to the opioid epidemic. Now, it may not be the right answer, but it is his answer. And the wall to him and his supporters are the potent symbol for, you know, him taking action to deal with that problem. So this seems to be the one issue that he, you know, that he is not willing to back down from.
[Whitfield:] Yes, Sahil, except that campaign promise was really about Mexico paying for the wall.
[Kapur:] That's right.
[Whitfield:] So where is that end of the promise? And is the President behaving as though he thinks people have forgotten about that jargon?
[Kapur:] He has tried a number of different arguments here. He said he started by saying Mexico will pay for the wall, then he is saying the wall will pay for itself. Lately, he has been saying that savings from this new updated NAFTA deal, the USMCA will pay for the wall. So, you know, he has tried to approach that a number of different ways. But it's very clear that Mexico is not paying for the wall. There is no provision in the law that prohibits Mexico from funding this wall. So that with the case, he could easily build it.
[Whitfield:] So Julian, the President and Republicans are really seem to be digging in their hills. There was a meeting with the vice president yesterday. There might be another one. The President went to Camp David today, presumably to talk about all of this. But where is the compromise? Where are the signs that anyone, either side, is willing to give in on something so as to at least get government up and running again?
[Zelizer:] It's very hard to see where the compromise might be other than some kind of from the Democrats increased funding for border security, not for the wall, but not nearly anything that he wants. The Democrats are not going to concede. They have already agreed to a budget that doesn't really include much of what they want. And most Republicans had agreed to that budget. So the real question is, when do congressional Republicans feel enough pressure to pass a budget whereby they can override the President? That's the way this whole logjam can be braked. It's really about the Republicans on Capitol Hill, not even Republicans in the White House.
[Whitfield:] And Sahil, that's what former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, you know, said this morning on another program saying it really is going to take Republicans perhaps crumbling, acquiescing, once this feeling, you know, the impact is made beyond the federal workers. Is he right?
[Kapur:] I think that is very true. I think the way, you know, one of the ways that this impasse finally break so that congressional Republicans are not willing to go along with this anymore, and we are seeing some cracks in the congressional Republican alliance with the President on this, and that Cory Gardner, the senator from Colorado, and Susan Collins from Maine, both Republicans who happen to be up for reelection in 2020 in states that Hillary Clinton won have called for reopening the government without wall money. Now, if you see an outpouring of more and more Republicans coming out and saying this, you know, this fight needs to end and the government needs to reopen, then the White House would be in a very, very difficult position. But at this point, we are seeing Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell standing behind the President on this. He has said no bill will come to the floor of the Senate without the President's support.
[Whitfield:] All right. Sahil Kapur, Julian Zelizer, we will leave it there for now. Thanks so much.
[Zelizer:] Thank you.
[Kapur:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] And this breaking news. Overnight in Texas where an arrest is made after an intense week-long manhunt in the shooting death of 7-year-old Jazmine Barnes. Now police have charged a man with capital murder. But investigators say there could still be other suspects at large. We are live from Houston, next.

[Hala Gorani, Cnn International Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Hala Gorani. We are live in Paris this hour. Thanks you for being with us on this Friday. This is a special edition of THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. Well, it comes down to this, a centrist who has never held public office and a far right candidate known for her anti-E.U. and anti-immigrant platform. They have left France's mainstream parties in the dust of a dramatic first round vote. And now either Emmanuel Macron or Marine Le Pen will be the next president of France. They have made their cases to the voters, in two days we will know who was successful. But as Melissa Bell reports, the final day of campaigning proved just as exciting as the rest of the race.
[Melissa Bell, Cnn International Correspondent:] A noisy end to a noisy campaign. Protesters gathered outside the Hans Cathedral. Inside the far-right candidate, Marine Le Pen, was paying a surprise visit, the last of her campaign, and one she was obliged to bring an abrupt end. Immediately afterwards, Le Pen blamed her rival.
[Marine Le Pen, French Presidential Candidate:] This is very revealing, perhaps it's a choice that French have to make. The horde that came to shove me to insult us at this sacred historical place. I think it is symbolic and practically organized by the militants in both cases.
[Bell:] In a debate on Wednesday that was as aggressive as it was personal, Emmanuel Macron had accused her of stirring up violence.
[Emmanuel Macron French Presidential Candidate:] I am talking about the party of the far right, the one that you lead. It's a party that spreads lies on social media, which encourages hatred, molests journalists, and generously dispense brutality everywhere.
[Le Pen:] We have never molested anyone.
[Macron:] You did on several occasions. At my meetings, you have threatened and beaten people and I have experienced that. That is the truth, Ms. Le Pen.
[Bell:] By the following day down the south of France, Macron's tone had become more magnanimous.
[Macron:] For the past ten days or so, we have been leading this fight, this fight for the second round that opposes the two projects face-to-face, and the one of the National Front. No! No! No, don't boo them, don't boo them, it is pointless to fight them. Make them lose. Vote against them. We must defeat them in the ballot box, and not boo them.
[Bell:] The independent centrist had not only risen in the polls after the debate, he'd also had a very unusual endorsement.
[Barack Obama, Former U.s. President:] I know that you face many challenges, and I want all of my friends in France to know how much I am routing for your success, because of how important this election is, I also want you to know that I am supporting Emmanuel Macron to lead you forward. Lamarche, viva la France.
[Bell:] But Barack Obama isn't the only American president taking an interest, only two weeks ago just after an attack against police on the Champs-Elysees, Donald Trump tweeted that "There had been another terrorist attack in Paris, the people of France will not take much more of this, will have a big effect on presidential election." A reminder of the fact that the world will be watching when on Sunday, the French decide which of these two candidates should become president. Melissa Bell, CNN, Paris.
[Gorani:] Our senior international correspondent, Jim Bittermann, has been following this race throughout. Jim, we saw a messy end of campaign in there for Marine Le Pen, when she has been egged and booed, you name it.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It is been all downhill from Wednesday onwards, the debate where she was roundly criticized and people said that she lost, and eggs on Thursday, and today her last day of the campaigning, she was off to the cathedral and got booed and had to leave through the back door and so it's a real mess for her.
[Gorani:] I find it remarkable how close the people can get to these candidates and also given the security concerns here.
[Bittermann:] Yes, it is amazing, and earlier on we saw Macron get flour, and Fillon get flour, and as you were saying, you can practically make a crepe out of the ingredients, but it is amazing that people can get so close.
[Gorani:] So the latest poll really gives Macron a huge edge, 62-38 and he gained ground in fact after the debate on Wednesday. However, it is not a done deal. There is still a path for Le Pen.
[Bittermann:] There is a clever researcher over at one of the French institutes who did a study of the votes and said that basically just because the Marine Le Pen voters are so committed, 90 percent of her voters will do it. They will not abstain on Sunday, whereas with Macron, they calculate that something like 60 percent of his voters will actually carry through and vote, and so, because of that fact, the opinion polls could be skewed.
[Gorani:] And you always have the unknowns. A rainy day, this is a long holiday weekend, you can have all sorts of things happening in the last two days.
[Bittermann:] Absolute terrorist attack.
[Gorani:] Yes, exactly. What about Macron, we saw that Le Pen got egged and booed and all of the rest of it. What did he do because he has had some tense moments?
[Bittermann:] Yes, he's had some tense moments mainly with confrontations with workers and that happened again today. He had face-off with the some workers. He was also at Media Park today, which is a left wing media organization here, and there he did a little bit better, but he also was at a cathedral today, but he did not get booed.
[Gorani:] All right. Thanks very much, Jim Bittermann. Of course, we will stay in touch with Jim over the next few hours for more. Let's take a look at France's election in the wider context of Europe because you have two candidates who are diametrically opposed on that question, one pro-E.U. and the other one very much against France's current participation in the E.U. as it sounds. Pascal Lamy is a former director general of the World Trade Organization. He's been a high level adviser in the French government and the European Commission. Thanks for joining us live from New York. First of all, what do you make of this race? The fact that in the second round, Marine Le Pen, the National Front candidate against the centrist upstart who has never run a campaign in his life, Emmanuel Macron?
[Pascal Lamy, Former Director-general, World Trade Organization:] Well, I think that as you are rightly said, it is it is a clear dividing line between a pro-European candidate and a Emmanuel Macron was the only real pro-European candidate, and clearly, anti-European candidate with Marine Le Pen. So it is something that is rather new in the French politics where you have a sort of combination of traditional right versus left, and sort of the Obama versus Trump in some sort, and on the other side open against closed Europe being the dividing line. And I think the result on Sunday, whatever it is, it looks good for Macron although as you rightly said, there are remaining certainties on the number of voters. The result is a sort of referendum about Europe.
[Gorani:] Yes. But you say, it is right versus left, but here, you really have two entirely different visions and the traditional parties, the conservatives and the socialist, performed pretty dismally especially the socialist. This is a rejection of the establishment, of people who say, listen, the way that things have been run over the last several decades have not worked for us and we do not trust our traditional politicians. Why is it happening in France? This is completely new.
[Lamy:] I totally agree with you. It is incredibly new. I mean, none of us sort of reasonably informed French people or the politicians would have thought a year ago that Emmanuel Macron would be now probably the next French president. It is an incredible story, but right you are the root of it, the starting point is a sort of the disintegration of the traditional party system in France where the traditional right wing parties went to the extreme, and the traditional left wing parties went to the extreme. And this opened a huge space for a guy like Emmanuel Macron who obviously was clever enough to jump into that big hole that opened up within the traditional parties.
[Gorani:] But those who were others jumping into that big hole are the far right, Marine Le Pen, but also the far left, Jean-Luc Melenchon. You have another candidate who may not be a household name granted outside of France, [inaudible] almost 5 percent. All those three put together represent 45 percent of the French electorate comfortable with the idea of either exiting the E.U. or renegotiating France's role in it, possibly even exiting organizations like NATO. I mean, what do politicians like yourself, and other establishment figures, maybe what have you and others done wrong to create a situation where it is possible for politicians like them to find a real audience?
[Lamy:] I mean, France has always been very specific with the sort of the tendency to move to the extremes, which is higher than other more traditional European countries, and that is true that if you are look at on the one side if Macron wins, great news for Europe. On the one side, if there is still 40 percent of people who feel disenfranchised and against the political system, this is big. But mind you, the French political system is not a presidential system. We have presidential elections on Monday, and if Emmanuel Macron win, if, the next big step is a month from now parliamentary elections. France is basically a parliamentary system, and the president who would be elected with a majority of the parliament against him would be severely handicapped. So the real fight now assuming that Emanuel Macron wins on Sunday will be whether he can get a proper parliamentary majority a month from now, and this is another fight. So assuming he wins on Sunday at 8:00, the next immediate thing is what about parliamentary elections?
[Gorani:] Right. He might start the presidency if he is elected and it is the expectation weak. Marine Le Pen could be looking at five years from now, this is a long game for a relatively young woman of 48 who has a very, very passionate support base.
[Lamy:] It is one of the many paradoxes, and one of the very extraordinary things in this campaign that a guy like Emmanuel Macron succeeds in making Marine Le Pen, who is roughly the same age as he is, as an old politician. It is many ways incredible if you are not following the detail of this incredible story which I think for you media people, it must be a fantastic story.
[Gorani:] Well, I'm not I am going to actually agree with you on that one. Certainly, it's been fascinating and a pivotal moment for France and Europe as well. We appreciate you joining us this evening, Pascal Lamy, the former director general of the WTO. Thanks for being with us from New York. There's a lot more to come tonight, it has been quite the week for Brexit negotiations and they have not even officially started yet. We will explain the latest swipe from that man, Jean-Claude Juncker. And with just a few hours of campaigning to go, both candidates are trying to get everything single vote. We will have much more from Paris. There were eggings, boos, and verbal confrontation, and this is just Friday. We will be right back.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] We will get you back to Capitol Hill and this contentious hearing, day one, so far here in this confirmation of potentially the next Supreme Court justice, if the president has his way, Judge Brett Kavanaugh there sitting there. So, we're waiting for his opening statement. That will happen in just a little bit. These senators are still giving their opening statements. I want to bring you back to the other breaking news on this Tuesday afternoon on this explosive new book that gives us a devastating look inside the Trump administration. This is all coming from Bob Woodward's book. It's called "Fear: Trump in the White House." It paints a disturbing picture of chaos, concern and dysfunction. Woodward also released a recording to "The Washington Post" of a conversation he had with the president about the book.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm just hearing about it. And I heard I did hear from Lindsey, but I'm just hearing about it. So, we are going to have a very inaccurate book, and that's too bad. But I don't blame you entirely.
[Bob Woodward, "the Washington Post":] No, it's going to be accurate.
[Trump:] All right. OK. Well, accurate is that nobody has ever done a better job than I'm doing as president. That, I can tell you. So, that's and that's the way a lot of people feel that know what's going on. And you will see that over the years, but a lot of people feel that, Bob. So...
[Woodward:] I believe in our country. And because you are our president, I wish you good luck.
[Baldwin:] When you think of Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Bob Woodward, you also think of this incredible man, Carl Bernstein, CNN analyst, who also teamed up with Woodward for their Pulitzer Prize- winning coverage of the Watergate scandal that eventually led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon. What do you think of all this?
[Carl Bernstein, Cnn Contributor:] I think that the most important thing that we see in Bob's reporting is that the people closest to the president of the United States in the White House and in his presidency see their job as to protect the nation and the world from Donald Trump as president of the United States. And it's an extraordinary thing. The only previous time that I know of that it's happened in our history is in the closing days of the Nixon presidency. This has been true throughout the Trump presidency: Save the country from the president of the United States. Page after page after page, Mattis, save the country from this moron. Gary Cohn taking papers off the president's desk, save the country from what he might do. And this is an irrefutable picture, because of Bob Woodward's methodology, which is to go exhaustively, to source after source after source. And unlike those of us doing these stories day after day on the air and giving little pieces, what Bob has done, going back to the tradition that we have seen through all of the books that he has worked on, is to put a coherent, complete narrative together that is absolutely undeniable, and in this case buttressed with notes, with memoranda, with actual quotes that go on and on and on. So there is not an element of this that the president of the United States can call fake news or fake book. This is the real story of Donald Trump naked as president of the United States.
[Baldwin:] So I was saying with Gloria a second ago, I mean, based upon what a lot of this has come from his own chief of staff, from Mattis, as you just pointed out. And who knows what happens with their futures? The concern would be if there is a true travesty in the realm of national security, Carl, and these people are replaced by yes-men or -women, what happens then? What happens when the person isn't there to swipe it off the desk?
[Bernstein:] The first thing is, if this is not a warning sign going off to the Congress of the United States, to the Republicans of the Congress of the United States, saying, first of all, we must protect Mueller's investigation, secondly, we cannot blindly follow this president and his incompetency, which is a theme throughout this book, and his recklessness and his disconcern for the national interest in favor of his own interests. It is time for the Republicans to say, the Trump presidency is a national emergency, and it is up to us, both parties, to treat the Trump presidency as a national emergency. We're just getting at the surface of what's in this book.
[Baldwin:] Do you think they will?
[Bernstein:] I have no idea. What we have seen so far is an abdication of responsibility by the Republicans in the Congress of the United States such as we have never seen. In Watergate, the system worked. It worked because Republicans decided, we cannot have a president of the United States who is a criminal or a danger to the presidency of the United States. This situation is far more dangerous. And that's what we know now. We have seen pieces of this on the air. Many people have reported on pieces of this, including descriptions that perhaps all of us have used on the air from our sources saying the president is unhinged.
[Baldwin:] Sure.
[Bernstein:] Here, we see and hear his aides by name day after day after day say, the president is unhinged, he is a rageaholic, he is a danger to our national security. That's what we're dealing with here. And, also, I want to say one thing about General Kelly.
[Baldwin:] Sure.
[Bernstein:] It would seem to me that General Kelly, in the interest of the country, needs to resign.
[Baldwin:] Really?
[Bernstein:] And with a statement that says the presidency can no longer be entrusted to this man. We now have a picture of what we have all been dealing with here. I will be happy to appear before committees of Congress, whether in executive session or whether in open session, and tell them what I have seen about this president of the United States and whether or not he is competent and able to lead the United States. I think he's in a position to do an act of great patriotism perhaps here, but for him to continue in this job, given what he is quoted as saying by Bob in this book and the thing about the book is, like all of Bob's books, the verisimilitude. And in this book, it goes even farther, because there are so many tape recordings from his sources that the account, the narrative accounts are based on, that we finally are inside the Trump White House. And it is a horror show. And I said that not with any glee. This is a terrible, sad, dismaying, demoralizing, dangerous condition that Donald Trump has put the United States in.
[Baldwin:] Carl Bernstein, thank you so much.
[Bernstein:] Good to be here.
[Baldwin:] We are going to pick up on that conversation in just a second. Let's go now to the confirmation hearings of this man, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who could become the next justice on the Supreme Court. Listening now to senator Cory Booker.
[Sen. Cory Booker , New Jersey:] ... the opportunity to at least speak and make our case. And even though you have not ruled in our favor, of which I'm disappointed, I do hope you understand that I value your friendship and, frankly, some of the most valuable moments I have had on this Senate. I still remember
[Sen. Charles Grassley , Iowa:] If you worry about our friendship being affected, it will not be. And that gives me an opportunity to say something to the public at large, and that is about this committee. You would think that Republicans and Democrats don't talk to each other, but I would like to remind the public that, when they think that happens, they ought to think of the record of this committee, not just this chairman, but this committee in the three-and-a-half years and maybe even before I got to be chairman, but in the three-and-a- half years I have been chairman. Every bill that got out of this committee has been a bipartisan bill. Proceed, Senator Booker.
[Booker:] Thank you very much, sir. I appreciate that. It doesn't detract from the fact that I just fundamentally disagree with the way you have been concluding today. When I first got to the Senate, I was very fortunate that a lot of senior statesmen, yourself, Senator Hatch included, pulled me aside and gave me hard wisdom at times. Remember, I came to the Senate in a special election at a time that they were trying that we were changing some of the Senate rules. Senator Levin gave him and gave me a hard talking-to. Senator McCain gave me a hard talking-to. And all of them made similar points about this idea that sometimes you need to be as objective as possible and see how you would react if the pendulum was the other had swung the other way. In other words, they warned me that what goes around in this place comes around and to really think that if the shoe was on the other foot. And I have been struggling with that, sir, with all honesty, of what would the Republicans be saying and what we would be saying if we had a Democratic president right now, a Democratic nominee right now, and this process was in the reverse? And I would like to believe how I would behave. And I'm pretty confident I would actually be a betting man, be willing to bet that if the Republicans were being denied effectively about 90 percent of the documents about a person's public record and I actually do believe that some of the analogies that are made to Senator to excuse me to Justice Kagan and her solicitor general time is not a favor analogy. This is part of the nominee's history that he himself has said was one of the most formative times. And so I would not hire an intern in my office knowing only 90 percent of their resume. There is not a person here that would buy a home only seeing 90 percent only seeing 10 percent of the rooms. I just believe what we're doing here, just on the objective view of fairness, is sincerely unfair, and it's insulting to the ideals that we try to achieve in this with some sense of comity and some sense of rules. But I want to go deeper than that. I'm trying to figure out what the jeopardy would be, what the jeopardy would be if we just waited for the documents. Last night, we had a document dump of tens of thousands of pages, tens of thousands of pages. As has been said already, there is no judge that who would allow a court proceeding to go on, no judge that would move forward if one of the parties had just got documents as of 5:00 last night or potentially as of 11:00. What I don't understand is, what's the jeopardy of just waiting, not just for us to digest these documents, but other documents? The reality is, is that, Senator Grassley, you yourself have asked for a specific, more finite set, more limited set of documents that you haven't even gotten. And so whether it's not seeing 90 percent of the resume of the gentleman before us or 50 percent or 40 percent, that should come within time. And there is no jeopardy, when we have a lifetime appointment. He will be there, should he be confirmed, for decades and decades and decades. Waiting another week or five days or two weeks for those documents that you yourself has requested, which is a more limited subset, for even those documents to come through, I don't understand what the rush is, especially given all that is at stake. And so those are the reasons why I say to you, with sincere respect, that this is an absurd process. It just seems unfair to me, and it could easily be solved by us putting a pause here on this process, waiting for the documents, evaluating the documents. And it will be a much more robust set of hearings on this nominee. As I said, I would not hire an intern if I had not seen if I had only seen 10 percent of their resume. And here, to have a fuller body of the work of this gentleman before us, who, as one of my colleagues called, popping up in some of the most interesting times in the last decade or two on some of the most important issues, already, the limited amount, what we call 7 percent of the documents that I have seen, unfortunately, those are things that are being held committee-confidential, which I don't even know if I can use in my questioning here, I think the penalty, sir, is ousting from being ousted from the Senate. But even the little limited amount of documents that have potentially made my questioning far more rich, far more substantive to get to the heart of the issues of the individual nominee. And, again, sir, I try to summon the spirit of some of the elder statespeople I had the privilege of serving with, from Rockefeller to Levin to McCain, to summon that spirit to be as objective as possible. I do not think it is unreasonable for us to wait for a week or two to get the full body of those documents. It will cause no harm or damage, except to have more of a full telling of what is at stake here. This is the stakes are too high in what this nominee represents for us to rush through this process without a full sharing of the documents. And with that, I will continue, sir, with my opening statement. I have said before already that...
[Grassley:] I will take this opportunity to probably say that you said I didn't get all the documents I requested. You probably heard the first sentence of something I said after our break. And that was that I could I first started talking about expecting a million documents. And we end up, I think, with 488,000. But then I went on to explain that the process, with all the software and everything else that can speed things up, duplicates were eliminated, and, et cetera, et cetera, and so we have gotten all the documents I requested, just to correct you.
[Booker:] Sir, and to my understanding...
[Grassley:] Go ahead with your opening statement.
[Booker:] No, sir, but I just want to make a point to that, if you don't mind. You had requested a limited set of documents of his time in the White House Counsel's Office. We have not received all the documents from his time. They are still being vetted slowly through a system of not a representative from the committee, but the Bill Burke individual is still reading through those documents as we speak. I imagine some of them will be dumped on us as this process is going on. And I predict with quite confidence that some of those documents might still be trickling out in the days before the actual full Senate vote. Please, sir.
[Grassley:] You're talking about committee-confidential. And you have access to them right now. It just there hasn't been a determination that like 80 percent of all the documents are on the Web site, so the public can see them. But in regard to some, they were forwarded to us without a second review. That second review gives an opportunity to then get them out to the public, if there is no reason that they are excluded under the law. And you can read those committee confidential documents right now.
[Booker:] Well, sir, I we sent a letter days ago asking for that. I will resend it with you in these next 24 hours before our hearing tomorrow.
[Grassley:] We responded to your letter.
[Booker:] Again, sir, you did not respond to our letter by allowing committee-confidential documents...
[Grassley:] Please go to your opening statement.
[Booker:] Thank you very much, sir. And, look, I was you know, former Senator, now former Vice President Biden talked about not questioning your colleagues' motives. And some of the colleagues across the aisle have called the efforts by some of us sincerely to get access to these documents a sham, a charade. I can go through a lot of the words that were used calling into question the motivations that I have for doing what I believe, sir, is perhaps the most grave and important duty that I have as a senator, to advise and consent. And, yes, as Senator Cornyn pointed out, I have announced my decision already, but my duty to the people of the state of the New Jersey and others is to fully vet an individual. That's why I think the documents are important, that his full record is made clear, and that we have a chance to ask questions about it. I also have said that I oppose this nomination happening right now because of the moment we are in American history, which is very unprecedented. I remind you that we have had bipartisan statements by senators working in tangent about the attack on the United States of America, which was an attack going to the core of what our democracy is about, the voting processes. A special counsel was put into place. And that has led to dozens of people being indicted, people all around the president of the United States. It has led to dozens and dozens of charges, and that investigation is ongoing. We have seen the president of the United States credibly accused by his own personal lawyer as being an unindicted co-conspirator. In all of this, we have one judge being chosen who was not on the original list. He wasn't on the outsourced Federalist Society's original list. He wasn't on the second version of that list. He got on to that list after this special investigation got going, in other words, after the president was in jeopardy. He was added to the list. And then the president pulled the one person from all of that list late that was added late that would give him, in a sense, the ability to pick a judge that has already spoken vastly about a president's ability to be prosecuted, about a president's ability to dismiss or end an investigation. And so that's the second reason why I have asked for us to put a pause on this process. Fundamental to this nation's very beliefs Judge Learned Hand said this as powerful and profound as the documents of this country are, our founding documents, they are not worth much if the people themselves lose faith in them. And I believe the nomination of a judge from all of this list that so powerfully speaks to a president's de facto immunity from ongoing investigation prosecution will shake the faith that millions and millions of Americans have in the fairness of the processes and system. And I have asked Judge Kavanaugh time and time again to recuse himself, to restore that faith, to alleviate the concerns of Americans. And he has thus far refused to do so. Now, I am upset about the process. And this is not manufactured outrage. This is sincere concern for a process that seems wrong and just not objective and fair. I am concerned about, as my colleagues are on both sides of the aisle, of a Russian attack on our nation. But there's a lot more going on here that makes this nomination of great concern. And it's, frankly, some of the things I have heard from both sides of the aisle tonight when we travel this country, and what we are hearing from individuals and how that relates to a position on the Supreme Court. Right now, millions of American families are watching this in sincere concern and fear. I have heard them. I have gotten the calls. I have traveled to this country. I have talked to Republicans and Democrats. They are fearful about where the Supreme Court is going and what it will do when it has the power to shape law, shape the lives and liberties for individuals for decades to come. I have talked to workers all over my state, all over this nation, workers that now work in a country where stages are at a 60-year low as a portion of our GDP, whose labor protections workers whose labor protections are being diluted and whose unions are under attack. So many of those individuals are asking whether the Supreme Court of their lifetimes will be an institution that elevates the dignity of American workers or one that allows powerful corporate interests to continue to weaken labor protections that didn't just happen, labor protections that were fought for, that people struggled for, that some, if you know the labor movement, actually died for. Are these labor rights going to becoming aggravated? Are they going to become limited, further increasing the vast disparities of wealth and power in our country? We know this. We have talked to both sides of the aisle. We have talked to cancer survivors, Americans with disabilities, survivors of domestic abuse, parents with beautiful children that happen to have disabilities, who, because of the Affordable Care Act, can no longer be denied coverage because of quote "a preexisting condition." There's a Texas case where that's being challenged right now. That's moving up. It could likely go before the Supreme Court. Well, knowing your record, it is right that these Americans, so many of them with preexisting conditions, are asking whether the Supreme Court will be an institution that affirms and protects the rights of people with access to health care, some many people who rightfully believe when they read our founding documents that talk about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that health care, they believe, is fundamental. We all know too many people who have set aside prescription drugs because they are too high because of what corporations are doing there, people who have put off going to see the doctor because a visit is too expensive. That is in the balance with this nomination. I have gone across the state. And, Senator Durbin, and I don't know if I have told you this. I was in your state talking to a Republican farmer about how the farm country is changing so dramatically, the livelihoods of so many independent family farmers are being threatened by the consolidation of large multinational corporations. These corporations have acquired so much power. This consolidation now, from the seeds that they buy, the prices going up, to who they have the ability to side this abuse of corporate consolidation is driving so many farmers out of business. You see, one farmer was telling me about the suicide rates. Now, people are saying that this is histrionics, this is not life or death. Well, I know these things actually are often a matter of life or death. When uninsurance rate goes up when insurance rates go down, rather, more people without health care often lose their lives. There is not one senator on the Republican side or Democratic side who has not seen I have only been here five years, and I have seen the culture of Washington change because of the obscene amount of dark money pouring into our political process, corrupting our political process, rigging the system. This nomination will have an effect on that. I have seen Americans all over this country, through bipartisan work that I have done with senators on the other side, who feel entrapped by a broken criminal justice system, one that is we know, unassailably, disproportionately targets black and brown Americans, where many Americans believe and one famous American said we have a system that now treats you better if you're rich and guilty than poor and innocent. These issues are in the balance now. And everyone who is concerned about these issues and more are wondering what the story of America is. We had this great leader, a man named King, who said the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. There are so many Americans who fought for these fundamental rights, who family members who they remember, union organizers, civil rights activists, women's rights activists, who fought for, struggled for and died for many of these rights, the right for women to make their own medical decisions, including the right to an abortion and not a back-alley butcher, the right for Americans to marry who they love, the right to vote and to work free of discrimination, regardless of race, and the rights of all Americans. These are our rights. These are American rights. And so we know the answer to these questions. I have looked through the record I have had access to, to see the pattern of your decisions. And that's the pattern that really troubles me, Judge. And I know we are going to get a chance to go through this, and I know my colleagues will as well, but it seems so clear that in your courts, the same the same folks seem to win over and over again, the powerful, the privileged, big corporations, special interests. And over and over again, the folks that lose are the folks that why I came to Washington to fight, working folks, consumers, women, immigrants, minorities, the disadvantaged, the poor. This is the challenge before us. This is why so much is at stake. I love that my colleagues keep going back to the Constitution, but understand this. I laud our founders. I think they were geniuses, but you have got to understand that there are millions of Americans who understand that they were also flawed people. We are the oldest constitutional democracy. We are the oldest one. We were founded in a break with human events. You know this, Judge. I have read your writings. We were not founded on some kind of tribalism, as much as we think it's breaking out in our country. We weren't founded because we all look alike, we all pray alike, because we are all the same race. We're not a monarchy or theocracy. We broke with the course of human events and formed this nation. God bless America. God bless our founders. But we know our founders and their values and their ideals. We know that they that they were flawed. And you can see that in the documents. Native Americans were referred to as savages. Women weren't referred to at all. African-Americans, blacks, slaves were referred to as fractions of human beings. As one civil rights activist I think it was Stokely Carmichael used to always say: "Constitu, constitu. I can only say three-fifths of the word."
[Grassley:] Senator Booker.
[Booker:] I'm almost done, sir.
[Grassley:] OK. Go ahead.
[Booker:] I have got about three more minutes.
[Grassley:] The only reason I stopped you at this point is, I thought that I would let people go at least as far as Senator Blumenthal went. And you have reached that point.
[Booker:] I appreciate that. I'm a bit of a trailblazer, sir. I'm going to push two or three more minutes.
[Grassley:] OK.
[Booker:] My point my point, sir, is that I'm proud of this history.
[Grassley:] Your clock, when it reaches 10, is your two-and-a-half minutes.
[Booker:] And I just want to point out right here, from the activism in Stonewall, Selma, Seneca Falls, there's an activism that I worry, rights that were gained were rolled back. And the example I have here is, there is an amazing activist here right now, Ms. Carlotta Walls LaNier. And Ms. LaNier, I thank her coming today. It was 61 years ago on this very day, on September 4, 1957, that Ms. LaNier, at the age of 14, faced crowds that were shouting racial slurs. She was jeered. And on that day, Ms. LaNier joined eight other students, a group that would become known as the Little Rock Nine, to try to desegregate an all-white high school in Little Rock, Arkansas. We know what they did that day was much more much bigger than a first day of school. It was the first major test of the Supreme Court's landmark decision, the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision. I have been shocked sitting here that there are now some judges that Trump has appointed that refuse to even say and I'm not saying this is you, sir that that's settled law. There are people like Ms. LaNier who were part of gaining rights in this country, advancing the ideals of this nation towards the purity of the ideals put forth by the founders, despite the imperfections. And now the fear and the worry is where the trend of the court of the court is doing is rolling back those gains, is undermining that progress, is restricting individual rights as the rise of corporations, the rise of dark money, the rise of the interests of the powerful and the privileged and the elite. And so I just say, in conclusion, sir, I said this to you in a heart- to-heart moment in the last seconds that you were you you came to my office to meet with me one-on-one, which I appreciated. I pointed to the map behind my desk, which is the Central Ward of Newark, New Jersey, a place with mighty people.

[Hala Gorani, Cnn International Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Hala Gorani. We are live outside the Houses of Parliament where the queen presented the agenda for the British government, but is there enough political facility to put the plan into action. A lot to talk about today. Also this hour, a very significant transition of power in Saudi Arabia. The man on the left is the new crowned prince. He is kissing the hands of the man who just replaced. How could that impact the region and the world? We will break that down for you as well. We begin here in the heart of British government, but it is a government in turmoil. Today, the queen delivered a speech prepared for her by Theresa May's Torys, but they do face an uphill battle to actually get anything passed. The event may look ornate to our international viewers, but today's speech was a toned down affair, make no mistake about it. The queen arrived in a car not a carriage as she usually does for these events. As you just saw the crown was carried in, she did not wear it. The speech itself included a series of Brexit bills and struck an optimistic tone about the country's negotiating position. Listen.
[Queen Elizabeth:] My government's priority is to secure the best possible deal as the country leaves the European Union. My ministers are committed to working with parliament, the devolved administrations, business and others to build the widest possible consensus on the country's future outside the European Union.
[Gorani:] The question is can Theresa May's minority government actually pass anything outlined in the speech. CNN's Nic Robertson is live from 10 Downing Street. What's next then for Theresa May?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] Well, there will be the debate in the House of Commons before the vote on the queen's speech later next week, and that's the period basically she has to try to get this deal struck with the DUP, the Democratic Unionist Party, of Northern Ireland. Ten MPs who then bolster her 317 MPs, which are a minority, and give them the sort of tip to get the necessary votes to pass whatever bills she wants. Right now, we are hearing from DUP that they think the talks are going well in mood music over the past sort of 24, 48 hours. This sort of indicated they are issues the DUP have been indicating those money issues. That perhaps they want to see an end to the Conservative Party's austerity. That perhaps they want money for additional building programs, schools, health care, hospitals, et cetera, in Northern Ireland. It's not clear because the talks have been sort of the details have been, you know, closely guarded. But the fact that it has sort of come out in the public domain in the last 24 hours does really seemed to indicate that they are struggling to get to this agreement. That we are keep being briefed that they will get to the agreement. But that's another bid for Theresa May. She needs that. She doesn't have it yet, and that doesn't look very good.
[Gorani:] All right. Thanks very much, Nic Robertson. Our senior diplomatic correspondent at 10 Downing Street. Obviously a lot to talk about with my next guest, conservative lawmaker, Sir Bill Cash. He is a longtime supporter of Brexit and in fact was one of the you are telling that the architects of what eventually became Brexit
[Bill Cash, British Member Of Parliament:] That was in the [inaudible]
[Gorani:] Let's talk a little bit about Theresa May. I mean, she called this snap election. She didn't have to. Clearly, it backfired disastrously for her. She lost her majority. Should she stay or go?
[Cash:] Absolutely stay.
[Gorani:] Why?
[Cash:] By the way, Ken Clark would say the same and he is not on the same argument with me, same side with me as Europe on the European issue. But basically, you're talking about turmoil. As a matter of fact, what is actually happening is to do with the numbers in the House of Commons.
[Gorani:] She created the turmoil, didn't she? She didn't have to call this election.
[Cash:] Well, I think the short answer is that she did the right thing in calling the election. The election campaign by Common Conservatives is not the best we've ever seen. Let's put it that way. However, we did get 43 percent of the vote, which is more than even under Margaret Thatcher. And in addition to that, we have now got a completely confused opposition who actually, as I said this afternoon in the House of Commons, got to power on the basis of what I would describe and did describe as a false elcomy of reckless spending. Now
[Gorani:] But that's putting a positive on what was an
[Cash:] But of course.
[Gorani:] let's be honest. Because you are saying that essentially the opposition is in disarray, but Jeremy Corbyn outperformed every single expectation, how is that a defeat for [inaudible].
[Cash:] Not today in the House of Commons. When it gets back in the House of Commons, he shrinks, and that is the point. And that actually is where the action is now going to take place.
[Gorani:] At the polls, he did better than expected.
[Cash:] Well, he did actually do really quite well getting 43 percent, but let's talk numbers for a minute because ultimately, all these matters are going to be decided by votes in the House of Commons. On the repeal bill, for example, some of the things that are not being fully explained is that Labour MPs who are absolute and completely with us on Brexit issues. And there were about anything between 7 and 10 of those. The DUP will come with us and absolutely no question about that, although there is
[Gorani:] Although there is no deal. Did Theresa May not I mean, essentially she announced as [inaudible] the fact that the DUP would rally with her, and by the way, the DUP for our viewers, we had to take the crash course in DUP politics. They are far right, Northern Ireland party. They have some social positions on for instance, gay rights, and abortion
[Cash:] But it has nothing to do with Brexit.
[Gorani:] I get that, but British voters didn't necessarily go to the polls thinking I'm voting for a minority conservative government plus the DUP. It's being opposed
[Cash:] That is completely true. But at the same time, the question of the alliance with the DUP is actually something intrinsic on Brexit in particular, which is this parliament. This parliament is going to be dominated by Brexit and that actually on that we can be sure that the DUP will actually work with us all the time. And that's really important because that takes us over the threshold of 326 and then we got the Labour members as well who will vote with us too. So actually it's not quite as bad as it looks for some people.
[Gorani:] That is your spin obviously as a conservative lawmaker. But let me ask you a little bit about how the Brexit negotiations are going
[Cash:] Yes.
[Gorani:] [inaudible] three or four. Already a huge concession, David Davis, the Brexit minister dropping a demand for parallel trade off with the E.U. That is already a concession on is this an acknowledge the U.K. really doesn't have the leverage it claims that it has
[Cash:] Now people who know me know I don't give spin and actually I take it straight, OK. And the bottom line is this, that I've just been with David Davis, as a matter of fact, and the bottom line is this, that we actually noticed a very good way forward as a result of those discussions with Mike Michel Barnaie. He's known Michel Barnaie since the Amsterdam Treaty in the 1990s. They were [inaudible] one another or working with one another as Europe ministers. Actually there are some real bottom lines here and above all else, E.U. realizes that we are leaving the European Union. It is not in their interest to create a monumental problem because they want to get on
[Gorani:] It's part of their interest to make anything for you either
[Cash:] Well, can I simply say that actually the real truth is it's in their interest to get a good deal and a fair deal, and I believe that that is what's going to do a merge out of this and it's going to be in everybody's interest that we do because actually they know we are leaving and we don't want to have a relationship antagonism. And our industries actually have a monumental trade deficit with the E.U. and we want to look out with the rest of the world. And we have a fantastic relationship with the USA [inaudible] with Wilbur Ross only two days ago and they had very good talks
[Gorani:] The commerce secretary of the
[U.s. Cash:] Exactly. And we have similar discussions with Canada, Australia with New Zealand and other countries in the Commonwealth. We have a tremendous opportunity here. This is not spin. These are facts.
[Gorani:] I know it's in your position consistently for many, many years. Sir Bill Cash, thank you so much.
[Cash:] Not at all. Nice to see you.
[Gorani:] We appreciate it. Nice to see you as well. Now amid the scale down pump in ceremony of today's queen's speech, there was one very famous face missing, the queen's husband, Prince Philip. The 96-year-old prince is being treated in hospitable for an infection. Buckingham Palace says he's in good spirits, but that he was disappointed to miss today's events. The queen's son, Prince Charles, attended the opening of parliament in his father's place. All right, we'll have a lot more from here in the United Kingdom on U.K. politics in a moment, but speaking of politics, in a completely different part of the world, a royal shakeup in the House of Saud is promising to affect Saudi Arabia's relationship with not just the Middle East, but the West as well. King Salman has removed his nephew as crowned prince and promoted his 33- year-old son, but the young heir has a lot on his plate. Here's John Defterios.
[John Defterios, Cnn Money Emerging Markets Editor:] A choreographed transfer of power at the heart of Saudi Arabia's monarchy. Outgoing Saudi crowned prince, Mohammad Bin Nayef, pledging allegiance to his cousin, 31-year-old Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, as the kingdom's new heir to the throne. Scenes of royal deference masking radical change. All triggered by this royal decree from King Salman removing the previous crowned prince, stripping him of his titles and roles in the government. Power not consolidated in the hands of this man, Mohammed Bin Salman. His swift rise began when his father ascended the throne in 2015. Young and ambitious, he's adopted an activist approach. He spearheaded Saudi Vision 2030, an economic transformation plan meant to whim the kingdom of his addiction to oil and bring about more social reforms. As defense minister, he was primary architect of Saudi Arabia's military intervention in Yemen against Houthi rebels and their allies. Two years on, it has yet to achieve its goals and has been criticized for causing civilian deaths and worsening humanitarian conditions of the region's forest country. And as his portfolio expands so too will the challenges he has to grapple with. Chief among them, the ongoing diplomatic standoff with Qatar, how to counter the kingdom's regional archrival Iran and deal with low oil prices depleting his cash pile. But the prince's backers aren't limited to his father's royal court. U.S. President Donald Trump chose Saudi Arabia as the first stop of his first trip abroad. Signaling his strong support for the kingdom and its regional policies. Support that will be key in helping the young prince push through bold domestic reforms and pursue a more confrontational foreign policy. John Defterios, CNN, Abu Dhabi.
[Gorani:] We've now gotten word that in fact and you saw that as the last image in that report that the U.S. president, Donald Trump, has spoken in fact with Mohammed Bin Salman. Let's break down what this shift means for the region and the world. Fawaz Gerges is here with me. He is the chair of Contemporary Middle East Studies at the London School of Economics. So Fawaz, what is the most significant thing about this transition of power in Saudi Arabia?
[Fawaz Gerges, London School Of Economics:] The most significant feature is the transition of power from the father's and the brother's little sons. You have a generational shift. So Mohammed Bin Salman now represents the public face of Saudi Arabia, 31-year-old, ambitious, charismatic, activist. He really for the young Saudis, they look up to him as the public face of Saudi Arabia. They view him very positively regardless of what we in the West think of him.
[Gorani:] But he's disrupting the Saudi's [inaudible] away some might call dangerous. You have the war in Yemen, the Qatar isolation, cutting off Qatar for whatever overturns it made to Iran and other reasons perhaps as well. I mean, what could happen going down the road? Because he's now effectively the ruler of Saudi Arabia.
[Gerges:] Mohammed Bin Salman, he was asked the same question about the war in Yemen. He says, he views Iran as an existential threat. He believed that Iran is trying to seize, I mean, the Islamic world and takeover the holy places in Saudi Arabia. So in this particular way, he views the war in Yemen, he views what's happening in Qatar and Syria, as really part of the regional war with Iran. He believes
[Gorani:] But that's precisely my point, it's dividing the region more. It's creating more sectarian tension than was there before.
[Gerges:] And in fact, Mohammed Bin Salman believes that he has to really standup, Saudi Arabia has a major responsibility to standup to Iran's infiltration of the Arab world, who Iran's basically desire and designed to penetrate the Arab World. I think we are focusing on foreign policy. The most important thing about the transition is that now what you have is a new leadership. He is in charge of the economy. He is in charge of overhauling the Saudi economy. His vision 2030 is to basically he does not want the kingdom to depend too much on oil. He wants to create a diverse economy. He wants also to loosen some of the social restrictions in this conservative kingdom. So informed policy, I'm sure there is a great deal of criticisms, some of it legitimate in terms of the inside the kingdom that's why he is very popular among young Saudis. What's his plan? Because I mean, going forward you either diversify your economy if you're Saudi Arabia and your primary business is selling oil to the world or your economy will shrink inevitably. Absolutely. I mean, this is why what distinguishes Mohammed Bin Salman from the traditional leadership style [inaudible]. He is not afraid to take risks. He is not afraid basically to disrupt conventional. He believes that the Saudi the future of Saudi Arabia lies in creating a new economy what he calls vision 2030. He wants to basically wean Saudi Arabia off the oil economy and the oil economy, you have 50 percent decline in all the processes. So he wants to overhaul the economy, create a diverse economy. Of course, everything remains to be seen, but the reality is he now in charge. And also what he needs to do is that what the king has done in the past 24 hours is to basically get rid of uncertainty, the ambiguity. No longer there is ambiguity
[Gorani:] The price of oil is going down now.
[Gerges:] Absolutely. It's been going on for a long time and that's why Mohammed Bin Salman vision, he says he frames his vision as [inaudible].
[Gorani:] I know you're talking about internal politics and the economy inside the kingdom, but the reason I brought up foreign policy so much is because the biggest trauma that the region is going through is mainly due to the proxy battle between Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia. Will this ruler alleviate that problem or worsen it?
[Gerges:] This is the biggest challenge facing him at least, is the fierce cold war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. And Mohammed Bin Salman deeply believes that Iran is basically an aggressor. Iran is a destructor and this is why I don't expect any major changes in this particular regional cold war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and guess what, President Trump has the same vision that Iran is a spoiler state. That's why you are going to see more of the same in the next one or two years.
[Gorani:] All right, Fawaz Gerges, as always thanks very much for your analysis on this very important development coming from Saudi Arabia. A lot more to come this evening. We are at Westminster. We'll get reaction to the queen's speech. We are hearing an inside voice from the prime minister's own party next. And despite an apparently unpopular president, Republicans runs aboard on special elections to fill empty seats in the U.S. Congress. What just what are Democrats doing wrong? We'll be right back.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Almost fired. President Trump denies a report saying he tried to fire special counsel Robert Mueller.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Fake news, folks. Fake news.
[Tapper:] But sources say it happened. And Democrats are crying foul.
[Sen. Richard Blumenthal , Connecticut:] There's a credible case of obstruction of justice against the president of the United States.
[Tapper:] What does a key Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee think? Senator Susan Collins responds next. Plus: Dead on arrival? The White House proposes an immigration framework.
[Trump:] We need the wall. We need security at the border. But there are fierce critics on both sides.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , House Minority Leader:] That plan is a campaign to make America white again.
[Trump:] Can moderates find a compromise in the middle?
[Sen. Joe Manchin , West Virginia:] The president wants to get this done. He's sympathetic towards that.
[Tapper:] Democratic Senator Joe Manchin joins us in moments. And prime-time speech. President Trump is getting ready to deliver his first State of the Union address.
[Trump:] The United States is once again experiencing strong economic growth.
[Tapper:] But which President Trump will show up?
[Trump:] No politician in history has been treated worse or more unfairly.
[Tapper:] Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is stormy. That's a reference to the tenor in town, not to the porn star by the same name, whom, according to "The Wall Street Journal," was paid $130,000 by Trump's lawyer for her silence. With all eyes now turning to the president's State of the Union address to see whether the president will try to alleviate tensions with Democrats in Congress, according to a senior administration official, the president's speech has been in the works for many weeks. If the president sticks to his prepared remarks, he is expected to take a victory lap, taking credit for the healthy economy and touting his tax reform plan. He also plans to look ahead by introducing his trillion-dollar infrastructure plan and pitching his new immigration framework to the nation and to Congress. Late Saturday night, the president was up tweeting about the plan, which includes a proposal for the dreamers covered by DACA that's the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and attacking the Democrats. He tweeted quote "I have offered DACA, a wonderful deal, including a doubling in the number of recipients and a 12-year pathway to citizenship, for two reasons, one, because the Republicans want to fix a long-time terrible problem, two, to show that Democrats do not want to solve DACA, only use it." Casting a shadow over the moment, of course, is the ongoing Russia investigation and the news first reported by "The New York Times" that President Trump ordered the firing of special counsel Robert Mueller in June. Here with me now is Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine. She's a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Senator, thanks so much for being here. We always appreciate your being here.
[Collins:] Thank you.
[Tapper:] So, I want to start with the reports that the president ordered his White House counsel start the firing process of special counsel Robert Mueller in June after he heard Mueller was investigating him for obstruction of justice. Because the White House counsel threatened to quit if the plan was carried out, Mueller was ultimately not fired. The president's supporters say this story doesn't because Mueller wasn't actually fired. Does it matter to you?
[Collins:] Well, first, I think it's important to note that the president cannot directly fire Mr. Mueller. The only person who can fire Mr. Mueller is the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein. He's the person who appointed Mr. Mueller. And last year at a hearing, I questioned him at length on this issue, and he was adamant that he would never give in to any White House pressure to remove Mr. Mueller. I think what happened here is, the president had a bad idea. He talked with his counsel, who explained to an angry and frustrated president why it was a bad idea, and that was seven months ago. And the White House counsel is still on the job, and Mr. Mueller is still aggressively investigating. And that's as it should be.
[Tapper:] Sources tell CNN the president has been talking about firing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein because of this frustration.
[Collins:] Well, if that's true, that obviously would be a terrible mistake. We have seen what happened back in the Nixon administration when President Nixon, on the Saturday Night Massacre, kept going down the line until he would find someone who would fire the special counsel. And that didn't end very well.
[Tapper:] Beyond whether or not the president has technically obstructed justice, because that's a decision that will be made by Mueller and then theoretically Congress, maybe even judges, do you agree with the idea, as a political matter, that the president has has clearly tried to stop or impede the Russia investigation?
[Collins:] I think the president would be best served by never discussing the investigation, ever, whether in tweets, except in private conversations with his attorney. And this is hard for us, but I think we have all got to be patient and allow the independent counsel to conclude his investigation and bring his findings forth before speculating on whether or not there are sufficient grounds for any kind of wrongdoing. We just don't know.
[Tapper:] There have been a number of bipartisan bills proposed in the Senate that would attempt to protect the special counsel from firing by the president. And you said in December that quote "You haven't seen the need for legislation protecting Mueller." Do you see the need now?
[Collins:] It probably wouldn't hurt for us to pass one of those bills. And I give Senator Tillis and Senator Coons great credit for coming up with a bipartisan bill. And Senator Lindsey Graham and Senator Cory Booker have a different approach. There are some constitutional issues with those bills. But it would certainly not hurt to put that extra safeguard in place, given the latest stories. But,again, I have faith in the deputy attorney general that he's going to do what he told me he would do.
[Tapper:] There are a lot of Republicans calling for the release of a memo written by the committee, the House Intelligence Committee, under Chairman Devin Nunes that alleges FBI abuses of surveillance laws in this case, in this case against Trump and this investigation. "The Washington Post" is reporting that President Trump wants this memo released, against the advice of his own Justice Department, people in the Justice Department very concerned that it might reveal sources and methods and that there are other issues with the memo. Democrats, who have seen the memo, say it's quote "profoundly misleading." Do you think it should be released?
[Collins:] Well, one of the problems with the House investigation, it has been very partisan. In contrast, the Senate Intelligence Committee, under the leadership of Senators Burr and Warner, have worked together. And I think that's a far better approach. There I have a lot of confidence in the FBI. They are the nation's premier law enforcement agency. That doesn't mean that there weren't that an agent and a lawyer who had inappropriate and highly political text messages in the midst of investigations, but let's look at what happened. First of all, the special counsel immediately removed the agent from his team in response to that. And, second, perhaps even more important, there is an ongoing inspector general investigation into this matter. And I think, again, we should let the inspector general sort this out. And...
[Tapper:] So, defer to the Justice Department on the memo; don't release the memo?
[Collins:] On the memo, I don't know what's in the memo. But if it...
[Tapper:] Burr doesn't either. They won't show it to Senator Burr.
[Collins:] And I think that needs to be shared. But, also, my concern is whether it would compromise classified information. And that's a really serious matter. So, to me, the preferable way to handle the allegations of wrongdoing by certain FBI agents and a lawyer there is to leave it in the hands of the inspector general, Michael Horowitz. I know him. He's aggressive. He will do a fair investigation.
[Tapper:] Let's turn to immigration. You have been working with a bipartisan group of senators to try to come up with some sort of compromise that can pass the Senate and pass the House and can be signed by the president. And that's no small task. The White House released a framework for immigration. It proposes a path to citizenship for 1.8 million dreamers, $25 billion for the border wall, an end to the diversity lottery program, drastic changes to family or change migration. How different is the White House proposal from the one that you're working on?
[Collins:] Well, we're going to be meeting this week, our Common Sense Coalition, to take a look at the four pillars that the White House has put out there. I think all of us realize that it's going to take a compromise on this issue for us to get something done and to protect the dreamer population, which is certainly a goal of mine. But I think the president is also right about border security, that we do need to beef up our border security. We know that from a state in Mexico, there's been an influx of this tar heroin, which is very inexpensive and is ravaging communities and families across our country. And we have been talking about securing the border better since the George Bush administration. We passed the Secure Fence Act. That doesn't mean a wall literally across our southern border, but it does mean using technology. Now, some people aren't going to like that. Some people aren't going to like the path to citizenship for the dreamers. What this is about is a compromise. And it's important to note that our coalition is not a legislative committee. We're going to be making recommendations to the chair and ranking member of the Immigration Subcommittee. That's Dick Durbin and John Cornyn. And I hope we can find a way forward. I think it's really important.
[Tapper:] What's your reaction to the "Wall Street Journal" story alleging that President Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen saw a $130,000 payment go to a porn star who at one point had been claiming a relationship with President Trump while married to Melania, although both she and President Trump now deny it?
[Collins:] Well, I don't know the circumstances of it. In some ways, this sounds like an issue that's between President and Mrs. Trump, because it doesn't seem to be a workplace issue, as far as I know.
[Tapper:] OK. I want to ask you about the former now former finance chair of the Republican National Committee, Steve Wynn, who stepped down after another "Wall Street Journal" investigation alleging massive accusations of sexual misconduct. He has now stepped down, but he still donated a lot of money to Republican candidates. And after the Harvey Weinstein scandal, the RNC made a big case that Democrats need to give the money back. I asked a senator, a Democratic senator, about that then, so I will ask now ask a Republican senator about Steve Wynn. Do you think Republicans who took money from Steve Wynn should give it back?
[Collins:] In if they have accepted contributions recently from him that have not been spent, absolutely. I don't even think it's a close call to return the money. I'm very pleased that he immediately stepped down from the RNC position. I was going to call upon him to step down. And the allegations against him are very serious, because they do involve harassment at the workplace and inappropriate behavior and sexual abuse. So, I think they're very serious allegations, and should be treated as such. And I'm pleased to say that I have never received any money from Mr. Wynn, so I have no money to return.
[Tapper:] Senator Collins, it's always good to see you. Thank you so much for joining us. We appreciate it.
[Collins:] Thank you.
[Tapper:] House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi says President Trump's proposed immigration framework is a plan to quote "make America white again." Will language like that help lawmakers reach a bipartisan deal? We will ask Democratic Senator Joe Manchin next.

[Briggs:] President Trump could decide today whether to follow the recommendations of his National Security Council and expel a group of Russian diplomats from the United States. The move would come in retaliation for the nerve agent poisoning of a former Russian double-agent and his daughter in the United Kingdom. Here is CNN senior diplomatic correspondent Michelle Kosinski.
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn Senior Diplomatic Correspondent:] Hi, Christine and Dave. The president's national security team has recommended that he take action against Russia now and expel Russian diplomats from the U.S. in solidarity with the U.K. that's already done the same after those poisonings there. Well now, a force familiar with the discussion say they expect an announcement on this as early as today, possibly coming from the White House, maybe from the State Department. But the Europeans are seeing signs to be optimistic that this is going to be a big coordinated announcement with the U.S. and multiple European countries, possibly 20 of them, to kick out a significant number of Russian diplomats. Of course, until this happens no one knows 100 percent how President Trump will respond. Remember, it was his own national security team that recommended only days ago that he not congratulate Russian President Vladimir Putin after his election win and, of course, President Trump did exactly the opposite. But if Trump does not act on this recommendation, of course, there are going to be big questions of why. First of all, his administration has called these poisonings attempted murder. They've expressed strong support for the U.K.'s belief that Russia was, indeed, behind this. They've expressed support for what the U.K. has already done in response. And multiple members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have repeatedly urged this administration to do more against Russia's behavior and to do so faster Christine and Dave.
[Romans:] All right, Michelle Kosinski, thank you for that. Saudi Arabia's Air Force intercepting seven missiles fired from Yemen. Saudi leaders say debris falling on residential neighborhoods killed a man. This is not the first time the Saudi Kingdom has been targeted. After previous intercepts, the Saudis launched airstrikes on the Yemeni capital. They are blaming Houthi rebels for the latest missile attack. We're expecting to hear today from attorneys representing the family of an unarmed black man shot by shot and killed by police in Sacramento. Officers say they thought Stephon Clark was holding a gun when they encountered him in his grandmother's backyard but investigators only found a cell phone. Attorney Benjamin Crump telling CNN he plans to conduct his own investigation.
[Benjamin Crump, Attorney For Family Of Stephon Clark:] It shocks the conscience when you think about somebody being shot 20 times as you watch that video and you say my God, they didn't even give him a chance to comply or anything. It's even more shocking to me as a father of black boys to say don't he get the benefit of some consideration?
[Briggs:] New questions this morning about why officers at the scene were instructed to mute their body cameras after Clark was shot. The officers are now on paid administrative leave. The department says they're getting death threats. Breaking news this morning out of Texas. A police officer shot in Austin. Authorities say it happened as officers were responding to a 911 call. They say someone inside a home began firing at police. One officer was struck in the right arm, another injured running from the alleged shooter. They are expected to be OK, though. The suspect barricaded himself inside the home. He was later shot and killed by the SWAT team when he emerged with a woman. We're told she was taken into protective custody.
[Romans:] A U.S. Army veteran who served two tours in Afghanistan has been deported to Mexico. Miguel Perez came to the U.S. legally at age eight but his application for citizenship was denied due to a felony drug conviction. The 39-year-old Perez said that what he was and what he experienced in Afghanistan sent his life off the rails, leading to heavy drinking and drug addiction. Perez, his family and supporters, including Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth argue that his wartime service had earned him the right to stay in the U.S. Duckworth condemned the decision saying Perez should have been able to exhaust all legal options before being rushed out of the country.
[Briggs:] All right. The Final Four is all set. Two number one seeds, Kansas and Villanova, will meet in one semifinal. The Jayhawks punched their ticket to San Antonio with a relic overtime victory because that shot from Grayson Allen as time expired in regulation did not fall. Eighty-five-81 your final as Malick Newman dominated O.T. all 13 Kansas points, including the dagger there, a corner three. Bill Self headed back to the Final Four. In the other game Sunday, Villanova defeated Texas Tech 71-59. The 2016 national champs headed back to the Final Four thanks to their fourth-straight tournament win in double figures. Michigan earned a berth in the other national final beating Florida State 58-54. The Wolverines riding at 13-game winning streak as they prepare to make their eighth Final Four appearance. Their streak, though, second only to the team they'll face next. You could call them America's team at the moment. Loyola of Chicago, winners of 14 in a row. The 11th-seed Ramblers romping the 78-62 win over Kansas State on Saturday and that matches the lowest seed ever to make it to the Final Four. Three other 11-seeds did. They all lost in the national semifinals. The last was VCU. Of course, they didn't have a good luck charm quite like this lady. Ninety-eight-year-old super fan Sister Jean who wore a Final Four cap after the win to go with her Sister Jean custom Nikes and her bobblehead doll. The Final Four starts Saturday in San Antonio. The final, one week from today.
[Romans:] I would not have been surprised if she got up there and cut down that net herself. I mean, she
[Briggs:] That would have been one unbelievable image.
[Romans:] She is something. All right.
[Briggs:] She's a star. All right, that will do it for us. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] And I'm Christine Romans. "NEW DAY" starts right now.
[Daniels:] He was sitting, you know, on the edge of the bed.
[Cooper:] And you had sex with him?
[Daniels:] Yes.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] The president has denied the allegations.
[Unidentified Female:] It isn't so much about the affair, it's the effort to cover it up. Stormy is laughing us all the way to the bank.
[Daniels:] I felt intimated and honestly, bullied.
[Ruddy:] The president thinks the White House is operating like a smooth machine.
[Unidentified Male:] He said he wasn't adding to his legal team but he added to his legal. He said he wasn't shaking it up, and then he shook it up.
[Corey Lewandowski, Former Trump Campaign Manager:] What you have to have are people who are on the president's agenda.
[Emma Gonzalez, Student, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, Florida, Activist And Advocate For Gun Control:] This is not the end. This was just the beginning.
[Santorum:] How about kids instead of looking to someone else to solve their problem do something about maybe taking CPR classes.
[Cameron Kasky, Student, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, Florida, Activist And Advocate For Gun Control:] Stand for us or beware. The voters are coming.
[Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, Florida, Activist And Advocate For Gun Control:] We can and we will change the world.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Monday, March 26th, 6:00 here in New York. Here's out "Starting Line." Adult film star Stormy Daniels breaking her silence about her alleged affair with President Trump in her first on-camera interview.

[Cabrera:] Lawmakers are reintroducing a bill to hold China accountable for the mass internment of its ethnic Muslim minorities. Now according to the U.S. state department, Chinese authorities have indefinitely detained at least 800,000 such people in the past year- and-a-half. CNN's Ivan Watson spoke to a refugee about the horrors inside the internment camps.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] There's a lot of love in this apartment in Virginia between a mother and her children. But something, someone, actually, is missing here.
[Watson:] In 2015, ethnic weeger, Mihrigul Tursun, then, a citizen of China, gave birth to triplets in Egypt where she had been living and working. And barely a month later, she flew home with them to Shin gang, a region of western China. At the airport, she says Chinese police detained her and took away her babies.
[Mihrigul Tursun, Uyghur Refugee:] I asked her, where is my baby? Please give me my baby. And then
[Watson:] Taped your mouth.
[Tursun:] Yes.
[Watson:] Mihrigul says police jailed and interrogated her for the next three months. The day of her release, she went to the children's hospital to see her infants.
[Tursun:] When I come, the doctors say, OK, my baby can go outside hospital. They say, yes, he die. I said, what? What die? Your son die this morning at 6:00. I don't believe it. And I scream, why you kill my son? And they say if you scream, I call the police. Stop. Be quiet. And they give me my baby. So cold. I say, why he die? What happened? He say we make operation and he cannot strong, so he die.
[Watson:] CNN reached out for comment from the
[Tursun:] They asked questions. When I say I don't know, they start beating me so hard.
[Watson:] During the second imprisonment, she says she was put in a crowded cell with 50 other women, all ethnic weegers from her home town in Churchin. Someone is my doctor, someone is my medium school teacher, someone are neighbor, all people, 80 percent I know. The U.S. government alleges this is part of a much larger, frightening pattern.
[Scott Busby, Deputy Assistant Secretary Of State:] Since April 2017, Chinese authorities have indefinitely detained at least 800,000, and possibly more than two million weegers, ethnic Kazakhs and members of other Muslim minorities in internment camps.
[Watson:] Beijing has gone from denying these alleged mass detentions to saying prisoners are getting vocational training. Authorities recently took some diplomats and journalists on a carefully supervised tour of some of these facilities. Some detainees told journalists the camps re-educate them.
[Unidentified Male:] All of us found that we have something wrong with ourselves, and luckily enough, the communist party and the government offer this kind of school to us for free.
[Watson:] The climate of fear in Shinggan can be felt halfway around the world.
[Arfat Aeriken, Uyghur Refugee:] I lost contact with my family in 2017. And
[I -- Watson:] So that was the last time you heard your mother's voice?
[Aeriken:] Yes.
[Watson:] And your father.
[Aeriken:] Yes.
[Watson:] 21-year-old Arfat Aeriken came to the U.S. three years ago to get a university education. But gradually, his parents stopped sending tuition money and stopped calling him. Then last September, Arfat made this desperate appeal on You Tube.
[Aeriken:] I have confirmed that my father sentenced with the nine-year in prison and my mom is in concentration camp.
[Watson:] If both of your parents are detained who is taking care of your 10-year-old brother?
[Aeriken:] I don't know.
[Watson:] If you could say something to your parents right now, what would you say?
[Aeriken:] I hope they are just alive.
[Watson:] Afraid to go home, Arfat has since been granted asylum in the U.S. Many weeger students are similarly stranded here,
[Prof. Sean Roberts George Washington University:] They are terrified because they doesn't know what to do. They don't necessarily want to declare asylum in the United States because that reflects badly on their family but they also have been getting messages from the region that they shouldn't come back because they will definitely be put in one of these internment camps.
[Watson:] During her incarceration, Mihrigul Tursun claims she saw fellow prisoner die in detention.
[Tursun:] In the same one room, nine women die, I see. So, so much people die, have torture like this. I will become crazy.
[Watson:] The Chines government denounces criticism of its human rights record saying these preventative counterterrorism measures protect more people from being devoured by extremism. Mihrigul and her family are now in the U.S., going through the asylum process but it's not easy. Her 3-year-old
[Cabrera:] CNN reached out to regional authorities multiple times for comment on this story and did not receive a response. Now if you ever needed a reason to look before you jump into the water, here it is. What may be the largest great white shark on the planet spotted swimming with divers off the coast of Hawaii. Much more on this, just ahead.

[Cabrera:] We're back with new developments in a murder at sea. The husband of a woman killed aboard a Princess cruise ship is in custody after witnesses came forward with a shocking account. CNN's Jean Casarez has it for us.
[Jean Casarez, Cnn Corresopondent:] Ana, Kenneth Manzanares has been charged with murder and he's in custody. His next court hearing will be in August. Kenneth and his wife, Kristy, wanted to take a summer vacation. They went to Alaska to board the Princess Cruise Lines last Sunday. And according to legal documents, several days later, Tuesday night, a little after 9:00, authorities on the ship were summoned to their cabin. And what they saw was a deceased Kristy on the floor. Her head having a severe trauma. A lot of blood and blood on several items in the room. According to the affidavit, Kenneth had blood on his hands, blood on his clothes. What may be a pivotal witness stepped forward shortly after that, saying he had asked Kenneth when he saw the scene himself a few moments later what happened and Kenneth allegedly said she wouldn't stop laughing at me. D.H., the witness, also stated to authorities he saw Kenneth dragging his wife out to a balcony area on the ship. DH, the witness, told authorities he dragged her, the victim, by her ankles, back into the cabin. Authorities arrested Kenneth. He's being held in Juneau, Alaska. His attorney has asked for a change of venue. We have reached out to the public defender. No call back at this moment. But Kristy worked for a renowned international realty company, Sotheby's, and they have issued a statement saying, "Kristy was a devoted mother and tried to balance her work life with raising her children." A very sad story all the way around. Ana, back to you.
[Cabrera:] What a story. Thank you, Jean Casarez. Coming up, McCain's maverick moment. We pick apart every frame of this dramatic, surreal 19 seconds when the Senator voted against the Obamacare repeal. Wait till you see this.

[Carl Azuz, Cnn 10 Anchor:] Hi. I`m Carl Azuz. Welcome to a new week, a new month and a new edition of CNN 10. We`re going to start today by recapping a few events from the weekend. It was an eventful one in the U.S. Saturday night, on his 100th day in office, President Donald Trump attended a rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He was with the crowd that helped him win the 2016 election.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And could not possibly be more thrilled than to be more than 100 miles away from Washington swamp, spending my evening with all of you, and with a much, much larger crowd and much better people, right?
[Azuz:] President Trump has frequently taken aimed at the media, accusing organizations of not covering him fairly and he was contrasting the Harrisburg rally with the White House correspondents` dinner, typically, an event where the president and the media trade jokes about each other and themselves. President Trump was the first U.S. leader since President Ronald Reagan not to attend the correspondents` dinner.
[Jeff Mason, President, White House Correspondents` Association:] But the values that underpin this dinner have not changed. In fact, I think they`ve been reinforced. We are here to celebrate good journalism. We are here to celebrate the press, not the presidency.
[Azuz:] Also on Saturday, tens of thousands turned out at Washington, D.C. for what organizations called the People`s Climate March. There were demonstrations like this in several other U.S. cities and abroad. The Trump administration has worked to remove government regulations on fossil fuels, regulations put in place by the Obama administration. And marchers believe the Trump administration`s policies will negatively impact the environment. President Trump has said he`s committed to protecting the environment, but that greener policies must not come at the expense of jobs. Ten-second trivia: How do most tornadoes rotate in the Northern Hemisphere? Clockwise, counterclockwise, latitudinally, or anticyclonically? In the Northern Hemisphere, most tornadoes, though not all of them, rotate counterclockwise. First responders don`t yet know the full extent of damage caused by violent storms over the weekend. They have reported that several U.S. states were hit Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. At least eight people died and dozens were injured. Numerous water rescues had to be made in Missouri as widespread flooding led authorities to close 150 roads. Officials say several tornadoes touched down in Texas, leaving a path of destruction 15 miles wide. Homes and buildings, cars and trees were demolished. The system begun lashing the Southwest and Midwest on Friday, and last night, it was moving east, putting more than 30 million Americans under flash flood watches and warnings.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Technically, a tornado was just a violent, rotating column of air coming out of the bottom of the thunderstorm. But it takes a lot to get that violently rotating column to come out.
[Subtitle:] CNN Explains: Tornadoes.
[Myers:] All you need for a tornado really to form though are thunderstorms and a jet stream. That jet stream is a loft. It makes the energy, if you have moisture at the surfaces, dry air, cold air, pushing that moisture up, you can get a tornado to form in any state. Those days where all the ingredients combine, you get the humidity, you get the dry air, you get the jet stream, you get upper energy in the jet stream. You get winds churning as you go aloft. The higher you go, the winds actually change direction. That can cause storms, those things all cause storms to exist and get big. Those are the ingredients that caused a big tornado day.
[Subtitle:] Rating tornadoes.
[Myers:] So, now the EF Scale, Enhanced Fujita Scale, starts at zero, goes only to five, and anything above 200 miles per hour is considered an EF-5 tornado. If you have a zero, you`re going to lose shingles. A one, you may lose a couple of boards on the roof. A two, you lose all the windows and maybe even a wall. A three, EF-3, you will lose a couple of walls on the outside, but there will still be a part of a home standing. An EF-4, most of the home is gone, but you`ll still the refrigerator, you`ll still see a closet and you`ll still the bathroom. An EF-5, you cannot find the house. It`s completely gone. We done know how big that Fujita Scale will be, how big that tornado literally until we look at the damage.
[Subtitle:] Tornado Alley.
[Myers:] We have this almost this triangulation that no other country in the world, no region in the world has. We have the Rocky Mountain to our west, we have the Gulf of Mexico in our south, we have Canada and very cold air masses coming down from the north, all of those things combined make Tornado Alley. Typically, the Plains, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, all the way to Chicago, as far south as the Southwest, including Georgia and Alabama, that`s basically the new or the bigger Tornado Alley.
[Subtitle:] Tornado Safety.
[Myers:] The greatest threat of a tornado is being hit by something that the tornado is moving. If you`re outside or if you`re not protected inside, if you`re hit by a 140-mile-per-hour two-by-four, you`re going to be killed. So, you need to be inside and the lowest level, somewhere in the middle of the home away from windows. When you hear the word "warning" and you hear your county, that`s when you need to take cover. When you hear the word "watch", that means something might happen today. Let`s have a plan. When you hear the word "warning", it`s too late to make a plan. You need to already have the plan. Warning is the long word, it`s the bad one.
[Azuz:] Now for a report on a CNN Hero. Shanti House is named for a Sanskrit word that means peace and tranquility. It was started by a woman who learned firsthand what it`s like to be homeless, living on the streets of Boston, Massachusetts, as a teenager. She eventually got her life back on track and returned to her native Israel to bring peace and tranquility to teens today.
[Unidentified Female:] I`ve had a difficult life. A lot of violence, abuse in every way. At age 16, I ended up in the streets. Life in the streets was very hard. It`s a life no kid should live.
[Mariuma Ben Yosef, Cnn Hero:] To be homeless in a young age, it`s very lonely. When I was 14 years old, I was living in the streets. I slept in benches and ate from garbage with other children that didn`t have a home. It was something that I couldn`t forget. In the age of 20, I opened my home to serve dinner to children, teenagers, and people that didn`t have any place to eat. Before I know it, I set the place for all these children to sleep in my own home. That was more than 30 years ago. Now, we have two homes. We provide temporary home and long term support for children at risk. My goal is that every child that comes through this door will feel at home. They will feel so secure and so happy. This is my children. This is my life. We`re there for them 247. [translated]: Did it hurt you that your mother didn`t come? You know, if she didn`t come, that is something she has to deal with herself.
[Unidentified Female:] You`re family and that`s the most important thing. When I got to the Shanti House, I was taught that I can achieve anything.
[Ben Yosef:] How was your weekly?
[Unidentified Female:] I always wanted to finish school and they made that dream come true. Suddenly, I see a big letter from everyone at the Shanti House and it says how much you`re proud of me and how much you love me. And I realized just how much you`re with me in every situation. The Shanti House is not just a roof over my head, it`s my family.
[Ben Yosef:] I didn`t have a family, neither these kids. So,
[Azuz:] Fire goats. It sounds like goats that breathe fire. But these are more like firefighting goats. Smokey the Bear might have said only you can prevent foreign fires, but these animals can help too. they naturally clear out flammable undergrowth in Anaheim, California, by eating it. City fire department uses about 175 goats. They helped patrol 27 acres of vegetation with their teeth, leaving little behind for a potential fire to chew on, taking a bite out of danger. So, maybe they don`t actually breathe fire, but as long as they keep their chins up and the undergrowth under grown, residents probably won`t mind being goaded into reaching safety goats by employing these goat to weapons in the bahhhttle against blazes. I`m Carl Azuz for CNN 10. END

[Whitfield:] All right, welcome back. Live pictures as we continue to watch out of Anaheim, California. Momentarily President Barack Obama, former president, expected to take to the stage there. He is stumping for seven Congressional Democratic candidates, hoping to turn those seats from red to blue. We'll bring you Obama's comments when it happens. Meantime CNN is learning that the Trump administration held secret meetings with rebel Venezuelan military officers to discuss plans to overthrow the country's president Nicolas Maduro, that's according to current and former U.S. officials. The meetings took place several times over the last year, but Washington ultimately decided against supporting a coup. Joining me right now is CNN national security analyst Samantha Vinograd. She's also a former adviser to the national security adviser. Good to see you, Sam. So rebel military officials from Venezuela were apparently the ones who initiated the contact. What is the first thing that U.S. national security officials would do when approached like that?
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] The first thing that they would do in my experience, Fred, would be to identify the problem that we're trying to solve for. We're all very fixated on this word "coup" and the outreach that the administration did, but we have to take a step back and think about this like if we were in the Situation Room. We would try to assess what would these military officials bring us, why would we go speak with them? And the issue at hand is that Nicolas Maduro is a dictator at this point who is presiding over a gross humanitarian catastrophe. Millions of Venezuelans are fleeing, the economy is in shambles. And is one of the tools in the tool kit supporting regime change through a coup, that is certainly something that the administration would look at. They'd see if these were viable interlocutors. But in my experience, at least under President Obama, we ruled out supporting coups as one of the tools that we would actually implement.
[Whitfield:] So the "New York Times" is reporting that there was some suspicion that the initial contact might be a setup to make the us look like it was plotting against Maduro. How serious a concern would that be?
[Vinograd:] It's always a concern. We know he that Nicolas Maduro has spread these conspiracy theories as recently as a drone attack a few weeks ago that people living in Miami supported by the United States were trying to get him out of power. And the truth is, Fred, there are a lot of leaders that we would like to see leave power. Nicolas Maduro, the Iranian regime which has taken part and is currently waging at least an overt campaign against. And previously, as you know, members of the administration have called for a regime change in places like North Korea. So if anybody reached out from Venezuela, said that they were trying to help us in a goal of getting somebody else in, you'd really have to do sharp intelligence analysis about who they were, who they were working for, and how viable they were.
[Whitfield:] But what about the risk that the U.S. would have in unilaterally trying to lot or be part of any kind of overthrowing of another government? It is very different if there were a coalition type of effort, right?
[Vinograd:] Exactly. And we got out of the business of regime change, at least when I was there, for several reasons. You look at the history of Latin America and U.S. support for coups in places like Brazil or Chile or Cuba, and it is a slippery slope. As much as you want to get someone out of power and think that you may be instilling someone who at that moment is more attractive and more amenable to the policy issues that you work on, you can't control them. And so we look at a country like Brazil where the presidential candidate actually was just stabbed a few days ago, but after we supported a coup there, there was torture instituted by the military regime that, again, we couldn't control. And that's why when there is a coup in Turkey, you heard President Obama say he didn't support it, he supported the democratically elected government. Coups are a very, very slippery slope.
[Whitfield:] And Venezuela has its attributes as being strategically important. What might they be?
[Vinograd:] Well, Venezuela, it is interesting, has the largest oil reserves in the world and has been a net oil exporter for some time. Their production is way down because of mismanagement and other production technological declines. But Venezuela has been deteriorating for a long time, first under Chavez and now under Maduro. It has become a humanitarian disaster. And there's a real question about what the president is willing to do to address issues that he, President Trump, cares about. There are mass migrant flows coming out of Venezuela that will impact and are impacting immigration flows in South America and potentially Central America and up through the United States. So there's a lot of highway between, for example, putting more sanctions on Venezuela's oil sector and supporting something like regime change. But those are exactly the conversations you have in the Situation Room when you look at all these different tools.
[Whitfield:] Samantha Vinograd, thanks so much.
[Vinograd:] Thanks.
[Whitfield:] Still ahead, nearly two years after President Trump's inauguration, a government photographer is admitting he intentionally edited a picture to make the crowd look bigger than it was. Who asked him to do it, next.

[Keilar:] Hillary Clinton is under fire for protecting a man accused of sexual harassment during her 2008 presidential bid. Clinton's faith and values adviser, Bern Strider, was accused of repeatedly harassing a young woman with whom he shared an office. The woman complained of inappropriate kisses and suggestive e-mails among other things according to this reporting, and instead of being fired, Strider was sent to counseling. He was told he had to go to counseling. He never actually completed that counseling according to these reports. And his accuser was moved, she was reassigned. Clinton addressed these reports via Twitter saying that she was, quote, "dismayed when the harassment occurred but was heartened the young woman came forward, was heard and had her concerns taken seriously and addressed." Clinton's then campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle has not spoken publicly about this until now. She is a CNN political commentator. She's joining me for her first live tv interview on this issue. Patti, thank you so much for talking to us about this.
[Patti Solis Doyle, Cnn Political Commentator:] Sure. Thanks for having me, Brianna.
[Keilar:] You recommended to then-Candidate Clinton, Senator Clinton, that she fire Bern Strider. Tell us about how this information came to you about what had happened, and the case that you made for him to go and ultimately what Clinton decided.
[Doyle:] Sure. So, a young woman made a complaint to our head of operations about sexual harassment against Bern Strider [inaudible], who is now the CEO of the DNC, against Bern Strider, who she reported to. The incident was brought to my attention and, you know, I did my due diligence. I interviewed all the parties involved, looked at the evidence, some e-mails he sent, looked at other documents, and came to the conclusion that there was sexual harassment involved, that the young woman was very credible, and my recommendation to the senator was to fire him. And I was overruled.
[Keilar:] You weren't the only one who recommended who believed this was the right avenue to take?
[Doyle:] Correct. Well, you know, there were a few people involved in the investigation, so to speak, but the people involved in it believed he should not be working with our campaign.
[Keilar:] So, she overruled you personally?
[Doyle:] I was overruled, yes.
[Keilar:] What was the reasoning behind not taking your recommendation on that? You know, I really don't want to divulge my private conversations or my private counsel to Hillary Clinton, suffice it to say I believe in a zero-tolerance sexual harassment in the workplace, I believe it now and I believed it then. But I also want to say, you know, it wasn't an easy call. None of these calls are easy and especially in a presidential campaign, we were just a few months away from voting beginning to start with the caucuses and the primaries, firing a high-profile person on the campaign would have certainly made news and caused a distraction, so it wasn't an easy call. But, you know, as a campaign manager, when this was brought to my attention, when you run an organization, you really your first instinct is to protect people, you know. I wanted to protect my team. I wanted to protect this young woman. I wanted to send a message that this kind of behavior is not OK. I wanted to make sure that other women and men for that matter could feel comfortable and free to speak up if something were to happen to them, if there were another incident. And it certainly wasn't lost on me that I was the first Hispanic female campaign manager for presidential campaign. And that I was working for who I thought was going to be the first woman president of the United States, and I didn't want to just be good on this issue. I wanted to be better than anybody else. To be clear, few weeks later, after the Iowa caucuses, you were pushed out as campaign manager. Ultimately, Strider didn't even go to the counseling that had been a part of his docked pay, pay commensurate with the demotion, has to go to counseling. In the end, he didn't go to counseling. You didn't have to do with that because you were gone at this point in time. But who made the decision on what, instead of him going, that these things were going to happen. That he was going to have face these consequences of counseling and
[Doyle:] You know, I said we I wanted our campaign to be better and I believe we were. There was an "Axios" item today where campaign staffers are being interviewed and they laughed at the idea there was an there is an HR process. But in our campaign, you know, I went to the lawyers, we had
[Keilar:] This was lawyers who were looking at
[Doyle:] Lawyers and operations people and me, senior management, we came up with the process, and we did everything I believe but fire him.
[Keilar:] OK. I want to ask you about how Hillary Clinton has responded to this because it is something that really sticks out to me. She says, "A story appeared today, about something that happened in 2008. I was dismayed when it occurred but was heartened the young woman came forward, was heard and had her concerns taken seriously and addressed." She doesn't admit that she messed up. She doesn't admit that especially in light of the fact that at the time you were recommending he go. Not like no one was saying he shouldn't go and we're now in an era where people look back and say, duh, he should have gone.
[Doyle:] Right.
[Keilar:] Why doesn't she just look back and say, this was the wrong call?
[Doyle:] You know, I don't know. I was disappointed by that tweet, that response. It was a wrong call. I wish she had said it was a wrong call. I wish she had said, you know, having to do it over, I would have fired him. I think that's actually true. I believe that she thinks that if I had to do it over again, I would fire him.
[Keilar:] But she doesn't say it, right? And the reason I think it seems reasonable that she would think that is because Strider publicly suffers nothing from this incident, right? This is all kept internally. Then he goes on and ahead of Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign and I know as a reporter who covered Hillary Clinton for I think it was over a year and a half before she ran, he goes on as the guy in charge of something called correct the record. This is key because this was essentially the response effort prior to her campaign launching, if you needed information, you went to correct the record as a reporter. They set themselves up as this was the pro Hillary Clinton PAC on messaging and this was a key position. So, he then goes on, he's in charge of correct the record, and he ends up being fired for workplace issues, according to "Buzzfeed" and "The New York Times," for harassing at least two other women. When you look back on that, does it strike you that allowing him to stay in the campaign gave him a platform to then go on and harass other women?
[Doyle:] Yes. I mean, I feel a great deal of regret that I didn't fight harder, didn't push harder for him to be fired. I read the "Buzzfeed" report and what the young woman said, one particular statement of a young woman who said she felt she need to quit because she felt she wasn't strong enough or tough enough to work in politics because she couldn't endure sexual harassment. And the idea that Bern Strider made her feel like she was the one that something was wrong with, like she was inadequate is just really infuriating. But having said that, Brianna, I want to say this about Hillary. Look, people are complicated, and Hillary is no exception. And she definitely made a wrong call here. But I worked for her for 17 years and I feel like I know the totality of her as a person, as a politician, as a public servant. And this is a woman who allowed me to put a crib in my office in the White House, and bring my 3-month- old baby to work every day because she knew I was struggling with balancing my early motherhood with a rising career. This is woman who hires women at the highest levels in her orbit, promotes women, gives them raises, who is dogged in her advocacy for the issues that she cares about, and I believe then and I believe now still that she would have all those characteristics would have made her a great president. Would she have made mistakes? Yes.
[Keilar:] Was Bern Strider her faith adviser, faith very important to Hillary Clinton, was he a confidant? What is the blind spot with Bern Strider that she couldn't say, you need to go?
[Doyle:] I don't know. I think that's a question for her.
[Keilar:] When her husband, Bill Clinton, obviously accuse of sexual misconduct on various occasions, he's pushed back on those occasions, do you think that was a blind spot for her, did that make her more skeptical of how you might accept an accusation or respond fully to an accusation like this?
[Doyle:] I've spoken about this before, she loves her husband. There is a real mutual respect and admiration and a lot of love in that marriage. And I think in that instance this was about a wife wanting to keep her marriage together and that
[Keilar:] You don't see a connection with this?
[Doyle:] Again, I have seen them both together up close and they love each other and
[I -- Keilar:] But you don't see a connection with how she relates to that and how this Bern Strider event? You wouldn't extrapolate anything from that, that she has a blind spot on how to adequately deal with some of these issues?
[Doyle:] No.
[Keilar:] Strider right now is the president of the American Values Network. It is a group that organizes Americans of faith toward progressive causes. Does he need to go?
[Doyle:] He does. He needs to go.
[Keilar:] Do you think he'll go?
[Doyle:] I hope so. If I could do anything to help him go, I'm more than happy to do that.
[Keilar:] Do you think looking at how he responded to these reports "Buzzfeed" report, great report by Ruby Cramer, great report in "The New York Times," do you think looking specially because he did speak to Ruby in that report
[Doyle:] Yes.
[Keilar:] Do you think he gets it?
[Doyle:] No, not at all.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor, Newsroom:] security officials to see if they can make some headway, and whether they did depends on whom you ask. Sources inside the meeting say there were, quote, "baby steps" but that Pence would not move from the dollar amount demanded by President Trump. And then, just a few minutes ago, this tweet from the president, Vice President Mike Pence and team just left the White House. Briefed me on their meeting with the Schumer-Pelosi representatives. Not much headway made today. Second meeting set for tomorrow. After so many decades, must finally and permanently fix the problems on the southern border. Let's get to our White House Correspondent Boris Sanchez now. Now, Boris, two reviews of that meeting, one only slightly more optimistic than the other. The president's acting chief of staff was there, too. What's his take?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hey there, Ana. Yes, the acting chief of staff clearly frustrated by the slow progress being made in these talks to try to reopen the federal government and to give President Trump what he's asking for, the 5.6 or $5.7 billion to fund his long-promised border wall. To be specific, those baby steps that you mentioned, according to a source on Capitol Hill, are, essentially, the discussion between Democrats and Republicans today that indicate that Democrats basically just asked Republicans for an official justification to appropriate that $5.6 billion in border wall spending. Republicans, essentially, said, we'll get back to you. They promised that they would respond either tonight or tomorrow. Both sides expected to meet again tomorrow. That, clearly, not enough for the acting chief of staff. He is making the case that Democrats are simply trying to stall. Listen to this.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Correspondent:] I know that Speaker Pelosi had said she would didn't want to give even more than one dollar to the border wall. President Trump has talked about $5.6 billion. Is there any give in the $5.6 billion, in terms of whether or not it has to be for a wall or whether it can be for more, generally, border security?
[Mick Mulvaney, Actng White House Chief Of Staff:] Well, I think the president has said, for a long time, that it was it's $5.6 billion for border security, including the wall. We recognize that things, like technology and border crossings are important. But, certainly, a barrier is important. We didn't make much progress at the meeting, which was surprising to me. I thought we had come in to talk about terms that we could agree on. Places where we all agreed we should be spending more time, more attention. Things we can do to improve our border security. And, yet, the opening line from one of the lead Democratic negotiators was that they were not there to talk about any agreement. They were, actually, in my mind, there to stall. And we did not make much progress.
[Sanchez:] Now, Ana, you'll hear more from the acting chief of staff tomorrow in "STATE OF THE UNION" with Jake Tapper on Sunday. He is actually expected to go to Camp David, along with President Trump. They're expected to hold a pow wow to discuss priorities for 2019 for the administration. I did want to point out. We got a statement from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi just a few moments ago. She's promising that Democrats in the House are going to try to pass individual appropriations bills to open certain sections of the federal government that are currently closed. That would include the Treasury Department, the IRS, simply to make sure that people's tax returns get done on time. There is no indication here, though, that the Senate would actually take up those bills or that the president would even sign off on them. As you noted, the president, according to a source, told Democratic lawmakers earlier this week that he would keep the government shut down until the next election if he didn't get funding for that border wall Ana.
[Cabrera:] Boris Sanchez at the White House. Thank you. The White House has painted the border issue is as a national security issue, from holding a briefing in "THE SITUATION ROOM" to Trump claiming yesterday he could build his wall by declaring a national emergency. Today, the president tweeted, quote, "We are working hard at the border but we need a wall. In 2018, 1.7 million pounds of narcotics seized, 17,000 adults arrested with criminal records, and 6,000 gang members, including MS-13, apprehended. A big human trafficking problem." Quick fact check on each those claims that echo similar statements he made yesterday. First, that 1.7 pounds of narcotics that have been seized. According to customs and border protection, this number is accurate. But the way Trump is using it is misleading. That's because the majority of hard narcotics seized by the U.S. come through legal ports of entry. Most heroin, for instance, is moved into the country through privately-owned vehicles at private ports, followed by tractor trailers where the heroin is mixed in with legal products. OK, claim number two, that 17,000 adults have been arrested with criminal records. Again, this number is accurate but misleading. Large portions of the immigrants arrested at the southwest border have committed nonviolent crimes, like illegal entry or illegal reentry or driving under the influence. Now, the president further claims that 6,000 gang members have been apprehended. That number is also correct, according to government data. But those 6,000 have been arrested in communities all across the U.S., not just at the southern border. Statistics show around 700 were arrested around the border alone last year. So, the president's tweet numerically accurate, yes. But misleading, also yes. Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell. He swerve he serves on both the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. Congressman, thank you for being with us. I want to ask you
[Rep. Eric Swalwel , , Judiciary Committee:] Good evening, Ana. Thanks for having me back.
[Cabrera:] about the Democrats and the president disagreeing on just how badly or what type of border security is needed. Both sides do support border security I know. So, what could the president offer that would have you on board? Is it a certain number, in terms of the amount of funds you're willing to put forward or is it about how the funds would be allocated? Spell it out for us.
[Swalwel:] OK. The president does not want border security. He wants border theater and that's been playing out here, as he's been offered increases in border patrol agents, increases in technology, fencing where there are vulnerabilities and enforcement on the visa overstays. But the president doesn't want to engage there, because that does not fulfill the promise that he knows that he's going to get which is that he's going to build a wall, sea to shining sea, and that Mexico is going to pay for that. We're never going to go for that. The American people don't want that. And it turns out when it comes to effective security, Ana, that isn't going to stop the issue that we all believe we need to address.
[Cabrera:] He says he doesn't want a concrete wall anymore, though. He wants steel slats. And if you look at the pictures on the border, I mean, it seems incredibly similar to fencing we already have, in some places. Does this create room for compromise?
[Swalwel:] If the president can articulate where he needs steel slats and why and we can agree on facts, yes, there is an ability to compromise. But if he the tweet that he put out earlier today, he's using the word, wall. A wall, to me, is immoral between two allies. You don't want a permanent structure between two allies, especially when the facts play out. And, one, we have a net outflow of illegal immigration, since 2008 in our country. More illegal immigrants are going from the United States to Mexico than the other way. And, two, the majority of people who are here undocumented have overstayed their visas. That's an issue we should address. But a wall isn't going to do anything to stop either of those two.
[Cabrera:] I want to turn to the Russia investigation, because you are on both the House and Judiciary Committees, which the Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee both controlled by Democrats, obviously. Let's talk about the investigative priorities. Tell us the top three people who should expect summonses and the specific documents you want to get your hands on.
[Swalwell:] Well, I don't want anyone sitting on the edge of the seat waiting to see if they're going to get a subpoena from your show. We don't do it that way, as entertaining as that would be. We're going to fill in the gaps on the Russia investigation to make sure that we, in this upcoming election, the presidential election ahead, protect our ballot box. And we believe we're still vulnerable to Russia intent. So, we're going to fill in the gaps where
[Cabrera:] So, where are the gaps?
[Swalwell:] So, we want to understand the witnesses who refused to testify because of different privileges that they asserted and evented. We want to, you know, bring them in and put them under subpoena. Bank records, cell phone records, travel records that we sought from people like Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, Jared Kushner and others, we would like to get those records. And then, the money laundering that we believe exists between the Russians and the Trump Organization, which, again, we were not allowed to pursue, we want to go there. And we believe that's the case because both Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump said that a lot of money, millions of dollars, was coming in from the Russians in the two thousands, and Deutsche Bank, the president's bank, was fined at that same period of time for laundering Russian money. So, we think we have reason to look.
[Cabrera:] Trump Jr. called the block number, shortly after he arranged that Trump Tower meeting. You'll recall, Republicans had refused to issue a subpoena about the mystery call. But now that you guys are in power, do Democrats plan to subpoena those records?
[Swalwell:] Absolutely. And that would go to the president's knowledge. Because you have Donald Trump Jr. being offered dirt on Hillary Clinton. Then, he makes a call, and on the phone record it's a blocked number, and then he calls back to Russia. And so, we know, from other evidence, that Donald Trump, his father, had a number that would come up as blocked. And that he was in the building at the time that Donald Trump Jr. was making these calls. So, we have reason to look. Again, every time we learned evidence, in the last two years, that was illuminating, the Republicans would take out their shovels and bury it. For the sake of the American people, we now can unearth that evidence and tell the American people what it means.
[Cabrera:] Some of your colleagues are already talking about impeachment. I know you're not there just yet. We know it is on the president's mind. Two sources tell us, in yesterday's meeting, during an apparently profanity laid in tirade, the president brought it up. And he directed his comments at Nancy Pelosi, alluding to that yesterday. Here is the president.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, you can't impeach somebody that's going a great job. That's the way I view it. And she said, we're not looking too impeach you. I said that's good, Nancy. That's good. But you know what? You don't impeach people when they're doing a good job.
[Cabrera:] You can't impeach somebody for doing a good job. Your reaction?
[Swalwell:] He shouldn't worry about us impeaching somebody who's doing a good job. But what he should worry about is that the last two years of having presidential immunity, where his abuses of power went just unchecked, those days are over. And we're not rushing to impeach but we certainly are going to do our job. And if there is evidence that's there, we will build an air-tight case, seek bipartisan buy in and make sure the American people know just what that means. And by the way, Ana, if this was Donald Trump justice, Donald Trump would be impeached already. He is so reckless with the facts that he would've thrown anyone that has done anything like what he's done out already. But we're not going to do that. We're going to give him a fair investigation that he probably deserves.
[Cabrera:] I want to quickly talk quickly 2020. Senator Elizabeth Warren announcing an exploratory committee this week. We said last year you were considering running. But you told me that decision will be based 100 percent on your family. And we saw you with your beautiful baby daughter on that House floor this weekend. We've got a picture of it up. Any announcements to make on our show?
[Swalwell:] We're getting close, Ana. Senator Warren I'm thrilled is in the race. I think other qualified folks will be in. This weekend, she is in my hometown, home county in northwest Iowa, where I was born. And I think it's important to run all over that state, because we have to go to the rural areas. And I'm going to be going back there soon. But, yes, a decision is forthcoming.
[Cabrera:] All right, Congressman Eric Swalwell. We hope you will save your announcement for my show
[Swalwell:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] when that time comes. Good to see you.
[Swalwell:] Of course. Of course.
[Cabrera:] You're always welcome back.
[Swalwell:] Thanks, Ana. Thank you.
[Cabrera:] All right, thank you. Joining us now, Democratic strategist, Basil Smikle, and host of "S.E. CUPP UNFILTERED" coming your way at 6:00 p.m. Eastern at the top of the hour here on CNN, S.E. Cupp. All right, I want to talk 2020 obviously eventually. But first, let's get back to the important issue this weekend, the shutdown. We're now into day 15. The longest shutdown ever, 21 days. S.E., you heard what we just had, that back and forth with the Congressman and, sort of, what Democrats are looking for, in order to end the shutdown when it comes to border security. What's your take?
[S.e. Cupp, Cnn Political Commentator:] I'm not sure Democrats have any incentive to change their behavior, at this point. They're not getting blamed for the shutdown, yet. That could change. And I think they're representing their constituents. Their constituents do not want a wall. And so, they've already thrown down the gauntlet, you won't get a wall. Come to the table with some other ideas. I don't think that they will get their piecemeal legislation fixed as passed. As well intentioned as they may be to keep the IRS running, the Treasury, that would take away Trump's leverage. And so, I don't think Trump, on other side, has any incentive to open any aspects of the government, because his incentive is to keep the pain on. That brings the other side to the table.
[Cabrera:] Do Democrats need to compromise, in some way, Basil, given they do now, sort of, hold the power in one portion of the administration, of the House?
[Basil Smikle, Former Executive Director Of The New York State Democratic Party:] Quite frankly, as S.E. said, they're in a great position right now. And even if the bills that Nancy Pelosi is intending to put forth next week to, sort of, piecemeal open up government, the fact of the matter is this is really going to fall squarely on Donald Trump and the Republicans. And the meeting at the White House was instructive. It was kind of lopsided, when you think about it. You had Mike Pence sitting across from staffers, not leadership, which tells me
[Cupp:] Don't forget Jared Kushner was there.
[Smikle:] Well, that's important, too. And but that tells me something really interesting. Number one, that Democrats are holding firm in their resolute. That's very key and that's very key to our base, number one. And, number two, it also says that negotiations don't really mean a whole heck of a lot, if Donald Trump, himself, is not in the room.
[Cabrera:] That's what I wanted to ask you, S.E., because we have the vice president, last week, throwing out $2.5 billion.
[Cupp:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] And then, the president this week saying, no way. It has to be $5.6 billion.
[Cupp:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] So, if he's not there, is that a problem, if he's not in the room to negotiate?
[Cupp:] Yes, Basil is absolutely right. I mean, having Jared there and Mike Pence there. I mean, Basil, you and I and Ana, we could have a meeting about reopening the government. If Donald Trump and the key players, the people who actually are in a position to make a deal aren't there, it's almost meaningless. And, frankly, sending staffers I thought was a little sort of, I don't know,
[Smikle:] It's
[Cupp:] giving the respect that they believe that meeting deserved.
[Smikle:] Exactly. Good point.
[Cabrera:] Interesting. Let's talk 2020 because Elizabeth Warren is on the move this weekend. She announced she is opening this exploratory committee. She was in Sioux City, Iowa earlier this morning and she immediately was met with a question about that now controversial DNA test and the video she put out. Let's listen to how she answered the question.
[Elizabeth Warren , Massachusetts:] I am not a person of color. I am not a citizen of a tribe. Tribal citizenship is very different from ancestry. Tribes and only tribes determine tribal citizenship and I respect that difference. My decision was, I'm just going to put it all out there. It took a while, but just put it all out there. All of my hiring records, including a DNA test, it's out there. It's online. Anybody can look at it. It's there. And I think what 2020 is going to be about is not about my family. It's about the 10s of millions of families across this country who just want a level playing field. Who just want a chance to build an America that doesn't just work for a handful of folks at the top. But an America that works for all of us. And that's why I'm in this fight.
[Cabrera:] S.E., how'd she handle that?
[Cupp:] You know, that was a valiant effort at a pivot. But this is never going away. That's, in part, because Donald Trump's been very effective at hammering her on this. But also because this was a huge unforced error of hers. She did not have to release a DNA test. She didn't have to pretend that she was a native American and release a video, boasting about her native American roots. That a candidate, for president potentially, has to get up and say, I am not a person of color, I am not a member of a tribe, it's really it's hard it's going to be hard for her to get away from this. No matter what she does, she will not get away from this. It was a huge P.R. disaster. And, folks, I'm talking to can't believe people around her let it happen in the first place.
[Cabrera:] Is that how she starts to get away from this, Basil, by just and now acknowledging I'm not a person of color and, sort of, meeting it head-on?
[Smikle:] It's a start. But I think this is going to follow her for a good chunk the campaign, if not the entire campaign. And I've said this to you before. You know, it bothers me, as a person of color, because it seems like she used her native American ancestry, however much it is, to an advantage. You know, my great, great, great grandfather is Scottish. I can never say that I'm white, ever, because it just doesn't work that way. And so, for her to use this, sort of, sliver of ancestry to her advantage and now have to actually roll that back a bit is, in some ways, doubly not dishonest but it's doubly hurtful, particularly to the tribes that are involved.
[Cupp:] And mostly because the tribes that were involved in those communities were insulted
[Smikle:] Yes.
[Cupp:] by her attempt at this. She directly offended them. So, when that community that you're trying to be a part of disowns you,
[Smikle:] Right.
[Cupp:] you've got big problems.
[Smikle:] Right.
[Cabrera:] We had Rashida Tlaib this week making headlines. She is one of the new members of Congress, a freshman Democrat, used an expletive laden speech to go after the president calling for his impeachment. Basil, what happened to when they go low, we go high?
[Smikle:] Well, the rules of decorum, I think, went a long time ago. This is it's not something I wouldn't necessarily do. But, the truth is, we're in a very different space right now. And if you're upset about that but not upset about all the things that Donald Trump has done in the last two years or his, sort of, silence, with respect to Charlottesville, for example, among other things, then I think not only is that sort of unfortunate, but it really does say a lot about where we are in this country right now. I don't look, it's not something I would do because that's just not what I would do. But I don't take away the anger and the angst that she probably feels in making that comment, and what the folks in the room how they took it. But we are well passed that point of decorum.
[Cabrera:] S.E., let me read you how a fellow Congresswoman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is defending Tlaib's language. She writes, Republican hypocrisy at its finest, going after the critics here, saying that Trump admitting to sexual assault on tape is just locker room talk, but scandalizing themselves into foe outrage when my sis says a curse word at a bar, GOP lost entitlement to policing women's behavior a long time ago. Next. Does she have a point?
[Cupp:] No, she's as she's want to do, she almost, sort of, walks into a contradictory point. If you are mad at Donald Trump's coarsening of language and you were critical of the way he talked about women, minorities, name your party, and
[Cabrera:] Grabbing women by the you know.
[Cupp:] All of it.
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Cupp:] Then you should be you should find as equally as offensive and gross and inappropriate. If you think Donald Trump's language is unbefitting of the office, so is this. I am religious when it comes to intellectual consistency. And so, as Basil is saying, if you're bothered by this but not Trump's language, that's a problem. The same for the reverse. Let's be consistent. Find it all gross and unacceptable and inappropriate and demand better. Any defense or justification of what Rashida Tlaib said I think is self-serving and hypocritical.
[Cabrera:] I've got to leave it there, guys. Thank you so much. Basil, S.E., good to see you both. S.E.'s back at the top of the hour. Don't forget her show at 6:00. New details tonight about the former U.S. Marine detained in Russia accused of spying. Sources are telling CNN he has no connections to the intel community. So, why is Russia targeting him? And what are they saying about a possible swap? Plus, as the U.S. is scouting sites for a second Trump-Kim summit and the president routinely boasts about his relationship with Kim Jong-Un, new questions over whether he is falling prey to Kim's flattery. Live in the CNN Newsroom. Don't go anywhere.

[Berman:] All right. First on CNN, the U.S. Navy is expected to call for a one-day operational pause. This is hours after the USS John McCain collided with an oil tanker. And this is to investigation, we understand, the series of events that have taken place this year. CNN Military analyst and diplomatic analyst, retired Rear Admiral John Kirby joins us now. Admiral, what does this mean, a one-day operational pause?
[Rear Adm. John Kirby, Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] Well, what this is, is they're going to give fleet commanders across the Navy a chance over the next couple of weeks to take one day at their discretion because they all have operational commitments they have to meet. I mean, they don't want to stand in the way of the Navy's mission readiness every day but they want to take one day over those weeks and give fleet commander chance to take a pause, a safety stand down, if you will, a chance to not operate at the unit level, and take a look at how they're training, how they're preparing, how they're standing watches, equipment readiness. Just take basically like taking a knee, John, to take a hard look at where they are in terms of watch standard readiness and material readiness before they go back out to sea. And again, this will be up to each unit commander to determine what day is best for them over the next couple of weeks. That way the Navy can still meet all its mission requirements.
[Berman:] All right. Admiral John Kirby, thanks so much for helping us understand this news. Again, the U.S. Navy issuing a one-day operational pause across the Navy to assess the situation in the wake of the collision with the USS John McCain. All right. Do you have your eclipse glasses ready? Yes? We were supposed to have music right there. Apparently we don't. But trust me, we're going to speak to Bonnie Tyler who sang a very famous song about eclipses. She'll be right here on CNN.

[Cabrera:] Duke Energy officials are saying they're doing everything they can to prevent a coal ash spill in eastern North Carolina. The rising floodwaters caused a dam to breach at a Duke Energy plant in Wilmington. That dam is meant to contain coal ash, which is toxic industrial waste, that includes arsenic and lead. Environmentalists now fear coal ash is seeping into the Cape Fear River. CNN's Kaylee Hartung is now joining us now from Wilmington. Kaylee, what is the latest on the situation there?
[Kaylee Hartung, Reporter, Cnn:] Ana, Duke Energy tells me they've taken samples from the cooling lake where that dam was breached by the flood waters of the Cape Fear River and they've taken samples from the river. They expect the results to come back late tonight or early tomorrow morning and to give them data to back up what now is confidence, that they do not believe that coal ash has made its way into this river. They've been doing ground inspections and aerial inspections. In the meantime, they say there's no visible sign of coal ash in these waters. Earlier today, I spoke with a representative from Duke Energy who got a bird's eye view for herself.
[Erin Culbert, Communications Manager, Duke Energy:] So I had the opportunity today to go up in one of the aerial inspections by helicopter. And we can tell by that kind of bird's eye view that the ash basin dams here at the Sutton site remain well protected, they are stable, and they are containing the coal ash.
[Hartung:] While Duke Energy doesn't believe this industrial waste has gotten into the water, what has environmentalists particularly concerned is that Duke Energy does say another byproduct of coal combustion has. That's what they call cenospheres, this is tiny bead-like metal particles whose consistency is not easy to distinguish from sand. And so, environmentalists say, if these cenospheres were able to get into the water, then they believe coal ash could too. But, Ana, that power plant, upstream from where I am here on the banks of the Cape Fear River, is a place where raw water is taken in to then be turned into drinking water for this area. That plant is 20 miles upstream from the power plant. So the Cape Fear River Utility Authority is saying that, no matter what happens at that power plant, the drinking water is safe and will be safe for the people in the Wilmington area.
[Cabrera:] OK, a bit of good news. Kaylee Hartung, thank you for that reporting. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani going on the attack against President Trump comparing him to former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Iran's state TV quotes Rouhani and saying Trump will fail in the economic and psychological war against Iran, just as Hussein failed in his eight- year war against the Islamic Republic. Rouhani also refuted the idea that Iran interferes in the affairs of other countries in the region. Now, Rouhani's message followed President Trump's own comments on Iran last night at his rally in Missouri.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] When I took over, and before I took over, everybody said Iran will take over the entire Middle East. Now Iran wants to survive, OK? But you know what, I hope we get along with them great. But it's not easy for them. And frankly, it's not easy for others, until we get treated with the respect that we deserve.
[Cabrera:] So this now sets the scene heading into next week's United Nations Security Council meeting on Iran, which President Trump will chair. An historic moment in Saudi Arabia. This woman is breaking through societal norms, becoming the first female to anchor the main newscast on state-owned Saudi TV. This is in a country known for its strict rules for women, so it is a truly groundbreaking moment. Just this summer, another sign of progress for women, finally able to legally drive.
[Unidentified Male:] This is CNN Breaking News.
[Cabrera:] You're live in the CNN Newsroom. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York, thank you for being with me. Our breaking news here on CNN, in just the past few minutes, we have confirmation now on a tentative date agreed upon for a woman to appear before a Senate committee and describe what she calls a sexual assault against her by President Trump's Supreme Court nominee. Christine Blasey Ford accuses Brett Kavanaugh of attacking her when they were both teenagers. Today, on a deadline, she agreed to speak before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We just learned that her day will tentatively be Thursday. Our Supreme Court Reporter, Ariane de Vogue, is with us. Also, with us, White House reporter Sarah Westwood.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you, Kate. And welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us. The president ratchets up his anti-immigration rhetoric. Does he really plan to deny due process to those crossing the border, or is he trying to look tough after an embarrassing family separation flip- flop? Plus, the president's trade war wobbles financial markets and slams an iconic American brand. Harley-Davidson is taking a big, financial hit and now says it has no choice but to move some production overseas. And incivility in America. The president loves insulting and inciting his critics, but is the left now going too far in its counterpunch? Florida's attorney general among the prominent Trump supporters asked to leave or heckled when trying to eat at a restaurant, or take in a movie.
[Pam Bondi, Florida Attorney General:] If she wants people to protest, that's one thing. But to continue this, they're inciting violence. It's not just yelling at someone and cursing at someone in a public place. They were trying to create a fight. So then we went into the movie and I said, I'm not going to leave. By then there were marked units everywhere. And so after the movie they said, do you want to go out the back door? And I said, no way, I'm not going to be bullied by them. We're walking out the door that we came in.
[King:] Back to that story in a moment. But we begin today with long lines at the U.S.-Mexican border and the tough talk of a president who wants his base to forget a giant White House immigration about face. On Twitter to begin the work week, this presidential vow, quote, to build a wall, and scorn for those who think more judges are now the answer to handling illegal border crossings. Today's muscular tweets follow the president's brash weekend rejection of a long-time American ideal, due process. The president tweeting, quote, we cannot allow all of these people to invade our country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no judges or court cases, bring them back from where they came. That tough talk from the president sure to be candy to the Trump base. It is also a trademark strategy when this president is proven wrong or forced into a legal or political retreat. His government now scrambling to reunite families separated by the president's zero tolerance policy. More than 500 children have been reunited as of this weekend. More than 2,000 still in the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services, waiting to see their parents again. Not sure exactly when that will happen. Now, word today travels fast. Many migrants making their way toward the border now know families are no longer to be separated. CNN's Leyla Santiago is live from the border crossing in Tijuana, Mexico. Leyla, tell us what you're seeing right there.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] All right, well, John, right behind me you can see this group of people sort of crowded around. Right now officials are actually taking in about 50 people who plan to seek asylum at the port of entry. This right here, what you're seeing, that's the legal way to do this. I talked to quite a few people who tell me they had they were hesitating. They had reservations about getting back in this line. But once they heard that President Trump signed the executive order saying child separation, or family separations, rather, were no longer going to be a thing, they got back in that line. Mothers who had backed off saying, look, I can't go back to Honduras but I also can't have my family separated. They were dealing with that sort of uncertainty. And now they are moving forward. They have this sort of unofficial list. The migrants made it. They manage it. And on that list right now, John, there are more than a thousand people. A thousand people waiting to get in. They put their name on the list and they come back weeks later. The woman who was next in line, a mother from Honduras traveling with her child, she said that she's been on the list for 16 days now. And so she plans to go in there and tell U.S. immigration officials her story, which is she is escaping violence. There was a threat made to herself, as well as her child. And she says if she goes back to Honduras, she could be killed. That's why she's heading here, out of desperation. We talked to her about the criticism that so many people have asked, what kind of parent would do this, and her response to me was, a desperate parent. John.
[King:] And, Leyla, do they have any sense of what awaits on the other side? Meaning, the administration is now scrambling to create these new detention centers for families, but do those those migrants hoping to get asylum, knowing they could will be stopped and questioned, do they have any sense of what's going to be on the other side?
[Santiago:] You know, many of these migrants are keeping up with the news because they're heading right toward that, right toward a place where immigration policy is really being debated right now. So they're keeping up with the news. But I will tell you, John, I spoke to a 16-year-old girl who she said the gangs threatened her, told her she had two options, either sell drugs or prostitution. The next day, her mother put her on a bus by herself, crossed the country of Mexico. And when I told her, do you know what's going to happen to you, do you know what this process is like? And she said, no. She had no idea if she would get to her aunt in North Carolina. She had no idea if she would be in immigration custody forever. Or she said she had no idea if they would return her to Honduras, where she felt she would face death if she didn't sell drugs or become a prostitute.
[King:] Leyla Santiago for us. That's at the border crossing in Tijuana. Leyla, appreciate it. With me here in studio to share their reporting and their insights, Eliana Johnson from "Politico," CNN's Phil Mattingly, Tarini Parti with "BuzzFeed News," and Margaret Talev with "Bloomberg." Again, to make the distinction, that's how, if you're going to do it, that's how you're supposed to do it. If you want asylum in the United States, come to the border crossing and declare yourself. The president's scorn has been more at those who come across illegally trying to do that. But over the weekend, the president's saying to people, let's forget due process. Let's no judges. Even a lot of Republicans have said, let's have more judges. Let's have more judges. We can handle these cases quicker. People will be in these detention centers for a shorter period of time. We can clean this up faster. Is the president really, really hopeful of such a step, or is he just trying to get his base to forget he reversed course last week?
[Eliana Johnson, National Political Reporter, "politico":] I think throughout this whole immigration fiasco for the Trump administration, there are many cases in which policy has followed the president's rhetoric. And that's why it's been such a confusing process. And it's not clear whether the president was just blowing off steam and tweets, and there's a policy that will follow this or not at this point. But I do think it's important to point out that there is a statute that gives the president, by law, the power to cut off simply cut off immigration. Immigrants illegal immigrants are not necessarily entitled to a hearing before a judge. If the president overrules that and makes it our policy, simply to cut off immigration from, x, y or z countries right now. And so but I think it's not clear whether he's going to take that step. We'll have to see in the coming days.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Yes. And I think what's interesting is kind of the two different worlds between the Oval Office and how they're trying the president wants to apparently try to address this on Capitol Hill, where Republicans are trying to figure out some type of short term fix to the executive action and every kind of the madness that followed as they try and figure it out. To your point, Republicans are trying to surge immigration judges. They're trying to speed up the process. They're trying to essentially supersede a court ruling from 1997. Basically make this entire process quicker and that's the way you address the concerns that are happening right now about detained families, keeping families together and then sending families back if those claims or not don't pass muster in a quick manner. That's the way the president's allies on Capitol Hill want to address this. That's the way Republicans in general want to address this. I think to Eliana's point, lawyers have looked at things like this, like what the president is asking for, in the past on immigration and decided there's not really a pathway forward there. There this isn't saying that his lawyers won't do this and his lawyers won't try and follow up with what he's saying, it just diverges dramatically from where the rest of his party is as they try and figure out some type of solution here.
[King:] Right. And it does steer, and the president's very good at this, he understands how this works. It does steer the conversation away from, OK, after not being able to answer questions for days, the government did, over the weekend, to its credit, put out a list and said we have a policy. We're trying to locate these families. That we've reunited 522, I believe it was, as of Saturday night. Two thousand and fifty-three, if my numbers are correct, around then were still, you know, in these shelters and they're trying to connect the dots and everything. Applaud them for their effort. Now the skepticism is, do you actually have everybody accounted for? What is the process in place then to locate the parents? How is this all going to play out? That is a policy confrontation. It's a humanity conversation as well, whatever your views on immigration, you want these families to be properly reunited. The president would rather talk tough like this.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I think the word "compassion" comes into it, but it's still equally as tough, if not tougher. We're going to keep families together, but the border is going to be just as tough as it's been. If we don't do it, you will be inundated with people and you really won't have a country anymore. Our issue is strong borders, no crime. Their issue is, open borders, let MS-13 all over our country.
[King:] There are people a lot of people who recoil at some of the words. But when the president says "infest" in tweets or "these people" in the tweet about we don't need judges, that is a conversation that he believes plays to his benefit.
[Tarini Parti, White House Reporter, "buzzfeed News":] Right. We saw last week the first split second there that the president brought up governing with heart. He mentioned that when he signed the executive order. But in the last few weeks, he's used such strong language against immigrants that he's clearly made the calculation that this is what his base wants and that this is what's going to help them in the 2018 election.
[Johnson:] Well, I think the reason he's ratcheted up his rhetoric is that he doesn't want his base to think he's retreating.
[King:] Right.
[Johnson:] When he has actually retreated from this and the most likely outcome is that the government will go back to a catch and release, which is the policy from the Obama era that he's been
[King:] Right, or they are now at the Pentagon looking to build these family detention centers, for lack of a better word. And someone help me if there's a better way to put it. But to create centers where you can actually keep the families together. Now, whether that stands up in court is a whole different issue, which is where you bring in the short term congressional action. Let's come back to Congress a bit later in the program, but as the as the administration now goes through this, this is Jim Lankford, Republican senator from Oklahoma, who says he buys it when the government says, we have all these children we've accounted for, now we're trying to do difficult work. They acknowledge it will take some time because people are in legal proceedings. Some of them are elsewhere in the country. Some of them may have left the country. We're going to figure out those. Senator Lankford says, I take them at their word.
[Sen. James Lankford , Oklahoma:] We know where every single child is. This is an issue that's gone out there somewhat in some of the other media that's been not been responsible for this with the assumption that the administration's lost track of that. So let me clarify a couple of things. These are career professionals that work HHS. And that work with DHS and Customs and Border Patrol and ICE. These are not political appointees. These are career folks. They know where every child is to be able to connect them to their parent or the relative that came.
[King:] Now, he's a serious policy guy. He seems to trust them. Is that well placed?
[Margaret Talev, Senior White House Correspondent, "bloomberg":] Well, I think there's two agencies to watch now, and one is going to be the Pentagon, the other's going to be the Department of Homeland Security. I suppose the Department of Justice would be a third. But how the agency implements the rhetoric that the president is talking about, often from Twitter, is how everyone finds out about it, including the administration. How those agencies take those and access are going to be really important to watch in the coming days. Mattis has always been kind of his reputation inside the White House has been to kind of slow walk or hold the line when the president says, we've got to do x, y, z. He says, OK, we'll take a look at that. And a slow process begins that take a very long time to unfold. Is that going to continue to be the pattern or are things going to happen very quickly? And then the courts, of course, are the other place to watch. For the president you'd ask, like, is he serious? Does he really want it to happen or is it just rhetoric? And I think the answer is, yes. I mean, I think he's OK with it if it happens and he's OK with it if it just muddies the water and changes the focus away from the really real problem of hundreds of children being separated and or thousands at some point being separated and not knowing exactly where those parents are and how to reunite them.
[King:] I suspect the courts will weigh in on this as well in the days ahead, as we'll keep an eye on that. Back to this story a bit later. But up next, a sell-off on Wall Street after Harley-Davidson says tariffs from the European Union now forcing it to move production out of Wisconsin to overseas.

[Smerconish:] If you are one of the many people fighting a losing battle with clutter help is on the way. I'm not talking really about hoarders, I'm meaning the many more of us with just too much stuff. Here's some of the pictures already sent in by some of you this hour. What's going on in your house? It piles up in garages, fills our closets, but often we are unwilling or scared to let go of those keep sakes. Enter the self proclaimed guru of spiritual decluttering, and bestselling author Marie Kondo who host "Tidying Up With Marie Kondo" on Netflix. Her KonMari ethos is simple, if an item sparks joy, it's a keeper, if not, give it away or throw it away. Kondo's books have been popular for years but since her series debuted on new year's day, she seems to have tapped into the clean living zeitgeist maybe too well. There are reports that thrift stores are being overwhelmed by a deluge of donations. By the way I have been an early disciple of KonMari. Haven't fully pulled it off but been doing it before it went mainstream. Joining me, organizing and lifestyle consultant Patty Morrissey, one of the KonMari experts certified outside of Japan. She's been called a Jedi level KonMari practitioner, and Jenny Eclair is also with us. She's a comedian and author from the U.K. you wrote this piece in the "Independent," "A Marie Kondo session led me to a glorious teenage hoard of beer mats, false beards and locks of hair." Patty, give me the cliff notes version. What does it mean to go KonMari?
[Patty Morrissey, Certified Konmari Consultant:] KonMari is a comprehensive tidying method where you go through your entire home starting with clothes, then books, then paper, then kimono, which is miscellaneous, and then you end with sentimental objects. And by doing so you not only clear your home but you also clear your life.
[Smerconish:] And categories matter, not location, right? It's not like, oh, I'll go to the bedroom, then I'll do the garage, then I'll do the attic?
[Morrissey:] That's right. Things are scattered all over our home. And so when we gather them altogether, we get to see exactly how much we have. And it becomes that much easier to make decisions.
[Smerconish:] I happen to have the book with me. So I'll use it as my prop, I would if this were one of the many books in my home, I'd say, hmm, Marie Kondo's book, does this give me joy and then I would decide whether I'm keeping or discarding?
[Morrissey:] That's right. You handling the object is very important, holding it up to your heart, and taking that moment of silence. We receive so many messages from advertisers and social media about what's important and that this is a process of introspection, of taking that moment and asking yourself, what do I care about? What matters to me?
[Smerconish:] Jenny the books are going to be among many problems for you in going full KonMari, I know from reading your piece in the independent.
[Jenny Eclair, Comedian And Author:] Yes. Yes. Well, the thing is Marie has said 30 books which I think is a bit of a tight limit. And for a woman who wants us to cut down on the number of books we keep, she is writing a number of her own, I mean, I'm not sure how many Kondo books we should keep. I've written myself four novels and I'm not throwing any of those away. I'm very opened to the process. I have gone semi Kondo as I call it in my house. I've managed one drawer which now closes. But I think with the many of us who have gone a bit Kondo, you get distracted by what you find on the way. But let me for a serious point first, I think that one of the reasons why this has swept around the world, I mean, this is a global phenomenon now. You've got it. We got it. We're all catching it off each other. It's an epidemic. And I think it's because we are all living in chaos. Particular in Britain we've got this awful Brexit dilemma going on, nobody knows where we stand, everyone is very anxious, and I think that by taking charge of what's in your what we call a knicker drawer, it can help you have some sense of order in the rest of your life. So I am I do approve some of the Kondo things but my daughter was kondo'ing. And she did a big picture of her heap of clothes. And she had, you know, all the stuff she was discarding on the photograph. I thought, well, I bought you that. What do you mean you are throwing that away? I bought you that last birthday. So the danger of that there's a danger of
[Morrissey:] Jenny, I have faith in you.
[Smerconish:] It sounds like a great it sounds like a great it sounds like a great time capsule and, Patty Morrissey, by the way, Adam, run some of the images that have come in while I've been on air so that people see the need for KonMari techniques from my tweeter oh, boy, look at that closet, holy smokes. Patty the hardest category is the memento category. What am I supposed to do? We have four kids. They've all done art projects. All the art projects are in our attic. Am I supposed to throw those out?
[Morrissey:] It's you have to build up to it. So the fact that Jenny stumbled upon her box of mementos in the first day we don't deal with that until the very end. And gratitude is really the key in letting things go. So by the time you get up there, you really know what you want to keep and what you don't. I just went with my daughter and looked through her homework with her. And we immediately throw things away and we just thank the piece of paper for helping her practice her math problems. We thank the strokes on the paper for helping her practicing her technique. And we chose a few pieces that are worth keeping. And then we just let we let the rest go with a lot of gratitude.
[Smerconish:] Jenny, you have a sugar cube you have a sugar cube from the cafe where you used to go and meet boys.
[Eclair:] Yes.
[Smerconish:] Now I guess you're going to have to KonMari that sugar cube and thank it.
[Eclair:] Never, never ever that sugar cube will go to my grave.
[Morrissey:] Jenny, what I recommend you do you is that you store it somewhere that has a place of honor. These things that are important to you put them in a place that's not locked up and hidden away. I was just working with a client and she saved something from her mother who had passed away and she said to me, "I guess that's kind of embarrassing. Maybe I should just tuck it away in the back of the closet." And I said, "No, let's honor it." And we put it on a tray and we gave it a prominent place in her home. And I told her to go get a picture of her mother.
[Eclair:] I'm going to make a shrine
[Morrissey:] Yes, make a shrine.
[Eclair:] make a shrine to my 15 year old narcissism. But there are things like as you know you mentioned somebody whose mother had died, in this book, my teenage stuff, is a detention slip that was signed by my father. You know, I got in trouble at school for not wearing a hat. I decided his signature, I couldn't throw that away I don't think. I'm not there yet.
[Smerconish:] I agree. Totally That bring that brings you joy. But that brings you joy. You would pick up that detention slip and you would say, this brings me joy. This is a keeper. Ladies, thank you. I love this conversation.
[Morrissey:] Thank you.
[Eclair:] Pleasure.
[Smerconish:] Thank you. Still to come, your best and worst tweets and Facebook comments and it's your last chance to vote on today's survey question. "Should public service be required of young Americans? Go vote.

[Lemon:] The President's personal attorney denying a story that alleged a sexual relationship between Trump and a porn star. At any other time, that would be what everybody is talking about. Two decades ago, the Monica Lewinsky scandal led to President Clinton's impeachment. Let us discuss now, Michael Isikoff chief investigative correspondent for Yahoo news and also Sally Quinn, a Washington Post contributor and the author of Finding Magic. Thanks for joining us. 20 years, Michael, since your reporting of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky and his lies about it became public. It was a bombshell. Talk to us about the news and how it hit Washington,
[D.c. Michael Isikoff, Chief Investigation Correspondent, Yahoo News:] Well, it was quite the earthquake, wasn't it?
[Lemon:] It certainly was.
[Isikoff:] On so many different levels. I mean people have talked about this as, you know, I had the story, I certainly was aware of the relationship that the President, the then-President Bill Clinton had with Monica Lewinsky. But what made this a story was the decision by Ken Starr to launch a criminal investigation of this matter. To wire Linda trip in her conversations with Monica Lewinsky to gather evidence to suggest that the President and his good friend Verna Jordan were seeking to cover up, to obstruct the ongoing Paula Jones lawsuit, and that was a stunning development.
[Lemon:] So without Ken Starr, are you saying this may not have been reported?
[Isikoff:] We at "Newsweek" knew about the allegations of the relationship for months. I had been talking to Linda Tripp. She had provided me all sorts of circumstantial evidence, including offering to give me the blue dress, although it was not clear what I could possibly have done with it to use that corroborating evidence, but once the Paula Jones lawsuit proceeded and it was clear that Bill Clinton was going to be deposed under oath and was going to be asked about this, we got closer to the story, but it was the intervention of Starr that made this the political earthquake that it was.
[Lemon:] And eventually the cover-up that made it a bigger political earthquake.
[Isikoff:] And the President of course denied publicly denied that the allegations were true.
[Lemon:] Sally, the Lewinsky story, it was epic then and eventually resulted in the President's impeachment, and you fast-forward 20 years and we have a story about President Trump allegedly having a tryst with a porn star, Stormy Daniels. The "Wall Street Journal" reported just this past Friday on an alleged tryst that the President's attorney, Michael Cohen, arranged a $130,000 payment for a former adult film star a month before the 2016 election as part of an agreement to preclude her from publicly discussing any alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Trump. Citing people familiar with the matter. Why hasn't the public reacted the same way? This is someone who is now the President of the United States, was married, had a small child and is accused of covering it up in some way. Why isn't this a big story?
[Sally Quinn, Washington Post Contributor:] You know why? Because I think that on the list of outrageous, this comes very low. With Bill Clinton, and I have to say that Michael Isikoff did a brilliant job reporting on Monica Lewinsky story and I was there hanging over his shoulder looking at his computer while he was doing it. During that time, it wasn't a shock that Bill Clinton was having an affair, because we already knew that he had done that, but it was a shock when it became clear that he was going to be deposed and then he lied. But I think with Donald Trump, first of all, everybody knows that this is what he does, and I think that he has it was a consensual affair. I don't think any money changed hands at the time, at least that we know of now. And I think that the only thing that is going to get in the way is the money, follow the money. Where did they get the money to pay her off to keep her silent? Why did they wait so long? How was it done? But that part of it, I think, could be difficult. But I think that when you look at what Trump has done with the environment and what he is done with DACA and what he has done with health care and what he is doing with the immigration and racism you know, you could go on and on and on.
[Lemon:] You think this just falls in there.
[Quinn:] This just falls at the bottom, and the Trump supporters obviously their issue
[Lemon:] They don't care. It doesn't matter. They don't care about anything. There is no indiscretion, there's nothing. You mentioned Kenneth Starr. Would something like this possibly turn up at the Mueller investigation?
[Isikoff:] You know, not on its face. I mean, with the Monica Lewinsky thing, she was a subpoenaed witness in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Remember, the Supreme Court voted 9-0 and said the lawsuit should go forward. It was a legitimate legal process. And that is what turns it, you know, turned it into
[Lemon:] Michael Cohen denies there is any inappropriate relationship with Stormy Daniels, and Cohen also released a statement from Daniels in which she denies having sex with the President. So why do you think this story hasn't blown up?
[Isikoff:] First of all, they did not deny the $130,000 payment. That is what leapt out at me. If nothing had happened, why did money change hands? And if money didn't change hands, why didn't they deny that money had changed hands? So that is the first sort of red flag that leaps out. Of course, as Stormy Daniels had talked to others and confirmed that she had had a sexual relationship with Donald Trump and then after the $130,000 payment, she said she did not have a sexual relationship with Donald Trump. So there are legitimate reasons to be somewhat skeptical about some of these public statements.
[Quinn:] I think you were saying discrepancies.
[Lemon:] Do you think it is a different standard, because listen, this President, everybody knows he has a problem with the truth. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about his affair. Do you think there is a different standard with this President? I don't have a lot of time left.
[Quinn:] Let me just ask you one question. Suppose this happened with Barack Obama. How would you think it would go down? It would be a huge scandal and he probably would have been forced to resign.
[Lemon:] Republican and Conservative Media would be all over it.
[Quinn:] But I don't think, I mean Melania would leave him over this, I don't think she would care. The only thing, his supporters are, number one, if it's ever been shown that he was behind an abortion of someone that he'd had sex with or, two, that if he were gay or a cross-dresser. I think that other than that, he is golden.
[Lemon:] All right. Thank you. That is like what is it? A live boy or dead girl? Thank you very much. Interesting.
[Unidentified Male:] His overall health is excellent. He has very, very good health. He is in the excellent range from a cardiac standpoint.
[Lemon:] But it turns out President Trump's tests show he has heart disease, so why didn't his doctor say that during his briefing?

[Patrick Snell, Cnn Sports Anchor:] Hi there. I'm Patrick Snell with your CNN World Sport Headlines. The L.A. Rams heading to the Super Bowl for the first time since 2001 after winning a thrilling and at times controversial contest Sunday against the New Orleans Saints. Next month, in Atlanta, they'll face the New England Patriots who outlasted the Kansas City Chiefs. The game would go into overtime, but that's when star quarterback, Tom Brady, drove the Pats down the field to score the sudden death touchdown. This is the third year now in a row the Patriots are in the Super Bowl. Meantime, the U.S. Open champ, Naomi Osaka, has advanced to the quarterfinals of the Australian Open. Osaka once again losing the first set but hit back to win the next two against the Latvian player, Anastasia Sevastova. The world number four saying afterwards she's been inspired by the exploits of fellow youngsters on the men's side, Francis Tiafoe and Stefano Tsitsipas who shocked Roger Federer on Sunday. And American skier, Mikaela Shiffrin, putting on a clinic once again in a super-G race this weekend. The 23-year-old has now won 11 world cup race this season and is on course to beat Vreni Schneider's all time record of 14, a record which has stood for 30 years. Shiffrin's career total now standing at 54 wins. This past week, her compatriot, Lindsey Vonn, admitting it won't be too long before she passes her own record of 82 That would be your CNN World Sport Headlines. I'm Patrick Snell.
[Howell:] Welcome back. Israel has launched a new round of air strikes in Syria. Russian state media report that at least four Syrian soldiers were killed. Israel says it was targeting Iranian forces but it also hit Syrian air defenses after they tried to launch missiles. The video from the Israelis purports to show an attack on a Syrian site.
[Church:] Israel says the strikes come after Iranian forces tried to launch a rocket at the Golan Heights from Syria. The Israeli military tweeted out this video and said the rocket was intercepted by Israel's Iron Dome system. And for more, CNN's Oren Liebermann is live in Jerusalem. He joins us now. So, Oren, what are you learning about the circumstances surrounding these air strikes and of course, what is happening right now.
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn Correspondent:] Rosemary, let's take this back to where this all began on Sunday morning. We just got for your information more information from the IDF, the Israel Defense Forces which is the Israeli military. This starts on Sunday morning when Israel launches a rare daytime strike on targets in Syria. That strike is called out by both the Russians and the Syrians. And then in a fairly rare move it is acknowledged or apparently acknowledge by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a trip to Africa. That strike according to both the Russians and the Syrians is intercepted. That is a6 number of Israeli missiles are intercepted by Syrian air defenses. It is after that and this is now Sunday afternoon when Israel says Iran launch a medium range surface to surface missile from near Damascus international airport towards the northern part of the Israeli occupied Golan Heights. That in the video you just saw is intercepted by Israel's aerial defense system. Israel's response is to target a number of Iranian forces or what they say are Iranian forces in Syria, both at Damascus international airport and in the area. Israel says they targeted munitions depots, intel sites, as well as a number of other sites. Israel says they conveyed to the Syrian message that this is specifically going after Iranian forces but when Syrian air defenses fired at Israeli aircraft, Israel then targeted they say those Syrian air defense batteries in and around Damascus. That brings us to now. The Israel military remains at an elevated level of readiness in northern Israel. The ski site in the northern part of the Golan Heights has been shut down but other than that the Israeli military says everybody else is living normally. There are no restrictions on civilian activities. Although it is an incredibly tense moment and intense time in northern Israel and in the Golan Heights, that's the situation as it stands right now, Rosemary.
[Church:] Right. And Oren, of course, the worry now is retaliation, how Russia and Syria likely to respond to those reports of deaths of Syrian soldiers.
[Liebermann:] That's an excellent question. Russia has generally stayed out so far, although it is a big move that they called out both the first Israeli strike and then the follow-up, basically putting on their social media. The Russian ministry of defense saying this was an Israeli strike here are the results of that strike. A certain number of missiles were intercepted and then a number of missiles hit their target killing four Syrian soldiers according to the Russians and injuring a numbed of others. It's a delicate moment what happens now and what happens next. Do Syria or Iran choose to respond at this point. It's difficult to say but we will certainly keep an eye on how this develops. We've seen these escalations before, notably last May and then last February, almost a year ago exactly, and it is the Russians that have tried to step in to try to ease the tension here. We'll see if that happens. Once again, Russia apparently playing an active role between Syria, Israel and Iran here.
[Church:] All right. Oren Liebermann joining us live from Jerusalem. It is nearly 10.30 in the morning. Thanks for bringing us to date on that story. I appreciate it.
[Howell:] The topic of Syria was also discussed between the U.S. president and the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. On the phone on Sunday., Mr. Erdogan said that Turkey is ready to take over security in Syria's Manbij without delay, he says. Turkish state media report he also repeated his substance that the YPG, a U.S.-backed Kurdish militia is a threat.
[Church:] The White House says the two leaders agreed they want to deal on how to handle northeast Syria after a U.S. withdrawal. It also says Mr. Erdogan offered his condolences for the four Americans killed in an attack in Manbij last week.
[Howell:] The issue of Brexit, if that were not complicated enough, a car bomb attack in Northern Ireland is stoking fears that if there's no deal a hard border might spark a return to sectarian violence in that region. We'll have details on the story ahead for you.
[Church:] Plus, a former Nissan chairman Carlos Ghosn's legal troubles are focusing new attention on Japan's legal system which some are calling hostage justice. We will take a closer look when we come back.

[Baldwin:] Here's breaking news on the special counsel investigation. We are learning a judge has granted Robert Mueller's request to extend the grand jury. CNN's Kara Scannell is with me now. What does that mean for the investigation moving forward?
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Reporter:] Brooke, it means it's going to continue without any disruption. The chief judge had approved the special counsel's request to extend this grand jury by another six months. It was initially seated in July of 2017 for 18-month term. That term was set to expire in the coming days. And so, by the judge now saying he would extend the grand jury's seating for another six months, which he can do under the federal laws, if there is substantial public interest. So now we know that the grand jury investigation will continue. And this grand jury has heard all of these cases, these indictments that we know about now from Robert Mueller's investigation, as well as heard a lot of witness testimony we've seen circling around Roger Stone. So, it's pretty important this grand jury has given this extension. It means this investigation is continuing, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Got it. Kara Scannell, thank you for that. Our other piece of breaking news this afternoon. The tale of two meetings. Democratic leaders calling talks with the President over the government shutdown calling it contention. President Trump calling it productive. Live at the White House, coming up.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. This morning two of the president's former right hand men are felons and the White House is ready to fight, unleashing a new strategy paint the president and his former fixer paint the president's former fixer as a liar. That's the strategy of the White House this morning. And the president with this message moments ago, quote, "If anyone is looking for a good lawyer, I would strongly suggest that you don't retain the services of Michael Cohen." OK. Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to eight felony counts and implicated the president in a hush money scheme. Cohen says then- candidate Trump directed the porn star and Playboy Playmate payoff to influence the election. This is just days before Americans went to the polls. And this morning Cohen's attorney says his client is ready to tell all to the special counsel.
[Lanny Davis, Attorney For Michael Cohen:] It's my observation that Mr. Cohen has knowledge that would be of interest to the special counsel about the issue of whether Donald Trump ahead of time knew about the hacking of e-mails, which is a computer crime that was the subject of the indictment of the 12 Russians.
[Harlow:] An already ugly fight is about to get uglier. Plus, the other felon in the president's inner circle handing Special Counsel Mueller a victory, a major victory. Ex-Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort convicted on eight counts, facing 80 years behind bars. What this means for Mueller's team this morning and will Paul Manafort flip? Let's begin with our reporter Kara Scannell on Michael Cohen. You were fantastic yesterday. Amazing reporting all the way through. Let's push it forward and let's talk about where we go from here.
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Michael Cohen will be sentenced on December 12th, that date is set. But I think between these four or so months in between we're hearing from Lanny Davis, one of his attorneys, that Cohen wants. He has information he wants to provide to Robert Mueller, the special counsel's team, and he's kind of dangling out little hints of what that might be, suggesting them that Trump knows about pre-hacking. You know, we know that Mueller's team is investigating and asking questions of all of these associates of Roger Stone.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Scannell:] You know, Roger Stone is one of the people that was referenced, although not by name, in that indictment of the 12 Russians.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Scannell:] He was communicating with the campaign and it seems like Michael Cohen is trying to bridge that and say that he happens to know something about that. Roger Stone hasn't been accused of any wrongdoing, he's been, you know, on our air and others talking about this. So I think, you know, we're going to see Cohen trying to get in with Robert Mueller's team and we'll see if they get the best deal he can get.
[Harlow:] Let me just ask you before we move on to the next thing. What was it like for you being in the courtroom yesterday? Because no one that's watching us, none of us saw Michael Cohen firsthand say I did all of these illegal things at the behest of the president but you did. You heard him. What was that moment like?
[Scannell:] Well, it was really stunning. I mean, Michael Cohen is you know, he's about to allocute, which is to describe to the judge, all the crimes that he committed and he asked the judge if he could stand to do it, and he had notes because he said he wanted to stay focused and so he went through his personal tax charges, he went through misstatements to the bank and then when we get to the campaign finance moment, you know, he says so clearly, in coordination and at the direction of the candidate for federal office, which we all knew was Donald Trump, and starts to list how he had worked with American Media, the publisher of the "National Enquirer."
[Harlow:] Right.
[Scannell:] And their payment for Karen McDougal that he assisted and the payment to Stormy Daniels to silence both of their allegations of an affair just before the campaign. And he also said specifically that he did it for the principal purpose of influencing the election, you know, so clearly implicating the president there. It was a silent courtroom. You know, he's just saying this in the words to sort of echoing.
[Harlow:] Wow.
[Scannell:] And it was really just a stunning moment to hear him very directly. There was no waver in his voice. Just very forcefully standing up and stating that he did this at the direction of the president.
[Harlow:] And that moment you get up and you run out the courtroom and bring the news to all of us. Kara, thank you. All right. Again we just heard from the president moments ago. He said don't hire Michael Cohen as your lawyer. That's swipe this morning. We'll see what else might be ahead. Ryan Nobles joins me at the White House this morning. The White House has a plan, has a strategy, it is discredit Cohen, clearly the president is part of that strategy as he's doing this morning. What else?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Yes, Poppy. It probably doesn't come as too big of a surprise that this is the plan that the White House has to try and discredit Michael Cohen as a figure in all of this drama and suggests that he's just not a credible voice in all of this. And it began with the president's tweet this morning where he is telling people that if they're looking for a lawyer that they probably shouldn't retain the services of Michael Cohen, but we should point that things here were a little bit uneven yesterday. Many members of the White House team seemed a bit stunned and shocked by the news. The president we're told in a dour mood as he traveled mood, I should say, as he traveled to West Virginia last night. And they took a step back and just decided that, you know, Michael Cohen, now a convicted felon, he's been accused of lying in the past and that the argument that they need to make to the American people is that he's someone who can't be trusted and therefore should not reflect poorly on the president. And the other tactic they're going to take, Poppy, is to try and show that this isn't connected to Russia in any way, and that no one has yet to provide evidence that the president is guilty of collusion with Russia. And this all tracks back to a bigger point that the White House is attempting to make and that this isn't necessarily a legal problem for the president of the United States, it is a political one. In the more that they can to try and distract from the Mueller investigation and continue to retain that support that people trust the president of the United States the less their chances are of the president facing impeachment. Poppy, that all comes back to the midterms. That's what you saw the president doing last night. They want to make sure they hold on to as many Republican votes as possible in October because that could be the president's salvation Poppy.
[Harlow:] The job must have may have gotten a lot harder for Republicans in Congress to do after the last 18 hours. Ryan, thank you. Joining me now CNN legal analyst Paul Callan and federal and white- collar criminal defense attorney Caroline Polisi. So, all right, let me read you a line that struck me on the front page of the "Washington Post" this morning from Dan Balz's fascinating column. He writes, quote, "Everything that happened in a pair of courtrooms hundreds of miles apart strengthen the hand of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and weaken that of the president of the United States." Is there any disputing that that is correct this morning?
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Analyst:] There's no disputing that it's correct, but the question is for how long does it strengthen the hand and how will this play out ultimately? And the thing I worry about in terms of people getting overly excited about the fact that if they're opposed to Mr. Trump that this will be his downfall is that legal cases against president of the United States and impeachment proceedings are extraordinarily different difficult to bring.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Callan:] I'm not so sure that in the end, in a month from now, that this story will have staying power.
[Harlow:] Really?
[Callan:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Fascinating. I mean, Caroline, to Paul's point, how likely do you think it is that the Southern District of New York which prosecuted Michael Cohen on this doesn't try to challenge the assumption, the precedent. It's not law, a precedent, that a sitting president cannot be indicted.
[Caroline Polisi, Federal And White Collar Criminal Defense Attorney:] You're right. It's an Office of Legal Counsel memorandum, it's disputed among sort of legal scholars because obviously it's not in the Constitution. So I think a really interesting point that Preet Bharara made last night on ANDERSON COOPER" is that if you look at the criminal information, and an information, just a charging document that Michael Cohen pleaded to, it's essentially the same thing as an indictment. The prosecutors just didn't have to go through getting a grand jury to sit. And the information doesn't actually have this language about the president. Michael Cohen, of course, in his allocution to his guilty plea stood up in federal court and stated that he did this, these campaign finance law violations
[Harlow:] At the behest of the
[Polisi:] At the behest of the president.
[Harlow:] But you think it's notable that it's not included on paper?
[Polisi:] I do. I do think that's notable because
[Harlow:] Why wouldn't it?
[Polisi:] There's a lot of this buzzword unindicted co-conspirator. The president is not technically an unindicted co-conspirator in this information. He's not actually mentioned in the information so I think that was a you know, a real move on the part of the SDNY prosecutors not to sort of go one step deeper. It would have been different if they named him in the information.
[Harlow:] What do you think it's a great point. Why do you think they didn't, Paul?
[Callan:] Well, it's an interesting set of charges against Cohen. The charge essentially is that the payment to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal were campaign contributions that were unreported and they were corporate campaign contributions.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Callan:] Now the idea here is that Cohen clearly is guilty of this, he's admitted it but if the president was using Cohen to make the contribution it's an entirely different thing because the president has the right to contribute to his own campaign.
[Harlow:] But he has to disclose it.
[Callan:] It's a very, very different he has to disclose it.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Callan:] So the only thing that
[Harlow:] And we know it wasn't disclosed?
[Callan:] That's correct. So the only thing the president would be guilty of is a failure to report it whereas the theory against Cohen is a much more elaborate theory and a much more serious theory.
[Harlow:] Can we talk about cooperation here? Because, you know, so many headlines this morning and last night were oh, and Cohen isn't even cooperating. That's not totally the case. There is a bargain in this plea that essentially says that in return for pleading guilty they will bring such things the SDNY won't, for example, not bring further charges but I think it's interesting that only the SDNY or the tax division agreed not to bring further charges. It does not include, for example, the DOJ or the special counsel here.
[Polisi:] Right. And that's sort of the leverage that they have in their tool kit.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Polisi:] Typically, I mean, the commentary is correct that typically the usual course in terms of procedurally you would enter the cooperation agreement concurrently with the plea deal. However, that by no means means that a cooperation agreement is excluded at this point. This is a highly unique case, Poppy, so, you know, some of you have gone so far to think that potentially there's a cooperation agreement under seal. I don't tend to agree with that but certainly there could be cooperation down the road.
[Callan:] Yes, I think
[Harlow:] Why wouldn't Michael Cohen I mean, if he's already pleaded guilty to all these counts, why wouldn't he cooperate to try to get a little bit less prison time?
[Callan:] I think he would be eager to cooperate and I also think that Cohen will supply ultimately a possible road to incriminate the president in a far more serious way than what we're talking about today.
[Harlow:] Which is what can we just play, guys, Lanny Davis. Michael Cohen's lawyer? He said as much. Let's listen to him.
[Davis:] But I do to answer your question know that Michael Cohen has information that would be of interest to Mr. Mueller in his probe of a conspiracy to corrupt American democracy very similar to the indictment of the 12 Russians. I believe that Mr. Cohen would be able to provide information useful to the special counsel. I won't call it smoking gun information, somebody else will have to judge that.
[Harlow:] Don Lemon then asked him, are you talking about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians and he said no, it's something else.
[Callan:] Yes. Well, this may be something entirely off the radar that people don't know about, Lanny Davis does obviously, but I've always thought that Cohen is the Achilles heel of Donald Trump because for so long he was the guy who for the Trump Organization solved the difficult problems in whatever way he had to and in that business world my suspicion is that if you push on Cohen, you're going to find that Donald Trump may have been involved in business transactions or family members of the Trumps were involved in business transactions that will create liability and exposure for them. And I think that's probably a greater problem for Mr. Trump than this case.
[Harlow:] Quickly, I would say that perhaps the only reason Cohen may not cooperate would be if he thinks he would some way get a pardon from the president. Clearly the president doesn't like him very much.
[Polisi:] Right. And Lanny Davis, you know, says he's not looking for a pardon.
[Harlow:] Right. But let's not forget that it was just a few months ago that the president pardoned Dinesh D'Souza.
[Polisi:] Yes.
[Harlow:] For campaign finance violations.
[Polisi:] And the interesting thing about the pardon for Dinesh D'Souza was that his defense wasn't that he didn't commit those crimes, it was that it was a selective prosecution, a vindictive prosecution.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Polisi:] That was a clear signal. You know, I think one of the things that people aren't considering is the fact that maybe the Southern District prosecutors don't want or need Michael Cohen's cooperation. They may not think he's a credible enough witness. So that's an option.
[Harlow:] Sure. And that credibility is so important, right?
[Polisi:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Thank you both. Nice to have you. Ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort also found guilty on eight charges. A win for the Mueller team? What does it mean moving forward? Next, a former Watergate prosecutor who is texting with Rudy Giuliani, the president's lawyer, yesterday in all this chaos, will join me. What he heard from the president's lawyer. Also, he's a founding member of the, quote, "Trump caucus." One of the president's first supporters in Congress. Well, now Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter and his wife have been indicted, accused of using campaign funds to pay for a lavish lifestyle. And in Iowa, a small town this morning is grieving a great loss as an autopsy is set for the body believed to be the missing Iowa college student Molly Tibbetts. An undocumented immigrant charged with her murder.

[Howell:] More than a week after a devastating earthquake and tsunami struck Indonesia, the hope of finding survivors is fading. Rescue teams are still searching for more than 1,000 people who are missing. But they are mostly bringing back bodies. Officials say more than 1,500 people have died and that that number will likely rise as information from remote areas continues to trickle in. Joining me now from Palu, Indonesia, Wahyu Widayanto. Wahyu is with CARE Indonesia's emergency response, the coordinator. We appreciate your time today, Wahyu. First of all, tell us about the difficulty of getting out to those remote areas and, of course, finding people who may still be missing. Do you hear me here on the phone? Are you with us?
[Wahyu Widayanto, Care Indonesia Emergency Response Coordinator:] Yes, hello, George.
[Howell:] Thank you again for taking time with us. We are looking at images of what seems to be so many people in this area where they are searching for people who could be missing. Talk to us, if you would, just about the difficulty of getting out to those remote areas.
[Widayanto:] First of all
[Howell:] Wahyu, again, we're looking at this image, these live images right now from Palu, Indonesia, where it is 4:46 pm. And again, what we're seeing, so that you understand it, we're seeing so many people who are all together in what seems to be an area where they are searching still searching for survivors. What is the mood of people there? Just given what everyone has gone through, how are people dealing with this so many days on?
[Widayanto:] Yes, yes. Some people still are
[Howell:] Still with you, yes. Go ahead and continue. We may be having some technical issues with Wahyu Widayanto's phone. But again, what he has explained to us is that the search continues there and it will certainly take some time, an extended amount of time, certainly many, many more weeks, possibly months to reach out to those rural areas and find people who are still missing and the continue to recover bodies. We again appreciate Wahyu Widayanto, who joined us on the phone from CARE Indonesia. And, of course, if you would like to help victims who were affected by this earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia, you can find help at a link at cnn.comimpact. That is where you can find again links to organizations that you can trust that are working on relief efforts there. In Nigeria, the parents of a kidnapped schoolgirl tell CNN that the terror group Boko Haram is threatening to kill their daughter if its demands are not met. Our Farai Sevenzo has the disturbing details from Nairobi.
[Farai Sevenzo, Cnn Correspondent:] There are real concerns in Northeast Nigeria about the fate of 15-year-old Leah Sharibu, who was abducted along with 100 other of her schoolmates from the Government Girls' Science and Technological College up in Dapchi, northeast Nigeria. Over the last couple days, Leah's parents, Nathan and Rebecca Sharibu, have issued a desperate plea for the government of Nigeria to try to do everything they can to bring their daughter back. They say that the militants have threatened to kill Leah this October if their demands are not met. No one has been privy to them but we know that, in the past, they usually involve money, exchanging of money and the freeing of captured Boko Haram insurgents. Now we don't know what stage these negotiations are at. And we do know that October, no firm fixed date but October is when reportedly the Boko Haram militants have said that they will kill 15-year-old Leah. And President Buhari is very keen to be seen to be on the side of those who are aching for better security up in the northeast of Nigeria. He tweeted in the last couple of days, "Toady I spoke with Ms. Rebecca Sharibu to reiterate our determination to bring her daughter, Leah, back home safely." And of course he says we will do everything we can to bring them back. There are over 1,000 kids that have been taken
[Sevenzo:] by Boko Haram since 2013. And remember also, April 2014, 200 girls taken from Chibok. About 93 of those still remain missing. But the fate of Leah no one quite knows what will happen to her Farai Sevenzo, CNN, Nairobi.
[Howell:] Farai, thank you for that reporting. You're watching NEWSROOM. We'll be right back.

[Blitzer:] President Trump's national security adviser, John Bolton, is heading to Russia potentially paving the way for a pleating between the President Trump and Vladimir Putin next month. Our senior international correspondent, Fred Pleitgen, is joining us now from Moscow with the latest. Fred, so what's the significance of this trip?
[Fred Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] I think it's hugely significant to the Russians, Wolf. It's interesting in the past couple of days, that the Russians really are pretty tight-lipped about when John Bolton was going to come here and what was going to be talked about. And the optics are pretty much clear. It's the Americans who are coming to the Russians. The Russians have this wait-and-see attitude. It's the Americans who are coming to them and trying to make this summit happen. And it's a pattern, Wolf, that we've been seeing over the past couple of weeks, especially since President Trump alienated some of the U.S.'s main allies at a recent G-7 summit, saying he believe that Russia should rejoin the G-7 to make it the G-8 again. The Russians then said, "Look, we don't really need the G-7." So the Russians are showing they don't need this but it is the Americans that are making the advances. At the same time, for the Russians themselves, this meeting would have huge significance as they, of course, try to get concessions from President Trump. For instance, sanctions relief from some of those sanctions that have really been biting the Russian economy, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Fred, see a Trump meeting with Putin potentially as vindication?
[Pleitgen:] Well, look, I think one of the things that the Russians are seeing, if you look at Russian government and you also look at some of the Russians state media, is that they believe that there are some rifts between the U.S. and its traditional allies, between the Trump administration, for instance, and the Europeans and the Canadians, as well. And they believe that that's something that could strengthen Russia's position. At the same time, there's always been the belief here in Moscow that President Trump does one thing and that some of the people in his administration may see things differently, that he wants better relations with Russia, whereas maybe some don't and that's something that the Russians believe that they could use to their advantage. I want you to listen into a clip from Russian state media from a show called "Sunday Evening" where they said exactly that. Here's what they said.
[Unidentified Male:] Trump and his team regularly go different paths. Yes. They've been keeping him away from this meeting for a long time. And maybe Trump has his own agenda. So if Bolton brings his own agenda, there is no chance. But if he brings Trump's agenda, here we have options.
[Pleitgen:] So clearly, they want all this stuff and when those two leaders sit down, of course there are going to be some concrete themes that are going to be on the table, Wolf. Syria, no doubt, will be one of them. Then, of course, also the crisis in Ukraine and Crimea. Of course, one of the other things we're going to wait and see is whether or not Russia's meddling in the 2016 election will also be a point that will be talked about, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] A lot at stake. Thanks so much, Fred Pleitgen in Moscow. Coming up, as the Trump administration pushes North Korea on denuclearization, U.S. officials are eager to extract some firm commitments. So what is on the wish list?

[Erin Burnett, Cnn:] "OutFront" next, President Trump's M.O. defend the accused, not the accuser. Why Trump's praise Rob Porter, says everything we need to know. And Chief of Staff John Kelly makes it clear to Trump he would resign over the Porter scandal. Are his days numbered? Plus, the number three at the Justice Department suddenly stepping down tonight, does this put Trump a step closer to taking out Bob Mueller? Let's go "OutFront". Good evening tonight, I'm Erin Burnett. "OutFront" defending the indefensible. There's no point in paraphrasing this, just listen for yourself to the President today in the Oval Office. He's talking about Rob Porter, his close aide who resigned after allegations surfaced that he physically abused both his ex-wives and his ex- girlfriend, something senior members of the White House knew for months.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We wish him well. He worked very hard. I found out about it recently and I was surprised by it. But we certainly wish him well. It's obviously a tough time for him.
[Burnett:] Tough time for him. Sure, no mention of the three hers. And the President continued.
[Trump:] He did a very good job when he was in the White House. And we hope he has a wonderful career and hopefully he will have a great career ahead of him.
[Burnett:] So the President hopefully hopes for Porter a wonderful career. Again, nothing about the three women. And the President continued.
[Trump:] It was very sad when we heard about it. And certainly he's also very sad. Now, he also, as you probably know, he says he's innocent. And I think you have to remember that. He said very strongly yesterday that he's innocent. So you'll have to talk to him about that, but we absolutely wish him well.
[Burnett:] So the President wants you to know that Porter strongly says he's innocent and that he's sad about Porter. No mention of the three women. It seems impossible to imagine. I mean, what about this picture of Porter's first wife, Colbie? She says Porter did this to her according to "The Washington Post." Porter privately told people that this picture came when they were arguing over vase and she was somehow hit with the vase. And what about the words of Porter's second wife, Jennifer.
[Jennifer Willoughby, Second Ex-wife Of Former White House Staff Secretary:] I told them all of the details of my marriage, including verbal and emotional abuse and including the incident when he pulled me out of the shower. They were also made aware of the protective order that I signed in June of 2010.
[Burnett:] No mention from the President of the United States that domestic abuse is abhorrent, that the victims here women are the women, three of them, including two ex-wives that he had before he was even 40. And what they suffered at the hands of Rob Porter, including the fact that one of them had filed a protective order against him. Or maybe the President should take a cue from Mike Pence who said this in an interview in Korea at the Olympics.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] There's no tolerance in this White House. No place in America for domestic abuse.
[Burnett:] The problem is that this President, the victims are the attackers, the predators, and the assaulters. It just takes his own words. Here he is on Senate candidate Roy Moore after multiple women came forward to say he abused them as teens. One of them, you may remember, was only 14 years old.
[Trump:] He totally denies it. He says it didn't happen and, you know, you have to listen to him also.
[Burnett:] Here he is on then Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes who was accused of sexual harassment by multiple women. The network force to pay massive settlement.
[Trump:] He's been a friend mine for a long time. And I can tell you that some of the women that are complaining, I know how much he's helped them.
[Burnett:] Fox News and former anchor, Bill O'Reilly, also paid a massive settlement to multiple women after he was accused of sexual harassment. President Trump said, "I don't think Bill did anything wrong." And of course when it comes to the President's own behavior, he bragged on tape about sexual assault, at least 16 women have come forward to tell their stories about him and he just says every single one of them is a liar.
[Trump:] These vicious claims about me of inappropriate conduct with women are totally and absolutely false. These claims are all fabricated. They are pure fiction and they are outright lies. These events never, ever happened.
[Burnett:] Deny and defend, that's what President Trump does when it comes to abuse and assault by men of women. Pamela Brown is "OutFront" live at the White House. And, Pamela, the White House in chaos tonight over these abuse allegations according to your reporting.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] That's right. It's been a week of confusion and division with internal strike finger pointing, a swirl of accusations. And while John Kelly, the chief of staff, has been more publicly blame, facing more of the public blame, those inside the White House are also blaming top lawyer, President Trump's top lawyer, Don McGahn and raising the questions why he didn't do more earlier because we're told resources that Don McGahn actually found out about some of these accusations, January of 2017, when Rob Porter actually went to him and alerted him that his ex-wives may say some troubling things about their past relationship to the FBI. And we're told that over the course of the year, Porter would inform McGahn and gave him more specifics about the allegations as it became clear that perhaps his security clearance wouldn't come through or hid a snag. And we're told, Erin, that the FBI actually turned over to the White House this past spring, some of their findings after interviewing the ex-wives which was brought to McGahn's attention and then Porter's ex girlfriend called Don McGahn over Thanksgiving telling him some of the allegations that she had experienced herself in terms of abuse and from the ex-wives. Now, McGahn told people around him that he called the security personnel at the White House to alert them about what the ex girlfriend had said, but others inside the White House feel as though, perhaps, he could have done more and that his personal relationship with Porter, whether he was lawyer worked closely with McGahn on legal documents, overshadowed or crowded his judgment in handling the situation allowing him to stay on board. So it has certainly been a chaotic week here at the White House, to say the least, Erin.
[Burnett:] And as your reporting well, if you're inside over the handling of this, there are growing questions tonight, Pam, about John Kelly's future. What are you hearing?
[Brown:] That's right because we are told that the President has also been unhappy with how his chief of staff has handled everything this week. And we are told that John Kelly today actually told the President that if he wanted him to resign, that he would resign. Now, we're told that it wasn't a formal sort of resignation or saying that, "Look, I will do this." But it was more of just telling the President that, "If this is what you want from me, I will do this." But sources tell us, Erin, that the President does not want his chief of staff, John Kelly, to resign. And apparently, this isn't the first time John Kelly has said this. Sources tell us that he has also said the same in the past and clearly nothing has happened, he's still in his job.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Pamela. "OutFront" now, let's go to Mark Preston, our Senior Political Analyst, Eliana Johnson, National Political Reporter for Politico, and Tim Naftali, our Presidential Historian and former Director of Nixon Presidential Library. Eliana, you've been doing a lot of reporting on this. The President defending Rob Porter, not uttering a single word about the ex-wives and the ex-girlfriend, all of whom have told the same sick and sad story.
[Eliana Johnson, National Political Reporter, Politico:] I think for anybody who has been covering this President, his comments today should have been expected and not surprising in the least. This really fits a pattern for Donald Trump the way he responds when people around him or associated with him are accused of wrongdoing. We saw him respond in precisely the same way when Roy Moore, the Republican Senate candidate in Alabama, was accused of inappropriate sexual behavior and even molestation of younger women. He said essentially that while the allegations were troubling, Roy Moore was maintaining his innocence. And behind closed doors during the campaign when Steve Bannon had then campaign chairman was when reports surfaced that when Bannon was married decades ago, he had been accused of domestic violence. Trump made light of it behind closed doors referring to Bannon has "Bam Bam" and when donors expressed their concern that Trump was associated with somebody like this Trump said, "Oh, you know, Bam Bam locked away in a room 24 hours a day, 23 hours a day. He's nobody to worry about." So I think we have seen a reluctance by this President to take allegations of wrongdoing of various sorts by the people close to him seriously. That being said, he has seethed at the people close to him in private because of the negative coverage he and those around him have gotten in the news media. So it's not that he doesn't take the allegations seriously. He does when he gets bad press, but he has real reluctance to distance himself from people publicly.
[Burnett:] I mean, Mark, it is stunning, you know, as Eliana said, this is the pattern and it fits the pattern. And yet to hear him come out today and say the things he said, he totally denies it. "We're sad. I wish him a great career," and not mentioned a single thing about what these women went through, somehow it is still stunning.
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] It is stunning. And I got to tell you, I've given up a long time ago trying to understand why the President is incapable or unwilling to show empathy, specifically when it comes to a subject similar to this, whether it is domestic violence or whether it's sexual assault. But it also does call into question his political and his messaging strategy. Remember, when Donald Trump ran for President, he talked about how he's the greatest salesman, how he's the greatest messenger. Well, any mediocre political consultant or messaging consultant would tell you that even if you didn't believe these, even if you didn't believe these women, Erin, that you would still come out and show some empathy. That's the smartest thing to do. Unless, and this is a very big unless, unless Rob Porter knows something that the President doesn't want him to speak about and he's trying to show him some loyalty. Now, we don't have anything to prove that that is the case, but you have to wonder the proximity of Rob Porter to Donald Trump over the past year certainly he knows some secrets.
[Burnett:] Tim, that's actually an important question.
[Tim Naftali, Former Director, Nixon Presidential Library:] Yes.
[Burnett:] Is that in this case something that you have to consider? I mean, considering Rob Porter who, again, did not have full security clearance but had his interim security clearance so he had access to absolutely everything, every piece of paper that went to the President's desk, all this private meetings, all of this interactions, Rob Porter knows.
[Naftali:] Well and he's been there since the beginning of 2017. You know, what's so disappointing and distressing is that our best Presidents appealed to our better angels of our nature and they understand that the White House is a symbol of entire country. And why this President once again when given the opportunity to set a nice and powerful ethical standard refuses to do it? Well, at this point we should never we can't expect him to do it. We can't expect him to do it. He's had so many chances to expect it now would be foolish.
[Burnett:] Yes. I mean but Eliana, the other reality of it is, of course, in a sense he can't, because if he does, then he's opening the door to his own tape where he admitted to sexual assault being true and the 16 women who've accused him. He always takes the side of the accused when it comes to these men. I mean, every single time.
[Johnson:] It's interesting. This is an area in which Trump is consistent and he gives the same defense that he defends others in the same way he defended himself, where for those who have accused him of sexual harassment or sexual assault, he has dismissed the claims out of hand. And he does seem to do precisely the same for everybody around him. He's extremely consistent with that. And there does seem to be, I'm not sure how conscious it is on the President's part, but a concern that if he says something like, you know, women deserve to be heard, or expresses empathy for the women in these cases, that he's going to open the door to questions about the women who have accused him of impropriety.
[Burnett:] I mean, which is in so many ways shocking. I mean, Mark, let me ask you about, you know, the Vice President obviously came out and said what the President should have said. The Vice President, I have no doubt he believes what he says, but he's also a very smart guy and he thinks before he speaks. And in the interview, he repeated what Raj Shah, the deputy press secretary, said on the podium yesterday when Raj Shah said that the White House had made mistakes. And then there was a lot of reporting. The President was really angry that Raj Shah made that admission. And yet, listen to Mike Pence and compare it to Raj Shah. Raj Shah is first.
[Raj Shah, White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary:] I think it's fair to say that, you know, we all could have done better over the last few hours or last few days in dealing with the situation.
[Pence:] I think the White House has acknowledged that they could have handled it better.
[Burnett:] Mark, did he do that knowing that the President was livid that Raj Shah made that admission, or is the Vice President that out of the loop?
[Preston:] No. I mean, look as you said he is very smart. He is right out of central casting for our President. As you said, he thinks before he speaks. He's very careful about what he says. And even as we have see him very loyal to the President, in this case he doesn't necessarily need to be loyal to the President because we're talking about a third party right now that the President has decided to defend. Now, Vice President Pence has come under a lot of criticism for his defense with Donald Trump. But it's been about the defense of Donald Trump not about folks that Donald Trump is defending. But also if you go back to what he said, Vice President Pence really did distance himself, didn't he, when he said they, the White House, even acknowledged that they didn't handle it correctly. Meaning, I had nothing to do with it.
[Burnett:] Right. There is no we in there. There was no we. It was a they.
[Preston:] Right.
[Burnett:] You know, one of those things as you point out, a man who knows his words, not said slightly and not said without thought. Thank you all very much. And next the breaking news, John Kelly making clear to the President he will resign if the President wants him to. So what is Trump thinking tonight? And more breaking news, a sudden resignation at the highest levels of the Justice Department and it could matter a whole a lot for Bob Mueller and the Russian probe. And the clock ticking on the President, will he approve the release of the Democrats response to the Nunes memo? Where is the Democrat's memo? Breaking news, John Kelly making it clear to President Trump he'll resign if that's what the President wants. And a source telling CNN, Trump is talking to friends about possible replacements for Kelly. Our Gloria Borger reporting Trump has called around the people, including House Freedom Caucus Chair Mark Meadows, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, all as possible replacements. Source tells us his Chief Economic Advisor Gary Cohn and the CIA Director Mike Pompeo would also be on the list. Trump offered the job, apparently to long time friend and chairman of Trump's inaugural committee, Tom Barrack. We can tell you Barrack said no. "OutFront" now, former adviser to four presidents, including Nixon and Clinton, David Gergen, and former Army Commanding General for Europe and the Seventh Army Lieutenant General Mark Hertling who conducted multiple operations with General Kelly in Iraq and you know him very well from those times under a great deal of pressure. David, the question is here, is the writing on the wall for John Kelly?
[David Gergen, Former Presidential Adviser:] Yes, it is. The very fact that within a few hours of all of this exploding in the White House we have a story now from the White House that White House aides are saying that General Kelly gave a false account of what happened at a staff meeting. People are very disturbed. They leaked that out. They it sends a clear message that John General Kelly may be heading for the door and there are some people pushing him in that direction on the staff.
[Burnett:] Let me just ask you a follow up that, David, because we are learning that in a staff meeting today, Kelly pushed the narrative that some who are in the meeting, you know, they said it was appeared to them to be very untrue about when he learned about the allegations against Rob Porter and what he did about them. You know, Kelly, claimed that he took immediate action and enforced the resignation essentially of Porter. What does it say to you that people are willing there who work for him to come out and leak it and say he's not telling the truth?
[Gergen:] I think that it says that there is a rebellion going on within. And that it must have the blessing of either Ivanka or Jared or someone for people to start doing this. You know, there has been story for some time that Ivanka wanted him General Kelly out. You know, so those surfacing outside, General Kelly coming there was a blessing. But he has crossed swords with a number of people inside and he said some things initially that caused the President some real trouble. I mean, one of the most disturbing things about this, of course, is what really bothers the President is not that people around him have been assaulting women, it is that he is getting bad publicity, so it's appalling.
[Burnett:] Well, and it's clear that the abuse doesn't bother him, right, as he's wishing Porter well and a great career and saying how sad he feels for him and all of those things. I mean, General, we know General Kelly knew about the abuse allegations for months and obviously didn't act on them until it broke in the media. He strongly defended Porter when the "Daily Mail" first broke the story. You know General Kelly. Is this the man that you knew and served with?
[Lt. General Mark Hertling, Conducted Operations With Gen. Kelly In Iraq:] Well, I met him in Iraq, Erin, and we conducted multiple operations together because we had a common boundary between the west and the north. So I knew him from a tactical and operational standpoint and I always saw him as a good commander. But truthfully, some of the actions that had occurred over the last couple of days tell me that he's missed something because good commanders don't do the kinds of things that he's done over the last couple of days and I'll give you an example of that. You know, whenever you have one of your the members of your team being accused of something or having something going wrong and you don't have the full facts, you don't put in a whole hearted defense, you kind of back away. In fact we're trained to do that, to let the legal system go through. So the comments about Porter's character and his integrity and his you know, he may have been a high performer and a great individual in terms of his daily duties in the White House. But when something like this comes up and evidently, John Kelly knew about this for a very long time, you start to back away. And you question and you actually do a little bit of investigation yourself as the commander, or in this case the chief of staff, to find out what the heck is going on. This seems extremely strange to me.
[Burnett:] All right. And of course, I mean, one of the most basic things about domestic abuse is it is by definition not visible in almost in so many cases to anybody who is not in the relationship, right? You don't know someone's character outside in a way that he seemed to so quickly jump to.
[Hertling:] Right.
[Burnett:] You know, David, if Kelly goes, it's going to be the latest departure in the White House. We have seen a modern record for turnover in the first year of the Trump White House, more than a third of the White House staffs are gone. Whether fired or resigned, I mean just look at this on screen. That's twice Reagan, it is more than three times Clinton, it's nearly four times Obama, even more than H.W. and George W. Bush. What does this tell you?
[Gergen:] Well, I mean, working for this President seems to be like riding a bucking bronco. You can only stay up on for so long before you get bucked off by just the circumstances. It is a volatile place. We know that they came in with very little experience. He didn't get the top people early on for his White House, that one would normally recruit because somebody had opposed him during the campaign they didn't like him because they were against him. And I think it's been a circus since then, which I just can't tell you. I just have never seen a White House with so many people around a President who have been accused at one point or another of being violent toward women or harassing women. I've never seen a White House that got information about a top person on their team. One of the most trusted people in the White House that he had that there was a dark side in which he was accused, there were credible reports that the investigators, the FBI and others had gotten about his past. And to sit on that, I don't know any legal counsel who would have sat on that. They would have immediately had red flags go up and say we've got to know more about this. I don't know of any chief of staff who would sit there and not have done something more. I don't understand. There is something about the culture in this White House that deserves examination because it's not right.
[Burnett:] That's deeply broken. I mean, General yes, go ahead, General.
[Hertling:] There is an old expression, those of us who study leadership says that the organization takes on the personality of the leader, the personality of the commander. In this case, I think there are certainly some issues with character across the board. We've seen that during the campaign and even during the first year with the President and I think that's unfortunately affecting some of the people in terms of what they are doing because it's what they think they are allowed to do. And it's represented in this most recent case in terms of what is happening with security clearances. As a guy who has worked with security clearances and having people within my organization required to have security clearances for the protection of the country and defending our nation, it's appalling what's going on [CROSSTALK]
[Burnett:] Yes, 30 to 40 to give
[Hertling:] And it is bubbling up with Porter, but this has been going on for a long time. And many of us have watched this saying, "What the heck is going on?" And people that don't have security clearances or have the interims are doing major engagements with allies, which require them to read intelligence. You don't go into the meeting with the Israelis or the Saudis without having some type of classified information at the highest level, the top secret SCI. So some of the folks who don't have security clearances are going into those meetings, either they're reading it without authority or they're not reading it at all, which is even more damaging, so all of this concerns anybody that's interested in national security.
[Burnett:] And let me just to make the point, obviously there could be many people involved with those talks, but one of whose leading those talks, Jared Kushner, does not have full security clearance. It's been over a year and he is still operating on an interim. David, before we go, you know the Porter family. What can you tell us?
[Gergen:] I do. Well, first of all, our major concern should be of course with the women, the victims here and I'm glad you've been emphasizing that. It is also deeply saddening to see what is happening to the Porter family. Roger Porter was the top domestic adviser in the White House.
[Burnett:] That's Rob's father. [CROSSTALK]
[Gergen:] He's been a friend. Roger is the father. And he's a wonderful man. He's been a friend for years, over 40 years. He and his wife, Ann, were deans or what we used to be called masters of one of the houses here at Harvard. He's very popular professor. He went to
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you both, so very much.
[Hertling:] Thank you.
[Burnett:] And next the breaking news, the third in command of the Justice Department suddenly gone tonight. What does it mean for the Russia investigation? And Kim Jong-un sister not showing away from Vice President Pence at all. Look at this.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] And welcome to our viewers here in the U.S. and around the world, I'm Natalie Allen. And we're following breaking news out of Iran. A passenger plane carrying 66 people has reportedly crashed. It was flying from the capital, Tehran, to Yasuj, an area to the south. Let's check in with our senior international correspondent, Sam Kiley, in Abu Dhabi. He's following developments. Sam, what more do we know about the area where this plane went down?
[Sam Kiley, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It's extremely mountainous. Local authorities say that the aircraft went down in an area known as the Dena Mountain. Now this is this one mountain alone has 40, that's 4-0, peaks over 4,000 meters. That is over 12,000 feet. And aircraft, a helicopter sent to as part of a rescue attempt or an attempt to find the wreckage and look for any survivors, was actually forced back by bad weather. This aircraft took off at 7:55 local time and disappeared from radar, we understand, about 50 minutes later, which would dovetail with its disappearance near Semirom. Authorities are saying they think it went down 120 kilometers from Semirom in a small village in the mountains. But they haven't been able to get to it and the assumption is that all of those on board most likely have perished in this aircraft crash, which comes amid the continuing concern in aviation circles in Iran that the lifting or easing of sanctions against that country, in return for it suspending its nuclear weapons program, is not filtering through in terms of spare parts and improved maintenance. That is not to say, however, that there is any link established at all, yet, between the disappearance of this aircraft and any mechanical failure.
[Allen:] Well, we have seen protests by Iranians, saying that they want more resources to stay in their country and spend them domestically. Yet again, as you say, we don't know the cause of this crash. Was there any hint or anything, do we know, from the cockpit, of trouble?
[Kiley:] There hasn't been yet any indication that there was a mayday signal or a communication expressing concern on behalf of the captain. The aircraft company has released a photograph, showing a man in late middle age, clearly a veteran captain. So there is no yet, so far, rather, any indication of perhaps mechanical failure or even bad weather. This aircraft simply, at the moment, vanished from radar and is believed to have gone down in this highly mountainous area, in an area that is, at the moment, blighted by bad weather and that is hampering retrieval of such things, such as the black box, which will be fitted to this French-made twin turboprop aircraft.
[Allen:] So you say it went down 50 minutes after takeoff. Is this a routine flight? And how far into the flight would that mean it crashed? How long was it supposed to take it to fly to Yasuj, do we know?
[Kiley:] Well, it's a little over an hour's flight or a little bit more than that to Yasuj. We can see from the direction of travel between the capital, Tehran, and Yasuj, where it went down or rather disappeared from radar, is on the normal flight path, albeit, perhaps, a little close nobody's quite sure, at least I'm not quite sure about whether or not the aircraft would have gone over that mountain range or around it. It's a pretty complex flying environment. But nonetheless, there's nothing to indicate that it was very far off track. And it was pretty much on time. It disappeared from radar. We don't know whether that was the moment of which it crashed or whether that was some other kind of possible failure. Of course, all of these sorts of details, if they find the black box, the flight recording apparatus that's on board these commercial airliners, particularly those fitted and manufactured in Europe, as this one was, that kind of information will emerge, no doubt. But for now, it appears that it was on a pretty routine flight from Tehran and has crashed en route in this very difficult mountainous area blighted by bad weather.
[Allen:] We hope the weather clears so they can reach the wreckage. Thank you so much. We'll stay in touch with you, Sam Kiley, covering the story for us. Thank you, Sam. On other news we're following, one day after 13 Russian operatives were charged with meddling in the U.S. presidential election and just three days after 17 students and faculty were slaughtered in cold blood by a young man with an assault rifle in Florida, U.S. president Donald Trump inexplicably linked the two events. In fact, he suggested the Russia investigation may have been to blame for the FBI failing to follow up on a tip about the Florida shooter. Late Saturday, he tweeted this, "Very sad that the FBI missed all of the many signals sent out by the Florida school shooter. This is not acceptable. They are spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. There is no collusion." The president has yet to even acknowledge the Russian meddling, putting him at odds with his national security adviser. Listen to what H.R. McMaster said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.
[Lt. Gen. H.r. Mcmaster, National Security Advisor:] As you can see with the FBI indictment, the evidence is now really incontrovertible and available in the public domain.
[Allen:] But Mr. McMaster's candor prompted this sharp rebuke from the U.S. president. He said, "General McMaster forgot to say that the results of the 2016 election were not impacted or changed by the Russians and that the only collusion was between Russia and Crooked H., the DNC and the Dems." All of those claims, we must say, are unsubstantiated. The federal indictment is a thick document, full of rich detail about how the Russians carried out such an elaborate campaign of disinformation. CNN's Polo Sandoval breaks it down for us.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] These 37 pages allege Russians went a very long way in their attempt to interfere with U.S. democracy. According to the federal indictment, Russians operating out of this St. Petersburg troll farm launched a misinformation campaign to wreck havoc on America's political system.
[Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:] The Russian conspirators want to promote discord in the United States and undermine;dependence and democracy. We must not allow them to succeed.
[Sandoval:] Examples of the alleged misinformation campaign include allegations of voter fraud by the Democratic Party and the purchase of advertisements to further promote the allegations on Facebook. The pages were even designed to look like they were run by real Americans and focus on issues in American life, race relations, immigration and of course, then candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Facebook estimates close to 126 million Americans may have been exposed to this and other propaganda. Federal investigators say the group behind it is the Internet Research Agency link today the Kremlin. Russia has denied any involvement in the U.S. elections. At the security conference Saturday Russia's foreign minister again dismissed those claims.
[Sergey Lavrov, Russia's Minister Of Foreign Affairs:] I have no response. Until we see the facts, everything else is just blather.
[Sandoval:] Then there are the rallies. In May 2016, a small group of anti-Islamic protests gathered outside a Muslim community center in Houston, Texas. Situation grew intense with counter rally. The very month of the election, both pro and anti-Trump demonstrations were held in New York. U.S. prosecutors say both events were organized by this same troll group half a world away in St. Petersburg. Russians traveled to the U.S. on a fact finding mission in 2014, say prosecutors. It would be the foundation of a massive operation brought to light in recent months and described in detail in these 37 pages Polo Sandoval, CNN, New York.
[Allen:] Let's talk about the indictment with Peter Matthews, a political analyst and professor of political science at Cypress College. Thanks so much for joining us, Peter.
[Peter Matthews, Cypress College:] Good to be here.
[Allen:] Well, Republican senator Lindsey Graham has said, Mr. Trump, the president, has a blind spot when it comes to Russia. Why does it seem like the president is incapable of saying anything negative about Russia or condemning Russia, when he easily attacked our allies, like the U.K., for example?
[Matthews:] It seems very strange from those of us looking from the outside objectively. And we're really wondering, maybe he had an inclination toward working things out with Russia when he came into office. But also we know that he's had investments. He's had private loans given to him for his businesses from Russian entities. And I'm not sure if that has anything to do with it but we have to look at that. He's very loath to criticize Mr. Putin or Russia policies, many times, maybe he has an inclination to want to work things out and reset the button. On the other hand maybe there's personal interests there involved. And that's very problematic, very concerning if that's the case.
[Allen:] Is there anything Congress can do to force President Trump's hand, vis-a-vis sanctions against Russia?
[Matthews:] Well, he's the executive branch leader. So he's got to implement what Congress actually has passed. If he refuses to do so, the only thing ultimately they could do to get him to do more of what they need him to do and what we need him to do is to impeach him and then eventually remove him if the Senate agrees to remove him after the House impeaches him. There's very little other recourse that the Congress has. He is the executive branch, the chief administrator, chief bureaucrat, chief executive to carry out the policies. If he doesn't want to do them or he wants to do them half-heartedly or turn them in a different direction, presidents often do that, actually.
[Allen:] Let's talk about the other topic that is dominating the news this week, the mass shooting at the high school in Parkland, Florida. President Trump visited victims and first responders following the massacre and today he spoke with the Parkland mayor. He also tweeted this, "Very sad that the FBI missed all of the many signals sent out by the Florida school shooter. This is not acceptable. They are spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. There is no collusion. Get back to the basics and make us all proud."
[Matthews:] I knew he was trying to connect the two. I knew he would try to connect the two. And it's just despicable in my view that he would do that. Instead he should stop underfunding the FBI. He should bring in more funds, rather than giving tax cuts to the superrich like he did in this plan that was just passed by him and the Congress and bring the funds in to hire more law enforcement, more FBI agents, more school safety measures, like having checks, you know, real safety checks with metal detectors in schools, as well as background checks and stopping those with a mental illness from owning or from having these guns. In fact, he reversed an Obama era ruling just a year ago, when President Obama made it more difficult for those with mental illness to be able to purchase a gun. Trump rescinded that executive order, just the opposite of what he's talking the other direction. So I think that was just very wrong for him to bring in the FBI and blame them for what happened there in that
[Allen:] Right. They did admit a mistake in not following up on that. The president has not mentioned guns in all of this. And many lawmakers haven't either. Vigils were held this weekend, though, with students calling out lawmakers over gun laws in the United States. Let's listen.
[Emma Gonzalez, Student:] If you don't do anything to prevent this from coming, from continuing to occur, that number of gunshot victims will go up and the number that they are worth will go down. And we will be worthless to you. To every politician who is taking donations from the NRA, shame on you. We know that they're claiming that there are mental health issues and I am not a psychologist but we need to pay attention to the fact that this isn't just a mental health issue. He wouldn't have harmed that many students with a knife.
[Delaney Tarr , Student:] I'm a high school senior, who, three days ago, was worried about which of my friends were going to receive flowers for Valentine's Day. I was focused on what I was going to be wearing to prom one week ago. My main concerns were my grades, college acceptance and my social life. Now I'm a high school senior who is worried about which memorials I need to place flowers at. Now I'm focused on what clothes I can wear so that I can run away from gunfire. My main concerns are funerals, gun control and whether or not I'm going to be shot wherever I go. My innocence, our innocence, has been taken from us.
[Allen:] These students are brave, they're outspoken and they're going directly to lawmakers. Could this be the massacre that's a tipping point?
[Matthews:] It certainly could, because especially if you have students who are so aware now. It's just heartbreaking to hear them and also encouraging to hear them come out with a real solutions, that it is gun control. We know statistically that where the states that have a high rate of gun ownership, there are far more gun related deaths. States with a lower rate of gun ownership there's lower gun related deaths as are true of nations across the world. So we have to have much stricter gun relations. Students are championing this now. And when students speak up, Natalie, things can really happen. And I'm very encouraged by these young women and
[Allen:] Right. And churches and concerts, it's an epidemic in this country. We'll wait and see and see if these students can make a difference to try to make this country safer. Professor Peter Matthews, thank you. We appreciate it.
[Matthews:] Thank you.
[Allen:] We continue to learn more about the confessed gunman, Nikolas Cruz. He's due back in court Monday. Defense attorneys say he will plead guilty, if he can avoid the death penalty. As of now, prosecutors are not ruling that out. We are also hearing from a friend of Cruz's, who says Cruz actually joked about school shootings.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] What would he say about school shootings?
[Allan Varela, Nikolas Cruz's Friend:] He would joke because we would be looking at photos. And he would joke about the photos and stuff. I really want to be there for him. I really did. I wish I felt like I could have stopped it. And I know it wasn't my fault, but I felt like I could have stopped him. I could have been there for him. Seventeen people wouldn't have lost their lives.
[Allen:] I feel for that young man there. There were other signs Cruz posted threats. Someone called the FBI last month, warning the shooter owned guns and wanted to kill. The bureau never followed up on that. And police were repeatedly called to his home over the past few years because of his violent outbursts. Many within that high school community remain in shock at this point. The principal of the school, Ty Thompson, posted this emotional message to his students.
[Ty Thompson, Principal, Stoneman Douglas High School:] Eagles, I promise you, I will hug each and every one of you, as many times as you need and I will hold you as long as you need me to, for all 3,300 of you and your families. And we will get through this together. Our community is strong, our students are strong, we will persevere in these trying times.
[Allen:] We continue to learn more about the victims and their bravery in the face of this horror. Among the 17 killed, geography teacher, Scott Beigel. Many of his students say he died a hero, saving others from the gunfire.
[Kelsey Friend, Stoneman Douglas Student:] Mr. Beigel was my hero and he still will forever be my hero. I will never forget the actions that he took for me and for fellow students in the classroom. And if his family is watching this, please know that your son or your brother was an amazing person and I am alive today because of him.
[Allen:] There are more stories of heroism. Aaron Feis, an assistant football coach, threw himself in front of his students, giving up his life to protect them.

[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] It could be very significant because as in this investigation, the Mueller probe goes forward and
[John King, Cnn Anchor:] It'd be interesting if we get to a point and we expect to get to a point where the president is interviewed by the special counsel, he said it didn't happen. But you have Comey, McCabe and several others with years of experience in law enforcement. Comey took contemporaneous notes and briefed people right away and gnaw what he was doing. Went and told other people so that it was on the official record. That's how you build a case against somebody. Let's move on to the other issue. I was watching another network last night that I often refer to as state T.V. here. And they were making there weren't touching that part of the story because of who it involves. But they were saying that, you know, McCabe is one of these people who they view as tainted. And they're working behind closed doors. If the Republicans have a case, if they have a case that whether it's Deputy Director McCabe or other people at the FBI not sending a few foolish text messages but we're actually working with bias. Will they held a public hearing or they just have behind closed door meetings and then come out and
[Rachael Bade, Politico:] Public hearings for sure, I do believe. Devin Nunes, if you watch him at the House Intelligence Chairman, he's a Trump loyalist. And he's been we reported out this week he's been he started this sort of secret investigation beyond only his committee's investigation. It's an investigation specifically aimed at looking at criminal actions in the FBI. Now, there are a lot of Republicans who are very uncomfortable with this. It created this divide in the House about whether or not, you know, trying to discredit this investigation is going to bar a questioning and making people question a law enforcement agency that is one of the most respected in the country. But, I think that Nunes, you know, is a dog with a bone right now, and they really are trying to make the point to try to discredit these folks in order to protect Trump.
[King:] Just saying you're investigating to the base of the Republican Party undermines their confidence. Their chairman is investigating. It undermines public conversation and institution. My point is, if they have something, bring it out in the public. We do if they have something, well then, we should see it. But if they're just trying to change the subject with behind closed door hearings and then innuendo, that's reckless.
[Molly Ball, Time:] Oh, that is really the question. Is this just an attempt to delegitimize somebody at the waters and to create confusion? And that you know, you see as you mentioned that the echo chamber of right wing media really creating really presenting this one-sided portrait. And so, that is much more about persuading the public rather than, you know, coming up with a matter that Congress could investigate and do something about. It really just about convincing the public that there's nothing to see.
[King:] And to the point, it works. You know, Speaker Pelosi writes that she wants the House investigation to continue. I think the Senate investigation and the Intelligence Committee sense that more credibility in town among people in all parties. But the investigation that counts is the special counsel of Robert Mueller. He's actually operating in the court system. And look at our new poll. The Russia investigation is a serious matter or an effort to discredit Trump. Ninety-three percent of Democrats say it's a serious matter. Seventy-eight percent of Republicans say it's an effort to discredit Trump. So, this attacking the institutions and the investigators and the prosecutors works.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, yes, that absolutely works. I mean, it works during the Clinton era too. You saw how effective that was and how it can start part of it to be a political document when it came out. I think that's that it's easy for Republicans to try to follow this sort of the same play book, you know. There are broader concerns about what this does to the fabric of American society when you're trying to undermine an institution like the FBI. So, I think that that, you know, is a broader concern and part of what's driving the
[Raju:] And expect next year, the House Republicans in particular to focus on the Clinton e-mail investigation which was why McCabe was behind closed doors with the two joint committees yesterday asked about how they handled it. They believe it was not handled properly. They believe what he said gave them fuel to the concerns that she was treated favorably as a candidate which is why she was not charged. That can be a big focus for them next year. So, these investigations will probably, at least in the House will grow partisan lines and probably shape the narrative heading into 2018.
[Bade:] I would also say, watch Republican leadership open house in the Senate, Ryan and McConnell, also Senator Burr potentially
[King:] It's a great point because when they come back, it will be an even numbered year and an election year. And sometimes that influences behavior of Washington D.C.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Welcome back. In less than an hour so from now President Trump scheduled to have a high-level national security briefing as North Korea threatens a strike on the U.S. territory of Guam. We're standing by for any presidential remarks. Stand by with us for that. But first, there's a brand new CNN polling just released in the last hour that shows republican lawmakers are taking a solid hit after failing to repeal Obamacare. Take a look at this. 7 in 10 Americans now say they disapprove of the job republican leaders in congress are doing. That's a 15-point drop since January when President Trump first took office. And this comes as the president is escalating a feud with someone who supposed to be one of his key allies in congress, the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. For a second day in a row the president is attacking McConnell, tweeting from his golf resort this only minutes ago, Mitch, get back to work and put repeal and replace, tax reform and cuts and a great infrastructure bill on my desk for signing. You can do it. Earlier today the president tweeted another tweet. Listen to this, can you believe that Mitch McConnell who has screamed repeal and replace for seven years couldn't get it done? Must repeal and replace Obamacare. The president's attacks come after McConnell said this in his home State of Kentucky earlier in the week.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Kentucky:] Our new president has of course not been in this line of work before, and I think had excessive expectations about how quickly things happen in the democratic process.
[Blitzer:] All right. right. Let's discuss with our chief political analyst, Gloria Borger, the senior White House correspondent for Bloomberg, Margaret Talev and CNN political director, David Chalian. Gloria, this battle is going that the president is having with Mitch McConnell. What's up with that?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Well, Maybe Jeff Sessions feels a little good about that because he's off the griddle this time. Look, I think the president feels that he there's no hell to pay for him for attacking Mitch McConnell. In our poll that you were just talking about, we asked republicans who they their approval ratings of both Trump and the republican leadership and the approval rating for Donald Trump is about double. What it is for the republican leadership. And republicans overwhelmingly do not blame they do not blame the president for all the problems that have occurred legislatively and so this president believes he can attack republicans. He's attacked more than half a dozen of them, calling them quitters because it works with this base. Now, in the long term I would argue it might not work so well for him if he's trying to rally his troops because they want to know that they can trust him and that he will have their back and it's very clear from what he's done to members of the senate that in fact, he won't. But for the larger picture, his base thinks it's fine to go after them
[Blitzer:] But so awkward though for other republicans, David, in the senate to see the president of the United States going after the republican majority leader.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Right. Although they've observed Donald Trump's behavior for two years throughout the republican nomination race and this is not unfamiliar territory that Donald Trump
[Blitzer:] But he's the president. He's got to deal with the republican leadership.
[Chalian:] There's no doubt. And he doesn't do the job of president like other presidents have. And I think that they've observed that for the last six months. I everything Gloria is saying is true about our polls. It is very easy to see that the politics of the blame game, Donald Trump versus republicans in congress, Donald Trump wins that. What is not clear at all to me is how this actually makes it easier for him to get a legislative victory because that's actually what Donald Trump needs. So does Mitch McConnell, so do the republican senators, but Donald Trump who's sitting at 38 percent approval rating just having a strategy that excites your base because you're taking on the republican establishment doesn't actually get to where Donald Trump needs to go which is he need to rack up some W's because his own numbers need a victory and a success to tell
[Blitzer:] He makes a good point, David -Margaret because in our poll among republicans who were asked who's most responsible for the lack of bills passed so far? Look at this. Opposition from democrats, 51 percent, disagreement among republicans, 32 percent. Only eight percent of these republicans say a lack of leadership from Trump is responsible.
[Margaret Talev, White House Correspondent, Bloomberg:] Well, there one thing that stuck out to me in the poll also was the desire, at least the her reported desire for more bipartisan collaboration. So I'll say this about the president's public fight with Mitch McConnell. The Twitter stuff is for mainstream, mass, public consumption. But look at the same time what he's doing. Supporting McConnell's choice to replace Jeff Sessions in the senate and just as we right just before we came here on this panel naming as the new chairman of the federal regulatory committee, Mitch McConnell's former energy policy advisor, a Kentucky native. So I think it's kind of that classic Trump play, right?
[Talev:] Where it's like, you know, the carrot and the stick at the same time and they're trying to figure out like, what's the strategy? It's kind of everything.
[Blitzer:] You know, I reads I read earlier, Gloria, two of the tweets that Donald Trump used going after Mitch McConnell, the original one, Senator Mitch McConnell said, I had excessive expectations but I don't think so after seven years of hearing repeal and replace. Why not done? So three tweets he's devoted to going after Mitch McConnell.
[Borger:] When something is on Donald Trump's mind, let's say we all find out about it and we find out about it pretty quickly. He goes at it over and over again. I mean, look at look at what he did to Jeff Sessions for days for days in a row. Mitch McConnell, luckily for him has established a policy and I think it goes back to during the campaign where he used to say, I'm not commenting on the president's tweets. I don't I don't comment on Twitter, well I think he and his staff were continuing that policy and that's probably the right thing to do particularly since by the way, his wife is also in the president's cabinet. And that could be that could be a little tricky.
[Blitzer:] It's a little awkward as well.
[Borger:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] You cover the White House, there's a new White House chief of staff, I thought things were supposed to be coming down a bit. on the president's tweets. I don't comment on twitter. I think he and his staff are continuing that policy and that's probably the right thing to do. Particularly since, by the way, his wife is also in the president's cabinet. You have that and that can be a little tricky. A little awkward. Covering the white house a new white house chief of staff. I thought things would calm down a bit. What happened to that?
[Talev:] All right. Well, maybe the president read all the coverage about how things were supposed to come down and decided he wanted to remind everybody who is actually in charge. But it is a really interesting dynamic. I think with General Kelly though, you know, you see this dynamic where there's what we can see. The tweets continuing or resumption of those tweets. The president having a little bit more public meetings at Bedminster and then there's what can't see which are the conversations that are happening among the generals as President Trump likes to call them. So sort of from the national security advisors, the defense secretary, to the chief of staff, and to some degree of the inclusion of the secretary of state, there are a lot of those conversations going on right now in an effort to try to guide this back, you know, towards diplomacy. I still I still think General Kelly inside the White House has a lot of goodwill and good faith from people but in terms of publicly, this sort of idea that nothing to see here is, well
[Blitzer:] David, speaking of General Kelly, the retired Marine Corps, four star general who's the new White House chief of staff, was the secretary of Homeland Security. Look at the new cover of Time Magazine and we know the president likes
[Chalian:] Watch out, General Kelly.
[Blitzer:] He likes to look at the covers of Time Magazine. There you could see the cover. General John Kelly. Trump's last best hope. Now, this is a sensitive issue when it comes to the president of the United States.
[Chalian:] Yes. You may recall, he's known for hanging false Time Magazine covers in his clubs or what have you. He's pretty obsessed with Time Magazine covers, he likes to have his own that were legit up in his office. I don't know that it bodes well for when a staff member ends up as the cover of Time Magazine. I would be a little careful of that. Donald Trump likes to be the one out in front.
[Borger:] Yes. No star is brighter in the constellation than Donald Trump. Remember when Bannon Steve Bannon was on the cover that he was in the doghouse for a while. This is a little early for General Kelly to be in the doghouse, so we'll have to see if he sat down for an interview or posed.
[Blitzer:] But what do you think about the point of the article that General Kelly, Margaret is Donald Trump's last best hope?
[Talev:] There's been a lot of this is the most important test and this is the last time but I do think there's General Kelly himself said no to this job several times before taking it. There is a recognition among everyone inside that White House including the general himself that this is absolutely a critical and pivotal time for the White House to turn around the narrative that's been dogging them the first six months of office.
[Blitzer:] Forget the country's in the midst of a crisis with North Korea.
[Borger:] Now in actual crisis. Yes.
[Blitzer:] As all of this politics is unfolding as well. Guys, thanks very much, Gloria, David, and Margaret. Good conversation. Coming up. My next guest has a message for the president of the United States when it comes to North Korea. "This is not a playground." Democratic Congressman Joaquin Castro taxes. There you see him live. He's standing by to join us. We'll talk about the growing nuclear threat right after this.

[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] Hello and welcome to our viewers all around the world. I'm John Vause.
[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm Isha Sesay. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. We begin with a second possible terror attack in Spain. We just got new video from the coastal town of Cambrils, Spain where five suspected terrorists were killed by police.
[Vause:] The video was taken inside a nightclub when something happened. There is the clear sound of what seemed to be gunfire. There's still no official word of exactly what went on there. Another video appears to show what happened next. And a warning this video you're about to see is graphic.
[Sesay:] Well, as we put that video up on the screen, you see what looks to be bodies at the scene that you see there lying there on the ground. They could be dead. Police say four terror suspects were killed and a fifth died later of his wounds. Well, the possible terror attack in Cambrils came just hours after the initial terror attack in Barcelona. That's where a speeding van mowed down crowds on the city's popular Las Ramblas Avenue.
[Vause:] CNN's Melissa Bell joins us now from the scene. But Melissa let's get back to Cambrils and what more doe we know about that counter-terrorism raid and in particular what may have been the presence there of explosive suicide belts.
[Melissa Bell, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. There is this idea police are investigating the possibility that these terrorists the five alleged terrorists that we now know to have died in that incident in Cambrils whether they were wearing any explosive belts at all. And of course, we also know from authorities that they believe that the event in Cambrils are linked also to those, of course, here in Barcelona where at 5:00 p.m. last night, John, that truck plowed down that Las Ramblas that road, pedestrianized central part of that road just behind me mowing down those very many tourists and locals who will have been ambling around in the evening killing, as you know, 13 of them. Of course, even as this investigation continues, we wait to find out whether that death toll rises or not since so many of the wounded remain in hospital, many of them seriously wounded.
[Sesay:] All right. Melissa we appreciate that. Thank you for the update. We'll come back to you a little bit later on the show to get more details thank you.
[Vause:] Ok. Las Ramblas Avenue was packed with shoppers, tourists and street performers when the van came at them at high speed.
[Sesay:] Witnesses describe the surreal moment when a largely summer day suddenly turned tragic.
[Unidentified Male:] I was just about to go on to the La Ramblas which obviously is the most one of the most popular tourist streets in Barcelona. And I came through a cross walk and the light turned red just as I was about to cross. And so I stopped. And all of a sudden, a white van started speeding out of nowhere and took a drastic right turn, right on to the walking part of the Las Ramblas street and right into the people that were standing on the opposite side of the cross walk that I was at. And he just plowed him down with his van and pretended to drive down the Las Ramblas. I heard a very loud kind of like it sounded like, you know, the guy that was driving whoever was driving the van kind of floored it. And I see this white van come. It looks like a utility truck or something, white van with some blue writing on the side. And it literally came straight down Ramblas and ran into people, you know, on every side. The Ramblas is full of, you know, pedestrians, street merchants, street performers and I saw people flying into the air.
[Unidentified Female:] All of a sudden there was tidal wave of people running toward us and they were hysterical. It wasn't just a small number; it was a large number of people. Children were screaming. There was clearly a lot of distress. In Spain, English is not widely spoken and it was very difficult to work except that you could see the fear and the distress on these people and the fact that they were screaming in terror. You know, regardless of what might have happened, we knew we had to get ourselves out of there. It was kind of like a little chain events where I just saw a few people turn around and started yelling and screaming. And then almost instantly everyone around them was just yelling, screaming and heading in the opposite direction. And in that moment, me and my cousin just turned around and started running back the way that we had initially come from. And all you could hear was just people scream and just so much chaos and everyone just screaming and yelling, trying to find their other family members just because that area itself and that market was so extremely packed. Everyone was just trying to run to safety
[Vause:] Joining us now CNN law enforcement contributor and former FBI special agent Steve Moore and Bobby Chacon also a former FBI special agent. Ok, Steve joint the dots here for us starting with this recent counter terror raid in Cambrils. Police say they stopped a second terror attack. The assumption is that there is a connection between what happened in Cambrils and the terror attack in Barcelona. But they're not offering a lot more details. So what would that what are the possibilities here? What could that connection be?
[Steve Moore, Cnn Law Enforcement Contributor:] What happens is after the first attack, you're going to roll out and pick up on any friends, any social media acquaintances anything, anybody that these people who you captured have talked to. You're going to immediately try to develop any leads on possible future attacks. And when you go out on those things, when you jump out to put all your resources on these attacks, you can hit a dry hole. These guys, from the looks of it, hit gold the first time. If these people were actually involved, then you've got an extremely quick, extremely effective investigation.
[Vause:] What you're saying is this sort of part of a bigger, wider plan for [inaudible] terror
[Moore:] Oh, absolutely. That's the ticking clock here because anybody you don't capture has no motivation to be captured. They're not going to sit around.
[Sesay:] So Bobby, the working hypothesis here multiple locations, multiple individuals involved which begs the obvious question, why didn't this come to the attention of authorities before now?
[Bobby Chacon, Former Fbi Special Agent:] Well, it's a good question and I think from the beginning, it had earmarks of not a lone wolf, suicide type attack. These guys were not suicide they didn't get out of that truck shooting people like we had on the London Bridge. And shortly after the incident, we found out that three days ago he returned from Morocco. So it looked like there was some advanced planning to this, that he traveled overseas, maybe had gotten some help and or maybe somebody traveled with him to Morocco and didn't come back, a bomb maker perhaps. So you had some earmarks that this wasn't the run of the mill Nice, France type attack; that this was going to be a coordinated attack and there could be other follow-on attacks.
[Vause:] Ok. So Cambrils is to the north of Barcelona. To the south is Alcanar where the night before after the attack in Barcelona there was an explosion. It left one person dead. There is a suspicion that someone was trying to build some kind of explosive device. And they say all of this is linked to the car attack in Barcelona Steve. So, you know, again no other details coming from the authorities, but it does raise the question that there was at least maybe a possibility that the terrorists were considering these explosive devices to be part of that car attack.
[Moore:] It's possible or it could have been follow-on attacks.
[Vause:] All right.
[Moore:] I mean that's what we've been seeing these, what we call marauding attacks. And attack here, an attack there and these attacks don't add. They multiply. They're exponential in the grief and in the panic they cause. So I'm not believing necessarily that these vests that they were supposed to be used in the initial attack. I'm believing that there might have been a follow-up. I could be wrong but that's where my [inaudible] is.
[Sesay:] So Bobby keeping you on the investigative track for a second, if indeed we're talking about interlinked individuals, again multiple locations, multiple individuals is this a good thing for investigators because the more people the possibility that someone's being sloppy and you can pick up a trail.
[Chacon:] Well, I mean you know, it's not a good thing if there are more people out there willing to carry out these attacks and have the ability to. I mean you would as harsh as it sounds, you would prefer an attack like we've already had where it's one person carrying out one crime and that's the end of it. So it's always more disconcerting when there's more out there and you don't know because when you catch eight of them, you don't know if there's 18. When you catch one and or he kills himself in the process, there's no other trail to follow, shortly into the investigation you have a comfort level that ok, this is it. With this, once you find more then you don't know how much more is out there.
[Vause:] As a general, Bobby the more sophisticated the plot, the plan is it easier to thwart as opposed to like two guys rent a van and drive it into a crowd just on a not on a whim but you know what I mean?
[Chacon:] Yes. It's almost easy to thwart and if you have a good intelligence service at work and I'm not saying they weren't good. I'm just saying you have to have a break. When you're going to take down a coup like that, you're going to have to have a break. You're going to have to have somebody on the inside telling you something happened. These are very close-knit groups or close-knit communities. And so, you know, if you don't get that break, even in a coordinated attack, yes there's more communication required, more movement required, more things to acquire. You have to buy more things, rent more things. So all of those things represent a possible exploitation by law enforcement to get into that group.
[Sesay:] Bobby sorry. Steve what is your expectation in terms of this the movements of the driver who's still out there on the loose? Is your expectation in these kinds of situations, that he's trying to get out of the country or that he's lying low within Spain?
[Moore:] Historically in the attacks we've seen in the last year, they have not really tried very hard to get out of the country. They may be looking for support and they may be looking to circle back and do as much damage as they can because they know that life as they know it is over. And to your question, the larger the plan, yes the more vulnerable it is to detection. But the more sophisticated it is, the less the less it's trackable.
[Vause:] Sure. And Bobby and again, just to your question about a break. In April there was this arrest of nine suspects apparently linked to ISIS. They were picked up. Wasn't that a break in some ways?
[Chacon:] Well we don't I mean we don't know. That's yet to be seen. We need they need to examine whether or not there's any kind of connection between those nine. It could have been a separate cell
[Vause:] There were no links to the [inaudible] airport attack possibly.
[Chacon:] Right. But we don't know if they were linked to this attack that happened today.
[Vause:] No.
[Chacon:] So that's going to be examined. And you know, they'll come and determine whether or not they missed something. And if they do we hope that they, you know, kind of shore that up and not miss it again.
[Sesay:] And it terms of getting hold of the van, you know, that's the whole thing with these attacks. It takes low skill and tech any one can do it. But when we're talking about explosives, the possibility of explosives being involved in the mix, I mean what's your understanding in terms of Spain? How easy it is to get your hands on, you know, the arms, the guns, explosives those elements?
[Moore:] Well, the triacetone triperoxide they're using, you can pick up in any store. I mean it's peroxide that they use in a highly concentrated form for hair work. And the acetone is not hard to get either. And so the problem is it's very hard to make. And sometimes you blow yourselves up doing it which would indicate that might have happened already. So the stuff isn't hard.
[Vause:] ISIS said these attackers were soldiers of the Islamic state. There was no sort of explicit claim of responsibility. Also no photos or details of the attackers have been issued by ISIS. And Bobby I'm assuming that's because the driver is still on the run?
[Chacon:] Well, maybe. But maybe this is one of those things and we hearken all the way back to San Bernardino where the new paradigm is you can be out there and you can plan and carry out one of these attacks and as long you claim allegiance to ISIS and al Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS then they will accept you as an ISIS soldier and you'll go into the afterlife as one of their martyrs. And that's what they all aspire to do. And so this is the paradigm. So ISIS, of course, comes in after the fact and claims them to be the martyrs, but that's part of the deal. The deal is we will go and carry out this attack and you will accept us as soldiers.
[Vause:] But doesn't all the elements that we're now finding out, you know, the explosion in the house the night before, the suicide belts, you know, the day after all this kind of stuff, you know, the guy heading off to Morocco all these pieces coming together indicates that maybe ISIS or someone or some group, jihadi group was more directly involved
[Chacon:] Absolutely.
[Vause:] as opposed to inspiration.
[Chacon:] Absolutely. Absolutely. And I think that the travel to that is key. The crucial thing to me as an investigator, first thing I picked up on was he just came back in the country. And so that tells me you don't come back and three days later carry out an attack like this. There's obviously brought much prior planning, if not planning that took place in Morocco and back and forth. So definitely this is part of a larger group, maybe even a directly-affiliated ISIS group of a tangentially affiliated group for ISIS but no doubt that this is part of a larger group.
[Sesay:] And Steve to John's point about ISIS providing no evidence, if you will, no supporting evidence to the claim that these were soldiers of the caliphate. Do they have the fact that, you know, there's this doubt, the credibility of their claim? Or is it still a win?
[Moore:] No. They this is a win because most likely they were inspired by ISIS if not directed by ISIS. The fact that they don't have identifying information is kind of outweighed or at least balanced in my opinion, by the fact that they took responsibility for it so quickly. So I think there is, you know, six degrees of separation back to Baghdadi on this one.
[Vause:] And Bobby, finally, you know, Spain is not France is not Belgium when it comes to ISIS but there is still this connection to ISIS as far as a transit point for militants coming in coming and going.
[Chacon:] Sure. And this is the new Europe, right with the refugee crisis and people willing to exploit whatever crisis is at hand. They'll exploit the things that they can exploit to move around. And freedom of movement is one of the things that enable these attacks to take place, and you know, the travel documents and traveling. So I think that that yes, I think this is part of the new Europe and they're going to have to, you know, work on identifying ways to stem some of these travel issues that they have over there.
[Vause:] Ok. We shall leave it there
[Sesay:] Gentlemen we appreciate it.
[Vause:] Bobby and Steve thank you so much for the insights.
[Sesay:] Thank you.
[Moore:] Thanks a lot.
[Chacon:] Thank you.
[Vause:] U.S. President Donald Trump reacted to the news out of Barcelona by tweeting this, "The United States condemns the terror attack in Barcelona, Spain and will do whatever is necessary to help. Be tough and strong. We love you."
[Sesay:] And then he tweeted this. "Study what General Pershing of the United States did to terrorists when caught. There was no more radical Islamic terrorist for 35 years." But here's the thing, there is no evidence backing up President Trump's claim that in the early 1900s General John Pershing and his forces shot Muslims with bullets dipped in pink blood to deter them from the Philippine-American war. So in the face of Barcelona's horrific terrorist attack some are questioning why the President is highlighting Pershing's story.
[Vause:] Other world leaders from places all too familiar with terrorism also sending their condolences.
[Sesay:] The German Chancellor called the Barcelona attack "revolting". A spokesman for Angela Merkel writes, "We are mourning the victims of this disgusting attack in Barcelona in solidarity and friendship side by side with the Spanish."
[Vause:] British Prime Minister Theresa May tweets, "My thoughts are with the victims of today's terrible attack in Barcelona and the emergency services responding to this ongoing incident. U.K. stands with Spain against terror."
[Sesay:] French President Emmanuel Macron also voiced his solidarity with Spain, "We remain united and determined," Macron said on Twitter. He described it as a tragic attack saying his thoughts are with the victims. And London Mayor Sadiq Khan echoing that sentiment; he called it a barbaric terrorist attack in the great city of Barcelona.
[Vause:] And in Paris, the Eiffel Tower went dark paying tribute to the victims of the Barcelona rampage. When we come back we'll have much more on the attack which killed 13 people, injured dozens more. You're CNN.

[Howell:] Live coast to coast this morning across the United States, from London to Sydney and all points in between. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM. Thank you for being with us. I'm George Howell. And I'm Natalie Allen. Here are our top stories.
[Allen:] World leaders are now assessing the remarkable summit between the leaders of North and South Korea and whether it will lead to concrete changes.
[Howell:] The two leaders, Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in, concluded their meeting with a joint declaration to formally end the Korean War and denuclearize the peninsula. North Korea media called it "historic."
[Allen:] Making those goals a reality is a tall order after 70 years of mistrust and animosity. But the rapport between the two leaders and the symbolism they embraced sent a powerful message that change could be coming. Chung Min Lee is with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He's also a former South Korean ambassador for national security affairs. Thanks so much for joining us from Seoul to talk about this. And the devil's in the details. We'll talk about
[Chung Min Lee, Carnegie Endowment For International Peace:] It's my pleasure.
[Allen:] yes, the tough road ahead. But right now, this was summit number 1; this was the first time that the North and the South, the leaders have met and they came up with an agreement to end the war and to get rid of the nuclear program in North Korea. What do you make of it?
[Lee:] Well, Natalie, this was the first summit between President Moon and Chairman Kim of North Korea but the third overall since 2000. And the declaration which was seen by the world yesterday was very positive on many fronts, including North Korea's promise to denuclearize. But as always the devil is in the details. North Korea said on previous occasions, we will never pursue nuclear weapons and they did. They have done over six nuclear tests, including a hydrogen bomb test. And they promised the U.S. on many occasions they will totally dismantle their nuclear and missile sites and that has not happened. So while we are very hopeful over the next ensuing weeks and months, we've got to really see whether Kim Jong-un is willing to accept really harsh sanctions to make sure and inspections to make sure that North Korea no longer develops and rolls back on nuclear weapons.
[Allen:] Right. You wisely point out he's gone back on pledges before. We also know Kim Jong-un is a brutal ruler. He wants total control. He fiercely defends his family dynasty, enemies within and enemies outside of North Korea. So the question is, how does South Korea and the world work with him, moving forward, knowing these realities about him?
[Lee:] You know, Natalie, that's a great question, because South Korea has to deal with North Korea, its arch political foe in many respects. They have downed airplanes before; they have done terrible terrorist acts. And this is a regime that is one of the most, if not the most authoritarian in the world. North Korea has several gulags; there are thousands of political prisoners as we speak. Nonetheless, this is the leader that we have to deal with. Kim Jong-un is 34 years old, he's a lot more aware of the outside world than his dad or even his grandfather was. And he's very savvy in his own way and he wants to put his mark on the North Korean regime and to make sure he gains as much economic benefits as well as sanctions relief. But he will not get that from Donald Trump unless he makes critical deals with nuclear issues.
[Allen:] Right. Speaking of Mr. Trump, he has had his part, hurling insults at Kim Jong-un and making threats. Some question maybe that helped get us to this point, to Mr. Trump's way of doing things. But the pressure will now be on President Trump to maybe continue the momentum in their meeting.
[Lee:] You're absolutely right, because President Moon laid the framework. There are pluses and minuses in all summits but there is a road map now. President Moon is slated to visit Pyongyang in the fall of this year. And perhaps by the end of the year there will be a formal peace treaty that ends the Korean War, including the U.S. and China. For Donald Trump, the bar therefore is very, very high. He wants North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons but Pyongyang won't do that unless he gets something substantive in return. And that includes, for example, a pledge maybe to withdraw U.S. forces over time and to reduce the number of U.S.-Korean military exercises or to withdraw the U.S. nuclear umbrella from South Korea. So these are tough issues that Mr. Trump's got to deal with, not only face-to-face but on various levels before the expected summit in early June.
[Allen:] I was about to ask you about that and you just answered it so my last question will be this. Did you see or observe anything about Kim Jong-un during this fascinating meeting and the walkaround and the chitchat on the bridge? You had to wonder if there's any engaging in small talk as well. But are there any takeaways from what you observed about him, during this whole day, really, of being able to watch this play out?
[Lee:] Well, I think there were two very important images that were spread all across the world. Everybody knew Kim Jong-un or expected him to be very cold, not very talkative. And yet he was very boisterous, he was pointing to various paintings. His suggestion to President Moon to cross over to the North Korean side and then shook hands again. So he was a very jovial, normal, a very vivacious leader, as it were. But at home he is a brutal dictator running a one-party family dynasty. But that's the image that he wants to portray in North Korea, but outside he wants to be the guy who is actually the who can make deals with South Koreans and others. The second point is that many thought that he would not be as open to suggestions. But, again, he surprised the world because he listed a number of initiatives that have yet to be panned out. So on those two points, we were surprised by North Korea but it was all planned on the part of Kim Jong-un and his critical aides, including his sister.
[Allen:] Very interesting. Well, you never know. Maybe the world, the outside world, will affect how he treats his fellow citizens in North Korea one of these days. Who knows? But it's a hopeful time, isn't it? Chung Min Lee, we thank you so much for joining us. We appreciate your thoughts.
[Lee:] Yes, it is.
[Allen:] Thank you.
[Lee:] Thank you.
[Allen:] All right. Let's talk Stormy Daniels. Her civil case against President Trump and his personal attorney, Michael Cohen. is on hold, at least temporarily. This coming as the criminal investigation into Cohen continues in New York.
[Howell:] A California judge cited that criminal investigation as the reason to grant Cohen's request to halt the case. Sara Sidner reports.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] This is certainly a win for Michael Cohen and his attorneys in this civil case against him and the President of the United States by Stephanie Clifford or Stormy Daniels, as we all know her. Basically the judge has said there's going to be a 90-day stay. That means that the case is put on hold for 90 days. That means that Michael Avenatti will not be able to depose the president. He will not be able to depose Michael Cohen or anyone else involved in the case at this point because a judge has put a hold on it. Why did the judge do it? Well, the judge gave examples and reasons for why he did it. First of all, he said, look, there's a lack of significant prejudice to the plaintiff. So basically it's not going to hurt Stormy Daniels if he holds off on this case for 90 days.
[Sidner:] But one of the really big reasons why this is happening and why Michael Cohen's attorneys asked for this is because of the potential significant impact to the criminal investigation against Michael Cohen right now, realizing that his properties had been raided by the FBI; they were looking for information that had something to do, according to our sources, with the $130,000 that he paid to Stormy Daniels to keep her quiet just before the presidential election. And also mentioned in the judge's reasoning, it says, "Mr. Cohen's significant interest in the preservation of his Fifth Amendment rights," that is the right against self-incrimination, that playing a big role in this. One more thing to mention, that we should point out, the judge also said in his ruling that, judging from what has happened in the criminal investigation, that court believes that there will be an indictment. Considering that, this is no ordinary investigation, because it involves the personal attorney for the President of the United States Sara Sidner, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Howell:] Sara, thanks. Stormy Daniels' attorney says they plan to appeal the decision. He spoke earlier to CNN's Jim Acosta and shared his concerns about the judge's ruling.
[Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' Attorney:] If this was only about 90 days, I don't think we'd be taking it up on appeal. We might. But we're concerned about it being delayed beyond that. My client continues to fall under this NDA, according to the defendants. They continue to threaten her with additional millions of dollars of damages. She wants to be clear of this and she wants the defamation claim against Michael Cohen fully adjudicated.
[Allen:] Again, that's Michael Avenatti speaking there. He also raised the possibility of bringing a defamation claim against President Trump for tweets suggesting Stormy Daniels lied to the American people. How about we end this with "stay tuned"?
[Howell:] More to come, right? Still ahead...
[Barbara Isaacs, Windrush Immigrant:] How can you have lived somewhere all of your life and, 50 years later, you're sleeping on the streets, begging people for certain things?
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] You're homeless.
[Isaacs:] Yes, totally. I was homeless, destitute.
[Howell:] A wave of Caribbean migrants were invited to come and live in England during the late 1940s. Now they're fighting for the right to stay. We'll have the details on that story ahead.
[Allen:] Also ahead here, travel back with us, like way, way back. How newly discovered fossilized footprints show how ancient humans stalked giant sloths.

[Vanier:] The World Cup file that finally is just around the corner, just a little over two days to wait. On Sunday France and Croatia face off for the championship. Until then, however, we have enough memes, those viral images to keep us occupied. "WORLD SPORTS" Don Riddell breaks down the best one so far.
[Don Riddell, Cnn International Sports Anchor:] The World Cup has captured football fans all over the world bringing moments of delirium and plenty of heartbreak. And in turn, the fans have captured the World Cup, its highs, and its lows online in memes. As the most expensive player in the world, Neymar was always going to be under the microscope but the Brazilian star brought joy to millions in a way that he could never have imagined. Clips of his overly theatrical rolling around went viral. In training, young kids all learned to do with the Neymar.
[Unidentified Male:] Neymar!
[Riddel:] And in general video editors were having a ball even turning him into one. It's not just the players who produce the magic, the fans do too. This clip has been viewed more than 20 million times. A grandma blessing the Mexico players before their win against Germany, granddaughter Paula tweeted I'm 100 percent convinced my grandma was the reason Mexico won. Later on, Mexican supporters were sure that South Korea was the reason that they were still in the tournament. After Korea's unexpected win against Germany, random Koreans were hoisted onto shoulders and paraded through the streets like gods. South Korea's Consul General in Mexico found himself to be the guest at a most unexpected celebration England surprise run to the semi-finals inspired all kinds of creative musing. And while football didn't actually come home, their fans were dreaming. This boarding card perfectly captured the sentiment with references to England's only previous victory in 1966 52 years have hurt and of course their unflappable manager Gareth Southgate. It's a cruel game for these Croatian Firefighters watching the quarter-final shootout against Russia, the result was the joy but the climbing would cruel. In the satirical video, they posted on Facebook, the comedic sight of them racing out of the firehouse and so missing the winning shot is a reminder to us all it's only a game. Don Riddel, CNN.
[Vanier:] And the World Cup coverage continues. Football fever gripping Croatia you have more of that next on "WORLD SPORT." I'm back at the top of the hour with more news stay with us.

[Harlow:] All right, this morning, world leaders and a number of CEOs of big U.S. corporations are making a final plea to President Trump. Do not leave the Paris Climate accord.
[Berman:] It seems like these warnings, though, may be coming too late. 3:00 p.m., he's issuing an announcement from the Rose Garden where he is expected to announce the United States is pulling out of that agreement. CNN's Frederik Pleitgen, live in London with really some pretty harsh world reaction. Fred?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Yes, some very harsh world reaction. I can tell you guys, especially here in Europe, every leader here on the continent and probably elsewhere in the world is watching and we'll see what happens there at 3:00 p.m. And there are some pretty harsh words for the United States and for the current White House. There are some leaders who are pleading with President Trump to stay in the Climate Agreement. Even the leader of the United Nations is saying, look, we could maybe make amendments, but we really want the U.S. to stay in. And then you have others who are threatening, like the head of the commission of the European union, who said look, you can't get out that easily, anyway. This is Jean-Claude Juncker saying, "The law is the law, and everyone must adhere to it. Not everything that is written into international agreement is fake news," he is saying. They're obviously making a reference to words that President Trump himself tends to use every once in a while. That same man, Jean-Claude Juncker, also said, look, if the U.S. wants to step off the leadership stage here as far as climate is concerned, maybe China will want to move into that vacuum. And the state would have it the Chinese prime minister is actually in Europe right now. He's meeting with the economic powerhouse here with Germany. And Angela Merkel had some pretty kind words for the Chinese. Let's listen to what she had to say.
[Angela Merkel, German Chancellor:] I first want to say that I'm pleased that China stands by the commitments laid out in the Climate Change Agreement. And especially with the visit to Brussels that follows, it will be important that the cooperation of the European Union with China in this area will play a crucial role, especially in regards to new technologies.
[Pleitgen:] And you can really see when you follow the meetings that are going on right now between the Europeans and the Chinese, how the Chinese are really laying on the full-court press, trying to woo the Europeans to closer cooperation on especially the climate sector, also the industrial sector as well. That certainly is something that I think the U.S. is going to be watching very, very closely as well.
[Berman:] All right, Frederik Pleitgen for us in London following the world reaction to the climate deal. Also, some news happening just moments ago, President Trump signed a waiver that will keep the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, in Israel, for now.
[Harlow:] Remember, as a candidate, Trump said over and over he was going to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Will you recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The answer is, yes, I would.
[Blitzer:] When? How quickly Fairly quickly. I mean, it's a process, but fairly quickly. I mean, the fact is, I would like to see it moved and I would like to see it in Jerusalem.
[Harlow:] I would like to see it in Jerusalem, but now signing this waiver just minutes ago. It means that he's not going to do that, at least not right now. Our correspondent Oren Liebermann has details. This is something Netanyahu wanted to see, but it's also something that would fly in the face of trying to get a peace deal done, right?
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn Jerusalem Correspondent:] And that's exactly how Trump views it. President Trump was very clear in his wording. He said he's not backing off the promise itself, only the timing of the promise, saying he'll reconsider it. But it seems Trump realizes that to move the embassy, to recognize Jerusalem's the capital of Israel right now would effectively ruin any chances he has of trying to pursue a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians. And he's made it very clear that that's his goal. He was very optimistic about it even just a few months ago, but it seems in his visit to the region, Israel, Jerusalem and the West Bank. He backed off some of that optimism, saying it's a very difficult deal, but still saying he'll get it done. So far, the only statement right now and remember, Trump just signed the waiver a matter of minutes ago. So far, the only statement has come from the White House. We haven't seen reaction yet from Israelis and Palestinians, but I very much suspect that will be coming. Here is part of what the White House had to say in making their announcement. They said "No one should consider this step to be in any way a retreat from the president's strong support for Israel and for the United StatesIsrael alliance. President Trump made this decision to maximize the chances of successfully negotiating a deal between Israel and the Palestinians." So, Trump making it very clear he is still very much determined to pursue some sort of renegotiation or restarting of the peace process between Israelis and Palestinians. John and Poppy?
[Berman:] All right, Oren Liebermann for us in Israel, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Joining us now is former U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Edward Walker. Thank you so much for joining us, Ambassador. I don't think it's a surprise at all that the president signed this waiver today, despite the fact that he had promised to move the embassy, you know, when he became president. The statement from the White House is the question is not if that move happens but only when. But the fact it's not happening now essentially means that the U.S. policy hasn't changed. This has been the U.S. policy, you know, for several administrations, certainly, the official congressional policy for decades.
[Edward Walker, Former U.s. Ambassador To Egypt And Israel:] That's correct. We've had this policy ever since the founding of Israel. And the original reason for putting our primary diplomatic mission in Tel Aviv was security. Now, we've got another problem or two problems relating to moving the embassy to Jerusalem. One is security, because we would suddenly become the target of every ISIS nut case in the world trying to reverse that effort. The other is that we really need to take time to study this because of the reasons said by your person in London and that is going to put to an end any opportunity for any kind of an agreement in the very short-term near future. So, it's a great decision to put it off. We should applaud the president for making this decision. It's not an easy one, given his statements.
[Harlow:] So, turning to the announcement the president's going to make this afternoon at 3:00 p.m. in the Rose Garden about what the U.S. will do with the Paris Climate accord. All our reporting is that the U.S. is going to pull out. And therefore, it is going to be practically alone, alone certainly among developed economies when it comes to not being a part of this agreement. You've said, I have no problem with "America First," but I have concerns about America alone. Why is this America alone and what are your concerns in terms of repercussions?
[Walker:] 147 countries that have ratified the agreement.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Walker:] 197 have signed it. We're going to be, along with Nicaragua and Syria, the only countries in the world that are not engaged in this process. Remember, it does not commit anybody to actual efforts. It's up to each country to make their statements as to what the results will be and then to pursue those statements. This is you know, I'd like to be a neutral person in diplomacy, so I'm supporting Trump on the Jerusalem thing, but I am definitely against the president in trying to walk away from our international commitments and alienating 9 percent of the world against U.S. foreign policy. It doesn't make sense and for what?
[Berman:] Who benefits, do you think? Because there are some people out there saying this only makes the Chinese stronger.
[Walker:] Of course it does. The Chinese have made it very clear that they're trying to take over leadership of, at a minimum, the Asian area and probably further than that. And our walking away from the Asia-Pacific Trade Agreement and our walking away from the Climate Agreement, which China has committed to continue as a leader. It's handing the process over to China and it's destroying our Asian diplomacy.
[Harlow:] To be fair, Hillary Clinton was also going to walk away from TPP as well. But you say that this will be particularly damaging for our diplomacy with Asia and China. It's interesting that China this morning sort of reaffirmed its commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement, something Angela Merkel called a joyous moment. Why do you think that is, that China reaffirmed so quickly, even though others would argue that this might give the U.S. a competitive edge, at least on some energy fronts for some jobs against China.
[Walker:] Yes, but China's looking at the larger global region and their role in it and they see this as another step for the United States to undercut its own ability to pursue diplomacy, to gain the strength of support among alliances and so on. We're undercutting ourselves. And as I said, you know, you start it off with the fact that Trump wants us to be "America First." I agree 100 percent. That's what a president ought to do. But we should not do it alone. And we cannot walk alone in this international climate today, particularly when we're fighting enemies such as ISIS. And so, we need support. We need support from the Europeans and we need support from the Asians. So, this doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
[Berman:] Ambassador Edward Walker, great to have your insight. Thanks so much for being with us. We appreciate it, sir.
[Walker:] You bet.
[Berman:] All right. Maybe as soon as next week, James Comey will testify before the Senate. What will he say? How candid will he be? A friend and former prosecutor joins us next.

[John Sarland, Cnn Correspondent:] now, will repeal of net neutrality lead to innovation or to a traffic jam?
[Whitfield:] All right. In the fast lane and the slow lane with John Sarland there. The next hour of the NEWSROOM starts right now. Hello, again. Happy Hanukkah. Welcome this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We're keeping our eye on the White House where President Trump is getting ready to depart for Camp David. He'll be joining Vice President Mike Pence and some members of the cabinet for the weekend. Meanwhile, President Trump is on the verge of bringing up his first major political victory as a final deal for massive tax reform is now on the table. The U.S. Senate and the House coming to terms after some holdouts threatened to derail it. House Speaker Paul Ryan saying the vote could come as early as Tuesday. Here are some of the key details. Despite a pledge to reduce the number of personal income tax brackets, this bill keeps all seven. Taxes will be lower for many in those brackets. The biggest cut is being saved for corporations where the tax rate drops to 21 percent from its current 35 percent. Also, in the bill is a $2,000 child tax credit. That's important because it apparently was key in moving U.S. Senator Marco Rubio's vote from a no to a yes. Individuals will also be able to deduct up to $10,000 in state and local taxes and the exemption for the estate tax would be doubled. Republican senators got their way and the Obamacare individual mandate will be eliminated. I want to bring in congressional reporter, Lauren Fox, in Washington. So, Lauren, good to see you again. It was just six weeks ago that lawmakers got a look at this first draft. There was a lot of horse trading going on to get the votes that they need. Now feeling very confident. Senator Marco Rubio and Bob Corker on board. Are there other potential holdouts?
[Lauren Fox, Cnn Congressional Reporter:] Well, when we talked to Republican leadership, they are feeling very confident about the fact that they will be able to deliver the votes on this signature legislative achievement for the year, something that Republicans have been trying to get to President Donald Trump's desk for several months and nearly a year at this point. So, one thing to remember, Senator Bob Corker coming out in support of this bill was huge yesterday, a major surprise on Capitol Hill. He had previously expressed many concerns about the fact that the bill would add too much money to the deficit. So, the fact that he came out in support of the bill is major. Now, we have to remember, there are some senators who have not said explicitly that they will be a yes. Senators like Susan Collins and Senator Mike Lee of Utah. Now, remember, they are saying they just need to read the bill, they're not necessarily nos. They definitely sound like they're leaning towards yes. But they are not saying at this point how they're going to vote because the bill just came out last night. Obviously, this is a huge massive bill, more than 500 pages. And it takes some time to go through with your staff to make sure everything is the way that you want it to be if you're going to be lending your vote to it.
[Whitfield:] Yes. It takes time to read 500 pages. The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation says the bill would increase deficits by almost $1.5 trillion. You just mentioned Corker, you know, at first said adding to the deficit would be a big turnoff. He's changed his mind potentially. Are there other Republicans openly raising concerns?
[Fox:] Well, Senator Jeff Flake has said that this can be a concern for him, but he did vote for the bill the last time around and that was a similar estimate that we're seeing now. So, without Senator Corker and if Senator Flake does end up voting for this bill, it's very hard to say that there's anyone left who's scared this bill adds too much to the deficit. It seems like that concern has really been put on the back burner. They really just need to get a major legislative win to the president's desk before the holiday.
[Whitfield:] OK, to make it that Christmas present. All right. Lauren Fox, appreciate it. We'll talk more about this with my political panel. Niger Innis is the national spokesman for the Congress of Racial Equality and Maria Cardona is a CNN political commentator and Democratic strategist. Good to see you both. All right, so Maria goes first. Good morning. Some say it's not reform, but it is a new plan. But regardless, will it be considered a victory for the president if indeed it passes?
[Maria Cardona, Cnn Political Commentator:] It will be considered a victory for the president I think in the short term. And let's be very clear, that's one of the reasons why they want to ram this bill through because they are desperate. They, the White House, and Republicans in Congress are desperate for legislative victory because they have had none. And President Trump promised so many things to all of his supporters during the campaign trail and has not been able to deliver legislatively on one of them except for maybe the Supreme Court justice. So, yes, they are desperate for this victory, but I think it will be a very short-term victory because going into the 2018 elections this, if it passes, this will have been the least popular bill that has passed in the last 30 years, Fredricka, and most Americans do not like this bill. Most Americans understand that it is a big wet kiss to corporations and millionaires and billionaires like President Trump and all of his friends and they don't believe they're going to see any tax cut whatsoever and some families, in fact, many families, are going to see a tax increase in the years beyond 2018.
[Whitfield:] It's curious, you know, Niger, because a lot of lawmakers are now trying to read through 500 pages this weekend. Maybe some citizens are also trying to do the same and try to understand. And already if this is a very unpopular bill, very unpopular Congress and the latest approval ratings for the president, you know, at 33 percent, very unpopular president. You know, how will a win be gauged here if indeed it is passed?
[Niger Innis, National Spokesman, Congress Of Racial Equality:] Well, it's the first tax reform that has taken place in a generation, since 1986
[Whitfield:] If that's all unpopular for the American people
[Innis:] I think
[Whitfield:] an achievement?
[Innis:] I think the jury is out on if this is going to be popular or not. It's really going to depend on the results. I mean, what the bet that Donald Trump and the Congress is making is the same bet that John F. Kennedy made in the early 60s. The same bet that Ronald Reagan made which is that cutting taxes is going to generate economic growth. And there's no question that simplifying the corporate tax by reducing it to 21 percent. But also eliminating over a dozen loopholes that currently exist in our tax code is definitely the bet that they're making and the investment that they're making is that this is going to bring back jobs to the country. That it's going to increase wages and if that comes to fruition, certainly before the 2018, I think the popularity of this agenda and the Trump economic plan will increase dramatically.
[Whitfield:] That's an oxymoron, you know, Maria, to say might there be any surprises. Of course, if you knew there was a surprise, it wouldn't be a surprise. But remember for the latest, you know, health care reform, you know, plan I just recall, you know, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, in the hallway, seemingly that they were unified in endorsing it and then it was John McCain who surprised everybody with a big thumb's down. Might there be a moment like that or maybe the better way to phrase that question is, is there anticipation that there might be another moment like this on that on tax reform?
[Cardona:] I know that clearly Republicans are confident that this is going to pass, but what we have seen about what has happened so far is that you never know what's going to happen on a minute by minute basis, and so anything could happen. If I were to put money on it, I would say it probably will pass. But, you know, this is a bet that they're making, but I believe it's going to be a bet that is going to fall on its face. This is not the same economy that President Kennedy had. It's not the same economy that Reagan had. And President Kennedy, yes, he passed tax cuts but guess what, his focus was on tax cuts for the middle class. This is not a focus on tax cuts for the middle class. This is a focus on tax cuts for the wealthy and for corporations. The other thing is corporations are making record profits. What makes us think that by giving them even more money they are going to invest those profits in jobs and in increased salaries. People who believe that have not seen the history of what corporations do when they have more money. What do they do? They give it to their shareholders. They give it as top executive bonuses. Americans understand that. This is why trickle-down economics doesn't work. It didn't work in the Bush administrations. And every time the past two Republican presidents that were in office drove the economy into a hole trying to focus on trickle-down economics and it took the two Democratic presidents that succeed them to get the economy out of the hole.
[Whitfield:] So, then, Niger, are there Republicans or lawmakers who are hoping that perhaps people won't either remember the trickle-down theory or perhaps they didn't experience it and so that's why they're on board with this?
[Innis:] Well, I beg to differ with my colleague, Maria. John F. Kennedy's tax cuts were across the board as were Ronald Reagan's. When we were all in high school back in the late '70s and early '80s, we had this thing called the misery index, which combined inflation with the unemployment rate and which actually was closely correlated to crime rates. Meaning if the misery index was very, very high, crime rates would go soon to follow. Ronald Reagan and Paul Volcker, the chair of the Federal Reserve at that time, broke the back of the misery index. At one time, the misery index I think under Carter was close to 19 percent. It hasn't been above 10 percent since the close of the Reagan administration and that is because of the dramatic economic revolution that took place and the unprecedented basically 20-year prosperity economic boom. The biggest in world history and our country that took place from Ronald Reagan through Bill Clinton. So, I beg to differ. I think that there
[Cardona:] There was a huge recession I'm sorry, there was a huge recession after President George H.W. Bush. That's why Clinton got elected. You're forgetting history.
[Innis:] There was a blip there was a blip of a recession, she's absolutely right.
[Cardona:] Because of trickle-down economics.
[Innis:] And I would argue because Bush raised taxes because he was blackmailed by a Democratic Congress.
[Whitfield:] There was not the winning argument nor evidence that these large corporations were actually creating more jobs at all. That's what is being promised this
[Cardona:] That's right.
[Innis:] But what is Fredricka, what is evidence is our tax rate for corporations was making us uncompetitive with other industrialized nations that had their tax rate close rate closer to the 21 percent that we're going to get to right now.
[Cardona:] Is that why our corporations
[Innis:] it's going to bring much more jobs back to the United States than overseas.
[Whitfield:] That's the slogan but, Maria, is that going to be the reality?
[Cardona:] Well, look, if our corporations are at such a disadvantage, is that why they're making record profits? Wow. I mean, that's just this does not match the reality, Fredricka. The problem is when corporations make more money, they don't they have not shown recently that they invest them in making in either more salaries, raising salaries, which is what we need, or creating more jobs.
[Innis:] You and I would both agree that it's far better for corporations to be making money by providing jobs here in the United States because the tax rate is much more in line with other industrialized nations than it is for them to go to other countries like Ireland where the tax rate is the lower and then bringing
[Whitfield:] by so many analysts that perhaps it's the shareholders that are benefiting from those new profits, but there hasn't been history that dictates or shows that it has created jobs and that's where we are. We'll find out if things change
[Innis:] We will see.
[Cardona:] And we're at a 4 percent employment rate. That is almost, you know that is a historic low, thank you, President Obama.
[Innis:] Yes, but the wages the wages have not gone up in a couple of decades for the American people.
[Cardona:] That's exactly right.
[Whitfield:] Niger Innis, Maria Cardona
[Cardona:] By giving more money to corporations, there's nothing to say that they're going to
[Innis:] Making us more competitive, Maria. Keep in mind, it's our money.
[Whitfield:] Happy holiday, happy Hanukkah and soon happy New Year. Thanks to all of you. Appreciate it. All right, straight ahead, North Korea firing back in a war of words with the U.S. Plus, is Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on the same page as President Trump when it comes to North Korea?

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] We continue on. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. There have been many estimates of how much President Trump's border wall could cost, in the neighborhood of $33 billion, but, today, the first tangible idea of exactly how to pay for it came about. A Trump administration official tells CNN the president had been thinking about tapping the Pentagon budget for funding, as in, have the military pay. Here is Press Secretary Sarah Sanders fielding a question on that moments ago.
[Question:] Does he mean that he wants the military to pay for the border wall? Could you speak generally to that?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Again, I'm not going to get into the specifics of that. But I can tell you that the wall is continuing to be built currently, and we are going to keep pushing forward until it's fully completed in the way that the president feels is necessary to defend the country.
[Question:] Isn't it true at this point that Mexico is not going to pay for that wall?
[Huckabee Sanders:] I'm not going to go beyond what the president has already said. I think he still has plans to look at potential ways for that to happen.
[Baldwin:] So, let's start there with our White House reporter, Kaitlan Collins. And apparently that was floated in a meeting that the president had with the House speaker a week ago. Can you tell us more about that conversation and the request?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Yes, Brooke, chanting that the military is going to pay for the wall just doesn't have the same ring to it that Mexico is going to pay for the wall. Obviously, that was a very popular chant at a lot of the president's rallies on the campaign trail before he came into office here. And we know that this is something that the president has been frustrated with, even that was really on display last Friday, as we saw the president threatening to veto that spending bill which he believes didn't include enough funding for his border wall in there, only had a very small amount in response to the $25 billion that the White House had asked for. Obviously, this all comes back to the president being frustrated that Congress didn't give him enough money for the border wall, but all along, the president said Mexico was going to pay for the border wall, though that's seeming less and less likely. And Sarah Sanders was also asked by a separate reporter directly, in what way could Mexico pay for this wall? And she said that they are still looking for options, potential options for that to happen, but not a lot of specifics there, Brooke, and not really a direct answer from the press secretary on whether that's going to happen. But we do we have confirmed that the president has floated the idea of having the military having that come from a military budget in order to pay for that wall, saying that it would be a national security reason. And the White House just didn't seem prepared to answer any questions to follow up on exactly what those specifics would look like. But it's very clearly a strong departure from having Mexico pay for it, which is something that the president certainly ran on, when he ran for office here, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] You are correct. Let's move to a question that she was asked a bunch of different times and ways, including from our own Jeff Zeleny, on Stormy Daniels on how the president is still noticeably silent on commenting on this. And she at one point said, he isn't going to counterpunch on everything. Do we know, Kaitlan, is being told, don't say a word?
[Collins:] He has been advised. He's been asking people, do they think he should publicly respond? He has been told for right now that his friends and his advisers don't think he should wade any further into this in any kind of a public aspect. He certainly has not directly addressed it. But there are three things in that briefing in response to the Stormy Daniels that stood out. One being the counterpuncher thing, because often in the past, when the president has said shocking things, the White House has responded by saying when he gets punched he's going to hit right back. But he hasn't been doing that with Stormy Daniels. And Sarah Sanders said he simply doesn't have time to respond to all of the attacks on him. But this has certainly been one of the biggest. It's really dominated the news headlines in recent weeks. So, it's certainly surprising that the president hasn't said a word about it, when he responds to other very small slights. And then, secondly, Sarah Sanders said that the White House has responded to these accusations extensively and they've gone over them with reporters extensively. And, Brooke, that's just simply not the case. The White House has actually refused to answer a lot of questions relating to these allegations and what the president's thoughts are on these. And the president himself has not addressed it directly either. And then one more thing. When asked about this payout from the president's lawyer, Michael Cohen, to Stormy Daniels, Sarah Sanders repeatedly referred reporters to the president's outside legal team. But, to be clear, that is the White House Press Briefing Room, and the president's outside legal team is not in there briefing reporters. It's the press secretary of the United States who is speaking on behalf of the president. And instead of answering those questions, she referred us to people who don't work in the White House Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Speaking of referring to legal team, Kaitlan Collins, let's talk about this next piece, the president today having issues finding lawyers to join his personal legal team to defend him in the Russia probe. We are learning two more star lawyers have declined to accept the job. That makes at least five law firms to turn him down, this as the president's personal legal team has been reduced to basically one individual. Attorney Jay Sekulow is up against at least 17 lawyers in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. So, let me bring in Solomon Wisenberg. He is the former deputy independent counsel in the Whitewater-Monica Lewinsky investigation. He questioned then President Clinton before of a federal grand jury. Solomon, welcome back.
[Solomon Wisenberg, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Thanks, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] And just on the news that these attorneys, and to name-check them, Tom Buchanan, Dan Webb, the two latest to say no, to pass on an opportunity to work for the president. They're saying it's about a conflict of interest. Do you take them at their word or do you think they simply don't want to work for the president?
[Wisenberg:] Oh, I absolutely take them at their word. First of all, Tom Buchanan, that's Pat's little brother. He is very conservative. He is an outstanding attorney. I know him well. Knew him well back in the day. Dan Webb, another outstanding attorney. They're at a big firm. My God, Winston & Strawn represented tobacco interest for years and didn't think twice about it. I don't think they would have any problem representing the president. I think it must be a conflict of interest. I absolutely take them at their word.
[Baldwin:] OK. You have publicly said part of why, actually, part of why John Dowd, going back to the news from last week, this lead lawyer, quit was over concerns of dealing with a client who won't listen. Can you imagine being asked to help the president when you're dealing with a man who ignores your advice?
[Wisenberg:] Well, I don't believe that I said that's why John Dowd quit.
[Baldwin:] No. I was jumping ahead. Forgive me. That was separate. You didn't say. I'm actually just asking.
[Wisenberg:] OK. Oh, you want me to answer that?
[Baldwin:] Yes, please, sir.
[Wisenberg:] OK. It's not that unusual. The client doesn't have to always follow your advice. You give advice as a lawyer. A client isn't required to follow that. There may be a point in time where you say, you know what? You're just ignoring everything I say and I'm going to quit. But ultimately most many of these decisions are up to the client.
[Baldwin:] OK. And you don't OK. I'm going to leave it there. On the president's personal legal team that exists right now, "The Times" has reported that it's essentially this one-man operation, Jay Sekulow, leading the charge for now. This we're however many months into this Russia investigation. How worrisome does that have to be for the president?
[Wisenberg:] It's worrisome if there isn't really a big team of blue- chip lawyers. And that would include associates helping out. I find it hard to believe there are only two or three lawyers helping out. Ty Cobb came from a big firm, I believe. So I don't know exactly who is in the backroom, but you are unquestionably up against the A-team when you're up against Mueller. And you need to have a commensurate operation to go up against Mueller. I just don't know how much of that is accurate as to how much firepower the White House has.
[Baldwin:] OK. You're questioning how it could just be this one star guy.
[Wisenberg:] I will tell you this. And keep in mind, Sekulow, brilliant constitutional attorney, but not any experience that I'm aware of in federal criminal law. Here is a reason that some Washington firms, my understanding, and I know this to be true in one case, have not responded to inquiries or not accepted offers or inquiries. There are a number of firms in Washington that are ideologically liberal and have made a decision and made a decision early on they don't want to do anything to help this administration. I think that's been discounted. It's not so much, oh, we don't have a client who won't listen to us or we're afraid of what clients won't do. It's people who are saying we don't want to help this president.
[Baldwin:] Sure. Got to believe in your client. If your ideology is not in doesn't jibe, it wouldn't work. Let me ask you, Solomon, about Stormy Daniels' let me play a clip Stormy Daniels' attorney and attorney for Michael Cohen in an unrelated matter sparred right here on CNN about this legal battle of this alleged affair, which, again, the White House is denying the president ever took part in. Watch this.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] Look, it's very simple. My client sat down. She answered the questions; 90 percent of America found her credible. Why hasn't Michael Cohen sat down forget two hours. I will take 20 minutes. How about 10 minutes? And answered the questions. Instead, he sends you. You're not even involved in the case.
[David Schwartz, Michael Cohen's Attorney:] Are you ever going to make an appearance in the case?
[Avenatti:] I am never making an appearance in that case. I am his attorney.
[Schwartz:] You're a talking head.
[Avenatti:] Of course. That's what we're here for.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Let's let him answer that.
[Schwartz:] We're here first of all, Michael Cohen just wants you to keep running your mouth and your client running because every time you do that, it's going to cost your client another million dollars. I mean, I hope you have a nice malpractice policy because you're advising your client to breach a contract.
[Baldwin:] Jeffrey Toobin is in the like, what do I even do? What do I even say? Who do you side with here, Solomon?
[Wisenberg:] Well, I don't know who you side with as a matter of contract law. I can tell you that you have to look at everything in these investigations at the substantive level and at the performance level. And I believe that Stormy Daniels' lawyer is doing a very outstanding job at the performance level. And I do think that the camp, whatever elements of the Trump camp are strategizing on this, you need to be very careful about who you send out to appear in public for you and how they sound, and talking about another million dollars here and another million dollars there. I would just think that needs to be kept in mind.
[Baldwin:] OK. That was a very diplomatic response. I was listening to what you didn't say that was everything.
[Wisenberg:] And can I mention one more thing about ideology?
[Baldwin:] Yes. Sure.
[Wisenberg:] Because you mentioned I don't necessarily think it is the case. This is what is so unusual if some firms are declining for ideological grounds. There are many examples of people who are on different sides of the fence politically who still go for representation to that other side. The top example I can think of is Karl Rove. He was defended in the Plame affair by Bob Luskin, who is a great attorney and who is a Democrat. Look at Jared Kushner being defended by Abbe Lowell, who has been involved in almost every liberal Democratic political case in the history of this town. So it doesn't have to be that way. I just say that people aren't thinking about it enough. There are some people who are very opposed. Some law firms here who have just made a political decision. I don't say whether it is right or wrong. I'm just saying that's what's going on, I think.
[Baldwin:] You are so incredibly plugged in. You know all these players. Solomon, thank you so much for coming on, and we will chat again. Thank you very much.
[Wisenberg:] Thank you.
[Baldwin:] Coming up next you got it a retired Supreme Court justice argues for the full repeal of the Second Amendment, sparking a major backlash online. We will debate that. Also, no state charges against the police officers who shot and killed Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, two summers ago. His aunt joins me live to talk about what they plan to do next. And, later, this mysterious train pulls into Beijing. Was the leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-un, on board? Details on his movements ahead of possible talks with the and U.S. South Korea. I'm Brooke Baldwin. This is CNN.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Federal authorities say the Las Vegas killer bought 33 weapons in the last year alone, but the repeated gun purchases did not sound any alarm bells. CNN's Jessica Schneider takes a closer look at why.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] Law enforcement sources say Stephen Paddock amassed 33 guns just in the past year. Many of those 33 may have been stockpiled inside his Mandalay Bay hotel suite where he orchestrated a shooting massacre. The spray of bullets lasted nine to 11 minutes, killing 58 country music concertgoers. Inside the suite, investigators counted 23 weapons.
[Unidentified Female:] It is still being determined which firearms were used in the shooting.
[Schneider:] Twelve of the weapons inside Paddock's room were equipped with bump fire stocks, a device demonstrated in this YouTube video. It allows the weapon to fire in rapid succession simulating fully automatic fire. A bump fire stock is legal and easy to obtain.
[Sam Rabadi, Former Special Agent In Charge, Atf:] Very easy. It can be purchased directly from the company or in different online sales from a number of vendors.
[Schneider:] Investigators have uncovered 47 firearms so far, 23 from inside Paddock's hotel room and another 24 from his homes in Mesquite and Verdi, Nevada. Law enforcement sources say Paddock has been accumulating his collection of weapons for the past 20 years. The sales apparently never raised any red flags since Paddock had no criminal history. And out west, the possession of large quantities of firearms by hunters and collectors isn't uncommon.
[Rabadi:] There are states in the country where there's a lot of hunting that goes on and outdoor activities. There are also areas where you have a higher population of collectors. So the purchase of that many firearms, in and of itself, would not necessarily be an indicator for us.
[Schneider:] Rabadi estimates Paddock's arsenal cost tens of thousands of dollars, with some weapons costing two to four thousand dollars each. Paddock purchased his guns in four separate states Nevada, Utah, California, and Texas, according to the ATF, frequenting shops in Nevada. He bought several long guns at Cabela's in Verdi, according to a law enforcement source. In Las Vegas, he bought a shotgun and a rifle from the New Frontier gun shop, and two rifles and one handgun from Discount Firearms & Ammo in November and December of 2016. In Mesquite, Paddock purchased a handgun and two rifles from Guns & Guitars within the past year. And the owner of Dixie GunWorx in St. George, Utah sold Paddock a shotgun.
[Chris Michael, Owner, Dixie Gunworx:] He passed all of our background checks here in the store. He passed every red flag that could have popped up. But it's still it's still there. It's still something that I'm still going what else could I have done better.
[Schneider:] There is no national registry of firearm ownership in the United States so even though Paddock acquired 33 guns in the span of one year, since they were from different locations and he presumably passed background checks, no red flags were ever raised, enabling Paddock to carry out his horrific attack. Jessica Schneider, CNN, Washington.
[Camerota:] OK. Joining us now is retired ATF special agent Sam Rabadi. Mr. Rabadi, thanks so much for being here. So obviously, we're getting this crash course in all of the things that feel like there's some sort of loophole in the law or that at least should be looked at. The idea that this guy could buy 33 guns in the space of one year, do you think that that should have raised some red flag and that there should be some system in place to alert someone to purchases like that?
[Rabadi:] So, there are a number of restrictions per federal law in terms of being able to maintain information about gun purchases, as was mentioned in just the previous piece here. There is no federal or national registry of firearms purchases. The only thing that ATF is able to maintain is information about a purchaser when that gun is recovered in a crime. In this particular case none of the guns, as far as I know, that were purchased by Paddock were recovered in any kind of crimes. There were no other indicators from these purchases that had come to ATF's attention
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rabadi:] that would sort of peak our interest to be able to take a closer look.
[Camerota:] Yes. Would it help the ATF fight crime if there were a federal registry of gun purchases?
[Rabadi:] Well, certainly, if something like that existed it would aid all of law enforcement to be able to look at information about a purchaser, especially when there are multiple firearms that are being purchased
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rabadi:] and being recovered in crimes. But the way the law is right now there is a very strict prohibition against doing that.
[Camerota:] Let's talk about the bump stocks. When you and I first spoke on Tuesday in the, you know, hours when people were still piecing together what had happened, that's when you first started basically explaining to so many of us who didn't know that these bumps stocks that can turn a semiautomatic rifle into an automatic weapon. That they are legal to buy and readily available and inexpensive. As a law enforcement officer for so many years, as you were, do you think those devices should be illegal?
[Rabadi:] So, even though this particular accessory is legal, I find my own personal opinion very, very few, if any, uses legitimate uses for this type of accessory. It would never really be used during hunting. It's just the gun could be pretty inaccurate difficult to maintain control of because of the use of the accessory. It would not really be used for target practice. The only legitimate use, as has been discussed the last couple of days, is more of the thrill of being able to shoot a machine gun-type of rifle. That's pretty much the only legitimate use I could see. As a law enforcement officer, as I mentioned the last couple of days, you know, the last thing I would ever want to see is this kind of device attached to a long gun that a law enforcement officer has to go up against.
[Camerota:] Right.
[Rabadi:] It's pretty scary.
[Camerota:] I mean, that is what we saw. That is what allowed this gunman to mow down 58 people and injure close to 500 in the space of 10 minutes. And the idea that he could do it inexpensively and easily online And I have other bad news for people. The sales of the bump stock have spiked, obviously, since Tuesday.
[Rabadi:] Yes.
[Camerota:] Not surprising. Talking about it then heightened interest in it and so now, one of the manufacturers of it is sold out of the bump stocks. So, as a law enforcement officer I mean, again, you devoted your life for, I think, 26 years to this would you call on Congress to ban this device of the bump stock?
[Rabadi:] Absolutely. Congress has the ability and obviously, the authority to make changes to the law that addresses these types of accessories. I'm not surprised to hear that sales have been increased with this type of device. I would even argue prior to a couple of days ago the vast majority of America, to include a number of law enforcement officers, didn't even know that this type of accessory existed. Congress not only has the ability but should go ahead and make adjustments and amendments to the law related to machine guns.
[Camerota:] I'm just trying to figure out its history. Did the ATF the organization, of course, that you worked for did it approve the sale of these bump stocks a couple of years ago?
[Rabadi:] It approved yes, it approved the use and the sale of these items, specifically because of the legal language within the law. This particular accessory because of the technical nature of the law, does not fit within the definition of a machine gun.
[Camerota:] Right. But, I mean, wasn't that how did the ATF let that one slip by? I mean, why would the ATF approve the sale of something like this?
[Rabadi:] Again, Alisyn, because when ATF is looking at these types of accessories or any other type of items that fall under the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act, we have to stick to the letter of the law. What's written in there, the technical language, the definitions, that's our guiding principle. We go exactly according to the law. That's why I just mentioned that it's really up to Congress
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rabadi:] to provide the right common sense kind of language within these laws and allow agencies such as ATF to enforce those laws.
[Camerota:] Look, so many people thought that after the tragedy in Newtown at Sandy Hook where so many little kids were killed, that there would be some common sense proposals. But, as you know, that got mired in all sorts of Congressional infighting and partisanship. Do you think that what we saw this week, the tragedy in Las Vegas do you think that again, something incremental like what you're calling for the bump stock to be banned do you think that there will be some sort of action in Congress?
[Rabadi:] Alisyn, I certainly hope so. You know, I think if you polled any law enforcement officer, regardless of political affiliation, they would all tell you that we need to somewhere be within the middle ground. There are plenty of common sense actions that can be taken to not only, you know, have law enforcement feel safer doing their jobs and what we're up against on the street, but all of our citizens. We're not asking for major, massive revisions to some of the laws, but just some of the common sense stuff that you and I can both look at and come to an agreement and say you know what, something like this will definitely allow us to do our jobs better and make us safer.
[Camerota:] Sam Rabadi, thanks. We appreciate your expertise and experience in this field. Thanks so much.
[Rabadi:] Thank you, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Let's get to Chris in Washington.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] All right. President Trump says now is not the time to talk about gun control. When is the time to talk about it, if ever? Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway is going to join us live, next.

[Casarez:] Welcome back. Kirk Nurmi, as the lead defense attorney for Jodi Arias, and we got 20 seconds, what is the advice that you have at this point for Watts defense team?
[Nurmi:] I would say that they should focus on the trial in the courtroom, not in the court of public opinion. And they should do everything they can to find moments of is serenity in their lives as this goes forward because the stress can, in fact, kill you.
[Jean Casarez, Hln:] That`s really good advice. All right. Thank you so much to all of our guests. The next hour of Crime and Justice starts right now.
[Ashleigh Banfield, Crime And Justice:] His story is, they died at the hands of their mother, and that had to be after 2:00 a.m. Monday.
[Joseph Scott Morgan, Forensic Professor, Jacksonville State University:] Within the stomach itself, that moment is frozen in time. Time is of the essence here.
[Banfield:] Tonight, big new possibilities in the case of the Colorado family man.
[Unidentified Female:] He`s a cheater.
[Banfield:] Accused of murdering his pregnant wife and daughters.
[Chris Watt, Accused Of Killing Wife, Children:] We had an emotional conversation, but I`ll leave it at that.
[Banfield:] Is there evidence their deaths were premeditated? Computers and phones and bedding and evidence tying watts to both crime scenes.
[Unidentified Male:] The bed sheet matched a set found in Chris Watts` kitchen trash can. What`s the origin of these hairs in the truck?
[Banfield:] And was there a different plan for getting rid of the bodies.
[Pat Lalama, Crime Journalist:] This is a man who may have severe emotional issues and he wanted to be completely unencumbered and that would take some planning.
[Casarez:] Good evening. I`m Jean Casarez in for Ashleigh Banfield. Thank you so much for joining us. This is Crime and Justice. It`s the case of Chris Watts. And it`s coming down to he said, she said or rather, he said, they said with Chris saying his wife killed both their daughters. And the police saying Chris killed all three of them. Police say he dumped their bodies at his worksite, before telling everyone his family was simply missing.
[Watts:] She wasn`t here, the kids weren`t here, nobody was here. No, I wasn`t going to kiss them to bed tonight. It was that`s why I left and it was just horrible.
[Casarez:] But now, the details from both crime scenes are starting to emerge, and according to explosive reporting from People Magazine there might just be evidence that Chris killed his little girls as well as his wife Shanann, and had it all planned out in advance. My panelist with me, but I do want to start with crime journalist Pat Lalama. Pat, we have just gotten some brand new documents from the court. And we don`t get them very often.
[Lalama:] I know.
[Casarez:] They are riveting in nature, in the fact that number one, the defense is asking that the prosecutors office launch an investigation into what they say are leaks from the prosecutor`s office. So we`re saying leaks. What are the leaks? Well People Magazine has just come out with riveting reporting.
[Lalama:] Right.
[Casarez:] And sources they say are close to the case.
[Lalama:] Right.
[Casarez:] What is People Magazine saying that it looks like the defense is something such an issue with?
[Lalama:] Well there`s a lot of evidentiary information as you know the story about hundreds of hairs being found inside Chris Watts` truck which is going to be significant one way or the other. Talking about we believe more and more that this was premeditated. But here`s the thing Jean, if I just got the documents too, and I was zipping through them, about 30 seconds before air time. I`m gleaning from that that the leaks look more at least from the prosecutor`s perspective. The leaks are not from them, if there are leaks, they acknowledge that somebody`s acknowledging they could come from the police department which begs the question, then who the heck is going to pay for any investigation. And I think that`s where they`re at a log jam right now, where are the leaks coming from, and who`s responsible for finding that out?
[Casarez:] And the prosecutors say that in the response, saying, who`s going to pay for all this?
[Lalama:] Yes.
[Casarez:] But what people magazines says Pat Lalama and you can go into this is that there is evidence that in was me meditation
[Lalama:] Right.
[Casarez:] For the deaths or murders of these three people.
[Lalama:] Well, you know, that`s rather and you know this being a lawyer Jean. It`s a vague statement. I mean what are the specifics? He told someone a week before? Hey, I`m getting rid of my family or is there some evidence on a computer. Is there evidence in a text message? Because shockingly, he didn`t, according to these leaks in People Magazine, didn`t delete anything. So I think it`s safe to say the police know a lot of things we don`t know that D.A. and prosecutors or prosecutors or defense know things we don`t know that is leading in that making them line in that direction.
[Casarez:] Tom Verni, you are a former NYPD Detective Law Enforcement Consultant. And there`s a lot of information here that if you put this together, paves a story. First of all, he is charged right now, with first degree murder not second degree, not manslaughter. But first degree murder which includes that premeditated murder.
[Tom Verni, Former Nypd Detective Law Enforcement:] Right.
[Casarez:] And the source that is cited in the People Magazine article saying that there has been so much evidence collected to date, including computers, all electronic devices, and that text messages and searches were not deleted. What does that tell you?
[Tom Verni, Nypd Detective Law Enforcement Consultant:] Yes. Well, either that he was very sloppy in what he was doing. You know and it`s great that they have so much overwhelming evidence because you know here you have someone who just this whole case is just disgusting to me. It`s I feel so awful for the family, and my condolences to the family. I mean these pour young children and his lovely wife. I mean here we have a troubled individual that saying that he`s snapped. I mean, clearly he snapped, but he clearly took steps to go about this in a very methodical manner, based on what we know already. And all the facts and evidence haven`t even come out yet. But based on what we know, he killed them and brought them to a different location to hide them. So Jean, that in upon itself is digging himself even deeper in this hole.
[Casarez:] Right. And prosecutors will mostly likely say he didn`t snap. He was methodical. He premeditated this.
[Verni:] Right.
[Casarez:] And when you think about computer searches and you think about Casey Anthony comes to mind.
[Verni:] Right, right. Exactly. Yes.
[Casarez:] And was searches for chloroform, right? That were found at very high levels found in that car. I mean the searches, can they show police which goes to prosecutor`s premeditation?
[Verni:] Well yes, anything he did, whether again the previous discussion you`re talking about whether it was text messages of some sort, whether he did the online search on you know how to kill somebody and what to buy, you know, when you`re killing somebody. If he went to home depot and brought you know tape and duck tape and straps and shovel and lime. Yes, I mean, there`s a lot of different pieces of this puzzle that are being put together by investigators already. And I don`t I don`t think they`re at the bottom of the facts and evidence. That`s on top of all the forensic evidence think have on him you know, in regards to this case.
[Casarez:] Eric Johnson, Defense Attorney joining us tonight. I want to ask you. This is a novel move by the defense to call for and asked for an investigation into where the leaks are because virtually, there haven`t leaks. I mean there`s was so much information we don`t know. But this is the first window through that People Magazine article to show that they may have evidence of that premeditation of three separate murders. How much success will they have in asking for an investigation of where the leaks are?
[Eric Johnson Defense Attorney:] Well I think it`s going to be very important in this matter because if exactly what we`re talking about here. We have a situation where they`re saying there`s premeditation, however, they`re based on entirely assumptions. We don`t know what is in his e-mails. We don`t know what is in his texts. And it could be situation that those things may evidence his infidelity, which is the state has been trying to use as a reason that he will commit these crimes. However, that is something else. And that does not dispute his allegation that he may have snapped. So by this information getting out, that does in some way possibly contaminate the jury in them thinking that this was premeditation. And this and to go against his possibility of his business as being something where there`s was a heat of passion.
[Casarez:] You know Chris one of the bigger challenges potentially for this department in the short term are all of the interviews he did. He did three different media interviews. And he really painted his defense. It puts him in a corner because he has said what the defense is going to be. That was actually in the affidavit. But in the interviews that he did we want to show everyone, this is from K.U.S.A. And we haven`t heard this before, this is brand new that he said to an affiliate in the Denver area. But he said, in regard to the backyard. He said, were all the doors around the house locked? That`s the reporter. Well he says, well, the front doors were locked. Watt says the garage door was unlocked. But that`s normal, for when she comes into the house and she leaves it unlocked. But the back door, sliding door, well that was locked as well, so then the reporter says, well, how would she have left the house? Because remember, Watts said she was gone. She was missing so this right very near beginning. How would she have left the house if she did leave the house? Then Watts says and try to keep with this. I don`t want to put anything out there, like suspecting if somebody pulled her in the back because we have a driveway back there from the new town homes but it`s so hard to tell. There`re no cameras in the backyard or anything like that so it`s really hard to suspect anything right now as far as how she could have left or if someone came and picked her up or someone took her. What? That is the affiliate K.U.S.A. It is not an affiliate. It is K.U.S.A. television. But we are reading that. They are allowing us to do that. I want to ask you right here Tom. I mean he went into all of this, is he trying to paint an abduction at that point?
[Verni:] It sure sounds like it. I mean but again everything that has come out since then is kind of everything comes back to him. It`s actually the fact that he said that he did.
[Casarez:] Yes.
[Verni:] So, you know, just at face value, we`re talking about a guy that admitted that he killed his wife. So it`s just everything so far circumstantial evidence and even the forensic evidence is coming back to him. There`s no one else that would be involved in this, as far as we can tell. And there`s no reason anyone else would be involved in this, other than him.
[Casarez:] Right, so let`s listen to his own voice right now, all right? He talks about, if somebody has her, and this is an interview he did with a local affiliate.
[Unidentified Male:] You think she just took off?
[Watts:] I mean right now, I don`t even want to throw anything out there like I hope she`s somewhere safe right now and with the kids. But I mean could she have just taken off? I don`t know, but if somebody has her and they`re not safe like I want them back now if they are safe, they`re coming back. But if they`re not, this has got to stop like somebody has to come forward.
[Casarez:] All right, Eric Johnson, as a defense attorney, this is very difficult when there`s something come into the courtroom during trial because it is a statement against his interest when it comes out that he said they didn`t go anywhere. No one abduct her. She didn`t got missing. But he snapped after she saw that she was killing the children.
[Johnson:] Yes, well, if you look at it. I mean you have two separate things that you have to look at, the commission of the mentioned crime of murder, and the action that he took to cover it up. So, therefore, because there was a crime committed, the fact that he may have taken some acts to cover it up does not oppose to the question of whether or not this is first degree murder as he`s going to be charged or second degree murder as he is claiming, based on his assertion that he snapped. So the fact is we do know that she is dead. And that he may it`s easy for the state to tie into the fact that he may be involved with the cover-up. And the cover-up itself shows and possibly disapproves the premeditation for multiple factors, his statement and the fact that he does not have what is perceived to be rehearsed answer to the cops. He`s speculating. He`s throwing things out there. He`s very unsure of himself. Also, the fact that her personal information we`re recovered. If this was premeditated information he would have done something with her purse. He would have done something with her credit cards. He would have done something with her telephone. And also, the fact that this was done at his job would be the first place they would look, shows that there was not a high deal of planning. Its shows that the mother was found simply buried and the kids because they were small were found in an oil drum. So that is something he conveniently disposed of in a location that he thought the people would not reach. It does not show a high degree of premeditation, and does not disprove his position.
[Casarez:] All right. Well I know we have to separate out the alleged murder from the covering up and the tampering with a corpse. But Pat Lalama, your thoughts?
[Lalama:] OK. Well your guest makes great points. And there`s no doubt that, you know, going back to the police issue leaking can prejudice the defendant the right to due process. But and it`s not up to me to convict this guy. But everything he says when he opens his mouth is painting himself. You talk about painting a kidnapping. I say he`s painting himself into a corner. He`s not that bright, sir. He`s not that bright. He thinks he`s bright. He`s one of those guys who says, I can talk my way out of this. You know I`m good looking. I`m this family man. He thinks. He`s like Scott Peterson. He`s like Drew Peterson. And he`s like Casey Anthony. He thinks he`s got that thing that he can ramble on and make some sense. And he`s not that bright and I would venture to guess that maybe he`s a little off his rocker.
[Johnson:] Well then it`s also safe to say by your claim of him having lack of higher intelligence that would also disprove the premeditation in this point. If you have somebody
[Lalama:] Not necessarily. Dumb people premeditate all the time. Sorry. I mean I don`t think it takes intelligence and in fact, most idiots get caught when they premeditate, you know, a murder. But it just it doesn`t make sense to me oh, I just snapped. Here`s a man with a history of financial problems. He is a cheater. He allegedly has some sort of sexual identity issues. I mean I`m not a psychologist. But I think were going to find it. This man as I said before and I`ll say it until the cows come home did not he wanted to be unincumbered. He didn`t want any responsibilities and like Scott Peterson in my mind decided I`m going to throw the baby well that`s a bad pun. I`m going to get rid of them all so I don`t have to think about it.
[Casarez:] But he did do three interviews. He was searching for his wife.
[Lalama:] Yes, because he`s stupid.
[Casarez:] He said that with a straight face.
[Lalama:] He`s stupid.
[Casarez:] And the fact is, like 24 hours after this interview, he`s going to confess that they didn`t go anywhere. That they were all in the house and yes he gives a story that may or not be true. We don`t know. He`s got the presumption of innocence at this point. There will be a defense.
[Lalama:] True.
[Casarez:] But the fact is, once the trial gets going, all of this can be played for the jury, and it shows someone isn`t telling the truth right there.
[Lalama:] Exactly my point.
[Casarez:] In all of those interviews.
[Johnson:] But in every but every crime, you have very few immediate confessions. So therefore, the fact that there was an attempted cover- up, the fact that there was a lie that was told is normally regular behavior in these circumstances. Nobody really confesses at the first time so therefore
[Lalama:] My friend, my friend me, excuse me. My wife was killing the babies. I saw it in the monitor. That like he`s thinking far ahead and that`s a figure OK, I`m not going to get away with OK she just disappeared. So OK let me think. Oh yes, I saw my children being killed, that`s a good one. I mean he`s no rocket scientist, OK?
[Casarez:] Right, we`re going to continue this after the break, what Pat was saying, he was very detailed in what he told police on that Wednesday 24 hours after those interviews right there. All right after the break, Chris Watts has only made one court appearance so far. But what will it be like to try and defend him. And what are the challenges for his attorneys in such a high profile case. Believe it or not, we have an attorney with us tonight. Kurt Nurmi. You know him. Jodi Arias` lead defense attorney about what Chris Watts` defense team can expect. That`s next.

[Vause:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause. We'll check the headlines this hour. Negotiators from the U.S. and North Korea are working to refine the on-again, off-again summit between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un. Talks have been taking place in the Korean Demilitarized Zone as well as in Singapore where the summit is scheduled for June 12. Italy
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] Nearly 1,500 children falling through the cracks of a broken immigration system, raising questions about Attorney General Jeff Sessions new zero-tolerance policy that leads to separating more children from their parents and placing them in the custody of the United States government.
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] If you are smuggling a child then we will prosecute you. And that child maybe separated from you as required by law.
[Flores:] The Department of Health and Human Services publicly admitting last month that it had checked on 7,600 kids placed in sponsor homes and couldn't account for about 1,500.
[Senator Heidi Heitkamp , North Dakota:] We're failing. I don't think there's any doubt about it. You are the worst foster parents in the world. You don't even know where they are.
[Flores:] And the agency acknowledging it's not even trying to find where the kids are.
[Senator James Lankford , Oklahoma:] We now have a child somewhere in the country that didn't appear in the court record and is not in their spot that we thought they were. Is there a pursuit trying to ferret where they are or what happens next?
[Unidentified Male:] There is not a pursuit.
[Flores:] Rick Santorum counterpointing the concern for the children expressed by senators on both sides of the aisle and suggested its sponsors failing to follow up with HHS does not mean the children are in danger. Rick Santorum, former Republican senator: The idea that they're quote, "lost", I think is an overestimate is hyperbole to try to create an issue. I don't really think there is one. The findings from a 2016 Senate subcommittee report show the problem is it's partisan. That even during the Obama administration more oversight was needed. The reports say HHS'policies and procedures are inadequate to protect the children in the agency's care. So much so the report found that the children were placed in the hands of human traffickers. Like this case from 2014 in which a number of immigrants were forced to work at an egg farm in Ohio for up to 12 hours a day, six to seven days a week and in inhumane conditions and without pay. And even though federal officials say that legally, they don't need to find these children, they don't need to track them down and make sure that they're not in dangerous conditions, senators both Republican and Democrat raised the question does the United States have the moral responsibility to make sure that these children are not in danger? Rosa Flores, CNN San Antonio Texas.
[Vause:] The deputy secretary of Health and Human Services says the reports of lost children are misleading; that their sponsors simply had not responded to follow-up calls from the department. The U.S. embassy in Nicaragua will be closed Tuesday in anticipation of more demonstrations. Protesters are demanding President Daniel Ortega step down and it appears he's losing support from the Catholic Church as well as the private sector. At least 77 people have reportedly been killed in these demonstrations which began last month after changes to social welfare. Coming up on Wednesday, CNN's Nick Paton Walsh has an exclusive report on an elite gang-fighting police squad in El Salvador which includes former members of a controversial unit alleged to have acted as a death squad. Here's a look.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Correspondent:] It's an undeclared war here in El Salvador elite police against MS-13, a gang menace that beheads, rapes, and terrorizes. And it's America's war, too because President Trump has declared MS-13 "animals" that must be eliminated. And these men are fighting with U.S. money and help. We're headed now to one of the scenes of the more prominent killings
[Vause:] Tune in Wednesday for the rest of Nick's report showing 5:00 a.m. in London and noon in Hong Kong. Well, Alberto has been downgraded to a subtropical depression but it's already claimed the lives of two journalists. We'll have details on that in just moment.

[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Revenge is best served cold. He has some scores to settle here.
[Phil Mudd, Cnn Counterterrorism Analyst:] If I were the FBI director, I would have said stick with the facts.
[Unidentified Male:] I have every confidence that Jim Comey is accurately telling what exactly went on.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] The White House is preparing an argument for why Rod Rosenstein should be recused.
[Unidentified Male:] Firing Rod Rosenstein is akin to firing Bob Mueller. Michael Cohen often recorded his conversations.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] It's a gold mine for investigators.
[Unidentified Male:] I believe there was a chemical attack.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] We are looking very, very seriously, very closely at that action.
[Unidentified Male:] The president has the authority to act without first coming to the Congress.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is your NEW DAY. It is Friday, April 13. Friday the 13th.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you for that warning.
[Cuomo:] Let me tell you, we're going to play on that theme a little bit this morning here at 6 p.m. Our starting line, the Comey-Trump war is now in full effect. Fired FBI Director Jim Comey is tell-all book is leaking out. Comey portrays the president is unethical, untethered to the truth. He compares Mr. Trump to a Mafia boss who demands loyalty and slamming what he calls the forest fire that is the Trump presidency. Now, Comey's account is very personal. And you're going to see things in this book that are unusual here from a former official at his level. There's a lot of revenge in this book, as well as telling his side of the story in terms of a factual account. Comey also writes about the president's fixation with having the FBI disprove one of the most salacious details in the infamous Russia dossier. How will the president respond to these revelations. Here's what we know. He is going to respond. And might this change his cooperation with Robert Mueller's investigation? I'm getting a little choked up.
[Camerota:] I know you are.
[Cuomo:] Part of it is my breakfast that got caught eating. The other part is the emotional impact.
[Camerota:] Glad you revealed that. I did think you were cutting it a little close with the scrambled eggs today.
[Cuomo:] Yes. You should have told me that.
[Camerota:] I should have. Meanwhile, sources say the White House is preparing to plan to undermine Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to make the case that he is too conflicted to oversee Mueller's probe. What exactly will they do? Also, President Trump's secretary of state nominee, Mike Pompeo, may fall short of the votes that he needs to advance to a vote on the Senate floor. So there are several crises facing the Trump administration. What will they do to get Pompeo confirmed? Let's begin our coverage with CNN's Abby Phillip. She is live at the White House. Another busy day, Abby.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right. There's so much to get to this morning, Alisyn. Already, days before Comey's book is even released, it's already making waves in Washington in part because of the stunning rebuke of President Trump's presidency. Comey characterizes him as a liar and as someone who is unconcerned with Russia's threat to American democracy. Fired FBI director James Comey's takedown of President Trump is nothing short of extraordinary. Comey revealing explosive details about the forest fire that is the Trump presidency. Comey paints the president as a compulsive liar, devoid of human emotion, "unethical, and untethered to truth and constitutional values. His leadership is transactional, ego-driven and about personal loyalty." Comey recalls his first-time meeting the president-elect at an intelligence briefing at Trump Tower just days before he was sworn in. After briefing him on Russia's meddling in the 2016 election, Comey writes, "Mr. Trump had this question": "You found out there was no impact on the result, right?" "The Washington Post" reports that Comey reveals in the book that he was surprised that Mr. Trump did not seem interested in Russia's threat to America but instead focused on how they could spin what he had just told them. The former prosecutor comparing the president's leadership style to that of a mob boss. "The silent circle of ascent. The boss in complete control. The loyalty oaths. The us-versus-them worldview. The lying about all things, large and small, in service to some code of loyalty that put the organization above morality and above the truth."
[Phillip:] And Comey also talks in this book about his reactions with President Trump at a private dinner that he had in which the president apparently asked him for loyalty. And here's what he wrote: "I was determined not to give the president any hint of assent to this demand so I gave silence instead. I stared at the soft white pouches under his expressionless blue eyes. I remember thinking in that moment that the president doesn't understand the FBI's role in American life." Comey also talked a little bit about the back and forth with President Trump over this dossier, the unconfirmed dossier. Some of the allegations in that dossier were so outrageous even to the president that he kept repeatedly asking Comey about them. And even at one point, Comey says, considered asking him to investigate it. But here's why Comey the president was so concerned about it, according to Comey. "It bothered him if there was even 1 percent chance his wife Melania thought it was true. He just rolled on, unprompted, explaining why it couldn't possibly be true, ending by saying he was thinking of asking me to investigate the allegation to prove it was a lie. I said it was up to him." As far as we know, the president didn't direct Comey to investigate one of the more salacious elements of that dossier, which is involves pee. That's all I'm going to say about it. But the point is that Comey is really detailing some of the most private moments with President Trump and also detailing a man who was obsessed with this Russia investigation; but not because of the impact that it would have on American democracy but rather the impact that it would have on his reputation Alisyn and Chris.
[Camerota:] Abby, there are some moments they don't teach you in journalism school. And I think you might have just encountered one.
[Cuomo:] But it's OK. Even knows what you're talking about, Ab. Don't worry about that. All right. Let's discuss the impact with CNN political analysts John Avlon and David Gregory. Brother Gregory, a little bit of Danielle Steele coming at us there with the white pouches under the expressionless blue eyes. A little bit of a bodice ripper. What jumps out at you about what we understand to be in this book so far?
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, the timing is what jumps out at me. We know this story line. We know the back and forth between, you know, these two players, the president and Jim Comey, who is going to be heavily criticized, as he was by Democrats and Republicans later. But Democrats at the time of the election, for how he intervened in this e-mail investigation and tried to manage his media profile and that of the FBI's in a way that was deservedly criticized. But so we know this back and forth. But I think the timing of it now, at this crescendo moment in the Mueller investigation, with the president, you know, making threats about firing the assistant attorney general, I think speaks to one of the most troubling aspects of this presidency. And that is that President Trump does not seem to respect the rule of law or the institutions of law enforcement in our government or our intelligence agencies. And that is a huge problem. What Comey puts out there again is the fact that, when the facts of the Russia meddling became known, without suggesting that it impacted the result of the election, the president didn't seem to care about what the threat was, what the future of the threat was. We have to keep coming back to that. And even the president's defenders have to give room to say, "Why doesn't he seem to care about a major threat to this institution?" These folks in law enforcement, from the attorney general to his head of the FBI, they believe in the rule of law. They're going to run this stuff down. They do care about that stuff no matter who appointed them. And the president seems not to care.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] He is concerned about questions about illegitimacy in his election. That seems to be the context in which he cares. But that speaks to, I think, what Comey the story Comey is telling is a president who's untruthful and doesn't seem to care about institutions or acknowledge them. Especially the institution of the presidency. Which is a sacred trust with American history and the American people and that you should care about, you know, things of national interest that don't affect you or maybe even reflect badly upon you. What's startling to me about this is this isn't just the timing, though I think it's fascinating. It is coming out as the Mueller investigation reaches a crescendo, as he says, but the fact that Comey brings to bear his lifetime, professional lifetime of experience in investigating in particularly the mafia and the New York mob. And the parallels he sees in the culture surrounding this president and things he saw at the Ravenite Social Club in the 1980s and '90s in New York. That's fascinating.
[Camerota:] Maybe we should maybe it's worth reading that passage again for people. Here it is. "Flashbacks to my earlier career as a prosecutor against the mob. The silent circle of assent. The boss in complete control. The loyalty oaths. The us-versus-them worldview. The lying about all things, large and small, in service to some code of loyalty that put the organization above morality and above the truth."
[Avlon:] And again, this is not coming from a partisan Democrat taking cheap shots. This is somebody who's always tried to hold himself above politics.
[Camerota:] Yes. But it is coming from somebody who has a score to settle.
[Avlon:] No question about it.
[Camerota:] Let me just say one thing. I think this is really important. The cascade of events that happened because James Comey was fired, OK? We've talked about this in terms of the Robert Mueller investigation. Also this book. I mean, this book would never have been written
[Avlon:] Of course not.
[Camerota:] had he not been fired.
[Avlon:] This is why people were warning the president not to fire Comey, because it would set off a series of things. But nonetheless, you have to look at Comey's record. He is a lifelong Republican, Republican appointee; served presidents of both parties honorably in different roles in the justice and the FBI. So there is real moral authority. So you can't simply dismiss him or the RNC trying to cheaply go after him with sort of frat boy humor. This is someone whose career has gravitas and you can't dismiss as a partisan.
[Gregory: I -- Cuomo:] Go ahead, David, please.
[Gregory:] I agree I agree with that. But we do have to step back and say that Comey got himself into a lot of trouble because of self- inflicted wounds. He tried to manage this e-mail investigation and making certain parts of it public for his own kind of political and media stature under the guise of protecting the FBI. He didn't have to do what he did. It was unprecedented that he shared both things that he thought would be you know, that Clinton people thought were good for them, as well as stuff that was bad for them. He didn't have to do either of those things. It doesn't mean he should have been fired. And let's remember: he was fired because the president didn't like how the investigation was going.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Gregory:] That's a huge problem. That's what still holds true. And you know, this business of this kind of mob boss mentality that this president has, let's remember as we question some of the events of the past couple of days, how the FBI is going in and seizing records from his lawyer and how unusual that is. It's also unusual to have a fixer as a lawyer do these outlandish things that nobody believes: making $130,000 payment to a porn star and recording these conversations. This is what FBI and Justice Department officials do. They do prosecute people for bank fraud, for wire fraud. They do that stuff, in part, to make a larger case, perhaps, or just because of those crimes in and of themselves. And so the president and his people can carp about it, but Comey and all these people represent law and order in the country, which is worth standing up for.
[Cuomo:] Well, that's going to be the open question about this book, though, is whether or not it's about light or it's about heat. I have never seen haven't read a ton of these types of books. But this man, with his type of stature, John, there's a lot of pettiness in this book. There's a lot of open revenge in this book.
[Camerota:] Should we read some?
[Cuomo:] Yes. And we do have to remember, Jim Comey did something that the FBI never does.
[Gregory:] Never does.
[Cuomo:] I mean, I've been working on cases with them for almost 20 years now. And they frustrate you with the "We can't confirm or deny. We can't tell you." Nothing ever ends. He came out in this. People believed it was self-serving. He's got enemies on both sides. In this book, it will be interesting to see how much who it really hurts and who it really helps.
[Camerota:] In terms of the more frivolous, I guess, if you want to call it, or as you said, tawdry stuff, do you want to talk about the appearance? Is that what you want to hear about?
[Cuomo:] Me personally? I don't want to hear about any of it. But go ahead, because it's going to get a lot of headlines. That, the pee- pee tape, that's going to get a lot of headlines.
[Camerota:] Here OK.
[Gregory:] That happened. That just happened.
[Cuomo:] It's going to happen. I mean, it says something about, you know, the culture, writ large. And I guarantee you that these clips, the ones you're going to read right now and the one about that tape are going to be the big sell on this book going into it. That tells you something, too.
[Camerota:] Maybe. But I mean, I do think that, to your point, this shows that it is James Comey sort of lowering himself when he talks about the president's appearance, who it is.
[Cuomo:] Go ahead. Go ahead.
[Camerota:] This is James Comey's impression of Donald Trump: "His face appeared slightly orange," Comey writes, "with white bright half moons under his eyes, where I assumed he placed small tanning goggles, and impressively coiffed bright blonde hair, which upon close inspection looked to be all his."
[Avlon:] There's a compliment right there.
[Camerota:] OK.
[Cuomo:] First of all, he's got unique perspective, because he's like 6'8", 6'9". So he's
[Avlon:] Look, you can call this petty. And you can say it's evidence of his observational skills developed as an FBI agent. And it's also not terrible writing. He is describing the president as he has seen up close. And I don't think there's anything petty, necessarily, about describing what somebody looks like.
[Cuomo:] That's what you want to hear from the former head of the FBI? Is his depiction of the president
[Avlon:] Among other things, absolutely. Sure, why not? Look, if there's an eye for detail that not every, you know, government bureaucrat or even author would have. So I don't think it's illegitimate. I'm not sure that, really, this is the great scandal of the book.
[Cuomo:] No, no, I hear you. It does set a tone. Go ahead, David.
[Gregory:] It's an editor it's an editor and an excellent writer like a John Avlon, saying, "Hey, Mr. Comey, can you take us in the room? Can you use precise descriptive language to kind of take us into the room that would help the narrative here?"
[Camerota:] Definitely. I heard an editor all over that moment.
[Cuomo:] Right. But you've got to remember who your author is. That's all I'm saying, is you know, you read the books, you know, from the big-shot generals and the big-shot politicians who are in. It's not the kind of recountance you're used to seeing.
[Avlon:] In very few of these post-administration memoirs is the blood this bad. Right? I mean, this is an FBI director who was fired, who's been a controversial figure on both sides of the aisle over the last 18 months. And I'm sure there will be stuff the Clintons don't like in the line he tried to walk to explain his decision to release those two memos. But but you know, I think you've got to see this in context. And this is somebody who, over the course of his career, has clearly stood for law and order and has seemed to be trying to hold himself to a higher standard than he's seen the president held.
[Camerota:] There was something, David, that we hadn't heard before, and that was how the first lady, Melania, reacted to the salacious parts of the dossier that were becoming public. And so it's interesting. Here's here's that excerpt. "It bothered him if there was even a 1 percent chance his wife Melania thought it was true. He just rolled on, unprompted, explaining why it couldn't possibly be true, ending by saying he was thinking of asking me to investigate the allegation to prove it was a lie. I said it was up to him." I think that's interesting, because you know, obviously, it shows sort of the personal interaction behind all of these salacious headlines. And it does have an impact on real human beings and real relationships.
[Gregory:] Well, it does. And it's also fair that President Trump would have a huge reaction to something that he claims is absolutely false and that has been unconfirmed getting into the public domain. There's a lot of sides to this that are understandable, including the president and his supporters' reaction to the idea that there's so much of this may not be true, that may be off base, that may be unfair to him, including concerns about the investigation and the sprawling aspect of the investigation. You know, that's all fair. I think and there's so much criticism to be levied at Comey, perhaps his conduct in the book, details in the book. But you've got to go back to the base points about what's been alleged in the basis of the investigation and was it justified to fire him. That's what people are going to examine here.
[Camerota:] All right. David Gregory, John Avlon, thank you both very much. So in the book, the fired FBI director, Comey, also claims that President Trump seemed unconcerned about Russia's election interference after a briefing by his intelligence chiefs. Former DNI James Clapper attended that briefing. He joins us with his take next. In his new book, fired FBI Director James Comey writes about his first meeting with President-elect Donald Trump days before Trump was sworn in, in which he and other intelligence chiefs briefed Mr. Trump about the Russia interference in the 2016 election. Comey says the president-elect did not ask any questions about Russia's threat to America's democracy or how to stop future attacks. Our next guest was present for part of that meeting, former director of national intelligence and CNN national security analyst, James Clapper. Director Clapper, great to have you here this morning. It will be very interesting to bounce off James Comey's impressions that he shares in the book with yours, since you were there for part of these things. The first one I want to bring up is the moment when you all were briefing President Obama about some of the things in the Russian dossier. Let me read this. "Obama turned his head to the left and looked directedly at me. He raised and lowered both of his eyebrows with emphasis and then looked away. To my mind, his Groucho Marks eyebrow raise was both subtle humor and an expression of concern. It was almost as if he was were saying, 'Good luck with that.'" Do you remember those moments?
[James Clapper, Cnn National Security Analyst:] I do, yes. As it turns out, the previous Tuesday, January 4, I was in the Oval, and in fact, as we were walking in, Susan Rice, the national security adviser, said, "Say, could you give President Obama a little run-through on the dossier?" And I kind of gulped, because I wasn't actually prepared to do that. So I gave him sort of a cursory review of it. And I thought that President Obama's reaction was very similar to what Jim described in our subsequent meeting when I say our, Jim Comey, John Brennan, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Admiral Mike Rogers, who was then and still is the director of NSA. That meeting came later. In my meeting, the president didn't say anything. He just kind of rolled his eyes. And I think, you know, body language, facial expressions conveyed volumes. And that so his reaction to my brief preliminary, you know, coming attractions was very consistent with what Jim described in our subsequent meeting.
[Camerota:] Director Clapper, there's so much in this book. It's so it's such a commentary on President Trump. It's a commentary on how James Comey thinks President Trump feels about the justice system. And there's all sorts of what some might call some petty details in here. There's some settling of scores. What do you think about James Comey having written this book?
[Clapper:] Well, I think it, above all, is a truthful portrayal of how you know, Jim's observations, his feelings and and what occurred. You know, people can take issue with decisions that Jim made and things he did. But in my view, knowing Jim as I do, I think whatever he did, he did it for what he felt were the best reasons and were in the best interests of the country. Of course, I'm kind of comparing notes here, because I've got a book coming out next month which also talks about some of the same events. And I'm sure that the same accusations are going to be levied at me, as well.
[Camerota:] Do you include things about the president's appearance? I'll read a passage hold on one second from James Comey's new book. "His face appeared slightly orange with bright white half-moons under his eyes where I assumed he placed small tanning goggles, and impressively coifed, bright blonde hair, which upon close inspection looked to be all his." Do you have details like that in your book?
[Clapper:] No, I don't,, Alisyn. Maybe I should have. I don't know. But no, I don't get that specific, although I've don't agree I don't disagree with any of the description. But I didn't include that kind of
[Camerota:] Yes. I mean, the point is the reason I ask is because James Comey was always depicted as this career prosecutor, serious man, straight shooter. And so is this the James Comey that you know to include some of the more salacious details in this book?
[Clapper:] Well, Jim didn't generate the salacious details. And so he chose to include, you know, some pretty specific graphic details about his impressions of President Trump. Well, that's the nature of those kind of books. So I don't I don't fault him for it. I just, in my case, chose not to include details like that.
[Camerota:] When is the last time that you spoke to James Comey, and what did he tell you about the coming onslaught connect connected to the book?
[Clapper:] Well, we didn't when last we were in contact was informal dinner that John Brennan and his wife and the Comeys and my wife and me had, we referred to it as the reunion of the Nazis, I guess.
[Camerota:] Why is that?
[Clapper:] Well, that's the way President then President-elect Trump characterized us after that 6 January briefing in his news conference on the 11th of January, which is what, of course, occasioned my call to him, which I did more just to defend the men and women of the intelligence community than anything else. So we, as I say, referred to it as the reunion of the Nazis. I mean, we all
[Camerota:] When was that? When did you all have this informal dinner?
[Clapper:] It was about three or four weeks ago. And I think we clearly, and certainly Jim understood, that there's going to be a firestorm in terms of reacting to the book. Of course, we're all having is a discussion about the book. And at least for my part, I haven't read it. All I've I'm aware of is excerpts that have been reported in the media. But there's going to an we knew there would be high interest in it. And you know, this is a period of great controversy, very politically charged. And however you describe it, is going to evoke controversy. And I expect there will be criticisms of what I said, too, when when my book comes out.
[Camerota:] Well, why don't you give us a preview? How are you going to trump this one, so to speak? What are some juicy tidbits in your book?
[Clapper:] Well, mine is a longer time span. It goes back over my 50 years in intelligence. And so I discuss my take on Edward Snowden and his aftermath and the aftermath of what he did, and Benghazi. I talk about that and I guess from sort of the government's perspective. So it's a broader time span than than just focusing on although I do speak, of course, to the election and the result and the aftermath which, to be honest, is kind of what motivated me to write a book. I hadn't planned to do that until all of that happened.
[Camerota:] Well, that sounds like it will be fascinating. Obviously, we will have you back on to help dissect your book when it comes out, Director Clapper.
[Clapper:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] Thanks so much for talking to us.
[Clapper:] Thank you. Thanks, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK. Chris.
[Cuomo:] I think we may see a spate of books. This administration is going to generate a lot of people wanting to tell their side of the story, so it seems. All right. After threatening to launch missiles, now we're hearing that President Trump has not decided on how to respond in any way to the suspected chemical attack in Syria. So was that tweet just hype? Is there any plan at all? Is there any plan to go to Congress? Is Congress insisting they do that? These are important questions. Answers ahead.

[Camerota:] OK, so a lots happened already during just our program. President Trump is now slamming his long-time confidant, fixer and personal attorney Michael Cohen. He's just done it this morning. And this is in response to sources telling CNN that Michael Cohen says the president knew about that meeting in Trump Tower with the four Russians. He knew about it in advance and he approved it. Here's what the president says in response. I did not know of the meeting with my son, Don Junior. Sounds to me like someone is trying to make up stories in order to get himself out of an unrelated jam, taxicabs, maybe. He even retained Bill and crooked Hillary's lawyer. Gee, I wonder if they helped him make the choice. Let's get "The Bottom Line" with CNN political analyst Carl Bernstein, who broke this story, along with CNN's Jim Sciutto. And we also have standing by CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Who did not break this story.
[Camerota:] But is offering valuable context.
[Toobin:] I didn't I didn't break the story. Carl Bernstein broke this story.
[Camerota:] Carl Bernstein has broken so many stories. Carl, tell us the significance of this one today.
[Carl Bernstein, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, the significance is that the lawyer to the president of the United States, or the former lawyer to the president, is alleging and has told a fair number of people that the president knew in advance of this meeting to take place at which Russian operatives were to deliver dirt on Hillary Clinton for use in his campaign. It would be a stunning development if indeed the president of the United States, then about to become the nominee of his party, knew of that meeting in advance because the meeting itself that did take place suggests a kind of collusion in the sense that those present expected to receive information from the Russian participants. If the president himself knew of it in advance, it is a very, very damaging piece of information, especially while he and his campaign are under investigation by the special prosecutor.
[Berman:] It is interesting because this morning the president has flat out denied it. Again, he has done it on Twitter. So someone is lying here. Either the president lying on Twitter, or Michael Cohen is lying as he is telling people that he will testify to this to the special counsel. Now, I will note, Carl, that neither the president, nor Michael Cohen, has said these exact words under oath yet in any way as far as we know.
[Bernstein:] Well, not only has neither said it under oath, as we have seen the president of the United States, aside from lying, and sometimes he's been truthful about some matters, but he also sometimes finds some wiggle room. Whether any wiggle room is possible here in the two versions, I have no idea. We're talking about two people here, Mr. Cohen and the president of the United States, who have not the most sterling credibility, especially in the kinds of matters that we're discussing here. And, once again, the president has chosen to try to make the issue here Hillary Clinton rather than his own actions. But if indeed this is a real denial, I'm going to presume that the special prosecutor is going to try and find out what version of events is true.
[Camerota:] Jeffrey, if Michael Cohen, the person who was beside Donald Trump for years, his confidant, his fixer, if he is willing to talk to Robert Mueller, which sources say that he is, is that a game changer?
[Toobin:] Well, you know, I think the key question here is what is Michael Cohen's corroboration? What is his proof that he is telling the truth? I think one of the most interesting things in Carl's story about Michael Cohen's version of these events is Cohen says other people were president when Donald Trump Senior knew was informed of this meeting. What do they have to say? Is there any contemporaneous record? Are their tapes? Are their e-mails? Are there texts that discuss Donald Trump Senior's knowledge or lack thereof of this Trump Tower meeting? You know, that is always what these contests come down to when two people tell conflicting versions of a story is
[Camerota:] Yes, but I'm even beyond the Trump Tower meeting. I mean Michael Cohen talking to Robert Mueller, isn't that isn't he a gold mine?
[Toobin:] You would think. I mean he is the person who has dealt with all of Donald Trump's most embarrassing problems with these women, negotiating these payments to these women. All of that will presumably be spelled out. You know, we now know we found out this week I mean the Trump developments happen so fast. Remember way, way back, two days ago, when we first heard the tape of Donald Trump and Michael Cohen.
[Camerota:] Vaguely, yes.
[Toobin:] That you know, does he have other tapes? What do they say? What is the corroboration? I mean all of that needs to be spelled out. And Cohen, if he's willing to cooperate and if they can get around the issues of attorney-client privilege, which are considerable, a very important witness.
[Berman:] You know, Carl, it's so interesting, and I heard you talking about this last night, there have been so many questions about why. Why Michael Cohen is coming forward now. How do you explain the change in psyche of someone like Michael Cohen? And you brought up another historical example. Obviously one with which you had deep personal knowledge in history with, and it's John Dean.
[Bernstein:] Well, let's first say that it's very clear that Mr. Cohen is looking for a get out of jail card from the special prosecutor in exchange for information that he says is truthful. And in the past, of course, there have been witnesses who, in all kinds of criminal cases, who have a record of not being truthful, who turn around and become prosecution witnesses and become truthful. Whether or not this is the case right now, we don't know. In the case of John Dean 45 years ago in which Mr. Dean and his attorney, before he testified before the Senate Watergate committee, they went around putting out a version of events that said that Mr. Dean would indeed turn on the president of the United States and disclose what he knew about the Watergate cover up. And in that instance, I was in touch with Mr. Dean's lawyers who were indeed telling me that Dean was about to do what we saw him do before the Senate Watergate committee in that historic testimony. And the story that we wrote, Bob Woodward and myself, was, of course, correct in what he was going to say. We do not know if the facts that Mr. Cohen is alleging here are correct or if the facts, as told by Donald Trump in this latest tweet, except that Hillary Clinton is not the real issue here. The issue is the conduct of Mr. of the president of the United States and those around him in the campaign. But we do not know yet whether or not Mr. Cohen is being truthful, what he will elaborate. He also, we have to be very clear, in saying he has a trove of other information to disclose. So let's wait and see how the facts develop.
[Camerota:] Yes. Carl Bernstein, thank you very much for sharing your reporting with us. That is really helpful. Jeffrey, thank you for all that. We should also mention that it's just been announced
[Berman:] Yes.
[Camerota:] That President Trump says he will be speaking about the economy in the next hour. We've just got the new economic numbers. They're great. They're going gangbusters for this quarter, 4.1 percent. So that's happening at 9:30 Eastern.
[Berman:] He's making a 9:30 statement on the South Lawn of the White House. We do not know if he will take questions. We also don't know if reporters will shout questions. That's become something of an issue at the White House of late.
[Camerota:] Indeed it has. I know what you're referring to.
[Berman:] All right, there's been so much breaking news this morning. We're staying all over it at CNN. The special coverage continues with Poppy Harlow and CNN "NEWSROOM" very shortly.
[Camerota:] Have a great weekend.

[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Anchor:] The record cold has the U.S. hunkered down. Record low temps overnight, life threatening conditions for tens of millions of people.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Robert Mueller's investigation targeted by the Russians. How a pro-Russian Twitter account spread confidential information.
[Jarrett:] Go back to school. The president seething at his intelligence chiefs who publicly contradicted him on security threats.
[Briggs:] And a California woman with dementia left to wander alone outside a mental health facility in the middle of the night. A disturbing video starts your day there. Welcome back to EARLY START, everybody. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Jarrett:] And I'm Laura Jarrett. 31 minutes past the hour. The record-breaking deep freeze is moving east. But the Midwest is by no means out of the cold, cold woods. Chicago set a record cold high temperature, minus 10, without the windchill. The ultra cold weather will halt postal deliveries and close schools in the area for a second day today. In Milwaukee and Minneapolis-St. Paul public schools also stayed closed to avoid roads that look like this, if you can even see the road there. In Michigan, where it felt like minus 35 with the wind chill, the governor is pleading for people to turn thermostats down to 65 degrees until midday Friday. A fire at a compressor station is limiting gas delivery.
[Briggs:] A fire also causing big problems for firefighters in Hammond, Indiana. At 22 degrees below zero, the water immediately turning into hazardous ice. The fire chief telling us, quote, "I'm currently thawing out and so is my crew." There have been at least nine weather-related deaths across the country. Four of them in Iowa. Nationwide about 6200 flights have been canceled since Tuesday. Hazardous road conditions causing at least seven injuries with this multicar pileup in Pennsylvania.
[Jarrett:] A lot of people doing amateur science experiments including kids and parents stuck at home in Wisconsin. Take a look at that. Hot water instantly turning to ice. There's one group the weather could not deter, runners in the Arrowhead 135 ultra marathon. They kept on going. The windchill at the finish line in Tower, Minnesota, a staggering 52 degrees below zero. Some of the runners finished with their faces completely encased in ice. More than 80 million people face temperatures below zero in the coming day. Dozens of record lows are expected to be set overnight. Meteorologist Pedram Javaheri joins us live from the CNN weather center with the latest where it is warm Pedram.
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Relatively speaking, yes, absolutely. And we're talking about still 40 below, 50 below windchills in a few spots in the upper Midwest and now as you said the energy shifting on towards the northeast. But really odd event taking place outside. Folks reporting that once they step outside, at least those initial breaths at 40 to 50 below, they hear a hissing sound when they take a breath. And of course frost quakes even reported where you have moisture in the soil beneath your feet that's freezing very quickly, the water is expanding, and you get little brief rattles beneath your feet and certainly hear the rumbles as well. But notice this, windchills at this hour in Minneapolis, minus 37. Same score out of Chicago, 19 below in Indianapolis. That's a little bit warmer than this time yesterday, so the wind is dying down just a hair, but the temps themselves without the wind just as cold. And you work your way toward the northeast, hitting in New York there at around five degrees, windchills 14 to 15 below zero at this hour. And of course airlines still severely disrupted by this. And yesterday we have reports of deicing material that was being put on top of the aircrafts that was freezing on contact across parts of the Midwest. That is in part led to some 6500 flights being either canceled or delayed. The vast majority of those across parts of the Midwest and of course Chicago O'Hare, and midway really taking the brunt of that as well. But notice this, as we go in towards Saturday, Sunday, Monday, a dramatic warming trend in store and in places like Chicago, you go from zero to 22 into the 40s eventually. New York 18 up to 37. But it gets better still. So hang in there New York, watch what happens here. You go from 20 for a high expected today up to almost 60 degrees come Tuesday afternoon. At this hour, in Central Park, it's three. So that's about a 60 about 55-degree variance from right now in Central Park to what it will feel like come Tuesday afternoon.
[Briggs:] It is with all due respect very cold in Atlanta, 20s and low 20s which is frigid.
[Javaheri:] It is in the low 20s.
[Briggs:] Warm compared to most of the country. Thank you, my friend. OK, back here, national security concerns after the Mueller probe was targeted again, but this time not by congressional Republicans, the Justice Department says a pro-Russian Twitter account targeted the investigation spreading confidential information. The information is from a case Mueller's team filed against a Russian company. The company is accused of funding an internet troll farm that interfered in the 2016 elections.
[Jarrett:] The Justice Department has been turning over evidence to the company's U.S. legal team. And Mueller's office now claims that some of that evidence showed up on a Twitter account posted from a Russian IP address. The tweets link to thousands of documents altered to make the Mueller investigation look like a big nothing burger. The documents did not have sensitive information, but the concern for the FBI is whether the people behind the account did have access to more sensitive material.
[Briggs:] Lindsey Graham wants a briefing from the FBI on the tactics the agency used to arrest Roger Stone. CNN caught those tactics the senator is questioning on video. You can see the FBI knocked on Stone's front door. Still Senator Graham, a former prosecutor, claims the American people are tired of what he calls the Mueller media circus.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] This seems to me over the top, and I don't know what the message was being sent, but I personally didn't like it. You know, I've been a prosecutor, defense attorney, it seems to be sending the wrong message that if you cross Mueller, look what's going to happen to you. Mueller, do your job, but these tactics are unacceptable given the level of threat here.
[Briggs:] President Trump telling the "Daily Caller" he is very disappointed with the way the raid went down. He says he will think about asking the FBI to review how it conducts its raids.
[Jarrett:] When President Trump receives his intelligence briefing today, it will be interesting to see whether the director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, is the one to deliver it. CNN has learned the president was seething yesterday as he watched coverage of his intel chief testifying on Capitol Hill on Tuesday and repeatedly contradict him. Two sources confirming Mr. Trump singled out DNI Coats by name. Here's why.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We have won against ISIS. We've beaten them and we've beaten them badly.
[Dan Coats, Director Of National Intelligence:] ISIS is intent on resurging and still commands thousands of fighters in Iraq and Syria.
[Trump:] Chairman Kim, we have a great chemistry and we're well on our way. You know, we signed an agreement that said we will begin the immediate denuclearization.
[Coats:] North Korea will seek to retain its WMD capabilities and is unlikely to completely give up its nuclear weapons and production capabilities.
[Briggs:] The president taking to Twitter to rip his intel chiefs as passive and naive concluding they should perhaps go back to school. Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer firing off a letter to Coats calling the president's criticism extraordinarily inappropriate. Schumer writes, "Trump's attack will undermine public confidence and efforts to protect national security."
[Jarrett:] Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz downplaying concerns by Democrats that he could help Donald Trump's re-election if he enters the 2020 race as an independent. On Wednesday morning, Schultz's Twitter account posted then deleted a message pointing to an article that said he could win the White House in 2020. It described Senator Kamala Harris as shrill and called Senator Elizabeth Warren Fauxcahontas. Here is how Schultz addressed Democrats' concerns during a town hall at Iowa State University.
[Unidentified Female:] What you're going to do is you're going to have us have another four years of President Trump. Please explain to me why you feel you can't run as a Democrat.
[Howard Schultz, Former Starbucks Ceo:] The Democratic Party today has moved so far to the left. What better expression of democracy would there be to provide a better choice and not the binary choice of just a Republican and Democrat.
[Unidentified Female:] Two words which a lot of people here probably weren't even born when this happened. Ralph Nader.
[Briggs:] Nader picked up about 97,000 votes in Florida in 2000. Al Gore lost to George W. Bush by 500 votes. Senator Sherrod Brown also testing the waters for a White House bid kicking off a "Dignity of Work" tour in his home state of Ohio.
[Sen. Sherrod Brown , Ohio:] Donald Trump has used his phony populism to divide Americans and to demonize immigrants. He uses phony populism to distract from the fact that he has used the White House to enrich billionaires like himself, because real populism is not racist. Real populism is not anti-Semitic. Real populists don't engage in hate speech and don't rip babies from families at the border.
[Briggs:] Senator Brown's listening tour will take him to Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
[Jarrett:] The White House re-nominating judges to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals a day after blistering attacks from conservative commentators. The left-leaning Ninth Circuit covers seven western states and has been a frequent target of President Trump. But when the White House last week said that it would re-nominate dozens of judges who did not get a hearing during the last Congress, three conservative nominees to the Ninth Circuit weren't on the list. In a tweet, the conservative Judicial Crisis Network questioned why the White House would tarnish a sterling legacy of Circuit Court judges. Last night the White House corrected the apparent overnight resubmitting the names.
[Briggs:] All right. Ahead, the self-declared president of Venezuela taking his message to the American press. How can he translate promises into help for his struggling country?

[Briggs:] Indonesia's search and rescue agency said it has located one of the black boxes from that doomed Lion Air flight that crashed into the Java Sea earlier this week just 13 minutes after takeoff. CNN's Ivan Watson live in Jakarta, Indonesia with the latest. Ivan, good morning.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave. That's right. This is a potential breakthrough and it wasn't easy to do. The divers, the fleet of ships involved in the salvage operation they took them days to locate the sonar ping, the beacon from the flight data recorder, and then to dive down braving in the currents and depths of more than 100 feet. Then the divers say that they had to dig in the mud to pull this flight data recorder out. And it's since been handed over to the National Transportation Safety Committee here which is overseeing the investigation of this deadly disaster which has resulted in the deaths of 189 passengers and crew. Now this isn't the cockpit voice recorder which would let us hear the last minutes of the interactions of the pilot and co-pilot. Remember that in the first minutes of this flight on Monday morning, they requested to return back to the main airport here in Jakarta. But they never had the time to sound a mayday, an emergency call. But what this recorder does is it measures scores of different kind of flight instruments, wind speed, altitude, even smoke detectors in some cases. It could take weeks if not months, we're hearing now, for all of that to be analyzed and hopefully provide an answer to the mystery of why a brand new Boeing 737 plunged out of the sky minutes after takeoff taking down all those passengers and crew with it Dave.
[Briggs:] Hopefully some answers ahead. Ivan Watson live for us this morning. Thank you.
[Romans:] Turkey's chief prosecutor says Saudi agents strangled "Washington Post" journalist Jamal Khashoggi almost immediately after he entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and then dismembered the body. The Turkish government demanding Saudi Arabia extradite all 18 suspects in the Khashoggi case. And now officials have a gruesome new theory about what happened to his remains. Want to bring in CNN's Jomana Karadsheh, she is live in Istanbul for us. And Jomana, it's just so grim and awful. It must be just terrible for his family. But to have him killed so quickly after entering the consulate would suggest that the Saudi are lying when they say it was a fistfight gone awry.
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, you know, Christine, we've had this changing narrative constantly from Saudi authorities on what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. And that is why Turkish officials are really frustrated. They want the Saudis to answer some of those questions and, you know, yesterday for the first time, nearly a month after the investigation, the criminal investigation into the killing of Jamal Khashoggi was launched by Turkish authorities here, the chief prosecutor for Istanbul who is overseeing this investigation came out with the statement. The most detailed so far of their conclusions as to what happened to Khashoggi after he entered the consulate. As you mentioned there they say immediately after entering that building, he was strangled to death. They say his body was dismembered and then destroyed. Now it's not very clear to us what they mean by destroyed. We are seeking clarification from Turkish officials. But according to "The Washington Post" they say a senior Turkish official told them that the theory they are going with right, that they are pursuing is that his body may have been destroyed using acid, either here at the consulate or at the nearby consul-general's residence. They say that biological evidence that was collected from the consulate garden does support the theory that his body was disposed of close to where the killing took place. Now despite these revelations they say they still have some key questions they want answered by the Saudis. Where are the remains of Jamal Khashoggi, they say, and who issued the orders? They were trying to get these answers from the Saudi chief prosecutor who was here for three days and left yesterday. But they did not get the answers. A senior Turkish official is telling us that it seemed to them that the Saudis were not really interested in cooperating in the investigation, that they were trying to find out what evidence Turkey had Christine.
[Romans:] All right. Jomana, thank you so much for that, for us this morning in Istanbul in front of that consulate where he was killed. Thank you. All right. Inappropriate office behavior is under the microscope. Now WeWork is testing new limits on its free beer. We're going to check on CNN Business next.

[Camerota:] Breaking news. President Trump and the first lady departing the White House moments ago. Here's the video. The president heading to flood ravaged Texas to assess the extent of the damage and rescue operations. The president is heading to Corpus Christi and Austin this afternoon. Joining us now on the phone is the mayor of Corpus Christi, Joe McComb. Mr. Mayor, thank you very much for being here. Tell us the situation on the ground in Corpus Christi.
[Mayor Joe Mccomb, Corpus Christi, Texas:] Well, right now, the morning, it's the best looking morning we've seen in a week. We got some sunshine and we got some blue skies. But that hasn't been the case. But we've got our operations people in full swing. We've got power restored to a substantial part of the community. We lost about half the power during the storm. We got our water treatment plants up and running. We've got our waste water treatment plant up and running. Most of our signalization on our streets so the traffic can be a little better controlled than just having intersections with no stop signs or signal lights. So we're making a great deal of progress in Corpus Christi. Some of our neighbors, Port Aransas and Rockport, they really took the brunt of the hurricane. And they they don't have power. They don't have waste water services. They don't have water. They they let the people in, you know, during the daylight hours just to come and see what the property is and then they've got to leave at night. So they're just it's inhabitable, uninhabitable.
[Camerota:] Yes, yes, yes, we can imagine. Mr. Mayor, as you're speaking, we're watching President Trump, he's landing in Marine One at Joint Base Andrews to get on Air Force One to come in your direction and come and visit you. What are you expecting from the president? What can he do to help?
[Mccomb:] Well, I think he can encourage people down here because we're getting into, you know, days three and four on and it's beginning to settle in that this is going to be a long hall in terms of recovery. And we're going need to learn that we've got a new normal. We can't go back to the way it was. That's just not going to happen. But it would be reassuring for the communities down here that, one, that he's concerned about our safety and our well-being, and he's also concerned about wanting to make sure that the aid and support that is available to us through the federal and state programs is available on a quickly responsive basis as possible. I think we've heard stories of, you know, people trying one, two years after a storm to still be trying to get help. And I think he's just wanting to really emphasize the need to be pay attention and be serious about helping the government side in responding when applications are formed for aid and for help and final assistance. I mean in Corpus Christi in our area down here, we have a lot of people, as in many areas. You know, they live from week to week on their paychecks and, you know, trying to find money to live for three or four or five months until some reimbursement comes really puts a strain on them. And so I think he just wants to emphasize the need to be responsive and be responsive in a in a quick manner. So we really appreciate him coming.
[Camerota:] Yes, as you're speaking, we're watching the president get off Marine One. It's a rainy day in the Washington, D.C., area.
[Mccomb:] Well, that's ironic. He's leaving rain to come down to sunshine, so
[Camerota:] Indeed. That is exactly right. And we're happy to hear that you're getting a respite there in Corpus Christi and that there's sunshine. But when you say that it's time for people there to prepare for their new normal, what does that look like?
[Mccomb:] Well, I really don't know. Corpus Christi, relatively speaking, and I don't mean to be misinterpreted, but relatively speaking, compared to Rockport, and Port Aransas, we really escaped the brunt of the storm in terms of this massive damage. But, like I said, Port Aransas and those folks there. But, I mean, it's just going to take some time to get the get their houses repaired, get back to their work. I mean there's still some businesses that haven't opened because they don't have power. And so that's an economic impact. But, you know, the we can we can endure the inconvenience of a lot of this stuff. Our goal at the city level in Corpus Christi and the emergency management operations was, our number one goal and focus was public safety and human life, protecting life. And at the end of the day, we had a Cat four hurricane come through Corpus Christi and Nueces County and we had zero fatalities and zero major injuries. So we feel like we really set a benchmark for ourself for the future. The teams, I couldn't say enough good things about the teams in the state, federal and local levels, that put the plan together. And I'm sure they felt like, you know, why do we go to all these practices and these rehearsals and things.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Mccomb:] But when it came game day, I mean they were on and they delivered wonderfully.
[Camerota:] Well, we are sure happy to hear that. That is a really encouraging story, Mr. Mayor. And we've just watched the president and first lady board Air Force One headed in your direction. So, Corpus Christi mayor
[Mccomb:] Well, I better get out there and get ready to welcome.
[Camerota:] You you've got a little bit of time. But, yes, you better get ready. Mayor McComb, thank you very much for being with us.
[Mccomb:] Thank you for having me. Appreciate it.
[Camerota:] A pleasure to talk to you. All right, so the governor of Texas is activating every National Guard member in the state to help victims of Hurricane Harvey. Lamart Clay and his wife and eight children are among those brought to safety in the past 24 hours. And Lamart Clay joins us on the phone from Katy, Texas. Mr. Clay, we know you've had a rough go of it with you and your family. I understand there were ten of you. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have kids in there from seven months old, three years old, 11 years old, 12 years old, 13 years old, 14 years old, a 22-year-old and 25-year-old. All of you were trapped. Tell us about how you got to safety.
[Lamart Clay, Survived Hurricane Harvey:] Hey, good morning. Those sound like the right ages, but I'm not sure. It's a lot of them.
[Camerota:] But what was that like, Mr. Clay, when you were in there with all of those kids, some of them your grandkids, I believe. What was it like for those 12 hours that you were trapped?
[Clay:] Well, it was it was pretty scary at first because the rain started coming down and it started moving up so fast that we couldn't evacuate. And before you know it, the rain started pouring into the house. And in a couple hours we had close to a foot of water. So we called the emergency dispatch, and they said, hey, they'll get somebody out there as soon as they can. The priority was folks with single family homes or one story homes. And so we went upstairs, hunkered down and waited it out. And it was pretty scary.
[Camerota:] And what were those 12 hours like? I man how were you keeping the kids calm? How were you saying calm?
[Clay:] Well, on the inside I was nervous. On the outside, I knew I had to be calm because if I showed weakness or any kind of nervousness, it would make the rest of the house follow me. So, I just knew that Jesus would safe us. I knew that once I prayed, that everything would be all right. And we prayed as a family together. And, ironically, after we prayed, the water outside kept getting higher but in my house it re- seeding. It got to be up to about two feet. But once we prayed, the water in the house went out but it kept going up on the outside.
[Camerota:] Well, you have a direct line to God.
[Clay:] Absolutely.
[Camerota:] And the power of prayer is strong today obviously in Texas and across the country. Mr. Lamart Clay, we are so happy that you and all of those kids survived and you sound like you're in good spirits today. We're wishing you the best and thank you so much for sharing your story with us.
[Clay:] No, thank you guys for having me.
[Camerota:] All right, we wish you the best. Meanwhile, CNN's breaking news coverage continues right now on "NEWSROOM" with John Berman.

[Quest:] The Spanish Prime Minister's path to direct rule over Catalonia appears to be open now. After Catalonia's president called off a plan for snap regional elections. Promised watchers had hoped a new election could stall the independence crisis. Carles Puigdemont said he couldn't get a guarantee that elections would have stopped the federal government from suspending his regions autonomy. He made his announcement later in the day amid rumors there would be an election. And Spanish stocks rose nearly 2 percent, 1.9 for the IBEX. In Madrid, the deputy prime minister has now accused the Catalan government of damaging the economy through its independence moves. Tourist numbers are down, and more than 1,300 companies have announced plans to move their legal headquarters out of Catalonia. Earlier this week, the economy secretary told me it is not an economic crisis.
[Pere Aragones, Catalan Economic Secretary:] A economic crisis and different companies and they are taking some positions among at municipal headquarters. But finally, central offices, facilities, data centers continuing in Catalonia. That's only that now, now that's only really an initiative position. Thirdly, if this situation continues over the time, over next months, then there will be affections on the Catalan economy.
[Quest:] If this drags on, Catalonia's economy will suffer. You can agree with that.
[Aragones:] If this situation continues, it's obvious that there will be a problem in the Catalan economy. But also in the Spanish economy. Because there's two economies are interlinked. So, it clearly shows that there is an incentive for negotiation and solving this problem, because it's a political problem, so it needs a political solution.
[Quest:] Economy minister of Catalan in Madrid and Barcelona lawmakers are planning their next move. CNN's Erin McLaughlin has been following it all from Barcelona.
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] Many moderate voices here in Catalonia had hoped that Catalan President Carles Puigdemont would call for snap elections on Thursday. The thinking was that would provide enough political room for Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy to soften his stance on article 155 and provide some sort of off-ramp to this crisis. But that didn't happen. Puigdemont explained his reasoning for ruling it out. Take a listen.
[Carles Puigdemont, Catalan President:] You know that I wanted to call for this election if we had certain guarantees that would allow their celebration and period of normality. There are no guarantees to justify today the calling for elections in the Parliament. My obligation was to try, to try honestly and loyally to avoid an impact on our institutions of the application of article 155, like the council of ministers and likely to be approved in the Senate.
[Mclaughlin:] Puigdemont also said that Catalonia's response to article 155 will be made by Parliament. On Thursday, there was a parliamentary session and debate. It's expected to continue on Friday. At the end of Friday's session, it is possible that they could vote to formally declare independence. But we're going to have to wait and see. Meanwhile, what seems certain is that the Spanish Senate in Madrid will move forward and formally vote for article 155 on Friday. If they do that, then that means that essentially come Saturday, Puigdemont and his entire government will be sacked, and emergency rule will pervade in Catalonia. Erin McLaughlin, CNN, Barcelona.
[Quest:] And so, to the European markets. The euro bosses and they all made gains. The CAC was up 1.5 percent. As indeed the Dax was up 1.3. The European Central Bank announced a slimming down of its massive stimulus program. It will half its bond-buying program to $35 billion from next year. But it extended it agreed to extend the length of time that it would be making those purchases for. Janet Yellen's chance of being asked to stay at the chair of the Fed seems to be fading according to two reports. Both "Politico" and "The Washington Post" both say the choice is now between two candidates, Jerome Powell and John Taylor. The two men you see here. You can always expect the unexpected with this president. He called Yellen very impressive in a recent FOXBusiness interview. Randall Kroszner is a former governor of the Fed and joins me live from Chicago. Let's just be blunt in this one. What's your understanding of the situation now?
[Randall Kroszner, Former Governor, Federal Reserve:] Well I think it's still fluid. I don't think the president has made the decision. The president has said that he's very happy with all the candidates that he has gone has met with. And, you know, as you had said, the president often likes to surprise. So, I don't think we really know. There are a lot of reports that are coming out, but I don't think the president has made his decision.
[Quest:] OK, let's assume for the purposes of this next question that it's not Janet Yellen. As between Jerome Powell and John Taylor, who do you prefer and why?
[Kroszner:] Well, they certainly have different set of characteristics. Jay has been at the Fed recently, Jay Powell, Jerome Powell, has been there and would likely extend the kind of monetary policy is that Janet Yellen has been pursuing, very, very gradual interest rate increases. John Taylor, on the other hand, has been very critical of the slow pace of increases in interest rates. Has been critical of the balance sheet, not moving it down more quickly. And so, he would certainly tighten faster than Powell would.
[Quest:] And of course, John Taylor from the Taylor rule, or the Taylor principle, once you understand the Taylor principle about its relationship between inflation and interest rates, you can sort of see where he's coming from at the slow pace which is the Fed has tightened, can't you? I mean, if you were dealt the Taylor principle or the Taylor rule, it should have been further and faster.
[Kroszner:] Yes, but we still haven't seeing that much inflation pressure. And so, the question is, do we want to follow up that rule? And actually, there are a lot of different versions of the rule. John has published a couple of different papers with different versions of it. And if you look around, central banks around the world, they publish different versions of it and talk about it differently. So, you could get one that moves the rates up faster or moves rates up a little bit more slowly. So, there's still some flexibility. It's not completely mechanical.
[Quest:] On a more basic question. Both men are qualified to run the Fed, aren't they? I mean, Jay Powell, obviously, because he's already there. John Taylor, an eminent economist, whether one agrees with economics or not, but both men are qualified. Would you agree?
[Kroszner:] Oh, for sure.
[Quest:] So, in that sense, what we really are is in extremely fortunate position, if it is one of the three, Yellen, Powell or Taylor that the president is unlikely to sort of impose somebody on a political whim, as a political I mean, I'm thinking of Gary Cohn here, who's not out of the running. But Gary Cohn, president of Goldman Sachs, certainly knows his way around markets and business. But one might argue when it comes to monetary policy, he's not of the PhD ilk to run the Fed.
[Kroszner:] Well, certainly, he doesn't have a PhD but neither does Jay Powell. But I wouldn't want to say that disqualifies jay because he doesn't have a PhD. I have a PhD, so of course, I'm kind of biased and in favor of PhD's, generally. But I also understand the incredible value of having practical experience. And so, if you have some PhD's around and some people with practical experience, as long as you have a good mix of that I think it works. And so, you can have a very effective chair who does have a PhD or one that doesn't have a PhD. I think with Jay's experience, that helps to mitigate concerns that people might have that he doesn't have a PhD. Mario Draghi going to slow the tapering, sort of. It's not quite a tapering, but it's a buying at a reduced level. But extending by nine months or extending out into the future beyond into September of next year. And most people expect the ECB to continue the asset purchase program longer after that at lower levels. And Mario Draghi made a very strong point of saying, this is not a taper, because taper suggest that is going down to zero. He said it's a downscaling, a downsizing. So, a sort of step down of the purchases. But he really wanted to say, this doesn't you know, don't expect to it to come to an end in September 2018. You know, it might. He left open that possibility, but he really wanted to draw that distinction, that unlike the Fed when they started the taper that that meant they were going to stop the asset purchases. He wanted to leave that possibility open. And that I think surprised the markets a bit and one of the reasons why the euro fell.
[Quest:] The euro fell, however, but the equity markets were up, which of course, just merely shows the confusion in the markets at the moment. Randall Dr. Kroszner, I must get it absolutely right. Doctor, good to see you, sir.
[Kroszner:] Yes.
[Quest:] We shall not leave those
[Kroszner:] It was great to see you.
[Quest:] Thank you. PhD in honor intact. Now, as we continue tonight on QUEST MEANS BUSINESS, there's new sexual harassment allegations and it involves the veteran journalist Mark Halperin. And in this environment, we feed to consider what employers need to do to eradicate, educate, and protect in the workplace. And I think, also, it's important employees. If the rules have changed and there's a load of dinosaurs still around who believe it's the'70s and the'80s, what do you do about it?

[Cabrera:] No apology from the Trump White House as backlash erupts over what was said to be a joke when a White House aide mocked Senator John McCain's battle with brain cancer. Breaking this afternoon, sources tell CNN Sarah Sanders told staff behind closed doors the comment was inappropriate. But the sources also tell us Sanders was more concerned with the fact that the comment was leaked than with the comment itself. CNN's Tom Foreman examines the comment and the outcry.
[Tom Foreman, Cnn National Correspondent:] Ana, this is the sort of thing you would expect any White House to address, but this White House is saying virtually nothing, even as others say a lot. [voice-over]: "Reprehensible, inexcusable, shame on you, resign." Outrage swirling around White House aide, Kelly Sadler, on Twitter after she dismissed Senator John McCain's opposition to President Trump's CIA nominee by mocking his grave illness, "He's dying anyway." His wife, Cindy? "May I remind you my husband has a family, seven children and five grandchildren." His daughter, Meghan?
[Meghan Mccain, Daughter Of Senator John Mccain:] I don't understand what kind of environment you're working in when that's acceptable and you can come to work the next day and have a job. That's all I have to say.
[Foreman:] The White House hasn't said there's anything wrong with this although the said apologized and said, in a statement, said, "We respect Senator McCain's service to our nation. And he and his family are in our prayers." But not a word from the president, who has never hesitated to go after McCain and never apologized for taunting the decorated veteran and former prisoner of war during the campaign.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured, OK? I hate to tell you.
[Foreman:] Complicating the issue, on "FOX Business," a former Air Force lieutenant general, who endorsed Trump, repeating a debunked claim that McCain gave information to his North Vietnamese captors when they tortured him.
[Lt. Gen. Thomas Mcinerney, Trump Supporter:] The fact is, on John McCain it worked on John. That's why they call him Songbird John.
[Foreman:] FOX says they won't have that general on again, but the bipartisan uproar is raging. Former Democratic Vice President Joe Biden says the Trump administration has "hit rock bottom." Republican speaker of the House, Paul Ryan?
[Rep. Paul Ryan, , Speaker Of The House:] Look, John McCain is a hero, no two ways about it.
[Foreman:] McCain has criticized Trump's leadership, policies and cast the deciding vote to stop the appeal of Obamacare, among his many maverick moves, his family and friends will far outlast his critics.
[Mccain:] My father's legacy is going to be talked about for hundreds and hundreds of years. These people, nothing burgers.
[Unidentified Female:] Nothing.
[Foreman:] All of that said, there's still no word on whether this staffer will face any real consequences for her comments or even what President Trump thinks about what she said Ana?
[Cabrera:] Tom Foreman, thank you. While Meghan McCain wonders how the White House staffer who joked about her father's brain cancer still has a job, let's look at the unprecedented number of officials who have left this administration. So far, a year and a half in, more than two dozen people have come and gone. That's roughly one person leaving every two and a half weeks. Now people have departed for different reasons. Some were pushed out like Press Secretary Sean Spicer and Reince Priebus, only to have the person who pushed them out, Anthony Scaramucci, pushed out himself. Scaramucci last just 11 days. Others weren't really pushed out. It was more like they were dropped, like Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. President Trump fired him with a tweet. Others, like former communications director, Hope Hicks, managed to leave on good terms. Hicks claims to have simply grown tired of Washington. She got a handshake from the president and a kiss on the cheek on the way out. But regardless of why or how they left, this pace of comings and goings is record setting. According to NPR, 43 percent, nearly half of top level positions in the Trump White House, have seen turnover. You can see how that stacks up to the predecessors in their first two years in office. When you narrow it down to cabinet levels, President Trump has had more turnover than any other president in the past 100 years. And still, more change may be to come. At least these seven officials have threatened to resign. Chief of Staff John Kelly has reportedly done so more than once. And Kirstjen Nielsen threatened to leave as recently as this week after Trump berated her during a cabinet meeting. Despite this unprecedented retention problem, the president denies there's any chaos: "The new fake news narrative is that there's chaos in the White House. Wrong. People will always come and go. And I want strong dialogue before making a final decision. I still have some people that I want to change. Always seeking perfection. There's no chaos. Only great energy." We're back in a moment.

[Camerota:] The FBI raided the office and hotel room of President Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen. CNN has learned that authorities seized information relating to Stormy Daniels in the raid. Mr. Cohen admitted he paid $130,000 in exchange for Daniels' silence about an alleged affair and that's just one of many moves that Cohen has made to try to protect his famous client. CNN's Gloria Borger has more on President Trump's loyal fixer.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] In the soap opera in which a porn star accepts a payoff to keep quiet about her affair with Donald Trump there's got to be a guy who gets it done.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] Where is Michael Cohen? Where's Mr. Cohen? Where is this guy? Where is this guy?
[Borger:] Michael Cohen is where he's been since 2007, standing behind Donald Trump or closer, in his back pocket.
[Sam Nunberg, Aide, Trump Campaign:] Michael was I'd always like to say the Ray Donovan of the office.
[Liev Schreiber, Actor, Showtime "ray Donovan":] I'll take care of it.
[Nunberg:] He took care of what had to be taken care of. I don't know what had to be taken care of but all I know is that Michael was taking care of it.
[David Schwartz, Attorney For Michael Cohen:] He's the guy that you could call at 3:00 in the morning when you have a problem.
[Borger:] Do you know stories of Donald Trump calling him at 3:00 in the morning?
[Schwartz:] Donald Trump has called him at all hours of the night. Every dinner I've been at with Michael, the boss has called.
[Borger:] But, Cohen did not call the boss, he says, when he decided to pay Stormy Daniels $130,000 out of his own pocket 11 days before the election.
[Avenatti:] I think it's ludicrous.
[Borger:] So you believe 100 percent Donald Trump knew.
[Avenatti:] One hundred percent.
[Michael D'antonio, Trump Biographer:] There's not a meeting that takes place, there's not an expenditure that is authorized that he doesn't know about it.
[Borger:] Cohen wouldn't go on the record for this piece but his friends claim it's all part of his job in Trumpworld, giving the boss deniability and protection.
[Schwartz:] If you know the relationship between the two people he took care of a lot of things for Mr. Trump without Mr. Trump knowing about it. That's part of the overall structure is that Michael had great latitude to take care of matters.
[Borger:] In Michael Cohen, Trump hired his consiliari, a version of his longtime mentor, the lawyer Roy Cohn, a controversial pit bull and aggressive defender of all things Trump, no questions asked. After D'Antonio finished his book on Trump he got the Cohen treatment in what turned out to be an empty threat.
[D'antonio:] Then he got mad and it was well, you just bought yourself an f-ing lawsuit, buddy. I'll see you in court.
[Borger:] In 2011, Michael Cohen described his job this way.
[Michael Cohen, Attorney For Donald Trump:] My job is I protect Mr. Trump. That's what it is. If there's an issue that relates to Mr. Trump that is of concern to him it's, of course, concern to me and I will use my legal skills within which to protect Mr. Trump to the best of my ability.
[Borger:] Cohen, a sometimes-Democrat, first came to Trump's attention after buying apartments in Trump developments. Then went to the mat for Trump against one of his condo boards and won.
[Schwartz:] Trump loved him for it. I mean, that was the beginning of it. And then after that they became close. It was much more than an attorney-client relationship. It was certain it was something much deeper, almost a father and son kind of kind of thing. Always hot and cold. They Donald Trump could be yelling at him one second and saying he's the greatest person in the world the next second. Donald Trump knew that Michael always had his back.
[Borger:] For Trump, it wasn't about pedigree. Cohen, who is 51, got his degree from Western Michigan's Cooley Law School and had some initial success in the less than gentile world of New York taxicab medallions.
[Nunberg:] If you look where Michael came from in his legal career before he started working for Trump board, it wasn't like he came from a white-shoe law firm. He came from a hardnosed a hardnosed New York trial firm. Trump has an eye for talent and this was somebody that I mean, he used to call him his bulldog, his tough guy.
[Borger:] At The Trump Organization, he'd done a bit of everything, running a mixed martial arts company, securing real estate branding deals, and even taking care of transportation.
[Nunberg:] You know, the famous Trump plane? There was an engine issue that he actually took care and got a really good deal on.
[Schwartz:] Watching him is it's like a it's like a reality show. He's got three phones, he's got the hardline, he's got two lines he's texting, he's on the computer.
[D'antonio:] You can almost say this is Donald Trump's mini-me. For a guy who started really in the middle-class on Long Island to now be quite wealthy himself, known internationally, and yes, he's in a bit of jam with the Russia scandal.
[Borger:] In the eye not only of Stormy but also of interest to the special counsel Bob Mueller and Congress.
[Cohen:] And I look forward to getting all the information that they're looking for.
[Borger:] During the campaign when Trump said he had no contact with Russia, Cohen was privately trying to cut a deal for a Trump Tower Moscow. It never happened but Mueller has asked about it.
[Nunberg:] And the sad reality is that Michael pursuing that Trump Tower deal in December is just another factor that goes into this whole Russian narrative.
[Borger:] Cohen's name was also in the infamous dossier which alleges he traveled to Prague to meet with Russians. He's completely denied it and is suing "Buzzfeed" which published it.
[Schwartz:] It's immeasurable the damage that has been caused to him, to his family.
[Trump:] I will faithfully execute.
[Borger:] When Trump became president he did not bring his brash wingman to Washington. Do you think he wanted to be in the White House? Be White House counsel or
[D'antonio:] There must have been a part of him that was dreaming of a great job at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But he's also the guy who not only knows where all the bodies are buried, he buried a lot of them himself and that, ironically, disqualified him.
[Cohen:] They say I'm Mr. Trump's pit bull, that I am his I'm his right-hand man. I mean, there's I've been called many different things around here.
[Borger:] Now he may be called to testify with the Stormy Daniels case in federal court.
[Schwartz:] I've known Michael Cohen for over 21 years and I know that he will not rest he will not sleep he doesn't sleep anyway, right, until he recovers every single penny from Stormy that's due the
[Llc. Avenatti:] I've seen a lot of attorneys use intimidation tactics. The problem is if that is your speed and if you are a one-trick pony and you use that in every case, when all of a sudden you run up against somebody that doubles down and that isn't intimidated well then, you're lost.
[Borger:] Cohen flew to Mar-a-Lago to dine with the president the night before Stormy Daniels appeared on "60 MINUTES" because if you're Michael Cohen, you're the ultimate loyalist
[Cohen:] The words the media should be using to describe Mr. Trump are generous, compassionate
[Borger:] and you still believe Donald Trump will be loyal
[Cohen:] kind, humble, honest
[Borger:] to you. Gloria Borger, CNN, Washington.
[Camerota:] We are following a lot of news so let's get right to it.
[Trump:] This is the most biased group of people that I've ever seen. Why don't I just fire Mueller? We'll see what happens.
[Unidentified Male:] Everyone involved are all people who have basically been handpicked by Donald Trump.
[Avenatti:] It appears that the noose is tightening around Michael Cohen. The president has considerable reason to be concerned.
[Unidentified Male:] A lot of this stuff is way beyond the mandate of why the special counsel was created in the first place. What the president said is that he believes he should be able to determine who is investigated in this country. That's what dictators do.
[Trump:] We are studying that situation extremely closely. We'll be making some major decisions.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm not confident that this president is getting a thorough counsel from the right sources.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] The United States is determined to see the monster who dropped chemical weapons on the Syrian people held to account.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.

[Smerconish:] It's finals time on college campuses and it's pretty typical to fall asleep in a dorm common room. When a black Yale University graduate student snoozed on a couch in her dorm, a white student called campus police who showed up and interrogated her. The black student whose name I may be mispronouncing, Lolade Siyonbola posted two videos of the encounter to Facebook where they went viral and drew thousands of comments. This is part of an ongoing national problem we keep seeing more and more examples of police being called by white people who are reporting black people for mundane activities. There were the two black men at the Starbucks right here in Philadelphia arrest forward not buying a drink while they waited for a business meeting, a black former White House employee who moved into a building in Harlem and a neighbor called cops about him being in his own building; three Missouri teens shopping for prom clothes in a Nordstrom who were wrongly charged with shoplifting. "The New York Times" just this morning summarizing these cases and more with a headline, "When White People Call the Police on Black People." It cites a NPR survey from last year in which half of African-Americans said they personally experienced racial discrimination in police interactions. As the Yale student said in her video, I deserve to be here. So what's to be done? Joining me is Cornell Brooks, the former President of the NAACP, currently a visiting professor at Boston University. Cornell, how do you apportion blame for this Yale incident, your alma mater, by the way?
[Cornell Brooks, Visiting Professor And The Former President Of The Naacp:] Yes, we have to be very clear. The blame falls squarely on the white graduate student, Miss Brioche, I believe. Because when you use blue uniforms to police presumably white spaces to maintain white privilege, this is not only a moral offense, it's potentially a crime. In other words, when you knowingly call the police to use them to harass a fellow student, it appears that she has called the police previously on African-American students. It appears from her interaction with Ms. Siyonbola that she knew that sleeping in a common area of a dorm was not a crime. What we have here is essentially discrimination by cop. It is white graduate student's responsibility for this whole entire mess and Yale has responded, I think, in a very sensitive way. They called that student into account, and so, yes, the blame falls on the white graduate student.
[Smerconish:] So that's actually my next question. I want to put on the screen the statement issued by the Yale police chief which says this: they informed the caller the student had been in the common room, was an authorized resident and had every right to be there. They also explained this was not a police matter and were reporting the incident to the Dean of Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. Should the white student be reprimanded?
[Brooks:] Yes. Think about this. We should not be using our police officers to engage in discrimination in public accommodations or accommodations on university campuses where we have a student calling the police for something she knows is not a crime. She's essentially trying to use the police to effectuate her personal preferences in terms of segregated white space. That's unconscionable. She should be reprimanded, and in fact we need to think about whether or not she should be charged for filing a false report. That is just simply unconscionable. Where we have an African-American student during finals, during a stressful period on the college camp campus, being subjected to what I would call an exorbitantly high race tax if you will; an emotional toll being imposed on her simply because of the color of her skin. She's a young African-American scholar trying to do what students do everywhere which is to study as hard as you can and make the best grades you can.
[Smerconish:] I can't argue with anything you've said. Just a limited time left but I do want to raise this subject. This case appears inexcusable. I'd love to interview the white woman to find out what was going on in her head. But I do worry in a climate of see something, say something, that a person really does see something that is noteworthy and now says, uh-oh, I better not call the police because I may be perceived as racist. You get the final word.
[Brooks:] Yes, I understand when you see something you should say something, but if you see racial stereotypes, and you believe a person's skin tone makes them a suspect, then rather than say anything to the police, you need a serious conversation with your own conscience. That is not being vigilant in terms of terrorism or vigilant against crime; it's effectuating one's personal preferences in terms of segregated space and discrimination.
[Smerconish:] Cornell commencement speaker at the Kline School of Law. Thank you for being here.
[Brooks:] Yes, I'm looking forward to it. Take care, Michael. Thank you.
[Smerconish:] Let's check in on your tweets and Facebook comments. I wish I had more time for social media. I love this. This is outrageous. Napping while black? I've fallen asleep during lectures. If the bitch who called 911, hey, tell me what you really think, was concerned, she should call an RA or campus security or just wake her up. Woman should be fined for wasting essential police services. Yeah, Shauna, I have to say I think there's a legitimate question here of, what do you now do with the woman who made that phone call because she did waste police resources and put those cops in a bad spot. She's deserving of some level of reprimand, I would say, for this. Last chance to vote on today's survey question on smerconish.com. Go to the website now. Which more accurately summarizes the impact of the Russian probe for the Trump Administration? These are both John Kelly's words. Embarrassment or distraction? Still to come the President's plan to fix our infrastructure seems to have hit a major pot hole. Here's my question should we emulate this activist oh, my in England who has figured out how to get the authorities to respond?

[John Vause, Cnn Newsroom:] The world's greatest negotiator is set to agree to less than $1.5 billion in funding for his border wall. A year ago he turned down a democrat offer of reportedly $20 billion. Goodbye El Chapo, hello, El Mencho, with a guilty verdict in a trial of the notorious drug lord, already a new more vicious kingpin is taking his place. And India, making life so miserable for tens of thousands of Rohingya refugees, life in a Bangladeshi a camp is seen as a vast improvement. Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world, great to have you with us, I'm John Vause and you're watching CNN Newsroom. To sign or not to sign, to cave or not to cave, that is the question facing President Donald Trump as he considers a congressional compromise on government funding and border security. The deal falls well short of the $5.7 billion the President demanded for his border wall with Mexico, but signing it would avert another damaging shutdown.
[Donald Trump, U.s. President:] Am I happy at first glance? I just got to see it. The answer is no, I'm not. I'm not happy. But am I happy with where we're going? I'm thrilled.
[Vause:] The deal includes nearly $1.4 billion for new border barriers but it prohibits the use of concrete walls. That means fencing or steel slats that are most likely the option which they'll use. The number of beds available for those detained by immigration and customs enforcement stays the same, just over 40,000 and the Department of Homeland Security will get a $1.7 billion increase in overall funding. Kurtis Lee is a National Correspondent for the Los Angeles Times and he joins us from L.A. Good to see you, Kurtis. Thanks for coming in.
[Kurtis Lee, National Correspondent, Los Angeles Times:] Thanks for having me.
[Vause:] Let's review here the art of the deal. A year ago with that offer for $20 billion reportedly for, you know, probably the grand bargain which included an overhaul of the immigration and legalization for the Dreamers, Trump turned them down, it wasn't good enough. Back in December he demanded almost $6 billion for a wall, he shut the government down for 35 days to get it, he got nothing. So now, it looks like Donald Trump will accept just shy of that $1.4 billion, he gets 55 miles of barrier and fencing similar to what is already in place on parts to the border. He [INAUDIBLE] with this 6 billion, he wanted 200, also miles of steel and concrete barriers, he's not going to get any of that. I guess the President well, he may need a little executive time to take a break for all the winning right now. It just seems clearly this is not over.
[Lee:] No, absolutely. I mean, this has been a campaign promise of Donald Trump. I mean, ever since the 2016 campaign, the President has touted that he is going to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. And, I mean, now, we're more than halfway into his first term and there hasn't been almost any funding for his wall, and which is came off of a 35-day government shutdown. The President has insisted time and again that he wants $5.7 billion for a wall. And now here we are after this 35-day government shutdown and we're just days away for another possible shutdown and democrats have basically said, hey, we will give you this $1.3 billion for fencing and, I mean, you're even seeing republicans saying, hey, President Trump, take this deal. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell had a phone conversation with the President in which he stressed the need for that for taking this deal. So it just remains to be seen if the President does take this deal, but the time is the clock is certainly ticking.
[Vause:] U.S. Vice President Ann Coulter, she hit the Twitter machine to let her frustration be known. Trump talks a good game on the border wall but his increasing which he's afraid to fight for it. Call this his yellow new deal. Then joining his regular appearance on Fox News, the White House Chief of Staff, Sean Hannity was equally critical.
[Sean Hannity, Fox News:] $1.3 billion? That's not even a wall or barrier? I'm going to tell this tonight and we will get back into this tomorrow. Any republican that supports this garbage compromise, you'll have to explain.
[Vause:] Okay. Ann Coulter is not the Vice President, Sean Hannity is not the Chief of Staff, but in many ways, they carry a lot more influence in their roles as conservative commentators. They're seen as being reflective of the base, and if that's the case, the base won't be happy.
[Lee:] No, absolutely. I mean, these are voices that President Trump listens to, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, obviously, he's appeared on his show a number of times and done interviews. I mean, these two individuals, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter, they have President Trump's base, their ear. And, I mean, the base really listens to these two firebrands who are on immigration, and they really do listen to them and the President sees these Tweets and he knows that his base is seeing them so it has to be in the back of his mind. I mean, right around before the 35-day government shutdown last month, I mean, Ann Coulter was Tweeting and there were reports that the President wasn't happy with some of her rhetoric and he was looking at it and that kind of lead to a series of events to lead to the shutdown. But these folks are Tweeting and talking and the President is certainly listening.
[Vause:] Yes. The plan now is to take this deal, take the $1.4 billion and then find money for the wall elsewhere within the government. Even if that plan actually comes together, I wonder if the base and all the talking heads will still be unhappy, because the President will be seen as giving into Chuck and Nancy and the base and the conservative talking heads on the crazy end into the radio dial, they like to fight. They don't like it when this President gives in to the democrats.
[Lee:] No, absolutely. I mean, the President's base loves for him to fight and they love for him to take into democrats and on this issue, I mean. But we saw polls during the shutdown. Time and again, polls showed that Americans were blaming the President for the shutdown and that wasn't you know, that was obviously, you know, probably on allies, people in his administration, their mind with this, but, no. His base definitely wants him to fight and he could be seen as caving on this issue.
[Vause:] Yes. We'll move over here quickly because the President, he's demanding the resignation of Ilhan Omar, one of two Muslim women elected to Congress because of a Tweet over the weekend, which suggested U.S. lawmakers only supported Israel because they have been paid off by an Israeli lobby group. The comment was regarded by both sides to politics as anti-Semitic. Omar issued an unequivocal apology but that was not good enough for Donald Trump. Here's what he said.
[Trump:] Anti-Semitism has no place in the United States Congress. What she said is so deep seeded in our heart that her lame apology, that's what it was. It was lame, and she didn't mean a word of it, was just not appropriate. I think she should resign from Congress, frankly. But at a minimum, she shouldn't be on committees.
[Vause:] Yes, the same President who could see very fine people on both sides of a rally when one of those sides were in fact neo-Nazis and white nationalists carrying Tiki torches and making Nazi salutes. I mean, this is just hypocrisy, which it is just going [ph] and beyond this scale.
[Lee:] No. Absolutely. I mean this is rhetoric. I mean, the President for the President to call on someone to re-sign, I mean, he's with a number of, you know, racially-tinged to remarks during the campaign and, you know, even during his time in office, remarks that offend immigrants that offend the native Americans and obviously the comment that you made earlier about him saying that both sides were to blame, when white nationalists killed the woman in Charlottesville. I mean, this is something that the President has made a number of controversial remarks. And it's kind of interesting that we really see him call on someone to resign, who has apologized for her remarks. But, yes, no doubt, the President has obviously made a number of controversial remarks over the years.
[Vause:] Yes. If that's the level for resignation, then Donald Trump should have resigned a long time ago anyway.
[Lee:] Right, yes.
[Vause:] Finish it off, Kurtis, last word.
[Lee:] Thank you so much.
[Vause:] Okay. Good to see you. Thanks for coming in. Well, international drug lord, prison escape artist and now, at long last, the notorious head of the Sinaloa Cartel has another title, U.S. convict. A jury in New York has found Joaquin El Chapo Guzman guilty of all ten federal counts he faced, including running an international criminal enterprise, that was the big one, drug trafficking, firearms and conspiracy to launder money. He faces a mandatory life sentence with no chance of parole. Guzman, showed no reaction as the verdict was read but one of his lawyers described El Chapo as extremely upbeat.
[Jeffrey Lichtman, Defense Lawyer:] This is a positive thinker. He's a positive guy. And, look, it's a testament, you know, to his character. And for better or worse, this is a guy that doesn't give up. And I can assure you he has lawyers that will never give up.
[Vause:] Well, to Washington now, and Malcolm Beith, author of the Last Narco, inside the hunt for El Chapo, the world's most wanted drug lord, now available at the discount table with all the good books were sold. Malcolm, I'm just wondering, after the verdict here, we had the defense lawyers, they spoke to reporters, they came out, they admitted that they had never seen a prosecution case quite like this one. Here's what they said.
[Lichtman:] I have never faced a case with so many cooperating witnesses. I have never faced a case with so much evidence. And we did our best.
[Vause:] Okay. So here's the question. Is this the end of the story for El chapo? Do you need to change the title of your book to the man he was the world's most wanted drug lord?
[Malcolm Beith, Author Of The Last Narco:] Well, the question now is whether he was the actual last narco or whether he's Mayo Zambala who the prosecution and defense brought up during the trial is really the last narco. And actually I was spoiler alert here, in my book, I contemplated that question too, because in 2010 when it was publish, similar question were swirling around Sinaloa. Is this the end for El Chapo Guzman, we'll see. He's going to spend the rest of his life in prison. But I was talking to a former colleague and friend and we agreed that this is not the last we will have seen of him. Somehow whether through wife, through his sons, who were believed to be running the Sinaloa Cartel or the remnants of it, we will hear his name again.
[Vause:] Outside the court, we heard from the prosecutors, they went kind of all Eliot Ness. Listen to this.
[Richard Donoghue, U.s. Attorney, Eastern District Of New York:] There are those who say that the war on drugs is not worth fighting. Those people are wrong. Every day, we lose American lives. Every day, harm is inflicted on this country by drug addiction. And every seizure, every arrest and every conviction contributes to a noble effort to save American lives.
[Vause:] I guess, perhaps the question should be is this the right way to be fighting the drug war? Last time El Chapo went to jail, what, 2016, 2017, heroin production from Mexico went up almost 40%.
[Beith:] Yes. You could always question the methods of stemming the flow of drugs or trying to stem the flow. Let's face it, they are smart businessmen at this point and they will meet the demand if it's there. They were producing they were increasing the volume of heroin production back in 2008 when I was there knowing that veterans coming back from Afghanistan and Iraq have end up historically turned to opiates, that they were ahead of the curve on this opiate trend, opioid epidemic. That's not surprising. What it really does show in terms of I don't believe in many victories in the war on drugs. It's a long, long effort. But this trial was a good step continuing in the right direction in that a drug lord like Chapo Guzman who had escaped prison twice, who had fled the law, fled justice in Mexico and created plenty of mayhem and effectively terror in some parts of the country was brought to a courthouse in New York where he was tried by U.S. citizens, not particularly a jury of his peers, but close you know, the closest thing that exists on that sort of trial level, instead of, for instance, we didn't drone him out of his base. We didn't bomb him and kill innocents in the meantime. As far as human rights are concerned, I think the fact that he was held on trial is a great development.
[Vause:] With the fall of one kingpin comes the rise of another. Goodbye El, Chapo. Hello, El Mencho. His cartel is makes El Chapo and the Sinaloa guys look like a bunch of Sunday schoolteachers. Here's a reports from Rolling Stone. The cartel has established trafficking routes in dozens of countries, six continents and controls territory spanning half of Mexico, including along both coasts and both borders. The cartel have increased their operations like no other criminal organization today. The network is about the same size as El Chapo's but grew in half the time and these guys sound like bloodthirsty lunatics. Again, quoting from Rolling Stone, in 2015, cartel assassins executed a man and his elementary school aged son by detonating sticks of dynamite, duck tape to their bodies, laughing as they filmed the ghastly scene with their phones. This is ISIS stuff, as one DEA agent who has investigated the cartel. There's also a report say they use rocket launchers, they laid siege to an entire Mexican city at one point, Guadalajara. The comparisons with ISIS in terms of tactics is pretty accurate.
[Beith:] Yes, there's no doubt. I have always been I've long been a skeptic of narco terrorism status that were introduced during the Bush administration. But the truth is a lot of these cartels have long used terrorist-like tactics, beheadings, any sort you know, at the end of the day, they are spreading terror. That doesn't always fit our definition of terrorism. But without a doubt, they're springing on the CJ&G's modus operandi is based that they've seized on the gap that was left by Guzman's, and it was the Sinaloa Cartel's gradual demise between 2009 and 2016. So they basically that's how they have expanded fast across the world. It's the same routes that the drugs need to get there. How terrifying they are and how terrorizing they are really I mean, we have to put it into context. DEA agents are going to sometimes exaggerate the fears or maybe highlight one killing, one specific incident. I don't track this stuff, but it's something worth tracking over the next year or so to see just how violent they're getting.
[Vause:] I want to finish up here with a word from the newly elected President of Mexico. As far as he is concerned more than a decade of a war on drug trafficking is officially over. He recently told reporters there hadn't been any capos [ph] arrested because it's not our main purpose. The capos is a reference to the name of the crime bosses. What we're looking for is safety, to lower the number of daily homicides. A part of that he says, will see you substitution for, let's say, crops [ph]. Can you see the psychos with a duct tape and dynamite deciding that maybe life is a corn farmer would be a better way of making an honest living?
[Beith:] No, it's not going to happen. I mean, my only I'm generally pro-legalization of marijuana at least, the other drugs probably not. It's just not possible. But when Calderon, The President Calderon in Mexico between 2006 and 2012 pushed decriminalization and the hope was to get effectively turnover the drugs long-term to the government. But why are they going to give up a multibillion dollar industry? And the question is would they be willing to just hold their disputes in a court for instance rather than shooting each other? Another reason why this trial is so important, this judicial model, some day, someone like Chapo might be tried in a courthouse in Culiacan, Sinaloa instead of Brooklyn.
[Vause:] And that would be a day to see. Malcolm, thank you so much, always good to see you.
[Beith:] Thanks very much.
[Vause:] In prison life seems to agree with comedian Bill Cosby calling it an amazing experience. He's serving three to ten years for drugging and sexually assaulting a woman in 2004. And his spokesman, Andrew Wyatt, says Cosby is trying to stay in shape even at the [INAUDIBLE].
[Andrew Wyatt, Bill Cosby's Spokeperson:] He said, wake me up at 3:30 A.M., they wake up him up at 3:30 A.M. and he exercises. He's in his cell, he does leg lifts. He pushes up against the bed and does push- ups to stay in shape. He showers. And he waits for breakfast.
[Vause:] Wyatt and Cosby's lawyers are apparently the only ones making jail visits, apparently that Cosby wants it. He talks to his wife on the phone three times a day for three minutes each and has received thousands of letters from total strangers, some even sending money. Persecuted, desperate and running out of options. Tens of thousands over Rohingya facing another crisis only this time from a place where they thought they would have been safe. Details, next.

[Unidentified Male:] alone he could not dispute because those were his shoes and that soil sample was the biggest part of our case.
[Unidentified Female:] When I understood that he was going to get life without parole I was just like Tod. Thank god. Now finally Michelle has some justice.
[Unidentified Male:] Now a jaw-dropping development. It seemed all very innocent at first. The seemingly perfect family shattered. He told me he had children.
[Unidentified Female:] He may have been hiding something even bigger.
[Unidentified Male:] A man who claims to be Chris Watts` former lover is speaking out. Portrayed that he was single.
[Unidentified Female:] Came to her mind that possibly he could be cheating.
[Shanann Watts, Victim, Wife Of Chris Watts:] Weirdo.
[Unidentified Female:] But at the same time, she was like, you know, he he has no game.
[Unidentified Male:] Very insecure and kind of dorky guy. He just told me he wasn`t really out or comfortable being out. Told me that if it would ever come out, he wouldn`t be allowed to see his girls. And the oldest spilled the bones that he was still married. He told me that he was the victim of emotional and verbal abuse.
[Unidentified Female:] An anonymous man claimed he met Watts on a dating app.
[Unidentified Male:] He was trapped in a marriage and didn`t know any way out because of the kids.
[Unidentified Female:] A shocker.
[Unidentified Male:] He just told me, he wasn`t really out or comfortable being out.
[Unidentified Female:] And perhaps this speaks to motive if it`s true.
[Unidentified Male:] My first initial reaction was that I fill. I felt nauseous. You never really know what someone is capable of.
[Ashleigh Banfield, Host, Hln Crime And Justice:] Good evening, everyone, I`m Ashleigh Banfield, and this is "Crime and Justice." In any murder case, the past holds a lot of clues. In the Watts family murders, clues are in high demand. Any detail that might help make sense of an unspeakable crime a pregnant mom and two little girls murdered and dumped in vats of oil. The doting dad in the family videos sure did not seem like the kind of guy who would be arrested and charged with a triple murder allegedly after cheating on that wife with someone at work. But it turn out we`re only just beginning to find out about the secret life that Chris Watts may have been living while at the same time expanding his own family. Our producer has tracked down a man who claims to be Chris Watts` former gay lover, who he says dated Chris Watts for almost a year. While he has shared his identity with us, he is asked us not to make it public. While we cannot independently verify everything he says about Chris, our producers has seen texts messages the two had apparently exchanged. And if his story is true it may help to explain that other affair that police say they discovered at his work. And it just may reveal why Chris tried so hard to bury those details in his arrested affidavit. Joining me now, Steve Helling, senior writer with "People" magazine, he is just back from Colorado where he is been reporting on this story extensively. And you have a few more bombshells to drop tonight. First and foremost, Steve, your reaction to the interview you sat and listened to on this very program throughout the hour last night.
[Steve Helling, Senior Writer, People Magazine:] You know, I found it really, really interesting because he did seem to know certain details that were not in the police reports, and were not in all the documents that were out there. Believe me, I`ve read those documents again and again and again. He was able to explain certain things about the house, he was able to explain certain things about the truck, things that you don`t just know. So that certainly gave some level of credence that at least he is in the know about certain things. You know, whether or not everything he said is true, you and I can`t know that. But he certainly knew more than the average person would know about the Watts family.
[Banfield:] So then there are the average people, and then there are the people actually doing the investigation. You have spoken to somebody close to the investigation. What are you learning from your sources about this revelation?
[Helling:] Again, you know, they there`s a lot of things that they believe could be there could be some truth to what the gentleman was saying. They also say that, yes, Chris Watts has had relationships outside of his marriage with both men and women. So that would certainly make it a little bit more plausible what we heard last night.
[Banfield:] So, let me just be crystal clear. with People Magazine over the decades that I`ve known you has been impeccable.
[Helling:] Thank you.
[Banfield:] I know you personally. I sat with you for months on in for the Casey Anthony case, we have sit beside each other in the courtroom. I know your reporting is excellent.
[Helling:] Thank you.
[Banfield:] And you have a police source who has now confirmed that Chris Watts had, plural, relationships with men, plural, and women outside of his marriage.
[Helling:] That is the exact, direct quote, yes, Ashleigh. That is true.
[Banfield:] We also know that a detective was apparently meeting with the man whom we interviewed last night, and that meeting was supposed to be starting now. And so we have yet to find out the outcome of that meeting. We again are trying to independently confirm this. We spoke with the law enforcement, the district attorney, confirmed to us, that they were aware of our interview last night. In fact, I believe they said we are well aware of your interview, and that was where they stopped. They said they wouldn`t comment on the interview, on the voracity of it, whether they are following up on it, whether they are sending their investigators out. We did receive word from the interview that he actually at the top of this program, because a police source a police detective, a woman, female police detective was meeting with him in the way he described it. Steve, can I just ask you in your estimation, when you spoke with your source, did they get a sense of the interview that they heard last night, did they believe him?
[Helling:] Yes. So what my source told me was that my source was that there was a lot of consistencies with the things that they already been uncovering about Chris Watts and his wife and that nothing that they heard that your interview happened last night, there was nothing inconsistent with what they know at this point. So there were no red flags. Nobody was sitting there saying, wait, that is a red flag, that is not true. That is not what the investigator were doing when they were watching your interview.
[Banfield:] It`s also congruous with the lifestyle that they say they had discovered he`d been leading with other men and other women. Did your source was your source able to let you know whether that redacted warrantless affidavit is referring to a man or a woman at work with whom he was having an affair?
[Helling:] That is one of as well, Ashleigh, my source knows the answer to that question, and my source will not tell me the answer to that question. We`re hoping to at some point get there, but that is not that hasn`t been confirmed to me yet.
[Banfield:] I`m just going to ask your professional opinion on something. And I`ll tell you what mine is. You can share it live on the air. I`ve read a lot of these warrants, OK. I`ve seen a lot of these warrants. Some of them are blacked out to the point where you can almost make no sense of them. This one is not like that. I`m just going to hold up the actual physical paper so that you can see this blackened out area on the bottom. When I count the lines that are redacted, there are four of them. Not four complete lines, but essentially there are four, there`s one off the image on the screen right now. Right below it, there`s portion of a line and what`s remarkable, Steve, is that if you look through the court documents and in sequence, this is the kind of thing that a prosecutor might redacted to protect the innocent party who had no part in any of this and his life is about his or her life is about to be destroyed. Oftentimes, law enforcement will do that. That is not why this was redacted. One of the first orders of business for Chris Watts and his attorneys as they`re staring down the possibility of a death penalty for a triple murder was to put forth a motion themselves to redact that information. Your spidey senses can`t be as far off as mine in knowing that that is not the first thing that is usually on your mind when you are in that much trouble.
[Helling:] No. I think it`s very interesting that the only place where we have a block of blacked out information is around the affair that he was allegedly having. And you know, it`s interesting blocking all that out takes out any sort of pronounce it takes out everything. So, you know, I can`t tell you whether it`s a man or woman, and we don`t know. But it certainly makes me think when it`s blacked out like that that there`s some bombshell in those four lines that could be about sexuality or it could be about something else. But if there is something there that is more than just a name and an address.
[Banfield:] Well, that is exactly it. As we have looked at these documents before, we see things that are redacted, that are necessary. The rest of which is not necessary. And typically a name and an address and maybe even a work title might be redacted, but that would constitute all of about a line, maybe two.
[Helling:] Right.
[Banfield:] Not four. So that is where I`m just curious about the information that is attached to this. It also says, in a subsequent interview, Chris blank, blank, blank, blank, blank, blank, blank, blank asked to speak with his father who was present at the police department. So perhaps there was a lot of information that was being revealed in that interrogation room that even his father might not have been privy to at the time, as well. One other question for you. The there`s another big break that you`re revealing in "People" magazine. And that is that your police source was there during the booking and made some alarming observations of Chris Watts. What did your police source say?
[Helling:] I want to be clear about this. This was a different source. I spent a long time there. But yes, a source who was there for the booking process said that unlike you know, you see everything in the process, the fingerprinting, the mugshot, being booked into jail. And a lot of times people are crying. A lot of times people are upset, they are agitated, they`re angry. And Chris Watts was none of those things. He was calm, he was very stoic. He was acting like this was just he couldn`t be bothered with the whole thing. Which is a very interesting thing considering that this was just hours before his family, they announced his family`s bodies had been found.
[Banfield:] Well, you know, I`ll tell right now, and I`m not we have hundreds of videos at this point in this program, in this case. We`re watching one where he was somewhere around the booking process. But here he is sitting in court, Steve, and when you say stoic or flat affect, that is what I thought in court because he had to be marched right past the grieving father and brother of Shanann Watts as they wept, as that father wept in court. And there`s another stoic look. This is a man who if you believe the police has just literally finished burying his wife and throwing and submerging his two little pig tailed angels in oil. So, to see the effect of him on that porch and again, if you believe the police, he copped to it. He copped to having done this just hours prior. Right, within a day. And there`s the effect on the porch. So it really does coincide and he displayed in the booking process. This is a guy again, we are three days from the actual death of his children. Whether he did it or whether his wife did it. Within three days of the death of his children, his affect was nothing.
[Helling:] No. And when you think about it, look, you`re a mom, I`m a dad. I tear up at anything bad that happens to my kids. So I can`t imagine just being so flat and having no emotion so quickly after, you know, what is clearly, a violent death, it just doesn`t make any sense.
[Banfield:] And no matter whose hands was that. Let us just say, notwithstanding whatever story`s true here true, your daughters just died.
[Helling:] Exactly.
[Banfield:] And you just watched them disappear into a vat of oil. That has to mean something, unless are you truly not human. It has to mean something. Steve, I have teared up to stories that I`m not connected to at all.
[Helling:] Exactly.
[Banfield:] But when it involves children who are so innocent, who have no defense at all it is and I have been wondering have you heard any of the reporting from the jail? They are fund up so tight as to what he is like in that cell. Is he under suicide who just lost their families would be? Is he despondent, is he asking for a bible, are we getting any of those color details from the cell where he is being held?
[Helling:] We are not, and that is very interesting. Because usually by now, we would have heard something. I mean, we have video of Casey Anthony in jail at one point and we are not getting anything like that. Which shows that they`re keeping everything very close to the chest for whatever reason.
[Banfield:] So, following up on the reporting that you and I have been doing in the last 24 hours, regarding these relationships that your police source, again, Steve Helling, if you are just joining us, People magazine, senior writer, and one of the better crime journalist that I have ever come across in the business has a police source who has confirmed that Chris Watts had relationships, plural, outside of his marriage, with both men and women. That is Steve`s reporting tonight. And I`m sure it is going to be in the magazine if not on people.com already.
[Helling:] Right.
[Banfield:] Did you find anything on the myriad dating sites that are available both gay and straight? There are so many of these dating sites that he might be had been you know, availing himself of. Because our source from last night said he met Chris Watts on meetme.com.
[Helling:] You know, it`s always hard because a lot of times the profile picture is not a picture of a face, but of a torso. You know, it is an alias, that type of thing. But yes, you know, I`ve been spending the day on bumble and tinder and grinder and scruff, and I`ve been all on those apps, looking to see if I can find anybody who matches his description. So far, no. But there`s thousands and thousands and thousands of profiles to go through. If he is on one app, there are chance that he is on others. It remains to be seen if we`ll find those profiles or not.
[Banfield:] And a note to both your wife and your human resources department tonight as having done this for work product and work alone
[Helling:] I am using my company phone, so, there we go.
[Banfield:] I am here to attest that you have been working extremely hard and really producing some remarkable material. Can you stay with us for the hour?
[Helling:] Sure. Absolutely.
[Banfield:] Because I`ve got a couple of other guests who will join and likely react to your reporting and then I want you to react to some of the other things we`re going run, as well, as the prosecutors right now obviously they`re in an early stage against Chris Watts? But don`t forget, they still have to decide if they`re going to seek the death penalty for this former father. They`re going to rule in and out the leads pouring in, but how do they vet claims of someone like the alleged lover who has spilled so many beans live on the air, we are going to break it down next.
[S. Watts:] I stuck around because he was the one for me.
[Christian Watts, Husband Of Shanann Watts, Suspect:] When somebody is not faithful to their partner, the relationship cannot be sustained.
[Unidentified Female:] He has been cheating bit at the same time she was like, he has no game.
[S. Watts:] I can`t tell you how wonderful he is.
[Unidentified Female:] A man claim that he had an affair with Chris Watts.
[Unidentified Male:] He messaged me. It seemed all very innocent at first.
[S. Watts:] He knew me at my worst and he accepted me.
[Banfield:] I get the chills when I see that. I still get chills video of Shanann Watts from mere weeks ago talking about how special that husband was to her and how she was so in love with him and how he was the best thing that ever happened to her. It wasn`t all an act either. You have to watch video after video to realize that even in her distraction, she can`t help, but gush about this man. There are three framed pictures of the word "Dad" in that home, three of them. This wasn`t a fake. And if it was, it`s about the best Oscar-worthy performance I`ve ever seen on a home video or shall I say dozens of home videos. Shanann Watts and her two girls had trips that were planned all throughout the summer. And the story was that Chris, that loving, doting husband and father, could not make all of those trips. Of course because of work. But after the Watts girls were found dead and Chris was arrested for their murders, that story started sounding less likely, because that is when the police determined he`d been having an affair with a co-worker. And now a source close to that investigations has told "People" magazine and our Steve Helling, our guest tonight, that indeed Chris Watts was seeing both men, plural, and women. And we have tracked down a man who claims to be one of Chris` former lovers. We are not naming him, and we are not showing him. We can`t verify what he says, including that he and Chris got together at least once when Shanann was out of town, but our producer has seen their supposed text messages between one another. And we`ve decided to share his side of the story. In case it helps to shed light on who this man was in all of those critical months leading up to the deaths. Months in which that family seemed full of nothing, but bliss. I want to just remind you that Steve Helling`s reporting has been bombshell after bombshell this week. "People" magazine is on the newsstands right now with his incredible breaking news and also people.com has his newest information which is yes indeed, the man in that beautiful wedding picture under the banner "Secrets and Lies" had a few secrets and was telling a lot of lies. Was, in fact, seeing both men and women according to Steve Helling`s inside source. A source close to the investigation telling Steve Helling. Steve, I want you to stay with me if you will. And I also want to bring in Jon Buehler, if I can. Jon has a unique perspective on this case as only he could. Because he was with the Modesto Police Department as a detective on the Scott Peterson case. Low and behold, here we have a proven liar again in our midst. A man who`s all too friendly with the camera and lies with such ease. We`ve seen this with Casey Anthony, we`ve seen it with Andrew Peterson, we had seen it with Scott Peterson, and we had seen it time after time. This story takes the cake, because of the nature of the video leading up to it. But I do want you, Jon, to comment on this remarkable interview last night from this man who claims that he was with him, he was with Chris Watts romantically for ten months. Give me your reaction.
[Jon Buehler, Retired Modesto Police Detective:] Well, if this information is true and it seems a little may be after hearing about Steve`s excellent reporting on it, it does start to explain that the incredible difference between the emotions that we would expect of a father grieving his children and a guy like this, that likely killed them. It seems like he was probably so far distant from this relationship and being a father, struggling with internal turmoil on where he wants to go, whether he wants to be with a woman or a man and dealing with all this stuff that I think he probably checked out of being a father a long time before this crime actually occurred which explains why he really is not affected by it, comparing this reaction of course too Shanann`s father and her brother in the courtroom.
[Banfield:] I want to ask you about something Steve and I were just talking about. I think it stood out to you, as well, Steve, that that remarkable, big, black mess of ink on the affidavit that we all got. An affidavit that is filled with details, really specific details from the police, and yet some critical details are missing. Jon, you are an investigator, you`re a detective, you have filled out this warrants, you have written these warrants, you have probably have helped to redact some of them. Does this stand out as a little more information redacted than needs to be redacted, if you are just trying to protect the name of some affair at work?
[Buehler:] Not necessarily so much that, but it`s just the fact that the defense came to the court and had the information redacted from the document. It`s usually that is done by the prosecution. And so it is kind of unusual to see this happen. It suggests that maybe Chris has intense allegiance and affection for whoever is in there and he wants to protect them. That seems like that would probably make sense. But for us to do it in in law enforcement, yes we would do that but not to that extent. And often times, if we are doing anything like that we just seal the affidavit so that nobody could see it until the case progressed a little bit further.
[Banfield:] So, I get it. I get it. Even he is facing death biggest crisis of his life, the potential of going, you know, to the death chamber that is what he is facing while he is getting his lawyer to protect his sweetheart. Even that, I`ll give him that, OK, I`ll give him that. Does it require taking four full lines out of the affidavit? Or does that sound like there`s a lot more information than just name, address, and work position?
[Buehler:] It does to me. Because like you said it isn`t going to take that much redacting to get that out of there. But just the mere fact that the defense made that claim, that petition to the court to have it done and they took so much out, if really it really, I`m looking for Steve to cover that tomorrow. I am hoping he can do that.
[Banfield:] Well, if we don`t get to it first. But at this time, I think Steve and I are working in lockstep on some of this just remarkable stuff. And I dare say that in this case it`s they`re once a decade. The Casey Anthony, the Jody Arias, the Scott Petersons, one with so many unbelievable details in them, and I think we`re only at the tip of the iceberg. Steve, you tell me, is this one of those, do you sense that we don`t know the half of it?
[Helling:] We don`t. And this is one of those cases where I think our jaws are going to drop a lot Ashleigh over the next few weeks and months. As things come out, more discovery comes out, as this happens, you know, you`ve been there. It seems like every time something new comes up, you`re like, wow I didn`t see that coming. You get blindsided all the time.
[Banfield:] Yes. Sure didn`t see that coming. I did not see this affidavit coming you know live on the air I just did not see this twist coming and there is so much more I want to ask about that. Kirby Clements as a defense attorney, jump into this conversation with me. You just hear John Buehler say what`s shocking is that it was not the prosecutors who wanted to protect this sweetheart at work, whomever he or she is, it was Chris Watts and his defense attorney that asked to have these redaction done, and the prosecutors agreed. So you tell me, have you ever had a defendant who was facing the most serious charge in his or her life, and the first thought is to protect someone else`s name?
[Kirby Clements, Defense Attorney:] Well, you know, you got to look at all the potentials for that. That is you may actually have a witness or someone that you`re going to call that you don`t want to have the press or people bombarding that person and tainting them. So it may not necessarily be a decision to protect a lover because I love this person or persons, it may be a tactical move. So I have made motions to try to keep things out, not because my client was sitting there dictating it, but because I thought it was going to benefit my client later on down the line. And that could be a very legitimate reason to redact the name of a person or several people.
[Banfield:] Four lines, Kirby, four whole lines. So not just name and address, that would have been one line. Four full lines. You just see on your screen three. There was another one in addition to that.
[Clements:] That, again, it`s that`s a lot of black ink right there. But I can just tell you that depending on what those four lines said, those four lines could have been very crucial to the defense. And you have to make a decision strategically in a case like this. And sometimes if you got to redact the whole page, so be it, but you got to do your job.
[Banfield:] Kirby, you understand more than anybody, as a defense attorney, it`s typically the prosecutors who, A, want to make sure that someone in a high-profile, national headline-making case, isn`t about to have his or her life destroyed by the press on the lawn. Think about Amber Frey. She had to get Gloria Allred as her attorney in that case because unbeknownst to her, the man that she thought was adorable was a murderer, was a wife and baby killer. And so I can understand a prosecutor wanting to protect someone like that. I can also understand a prosecutor and investigator saying, I don`t want whomever this person is talking to the press, I want a clean record of everything this person is going to say, and I want it first, and I want it foremost. That all makes sense to me. I have a tougher time with the defense, the defense protecting this much information. Again, while the charges are so serious, down the road, I get it. But in the moment that you are facing potential of a death penalty story three times over, I can`t imagine that your first allegiance is to making sure your sweetheart remains anonymous. It`s just a little shocking to me. I want you all to hold on for a minute, if you will. I have a regular guest on this program, Joseph Scott Morgan, who is a professor of death. I mean, honest to god, as a certified death investigator, there is no one who knows more about it than Joe. Joe, when we come back, there`s something that I`ve been wanting to ask you a lot bout. Video after video after video, I have seen something that I think is going to play a big part in this case, and I feel like you`re the guy who`s going to know about it, because you can tell a lot from a woman`s manicure. Shannan Watts clearly loved her bright colors, her bold designs. But it is not the colors that she painted on those nails. It is not the manicure that she was so careful about. It is not the seasons that she represented or the holidays or the football games that she reflected in those nails. It is now the forensics under those nails, and the story that they may just tell us about whether the husband of hers whom she loved so much has told his final lie.
[Unidentified Female:] Two thousand eighteen is my year. I am claiming it. We say I am loved I am loved. We love them so much. I am special. I am special. He just didn`t seem like the type of guy to injure a fly. They had the hearts of angels and the souls of angels. I don`t believe that they`re gone.
[Banfield:] As we speak, a stunned community is trying to plan a funeral. Not one, but three. Trying to find a way to honor all three lives, Shannan Watts, Bella Watts, and Celeste Watts. Without reminding anyone of just how dark their deaths were. And we know that daddy will not be at that funeral because police say it was daddy, and it was Chris Watts, who`s responsible for killing them. Though how he might have done it, still remains a mystery. And he certainly has his story. I want to bring in Joseph Scott Morgan, certified death investigator, professor of forensics at Jacksonville State University. You saw that montage going out to break, Joe, of Shannan`s meticulous manicure. She was so devoted to keeping her nails in perfect shape, changing the color by the holiday or the season or the football game, but never once did those nails appear as anything but perfect. And in my estimation, that`s got to be a windfall for investigators.
[Joseph Scott Morgan, Certified Death Investigator:] Yeah, you`re absolutely right, Ashleigh. Let`s reflect back and think about these two children first. The children were found submerged in petroleum, all right, so I don`t know how much trace evidence we will get there. However, I will point this out. Shannan was buried. And with this, what we`re looking at in the nail, beneath the nail, at autopsy, one of things that will happen, they will do what it first referred to as nail scrapings. They will actually scrape beneath the nail to remove any kind of skin sample that there might be from a foreign entity, OK? That is in a person who may be attacking her or whatever the case might be. This is not for the purposes of touch DNA. It is going to be longstanding DNA. And also they will do nail clippings. They will clip away the nails and save these. This is going to be very import. One of the things that I`m very, very interested in in regards to this husband is the following. What injuries if any, if any, did the police observe on his body? I`m talking about around his face, in his beard, remember he`s got this neatly trimmed beard, around his neck, on his wrists, around his arms, anywhere on his shoulders to fight him off. You`re talking about a woman who is pregnant, who has two children. She may have just found out that they were dead. She is going to be upset. There is going to be a fight, in my opinion.
[Banfield:] There would have been some kind of pitched battle. If you`re being strangled, you are fighting for your life. In fact, the video we are showing right now, a lot of people on Facebook and social media pointed out what they thought were red marks on Chris` neck on the left-hand side of his neck, on the opposite side where he`s holding the phone.
[Scott Morgan:] Right.
[Banfield:] In some pictures it definitely looks like there`s a slight red mark. In other pictures it looks like maybe just a blemish. But clearly police know exactly what to look for and how to delineate between those, correct?
[Scott Morgan:] Yes, they do. You know, this is this is trace evidence that is kind of, if you will, kind of protected because it would be beneath the level of the nail. We`re finding out a lot of information about the dynamics of the family right now and all this stuff. But to this point, like you mentioned, the only statement that we really have about the cause and manner of death to this point is what he had initially, that statement he had initially allegedly made to the police. To this point, the coroner has not said anything, the M.E. has not said anything. Nothing has been released.
[Banfield:] Nothing. Yeah. That`s what leads me to my next question for you. I think this is a critical piece of evidence that eventually we will learn when the autopsy is made public. Shannan was on a delayed flight. She was coming home from a work trip on Sunday night but bled into Monday morning. It was around 2:00 in the morning when she got home, and if you and I are any example after a long flight, the last thing we would do is go to sleep in the clothes we were in, correct? And especially if you`re a woman. You want to clean up, maybe wash your face. Chris` story, if you believe the police affidavit, is that she went to bed. And then at 5:00 in the morning, they had some kind of emotional argument. He told her he wanted to split. She went and killed the kids. If she`s found buried in anything other than pajamas, that has got to be a massive clue, correct?
[Scott Morgan:] Yeah, it would be. That means that there was a changing of clothing. This sort of thing. This all goes back to what we call in medical legal death investigation terms as PMI, that is postmortem interval. This is critical in this case. I have always wondered about this case since you and I first started discussing this, Ash. How long had the children been deceased? How long had they been down? And what is the interval between the time in which they passed and what time in which she passed? Is there going to be any difference there?
[Banfield:] Yeah. That will be a big clue, because they have actually said that the window within which we need to assess whether those children were killed is all the way from Sunday into Monday. They are not saying that it was at the same time that Shannan was killed. They`re saying you got to leave that window open, perhaps last known contact with them. Shannan arrives home, we know, for a fact, sometime around 2:00 in the morning. So she definitely died after 2:00 in the morning. But I`m so fascinated to find out what those children were wearing when they were dumped into the oil tanks and what Shannan might have been wearing when she was buried in a shallow grave. What it was that was used to lug those bodies out to that site in the back of his truck as is detailed in the police accusation against him. All of it is so uncomfortable especially when you see a video in the master bed of these little girls singing "Holly Jolly Christmas" with Chris beside them. The master bedroom that became the scene of the crime. It`s so disturbing to see this. I just want to listen to it for a moment.
[Unidentified Female:] Have a holly jolly Christmas. It`s the best time of the year. I don`t know if there is snow. Eight years later, we have two kids. We live in Colorado. Everyone who looked at Shannan and Chris, they just immediately thought it was love. He`s the best thing that has ever happened to me. The way that she looked at him and the way that he looked at her. I`m sickened that a parent could do that to his children and to his wife.
[Banfield:] They went from Facebook friends to mom and dad, to murder victim and murder suspect. Wasn`t all that long ago that Chris and Shannan Watts seemed deeply in love and excited about expanding their family with a brand-new baby boy. But that little boy will not be coming because in only a matter of weeks, the Watts family has drastically changed. Shannan and the girls are dead and dad is behind bars accused of triple murder. And the clues as to what happened are only just starting to surface. The stories of lovers in his past, both male and female, now surfacing. People magazine with an inside source in the investigation saying both men and women in his past, he was involved with all of them. And then there is that investigation and the upcoming funeral for Shannan and the girls. Joseph Scott Morgan, as a death investigator, he says that she strangled those babies. Can you tell forensically if you can get a look at those children`s necks, what the size of the hands were that may have done it? Is it provable that it was either he or she that did it?
[Scott Morgan:] I think that would be very difficult. What would be there, though, Ash, is the fact that underneath the layer of skin, there will be deep tissue hemorrhage in there, focal areas of hemorrhage. So it could be proven that these children and as well as Shannan, had been throttled at some point in time.
[Banfield:] He was just so exquisite at lying. It`s hard to believe him now when he tells the story, but they have to forensically map this out in a case against him. There is, you know, a funeral planned for this Saturday. Alongside the same day that John McCain is being laid to rest, Shannan and the girls will be laid to rest. They are Catholic. It is often protocol to have an open casket. Do you see it as a possibility given the way that it is believed these this mother and two children died? That they could have open caskets?
[Scott Morgan:] I think that it might be difficult. I think that they`re going to be probably in a moderate state of decomposition. I think it would be very difficult, yes.
[Banfield:] And not just necessarily because of the reported strangulation of them. It`s mostly that the state of decomposition after four days, correct?
[Scott Morgan:] I think any kind of external trauma on the neck could be covered, but unless their faces were marked up in some way traumatically. I think that decomposition will be the biggest hurdle to overcome.
[Banfield:] That is just so incredibly sad. All of it. Every aspect of it. Sad but also so enraging when you see the banner on this program, did Chris Watts have secret gay lovers? Now, our Steve Helling with this bombshell reporting from People magazine that yes, indeed, the police are confirming to Steve Helling from People that he had both male and female lovers, that he was more than likely hiding from the woman who could not say more about him in the loving way that a wife would. All of it just so horrifying. To good god-fearing family people across America who look at these pictures and say, god, please, don`t let it be true. Being a mother isn`t all about the big wins, the parental wins. It`s also about the little moments where a child is completely wrapped up in love. And Shannan Watts certainly seemed to be a master of the moments. Her little daily message to her girls is next. It is a fact of life that we all have dark days and difficult nights. But Shannan Watts never hid from her challenges. She used them, good and bad, as a way to help others. And she was teaching Bella and Celeste this vital life lesson, creating something called vision boards that list out the things that we all want to achieve. For Celeste, it was pretzels. For Bella, it was Disney World with the grandparents. And the dream of being a teacher or a doctor or maybe a princess. Shannan told her daughters how very special they were every day.
[Unidentified Female:] What do we do every day? We say I am loved. I am loved. I am beautiful. I am beautiful. I am special. I am special. I am healthy. I am healthy. I am blessed. I am blessed. I am strong. I am strong.
[S. Watts:] I am strong.
[B. Watts:] I am strong.
[S. Watts:] Yes. I am gifted.
[B. Watts:] I am gifted.
[S. Watts:] I am smart.
[B. Watts:] I am smart.
[S. Watts:] I am confident.
[B. Watts:] I am confident.
[S. Watts:] I am perfect.
[B. Watts:] I am perfect.
[Ashleigh Banfield, Hln:] The next hour of CRIME AND JUSTICE starts right now.
[Unidentified Male:] Now, a jaw-draping development.
[Banfield:] An anonymous man who claims he met Watts on a dating app. How soon after you actually met him in person did your relationship turn romantic?
[Unidentified Male:] That time, he just told me he wasn`t really out or comfortable being out. Very insecure and kind of dorky guy.
[S. Watts:] Well, come over. You`re sitting right here.
[Chris Watts, Husband Of Shanann Watts:] I`m right here.
[S. Watts:] Weirdo.
[Banfield:] During that time, did he ever tell you that he was married or had children?
[Unidentified Male:] Well, I knew he had children. She asked him if she could sleep with him him and mommy tonight.
[Banfield:] This alleged lover said he doesn`t know what to believe now.
[Unidentified Male:] There were just lots of red flags.
[C. Watts:] Do I have a desire to keep this relationship going? Do I have a moral obligation to stay in this relationship?
[Amanda Thayer, Friend Of The Watts Family:] It came to her mind that possibly he could be cheating, but at the same time, she was like, you know, he has no game.
[Unidentified Male:] He told me that he was the victim of emotional and verbal abuse, and he was trapped in a loveless marriage. And he didn`t know any way out because of the kids.
[Banfield:] And perhaps this speaks to motive, if, in fact, it`s true.
[Unidentified Male:] I didn`t hear anything until after the bodies were found. You never really know what someone is capable of. He was one of the most gentle people I have ever met.
[Banfield:] Good evening, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield and welcome to the second hour of CRIME AND JUSTICE. It has been a vexing mystery from the moment the story broke. A seemingly wholesome Colorado dad whose beautiful family went missing is suddenly arrested for their murders. After, police say, he led them to the bodies. But if you thought the story of the Watts murders was gripping, it just got a lot more complicated. And it just turned very dark. Because we have tracked down a man who claims to be Chris Watts` gay lover. We cannot confirm everything he says, but our producers have seen text messages that the two apparently exchanged. And if what he says is true, Chris Watts` pile of lies and deceit has now turned into a virtual mountain. Joining me is Steve Helling, senior writer with "People" Magazine. He`s just back from a trip to Colorado where he spent extensive time reporting on this story. You have some bombshell reporting of your own tonight that is on newsstands now, Steve, but, first, your reaction to this extensive interview you sat through on this program last night for an hour as this man poured out the details of a gay relationship he secretly had with Chris Watts for 10 months last year.
[Steve Helling, Senior Writer, People:] Absolutely. And like you said, we can`t verify everything that he said. We just can`t do that. But what we can do is we can say, are the things he said, were they consistent with the things that we already know about this case? And he was able to make some descriptions that were not readily available on police reports and things like that. On top of it all, you know, what he said is consistent to from what I`ve heard from somebody who is close to the investigation who says that, yes, Chris Watts had had other relationships outside of his marriage, both with men and with women. So all of that together makes you think, well, maybe there is some truth. Maybe what this gentleman told you yesterday, you know, maybe it lends some credibility to what he had to say.
[Banfield:] I do want to say that, you know, some reporting about this remarkable interview last night that lasted an hour was that he was anonymous. He`s absolutely not anonymous. I assure you we know exactly who he is. We know his name. We know his phone number. We have been in conversations with him for days. He is not anonymous. He is terrified. He doesn`t want his identity revealed publicly, but that does not make him anonymous. It`s also important to know we reached out to him, not the other way around. A lot of people say that they think this is just a moment he`s seeking in the sun, but we had to work on him for a day to convince him to actually tell the story publicly. Again, not the other way around. But I think the biggest bombshell is what you just said. Your inside source in the investigation has confirmed that Chris Watts indeed was having affairs outside of his marriage with both men and women.
[Helling:] Yes. I mean, that certainly, you know, changes things quite a bit. That explains, you know that explains a lot, if you`re looking through the lens of this case, you know, what these lies may have been that he was telling his family, telling, you know, his wife. You know, we don`t know the relationship that they had, but certainly speaking, it looks as though he was not a faithful husband by the strictest sense of the word.
[Banfield:] Which is so unsettling. You know, I`m sorting through so many videos. There are just dozens upon dozens. And one that stands out, in particular, is a video of Shanann really lovingly surprising him with the announcement that they`re going to have another baby. They`re that she`s pregnant. That the third pregnancy, in fact, is a go. And we often see this, Steve. We often see videos on the Internet. Here she is with her T-shirt. She is getting in position. And it says, oops, I did it or, oops, we did it again. She puts out the pregnancy test, and he comes home. Who knows where from, because this is really only within the last 15 weeks, isn`t it? She died 15 weeks pregnant so this is within a matter of weeks that he walked in to this adorable surprise she set up. Can I actually run the sound of him? Do we have the actual full video of him walking around the corner and being surprised? Because, now, I want to know what his reaction is, knowing that police say he was engaged in affairs with men and women while he`s building his family and seemingly pretty happy about it. Do we have that video? Can I run it? Let`s roll it.
[C. Watts:] So pink means? We did it again. So pink means?
[S. Watts:] That`s just the test.
[C. Watts:] I don`t know. It just says that pink is going to be girls?
[S. Watts:] I don`t know.
[C. Watts:] Guess I guess when you want to, it happens. Wow.
[Banfield:] I guess when you want to, it happens. Now, I`m reassessing what that "wow" means. Wow, what the hell did I get myself into? Or wow, this is great, I love my double life? And can I ask you what your source in the investigation said about our interview?
[Helling:] Well, they were aware of your interview. They said that there were no red flags based on what they heard from the interview compared to the things that they already knew. So there wasn`t anything where he said something that the investigators were like, oh, wait, that`s a lie, that`s not what happened. That`s not to say that they wholeheartedly say every word that he said was true, just that they didn`t see anything that was inconsistent with the things that they were learning.
[Banfield:] So they didn`t dismiss him outright? They didn`t say, you know what, not worth our time.
[Helling:] No, they didn`t do that at all.
[Banfield:] Yes. So we also Steve, we reached out to the District Attorney in this case. And we both covered a lot of cases, and some are porous and some are airtight. And this is one of those airtight cases where you just it`s a struggle to get any information at all. But the D.A. did say to us that they were, in fact, aware of the interview. I think they believe I believe they said, we are well aware of the interview, and then that`s where they stopped. They would answer no further questions. They didn`t say, are you reaching out to this person? They wouldn`t answer that. Do you believe this person? They wouldn`t answer this. Could you tell us if the relationship at work is a man or a woman? They wouldn`t answer that. They wouldn`t go anywhere, in fact, but we did hear from the source, from the man who did the interview last night, from the alleged lover, that a detective was coming to meet with him at 6:00 Eastern, which is about an hour and eight minutes ago. He also said that the detective was a woman. And I`m just curious if you are surprised by that.
[Helling:] No, I`m not. You know well, I shouldn`t say I`m not because everything in this case really does surprise me. But, you know, the bottom line is that when somebody comes forward and starts telling the story, you know, then you have to listen to everything that they say, decide, you know, does it all sound true? Does half of it sound true? So there`s nothing that he said to me, you know, stunned me. But you know, there are some he gave us new leads to look at, Ashleigh. That`s really what`s going on here. And you know, this wasn`t
[Banfield:] Boy, I`ll say.
[Helling:] Yes, this wasn`t the direction I expected this case to go.
[Banfield:] No. But then again, Steve, what you have discovered and, again, if anyone is just joining us on this live program tonight, Steve Helling from "People" Magazine, one of the foremost crime reporters in the country and I have been in the business 30 years, so I know a thing or two about crime reporting, and, Steve, you`re one of the best.
[Helling:] Thank you.
[Banfield:] Your sources are impeccable. Your reporting is impeccable. I have worked with you day in and day out on the Casey Anthony case, and so I know your work is solid. And your source is saying, again, breaking news and a bombshell discovery here, that Chris Watts was having affairs with both men and women while married to Shanann Watts. And it is so disturbing to see these family videos where she seems so in awe of him and so in love with him. And she admires him on Happy Spouse`s Day, Happy Husband`s Day, Happy Father`s Day. She has a tribute video to every one of these hallmark occasions where she pays tribute to him. A surprise birthday present, Metallica tickets because it`s his band. An incredible piece of mechanics` equipment that he wanted for one birthday, she surprised him with it. And then we see this redacted affidavit. And so it`s starting to make a little more sense now, Steve, the redacted affidavit that covers up the information about the person with whom he`s having the affair at work. And it`s a lot of redaction. So now that we know what your source has said in the police investigation, that he was having affairs with men and women, what do you make of this business, about four full lines of redaction, about this person at work?
[Helling:] It just adds to the mystery, Ashleigh, because, you know, we don`t know if this person who he was having an affair with, we don`t know if they were male or female. We just don`t know at the moment. It`s just curious that so much of this was redacted. So there`s absolutely no identifying information that`s out there all of a sudden. And that`s you know, that is that certainly leaves a lot of doors open at this point. And so nothing will surprise me, when we finally see this nonredaction, what it ends up being.
[Banfield:] Yes. And I`m going to recreate that graphic for later because that shows three lines. There`s one more line after it that`s blacked out as well, having to do with this topic of this lover at work, whomever he or she is. Steve, the hits keep coming. Your scoops have been incredible today. You have another one. You have another source in the investigation present at the time that Chris Watts was brought in for the booking. So let`s just set the stage for our viewers. Presumably, if what Chris Watts says is true, he is being booked for a story whereby he saw his children being murdered before his very eyes and in a rage, murdered his loving wife. And yet in the booking, what did your source witness?
[Helling:] My source told me that there was not a lot of emotion there. And normally, there is emotion. When somebody who is not a career criminal is being booked into jail on serious charges, they`re upset. They`re angry, they`re crying, they`re unhappy. And there was none of that. He just kind of went through the motions. He was very stoic. He was very reserved. And it was almost like he couldn`t be bothered by the whole thing, was the quote that I got. And I think that`s really, really interesting.
[Banfield:] Couldn`t be bothered by the whole thing. Was he aware that he was staring down three first-degree murder charges which, in the state of Colorado, can bring with them the death penalty?
[Helling:] Well, obviously, he was aware that he was getting arrested for the deaths of his family. So, yes, I mean, he`s a smart guy. He was certainly aware of it. And you know, that could there could be many explanations for why. I guess, we could say that, you know, was he in shock, whatever, but all we know is that he didn`t show emotion as he was being booked into jail.
[Banfield:] You know when else he didn`t show any emotion, was when he actually made that court appearance as well and walked right by Shanann`s grieving, sobbing father who could barely keep his head up and the icy death dagger of a stare from Shanann`s brother, Franky, who was also in that courtroom. And the flat affect on the porch when he was begging us all to help us find his pretty wife and beautiful children, who were, I don`t know, somewhere out there. I don`t know, maybe she did take off. But in this moment in court, the emotion was so raw from Shanann`s family. That`s her father. And that`s her brother on the right, throwing a death stare at that man across the courtroom. And yet he held his head high. Chris Watts stared across the courtroom. He sure didn`t show that he was upset about his two babies being dead. According to his story, they had just been murdered by his wife, but he showed no emotion at all. Sat there stoically just like that.
[Helling:] It boggles the mind. I don`t know how anybody would react that way. And I understand people react differently under stressful situations, but this just goes outside what you would expect somebody to do in such a stressful situation. Even if we believe every word that he says.
[Banfield:] Sure.
[Helling:] This doesn`t this isn`t this certainly doesn`t
[Banfield:] It`s not plausible.
[Helling:] Yes, it doesn`t seem plausible.
[Banfield:] Yes. Something else that you broke that is incredible. Your inside source in the investigation says if his story is the way he tells it, the evidence does not match.
[Helling:] Right. And you know, obviously, I don`t know what all the evidence is and you don`t know what all the evidence is, but the investigators are putting together what the evidence is. And they`re saying right now, you know, his story doesn`t add up. And that`s not a big surprise, really, because we certainly know that he was charged with three counts of first-degree murder, which means police do not believe his story. But they haven`t found anything since that has made them change their mind and say, well, we need to drop these charges.
[Banfield:] Your reporting has been amazing, and it`s just bombshell after bombshell. The magazine "People" Magazine`s issue with Steve`s reporting is on newsstands right now. And I guarantee you, if you go to dotcom, he`ll have updated it with even more brand-new information. Thank you so much, Steve. I really appreciate all of this.
[Helling:] Thank you.
[Banfield:] I also want to let our viewers know that the prosecutors, as Steve said, they`re still in the early stages of building this case against Chris Watts. But how do they decide what are the good leads and what aren`t? That`s next.
[S. Watts:] He stuck around because he was the one for me.
[C. Watts:] When somebody is not faithful to their partner, the partners realize the relationship cannot be sustained.
[Thayer:] He could be cheating, but at the same time, she was like, he has no game.
[S. Watts:] I can`t tell you how wonderful he is.
[Banfield:] A man claims that he had an affair with Chris Watts.
[Unidentified Male:] He messaged me. It seemed all very innocent at first.
[S. Watts:] He knew me at my worst and he accepted me.
[Banfield:] I still get the chills when I see that. I still get the chills when I see a video of Shanann Watts from mere weeks ago talking about how special that husband was to her and how she was so in love with him and how he was the best thing that ever happened to her. And it wasn`t all an act either. You have to watch video after video to realize that even in her distraction, she can`t help but gush about this man. There are framed pictures of the word "dad" in that home. Three of them. This wasn`t a fake. And if it was, it`s about the best Oscar-worthy performance I have ever seen on a home video. Or shall I say, dozens of home videos. Shanann Watts and her two little girls had trips that were planned all throughout the summer. And the story was that Chris, that loving, doting husband and father, could not make all of those trips. Of course, it was because of work. But after the Watts girls were found dead and Chris was arrested for their murders, that story started sounding less likely. Because that`s when the police determined he had been having an affair with a co-worker. And now, a source close to that investigation has told "People" Magazine and our Steve Helling, our guest tonight, that indeed, Chris Watts was seeing both men, plural, and women. And we have tracked down a man who claims to be one of Chris` former lovers. We are not naming him and we`re not showing him. We can`t verify what he says, including that he and Chris got together at least once when Shanann was out of town, but our producers have seen their supposed text messages between one another. And we have decided to share his side of the story in case it helps to shed light on who this man was in all of those critical months leading up to the deaths. Months in which that family seemed full of nothing but bliss. I want to just remind you that Steve Helling`s reporting has been bombshell after bombshell this week. "People" Magazine is on the newsstands right now with his incredible breaking news. Also, people.com has his newest information, which is that, yes, indeed, that man in that beautiful wedding picture, under the banner, "Secrets and Lies," had a few secrets and was telling a lot of lies. Was, in fact, seeing both men and women, according to Steve Helling`s inside source. A source close to the investigation is telling Steve Helling this. Steve, I want you to say with me, if you will. And I also want to bring in Jon Buehler, if I can. Jon has a unique perspective on this case as only he could because he was with the Modesto Police Department as the detective on the Scott Peterson case. And lo and behold, here we have a proven liar again in our midst. A man who`s all too friendly with the camera and lies with such ease. We have seen this with Casey Anthony. We`ve seen it with Drew Peterson. We`ve seen it with Scott Peterson. We`ve seen it time after time. This story takes the cake because of the nature of all the video leading up to it. But I do want you, Jon, to comment on this remarkable interview last night from this man who claims that he was with him he was with Chris Watts romantically for 10 months. Give me your reaction.
[Jon Buehler, Former Detective, Modesto Police Department, California:] Well, if this information is true and it seems a little bit more likely tonight that it may be after hearing about Steve`s excellent reporting on it it does start to explain that incredible difference between the emotions we would expect of a father grieving their children and a guy like this that likely killed them. It seems like he was probably so far distant from this relationship and being a father, struggling with internal turmoil on where he wants to go, whether he wants to be with a woman or a man, and dealing with all of this stuff, that I think he probably checked out of being a father a long time before this crime actually occurred, which explains why he really is not affected by it. Comparing his reaction, of course, to Shanann`s father and her brother in the courtroom.
[Banfield:] I want to ask you about something Steve and I were just talking about. I think it stood out to you as well, Steve, that remarkable big black mess of ink on the affidavit that we all got. An affidavit that is filled with details, really specific details from the police, and yet some critical details are missing. Jon, you`re an investigator. You`re a detective. You have filled out these warrants. You have written these warrants. You have probably helped to redact some of them. Does this stand out as a little more information redacted than needs to be redacted if you`re just trying to protect the name of some affair at work?
[Buehler:] Well, not necessarily so much that but it`s just the fact that the defense came to the court and had those certain information redacted from the document. Usually, that`s done by the prosecution, and so it`s kind of unusual to see this happen. It suggests that maybe Chris has some intense allegiance and affection for whoever is in there, and he wants to protect them. And it seems like that would probably make some sense. But for us to do it in law enforcement, yes, we would do that, but not to this extent. And oftentimes, if we were going to do anything like that, we would just seal the affidavit so that nobody could see it until the case progressed a little bit further.
[Banfield:] So I get it. I get it. Even while he`s facing down the biggest crisis of his life, the potential of going, you know, to the death chamber that`s what he`s facing while he`s getting his lawyer to protect his sweetheart. Even that, I`ll give him that. OK, I`ll give him that. Does it require taking four full lines out of the affidavit, or does that sound like there`s a lot more information than just name, address, and maybe work position?
[Buehler:] Well, it does to me because, like you said, it isn`t going to take that much redacting to get that out of there. But just the mere fact that the defense made that claim or that petition to the court to have it done and they took so much out, it really I`m looking for Steve to uncover that tomorrow. I`m hoping he can do that.
[Banfield:] Well, if we don`t get to it first. But at this point, I think Steve and I are working in lockstep on some of this just remarkable stuff. And I dare say that, in this case, it`s they`re once a decade, the Casey Anthonys, the Jodi Arias, the Scott Petersons. Ones that have so many unbelievable details in them. And I think we`re only at the tip of the iceberg. And, Steve, you tell me, is this one of those where you sense we don`t know the half of it?
[Helling:] We don`t. And this is one of those cases where I think our jaws are going to drop a lot, Ashleigh, over the next few weeks and months as things come out, as more discovery comes out, as this happens. You know, you have been there. It seems like every time something new comes up, you`re like, wow, I didn`t see that coming. You`re you get blindsided all the time.
[Banfield:] Yes, I sure didn`t see that coming. I didn`t see this affidavit coming when it was let you know, let out live on the air.
[Helling:] Yes.
[Banfield:] I just did not see this twist coming. And there`s so much more I want to ask about that. Kirby Clements is a defense attorney. Jump into this conversation with me. You just heard Jon Buehler say what`s shocking is that it was not the prosecutors who wanted to protect this sweetheart at work, whomever he or she is. It was Chris Watts and his defense attorney that asked to have this redaction done, and the prosecutors agreed. So you tell me, have you ever had a defendant who is facing the most serious charge in his or her life, and the first thought is to protect someone else`s name?
[Kirby Clements, Senior Partner, The Clements Law Group:] Well, you know, you`ve got to look into all of the potentials for that. That is, you may actually have a witness or someone that you`re going to call that you don`t want to have the press or people bombarding that person and tainting them. So it may not necessarily be a decision to protect a lover because I love this person or persons. It may be a tactical move. So I have made motions to try to keep things out not because my client was sitting there dictating it but because I thought it was going to benefit my client later on down the line. And that could be a very legitimate reason to redact the names of a person or several people.
[Buehler:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Four lines, Kirby? Four whole lines. So not just name and address, that would`ve been one line. Four full lines. And you just see on your screen three. There was another one in addition to that.
[Clements:] That, again, is so that`s a lot of black ink right there, but I can just tell you that, depending on what those four lines said, those four lines could have been very crucial to the defense. And you have to make a decision strategically in a case like this. And sometimes if you`ve got to redact the whole page, so be it, but you`ve got to do your job.
[Ashleigh Banfield, Hln:] So, Kirby, you understand though more than anybody as a defense attorney, it`s typically the prosecutors who, A, want to make sure that someone in a high-profile, national headline-making case isn`t about to have his or her life destroyed by the press on the lawn. Think about Amber Frey. She had to get Gloria Allred as her attorney in that case, because unbeknownst to her, the man that she thought was adorable was a murder, was a wife and baby killer. And so, I can understand a prosecutor wanting to protect someone like that. I can also understand a prosecutor and an investigator saying I don`t want whomever this person is talking to the press.
[Shannan Watts, Murder Victim:] 2018 is my year. I`m claiming it. We say, I am loved.
[Celeste Watts, Murder Victim:] I am loved.
[S. Watts:] I am special.
[C. Watts:] I am special.
[Unidentified Female:] He just didn`t seem like the type of guy to injure a fly. They have the hearts of angels and the
[Banfield:] As we speak, a stunned community is now trying to plan a funeral. Not one but three.
[Joseph Scott Morgan, Certified Death Investigator:] Yes, you`re absolutely right, Ashleigh. Let`s reflect back and think about these two children first. These children were found submerged in petroleum, all right? I don`t know how much trace evidence
[Banfield:] Well, there would have been some kind of pitched battle. You`re being strangled, you are fighting for your life. In fact, the video we`re showing right now, a lot of people on Facebook and on social media have pointed out what they thought were red marks on Chris` neck, on the left-hand side of his neck, on the opposite side where he`s holding the phone. In some pictures, it definitely looks like there`s a slight red mark. In other pictures it looks like maybe just a blemish, but clearly, police know exactly what to look for. And how to delineate between those, correct?
[Morgan:] Yes, they do. And you know, this is this is trace evidence that is kind of
[Banfield:] Yes. So and that`s what leads me to my next question for you. And I think this is a critical piece of evidence that eventually we will learn when the autopsy is made public. Shannan was on a delayed flight, she was coming home from a work trip on Sunday night that bled into Monday morning. It was around 2:00
[Morgan:] Yes. It would be. That means that there was a changing of clothing, this sort of thing, and this all goes back to what we call in medical legal death investigation terms as PMI, that is post-mortem interval. This is critical in this case. I have always wondered about this case since you and I first started discussing this, Ash, how long had those children been deceased, how long had they been down? And what is the interval between the time in
[Banfield:] Yes, that will be a big clue because they had actually said that the window within which we need to assess
[Bella Watts, Murder Victim:] Have a holly jolly Christmas. It`s the best time of the year. I don`t know if there is snow but
[S. Watts:] Eight years later, we have two kids. We live in Colorado.
[Unidentified Female:] Everyone who looked at Shannan and Chris, they just immediate thought was love.
[S. Watts:] He is the best thing that has ever happened to me.
[Unidentified Female:] The way that she looked at him and the way that he looked at her. I`m sickened that a parent could do that to his children and to his wife.
[Banfield:] They went from Facebook friends to mom and dad to murder victim and murder suspect. Wasn`t all that long ago that Chris and Shanann Watts seemed deeply in love. And excited about expanding their family with a brand-new baby boy. But that little boy will not be coming because in only a matter of weeks, the Watts family has drastically changed. Shannan and the girls are dead, and dad is behind bars accused of triple murder. And the clues as to what happened are only just starting to surface. Stories of lovers in his past, both male and female, now surfacing. People Magazine with an inside source in the investigation saying both men and women in his past, he was involved with all of them. And then there is that investigation and the upcoming funeral for Shannan and the girls. Joseph Scott Morgan, as a death investigator, he says that she strangled those babies. Can you tell forensically if you can get a look at those children`s necks, what the size of the hands were that may have done it? Is it provable that it was either he or she that did it?
[Morgan:] I think that that would be very difficult, what would be there, though, Ash, is the fact that underneath the layer of skin, there will be deep tissue hemorrhage in there,
[Banfield:] I mean, he was just so exquisite at lying, it`s hard to believe him now when he tells the story but they have to forensically map this out in a case against him. There is, you know, a funeral planned for this Saturday, alongside the same day that John McCain is being laid to rest, Shannan and the girls will be laid to rest. They are catholic. It is often protocol to have an open casket. Do you see it as a possibility given the way that it is believed these this mother and two children died, that they could have open caskets?
[Morgan:] I think that it might be difficult. I think that they`re going to be probably in a moderate state of decomposition. I think that would be very difficult, yes.
[Banfield:] And not just necessarily because of the reported strangulation of them, it`s mostly that the state of decomposition after four days, correct? I mean, that is just so incredibly sad, all of it, every aspect of it, sad but also so enraging. When you see the banner on this program, Did Chris Watts Have Secret Gay Lovers? Now, Steve Helling with this bombshell reporting from People Magazine that yes, indeed, the police are confirming to Steve Helling from People that he had both male and female lovers, that he was more than likely hiding from the woman who could not say more about him in the loving way that a wife would. All of it just so horrifying to good God-fearing family people across America who look at these pictures and say, God, please, don`t let it be true. Being a mother isn`t all about the big wins, the parental wins, it`s also about the little moments where a child is completely wrapped up in love and Shanann Watts certainly seemed to be a master of the moments. Her little daily message to her girls is next. It is a fact of life that we all have dark nights and very difficult days but Shanann Watts never hid from her challenges. Instead she used her experiences, good and bad as a way to help others. And she was teaching Bella and Celeste this vital life lesson, creating something called a vision board. If you don`t know what it is, something that lists out all the things you want to achieve. For Cece, that involves pretzels. For Bella, it was a trip to Disneyworld with her grandparents and the dream of maybe one day being a teacher or a doctor or a princess. Shannan told her daughters every day how very special they were.
[S. Watts:] What do we do every day? We say I am loved.
[B. Watts:] I am loved.
[S. Watts:] I am beautiful.
[B. Watts:] I am beautiful.
[S. Watts:] I am special.
[B. Watts:] I am special.
[S. Watts:] I am healthy.
[B. Watts:] I am healthy.
[S. Watts:] I am blessed.
[B. Watts:] I am blessed.
[S. Watts:] I am strong.
[B. Watts:] I am strong.
[S. Watts:] Yes. I am gifted.
[B. Watts:] I am gifted.
[S. Watts:] I am smart.
[B. Watts:] I am smart.
[S. Watts:] I am confident.
[B. Watts:] I am confident. I am perfect.
[Banfield:] We`ll see you right back here tomorrow night at 6:00 Eastern. You can listen to our show any time, download our podcast, Apple Podcast, iHeartRadio, Stitcher, TuneIn, or wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks so much for watching, everyone. "FORENSIC FILES" begins right now. END

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Top of the hour. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Major breaking news from the White House tonight. "The Washington Post" is reporting that President Trump asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions about closing the case against political ally, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the man the President pardoned last evening. More on than in just a moment, but, first, the disaster in Texas and dire warnings of potentially historic floods in days to come. Harvey is now a tropical storm that is stalled on shore within range of the flood-prone city of Houston. Harvey could dump up to three feet of rain in some areas before this is all over. The monster storm has already left behind a wide swath of destruction in Rockport, Texas. Some homes and businesses are just piles of debris now, and more severe weather is expected soon. This video shows a large funnel cloud rolling through a neighborhood in Cyprus, Texas, just northwest of Houston. We just got some new reaction from President Trump tweeting, quote, wonderful coordination between federal, state, and local governments in the great state of Texas. Teamwork. Record setting rainfall, unquote. Now, we checked with CNN Weather Center, no rainfall record set just yet. Seventy-five percent of the rain is yet to come. Let's get started with our special coverage of the disaster in Texas. We've been showing you the devastation out of Rockport, Texas, one of the areas hardest hit by Hurricane Harvey. It's also where the state's one fatality is being blamed on the storm. And fresh, new drone video shows just how destructive those 130 mile- an-hour winds were. In the lone star state, more than 3,000 customers are without power in Texas at this hour, many trying to pick up the pieces of their lives after this devastating storm. Our Martin Savidge is joining us now from Rockport. Martin, I understand you had a chance to speak with some of the victims hit hard there in Rockport.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. People actually brought up the storm, which is hard to imagine when you look at the devastation here. First of all, why in the world did they stay, and then what could it have been like? You're going to hear from them in just a moment. Two things. There is good news to report in that we saw a large convoy now of what looks like relief efforts making their way into the community here. This is everything from National Guard troops that will be helping to secure and patrol the streets, as well as heavy earth moving equipment that will be used to move the debris out of the way to allow more rescue crews to come in. Also at this hour, going house by house, are the first search and rescue teams. To the fatality you've talked about, there is one that is being reported. But, quite frankly, the Sheriff here in this county says he does not know if it is possible there could be more. There was just so much devastation, and the process of searching has only just begun. Right now, they're checking up on those calls for help that came in the night, and then the lines went dead. So those are the first places they'll begin, but this time, it's been divided into a grid. They're working that through the night. As to survivors and what you see here, here's a little more.
[Savidge:] This is fairly typical when you have a major hurricane, just a debris field that is spread all over. And it is all over this town, but I want to show you something else over here. You got to watch your footing because there's nails. But take a look at this. This is not so typical. The entire front of this building, sheared of completely. Now, the interior's been knocked around a lot, but much of it is still intact. You rode it out last night here?
[Tim Freiburger, Hurricane Harvey Victim:] I did, and it was crazy. It was crazy. The wind was unbelievable. We first the wind came and we were went upstairs we have a two-story home and just peeked out the window because you really couldn't see much below. I had everything boarded up, except the upstairs windows. I couldn't reach them. And the fence was waving, you know, when it first started. And then it gave way. About an hour later, we heard this big thump. Well, we have a very big chimney out of brick that had fell over onto the roof and collapsed a part of the roof there. And then, 45 minutes later, the garage had lifted up and slammed against the house.
[Savidge:] Rockport's right on the water. That's part of the reason it got so hit so hard. It's a very tourist town. You can see that the marina didn't fare well at all. There are, what looked like, dozens, if not maybe over a hundred boats here. Looks like many of them suffered varying forms of damage, from light all the way down to a total write off. Also pulling into town, along with that relief column came many, many buses. These are buses that are being brought in to evacuate people. There are people who are sheltering in nearby communities in various shelters that have been set-up, and then there are people who stayed in their homes last night. But it's not possible to stay in this town now. There's just no electricity. There's no water. There's no telephone service. This town, by all modern conveniences, is essentially dead. And it's going to be weeks, if not months, to try to restore some of that service, so they're encouraging people to leave and go elsewhere, to those shelters in, say, San Antonio. Ana.
[Cabrera:] Yes. Those pictures behind you, Martin, and what you showed us, what you walked us through, the amount of damage there, really, is pretty striking. Thank you so much for that report. Breaking news concerning President Trump's pardon of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio. "The Washington Post" now reporting this hour that President Trump had previously asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions whether the government could drop the criminal case against Arpaio, but he was advised that it would be inappropriate. After realizing the case would not be dropped, President Trump decided to let the case go to trial and grant Arpaio clemency if he was convicted. A White House official tells "The Washington Post," quote, we knew the President wanted to do this for some time now and had worked to prepare for whatever the moment and whenever the moment may come. Now, when asked about the President's conversation with Sessions, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told "The Post," quote, it's only natural the President would have a discussion with administration lawyers about legal matters. This case would be no difficult. And the paper says the Justice Department declined to comment. CNN White House Correspondent Athena Jones is live outside the White House following this breaking news. Athena, I know CNN is still working to confirm these details that "The Post" is reporting, but Republicans have already been very critical about this pardon. What impact might this news have?
[Athena Jones, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Ana, I think this is a remarkable report by "The Washington Post." As you mentioned, we've reached out to several White House officials to get their response to this, to find out what more we can about this, but it's remarkable to see a president trying to interfere directly in a specific case. This is not something we're used to seeing presidents do. In fact, in the past administration, if you tried to ask President Obama about a specific case, he would say that he didn't want to comment in order to avoid the appearance of politicizing what should be an impartial justice system method that is going to be carried out by the justice system. And so that is one thing that's unusual. It's also interesting because this appears to be part of a pattern. You'll remember the now former FBI Director James Comey saying that the President, early on in his administration, had a conversation with Comey about maybe he could see a way to let the investigation into his then his national security adviser, Michael Flynn go. And so this is just the latest example of the President potentially trying to interfere in order to help out an ally. And as so this is going to add, most likely, to the backlash that we're already seeing, as you mentioned, not just from Democrats but also from the President's fellow Republicans like the two senators, the GOP senators, from the state of Arizona who are calling this President's move, this decision, into question. But also, just in the last couple of hours, by House Speaker Paul Ryan, who put out this statement via a spokesperson saying, the Speaker does not agree with the decision. Law enforcement officials have a special responsibility to respect the rights of everyone in the United States. He went on to say, we should not allow anyone to believe that responsibility is diminished by this pardon. But it also goes to show you, Ana, that this is something, as "The Post" suggests and as some of CNN's reporting has suggested, that at least the paperwork to pardon the Sheriff was drawn up recently. But this shows that the President has been thinking about this for several months now, if this report is to be believed. He wanted to help his ally, Sheriff Arpaio, who was an early supporter of the President, an early endorser of the President, who was prominent on the campaign trail, and who also shared this with the President. Sheriff Arpaio was also a prominent proponent of the birther conspiracy that said that President Obama was not born in America. So this is someone who has been a long-time ally of the President, someone he clearly wanted very much to help out. Now, he has done so, and we're seeing blowback and now more details emerging about how that decision came about, which is certainly to be to receive more criticism. Ana.
[Cabrera:] All right. Athena Jones at the White House for us. Thank you. I want to bring in CNN Legal Analyst Michael Zeldin. He is a former federal prosecutor who has worked closely with Special Counsel Robert Mueller in the past. Michael, what are the legal implications of asking the Attorney General about dropping a federal case against a political ally?
[Michael Zeldin, Former Special Assistant To Fbi Director Robert Mueller:] Well, so for decades, in order to prevent the appearance of political meddling in federal law enforcement, both Democrats and Republican administrations have had written policies that limit the contact of the White House with the Department of Justice. In 2007, for example, then Attorney General Mike Mukasey issued a memorandum which said, essentially, there shouldn't be these things. You could have them around policy matters, but not on specific cases. So there's a long tradition of not doing this. And so the President doing this violates the many years of practical policy that is designed to ensure that people feel that the administration of justice is impartial from political intervention. So that's problematic. With respect to the specifics of the pardon, there is a process in the Justice Department. There's an Office of Pardon. There's a pardon attorney in the DOJ. There are written guidelines in the Code of Federal Regulations that govern how these pardons should be issued. And none of those rules was followed. And that creates lots of problems about why this was done and the message it sends with respect to the denigration of the seriousness of the offense that Arpaio was convicted of.
[Cabrera:] OK. Let me bring in Page Pate. He is a CNN legal analyst as well. When we talk about this new reporting, Page, that the President, prior to the Sheriff Joe Arpaio, former sheriff now, being convicted of criminal contempt for ignoring and disobeying a judge's order to stop racial profiling, to stop pulling people over and detaining them simply because he believed they were undocumented immigrants, the President apparently went to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, according to "The Washington Post," and said please drop this case against Arpaio. Given this reporting, if true, could it make the pardon now illegal in any way?
[Page Pate, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I don't think so. The President has very broad powers when it comes to issuing pardons. And I think what he's done here, while many, I think, appropriately consider it the wrong to do given the circumstances of the conviction, the type of offense that was involved here, I think he's got a legal right to do it. And even though he may have weighed in during the investigation, and I do agree that that violates, you know, years of both tradition and policy within the Department of Justice, it's still within his right to do it. So you can criticize it politically, you can criticize it from an ethical standpoint, but as far as legally and constitutionally, I think he has the right both to intercede and then ultimately to pardon him.
[Cabrera:] OK. Michael, Mueller, we know, is looking into whether Trump obstructed justice when he fired James Comey and when it came to the Russia investigation. Is it possible Mueller could be now looking into this as well?
[Pate:] Well, I don't think so. I think they're
[Zeldin:] I don't think so. It's
[Pate:] Sorry, go ahead.
[Zeldin:] I think these are unrelated matters. You know, the Deputy Attorney General is always free to expand the Mueller mandate to include something like this, but I don't think this falls within Mueller's purview. But as was said in the outset, though, it does create the appearance of a pattern when the President, if true, ask that the Flynn matter be dropped, and now he's asking the Attorney General again a few months later that this matter be dropped. And so I agree that he has the constitutional right to pardon. I do not believe, however, that he has the right to intervene in a specific case in order to effect a political outcome. I think that's beyond appropriate White House Department of Justice protocol.
[Cabrera:] Page, do you agree that this could back up
[Pate:] Well, there's a difference between
[Cabrera:] Go ahead.
[Pate:] No, I mean, there's a difference between what's appropriate in Justice Department protocol and what's constitutional. I mean, I certainly agree with the idea that there are protocols and policies in place to prevent a president from weighing in politically into a decision about prosecuting someone, but the President still controls the executive branch. And so he has the ultimate authority to decide who is going to be prosecuted in federal court. So I think it's inappropriate, but I still think it's legal, and I think it's constitutional.
[Zeldin:] Well, it's could be
[Cabrera:] So, Page, do you think it could back up
[Zeldin:] It could, Page
[Cabrera:] James Comey's story that let me just, sorry, get this out real fast to just I hear what you're saying, Page, in terms of the constitutionality.
[Pate:] Right.
[Cabrera:] But then Michael was arguing regarding the Mueller investigation. When it comes to
[Zeldin:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] evidence that could back up James Comey's story, that the President had asked him to drop an investigation into Michael Flynn, I mean, could this be a piece of evidence, to some degree, regarding the President's pattern of intervening in an investigation perhaps?
[Pate:] Absolutely. In that situation, I think it does show a pattern of conduct which somebody like Bob Mueller would be interested in because it shows or it helps him prove intent. Because if this is the way the President handles or puts his thumb on investigations, wants to change the outcome of an investigation, wants to change who is going to be charged, what they're going to be charged with, then, although it's not within the specific directive that was given to the Special Counsel in this case, I do think it can be considered as evidence of intent.
[Cabrera:] Michael, final thought?
[Zeldin:] No, I think that's right. I think that there is an absence of mistake or proof of motive or intent that this may relate to. I was trying to add to the question that, does this fall within his mandate? But as a pattern of behavior, sure, I think it would be relevant to understanding whether or not Comey was being truthful about the Oval Office meeting where the Flynn case was asked to be dropped. It seems as if the President has a disregard for the traditions of communication between the White House and the Justice Department. And I would say this one last thing, which is, while it may be constitutional, I think that if it's a corruptly undertaken act, then it may rise to be abusive. And that could give raise to articles of impeachment where one do find that.
[Cabrera:] All right. Michael Zeldin and Page Pate, thank you both. We really appreciate you jumping on the phone on such short notice. Much more ahead this hour. Up next, where tropical storm Harvey is heading next. Stay with us. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Our special coverage continues with "
[Erin Burnett Outfront". Erin Burnett, Cnn:] OUTFRONT next, breaking news, two bombshell court filings tonight from the special counsel, Robert Mueller. One on Michael Cohen and just how he has helped Mueller, the other on Paul Manafort, and his lied. Details about contacts with Trump administration officials. Plus, the president's tweets that he's in the clear tonight. Is he in denial or purposely muddying the water? And then Rex Tillerson versus Trump. Did the former secretary of state reveal one of the most damning details about Trump and the law yet? Let's go OUTFRONT. And good evening, I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, Mueller dropping a major bomb on Trump in a new court filing and we've got a few of them here tonight. In a new filing, Mueller says President Trump's former attorney general, Michael Cohen, has, "Gone to significant lengths to assist the special counsel's investigation." Mueller goes on to say Cohen helped in multiple, "significant respects." OK, so multiple significant respects. And in this filing, we learned that there are multiple Russia related issues that are core to the investigation. So, let me read to you Mueller's words here to that effect. This is from page 6 of the seven-page filing. "Cohen provided the SCO," that's the special counsel's office, "with useful information concerning certain discrete Russia related matters core to its investigation that he obtained by virtue of his regular contact with company executives during the campaign." Matters, plural, core to the investigation. Also, the timeframe, something very, very important here, could be changing tonight. Mueller saying Cohen's help, including discussing contacts with people connected to the White House as recently as this year, just be clear, that's 2018. So again, I go back here, to page 6, and Mueller's words. "Cohen provided relevant and useful information concerning his contacts with persons connected to the White House during the 2017-2018 time period." And also, in this filing, specific contacts with a Russian, a Russian, it appears that we did not know about. You're going to hear a whole lot more about that in just a moment. But it comes as the Southern District of New York also filed a court today about Michael Cohen, recommending a substantial prison sentence for Trump's former personal lawyer. Even as prosecutors said that the president of the United States himself, basically, it could have we're going to talk about exactly what this means, committed a felony by violating campaign finance law with that Stormy Daniels payment. President seemed well aware today that big things were about to drop, going on a Twitter tirade against Mueller, witch hunt, Robert Mueller's big time conflicts of interest, five tweet long rant. Look at it on your screen there with multiple unfounded and some inaccurate just on the facts of it accusations against Mueller. Let's begin here with Evan Perez OUTFRONT in Washington. Evan, we're here just talking about Cohen. Of course, we've got all these Manafort filings as well. I want to ask you though, here, Mueller talking in this seven-page document about the significant areas of cooperation by Cohen. What's most important to you?
[Evan Perez, Cnn Senior Justice Correspondent:] Well, they take about Erin, they talk about these four areas that Michael Cohen was very helpful with the special counsel and one of them has to do with this contact with Russians about the so-called Moscow project. It's a project to build that Trump Tower in Moscow. And there were others connecting with Russians, trying to make contact. There were other Russians trying to make contact with the campaign and in particular they talk a little bit about a trusted person, a Russian national, who was suggesting a political synergy campaign and we'll tell you a little bit more about that. Second thing that they talk about that the special counsel says is that there's information related to Russian related matters, obviously, that were core to this investigation, that you said, you were pointing to the fact that these were things that he learned from interacting with the Trump Organization. That's a big deal as this information as this investigation goes forward. And then of course, the special counsel points out that Michael Cohen describes people he was talking to close to the White House through 2018. That is this year. Again, when the president talks about this is an investigation that is looking way, way back, what the special counsel is saying is that they're looking at information that came in this year and then there's finally, how he was coordinating with people close to the president on some of his false statements. Now we've seen that in some of his in some these court filings but it's very important for us to keep in mind that Mueller wants to know how the lies came about and whether or not the lies were essentially an effort to obstruct this investigation. But back to the Russian. We, you know, we don't know a lot about this person, but this person apparently is someone who is close to the Kremlin and we know that Paul Manafort that we know we know that Michael Cohen had been working on this Moscow project. This appears to be a separate project, Erin.
[Burnett:] And we understand, you know, from looking at this, Evan, to your point, you know, it would seem significant that we are now entering a new, it seems, a new Russian into this who was close to Putin.
[Perez:] Right. Exactly. I mean that's what's interesting about this is that we've seen some of the other characters that Michael Cohen was talking to. We know that he had been in touch with Dmitry Peskov, who is the spokesman, someone very close to Vladimir Putin. We know he was also working through somebody who a Russian national, somebody who has U.S. citizenship, who was trying to be an interlocutor with the Russians. This appears to be a totally different character that we have not seen before and it tells us that the special counsel has more information about this person and maybe we'll see this in more information that comes forward in this investigation.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Evan. We're going to talk much more about this person. You know, talking about multiple times, about a meeting between Putin and Trump. We'll get to those details in a moment. I want to go through the Southern District of New York's filing on Cohen because that was also hugely significant, you know, especially when we talk about whether the president of the United States committed a felony by violating campaign finance law by the Stormy Daniels payment. MJ Lee has been covering and going through this filing. And, MJ, you know, we hear the special counsel say Michael Cohen's been very cooperative but in the southern district, oh, not the same point of view at all.
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Political Correspondent:] That's absolutely right. If you just look at this SDNY filing, it is bad news for Michael Cohen. No question about it. It is actually asking the court to give Michael Cohen a substantial term of imprisonment, only a modest amount of leniency from the few years that he could get. Of course, this is bad news for Michael Cohen, whose lawyers have actually been asking for no jail time for him when he is sentenced next week. This filing from SDNY lays out how he evaded taxes, how he lied to banks, and also how he illegally tried to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. This last point, of course, is the most relevant for President Trump. These are the payments that we have been talking about all year to Karen McDougal and to Stormy Daniels, two women who alleged to have had affairs with Donald Trump. Not only this is really interesting not only does the filing just lay out how Michael Cohen tried to affect the outcome of the election by coordinating these hush payments to these two women, it also goes to some length to say how Michael Cohen was effectively hurting the Democratic process, how he was deceiving the American people and American voters and how he orchestrated secret and illegal payments to silence two women who otherwise probably would have gone forward, gone public with their stories about Donald Trump. And even though, Erin, the filing doesn't actually come out and say that Michael Cohen was delusional or perhaps in denial, the suggestion is at least there. It says that he has a rose colored view of the seriousness of his crimes, and that he is asking for extraordinary leniency even though the crimes that he committed are the so, so serious. And I just want to quickly read a key passage from this SDNY filing that sums up the seriousness of all of this. It says, "After cheating the IRS for years, lying to banks and to Congress and seeking to criminally influence a presidential election, Cohen's decision to plead guilty rather than seek a pardon from his many fold crimes does not make him a hero." Now, that last piece, I'm betting, is going to be a bit of a gut punch for Michael Cohen because again, his strategy has been recently to present himself as a new man who wants to deliver the truth to investigators and to cooperate and to get no jail time, that is their goal, clearly, Erin, SDNY does not agree.
[Burnett:] Clearly not. MJ Lee, thank you very much. As they are requesting three and a half years of prison time for Michael Cohen. OUTFRONT now, John Dean, Nixon White House counsel during Watergate, Harry Sandick, the former U.S. assistant district attorney for the Southern District of New York, April Ryan, White House correspondent for American Urban Media Networks and author of "Under Fire: Reporting from the Front Lines of the Trump White House", and Greg Brower,, former FBI assistant director. OK. Thanks very much to all of you. So much to talk about here. I want to talk, specifically, first about Cohen and the Mueller filing from the special counsel. John Dean, Cohen provided useful information on multiple Russia matters, we learn here, right, including information about contacts with White House officials that were going on as recently as 2018. Which, you know, as Evan and I are emphasizing, could be a significant change here or new look that we're talking about a very different timetable. This could mean the investigation is bigger than we thought, John Dean?
[John Dean, Former Nixon White House Counsel:] It does mean that. There's that very real potential. With Michael Cohen, it appears, given the fact he went to the, apparently, initially, to the special counsel, didn't wasn't truthful with them as a footnote shows. And then went up to the Southern District and had sort of a partial cooperation up there, that he was slow in realizing that he had to come forward. And that's why this information is kind of dribbled out, out of him. And I think what's going on, he's got a very savvy lawyer, principal criminal lawyer, as well as one who is sort of handling the public side of this. And I think he's relying on what's called rule 35 where after he testifies, he can go back to the court and say, listen, here's all the information I have supplied, I'd like a reduced sentence. That's, I think, his hope.
[Burnett:] Which could be, and of course, obviously, Southern District asking for a long sentence, right, more than three and a half years here.
[Dean:] They are.
[Burnett:] Greg, let me ask you, though, in this filing from Mueller, it is very clear, from what they are saying in here, that Cohen is playing a role in the Russia investigation, which is beyond, above and beyond the Moscow tower, right? We're talking about Russia related matters, plural, core to the investigation, contacts with persons connected to the White House from 2017 and 2018.
[Greg Brower, Former Head Of Fbi's Congressional Affairs Office Under Comey:] Right. These all of these recent filings, the Manafort filing, the Cohen filings, and the Flynn filing, all are stunning in that they come as close as we've seen so far at pointing directly to the president in terms of implicating him in this Russia connection to the campaign. And so, the fact that Cohen and Flynn in particular are cooperating with the special counsel to the extent they apparently are, can't mean anything good for the president. And I assume that we're going to see a lot more detailed information to come in terms of what both of them have been able to provide to Mueller's team.
[Burnett:] Right, Harry, because of course obviously, they are tipping their hand in one sense, right? They're saying multiple Russia issues core to the campaign, the timeframe seems to be changing, they're adding another Russian here but obviously this is still ongoing so they're not giving us details on what all these Russian related matters are. But what about this Russian? We have all these details here. This person reached out to Michael Cohen around November 2015. So, you know, Trump announced in June. By November, this person, who as you heard Evan say, could be a totally new person close to Putin that we did not know about, offers the campaign, "political synergy and synergy on a government level." Repeatedly proposes meetings between Trump and President Putin, and says, a meeting could have a phenomenal impact in political and business dimensions. These details are all in here.
[Harry Sandick, Former Assistant U.s. Attorney, Southern District Of New York:] Yes. And you read this, and how can anyone say with a straight face, no collusion or no contacts with Russia. This is through Michael Cohen, someone who was very close to the president for many years, and different from the Moscow project. Now, it does say the meeting did not happen, but it says in the
[Burnett:] Between Putin and Trump.
[Sandick:] That's right.
[Burnett:] That's it does say that meeting did not happen.
[Sandick:] Right. And it also says that Cohen did not pursue his dealings with this Russian, but that was only according to the Mueller filing because Cohen had other contacts with Russia that he thought would be more productive than this new Russian figure. So there's contact with Russia everywhere. I mean I don't want to take the entire hour listing all the different connections between Trump and Russia, but this is a very serious addition to that list.
[Burnett:] And, April, you know, the other question is, how much Michael Cohen knew about Trump's activities, you know, what he really knew. I mean, right? Obviously, it looks like from what we're learning here tonight, he knew a lot more than we thought.
[April Ryan, White House Correspondent, American Urban Radio Networks:] Yes. You know, Cohen is connecting the dots. No matter the fact that he has lied in the past and he is considered a liar by the U.S. Attorney's Office, but Cohen has tapes. He's got proof that is nailing this down. You know, the president just talked about no collusion. Well, Cohen is maybe bringing something else to the table saying that may not be true, Mr. President, and also the fact that, you know, obstruction of justice is on the table as well. Cohen was someone who said he would fall on the sword for the president. He was loyal to the president.
[Burnett:] Take a bullet, right? Those were the words. Direct quote.
[Ryan:] Yes, take the bullet. Take the bullet.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Ryan:] Fall on the sword. But take the bullet, yes, for this president because he was loyal to him and there was a payoff at that time.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Ryan:] The payoff is over. Now he's fighting for his own life. He is giving up all the information that could really connect the dots to the Oval Office, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, if indeed it's true, 2017 and 2018 are in play as well.
[Burnett:] So, Greg, you know, in the filing from the Southern District, and this is the crucial part MJ was referring to, right, obviously they're taking a very tough line against Michael Cohen on his cooperation. But they are saying, in a court filing, right, for the first time, right, they are saying that the president of the United States, you know, knew about this payment to Stormy Daniels. Is this saying the president of the United States committed a felony?
[Brower:] Yes. It's hard to read this document without interpreting it as just flat-out implicating the president of the United States in a couple of different felonies relating to campaign finance laws. I don't know that there's any other way to read that. And so, I think that's the takeaway from that filing.
[Burnett:] I mean, Harry, I know you think that the one the one out could be did he know that it was a violation, the knowledge.
[Sandick:] That's right. That's right.
[Burnett:] So, here's the question, though. What happens? If we are at a point where we're saying the president of the United States committed a felony and then OK, he had no what are they going to do about it?
[Sandick:] Well, they're it's not clear that they're going to do anything about it, for a few reasons. Number one, there are DOJ policies that say that whatever the circumstances, the president can't be indicted until after he leaves office, and it seems as if the prosecutors in the Southern District and on the Mueller team are going likely to follow that rule. The second issue is that because Cohen did not go all the way as a cooperator, did not tell the government everything he knew, did not sign a cooperation agreement, the U.S. attorney's office in the Southern District doesn't have him available to call as a witness. They have a specific program for cooperators. They've had it for many, many years, and as they say in their brief, Cohen didn't follow it.
[Burnett:] And yet, John Dean, we are at a point, if you look at that filing and you say that this is a felony, campaign finance violation, and the president knew about it and directed it, that, again, is a new stage here to be so formally at that point, right? This is a court filing in which that is the clear implication.
[Dean:] That's true and that's exactly what Michael Cohen said in court when he pled. He in his allocution, he implicated Trump directly, that he was doing his instructions that's why the payments were made for his benefit. I don't know that this will forever disappear into some dark hole of unprosecutable presidents. I think will it will resurface in the Congress. I think what this totality of today's filings show that the House is going to have little choice the way this is going other than to start impeachment proceedings.
[Burnett:] And obviously, I just point out what everyone watching knows, you now have a Democratic controlled House, not in the Senate but, you know, you have a real question now of whether you're looking at a Bill Clinton-like moment where you actually get that impeachment vote. April, something clearly on the president's mind and I want to make a point here because the president is, you know, over time vacillated between Michael Cohen, my friend and an honest broker and a liar. The special counsel very clear here on page two of the filings, referring to Cohen, the information he's provided has been credible and consistent with other evidence obtained in the ongoing investigation. They are making it clear we've corroborated all this. We know it's true.
[Ryan:] Yes. I mean, you know, Michael Cohen has been proven to be a liar, but when you have tapes that they have found that may not have been edited, what have you, and you have voices, clearly having conversations, audio tapes, video tapes, whatever tapes, that nails the coffin shut to a certain extent. And then other people who, I guess, if they have evidence on or to talk to, to say, look, we've got this, give us the information. It's not about their word now. It's about the evidence that's in front of them. And Michael Cohen has given them the evidence to prove certain things. So this president, I mean, when he goes out and tweets, he's got to be very careful, because we don't know. I mean, he doesn't probably know a lot that's on the table as well. He may have answered questions. If there are things that we are still finding out, and many who are involved in this are still trying to figure out.
[Burnett:] All right. We're going to continue our breaking coverage here, obviously, of this filing, also the breaking news on Paul Manafort. We've got a new filing here tonight and there's quite a bit of new information in it, how Paul Manafort lied to investigators about five major issues are detailed in here, including his contacts with Trump administration officials. We've got the new details in here, some crucial developments on a couple of those areas. Plus President Trump and the White House just responding to tonight's bombshell court filings. The president is responding at this hour. We're going to talk about that. And Chief of Staff John Kelly, not speaking with the president anymore. He and the president not on speaking terms. This as we are learning that Kelly has now spoken to Bob Mueller's team about the investigation.

[Bolduan:] For so long, most top Democrats were hesitant to use the word "impeachment." Hesitant no more, it seems. Incoming top Democrats are now openly discussing impeachment and even jail time for President Trump based on the new court filings by the special counsel and federal prosecutors. Listen to this.
[Rep. Jerry Nadler, , New York:] Well, they would be impeachable offenses. Whether they are important enough to justify an impeachment is a different question. But they would be impeachable offenses because even though they were committed before the president became president, they were committed in the service of fraudulently obtaining the office. That would be an impeachable offense.
[Bolduan:] Important statement from who could be the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. CNN congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly, is on the Hill for us. Phil, what are you hearing from lawmakers on this?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Look, Kate, I think there's no question about it. Everybody who is reading through the filing, particularly, the people on the Judiciary Committee, on the Democratic side, took what they saw on Friday and were unsettled by it and thinking about what the next steps were. It was important to also make a clear distinction about what Congressman Nadler, the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was saying. He's saying these rise to the level of impeachable offenses but he did not say they were going to immediately pursue impeachment. It's not a straight line. When you talk to Democrats, their leaders, Kate, you made the clear point, leadership has been wary of going too far into this. They recognize that it's not just a purely legal process or a purely committee process based on policy. It's also a political process. Democrats don't want to wander down a path or head down a path when they know Republicans control the Senate. They might not have Republican help in the House. Those are the metrics they're looking for right now. One of the more interesting sound bites of the weekend came from Adam Schiff, incoming chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He moved past Congress into what could happen if the president doesn't win re-election. Take a listen.
[Rep. Adam Schiff, , California:] My takeaway is there's a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him. That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time.
[Mattingly:] Kate, obviously, keying off the filings that the president directed the payments and, therefore, the southern district of New York may pursue criminal charges after he's no longer in office. That's where Democrats are right now. They're in a similar place to sum it up that a lot of people are. They're trying to figure out where the ground is laid right now, next steps. They're not quite ready to green-light things yet. There's no question about it, they're eyeing what they're seeing and trying to figure out what happens next Kate?
[Bolduan:] Great to see you, Phil. Thank you so much. Joining me to discuss the politics of all this, CNN political commentators, Keith Boykin, a Democratic strategic, and Rob Astorino, a member of Trump's reelection advisory council. Great to see both of you. Sorry for the frog in all of our throats. Keith, let's talk about impeachment here. For the longest time, it has seen top Democrats, Nancy Pelosi, Jerry Nadler, they are careful to talk impeachable, And, yes, Nadler was saying if these things are true, they would be impeachable offenses. He's careful in his language. They were careful before, maybe because of the politics, maybe because they hadn't seen evidence of anything that would be impeachable. Either way, it seems something has changed over the weekend.
[Keith Boykin, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, two things have changed in the past month. First, the Democrats won control of the House of Representatives, which means next month they'll have the power for accountability. And over the weekend, on Friday, we saw that Robert Mueller's office and the southern district of New York, issued charging statements, essentially sentencing memos that implicate the president of the United States in federal crimes.
[Bolduan:] Then leads to the question of, does a campaign finance violation, does that rise to the level of impeachment of a president?
[Boykin:] There are possibilities here because, you think about the John Edwards case, there was a trial that took place in that case. In this case, we have the president of the United States engaging in a conspiracy to conceal not one but two different affairs that could have had an impact on the outcome of the election. And paying people at the same time to do so. And at the same time, engaging in a fraud to violate the campaign finance laws. And at the same time, engaging in a fraud to collude with Russia in some respect to build the Trump Tower Moscow project and not revealing that to the public. Taken together, you have a reflection of fraud on the part of the president of the United States. This is a guy who two days before he took office paid a 25 million fraud settlement for the Trump university.
[Bolduan:] Rob, Clinton was impeached by the House for perjury, for lying. How does this compare?
[Rob Astorino, Cnn Political Commentator:] And it's a very big difference because Clinton was the president of the United States. He did lie under oath. And he abused his office. If you remember, the Republicans suffered. There was a lot of backlash. And as much as they pushed impeachment and did impeach him, Clinton just got more and more popular. This is something that happened a long time ago. He was the president. Not a single person in America probably thought
[Bolduan:] Payments happened in 2016.
[Astorino:] I'm talking about for Trump, I'm talking about the women, the Stormy Daniels payoffs and everything.
[Boykin:] The legal time took place in 2016.
[Astorino:] We don't know it's illegal and the act itself took place 10 years before that.
[Bolduan:] The act maybe, but the hush payment, which is the thing that matters here, happened in late 2016.
[Astorino:] It does. If they can prove he did it specifically and solely for political purposes. Nobody in America thought he was going to win the race, number one. He had and has a business that has a reputation. He has partners, business partners. He has a family. And I think, logically, most Americans can say, OK, I can see both sides. I can see he did it for private and personal reasons just as much as he did it for political.
[Bolduan:] Let me pose this to you because this might actually get maybe to what you're saying. Former FBI Director Jim Comey was at the 92nd Street Y giving a talk last night. And let me play what he had to say about impeachment. Listen to this.
[Jim Comey, Former Fbi Director:] I hope Donald Trump is not removed from office by impeachment because it would let the country off the hook. And it would drive into the fabric of our nation, a third of the people believing there was a coup, and we need a moment of inflection where we all get off the couch and say that is not who we are. And in a landslide, rid ourselves of this attack on our values.
[Bolduan:] Do you do you agree with Comey on this?
[Boykin:] I understand the political implications of impeachment. I understand Rob's argument about the danger of overreach of impeachment.
[Bolduan:] Yes.
[Boykin:] However, I think that I'm not advocating for impeachment. I think there needs to be accountability, checks and balances and subpoenas and hearings to find out exactly what took place. There needs to be a thorough Robert Mueller investigation from the special counsel's office. And we also need to remember here, this is not 12 angry Democrats doing this from the southern district of New York.
[Astorino:] Thirteen.
[Boykin:] Thirteen, whatever the number is Trump has generated for the day. But my point is, this is Trump's own Justice Department, Trump's own hand-picked U.S. attorneys has implicated him in federal crimes. This is a serious offense. And wherever it leads is where it leads. If it leads to impeachment, let the chips fall where they may.
[Astorino:] If you read the sentencing documents, they trash Michael Cohen. They're sitting there saying he's deceptive.
[Bolduan:] Yes, they do.
[Astorino:] He's a bad witness. He's uncooperative.
[Bolduan:] So what?
[Astorino:] Yet, they're going to hang everything on Michael Cohen?
[Boykin:] Trump picked him as his attorney.
[Bolduan:] Clearly, you weren't listening to the top of the show, because asked the exact question. Renato Mariotti said he's worked with a lot of scumbags that they wouldn't be a witness he would use in court, but they were credible when it comes to their investigation.
[Astorino:] Here's the point that I think Comey was trying to make, and Keith was trying to make, and I agree. If you're going to impeach, and try the president of the United States, you've got to have overwhelming support in the public like, you know what. That was something really bad.
[Bolduan:] You want to base it on polls?
[Astorino:] No, no, no. But honestly, if you're going that far, this is something most Americans would be like, you know, I don't know.
[Bolduan:] I will tell you, no matter what, Donald Trump hopes that's what a lot of Americans are thinking. That's the bottom line.
[Boykin:] The point is the point is the point is you have to have hearings and investigations to see where it leads.
[Bolduan:] OK. I can promise you one thing. The sun is going to rise tomorrow and there will be investigations.
[Boykin:] Absolutely.
[Bolduan:] Great to see you. Thank you so much. Breaking news I want to get to now. The Wall Street roller coaster is continuing right now. Trade tensions with amid trade tensions with China. The Dow down more than 400 points. We're going to go live to the stock exchange to see where this will take us today. We'll be right back.

[Cabrera:] People who know President Trump, worked for his companies and even wrote books about him, say there is one universal constant about this man. That you can count on him to stretch the truth, even outright lie if it suits the situation. And that's not a new facet of Donald Trump's personality. Here is CNN's chief political analyst Gloria Borger.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] From the election itself
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] In many places like California, the same person votes many times. You probably heard about that. They always like to say, oh, that's a conspiracy theory. It's not a conspiracy theory, folks. Millions and millions of people.
[Borger:] to the inauguration.
[Trump:] We had a massive field of people. You saw that. Heck, it went all the way back to the Washington Monument.
[Borger:] To statements like this.
[Trump:] What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening.
[Borger:] Donald Trump has had a fraught relationship with the truth, one that goes back decades, to the building and selling of Trump Tower where Barbara Res managed the construction.
[Barbara Res, Former Construction Manager For Donald Trump:] He pointed that Princess Di was looking for an apartment in Trump Tower.
[Borger:] And that didn't happen?
[Res:] No.
[Borger:] Oh.
[Res:] But it made the papers.
[Borger:] Sure. So veracity wasn't a part of it. It was just getting the buzz out there
[Res:] Yes.
[Borger:] about
[Res:] Yes.
[Borger:] about Trump? Did you guys laugh at it or
[Res:] Yes. Because there was nothing so terrible about it. I mean, you know, it's kind of like puffing. You know, it's like exaggerating.
[Borger:] Tony Schwartz, co-author of Trump's "Art of the Deal" has a name for this.
[Tony Schwartz, Co-author, "trump: The Art Of The Deal":] I came up with this phrase, truthful hyperbole, which is you know, I called it an innocent form of exaggeration. Now, I can call it something that I actually sold for $2 million and I can say $10 million and that becomes truthful hyperbole. The problem is that there is no such thing as truthful hyperbole. The truth is the truth. Hyperbole is a lie. They don't go together.
[Borger:] And they didn't go together during the troubled opening of Trump's Atlantic City Taj Mahal casino in 1990 when some of the slots didn't work.
[Alan Lapidus, Former Architect For Donald Trump:] When the Casino Control Commission went down there on opening day to check out that all the things have been done, many things haven't been done. They shut down a third of the slots.
[Borger:] Slots that were critical to the casino's success.
[Lapidus:] The slots are the prime revenue producer of the casino. To shut down a third on opening day was both humiliating and financially disastrous. And it's and it was only done because he doesn't have, you know, an organization in depth.
[Borger:] But that wasn't the story Trump told.
[Jack O'donnell, Former Manager, Trump Plaza Hotel And Casino:] Something could go bad, like the opening of the Taj, and he would say, it's because we had so much business here that this happened. Not that the systems broke down, not that we didn't know what we were doing. We had so much business, it broke down. Truly, he just would lie about everything.
[Borger:] And he did.
[Larry King, Host, "larry King Live":] What about the slot machine thing where they were down for a while?
[Trump:] The slots were so hot, nobody's again, nobody has seen people play that hard and that fast, we were
[King:] So what, it blew out the slots, literally?
[Trump:] They blew apart. We have machines that
[King:] Was it like too much use?
[Trump:] They were virtually on fire.
[O'donnell:] Donald is so wrapped up in hyperbole that it's almost constant lies. You know, whether it's the littlest things where, you know, if you had 2,000 people at an event, you know, he would say there were 5,000 people at an event.
[Borger:] And he got away with it.
[Schwartz:] There is no belief system. If it will work, I will say it. If it stops working, I'll say its opposite. And I will not feel any compunction about saying its opposite because I don't believe anything in the first place.
[Borger:] Switching gears is exactly what President Trump had to do after his press conference with Vladimir Putin, attempting to walk back this remark on election interference.
[Trump:] My people came to me Dan Coats came to me and some others. They said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia. I will say this, I don't see any reason why it would be. In a key sentence in my remarks, I said the word "would" instead of "wouldn't." The sentence should have been, I don't see any reason why I wouldn't or why it wouldn't be Russia.
[Schwartz:] Seeing it from his perspective, doesn't make a distinction between what's true and what's false. His only distinction is what will work and what will not work.
[Borger:] And what happens when he is challenged with facts? What does he do?
[Schwartz:] He has a genius, you know, perverse genius, for turning any situation into something that is evidence of his brilliance. Even if it's not true.
[Borger:] Gloria Borger, CNN, Washington.
[Cabrera:] From Washington to the other side of the country, and celebrity chef Guy Fieri knows all too well what people in the fire zone are dealing with right now. Last fall, a fire forced him to evacuate his northern California home. How did he respond? He set up a mobile kitchen and he fed his fellow evacuees and first responders. And now, he is helping out again. Guy Fieri is joining us now on the phone from Redding, California. Guy, thank you for spending time with us. Northern California is your home turf. First, I just want to ask you, what are your thoughts about what you're seeing there?
[Guy Fieri, Celebrity Chef:] It's unbelievable. I mean, it's unbelievable to see what folks are going through, but it's even more well, I should say unbelievable of just how great this community is and all these folks that have come together and the Salvation Army. I mean, we're in tough times as a world with all of the things going on. And, boy, you take a moment like this and you really see what America is made of. A lot of great people coming together.
[Cabrera:] No doubt about it. I'm a big fan of Food Network, so I know how busy you are. Kudos to you for taking action to try to help in the response there. Tell us about what your plan is.
[Fieri:] Well, you know, the Salvation Army has been on the ground here in Redding. And Redding is a great place right here in northern California, and it's I mean, I come here for years as a kid. And they got involved right off the bat. And people are displaced. The fire has been up and you can't even see the sun. And they got involved Friday, started helping folks with a place to stay and get some needs and get water and, you know, all those basics that we you know, we have on a regular basis, all of a sudden they're gone. And my team and I got involved. We my son and I and his buddies and a bunch of mine loaded up our caravan from the Wine Country and drove, you know, four hours up here and just working arm in arm with the Salvation Army and local chefs and residents and everybody helping out all the evacuees. There's like 36,000 folks that have been displaced, so it's
[Cabrera:] That is
[Fieri:] It's quite a program.
[Cabrera:] No. OK, and that is quite the undertaking. What is it like to try to, I guess, respond in that way, to try to feed that many people on just a moment's notice?
[Fieri:] You know, it's not the simplest thing, but when you have a lot of people around you I mean, we've got lots of volunteers. I probably got 20 volunteers right now standing in a parking lot at Shasta College, and we've made a makeshift kitchen setup with one of my trailers and a bunch of stoves. And you know what it is? The Salvation Army has got people that are giving them great support. We have a group called Operation Barbecue Relief that's getting involved. They're going to be here with a couple of big trailers. Because we got more yes, more and more people are finding these shelters and the opportunities that the shelters have. A lot of them don't know where to go and what to do, but Salvation Army is going to help set it up. So cooking for that many people, we just did lunch for we just did lunch for 750, and we're getting ready to do dinner for that same group now. Trying to keep the menu interesting. But you know, I know folks are always asking me, how can I help? What can I do? If you go to gosalarmy.org, it's a great place. They can make donations. You know, folks are trying to drive stuff down here, but they can go on, they can make a contribution. People need clothes. People need just life necessities.
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Fieri:] But they're a really great group to work with.
[Cabrera:] Well, Guy Fieri, food is comfort, especially during these difficult times for people, so thank you for what you are doing there, for giving back to that community. And, again, for just raising awareness of how people can help. We appreciate it. And we're back in just a moment.

[Briggs:] This ranks now as the ninth-deadliest in modern U.S. history. Let's bring in Charles Ramsey, CNN law enforcement analyst and former police chief of Washington, D.C. and Philadelphia, and you started your career in Chicago three cities that know violent crime. But when we talk about the two recent most deadliest school shootings we're talking about Newtown, Connecticut and Parkland, Florida, which was the 15th-safest city in the United States. What's the message?
[Charles Ramsey, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst, Former Police Chief, Washington, D.c., Former Police Commissioner, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:] The message is it can happen anywhere. I mean, it's not safe anywhere from gun violence. It's just like the opioid epidemic. It's no longer confined to certain areas and urban areas or what have you. Everyone is affected now and impacted by it, so that's the message.
[Briggs:] Eighteen school shootings this year in 13 different states so, yes, no one is safe. Let's turn now to the investigation and to this attack. There was a report that he pulled the fire alarm
[Ramsey:] Right.
[Briggs:] and was armed with smoke bombs. Now, there was a fire drill earlier in the day, totally unrelated. It may have played into the reaction of the students and the kids. But how much advanced planning went into this attack?
[Ramsey:] Well, you would think that he thought this through. How can I draw as many people out into the open as possible? Pulling a fire alarm certainly would do that. He knew exactly what he was going to do so there was some planning. For how long, who knows. That's all part of the investigation and the interrogation of this individual to try to find out just how much planning and whether or not he had someone else that was involved in that planning.
[Briggs:] Yes, the law enforcement community has a busy task ahead. You talked about the law enforcement community and changes you'd like to see across this country. Congressional action is doubtful at this point. We talked about Sandy Hook when nothing happened. Even the congressional shooting, Steve Scalise, nothing happened. What would you like to see? What would the law enforcement community like to see done here in the United States?
[Ramsey:] Well, first of all, I'm not anti-Second Amendment or anti- firearm
[Briggs:] Sure.
[Ramsey:] I'm really not but we got to make it more difficult for people to get their hands on weapons if they're not responsible and if they're not law-abiding people that are going to use them properly. I mean, if you have some form of mental illness. I mean, think about it. If you're on the no-fly list you can still go out and buy a gun. I mean, that is absolutely crazy. So there have to be some steps that we can take if we sit down and think this thing through and do what we have to do. If we don't care about ourselves as adults, at least care about the kids because they're the ones being impacted. Not just those shot think about the trauma that these kids are going through. Their lives have changed forever now.
[Briggs:] Everyone in this town, I think, their lives
[Ramsey:] Yes.
[Briggs:] have changed forever. School is canceled Thursday and Friday but ever coming back to this school will be emotional, and painful, and difficult for all of these kids. Talk about this AR-15 rifle. They made it easier to acquire for 18- year-olds. Just about five years ago the attorney general Pam Bondi joined with 21 other states and the NRA. Should something be done about that weapon?
[Ramsey:] Well, it's my understanding some eight million people currently own them
[Briggs:] Yes.
[Ramsey:] so to think that we're totally going to get rid of them I don't think is really practical. But again, can we make it more difficult for people to purchase that kind of weapon? Maybe instead of looking at it as just all firearms, look at some of these different types of firearms, assault weapons being one. A little more difficult, a more thorough background check, something that would make a little more difficult well, a lot more difficult, actually, for someone like that to get their hands on it. What would an 18 or 19-year-old need with an assault weapon like that?
[Briggs:] It is difficult to imagine what they need that for. So, that's Congress. Is this a call to action, you think, to parents, to students, to teachers, to administrators, to the parents of kids to look at their social media and take a role in this take action?
[Ramsey:] Well, it is that but it's also all Americans need to just step up and just say hey, enough is enough because what's going to happen we have a short attention span in this country. I mean, you know, and a few days will pass and we won't be talking about this. We'll be talking about the latest tweet from the president or something like that. This is a serious issue that has be addressed. This is not going to be the last school shooting. There'll be others, guaranteed. The question is where and when, and unless we do something it's not going to change.
[Briggs:] There has been one every three days. You can see brand new investigators arriving here at the scene behind us. A heavy law enforcement presence as you would imagine. Charles Ramsey, thanks for joining us
[Ramsey:] Thank you.
[Briggs:] here this morning. Christine, back to you in New York.
[Romans:] All right, Dave, thanks. You know, so far, gun rights advocates have been largely silent and two of Florida's most prominent Republicans are taking a familiar fallback position, including Sen. Marco Rubio.
[Unidentified Male:] Some of your colleagues in the Senate and here from Washington, D.C. have already been trying to make this about policy and about gun control. Is this the appropriate time to be doing that?
[Sen. Marco Rubio , Florida:] No, it's not, only because people don't know how this happened. I mean, who this person is, what motivated them, how did they get ahold of the weapon that they used for this attack? I think it's important to know all of that before you jump to conclusions that there is some law that we could have passed that could have prevented it.
[Gov. Rick Scott , Florida:] There's a time to continue to have these conversations about how through law enforcement, how through mental illness funding that we make sure people are safe, and we'll continue to do that.
[Romans:] Well, let's bring in "CNN POLITICS" reporter Tal Kopan live in Washington. Good morning. And first of all, I mean, it's just such a just such a sad story. For so many of those kids, and teachers, and survivors this is something that will mark the rest of their life, and to see this played out every three days, as Dave said there is a school shooting. It's interesting because five years after Sandy Hook, no legislative action. Congress doesn't do anything and clearly, on this matter. But you heard Chief Ramsey say there that law enforcement leaders in law enforcement may have to take a stand. I mean, these are people who are pro-Second Amendment, who are pro-gun rights and gun ownership, but who want public safety. The electorate may have to move on this. Is there any indication that voters for voters, this is important or these events resonate?
[Tal Kopan, Reporter, "cnn Politics":] Well look, Christine, this is one of those issues that it seems so silly in some ways that Congress can't come together because the polling is pretty strong on some sort of moderate, middle-of-the-road provisions that the electorate wants to see. I feel like every time we have one of these tragedies and again, it is so unfortunate that we even have to say a sentence like that, that anytime we have one of these tragedies, they happen so often. But, there's a clamor for some sort of a reasonable proposal. Let's remember, after the Las Vegas shooting last year, there seemed to be all this momentum for finally doing something small and regulating bump stocks, which was a way to make a semi-automatic fire more quickly. That has fizzled. That did not go anywhere. It has been left with the administration to do sort of through regulation that's been very murky. Even that couldn't get across the finish line. But until lawmakers feel like you know, like it's what they're hearing at town halls, it's what Americans are discussing at their kitchen table, and it's what Americans will vote on them primarily at the polling station. It's unclear whether that message is actually going to hit home, how popular an issue this is.
[Romans:] The president tweeting yesterday afternoon not a public, on-camera statement but tweeting, "My prayers and condolences to the families of the victims of the terrible Florida shooting. No child, teacher, or anyone else should ever feel unsafe in an American school." I can tell you, waking up this morning as a parent, I do feel unsafe about American schools. The Florida "Sun Sentinel" says this is an editorial. "Yes, thoughts and prayers are a welcome response to anyone in mourning and in need. But with this type of tragedy, repeated so many times across our country, we already know that thoughts and prayers alone are a grossly inadequate response to our country's self- inflicted cancer on gun violence." That word cancer really got my attention because I thought, Tal, no, we spend a lot of money and a lot of time fighting cancer. We don't spend anything fighting gun violence.
[Kopan:] That's right, and you keep in mind, you can compare the administration's reactions to different tragedies. And this reaction is very different from the reaction to some recent terrorist attacks, especially when they're committed by someone who was not born in this country. And so, you know, you have to sort of compare that reaction when you look at the administration and see in those instances in terrorist attacks, a sort of entire apparatus of government springs into action to get to the bottom of it and there is a conversation about what could have been done to prevent it. And perhaps, per our earlier conversation, it's up the voters to demand the same in this case. But, you're right. It is not like cancer. It is not like a number of other issues. This seems to be one that stymies Congress over and over and unfortunately, the partisan lines have been drawn. The sort of the game plan has been set. We see this pattern repeat over and over. It's unfortunate that there even has to be such a pattern. And there seems to be nothing at this point
[Romans:] Right.
[Kopan:] No tragedy so atrocious that shakes us out of that pattern.
[Romans:] Yes, and Republicans say don't Democrats don't play politics with the pain and suffering of these of these poor people. And, Democrats say don't just say thoughts and prayers. That's insulting.
[Kopan:] Right.
[Romans:] So they just replay the tape, replay the tape. Let's talk about immigration. You cover immigration for us here at CNN and there is a move a narrow move underway here to get some sort of deal. Can they get 60 or what does that deal look like?
[Kopan:] Right now, Christine, we do not know if they have 60 votes. They are very close. The bill came out with about eight Republicans in support. If every Democrat votes for it, which at this point is not a given, they need 11 Republicans so they're sort of right on that precipice of possibly being there but it's not clear at all whether they will get there. And right now, what has been proposed this came out of a group of bipartisan senators who have been meeting for weeks. It was sort of looked at as the most likely chance of finding something that could actually pass. It's a much narrower version than what the White House has asked for. It's sort of the DACA piece, though legalizing a path to citizenship of 1.8 million people. It's $25 billion for border security, as we've seen, and a small provision limiting the ability of those individuals once they become citizens to sponsor their parents for citizenship, which is one concern of conservatives on this issue.
[Romans:] Right, but the diversity lottery that's not in it?
[Kopan:] It's not in there.
[Romans:] Not in there.
[Kopan:] No.
[Romans:] OK, all right. Tal Kopan, nice to see you this morning. Thank you so much.
[Kopan:] Thank you.
[Romans:] All right. The president didn't say anything publicly, as we've said, about the shooting but after a week of silence he did speak up about domestic violence.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I am totally opposed to domestic violence of any kind. Everyone knows that.
[Romans:] Now, CNN has learned Rob Porter was one of many in the White House operating without with temporary security clearance for a year.

[Cabrera:] The influenza virus is on the rise this season. The flu is on the rise. The Centers for Disease Control is now reporting that the number of states with high levels of flu activity have doubled in just the past week. CNN senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen spoke with the mother of one of the 13 children who have died from the flu so far this season.
[Unidentified Male:] Say hi [inaudible].
[Unidentified Female:] Hi.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Senior Medical Correspondent:] Allison Eaglespeaker, 6 years-old, loved her big brother Matt and little sister Daisy and Native-American dancing.
[Crystal White Shield, Allison's Mother:] She was a beautiful little girl. We were blessed with her life and we miss her dearly.
[Cohen:] Allison who lived in Montana died on December 1st from the flu. New numbers out from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Friday showed that the situation is getting worse. Nineteen states are showing high levels of flu activity compared with nine states last week and 13 children have died from the flu this season. Children are particularly vulnerable to h1n1, this year's predominant flu strain. Allison's mother wants other parents to be watchful when their children have the flu. Allison died less than 48 hours after first becoming ill.
[Shield:] This illness hit her really hard and really fast for it to just take her life. Nothing prepares you for how fast it moves.
[Cohen:] While Allison had mild asthma, about half of children who die from the flu are otherwise healthy according to the CDC, mand 80 percent of the children who died last year had not received a flu shot. With months of flu season still to go, it's not too late for children or adults to get vaccinated. [on camera]: No one knows why the vast majority of children recover relatively easily from the flu but a relatively small number get very sick, gravely sick like Allison did. But they do know that when they do get sick it happens very quickly just like in Allison's case. Ana?

[Rosemary Church, Cnn Anchor:] The new anti-Semitism in France. As the extent of the problem is revealed, many Jews fearing for their safety are packing up and leaving the country altogether. Just a minor border incident: Russia's Vladimir Putin downplays the latest military confrontation with Ukraine and accuses Ukraine's president of planning the clash at sea. Plus giving sanctuary: how a small church in The Hague is trying to save a family from getting deported. Hello and welcome to our viewers all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church and this is CNN NEWSROOM.
[Church:] We begin with "A Shadow over Europe," our extensive investigation into the rise of anti-Semitism on the continent. CNN has spent months looking into the surge in hate crimes and hate speech across Europe. And nowhere is the problem more apparent than in France, home to the largest Jewish population in Europe. CNN's exclusive polling shows 48 percent agree anti-Semitism is a growing problem in France today; 29 percent of those surveyed say they know just a little or have never heard of the Holocaust. And 24 percent believe Jewish people have too much influence over global finance. Rarely does a week pass in France without news of another anti-Semitic attack. The mood in the country is driving some Jews to leave France altogether. CNN's chief international correspondent Clarissa Ward reports from Paris.
[Clarissa Ward, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] In France today, anti-Semitism is not just a prejudice. Its 26 people held hostage in a Kosher supermarket. Its three children and a teacher gunned down at a Jewish school. It's a Holocaust survivor murdered in her apartment. It's 11 body bags in 12 years. Nathaniel Azuly [Ph] nearly ended in one, too. He says he and his brother were attacked in a Paris suburb by a group of local Muslim kids. One of them armed with a saw. "We were in our car and it happened very quickly," he said. "It happened just because I had the kippah on."
[Ward:] Just because you were wearing a kippah? "His speech changed when he saw the kippah," he told us. "He started hurling anti-Semitic insults. Jew, you're going to die on this road." Azuly [Ph] believes that his knowledge of Krav Maga, the martial art form favored by the Israeli military, saved his life. Instructor Avi Atlan says he has seen an uptick in the number of young Jews wanting to learn to defend themselves. "It's very said but that's where we are," he told us. "There are so many people who hate Jews." According to the French government, the number of anti-Semitic acts here increased by a staggering 69 percent in the first nine months of this year and the nature of the attacks is changing, becoming more violent. Frederic Potier has been tasked with managing the official response. He says the government does not fully understand the reason for the increase.
[Frederic Potier, Head, French Government Office Against Anti-semitism:] We're worried about these figures. But we have decided not to hide these numbers. We decided to face it. And that's very important.
[Ward:] So, what do you say to a young French boy who is too afraid to wear a kippah?
[Potier:] Don't be afraid to wear it. I need him, I need to fight anti-Semitism. I need him to fight cliche and stereotype. I need him to stand for with the republic saying that, all the French Jews are French.
[Ward:] France is now spending nearly $6 million dollars on educational and online initiatives to combat hate speech. But anti-Semitism is a complex issue here. Analysts say the traditional anti-Semitism of the far-right has been compounded by a more recent threat from radical elements in France's Muslim population. Hakim El Karoui has advised previous governments on what some are calling the new anti-Semitism.
[Hakim El Karoui, Senior Fellow, Institut Montaigne:] We don't speak about Muslim anti-Semitism, which is a reality in which aligns the anti-Semitism from the far-right and from the far-left which is mostly directed
[El Karoui:] towards Israel.
[Ward:] A CNN poll found that more than a quarter of French people have a somewhat or significantly less favorable opinion of Jews as a result of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. France is home to the largest Muslim and Jewish minorities in Europe with roughly half a million Jews and 4.7 Muslims. But the relationship between the two communities has deteriorated steadily since the first Palestinian intifada in the year 2000. As the politics of the Middle East has lapped up on France's shores. "They're right to be afraid because the conflict in Palestine has reached here. That's why there's this situation." Muslim resident Mallika says, "but for me when I see a Jew next to my place or on the street, I say we are the same family, they have nothing to do with what's going on in Palestine and they're afraid for their children. And that's crazy." France does not identify the religion of those convicted of anti- Semitic crimes. Making it a difficult problem to quantify and a sensitive issue to discuss with the Muslim community that already feels discriminated against and disenfranchised.
[El Karoui:] The perception of the Muslim is that they are the victims. They are the ones who suffered from racism and discrimination. And then the Muslim community is going to tell you, yes, there is an an-Semitism problem but don't our situation. And the problem is that you start comparing victims.
[Ward:] Miriam and her family have considered moving from France, joining the more than 55,000 Jews who have left the year 2000. In the sanctuary of their home, they celebrate Shabbat, a ritual ushered in every Friday night by lighting candles and reciting a blessing.
[Miriam, French Citizen:] I'm scared for the future of my baby here, I hope that he will have a future here. And you know, Jewish community is a part of historical France. Really. And so, I think France without any Jews is not any more France.
[Ward:] Miriam's prayers are for a France of tolerance with her little boy can grow up free of fear, but for now, there are no signs that her prayers will be answered Clarissa Ward, CNN, Paris.
[Church:] Join us again on Friday, when Clarissa Ward talks with Edith Eger, who survived the Auschwitz death camp and has dedicated her life to educating people about the horrors of the Holocaust.
[Edith Eger, Holocaust Survivor:] He pointed my mom to go to the left and I followed her. He came after me, grabbed me I'll never forget those eyes. He said, "Your mother is just going to take a shower. You'll see her soon."
[Ward:] Edie never saw her again. Both her parents were killed in the gas chambers of Auschwitz, along with more than 1 million Jews.
[Church:] Clarissa also talks with the chief rabbi of Poland for his thoughts on the fact that many young people know very little about the Holocaust. Don't miss the next report in this exclusive series, "A Shadow over Europe: Anti-Semitism in 2018." That's Friday, only on CNN. Well, a federal judge in Argentina will allow an investigation of Mohammed bin Salman to move forward. The Saudi crown prince arrived in Buenos Aires on Wednesday for this weekend's G20 summit. Human Rights Watch requested the investigation of possible crimes against humanity, citing the war in Yemen and the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Argentina's foreign ministry says the crown prince has diplomatic immunity and will not be arrested during his visit. Meanwhile in Washington, U.S. senators got a briefing on the Khashoggi murder from the U.S. secretaries of state and Defense. But many were angry about the top Trump administration official who was not there to answer questions. CNN's Alex Marquardt reports.
[Alexander Marquardt, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] A defiant and determined Mike Pompeo on Capitol Hill today.
[Mike Pompeo, United States Secretary Of State:] We talked about U.S. policy in Yemen, the U.S. policy with respect to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
[Marquardt:] After giving a briefing to senators, making the argument Congress should not take action to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led fight in Yemen following the killing of "The Washington Post" journalist Jamal Khashoggi and giving the Saudi crown prince, who is known as MBS, a pass.
[Pompeo:] There is no direct reporting connecting the crown prince to the order of the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.
[Marquardt:] Pompeo, who is a former CIA director himself disagreed with the CIA's assessment that MBS ordered the killing, as did Secretary of Defense James Mattis who joined Pompeo on the Hill.
[James Mattis, United States Secretary Of Defense:] We have no smoking gun that the crown prince was involved.
[Marquardt:] The comments following Pompeo strongly worded and controversial op-ed in the Wall Street Journal where he argued that Saudi Arabia's strategic importance trumps the brutal murder of Khashoggi, dismissing what he called the "Capitol Hill caterwauling and media pile-on," adding that degrading U.S.-Saudi ties would be a grave mistake to the national security of the
[U.s. Sen. Bob Corker,  Tennessee:] I think 80 percent of the people left the hearing this morning not feeling like an appropriate response has been forthcoming.
[Marquardt:] There was widespread disappointment and condemnation across the aisle of the briefing by Pompeo and Mattis were CIA director Gina Haspel was a no-show, asked why, Pompeo replied simply-
[Pompeo:] I was asked to be here and here I am.
[Marquardt:] Not good enough for many senators.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] Yes, I'm not going to be denied the ability to briefed by the CIA that we have oversight of any key vote. Anything that you need me or to get out of town I'm not doing it until we hear from the
[Cia. Sen. Dick Durbin,  Illinois:] We were told in this briefing that it was a direction of the White House that she not attends.
[Marquardt:] A White House that also disagrees with the intelligence committee's conclusion that in all likelihood MBS was behind Khashoggi's murder. Trump telling the Washington Post that MBS denies it. That the CIA isn't sure. "I'm not saying that they're saying he didn't do it." The president said, "but they didn't say it affirmatively." And the CIA has responded to those allegations from those senators that Haspel was directed by the White House not to show up to today's briefing, the CIA said that they had already briefed the Senate intelligence committee and said in a statement, quote, "the notion that anyone told Director Haspel not to attend today's briefing is false" Alex Marquardt, CNN, Washington.
[Church:] Vladimir Putin said it was Ukraine's president who provoked a naval confrontation of Crimea to increase his popularity ahead of an election. On Sunday, Russia seized three Ukrainian ships and detained a crew, saying they illegally entered Russian territory. The Ukraine president responded, imposing martial law in border areas. Then he visited troops, warning Moscow could launch a full-scale invasion. But Mr. Putin said the Ukranian president is playing a political game, one that could backfire. Our Fred Pleitgen has more.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] The three Ukrainian ships remain impounded at the other end of the bridge that I'm standing at right now in the port town of a Kerch. And a court in Crimea has also announced that's 24 Ukrainian sailors who were on board of those trips are going to remain in detention for at least two months, awaiting a trial. The Russians, of course, accuse them of entering illegally into Russia's territory. Now Russian president Vladimir Putin he came out on Wednesday and he said that he believed that the incident was what he called "a planned provocation by the Ukrainian government" and its president, Petro Poroshenko, who the Russians say was in trouble ahead of an election in Ukraine. That's one of the reasons why the Russians say they believe that this maneuver was pulled off. The Ukrainians of course, very much denying that. They continue to say that it's the Russians who provoked this incident and are in breach of international law. Now the U.S. special representative to Ukraine he came out and he said those ships need to be given back by the Russians immediately. And the U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis also coming out and blasting the Russians, saying they are showing that their word, quote, "cannot be trusted." The Russians, however, are not feeling as much blowback from the U.S. president. Dmitry Peskov, the spokesman for Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, saying he believes that despite this recent standoff that that meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin at the G20 summit that's upcoming, of course that that meeting is still very much on. And Russia's president Vladimir Putin, he himself came out and he said that he still believes that President Trump is positively inclined to bettering relations between the United States and Russia despite the incident that took place right near where I'm standing right now Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Taman, Russia.
[Church:] Paul Manafort is behind bars right now but for how long? The U.S. president dangles the prospect of a presidential pardon for his former campaign chairman. That's next. And who is the right-wing conspiracy theorist at the center of the Russia investigation? We'll have the details when we come back.

[Harlow:] This morning the government is open. That is a good thing. The future of so-called Dreamers, though, hangs in the balance. It is very much up in the air this morning.
[Berman:] Yes. This is what the president wrote. He wrote, "Nobody knows for sure that the Republicans and Democrats will be able to reach a deal on DACA," that's the Dreamers, "by February 8th but everyone will be trying." Joining us now, CNN's Ryan Nobles for the very latest on Capitol Hill. Where do things stand, Ryan?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Well, John and Poppy, you're right, the government is back open. Lawmakers here were able to get past that impasse, but the fundamentals of the divisions between both sides as it relates to these big issues that need to be hashed out remain. And take a look at the calendar that lawmakers have in front of them now. Yes, the government is back open. But now they have a three- week sprint to try and come up with a deal that will keep the government open even longer, and deal with some of these big issues primarily DACA and immigration reform. And as I said before, there isn't a whole lot of difference between where most of these senators stood before the government shutdown and where they stand now as it relates to DACA. The only big difference now is that Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has made a promise. And that's a promise to bring a DACA bill in some form to the floor. Take a look at what Mitch McConnell is promising. He's saying that, yes, they will take up legislation to address DACA. There should be a level playing field on the immigration debate. And he is promising a fair amendment process. 2Now that may result in some sort of a piece of legislation leaving the Senate with bipartisan support. But there are no promises once that bill leaves here and heads over to the other side of the capitol and the House takes it up. And already some of the hard-liners as it relates to immigration are warning House Speaker Paul Ryan that they are not going to budge. They want to see full funding for a wall. They're concerned about things like chain migration and the visa lottery. And they also want a DACA bill that is perhaps not as friendly as some Democrats are looking for. So, John and Poppy, the government is back open, but the problems continue to exist and they've only got three weeks to figure it out.
[Harlow:] And you wonder if anything is much different than it was, you know, before. We'll see if these three weeks change things. Ryan Nobles, thank you. Joining us now, Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. It's nice to have you here and we want to get to all of that in a moment, but I'm sure you heard by now and read that Attorney General Jeff Sessions sat down last week for hours on end with Bob Mueller's team, the special counsel leading the Russia probe. What is your reaction to that news and are you encouraged that, look, this is the highest level person around the president, the only Cabinet member to be interviewed by Mueller's team, that he was willing to do so?
[Sen. Chris Van Hollen , Appropriations Committee:] Poppy, this is a sign that the Mueller investigation is continuing, it is vigorous, it's getting to the bottom of everything and working to get the facts. So I think it's good news for the public because I think we all deserve accountability. We need to know what happened. So it's one more sign that the Mueller investigation is continuing at a brisk pace.
[Berman:] All right, Senator. The government is open today. And a lot of people including a lot of Democrats, progressives especially, are asking, what did you gain in the Senate, Democrats in the Senate gain by shutting the government down by three days, but then agreeing to open it for what they consider to be not much? What did you gain?
[Van Hollen:] Well, first of all, John, let's be clear. It was the total incompetence of President Trump and the dysfunction of this White House that led to the shutdown in the first place. As Senator Lindsey Graham said, there are unreliable negotiating partners so they got us into this mess and then did nothing, nothing to get us out. But what got us out was bipartisan group of senators working to get a commitment from Mitch McConnell to take up a bipartisan DACA bill, a commitment that they've refused to give in the past. We know there are 57 senators right now, Republicans and Democrats, who support the Graham-Durbin bill and now is an opportunity to build on that and get a vote.
[Berman:] Well, hang on one second, Senator, because he gave that guarantee to Jeff Flake to get his vote on the tax bill back in December.
[Harlow:] And Susan Collins on health care.
[Berman:] And Susan Collins on health care. I mean, he's made promises before, particularly on DACA, and the vote didn't happen in January at least as he promised to Jeff Flake.
[Van Hollen:] So, look, a couple of differences. One is this is a commitment he made in public as opposed to behind closed doors to Jeff Flake. Second, it's a commitment he made to over 15 Republican senators, in addition to the American people. And finally, there are lots more levers in this process. I mean, going three weeks on a continuing resolution, still leaves all the budget issues. It leaves all the issues relating to an omnibus appropriations. So there are tools that we have to make sure that Mitch McConnell keeps his commitment, in addition
[Harlow:] Right.
[Van Hollen:] to the fact that he made it out in public and people are going to be holding him to his word.
[Harlow:] Look, and all of you hope he does keep his commitment because you ultimately have to answer to your constituents. Let me read you what Frank Sherry, the executive director of America's Voice. This is an immigrants rights group. Here's what he said. "I'm moved to tears of disappointment and anger that the Democrats blinked before hoping that Paul Ryan is going to have the courage and House Republicans are going to be fair and decent or smoking something." You know, even if you can get this through Gang of Six legislation or something similar through the Senate, you're going to have a much tougher road in the House, and with the White House unless you give a lot. Hearing things like that, concerning to you?
[Van Hollen:] Well, look, this is a moment where everybody has got to come together and focus on getting the bill out of the Senate, bipartisan DACA bill, and then putting pressure in the House. I understand the disappointment. We did not get everything we wanted. But there was absolutely no guarantee that two, three weeks of government shutdown would have left this in a better place. In fact, it could have very well left us in a worse place. At least right now we have this commitment, this public commitment, from Mitch McConnell, to move forward. Something they had refused to do in the past. So at least we have a path forward now. And if we get it out of the Senate, and I think there is strong bipartisan support, the whole country will have to pile on the House. Here's what we know about the House. We know that there are a majority of House members in favor of a bipartisan DACA compromise. The key is getting them to act on it. And there are some tools like discharge petitions and other things you can use in the House, but first step is to get everybody to come together, focus on getting this out of the United States Senate, and over to the House.
[Berman:] Do you promise the 800,000 Dreamers if you look a Dreamer in the eye and say, I will not agree three weeks from now to open the government or to keep the government going unless there is a deal for your future?
[Van Hollen:] What I can say is we will use every tool that we've got, and we've got lots, to keep Mitch McConnell at his word which is to have that vote on a bipartisan DACA bill. I think we will get that vote. And then the key is to make sure that we work the House as you just indicated. And, look, March 5th is the date that President Trump set. I mean, we had Dreamers who are here illegally and it's Trump that sort of set the clock in March 5th. As we get closer to that date, there will be more and more pressure on the House, if we get our bill out, to get this done. And we will use every tool we've got to make sure that happens. I am confident that we are in a better spot today than we were before Friday, before we saw everything happen because at least we have a path forward now. Not everything we wanted. I understand that. But certainly in a better situation than we were before this whole process started. And I must say, you know, Donald Trump's tweet today, I take no confidence in that. He has been a totally feckless leader. Totally incompetent. This is a moment where Republicans and Democrats and the Senate got to get this done, get it over to the House and then get the public fully engaged.
[Berman:] Three weeks. Senator, thank you so much for being with us. Appreciate it.
[Harlow:] Thank you.
[Van Hollen:] Thank you.
[Berman:] We've got a lot of breaking news today, including news on the Russia investigation. Stay with us.

[Fred Guttenberg, Daughter Killed In School Shooting:] Your comments this week and those of our president have been pathetically weak.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Angry families make a statement in a riveting exchange of views and ideas on guns. Marco Rubio took a beating, but did have the decency, the courage to show up there.
[Andrew Pollack, Daughter Killed In School Shooting:] How many schools, how many children have to get shot? It stops here with this administration and me.
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Anchor:] Families of several school shootings also made their case at the White House. The president suggested arming teachers, an idea that's now getting pushback from lawmakers and law enforcement.
[Romans:] And, an instant classic overnight at the Olympics. The U.S. and Canada needed a shoot-out to settle the gold medal in women's ice hockey. Wait until you see the move that finished the game. Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Marquardt:] What a game.
[Romans:] I know.
[Marquardt:] Great to be back with you. I'm Alex Marquardt in for Dave Briggs. It is Thursday, February 22nd, it is 4:00 a.m. here on the East Coast. There was a powerful day yesterday of nationwide advocacy by survivors, families and gun control supporters following the Florida school shooting. The day was capped off by the emotional CNN town hall on gun violence. 2There were signs at least that some marginal change might now be possible. Florida Senator Marco Rubio was the only Republican willing to face his critics. He said that he now backs raising the minimum age for owning a rifle from 18 to 21.
[Sen. Marco Rubio , Florida:] In this country, if you are 18 years of age you should not be able to buy a rifle, and I will support a law that takes that right away.
[Rubio:] I traditionally have not supported looking at magazine clip size and after this and some of the details I've learned about it, I'm reconsidering that position and I'll tell you why. I'll tell you why. Because while it may not prevent an attack, it may save lives in an attack. 2
[Romans:] So Rubio defended his opposition to broader gun control gun violence legislation including an assault weapons ban. Here's an exchange with Fred Guttenberg, who lost his daughter Jaime in the Florida school massacre.
[Rubio:] If I believe that that law would have prevented this from happening I would support it, but I want to explain to you why it would not. 2
[Guttenberg:] Senator Rubio, my daughter, running down the hallway at Marjory Stoneman Douglas
[Rubio:] Yes, sir. 2
[Guttenberg:] was shot in the back.
[Rubio:] Yes, sir.
[Guttenberg:] With an assault weapon, the weapon of choice
[Rubio:] Yes, sir.
[Guttenberg:] OK? It is too easy to get. It is a weapon of war. The fact that you can't stand with everybody in this building and say that, I'm sorry.
[Romans:] Rubio also faced tough questions with Stoneman Douglass high school student Cameron Kasky.
[Cameron Kasky, Junior, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School:] This is about people who are for making a difference to save us and people who are against it and prefer money. So, Senator Rubio, can you tell me right now that you will not accept a single donation from the NRA in the future?
[Rubio:] The positions I hold on these issues of the Second Amendment, I've held since the day I entered office in the city of West Miami as an elected official. Number two no, the answer to the question is that people buy into my agenda. And I do support the Second Amendment and I also support the right of you and everyone here to be able to go to school and be safe. And I do support any law that would keep guns out of the hands of a deranged killer. And that's why I support the things that I have stood for and fought for during my time here.
[Kasky:] No more NRA money? No more NRA money?
[Rubio:] I there that is the wrong way to look. First of all, the answer is people buy into my agenda. Our goal here is to move forward and
[Kasky:] OK, so hold on.
[Rubio:] And prevent this from ever happening again.
[Kasky:] So right now, in the name in the name in the name of 17 people, you cannot ask the NRA to keep their money out of your campaign?
[Rubio:] I think in the name of 17 people I can pledge to you that I will support any law that will prevent a killer like this from getting a gun.
[Kasky:] No, but I'm talking about NRA money.
[Rubio:] No. This very evening, I have told you that I support lifting the age from 18 to 21 in buying a rifle. My understanding before I walked out here is that that organization is not in favor of that.
[Marquardt:] So many incredible moments from last night. Now Rubio there has an A-plus rating from the NRA. And he is right about that. Before the town hall, the NRA says it said it opposes raising the age to buy an AR-15. The group did send a spokeswoman to the town hall. Her name is Dana Loesch. She would not budge on NRA priorities and suggest that local law enforcement missed crucial warning signs.
[Dana Loesch, Spokeswoman, National Rifle Association:] I don't believe that this insane monster should have ever been able to obtain a firearm. He had already taken bullets and knives to school. He had already assaulted people. He assaulted his parent, he assaulted other students. Thirty-nine visits and this was known to those to the to the intelligence
[Sheriff Scott Israel, Broward County, Florida:] What so, you're saying 39 visits
[Loesch:] and law enforcement community.
[Israel:] You're
[Loesch:] Now, I'm not look, I'm not saying that you can be everywhere at once.
[Israel:] Yes.
[Loesch:] But this is what I'm talking about.
[Israel:] You're not the
[Loesch:] We have to follow up on these red flags.
[Israel:] You're not
[Romans:] CNN's town hall followed an entire day of action across the country at the Florida state capitol in Tallahassee, busloads of Parkland students lobbied lawmakers, although a number of lawmakers declined to meet with those students. Outside, thousands more students and other protesters from around the state rallied, demanding lawmakers take action to curb sales of assault-style rifles.
[Protesters:] Vote them out. Vote them out. Vote them out.
[Romans:] What you're hearing there are chants of "vote them out" aimed at lawmakers who will not act. Governor Rick Scott has promised a gun proposal by tomorrow. Students who met with him were hopeful.
[Carlos Rodriguez, Survived Parkland High School Massacre:] I felt supported. I felt like he will make a change and he will help us and hopefully provide the safety for all the other students.
[Amanda De La Cruz, Survived Parkland High School Massacre:] Small steps count and he's really cooperating on participating with those small steps.
[Marquardt:] Across the country, students then walked out in solidarity with survivors and victims of the massacre. In Washington, Arizona, Minnesota, Colorado, Kentucky, and Illinois, students marched out of class, even defying threats of discipline from some school districts. At Coral Springs High, you can see there, students forming a heart in the middle of the football field to show their support.
[Romans:] That's amazing. All right. Before the CNN town hall, President Trump had an emotional listening session with victims of school gun violence, students and parents. And he floated the idea of arming teachers and arming school staff.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] This would only be obviously for people that are very adept at handling a gun and it would be concealed carry. A teacher would have a concealed gun on them. They go for special training. They would be there and you would no longer have a gun-free zone.
[Romans:] Now the idea met with support from many in attendance there. But not Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel.
[Israel:] I don't believe teachers should be armed. I believe teachers should teach.
[Marquardt:] On Wednesday, the sheriff did order all deputies in Broward County schools where that massacre took place to carry rifles on school grounds. That move has the support of the Broward school superintendent. As for the president, he is not done addressing the gun issue. We now get more from CNN's Jeff Zeleny at the White House.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Christine and Alex, President Trump will be holding another listening session here at the White House today with state and local officials. Of course this comes one day after holding that very emotional session in the state dining room of the White House on Wednesday. Listening to stories from six students from Florida from that shooting one week ago, their parents sitting alongside parents of Sandy Hook and Columbine. Certainly shootings that are etched into our collective American memories. But the president stood and watched as he heard the story from one father, Andrew Pollack, whose 18-year-old daughter Meadow died last week.
[Pollack:] All the school shootings, it doesn't make sense. Fix it. Should have been one school shooting and we should have fixed it. And I'm pissed. Because my daughter I'm not going to see again. She's not here. She's not here. She's at in North Lauderdale, whatever it is, King David Cemetery. That's where I go to see my kid now.
[Zeleny:] The president flashing a thumbs up to the father as he called for some type of change. Now the president said perhaps it would have been different if school officials and teachers had been armed. That prompted one mother of a Sandy Hook child to stand up and said no, that is not the solution. So the problem here so very clear. The solution far from it. But the president said he is committed to making some type of change here. We've seen this happen so many times before. This feels different. The president says he is engaged on this. This will be an incredible test of his leadership Christine and Alex.
[Romans:] All right. Jeff Zeleny at the White House. It will. Thank you. The reigniting gun debate taking an ugly political turn Wednesday and comments from Republican Congresswoman Claudia Tenney from upstate New York. She represents one of the most competitive district in the country. A local radio host said the majority of gun victims come from the inner cities. Tenney said this.
[Rep. Claudia Tenney , New York:] It is interesting, so many of these people that commit the mass murders end up being Democrats but you don't want to the media doesn't talk about that either.
[Marquardt:] Tenney is an ardent gun supporter. She later stood by the remark in a statement saying, "While we know the perpetrators of these atrocities have a wide variety of political views, my comments are in response to a question about the failure to prosecute illegal gun crime. I will continue to stand up for law- abiding citizens who are smeared by anti-gun liberal elitists. So doubling down there.
[Romans:] All right. Trump administration official says the U.S. has warned Russia not to interfere with the midterm elections. That official adding the U.S. has taken direct action to address Russian election meddling going forward. CNN's Fred Pleitgen in Moscow with the latest. And of course, Fred, the Russians say this never happened in the first place. How tough is the U.S. being at this point?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Yes, you're absolutely right, Christine. The Russians are saying this never happened in the first place. And the Russians are also saying that they are planning not to meddle in the midterm elections. They say it's something that they have done and that's something that they are going to do in the future. Obviously the administration doesn't believe that. They say that there are signs of election meddling coming up in the 2018 elections. The director of the CIA, in fact, said that the signals are very clear. Nevertheless, Russians I don't think really feel that the administration is being very tough on them. One of the things that we keep hearing from Russian officials is that they feel that yes, the American bureaucracy, the agencies like for instance the CIA but also Congress are being tough on them, but the president certainly isn't. It's interesting also, one of the things that the Russians are looking at as well is that the recent tweet that came out from President Trump where he said why aren't Dem crimes calling them the Democrats, obviously, being investigated and at the end saying, "Ask Jeff Sessions." Obviously ripping into his own attorney general. That also plays into that narrative that we've been hearing from the Russians where they keep saying, look, it met the U.S. officials that are putting pressure on Russia, but they still think that President Trump wants better relations with the Russians and they certainly don't think that President Trump is tougher on Russia than President Obama was Christine.
[Romans:] All right. Fred Pleitgen and the plot thickens. Thank you so much. Nice to see you this morning.
[Marquardt:] All right. Well, coming up next, big drama on the ice in Pyeongchang. The U.S. and Canada go to shootout in the women's hockey finals. Even that wasn't enough to settle the gold medal. Coy Wire is live in Pyeongchang next.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, New Year's shutdown. With much of the government shutdown all around him, President Trump is a White House shut in this New Year's Eve, tweeting like fireworks as he battles Democrats over his border wall. Accused of spying. Russia arrests an American citizen in Moscow, accusing him of espionage. Is that a move to retaliate after an alleged Russian spy pleads guilty to trying to influence U.S. policy during the election campaign? Warren's run. Elizabeth Warren announces an exploratory committee for a Presidential run, but at the same time, she is in all the way, she says. Could she be the Democrat to take on President Trump? And securing Times Square. Thousands of police, assault units and bomb-sniffing dogs will be working to keep New Year's Eve revelers safe in New York's Times Square. For the first time, a drone will provide eyes in the sky. Wolf Blitzer is off. I'm Brianna Keilar. This is the SITUATION ROOM Special Report. It's New Year's Eve, and day ten of the government shutdown. President Trump is again home alone for the holiday. He began his celebration with a twitter tirade, contradicting his outgoing chief of staff by saying he never abandoned the idea of a concrete border wall. Calling the southern border an open wound and saying Democrats should come back from vacation and fix it. Democrats are planning votes to reopen the government without offering new funding for a wall. The President also suggests he should be hailed as a national hero for his stance on Syria, attacking what he calls failed generals who have criticized his troop pullout. I will be speaking with Democratic congressman, Ruben Gallego of the arms services committee. And our correspondents, specialists are standing by with full coverage. We do begin at the White House, and with CNN's Jessica Dean. No movement, Jessica, on this shutdown standoff.
[Jessica Dean, Cnn Correspondent:] No. No movement from here at the White House, Brianna. As you mentioned, President Trump here at the White House after cancelling those New Year's Eve plans to go down to Mar-a-Lago. His wife and their son down in Florida tonight, but he, as an aide says, is in the oval office today. We certainly haven't seen much of him, but we have heard a lot from him on twitter. That's been his primary mode of communication throughout these past several days, as he talks about the shutdown. And one thing is certainly clear, he is digging in on the wall and the money that he wants to fund it.
[Dean:] Ten days into the partial government shutdown. Sources involved with negotiations say President Trump is privately telling lawmakers and officials, he will not sign a bill with only $1.3 billion for border security, the current Democratic offer. Today, the President sending out a flurry of tweets on the shutdown, taking shots at the Democrats saying quote "I'm in the oval office. Democrats, come back from vacation now and give us the votes necessary for border security, including the wall." But Democrats appear equally dug in, taking control of the House on Thursday, they plan to vote on a package that maintains the $1.3 billion for border security, but no wall funding. Still, following a two-hour lunch with the President on Sunday, Senator Lindsey Graham remained optimistic a compromise could be reached in the next few days.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] The President didn't commit, but I think he is very open-minded.
[Dean:] Meantime, new details about the administration's attempted rebranding of the Trump wall. Outgoing chief of staff, John Kelly, telling the "Los Angeles Times" quote "to be honest, it's not a wall." He went on, explaining, the President still says "wall," oftentimes, frankly, he will say barrier or fencing. Now he is tended toward steel slats. But we left a solid, concrete wall early on in the administration when we asked people what they need and had where they needed it. The comments led Trump to fire back, tweeting, an all-concrete wall was never abandoned, as has been reported by the media. Some areas will be all concrete, but the experts at border patrol prefer a wall that is see-through. Thereby making it possible to see what is happening on both sides. Makes sense to me. The President also brought the Obamas into his border wall fight. Tweeting, President and Mrs. Obama built, has a ten-foot wall around their D.C. mansion compound. I agree, totally necessary for their safety and security. The U.S. needs the same thing, slightly larger version. The U.S. secret service did erect a barrier gate in front of the Obamas' home before they moved in. The house is located on a residential street in Washington, D.C. And he also brought the deaths of two migrant children at the border into the fight, blaming their deaths on Democrats, tweeting, any deaths of children or others at the border are strictly the fault of the Democrats and their pathetic immigration policies that allow people to make the long trek, thinking they can enter our country illegally. They can't. If we had a wall, they wouldn't even try. As Trump seems unmoved on the money he needs for the border wall, his decision to remove U.S. troops from Syria may be slowing down. Senator Graham telling reporters, the President agreed to reevaluate in order to find the best way to move forward with the withdrawal.
[Graham:] I think we are slowing things down in a smart way, but the goal has always been the same. To be able to leave Syria, make sure ISIS never comes back. Our partners are taken care of, and Iran is contained. And I think that's possible. It's going to take a little longer than everybody thought. But hopefully we can get there.
[Dean:] The President also tweeting about Syria, saying he plans to slowly bring back the troops while continuing to fight ISIS. And he says, Brianna, this is what he always promised to do when he was on the campaign trail. He's just making good on that promise.
[Keilar:] All right, Jessica Dean at the White House, thank you. Now Democrats are pursuing a strategy to reopen the government while denying the President what he wants. Let's bring in CNN congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly. Is this going to work?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] If your baseline is reopening the government, the short answer is probably not. Right now it's been made very clear, Democrats, once they take power in the House on Thursday, speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi always made clear, she was going to pass something right off the bat that would reopen the government. What Democrats have decided to do is basically six of the unfunded agencies at this moment would be passed in a bipartisan way with Senate appropriation bill. The seventh, the department of homeland security, which obviously the most contentious part, because that's where the wall would go. That would be passed at the continuing resolution level. So current fund-raising up until February 8th. Here's the catch. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, has made clear. He is not going to put anything on the floor that the President doesn't support. What do these bills not have? They do not have any extra money for a border wall. They don't have money for a border wall, period. And that means that even though House Democrats are going to move forward on something, this is not the answer. So long as the President maintains his current position. And Brianna, everybody I'm talking to on Capitol Hill has made clear, someone is going to have to blink at this point in time. Democrats have made clear, they feel very comfortable in their current position, and I would just point you to the President's twitter account. If you don't think he is comfortable in his. So the big question becomes, what is the way out at this point in time? This likely isn't it. It's probably going to take another couple of days, maybe even weeks, as well. But more than anything else, it's going to take somebody saying I have to give up, basically, at this point. And nobody is there yet. So ten days right now could go 12, could go 14. I'm told weeks is a real possibility at this point.
[Keilar:] Weeks. That is stunning. Phil Mattingly, thank you so much. Russia has detained a U.S. citizen in Moscow, accusing him of spying. And this comes after alleged Russian spy Maria Butina, pleaded guilty to conspiring to influence policy toward Russia during the election campaign. CNN's Brian Todd is here with that. So what are you learning? Is there a connection here?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Brianna, neither U.S. officials nor the Russians are saying tonight that there is a connection. But former CIA officers we spoke with say there very likely is a connection. Now Vladimir Putin has denied he would ever retaliate in kind. But we are told Putin has been furious over the Maria Butina case.
[Todd:] Tonight, Vladimir Putin's security services could have a key bargaining chip in their ongoing spy operations against the U.S. Russia's federal security service, the FSB, says it has detained an American citizen in Moscow quote "while carrying out an active espionage." The Kremlin identifies him as Paul Nicholas Whelan. But tonight there's virtually no other information available about him. And the Russians aren't being any more specific on what they accuse Whelan for doing.
[Bob Baer, Cnn Intelligence And Security Analyst:] I think this is a tit for tat. Our relations with Russia are going downhill very quickly. We have been identifying Russian spies. We have arrested Butina. Putin is furious about it.
[Todd:] Maria Butina, the accused Russian spy who just struck a plea deal, is still in jail in the U.S. and is cooperating with federal prosecutors. U.S. officials have suggested in court papers that Butina was specifically tasked by her Russian handlers with infiltrating conservative political groups in America, such as the NRA. Putin recently complained publicly about her case, denying any knowledge of Butina.
[Vladimir Putin, Russian President:] No one knows anything about her at all. The only thing anyone knows about her, is that she worked at the federation council for one of the deputies. That's it.
[Todd:] As for Paul Whelan, former CIA officer bob Bear says he thinks it's unlikely that Whalen works for the U.S. government, which we says doesn't usually send spies to Moscow unless they are under diplomatic cover. Whalen, he says, could have simply been working for a private company and was conveniently rounded up. Baer says it's possible the Russians will hold Whelan until Butina's case is resolved and she returns to Russia. But he says Putin is under a great deal of pressure inside Russia, and may want more for the American than just Maria Butina.
[Baer:] A lot of the oligarchs are being sanctioned by the United States. They want those sanctions off. They want relief. We are going to have to sit somebody down at the KGB, ask what they want to make this go away. But frankly, the guy is a hostage. And it's up to the Russians how long they want to hold him and whether it's serving Putin's interests.
[Todd:] Putin recently said he would not arrest any quote innocent people for any kind of spy swap. Now, so far U.S. officials either have very little information on Paul Whelan or simply don't want to say much. A state department spokesman telling CNN, they are aware of the Americans' detention and have requested access. Right now, there is no indication of when and whether the kremlin is going to grant that access Brianna.
[Keilar:] Brian Todd, thank you so much. Now President Trump wasn't the only one tweeting today. There has been a rather strange message that was sent out by the U.S. strategic command, which controls the launch of U.S. nuclear weapons. Let's turn to CNN pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr on this. This is something that had us going. Is this real?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] That's right, Brianna. And it is real. The U.S. military says all they were trying to do is remind everyone in the world that 247, the U.S. military is always ready to respond if needed. But get a load of this. It's New Year's Eve. Everyone is looking for a very peaceful, happy holiday. And here's what the U.S. strategic command decided to tweet. And let me quote and then we'll show you the video. But first, they say, Times Square tradition rings in the New Year by dropping the big ball. If ever needed, we are ready to drop something much bigger. Watch to the end. Well, watch the video that they posted with this. This is a b-2 bomber, nuclear-capable, but in this video, it is dropping in a test firing, two of the biggest bombs the U.S. military has, 30,000-pound bombs in this weapons test that was recently conducted. And now attached to this message, saying, if ever needed, we are ready to drop something much bigger than the Times Square ball. Awkward, peculiar7. But they are sending this message out at a time when we're seeing tonight the transition between secretary Mattis and the new acting secretary, Pat Shanahan, when the Russians are testing hypersonic weapons. When the North Korean situation is unresolved. When the Chinese are moving ahead, expanding their weapons arsenal. Peculiar timing, perhaps, to say the least Brianna.
[Keilar:] Indeed. Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. And joining me now is Democratic congressman, Ruben Gallego of Arizona. He is a member of the armed services committee. He is also an Iraq combat veteran. Congressman, thanks so much for being with us.
[Rep. Ruben Gallego , Armed Services Committee:] Thank you.
[Keilar:] So we have a lot to discuss. First, that tweet, I saw you raising your eyebrows. What did you think about that?
[Gallego:] I think it's very tacky. You know, power whisperers especially comes into
[Keilar:] Is it the timing of it? Is it making light of something so serious?
[Gallego:] I don't know what they are trying to say. But it's really unprofessional. And whoever did that should really be reprimanded.
[Keilar:] Let's talk about the shutdown. Democrats are planning to vote on Thursday, as you know, on funding bills. From the start of this, they're really going to go nowhere in the end. So what is the end game? Where is the next step and the one after that?
[Gallego:] Well, our end game is always been to be the responsible party and keep government open. And that's why we actually struck a deal with the Republicans and the senators. They have got 100 percent support from the Senate. About 99 percent of members of Congress and then was rejected by this President when a couple right wing pundits decided they did not like the deal. At the end of the deal, we are going to bring border security money to the fold and fund government. Now, what we're not going to do is support a irresponsible use of money for a border wall that is not needed, specifically because the President has not truly used the money we already allocated in the last funding.
[Keilar:] So you are putting up votes on funding bills that aren't going to be taken up by the Senate. So does that mean doing something, clearly sending a message, but in the end not getting something accomplished. Does that mean that you as Democrats are very comfortable with where you are? You are not going to blink in this?
[Gallego:] I think the most important thing we are comfortable with, we know that we are standing in the right position for this country. We are going to do the best we can to open portions of the government that we think we could find some consensus in. Just because we can't come to an agreement when it comes to homeland security funding, does not mean we have to keep the rest of government closed. Hopefully, Senator McConnell agrees with us and hopefully Donald Trump President Trump agrees with us also, so we can continue negotiating. I think this stance we are taking is deeply irresponsible.
[Keilar:] You also serve on the armed services committee. After announcing a full withdrawal of troops from Syria, the President is now saying this quote. "We are slowly sending our troops back home to be with their families, while at the same time fighting ISIS remnants." Are you encouraged by what seems to be a modifying of the time line, even if the total withdrawal stands?
[Gallego:] Well, I think what we should do is actually have a proper authorization of use of military force in Syria, so we can actually project what our goals are to both our enemies and the citizens of the United States. I have actually have been for a withdrawal of our troops from Syria. I would have done it in a manner that is more consistent and predictable and working with our allies and protecting them at the same time. But the best way to do it for all sides, whether it's the President's position or whether it's a war hawk like Lindsey Graham, is for us to actually have an authorized use of military force, a real one. One that clearly defines what our goals are. Not exactly what we have right now, which really has been, I think, a total mistreatment of the 2003 authorized use of military force. And I think that's why you are having a lot of confusion both from the President and from the Senate.
[Keilar:] Doesn't seem to be a series, a chorus of calls, for that, though.
[Gallego:] Well, there should be. And I certainly will be leading that in the house. And I think there's going to be a lot of senators, both Democrats and Republicans, that will be doing that. And I think we should have done it under Obama. We didn't. And we should continue pushing that under here, President Trump.
[Keilar:] I want to ask you about a video that CNN just obtained. I do want to warn our viewers, this is tough to watch. This is upsetting. It shows staffers at an Arizona facility pushing and dragging migrant children, and the company that ran this facility, Southwest Key, it's the largest provider of shelters for migrant children in the country. We knew that this had happened, that bad behavior had happened. We knew this back in October. But this video is new. I wonder, what's your reaction to this? Also, this seems to, I think, increase awareness and more concern. But also the idea of this is what we have now seen. There are other things, perhaps, that are unseen.
[Gallego:] Well, I think this plays to a couple of things that are important. Number one, we need to have oversight. Especially the way that DHS and the President have been rushing the separation of families and separation of children from their parents. We, as government, are the acting parents. And if we have a cavalier attitude, such as John Kelly, when he was asked first time that they are going to be separated or something of that nature or the President's current attitude, where he is trying to lay blame on everyone but himself, we need to have oversight both for us in Congress, the Senate, the President, as well as local officials. And what finally actually happened here, local journalists that got hold of this video and forced the Maricopa County sheriff to actually file charges. And it's unfortunate that's what we had to do. But that is a really good example of true checks on something that is probably going a lot of times across this country.
[Keilar:] All right. Congressman Gallego, thank you so much. Really appreciate you being with us. Happy new year to you, as well.
[Gallego:] Thank you. You too.
[Keilar:] Up next, Paul Manafort reportedly came under heavy pressure from Russian associates, including a former spy. The payback, heavy debts. Could this have affected his actions while he was Trump campaign chairman? But first, we are tracking some celebrations around the world. Take a look at how the New Year rolled in just moments ago in Athens, Greece.

[Unidentified Male:] North Korea has just launched another ballistic missile.
[Unidentified Female:] We're not looking to pick a fight, but don't give us a reason to have one.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] There's a chance we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Obamacare, we're going to repeal it, we'll replace it. We're going to get something done.
[Unidentified Male:] The American health care act it's important to work together.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you have the votes?
[Unidentified Male:] Right now I'm a no. As of now, I'm still a no. The best thing I think to do is to pull this bill. I will not sugarcoat this. This is a disappointing day for us.
[President Trump:] Who knew that health care could be so complicated? We will build a great wall.
[Unidentified Male:] There is no way that Mexico can pay a wall.
[President Trump:] The wall is going to get built.
[Unidentified Male:] So help me God. Congratulations.
[President Trump:] The newest member of the United States Supreme Court.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm humbled by the trust placed in me.
[President Trump:] And I got it done in the first 100 days.
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] The first 100 days out of the nation's capital.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] Of course, we do.
[Paul:] Happy Saturday. We're so grateful for your company. I'm Christi Paul.
[Blackwell:] I'm Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you. It is day 100 of the Trump administration and President Trump says that being president is tougher than he thought. We'll talk about that assessment in just a moment. But North Korea is determined to make life even more difficult for the president this morning after firing yet another ballistic missile.
[Paul:] This is the 10th missile test since Trump took office. The Pentagon says this latest exploded soon after launch, but according to one former State Department official, the message from Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Un is very clear.
[John Kirby, Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] This is Kim giving us the finger, giving China the finger, giving the U.N. the finger after what happened today. There is no question about that. I think the timing is absolutely planned and pre-ordained in his mind.
[Blackwell:] This morning we have our team of correspondents covering this around the globe. CNN senior Washington correspondent, Joe Johns, is following the reaction from the White House. David McKenzie is standing by in Beijing, but first, let's go to Will Ripley live inside the North Korean capital of Pyongyang. Will, good morning.
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Victor. Here in North Korea even though the rest of the world has been talking about this missile launch still no official acknowledgement by the regime that this even happened which means pretty much every North Korean aside from rocket scientists and Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un have no idea because they only announce successes inside this country. But the message that North Korea was sending with this missile launch to the rest of the world, very clear. Even though the missile by U.S. assessment only flew about 22 miles, exploding over North Korean territory, it was as that analyst said it was a missile finger to the United States. Because the kind of missile that they tested is the kind that North Korea could eventually use to launch and sink potentially an aircraft carrier like "USS Carl Vinson," that strike group approaching the waters off the North Korea Peninsula. North Korea remains defiant despite mounting international pressure calls for them not to test missiles or nuclear weapons. But officials on the ground here say they will push forward despite what the world thinks. They say that the United States, which is engage in joint military exercises is hostile and that they have a right to develop these weapons they feel to protect their national sovereignty. That's the view from here. For the view from the White House, here's Joe Johns.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] The White House reaction to the missile launch was very much muted, overall leaving the impression that they were trying to downplay it. The president of the United States himself tweeted about it indicating in the first place that North Korea had disrespected the wishes of China's president with the launch. The president's words that he used to describe this was bad with an exclamation point. There was a bit more from the National Security Council's K.T. McFarland indicating that this launch was cause for concern. Nonetheless, she was asked at one point with an interview with CNN whether this was provocative, given the fact that the secretary of state had chaired a meeting at the United Nations. Of course, she said this was one of those situations that North Korea had always been provocative. Now to David McKenzie in Beijing.
[David Mckenzie, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, that's right, Joe Johns. Here in Beijing, silence. That's to be expected because China has said repeatedly THAT it wants to calm the situation down and there has been strong words at the Security Council from the foreign minister saying that really the only solution to the North Korean crisis is for all sides to ease off on the rhetoric, to stop military moves of any kind and, in fact, to get to the negotiation table and talk. There's little sign right now, though, that U.S. administration is opening the door to talks that North Korea will play ball with that, but North Korea has been ignoring China's pleas for years. So there is a sense that they are primed to wait this out, this current missile test and push towards more diplomacy Christi, Victor.
[Blackwell:] All right, David, thank you so much. Let's bring in our panel now, Maria Cardona, CNN political commentator and Democratic strategist, Kayleigh McEnany, CNN political commentator and contributor for "The Hill," Sara Westwood, White House correspondent for "The Washington Examiner," Eugene Scott, CNN politics reporter, and Clarissa Ward, CNN senior international correspondent.
[Paul:] All righty, full house here. Clarissa, I want to start with you. In the last 24 hours, we have full condemnation on North Korea from President Trump, from Rex Tillerson, from the prime ministers of the U.K., from Japan. Is this launch a reaction to all of these comments in the last 24 hours?
[Clarissa Ward, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, I think it's a little difficult to speculate as to exactly what prompted this missile launch. It may take probably, and I would have to defer to a military expert some weeks to actually t-up a missile launch. But I think it's certainly a response to the kind of rhetoric that we've been hearing more generally over the past week. I think what is a little concerning to people and allies in the international community, when you look at the U.S. response, is that we're seeing a division within the administration between the type of rhetoric that we're hearing from President Trump who just yesterday told Reuters there's a chance of a major, major conflict with North Korea. And the rhetoric that we're hearing from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, which is much more nuance, much calmer, saying we're not seeking reunification, we're not seeking any military action or regime change we're seeking denuclearization. So are they playing good cop, bad cop thing or is there a lack of coherent strategy underpinning the reaction to North Korea. That's what have people a little bit on edge I think.
[Blackwell:] Sara, yesterday the president tweeted that this launch was disrespecting President Xi but this came right after Rex Tillerson's comments at the U.N. Disrespecting the U.S. as well I'd imagine, but the president didn't frame it that way.
[Sara Westwood, White House Correspondent, "washington Examiner":] Right. And his North Korea strategy has centered around putting pressure on the Chinese to bring Pyongyang to heel so that is in keeping with how he approached the North Korea problem all along. He knows that China has the most economic and diplomatic leverage with North Korea and he's hoping to keep the U.S. out it as much as possible by trying to get the Chinese to deal with it and he's vaguely threatened with the Chinese that if they don't take care of it, the U.S. and their allies will.
[Paul:] What has to happen for China to align with the U.S., do you think?
[Maria Cardona, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, I think I think first of all, a little bit more of an understanding from this administration as to where China is. I think one of the most jaw- dropping moments so far and there's been many in this administration, is when Trump admitted that he actually didn't really understand the relationship between China and North Korea until the president of China explained it to him. And then he's like oh, I understand. After a ten-minute conversation that he had with the president of China. And so I think that what underscores a lot what has people on edge this administration doesn't really seemed to have a strategy. Because from the top down, at least certainly from Trump's perspective, there's a huge lack of understanding of what the reality is, not just with China but with what is going on in that area in the world at the moment. So I'm hoping that Tillerson and the military strategist and Haley and all of his team that actually do have some experience in this are the ones who are going to actually be talking the mantle in terms of what our strategy is moving forward.
[Blackwell:] But we are hearing some discrepancies between, you know the vice president told Dana Bash that there would be no conversations with North Korea and then we heard from Rex Tillerson on NPR that yes, there's a possibility we will talk with North Korea.
[Kayleigh Mcenany, Cnn Political Commentator:] Yes. I would argue, she speculated there's perhaps a good copbad cop scenario going on. That might be the case. I would dispute what Maria said, I think there has been progress on the China front. You look at China, they cut off coal imports and threatened to cut off oil exports. They even said according to Rex Tillerson that perhaps they would even levy sanctions if, in fact, North Korea did do a nuclear test. Now they just did a ballistic missile test not a nuclear test, but those are some changes on the China front and those are significant, I would argue, forms of progress that could really make progress in the North Korea front.
[Blackwell:] What's the fruit there? I mean, if China is putting pressure on the North Koreans, who had two attempted tests, missile tests in two weeks, what's the fruit of what we're seeing, the pressure the president put on China?
[Eugene Scott, Cnn Politics Reporter:] Well, I think the fruit that China would like to see from the president is just a calmer tone and less provocation, at least from their perspective in dealing with a very complex nuance issue that involves a lot of world leaders and experts trying to get North Korea to respond well and appropriately in a way that does not harm anyone else and that moves everyone together in terms of responding more diplomatically to the issues affecting all of us.
[Paul:] OK, so Clarissa, we're watching the missile test, but I think everybody is bracing for is another nuclear test. Is that the red line that if crossed then what does the U.S. do?
[Ward:] Well, we don't really know exactly what President Trump's red line is. He seems to be more than willing to use military force. In fact now every problem seems to be a nail for him because he felt there was some he had some political support after the strikes on Syria. So we don't exactly know what President Trump's red line is. Beyond that we don't know really what the young Mr. Kim's red line is either and that's what has people very nervous because his father while undoubtedly an unpredictable character was not as erratic, was not an unknown commodity. We've seen him quite clearly trying to assert himself both internally and internationally. We know he is willing to go quite far. This is one of a dozen tests this year alone. So clearly he has an objective in mind. The question is that objective to get people to the negotiating table to try to extract more aid, more concessions, as it has been historically, or is he potentially more of a magnet. Is he willing to cross that line? I don't think anyone knows the answer. That is what is so deeply disconcerting about saying we're doing away with strategic patience, but we don't really know what we're doing in with. We're not bringing in a new policy.
[Paul:] Yes, no doubt about it. OK, everybody stick around. We have a lot more to talk about. President Trump promised to take on corruption and collusion in Washington within his first 100 days as president even signing a contract with the American voter, here it is, saying so. Is President Trump draining the swamp?
[Blackwell:] Plus the divided states of America. CNN travels the country finding out what voters across the spectrum think of the president's first 100 days in office. This hour, how happy are his most staunch supporters?
[Unidentified Male:] How do you think Trump is doing? I think he's doing good. I do not regret having voted for Trump. One hundred days in, I'm not pleased.

[Cabrera:] A porn star's lawsuit against President Trump's personal attorney has been put on hold for 90 days. A federal judge in Los Angeles halted the case against Michael Cohen, in part to let events play out in a criminal investigation underway against Cohen in New York and warned Cohen likely faces a criminal indictment. But who is Michael Cohen and what is it, exactly, he does for President Trump? Here's CNN's chief political analyst, Gloria Borger.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Ana, lately, Michael Cohen has been in the news almost as much as his famous client, Donald Trump, but their relationship goes back more than a decade.
[Borger:] In the soap opera in which a porn star accepts a payoff to keep quiet about her affair with Donald Trump, there's got to be a guy who gets it done.
[Unidentified Male:] Where is Michael Cohen? Where's Mr. Cohen? Where is this guy? Where is this guy?
[Borger:] Michael Cohen is where he's been since 2007, standing behind Donald Trump, or closer in his back pocket.
[Sam Nunberg, Trump Campaign Aide:] Michael was, I would always like to say, the Ray Donovan of the office.
[Unidentified Male:] I'll take care of it.
[Nunberg:] He took care of what had to be taken care of. I don't know what had to be taken care of, but I knew Michael was taking care of it.
[David Schwartz, Friend Of Michael Cohen:] He's the guy you could call at 3:00 in the morning when you have a problem.
[Borger:] Do you know stories of Donald Trump calling him at 3:00 in the morning?
[Schwartz:] Donald Trump has called him at all hours of the night. Every dinner I've been at with Michael, the boss has called.
[Borger:] But Cohen did not call the boss, he says, when he decided to pay Stormy Daniels $130,000 out of his own pocket, 11 days before the election.
[Unidentified Male:] I think it's ludicrous.
[Borger:] So, you believe 100 percent Donald Trump knew?
[Avenatti:] One hundred percent.
[Michael D'antonio, Author:] There's not a meeting that takes place, there's not an expenditure that is authorized that he doesn't know about it.
[Borger:] Cohen wouldn't go on the record for this piece, but his friends claim it's all part of his job in Trump world, giving the boss deniability and protection.
[David Schwartz, Friend Of Michael Cohen:] If you know the relationship between the two people, he took care of a lot of things for Mr. Trump without Mr. Trump knowing about it. That's part of the overall structure, is that Michael had great latitude to take care of matters.
[Borger:] In Michael Cohen, Trump hired his consigliere, a version of his long-time mentor of the lawyer, Roy Coe, a controversial figure and an aggressive defender of all things Trump, no questions asked. After D'Antonio finished his book on Trump, he got the Cohen treatment in what turned out to be an empty threat.
[D'antonio:] Then he got mad, and it was, you just bought yourself an f'ing lawsuit, buddy. I'll see you in court.
[Borger:] In 2011, Michael Cohen described his job this way.
[Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's Personal Attorney:] My job is, I protect Mr. Trump. That's what it is. If there's an issue that relates to Mr. Trump that is of concern to him, it's, of course, of concern to me. And I will use my legal skills within which to protect Mr. Trump to the best of my ability.
[Borger:] Cohen, a sometimes Democrat, first came to Trump's attention after buying apartments in Trump developments. Then went to the mat for Trump against one of his condo boards. And won.
[Schwartz:] Trump loved him for it. That was the beginning of it. And then after that, they became close. It was much more than an attorneyclient relationship. It was something much deeper, almost father and son, kind of thing. Always hot and cold. Donald Trump could be yelling at them one second and saying he's the greatest person in the world the next second. Donald Trump knew that Michael always had his back.
[Borger:] For Trump, it wasn't about pedigree. Cohen, who is 51, got his degree from Western Michigan's Cooley Law School and had some initial success in the less than genteel world of New York taxi cab medallions.
[Sam Nunberg, Trump Campaign Aide:] If you look where Michael came from in his legal career, before he started working for Trump Org, it wasn't like he came from a white-shoe law firm. He came from, you know, a hard-nosed New York trial firm. Trump has an eye for talent. And this was somebody that, I mean, he used to call him his bulldog, his tough guy.
[Borger:] At the Trump Organization, he's done a bit of everything. Running a mixed martial arts company, securing real estate branding deals, and even taking care of transportation.
[Nunberg:] You know, the famous Trump plane, there was an engine issue that he actually took care of and got a really good deal on.
[Schwartz:] Watching him is it's like a reality show. He's got three phones, he's got the hard line, he's got two lines, he's texting, he's on the computer.
[D'antonio:] You can almost say this is Donald Trump's mini me. For a guy who started really in the middle class on Long Island to now be quite wealthy himself, known internationally and, yes, he's in a bit of a jam with the Russia scandal.
[Gloria:] In the eye not only of Stormy, but now under criminal investigation in New York, including a stunning raid on his home, office, and hotel room with a search warrant that mentioned not only Cohen's businesses, but the president himself, causing a fight and a circus in court. Not to mention the continued interest from the special counsel and Congress.
[Cohen:] I look forward to giving all the information that they're looking for.
[Borger:] During the campaign, when Trump said he had no contact with Russia, Cohen was privately trying to cut a deal for a Trump Tower Moscow. It never happened, but Mueller has asked about it.
[Nunberg:] The sad reality is that Michael pursuing that Trump Tower deal in December is just another factor that goes into this whole Russian narrative.
[Borger:] Cohen's name was also in the infamous dossier, which alleges he traveled to Prague to meet with Russians. He's completely denied it.
[Schwartz:] It's immeasurable, the damage that has been caused to him, to his family.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I will faithfully execute
[Borger:] When Trump became president, he did not bring his brash wing man to Washington. [on camera]: Do you think he wanted to be in the White House, be White House counsel or
[D'antonio:] There must have been a part of him that was dreaming of a great job at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But he's also the guy who not only knows where all the bodies are buried, he buried a lot of them himself. And that, ironically, disqualified him.
[Cohen:] And they say, I'm Mr. Trump's pit bull. That I am his I'm his right-hand man. I mean, I've been called many different things around here.
[Borger:] Now he may be called to testify, with the Stormy Daniels case in federal court.
[Schwartz:] I know Michael Cohen for over 21 years and I know that he will not rest he not will not sleep he doesn't sleep anyway, right until he recovers every single penny from Stormy that's due the
[Llc. Avenatti:] I've seen a lot of attorneys use intimidation tactics. The problem is, if that is your speed and you are a one-trick pony and you use that in every case, when, all of a sudden, you run up against somebody that doubles down and that isn't intimidated, well, then you're lost.
[Borger:] Cohen flew to Mar-a-Lago to dine with the president the night before Stormy Daniels appeared on "60 Minutes," because if you're Michael Cohen, you've always been the ultimate loyalist.
[Cohen:] The words the media should be using to describe Mr. Trump are generous
[Borger:] And that loyalty
[Cohen:] compassionate, principled
[Borger:] is what the president and his allies are counting on as Cohen faces the feds. [on camera]: We'll just have to wait and see who wins that test of loyalty Ana?
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Gloria Borger, thank you. On the new season of "PARTS UNKNOWN" it kicks off tomorrow Anthony Bourdain explores West Virginia.
[Anthony Bourdain, Cnn Host, "parts Unknown":] Everyone who comes here tends to tell the same story. But I wonder, what does everybody miss? If you were describing all those in this area, small families, beautiful countryside, uniquely beautiful. How many places look like this? Church going. I don't say grace before dinner, but every meal I've had here, people do. I believe these are straightforward, heartfelt expressions of something people deeply believe in. So is this the south?
[Unidentified Male:] I consider it more just, we're not on the morals of No, no.

[Cabrera:] Millions of Americans are expected to fly somewhere this Memorial Day weekend. But considered this a warning. Starting soon you might just have to check your computer, probably even your iPad before getting on the plane. Homeland security secretary John Kelly tells CNN the administration is considering expanding its electronic ban that already applies to some foreign flights coming to the U.S. And it could affect any electronic device larger than a cellphone. Here is CNN aviation correspondent Rene Marsh.
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Aviation Correspondent:] Travelers are on a move in expected record volume and the terror gives is as high as it was on September 11th. That's according to department of homeland security secretary, John Kelly.
[John Kelly, Homeland Security Secretary:] What I have learned in the last 120 days this, you know, relentless attempt on the part on terrorist to blow up airplanes in flight. Ideally bigger planes and a lot of people. We are watching numbers of very, very sophisticated advance threats right now.
[Marsh:] Travelers flying to the United States from ten airports in eight Muslim majority countries are already under a laptop ban meaning electronics larger than a cellphone are not allowed in the cabin of the plane over fears they may be used to detonate or conceal explosive. The ban is expected to expand to more countries soon.
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] So this heightened language without any policy changes really leaves the American public at a disadvantage. That kind of language makes the American public do one or two things, freak out or tune out. And neither is good place to be.
[Marsh:] Travelers at ten U.S. airports may experience new TSA screening measures on large electronics. The agency is testing screening those item separately before allowing them onboard. All this on the heels of a terror attack on concert goers in Manchester, England and just four months after a gunman retrieved a nine millimeter handgun from his checked luggage at the baggage claim and opened fire in Forth Lather Dale. Now, secretary Kelly is warning Congress, homegrown lone wolf attacks will continue.
[Kelly:] As horrible as Manchester was, my expectation is we are going to see a lot more of that kind of attacks.
[Marsh:] it is why some are alarmed at President Trump's proposed 2018 budget cuts to TSA's viper program. The program dispatches 31 teams of law enforcement and explosive experts to soft targets based on the threat level. The budget cuts would leave only eight teams in place.
[Kayyem:] There is no consistencies between the language of Secretary Kelly about the terror threat and what his budge looks like.
[Cabrera:] That was Rene Marsh recording. Our thanks to her. Coming up in the NEWSROOM security concerns at the Indi 500. Our Coy Wire is live. Hey, Coy.
[Coy Wire, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Hi Ana. A beefed up presence of federal state and local agencies officer homeland security at every gate. We are going to tell you coming up how they plan to keep fans safe at the world's largest single day sporting event, the Indy 500.

[Hill:] This morning, new concerns the government will not be able to meet its court ordered deadline to reunite more than 2,000 migrant children with their parents this month. All of this as CNN captures an emotional reunion in Miami. The mother and daughter you see here were separated for nearly two months under President Trump's zero tolerance policy. Kaylee Hartung was at that tear-filled reunion and she joins us now with more. Kaylee, good morning.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Erica. When that seven-year-old girl wrapped her arm around her mother for the first time in two months, she asked that they never be separated again. We saw tears of joy and relief. There was even laughter when seven-year-old Janne asked for pizza for dinner, her favorite, her first meal back with her mother. This reunion as emotional as you could imagine it to be. But let me give you some more context to this family's story to better understand the significance of that moment you see. Buena Ventura came to this country on May 1st with her then eight- month-old son. She and her family wanted a better life outside of the gang violence that they saw in Guatemala. One week later, her husband, Pedro, and their daughter, Janne, followed. But in the time between their arrivals, the zero tolerance policy went into effect. So, suddenly, this family was divided, split up and shipped across this country. Buena was detained in Arizona, but she was released with her son. She came here to Miami, where she had family waiting for her. But her husband was sent to Georgia, her daughter to Michigan. She said there was a feeling of helplessness as they were apart. But you see the joy in that reunion just yesterday. Another Guatemalan family also reunited yesterday at LAX. This a case of a 12-year-old girl and her mother who were forcibly separated at the border more than a month ago. With all of this emotion swirling, though, Buena told us, for any other families who are searching for a better life like they were, she says, find another country. She says the laws in America now are too harsh and she says people here don't have a heart. Erica, we don't know how many other families are waiting for the moments like we see here. The last number we got from HHS was last Tuesday saying 2,047 children were in their care. But as many immigrant attorneys have told me, they don't see a clear process. They don't see how the government will be able to meet the deadline they have set for themselves to reunify these families.
[Hill:] Still so many questions. The most important one, as you pointed out here, being how will those 2,047 children be reunited. Kaylee Hartung, appreciate it. Thank you. Joining me now, CNN political analyst Eliana Johnson and Matt Viser. There is no way that we're going to get away from this topic immigration. Not that we're going to stop talking about these 2,047 children either. And yet there are not a lot of clear answers. All of this happening as we see Democrats, even more Democrats, jumping on this bandwagon, pushing to abolish ICE. Matt, the president's embracing that as well saying, go for it. This is going to be a win for Republicans in November if Democrats continue to go down this road. Does he have a point?
[Matt Viser, Cnn Political Analyst:] He does, a little bit, yes. I mean Democrats are sort of bringing up a new issue that in some ways diverts from a very a harder one for President Trump, which is the family separation and indefinite detention of family members as the Trump administration is now perusing to a new issue, which is about ICA and, you know, abolishing ICE, which has been a new litmus test for a lot of 2020 candidates. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, all recently starting to call for that. And I think it gets to be a much more complicated issue and a harder one to explain. And it also diverts because ICE is not the one currently responsible for separating the families, it's another part of the government and the customs and border control. So I do think it's a complicated issue for Democrats.
[Hill:] A complicated issue. Not all Democrats are on board, as we know. Here's Tammy Duckworth from "State of the Union" this weekend.
[Sen. Tammy Duckworth , Illinois:] I just think that if you abolish ICE as it is as an executive agency, it reflects the policies of the White House, of the president. You abolish ICE now, you still have the same president with the same failed policies. Whatever you replace it with is just going to still reflect what this president wants to do.
[Jake Tapper, "state Of The Union":] So, no, you don't support abolishing ICE?
[Duckworth:] I you know, I think there's a lot of other things we can do before we get to that point.
[Hill:] The big question, of course, Eliana, what are those other things? And can Democrats be of one accord moving into November?
[Eliana Johnson, Cnn Political Analyst:] I think that's the key question. I think it was widely understood in the country that the president overplayed his hand here with the child separation or the zero tolerance policy, but that he did have a mandate in the election for cracking down on immigration. So the Democratic response then has been, well, let's abolish ICE to respond to the president overplaying his hand. The point I think that Tammy Duckworth was making was that the abolition of ICE is going to be understood in the country as Democrats pushing for no border enforcement. But the crisis on the southern border of young migrants and now young migrants with their parents flooding across the border I don't think will be accepted or tolerated by Americans. That's why Trump had a mandate and he bungled the execution. I don't think that the proper response, no border enforcement or no borders by Democrats is a good one or is going to be is going to get a lot of following from the American people.
[Hill:] As Democrats try to figure out what their message is come November and beyond, it's interesting, there was some pushback against Senator Duckworth from Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, of course, who won here in New York, representing the Bronx and Queens, who she hopes to then go on and represent in Washington. And she tweeted, with respect to the senator, strong, clear advocacy for working class Americans isn't just for the Bronx. She's talking about various policies here. Noting that states that Bernie Sanders won, of which several were then lost in the general. So what's the plan to prevent a repeat? Matt, is part of the answer here that there needs to be some young blood, there needs to be some new way of thinking and perhaps it's time for some of the old guard to step aside? And, Eliana, to that point, as both parties at least the fringes of both parties become more and more vocal, where do moderates from either party go?
[Johnson:] Look, I think that's a real problem for that you're going to see. Republicans grappled with it in 2016. You're going to see Democrats grapple with it in 2018. But just to be frank and let's be serious here, you know, the Democratic calls to abolish ICE are akin to Republicans calling to abolish the Department of Education or other departments. And so, you know, "The New York Times" called for Democratic leadership to step aside. That's real. But I think that the calls to abolish ICE are, you know, absurd. And that's the problem that Democrats are faced with. They need new leadership. They don't have good solutions on the other side.
[Hill:] Eliana Johnson, Matt Viser, appreciate your insight, as always. Thank you. Family and country, not the president. It is family and country that come first. That's what we heard from President Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, breaking his silence.

[Howell:] Welcome back to CNN NEWSROOM. I'm George Howell. We're learning more about a man who police say opened fire at a yoga studio in the state of Florida. Two women were killed Friday in that shooting, five others were wounded. "The New York Times" reports the 40-year-old suspect posted several racist and misogynist YouTube videos back in 2014. Our Dianne Gallagher has more on the details.
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] Federal, state and local authorities are still trying to figure out what the connection is between the 40-year-old gunman and the people who were simply practicing yoga on a Friday evening in Tallahassee. Now according to authorities, 40-year-old Scott Beierle posed as a customer, that he was going to go in, take a class, and then began firing a handgun indiscriminately at people in that Hot Yoga studio. They say that some of the people who were in there trying to attack him before he turned the gun on himself, killing himself. Now there were six people who were shot, one person who was pistol whipped and two of those victims died: 61-year-old Nancy Van Vessem, she was a doctor, an internist, the chief medical director at Capital Health Plan, she also was part of the FSU faculty. And Maura Binkley, a 21-year-old double major, English and German, at Florida State University. Her sorority, Tri-Delta, posted that she embodied the Tri-Delta woman; she was brave, bold and kind. She is from the Atlanta area, she graduated from Dunwoody High School just three years ago. And, again, they're trying to determine right now why. They do know he lived in Deltona, Florida, that he had served in the military in the past and had attended FSU as well. In fact, Tallahassee police had dealt with this man before, with phone calls and complaints about harassing young women there. He lived in Deltona, Florida, a four-hour drive to Tallahassee, got a hotel room in Tallahassee and, at this point, police do know why he came into the yoga studio. They're going through his social media, electronics and home back in Deltona to try to find a connection.
[Howell:] Dianne Gallagher, thank you. A mayor from the U.S. state of Utah has been killed while serving with the Utah National Guard in Afghanistan. Brent Taylor had temporarily stepped down as mayor of North Ogden to deploy for a fourth tour of duty. Initial reports indicate Taylor was killed in Kabul Saturday by a member of the Afghan national defense and security forces. The attacker reportedly was killed by other Afghan soldiers. Taylor marked his 15th wedding anniversary last month; he leaves behind seven children. It has now been one week since the deadly shooting at a synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Jewish communities around the world came together for services this weekend remembering and honoring the 11 victims. In a sermon on Saturday, a Pittsburgh rabbi blamed politicians for a rise in divisive rhetoric. He says that he told Donald Trump last week that hate speech leads to hateful actions. Our Alisyn Camerota spoke with him.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Are you scared when you see this building?
[Rabbi Jeffrey Myers, Tree Of Life Synagogue:] No. I'm not scared. I'm angry. How dare you defile our holy space? I'm a witness. I'm a victim. I'm a survivor. And I'm also a pastor but I'm also a human. And I stand here and I'm in pain.
[Howell:] From Pittsburgh and now to Israel, a vigil held there, a show of solidarity for the victims. CNN's Ian Lee spoke with mourners there, many who had ties to Pittsburgh.
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] Ra'anana is Pittsburgh strong tonight, despite the Steel City being thousands of miles away, couldn't be closer to their hearts.
[Lee:] Avishai Ostrin lost his uncle, Jerry Rabinowitz, at the Tree of Life Synagogue. "When shots were heard, instead of hiding or trying to escape, Uncle Jerry ran toward the inferno, to assist the wounded," his nephew says.
[Roni Weil, Former Pittsburgh Resident:] This is the single worst attack in American Jewish history.
[Lee:] It took a Pittsburgher so far from home and feeling lost to rally the community.
[Weil:] I felt like my heart had literally just been torn into two. My community, my home had just literally been ripped apart.
[Lee:] Her call was answered. But through the grief, a charge to politicians in this midterm season, to unite, not divide, not to single out what makes us different for political gain but embrace our commonalities.
[Weil:] There is such strength in America, such strength in Americans and Jews and even non-Jews that are reaching out. You know how the Muslim community raised so much money to help us out. There is beauty in America, how other people can help Jews when they don't have that everywhere else in the world.
[Lee:] In the aftermath of terror attacks against Jews overseas, many think of packing up. Karen Anisfeld offers a Pittsburgh lesson.
[Karen Anisfeld, Former Pittsburgh Resident:] I feel safe going back to the United States. But there is a huge tear in society. And the one thing that I think Pittsburgh demonstrates to the world, a light unto the nations, is that a strong community is a fortification.
[Lee:] A fortification no gun or hate can destroy Ian Lee, CNN, Ra'anana, Israel.
[Howell:] Live around the world and here in the United States, you're watching CNN NEWSROOM. Still ahead, we talk a great deal about many of the races here in the U.S. midterms but one in particular may hold a key to all the rest. We'll explain. Plus, voter suppression, a serious concern of many voters, one group will tell us their take. Stay with us.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon. Thanks for joining us. So, President Trump and his top aides at it again today. Saying things that are simply false. We should just call them for what they are. They're lies. As if saying them makes them true. It doesn't. But what is true, what is real for so many American families is that hundreds of thousands of federal employees are taking the brunt of the partial shutdown of the government, nearing its seventh day now. Going without paychecks this holiday season. These are the facts. OK? About the Trump shutdown, as Nancy Pelosi calls it. Three hundred eighty thousand federal workers have been furloughed, and there is no guarantee they'll be paid retroactively when the shutdown is over. There's no guarantee of that. In addition, 420,000 employees are deemed essential and are working without pay. That includes 41,000 federal law enforcement and correctional officers. And tens of thousands of Customs and Border Protection agents and customs officers. President Trump's ignoring those facts. And today he tweeted this really outrageous remark. "Do the Dems realize that most of the people not getting paid are Democrats?" The crassness of that statement is just stunning. And as usual, the president offers zero evidence to support it. No evidence. But Congressman Gerry Connolly, a Virginia Democrat who represents thousands of federal workers, responded this way.
[Rep. Gerry Connolly,  Virginia:] What an outrageous thing for a president of the United States to say. I have no earthly idea whether a federal employee is a Republican or a Democrat or an independent. And what is the relevance of that to a shutdown to an individual federal public servant not getting paid?
[Lemon:] And it looks like those federal workers will be without paychecks for quite a while. Both the House and the Senate reconvened for just moments today, and then they adjourned until next week. So that means no progress, nothing is getting done. But the White House lies, well, they just get better. OK? Because the press secretary Sarah Sanders releasing a statement today claiming President Trump and his team stayed in Washington over Christmas to negotiate a deal and that the Democrats decided to go home. So, let's see what's wrong with that statement. OK? Purely political. Obviously not true. The president stayed at the White House because of the optics of going to his luxurious Mar-a-Lago estate. Well, that stinks. While hundreds of thousands of employees are not being paid. Top aide Jared Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, they're not in Washington this week. They're in Florida. Along with their Secret Service detail, by the way, which is not being paid right now. And the idea that Republican leaders stayed on Capitol Hill to head off a shutdown, that's laughable. Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan couldn't get out of town fast enough after Trump scuttled the deal to keep the government funded temporarily. And note to this White House. Capitol Hill is empty. Negotiations said to be frozen. President Trump, meanwhile, blasting Democrats as obstructionists for not giving him $5 billion for his border wall. Nancy Pelosi in a statement tonight reminding him that there are proposals on the table to reopen the government and they include money for border security, which is different than a border wall, which she calls immoral and expensive. But remember, it was the president who said this about a shutdown.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Chuck, you want to put that on mine.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer,  New York, Minority Leader:] You said it.
[Trump:] I'll take it.
[Schumer:] OK, good.
[Trump:] You know what I'll say? Yes. If we don't get what we want, one way or the other, whether it's through you, through a military, through anything you want to call, I will shut down the government.
[Schumer:] OK. Fair enough.
[Trump:] And I am proud-
[Schumer:] We disagree. We disagree.
[Trump:] And I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck. I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I'm not going to blame you for it.
[Lemon:] You can count on that, Mr. President. But let's go back to 2013. OK? This is what Donald Trump said to Fox News ahead of a government shutdown when Barack Obama was still president.
[Unidentified Female:] Who's going to bear the brunt of the responsibility if indeed there is a shutdown of our government?
[Trump:] Well, if you say who gets fired, it always has to be the top. I mean, problems start from the top and they have to get solved from the top. And the president is the leader. And he's got to get everybody in a room. And he's got to lead.
[Lemon:] It starts from the top. If anyone should get fired, the president. Donald Trump suggesting that President Barack Obama should have been fired for a government shutdown. Priceless. Well, a lot to get about the government shutdown. Let's begin with former Republican Congressman Charlie Dent, National Security Analyst, Matthew Rosenberg, and Political Analyst, Rachael Bade. Good evening to all of you. Thank you for being bright and chipper and joining us this evening. I appreciate it. Rachael, I'm going to start with you. You know, I called it. The shutdown will continue into the new year. Our sources on the hill say no progress has been made towards a deal. And that is abundantly clear when you look at the sheer number of tweets the president shot off today. Nothing is getting done.
[Rachael Bade, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes, that's absolutely right. I was up there all day today. And it was a ghost town. I can tell you. I think I saw maybe two lawmakers, Jim McGovern, who is a Democrat from Massachusetts, he tried to bring up a bill in the House at about 4 o'clock that would basically reopen the government. He tried to-
[Lemon:] You saw a Democrat the president said Democrats had gone home and the Republicans were still there. Well, clearly say one thing, facts clearly show another. Right? And Republicans are the ones who gaveled him down. They wouldn't let him bring it up for a vote. So, you know, there's a lot of talk about this. Clearly lawmakers, despite the fact that this is, you know, a total disaster and people, federal workers are going to feel the brunt of this, they're not here. And you know, my sources on the hill are saying maybe January 11th becomes the new soft deadline. That is the day of the first furloughed paycheck for a bunch of government workers who are either working without pay right now or not working at all. So, we've gone a while and I think the reason you're seeing Trump tweet so much right now is because he knows he's losing this war right now. And his leverage is only going to decrease as soon as Nancy Pelosi takes the speaker's gavel because she's going to pass over and over again a bill that will reopen the government and you know, the pressure is going to be increased tremendously on Mitch McConnell in the Senate to put that on the floor and reopen the government. And it's just going to look increasingly bad for the president. Yes. Congressman Dent, listen. I'm kind of joking about that because I just think it's I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. There's nothing funny about this, you know. And the minute it came out I was like you know, there's nothing funny about it. But there's so much it's so hypocritical because the president is claiming without evidence that most of the 800,000 federal workers affected by the shutdown are he's saying they're Democrats. He is trying to play a political game here. But come on, these are real people with real bills and mortgages. It's offensive.
[Former Rep. Charlie Dent , Pennsylvania:] Yes. It's almost inexplicable that he would make a comment like that. It's certainly indefensible. I mean, the shutdown affects everybody negatively. There's nothing good about it. And by the way, the party that makes the policy demand owns the shutdown. And the president owns this one. When he says if I don't get my border wall funding, I'm shutting down the government. Well, guess what? You own it. When the Democrats insisted on a DACA bill as a price for keeping the government open, they more or less opened that shutdown. When Ted Cruz insisted on defunding Obamacare as the price to keep the government open, guess what. Ted Cruz and Republicans owned that shutdown. So, the president clearly owns this one. And this is so unnecessary, as Rachael said. Nothing is going to happen on this until January 3rd when the Democrats I think are going to probably pass one of three likely funding bills which I can get into if you'd like to hear them. But they'll have I think three options to reopen the government. Then you have to send a Democrat Senate Republicans to figure out how to proceed.
[Lemon:] You can tell me about the options if you can do it quickly.
[Dent:] Sure. One-
[Lemon:] You said if you'd like to hear that-
[Dent:] Yes. Absolutely. The first one would be the continuing resolution that the Senate passed, that same one. Identical. Pass that. If they don't do that then I would recommend they can pass a continuing resolution for the entire year. Not recommended but they can do that. And the third one, my choice, is pass the six appropriations bills that are completed.
[Lemon:] Right.
[Dent:] Pass them as is and then do a continuing resolution on the homeland security appropriations bill.
[Lemon:] What do you-
[Bade:] And Senate Republicans, just to be clear, on that first option, the reason Senate Democrats think they actually have the upper hand on this is the Senate Republicans just voice voted that same bill to continue funding the government through February. So, they think they have the upper hand on that.
[Lemon:] Yes. Matthew two questions. First one is what are the chances do you think that anything will happen like what Charlie said?
[Matthew Rosenberg, Cnn National Security Analyst:] You know, I mean, with-
[Lemon:] OK. That was your answer right there.
[Rosenberg:] I mean, look, the guy is sitting in the White House spending the week tweeting. It's really not a president that presidency we've had before. So, I'm having trouble predicting what could happen here.
[Lemon:] OK. Well, let me ask you this. So, House Democrats take control in the new year. Right? What leverage does the president have to demand $5 billion for a border wall once they take control?
[Rosenberg:] I mean, look, he can keep the government shut down. He can veto every bill they come up with. That's leverage. I don't know if it does him any good, but it's leverage.
[Bade:] Yes. I would I was just going to add, Reuters just put a poll up a few minutes ago saying that 47 percent of Americans blame the president for the shutdown and 33 percent blame the Democrats. I think that that gap is just going to continue to grow. And you know, again, Charlie Dent just said it. If you're the party making the demand, you are the party that usually loses. Just look back to what happened one year ago when Democrats were saying we're going to shut down the government until we get a fix for DREAMers.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Bade:] And they didn't get anything. They folded and they looked like fools.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Bade:] And likely that's what's going to happen here.
[Lemon:] Yes. That's we don't use that polling but I mean, it gets the point across because I think all the polling across the board shows something at least similar to what Rachael is talking about, Congressman Dent. Here's the other thing. The federal deficit rose to $779 billion in fiscal year 2018. That's up 17 percent from last year. Where's the money coming from to build a wall, the wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for?
[Dent:] Well, that's why we run deficits. They're going to have to find the money. They're going to issue it. Revenues are going to be obviously not sufficient to meet expenditures. The point is look, if I were the Democrats right now, I would just first move to reopen the government. Once I reopen the government, then seriously negotiate with the president on border security. You know, $5 billion is a small price to pay for DREAMers and maybe the Mueller protection the Mueller protection bill. I mean, they can negotiate something. I agree there's no reason to build a 2,000-mile concrete barrier on the southern border. That literally makes no sense. I voted for the Secure Fence Act in 2006 that authorized 700 miles of fencing along the southern border. They can do a lot of things to enhance border security and maintain operational control. But what the president's talking about, he still hasn't really explained what it means, what wall means. How many miles?
[Lemon:] Well, they added a trillion dollars to the deficit this year, congressman. I mean, come on. Who's going to pay for all this?
[Dent:] Right. By the way, deficits were projected to go up anyway. I'll just say that. Sooner or later this president and the Congress, whether it's Democrat or Republican, are going to have to get involved in a very serious fiscal reform, something along the lines of Simpson- Bowles, and get serious about it. The day is coming. And these deficits are only going to get worse. You're right, Don. You're making a point. It's money that's going to be deficit financed.
[Lemon:] Congressman, Matthew, Rachael, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.
[Rosenberg:] Thank you.
[Lemon:] Secretary of homeland security traveling tomorrow to Texas to the border with Mexico. Two migrant children have died in U.S. border control custody this month. I'm going to talk to the incoming Democratic congressman from El Paso on what changes need to be made to U.S. policy along the border when we come back.

[Bolduan:] Right now, Hurricane Florence is churning closer and closer to the Carolina coast. The storm is on a menacing path right now, packing a punch of sustained 130-mile-per-hour winds, on track to be the strongest storm to make landfall anywhere on the east coast since Hurricane Andrew back in 1992. More than a million people are being told to evacuate. Many of the mandatory orders are going into effect at the top of the hour. To be clear, the concern now, as you're looking, as we're hearing from the National Hurricane Center, isn't just the coastline and the storm making landfall. It's the storm is slowing down. So heavy rains and massive flooding are now also a very big threat to the region. What is the federal government doing to prepare this time around? Rene Marsh is in Washington. She's got that angle of it for us. Rene, what are you hearing from officials ahead of the storm?
[Rene Marsh, Cnna Aviation & Government Regulation Correspondent:] They're echoing that there are just more than a million people who are under the gun here with this mandatory evacuation. FEMA held a briefing this morning, and I can tell you, Kate, the agency's warning is stern and clear: If you're under a mandatory evacuation, pack up and leave your home now. The agency says this is a dangerous storm with the potential to kill. Now, the agency is expecting, aside from the highlight that you're seeing there on the screen, they're also expecting significant inland flooding in other areas. There are several storms brewing, but the agency, FEMA, says they're most focused right now on Florence because it's the biggest threat from a life-saving standpoint. Right now, FEMA says it's focusing on positioning commodities, like water and cots and tarps, so that it can get to those areas once the storm passes. They also say their FEMA staff is already communicating with states to make sure that they have an accurate read on what the needs will be so that they can respond appropriately. Here is more from FEMA earlier this morning at their first briefing. Take a listen.
[Jeff Byard, Associate Administrator, Office Of Response & Recovery, Fema:] So this is not going to be a storm that we recover from in days. It will take us a good amount of time to do the full recovery. However, we are focused on those critical missions that we have to perform immediately following the storm, opening the roads, performing life-saving missions in support of our state and local partners.
[Marsh:] OK, you remember FEMA was criticized last year over its response on it how it handled the three hurricanes, including Maria in Puerto Rico. The government watchdog agency, the GAO, said the agency was overwhelmed, stretched thin, they had staffing shortages. This morning, I asked the agency what it has done this time around to make sure that is not the case again. FEMA telling us that they have improved the way that they deploy staff, and they have also improved their coordination. So we'll wait and see how this all pans out. But again, they say they are confident that their response will be adequate.
[Bolduan:] All right, Rene, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Let's go back to North Carolina, though, to one of the towns projected to be in the direct path of the storm. CNN's Martin Savidge is in Carolina Beach. Martin, what are you hearing from folks there?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, beautiful day, you can see, but the ominous sight really, other than two surfers in the water, nobody on the beach, which that tells you right there, this is a community that is very much worried about what is lurking right over the horizon here. Mixed opinions. Some people say they're going to wait and see a little bit more, hoping the storm could turn somewhat more to the north. However, there are others who are simply saying, no, they're packing up, leaving. And there's a mandatory evacuation order in effect for this particular area of North Carolina. And the reason being the storm flooding is expected to be at least 13 feet. That would mean it would come over the barrier here and it would wash all into the community itself. That's going to take sand, that's going to take water, and that's going to knock out power. That is the real danger they're facing here right now Kate?
[Bolduan:] That is brutal. Martin, thank you so much. It is so deceiving how beautiful it is right before it starts heading in. Really appreciate it. Coming up next for us, imagine going to vote, on your ballot, though, none of the names you expected. Next, the election error that may have cost a Georgia legislator his seat.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon. We have major breaking news in Robert Mueller's Russia investigation. A federal judge ruling that Paul Manafort, President Trump's former campaign chairman, intentionally lied to the FBI. He lied to the special counsel's team, and also to a grand jury in the ongoing investigation. And that breaks the plea agreement that made that Manafort made with as a star cooperator for Mueller. The big question is what this ruling could mean for Manafort's upcoming sentencing. Also tonight, a CNN exclusive. Sources saying that William Barr who's expected to be confirmed soon as attorney general is already in discussions with the Justice Department officials on how to handle the report that Robert Mueller will submit to the Justice Department about the Russia investigation. And exactly what information Barr will share with Congress. A lot to discuss. I want to bring in now Shimon Prokupecz, Susan Glasser, and Michael Moore. Wow, every night it seems there's a lot to discuss so let's get right into it. Good evening to all of you. Shimon, let's start with the news. The judge ruling tonight that Paul Manafort intentionally lied to the FBI, to the special counsel and to the grand jury even after his plea deal. But I want you to dig into it further. What did we learn from this about Mueller's case?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] I think what we learned here is that he lied what the judge ruled and agreed with the Mueller team is that he lied about facts there, material to the investigation, you know. And that's what the important part of this is. He agreed to cooperate, he came before FBI agent, he came before prosecutors and the special counsel's office. And when they started asking him questions that were important to their investigation, questions that they said were at the heart of their investigation, he started lying about it. And the judge agreed with the special counsel on this hugely significant because, you know, they were on a fact-finding mission. And you're right, Don. They did in some ways look at him as this big cooperator. They were trying to get him to cooperate from the beginning. You know, we see this deal that Rick Gates got and he's out free. This was the same deal that Paul Manafort was going to get had he cooperated from the beginning. And when he finally agreed to cooperate, they thought, they trusted him. He came before them, he said certain things and obviously they didn't believe him. And now the judge agrees with Paul Manafort, and you know, he's facing a lot of prison time now.
[Lemon:] Shimon, as I said earlier, it's kind of a mixed bag, though, because the judge's ruling wasn't all good news for Mueller's team.
[Prokupecz:] No, on the most significant part it certainly was good news for the Mueller team. There's couple of things that she did find that she didn't agree with the Mueller team on. And that is, you know, an important part of this, she didn't agree that he lied one of the key things is that she didn't agree that he lied about contacts with people in the Trump administration. She did not agree with the special counsel on that. Obviously, that was a big deal that was something that the special counsel's office had raised. That, she did not agree with the Mueller team on.
[Lemon:] Michael, let's bring you in now. Here's the big question is why. I mean, why would Paul Manafort risk his plea deal and lie?
[Michael Moore, Former U.s. Attorney, Middle Districtof Georgia:] I think that is ultimately the question. The plea deal is nothing but a contract between the defendant in this case, Manafort and the government. And so, he had a good chance to hold the government to the position and recommended to get a lesser sentence and then he threw that out the window. I think there's probably some speculation on whether or not there had been some discussions about a pardon. He may have calculated, you know, I'm going to do eight or 10 years regardless under the best circumstances, and so I'm not going to last that long. Maybe if I can convince the president I'm going to bat for him that I can put myself in line for a pardon. It really makes no sense. But I think if you look at his age, you look at what he's charged with, you look at what he's facing, at some point he probably decided that it was a diminishing return and he needed to take his chances and try to
[Lemon:] So, he's taking his chances on a pardon, you think?
[Moore:] I think so.
[Lemon:] OK.
[Moore:] I think otherwise you're talking about decades in prison anyway and he's going to take his chances.
[Lemon:] Susan Glasser, let's and I want you to take a look at this list of all the Trump associates who have now either admitted to or admitted or being proven to have lied about the Russia investigation. What does this pattern say to you?
[Susan Glasser, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Well, look, first of all, Don, obviously these are not just bystanders in the world of Donald Trump. These are people who were intimately and significantly connected to him. In the case of Roger Stone, Paul Manafort for decades, who were instrumental in this shocking rise to the presidency? So, the fact that there's already a documented and proven pattern of lying all around the president is something that if it weren't for the seriousness of the other charges we're talking about, would be breathtaking in its own right. And I think that's something that does get lost here, but that is very, very long list of crucial senior level Trump insiders, the people who ran his campaign, ran his inauguration, ran his national security. Again, in any other administration this would be a crippling scandal, number one. Number two, the seriousness of the allegations that are underlying this question of what Paul Manafort was lying about is something that also tends to get lost in the mix here. And I think it's very significant that what the federal judge is saying she believes Paul Manafort lied about was his repeated contacts with a known agent of Russian intelligence, in the very middle. In August of 2016, in the very middle of the 2016 campaign, while he was running the nominee for president of the United States, Donald Trump's campaign.
[Lemon:] Well, that's my I want to that's question to Shimon. Shimon, let's talk about the name that keeps coming up is Konstantin Kilimnik, right? And the judge specifically mentioned Manafort's lies about his interactions with him. And by the way, Konstantin Kilimnik is a man with alleged ties to Russian intelligence. Why is this so significant?
[Prokupecz:] It is probably the most significant aspect of all of this, Don. I think Susan is right as well. I mean, this is what really the Mueller investigation has been about. This is the man that the special counsel and the defensive team has, you know, inadvertently leaked that he provided, Paul Manafort provided internal polling data for. This is man that Paul Manafort had a secret meeting with in New York where it's believed he discussed, you know, Ukrainian political issues there at this meeting in New York. This is man that the special counsel has been very interested in, very interested in the relationship between Paul Manafort and this Russian operative. And they said in court, in these court documents and transcripts, they said this is the heart of our investigation. And when Paul Manafort came before them and when FBI agents and prosecutors started asking him questions about this man and his relationship and his meetings and his contacts, yet again we saw another person connected to the Trump campaign lie about it. That's what the judge said, that he specifically she said that he lied about his contacts, about his communications with Kilimnik. And this is what has so troubled I think the special counsel and the FBI throughout this entire investigation.
[Lemon:] So, what does this do? You know, we've been saying all along collusion is not a crime, it's just a term, right? But what does this mean for the potential of that, Michael?
[Moore:] You know, we would talk about this, that this is, we don't have collusion, but we do have conspiracy. You know, this is if you think about a bicycle wheel and you've got the spokes of the wheel and there's something at the center and that appears to be the Trump campaign or maybe Trump himself. And there are the other tentacles that reach out that had spokes that are doing sort of the dirty work, and there is something that connects. So, what we're seeing is, I think you're seeing Bob Mueller tell the story of what's connecting these people. It may be the meeting at the Atlanta club, it maybe be Kilimnik, it maybe the sharing of the polling data for some unknown reason, it may be money at the end of the day. I still think we're going to be following the money. And that's what Mueller has been doing in this case. But there's something that's tying all these people together. And so, by bringing in the ideas of Kilimnik being involved and the data going out, and whether Trump was shouting out to the Russians after the WikiLeaks problem, you know, that is we're hearing sort of that wheel get pieced together and we're seeing Mueller connect those spokes.
[Lemon:] All right. So, let me ask you this, Shimon, you point out that over two years ago when you started covering this story, officials pointed to Paul Manafort as a possible nucleus of the investigation. Is that how it's looking to you right now?
[Prokupecz:] It is, Don. Look, I could tell you, you know, two years ago when we started forming our team here at CNN to cover this, we realized it was going to be a big story and it was going to dominate a lot of what we were doing. And as we started meeting with people and U.S. officials and discussing Paul Manafort's name I could tell you kept coming up. There were intercepts, there were communications that they were picking up not necessarily between Paul Manafort and people, but his name kept surfacing. And they were always very concerned about what was he doing in this campaign, why was he even involved in this campaign. Why was he even involve in this campaign? And they were certainly always concerned about his relationships with Russians and people connected to the Russian government. The FBI has always been concerned about this. And, you know, when you look at the charges, the tax fraud and the other money kind of charges that Paul Manafort wound up getting convicted for, this is something that had been around for quite some time, and that if the FBI and the Department of Justice wanted to go after him for they could have done it, you know, probably some time ago. But I do think that the special counsel was trying to use this as a leverage to get him to cooperate. Because ultimately, they wanted to get to the heart, right, they say this to the heart of this investigation. And it really is about the Russians and what were the Russians doing here. And in some ways how they were able to infiltrate the Trump campaign and what they were doing. And they were trying to learn, and the FBI is still trying to understand this.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] And they were hoping that Paul Manafort could help them along those lines, and he didn't.
[Lemon:] But Susan, there's something to be said that why they didn't do it before. But I mean, was someone like Paul Manafort even on the government's radar before this? I mean, this put him on the government's radar. You can't certainly say though, well, they're just doing it because of Trump. Yes and no. He's front and center and they've also found credible evidence obviously to charge him with these things and he's admitted to lying about some of it.
[Glasser:] Well, look, Don, I do think that Shimon is right, that he was well-known to U.S. law enforcement, very likely to U.S. intelligence as well. You know, his role in working for a variety of unsavory international figures is something that was well-known. I've asked this question myself to a number of former senior national security officials of the Bush and Obama administrations before that, in particular his role in Ukraine, which went through a revolution in 2014. That's when his client Viktor Yanukovych was essentially fled from power and return to -went to Russia to seek haven. You know, this was something that was extremely well-known. Paul Manafort was a very questionable figure, and I think that this issue of why he was working for Donald Trump remember, this is something that people forget a lot. If your campaign chairman is working for zero dollars managing your presidential campaign, the question is who's paying him or what is his financial interest in this campaign that is non-salary, shall we say. And so, I think there was enormous amount of suspicion already to be raised about this. And so, I think no one is surprised from the very beginning that Paul Manafort, if anything it was too obvious. This was a man who had well-known associations with Russian oligarchs, with questionable Russian figures and in fact, really had been essentially purged from working in Washington in the more respectable quarters of lobbying here because of it. So, you know, the fact that we're circling back to the guy who was being paid zero dollars, who raised his hand to Donald Trump and said, I'd love to work for you for free, and he's meeting secretly in New York City taking time out from those campaign duties, meeting secretly in New York in August of 2016 with a known Russian intelligence agent, that's at the heart of what we're talking about today. And the fact that he agreed to cooperate with prosecutors and then lied about that meeting, and again, you talk about the evidence that they've compiled this. One thing we've learned in the course of this court filings is that special counsel's office had information and intercepts presumably or intelligence information that contradicted their own witness, Paul Manafort. And they confronted him with this evidence of his own lying.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Glasser:] And that's what the judge has accepted tonight. I think it's a big deal.
[Lemon:] Thank you all. I appreciate it. We'll be right back.

[Blackwell:] It's 23 minutes after the hour now. The president is at his resort in Bedminster, New Jersey, starting a two and a half-week vacation. Congress is headed to break as well. And as they head to break, still the unfinished business of repealing and replacing Obamacare, but the vice president told the group last night, this ain't over. Watch.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] My fellow conservatives, let me be clear, this ain't over. This ain't over by a long shot. And President Trump are absolutely committed to keep our promise to the American people. We were not elected to save Obamacare. We were elected to repeal and replace it.
[Blackwell:] All right. Joining me now, Republican Congressman Francis Rooney from Florida. Congressman, good morning to you.
[Representative Francis Rooney , Florida:] Thanks for having me on.
[Blackwell:] Certainly, thanks for coming on. So, the movement in the House is with this problem solvers caucus trying to fix Obamacare. Mitch McConnell said it's time for them to move on to tax reform. How will Republicans fulfill that promise to repeal and replace, in this environment, considering the context?
[Rooney:] Well, first of all, the House of Representatives has done its part, we passed the AHCA which is a good conservative view of how to bring free enterprise patient-centric care back into the market for non-group insurance, and to reform Medicaid and turn it back to the states. I do not understand why it's so hard to do what we've been telling the American people we wanted to do for eight years.
[Blackwell:] So, I spoke with some of the candidates for Jeff Sessions former seat in Alabama this week, and two of them, Moore Brooks and Judge Roy Moore said that it's time for Mitch McConnell to go. And they believe that this inability to repeal Obamacare, they are not so much into a replacement, is part of the justification. Do you believe that Mitch McConnell, if he didn't hold to this promise, to push for repeal of Obamacare should go?
[Rooney:] Well, it wouldn't be my place to comment on the majority leader of the Senate. But I do think the American people expect better than what they've been getting from all of us, in terms of repealing and replacing Obamacare. I'm proud of my colleagues in the House and I wish the Senate would be able to focus on accomplishing what they've been telling the people they were going to do.
[Blackwell:] Could you get behind this effort to make some fixes, instead of a repeal?
[Rooney:] I think we need to repeal it. I think we told the American people we wanted to repeal it. They voted us in to repeal it. We need to repeal it.
[Blackwell:] All right, let's move on to another policy issue here. After the week of the president's January call with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto this week, you told my colleagues this about the president's promise to build a wall and that Mexico would pay for it. Let's watch together.
[Rooney:] I don't think anyone during the campaign seriously thought that Mexico would pay for that wall even though we all desperately believe the wall is a metaphor for border security.
[Blackwell:] Nobody believed Mexico would pay. The wall was a metaphor. Do you believe the crowds at President Trump's rallies believed when they were shouting build that wall, they were supporting a metaphor, instead of a traditional brick and mortar, cement wall?
[Rooney:] Well, there's an element in the border, where the wall brick and mortar wall is appropriate. There are also elements that need to be brought to bear on policing the border like technology. What I said during the campaign, and those very people you're talking about I think understood, that we need to combine a wall with technology and we need to do all that we can do to secure the border. There are areas where the Rio Grande, west of Brownsville is very narrow, that might support a wall better in places where it's wide. There's places where those private property, which don't lend itself to a wall right on the river, but lends itself to a wall where. And then across the land border through New Mexico and Arizona it lends itself to a wall all the way across.
[Blackwell:] True. And you know, what you're offering to this conversation is nuance, but we didn't hear that from the president. In fact, let's remind people of what the president said. We've heard you say that this was a metaphor. Here's what the president said the wall would be.
[Trump:] It's going to be a real wall. It's going to be a high wall. It's going to be beautiful It's going be made of hardened concrete and rebar and we're going to set them in nice heavy foundations. In order to get the wall started, Mexico will pay for the wall. On day one, we will begin working on an impenetrable, physical, tall, powerful, beautiful southern border wall and Mexico will pay for the wall. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border and I will have Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.
[Blackwell:] And you know what, let's follow this up with your own promise to voters, when you ran for the seat you currently hold. You're in the construction business. You appeared in your own ad with a safety vest and a construction helmet there, a hat. Here's what you said about the wall.
[Rooney:] I'm Francis Rooney, I work in the construction industry, so I know a thing or two about building walls. In Congress, I'll fight to build a big one on our southern border.
[Blackwell:] So, this is metaphor talk just an excuse to get the wall started in the first six months?
[Rooney:] No, I think first of all, like I said, there are areas where a big wall will be part of the solution. There are also areas where we need something different than a wall, where we need a wall that's removed a bit from the Rio Grande. But the metaphor part is there's a broad-based feeling of frustration and insecurity all across our country over what's happened with terrorism and people crossing our border. And our broken visa system that half the people came in legally and overstayed that we need to fix. That's what I mean about the metaphor is a small wall for big problem, border security and individual security.
[Blackwell:] The president also has said before the inauguration and since the inauguration that Mexico will pay for the wall. Do you believe that?
[Rooney:] No, I don't think Mexico will pay for the wall. I think he was maybe speaking in a campaign hyperbole or whatever, but I don't think Mexico will pay for the wall.
[Blackwell:] He was speaking could you repeat that? He was speaking in what?
[Rooney:] It could be just campaign words, you know.
[Blackwell:] But campaign words are the basis for which on which voters selected Donald Trump. So, are we now supposed to dismiss the promise that Mexico will pay for the wall? That's why potentially some people voted for him?
[Rooney:] Well, I don't think if they voted for him because of who was going to pay for it or they voted for it because they wanted to see our border strengthened and bring security back to the American people. That's where I get back to the broader metaphor idea.
[Blackwell:] OK. Let's move on to another policy issue here quickly. The president supports a plan to cut legal immigration in half by the end of the decade, end of this term. In your district, Florida 19th, there is a construction labor shortage right now in the middle of a construction boom. Now Pew finds that 1 in 8 construction workers is a lawful immigrant. 1 in 5 and is also a farm laborer in the country is also a lawful immigrant. Is this reduction and prioritization of high-skilled workers really best for your district?
[Rep. Francis Rooney , Foreign Affairs Committee:] I think the idea in Senator Cotton's bill of shifting the concept of immigration from family to skilled is a good idea. Now when you get into exactly the formula and the type of skills that we need, I think we have to have employer input, because they're the people that are hiring the workers. But we have a broad-based problem with our workforce in America now. Part of it is the kind of immigrants that come in. And I'm all for ending chain immigration and going for skills. Part of it is the thing that you mentioned that we have a drastic need for a quad- skilled people. They got career and technical education. We need welders, carpenters, cement finishers.
[Blackwell:] But also some of the people who work on
[Rooney:] All of this country. Computer programmers.
[Blackwell:] these tomato farms in collier county in Calla County and Lee County that you represent, they don't have skills that match what you've just listed there. And those farms need
[Rooney:] Yes. I'm getting to that part, too.
[Blackwell:] Go ahead.
[Rooney:] After we talked about high school, and I did introduce a bill to reform h-1b program to make sure it is strictly high-skilled people, then we move in to talking about applied skilled people which are the traditional working America jobs that we still need to do in the era of globalization and technology. Then you move on to the low- skilled jobs and we don't have enough people to do them either. Our people in our district are crying for more H-2as.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Rooney:] To bring in temporary agricultural workers. We can't get the oranges picked without them.
[Blackwell:] All right. Republican Congressman Francis Rooney of Florida. Good to have you on
[New Day. Rooney:] Thank you very much.
[Blackwell:] Sure.
[Paul:] Well, a nationwide manhunt for a college professor and another university employee is over this morning. Both are now in custody facing charges in what police call a savage murder. We'll tell you how they were captured.
[Blackwell:] Plus the NAACP is warning minority travels of what they call looming dangers in the state of Missouri. What prompted them to issue its first state-wide travel advisory?

[Lu Stout:] Welcome back, this is "News Stream." Art lovers around the world are still wondering just how British artist Banksy pulled off one of his boldest stunts yet at an auction in London. Now, moments after his iconic "Girl with Balloon" painting sold for more than a million dollars at Sotheby`s, it began to shred itself to pieces. There was speculation that Sotheby`s might have known about the prank beforehand, but Banksy`s former agent who has known him for many years told CNN that it is very unlikely that the artist colluded with Sotheby`s to pull off the prank. CNN`s Lynda Kinkade reports on this and some of the artist`s other stunts.
[Lynda Kinkade, Cnn Correspondent:] Moments after a buyer placed the $1.4 million winning bid on this famous Banksy artwork, a stunt like no other. The iconic image known as "Girl with Balloon" self-destructs. The artist delighting in the moment in real time on his Instagram account writing, going, going, gone. A shredder built into the frame rips the piece into strips at Sotheby`s auction house in London. Banksy says he added the shredder to the picture years ago just in case it was ever auctioned off. It`s not clear how the shredder was activated or how this will affect the art`s value. Could it worth more now?
[Will Ellsworth-jones, Chief Reporter And New York Correspondent, Sunday Times:] Well, that will be sad if it is.
[Kinkade:] Will Ellsworth-Jones, author of "Banksy: The Man Behind the Wall," says the artist has a clear message.
[Ellsworth-jones:] It was a sort of protest against the way his paintings have been monetized. It`s become how much does a Banksy make, how much is it worth rather than a painting.
[Kinkade:] Banksy is known for using the element of surprise to make a point. Like the time he brought a truck of stuffed animals into New York meat packing district squeaking for help, or when he painted a finger of privilege by painting a butler serving a young graffiti artist on a ball in the Bronx. In a statement, Sotheby`s auction house said, we`ve been Banksy-ed. Lynda Kindade, CNN.
[Lu Stout:] Now, one of Tokyo`s iconic attractions and points of commerce is alas no more. The Tsukiji fish market for decades has drawn restaurant tourists and tourists alike, but now the market has closed its stores as it moves to a new location.
[Unidentified Male:] I am sad to see it Tsukiji close, but I do look forward to seeing what the land will be used for after this and how Tokyo will develop going forward.
[Unidentified Female:] Tsukiji is now a brand name and people buy from here because it is from Tsukiji. I am hearing a lot of people that Toyosu will not be the same and that is why people don`t want to move. I`ve been working here 23 years and don`t want to move either. This all brings up a lot of emotions in me.
[Lu Stout:] The new location is called the Toyosu Fish Market. It is due to open October the 16th. Big reason for the move was the fact that Tsukiji is on such valuable real estate in the center of Tokyo. And that is "News Stream." I`m Kristie Lu Stout. But don`t go anywhere. "World Sport" with Christina Macfarlane is next.

[Allen:] More fallout from the Grenfell Tower tragedy in London. Hundreds of families have been moved to temporary shelters. They're out of their homes for the next month or so because the cladding on their buildings in North London is flammable.
[Howell:] The siding on the Grenfell Tower contributed to last week's fire, a fire that killed 79 people. Safety checks are underway at apartment buildings across the United Kingdom. Local London officials say Grenfell has changed everything.
[Unidentified Female:] I realize it's disruptive to people's lives but it's particular safety comes first. If it's not safe, then people need to go. What we found that while the insulation was safe, the external cladding was not up to the standards that we wanted. It was not fire retardant. Obviously, this was very disappointing. We shared that news with our residents and, on Thursday night, we had a public meeting with local residents, where they shared a number of concerns about fire safety that I hadn't been aware of.
[Howell:] No doubt, there are a lot of big questions. The big question, how far could this go? I spoke earlier with Kuldeep Virdi. He's a professor emeritus of structural engineering at City University of London and I asked him how this happened in the first place.
[Kuldeep Virdi, City University:] The authorities have made a risk assessment and they decided that the fire services could not cope with a fire of this magnitude. Therefore, they've decided to evacuate many of the buildings.
[Howell:] Kuldeep Virdi, so on the side here, we're seeing these images inside the Grenfell Tower following this fire. If we could take these images full because I want to talk about the gladding that was on the exterior. I want you to tell us about this cladding. What is the process to remove it? How difficult is it to go back to buildings, to identify which buildings are affected and then strip them of this cladding?
[Virdi:] I think the decision as to which buildings to be stripped of the cladding is straightforward because we would know what materials were used in those buildings and if it was the case that the material was flammable, then you decide to remove the cladding. The question whether it's easy to remove or not, I think it's not very difficult because these panels are not very heavy, made of aluminum and some polymer materials. So handling them is not too difficult. Of course, when the cladding is at, say 20 stories high floor, then you have to take care that the persons removing the cladding are also safe. So there has to be consideration of safety of people removing the cladding. But as for the weight of the cladding, elements are concerned, it's not too heavy. Should not be too difficult.
[Howell:] We hear this from officials. They say that Grenfell changed everything. In this case, we're talking about a particular set of buildings. But with regard to the scope and scale of this problem, look, could we be talking about hospitals? Could hotels be concerned about the cladding on their structures? How common is this type of cladding? And how far could it go?
[Virdi:] My understanding is that this type of cladding was used for all the buildings where they decided to do two things: one, to improve the appearance of the building and, second, to improve the thermal insulation. So the aluminum on the outside is there for appearance and the insulation there is to improve the performance of the buildings, retaining heat, et cetera. So from an energy point of view, this would have been a good product. But, unfortunately, it's turned out that another aspect of this is whether the material is flammable or not. And I think we have seen the case that the material was flammable. It is not the case that all cladding systems have
[Howell:] Obviously, the fire in London has drawn attention to this type of paneling, this cladding. Now the question, you know, certainly in the United Kingdom but what other countries, what other buildings around the world could be affected by this? Kuldeep Virdi, thank you so much. Thank you for your time.
[Virdi:] You're welcome.
[Howell:] I want to tell you now about a development on a story that stunned the United States and certainly around the world and led to a national debate on race relations, the fatal shooting of an African American teenager, Michael Brown, by a police officer.
[Allen:] We now know Brown's family will receive $1.5 million after reaching a settlement in a lawsuit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri. Ferguson became a flashpoint for unrest across the U.S. after the shooting in 2014. That anger was exasperated [sic] when a grand jury cleared police officer Darren Wilson, who had shot Brown.
[Howell:] Now to another police-involved shooting in the United States. An Ohio judge has declared a mistrial in the case against former University of Cincinnati police officer Ray Tensing.
[Allen:] Tensing was charged with murder, involuntary manslaughter after shooting Samuel DuBose during a July 2015 traffic stop. His bodycam caught the entire incident. Tensing testified that he feared for his life after his left arm became trapped inside DuBose'moving car.
[Howell:] This is the second time a jury has deadlocked considering this particular shooting and Tensing is the third U.S. law enforcement officer to be tried for shooting an African American in the last week. None of them were convicted.
[Allen:] Ahead here, the joke that was no laughing matter for the White House. Actor Johnny Depp apologizing for a controversial visual comment about President Trump.

[Vause:] British Prince William and his wife Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge labor for their third child on Monday. The baby boy who doesn't have a name just yet is fifth in line to the throne.
[Sesay:] Our CNN's Max Foster, reports the royal couples new arrive across Kensington.
[Vause:] They always do.
[Max Foster, Cnn International Correspondent:] A new royal baby boy, a third child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, of the queens sit great-grandson. Seven hours after giving birth, the Duchess of Cambridge introduce her youngest son to the world. Just in red, standing next to Prince William and holding her newborn. She waved and smiled to the waiting cameras on the well-wishers. The announcement to the birth was made on Twitter, which was consequently flooded with congratulatory messages. The traditional isle proclaiming the birthplace on the four courts of Buckingham Palace. First, princess of a newborn were his brother and sister, George and Charlotte. It was Prince William who've been in the delivery room who left the hospital to collect them. They ride, walking by their father's hand and end to the building not before Charlotte gave a little wave to the press and crowds. "Thrice the worry now," William said as he stepped in to drive his wife and baby back home to Kensington Palace. The excitement outside the hospital was pout able. Some royal fans have been waiting for this moment for days.
[Unidentified Female:] It's been
[Unidentified Male:] It's absolutely fantastic, a happy healthy prince there.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm so excited to be here. We're just here by chance and I'm so glad it was today. It's so exciting
[Foster:] The new baby is fifth in line to the throne. He's the first male not to step in front of his older sister in the line of succession. In the past, royal sons took presidents over the female siblings, but they'll always recently updated. Now, we wait the name expected in the next couple of days. Max Foster, CNN, Kensington Palace, London.
[Vause:] Well, today are going to be.
[Sesay:] And how at Lenny?
[Vause:] Sweetie, sweetie. OK. As the cup of Prince Sweetie, as recovery case of a monkey selfie. In U.S. federal bills code as favorite humans over animals. The court apart of ruling that animals did not have the right to sue for copyright.
[Sesay:] This Naruto and
[Vause:] I think so. It looks pretty happy though.
[Sesay:] Do he?
[Vause:] Looks like a he? What do you think? Looks like a boy?
[Sesay:] You've been watching CNN it does
[Vause:] I'm John Vause. Who was on Twitter, CNNNEWSROOMLA. There you find hubs and clips in our show. The news continue is next with
[Sesay:] The one only
[Vause:] Rosemary Church.

[Camerota:] FBI Director James Comey faced four hours of questioning in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He revealed new details in the now-closed FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails found on Anthony Weiner's laptop.
[Sen. John Kennedy,  Louisiana, Committee On The Judiciary:] Was there classified information on former Congressman Weiner's computer?
[James Comey, Fbi Director:] Yes.
[Kennedy:] Who sent it to him?
[Comey:] His then-spouse Huma Abedin appears to have had a regular practice of forwarding emails to him for him, I think, to print out for her so she could then deliver them to the Secretary of State.
[Camerota:] All right. Joining us now is the senator asking those questions, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana. Good morning, Senator.
[Kennedy:] Good morning, Alisyn. How you doing?
[Camerota:] I'm doing well. You got some new information out of Dir. Comey there that we hadn't previously known about how Huma Abedin would send these emails from Secretary of State Clinton to her husband in order for him to print them out. And that prompted Sen. Lindsey Graham to ask Director Comey should somebody be prosecuted for sending classified information to Anthony Weiner, and then Director Comey said there's no Anthony Weiner statute. So what did you think of that whole exchange and information?
[Kennedy:] I appreciated Comey's candor. He was he was forthcoming, he wasn't apologetic. Look, it's no secret. Comey doesn't get invited to many parties on Capitol Hill. He's about as popular as cholera. But I respect that about him. I mean, the impression I get of Comey is that he's going to do his job and he doesn't much care who gets mad at him. I questioned him at length about Sec. Clinton's email scandal or circumstances whatever you want to call it. He gave me straight-up answers. He answered the yes and no questions with yes and no. I also pressed him pretty hard on the investigation about Russia's interference with the last round of elections.
[Camerota:] Yes, and so on that on that note what did you learn? What was new that you learned yesterday?
[Kennedy:] Well, here's what I hope I learned, and I say that because I didn't get a chance to ask him this straight-up. I ran out of time. But what I wanted to say was look, this issue about the interference in our election has been raised. The American people get it. Not every American reads Aristotle every day but they know something's going on. And now the FBI's involved. They've announced they're doing an investigation. Comey and his team have got to they've got to turn over every single rock every single one. They've got to let the chips fall where they may and after they conclude their investigation, whatever it is, they can't just do a press conference and say OK, we're finished, never mind, nothing there, or here's what we found and we're going to in terse, cryptic terms. He's got to call a press conference and say to the American people this is what happened. This is who did something wrong. This is somebody who didn't do something wrong. Here's what we plan on doing in the future to stop Russia from doing this. We'll never stop them completely. I mean, this goes all the way back Russia tried to it's well documented interfere in the Nixon- Humphrey election.
[Camerota:] So
[Kennedy:] They tried to interfere in Ronald Reagan's reelection. They're always trying to screw with our elections.
[Camerota:] But do you think there was something different in the 2016? Do you have any doubt in your mind that they did interfere in the 2016 election?
[Kennedy:] There's no doubt in my mind based on the briefings I've had that they did interfere. There are two questions, though, that have to be addressed by the FBI. Number one, what was the extent, if any, of staff on presidential campaigns interacting with Russian agents? That's number one. Number two, OK, the Russians interfered. Did they influence the election and how do you know that? How do you quantify that? And really, number three, what do we do about it in the future?
[Camerota:] And so, given that you think that James Comey should come out and make a statement based on whatever they find, am I to then extrapolate that you think that it was within his purview and his right and good judgment that he did make the statement about Hillary Clinton's email and that he did send the letter to Congress on October 28th that she now credits for her loss?
[Kennedy:] Well, you know, I wasn't in his shoes. I don't know what I would have done, but he explained he thought he had two doors, disclose or conceal. He chose door number one. He's unapologetic about it. He explained this thinking. I don't think anybody would know what they would do until they're in those in his shoes. It was a tough call. But I will say this, this is my impression of Comey and I don't know him. I met him for the first time yesterday. He loves his job, he cares about the FBI, and he just doesn't really care who's mad at him and I like frankly, I like that about him. I mean, he's an equal opportunity aggravator up here and that's a pretty good that's a pretty good qualification for working on Capitol Hill as far as I'm concerned.
[Camerota:] There you go. Susan Rice, the former national security adviser to President Obama. You would like her, I understand, I think, to testify in front of your committee. She does not want to. Will you subpoena her?
[Kennedy:] You know, it's not my decision to subpoena her. I think she ought to testify. Now, if she's lawyered-up you know, if her lawyers tell her not to do it I'm sure she's going to listen to her lawyers. But I'd like to know. I'd like to hear her side of the story. There are generally two sides to a story. I haven't prejudged the situation. I want to hear what she has to say.
[Camerota:] Yes. Senator, I want to ask you about something else that's happening the country right now and that's, of course, the flooding. There's been storms throughout the Midwest.
[Kennedy:] Yes.
[Camerota:] Missouri has had flooding, as has other states. I know that you have a plan to, I guess, cut down on flood insurance abuse? What's happening?
[Kennedy:] As you know, FEMA runs the National Flood Insurance Program. Actually, they don't run it, they're in charge of it. They hire some private insurance companies to operate it. The private insurance companies hire consultants to help them lawyers, contractors, engineers. Most of those consultants do a pretty good job, some of them don't. Some of them try to screw people. There's been evidence introduced in federal court where engineers have changed reports, where lawyers have been dilatory. The head of the Flood Insurance Program for FEMA testified in front of our banking committee. I asked him look, these bad actors, why don't you fire them? I know they're a minority but there are still some they're firing. He said I don't have the authority unless they're criminally convicted. I said OK, we're going to give you that authority and that's what my bill does. My bill says that the FEMA director of the Flood Insurance Program can pick up the phone and if there's a bad actor out there working for an insurance company that has a contract with the Flood Insurance Program
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Kennedy:] and the director thinks that they are committing bad behavior or fraud, he can say you're fired and they'll have a right to appeal. If people buy flood insurance and they flood, they ought to get their money. It's just -it's just that simple.
[Camerota:] Well, that sure makes sense. Senator John Kennedy, thanks so much for being on NEW DAY Chris.
[Kennedy:] You bet. Thanks, Alisyn.
[Cuomo:] All right. The president is set to sign an order today allowing churches and other religious organizations to become more politically active. Is the order going to face a legal challenge? We debate.

[Berman:] President Trump's long time personal attorney, Michael Cohen, could learn his legal fait soon. CNN has learned the prosecutors in New York are preparing charges against Cohen that could come within the next few weeks. We're back with Ross Garber, Asha Rangappa, and John Avlon. Asha, this is serious. I mean, Michael Cohen, the New York Times reports, could face charges dealing with $20 million worth of bank fraud. This has to do with his taxi cab company, the medallions he owned. But these are serious, serious charges.
[Rangappa:] They are serious charges. So these involved potential bank fraud by misrepresenting his assets in trying to obtain bank loans for his taxi business, not reporting the income from his taxi business. This goes to tax evasion or tax fraud. And then, of course, the pieces that relate to potential illegal campaign finance contributions because of stories that were being silenced, and that appears to be the piece that could overlap in terms of the charges with the Trump campaign. I think it remains to be seen whether he has A, has information, and B, is credible or valuable enough to either Mueller's team or even this other district for other things related to
[Berman:] Right.
[Rangappa:] you know, criminal activity that he knows about that might be able to get him some kind of cooperation plea deal.
[Camerota:] Well, Lanny Davis, a famous lawyer, was saying the same thin to Politico. I'll read it to you. "I reached out to my old friend John Dean." John Dean is a fiend on this show,
[Ok - Berman:] Everywhere.
[Avlon:] Oh yes. Where isn't John Dean?
[Camerota:] "because of what he went through with Watergate, and I saw some parallels to what Michael Cohen is experiencing. I wanted to gain from John's wisdom. I certainly don't want to raise expectations that Mr. Cohen has anything like the deep level of involvement and detailed knowledge that John Dean had in the Nixon White House as a witness to Nixon's crimes, but I did see some similarities and wanted to learn from what John went through."
[Avlon:] I mean, why in the world would invoke John Dean's name five times in a statement to the media if I didn't want to raise any expectations as Michael Cohen's lawyer? Crazy talk. Look, I mean, John Dean parallels aside, we can do Watergate parallels all day long. It's a fun part of working with. This particular legal problem having to do the notoriously dodgy business of taxing medallions looks like he's a whole heap of hot water. Very little to do with the Russia investigation, unless it is about getting him to flip further which he's already shown an openness to do. And then they have questions and payments to Stormy Daniels and company.
[Garber:] He's showing an openness to do. I mean it
[Avalon:] I may be underselling that.
[Garber:] Holy cow. I mean Lanny Davis over and over and over. And now with this John Dean comparison I mean he is begging to be able to be useful to the government.
[Avalon:] Yes.
[Garber:] Begging to.
[Camerota:] And why wouldn't they take him up on that offer?
[Garber:] Well for one thing it may be a credibility issue, maybe he's got that. Maybe they think he doesn't have that much to offer. But there's another there's another possibility and it's that they want to have him dead to rights. Dead to rights before they even approach him, because they don't want to do much negotiation with him. They want to make clear they're not going to put up with any slipperiness. They may want to just make sure they have him nailed and then bring him in and see what he has to say.
[Berman:] I think this does explain perhaps why we saw that leak, where ever it came from a few weeks ago suggesting that Michael Cohen wanted to sing about the Trump Tower meeting here. It think the legal term is flailing. Michael Cohen and his legal team there flailing about here. Trying to find a way out for him because they know how dire the situation is. And they're trying anyway they can Asha to dig there way out of it.
[Rangappa:] Yes. I mean he's in a heap of trouble. We knew from the time that they that the FBI executed the search warrant and the high standards. That such a search warrant would entail given that it could implicate privileged information that the government had a lot of vary incriminating information already. And remember he's not protected here in terms of what the president is doing on other fronts. This is in the southern district of New York. What ever happens with Muller is not going to affect this case. It's going to precede a pace. It doesn't look like in terms of the path that he's taking that he's expecting or that I think Trump would be inclined to pardon him. So you know he's got some limited options. And I think if he doesn't have something to offer could be looking at a pretty bleak outcome.
[Camerota:] But John, I'm so confused. I thought that the tax the taxes business was like a golden goose of money? Why did he need $20 million in loans?
[Avalon:] I think it's about how you finance those medallions and how you move the money that comes from medallions. For a long time owning a tax medallion in New York City was incredibly valuable, also very expensive because it threw off a lot of cash. The rise of Uber and Lyft changed those dynamics. But then there's the question of the folks who were also in the taxi business. But $20 million in loans probably not accurately reported to the IRS. Maybe a best practice in that part of the industry, there's an icarus problem. The higher you get, the further you got to fall.
[Garber:] Can I go back to truth?
[Berman:] Oh, please.
[Camerota:] If you must.
[Berman:] Let's.
[Camerota:] You seem to be a stickler for truth.
[Garber:] I know I'm obsessed with this idea that maybe there is such a thing as truth. Because in this same interview where Rudy Giuliani declared the truth isn't truth.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] He said something that was in fact
[Camerota:] False.
[Garber:] False.
[Camerota:] There are false hoods. I will grant you, yes.
[Garber:] Right, all right.
[Camerota:] Or watch.
[Avalon:] Or is your concession by team two [inaudible].
[Berman:] Well that's true.
[Camerota:] Yes, no let's not test it.
[Berman:] OK, if we can, if we can get hold of this I want play it. Because Rudy Giuliani was talking about the Trump Tower meeting, the one where Donald Trump Jr. was told that he would be provided dirt from the Russian on Hillary Clinton, from the Russians. And Donald Trump Jr. was told he would be meeting with a Russian attorney.
[Camerota:] I remember that.
[Berman:] This is what Rudy say's.
[Rudy Giuliani, Attorney:] The meeting was originally for the purpose of getting information about Clinton. The meeting turned into a meeting
[Unidentified Male:] Which in itself it's attempted collusion. I under
[Giuliani:] No it's not.
[Unidentified Male:] You just said it. The meeting was intended to get dirt on Hillary Clinton from a Kremlin lawyer.
[Giuliani:] No it wasn't. No, no.
[Unidentified Male:] That was the intention of the meeting. You just said it.
[Giuliani:] That was the original intention of the meeting. It turned out to be a meeting about another subject and it was not pursed at all. And of course any meeting with regard to getting information on your opponent is something any candidate's staff would take. No.
[Berman:] He goes on to say he didn't even know that he was meeting with the Russian lawyer. When in fact inside the e-mails Donald Trump Jr. was told the Russian attorney is in court until three, I was just informed. Would it be possible to move the meeting to tomorrow? Also I was asked to schedule a meeting with you and the Russian government attorney.
[Avalon:] Yes.
[Garber:] Right. Well and that's one of the difficulties. Truth is not truth, can not mean it is OK to misstate things. It's OK to lie. I don't think Rudy lied here. I think he didn't know the facts. But I think that's the point. Truth is not truth can not mean that. I can mean sort of the high minded discussion we were all having a few minutes ago.
[Berman:] Very high minded.
[Camerota:] Very high minded, Socratic in that.
[Avalon:] And or the case of Rudy he can go deep on St. Thomas to quite us. But this is not that. This is just one other reality check about that, the idea that all campaigns were taking oppo on an opponent. Right, that is not true when it is the Russian government offering with oppo. That's a bright red line.
[Camerota:] Right and he said that he's saying she was a regular civilian, he didn't know it was the Russian government. Yes they did, yes, they did.
[Berman:] Yes they did.
[Camerota:] So this is a fact. Facts exist.
[Avalon:] I'm so glad you understand that.
[Camerota:] Truth is different.
[Avalon:] Oh, OK.
[Camerota:] But we will dissect more of that. Also it's day three of the deliberations for Paul Manafort and we'll get into that later. Thank you very much panel. So we also have an amazing survival story to tell you about. This woman went overboard on a cruise ship. And after 20 sorry 10 hours of treading water at sea they found her, and she lives to tell about it next. We are following some breaking news out of Iraq. That's where a U.S. coalition helicopter has crashed in a remote area north west of Baghdad. Killing one service member and injuring several others. Military officials say the helicopter was part of a counter terrorism mission. There's no indication that the crash was caused by enemy fire. The fallen service member has not yet been identified. END

[Text:] LET'S GET AFTER IT.
[Cuomo:] You know, one of the most common comments I get is that "Man, this President seems consumed with watching Righty-media, and being on Twitter all the time." And you know what? His schedule gives you guys some basis for your complaints. There's another leak from the White House. It gives us another insight. According to three months of leaked White House schedules, about 60 percent of President Trump's time is so-called Executive Time, a phrase that reportedly covers time for tweeting, phoning friends, and watching TV. And understandably, Sarah Sanders says, "This is just the President being creative that he's simply a different kind of President." Nobody's going to argue with that. But, for comparison, take a look at this. This is FDR's daily schedule from back in the day. Take a look at this, and how much booking there was from 9 o'clock in the morning or so until 11:30 at night. Why? Because the President's got like the hardest job in the world. And you certainly hear that from those who have done it. Take a listen.
[George Walker Bush, Former President Of The United States:] That's a hard job. And it's difficult.
[Barack Obama, Former President Of The United States:] You know, nothing truly prepares you for the demands of the Oval Office. You can read about it. You can study it. But until you've sat at that desk, you don't know what it's like to manage a global crisis.
[Cuomo:] I can't even imagine! I can't even imagine the stress and the strain. That's why these men, almost without exception, either prepare like crazy, or have people around them who are as prepared as they possibly can be. So, as this current President prepares to address you tomorrow night about promises kept, I would remind you that he promised you more and better. He told you he knows how to get things done. Listen.
[Trump:] I promise you that I will work so hard, we're going to get it turned around. I just want to stay in the White House and work my ass off. I'm going to be working for you.
[Cuomo:] He doubled down when he suggested that he'd never go golfing the way that Obama did. He may have even said never at all. And then, remember what he said about Hillary Clinton and stamina. Look, we know those were BS arguments when he made them. They were just cheap politics, but they worked at the time. But now that we see his schedule, it seems that the Resolute Desk, you know what we call this, it's more of a prop for photo ops than anything else, according to the schedule. 60 percent Executive Time goes to what has become a disturbing trend with this President, an apparent unwillingness for the difficulties of the job he was elected to do. So, when you hear him about wandering out of a key policy meeting with the Speaker of the House, seeing his own Intel Chiefs, say publicly that he's misinformed on global threats, when important parts of his job like making sure the government is properly staffed, you know, they still have a ton of jobs outstanding, right, you have to ask who's doing the job of the President? Oftentimes, we know the answers. You remember when the military decided to drop the Mother of All Bombs, the MOAB in Afghanistan? Who made the decision? Not people who were elected to do it. So, it is good that someone leaked this because you deserve to know how much of the President's time is about you versus him. When you see giant holes in his schedule and tons of Executive of Time which, by the way, is officially what I'm going to call fight training officially from now on, I used to call it "Me Time," now it's "Executive Time." Back to what matters, you look at the schedule you look at no log of who is coming and going at the White House, no reports of his conversations with foreign leaders, you need to know what the President does, it'll give you insight into why he does what he does. Remember, the President works for you. All right, speaking of that, and what works getting done, we are now 11 days away from what could be another shutdown. Would the President really do that again with all we learned about the pain and the reach just to get a wall? Two questions for a great debate, next.
[Text:] CUOMO PRIME TIME.

[Allen:] The Syrian civil war reached a grim milestone as residents fled Eastern Ghouta Thursday. State media report more than 10,000 people escaped the area, this as the conflict reached its seventh anniversary. Eastern Ghouta has been hammered for weeks by a Syrian government assault, constant bombings. Both rebels and government forces accuse the other side of using civilians as human shields. The mass exodus from Eastern Ghouta may be one of the largest since the war began. To discuss what has to be done to protect this huge group of people, I'm joined live from Beirut, Lebanon, by Paul Donohoe. He is a senior media officer at the International Rescue Committee. Paul, thanks so much for talking with us. It is difficult to fathom what the civilians of Syria have been through but we have this photograph, which is another painful illustration. This is Ahmad Hamdan, who social media campaign, #IAmStillAlive. He has now been killed in Syria. He was a resident at Eastern Ghouta. The U.N., of course, tried to stop this bombardment. But it has continued and now people are running for their lives. Is that the solution at this point?
[Paul Donohoe, International Rescue Committee:] Well, no, the only solution is that the cease-fire that was agreed by the U.N. Security Council is enacted. The bombardment that we've seen kill over 1,000 people for the past month to stop and for aid convoys to enter so that those who desperately need food and aid get the help they so desperately and urgently require. For those that have decided to flee, it's going to be a very worrying time for them. They're going to face real trepidation about what waits for them on the other side. But they do know that if they stay, that they're likely to only face more death and destruction. And many of these people would have spent the last month sheltering for their lives in basements. And this could be the first time they'd even have the opportunity to venture out of their homes.
[Allen:] And who is assuring that they will reach a safe place and be cared for?
[Donohoe:] So they've been told that they will receive support when they are able to leave Eastern Ghouta. The one thing we would be looking for is for independent observers to now be involved, to make sure that civilians are protected throughout. What I think we do need to consider, the safety of those that remain inside Eastern Ghouta, so the reports are 10,000 to 20,000 have left. But that still leaves nearly 400,000 remaining inside Eastern Ghouta. And for them, the past month has been hell on Earth. People are told the International Rescue Committee that they don't know if they're going to live one minute from the next. And the only thing that's going to keep them safe is for an end to the bombardment.
[Allen:] Yes; as we talk, I want to bring up more pictures from the #IAmStillAlive, just to show children, all kinds of people, trying to get out to social media that they are still alive. We don't know if they are. You mentioned the United Nations. They tried and they failed over and over again. Do you have any hope in that area?
[Donohoe:] Well, we can only hope that the power that can have influence on the sides involved in the war continue to do what they can to have these agreed U.N. cease-fires enacted. What we all see, though, is the reality that the bombs continue, that more than 1,000 died, 4,000 injured in the past month and that people are just in a desperate situation. There were a few aid convoys that managed to enter some of the besieged area over the last week. But they're only reaching a fraction. And so people have been struggling for four years now, living under siege, not getting the food they require and not getting the health care that they desperately need. So there are more than 1,000 who needed urgent medical evacuation. And a number, I mean, 25 hospitals and clinics were hit during the past month, including two supported by International Rescue Committee. And so the number of people who may have died simply because they were unable to get health care because the hospitals had been put out of action, just shows how desperate a situation this is.
[Allen:] Is this the final front for the Syrian regime, backed by Russia? Does it end here? And what does the fall of this enclave signify?
[Donohoe:] Well, there are millions of people who still live in areas that are controlled by the government of Syria. But this is obviously a very dramatic moment. The 40,000 people who've been living under siege in Eastern Ghouta, that's just on the outskirts of Damascus. But there are still millions of people who are living in Idlib and in the south in Daraa. And all these people are in very difficult situations. They find them so many of them have been displaced by the war, sometimes many times. And aid agencies have been trying to reach as many as the time and help those who live, many them in informal injured and half the population of Syria fled their homes. What we are seeing, though, in Eastern Ghouta right now is a real change on the dynamic on the ground. And we are fearful in all in international aid organizations, we should be fearful right now for the safety of civilians that, in a moment like this, we don't see civilians caught in the crossfire as we see forces advance.
[Allen:] Every time there's another atrocity, we think, the world thinks, how can there be any more? And there is another and another and we're seeing that now. We thank you so much, Paul Donahoe, with the International Rescue Committee. Thanks. Well, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may have unleashed his war machine against his own people seven years on now. But years ago he was a practicing eye doctor in London. Nic Robertson look at how he went from being a family man to ruling over the rubble of his own country.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] President Bashar al-Assad has all the traits of an old-school dictator. He is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Syrians. But it's not how he sees himself.
[Bashar Al-assad, Syrian President:] My enemy is terrorism. The instability in Syria. This is our enemy. It's not about people. It's not about persons. The whole it's not about me staying or leaving. It's about the country being safe or not.
[Robertson:] To his loyal followers, Assad is a bulwark against a threat of radical Islamist terror. Before the war, many in the West thought he was a bulwark against instability sweeping the region. He trained and practiced as an eye doctor in London. Was thought to be more sophisticated than his brutal father, Hafez, whom he replaced 18 years ago. But it was a sham. When faced with peaceful protest, he called in the tanks. Assad had never expected to lead Syria. His tougher older brother, Bassel, who had been groomed to be president died in a car crash in 1994. Once the civil war got under way, Assad's family, in particular his younger brother, Maher, a feared military commander, stiffened his resolve for a long, bloody fight. Iran and their Lebanese proxies added their punch, backing Assad's forces with weapons and troops. Then, Russia, detecting a lack of Western will, flew to Assad's rescue with massive air power, turning a tide of battlefield losses to strategic gains. While hospitals were crushed and civilians starved and pulverized under their brutal bombing, areas under Assad's control escaped the worst ravages of the war. Compare the center of the capital, Damascus, Assad's official home, with Eastern Ghouta less than 10 miles away. In his rare appearances, Assad, occasionally accompanied by his wife, appears unruffled by the mayhem they are spawning and in even rarer interviews, he sounds as callous as he is blind to the facts under his knows. This, in 2011.
[Assad:] The only thing that you could be afraid of as president to lose the support of your people. That's the only thing that you can be afraid of.
[Robertson:] And this, six years, hundreds of thousands of deaths later.
[Assad:] The suffering of the Syrian people, the humanitarian interaction between me and every city and my family who died, who only died. This is the only thing that could deprive me from sleep from time to time. But not the Western statements and not the threat of the support of the terrorists.
[Robertson:] Despite unanimous U.N. agreement to transition Assad out of power, peace talks in Geneva are failing to unseat him because he is winning the war. His big backers, Iran and Russia, have too much to lose to let him go. Assad may bridle at the moniker dictator, but no other world leader now in power has so much of his countrymen's blood on his hands Nic Robertson, CNN, London.
[Allen:] Top diplomats from North and South Korea are preparing for what could be a momentous summit between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un. We will have more details straight ahead.

[Cabrera:] We are just now getting a clearer picture of how deadly anti-government protests have become in Iran just as access to the Internet is reportedly being strangled off by the government. There are reports that at least 21 people have been killed. Reports on the ground trickling out on social media paint a different picture with social media saying that there are distress calls coming from protesters. The reports are giving us a glimpse into an unprecedented revolt. Revolts there. Video showing thousands of demonstrators saying "death to Rouhani" and "death to Khamenei", the country's top two leaders. This video showing hundreds cheering as a picture of Iran supreme leader is torn. Joining us now is CNN national security analyst, Matthew Rosenberg, who is with "The New York Times". And, Matthew, I want to ask you about the president's reaction to this protest. President Trump tweeting this today: The people of Iran are finally acting against the brutal and corrupt Iranian regime. All of the money that President Obama so foolishly gave them went into terrorism and into their pockets. The people have little food, big inflation and no human rights. The U.S. is watching. What is the impact of these tweets from the president?
[Matthew Rosenberg, Cnn National Security Analyst:] I mean, I think we need to make this clear. The Obama administration did not give any money to Iran. Money that was returned to them after the Iran nuclear deal went through
[Cabrera:] We assume that's what he's referring to, that it was lifting of sanctions on Iran.
[Rosenberg:] Yes, exactly. Look, I think inside the Obama White House, there was a big debate during earlier set of protests about whether they should weigh in, what they should say if they say anything. I think they decided at the time, you know, let's not say anything because that's going to be presented as, you know, these protesters being lackeys of the U.S. I think there's some regret among the Obama folks. And for the Trump White House, you know, they are saying, we should weigh in. I think we are seeing with Iran supreme leader talking about the enemies in Iran being behind the protest. Whether the U.S. says anything, the reaction from the Iranian leadership is going to present this protest as being the work of pro-Western agents or others, the enemies are out to get them. So, I think the Trump White House is, you know, the president in his own way, is trying to get out ahead and say, look, we support these protests. What impact that will have on the ground, I don't know. I don't think President Trump is particularly popular person among Iran's leadership or average Iranians. And so, the actual practical impact is very hard to measure.
[Cabrera:] OK, as we again away a press briefing set to get underway here in the next few minutes. I want to turn to North Korea because Sarah Sanders is sure to be asked about the Korean peninsula. We now know the south and the north are expressing interest in talking to each other. What do you make of the president once again calling Kim Jong-un rocket man as these talks now approach?
[Rosenberg:] I mean, the talks present a real they're a real issue for President Trump. He's tried to rally the world to be incredibly tough on North Korea. And in his New Year's Day speech, the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un seemed to find an opening there and to say, you know what, I want to talk to South Korea. I'm open to direct talks with South Korea. And in South Korea, you have a liberal leadership that is eager to talk to the North that is very hesitant to take Trump's hard line and that is very hesitant to join in what they see is rush to possible conflict with North Korea which would be fought largely in South Korea, which could result in tens of thousands or millions of their citizens dead. So, I think this is a real issue that the president is going to have to try to figure out here, because the North Korean do seem to have found a sort of way through this for now to try and split the U.S. and South Korea or at least to make an attempt to try and create daylight between the U.S. and South Korea.
[Cabrera:] All right. Matthew, stand by. Any moment now, the White House press briefing ready to begin live. We'll bring that to you. And more on our breaking news, Republican Senator Orrin Hatch says he plans to retire despite being urge to run for reelection by President Trump. We are back in a moment.

[Tapper:] Welcome back to THE LEAD. The Trump administration is considering withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, the world's first comprehensive climate agreement adopted in 2015 by nearly 200 nations. It's our "Earth Matters" segment. Candidate Trump, of course, promised to, quote, "cancel the Paris agreement". But sources tell CNN there's an internal White House debate on whether they should. The Jared KushnerIvanka Trump wing wants to stay in the agreement. The Steven Bannon wants to pull out. Here with me for more is CNN's Rene Marsh. And, Rene, what is the U.S. required to do under the agreement, and what happens if the U.S. pulls out?
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Government Regulation Correspondent:] So, essentially, this agreement is, many would argue, to save the planet. They want to rid the planet of this carbon pollution in this century. A hundred and thirty-two countries, they have all committed to this Paris agreement, including the United States. The United States has committed to decreasing its carbon emissions by some 28 percent by the year 2025. In order to do that, they are putting things in place or they have put things in place like fuel standards, efficiency standards as well as limits for carbon emissions from coal power plants. But as you know, Jake, we've been reporting on it. The Trump administration has been unraveling a lot of or attempting to unravel a lot of those regulations, and then there's this debate whether to stay or leave that the Paris agreement. Well, now, there's a new issue on the table, and that new issue on the table is whether the U.S. would get into some sort of legal trouble if they stayed but they just didn't meet their targets, meaning they didn't reduce the amount of emissions that they said that they would going into the agreement. That is what sources are telling CNN. The White House lawyers are concerned that staying in and not doing what they said they were going to do could present a problem. So, that begs the question, what will they do? Will they leave all together if now they are concerned about the legal problems? We don't know yet because they haven't made the decision and this debate has been going back and forth for quite some time.
[Tapper:] And, Rene, just a few days ago, the president signed an executive order to expand offshore drilling. Even some Republican members of Congress who represent Eastern coastal states are opposed to this, and now, there's environmental groups suing.
[Marsh:] Right. So, this separate executive order, what it does is reverse Barack Obama's ban on oil and gas drilling both in parts of the Arctic as well as the Atlantic Ocean. And so, now, what Trump wants to do is owe essentially roll this all back, but like you said there's a bipartisan pushback on all of this. And just a few hours ago, we did get word that several environmental groups, they filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over this action. They are essentially challenging Donald Trump's constitutional power to undo President Obama's permanent protection of parts of the Arctic as well as the Atlantic Ocean. So, again, that legal battle is gearing up now all because of this executive order. So, we'll have to wait and see how the Trump administration responds. At last check, they haven't responded to this latest lawsuit.
[Tapper:] All right. Rene Marsh, thank you so much. Appreciate it. New momentum and optimism as Republicans hope to vote on a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare by tomorrow, but will pre-existing conditions still be fully covered like President Trump promised? Stay with us.

[Berman:] The battle for who controls the House and Senate, that might be grabbing most of the attention today. But there are also 36 governor's races across the country. They are huge. Republicans currently control 26 of those states. Here to discuss now is the governor of Washington State, Jay Inslee. He is the chairman of the Democratic Governors Association. And, Governor, I don't want to reveal the secret from the break here but you came on practically singing James Brown, "I Feel Good."
[Gov. Jay Inslee , Washington, Chairman, Democratic Governors Association:] Yes, James Brown. This is an "I Feel Good" moment. I think tonight we are going to find that the majority of Americans have a Democratic governor working for them. And I'm very happy about that effort, both as a check on the chaos out of Washington, D.C. but more importantly, this is the place we can make progress starting tomorrow morning because we can make progress and Donald Trump cannot stop these Democratic governors from making progress.
[Berman:] So, as we've been saying all morning, we don't know what's going to happen. It's early in the morning. The polls close tonight we'll count the votes.
[Inslee:] Right.
[Berman:] But one of the things that you know as a Democratic governor and you know by looking at the calendar is that this race is so important for Democrats because redistricting will happen after the 2020 census
[Inslee:] Right.
[Berman:] and governors who were in office, they have a key seat at the table.
[Inslee:] Yes, I think there's three things. Look, gerrymandering is a pathology on the body politic. We have to stop this pernicious gerrymandering. The best way to do that is elect a Democratic governor. In just eight states, if we get a Democratic governor, that could mean Americans have a chance to elect 26 new members of the U.S. Congress in a fair districting process. So it's extremely important from a congressional standpoint, but I would say it's most important in our ability to move forward. And, President Trump cannot stop Stacey Abrams from getting a half million people to have insurance, Andrew Gillum fighting climate change, Gretchen Whitmer for fixing the roads in Michigan. This is a it's simply, with all his tweets, he can't stop that progress.
[Berman:] And that's interesting because you're positioning this as a national election for governors. These governors, you're suggesting, are
[Inslee:] Right.
[Berman:] running in opposition to the president?
[Inslee:] Well, that is part of it. And I think if you were going to write the book of the rise and fall of Donald Trump, the rise ended this morning and the fall is starting tomorrow because these governors can lead the country both resisting some of this chaos and division, but also showing a way forward on health care, on education. Or, Laura Kelly in Kansas can show the way forward on education, or Michelle Lujan Grisham can show a clean energy jobs program to fight climate change when we have a climate change denier in the White House. So I really do think we're setting a plate for great progress, starting this morning.
[Berman:] You earn your keep as chair of the Democratic Governors Association by naming as many of the candidates as you can during this one television appearance.
[Inslee:] They're friends.
[Berman:] I know. But I will note you've been successful in getting all the names in. Stacey Abrams in Georgia
[Inslee:] Right.
[Berman:] Andrew Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee in Florida. Those races have garnered a lot of attention
[Inslee:] Yes.
[Berman:] maybe historic in both cases. African-American candidates ascending to the state to the governor's mansion in those states. When you look at those races what factor has race played?
[Inslee:] Well, it's an unfortunate factor because in both of those races we have these hugely inspirational candidates with great personal stories. I told a story of Stacey yesterday a story where she was valedictorian of her high school, but when she went to get to the governor's office to sort of be rewarded he wouldn't let her in. Andrew Gillum tells a story of bringing it home. His parents always told him bring it home. When you got to school bring something home to the family. Now his theme is "Bringing it home to Florida." So, inspirational candidates and every time a Republicans opens their mouths some dog whistle to division and hatred and latent racism comes out, and it's really unfortunate. And I but here's the good news, not going to work. I really do believe we're going to do well there.
[Berman:] Georgia could go into overtime. What's the Governors Association the DGA going to do to help Stacey Abrams if it ends up in a run-off there?
[Inslee:] I think I've won every overtime game I've ever been in so I hope that that will continue. We will be very active. We're excited about Georgia.
[Berman:] Let me ask you this. You have suggested you are thinking about or have been thinking about running for president, like roughly 673 other Democratic potentials.
[Inslee:] Right.
[Berman:] When do you have to make your mind up if you're going to run in 2020?
[Inslee:] Well, not today because today is for saying let's vote. And by the way, everybody who is listening to this show is going to vote. I know, because they care. That's why they're listening to your show. But I hope people are heroes today, which gets all of their nephews and nieces to vote
[Berman:] When do you have to decide whether you're going to run for president?
[Inslee:] Sometime in the future. Today, I'm getting everybody on your show to become a hero to get everybody under the age of 40 to vote.
[Berman:] Before the first of the year?
[Inslee:] We don't know.
[Berman:] All right. Governor Inslee, thank you for being with us. Good luck today and thanks for being here.
[Inslee:] Thank you. Don't forget to vote.
[Berman:] All right.
[Camerota:] As Americans vote today, Canada's prime minister is talking about his complicated relationship with the president. Poppy Harlow's interview with Justin Trudeau, next.

[Whitfield:] This week, highs and lows where race is at the core. L.A. fitness is now apologizing after accusations of racial profiling. Videos posted on Facebook show staff members in New Jersey asking two African-American men to leave. Those men say they were targeted, even though they had a valid membership and guest pass to be there. L.A. fitness says they are now exploring ways to better train staff members. This follows the arrest of two black men at a Starbucks in Philadelphia who were waiting for a business colleague. Starbucks executive chairman Howard Schultz says he is, quoting now, "embarrassed and ashamed." The CEO promised this.
[Kevin Johnson, Starbucks Ceo:] For me, it's a learning experience. It's an emotional learning experience, and I take it personally. So, yes, I'm affected by it. And I'm going to fix it.
[Whitfield:] Contrast that with a couple milestones being celebrated involving two of music's biggest stars. At Coachella, the largest music festival in the U.S., Beyonce is the first woman of color to ever headline it. And rapper Kendrick Lamar becomes the first Pulitzer Prize winner for music that isn't a classical or jazz musician. So what does all of this say about race in America? Joining me right now is CNN political commentator and host of the "VAN JONES SHOW," Van Jones. Van, good to see you.
[Van Jones, Cnn Host, Van Jones Show:] Good to see you.
[Whitfield:] All right. SO how do we assess what's happening when you have new examples of racial profiling juxtaposed against barriers still being broken?
[Jones:] Well, you know, when a train is moving, all the cars aren't in the same place. And I think we may be seeing real progress and real breakthroughs in other places. In some places, certainly, in the arts and communication and in entertainment, you are seeing breakthrough after breakthrough. You know, Ryan Coogler with "the Black Panther."
[Whitfield:] At that Starbucks, these two gentlemen, you know, handled it in a really inspiring way. While it was a heartbreaking thing, you know, to say. And you know, one of the gentlemen saying, you know, this is a people thing. And now Starbucks is teaching classes in a month. So is this a starting point or is this a false start that it's a month from now?
[Jones:] No, no. It takes a while to pull the curriculum together and that kind of stuff. I mean, and frankly, if you are going to take a whole day as Starbucks is doing, close all your stores, that's a huge statement, and then try to retrain everybody all at once. You better do it right. If you rush and do it, you know, day after tomorrow and it's a disaster and it doesn't work and makes no difference, that's not good. I think the fact that they said that they are going to do it and are planning to do it, and have brought in some very, very serious people to do it sends a very important signal all the way down the chain that this is not going to be tolerated.
[Whitfield:] So these other incredible high points you alluded to, you know, "Black Panther," you know, still dominating at the theaters, this is black produced, directed by, you know, the same, a black man, mostly cast of black talent, huge hit while there also remains this real feeling among black people of being dismissed, being discounted, being disregarded in so many ways.
[Jones:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] How do, you know, we understand?
[Jones:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] You know, these extremes here.
[Jones:] Yes, well, I mean, there's no celebration when an all-white cast has a movie that's successful. So that lets you know right there that that's the norm. That's already been accomplished. But when an all-black cast does, we rightfully celebrate because it's never happened before. You have an all-black cast, no slaves, no drug dealers, you know, all dignified people, even the enemy, even the opponent has some dignity to him. It's a huge achievement. But listen. It's a tale of two cities. It's the best of times and the worst of times. I mean, you both things can be true that good things are happening. But there are things that are happening to ordinary people who don't have the fame, who don't have extraordinary talent, who don't have big studios behind them that's just not fair.
[Whitfield:] So there was, you know, this real palpable feeling, you know, of empowerment during the Obama administration, people of color, women out front, you know, and center in leadership roles with real power. So how hopeful are you that there will be this return of that kind of feeling?
[Jones:] You know, listen, breakdowns lead to breakthroughs. Let's not forget the Obama moment came after the George W. Bush moment where some people felt that we were moving in the wrong direction, had gotten into these two wars that we didn't know how to get out of. We had a big recession under George Bush and the collapse of the stock market. So, you know, in that situation, suddenly people turn to an Obama who seemed more hopeful. Who knows what comes after this moment. It could be something even more hopeful, even more beautiful. Things go back and forth. But here's what I do know. The idea that progress is inevitable and can never be rolled back, that idea has to be taken off the table. It is, in fact, every generation's responsibility to fight for more justice and against injustice just because Dr. King's generation made a step forward, doesn't mean that something good is happening in the Starbucks today. Those have nothing to do just because Barack Obama was elected nine years ago, doesn't mean that what's happening in that sports center is fair today. You got to continue to be vigilant for what we call liberty and justice for all. It's not automatic. We got to fight for it every day.
[Whitfield:] All right. Van Jones, thanks so much. Always good to see you. And of course we will all be watching "THE VAN JONES" tonight, 7:00 p.m. right here on CNN. Thanks so much.
[Jones:] Thank you so much.
[Whitfield:] Also tonight, don't miss two all-new episodes of Christian Amanpour, "Sex and Love Around the World." It all starts at 10:00 p.m. Here's a sneak peek.
[Christian Amanpour, Cnn:] For years, marriage and relationships here have been controlled by three sacred pillars. Family, tradition, and state. I'm curious to find out to what extent people are taking back control of their relationships, their love, their desire, and their sexuality.
[Whitfield:] All right. Don't miss "Sex and Love around the World" tonight, 10:00 eastern and pacific right here on CNN.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon, it is 11:00 p.m. here on the East Coast. Live with all the new developments. The White House grappling with one legal problem after another tonight. The President's legal team unsure exactly of what White House Counsel, Don McGahn told the Special Counsel in some 30 hours of testimony. Under "The Washington Post" reports tonight that McGahn does not believe he implicated Trump in any legal wrong doing. That is according to his attorney. Not only are the President's attorneys still in the dark about it, sources telling CNN, the President himself is rattled. Remember it was Don McGahn who threatened to quit when President Trump attempted to fire Robert Mueller last June. Plus, sources confirming to CNN, that federal authorities are preparing charges against the president's former longtime attorney, Michael Cohen. The U.S. Attorney's office for the Southern District of New York is investigating Cohen for possible bank and tax fraud as well as campaign finance violations related to a hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels. Those charges could come by next week. And today, a jury in Virginia ended its third day of deliberation over the fate of president's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort served the Trump campaign for five critical months leading up to the election. He is facing 18 separate counts of bank and tax fraud. And this is just his first trial. He also faces a second trial next month on charges of lying to the FBI, money laundering and foreign lobbying. I want to bring in now, Nancy Gertner, she is a former federal judge and a Harvard Law professor, also former U.S. attorney Harry Litman, and Clinton White House Counsel, Jack Quinn. Good evening, everyone, welcome to the program. Harry, here's what the sources are telling CNN, McGahn didn't provide incriminating information about the President and Washington Post has reported that McGahn doesn't believe he implicated Trump in any legal wrongdoing with the Special Counsel investigators. Give me your assessment of this, Harry?
[Harry Litman, Former U.s. Attorney:] I just don't understand how they can say that so confidently. Remember the key piece of evidence that remains is Trump's state of mind. We know the acts he did. We know they would constitute obstruction if done with corrupt motive. McGahn is in the White House, he calls the President King Kong for his occasional volcanic outburst. He is the guy who Trump directs to tell Sessions to recuse before he McGahn knew that he couldn't do it. He is the guy who argues against the Comey firing, I mean he was there shoulder to shoulder, and he doesn't know what Mueller knows. It just seems implausible to me that in 30 hours he doesn't provide some factual material that is really illuminating about the President's state of mind. So, I think it's a little bit overconfident to be saying that at this point.
[Lemon:] So, the real question is, why would Trump's lawyers not debrief McGahn, Jack, because the White House Counsel, Don McGahn has given 30 hours of interviews to the Special Counsel investigators. Much of which the Trump legal team is in the dark about. Why would they brief him?
[Jack Quinn, Former Clinton White House Counsel:] Thirty hours is like a book on tape, isn't it? That is a lot of testimony. I mean, the White House got nothing out of this in return for letting all of these people submit to interviews. You would have thought that they would have at least negotiated, be able to debrief everyone. I understand, by the way, that it was not just Don McGahn who was not asked to provide a debriefing. Apparently none of the witnesses from the White House were debriefed. That is breathtaking. As Don McGahn's lawyer acknowledged. Though he thinks there was nothing incriminating, he doesn't know all of the evidence in the case, and he doesn't know how it all fits together. So what he is saying when he acknowledges that, he doesn't know what incriminating necessarily is.
[Lemon:] Nancy, I want to bring you in, and ask you President Trump says McGahn testified with his approval. He tweeted about that. So McGahn's legal strategy is to be transparent to prove he did nothing wrong. How might that meld with President Trump's legal strategy?
[Nancy Gertner, Former Federal Judge:] Well, just rolling back for a moment on the question of whether or not McGahn incriminated the President, what's really been stunning in the past couple of days, it has been with the President seems not to understand that McGahn is not his personal lawyer.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Gertner:] So, you think about the kind of things that may have been said to McGahn under the misapprehension that he was his personal lawyer. So that was number one. It was also taking place under the rubric at a time, when they didn't think obstruction of justice could possibly be a crime. That was their view then and view now. And then I take Harry's point, that it's almost like McGahn can provide the framework on to which other details can be placed. You know, what was the nature of the discussions before and after the Comey firing? What about discussions about Flynn. Who set up the meetings with the Russian ambassador shortly after the Comey firing? I mean, there are ways that even if he doesn't directly say ex, ex can be inferred when you put what he is saying next to what other people are saying, and then you really do have to add to that, the failure to debrief is very interesting. Because it suggests that they did not understand what was going on here. And that suggests there may have been admissions that were made, but we really don't know.
[Lemon:] Hold a second, Nancy, let me ask you, because I asked this question in the last hour, it is kind of what you said, do you think it's finally starting to settle in, that this President is realizing now that Don McGahn is not his personal attorney. Don McGahn represents the office of the presidency.
[Gertner:] Well, I think now that we're talking about why it is that McGahn actually had no defense to talking to Mueller. I mean, he could have raised issues, he could have raised executive privilege issues, but they did not. But he actually has no attorney client privilege. Because he is not privileged situation vis-a-vis the president. So, I mean I'm interested in, what came out when the President didn't know that people were listening.
[Lemon:] Interesting. Go ahead, Jack. Sorry.
[Quinn:] Well, I was going to say to your last point there, they not only didn't raise executive privilege, they pretty much waived it. I think it is going to be very difficult for them to reel this back in. The other thing I wanted to mention is that, you know, initial reporting in "The New York Times" about McGahn providing testimony, indicated that he was doing so because he was afraid that he was being setup. That speaks volumes, I mean, clearly, somebody who feels like he might be setup thinks that one or more people in the office in which he works, that is to say in the administration has exposure, has legal exposure and he wanted to make sure that he was not the one holding the bag. So
[Gertner:] Which was the motivation for Dean coming forward, wasn't that the motivation for John Dean coming forward? During Watergate?
[Quinn:] So, I think that says a lot. You know, again, assuming the reporting is accurate. And I have no reason to think it's not.
[Lemon:] Harry, did you say something was possible or not to possible? What were you saying?
[Litman:] I was agreeing with Jack that there's no way they spoke today. This really is the legal gang that couldn't shoot straight from the top. But there some suggestion that now maybe first of all, Nancy's is 100 percent right, no attorney client privilege. And executive privilege is a little bit of a hard road to hoe. It could [inaudible] it could be overcome, but now that he said it. The notion that they can expose facto, try to reel back in the testimony I was just agreeing
[Lemon:] They can't do it?
[Litman:] The stuff that is been used is waived, yes.
[Lemon:] OK. Listen, we're learning that federal prosecutors are preparing criminal charges against Trump's long time attorney and fixer Michael Cohen. They've been investigating possible bank and tax fraud as well as $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. Charges could be brought within the next 10 days. Again that is a reporting, what should Trump be most concerned about? What do you think Nancy?
[Gertner:] Well, I mean, what he has to be most concerned about is that Cohen looking down the barrel of serious charges I might add, not brought by the special council this is the southern district of New York. These kinds of charges would continue. If Cohen is looking down the barrel of the gun, what will he do or say vis-a-vis the President. That is what the President has to be concerned about.
[Lemon:] So, Jack, I want you to check put this little headlines. This is from the last few days. McGahn talks to Mueller's team and White House doesn't know. What he said, Cohen may be charged soon we're expecting a Manafort verdict any day. Are the walls closing in on this President? Do you think?
[Quinn:] Certainly, if he is reading headlines like that, he must feel like they are. For sure, Rudy Giuliani feels like they are, I mean you don't get this kind of excited rhetoric unless, you know, you really have cause for grave concern, I think.
[Lemon:] All right. Thank you all.
[Gertner:] There's also an issue of timing which is if Mueller wants something now. In advance of the election. Substantial events of the election.
[Lemon:] Thank you Nancy, thank you, Jack and Harry, as well. I appreciate it. When we come back, new developments in the President's campaign to silence his critics by revoking their security clearances. Plus the new report that details the behind the scenes battle when team Trump reportedly considered stripping President Obama's access to intelligence briefings.

[Bianna Golodryga, Correspondent, Cnn:] The closing bell rang earlier on Wall Street as traders took a half day before Independence Day. It's Tuesday, the 3rd of July. Tonight, Donald Trump resumes his row with Harley-Davidson, and economists worry about recession. Glencore shares sink amid an international corruption probe, and in the case of Malaysia's missing millions, the former Prime Minister is under arrest. I'm Bianna Golodryga and this is "Quest Means Business." First tonight, a World Cup stunner is in progress. Colombia has just pulled even with England in the 94th minute of their match. It is now locked at 1-1; extra time is about to begin. World Sport Don Riddell is at the CNN Center, Don, don't they know we have a show to put on? Two days in a row now. It's come down to the 90th minute, these nail biters seem to be a recurring theme.
[Don Riddell, Host, World Sport:] You know, this has been an absolutely brilliant World Cup. The games have been fantastic, so competitive, the theme of the tournament has been the shocks, the upsets, and the late, late goals. The extraordinary drama here again with this game in Moscow, England were inching towards the finish line thanks to a Harry Kane penalty, but deep into stoppage time in the 94th minute, Yerry Mina headed in for Colombia sending this one into extra time. This is the final game in the round of 16. It is the quarter finals after this, but we're going to have to wait at least half an hour to see who will be playing Sweden in the quarter finals. I'm an England fan, so it's painful for me at the moment.
[Golodryga:] It's not over yet, Don.
[Riddell:] It's not over yet, but that was a tough way to end that game.
[Golodryga:] Yes, seeing the jubilation in Bogota right now. As we said, it is not over, Don. Hang in there. We'll be back with you...
[Riddell:] All right.
[Golodryga:] ... when the game finishes. Meanwhile, it's our business agenda tonight. Donald Trump is forging ahead in his spat with corporate America as economists warn of severe damage from a trade war. This was the President's tweet, "US Harley customers are not happy with their move. The US is where the action is." Now, remember Harley-Davidson decided to move some production overseas to avoid EU tariffs. The President says new trade deals will only accelerate economic growth. Meanwhile, Bank of America's top economist warns the world could fall into recession if trade skirmishes become a full blown trade war.
[Ethan Harris, Head Of Global Economics, Bank Of America Merrill Lynch:] What we're talking about here isn't just a trade war with China, but a trade war between the US and most of its trading partners and if the US were to impose tariffs on all of its trading partners and they were to come back with similar tariffs, you are very likely talking about a US and global recession. Now, right now, we are a very long way from that kind of situation. Right now, it's a trade skirmish, not a trade war, but the end game here if the two sides don't back down is pretty dire.
[Golodryga:] Joining me now is Rana Foroohar, she's the CNN's global economic analyst and business columnist at "The Financial Times." Rana, great to have you on set.
[Rana Foroohar, Global Economist, Cnn:] Thanks for having me.
[Golodryga:] So, we heard trade skirmish, not a trade war, I heard somebody say this is t trade battle, not a trade war. At this point, what's the difference?
[Foroohar:] Well, I don't know what the scientific difference is between skirmish and war, but it's a full on trade battle, I would say. You know, this is tit for tat tariffs. This is exactly what economists were warning about when we started to see the first round of tariffs, China then later with the EU, now we're seeing battles with the NAFTA partners, and the worry is that, trade becomes a spaghetti bowl, right, where it's back and forth and there are all kinds of unintended consequences because of the really complex global supply chain.
[Golodryga:] And yet, we don't really hear specifics as to a long term plan from the President except that it will all work out. He said in an interview over the weekend that you don't know this, but I get calls from all of these global leaders saying, "Let's work out a deal." What does he know that we don't about where this ends?
[Foroohar:] I don't think he has a plan. I don't think there's a 360 here. I think there's sort of two things in play. One, it has to be said that Donald Trump is in some ways making real on threats that the US has been making for a long time now and on both sides of the aisle, right? You know, Democrats under Obama had many of the same complaints that this administration does, but Donald Trump is just moving ahead unilaterally and sort of getting out there with these tariff announcements almost before his staff sometimes, before his staff knows. I mean, you can hear just the differences between like a hawk like Peter Navarro for example, and some of the others like Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. There's not even cohesiveness within this administration on what's going to happen next.
[Golodryga:] Yes, Mnuchin seeming to calm the market's nerves or wanting to calm the market's nerves by saying we're not there yet, others suggesting otherwise.
[Foroohar:] Right, and what's interesting to me, I've spoken to people on both sides of the aisle again that are even pro-trade moves, pro-tariffs in some cases, but they say, "We've got to have a strategy." Nobody knows what victory looks like here. Our partners don't know it's sort of shooting from the hip.
[Golodryga:] Let me get back to these tweets with Harley-Davidson because it has become personal. The President said after he came to Harley-Davidson's defense early on, now said now that Harley-Davidson is moving part of its operation out of the US, my administration is working with other motorcycle companies who want to move into the US. He started talking about how their sales are down 7% in 2017, the US is where the action is. Once again, we're seeing a President target a specific company. What message does this send Harley, and what message does this send other companies?
[Foroohar:] You know, I think companies are in a real existential crisis right now because this President again is making good on threats to change the global trading regime, to change sort of 40 years of the way business has been done, which is that companies can move jobs where it's cheapest, where it's most expeditious to do so. Harley is now doing that, but for the first time, they are facing this real governmental pushback which we have not seen yet. I think that you're going to see more companies doing what Harley has done, but I also think there's going to be blow back for them in the domestic market and there's going to be a political cost to all of this.
[Golodryga:] And for a President who throughout the campaign and as long as we've really known him has followed the stock market on a daily basis, at least when it was going up, talked about the economic growth that he's brought into the country since he's been President, it seems to be kind of a walking contradiction to now say, "Don't worry about it, we may hurt in the short term."
[Foroohar:] Well, it's funny that you say that because there's never a good time for a trade war, but in some ways now is as good a time as any for Trump because you do have annualized 5% growth right now. I mean, that's way up beyond what many people would have said it could be. Yet, that could be an amazing thing for him in the run up to the midterms and instead, he's heading it off. He's sort of countering it with this other force which is a trade war that's going to depress growth. So, this may end up being a net neutral rather than a positive.
[Golodryga:] And again, all of this avoidable, this being the President's own decision. Where does this leave the Fed if in fact, we do see the economy start to slow down?
[Foroohar:] Well, that's a great question. I don't think it's ever been a harder time to be a Fed chief right now. I have to say, I do not envy Mr. Powell. I think that the big question is, are we going to see an inflation tick up and how quickly? Now, one thing that's very interesting to me, I watch the bond markets very carefully because the smart money is usually in the bond markets, right? And you see the yield curve which is the difference between short term and long term rates. You see that flattening. So, the markets are actually saying, "Okay, we might see a little inflation in the short term, but you know what, longer term, we think this trade war is going to take a toll on growth, and so we may go into recession. That puts the Fed in a very difficult position.
[Golodryga:] Yes, the Fed and the Republican Party going into the midterm as well.
[Foroohar:] Indeed.
[Golodryga:] Rana, great to have you on set. Thank you.
[Foroohar:] Thank you.
[Golodryga:] Well, later in the hour, I'll be speaking to the former US Ambassador to Canada who says a trade war with Canada would be devastating. Two international giants saw their share prices fall today now that they're facing new Federal investigations. Both Facebook and Glencore are facing legal trouble in the United States. Glencore says it is being subpoenaed by the US Justice Department. Shares in the world's biggest commodity trader plunged more than 10% before recovering slightly. American authorities are apparently probing Glencore's compliance with money laundering and anticorruption laws in Africa and Venezuela. Eleni Giokos is in Johannesburg with the latest. Eleni, so the company says that they are cooperating and investigating this as well. How damaging are these allegations?
[Eleni Giokos, Correspondent, Cnnmoney:] Well, I mean, one just has to look at the amount of money that Glencore lost today on market cap and we're talking about billions of dollars wiped off its share price in London and also in South Africa. The stock was down here around 9%. I mean, this is a clear sign from investors. They don't like the news. They're expecting something bad to come out of this and remember Glencore has had quite a bad year relating to these specific countries. So, we're talking about the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, as well as Venezuela, and we're talking about fraud and money laundering, corruption. These are the things that the Department of Justice wants to look into and they're asking for paperwork and documentation going back over a decade, and remember this is a company that listed in 2011. So, it's interesting that the Department of Justice does want that historical paperwork, and just looking at these jurisdictions. Firstly, the Democratic Republic of Congo accounts for around 25% of the company's net value, around $6 billion worth of revenue comes from the cobalt and copper mines there. And when you look deep into what's happening into the country, firstly, we know the DRC isn't exactly a bastion of transparency when it comes to the corruption index, but more importantly, Glencore has been paying what many say is a DRC risk premium on its share price because of the troubles...
[Giokos:] ... that it's experienced in that country. In Nigeria, the oil assets that Glencore is dealing with, we know that there's been a lot of questionable issues that have arisen from working very closely with government officials, similar stories coming out of Venezuela, so I think a lot of investors and analysts that I have been speaking to saying that they're not surprised that this has come to the full. It just depends how deep the rot is, if there is going to be rot that is found and of course, the price tag if a fine then does emerge through any kind of findings down the line, I think that's what people are awaiting for, and I think when you see the share price coming under so much pressure, it's indicative that people are not exactly betting on good news.
[Golodryga:] Yes, a huge blow for the company. What stands out is that these accusations of money laundering go back to 2007, as you mentioned over a decade. It seems like it would be quite a time and quite a while for investigators to finally dig through all of these years.
[Giokos:] Yes. Exactly. I mean, it's going to take a very long time and the question is, how can Glencore actually put this paperwork together and we don't know if the Department of Justice has actually given them a timeline. I am sure they have. They're going to have to get their paperwork in order very quickly. And I just have to say that looking at the initial public offering documents, you know the paperwork that is kind of distributed to investors during the road show is actually a clause in there saying that Glencore operates in many different jurisdictions, 90 commodities in 50 countries and it admits to saying that they do operate in countries that are known to be corrupt and with bribery is rife and they cannot always dictate any kind of scrupulous transactions that might occur in these jurisdictions. So, I think that warning had come out to investors from the onset and the question is, have they been implicated? Are they implicated? And what would the findings be down the line.
[Golodryga:] Huge implications not only for shareholders, but obviously, for the 146,000 employees of the company as well. Eleni Giokos, thank you for joining us. Well, Facebook shares fell more than 2% today after reports that the company is facing growing scrutiny from the US government over the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Samuel Burke joins me from London. Samuel, this is at a time when the company has been saying repeatedly that they are working on being fully transparent. New reports suggest otherwise, however.
[Samuel Burke, Correspondent, Cnn:] Here's the problem with that whole transparency line, Bianna is that, they only made people aware of this back in March, but we knew that they were aware of this back in 2015. That is about three years. Let me just put up a list on the screen of all of the agencies that we now know have open inquiries into Facebook. And it's a lot. When you think about the fact that the FBI, the Securities and Exchange Commission, that's the group that's looking at the timeline, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice here's the issue. Okay, they didn't tell tech journalists like me until March, but did they have a fiduciary obligation to their investors to tell them back in 2015 or at least in 2016 when it became obvious to the world that Cambridge Analytica was working with President Trump's campaign. Shouldn't that have set off some type of alarm bell for them and that's the question that the SEC is going to be asking. Also, when you look at the FTC, what they're looking at here is whether Facebook violated a previous agreement they had made with them in the early 2010 about consumer information. These are really serious questions and Facebook has been able to shrug off this whole scandal in terms of stock price after Zuckerberg testified, really until today, that's a big chunk of money lost, at least in market value for Facebook.
[Golodryga:] Yes, and there may be gray areas as far as what they should and shouldn't have done and what their duty is, fiduciary duties were as well, but given what they have gone through, at least optically, I am not sure anybody would have advised them to not be fully transparent at this point.
[Burke:] Especially with something as serious as something that would link them to the Presidential campaign, Donald Trump as we all know is the divisive figure on many levels, so at least then, made that trigger something, but that's not the only thing that they're dealing with today. I don't think it's really driving the stock price down, but I'm calling this the ex-lover's bug because basically, some folks, about 800,000 had people that they had blocked on Facebook, Bianna that could all of a sudden see their messages and we all have ex-friends that we blocked on Facebook. We all have some exes, some ex-lovers we've blocked on Facebook, those people were able to message folks. Another headache for Facebook but certainly not as bad as having four different groups of the government in the United States looking into what exactly happened with Cambridge Analytica.
[Golodryga:] That is for sure, and Sam just between us, I would never block you on Facebook, just so you know.
[Burke:] We're not exes.
[Golodryga:] Yes, we're friends, strictly friends. Sam, thank you. With diamonds to Hollywood films, even a Picasso investigators around the world are still hunting down the funds they believe were diverted from Malaysia's sovereign wealth fund. Now, the arrest of the former Prime Minister may shed new light on what really happened. And if you are sick of your local Starbucks, this CEO thinks he has an answer for you. The boss of Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf joins me live. Malaysia's former Prime Minister has been arrested in connection with a long running corruption scandal. Najib Razak will be charged Wednesday. He has apologized to the Malaysian people for his weaknesses, but says that not all of the accusations are true. Investigators in at least six countries are still trying to figure out what happened to billions of dollars that went missing fromm Malaysia's sovereign wealth fund, known as 1MDB. The US Department of Justice alleges hundreds of millions in cash ended up in the bank account of a powerful politician named only as Malaysia Office Official One. Other laundered money was spent on Picasso's, Van Gogh's and Monet's, a 300-foot luxury yacht. The production "Wolf of Wall Street," a 22-carat pink diamond pendant and necklace for the wife of Malaysian Official One and it has been widely reported that Najib Razak is that official. The current Prime Minister of Malaysia does not mince words about his predecessor.
[Mahathir Bin Mohamad, Prime Minister, Malaysia:] He was totally responsible for 1MDB, nothing can be done without his signature and we have his signature on all the deals entered into by 1MDB, therefore, he is responsible. We have the text, we have the letters signed by him, so he cannot say that, "I had nothing do with it."
[Golodryga:] And I am not joined by Wall Street journalist, Ken Brown, who launched the papers' exhaustive coverage of the 1MDB scandal. Thank you so much for joining us.
[Ken Brown, Journalist, Wall Street Journal:] Thank you.
[Golodryga:] What led up to this arrest?
[Brown:] Well, so the big thing was the election, right? So, Najib lost to Mahatir in May and now as you have been able to stop all the investigations for three years now and once he lost office, he couldn't stop them anymore.
[Golodryga:] And talk about the brazenness of him. We went through some of the allegations, the millions of dollars that went missing and diverted, but it really took US investigators getting involved as well because US banks were involved in the laundering, at least from the charges.
[Brown:] Right, so the US government went after some of the assets that were stolen because they were laundered through US banks because they were in dollars and so, that's what led to these asset seizures that happened last summer, the boat and diamonds and the film studio that made, "Wolf of Wall Street." That studio was run by the stepson of Najib.
[Golodryga:] And Najib comes from a family that's very well known politically in Malaysia. His father was a Prime Minister, I believe his uncle was as well, talk about the significance this is for the family and its legacy in the country.
[Brown:] Yes, that legacy is really tarnished. Even his brother has criticized him. I mean, Malaysia has always been sort of a low-level corruption country, bribes and things like that, but he the brazenness as you said, just got so huge that the establishment policies actually went after Najib for this. When we wrote our first story, which was three years ago today, ironically, that $681 million ended up in Najib's personal bank account that just shocked the whole country.
[Golodryga:] So, would this be considered the trial of the century in Malaysia if this goes to trial?
[Brown:] Oh, yes. I mean, to bring down a sitting Prime Minister or a former Prime Minister of that family and that legacy, this party that he controls have governed the country continuously since independence, so you can't understate how huge a deal it is, but the brazenness, the amount of money they stole, I mean, it's $4.5 billion. It's mind boggling.
[Golodryga:] Mind boggling and you look at it from the art work to the jewelry for his wife, and now he and his wife are not allowed to leave the country. What does this mean for the current Prime Minister? His successor who as we just heard from now did not mince words in talking about these accusations?
[Brown:] Mahatir never minces words, right, he is a tough guy. Well, I mean, they need to get this behind him. He campaigned Mahatir campaigned on this corruption platform an anticorruption platform. Mahatir was Prime Minister for years and years and he picked Najib as a Prime Minister. He is a super powerful guy in Malaysia. He's 92 years old. He came back to fight this election out to get Najib out. So, for him, this is very important politically. Also, it's going to help him now try to govern this country and get it sort of back on track.
[Golodryga:] And what is the reaction amongst Malaysian people to this news? Are they surprised or maybe not as much?
[Brown:] Well, so the press had been really suppressed in Malaysia for years, and so, we knew because people were reading our stories on Facebook in particular, and so as we were exposing it, we were getting a lot of reaction. You know, Malaysia is a really interesting, well educated rising country, very young population, and so they were frustrated because this old style corrupt government was really embarrassing to them, so the people were very happy that this has happened. Najib has some supporters, but really, I think the country it's a sense of a relief.
[Golodryga:] Do you think Najib goes to jail?
[Brown:] I think so. They say they have the evidence.
[Golodryga:] Fascinating story. Fascinating reporting on your end as well. Thank you so much for sharing with us and coming in. We're going to move to China now where fears about trade and growth rock stock markets in the yuan. On Tuesday, the Chinese currency hit its lowest level in 11 months against the dollar. Now, later it stabilized. The traders say the Central Bank has to intervene. State media calls the market's behavior irrational. CNN's John Defterios has more.
[John Defterios, Emerging Markets Editor, Cnn:] Bianna, clearly, investors are expressing real concern about two driving forces when it comes to the Renminbi, slower Chinese export growth ahead, and a looming guillotine dropping on US trade sanctions. We now know China's Central Bank's threshold for pain, 6.7 versus the dollar which have broke the reported intervention. China's Central Bank Governor said at a forum, it will work to keep the Renminbi generally stable and at a reasonable and balanced level. The worries over the currency reflected in the main Shanghai Index before Tuesday's recovery, it answered their market territory exactly a week ago falling to its lowest level in nearly two years. Overall, that ugly word contagion has reappeared in emerging markets, with currencies from India to South Africa under pressure. Turkey saw its currency fall again as inflation spiked to over 15%. But one cannot downplay the impact planned tariffs by the US could have on China, $50 billion overall, $34 billion in the first wave. If they go through on Friday, the second wave pegged at $16 billion with the potential to be much bigger if Beijing retaliates. Another worry factor, China's corporate debt, a good share price in dollars hovers around $18 trillion or about 170% of GDP. If the Renminbi resumes its fall, then Chinese debt will continue to rise. Bianna.
[Golodryga:] And you'll watching it. John Defterios, thank you. Yesterday, President Trump put the WTO on notice. Today, NATO. The President says America's allies need to spend more on defense or else. Hello, I'm Bianna Golodryga. Coming up in the next half hour of "Quest Means Business" coffee bean prices are falling and some coffee chains are expanding. I'll be speaking to the CEO of Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf. And while Delta warns about the rising cost of fuel, the head of Singapore Airlines tells us why he is re-launching the world's longest flight. First, these are the top news headlines we're following on CNN this hour. Thai Navy Seals have set up this command center inside the cave where a youth football team is trapped, two kilometers from the entrance. Rescuers haven't decided whether they will try to get the boys out immediately which could be risky or wait, perhaps months until the flood waters recede. Two British divers discovered the team's location Monday, almost 10 days after they disappeared. A healthcare worker was arrested today on suspicion of killing eight babies and trying to kill six others at a hospital in northwestern England. Police are looking at 17 deaths and 15 other nonfatal cases in all. They haven't said who the woman is or what job she held at the hospital. President Trump says he has interviewed four prospective justices as he looks to decide on a Supreme Court nominee by Monday. The spokesman for Senator Mike Lee says the Utah Republican also was interviewed by phone. White House aide say the President is hoping to play up the drama of the selection process. Extra time is almost over in the England game. The game between England and Colombia, the winner will play Sweden who beat Switzerland 1-0. Sweden is trying to reach the finals for the first time since 1958. The US car sales are [inaudible] despite recent talk of a trade war. New numbers for June show Ford and Fiat-Chrysler both saw sales increase year on year. While GM no longer reports monthly numbers, it's done it for Q2 as a whole showed sales were up 5%. GM has already warned that auto tariffs would hurt the company. Many of its car parts come from Canada. Bruce Heyman is a former US Ambassador to Canada and is joining us more on this. Bruce, first of all, let me get your reaction to this increased rhetoric that we're hearing at this point, not just from President Trump, but also from our trading partners who he has been threatening.
[Bruce Heyman, Former Us Ambassador To Canada:] You know, this is so disappointing, especially in the field that I know quite well, and the relationship between US and Canada, that relationship has been the envy of the world. I mean, you think about these two countries. We share a 5,525- mile border; 400,000 people cross on a daily basis. We have about $2 billion worth of trade that crosses the border almost every day and it's balanced. You know, the U.S. actually has a bit of a surplus. We worked together in NATO, we worked together in NORAD, protecting North America, we've been allies for 150 years as all these candidates have been around, 151, and here we are now, you know when we've reached the depths, when the United States president is taking shots at Canada. You know we're at a very low point.
[Bianna Golodryga, Host, Quest Means Business:] And when it comes to NAFTA, the president said maybe we'll keep it, maybe NAFTA 2.0, it's sort of this guessing
[Heyman:] Right
[Golodryga:] Game. You've said though that you believe this is all a set up.
[Heyman:] It is a set up and I actually if you walk through the timeline, President Trump even before becoming president has been against trade agreements with the United States his whole life. He thinks somehow everybody in the world is taking advantage of the United States of America. Amazing how we've been able to grow our economy, become the number one economy in the world under all of these really bad agreements we have. But with that in mind, he actually hit NAFTA pretty hard during the campaign and so all the things that they're doing in the administration leaves one to believe that they do not believe that they want NAFTA 2.0, otherwise their behavior would have been much different.
[Golodryga:] And so what's the end game here? How do you see all of this falling out? We've had an election with a surprise victor in Mexico, a far left candidate has come in, what happens going forward between not only the U.S. and NAFTA negotiations, but the U.S. and Canada as well.
[Heyman:] So here's the path that we could go down. So I think there are three choices, and you know, everybody knows that Canada did its retaliatory declaration of tariffs and they went into effect on the 1st of July. So here we are, now the president can, one, let it go and just keep everything in stasis, that is a possibility and not respond. Number two, we can actually back away and say, Canada, you deserve an exemption for stealing aluminum since the U.S. actually has a trade surplus in steel with Canada and we actually make all of these things together including most of our military vehicles and equipment. Oh, and number three, the president could follow through on his automobile tariff threat. And he's also threatened to tear up NAFTA. So if he goes that route, I think that it's a very high risk move, it would be incredibly dangerous economically for Canada, Mexico and with Mary Barra's comments just the other day, I think it would be harmful to the U.S. as well.
[Golodryga:] And judging by the president's actions thus far, doesn't it seem as though option three is the most likely, the president rarely walks back his own comments
[Heyman:] Yes
[Golodryga:] Option two would suggest that he come out and walk them back, think he was wrong.
[Heyman:] Yes, and he rarely does that, actually, you're right, and it's quite unfortunate. So if he does move ahead with the threats he's made, and he and all of your international audience knows he did that with Paris, he did it with TPP, he's done it with the Iran deal. He's now threatening the same in the same type of language with NAFTA. So that is a more likely scenario. Now, everybody should know in NAFTA that there's and that you have to give a six-month notice before you leave. And he may actually give the six-month notice as another squeeze in terms of negotiation. That doesn't mean we're out, but that if he gave that notice for example this week, that would put him over into January of 19th before any decision would actually have to be made.
[Golodryga:] Yes
[Heyman:] But this is this is an increasing possibility, and I think, you know, NAFTA 2.0 is on life-support at this point.
[Golodryga:] Yes, that would be after the mid-term elections, in the meantime leaving the global economy
[Heyman:] Right
[Golodryga:] And the stock market in limbo, waiting to see what the president ultimately decides. We have to leave it there, thank you so much, we appreciate your time.
[Heyman:] Pleasure to be here.
[Golodryga:] Well, Washington's allies and NATO are defending themselves after a series of stern letters from President Trump. He warned Angela Merkel of growing frustration and Germany's failure to meet defense spending target. NATO members committed to spend 2 percent or more of GDP on defense. Most do not. Joining me now, John Kirby served as assistant U.S. Secretary of State. John, great to have you on this show. So let's talk about the difference between this president and his two predecessors because they also pressed NATO allies to spend more on defense. So how does a bit more bombast necessarily change the field?
[John Kirby, Former Assistant U.s. Secretary Of State:] It's not just the bombast, it's the context within which that bombast is being delivered, right? So you've got a much more aggressive Russia and Putin now and this is post-election meddling, he has done he has done similar activities in European elections in just the last six, eight months. So we have a much more hyper charged atmosphere on the continent, and not to mention a migration crisis caused by the civil war in Syria, that's the worst since World War II. So the situation on the continent is different, it is highly more charged than dynamic. And when he continues to complain in this very public vitriolic way, it has I think a more dramatic effect than it would have if it was President Obama in his term or President Bush before him.
[Golodryga:] Is it fair to say expectations amongst NATO members gearing up for this meeting which would be the second meeting that this president has participated in. If expectations are low, given the news that we've been following, especially given the meeting that he has immediately after with
[Kirby:] Yes
[Golodryga:] Vladimir Putin
[Kirby:] I think so, I think not only are the expectations low, but I think our European allies are actually worried about this summit, literally sort of just falling apart and not being very successful at all because he seems to want to make it all about this one agenda item. And look, he has a case to be made. The NATO allies do need to pitch in more, they all need to work harder to get to their 2 percent defense spending minimum agreement that was made back in 2014, but he has to remember that there's other things the alliance is needs to be focused on right now. Cyber, counterterrorism, crisis in Ukraine and of course as we talked about Russian election interference. There's a lot on the plate for the alliance and it would be a real shame if this one issue hijacked the summit and you're absolutely right, he's going to leave there, go to Helsinki, meet with Putin. Nothing would please Putin more than to be able to see Trump on the back- end of a NATO summit that really just kind of fell apart.
[Golodryga:] And Putin has already said Crimea is non-negotiable, President Trump has sort of vouched for Vladimir Putin in saying he believes him when he says they didn't interfere in the election. So what if anything can come out of this meeting other than a positive headline or two for Vladimir Putin.
[Kirby:] Not much, and you know, frankly, if you look at John Bolton's comments on the Sunday show just last weekend, that's pretty much what he said, he didn't say it in those words, but basically he called this a meet and greet, and they're going to talk a lot and a lot of issues and they're going to sort of air out some things. But there's not really a specific agenda item that they're driving too in this Putin-Trump summit, they're not really a specific tangible outcome that I think we can expect from it. Now look, I think it's always good for him to sit down with Putin, we do have a lot of differences. And quite frankly, there's some areas for cooperation even with the relationship as tense as it is, but it's a it would be a real again, I think to the detriment of the United States national security and our allies if he goes there after a NATO summit that really has just kind of done nothing except give Trump another venue, another opportunity to complain about defense expenditures.
[Golodryga:] Yes, it is incredible that he seems to be getting more and more distant between our U.S. allies and perhaps closer with Vladimir Putin, and we will be covering this in the next few weeks, we appreciate you joining us, thank you.
[Kirby:] My bet, thank you.
[Golodryga:] Well, do you have Starbucks fatigue? The CEO of Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf is betting on it. He'll tell me how he plans to capitalize on that, coming up next.

[King:] A warning from President Trump aired on TV today that could complicate the full spending debates in Congress. Any immigration bill that hits his desk, the President says, must include funding for the border wall if lawmakers expect him to sign it. Listen. This is Fox News this morning.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We actually have four different bills. Unless it includes a wall and I mean, a wall, a real wall and unless it includes very strong border security, there'll be no approvals from me. Because I have to either approve it or not. There are bills going through. I'm watching one or two of them. We'll see what happens. I think it's time to get the whole package. It's not such a big deal, right? It's time to get the whole package.
[King:] Can he get a whole package, the whole package? He's gotten very modest down payments of this wall funding because it's impossible to get the votes for the whole package. As we get closer to the election, can he find those votes?
[Kapur:] He can get the money for his wall. I think Democrats have already seated to that as part of a DACA deal. What he cannot get is cuts the legal immigration which he wants which have scuttled, you know, immigration negotiation and DACA deals I think for months now. He wants to eliminate the diversity of lottery. He wants to cut what he calls chain migration, which is family sponsorships for siblings, adult parents, adult children. Democrats are not moving on that. What's happening now is a group of moderate Republicans of the House are teaming up Democrats to subvert Paul Ryan and to push a vote on the House for they can do that with a discharge petition. My colleague Eric Watson reports that there are conversations happening now between those moderate Republicans and the leadership as long as the hard liners to see if Republicans can agree on a deal. Whether they can, I highly doubt it, because you're not going to get the hard liners to agree on citizenship without a whole bunch of restrictionist measures that cannot pass the House.
[King:] That has been the quick send of the last 10 to 15 years. I want you to listen more in this interview about the President's tone about the President we all know he campaigned on having a tough border. What other things that bothers the President is when you come to United States border, and you show up at the border, you can see a judge and apply for asylum. The President says he wishes it were different.
[Trump:] We're the only country essentially that has judges. They want to hire thousands of judges.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes
[Trump:] Other countries have it's called security people, people that stand there and say, you can't come in. We have thousands of judges and they need thousands of more judges. The whole system is corrupt. It's horrible. Whoever heard of a system where you put people through trials? Where do these judges come from? You know, a judge is a very special person.
[Unidentified Male:] Right.
[Trump:] How do you hire thousands of people to be a judge?
[King:] There is a competing view, that what makes America great is that if you are being yes, illegal immigration is wrong. And the President has every right to stand up and say we should be able to protect our borders. Let me start there. He has every right to say we should be able to protect our borders from illegal immigration. Of course, we should and of curse he should make his case and try to get the money. But the idea that if you are being persecuted somewhere, what people say makes America great, you can show up the border and say help and get to see a judge not a security person with a gun who send you away.
[Davis:] Right. And what the President is saying, you know, is so objectionable here is called due process for that particular process. There is And by the way, there are people, there are security personnel at the border, and he made sure now there are more of them because the National Guard is now backing up at the border at his orders. But there is a process when these people present themselves and say they have a credible fear of going back to their home countries, there is a process where by, you know, they get process and they register and they get a court date and they get to plead their case. And they figure out whether or not they should be allowed to stay. What he really objects to and what he is pointing to is the fact that, and it is a fact that, a lot of these people, when they do get their, you know, appointment to go and have their case heard, they disappear into the interior and often times do not return for that court date, and therefore, you know that's another source of illegal immigration. And he has really tried to get at that problem. It's really difficult to get at that problem. And one of the issues with what Sahil was talking about earlier is he wants this legislative package to include changes to that whole process, so that people arriving at the border would have to go through a totally different process or maybe have no process at all or no way of staying in the country if they were afraid credibly of going home.
[Kapur:] He wants to eliminate that right essentially people who come to the country and want to speak to a judge, want to make their case, have a right to be heard. He is not wrong that the United States has generous law in that regard. A lot of other countries don't have this. But, you know, that is reflective of what the United States claims to stand for, stand for people of all, you know, who are persecuted in all sort of ways based on their race, religion, what have you. The President wants to change that. He wants
[King:] Whatever your opinions at home or whatever your coverage skills here at the table, is there anyone who thinks this close to the election were going to negotiate a major immigration package and get it passed into law and signed by the President?
[Johnson:] They didn't do it months before the election, so I think as we get closer it's more and more unlikely to happen.
[Collins:] But we have seen the immigration be a boiling point for the President in recent weeks. It always has been one of his things but lately he has been furious about it. We saw him unload on the Department of Homeland Secretary recently. He's very angry about immigration which makes it even more unlikely happen.
[King:] Yes. Two political reflexes constant, immigration and trade issues.
[Unidentified Female:] It might pass the House.
[King:] Thanks for joining us in INSIDE POLITICS today. Wolf will start right after a quick break. Have a good day.

[Becky Anderson, Connect The World, Cnn:] A tidiest search as Mexico mourns rescue workers keep up their search for survivors, including at this collapsed school. We are live at Mexico City with a full update for you. Also ahead this hour, a bird's eye view of a devastated land. We are going to update on hurricane Maria and the mayhem that it has left in its wake. Plus, political metaphor, United Nation North Korea lashes out at U.S. President Donald Trump. We are there with the explanation this hour. Hello, welcome. This is Connect the World, I'm Becky Anderson for you in Abu Dhabi. It is just after 7:00 in the evening here. We will begin this hour in Mexico City where the race to find survivors after Tuesday's massive earthquake has not stopped. At one school there is an intense effort still underway. Rescuers digging through a mountain of debris. The work delicate, pain staking and has been non-stop. Rescuers need to hear even the faintest sounds to try the reach survivors that calls for quiet, fists, raised in the air. CNN's Rosa Flores is at the school in Mexico City, and she joins us now live. Any success, Rosa?
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] There are signs of life right now, Becky. I'm whispering because if you take a look behind me, you were just showing video of those fists being raised. That is what's going on right now and they have just ask, for it to go down. So I'm going to speak normally now. But that is what we've been experiencing here today. Whenever we see those fists raised, we know those are signs of life. We know that rescuers are either listening or had heard signs of life. I want to show you around, too. Because what's happening now is they are unloading metal beams. Now, we had seen wooden beams unloaded before and carried in, but this is a new development now they are bringing metal beams. They are unloading them and taking them closer to the school. We have seen more resources arrive at daybreak here. And the flow of resources really has not survived. Now, in the past 20 or 30 minute I was able to go beyond this barricade and take a first look at some of the activity. And I can tell you that there is a lot of coordination. There are police officers lined up ready to go replace whatever other, police officers are doing to make sure, that those shifts keep rolling. I saw also rescue workers with bloodshot eyes that have been working for very long hours. I talked to one of them who had finished his shift who said that he worked for 36 hours straight, and he wasn't the only one. He was one of a group of 25 men that had been working for 36 hours to try to get to life in this pile of rubble. He was telling me a little bit about the mood as well. He said that it'been a roller coaster of emotion for the people who had been volunteering here because they feel a lot of joy and energy when they hear that someone has been saved, when their effort has saved someone, and of course the mood plummets he says whenever they hear that they were able to get to someone but that individual is dead. The death toll here at this school rose overnight by a 58-year-old woman who was pulled from the rubble unfortunately dead that raises the death toll here at the school to 26. 21 of those, children. Becky, I talked to a mother who lives in front of the school and said that parents had been communicating via what's app groups. Unfortunately, they are communicating about funerals at this hour, because 21 those bodies that were recovered were, children. Becky.
[Anderson:] Absolutely awful, isn't it? All right Rosa, we thank you very much indeed for that. The scene in one part of Mexico City. Hurricane Maria bearing down on the Dominican Republic this hour as it cuts a devastating path through the Caribbean. Forecasters say torrential rains could bring life threatening flash floods and mudslides to the country that still hasn't dried out from hurricane Irma just two weeks ago. Maria has now got the Turks and Caicos in its cross hair the storm is expected to strengthen once again as it churns through the warm waters. Puerto Rico has a very long road to recovery ahead of it after taking a direct hit from Maria yesterday. All power on the island is out and may not be completely back for four to six months. Puerto Rico's governor calls it the most devastating storm the hit the island this century if not in modern history. CNN has a team of reporters covering Maria destructive path through the Caribbean. I want to start with CNN international correspondent Nick Paton Walsh who is in Puerto Rico. Have a look at this.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Correspondent:] Puerto Rico ravaged taking its first direct hit from a category 4 hurricane in nearly a century. The governor, imposing curfew each night for Puerto Rico's 3.4 million residents. The entire island in the dark after the power grid was completely knocked out.
[Unidentified Female:] We are, looking at four to six months without electricity.
[Paton Walsh:] Roofs ripped off the buildings. Home reduced to rubble. Street swallowed by flood waters, littered with debris, gas stations under water. The island's already fragile infrastructure decimated. The governor asking President Trump to declare the island disaster zone.
[Unidentified Male:] This is the most devastating storm either in the century or quite frankly, in modern history.
[Paton Walsh:] Hurricane Maria unleashing punishing winds up to 155 miles per hour. Pelting torrential rain sideways. And breaking trees in half as residents rode out the storm some in shelters, others in stairwells.
[Unidentified Male:] I have never seen anything like this. The ferocity powering through. It is very alarming. Pulling out the trees, too.
[Paton Walsh:] This is the road of destruction re-encountered on our drive from of the east coast of the island in Pauma Del Mar where Maria made landfall. A gas leak forcing us to evacuate our hotel. The scale of devastation staggering. The highway littered with dead trees, downed electrical cables and telephone poles, propellers snapping off wind turbines. The closer we got to San Juan the more dangerous to drive to Cain also inundating the roadways as we try to pass. The storm surges of upwards of five feet turning streets into rivers and parking lots into swimming pools. The monster storm devastating much of the Caribbean. The worst of it captured in these aerial images from the island of Dominica which took a direct hit from Maria with a category five storm. At least 14 are dead, many others still missing. Officials estimating about 70 percent of the island's buildings damaged or destroyed.
[Anderson:] Nick is joining us now live from San Juan in Puerto Rico with the very latest. Your report, and the details from those who survived this storm just harrowing. And as they pick up the pieces of their lives, Nick, warnings that it could be months before the power is back on, let alone life anything like back to normal. The physical and psychological effects of this disaster are hard to imagine. How are people coping?
[Paton Walsh:] Actually, at this point bizarrely her, we have some information. I think they are coming up to us asking, how strong was that storm? Is the airport open? Because the electricity is out. And also to cell phones. The basic things you count on beyond texting your mom to make sure she survived the night OK that is out. They have to drive around to get basic information about their loved ones. Bear in mind the second one is the power is out, too. If it is going to happen four to six months, that puts a lot of people's jobs in jeopardy. A huge rethink frankly on daily life here. You see around me the devastation is pretty obvious but there are business trying to open their doors. Walgreens there still power on but the doors are boarded up. People are taking shutters down by now sort of see. This has been the first morning they have really had. But there is a sense at this stage of amazement, but I think also an acceptance of their enormity of the task ahead. We are obviously captivated by the extraordinary power and ferocity of the storm and the winds and the water and the damage done where it made landfall. We drove through the island of San Juan last night. The broader question now is the boring one, the months long of rebuilding, taking the debris out, putting the buildings back together and getting basic utilities up and running again. Becky, in a country that was on its knees before hurricane Irma struck two week ago. 70 billion in debt. Even then, about half the population below the U.S. poverty line. Not a good place, Irma comes in and that is a billion of dollars damage. People think they are lucky that they too a glancing blow from hurricane Maria comes in, the worst for 90 years, 155-mile-an-hour winds, vast amounts of water. You can't pretend that it is not an ugly year ahead. Becky?
[Anderson:] Nick Paton Walsh reporting for us from Puerto Rico. Nick showing you some of the damage on the island of Dominica. Thanks Nick. One of the poorest countries in the Caribbean. Maria's wrath there was simply catastrophic, homes shredded apart, rainforest strip there, hills eroded by landslides. The office of Dominica's Prime Minister says at least 14 people lost their lives. Water and food are scarce, and there is widespread looting as the nation goes into survival mode. CNN's Michael Holmes shows us the devastation from the skies.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Anchor And Correspondent:] Hurricane Maria hit Dominica at full category 5 strength and showed no mercy. Plowing through villages, towns and the capital. Not a tree untouched across the island. Thousands snapped in two. No greenery left there was a spectacular rainforests here. No more. This is as close as we or anyone can get to Dominica at least for now. The airports shut down. They are hoping to open it in the hours ahead to see just how bad things are down there. But we can see from up here, this island has been hit and hit hard. We pass low, buffeted by the remnants of Maria. Our pilot unable to land before on the ground safety checks the deemed the runway safe. The damage is island-wide. Where there is a town or village, there is debris covering the landscape like confetti, houses ripped open, torn apart, roofs gone. We saw some cars moving but no people, we did see evidence of numerous landslides on this mountainous island. The usually blue-green sea rendered brown in places from the earth swept into it. Dominica has an agriculture-based economy. It is a sugarcane, banana plantation, citrus and most of that is exported. From what we can see up here, that is gone, and the loss of those sources and their income is going to be devastating for this island and its people. Of course, the immediate concern is the 73,000 residents here making sure aid gets in and quickly. Medical treatment, power, fresh water and shelter the immediate priorities. Regional officials planning for aid flights and voyages to begin in force on Thursday from the nearby island of St. Louisa, and hoping for clarity on just what had happened to island of Dominica. Michael Holmes, CNN, over the Dominica in the Caribbean.
[Anderson:] And a whole lot more on hurricane Maria ahead on this show this hour. We will get an update on the conditions in the Dominican Republic as it takes a beating from this storm. And we will check in with CNN weather center, see what can be expected in the hours ahead. Just awful. Still to come, and the Korean crisis provokes sharp debate at the U.N. What North Korea thinks about U.S. President Donald Trump fiery speech? And will he or won't he? Mr. Trump boo prides himself on being the ultimate deal maker could be about to walk away from a historic deal with Iran. Well that is coming up, after this.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Millions of Americans now in the path of another monster hurricane. We're tracking Maria as it plows through the Caribbean with Category 5-force winds. Total destruction. President Trump uses his first speech at the United Nations to deliver a doomsday warning to North Korea. New reaction this hour to his bombastic language and his vision of a world that is quote "going to hell." And last-ditch attempt. Heading down to the wire for Republicans who are now struggling with how to vote on a desperate new bid to repeal Obamacare. We're going to tell you who's on board tonight and who's on the fence. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news tonight, two devastating natural disasters are unfolding right now. We're just beginning to get a sense of the destruction from a powerful 7.1-magnitude earthquake that struck Central Mexico, rocking the capital of Mexico City about 75 miles away from the epicenter. At least 57 people are dead, but that's just a very preliminary account. There's reports of buildings collapsing, cars being crushed, people trapped. Stand by, new details coming in. Also breaking, a pulverizing hurricane is barrelling towards millions of Americans, the third catastrophic storm impacting U.S. citizens this month. A new forecast shows Maria is approaching two U.S. territories, the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, as a Category 5 hurricane. Residents are now bracing what could be a direct hit in the hours ahead. Also tonight, sources tell CNN that United Nations diplomats were taken aback by President Trump's debut speech before the U.N. General Assembly. Mr. Trump threatening to totally destroy North Korea if the U.S. is forced to defend itself or its allies. He says Kim Jong-un is on a suicide mission with his nuclear and missile programs, once again mocking the North Korean dictator as the Rocket Man. The president telling U.N. members that parts of the world are quote "going to hell" and vowing he will always put America first. We're covering all of that and much more this hour with our guests, including the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin. And our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. First, let's go to CNN's Brian Todd. Brian, you're getting new details on the earthquake in Mexico. What are you learning?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, the latest figures we have on casualties tonight, at least 57 people dead from this earthquake in the states of Puebla, Morelos, and the state of Mexico. President Enrique Pena Nieto also says 27 structures collapsed in Mexico City. These are very early assessments of what will almost certainly become a rising death toll and escalating damage estimates.
[Todd:] In the streets of Mexico tonight, panic and pandemonium. A major earthquake, a 7.1, shook Central Mexico shortly after 2:10 p.m. Eastern time, hitting in a heavily populated area just 75 miles southeast of Mexico City. The quake struck 33 miles below the earth's surface. The shallow depth could mean that destruction will stretch far across the region. As buildings swayed, thousands of people fled office buildings and homes, only to see glass shatter and roads split open. Passengers forced to evacuate Mexico City's international airport. This scene from Mexican television shows firefighters digging through rubble of what appears to be a collapsed building. Tonight, Mexico City schools are closed and Mexico's president has called for a national emergency committee meeting to assess the damage.
[Unidentified Male:] I think everybody here is scared. I mean, you can see it. People are worried.
[Todd:] Today's quake ironically comes on the anniversary of a devastating 1985 quake that killed thousands and destroyed much of the capital. People in the city had spent part of today holding drills. This earthquake today comes just two weeks after a magnitude- 8.1 earthquake shook Mexico. The president's office told CNN that President Pena Nieto had been visiting those devastated by that disaster when this one struck today. Also tonight, Wolf, another estimate that will very likely rise. About 3.8 million customers have had their electricity disrupted by this earthquake. That is according to officials of Mexico's federal commission of electricity, Wolf. All of these horrible numbers are very likely going to be rising throughout the evening and into tomorrow.
[Blitzer:] Very preliminary numbers indeed. Brian Todd, thank you very much. Let's get a live report now from the earthquake disaster zone. We're joined on the phone by Joshua Partlow. He's the Mexico City bureau chief for "The Washington Post." So, Joshua, what was it like?
[Joshua Partlow, "the Washington Post":] Wolf, it was a strong, scary earthquake. Everyone was running out.
[Blitzer:] What did it feel like? Where were you when you began to feel this earthquake?
[Partlow:] I was just in the office. The lights, the hanging lamp started swaying.
[Blitzer:] I think we have lost our connection with Joshua Partlow. We're going to try to reconnect him. Joshua Partlow is the Mexico City bureau chief of "The Washington Post." Totally understandable that you lose these technical connections, given what is going on over there. Tonight, Central Mexico is clearly on alert for any major aftershocks that could make this earthquake disaster even worse. Let's check in with our meteorologist, Tom Sater. Tom, very strong earthquake, 7.1 magnitude. Tell our viewers what we can now anticipate.
[Tom Sater, Cnn Meteorologist:] I think for the next not just several hours but the next several days and weeks, aftershocks will start occurring. And when you have a significant quake such as a 7.0, 7.1, the next one would be the highest could be a 6.1. It drops down significantly, but this is our ring of fire on the edge of the Pacific. This is where the high mountainous range is. This is the very active tectonic plates, 450 volcanoes, Wolf. 90 percent of the world's earthquakes occur in this area. And no doubt about it. There's the West Coast of the U.S. down into New Mexico. Here's what we have for you. Usually, we will have one 8.1 a year. We just had that 11 days ago. It was the southern coast of Mexico. Between a 7 and 7.9, we have 15. We've had a few of these. But this one is interesting to come so close. Are they related? Most likely not. Now you can, if they were a little bit closer, since we had an 8.0 11 days ago, if we were to have a 7.1, that could have been an aftershock. But we think they're different locations, so really not related, so to speak, 32 miles in depth. That's still considered shallow. Sometimes, down to even 44 miles can be considered shallow. But we see these hundred of miles deep around the world. Here's the shake map. When it comes to light shaking, over 20.5 million people, moderate, 14 million. Strong shaking, this is where you want to start this is probably where you start seeing a lot of the destruction, 15 million. And then 1.6 million felt very strong. We could even get in closer and give you an idea of the shake map. This comes from the USGS. First, what you're noticing here, these yellow dots, these are aftershocks from the 8.0 that we had just 11 days ago. We will start to see more of that activity in the hours and days ahead. So everything yellow is over a week old. So they have been getting some aftershocks. Interesting to note though just how high the death toll has already risen with this. Getting closer, here's Mexico city. We will start to see some colors of green, even yellow. So, they were an extreme periphery of this, Mexico City. But even with that said, feeling strong shaking that far away, you can understand why a lot of the structures have been compromised and some of them collapsed or even had facade issues. Back to our maps and back to what we can expect quickly for you, Wolf, fatalities, again, based on computer models by the USGS, you want to see green. That's where no fatalities may have occurred, especially if they're really deep. But this is considered shallow, so in yellow, we have a 19 percent chance to have 10 to 100 fatalities and a 39 percent chance, Wolf, to have 100 to 1,000. Let's hope that's not the case here, but it is rising quickly.
[Blitzer:] Yes, let's hope it's not. We're also getting live pictures right now coming in from St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin Islands, as you can see. Check it out. The wind and the surf already beginning to pick up there. A state of emergency is in effect in Puerto Rico, as we have mentioned, Hurricane Maria threatening homes and lives. Millions of Americans in Puerto Rico, as you know. Let's go to our senior international correspondent, Nick Paton Walsh. He's on the island for us tonight. Nick, so what are the conditions like there? Because in the coming hours, you're going to get walloped with this storm.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, it's the east coast that should first see landfall, we're hearing here, about 8:00, 9:00 tomorrow morning. It could well be the coast behind me. That is the moments where it first hits land at 165 miles an hour. As you heard there, you have to be really over 89 years old to have experienced anything like this in Puerto Rico's history. That storm surge, well, it could well possibly reach to nearly twice my height as I stand here now. And we're seeing this beach resort evacuated, although strangely actually people on beach buggies popping down to the sand there to get perhaps the last glance, as this obvious storm begins to approach and the skies have begun to darken around me, the clouds moving very fast above me. We're beginning to feel it pick up here. But Puerto Rico really still reeling from just two weeks ago Hurricane Irma itself. That caused a billion dollars worth of damage and has left even still now 46,000 people without electricity. And the debate really is, has that hurricane left people in a higher state of readiness? It really only caused a glancing blow to this island. Maria is supposed to go straight across it, making landfall here and, according to the latest hurricane survey update, perhaps dispensing most of its high-speed energy on the island itself, across San Juan, the capital, a state of emergency here. Many shelters in place, but very serious concerns about the next 24 hours Wolf.
[Blitzer:] And 3.5 million people living in Puerto Rico, 3.5 million people U.S. citizens. Nick Paton Walsh, we will check back with you as well. And now to President Trump's debut speech at the United Nations laced with bombastic language and truly extraordinary threats. He saved some of his toughest talk for the North Korean dictator he now refers to as Rocket Man. Our chief security national correspondent, Jim Sciutto, is over at the United Nations for us tonight. Jim, this was not a typical speech we hear from a U.S. president at the United Nations.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Not at all, unlike many speech that many of those delegates, diplomats in the room had ever heard from a U.S. president. I spoke to a senior U.N. official, diplomat shortly after the speech. And he described himself and others around him as taken aback in particular by that line the president threatening to obliterate a country, North Korea, from the map. He said it was an emotional reaction, that it felt like, in the words of this diplomat, that a wind had swept through the room, and of course the line about North Korea just one of many bold lines in a defining speech for the Trump foreign policy.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Major portions of the world are in conflict, and some, in fact, are going to hell.
[Sciutto:] In his maiden speech before the U.N., President Donald Trump delivered a blistering attack on nations he described as evil and grave dangers to the world.
[Trump:] If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph. When decent people in nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength.
[Sciutto:] The president giving the more than 150 international delegations present an up-front look at his America-first policy.
[Trump:] As president of the United States, I will always put America first.
[Sciutto:] He reserved his boldest threat for North Korea, vowing in unequivocal terms to destroy the country if it threatens America's or its allies security.
[Trump:] The United States has great strength and patience. But if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime.
[Sciutto:] For Iran, Trump described government as murderous and reckless and appeared to signal that he will exit the Iran nuclear deal.
[Trump:] The Iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into. Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don't think you have heard the last of it, believe me.
[Sciutto:] Praising Mr. Trump's remarks was Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said he had quote "never heard a bolder or more courageous speech in three decades of experience with the U.N." The president's address also taking aim on what he described as growing terrorist threats around the globe.
[Trump:] The United States and our allies are working together throughout the Middle East to crush the loser terrorists.
[Sciutto:] Beyond the threats, Trump's speech more clearly articulated the outlines of his foreign policy, including a drastic turn from a tent of U.S. foreign policy for decades, that the U.S. will support democracy abroad.
[Trump:] This is the foundation for cooperation and success. Strong sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect.
[Sciutto:] Those words and phrases about sovereignty, different values, loaded terms in the halls of the U.N., often repeated by authoritarian leaders in China, in Russia, in Africa in response to the U.S. pushing back against what they call preaching about human rights records, et cetera, often heard here, but not from the mouths of an American president, whether Democrat or Republican, if followed through upon, would represent a significant change in U.S. foreign policy under Trump, Wolf, going forward.
[Blitzer:] Jim Sciutto at the United Nations for us tonight, thank you very much. Let's get some more on all of this. Joining us, Senator Ben Cardin. He's the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator, thanks for joining us. So, you heard the president say today that if the United States is forced to defend itself from the Kim Jong-un regime, North Korea, it will have, in his words, no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Do you agree with that?
[Sen. Ben Cardin , Maryland:] Well, Wolf, it's very good to be with you. Just look at the venue of the speech before the United Nations, before the international community. I don't think his remarks were well- received by our allies and I don't think they were well-received by our foes. We know that we have to deal with a dangerous North Korea. The international community should be there to help us. The president's comments puts a wedge in our type of international coalition. We need to find a diplomatic solution. A military solution will have catastrophic effect. We need to explore diplomacy. And that means working with our friends and allies.
[Blitzer:] What if the diplomatic solution doesn't happen, if the North Korea continue to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles and they're capable of putting nuclear warheads on those missiles and they threaten the United States? Can the U.S. live with that?
[Cardin:] Wolf, what North Korea is doing is extremely dangerous. They're the ones causing the problems. They would be violating international rules if that were to occur. We have an obligation to defend ourselves. I understand that. But there is a diplomatic path that could work. The president is not doing everything we can to explore that route. China and the United States have a common objective to prevent North Korea from becoming an effective nuclear weapons state. China and North Korea have a common agenda to preserve the Kim regime. The United States is more interested in the nuclear issues than regime change. We need to talk to China, get China to believe that our interests are together, because they are, and then China can change the equation in North Korea. I know that that's not a slam-dunk, and there's long shots on all of this. But it's the best path forward. And the president needs to engage the international community to work with this, particularly China and also Russia. Today's speech did not help. In fact, it made it more difficult.
[Blitzer:] The president also seemed to threaten to rip up the Iran nuclear deal. You voted against it. Would you support that decision, if he were to go forward and say the U.S. no longer believes Iran is in compliance and the U.S. is abandoning that agreement?
[Cardin:] Wolf, I don't think he's going to do that. Our concern is that he will rip up the agreement, even though Iran is not in violation of the nuclear agreement. We have already had two certifications under the Trump administration of compliance. We're not aware of any material breach by Iran of the nuclear agreement. President Trump's concerns, and I think many members of Congress, our concerns are on the non-nuclear front not covered by the agreement. So, if the United States were to rip up the nuclear agreement, we would be the ones walking away. Our European allies would scratch their heads, figuring out, what are we doing isolating the United States, when we're trying to isolate Iran?
[Blitzer:] Senator, there's more we need to discuss. There are other developments breaking right now. Got to take a quick break. We will resume our interview right after this.

[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] Expressing regret. Donald Trump's former adviser distances himself from controversial comments attributed to him about the U.S. president and his family.
[Rosemary Church, Cnn Anchor:] Face-to-face as North and South Korea get set for talks, there are hopes it would lead to more dialogue.
[Howell:] And a room full of winners. Oprah Winfrey brings Hollywood to its feet with a rousing message at the Golden Globes.
[Church:] Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us here in the United States and of course all around the world. We are live in Atlanta. I'm rosemary church.
[Howell:] And I'm George Howell from CNN's world headquarters. Newsroom starts right now. The tell-all book "Fire and Fury" paints a scathing picture of the Trump White House. The White House is pushing back. But there are no signs the fallout from this book are letting up.
[Church:] Yes. Some of the most explosive quotes from "Fire and Fury" are attributed to Steve Bannon, President Trump's former chief strategist. But now Bannon says he regrets not responding sooner to what's in the book. He says he still believes in the president and his agenda, and that he never bad-mouthed Donald Trump, Jr. as the author suggests.
[Howell:] When the book came out Friday, this despite legal threats from the president's personal attorneys, the president responded furiously on Twitter calling it a fake book written by a totally discredited author.
[Church:] Now all of, this though, may be too little too late. We are told President Trump is drawing a line in the sand, calling allies and friends, making it clear they must choose between him and Bannon.
[Howell:] Our Boris Sanchez picks it up from here.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] It has now been five full days since when we first got those excerpts from "Fire and Fury" that were explosive and drew into question not only the president's mental fitness for office, but also his relationship with his former chief strategist Steve Bannon. Today Steve Bannon putting out a statement for the first time directly in response to those quotations of his in that book, specifically taking exception to a portion where he describes a meeting between Trump campaign officials and Russian nationals at Trump Tower back in June of 2016 as treasonous and unpatriotic. Bannon saying that those comment were not directed toward Donald Trump, Jr. who he calls a patriot, but rather toward former campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Here's that specific section. He writes, quote, "My comments were aimed at Pall Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate. He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr." Of course, we should point out a trail of e-mails shows that it was Donald Trump Jr. who brokered that meeting with Russian nationals and who then looped in not only Paul Manafort but also the president's son-in-law Jared Kushner. And in a later e-mail he said that he loved the idea of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton that was being offered to the Trump campaign by these Russian nationals. The most fascinating part of this statement though, is the portion in which Steve Bannon tries to put himself once again in the president's good graces by saying that Donald Trump was the only candidate that could have defeated Hillary Clinton and then going a step further and touting his own abilities as a messenger for the president, saying that he has taken the America first message as far as Hong Kong and Tokyo. Steve Bannon here is in a bit of a predicament because over the past few days we have seen not only Trump surrogates going after him, but also the president himself, calling him a sloppy Steve. And earlier today CNN was actually able to confirm that the president has been making calls in recent days to friends and allies, telling them that they either support Steve Bannon or they support the president. So it seems as though Steve Bannon feels his influence shrinking and potentially is trying to salvage his political career by reaching out to the president in this way. Boris Sanchez, CNN at the White House.
[Howell:] All right, Boris, thanks. Now we heard from the president's senior policy adviser who appeared on CNN's Sunday to defend his boss.
[Church:] In his conversation with Jake tapper Stephen Miller called Bannon's comments grotesque. He also had some choice words for the book and its author.
[Stephen Miller, White House Senior Policy Advisor:] The book is best understood as a book of poorly written fiction. And I also will say that the author is a garbage author of a garbage a book.
[Howell:] A lot to talk about here. And to do so, let's bring in Leslie Vinjamuri. Leslie, a professor of international relations at SOAS University of London, live this hour in our London bureau. Always a pleasure to have you, Leslie, with us.
[Leslie Vinjamuri, Senior Lecturer, University Of London:] Thank you.
[Howell:] Let's go back to this situation with Steve Bannon. He has offered not an apology, but offered regret about a single point from this book that point about Don Trump, Jr. But with the president reportedly calling his friends and allies, telling them to pick between him or Steve Bannon, does Bannon's olive branch of regret even matter at this point in your mind?
[Vinjamuri:] Well, it's very difficult to know. As we know with the president, he does change his mind actually about people and about situations. So it's difficult to know. And of course he has had a very long and very interesting relationship with Steve Bannon. I think Bannon's position is perhaps not surprising. Because remember, Bannon is very committed to his views on the U.S., on the future of the U.S. and U.S. Foreign policy. And I think for Bannon, whether he could influence the president and the United States in the course of direction of U.S. policy, whether that's within or without, outside of the White House, both of those things are very important to him. So his admittedly delayed statement I think is pitched at being sure that he can remain a very serious voice and have important influence over the public debate and over the White House and more specifically over Donald Trump. How that will turn out is very difficult to know. As you can see, he is at risk now of losing a lot of his backers. But he understands that the, you know, attacking the president's son is no small thing. And he uses that word patriotic clearly as a response to what he was quoted saying earlier, which is that the behavior was treasonous. So I think it's not surprising given Bannon's very clear desire to really push forward is a very nationalist agenda. And to do that now from outside the White House.
[Howell:] OK. So Bannon now has a new nickname called sloppy Steve. Here is the question though, with his statement of regret, returning hat in hand to the president. Is he accepted again do you think by this president?
[Vinjamuri:] Well, again, I don't think that we can anticipate what Trump will feel or say or do in the next, you know, day or days when it comes to Steve Bannon. Certainly the last day or two suggests that this is a very major rift. But you know, there have been people that we thought were on the way out of the White House that have remained in place. You know, there were rumors of Tillerson going or rumors of Jeff Sessions going. Many things changed. Of course the relationship between Steve Bannon and Donald Trump is very much different. But it's always been, you know, that Bannon was in the White House, it was a very contentious White House. There were a lot of feuds. The president was I'm sure managing those. So I think it's difficult to anticipate which way this will go, despite the optics, which is that it looks like it's a very deep fracture in the relationship right now.
[Howell:] All right, Leslie, this book "Fire and Fury," it is having an impact. Just listen here to a republican lawmaker who has already announced his retirement, important to point that out, but speaking out now about his impressions from this book and its portrayal of the president. Listen.
[Charlie Dent,  United States Representative:] Bottom line is the issues raised in that book do raise concerns for most of us. Because clearly the whole idea of impulse control, lack of focus and we've heard this before. The book more or less just confirms what many of us had been hearing.
[Howell:] The question do, you take the book seriously or literally? That was a question back from the campaign. Michael Wolff has insisted he is uncovering the things that people say behind closed doors and that it's pervasive throughout the administration. Also important to point out, that his techniques questionable with some regards, attribution, things of that nature. But overall this narrative that he paints, can the Trump White House easily dismiss it?
[Vinjamuri:] Well, I do think that, you know, it seems to be it's widely known that Michael Wolff plays fast and loose, not only with making his those he is interviewing aware that they're actually being interviewed. But he also plays fast and loose with the facts. So I think in terms of any specific incident, one has to be wary. The thing that we can also see, though, is that people who have very seriously covered this White House throughout the entire presidency, who covered the campaign, who were very credible are saying, and I think for all of us who followed the Trump White House, that the general picture that's being painted is one that is not surprising actually to most people. So it's almost surprising that so many people are interested in the book given that everything that we hear and everything that we have read so far. And I've read a good portion of it, but not all of it yet. It isn't so far from what we've already taken to be true about the dysfunctionality of the White House. But again, the specific details in much of the book, one can't be sure of.
[Howell:] Always good to get the insider view. Leslie Vinjamuri, live with us in our London bureau, thank you. We'll stay in touch.
[Vinjamuri:] Thank you.
[Church:] To a very different topic now on Sunday night. The Golden Globes reminded the world of the power of women. The show honored the best in TV and film, but it seemed like the trophies took a back seat to politics this year. Host Seth Meyers set the tone in his opening monologue mentioning the sexual harassment scandals that have plagued Hollywood recently.
[Seth Meyers, Host, Golden Globes:] They tried to get a woman to host this show. They really did. They say hey, how would you like to come and be judged by some of the most powerful people in Hollywood. And women were, well, where is it? They said it's at a hotel, and long story short, I'm your host tonight.
[Howell:] All right. Actor Sterling K. Brown made history on Sunday night. He became the first African-American to win best actor in the TV drama for his role in "This is Us." During his speech he talked about benefitting from color-blind casting.
[Sterling Brown, Actor:] What I appreciate so much about this thing is that I'm being seen for who I am and being appreciated for who I am. And it makes it that much more difficult to dismiss me or dismiss anybody who looks like me.
[Church:] But it was Oprah Winfrey who brought the crowd to their feet. She became the first black woman to be awarded the Cecil B. Demille award for lifetime achievement. And during her heartfelt speech, she addressed the sexual harassment plaguing the industry.
[Oprah Winfrey, Winner, Cecil B. Demille Award:] Speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have. A new day is on the horizon! When nobody ever has to say me too again.
[Howell:] Those words heard around the world when she said...
[Church:] Yes, absolutely.
[Howell:] ... before the show even started celebrities were making statements. They dressed in all black. To draw attention to sexual harassment and to gender inequality, and to show support for the hash tag Me Too movement.
[Church:] Actress Michelle Williams brought the founder as her guest. They caught up with Stephanie Elam on the red carpet.
[Tarana Burke, Founder, Me Too:] It's humbling, but it's also empowering, right. This is such a bold statement for women who work in Hollywood to make in solidarity with women across the world. And you know, a person like me, I stand and I represent survivors. And so I know that so many women on this carpet are survivors. And so it just really makes me feel wonderful.
[Stephanie Elam, Correspondent, Cnn:] And Michelle...
[Michelle Williams, Actress:] It's amazing to see the women come up to her though, with like, tears in their eyes. Because Tarana is really among the first. I mean, she started the Me Too movement. Because she was among the first to say like, I see you and you're not alone anymore.
[Elam:] So you think, I'm going ask you both this. Do you think this is a true changing moment, a real turning point here in Hollywood in this post-Harvey Weinstein days?
[Williams:] I don't think it's just a change in Hollywood. I think it's a change the worldwide change...
[Burke:] Yes.
[Williams:] ... that we want to hand to all of our daughters.
[Burke:] Yes, I agree. I think that the media pays a lot of attention to Hollywood because it's Hollywood. But these are people; these are women who are survivors just like the women survivors who I represent in communities all across the country. And I do think that this is a moment that is going to be lasting. We've never seen anything like this in our lifetimes. And I think that this is not just a footnote. It's going to be the start of something major.
[Church:] For more I'm joined by Rebecca Sun. She is a senior reporter at the Hollywood Reporter. Good to have you with us. So some impressive wins at the Golden Globe, but Oprah Winfrey stole the show with an inspiring speech on sexual harassment and freedom of the press that has some suggesting she run for president in 2020. What's being said about her speech and its impact?
[Rebecca Sun, Senior Reporter, The Hollywood Reporter:] Yes, and you know, Oprah Winfrey's speech was hands-down the highlight of the night. And Oprah 2020, Oprah for president means are already trending on Twitter. I mean, I think that she really covered pretty much everything. You know, as you said, she addressed Me Too. She addressed time's up, saying that, you know, the time is up where women have to say me too, where sexual harassment and sexual misconduct are hopefully going to become things of the past. She also talked about intersectionality and talked about the significance of being the first black woman to receive this award. She remembered seeing Sydney Poitier when become the first black man to win a Golden Globe back in '63. She talked about Recy Taylor. That's really important. Recy was a young black woman who in 1944 was gang raped by six white men, and two grand juries failed to bring indictments against them, which means that they were never charged even they admitted they had done it. And she died ten days ago. Oprah Winfrey really gave Recy Taylor that platform and really moved the entire room to tears. And I would imagine a lot of people at home as well.
[Church:] Yes, incredible. And the Golden Globes were the first major awards show to go to air since the harassment and sexual misconduct allegations shook Hollywood to its core. And we saw significant projects win big, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Lady Bird, Big Little Lies, the Handmaid's tale and others, all with women at the center. What stood out and what will everyone be talking about in the hours ahead, do you think?
[Sun:] Yes. That is what was really interesting, is that you saw all of the really major awards on both the film and television side happened to be really female centric projects, you know. In an earlier era they would have been called women's pictures. But now they're being honored in a general sense. You know, Lady Bird was directed by Greta Gerwig in her directorial debut. She was snubbed for the best director win. But the fact that her film won best comedy was huge. You now, the Handmaid's Tale and Big Little Lies, again, were projects that starred and were produced by women. What was interesting to me was Three Billboards winning best drama. That race wasn't a sure thing. Some people thought it would have gone to the shape of water. some people thought the post. But it looks like they were positioning Three Billboards as a sort of female centric movie with Frances McDormand's performance, a really tough mother grieving the brutal death of her daughter as right at the helm.
[Church:] And of course, many articles written in the wake of the Golden Globes award say this was more about a cultural correction than an awards night. Was that the sense you got? And could this signal some significant shift in Hollywood and ultimately society? And of course, Seth Meyers, did he get that balance right?
[Sun:] You know, it was a really, really tricky challenge to be able to address, properly address this climate of something so serious, something that really goes beyond Hollywood with all of the traditional work of an awards show. You saw a little bit of that awkwardness coming out of Oprah Winfrey's speech right into the best director category, which Natalie Portman went off prompter, went to note was all men. That was an amazing moment, an unscripted moment that turned out to be another highlight of the awards show. I thought Seth Meyers did a good job. I thought he really disappeared after his monologue which set the tone and was, you know, he went right for it. He was very direct. He name checked and called out Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Woody Allen. These were guys who were revered at the Golden Globes in the past. And now are persona non grata.
[Church:] All right, Rebecca Sun, always great to talk with you. I Appreciate it.
[Sun:] Thanks.
[Howell:] All right. Still ahead, one of the U.S. president's top advisers comes to CNN to defend his boss from the bombshell new book.
[Church:] And it got tense. The details coming your way in just a moment.

[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor, "realclearpolitics":] Just naturally something that John Kelly would know would make the would really enrage President Trump.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] So why is he doing it? I mean so it's the suggestion
[Stoddard:] Right. I actually believe that he's doing it to push back because internally his pushback wasn't working and then that and they he has been really entangled to this and a great debate on immigration. And I think that it is a known fact that when people cannot convince President Trump behind closed doors, they take their argument to television to try to convince him that way.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Well, but who took this story that there's a rift that the president's unhappy with John Kelly to division, right? Because CNN is reporting this in the last 24 hours, on the front page of "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post." Someone wants to get this story out there, John Avlon, that there's a problem here.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes. Yes. And the chronology of it, the who benefits from it, you know, let's put that aside for this reason. If there's a rift between the president and Kelly, that's primarily for the president, because Kelly's actually been one of the best things to happen to this White House in terms of instilling a degree of discipline on a president who is doesn't like being constrained, but desperately needs some discipline and structure around him just for the country, just for the operation of the government. And does that frustrate him? Does he want to free Donald and just be able to free wheel all the time? I'm sure he does. And you'll have some outside advisers saying, let Trump be Trump. But there's also the just progress of the government that requires a degree of discipline and information the president doesn't have. And if the standard for spokesmen and advisers is that I'll be your best Baghdad bob, I'll tell you the sky is purple. If you tell me the sky is purple, and then I'll communicate that to the American people, that doesn't actually serve the president well at the end of the day. Is the relationship complicated? Yes. Is it frustrating? Yes. But I think Kelly and McMaster have tried to impose a structure of decision making on the president that is constitutional, that respects the fact he won the election, but also says he needs to be presented with accurate information and then the decision he makes, we will do our best to execute.
[Camerota:] OK, A.B., let's move from entry to policy. Let's talk about the immigration plan that the White House has now, it seems, gotten behind. And it's so interesting. I mean there's lots of developments in there that people didn't see coming. Number one, yes, protection for the dreamers, a pathway to citizenship for not just 700,000, which is the number that we've all been using for the past weeks, but more than that, from people who hadn't even registered as dreamers yet. The 1.8 million people in that category. Now, in exchange, they want $25 billion for to build the wall and other border security enhancements, infrastructure technology. Eliminate the visa lottery. We know the president is determined to do that. And eliminate the, you know, chain migration so-called and, meaning, nobody beyond the nuclear family, the spouse and children get to come. So, why are some Democrats, like Dick Durbin, not happy with this outcome?
[Stoddard:] Well, it's interesting. I'm fascinating by this because this is absolutely a true compromise. If both sides are furious, you have absolutely split this in half.
[Avlon:] That's right.
[Stoddard:] The Democrats do not like the concessions that were given to immigration hawks, these changes to family reunification, constraining that, ending the visa lottery system. They don't like that much money on a wall. And in exchange for a fix to the dreamers that they hoped Republican colleagues would join them in sort of, you know, getting rid of and resolving as soon as possible. It's very interesting on the Republican side. Senator Cotton, Senator Perdue, those hawks that were pushing the president, along with his aide, Steven Miller, to the right to this issue are are approving of this compromise and saying it's the right path forward, while groups on the outside, your Breitbart crowd and your pro border security immigration groups
[Avlon:] Right.
[Stoddard:] Are absolutely livid. Ann Coulter is on fire over this. And this is going to get a lot of pushback from that wing.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Stoddard:] Look, if Senator Dick Durbin, the Democratic whip, says that this is not credible and it can't move forward, we're not at a compromise. But the definition of compromise would be something that makes both parties mad.
[Avlon:] The broad outlines are impressive. It is definitely Tom Cotton supporting it is fascinating and obviously reflects his own interests to remain in Trump's good graces. But this is how a large deal is supposed to be done. I'll say, they've come this far. One of the open questions then is comprehensive immigration reform. What happens to the 11 million in this country? And that's larger can he pull a Nixon in China. This is signature.
[Berman:] And it will be interesting to see if any of the Democratic senators, those moderates come forward and support this soon. They have not as of yet. All right, John, A.B., thanks so much. A reminder, we will carry the president's address at the World Economic Forum live. That's at 8:00 Eastern Time. And, remember, it's in the midst of the breaking news overnight about the fact the president wanted to fire Robert Mueller.
[Camerota:] And another quick programing note. Be sure to watch "Cuomo" primetime, tonight at 9:00 p.m. Eastern.
[Berman:] All right, the mother of one of the teenagers killed in a shooting at a Kentucky high school speaking out about her own daughter's final moments. Her heartbreaking words, next.

[Cooper:] A conservative activist named James O'Keefe has released another selectively edited tape today this time targeting CNN Political Commentator Van Jones. Van is going to weight in on it for the first time in a moment. But first, here's what O'Keefe chose to publish from the secretly recorded conversation.
[Unidentified Male:] Hey, man. We met in Palm Springs a few years back.
[Van Jones, Cnn Political Commentator:] Hey good to see you man, you good?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes. How you been?
[Jones:] I'm good.
[Unidentified Male:] What are you doing? What do you think is going to happen this week with the whole Russia thing?
[Jones:] The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger.
[Unidentified Male:] Really? You don't think that's
[Cooper:] And Van Jones joins us now. So just explain what happened here. Who were you talking to? Where were you? What was the context?
[Jones:] OK. I was standing outside the bureau in Los Angeles, you know, and I'll talk to anybody. I don't care you're a janitor, homeless person, police officer, pop star, I talk anybody. A guy comes up and he starts engage me in conversation. I'll talk to anybody and he starts asking these questions around what's going on in American politics. As you know, I have been beating the drum about progressives going so far over board on Russia. The news agency should be going in on Russia. Because any time you have the president of the United States under investigation by the FBI that is a news story. But Progressives have to be very careful that we don't put all our eggs in that basket because the chances of this cowardly Republican Party actually impeaching and then removing a president, something that has never happened, I think it's very, very slight. And so, I was about to go into that and says there's nothing you can do, and then a bunch of my guys from CNN came out we started talking. So he took that little bit thing and made it seem like I was out here saying that there's nothing wrong that Donald Trump has been doing. This guy is a hoaxster, he's a fraudster, he's been convicted, he's
[Cooper:] So when on the tape you say that the Russia investigation was a big nothing burger what did you mean?
[Jones:] I meant for Progressives to keep jumping up and down about this doesn't make a lot of sense because you've got a bunch of us acting as if this guy is going to be impeached tomorrow. That Trump is going to be impeached and he's going to be gone. Listen, from a political point of view, if you're looking honestly, you do not have the ability to both impeach and remove this guy. And from political point of view, it's a nothing burger. You've got to be focused on real stuff, like jobs, health care, addiction, and stay focus on the substantive issues
[Cooper:] Which you say we're not talking enough about.
[Jones:] No. You're not you're talking about stuff that is not going to register for ordinary people, it's not for ordinary people. Real people are going to be worried about jobs, health care, addiction, that kind of stuff. We've got to stay focused on that. And that's whereas about to go, but I don't know this guy and then my guys come up from CNN whom I love at the bureau and we start talking. So he took that little clip and he puts it out there. But here's the reality. You would have the worst thing isn't that the guy did the little hoaxster thing. This guy is a hoaxster, he's a fraudster. The worst thing is that the Trump White House then elevated it. So you've got the Trump White House elevating a guy who is a known fraudster.
[Cooper:] But Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, you know, she didn't know if it was true or not but urged everyone to look at it.
[Jones:] That's not good. Let me today. You always have fraud out there putting out selectively edit, look, if you're still falling for selectively edited videotape in 2017, you haven't been paying attention. But for the White House to fall for it and promote it, that's what really is terrible.
[Cooper:] You said that too many Democrats see the Russian controversies is a kind of a magical get out of jail free card, meaning that they think the president is somehow going to be impeached.
[Jones:] Listen, we have a bunch of problems in our party. And rather than dealing with those problems in a serious way, rather than getting back to talking about jobs, backs to talking about the real pain at the bottom here in our country, you've got a lot of people just going in loops and cycles. I'm not talking about news people. We got to cover this news. I'm talking about Progressive activists who talk about Russia all day and don't talk about jobs any day. That has got to stop. And if you think that just talking about Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia is going to be a way to get this guy impeached or remove or win an election. I think you are wrong and I think we need to get back to substantive stuff for ordinary people, not only the stuff that the news media are excited about.
[Cooper:] Van, thank you very much. You can read Van's full editorial in the tape and the nothing burger comment at cnn.com.
[Jones:] Much ado about nothing burger.
[Cooper:] All right. Thanks Van. Just ahead, a story breaking tonight in "The Wall Street Journal" with new reporting on hacked Clinton emails Republican operative and Michael Flynn, the correspondent who got the story joins us next.

[Harlow:] Happening today, CNN has learned the Justice Department is expected to issue a legal opinion that will defend President Trump's appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general. This as some congressional Democrats continue call for Whitaker to recuse himself from Robert Mueller's Russia probe due to his past critical comments about the probe. Let's talk to a congressional Democrat about that. Denny Heck of Washington joins me. He sits on the House Intelligence Committee. Good morning, sir. It's nice to have you. And let me begin with whether you join some of your fellow Democrats in Congress who say Whitaker must recuse himself from the Mueller probe. Do you believe that he can adequately oversee it?
[Rep. Denny Heck , Washington:] I think Matthew Whitaker's appointment was unconstitutional, illegal, and just plain wrong. It's unconstitutional because he's not been subjected to the confirmation process. It's illegal because he violated the AG succession statute, and it's just plain wrong because we are learning now things about his background that should have absolutely been exposed during the vetting process. Absolutely. He should recuse himself. Because he's frankly not qualified to be the attorney general.
[Harlow:] So, Congressman, let's pick that bit by bit here on the law, on the constitutionality of it, two points that I would make. The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 lays out that the president can appoint someone to a position like this if they've served in that department for at least 90 days, which he has. And then when you look at precedent here, you have a Supreme Court case dating all the way back to 1898. And that's U.S. v. Eaten, right, where the Supreme Court decided that a temporary appointment to a principal office was constitutional. Where do you see a violation of the law here?
[Heck:] So let's look at precedent, Poppy. Matthew Whitaker is the first person to head a federal agency, I believe, in our nation's history, who had not been subjected to the vetting process and confirmed by the Senate for another position. There is an underlying statute I think that works also with respect to the succession for the AG's office. But here's the message, Poppy. The president can't have it both ways. When Director Mueller was appointed special counsel, he specifically mentioned the appointment clause in the Constitution saying anybody with that kind of authority had to be confirmed by the Senate. He can't have it both ways.
[Harlow:] Yes. Which is not factual, and he may be being hypocritical, but that aside, the question comes down to what the law is. And I wonder if you are willing to risk a government shutdown to fight Whitaker's appointment. You say it's unconstitutional. That's pretty serious.
[Heck:] I didn't know that we were at an either-or and
[Harlow:] Well, let me ask it this way. Because we heard Senator Chuck Schumer say over the weekend that there is enough support to add that to must-have legislation, which would be, for example, you know, funding the government. Do you think Democrats should do that? Is it are you supportive of going that far if necessary to shut down the government if you don't have legislation to protect Mueller attached?
[Heck:] So you're presuming that if the legislation is attached to it, the president won't sign it. I believe there's a majority support in the House and the Senate to support Bob Mueller completing his investigation.
[Harlow:] So you're you're saying it's not an either-or, but should Democrats be willing to go that far if it comes to that? Willing to come to not funding the government?
[Heck:] So, again, that's not a question that's before us at all. The question that's before us is whether or not Matthew Whitaker should be in that position or recuse himself. And whether Bob Mueller should be allowed to complete his work. And I think our efforts in the short term ought to be on doing what we can to assure him that he can go ahead and complete his work.
[Harlow:] Let me ask you about the potential for Articles of Impeachment against the president come January when Democrats take control of the House. This struck me, what the likely incoming chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative Jerry Nadler of New York, what he said about that. Listen.
[Rep. Jerry Nadler , Ranking Member, Judiciary Committee:] You don't want the country torn apart in a sense that half the country says for the next 30 years we won the election, you stole it. So one question before you do an impeachment is, do you think that the evidence of such terrible deeds is so strong that a large portion of the opposition vote base, of the president's vote base, will be convinced by the end of the process?
[Harlow:] Is that an important warning for Democrats? Do you agree with him?
[Heck:] I think Jerry's sentiment reflects that of a significant number of House Democrats. What he didn't say there, I'm sure he's said on other occasions is, we all eagerly await the conclusion of Director Mueller's work at the special counsel's office. That will be an important and significant predicate for any deliberation or direction that we take, while we're simultaneously going down the path of upholding our Article I constitutional responsibility to provide a check and balance to the president.
[Harlow:] Given your position on the House Intel Committee, and the potential use of subpoena power here. You have said that it will be used sparingly and carefully. Is there a risk for members of your party to overreach here in a way that alienates America?
[Heck:] If we proceed as each of the chairs of the relevant committees of jurisdiction have indicated, which is to say that we use subpoena power sparingly and carefully, then I think there is no risk whatsoever. I think that Chairman Nadler, Chairman Schiff, and chairman Cummings have all said essentially the same thing. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We've got a lot of things to get done on behalf of the American people at the end of the day.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Heck:] We need lower prescription drug prices, we need to protect people with pre-existing conditions. We need to create good jobs and infrastructure to set a long-term platform for economic growth. We need to do those things. We also need to be holding the administration accountable where appropriate. We can do both those things.
[Harlow:] And finally, leadership for the party. Nancy Pelosi, you have spoken glowingly of her. You've said, you know, she takes her work exceedingly seriously. You've been a supporter of hers. Do you support Nancy Pelosi's bid for leadership?
[Heck:] I do. And furthermore, I'm not sure why it's even a question. I think it's a moot point. There's nobody running against her. Nancy Pelosi has a significant majority of the members of the House Democratic caucus, period.
[Harlow:] You think she has the votes. There is no question in your mind.
[Heck:] She has a significant majority of the members of the House Democratic caucus. Of that, there is no question whatsoever.
[Harlow:] Congressman Denny Heck, we'll see how this all unfolds and if she does has those running against her. We appreciate you being here. Thank you.
[Heck:] You're welcome, Poppy.
[Harlow:] All right. So the Camp Fire, this is the deadly fire in northern California, is now the deadliest and the most destructive in the state's history. We're going to have a live report from one of the hardest hit areas next.

[Gorani:] It's been just over a month since journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed inside the Saudi consulate in Turkey. No trace of him has been found since by the way. Now in an exclusive interview with Nic Robertson, his sons are speaking out for the first time since losing their father.
[Salah Khashoggi, Son Of Jamal Khashoggi:] All what we want right now is to bury him. In Medina with the rest of his family.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] In Saudi Arabia?
[Salah Khashoggi: Robertson:] In Saudi Arabia, yes. I talked to that I talked about that with the Saudi authorities. And I just hope that it happens soon.
[Robertson:] But somebody needs to find his body.
[Salah Khashoggi:] Yes. I believe that this search is ongoing and I'm really hopeful about that.
[Robertson:] But what do you place your hope in?
[Salah Khashoggi:] It's in Islamic tradition. It is not only Islamic. It's basic humanitarian issue. We just need to make sure that he rests in peace. And until now, I still can't believe that he's dead. It's I know. I mean, it's not sinking in with me emotionally. He has deceased. For sure. But the emotional burden that is coming with the puzzle is really is really big.
[Robertson:] When you went into your father's apartment here in the United States, you discovered something that made you realize just how important you his grandchildren, were to him. Can you tell us about that?
[Abdullah Khashoggi, Son Of Jamal Khashoggi:] I think going to apartment, that was maybe the most emotional moment I had, like in this past days. This picture especially. It was next to his bed stand. Next to his bed. And his grandchildren. That's the last thing he looked at before he goes to bed. It's that shocked me. Not shocked but says it showed a side not a new but it put an emphasis on his tender side of loving his family, his grandkids.
[Robertson:] What are you proudest of?
[Abdullah Khashoggi:] He always said the truth. Like, basic human just a good person. As simple as that. He was very brave. He was always out there. For me, it was like rock n'roll star and as a journalist. Like
[Robertson:] Because he was sort of pushing the system a bit.
[Abdullah Khashoggi:] Yes. And he's always pushing. He was always Yes. He was brave.
[Robertson:] There have been people who have been trying to sort of create a different impression about him, a different legacy, allegations that he was sort of supported the Muslim Brotherhood.
[Abdullah Khashoggi:] I used to tease him. Like the last time in Turkey I used to tease him like, oh, I heard this on Twitter. Like they're saying you're Muslim Brotherhood. Where is your beard? He laughs. I'm not Muslim brotherhood because of this, this, this.
[Robertson:] Meant so much to you.
[Abdullah Khashoggi:] Yes. And it just labels or just people not doing their homework properly and reading the article, going in depth. So, it's just easier for them just to stick a label on him. Like you're something. You're that. You're that.
[Robertson:] Can you tell us about that meeting with crown prince and the king?
[Salah Khashoggi:] Yes. In that meeting, with the king and the crown prince, when I went there with my uncle Sal, the king has stressed that everybody involved will be brought to justice. And I have faith in that. This will happen.
[Robertson:] You're placing your faith in the king?
[Salah Khashoggi:] Yes.
[Robertson:] In your heart of hearts, what do you think happened?
[Salah Khashoggi:] Something bad happened. Something might be but I really hope that whatever happened it was just it was it wasn't painful for him or something like that. It was quick or he had a peaceful death. That's what I wish for.
[Robertson:] How do you think your father would want to be remembered?
[Salah Khashoggi:] As a moderate man who is who has come with everyone. Genuine. Honest. A man who loved his country. Who believed so much in it and its potential. Jamal was never a dissident. He really believed in the monarchy. It is the thing that's keeping the country together and he believed in the transformation that is that it is going through. And that's how that's how he should be remembered.
[Gorani:] Jamal Khashoggi's sons speaking to Nic Robertson in the U.S. there. The first time they've spoken out on television or in an interview since their father was killed. All the while in neighboring Yemen, the Saudi-led coalition said it made significant progress in the battle to capture a key port city but the U.N. is worried more fighting disrupts vital humanitarian aid. Millions of people starving. Many of them children. Caught in the cross fire. Nima Elbagir has more and I must warn you the images you are about to see are very disturbing.
[Nima Elbagir, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Yussef arrived at the hospital yesterday. The family couldn't afford hospital. They had to wait until they could scrape together enough money for the journey. They turn him over to examine his back but it's too painful. His nutrition is so advanced that every breath is a wheeze of agony. At 13 years of age, he weighs as much as a 4-year-old. Here at this hospital, they've been inundated with starving children. Mohammed is 5 months old and severely malnourished. Starving mothers giving birth to starving babies and the cycle continues.
[Lise Grande, Un Resident And Humanitarian Coordinator For Yemen:] Every single day more than 100 children are dying because of causes related to the conflict and to the crisis. There are 7 million people in Yemen who are malnourished. 3 million of who are acutely mall nourished. It is a devastating, heart breaking human, very human tragedy.
[Elbagir:] For three years Yemen has been in the grip of a civil war pitting the U.S.-backed Saudi-led coalition against Iran-backed Houthi rebels. Here in Yemen, even as criticism swirled over allegations of official Saudi involvement in the murder of journalist Khashoggi, the world ignored the Saudi crown prince's other undertaking. Restoring the government of President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi at whatever cost. Now, it may almost be too late.
[Grande:] You've asked us the important question about whether or not we can scale up to meet the increased needs across the country. We estimate 14 million people could be at the brink of famine. We know that if we receive funding and now that we will be able to reach these people. It will, however, require that all of the parties to the conflict do everything they can to facilitate and support our work.
[Elbagir:] Dahlia is just over a year old. She has the telltale swollen stomach of malnutrition. Her shallow breaths almost as an agony for her mother as they are for her. Her mother says she needed an operation to insert a feeding tube. Their last hope. Now, they wait. Yussef's mother rubs his hands. She's already lost two children. And she doesn't know whether Yosef will survive. Whether he'll ever be the same again. Like so many mothers here, she can only hope. And pray. Nima Elbagir, CNN, London.
[Hala Gorani, Cnn International:] A hundred children, according to the U.N., die a day and this as so many other conflicts happening on our watch. We'll be right back. Stay with CNN.

[Tapper:] And we're back with Ohio Governor John Kasich. Governor, Vice President Pence said on Friday that disabled people in your state of Ohio were struggling because of Obamacare. Take a listen.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] I know Governor Kasich isn't with us, but I suspect he is very troubled to know that in Ohio alone, nearly 60,000 disabled citizens are stuck on waiting lists, leaving them without the care they need for months or even years.
[Tapper:] What's your response to that, Governor?
[Kasich:] Well, we know he's wrong about that. Everybody has said it and the fact is there is no connection between our developmental disabilities. By the way, we have put historic amounts into that. There is no connection between that and Medicaid. And, frankly, these waiting lists are things that people we had a three-month-old baby, the parents of a three-month-old baby, put him a waiting list that will come, who knows, 10, 15 years down the road. There is just no connection. I think they've tried to back off. But this is not the time for me to be in a back and forth with Mike Pence. I think it's all been clarified, and look, we just move on. I don't I don't like to get in those kind of squabbles, but that information was false.
[Tapper:] Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was asked this afternoon about Republicans keeping their frequent promise to repeal Obamacare. Take a listen to this exchange.
[Reporter:] How would explain this to voters next year who
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] Well, we have a new Supreme Court justice. We have 14 repeals of regulations and we're only six months into it. The last time I looked, the Congress goes on for two years.
[Tapper:] So, there is Mitch McConnell being asked, what are you going to say to voters failing to deliver this? He talked about Gorsuch and regulations being defeated. But the big question is, why did Republicans not have a plan? They've been making this promise for years.
[Kasich:] Well, Jake, I think when you get in the middle look, all these folks that run for office, many of them, and I said this during the presidential campaign. I said, did you ever notice how many people make promises and then when they get elected they don't deliver on them? It's because once you get there and you understand the gravity of the situation, it's difficult. And again, I don't want to have somebody saying, oh, well, the Republicans failed, no? I think what they're doing now is saying that we don't have the best solution. And when we looked at everything here, we didn't have anything that really made sense. But I think it's very clear, two points. One is the insurance markets need to be stabilized. And there are efforts that can be made to do that. It should be done on a bipartisan basis. I think there are senators willing to do it. Number two, on the issue of entitlements. We can't continue to have entitlements grow and eat up greater and greater portions of the budget, and Jake, here's the thing. I think our debt is about 80 percent of our gross domestic product, GDP. When it gets up higher and higher, it means we have slower economic growth. But in order to reform, you have to reform entitlements, you don't have to go and cut them. You need to get them on a glide path, just like we did when we balanced the budget in the late '90s. So, this whole business look, if Republicans go home and they say, we did our darn best, but here's the thing. We don't want to cut people off who really need health care, we will fix this, we will slow the growth of health care, I think it's a winner. I don't think they need to go around apologizing for it, just say what they found. It's OK. Life is short.
[Tapper:] Governor John Kasich of Ohio, thanks so much for your time, sir. As always, good to see you.
[Kasich:] Jake, always good. Thank you.
[Tapper:] New details about Donald Trump's meeting with that Russian lawyer. We now know who the eighth person in the room is. Stick around.

[Cabrera:] We're following breaking news. The Navy has identified three sailors who have been missing since their plane crashed off the coast of Japan Wednesday. Here are their faces. It comes after they notified families that search-and-rescue efforts ended. CNN's Polo Sandoval joins us now. Polo, tell us about these three young men.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] This is the personal side of these heroes. The Navy had been holding off releasing information until they could notify families. Today, this information released by the government. I want to tell you a little about these men, now identified by the U.S. Navy as Lieutenant Steven Combs, a man from Florida, assigned to provider's fleet of logistical support squadron 30. Airman Matthew Chialastri from Louisiana was assigned to "USS Ronald Reagan," as was Airman Apprentice Bryan Grosso from Florida. They did not survive the crash earlier this week. They were among 11 crew and passengers on a Navy transport plane that crashed as it approached an air carrier Wednesday in the western Pacific. At least eight of those individuals were rescued by officials, both from Japan and the U.S. They covered about 1,000 nautical miles in a desperate search for any sign of the three men. Sadly, presumed dead by the Navy and now family members are aware, their sons will not come home. This investigation is on-going now, Ana. We understand Japanese defense minister said they believe engine trouble may be to blame, but the investigation is still on-going.
[Cabrera:] And yet, this is a tough year for the Navy, the Seventh fleet specifically, lost 17 servicemembers in a number of different incidents. What's going on?
[Sandoval:] Seventeen men and women there. Important to point out this has happened over time. When you look at the list, Ana, it is tragic to see lives are lost after these incidents. In August, the deadly collision with the "USS McCain" and a merchant ship. That left at least 10 sailors dead. Back in June, a missile destroy are, "USS Fitzgerald" collided with a cargo ship, seven dead there. Two fatal incidents out of the list were later determined to be, quote, "avoidable," and also the result of, quote, "numerous failings occurred on the part of leadership," according to a Navy report. So clearly some serious issues there. Some top Navy officers lost jobs over this. Important to point out with the loss of the three men, it seems this was an accident. They're still investigating. As we mentioned, they believe engine trouble may be to blame. So a different situation. Nonetheless, tragic for the three men not coming home.
[Cabrera:] Polo Sandoval, thank you.
[Sandoval:] Thanks, Ana.
[Cabrera:] Infighting in the Trump administration is threatening to overshadow a major global summit. State Department officials tell CNN the U.S. is not sending a high-level delegation to next week's Global Entrepreneurship Summit in India. The main reason, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson doesn't want to support Ivanka Trump, who is leading the U.S. delegation at this event. CNN senior diplomatic correspondent, Michelle Kosinski, broke this story and joins us with more details Michelle?
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn Senior Diplomatic Correspondent:] What we're talking about here is the Global Entrepreneurship Summit. It is a big event, put on by the State Department. This year, first daughter and senior White House adviser, Ivanka Trump, is headlining it. She leaves this weekend. She was invited by the Indian prime minister. And the theme is women's entrepreneurship. What we are hearing from several sources, including senior ones in the State Department, as well as the White House, Rex Tillerson and his inner circle don't want to send senior people because they don't love the idea of Ivanka Trump leading the U.S. delegation here. From a senior State Department official, "They," meaning Tillerson and staff, "won't send someone senior because they don't want to bolster Ivanka." Another rift at a time Rex Tillerson doesn't need more problems with the president. From a source close to the White House, "Rex doesn't like that he is supposed to be the top diplomat and Jared and Ivanka stepped all over him. So now he is not sending someone from the State Department and not supporting Ivanka Trump." When you look at this event in past years, President Obama attended once, Secretary of State Kerry last year, an undersecretary and an assistant secretary of state. But originally, the acting assistant secretary for the region was slated to be on the trip. She was then pulled by Tillerson and staff. When I asked a spokesperson, who are the senior people going on the trip, the list hasn't been officially published, they did give me a short list of the top U.S. government officials, but none of them were from the State Department. There was an ambassador, but that person is already in India. You could say, all right, this event was an Obama-era creation, the current State Department is trying to slash its budget left and right, and there's no permanent assistant secretary. But the answers back from sources, if you send a smaller delegation, fine. Wouldn't you send senior people and cut back in other ways? We did get an on-the-record statement from the State Department and it says, "The department is committed to supporting women's economic empowerment and entrepreneurship. This summit is a prime opportunity to showcase the importance of these themes. The summit is really about the more than 1500 entrepreneurs, investors and supporters." But they're obviously not commenting on this perceived Tillerson's Ivanka snub, and not denying this either. Michelle Kosinski, CNN, Washington.
[Cabrera:] Michelle, thanks. "Thanks, but no thanks," that's the word from President Trump after saying he passed on an offer to be "Time" magazine Person of the Year. But the publication says that's not true. We'll explain.

[Lemon:] All eyes are on Alabama tonight with voters are set to go to the polls in a matter of hours in an election like none we have seen before. The Republican candidate Roy Moore an accused child molester. Earlier I had talked to the always outspoken Charles Barkley who is campaigning for Moore's opponent, Democrat Doug Jones. How you doing, Charles?
[Charles Barkley, Former Nba Player:] Nervous. Nervous. I got to say I can't believe we're in this situation where the people of Alabama are going to turn a blind eye to all the accusations, all the rhetoric, all the racist BST. Steve Bannon's down here again today who's a white nationalist who is a white separatist. He is campaigning for the third time for Roy Moore. And I can't believe the people of Alabama will let them get away with that, Don.
[Lemon:] I want our viewers to hear some of what you're saying because you have been campaigning there I know at least all weekend. You were on stage today. Let's listen to some of it and then we'll talk.
[Barkley:] At some point we've got to stop look like idiots to the nation.
[Lemon:] It wasn't an easy decision, I would imagine for you or maybe it was to go down there and take away for from your personal life, your business, your family and start campaigning for Doug Jones.
[Barkley:] Well, I wanted to look my family and my friends in the eye and tell them they got to get out and vote. I think sometimes a lot of people are disillusioned with the American dream. They just become nonchalant. But this is about the big picture for Alabama. Listen, Alabama's a wonderful place. We've got some great people here. But these people have been held down for so long. They hide under the umbrella of religion. When I got here, I'm looking at Roy Moore ads. And they're the same ads that I saw 30 years ago against gay marriage, against abortion, against any form of illegal immigration. And talking about if you believe in God, the Washington insiders don't like you. It's the same religious facts that they've been using to win elections. And I wish sometimes people would look past quote-unquote their religious believes and just try to do the right thing. You can't just win elections talking about I'm against gay marriage, I'm against the abortion, I'm against illegal immigrants. That is not a way to win an election. This is 2017. We're already behind the times here in Alabama. And it's just sad more than anything. We need to get everybody out and vote for Doug Jones. It's a really big deal.
[Lemon:] Do you think people, though, the people who need to hear you, Charles. Do you think they're hearing you? Or do you think they're tuned 2into conservative radio or media that is going to say to them what they want to confirm or reconfirm their own believes about Roy Moore? As I listen to the sound bites, I'm a son of the south, I can't believe the way some people are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to figure out a way they can vote for Roy Moore. Why do you think people are so willing to dismiss credible allegations and crazy things that he has said on the record?
[Barkley:] Well, because in the south one of the reason the south is always behind the times they use like I say, I look at his commercials. All he talked about is I'm a Christian, and Washington they don't want my Christian values in Washington. He is against abortion. He is calling Mr. Jones because he is pro-choice, he is calling him a baby killer. And he just shows all these pictures talking about Trump says the same thing. Listen, I think these Hispanic people are amazing. I think they do work the whites and blacks don't want to do. And to act like illegal immigration is the biggest problem in our state is disingenuous. But there's a faction of people in the south who got all the money and all the control. They just want to keep us dumbed down and keep all the money and the power. That is always been the case in the south, and it's really unfortunate.
[Lemon:] Let's discuss all of this now CNN political commentator Bakari Sellers, Alice Stewart and Mike Shields. Tonight he is down there and he is stomping for Doug Jones. Roy Moore, both of them held their final rallies. Alice, I want to play some this is very powerful sound from a local peanut farmer. And he talks about losing his gay daughter to suicide at the age of 23. Watch this.
[Unidentified Male:] I was anti-gay myself. I said bad things to my daughter myself which I regret. But I can't take back what happened to my daughter. But stuff like saying my daughter's a pervert, I'm sure that bothered her. Judge Moore, he didn't call my daughter by name. He said all gay people are perverts, abominations. That is not true. We don't need a person like that representing us in Washington.
[Lemon:] Brave man. He is out there for her daughter. What's your response?
[Alice Stewart, Cnn Political Commentator:] I lived in Dothan for a few years, I met a lot of peanut farmers just like him. I can feel his pain and I understand his frustration. The reality is a lot of people in Alabama their core issue that their making their decision on is the life issue. And Roy Moore supports life. And that is going to be a big factor in this race. But at the end of the day I think Charles Barkley was very compelling in his closing argument for Doug Jones. I think he should have been out there a long time ago. We also heard tonight from Steve Bannon once again out there campaigning for Roy Moore. Basically counteracting what Ivanka Trump says. He says there's a special place in hell for people who prey on children. But tonight Steve Bannon says there's a special place in hell for Republicans who just don't get it with regard to Roy Moore. I think that is very troubling. I think in my view the accusations against Roy Moore is very troubling. I believe these women, I believe what they said. His denials do not stand up to their allegations. And I think in my view as a Republican, long-term for this Party, it would be much better off if we had a write in candidate. And I think it's better for us to look at the long-term gain than the short term issue.
[Lemon:] That is going to be the issue when come 2018 and 2020. Bakari, I don't know if you want to respond to Charles, but to Alice's point, Steve Bannon is out there, that sheriff with the cowboy hat joined him at a rally this evening. Is this what, the Republican Party, do they want the mainstream GOP, is that what they want?
[Bakari Sellers, Former House Of Representatives:] I don't know. Sheriff Clark is my favorite white supremacists, but I digress. Listen, I like the fact that what Doug Jones had tonight with Charles Barkley and with the peanut farmer that we heard, it contrasted with Roy Moore had with Steve Bannon and Sherriff Clark. The reason being is because it was so genuine. You could hear Charles' voice, you could hear the pain in the peanut farmer's choice. They are Alabama. And they're not Cory Booker, not Steve Bannon, not anyone coming in from the outside to tell us how to vote. But what they are saying we're from Alabama and we need to reflect the values that we hold true. I don't know if that is going to win the day, because there are issues that Alice pointed out, which I heard and I was there every single day with Doug Jones. And every time I was trying to talk to a voter whether they were going to come out to vote for Doug Jones or Roy Moore, there was always the issue for abortion. My response is the irony in this situation is that Roy Moore may care about a child in the womb, but then he preys on them when they become teenagers. What about that hypocrisy? When are people going to vote for just good people? My last point, the closing argument Doug Jones has been making for the past week that this peanut farmer echoed, that Charles Barkley has echoed, it's been about him. It hasn't necessarily been about Roy Moore but the good things and good virtues that Alabama represents.
[Lemon:] Michael I want to get you in. Moore supporters that Moore is receiving a hi-tech lynching, that was Clarence Thomas' phrase back in the day for those who might not remember. What do you think of him invoking the image of lynching and applying it to Roy Moore?
[Mike Shields, Former Rnc Chief Of Staff:] Look I mean, first of all, Charles Barkley, I love him as a basketball player. But Roy Moore would actually want to take your interview with Charles Barkley and send it out to the voters of Alabama. He doesn't want to talk about the allegations against him. He is going to win if he wins, because of the things Charles was talking about like the life issue. So what I look at when I see Alabama is the Democratic Party after losing the 2016 election said you know what, we've got to talk to those voters. We're not able to talk to working class voters across the country. And if they can't win in Alabama when allegations have been raised against Roy Moore, whatever project they have to reach voters is failing. What Charles Barkley said right back there is not the way the Democratic Party starts to make inroads with the voters that are causing him to lose elections across the country. They are still heading to a completely wrong direction. And what does it say about the Alabama party that the wrong issues on guns and abortion and parts of the country that had them keep losing. So that is what I see in Alabama.
[Lemon:] We're going to come back. We'll go to break. And I also want to ask the question, do all working class voters hold those extreme views? I don't think so. We will be right back.

[Paul:] Well, President Trump, well a little unfortunate here misspelled the first lady's name in a tweet welcoming her home for the hospital. In a now deleted tweet, he wrote, Melanie is feeling and really well. Twitterverse having heyday with that, though he fixed it within a few minutes, but the first lady is back at the White House after ongoing that procedure for what the White House describes as a benign kidney condition. Her spokeswoman says Melania is resting comfortably. She remains in high spirits. CNN contributor Kate Andersen Brower with us now. So, Kate, the thing is the length of her stay raised a lot of questions. Do we know anything more or do you believe we will get anymore clarity about what was going on with the first lady? This came just about a week I think before she unveiled her Be Best platform. Any idea where that is going to go and when she might be in full force with that project?
[Brower:] I don't know. I reached out to her spokesperson to try to find out. And I'm not heard back yet this morning. It's early yet. But I would be surprised if she did anything this week. But again, I don't know. It's interesting that this comes on the heels of one of her most public weeks when she gave her Rose Garden announcement. It was about 11 minutes long. It's the longest we've really heard her speak as first lady. And so, obviously, this medical issue coming on the heels of that is a surprise. They are just very private, very close knit staff. I would be surprised if we hear much more from them on this.
[Paul:] I wanted to ask you, I know she received all kinds of well wishes and people were very concerned about her. What is it about this first lady you think that does resonate with people?
[Brower:] Well, her approval ratings are well beyond her husband's. I think the last poll was something like 57 percent approval. I think people feel that she is warm. She is engaging and kind of staying above the fray. I mean, we saw after this Texas shooting she tweeted out her thoughts and prayers for the families there. She is very careful and measured on Twitter in a way that her husband is not. So, I think people see the juxtaposition of this married couple who have two completely different approaches. She is taking a really traditional approach of job of first lady. I think people appreciate that about her. I think most people want to give the first lady a pass in some ways because she's not political and she's not overtly political.
[Paul:] A very good point. Kate Andersen Brewer, so good to have you here. Thank you.
[Brower:] Thanks.
[Paul:] Sure.
[Blackwell:] We are watching very closely breaking news in Hawaii this morning. Look at your screen. The details of this erupting volcano, lava bombs being hurled into the sky. We'll have more of what you are seeing right here in Pahoa, Hawaii, in just a moment.

[Vause:] After weeks of tensions on the Korean peninsula, the U.S. and South Korea have a simple message for Pyongyang, here's the solution when it comes to military exercises. Planned U.S. and South Korea drills are into their second day. That's despite North Korea warning they could lead to a, quote, "uncontrollable face of a nuclear war," if they went ahead. Paula Hancocks is in Seoul. She joins us live. So, Paula, the big question is not so much what the North Koreans are saying but what they're actually planning to do.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, John. If they're planning something at this point, whether there's going to be another missile launch, whether there's going to be another nuclear test. Certainly, this time last year, September 9th, we had the most recent nuclear test, which was just a few weeks after the military drills, the Operation Freedom Guardian. No way of knowing whether or not they were actually connected or whether it was just time for North Korea to carry out another test. So we're hearing more rhetoric today. We're hearing a number of, or reading a number of articles in the state-run news media saying they were going to give ruthless retaliation and punishment for these military drills which are ongoing. But we've also heard from the top U.S. military command in the region in the last hour or so. They gave a press conference. And General Vincent Brooks, the head of the U.S. forces in Korea, said that, in our view, we have to exercise until we have reason not to. And that reason has not yet emerged. Also, we heard from Secretary of Defense James Mattis, saying that the North Korea know these drills are defensive, no matter what they say for public consumption. They've had these drills for decades and they know they're very transparent about them to make sure there's no room for miscalculation John?
[Vause:] Paula, thank you. Paula Hancocks, in Seoul, with the latest. We'll take a short break. When we come back, as the United States continues to grapple with a fierce and emotional debate over statues of Confederate monuments, we'll look at the lessons from Eastern Europe. Also ahead, millions of star gazers tracking the moon on Monday as it blocked out the sun. We'll look at the total solar eclipse in just a moment.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Families finally coming together after decades apart. Some lucky people on the Korean Peninsula get to reunite with their loved ones. Thousands of people still trapped and rescue teams scrambling as Kerala, India, struggles with its most devastating flooding in decades. And this lavish exhibit might have Banksy written all over it but the mysterious artist is sharing his outrage instead. These stories are all ahead here. Thank you, everyone, for joining us. I'm Natalie Allen, coming to you live from Atlanta and this is CNN NEWSROOM.
[Allen:] Our top story: for a few lucky South Koreans, the day they had hoped for but feared would never come is finally here; 89 South Koreans are now in North Korea for reunions with loved ones they have not seen in decades. Thousands of families were separated when the Korean War broke out in 1950. These reunions will be brief, just three days, but it could be the last chance for these elderly Koreans to see their relatives. Our Paula Hancocks joins us now from Seoul, South Korea. Just seeing people on buses makes you excited for what they're about to experience Paula.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Natalie, there has been a huge amount of excitement from these participants, as you say, they have now crossed into North Korea. Within a couple of hours, they should have their first session with their family members. It's very choreographed. It's very well organized. So there's only certain hours of the next three days they'll be able to sit down with family members that they have not seen in decades. We spoke to one lady who was going to see her nephew and she said it was a bittersweet experience.
[Unidentified Female:] [Speaking foreign language].
[Unidentified Male:] [Speaking foreign language].
[Hancocks:] So these family members will be reunited for just three days and then they'll come back on Wednesday, knowing they're very unlikely to see those family members again. But they are considered among the lucky ones; 89 families are going as part of this first round of the reunions; 57,000 were up for consideration. So it just shows you how it's a drop in the ocean, a tiny fraction of those who want to be reunited with family members, who are actually lucky enough for this to happen. Now I spoke to the head of the Red Cross here in South Korea. He said he is pushing for more of these reunions and he's pushing to make sure there's more than just 89 people within each reunion. He wants to find different ways of getting these families together and also to make sure that they can stay in touch afterwards. This is what he had to say.
[Unidentified Male:] Imagine, 73 years long without knowing whether their family members are still alive or passed away. No news
[Hancocks:] So certainly a very emotional time for those families involved in this round of reunions and a tragic example of just how this is a race against time, to try and bring as many families together as possible. Four of those families who were supposed to be part of this first round had to pull out in the past few days because of worsening health. The majority of people who are applying to see their family members are in their 80s and their 90s. So it is definitely a race against time Natalie.
[Allen:] All right. We look forward to hearing more about this reunion as it takes place. Paula Hancocks, thank you so much. There are signs a cease-fire could be getting under way in Afghanistan. President Ashraf Ghani announced a deal on Sunday to mark the Islamic Eid al-Adha holiday. If the Taliban agrees, the truce could last three months. It's still not clear how the militant group will react. It's not formally accepted but says it will release hundreds of prisoners for the holiday. Last week, the Taliban was sending a very different message. Its failed offensive on the city of Ghazni reportedly killed hundreds of people. Another powerful earthquake is rattling some already jittery nerves in Indonesia. See the shaking right here with this camera. A 6.9 magnitude quake struck Sunday, sending people running from buildings. That island still reeling from a devastating quake that killed more than 430 people two weeks ago. Two other tremors shook the South Pacific Sunday but fortunately there are no reports of major damage or injuries. Right here, you're seeing a child being rescued by helicopter in the Indian state of Kerala. Water levels are slowly receding in the worst floods there in nearly a century. But the threat is not over. Thousands remain trapped or stranded. The death toll has increased to 391 since the monsoon season began in May. And officials fear there could be an outbreak of disease among the more than 800,000 people staying in shelters. The recovery ahead could prove overwhelming for Kerala and its 33 million people. Our Alexandra Field is following the story from Hong Kong. Alex, yes, 33 million people and most of that state is under water. It does seem overwhelming, doesn't it?
[Alexandra Field, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, this really is a major effort now not only to do the cleanup and to assess the damage but also to rescue all those who are still stranded. That's an operation that officials are hoping they can wrap up today, reaching people who are still out there on their rooftops or even inside those flooded buildings.
[Field:] Rescuers can only reach the most desperate by boat and by air, people left stranded by raging waters by the thousands.
[Christopher Joseph, Flood Victim:] No houses left here, no houses left here. Almost all the houses are flooded. It's currently 4 feet water has come down in this particular place. And when we get inside, still you can't walk. You need a boat or something like that.
[Field:] Emergency workers among them, the Indian Air Force and the National Disaster Response Force must navigate the washed out roads to deliver supplies, a hand, any help they can give.
[Dharambir Singh, Assistant Commandant, National Disaster Response Force:] On the day we were deployed here and the situation was very horrifying. Almost 10 feet to 6 feet and you can find water everywhere. There are water
[Field:] The Indian state of Kerala is now a disaster zone. Food is airdropped to those who can't be reached, the injured and traumatized taken to hospitals. Days of deadly landslides and flash floods brought devastation worse than any they've seen before, even here.
[Unidentified Male:] The thing is, right now, the flood which we are experiencing right now is horrible. We never had such a chaos situation. Every flat, every house is filled in the water.
[Field:] Hundreds of thousands who have reached shelters are still in need.
[Unidentified Male:] The thing is, there's no toilet over here, OK? There's nothing, no sanitation, basic sanitation thing over here. There's no drinking water over here. We have no drinking water. The water issue is the primary that's also a primary concern.
[Field:] Every year, millions of tourists visit Kerala, drawn by its rivers, its natural beauty. Its natural disaster has now claimed hundreds of lives. And, Natalie, those pictures are really images of some of the worst flooding in that region in some 100 years. The damages are estimated to cost almost $3 billion. But the priority right now is on freeing up resources and getting them to the people who are in need. We're talking about essential items, like oxygen in some cases, medicine, food, fuel and, of course, water to stop the spread of disease Natalie.
[Allen:] Absolutely. Alex, thank you. Another bombshell development could soon hit Washington. Donald Trump's longtime fixer may be criminally charged within days. We'll take a look at what that might mean for the U.S. president. Also, what Twitter is doing to stop hate speech on its platform. Ahead here, a conversation with the CEO.

[John King, Inside Politics:] Welcome back. Mixed signals today from the Kremlin and the White House. Will Presidents Trump and Putin meet tomorrow or are they too far apart on anything important to make a meeting worth while? The leaders will both be in Vietnam for the Annual Asian Pacific Economic Summit. Russia says the meeting is on and that the exact time and the agenda are being negotiated. But Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says it's all TBD.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] With respect to the potential meeting between President Trump and President Putin, that's still under consideration. The view has been if the two leaders are going to meet, is there something sufficiently substantive to talk about that would warrant a formal meeting. And so I would just say there has been no conclusion made on that.
[King:] We seem to have a slight difference of opinion here.
[Abby Phillip, National Political Reporter, The Washington Post:] Well, I think it's also interesting how often this White House and this administration generally allow the Russians to set the narrative about these conversations. I remember very similar thing happening before their last face-to-face meeting in which there was a lot of information coming out of the Kremlin and not much information coming out of the White House. And what is coming out of the administration is this internal dispute about whether it is wise to do it at this moment or not. So, you know, on some level they have to kind of resolve this at some point, figure out what their strategy is. The challenges that its people like Tillerson warning against the President and, you know, you know who wins those disputes.
[King:] But there is I mean, if maybe they don't have an agreement on any transactions if you will, but North Korea, the President said repeatedly on his trip he needs China and Russia to help him on North Korea. There's been a lot happening in recent weeks in Syria where Russia has not been on the same page with the United States and that's a dramatic understatement. So there's reason for the two leaders to talk. There's also the undercurrent that if they talked, would the President of the United States criticize Putin? Would the President of the United States raise an issue that every, look at the congressional investigations, look at his own intelligence agencies, say Russia is still trying to middle in U.S. elections. Our Jeff Zeleny tried to ask Secretary of State that question. You have to listen closely here. It's hard to hear Jeff's question but we showed here in the screen. If they meet, will the President bring up Russian election meddling?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Russian meddling investigation is still on the list of things to talk about? Were they considered to be at the
[Tillerson:] It stays on that list.
[King:] It stays on that list from Secretary Tillerson's view. But we've also had the reporting in the last week that the President of the United States told his CIA director to meet with a conspiracy theorist who says it wasn't the Russians who hacked in. It was some internal hack job inside the DNC. So we know what the President still thinks about this.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Right. When they met previously, the readout was that the President brought it up. But we don't know to what extent, in what context if he said look, I'm really, really sorry that they're just investigating. Like we'll get over this, or if he said stop interfering in our elections. We don't really know the answer to that. But the TillersonTrump administration versus the Kremlin negotiation about this meeting playing out in public is so fascinating. Because obviously the Russians are trying to make it happen by saying it publicly. And now that they have said it publicly, Tillerson is trying to use that as leverage for whatever he is trying to get behind the scenes to actually make it so. And, you know, sometimes we see this kind of diplomacy that normally goes on behind the scenes play out in public. But not to this extent and that's really interesting.
[Olivier Knox, Chief Washington Correspondent, Yahoo! News:] When they met last time in Hamburg, the Russian readout was that that President Trump has accepted the Russian explanation for the election
[Bash:] Right.
[Knox:] meddling, their denial effectively. Some of this is just diplomatic choreography. Because one of the questions is, is it going to be what's called a pollicized? Do they share a hand shake in a conversation in a corner of the room or the other leaders of the Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation former are talking about something else? Or is it a full on sit down bilateral meeting like the one in Hamburg? If so, who's going to attend? You remember all the kerfuffle about the fact that it was just the President and Secretary Tillerson last time. And then he went over and sat down after dinner. He went over and sat down for a longer conversation with President Putin.
[Bash:] But we didn't find about
[Knox:] But the Tillerson bar here, if they have something substantive to discuss we've cleared that bar a long time ago, as you illustrated with your list of issues. That part has been cleared. It's not about that anymore. It's not about where the meddling substantive to discuss.
[Eliana Johnson, National Political Reporter, Politico:] Yes. Well, I think it's fair to assume that Secretary Tillerson was trying to exact some sort of concession from the Russians in exchange for a meeting or to determine what exactly it was they would be discussing and then the Kremlin got out in front of him. And is trying to strong arm him. And what's curious to me is that the White House hasn't come out and said anything or they still seems unresolved now several hours later.
[King:] Maybe he wanted concessions from the Russians but they wouldn't put out a readout saying the President accepted President
[Johnson:] Exactly, exactly.
[King:] what happened in the election. A quick break. Coming up, was Tuesday's electoral route for the Democrats? A roadmap to winning back the House in 2018? Nancy Pelosi thinks so.

[Carl Azuz, Cnn 10 Anchor:] Hi. I`m Carl Azuz. Thank you for taking 10 minutes for CNN 10. We resume our daily news coverage today, but our first story appears to be related to yesterday`s special edition concerning the ISIS terrorist group. A U.S. law enforcement official says a terrorist attack in New York City on Tuesday was done in the name of ISIS. It involved a man who apparently drove a rented pickup truck onto a popular bike path. Eight people were killed and more than 12 others are trying to recover from their injuries. After crashing the truck into a school bus, the suspect then reportedly stepped out, holding imitation firearms, a pellet gun and a paintball gun. A police officer then shot him in the abdomen. He survived and was taken to the hospital. This was the deadliest terrorist attack in New York City since the assaults of September 11th, 2001. It happened just blocks away from the World Trade Center, which was a target 16 years ago. The suspect is a 29-year-old man named Sayfullo Saipov. He`s from the Central Asian country of Uzbekistan. Officials say he came to the U.S. legally in 2010 and that he learned about ISIS and radical Islamic tactics afterward. Police say he`d been planning Tuesday`s terrorist attack for months and then a note found near the scene was written in Arabic and had the general message that Islamic state, another name for ISIS, would endure forever. The use of vehicles as weapons has become increasingly common among terrorists. Since 2014, there had been 15 jihadist attacks using cars or trucks in western countries, killing more than 140 people. That`s according to New America, a nonpartisan research group.
[Subtitle:] The one thing: ISIS-inspired attacks.
[Philip Mudd, Cnn Counterterrorism Analyst:] The one thing you need to know about the evolution of terrorism is that even as we see the ISIS organization degraded in countries like Syria and Iraq, we will see individuals who pick up the ISIS message for months or years to come through social media. ISIS is being degraded, as al Qaeda was before. If you compare this to the highlight of ISIS roughly mid-2015, fewer leaders, less money, obviously, fewer recruits from North America and Western Europe, little ability to confront the armies in Syria, the Russian army as well, and the Iraqi army. But in the age of social media, ISIS has been able to propagate their ideas. The fact that their message still lives and will leave for years on social media means that we will get isolated individuals, sometimes mentally disturbed individuals who decide in their own minds to take action based on an ISIS message, even when the ISIS organization is dying.
[Azuz:] Another terrorist attack took place in the Asian country of Afghanistan. A local spokesperson says an explosive was placed on a fuel tanker. It went off next to a passenger bus, killing at least eight people and injuring dozens of others. So, besides murders, what`s the purpose of these attacks whether they`re carried out by a vehicle, an explosive or firearms? Dr. Sanjay Gupta explores the psychology of terrorism.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] Make no mistake: terrorism is a strategic war against our minds. Its weapons, fear, panic, and most importantly, an overwhelming feeling of vulnerability.
[Subtitle:] The psychology of terrorism.
[Gupta:] If we feel vulnerable, we`ll be in constant fear. And that`s exactly what they`re trying to achieve. Bombs are set off in places where we gather. The message: we will find you where you work and play. Shooting unsuspecting innocent people. The message: there is nowhere to hide. Videos revealing the horrors of rape, mass murder, and beheadings. The message: no one is immune. In fact, following a terrorist attack, studies show it`s the most vulnerable of us who will suffer longest, especially those with personal histories of trauma. But while most everyone may be fearful or anxious for a few weeks, the vast majority of us will prove resilient. And in this regard, experts say terrorism is failed strategy because research shows that terror often backfires, making nations stronger as citizens band together and angry countries join ranks to fight back. But history has also proven terrorism only works if we allow ourselves to be terrorized.
[Azuz:] A couple of days ago, we reported on an extraordinary rescue at sea. It involved two American women and their two dogs who said they were adrift for months in the Pacific. But since then, some questions had been raised about their story. For one thing, U.S. Coast Guard says the sailors had an emergency beacon on their ship that was registered and working but that the women didn`t activate it during their five months at sea. They say their boat was still sea-worthy, that they thought they could find a place to make repairs and that they were not in imminent peril. The sailors also said that at the beginning for their journey, they were hit by a violent storm near Hawaii, on or shortly after May 3rd. But the National Weather Service says while there were some strong trade winds on May 3rd, there were not any organized storm systems or storm warnings at that time. The Coast Guard and some scientists say there were additional inconsistencies with the women`s story. According to CBS News, sailing experts who know the route from Hawaii to Tahiti, which the two women had planned to take say it was a bad idea to attempt making a trip like that with fewer than three sailors aboard. Ten-second trivia: Which of these U.S. government agencies was established first? Food and Drug Administration, Federal Trade Commission, National Park Service, or Federal Communications Commission? The FDA was established in 1906, making it the oldest agency on this list. It`s also the oldest consumer protection agency in the government and today, the FDA is responsible for making sure that everything, from drugs and medical devices, to food and cosmetics, are safe for people to use. It was created with the help of something called the Poison Supper Club, which probably wasn`t a group folks were hungry to join. Their studies helped determine that while compounds like borax, hydrated sodium borate, are effective at cleaning, adding minerals to the soil, repealing pests and manufacturing glass and porcelain, they`re less savory as a food preservative.
[Reporter:] Until about 1902, legal food preservatives included chemicals like formaldehyde, borax and copper sulfate. That is until one guy organized a poison supper club to stop it and became the father of the
[Fda. Subtitle:] The Nation`s Poison Squad.
[Reporter:] OK, here`s the story. In order to keep food looking fresh, food manufacturers used a slew of chemicals, cooper sulfate, a common pesticide, made canned peas bright green. Borax and formaldehyde were packed with meat to make it appear fresher. At this time in our history, there were no true food regulations. You didn`t need to label your ingredients. There is no safety testing, no monitoring. Cue, Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, a chemist with the crazy idea that these chemicals had no place in our food. He started some hygienic lab trials where he could officially test the effects of these poisons on the body. It was easy to get the chemicals, but he needed the bodies. And that`s where the poison squad came in. The first 12 members of the poison squad were volunteers from the Department of Agriculture. And they volunteered to eat his poison food for six months so he could track the effects it had on them. Each day, the menus would change and Wiley`s volunteers never knew which poison they were consuming. A dinner at the poison supper club might look like this: applesauce, soup, turkey, can string beans, sweet potato, white potato, chip beet, red and butter, coffee, rice pudding, and a little borax. Throughout the trials, Wylie noted signs of acute poisoning, including upset stomachs, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, kidney damage, you know, things that happen when you get poisoned. And this did not stay hidden. The press caught on and in 1906, the first food regulations were passed. This ultimately led to the creation of the FDA. So, thanks, Dr. Wylie, our food is so much better without all that borax.
[Azuz:] For "10 Out of 10" this Thursday, 4.59. That`s how many seconds it took this 23-year-old competitor to solve a Rubik`s cube. He knows it was fast, he quickly gets the attention of the other cubists, and it appears a new record has been set for solving the puzzle in 4.59 seconds. Previous record, 4.69. Some folks have been trying to solve this puzzle since it was invented in 1974. It may not be Picasso`s brand of cubism but it`s still a square deal. The young man knew all the angles. He was a sticker for accuracy, his talent is multi-faceted and it`s clear he`s an expert in gleaming the cube. I`m Carl Azuz and that`s CNN 10. END

[Rachel Bade, Cnn Political Analyst:] However, I wouldn't discount what he's saying about the family issues. We heard years ago that John Boehner had to be convinced Paul Ryan to stay in the House. This was before he became speaker. Before we even knew that President Trump was going to be running for president. That's was because he wanted to spend more time with his family. He had kids when he was in Congress. He said he's been basically living out of a suitcase the entire time they were growing up and he wants to go home now.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] Sure. Also on the political side, we know that he lost his dad at 16. I have to imagine it's resonating when his oldest is that same age now.
[Bade:] That's right. His kids are entering their teen-age years and in high school. He says he wants to be a part of their life full time and not just a, quote, "weekend dad." I think it's going to be interesting over the next few month, this is going to really rev up the jockeying over who is going to replace him. We're seeing Kevin McCarthy is number two and Steve Scalise is number three. They're jockeying for position, building alliances, getting ready to run. A big question on whether McCarthy can do it. Needs 218 votes to be speaker if Republicans keep the house. He was unable to do it last time, which is why Ryan became speaker when McCarthy was through. Now McCarthy has Trump on his side. He's very close with the president. There's some people out there who think Trump might endorse him. If that were to happen, maybe he gets to 218, maybe not.
[Baldwin:] Rachel, thank you. We'll be watching closely. And appreciate you. Also, this afternoon, House Speaker Paul Ryan talks to Jake Tapper coming up on "The Lead" starting at 4:00 Eastern today. Just into us here at CNN, another resignation in the Trump administration. Let's bring in CNN's Jeremy Diamond over at the White House. Jeremy, who is leaving now?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Brooke. It's the third national security official at the White House to leave in the same number of days. Nadia Schadlow submitted her letter of resignation yesterday. She was H.R. McMaster's closest aides. She helped write this national security policy that tried to translate the president's foreign policy vision into actual paper. Raj Shah, the White House spokesman, thanked Schadlow for her service and her leadership in crafting that national security document in a statement to CNN. This is very interesting because John Bolton, of course, just came into office as the national security adviser. He is preparing to build out his own team. Interesting enough, we've seen Michael Anton leave, Tom Bossert, and now Nadia Schadlow. And we haven't seen Bolton bring in his own team. Nadia's last day will be April 27th Brooke?
[Baldwin:] Jeremy Diamond, thank you so much. This afternoon, CNN's cameras getting a shot at Defense Secretary James Mattis arriving for meetings at the White House, hours after the president took to Twitter to taunt Russia saying, "Get ready, missiles are coming." CNN will take you live to northern Syria, next.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, and welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. We're beginning today with breaking news in our money lead, because you're about to look at live pictures of the New York Stock Exchange as we await the closing bell today, the Dow up more than 240 points in anticipation of President Trump releasing elements of his tax plan either this evening or tomorrow. Over the last two days, the Dow has surged more than 400 points. CNN money correspondent Cristina Alesci joins me now live. And, Cristina, what does Wall Street see here, and what does it like?
[Cristina Alesci, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, listen, you hit the nail on the head. There's several reasons for the rally, but the first one is investors are applauding a possible reduction in corporate taxes. Investors are excited to see the details of the plan tomorrow. I'm hearing they will come probably in the afternoon. Look, Jake, slashing corporate taxes from 35 percent to 15 percent would be an immediate boost of the bottom line for many companies on the Dow and other indexes. Also, solid corporate earnings are boosting prices, and finally investors feel more confident that the French will elect more moderate pro-business Emmanuel Macron over the populist Marine Le Pen. Now, we have seen the Dow, as you mentioned, rally 400-plus points over the past two days. It's up about 14 percent since the election alone. A lot of excitement is also showing up in the tech-heavy Nasdaq. It crossed 6000 for the first time ever just today. Bigger picture here, Jake, with markets hitting record after record, there is a big risk for investors. Some are concerned that there's too much optimism out there, and, for example, if tax cuts take longer, markets can reverse course. You can bet Wall Street will be watching tomorrow's announcement on taxes very carefully. If there's any disappointment that we could see it take longer for actually to get this tax reform done, this big two-day rally could be reversed Jake.
[Tapper:] All right, Cristina Alesci, thank you so much. Now let's turn to the politics lead and more clouds over the head of the man who was briefly President Trump's national security adviser. A top House Republican suggesting today that former Lieutenant General Michael Flynn broke the law when accepting payments from Russia and Turkey and not disclosing them. House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz of Utah saying today he's seen no evidence that Flynn complied with disclosure requirements regarding engagements and appearances in Russia, as well as lobbying Flynn's consulting group did for company to the Turkish government. Let start with CNN's Pamela Brown. Pamela, the White House sent a letter to the committee in which basically there was no information provided. The White House seems to be making two arguments. One, if Flynn signed any documents, they don't have them and that might be, of course, because they don't exist, and, two, the White House just refusing to provide any information about contacts that Flynn had with foreign officials when he was in the National Security Agency and when he was in the transition.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] That's right. And we saw this play out during the White House briefing today where White House spokesman Sean Spicer said, look, the White House doesn't have these documents. The Department of Defense does, and he also argued that the administration should not be expected to know what Flynn did before President Trump assumed office on January 20 and before he became the national security adviser. Now this comes as a top House Republican says Michael Flynn likely broke the law after failing to disclose payments he received from foreign governments.
[Brown:] Tonight, President Trump's former national security adviser under fire as questions swirl about whether he broke the law over payments he received from Russia and Turkey.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Do you believe that Michael Flynn broke the law?
[Rep. Jason Chaffetz , Utah:] I see no information or no data to support the notion that General Flynn complied with the law.
[Brown:] The revelation comes after leaders of the House Oversight Committee reviewed classified documents in a private briefing. Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill today, they revealed they have seen no proof showing Flynn, a former top military intelligence official, received permission from the Pentagon or the State Department for the foreign government payments he received.
[Rep. Elijah Cummings , Maryland:] He was supposed to get permission and he was supposed to report it, and he didn't, period.
[Brown:] And they say he didn't fully disclose the more than half- million dollars his firm was given for lobbying activities on behalf of Turkey when he applied to reinstate his security clearance, or the $45,000 he received from Russia for an R.T. TV speaking engagement, money Chaffetz says Flynn might have to pay back.
[Chaffetz:] As a former military officer, you simply cannot take money from Russia, Turkey or anybody else. And it appears as if he did take that money, it was inappropriate, and there are repercussions for a violation of law.
[Brown:] Flynn's attorney general said in a statement he did comply with the law, saying quote "General Flynn briefed the Defense Intelligence Agency, a component agency of DOD, extensively regarding the R.T. speaking event trip both before and after the trip." At the same time, the White House is refusing to turn over necessary paperwork on Flynn, saying it doesn't have the relevant documents.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] Right now, to ask the White House to produce documents that were not in the possession of the White House is ridiculous.
[Brown:] The embattled former national security adviser left amid controversy in February after he lied about discussing sanctions with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak Now the former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who alerted the White House about Flynn's conversation with Kislyak, will soon testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Russia's interference in the election.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] We will ask her all questions about Russia, what she knew about Trump ties. Was there any administration effort to unmask people for political purposes? We are going to get to all things Russia in terms of what the administration did and what Russia did.
[Brown:] And the Judiciary Committee's hearing adds to this crowded field of investigations into Russia's meddling in the election and any ties to the Trump campaign associates, including the FBI, the Intelligence Committees and the House Oversight Committee. Meantime, tonight, the Senate is poised to confirm the new DOJ head of the Russia probe, so a lot going on, on this front.
[Tapper:] It's an odd argument that the White House has no bearing and no relationship with the transition team. It was headed by the vice president.
[Brown:] Right. Exactly. And you heard many reporters during the briefing continuing to press Sean Spicer on that point.
[Tapper:] Very good. Pamela Brown, thank you so much. Let's bring in my guest, former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta, who served under President Obama. Secretary Panetta, great to see you. Thanks for joining us.
[Leon Panetta, Former U.s. Secretary Of Defense:] Nice to be with you.
[Tapper:] As a former head of the CIA, do you find it surprising that a fellow former intelligence professional like Mike Flynn took money from Putin's government and lobbied for a company with ties to Erdogan and then did not disclose those payments?
[Panetta:] Well, Jake, it certainly seems as if the rules were not adhered to here. And, obviously, it will be investigated by both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, but, more importantly, it's probably being investigated by the FBI. And I think the FBI clearly have a lot more leverage here, because they can actually prosecute for any crimes that have been committed. So, I suspect that one of these investigations is going to turn up just exactly what took place here.
[Tapper:] Chairman Chaffetz said today that the White House refused to provide any material related to Flynn's vetting or when he was fired. The White House deferred to the Pentagon for some of that material. You were a White House chief of staff. If you were advising President Trump, what would you suggest he do when it comes to sharing information about General Flynn?
[Panetta:] I think the best policy is for the White House to fully cooperate in these investigations. When the White House decides that it's going to stonewall on one issue or another, then the White House becomes the target for concern as to what they're trying to hide. So, I think, in this instance, it makes a great deal of sense for the White House to fully cooperate with all of the investigations that are going on, on this matter.
[Tapper:] We learned today that several Obama administration officials are going to be testifying before Congress about this investigation into how much Russia interfered in the U.S. election and also how much Trump advisers may have cooperated and coordinated with members of the Russian government or officials known to U.S. intelligence. Based on what you know, based on what's out there publicly, how concerned are you about possible collusion?
[Panetta:] Well, that's the that's the key issue here, because there's no question that the Russians clearly tried to influence our election. Eighteen intelligence agencies came to that conclusion, and I think everybody pretty much sees that Russia deliberately tried to do that. So the fundamental issue here is, was there any collusion between the Russians and members of the Trump campaign? And, obviously, there's there's been a lot of meetings, as we have seen with Mr. Flynn. There's been a lot of money exchanged. Ultimately, that all has to be investigated in order to determine whether there was any kind of deliberate collusion or whether these were a bunch of people operating on their own. We don't know the answer to that. It's up to the investigation.
[Tapper:] Secretary Leon Panetta, we have much more to talk to you about, including fake news being peddled to influence the French presidential election and questions about whether Russia is behind that. Please stick around. We will be right back.

[Marsh:] American figure skater Nathan Chen offers condolences to the victims' families in the deadly Florida school shooting before taking to the ice. Coy Wire has more from Pyeongchang. Coy, I mean, obviously, this tragedy stretching even there in South Korea.
[Coy Wire, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Yes, Rene, less than 24 hours before that highly anticipated men's figure skating short program, the world's only undefeated skater this season, 18-year-old American Nathan Chen, was asked about the shooting.
[Nathan Chen, Team Usa Figure Skater:] Truly, my heart hearts go out my heart goes out to them. It's devastating. It's terrible that things like this keep happening. But, you know, I can just give all of the families involved my condolences. And I hope that, you know, everything kind of starts going on an upward trend. But, I mean, yes, it's not great news to hear that before a competition.
[Wire:] Having fallen earlier in the team event, the pressure for Chen was high. Chen fell not once but twice. He is currently in 17th place. He is the defending U.S. champ. Now the legendary 23-year-old from Japan, Yuzuru Hanyu, though, looked poised. The defending Olympic champ put up the second highest score ever recorded, falling just short of his own world record. His passionate fans threw truckloads of stuffed Winnie the Poohs, Hanyu's favorite, onto the ice when the score was announced. I was sitting among them. Some were praying, others were crying, but all celebrating the top scorer heading into the free skate, which is later tonight, East Coast time. Now, in women's slalom, Team USA's Mikaela Shiffrin, the overwhelming favorite to defend her gold from 2014 finished fourth. It's her strongest event. She said she vomited before her first run. She said it was nervousness. She had expectations of four medals at these games. She already did capture gold in the giant slalom. Let's give you an early start on your medal count. Norway at the top with 19. Germany with 15. Canada, 13. The Netherlands, 12. And the U.S. still sitting in fifth place with eight medals. Rene, back to you.
[Marsh:] All right. The U.S. sitting in that fifth place. Hopefully we'll move up a little bit. Thank you so much, live for us in South Korea, Coy Wire. Now, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is in Turkey trying mend relations and breaking protocol, meeting with the country's president without an American translator. Tillerson and President Erdogan met for more than three hours Thursday. The Turkish foreign prime minister did the translation. The State Department says that the secretary has met with Erdogan before and was OK with it. Tillerson is in Turkey to discuss tensions over the United States anti-ISIS alliance with the Kurdish militia in Syria. Moments ago, Turkey's foreign minister said the U.S. and Turkey agreed to start normalizing relations on the issue. Let's hope that that translation was accurate. Well, EARLY START continues right now.
[Unidentified Female:] President Trump, please do something!

[Cooper:] Hey, welcome back our continuing coverage of Hurricane Irma. Again, I just can't get over that sweep of the water and the way this river has gone down so much throughout the day and still remains low despite the fact all this water pouring on it. Again, the amount of storm surge in Tampa, that is the big variable here at this hour. You know, you heard the good news from Miguel Marquez saying they are not expecting the storm surge in Punta Gorda, so all that water that Miguel saw moving out of the marina, they say that's going to come back because they're not going to be getting those winds coming back in, sweeping the water in, it's going to come back fill in more naturally and more slowly. So that's certainly good news there. Alex Marquardt saying in Sarasota, they're expecting one to three feet of storm surge, it would still could do some damage, but it's less than anticipated. Again, the big question is, for Tampa, what kind of storm surge this city which even on a day of heavy rain has problems with flooding and getting that water off the street, so that's something to watch in the hours ahead and we'll know more of that in the late hours this morning. Let's go to Ryan Young who's over in Clearwater, just west of here. Ryan, last time we checked in with you, I mean, the conditions were really bad. I think you're in a particularly windy area. I think we got some of our wind, thankfully, has blocked by some of these big hotels, Sheridan and others that were around, but it's still pretty bad where you are.
[Ryan Young, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, absolutely. The wind, that's why it really takes you literally almost off your feet. And just to kind of show you this, if you have anything sort of blocking you, it changes the whole conversation. I'm going to walk over here and then I'll talk once I'm ready for this. Well, look, you don't hear as much as the wind if we're standing over here, we have concrete kind of surrounding us. But as soon as you step outside and as soon as you get into the direction of the wind, it's brutal on you, and the wind keeps shifting. So the last time we were talking, it was kind of moving in a circular direction. Now, it is sort of blowing that direction there. And we've actually seen some of these cars kind of almost like they're inching closer and closer together depending on the gusts. Now, the real conversation here is when you have as much saturation as we're getting and then you have trees because that's the whole idea here. Sometimes, it's the days afterwards when trees will fall. Of course, palm trees can deal with the wind, but there'll be other tress that will certainly fall, especially when people come out to survey their damage. Now, as we talked about before, the lights are still on in this area, but what's dangerous about this when people decide to come outside and kind of survey the damage [00:25:00.5]
[Young:] what could happen then? So it's best obviously to wait until light. That was the benefit about what happened in Miami because of the fact that it was some sunshine outside. Right now with this darkness, you really have no idea sort of what's coming in your direction or what's going on around you. So maybe the surge is getting worse in some places, but I can tell you, this wind that we've been dealing with for quite some time, it has been not only powerful, but it's been unrelenting in terms of the power that we've been feeling and the forces right on cue in terms of this wind, Anderson.
[Cooper:] The other thing, you know, you don't think about, Ryan, in a storm like this is just the cold. I mean, for anybody and that's one of the reason another one of those reasons that first responders are thankfully off the streets. You know, if you're out in this rain, if anybody is out, if there's homeless people who were out in this rain, just over the hours, the accumulation of the rain hitting you, it's impossible not to just start shivering, not to kind of feel it seep into your bones. It gets just very, very cold out here.
[Young:] You know, that is the one thing that we felt, the temperature dropped at least 10 degrees. And you talk about homeless people, we saw a few people trying to walk and beat the storm a little earlier, not sure of their direction. You know, this conversation, some people don't want to go to shelters, they rather try to brave this themselves and the people understand that. But at the same time, you know, people are making some life or death decisions here, and sometimes the least of these people who don't have any things are just hoping to pray on God and quite honestly to avoid some of these situations. Some people do not want to go to shelters and I understand their kind of thought process when it comes to that, but the idea of being out here stuck in the storm for several hours and having to deal with this, I couldn't imagine that. And you have to your heart goes out to people who make that decisions. At the same time, I'm going to step out of this at some point and get dry for a little bit. Of course, right? We have that availability, but for other people, they might not have that experience and that's what they think about in a situation like this or even someone who losses their home because I can tell you, it's a long process to get your house back together and something that you don't forget in terms of when you have hurricane damage. This is not a storm that you just forget about, you think about the folks in Harvey, they're dealing with the aftereffects of the hurricane. And look, if you cover Katrina so you know the idea of how this has just a mental effect on people when it comes to what storms do to you. There are some kids somewhere tonight that hearing this wind hitting a house or maybe a tree hitting a house, they will never forget that sound, it is something when you live through a storm. Like I said earlier, you will mark your life by this storm. This storm will never be forgotten by the people who live in the area because the impact it will have on their life, because sometimes this is the most terrifying night that you'll experience when you live in the State of Florida.
[Cooper:] Yes, and of course, you know, when you talk about an area like perhaps Sarasota or Punta Gorda not getting the kind of storm that they had anticipated, obviously, any deviation of the storm, it can be good for one city, for one town, but it can mean tragedy for another town. We certainly saw that with Charley back in 2004 when it was coming up, people thought it was going to make a direct hit on Tampa, it swerved in the last minute. And I think it was just a four- degree change and that means it hit and decimated Punta Gorda. There's a lot you know, the other thing about this storm and we've been covering this now for days, just the sheer size of it is extraordinary. And we continue even now at this hour, at this stage of the storm, we continue to get a sense of just the size of it. The fact that we have reporters on the West Coast where we are here in Tampa, but also still have reporters on the East Coast, Brian Todd, still in West Palm Beach, still in the midst of the storm, still seeing bad conditions out there, wind and rain. Let's check in with Brian. How is it now? Because, Brian, I feel like you had been on, I don't know for how many hours and I'm just pointing that out just to give a sense of the length of the storm, the length of the time that people in West Palm Beach and Miami and elsewhere have just had to deal with some level of Hurricane Irma.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Anderson. We've been on the air for 14 hours. This storm has been of this intensity, hurricane force winds for about nine hours. You mentioned that Punta Gorda dodged a bullet, didn't get the storm they anticipated, well, Palm Beach and West Palm Beach, where I'm standing, they got much more of the storm than they anticipated. Palm Beach County has just been just pounded unrelentingly by this wind. And now the rain has ceased here, the wind has certainly not ceased and it's gone in a circular motion at times making it even more threatening. We saw three transformers blow up just a few yards away from us here, an intense kind of blew concussive blast into the sky. [00:30:00.4]
[Todd:] So it's still very intense and very dangerous here. There are so many projectiles flying. And now that, you know, we've been in darkness for a couple of hours that makes it even more dangerous. You cannot see something flying at you, so we have to our team here has to very cognizant of that. What we can also report to you tonight from this county, Anderson, is that the intensity of this wind has prompted a rescue and a pretty significant one. The mayor of Riviera Beach, Florida, in this county, Palm Beach County, has told us, his name is Thomas Masters, he has told us that the Stonybrook Apartment complex in Riviera Beach had the roofs ripped off. Two units, two apartment units of that complex, they had to get first responders in there in these conditions and rescue at least 50 people. Fifty people pulled out of those apartment units, the Stonybrook Apartments in Riviera Beach. Thomas Masters said that he himself went over there along with the fire and the police department and went door to door excuse me, to get people out of there. Luckily, they got at least 50 people out, they got them safely to a shelter, including several small children and there were no injuries. But again, the intensity of this wind, people thinking in this county that they can ride it out and it's just been pounding for several hours and those people at that apartment complex maybe thought it wouldn't last this long. Well, it certainly did and this evening, they had to be rescued where Palm Beach County official said, "Our message is clear, the curfew is still on. You can be arrested if you're out here." And they want people they want people to get inside, stay inside, stay hunkered down, stay in shelters. This is just not letting up, Anderson. It is not letting up here at all.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, and that yes, and that's the message from the chief of police here in Tampa I spoke to a short time ago who was saying, "Look, you may think that this isn't as bad as it might have been, but these are still this is still a deadly storm. There is still a potential for an awful lot of bad things to happen in the hours ahead. So, please, stay at home, stay in the shelter you're in, and just keep riding this out. You've gotten this far, just push through the night and let's get to tomorrow safely." Brian, we'll continue checking with you. Another short break here. We'll be right back.

[Anderson Cooper, Host, "cnn Hero Of The Year":] Ladies and gentlemen, the 2018 CNN Hero of the Year is
[Cooper And Kelly Ripa:] Dr. Ricardo Pun-Chong.
[Camerota:] It was a big moment last night for Dr. Ricardo Pun-Chong, who was named CNN's Hero of the Year. Dr. Pun-Chong provides free housing, meals and support for sick children and their families while they undergo treatment in Peru.
[Dr. Ricardo Pun-chong, 2018 Cnn Hero Of The Year:] Thank you for my volunteers that help this 10 years at our shelter. Thank you for all the people that knock the door and give us rice or beans or some money.
[Camerota:] Joining us now is Dr. Ricardo Pun-Chong. Doctor, great to see you this morning. Congratulations.
[Dr. Ricardo Pun-chong, Cnn Hero Of The Year:] Thank you so much.
[Camerota:] What was that moment like last night? What did this mean for you?
[Pun-chong:] Well, I was so excited. I don't have words to explain what I feel really. First, I think I'm going to fall down. And
[Camerota:] Fall over?
[Pun-chong:] Yes. But then I saw the people, and saw my friend there and said, yes, you did it. You did it. So it was great. It was great.
[Berman:] Tell us about this shelter. Because the work you're doing is such a great need in Peru.
[Pun-chong:] Yes. Well, you know, the government gives the patients the treatment free. The cancer, the leukemia, for example, that is the first cancer in kids, the first step of treatment, it's about six months. So they might be there in Lima almost six months without moving.
[Camerota:] Oh, my gosh.
[Pun-chong:] So they slept on the floors or near the church or near the parks. So we decided to rent a house to help them. And that's it.
[Camerota:] I mean and some of them come from, obviously, very rural areas, very poor areas.
[Pun-chong:] Yes.
[Camerota:] They make the journey to Lima to get treatment. But then and it's wonderful, of course, that the government provides the treatment, but then what about the food and the shelter?
[Pun-chong:] Yes.
[Camerota:] And that's when you guys come in. And I know that you have also said that it can't just be a place that provides food and shelter. It also has to provide healing and the cure. So what do you do in your shelter that is special for the families?
[Pun-chong:] Well, really we play, we have fun. We don't have a TV because we want the children to be creative, yes, to play, to jump, to finally laugh. And that's it.
[Camerota:] And what did you think when you came out and you saw your car really painted?
[Pun-chong:] That was wonderful. It was wonderful. You know, there are kids in my shelter. That's wonderful. I love it.
[Berman:] One of thing that was so inspiring to me last night is one of the first things you talked about wasn't that you won but what you're going to do now that you have become the CNN Hero of the Year with the money that you're going to
[Pun-chong:] Yes, you know, two years ago,
[Camerota:] And how did you get like this? How did you become selfless? Why aren't you just wanting to make as much money and become as successful as you, in your own life? Why did you want to open your arms like this?
[Pun-chong:] I asked God 11 years ago, I was well, I used to go every day to church, always. And 11 years ago I asked God to explain to me what I have to do because I didn't know my mission here in this world. So I asked, you want me to be a priest, a missionary or what? What do you want to do? And, well, I have it.
[Camerota:] You got the answer.
[Pun-chong:] I have.
[Camerota:] Wow!
[Pun-chong:] So, I'm doing what I feel, and I think it's OK.
[Berman:] Dr. Ricardo Pun-Chong, I have to say, it was so inspiring to see you up there surrounded by so many other people doing amazing things. And the admiration you all have for each other, it was inspiring.
[Pun-chong:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] Thank you so much for being here, doctor. Great to talk to you and hear about your mission.
[Pun-chong:] Thank you. And continue your dreams. Please dream, always dream. You believe in you. And you know you can do it.
[Camerota:] That's a wonderful message.
[Berman:] You're proof of it.
[Pun-chong:] And I have a present for you.
[Camerota:] Oh, good, let's see that. You're not supposed to bring us presents.
[Pun-chong:] Yes.
[Camerota:] What is it?
[Pun-chong:] It's a scarf.
[Camerota:] Thank you.
[Berman:] Thank you very much.
[Camerota:] Is the name of the shelter. Thank you. Oh, my gosh.
[Berman:] Thank you so much.
[Camerota:] Thank you so much. Thank you for all that you do.
[Berman:] And congratulations for everything.
[Pun-chong:] Thank you so much.
[Berman:] So one of our other favorite moments from last night's events, a pair of canine heroes posed for their close-up. Wow. "The Good Stuff" is next.
[Camerota:] It was love. We'll explain.
[Berman:] Yes.

[Trump:] And I appreciate very much. And General, your reputation is an incredible one. Thank you very much for doing the job. I'll see you back when you're in the United States or maybe I'll even see you over there. You never know what's going to happen.
[Cabrera:] You never know what's going to happen. President Trump hinting on that call with U.S. troops he may take a trip to see them in Afghanistan. Now two years into his term, he's faced mounting criticism for having yet to visit a combat zone. The "Washington Post" reporting the president told advisors he doesn't want to associate himself with wars he views as failures. Defense Secretary James Mattis revealing he, at times, has advised the president not to go to certain places, saying, quote, "The president is the commander-in-chief and he decides where he needs to go. There are times I don't want him in certain locations, to be frank with you, for his security and the troops' security. So don't worry about that." Joining me now, retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, former Army commanding general in Europe and the 7th Army, and a CNN military analyst. General, always good to see you. You've said you're fine with the fact the president has not visited a war zone. Why?
[Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, Cnn Military Analyst:] I'm fine with it now, Ana. Good afternoon. The reason I said that is because if it takes this amount of pressure to go, it's probably not best to go in the first place. Like you said, you know, this is part of his responsibility, to understand that as the commander-in-chief, with that title, he is responsible for all of those serving in deployed locations and in combat zones. And it would seem that someone that's responsible for that kind of requirement would go visit. He hasn't done so yet. And it seems now he's only reacting to pressure from the press or his opposition that's saying, gee, he hasn't been there in over two years, why hasn't he visited, for him go. That's not the kind of requirement that should force the president to go to a war zone. Not only that, but in all of the engagements with military forces, both on these conference calls, like occurred on Thursday or several other engagements, he seems to have politicized or attempted to politicize the military, asking them questions that they know they should not answer. They're not his
[Cabrera:] Hold your thought for just a second, though, because I would like to play some more sound from that call and then you can continue with your assessment.
[Trump:] So, Colonel, how many people are you commanding right now, would you say?
[Unidentified U.s. Military Commander:] About 10,000.
[Trump:] Wow. That's a lot of people. And what do you see in the region? What's going on in the region? How are they feeling about things? How are they feeling about trade? You know trade for me is a very big subject all over. We've been taken advantage of for many, many years by bad trade deals. We don't have any good trade deals. How are you finding things in the region, Nick?
[Unidentified U.s. Military Commander:] Mr. President, from our perspective out on the water, sir, we're seeing there's an abundance of trade happening in the region.
[Trump:] Tell me about the catapult system. So on the "Gerald Ford" they don't use steam, which is the first one I ever heard of that doesn't use steam. I know they have some difficulties which I'm not happy about.
[Cabrera:] So, General, you talk about the political tone being part of these phone calls. As somebody who has spent years in combat and commanded tens of thousands of troops what would you have liked to hear the president say instead?
[Hertling:] Those were just a few very many cringe-worthy moments on that telephone call. I would have wanted him to ask, what's the morale of the soldiers, how's the mission being accomplished over there, what kind of support do you want from the American people, what things should we next look at in terms of your operation, or just making sure the soldiers and the various military forces know that their family members are being taken care of and that they are appreciated. Those are the two number-one things that deployed soldiers want to hear from politicians is they are supported and their mission is important and they are taking care of their family members back home. To go off on all kinds of questions about readiness statures and number of soldiers and whether or not they agree or not with court decisions or even comparing a combat mission with what's going on with the southern border and his approach to that is just the wrong thing to bring up when you talk about an apolitical military.
[Cabrera:] We're also hearing from Cindy McCain speaking out publicly for the first time this week since her husband's. Here's what she had to say about President Trump suggesting John McCain wasn't a war hero because he was captured.
[Unidentified Correspondent:] We you hurt when the president said he wasn't a war hero?
[Cindy Mccain, Wife Of Deceased Senator John Mccain:] Yes, I was. I thought it was inappropriate and wrong. I really did. It hurt the family, too. You know, and he hurt the other men that served with John, that were in prison as well. It wasn't just about John. It was all about the other people. So I think that was a wrong thing to say. And, you know, I don't know if I'll ever get over it, I'll be honest. I'm the wife, that's my prerogative, I don't have to.
[Cabrera:] General, quickly, if you will, what's your reaction?
[Hertling:] Same as hers. Anybody who has been captured and served time as a prisoner of war understands the challenges associated with it. I think every single military person that had heard him make that comment about Senator McCain you don't have to agree with McCain's ideology, many of us did not, but you have to honor the kind of suffering he went through over five years, two years in solitary confinement being tortured. It's incredible. He gave a lot in service to the country. That's what's so denigrating about what the president said about Senator McCain.
[Cabrera:] Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, thank you very much for being here. So good to see you.
[Hertling:] Thank you, Ana.
[Cabrera:] No one knows exactly how they would handle sudden live- altering adversity, but we can all hope it's something like this 2018 top-10 "CNN Hero." Amanda Boxtel was an athlete, dancer and an avid skier. That changed in a blink of an eye. She then turned her pain into purpose.
[Amanda Boxtel, Cnn Hero:] Twenty-six years ago I went out skiing and I remember I somersaulted and I landed on my back and I knew in an instant I was paralyzed. But I was determined to show I wasn't going to give up so easily. I was inspired to create a program that could gift mobility to anyone that has a neurological impairment.
[Cabrera:] Go to CNNheroes.com to vote for her for "CNN Hero" of the year or any of your top-10 "CNN Heroes." We'll be right back.

[Vause:] France and Germany have renewed a friendship pact, first ratified in the 1960s in an effort to deal with rising populism on the continent. Now, during appearance, the French president and the joint councilor have warned nationalism is the threat to all of Europe. CNN's Jim Bittermann has more.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It was like an old married couple getting together to renew their wedding vow at France and Germany getting together, 56 years after they signed what was called the Elysee Treaty. A treaty that showed that they could cooperate after World War II. The bitter enemies getting along in terms of culture and economics, and security, and those kinds of things this time around. It was to intensify those kind of links that Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel got together and signed a treaty in Aachen, Germany. And basically, the treaty provides for all kinds of different lengths to be strengthened. It's a very generalized term not big on specifics. Although, the one that's being cited most often here is this mutual defense treaty which provides for Germany to come become to the defense of France and perhaps to become to the defense of Germany should they be attacked. Jim Bittermann, CNN, Paris.
[Vause:] Now, the CNN's ongoing "FREEDOM PROJECT" which highlights the epidemic of human trafficking around the world, and the latest U.N. report is warning this billion-dollar industry has taken on horrific dimensions. Warning the number of victims is on the rise, while armed groups and terrorists are trafficking women and children to generate funds and recruit. The report notes globally more victims are being found and more traffickers sent to jail. But at the same time, there's been a big increase in the number of children being bought and sold, and far more girls are being trafficked than boys. As shocking and as depressing as this report is in many ways, it fits in with the perception most have of human trafficking. Victims who extra been vulnerable, living in poverty, and conflict zones. But human trafficking is a crime which could happen in a market part of London, and the victim can be a model turned aspiring actress.
[Frida Farrell, Film Actress:] Are you going to kill me?
[Unidentified Male:] Our client is coming back a few days.
[Farrell:] Why are you doing this to me?
[Vause:] As part of the trailer from Apartment 407, based on the true story of actress Frida Farrell, who wrote and stars in the movie which has just had its worldwide release. And as part of this, Frida joins us now from Los Angeles. Thank you for coming in. Thank you for being with us.
[Farrell:] Thank you for having me, John.
[Vause:] I want to start with the news from the U.N. First thing about the surge in the numbers of trafficking victims. As a survivor of the sex trade industry, as a survivor as someone who is kidnapped, that is must be especially disturbing.
[Farrell:] Yes, very disturbing. The fact that is rising and rising and rising, and it never ends. So, we need to find an end to this. And I believe that education is one of them. We need to educate our youngsters and show them red flags and how not to get into it. It's a serious subject that is not talked about enough. So, I'm glad talking about it.
[Vause:] We treated to see your movie basically because you didn't talk publicly about your ordeal for years. Was there one moment, an incident which you know, made you decide that after 14 years, staying silent was no longer an option.
[Farrell:] It was no longer an option. We were making a film and I was basically talked into making a film about my own story. Which I was hesitant about since I hadn't told anyone at all. And going from telling zero people to telling the world, basically, felt very intimidating. But I felt if I can do this, and instead of thinking about myself and my story help other women. Either get over what happened to them or make sure they don't end up in a situation that I was in, then my job is done. And my and I'm you know, using the film in my story for the right reasons.
[Vause:] So, for all these years, there were so many people out there, people who were close to you that they had no idea of this trauma you'd gone through that you know, that essentially, you were a young model, it was back in London's a guy approached you about you know what, a modeling job and you can't over a bit suspicious but you followed through on it. And that's when you were taken at knifepoint, right?
[Farrell:] Yes, I did go for a casting in London. I was a student at a time. I just finished drama school. And I went for a casting thinking it is good money, and I had been modeling. So, it wasn't something new to me. And then, he called me back. He said, "The client loves you, you want to come back and did the job?" Then I was like, "Yes, I would love too, its great money. I went back to the same place, and the same person opened the door and I stepped into the place where you know, the day before had been people, fruit, coffee, tea, a backdrop photographer, and today, nobody was there, it was dark and cold. And I stepped in and he quickly locked the door behind me and pulled out a knife.
[Vause:] And you managed to get out what, after three days because of the slip-up, right?
[Farrell:] Yes, I did. I was
[Vause:] Did he left the door unlocked?
[Farrell:] He did left the door unlocked. And I was I consider myself one of the lucky ones.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Farrell:] Because the escape rate right now is less than two percent.
[Vause:] Wow.
[Farrell:] So, I'm really lucky.
[Vause:] Well, unlucky and lucky I guess, but all at the same time. You know, this is not an easy movie to watch and that's how it should. Here's one part which shows this total inverse power relationship which exists between the kidnapper and victim.
[Unidentified Male:] I'd like it. If I don't have to don't have to do this again. OK?
[Vause:] How does it feel for you to watch that back, and how do you describe that a feeling of being totally helpless?
[Farrell:] I say it makes my heart beat faster. Yes, it's hard to watch.
[Vause:] OK, yes.
[Farrell:] I was very hard. It was hard to edit the film, took years to edit because it was hard for me to watch the scenes over and over and over. It was hard enough to film it. But then, just sit and watch everything again and again and again, it just, I had to take years to do it.
[Vause:] You know, there's a feeling of being totally helpless and being powerless. And did you have that when you went to the police after you escaped and you tried to report what had happened and they didn't believe you?
[Farrell:] No, unfortunately. And I don't like to paint out the police in London to be anything but good because they're great. And they have changed the ways there are now. I suppose to
[Vause:] It is just 14 years ago, we should say.
[Farrell:] Yes.
[Vause:] But at the time, though.
[Farrell:] Yes, at the time, I ended up with two young guys who it was in the evening and I walked in, and I was telling them my story. And they kind of went "OK, let's come and sit in this room and talk about it." And I told him the whole story and they're like, "Well, did he force you in? Did he grab you? Was he physical and forced you in?" And I was like, "No, no, he didn't. I walked in on my own but under false pretenses." So, I was trying to defend myself in the matter but I just it was hard as a woman on my own sitting there trying to retell my story. And then, I wasn't believed. I think that was a huge part of why I was silent for so long too. I was embarrassed and ashamed.
[Vause:] And we will just finish up here for you. But look, the point is the things have changed, the police take a different approach now.
[Farrell:] Yes.
[Vause:] But they take a different approach because people have spoken out like you.
[Farrell:] Yes.
[Vause:] So, things are changing. And hopefully, they continue to change especially you know, in light of this movie. So, thank you.
[Farrell:] Thank you.
[Vause:] And thank you for joining us. I'm John Vause. After the break, Becky Anderson will continue our special coverage from the World Economic Forum. And Kristie Lu Stout in Hong Kong will have all the day's news from around the world. You're watching CNN.

[Sesay:] Hello, everyone. The California couple accused of holding their 13 children captive in their home will stand before a judge at a court hearing on Thursday. Authorities say the siblings' condition indicates they were subjected to abuse for prolonged period of time. CNN's Dan Simon has more on this extremely disturbing story.
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] We know that when authorities first arrived at the house behind me that the mother, 49-year-old Louise Turpin, she was said to be perplexed as to why deputies were even there. We don't know what the father, 57-year-old David Turpin, was taking but of course the question is being asked what was going on in their lives to make them think that this kind of parenting was OK. We know that authorities were alerted to this whole situation by one of their daughters, a 17-year-old, escaped through a window very early Sunday morning. She called police, 911, just before six in the morning and when deputies came and met her, she said that she was being held against her will, that her siblings were also being held against their will. She showed them some photos on her cell phone and what that did is it made authorities believed the story that she was telling them. They came to the house and they saw the horrid condition. They saw that at least three children were being chained to some furniture. They were all evacuated from the house. They were taken to various hospitals. Their psychological well being as well as their physical well being being looked after. And of course the couple now in jail. Both being held on $9 million bail, charged with torture and child endangerment. Dan Simon, CNN, Perris, California.
[Sesay:] Just terrible. Judy Ho and Bobby Chacon join me now. Judy is a clinical and forensic psychologist and Bobby is retired FBI special agent. Welcome to you both. Bobby, I want to start with you. This is truly awful. The children were found in shocking state and the conditions in the house were described as horrific. Talk to me about the process of building a picture of what happened in this home.
[Bobby Chacon, Retired Fbi Special Agent:] Right. So this is going to require a series of interviews with the children. They are the victims and really the only witnesses that we have. So you have the two parents who are the suspected criminals in the case, and now you got 13 witness victims. And so really it is going to these interviews are not going to be easy to conduct. You know, there is a lot of emotion involved. That is going to be conducted by experts who have expertise in interviewing children in these circumstances. And so it may take a series of interviews to actually sort out what was happening. The prosecutors and the investigators are going to have to sort all that out and figure out what criminal violations we actually have here. The obvious ones are kidnapping and child abuse. But you have to get the evidence to support that. That is going to have to come from those children.
[Sesay:] Judy, to bring you in, how difficult is that going to be? You heard that neighbor say when she said something completely innocuous and pleasant, the children froze.
[Judy Ho, Psychologist:] Right.
[Sesay:] How do you begin to unpack this?
[Ho:] And because of the prolonged abuse that they probably suffered, they were not exposed to other people outside of the family to socialize, to have conversation, and that is why they acted so strangely. I am also concerned for the cognitive development of these children because if they have been malnourished for all of this time, it is very likely that a lot of their executive function centers didn't develop and that's why they couldn't make good complex decisions. This is why it is so wonderful that this 17-year-old somehow got the wherewithal to actually break out and have the skills to do that. But I am really concerned about how these interviews are going to go, how much they can even recall, because their learning and memory are probably impaired as well.
[Sesay:] Yes. Bobby, I do want to come to the question that we always ask in these moments. How did neighbors, how did family members not suspect, not know something allegedly I mean, there is no allegations the kids were found in terrible conditions. Who did it? You know, you can pause that, but that something terrible was happening in the house?
[Chacon:] The biggest thing is isolation. So they kept them out of the public eye. They were home schooled. They didn't go out socially. So nobody had contact with these children. So that was the biggest thing that they did, they isolated these children. Some of these children, some of them have never had a conversation with anyone outside that house. You know, this 29-year-old daughter may have never talked to another adult in her life. Some of these children may not know bad things were happening to them because they don't know those things are bad.
[Sesay:] But the children were seen in videos. The children were seen at their parents renewing their vows. These children I mean, they were
[Chacon:] They lined them up. If you see some of those videos, they were always lined up, very regimented, very controlled. So even when they were in public, they were under control of those parents, mainly the father.
[Ho:] And the key is the control here.
[Sesay:] Yes.
[Ho:] The fact that they really kept it under such scrutiny and there are reports that they were basically not allowed to go outside of the house unless it was dark and only a few at a time. And I think to Bobby's point, some of these children because they don't know any better, this is their normal and they were potentially probably even told by their parents that they were doing this to protect them. I mean, we don't know what kind of messages these parents are sending. And so of course my biggest concern now is the psychological development of these children and what is going to them because this type of abuse is much more likely because this is prolonged lead to much bigger issues as they get older.
[Sesay:] What kind of issues?
[Ho:] Things like dealing with social development, having relationships with other people. We know that from research 30 percent of people who have been abused themselves will repeat that cycle of abuse. And whether or not they are going to be able to even hold a job or understand that people can out of basic level still be trusted. All of those thing have to be sorted out and they need to get professional care as soon as possible.
[Sesay:] I want you both to weigh in on this issue. To me, it was just incredibly striking. I want your expert view. When the police got to the home, the mother was puzzled that they were there. And even as they went into the home where, according to authorities, they found some of the children shackled
[Ho:] Right.
[Sesay:] She was still kind of puzzled.
[Ho:] And this is where I believe that there might be a piece where either of the parents or maybe both was carrying on some type of a delusional thought process. Maybe a paranoia where they actually thought what they were doing was in the good interest of the children, and that is why the mom was so surprised, because somehow in her mind she had it twisted that this is actually how you take care of your kids.
[Chacon:] I am sure that is the case. I am sure that the mother did not think they were doing anything wrong. As warped as that sounds, I think the mother at least probably thought that she wasn't doing anything wrong and she was doing what was best for her children.
[Sesay:] Let me ask you this again, back to the question of who knew what, when, if anyone did, if someone did know, if it is proven that other people knew that these children were being abused, are we looking at potential extension of prosecution of those individuals?
[Chacon:] Sure, I mean, the only one I've seen is the grandmother speaking and she said they were the perfect family. So I don't know if there is going to be many other people that were involved with exposure to these children. I think the success that they have if you want to call it success in carrying this out for so long has been the isolation, has been keeping them from other people.
[Sesay:] I am going to ask questions that I know our viewers have at home. How did child welfare, how did I mean, this was registered as a school, this home. How did the authorities or officials didn't have contact?
[Chacon:] California law does not require private schools to be inspected.
[Ho:] Right. And that is really scary because they're not really subject to any of the laws or the policies but the other part of it is it's probably hard for people who have witnessed some weirdness, some secrecy to say I'm going to step forward and actually report them for a welfare check. But I just think this is a good lesson for all of us that hey the worst thing that could happen to you is be a little embarrassed but hey, you can really be saving lives. And we know that one in every single day about five children in America die of child abuse and maltreatment. And so if there's any potential in preventing that many people can just be a little bit, we're just going to go ahead and report it and see what happens.
[Sesay:] Yes, I mean, cross that line. If it is going to save lives cross the line. Judy Ho, Bobby Chacon, great conversation. I thank you.
[Chacon:] Thank you.
[Ho:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Coming up. Hundreds of thousands of Rohingya fled a brutal military crackdown in Myanmar but soon they may be going home. Details next.

[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] Good Sunday morning to you. It is not a trick question. In fact, it's pretty straightforward. Will you support President Trump, the standard bearer for the party, in the 2020 election?
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] Another high-profile Republican is punting, so to speak, on endorsing the president for reelection. Mitt Romney tells, CNN, quote, "I will make that decision down the road." Joining dozens of House and Senate Republicans who appear reluctant to back a Trump re-election bid.
[Unidentified Male:] I haven't thought about that election. It could be a completely different world by 2020. It's a long way off.
[Unidentified Female:] I think it's far too early to make a judgment of that type.
[Unidentified Male:] Talk about what might happen in that time I think is premature. We have no idea who is going to run. Whether the president runs again or not I think is very questionable, candidly.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Why wouldn't he?
[Unidentified Male:] I don't know. Why would he?
[Paul:] All righty. CNN White House reporter, Jeremy Diamond, is with us as well as CNN political analyst, Julian Zelizer, and commentary writer and editor at the "Washington Examiner," Siraj Hashmi. Thank you, Gentlemen, all for being here. Jeremy, want to start with you. So, the relationship between the president and Mitt Romney has been tumultuous. We understand that. Is it surprising however at this point that we haven't heard a solid position from Mitt Romney?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] He is following a long line of senators and Congressmen who are not ready to jump on to the Trump campaign 2020 re-election bid yet and telling of this president's current position, his approval ratings and situation in Washington. But Trump and Romney, in particular, of course, have a very tumultuous relationship and I think we have a clip of their longstanding feud.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] I don't think Mitt needs lots of money, but I'll certainly do whatever is necessary. We need somebody great as a president. I think he'll be a great president.
[Mitt Romney , Former Presidential Candidate:] Being in Donald Trump's magnificent hotel and having his endorsement is a delight.
[President Trump:] I have a lot of friends. No, I have a lot of friends. By the way, Mitt Romney is not one of them! Did he choke?
[Romney:] Here is what I know. Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud.
[President Trump:] The last election should have been won except Romney choked like a dog! He choked! He went I can't breathe! I can't breathe, he said!
[Romney:] I've had a wonderful evening with President-elect Trump. These discussions I've with him have been enlightening and interesting and engaging. I enjoyed them very much.
[Diamond:] So, clearly, these two men have had a very back and forth relationship, love-hate, love-hate. Right now, they are in the love phase where President Trump endorsed Mitt Romney for his Utah Senate bid. Despite that endorsement, though, Mitt Romney, yesterday, not clenching the 60 percent vote threshold required for him to get the Republican nomination in that state outright. He will face a primary challenge in June. A lot of state-based issues there as well, but it is notable that the president endorsed him and Mitt Romney not quite making the threshold although it is likely he will meet that threshold in June.
[Paul:] All righty. Thank you. Julian, let me ask you about that. What do you make of the fact that we have an endorsement from the president? I want to read it to you because he sent it out in a tweet. This isn't something that he went and rallied for Mitt Romney. But he did it on Twitter saying, "Mitt Romney announced he is running for the Senate from the wonderful state of Utah. He'll make great senator and worthy successor to Orrin Hatch and has my full support and endorsement." Mike Kennedy, the state representative there in Utah got 50.88 percent. Romney got 49.12 percent, which means again, June 26th, they are going to face off. What was it here, do you think? Was it President Trump's endorsement that didn't do the job or is there a fracture, a broader issue of a fracture in the Republican party, particularly in Utah?
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Political Analyst:] Some of the politics is local and some of this has to do with Mitt Romney collecting signatures rather than just relying on the nomination process which angered some Utah activists. Some of this is the baggage that comes with President Trump in 2018. Mitt Romney is the quintessential candidate who has tried to play it from all sides. He was the never Trumper who then wanted to be secretary of state for President Trump and who is now receiving his endorsement. So, I think he is angered both the moderates in the state and they are numerous for associating himself with the president. He is also angered conservatives because he came out so strongly in parts of the campaign against Trump. He tried to have it all ways and so there is a lot of built-up resentment even though he still is very popular in the state. He is paying a political price for the president.
[Paul:] OK, so let me ask you, Siraj. Are President Trump and Mitt Romney, are they friends or not friends? At the end of the day, does it matter?
[Siraj Hashmi, Commentary Writer, "washington Examiner":] Well, for one, they are, at best, frenemies, which, of course, you know, everyone has been saying nowadays that, you know, Romney is more known for demonstrative speech against President Trump and called him a phony and a fraud. In the end, it really doesn't matter because Mitt Romney is the favorite to win that primary race and the general election in November. What is interesting, though, is that many Republicans, outside of Utah and some in Utah, believe that Romney is more known for that speech in March of 2016 in which he called President Trump a fraud and a phony. So, what is interesting is will that actually take him over the edge. I think he'll be OK, considering the fact he is so popular there and he has enough name recognition to overcome that type of whatever conservative lapse he kind of rebukes then Candidate Trump.
[Paul:] I need to get Julian here to a new issue this morning with Scott Pruitt of the EPA. Walter Schwab tweeted this out trying to make it as concise as possible. He said, "While Pruitt was state government, the "New York Times," says a lobbyist sold him a home for $100,000 less than she had paid for. Her telecom employer paid the difference. He then voted to let the employer raise its rates. At the EPA, he hired her and the banker who lent him the money. They also say a shell company was used for this transaction and that he failed to disclose his interest in the shell company when he filed a financial disclosure form that's required under the state's ethic program. So, here you go, you couple this with all of the issues he is already dealing with. I think we have a rundown here, D.C. housing arrangements, 247 security detail, first-class travel, office improvements that summit added up to $43,000 for a soundproof booth that the GAO says violated federal law. At the end of the day, he is doing President Trump's job, the job that the president wants him to do. Does that alone make him safe, Julian?
[Zelizer:] Well, it doesn't make him safe. I think this kind of story hurts in that it gives credibility to the idea that these weren't simply mistakes what is going on in Washington and this is a long pattern of how Pruitt lives his political life, right on the border of what is ethically correct and incorrect and sometimes going beyond it. It is true. What makes him safe isn't that he is working for the president. He is actually moving forward on one of the key issues for the president, which is going after all kinds of environmental regulations that have been put into place over the past few decades. So, it's balancing the scandal and the constant turmoil that Pruitt is causing this administration versus the fact that he is a partisan warrior on some of the issues that the president really cares about.
[Paul:] But here's the thing, Siraj, is there a political consequence for President Trump if there is not one for Pruitt?
[Hashmi:] Well, that is the thing. We are seeing the bounds and line drawn with Scott Pruitt and how it applies to President Trump concerning the ethics blurring of the lines. What is interesting, though, is Scott Pruitt, albeit all the regulations that he's undone in the EPA, for conservatives he is kind of undermining their cause. It's kind of like Kanye West announcing that he's, you know, coming out with a hot fire album in June, but then saying he's in support of president you know, a meeting with President Trump in December of 2016 and then supporting tweeting out his support of Candace Owens. In many ways he is doing himself a disservice and President Trump by not firing him is somewhat of an indictment on his administration and it's not looking good. But, again, we are probably not going to see probably not see a resignation any time soon.
[Paul:] All right. Jeremy Diamond, Julian Zelizer, Siraj Hashmi, sorry we ran out of time. Gentlemen, thank you so much.
[Blackwell:] All right. There's breaking news out of Tennessee. One person is dead. Several others are injured. This is after a shooting at a Waffle House in Antioch in the Nashville area. A naked gunman police say wearing only a green jacket is out there somewhere and believed to be armed with an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle. We have more details coming in by the minute from our affiliate reporter who is on the scene. We will get to those in a moment. All right. Now according to "The Washington Post" the White House is privately skeptical of North Korea's plan to halt their nuclear testing site in that facility. There's concern Pyongyang maybe making a play to the U.S. to help ease sanctions on Pyongyang. We have details on that.
[Paul:] Also, French President Macron heading to the U.S. this week for a state visit with President Trump. We are going to look at their relationship. It's been a little rocky ahead of this White House arrival.
[Blackwell:] Also, Starbucks is closing 8,000 stores nationwide on May 29th for racial bias training? But one expert says, these exercises have proven time and time again to be ineffective. He'll be with us in a moment.

[Curnow:] U.S. intelligence agencies said Russia was the culprit in election interference two years ago, but the U.S. Vice President Mike Pence now says China is taking that to a whole new level. He's accusing Beijing of running a divisive influence campaign ahead of the upcoming midterm elections. And the main target according to Pence is Trump voters.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] The tariffs imposed by China to date specifically targeted industries and states that would play an important role in the 2018 elections. By one estimate, more than 80 percent of U.S. counties targeted by China, voted for President Trump and I in 2016. Now, China wants to turn these voters against our administration.
[Curnow:] But Pence didn't stop there. He also slammed China for a near collision between U.S. and Chinese warships. So, Security Analyst Samantha Vinograd joins me now to talk about all of that. Sam, good to see you. You used to work in the Obama White House. What did you make of that speech?
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] What I make of it is that this is not a speech about election interference. If this was about election interference, Vice President Pence would have talked about the other state-sponsored election interference attempts that had been referenced by the National Security Adviser and by the Secretary of State. We have both of those officials citing Russia, of course, China, Iran, and North Korea as having both the intent and the capability to interfere in the U.S. elections. Instead, Vice President Pence chose just to focus on China which really signals to me, Robyn, that this was a political speech. This was not about security. And it's actually really dangerous, because now, we have the Vice President of the United States telling the world that the number one election interference risk is coming from Chinese propaganda. That's ridiculous. And can lead to a gross misallocation of resources that should be spent, for example, looking at Russian covert activity, Iranian covert activity, North Korean fiber hacks, and that sort of election interference.
[Curnow:] OK. And also, I just want to talk about the him conflating security issues around election security, and then the trade war and tariffs. Because if China it wasn't only just China who targeted Trump country, essentially. I mean, I know the Europeans were also in terms of this trade war, focussing, say, on Jack Daniels and a variety of, you know, other Trump-country-type targets, because that was the point of the trade war. So, that's again, a weird way to perhaps conflate the two. What do you think was also key, though, from a political point of view about this speech?
[Vinograd:] Well, that's an excellent point, Robyn, and what's key to me, is that the Vice President is trying to use politics and play politics, again, under the guise of national security. As you pointed out, the Europeans were choosing to focus on products that were really made in states and areas that were pro-Trump in the past, and it's nothing new for the Chinese to use propaganda in the United States. The South Koreans several a decade or so ago or two decades ago, put factories in certain states because they had political implications. This is not a new practice by countries. What is new is, again, waving the flag of election interference when in fact this is a political issue that the Vice President and the President are sensitive about.
[Curnow:] OK. We're going to have to leave it at that. Thanks so much for joining us, Sam Vinograd.
[Vinograd:] Thanks.
[Curnow:] I appreciate it. You're watching CNN. Stay with us.

[Reporter:] Why did you fire Director Comey?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Because he was not doing a good job, very simply. He was not doing a good job.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] The reasoning sounds simple enough, but we have new details this morning about the president's real rationale for firing James Comey, and it has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Anchor:] Plus, Michael Flynn subpoenaed by Congress. Will he finally hand over documents that his lawyers declined to provide last month? And what does that mean for the Russia investigation? Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Alison Kosik.
[Briggs:] And I'm Dave Briggs. It is Thursday, May 11th. It's 4:00 a.m. in the East. This firing of James Comey, Alison, is a political backfire along the lines of Trump vodka, Trump steaks, not going well for the White House this morning, because we have new details this morning which paint a startling picture of a scorned President Trump increasingly consumed by a now-former FBI director whose Russia investigation was simply picking up too much steam for the president's comfort. A source close to Comey telling CNN's Jake Tapper, James Comey was fired for two reasons now.
[Kosik:] OK, here come the two reasons. First, Comey never gave the president any assurance of personal loyalty. And second, the FBI investigation into possible collusion by team Trump with Russia, that was accelerating. So, that may explain the timing of all this. Sources are telling CNN that Comey was fired just a week after asking for more resources to investigate the Russia connection. The White House for its part denies Comey made that request. Regardless, there is progress reported in that probe. A Senate committee issuing a subpoena to former national security adviser Michael Flynn. More on that in a moment.
[Briggs:] First, the White House doggedly defending its rationale for Comey's firing. Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders using some blunt language to describe the investigator's handling into the investigation into Hillary Clinton's e-mail.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Deputy White House Press Secretary:] I think one of the big catalysts that we saw was last week. On Wednesday, Director Comey made a pretty startling revelation that he had essentially taken a stick of dynamite and thrown it into the Department of Justice by going around the chain of command. Having a letter like the one that he received and having that conversation that outlined the basic, just atrocities in circumventing the chain of command in the Department of Justice.
[Briggs:] There are signs that that rationale may not hold up. "The Washington Post" reporting the justice official who wrote the memo justifying Comey's firing that's Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein threatened to resign after the White House leaned heavily on him as the reason Comey was fired.
[Kosik:] Now, today, the new acting director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, he is set to testify at a Senate committee after meeting face-to-face with the president on Wednesday. It's likely he'll face questions about Comey's firing as the White House intensifies its search for a new FBI director. Our coverage begins now with CNN White House correspondent Athena Jones.
[Athena Jones, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning, Alison and Dave. The White House's explanation of the Comey firing has been evolving over the last couple of days. Now, we're learning the White House says that the president was considering letting Comey go starting from the day he was elected to the office. And so, late Wednesday afternoon, the White House put out a timeline trying to clarify how this all went down, starting with the president losing confidence in the director over the last several months, then being angered by the director's testimony last Wednesday on Capitol Hill. And then, the president having a conversation, having a meeting with the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, and the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, to talk about reasons for removing Director Comey. Now, that's a little more information than we had before. Before, the White House wasn't really answering the question of whether the president had asked Rosenstein to write up that memo that he wrote in the end. One thing, of course, the White House not eager to address, certainly not in this timeline, is the issue of the attorney general having recused himself, having played a role in the firing of the man in charge of the Russia investigation. So, there's still a lot more explaining to do Alison, Dave.
[Briggs:] Athena, thank you. James Comey refusing to dwell on his dismissal in a farewell letter to his former colleagues at the FBI, Comey writing, quote, I have long believed that a president can fire an FBI director for any reason or for no reason at all. I'm not going to spend time on the decision or the way it was executed. I hope you won't either. It is done and I will be fine, although I will miss you and the mission deeply.
[Kosik:] Sources inside the White House tell CNN, President Trump kept his decision to fire Comey very close to the vest in the 48 hours before he dropped the bombshell. It did not seek he did not seek a wide range of viewpoints and he grew increasingly angry with the FBI director after reaching the conclusion Comey was his own man and could not be trusted. A longtime friend who spoke to the president over the weekend described him as white hot and complaining repeatedly about, quote, Russia, Russia, Trump and Russia. That friend says the president has regularly expressed frustration that they can't make this all go away, apparently referring to Comey and his staff, among others.
[Briggs:] The president also particularly angry with Comey for testifying he was, quote, mildly nauseous about the possibility that he himself influenced the presidential election. The president also upset that Comey was not putting enough emphasis on investigating the leaks. Also developing at the White House, closely monitoring the performance of Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She's been filling in this week for Sean Spicer, who has Navy Reserve week. Multiple administration sources say Spicer has been benched, though, and could actually be replaced.
[Kosik:] All right, there is new intense reaction to Comey's firing this morning from both sides of the aisle. Some criticism from Republicans, including Congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Trump supporter, calling on the Justice Department inspector general to review the firing. Chaffetz says in a statement, "Previously, I asked Inspector General Horowitz to review the FBI's actions in advance of the 2016 election. Today, I sent a letter urging IG Horowitz to expand the scope of his review to include the decision to fire Director Comey. I look forward to receiving the IG's findings."
[Briggs:] Other top Republicans coming to the president's defense, like House Speaker Paul Ryan in his first comments since the firing of James Comey.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , Speaker Of The House:] James Comey, who is a worthwhile and dedicated public servant, I think he had basically just lost the confidence of a lot of Republicans and a lot of Democrats based upon his conduct, his actions, and some of the comments that he had made. And most importantly, he lost the confidence of the president. And it is entirely within the president's role and authority to relieve him, and that's what he did.
[Briggs:] Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, who Trump personally targeted on Twitter yesterday, suggesting this could become a crisis along the lines of Watergate.
[Sen. Richard Blumenthal , Connecticut:] It is a looming constitutional crisis because it involves a potential confrontation, as did Watergate, between the president and other branches of government. It may well produce impeachment proceedings, although we're very far from that possibility.
[Kosik:] President Trump himself still hanging tough on his decision, taking to Twitter last night to post a video of Democrats who have been critical of Comey. He tweeted this: Democrats should be ashamed. This is a disgrace. #draintheswamp.
[Briggs:] While Director Comey's firing was dominating the headlines, former national security adviser Michael Flynn was being subpoenaed by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Lawmakers demanding all documents related to his interactions with Russian officials. The subpoena was issued once Flynn's lawyer informed the senators he would not be voluntarily turning over any of the information they requested in late April. Now, several of Flynn's associates were subpoenaed earlier this week. We get more on this now from CNN's Manu Raju.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] Good morning, Alison and Dave. Now, the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation into the Russia meddling and any of those ties that exist with Trump associates starting to ramp up now that the intelligence committee has subpoenaed Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, for documents related to anything, any of his ties to Russia. This is because Flynn apparently did not abide by the committee's request for records. Now, I am told that, really, the committee has only gotten a handful of requests back from those Trump associates, and some of them have not even satisfied what the committee is looking for, including Carter Page, that former Trump adviser, foreign policy adviser, not giving details that the committee wants. So, expect some more subpoenas, potentially, in the coming days. Now, this comes as later today a major hearing happening in the Senate Intelligence Committee where national security leaders will come and testify about concerns they have worldwide. One person who will not be there: James Comey. Now, he was scheduled to testify there. Also next week, Comey invited to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee, but one catch, this is going to happen in a closed-door session and will not be open to the public, so we may not know what questions Comey is presented with and what answers he gives, particularly behind why he was fired by President Trump guys.
[Kosik:] All right, Manu. Thanks very much. And the first meeting between President Trump and Russian President Putin, that's apparently set after a face-to-face sit-down between the president and Russia's top diplomat, who had a bizarre reaction to the firing of James Comey. We're live in Moscow, next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] President Trump certainly has long seen the overall Russia investigation as a personal attack on him, but now he's expressing the opinion that it's much more than just about him. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I have this witch hunt constantly going on for over 12 months now. And actually, much more than that. You could say it was right after I won the nomination, it started. And it's a disgrace. It's, frankly, a real disgrace. It's an attack on our country in a true sense. It's an attack on what we all stand for. So when I saw this and when I heard it and I heard it like you did I said, that is really now in a whole new level of unfairness.
[Blitzer:] Here with us now is Richard Ben-Veniste, CNN legal analyst, former Watergate special prosecutor. Richard, what was your reaction when you heard about the raids on Michael Cohen's apartment, his home, his office, his hotel room, and then you just heard the president's blistering response.
[Richard Ben-veniste, Cnn Legal Analyst:] It's a response that seems more appropriate to the king of France, who said, [SPEAKING FOREIGN LANUAGE, "The state is me." This is not an attack on the United States. This is the legal process. Yes, it was an aggressive act. And I suspect that when the dust settles, the justification for the search warrant will become more clear. But this is nothing like how the president has described it. This is our legal system working.
[Blitzer:] He says it's a "witch hunt," "it's a disgrace," "it's an attack on the United States." Why do you think Mueller would refer at least part of the investigation to Michael Cohen, the president's lawyer, to the office of the U.S. attorney in New York?
[Ben-veniste:] You know, all this Stormy stuff started with a suspicious transaction report by the bank. After all, this was a shell company that Cohen used to make this payment
[Blitzer:] The $130,000.
[Ben-veniste:] Very suspicious looking. So he would have had to give some explanation for it. And if that explanation was misleading or false, then he's got a separate criminal potential for an additional crime beyond all the others that have been described.
[Blitzer:] And they're also looking into what, if any, connection he may have had to the $150,000 payment from American Media, the parent company of the "National Enquirer," to Karen McDougall, the former playmate?
[Ben-veniste:] Yes. And Ms. McDougall said, and her lawyers have said, there was collusion between her lawyer and Mr. Cohen to arrange for that payoff, and that she wasn't really getting the true representation from her lawyer. That's a serious charge in and of itself. And so if all of this was to disguise a favor to Mr. Trump by his friend, David Pecker, then there's another potential for fraud. So the Southern District of New York is notoriously it's my alma mater, so I can take some pride in this. And I was head of the Official Corruption Section before I went down to Washington to work on the Watergate case.
[Blitzer:] Let me get your quick reaction to the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, reacting today when he was asked about the possibility the president could fire Robert Mueller. Listen to this.
[Sen. Chuck Grassley, , Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee:] I think it would be suicide for the president to fire him. I think the less the president says about this whole thing, the better off he will be. And I think that Mueller is a person of stature and respected, and I respect him. Just let the thing go forward.
[Ben-veniste:] That is hugely important.
[Blitzer:] Why? Tell us why you believe that's important.
[Ben-veniste:] I testified before Senator Grassley's committee back in June, and the import of my testimony was that the Judiciary Committee needed to protect Robert Mueller against the potential for firing, just what's been discussed. And what has been reported to have been the case back in June, when the president supposedly asked his counsel, Don McGahn, to orchestrate the firing of Robert Mueller. So this is the very, very powerful Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee speaking, saying that this would be suicide. That's a huge statement, warning the president not to do it. And, indeed, I think that is the only thing on the table that might warrant a resolution of impeachment, that is, the firing of Rosenstein and Mueller, or at least a hobbling of Mueller through various moves that the president might make.
[Blitzer:] Richard Ben-Veniste, thank you for coming in.
[Ben-veniste:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Is the president of the United States considering firing deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein? I'll speak to a Senate Democrat who, along with his colleagues, are preparing right now for that possible scenario. Plus, we're only moments away from two major live events in Washington. The White House set to respond to the raids on Michael Cohen's office, his home, his hotel room. And Facebook CEO Mike Zuckerberg set to be grilled by lawmakers on the massive data scandal up on Capitol Hill. We'll have live coverage. We'll be right back.

[Cabrera:] Come look at your TV. If you are in another room right now, because Denver police are investigating an FBI agent who is showing off his dance moves, and he accidentally shot a man on the dance floor, and you can see it in the video it is a happens. The off-duty agent is there doing a version of the stinky leg maybe, the gun falls out during the backflip and then it goes off with the flash when he goes to pick it up. One person was taken to the hospital with a leg injury. Luckily that wasn't serious. Here's how a witness described the scene.
[Cara Chancellor, Witnessed Accidental Shooting:] It was a break dance circle, quintessential break dance circle. There was one man doing flips and he left and the FBI agent, I guess, we didn't know that, he came on the scene and he did a back flip and he was dancing. And then right as he did that back flip his gun fell out and hit the ground. It shot off.
[Cabrera:] That agent was taken to Denver police headquarters and later released to his FBI supervisor. An immigrant family from Ohio says U.S. customs seized their life savings, a $58,100 to be exact. Rusham Kazazi was flying home to Albania with the money in his bag and court documents because all he say for his family and to help purchase a vacation home. Karzazi says customs agents interrogated him and took the money. Here's how his son reacted.
[Erald Kazazi, Son Of Rusham Kazazi:] He was intercepted by TSA at the airport because he had money in his luggage. We have never even done anything wrong, so to have CVP take his money with no cause whatsoever is shocking.
[Cabrera:] Polo Sandoval is joining us now. And court documents say that man was also strip searched.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn National Correspondent:] That is what this gentleman alleges in these court documents that have been recently filed as he seeks to get his life savings back on. He also claims that he put the $58,100 in his carry-on when he left Cleveland Hopkinton international airport headed back to his native Armenia. He said wanted to buy a vacation home here. He had a layover in Newark, New Jersey where Mr. Kazazi says he planned to make that declaration of this money. So did federal authorities have that solid legal footing in seizing this money? It's actually kind of unclear here, Ana. Let me explain here. It is not illegal to either come into the United States or leave the United States with large amounts of cash as long as you declare amounts in excess of $10,000. The question is though where should that declaration happen? When you pull up the form here that's required when you are traveling with these large amounts of money and you can read the the instructions for yourself here, it says that travelers carrying currency in excess of $10,000 either in or out of the United States have to make the declaration at the time they make entry into the United States or in Mr. Kazazi's case at the time of departure from the United States at a port of entry. The question though what port of entry? Mr. Kazazi claims that he planned to make that declaration at Newark international during his layover before he left to Armenia. But authorities here seem or at least everything that we have everything that's pointing to what we have right now is that seizure made by authorities happened hat Cleveland international airport. So that's the question here. If you are moving with these large amounts of money, should you make that at your initial point of departure or your last U.S. port of entry before you least United States? We looked at the forms here, and it just doesn't say. We turned to customs and border protection saying they cannot comment because of pending litigation, and they simply referred us to the form that doesn't go into great detail.
[Cabrera:] Have they told the man whether he can get his money back?
[Sandoval:] The seizure took place in October there in Cleveland Hopkins international airports. Two months, Mr. Kazazi then received that formal notice that they would not give him back his money saying that this money was involved in smuggling, drug trafficking and money laundering. However, criminal charges have not been filed against this man yet. So, again, we will have to see how that plays out in court.
[Cabrera:] Indeed. Polo Sandoval, thank you. Coming up, a CNN exclusive. The war against the most dangerous gang in the world, MS-13. Our own Nick Paton Walsh, he has access to an elite police squad that tracks down gang members but not without controversy.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn The Situation Room With Wolf Blitzer:] continues with Erin Burnett OutFront right now.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Erin Burnett, Cnn Erin Burnett Outfront:] Good evening. I'm Erin Burnett. OutFront tonight, breaking news. The Washington Post reporting this evening that the president of the United States has revealed top secret classified information to Russia. According to the post, Trump shared the classified information with the Russian Ambassador and the Russian Foreign Minister at the White House last week. This information involved ISIS. The report states it jeopardized the critical source of intelligence and we are awaiting a briefing from the national security adviser at those cameras momentarily. The White House now in full denial mode, the deputy national security adviser for strategy, Dina Powell saying tonight the story is false. The president only discussed the common threats that both country face. Of course, the Russian Ambassador is believed by U.S. intelligence to be a top Russian spy and a spy recruiter. Sara Murray begins our coverage OutFront at the White House as we await H.R. McMaster approaching those cameras and speaking to the press. The minute that happens we'll bring you there live. Sara, I know you're just feet away. What are you learning?
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Erin, we are looking for a fuller explanation from the president's national security adviser, H.R. McMaster on exactly what happened in this meeting between President Trump and Russian's foreign minister as well as Russia's ambassador. That's what the Washington Post is reporting that the president apparently shared classified information. Now, the White House has been scrambling for the last I would say, hour or so to figure out how they're going to respond to this. They responded by putting a trio of statements out from some of their officials and they don't all say the same thing, Erin. As you pointed out, there's a statement from Dina Powell, deputy national security adviser that flat out says this story is false. But it's worth noting that the White House also put out statements from Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson as well as national security adviser H.R. McMaster already. Those statements don't go that far. They do not say the story is flat out false. Let me read you what H.R. McMaster said in his statement. The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation. At no time or any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that we're not already known publicly. So not a flat out denial that this story is false. And Erin, just one more point of fact checking here. The Washington Post report, they broke this story about what the president said to these Russian officials does not say that he discussed sources and methods but it does say that he disclosed classified information, clearly the kind of classified information that was very alarming when U.S. officials found out about it. And obviously we're waiting to get more details on this sort of discrepancy we're seeing in these statements from H.R. McMaster when he began speaking.
[Burnett:] All right. Sara, thank you very much. And the Washington Post reporter who broke the story going to be with me in just a moment because there are some crucial details here in the story. I want to go to the Pentagon now though for the response. Barbara Starr is there. And Barbara, do we at this time know what it is that the president revealed?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Well according to the Washington Post and I'll leave it the reporter you have to explain it further, some of this did have to do in fact with intelligence that perhaps led to the ban on laptops onboard, passenger cabins in airplanes. So it's quite interesting that that statement referenced aviation. You could talk about that with the Russians certainly. Nobody wants to see Russian passenger liners crash due to some intelligence threat they may not be aware of. But the Post article clearly suggesting that the president shared some of the most sensitive intelligence information about this and that that information came from another country. And that is a key problem. When you get intelligence from another country, you can't share it with somebody else. It's very sensitive. It's very confidential. There's no expectation that you're going to share it with another country. Countries want to know that they can tell the U.S. things that they can tell the president, the CIA, and that that information will be kept confidential. Because if it is shared, it puts their own people, this other country that we don't know who it is, it potentially puts their people, their intelligence gathering systems, all of that at risk on the ground in very dangerous places around the world. It jeopardizes their safety, their ability to operate and what happens is they don't want to share with the United States anymore. So there's going to be a real question here about whether some confidence has been shaken in intelligence services around the world. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right. Barbara, thank you very much. And I want to get to the reporter who broke the story, Greg Miller, national security correspondent for the Washington Post. My whole panel is with me. I want to introduce all of you then we're going to start with Greg. Bob Baer is here, former CIA, Juliette Kayyem, former Homeland Security, Mark Preston, political analyst, Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law professor, Emeritus, and Jim Sciutto, our chief national security correspondent. So Greg, let me start with you so you could explain. And I know, I want to make sure people understand. You're going to share as much as you can but not enough to put lives at risk if you if that is what you're trying to do, right? You're not going to say the city from where this intelligence operative was able to penetrate a top levels of ISIS for example, to try to protect lives. But tell me, how specific, how top secret, what was this information?
[Greg Miller, National Security Correspondent, The Washington Post:] As your other reporter summarized, this was really sensitive information about an ongoing and unfolding Islamic state terror plot that has caused a great deal of concern among counterterrorism officials. And in a conversation with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador, Trump is going into details of what the United States knows about this unfolding plot, how the Islamic state is pursuing it, trying to put it together, trying to pull it off. And at the same time talking about some of the measures the United States is taking to try to deal with it. And this is problematic mainly because this is information that the United States has mainly if not exclusively because of a foreign partner providing it that has some access to the Islamic state. And so this wasn't Intel that the United States was authorized to share, and especially not authorized to share with Russia.
[Burnett:] And I want to read to you, Greg, because this goes to the heart of what you're reporting, two statements from the White House tonight, one of which came from the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson via the White House say this, during President Trump's meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov, a broad range of subjects were discussed. Among which were common efforts and threats regarding counterterrorism. During that exchange, the nature of specific threats were discussed, OK? So they admit it. I'm sorry. But they did not discuss sources, methods or military operations, all right? So let me just ask you specifically, Greg, because in your report you are saying that while the sources and the methods may not have been specifically discussed but the information that the president shared they would be easily ascertainable, right?
[Miller:] In fact our story says clearly that the president did not discuss did not name this partner, the source of this intelligence.
[Burnett:] The country.
[Miller:] Did not talk about the particular collection capability that was responsible for this intelligence but was providing details that came because of this intelligence stream. And the worry among a lot of security officials that we talked to was that Russia, which has a very capable intelligence services of its own, could try to reverse engineer this. Could try to figure out what is this source that the United States has, who is the ally that the United States is depending on, where does this stuff come from. Trump's reference to a specific city may have made that even easier. So that's what the concern is about.
[Burnett:] And Greg, you continue there's one sentence in your story, you write, Moscow would be keenly interested in identifying that source and possibly disrupting it.
[Miller:] Yes. That's right. And then, so the relationship with Russia and Syria is so problematic, right? I mean on the one hand the United States and Russia both regard the Islamic state as a threat and want to deal with that threat and probably collaborate or cooperate to some degree in sharing information that might protect Russians or might protect Americans from attack.
[Burnett:] All right. Greg, I interrupt just to listen to the national security adviser H.R. McMaster. Everyone, here he is.
[H.r. Mcmaster, White House National Security Adviser:] There's nothing that the president takes more seriously than the security of the American people. The story that came out tonight as reported is false. The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats to our two countries including threats to civil aviation. At no time, at no time were intelligence sources or methods discussed. And the president did not discuss any military operations that were not already publicly known. Two other senior officials who were present, including the secretary of state, remember the meeting the same way and have said so. They're on the record accounts should out way those anonymous sources. And I was in the room. It didn't happen. Thanks everybody. Thank you.
[Burnett:] So Greg, let me just go to you first, OK? Because I want to give you a chance. I want to make it clear here. He's saying your story is false. And no sources and methods were disclosed. But I want to be loud and clear here. Your story does not say sources and methods were disclosed. It says a specific plot was discussed from which one would be able to figure out sources and methods. Am I correct?
[Miller:] I think that's right and I think that the White House is playing word games here to that effect to try to to try to blunt the impact of this story, nor do any of the White House officials who are denouncing this story, nor have any of them offer explanation why that this was also above board and not problematic in any way, why did the national security council coming out of this meeting feel it was necessary to contact the CIA Director and the director of the National Security Agency to give them a head's up on what Trump had just told the Russians.
[Burnett:] Right. So the bottom line is, you stand by the story and every word of it. He says it's false, You say no.
[Miller:] Absolutely.
[Burnett:] All right. Please stay with me. All of you stay with me. I just want to go to our justice correspondent Evan Perez. Evan, Greg couldn't be clear.
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, yes, Erin. And I got to tell you, the words that the that H.R. McMaster just spoke really does not really contradict Greg's story in the Washington Post report. And look, we know from experience because we reported back on March 31st about the intelligence that was behind the laptop ban and we spent a couple of days doing conference calls with the U.S. Intelligence Agencies and they were specifically concerned about the aspects that Greg was pointing out in the story. The things that the president allegedly told the Russian the Russian officials in the Oval Office there during the meeting are exactly the things that we were asked to keep out of the story because we were told that if we reported those things it would it would tell the enemy about the sources and methods, the way in which the U.S. had gathered this information. And its allies had gathered this information. So really, what we're talking about is you don't necessarily need to say, you know
[Burnett:] This is how we got it. Yes.
[Perez:] This is how we got it. But just the use of certain words and certain aspects, details of the story, we were told that we should hold back and we did because we felt that we there was no interest for us to help the enemy and help terrorist organizations, you know, get through the security system here in the United States or around the world. So we held back a lot of those details and now apparently, according to Greg's reporting, it appears that the president just kind of let that out in his meeting with the Russian officials.
[Burnett:] So, Greg, let me just ask you in terms of the detail. Obviously, you said it was a looming threat that he was giving details about. And could you give me a little more information? He was walking through all sorts of scenarios related to this laptop bomb. I mean, what was it that he was sharing?
[Miller:] Yes. I want to be clear here. The sources that we talked to were really worried about they didn't want to compound the problem here, so they were withholding details from us and then we are withholding even further details from our stories at the request of officials that we talked to all day today.
[Burnett:] Just such I'm sorry to interrupt, just as you're withholding the name of the city so that ISIS wouldn't theoretically be able to know someone had infiltrated their top levels in a specific
[Miller:] Correct.
[Burnett:] degree. That's just one thing. Anyway, go ahead.
[Miller:] Correct. And so, I mean so we're withholding some of that information. But when Trump but we know more about what Trump talked about in the session and the way it was described to us was he he was laying out sort of details about the capability here. How the Islamic state is pursuing this plot, how it's going about developing it, how it's attempting putting it what it's putting in place to try to pull it off, talking about situations in which you might have a greater impact or lesser impact under which circumstances. In other words, if it if it happen in this kind of case, we could expect a big, big problem, many casualties possibly or in other cases it might be more muted and not as effective. I mean, he's revealing stuff that is coming largely from this really important intelligence stream.
[Burnett:] Now Greg, from your reporting, did the president have any idea what he was doing? I mean, he is in a meeting with the foreign minister of Russia and of course, Sergei Kislyak, the ambassador who's controversial and we have reported is believed to be not only a Russian spy but a top Russian recruiter of spies in this country. Any knowledge as to the president knowing that he was sharing this information that was so
[Miller:] Well, I think that, you know, there's a couple of things there. So, a couple of my colleagues described this meeting with Kislyak and Lavrov as inopportune at best, right? I mean, so it's one day after he's fired the FBI Director. Trump is admitting that that was partly because of his frustration with the FBI's inquiry into Russia in the Trump campaign. And then he's greeting the Russian ambassador and foreign minister at the White House and having this lengthy conversation with them. And so, I mean, that's just problematic on so many levels. Other officials that we talked to, and we include this in the story as well, express frustration with a lack of discipline for the president. So they prepare pages of talking points, trying to prepare him going into meeting like this, this is what we should discuss, this is what we need to talk about, this is what you can expect them to try to raise. Trump has insisted that those be boiled down to a single page of bullet points that he can digest and often even strays from those.
[Burnett:] And you also reported a sense that some of this was bragging.
[Miller:] Yes, I mean, the White House hasn't disputed any of that language in order to anybody that we talk to today that he goes and launches into this subject by saying, I get the best Intel, I get a great Intel, I get great briefings every day. You got to believe this. And wraps it up this whole part of the conversation by saying, can you believe the world we live in?
[Burnett:] So, I mean, the bottom line here seems to be that they're saying that your story is false. But they're saying that you're saying something you're not saying at all. I mean, that's sort of the conclusion that I'm reaching here, Greg, right?
[Miller:] And that's a sort that's a sort of classic ploy to
[Burnett:] OK. So let me Jim I got Jim Sciutto here as well. Jim, I mean, here's the reality. Greg's reporting would indicate that what H.R. McMaster just said, this story is false, what Dina Powell is saying, the deputy national security adviser for strategy came out and said the story is false. Those two statements are untrue.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] His statement is fundamentally insufficient because
[Burnett:] H.R. McMaster?
[Sciutto:] H.R. McMaster. And frankly all the statements because The Washington Post story says that the president revealed classified information resulting from a secret source not that he revealed who the secret source was. Now, in the world of intelligence, oftentimes you can make conclusions about who the source is based on where it's coming from, that's the thing as Greg was saying to reverse engineer it. That's the point I would make. Second point I would make is if the White House have demonstrated credibility on any certainly intelligence issue but any of the other many controversy that have come out.
[Burnett:] You mean, in terms of trusting the statements that come out
[Sciutto:] That come from the White House podium or senior officials, you might be inclined to give this statement more. I'm just stating an obvious fact. You might be inclined to give this statement more credibility than it has. Two other points having me. One, there are really three things that I've been speaking to intelligence officials and form current and former all day as the ripples of this go out. They make three points to me about why if this is confirmed, it would be significant. One, the obvious point is classified information. Two, revealed to a prime adversary of the U.S., Russia.
[Burnett:] Russia.
[Sciutto:] And three, that it gets to a sensitive relationship. Difficult abilities relationships, the U.S. has many intelligence sharing relationships in the country. They are natural.
[Burnett:] Right. Meaning, this country this country that is that is have has agents' lives at risk at this moment in the middle of ISIS.
[Sciutto:] And we have relationships that our intelligence sharing that are public, Britain, France, Germany, et cetera, the five Is which includes Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, then we have others relationships that are more sensitive, built overtime, more comfortable more uncomfortable rather for those involved. The final point I would make is this. If this relates to the laptop ban and there's a lot we're talking about aviation risks, even McMaster referenced aviation risk.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] Let me just tell you. This is an extremely hot threat right now in the view of U.S. Intelligence and counter terror. There is a debate going on right now about banning laptops, not just from these eight Muslim majority countries but from Europe and even talk on U.S. Airlines. This is a you know, this is a clear and present danger. You were talking about the most urgent terror threat to the
[U.s. Burnett:] So Greg, let me ask you, from the people you spoke to, when you were first told Greg is not there? OK. Sorry, as we get him back, let me just go to you Juliet Kayyem and ask this question because we understand from Greg's reporting, right? That the president walked through various scenarios. He was saying some with mass casualties when he was talking about this laptop bomb with the information that he had. Does this information that he shared because he shared it with the Russians put lives at risk? Lives of the agents whose lives are on the line infiltrating ISIS and lives of regular civilians who could be on an airplane that because this source somehow ends up being put of commission are now at greater risk?
[Juliette Kayyem, Former Assistant Secretary, Department Of Homdland Security:] Yes. The short answer is yes. You know, we have a tendency to say that was dangerous what the president did or it could risk lives. This literally was disclosed in the middle of one of the most serious intelligence debates going on in government right now. We've heard pieces of it regarding the laptop ban. But it regards the extent to which ISIS and to be honest until this story I didn't it was ISIS we were talking about. There were actually questions whether there were other terrorist groups trying to do this. To the extent to which ISIS had the capability to essentially get a laptop bomb near the skin of an airplane in the air and kill hundreds of people. So we have a limited laptop ban going on now. There were rumors last year that we reported on CNN that that would be extended to Europe. It was sort of put on hold. No one knew why. And so this is this is not some, you know, historic issue. This is this is the headlines and the Washington Post story seems remarkably legitimate and timely at this stage.
[Burnett:] Bob baer, how serious is this?
[Bob Baer, Former Cia Operative:] It's extremely serious, as Juliette said. These bombs are chemical explosions, they can reach full detonation with a suicide bomber on an airplane. You can take down any airplane. There's no way to detect them with x-rays which can detect nitrates, normal explosives. This is an innovation that the Islamic state has taken beyond our wildest imagination. And the only way we can actually stop these plots is to keep running sources inside the Islamic state. And the president by revealing this to the Russians has lost control of this information. It's going to the Syrians. It's going to go to the Iranians. Russia now lies in the ability to protect that source, whoever he is, wherever he is. Has been seriously undermined. And I can tell you this. If a CIA officer had revealed this information to the Russians, he'd be fired instantly.
[Burnett:] Fired instantly. That will not happen to the president of the United States because he can declassify whatever he wants but that doesn't change the seriousness or perhaps lack of judgment that was just shown.
[Baer:] Well, this is worse than criminal. It's not criminal because the president can declassify. It doesn't violate the espionage law because it says material that basically shouldn't have gotten to another side. So he's safe from criminal investigation. He's probably safe from impeachment. But the worst case scenario here is this is Jordanian Intelligence or Israeli Intelligence, they've got a guy who for years who is on the inside, this guy is now going to get killed. The information gets to Hezbollah, it gets to Iran, it gets to all of America's enemies. Now, we learned one new thing tonight from the Washington Post reporter. We learned that the leak didn't come from Russia. We learned that the leak came from an American source. Why? Here's what he says. He says, the source didn't want to compound the problem. He's telling us he may not have wanted to, but he's telling us something that's important. That the leak came from an American source. So there's an American intelligence source who is loyal to the United States who feels that the president did something so bad that he is prepared to go to the Washington Post and perhaps even in some ways compound the problem because he thinks on balance he has an obligation to do that.
[Burnett:] Which is crucial to some people, Jim, watching may say this is compounding the problem. OK. The Washington Post is refraining from publishing the city for example where this intelligence operative may have penetrated ISIS. ISIS can figure it out. Russia can figure it out. That's the whole point of the story. What is the balance that the person leaking would have thought it was important to share.
[Sciutto:] So share, there are lives at risk here, right? Because for a moment
[Burnett:] Right. Because from this person's point of view whether we know or not in the press, or you watching though, the Russians are going to tell the Iranians, ISIS is going to know and all of these lives could be at risk any way.
[Sciutto:] Relationship damaged and the value of that relationship, right? Because this is intelligence that seems related to the most current terror threat to the U.S. Great concern about aviation threats. And this this another point I would make. At some point, we have to separate from does this damage the president? What is the risk to the president? It seems to be a clear and present risk to lives here. Senator Blumenthal, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee made that very point.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] That's what to a key intelligent relationship and two and to the response to and prevention of the most immediate terror threat.
[Burnett:] So senator Blumenthal is going to be with us in just a couple of moments. Let me ask you though, Mark Preston, about the questions this raises. Does this raise questions about the president's competence? I just go to the Washington Post report where Greg wrote and quoted, a former official saying, does he understand what's classified and what's not? That's what worries me.
[Preston:] Yeah. And let me put it in two different veins. The geopolitical vein right now, you are looking at about 12:23 a.m. in London. You're looking at about 2:23 in Tel Aviv. To think the head of those intelligence agencies, for those countries who are big allies, strong allies of the United States have not been roused from their beds to be told what is going on right now as we speak here in Washington, D.C. We'd be foolish. And that comes to the question of competency and trust. And can they trust as Jim Sciutto was saying right there talking about relationships, can they trust giving President Trump information. I also think it's telling when you look at the electoral political fallout is that you have Paul Ryan, the speaker of the house saying that he wants to get a full account of the facts from the administration. At the same time you're not seeing any senators, any republicans who are rushing to the defense of Donald Trump. They're being a little more careful and taking a step back. I think that is very telling.
[Burnett:] Very telling because, Mark, part of the issue is they're coming out and saying that the story is false. But what they're saying is false isn't what the Washington Post reported. And unfortunately, as we've seen even in their rendition of what happened with Jim Comey, what they all came out and said ended up being completely untrue. So, people whether it would be republicans in congress or people watching tonight don't know whether to trust them or whether they're lying.
[Preston:] There's been so many opportunity in the past where republicans have walked out on a limb where they have defended Trump on quite frankly silly aspects whether crowd size through his inauguration or what have you. This is no longer silly. This is very, very serious.
[Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor, Emiritus:] This is indefensible. Nobody can defend nobody will defend the president on this. They may say it's untrue but if it's true, he will get no defense on this.
[Burnett:] Juliette.
[Kayyem:] Erin? Can I yes.
[Burnett:] Yes,
[Kayyem:] So, in the world of counterterrorism, when a terrorist organization thinks that there's someone near them who may know something, so first of all, that person if it's actually a human asset that has gotten close to ISIS and they're planning, that person is likely dead. I'm just being blunt here. So let me just talk so what happens when a terrorist organization thinks it's been compromised? Two things. One is, they postpone what they were planning or which would be great, or they speed it up. And so, all of our concern about what's goings on here is there is a tendency when an organization is compromised that they actually move faster to avoid detection. And so we are probably entering a more heightened sort of concerned time because of the fact that we now know but the Russians knew a couple of days ago that someone or something, some intelligence was exploited.
[Burnett:] Bob Baer, what do you make of the point that Juliette is saying? They either they either sow it down, OK. Or they speed it up. And by the way, just to remind everybody, that's what we saw for example in the Brussels attacks at the airport, right? They thought they were on to them and they went ahead and did that before they were ready. But that is what we've seen happened before. The speedup.
[Baer:] Well, Juliette is right. But more than that as a former case officer at the Central Intelligence Agency, getting a source inside the Islamic state is almost impossible. We rely on our allies whether it's Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel to get inside these groups. They're closer. They're this is part of their world. To lose these sources, to lose these liaison services is a catastrophe. And I think we have to understand that breaches like this will get Americans killed eventually. It there's no other here's no better way to put it.
[Dershowitz:] And they may have to ban all laptops starting tomorrow. We may have to take immediate emergency action. This is an emergency.
[Burnett:] And to be clear, that would only slightly minimize the risk, right? I mean, it certainly doesn't it doesn't take it away of what we're talking about here with a plane.
[Sciutto:] Well, because you have address cargo issues as well. But we know that there's a debate under way about this very risk, about whether they extend it to other flights and possibly to the U.S. and I think the professor is correct that if it's out there, you can't think about it, right? You might have to respond.
[Burnett:] So I just want to we go to Evan here, you know, this is just to give everyone a sense of the context here. Donald Trump or his campaign, right? Is under investigation for possible collusion with the Russians during the campaign. This meeting without question happened with one of the Russians involved in the conversation, the ambassador from Russian believed by U.S. intelligence to be a top spy and spy recruiter for the rest. Here is what Trump said during the election about classified information. A tweet of course. Crooked Hillary Clinton and her team were extremely careless in their handling a very sensitive, highly classified information. Not fit. In February of this year, the president, the real scandal here is that the classified information is illegally given out by "intelligence like candy." Very Un-American. And yet, Evan, it is the president of the United States who has, it seems from this Washington report, done just that.
[Perez:] Well, That's right, Erin. And I got to tell you, the words that Juliette Kayyem just spoke, exactly the words that we heard from the intelligence agencies before we did our story back on March 31st. We heard exactly the same thing that if we said certain bits of information, certain details of what we knew from the intelligence, that the terrorists could either, A, kill people who were inside who they detected or suspected were spies or and, you know, they would simply speed up plots that they already had in mind or they would change their tactics which would make it much more difficult for us and the for the U.S. and the allies to be able to figure out what they're up to. So, this was the danger that was described to us. I mean, it was it was pretty stark over a couple of days that we were on the phone with intelligence agencies. They were trying to get us to make sure that we did not reveal these specific details that according to the post the president has reveal.
[Dershowitz:] I think it's a serious mistake to conflate this with the issue of whether there were, you know, combinations before the whole Russian thing, it's a serious mistake to conflate that because the republicans will make that an arguing point. I think you to forget about that and focus only on the national security threat. This didn't happen because there were meetings between the campaign and between the Russians.
[Burnett:] No.
[Dershowitz:] So put that aside. Get that off of the agenda, focus only on the national security.
[Burnett:] What your what Jim, the point you're making is unwitting.
[Sciutto:] It's collusion of a type if it turns out to be true because you're sharing with an adversary extremely sensitive information that should not be shared whether it's intentional or not is another question. It does not appear to be intentional.
[Burnett:] So what we have so far stay with me. I want to make the point here. We have a statement from Rex Tillerson which came from the White House, we have H.R. McMaster going to cameras and saying the story is false, no sources and methods were shared. And we have Dina Powell, the deputy national security adviser saying the same thing. To be clear that does not mean the story is false. The story says he shared top secret classified information. It does not say he shared the sources. It simply says, it would be easy to ascertain them from the information. But that's it, H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser coming to those cameras saying essentially the exact same thing with secretary of state just put out in a statement, not taking a single question on such a crucial issue. And I want to go to Michelle Kosinski who's live at the state department. And Michelle, you've seen that statement from the secretary of state and you have some unbelievable information. That statement from the secretary of state and you have some unbelievable information, that statement from the secretary of state is a surprise to the state department?
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn Senior Diplomatic Correspondent:] Well, a number of senior state department officials I talked to night, first of all, they weren't all aware of the news when it broke. So that tells us one thing that there was no kind of preliminary damage control going out wide to all senior officials here at the state department. That's not to say some didn't know about it. But those I spoke to, a few didn't even know that the news had broken when it did. Then the statement that came from the White House I mean, the officials I spoke to weren't sure what to say at that moment. Later when I spoke to other senior officials, they didn't know that their own secretary of state had already put out a statement and that it came from the White House. Two of those officials we notified about that statement. This is shyly unusual. What one of them said to me was that this was surprising. Another called this odd. One senior official told us that they were scrambling to try to first figure out what countries were involved. Not only in this information, the partners that could have been involved in talking about the threat itself but also the allies where there now has to be damage control. They were not aware that this statement had even gone out as they were trying to ascertain what of the countries that they handled could have been affected by this down the road. So, that's the state of things right now.
[Kosinski:] As for what happens next oh, go ahead, Erin.
[Erin Burnett, Cnn Anchor:] No, I just I just wanted to jump in for a second. Stay with us, Michelle. But I want to go to John Kirby, who, of course, you know and our viewers know. He was the State Department spokesman. He also spokesman for the Pentagon. So, John, let me give you a chance to respond here to Michelle's reporting.
[John Kirby, Former State Department Spokesman:] Sure.
[Burnett:] She was the one who told two senior State Department officials that a statement had come out from the secretary of state. So, the State Department didn't know about it. It came from the White House. How shocked are you?
[Kirby:] I'm stunned. I mean, it's I think it just speak to a level of dysfunction at the State Department in terms of at least the communications effort that I think is truly remarkable. I can't remember a single time and I worked for two secretaries of defense as well as a secretary of state where the principal, the cabinet official put out a statement, a public statement about something this big and this newsworthy where the communications staff and the staff in general wasn't aware, wasn't tracking it, wasn't helping edit it, wasn't pushing it out. So, this is, I'm sure Michelle's reporting is good. It's stunning.
[Burnett:] John, does it open the door to the fact of whether the secretary of state even know?
[Kirby:] I think it probably yes, I think that's an inescapable potential conclusion, yes.
[Burnett:] So, on that note, Jim, let me just ask you. We don't know whether he knew or didn't know. We know that no one at the State Department seemed to know. We know that what he says matches what H.R. McMaster said and what Dina Powell said. So, clearly, the White House is trying to circle the wagons here. Senator Corker has just came out and spoken, obviously, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and he's said, they are in a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that's happening. It's a pretty strong statement and a stunning statement from someone who had been rather an ally of this White House.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Well, one, you might expect to hear from a Democrat but not a very senior Republican who has been very sparing in his criticism of the Trump administration through the campaign and now.
[Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor, Emeritus:] This is the most serious charge ever made against a sitting president. Let's not minimize it. Comey is in the wastebasket of history. Everything else is off the table. This is the most serious charge ever made against a sitting president of the United States. Let's not underestimate it.
[Burnett:] So, Alan, what does that mean, though? Because you're saying this is the most serious charge ever made against a sitting president and yet it's not criminal.
[Dershowitz:] It's not criminal.
[Burnett:] It's not impeachable.
[Dershowitz:] That's right.
[Burnett:] But it is more serious than things that were?
[Dershowitz:] Absolutely right. Absolutely right.
[Sciutto:] Well, what's impeachable is up to the Congress.
[Dershowitz:] Well, but it says high crimes and misdemeanors. And this doesn't fit into that category, but something has to be done. And everything else should be put on hold and everything should focus on this.
[Burnett:] And I want you all to stay with me, please, to give you a chance to react, because I want to go to someone who may have a strong point of view on this, the Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, who sits on the Judiciary Committee. And, Senator, I don't know if you just heard what Alan Dershowitz was saying here, but he was saying he believes this is the most serious charge against a sitting president in American history. Your response?
[Sen. Richard Blumenthal , Judiciary Committee:] What we know is that it is a very, very serious threat to our national security and safety, and that's why my hope is that Republicans and Democrats will come together in favor of an independent investigation through a special prosecutor and through an independent commission, so that we can follow the facts wherever they lead and the appropriate remedy adopted. Make no mistake: this kind of serious grave threat really requires a national response, putting country above politics. That's what I hope we'll be seeing and
[Burnett:] What needs to happen right now, though, Senator? I mean, obviously the nature of what we are discussing right now is a president, an imminent threat to civilians, American and other, right, in aviation.
[Blumental:] What needs to happen right now
[Burnett:] That's what we're talking about. So investigation, I hear you on that. But what needs to happen right now?
[Blumenthal:] What needs to happen is for a full explanation from President Trump. He owes the American people an explanation, not just a flat denial, which is really a non-denial denial that fails to address the details of this story. Remember, one of the most telling details here is that the White House itself deleted from the official record some of the details of the disclosure so that there would not be peril to lives and sources and betrayal of allies. And that's really what's at stake here. And so, what needs to happen is the truth needs to be uncovered and anyone responsible for this violation of the norms, if not the law of intelligence, has to be held accountable.
[Burnett:] Your colleague Senator Corker, I just quoted him a moment ago just said, talking about the White House, quote: They are in a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that's happening. How significant is that statement from Senator Corker?
[Blumenthal:] That is profoundly significant because it reflects the conflicting and confusing statements, which is why the White House now has to provide a full explanation to the American people. People are going to be alarmed, astonished, appalled by the recklessness and carelessness at best of this kind of talk with the Russians. Remember, there's a common thread here. The Russian interference with our elections, the foundation of our democracy, an existential threat to our nation, and then, potential collusion between Trump associates if not the president himself and those Russians. His firing of Director Comey when he was engaged in an investigation of that potential collusion, and then, literally, a day later this kind of disclosure.
[Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professorr, Emeritus:] I think Senator Blumenthal is making a serious mistake in politicizing this issue. We should not be talking about these other issues. We should focus only on this threat. That's what the Republicans and Democrats can agree. Democrats should not be trying to take political advantage of this. This should be a national security issue, pure and simple, in isolation of everything else that went on before.
[Burnett:] Alan Dershowitz, just so, Senator, you know who that was, just jumped in from our panel. But let me put this question to you, Senator. Do you worry that mixing this with the broader Russian investigation is a mistake, that this is something more clear and present and specific to national security?
[Blumenthal:] The immediate focus should be on this threat to our national security and safety, no question about it.
[Burnett:] And, Senator, before you go, let me ask you because I know last week, you had you were talking about the Comey situation. You were saying that this could lead down the road to impeachment but we weren't anywhere near that yet. I'm paraphrasing you, but I believe that captures the sentiment of what you were saying accurately. Does this breaking news tonight change your view on that?
[Blumenthal:] The focus now should be on these facts, on an explanation from the president, which he owes the American people, on an inquiry and investigation into this potential betrayal of confidential information and risking American lives and possibly sources that may have provided this kind of information. That threat to our national security and safety has to be the focus right now. And I agree. It is an immediate threat that has to be addressed.
[Burnett:] All right. I thank you. Our panel is with me. We're going to take a quick break. We'll continue to cover our breaking news. President Trump allegedly sharing highly classified intelligence with Russians that could American and other lives at risk. We'll be right back.

[Sy:] Hello, I'm Stephanie Sy in New York. We'll have more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in a moment when Richard takes us to the heart of the global shipping industry, the UPS Worldport in Kentucky. But first the headlines this hour. British police say a former Russian spy and woman about half his age were found unconscious at as Saulsberry shopping center. They're being treated for exposure to an unknown substance and apparently knew each other. The ex-spy Sergei Skripal was granted refuge in the U.K. following a spy swap between the U.S. and Russia eight years ago. China is revealing a hefty new defense budget at its annual National People's Congress. Beijing plans to increase military spending by more than 8 percent to $175 billion. That's the biggest rise in three years as China modernizes its military. Britain's most decorated Olympian cyclist Bradley Wiggins is fighting accusations he abused anti-doping rules to enhance his performance during the tour de France. A British government committee claims Wiggins and Team Sky crossed an ethical line by abusing his medical need for a banned drug to enhance his performance. Wiggins and Team Sky deny the allegation. Those are your news headlines this hour. Up next, Richard takes us inside the UPS Worldport in Louisville, Kentucky.
[Richard Quest, Cnnmoney, Editor-at-large:] One of the hundreds of wide- bodied planes that come to the UPS Worldport in Louisville, Kentucky, every day. It's here that 2 million packages are sent across the world. And over the next half hour, we're going to show you the UPS system and discuss where the man in brown is headed next. First, we need to understand the backbone of UPS.
[Quest:] How do you go forward fast with a company this big?
[Abney:] You cannot act like an incumbent. You've got to feel like if someone is going to try to disrupt the industry then we have to have that mentality. So, we talk about, do we have to make decisions much quicker. We have to not have to try to protect the past and we can be proud of the past. We have to embrace the future and the future is all about technology. It's our smart logistics network and how we interconnect with our customers.
[Quest:] On the question of the global economy, you are very big here. You've got a major center in Cologne. You have a major center in Shenzhen. Are you worried at the level of protectionism that is now coming into the world? A level where I mean, you know, we've seen it in rhetoric and we're starting to see it in action. We're starting to see the scintilla that global trade could be threatened.
[Abney:] You know, at the same time that you do here all the rhetoric, global trade is expanding right now, and we see it as much more optimistic than what we're hearing in the news. Now we are big believers in free trade. Everywhere we've seen the U.S. sign of free trade agreement, our business which is reflective of our customers has increased 20 percent.
[Quest:] So, I assume it was a disappointment that the U.S. backed out of TPP and you would urge the U.S. not to back out of NAFTA?
[Abney:] We are strongly urging the U.S., Canada and Mexico to find ways to have a win-win-win situation. It's a 25-year-old agreement. It needs to be modernized and it does not need to be eliminated. Supply chains are just so interconnected between the three countries. And yes, we would have liked to see TPP passed. There's no doubt about that. We still believe there's opportunities for additional agreements.
[Quest:] I want to finish, since you've been very kind to give us a good dose of time. This I kind of keep coming back, David, to this idea of the disruptor.
[Abney:] All right.
[Quest:] The company that is this big. The man in brown. How do you do it? What do you envisage disruption looks like so that you don't find your core business just eaten away by everybody else?
[Abney:] Well, you have to embrace the future. You have to embrace the technology that did not exist in years past. We just formed an advanced technology group that is focused on not what's going to happen the next two to three years, but much further down the road. We capture now 21 terabytes of information that we have stored. How to take that information, integrate it with our customers' needs and be predictive in our analysis. Help them to be more effective in their supply chains which we will get the benefit of that and that's what we're investing in.
[Quest:] This is the calm before the storm inside at the Worldport. Do not be deceived. It all looks quiet, relaxed, but what you're looking at is a machine waiting to be fired up in the middle of the night. Hairspray your Houston, dog food for Dallas. Samples to Sydney. A contract for Kansas. Sorting parcels seem so simple. The goods come in, they're sorted, and then they leave. But when your warehouse is bigger than 90 football fields and you're handling 20 million packages a day, there's no room for a snooze at the UPS Worldport hub in Kentucky. In charge of it all is Jason Foote.
[Jason Foote, Ups Worldport Operations Manager:] This facility on a normal day may only process 2 million packages, during peak season we'll handle more than double that.
[Quest:] Well, only, that's an enormous number.
[Foote:] It is but it's only every day.
[Quest:] Cameras and conveyers everywhere, 155 miles of moving belts. While automation is key, humans remain part and parcel of this operation. Many of them working here are local students and the pace is relentless. [on camera]: This is never ending. Hour after hour, these small packages flow into this tidal wave of sorting that now has to take place. To ensure these little packages end up in the right destinations. How do you keep track of all these parcels?
[Foote:] All these parcels have a unique label and mark all them. And the machine does it, automation does scanning and all the sortation of the facility. And that's how we only handle the packages twice. One here and once unloaded and once again in the load.
[Quest:] That's where the humans came in. They're needed to fill freight containers to the brim. Kyle: What you want to do is build up as high as you can. Kyle is the supervisor and showed me how. Think of playing Tetris.
[Kyle:] You want to start in this back-left corner.
[Quest:] Why?
[Kyle:] Why, because that's where you're going to build your entire load off of.
[Quest:] Right.
[Kyle:] The way you want to do this is you want to build left to right, as high
[Quest:] Why?
[Kyle:] Because that your cornerstone package and that's going to be the hardest package. That's what you're building your entire load off of.
[Quest:] Right. [voice-over]: Suddenly a song came into my mind, "little boxes on the hillside. Little boxes made with ticky tape. Little boxes on the hillside and they all look just the same." [on camera]: Live crickets. [voice-over]: Crickets in the cargo? And Amazon logos grinning down on me everywhere. [on camera]: All very complicated. [voice-over]: E-commerce is what's filling these containers. [on camera]: I'm just standing here and I'm just seeing Amazon after Amazon after Amazon just going through.
[Foote:] Correct.
[Quest:] I mean, the e-commerce volume must be tremendous. Foote: Well, it's be quite significant. And we have added opportunities in our network to handle that. It's about half past 1:00 in the morning and the tempo has increased. Roughly 380,000 packages an hour are now flowing into the Worldport. [voice-over]: My parcels depart as quickly as they arrived. As those metal containers slide toward the planes. [on camera]: Amid all this high-technology movement of commerce, there's a delicious simplicity about the way these containers are dragged around by hand. [voice-over]: The fact is, as the network grows with demand, so does the risk of problems and challenges. It's a fine balancing act for those in control.
[Foote:] We have 120 aircraft coming in, so it's bound to happen, but we do it every night. We make that balance every single night.
[Quest:] And that's when you're called. When they say, all right?
[Foote:] No, we have about 10,000 people who work here a night. They do a great job. They don't even need me.
[Quest:] Kentucky is UPS's biggest facility. And it's not big enough. Future expansion means the place will handle half a million packages an hour. As our love of e-commerce grows exponentially, so does this logistics powerhouse. After all these parcels are sorted and packed, some will go off to their final destinations in iconic style. We'll climb aboard a Boeing 747- 8. The passenger plane with a new lease on life as a freighter.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] And still more on our "POLITICS LEAD." The President's personal attorney Michael Cohen now a focal point learning as we're learning more about a criminal investigation into him and the access he was allegedly pitching to clients. Cohen's name splashed across the headlines from Washington Post, and the New Yorker, Vanity Fair, the Intercept. The stories focused on his financial dealings, state of mind and now missing bank records. My panel is back with me. And Laura Coates, let me start with you. For the first time we're learning the Intercept reporting that Cohen pitched himself to a foreign government official asking for a million dollars from the Qatari government in 2016 in exchange for access and advice about the then incoming Trump administration. Is that legal?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, the idea of paying for play, unfortunately, it's swamp-like but it's not necessarily illegal but it can turn illegal if the motivation was to secure some sort of a bribe where there was a quid pro quo that was being requested without knowing everything in all the details. And of course, the Qatari government official did turn down that particular request. It's important for us to understand the contest here. It could very well be illegal if he was trying to get that million-dollar payment in order to secure a bribe or some influence or direct official act of President Donald Trump. And if it was known by the President of the United States he was doing that even more of a mushroom cloud for the administration let alone Michael Cohen.
[Tapper:] And this is the same businessman we should point out, Ahmed al-Rumaihi who was then head of the investment division within the Qatari government that we saw at Trump Tower during that meeting supposedly between Michael Flynn and the Persian Gulf States Foreign Minister. What's the most odd to me about this is the fact that Cohen represented Trump at the same time he was doing this. Usually, with the quid pro quos and the selling access and that, the person ends the relationship, the official relationship with the primary, whether it was a senator or a president or whoever, then goes and peddles influence. I've never seen it work, it's at the same time.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] It's obviously not
[Margaret Hoover, Cnn Political Commentator:] Don't you know the right way to be a lobbyist to the President of the United States? Don't you know the right way to trade on play for pray and have like codified cronyism and corruption in this government?
[Tapper:] I'm just saying this seems unusual to me.
[Hoover:] I mean, that's sort of what you're dealing here. I mean, the criticism on every level at the Trump regimes is sort of been a bit J.V. in the way they do everything and that corruption scandal.
[Avlon:] Yes, so it's not the same kind of professionalized corruption we've seen in the past, Jake. I mean, look, just to be clear, I mean, there's something inherently shady about during a transition hitting up a you know, Qatari you know, investor connected to the government and saying give may million dollars and make sure you have inroads to the administration. If that is done, it's usually the context of lobbying and it's a registered foreign agent, neither of which appeared to apply to Mr. Cohen. It was refused but this is this is nowhere in the universe of best practices.
[Tapper:] One of the other story in the New Yorker, Ronan Farrow has this incredible scoop. The person who has been leaking some of Michael Cohen's financial records came forward to Ronan Farrow and said he did it because he's alarmed because two very sensitive reports related to Cohen's finances were supposed to be in a Treasury Department database and they're missing. Laura, how unusual is that?
[Coates:] Extremely unusual. Remember, this reports, this suspicious activity reports are generated because banks have an obligation to report to the government anything they suspect might be fraudulent activity, money laundering, tax-related issues, all these things to keep the government abreast because we do not want people to use our credit institutions, financial institutions for money laundering purposes. So you keep these not because they're proof of a crime but because they're enough to raise suspicion and alert the government and actually could be used as evidence later in a court proceeding. To have them just poof go into thin air and only these two reports when a third one that is known alludes to them something is very suspicious for it to evaporate in the thin air. Although I will say there is a possibility you can make some of this data more sensitive and removed from the system but that's not a usual practice at all.
[Hoover:] And we also I mean, there's look, the facts are what they are. We don't know who removed them. It could be that they're nefariously removed but it also could be that they were removed by law enforcement officials at the higher levels because they're protecting they're covering their tracks or they're protecting their investigation.
[Coates:] Right.
[Hoover:] But what is clear, too, is that the individual leaked them which is an offense that could cost him up to $250,000 and five years in jail, a serious decision on that Justice Department on that individual's behalf because he was afraid that this could be suppressed and would not be known.
[Tapper:] His fear speaks a lot about what's going on here.
[Avlon:] That's what's significant to me is that he did this wide-eyed knowing the risks because he was concerned not only for himself but for the direction of the our democracy.
[Hoover:] Could be a she.
[Avlon:] It could be a she. That's a great point. And look, you know
[Coats:] Don't bring women into this, Margaret.
[Avlon:] Fair and important point. But, you know, I think the reason it's potentially such a serious evolution in the case is this is where two of the old aphorisms around investigations seem to collide. Follow the money and it's not the crime, it's the cover-up.
[Tapper:] Right. Cohen of course also saying that he's "not just going to roll over," according to Vanity Fair's Emily Jane Fox, he's supposedly told friends he's being attacked and his family is being made to suffer. Laura, the FBI doesn't just raid an office for no reason.
[Coates:] No, they don't. And certainly people have every right to defend themselves and Manafort you see is not rolling over, not working out as quite as well for him in that strategy, however, as the cases continue to go on. But every person who's accused of a crime has every right to defend themselves. Interestingly enough Michael Cohen has yet to be charged with a crime. And so, the fact that he's already planning for his defense in the event of indictment is probably quite telling, but it also as probably him saying that he is not going to roll over and sing like a canary, either. This may be an issue where he's trying to alert somebody that he has no intention of simply becoming a cooperator and that he will fight and that may have really be consequences for him, for Donald Trump who could always pardon somebody even before they're charged with a crime.
[Tapper:] And that's one thing that's interesting about is this whole case having to do with Michael Cohen was referred to the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney's office by Mueller. It wasn't in the per view but there's something there to investigate.
[Hoover:] Well, I mean, that's exactly right. That you know, where there's smoke there's fire but this wasn't within the broad I mean, everybody criticizes Mueller for having such a broad scope of his investigation but frankly, he is staying within some kind of parameters rather than going for ancillary figures. He himself referred the ancillary figure to the Southern District.
[Tapper:] Great panel. Thank you so much, everyone. I appreciate it. Coming up, a rear look at the horrifying moments when American soldier was separated from his team and pinned down in that horrific firefight. What really happened in that deadly ambush in Niger? Stay with us.

[Cooper:] We got our breaking news, the House Intelligence Committee has voted to release the Democrats' rebuttal to the GOP memo alleging that the FBI abused surveillance laws. Meantime, an FBI supervisor special agent who spent more than a decade at the bureau, he was a special assistant to fired FBI Director James Comey, has resigned over what he calls constant attacks on the bureau. Josh Campbell is his name. He writes in a "New York Times" op-ed, "I am reluctantly turning in my badge and leaving an organization I love. Why? So I can join the growing chorus of people who believe that the relentless attacks on the bureau undermine not just America's premier law enforcement agency but also the nation's security. My resignation is painful, but the alternative of remaining quiet while the bureau is tarnished for political gain is impossible." Josh Campbell joins us now. He's now a CNN Law Enforcement Analyst. Josh, I know you called the day that you walked across the stage at the FBI academy, got your special agent badge one of the greatest honors of your life. If that's the case, why resign?
[Josh Campbell, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] It's a good question and I'll say at the outset that, you know, I believe that the rank and file, the men and women of the FBI deserve these political attacks to stop. I think when we look within the organization at people who are trying to do their job every single day, they see these attacks, and it's puzzling. It's curious. And sometimes it's actually infuriating. I'm simply a vessel for their dismay. Some of the criticism that we've heard from within that, again, threatens our public image, our ability to do our job, and I didn't think I could speak out like I'm doing now in order to call for an end to these political attacks if I was still inside the FBI. What I mean by that is no one wants someone inside the FBI anonymously criticizing partisans. No one wants that. So I figured that the only appropriate way to do so, to defend the organization I love, is to step out and do it from the outside.
[Cooper:] There have been a lot of people, though, you know, when talking about some of the attacks president has said or the comments the president has made about or other political leaders against the FBI, that, you know, that it doesn't really undermine the bureau, that, you know, FBI agents are professionals. They just keep their heads down. They do their job, and it doesn't impact things you know, law enforcement on a day to day basis.
[Campbell:] I agree with all that. FBI agents are dogged people. But unfortunately they are only one part of the equation. The other part that allows us to do our job is public trust and that's something that we have less control over. And what I mean by that is when an FBI agent knocks on someone's door and needs assistants, needs information, the likelihood of that person is going to assist is correlated to their opinion of our agency. Do they see us as trustworthy? Do they see us as honest? Similarly, you know, we do a lot of work based on information from informants, people who are coming to us sometimes at great risk to themselves to provide us information. I was talking with a former colleague last week about a source that we met overseas. And someone who went to great lengths to endanger their own lives in order to meet with the FBI and provide important information about a terrorism case, and when we met with this person I asked him, I said why didn't you just provide this information to your own country's law enforcement? And he said, you're the FBI, I trust you. I can't trust our corrupt officials. So what I wonder is how many of those people are going to take that risk to provide information to the FBI if this corrosive doubt about the organization continues to seep into the national dialogue.
[Cooper:] What do you say to those who say, look, if there are some bad apples in the upper leadership or anywhere in the FBI, that criticism is warranted, that the impending inspector general's report will answer some questions raised about, you know, potential politicization within the senior ranks of the FBI and the
[Doj. Campbell:] I would agree with that. I would say that criticism is not only warranted, it's extremely necessary. We cannot police ourselves. Every FBI employee to a person would be the first to say that, that FBI agents have incredible power. I mean we have the power to deny someone's liberty in our investigation. So with that great power, we also have to have great accountability. So I concur with that, that oversight is important. What I'm distinguishing between is criticism for the sake of pointing out those in leadership who may have done wrong and criticism that's purely political that may have that long-lasting impact on public trust.
[Cooper:] Finally, I just want to ask you about the firing of former FBI Director James Comey last spring. In newly disclosed e-mails, FBI leaders appeared to express shock and sadness in the immediate aftermath even as the White House attempted to portray a bureau in crisis. I'm wondering how would you describe the reaction that you saw and heard by the rank and file agents to remove Comey?
[Campbell:] It's a good question. And I'll say it at outside. Obviously, I'm a biased party because I had the honor of working for Director Comey. I'll also say that the support within the organization was very thorough throughout. He was widely respected, in some cases loved. And I saw it on a number of different levels. At first being as person honored to be Director Comey's special assistant, I saw him interact literally with thousands of FBI employees and I got to see their face, I got to see how they interacted with him. And it was a very positive reception, even some of those who disagreed with him. And there were some, you know,
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Campbell:] I'm here to give you facts, you know, based on my experience and I can tell you that's what people thought of James Comey.
[Cooper:] All right, Josh Campbell, good to have you on. Thanks very much. Busy night up next, even more breaking news on who will or will not be testifying in the Russia probe. Also ahead, treason, a very strong word with of course deadly consequences, President Trump used it today referring to Democrats who didn't like his State of the Union speech. He also called them un- American. Details ahead.

[Golodryga:] Samsung has unveiled its new smartphones at the world's biggest phone show, the Mobile World Congress. The Galaxy S9 and S9 Plus are designed to rival Apple's new iPhone X. The new phones are sure to face increased scrutiny. After all, the trouble Samsung had with the Galaxy Note 7 catching fire. Samuel Burke reports from Barcelona.
[Samuel Burke, Cnn Tech, Correspondent:] Bianna, Samsung didn't take a lot of risks here, but they've managed to improve on their previous models. The smartphone market globally is actually contracting. In 2017, all these companies together sold less phones than they did in 2016. And Samsung appears to be conscious of the possibility that the price tag of a lot of these phones may have been one of the reasons. So, the new phones the S9 cost $720. The S9 plus, $840. A lot of money, but less than the nearly $1,000 iPhone X. Where Samsung's gotten the most attention for their new phones is the camera with augmented reality. Unlike the iPhone X where you can turn your face into an animal emoji, the augmented reality on the new S9s allows you to turn your face into a more human-looking emoji. Some people say my color is a bit off on the emoji that I created. Now, other innovations that we're seeing here have to do with privacy and security. This new Huawei laptop has a hidden webcam. Can you spot it? It's called the Huawei Matebook X Pro, it will cost you about $1,850. And you don't see a webcam up here, but Bianna, if you look closely between the f6 and f7 button is a little camera, you click it, and then it pops up there. I used to make fun of my dad for putting tape across his webcam. But now it looks like Huawei is trying to capitalize on security-conscious people like my dad. And the banana phone is back. The Nokia 8110 made famous in the matrix film back in 1996, well a Finnish startup called HMD, has purchased the rights to bring it back. Although this time it's actually yellow like a banana. It doesn't use android or iOS. You'll have some mainstream apps like Facebook, Google Maps and Twitter. But what it lacks in apps it makes up for in battery life, 25 days of standby time. Can't do anything on a smartphone for 25 days and it will cost you just under $100 for this blast from the past. Hello.
[Golodryga:] You had me at 25 days' battery life. All right. Well that's it for the show. But first, we're going to go over to Europe where stocks closed slight higher. They were followed on from Friday's rally on Wall Street as well as comments from the president of the ECB. Mario Draghi said the slack in the economy may be bigger than previously thought. That means it's unlikely that the ECB will quickly draw down its stimulus program. That's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Bianna Golodryga, thanks for watching. END

[Cabrera:] The President may be willing to build his promised southern border wall at any cost. But many of the country's most undeniable experts on border security believe building a physical barrier there is not only a waste of money but one that won't work very well. These men and women patrol the border every day as border officers. And CNN's Gray Tuchman road with a sheriff of a border county in Texas who supports President Trump 100 percent except when it comes to that wall.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Keith Hughes is a border county sheriff in a remote county in Texas where illegal immigration apprehensions have increased. How big of a problem do you think illegal immigration is?
[Sheriff Keith Hughes, Terrell County, Texas:] I think it's going to devastate our country one of these days if we don't do something about it, if it hasn't already.
[Tuchman:] No county on America's southern border gave Donald Trump a bigger win on Election Day than Terrell County. Sheriff Hughes voted for him.
[Hughes:] I support him 100 percent. I think he has done a great job, so.
[Tuchman:] But the President during his oval office speech said professionals want and need a wall. Do you want and need a wall in your county?
[Hughes:] No, sir, I do not. Either one do not want one, do not need one.
[Tuchman:] That's because he says they already have one, a natural one, the Rio Grande which separates the U.S. and Mexico. This stop sign, there may be no other mandatory stop sign in the world because if you don't stop here, it's about a 300 foot drop to the Rio Grande. Which means it is 300 feet up. The sheriffs and others here call these cliffs God's wall which lines the river throughout most of Terrell County. That's why the sheriff has always thought that the concept of a continuous border wall made little sense. Other parts of the county's border though are level as the Rio Grande once with heavy brush. In a plat area like this where it's easier to cross the river, different than they were before?
[Hughes:] Right.
[Tuchman:] And you have this money, would you use any of it for the wall? Would you take all the money and use it for more people and more technology?
[Hughes:] I wouldn't use it for a wall. Use all the money for technology and people. That money would be better spent on those situations instead of the wall.
[Tuchman:] Sheriff Hughes says every dime received should be spent on law enforcement and technology. Terrell County has a small population, but it's about 24 00 square miles. The sheriff only has four deputies and there are very few border patrol agents. Most of the time it's only cows observing migrants swimming across the Rio Grande.
[Hughes:] The hell with the wall for right now. I mean, it's going to happen, it's going to happen. If it's not, it's not. But we need to quit dwelling on the wall and deal with right now.
[Tuchman:] Gary Tuchman, CNN, Terrell County, Texas.
[Cabrera:] Now here's a different perspective from a Texas border control agent in the Rio Grande valley. He told me a wall is necessary. Watch.
[Chris Cabrera, Border Patrol Agent:] We do have hundreds and sometimes thousands a day of people coming in to request asylum or to get asylum through the catch and release system. What that does is it ties our hands and we are unable to patrol the other areas where people are out to avoid detection, and ultimately get into the United States. So the wall is necessary down here. There's communities out here that have benefitted greatly from the wall. It's not stopping everybody from coming in, but it is funneling them into areas where we can apprehend them. And unfortunately, a lot of politicians down here will tell you one thing on camera, but behind closed doors, it's a different story just because the wall is such a touchy topic that a lot of local politicians don't want to take a stand against the status quo.
[Cabrera:] I want to bring in someone else who knows the area well, Democratic congressman Henry Cuellar who has represented Texas' 28th district since 2005. His districts includes 290 miles of the southern border. Congressman, good to have you with us. We just heard now from that Texas border patrol agent who says a wall is necessary. Gary Tuchman talked to the Texas sheriff who insist the wall is not necessary. Who is right?
[Rep. Henry Cuellar , Texas:] Well, you know, the sheriff is right and border patrol was right in 2012. Let me explain that. If you look at the union patrol back in 2012 their position was that the wall was not necessary because that people could do a tunnel, dig a tunnel, climb over it, and it was useless waste of dollars. So the sheriff is right, and then the border patrol before 2012 were correct on that. So again, I do support border patrol strongly. I want to see more of them hired. In fact, 2000 of them there are 2000 of them short. We need to make sure we hire more border patrol and make sure that if we want to stop drugs, look at where drugs come in. Most drugs will come from ports of entry, period. That's where they come from. So we need to modernize our ports and put technology and personnel and k-9s at the ports of entry.
[Cabrera:] Let me just emphasize what you just said because we also saw in a letter from the House speaker Nancy Pelosi outlining what kind of border security improvements Democrats support. She says more technology to scan cars and trucks at the ports of entry, new technology to detect unauthorized crossings, more agents, better port of entry, infrastructure. We have heard President Trump and Republicans express support for those things as well. So that's where everybody agrees. The wall, though, is the big question right now. As someone who represents border communities, do you think Democrats should be willing to pay for a wall in some areas of the border?
[Cuellar:] Look, there's already 654 miles of fencing across the United States. As the sheriff said a while ago in west Texas, what do you have? You have those large cliffs. I have been there. Those are huge cliffs. Then you have the rivers, the natural boundaries.
[Cabrera:] Right. You don't need a wall there, right?
[Cuellar:] Yes. That's like he said, that's God's wall. So, again, you know, we already added 654 miles of fencing on it. Now, I would say that back in 2008, this is an important point. Senator Cornyn and myself and a Democratic county judge came up with a compromise in the Bush administration when we did a levy wall. So there are some sort of ways that we can provide flood control and security. The problem is that Washington wants to dictate the type of fencing that where they want to put it. If they would just let the local border patrol chiefs have some independence, and if they can work with the local communities, you would be surprised what they can work on.
[Cabrera:] So just to make sure I'm clear, would you be willing to vote for any legislation that offers some money to walls or steel slats in some places? I know I talked to a fellow Democrat like a congressman Garamendi just yesterday who said yes, as long as you specify where the wall is needed and why.
[Cuellar:] Well, again, like I said a few minutes ago, we have worked out on the past, levy walls. But the local community was involved, and that type of infrastructure if Washington would allow the local community input where they can work along with them, we can come up with some infrastructure. And that's the key. Washington doesn't dictate. It's the local community working with the local border patrol sheriffs and you'll be surprised what they can work on.
[Cabrera:] OK. Here's what the President tweeted this morning suggesting potential negotiations about the wall for DACA protections. He tweeted this. Democrats are saying that DACA is not worth it and don't want to include in talks. Many Hispanics will be coming over to the Republican side. Watch. Congressman, what's your response to that?
[Cuellar:] Well, again, the President is known to say or tweet so many things that are just not correct. I would just leave it like that. Look, we want to make sure that we have protected dreamers. We want to make sure we also have full immigration reform. We want to see immigration reform. The problem is that the Republicans and the President only wants to talk about certain extreme immigration reforms that they talked about. They don't want to sit down or look at what, you know, we have done in the past. There's a lot of things that have been already drafted that we could work on, but they just don't want they when they say negotiate, they say take our position and that's how you negotiate. And that's not negotiations.
[Cabrera:] But haven't Democrats in the past offered DACA protections and we will give you the money for the wall?
[Cuellar:] Some people have. I have not been one of them. I think those are two different things. I think we need to do everything to protect our dreamers and I voted for the dreamers. But the wall is something else. When you protect I mean, when you represent, you know, landowners that have had lands for so many years and a government is going to come in and build this fence and keep in mind when you have the river, many a times they have to go up one mile, one mile walk from the bank, you are giving up one mile of territory that becomes a no man's land and that's what we are saying is that, you know, we got to protect private property rights. And again, you will be surprised if we can get together, we can get rid of the
[Cabrera:] OK. Congressman Henry Cuellar, glad to have you with us. Thank you very much.
[Cuellar:] Thank you so much.
[Cabrera:] We will be right back.

[Bolduan:] President Trump said a lot in his 80-minute speech last night. Did he also unveil a new campaign slogan? Listen to this.
[Donald Trump, Preident Of The United States:] If there's going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation.
[Trump:] It just doesn't work that way.
[Bolduan:] The president's clear message to the new Democratic House majority, even before they get started, get off my back. So where do things stand now? Joining me is Democratic woman from California, Karen Bass. She sits on the House Judiciary Committee. Congresswoman, thank you for being here.
[Rep. Karen Bass, , California:] Thanks for having me on.
[Bolduan:] When you heard that last night from President Trump, did you take that as some kind of a threat?
[Bass:] No, I don't take it as a threat. I just take it as another example of him still not understanding how the democratic process works. He said it just doesn't work this way. No, actually it does. There are three co-equal branches of government and one of our primary responsibilities in the House of Representatives and the Senate is to provide oversight over the administration. This is the new reality he is going to have to get used to. I hope somebody sits him down and explains the democratic process.
[Bolduan:] Maybe put another way, the president might be saying that if a Democratic House majority spends the bulk of their time and committee resources on looking into him and his administration with investigations, then they're not going to have time doing anything else.
[Bass:] Well, I think that's exactly not true. We are going to do our responsibility. The thing is, one of the reasons why he's confused is because, for the last two years, there has been no oversight over this administration at all. So he's going to have to get used to that reality. I can guarantee you that the Democratic majority has a very robust, pro-active, positive agenda that we are going to fight for over these next few years. So he's going to see that we can walk and chew gum at the same time.
[Bolduan:] We're all watching as that plays out. Speaking of walking and chewing gum at the same time, your committee has oversight over the Justice Department, of course.
[Bass:] Yes.
[Bolduan:] The acting attorney general, Matt Whittaker, is testifying before your committee on Friday.
[Bass:] Yes.
[Bolduan:] The chairman, Jerry Nadler, has already said he's having a subpoena drafted though in case Whittaker doesn't show up or claims executive privilege to avoid answering some questions.
[Bass:] Right.
[Bolduan:] I do wonder, Congresswoman, why draft the subpoena ahead of time? Do you have an indication he's not going to answer questions?
[Bass:] I think we have to be prepared for that. It's not really clear, because the administration doesn't quite understand the role of the House of Representatives, it's not clear they're going to comply. Secretary Nielsen said she was not going to come before the House Homeland Security Committee. And the chairman, Benny Thompson, had to prepare a subpoena. Before he enacted that subpoena, she did agree to testify. I think it's absolutely right that we need to prepare subpoenas, because we don't know whether this administration plans to cooperate. Hopefully, they will understand the co-equal branches of government before too long and realize it's their obligation to comply when called before the House.
[Bolduan:] I mean, say he shows up, he still has the subpoena drafted. Do you see a scenario where the chairman hands Whittaker a subpoena in the middle of a hearing?
[Bass:] No, I don't. I think if Whittaker comes for goodness sake, I would hope he comes with the intention of being compliant. I don't know whether the chairman would hand him a subpoena right there at the hearing. But you know what? If that's what he needs to do to get them to understand that they need to comply with the way our government operates, then so be it.
[Bolduan:] What do you most want to hear from the acting attorney general or what is your big question right now?
[Bass:] Well, I think the main thing is whether or not he is going to try to block the Mueller report, because we don't know whether or not that report will become available before a new attorney general is sworn in. So I think that's one thing. And then also for him to be accountable for all of the statements that he's made basically saying that a president cannot and should not be held accountable. We need to know, OK, that's what you said on CNN, but now that you're in this position, where do you stand.
[Bolduan:] How confident are you that the Mueller report will be made public?
[Bass:] Well, you know what, I don't know. The question will be whether or not this administration tries to block it from becoming public. I can't imagine that Mueller wouldn't want it to become public, but we will see. We will see if the administration tries to block it and there will be a standoff between the two. I think, at the end of the day, it will become public. It's absolutely critical that it become public. The whole country has been waiting over the last two years, what is going on. And the idea that he would complete the investigation and then it would be squashed, I think there would be a terrible backlash in the country. It would be very unhealthy. So
[Bolduan:] Even from the perspective of Republicans, Senator Chuck Grassley, his point is the American taxpayers paid for this investigation, they should see what comes out of it. He's with you on that.
[Bass:] Absolutely.
[Bolduan:] You are also the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus.
[Bass:] Yes.
[Bolduan:] You have called for the Virginia governor to resign over the racist photo and his reaction to it, quite frankly.
[Bass:] Yes. That's right.
[Bolduan:] The lieutenant governor Virginia politics is a mess right now because the lieutenant governor is facing a sexual assault allegation that he has vehemently denied. The woman, Vanessa Tyson, is working with the same firm that represented Christine Blasey Ford when she took on Brett Kavanaugh.
[Bass:] Right.
[Bolduan:] I look back, and back then, your campaign put out a statement saying, "I believe you and I'm with you," to Christine Blasey Ford. Should this woman be heard now?
[Bass:] Absolutely, she should be. I don't believe in a double standard at all. I, first of all, think the governor should step down. That's a separate issue. If the lieutenant governor were to assume the governor's position and I don't know what the process is in Virginia but I think she absolutely should be heard. Whatever process is appropriate in Virginia should be followed. Maybe he wouldn't be able to take the seat. Maybe it would have to go to the attorney general. I don't know what the specific situation is, but I do not believe in a double standard and I do believe everybody should be held accountable.
[Bolduan:] Congresswoman, thank you so much for being here. I appreciate your time.
[Bass:] Thank you.
[Bolduan:] Just in for us, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, he says the now Democratically controlled committee, his committee, is expanding the parameters of their investigation to now go beyond Russia. What does that mean? That's next.

[Cabrera:] A federal judge is considering imposing a gag order in the case against longtime Trump ally and self-described dirty trickster, Roger Stone. Now, the judge declared this is a criminal proceeding and not a public relations campaign, and she's warning Stone to stop arguing his case on the, quote, "talk show circuit." Stone was definitely not camera shy since his arrest on the charges stemming from the Mueller investigation. Listen to this.
[Roger Stone, American Political Consultant:] This indictment is thin as piss on a rock. The president needs to wake up. This is a speeding bullet heading for his head. To storm my house with greater force than was used to take down Bin laden or El Chapo or Pablo Escobar, it's unconscionable.
[Cabrera:] April Ryan and Michael Shear back with us now. April, Stone loves to talk. What's the overunder that he complies with the judge's order?
[April Ryan, Cnn Political Analyst:] I don't think he's going to try to I don't think he's going to comply. But the bottom line is this Trump crew, this presidential crew, they always push the envelope and move the bar. He's going to try it. They don't stop talking. They want to play this out in the court of public opinion. Roger Stone is going to continue to talk, and I would not be surprised even if he gets a gag order, he may say a couple things. He might pull it down a little bit, but he may continue to talk. And he's going to he's going to push it until he looks like the victim. He wants to tell his story. He wants to tell his side.
[Cabrera:] Michael, Stone and Trump, we know, have known each other for decades. Both men have been open about that. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Roger's a friend of mine. He's a good guy.
[Stone:] He's my friend of 40 year.
[Trump:] I've known him for a long time, and he's actually a quality guy. He's a nice guy.
[Stone:] Donald Trump came to my wedding. I went to two of his. I was at both his parents' funeral.
[Cabrera:] This week, we learned Mueller sized evidence from Stone's iCloud account, his e-mail accounts, cellphones, spanning years. Michael, how likely is it that there are communications involving President Trump?
[Shear:] Well, I mean, I think it's almost certain that there are communications involving the president, and I think the question is, are there relevant communications? Are there communications that go to the heart of or speak to Mueller's investigation? I mean, what we found with Michael Cohen, whose, you know, telecommunications equipment and the like were similarly seized in investigations, was that a lot of that material, a huge portion of it, was just sort of non-relevant, kind of incidental communication. So the question will be, how much of it is actually relevant to the to the investigation? I mean, look, you know, Roger Stone is a person who for decades has treated his entire life like a public relations stunt. That's how he and Donald Trump frankly operated was that, you know, he solved problems in the court of public opinion. I think that the challenge for him is going to be and the hammer hasn't come down yet. But if the gag order is imposed and the court were to and he were to flout it and to say, look, I'm going to continue to go on talk shows. I'm going to continue to talk about this, I mean the court has penalties and can throw him in hold him in contempt and throw him in jail if need be. I mean and what we've seen with the other defendants in this case, like Michael Cohen, is that they sort of have this bravado initially because that's kind of how they act, and that when the real serious, you know, implications of being under federal investigation and accused of crimes comes down, they sometimes change their behavior. And I think that's what we just don't know yet about Stone is whether that you know, that shift will happen when the hammer falls.
[Cabrera:] I want to talk a little bit about the president's interviews this week, in particular what he told the Times. He brushed off the larger Russia investigation by saying he had received assurances from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Listen to this.
[Unidentified Female:] Has Rod Rosenstein given you any sense over the course of the last year about whether you have any exposure either in or there's any concerns or whether you're a target of the Mueller report?
[Trump:] Well, he told he told the attorneys that I'm not a subject I'm not a target of yes. Oh, yes.
[Unidentified Female:] Did he say that about the SDNY investigation, too?
[Trump:] About which?
[Unidentified Female:] The SDNY investigation. Because there's two, there's Mueller and there's Cohen investigation.
[Trump:] I don't know. I don't know about that.
[Unidentified Female:] OK.
[Trump:] That I don't know about.
[Cabrera:] April, important to point out that Trump couldn't remember when Rosenstein would have assured him.
[Ryan:] Right. Right. You know, the president, one, likes to pick out certain things, certain words and certain statements. He'd a lot of times gets it the way he wants it to be. So that's one piece right there. But I think we need to really wait and see how this plays out. I'm not believing that. I want to see how it plays out from Mueller himself and from what other investigation there is or any kind of hearing, what have you. I want to see how it plays out before we jump the gun and believe what the president had to say about this. I'm not saying that he's lying, but I'm saying that the president has a way of picking and choosing words and making things the way he wants them to be.
[Cabrera:] Let me move on to something else, Michael. Sources telling CNN Senate investigators now have information that the phone calls Donald Trump Jr. made involving that blocked number ahead of the infamous Trump Tower meeting with Russians, those phone calls were not with his father. As you know, Democrats had long suspected Trump Jr. informed his father of the meeting in a phone call. How significant is this development?
[Shear:] Well, I think it's significant as a warning to all of us pundits and all of the people who are opining and reporting about the investigation with partial knowledge, right? Only Mueller, only his investigators really know the full extent of what they've got and what they know, and it's always dangerous. And this is a reminder of that, to make assumptions based on limited set of facts. And so I think I think that's number one. But number two, I think you don't make assumptions in the other direction either. It could still be that the people that were at that meeting communicated the information about that meeting, about what was really talked about and the real information that was that was garnered and not the fake story that was later, you know, put out to our newspaper and ultimately to everybody else. It's still possible that that information was really communicated to the president, maybe not through that phone call, maybe through intermediaries. Maybe, you know, in other conversations either in person or on phone or electronically. And we just don't know. So on the one hand, we can't jump to the conclusion that, you know, and it looks like now that jumping to the conclusion about those phone calls was wrong. But neither should people say, well, therefore, the president is exonerated of knowing about the meeting because there may be other ways that he knew about it.
[Cabrera:] April, we also heard the president discredit what his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, had said about the Trump Tower-Moscow proposal, the talks lasting late into 2016. Quote, "Rudy was incorrect," he said. "Number one, he was incorrect, and we've explained that. He was wrong. Rudy has been wrong a little bit. But what has happened is this. I didn't care. That deal was not important." Honest question here. Why is Rudy Giuliani still the president's lawyer at this point?
[Ryan:] I know, right? Rudy Giuliani is a character. This Rudy Giuliani is nothing like the 911 Rudy Giuliani. Rudy Giuliani has talked too much. You know, we're going back down that line again from Roger Stone now to Rudy Giuliani. They talk too much and they want to play this out in the court of public opinion. But what's happening for Rudy Giuliani, he is contradicting things and he's actually putting the president in jeopardy. And I am wondering if the president has now come out and said this about Rudy Giuliani, which could actually really be really bad for the president as into the president was dealing with this up until, what, November of 2016, that was when he was president-elect. So the bottom line is I'm wondering when the president is going to sever ties. The president is very cognizant of the optics of all the people that have been in his inner circle that have been fired, and I'm wondering what that is for the president to say bye, Rudy.
[Shear:] But you know can I just say, Ana, I'm not 100 percent sure that he really he really doesn't like what Rudy is doing. I think in some ways Rudy throws up chaff into the air for us all to talk about him, to chew on him, and at the end of the day, I'm not sure that the president doesn't like having somebody out there, even if it's not accurate, but that it still kind of puts a lot of distractions into the media for us
[Cabrera:] Even if it's not in his best interest. Guys, got to leave it there.
[Ryan:] It was a great distraction at the beginning, yes.
[Cabrera:] April Ryan, Michael Shear, good to have you with us. Thanks.
[Shear:] Sure.
[Cabrera:] President Trump suggesting he is going to build the wall himself, calling talks to avoid another shutdown a waste of time. Is there a big announcement coming around the State of the Union?

[Briggs:] Breaking news at 5:15 am. Kim Jong-un visiting China today and tomorrow. The North Korean leader expected to bring President Xi about his summit with President Trump last week. Let's go live to Beijing and bring in Matt Rivers. Matt, this is the third meeting in less than three months. It appears President Xi Jinping looms over all of this.
[Matt Rivers, Cnn Correspondent:] It is hard to overstate the role China has played in the ongoing negotiation with the United States and North Korea. Although China wasn't at the Singapore summit with Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un, the presence was felt. Kim Jong-un coming to China for the third time. As is typical when North Korean leaders come to China, not a lot of details. We have not seen a picture yet of Kim Jong-un here. Officially we're expecting that in the next couple of hours or so. That is usually how it works. You can bet they will be talking about that summit. What was the conversation between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un like? What was said that didn't make it into that document? What does denuclearization really mean to Kim Jong-un? And for China's point of view, they want to talk about their strategic interests, not the least of which is the suspension of the military exercises, which everyone viewed as a win for China, when Donald Trump agreed to suspend them and also potentially the removal of the U.S. troops way down the line from the Korean Peninsula. But it is just incredible, remarkable, that Kim Jong-un continues this diplomatic push. The third time he has been here to China since the end of March. That was his first time ever leaving North Korea as its leader Dave.
[Briggs:] Totally normalize on the global stage. Matt Rivers in Beijing, thank you.
[Romans:] President Trump is ordering the Pentagon to create a new space force. He wants it to be a sixth branch of the armed forces.
[Trump:] When it comes to defending America, it is not enough to merely have an American presence in space. We must have American dominance in space.
[Romans:] The Pentagon says it will begin working on the president's request and seeking input from multiple stakeholders.
[Briggs:] It takes an act of Congress to establish a new branch of the military, great strides have been made in international diplomacy to avoid the militarization of space. Also the U.S. already has a space force of sorts in the form of the U.S. Air Force Space Command. Twitter was in all its glory on the story yesterday with, "Spaceballs" and "Star Wars" references throughout. Ahead, after winning the first Family Cup in Washington Capitals history, Barry Trotz is out as the team's head coach. We have got Caps insider this morning. Lindsay Czarniak has more in the "Bleacher Report" next.

[Joe Johns, Cnn Correspondent:] Nonetheless, an important moment on Capitol Hill with these two senators very outspoken and harsh, even personal criticism to the president.
[Sen. Jeff Flake,  Arizona:] There's time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end.
[Johns:] Outgoing Senator Jeff Flake fiercely denouncing President Trump's policies and behavior as dangerous to democracy and calling on his fellow Republicans to do the same.
[Flake:] When the next generation asks us, why didn't you do something, why didn't you speak up, what are we going to say?
[Johns:] Flake railing against the politics of the era of Trump, the undermining of democratic ideals, the personal insults, and what he called the flagrant disregard for truth and decency.
[Flake:] Reckless, outrageous, and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as telling it like it is when it is actually just reckless, outrageous, and undignified. We were not made great as a country by indulging in or even exalting our worst impulses, turning against ourselves, glorifying in the things that divide us, and calling fake things true and true things fake.
[Johns:] Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praising Flake but punting when asked by reporters how the party would respond?
[Unidentified Female:] At what point do you have an obligation as the leader of this party to weigh in on these very serious criticism of the president.
[Mitch Mcconnell,  Senate Minority Leader:] What I have an obligation to do is to try and achieve the greatest cohesion I can among 52 Republicans to try to achieve for the American people the agenda that we set out to achieve.
[Johns:] Flake's sweeping indictment coming hours after Republican Senator Bob Corker also blasted Mr. Trump.
[Sen. Bob Corker,  Tennessee:] The president has great difficulty with truth. I don't know why he lowers himself to such a low, low standard and debases our country in the way he does, but he does.
[Johns:] The retiring Senate foreign relations committee chairman expressing concern that the United States' position in the world is suffering under President Trump.
[Corker:] World leaders are very aware that much of what he says is untrue. He purposely is breaking down relationships we have around the world that have been useful to our nation.
[Johns:] Their feud reaching a boiling point with the president responding to Corker's in a series of tweets, again calling him little. The White House brushing off the criticism as petty while welcoming the decision of the senators to retire.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I think they were not likely to be reelected, and I think that shows that the support is more behind this president than it is those two individuals.
[Johns:] A source familiar with the president's thinking says he is high spirits after Flake's announcement. An ally of Mr. Trump's former chief strategist also celebrating, saying Steve Bannon added another scalp to his collection as another establishment domino falls. Now, these two senators are not leaving Capitol Hill any time soon. They both are scheduled to leave the capital January of 2019. The White House needs them to get anything important that is partisan passed. Alisyn and Chris?
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Joe, thank you very much. So moments ago we spoke with Senator Jeff Flake live on NEW DAY about the president's new tweet and Senator Flake's reasons for speaking out now.
[Camerota:] Is the only reason that you dropped out of the race because you had zero chance of being elected?
[Sen. Jeff Flake,  Arizona:] I can tell you it's very difficult to be re-elected in the Republican Party right now, and in Arizona in particular. It doesn't matter the policies that you adopt or your votes. It's if you are with the president. And I can't be with the president at all times. I am sorry. I just think that when the president is wrong you ought to call him out, and sometimes he's wrong, and that's what I tried to point out in the speech yesterday.
[Camerota:] Are so you an outlier, senator, in the Republican Party now? What about the second half of what the president just tweeted, the meeting with the Republican senators outside of Flake and Corker was a love-fest with standing ovations and great ideas for the USA. Is that how you see it?
[Flake:] I'm not going to describe a private meeting. I can just say a lot of my colleagues share the concerns that I raised on the floor yesterday and I believe that more of them will speak out in the future. I hope that we've reached a tipping point of some type where we don't continue to normalize by being silent the kind of behavior that we have seen. That's why I felt it was important to give the speech and I hope that we move in a different direction.
[Camerota:] But those colleagues that you had those conversations with behind the scenes that you believe will speak out, what are they waiting for?
[Flake:] I think they will. I think we have hit the tipping point. There is at some point just the weight of it just causes people to change and to say I can't take this anymore.
[Camerota:] But do you feel that by retiring that you are surrendering somehow?
[Flake:] It's tough. I am competitive, I like to fight these battles, but I also knew that I couldn't run the kind of race that I would be proud of and win in a Republican primary at this time. The politics in that way has changed. You can be conservative on policy and it doesn't matter, it seems, as much as being with the president or not criticizing him even if you think he's wrong. We haven't entered politics like that before. This is something new. So I didn't feel I could move ahead and run a campaign I could be proud of, so that's why I am retiring.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] All right, so let's see where Republicans are in this state of play. We have Republican Senator, Rob Portman of Ohio, a member of the Finance and Foreign Relations Committee. Thank you for being on the show, as always, senator.
[Sen. Rob Portman,  Ohio:] Thanks, Chris, good to be on with you again.
[Cuomo:] So do you agree with your colleagues, Flake and Corker, that we've reached a tipping point? Do you stand with them and against what the president has said and done?
[Portman:] First, they are buddies of mine, they're friends, they're good legislators and I respect them. But my focus, Chris, you know I've talked about this before, is how to get things done. And just as I worked with President Obama, as you know I had 50 of my bills signed into law by him, I didn't agree with him on a lot of things but I worked with him. I continue to work with the Trump administration. I also speak out when I disagree with them, and there's no reason you can't do that. As you know, I spoke out against the travel ban when it came out and I was the first Republican to do so I think. I've also spoken out more recently on the Russia issue, something I've been concerned about for years and the disinformation campaign. I think we're not being tough enough. I opposed them when they opposed sanctions, there's no sanctions on Russia. So you want to pick your fights because you do want to accomplish things. This week, for instance, as you know, I am working with the administration on tax reform, also working with the House. This is something I feel very strongly about. I think we can actually get something done that will help the people I represent. I am also going down tomorrow for the opioid announcement because I have been pushing the president to declare a national emergency.
[Cuomo:] It has not happened yet. It's supposed to happen this week. Is it going to?
[Portman:] I hope it will. There's a meeting at the White House tomorrow, I'm told he's going to make announcements, and we need to implement the legislation that you and I have talked about, the comprehensive addiction recovery act much more aggressively. So I think to me you try to get above the Twitter wars and focus on the policy issue so you can get something done.
[Cuomo:] Let's test that a little bit because what the man says matters. How he leads matters. His sense of moral agency matters. It's not just about getting things done from a legislative capacity, otherwise we would have machines do it. So when you say I'm going to get above the Twitter war, that's what he says, that's what he means. Don't you have to have a position on the kinds of things the president says? Isn't one of the reasons you were put in office is to be a leader on many levels?
[Portman:] Absolutely. And again, I do think those positions. When Bill Clinton was telling the country that, you know, he did or did not do things with regard to Monica Lewinsky, I still tried to work with the Clinton administration and get things done.
[Cuomo:] But you also talked about what he has done and your sense of the morality of it. I am asking you about that now with this president. Do you stand with Senators Flake and Corker about it being too much, that it's too negative, it's too destructive?
[Portman:] Look, I strongly believe our country is polarized right now and too divided, and I think there's blame on the right and on the left, frankly. And I think there are too many people in our country who are getting their information only from sources on the right and left and not realizing that the way you move forward as a people is to find common ground together. And that's where I'll try to focus, and I'll continue to do that, not just with the administration but with my colleagues in the Congress. This is an opportunity, for instance, on the opioid crisis to keep it not just bipartisan but even nonpartisan.
[Cuomo:] I get you on the issues. We talked about opioids, and you are always welcome to do it on the show. As you know we just did a documentary on the issue as it affects New Hampshire, Ohio is not immune, West Virginia and other states, no question. But, again, I am not going to chase you all day on this, I want to talk about other things as well, but you are not saying that yes, I've heard what the man said, President Trump, here's how I feel about it, how I don't think it's a tipping point, I don't agree to Flake and Corker. Can you give an answer?
[Portman:] Look, let me give you a specific answer. I saw this morning some tweets saying that somehow Bob Corker maybe wasn't for tax reform or Jeff Flake wasn't
[Cuomo:] The president has also said Corker brought us the Iran deal. You know that's not true. You know that saying that is a lie, because a lie is when you know something is false and you say it anyway to deceive. That's the only explanation for saying that about Corker. He was against it. He voted against it.
[Portman:] Yes, and he tried very hard to improve it as well. But on the tax reform point, just let me back up to that, they are for tax reform. So these two senators are going to do what they think is best for the people they represent.
[Cuomo:] But you have no opinion about the president saying those things, senator?
[Portman:] I think of course we ought to stick to the truth, and of course we ought not to say things that are not accurate about colleagues, and as you may recall regarding Senator Bob Corker, I think I was the first if not the second Republican senator to send something out supporting Bob Corker and his legislative successes, including with regard to fighting terrorism and economic growth issues like tax reform. So bob has been a real leader and I will continue to do those sorts of things.
[Cuomo:] Senator, the president says this is the biggest tax cut in U.S. history. Is that true?
[Portman:] Well, it depends where we end up. My hope is that we do have significant tax relief but also very substantial tax reform because it is the tax reform that's going to create the growth in the economy that will result in us not having a negative impact on the deficit but even be able to reduce the deficit. And I think that's the point here. It's tax relief from a so called static score bases, to use a Washington term, meaning if you don't take into account the growth that's going to happen. But if you do the right kind of tax reform, and Chris, you and I have talked about this, it's a broken tax code now. We have companies in New York and Ohio and elsewhere who are literally leaving our states to go overseas because our tax code is so bad. They are taking jobs and investment with them. So this is a chance to reverse that and actually begin to bring back investment to the United States and create more jobs and higher wages. So if we do that and do it right, you will have some tax relief compared to what it would otherwise be is actually relatively minor compared to the total revenue. But you'll actually have growth that will result in more revenue. That's the idea.
[Cuomo:] Right. But the economic problem politics are one thing, can you get the votes. And it ties in with an economic reality that when you cut taxes it is going to cost you money on the deficit and on the debt side. This plan is scored as doing that in its early stages. We'll have to see how it gets negotiated. But billing something as a middle class tax cut when the cuts are not weighted forward the middle class they do get some cuts in the early iteration, but not like the top tier does and it adds to the deficit, are those things you are OK with?
[Portman:] First of all we don't know the final plan because none of us have seen that, but it will have middle class tax relief, there's no question
[Cuomo:] But not like it gives to the top.
[Portman:] Well, we'll see.
[Cuomo:] It doesn't right now is what I'm saying, what we have seen so far.
[Portman:] Yes. What we've said from the start is that the wealthy will continue to pay their burden that they pay now at the 10 percent pay something like 70 percent of the taxes, and that shouldn't change. And I feel strongly about that, as do others. But with regard to the growth side, let me just give you a couple quick numbers. If you grow the economy by one percent, so instead of the 1.9 percent projected by the Congressional budget office over the next 10 years, 2.9 percent, that would add $2.7 trillion more in revenue. That's the CBO number, Congressional budget numbers.
[Cuomo:] How do you know that tax cuts would do that?
[Portman:] We are talking about substantially less than that, more like 0.4 percent, so instead of 1.9 percent growth, you have something 2.3 percent growth. You and I grew up in a time when we have 3.5 to four percent growth regularly. So if you do the kind of tax reform we're talking about, and it needs to be properly scored by people who look at the growth element of this, we will have growth. There's no question about it. We have the highest business rate in the world right now. They are literally companies leaving our shores as we talked about earlier. You've got $2.5 to $3 trillion locked up overseas.
[Cuomo:] You definitely have the money locked up overseas. That's something that we're looking for you guys to address. But you know that's a little fuzzy math when it comes to the tax burden on businesses. The nominal rate is one thing, the practical rate that they play with all the loopholes and the way they're able to hide money is something else. When you look at it that way, they're not doing badly by being in the
[U.s. Portman:] The effective rate is still above the average of the industrialized country. You see the average is 22.5 percent, we're at 35 percent, the effective rate is probably in the mid to high 20s.
[Cuomo:] But it's not the worst in the world as we keep hearing from your side of the aisle.
[Portman:] Is it in terms of the statutory rate which is what companies look at initially
[Cuomo:] But they don't pay it.
[Portman:] You have to add the percentage of New York state and Ohio and other states, average is actually about 39 percent. Yes, most companies don't pay it, some do.
[Cuomo:] But some pay nothing. That's why I am saying
[Portman:] And that will change under this proposal, in other words, everybody will pay some taxes with this proposal, which is another important difference. But look, this is something Chuck Schumer and I agreed to two years ago that we needed to fix our international tax system to go to a so called territorial system to lower the rate and bring back this money, bring back the jobs. Chuck Schumer wanted to put some of the money into infrastructure as well, to be honest, but that's fine, too. But my point is this has not been a partisan issue. It was in the SimpsonBowles proposal that everybody supported. So this is something we should do, and if we do it, there's no question, and economists agree on this, it will increase economic growth which will raise revenue.
[Cuomo:] Well, it depends on what you do. I mean, if you repatriate money, obviously, that's a good thing. You have more money in your economy. The idea of jobs, you know, the president puts it in quotes, in caps, jobs, you have lots of jobs here, and in some places, you have more jobs than they able bodied or competent labor, which goes to training and how we treat our workers from the last generation to this generation. But it's about wages.
[Portman:] Exactly.
[Cuomo:] The theory that we are going to give companies more money so they can pay people more, we haven't seen companies holding cash the way they are right now in a long time, if ever, and they ain't paying more. So, the idea of giving them more money, that doesn't communicate to larger wages.
[Portman:] Well, what the Congressional Budget Office said, again, this is a nonpartisan group, so I look to them on things like this, and they have said when you do lower the business rate, 70 percent of the benefit will go to workers in terms of wages and benefits, why? Because there's more competition for workers. And particularly with the tight labor market we got right now, and you're correct about that, there's no question in my mind you are going to see a bump up in the wages. We are already seeing it in the last quarter, as you know, finally, after, you know, really a decade and a half of flat wages and higher expenses, and that middle class squeeze, it results is one of the things that we're trying to address here.
[Cuomo:] They definitely need help.
[Portman:] Both through the business side but also through the middle class tax relief. So, I think this is identifying the problem properly, which you just did, which is the middle class wages.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Portman:] Identifying the problem properly, which is American companies literally not becoming American companies, would become foreign companies which hurts us because jobs and investment follow that. There's a recent study by this group, Ornstein Young, an accounting firm, saying 4,700 companies would be American companies today rather than foreign companies if we put this kind of tax reform in place 13 years ago. In other words, just in the last decade
[Cuomo:] Right, I saw that I saw that analysis. We will talk about it when we get more meat on the bones. As you know, the number one reason they are going somewhere else is labor costs, and that's another conversation that needs to be had about how you curtail about a business calculus about what makes sense for them.
[Portman:] Labor costs as you know, Chris, is a smaller and smaller part of the calculation, as other countries do raise their wages and as there's more machination, more innovation, and more technology
[Cuomo:] Right. Right.
[Portman:] but, look, it's crazy that we have a tax code that is not serving the American worker. If you are working in a manufacturing industry working today, and it's international, you are working every day with one hand tied behind your back.
[Cuomo:] I hear it.
[Portman:] So, let's at least give them the tax code that let's them be competitive.
[Cuomo:] I hear it and we'll see how you do that. Senator, thank you for coming on the show.
[Portman:] Thanks, Chris. Great to talk to you.
[Cuomo:] You are always welcome. Alisyn?
[Portman:] Take care.
[Camerota:] Well, the Senate Armed Services Committee will receive a classified briefing tomorrow on that deadly ambush in Niger. One lawmaker tells us next, she has big questions.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn:] There's more breaking news on Capitol Hill this hour. It's a busy day. Congressman Trey Gowdy, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, says he will not seek re-election. The South Carolina Republican published a lengthy statement online saying, in part, quote, "Whatever skills I may have are better utilized in a courtroom than in Congress. And I enjoy our justice system more than our political system." My panel back with me here, Kaitlan Collins, April, A.B. A.B., if I could begin with you. This is part of a string of Republican retirements here. I've lost track now, but it's probably three dozen now or so. That always happens in a lot of cycles. But in this particular cycle, it's been notable.
[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor & Columnist, Real Clear Politics:] Yes, it's really a record going back many, many, many decades. So it's disconcerting to the Republican leadership, facing headwinds going into the midterms to lose anybody. He's not in a swing seat, but he's sort of a leader in the Republican Party. He's been a great spokesman on these issues. Republican voters know who he is. He led the Benghazi investigation. He's interesting, because of what we talked about today, tried to straddle an interesting line in the last few weeks.
[Sciutto:] Interesting, No question. During the Obama administration, all over Benghazi. In recent weeks, his statements a bit more on the fence.
[Stoddard:] He's trying to make it clear he doesn't want to malign the entire DOJ or FBI. He's tried to warn his colleagues that you can ask questions and be skeptical without being accusatory.
[Sciutto:] What's your read of why he
[Stoddard:] Well, there's speculation in the Twitterverse there might be an opening on the Fourth Circuit that he's interested in. He made it clear that he prefers the judicial landscape to the political arena. I don't blame him. He made it clear in a statement. So he might be looking for a judgeship.
[Sciutto:] April, is there anything information that the Trump administration is considering him for a court appointment?
[April Ryan, Cnn Political Analyst:] That's a powerful seat. That is a very powerful seat. He stood with the administration, but the administration we don't know. We never know what they do. A lot of times people are qualified and sometimes people are not. But one thing I will say, those who know Trey Gowdy very well and those who work with Trey Gowdy, both Dem and Republican, say he has higher aspirations. Those higher aspirations one day could wind up being 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
[Sciutto:] But you're saying there are political ambitions in Congress?
[Ryan:] So he may realize that right now to save himself for later on, for his aspirations, he may need to leave now and possibly move somewhere else and be appointed to a seat, but he wants to make sure he's clean for something else. He doesn't want to fight with this president, being a high-ranking Republican that he is. I just want to say one thing, too. Congressman Elijah Cummings has outlived Darrell Issa and Trey Gowdy. Isn't that crazy?
[Sciutto:] Kaitlan, you wanted to
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Not totally surprising he made this decision. He had expressed interest in becoming a judge. I think he filed for re-election at the deadline last time around and threw people off a little bit. I don't think it's that surprising, but it is significant because it's another Republican who's not running and a prominent chairman at that. It does make a change.
[Sciutto:] No question. There's other political news. There's a new poll from Monmouth where the president's approval rating has ticked up to 42 percent, 50 percent disapproving. This is out of the 30s, where President Trump has wallowed, one might say, for most of the time since his inauguration. A.B., why? Why do we think?
[Stoddard:] I think it's probably related to two things. I mean, they did pass tax reform by a Christmas deadline after a year of failing to repeal and replace Obamacare and fighting with each other.
[Sciutto:] I know that the tax reform plan at least in many polls is viewed by a majority of Americans negatively.
[Stoddard:] The polling on tax reform was really bad in December. It's actually rising. It's becoming more popular. And either people are responding to their own personal data or they're responding to these stories of corporations feeling a boost and sharing it with their workers. And that is a positive for him. It's a legislative success, and it's an economic success.
[Sciutto:] Kaitlan, I wonder, because you're still seeing this wave of Republican departures and part of that is based on a calculation it's going to be a tough year in 2018. It always is. A midterm year always is. It certainly was for Obama in 2010. But as this number rises, if it continues to, does that better improve does that improve the chances of Republicans in the midterms?
[Collins:] It certainly raises some questions. The president has created a lot of problems for people who are running for re-election. At times, he's sparred with some of those people who would typically need a president's support. But the question now and in 2018 will be, does the president's support actually help pull people over the line who are in those hotly contested primaries. Does his support help them? So far, we've seen it not really help, in Alabama with Luther Strange and Roy Moore. With those races, it hasn't helped them at all. It is a question for the White House. It will be a question of what they can accomplish for the rest of his term in office, depending on who they have over on the Hill.
[Sciutto:] April, we know this president likes to celebrate good news, or his perception of good news. Do you sense in the White House an increasing confidence or optimism?
[Ryan:] Oh, most definitely. This president will definitely tout, "My numbers are great." We saw that not long ago on Twitter when his numbers were moving. The negative piece was that the vast majority still do not approve of you. You have the vast majority disapproving. This president takes any positive step up and he says this is a building block. But the question is, how long will he be able to build? Let's see what happens in the next couple days when it comes to issues of having to deal with the budget or C.R. and having to deal with DACA again. Those sensitive issues are what brings it back down, when you deal with the issues of the race, or did he say this, or did he say that, or did he tweet this or tweet that. Those are the things. Right now, this is a moment. But let's what happens in the next couple of days.
[Collins:] And to add to that, the president insists to his allies and friends all the time that approval rating it not his actual approval rating. He insists to people it's much higher than what it is.
[Sciutto:] Yes, hates polls, except for the polls he likes, right? Kaitlan, A.B., April, thanks very much. More on our other breaking news. The FBI issuing a stern public warning directly to the White House saying it has grave concerns about the accuracy of the Republican memo that attacks law enforcement agencies. This puts the FBI director, Christopher Wray, at odds with the man who selected him, the president. Stand by.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor:] This, says the company, is not true. It is 10:00 a.m. in the East. 7:00 a.m. in the West. I'm Jim Sciutto in New York.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm Poppy Harlow. We're glad you're with us this morning. The White House is, quote, "running very smoothly, thank you." That is according to President Trump, who for his part, according to one White House official, is, quote, in this official's words, "pissed at damn near everyone." That is because of the midterms and the Mueller probe and of course the sudden ouster of a top White House National Security aide at the behest of the first lady.
[Sciutto:] The midterms are still a work in progress. In Florida, the deadline to finish machine recounts is just five hours away. Court fights are sure to last far beyond that, though. In Florida, and next door in Georgia as well. We begin this hour with CNN's Kaitlan Collins, she is at the White House. Kaitlan, the question of the hour, can the White House run very smoothly when the president is, quote, "pissed at everyone"?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Jim, the idea that the White House is running smoothly is not an assessment that most people who work inside the West Wing would agree with right now. They've actually been the ones describing the president's dark mood, which they say has only intensified in recent days since he returned from Paris, and a lot of them are fearing for their job security, unsure if they're on stable footing with the president. Now that's not only limited to the chief of staff, John Kelly, but also the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. And when the president was asked about Nielsen's future in this administration, he did not give a yes or no answer during an interview with the "Daily Caller" yesterday, but he did points to how administrations make changes after the midterm elections saying, "After the midterms you make changes so I'm looking at things." He said, I've got a lot of options. And I'm quoting the president now, he says, "I haven't made a decision yet. I will be making a decision on Homeland shortly." Jim and Poppy, we've been talking about that, the fact that the president is obviously wanting to get rid of Kirstjen Nielsen in that post at DHS. He's just not sure who it is he should replace her with yet, and then that creates another question, does the Chief of Staff John Kelly who brought her into this administration in the first place follow her when she does leave, which we are told by sources is a matter of if not when. A question of if when, not if, when she does leave the administration. But it's not just staffing changes that are making the president's mood so dark in recent days. He came off that trip from Paris and he was very embittered about the PR and the optics of it, after he cancelled that trip to a military cemetery. He also feels that the White House has lost that winning narrative they had in the days after the midterm elections. So all of those are on the president's plate. And then as you can see from Twitter this morning, he is quite troubled by the Russia investigation once again.
[Sciutto:] Yes. That's putting it mildly. Kaitlan Collins at the White House. With us now, CNN political commentators Doug Heye and Patti Solis Doyle. Doug, if I could begin with you, because also in this "Daily Caller" interview, the president propagating once again unfounded and you know, genuinely dangerous myths about voter fraud in Florida. He said, I'm going to quote here, "I have seen it. I've had friends talk about it, when people get in line that have absolutely no right to vote then they go around in circles. Sometimes they go in their car, put on a different hat, put on a different shirt, come in and vote again. Nobody takes anything. It's really a disgrace what's going on. The disgrace is that voter I.D. if you know buy a box of cereal, if you do anything, you have a voter I.D." Let's set that aside for a moment because of course you can buy cereal without an I.D., and in fact, in Florida, a voter I.D. is required here. In your view as a Republican as well, is this dangerous for the president of the United States from his pulpit here to be calling into question the votes in such a crucial state as Florida?
[Doug Heye, Cnn Political Commentator:] In a word, yes. And I think it was troubling for a lot of people when he was doing so in 2016 as well. Obviously, he won that result and then it was a big, beautiful result with no fraud because he won. But politically the reality is I think Ron DeSantis is going to win the governorship. I think Rick Scott is going to win the Senate seat. They are both leading right now. So calling into question the results is, I think, a dangerous precedent anyways. But it also doesn't suit his political purposes if Republicans are going to win. Why call into question a result that would benefit you?
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Patti, just moments ago, the president tweeted again about, you know, the Russia probe and collusion, et cetera. Nothing new there, but I did find it fascinating, and I wonder if it's a warning to some Democrats on how to proceed here in the new term, what the CNN poll that we just got showed us about impeachment. It said 55 percent of Americans don't think the president should be impeached or removed from office. Six in 10 say there's not enough for Congress to even begin impeachment hearings. And I think you only had 3 percent here who felt that that should be the top priority for Congress right now. What should Democrats take from that come January?
[Patti Solis Doyle, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, I think talking about impeachment now is not a good idea for Democrats. We have to wait for the Mueller report and see. You know, there's a high threshold for impeachment. High crimes, and we don't know whether Mueller will say that indeed President Trump obstructed justice or indeed he colluded with the Russians or his campaign colluded with the Russians. So we have to wait. But trust me, there is plenty of other things that now a Democratic- led House can do. First and foremost, I think, is getting the president's taxes. Secondly, there's just a plethora of ethics violations in that administration right now. But also, there's legislation to be done. There's an infrastructure bill, there's a voter rights bill. There's work to be done. So I think talking about impeachment is just not smart for Democrats and it's very premature.
[Harlow:] Interesting.
[Sciutto:] Doug, let me bring up this crazy idea of bipartisan legislative cooperation. Funny thing is, though, that both sides, even the president, had a Democratic lawmaker on, Eric Swalwell, on in the last hour talking about that and then bringing up specific ideas. First, we had this prison reform bill yesterday, bipartisan support for that. There's talk on drug prices, on infrastructure, possibly on DACA. Do you see with this split Congress and noting the difficulty that Democrats might have voting along with the president on anything, but do you see the potential there for some of these priorities moving forward?
[Heye:] I do. I think in a limited sense, infrastructure being one. I was at a criminal justice reform event yesterday in Los Angeles that Van Jones was doing with Kim Kardashian. And you know, bringing that kind of attention to an issue like that only propels things further. And we have Republicans and Democrats who support it. Hakeem Jeffries, the Democrat, Doug Collins from Georgia, the Republican, who pushed the First Step Act. That's a good first step forward. Not just on the issue but on bipartisanship. I have long thought, Jim and Poppy, that Donald Trump is in a unique position to cut deals that no other Republican would be able to cut, say a President Jeb Bush or a President Scott Walker on guns or on immigration. That may be a taller order, but if issues come up where that needs to be done, Trump is in the unique position to do it if he seizes that moment. And then people would be very surprised that he is the great negotiator he's always told us he is.
[Sciutto:] Well, yes, I mean, one caveat, there has been talk on gun control. We saw that in the last session. Didn't go anywhere. We'll see.
[Harlow:] Patti, to you, on Nancy Pelosi. I mean, you have these 17 Democrats who put their name down on this letter saying we're not going to vote for her. CNN's reporting is there are five more who haven't signed it yet but are in that camp as well, and that would mean that she wouldn't have the votes, the 218 number that she needs to be speaker and the CNN polling again shows when you look at all Americans, only 3 in 5 3 in five say they'd prefer someone else. And even among Democrats and Democratic leaning independents, 44 percent only back her. 46 percent want someone else to take the lead. Is this the time for a new leadership for the party?
[Solis Doyle:] You know, I don't I can't remember a more effective speaker than Nancy Pelosi. She is very, very good at what she does. And you know, with the help of others, she took a great lead in actually winning back the House for Democrats. But having said that, Nancy Pelosi has a problem. There are several new members, newly elected members of Congress, who pledged that they would not support Nancy Pelosi for leadership. And if I were advising any of those new members, I don't think that going back on your campaign pledge is a way to start your new job. So she's got a problem with those members, for sure. And for a long time, Republicans have made Nancy Pelosi the boogey woman.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Solis Doyle:] Much like they've made Hillary Clinton the boogey woman. It's unfair, it is not right, it is not substantiated by any real facts in terms of her doing her job. And she's more moderate than she is liberal, actually. But it is an issue for her. Ultimately, I think she will win, but she's got a problem right now.
[Heye:] Can I respond to that really quickly?
[Harlow:] Very quickly, yes, go ahead.
[Heye:] In 2010, I helped spearhead the "Fire Pelosi" campaign at the RNC. And I agree with Patty, one of the reasons that we wanted to fire Pelosi was because she was so darn effective and she put Obamacare through. Democrats would be foolish to cast her aside, I think.
[Harlow:] That's really interesting.
[Sciutto:] Interesting. You have she has your endorsement. We're going to let her know that.
[Harlow:] There you go.
[Heye:] A weird one.
[Harlow:] There is that. Thank you both, Doug and Patti. Nice to have you as always. So this morning, Florida Governor Rick Scott is appealing a judge's ruling that allows voters to essentially try again to match their signatures. Earlier, a federal judge in Florida extended the deadline for voters with mismatched signatures to sign again and see if they match this time.
[Sciutto:] It's a hard standard to meet. This comes as officials in Florida work to meet a 3:00 p.m. recount deadline today. Just a few hours from now, all 67 counties must submit all machine vote totals. Let's get right to CNN's Ed Lavandera. He is in Tallahassee, Florida. What's the latest, Ed? Do we expect to see a resolution today?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, that's what we're waiting for, for this 3:00 Eastern deadline from the secretary of state here in Florida, as all of the counties across Florida are sending in their recount numbers that have been implemented here since last week's election. But really the focus here in Tallahassee is the ruling from this federal judge extending this deadline on the question of signatures that didn't match. And this is a deadline that is extended until Saturday afternoon. So they have several days to go back to all of these people, which is close to some 5,000 people across the state. Now what is interesting here, Jim and Poppy, is that right now, Rick Scott leads Senator Bill Nelson in this senatorial race by more than 12,000 votes. So if even unlikely scenario that all 5,000 of these signature ballots that are in question were all to vote for Bill Nelson, which we all know is highly unlikely, that means that there still aren't enough votes there to make a difference. But this is just one of several lawsuits that are still winding their way through the system here in Tallahassee as Democratic lawyers and Republican lawyers continue to fight it out here in the courts as these deadlines of counting and certifying this vote quickly loom here in the state of Florida.
[Harlow:] Been there before. Ed Lavandera, thank you. So will McConnell cave? Outgoing Republican Senator Jeff Flake says he will vote against, block judges if a vote to protect Special Counsel Bob Mueller does not get taken to the floor. And prosecutors push for the death penalty for five people charged in the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi. But the Saudi Foreign minister says this has nothing to do with the crown prince.
[Sciutto:] Hundreds are still missing as wildfires burn across California, sparking fears that what's already the deadliest wildfire in state history, that that death toll could rise.

[Whitfield:] All right. Welcome back. Hello again, everyone. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. Senator Dianne Feinstein has confirmed I'm sorry, we don't have our scripts together here. Where are we going here? All right. Less than two weeks before Alabama's closely watched special Senate race, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is softening his stance on Republican candidate, Roy Moore. When allegations of sexual assault first surfaced against Moore, McConnell was among the Republicans calling for the candidate to leave the race. But today, McConnell took a different view.
[Senator Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] I think we are going to let the people of Alabama decide a week from Tuesday who they want to send to the Senate and we will address the matter appropriately.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you believe that Judge Moore should be in the Senate?
[Mcconnell:] I'm going to let the people of Alabama make the call. The election has been going on a long time and they will make their decision a week from Tuesday.
[Unidentified Male:] But you are prepared to take action if he is indeed elected?
[Mcconnell:] The Ethics Committee will have to consider the matters that have been litigated in the campaign should that particular candidate win.
[Whitfield:] The latest "Washington Post"Shar School poll has Moore's Democratic rival, Doug Jones leading Moore by more than three percentage points. To win, Jones would have to win a good number of Republican votes, and in a state as conservative as Alabama, that could be quite the challenge. Our Kaylee Hartung joins us now from Birmingham. So Kaylee, what are you hearing from people there?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Fred, keep in mind about half of the adults in the state of Alabama identify themselves as Evangelical Protestants. Pastors who I've talked across this state, many of them have told me you won't hear them offer a prayer for the candidates from their pulpit or specifically endorse either candidate from the pulpit. But as Dr. Daniel Wilson here at First Baptist Church in Pleasant Grove, Alabama, just outside of Birmingham illustrated for me today, he is willing to touch on social and moral issues from the pulpit, specifically those which he feels are rooted in biblical scripture. So, as we approach Christmastime, this morning in his sermon, he reminded his congregation that Jesus was once an unborn baby in his mother's womb and that God looked for a home for Jesus with a mother and a father. So, while he won't specifically endorse a candidate, it was clear to me it's hard to discern for a lot of people in Alabama where religion end and politics begin.
[Roy Moore , Alabama Senate Candidate:] A poor that which is evil and [inaudible] to that which is good.
[Hartung:] That's Roy Moore appealing to his constituents, but not all of them are convinced. Bill Brewbaker is a lifelong Republican and an Evangelical Christian, but he won't be voting for his party's candidate in Alabama's December 12th special election. No state has a higher percentage of Christians among them than Alabama according to Pew Research.
[Dr. John Killian, Former President, Alabama Baptist Convention:] And I think for that reason, Judge Moore's messages resonated because of the culture.
[Hartung:] Like many, Dr. John Killian, former president of the Alabama Baptist Convention thinks this deeply Republican state is ripe and ready for the taking by the former judge, but some like Brewbaker think that's an unfair assumption.
[Bill Brewbaker, Lifelong Alabama Republican:] Evangelicals are being painted with a very broad brush.
[Hartung:] He says this goes deeper than the allegations of sexual misconduct against Moore.
[Brewbaker:] The idea that there is a candidate who is wrapping himself in the mantle of Christianity and is at a political rally and pulls out a hand gun?
[Hartung:] Moore has been hitting his base visiting rural conservative churches. Though, some of the worship services have felt more like campaign events.
[Jeremy Ragland, Pastor, Bryan Baptist Church:] The only way our voice can be heard throughout this country is by us taking our liberties and voting. They want to do two things, several things. They want to hide the true issues. That's why you see "The Washington Post" bring out the Russian investigation when the people want to know about immigration and health care.
[Hartung:] But Brewbaker worries about the message electing Moore would send.
[Brewbaker:] I'm deeply concerned about the effect of Roy Moore's presence in the Senate will have on the reputation of Evangelicals. I'm tempted to vote for Doug Jones for that reason, but I can't bring myself to pull the trigger on that.
[Hartung:] Democratic challenger, Doug Jones's biggest hurdle with Republicans like Brewbaker is he is pro-choice, an issue, the issue that puts him at odds with conservative voters. Jones is also a man of faith, attending a fish riot in Montgomery.
[Doug Jones , Alabama Senate Candidate:] Folks, pray but we have to move our feet, all right?
[Hartung:] Jones will need high turnout in metropolitan areas particularly the African-American populations in the state to capitalize on Moore's perceived vulnerability. It's a steep mountain to climb in a state that has not elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate in a quarter of a century. Like many Alabamans across this state, Doug Jones and Roy Moore both attended church services this is morning and Fred, that latest "Washington Post" poll that has Jones with just a 3 percent lead over Moore is within the margin of error of that poll. As Bill Brewbaker illustrated for us there a hard number to pin down right now. How many people stay home come December 12th?
[Whitfield:] All right. Kaylee Hartung, it's right around the corner in Birmingham. Thanks so much. We'll be right back.

[Church:] Hearing and seeing the fury there of the powerful hurricane Irma a category 5 colossus with sustain winds of about 300 kilometers per hours and gusts even stronger. Irma is one of the most intense Atlantic hurricane in recorded history killing at least nine people so far as it pummels the Caribbean. Barbuda's prime minister says the impact on his island is unprecedented with 95 percent of properties there damaged or destroyed. In Texas, the magnitude of another hurricane Harvey has overwhelmed government resources and it's likely to be a similar situation if hurricane Irma strikes the U.S. Rene Marsh reports on why FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency may not have enough money to help every community that needs disaster relief funds.
[Rene Marsh, Aviation Correspondent, Cnn:] First Harvey, now Irma.
[Unidentified Male:] If you're told to evacuate, get out quickly.
[Marsh:] A second major hurricane is headed to the U.S. and it's one of the strongest Atlantic storms ever.
[Unidentified Male:] Storm surge and extreme winds are the biggest concern right now.
[Marsh:] Irma a category 5 hurricane is threatening Florida nearly two weeks after Harvey devastated Texas. And it's all happening as FEMA comes dangerously close to running out of money. FEMA has just over $1 billion with $541 million of that available for immediate use as of Tuesday morning.
[Wolf Blitzer, Host, Cnn:] Are you confident that Congress will set aside enough funding for FEMA?
[Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency:] You know that's up to the Congress.
[Marsh:] Wednesday the House approved $7.8 billion in relief aid but the aid package now in the Senate has gotten political with relief funding being tied to raising the debt ceiling.
[Paul Ryan, United States Speaker Of The House:] We got another unprecedented hurricane about to hit Florida and they want to play politics with the debt ceiling? That will strand the aid that we need to bring to these victims.
[Marsh:] Even if the 7.8 billion in relief aid passes Congress, Florida Senate here say it will only cover federal response cost for about a couple of weeks and would not adequately cover resources FEMA needs to respond to Irma.
[Long:] We need citizens to be involved. Texas this is a landmark event. We have not seen an event like this.
[Marsh:] The historic magnitude of Harvey overwhelmed federal responders causing them to ask the public for help. And that will likely happen again with Irma. Well, the response and recovery will be overwhelming for federal responders. Despite that FEMA says that it has activated its headquarters and its regional offices and already deployed some 700 people to respond to hurricane Irma. Rene Marsh, CNN, Washington.
[Church:] I'm Rosemary Church. The news continues with our Max Foster in London. You're watching CNN. Have a great day.

[Hill:] President Trump appreciates North Korea's decision to leave its long-range missiles out of the country's 70th anniversary parade. The president tweeting, "Thank you to Chairman Kim. We will both prove everyone wrong. There's nothing like good dialogue from two people who like each other." He states experts say Pyongyang left the missiles out as a sign of its commitment to denuclearize. Important to point out here that there's been no proof that is happening. Joining me for a closer look is Gordon Chang, columnist for the "Daily Beast" and also author of "North Korea Takes on the World." Gordon, I'm guessing you're not really buying the president's declaration here.
[Gordon Chang, Columnist, Daily Beast:] No. First of all, the North Koreans are continuing to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons. They're continuing to work on their ballistic missiles. And this is happening in the background of they're trying to stall us. Up until the end of May or so, we had a maximum pressure campaign to cut off money to Kim Jong-Un. That's the reason he became much more cooperative. Since then, we allowed Chinese sanctions busting, we allowed the Russians to do it, the South Koreans are getting in on the act. Kim is getting everything he wants so, of course, he's going to be nice because he's going to make sure we don't use American power to take away his weapons.
[Hill:] So he's trying to keep President Trump happy. It was interesting, too, a Chinese official who was reportedly at the parade telling Chinese state TV, "The Chinese highly value North Kora's efforts to denuclearize." Which, again, is interesting in a statement because, as you point out, we don't know that's happening at all. In fact, perhaps the opposite.
[Chang:] Certainly, the opposite. And the Chinese have been supplying some crucial equipment for North Korea's ballistic missile program recently. They're supporting the economy, busting the sanctions. We're seeing this with the coal purchases from North Korea, ship to ship transfers. Chinese money is being North Korean money is laundered through Chinese banks. This is not a good story. We're just watching this and we're not imposing any costs on Beijing. And of course, the North Koreans aren't going to be cooperative because we're not doing anything.
[Hill:] You pointed out to me in the break that this isn't just about placating President Trump and making him feel good about where we are. A lot of what happened or was not shown at this parade is also a message that it's aimed at South Korea.
[Chang:] Certainly. South Korean President Moon Jae-in is going to Pyongyang September 18th for two days of talks. Moon is very pro North Koreans. He wants to unify the peninsula, which means he's undermining his own democracy to make South Korea more compatible with North Korea. Also, Moon wants to shovel a lot of money into the hands of Kim Jong-Un. He wants to open up this liaison office in the Kaesong Industrial Complex, which is in North Korea, which shovels a lot of money into North Korea when it's open. So Kim has a real important ally. Not just Xi Jinping, not just Vladimir Putin. He has a real important ally in South Korea.
[Hill:] Is the president getting played here, President Trump?
[Chang:] He probably is getting played. The alternative argument is what he said in Ottawa at the G-7 just before the summit with Kim Jong-Un. He said, I'm giving the North Koreans a one-shot opportunity to do the right thing. He's given the North Koreans maybe a two-shot opportunity, a three-shot opportunity. And I wouldn't have given them any opportunity at all. But nonetheless, this is the president's plan. It's not a bad one. He's really trying to cooperate and try to create this good atmosphere where the North Koreans can feel comfortable giving up their weapons. But I think that's the wrong strategy.
[Hill:] How long do those chances last? I mean, when do you finally put up your hands and say, wait a minute, this could get a little dangerous?
[Chang:] It's getting very dangerous because the situation is getting beyond control. A lot of people speculate the president will pivot to a more resolute policy after the midterms. I don't know. But nonetheless, we have to do it at some point. Because the North Koreans are just proving that the fundamental assumptions we make about the North Koreans have been wrong.
[Hill:] Gordon Chang, always appreciate it. Thank you.
[Chang:] Thanks, Erica.
[Hill:] And 20 Republican-led states are taking the Affordable Care Act back to court. Is it unconstitutional as they allege? Up next, we'll speak with Louisiana's attorney general, Jeff Landry, who is part of that challenge.

[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] necessary step for North to enter the Earth's atmosphere impact. That would be a necessary step for North Korean ICBM to hit a target. Then there's the issue of placing a nuclear warhead on top of the missile.
[Rep. Michael Mccaul , Homeland Security Chairman:] They're trying to miniaturize this warhead to put it on top of this ICBM delivery system. So I think it's a very serious threat.
[Starr:] A threat that for now the U.S. is confronting peacefully.
[James Mattis, Defense Secretary:] This is a diplomatically led international efforts to stop a worldwide threat that they are bringing to bear.
[Starr:] But what does that looks like? Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced the Trump administration's goal is to roll back North Korea's nuclear and missile program.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of The State:] Stopping where they are today is not acceptable to us.
[Starr:] So one of the big diplomatic questions is this, would talking to North Korea directly even help? So far, no indication. Pamela?
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Anchor:] All right, Barbara Starr, thank you so much for that and Senator Chris Coons, back to you now. So bottom line, your view, can the U.S. do anything at all to prevent a nuclear capable North Korea?
[Sen. Chris Coons , Foreign Relations Committee:] Well Pamela, both Putin and president Trump have said publicly, they intend to follow diplomacy first that they're trying to mobilize a world effort. And some of the things that have been done in the United Nations at the G20 suggest that some of our key allies also see it the same way that they're willing to support tougher sanctions on North Korea. The key country here is China. This is China's problem, because this is destabilizing pet Korean Peninsula, it's destabilizing the region, but China hasn't yet taken tough enough actions to actually impose some cost on North Korea for this destabilizing action. My main question is up for pursuing diplomacy first. And this is one of our most important national security questions, then why is president Trump advancing a budget that would cut the state department by almost a third? That seems to me like were you in a lottery disarming our most important tool or weapon in a diplomatic effort against North Korea?
[Brown:] When you talk about diplomacy, you mentioned China is key in all of this. But if China hasn't done enough up to this point, why are you confident that they could?
[Coons:] I'm not confident. In fact, I'm not even optimistic. I'm concerned that China is balancing their concern that if the North Korean regime collapses, there will be humanitarian crisis on the border and loss a key ally versus their concern that the rest of the world will coalesce around making them pay a high price. I think we are in a race against time. And frankly race that we may well loss. We may be facing a North Korean nuclear armed country that has an ICBM capable of hitting the United States within two years. We don't have a lot of time. That's why we need to focus on the diplomatic effort and we need presidential leadership that engages all of our allies around the world. This is not the time for President Trump to be under mining NATO or the E.U. or the G20 or our partnerships with the rest in the world.
[Brown:] So you think within two years, North Korea will figure out the technology miniaturizing warheads and they will have it will be fully
[Coons:] That's just a rough guess. In open source reporting, that's been talked about as the time it likely will take them. I think this latest missile test took a number of us by surprised in being more successful than expected by as you've just heard Secretary Tillerson say, they're still analyzing it. So that's a rough guess, two years.
[Brown:] what's clear is that North Korea does not shows any signs of backing down?
[Coons:] No signs of backing down. And this is very risky for the United States. We need to focus on this and we need to bring all of our resources to bear.
[Brown:] I want to ask you. I want to circle back to Russian reporting. We just saw from for me and my colleagues showing for the pass, an event for us about spying by Russians inside the U.S. and the fact that Russians are stepping up their efforts even after the election. And what we're told is part of the calculus is that really the Russians haven't faced severe retaliation for the election meddling, according to the intelligence community. How concerned are you about this?
[Coons:] I'm very concerned. I think Vladimir Putin will only stop when we stop him. And he will only stop when he and his nation pay a significant price. Meddling directly in the American presidential election that was at the very heart of what it means to be a democracy. Remember what they've done recently, invaded and occupied a portion of a neighboring country, Ukraine, where we had guaranteed in writing an agreement there at territorial sovereignty. Taking the side of Bashar al-Assad, a murderous leader of the Syrian regime and Military where Russia intervened and really has prevented in his collapse and when United States had committed to his removal from power and interfering directly in our elections. They don't share our priorities. They don't share our values. They've attempted to undermine NATO, distance the United States from its Key North Atlantic allies and to affect our elections. We need to take tougher action.
[Brown:] But what about during the Obama administration because the argument hasn't made, the Obama administration didn't do enough?
[Coons:] I would agree with that. I'd frankly say that the Obama administration in abundance of caution didn't act more decisively right before the election. Out of a concern, that would be proceed as partisan. But the Obama administration did take strong steps to make sure that the intelligence community was focus on this threat, produce a broad consensus report and that will share both with leaders and congress and with the incoming Trump administration.
[Brown:] Let me just ask
[Coons:] It's the administration that has taken the steps that were needed to follow up on the intelligence.
[Brown:] let me just ask you this, because our sources tell us also part of the concern was that it could launch cyber warfare.
[Coons:] That's right.
[Brown:] And I'm hearing from people I think doing the intelligence community that Russians have been very focus on penetrating the supply chain, particularly, telecommunications companies. We know nuclear plans. There were recent hacks. How much does that factor in the concern that they would be able to cost great harm in retaliation on that?
[Coons:] I think that's a very legitimate concern. I think Russia is the most capable cyber adversary that we face in the world. They have a very sophisticated intelligence service. They have a fairly sophisticated military. And they have made the cyber domain. There priority area is actually against the United States. So I think it would be perfectly reasonable for the administration to hesitate before taking really strong escalatory action against Russia particularly in the run up to an election where some sort of the utility black out or some sort of a financial services crash could have really destabilized our election. But frankly, the longer we go without having president Trump forcefully say publicly that Russian meddling in our future elections and in future elections in Europe will not be tolerated along the way or exposed to a repeat of this threat.
[Brown:] And, of course, secretary Tillerson said today that he did press Vladimir Putin on the issue during the meeting at the G20 Summit. Senator Chris Coons, thank you very much.
[Coons:] Thanks again.
[Brown:] And coming up right here on THE LEAD, energy secretary Rick Perry gave an economic lesson. What he said that lapse many people scratching their heads? The panel discuss that and more, up next. Plus, "Everybody still loves Raymond" one of the stars of the mega hit com is here to look back at the '90s with us at least the party remembers. Stay with us.

[Richard Quest, Cnn:] Real jubilation at the stock exchange, as a medal of honor from the Vietnam War rings the closing Bell. Let's not worry too much how the Dow is doing. This is a true hero who is ringing the closing bell. And, one, two, three. Yes, just what you had hoped from Specialist Five James McCloughan, medal of honor of the Vietnam war. Showing the market is down a tad, a small loss at the end of the day, on Thursday, it's September 7. Tonight, Irma's deadly advance continues across the Caribbean. We'll show you where it has been and where it is heading next. Britain gets moving on its Brexit Bill, as Europe polls for delay on the talks. And Russian trolls are buying their way into your social media. And now Congress wants answers from Facebook and Twitter. I'm Richard quest live in the world's financial capital, New York City, where I mean business. Good evening. Tonight, Irma is showing her power demolishing communities and shattering records as this monster hurricane rips through the Atlantic. No storm has been the strong for this long. Just take a look. Parts of Haiti are currently being battered. This is where Irma is at the moment, Haiti. And ahead, smaller low-lying islands like Turks and Caicos stand directly in its way. And soon Eastern Cuba will start to feel Irma was wrath. The scale of the devastation is vast and unprecedented. So, first in Puerto Rico hundreds of thousands of people are being left without power. Look at the winds that ripped through the island. Water supplies have been disrupted. The island of St. Martin both French and Dutch, badly hit. And in Irma's wake trees flatten, roofs torn off, communication towers and power poles all torn down. Northwest of their the Turks and Caicos Islands, people were warned. Expect the worst.
[Vaden Williams, Turks And Caicos Minister Of Housing:] As a government will do our best after the storm to get this country back on track. We can replace your homes and cars. You can't replace your lives. So, we encourage you to go to the shelter, go to the shelter now.
[Quest:] That's what happens. But there are competing models showing where the store may go next, which will talk about at the CNN world whether center in just a moment or two. I need to show you where it's been, where it's now and who's next in the path. Let's start on Wednesday. And you can see on Wednesday, you're down here. Barbuda has been completely devastated. 90 percent of the buildings have been destroyed. St. Martin, four dead, in Puerto Rico50,000 without power. Go to Thursday and you're looking at the Dominican Republic where 7,000 people have been displaced and Haiti, potential flooding mudslides. We'll talk to Paula Newton who's in Haiti in just a moment. And then a little bit further north, the Turks and Caicos Islands, where some of the islands will be completely over washed. We'll have the governor in just a second. And then towards Friday up into the Bahamas, which is undergoing the largest ever evacuation in the islands history. But this is where it gets very uncertain, because by the time we get to the weekend on Saturday in red it's where the storm could go. So, we are seeing mandatory evacuations in Georgia and in Florida and you're seeing in the Carolinas where a state of emergency has been declared. The cone has moved its way up getting bigger and this is where it is at the moment. The Turks and Caicos and the Bahamas are in Irma's path right now. Dr. John Freeman, is the governor in Turks and Caicos. I spoke to you 3 12 hours ago, governor, when you were waiting and anticipating Irma. Irma is now with you. How bad are things?
[Dr. John Freeman, Governor Of Turks And Caicos Islands:] Richard, thank you. I have been kind of working since we spoke. The Winds are building up. We have tropical storm force wins here. We haven't yet gotten the full hurricane force winds. Irma is about 70 kilometers off the most east of the island in Turks and Caicos, Grand Turk. Where in the coast already being felt. Electricity has gone down in Grand Turk. All water has ceased pumping and the shelters there are full, as you know would expect and hope. Over in Providence where I'm sitting somewhere across from Grand Turk we have already had some electricity going down in certain communities. It went down in the command center that I'm. We have a generator that's come on here. And we hope that it survives quite a while because of the winds speeds. So, that's roughly where we are.
[Quest:] Are you seeing the worst of it yet? I mean how much more do you anticipate there is still to come?
[Freeman:] We are not seeing the worst. I fear Irma is still limbering rather than being fully running. And because what we're getting is tropical force winds, which are significantly less speedy than the full hurricane force. We would expect within the next four hours.
[Quest:] Are you in touch with London? Which of course, has responsibility in these matters for assisting you. And if so, what is her Majesty's government saying that they can provide ones Irma has passed?
[Freeman:] We are in talks with London. I took part in a
[Quest:] Governor, thank you. We'll talk more on this. Please stay safe. Know that our thoughts and prayers are with you and all in the Turks and Caicos. Thank you, Sir, for joining us. So, this is the Turks and Caicos, that's where the governor has been talking with us from his command post at the moment. Let's go slightly south down to Haiti. Paula Newton is on Haiti's northern coast, which puts this just directly opposite the Caribbean Sea from where the governor is. I hope, Paula, you were able to hear the governor. There sort of being trashed Now, the cone seems like it when I say it is going to miss, it's meaningless. You're going to feel the force. How bad are things getting?
[Paula Newton, Cnn Correspondent:] We are already. We are being lashed by some furious winds. And as I looked behind me just to make sure there wasn't anything on our way. As the governor he was saying, we have not seen hurricane force winds. Believe me, Richard, Haiti is very lucky for that. We have had some very blunt statements from local officials here and you're talking hundreds of thousands of people at risk. They say they are not prepared, nor are they prepared for the aftermath. So, all best intentions out the window. At this point in time they are very lucky that the path of the storm essentially wobbled a bit east and a bit north. Having said that, even the back end of this storm could be quite furious. It's not even just the wind and what's passing right now, but what's coming after. In terms of regions that will continue to have a deluge of rain and also those mudslides. A lot still to fear here as we just continue to see the beginning of the storm Richard.
[Quest:] All right. Is it believed that you're going to get the outer bank of the hurricane looking at the model so far or is Haiti going to receive the full force? Again, maybe it's dancing on the head of a pin, Paula. But you know what I mean.
[Newton:] No. It is actually highly significant, what you're saying, Richard. And they will not take the full force. And so, we're talking about anything that might approach a category one or category two, perhaps not even hurricane force winds. That is good news. They told us point blank that they weren't prepared. The problem, Richard, is that even when you start to get more of this outer bands. How much moisture actually is produced in which areas has a significant impact on the kind of devastation we might see here and unfortunately loss of life. Right now people are still not in those evacuation centers. There weren't many of them to begin with. A couple that we visited didn't have food or water. They just said it was a solid structure so please come in. People were not convinced. And really, quite resigned to what happened and most people hunkering down in their own homes. You know, shaky homes I might add. A lot of them plywood and tin roofs and they are trying to whether this. We still have another 10 hours to go at least.
[Quest:] Paula, final question. Some viewers may well be wondering, where are you? What structure are you? Obviously, safety for you and our team. Where are you?
[Newton:] Yes, good point. We Cape Haitian, we're a little bit elevated. We can see the ports. And we are in a hotel. Has good cement, good rebar, good windows. Things have been boarded up. We are fine and of course, CNN has made sure that we have all of the provisions here that we need. Even if the power goes out we will continue to do our live shots. What is alarming, again, is the lack of preparedness pretty much all around us even though we feel we are quite safe here.
[Quest:] Paula, thank you, I appreciate it. Give the best of the team. And Tom Sater is with me at the world weather center. Tom, I have done a rather shabby job with my map of showing here it is going and what it is go doing. With your more sophisticated graphics, let's take this point by point. If we may.
[Tom Sater, Cnn Meteorologist:] OK.
[Quest:] I see where it is. What are the winds and the rainfall currently?
[Sater:] Well, about 280 kilometers per hour. Remember, super Typhoon Haiyan was at 315, but it didn't have the staying power that we have with Irma. What we are watching now is we are getting conditions that are pretty rough on the northern coast of the Dominican Republic into Haiti. More concerned about the Turks and Caicos right now, Richard. Because of the sea level rise as it makes its way toward the islands. I mean, they are looking at a good 6, 6.5-meter storm surge here. But this is new today. Warnings for the Bahama Islands but they slapped a hurricane watch unto southern Florida. This is a big, big stage. They don't slap these up here haphazardly. This is heavy consideration, a great analysis because it costs millions and millions of dollars when you put a hurricane watch somewhere in the U.S. because federal, state and local aid that needs to get in the equipment that needs to get here and evacuations.
[Quest:] When do you expect to know when that north turn is going to happen? Let's be clear about this when I say you I mean meteorologist and the UGS. They are pretty certain this northern turn is going to happen.
[Sater:] Yes. It is going to happen. About a week ago we were wondering exactly what had happened sooner than later. I mean, you would like to see that turn northward sooner and stay from, of course, the Bahamas maybe if that's possible and cross off the East Coast. But the storm surges going to be an issue. That term what we are watching though, getting closer to around northern Cuba. Still some questions on whether northern Cuba will have any interaction with this storm system. Because if it does, then it would break the system down to category two. Unfortunate for Cuba getting a lot of water just kind of squeezed out over that area. But it still looks like it's going to be some time, I believe late Friday. The timing seems to be good. The models have been in great achievement, which is staggering really this far out. The European model last Thursday had it sitting south of Miami. U.S. model was up by the U.S. you know, over 12,000-mile separation. But the turn takes place on Friday. Again, the models have been shifting a little west and a little east. This is when it gets interesting now. If we take a look at the spaghetti plots and there's all kinds of models. There is over 70 of them really. But again, there's been a little shift off to the east with some of the spaghetti plots, but if we break it down even further, you're going to be able to see that it's either going to be one of these two scenarios and they are both terrible. The European takes it right into Miami. So, a 10- foot storm surge right into Biscayne Bay. That takes it right up towards Orlando on Sunday and straight up into Georgia. The American model takes it right up the coastline and slams into Savannah, Georgia. So, both will be historically damaging.
[Quest:] Move to your left if you would be as kind and show me. So how serious is Jose still out in the Atlantic and Katia in the Gulf? Amazing. It has been since 2010 we had three hurricanes at the same time. Those names are Carla, Julie and Igor and it looked just like these positions here. It's almost identical. It's amazing. Katia is not a big concern although it is for Veracruz and Mexico as it slides downward. We've got a little bit of a cold front here, Richard, which is too bad that it's not coming through on Friday to help push Irma away. But that'll slide that system to the south. Now Jose, we knew was going to become a hurricane and it is. Yesterday we talked about it could become a major hurricane. That means category three. And it's getting dangerously close to the northern islands of the lesser Antilles. Can you imagine telling the residents of Texas 24 hours after Harvey hits you and devastates you and you have another one coming with another hurricane watch. Hurricane watches are now in effect. It is hard believe in hard to just fathom this. Barbuda, Anguilla, St. Kitts, the system is coming dangerously close. They are already as we've heard barely habitable. So where do you go? We don't have a convention center like we do in Houston. I don't think it's going to make landfall, Richard. But it's going to come close enough where tropical storm force winds are going to throw all of that debris around. Debris that has enclosed on buildings. Tom Sater, thank you, sir. Thank you. Stay with it. Obviously, you're going to stay with it. We need you for the details. Thank you. Not knowing exactly where the storm will hit is making it very hard for the authorities to give any evacuation orders. Airlines are lowering ticket prices. Every seat on every plane is being filled to get people out before Irma causes thousands of people to be stranded once the flights are canceled. It's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. Good evening.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to continue to watch this very disturbing story. In the meantime, "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.
[Erin Burnett, Cnn:] OUTFRONT next, Trump puts his second meeting with Putin on ICE, just to save face? This as his Secretary of State is grilled on Capitol Hill today. Plus, the White House banning a CNN reporter from a Rose Garden event. What were they afraid of? And our special series on drilling and mining in Alaska. How President Trump's election is giving new hope to one of the most controversial projects in the nation. Let's go OUTFRONT. And good evening, I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, saving face. President Trump responding to a snub from Vladimir Putin today by postponing his highly touted summit in Washington. National Security Adviser John Bolton releasing a statement, saying, "The President believes that the next bilateral meeting with President Putin should take place after the Russia witch hunt is over. So we've agreed that it will be after the first of the year." Now, we don't know whether the Russians have agreed to that or not, they haven't said. But after the first of the year is a big change from this fall, which is what the White House announced on Twitter. So why is this meeting suddenly on ICE? Well, our Jeff Zeleny asked.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Mr. President, why did you cancel the meeting with Vladimir Putin, sir?
[Burnett:] Silence. And maybe the reason for Trump's reticence is this. When Putin got the invitation, the original one, a Russian aide replied with a frankly dismissive RSVP, saying of the second summit, quote, not now. That was an embarrassing slap at President Trump.
[Unidentified Female:] Why is Vladimir Putin not accepting your invitation?
[Unidentified Male:] Come on. Thank you, everybody.
[Unidentified Female:] Let's go.
[Unidentified Male:] Let's go. Come on, guys.
[Unidentified Female:] We're done. We're done. Let's go. Why is Vladimir Putin not accepting your invitation, Mr. President? We're done.
[Burnett:] OK. You saw President Trump. He didn't look happy with those questions. He moved quickly once Putin dissed him. Because he want to be the first about the summit on ICE, that's what it seems like. That, frankly, is par for the course for Trump. Remember North Korea, in that summit, the President originally canceling that meeting with Kim Jong-un when he reportedly feared that Kim might be a no show. And then do you remember the Philadelphia Eagles White House visit? Well, if you don't, here's what happened. The President pulled the plug on that meet and greet after a number of players turned down the President's invite. And remember Trump's economic council? We do. He disbanded it last year, because, you guessed it, so many members were quitting over the President's response to the white nationalist attack in Charlottesville but he said he was disbanding the whole thing. Oh, but the reason Trump is giving for putting the summit with Putin on ICE until, quote, after the first of the year, according to John Bolton, you heard it, they're going to wait until after the Russia witch hunt is over. Look, the use of the words witch hunt we all know at this point, that is just the way it is from the Trump White House. Even though his own top intelligence officials say it's a completely false thing to say. But it is interesting that team Trump is yet again putting a hard deadline on Mueller. It sure seems to be wishful thinking, because it was last August when Trump's former Attorney, Ty Cobb said, "I'd be embarrassed if this is still haunting the White House by Thanksgiving, and worse if it's still haunting him by year-end." Well now he is truly haunted. Because when the investigation was still hanging over the White House after Thanksgiving and after Christmas and in January came this prediction.
[Unidentified Male:] When do you believe this investigation will reach its conclusion? There's no reason for not to conclude it soon. What is soon? Well, and soon to me would be within the next, you know, four to six weeks.
[Burnett:] Wouldn't have even been spring by the time that happened. OK. Well, safe to say their predictions have been pretty bad. And today the Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, faced hostile questions about what even happened in the first summit with Putin. Never mind putting this whole second one on ICE. Michelle Kosinski is OUTFRONT on Capitol Hill for us tonight. And Michelle, Secretary of State Pompeo coming under a lot of fire today. He did, though, sound defiant.
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn White House Correspondent:] He did, Erin. This was contentious from minute one. And in fact, the Republican Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee started out with criticism, saying he feels like the Trump White House wakes up every morning and makes up foreign policy as they go. This was a chance for senators to finally get their questions answered over what exactly was said between Trump and Putin in Helsinki, but Pompeo, often with a snarky attitude for many of these questions, simply refused to give a clear answer.
[Mike Pompeo, Secretary Of State:] Senator, I understand the game that you're playing.
[Sen. Bob Menendez , New Jersey:] My question is to get to the truth. We don't know what the truth is.
[Kosinski:] Secretary of State Mike Pompeo still vague, at best, on Trump's summit with Russian President, Vladimir Putin.
[Menendez:] Has the President told you what he and President Putin discussed in their two-hour closed-door meeting in Helsinki?
[Pompeo:] The President have a prerogative to choose who's in meetings
[Menendez:] I asked you a simple question.
[Pompeo:] I have had a number of conversations with President Trump and I think I have a pretty complete understanding of what took place in that meeting.
[Menendez:] Good. Did you speak to the translator who was at that meeting?
[Pompeo:] No, I haven't.
[Kosinski:] And on sanctions
[Menendez:] Did the President discuss relaxing U.S. sanctions on Russia?
[Pompeo:] Senator, the U.S. policy with respect to sanctions remains completely unchanged.
[Menendez:] I asked a very specific question.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator, and I gave you a very specific answer.
[Menendez:] Did the President tell you that he discussed relaxing Russia's sanctions or not? Yes or no?
[Pompeo:] Senator, the President is entitled to have private meetings.
[Kosinski:] No answer. Same on whether Trump called on Putin privately to withdraw from Ukraine. And on whether there were agreements on Syria.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you know if there was any sort of downgrading of our U.S. presence in Israel? I mean, in Syria, that was discussed?
[Pompeo:] Senator, there's been no change in U.S. policy with respect to our activities in Syria.
[I -- Unidentified Female:] I understand. But that's not exactly the question.
[Pompeo:] Senator, it's what matters.
[Kosinski:] The Republican Chairman of the Committee, Senator Bob Corker, had striking criticism for the President and his administration as a whole.
[Sen. Bob Corker, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee:] It's the President's actions that create tremendous distrust in our nation, among our allies. It's palpable. We meet and talk with them. Is there a strategy to this? Or is it what is it that causes the President to purposefully, purposefully create distrust in these institutions? And what we're doing?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I just I disagree with most of what you just said there.
[Kosinski:] Pompeo said he wasn't answering these questions because these were private conversations. But one thing he did state clearly, he said President Trump does accept the intelligence community's assessment that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election, that he has a complete understanding of that. Although that is something that Trump himself refused to say when he was standing side by side with Putin. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Michelle Kosinski. And Michelle, really giving us a sense of what happened there. Contentious. And OUTFRONT now, let's get to Democratic Congressman Denny Heck who sits on the Intelligence Committee. And Congressman, obviously, you saw heard everything that went down today. Did you find Secretary Pompeo's answers, the way he chose to answer these questions or not answer these questions, right? Well, the policy is unchanged. It's sort of, who cares what the President may or may not have said and I'm not going to tell you that. Did you find that helpful?
[Rep. Denny Heck , Washington:] So I'm not at all convinced, Erin, that Secretary of State Pompeo knows what was said there. And I think you could infer that from the basis of his vagueness. I think, however, that Americans should look at that hearing and at least insofar as what I know about it, and actually take some encouragement, if not inspiration from it. Because what you saw was members of the United States Senate on that committee, Republicans and Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives, and everybody in between, asking hard questions of the Secretary of State, about this very important matter. In other words, they were attempting to fulfill their constitutional responsibility for oversight and to hold the President accountable for this virtually unprecedented action on this part
[Burnett:] Well, as you point out, it was Democrats and Republicans that we just saw there, even in those clips, which Michelle just played. Look, to all of us, what happened in that meeting between Putin and Trump is a complete mystery, right, because he didn't let anybody in. Secretary Pompeo, though, you know, you're saying you're not sure he knows what happened. But today he said, oh, I'm confident, I know. And here's how he put it.
[Pompeo:] I have a number of conversations with President Trump about what transpired in the meeting. I was also present when he and President Putin both gave us a sense of what they discussed in the meeting that followed immediately after. I have also had the chance to speak with Sergey Lavrov twice about the Russian bureau and what take place. I think I have a pretty complete understanding of what took place in that meeting.
[Burnett:] Do you think he thinks he has a pretty complete understanding, Congressman Heck, or do you think he is really doesn't know and is he's just trying to put a good face on it?
[Heck:] Well, probably more the latter, Erin. But here's the deal. If, in fact, the President gave him a complete 100% readout on that meeting, then it really begs the question, why wasn't the Secretary of State in that meeting to begin with? Because the fact of the matter, throughout all of history, that is the norm, not the practice of this President, which is to meet privately. Meet privately with Vladimir Putin, shortly after having stood on foreign soil and actually taking the autocrat of a hostile foreign power, Mr. Putin, over the word of his own intelligence community. So if, in fact, the Secretary of State knows everything that went on there, then there would have been no reason for the President to keep him out, which would have been the usual practice.
[Burnett:] So the White House announced today, Congressman, you know, we're talking about what happened in the last meeting, but the proposed second meeting that was supposed to be this fall according to the President is not going to happen this year. They're saying it's being put on ICE until after the beginning of the year when the quote, Russian witch hunt is over. Do you buy that excuse?
[Heck:] So, I don't think the first meeting should have happened, given the context with where we are with Russia right now. But secondly, I'm not at all convinced that there was ever going to be a meeting second meeting. You know, the President has a continuing effort to engage in treating us all to a 3-D movie. Deception, deflection, and distraction. And it is the news of the day, and then soon thereafter, we move on to the next thing. So I'm not convinced that he ever really intended to have a second meeting, but we sure have been talking about it.
[Burnett:] So, before you go, I want to ask you about this. If this is important to the Russian investigation. 30 members of Congress, and I believe you're included in that, Congressman Heck, have reviewed what is largely unredacted copies of the Carter Page FISA materials, right, which are being hotly discussed. The Chairman of your committee, though, Devin Nunes, has not reviewed that, despite obviously having a strong opinion on it. Do you know why?
[Heck:] Do I know what?
[Burnett:] Do you know why he has not reviewed it?
[Heck:] I have absolutely no idea, Erin. But then again, I would be hard-pressed to explain an awful lot of his behavior in the last 18 months with respect to the Russian investigation. It is a mystery to me why it is that a member of the United States Congress, who raises his right-hand and swears to uphold the constitution of the United States isn't more concerned about what is now well-established Russian interference, not just in America's democracy, but on all western democracies, as a matter of fact. Look, the indictments that the Special Counsel, Director Mueller, issued for the 12 uniformed members of the Russian intelligence services is a master piece of criminal investigation. And I confidently predicted it will go down in the history books as such. To be able to trace their names, recreate the paper trail, as it were, is brilliant detective work. Nothing less. And you know what, Erin?
[Burnett:] What?
[Heck:] Tomorrow's the 110th anniversary of the establishment of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. And for the President to continue to wage war against this federal law enforcement office, it is a mystery to me.
[Burnett:] Congressman Heck, I appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.
[Heck:] You're welcome.
[Burnett:] And we have breaking news in just a moment. Prosecutors leading the criminal investigation of Michael Cohen, had no clue that that secret tape of President Trump was going public. And that could be causing big problems for Cohen tonight. A breaking development. And a CNN White House correspondent banned from the Rose Garden today from an event there, right. She was supposed to be the reporter there, the pool reporter. And the reason she was banned is this.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Did Michael Cohen betray you? Are you worried about what is on the other tapes, Mr. President?
[Burnett:] Those questions. What is the White House afraid of? And winning streak. Two more women victorious in their runoff races for Congress last night. Should the President be worried?

[Banfield:] If you live near a river, it is a summer tradition, grab a tube, fill up a cooler, and go for a float. Unfortunately in San Marcos, Texas, the neighborhoods say it`s also a tradition for people to get in their cars and drive home after all that fun, after they`ve spent a whole day drinking on the river. And one of those people clad only in a bikini was 21-year-old Shana Elliott who had drifted into oncoming traffic and then crashed headfirst into another car. Police say she was so drunk, she was more than twice the legal limit, and that she couldn`t even stand during her field sobriety test. She told the cops that she`d only had a few beers, and that not aware that she had taken two lives.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you remember much about the accident?
[Elliot:] No. It`s really blurry. I just remember as soon as the accident was as soon as the accident happened, I knew that I made the worst decision ever. I remember getting out of my car and me going to other car and making sure they were OK.
[Unidentified Male:] But they weren`t, were they?
[Elliot:] No.
[Jeffrey Boney, Associate Editor, Houston Forward Times:] Well, Shana Elliott, she took the stand on her own behalf, and she seemed to be remorseful about what occurred. Even the defense attorneys were emphasizing the fact that she was remorseful after the accident happened. So in an effort to persuade the jurors, she, you know, basically was trying to go for a relatively lenient sentence for causing this drunken automobile crash that killed, of course Fabian and their unborn son. She you know, the difference between this situation I guess and any other things is she previously pled guilty to these incidents. She knew exactly what she had done, and she had previous run-ins with the law. She`s no stranger to the law. She was accused of possessing heroin, methamphetamine, marijuana back in March of 2016. She was arrested again for possession of heroin two months later in May of 2016. So in this situation she was trying to throw herself at the mercy of the court, but she tended to not be remorseful but other actions that she had done prior to this incident.
[Banfield:] Well, to that end, you know, for anybody who tries to throw their selves throw themselves at the mercy of a jury, it is not an easy thing to do. And if you`re pretending and, you know, shedding crocodile tears, a lot of times they`re smart enough to see right through that, or at least they can feel something`s up. So you be the judge when you hear Shana Elliott as she effectively says to the jury what I did was wrong, and God help me, maybe you could have some mercy. Have a listen.
[Elliot:] I just want to say that I want to say to the victims` family that I`m sorry from the deepest of my heart, and I know that an apology doesn`t do much. You know it but I pray for forgiveness every day. And to the jury, I just hope that you can find it in your hearts. Whatever`s fair for you all, whatever you all punish I accept it because I accept responsibility, and I know what I did was wrong.
[Banfield:] Jeffrey, you you cannot help but feel sorry for people, generally people. But this young woman, it is not her first time at the rodeo. She`d admitted to drinking and driving before. And also she`d been arrested three months prior and then I think five months prior for possession of heroin and methamphetamine and marijuana, and none of that seemed to be a problem. It certainly didn`t mitigate her behavior on the day when Fabian Guerrero Moreno and his unborn baby who was supposed to be named after him, Fabian, died. So, I guess it really just comes down to how the jurors reacted. And that`s always difficult. We don`t get the camera angle. We`re not allowed to watch them. But it`s a hard case look, everybody could put themselves in that position. But for the fact that her blood alcohol level was.199. And that`s nearly double the legal limit which, if you are trying to figure out how you would act if you were.199, and would you make the same mistake, it is described as being in a condition where your behavior is sloppy, you would feel dazed and confused, disoriented. You might need help to stand or walk, maybe that`s why Shana can`t keep her balance when she`s doing her bikini test, field sobriety test. The gag reflexes impaired. You feel like you`re going to vomit. Blackouts are likely at this level, at.199. It doesn`t matter how big you are or how small you are. Everybody at.199 would get this kind of an effect. Is that being discussed in this trial so that jurors know damn well just how drunk she was?
[Boney:] You know, that is being that`s been brought up, but Ashleigh, I think one of the biggest things that the prosecutors brought out in the sentencing phase here, they played recordings of phone calls that Shana made from jail, and in one of the recordings, you hear her talking with her boyfriend, speculating that the victims of the crash were part of the cartel. And in another conversation you hear Shana joking and laughing with her friends about getting her eyebrows threaded in jail just four days after the crash. So I think they brought that information out to really show that the remorse argument that she was trying to present or at least the narrative she was trying to present was not how she was really feeling even after being arrested and being in jail for a few days, and that she really was aware of what she was doing, and this was a part of her overall lifestyle.
[Banfield:] Wow.
[Boney:] And so, yes, they did bring that out. But this was something that`s been...
[Banfield:] Are you kidding holy molly. They played those? Jeffrey, they played those audio recordings of her jailhouse conversations where she`s suggesting that the Fabian Guerrero Moreno and his unborn baby and his wife who`s a widow, who`s in that courtroom, were somehow part of a cartel?
[Boney:] Yes.
[Banfield:] She said those things, and they heard those things?
[Boney:] To hear that recording, and then of course, again, hearing her laughing and joking and being jovial with her friends about getting her eyebrows threaded while she was in jail. I mean, these are the types of things where, you know, the prosecutors, I believe, did a pretty good job of trying to at least in their in their argument to try to show her as a non-remorseful individual who really was aware of what had happened and that this was a part of her everyday lifestyle.
[Banfield:] Wow. That is that`s brutal. That is brutal. Because it is really convenient to feel the way she feels on the stand, you know, when your judgment and those 12 faces are in front of you. But she had no idea probably when she was on that prison call, that jail call, that those 12 faces were going to hear her demeanor while she was awaiting the trial which brings me to Eric Johnson. Eric, that`s basically in legal speak, that sucks.
[Johnson:] Very much so, very much so.
[Banfield:] It sucks, right?
[Johnson:] Yes, it does. Yes, it does.
[Banfield:] Yes. So how much does it suck because she`s facing zero probation effectively all the way up to 50 years. And jurors, they`re no dummies. They`re her peers, right?
[Johnson:] Correct.
[Banfield:] They`re going to be able to make the difference between her jailhouse call and then her performance on the stand.
[Johnson:] I think one of the biggest issues from what I`ve seen about this case is the fact that they had a trial in and of itself. I think that her guilt in this matter was pretty straightforward, so this is something that she may have wanted to take a plea. And the fact that she`s gone through a trial in which the victim has had to sit there and listen through all of these things may something that be taken held against her when it comes time for final sentencing.
[Banfield:] Boy, boy, boy, boy. Boy. Can I just put one more thing on this, just before we wrap this up? I want to hear from her one more time. Because again, I said this wasn`t her first rodeo. I already told you about the drugs. I already told you about the arrests. But then on the stand under cross-examination, she had to admit, yes, she`s been drinking and driving a lot in the past. Have a look.
[Unidentified Male:] Ms. Elliot, you`re a good student, right?
[Elliot:] Yes, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] Pretty smart individual?
[Elliot:] Yes, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] So you were fully aware of the risks of your actions on August 2nd, 2016?
[Elliot:] To an extent.
[Unidentified Male:] You`re saying the risks didn`t seem real to you, is that what you`re saying?
[Elliot:] It seemed real. It did.
[Unidentified Male:] And you disregarded that risk?
[Elliot:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] Was this your first time being intoxicated and making the decision to drive?
[Elliot:] No.
[Unidentified Male:] How many times previously had you done that?
[Elliot:] Quite a few, sadly. It`s it`s too common, and that`s what needs to change.
[Unidentified Male:] OK. Is it fair to say that each time before August 2nd, 2016, you were running the risk of this exact result?
[Elliott:] Yes.
[Ashleigh Banfield, Primetime Justice Show Host, Hln:] Yes. Too common, it needs to change. And usually the way it changes is when TV people like me broadcast cases like yours. And you end up in the pokey for a long, long time. And then other people don`t want to end up in the pokey, so they don`t do it. That`s usually how it works. My thanks to Jeffrey Boney and Eric Johnson for that. You ever wonder what it`s like for victims of crimes after the crime? A serial armed robbery suspect holds a gun to a young woman`s head as mom is looking on. He tries to hold up a store, but he didn`t know that those two women, mom and daughter, they`re going to fight back. They`re going to fight back hard. But the bullets fly, and a lot of them fly. And the terror they endured, we`re going to ask that mother what it was like to have to watch the scene play out in front of her where a man held a gun to her daughter`s head and actually pulled the trigger. That`s next.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] More insights as people come out of the courtroom we'll learn more information. Stay with us as that will come to you as Brianna Keilar starts right now. Have a great afternoon.
[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Brianna Keilar, live from CNN's Washington headquarters. And we begin with breaking news. A surprise twist in the sentencing of fired national security adviser Michael Flynn. Just moments ago the judge in this case, Judge Sullivan, agreeing to delay Flynn's sentencing. Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller's team is asking the court to go easy on Flynn. They've recommended a sentence of little or no jail time. And now Flynn's lawyer has taken the judge up on his offer of a delay in sentencing so that Flynn can continue to cooperate. I want to bring in CNN's senior White House correspondent Pamela Brown, we have our crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz with us as well. They're both outside of the federal courthouse there in Washington. Shimon, explain to this to us. What happened?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] It's hard to explain, right? It's kind of been a wild morning here. Certainly nothing any of us expected here this morning, that the judge would go ahead and delay this. Clearly the judge kept sending signals to Michael Flynn, to his attorney that it might be a good idea to delay this. He was not happy about a lot of things perhaps. Not entirely clear. He was using words like treason, then accusing Michael Flynn of being of working as a foreign agent while at the White House. Not true. He had to walk that back. The judge, he had to walk back other statements he made. And then, in the end, he kept insisting, look, the judge did to Michael Flynn's attorney, if you think you want to delay this, just let me know. And, eventually, that's what happened. One of the things to keep in mind here is because Michael Flynn is still cooperating in the in a case involving his associates who were just charged yesterday, the judge thought maybe it might be a good idea to wait until that cooperation is over so that his attorneys so that Michael Flynn's attorneys could come in and explain more about that cooperation because it could be favorable to Michael Flynn. And it's clear and it's very clear here that this was not going the way Michael Flynn expected. And perhaps the judge here said, you know what, let me give you a break. Take some more time. Because I think what ultimately would have happened is the judge was ready to sentence him to jail.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Yes. And I think what you saw there was Michael Flynn's lawyers essentially taking the hint, hearing the judge's strong word that the judge's strong words, I should say, that this was a disgrace, pointing to the flag and saying that you arguably sold your country. Again, the judge sort of walked back some of those comments. But what he made clear in that courtroom is that this case is different from the other defendants who pleaded guilty and were sentenced. He made it clear that, look, you were the former national security adviser. You made these lies to the FBI inside your office in the West Wing. Evan Perez, you were inside that courtroom. Bring us in there and the stunning turn of events.
[Evan Perez, Cnn Senior Justice Correspondent:] Well, you know, I think, in the end, the judge, I think, made an impression with the lawyers and they decided that they'd rather take a chance and wait 90 days. Again, the judge just decided that he would set sentencing for a date in March, giving, as Shimon says, Michael Flynn time to again continue his cooperation. One of the things that Flynn's lawyers raised in the court there today was that he might be called to testify in the case of his associate who were just charged in Alexandria, Virginia, yesterday. So, again, this is something that the judge is willing to take into account. And as Shimon points out, it was clear that despite the fact that the prosecutors were recommending no jail time. The defendants the defense was saying, no jail time. The judge was not going along with that and so he was giving them every chance he had to be able to say, you want to delay this? Do you want to delay this, because I can take into account your further cooperation? It was a stunning turn, Pamela, because it was not what we expected. You know, I've been we've been in sentencing over the years and these things are usually, you know, 30 minutes, you know, you go through
[Brown:] Especially when both sides agree. They're on the same page.
[Perez:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] I also think, and you know this judge because you've covered this judge before
[Perez:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] Look, I've talked to lawyers who have been before this judge and they all said, this guy's a he's a wildcard. He likes to speak, he likes to say a lot. And clearly he was sending a message in some ways about this investigation, about what's been going on here. And this was the wildcard kind of going in.
[Perez:] Right. It was a it was an interesting way for the wildcard to go, though, because a lot of us were expecting, because this judge takes a dim view of any misconduct by the government, we thought that
[Brown:] Right.
[Perez:] Because the defense had raised the possibility on misconduct on the part of the FBI, that he would take a hard line against the government. Instead, what he did is
[Brown:] That seemed to backfire, right?
[Perez:] Oh, it completely backfired. And right after the recess, one of the first things that Rob Kelner, one of Michael Flynn's lawyers, stood up in court and said, judge, essentially, do not punish Michael Flynn for a filing that his lawyers made. And, again, the judge, as you pointed out, was sort of walking back some of his more harsh critiques of Michael Flynn. But it was clear
[Brown:] There was back peddling sort of on both sides there.
[Perez:] Yes. But it was also, by the way, the judge raised one other thing. Michael Flynn's lawyers sort of offered as a comparison the fact that David Petraeus got a misdemeanor for pleading guilty to sharing classified information with somebody that wasn't authorized to have it. That was a big deal. And the judge sort of raised that and said, I don't agree with that sentence. I think that that he should have gotten more than that, essentially taking a shot at the Justice Department for the way they handled that case. And he also said that essentially Michael Flynn and David Petraeus are not in the same league. So that's that was that was an unsolicited thing for him to say.
[Brown:] That's that's not good news for Michael Flynn's side.
[Prokupecz:] I also think for the special counsel's office, which is priding itself in some ways of getting these cooperators and getting people to cooperate you know, help them out in their cases, this could have potentially been bad for them too
[Perez:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] Had he been sentenced to jail time because they are asking and there you see Michael Flynn walking out now with protesters outside.
[Brown:] Right. And what's so interesting, as we see him walk outside of this courthouse after a very different outcome. Let's listen in.
[Crowd:] Lock him up. Lock him up. Lock him up. Lock him up.
[Crowd: Usa. Usa. Usa. Usa. Perez:] Yes, you have you have you have both sides there. You have some a sizable group of people who showed up to show support for General Flynn. They have signs saying General Flynn is a hero and so on. And then, of course, there's some counter protesters who are out there saying "lock him up," which, of course, recalls the chat that Michael Flynn shouted on the stage at the Republican National Convention. Look, a lot of us were so surprised by today and certainly did not expect that he was going to end up where he was at the end here today.
[Brown:] He thought he would walk outside of that courthouse today
[Perez:] Yes.
[Brown:] With no jail time and perhaps probation. He is walking out now, after being scolded by the judge, and a delayed sentencing
[Perez:] And the judge essentially raising the prospect that he could have locked him up.
[Brown:] Exactly.
[Perez:] So, again, the chant that made Michael Flynn famous at the time of the Republican National Convention turned against him here today by what the judge said in court. And one of the last things, by the way, at the end of the hearing, the Michael Flynn's lawyers asked to speak privately to the judge before they left. So, clearly, there was some things that they wanted to make sure they reassured the judge, again, that Michael Flynn shouldn't be punished for things that his lawyers did essentially.
[Brown:] And what was so interesting, we were talking about this, that it seemed like Robert Mueller's prosecutor in the room was trying to sort of come to Michael Flynn's defense too
[Prokupecz:] Defend him.
[Brown:] Saying, look, he's been very helpful. He's been cooperating in this case. And when he was asked by the judge whether he should have been charged with treason, he didn't go there.
[Perez:] No, he didn't.
[Brown:] I mean it is clear that was not under consideration.
[Perez:] And, right. And after the recess he clarified even further and said, look, he met with us 19 times and never once did we contemplate that he as guilty of anything treasonous. So, again, they were very, very careful and, as you said, supportive of General Flynn because I think they realized what a what a bad position he had suddenly found himself in and essentially tried to give him a little bit of a rescue in front of this judge.
[Brown:] And
[Prokupecz:] This judge was trying to rescue him, right?
[Perez:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] I mean how many times was he like, do you want to delay this?
[Perez:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] Should we do this another time? Do you want to postpone this?
[Brown:] Do you want to withdraw your guilty plea?
[Prokupecz:] To his attorneys, do you want to
[Perez:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] So I found that so surprising and just continuously how the judge kept coming at the defense team and Michael Flynn, are you sure you want to do this today? And after the break, it's clear the attorneys finally said, you know what, you know, we're about to
[Brown:] If we don't delay it
[Prokupecz:] Yes.
[Brown:] We could get jail time. So here you have a situation, Brianna Keilar, where Michael Flynn, the national security adviser, the former adviser to President Trump, walked into that courthouse today likely thinking he was going to get no jail time from the judge, then walking out after a very different sentencing proceeding than he expected, than likely Robert Mueller's team expected. Now the sentencing is delayed and we'll have to wait and see what happens, Brianna.
[Keilar:] Yes. I imagine he walked in there today thinking soon this will all be over and here it is still hanging over his head.
[Brown:] Yes.
[Keilar:] And we'll be seeing what he'll be doing in terms of cooperating. Evan Perez, Shimon Prokupecz, Pamela Brown, thank you so much. I want to bring in some of our legal and political minds here to help us break all of this down. And we're going to need some help here. Kara Scannell, CNN reporter, we have CNN political director David Chalian, Kim Wehle is a former associate independent counsel in the Whitewater investigation, Michael Zeldin with us, he's a CNN legal analyst, he was Robert Mueller's special assistant at the Department of Justice, and joining us from New Haven, Connecticut, CNN legal and national security analyst Asha Rangappa. So, Asha, when you look at this, the judge admonishing Michael Flynn, saying that he had sold out his country, taking a recess, coming back, back peddling a little bit on that, but making it clear that he was not perhaps going to be as friendly to Michael Flynn as the Mueller team had asked for or suggested. What was your reaction to that?
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal And National Security Analyst:] This judge don't play. I mean, look, you don't make those kind of claims in a court document that's alleging serious malfeasance, misconduct by the FBI, that calls into question your plea deal, your plea agreement, and then not expect the judge to, a, question you about it, and then when you back track to get I think understandably upset. I mean, you know, this was his chance, if he wanted to change his plea, to do it. He did it, which means he wasn't making those assertions in good faith. And I think what you saw here was the judge then accepting the plea you know, the guilty plea and saying, you sold out your country and that this is a very serious crime. And I think that that, beyond Michael Flynn, should worry everyone else who was in the crosshairs of this investigation.
[Keilar:] And I wonder, Michael Zeldin, we heard Evan reporting there, we heard Shimon reporting, this is a judge who has, as Shimon put it, a I think a dim view of misconduct by the government, which might explain why Michael Flynn's lawyers had put in that pleading, essentially, oh, well, Michael Flynn was caught off guard by the FBI, something that ended up backfiring on him.
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Absolutely. It was a mistake as it turned out. They said, we accept what Mueller has to say, that is no jail time, but we want to bring some additional facts to your attention, which spoke to this government misconduct in the interview. So part one of the sentencing hearing was the judge saying to Flynn, are you wanting to remove this guilty plea and contest the hearing? They said, no, no, no, no, no. Then they said, fine, now that that's over, let me turn to the seriousness of the offense. And I, Judge Sullivan, believe this was a very, very serious offense. That's when he went off on his treason and stuff. That's when Flynn's lawyers determined, this judge may put him my client in jail.
[Keilar:] Can I can I ask can I ask you, though, Kim, I wonder what you think about this, the fact that actually the judge said some things that were not factually accurate and how concerning that is that he said, you were an unregistered agent of a foreign country while serving as the national security adviser to the president of the United States. Factually, that doesn't that's not exactly right. He was an unregistered foreign agent under under the the designation of the law at a certain point. But he ended up having to backpedal. How odd is that for a judge?
[Kim Wehle, Former Assistant U.s. Attorney:] Well, I mean, he judge has law clerks that prepare bench memos. There's a lot of paper they need to read. My guess is this judge realized this was his moment or the moment of the federal judiciary to weigh in, in a meaningful way, on this entire situation, what's going on politically around the Mueller investigation. That is, federal judges have life tenure. They're not political. And so I think
[Keilar:] But is it is it which and maybe it's understandable in the case of this judge, but when he does it this way, what does that say about the legal proceedings in this circumstance and the faith that people may have in the system?
[Wehle:] Well, we're seeing a number of mistakes. We saw mistakes on behalf of the Mr. Flynn's lawyers. That was a mistake. What I don't know I'd have to think it through whether the whether while he was national security adviser versus before when he was lobbying on behalf of Turkey is a meaningful legal distinction.
[Keilar:] Yes.
[Wehle:] I think with respect to treason, the Supreme Court has held treason is not a crime unless it's we're in wartime. We are not in wartime. But there are treason-like criminal statutes that I don't think is completely beyond the pale that the judge would be drawing that connection.
[Keilar:] And perhaps the judge sees, hey, you were unregister at this point and then you go on to be the national security adviser. It's not appropriate.
[Wehle:] Yes, and
[Keilar:] I need I need to get in a quick break. In what is really a it's almost reality television in a way from all of this drama happening at the courthouse to Michael Flynn's car peeling away from the courthouse. We are standing by to hear from the White House. Sarah Sanders is set up to brief reporters any minute. We're going to take you there live.

[Burnett:] Tonight, a showdown looming between the Trump White House and FBI. White House officials telling CNN President Trump could release a memo spearheaded by Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes that alleges FBI abuse of surveillance warrants during the Russian investigation, related to the Trump campaign, as soon as tomorrow. But FBI led by Trump's handpicked choice Chris Wray is urging the White House reconsider, stating it has, quote, grave concerns about the memo's accuracy and damage that could be done with its release. OUTFRONT now, Republican congressman from New York, Lee Zeldin, who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman, I appreciate your time, thank you. I know you have had a change to read the memo. You have called for the president to release it. Now, of course, the FBI has come out and said with Christopher Wray himself, saying grave concerns. That it should not be released. Trump's own Justice Department saying it could be extraordinarily reckless to release it. Do you think the FBI and Justice Department are both wrong?
[Rep. Lee Zeldin , New York:] They were wrong as it relates to the FISA abuse. And it would make sense that there would be people at the DOJ and the FBI that wouldn't want this memo to go out because it's going to show FISA abuse took place and there was misconduct at some of the highest levels of both agencies.
[Burnett:] So, when you talk about FISA abuse and misconduct, of course, you're well aware, there is a Democratic memo based on the same source material which reaches the opposite conclusion, that there wasn't such abuse. And I know you believe in transparency. I assume the, Congressman, that you also want the Democratic memo which does reach the opposite conclusion that the GOP want to be released, right?
[Zeldin:] Yes, I think that we need to be able to get both memos out. As it relates to the Schiff memo, which is a little bit more about damage control, and when it comes out publicly, you'll be able to see it yourself. The memo has certain things added to it that there is going to have to be a discussion as to whether or not the Dems are actually calling for certain sources and methods to come out. The majority memo is a little bit shorter. It doesn't go into certain specifics of certain sources and methods on purpose. So, that will be something that it will be worth having a conversation to Democrats of whether or not they want to release the entire memo or if they want to change any of the words around because there were certain things in there that they placed that I'm just not sure they actually would want to release some of those details.
[Burnett:] OK. So, you talk about sources and methods. Now but the point that I'm making, and look, you are being consistent here on transparency, if you want to put them both out, and there may be parts of both that have to be redacted for classified reasons, that will have to be negotiated, right, with the FBI and the Justice Department. But, you know, they're both based on the same source material and both reach different conclusion. So, you said on the floor of the House in addition to releasing the memo, I believe it's important to release relevant material source in the memo. Obviously, as you know, many of your colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, are against revealing the source material. But I just want to be clear, Congressman Zeldin, are you for releasing all the underlying intelligence, so the American can read it themselves and they could read the Democrat resolution and the Republican, and truly make up their own mind?
[Zeldin:] The American public wants as much information as they can to be able to form their own independent judgment for themselves. As far as the relevant material source in the memo, I would want as much of that information that can be released as possible. I think the American public wants as much information to be released as possible. They don't want to be able to just take my word for it or just take your word for it. They want to be able to see them for themselves. I respect that. Give them more information and have a lot of faith in the American public.
[Burnett:] So, the question is what this will lead to now that this has all become so public? And if the answer is either all or nothing and you're going to go with all as much as can possibly put out there, your colleague the Democratic Senator Ron Wyden tweeted today, quote, if this memo comes out, referring to Devin Nunes memo, I have a long list of less sensitive but still classified information that the American people deserved to see. Are you worried he might be right? That this fight over this one thing could start a flood of let's just put this classified information out there and that out there, and, all of a sudden, you do have a real compromise in the system?
[Zeldin:] Well, it's I mean, I've read both memos. The majority memo that was written, by the way, you just referred to it as the Nunes memo. He didn't read it. It was drafted by another member of the committee with staffers, but Chairman Nunes did not write this particular memo. That's why it's more majority memo. As far as the contents of the memo goes, it is not revealing any good sources and methods. The in the Schiff memo, if they want to change any of the wording around to make the same exact point, but without revealing, there are certain details by the way, the scope of the Schiff memo, this is beyond the FISA abuse topic. And the other thing that I'll point out is that in certain respects, they are talking past each other. Like if, for example, I offered you a dollar and you wanted to sell me lemonade, and then you gave me lemonade and I don't know like how it tasted, and never actually gave you the dollar. And I said I offered you the dollar and you say that you never received the dollar, maybe it's both true, but kind of talking past each other. So, you know, that's something else. But you know what? That's where when you get everything out for the American public, they can decide for themselves. But, you know, the two memos don't directly rebut each other. The Schiff memo kind of talks past the majority memo at certain points.
[Burnett:] Which, you know, frankly might be fine, however much pages of underlying material, you reach different conclusions on different things. I mean, that would make sense that different people would see different things they think are of importance. Before you go tonight, Congressman, I just want to say, obviously, you are in West Virginia tonight and people should know, you had a very scary day. We are so glad you are OK. Your Republicans are OK. There was obviously a tragic train accident with that truck when you're on your way to West Virginia that happened in Virginia. The driver of that truck was killed. Others were injured. I know you are OK, but no doubt it was a very scary and upsetting experience. What went through your mind when it happened?
[Zeldin:] Well, when it first happened, we knew something really bad took place, but you didn't know exactly what. And if I had to come up with an analogy, it's kind of like getting into a car accident except you are on a high speed train and you're hitting a dump truck. And, you know, a lot of different noises because aside from the impact itself, the train was trying to slow down. Now, what is in my mind above all else is someone lost their life and there is a family that's mourning right now. You have people who are injured, who are fighting for their lives. That is first and foremost on my mind. I'll tell you something else, though, is that thank God that the conductor of this train was able to keep this train on those tracks. It's amazing that this train was able to come to a complete stop because if it derailed, you had almost every single member of the House and Senate, including the speaker of the house, and it would have been a total catastrophe. So, you know, the first responders, the police, the doctors, all of the medical professionals, and certainly keeping our thoughts and prayers with those who are injured and the one gentleman who was killed, that's what's on our mind. This could have been a lot worse. And I'm also just very thankful for just great Americans who stepped up on a moments' notice, whether it's training, their instincts, their expertise. We really do have a great country.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you so much, Congressman Zeldin. I appreciate your time.
[Zeldin:] Thank you, Erin.
[Burnett:] And now to another breaking story, an alarming failure today of the American missile system. The system failed to intercept an incoming target that was launched in Hawaii. This comes as sources tell CNN, don't rule out another missile test in the future, right? This is the test that is supposed to protect America from incoming ICBMs from North Korea. Barbara Starr is OUTFRONT. And, Barbara, I mean, this is pretty significant. Second failure of this missile defense system in the past year and this is the defense system that America would rely on in the event of an incoming missile from North Korea.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Well, that's right, especially for it to fail right now, when the message to Kim Jong-un is, you know, don't try anything. We can shoot your missiles down well, this test failed to do it. The missile launched, the target launched but during the test, they just simply didn't intercept each other. They are trying to find out what the malfunction is and what actually went wrong with this. But it is a very crucial situation. The timing is critical because just a few days ago, the CIA Director Mike Pompeo told an audience that it maybe just a handful of months from when Kim Jong-un is able to demonstrate the capability, not that he would attack, but demonstrate the capability for him to put a warhead on top of a North Korean missile that could potentially hit the U.S. So, to have this failure is nothing something that the Pentagon is too anxious for the world to see. This particular part of the system is, in fact, designed maybe somebody to hit an intercontinental ballistic missile, that kind that would come from North Korea and it's a system that Japan wants to feel for its security in that Asia-Pacific region Erin.
[Burnett:] All right. Barbara, thank you very much. And, of course, even scarier when you think about the false missile threat in Hawaii just a couple of weeks ago. If that had been real, that's the shield we've got. OUTFRONT next, from Melania to Michelle, the secret gift revealed.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] You are watching CNN with me on this Friday afternoon. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you for being with me. Let's dive right into this breaking news. The 7.0 earthquake near Anchorage, Alaska has now triggered a tsunami warning and you can see as we all been watching these pictures coming in roads, highways, bridges totally collapsed, a lot of damage from this quake. Anchorage emergency officials are alerting people to shelter in place. Right now, 2:00 on the east coast, 10:00 in the morning, Anchorage time. And as we're getting more, more pictures, you can see more of a chaotic scene, high school students hiding under desks in the classroom as glass is shattering all around them. We have also heard from the Anchorage school districts that they have closed all the schools there. And our affiliate, KTVA, who has been up live on Facebook, is reporting several road closures and at least one report of an overpass that has possibly collapsed. Here is our affiliate KTVA.
[Unidentified Male:] Not much but quite a bit. Yes. No, this is No, in short you are I resume it for office. Yes, this is the graphics department office where we have flooding, batteries all over the place. Lots of Now, some TVs were able to stick on the wall there and on the wall. I man, it is just absolute destruction. This is Doug's desk right here. This is where the gentleman holding the cellphone works works on daybreak to different, you know Let's have the [inaudible]. I see a I want to take you down towards the main studio right now. And again, if you just joining us, it happened about 8:30, so we are daybreak on KTVA from 6:00 to 7:00 do some cut- ins, some different things. Looks like this area Looks like master control is doing all right. That's good. [Inaudible] you can see Jeremy there, that's going out of a broadcast television. Like we we're just like get ready to the day basically, going to take couple of. We had Deejay Spencer Lee and we had fishing game on this morning on daybreak. So, we kind of break those stories up and get some stuff some content for the evening news. So, that's what we were doing about 8:30. 7.0 magnitude earthquake and it was what, about five miles north of Anchorage, 25 miles deep so pretty shallow and just caused mass destruction overpasses at Minnesota International since daybreak, and then also the [inaudible] bridge going to show up here. So OK. Let's just show up. we got help. This is our production control room. As you can see, Jeremy is live right now through our station, but this is what we're sort of looking at, a lot of our stuff, our monitors have fallen. We've got a lot of some lights have fallen.
[Unidentifed Male:] Sound board here.
[Unidentified Male:] Next up the highest slides of the board up manually. And this is dangerous too. Eric almost hit his head, right on that because he's a tall guy. Yes. Be careful where you're walking about with this debris. That the end in this light picture is just kind of hanging on by a thread it looks like. So I really like this whole idea of, at least telling over yes, I mean, I'd like to show where I was when this happened because this is a pretty impressive example of what you're looking at, about where why it's important to get under shelter. So this is the room I was in when this happened. I don't know how well you guys can see but this is our tape room. All these tapes This is library [inaudible] Early I did iditarod you might the first time iditarod is in here. We got some really cool classic footage in KTVA archives here. Yes. I was sitting over there at that computer and, you know, luckily got out of the building before a lot of this happened but this going to be a messed to clean up obviously. But imagine if you were trying to hide or take shelter against a wall against the wall with the tapes. This is why you don't do that because this can fall on you, it can hurt you, lots of other stuff could have fall in it and got you or any of us, you know, don't stand on a doorway. Get under something sturdy.
[Unidentifed Male:] Let's back here.
[Unidentified Male:] Looks like we got our It used to be the graphics department, all [vent] entire table has flipped over back here and look or maybe this is just mess to begin with. I don't really think so. It is not. It is not. This is worst. And then
[Undintified Male:] Let's go downstairs.
[Unidentified Male:] You know, a lot of people were asking if anyone was OK, if everybody here was OK and I believe everybody got out of the building OK. It was 8:30, so we didn't get our big rush of people coming into work quite yet. In fact some folks are usually here about this time work in yet which is kind of a surprise to me. Be careful there and we should show off Augie Hebert, find here to last get television. The studio is named after him. And, man
[Undintified Male:] There are more damages this is got to happen earthquake damage. What happen is the whole building shakes and the foundation, especially around wall seams sort of just rips. So, or here you can see these studs where we had the studs come in, they got shook loose.
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, yes, look at that. Right here there'll be a good shot of what happens to the seams around drywall where it sort of just shakes, and sheers, and
[Baldwin:] All right. So all of our all the different TV stations in Anchorage have been knocked off the air but, you know, credit to KTVA, they have been up and live on Facebook. Michael West is with me now, the Alaska state seismologist. And Michael here's what I have, it was a 7.0 magnitude quake, eight aftershocks. Tell me what you have.
[Michael West, Alaska State Seismologist:] So we located this earthquake five to ten miles north of Anchorage. It is about 30 miles below the surface so that's different than what some of your viewers might be thinking of, there isn't necessarily. We're not expecting a singular, you know, big fault line ripping across the surface of the earth. However, because it's deep, it was felt quite widely. We have-
[Baldwin:] How wide, Michael? How far spread?
[West:] We got reports from about 400 miles away-
[Baldwin:] Oh wow.
[West:] credible reports of feeling the earthquake. Of course, it's much stronger, the ground shaking much, much stronger near the epicenter.
[Baldwin:] How often do you guys get earthquakes in Alaska?
[West:] Well, earthquakes are happening all the time at small magnitude, every 12 minutes or so, they're something small. However, earthquakes of this magnitude in a location like this where they actually intersect with population are rare, this is a very, very significant event.
[Baldwin:] And lastly as this tsunami warning is out there for the Cooke Inlet in the Southern Kenai Peninsula. Can you tell us about that area?
[West:] Yes. It's a complicated area to try and do a tsunami warning. There's a lot of different inlets and bays that can focus and channel water. It is my understanding that as of now, the NOAA has canceled their tsunami warning for this
[Baldwin:] Got it. Got it. That's good news for folks in that area. Michael West, thank you so much, the Alaska State seismologist. Nick Watt, is with me now on some of these. As we're looking, Nick, at the damage, I was watching that Facebook beyond, you know, shattered and, you know, newsroom, you see these pictures of highways and bridges damaged. We don't have Nick Watt. So, Brian Stelter, I'm going to switch on over to you on again, you heard Michael say we're talking a second ago of how widespread this is.
[Brian Stelter, Chief Media Correspondent:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] It is unique in that. It is you have earthquakes all the time but that it's as severe in such a populated area in Anchorage-
[Stelter:] Right.
[Baldwin:] which is quite, you know, newsworthy and that people though could feel it as far as 400 miles.
[Stelter:] As far away as Fairbanks, 350 miles to the north, also in Anchorage suburbs like Wasilla, lot of damage in Wasilla and areas like that. And we've been seeing people using Facebook and Twitter sharing what they experience because these local TV stations are down, because the radio stations are down. They're posting and sharing information with each other. A lot of reports of damage within people's homes, glasses shattered, things off shelves. The same thing at stores, we're seeing things knocked of the shelves
[Baldwin: 8:30-- Stelter:] the road works, it was still dark there come up there in Anchorage. Sun up was around 9:30. So this is happening at night which made it even scarier I think for some residents. They could see transformers going in the distance would, you know, power is out in part but not all of Anchorage and the surrounding area. Some people posting on Facebook saying, they're having a clean up glass in their homes, having a check for damage. Thankfully though as reporters were mentioning, no reports of fatalities or injuries yet, hopefully that will remain the case, it's only been an hour and a half. But so far in our reports of fatalities, I think what's most scary from these images we're seeing are these highways and roads that have buckled. And that's the case both in Anchorage and up toward Wasilla, numerous infrastructure problems being reported.
[Baldwin:] On that note, Nick Watt, let me go to you because to Brian's point, we see his picture of this car totally stuck after these highways, roadway, whatever it is totally buckled. How widespread is this sort of damage.
[Nick Watt, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, I mean, we've heard from the Anchorage police department that this is widespread. They say and this is a direct quote from the police department, there is major infrastructure damage across Anchorage. Many homes and buildings are damaged. And Brian just mentioned, Wasilla, there was a tweet, of course, Sarah Palin that just came in a little while ago. And she says, "Our family is in tact, house is not." She is from Wasilla. Since I imagine that's case for many, many others. Now, we've heard from the school district, from the transportation department, they have people on the ground right now, stand out across the city trying to assess that damage and how bad it has been. But I as I say from the police department, they say multiple buildings damaged. But so far, as we say, no report of injuries or fatalities coming in from Anchorage but it is difficult to get that information out of there. And of course, there was the initial quake southern miles outside of Anchorage, then these eight or more aftershocks that can also cause damage. We have just heard that the tsunami warning that was in place for the Kenai Peninsula in the Cook Inlet that has just been lifted. They say there is now no threat of a destructive tsunami so that's one sliver of good news that we just got in now from Alaska. Brooke, back to you.
[Baldwin:] Nick, thank you. As we're seeing these pictures, we're now hearing from folks who've lived through this, who felt it themselves Kristen Dossett is one of those individuals there in her home in Palmer, Alaska. Kristen, I understand you are at home with you 19- year-old, you guys OK?
[Kristen Dossett, Resident, Alaska:] We are just fine, yes. Thank you.
[Baldwin:] OK. So what did it feel like?
[Dossett:] I have been here 37 years and that was the most violent earthquake I have ever felt. It was absolutely terrifying.
[Baldwin:] Describe it for me. When you say violent, what is that feel like?
[Dossett:] It shook like I have never felt anything shake before. I mean, it was it just didn't stop. It just kept going and it got louder and then louder, and then things just fell everywhere. It's just everything off my dressers, off my book cases, my kitchen covers, there's broken glass everywhere, sawdust off the walls, very violent feeling.
[Baldwin:] And your husband, he is not home. Is he stuck in traffic? How is he doing?
[Dossett:] He is on his way home from Anchorage. He is stuck in traffic. They had to close one of the main bridges out of Anchorage, s they're routing everybody through the Town of Eagle River back onto the highway because the bridge over the river has been damaged. And then one of the bridges in Peters Creek, the side heading into Anchorage, has collapsed and blocks the road and there are sinkholes on the highway as well.
[Baldwin:] So may be a minute, Kristen, your sweet husband come home. When we talk about the 7.0 magnitude quake, you say it's the most violent quake you felt in three-plus decades. We also have been reporting these aftershocks, we have eight reported aftershocks. What have those felt like? How severe?
[Dossett:] They're not real severe. You can hear things rattling noise. When I was on hold with you guys we had two of them. Things just start to rattle and it started to shake a little bit. You get a little scared because you don't know how big it's going to be.
[Baldwin:] What does it sound like?
[Dossett:] Like somebody is just shaking everything in your house literally. Your house is just shaking everything, anything and everything rattled. And it's hard to describe. My piano moved a foot-and-a-half away from the wall. And oh there's another after shock right there..
[Baldwin:] You just felt an aftershock just now?
[Dossett:] Yes. We just had another one. I have a lantern that kind of rattled and every time times there's one, it rattles and makes noise. So yes, it's horrible. It's absolutely horrible.
[Baldwin:] And wow, and your piano, a foot-and-a-half off the wall. What about the actual quake itself? How long from start to finish did it last?
[Dossett:] You know, I was so terrified I couldn't tell you. It felt like forever. I would say it was probably 15 seconds but it may have been longer. And we have a [inaudible] house and my son was at the other end. He couldn't hear me screaming for him. So I waited until it stopped. And then I ran to the other end of the house to find him and he was OK. But and it was dark, we had lost all power, it's still dark out. Luckily, we turned on our cell phone's flashlights and use that, but, you know, we have our power back now but it was pitch black.
[Baldwin:] You do have your power back now, OK got it.
[Dossett:] We do have our power back now.
[Baldwin:] That is a good thing. Hang tight I know the directive is to shelter in place. Kristen, thank you so much for hopping on phone with me and then helping us understand those of us who have never been through an earthquake, what it feels like. Kristen Dossett, thank you very much, in Alaska for me. We are getting dramatic new video from inside these building, so stand by, much more on out special coverage of Alaska on the 7.0 magnitude earthquake next. All right, here's a breaking news. If you're just tuning into us here at CNN, there's been a 7.0 magnitude earthquake right around the Anchorage, Alaska area. But I was talking to the seismologist just moment ago who said, it's been actually felt as far as 400 miles away. The silver lining to all of these, we have no reports of injuries, no reports of fatalities but just quite a bit of damage in and around the Anchorage area. I was just talking to a woman who said she'd been through, you know, random earthquakes, living in Alaska for 37 years, and she said, absolutely, this was the most violent earthquake she had ever felt. Let's go now to the Press Secretary over at the White House, who just tweeted out, the White House's acknowledgment of this earthquake. Sarah Sanders posting this, "The President has been briefed on the earthquake near Anchorage, Alaska and is monitoring damage reports. We are praying for the safety of all Alaskans." Allison Chinchar is with me, CNN Meteorologist. And, Allison, at least that the tsunami warning has been lifted, but let's focus on this earthquake. Tell me more about what you know and the damage.
[Allison Chinchar, Cnn Meteorologist:] Yes, you're right. The good news is we had the tsunami warnings that no longer exist. The bad news is we are continuing to get more and more of those aftershocks. We're now up to nine aftershocks. Several of those are large aftershocks including 5.7. It was the closest to downtown Anchorage. Now, when we talk about how many people really felt this particular earthquake, it's quite a lot. And the best way to show is these colors. Where you see the yellow, those people felt strong shaking, and the orange, that indicates very strong, if not severe shaking. And that's likely why we're seeing so much of that damage. One of the other concerns for this area is what's called the liquefaction, OK? And most of that has to do with the soil composition for these areas. Now, these, if it's hard to see, this right here where my hand is, that is where Anchorage is located, OK? But a little bit farther up from that, you have high areas. But even in downtown, again, a lot of these coastal regions are at a significant area where we have the potential for that liquefaction to take place. One of the other concerns, flights. We do know that the international airport in Anchorage has issued a ground stop, OK? So no flights are leaving out of that airport as of now. Now, in terms of some of the airplanes coming in, they are still there at that point. They may end up rerouting them. Again, we don't know that for sure. We just know that no airlines are leaving out of that airport as of now. There is a ground stop. So if you have any travel plans there today, please check with your carrier to make sure that that may actually still be taking place. Again, we talked about some of the impacts here from this particular earthquake. Again, it was a 7.0 depths of about 40 kilometers. That's about 25 miles, give or take. This again, is the area that felt it. So you can see it goes pretty far out for those people that felt strong, if not very strong shaking. And, Brooke, one of the other things to note too, we are in what's considered the yellow pager for economic impact. The main concern here is going to be the significant damage area that we had to buildings as well as roadways throughout this area.
[Baldwin:] Allison, thank you. I really want to hone in on the Anchorage area. Philip Peterson was in downtown Anchorage when this earthquake hit right around 8:30 this morning, local time. Philip is on the phone with me now. And Philip, are you doing okay?
[Philip Peterson, Ktva Affiliate:] Yes, I'm fine. A little shook up but I'm feeling better now.
[Baldwin:] Understandable. So where were you and what did it feel like?
[Peterson:] So I worked in an office building downtown. It's a kind of a mid-rise, 12-story building. And when it started shaking, we kind of right away tell that it was not a small earthquake. So I jumped under my desk and just started like, my heart was beating out of my chest because this is one of the first real earthquakes I've been in since I moved up here.
[Baldwin:] One of the first real earthquakes. For people who have never felt it, can you try to describe it for me?
[Peterson:] Yes. It feels like everything is shaking. I think it lasts about 45 seconds but that feels like half hour. I mean this got my chest shaking, shaking, shaking. And then it starts to roll a little bit too. And when you're in a high-rise building, it's kind of swaying as well.
[Baldwin:] Oh, my gosh.
[Peterson:] It's really nerve-wracking
[Baldwin:] Oh, my gosh. And we heard about this, you know, about nine aftershocks or the 5.7 aftershock right around at downtown Anchorage area which I'm sure you felt. Are you still in that? Are you still in your office building or have you, have you left?
[Peterson:] No, we evacuated the office. So I returned home and I'm sheltered down there now.
[Baldwin:] Did you get a chance as you were leaving though, to look around and see how bad the damage is in the downtown Anchorage area?
[Peterson:] Yes. So I tried to take a look around there, I was curious. Our buildings took quite a big damage as far as like ceilings, tiles and everything. But structurally, I couldn't tell you how it is. When, you know, driving through downtown, you couldn't see anything like any there's no fires that I could visibly see. And there was not any like collapsed buildings or anything like that. It was catastrophic. I did see some collapsed overpasses on my drive home, which I think people seen pictures of. That looks pretty intense. But other than that, you know, cracks from some of the roadways.
[Baldwin:] Philip Peterson, I'm glad you're home and safe, 7.0 magnitude, amazingly so far. I know it's still early but no reports of even any injuries in the Anchorage area or even beyond. Philip, thank you. Take care. We're going to take a quick break. Brand new chilling video coming in as police say there is a massive infrastructure damage across the City of Anchorage, Alaska.
[Brooke Baldwin, Anchor, Cnn:] Now these are pictures from inside the Ted Stevens International Airport there in Anchorage just so you can get a sense of what this 7.0 magnitude earthquake felt like. Not just on the road, we've seen that, you know, one roadway totally buckle with the cars stranded. We talked about the local TV stations and now the airports as well. There is a full ground stop, no flight out of Anchorage whatsoever. Rene Marsh is covering that for us. Rene, just seeing all those people running as the siren is overheard, how frightening.
[Rene Marsh, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, absolutely.

[Allen:] Tributes are pouring in, right now, for Hollywood star, Burt Reynolds. He died Thursday of cardiac arrest. He was 82. Reynolds starred in many film and T.V. roles during his 60-year career, including Smokey and the Bandit, Deliverance, and Evening Shade. Stephanie Elam looks back at his extraordinary life and career.
[Stephanie Elam, Cnn International Correspondent:] Burt Reynolds was one of the top box office draws in the 70s and 80s. But the big screen was not where he set out to be. No. The handsome, charismatic, Michigan-born actor, wanted to be a football star. Reynolds attended Florida State University on a football scholarship. But an injury derailed his athletic career and put him on the path to Hollywood stardom. At first, Reynolds landed roles on television, including shows like Gun Smoke and Flipper, but it was the 1972 film, Deliverance, that was his breakthrough role.
[Burt Reynolds, Actor:] Who has the ability to survive?
[Elam:] He also became a sex symbol, and posed nude in Cosmopolitan magazine. He capitalized on his success in 1974 sports drama, The longest Yard.
[Reynolds:] I'm going to fix it, OK?
[Elam:] By 1977, the actor who was known for his signature mustache was riding high with the success of Smokey and the Bandit, alongside Sally Field.
[Reynolds:] What's your handle, son?
[Elam:] The film became a successful franchise for Reynolds. So did the movie, Cannonball Run, in 1981.
[Unidentified Male:] Can't you do something? I mean, you're professionals.
[Reynolds:] This is our day off.
[Elam:] He kept the laughs coming as the sheriff in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas, co-starring Dolly Parton. Although his film career slowed down by the late 80s, Reynolds found success on television in the 1990s series Evening Shade. It ran for four seasons and earned him an Emmy and a Golden Globe. While his T.V. career was on a high, his personal life, unravelled. He ended his five-year marriage to actress, Lonnie Anderson, in1993, and was involved in a messy custody battle over their adopted son, Quinton. By 1996, Reynolds filed for bankruptcy.
[Reynolds:] Jack Horner, filmmaker.
[Elam:] But things began to look up for the actor, when he landed Paul Thomas Anderson's film, Boogie Nights. The role led to his first Oscar nomination. Though he didn't win, he received critical acclaim in the hockey film, Mystery Alaska, in 1999.
[Reynolds:] I don't want to hear another word about a hockey game.
[Elam:] Throughout the 2000s, he kept busy with a number of T.V. and film roles like the Dukes of Hazzard, and a career that took him from the football field to becoming one of the biggest stars in Hollywood. The legendary actor will be remembered for decades of iconic roles in films and television. Still to many, Burt Reynolds will always be the bandit.
[Allen:] What a smile, what a laugh, what a what a guy. Let's bring in Turner Classic Movies host, Ben Mankiewicz, now. Hello, Ben. He joins us now from Los Angeles. Yes, what a loss, Ben. I mean, you just saw that smile from Burt Reynolds. He always just seemed like he was just having a good time no matter the role.
[Ben Mankiewicz, Host, Turner Classic Movies:] Yes. I'm, you know, I'm really sad. I didn't know Burt Reynolds well. I did a couple of interviews with him, one with the cast of Deliverance at the Turner Classic Movies Classic Film Festival a few years ago. And I did an interview that really, sort of, touched me about I think it was 2011, on our, sort of, road to Hollywood, we called it, before the TCM Classic Film Festival. It was at a theater in Tampa, the Tampa Theater. And there was a huge crowd there to see Burt Reynolds and the Trans Am from Smokey and the Bandit was there. And we were we were downstairs at the theater, and he had to walk up the stairs to get to the stage. And if you know anything about, sort of, the late stages of Burt Reynolds' life, he was in chronic pain, both from having played football, as the report you just aired indicated, and also from doing many of his own stunts, including on Deliverance, where he broke his tailbone. And he was laboring up the stairs, and after we talked for a while, he said, you know, what are we going to talk about? I'm like, well, maybe, mostly Smokey and the Bandit. And then he said, you know, Ben, I've made like 80 pictures and only four of them are worth a damn. And he said it with a, sort of, an ennui. And I thought, I just felt bad for him because, one, it isn't true. And after our talk downstairs, it was just I was left with the impression of a of a guy who thought that he could have done more with his career. And, of course, he did a lot. I mean, he's the number one box office star for five years in the late 70s and early 80s.
[Allen:] Yes, absolutely. I wonder why he felt that. I mean, every time we turned around, Burt Reynolds was doing something. And I was struck by something he said that I read, that he said he didn't take his crap too seriously, that he was in it just having fun. You kind of got that sense from him.
[Mankiewicz:] I think that's I think what you're touching on there is actually what he meant, is that he didn't take it too seriously, and he wishes that he had taken it more he was trained at the actors studio. I think he thought that he could have been a more substantive star and not just a great big action star. You know, he turned down Jack Nicholson's role in Terms of Endearment. He told Milos Forman he didn't want to play the role that also went to Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. He had a chance to play James Bond after Sean Connery backed out of the franchise and he, sort of, said a British guy should do it. He didn't again, he felt like he didn't I sensed that he felt like he didn't challenge himself, and I think that's too bad because as we saw, whenever he did challenge himself, when he had real great material like Paul Thomas Anderson's Boogie Nights, he really delivered.
[Allen:] Yes. So, mainly, perhaps, he relied on what he brought to the big screen, which was sexy and cool, because he certainly had that going for him.
[Mankiewicz:] Oh, he had that in spades. You know, just that wink, that Burt nobody winked, in Hollywood, like Burt Reynolds.
[Allen:] I know. It's so true. It's so true. What do you think about the big thing that he did when he posed semi-nude in a women's magazine?
[Mankiewicz:] Well, again, that was another example of, I think well, I don't think, we know it. He said it. His book, by the way, that he wrote in 2015, Enough About Me, is one of the great Hollywood memoirs. But he wrote about it then. He talked about it, to me, and to other people. He regretted that enormously. He thought it would be a joke, sort of, spoofing Playboy. But, I guess, maybe we weren't ready for that joke. He said, you know, I was the only one who thought it was funny. So, he regretted it instantly, and it made people, again, presume that he wasn't a serious person. And it comes right around, Deliverance, right at the time when Hollywood and the filmmaking industry and this incredibly vibrant time for American films from 1967 to 1976, when he could have been a big part of that. And again, that decision, I think, undermined his credibility. He regretted it. He thought it was a good idea. He thought it would be seen as funny, and it wasn't, at least, not by enough people.
[Allen:] So, for any of the younger folks watching, what movies would you say are a must-see for Burt Reynolds?
[Mankiewicz:] Yes. Well, I mean, Deliverance, no question, Semi-Tough. Look, for me, I'm of the age when I was 10 years old when Star Wars came out. But the movie that I saw three or four times in 1977, wasn't Star Wars, it was Smokey and the Bandit. No question. I mean, you should see everything by Paul Thomas Anderson. But you should definitely see you should definitely see Boogie Nights too. But Semi-Tough, The Longest Yard, he made a lot Sharky's Machine, which he also directed. I love Sharky's Machine. There's a stick which is an Elmore Leonard adaptation. And you can get to 10, 12 quality Burt Reynolds movies, you know, Gator, White Lightning, they're all worth seeing.
[Allen:] Definitely people need to have a Burt Reynolds movie night party. That's for sure. Thanks so much, Ben. We appreciate your insights. Thank you. Thanks for watching CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Natalie Allen. "WORLD SPORT" will start right after a break. I'll see you back here in 15 minutes.

[Jones:] Now, we all remember at least one awesome teacher. Maybe she stayed late and helped you with your math or maybe went to his pocket, got some money for you, and got you some classroom supplies you need. But let me tell you how amazing our next guest is. She is a teacher who learned sign language just so she can help to teach two of her students. These kids were born deaf. They're from Syria. They had no language at all. Now because of her, they're both preparing to go to college. That teacher, Mandy Manning, was just awarded the 2018 Teacher of the Year Award, and she joins us now. Welcome to THE VAN JONES SHOW. Man. You've gone above and beyond above and beyond for kid after kid after kid. You took some kids who only had a fourth grade education from overseas and you got them college ready in four years. Why do you go that far for kids? They're not your kids. You don't know these kids. They're not from America. Why are you doing it?
[Mandy Manning, English Teacher, Joel E. Ferris High School:] They are my kids. I love them. Because there's potential in every single classroom I've ever worked in. And I haven't always taught immigrant and refugee students. I've taught them for the last seven years, 19 years, though, in regular classrooms. And so whenever I look at a kid, I see immense potential.
[Jones:] Yeah.
[Manning:] And it's my privilege to get to help them achieve that potential.
[Jones:] Well, you got invited to the White House because of your great work, and you brought a stack of letters from these refugee children to President Trump. I'm sure he was surprised. So what happened?
[Manning:] I had a photograph with the president and my family, and I took advantage of that opportunity and I presented him with the letters. And I just asked him. I said, these are letters from my students and a few community members from Spokane. And they it's really important to them that you read them. And he did like he took them so graciously and he thanked me and he said he looked forward to it and had them put on his desk.
[Jones:] What do you think President Trump can learn from these children, these young people?
[Manning:] That they are thankful that they are here. Very thankful. Every single letter said thank you. That they have dreams and hopes to be productive members of our society, our community here in the United States and that coming to the United States represented hope. And that they could achieve their dreams because so many of them went through tremendous trauma in order to get here.
[Jones:] Why do you have all these pins on? You have pins talking about trans equality, you have women's march pin. Why did you wear those pins to the White House?
[Manning:] So I just have to mention that the women's march pin, I didn't make that connection. Yes, it's a women's march pin. But for me, this is the dreamers. This represents my immigrant students. I wore all these pins because I teach all students and this was my message to my students, that I 2was there representing them and ready to tell their stories.
[Jones:] Beautiful. The White House pool was banned from your speech, which is shocking to a lot of people. I want you to have a chance to read your speech, at least part of it, on "The Van Jones Show." Would that be all right with everybody? Do you have it? Whip it out. It is unbelievable that they were so concerned about what you had to say. But we're not concerned, we're inspired by it. What did you have to say?
[Manning:] So where should I look? At you still?
[Jones:] You can read away. You don't have to look at me.
[Manning:] Over the next year, I will be sharing my students' stories and profound insights into our country throughout the nation. Like Sultan, a refugee from Syria, who escaped war in his country and understands the importance of the United States to be peacemakers. I am here for refugee and immigrant students, for the kids in the gaystraight alliance, and for all the girls I've coached over the years, to send them the message that they are wanted, they are loved, they are enough, and they matter. Go out today, seek an experience you have never had before. Get uncomfortable. Challenge your own perceptions to find clarity. Be fearless. Be kind. Meet someone new.
[Jones:] That's beautiful. Wonderful, wonderful. I so thankful that you were able to be here. I really, really am. Keep up the great work. You know, something else I'm thankful for is my hometown of Jackson, Tennessee where both of my parents were school teachers. And I got to go home last weekend. I got to speak at the same church I attended as a child. I gave a commencement address at Lane College, the small historically black school where my grandfather was once president. And I got the key to the city. And, you know, the whole thing just reminded me that some of the biggest hearts in the world beat in some of the smallest towns in America. There's no place like home. Thank you all. I'm Van Jones. This is THE VAN JONES SHOW. Peace and love for one another.

[Lemon:] We got Conor Lamb's performance in Pennsylvania special election, has Republicans worried about a blue wave in the midterm. So, is this a wake-up call for the GOP, here to discuss, Mark McKinnon, executive producer of the Showtime's "The Circus" and a former adviser to George W. Bush and John McCain. Also veteran Republican strategist, Mike Murphy. Veteran. Good evening, gentleman.
[Michael Murphy, Republican Strategist:] Jurassic.
[Lemon:] Never.
[Murphy:] Veterans, means over the hill.
[Lemon:] Young at heart, legendary.
[Murphy:] Right.
[Lemon:] So, Mark, last time you were on, you know, we talked about this. And you said all politics are now national and that old axiom has been turned on its head, anything listen, I wondered if last night changed your mind, because that was I thought that was a local race and he fit, what the local folks wanted and that is why he won. No?
[Mark Mckinnon, Executive Producer, Showtime's "the Circus":] No, I don't think so. You know, I don't think you can't put lipstick on this pig. It needs plastic surgery. It was a it was a Republican seat. Every column in this race should have been is checked for Republicans, 20 point advantage, Trump won by 20 points, long-held Republican seat. So, you know but all practical matters, this should have been a Republican win and it wasn't. So what does that say? It means the Republicans lost a seat they should have won. It wasn't even a marginal seat, it wasn't a swing seat. So, now those swing seats look really like they're in really big trouble. And I think the problem was it was nationalized, because this candidate, remember said, he was Trump before Trump was Trump. And my advice to Republicans running out there is, you have to show a show of measure of independence. You can agree with Trump on some things, but you got to be independent and prove that you are not just completely you don't want to hug him, so you need a restraining order. And the second thing is, Trump embraced a really Democratic idea, which is tariffs. And if you are a Democrat and you believe in tariffs which most Democrats do, why not pick the Democratic choice, instead of Republican one.
[Lemon:] Yes. So Mike, listen, you said Republicans should have been able to I read this on air last night, elect a bag of hammers there. So I want to ask you, let's talk about these spreads, OK? Because here is the spread, Pennsylvania's 18th district is a is listed on R plus 11, right? According to the Cook political reporter...
[Murphy:] Right.
[Lemon:] ...partisan voter index. Meaning that Republicans had an 11 point advantage there, over Democrats. Devin Nunes and Cathy McMorris Rodgers are listed as R plus eight. Paul Ryan and Lee Zeldin are only R plus fives. Are these guys safe?
[Murphy:] Well, no, like many Republicans in swing seats, they're in a real tough environment. I mean, let's look at this Pennsylvania 19 thing and step back. We couldn't carry...
[Lemon:] 18th.
[Murphy:] A Pittsburg district that Romney won by 17 and Trump by 20, a week after we passed steel tariffs for Pittsburgh. And yet still our guy lost. Now the spin going around D.C. is we had a sad sack candidate, but as I said, that district is so good, we ought to be able to elect a box of hammers there. So, I'm with Mark. We have to be honest in the party, what's going on. President Trump who peaked in districts like that, a year and a half ago, is now in real trouble, has been become an anchor on the party and guys like Nunes, are bunch or Republican that are about 30, 40 districts that are in real trouble right now and this has been coming. This isn't a freak thing, like some specials, where out of nowhere, you know, special pops. This was way deep in Republican territory. After we had the trouble, we had in the Virginia governor race and after a lot of other special elections where we way underperformed. So there is definitely a blue wave coming. We got to get ready for it and stop lying to ourselves about all, it was the candidate's bumper sticker that wasn't any good.
[Lemon:] Mark listen, Mike just set me up for my next question about the blue wave coming. Because in front of the cameras, publicly, you hear Republicans, even Paul Ryan saying well, you know, don't read too much into this. He ran basically as a Republican. You are plugged into a lot of Republicans. What are they saying what are they really saying behind the scenes?
[Mckinnon:] They're saying get off the beach. Get out of here. Actually that is happening. I mean, they're getting out of the races altogether, but 41 Republicans have retired and resigned. And I think because of last night, we will see more resignations. There is a lot of Republicans that are on the you know on the bubble. And if you're on the bubble, looking at last night's news, you know, that was the canary in the coalmine getting hit by mustard gas and grenade and there is feathers everywhere.
[Lemon:] Oh my gosh. All right, so then, whose fault is it? is it we have folks on last night saying, Republicans candidates need to wake up or this was a sort of referendum on the Trump presidency. Whose fault is it? Is it a combination?
[Murphy:] I'm sorry, is that for me.
[Lemon:] Either one of you, go ahead, Mike, Mike.
[Murphy:] I'm a trained puppet. I didn't hear that. That was Mike part. Look, I'll say it, yes, it's Trump. This is not rocket science. We had the most unpopular President in the history of polling in the first year of an administration. So, you know, two plus two is four here. Massively unpopular President, who is constantly doing things to undermine the presidency and offend two- thirds of the country. Breaking Republican orthodoxy, dumb policy like steel tariffs and so guess what, we getting clobbered now, at the polls. This is not hard, the problem is fundamentally Trump and the fact the party has become lemmings following him and giving up on a lot of things that old Jurassic Republicans like me signed up for. Like free trade, like standing up to the Russians. And a whole host of other things, including having some respect for the office of the presidency. So, yes, I totally blame Trump.
[Mckinnon:] The other thing, that is problematic about that, Don, is that, you know, I think a lot of Republicans were holding out hope that because of the tax cuts and because of the very strong economy that would help carry through some of the problems that we've been seeing out there. This suggests that, that is not going to be the life boat that everybody thought it was going to be.
[Lemon:] Yes. Let's let's and my open at 10:00 I said I talked about the chaos that is happening at the White House, so many different people leaving. We never know how many different stories that are really important stories that we're going to get on any given day here. He wants to blame everyone else, even taking trying to take credit for Conor Lamb's win last night or CNN hasn't called it yet. He declared himself the winner. He wants to take credit for that. But when it really comes down to it, he is the master of chaos. No one is more responsible for it than the man who is sitting in the White House, Mark McKinnon.
[Mckinnon:] That is right. I mean, first of all, he tried to hedge that before the race by saying there was a weak candidate in case he lost. Second of all, he tried to say that Conor Lamb ran, you know sort of in his direction. Which just isn't true. You know, on issue after issue very strong union now obviously he is a conservative Democrat. You know, that is something I'm familiar with having been one myself in Texas for many years. So he represented the district well. That is what, you know, I think a lot of Democrats are going to get that play book and try to fill the right kind of candidates, in the right districts. And you know, he he certainly wasn't running to Trump, but he was running as somebody representing a district in the middle of Pennsylvania.
[Lemon:] Mike, I know you
[Murphy:] That is true that he he sent the right cultural signals, Lamb did. Half the time, he was campaigning by carrying a rifle and complaining about Nancy Pelosi. You know, that gave him a little traction there. What Republicans should do is learn from that. We need to give the same kind of long leash to some of our candidates, who want to walk away from the President a little bit and walk away from some of the litmus test primary issues, like guns and the suburban districts where Republicans support is collapsing. So, I would say my advice to the Republicans would be, copy that. Because we are heading for real head winds and it's an effective tactic as we just learned in one of our base districts.
[Lemon:] And a Democratic strategist would say the same thing that you are saying, that other Democrats around the country should probably copy that as well and get rid of some of the litmus test candidates. Listen, I want to ask you guys, about this important, Michael, I'll start with you first. These possible youth wave in November. What impact do you think that is going to have on top of this? Look how organized all this young people were today about the school walkout and that core really, you know, really doesn't favor President Trump according to the polls, Trump's approval rating is at decimal 22 percent among 18 to 34-year- olds, that is according to the latest CNN polls, what do you say to that, Mike?
[Murphy:] Well, I'll say one, I'm impressed by all kinds of activism. And these kids have been particularly impressive to me. Makes me feel better about the democracy, even if I don't agree with them on every single issue. Now, you hit a real Republican worry here. Because generally in the off year election, where 85 to 90 million people vote, we do well, because grumpy old white guys like me, I'll show up and vote and they tend to be more Republican. In the Presidential year around 139, 140 million people vote and a lot more, and they and a lot of those of young voters show up only in the Presidential years. So if young voters, who as you cited in the polling data don't like this President very much, decide this is a year to be active and to do what they normally don't do, which is show up and vote that becomes a big part of the blue wave that we can be looking at. Theresa May, saw something like that in Britain, in the elections where the conservatives underperformed. We are seeing it in the special elections like Virginia and other places. We don't have exit polls in Pennsylvania. I'll bet you see it there particularly in Allegheny county. So, yes, it is the other part of the equation. Young Presidential year, lean Democrat voters get energized to not to flood the lower turn out midterm elections and that is good news for the D's.
[Lemon:] I want to get your take on this Mark and as I do that I understand you had a chance to be with some students during the walkout today. Tell us about that.
[Mckinnon:] I did. I went to Fairfield High School in Boulder today, where a walkout was organized. All 2,200 students walked out and were silent for 17 minutes which is hard to do for anybody of any age, but to see them all activated and there were three students from Parkland, who were there as well. But I was really impressed not only by the energy and their activism, but it was really civil. You know, all sides of the debate were represented. It was it was the kind of debate that I wish, I'd see more among adults. And so but to Mike's point, midterm elections are all about energy and who is energized. And it's just the case that, you know 18 to 34 demo's is a heavily Democratic leaning group. And what I saw in Boulder, Fairfield High School, that I was, these kids are activated, they are energized and they are taking action and they're going to show up at the polls.
[Lemon:] Mark McKinnon, Mike Murphy, always a pleasure, thank you.
[Murphy:] Thank you.
[Lemon:] When we come back, the main challenging Paul Ryan for his House seat in November, Iron Stash. I'm going to ask him how he plans to ride the blue wave in Wisconsin.

[Camerota:] OK, President Trump's latest tweet teasing trade talks with China is this trade negotiations are continuing with China. They have been making hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the U.S. for many years, stay tuned. Did he seal a deal also with a Chinese tech firm, TZE? We need to talk about that.
[Gregory: Zte. Camerota:] DT what?
[Gregory:] You said TZE. It's
[Camerota:] And what is it?
[Gregory: Zte. Camerota:] ZTE. We need to talk about ZTE, David Chalian, our political director with "The Bottom Line."
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Good morning.
[Camerota:] So, let's talk about this because this is the tech giant that was violating sanctions, dealing with Iran, with North Korea. It caught many people, including many Trump supporters, by surprise, when on Sunday the president tweeted that he was going to be helping that tech giant in China save jobs. What's going on here?
[Chalian:] Right. You wonder in the tweet this morning, you said, well, is there a deal here he's ready to announce? The other question could be, or is this just a cleanup tweet of that tweet on Sunday which could be summed up in sort of, make China great again. And and before he heads to Capitol Hill to meet with Senate Republicans today who would like a little more information about why he tweeted what he tweeted on Sunday. There are two prongs here, Alisyn. You've got an economic concern, which is what happened to America first and, you know, really concerned about America jobs at all cost and all of a sudden we're hearing from the president about striking a deal with Xi to make whole this company who suffered under sanctions. But then there's the national security component to this as well, which is, is ZTE if you have a ZTE component phone in your hand, are you all of a sudden a spy for the Chinese government unwittingly? And so there are real concerns here. Two members of the leadership in the Senate, Cornyn and Thune, have already said they want to question President Trump about this today.
[Gregory:] Can we just pull out just a little bit longer. You may have a follow-up on that. But a little bit larger picture. Because what I'm noticing, you know, you wonder to what extent trade talks with China fit into how the president and his team are thinking about a potential deal with North Korea. You look about at tearing up the Iran deal, moving the embassy to Jerusalem. It really strikes me that this is a president who is feeling what a lot of presidents feel, which is, they have the most control when it comes to foreign policy and national security policy and all of a sudden he's putting together a portfolio of potential successes and certainly bold action whether you agree with it or not that will really define this administration.
[Chalian:] It's a good point, David, after especially when you put it up against the context of a year of what was largely frustration on domestic policy dealing with Congress, unable to bend it towards its will. You're right, many presidents have found this. I mean other than at the end of the year he was able to get that big tax cut legislation through. But for the big part of his first year, he was mostly just living in frustration that Congress wasn't going along with him. And I think you're right, most presidents do find the foreign policy, national security arena a little bit more easy to bend to its will. But there's something added here, I think, that is specific to President Trump, and that is, the art of the deal president. This is this is the guy who came in and said, I am a deal maker and I am going to make deals you know, it will make your head spin how many deals I'm going to make. And I think he's starting to really feel the ability to do that in the office.
[Camerota:] Laura Ingraham, conservative commentator, host on Fox News, radio host, she has, I think, proven herself to be somebody who is willing to call the president out when she's confused about one of his policies, or it seems inconsistent. She's just done so this morning about the ZTE thing. She says, this is extremely disconcerting. Just as Donald Trump is moving public opinion on China, this strange move to help ZTE. Soy beans are not as important as national security. Is North Korea the reason? So, David, I mean do you expect to hear from other people who this is some sort of line for them where they think the president has gone overboard?
[Chalian:] Yes, I think you're going to hear from all different corners, both conservative corners and his critics on the left, to for clarity here. I think that the president has not spelled out exactly what he's doing with China. We know how much he relied on China to get to the place he is to set up this June 12th meeting with Kim Jong-un. But I think everybody is looking for clarity on what he's doing with China and his tweet confused more than clarified on Sunday.
[Gregory:] And the question is whether his hard line stance on trade will soften if he gets something from China on North Korea.
[Chalian:] Exactly.
[Camerota:] All right, David Chalian, thank you very much for "The Bottom Line."
[Gregory:] Good to see you.
[Chalian:] Thanks, guys.
[Camerota:] We have "The Good Stuff" for you. That's next.

[Allen:] And welcome back to our viewers here in the U.S. and all around the world. Thanks for watching CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] I'm George Howell with the headlines we're following for you this hour.
[Allen:] Police in Louisiana are searching for a man they say killed five people Saturday.
[Howell:] The suspect is believed to have shot his girlfriend, her father and brother and then his own parents. Our Kaylee Hartung has the story.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Saturday morning, Elizabeth and Keith Theriot were shot in their home in Gonzales, Louisiana. When police responded, the two victims were able to identify their 21-year- old son, Dakota Theriot, as the man who shot them. Both husband and wife later died in the hospital in Baton Rouge. In the meantime, while authorities in Ascension Parish were looking for this killer on the run, in Livingston Parish, authorities began investigating the murder of three family members found in their home, Billy, Summer and Tanner Ernest. Once these two departments talked to one another, they realized they were looking for the same man in Dakota Theriot, as Dakota was believed to have a relationship with one member of the Ernest family. Authorities no longer believe he's in the vicinity of these five murders committed in Louisiana. They say they have reason to believe he's headed east towards Mississippi. And they think he is driving this stolen vehicle from the Ernest family. Here you see a 2004 Dodge Ram pickup truck, gray on the top, silver on the bottom, it has a Louisiana license plate of C583809. Here's more from the Ascension Parish sheriff.
[Bobby Webre, Ascension Parish Sheriff:] The good news is we know who did this and we will soon find this person and put him in jail where he belongs. This is probably, I would say, one of the worst domestic violence incidents I've seen in quite a while, for a young man to walk into a bedroom and kill his mother and his father and then kill friends in Livingston that he had a connection with.
[Hartung:] The sheriff went on to say they believe this is an isolated incident; they don't believe anyone else is a target for murder by Dakota Theriot. But a reminder that he is armed and dangerous so anyone he comes into contact with could be a target Kaylee Hartung, CNN.
[Howell:] All right, Kaylee, thank you. It's not February yet and the 2020 Democratic field is already starting to take shape.
[Allen:] It seems like candidates are throwing their hats in the ring almost every day.
[Howell:] So here is the lineup as it stands right now: The California senator, Kamala Harris; the former Obama cabinet member, Julian Castro; Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard; former representative John Delaney and businessman Andrew Yang.
[Allen:] Also Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren are exploring a run, as is South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
[Howell:] One of those Democrats, Senator Kamala Harris, made her first major campaign trip since announcing her run for president.
[Allen:] She was in South Carolina Friday, courting a powerful voting bloc, black women. Our Kyung Lah was there.
[Kyung Lah, Cnn Senior U.s. Correspondent:] At a home in suburban Maryland, these college friends reflect on their past as one of their own makes a run for history.
[Unidentified Female:] We were all just right there together. We were just all, just, you know, regular girls and now here's Kamala.
[Lah:] Or as the public calls her, Senator Kamala Harris, now a presidential candidate.
[Sen. Kamala Harris, , Presidential Candidate:] That's why I'm running for President of the United States.
[Lah:] On the heels of that announcement, the senator is making a first campaign stop, not in Iowa or New Hampshire but in South Carolina for her national sorority. What does this sisterhood mean politically?
[Monique Poydras, Alaska Sorority Member:] It is a fact that there are close to 300,000 women in Alpha Kappa Alpha, the sorority, incorporated and that is a fact. So it doesn't it is not rocket science.
[Lah:] These translate into votes and bringing other people in?
[Poydras:] I think that's a fair assessment.
[Lah:] These women are the foot soldiers of a powerful voting bloc. CNN exit polling shows black women supported Democrats more than almost any other voting subgroup, helping drive Democratic wins in last year's midterms. A fellow sister, the first black woman to enter the 2020 fray.
[Unidentified Female:] It translates into a ready made group of people who will come when she calls.
[Lah:] This isn't just a friendship or a sisterhood. We're talking about political power.
[Unidentified Female:] We're talking about political power and we have it. We have it and we're going to leverage it. And you'll see, it is going to make a difference.
[Lah:] You're looking at a built-in infrastructure and here's why.
[Unidentified Female:] There was a connection that was made back on the campus of Howard University that has transcended miles and years that brought us here today.
[Lah:] A bond crossing more than three decades. In 1986, 38 women became line sisters. They were all students at Howard University, a historically black college, and joined Alpha Kappa Alpha, the first black sorority in the U.S., formed more than 100 years ago.
[Jill Louis, Aka Sorority Member:] If you think about it, in 1908, people were just a few ticks off emancipation. So now they find themselves in college. And what are they trying to do? It is really an uplift mission.
[Lah:] Bound by that history, they forged their own paths, year after year, their lives weaving together.
[Unidentified Female:] We were down at the Senate, she had her formal swearing in at the time. Vice President Biden had sworn her in.
[Lah:] This was very recent.
[Poydras:] This is her recent picture, yes. So this picture was at her GW book event and we went there to support her.
[Unidentified Male:] You're also
[Aka. Harris:] Yes, I am.
[Poydras:] She talked about being a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha and the room exploded. The appropriate response was
[Harris:] That's my source and my fans are in the room as well.
[Poydras:] You could see just by her response and then our response that it is all love.
[Lah:] Felt most by those who know Kamala Harris best but shared by a national sisterhood, eager to help one of their own.
[Unidentified Female:] Next gathering, next sleepover, next girl's night in, it'll be at the White House? Yes, we're all going to be there.
[Lah:] Kyung Lah, CNN, Rockville, Maryland.
[Allen:] You can certainly feel the support she has. Here is a quote for you, "Life is not in the cloud waiting to be downloaded." Who said that? Pope Francis. That was the message he brought to thousands of young people in Panama.
[Howell:] Get off your phones. Get into life is basically what he's saying. During events celebrating World Youth Day, the pope said it is not enough to be connected online, you must actually get involved. During the service, he also called all those who abuse children, including clergy members, "unscrupulous."
[Allen:] Some bikers in Iraq are trying to leave years of war and sectarian violence in the dust by sharing the road.
[Howell:] Their group has a secret to keeping the peace. They're steering clear of any talk of politics. Our Michael Holmes has this report.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Anchor:] Clad in leather, engines revving, a band of brothers roars through the streets of Baghdad, traveling the highways in a rumbling symbol of unity in a city that has seen so much war.
[Bilal Al Bayati, Founder Of Iraq Bikers:] Our goal is to build a brotherhood. It is humanitarian. And it changes society's view of this bike.
[Holmes:] These Iraqi bikers are hitting the road to put years of sectarian violence behind them and trying to put a new face on the stereotypical outlaw biker image. It is a group that is 380 strong, made up of men from different faiths, ages and professions, who have one common love: motorcycles.
[Ahmad Haidar, Biker:] This team brought together people from all of Iraq's sectors, the doctor, the employee, the engineer, the lawyer, the laborer. It is like a small-scale Iraq.
[Holmes:] Founded seven years ago, when ISIS was on the rise and violence was widespread among the country's religious groups, the club meets regularly to ride together. And there is one rule everyone must follow.
[Bayati:] It is absolutely prohibited to talk politics among members. If someone talks about politics, they're warned once or twice and then expelled.
[Holmes:] It is not all easy riding in Baghdad, though; military checkpoints slow down the choppers but the bikers say it is just part of the journey to find new roads for the country. BAYATI [through translator] We no longer have the strength to endure these tragedies or to repeat them. A hope for more safe travels ahead for these road warriors Michael Holmes, CNN, Atlanta.
[Howell:] Still ahead this hour, a joyful end to a long, cold search. How a rescue team found a 3-year-old boy alive in the woods after being lost for days.
[Allen:] Plus, the coldest temperatures of the year are coming to Atlanta just in time for Super Bowl
[Liii. Howell:] Bundle up.

[Vanier:] U.S. President Donald Trump is blocking the release of an intelligence memo written by House Democrats. The White House says it contains classified and especially sensitive information and has been sent back to the House Intelligence Committee for changes. The document was meant as a rebuttal to Republican memo released last week with President Trump's approval. Now that memo, you might recall, alleged surveillance abuses at the FBI. But the FBI says it admitted key information and was misleading. That is by no means the only major news coming out of the White House on Friday and this Saturday morning. President Trump is praising a former aide who resigned earlier this week over accusations of domestic violence. That is right, he is praising him without mentioning the alleged victims. Mr. Trump said former staff secretary Rob Porter did a good job and said he wished Porter a, quote, "wonderful career." On Friday, a White House speechwriter also stepped down over similar accusations which he has also denied. Sources familiar with the situation say the president blames chief of staff John Kelly for letting the scandal get out of hand. But the White House denies that Kelly offered to resign. Larry Sabato joins us now from Charlottesville, Virginia, to talk about all of this. He is the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. Also the author of "Kennedy Half Century." Larry, I thought we had one big topic this evening; turns out we have two. Let's go to the memo first. Mr. Trump is not ready to declassify the Democratic memo. So either this is a technical issue, there is just too much classified intelligence in there that needs to be redacted, or Mr. Trump does not want to give Democrats their right of rebuttal. Where do you fall on this?
[Larry Sabato, University Of Virginia:] I fall at the latter, Cyril. It is very difficult to believe that it's just redactions. And if were just redactions it could be done almost immediately. But it is not going to be. Essentially the
[Sabato:] Republican memo released, that four-page memo, fell flat, completely flat. It did not prove what President Trump said it did, which is that it exonerated him on the whole Russiagate matter. So I don't think the Republicans and certainly not President Trump want to give Democrats an opportunity to score with their more detailed memo, about 10 pages.
[Vanier:] But look, Larry, and I'm just reading the latest statements, the White House is telling Democrats, well, work with the Department of Justice; work with the Intelligence Committee; get your memo in order so that there are not any obvious intelligence so there isn't classified intelligence that's made public. And the subtext is, then we could perhaps release it. Now, Mr. Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, is saying, sure. We will work with them and it will be releasable. So where does that get the White House?
[Sabato:] Well, again, we'll see exactly what is what we won't see which what's redacted and that really is the question most people have. You know, you can release a document but redacted enough so that it is meaningless. And it really does not communicate what you believe it should. So I will believe that we are going to see the essence of the Democratic memo when I read it in my hands.
[Vanier:] Can Mr. Trump avoid the perception of naked partisanship if he does not declassify the memo or if he declassifies it only in a very narrow way?
[Sabato:] He cannot avoid that label. It obviously does not matter to him. He has long since adjusted to the fact that he is going to have the strong support of maybe 40 percent of the public and 55 percent or so will be strongly opposed and nothing he does or doesn't do will change that.
[Vanier:] Let's turn now to the other major news that is consuming and has consumed the White House for the last couple of days. Rob Porter, who resigned this week over allegations by two of his by his two ex-wives of physical abuse and now another person from within the White House is resigning, pretty much over the same thing. A speechwriter is resigning. This does not feel like coincidence that it is happening the same week. It feels like the dam is breaking. What are we looking at here?
[Sabato:] Well, it's the #MeToo movement all over again, I suppose, except this relates more to spousal abuse or abuse of a girlfriend and, by the way, a third person has come out now for Mr. Porter, a more recent girlfriend has reported incidents similar to the two wives. So I think we can pretty much conclude that there is a lot of truth to that. The most significant part of this was President Trump's reaction. Everyone is just appalled that when he was asked about it, all he did was defend this Mr. Porter.
[Vanier:] Yes, let me interrupt you, Larry. We're going to play that. We're going to play the sound bite by the president when he was asked about Rob Porter.
[Trump:] He says he's innocent. And I think you have to remember that. He said very strongly yesterday that he is innocent. So you'll have to talk to him about but we absolutely wish him well. Did a very good job while he was at the White House.
[Vanier:] So Larry, there appears to be a pattern here.
[Sabato:] Well, there certainly is. He never mentioned the women who were abused. Seems to me that a president ought to be concerned about the victims. But this is par for the course for Donald Trump. As you remember, more than 2 dozen women accused him of sexual harassment during the campaign in 2016. He insisted over and over that every single one was lying. Then when he was supporting that Republican candidate for Senate in Alabama, who had all kinds of sexual allegations lodged against him. Trump simply cited the fact that Roy Moore had said it is not true. The denial was enough. Denials are never enough. Proof matters.
[Vanier:] Larry Sabato, thank you. For those of you who obsessively check U.S. stock prices, we see you. You can exhale. Markets are closed for the weekend after a turbulent week of trading. Up next our wrap-up of the numbers. Stay with us.

[Berman:] All right. This morning Senate Republicans are at a bit of crossroads on health care. The question is, move on or try to push ahead with possible fixes to the current system despite the failed repeal efforts. This is one of the many issues that could come up today when Senate leaders meet for their weekly luncheon. And will some Republicans say, move on, now. We have tried this. Other Republicans do want to go back to the drawing board.
[Sen. Ron Johnson , Budget Committee:] Well, we can't move on from health care because Obamacare is a mess.
[Mick Mulvaney, Director, Office Of Management And Budget:] You have the political consideration that you promised folks you would do this for seven years. You cannot go back on that. So, yes, they need to stay. They need to work. They need to pass something. And I think that's not only official White House position on this right now. It's sort of the national attitude towards it.
[Harlow:] Let's discuss. Republican Congressman Leonard Lance of New Jersey is here with us in the flesh, nice to have you here, not remotely somewhere. So, regardless of what you guys, what Congress does, what the president may do very shortly is threatening about five to six million Americans. And that is if you pull these subsidies from insurance companies that are part of Obamacare. They actually go to making health insurance somewhat affordable for five to six million Americans. He has threatened to do that. He has threatened to pull the funding away from you guys and Congress as well. What would you do if the president makes that choice?
[Rep. Leonard Lance , New Jersey:] I think we should fund that through the appropriations process. And I did not like the fact in the Obama administration it was not done through the appropriations process.
[Harlow:] Which got a caught up in the courts.
[Leonard:] And that is being mitigated in the courts. And I'm a member of the first branch of government, article one. And I think this involves the appropriations process. And we should appropriate the funds.
[Berman:] So, you will try to get the money if he pulls the money?
[Leonard:] That's correct.
[Harlow:] OK.
[Berman:] Let me ask you in general for health care right now. Because we set it up there, there is this discussion about whether or not Republicans should move on, you know go on to tax policy, go on to something else or you know dig in again and try to fix health care right now. Where are you?
[Leonard:] I think we can do both. I want to move to tax reform. And I think in September, we should move to tax reform, John. However, I'm a member of what's known as the Problem Solvers Caucus. And we have put out a plan regarding the individual market. It's not a complete plan. But I hope that we examine that and it's completely bipartisan in the House of Representatives.
[Berman:] And it does, by the way, include these subsidies he's talking about right there, which is significant.
[Leonard:] Yes.
[Harlow:] So, I'm sure you read the front page of "The Washington Post" this morning and the story that the president himself dictated on Air Force One, this completely misleading statement about that meeting that his son Don Jr. had with the Russian attorney. Your response to that? Troublesome to you? If so, what level?
[Leonard:] I was the first Republican on Capitol Hill to call for Jeff Sessions to recuse himself regarding the Russian matter. This is not being investigated by two very confident committees in Congress, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the House Intelligence Committee, and of course, obviously by Mr. Mueller as well. And I'm sure that we will get to the bottom of all this.
[Harlow:] Yes but isn't that Jeff Flake just called out those kind of answers in his op-ed. Today, as you know, he said that sort of as Republicans not calling out the president on things that you do not agree with cannot continue. He said he's done it. So, how do you feel, personally, about the president dictating what we now know from this reporting that the White House is not countered is misleading to the American people?
[Leonard:] I try, Poppy, to lead by example and I always try to be truthful with the press.
[Harlow:] You wouldn't do it?
[Leonard:] I don't think I would do it, no.
[Berman:] Poppy brought up the Jeff Flake piece that was in "Politico" today, part of an essay, and he's running a whole book also, really which seems to setup questions as he has or Republican senator has right now about the Trump presidency. Let me just read you something that he writes. "Too often, we observe the unfolding drama along with the rest of the country, passively, all but saying, "Someone should do something!" without seeming to realize that that someone is us." "And so, that unnerving silence in the face of an erratic executive branch is an abdication, and those in positions of leadership bear particular responsibility." You were talking about your role and the first branch of government as you put it. Do you think you and your fellow Republicans need to do more to stand-up to this White House?
[Leonard:] We should stand-up where we think it's appropriate and we should support the president and we think that's appropriate as well. And I'm comfortable in doing both. I've indicated where I disagree with the president and I've indicated where I agree with him. But certainly, we are an independent and separate branch of the government. And we have constitutional responsibilities. And for example, we passed overwhelmingly last week the sanctions bill against Russia and Iran and North Korea. And I hope and expect the president will be signing that even though he indicated perhaps he would examine it. But I think Congress really stood up and indicated this is the policy that should exist here in the United States.
[Harlow:] You say quickly to wrap up, it's appropriate. We should stand-up where appropriate and we're not appropriate. Where is it inappropriate for members of Congress to stand-up?
[Leonard:] I agree with the president on certain of his policies, for example, on tax reform, I think we should move forward and other areas as well. I favored the appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. And where appropriate I will support the president and where inappropriate, I will not.
[Berman:] Has his six months and I guess we're what, just short of 200 days in office for the president, has it gone like you thought it would?
[Leonard:] I think that it's been a very challenging time. However, I do think that General Kelly will be excellent as chief of staff, so long as everyone in the White House can report to him. I think there can only be one chief of staff and that should be General Kelly.
[Berman:] Think or hope?
[Leonard:] I think that General Kelly will be successful.
[Harlow:] Thank you.
[Leonard:] Thank you.
[Berman:] Congressman, great to have you here with us. Really appreciate it. All right, just days after its latest missile test, North Korea engaging with USS is highly unusual submarine activity. So, what does this mean for the president's vow to quote, "Handle North Korea." Stay with us.

[Romans:] An international manhunt is underway for the driver of a van who ran over and killed 13 people in Barcelona last week. Police now pouring over the wreckage from a suspected bomb factory for any clues about the terror cell behind this attack and they're looking for this man, 22-year-old Moroccan national, Younes Abouyaaqoub. The interior ministry of Catalan confirming over night, he is that man right there, is the suspected driver. Again, he is on the loose. CNN's Isa Soares joins us live from Barcelona. Bring us up to speed, Isa.
[Isa Soares, Cnn Correspondent:] Very good morning to you, Christine. That's right, in the last few hours, the Catalan interior ministry confirming to CNN that the man on the run is Younes Abouyaaqoub. He is 22-years of old of age, considered to be from Morocco, Moroccan national. He's was he's the man behind the white van that, Christine, that plowed into Plaza Catalunya where we are and killed more than 14 people and continued on to Las Ramblas, plowing people down. Police tightening the net on him, saying they are looking for him, they have reinforced the border with France. But they also cannot say whether perhaps he's already escaped into France, so a lot of attention looking into his whereabouts. But also, police circling one man in particular, and that is an Imam an Imam from Ripoll. Ripoll is just north here of Barcelona. The city has eight of the 12 suspected attackers. And now they want to know whether he, the Imam, was a suspected ringleader. Christine.
[Romans:] Interesting, all right, trying to piece all of that together for us this morning. Isa Soares in Barcelona, thank you, Isa.
[Briggs:] The world of showbiz and the nation mourning the death of Jerry Lewis this morning. Lewis best known for Slapstick comedy and his commitment to fund rising as a telethon host for the Muscular Dystrophy Association. He died Sunday after a brief illness at 91. CNN's Stephanie Elam takes a look back at his life and legendary career.
[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] He was born Joseph Levitch in 1926 but he became known to the world as Jerry Lewis, the zany but lovable fool in film such as The Bell Boy and The Nutty Professor. Lewis hit it big at age 20 when he teamed up with another young entertainer, Dean Martin.
[Jerry Lewis, Legendary Comedian:] Dean was the virile, macho, and I was the monkey. And I knew we had lightning in a barrel.
[Elam:] Martin and Lewis became one of the most popular comedy teams in history. Thousands of sold-out performances, 16 hit movies, and dozens of radio and TV appearances. On his own, Lewis signed a seven-year, $10 million contract with Paramount in 1959. At that time, it was the largest contract ever between a studio and performer. Lewis went on to act in or direct shows and movies for several decades. He later offered this advice to fellow entertainers.
[Lewis:] Be a hit, score. Get the audience laughing and happy. That's the secret of success in this business.
[Elam:] He didn't just make audiences laugh. Lewis used his fame to make a difference, taking up the fight against muscular dystrophy. For more than four decades, his annual Labor Day telethons helped raise more than $1 billion for research and treatment and almost always ended with his signature song, You'll Never Walk Alone.
[Lewis:] Walk alone with hope in your heart and you'll never walk alone
[Elam:] Lewis struggled with his own health problems over the years including prostate cancer, type-one diabetes, pulmonary fibrosis, and heart disease.
[Lewis:] It's been a long, long, grueling ride. I've ingested more than 24,000 pills.
[Elam:] But through it all, he kept his sense of humor.
[Lewis:] You better laugh at it because the alternative is not funny.
[Briggs:] Good stuff. He raised more than a billion dollars for muscular dystrophy.
[Romans:] Unbelievable, yes.
[Briggs:] It's unreal. What a legacy it is.
[Romans:] All right, so will the weather cooperate today for a little tiny event you've never heard off, being called the eclipse of the century. It's a very big day, guys. Let's get to our meteorologist Pedram Javaheri.
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Dave and Christine, the big day here. And we're watching the forecast very carefully because very easy to see what's going on here, at least across the northwestern corner of the country, Oregon, Idaho into Wyoming, generally clear skies, some wildfires across the region but making it pretty hazy across the region. So incredibly that ash could enhance some of the colors when it comes to approaching totality in the last few minutes before the sun is completely obscured for those couple of minutes. That notice around the central portion of the country, plenty of cloud cover, some storms, some of which that could be severe. And then once again toward the southeast, namely around, say, portions of South Carolina, around Charleston, also looking at some cloud cover. Maybe 80 percent of the sky could be covered by clouds across Charleston, still watching that very carefully, as well. It's really interesting to think about the light and the complete totality because if you think, say, you're in an area that have 95 percent, 96 percent, 97 percent of coverage of the sun, it's going to get pretty dark, and really not so the case. In fact, even at 99 percent, it is still about 10,000 times brighter than once the sun is completely covered at 100 percent. Really an analogy to use here is to think about say, a hotel with a blackout curtain. If a little bit that curtain is open, you're going to let a tremendous amount of light in. But once you cover it completely, it gets dark, that could be the case across some of these areas with the 100 percent totality guys.
[Romans:] Wow. You can see the planets in the middle of the day.
[Briggs:] It's 2:45 Eastern Time, I think we peek.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Briggs:] Time to go a little after 10 for those...
[Romans:] And I think it's like 71 percent eclipse. So I'm trying to figure out where to take the kids.
[Briggs:] Take them to just Oregon. You can make it there in the net couple of hours.
[Romans:] Too Late. Too Late.
[Briggs:] All right, some breaking news this morning, ten sailors missing in the Pacific after a U.S. Navy destroyer collides with an oil tanker. We'll have the latest on the search on EARLY START.

[Camerota:] President Trump is on a political winning streak, so do the numbers back up those recent successes? CNN senior political analyst John Avlon joins us with a CNN "Reality Check." What's the reality, John?
[John Avlon, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Here's the reality, Ali. Four weeks from today, voters will be heading to the polls and just in time, the reality show president can claim his best week ever. There's no denying it. Trump's been on a bit of a winning streak in big areas of jobs, trade, and judges, which his party could definitely use after trailing in the polls. So let's start with jobs, always the core promise of Trump's presidency. On Friday, new job numbers came out showing a nearly 50- year low in the unemployment rate, hitting 3.7 percent in September. You've got to go all the way back to 1969 Woodstock to find a lower unemployment rate. And while it's fair to point out that this is the culmination of an 8- year recovery, this new low is on Trump's watch and that's great news for the country. Also, Trump fulfilled a major campaign promise successfully renegotiating NAFTA, rebranding it the USMCA. Now, this is no revolution. The basic premise remains intact but Trump played hardball and gave concessions that benefit workers. In particular, at least 75 percent of car parts will need to be made in North America and at least 40 percent of cars will be built by workers making at least $16 an hour by 2023. There are improved protections for intellectual property and increased access to Canadian markets for dairy farmers. All good news. Finally, of course, judges. With the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh, Trump can claim two Supreme Court seats. As many justices in two years as President Obama got in eight, thanks to the unprecedented obstruction of Merrick Garland. Yes, this was the narrowest confirmation vote in over a century and the court is more politicized than at any time in living memory, but a win is a win no matter how ugly. And with that, Trump made good on his promise to social conservatives who overlooked his personal behavior on the premise that he'd appoint the right judges. Now, the Supreme Court will have a decided conservative tilt for the foreseeable future. And that's not all. Trump and Senate Republicans have pushed through 69 judges to higher courts, more than any recent president. Add to this an increasingly tough line with China, including an ongoing trade war, continued talks with North Korea, and his passionate pen pal Kim Jong Un. Plus, a comparatively taped Twitter finger and you've got to acknowledge a presidency that's hitting its stride and delivering for his base. So it should come as no surprise that Trump has seen a job approval bump, gaining five points in the past month. But, before the White House uncorks a bottle of Trump wine to celebrate, it's still the lowest approval rating for any president on record at this point in their term, according to Gallup, and that's with a booming economy. So, cold shower alert. Heading into the midterms, a president with below 50 percent approval rating has lost an average of 37 seats in the House. But this unprecedented president knows a thing or two about defying polls and political history, and Trump can now credibly claim his best week ever and point to some big wins coming down the stretch. And that's your "Reality Check."
[Camerota:] Really interesting, John. Maybe that's why people are so tired. They really are tired of winning.
[Berman:] You know Kaitlin Collins said
[Avlon:] Or a second cup of coffee.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Berman:] Kaitlin Collins noted though, John it was interesting that if you're talking about the president's best week ever, that was the week when that "New York Times" had that giant expose on his finances and the fact that he wasn't exactly as self-made as he always claimed to be, so that's interesting.
[Avlon:] A lot of big stories that should have really hit and hurt, but the other stories the big narratives were elsewhere. So those big stories may still get him in the end. They may snowball their impact. But the attention was elsewhere on Kavanaugh, on Ford, and Trump benefitted from that momentum.
[Berman:] All right, John Avlon. Thank you very much. We do have some breaking news on Hurricane Michael, now a category two storm, so let's get the latest forecast now.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Camerota:] All right. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Tuesday, October ninth, 8:00 in the east. We do begin with breaking news because the National Hurricane Center says Hurricane Michael has intensified in just the past few moments into a category two storm. Forecasters say it will continue to strengthen to a major hurricane before making landfall in the Florida Panhandle tomorrow. These are live pictures that you are looking at right now. You can see the surf kicking up. This is Panama City Beach. This, of course, is well ahead of the storm so people are still sprinkled on the beach a little bit there, though there is a mandatory evacuation now in effect for that very spot. Governor Rick Scott has a dire warning. He calls Hurricane Michael a monstrous storm that could bring total devastation. Millions of people are now under evacuation orders in at least 10 counties ahead of this hurricane.
[Berman:] And in 90 minutes, Justice Brett Kavanaugh will sit on the bench of the Supreme Court for the first time. Overnight, he took part in a White House ceremony.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] The doctor is in. The latest shakeup sees the president tap his personal physician to lead the VA, Ronny Jackson's lack of management experience is raising some concerns. Now outgoing Secretary David Shulkin firing back.
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn Anchor:] A new report says the president's lawyer floating pardons for top campaign aides. Was the Trump legal team trying to keep Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort from cooperating in the Russia probe?
[Briggs:] The date is set for leaders of North and South Korea to meet. The agenda includes denuclearization and other stuff as Pyongyang evolves into a major player on the world stage. Boy, this story rapidly evolving on the Korean Peninsula. Welcome back to the EARLY START, I'm Dave Briggs.
[Kosinski:] I'm Michelle Kosinski, it's 31 minutes past the hour. Another change at the top of the Trump administration. David Shulkin is out as Veterans Affairs Secretary. President Trump making the announcement where else? On Twitter. But in this case, we're told Chief of Staff John Kelly did give Shulkin a head's up. White House officials says the controversy surrounding Shulkin and questions about his travel spending had become distractions that were getting in the way. The president of course campaigned hard on helping veterans.
[Briggs:] The big surprise was not Shulkin's ouster which had been rumored for weeks, it was who is being nominated to replace him his personal physician Rear Admiral Dr. Ronny Jackson. Perhaps, unsurprisingly, the nominee's performance on television had something to do with this selection. A White House official says Dr. Jackson's White House briefing where he praised the president's health played a role in case you missed it, here is a look back.
[Ronny Jackson, Physician To Donald Trump & Currently Nominated As Secretary Of The Department Of Veterans Affairs:] There's no indication whatsoever that he has any cognitive issues. The president you know, he's very sharp, he's very articulate, a lot of energy and a lot of stamina. You know, look at his vision, I mean, he's you know, he's 71 years old, I mean, he can drive if he wants to without glasses. I mean, he washes his hands frequently, he uses, you know, Purell. The president's health is excellent because his overall health is excellent. And he has incredible genes, I just assume and I think he will remain fit for duty for the remainder of this term and even for the remainder of another term if he's elected.
[Kosinski:] I'd like my doctor to watch pull me out to walk
[Briggs:] Me too.
[Kosinski:] Dr. Jackson still faces confirmation though which of course could be bumpy. He is an active duty Navy physician who has served on the White House medical team for the last 12 years. Twenty-thirteen, he was nominated by President Obama to become physician to the president. CNN has learned President Trump floated Dr. Jackson as a potential replacement at the VA recently, but people he was speaking with did not take him seriously.
[Briggs:] Yes, Dr. Jackson's nomination not going over well with Veterans groups. The executive director of American Veterans or AMVETs says tonight, the momentum at the VA has come to a screeching halt. We are very disappointed, and even more so, we are concerned. We are concerned at who the nominee is. We don't see anything in his bio that makes him fit to lead.
[Kosinski:] In a stinging op-ed published in the "New York Times" overnight, David Shulkin takes aim at people who want to privatize the VA. He doesn't until the past three months veterans issues were dealt within a largely bipartisan way. But Shulkin says the department has become entangled in what he calls a brutal power struggle.
[Briggs:] He says, quote, "solutions should be determined based on the merits of the arguments. The advocates within the administration for privatizing VA health services, however reject this approach. They saw me as an obstacle to privatization who had to be removed. That is because I am convinced that privatization is a political issue aimed at rewarding select people and companies with profits, even if it undermines care for veterans." Stinging indeed, expanding private healthcare for veterans is a White House priority.
[Kosinski:] "New York Times" reports President Trump's now former top lawyer John Dowd floated the possibility of pardons for Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort. The "Times" says Dowd raised the issue last year with the lawyers for the former national security adviser and Trump campaign chairman. Both are now facing charges in the special counsel's Russia investigation.
[Briggs:] Dowd's reported action raises questions about whether he tried to influence their decision to cooperate with the Mueller probe. CNN's senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin providing some context here.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] There is nothing unlawful about a lawyer discussing pardons. That is a power of the presidency. Where there could be trouble is if there was some sort of promise implied or given to witnesses in the Mueller investigation that if you don't cooperate, you will get a pardon.
[Briggs:] In a statement to the "Times", John Dowd denies the report, Dowd resigned from the president's legal team last week. The White House trying to dodge a pivotal question, the Stormy Daniels scandal. What did President Trump know about his lawyer's $130,000 payoff to silence the adult film star? Secretary Sarah Sanders claims that as been asked and answered, but every time a reporter repeats the question, we hear something like this.
[Unidentified Male:] You haven't answered the substantive question about whether the president was aware of the $130,000 payment that was made. Can you answer that question? You were asked three weeks ago today and said you weren't aware. Are you aware now?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Press Secretary, White House:] Look, the president has denied the allegations. We've spoken about this issue extensively and I don't have anything else to add beyond that, anything beyond that, I would refer you to the outside counsel.
[Kosinski:] Sanders claims the president has already addressed the controversy surrounding Stormy Daniels, but he never has. Daniels' Attorney Michael Avenatti filed a motion in federal court Wednesday, seeking to depose the president and Attorney Michael Cohen in order to question them about the $130,000 pay off.
[Briggs:] A federal judge giving the go ahead to a lawsuit alleging the president is profiting illegally from governments doing business with the Trump Organization in Washington D.C. A Maryland and D.C. attorneys general who brought the case argued the Trump International Hotel operations put other nearby hotels and entertainment properties at a competitive disadvantage. The judge did not make any rulings on the allegations in the case, but he did note foreign governments have moved business from other hotels in D.C. to the president's hotel.
[Kosinski:] Former Vice President Joe Biden now says he regrets his comments about fighting President Trump. Biding telling the pod Save America Podcast he was referring to how he would have acted if he were in high school, not how he would act today.
[Unidentified Male:] We didn't want to run a few of the names that we were considering for the fights by you, and you just you stopped me when you feel like we have hit a winner. MAGA Saga wait, I've got to I guess if you
[Joe Biden, Former Vice President Of The United States:] All right, I want to hear them, that's good
[Unidentified Male:] Sixteen hundred Punchsylvania Avenue. The big duel or spar-a-Lago.
[Biden:] I think they're all good guys, but what I did say was, the way this came up, and I shouldn't have said what I said. I shouldn't have brought it up again. Because I don't want to get down to mosh pit with this guy. The idea and that I would actually physically get in a contest with the president of the United States or anybody else now is not what I said and is not what this was about.
[Kosinski:] Earlier this month, Biden said he would beat the hell out of Trump if the two were in high school because of the way Trump talks about women. The president shot back with a tweet saying "Biden would go down fast and hard, crying all the way if they did fight."
[Briggs:] The website Bovada has an article on who might win this theoretical fight, and they installed Trump as the favorite based on the weight advantage. You want to weigh in there?
[Kosinski:] Biden is extremely fit.
[Briggs:] I would I would not mess with Biden
[Kosinski:] He
[Briggs:] I would not.
[Kosinski:] He's still a good guy.
[Briggs:] All right, amid criticisms it failed to protect user data, Facebook is now cutting ties with data brokers. Data brokers help advertisers to target people on social media. Now Facebook says it will limit the info it shares with those brokers. The goal is to improve user privacy. Facebook also adjusted its privacy settings, giving users greater control over their personal info and what data is shared with third party apps. Third party app was behind Facebook's recent data crisis. It allowed Trump campaign consultants to access 50 million users without their consent. Setting a backlash from users and investors. Facebook's stock has lost $80 in market value since then. Facebook also faces scrutiny from lawmakers on Tuesday, CNN first reported, CEO Mark Zuckerberg does plan to testify before Congress.
[Kosinski:] Breaking overnight. The summit between North and South Korea is set. Denuclearization is on the agenda. Now another key player in the region wants to talk to Pyongyang. We're live in Seoul.

[Avlon:] Breaking news. Haiti's foreign minister confirms to CNN that five Americans have been arrested on conspiracy charges, but they've not been formally charged by Haitian authorities. It comes after more than a week of deadly riots protesting Haiti's president and calling on him to step down over alleged corruption. CNN has reached out to the U.S. State Department and we are awaiting its reaction.
[Camerota:] All right, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar is spending Presidents 'Day in New Hampshire as her campaign enters its second week. Tonight, Klobuchar will take part in a CNN town hall moderated by Don Lemon. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux is live in Manchester with more. What's going on there, Suzanne?
[Suzanne Malveaux, Cnn National Correspondent:] Hey, good morning, Alisyn. There's a lot of excitement here, as you can imagine. You see the stage just behind me. That is where Don Lemon is going to be talking to Amy Klobuchar. But also in this small, intimate setting, she's going to be hearing and getting questioned fielded from students, from faculty, from Democratic activists. And seeing her up close for the last couple of weeks, get a real impression, a sense of how she'll respond. If you ask her about immigration reform, she loves to tell stories. She'll tell the story about her grandfather who went to Ellis Island and was rejected and then later accepted U.S. citizenship two weeks before World War II and how that meant the world to her. If you ask her about everybody participating in this democracy, she'll talk about her husband John growing up with five siblings, all six of them in a trailer and then piling into a station wagon and having to count off each one of those kids so they didn't leave anybody behind. That everybody has to be included. Those are the kinds of things that she loves to do to make those personal connections. She's travel with her daughter Abigail, her husband John. And you won't hear so much about Minnesota and ice as you will hear about heartland economics. And that is the idea, that people in rural areas should have education, have jobs, health care, just like the rest of the United States, the rest of Americans. Those are the voters that she is really focusing on. That is her greatest strength. And, Alisyn, I would put money on this. She will make a joke about not being in the snow. That how wonderful it will be indoors. That she didn't bring her snow globe. It is one of those metaphors that she uses for showing that, yes, she has grit, she has tenacity, she's able to handle kind of those tough circumstances, including the president. Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Yes, she has grit, tenacity, but no hat. That is what I felt she needed for that announcement.
[Malveaux:] I and gloves. I don't know how she did it, but
[Camerota:] I don't either.
[Malveaux:] We'll we'll hear about it for sure.
[Camerota:] All right, Suzanne, thank you very much for that preview. You can watch Senator Amy Klobuchar in our CNN town hall with Don Lemon tonight at 10:00 p.m. in New Hampshire only on
[Cnn. Avlon:] Now, all nine 2020 Democratic contenders, some wearing hats, vowing to go to battle for main street over the interest of Wall Street. But that rallying cry could pose a challenge. CNN's Athena Jones explains why.
[Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand , Presidential Candidate:] Part of my goal in running for president is to make sure that no community feels left behind.
[Athena Jones, Cnn Correspondent:] It's become a rallying cry for Democrats, fight for main street over the interests of Wall Street.
[Sen. Kamala Harris , Presidential Candidate:] When bankers who crashed our economy get bonuses, but the workers who brought our country back can't even get a raise, that's not our America.
[Sen. Elizabeth Warren , Presidential Candidate:] The problem we've got right now in Washington is that it works great for those who have got money to buy influence. And I'm fighting against that. And you bet, it's going to make a lot of people unhappy.
[Jones:] A growing chorus of Democratic contenders is now answering the call more than a decade after the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. A crisis sparked in part by big banks making risky mortgage investments.
[Sen. Amy Klobuchar , Presidential Candidate:] We should close those tax loopholes designed by and for the wealthy and bring down our debt and make it easier for workers to afford child care, housing and education.
[Sen. Cory Booker , Presidential Candidate:] I want to run this campaign on the power of the people.
[Jones:] Seeking to burnish their populist credentials on this front, all nine of the Democratic candidates who have entered the 2020 fray so far have pledged to reject money from corporate political action committees.
[Gillibrand:] We really need to make every effort we can to get rid of the corporate money and dark money that is flowing into politics. And my effort to ban corporate PAC checks is just a first step in that direction.
[Jones:] These candidates are mindful of the lessons of the 2016 primaries, when Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders seized on Hillary Clinton's paid speeches before banks like Goldman Sachs to paint her as too close to the industry.
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Vermont:] Secretary Clinton was busy giving speeches to Goldman Sachs for $225,000 a speech.
[Hillary Clinton , Former Presidential Candidate:] I stood up against the behaviors of the banks when I was a senator. I called them out on their mortgage behavior.
[Jones:] The reverberations from that debate still being felt as the 2020 race gets underway. New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand took to Twitter last month to respond to a report about her outreach to Wall Street executives to gauge support for her campaign by laying out her record taking on the financial industry. She touted her support for a financial transaction tax and separating commercial and investment banking, as well as her two votes against the 2008 bank bailout. But she argues the problem is bigger than Wall Street.
[Gillibrand:] It's not just about one industry. It's actually about how the country works. It is a system that is deeply rigged for the people who have enormous amounts of money and power. It is the powerful interests that control everything. And that's what we have to take on.
[Jones:] It's a move that reflects how ties to Wall Street could pose a challenge for some Democrats, particularly for candidates such as Gillibrand and New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, who have accepted millions in campaign contributions from employees of a securities and investment industry in recent years.
[Warren:] Our democracy is not for sale.
[Jones:] And opens a potential line of attack for rivals.
[Warren:] By the way, if we truly believe that, then we also need to end the unwritten rule of politics that says that anyone who wants to run for office has to start by sucking up to a bunch of rich donors on Wall Street and powerful insiders in Washington.
[Jones:] Athena Jones, CNN, New York.
[Camerota:] Well, I mean, she makes a good point there. You know, that's how you play the game. I mean you need the grassroots small funding and you need the Wall Street funding. So
[Avlon:] Well, and I think now talking about it honestly builds a backlash and people saying, look, you know, don't just look at the donations, look at my record. But there's appropriate scrutiny of that process.
[Camerota:] That's a tell.
[Avlon:] So, here we go.
[Camerota:] All right. Here's what else to watch today.
[On Screen Text: 12:] 00 p.m. ET, protest against national emergency declaration. 4:00 p.m. ET, President Trump speaks at FIU on Venezuela. 10:00 p.m. ET, CNN town hall with Sen. Klobuchar in NH.
[Avlon:] The president not laughing at "Saturday Night Live's" opening sketch. The threat he tweeted after the show, next.

[Berman:] This morning, Steve Bannon out at Breitbart, stripped of his radio show, and FOX News prophylactically and yes, I just like to say that word. Prophylactically tells him
[Harlow:] Twice this morning.
[Berman:] Three times now. They tell him they will not hire him as if anyone asks.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Berman:] All of this is the consequence apparently of crossing the president in the new Michael Wolff book, "Fire and Fury."
[Harlow:] I mean, keep in mind. This was the man on the president's side, the former chief strategist, the man who declared war on the Republican establishment for 2018. Does he have any fighting power left? Joining us is Kurt Bardella, he's a former spokesman for Breitbart News. Not only that, someone who was hired by Bannon, worked side by side with him, talked to him in and out every day. Kurt, your expertise is needed here. Who is Steve Bannon without all of this?
[Kurt Bardella, Former Breitbart Spokesman:] I think he's a man without a movement. This is someone who, for the last year, has really been trading on the idea that he had this access to President Trump, that he had a billionaire in his back pocket to fund his efforts and campaigns and candidates of choice. And a platform in Breitbart to reach the Republican primary electorate. And within one week, all that's been taken away from him. And so he's left now as the self-declared leader of a movement that's actually now left him. And in the choice between Donald Trump and Steve Bannon, it wasn't even a competition. And I think what Steve failed to realize is that most people in the Republican Party, most people, most voters, they don't know who Steve Bannon is. They've never asked a candidate or congressman, hey, where are you on Steve Bannon? They ask, where are you on Donald Trump?
[Berman:] So, you know, will Steve Bannon go quietly? Is he a threat now, do you think, to the Trump administration in any way? A wounded animal that you can't predict?
[Bardella:] Well, I think that he's going to spend this intermediate period trying to rebuild and recapture the relationship of President Trump. I think that Steve believes, if he just waits quietly, exercises loyalty, and humility, that he'll find his way back to Trump. And certainly Trump has shown a penchant for attacking people one day and embracing them the next. Look at his own attorney general Jeff Sessions.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Bardella:] And so I think Steve believes that if things get bad for Trump, that could be the way for Steve to get back in his good graces.
[Harlow:] There's also a difference, though, for Sessions, right, and how it would look if he were to fire Jeff Sessions versus, you know, with Steve Bannon. With different calculation. What message do you think this sends overall to anyone who's considering crossing the president or his family?
[Bardella:] Well, if you certainly work for the president, work in his administration, don't talk about his family. And you wouldn't think that actually would have to be said. That's kind of common sense, right. You know, if you're working in the administration, working in the White House, maybe it's not a good idea to talk to a book writer and bad mouth the president's son and daughter and son-in-law. But, clearly, that needs to be said, because Steve spectacularly just blew himself up doing that.
[Berman:] Are you surprised at all, Kurt, to the ends to which this White House, the president seems to be going right now to outlaw Steve Bannon? I mean, it's not enough that he lost the White House job, but Breitbart had to push him out. Sirius XM Radio now dropped him, and FOX News, you know, so nervous about what the president might think, feels compelled to come out in advance of anyone even discussing it, saying Steve Bannon won't work there.
[Bardella:] Well, I think it just shows you the power of President Trump and that he has a true stranglehold right now on the Republican Party, in that you know, if it comes down to it and he says, choose me or them, the party and everybody, billionaires, benefactors, platforms, media entities, they're going to side with Donald Trump.
[Harlow:] Kurt, we appreciate your insight. Thank you for coming on.
[Bardella:] Thanks for having me on.
[Berman:] All right, Oprah Winfrey right now, everyone talking about that speech. What will the impact of it be going forward? Can she reach heights that no woman ever has before?

[Alison Kosik, Cnn Correspondent:] an unusual thing to see in Times Square, the heart of Broadway, the heart of restaurants and shops and where tourists go, especially on a beautiful New York City day. John.
[John King, Cnn "inside Politics":] And blocking off the part of the city as they respond will cause additional domino effect if you will. Alison, please standby and keep gathering information. I want to bring in CNN correspondent Brynn Gingras who is at the scene and joining us on the phone. I understand that Brynn, as we bring you to the conversation, Governor Andrew Cuomo we are told is on his way to the scene. Tell us where you are and what you're seeing.
[Brynn Gingras, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's a very chaotic scene here, John. We are just approaching the area where this car is and it is a widely roped off area by the NYPD and the FDNY at this point. Where these two avenues meet, we always say the cross roads of America. Well, that's exactly where this point is. You have major two avenues crossing each other at this point in Times Square. At the big pedestrian walkway which has been changed by the city over a number of years of construction. So there's really only one avenue of traffic going through. The rest is all pedestrians. And I just heard you guys talking about how this is an area where people walk around. This is the time of lunch. It's a beautiful day out. It's certainly a lot of people out here. But we could see- sorry, I'm a little out of breath as I rush in to the scene. But we could see that red car perched up against that lamp post right at 45th Street. And right now we're rush and looking at it. We're trying to get a visual closer visual. But this is fairly roped up and this is upon a street away is as close as it gets to the scene, but certainly active with police and the FDNY and emergency personnel trying to sort of get people out of that area and keep crews away the street.
[King:] Brynn, if you need to drop to move through the crowd let me know. I know and as I ask you a questions this for what you see in the sense that one way to judge the severity of the injuries in this situations, how many people. Can you get a sense, are people being treated on the sidewalks? Or people would have, you know, have been running and tripping and falling perhaps minor injuries as supposed to ambulances scene leaving that scenes to head off to hospitals?
[Gingras:] Well, we're still hearing there's a number of sirens going to that area not necessarily leading at this point. Like I said, I'm about a block away from where the car is perched up against that lamp post and there are just a number of emergency personnel working on that area right around the car. Now, where that car is perched up, I have to highlight again that it's not perched up where the avenue is. It's actually perched up against a lamp post where it is a huge pedestrian walkway. So right now it's dead obviously because people have been told to vacate this area, but this at the time that it would have happened would have been packed with tourists, packed with people that were having lunch in this area because this was specifically made to be an area that people can walk around and sit and eat. So it's unclear exactly the details of this accident at this point But certainly where that car is perched up, it is perched up in an area where a lot of people would have been. I know that we have reports from the FDNY that 13 people injured. We're still getting a lot of information from officials at this point. But preliminary preliminarily just by the looks of it, it is in an area where a lot of people would have been, John.
[King:] And because a lot of people are there, I assume you also have a large crowd now just gawking. I don't mean that in a bad way, just trying to figure out what is going on the scene. Is that true? There are there police clearing people away to try to get some space?
[Gingras:] Yes, there's police have cleared out about let's say, a two-block radius of this area. I can see a tent up about two blocks from where I'm standing. I'm not quite sure if that's related to this. But certainly police have taking over two blocks of this area and cleared it out. Certainly a lot of people still coming by taking pictures, trying to figure out exactly what happened. We're on the north side of where this accident. So we have a good clear shot of the car that was involved. But past that is where all the emergency personnel south of us, that's where they are right now. And that's where there's a lot of chaos going on. I can't quite tell if they're still being treated on the sidewalks, because we're sort of being blocked at this point. But certainly it's a little bit of a hectic scene over there and in back of us is just a lot of gawkers as you mentioned.
[King:] All right, Brynn, standby for just one second and make your way as you can continue the reporting. I want to recap quickly for our viewers. Just before noon Alison Kosik and some scenes. Well, just before noon, from the Fire Department of New York word that a vehicle struck pedestrians in Times Square. You see the pictures coming in from our affiliate, that the CBS. The car as Brynn just told us is up against a lamp post tilted on its side a bit. First responders are on the scene. Initial reports from the fire department, 13 people struck or injured in this incident. We don't have the exact details yet. There are some reports of fatalities. We do not have that confirmed. Governor Andrew Cuomo we are told is on his way to the scene. This is one of the busiest most visited scenes in Times Square. Sean Spicer the White House Press Secretary just tweeting out at POTUS, that's the President of the United States has been made aware of the situation in Times Square and will continue to receive updates. CNN's Alison Kosik is on the scene. I understand have some new information, Alison.
[Kosik:] Yes, we are learning that once again 13 injuries. One person according to New York Police Department is dead as a result of this accident. And the picture is really amazing when you see that car up on its side like that. Just keep in mind, in the middle of Times Square, there really isn't much of an ability to pick up speed in Times Square because it is such a condensed area where you've got so many people walking and so many cars sort of all together. I mean, if you're really moving at a normal speed, you're barely going, you know, 20 miles an hour when you try to drive-thru that prime area of Times Square. So to get that car up on its side, it really makes you wonder how fast it was going. And then you think about the time of day that this happened, in the middle of the day when it's lunchtime, everybody out walking to go get a bite to eat. It's a beautiful day here in New York City, 90 degrees. And then you see these pictures. Surreal to see on the right there how empty the street is because authorities have blocked off the area so they can investigate. They could help anybody who was injured. And then to see that picture on the left of that red Honda up on its side like that. Once again, John, we don't know about the driver, about where the driver is at this point and what condition the driver could be in. Once again, there are 13 victims. One confirmed dead. And as you said, Governor Andrew Cuomo, the Governor of New York is heading to the scene. John.
[King:] And Alison, just describe for people who maybe can't see further back in some of these pictures we're seeing, you see on the left there the Honda up nearly perched on its side in an angle up against the lamp post, on the right the broader scene from our affiliates of people in the street emergency response vehicles as well. Most of the people you can see in those shots are first responders. What are you seeing in terms of the mix of whether they're fire trucks, ambulance, police vehicles, other emergency response operations and equipment?
[Kosik:] I think all of the above is what you see. I mean, this was called in at 11:50. That's when we had learned. About 11:50 this morning, you're seeing ambulances. You're seeing and police cars. You're seeing that yellow tape blocking off the areas so they can get to the scene and help anybody who was injured. You know, a lot of tourists blocked to this area to see Broadway shows, to go shop and to eat. It's really is a surreal scene to see the streets empty like this and to see all of these emergency vehicles flooding in to help anybody who may have been injured. John.
[King:] And Alison, as you make your way through the scene there, as you get any sense, normally the New York City Police Department and Fire Department are very quick to set up a crime scene and then to offer information. Do you get any sense of where they near that process? And when you're looking at the uniforms, do you see is it state is it all city presence, or do you see state and federal of any state or federal response on the scene as yet?
[Kosik:] I'm actually not at the scene so like, I am not there on the ground Brynn is. I'm here at the studios reporting the pictures that I see here so I can't answer that. But it looks like, you know, considering this happened less than an hour ago and the police have cordoned off this area the way they have. All of the victims are on their way to hospitals. From what we can tell preliminarily the action was quite swift. What we now what we are learning now, some sources are telling us that the car involved, John, was speeding before the collision. This according to a source familiar with the police response. An office of emergency management official is describing the vehicle as, "out of control" before it struck multiple people. And that is really disturbing because once again, it is really hard to pick up speed in the middle of Times Square when you've got so many people walking. People really don't drive. And those who do drive, you don't drive fast. And so it's disconcerting to hear that the car involved in this, John, was speeding before the collision. And keep in mind speed limits in New York City are 20 miles per hour. Just because it's a pedestrian city and so imagine that a car picked up speed right in the middle of possibly, you know, hundreds if not, you know, more than thousands of people walking in a very condensed space. That is disturbing. John.
[King:] Alison, standby of course and my apologies for the unfair question. I wasn't aware of your location.
[Kosik:] No, that's OK. That's OK.
[King:] Now that's the bad on me. All right, so joining us by phone, somebody who understands the response and understands this is area quite well. Harry Houck, the CNN Law Enforcement Analyst and retired detective for the New York City Police joins us by telephone. Harry, I'm hoping you can see some of these pictures as you joined the conversation. Just from what you have heard a vehicle picking up obviously above the speed limit to cause this kind of damage in New York City. Thirteen people injured one fatality. Just take us through where we are here in the city and if you were on the beat today what would be happening?
[Harry Houck, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Well, one interesting about look for when we got to the scene is are there any marks on the ground where he attempted to brake before he hit the civilians on the street. But that would be one of my most important things to take a look here because then if I saw that it was attempting to brake that this it's good chances is probably an accident. Also, you know, the fact that if this was a typical accident and he was not injured and taken to the hospital, I would say the driver
[King:] And you brought into the conversation there's something that we're always reluctant to strike the balance in the sense that Times Square has been a target of attempted terrorism before. And we have seen in recent month around the world the use of vehicles, usually trucks but in France and elsewhere we have seen these incidents. So they would pop into mind when people hear iconic Times Square, vehicle hitting people. It's logical to worry about the risk of terrorism. So, from a detective standpoint, those officers on the scene right now and the other people responding, and I assume there's a federal response as well, what is their checklist essentially to take us through how you decide what is this? Is it a DWI? Is it, you know, just like a speeding check
[Houck:] It's very important to talk to witnesses on the scene. I know, you know, CNN has talked to some witnesses on the scene. Did this vehicle pick up acceleration really quickly or was he driving through Times Square is really tough. It's only, you know, if you can go more than 10 miles an hour going through Times Square, that's a lot. So, you know, that's why I'm sitting here thinking that maybe an accelerator was hit by mistake and the investigation being conducted, I'm sure detectives and accident investigators are talking to the driver right now, this might injured, trying to find out exactly what happened. And I'm sure right now also, you know, it's a terrorism is in the mind of everybody when something like this occurred, they're conducting background investigations on that person already. They ran that vehicle. They know who the driver is. They're checking the driver's background, you know. This is something they're going to have to do anyway in the face of terrorism that, you know, we're facing every day now. So that background investigation has got to be conducted. This is a crime scene here. It's probably going to be Times Square is probably going to be backed up for quite a few hours unless they make a determination quickly that this was some type of an accident. If it was, they'll be able to get that vehicle out of there. Open Times Square up again. Also a lot of the victims that were injured, if they're able to speak, detectives are at the hospital speaking to those people. See what they exactly saw it, did they hear the car rev from 15 miles an hour to all of a sudden speeding through a crowd of people. So, there's many pedestrian areas there that have been blocked off, just best thing to drive. This is a target rich environment in the event somebody wanted to do something like this purposely because of the amount of people out there in Times Square every day and all night. So, you know, they're going to be very careful conducting this investigation to make sure that they've covered all bases here and the fact that this is not a terrorist attack and maybe if that was just purely an accident or some other mistake that the driver had made. But that's why, if it was a regular car accident, he would probably still be on the scene. So that's a very interesting point for me.
[King:] To that point, Harry, I want you to standby. Our Brynn Gingras has now have new information. She's made her way closer to the accident scene. So Brynn, tell us the new information you're getting on this key question. Especially can we answer it yet? Does the New York City Police department believe this is some kind of an accident or did they believe it was some kind of deliberate attack?
[Gingras:] Yes. At this point we're learning from sources that they do believe a law enforcement official that this was some sort of accident that happened. I want to zoom right past me because now you have a good shot of that car that's perched up against the pole. According to law enforcement sources, we're also learning that the driver of this car is in custody and also my colleague [inaudible] said that that driver does have a history of drunk driving. So some of this information now trickling out about the driver of that car. We also know that that 13 people according to FDNY were injured in this crash. That's at minimum. We're still getting numbers about that. But as of now the FDNY reporting 13 people injured and w also have confirm confirmed rather that one person was killed. So, a lot of new information coming out. Some of that preliminarily, as you can imagine, this is a chaotic hectic scene with a lot NYPD, FDNY and medical personnel here trying to just piece everything together. But certainly those are the main points. I do see someone from the NYPD coming toward us so it's possible we'll get more information here at the scene. But John, I do want to point out to you the layout of this area because I was explaining it to you last time I talked to you. This is 7th Avenue. As you see, it is an open road. So the car would have had to be traveling down 7th Avenue and then somehow got into this accident. That's now the car perched up against that light post. As you can see here to my right, this is a whole area that has just recently been transformed into -OK, sorry, taking a moment there because you can hear the police telling us we're going to need to pushback because they need to get the bomb squad to actually get into this area. I'm not sure if that's precautionary thing or if they had some Intel that makes them believe they need to get the bomb squad in there. But we're being told we need to pushback at this point. So I'm going to send it back to you once we get into our new position John at this point.
[King:] Brynn Gingras on the scene. And you hear, Harry Houck stay with us. I just want to ask Harry if you're still on the phone. Obviously, you heard the information that they believe very much this is an accident. Our justice correspondent reporting our justice police reporting the driver has a history of DWI. So, the first instinct is this is this is horrible but it is not terrorism and yet they bring in the bomb squad. That's a routine procedure I would assume or does that raise any alarms?
[Houck:] Well, I think probably they still don't know what they have yet, so the fact they want to check out that vehicle. You know, from the video on scene and I you see nobody around the vehicle loop. I did see two looked like might have been police officers at the crime scene, officers that were checking out the vehicle. So, I think maybe to be safe to bring in the bomb squad and then to make sure, you know, they're going to cover all their bases to make sure there's no bomb inside that vehicle or maybe they have information that maybe from the driver that there is a bottom inside the vehicle. I don't know. It's really, you know, with the environment we're living in today, as police officers, you've got to make sure, even something like this that just might be an accident, and because of the history of these things occurring all over the world, that you bring the bomb squad in just to check it out to make sure that that vehicle is safe before they move that vehicle. And the possibility that no bomb- or there's no bomb in the vehicle. But I don't see people being moved away from that vehicle. You know, from the video I'm seeing and watching on the television is that there are some people standing around watching and we tend to think that if they have a real tip that there was a bomb inside that vehicle, they will clear that entire area.
[King:] That's an excellent point it's more like much more like a routine precaution triple check, quadruple check just to be sure. But it does not seem- not seem at all to be any sense of panic or overconcern at the scene as you see several individuals standing across the car. Harry, I want thank you for your time and expertise. Our correspondents on the scene are going to continue to report. We're going to take a quick break. When we come back we'll bring you any updates of this tragedy. At least one dead 13 injured, we are the vehicle accident in the heart of Times Square at lunch hour, New York City. Also big news here in Washington the fallout from the Justice Department decision to name a special prosecutor to take over the Russia election meddling investigation. Stay with us.

[Vause:] Thanks for staying with us. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.
[Sesay:] And I'm Isha Sesay. The headlines this hour.
[Vause:] At one point the biggest of the fires was destroying an acre of land every second, to make that point that's almost the size of a football field going up in flames every second.
[Sesay:] Hundreds of homes and buildings have been chury, including a hospital, have all been destroyed. That city will be under curfew in less than an hour. Our own CNN's Sara Sidner was there.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] You hear the numbers, you're talking about tens of thousands of acres burned. You're talking about more than 96 square miles that have been burned. But then you see the reality, the thing that hurts when the residents have to come back into an area like this. This was a home. We ourselves watched it burn to the ground after embers came flying over. You look up at those hills, flying over from there on to this home. And it just goes up like a matchbox. We have seen that time and time again, you are seeing fires all over this city here in Ventura. This is where the largest of four fires were burning throughout the day. Firefighters having a very difficult time getting it contained because of the Santa Ana winds that we normally see in October but that are here now in an unusual way, going very fast, at some points upwards of 70 miles an hour, making it very difficult to get in front of the fire. Plus, it's extremely dry and that is why, for hours and hours, this particular home and many others are just smoldering. You see them smoldering there, the firefighters have been out here for much of the day, coming back and forth, trying to put out those small fires that keep popping up. But so has the neighbor, who is terrified that the fire will jump over this wall just here and land on his home. So he has spent time with his own hose coming over and trying to make sure he can wet down the area as much as possible. He's been calling over firefighters to say, hey, it's burning again. This is a dangerous situation and everyone in this neighborhood is fearful that their home could be next. It has been a very rough time here in Ventura for those who live in and around this neighborhood Sara Sidner, CNN, Ventura, California.
[Sesay:] You see it's still smoldering behind her there.
[Vause:] It's incredible. The smoke is visible from everywhere. A short time ago one of the fires jumped the 101 Freeway, which is causing all sorts of problems.
[Sesay:] It is moving very quickly. We want to turn now to a stinging conclusion about the Manchester terror attack, an official report suggests the tragedy might have been averted if, quote, "the cards had fallen differently." The findings indicate security services didn't pursue relevant intelligence about the attacker, Salman Abedi, because its significance was not fully appreciated at the time.
[Vause:] The report didn't reveal what the intelligence actually was. Abedi killed 22 people at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester last year. To Brexit negotiations now. The chaotic day for the British prime minister, Theresa May, she was in Brussels to showcase the U.K.'s progress with the talks. But everything hit a big roadblock on Tuesday. That roadblock was the Irish border. Bianca Nobilo has more on the pressure Ms. May is now facing on multiple fronts.
[Bianca Nobilo, Cnn Correspondent:] Another day and more turmoil and delays to the Brexit negotiations. Ireland remains the biggest sticking point and we learned today that the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party, Arlene Foster, only found out the exact wording of the Brexit draft deal yesterday after pushing to see it for five weeks. It's Foster's and the DUP's resistance to the prime minister's draft deal for Northern Ireland
[Anna Soubry, British Conservative Mp:] The British people are fed up to the back teeth with all of this. They want a solution. Now it may be that regulatory alignment is the solution. But if it's good enough for Northern Ireland, it's good enough for the rest of the country.
[Nobilo:] How the prime minister will reconcile all of these opposing forces on the Brexit negotiations remains to be seen. But Theresa May and David Davis maintain that progress on to phase two is possible by the end of this week Bianca Nobilo, CNN, London.
[Sesay:] A quick break here and then fears of a humanitarian crisis are intensifying with the latest instability in Yemen. We'll talk with a native official in the capital, Sanaa.

[Church:] Hello, everyone. Welcome back to our viewers here in the United States and of course, all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church. Let's update you now on the main stories we've been following this hour. The borders of Catalan independence are criticizing the Spanish King's visit to Barcelona. Protesters clash with Catalan police Sunday asking Felipe attended a welcome dinner for the 2018 Mobile World Congress. The King is a vocal critic of the independence movement. U.S. is again warning any dialogue with North Korea must leave the regime to give up its nuclear weapons as the Winter Olympics came to an end. South Korea renounced that the North is willing to hold talks with the U.S. but there's no indication Pyongyang would agree to negotiate its nuclear program. Florida's governor is ordering an investigation into the response to the deadly high school shooting in Parkland on February 14th. An armed deputy working as the school resource officer never went inside the building where the gunman was firing at students. There are also reports three other sheriff deputies did not go into the school. And then the wake of the school shooting. A number of Florida lawmakers are urging the governor to suspend the Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel. State Representative Bill Hager spoke with CNN's Fredricka Whitfield.
[Rep. Bill Hager , Florida:] Clearly a series of failures at multiple levels. I've identified the sheriff's office probably the most grievous of fault at least based on the reported facts as we can understand so far lies there.
[Church:] The Speaker of the Florida House also tweeted that 73 of his Republican colleagues support the sheriff's suspension. Well, classes at the South Florida High School where the 17 students and teachers died will resume on Wednesday. On Sunday, students returned to the school for an open house and for many, it's the first time they've been back there since the terrifying attack. CNN's Kaylee Hartung was there to see how they're coping.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Reporter:] In the lead-up to Sunday's open house, many students and teachers told me they were feeling anxious. They didn't know how they would feel or react to being back on Stoneman Douglas' campus, but after an afternoon in which many students were reunited with their classmates and teachers for the first time since February 14th and have the opportunity to reclaim their belongings like backpacks, laptops, phones and wallets. Of course it was difficult for some but many telling me there was more happiness then sadness among them. Listen to 10th grader Tanzil Philip described the evolution of his emotion.
[Tanzil Philip, Stoneman Douglas High School Student:] It was it was really scary, I didn't know how I was going to feel when I when I went and I saw the fence around the freshman building. I just and all the windows recovered, I was just like I just I just can't believe something like this happened. And then we all decided to meet in our in our theater room where I was and we just gave each other hugs and I'm just happy a lot of my friends decided to show up because without them I wouldn't have been able to do it.
[Hartung:] When classes resume on Wednesday, teachers telling me it will not be class as usual, it will take a while before academics are the focus in the classroom. Superintendent of this school district telling us that he wants to be as accommodating and as flexible as possible to meet the individual needs of these student and teacher. This could mean counselors in classroom if requested or service dogs perhaps even stress reductions exercises like yoga. The healing process here at Stoneman Douglas is underway but we know there is a long road ahead. Kaylee Hartun, CNN, Parkland, Florida.
[Church:] This certainly is. All right. We do want to turn to the weather now and parts of the central U.S. dealing with heavy flooding and tornadoes and thunderstorms have caused severe damage in the south. Meteorologist Ivan Cabrera joins us now to cover all of that. A lot of really severe incidents there weather wise.
[Ivan Cabrera, Cnn Meteorologist:] No question about it, Rosemary. Good to see you. And in fact, over the weekend, our first major severe weather outbreak again that we tornadic storms as a result just the beginning of course and what typically is a season goes in this direction here. The time we get into May and June, that's when we peak as far as a tornado averages by month but in February, they only average about 30 you don't need quantity to get them to be deadly. That's exactly what happened over the weekend. This was the line that spanned all those deadly tornadoes. We had 12 tornado reports, National Weather Service has been out there of course surveying the damage and we have the Fujita scale which is the damage scale, and they look at the damage and basically by that determine what kind of winds rolled to the region and some of these again were deadly. I want to focus in on Clarksville, Tennessee as we're going to need
[U.s. Church:] Yes, most definitely. Ivan, thanks so much and we'll chat again next hour. I appreciate that. Let's take a commercial break. We'll have more for you when we return.

[Rosemary Church, Cnn:] We're starting another hour of news for you. Hello, everyone. Welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. We appreciate it. I'm Natalie Allen. And this is CNN Newsroom. And what a day it could be for Theresa May. She is still standing as Britain's prime minister but her political future is shaky because of the Brexit deal she negotiated with the European Union. Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab was the first casualty. He was one of six officials in May's government to resign on Thursday, just hours after she had narrowly secured her cabinet's approval of a draft Brexit agreement. But details inside the massive document have proven to be hugely unpopular with just about everyone on every side of the Brexit issue. Now there are calls in parliament of no confidence for members of her own party. Mrs. May refused to back down as she faced reporters. Listen.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] Leadership is about taking the right decisions not the easy ones. As Prime Minister, my job is to bring back a deal that delivers on the votes of the British people that does that by ending free movement. All the things I raised in my statement. Ending free movement, insuring we're not sending vast on your sums to the E.U. any year any longer. And ending the jurisdiction of the European court of justice, but also protects jobs and protect people's livelihood and protects our security, protects the union of the United Kingdom. I believe that this is a deal which does deliver that, which is in the national interest. And am I going to see this through? Yes.
[Allen:] She says she is, but will she? CNN's Nina Dos Santos is outside the House of Commons there for us this morning, and Phil Black is outside 10 Downing Street covering the drama for us in London. Phil, let's start with you, because Theresa May surely sounds like she's going to hang in there until the finish. The question is, will she? Her position seems very precarious.
[Phil Black, Cnn Correspondent:] Indeed, Natalie. So, her position, you heard it there, it's pretty clear. She's going to see it through. She believes she's acting in the national interest. She believes with every fiber of her being she says that this withdrawal agreement is the way to go. So, her message to her party is you're going to have to carry me out of this place. Now whether or not that happens, whether or not there's any enthusiasm for that sort of move within the conservative party or how great that enthusiasm is, I should say, we could find out today if there are any more high-level cabinet resignations that would undoubtedly further weaken the prime minister. The other threat comes to her from the back benches. We saw yesterday a swelling rebellion among back bench M.P.'s who are now openly calling for the prime minister to be replaced. Now for that procedure to be followed, 50 percent of party M.P.'s have to write a letter to their organizing committee question a vote of no confidence in the prime minister. That's 48 letters. If that happens, we will find out pretty quickly. And then once that happened, it's very likely that a vote could proceed soon after and then Theresa May will certainly be fighting for her political life. She's made it clear she wants to stay. But it is still possible that inevitably we could come to a position where it is no longer her choice. Natalie?
[Allen:] All right, Phil, thanks very much. She is fighting for her own political life right now on the radio. We're going to take a portion of her show to see what she is saying about Brexit. Let's listen.
[May:] Our country will be taken here in the U.K. and not by Brussels. And that's exactly what the deal I've negotiated delivers. So, we will see an end to free movement. I think this is absolutely crucial. You mentioned there that in the backstop arrangement, which I come on to in a minute. There would there be free movement? No. There wouldn't actually. There's no obligation in relation to free movement in the backstop. And when we when we insure that we get the future relationship in place with the E.U. free movement will end once and for all. And I know that's a really important matter for a lot of people.
[Nick Ferrari, Radio Host, Lbc:] That's a big win, though. Sorry to interrupt on you. You say, when you get that deal, there's no guarantee when that might be.
[May:] Well, all everything in the deal is about working really hard and doing our best to make sure that's there by the first of January 2021. What we've done is we're leaving next month, that's the first thing to say-
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] to all your listeners. We're leaving the European Union on 29th of March, 2019. But then going to be a period of time up to the end of December 2020 for businesses to be adjusting to what the new relationship we're going to have with the E.U. will be.
[Ferrari:] But what, Mrs. May, what can you achieve in 21 months that you've not been able to achieve in two years?
[May:] Well, because those 21 months will be based on what we've part of what we've decided and what we've agreed in those years. Because although there's you know, Daniel, I recognized because you particularly reference the backstop. And I know there's a lot of concern about the backstop, and I fully recognized that. And I have some of those concerns myself. But obviously alongside that, what's called the withdrawal agreement acts as part of that is the future relationship, that the document that says here's the basis on which we're going to continue to cooperate with the European Union on things like working together to deal with organized crime and terrorism. Here's the way in which we're going to be able to continue to trade with trade with the European Union in the future. And it will be the case in that future relationship that we will have parliament will have the ability to decide who comes into our country and how we spend our money so we can spend the money with sending to the E.U. today on RHS and other priorities and determine our laws.
[Ferrari:] Daniel, thank you for that. I want to get the opportunity to as many people as possible. Let I want you probably want him to come back but I must move on. Michael and Derry, appropriately enough. Michael, you're on the radio through to the prime minister. Go ahead.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes. Morning, Mick. Good morning, Prime Minister.
[Ferrari:] Good morning, sir.
[May:] Good morning.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm from the north. And all I say when we voted in the majority to remain, myself included, I actually see that, Prime Minister, would be of a huge benefit to the region. However, can the prime minister give any assurance to the people of the north that the stop being negotiated and wouldn't be stopped by her confidence and supply [Ph] partners within the DUP?
[May:] Well, thanks very much, Michael. Because I think one of the things we've been trying to do is to ensure that people living in Northern Ireland, businesses in Northern Ireland can carry on as they do today and won't see any problems arising as a result of us leaving the E.U. in relation to the border with Ireland. But when this deal is finalized and there's a meeting a week on Sunday with the E.U. cancel, when this deal is finalized and comes back to parliament, I hope every single member of parliament is going to look at the need to ensure that we deliver on the referendum, deliver on the result of the referendum for the British people. And think about the impact on our overall national interest, on our economy, and also on the jobs of their constituents. And you know, I'm doing my job. I'm doing, bringing back what I believe to be the best deal for Britain and M.P.'s will then do their job and thinking about the impact on their constituents.
[Ferrari:] But Northern Ireland will be treated differently, won't they, that's different from the rest of the United Kingdom as part of this deal?
[May:] Well, no. You see, this is, if I can in one sense, can I give an explanation which may seem lengthy.
[Ferrari:] Please.
[May:] There's two bits to the deal. This is this is very crucial. One bit of it is this treaty that is about how we leave the European Union. This is and this is things like, if you're a business today and you got a contract with the European with a country in the European Union that is going to extend beyond the date that we leave, what happens to your contract?
[Ferrari:] Right.
[May:] What happens to that business? So, things like that have to be looked at. And that's part of that withdrawal agreement.
[Ferrari:] But is it true-
[May:] But separately.
[Ferrari:] that you can impose a different VAT rate on Northern Ireland as [Inaudible] yesterday?
[May:] No. This is not about the decisions about VAT, the we will be responsible.
[Ferrari:] During the transition period.
[May:] During well, during the question people have asked and this is where it gets slightly more complex, but the question people have asked about what's called this backstop arrangement.
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] Now the point of the backstop is to say that even if we can't get a future relationship in you've asked me what date.
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] By the beginning of 2021, is there's a short period of time where we can't move to that future relationship, we need to make sure that Northern Ireland's border is still fully open with Ireland.
[Ferrari:] Yes. Which means-
[May:] And that's what the backstop is about.
[Ferrari:] Yes, so it is effectively still and more under the E.U.'s control than it is the
[U.k. May:] It will be well, what we've negotiated is to make sure there's no customs border down the Irish Sea which is absolutely crucial to me, that we didn't have Northern Ireland be separated off on that sense.
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] They would be enjoying keeping some regulations-
[Ferrari:] yes.
[May:] the same as with the
[E.u. Ferrari:] But if I remind you Lancaster house last year, Prime Minister, you said this would strengthen the union.
[May:] Yes.
[Ferrari:] This doesn't seem to be strengthening the United Kingdom.
[May:] Well, we are maintaining the integrity of United Kingdom, Nick. Look, what the E.U. wanted, what the E.U. wanted was effectively to separate Northern Ireland out away from the rest of the U.K. We said no.
[Ferrari:] They wanted a hard border.
[May:] They wanted, effectively they wanted customs border down the Irish sea.
[Ferrari:] That's what they said.
[May:] Well, that's what they said. They said that back in February. We said no immediately. We've been saying no ever since. And in October they finally said, OK, we accept we have to do it in a different way. So, we've now got it being done in a different way. But the point-
[Ferrari:] And this is the biggest point of intransigent did you see?
[May:] Well, no. There been quite a few. There been quite lot of areas. I know one of the things, you know, Daniel when he rang up-
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] he spoke about sovereignty. One of the key things that a lot of people worried about is this European court business, you know. How much can the European court do to the U.K. once they're out? The answer is we will no longer be under the jurisdiction of the European court.
[Ferrari:] All right. We move on. Just lastly, it's been reported that sources close to Arlene Foster, [Inaudible] leader of the DUP says that they're ready to withdraw support unless there's a new prime minister. Are you aware of this?
[May:] I'm aware of a lot of things that are written and rumors, Nick. Look-
[Ferrari:] is it true, have you had a rather testy exchange with Arlene Foster?
[May:] No. I haven't had a testy exchange with Arlene on that. We've had exchanges with the DUP.
[Ferrari:] You still enjoy her support, the support of her party?
[May:] On Northern we have had exchanges with the DUP about Northern the issue in relation to Northern Ireland. They've raised some questions with us, they've raised some concerns with us. And yes, we're looking at those. So, one issue is what can we do in the U.K. ourselves? Nothing to do with the deal with the E.U. What can we do in the U.K. to help to reassure not just the DUP but the people of Northern Ireland.
[Ferrari:] And so, you still got her support, the DUP support.
[May:] We've yes, we're still working with the
[Dup. Ferrari:] And they'll vote for this deal do you think?
[May:] Well, we will see how every member of parliament is going to vote for this deal.
[Ferrari:] But you're confident they'll vote for it?
[May:] I am confident that members of parliament when they see this deal when it comes back-
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] when they look at it-
[Ferrari:] Yes.
[May:] they will be saying to themselves-
[Ferrari:] Including the DUP. Sorry to stress this point, the DUP will be voting with you.
[May:] Look, the I when this vote comes back, every individual member of parliament will decide how they vote. Whether they are member of the DUP, conservative labour or parties within the House of Commons. My job is to persuade, you know, first and foremost, my my conservative benches, those who are working with us, the DUP are working with us obviously in confidence and supply. But I want to say, be able to say to all parliamentarians every M.P. I believe this is, truly believes this is the best deal for Britain.
[Ferrari:] Julie [Inaudible]. Julie, you're through to the prime minister, go ahead.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi, Nick and Prime Minister.
[May:] Hello.
[Unidentified Female:] Thank you for talking. I'm glad you are talking to the people about this now. I just need to ask, I'm disabled, I'm bedridden and I take medicines and need appliances to keep me alive so I can be with my family. I just would like to ask about the provision in the draft agreement makes to guarantee access to medicines in the future and in the future relationship. How long will people have to worry and whether they're going to be getting their medicines?
[May:] Well, Julie, you've raised a really important point. And I think, you know, this is something that people have asked both you know, if we weren't going to get a deal what would happen. And the Department of Health is making sure that medicines will continue to be available in that in that circumstance.
[Ferrari:] Is that good stock piling, prime minister.
[May:] It's making proper contingency, Nick, to make sure that if there's a problem, if there are any problems at the border-
[Ferrari:] Right.
[May:] that medicines can still get through and that they're available for people. But the next issue which you've absolutely rightly raised, Julie, is about the whole question of what happens in the future. And what we're doing is within the agreement, we want we're looking at the relationship we have with something called the European medicine agency and this is about making sure that drugs are will still be in and medicines will still be available in the U.K. And it is by the process, you know, if new drugs come on board, how do we insure that those drugs are available as easily in the U.K. as they will be elsewhere in Europe.
[Ferrari:] In the cabinet meeting, when the Matt Hancock, the health secretary said in a case of a no deal scenario, he couldn't guarantee no one would die as a result of the deal of that no deal. How did you react?
[May:] Well, first of all, I don't normally talk about what said-
[Allen:] British prime minister, the embattled prime minister taking her case for Brexit straight to the people this morning there in London on a live radio show. We have with us to talk about it, what could happen and transpire on this day. CNN's Nina Dos Santos outside the House of Commons. Phil Black is outside 10 Downing Street. I get to you, Nina in just a moment. I want to go back to Phil, to you first. Is this unprecedented or is this something that's kind of typical with this prime minister to go on a radio show like this and kind of plead her case straight to the people?
[Black:] So, what you heard there was the prime minister taking questions from people across the country. And her, continuing her effort to explain to the country why she believes that this is the best pragmatic way forward and why she believes her vision for Brexit as it's been negotiated is the best option for the country. Now, I think it was expected at this time. Once the final withdrawal agreement was revealed, that yes, she would essentially go on something of a tour, if you like, to sell it. Not just to the politicians here in Westminster, but to people across the country. And to explain to them why she believes that after this long negotiation process, although the deal is not perfect, it's not precisely what she wanted. It is the best end result of those negotiations from her point of view and why she thinks it is the better way forward. And also, why she believes and she said this over the last 24 hours or so, that there simply is no better option. You heard her there talking about the backstop, the Irish backstop. That is at the core of much of the discontent that we've been talking about over the last day or so. It has led to people resigning from cabinet, it has led to people in her own party calling for her to go. And it is highly technical. She may have notice she was struggling to explain it herself there. Because it is about what happens at the end of what's known as the transition period. So, Britain leaves the E.U. at the end of next March. That's a given as the prime minister said. We then enter a transition period to try and determine what the future relationship will be. That's 21 months long. At the end of that 21-month process, the hope is that there will be a new trade and agreement, something that really clearly defines what the future relationship will be between the U.K. and the E.U. but if there isn't, and if they decide not to extend that transition period, then that's when the backstop kicks in. It's an insurance policy that is designed to ensure that there will never be a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. Northern Ireland part of the U.K. and the Irish Republic will still be part of the E.U. It will be the one land border between the U.K. and the European Union. And the reason why there is so much concern about that is because of the violence that gripped that region for decades. The concern is that if you install a hard border there, then that undermines the fragile peace that exists there and has been taking root for some years now ever since the Good Friday agreement. But the concern from the Brexit purists is that backstop simply leaves the U.K. tied too closely to Europe that it abdicates powers and sovereignty to a degree that they are simply not prepare to accept. And that is why Theresa May's political future is in doubt today. Natalie?
[Allen:] All right, Phil. Let's cross over to Nina Dos Santos. Speaking of her political future, she's outside the House of Commons which could decide that. She just said on that radio show, Nina, I believe this is the best thing for Britain and the M.P.'s will agree with me. Well, we'll see.
[Nina Dos Santos, Cnn Corresppondent:] Well, she's a bit more evasive than that. Actually, if you read the tea leaves of what she was saying, especially when she was asked, Natalie, about whether she could count upon the support of the DUP that northern Irish party that very much wants to stay part of the U.K.'s unionist. Vehemently opposed to any change in legislation that is still referred to, could give more power to Brussels, more power to the Republic of Ireland which is inside the E.U. and south of its border rather than the U.K. Effectively, they do not want any different type of legislation that could see them cleave away from the U.K. because they believe that could be the first stretch towards eventually at some point in the future, potentially even a unified Ireland which of course, would spark the violence that we saw so many years ago that nobody wants to return to. And there are reports in some of the conservative pro-Brexit newspapers that the prime minister has already lost the support of the DUP. She was asked repeatedly on that radio show as you could hear there, whether or not she still has the support of the DUP. Eventually, she said yes, and then of course, the host said, will they vote with you, can you count on their 10 votes that you so badly need needed? And she was more evasive about that point. And that brings me to the parliamentary arithmetic here. It is looking increasingly unlikely that at this point Theresa May has yet managed to secure the support of members of the opposition party about 50-odd pro-Brexit, fiercely pro-Brexit M.P.'s who said they're going to vote down her deal in parliament. That leaves her without anywhere near the majority that she needs to get this through. She needs 320 votes to get it through. She only has 350 which isn't a majority at the moment for her whole party after calling an ill-fated general election in 2017, she could lose 10 votes from the DUP. She can't necessarily count on labor support either. So that's the real concern here about the parliamentary arithmetic and as Phil was pointing out before earlier in the show, she also has to deal with the arithmetic in terms of the potential for a leadership challenge within her own party. If 48 members of her own party write to specific back bench committee saying they have no confidence in the prime minister, she well, may well, not be the person to try and push this through the house. And her deal could fall apart.
[Allen:] We'll be watching it hour by hour on this day. Nina Dos Santos for us and Phil Black. Thank you both so much. And we'll be right back with more news right after this.

[Anderson:] Welcome back. Quick reminder of our top story this hour. The U.S. President says he accepts his own country's intelligence on Russian election meddling sort of and he misspoke he says, during his press conference with Vladimir Putin, sort of, he says. And that clarification satisfied critics, or sort of not. Today President Trump continues to defend his performance in Helsinki tweeting that it was loved by many people at the higher ends of intelligence. And those complaining are haters who wanted to see a boxing match. To the thorn in Theresa May's side now that is Brexit. Earlier today the British Prime Minister faced her last question time before the summer break. And she was attacked by both Labour and members of her own Conservative Party about her plans to get out of the EU.
[Andrea Jenkyns, Conservative Member Of Parliament:] Did the prime minister inform the house at what point it was decided that Brexit means remain?
[John Berow, Speaker Of The House Of Commons:] Prime minister.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] Can I say to honorable friend. At absolutely no point because Brexit continues to mean Brexit. And I could say to my honorable friend, I know that she wants us to talk about the positives of Brexit and I agree with her. I think what we need is a solution that is going to work for the United Kingdom and sure we leave the European Union and embrace that bright future that we both agree.
[Bianca Nobilo, Cnn Westminster:] Well, Becky, we didn't hear the starting gun being fired, but I think it's a little more complicated than that. So, on the surface Boris Johnson by his standards delivered an incredibly measured speech. He's a huge fan of rhetorical flourish and over-the-top language. He studied rhetoric and he really indulges in it most of the time when he speaks. And he's got a reputation for not taking himself too seriously. There are plenty of incidences for when he was London mayor that come to mind. But today the speech was very measured. As you mentioned he didn't attack the Prime Minister personally. In fact, he praised her courage and her resilience. But he did lay into her Brexit strategy. Basically, saying that she reneged of the promises of her Lancaster House speech. Which set out a fairly hard Brexit. But he did say Brexit could be salvaged. Let's take a listen.
[Boris Johnson, Former British Foreign Secretary:] It is not too late to save Brexit. We have time in these negotiations. We have changed tack once and we can change again. The problem is not that we failed to make the case for a free trade agreement of the kind spelled out in Lancaster House, we haven't even tried.
[Nobilo:] That was his main point, that there was still cause for optimism. That enough of an attempt hadn't been made to steer Britain down the course to a hard Brexit where it would be fully independent. Now to come back to a question, Becky, it didn't sound like a leadership bid. As we said, no personal attacks against the Prime Minister. It was very calm and controlled but that is precisely why I think it is actually the beginning of an oblique leadership campaign. Because the chief criticism of Boris Johnson is always levered when he's mentioned as a possible leader of the Conservative Party, is the fact that he's not a serious enough contender. He doesn't have the statesman-ly quality. He isn't considered, he isn't cautious enough. Well, this was one of the first speeches that we've heard of his where he seemed to prove that he was, in fact, all of those things. So, watch this space, Becky. I really think precisely the fact that it didn't seem like a leadership bid is exactly why it might be.
[Anderson:] Very good point. Bianca, thank you. All this Brexit unrest comes in the wake of an explosive finding from the U.K. Electoral Commission that the Vote Leave campaign violated election laws. In the final weeks of June of 2016, Vote Leave was running up against its spending limit so according to the commission it transferred more than 600,000 pounds, just under $1 million to a small organization called BeLeave. Much of that money ended up going to a Canadian data analytics firm. One major reasons this scheme was discovered was a man named Shahmir Sanni. He was a volunteer for both Vote Leave and BeLeave. He knew about the money being funneled between the groups and he blew the whistle on it. He joins me live from our London bureau. Briefly describe why you got involved in the first place, your role and why you blew the whistle.
[Shahmir Sanni, Vote Leave Whistleblower:] Well, I started off the Vote Leave as a volunteer. And then within Vote Leave they had a multitude of outreach groups which were created to target specific demographics to increase the chances of people voting leave, standard campaign practice and BeLeave was one of them. So, I started volunteering for Vote Leave within Vote Leave for BeLeave. By the end of the campaign BeLeave had become a separate through the advice of lawyers and the senior staff, two volunteers, Darren Grins and myself, set up BeLeave as a separate organization. And after that we received 625,000 pounds to give directly to AIQ. And obviously at the time we didn't know that it was illegal because we were being advised by lawyers. It was only through my own self-reflection that I came to terms with the fact that actually this went against electoral law and I came forward.
[Anderson:] All right, I know you're raising money on the internet to help fund your lawsuit against Prime Minister May's government. I want you to explain why. I know that so far, you've raised more than 36,000 pounds via crowd funding for your lawsuit. What do you hope that that will prove? I want to talk about Brexit and the outcome or the fallout from your whistleblowing shortly. We just want you to answer that first question if you will.
[Sanni:] Well, when I came forward Number Ten released the press release saying that I had essentially come forward with the information because I was a bitter boyfriend of one of the political advisors to the Prime Minister. In fact, the political adviser wasn't the only person that I told the electoral commission and authorities about. It was a number of people. Including Vote Leave as an entire organization. Now, Number Ten used my sexuality as a weapon to intimidate and silence me and deter the story. And they called my allegations just that, allegations. But now they've been proven by the electoral commission to be fact. And the reason why it's important is because it's this entire issue goes to the heart of Number Ten. Boris Johnson, for example, called my allegations ludicrous and said that Vote Leave had acted totally legally and now we know that that's entirely not true. So, we really need to be asking questions as to how much did Number Ten know? How much did Boris know? And how much did cabinet ministers that were involved with Vote Leave know about this, the breaking of the law.
[Anderson:] I mean, some people will say, well, we're talking about less than $1 million, 700,000 quid, but it broke the law and that is what the electoral commission has deemed. Now a political cartoon from the esteemed "Times" newspaper shows Theresa May being poked and prodded towards a second referendum and a very risky looking path there. Do you want to provoke that, another vote, another referendum? Because it would be extremely difficult to prove that this over spend by the leave campaign actually tipped the vote in favor of Brexit. So, I wonder if you are provoking the idea of a new referendum, where would that get Britain?
[Sanni:] Well, one, it doesn't matter whether it would have tipped the referendum this way or the other. All we know is that it could have gone the other way if the law had not been broken. Secondly, this isn't another referendum. This is a first referendum without the breaking of the law. That any argument against if we go through with Brexit, I mean I find it surreal that there are MPs arguing for this current Brexit process when we know the first referendum was totally based on the breaking of the law. That's not how democracy works. In this country democracy is based on following the law. Our campaigns and our elections are based on following the law. That is the core and foundation of democracy. And if our referendum was not based on the law, then it is not a democratic referendum.
[Anderson:] We don't normally do this as Brits. We don't normally ask people how they vote but given that you were campaigning for the U.K. to leave the EU, I have to assume you would have vote leave the first time.
[Sanni:] Yes.
[Anderson:] Would you vote to remain?
[Sanni:] No.
[Anderson:] Would there or should there be another referendum?
[Sanni:] No. Because the whole point of why I've done this is because I voted leave because I believe in sovereignty and democracy. It's why many people voted leave. They voted leave because they wanted to have their own rules. They wanted to take control. But the facts of the matter are that this government, including cabinet ministers and former cabinet ministers like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Priti Patel, among many others are complicit in referendum that broke the law. So, there's really no question about it. You're either for the law or you're for what? Like breaking the law.
[Anderson:] Shahmir, thank you for coming on. Shahmir Sanni with us on the show today. That's an important story and one that we should not forget within the context, the wider context of this whole Brexit debate that is going on and paralyzing British politics at present. British people I'm sure are completely fed up with it. Live from Abu Dhabi, this is CONNECT THE WORLD. Coming up, the European Union has slapped Google with a massive fine. Find out why the search engine is in hot water. That's next.

[Rep. Carlos Curbelo , Wanted U.s. To Stay In Paris Climate Pact:] And we also understand that pollution and CO2 emissions don't respect national and even continental boundaries. What happens in India, what happens in China, has an impact on all of us. So, I'm very disappointed that we've withdrawn we have left our seat at the table vacant, that we have yielded leadership to countries like China, like Russia. I really hope this administration reconsiders and adopts a responsible environmental climate policy that promotes American innovation, job growth in this country, the jobs of the future, the jobs that young people who are graduating from college need. So, down here in South Florida, I know there is a lot of disappointment today as a result of this decision.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Why are so many Republicans so many of your Republican colleagues not onboard with what you're talking about? Some of them don't seem to some of them seem to think it's environment versus jobs. We heard that from the president today. Some of them seem to think that climate change is not a problem.
[Curbelo:] Jake, regrettably, this issue has been politicized. The polarization is out of control. I really think it dates back to when former Vice President Gore adopted this cause. Back then, a lot of Republicans just assumed that they must be against whatever Mr. Gore was discussing at the time. I don't blame him for having adopted the cause. But I really wish he would have done it with a fellow Republican. That is what we are trying to do in the Congress right now. My colleague from up the road here, Congressman Ted Deutch, who's a Democrat, and myself, a Republican, we are building a caucus in the House of Representatives. We have 40 members already, 20 Republicans, 20 Democrats. That's the rule. You can only join if you come in with a member of the opposing party. And we're all making the statement that this issue matters to us. That we understand that our economy depends on a healthy environment and that we are going to fight for sound, reasonable pro-growth environmental policies in the Congress. If the administration doesn't want to lead on this issue, the Congress must and we're trying to build an environment in the Congress that will allow for that.
[Tapper:] Twenty-two Republican senators wrote a letter to President Trump asking for him to take a break to withdraw from the Paris deal. They argued that staying in it puts the U.S. at risk for significant litigation if the U.S. does not meet certain goals. What is your response to that? A lot of Republicans making that argument that the withdrawal actually will help avert legal trouble for power companies and even for the U.S. government?
[Curbelo:] Jake, I'm not saying the Paris agreement was perfect. But I think if we wanted to change it if we wanted to update it, if we wanted stronger protections for our country, we should have stayed at the table. It's very difficult to modify an agreement and organization from the outside. When you're on the inside, you can really work with the partners and make progress. And we've kind of seen that on NATO where the president has put some pressure, not using the style that I would use on some of our allies there and some of those countries have agreed to invest more in defense budgets. It's good. But it's really hard to have an impact from the outside. And again, we yielded leadership in this area to the Chinese, to the Russians and others. And we've also put our country on a list together with Bashar al Assad in Syria, Daniel Ortega's Nicaragua. That's not the kind of list I want to be on.
[Tapper:] Congressman Carlos Curbelo, thank you so much for your time. We appreciate it, sir.
[Curbelo:] Thank you, Jake.
[Tapper:] Let's stick with our panel right now. He is we should point out even though he is a Republican in the majority in the House, he is in the minority in taking this issue in his party as seriously as he does.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] He is in the minority. But I think that the fact that he was making the arguments speaks to a very real part of the Republican Party and a concern among those who agree with the congressman, that there is a generational problem for the party, and that and that actually speaks to some of the Trump coalition in general. But specifically with the Republican Party, that this kind of withdrawal for younger people who are thinking maybe for economic reasons or others that they have a home in the Republican Party who think that this is anathema. Why would a Republican president pull out of this agreement? And that the concern is that this kind of thing will hurt Republicans in keeping young people and recruiting young people into the party. And that this could be I interviewed Lindsey Graham when I was filling in for you on Sunday, who talked about that. I mean, he was sort of a lone voice in the presidential race when he was running, saying that the Republicans need to take climate change more seriously. But part of the reason why he and others say that is because of sort of the broad question of where is and what is this Republican Party standing for? And concern that it's going the wrong way.
[Chris Cillizza. Cnn Politics Reporter And Editor-at-large:] And two things. One, Lindsey Graham was a nonfactor in the presidential raise for exactly the point Dana is making.
[Bash:] Right. No, you're right.
[Cillizza:] Because there is the congressman mentioned it. There is a huge amount of tribalism that exists. You tell me if you're you meet someone from the street and I ask, are you Republican or Democrat, I can tell what you think on every single issue down the line without there will be almost never any overlap which was not the case either in our Congress if or in our country forever. We've had partisanship before not. We've had not it like this. Donald Trump drives it even more. I do think the this is Donald Trump's vision of the country, vision of the world, vision for where the Republican Party should be, which is different than the vision of the Republican Party that, for example, a Paul Ryan had. Now, we know this on domestic issues but this is different on foreign policy as well. It's different than the vision of Lindsey Graham. It's different than the vision of Ben Sasse. Ben Sasse was asked today yesterday, Jake, in one word, describe the Republican Party. He used two but it's telling question mark. Donald Trump is not of the Republican Party. This was a hostile takeover in every regard. He is now remaking the party in his own image. This is not sort of an obvious flow, evolutionally of the party, as Bill Clinton was sort of came out of the Carter years. This is not that. This is something different than that. I don't know it seems like most Republican members of Congress are not like the congressman to say you know what I disagree here. Most are not Lindsey Graham or Ben Sasse. Most are willing to say the base likes Donald Trump, I don't really want Donald Trump picking on me, individually, and I'm willing to go along to get along. I don't know what the effects of that will be politically, philosophically, morally for the party as we go into the future. We'll see. The first mark will really be the 2018 election, what do the American people make of this? Is this is the Donald Trump Republican Party not Donald Trump the Donald Trump Republican Party, Trumpism, what people want?
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] And what I think will be interesting to watch tomorrow, the job numbers will be interesting that will come out. You talked about whether or not Trump can make good on all these promises. We'll see what the numbers say tomorrow. It will be interesting to see what business does. And they are clearly at odds with this president, a lot of businesses are, which is odd to say that for Republican administration be odds at odds with business.
[Cillizza:] Particularly this one.
[Henderson:] Exactly.
[Cillizza:] That was his whole pitch.
[Henderson:] Exactly. And he is a businessman, but he doesn't talk about innovation, right? He is some ways very backward looking businessman, talking about coal. I mean, it's almost like somebody talking let's build book stores. So
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Wait a minute.
[Tapper:] I want there obviously with
[Henderson:] And it will be interesting to watch governors, Republican governors, what they do in their states. Are they at odds with this president?
[Tapper:] Obviously, with an international treaty that the United States is now withdrawing from, there is a lot of worldwide reaction to the decision and the announcement by President Trump. I want to go now to CNN's Nic Robertson who is in Scotland. He happens to be outside one of President Trump's golf courses. And, Nic, this is a major break with every international partner in the world, with the exception of Syria and Nicaragua. What kind of reaction are you hearing?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] It's a huge rift, Jake. The pope has described this as a disaster for the planet. The German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said it's a joyous fact that China and the European Union is still signed up to the Paris climate accord. The British foreign secretary today said that the British government who worked for months trying to convince the Trump White House to stick with the Paris accord. But the way this is going to be understood here, Jake, and let me be very clear. The way that this is going to be understood here just over the sand dunes behind me is, one of Donald Trump's golf courses, you were mentioning. The Scottish government was trying to put in 11 electricity generating green energy turbines just out to sea, just off the coast from President Trump's golf course there. He has been fighting that through the courts even appearing at a hearing of the Scottish government, stating very clearly and unequivocally that his investment was more important than the concerns he had about how his investment might be impacted by this green energy project, out to sea. That is how his decisions are going to be understood someone who cares more about his money and investment than he does about the environment. Why is that such a big issue here? The language that President Trump used today to describe why he is doing this and that European and other leaders shouldn't have such a big say in the affairs of the United States that this time is going to resonate so deeply. It is going to strike a huge rift in European relations with the United States. This goes to the core of the European leaders' concerns about President Trump since he came to office. At the beginning of this week, the German chancellor said, we have to fight for our own interests ourselves. This is not the way the world was just a week ago, Jake. This is a big and significant rift beyond what he has had to say about climate.
[Tapper:] And, Nic, as you mentioned just a minute ago, the E.U., the European Union and China have come together in this alliance when it comes to the environment. And there is a lot of talk, especially by opponents of the president's decision today about how China might be able to capitalize on the United States' withdrawal from the agreement. Tell us more about that.
[Robertson:] Yes, well, today, the Chinese premier has been visiting Brussels, the headquarters of the European Union, visiting with the German chancellor. And there, the discussion has been about how the European Union can help China develop the technologies that can help it combat some of its most polluting industries. So, the view from here is that this is the time and moment to help countries like China get their act together and be better on the global stage. This the position that President Trump has laid out today will be an anathema to Britain leaders. Come back to Britain. Theresa May has aligned herself so closely with President Trump, she's going to be there is going to be an election in Britain in just eight days. This is going to work very badly against her. And it's going to and in that context, any leader in Europe now who sidles up, if you will, to President Trump, to the White House, is going to be looked upon very poorly by their electorate who are pro the Paris agreement. So, you know, the European Union sees this is as an opportunity to help China, not to sort of strike it off the good guy list.
[Tapper:] All right. Nic Robertson in Scotland for us, thank you so much. And, Gloria, I do think President Trump sent a signal in his recent international trip, one where he was reaching out to countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, one where he was giving some heat and chastising European leaders for not contributing enough for into the defense budget when it came to NATO agreements. That might continue. That dynamic of alliances with petroleum states like Saudi Arabia and Europe as you just heard from Nic, very upset with President Trump.
[Borger:] Right. Well, and I think we heard it in the speech today where the president sort of whacked NATO members without saying NATO, you know, people who are not contributing their fair shares, countries that are not contributing their fair share. He sees himself as the guardian of the American taxpayers to a great degree. And he doesn't want to spend one extra penny that he doesn't believe he should spend which is how he ran the Trump Organization. I mean, he is kind of famous for saying to lawyers, you didn't do your job, I'm only going to pay you 30 percent of what I owe you because that's all you that's all you deserve. I think we heard that today in his speech. I think we saw it in Europe. I think these are shifting alliances. We're not talking about human rights when we're in Saudi Arabia. So, I do think that, you know, it's a different it's a different world with this president. And again, it's a different world from other Republicans. To Chris's point, this is this is a Trump world here. And there are lots of Republicans and, Steve, you know this more than better than I do, who don't who don't sign on to this. But he is the president.
[Moore:] So, let me say something about Europe, because this is not a story that's well-known. But ten years ago, the United States and Europe took very different approaches on energy. We went into the shale oil and gas revolution. German, France and, Italy, Spain, all those countries went into the great energy sources that you're talking about. They went to wind, they went to solar. Look at what's happened today wait, let me finish my point. Today, United States electricity prices are half to a third of what they are in Europe. Europe's green energy and Europe is moving away from solar and wind because it's been so expensive they're actually losing factories, Germany to the United States, because we have lower energy costs. One of the reasons Europe wants us all in is because they can't compete with us if you're using much cheaper energy than they are. This would kind of level the playing field and that would cost American jobs. I mean, you said those are just facts. Their costs to are two to three times higher than ours.
[Jones:] That has to deal with taxation hold on a second.
[Moore:] We're talking about retail prices.
[Jones:] You're saying stuff just not true, and I got want stuff I want to say that actually is true.
[Moore:] Their electrically prices are double to three times
[Jones:] What? You're talking about Germany? The reason that you have the cost structure you have in Germany is because they're trying to move away from nuclear power. It has nothing to do with solar and wind. I don't want to talk about that. Listen, let's talk about the politics, just for a second. 1645
[Van Jones, Green Jobs Adviser Under Obama:] structure you have in Germany is because they're trying to move away from nuclear power has nothing to do with solar and wind. I don't want to talk about that. Listen, let's talk about the politics, just for a second. Let me talking policy online. I want to talk about politics as well. The Democrats, how do the Democrats get in this situation where manufacturing jobs were growing under Obama? Somebody like this comes out says, oh my god the Democrats were terrible for industry. They hate industry. Obama grew
[Stephen Moore, Cnn Senior Economic Analyst:] It was the weakest economy in 40 years.
[Jones:] Hold well, hold on a second. Yes, because you had a great recession. Listen, whenever you have a financial collapse as opposed to normal recession you know this, it's going to be slower coming back. But let me just talk about
[Moore:] l wasn't slower under Reagan, it was faster.
[Jones:] It wasn't a financial collapse.
[Moore:] It was a collapse, we had 15 percent inflation.
[Jones:] Economic I don't want college here.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn The Lead Anchor:] Can we stay focus on we stay focused on we stay focused on the Paris accord.
[Jones:] OK. Thank you. So here is the thing. How do the Democrats wind up in this situation where someone like this could come on and say the Democrats are bad for industry and manufacturing? They were growing manufacturing jobs under Obama and unbroken way. The actual design cap and trade program the President tried to pass would have actually grown jobs. But guess what, you have Democrats looking like we care about polar bears and don't care about workers. Now, that is political malpractice on the part of the Democrats on this and Trump is taking advantage of that.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter And Editor-at-large:] Is the is the indictment to your point Joe Biden now it's easy in hindsight but Joe Biden's indictment of the campaign I thought was interesting particularly given the fact that I think he doesn't want to not say he's not going to run in 2020. His indictment in the campaign was, this is the first campaign in modern history that Democrats haven't had a message for the people who make a total of $65,000. The manufacturing industry that we left that out that they became the national party that Republicans character them as liberals, they want to raise taxes. They think we got to save the myna bird.
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] But it's also I mean, the first campaign we had in history about building a wall, about banning Muslims,
[Cillizza:] Yes. No question.
[Henderson:] about deporting illegal immigrants. So that's sort of the nationalistic language, I think, you know, were very much resonated with a certain segment of the population. And that's I don't think we should ignore that part of Donald Trump's message.
[Cillizza:] The only argument the only argument I make against that I don't disagree at all. Donald Trump's messaging, I don't even know if you could say it was conservative but in terms of the ideological spectrum, it was way over
[Dana Bash, Cnn Political Correspondent:] Popular.
[Cillizza:] Right. But with certainly like beyond what George Bush would say, what Mitt Romney said. I mean he was outside of the sort of traditional mainstream of Republican thought which I think appealed to them. What I would say is if you look at the messaging of Hillary Clinton, the way in which she
[Tapper:] I want to take this opportunity now that I got a word into the to squeeze in a quick break. We'll be right back with much more debate and discussion about this important day. Stay with us. Welcome back to THE LEAD, I'm Jake Tapper. I want to bring in CNN Rene Marsh right now. We're all covering President Trump's announcement of that he is going to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement. Rene we just received a joint letter from several mayors across the United States who are responding to President Trump's announcement. What are they saying?
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Government Regulation Correspondent:] Yes, Jake, you know, the environment is one of these issues that evokes a lot of passion and we're seeing that in this letter here. Over 50 mayors in cities across the country writing this open letter, they essentially are saying if the President isn't going to keep up with the Paris Accord, they will. I'm reading a portion here. It says quote, "we will intensify efforts to meet each of our cities current climate goals, push for new action to meet the 1.5 degree Celsius target and work together to create the 21st-century clean energy economy. They mentioned this 1.5 degree Celsius target. Of course a lot of the action as far as the Paris Agreement is concerned and surrounds this idea of preventing the earth from warming another 2 degrees Celsius. So that's what they're referring to there. But Jake, I do want to point out with all this discussion about the President's big announcement today, a little bit on the timeline of all this. Of course, once we say that we're out or the President says that we're out, technically we're out but not formally. The President is not allowed to, according to the agreement to submit a letter to formally start this process of withdrawing until November of 2019. And then the United States would not be able to officially withdraw until November 2020. And the cherry on top here really is that November 2020, the time when we're allowed to officially pull out, would be about one day after election day in 2020. So you can bet this is going to be a pretty major election year issue when we talk about the climate.
[Tapper:] All right. Rene Marsh, thank you so much. We are we're getting more reaction from around the world to President Trump announcing the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Accord. Take a look at the cover of the German weekly magazine, Der Spiegel. It's a tweet I believe, "America first earth last," it says. And then this evening the Paris City Hall was glowing green to reaffirm that city's support for the climate agreement. Let's come back with our panel. It is hard to imagine that this will be especially since the withdrawal date would be November 2020, that this is going to be the last time we have debates like these or hear debates like these. And Dana it seems clear that President Trump will cast this in very stark terms, jobs versus redistribution of wealth to poorer countries.
[Bash:] No question. And it was very clear in the way that he gave his speech, as you said so well Gloria, completely about the economy, very little to nothing about the environment. That is going to be his message. And the question is, whether or not the Democrats that Van has been talking about the past hour or so are going to figure out a way to penetrate that and to combat that. And to appeal to the people who were for generations Democrats in coal country, were Democrats in other places of this country who feel left behind and are and eat up the message they heard from the Rose Garden from the President.
[Tapper:] Well, I think, Chris, there was an interesting article today I think by Jesse Ferguson but I'm not sure, about how instead of looking to these Obama turned Trump voters that what Republicans I mean sorry what Democrats should be doing is looking more at Romney turned Hillary voters. That those people Republicans live in the suburbs of the cities where the mayors just wrote that letter, that that might be riper picking because we're in the middle of a political realignment.
[Cillizza:] Northern Virginia, let's just take as example because it's close. You know, Frank Wolf represented a district that touched on Northern Virginia, had Loudoun County in it. Some of these ex-urban suburb and really growing counties very Republican at one point moving more toward Democrats because of this is not the Trump Republican. This is the Mitt Romney, George W. Bush, George H.W. Bush certainly kind of Republican. It's not a Donald Trump Republican. I think we were we're so fixated on the map from 2000 to 2006, right, closely divided America. And you look at it and you say well the 2016 map was essentially a validation of that, right? The costs for Democrats, the center of the country for Republicans, true, but to your point Jake, if you look county by county even or if you look even nerdier precinct by predict. What you see is that Donald Trump Is over performing Mitt Romney by 15, 20 points in places and which is more rural, older whiter, and drastically underperforming Mitt Romney in places like Mclean and Falls Church Virginia.
[Bash:] The city right, city parts of the country is exactly what got Hillary Clinton and Democrats in trouble.
[Cillizza:] And in some ways in some ways, he was widely mocked for at the time, I don't think he implemented it correctly. But remember when Howard Dean was the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. The 50 state Right.
[Jones:] I don't care who they vote for. I don't care who they vote for. They can vote for whoever they want for. You can't live in a country where you just have sacrifice zones, whether you talking about south central or Appalachia or the Rust Belt and no political party stands up for them respectively. And so, it's not about competing for votes. At a certain point, my problem with the Democrats allow happen. If you go on the Web site Hillary's Web site, way down there is a bunch of good policies for you but the heart wasn't there for the folks who are hurting. I don't care if they vote for you. You got to talk to them.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] But that's the challenge. I mean, they have to learn how to talk about environmental policy in a different way, from the heart. And they didn't and whether it's younger voters or Dana pointed out earlier, because younger voters care about this a great deal and they weren't thrilled with Hillary Clinton if you'll if you'll recall. But it's also telling people, look, this is what we have to do as a country. Maybe we have to change. Maybe we have to do some things differently. We want to save your jobs but this is where we are headed in the future. And I want to be a President of the future and I want you to be a part of that. That's what the Democrats have to figure out this in time. I mean, far be it for me to
[Moore:] And the Republican message has to be that the one the EPA administrator just said which is we can grow this economy and we can keep our environment safe and in fact, we have done that over the last ten years. We've used you know, more fossil fuels but reducing our carbon emissions. So this economy versus environment tradeoff is a fiction. We through growth, we spend more money in reducing our pollutions and that's a good Republican message.
[Tapper:] So do you think
[Moore:] When you're talking about by the way, when you talk about this realignment, what you're really talking about is Democrats become of the party of the elites and the and the Republican Party becomes the class the class the party of the working class.
[Cillizza:] It's certainly it's certainly the danger. Though I would say I would say we've spent the whole 2000s debating the suburbs. And I do think the suburbs so matter. Mitt Romney ran so much strong on the suburbs than Donald Trump. Donald Trump still won the electorate. I mean, I'm not arguing that that doesn't matter.
[Tapper:] Great. Thanks everyone for being here. Really appreciate it. That's it for THE LEAD, I'm Jake Tapper. I now turn you over to Wolf Blitzer, he's in "THE SITUATION ROOM." Thanks for watching.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn The Situation Room:] Happening now, breaking news, going it alone.

[Amanpour:] Moments ago, thousands of people flocked to Albert Square, that is in the heart of downtown Manchester. They came to pay their respects. Some were carrying placards saying, "I love Manchester," some were carrying flowers, and they all came and applauded when members of the city council and other local dignitaries talked and led the vigil and pledged that this city would remain united and the terrorists would not rip the fabric of this city apart. The poet, Tony Walsh was there and he read his ode to Manchester, "This is the Place". Here's what he said.
[Tony Walsh, Poet:] This is the place, in the northwest of England. It's ace, it's the best. And the songs that we sing from the stands, from our bands set the whole planet shaking. Our inventions are legends. There's not we can't make, and so we make brilliant music, we make brilliant bands, we make goals that make souls leap from seats in the stands. And we make things from steel, we make things from cotton, we make people laugh, take the mick sommat rotten, and we make you at home, we make you feel welcome, we make summat happen, we can't seem to help it. And if you're looking from history, then yes we have a wealth. But the Manchester way is to make it yourself. And make us a record, a new number one, and make us a brew while you're up, love, go on. And make us feel proud that you're winning the league, and make us sing louder and make us believe that this is the place that has helped shape the world. And this is the place where a Manchester girl named of Emmeline Pankhurst from the streets of Moss Side from the streets of Moss Side led a suffragette city with sisterhood pride.
[Amanpour:] A moment to smile perhaps. You heard the cheers down there when the poet Tony Walsh really rousingly rallied that crowd to remember the pride of this city and the space that it occupies in the United Kingdom. Well, joining me right now is the MEP of
[Afzal Khan, European Parliament Member And Former Lord Mayor Of Manchester Area:] Well, you've seen this tonight, this afternoon, this vigil. I was there.
[Amanpour:] And you were there when you heard the poet and all of them speaking.
[Khan:] It was amazing experience. You saw tens of thousands men coming together in the spirit of unity, defiance, cheering, message of love, solidarity. This is what Manchester is all about, so I am absolutely firmly I believe this, that Manchester actually is going to be even more stronger, not weaker.
[Amanpour:] And we saw members of different faith communities coming out from the town hall. We saw MPs, we saw all sorts of counselors and dignitaries. And people in the crowds, you know, desperate to be rallied. They had their flowers, they had, as I said, placards saying, "I love Manchester". But I mean, this was depraved what happened last night. That almost you actually can't put words to what people did, killing children.
[Khan:] That's like a bolt going through Manchester, to be honest. Real shock and horror. Unbelievable, yes? But this is why you also saw the other side now, the opposite side of coming together and saying, no, no, no, not in our
[Amanpour:] Have you been able to talk to any of the officials, any of the police officials, do you know anything about this young man who's been named as the person carrying the IED, according to the police? His name, 22-year-old Salman Abedi.
[Khan:] Yes, but, you know, this information, I think police, the emergency service have been doing amazing job since yesterday. They've been flat-out dealing with what had happened but then also getting on with the investigation. They're making
[Amanpour:] People like yourself, you know, who believes like so many the majority of this country in actually being law-abiding citizens, what do you say now to those in this city who clearly demonstrated, at least this one, that is not? Is there any kind of pocket of support for somebody like him to grow his radical ideas, his hate-filled whatever it might be?
[Khan:] Look, the world we're living in is really difficult, in the sense that it's so much easy for us to move around, which is amazing, but it can be used negatively. And equally, we can communicate so easily all over. Some of these things are throwing up new challenges for us all. And it's this we need to manage. You will always get you know, what we're seeing here, a small number they can cause such devastation, such a shockwave throughout the world almost. But we need to get on top of it, we need to keep the hope alive, we need to really get the whole people rallied like this what we've seen today in Manchester. I firmly believe that the humanity anywhere is very strong, very powerful. They are the majority, overly majority. It's the small number minority we need to deal with them, we need to challenge them, we need to do our best so they understand.
[Amanpour:] I mean, there's a there's a "how" to that, obviously. They are a minority, but they're there, some of them as we know are common criminals, some of them are thugs who have been to prison who think they found religion and have come out and have done this kind of thing. There's umpteen reasons for why these
[Khan:] Yes. Some have mental problems.
[Amanpour:] Some have a mental problem.
[Khan:] So, it is complex, you know.
[Amanpour:] So, what's to be done? This is happening now with alarming regularity.
[Khan:] Yes, that's right. So what we need to do is really keep reaching out further. More first, being that good example, making sure we keep an eye on some of our young people, making sure, you know, what some of the things they're doing, what they're saying, helping them.
[Amanpour:] Do you think the whole community is prepared to keep an eye on and to report whoever might seem to be up to no good in this way?
[Khan:] Look, it's a very difficult time where we are standing but I think if you'll reflect back in the last 10, 12 years, for example, in Britain, the police services or intelligence services have some amazing record in identifying some of these issues and problems, and got
[Amanpour:] Afzal Khan, thank you so much indeed for joining us. Former Lord Mayor of Manchester, thank you very much.
[Khan:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] And we will be back with much more after this short break.

[Romans:] A big oops by fashion giant Burberry. It's apologizing for clothing a runway model in a hoodie with a noose around the neck at the London Fashion Show this week. Criticism from one of their own models, Liz Kennedy, led to an online backlash. Kennedy wrote in an Instagram that suicide is not fashion. The CEO says the design was inspired by the marine theme that ran throughout the collection, but it was insensitive and we made a mistake. Burberry has removed the item from its collection.
[Sanchez:] A marine them. When I think marine, I think of vinyl and fur, whatever that was. Finally, one of baseball's big time free agents signed a deal, Manny Machado, heading to San Diego.
[Romans:] Andy Scholes has more on this morning's "Bleacher Report". Hey, Andy.
[Sanchez:] Good morning.
[Andy Scholes, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Yes, good morning, guys. This is a big get for the Padres. San Diego is considered a small market team. It normally don't sign big time free agents like this, but according to multiple reports, they got Manny Machado, signing him to the biggest free agent deal in American sports history. Ten years, $300 million. Now, Machado just 26 years old, hit 37 home runs last season while playing for the Dodgers and Orioles. He will help the rebuilding Padres who finished last in the NL West in 2018. With free agent started, the Yankees are thought of as a potential landing spot for Machado, but they weren't interested. One young fan at spring training he was pleased when he was told Machado was going to the Padres.
[Young Yankees Fan:] I just don't want anybody any you're not going to take a guy you hate to another team. It's kind of like taking Tom Brady from the Patriots and adding him to the Dolphins, it just doesn't happen.
[Scholes:] That's great. That kid clearly just wants homegrown Yankees like Derek Jeter and Aaron Judge. The big question now is will Machado signing finally get free agency going. Many good players remain unsigned including superstar Bryce Harper. The Phillies and Giants are rumored to be the front runners to land the former MVP. All right. Best rivalry in college basketball. Duke versus North Carolina is going to take place tonight at Cameron Indoor Stadium. If you want to get into this game this year, it's going to cost you more than going to the Super Bowl and I'm not exaggerating. The cheapest ticket to the game right now on StubHub is nearly $3,000 and there are less than 30 tickets available for purchase. Why are the tickets so expensive this year? Cameron Indoor holds less than 9,500 people. Duke ranked number one in the country, North Carolina eighth. This is likely fans only fans at seeing phenom Zion Williamson take on UNC at home.
[Unidentified Male:] We're number one, we beat anybody. We are the devils. The devils.
[Scholes:] Actor Patrick Warburton better known as Puddy from Seinfeld was back in his old character at the New Jersey devils game. Dropping the first puck in celebration of '90s night and he got the crowd fired up, even taking off his jersey. He then went over to first pump all the players and watch when he tries to leave the ice. He slips right there and fell. All good, though. He gave up and gave the crowd a nice wave. He was just fine. Funny stuff from Puddy back in his old character.
[Romans:] Devils do such a good job in their pregame. It's really fun. It's really good.
[Sanchez:] High-five, Andy Scholes. Thanks so much.
[Romans:] Thanks.
[Scholes:] Have a good one.
[Romans:] All right. Imagine if you were implicated in a federal investigation and you tried to get your donor and supporter to leave that very probe. New obstruction questions this morning swirl around the president.

[Unidentified Male:] There's our house. Is that yours? That's mine. That's ours. Gone. Gone? She's gone.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Wildfires in California now claiming 44 lives, the deadliest and most destructive in the state's history.
[Gov. Rick Scott , Florida:] He's just a pure sore loser trying to steal election.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] The recount in Florida becomes heated as the judge calls on both sides to ramp down the rhetoric.
[Briggs:] "The Washington Post" reporting Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen could be fired as soon as this week. Why the president wants her out.
[Romans:] And the Dow dropping more than 600 points on Monday. President Trump blaming Democrats for the drop. We will breakdown what's really behind the big move on Wall Street. Welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. Four thirty Eastern Time, 1:30 in California, and another high wind warning there, not what they need to hear. We start in California where the death toll keeps rising. Forty-four people now killed in wildfires statewide. In northern California, 42 people have died in the Camp Fire, making it the deadliest wildfire in state history. More than 7,000 buildings destroyed. Fire officials say the Camp Fire has burned 117,000 acres. Officials estimate it is 30 percent contained.
[Romans:] In Southern California, 57,000 structures threatened by the Woolsey Fire, which has grown to more than 93,000 acres. Also 30 percent contained, two fatalities there. CNN's Nick Watt has more from Malibu, Malibu has been just devastated by the Woolsey fire.
[Nick Watt, Cnn Correspondent:] Dave and Christine, the death toll at the Camp Fire in northern California has risen to 42. Thirteen more bodies were found on Monday. Now, ten of the bodies that were found on Monday were found in the little town of Paradise, once home to 26,000 people, almost completely blown, burned off the map by that fire. And sadly, the death toll up there could rise even further. The sheriff has called for more search and rescue teams to come in Tuesday, along with cadaver dogs to try to find more of the missing. The last we heard, there are 100 people are still missing. But that doesn't mean they're all dead. A lot of people go missing because of cell service drops. So, we are waiting, hoping that figure doesn't rise, but fearing the worst. Now, the winds up there in northern California have died down a little bit, down where we are in Malibu in southern California, the so-called Woolsey Fire, the winds here are still whipping and they will continue those Santa Ana winds through Tuesday and Wednesday into places, but on Friday, they're going to change direction and bring some much needed humidity in from the ocean. Dave and Christine, back to you.
[Briggs:] Nick Watt, thank you. As he mentioned there, the weather expected to make things very difficult for firefighters for at least the next of couple days. Here's meteorologist Pedram Javaheri.
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Good morning, Dave and Christine. Yes, these conditions here are going to begin to improve actually over the next couple of days. So, at least some good news to tell you across this region of California in particular, to the north initially. But here is how we get here. We have, of course, the hottest July on record this summer. We had the hottest single month on record for California's state history. So, plenty of fuel, plenty of dry conditions across the region. But going into Tuesday, now, notice the elevated concern in place. We dropped it down from extreme to critical. The winds will be 5 to 15 miles per hour across the north. To the south, it's an entirely different story. Still looking at critical to extreme conditions for fire weather behavior. And a lot of concerns is due to spot fires. In fact, guts are picking up embers carrying downstream and essentially creating smaller fires across the same vicinity of these wildfires. So, firefighters have had their work cut out for them tracking those. Winds peaking across southern California as high as 70 miles an hour. We do expect calmer conditions by Wednesday across southern California. So, containment numbers could begin to go up as well guys.
[Romans:] All right. Certainly hope so. Thanks, Pedram. To Florida where the lawsuits are mounting and the accusations flying in the chaotic election recount, officials now are scrambling to count every vote by Thursday's deadline as the race for Senate become uglier by the hour. Republican Rick Scott and Democrat Bill Nelson blasting one another.
[Scott:] What Bill Nelson needs to do now is what he would be asking me to do if I have lost an election is say, look, you know, the election happened. Let's go forward. But he is not. He is a pure sore loser trying to steal an election.
[Sen. Bill Nelson , Florida:] Rick Scott isn't interested in making sure every lawful vote is counted. And the second is that he is using his power as governor to try to undermine the voting process.
[Romans:] A Florida judge is warning both sides to ramp down the rhetoric. Republicans, including Scott and President Trump, still alleging fraud in the election process without offering any evidence and despite repeated denials from the Florida Department of State. The president actually suggesting in a tweet an honest vote is no longer possible. Ballots massively infected. Must go with election night.
[Briggs:] In the Florida governor's race, Democrat Andrew Gillum continues to call for every vote to be counted. His rival, Republican Ron DeSantis, is staying under the radar. Ryan Nobles with more from Tallahassee.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] Dave and Christine, here in Leon County, which is where Tallahassee, the state capital resides, they expect to have the counting wrapped up on Tuesday. Now, each one of Florida's 75 counties operates just a little bit different. But most counties are confident they will have all 8.5 million ballots recounted at least in that U.S. Senate race. And that U.S. Senate race is the one getting the most attention. That's because the margin between Rick Scott and Bill Nelson is tight, 12,500 votes separate the two. And that's why there are so many people focused on it. Democrats believe they have the chance to flip the race from one hand to another. Now, while there is a lot of focus on the vote counting, there is another battle playing out in the courtroom. Lawsuits filed by both sides in the past couple days, including the lawsuit filed on Monday by the League of Women Voters. It's a lawsuit that's going to attempt to compel Rick Scott and his capacity as governor to step away from the recount process, recuse himself. And Scott has been very aggressive on that front. He has actually instructed the Attorney General Pam Bondi to get involved. He's also asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate any potential claims of fraud or criminal activity of which the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has said they have not found any as of yet. The next big thing we're waiting for, though, is Wednesday. That's when a significant court hearing takes place. The Democrat Bill Nelson filing a lawsuit to get clarification on how to handle the adjudication of some provisional and mail-in ballots. That has the potential to impact as many s 20,000 votes. So, that will be an important court hearing that will be waiting for on Wednesday. Meanwhile, the vote continues as we wait to figure out who the next U.S. senator and governor is from Florida Dave and Christine.
[Briggs:] OK, Ryan, thanks. Six days after the midterm election, a big win for Democrats. Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema defeating Martha McSally in the Arizona Senate race. Sinema, the state's first female senator flipping a seat that had been on GOP hands for more than two decades. She also becomes the first openly bisexual member of the U.S. Senate, period. McSally conceded the race Monday night, congratulating Sinema in a video message on Twitter. The victory means among the races settled, the Senate have 51 Republicans and 47 Democrats in the new Congress.
[Romans:] All right. After a year long search, Amazon has chosen two places to share duty as its second headquarters, HQ2. This is from "The Wall Street Journal". "The Journal" reporting late Monday that Amazon has picked New York's Long Island's City and the Washington, D.C. suburb of Crystal City as HQ2. The development projects promise to bring the city's big infusion of jobs and tax revenue. It is certain to draw fire against critics. The search for HQ2 drew interest from hundreds of cities and a number of states. Amazon outlined criteria for its second headquarters such proximity to a major airport, a suburban or urban area with more than a million people, access to mass transit. Amazon received more than 200 proposals for HQ2, spanning 54 states, provinces, districts and terrorists across the U.S. The Amazon says the new facility will create as many as 50,000 jobs and cost at least $5 billion to build and operate. Amazon has not explained how the money and jobs might be divvied up across these two different sites. There are this morning who are calling foul a little bit. Some of the cities spent a lot of money and had to turnover a lot of proprietary information about their labor markets and their tax bases. The idea being there was going to be one new headquarters. Now, it looks Amazon is going to divide that one headquarters and added two places that already exist.
[Briggs:] Yes, people are divided over the tax breaks are too generous to begin with. Ahead, special counsel Robert Mueller apparently inching closer to Trump adviser Roger Stone.
[Jerome Corsi, Roger Stone Associate:] I fully anticipate the next few days I will be indicted.
[Briggs:] Why one of Stone's associates says he's in real trouble.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] The world's two biggest economies are now war over trade in the week of President Trump's whopping 25 percent tariff on Chinese exports. China has just retaliated with its own tariffs against the U.S. It will also impose a 25 percent tax on $50 billion of U.S. goods. Christine Romans, CNN Money chief business correspondent, explains the potential impact on American consumers.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Money Chief Business Correspondent:] Brooke, the president this morning on his trade agenda, saying the U.S. isn't the one who started a trade war.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The trade war was started many years ago by them, and the United States lost.
[Unidentified Reporter:] So you're saying we're on the losing end of it.
[Trump:] Well, no, there's no trade war. They have taken so much. So last year, $375 billion in trade deficit. With China. We had overall over $800 billion over a period of years, each year, close to $800 billion in losses on trade. Not going to happen anymore. It's not going to happen.
[Romans:] So the China tariffs are back on. The president says trade with China is unfair. The situation, no longer sustainable. And he's targeting technology that China has vowed to dominate. Xi Jinping's made in China 2025 initiative. There will be a 25 percent tariff on 1,100 products, what the U.S. Calls industrially significant technologies like aerospace equipment, tech, manufacturing, medical supplies. U.S. Companies pay the price. They pay the tariff to the U.S. Government when they import these goods. Companies can either absorb the higher cost or pass it along to consumers. Quick reaction from the Chinese commerce industry, which said the U.S. kept changing its mind and has now decided to launch a trade war. In fact, the tariffs tiff has been on and off. The White House first unveiled this list in March, actually, a bigger list. Multiple rounds of trade talks with China then, a tariff cease-fire, remember, in May. And then the recent summit with North Korea seen by many as a big win for China. But then today $50 billion in tariffs anyway. The Chinese vow retaliation. The White House vows mortar I was if China targets American farmers or hurts Americans doing business in China. The U.S. move is punishment for China stealing trade secrets, for forced technology transfers from American companies, for cyber theft, years of it. And fulfills Trump's pledge to cut a trade deficit more than $300 billion a year Brooke?
[Baldwin:] Christine, thank you. Both of the new tariffs will start to take effect July 6. Now a trade war with China is just one concern Republicans on Capitol Hill have about what's going on at the White House. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican, South Carolina, was a fierce critic of Candidate Trump, but says President Trump has mostly been an ally, and some Republicans don't like it one bit.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] Some people say this is two-faced. Where is the Lindsey Graham of standing up to Donald Trump? What do you say?
[Sen. Lindsey Graham, , South Carolina:] Well, I'll tell them when I think he's wrong. Let me just tell you about the critics. When I work with President Obama and I did on occasion, I was a hero. Now when I work with President Trump, I'm two-faced. I know how the game is played, and I don't give a damn. I'm going to do what's best for the country. I like the president. I want to help him. I hope he's successful. He's been a friend to me. And he says some things I don't agree with. So if you don't like me working with the President Trump to make the world a better place, I don't give a
[Baldwin:] Ho! Correspondent Phil Mattingly, I mean, you know you've got this Republican Senator here saying he doesn't give a shhh thoughts?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] So it's complicated. I think would probably be the best way to explain the current dynamics on the Hill. A couple days ago, Brooke, Republicans attacked one another in a closed-door lunch. Primarily over the trade issue, over amendment frustrations, over dealing with the White House, something Lindsey Graham was actually involved in. Look, what Senator Graham laid out was actually I think kind of an important view into how a lot of Republicans look at this administration. Up with of the biggest struggles that Republicans have had, and I've talked to many of them, asked them specifically about this over the course of the last 15 or 16 months, is how best to communicate with this White House and with this president. The normal channels, the normal kind of operational gears that are involved in dealing with the White House between the Hill and White House officials. Don't really exist here. They more or less exist in 280 characters or by the phone. So what Senator Graham is trying to say is, where there are moments that he is opposed to the president and those moments have occurred, even since the campaign, he will say something. When he's not opposed to the president, he finds that it's better to work behind the scenes and try and get something from him as opposed to coming out publicly. Obviously, Brooke, we saw this week Senator Bob Corker really going off at Republicans for not saying more publicly. Senator Jeff Flake, as well. Well, key point. Senator Bob Corker and Senator Jeff Flake are not going to be here next year. You have the political dynamic, as well. Look at the poll numbers, Republicans, the party, support President Trump. So you have all of these different dynamics here. You have issues like trade war, Republicans are opposed. But there's really no consensus in terms of, how do we actually get what we want when we disagree with the president? They're nervous about the politics, and they still aren't totally sure what the best avenue is to communicate those concerns to the guy who sits in the Oval Office.
[Baldwin:] Complicated, indeed. But I got you. Phil Mattingly, well explained. Thank you so much from Capitol Hill. Coming up next here, President Trump making history on the White House lawn today, becoming what's believed to be the first sitting president to just roll up to the media. And there are live shots positioned there on the North Lawn. And what an interview that was. We have details, just ahead.

[Whitfield:] Some hopeful news for Louisiana's Congressman Steve Scalise. Doctors say an excellent recovery is a good possibility. This after being shot in the hip during that attack on Republicans Wednesday on a ball field. And there was a moving moment at Thursday night's congressional baseball game as one of the officers who helped save Scalise's life through the first pitch. CNN's Alexander Marquardt has more on Officer David Bailey and his colleague who went beyond the call of duty.
[Alexander Marquardt, Cnn Correspondent:] They are officers in an arm of law enforcement that most Americans had probably never heard of until Wednesday. David Bailey and Crystal Griner, special agents for the U.S. Capitol Police, are being hailed as national heroes for preventing a slaughter at the Republican Congressional baseball team practice.
[Donald Trump,  President Of The United States:] Many lives would have been lost if not for the heroic actions of the two Capitol Police officers who took down the gunman despite sustaining gunshot wounds during a very, very brutal assault.
[Marquardt:] According to the harrowing accounts of the members of Congress and staffers at the practice, when they realized they were being shot at, they franticly ran for cover.
[Rep. Brad Wenstrup,  Ohio:] Everyone was basically a sitting duck in many ways. There was only so many places you could go, especially when leaving the field.
[Marquardt:] That's when agents bailey and Griner sprung to action, instead running toward the danger and returning fire.
[Rep. Mo Brooks,  Alabama:] They were taking on a guy with a rifle from 90 to 120 feet away. They had pistols, he had a rifle. That's not a fair fight. Both of them were wounded. The bravery that they showed is just incredible.
[Rep. Mike Bishop,  Michigan:] These two Capitol police officers are warriors. I have never seen anything like it before. Both of them had wounds and they were still fighting.
[Marquardt:] Bailey and Griner were only at the early morning practice because they are the security detail assigned to Congress Steve Scalise, the team's second baseman, but more importantly, the House majority whip, a leadership job that comes with 247 protection.
[Bishop:] I can't underscore enough how important the Capitol police were. They were there within seconds, and had they not been there, I would not be standing here today. I am sure of that fact.
[Marquardt:] More than 50 shots were exchanged before the attack finally ended, but not before the shooter, James Hodgkinson of Bellville, Illinois, wounded four, including Scalise and special agent Gringer. Had they not been there, it could have been what several players have called a massacre.
[Rep. Roger Williams,  Texas:] There could have easily been 25 deaths or more today. But Officer Griner and Bailey prevented that, and my family and I will be forever grateful.
[Marquardt:] Alex Marquardt, CNN, Alexandria, Virginia.
[Whitfield:] Officers Griner and Bailey indeed heroes. All right, that's going to do it for me. Thanks so much for being with me today. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. There is so much more straight ahead in the newsroom with Ana Cabrera.
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Seven U.S. sailors are missing at sea after a dramatic collision off the coast of Japan. We have the latest on the hunt to find them. Plus, President Trump on the defensive as the first family spends the weekend at Camp David. We have news that the president's legal team is now expanding in the wake of the Russia investigation.

[Berman:] All right. Backlash from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle about the president's remarks on the Charlottesville violence. And this morning, remarks from the CEO of Merck as well. He quit the president's manufacturing council and the effect there is it got the president to respond in a statement. I want to bring in the Democratic Congressman Tom Suozzi right now of New York. Congressman, thanks for being with us. Ken Frazier, CEO of Merck, quit the president's manufacturing council essentially saying he feels it's necessary to take a public stand against bigotry and whatnot. The president responded to that by going after Ken Frazier. He said, "Now that Ken Frazier of Merck Pharm resigned, he will have more time to lower rip-off drug prices." Your reaction to this back-and-forth this morning, sir?
[Rep. Tom Suozzi , Armed Services Committee:] I think the president has dropped the ball here. He's made this whole issue too much about him instead of about the hate that we see going on in America. And the president, by not speaking out directly about the white supremacists, by attacking the CEO of Merck is making it too much about the president, and not about the issue, which is that there's too much hate. And we have to all stand up against this hate in the country.
[Berman:] What do you want to hear the president say today? CNN has learned that he will address the violence in Charlottesville again today. We don't know exactly what he will say. What do you think he needs to say?
[Suozzi:] The president needs to be very bold and just comes straight out and say the United States of America is based upon a fundamental principle that all men and women are created equal. And white supremacists and Nazis and skin heads and these other demented people are not acting American. They're un-American, in fact. And they may have a right to free speech, but we are going to call them out for what they are, which is un-American and there's no place for them in our society.
[Berman:] Have you thought about what might be his motivation for not having said this over the last few days?
[Suozzi:] You know, the president, during his election campaign, you know, really went out of his way to call out progressives and call out Black Lives Matters and other groups, and saying, you know, these protesters and these politically correct people, you know, they've got hate and they're bad you know, like he said, it's both sides. He's just completely wrong here. He's just completely missed the boat because here we have people marching with torches, calling out the most vile things you could possibly imagine. The president has got to be blunt, he's got to be clear, he's got to be direct and he's going to say there's no place for white supremacists in our country.
[Berman:] You know, one area where the president has been blunt and clear is on North Korea. And this is an area you've been watching closely being on the Foreign Affairs Committee. You know, the president says we're locked and loaded in reaction to North Korea right now. Blunt and clear there. And this morning, his secretary of state and secretary of defense wrote an op-ed in the "Wall Street Journal" where they, too, were clear but it was a very different type of clarity right now. They talked a lot about the peaceful pressure campaign the administration is putting on North Korea. Your reaction to their statements?
[Suozzi:] I read that op-ed piece in the "Wall Street Journal." I thought it was very measured. I thought it was very intelligent. I think that Secretary Mattis is really a great American. We're fortunate to him serving our nation. He's devoted his life to our country. But the president, again, he's making these things too much about himself instead of about the issue. Let's not forget who the bad guy is here. The bad guy here is the supreme leader of North Korea. Kim Jong-un is a dangerous character on the world stage and we need to be tough, we need to be firm. This has been going on for a long time. It's been going on for decades, quite frankly. A decade since Kim Jong-un has been there. And we need to send a very clear message that we're not going to support further nuclearization of North Korea. But at the same time, ratcheting up this rhetoric is very dangerous. As Leon Panetta said the other day, God forbid somebody makes a mistake here. This is we're talking people's lives.
[Berman:] Right.
[Suozzi:] People are freaking out all over the world because they are afraid of what could happen.
[Berman:] You say people are freaking out all around the world. But there has been a new development this morning which is that China has instituted new sanctions on North Korea, banning I believe imports of seafood and also some iron products right now. Is it possible that the president's statements and pressure are working to get China to actually do something?
[Suozzi:] Well, since day one, this administration has said that their main goal is to get China to help us with North Korea. That's a good, positive goal.
[Berman:] That's good
[Suozzi:] Yes, that's good, it's positive. That's a very positive thing. And I think that the rest of the international community has stepped up. We have both China and Russia vote for sanctions. This is before the president's tough talk. Good for sanctions. So this has been a concerted effort for some time that the administration has had, that Congress has had, to try to get China and Russia to do more of the heavy lifting here. We need Japan and South Korea to do their share as well. And hopefully, as time goes on, we'll succeed in this effort to try and denuclearize North Korea. But the rhetoric is very dangerous because while we are trying to advance this agenda, people are so worried in that part of the world, as well as in this part of the world, that somebody could make a mistake. The North Koreans can make a mistake. We can make a mistake. I can make a mistake. You have to be careful when dealing with the stuff that someone doesn't make a mistake.
[Berman:] Right.
[Suozzi:] This is a very positive development that China is taking these steps. It's always been the agenda to have these steps be taken. But we're going to need more going forward as well.
[Berman:] Congressman Tom Suozzi of New York, thanks so much for being with us, sir.
[Suozzi:] Thank you, John.
[Berman:] All right. We're going to have more now on the growing tensions with North Korea this morning. The president's top general says he has given the president military options. What does that mean?

[Cuomo:] All right. So the president and some of his supporters are doubling down on the defense of what was said about Charlottesville and what was not said and now turning to the issue, which is really a non-issue, about the statue in Charlottesville, because that's not why the hate groups went there. That was just a ruse. But in a series of tweets, the president has called these statues beautiful and said their removal was ripping the country apart. Meanwhile, cities across the U.S. are having to deal with these issue because it's often a local issue. So what are they going to do with these symbols? Joining us now is the mayor of Dallas, Mike Rawlings. He's called for creating a task force to weigh the issue. Mr. Mayor, thank you for joining us during a very important time.
[Mayor Mike Rawlings , Dallas:] Thank you, Chris, for being interested.
[Cuomo:] So, mayor, what did you learn coming out of your situation, the tragedy that you had to deal with in Dallas?
[Rawlings:] You know, race has been a big issue in the history of Dallas. I mean we were a bastion for the KKK decades ago and then a mad man took the lives of officers because he wanted to kill white men. And so as we look at how to kind of bridge that divide, I think the president, any leaders, must be uniters first, as opposed to playing to a political base. That's the measure. Can you unite people to find a third idea, a better way forward in this? You've got to be a clear communicator. You've got to make sure you speak the truth. And then you must listen to people and really understand that the process of coming to a new place is going to be as important as the decision you make. And that's the way you bring people together. They appreciate it. They may not always agree with you, but the real empathy towards their points of view is very important.
[Cuomo:] So what is the risk in what you see? I don't know if you were watching before you came on but we had a fire breather on who's supporting the president and saying that what this really is about is covering for the alt-left and that this is about the right versus the left. It's pretty clear what path the president is on. He is going to engender this movement. What's your concern about that?
[Rawlings:] Well, it's divisive. I mean if we start to play this tit for tat thing, the country continues to be divided. We become less strong internationally and nationally. Great leaders unite our country and that's what I wish the president would do. Stop with the dog whistles, stop with the innuendos. Let's say what it was. We had a terrible white supremacist group trying to take advantage of something to make a political statement. That's not going to help the country.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Rawlings:] It's not going to help Dallas.
[Cuomo:] So what do you think about the statues? We know municipalities are dealing with it across the country.
[Rawlings:] Well
[Cuomo:] What do you think's the right way to do it?
[Rawlings:] I'm proud of the mayors and the cities that have taken action. We started this a couple of months ago and it's moved very, very fast. Now it's not just a question of statues. These have become totems for the the alt-right, the white supremacists and now we've we've got it into a new conversation. That's why I've supported that for the removal of these. But how we do it is critical. Our citizens have a lot of points of view and I want to make sure we gain it. I want to be stronger coming out this, not just solving one issue. Because this race issue is about listening to one another. It's about understanding one another. This is a gift that we are given to make sure we we do this in the right way. And so I'm pleased at how we're approaching it and hopefully we'll get over this and we'll be stronger as a country because of it.
[Cuomo:] Well, that is a procedure ideal. We'll see how it manifests itself in the current situation. Mayor Rawlings, thank you for joining us.
[Rawlings:] Thank you.
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Rawlings:] Thank you, Chris.
[Harlow:] The fact that he said I want us to be stronger after this, I think that's the message to leaf everyone with this Friday, it we can. Be stronger after this. Stronger together after this, if there can be any unity.
[Cuomo:] That's the goal. And when you see people working against that goal
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] That's our job. We call it out.
[Harlow:] And we do indeed. Chris, nice to be with you this week.
[Cuomo:] You were great all week. Thank you for being here.
[Harlow:] Now I'm off for two weeks. Getting on a plane.
[Cuomo:] You deserve it. That's how it is. You work with every day you work with me, you should get two off.
[Harlow:] I earned two days off, folks, by the way. Thank you for having me. It's been nice to be with you.
[Cuomo:] Absolutely. So, CNN "NEWSROOM" with John Berman is going to pick up right after the break. There's a lot of news. Please, stay with CNN.

[Blitzer:] Breaking news right now. North Korea's foreign minister says President Trump has declared war on Pyongyang by tweeting over the weekend that North Korean leaders wouldn't be around much longer if they continued their rhetoric. U.S. military officials are now responding. Let's go to our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr. Barbara, what are you learning about this dramatic escalation in the rhetoric?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] One of the key things the North Korean said, Wolf, is this mounted, as far as they were concerned, to a declaration of war by the United States. The State Department rapidly pushing back, saying there is no declaration of war on North Korea by the Trump administration. The Pentagon also taking the opportunity to, one more time, trying to impress upon the North Koreans, if they can, that there are options for dealing with them and their weapons program. The Pentagon chief spokesman, Colonel Robert Manning, saying, and I quote, "The military will take all options to make sure that we safeguard our allies, our partners, and our homeland, so that if North Korea does not stop their provocative actions, we will make sure we provide options to the president to deal with North Korea." Again, sending that message that there are options the U.S. military can take if the North Korea continue down this path and threatens the U.S. and its allies Wolf?
[Blitzer:] A dramatic escalation in the rhetoric. Thank you, Barbara Starr, at the Pentagon. Other news we're following, we're now learning that Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, was warned about the danger of fake news and its role in the 2016 presidential race. That warning came from no other than then-President Barack Obama. A source confirms a "Washington Post" report that Zuckerberg and Obama had a discussion last fall about Facebook and fake news. Zuckerberg, apparently, shrugged off the then-president's warning. Let's bring in our panel to discuss this and more. CNN chief political analyst, Gloria Borger, is with us, our CNN political analyst, Margaret Talev is with us. She's a senior White House correspondent for "Bloomberg News," and Rachel Bade, congressional reporter for "Politico." Gloria, what do you make of the initial reaction from the Facebook owner?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] I think when the president of the United States goes out of his way to warn you about Russian infiltration into your organization, you ought to pay attention to it. And I think what you see Zuckerberg doing now is realizing that he should have paid more attention to it at the time, and so they're sort of playing catch-up. But what else would inspire an outgoing president to talk to a CEO like this unless it were really, really serious?
[Blitzer:] And as you know, Margaret, the House and Senate investigators, they're saying the 3,000 or so Facebook ads sold by a Russian-linked bought by a Russian-linked account may just be the tip of the iceberg, that there potentially were a lot more that we don't know enough about yet, and that there are serious ramifications going down.
[Margaret Talev, Cnn Political Analyst:] That's right. I know I'm still struck even though this is all news how under the radar President Obama tried to stay under the election season probably because he didn't want to look like he was trying to intervene on Hillary Clinton's behalf. That was a mistake. And President Trump and his team now are faced with kind of a different, but a similar set of problems which is the president does not want to legitimize criticism or doubts about his election. But this is a major problem, and not just in terms of the private messaging and policy, wo, but in terms of the public face the president puts on this. So far, he's been more than understated and almost shrugging it off and this is a pivot point for the president to decide what he want his public message is today.
[Blitzer:] Rachel, I think you agree that from President Obama on down, including the Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, they just assumed she was going to win, and why create this huge uproar and this huge issue if he were to more dramatically, for example, talk about Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election.
[Rachel Bade, Congressional Correspondent, Politico:] It was certainly political calculation at that point in time. I think this whole Facebook phenomenon we're seeing with the Russian ads is with the broader fall from grace, which was always put on a pedestal in Washington. You have the Facebook ads on Russia, fake news, et cetera. And you have conservative accusing them of suppressing conservative voices and opinions. And you have investigators on the Hill going after the tech industry about child sex trafficking. For a long time, I would say Washington had a light touch with the tech industry and now we're seeing that change. And the Facebook fake news will rev that up.
[Blitzer:] Another sensitive thing, Gloria, involving the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, senior adviser to the president, all of a sudden, we are learning that he was using a private e-mail account to send some Trump administration business to some colleagues and associates, this after the uproar involving Hillary Clinton's private e-mail.
[Borger:] I would have to say oops to that, as his lawyer, Abbe Lowell, points out these are 100 e-mails and none of them involve classified information which is the key, I know, we're all laughing. None of it involved classified information which was the whole thing for the Hillary Clinton brouhaha. So I think that they have to be careful. This is the president who is leading rallies of lock her up because of her private e-mail server. Nobody is accusing Jared Kushner of using a private e-mail server. Nobody is accusing him of sending classified, mails. His lawyer says he was sending mostly clips and he was responding to people who e-mailed him on his g-mail account, but when you run a campaign that is based on "lock her up" about private e-mails, you open yourself to the charges of hypocrisy, I would say, at the very least and they understand that.
[Blitzer:] Getting to the other very sensitive story, an issue that's unfolding right now, the president's decision Friday night at that rally in Alabama, speak out about NFL players who are kneeling during the national anthem and then continue it all through the weekend, including today, and continuing to tweet about it. Why is he doing this?
[Talev:] I think we'll hear a ton of questions about this at the briefing coming up shortly. Look, it may have seemed like the right message for that audience and kind of a Friday night lights crowd and it's always been the president's instinct to double down and it may be more strategic a few days out of this, it's obvious from the White House team to the policy folks that had has become this cloud that's obscured everything else. The debate on taxes and healthcare, if that's not by design then they have an opportunity now to pull back, but it is, you know, across the board has been the divisive issue across racial groups, across sports teams and turning the president's own political allies away from him.
[Blitzer:] Because some are suggesting there may be a political logic here and he wants to change the subject from defeat on health care and maybe his candidate in Alabama will lose, so he's trying to change the subject. You've heard that suggestion.
[Bade:] Obviously, we've heard rumors on that right now. I can tell you most of the Republicans on the Hill, yes, they're bracing themselves to fail this week and they probably don't want their noses rubbed in that at this point in time, but this is supposed to be a big week on tax reform and the president is supposed to go out and campaign for it and I can tell you from talking to Republicans on the Hill, a lot of them are banging their heads on the wall right now that the headlines are looking at this and they 100 percent blame Trump for this. I had a Republican source say to me a couple of hours ago, before this weekend there were just a few players doing this and most of these headlines had sort of faded. Trump came out attacking predominantly black players, right, and just a couple of weeks after Charlottesville, and now you have the culture war taking over the front pages. And that's not what we want to talk about right now.
[Borger:] This is how Donald Trump thrives. He thrives on division. He's not a president interested in uniting the country unless he's reading from teleprompter. This is someone who was in Alabama giving a speech and knew exactly what he was saying to that audience. He's somebody who viscerally feels the audience in front of him. And what he's done, instead of uniting the country, is he's created another culture war, as you say. And maybe, in the end, as Lebron James was saying earlier that this starts the conversation and that people can actually continue it in a more civil way.
[Blitzer:] All right, guys. Thank you very, very much, Gloria, Margaret and Rachel. Moments from now, the White House will face reporters in the briefing room, the first time since the president's attacks on NFL players. Will White House officials double down? Stand by.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon. A little past 11:00 here on the East Coast. Live with all the new developments for you tonight. We're talking about journalist Bob Woodward dropping a book which has the west wing in damage control right now. Sara Sanders, calls the book entitled "Fear," fabricated stories by a disgruntle employees, but Woodward, not only conducted hundreds of interviews, he says he recorded nearly all of them and what's been released so far, from the book shows that the President's inner circle, those in there, are worried that he is in danger to national security. So let's discuss now. I want to bring in now, CNN Political Analyst, Carl Bernstein, CNN Global Affairs, Max Boot and CNN Presidential Historian, Timothy Naftali. Good evening to all of you. it is going to be a very heavy call tonight, because as you know, Bernstein and Woodward, depending on who you're talking to, so Carl I've got to start with you because a couple of questions, no one knows hi, better, his work better than you. Many administration officials are being quoted in this book, right, and here's what he said tonight. He gave an interview. He said, he told the Daily Caller, it's just another bad book
[Carl Bernstein, Cnn Political Commentator:] The President.
[Lemon:] The President said this, yes. He is a lot of credibility. The President says, not Bob. He has a lot of credibility problems. And he is speculating that his statement could have come from where they came from is just as disgruntled employees just made it up. It could just be made up by the author. Talk to me about how Woodward works, his methodology. I know you want to talk about that.
[Bernstein:] Well, the methodology actually goes back to the Watergate reporting, particularly to the final days of the book he we wrote about Nixon's last year, in office. In which we went to literally 100, 200 people, tape recorded all our interview, the major participants, those closest to the President. And what emerges and what's so important about this book is that it's not about using the word idiot. It's not about a phrase here or there. This is a disturbing narrative scene after scene after scene of those closest to the President of the United States in his White House and administration saying we must save the country from the President of the United States.
[Lemon:] What about
[Bernstein:] Don, that is nonsense. It's not a book about palace intrigue. This is a book about those closest and most intimate in the president's inner circle of governance. Saying their job as they see it, is to save the country from the President of the United States' from his recklessness, from his lying, from his ignorance. And now to hear these denials knowing the methodology and knowing how Bob goes about his meticulous reporting and listening to the President talk about, well, maybe Bob is a Democratic operative. Look, Woodward has written books about Democratic Presidents that Democratic Presidents have hated. I've written a book about Hillary Clinton that Hillary Clinton has hated. The idea of reporters as Democratic operatives here, this is a book by the preeminent reporter in America using the methodology that has given us the history, Tim Naftali can tell you. We know what we know about the Presidency's of the United States going back for 45 years, because of Bob Woodward. More than any other thing in these books have held up book after book after book is calls you such a great
[Lemon:] So, let me get into Timothy picture it here.
[Timothy Naftali, Cnn Presidential Historian:] Yes, I will.
[Lemon:] So, let us get into tale a closer look at the book. OK, because the President's closest advisor describes him this is according to Woodward, the White House Chief of Staff, John Kelly, idiot, unhinged. Defense Secretary, James Mattis, a fifth or sixth grader. Former Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, f-ing more, and the former Economic Adviser, Gary Cohn, a professional liar. Former personally attorney, John Dowd, an f-ing liar. How alarming is this?
[Naftali:] Two things, this is alarming. I just want to say, if you want to test the Woodward approach, I would like to say it was the Woodward and Bernstein approach, because you're sitting there, so, I had an occasion to do this, go and look at their interviews for the final days at the University of Texas and then you can say how they've built the book. This is really damning because Woodward is moving the story beyond where Wolf and Whipple took it. And let me tell you where it's different, Mattis is in this story. To my mind, the biggest deal that I've read so far is we're hearing, if not from the Secretary of Defense because he is in awfully quiet, but from people close enough to him that Woodward is confident that he has a sense of what Mattis is thinking. Mattis is playing a role I believe in this administration similar to the role that Melvin Laird played in the Nixon administration. He is slow walking things, he is calming down the national security state because the President cannot be relied on to make smart national security or defense decisions. So one of the big windows Woodward appears to have opened in this case is the window to the DOD, especially to Mattis.
[Bernstein:] And Tillerson, and the assistant to the President, keep going through the list.
[Lemon:] Yes. Well, listen, let's talk more. Max, I want to bring you in. I mean, in the staff meeting, this is what the Chief of Staff John Kelly said in the book, again according to the book, he is an idiot. It is pointless to try to convince him of anything, he is gone off the rails. We're in crazy town. I don't even know why any of us are here. This is the worst job I ever had. OK, so then Kelly released a statement saying the idea that I called the President an idiot is not true. Adding the claimed, it's another pathetic attempt to smear people close to the President Trump and distract from the administration's many successes. He only said, I didn't he said one part
[Max Boot, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] I mean you have to parse those denials pretty closely. So, he denies calling him idiot, maybe he called him a moron like Rex Tillerson. I mean, clearly when you get into a battle of credibility between Bob Woodward and this White House Bob Woodward wins hands down. Because obviously going back to his base reporting with Carl Bernstein and I'm sure he learned everything that he knows from Carl, he has a 50-year track record of credibility of getting things right. On the other hand you have President Trump, just today, "The Washington Post" came out with the latest fact checker that would determine that President Trump lies an average eight times a day. This is the most mendacious White House ever. They lie more than the Nixon White House did. They have negative credibility, less than zero credibility, so it's just hard to take on faith anything they say and denying anything in this book especially because it paints a consistent picture if you read like what Michael Wolff said or Omarosa said, it's very, very similar where people around Trump have contempt for him. They view him as an idiot, they view him as a liar. That is a very consistent picture that Bob Woodward is not making that up.
[Lemon:] But it is also different to, I mean, the credibility
[Boot:] Yes, right, you know, Woodward adds details.
[Lemon:] Can I ask you specific, because I think this is important, you said you were telling him to go down the line and name all these people. This one is from Gary Cohn and this is one that really illustrates a level, I think of distrust for President Trump. Where reports that Trump was about to sign a letter that would have ended a critical trade agreement with South Korea, and Gary Cohn thought that it was it could have jeopardize top secret program to detect North Korean missile launches. And here is what he said he did next. He said, I stole it from his desk, I wouldn't let him see it. He is never going to see that document. I've got to protect the country. And according to Woodward, the former Staff Secretary Rob Porter also stole documents from the President, so he wouldn't see them. A third of my job, he says, was trying to react to some of the really dangerous ideas that he had and try to give him reasons to believe that maybe they weren't such good ideas. Have you ever heard of a situations like that?
[Bernstein:] Only in the final days of the Nixon presidency when those around Richard Nixon were afraid of what me might do because of the pressure he was under, but what Gary Cohn concluded was that the President of the United States is a threat to the national security of the United States, that is what aide after aide, principal after principal in this administration is saying in his book and the people who would recognize the truth of this book better than any others are Republicans on Capitol Hill. Because they have been sources for Bob Woodward in previous books. They know that Bob Woodward doesn't make these things up. So the question now is are some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill going to finally put national interest above partisan interest and call General Kelly in there for an executive session or Kelly resign and have some principle and say I need to tell the Congress of the United States in executive session what it is that this President has done, what he hasn't done, whether or not he is a threat to the national security of the United States. Because that, if you read this book it is very clear that Kelly believes that the President of the United States is a threat to the national security of the United States.
[Lemon:] Well, that was my question.
[Bernstein:] So enough of this nonsense from Sarah Sanders. Let's get down to what this is really about.
[Lemon:] That was my question. Why do they continue to do this and standby
[Naftali:] Because of what's happening in the Senate today. I am convinced that a lot of this is a bargain is to bargain. What they're doing, these Republicans that who have decided not to tell the truth about
[Lemon:] Or not to have a backbone.
[Naftali:] Here's the thing, Republicans used to believe in free trade. And the Cohn anecdotes are so powerful, because they're showing that there were people in the White House, Republicans were trying to stand up for Republican values and the President has no interest in those, but here's what I think is going on, they have made a fustian bargain. They have decided, we want Kavanaugh, we want as many Conservatives on the court. We are going to do this for a long term and if we have to put up with short-term crazy town, we will do it for the long term. I think that is what is going on.
[Lemon:] I got a lot sure ahead of me, but I hate it when people come on and say, whoa his supporters won't matter as if that makes a difference, you know if someone is lying and incompetent. Most supporters don't matter. Well, a lot of people who support people who do the wrong thing.
[Boot:] Right, I mean there's no question that Trump has done a pretty clever job of inoculating his supporters against believing the very credible reporting coming out about the craziness in the White House, because he is attacked the fake news media, he has painted the media as the liars, and yes he maintains 78 percent support among Republicans which is also part of the reason why Republicans on Capitol Hill are too cowardly to turn on him, but let's remember that Republicans are only about 26 percent of the country and in the country at large people have woken up to what's going on. Where you had the Washington Post, ABC News poll last week, which showed that Trump had a 60 percent negative rating. More people approved of impeaching him than approved of his job performance. So, you know, he is with this nonstop stream of falsehoods and attacks on the media, he is managing to keep his base together, but he is not convincing the rest of the country. And if that trend holds in November, he is going to pay a big price in the midterm election.
[Lemon:] That has got to be the last word. Thank you gentlemen, I appreciate it. When we come back. Another shocking revelation from Bob Woodward's book. Why President Trump called his speech denouncing white supremacists after Charlottesville, the biggest mistake he is made.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] President Trump, looking to strike a compromise to keep the government open. He's said to be ready to wait to fund the border wall, at least for now. The president also ready to slash the top corporate tax rate. How low will he go? And what could stand in his way? And why is the State Department giving promotion to the president's Mar-a-Lago resort? We'll show you the explanation for a very controversial article. Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans. It is Tuesday, April 25th. It is 5:00 a.m. in the East. Good morning, everyone. President Trump this morning showing some flexibility on funding for his promised border wall, indicating it might not be a deal-breaker on ongoing talks to fund the federal government past Friday's shutdown deadline. White House officials now signaling that an offer from Democrats for funding border security measures rather than funding the wall itself, that might be enough to satisfy the president. Trump telling conservative journalists at a private meeting that he is open to delaying funding for the wall construction until September. So there's no deal yet, but a strong sign the White House may not force a showdown over the wall as that Friday deadline looms. The new wiggle room eases back from earlier administration demands that at least sounded like the White House was insisting on funding for the wall as part of any deal to keep the government open. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said it this way to our Jim Acosta who asked why wall is even an issue if Mexico was supposed to pay for it.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] Well, I think, Jim, that the president has made very clear that, initially, we needed to get the funding going. And there's several mechanisms to make sure that that happens. We feel very confident the government is not going to shut down. Number two, is I think the president has been clear in the past, about the fact that and this is not a new thing. He talked about this. That in order to get the ball rolling on border security and the wall, that he was going to have to use the current appropriations process. But he would make sure that that promise would be kept, as far as the payment of it.
[Romans:] Some Democratic support in the House and especially the Senate, where 60 votes are required, will be needed to pass the spending bill. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer put out a statement late overnight, saying, "It's good for the country that President Trump is taking the wall off of the table in these negotiations. Now, the bipartisan and bicameral negotiators can continue working on the outstanding issues." The White House is floating the proposal to cut the corporate tax rate to 15 percent. Here's why the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate among developed nations, at 35 percent. The average worldwide is about 23 percent. Now, critics will tell you this makes the U.S. less competitive. They say it forces companies to use, shall we say, innovative tax practices and keeps huge piles of cash overseas. But cutting the corporate rate won't solve those problems entirely. Two main issues. First, the effective corporate tax rate is 14 percent, that's not 35 percent 14 percent is how much big profitable companies paid between 2006 and 2012. This is according to the Government Accountability Office. One in five big profitable companies paid no tax at all. Tax credits and loopholes allow these companies to legally reduce their tax burden. If the White House leaves those in place and reduces the corporate rate, revenue will simply plunge. That's the second issue. Tax cuts are expensive. If companies pay less, individual taxpayers would be on the hook to make up the difference. A Tax Policy Center study from last year, which looked at Trump's initial 15 percent proposal shows it will cost $2.4 trillion in vanished revenue over the next decade. That's about $240 billion a year gone. It's about the same the government spent on food stamps, jobless benefits, child nutrition for some context. So, the big question now how will the administration pay for it. The proposal will have to be revenue neutral to pass, as part of the budget process. Steven Mnuchin, the treasury secretary, has said they'll pay for it through stronger growth, something that people who score budget could be really tough to do. Let's talk politics with our panel, politics and money. Here with us in New York, political analyst Ellis Henican, author of 'The Trump's America" column for Metro Papers, and at CNN Center, political economist Greg Valliere, chief strategist for Horizon Investments. Good morning, gentlemen. Good Tuesday morning.
[Ellis Henican, Political Analyst:] Good morning.
[Romans:] Greg, let me start with you and this 15 percent floated tax rate. Is this just where, I guess, the president is starting his negotiation here? It seems like he's jumping out there, he wants to get this tax reform debate started.
[Greg Valliere, Political Economist:] Yes, he will say he wants 15 but, you know, Christine, I think he would take 20 or 21 or 22. That's still a dramatic cut from 35 percent. The other big part of this story, maybe not a good story for the bond market in the long-term, is that they really don't have a clue on how to pay for it and I think they will pay for it by assuming growth that will be extraordinary and maybe illusory.
[Romans:] Yes, we're calling it in our CNNMoney story, we're calling that the magic wand of growth to pay for it. Magic wand is right there in that headline. Let me ask you, Ellis. We also heard the president may be stepping away, may be blinking on this promise to put wall funding in budget negotiations. Has he learned something from the healthcare debate? What did you see in his negotiating tactics here?
[Henican:] Well, yes, don't bet all the marbles on something that you can't make happen in Washington. Clearly, this was really going to be a problem keeping the government open. If the president insists on this and Republicans in the Congress are willing to stand by him, you really could have had a government shutdown at the end of the week. I think that's looking increasingly less likely now. And that, you know, we will fight about it in the fall.
[Romans:] You know, we've heard so much, Greg Valliere, about this fight with Mexico and Mexican the president has said about Mexico, taking advantage of the United States, but it's interesting to me that the wall, then, is out perhaps. I mean, indications are that the wall is out of the budget negotiations and the first tariffs the president puts on are on Canadian companies.
[Valliere:] Yes, what a story. You've got a Republican party in control of both houses and the White House and they can't get what they want on the wall, they can't get what they want on a lot of things, maybe not even on the extent of the tax cuts. So, the Democrats are feeling kind of emboldened. They're going to get their way on a lot of this stuff. As far as Canada goes, we now have two big fights, lumber and dairy where this administration is really going after Justin Trudeau and the Canadians. I question why we would want to get into a fight with one of our strongest allies.
[Romans:] Yes, and the commerce secretary saying this was a bad week for U.S. and Canadian trade relation. Guys, let's talk about 100 days, the White House has called it ridiculous, has called it arbitrary. Last year, it was a contract with the American voter for 100 days, so it really has changed its view on that. You know, we've had some executive orders, Trump has issued some executive orders. He's had a big legislative accomplishment which is Gorsuch, but I want to stack up Trump, Obama, Bush the laws signed in the first 100 days. And, Greg, you say we are watching a transformation of this president into a typical center right politician with Goldman Sachs faction in control and no real legislative accomplishments here.
[Valliere:] Not a lot yet. I went back the other day and looked at 1933, Franklin Roosevelt in his first 100 days. That was extraordinary, epic, unprecedented. This president said a week or so ago that he has had the most impressive 100 days ever in the history of the presidency. Not quite sure I'm buying that.
[Romans:] I'm glad you bring us FDR, because, Ellis, here's what's interesting. Why we look at the first 100 days is because that construct was introduced by FDR because we were in a national emergency. And President Trump won by convincing voters that we are in a national emergency second only to the Great Depression.
[Henican:] First of all, FDR is a pretty high bar, I don't know that we should be comparing any modern president go ahead and try with that one if you like. But you know what? You're right, on the campaign trail and even in the early days of the administration, the president was really talking about America as being a very dire and bleak place and I've got to tell you, we've got some challenges. But I don't think that's the national mood at this point. Most people are middle class folks, particularly, it's tough but I don't think there is a sense that oh my God, we've got to turn over everything and I think the rhetoric didn't quite match the mood out there, and that's part of the reason why these things are not turning into actual serious legislative accomplishments.
[Romans:] I mean, when you look at investors, investors are making a ton of money, banks are making a ton of money, housing market looks good for the spring selling season, existing home prices up something like 7 percent. I mean, the question is, is the job market going to continue humming and can the president, Greg, take credit for that?
[Valliere:] Some credit but I do think a fundamental shift has been his alliance with the Goldman Sachs faction within the White House. They've won and that's not a bad story for the markets.
[Romans:] Not a bad story for the markets. Europe not a bad story for the markets. But what about the little guy, Greg? Is the little guy going to feel any better in four years when he goes back to the voting booth?
[Valliere:] I think the big story for the little gal, the little guy over the next couple years is how tight the labor market is. You and I have talked about this before. I think within a year the labor market will be so tight you're going to see wages going up. That's a good story as well.
[Romans:] Ellis, how does he what does he say about 100 days? I mean, is he going to pass he's going to have a rally in 100 days.
[Henican:] Right. And, in fact, he is' going to miss the correspondents dinner to have a rally in Pennsylvania, which apparently will be a much more happy audience, let's say. You know, I'm still in the incomplete category. He does make a legitimate point that many of the great accomplishments of our presidents have not occurred in the first 100 days, but he's kind of only got himself to blame on this because he set that standard for himself on the campaign and it's coming up a little short.
[Romans:] We will see if they can keep the lights on in Washington over the weekend.
[Henican:] Be careful what you say, by the way.
[Romans:] Yes. All right, guys, thanks so much. Come back in about a half an hour, get a cup of coffee. The State Department removing a post from its Share America site promoting President Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort. The article posted on U.S. embassy sites gave a visitors guide to the winter White House, saying it's become well-known a the president frequently travels there to work or host foreign leaders. Officials taking down this post, saying, "The intention of the article was to inform the public about where the president has been hosting world leaders. We regret any misperception and have removed the post." The post was new fodder for critics concerned about conflicts of interest between the presidency and the Trump businesses. Mar-a-Lago has already seemingly benefited from the Trump presidency. It club raising its initiation fee from $100,000 to $200,000 right after the election. President Trump with some harsh words for Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang, quick to respond with a military drill overnight. We're going to go live to Seoul, next.

[Camerota:] "Time" magazine accuses President Trump of, quote, "total b.s." after President Trump claims that "Time" was considering choosing him as person of the year. "Time" says there is, quote, "not a speck of truth to it." CNN's Brian Stelter is here to separate facts from fiction. Hi, Brian.
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] I'll try.
[Camerota:] OK. So, do we know if "Time" called and floated the idea that he would be person of the year?
[Stelter:] The magazine won't officially say, but it certainly makes sense that those phone calls would go out at this time of the year. Trump has been a contender in the last two years. Of course, last year he was the person of the year. So, it would make sense the magazine would ask for an interview. Maybe try to win an opportunity for a photo shoot. I doubt there was an explicit quid pro quo the way Trump is implying, but certainly, they were to smoosh him, trying to get an interview, and what's interesting about this I think is
[Camerota:] Maybe.
[Stelter:] we are not seeing the president give interviews to magazines like "Time" or outlets like
[Cnn. Camerota:] I mean, maybe if they were really smooshing him because that what he is saying, but they are saying there is not a speck of truth to it.
[Stelter:] Right. And they don't want to talk about it until December 6th when they announce person of the year. Now, I wonder will Trump still be the person of the year or will it go to some other category, foreign leader or perhaps will there be an acknowledgment of this tipping point we are seeing in the country, recognition of women who have spoken out against sexual harassment.
[Camerota:] That would be interesting.
[Stelter:] That's what I would do with the cover of "Time" magazine, but we're not the editors.
[Camerota:] Here's another interesting thing, it seems very important to President Trump to be on the cover of "Time" magazine because as we know, he created fake covers of himself as person of the year before he was ever named, and hangs them here it is. This was the fake cover that he hangs in his golf clubs.
[Stelter:] It might be real until you take a close look at it, and then you realize the fonts are not quite right. [Inaudible] other piece with President Trump doubting the "Access Hollywood" tape, retweeting "The Conspiratorial" website. All of it is somewhat related. You know, that he does buy into fake information or conspiracy theories when it is convenient for him to do so.
[Camerota:] So, what you are talking about in terms of retweeting this purveyor of fake news and conspiracy theories, he just doesn't check this stuff. First of all, he likes these websites that have fake news. He somehow gets his information there and then he doesn't do any quality control of his retweets.
[Stelter:] This is a conspiracy theory president. This time last year as president-elect, he talked about the millions of alleged illegal votes that don't actually exist and that continues now that he is in office. This website [inaudible] promoted over the weekend, he said this is what the media should be reporting. The website talks about satanic rituals, falsified terrorism, deep stake conspiracy theories, et cetera, et cetera.
[Camerota:] That's what he would like to see the press really dwell on and talk about.
[Stelter:] I guess, he didn't read that far down the website. He liked that list of accomplishments and wanted to leave it there. But I think a presidential figure, whether in the White House or any other foreign capital. What that person will be doing is promoting [inaudible] literacy and encouraging an informed citizenry, but what we get from President Trump sometimes is that opposite, that the desire to just promote whatever makes him look good.
[Camerota:] He was going after CNN again. Here is what he tweeted, "Fox News is much more important in the United States than CNN. But outside of the U.S., CNN International is still a major source of fake news and they represent our nation to the world very poorly. The outside world does not see the truth from them."
[Stelter:] Interesting to see CNN's response to that, by the way. Within minutes the network said, "It is not our job to promote the U.S. to the world. It is your job. Our job is to report the news." And I was struck by this, Alisyn, CNN's response actually got more than twice as many shares and faves and retweets as the president's message.
[Camerota:] That's really telling, Brian. I'm glad that you point that out because so many people obviously around the world do rely on CNN. I'm sure you had the same experience I have had, people coming up and thanking us for still bringing the facts, for still being the press, still being there. It is nice to know that people are spreading that word.
[Stelter:] And that is not a partisan position.
[Camerota:] Brian, thank you. Great to talk to you Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right. So, there is a legal battle brewing over who can lead the country's top consumer watchdog. There's an Obama-era official now suing President Trump. Who has the legal upper hand? Answers ahead.

[Sciutto:] The Senate delivering a rebuke to President Trump's handling of the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi. A majority, a large one, voted to advance a measure to end U.S. military support of the Saudi-led war in Yemen. In a briefing to senators on Wednesday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said there was a, quote, "no direct reporting linking the Saudi crown prince to the killing."
[Poppy Harlow, Co-host, Newsroom:] No, notably missing from that briefing, CIA Director Gina Haspel, one of the president's biggest supporters on the Hill, Senator Lindsey Graham expressing more than just a little frustration with her not being there. Why? Because she is the one who heard the tape
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] Of the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Listen to Senator Graham.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I'm glad we had it. I admire both the secretaries, but it was inadequate because the CIA was not there. Any key vote, anything that you need me for to get out of town, I ain't doing it until we hear from the
[Cia. Unidentified Female:] Have you made that clear to the president?
[Graham:] I just did.
[Harlow:] All right, we have significant breaking news to bring you this morning regarding President Trump, regarding Michael Cohen. Let's go to our colleague Pamela Brown, and Pamela, give us the main headlines here.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] What we are learning, Poppy and Jim, that Michael Cohen, the president's former attorney for more than a decade is expected to make a surprise appearance in front of a federal judge in New York this morning where he is expected to plead guilty to misleading Congress in the Russia investigation. So we know that Michael Cohen has previously testified to Congress on a number of issues related to the Russia probe including his efforts to brand the Trump Tower in Moscow. He has previously told Congress that those efforts have ceased in January of 2016. He also had told Congress that the president barely knew about it. So that was just one of the issues that we know Michael Cohen has previously talked to Congress about. And now this morning, we are learning ahead of his sentencing coming up later in December, that he is going to be appearing before a federal judge and pleading guilty to misleading Congress. This is significant for a number of reasons because the question is how will this impact the president? Michael Cohen is someone who has previously said he would take a bullet for the president and now it turns out he could be one of the most damaging witnesses to the president and his presidency. And so we could learn more about potentially, what the president has known as it pertains to the Russia investigation. We are waiting to find out what happens when he does appear before this federal judge. Shortly, he has already pleaded guilty to eight counts as we all know, as we've covered previously, that involves tax fraud as well as campaign finance violations. So this is certainly significant, because this is different. This is pleading guilty to misleading Congress and the Russia investigation. Poppy and Jim
[Sciutto:] So Pamela
[Harlow:] Yes
[Sciutto:] The timing here is key because he had testified that the talks regarding Trump Tower, the Trump Tower project in Moscow ended in January, 2016. He is now saying, is it correct, that those talks continued into June of 2016? That timing of course key because the president by then was presumptive Republican nominee for president. That timing key, no question. Is he also testifying that the president was aware that those conversations were continuing?
[Harlow:] We're going to have to wait and see what he says. I can only just tell you what he has testified to Congress in the past. He says that those discussions about Trump Tower in Moscow ceased in January of 2016. And he also said that the president barely knew about it. So those are two key points he has previously told Congress. And we know that the president has come out and said on several occasions that there is no deals with Russia. He has no financial dealings with Russia. He said that during the campaign. He said that again January 2017. So it certainly would be significant if Michael Cohen does appear before a judge and says that he misled Congress in terms of what the president knew about Trump Tower in Moscow and those efforts. Of course, nothing ever came of it as we know, the deal fell apart. But there was a letter of intent signed by the president in 2015. But again, the president continually distanced himself, saying he didn't know anything about it. Michael Cohen has come out in the past when he was Trump's attorney, he no longer is, and said that he didn't know much about it. So we're going to have to wait and see exactly what Michael Cohen is going to say in terms of pleading guilty to misleading Congress. So also, Pamela, you know, up until now, at least Michael Cohen has not yes, he pled guilty to those eight counts. He has not had a cooperation agreement with prosecutors in the Southern District. A, do we know if that changes today? Because we know he's facing a sentencing on December 12th, the sentencing where he could get 46 to 63 months in prison, and in the federal sentence, you have to serve 85 percent of it. So is he is this a cooperation agreement now? Do we know, and B, do we know if prosecutors from the FDNY or from Mueller's team will say anything about the effectiveness of what he has told them or how truthful they think it is?
[Brown:] Well, we're waiting to find out, you're right, there is no cooperation agreement between Michael Cohen and Robert Mueller's team, even though Cohen has been a significant of time, talking to Robert Mueller's team about the Russia investigation. He's also spoken to prosecutors in the Southern District of New York about the other charges that he pleaded guilty to including of course as we know, tax fraud in campaign finance violation. So the question is, is this an effort to perhaps get more leniency ahead of his sentencing coming up on December 12th. It's unclear at this point who will be present in that courtroom when Michael Cohen does plead guilty to misleading Congress. But that is certainly something to watch out for. Robert Mueller's team, their reaction to this, and what led to this because presumably he told Congress what he told Congress. But we know Robert Mueller's team has already been looking into this issue, what the president knew about the Trump Tower deal in Moscow. And so the question is, is through that investigation they were able to uncover that what Michael Cohen has told Congress didn't line up with the facts that they had from other communications from other people involved in this investigation. And as Michael Cohen is pleading guilty to misleading Congress in an effort to get leniency in his sentencing. We'll have to wait and see what happens on that front
[Harlow:] Right
[Sciutto:] Well, so this is happening now, well, presumably, we're going to know a lot more, one, about how far he goes, about the president's knowledge, et cetera, based on what he says in that courtroom, but also how the special counsel views his how helpful his testimony has been. That's correct, right? He is making this he is making these statements now in a courtroom here in New York.
[Brown:] That's right. He's going to be in front of a federal judge pleading guilty to this. And it's significant and unusual for this to happen, for this turn of events before someone is sentenced. I mean, this is someone who has already pleaded guilty to eight counts related to campaign finance violation and tax fraud. And now in a turn of events just before his sentencing, he's going to go before this federal judge in a surprise appearance and say that and plead guilty to lying to Congress. So the question is what role did Robert Mueller's team in this, and how will this impact things moving forward? And will it shed any light on the testimony that Michael Cohen has been giving to the Robert Mueller's team, how helpful it has been as it pertains to the president. You can imagine the president and his legal team would be paying close attention to this because Michael Cohen knew the president very well. He was his attorney for more than a decade, again, he was one of his fiercest defenders and of course he had then come out came out in court and said that he paid off those the two women in campaign finance violation at the direction of the president. So that sort of up ended any legal defense agreement between the president, his team and Michael Cohen's team. But certainly, the big question today is how has the testimony Michael Cohen has given to Robert Mueller's team impacted the president in this
[Harlow:] Yes
[Brown:] Russia investigation.
[Harlow:] So
[Sciutto:] We're getting those
[Harlow:] Yes
[Sciutto:] We'll be getting those reports from inside the courtroom. Pamela Brown, thanks very much as this goes forward, we have with us Jeffrey Toobin, Asha Rangappa. Jeffrey, let's talk about and again, we're going to be getting more information here, clearly. We have someone inside the courtroom, we're going to share that once we know once we know the details of that reporting. But just on what we know now, so he's going to say that he misled Congress on when those discussions regarding Trump Tower in Moscow ended. Initially, he said January, now he says it goes all the way into June, a month before the Republican convention when the president is the presumptive nominee. Legal significance to that, is it about abuse of the position, right?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, I mean, legal significance in terms of Michael Cohen is you can't lie to Congress.
[Sciutto:] Right
[Toobin:] I mean, that's pretty straightforward
[Sciutto:] For the president
[Toobin:] What it means for
[Sciutto:] Right
[Toobin:] The president is a lot more complicated. I mean, you know, this is an investigation about whether Donald Trump was working with the Russians to get himself elected. That's what this is about. That's what collusion means. And what the president has said over and over again is I have nothing to do with Russia. Here you have Michael Cohen saying apparently, that there were discussions, negotiations, something I mean, we'll see in court today between the president and his between the president's representative, at least, and the Russians in the middle of the 2016 campaign at a time when he was been extremely solicitous
[Sciutto:] Right
[Toobin:] To Vladimir Putin at a time when they changed the Republican platform at the convention to make it more
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Toobin:] Sympathetic to Russia
[Harlow:] I mean, with the Russia and that, by the way, tied into Ukraine as well which is obviously
[Toobin:] Paul Manafort bailing writ, yes
[Harlow:] A key interest right now and for the president has responded to Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Let's remind people what Michael Cohen told Congress behind closed doors when he said, look, all talk about a Moscow-Trump Tower ended in January 2016. He said because, quote, "the proposal was not feasible for a variety of business reasons and should not be pursued further." He said it ended then. Now we know from this reporting that there are questions about the honesty of that and where it went and who was involved and who in Russia was involved, Asha. As you look at this, Pam noted how rare it is for him to be coming forward and saying, look, I did this. What do you think this means about a cooperation agreement? What
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal & Security Analyst:] Well, you know
[Harlow:] Are we two weeks away from a sentencing?
[Asha:] When Cohen originally pleaded guilty, there were you know, it was clearly that he was trying to posture himself as somebody who could help Mueller and it seemed that Mueller was kind of rebuffing it, he was not interested. So the fact that he is doing this and clearly has information that's valuable to Mueller is significant. I would say that the other significant thing here is that Mueller has enough information to know that Cohen lied to Congress. And we have had many other people also testify in front of Congress, and I think they should be very worried because if Mueller gets a hold of those transcripts, he clearly has intelligence information evidence of what actually went on and those people could be on the hook as well.
[Sciutto:] OK, this is ongoing as we speak. Michael Cohen's surprise appearance in the court of the Southern District of New York federal court there. We have a reporter inside the courtroom and our colleague Kara Scannell who is in Washington is getting color from inside the courtroom. Kara, tell us what you are hearing about what Cohen is saying to the judge.
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Reporter:] Well, Jim, so we do have a colleague in the courtroom who is telling us that Michael Cohen has waived his right to an indictment which signals he is about to plead guilty, if he hasn't already. And what he is going to say that he did according to our colleague there is that he made false statements regarding the Moscow project and discussions about the Trump Tower-Moscow project. Now, this was a project that Cohen was involved with starting in the Fall of 2015 when Trump was beginning his presidential bid, and that he told Congress that it ended in January of 2016, you know, when the president was really getting underway with his bid for the then candidate. But Cohen is now saying that he lied about this, so the question is what did he lie about and what did the president know about this project? This was, though, a critical meeting, it was, as we had seen Michael Cohen has provided Cnn previously with the letter of intent about this deal that he has that Trump had signed between in the end of 2015. And this was all plans to build a luxury condominium tower like Trump has done elsewhere where they would make $4 million off that project. Michael Cohen has said to Congress that, you know, he reached out to the spokesman for Vladimir Putin trying to get a deal. And he had told us previously that, that had gone nowhere. So now we're learning that some of these statements that Cohen had made were not true, we don't know the details of that yet, but it's likely playing out in court right now as Cohen is pleading guilty. Again, he had already pleaded guilty in August to other
[Harlow:] Yes
[Scannell:] Offenses, and that time
[Harlow:] Right
[Scannell:] He implicated the president in the campaign finance piece.
[Harlow:] So Kara, stay with us on this because we're just getting these alerts out of our colleague Julia Jones in the courtroom, and significant what she is reporting is that Michael Cohen is now saying that he had discussions about this project as late as August of 2017
[Sciutto:] That's after that's after Trump has already he's already the Republican
[Harlow:] He's president
[Sciutto:] Nominee.
[Harlow:] Yes
[Rangappa:] In 2017
[Sciutto:] August 2017
[Harlow:] August 2017
[Sciutto:] August 2017 after he's
[Harlow:] President
[Sciutto:] Elected president. So this is even further than well, it's more than a year and a half beyond what he initially testified to Congress
[Rangappa:] And when the special counsel was already investigating.
[Sciutto:] Yes, so our legal experts sitting next to us here, significant, Asha, for the president.
[Rangappa:] Well, then you're getting into, as Jeffrey mentioned earlier, you are now in a place where he is holding an office and has certain fiduciary duties to his office to, you know, to not be profiting from, you know, whatever leverage he has over foreign relations or anything that Russia might want. And I think that this is really critical because I would like to know if any of the written questions that Mueller presented to Trump included questions in this vain. I expect that they did if Michael Cohen was already talking to them about this, and if he lied about those questions, dealings with Trump Tower, that could be a big problem for him as well.
[Toobin:] Let me just give another piece of context for all of this. I you know, I went to Moscow, I did a "New Yorker" piece about the Miss Universe pageant which his business partners in the Miss Universe pageant was the Agalarov family. The Agalarov family, the leader of that family is a big builder and sometimes called the Donald Trump of Moscow. Agalarov was the person who wanted to build the Trump Tower in Moscow. END

[Lemon:] Conservative media waging war on the FBI and Robert Mueller as the President charges the bureau is in quote, tatters. Let's discuss now CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter is here, legal and national security analyst Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent joins me via skype and political commentator Jason Miller, a former Trump senior communications adviser. Good morning to all of you. Asha, I'm going to start with you. Today, FBI Director Ray defended his agency against accusations by Republicans including the President that its agents were allowing political bias to seep into their investigations. What's your reaction to what seems to be a concerted effort, looks like a concerted effort to undermine the FBI and the special counsel's investigation?
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal And National Security Analyst:] I would say that it doesn't recognize what agents go through to get into the FBI. There is a new monic that we use to do background check with the FBI. This was applied to agents it is called CARLAFBAD. Which stand for Character Associate Reputation Loyalty Ability Finances Bias Alcohol and Drug. So every agent has to be measured against all of those criteria. And biased is one of them. It's important because any kind of bias, whether it is political, religious, racial, will disqualify an agent from getting in, because the whole idea is that agents need to be able to put aside all of their personal feelings in order to approach cases objectively. And it's a very intensive process. So, I would say, you know, this is extreme vetting for FBI agents, and to impugn an entire agency which is 35,000 people, 14,000 agents for what appears to be political reasons, I think really does a disservice to the men and women who are out there, you know, fighting the good fight and really trying to uphold the constitution every day.
[Lemon:] Brian, there has been a huge rise in anti-Mueller and FBI rhetoric from right winged media recently. It's just shocking to watch.
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] Yes, yes.
[Lemon:] And, I mean, it's got to be coordinated. Because they're all saying the exact same thing. Some of the same people who praise some of members of the FBI and the FBI not that long ago. Watch this.
[Sean Hannity, Fox Hannity:] Mueller is frankly a disgrace to the American justice system. And has put the country now on the brink of becoming a banana republic.
[Gregg Jarrett, Fox News Legal Analyts:] The Mueller investigation is illegitimate and corrupt. And Mueller has been using the FBI as a political weapon. And the FBI has become the America's Secret surveillance, intimidation, harassment, and threats. It's like the old KGB that comes for you in the dark of the night banging through your door.
[Hannity:] Mueller's stooges literally are doing everything within their power and then some to try and remove President Trump from office.
[Lemon:] Is this concerted effort to discredit Mueller?
[Stelter:] Yes, and remember, this is what President Trump's watching every morning and every night. That is why I think it matters. He is being told on a daily basis going back months, but especially right now, they're out to get you, his investigation is bogus, it is out to reverse the election, they're trying to impeach you, and that message over and over and over again, it must have an impact not just on President Trump, but also on his aids and on his supporters. That is why I think it's so troubling. And I wish, Don, I wish Asha could go on Fox and say what she just said. The problem with shows like Hannity, we're not hearing the other side. We're not hearing the reality of what it's like on the
[Fbi. Lemon:] I disagree with you, we are not hearing. We are hearing it. But Fox viewers are not hearing it. People in Alabama and Conservative viewers are not hearing it.
[Stelter:] Hopefully they're hearing all the sides, unfortunately too often, folks on the left and right live in bubbles. On the right now on the right that bubble is an alternative reality. It is very intense right now.
[Lemon:] It's really weird and I wondered, listen, watch Fox all the time, we would talk about it and say why do you watch Fox? You need to know what they're doing. I watched everyone, and now I just it's embarrassing.
[Stelter:] And if we get to the point
[Lemon:] It is embarrassing. I can't watch I have many friends over there
[Stelter:] It will be partly because of this rhetoric. Partly because of this daily drum beat of anti-Mueller.
[Lemon:] I wonder, do you think they know what a disservice they're doing to the American voting public? And I know they're probably going to play this, and this is not personal, you can play it all day long on Fox or whatever show, it's not personal, but one wonders, as a journalist, and some of them are not, some will hosts. I'm not saying anything disparaging, but how they can sit there and do such a disservice to the voting public, because we're supposed to be informing people, and they're not.
[Stelter:] Newt Gingrich is saying there should be an investigation of the investigation. Six months after he praised Mueller. Whether or not they know they're doing a disservice, it is a disservice to the audience. Because after all, Mueller in the case of this one FBI agent who was removed over the summer, he was removed. He is no longer in the investigation.
[Lemon:] Any time there and also what I wondered if their viewers realize, any time there is a where aboutism and whatever, you know that that is a shiny object because Hillary Clinton is not President. Bill Clinton is no longer President. And these are different times. Especially when it comes to sexual assault and abuse allegations. Even Bill Clinton would not have been stayed in office.
[Stelter:] Clinton's has been replaced finally after 12 months, Robert Mueller is the new bogey man on Fox News.
[Lemon:] Ok. Jason, I want to get you in here, because, do you think the president is taking his cues from the right wing media or is it the other way around, sort of circle or an echo chamber that just keeps going round and round.
[Jason Miller, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well Don, it comes as a complete surprise, I disagree with you in the entire premise here.
[Lemon:] That is ok.
[Miller:] During the commercial break, I went and flipped through the several of the largest conservative websites, Breitbart, Daily Collar, News Max, and I didn't see any of their top stories a focus on whether it be the FBI or Mueller. They certainly had other stories they were going into and so, the couple of clips that you showed, there were a couple of Hannity clips and one of the other telecasters over there at Fox News
[Lemon:] Isn't that kind of proving the point if they're not reporting on this? On the Russia investigation?
[Miller:] No, but I think there are a couple things that are completely fair game. And this even if you go back to you brought up the Clintons and that as the excuse to go back to Bill Clinton's presidency, but, you know, the Clinton White House very much made it a point to go after Ken Starr and folks who are working with him, to call it a certain ideological leanings and certain political activity.
[Lemon:] I think you're on, you were on the Paul earlier if I am not
[Miller:] Not tonight, but I have been.
[Lemon:] And he explained earlier. He explained earlier the difference in that. And I will give you that. That Democrats are using some of the same talking points during the Clinton investigation. Also remember, Robert Mueller is a Republican. Ken Star was a Republican as well. Bill Clinton was a Democratic president, also Ken star worked for the tobacco industry which is very anti-Clinton. So it's
[Miller:] Don, you're drifting lanes.
[Lemon:] No, I'm not. It is facts.
[Miller:] Tobacco industry, come on, let's reel it back in and get back to the point here for minute. The point that I was getting to is if you want to go through and raise an issue with say for the fact that someone has sent a bunch of text messages that are anti-Trump. I think that is very fairgrounds for removing them
[Lemon:] That is a fair point. And he was removed.
[Miller:] That is what I was doing. I was giving him credit for going and doing that. I think that is a very fair point. If someone maxed out whether be to Secretary Clinton or to President Trump, I think that is very fair to raise that issue and say wait a minute, this person has contributed $2700 or $5400. I think that is a fair point of criticism, now I think there's one thing that is going on here also and that is the fact that last year, under Director Comey, I think the FBI at least in the eyes of the American public really became highly politicized. I think some of Comey's actions really kind of cast a shadow over a lot of the hard-working men and women at the FBI. I have a number of friends who work at the FBI who really check their Politico
[Lemon:] What does that have to do with now and Bob Mueller.
[Miller:] Because what I'm saying is the point, I think it's very fair if folks to want go and make sure that the people who are part of these investigating teams are in fact playing it very nonpartisan. I think that is a very fair point
[Lemon:] I don't think anyone will disagree with that.
[Stelter:] It's different than saying it's illegitimate. Fox is spreading poison. You're aware of that.
[Miller:] But, you're making it sound like there's you're making it sound like there's a conservative bat signal that is being shot into the sky, and there's some
[Lemon:] Yeah, it's called satellite or a telephone or text message or an e-mail. Come on, Jason.
[Miller:] No, don, you're being this is the kind of stuff
[Lemon:] How else would the deep state get in touch with each other if they didn't send out bat signals? Listen, I've got to go. I am two minutes over, and I am in trouble, because they don't to want report on the Russia investigation. They want to give people what they want to hear. Trump supporters don't to want hear about the Russia investigation.
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal And National Security Analyst:] Don, can I just say
[Lemon:] Sometimes the truth is a funny thing. Thank you all, I've got to go. When I come back, the President being criticized for planning to attend the opening of the Mississippi civil rights museum. People are protesting, boycotting two African American congressmen are now skipping the event. Fair criticism? We'll discuss next.

[Philip Mcnamara, Former Dhs Official:] Build relationships with elected officials, with policy-makers on both sides of the aisle.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] Sure.
[Mcnamara:] And that meant that, you know, we had to work as well with Texas Governor Abbott as we did with New York Governor Cuomo. Right? They were equally important to us. And...
[Baldwin:] Sure. I no, I got I got you. Forgive me, because we need to start the next hour.
[Mcnamara:] Sure. Yes.
[Baldwin:] But I hear you and understanding exactly the scope of your job, how you feel, how you hope he doesn't get your job. We will just all wait and see what the secretary of homeland security says. Maybe we will talk again. Phil McNamara, thank you.
[Mcnamara:] Thank you so much, Brooke.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Baldwin:] All right. Here we are, continuing on. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. More breaking news today, two major live events happening this hour, one, live pictures there at the West Wing. The president will be speaking from the White House for the very first time since news broke that a special counsel will now investigate whether his campaign had ties to Russia. So we're watching and waiting for that. He's doing that with the Colombian president. Meantime, on Capitol Hill and you see the microphones set up we're hoping to hear from some of those senators. The man who appointed Robert Mueller to spearhead this independent investigation is the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein. And he is briefing all 100 senators in a closed-door meeting as I speak. And he is expected to reveal what he knows about why President Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey. But, first, let's get to some more breaking news, because sources are telling CNN that former Senator Joe Lieberman is the front-runner to replace Comey as FBI director. So, let's begin there with our senior White House correspondent, Jeff Zeleny, and Phil Mattingly on Capitol Hill. Jeff Zeleny, first to you. What are we hearing from these senior administration sources on the president's thoughts on Senator Lieberman?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] Well, Brooke, we do know that the president would like to name an FBI director before he leaves Washington, which is exactly in about 24 hours or so. So, we are learning from several sources that Joe Lieberman is right now, at the moment at least, the leading contender for this position. Now, it was less than 24 hours ago, just at the end of the day yesterday, where Senator Lieberman was here at the White House having an interview, his first and only interview with the president on this. And Mr. Lieberman said himself that this came out of the blue. He was somewhat shocked to be approached about this, but indeed he was. So, look, this is someone who, if nominated, would likely be confirmed because of his long relationships with senators on both sides of the aisle. But it is interesting to point out the president said he wants to get this done, but he wanted initially to name John Cornyn, the number two Republican in the Senate. Manu Raju and I reported this yesterday, that this was the president's top choice for this. So, Senator Lieberman would be sort of the second, but that does not, you know, discount this at all. But the president is eager to get this done. But now, with a special counsel hanging over this, Brooke, it changes everything in terms of the FBI, the Russia investigation, et cetera. But expect the president to be asked about this, this afternoon when he has that news conference in a short time in the East Room.
[Baldwin:] We will listen in live this hour. Jeff, thank you. On down the other side of Constitution Avenue, we have you, Phil, covering this Rod Rosenstein closed-door meeting. What are some of the questions? He's been talking he will be talking to the full Senate. What are some of the questions you think that will be asked of him today?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] Brooke, I think you have hit on the key element. Right? I think senators and this isn't just a Democrat thing. This is a bipartisan thing. Senators want answers to what exactly happened in the lead-up to the firing of Jim Comey. Obviously, Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, was the one who drafted the three-page memo that essentially gave the rationale for why James Comey deserved should be fired. Now, he didn't explicitly recommend that. And that was the three-page memo that White House official after White House official after White House official cited for the rationale for his firing. Also, Vice President Mike Pence repeatedly cited that as the reason for his firing. And then you had the president come out a day later and say, no, I was actually going to fire him the entire time. So, I think there's a lot of questions now. Was the White House influence exerted on that process? Why did that actually occur? But also another thing that I have picked up, Brooke, just in the last hour or so, when Rod Rosenstein walked in, he did not respond to questions that were shouted at him. And he's not expected to speak to the press at all. But Democratic senators are concerned. You have noted a couple times the president's tweets this morning about this investigation, calling it a witch-hunt. They want to make sure that Robert Mueller, who is well-respected on a bipartisan basis, will have the autonomy he needs to conduct this investigation. Now, as a special counsel, he is supposed to have that autonomy. He will staff it himself. He will have the resources. But they want to make sure, because this is more or less housed inside the Justice Department, that nobody from the Trump administration will have oversight on that. So, that's something I have picked up as a key question, a key commitment they want answers to at this briefing. But I do think, as we have all been paying attention to bombshell after bombshell after bombshell the last 10 days, how the Comey firing happened and what the White House and president's role in it, that is kind of question one, two, three, and four right now.
[Baldwin:] Well, we know that there are two and two questions that will be asked of the presidents. We just saw the Colombian president arrive there at the White House, with President Trump welcoming him. And so, as Jeff mentioned, that news conference will happen. They will get some questions. We will wait and see if any of those pressing questions are asked of President Trump. Guys, thank you both so very much. Let's have a bigger conversation about really all of the above today. I have CNN presidential historian Tim Naftali, who is the founding director of the Nixon Presidential Library and Museum. Also with us, CNN political analyst Carl Bernstein of the fame Woodward and Bernstein, the journalists who broke open the Watergate story for "The Washington Post." So, Carl, let me begin with you on the news that it sounds like Senator Joe Lieberman could be it, could be the pick for the FBI director. Your thoughts?
[Carl Bernstein, Cnn Contributor:] Well, I think it's possible to be a bit cynical about the choice, for the following reasons. Lieberman is someone that Trump likes. Jeff Sessions likes Joe Lieberman. They know each other. He comes from a law firm that has done work for the president of the United States in his private life. It's clear that this president wants to hold on to as much influence and control and affect the investigations to whatever degree that he can. There has been a cover-up that's been going on. Doesn't mean he's obstructed justice, but there's no question that there's been a cover-up going on, in which the president of the United States has tried to impede, obstruct, demean legitimate investigation. And now I cannot imagine he doesn't want to continue to have whatever influence and contact with the investigation he possibly can. And perhaps he is thinking and Sessions is thinking that, at least with Joe Lieberman, it's a somewhat friendly figure who would be the head of the FBI. But, also, Joe Lieberman is someone with a really distinguished record as a member of Congress. He was the vice presidential nominee of his party when he was a Democrat. Another reason I think he's viewed favorably by the White House is that he did become an independent, he did move away from the Democratic Party. But I also don't want to be too cynical about this, because I cannot imagine that Lieberman, if he were in that job, would not take it seriously and go for the letter of the law and the spirit of the law, and particularly with Robert Mueller as the head of the investigation, as the special counsel. And what has really happened here is that Rod Rosenstein has thrown a monkey wrench into this cover-up and into the ability of the Trump White House to stonewall and put impediments in the way of the investigation. So, we have a whole new situation.
[Baldwin:] Let me get to that monkey wrench in a second. Let me get to that monkey wrench in a second, Carl. But, Tim, I want your 2 cents. As Carl appropriately points out, Senator Lieberman was a Democrat. That's great for bipartisan support. But, listen, the president needs to shore up support in his own party. It doesn't hurt that he's close friends with the likes of Senators McCain and Senator Graham?
[Tim Naftali, Cnn Presidential Historian:] Well, I learned a long time ago never to second-guess Carl Bernstein's political instincts.
[Baldwin:] Smart man.
[Naftali:] But one of the things we have seen is that presidents often make choices thinking they have found a friend, or a White House would do that. I mean, Leon Jaworski was the man chosen to replace Archibald Cox. The assumption was, this Southern Democrat, he's not going to ask the kinds of questions...
[Baldwin:] Oh, but he did.
[Naftali:] But he did.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Naftali:] I don't know Senator Lieberman, but I suspect a man who wanted to be vice president of the United States, came very close to being vice president of the United States, would have the bigger picture in mind and would see the opportunity to be remembered for getting to the bottom of a scandal that isn't just, which is big enough, a domestic scandal political scandal, but this is one with international implications. You get Lieberman, a man with respect on both sides of the aisle, you couple that with Mueller, a man who also enjoys professional and bipartisan support, and you have the likely scenario for a deep, serious investigation of the Russia hacking and possible collusion scandal.
[Baldwin:] Point taken. Carl, back to your monkey wrench point, Rod Rosenstein, he's the guy who is the deputy attorney general. He's behind closed doors right now answering questions with the full U.S. Senate. He is also the reason why the president is irked today, because he is the one who appointed Bob Mueller as this special counsel. The president has responded. We can throw the tweet out. There were two tweets this morning, one ultimately from the president, saying this is like this massive political witch-hunt. How hopeful are you, sir, that the president will comply with Mr. Mueller and this investigation?
[Bernstein:] I don't think it's about being hopeful. I think it's a question of whether the president of the United States has the ability to understand what is really going on around him. One of the things that we have seen and we're hearing from Republicans on Capitol Hill is, there's real question among some of them in private about his fitness to be president of the United States, that these tweets, including the one from today, are indicative of a lack of understanding about what the office of the presidency is, about our history, about what the witch-hunts in this country have really been about, that the president of the United States has shown himself to be of a singular out-of-synch person in terms of the occupants of this office. I don't know how else to put it. And that's what is striking more and more Republicans as they watch his handling of these events. The question of collusion with the Russians and I think Tim's analysis, incidentally, about Lieberman, his optimistic analysis, is absolutely very smart, and particularly as well because Lieberman has shown such disdain for the Soviet Union, for Putin, for the Russians. And he has a great understanding of their playing in world politics and their desire to destabilize the United States and probably our elections. And what we have seen is the president himself dismisses the unanimous view of the Intelligence Committee community that the Russians really, seriously tried to destabilize our elections. He gives lip service to it every now and then, and then he goes back to being a victim, as he expressed himself in his tweet today. So, we have two things happening simultaneously. What Mueller is going to do is follow the law and see whether or not the president and those around him have colluded with the Russians in any way, but more than that, he's going to take a look unquestionably at the Trump finances, at the Trump family finances, the Trump Organization finances...
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Bernstein:] ... because so much of that is related to Russian money, according to Trump's own sons and according to the money that other investigators have followed.
[Baldwin:] Carl, you said a word a minute ago. You said the president feels like the victim. And it does. It's evident in some of his tweets. But these are self- inflicted wounds. And I'm looking at the two of you, and we have been talking a lot about Watergate. But, Tim, let's bring up Whitewater. Whitewater was something that started as this land purchase in Arkansas that mushroomed into what we now know as the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
[Naftali:] Yes, right.
[Baldwin:] And I can't help but wonder, is this something, in the back of President Trump's head, right, and he's thinking, well, that's what happened there maybe this is part of the reason why he's tweeting the way he is.
[Naftali:] Except he tweeted that there wasn't a special counsel during the Clinton period. And he completely was telling us he completely forgot that the entire Clinton administration was one long investigation. I think, to the extent that any of us could get into the back or even the front of the president's head, or mine, I suspect that the president realizes that the selection of Robert Mueller is a big problem for him, because this is not someone who is going to respond to his charms. This is a man whose reputation rests on the fact that he follows data wherever it goes.
[Baldwin:] OK. Gentlemen, we have got to break away from both of you.
[Bernstein:] Can I add can I add one...
[Baldwin:] Hang on. Hang on. Carl, forgive me. I never like cutting Carl Bernstein off, never, ever.
[Bernstein:] That's all right. Not to worry. There will be another...
[Baldwin:] But I have got there will be indeed. Thank you both. I have got some breaking news, because Wolf Blitzer is now standing in front of a camera, I'm told, because he's just met with the president of the United States. There you are at the White House. Wolf, what what did he share?
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, we had an extensive luncheon, network anchors, with the president. But one part of that exchange that we had with the president dealt with his reaction to this decision for a special counsel, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, to take change of the entire Russia investigation and related aspects of that. And the president did offer us an on-the-record off-camera statement about that, how worried he is about this decision, because he believes it hurts America. And let me read to you the entire statement. This is on-the-record from the president of the United States about this appointment of a special counsel quote "I believe it hurts our country terribly because it shows we're a divided, mixed-up, not-unified country. And we have very important things to be doing right now, whether it's trade deals, whether it's military, whether it's stopping nuclear, all of the things that we discussed today. And I think this shows a very divided country." The president then added this, giving us his on-the-record reaction to this decision quote "It also happens to be a pure excuse for the Democrats, having lost an election that they should have easily won because of the Electoral College being slanted so much in their way. That's all this is. I think it shows division. And it shows that we're not together as a country. And I think it's a very, very negative thing. And, hopefully, this can go quickly, because we have to show unity if we're going to do great things with respect to the rest of the world." That on-the-record statement, at length, giving us his reaction, a very angry reaction to this decision, which clearly took him by surprise, to go ahead with a special counsel named by the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein that's his reaction, a very strong reaction. He says, "I believe it hurts our country terribly because it shows we're divided, mixed-up, not-unified country" that statement, Brooke, from the president of the United States.
[Baldwin:] Wow. So, he takes you back to the election and says it's an excuse for the Democrats having lost, and says the special counsel hurts the country. What else, Wolf? What else can you share about this meeting?
[Blitzer:] Well, you know, most of the meeting was on background, and a lot of it was what we call off-the-record. I have been coming to the White House for meetings like this, luncheons, with presidents of the United States for many years, and very often, they feel much more comfortable speaking either off-the- record with network anchors or on background. One thing I did learn and I think this is significant the first stop on his trip he leaves tomorrow for Saudi Arabia we did learn from U.S. officials during the during this luncheon that an important agreement will be signed with Saudi Arabia. That's the first stop on the trip. It calls for the Saudis over the next 10 years to purchase $350 billion, billion, worth of U.S. military equipment, over the next year alone, $109 billion or...
[Baldwin:] Excuse me, Wolf. Let me go to Senator Lindsey Graham. Let me come back to you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right.
[Baldwin:] Lindsey Graham out of this Rosenstein hearing.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] It's now considered a criminal investigation. And Congress' ability to conduct investigations of all things Russia has been severely limited, probably in an appropriate fashion. So I think a lot of members want the special counsel to be appointed, but don't understand that it's you're pretty well knocked out of the game. And that's probably the way it should be. It was a counterintelligence investigation before now. It seems to me now to be considered a criminal investigation. And what does that mean for the Congress? I find it hard to subpoena records of somebody like Mr. Flynn who may be subject to a criminal investigation, because he has a right not to incriminate himself. As to Mr. Comey, the former director of the FBI coming before the committee, if I were Mr. Mueller, I would jealously guard the witness pool. So, one of the big losers in this decision is the public. We had a really good hearing with Yates and Clapper where the public could hear what happened with Ms. Yates and Mr. Clapper. I think that opportunity has been lost, maybe for the greater good, but there are a lot of people in that room who are shocked that, when a special counsel has been appointed, that Congress has limitations on what we can do. So, I have always believed that a counterintelligence investigation did not need a special prosecutor or counsel. A criminal investigation might. The deputy attorney general decided to appoint a special counsel. And one of the results of that, the ability of Congress to call people who may be witnesses in an investigation conducted by Mr. Mueller is going to severely restrict what we can do.
[Question:] Did the deputy attorney general confirm that it's now a criminal investigation?
[Graham:] I never got to ask my question specifically about that. But the takeaway I have is that everything he said was that you need to treat this investigation as if it may be a criminal investigation. So, I think the biggest legal change seems to be that Mr. Mueller is going to proceed forward with the idea of a criminal investigation vs. a counterintelligence investigation. There was no facts laid out as to why you would change that, but appointing a special counsel has created, I think, a dynamic for Congress that's going to have to be very leery of crossing into Mr. Mueller's lane, because of the possibility of a criminal investigation.
[Question:] ... mean that you won't the Judiciary Committee won't be able to get memos that were requested yesterday?
[Graham:] I think Mr. Mueller will tell us what we can get and what we can't.
[Question:] So, the upshot, Senator, is that your investigation is going to be put on a back-burner. And while you were inside, you may not have heard that Joe Lieberman's name has now emerged as a top contender for FBI director.
[Graham:] Good choice.
[Question:] What's your reaction to that?
[Graham:] Well, one of the winners of this decision of appointing a special counsel is the new FBI director, because they don't have to deal with this. I think Joe Lieberman is a pillar of credibility. And I think he'd be a good choice. But now we have a special counsel, the FBI director does not have to worry about riding herd over an investigation of the man who appointed him. So, I think it changes...
[Question:] So, this takes care of your concerns that you enunciated...
[Graham:] Yes. Yes.
[Question:] The president just said that having a special counsel hurts our country terribly.
[Graham:] Well, he's entitled to his opinion. I would suggest to the president that one has been appointed, honor that decision, cooperate where is appropriate, fight back when you have legal ability to do so. I have been through this once before with the Clinton administration. Clinton hired an individual lawyer to deal with all things related to Ken Starr, so the White House could conduct its business. If I were the president, I would focus on defending the nation and trying to get his legislative agenda through the Congress. One of the side benefits of this is that now Congress has been pretty much sidelined, not completely, but pretty much. And we can go back to dealing with legislative matters that affect the American people. So, the bottom line here is, the president may not have liked this decision. It was made. I have questions about it. I honor it. You couldn't have picked a better man to do the job. And I think most people in that meeting are generally OK with the idea of a special counsel. But what they don't quite understand yet is I think this has really limited what Congress can do. I find it hard I would be reluctant to subpoena someone or a document in their possession if I truly believed they may be subject to a criminal investigation. That's not fair to them.
[Question:] Did you get a satisfactory explanation as to from Rosenstein about why Comey was fired?
[Graham:] I think Mr. Rosenstein viewed the whole process as something Mr. Mueller will speak on, not him.
[Question:] Are you satisfied with the answers you received about the firing of former FBI Director Comey?
[Graham:] Mr. Rosenstein talked about why he voted wrote the memo, the fact that he believed that what the FBI director did in July was inappropriate, that he stepped out of his lane.
[Question:] Senator, was he tasked to write that memo?
[Graham:] He did not I will let you ask him that question. Now that we have a special counsel about all things related to the process of the memo, I think we will you will need to talk to Mr. Mueller about. I have got to go.
[Question:] All right, thank you very much, Senator.
[Baldwin:] All right, Senator Lindsey Graham clearing the path away from all of those reporter who have lots and lot of questions. So, there's just been this closed-door meeting with the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, who is the person who appointed the FBI Director Robert Mueller to be the special counsel in this Russia probe. And so, Carl Bernstein, Tim Naftali, you guys are both still with me. Carl, to me, the headline out of that is that Senator Graham said it seems no longer will this probe be seen as counterintelligence, but as a criminal investigation. That seems significant to me. Your take?
[Bernstein:] I think that's absolutely right, that the gravity of the criminal investigation has now taken precedence over a public, more public investigation by the Congress of the United States. But I think we ought to look at this in terms also of what the president of the United States said to the anchors, including Wolf Blitzer, which was extraordinary, that looking at a legitimate investigation as evidence of a divided country and a kind of sadness, without, once again, taking into consideration what apparently has occurred with the Russians and their attempt to destabilize American elections, and whether people around President Trump or perhaps President Trump himself were involved, which is partly what this criminal investigation is going to be about. But an important part here about both Mueller and Lieberman, and that is, we talked earlier about fishing expeditions such as the Whitewater investigation that led to Monica Lewinsky. One of the things you have with Mueller is an understanding of how some special prosecutors have abused their authority. I don't think there's a chance in hell that we're going to see Mueller abuse his authority with a fishing expedition, nor would Joe Lieberman go there, that, yes, are we going to see them perhaps look at Donald Trump's finances and do forensics on his business ties and whether there is something that needs investigation there that might have to do with something that happened with the Russians? Yes. But is he going to allow this thing to go all kinds of latitude that is nothing but inappropriate fishing? Not going to happen. And I think president of the United States, instead of feeling sorry for himself, ought to feel confident, if the facts are as he maintains and that there's no there there.
[Baldwin:] Again, if you're joining us, the breaking news, we're this is the stakeout microphones, waiting to hear from U.S. senators, as this Rosenstein testimony has been going on in front of the full U.S. Senate, Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican there, just basically saying it appears to him that this probe is now a criminal investigation. Here's more senators. Let's listen.
[Sen. Claire Mccaskill , Missouri:] ... concerning Comey's dismissal, because he's anxious to give wide latitude to Robert Mueller to make a determination as where his investigation should go and what it should include. As a former prosecutor, I respect that decision. He did acknowledge that he learned that Comey would be removed prior to him writing his memo.
[Question:] Say that again? He what?
[Mccaskill:] He knew that Comey was going to be removed prior to him writing his memo.
[Question:] Senator, Joe Lieberman has been now emerged as a top candidate for FBI director. Would you be receptive to that nomination?
[Mccaskill:] I think it's a mistake to nominate anyone who has ever run for office. I'm somebody who spent a lot of time in law enforcement. This is a moment where we need a law enforcement professional that has never campaigned for a presidential candidate, never campaigned for office, never worn a party label to head the
[Fbi. Question:] What is your takeaway from the revelation that he knew Director Comey was going to be fired, regardless of what his recommendation was going to be?
[Mccaskill:] Well, I think the facts speak for themselves. And I'm going to not comment any further, because we still don't have all the facts. We don't have the documents. We don't have sworn testimony. But he was very careful about not going into any details surrounding the removal, because he wants to give Robert Mueller the opportunity to make his independent decision as to where the investigation is going to go.
[Question:] What does it mean for the congressional investigations? Do they now take a back-burner, Senator?
[Mccaskill:] Well, there were a lot of questions about him cooperating with the congressional investigations, once again with the caveat that he's no longer in charge and that he wants to give Robert Mueller the opportunity to deconflict with the committees of jurisdiction... ... conducting the investigations. I think that he generally, obviously, expressed a desire to cooperate with congressional investigations.
[Question:] Senator Lindsey Graham has just told us that, based on the briefing, this investigation has crossed, he thinks, an important thresholds from a C.I. case to a criminal case, and that this may in fact limit Congress' ability to get evidence and bring in witnesses to testify.
[Mccaskill:] Well, Lindsey is a former prosecutor also, and I will let Lindsey's comments speak for themselves. What I sensed from him was an overarching desire to make sure Robert Mueller had complete discretion to take the investigation where he thought it needed to go. Thank you.
[Baldwin:] OK, so, another major piece of news there from Senator Claire McCaskill, essentially saying to reporters that Rod Rosenstein told these senators in this closed-door meeting that he learned that the then FBI Director James Comey would be removed prior to Rosenstein's writing the letter to recommend the removal. All right, so, Carl Bernstein, how does that jibe with all of what we heard from the White House, and then later we heard from President Trump in the interview with Lester Holt on NBC, saying, no, no, no, I didn't listen to anyone's recommendation, I wanted to do this for quite a while?
[Bernstein:] Well, I think it's been evident for quite some time that the president, as well as Jeff Sessions, wanted to use Rosenstein as someone with credibility and as window dressing for a decision that had already been made, and which, in fact, as we now see, with Mueller's investigation, the decision itself to fire Comey could be part of an investigation into whether the president of the United States obstructed justice. We don't know that's the case, but it certainly is something that may be suggested in all of this. And we know from some things that have been said by Rosenstein in private to people on Capitol Hill that he felt used and abused...
[Baldwin:] Thrown under the bus.
[Bernstein:] ... by by what happened in his letter being used to justify what had already occurred, in other words, that he was hung out to dry, perhaps, by the president of the United States and Jeff Sessions. And let me say one other thing about Jeff Sessions here.
[Baldwin:] Sure.
[Bernstein:] There is a possibility and I don't want to suggest that I know this is the case, but, certainly, there is the possibility that Jeff Sessions could be one of those who is being looked at or may be looked at as part of this criminal investigation. It doesn't mean he's done anything illegal or that he's the focus of anything. But he was the head of national security matters for the Trump campaign. And that may or may not figure in part of the FBI's investigation. And we should keep it in mind. And I don't want to cast any aspersions, only to say that it's relevant

[Gorani:] What will you do if you are a world leader trying to get over horrible past seven days? If you're Britain's Theresa May, you go on national radio and take questions directly from the public. She was speaking to Ian Dale, a panelist on our very own CNN talk show. Here is some of what she had to say. Listen.
[Unidentified Caller:] I'm particularly just worried about this new deal scenario. I know that you really want to try to get a good deal, but what would happen in the case and you release the white paper on this yesterday. What is your backup plan for E.U. citizens in case of a no deal?
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] Yes. Well, as I said, we are looking at we wanted to say perhaps the basic message, we want to ensure that you can stay in the U.K. Obviously, the reason we are having these discussions with the E.U. is because once we leave the E.U. if we have got an agreement with them, then it is about how that reciprocity of treatment. But we want you to be able to say and we want you to be able to contribute to our society.
[Unidentified Radio:] Can you guarantee that Nina and all the millions of people like her under no ideal situation would be able to stay with the same rights that they enjoy at the moment?
[May:] Well, we will device a [inaudible] to people staying when we got a deal with the European Union and that is what we are working out.
[Unidentified Radio:] We know that, but we are talking about a no deal here.
[May:] Now you are talking about no deal and that is why what I'm going to say to Nina is that we will look at the arrangements that we would put in place in relation to no deal. We are doing work on that at the moment.
[Unidentified Radio:] If there was a Brexit vote now, would you vote Brexit because you guys had remain in the referendum. Have you changed your mind?
[May:] Well I don't answer hypothetical questions, but what I have
[Unidentified Radio:] It's an easy answer. I would be able to answer that. I know I would vote in exactly the same way.
[May:] Well, I voted remain. I voted remain for good reasons at the time but circumstances move on. I think the important thing now is that I think we should all be focused on delivering Brexit.
[Unidentified Radio:] Absolutely.
[May:] And delivering the best deal what you're asking me to say how would I vote in a vote now against a different background, different national background, different economic background
[Unidentified Radio:] You tell me that you would vote to leave now? Jeremy [inaudible] conference, he said he voted remain in the referendum [inaudible] because of remain. He said now he would vote for Brexit because he says George Osborn's economic predictions did not come true and he said that he was fed up with the [inaudible] of the European Commission. Now if he says he could change his mind, I don't quite understand why you can't since you are prime minister leading us into Brexit.
[May:] Yes. And I'm prime minister showing I'm going to deliver Brexit for the British people
[Unidentified Radio:] You can't tell me that you would now vote leave in the referendum?
[May:] Because I think and when you come- I could sit here and I could say I'd still vote remain or I vote leave just to give you an answer to that question. I'm being open and honest with you. What I did last time on was I looked at everything and came to a judgment and I do exactly the same this time around. But we are not having another referendum and that's absolutely crucial.
[Gorani:] I'm joined now by the man you saw in that clip, Iain Dale, he was interviewing the prime minister and also here with me is Ayesha Hazarika, a fellow CNN Talk panelist. They both join me now. Iain, what did you make of this interview was a bit cringe making in parts, wasn't it? I mean, she was asked quite clearly, would you still vote remain, yes or no. I don't how many times you asked it five or six times, she wouldn't give an answer.
[Iain Dale, Cnn Talk Panelist:] You showed 2 minutes, though. It was actually 40-minute phone in. She did well on quite a few other questions, but on Brexit, you would expect the prime minister to be really fluent to answer question very clearly. But, as you saw there that did not really happen. I think a lot of people will wonder why somebody who is leading Britain through these Brexit negotiations she can't actually say yes, well, of course, if there was referendum now, I would vote Brexit.
[Gorani:] Is it a tricky position? If she says yes, I'd vote remain again then people would be wondering why on earth are you leading negotiations to leave. If she answers no I'd vote leave now, they say you are flip-flopping, wouldn't they?
[Dale:] Well, the health secretary as I said in the interview, Jeremy Hunt, he told me last week in an interview, which is kind why I asked the question that he had changed his mind for very logical reasons. Now she must know what she would do. She says, well, I don't answer hypothetical questions. Always get out tools for any politicians as you well know when [inaudible]. That did not come over very well.
[Gorani:] What did you make of her demeanor?
[Dale:] She was when she started, we talked about her conference call, when she made that conference speech last week, she has somebody rush the stage and then she could not really get her words out because she's coughing for half of the speech and she was very good on that. And she's quite lighthearted and she answered questions. We've had so- called racial disparity order today, which has made very uncomfortable [inaudible] in this country about how the minorities feel disadvantaged. It was her initiative and that was the original reason for the phone-in so she could come on to talk about that. We spent about 30 minutes talking about it and she was fine on that and she clearly cares about a great deal. But I'm afraid all headlines in tomorrow's newspapers are going to concentrate on one thing and it's not that.
[Gorani:] All right. Ayesha, what did you make of it?
[Ayesha Hazarika, Cnn Talk Panelist:] Well, I think it confirms to everybody that she's in a very, very weak position. I mean, I think Iain was quite naughty enough given that question because it's an impossible question for her to answer. But she should have been prepared for it. She looked very sort of caught under with and the answer that disturb me the most, she was asked by a call if there is no deal, will E.U. citizens be allowed to stay in the U.K. and she could not give a definite answer. I think that is a terrible headline to come out tomorrow. Iain even pushed her on that. Now Iain is, you know, he's a proud Brexiter and he almost I think was fishing her to give an answer of reassurance. She could not give the answer there on my
[Gorani:] [Inaudible] hard Brexit is not an unlikely possibility. It seems like the idea and the notion of a hard Brexit is floating around more. The German Federation Industry Federation even said not preparing for a hard Brexit is, quote, "naive."
[Dale:] Well, I think they are all preparing for that. They are actually preparing for no deal, but I don't think those preparations have got very far yet, because it's only in recent days that Theresa May and David Davis, the Brexit secretary, have been talking about this. I'm not sure I take a [inaudible] of the German business organization because
[Gorani:] But the whole point of Brexiters, they've been saying over and over again, the Germans [inaudible] So, the German Industry Federation says it's not inconsequential.
[Dale:] It's a [inaudible] organization, a confederation versus industry in this country. What you have to do is to talk to the individual businesses, they are the ones that are putting pressure on the German government not necessarily through their trader association.
[Hazarika:] What this does show is that the government is so sieved on the Brexit plans. I mean, I got the impression from that tortured clip when you said to her, would you change your mind. Clearly the answer was no. She said I voted remain for good reasons. I think she sees the [inaudible] is looming ahead of her. She can see this cliff edge and that's why her body language looked as [inaudible].
[Gorani:] Does the Labour Party have a better idea of what to do, how to leave these negotiations and more effectively? What is their proposal?
[Hazarika:] The Labour Party the Torys moved into the position of the Labour Party. The Labour Party said we should have a two-year transitional period or as long as it takes with customs union and the single market and then Asian said the conservatives adopted that position. But the Labour Party are not [inaudible]. What is interesting is that there are briefings coming out seen actually the E.U. is starting to talk to the British Labour Party. They all seen as Jeremy Corbyn made a joke beforehand. They are having discussions with that the Brexit secretary, [inaudible], the shadow Brexit secretary and Jeremy Corbyn because they think British politics is in such disarray. Who know what will happen?
[Dale:] What they are doing is just trying to stir the pot and annoy the conservatives. That's what they are doing.
[Hazarika:] Well, they don't need to stir the pot that much more because clearly Brexit is in disarray.
[Gorani:] I mean, I guess, from the outside looking in, a lot people asked me now here is the prime minister who called an election which she didn't have to, lost her majority and is now saying as if there is no debate about it whatsoever. There will never be a second referendum even on the terms of the deal. How is that acceptable to Britain? This is the question I get most often.
[Hazarika:] Remember, this is the prime minister said, I will not call an early election. I will not call an election, and she did. So, I would not have any story, in her words, saying that there will be a second referendum.
[Dale:] Well, they won't be a second referendum and the reason it won't
[Hazarika:] We don't know that.
[Dale:] I do know that because if there is
[Gorani:] On the terms of a deal not on the
[Dale:] It's taking the British people for fools. It was 52-48. Yes, that was close
[Gorani:] But nobody saying a referendum on whether or not to Brexit, but a referendum on the terms of the deals.
[Dale:] That's what I mean, though, because if you don't accept the terms of a deal, you have to stay in
[Gorani:] You come up with another deal, couldn't you?
[Dale:] Well, should we make best of three?
[Gorani:] Why not?
[Hazarika:] A seasoned political commentator with all [inaudible] can't make any predictions on this. There could be a second referendum.
[Dale:] Well, my prediction is that there won't be.
[Gorani:] OK. So, let's look a little bit forward because time is of the essence here, we are a year and a half away from 2019. What's going to happen? Just every few weeks the two negotiators on one side David Davis and the E.U. on the other will say two very different things at the same [inaudible] and then we'll get to the next round of talks? ou feel you have to stay with another neocon's
[Dale:] If you read the book by Yanis [inaudible], the former great finance minister, he shows exactly how the European Commission appraised in negotiations. Now we are not Greece. I'm not saying we are, but they are following the blueprint of what happened to Greece in 2013. They will take this right up until the 59th minute of the final hour and they will rely on the fact that we will just cave in and give up everything. Well, we are not going to do that I don't think nor should we do that because it shows a sign of weakness. We are not a weak country.
[Gorani:] What Yanis [inaudible], we interviewed him here. I think it was one of the most interesting interviews on Brexit that we that we actually conducted. Because what he said is Britain is going to spend two years negotiating about who to negotiate with, how to negotiate, it is going to be going it's going to go on and on and on and it is going to be crazy making for them. They think they have a negotiating partner, but they don't.
[Hazarika:] I mean, I used to be a British civil servant, we used to go in and do quite a lot of work with the bureaucrats at the European Union. All of this is just fluff. All of this wheels within wheels. This is all the [inaudible] before the main deal will be struck, which will be in the 11th hour. And the truth is Iain despite what you say there is the might of E.U. against Britain. They will have the upper hand. That's why a lot of people and I don't think Brexit is going to get a brilliant deal. We will have to take what
[Gorani:] Will you able to say [inaudible].
[Dale:] [Inaudible]. What kind of language is that?
[Hazarika:] That's the reality of negotiating.
[Gorani:] Iain Dale, Ayesha Hazarika, thanks so much for joining us. We really appreciate it on this day and it was great listening to your interview, your calling program with the Prime Minister today on LBC. Still ahead, Donald Trump takes another dig at a Republican senator who blasted his leadership. We are live in Washington with the latest.

[Berman:] All right. CNN has learned that campaign adviser to then- Candidate Trump and the president's first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, is worried about the prospect that his son could be caught up in the Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
[Harlow:] Flynn Sr. has been under federal investigation even before Robert Mueller became the special counsel. Flynn Jr. has played a key role in the family's consulting business. Our Michelle Kosinski has the details. What can you tell us?
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn Senior Diplomatic Correspondent:] More complexity in this. CNN is told by multiple sources familiar with this that Flynn himself has expressed concern about the potential legal exposure of his son, Michael Flynn Jr., who like his father is under scrutiny by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. So, Flynn's concern could factor into his decisions about how to respond to Mueller's ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign and the business dealings of key Trump campaign advisers.
[Harlow:] What legal questions do you think the special counsel is focusing on regarding Michael Flynn?
[Kosinski:] This is coming from two witnesses who themselves were interviewed by Special Counsel investigators and they told CNN's Jim Sciutto the questions regarding Flynn focused on his and his son's business dealings, including their firms reporting of income from work overseas. So, we've hearing a lot lately about FARA, the Foreign Agents Registration Act. That requires people who are acting as agents for foreign entities to publicly disclose their relationships with those entities and financial compensation that they get for that kind of work. So, Flynn Jr. who serves as his father's chief of staff and top aide was actively involved in his father's consulting and lobbying work at their firm, Flynn Intel Group, and that included joining his father on some overseas trips including Moscow in December 2015, that was the time when Flynn dined with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, at a black-tie gala for the Russia Today television network. Flynn Sr. is also under legal scrutiny remember by Mueller's team for his undisclosed lobbying during the campaign on behalf of the Turkish government. Flynn's alleged participation and discussions about this idea of forcibly removing the Turkish cleric who has been living in exile in Pennsylvania, according to sources. So, in the past a spokesman for Flynn denied such discussions ever happened.
[Harlow:] So, then what is next? I mean, what happens next in this investigation?
[Kosinski:] Well, Flynn's business dealings have been the subject of federal investigation since November, that was prior to Mueller's appointment in March. It's not clear that either of the Flynns will face charges once the investigation is over. Flynn's attorney did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Flynn Jr.'s lawyer declined comment, although, Flynn Jr. tweeted this past Sunday, quote, "The disappointment on your faces when I don't go to jail will be worth all your harassments."
[Berman:] Smart legal strategy, we will get to that in a moment. Michelle Kosinski, thanks so much. With us now, CNN legal analyst, Michael Zeldin. Michael, thanks so much for being with us. So, what is the special counsel doing here if this reporting rings through, using Michael Flynn Jr. as leverage. Why would that be an effective tool?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, so back up one second and then I will go forward with that. It seems to me that Flynn probably should look to the Manafort indictment as a template for what Mueller is looking at with respect to him and his business and his son. They all seemed to have similar patterns of receipt of moneys overseas, foreign bank accounts unreported, taxes unreported, failure to register as a foreign agent, and in Michael Flynn's case perhaps misstatements on his SF-86, that's the financial disclosure form that Manafort did not have because Manafort didn't join the government. So that's the backdrop of it. Flynn Jr. is part of that conglomerate of Flynn Intel Group and so they are going to look at both of these guys as potential criminal actors in that investigation. The problem, of course, for General Flynn is that it's his son and so every parent wants to protect their children and therefore, they have pressure on them to decide what to do in order to protect their son, and that might mean cooperating. Normally, we see this in the context of spouses, the husband protecting the wife and doing the jail time or the guilty plea to protect her. Here it's a father and son, but it's very typical of prosecutors to try to leverage who they really want, which is General Flynn, by working through his son.
[Harlow:] What do you make of the son's tweet, of Michael Flynn Jr.'s tweet, you know, just within the last week, saying the disappointment on your faces when I don't go to jail with be worth all your harassment. Your his lawyer, you are looking at this and you're thinking what?
[Zeldin:] I'm thinking really and how did you not tell me that you were thinking about doing that? This notion that he is going to try to poke the eye of the Mueller team by taunting them is just so ill considered. You just can't figure out what could possibly be behind the thinking of such a tweet. There it stands. I don't think it will really make a difference to Mueller. Mueller will not look at his tweet and say we are definitely indicting him now. That doesn't matter. As a PR matter it doesn't show contrition or recognition of a mistake.
[Berman:] You think General Flynn, if he's not cooperating, he will be soon. Why?
[Zeldin:] Because his son is exposed. I just don't think that he can sort of withstand the pressure in the family of being silent if he has something to say and having the consequence of that be potentially his son gets indicted and if convicted goes to jail. It's not human nature to me. You think about it in our own lives, just day-to-day lives, you want to do what you can to protect your kids. If Flynn has a story to tell and Mueller can't get that information other than through Flynn, there is a lot of pressure on Flynn to cooperate.
[Berman:] It was Michael Flynn's lawyer, by the way, who said he has a story to tell.
[Harlow:] Those words exactly.
[Zeldin:] That's right. But so far Flynn has not been very cooperative in the public domain, at least.
[Harlow:] We have to leave it there. Michael Zeldin, we appreciate your expertise. Thank you. So, a big question for incumbent Republicans after a blue wave, a wave they didn't like on Tuesday, embrace President Trump or distance yourself? We are going to ask one New Jersey congressman what he plans to do.
[Berman:] And we are just moments away from the opening bell. Alison Kosik joins us for the preview.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Business Correspondent:] Good morning. Another sign that the retail apocalypse continuous. We got that new sign from Macy's reporting its latest earnings and they are not looking good. Revenue down. Sales down. You are looking at the stock there, a year to date. Shares of Macy's are down more than 50 percent just this year, and this is coming as we are seeing a resurgence of Walmart. We are seeing Amazon continue to dominate the world when it comes to the retail space. As far as stocks go, we are seeing that negative sentiment about retail weighing on stocks over all. Expect the Dow to start the day deeply in the red, down at least 100 points.
[Harlow:] Alison, thank you. We appreciate it. A quick break and we will be right back.

[Banfield:] An elderly woman arrested for hopping on a flight to London without a ticket and if it was the first time, OK, you know, a lot of people get second chances when they do something naughty. This was not Marilyn Hartman first go-around, not even her second rodeo. No, she had gotten on board planes illegally a whole bunch of times and has been arrested at least eight times before. Scary thing is how she did it at Chicago, O`Hare International. Police say she made it through a TSA domestic checkpoint. Don`t ask. I don`t know how she did that. But she did it without a ticket. And then, somehow got onto the shuttle. It took her to the international terminal. She wasn`t arrested until she landed at Heathrow. But according to multiple sources, Marilyn has been arrested at least eight times and stopped more than a dozen times at airports in Illinois, California, Florida, and Arizona, all for breaching security. And here`s what she had to say after her arrest back in in 2014.
[Marilyn Hartman, Serial Stowaway:] It was stupid and it is something I don`t want to repeat. It was clearly wrong on my part, and I certainly don`t want to do it again, because I certainly don`t want to do any jail time. Obviously, they`ll be on the watch for me, so I wouldn`t dare attempt this again. I don`t want to be in that position. I want to go with a paid ticket. Wonderful. I feel free as a bird. I wouldn`t want to encourage that behavior, because I`m as concerned about security as everyone else. So, that`s why I don`t want to encourage it.
[Banfield:] No. Because of the hearing last week, the judge released Marilyn Hartman on her own recognizance on the condition that she receives some psychiatric help. And there`s no word on how that`s going right now. But honestly, when I saw the story today, Joey, I thought this was a repeat, that script that we had a few years ago on a show I did on CNN called "
[Legal View." Jackson:] Yes.
[Banfield:] She`s back at it. There are five arrests in 2014, two in 2015, one in 2016, one in 2018. I don`t even know what to put up the row of pictures again.
[Jackson:] Love those mug shots.
[Banfield:] How does this happen?
[Jackson:] Look, I can`t cast aspersions on our TSA because we both have to travel and I don`t want to be stopped nor want you to be stopped but the reality is, they should potentially hire her to look at the flaws, look at the breaches, look at what she did, how she did it.
[Banfield:] You`re not kidding? Wow.
[Jackson:] I`m not kidding. In order to shore up their security, and she`ll get a slap on the wrist. She`s released on her own recognisance, judge should have said, bail. I know she`s, you know, 66, what have you.
[Banfield:] But come on, nine mug shots already for the same thing. I can`t believe they don`t have those nine mug shots that every single checkpoint all around the country
[Jackson:] They will now. A day late, a dollar short.
[Banfield:] Yes. OK. So, a gas station robbery takes an unexpected turn when the suspect goes ahead and sets the counter on fire. That`s coming up next.

[Barack Obama, Former President Of The United States:] Got really good Cuban sandwiches. You've got very nice looking people. So there are a lot of good reasons to come to Miami.
[Obama:] You know, it's OK. You know, You know what, it's an old playbook. It's one that the powerful and the privileged turn to whenever control starts slipping away. They'll get folks riled up just to protect their power and their privilege, even when it hurts the country, even when it puts people at risk. It's as cynical as politics gets. But in four days, in four days, Florida, you can reject that kind of politics. In four days, you can be a check on that kind of behavior. In four days, you can choose a bigger, more prosperous, more generous vision of America, an America where love and hope conquer hate, an America where we, the people
[Baldwin:] All right, so talk about what a day, dueling rallies, dueling presidents from President Obama in Florida to President Trump just speaking to reporters at the White House. Let's listen to him.
[Trump:] Thank you very much and it will be a very exciting five days. We're doing numerous trips to numerous great places, great states. And I hear we're doing very well, but we'll we'll let you know on Tuesday night. You'll know before I will, I suspect. I will say that we had tremendous job numbers today. It was just released 250,000 new jobs created in the month of October. That was shocking for a lot of people and that was a tremendous number by any standard. And that's despite the hurricanes. The hurricanes normally have a big impact and I'm sure these hurricanes they were massive they had a big impact. But so the 250,000 new jobs in October was an incredible number. We also had a wage increase of 3.1 percent. It's like a perfect increase. It's an incredible number, but it's a perfect increase. So the country is doing, I think, maybe you could say, better than it's ever done. We have a lot of new companies moving into the United States. And that's where we're letting people in. We're letting them in based on merit. We need workers. We need people to come in at 3.7 percent, which was also announced this morning 250,000 jobs; 3.7 percent; and a 3.1 percent or so wage increase. It's like, really unbelievable numbers. So that just came out. I'm sure you people know about it.
[Question:] If you lose the House, will you work with compromise with Nancy Pelosi and the other Democrats?
[Trump:] Sure. I would. Sure.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, are you really okay with the U.S. military firing on the caravan people?
[Trump:] No, they won't have to fire. What I don't want is, I don't want these people throwing rocks. It's turned out in fact, it was just announced by Homeland Security you have, in just certain areas, over 300 people that they know are trouble. What they did to the Mexican military is a disgrace. They hit them with rocks some were very seriously injured. And they were throwing rocks in their face. They do that with us, they're going to be arrested. There is going to be problems. I didn't say "shoot." I didn't say "shoot." But they do that with us, they're going to be arrested for a long time.
[Question:] But the military can't arrest them. What's the military going to do?
[Trump:] We'll arrest them. But ICE and Border Patrol is there with the military.
[Question:] Sir, who said you could change a constitutional amendment through an executive order? Did Don McGahn tell you that?
[Trump:] Which are you talking about? Who?
[Question:] You said that you were told that you can change birthright citizenship as outlined in the Constitution.
[Trump:] You know who's going to determine that? The Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court will the Supreme Court will determine that. The Supreme Court is going to determine that. Many, many people feel that. Yes, go ahead.
[Question:] Are you prepared to make a deal with China and announce it at the G20? Or do you think that deal is not going to come together?
[Trump:] We've had very good discussions with China. We're getting much closer to doing something. They very much want to make a deal. As you know, their economy went way down since we've been doing this skirmish. I spoke with President Xi yesterday. They very much want to make a deal. I think we'll make a deal with China. And I think it'll be a very fair deal for everybody, but it will a good deal for the United States.
[Question:] When will you make the deal, sir?
[Trump:] Say it?
[Question:] Will you make it by the G20, sir? Or when will you have the deal ready, sir?
[Trump:] Well, we're going to meet at the G20. We're going to have dinner. President Xi and I have agreed to meet at the G20. We'll be having dinner. We'll be discussing it. But I think a very good deal will be made with China. They want to make it very badly. We want to make a deal if we can. And a lot of progress has been made. A lot of progress. And they understand that if a deal isn't made, we're doing very well the way we're doing it right now, you understand that. Two hundred and fifty billion dollars at 25 percent. And it could be elevated by another $267 billion at 25 percent or more. So, we're doing very well, but I believe I know they want to make a deal. They've been hit very hard. Their economy has been very, very bad. I will say this: If we can make the right deal for this country and also, they're going to make the right deal for them. If we can open up China and make it fair for the first time ever this should have been done years ago by other Presidents but it wasn't. I am very willing to do it. But China very much wants to make a deal.
[Question:] Mr. President, Alec Baldwin was just arrested for punching somebody out during a parking dispute. Any reaction to his arrest?
[Trump:] Who was arrested?
[Question:] Alec Baldwin. He punched somebody out during a parking dispute.
[Trump:] I wish him luck.
[Question:] Mr. President, can you clarify the statement when you said that you're going to arrest people. You're not advocating actually shooting people who are having throwing rocks? Can you clear that up?
[Trump:] No, no, no, no. No. No. But if our soldiers or Border Patrol or ICE are going to be hit in the face with rocks, we're going to arrest those people. That doesn't mean shoot them. But we're going to arrest those people quickly and for a long period of time.
[Question:] Mr. President, your executive on asylum how is it legal to make these kinds of changes to asylum through executive order?
[Trump:] Everything we're doing is totally legal. It's all going through the courts. But we have one of the few systems, where instead of telling people, "You can't come in," we take them in and we have to bring them through a court system. It is the most ridiculous system in the world. It's obsolete, but that's not the problem. The problem is it's a stupid system. And it doesn't work and the Democrats and the Republicans should change it immediately. We can do it one day; we could have it fixed. But the Democrats don't want to do it because they're playing politics. And actually, I think it's very bad politics because the people of this country know what's going on better than they do. And you know what? We could fix our immigration system in one day if we could sit down with them. But they don't want to do it because they want open border and open borders mean crime. They want they want those people coming up by the thousands. And you know, honestly, they always have come up. They want them to pour into our country. And in the group and you just saw the report that came out you have a lot of bad people. You have people that are criminals. You have people with records. You have people with criminal records. We could fix this system so quickly, so easily. But we need some Democrat votes. Or vote all Republican. If we had more Republicans, it would be fixed immediately. Say it?
[Question:] The Iranian sanction oil sanction will start on Monday?
[Trump:] That's right, sanctions start on Iran. They're very serious sanctions. They're very big. They'll be elevated from there. But, as you know, sanctions are starting on Iran and, you know, Iran is taking a very big hit. The country is not the same country as when I started almost two years ago. Iran is a much different country since I terminated that deal. That was one of the most ridiculous deals ever made by any country, at any time: the Iran nuclear deal. But sanctions very much are elevated as of you know when: next week.
[Question:] The Democrats said they had a bipartisan agreement on immigration but you won't back it.
[Trump:] The Democrats never had a bipartisan agreement. They're trying to say that. They never had a bipartisan then tell them to come around and see me. They had an agreement that was a one-sided agreement that I would never approve. You've got to get rid of catch- and-release. You've got to get rid of chain migration. You've got to get rid of the visa lottery. They never agreed to any of that. Ask them if they agreed. They never agreed to it.
[Question:] So can you promise that the military is not going to fire on foreign civilians?
[Trump:] Well, I hope they won't. We're going to see. I hope they won't.
[Question:] But you can't promise?
[Trump:] You know what? We're not going to stand for people doing what they did to the Mexican military and to the Mexican police, what they did to those people. They were very badly hurt, very badly injured the military and the police. What they did with rocks being thrown in their faces not going to happen to our soldiers.

[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Then he says, I'm not going to discuss my conversations with the President about the southern district of New York. We saw very different answers depending on who in Congress was asking him the question, but I think the overall takeaway point here is that he got trapped when he wanted to put his foot down and have strong answers and show the President that he wasn't going to be bullied by Congress, then he had something to say. When it got heated there, he wanted to back up and wanted to retreat to not a full exertion of executive privilege. He's doing actually something a little bit more subtle, preserving the option for the White House to exert it down the line.
[Baldwin:] Therefore, the word inconsistencies from the committee chairman. I want to play here are some of the other heated moments from this nearly six-hour hearing.
[W:] I'm sorry. I don't know if your time's been restored or not.
[Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee , Texas:] Mr. Attorney General, we're not joking here and your humor is not acceptable.
[Rep. Doug Collins, Ranking Member Of Judiciary Committee:] He's willingly was willing to come but yesterday we had the charade yesterday. This hearing is pointless and basically was made even more pointless by the chairman's opening statement. This is not about the good men and women at the Department of Justice were doing. This is not about FBI agents doing their job.
[Rep. Hakeem Jeffries , Judiciary Committee:] There are many American throughout the country who are confused. I'm confused. I really am. We're all trying to figure out who are you, where did you come from and how the heck did you become the head of the Department of Justice? So hopefully you can help me work through this confusion.
[Matt Whitaker, Acting Attorney General:] I mean, Congressman
[Jeffries:] Mr. Whitaker, that was a statement, not a question.
[Whitaker:] OK.
[Jeffries:] I'll assume you know the difference.
[Baldwin:] So, John Dean, back over to you. This is a man who will be in his job only for a few more days. There was all the drama yesterday between him and Chairman Nadler over will hewon't he show up pending subpoena. Why did today matter?
[John Dean, Cooperated With Watergate Investigators Against Nixon:] Well, it's our first as the Congressman just said, where did he come from, how did he get there? I think that's what everyone really wanted to understand. It's just too fishy that the President sets aside the entire succession statute and slides this guy from nowhere into that top job. Plus, he'd been on CNN and elsewhere making all these statements against the special counsel and we didn't really get an answer today and it's very important for the people to understand where did this man come from.
[Baldwin:] Gloria, final thought from you.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Look, it was clear to me that he was completely uncomfortable with this hearing, that he had too many people he wanted to please because he's thinking about his next life, so he didn't want to anger the President, he didn't want to anger the House Republicans, but he also wanted to make sure Rod Rosenstein was OK, and that he's thinking about what he does next and not the current job that he has and it was a lot of theater from both sides, from the Democrats and the Republicans and did anything meaningful come out of it? I'm not so sure.
[Baldwin:] On that note, thanks, everyone so much. Now to the breaking news today. Federal prosecutors are now involved after amazon CEO Jeff Bezos says the publisher of the "National Enquirer" tried to blackmail and extort him. This is a huge story. We have all angles covered for you. Also missed deadline. The White House refuses to send Congress on the report whether the Saudi government had any role in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. What lawmakers are planning to do about that? Remember this
[Unidentified Male:] Can you explain to me how a guy who eats McDonald's and all those diet cokes and who never exercises is in as good a shape as you say he's in? It's called genetics.
[Baldwin:] So, we're back again. President Trump getting his physical right now, CNN learning he has not been following his doctor's orders. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We'll be right back.

[Rep. Ted Poe, , Texas:] I think the preparedness has been adequate thus far. Immediately, the local and state officials take control of the disaster and the immediate response. The federal government is a back up. So, so far, I think the federal response has been OK.
[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] OK. Why adequate and, OK, not great, not impressive? What would it take to kind of raise the bar, in your view, and your assessment of response?
[Poe:] Well, the when I say, OK, I think they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Federal response has been, I think, very adequate or very good. We have all different agencies here. FEMA is not the only one. We have them all set up, ready to take over, really, recovery when that starts right away. So far, they are doing OK. I don't really have any criticism for really any government agency that is here and trying to work and then help people in this massive destruction of flooding throughout the area.
[Whitfield:] It's a monumental task, no doubt. There are so many immediate needs right now. Some people are needing to be rescued. People are seeing high water. We have seen images of water making their way into nursing homes and rescues continue. If I could ask you about what has happened, also in Crosby, Texas, in your district, that's where the chemical plant, Arkema, had the fire. They had explosions. We heard from the executive that said, yes, there are chemicals housed there. When they get to the level they are in cooling stations. The cooling stations are down, when they get heated to a level, they are combustible. There was a fire, but the smoke was not a chemical fire but there was carbon in the air. The irritants got in the throats of more than a dozen fire officials. So, what are you being apprised of from that chemical plant and how concerned are you about the people who live and work or are stranded in that area?
[Poe:] The plant has been evacuated for a mile and a half to two-mile radius from the center of the plant. The that's a mandatory evacuation. There are people that live beyond that, the Texas commissional environmental policy, is the one monitoring this issue. They say there's not a problem. There are more explosions we need to think of as not a massive amount of explosion, but these, there are nine containers, I understand, that these chemicals are put in nine containers. As you said, when the chemical gets warm, it expands, it explodes and there's a fire. That's the main thing, there's a fire. The air quality, my understanding is, it's not a massive problem, but is causing irritation and other things about eyes and coughing. That's why there's the evacuation. That's the closest update I have. The other containers, two or three that have exploded and caught fire, they say will follow the same thing will happen. It's because, as you have mentioned, the chemicals have to be kept cool. The refrigeration unit doesn't work because of six feet of floodwater in it. The two back-up generators don't work either. They are in containers and they are the size on the back of an 18-wheeler. That is what we are thinking about. We may see more fire in the next couple of days for the other containers.
[Whitfield:] And this Arkema manufactures organic peroxides, a family of compounds used in pharmaceuticals to construction materials, pipes, countertops, et cetera, if you wonder what that plant is all about. Meantime, while this really is a colossal humanitarian effort, this issue, this storm Harvey gets political because much of Houston, 80 percent of the people do not have flood insurance. People are going to be relying on federal funding in a very big way. What are your concerns about a bill being passed by Congress to assist people there when there are reportedly a number of members of Congress, some, you know, right there in Texas who were not big advocates of the same kind of funding for Superstorm Sandy victims?
[Poe:] Well, I think there will be an appropriations bill specific with Harvey and the devastation from Corpus to Louisiana in dealing with that. What is going to be in that appropriations bill, that relief bill, I do not know. FEMA is spending money that they have for this purpose. What this bill looks like certainly can't answer. As far as Sandy goes, the political issue involved in Sandy was, I think most members were supportive of the appropriations for Sandy relief. But what happened, when the bill got to the floor, other members of Congress tacked on appropriations for things that did not relate to Sandy at all and doubled the cost of that bill. I think most members are, were, and still are supportive of specific bills of relief but members should not add on other things, pork projects or their pet projects. I think that's going to happen.
[Whitfield:] If that were to happen in this package, as it pertains to Harvey and other things attached to this relief package, would you still be on board, knowing the need of your constituents, or will you be arguing to streamline such a package?
[Poe:] I mean, I want to streamline the package. I really don't see another bill like Sandy that adds on other things that are unrelated to the hurricane relief. I really don't think that is going to happen again. We are getting support. I'm getting calls from all over the country. Representatives from Massachusetts has called. We talk about you know, he talks about helping out the folks here. We don't talk politics. We talk about people. I think this is an event that is really kind of helping get rid of the political infighting, politics, rhetoric that we have seen taking place for the last several months. So, I don't see that happening, the possibility of a big package is going to be enough support for a specific bill to help the folks that have been devastated by Harvey. That's all it should be.
[Whitfield:] Congressman Ted Poe, thank you. Our best to you and your constituents and all of Texas and Louisiana. We appreciate it. We continue to get an incredible scope of the devastation as a result of Harvey. Anderson Cooper is inside a U.S. Coast Guard chopper for a firsthand look at the rescue missions take place there. I understand, Anderson, you are over the BeaumontPort Arthur area right now?
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] That's right. We have been flying over this area for about 20 or 30 minutes. It's a Coast Guard crew who launched about an hour and a half ago. They just believe they have somebody waving to them. It's a confusing situation, though. They can't tell if this is somebody who wants to be rescued or not. The rescue diver, Evan Galant, is ready to go down, if necessary. But, there's a they are trying to figure out exactly it's one of the difficulties the Coast Guard crew is having is the lack of communication. They get information based on 911 calls. A lot of the people that they have been rescuing, they just see, they get a visual on and then they hover over the area. They give them a thumbs-up or thumbs-down to get an indication of whether they need to be rescued. Right now, there are hovering low over this area that's extensively flooded, trying to get a sense of exactly what to do. They were going to send down Evan, the rescue diver, just to see and talk to this person. The other concern is, as you can see, with the helicopter until the air, there's another helicopter in the air nearby. That's another concern for the Coast Guard crews and the helicopter crews out here. There's a lot of assets in the air. And while there is central communication coordination between them, they have to constantly be on the lookout to make sure they are not getting too close to another air asset. It seems like they are getting
[Whitfield:] You know, Anderson
[Cooper:] Sorry, go ahead.
[Whitfield:] Looks like your photographer zoomed in on what appears to be a person on top of the roof. I understand what you are saying, though, in that these rescuers are trying to determine from many feet above whether the person they see actually wants to be rescued or not. We see your diver is now strapped in and soon-to-be hoisted or descend there.
[Cooper:] Yes. He's definitely getting ready to go. The pilots, Dan Miller and Matt Mayer, they are just hovering now in place trying to coordinate with the other crews also in the air. Evan looks like he is about to go over. They have a basket that they can also lower in order to bring up anybody who is not able to come up or to bring up multiple people. Right now, they are just going to Evan is going to go down on his own and ascertain exactly what the condition is of this person. Earlier, they saw somebody who seemed to be waving a white towel needing help, but I believe another crew responded to that.
[Whitfield:] You talk about the risks, you know, Anderson, with how precarious it is, A, to try to spot people. You have other assets in the air. There he goes now, about to descend. These folks are fatigued. They have been doing this now inside of this six days since Harvey. Have any of them talked to you about what fuels them. As we see now, there is a person on the rooftop there that that basket is getting close to. Looks like three people, actually.
[Cooper:] They have had
[Whitfield:] Go ahead, Anderson.
[Cooper:] They have had crews out since early this morning doing rescues and circling. It is hit or miss. It's a question of getting out there and seeing what's on the ground. They do get 911 calls. They get word of people. There was a call earlier of somebody who needed dialysis, hadn't had it in a while. Another crew was going to go pick up that person. This is the first rescue this morning that this crew that I'm with, piloted by Dan Miller and Matt Mayer, has undertaken. I'm just listening as the pilots are coordinating with the other air assets in this area. They have room for six or eight people on this chopper. Obviously, if there were more people to get rescued, we would get off. Now, the rescue swimmer, Evan, is down there. He is going to try to ascertain what the situation is. We are going to move up to try so we are not creating more of a water we are not upsetting the water or the area around there, just hovering the area. Evan will communicate with the chopper to say whether or not they need evacuated.
[Whitfield:] When we looked again, maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me, there may be one person. It is difficult to discern because there are items on the rooftop. That's part of his job, assessing, you know, who is in need and what the condition of that person is. Anderson, give me an idea if that person needs medical assistance. Go ahead.
[Cooper:] We are in an area between Beaumont and Port Arthur. They circled over Beaumont for a while. As bad as it is, there are a lot of folks with boats on the ground. The pilots here believe that it seemed like folks on the ground had the situation well in hand in Beaumont. And anybody who might have needed rescuing would have been able to be taken out by boat earlier. So, they started to move on. Now, we have been hovering around this area. It has been interesting. Part of I-10, we just crossed over part of I-10, which is still under water in this area. Some vehicles were trying to make it through the water. We also passed over a gator farm that had supposedly several hundred gators. We only saw a couple. The folks at the gator farm told other news organizations that the gators were all there. We are now just waiting for word on what's going to happen.
[Whitfield:] Then, quickly, I know you are also listening to the pilot simultaneous to hearing me, if a person they rescue needs immediate medical attention, are they able to assist with some of that on the aircraft, on the chopper there?
[Cooper:] Not really. I mean, what they do is get them on this chopper, then they get them to an area as close as possible so they can get medical attention. Not everybody needs medical needs. Some of the medical needs may be a situation like the person I talked about before who needed dialysis, hadn't had dialysis. It's one of the things you don't think about in a situation like this, not people who are necessarily injured based on the storm or flooding or having been in the water, but their regular medical needs they can no longer get taken care of. They need medication. They need dialysis. But right now, I just got word, I think I'm trying to listen to the pilot at the same time I'm talking to you. I believe they said this person does not have a medical issue. But I think we are heading back to try to get closer and bring the rescue swimmer back up. I'm not sure if they are bringing this person up or not.
[Whitfield:] OK. You said that chopper is equipped to be able to handle six people. This is your first rescue of the day?
[Cooper:] It is. They said they can fit about six to eight people on board. Basically, squeeze them in. Obviously, if more people were need, we would get off the chopper to make more room. At this point, you know, there's not a lack of Coast Guard choppers. There's also customs and border protection as choppers in the air. U.S. military choppers are in the air, Navy and Army as well, National Guard. There's a lot of assets in this area. As I said, that's one of the dangerous things, the pilots are constantly on the lookout, just visually turning around, looking to make sure they are aware of any other choppers and exactly what elevation they are. Sometimes one chopper will hover low and another will pass overhead. It's obviously a situation pilots want to be cautious about and aware of. Earlier, somebody had a drone in the air, which is also a concern for helicopter pilots. Of course, any power lines or antennas in the air, so there's a lot for the pilots to look out for. Even though the weather is no longer an issue, yesterday, there was driving rain, problems with wind. It was a difficult weather condition for the pilots. Today, it's sunny, it's a little hazy. The weather is not so much an issue. It's a number of air assets in this area.
[Whitfield:] Of course, because of weather like this that is more optimal. Does that raise the hopes of them canvassing a greater area?
[Cooper:] I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you.
[Whitfield:] Because the weather is better today, does it increase the chances of being able to stay in the air, conduct more searches?
[Cooper:] Yes. It absolutely does. We have about three hours of fuel when we took off. We probably can stay in the air another hour and a half. A lot of these crews are constantly checking in with each other to determine exactly how much fuel they have. That's why this chopper actually responded to this, because of the amount of fuel we still have that they still had to fly around with. You can see just the extent of the flooding. The water, you know, water in these. You can see the trucks down there. There's water high up to the trucks. Again, a lot of these areas have been able to be reached by boat. You can see a number of people on the ground with small boats. We have seen a lot of boats going through some of these roads that are flooded, checking in on people. Now, we are basically circling this area of waiting to find out whether or not that person needs to be brought back up.
[Whitfield:] Anderson, how Yes. Go ahead.
[Anderson:] Yes. Hold on. OK, I just talked to Dan Miller, the pilot. The word from Evan on the ground is the person they were talking to, they said there's another person inside the house. We believe it's the person's wife. Evan, the rescue swimmer, the rescue diver, is going down into the house now to check on that person and to see, A, if they do have medical needs, if they need to be evacuated. And also trying to figure out how to get that person downstairs onto the roof. That's critical for them to get hoisted up on to this chopper. It's not something that that is seems like a couple of minutes in order for Evan, the diver, to actually to assess exactly what's going on.
[Whitfield:] Wow. That's extraordinary coordination, communication there in the chopper as you circle the area looking for others. Anderson, we'll check back with you. Anderson Cooper is onboard a Coast Guard helicopter there. They spotted an individual on a rooftop. Zeroed in on that person. You had the rescue diver, swimmer, descended. Images from earlier. Descended to that rooftop. Anderson has done an extraordinary job explaining how the diver communicates with the person on the rooftop. And doesn't appear to be injured but another person is inside the house. And extraordinarily, that diver will then get into that home, try to assess the condition of that other person. And then be able to potentially rescue at least those two people, thus, we know, at that house right there in the Beaumont, Port Arthur area. We'll continue to watch these live images. We'll take a short break and check back in with our Anderson Cooper. We'll be right back.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Breaking news this morning. A shooting at a bar in Thousand Oaks, California. All the latest details as we're covering them right now. Again a breaking situation. Good morning. Welcome to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Dave Briggs. It is Thursday, November 8th. It is 4:00 a.m. in the East. 1:00 a.m. in Los Angeles. And that's where we are covering this breaking news. Police were called at 11:20 p.m. California Time. It is now again 1:00 a.m. and still considered it active. A mass shooting incident ongoing at this hour. A bar in Thousand Oaks, California, that's northwest of Los Angeles. Information still coming in at this hour. Here's what we know. The attacker forced his way into the Borderline Bar & Grill in Thousand Oaks, reportedly shot a bouncer or barman. Now what is the Borderline Bar & Grill? A large country dance bar popular with Pepperdine and Cal Lutheran students. Cal Lutheran is just down the street. An official on scene saying there are at least a half dozen wounded including one deputy sheriff.
[Romans:] Their conditions not yet known so we're still gathering that information. But there's one witness telling CNN affiliate KABC that a gunman walked up, shot a security guard, entered the bar, set off a smoke bomb. Some of the witnesses there said there were several smoke bombs but again these details all need to be confirmed and then began shooting. Tactical officers have entered the bar now. It is still, as we said an active scene. It is unclear right now if there's any threat to the public that still remains. A few more words about the bar, the Borderline dance floor alone, 2500 square feet. Officials say hundreds of people were inside. And look, this was college night. Wednesday night, college night at the bar. So you've got students from Pepperdine, you've got students from Cal Lutheran who are frantically trying to find out if their friends were inside. And there were lots of eyewitness reports of some of those college students fleeing by any means possible the scene.
[Briggs:] And again still an active situation. CSU Channel Islands, another local college in the area. For those of you that have not been to a similar place, imagine hundreds of young people dancing to country music. Line dancing often takes place. Could be hundreds of people on the dance floor at anytime. Here is what we know from the local captain of the Ventura County Sheriff's Office with an update.
[Capt. Garo Kuredjian, Ventura County Sheriff's Office:] So about 11:20 this evening, we received a call of shots fired at the Borderline Bar & Grill here in Thousand Oaks. As our first deputies arrived on scene, they also heard shots fired. Our deputies have been searching the area. It's an active scene as you can see behind me. But we can confirm that there are several people that have been injured inside the Bar & Grill, including one deputy sheriff who was transported. I can't tell you the condition of the deputy or those that are injured inside. But I can tell you that this is still a very active scene and we have obviously dozens of personnel behind me now that are trying to get to the bottom of what happened and to neutralize the threat if the threat is still active.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Do we know if Is the threat is still active, sir?
[Kuredjian:] Yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] OK. So it's an active situation.
[Kuredjian:] It's an active situation. We can't consider this situation under control at this point. We have lots of personnel that are on scene including special weapons and tactics team with the Ventura County Sheriff's Office, the Ventura Police Department, as well as the Simi Valley Police Department.
[Unidentified Reporter:] So the shooter could be alive and could still be a threat?
[Kuredjian:] Yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] And can you give us any sense of how many people were there?
[Kuredjian:] I would say about half a dozen people were injured inside the location.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Shot?
[Kuredjian:] Yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] OK. And once more, the status of the shooter, sir? What can you tell us?
[Kuredjian:] I can't tell you much about the shooter at this point. We are still looking for the shooter. We can't confirm that the shooter is in custody at this point.
[Unidentified Reporter:] What is the number of victims? We're hearing mass casualty means anything from 11 to 20 victims? Is that right?
[Kuredjian:] At this point, what I'm hearing is about six.
[Unidentified Reporter:] How many people were inside at the time?
[Kuredjian:] I would say hundreds, but I can't confirm the exact number.
[Unidentified Reporter:] As far as you know only half of it only six victims total?
[Kuredjian:] That's what I can confirm at this point. But again I want to remind you this is very preliminary. And our deputies are still processing it to ensure both that the shooter is neutralized and that the victims are taken care of.
[Unidentified Reporter:] We're told by a witness that You said on arrival. You described a very dynamic scene. What was that like?
[Kuredjian:] When deputies arrived on scene, they responded to a shots fired call. When they got here, they were still hearing those shots. And they responded to neutralize that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] One of the witnesses said that they may have thrown smoke bombs in. Do you know about that? And was that still going on when the deputies arrived?
[Kuredjian:] I have not heard about the smoke bombs. I don't know about that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Has anyone been confirmed killed or has anyone died?
[Kuredjian:] I can't tell you what the status of any of those that were shot is at this point.
[Unidentified Reporter:] When is the last time you had a shots fired incident in this community?
[Kuredjian:] It's been quite some time. It's been quite some time.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Thousand Oaks is known for its safety. This obviously changes everything.
[Kuredjian:] Thousand Oaks is a very safe community. This is something that thankfully is a very unusual and it doesn't happen very frequently in our neighborhood.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Do you train for active shooters?
[Kuredjian:] We train all the time with active shooters. And if you see behind me, we have law enforcement for all agencies. We all train the same way for active shooter scenarios, so we can seamlessly work together to neutralize that threat. And so we're working with our partners both state and other municipalities.
[Unidentified Reporter:] When is the last time you heard a shot fired?
[Kuredjian:] That's a tough question. I can't tell you specifically, especially in this neighborhood.
[Romans:] So again, to recap, this is late Wednesday evening, the call comes in at 11:20 that someone had entered this bar shooting. One report of a smoke bomb. Full of students Wednesday night. College night. Cal Lutheran, very close there. It's right there on the Ventura freeway. A dance floor that's, what, 2500 square feet.
[Briggs:] Yes, an enormous country line dancing bar. And again, that was the update at 12:45 a.m. Pacific Time, about an hour and a half after the initial call came in to the police department. It was still at that point an active situation. The local coverage there was zooming in on a body, a deceased body, just outside the Borderline Bar & Grill. Eyewitnesses said there were hundreds of people on the dance floor at any given time. And again eyewitnesses said there were smoke bombs thrown into this country line dancing bar at the time of the shooting. Let's hear now from some of the witnesses.
[Unidentified Male:] I was to the front door. I was talking to my stepdad. And I just started hearing these big pops. Pop, pop, pop. There's probably three or four. I hit the ground. I look up. The security guard's dead. I don't want to say dead but he was shot, he was down. And the gunman was throwing smoke grenades all over the place. I saw him point to the back of the cash register. And he just started he just kept firing. I ran out the front door. I hear chairs being thrown out the window. People were trying to get out the window. And the gunman went to the he went behind the cash register. He kept there was probably 12 shots before I got out the front door. And I go out. I come back in to see if my stepdad's OK. I hear him yelling. And I ran. But the gunman he was he had a beard. He looked Middle Easterner or so. He was wearing a hat, black jacket. I think he had glasses on like prescription glasses. He had a big handgun. And I mean, shots were just firing. Everyone was hanging out. All of a sudden we heard a bunch of shots obviously from a semiautomatic rifle. The police showed up. Three of them went to the door. Currently there's one officer down as they were breaching the front entrance. The other two pulled out. One, I think, is still in there. And now I think about it, there are probably two officers down. Because only one came out. So they both pulled out. He is still holed up inside.
[Romans:] You just hear the shock in their voices. Calm and composed, but clearly shaken here. The scene is still active, we are told. We heard from officials there, Ventura County sheriff's captain at 3:45 a.m. Eastern Time. The first call was received at 11:20, shots fired. He confirmed that six people were shot including a deputy. But again not confirming of course any status. And all of this is very preliminary. It's really important in breaking situations like this, Dave, to remind everyone that even some of the eyewitness testimony, it's just one small little bit of what happened in there. And sometimes the early information can be corrected.
[Briggs:] And again, that sheriff's county captain said just six which would be surprising considering hundreds of people dancing on that floor at any given time. ABC 7, the local there in Los Angeles, says eyewitnesses describe the shooter as a Middle Eastern male with a beard. To Christine's point, that evidence, that eyewitness account can certainly change as we move forward. But black hair, black trench coat, described as a Middle Eastern male at this hour. 1:09 there, Pacific Time.
[Romans:] This is, right there, on the Ventura freeway, a big borderline country and western bar. Wednesday night was college night there. So among those eyewitnesses were college students from Cal Lutheran. The Pepperdine student newspaper is writing about this, we're told, because this is a place that according to folks writing for the newspaper was a popular place with Pepperdine students. And Wednesday night, a college night there. So there would have been hundreds of people there in the venue.
[Briggs:] And an update now from ABC Eyewitness News there in California. They are reporting one sheriff's officer was transported to the hospital. Authorities say the suspect may still be on the loose. Let's bring in now Steve Moore, CNN law enforcement contributor, retired supervisory special agent with the FBI. Steve, good morning to you. It is 1:10 Pacific Time. The first calls came in at 11:20 p.m. there, Pacific Time. They say it's still an active situation. What's your read into this? Is there still a shooter on the loose?
[Steve Moore, Cnn Law Enforcement Contributor:] Well, yes, if they say that they haven't if they say it's still active, yes. Something is there. I also see people walking on the roof. That's indicative of possibly still looking for the person. They have probably with the Ventura County Sheriff's Office, one of the more robust and well- trained law enforcement agencies in Southern California. And I would expect that they're going to be doing this the right way. But if they have said that it is not resolved, then they are either looking for the primary or a secondary suspect. In these situations, you're always going to be told that there is a secondary suspect by someone. So I'm not sure that they are not doing this out of an abundance of caution. But they are still right there, looking at these yes, they are going in search right now from what I can see. They are one thing that's significant is you are not going to see emergency personnel, medics, EMTs, firefighters go into a venue until it is considered reasonably safe. So at a certain level they have to think that there is it is safe to bring those firefighters, those EMTs in.
[Romans:] Talk to us a little bit about the mechanics of securing the scene than we've seen you know, we've seen first responders going into the building, you mentioned on some of these videos you can see that there are people, first responders, on the roof. If you've got hundreds of college students in there, and somebody was in a black trench coat who maybe could ditch that black trench coat, how are they handling all of the witnesses, all of the young people who were there dancing?
[Moore:] Excellent question. What they're going to do is, as much as is humanly possible, they are going to segregate anybody out who is even in the area at this time of night, especially at a location like the Borderline where it is easily cordoned off. It's even though it's in a very popular place it's bordered by several roads that make it easy to get everybody corralled. Once they do that, they're going to go person by person and identify them, search them and interview them because, as you just alluded to, because people can just drop their clothes they were wearing, especially if it's an outer garment and just blend in with the crowd.
[Briggs:] But just again, Steve, judging by what we're seeing these pictures of people standing around while traumatized, yes, there are hundreds of people standing around yet the police describe it as an active situation must do surmise that the shooter has been in some way either detained or shot judging by the fact that police are allowing people to stand around and reporters to stand around right next to the bar.
[Moore:] Yes. From what I'm seeing, they are where the people are standing is probably a block or two away. But yes, I mean, I don't I can't imagine that from their actions that they don't have an idea somehow on where the main shooter is and maybe they're looking for other shooters as they
[Briggs:] Steve, hang on. This is the video I'm referencing here. People standing around, officers without guns drawn. That does not look to me doesn't it to you like an active shooting situation?
[Moore:] Not at all.
[Briggs:] OK.
[Moore:] In fact I've seen one of the tactical team guys carrying his helmet. When I was on the tactical team, you did not take your helmet off until you were going home. So that would indicate to me that this is not a as active a situation as maybe they're talking about to the press right now. But you're absolutely right. They are already putting up crime tape which to me means you don't do that until you have a scene to cordon off. So to me it looks like they've gone from the response stage to the investigative stage. Again I'm only judging from what pictures I'm seeing. I you know, the encouraging thing I saw is they have their triage mats out in the lot which is just southwest or northwest of the location. Those mats are empty, which is a phenomenal good news. You don't have victims laying in these triage mats. It also appears that they've set up mobile command post which is on the complete other side of Borderline. So there is caution being used displayed, but it doesn't mean that there is something going on right at the moment.
[Romans:] Sure. Steve, talk to us a little bit about the bar. We know that it's a country western bar and grill. We know Wednesday night was college night. So it could have been full of young people there. And these are the kinds of, you know, soft targets that are just are so difficult to secure when you have a crowd situation and someone with a firearm.
[Moore:] Yes. You're not going to you're not going to be able to defend a soft target like that. Especially, I mean, if you really actually had somebody go in there and as I have seen reported attack a security guard and begin throwing smoke grenades into the place. Again, this is all preliminary.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Moore:] And witnesses are very reliable at this point. But if that's the case, you have somebody who's planned this that this doesn't appear to be somebody getting mad and coming back. And again the crowd is not one that would tend to you know, on college night then to bring out people who would use violence to end an argument. So
[Briggs:] Yes.
[Moore:] You know, based on what I'm hearing, it could be a very well- planned thing.
[Briggs:] Students as young as 18 could be in that bar that night according to the bar's Web site, 18 and older. And according to the L.A. Times the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force has been dispatched. Also according to the "L.A. Times," 30 shots were fired. What does that tell you about this handgun as reported and the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force? Is that typically that they would be dispatched to a shooting like this?
[Moore:] Yes. In fact I was the supervisor on that task force for years. So they will be on their way out. Again, part of the reason is, you know, the FBI does handle mass shootings. But there are reports that indicate that the person might have been Middle Eastern. I don't put a whole bunch of credence into that based on just the fact that early reports were usually incorrect. But, you know, that you can't ignore that. And so there are going to be a bunch of law enforcement here. And frankly, you know, one thing about Thousand Oaks is every other block, you either have a policeman or a federal agent living.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Moore:] This is where law enforcement lives in the northern Los Angeles area. This is where they go because this is statistically one of the safest towns by population in the nation.
[Romans:] Yes. Yes. Isn't it? Thousand Oaks is a nice it's just a nice little community there, an L.A. community. Quickly, so at this point, I mean, can we assume that first responders are clearing out folks that might be hiding, employees and people who might be hiding inside that venue?
[Moore:] Yes. That's what you would be doing at this point if you believe that your suspects are if most of the indication is your suspects are down, then you are emptying the place and making sure everybody is secure. But I don't even see that level of concern at this point. You would see teams coming in and out because it's a very exhausting process to look for survivors and look for people who are hiding, and so you bring people in and out like you bring players off the bench just to keep them fresh. And right now I see nobody coming out, nobody really going in. And you would see tactical teams moving in and out. I do not see that at this point.
[Romans:] All right. Steve Moore, CNN law enforcement contributor, helping us understand what's happening on that scene right now. The Borderline Bar in Thousand Oaks, California. Stay close. Thank you so much for your context.
[Briggs:] We'll check back with you. Let's welcome in now Betty Harrah. Her son was inside the Borderline Bar & Grill at the time of the shooting. We are happy to report her son is doing OK. Betty, good morning to you. How is your son? What did he tell you about what he witnessed?
[Betty Harrah, Son Survived Shooting:] Yes, he goes there on a regular basis. This is an innocent place for young kids to go have a good time. He was standing across the way and a man walked in dressed in all black. Came in and started shooting. He shot the girl in the front, which he witnessed, which was his friend. She was his friend. She worked there and he said he shot her. And then he ducked down. He had his girlfriend's hand. He fell on the ground. He was dragging her out. He called me, hysterical, crying, I was on the way there. He told me, don't come there. It's just it's a tragic scene. I lived here my whole life, I've never witnessed anything like this here. It's very, very sad, we are a very safe community. And it's tragic. It's very tragic.
[Romans:] So your son told you, Betty, that he saw the a young woman who worked there at the bar inside the front door being shot?
[B. Harrah:] Right. Inside the front door. Just walked in and shot her.
[Romans:] Just awful.
[B. Harrah:] And he said he heard four or five gunshots.
[Romans:] Did he keep shooting inside? Did he he heard four or five shots. So he heard the gunman continue to shoot after that?
[B. Harrah:] Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. And then evidently jumped behind the bar. He was throwing some kind of smoke bombs. He had a beard. He did have a beard and he was wearing a beanie. So the things that they are saying he seemed are true.
[Romans:] OK. We're going to have thank you so much, Betty Harrah. Don't go too far, Betty, we might want to talk to you again but we're going to get an update here from law enforcement on the ground. Let's listen in to this update.
[Kuredjian:] The shooter is confined within the facility. So there is no threat to the general public outside the bar and grill. I don't know what the status of the shooter is. If he's been captured or if he's been neutralized. But what I can tell you is we don't feel that he is out of the bar and grill at this time.
[Unidentified Reporter:] At this time. How about weapons? Have you determined what he brought inside? We've been hearing about smoke bombs. What do you know?
[Kuredjian:] I know only of the guns. I've heard of the smoke bombs by being at the presser earlier, a reporter mentioned that, but I don't know that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] So 11 shots How many died
[Kuredjian:] I don't have the status of any of their injuries.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Including the deputy?
[Kuredjian:] I don't have the status of the deputy.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Is the location clear now? Is the location clear? We've heard there might be people in the attic?
[Kuredjian:] We have deputies going through it now. My understanding is that there is I didn't know about people in the attic. I haven't heard that at all.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Sir, can you spell your name again and your rank?
[Kuredjian:] It's K-U-R-E-D-J-I-A-N. My first name is Garo. G-A-R-O. I'm the captain of Ventura County Sheriff's Office.
[Unidentified Reporter:] So, Garo, was one of your colleagues injured or
[Kuredjian:] A deputy was shot. I don't know what his condition is. With the Ventura County Sheriff's Office.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Were they responding to the scene or?
[Kuredjian:] Yes. They were responding to the scene.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Was it someone who engaged the suspect?
[Kuredjian:] I don't know that but I assume so. But I don't know that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] We heard of a report about a security guard who got injured. Do you have information about the security guard who was injured?
[Kuredjian:] I don't have information on any of those injured other than the deputy that was injured. That's all that I know.
[Unidentified Reporter:] You don't have any conditions on any of the victims? Is that right?
[Kuredjian:] I don't have any conditions on any of the victims.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Eleven total right now?
[Kuredjian:] Yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Are you expecting that number to grow?
[Kuredjian:] I would guess if anything that number would go up. These are, again, like I said earlier, they were preliminary numbers. I want to give you guys numbers as opposed to saying several. That number could just like what I said earlier six. That number has gone up to 11. That number could change and that's all that I can say at this point. I don't have that information. I don't know of anyone that is deceased or not transported.
[Unidentified Reporter:] As far as you know 11 people are in the hospital?
[Kuredjian:] I don't know if they were transported or if they are here or what their condition. I don't know that answer.
[Unidentified Reporter:] What are you saying to the families? There are so many people. Friends and loved ones worried about the status. When will they know? When will
[Kuredjian:] That will take some time. It's not a scene that is safe where people can go in and out of at this point. We have investigators that are looking to make sure that the scene inside the nightclub is safe and it's going to take some time. I don't have a time estimate for that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Do you know how this call came? Was there someone in the bar that called for help? Someone who left
[Kuredjian:] I don't know where the call came from. What I can tell you is the call was shots fired. And that's what our deputies responded to. That is what they factored when they arrived on the scene.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Did you check the security guard on arrival?
[Kuredjian:] I don't have that level of detail. I think since it's so rapidly unfolding at this point, we're trying to give as much information to give you all about the statistics of what is happening. I don't have that level of detail. Haven't been in talks with investigators to that level yet.
[Unidentified Reporter:] So the shooter is
[Kuredjian:] We don't feel that the shooting has left the bar and grill. So whatever it is, was contained inside the bar and grill. We don't feel that there is a threat to the public outside, to the neighbors outside.
[Unidentified Reporter:] We heard the inside the building and the shooter
[Kuredjian:] I don't know if he's been transported or if he's been captured. What I can tell you is we don't feel that there is a threat to the residents outside the area.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Do you know
[Unidentified Male:] OK. So, well, there, we're just hearing a big update from
[Romans:] So look, we were an update there from a captain there in the Ventura County Sheriff's Office confirming in fact that a deputy was shot. A deputy with the Ventura County Sheriff's Office was shot. But not any details about how that happened. Look, all of this is all preliminary. So I want to really caution people that it's rapidly unfolding. It's only been a couple of hours since the first call came in at 11:20 local time. And they say that the gunman is confined. But he is not the sheriff's captain is not saying what that means exactly. If he is if he's been shot, if he's been arrested. He's just confined inside the location. They don't think there's a further threat to the public here.
[Briggs:] And the captain confirmed a sheriff's deputy has been shot, has been transported to the hospital. Again, for those of you just tuning in now, it's a college night at the Borderline Bar & Grill. The Pepperdine student newspaper can't confirm Pepperdine students were at the bar at the time of the shooting. I can confirm from watching local news Cal Lutheran students, several were at the bar at the time of the shooting. But again just right now, 11 reports of shootings from that sheriff's deputy. The black hair, black trench coat, black beard is what we know at this hour about the shooter.
[Romans:] Betty Harrah is someone who lives nearby. Her son was inside. He is OK, but he went running out of that venue with his girlfriend after the shots were fired. Betty, are you still with us?
[B. Harrah:] I am. Yes.
[Romans:] Tell me a little bit more about what your son says he saw and how quickly this unfolded.
[B. Harrah:] You want to tell them, Holden?
[Romans:] Hi there. What's your name? What's your name, sir?
[Holden Harrah, Shooting Victim:] My name is Holden Harrah.
[Romans:] Hi, Holden. I'm so glad you got out of there. Must have been terrifying.
[H. Harrah:] One of the worst, horrendous tragic event that ever happened in a very long time.
[Romans:] Tell me, Holden, what you saw, what you were doing. You were dancing?
[H. Harrah:] No, I was on the opposite side of the bar. And I was with just a few friends. And yes, and I go there every week. I have been attending there for about six months. And just a place to go out, hang out with your friends and just have fun as young adults. And unfortunately what happened tonight and what I actually saw with my own two eyes was a gentleman who walked in to the front door and shot the girl that was right behind the counter. I just I see this girl every single time I'm there. It just I don't know her name. But someone to make small conversation with, and say hi here and there. We're starting to get really familiar with each other. And the first two gunshots hit her. I don't know if she's alive.
[Briggs:] We are so sorry, Holden. We know how difficult this must be. I can't imagine what it was like to be inside that bar at the time. Did you see the shooter? Did you make anything out?
[H. Harrah:] Yes. I saw a gentleman wearing a black trench-looking coat. He had a beard. It seemed was also wearing glasses. And within seconds he went and walked through the door, pulled the gun out and fired twice. And then there was about three or four other shots that I did hear, but I was already out of the building at the time. But I just I am just in shock over what I saw with my own two eyes tonight.
[Romans:] Was it dark inside the bar?
[H. Harrah:] No. There's light.
[Romans:] Yes.

[Cabrera:] Two high-profile Democrats throwing their hats into the 2020 ring today and launching their presidential campaigns. First up, Julian Castro. He is considering himself to being the anecdote to Trump. He's a former Obama cabinet member. He's the only Latino candidate in the 2020 race so far. Also today, an Iraq war veteran in Hawaii, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, announcing her 2020 run during her interview with CNN's Van Jones. Let's get to CNN's M.J. Lee inside the Warren event in Manchester. M.J., how is Elizabeth Warren trying to build momentum today after last weekend's Iowa trip?
[M.j. Lee, Cnn Politics Reporter:] This was her first visit back to New Hampshire since 2016. Senator Warren told the audience, when you visit a neighbor, you're supposed to bring your whole family. That is a reference to the fact that she was visiting New Hampshire, a neighboring state of Massachusetts, where she's a Senator. So she brought her husband, Bruce, and their dog, Bailey, on stage with her. That was a moment the audience enjoyed. But proceeding from that, she gave her stump speech that we became familiar with last weekend in Iowa and took a lot of questions from the audience on everything, from education, to criminal justice, to how to protect the environment. Afterwards, she took a couple questions from reporters backstage. She got a question on why she has not been directly addressing President Trump and discussing him on the trail. Here's how she answered that question.
[Sen. Elizabeth Warren, , Massachusetts:] I think we need to talk about our economy. I'm willing to fight. Everybody knows that. The question is, how do we build an America that works, not just for those at the top, but an America that works for everyone else. I talked serious policy here in New Hampshire and that's what I'm going to keep on doing.
[Lee:] Senator Warren is moving full steam ahead with an expected 2020 presidential campaign. All as some of her Democratic colleagues, including in the Senate, are trying to decide themselves whether to throw their hats in the ring, including Senator Kamala Harris, who has launched a book tour ahead of what seems like a 2020 campaign. Julian Castro announcing this morning that he is going to be running for president as well. A lot of questions about former Vice President Joe Biden, as well as Senator Bernie Sanders and whether they are going to be making their bid as well. It is clear that these Democrats, eventually, if they get into the race, will have to figure out what their message is going into 2020. But it is clear that Senator Warren has figured out her message. Back to you.
[Cabrera:] M.J. Lee, thank you. We're back in just a moment.
[Unidentified Female:] The '40s and '50s were definitely an America finding itself.
[Unidentified Male:] Americans felt very second-rate when comparing ourselves to Europe.
[Unidentified Female:] Sportswear became the defining style of the United States.
[Unidentified Male:] The bikini was the biggest thing since the atom bomb. Since the '60s, '70s, our style and fashion represents freedom. When you look at hippy culture, it's really oppositional to the Vietnam War. Disco was really important in terms of people being free to express themselves.
[Unidentified Female:] In the '80s, it was a lot of excess in every way.
[Unidentified Male:] We had our Calvin Kleins and our Ralph Laurens and our Donna Karans. Public advertising was rather scandals.
[Unidentified Female:] His underwear ad stopped traffic in Times Square.
[Unidentified Male:] By the '90s and 2000s, things have become less formal.
[Unidentified Female:] Supermodels really brought fashion into every household.
[Unidentified Male:] Now what's embraced is being yourself.
[Unidentified Female:] Style gives you a voice. It's freedom.
[Announcer:] "AMERICAN STYLE" premieres tomorrow at 9:00 on CNN.

[Erica Hill, Cnn Anchor:] This morning, Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants more Russia related documents from the Trump campaign and has issued a subpoena to get them. Sources telling CNN, investigators are looking for things they're not seeing in the documents they already have. All of this coming as senators zero in on Trump's son-in-law. They say Jared Kushner got e-mails about WikiLeaks and about a Russian backdoor overture and a dinner invite and that he failed to turn those over to the Judiciary Committee. Well, now lawmakers want those documents and more. CNN's Shimon Prokupecz is following these investigations. So, let's start first with Mueller's subpoena. What exactly do investigators want at this point from the campaign team?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Yes, Erica, so this subpoena we're told or subpoenas were issued back in October, just last month, and it went to more than a dozen people associated, some top officials at the Trump campaign. And it appears that they're asking for more documents, more e-mails, information regarding perhaps the Russia investigation, which, as you've mentioned, Bob Mueller, the special counsel, has been look into. We don't know exactly what's being asked for, what the special counsel has requested. But people close to the campaign have said that they have been cooperating with the investigation. So it's not really clear why a subpoena what happened that now the special counsel has decided to issue subpoenas. It's a pretty aggressive step, you know. Some people close to the campaign, close to the president said that this was a book-keeping matter. It's really not clear. And it's also not something normally done in a bookkeeping matter to send subpoenas. So we just don't know enough, but it is a significant perhaps somewhat of an aggressive step by the special counsel.
[Hill:] And so as we continue to follow that, there are also these missing Kushner documents that the Senate Judiciary Committee wants to see. Walk us through that.
[Prokupecz:] Yes. So this was a letter that was sent by the top you know, the leaders of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley and the Democrat, Senator Feinstein. The two leaders are asking for more information. They're conducting their own investigation. And they say Jared Kushner is withholding documents they know exist. The letter they sent to Jared Kushner's lawyer is pretty specific in what they're seeking. And there's some of want they want. It was a forward e-mail that Kushner received about Russian backdoor overtures and a dinner invite, they say. And, as we know, Kushner has previously admitted that there was talk with the Russian ambassador during the transition about setting up a line of communications with Moscow through a Russian embassy in the U.S., which some have said was a backdoor channel. Now, Kushner has claimed it was to communicate about with Russia about Syria. The senators say that Kushner has been cooperating with them, but they still want more details about his security clearance forms, phone records and his contacts, his foreign contacts, and also information regarding the former national security adviser, General Michael Flynn.
[Hill:] Shimon Prokupecz with the latest for us there. Thank you. With us now to dig a little deeper, CNN legal analyst Michael Zeldin, who also served as a special assistant to Robert Mueller in the Department of Justice. Let's start off first here with these subpoenas, as we were just learning about from Shimon. It's not clear exactly what they're after. People close to the White House, as he just reported, saying it's more about bookkeeping, but that's not typically how this is done. What do you really see really playing out here?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] So what we don't know is, have there been previous subpoenas that this current round of subpoenas is just additive of. So, for example, if in an early subpoena you said, give me all information about your contacts with Russia, and now you realize that your subpoena should have said, give me all contacts with Russia, agents of Russia, or those affiliated with Russia, then you might send a secondary subpoena to clean that up, to make sure that the document production is complete. If this was not done by prior subpoena, if it was just an informal request for documentation, they reviewed that documentation, realized that somehow the information was incomplete, that they decide now they're going to issue a subpoena to make sure that there is no doubt about the obligations of these parties to return the information that they seek. So we just have to figure out what's going on.
[Hill:] So you're saying it could be as simple as a cleanup
[Zeldin:] It could be as simple as a cleanup, or it could be a belief by the prosecutors that the voluntary disclosures were insufficient and now they're going to make it formal with a subpoena.
[Hill:] And so that is the question mark there.
[Zeldin:] Right.
[Hill:] Meantime, in terms of information, we know senators, of course, are now looking for crucial information. They're talking about e-mail from WikiLeaks. These Russian backdoor overture and dinner invite. How problematic is it that the committee knew about these e-mails but they were left out of the documents that Jared Kushner turned over?
[Zeldin:] So, again, it depends on what was asked of Kushner. If they said to Kushner, give us all information about your contacts with Russians, one might reasonably conclude as a lawyer that that does not include communications with WikiLeaks. And so that it was left out because it wasn't responsible to the exact black letter of the request. Others might say, well, that's being cute by one half and you should know that WikiLeaks is believed to be associated with Russia and that you should have done it in the first instance. So I'm not going to attribute to Kushner and his legal team bad purpose here. So we'll have to just see what it was that was asked for, what was delivered, and now what supplemental material they are delivering. I believe that Kushner has been endeavoring to cooperate with this committee, and so I can't really get my arms around the notion that this is a purposeful withholding of information.
[Hill:] Let me ask you really quick. Throughout this investigation the president has really tried to distance himself. You know, Papadopoulos was a coffee boy. Carter Page wasn't really that involved. But you can't distance yourself all that much from your son-in-law as this seems to be closing in on the White House. What do you see the president doing?
[Zeldin:] Well, I think that the the more the president has got more jeopardy potentially is not the son-in-law but the son. I think Don Junior, in his communications with WikiLeaks, which were direct communications. Remember, Kushner it seems is receiving e-mails that are forwarded to him, probably by Don Junior. And Don Junior is the one who is communicating with WikiLeaks starting in September 16, 2016, all the way up to July 2017, where it looks as if they are cooperating with one another about the distribution of material that has been stolen, given to WikiLeaks, and now being distributed by WikiLeaks and being facilitated in that distribution by Don Junior in his tweets. And that, I think is way more problematic for the president and his family than the Kushner forwarding of e-mails and perhaps clerically not getting that to the committee as they hoped.
[Hill:] Michael Zeldin, appreciate your insight. Thank you.
[Zeldin:] You're welcome.
[Hill:] The Trump administration says the tax overhaul will give middle class Americans a salary increase. Here's what former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers calls that claim.
[Larry Summers, Former Treasury Secretary:] Ludicrous. Absurd. Not going to happen.

[Banfield:] Did members of a Penn State fraternity deliberately erase a videotape that just might be the key to solving the tragic death of one of its pledges? And if so, might that videotape have also been the key to the case against 18 members of that frat house who are now charged in Timothy Piazza`s hazing death? There was some pretty alarming evidence that was unleashed during some preliminary hearings today. And if you don`t know this story, it`s sickening. Timothy died two days after a liquor-fueled party in which he tumbled down two flights of stairs at the beta theta phi house. Investigators say the fraternity brothers failed to help him for upwards of 12 hours while he was dying. And they say it was instead that time they used to cover up the hazing and coordinate a story. Eighteen members of that university fraternity were arrested on charges ranging from tampering with evidence all the way to involuntary manslaughter. And the thing is, their actions were actually recorded. The fraternity has video surveillance cameras, and the prosecutors played them during the preliminary hearings. But not the one from the basement. That`s weird. It seems the authorities were told that that camera wasn`t working, that is until the authorities were un-told that story. CNN`s Sara Ganim describes what she saw in some of those videos.
[Sara Ganim, Cnn Correspondent:] You see the pledges, including Tim Piazza, lined up in khaki pants and button-down shirts. And they`re standing hand to shoulder in a line. In this ritual, the point is almost like an obstacle course, an alcohol obstacle course. He starts by chugging a handle of vodka. Then he goes to the next station and chugs a beer, and then to the next station, where he chugs wine. And about an hour-and-a-half after this gauntlet begins, a brother walks Tim Piazza through the lobby of the house, and you can already see that he is staggering.
[Banfield:] But that`s not all. Today, this other shocker, the lead detective in the case revealing it appears that one of the frat members who`s been charged actually admitted to deleting key parts of the video from the basement. And the basement is where Timothy fell and suffered for hours. CNN correspondent Sara Ganim has been in court all week, and she saw the surveillance video when it was played yesterday. So this is an astounding development. If it`s true that one of the kids who was actually sitting in court today deleted that basement video, do they have the information from this young man as to what was on it?
[Ganim:] Well, I don`t think prosecutors are quite there yet. What prosecutors said today in court is that they no longer believe that the camera wasn`t working. They believe that the video from that basement camera may have been deleted.
[Banfield:] And that`s the story they originally got, that camera in the basement wasn`t working. Sorry, there`s no video.
[Ganim:] Originally, when the police went to go get the video, days after Tim Piazza`s death, all they could retrieve was the video from the first floor. They couldn`t get the video off the system from the basement. But what they said in the original hearing, the first day of the hearing, which was several weeks ago they said they couldn`t retrieve the basement video because it wasn`t working. Today, the prosecutor said it appears it had been deleted. That is now their working theory. And she said that charges are imminent because of that, but would not say who may be charged, and nothing formally has been filed.
[Banfield:] So let my bring in Mark Rasch because he`s a digital forensics expert. He`s also former Department of Justice cyber crimes prosecutor. He joins me now live from Washington. Mark, you`re the perfect person to ask the two critical questions here. Number one, I hear of stuff that`s deleted all the time, but people like you can recover it. Can they do that? And number two, if they do, what kind of charges might these young men and the actual frat itself face if they actually did delete it?
[Mark Rasch, Digital Forensics Expert:] So as to the first question, whether or not they can restore what might have been on the videotape or on the recording, the answer is, of course, it depends. It depends on the technology that was used to record it and the method that was used to erase, delete or get rid of it. Obviously, if somebody took a physical videotape and burned it or destroyed it, then you`re not going to be able to recover it. Most modern recording machines record either to a hard drive or what`s called a solid state drive. And on those kinds of things, when you delete it, it`s just like deleting e-mail. There`s always a potential to be able to recover that data. And since they took custody the police took custody of the house and any recordings that might have been in it within a couple of days, the odds are that it wasn`t overwritten, like, you know, you have a continuous loop. So there`s I`d say about maybe a 20 percent chance if they can find the medium that they`ll be able to restore the data.
[Banfield:] You`re saying a 20 percent chance that we will actually end up getting that video into this case.
[Rasch:] If they were able if they were if the people took the hard drive out and threw it away, then unless they tell them where that hard drive is, they`re never going to get the tape. But if they can get...
[Banfield:] Well, the guy Mark, the guy who was sitting in court, the detective, from the stand, said, I`m not going to, you know, say who it is, but he`s in this courtroom right now. Apparently, he`s squealing like a canary because he told them he did it. So you would assume that he would have told them how he did it or where he put it, right?
[Rasch:] Well, if he knows. If he threw it in the trash bin and it`s gone, it`s gone. So it won`t be able to be recovered. But if they can actually physically get that drive, the odds are pretty good that they`ll be able to recover some maybe not all, but some of the information on that tape. Now, as to the charges that can be charged, there`s a lot of things could go on here. I mean, the first problem is somebody lied to the police. Somebody told them, Oh, there was no tape. It was destroyed. And it`s probably the person who destroyed it, and maybe others. So you have false statements to the police, which is one charge. Then you have obstruction of justice, which is another charge. Third is evidence tampering, which is another charge. And then there are charges related to whatever you can see on the video, if they can get it back, which are potentially manslaughter charges, reckless endangerment charges, and maybe even murder.
[Banfield:] Well, you know what? You nailed it because they`re definitely charged with all of those things. Manslaughter, though, involuntary manslaughter is the highest charge which carries with it about five years. Let me bring in Joey Jackson on this one, too, HLN and CNN legal analyst on this because, Joey, if what Mark is saying is that they can get these guys and there`s a lot of ifs here.
[Joey Jackson, Cnn/hln Legal Analyst:] Of course.
[Banfield:] If they can get the hard drive, if, if, if, if, if. Obstruction and lying are not small change.
[Jackson:] No, they`re not at all. And you know, it`s interesting because this speaks to the broader narrative, obviously, of fraternities in general, the culture of fraternities. And here you`re setting an example and you`re going after them. And what else is interesting is whenever a prosecutor starts on one path, you always know when the investigation broadens and they uncover other things, like here, initially believing that this tape was unavailable, now believing that it`s deleted. But whenever you do something like that, you get to the issues of tampering with evidence which is criminal because it impedes and otherwise prevents investigators to do their job. And so I think there`s a long way to go. Of course, we`re in a preliminary hearing, and we should remind viewers, of course, Ashleigh, that preliminary hearing is not to determine guilt or innocence
[Ashleigh Banfield, Primetime Justice Show:] Yes.
[Jackson:] but just whether there is enough evidence to move forward, and therefore you don`t have to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt.
[Banfield:] Let`s call no brainer in this one if you look at the stuff just we have.
[Jackson:] Absolutely.
[Banfield:] Sara, you interviewed Jim and Evelyn Piazza. That`s Timothy`s mom and dad. Jim said something that was, you know, first of all, as any parent who sends their kid off to college, and you hear that kids were stepping over your son as he was passed out for hour after hour after hour, and going and getting a glass of water, having a drink, taking a look at him and keep on going, you hear those, and you want to be sick. How they kept their composure during this interview, I don`t know, but I do want to play a little snippet of what Jim said to you regarding what he thinks about the culture and the folks in that house. Have a look.
[Jim Piazza, Father Of Timothy Piazza:] There were people in that house that knew he was dying. And when they knew that death was imminent the next morning, they waited 42 minutes to call for help while they told people to clean up, cover up the evidence, get rid of it. This wasn`t boys being boys. This was criminal activity. This was an alcohol-free, hazing-free fraternity with an adult, athletic trainer living in the house. But there were years of parties documented on the tapes. Nobody paid attention to anything. I blame all of them.
[Banfield:] That will be, you know, for the court to determine ultimately. But more importantly, how are they?
[Sara Ganim, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, obviously, they`re struggling. This is not something that`s been easy for them, but they have made a point to be in the courtroom for each of the days of this preliminary hearing, even though it`s been strung out over several weeks. This was day four. Tomorrow is day five. They`ve been there every day, but I will tell you, they never want to see the surveillance tape ever. They made that point. They are very clear. That`s why prosecutors haven`t entered into it into public record. That`s why we haven`t seen it publicly, why it hasn`t been released to the public. They leave the courtroom when it plays. They never want to see it because, Ashleigh, I`ve seen it. What you`re watching is Tim Piazza dying. You`re watching him overnight struggling as his body shuts down.
[Banfield:] You know this feeling, how you just have no control over them there.
[Jackson:] It`s amazing, and that`s how it hits you. You know, it`s hit obviously. You know, I`m here to talk about it from a legal perspective. But from a person perspective and not only that, but to hear them talk about these frat parties, which is why when you asked me the legal question, we`ll talk about Penn, but it speaks to the larger narrative of colleges all over the country and what this prosecution may do to deter others from engaging in behavior like that.
[Banfield:] Talk. Talk to your kids.
[Jackson:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Please talk to your kids about this story. Sara, you have done great reporting on it. You`ve done so much great reporting on it. It`s just so critical for young people to know how quickly their lives can go south and how quickly someone can lose a life. It is critical. Thank you not only to Sara and Joey, but also to Mark Rash for his perspective on this as well. Another story we`re covering. If you know Taylor Swift`s music, you know that she is not afraid to call out people who do her wrong. So it certainly comes as no surprise that she didn`t hold back anything when she got on the stand today and described in pretty stark terms the groping she alleges by a Denver DJ.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Just hours after his scripted speech about war and unity, will he go back off the rails tonight? The heat is on. Supporters and opponents of Mr. Trump, they're on the streets of Phoenix right now. They are weighing in on his presidency, his policies and his response to the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. We're following the frustration out west as the president ignores an appeal to stay away and feuds with top Republicans. Still simmering. Charlottesville residents demand answers during an explosive city council meeting. Emotions raw after the racist rally and the president's reaction. Even the House speaker here in Washington now declaring that President Trump messed up. And changing his view. The president abandons promises to get out of Afghanistan, admitting he's going with the advice of his generals and against his instincts. New reaction tonight as Mr. Trump's policy is attacked by the far-right. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN Breaking News.
[Blitzer:] We are following breaking news. President Trump returning to campaign mode in Arizona one week after his widely condemned remarks about white supremacists and the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. Mr. Trump leaves soon for a rally in Phoenix from Arizona's southern border where he's been meeting with the Marines and Border Protection officials. People are on the streets of Phoenix right now. They are awaiting the president. Thousands are expected to protest his visit, giving President Trump a fresh taste of the Charlottesville backlash. The state's top Republicans will be conspicuously absent tonight amid concerns about what he may say and the state of his presidency. Also tonight, "The New York Times" report that Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell is privately expressing uncertainty that Mr. Trump will be able to salvage his administration following one crisis after another this summer. Right now Republicans are divided over the president's address to the nation overnight, outlining his new Afghanistan policy. Many mainstream GOP leaders are backing his decision to abandon his past calls to withdraw U.S. forces from America's longest military conflict, but the far-right is fuming, accusing him of supporting unlimited war. One of his harshest critics, Breitbart News, the right-wing Web site where Mr. Trump's fired chief strategist Steve Bannon is now back at the helm. This hour I'll talk about those stories and more with Republican Congressman Mark Sanford, and our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. First, let's go to our senior national correspondent Alexander Marquardt. He's in Phoenix at the site of the president's big rally later tonight. Alex, so what can we expect?
[Alexander Marquardt, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, the big question is which Trump will show up. Is it the free-wheeling unscripted Trump that these people here, his base loves, or is it the more scripted, on-message, on-teleprompter Trump that we saw last night in the speech on Afghanistan? The White House is saying very little about what the president will actually say, but in the wake of those violent events in Charlottesville, the press secretary saying just a short time ago that we can expect to see more condemnation of hate in all forms.
[Marquardt:] President Trump arriving in Arizona tonight for a campaign rally facing angry crowds over his response to the violence in Charlottesville and an escalating feud with a fellow Republican, Senator Jeff Flake.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The American people are weary of war without victory.
[Marquardt:] Tonight's rally comes one day after Monday's more serious and somber primetime address on Afghanistan in which the president reversed course on his repeated calls to withdraw troops from Afghanistan.
[Trump:] My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like following my instincts. But all my life, I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office. In other words, when you're president of the United States.
[Marquardt:] Trump has used past campaign events to rally his diminished base, feeding off the crowd, reveling in their support.
[Trump:] With the exception of the late great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president that's ever held this office. That I can tell you.
[Marquardt:] Tonight's rally coming during a particularly tough time. A new poll showing the president's overall approval at 37 percent. And just 28 percent approved of his response to the deadly violence in Charlottesville.
[Trump:] Very fine people on both sides.
[Marquardt:] Monday night House Speaker Paul Ryan told a CNN town hall that Trump, quote, "messed up."
[Rep. Paul Ryan , House Speaker:] I think he made comments that were much more morally ambiguous, much more confusing. And I do think he could have done better. I think he needed to do better.
[Marquardt:] Today Vice President Mike pence coming to Trump's defense.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] The president specifically denounced white supremacists, neo-Nazis and the KKK repeatedly, and he did it on he did it when he denounced hate and violence on Saturday. He did it in his address to the nation Monday. And he did it again in the press conference. There was no moral equivalency drawn by the president.
[Marquardt:] That fallout has the potential to get worse if the president follows through on pardoning the deeply controversial Sheriff Joe Arpaio convicted of criminal contempt for refusing to stop racially profiling Latinos. Arpaio tells CNN he was not invited to tonight's rally, but he was a staunch Trump surrogate on the campaign trail.
[Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Maricopa County, Arizona:] I'll see you again with Donald Trump because once he becomes president. I know he's never going to forget Arizona. He'll be back and I hope to see him as president.
[Marquardt:] Trump also threatening to deepen the divisions in the GOP, engaging in a war of words with Arizona Senator Jeff Flake, a staunch critic. Just last week Trump called him "Flake Jeff Flake, who is weak on borders, crime and a nonfactor in Senate. He's toxic."
[Unidentified Reporter:] How about the president calling you a nonfactor in the Senate and toxic?
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] I don't worry about it at all. I'm going ahead and doing my job.
[Marquardt:] Now in that same tweet that Trump wrote about Flake, he did appear to endorse a challenger in that reelection next year, writing, "Great to see that Dr. Kelli Ward is running against Flake." Ward is a former state senator. She will be in the crowd tonight. As for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, we're told by the White House that no action will be taken on that possible pardon today. Press Secretary Sanders saying in a statement just a short time ago, no action will be taken any time today Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, Alexander Marquardt reporting for us. He's in Phoenix. Meanwhile multiple protests are planned in Phoenix for tonight as the president's visit deeply angers his opponents and even some members of his own Republican Party. Our national correspondent Miguel Marquez following the demonstrations for us. Miguel, what's the situation where you are right now?
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's getting a bit fraught at this point. We have about 10 or 12 different protesters who have come down here to basically be present as the Trump people start to go into the convention center here. I want to show you a little bit of how these things are happening. If you go up high, these are two people having a heated argument. You have police in there in plain clothes who are trying to do two things. Let them have their First Amendment rights and yell and scream as much as they like, and keep them from getting to anything more in terms of physical violence. It is a very difficult thing for them to do clearly. There are several groups, anti-Trump groups certainly, but Jewish groups, pro-immigration groups that are gathering at different points in the city. It is likely in the next several hours they will start to come here. Let me show you the individuals who have sort of come down here so far. These are maybe there are now 15 to 20 people who have come down here. They say that they are self-organized and they just want to have a presence here. It did cause some sort of moments with the police down here and with pro-Trump supporters, anti-Trump people, them exchanging very, very heated words. I can tell you the crowds have also started to go into the convention center now, so that will help keep things at a somewhat less of a fever pitch. The first person in line had been here since 7:00 p.m. last night, almost coming up on 24 hours at this point. The president isn't expected to be here for several more hours. And for police, they are treating this like a major event. Whether it's the Super Bowl or the World Series, it's all hands on deck. All police agencies are involved here, even the National Guard just in case things get out of hand. As you know, the mayor here in Phoenix has asked that Donald that President Trump not show up here, put off this rally for some time, but he did not do that. And people, I can tell you, Trump supporters have come in from all over the country as well. I met people from Texas, from Florida, from California. They are rallying behind the president Wolf.
[Blitzer:] How many people can fit into that convention center? Looks like thousands are getting ready to begin to enter.
[Marquez:] There are thousands. Give a look at the line. There are thousands who have been lining up. There will probably be between 15,000 and 20,000 in there by the time it's done. Protesters hope to have up to 10,000, perhaps more protesters, out of the several different protests that they have planned. But it is not clear how this is going to go Wolf.
[Blitzer:] We're going to stay in very close touch with you. Miguel Marquez on the scene for us in Phoenix. Stand by over there. In the meantime, let's talk a little bit more about the president's trip with Republican Congressman Mark Sanford of South Carolina. Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.
[Rep. Mark Sanford , South Carolina:] Yes, sir.
[Blitzer:] This is your first interview since President Trump's response to the white supremacists, the protests, the car attack in Charlottesville, Virginia, last week. What did you make of how the president handled the situation?
[Sanford:] Well, I think it's been, you know, well stated, and probably overstated at this point. A lot of people were disappointed in his response, that there wasn't immediate condemnation of some of the groups that were, I think, way, way, way out of bounds and any kind of equivalency I think was, again, equally out of bounds.
[Blitzer:] What would you have wanted the president to say immediately? And all of us recall what happened in Charleston, in your home state when there was a white supremacist who went on a rampage.
[Sanford:] Well, what the governor at that time did and what I think a whole host of local leaders did was to immediately condemn what had happened unequivocally, pure and simple say there is no justification. There can no be righting of the ship. What happened was tragic and wrong period, end of story. And I think if the president had done that in Charlottesville, he would have been applauded for that. There was initially a lag and then there was sort of, well, there were bad folks on both sides. That isn't the time nor the place to go into those kind of subtleties. I think it was, again, a time to be unequivocal in simply condemning what had happened and condemning racism in any form or fashion.
[Blitzer:] The president said there were very fine people on both sides. That's the statement that really irritated, angered so many people out there because on the one side there were white supremacists, KKK, neo-Nazis. On the other side there were protesters who opposed those white supremacists. When you heard those words, very fine people on both sides, Congressman, what was your reaction?
[Sanford:] Well, as I just stated, a bit of shock and a bit of disappointment. You know, I attended business school in Charlottesville, Virginia. I have two boys one who is there currently, and one who graduated just a couple of years ago from Charlottesville. I put out a Facebook comment and said this is not the Charlottesville I know. And we need to overcome evil with good which I think was the beauty of what happened in the tragedy that occurred here in Charleston, South Carolina, in the wake of the tragic shooting at the local church.
[Blitzer:] What would you like to see the president say, if anything, about this tonight?
[Sanford:] Well, I think he has, you know, backed up and made the vice president stated, a number of different points of condemnation. The problem is it was late. And the problem, again, there was that equivalency component that I think troubled a lot of folks. If he wants to, again, come out with further condemnation, I think it would be a good thing. I don't know that this is where it's going to fit in given I suspect much of the conversation, in fact, will be about border wall and what happens next on immigration.
[Blitzer:] A lot of people are wondering why the president decided to hold this campaign rally tonight, this huge campaign rally in Phoenix so quickly after what happened in Charlottesville, Virginia. Here's the question, Congressman. Does this send the right message about trying to bring the country together?
[Sanford:] You know, you can parse these things to, I mean, a fairly crazy level. And so I no. In other words, my first reaction would be no, give it a little bit more of a pause. But in fairness, you know, there's been a long-standing promise he made with regard to immigration policy, in particular securing the border. I think that a lot of Republicans, a lot of conservatives would like to see a more secure border. There was a funding built into the mini bus appropriations bill that was passed in the Congress that would have another 73 miles worth of border wall protection in it. And so, you know, at some point we've got to get onto that conversation. You know, the timing might be a little bit off from my end, but in fairness, there is an important transition in moving forward on a number of issues that I think are going to be very, very important this fall, whether that's on the deficit, whether that's on what comes next and how we fund government prior to the end of the fiscal year, which is September 30th, or indeed what happens next on the border.
[Blitzer:] But is it appropriate 3 12 years before the next presidential election for the president to be out on the campaign trail attending these kinds of huge reelection campaign rallies as he's about to do tonight? A lot of people are wondering why.
[Sanford:] The one place I'm not going to try and get is inside Donald Trump's head. And so, in fairness, he's going to do what he's going to do. You know, as a legislator, I've got to simply react to what comes next from a legislative standpoint and it's going to be an awfully busy season come, you know, a couple couple of days from now as we get back into session.
[Blitzer:] Right after Labor Day you guys got a lot of work to do in September including raising the nation's debt ceiling to make sure the nation's full faith and credit is not undermined. "The New York Times" has just reported, Congressman, that the Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell was privately horrified by the president's handling of Charlottesville and the relationship has disintegrated so far that the two haven't spoken in weeks. How damaging is this to the Trump presidency?
[Sanford:] I don't know. Wolf, you're asking me to go off on, you know, a private horror, private speculation, private comment. I mean, I don't know what was said. I don't know what wasn't said. I don't want to get into, again, Donald Trump's mind. I don't want to get inside Mitch McConnell's mind. You know, until they are public about what each is saying about the other, you know, I'll wait and see and see how that plays out. Again, it's conjecture at this point to say what McConnell is really thinking given this report that came from "The New York Times."
[Blitzer:] But, Congressman, if the relationship between the Republican president of the United States and the Republican leader in the Senate, the Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, has so deteriorated that they're not even speaking to each other right now, and that Mitch McConnell is privately, according to "The New York Times," expressed uncertainty that the president will be able to salvage his administration. How extraordinary you've been around for a while, so have I. This is pretty extraordinary, isn't it?
[Sanford:] It is. So to that point, which is a different point, I would say it's a real problem because, again, I've been in executive capacity. Your hands, at the end of the day, are going to be driven by what the legislature does or does not do. And you better find a way to work with them because at the end of the day they can, again, stymie your efforts or they can actually move them forward. And so it's a real problem from the standpoint of him advancing his legislative agenda. What's, again, allegedly going on between the president and Mitch McConnell.
[Blitzer:] It's a real problem for so many Republicans, especially in the Senate. They're going to have to pick. Do they stand with the majority leader Mitch McConnell? Do they stand with the president? These two men apparently not even talking to each other. I guess the bottom line question, and I have to take a quick break, but you can give me a quick answer, Congressman. Are you proud of where the Republican Party is right now?
[Sanford:] Am I proud of it? Oh, Wolf, you've got a lot of strange questions tonight. What I'd say is I think that it is an awfully tense time in politics right now. On the one hand you have a lot of the Trump supporters out there who legitimately are frustrated with their belief that nothing is getting done in Washington that improves their lives. On the other hand, you have people who are saying, wait a minute, some of the institutions that made this country great are being challenged in the process and you're going to have a real tug of war over the weeks, months and even years ahead between those two points.
[Blitzer:] Congressman, I want you to stand by. There is more we need to discuss. We are following what's going on right now in the streets of Phoenix, Arizona. The president getting ready to arrive there shortly. We'll have much more right after this.

[Riley:] Welcome back to CNN WORLD SPORT. Keeping up with the Kordas is clearly no easy feat. Just imagine being part of a very successful sporting family. Your father's a grand slam tennis champ, and both your siblings also have prestigious titles in their names, too. Well, on Sunday, Nelly Korda put her name up there in lights by winning golf's Australian Open on the LPGA tour. And this is so special, too, because everyone else in her family already had an Aussie Open title to their name. Well, afterwards her sister Jessica could be heard screaming with joy on face time to congratulate her.
[Korda:] Thank you. I'm finally a part of the club.
[Riley:] Well, back in 1998, her dad Peter won the Australian Open tennis tournament, and that's young Jessica in his arms there; and his wife was pregnant with Nelly at the time. Fast forward to 2012, and Jessica's now a professional golfer herself herself. She won her first title on the LPGA tour, and it just so happened to be the Australian Open. Then in 2018, almost 20 years to the day since his dad won the tennis at Melbourne, now 18-year-old Sebastian Korda won the junior title at the Aussie Open, too. So you can understand why Nelly was feeling a bit left out, but on Sunday she truly joined the club, completing what they're now calling the Korda slam. It was an absolutely heart-breaking weekend in Mexico City for Germany's formula-E driver Pascal Wehrlein. Just for context here, this series involves electric-powered cars. And here's a reason we're mentioning it off the very top. Because straight to the very first lap, and check out the leaders' graphic here and how much on you power they have left. Well, Wehrlein had been leading from pole position, but he was down to just 1 percent. And with the finish line in sight, it actually dropped to zero. As the checkered flag came down, his car failed him and the Brazilian Lucas di Grassi flew pass past him to seal victory for himself.
[Lucas Di Grassi, Winner At Mexico City:] I think today was my best Formula One race ever.
[Unidentified Female:] Really?
[Di Grassi:] It was unbelievable. Wehrlein was very dodgy. Closing the door and changing direction many times. So I tried to put pressure on him and make him more use [SIC] energy. And then in the last corner he just slowed down, tried to close the door, and I crossed the line sideways. It's unbelievable.
[Riley:] Belgium's Jerome D'Ambrosio finished fourth, so he returns to the top of the standings. Di Grassi is a former champion and, after his first win of the season, he's now into fourth. We have a fresh new look to the international sailing calendar as the weekend's first ever SailGP event took place down in Sydney. This is a two-day event. And team Australia were trailing Japan by a point at the halfway stage, but the Aussie skipper, Tom Slingsby, turned things around, winning all three of their races on the second day to claim the inaugural event here. The next one will be in San Francisco at the start of May.
[Tom Slingsby, Australian Skipper:] We don't take losing lightly, and that first race really shot us into gear. And I expect a lot of myself. I expect a lot of these guys, and these guys delivered today. And I'm happy to say I delivered and, yes, we got the win; and we won three races straight. It's amazing.
[Riley:] Yes, well done there. Well, it has been an eventful last seven days, to say the least, on the ski slopes of Europe. You'll remember, of course, that last weekend we saw Norwegian star Aksel Lund Svindal calling time on his storied career. And not only that, but the American legend Lindsey Vonn also breaking the news of her retirement, as the most successful woman on the World Cup circuit. Austria's Marcel Hirscher can also claim to be one of the best, and on Sunday he won the men's slalom at the World Championships over in Sweden. His seventh gold medal at these championships. And no male skier has won that many since the late 1950s. And he continues his domination of the sport. He's also closing in on an eighth consecutive overall World Cup title. Many congrats. Now that is it. From the whole team and me, many thanks for watching, as always. Stay with CNN. The news is next.

[Acosta:] "Family and country," that's what President Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen, says is where his loyalties lie. His comments come as some within the president's circle think the president could be turned against by Cohen and potentially put the president in legal jeopardy in a series of matters, including the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels. Joining me now from Los Angeles is Congressman Ted Liu, a Democrat, on both the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committees. Congressman, what do you make of Michael Cohen's comments? They seem to be carefully choreographed this morning. But they do seem to indicate the possibility that he may turn against the president. What do you make of that?
[Rep. Ted Lieu, , California:] Thank you for your question. It is not remarkable that he said he would put family first. But when he added that he would put country first, I found that very interesting. Because it suggests that Donald Trump was not putting country first. And then looking at this entire interview, as a former prosecutor, it seems he's signaling to the president he's going to flip on him. I hope the president does not pardon Michael Cohen, because if he does, that's crossing a red line for Democrats and also some Republicans.
[Acosta:] Do you think it also could be a flair to the president that if you're going to pardon me, do it now? Is that how you're reading between the lines here potentially? What do you think, Congressman?
[Lieu:] Reading between the lines, it absolutely seems like he is telling the president that he will likely flip on the president if he is charged, and he's hoping, in his own mind, I think, to try to get a pardon. I think that would be a grave mistake. I hope the president does not go down that path.
[Acosta:] And moving onto other topics, as you know, we found these massive immigration demonstrations over the weekend. Tens of thousands of Americans taking to the streets around the country protesting the zero-tolerance policy of the president, the policy that forced family separations. With that as a backdrop, as you know, I don't have to forecast this too much. There's a growing call among Democrats who want to abolish ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Where do you stand on eliminating ICE? There are a number of Democratic congressmen in both the House and the Senate who are starting to come forward in saying this. Are you joining that core, I suppose you can call it, of Democrats who want to see ICE eliminated?
[Lieu:] I have called for the resignation of Secretary Nielsen of Homeland Security. We just put in a new ICE director. I think he should be given some opportunity to try to change the culture of ICE. Then we need to change the policies of ICE so they don't terrorize communities. If none of that happens, then I would support abolishing ICE and replacing it with an agency that is more consistent with America's values.
[Acosta:] And let me ask you this. Because the president seems to be delighting in this possibility that you're going to have a lot of Democrats calling for the elimination of ICE. He seems to think that this is a winning issue for him going into the midterms. You've been hearing this for a couple of weeks, positioning himself against the Democrats saying he's for border security. He's for he's against crime and that Democrats are for open borders. And an increase in crime. Obviously, there's a lot of political hyperbole in that. But this notion of eliminating ICE, are you concerned the Democratic Party could be portrayed as being anti-law enforcement going into the midterms? And doesn't that concern you somewhat?
[Lieu:] I'm not concerned because ICE actually doesn't deal with borders. That's customs and Border Patrol. No one is calling me for elimination of Border Patrol. What happened to ICE is it was an agency with multiple missions including tackling child pornography, sex trafficking, things people can support. But part of the mission went beyond what they were supposed to do and they started terrorizing communities. That's the part Democrats are concerned about. And the president, since his inauguration, has been bashing immigrants this entire time. At the same time, Democrats won 43 special elections, flipped Alabama, flipped a seat in western Pennsylvania. So we're happy to talk about immigration as well as the economy and jobs. Clearly, people are not experiencing the benefits of this economy, especially middle-class families.
[Acosta:] I want to ask you about this upcoming summit, President Trump sitting down with Vladimir Putin. The president's national security adviser, John Bolton, will not rule out the possibility that they could recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea. What do you make of that?
[Lieu:] That's a grave mistake because that only incentivizes Russia to attack other countries as well. We need to continue pushing back against Russia. I agree with Nikki Haley, our U.N. ambassador, that Russia should be sanctioned more for what they've done. I'm glad the administration has taken some steps towards that. They need to fully implement the congressional sanctions that we all passed on a bipartisan basis.
[Acosta:] What would it say about the president, do you think, if he says that Russia can keep Crimea, that he essentially is recognizing Crimea as part of Russia? What does that say about the president, do you think?
[Lieu:] I do not understand why the president is so close with Vladimir Putin. He seems to do everything Putin says. That is a mystery to me. I don't really understand how the president of the United States is taking all Russia's talking points and making them into American policy. It is very, very concerning.
[Acosta:] All right. Congressman Ted Lieu, thank you for joining us. We appreciate it. We'll see you next time.
[Lieu:] Thank you.
[Acosta:] Thank you, sir. Anthony Scaramucci, who normally defends the president, is now warning the trade wars are going too far. This, as Canada is striking back in a way that will hit Americans. Plus, an anti-Trump leftist is elected president of Mexico. So how does all of this impact relations with the U.S.? We're going to be live in Mexico coming up straight ahead.

[Lemon:] We are back with breaking news the on two huge stories, James Comey's stunning testimony, Senate testimony and one of President Trump's top alleys Theresa May in the battle of her political life. CNN's senior international correspondent Frederik Pleitgen is live for us outside number 10 Downing Street. Fred, hello. First shock of Brexit, the results in the UK now another unexpected election result there tonight. What's going on with Theresa May? Is she still the prime minister?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, that's a very big question at this point in time, Don. It really is a nail biter here in the United Kingdom. Now, we are coming toward the end of the vote counting and it is still is unclear whether or not Theresa May will be able to stay in office whether she will retain her majority or whether or not she has lost that governing majority. And remember this is an election she actually called because she thought she wanted to strengthen her majority as she is negotiating with other European countries for the UK leaving the European Union. There is already people who are calling on her to resign whether she wins or not. She came out earlier and said that if her party does retains that majority that she wants to stay in office. But this certainly is so far at least a devastating result for her and is any case. And it really is unclear whether or not she is going to hang on to her political life here in this country, Don.
[Lemon:] You know, the prime minister came to the United States and visited our President Donald Trump who is an extremely controversial figure in Europe. There is a video of them walking there at the White House. And recently he attacked the mayor of London on twitter immediately after a terror attack. What does this mean for the President here? Do you think he has lost an ally there?
[Pleitgen:] I think potentially that he might have lost an ally. You are absolutely right. So one thing that happened in Britain as the country leaves the European Union, it sought closer relations with America. Of course, there was always that special relationship, and especially between Theresa May and President Trump. It seems that this relations would become even better. Now, of course, all of that is called into question. But I think one of the things that also did influence this election a little bit is the fact that President Trump did get involved in that twitter battle with the mayor of London so shortly after the terror attacks happened here in the city. That really rubbed a lot of people here in England the wrong way. And Theresa May didn't come to the defense in the mayor of London, the man who running against her, Jeremy Corbyn did. And that certainly something that may have swayed some of the polls as well. And certainly didn't help Theresa May at all. But you are absolutely right that Theresa May is voted out of office and Jeremy Corbyn in office then certainly the relations between the U.S. and the United Kingdom will become a lot more difficult at least for this current White House.
[Lemon:] Frederik Pleitgen, keeping close watch there. Frederik, thank you very much. I want to turn now James Comey senate testimony. Let's discuss now with Chris Swecker, a former FBI, assistant director for death criminal investigative division and former CIA operative Evan McMullin and CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem. Good evening. I'm so good to have you all here. Chris, let's get right to it. Here is more of today's testimony referring to the salacious allegations in the controversial dossier.
[Comey:] The President called me I believe shortly before he was inaugurated as a follow up to our conversation private conversation on January the 6th. He just wanted to reiterate his rejection of the allegation and talk about he thought about it more and why he thought it wasn't true. The verified unverified and salacious parts and during that call he asked again, I hope you are going to stay. You are doing a great job. And I told him that I intended to.
[Lemon:] So he was concern about, in the written statement that we had from Comey last night saying that the President saying to him, according to Comey, he didn't have any relationship with hookers. Again, this is according to what he said last night, the document that was released from Comey that he always assumed when he was in Russia that he was being recorded. The President seem more concern with this dossier than the Russians meddling in out election?
[Chris Swecker, Former Fbi Assistant Director Of The Criminal Investigative Division:] Well, I see the President of someone who has never had an utter thought, anything in his brain is going to spill right out. In this contact, I mean, he was I think Comey said it was neither inappropriate. But in all in each of these contacts, director Comey never pushed back which was very disappointing to me. As someone who loves the organization and certain organization for 25 years, what I was struck with was someone at his confidence level, his experience level being so surprised taken back and not responding decisively to the things that the President was asking about and supposedly was directing him to do. That was one of the things about the testimony that stunned me today. I did not expect to be surprised today. I thought it will be fairly routine.
[Lemon:] Yes. Evan, you say the major issue here is that Trump fired Comey to quote he said "to effect the investigation." So where do we go from here?
[Evan Mcmullin, Former Cia Operative:] Well, I think the investigation needs to go forward. But I still believe that the critical issue here as you said is simply that Donald Trump fired the director of FBI who was leading the investigation into the President's own campaign over potential collusion with the Russian government. That is still the issue and that's by his explanation. These are the President's own words. So, you know, we learn more from Comey today and from his written testimony. I think that, you know, what Comey did today is give the investigation more to do. And so in that way, I think the walls of justice are closing in on President Trump. But what I also saw today and what I see elsewhere is that politically things are getting more difficult for Donald Trump. You saw that not a single Republican senator was willing to defend the President's honor, his trustworthiness or in any other way other than Senator Reich making a point about the President's comment about hope and whether that could constitute obstruction of justice. But, the point is that Republicans support of Donald Trump is softening. And that combines with this expanding investigations and advance investigations leave the President in an increasingly precarious situation.
[Lemon:] Juliette, Director Comey did not want to talk about many details in the investigation and opening statements. But was there anything that he did say that surprise you?
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Yes, I think regarding Michael Flynn, I was surprised and I think the Senator who was asking the question was surprised to the extent he essentially said that the investigation against Flynn right now is an obstruction of justice or a lying investigation, meaning that's going forward. And also suggesting that the special investigator and his team are looking at that issue of obstruction vis-a-vis Trump and his co-work. So I thought there was a lot more in there that was surprising than I had anticipated. I think the other thing just to the point of the bigger issue of why we are all here is Comey consistently saying what Trump had never asked him about which was the Russian hacking. Never asked. I mean, he asked about the hookers and he asked about loyalty and he asked about, you know, ending the case, never once asked about our democracy. Never said so how can we stop the Russian from doing it? How do we make sure this does not happen again? What can we do to retaliate? How can we get DHS and CIA and NSC. And all of the, animated so that this doesn't happen again not once. And I think that that to me was just that it was just affirming that all of this is about Trump's own sense of self preservation and not leadership about protecting the American democracy.
[Lemon:] Chris Swecker, Comey was very upset about the President's comment about the FBI and his reputation at the bureau. There were a number of FBI agents who showed up there to support him. Have those comments backfired on the President, do you think?
[Swecker:] Well, they certainly did not help. I mean, Director Comey, former director Comey clearly is resentful and has some harvest some resentment and has bad blood there. And rightfully so the way he was treated. But I would still go back that expected more out of Director Comey. I know him. I admired and respected him. And I expect him to push back harder. I expected him if he thought that there were some sort of obstruction of justice and he outlined that basically in his testimony that there is a process. The attorney general guideline provides what level of investigation is required initiating investigation. He should have recused himself as a potential witness and kicked it down to his number two, his number three to look at whether that case should have been open up as an obstruction case or potential So I am sorry but I keep going back to my disappointment both with the President but with director Comey as well.
[Lemon:] You think he should have pushed back? Do you think he should have pushed back more? Do you think he should have been stronger, Juliette Kayyem?
[Kayyem:] I think it is difficult to know in that position. I mean, look. He clearly felt that Trump was trying to obstruct the case. He also felt that Trump was really bad at doing it, until of course he gets fired. The fact that Trump's bad at obstruction mean that is Comey can go forward until the moment that Comey is fired. So, you know, in other words, the fact that Trump is bad at obstruction, right, means that Comey can go forward until, of course, the moment that Comey is fired. And so, to me Comey did almost everything he possibly could do. He kept the memos. He talked to his the people around him about what was happening. And I think one other piece you asked me what was surprising. I would be worried if I were Sessions right now. To me between the letter that the opening statement that Comey released yesterday and some of the testimonies today, the extent of Sessions was not an agent for the department and that Comey felt that way. I mean, in other words, he was very weary obsession, Sessions appeared not be able to protect him and willing to for Sessions leaves the room when Trump tells him to in the famous meeting in the oval office. I left there thinking Comey may not have had much options as Chris points out should be available to him.
[Lemon:] Hey, Evan, I'm running out time but I will give you quick the last word especially director says the Russians are stepping it up in a sick way when it comes to influencing the election.
[Mcmullin:] Yes, absolutely. Well, this is something that they have been doing for a long time through history. But now at their fingertips and that everyone finger tips of all these electronic means, and social media, the internet, et cetera. And so, all of these efforts to influence other elections and foreign countries are going to be much easier and can be scaled up much more broadly, absolutely it is going to be a threat from Russia again but also from elsewhere.
[Lemon:] Thank you all. I appreciate you joining this evening. That's it for tonight. Thanks for watching. I will see you right back here tomorrow. Good night.

[Camerota:] The anonymous source who leaked Michael Cohen's financial records to the press is coming forward and wait until you hear the source's motivation. Ronan Farrow this bombshell report from "The New Yorker" and Ronan joins us now. Another bombshell, Ronan. Wow, this article that you've just published is incredible so let's go slowly through it. It's dense. OK. Last week, several news outlets reported Michael Cohen's LLC there was money coming in and out of there from places like Novartis, from Columbus Nova which had connections to the Russian oligarch.
[Ronan Farrow, Contributor, "the New Yorker":] A Korean aerospace company that had a potential contract before the administration.
[Camerota:] Yes, and
[At&t. Farrow:] Yes.
[Camerota:] OK. The source of that leak has now come forward to you about his or her motivation
[Farrow:] Yes.
[Camerota:] for doing this. What is it?
[Farrow:] This whistleblower says that upon searching a government database that is supposed to contain all the reports of suspicious bank activity, this person found several reports missing. Now, I should explain what these reports are. They're suspicious activity reports. That's what banks are legally required to file when they see activity that looks like fraud or money laundering. And we've seen some of these documents and they do, indeed, look like fishy payments involving foreign interests broken up into smaller payments. Things what would cause bank investigators to say hey, put a red flag on this. In the one document that was released last week which covers under a million dollars in transactions
[Camerota:] And this is, by the way, what Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' lawyer, had access to and also released.
[Farrow:] Michael Avenatti released some summaries of Michael Cohen's transactions and you'd have to ask him about his exact sourcing for that. But, you know, I will say that we can verify that this whistleblower is the original source of why this stuff became public. And the reason, to your original question, is this person saw that in the release reports that we have now there are internal references to other reports covering more transactions. We're dealing with about a million dollars' worth of transactions now. There were also additional reports, Alisyn, covering three million- plus.
[Camerota:] That went in and out of Michael Cohen's account.
[Farrow:] That went in and out of his account the main account at First National Bank. And those appear to be gone from a government database.
[Camerota:] OK. Is your source Michael Avenatti's source?
[Farrow:] I can't speak to the exact chain of command of who had these documents at what point, other than to say that this is the source who originally made these public.
[Camerota:] OK. This source says that he or she became alarmed when he noticed these two suspicious activity reports gone. How do they know that they're gone from the system and they're not masked somehow or moved somehow?
[Farrow:] So let's be careful about the term "gone." You're exactly right. One of the things we talk about at length in this story is all of the possible explanations, including many that could be, relatively speaking, more benign than what this whistleblower feared. It's possible the prosecutors we talked to and people experienced with the database that we talked to said that, for instance, the Southern District of New York or special counsel Mueller went in and said please quarantine these restrict them in some way. But what I'd highlight, Alisyn, is every expert we spoke to said that almost never happens. They didn't know of a procedure for doing that. So if indeed, that's the case it suggests that there is something very, very sensitive in these remaining reports.
[Camerota:] Your source is taking a great personal risk to come to you to flag this. In fact, you write, "Of the potential for legal consequences, the official said [to you] to say that I am terrified right now would be an understatement. But referring to the released report, as well as the potential contents of the missing reports [the official also added] this is a terrifying time to be an American, to be in this situation, and to watch all of this unfold."
[Farrow:] And this is why, Alisyn, I'm being so careful about talking about, for instance, the chain of custody of these documents. It's very important in this case that as much as law enforcement is searching for this individual the inspector general of the Treasury has said we're looking for who disclosed these that I've got to protect this person's identity.
[Camerota:] Because they're going to prosecute this source, I mean, is the thinking.
[Farrow:] I think quite possibly, yes. You know, look, according to what the legal penalties are this person could face exactly what you just described potentially, up to five years in prison for this. And the reason that this law enforcement official came forward is because this person was so troubled by what they viewed as clear examples of corruption in the existing reports and so concerned that at least some categories of law enforcement officials are no longer being given access to two remaining reports that potentially have even larger swaths of transactions in them. That was troubling enough to this veteran official that they said this has to be subject to public scrutiny.
[Camerota:] Ronan Farrow, thank you very much for explaining all of your reporting to us. Thank you for bringing it to us. This will not be the last time that we talk.
[Farrow:] Good to be here. Thanks, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Great to have you Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right. If you are following along with the events of the Royals this weekend the big wedding there's a development. Meghan Markle releases an announcement just a couple of days before the wedding. What she's saying about who won't be there and why, next.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. Thanks for being here. Thanks for rolling with me this evening. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York and this time tomorrow the very first arrests could be made in the special counsel investigation being led by Robert Mueller. As we've been reporting, a federal grand jury has now approved charges, but what those charges are and who they're against is sealed for now. So far there is no official comment from the White House on the pending indictments. The president did have quite a few other things to stay, however. He tweeted this, "All this Russia talk, right, when the Republicans are making their big push for historic tax cuts and reforms. Is this coincidental? Not." He also unleashed a barrage of blistering attacks on Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, referencing a witch hunt for collusion he claims doesn't exist. And ordering Republican lawmakers to, quote, "do something." Now following those tweets, White House attorney Ty Cobb wanted to make clear that, quote, "contrary to what many have suggested, the president's comments today are unrelated to the activities at the special counsel with whom he continues to cooperate." I want to get straight to my panel. CNN crime and justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz, CNN political analyst and White House correspondent for American Urban Radio Networks, April Ryan, and lastly, Patrick Healy, CNN political analyst and "New York Times" editor. Shimon, as we look ahead now to tomorrow, it is important to note that Mueller was building on intelligence from previous investigations. He didn't start from scratch.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Yes. While he didn't start from scratch, we do know that he ordered some of the investigators of the FBI agents to go back and look at some new information or to perhaps go over the information that they already had because he wanted to do it his own way. But I can tell you, Ana, as you just said, yes, I mean, the special counsel has been sitting on information that the FBI and other investigators have collected for well over a year since the FBI started this investigation which was way back last July before the election. So all of that information has been sitting with the with Mueller and the special counsel team. And then since then really, they've done a lot of their own work, brought in more prosecutors, but absolutely they've been sitting on this and they've had a lot of this information for months, for well over a year now.
[Cabrera:] Shimon, I want to make sure I'm understanding something correctly because these indictments, they're sealed. The person or persons who could be arrested tomorrow, they may not know right now that they have even been charged, meaning there could be Trump associates who know they're the focus of the probe going to bed tonight wondering if they could hear a knock at the door tomorrow, right?
[Prokupecz:] Yes, I mean, that's pretty wild to hear, but yes, that's absolutely true. There could be people who are facing charges that don't know, and in the morning, early morning tomorrow, they will get a knock on their door from the FBI with an arrest warrant saying, hey, come with me, you're being arrested for whatever it may be. And then at that point at some point within that hour or so, they'll be brought to an FBI office here in Washington, D.C. where they'll call their attorneys and then the process will begin. But that is, you know, a likely scenario. You know, we've also been told that someone may surrender. So we don't know exactly what's going to happen, but absolutely there is the possibility that someone is going to sleep tonight and has no idea that they will be arrested in connection to this investigation.
[Cabrera:] April, the president isn't necessarily tweeting about Robert Mueller, but he is spending a lot of time tweeting about what he called a witch hunt and pointing fingers at Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, his attorney says those was not about the Mueller probe. But it appears this news has hit a nerve with the president.
[April Ryan, Cnn Political Analyst:] It's touched a nerve. This president is very concerned, even though he's trying to deflect on Twitter about what's happening. This is a very serious situation. Everyone was wondering when and if this would happen and it's happening now before our eyes. We just have to wait and see. We just don't know who but it is something. This could be one of the major nails that some are looking for to nail a coffin shut. This could begin the process of something linking to Russia.
[Cabrera:] As we know the president often encourages his supporters to watch FOX News, he's close with a number of anchors there including Judge Jeanine Pirro. Listen to what she was pushing on her show this weekend.
[Jeanine Pirro, Fox News Anchor:] It's time, folks. It's time to shut it down, turn the tables, and lock her up. That's what I said. I actually said it, lock her up.
[Cabrera:] So, we had a president that is getting increasingly unpopular with his so-called base. I mean, the latest polls if you take a look at the "Wall Street Journal"-NBC News poll today shows with white college rather, white people without a college degree, it's down from 58 percent last month to just 51 percent approval now. Still the majority, but that's not, again, the 58 percent that it once was, it's dropped seven points. Now could this what we just heard from Judge Pirro there and the president's tweets today really be focused on changing the momentum here and trying to unite Republicans along with a common folk?
[Patrick Healy, Cnn Political Analyst:] That is the that is the wish, that is maybe the fantasy of President Trump and people like Jeanine Pirro that somehow if they say certain things enough, if they throw enough kind of red meat at the base, the base will just keep responding in this totally predictable way. You know, but here's the thing, I mean, President Trump said we're going to be winning so much. We're going to be winning if you put me in office. And the reality is, he has not had the kind of legislative victories that a president, Republican or Democrat, would usually have in the first year in office. And instead, he's going on about how the stock market is doing so great, but that doesn't often help a lot of the, you know, white male people who lack a you know a college degree, who aren't in the market as much as some of those, you know, sort of very wealthy supporters of President Trump. Look, he wants to be spending any president would want to be spending his time right now focused on his tax reform package, on the Asia trip.
[Cabrera:] It's what this week supposed to be about.
[Healy:] This is what this week is supposed to be about. The Asia trip that's coming up at the end of the week. Instead, he is going on Twitter, Jeanine Pirro is going on FOX News talking about Hillary Clinton again. They're not even talking about an agenda or things that could help those voters in the poll that you showed. They're not communicating, they're sort of going in this wishful kind of fantasy that they hope, you know, will distract enough people probably from the big news that's coming.
[Cabrera:] And April, some Republicans have even started calling for Mueller to resign this week. The "Wall Street Journal" editorial board wrote this in a new op-ed, quote, "The "Washington Post" revealed Tuesday that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee jointly paid for that infamous dossier full of Russian disinformation against Donald Trump. Strip out the middlemen and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a U.S. presidential candidate. Did someone say, quote, 'collusion'?" April, what's your response to that?
[Ryan:] There's a lot going on. And there's a lot of questions circulating on all sides. Right now this investigation is under way and it's got to play out. And that's what everyone said before. And it does have to play out. This investigation has to play out. Now if they want to play another piece for something else, that's fine. But this investigation has to play out. And you cannot impede it because if you impede it, it makes it look like there's something wrong. So this investigation must play out. And when it comes to Hillary Clinton and their campaign, if there needs to be investigations, let there be, but this investigation has to play out.
[Healy:] And one key point to add, if I can, to April's good point, is that the "Wall Street Journal" is owned by Rupert Murdoch and Rupert Murdoch has been one of the staunchest supporters of President Trump. They speak regularly. So an editorial like this is not exactly a shocker.
[Cabrera:] And Shimon, you talked to Justice officials regularly. Has anyone among them express concern that the president might try to fire Robert Mueller?
[Prokupecz:] Well, there's always been concern and even from people at the White House and his attorneys at the White House that, you know, the president would do something like that. It would create a whole new storm of controversy, but privately in talking to justice officials, really, there's always this concern that the White House was going to interfere or somehow tell them what to do and they really like to keep what they do separate from the White House. Even at the FBI, much of this controversy that's ongoing now is because in some ways the White House, you know, not well, was communicating with the FBI inappropriately. You know, those Oval Office meetings with Comey that the president had. So there's always this concern that the White House could try to influence or could somehow interfere from people at the Justice Department, but publicly no one ever says anything to us. And also, you know, I think there is always going to be that concern. So what they did, this is why they have a special counsel. Right? This is why the deputy attorney general appointed Bob Mueller to head this investigation. I think partially because of this concern.
[Cabrera:] Patrick, looking towards tomorrow, what do you see as worst case scenario for the president in terms of who was indicted?
[Healy:] Well, it's the outer ring and the inner ring of advisers. You know, in terms if an indictment comes down as unsealed and it is someone who is still in President Trump's direct orbit, not a former campaign official or a former adviser, but someone who is in, you know, the inner circle or someone who he's still close to, that becomes a huge story. A huge distraction. You know, it becomes the headline that pushes off tax reform, that pushes off kind of the Asia message that they're hoping that this trip. You know, they don't know. I mean, to your point earlier, people are going to bed tonight and they don't know what they're going to wake up with, and President Trump, you know, is so invested in this idea that he be cleared of any kind of collusion.
[Cabrera:] Right.
[Healy:] And for him I think he's going to bed wondering, you know, is what does Mueller have? He fundamentally doesn't know what does Mueller have? And is what he's going to have sort of start changing the narrative about collusion? Right now no definitive evidence. You know, we're going to start seeing those details come out.
[Cabrera:] April, I read Ty Cobb told the "New York Times" in fact this weekend that the president still hasn't been asked to speak with Robert Mueller's team. What is the best case scenario for the president with these indictments?
[Ryan:] The best case scenario for the president with these indictments is that none of his family members are indicted. I think that's the best case scenario for him. Because if his family members or any family member, be it in-law or blood, that's earth-shaking because it's so close to the president. And it makes you wonder even more what did the president know? So that's the best case scenario I think that no family member would be indicted. You know, you just we don't know. And Mueller has information, he has had a broad scope and we know he was able to touch finances, he's touched so many different areas. He's talked to so many different people. People that we know, people that we don't know. So it just I'm not going to speculate because we're hearing so many different things and names in Washington. I don't want to put it out there, but I'm just going to wait and see and listen to what Mueller has to say.
[Cabrera:] All right, thank you all. April, Patrick, Shimon, we appreciate it. We have some breaking news we're following right now concerning an Army Green Beret who died in West Africa back in June. The U.S. Navy is now investigating whether Sergeant Logan Melgar may have been killed by two members of Seal Team Six. The "New York Times" first reported the story and quotes officials as saying Sergeant Melgar died of strangulation. CNN Pentagon reporter Ryan Browne is joining us now from Washington. Ryan, what more have you been able to find out about this investigation?
[Ryan Browne, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Well, Ana, we now know that two U.S. Navy SEALs from SEAL Team Six are being investigated by the Navy's criminal investigation service NCIS. Now the Army was initially investigating the death of Staff Sergeant Melgar but was since transferred its investigation authority in September, so relatively recently, to the Navy showing that Navy personnel were subjects in the investigation. And we now know there were two members of SEAL Team Six. We know that the military medical examiner deemed Sergeant Melgar's death a homicide, and that his widow was informed of the circumstances of his death as well. So the Navy very much looking into this, trying to determine what happened, but at least two Navy SEALs are under investigation.
[Cabrera:] All right, Ryan Browne from the Pentagon, thanks. Coming up, scandal in hurricane-devastated Puerto Rico involving a contract to rebuild the island's power lines. Why officials are now planning to cancel the $300 million deal to a tiny company based in the hometown of Trump's Interior secretary.

[King:] Welcome back. If you're watching with us, last look, President Trump just landed in Rome moments ago. That stop three on a nine-day international debut for the president. A Vatican meeting with Pope Francis is the main event tomorrow. Those two leaders, big difference is of climate change, immigration, and other issues. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the focus earlier today. President Trump traveled to Bethlehem to meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. His public remarks touchdown on an issue were told was raised more pointedly in their private talks. Palestinian payments to families of convicted terrorists.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Peace can never take root in an environment where violence is tolerated. Funded and even rewarded. We must be resolute in condemning such acts in a single unified voice.
[King:] Before flying to Rome, the president concluded his trip to Israel and the Palestinian territories with a stop back in Israel at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial.
[Trump:] And I had a meeting this morning with President Abbas and can tell you that the Palestinians are ready to reach for peace. I know you've heard it before. I am telling you that's what I do. They are ready to reach for peace. And my meeting with my very good friend Benjamin, I can tell you also that he is reaching for peace.
[King:] God bless him. And I mean that genuinely that he's trying. But is there do we see any substance behind this optimism? He is friends with Mr. Netanyahu when President Obama was not. So if you're asking for a personal favor or a little extra personal space, perhaps this president has it in a way the prior president didn't. But whether it's the issue of the Palestinians stopping these payments, having effective governance, having the political courage and the space to come to the table or the prime minister stopping settlement construction, dealing with his very tight coalition within Israel, having the political courage and the political space to come to the table, is that there beneath the president's effort which is to be applauded?
[Naftali Bendavid, The Wall Street Journal:] I don't think we're getting any indication that it is. There's a little bit of a pattern here of administrations coming in and talking optimistically, having high hopes, getting credit for their big aspiration and then they hit against the reality of the Middle East. There's the issue of settlements, there's the issue of East Jerusalem. Mr. Abbas raised both of those actually in his talks and it's great that people are speaking positively. But ultimately there's no real sign that any of these things have changed. And there's another point to be made which is that even if somehow Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu were to agree, they have followers who may not necessarily disagree. And the issue of terrorism, the issue of the settlements have only gotten harder and more intractable. So you can't, you know, criticize them for getting positive statements. But whether it really means that this is different and that we're on the [inaudible] of peace in the Middles East I think that's something we really need to reserve judgment on.
[Laura Meckler, The Wall Street Journal:] I don't just miss the possibility that Donald Trump who has a very different style than all of his predecessors could, you know, potentially approach this in a different way. And who knows, nothing here [inaudible] worked so maybe he could. However, I do fundamentally think that whether there's if and when there is peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians has a lot more to do with them than does has to do with us. I mean, [inaudible] come there, show up one day, say these things, say they're both reaching for peace and then he's off to Rome. You know, the people who live there are the ones who have to make this decision. And I don't think we've seen to go to your question any real evidence that either side is willing to make the tough decisions. To sell the tough decisions to their people that need to be done in order to bring them together. So I just think that this is
[Jackie Kucinich, The Daily Beast:] And frankly we haven't seen any evidence that the president's skill set in business has transferred to politics in any way, shape or form. I mean, he barely got health care helps get health care through the House Republican conference. I mean, my goodness, those are a group of people that actually in theory should listen to him. So and when he says this is what I do, oh, that's what you did. We haven't seen evidence that you can do that now.
[King:] And I mean, I'm waiting we're going to see Jared Kushner shuffle diplomacy if it's truly is his portfolio. I don't say [inaudible] but if you're going to do this, I remember, you know, that Camp David and Bill Clinton tried for years and years and years and thought he was right there and then it collapsed at the last minute. It takes a lot of work.
[Michael Crowley, Politico:] It takes a lot of work and even Donald Trump who after coming into the office said some things to be effective, you know, this isn't so hard, I think I can do it. Now more recently much like health care is saying things to be effective, who knew that this was so hard and complicated. And similarly when he first came into office we saw a lot of talk, heard a lot of talk about Jared Kushner being the peace maker, the outsider who will come in as part of his portfolio that includes five other world historical projects, hearing a little less about Jared's direct role. I think reality is settling on them. Last thing I would add is, for someone like Donald Trump who's not an expert on the region, he's going to come [inaudible] both leaders, they always say we want peace. I mean, the concern that this is a naive reaction. That boy, they both told me they want peace. They've been saying that for years. The gap is still really wide. I'm not optimistic he can bridge it.
[King:] Well, we'll check this is one of those things that again applaud the effort, check back in three months, six months, nine months, see if there's actually been any progress. There is no peace process, there's no process at the moment. We'll see. When we come back, more on the former CIA Director James John Brennan, excuse me on Capitol Hill today. Pressed on whether there's collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin in the 2016 presidential campaign. More on his very interesting answer, next.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] We also extended an offer to House Speaker Paul Ryan to join us for a town hall. We hope he accepts our investigation. Thank you for being with us. "CNN TONIGHT" starts right now.
[Don Lemon, Cnn:] This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. An important and informative town hall with Nancy Pelosi tonight. But I want to go to the big picture now for you. Take a moment to do that. And this is really important. Our country is in the middle of an extreme crises, a crises that threatens our foundation, a crises that threatens the values we all hold dear, a crises created to blind us to the truth. Indeed, to destroy the very existence of the sheer truth in this country. The president of the United States is lying to us over and over and over and over again. We've all seen it with our very own eyes and we heard it with our own ears. He relies on our airwaves to play the lies to you and uses the airwaves of other networks to amplify those lies and pile more and more upon them. He uses Twitter to recklessly tweet them out to you, to all of us, telegraphing his every thought including to those who mean this country harm, undermining our nation's traditions and norms in real- time. But, what we've seen and heard from the president in the past five days may be the biggest lie of all. Repeatedly and with no facts to back him up, making the outrageous claim that the so-called deep state spied on his campaign, he did it again today.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] When they look at the documents, I think people are going to see a lot of bad things happen. I hope it's not so, because if it is there's never been anything like it in the history of our country. I hope, I mean, if you look at Clapper, he sort of admitted that they had spies in the campaign yesterday inadvertently. But, I hope it's not true but it looks like it is.
[Lemon:] It's not true. It's a lie. James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence did not did not in any way admit to the false charges, spies in the Trump campaign. In fact, he said the opposite. I want you to listen to what he told Jake Tapper today.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] Did the intelligence community spy on President Trump and his campaign?
[James Clapper, Former United States Director Of National Intelligence:] No, we did not. That is a distortion of what I said. In fact, I had an aversion of the use of the term and I thought I made that clear. And the important thing is here what was this all about. What it was about was trying to determine what the Russians were doing. Were they trying to gain access, infiltrate a political campaign. Didn't matter which campaign. It had nothing to do with spying on the campaign per se, it was about the Russians which is what we all should be concerned about to include President Trump.
[Lemon:] And then there is the president telling Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Listen to what he said today when asked if there was a so-called deep state at the State Department.
[Rep. Ted Lieu , California:] Do you believe there's a so-called criminal deep state at the State Department?
[Mike Pompeo, United States Secretary Of State:] I haven't seen comments from the president, I don't believe there's a deep state at the State Department.
[Lemon:] And yet, President Trump doubles down on his baseless claims of spies and a deep state. This is not just an angry president popping off, this is a deliberate and coordinated effort to save his presidency. To cast doubt on the Russian investigation by repeating a lie. Repeating it every chance he gets. And that repetition is a key part of the strategy here. Because if you hear him say the same thing over and over and over it gets into your head. You may even start to wonder if there's some truth to it. And that's exactly what the president and his allies want. To put that question in the back of your mind. It is a strategy he's used since he first stormed into the national political stage with his utterly false and racist birther claims that President Barack Obama was not born in this country.
[Trump:] I want him to show his birth certificate. There's something on that birth certificate that he doesn't like.
[Lemon:] That was a lie. A lie he told for years. A lie he reportedly still clings to today but it served Trump's purpose, he rose to prominence on it. Do you think he regrets it in any way? I doubt it. What lesson do you think he learned from it? I wonder. And you may wonder. You may have been wondering through all of this why doesn't his own party stand up against this blatant disregard for the truth. It's telling that few Republicans who are speaking out against the president are leaving Congress. Like Arizona Senator Jeff Flake. In his Harvard Law School commencement address today here is what he said. This is a quote, "Our presidency has been debased by a figure who has a seemingly bottomless appetite for destruction and division and only a passing familiarity with how the Constitution works." "I do not think that the founders could have anticipated that the beauty of their invention might someday founder on the rocks of reality television and that the Congress would be such willing accomplices to this calamity." Very strong words. But this is not just about talk, this is about facts. Facts do matter, the truth matters, and the truth is under daily assault from the president of the United States and that is a crises and that is the truth. We're going to begin though with some breaking news tonight. The White House now saying they are working on having two meetings, two classified briefings tomorrow. One, the White House Intel Chairman Devin with White House with the Intel Chairman Devin Nunes excuse me- the oversight chairman, Trey Gowdy and DOJ officials, the gang of eight in the next couple of days. I want to get now to the folks who are here. John Dean, Max Boot, and Charlie Dent. Thank you so much for joining us. Charlie, I'm going to start with you, the breaking news tonight, we're learning the White House is working on this bipartisan gang of eight, this briefing before Memorial Day, initially we heard it was going to be after. This is a separate meeting from the former colleagues Trey Gowdy and Devin Nunes than the one that they are attending tomorrow. Why not just have one briefing for everyone?
[Rep. Charlie Dent , Pennsylvania:] Well, Don I would certainly have one briefing for everyone. I was chair of the House ethics committee. It operates in the similar way to the intelligence committee and everything is done rather secretly and quietly. And I'll tell you one thing. I never would have met with witnesses, conducted any interviews or done anything of substance on sensitive information without the minority members or at least the ranking member present with me. You should always have to work together in these types of matters, otherwise the other side will question the integrity of the investigation. So I think it's a mistake to have a partisan only meeting. Everybody should be brought in.
[Lemon:] So, everybody wants to be on the same page when it comes to this intelligence. But I mean, you have the president consistently putting out false information. The truth is going to survive. I'm wondering if it's going to survive this presidency, what do you think about this, Max?
[Max Boot, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Well, unfortunately, I think that Donald Trump strategy is being all too effective. I mean, as you completely rightly said, and I think I commend you for calling him out, Don. I think more journalist need to do that. But nevertheless, his strategy is working with the Republican base. I mean, if you look at the polls the numbers are pretty shocking. CNN just had a poll showing that only 17 percent of Republicans have confidence in Bob Mueller's investigation. And 71 percent, 71 percent of Republicans think that Donald Trump is telling the truth about Russia, even though he has been caught in lie after lie as you've pointed out. And so this strategy of trying to run down the special counsel, much in the way that the O.J. Simpson defense team tried to run down very successfully the prosecutors in that case, unfortunately, what I see it is it's working for Donald Trump. This is an unethical strategy, it's a threat to our democracy, but Donald Trump doesn't care about that, all that he cares about his political survival and he is helping to ensure his political survivor by convincing the Republican base that he is in fact, the victim of this imaginary deep state plot.
[Lemon:] OK. So, but on that again, everyone wants to be on the same page when it comes to this intelligence. Why not have one meeting, a bipartisan meeting instead of having two meetings back to back?
[Boot:] This is not a this is not an impartial inquiry, Don. This is a partisan hit job designed to acquire information that will help the president to defame the investigators who are looking into his own campaign. That's what that's what Devin Nunes is all about. I mean, he has destroyed the reputation of the House Intelligence Committee. He has continued to destroy the House intelligence committee reputation his own reputation by acting as essentially a partisan henchman for Donald Trump instead of upholding his duties as an independent a member of Congress sworn to oversee the intelligence community.
[Lemon:] John Dean, is this just to save face to say well, we try to make it bipartisan even though you don't have the two groups meeting in the same room?
[John Dean, Cnn Contributor:] You mean the consent subsequent meeting?
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Dean:] That's what it appears to be, that they got pressured into having that. I think Max has just nailed it, he's out to do this to have a private meeting with the sort of his co-conspirators on how to defend themselves and getting the help from the people in Congress who are sort of leading the fight. You know, what's interesting though, I think that there's a limit to how far these people can go on Capitol Hill. Legislative immunity has a limit. And if you start interfering with witnesses or disrupting the process in some way, these people could be charged with obstruction of justice. There is, they can't just push this too far. And this is going to play later, if this is ever tried the president will hear about his behavior and these kinds of meetings.
[Lemon:] Yes. So, John, let's I want to talk again about sort of the gas lighting that's going on and what I said in the opening especially about-
[Boot:] That's the right word.
[Lemon:] Yes. You heard the president destroy Clapper's words. But, I mean, it has a cost. Here's more from Clapper then we'll talk.
[Tapper:] What do you make when they suggest that you committed a crime of some sort?
[Clapper:] Well, I take umbrage of that. I didn't commit a crime. I was trying to explain my understanding of what this informant was doing. It wasn't spying on the campaign, you know, I take exception to it. And I don't particularly want to dignify it by talking about it too much.
[Lemon:] Wow, that was a great answer. I mean, this president, he lives, John, and breaths in conspiracies and distorting the truth. And you watch that and you realize that he's attacking people whose served this country all their lives and he's attacking the broader institutions as well. To what end?
[Dean:] Well, I don't know what end. Clapper's got a book out there now, he may trying to be discredit it. I happen to share editors with Mr. Clapper, I don't know him personally, but I know the wonderful reports I have from my editor of what a fine man this was to work with, how candid and open he was as he was pulling together the story of a book he hadn't plan to write. And he wrote it only because of the way this presidency was won.
[Lemon:] Yes. The president is also still attacking James Comey, watch this.
[Trump:] I think James Comey has got a lot of problems. We're not undercutting, we're cleaning everything up. This was a terrible situation. What we're doing is we're cleaning everything up. It's so important, what I'm doing is a service to this country. And I did a great service to this country by firing James Comey.
[Lemon:] Charlie, he says he's cleaning things but undoubtedly he's making a bigger mess and putting his own interest above the country's.
[Dent:] I have to say I agree with you. And I'll tell you what. Look, he had the right to fire James Comey but when he fired James Comey that's what got him a special prosecutor on his back. That was a mistake. And I just want to say something as a political matter from my Republican colleagues, in the House especially, I got to tell you, you know, they need to exercise serious oversight. And if they didn't get that message in the election in western Pennsylvania, where the Republican candidate says he was going to be Trump's wing man. He was Trump before Trump. In the district where the president won by 20 points and voters out there wanted somebody to be a little bit of a check on the president in a safe Trump district. So I keep telling my colleagues they have to be serious about their article 1 powers not only when there's a Democratic president but when there's a Republican president. And we have to act that way, otherwise we can end up in the minority.
[Lemon:] Yes, go ahead.
[Boot:] Really quickly, Don, I mean, the thing that jumps out at me from hearing this tirade from President Trump against the so-called criminal deep state, he doesn't seem to have any awareness that he is actually the head of the state, that he is the president, that all of these people report for him, that he is tearing down the FBI, he is tearing down the Department of Justice. He is supposed to be the person who is their boss and he doesn't seem to be any he doesn't care about the cost of defending himself which is diminishing public confidence in law enforcement which is going to make their job much tougher. He is making this country less safe by getting people to believe that the FBI is part of this nefarious conspiracy. They're not going to cooperate with the FBI in the future and this is, you know, a pretty clear violation I would say of his oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution.
[Lemon:] The deep state is him and the people who are-
[Boot:] He is.
[Lemon:] right.
[Boot:] And the conspiracy is really him and Nunes and Sean Hannity and all these people who are out there pushing this crazy conspiracy theory to defend Donald Trump.
[Lemon:] I want to keep you guys. We're going to continue to talk with the breaking news, is that the Justice Department says that there are going to be two classified briefings tomorrow. There was only going to be one, remember with only Republicans. The second is going to be with a gang of eight. The first one is going to include the White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein the FBI Director Christopher Wray, the director of national intelligence, Dan Coats, Nunes and Gowdy along with the additional FBI and DOJ are going to be briefers and staff. And the second one would be Kelly, Rod Rosenstein, Wray, Coats, and members of the gang of eight, Gowdy and FBI and the justice staff members. We'll continue one and we'll talk about that. Everyone stick with me. We're learning more tonight about exactly what kind of questions as well that Robert Mueller's team will ask Jared Kushner. And those questions don't sound one bit like a witch hunt as the president consistently claimed.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Newsroom Anchor:] is also a Trump supporter and the full interview, by the way, airs tonight. But listen to this part of what she said.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] How would you feel if the President pardoned Paul Manafort?
[Paula Duncan, Trump Supporter And Manafort Juror:] I feel it would be a grave mistake for President Trump to pardon Paul Manafort.
[Cooper:] Why?
[Duncan:] Justice was done. The evidence was there. And that's where it should stop.
[Cabrera:] Michael, would this be a grave mistake?
[Michael Smerconish, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, I'm not surprised at all to hear a juror say that particularly one who voted for conviction because if he should offer a pardon, her view is going to be, hey, what the hell, I sat in that courtroom for three weeks and you mean my time wasn't worth anything? I think that the President is setting the stage for a pardon of Paul Manafort and the argument that he'll one day make maybe is to say that Robert Mueller set off on this witch hunt looking for collusion, couldn't find it, and the best he could do was tax fraud, tax evasion of events that preceded the presidential election of 2016. That's I think the case he is getting ready to make.
[Cabrera:] We should note Rudy Giuliani saying that he and the President have talked about pardoning people including Manafort, but that they would not do it that the President would not move forward with any pardon of that nature during the pending investigation. So Michael Smerconish, we'll chat with you, we'll see where these all goes. Thank you so much as always. Michael has his show tomorrow morning, it's Smerconish that airs at 9:00 Eastern here on
[Cnn. Cabrera:] Up next in the newsroom, Senator John McCain, his family now announcing he has discontinued treatment for his brain cancer. His friend and former Campaign Official Ana Navarro is going to join us live with her reaction.

[Baldwin:] The "Roseanne" reboot is on a roll. Monster ratings right out of the gate. ABC is poised to renew the show for a second season. But after episode one, people are wondering if the reboot is Trump propaganda. And 2018's Roseanne is a Trump supporter. And the real- life Roseanne has a history of promoting right-wing conspiracy theories on her Twitter feed. The series' star says she wants the show to be a realistic image of a family in America's current political climate. With me now, Dan Abrams, legal analyst, and founder of "Mediaite." Good to see you.
[Dan Abrams, Chief Legal Affairs Analyst, Abc News & Founder, Mediaite:] Good to see you.
[Baldwin:] Do you think ABC will have an issue on its hands with the conspiracy theories that are beginning to percolate into the mainstream?
[Abrams:] No. She's long had a big following on social media. This is not news she has said these things in the past. She's gotten this renewed interest. People are looking, I guess, again at things she said under the microscope more.
[Baldwin:] What if she keeps it up?
[Abrams:] That would be different. My guess is that her goal will be to have crossover appeal, someone that Trump supporters can say I like the show and non-Trump supporter can still say I get it. I was a fan back in the day and this isn't going to make me not watch the show. I think we've become very forgiving about past social media comments and I also think broadcast television is different.
[Baldwin:] I agree, given who the audience may be, and who may or may not be aware of all this percolating. Do you think that the president deserves credit for any of her 18 million viewers? Because he's taking it.
[Abrams:] No. Who knew what was going to be said on the show. To say you see, because they were talking about this in a positive way on the show, that's why the show popular. That would suggest that people had a script before to go see the show. They're building an audience of X, Y or Z after three episodes. But to say on the first episode they said things that were pro Trump that that's the reason that the show did well, doesn't kind of make sense.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Abrams:] You could say it's why people might watch the second episode.
[Baldwin:] But not the first.
[Abrams:] Right. Because
[Baldwin:] It's not just she's a Trump supporter. There's so much more progressive issues, her sister wearing the hat for the woman's march.
[Abrams:] Yes. Yes.
[Baldwin:] I agree with you on the crossover appeal. Something I was wondering about, because we have the likes of everything between "Fuller House," "Will & Grace" reboot, not "Roseanne," is there an '80s or '90s show that could be relevant today that you would like to see reboot up?
[Abrams:] That I would like to see?
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Abrams:] Me, I'd like to see
[Baldwin:] That could be relevant today.
[Abrams:] I would love to see "Seinfeld" today. I don't know that it would be that relevant, so to speak. We maybe analyzing "Roseanne" a little bit too much. We in the news business want to bring everything back.
[Baldwin:] Not often is there a working-class family on mainstream TV. And I think there's a need for it, based on people watching.
[Abrams:] Right. But that's what we need on television. That's a different question from relevance today. Working-class families are always going to be relevant on television. Period. And if they're under represented, that's always going to be a problem, period, no matter when you're talking about. But I think these reboots are going to be something that every network will want to try to do. You have familiarity. You have people who know the characters. And you have people who, in many cases, love the characters.
[Baldwin:] I want to ask you about Laura Ingraham. Let me say for the record, I would love to see "Family Matters," Steve Erkel, African- American family, police officer father. With everything happening now, wouldn't you like to see it? Jaleel White, if you're watching.
[Abrams:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] I would love to see that. Meantime, FOX News' Laura Ingraham basically bullied this Parkland survivor let's call it what it is on Twitter over not getting into any colleges, and he tossed a bomb back and said to advertisers, essentially, I dare to you pull out of the show. Are you surprised how many advertisers have bailed?
[Abrams:] I am surprised, because I think many who advertise with her show know what the show is. I think we should be careful. I think it's dangerous for either side to celebrate advertisers pulling out and advertisers deciding
[Baldwin:] Why?
[Abrams:] Why should advertisers be the ones who can finally have the impact? Right? It seems that's the only way
[Baldwin:] Isn't that what she really cares
[Abrams:] Do I think that's the reason she apologized? My guess is that it's her realizing she went too far and the advertisers. It's a dangerous business on the whole when we start celebrating the advertisers are pulling out. That can happen to either side and anyone. You can hope that it would be the public, the viewers who are the ones that demand change and
[Baldwin:] Last question, the devil's advocate piece. But if these students, many whom are 16, 17, 18 years of age suffer a tragic loss, but if they're using words like "murderers" in referring to members of the NRA and others who is it fair to throw it back?
[Abrams:] No, they're fair game. They're advocates now. They're young victim advocates. But they have to be treated as advocates. The problem here was Laura ended up being petty about it. It wasn't that she criticized him that was the problem. The problem was it felt small and petty to do to a high school student. In particular, when you're talking about something that only high school students have to deal with, getting into college. That's what made this different. There's no question, hey, these kids better saddle up. If they're going to get into this debate and be out there advocating, they better learn how to take it.
[Baldwin:] Dan Abrams, good to see you.
[Abrams:] You, too.
[Baldwin:] Thank you so much. Ahead here, Gloria Allred splitting with one of the president's accusers, the former "Apprentice" contestant, in the middle of a significant lawsuit. And Summer Zervos says it's her decision to split. We'll get into that. Also, student outrage boiling over at the campus of Howard University in D.C. after the iconic school fires six employees for misappropriating financial aid funds. We have the details on the scandal that dates back nearly a decade.

[Tapper:] I turn you over to Wolf Blitzer. He's in THE SITUATION ROOM next door. Thanks for watching.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news. Reduced clearance. President Trump's senior advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner loses his top-secret security clearance. How can he keep working on sensitive issues like the Middle East and China? No authority. America's cyber-security chief says President Trump has not given them the authority to go after Russia's election hackers at the source. And warns the Russians have not paid enough of a price to change their behavior. Refusing to answer. Another top Trump aide stonewalls a congressional Russia probe as communications director Hope Hicks refuses to answer questions about her time at the White House. And sniper's nest? A law enforcement source says the Florida high school gunman left behind 180 rounds when he fled and may have tried to set up a sniper's nest in a school window, perhaps to shoot at people outside. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news, presidential son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner is among the White House aides whose interim security clearances have been downgraded, according to sources who say the move will keep Kushner from seeing top-secret material. Plus, the Russia investigations are in full swing up on Capitol Hill. In stunning Senate testimony, the National Security Agency chief says President Trump has not given him the authority to go after Russian cyber-attackers. And House members question one of the president's closest aides, communications director Hope Hicks, without getting many answers. I'll speak with Congressman Eric Swalwell of the Intelligence Committee. And our correspondents and specialists, they are all standing by with full coverage. But let's begin with the breaking news. As presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner gets a downgrade from his top-secret security clearance. Let's go straight to our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, what are you learning?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] Wolf, the president ignored questions about his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, losing his top- secret security clearance here at the White House. The questions are coming in response to a change made here by the chief of staff, John Kelly. That will affect White House staffers who are operating on interim top-secret clearances. As a result, those employees, including Kushner, will have their access to sensitive materials limited over here. The White House is attempting to clear up its security clearance process, just as it's also doing damage control on two big issues: Russia and gun control.
[Acosta:] It was a stunning admission from the director of the National Security Agency, Admiral Mike Rogers, revealing that the president has not issued a directive to put a stop to Russian cyber operations designed to disrupt U.S. elections.
[Unidentified Male:] Have you been directed to do so?
[Admiral Mike Rogers, Nsa Director:] No, I have not, but if I could flesh this out...
[Acosta:] That admission left lawmakers exasperated.
[Unidentified Male:] We have not taken on the Russians yet. We're watching them intrude in our elections, spread misinformation, and we're just essentially sitting back and waiting.
[Rogers:] It's probably fair to say that we have not opted to engage in some of the same behaviors that we are seeing.
[Acosta:] Rogers went on to say Russia has yet to really for what they did in 2016.
[Rogers:] I believe that President Putin has clearly come to the conclusion, there's little price to pay here.
[Sen. Clair Mccaskill , Missouri:] The notion that you have not been given this mission to stop this from happening this year is outrageous.
[Rogers:] Thrown once again into Russia damage control mode, the White House tried to push back on the notion that the president even needs to direct NSA to take action.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Nobody is denying him the authority. We're looking at a number of different ways that we can put pressure. Look, this president, as I told you last week, has been much tougher on Russia than his predecessor.
[Acosta:] Russia was on the president's mind in the morning as he tweeted that he's the victim of a witch hunt. A new CNN poll shows a majority of Americans don't approve of the president's handling of the Russia probe.
[Sanders:] Let's not forget that this happened under Obama. It didn't happen under President Trump. If you want to blame somebody on past problems, then you need to look at the Obama administration. The president is looking at all of the different causes and all of the different ways that we can prevent it.
[Acosta:] The White House is also on its heels on the issue of gun control...
[Unidentified Male:] Enough is enough! Enough is enough! Enough is enough!... insisting the president does support the idea of raising the age limit to 21 for buying some weapons.
[Sanders:] The president still supports raising the age limit to 21 for the purchase of certain firearms.
[Acosta:] That clarification came after sources told CNN the president was backing away from the proposal. Mr. Trump didn't even mention the idea when he met with the nation's governors.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] We're really going to, I think, have the support of the NRA having to do with background checks. Very strong background checks and a very heavy section on mental health.
[Acosta:] That was just before press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters the president liked the idea of raising the age limit but as a concept.
[Sanders:] In terms of the concept, there's still support for that, but how it would be implemented and what that might look like is still part very much part of the discussion.
[Acosta:] But a key GOP congressional source tells CNN there does not appear to be a path forward for the age limit proposal, which is fiercely opposed by the National Rifle Association. House Speaker Paul Ryan sounded more supportive of strengthening the nation's background check information.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , Speaker Of The House:] We shouldn't be banning guns for law-abiding citizens. We should be focusing on making sure that citizens who should not get guns in the first place don't get those guns.
[Acosta:] Now as for security clearances for Jared Kushner and others here at the White House and those clearances being reduced, sources close to the White House are bluntly telling CNN that Kelly's move that is chief of staff John Kelly's move directly undercuts the president's son-in-law that's Jared Kushner in his role as an envoy to the Middle East. As you know, Wolf, the president on down, they've been saying that they had confidence in Jared Kushner to be able to broker some kind of Middle East peace deal. This one source I talked to close to the White House earlier today, who said this move from General Kelly really undercuts Jared Kushner's ability to be involved in those kinds of negotiations. Another source told us that this will keep Jared Kushner out of a lot of important meetings here at the White House. And Wolf, as you know, at the White House, access equals influence. So it's difficult on see how Jared Kushner can go on in his current role as a very important senior, close adviser to the president while having his security clearance limited. Wolf, we were reporting just a couple of weeks ago that Kushner, Ivanka Trump, the president's daughter, that they were a member of some 100 staffers over here at the White House who were working off of interim security clearances. Now we understand our sources are telling us that the FBI, as well as the White House, they're trying to work through all those security clearances and get these issues resolved. But it seems in the meantime, Jared Kushner's going to have his role greatly reduced over here as a result of this change implemented by General Kelly, the chief of staff.
[Blitzer:] Yes. There's a significant, very significant huge difference between top-secret, SCI, what they call sensitive compartmentalized information, as opposed to secret information. It's going to be really difficult for him to continue in those roles without that top-secret security clearance. Jim Acosta at the White House, thanks very much. Another top Trump aide, meanwhile, is stonewalling the House Intelligence Committee. The White House communications director, Hope Hicks, is refusing to answer questions about her time in the White House over these past 13 months. Let's to go our senior congressional correspondent, Manu Raju. Manu, is she still in that room behind you?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, that's right. For more than seven hours, Wolf, she has been behind closed doors before the House Intelligence Committee. For most of the day, she was not answering questions about the transition period and for about her time during the White House, only saying that the White House has authorized her to speak about the campaign period but not any talk about any topics after the campaign. Very much in line with what Steve Bannon did when he came before the committee on two separate occasions and would not answer questions about his time after the campaign. Well, there's been a bit of a shift in the last several moments here, Wolf. One Republican member of the committee, Tom Rooney, just emerged and said that Hope is starting to answer questions about the transition period, in large part because she had answered questions about the transition when she met previously before the Senate Intelligence Committee, and House Intelligence Committee was saying that they should also be afforded the same right to get those their questions answered about the transition. Still, she is not answering questions about her time at the White House, and Democrats are not happy. They're saying that she should be subpoenaed to answer some of these questions. That's a concern that was raised earlier today by Congressman Mike Quigley.
[Rep. Mike Quigley , Intelligence Committee:] I have less hope we'll get to all the answers.
[Raju:] Has there been a subpoena issued for her?
[Quigley:] No.
[Raju:] Should there be?
[Quigley:] Yes.
[Raju:] Why is that?
[Quigley:] With anyone who doesn't answer questions, they ought to be subpoenaed.
[Raju:] But so far we're not seeing as much concern from Republicans about her refusal to answer some key questions as they had with Steve Bannon, of course, threatening on hold him in contempt of Congress for not answering questions about the transition and during the White House. And you'll recall that there was those threats about contempt for Bannon. But we're told today by several of the members, Republican members of that committee that they have not made a decision yet about whether or not to move forward with a contempt citation for Steve Bannon and certainly not clear that they would go anywhere near there with Hope Hicks, because she appears to be leaving some Republican concerns even of Democrats are not happy. We'll see what they have to say when she they emerge in probably a matter of moments. This hearing going on all day. Democrats want a lot more answers about what she knew during the White House, the firing of Jim Comey, that infamous statement that was drafted about that Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr., and the Russians and other topics. She's shed any light on that. She hadn't earlier in the day, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Seven hours and counting. We'll see when she finally emerges. Manu, we'll get back to you. Manu Raju up on Capitol Hill. Let's bring in our reporters and analysts. We're standing by to speak with Congressman Eric Swalwell, Gloria. He's a member of the committee. As soon as he walks out from the Intelligence Committee hearing this is all happening behind closed doors we'll talk to him, as well. But let's get back to the breaking news: Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, senior adviser, no longer has top-secret security clearances. He's not secret security clearance. There's a big different, and questions now remain. Will he be able to continue his work in the Middle East, continue his work on China, continue his work on Mexico? You really need top-secret SCI clearances for all of that.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Right. I don't see how, really, he can continue to do his job at the level that that he was doing it. You need that kind of clearance. I know what General Kelly has said. I know what his attorney has said. But the truth of the matter is that his clearance will be very limited right now. And when you're dealing with, let's say, a place like the Middle East, and you want to you want to deal with intelligence that comes from the Middle East, it's useful to know sources and methods, for example. It's useful to see some sensitive intercepts. But you might see, and you wouldn't see that under under the clearance that he now has. And, you know, our reporting from the last week has shown that, so long as the Mueller investigation is going on, that Jared is very unlikely to get that clearance upgrade that he really needs. And so I would think that's a real problem for him in doing his work.
[Blitzer:] Yes. They've been checking his security clearances, Sabrina, for 13 months now. Maybe even earlier during the transition. I assume they started, and he still hasn't qualified. That's a major setback.
[Sabrina Siddiqui, "the Guardian":] Absolutely. And this, in some ways, has been a long time coming. I think it's been notable that members of both parties on Capitol Hill have raised red flags about the status of Jared Kushner's security clearance. We know that he had omitted dozens of financial transactions on his security clearance forms, as well as contacts that he had with foreign officials and foreign leaders. That included, of course, a meeting during the transition with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. at the time, as well as the head of a bank, a Russian state bank that was sanctioned by the U.S. So these are some of the concerns, I think, that have been brimming to the surface. And really, the dam was broken during the Rob Porter scandal, which highlighted the security clearance process within the White House.
[Blitzer:] Only the other day, Sara, the president said he was going to leave it up to his White House chief of staff, General Kelly, to make this decision. He was going to step back. Well, General Kelly has now made his decision.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Yes, General Kelly has made his decision. And look, for I guess, those people who are watching the White House and had concerns about nepotism, maybe this makes them feel better that the president didn't directly intervene. And I think Sabrina makes a good point that, you know, Jared Kushner's security clearance was going to be complicated for a lot of reasons. It was going to be complicated because he filed his forms incorrectly the first time. It was going to be complicated even if he filed his forms correctly because he has done so much business and has had so many different foreign contacts, and he was coming from a nonpolitical world. So this is a more complicated background than you would normally see for someone coming into the White House like this. And now you have the Mueller investigation still ongoing. And we know that there are questions being asked about, you know, some of the meetings Jared Kushner took and some of the financing for his business. Obviously, that adds another layer of complication and, as Gloria said, makes it more likely that he would get any kind of top- secret clearance while this investigation is still ongoing. You know, if you're John Kelly, you're really between a rock and a hard place. Do you do, you know, what you think is going to please the president and give this person top-secret security clearance, even though that's not necessarily what is warranted, or do you go with what the protocol calls for? And I think that's what we've seen him do.
[Blitzer:] The president did say that he expected John Kelly to make the right decision. He was fully confident he would make the right decision. What do you think?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Well, you know, just to go back to what Gloria said, if you ask the CIA, if you ask the NSA. Like, why do we have the CIA? Why do we have the NSA? The reason is to give policy makers the information that they need to make decisions. He's allegedly in charge of Middle East negotiations. There is no more important or high-profile NSACIA information. How can he do his job? What is his job now if he doesn't have access to this material? And all of it goes back to the problem of nepotism. If he were treated like everyone else, he'd be gone.
[Borger:] He wouldn't be there. He wouldn't be there in the first place.
[Toobin:] He wouldn't be there you're right. He wouldn't be there in the first place, but he'd certainly be gone by this point. But because he's the president's son-in-law, they have to sort of jerry rig the system where he's sort of there and he can sort of do his job, but that's not what the American people asked for, and it's not what they deserve.
[Blitzer:] Because is he really qualified...
[Borger:] No.
[Blitzer:] ... to be Middle East negotiator, a special envoy dealing with some of the most sensitive, some of the most complex negotiations in the world of diplomacy.
[Borger:] Is that a rhetorical question? I think not. Look, Jared, as the president has pointed out many times, has a great deal of knowledge about the Middle East, I'm sure. A great deal of interest in the Middle East. But is he the person that a president you would think a president would pick to be the chief negotiator for the United States for peace in the Middle East? You know, I think not. I mean, this was something that the president felt, Jared could do, because he's a great negotiator or deal maker. I'm not quite sure why. Or married to his daughter? I don't know. But, you know, obviously not. I think that he's also involved in Mexico, a U.S.Mexico relationship.
[Toobin:] China.
[Borger:] China. And there are all kinds of issues there with Jared and his business and his business dealings. So I think that that this security clearance denial is one way of saying, "You know, you're not going to be able to do that job."
[Blitzer:] The president presumably could overrule his White House chief of staff and say, "You know what? I'm the president. I'm giving him the security clearances he needs."
[Siddiqui:] And this is a president who changes his mind on any given day. Now when he spoke to reporters on Friday, as we just noted, he said he was leaving the decision up to his chief of staff, John Kelly, but we know also that there are competing factions within this White Houses, and John Kelly, in particular, has often been at odds with Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump. You know, the extent to which this further exacerbates some of those internal fissures and where that leads the White House in the coming weeks and days and whether or not the president is going to, again, show this complexity with his personal relationships and these very influential positions, that remains to be seen.
[Blitzer:] All right. Everybody stand by. We're getting more information now just coming into THE SITUATION ROOM about Jared Kushner. We'll take a quick break. We'll update you right after this.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] These are storms of catastrophic severity. And we're marshalling the full resources of the federal government to help our fellow Americans in Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Tennessee, and all of those wonderful places and states in harm's way.
[King:] That was President Trump this morning pledging resources to help those impacted by hurricane now Tropical Storm Irma. That includes the United States military. More than 10,000 military personnel now already engaged in the response to the storm. Barbara Starr joins us now live from the Pentagon. Barbara, walk us through what the military is doing to help deal with the impact of Irma.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Sure, John. You know, most of these are National Guard activated by the governor at this point. But what is taking shape behind the scenes is the possibility of a very significant military operation, in fact, involving the Pentagon. The Aircraft Carrier Abraham Lincoln and several other ships have now arrived and are arriving shortly off the coast of Florida and getting ready to hopefully start operations to help in southern Florida and in the Florida Keys. Let me pause and remind everyone. The U.S. military, of course, never would just march into some community in the United States. It has to all be worked through the governor, state, and local authorities to offer that military assistance and to have it approved by state and local authorities. It's expected that that will come, final signature on the dotted line not just yet. But everyone's looking towards that. And what we are looking at is dozens of helicopters off of these ships beginning to start aid flights into these areas, bringing in whatever is needed, food, water, supplies. There are hundreds of military medical personnel on stand-by. That can bring them into these areas, especially down in The Keys, to help with hospitals and medical care, perhaps not being available there for some time until power is restored and things can get back moving. Now, these ships themselves are already running into heavy seas and high winds, but they are expected to be on station off southern Florida ready to begin operations as soon as later today. In the Caribbean island, the U.S. military is wrapping up an effort, we're told, to evacuate Americans out of the Virgin Islands. They've already evacuated about 2,000 American citizens out of there. They expect to finish up that part of the operation as soon as today. All attention now on southern Florida and the Florida Keys to see where the military can work with the state and local authorities and step in. They are even looking at the prospect of opening up some small air fields in southern Florida so they can get closer to where people need the help and get it to them even faster. John.
[King:] Barbara Starr live at the Pentagon. A reminder of the diversity of the missions faced by the men and women of the armed services. Barbara, appreciate it very much. And as members of the National Guard jump in to help those in need, listen here, listen to this guardsman describe conditions while trying to rescue Florida residents whose homes were flooding.
[Unidentified Male:] We had our trucks. They were they were overflowing and we couldn't even get further back there. How were you able to get the families out? You use the boats? I got out on foot. On foot?
[King:] Joining us on the phone now, Senior Master Sergeant Nick Seibel. He's with Oregon's Air National Guard. He's at Hurlburt Air Base in Florida. Arrived shortly before Irma hit. Senior Master Sergeant, just start tell me, what's mission number one today?
[Sr. Master Sgt. Nick Seibel, Oregon Air National Guard:] Well, first off, John, thanks for having me talk today. And our thoughts and prayers are with the people in the path of Hurricane Irma. Right now we this early this morning, about 6:00 Central Time, we sent out two California helicopters with a C1-30 in trail, giving it gas while in flight to get an airfield team and a rescue team on the ground at Marathon Airport to do an assessment and make communications with the county emergency manager and start reaching back via satellite communications due to all of these cell networks and landlines currently being down back there. So they are routing all of that information of the critical needs of all of these medical supplies, food, water, shelter, gas, all of that stuff is being routed through us at this operations center here in Hurlburt Field. And we are working diligently to get all of this stuff ready to help those people out. Our airfield team down there is currently doing an assessment of Marathon and helping the what we have right now, the report is roughly 150 firefighters and our guys down there are clearing the airfield of debris and getting it ready to receive, whether it be military aircraft or civilian aircraft, to bring in all these much needed supplies for the people that are affected.
[King:] And do you have any sense, both Marathon and Key West Airports on your mission list, any sense of when they will be ready?
[Seibel:] Well, we've got the initial reports that they should be ready to receive aircraft in the next couple of minutes, whether it be 15 or 30 minutes. We are still waiting to make communications with the Federal Aviation Administration to make sure they are ready to start receiving aircraft at those locations.
[King:] That's quick progress. We applaud the work. And when you you mentioned getting in, maybe it's medical supplies, maybe it's food and water. From the radio traffic this morning, what's the greatest need and where?
[Seibel:] Well, it's just to be from the reporters that we got, to the north of the southernmost key, from mile marker pretty much 10 to mile marker 50, they are in serious need of we've gotten a request for some antibiotics, IV fluids and starter kits, gas and diesel, some highly trained paramedics and some palettes of food, water, and other humanitarian supplies.
[King:] Senior master sergeant, you're from the Oregon Air National Guard. Do you have any hurricane experience in the past or is this a first?
[Seibel:] Well, to be honest with you, about a week ago I was in Houston for Harvey.
[King:] What's the biggest difference?
[Seibel:] Well, I think, you know, the biggest difference in this one is there's a lot more debris and damage that we are helping take care of. And last week it was obviously just the volume of water that was coming on the mainland.
[King:] And you mentioned the two helicopters up this morning. They're available for search and rescue? Is that the idea? Or just from whatever you get incoming for request for need?
[Seibel:] So right now they are working with the county emergency manager and they are providing search and rescue operations from about that mile marker 10 to mile marker 50. So they have para rescue men on board their aircraft that have the ability to be hoisted down to any person that is in need and access their situation and either hoist the affected personnel to safety or help coordinate whatever they need at that location.
[King:] Senior Master Sergeant Nick Seibel of the Oregon Air National Guard. Sir, thank you for your service and thank you for everything you're doing. It's a tough story when you see these pictures of all the destruction and the like, but it's also heartwarming to hear people volunteering and you're doing military service down there and helping people out. Please thank everybody involved with your operation down there and keep in touch as we go through. And before we go to break, millions of Floridians without power. But one of the companies responsible for restoring it says they're going to unprecedented lengths to get the lights back on.
[Robert Gould, Vice President, Florida Power And Light Company:] We've got an army of 17,000 restoration workers, the largest we believe in U.S. history. On the west coast, with all what we've seen, we're literally talking about a rebuild that could take weeks.

[Harlow:] An Iowa community this morning is mourning after the body of what is believed to be the 20-year-old college student, Mollie Tibbetts, was found in a corn field. An autopsy will be performed today to try to determine how she died. Authorities have spent a month looking for her. They have yet to confirm the body is indeed Tibbetts, but police arrested Christhian Rivera on first degree murder charges. He is an undocumented immigrant and he did confess to approaching Tibbetts after he saw her running. He told investigators he pursued her and then abducted her. The news has crushed the hopes of family and friends and everyone in that community that were searching and searching for her for weeks. Let's go to our correspondent Ryan Young. He joins me now again from Iowa with more. Good morning, Ryan. What can you tell us?
[Ryan Young, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Poppy. This was very tough. In fact, they've raised over $400,000 as reward to have people come forward. There were thousands of posters around this area, semi- trucks had her picture on the side of it. I think yesterday something that stood out to us was the gasp and the cries and the moans from the people who showed up at this news conference who are hoping for better information. That's not what happened here. In fact, they learned the worst about Mollie. They found that she had died. She had been killed. And they could not believe that someone in this community could possibly be at the hands of that. And listen to the neighbors who used to live right next door to her and their pain in this story.
[Mary Jo, Neighbor Of Mollie Tibbetts:] We're devastated. We're heartbroken. We're sad. Not you know not for us. I mean for Mollie's family. I mean we know them all so well. And this community, sometimes they say it takes a village. Well, this village really showed they showed up.
[Young:] So you have to think about this family and also the idea, even investigators were asked about this how could you miss the corn field? Look, there's cornfield everywhere. In fact, we talked to a neighbor who lived nearby the corn field where the body was found, and she was so upset. They're talking about locking their doors now. Something they don't normally do. But something that we also want to share. A neighbor who turned over some video to investigators. They went by through it inch by inch. They were able to see a dark colored car. They also saw Mollie running by. And then of course Christhian Rivera, according to investigators, told them that he followed along, even circled back a few times, got out the car, started running alongside of her. That's when she threatened to call 911, according to Rivera, which he told investigators. And then at some point he blacked out, and then threw her car in the trunk. From there we have to figure out what happened next, Poppy, but obviously something very disturbing.
[Harlow:] Ryan Young, thank you for being there and for all that reporting. Our hearts are with all of them right now. All right. So, happening today, Ohio State Board of Trustees is deliberating the fate of the football coach there, Urban Meyer. We'll explain next.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Top of the hour. Good morning. I'm Poppy Harlow.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm John Berman. This morning a tale of two meetings, two awkward meetings for the White House. One awkward for what we know about it, and the second awkward for what we did not know. Republican senators, all of them, summoned to the White House for a special lunch with the President in just a little bit. The kind of special that deals with how Republican efforts to repeal and replace ObamaCare went up in flames after seven years of promises.
[Harlow:] Indeed. The Senate Majority Leader has now called a vote for Monday that seems all but certain to fail. And if the healthcare system in the United States crumbles, well, the President of the United States now says that's not on him. The lunch meeting today is on the schedule and transparent. The other meeting, not so much. The White House now confirms the President held a second previously completely undisclosed meeting with Russia's President, Vladimir Putin. This was at dinner at the G20. It lasted about an hour. The official calls it brief, but White House officials are telling CNN, nearly an hour. And as for what were discussed, we might never know because no other American was present. No interpreter, no record taken. First, though, this morning, breaking news on healthcare. An intriguing new statement from the President. The Republicans never discussed how good their healthcare bill is and it will get even better at lunchtime. The Dems scream death as OCare dies. M.J. Lee joins us from Capitol Hill. So what does that mean, a third stab at this? Is that what the President is saying?
[M.j. Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] Well, certainly, Poppy, this has been a really, really rough week for Republicans in their attempts to make some kind of progress on healthcare. Just to remind you, remember that going back to before the July 4th recess, that was when Mitch McConnell wanted to have his first vote on a repeal and replace bill. He did not have the votes for that. And then when folks came back after the recess, they proposed a revised bill, with changes made to that first bill. They did not have the votes for that bill either. So, now, this week, Mitch McConnell basically conceding that the repeal and replace strategy is simply not going to work. And now what he's trying to do is have a vote, as you said, early next week on a bill to repeal and delay. And this is something that has not been successful in the past or that Republicans, at least, said wouldn't be successful. But why is he pushing for a vote next week even though the math is, again, not in his favor? Because of President Trump. This is what President Trump wants. And McConnell made that clear when he made the announcement about the vote last night, that this is coming from the President, that he is trying to make a final push. And that is why, I think, we are clearly seeing him invite all of the Senate Republicans for a lunch meeting at the White House today. Now, the President, of course, has been not in a good mood about the progress or the lack of progress that Republicans have been making on the healthcare front. He has been lashing out at Democrats, even blaming some of his Republican colleagues, and even saying yesterday that Republicans should simply just let ObamaCare fail. And, of course, the tweets from this morning making it clear that he intends to continue putting the pressure on Republicans. And I think, Poppy and John, the big question that everyone is wondering about is, what could possibly happen between now and the vote next week to change the minds of some of these Senate Republicans? I asked that question to Senator John Cornyn yesterday, and his response was simply a little passage of time. So we will see if a little passage of time is exactly what Republicans need.
[Berman:] But instead of you know, beyond time and just hope, M.J., is there anyone up there who says this is anything but dead at this point despite or, you know, notwithstanding the President's tweet from moments ago?
[Lee:] Frankly, the answer is no. The Republicans and the Republican aides I am talking to and have been speaking to over the last few days, it's clear that this bill, the new attempt by McConnell to try to do a vote on a repeal and delay strategy, again, this is something that they actually ended up ruling out earlier this year because a lot of folks do not want to pass to simply pass a bill that would replace ObamaCare without a replacement bill in place, ready to go.
[Berman:] All right. M.J. Lee for us on Capitol Hill. The President apparently not taking no for an answer.
[Harlow:] He says it's going to get better.
[Berman:] We will see. Very interesting. In the meantime, new questions surrounding the undisclosed meeting between presidents Putin and Trump. These are the facts as confirmed by a senior White House official. This happened during the G20 dinner event. The conversation lasted nearly an hour. Only Russia's translator was there, which means there is no official record of what was said. The White House only went public with any of this after they were asked about it.
[Harlow:] So the President's response, knowing all of that coming from the White House, is this Fake news story of secret dinner with Putin is sick. Press knew. Even a dinner arranged for top 20 leaders in Germany is made to look sinister. Joe Johns is outside the White House with more on all of it this morning. Any explanations from the White House on this?
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] A little bit of explanation. They say it's not a meeting. I'll get into that in a minute, but I think it's the optics of it that's probably the biggest problem for this White House. The world was transfixed when President Trump had his first meeting with Vladimir Putin. And now we've learned that there was another meeting with Vladimir Putin, a two-hour meeting without an American translator. The President, as you said, calling the coverage sick, saying it was being made to look sinister. Now, here is what the White House says, Poppy. There was no second meeting between President Trump and President Putin, just a brief conversation at the end of a dinner. The insinuation that the White House has tried to hide a second meeting is false, malicious, and absurd. It's not merely perfectly normal, it's part of the President's duties to interact with world leaders. Now, the other story on the Russia investigation here in the United States, if you will, is the identification of the eighth person who is in another meeting. That meeting in 2016 with Donald Trump, Jr., at Trump tower, where they were trying to essentially find out about dirt about Hillary Clinton. The eighth person in that meeting, CNN has learned, is a man named Ike Kaveladze. Now, he is an American citizen. He is a fluent Russian speaker. Also vice president of a real estate company owned by a billionaire whose family may have actually called for the meeting. But the most interesting thing perhaps in his resume goes all the way back to the year 2000 when the General Accountability Office was looking into companies he owned and said those companies engaged in money laundering. No charges were filed, it's our understanding. And Mr. Kaveladze, for his part, has said this is all just part of a witch hunt. John and Poppy, back to you.
[Berman:] All right. Joe Johns for us at the White House. Joining us now, CNN Political Analyst Jackie Kucinich, April Ryan, David Swerdlick. April, I want to start with you. You know from covering the White House it's not unusual for world leaders to speak during these big summits, even on the sidelines of dinners like this. But isn't it unusual that this meeting between presidents Trump and Putin went on for an hour? And isn't it even more unusual that there was zero disclosure or information from the White House about this for more than a week?
[April Ryan, White House Correspondent, American Urban Radio Networks:] Well, John, it depends upon what normal is now. But traditionally and this President says that he is a he's new he is a new, modern presidential president, so let's take it in that context. So the way he does things is totally different from what other administrations would have done. Leaders meet at these meetings, at these dinners, but what you have is staff on the side or behind them. Someone maybe from NSC, someone maybe Chief of Staff, someone around from the administration to make sure that everything is above board, above the fray. And then also, you know, they typically chitchat we've seen pictures of presidents chitchatting on the sidelines. But for an hour for an hour or close to an hour, that's a long time. And then for the White House to omit that and then answer it, though, when they're asked, that leaves a lot to be desired, especially the time when we are wondering what is going on with this administration and what this administration is doing and did when they were running for the office with Russia.
[Harlow:] So, David, I mean, the response from the White House and the President on Twitter is not atypical. You would expect this. It's an attack on the media and the coverage of it. However, what we have not gotten is any details about what was discussed. So if they do want to be transparent and now it's out there after it was, you know, reported by Ian Bremmer and others, why put no details out there? If it lasted an hour, it had to be something more than small talk. No?
[David Swerdlick, Assistant Editor, The Washington Post:] Yes, Poppy. I mean, it's a little late for the administration to be completely transparent because as April said, this meeting could have been disclosed from the beginning. They already had a messaging problem with the first disclosed two-hour meeting where the Secretary of State and the Foreign Minister were there because, you know, if Trump really had wanted to do a boss move on President Putin, he wouldn't have brought up the Russian meddling in our election at all, Poppy, right? We our intelligence services have already confirmed that. They could have moved on to Syria, to Ukraine, to sanctions, et cetera, strengthen relations as the President says he wants to do. Instead, he gave that opportunity for Putin to say, no, we didn't meddle, and then they moved on. Now, you have this meeting, and it's just causing people here and in Europe to scratch their heads and say, look, the President seems in thrall to the Russians. He didn't have an hour aside with Chancellor Merkel or Prime Minister May, our staunchest, most important allies, or President Macron. He sits at this dinner where all these other leaders are, and he chooses to have this hour aside with Putin. And as you said, now, we're still left wondering, OK, what did they talk about in that hour that they didn't talk about in the other two hours when others were present?
[Berman:] So, Jackie, I want to talk about another meeting that involved a Russian. This is Donald Trump, Jr.'s meeting with the Russian lawyer, which is now beginning to look like the bar scene from "Star Wars," right? More and more characters coming to light here including this eighth person, the eighth man it sounds like a Graham Greene novel Ike Kaveladze, a guy who was accused of some serious money laundering. These are serious accusations from 2000. So no matter what was discussed inside the meeting, you know whether it was adoption, sanctions, or collusion you know, it's not a good look, is it, with all these people?
[Jackie Kucinich, Washington Bureau Chief, The Daily Beast:] No, because, initially, remember how this was about adoption. I mean, I think that was a week ago, that that was the story coming out of this. And it's one of the reasons why you have senators, like Senator Dianne Feinstein, who now want to talk to Donald Trump, Jr. about what was discussed here. You know, part of the concern here you hear from the intelligence community and going inside the White House, when you talk about President Trump and President Putin and Donald Trump, Jr. and some of these the Russians that were visiting him, we're not talking about evenly matched people at this point. So we're talking about, I mean, some people like the President and his son, and Russians who are very experienced in what they do, in extracting information from Americans and espionage and all sorts of kind of ways of getting into the American government. So the fact that we don't have a clear readout of this meeting in Trump Tower and at the G20 at this side meeting is problematic because we don't know what was said. We don't know what information was exchanged. And that causes a lot of concern considering the adversarial nature of the Russian government.
[Harlow:] So, Jackie, just staying with you for a moment on all things Russian, and we'll move on to healthcare, but we just learned overnight that the President nominated Jon Huntsman, formerly governor of Utah, formerly a presidential candidate, to be Ambassador to Russia. Now, this is someone who was supportive of the President but after that "Access Hollywood" tape came out, he said Pence should leave the ticket. And back in 2012 during that election, President Trump tweeted about Jon Huntsman saying Jon Huntsman just called to see me. I said no. He gave away our country to China. Is this a big boy move? Is this a big move from the President to put all that aside and put him in such an important role when it comes to Russia?
[Kucinich:] It seems to be. I mean, Jon Huntsman's record as ambassador, that you mention, is unimpeachable. But he's also someone I remember having a conversation with him right after the "Access Hollywood" tape came out. He was someone who was very disgusted with the President and, you know, with the party establishment for lining up behind him regardless. But and we've also seen in other parts of this White House where if someone has spoken out against the President, they have been totally nixed from the lists of appointments. So, you know, perhaps this is an acknowledgment of the important importance of the Russian ambassador in the grand scheme of things because and you have to imagine that Jon Huntsman is going to sail through his confirmation hearing. So perhaps this is a bright light.
[Berman:] So, April Ryan, healthcare now, this big lunch meeting at the White House that the President says some miracle will be performed that resurrects this bill. We don't know what will be discussed there. It's a little confusing why he thinks it may, all of a sudden, work. What we do know from "The New York Times," the President was pretty ticked off at Rand Paul, not just for opposing this but for talking about it on television. And as for the
[Ryan:] Well, let me tell you what I'm hearing, and I just talked to a Republican source before I came on with you. The source is saying that the GOP is in meltdown about this, about healthcare, because the President is forcing Mitch McConnell to hold a vote when there is not support for it. So and this is about the American people being touched. Many of the President's supporters are not feeling the new healthcare plan that would affect them and the ways that it would. They are not happy with this, and the president is trying to force a vote. And he can have all the lunches and meetings that he can call as much as he want, but what it affects the senators constituents and affects people, and people are going to these town hall meetings screaming, these senators feel it. That's why you are hearing from the Rand Pauls and you're seeing the women who are pulling away from saying yes to a vote on this new healthcare plan. It will continue to be a downward spiral. And he will have to call on a higher power, as you said earlier, John, if he wants to see this passed because it doesn't look like it's going to happen right now at all.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] David, very quickly
[Jackie Kucinich, Cnn Political Analyst:] If I could interject here. The president is not getting behind Republicans on this. Remember, he celebrated with House Republicans about passing their bill, and then turned around and called it mean. So senators are putting their necks on the line for this healthcare bill and don't know that the White House will back them up. That's causing a chilling effect.
[Harlow:] David, before we go, very quickly to you. If the tactic is now let it fail, maybe help it fail by not, you know, supporting enough funding, no subsidies or not enforcing the individual mandate, can these Republican senators that Jackie brings up who put their neck out there on this one, can they stomach that and what that will mean for their constituents?
[David Swerdlick, Cnn Political Commentator:] I don't think they will ultimately be able to stomach that if prices and premiums go up and if people lose care, but in the short-term I don't think they have much choice. Big picture, Republicans didn't have were not ready with a plan when they won the White House and both houses of Congress, that's where we've been for the last six months, Poppy. It's that Obamacare, was Romneycare, was the Republican alternative to what Democrats were proposing for years and years and years. Now that ObamacareRomneycare is the law of the land, Republicans have never been able to get their hands around what they want to replace it with and why that's so bad as opposed to whatever unknown plan or you know, draft plan they've tried to propose. And that's going to carry on through 2018 and 2020 as Jackie said, it matters how it affects constituents down the road.
[Harlow:] Guys, thank you very much. Jackie, April, David, appreciate it. So what did Trump know? When did she know it? She being Ivanka Trump. A group of House Democrats this morning questioning the first daughter's security clearance calling on the FBI to investigate whether she knew about her husband and brothers' meetings with those Russian officials. Plus a few setbacks under a cloud of controversies six months in the White House, what is the president's next move?
[Berman:] And did a kiss killed a baby just weeks after she was born? What happened here has so parents concerned?

[Lu Stout:] You are watching News Stream. And these are your world headlines. Now crowds have gathered outside parliament in Zimbabwe's capital to show support for the impeachment of the president. Robert Mugabe's own party is leading the effort after he ignored calls to step down. His vice president who he sacked has told him to accept the will of the people. The German president wraps up meetings in the next few hours with the Free Democrats and the Green Party to try to convince them to come back to the negotiating table. Chancellor Angela Merkel was elected for a fourth term but talks on forming a coalition collapsed. She says she is willing to try again but prefers a new election to a minority government. China says the situation on the Korean Peninsula is highly complex and sensitive and a call for all parties to do more to ease tensions. This after U.S. President Donald Trump put North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Puerto Rico is struggling to cope with the devastation from hurricane Maria that hit months ago. And now CNN has found the death toll might be nine times higher than reported by the government. Now, the official count stands at 55. CNN has learned hundreds more are believe do have died. Now, Russian president Vladimir Putin plans to discuss Syria's future with U.S. President Donald Trump in the coming hours and the white House now says it is expecting the call. Now earlier Mr. Putin hosted Syrian President Bashar Al Assad in Sochi. The Russian president praised Assad for his work for fighting ISIS and stressed the need for a political solution to the crisis in Syria. Now CNN's Matthew Chance joins us now live from Moscow. And Matthew, Putin and Assad met. They apparently hugged as well. What does Putin say about the Syrian president and their work against ISIS?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] You are right. They did hug. There are official photographs that have been released showing this sort of close increasingly close personal relationship between these two figures. The meeting actually took place in Sochi in Southern Russia yesterday. But it took place in secret. We didn't know it will happen early as of Tuesday and presumably by the time the announcement came from the Kremlin. This meeting had taken place. Bashar Al Assad was safely been ensconced back in his palace in Damascus. In terms of what they discussed, they seem to according to Kremlin read-out, they discussed the fact that the Syrian conflict has transformed from being mainly military operations. And of course Russia has been engaged in conducting many of those military operations, turning the tide of the battle in favor of Bashar Al Assad with its use of air strikes, SO turning from the military operations towards the search for a political solution. And it's that prospect of a political solution bringing in sort of approved opposition groups into a political process which the Russians have already started alongside various other countries. That was discussed and it was explored between the two leaders, Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad. Indeed it is the contents of those discussions which the Kremlin says it will communicate to the White House when President Putin speaks with Donald Trump in Washington presumably later on today. It feels a bit like a courtesy call, all this hard work of finding a political solution to the Syrian conflict is being done by Russia and the Syrians and a few other countries directly. They're merely communicating what they discussed to the United States rather than bringing the U.S. into the process.
[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn News Stream Show:] Got it. So to clarify this phone call that the White House is expecting, when Vladimir Putin called Donald Trump, it's merely just to share the notes of the meeting that he had with Bashar al-Assad, not to ask Donald Trump for anything?
[Chance:] I don't think so, because I think that actually the Russians along with the Iranians and the Turks as well to a certain extent. They got a big summit of leaders here tomorrow. The presidents of those countries are meeting in Russia to discuss the Syrian conflict. They basically intentionally cut out the United States from this problem. And Russia has really emerged or asserted itself as a power broker in the Middle East. That's why you are seeing these face-to-face talks with him and Bashar al-Assad and with Iranian and the Turkish presidents tomorrow in Russia, and then simply communicating what was discussed, what they decided effectively to the U.S. president in Washington.
[Lu Stout:] Got it. A courtesy call after cutting the U.S. out of the process. Mathew Chance reporting live for us from Moscow. Thank you so much. The search for a missing Argentine navy submarine that has entered its six days and 44 crew members are on board. The navy lost contact with the submarine on Wednesday. Authorities don't know if the vessel is at the surface of the ocean or is completely submerged. It has now been determined that underwater noises detected on Monday were not from the missing crew. Officials warned it could be just over a day before the crew runs out of oxygen. Let's bring in CNN meteorologist Chad Myers for more on the story because weather plays a big part here. Chad, we know that strong winds, high waves, they have been getting in the way of the search effort. What are the conditions like now and will they improve?
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist And Science Reporter:] Better than yesterday, but not as good as tomorrow. They will get better tomorrow. We are still looking at six-meter waves right now. And that swirl and that churn and the foam on the ocean. Truly, any plane that's out there with the cloud cover being at about 300 or 400 meters can't get a really good view of anything with that foam and that spray over the ocean. Let's zoom you in to the search area here because they were leaving the archipelago and moving up toward
[Lu Stout:] Yes, absolutely, because the clock is ticking. Chad Myers reporting. Thank you, Chad. Now at least 50 people were killed in a suicide attack in Nigeria. Witnesses say the bomber who looked to be about 17 years old, detonated his explosives at a mosque in the town of Mubi. That attack happened during early morning prayers. No one has claimed responsibility for the attack. You're watching "News Stream." Up next, the U.S. Justice Department is suing to stop the merger of an American telecom and a media company, AT&T and Time Warner. Coming up, we explore why this action is so controversial.

[Harlow:] Overnight North Korea carried out a new large scale artillery drill as an American nuclear submarine arrives in South Korean waters. That move by the United States now being described as a show of force as tensions continue to escalate.
[Berman:] Yes, today North Korea celebrating the 85th anniversary of the founding of its army and it comes as President Trump told a group of journalists, "I'm not so sure he's so strong like he says he is," talking about the North Korean leader. Let's get right to CNN's Will Ripley inside North Korea, in Pyongyang. Will Ripley, a very large military exercise by the North Koreans.
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. Certainly, there was an expectation of something provocative from Pyongyang and Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader delivered. We believe he was presiding over this long-range artillery drill involving hundreds of North Korean soldiers. This is the kind of artillery that is pointed directly at South Korea on the DMZ that divides the two countries. Tens of millions of people potentially in firing range and these conventional weapons analysts say actually have the potential to do more damage and kill more people right now in the immediate future than North Korea's nuclear weapons, which are still being developed. Now the sixth nuclear test that everybody has been kind of waiting for. We know that North Korea is ready to push the button on it, it has not happened yet. We will have to watch and see if there is a nuclear test or a more missile launches round this major national holiday. There were large celebrations in the streets of Pyongyang. People dancing in the streets. There was a wreath laying ceremony to honor the hundreds of thousands of North Koreans who were killed in the Korean War. And the U.S. is engaging in provocative behavior of its own, deploying that nuclear submarine, the "USS Michigan" to Pusan in South Korea. Of course, the USS Carl Vinson carrier strike group continues to move closer to the waters off the Korean Peninsula. Then you have President Trump urging the U.N. Security Council to take stronger action especially China to try to reign in the North Korean nuclear threat. He calls it a grave threat facing the entire world John and Poppy.
[Harlow:] And, Will, let's not forget, of course, as you were reporting yesterday, the American professor who was being held now, now currently the third American being held in North Korea. This is your 12th trip inside of North Korea. What is the mood of the people right now there?
[Ripley:] It's really interesting, Poppy, because obviously there is a lot of tension and chaos swirling around outside North Korea. But when you're on the streets here in Pyongyang, people say that they feel secure, that they are confident in the decisions made by their leader. Now, of course, this is an authoritarian country. Political dissent, dissenting voices, opposition of any kind toward the government not allowed. So nobody is going to go on the record and say they don't agree with what Kim Jong-Un is doing. But I have asked people if they are fearful that North Korea may be headed on a dangerous path and they believe, no. They think that they have a viable nuclear weapon that could sink a U.S. aircraft carrier. That's a threat that North Korean state media made a matter of days ago. They believe that even though the United States has more fire power that North Korea can hold its own and perhaps even win in a confrontation and they point to the size of their army. They have more than a million people in their standing army and an additional six million if you count reservist and para military. So people say that they are calm. You don't sense a lot of tension on the ground here in Pyongyang. There is some tension, though, among tourists visiting the country after the detainment of that American professor, Tony Kim. He was about to board his flight at the airport. Authorities pulled him away. We don't know where he's being held right now, what he's charged with and we may not know for quite some time. This is why the State Department, John and Poppy, really urges Americans to think twice for traveling here especially right now given the heightened tensions.
[Berman:] Wise advice.
[Harlow:] Absolutely. Will Ripley, thank you for the reporting inside of North Korea.
[Berman:] All right, joining us now, Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland. He is the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Cardin, thanks so much for being with us. I want to get your reaction to this large artillery drill by North Korea. Overnight, there is U.S. naval drills with South Korea and Japan right now, how concerned are you about the overall level of activity, military activity in the region right now?
[Sen. Ben Cardin , Maryland:] First, it is good to be with you. Thank you for having me. This obviously is a very tense situation. We know that the leader of North Korea is unpredictable. He doesn't have a mature judgment. We worry that he could do things that could really set off a tragic episode. So we have to exercise mature leadership. We have to work with the global community to try to reduce tensions in the region. We recognize that North Korea's actions violate international norms, international agreements, and our objective is to change the equation in North Korea and their calculations so they move away from their nuclear ambitions and move more towards the league of nations and being more acceptable in their conduct.
[Harlow:] Senator, you bring up the word maturity and you have said it before. You have said this country needs mature leadership in dealing with North Korea. Overnight, we heard President Trump say that he does not think that Kim Jong-un is as strong as many people might think he is. Do you believe that the Trump administration is exhibiting mature leadership?
[Cardin:] Well, quite frankly, we look forward to understanding what the administration's policy is in regards to North Korea. We will have a meeting tomorrow at the White House. I'm looking forward to getting that information. But it's not exactly clear what the objective in our policy is working with international community. So in North Korea and many other parts of the world the Trump administration has not been clear with Congress, not clear with the American people, not clear with our allies as to exactly what their strategy is about.
[Harlow:] But when you are using the word mature, you seem to be talking about the Trump administration. I just want some clarity on that. Are you saying they are acting immaturely when it comes to North Korea?
[Cardin:] I don't know. I don't know their policy so it is hard for me to evaluate that policy. It is extremely important that he work with the members of Congress, our committee, Senate Foreign Relations has that responsibility. We are a co-equal branch of government. The American people have a right to understand what our objectives are. There is no military solution to these types of problems. The best solution is to try to negotiate and change North Korea's calculations. There is ways of doing that. China has a direct interest in a nonnuclear Korean Peninsula. We have a common objective there. Although, they do not favor our system of government and they would like to see a viable North Korea, we can work with China and of course, there was that meeting with the premiere and the president. We have not yet been fully briefed as to what was discussed in that meeting. So it is too early for me to tell whether the Trump administration is acting properly or not because I don't know their policy.
[Berman:] You will be part of an all senators briefing tomorrow at the White House. We'll check in with you after that to see what your opinion is then. Some other news this morning, we just learned that the Senate Judiciary Committee is going to have what we believe is a public hearing with Sally Yates, the former acting attorney general and also the former DNI, James Clapper. They're going to come testify about this investigation into Russian ties possibly with Trump associates. That's the Judiciary Committee. There is also the Senate Intelligence Committee. You know, you can see this investigation sort of spreading. Are you comfortable with where it's headed right now?
[Cardin:] I think the congressional committees have a responsibility of oversight. I think what the Judiciary Committee is doing is absolutely appropriate. What the Intelligence Committee is doing is appropriate. But we need an independent commission that does not have the constraints of a congressional committee, that has broader jurisdiction and can operate in a non-partisan environment to give a full report to the American people as to what Russia was doing here in the United States during this past election. Contacts they made and how that squares with America's national security priorities. That independent commission, similar to what we used after the attack on 911 is needed, but congressional committees have responsibility and they should conduct oversight as the Judiciary Committee is doing.
[Harlow:] Your committee, Senator, is holding hearings today on U.S. involvement in Libya. Last week the president said, and I'm quoting, "I do not see a role in Libya for the United States." His argument is, look, the U.S. cannot be everywhere and he clearly doesn't see a role for the U.S. in Libya right now. Is the president right on that?
[Cardin:] No. I think the United States has to exercise global leadership. I was with the Security Council ambassadors yesterday before they had lunch with the president and the message was very clear that U.S. leadership is critically important. America's strength is in our values and what we stand for. So when we talk about what we can do in Libya to get a government that represents the people of Libya so there isn't a void where ISIS can grow, if the United States is absent, then there is more likelihood you will see Russia's involvement. If we see Russia's involvement, it is not going to be good for our interests. You also see voids that are picked up by terrorists. That's not good for U.S. interest. So we have a responsibility to be part. Obviously, we will not be using American troops. The local community and local security must defend the country, but we need to be part of the operation to secure Libya for its future.
[Berman:] Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, great to have you with us. Thanks so much for your time. All right. President Trump we may be within 24 hours of a major announcement on big tax cuts. Sources say he wants to slash the corporate tax rate down to 15 percent, but where exactly would he get the money to do that? Who would pay for it?
[Harlow:] The markets, of course, very closely following this. We are moments away from the hoping bell on Wall Street. None other than our chief business correspondent, Christine Romans, is here with what the markets think.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] Lower corporate taxes means bigger profit for big companies, right, and that is something driving these stock markets higher. Caterpillar, 3M, DuPont, a bunch of big names in the Dow better than expected earnings that are already making an awful lot of money and likely will make more money if you have lower taxes. All of those are moving higher here today. It is the tax story that is driving the tax story and earnings driving Wall Street right now. Look at the Nasdaq, almost to 6,000. A milestone we have never seen before. Record highs for Nasdaq, for tech stocks, expect this rally to continue today.
[Berman:] I remember when investors in Wall Street to be concerned about deficits and the national debt. That would add, what, $2 trillion to the debt over ten years?
[Romans:] It would. What this market says is this is a president who is more interested in corporate profits than red ink for taxpayers and that's good for companies bottom line. This is a business friendly president, a Wall Street friendly president. The bank stocks have done very, very well. So the guy that champions the little guy is helping the big guy.
[Harlow:] He did call himself the king of debt not that long ago, right?
[Berman:] Maybe right about that. All right. Christine Romans, stick around. A lot more to discuss. We'll be right back.

[Nobles:] Just a day after the historic summit between North and South Korea, President Trump is weighing in on plans for his own talks with North Korea's leader, tweeting out "Just had a long and very good talk with President Moon of South Korea. Things are going very well. Time and location of meeting with North Korea is being set. Also spoke to Prime Minister Abe of Japan to inform him of the ongoing negotiations." The agreement between the two countries committed to a declaration of peace and denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. I want to bring in CNN's Will Ripley. He is live for us today from Seoul, South Korea. And Will, is it impossible for the meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong-un to take place if we don't get this first step of the meeting between the leaders of South and North Korea?
[Will Ripley, Cnn International Correspondent:] It needed to happen because President Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong-un needed to talk first about inter-Korean relations because at the end of the day the two Koreas want to determine their own path forward. They were divided back in at the end of World War II by the former Soviet Union and the United States. And then the wars that were fought, it was essentially a proxy war as well. And now they want to have a hand in their own future moving forward. And so step one, the inter-Korean summit. But the very important step is the summit with President Trump, the first meeting between a North Korean leader and a sitting U.S. president, because that is going to decide whether the Koreas can accomplish things like denuclearization and a peace treaty formally ending the Korean war.
[Nobles:] There's obviously some other pretty powerful players in that region who are going to want to have a say in these discussions, including the prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe. Is he in support of these meetings with North Korea? He obviously has been in contact with President Trump.
[Ripley:] Yes, Prime Minister Abe was certainly blindsided by President Trump's quick decision to accept a meeting with Kim Jong-un because Japan really dug in their heels on a more hawkish approach that they thought the Trump administration was taking. In fact they were until they weren't. But Prime Minister Abe did go to Mar-a-Lago. They had a good meeting. I think the prime minister of Japan feels more engaged right now. He's also organizing a trilateral meeting expected to happen within the next couple weeks in Tokyo. President Moon will fly to Tokyo for that. Also, they'll have a representative from China there as well to talk about North Korea as well as other regional issues.
[Nobles:] And of course Kim Jong-un talked about reuniting Korean families as part of this agreement. Is that an important issue for South Koreans?
[Ripley:] It absolutely is an important issue on this peninsula because there are so many families who have been divided since the end of the Korean War, since that armistice that was signed in 1953. And a lot of these family members, brothers who haven't seen their sisters, they're getting older and they're dying without ever having these reunions take place. So time is of the essence. And one of the agreements made at Panmunjom, at the inter-Korean summit, was that the family reunions are due to happen again. They have happened periodically over the years. They're going to try to make them happen again probably sometime this summer.
[Nobles:] All right, Will Ripley with the view on the ground there in Seoul, South Korea. Will, thank you for that report. Still to come, details on three marines charged with sexually assaulting two women. A live report on that investigation straight ahead.

[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] on this island. So really there are a lot of people who are still asking for rescues from police officers. Police officers that I have talked to hear who say, A, communication is down so they don't have much to go on as far as radio, and at this point they believe it is too dangerous just to begin assessing the damage here. But, man, I tell you, as we step out for the first time to get a glimpse of this storm, when people say this is historic it is easy to see why. When people say this is catastrophic, the pictures certainly tell you why. These businesses have just been pounded, pounded by these winds and the rain that is now coming down as Maria continues to make her way through.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Leyla Santiago, outside for the first time in sometime in San Juan giving us our first look of the impact of the the impact of Hurricane Maria. Leyla, stand by for on moment. I want to bring in Chad Myers right now to get a sense of the path of the storm. Chad, you know, obviously, Leyla it was still windy there but it really didn't look nearly as bad as before. It didn't look like the brunt of the storm had moved past her. Is that true?
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] It is true. And there's a Venturi effect that goes on there or anywhere, where there are tall buildings. For a while we had the wind coming from the wrong direction, blowing everything in one direction and now it has shifted so that building kind of acting as a buffer. Let me get to what I'm talking about. For most of the morning hours the waves and winds are coming this direction and then for San Juan they're coming this direction, but now I believe we can't tell you because the radar in San Juan went out immediately upon impact with the eyewall. So I believe somewhere right here is the eye because we watch it there, watch it there, watch it there, so now the wind is coming in this direction so likely blocked by many of the buildings there in San Juan. And I think when we get out into the areas that aren't concrete the damage is going to be unbelievable. You are going to look at the buildings and say, was that a house? Because these structures that were just made of wood are not going to stand up to 145 miles per hour. And Leyla didn't get 145 there in San Juan, but if you get toward the El Conquistador or down near Palmas del Mar-a-Lago where our Nick Paton Walsh was all morning long, they did get winds of 135 to 145. And so that's the area that is truly going to see the devastation where you're not even going to be able to tell where the power pole was supposed to be. What pole they were supposed to be on because the poles are down, the lines are down. And all the lines are down. This is the reason why we're talking about months to put the power back in some spots. Weeks or months to get water back. And it's like, you know, I have been there a number of times with Anderson Cooper. When you lose water and power, it's like camping. And we had the opportunity to get on an airplane five days later and fly home. There's 3.5 million people that will be without water to wash their hands or wash themselves, or to cook with, and then power to even keep themselves cooler with air conditioners or a fan for weeks and months at a time. You're not going to get 3.5 million people out of there. They're going to be sitting there living this nightmare for so very long Now the forecast does change a little bit overnight. The storm did slightly jog left, and left I mean left of where we were yesterday. Not a lot. 50 miles. But I don't want this thing to keep moving west 50 miles every 12 hours, let me run the model, because then all of a sudden we're going to run into the U.S. So for now it is still a fish storm after it gets off the coast here of San Juan and Puerto Rico. It'll still affect the Dominican Republic with wind here. There's the there's the wind field in about three hours. But for now it's a fish storm but I don't want you to take your eyes off this thing anywhere along the east coast, maybe not Florida, but anywhere along the east coast north of there, this thing may not be done yet. You know, we don't know. Models are good for about 48 hours. We're talking seven days away, guys.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Wow.
[Berman:] You've done a pretty good job over the last few weeks, though, Chad, so I think we should all keep an eye on that very, very closely. Chad, you stand by, I want to go back to Leyla Leyla Santiago in San Juan. And one of the things we've seen, Leyla, on Chad's map is rainfall. You know, 12 inches of rain or so in the last several hours in Puerto Rico. You've shown us some of the wind damage. Are you getting any sense of the impact of the water, the rainfalls had?
[Santiago:] Where we are right now and let me kind of put this in context. The coast the northern coast is this way, the rest of the island this way. And we are certainly starting to feel the rain come down more so on this end than I would say when Maria first started coming in. Certainly, you know, I was almost sort of blown away right here when those winds were coming in and now this rain is heavy. I will tell you when we were inside the hotel, they're already putting trashcans out from some of the leaking of this hotel and already they are going through towels as some of the water makes its way through despite whatever protection they have managed to put in place in the last few hours. I'll step out of the way so you can get a better sense of the rain and the wind that is still in place here in San Juan, Puerto Rico. I'll be more specific for those familiar with this area. This is Condavo. And so some of these buildings that have already had the wind tear through, that have no windows, that have no doors are now, to your point, John, going to have the rain come inside. These are apartment complexes. These are buildings. The good news is I don't see people out here. Again, last check, 11,000 in shelters right now. Power we are running in this hotel on a generator. 60 percent of the island without power. And the governor has already said by the time Maria makes her way through this island of 3.5 million people, he expects it will be 100 percent without power. So yes, I want to reiterate, sort of recap here, we are still feeling winds. We are still seeing rain. But now for the first time we are seeing the damage that we had to steer clear of for a little while for safety purposes. So if you are in Puerto Rico, I understand that what I'm doing right now is dangerous. I'm doing this so that you can see what is outside. Anyone who was in Maria's path, you can see sort of the power of Mother Nature here as she makes her way through this island.
[Harlow:] Stay with us, if you can, Leyla. And thank you to you and your entire crew out there bringing us these shots, showing us the first images that we're seeing of the damage. Look, these are 3.5 million American citizens that, as Chad said, may be without power for months, cannot just get on a plane necessarily and go somewhere else. And this also comes on top of the situation I think we have Leyla, still, do we? That Puerto Rico is in, Leyla. $70 billion in debt. I mean, when you talk about rebuilding, when you talk about the homes that will have been totally wiped away, as Chad said, this is just adding insult to injury in an already very, very difficult position for the entire island.
[Santiago:] Right. I do want to point out that before the storm came in, as you mentioned, this is U.S. territory, so there was a state of emergency declared not only on the island but also from a federal level. So there is aid here from the United States. But to your point, there is an economic crisis that has been looming over this island long before this storm even formed in the Atlantic. And so when they talk about rebuilding here, when the governor says, hey, hunker down because we are going to rebuild, how is this island going to rebuild when it's $70 billion in debt? When the power system lacks maintenance and is vulnerable because of that financial instability, because of that economic storm that is looming over this island? That's a big concern as I talked to people yesterday who still didn't have power after Irma passed and now they are dealing with Maria. This is not a matter of days without power. This is not likely not a matter of weeks. For many of the people of Puerto Rico this could be a matter of months before power is restored given that Irma excuse me, Maria is having a direct impact on some of these power plants that are so vulnerable right now Poppy.
[Berman:] All right. Leyla, stand by if you can. We'll let you get a quick break, dry off for a moment. We are going to take a quick break, but again a category 4 storm right now is hitting Puerto Rico at this moment. The most devastating storm that island has ever seen according to the governor. Our reporters are sending in their dispatches as quickly as they can, as soon as we they can get their communications up. We're hoping for a look of the damage outside the cities right now. Again, we are warned, it could be horrific. Stay with us.

[Paul:] Glad to have you with us. 30 minutes past the hour right now, I'm Christi Paul.
[Blackwell:] I'm Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you. A source tells CNN, the FBI now has recordings of President Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen. Cohen apparently, recorded his conversation with the lawyer for two women who say they had affairs with the president.
[Paul:] All of this event folding, of course, and meanwhile, a source says Cohen got a call from the president yesterday. A White House spokesman says Cohen is still the president's personal attorney even though he's under criminal investigation. According to a warrant, Cohen is being investigated for bank fraud, wire fraud, and campaign finance issues. So far, Cohen has admitted no wrongdoings and we need to point out, he has not been charged.
[Blackwell:] So we have learned a lot in the last 24 hours. Joining us now, Joey Jackson, CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney. And Kelly Jane Torrance, deputy managing editor for The Weekly Standard. Good morning to both of you.
[Kelly Jane Torrance, Deputy Managing Editor, The Weekly Standard:] Good morning.
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Good morning, Victor.
[Blackwell:] Joey, let's start here with these recordings, the CNN exclusive that there are the recordings of the calls between Michael Cohen and Keith Davidson, who represented both Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. The value those could add to this case is what?
[Jackson:] The value is everything, right? So, think about this, Victor. How many times do we say wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall? Right? To the extent that you have recordings that gives you insight to exactly what was happening. What were the conversations about? Who were they about? Who did you indicate that you were representing? And you know, what was the agreement about? When did it start? When did it begin? What were the terms? What were the conditions? And so, it will tell us everything. The larger question for me, Victor, is why you would record such a thing. I thought we learned that the days of Nixon that, that wasn't such a smart thing to do for a lawyer. Why? I mean, on the one hand, if the recordings exonerate you, the prosecutors are going to say, Aha! The reason you recorded it is to set it up. You knew you were guilty and you have proof to establish that you would doing nothing wrong. On the other hand, if the recordings implicate you, you know, look, it speaks for itself. And so that's problematic. Last thing I'll say is this, I think we should have any discussion concerning Michael Cohen, under the backdrop of the Scooter Libby pardon, right? I mean, we're talking about Michael Cohen, who is so close to the president, who gets a phone call from the president no matter what they spoke about, right? Oh, the weather is changing, whatever else. I think the code is, listen, you know the power that I have, you know what I can do, I know you know my secrets, don't say a word, and I got your back. And so
[Blackwell:] Yes, you really don't have to talk about the topic of the day, just the call at the right time may send message enough. Let me come to you, Kelly Jane, because this recordings may not be exclusive to the conversations between Cohen and Davidson. We understand that this was a practice that Cohen employed for some time.
[Torrance:] Yes, and let's face it, Victor. There might be a good reason that Michael Cohen was recording his conversations, and that's because he's doing a lot of unsavory business with some unsavory people. You know, I have to say, Donald Trump, talks about how he always hires the best people. Well, Michael Cohen is not your typical high powered lawyer. I mean, this guy did not graduate from a Harvard or Yale law school. He graduated from Western Michigan University Cooley Law School, which apparently a couple of years ago had the worst entering class that legal academia had ever seen. And this is a guy who deals with a lot of sectors not known for transparency and not known for great dealing. We're talking taxicab medallions, things like that. And so, the fact that he's recording his calls might mean he's dealing with a lot of unsavory people. But look, when you think about it, these recordings could be very big because the things that the search warrant said they're investigating is wire fraud, bank fraud, possible campaign finance violations. Well, we know Keith Davidson is already under fire from one of his former clients, Karen McDougal, who she argues he actually collaborated with Michael Cohen to help Donald Trump's interests and not her interests. Which of course, he's her lawyer, he's supposed to be. So, those recordings, if they are, you know, honest and they were made and nobody keep this and didn't know they were being made. Apparently, they could really establish that Donald Trump's lawyer engaged in fraud or possibly extortion to get these women to remain silent.
[Blackwell:] So, Joey, let me come to you with the work that Michael Cohen's lawyers have to do over the weekend. Cohen's attorneys, obviously, were in court yesterday, asking the judge to block prosecutors from using the information, the data that they got during this raid on Monday, in part because of attorney-client privilege. Well, the judge asked, who were the other clients? Give me a list. And his attorneys couldn't give an answer. They've got until 10:00 a.m., Monday to give that list. Why is that important?
[Jackson:] Well, it's significant for a number of reasons. Let me say this, first of all, I think Judge Kimba Wood, the federal court judge is right on point. The
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Jackson:] Then, you know, the judge has to rule accordingly. So, I think this judge in keeping with her background and experience is being careful, wants to get it right and wants the information necessary in orders to do just that.
[Blackwell:] Kelly Jane, finally to you. We've also learned, in addition to the hush agreements as related to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal that were negotiated in connection with president. Of course, President Trump denies those affairs, that Cohen facilitated these $1.6 million dollar hush payment last year to a former Playboy model who says she was impregnated by a top GOP fundraiser, Elliott Broidy. I mean, a pattern here, but is it is the value more than the pattern? Is the value in this beyond just there being a third here?
[Torrance:] Yes, I do think so. First of all, the fact that you know, Michael Cohen seems to be the guy handling this kind of cases certainly says something. And Elliott Broidy, of course, just stepped down as one of the deputy finance chairman of the GOP over this issue. And what's really interesting is that how did Michael Cohen, hear about this Playboy Playmate with these claim? It was from Keith Davidson, he actually, was the lawyer for this woman. So, it looks shady on so many different levels. And when you look at the fact it's not just Donald Trump now, it's somebody else in the GOP. You do have to wonder how much was going on before the election, and how much of it was involving information they wanted to suppress because of the election. And you know, the pattern is certainly concerning. And I again, if you look at the search warrant, it says wire fraud, bank fraud, campaign finance violations. And that has to do with all of this stuff. And the fact that the same lawyer's involved in getting hush money for these women, and apparently, again, the argument Karen McDougal made is he was working against her interests
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Torrance:] and for the president's interests. It's very suspicious, and you can see exactly why prosecutors got the search warrant. It's an outrage as some in the White House are trying to say.
[Blackwell:] Yes. We've got to wrap it thee because we got the breaking news this morning. But we know that Michael Cohen is ordered to be in court on Monday. Kelly Jane Torrance, Joey Jackson, thank you both.
[Torrance:] Thank you.
[Jackson:] Thank you so much.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Paul:] So, the U.S. considers an air strike on Syria a success. What about Syria's allies? We have more from our reporters in Russia and Iran, live for you. Stay close.

[Lu Stout:] A sources tells CNN, reports that Rex Tillerson might be replaced as U.S. Secretary of State are aimed at publicly shaming him. And expressing President Trump's displeasure, we'll have the latest. Well, reports say Kim Jong-un's half brother was carrying the antidote to the poison which killed him at the airport when he died. And what happens in the Arctic will affect the whole world. We'll take you to one of Greenland's fastest moving glaciers and the huge chunks of ice into the sea, much quicker than anyone expected. And we begin with another possible shakeup at the White House. Reports emerged yesterday that Rex Tillerson's job as Secretary of State is on the chopping block. Now a source tells CNN that those reports were a White House effort to publicly shame Tillerson into quitting. So he could be replaced by CIA Director Mike Pompeo. Tillerson has been on thin ice with President Donald Trump for months, but especially sense he never actually denied that he once president a quote, moron. This is what the White House had to say about Tillerson on Thursday.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] When the president loses confidence in someone, they will no longer serve in the capacity that they're in. The president was here today with the secretary of state. They engaged in a foreign leader visit and are continuing to work together to close out what we have seen to be an incredible year.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you have Rex Tillerson on the job, Mr. President?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He's here. Rex is here. Thank you very much, everybody.
[Lu Stout:] All this should make for a pretty interesting conversation later today when President Trump has lunch with Rex Tillerson as well as his defense chief James Mattis. Now the impact of replacing America's top diplomat would go far beyond Washington. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is in London with more on the story. Nick, again, Tillerson is expected to be on his way out, Pompeo, on his way in. What could be the geopolitical impact of this?
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Correspondent:] First of all, I mean the timing of this significant change probably the most prominent and powerful diplomat in the world, having his exit imposed upon him and signaled through the U.S. Media. Just pause and think about that in terms of a strategy. Like a bizarre reality TV show. But also, too, all that does to everything that Rex Tillerson touches now going forward until he leaves that job. He's a marked man, a lame duck and clearly not somebody who speaks in the authority of the White House. So look at the meetings ahead of him. Particularly, meeting foreign ministers, things like that and pretty much consider the U.S. contribution there to be useless. But the standing it does to U.S. diplomacy is quite staggering as well because it shows a division at the highest possible level at the same time when there are an insane number of challenges facing the U.S. administration. Namely above all, we have the North Korea fired in the direction of Japan an intercontinental ballistic missile. So these are the things that it does to U.S. opposition globally. But then the broader question is, well, when Rex Tillerson is gone, this has not necessarily been something that was anticipated at some point in the future. If Mike Pompeo, the CIA Director comes in, what does that mean for U.S. Foreign Policy. Well, I have to say with all things at Trump White House, it's very hard to really know. He said himself, the only person his opinion matters is quote, him. So if Mike Pompeo will come there with a series of differing potential ideas, he is known to be a much more hawkish figure when it comes to North Korea, having discussed regime change, roll back a little bit at those comments. And North Korea is an impractical idea in the first place, frankly, it would have sparked some sort of war, but also, much more hawkish when it comes to the nuclear deal over Iraq's nuclear power and weapons I'm sorry, Iran's nuclear power and weapons program. He called that disaster and say he wanted to dismantle it, talked about the needs to compile intelligence to prove the case that Iran is in violation of it. And I think fortunately unfortunately then you will see that President Trump is surrounded by an increasingly hawkish number of voices on Iran. Jim Mattis, then Secretary of Defense, a relatively sane voice is still pretty hawkish with Iran, so as John Kelly, his chief of staff, Mike Pompeo is very hawkish, there is a suggestion that he will replace Pompeo at the CIA, [Inaudible], he is pretty hawkish, too, so that makes for a very troubling series of opinions that surround Donald Trump. He's not known himself to have a big background at all in foreign policy. Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, hawkish voices and very loyal lieutenants are surrounding President Trump, pretty soon, as we anticipate the end of Rex Tillerson. Nick Paton Walsh reporting live for us, thank you. Now meanwhile, President Trump's posting of those anti-Muslim videos from a far right British group is drawing condemnation still at home and abroad. It is fuelling fears and fact about safety at U.S. embassies around the world. Here's Jake Tapper.
[Jake Tapper, Correspondent:] Officials at the U.S. State Department were so concerned about the anti-Muslim videos that President Trump retweeted yesterday. They told the White House, they were actually worried that the president's actions might spark a reprise of violent protests at U.S. embassies in the Middle East. They're already on high security alert. Quote, it didn't manifest in anything actionable, but it was a big concern. One State Department official told CNN reporters, Elise Labott and Abby Phillip. Just think about that for a second. President Trump's State Department worried about the safety and security of Americans abroad, and why because the president recklessly pushed out videos of questionable veracity from an extremist far right wing Britain first group. The resulting security concerns are just another example of how far reaching and deeply felt the president's words can be. Still, this is the White House response just minute ago.
[Sanders:] What he's done is elevate the conversations to talk about a real issue and a real threat, and that's extreme violence and extreme terrorism. Something that we know to be very real and something the president feels strongly about, talking about, and bringing up, and making sure there's an issue every single day, but we are looking at the best ways to protect Americans. John.
[Unidentified Male:] On that point, Sarah, did the president when he retweeted Jayda Fransen know who she was?
[Sanders:] No, I don't believe so but again, I think he knew what the issues are.
[Tapper:] So, to recap, the president did not know who the source was, an extremist far right group and he saw these videos that clearly seek to portray Muslims as dangerous savages, he thought that that would elevate the conversation.
[Lu Stout:] Wow. That was CNN's Jake Tapper reporting. In the last hour, Pope Francis met with a group of Rohingya refugees, the very people whose plight has been in sharp focus during his trip to Myanmar and now Bangladesh. And crucially, he also finally used the word Rohingya publicly for the first time since the beginning of his tour, a controversial move in itself and that Myanmar does not recognize them as an ethnic group. More than 600,000 Rohingya Muslims had fled Rakhine State in recent months due to alleged murder, rape and destruction in their villages by the Myanmar military. Now our Vatican correspondent Delia Gallagher is in Dhaka, she joins us now And, Delia, again in Myanmar, Pope Francis tiptoed around the issue, even refrained from using the word Rohingya, but he has finally said Rohingya. He's finally found his voice there in Bangladesh.
[Delia Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, that's right, Kristie, it was a surprise, there were off the cuff comments, but the Pope has the last word on criticism that he was not naming the Rohingyas. After he met with them in spontaneous remarks, as I've said he said the presence of God today is also called Rohingya. And he asked for people to continue to work for their rights. He said, their plight was an example of the egotism of the world. So some very strong remarks from Pope Francis coming almost at the end of his trip, he leaves tomorrow and after some days of criticism, because in Myanmar, as you say, he did not mention the word Rohingya, which is not accepted by the Myanmar government and the Vatican was saying, it's a diplomatic trip. It's a political trip. And the pope was trying to work towards that angle of trying to find a long-term solution and to not upset Myanmar, get them to the table for dialogue, so that was the reason you see him there. But he certainly has spoken out about the Rohingya numerous times and, of course did so tonight at this very important symbolic moment when he actually met with some of them. Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, he's met with some of the Rohingya refugees there in Bangladesh. He finally used the term and said the presence of God today is also called Rohingya. The Pope is expected to leave for Rome on Saturday. At the end of this trip, what do you think the Pope has achieved?
[Gallagher:] Well, coming into this, the idea, as I said, was a kind of diplomatic one. Of course, the trip has been arranged before the August influx of the 600,000 Rohingya refugees, which created such international attention on the crisis. There had been some before and the Pope had spoken out about it before but he was coming here to meet with the authorities in Myanmar to try he met with the military general as well and, of course, Aung San Suu Kyi. So he was trying to work behind a diplomatic angle. But people any papal trip and this one in particular draws attention to a certain situation. And what I have heard from people on the ground here, from leaders and from the people, is that they are happy to have attention. Not only on the refugee situation in Bangladesh, but also on Bangladesh's situation. This is one of the most vulnerable countries that climate change, for example the focus also been speaking quite a lot about that, about poverty and those other things that Pope Francis focused here. And that he thinks the world's attention should be drawn to. He said it tonight, the Rohingya are an example the egotism of the world. Those are themes for the Pope that he continues to repeat and I think probably coming here was able to get the world's attention on this place. Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Absolutely, Delia Gallagher reporting live from Dhaka as Pope Francis wraps up his visit trip to Bangladesh and Myanmar. Delia, thank you. Now to a really peculiar new twist in the Kim Jong-nam murder mystery. The North Korean leader half brother, as you called, was killed in February in Kuala Lumpur. And now as Paula Newton reports, it appears that he was prepared to save himself.
[Paula Newton, Cnn Correspondent:] It is a prophetic twist. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's half brother was actually carrying an antidote to the poison nerve agent that killed him within minutes. Kim Jong-nam was allegedly poisoned with a VX nerve agent at the Kuala Lumpur airport in February. This new information from Malaysian state media possibly indicates that the elder Kim knew he was a target.
[Dr. Nial Wheate, University Of Sydney:] It sounds like to me he knew what was coming and he wanted to give himself the best chance.
[Newton:] Kim was approached by the who women in the airport who smeared the odorless, colorless liquid on his face, those two women on trial now in Malaysia. One of the women's defense attorneys has said that the antidote known as atropine was found on Kim Jong-nam's carry-on bag in tablet form. But in the state media report, there was a reference to glass vials, possibly indicating the substance was in liquid form. Regardless of its form, experts caution, it was unlikely to save him.
[Wheate:] The VX or any nerve agent is very fast acting. We're talking, if you get exposed enough to it, death within a couple minutes.
[Newton:] To save him from death, atropine would have to be administered immediately into the blood stream or muscle. Here is another intriguing twist in an already baffling story, the two women charged in the murder say they are innocent and thought they were part of a reality TV prank. And a mystery still why Kim Jong-nam apparently didn't attempt to consume the substance, he instead stumbled into an airport clinic and was rushed to hospital in ambulance. He died en route. As this trial continues, suspicions may now be backed up by evidence, that Kim Jong-nam lived in fear of being assassinated by his half brother and took an educate guess on how he would be murdered. North Korea denies any involvement in his death. Paula Newton, CNN, Seoul.
[Lu Stout:] Now the Argentine Navy has official called off the mission to rescue the 44 crew members aboard at the missing submarine. While the search sub continues, some families are begging the Navy to continue the rescue operation. One said, they need to see the bodies to grief. Argentina and 11 other countries have been searching for the sub that went missing on the coast of Argentina on November 15th. You are watching News Stream. Still to come, the Arctic is thawing fast and dazzling landscapes are simply melting away. CNN team takes us to Greenland to see the effects of climate change first hand.

[Gov. Greg Abbott , Texas:] outages. That is an improvement since the last time I reported which I think was around the 138,000 level. But the good news is there are many new power crews that are out now working in the region to reduce the power outages. Since the last time I reported, there are two other power companies with reports. Our numbers showed that CenterPoint has a little bit more than 90,000 power outages and that would be primarily in the greater Harris County region. And also, Entergy has more than 81,000 power outages. And they are all working as swiftly as possible to restore power. For the Texas TCEQ, I want you to know that we have been working with the EPA on a daily basis to address environmental issues. They have deployed rapid needs teams to assess needs that have arisen in certain areas, including water and waste water assessment teams, especially focused in that regard on the Corpus Christi, Ingleside and Rockport areas. A report from the Texas parks and wild life. They have 5,000 evacuees at state parks in the state of Texas. Most of those are in shelters, cabins or mobile homes. A report from the Department of Public Safety. There are more than 2,000 Department of Public Safety who are deployed to targeted regions. And they will continue those deployments to ensure the safety and security is maintained in those regions. From the Texas Forest Service. They continue assisting local fire departments in all of the affected regions. From the Department of Health. They have deployed multiple health care teams. To give you an example of what they are doing. They have set up two emergency room departments at the George R. Brown Center in Houston, as well as they are setting up a medical shelter at the new evacuee center in Harris County at NRG. New information about transportation. And that is there are transportation busses that are available that will be transporting evacuees from the southeast Texas region and taking those evacuees to locations around the state. Many of those who will be transported from the southeast Texas region will be taken to the Dallas region but not necessarily all of them. The information that we have compiled state wide is that there are more than 32,000 people currently in shelters in the state. Importantly, we have approximately 30,000 beds that are available for sheltering as needed. And we continue to work on additional backup plans in the event that more than that is needed. Some updated information from FEMA that just came out. This shows how important it is for everybody impacted by this storm to register. There have been 210,000 registrations for individual assistance. And FEMA has already approved more than $37 million in individual assistance. And for those who have not yet applied, again, I give you the address to go to, which is disasterassistance.gov. One of the things most important for me to help you the best I can, those who are affected by the storms, is to get you the assistance you need as quickly as possible. So, I strongly urge you to sign up at disasterassistance.gov so that you can register to begin to receive the money and other resources that you need that you can get from FEMA for the next transition. One thing that FEMA is also doing that is very helpful. The shelters and evacuation centers are intended to be short-term facilities. We want to quickly move people from evacuation centers, like a convention center, into a location where there are living rooms and bedrooms and bathrooms that people can use as a family unit. And already, there is transition housing, which means post evacuation center, for almost 2,000 rooms. And we want to provide more as soon as possible. And FEMA has already provided more than 5 million meals. With that, I'll take a few questions.
[Unidentified Male:] Governor, watching what's happening right now in Beaumont and Port Arthur, does it seem overwhelming right now for everyone?
[Abbott:] Certainly, it is overwhelming for the residents and the people who live in that region. For the state and the responders, it is just part of our ongoing emergency swift response to make sure that we address and take care of the needs of the people putting protection and safety of life first.
[Unidentified Male:] Are you satisfied or are you pleased to see how sheriff's departments, police departments, other places that have not been affected in the state, caravan after caravan heading down the road? I've seen are you a little amazed by seeing that kind out outpouring? Plus, the average just pulling
[Abbott:] I'm not amazed because we've seen this before. Texans really step up and protect and aid their fellow Texans. Whether you're a first responder or just an individual, neighbor helping neighbor, friend helping friend, stranger helping stranger, Texans have really stepped up. That said, I do want to applaud all of the first responders, all of the sheriff's offices, all the police officers across the state for doing such a terrific job. I really applaud the Harris County Sheriff's Office, the Houston Police Department for the way that they've handled such an overwhelming demand upon their agencies. But the same can be said for sheriff's offices and police departments in all of the affected areas. I applaud them all for going above and beyond the call of duty, ensuring that they have protected Texans and maintained order. All right, and when you consider the magnitude of this catastrophe, what they have achieved is just stunning.
[Unidentified Male:] Any information about the price gouging? What's your message in regards to that, sir?
[Abbott:] Price gouging is not only reprehensible, it's illegal. And the attorney general of Texas is taking swift and aggressive action to prosecute price gouging. Understand this, if you price gouge anybody, you could be subject to penalties of up to $25,000 per incident. If you're a business, you can be put out of business by the Texas attorney general if you dare try any price gouging. It's un-Texan and we will not tolerate it. When you look at comparisons, the population size and square mile size of the area impacted, both by the hurricane swathe and the flooding, it's far larger than Katrina, far larger than Sandy. And if I recall correctly and I will not have a precise number here. But my recollection is that the Katrina funding was well over $100 billion. I want to say it was over $125 billion. And so, if we go on a parallel standard, it should be far in excess of that amount. I want you to know that I have been working with Senator Cornyn, who's on Senate Finance, who's providing me the categories of funding that were provided for FEMA. And we are working to use those categories as a general outline of what will be provided.
[Unidentified Male:] Is this the largest deployment of federal and state Guard troops in state history to your knowledge?
[Abbott:] I am unaware of there ever being another incident in the history of the state of Texas where there's been this much deployment. As you know, I have deployed 100 percent of Texas National Guard. And then, on top of that, we are bringing in well over 10,000 from outside. And understand this, the amount of National Guard that we have in the state of Texas now will only grow. Because we're operating in stages here. We are in the emergency response stage right now. As we go through the process, as the water recedes, it is essential that we have as many people as possible to continue to go door to door, for the rescue and recovery mission and the restoration of order mission. And the National Guard is experienced at doing this. And so, I would anticipate, but can't say for certainty right now, but I would anticipate that a number of National Guard deployed in the state of Texas will increase from here.
[Unidentified Male:] For weeks, months?
[Abbott:] I would say for months.
[Unidentified Male:] Have you had any problems with fuel?
[Abbott:] You've had a lot of questions. Let's spread it around.
[Unidentified Male:] Is it too soon for fuel rationing?
[Abbott:] What we are we are working both with the EPA as well as energy companies, as well as other authorities to ensure that we're going to get fuel out as fast as possible. We have a priority right now. Fuel priority must be for first responders so that we can keep people safe and protected and rescued. And once we finish with the first responder needs, then we can get into other issues. But having talked to leaders of energy companies, they are working as swiftly as possible to ensure that fuel operations will be restored quickly.
[Unidentified Female:] Governor,
[Abbott:] You need to understand that any claims along those lines are absolutely bogus. And I'm going to read you to make sure you have it the statement issued by the Texas Department of Insurance. The Texas Department of Insurance is reassuring Texas policyholders that storm claims will be paid and that the agency will aggressively enforce state laws and policy provisions to protect victims of Hurricane Harvey and the widespread flooding that followed. The claims filing process and deadlines aren't changing September 1st. House bill 1774 does not change how property owners file a claim. It doesn't change deadlines to file claims or how insurers process claims. It also does not apply to claims with the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association or the National Flood Insurance program. Property owners with covered damages maintain the same rights to an insurance claim, whether they file their claim before or after September the first. The Texas Department of Insurance is sending staff to affected area this is week to help victims file claims and has extended hours for its consumer help line. The Texas Department of Insurance help line is 1-800-252-3439 and it's open from 3:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, as well as 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Here's the reality of what is driving all of this. The implementation of this bill does not affect the ability of any policyholder from being able to file a claim or have that claim paid. What it does do is it empowers policyholders to keep more money in their pockets as opposed to paying money to lawyers who may handle their claim. Because all it really does is require a notification by a policyholder to the insurance company before a policyholder files a lawsuit. And what that does is that spurs the insurance company to get that claim paid faster.
[Unidentified Male:] Two more questions.
[Abbott:] Say again.
[Unidentified Male:] The official death toll?
[Abbott:] I'll have that
[Unidentified:] We're not anywhere close.
[Abbott:] Yes, we will defer to the local jurisdictions and what they categorize as a death related to the hurricane.
[Unidentified Male:] OK.
[Unidentified Female:] Governor, have you made any decision about whether you're going to accept the help from Mexico
[Abbott:] Yes, I have. And we are. And we have I don't have it with me here. We have a list of aid and assistance that they have offered to provide that we are accepting. I don't have the list, but I can tell you loosely, it involves things like vehicles and boats and supplies and food.
[Question:] Are people in more
[Unidentified Male:] One one more and then we have to go. Right here.
[Question:] Quick question. I know some of the people that are affected are also undocumented.
[Abbott:] Well, the director of the Department of Public Safety made clear the other day, and that is, when people are going to evacuation centers, when people are seeking help or anything like that, no one is being asked about their status. We're here for one purpose, and that is to save and help people who are here.
[Question:] Governor
[Abbott:] Thank you all very much.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, we have to we have to go. I'm sorry. We're really late.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Anchor:] All right, there you have Texas Governor Greg Abbott wrapping up a press conference there in Austin, updating the public on relief efforts in the state of Texas. On the other side of your screen right now, you can see Brian Todd. He is on an airboat navigating some of the areas that are affected by Harvey. And we're seeing some extraordinary pictures coming in from him. We'll touch base with him in just a little bit. But we want to start this hour with a desperate call for help in east Texas. Officials in Port Arthur are pleading for boats to help rescue residents from being washed away by heavy flooding. Tropical Storm Harvey came back on shore this morning, bringing more devastating rains to Texas and Louisiana. The storm and flooding are being blamed for at least 19 deaths at this point. But that number may rise. In Houston, people are still being helped from their flooded homes. While the rescues are slowing down, the scope of this humanitarian disaster is still widening. More than 30,000 people are in shelters right now with flood waters claiming their homes and neighborhoods. Meanwhile, President Trump, who was in Texas yesterday, offered this tweet earlier this morning. After witnessing firsthand the horror and devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, my heart goes out even more to the people the great people of Texas. And some of the worst of what we're seeing right now is in Port Arthur, Texas. Our Kaylee Hartung is in nearby Orange in far eastern Texas, very close to the Louisiana border right now. Kaylee, it's been a dramatic day of rescues. We just saw Brian Todd on an airboat a few moments ago, navigating those waters. Water is everywhere. It's behind you right now. What can you tell us?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, and, Jim, just as you cross the Texas state line, this is the first large scale rescue effort that we could see as we traveled here on I-10 westbound. But just as quickly as these boats can come up and unload people and the very few belongings that they were able to bring with them, the boats are back out there. In taking with volunteers who have been on these waters since 7:00 a.m. this morning, some in late hours of last night, they say they believe they have cleared most of this area to this direction, but there is a large apartment complex that direction where they say some people just don't want to leave. Now those same volunteers who have been on these waters, they don't think that's a good idea because nobody who lives in this area, is familiar with this area, thinks that this water will recede any time soon, though they don't really expect it to rise much higher. Yesterday, over a 24-hour period, Orange saw 26 inches of rain. And that was before Harvey made landfall. These rescues, like I said, started in the middle of the night. They actually had to suspend rescue operations around 3:00 a.m. because the weather was so terrible. And the fire department was coordinating a lot of those rescues done by volunteers. Lightning struck their department and their communications were out. Their ability to get information about the safety of the dynamics in which they were working with. But you heard Governor Abbott talking about the efforts the state is now making for transportation of these people because it's a two- pronged effort here with these rescues. Once you get people out of these waters and on to dry ground, like we had here underneath this interstate overpass, then the question is where do you go? And the hopeful rumor here right now is that school buses are on their way. Many people have been here since 7:00 a.m. this morning. Nobody can really quantify how many people have spent time underneath this overpass. But so many people now looking for a next place to go. We believe the closest shelter of any large scale is in Lake Charles, down I-10, the eastward way, about 30 miles from here. Their civic centers still open and accepting evacuees.
[Acosta:] And, Kaylee, just behind you, there's an elderly gentleman sitting on his walker underneath that overpass that you just talked about. It just goes to show you people are now just living out on the streets right now. Kaylee Hartung with that very vivid picture there in Orange, Texas. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. The sun is out in Houston for the first time since Harvey hit and officials say floodwaters are starting to recede in some parts, but the threat is far from over. There have been at least 50 rescues since last night. This video taken aboard a National Guard helicopter shows a little boy and his family being hoisted up out of the floodwaters near Houston. This crew also rescued a one-month-old baby. Our Brian Todd, we showed you some of those pictures just a few moments ago. He's on an airboat in Houston. I don't know if you're still on the back of one right now. We can only see you from the chest up there.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes.
[Acosta:] But we saw you just making your way around these waters a few moments ago. Oh, yes, there you are. Yes, you certainly are. What can you show us right now. Those cars are parked right behind you and you're on a boat.
[Todd:] That's right, Jim. This is the Lakeside Forest neighborhood west of Houston. The water here really rose very high late in this whole process, really just this morning, and we're going around with these search and rescue guys just looking for people who might be in these apartments that are flooded here. Joe Fairchild, this volunteer here, we just saw a towel being tied to a railing. So Joe climbed up there and banged on the window to see if anybody needed rescuing. Nobody came out. So he's you can see, he's going up here. There's a towel over here. Sometimes a towel or a sheet signifies, you know, they need to be rescued and they want to get out. He's checking that out right now, climbing on the roof of this. Mark Malfa here is the airboat pilot. Mark, talk about just some of the logistical problems of trying to navigate this neighborhood. You've got chest high water here.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, there's just so much stuff in the water. I mean these cars actually, we came around the corner here. The cars are actually the water's right up to the roof. And then you get lower water, you're going to hit a drainage pipe or something. There's all kinds of stuff. Airboat are real handy. You can just float right over it. Lower units get destroyed out here. I'm not saying don't bring your boat. Whatever you've got is helpful. But the logistics is kind of nightmare. It's not your typical lake or your river that I'm used to running. It's just it's a mess.
[Todd:] And we've heard that they're looking for a couple of private rescuers who are missing. Do you think about that? Do you think about the danger out here?
[Unidentified Male:] Not really. No.
[Todd:] Why not?
[Unidentified Male:] You just come and do it, you know? I have run a boat all the time. I deal with horrible crap on a consistent basis here. I'm used to it. I don't think twice about it. People need help, you come and help them, you know. I've been very little sleep, keep going. People need my house is safe. A lot of these houses are jacked up. People lost their cars. They lost everything. I've lost nothing. I may be took some palmer off the bottom of this boat and that's it. God bless, you know.
[Todd:] Good luck, Mark. We're going to hang with Mark for a good part of the day here. Take a look down. There's another rescue team there. I think they see something or someone maybe around that corner of that apartment who might need help and they were signaling to someone over there, Jim. So I mean this is kind of what you do. You just troll around these neighborhoods. You look for people waving. We've picked up, I'd say, maybe 15 people and about five dogs today. And this is the water level that you're talking about. Now, the residents here, Jim, they're blaming the spillover and that controlled release from the Addicks Reservoir that, you know, they needed to do to relieve pressure from the reservoir, but they think this is the result of it, Jim, a late rising floodwater situation here after the brunt of the storm has passed.
[Acosta:] Absolutely, Brian Todd, a very desperate situation there. And you can see those guys behind you doing their best to try to find people in those apartments in that neighborhood. Brian Todd, we're going to check back with you. Keep us posted if you run across any victims being brought out of those homes. We appreciate it very much. And we want to turn right now we understand that the mayor of Houston is holding a news conference. Yes, he is. Updating the public on what is happening in his city, which, of course, has been devastated by Harvey. Let's listen in.
[Mayor Sylvester Turner , Houston:] Based on talking to the chief, and Chief Acevedo, I'm going to bring him up, it was effective. I don't believe any citations were issued. People were very cooperative last night. And as you know, there were other jurisdictions that also followed Houston's lead. So I want to thank people for cooperating on the curfew from 12:00 to 5:00. It's going to remain in effect until we kind of, you know, get past the situations that we are in. But it was quite effective. Chief Acevedo. Here we go.
[Question:] On curfew, sir? Curfew is the question.
[Turner:] Yes, the yes, curfew.
[Chief Art Acevedo, Houston Police:] Thank you, mayor. Good morning. Or good afternoon. The curfew last night went very well. We did not have to make any arrests for curfew violations. Obviously we've made other arrests for burglary and a couple of looting incidences that you can call it burglary, you can call it looting. And, you know, so, on a regular night we'd probably call it a burglary, but today because of this environment we're in, it's probably more called looting. The bottom line is that the curfew that we've instituted here and other cities in the area, so it's important for your viewers in this entire region, other cities have also launched curfews as provide us a tool to keep people safe and to provide security to this entire community. So a real quick update so I can get out of the way, mayor, just give it out to everybody.
[Turner:] Sure.
[Acevedo:] So far we've had 88 police vehicles that have been flooded and damaged. One hundred and sixty-one officers have reported significant damage to their homes. Forty-seven of our facilities of our police facilities have been damaged and some we might not ever preoccupy. Calls holding as of this morning. OK, first you did it to
[Acosta:] All right, there you have officials there in Houston updating the public on relief efforts in that city. We're going to take a break in just a few moments. But first, up next, as waters in Houston recede, residents are returning home. A live report when we come back. But first, a brief moment to rest and recharge in between flood rescues. You're looking at check take a look at this. Some exhausted Texas National Guard troops getting some rest on brand-new mattresses in a furniture stores that opened its doors to them. This is what they've been talking about all day long, Texans helping Texans, taking care of Texans. They're among the 14,000 members of the National Guard activated for this storm response with 10,000 more on the way. We'll be right back.

[Sciutto:] Will former Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz, run for president as an Independent. We could learn the answer to that question tonight when CNN hosts a Presidential Town Hall with Schultz in Houston, Texas. Democrats have put pressure on him not to run, claiming that he could split the party's vote, therefore, enabling re-election of Donald Trump. CNN reporter, Vanessa Yurkevich, is in Houston, New Forest. Vanessa, we have to assume that Schultz will be appeared to prepare to attempt to address the criticism of a potential run.
[Vanessa Yurkevich, Cnn Digital Correspondent:] That's right Jim. He's either going to get that question from Poppy Harlow, or from one of the voters. And, as you mentioned, the minute he announced that he was thinking about running for president as an Independent, there was immediate backlash from Democrats saying that he would be taking votes away from a potential Democratic nominee, thus ensuring that President Trump would seek re-election. But, Schultz has said the last thing he wants to do is run into a situation where Trump is being re-elected to a second term.

[Newton:] Iran says it has successfully tested a new ballistic missile capable of carrying multiple warheads. Now it was launched from an unknown location. This is Iran's third type of missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers. It is smaller in size and more tactical than previous types. Officials say it will be operational in the near future. Now the war of words over North Korea's nuclear program has not let up. U.S. president Donald Trump renewed his attack on Kim Jong-un on Friday, calling him not only "rocket man" as he did at the U.N. this week but now disparaging him even more as "little rocket man." Mr. Kim earlier called the U.S. president a "dotard," an old term now for an old term for an old imbecile, apparently. Mr. Trump told a rally in Alabama that it is long past time to deal with North Korea.
[Trump:] This should have been handled eight years ago and four years ago and honestly and 15 years ago and 20 years ago and 25 years ago. This should not be handled now but I am going to handle it, because we have to handle it. Little rocket man, we're going to do it because we really have no choice.
[Newton:] Of course none of Mr. Trump's insults appear to have deterred North Korea so far in its nuclear ambitions. Our Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr has more.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] North Korea already is getting ready for its next missile launch, according to administration officials, possibly a missile that could hit the U.S. Kim Jong-un now threatening the highest level of hard-line countermeasure in history following President Trump's speech at the U.N. North Korea's foreign minister suggesting the regime may launch potential devastation.
[Unidentified Male:] I think this could probably mean the strongest ever hydrogen bomb test on or above the Pacific Ocean.
[Starr:] Detonating a hydrogen bomb above ground could change everything.
[Col. Cedric Leighton , Cnn Military Analyst:] What you are looking at is from a radioactive standpoint is large areas of East Asia, the Western Pacific, all the way potentially to the West Coast of the United States being blanketed by radiation.
[Starr:] The U.S. intelligence community will now watch for very particular signs.
[Leighton:] So what they could potentially see is special work being done on the muscle itself. They could see certain things being moved around that would potentially indicate that a warhead of a particular variety was being put inside the missile. Kim matching Trump on the battle of words. "I will shortly and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire." President Trump responding, "Kim Jong-un of North Korea, who is obviously a madman, who does not mind starving or killing his people, will be tested like never before." All after a doomsday warning from president Trump at the U.N. that if the U.S. is forced to defend itself or its allies...
[Trump:] We will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.
[Starr:] The head of the U.S. Strategic Command, who would help lead any attack on North Korea, making the case for U.S. firepower as a deterrent to Kim.
[Unidentified Male:] We're right there; we're watching all the time. And if you want to go that way, we're ready. So we can deter an attack on North America or our allies.
[Newton:] That report from our Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Now the latest Republican effort to undo ObamaCare is one vote away from failing after a key senator said he would not support it. It is not the first time that John McCain has opposed legislation important to the Trump White House. In July, McCain cast the deciding no vote on the so-called skinny repeal of ObamaCare. Now on Friday while campaigning in Alabama for a Republican Senate candidate Luther Strange, U.S. president Donald Trump singled out looking for criticism.
[Trump:] John McCain's John McCain's list John McCain was not on the list. So that was a totally unexpected thing, terrible, honestly, terrible. Repeal and replace because John McCain, if you look at his campaign. His last campaign was all about repeal and replace, repeal and replace. So he decided to do something different and that is fine. And I say we still have a chance to oh, we're going to do it eventually. We're going to do it eventually, oh, with Luther and every we're going to do it.
[Ryan Lizza, Cnn Correspondent:] You can certainly tell that he is deeply frustrated that McCain, for the second time, seems to have scuttled one of Trump's major campaign promises. And because of these funny parliamentary rules of the Senate, if they do not do this by September 30th, it is pretty much dead until the next Congress 2019. So serious frustration with McCain. Remember, these two guys have a long history; during the primary season, you know, I actually have a personal role in that, not to be all Trump-like and talk about myself. But I did an interview with John McCain, where he said Trump was "riling up the crazies." That was his remark. And when I after I reported that, Trump was asked about that comment. And that is when Donald Trump attacked John McCain's service in Vietnam and said, I like people who don't get captured, because, of course, John McCain was held by the Vietnamese for many years and tortured. That was the start of their very, very testy relationship, really hasn't improved much with Trump as president. McCain has been a consistent critic of Trump across a host of issues. Frankly, this healthcare was never an issue that McCain was a student of. He is not a big it has never been an issue for McCain and so I think a lot of people rightly think that the personal dynamics between the two of them have something to do with McCain's opposition.
[Newton:] Ryan Lizza there. Now the CEO of Uber is pleading with London to change its mind about Uber's license to operate, tweeting a few hours ago, "Dear London, we are far from perfect but we have 40,000 licensed drivers and 3.5 million Londoners depending on us. Please work with us to make things right." The rideshare service is appealing after London revoked Uber's license. CNN's Erin McLaughlin tells us why.
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] I'm told this decision involved a lengthy and meticulous review process by Transport for London or TFL, the regulatory body which governs London's transport networks. There were several reasons for this decision, primarily relating to the safety and security of Uber, its approach to the background checks, extensive background checks of its driver as well as the way it reports criminality. Earlier I spoke to London's mayor, Sadiq Khan, who says he supports this decision. Take a listen.
[Sadiq Khan, Mayor Of London:] If you're a Uber driver, if you're a Uber user, you're right to be angry at Uber for failing to play by the rules. The question you should be asking is why is Uber not playing by the rules? And Uber have said they're going to appeal this decision. Uber employs an army of lawyers and public relations teams and they've already set out their plans to appeal this decision.
[Mclaughlin:] London's Black Cabbies are likely to be celebrating this decision. They've long protested Uber's presence in the city. Their union actually backs London mayor Sadiq Khan although he told me that this had nothing to do with him, this decision, or any sort of political involvement, that TFL is an independent body. The people who will probably are very upset by this decision, of course, some 40,000 Uber drivers, registered Uber drivers, as well as the millions of people within the city that use their services. We spoke to some of them and they're pretty upset.
[Unidentified Female:] No, I'm like shattered. I don't know what I'll do on a Sunday night now. I use one like every day. It's just an easier, better way to get around, like a Black Cab fare is so expensive.
[Unidentified Male:] At the end of the day, it's a reliable service. Not only in London, if you're a foreigner, if I fly out to New York or go to somewhere else and I know exactly by pushing a button, I'm getting a reliable driver, he is checked; I know him. We talk and they're all friendly, all of them, you know. And also they have families.
[Mclaughlin:] Well, Uber hitting back at the allegations, saying, quote, "The mayor and Transport for London have caved in to a small number of people who want to restrict consumer choice." It does plan to appeal and can continue to function while the appeal process is underway Erin McLaughlin, CNN, London.
[Newton:] And thanks for watching CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Paula Newton. I will be right back with the headlines in just a moment.

[King:] Welcome back. The Trump administration struck a big deal with China today, ignoring threats of a revolt in Congress. The Commerce Secretary says Chinese telecom giant ZTE gets a clean stake after agreeing to pay take $1 billion fine to bring in an American monitoring team and to replace its board chairman.
[Wilbur Ross, Commerce Secretary:] It is imposes the most strict compliance that we've ever had with any company, American or foreign. I think this is a very, very well publicized, very important message to other parties, don't fool around with our export controls, or you're really going to get hurt.
[King:] If you haven't been tracking this, ZTE was officially walled out of buying American parts because it violated U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea. But that cheating is a secondary point for ZTE critics in Congress. They say the company is part of China's intellectual property theft and China's global espionage network. But the President cutting this deal knowing, and we see it already, that both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are saying, "We will try to stop you."
[Kapur:] Call me skeptical that there will be a serious revolt in Congress. I mean, there will be a lot of sternly worded statements. There'll be a lot of criticisms from Democrats. I think Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate, is saying the President wants to make China great again. And that you'll see real this time from Republican members. The question is, is Speaker Ryan going to put something on the House to try to confront the President? Is Majority Leader McConnell going to put something on the Senate that goes against the President? Within six months of an election, were they know they need him and they need his base and he cannot afford to take him on? I think no matter what the disagreement is on tariffs, Republican leaders, strong leaders, agree with the President. They have suggested they're not going to, you know, try to legislatively stop him. So call me skeptical that they won't.
[Ball:] But the one time that they have done that was on Russia, and that was a sanctions issue. And that was an overwhelming vote because that was actually a policy issue that really motivates a lot of Conserves and Republicans, and they're very unified on it. And so unlike many other private disagreements that they have with the President, you know, free trade in China is an area where you do hear them speaking out much more and much more overtly disagreeing with the President then on a number of other issues. Now, I thought it's probably right that they won't actually do anything but you are hearing more dissent. And it's a fascinating dichotomy in the President's policy that they'd played out, that on the one hand, we were just talking about how he hasn't been afraid to be tough with the Europeans and to followthrough on his isolationism and some unilateralism. On the other hand, with China where he had so much tough rhetoric, probably the toughest outside of Mexico
[King:] Where they campaign, yes.
[Ball:] he has these other objectives that he wants. He wants this North Korea summit. He wants to achieve this breakthrough that other presidents failed to achieve. And, you know, we can sit here and say, "Oh, he's not doing this normally but the normal channels haven't worked."
[King:] Right.
[Ball:] He's doing something different, but those objectives are at odds and it's been fascinating to see him try to split the difference, or in the eyes of some, go soft on China.
[King:] And he's soft on China for his playbook. There's also this group, and this predates President Trump but it's been exacerbated under President Trump because of this ZTE thing. This group had says the United States government is just failing to take seriously the national security threat from Chinese technology. Marco Rubio among them, saying the deal with ZTE may keep them from selling to Iran and North Korea. That's good, but there will be nothing to keep do nothing to keep, let's say, from corporate and national security espionage. This is dangerous. Now Congress needs to act to keep America safe from China. I assure you with 100 percent confidence, ZTE is a much greater national security threat than steel from Argentina or Europe, very bad deal. This is a point they've been making for years, that China is, A, from intellectual property perspective, steals anything it gets its hand on and, B, uses these technology companies to listen, to snoop, to spy and to steal.
[Shear:] And the irony of this deal announcement on ZTE coming the day before he leaves for this G7 Summit where the Europeans and the Canadians are already furious that the President would say that somehow they're steel and aluminum imports are national security threats when then he goes, and on an issue that there is great consensus really is a national security threat, he says, "That's OK. You know, it's a little fine." You know, I mean, I don't mean to minimize the deal, but from the view of the Europeans and the Canadians, that's crazy.
[King:] That's an excellent standpoint [inaudible].
[Kapur:] That's the irony here, the trade war with China is on hold. The trade war with American allies, Canada, Mexico and Europe, is moving forward. China, of course, holds the keys President Trump's plans on North Korea.
[King:] We'll watch it play out. All fascinating we put it together. Up next, the President's polls numbers are up. But that's not necessarily good news as Republicans try to keep their hold on Congress.

[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] Calling it quits: a Las Vegas casino mogul accused of sexual misconduct is stepping down from the Republican National Committee.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Explosives, hidden inside an ambulance. We look at the horrific massacre in Kabul.
[Howell:] And one young man's determination to make history. Rowing solo across the Atlantic for a good cause. Wow.
[Allen:] And, he's just 19 years old. Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. We are live in Atlanta, I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] And I'm George Howell from CNN World Headquarters, NEWSROOM starts right now. It's 4:00 am on the U.S. East Coast. He's a casino mogul in Las Vegas, Nevada, a political ally of the U.S. president but now Steve Wynn is out as the main fundraiser for the Republican National Committee. Faced with multiple sexual misconduct allegations, Wynn resigned as finance chair. Dozens of his employees told "The Wall Street Journal" about a pattern of misconduct going back decades.
[Allen:] Wynn denies all of the allegations. He is a business rival turned friend to Donald Trump. And it was the president who first tapped him for his post at the Republican National Committee. Boris Sanchez has more for us from the White House.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] On background, a White House official tells CNN that President Trump supported the resignation of Steve Wynn from the Republican National Committee. There was some question as to how the White House would approach this situation, considering some inconsistencies in the past when responding to sexual assault allegations. You'll recall, in just the past two months, the White House simultaneously demanded the resignation of former Senator Al Franken while backing Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore, two men that were both accused of sexual misconduct. President Trump is actually supposed to see Steve Wynn last weekend at a fundraiser in Mar-a-lago. The president couldn't attend the fundraiser because of the government shutdown. But Wynn took the stage and gave a speech in which he defended the president and his agenda. Here's some more of what Steve Wynn said Saturday night at Mar-a-lago.
[Steve Wynn, Wynn Resorts:] And then all of a sudden, once again in American history, an unlikely person became president, perhaps the most unlikely of all since Abe Lincoln. Donald John Trump became 45th President of the United States, to the chagrin, to the hysterical chagrin, of the other side. He was their worst nightmare.
[Sanchez:] Though in 2016, President Trump called Steve Wynn "a great friend," the two men have historically had some rocky moments. They were competing hotel and casino tycoons who've known each other for 34 years. Ultimately, with President Trump handpicking Wynn to be the finance chairman for the RNC and now, on Saturday, again, a White House official telling CNN that the president backs his resignation, in part, to limit any kind of political damage that could hit the RNC or the White House Boris Sanchez, CNN, at the White House.
[Allen:] Joining me now to talk more on this, Peter Matthews. He is a professor of political science at Cypress College. Peter, thanks for joining us.
[Peter Matthews, Cypress College:] Good to be here, thank you.
[Allen:] Let's begin with yet another sexual harassment scandal this country is hearing about. It involves accusations against Las Vegas casino mogul Steve Wynn. He has stepped down as finance manager of the Republican National Committee, a position handpicked by President Trump for him. What are the ramifications of what could be another sex scandal, this the first CEO of a public company accused?
[Matthews:] The ramifications are huge, because, you know, here's a powerful man, once again, taking advantage of women that worked for him or his company. And he was the head of the fundraising. I think personally donated $100,000 to candidates. And some of those candidates are having to give the money back. So it throws a lot of disarray in the picture, not to mention the fact that the women themselves were widely suffering and it's more an example of powerful men taking advantage of many women who worked with or for them. So it's not good at all for the Republican National Committee or for the women especially and for Steve Wynn either or for Trump himself.
[Allen:] Of course he categorically denies all of the accusations. There is an investigation going on with his company into what allegedly happened. So you see this, in some way, impacting the Republican National Committee?
[Matthews:] Absolutely. Also the election's coming up, this November 2018, and that's those elections are very important because it's a chance that the Democrats have to capture the House and Senate back. And this is going to be a negative force on the Republican candidates, because, again, it's their party. It's their head of their RNC and they've taken money from him and he raised money for them. So there's some taint there. I'm not saying it's 100 percent effect on them but it's not going to help them in any way. It could have an impact on some races, especially close races.
[Allen:] The president, though, is set to deliver his State of the Union speech this week. Let's talk about that. The economy is good. The tax cuts well received by many in corporate America. Some corporations handing down pay raises now to employees. He's got some good stuff that he'll likely tout. What else, though, does this president have to brag about or what achievement can he rally behind in this very important speech?
[Matthews:] Well, he's going to brag about the tax cuts, of course, but also he's going to brag about having repealed ObamaCare as an individual mandate and a few other things, like the Supreme Court justice appointment that he got for Neil Gorsuch. But he's also going to ask for infrastructure spending and to have immigration reform in a very conservative, right-wing manner, which is going to be very troubling for a lot of people. And infrastructure spending, he's asking for $1 trillion; whereas the American Society of Civil Engineers said it will take at least $3 trillion to bring the American infrastructure back up to par. Our roads, our bridges, our sewer systems, our airports are all in disarray in many cases and decrepit so we have to see whether Trump's recommendation is even enough. He's going to be asking for those kinds of things for sure. And immigration, again, going back to immigration, it's going to be a problem because he's asking to stop family unification, as he calls it, chain immigration, which means keeping families together as opposed to just having high-tech people come into America, which he wants. It's going to be a complete radical change and departure from our recent immigration policy of having people unite with their families and have a strong base here of society built in America through immigration.
[Allen:] Of course, he gives his speech under the cloud of the Russia investigation. That goes on amid reports that he tried to fire Mr. Mueller back this summer. As that hangs over his head, a lot rides then on this speech. We saw him stick to the speech at Davos and get a good response. Do you expect he'll do the same, coming up here?
[Matthews:] That is very difficult to predict because you know Mr. Trump. If he sticks to teleprompter he's generally OK as far as the form goes. But he doesn't just stick to the teleprompter. He likes to go off script. And in Davos he was on script for sure. But this time you've got 48 million people watching, Natalie. That is a huge audience and what happens once the speech is over? Even if he sticks to the script, will he stick to script after the speech is over, the next week or two, when the focus should be on the items in the speech as opposed to some 240-word character tweet? He could tweet something that will throw people completely off from what he said in the State of the Union address. So that's something we have to watch and see what happens in the next couple of weeks.
[Allen:] We thank you for joining us, Peter Matthews. Thanks, Peter.
[Matthews:] My pleasure, thank you.
[Allen:] And that State of the Union address will happen Tuesday. You can see it right here on CNN, coverage begins at 8:00 pm Tuesday in New York. That's 9:00 am Wednesday morning in Hong Kong.
[Howell:] In Afghanistan, the government has declared Sunday a national day of mourning after a vicious bombing that took place in Kabul. The attack happened a little more than 24 hours ago. Authorities say that a driver was able to get through a checkpoint and detonate explosives packed into an ambulance. At least 95 people were killed and almost 200 others wounded.
[Allen:] A spokesman for the Taliban claims the group is responsible. U.S. President Donald Trump calls the bombing "despicable." He also said it has renewed the resolve of the U.S. and its Afghan partners.
[Howell:] Let's get the very latest on this attack from journalist Bilal Sarwary, joining this hour from the Afghan capital. Thank you so much for your time today, Bilal. First, let's talk about the nature of how this happened, an ambulance with explosives packed in it gets past a checkpoint in order to carry out such a destructive attack. What more do we know about the security situation, how this vehicle was able to get past an inspection?
[Bilal Sarwary, Journalist:] Well, Afghan counterterrorism officials are saying that's exactly what they want to find out. But what is clear, the attacker was in an ambulance, he had said he had a patient when he was stopped at the second checkpoint. That's when he detonated his explosives. A day after that attack, today, Kabul is a city with a broken heart and with a broken soul. I was able to go out in the city. I really didn't see the same hustle and bustle, the traffic jams, the life, although Kabul is quite chaotic as a city. So obviously, Afghanistan continues to lose not only with lives but also there are economic losses. And people are actually quite scared to come out and just do their daily day-to-day business. At this stage, sources within the health ministry are saying that a number of those people wounded
[Sarwary:] some of them are in critical conditions. We know some of the victims have lost their body parts, like arms and legs and some family members are even still trying to find out what happened to their loved ones. And there's a lot of criticism that why the Afghan government still does not have a hotline, given the fact that these attacks are happening now, unfortunately, on a more regular basis. I spoke to the family of 29-year-old Jafar, a young man who had finished school and he wanted to take admission in university. So he's among those killed. Obviously, there are a lot of heartbreaks. And Afghanistan just continues to really have these heartbreaks which are becoming, unfortunately, the new normal and this is a city of at least 7 million people. So people are actually really asking for some sense of responsibility and security from the government.
[Howell:] Bilal, this attack happening on Chicken Street, near an area that's known for shopping, people coming together, government buildings there. But let's put this into context, because, just a week ago, Bilal, we saw another attack at the Intercontinental Hotel there. Is there a sense among people that the Taliban is picking up the pace here? And what are people saying about that?
[Sarwary:] Well, we've definitely seen a very clear shift in strategy, both on the part of Taliban and the Islamic State in terms of moving the fighting from the provinces and rural areas into the cities. We have to remember, the American military, other international forces, Afghan special forces, are really going after mid- and high- level Taliban as well as Islamic State leadership. So they've lost their commanders and fighters. And I think they want to strike inside cities to create a climate of fear but to also really send a message that we can actually hit you in some of the most secure locations. Where the attack took place, this used to be the old interior ministry and it's not very far from the Swedish embassy, from the European Union, from the Indonesian embassy and from the country's high peace council. I think what the people of Afghanistan are demanding is that officials responsible for the security of Kabul be held responsible, that this culture of impunity must end. And remember, this is almost becoming like a disease, these security and intelligence breaches, which really also respects international diplomats and aid workers from doing their work effectively because now they are forced to work from behind glass walls. And this attack also comes after the big truck bomb that Afghanistan's capital had in 2017. So we already see the impact of that truck bomb attack, whether it's investors not wanting to invest or international aid organizations that really cannot operate in a safe environment.
[Howell:] Well, you touched on this but I want to push further. I mean, in the sense that we've seen the Taliban carry out many attacks, we've seen them reclaim some security that had been previously lost. The U.S. president singled out neighboring Pakistan for not doing enough to crack down on the group and its reach into Afghanistan. The question that I pose to you, is there a sense among people there, among officials there, that enough is being done on either side of the border, quite frankly, to make an impact on this group?
[Sarwary:] Well, we have seen this tit-for-tat for almost last 17 years, you know. What the Americans and Afghan officials really want Pakistan is to go after Sirajuddin Haqqani, the leader of the Haqqani Network, the Pakistan-based militant network. Sirajuddin Haqqani is the deputy head of operations for the Taliban. So there's clearly that expectation that Pakistan needs to really move against those militant groups and leadership. And there are also accusations that there's institutional support for groups like the Haqqani Network. But let's also not forget, the Afghan government is struggling after a disputed election in 2014. And what we have seen is a lot of criticism directed at the government, saying, you know, why are the police chiefs not able to do their job? Why are you not bringing, President Hamid, the right people into these jobs? So you know, Afghanistan has its own issues, no doubt. But I think what you, you know, constantly hear in public these days, even the U.S. president made it very clear, that Pakistan really needs to move against the leadership of the Taliban as well as the Haqqani Network. And Sirajuddin Haqqani's group have really carried out some of the most deadliest attacks here in Kabul and elsewhere, especially against American forces. But you also have the issue of corruption and political instability. You have Afghan leaders, you know, fighting in public, most of the times like children, and they hardly come across as leaders of a country that's at war. So I think you hear a lot of, you know, grievances and there's a lot of frustration on the part of ordinary people. But most importantly, you know, as someone told me yesterday, everywhere else, you know, death is by chance. These days in Kabul, you know, you have to really be lucky to be alive. And I think that sentiment, you know, is very well rooted among the citizens of Kabul, who are quite worried about the state of security.
[Howell:] People concerned, wanting more to be done about this. Journalist Bilal Sarwary, thank you so much for your time and the reporting today and we'll stay in touch with you.
[Allen:] It is shaping up to be a tense day in Russia. Thousands expected to protest the coming election, despite the government telling them to stay home. We'll take you live to Moscow for the very latest in just a moment.
[Howell:] Plus a reckoning in the U.S. State of Michigan. Investigators there dig into the university that employed and enabled sexual abuser Larry Nassar for nearly two decades. Stay with us.

[Tapper:] We're back with our panel. Sticking with politics, after 16 hours of being grilled by three different House committees, the big question: did FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe confirm that he had been told at the time about conversations President Trump denies ever happened? Sources tell CNN that McCabe confirmed to House members that former FBI Director James Comey told him about conversations the president had with him. Does that include the president asking Comey to lay off his investigation into Michael Flynn? Does it include the president asking Comey to pledge his loyalty, a conversation the two men have very different recollections of?
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] He asked specifically of loyalty in the context of asking me to stay. My common sense told me what's going on here is that he's looking to get something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I don't know how that got there because I didn't ask that question. I hardly know the man. I'm not going to say I want you to pledge allegiance. Who would do that?
[Tapper:] I want to bring in CNN's senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju. And, Manu, so just to be clear here, we don't know what conversations Andrew McCabe, the deputy FBI director, confirmed to the House that Comey told him about, but it could be those significant ones.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] Yes, I mean, he apparently was told the House Intelligence Committee that after all of the times that James Comey had a conversation with President Trump, he later told Andy McCabe about, including that pledge for loyalty. So, this is his sworn testimony, that at the time of these conversations, soon after Comey did tell him about these conversations. Now, why that's significant, of course, is that clip that you just showed, the fact that the president has denied this. The fact that we know the special counsel is, in fact, investigating the circumstances around the Comey firing, including questions about whether any there was any obstruction of justice. So, presumably, McCabe could be a witness to corroborate corroborate exactly what happened. Now, Comey did say before the Senate Intelligence Committee that he briefed his full leadership team at the FBI and he didn't say McCabe. Now we know that it is McCabe. Presumably there are some others as well and presumably they'll also give their accounts of what happened to Mueller or congressional investigators.
[Tapper:] And the House Intelligence Committee, they've interviewed some big players this week, including the president's former associate of three decades. What do we know about that?
[Raju:] Well, Rhona Graff, she's been a longtime associate, personal assistant of the president at the Trump Organization, works in Trump Tower. We do know that the House Intelligence Committee has been interested in her because she has served as a gatekeeper of sorts. She's someone who presumably knew about contacts that may or may not have occurred with either Russian officials or people within the Trump organization. And we do know that in that e-mail exchange between Rob Goldstone, that British publicist who set up the meeting with Donald Trump Jr., June of 2016, Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort attended where he was promised dirt on the Clinton campaign, that she was mentioned in that e-mail exchange from Rob Goldstone to Donald Trump Jr. saying that, well, I can go straight to your father, I can fill him in on this information by talking to Rhona Graff. So, the questions that the investigators are going to ask, undoubtedly is that did the president know about the meeting at Trump Tower? Now, we don't have a full sense of what happened yet. That happened today off-site in New York. This is mainly interviewed by staff of the House Intelligence Committee. And actually that has caused some concerns among Democrats on the committee, because they wanted her to come to Washington and to interview her personally, but the Republicans wanted to get this done at the end of this week. That's why they went up to New York. Staff members mainly interviewing her today, Jake.
[Tapper:] More to come on that interview. Manu Raju, thank you so much. Don't go anywhere. We've got a lot going on. Strong and insulting words about the United States from Russian President Vladimir Putin. This is, of course, the same Putin who reportedly had a friendly phone call with the president just last week. Stay with us.

[Van Jones, Cnn:] Good evening and welcome. I'm Van Jones. It's THE VAN JONES SHOW. We have another amazing show for you tonight. A couple of highlights. We are with the star of a hit TV show "Black- ish" and she is a fierce advocate for women. She is a daughter of the iconic Diana Ross. Tracee Ellis Ross is with us tonight. That is going to be amazing to hear from her.
[James Shaw Jr., Tackled Waffle House Gunman:] My brother. Thank you.
[Jones:] Good to see you, man. I tell you what, first of all you're making us Tennessee boys look good. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. The question that I think most people have when they think about you, the gunman was killing people. He stopped firing and he is trying to reload, trying to do something else. You were hidden. He didn't know you were there. Why didn't you run? Why didn't you hide? Why would you confront somebody with a weapon like that?
[Shaw Jr:] So at the time I was behind a door in the bathroom. The door actually didn't lock or anything like that. Behind me there was nothing but a brick wall. So I felt like he might find me. And so I was just looking for my opportunity and I took it and I'm glad it worked out for me.
[Jones:] I'm glad it worked out for you, too. It's beautiful to see you here. You know, but your heroism, and we will talk about that word and I know you don't like that word.
[Shaw Jr:] Right.
[Jones:] But your heroism helped didn't stop that night. You setup a GoFundMe, not for yourself, not for your family, not for your fame, not for your fortune, but to help all the other people who were there. Why how was your raised? How did you come out of a tracking like that, thinking about everybody but yourself?
[Shaw Jr:] Well, I was raised and I pledge a fraternity outside for we are servants of all. So, I wanted to help out and I know that the money is not going to do anything for the actual loss of life, the actual loss of life, but it can be something like a gesture just to help that family to try to get through this tough time.
[Jones:] You know, you touched the whole world. I mean all you have to say it Waffle House hero. Everybody knows who you are. Have you heard yet from President Trump?
[Shaw Jr:] At this time I haven't heard anything, but that is not to say he didn't try to contact me or not.
[Jones:] So he hasn't successfully contacted you, you know, but he gave a shout out to, you know, gave a shout out to Kanye today. No shout out to you. How do feel when the President of the United States misses an opportunity, to hold up, you know, somebody who is trying to do good stuff like you?
[Shaw Jr:] I know he is a busy agenda, busy schedule. Maybe he just hasn't gotten around to me and maybe my time is coming. It's not for me to judge whether what he does is just, you know, I did what I did. I didn't really do for working this, I did it just to save my life, honestly.
[Jones:] Wow. That is amazing. You know, a lot of people who are survivors of these attacks like the Parkland kids, they're very, very strong on gun control. What's your view about gun control?
[Shaw Jr:] The underlying problem of it before you even get to the gun problem is the mental illness or it's some kind of public health problem. And if you can try to focus on that person and you can try to make that person mentally better then you won't get to that. It won't be that kind of violence.
[Jones:] Yes. Now, we had a conversation of intimacy and you were talking about cars, how different cars are appropriate in different circumstances and maybe race cars are appropriate on a racetrack, but not in a neighborhood. Would you apply that to some different types of weapons?
[Shaw Jr:] I don't have any type of problem with any kind of handgun or anything like that. Shotgun or, you know, your hunting rifle, but a formula one race car is for a racer. An AR-15, M-16's,.223s, are those special specific guns are meant for people that have some kind of training. If you do want to shoot that gun, I understand, you know, that is your, god given right if you want to shoot that gun. Let them go to a target range and let the target range handle it and you can shoot there. But for you to just simply want to own that and you don't have any kind of training and you're reliable for that, that is just a lot to be reliable for and it's possible that, you know, deaths could happen.
[Jones:] You know, in that moment, I just think about that. Do you wish that you had a gun? I mean you're in a situation that somebody has a gun and you are unarmed. I'm just always curious, in that moment don't you wish you had like a bazooka or flamethrower or something.
[Shaw Jr:] You know, it's going to sound weird. No, because when people see me even though they call me a hero, I want you to emulate that fire that I have inside of myself, and if I had a gun it would be just good guy took bad guy down with a gun. But since I didn't have a gun it seems like it's more touching the people. So I'm really happy how I can touch people throughout the world.
[Jones:] And you are touching people throughout the world. We were together and people were coming up to us and they wanted me to take your picture with them.
[Shaw Jr:] It's definitely a whirl wind. It is definitely not something I'm used to. So I am just an engineer and I am an electrician right before this, and then now I can't really walk to far down the street or especially in the airport, but you know, it does not really bother me, I will take pictures with you, and the that doesn't bother me. The problem the only thing that bothers me is when people know who I am and then look at me and they all say I am just like come on over and just talk to me let us break the ice, you know that is fine, but yes I am getting used to it. Accustomed to it.
[Jones:] How is your daughter? You have a 4 year-old daughter?
[Shaw Jr:] So, my 4-year-old daughter, she is good. She is with the school. Her classmates and her, they all made me cards, they all call me hero. Now, for little kids, I don't care if they call me hero. Because that is a really big thing for them, heroes. But for adults, I just want you to see if you're ever in that situation that a regular guy did it, that you can do it too.
[Jones:] Wow. That is beautiful. So I'm glad you didn't run away from the gunman. But I would be even more glad if you were to run for higher office.
[Shaw Jr:] President.
[Jones:] Mayor. What about mayor?
[Shaw Jr:] Honestly, I haven't really thought about it. It's just been joked about with some of me and my colleagues and close friends, but maybe, we will see what the future had.
[Jones:] Hey, listen. It makes me happy to hear that even an opportunity, because we need people with integrity in high office. And you're right. They always say it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. But sometimes it takes a good man with a good heart to stop a bad guy with a gun. And that is who you are. So, thank you so much. Really, really good heart.
[Shaw Jr:] Thank you.
[Jones:] Thank you. This child is unbelievable. Now, coming up, everybody's been talking about Kanye West all week. Whether you love him or hate him, he is just sparking a ton of debate about free speech. And whether black voters should give Trump a chance, we're going to talk about all of that coming up with two young black activist, one is a liberal, and one is a conservative. Now before we hear from them, I want to hear from you and your opinions about the Kanye controversy. Here is what you have to say.
[Unidentified Female:] For him to say that slavery was a choice, I don't think that was right. Because if slavery was a choice Martin Luther King, Jr. would simply like, it will not have happened at all because they would not have to go through all these discrimination and all the hurt that they have long for many years.
[Unidentified Male:] If the Democratic Party knows that they could have our vote easily they could just easily talk around this. In this current state, however, the Republican Party is not a viable choice for the black community.

[Harlow:] All right. So this morning, nearly 15,000 Americans are beginning the holidays knowing they will soon be out of work. Here's why, General Motors is closing five plants in North America. That means these workers must now come to terms with the sobering reality that the man many of them helped catapult to the White House with promises of more and better auto jobs has made a promise that he cannot keep in some key swing states. Here is one of those promises from President Trump last year in Ohio.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I was looking at some of those big, once incredible job-producing factories. And my wife Melania said what happened? I said those jobs have left Ohio. They're all coming back. They're all coming back.
[Sciutto:] Cristina Alesci is outside the plant that is now closing in Ohio. It has to be emotional times there. It's just before the holidays. Just devastating for these communities. What are you hearing on the ground?
[Cristina Alesci, Cnn Money And Politics Correspondent:] A huge blow to this community. They're angry, they're frustrated, but to the point about the political shift, the political change here came hard and fast in 2016. This was a Democrat stronghold. In fact, I was in the union leader's office this morning, and pictures line the walls with President Clinton and President Obama. This was a Democrat town until 2016. The community here, the area, voted for Trump on the promise of getting jobs back. And that has not happened. In fact, as Poppy said up in the intro, people are losing their jobs. In this community alone, 1500 jobs directly impacted.

[Whitfield:] All right, welcome back. Now that we have learned that Michael Flynn's lawyers have stopped talking with the president's lawyers about the Russia investigation, there is growing speculation that the former national security adviser is playing "Let's Make a Deal" with the Special Investigator Robert Mueller's team. Such a move could have major political and legal ramifications. Joining me right now to discuss the possible legal impacts of Flynn, potentially Flynn flipping, Avery Friedman, civil rights attorney and law professor in Cleveland, and Richard Herman, a New York criminal defense attorney and law professor, joining us from Las Vegas. Good to see you all. Happy Thanksgiving weekend.
[Avery Friedman, Civil Rights Attorney & Law Professor:] Good to see you, Fred.
[Richard Herman, Criminal Defense Attorney & Law Professor:] Good to see you, Fredricka. Happy Thanksgiving.
[Whitfield:] All right, so Richard, to you first, you know what are the chances that you believe, you know, Flynn's lawyers are cooperating with the Mueller team because they may be trying to, you know, cut a deal, especially after what, six months ago, Flynn said, you know, we have an interesting story, if only he would be granted immunity, but now potentially could there be some real deal making in the works?
[Herman:] Well, admittedly, Fred, it's all conjecture right now because we don't know. But based upon my experience in complex multidefendant federal prosecutions, this behavior, by Flynn and his attorneys, would indicate to me that, either, one, they already have a deal and he's been cooperating for months or, two, they're looking to make a deal, and so they want to make Mueller and his team happy and they want to send a signal that they are with the government now, they're not helping Trump or Trump's people. This is very serious, Fred, because this was the first three-star retired general to align himself with Trump. He was there during the campaign. He was there during the transition. He was there for 24 days after the after Trump was inaugurated, you know. And here he was. Remember visions of him standing on the stage, rah, rah, rah, lock her up, lock her up. Ain't that a bitch, because she might get locked up now. He has the government has slam-dunk prosecutions against him for financial foreign disclosure violations, Fred. It's open and shut. They have him criminally. They can get him, slam dunk. It's his son, that's who he's going to look to protect here. And that's why he's going to make a deal. And we'll see what information he's going to give up.
[Whitfield:] Avery, let's keep it clean. So now what about talk about immunity. Is that something that would still be on the table, if he were cooperating, even though months ago that was not something that the Mueller team would entertain? Is it ever too late to be granted immunity?
[Friedman:] It's never too late. I don't think we're going to see immunity. The deal here is going to be, what extent he's going to be behind bars in my judgement. And I'm also in agreement. The real provocative crime here, beyond failing to register, failing to disclose, making false statements, is this question of so-called extra judicial rendition, which in layman's terms means a possible kidnap in conjunction with Turkey and getting their hands on a cleric, the Turkish cleric, who's holed up in the Poconos right now. So when you look at the four major felonies and you couple it with that, and the fear of impacting Junior, Michael Flynn Jr, there are very, very good reasons that Michael Flynn has got to do a deal. Whether it's going to result in jail time is a completely separate issue. I have very little doubt we're going to be looking for a deal. And he's going to be talk about what is going on in the White House.
[Herman:] That's right.
[Whitfield:] Right. Because, Richard, the primary focus was to be about, you know, Russia, its influence, et cetera, on the U.S. elections, how complicit the Trump campaign was but now underscoring the whole turkey connection, the cleric, I mean, it has been broadened out considerably.
[Friedman:] Sure.
[Herman:] OK, that's a side show for the Mueller investigation and that is problematic and there may be criminal violations with that. But what Mueller is focusing on with Flynn is Flynn's meeting with Ambassador Kislyak with Jared Kushner
[Friedman:] That's right.
[Herman:] where the issue of sanctions was discussed. Because if there was a quid pro quo, Fred, and if Flynn testifies that Trump told him, you tell the Russians, if they help us win the election, I will ease up the sanctions, that's what Mueller wants here for the collusion. That's why they're doing that. We'll see how far Flynn goes. Because, listen, it could go anywhere for him. With getting his son off the hook. And him getting, you know, a few years in prison, ten years in prison or no time in prison. It depends upon substantial assistance.
[Friedman:] That will never happen.
[Whitfield:] And to help get off the hook, you know, to borrow your language, it really does mean leading to a bigger name, right?
[Friedman:] Yes. Well, sure.
[Herman:] He has to give up he's to give up Jared Kushner. That's who he's going to give up.
[Friedman:] We don't know that. We don't know that.
[Herman:] Jared Kushner. But that meeting We don't know anything, Avery
[Friedman:] That's right.
[Herman:] but it's conjecture here based on the facts and meeting with Kislyak and the failure to turn over documents and failure to comply with subpoenas
[Friedman:] Wait a minute, failure to turn over something is not a crime
[Herman:] They're hiding something here. It's going to come out. Flynn's going to tie it together for Mueller.
[Whitfield:] OK, Avery?
[Herman:] This is very serious for Trump.
[Friedman:] I think that December meeting, that December meeting with Sergey Kislyak, the ambassador, is going to be critical, because why on earth would Michael Flynn, after meeting with the FBI, lie about that? So the bottom line, with all the other times, failure to register, failure to disclose compensation, I mean, this is serious. And whether he's motivated to save his son or not, I think, is part of the motivation to say, hey, look, I don't know how much time I have to do, but limit it. I will turn somebody over. I will flip. I think that's exactly what we will see.
[Whitfield:] So is the White House sweating right now?
[Friedman:] Got to be.
[Herman:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] Richard?
[Herman:] Big time, Fred. I don't care what Sekulow says. He is wrong. He is there to make Trump feel good. This is very, very serious. Because Flynn also in addition to collusion, has information concerning obstruction. That's the number-one count they're going to get Trump on, I believe. And Flynn was right there in the middle of that, Fred. I'm telling you, he is going to give a treasure trove of information to Mueller. It's dangerous for Trump.
[Friedman:] We will see.
[Herman:] Very dangerous.
[Whitfield:] We will see. Thank you so much. Avery Friedman, Richard Herman always great to see you. I am grateful to see you this Thanksgiving holiday.
[Herman:] Great to see you, Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right. Thanks so much. Still so much more straight ahead in the NEWSROOM. But first, in this week's new episode of "PARTS UNKNOWN," the heel of the boot draws Anthony Bourdain back in time as he visits the largely untouched landscapes and colorful locals of southern Italy.
[Anthony Bourdain, Cnn Host, Parts Unknown:] Despite its uncanny beauty, sunny Italy's Palou and Basilicata regions are some of the least populated, least visited, least known parts of the country. A mix of sea, hills, valleys and rich earth. The food here is Italian but completely its own. [on camera]: Little garlic, parsley, some kind of fish, Fu main, pasta. That's it. Oh. Incredible. I've never been to this part of Italy before. Lot of blue here, light browns and ochres and white. I don't know. You look at this place, it demands a big space. As I walk around I'm always humming with these stores. For a few dollars more, once upon a time.

[Camerota:] Louisiana state police will now investigate the two Baton Rouge police officers involved in the fatal shooting of Alton Sterling after the U.S. Justice Department announced Wednesday that it will not file criminal charges. CNN's Nick Valencia is live in Baton Rouge with more for us. What's the latest, Nick?
[Nick Valencia, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Alisyn. This was an announcement that was anticipated by practically everyone here in Baton Rouge, which is perhaps why we saw no arrest last night or any major demonstrations. The Department of Justice announcing that after an exhaustive ten- month investigation, their findings did not reach the threshold for civil rights charges for these two officers involved in a shooting. At a press conference yesterday, the family was saying that they're not defeated. They struck somewhat of an optimistic tone. Their hopes now rest in the hands of the state attorney general's office, which will conduct an investigation at the state level. I was speaking to the family attorney for the Sterlings who told me that in DOJ's discovery, they told him that one of the officers involved, Officer Blane Salamoni, threatened to kill Alton Sterling before shooting him dead. They're hoping that this new information will help them seek justice at the state level Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right. Appreciate it, Nick. Thank you very much for that this morning. So, White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney insists the president's border wall is being built. In this climate, you got to reality check everything. So, he goes out there at this conference and starts pointing at walls and saying, "The Democrats didn't tell you we were going to build this, did they?" Then, Sean Spicer doubled down on that. So, CNN headed down to the Mexican border to find out the real story, next.

[Banfield:] I have covered a lot of courtrooms. I have sat in a lot of courtrooms. I have watched so many verdicts, I can`t even count. But the was a verdict today in Mississippi that truly blew my mind more than O.J. Because in the case of Jessica Chambers and the horrifying death that she suffered, she was virtually burned alive, Quinton Tellis, the man on the right of your screen was charged and he was tried. And the jury came out today with something I can only describe as absolute chaos. When they came back, they actually returned two, two verdicts. And it didn`t take long for the first one to create a big ole stir. Here it was.
[Unidentified Male:] Please read the verdict.
[Unidentified Female:] We, the jury, found the defendant, Quinton Verdell Tellis, not guilty of capital murder.
[Unidentified Male:] In a request to cancel?
[John Champion, District Attorney, Panola County:] Yes, sir. We request the jury to be polled.
[Unidentified Male:] All right.
[Banfield:] Not guilty. That would be very, very upsetting for that family. I could have said it would be like clockwork that a family would fall to pieces. Remember O.J. and the Goldmans and how they fell to pieces hearing not guilty? It is devastating because we have protections in this country called double jeopardy. You can`t be tried again. That`s it, done. Not guilty means you walk out that door, you cannot be tried again for that murder. Here is the problem. That was absolutely not what the jury decided. That was not what they deliberated over nine hours and agreed upon. That was not what they marked their jury ballots with. What they marked their jury ballots wit turned out to be something completely different. So, an hour later, guess what happened? They came out and they announced this. Have a look.
[Unidentified Female:] We, the jury, cannot unanimously make a verdict of guilty or not guilty for the defendant, Quinton Verdell Tellis.
[Banfield:] Oh, that`s totally different, yes. That is totally, totally different. That means you got another crack at this guy. That means we couldn`t come to consensus for or against this verdict, but you can go ahead and find another jury, if you want. So that is a very big deal. Therese Apel is a reporter for the Clarion Ledger. She was in the courtroom for that moment or should I say
[Therese Apel, Reporter, The Clarion Ledger:] I think that`s kind of what we all felt because, you know, you had the first time they came out and wanted to know, if we can`t decide unanimously that he`s guilty, does that mean that he`s not? So, the judge reiterated again that you have to have a unanimous verdict. What the jury instructions actually said was you have to have a unanimous guilty verdict, but I don`t think it specified that also applied to a not guilty verdict. So, I believe that the confusion was that they thought that if they didn`t all think he was guilty, that he was, by default, not guilty.
[Banfield:] Well, that`s a problem. That`s a big problem because, you know, you are supposed to have instructions when you go back. These are average people. They are mechanics and hairdressers. They are everything but usually lawyers and judges who know how the mechanicings of a courtroom work. Shame on the system for not helping those people to understand how significant that was. Real quickly though. Is this make up correct? Is this five black jurors said not guilty. Two black jurors said guilty. And five white jurors said guilty. Is that correct?
[Apel:] Yes, that`s what we got as we listened to them when they polled the jury.
[Banfield:] Well, that`s a big ole racial split right there. Let me bring in defense attorney and CNN legal analyst, Joey Jackson. He joins me now. I am always upset when I see that. I am always upset when I see things almost exactly going down racial lines. For the white folk, it went right down racial line.
[Joey Jackson, Criminal Defense Attorney, Cnn And Hln Legal Analyst:] It absolutely did. And back to your point about polling the jury, let`s take it all the way back.
[Banfield:] Oh, yes. By the way, really important if you are a litigator, poll your jury.
[Jackson:] And let`s talk about what that means. So now they come back. That is the jury, right? They say they read the verdict and it`s not guilty. It`s over, right? But then they ask for the jury to be polled. That is the attorney, right?
[Banfield:] They wanted the jury to be polled.
[Jackson:] Now, polling a jury means going one by one to the individuals and saying, is that your verdict? And then surprise, Ashleigh, it wasn`t the verdict because seven of them said guilty. Now we get to the issue of the racial lines. Think about O.J. and, of course, the O.J. jury which, right, said that he was not guilty. A lot of America would beg to differ. How many of those jurors, 11 African-American, right, having a point of view that, look, there`s a problem with the system. There`s a distrust to the system. Perhaps justice is not justice after all. I think to this case
[Banfield:] One of those one of those jurors, a black juror in the O.J. articulated that in a fantastic documentary that came out that this was a screw you over Rodney King.
[Jackson:] A hundred percent of years of injustice.
[Banfield:] Yes.
[Jackson:] But if you go to the racial composition and the make up, you have the African-American jurors here apparently saying, wait a second, she said it was Eric, Eric, Eric who did it, right? Derrick or Eric who did it. This guy`s name is Tellis Quinton, so that is a discrepancy. He has an alibi defense, and so race matters, whether we want to believe it or not.
[Banfield:] I thought the case was a stinker, period. I just thought the evidence was stinker material. I don`t think it was conviction worthy. To see five whites all say guilty troubles me greatly. But to just see such division, it troubles me even more for another
[Jackson:] I get it.
[Banfield:] Yes. Joey, hold on for one second. I got that shocking video. I want to bring that if I can. Remember the cheerleaders on video brought to tears by a coach who forced her and others into very, very painful splits? So the D.A. looked at the case and guess what? Like the banner says, no charges. How is this not criminal?

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back. Seven years after former NBA player, Lorenzen Wright, was found murdered in a field in Memphis, Tennessee, a new twist in the case. His ex-wife, Sherra Wright-Robinson, has been arrested and charged in connection with the basketball star's death, along with a second suspect, a man identified as Billy Ray Turner. He was arraigned earlier this week and is being held at the Shelby County jail in Memphis. The district attorney there spoke about the charges earlier today.
[Amy Weirich, District Attorney, Shelby County, Tennessee:] There are bits and pieces to this case that have been solved. But the defendants that have been indicted this week, Tuesday, the Shelby County grand jury returned indictments against Sherra Wright and Billy Turner for conspiracy to kill Lorenzen Wright and first-degree murder of Lorenzen Wright. They are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
[Whitfield:] When police were asked about the relationship between the two suspects, police said, quote, "It's safe to say they knew each other." President Trump's efforts to remake the federal courts are off to a rather quick start, with the Senate confirming 12 appeals court judges in the president's first year, a modern record. But some of Trump's nominees have come under fire for their extreme lack of experience or even basic legal knowledge. The latest example, Matthew Petersen, a commissioner on the Federal Elections Commission. CNN justice reporter, Laura Jarrett, has the story.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Fred, this cringe-worthy exchange between Republican Senator John Kennedy and President Trump's nominee for a powerful seat on the federal bench in D.C. is raising questions about the qualifications of the people President Trump is appointing. In this case, Matthew Petersen admits he hasn't tried a case, has no basic grasp on basic legal motions filed routinely in federal court, and really no familiarity with the legal standards he'll be tasked with applying if confirmed. Take a listen.
[Sen. John Neely Kennedy, , Louisiana:] Have you ever tried a jury trial?
[Matthew Petersen, Judicial Nominee:] I have not.
[Kennedy:] Civil?
[Petersen:] No.
[Kennedy:] Criminal?
[Petersen:] No.
[Kennedy:] Bench?
[Petersen:] No.
[Kennedy:] State or federal court?
[Petersen:] I have not.
[Kennedy:] Do you know what a motion in limine is?
[Petersen:] I probably would not be able to give you a good definition.
[Kennedy:] Do you know what the Younger Abstention Doctrine is?
[Petersen:] I've heard of it, but, I, again.
[Kennedy:] How about the Pullman Abstention Doctrine?
[Petersen: I -- Kennedy:] You'll all see that a lot in federal court. OK.
[Jarrett:] This exchange right on the heels of news earlier this week that the White House is also withdrawing the nomination of Brett Tally, who was unanimously rated not qualified by the American Bar Association, as well as the nomination of Jeff Mateer, who was up for a seat on the federal trial court in Texas, but our "KFile" team found comments where he disparaged transgender children Fred?
[Whitfield:] Laura Jarrett, thank you so much. Let's bring in our legal guys. Avery Friedman, a civil rights attorney, and Richard Friedman, a criminal defense attorney. Good to see you both.
[Avery Friedman, Civil Rights Attorney & Law Professor:] Hey, Fred.
[Richard Herman, Criminal Defense Attorney & Law Professor:] Good to see you, Fredricka
[Whitfield:] Happy Hanukkah, happy holidays.
[Herman:] You, too.
[Whitfield:] Thank you. You first, Avery. This gentleman nominated for a lifetime appointment. The questions that Mr. Kennedy was asking about his knowledge or experience of, you know, different various types of trial, you know, attorney work or even awareness of motions. Is that typical that an attorney or would have had all of that experience before being considered for this kind of bench?
[Friedman:] Yes! I mean, the amazing thing about this is not that he didn't know anything, the idea that you appear before a Judiciary Committee and I've done it and believe me, you prepare, because you've got like 10 people firing questions at the same time. What it seems like is I don't think Matthew Petersen is a lunkhead, Fredricka. I think he wasn't prepared. I think he knows nothing about federal court. And it's the best example. And give credit to Senator Kennedy, from Louisiana, who is a Trump supporter who supported his other judicial nominations, but he said, you know what, we are a check and balance against the executive branch and, you know what, within five minutes, there was nothing left of Matthew Petersen. He may be good for an administrative post somewhere, but in a federal courthouse, Fredricka, huh-uh, wrong guy.
[Whitfield:] It was a humiliating moment. You don't have to be from the field of law to just kind of feel for Petersen at that moment.
[Herman:] He's not qualified, Fred, and I don't believe the ABA said that.
[Friedman:] Yes, they did.
[Herman:] This is so disturbing. This is so disturbing, Fred, on so many levels. You know, the United States district court judge, these are some of the best and brightest of the judges in the history of the United States jurisprudence system. They really are. They're appointments for life. They don't answer politically. They don't have to run for office. You walk into a federal court, these are very serious cases, Fred. That's where I make a living. People are facing 20, 30 years in prison. The civil lawsuits are usually $100,000 and above. It's very, very serious. And to think the credulity of this individual to think he had the ability to be a federal court judge, it's like Sarah Palin, who couldn't count to 10, thought she could be the vice president of the United States.
[Whitfield:] Except he didn't nominate himself. Somebody said, hey, I got this great potential opportunity, you want to be able to step up and say yes.
[Herman:] No. No.
[Whitfield:] But then he's also being underserved perhaps by others who said, we do think you're qualified, it doesn't matter that you haven't, you know, argued in civil, you know, or bench or criminal cases.
[Herman:] No. No.
[Friedman:] Don McGahn, the White House counsel, is who. That's the answer.
[Herman:] No, he never Fred, he never did a trial! He never did a small claims court trial.
[Whitfield:] Even we heard Senator Kennedy say, no depositions, I mean, independently
[Herman:] Not one deposition did he handle on his own, Fred. Come on, he didn't know a motion in limine. A first-year law student, a paralegal, it's on every bar exam. How do you not know that? It's an abomination. Fred
[Whitfield:] You haven't used that word in a while. I like that. Avery, the White House though is contending, and they even put out a statement, saying Petersen is qualified. The president's opponents are the ones who keep trying to distract. Senator John Kennedy, you know, the Republican there, you know, was the lawmaker who was grilling Petersen. This is what he said when he was a guest on CNN just last night.
[Kennedy:] You can't just walk into a federal courthouse for the very first time and say, here I am, I think I want to be a judge. It just doesn't work that way.
[Whitfield:] So Avery, I guess everyone is relieved that, no, it doesn't work that way. It shouldn't be so easy. You actually have to be up for the task.
[Friedman:] Well, that's right. Beyond the fact that clearly the nominee hadn't been prepared, this isn't lunk-headedness, this is stupidity. I think it's unbridled arrogance coming out of the White House counsel. Don McGahn was one of the well, the most instrumental person in setting this nominee up. That poor sucker. You walked into the Judiciary Committee and a Republican Senator ate the guy alive. If anything, the blame and let me tell you something, in the history of federal court, in the history of our federal legal system it is not exclusively Republican. Democrats have done the same thing. When you put in a candidate like that, by and large, you're going to see exactly what happened yesterday. And you know what, it proves that the system works. The legislative branch checked the executive branch and, yesterday, arrogance lost, and competence won.
[Whitfield:] You can't help but be humiliated for Matthew Petersen, too. Either he wasn't prepped, or somehow no one knew that these are the kinds of questions you would be asked or needed to be prepared for in order to, you know, sit on the bench to have such an incredibly important job for life.
[Herman:] Fred, these were not esoteric questions they were asking him. A motion in limine is a motion made before trial to preclude evidence. It's a basic motion. It's one and one is two. If you're a lawyer, you know this, Fred. He didn't know that!
[Friedman:] And that's why he wasn't going to get confirmed.
[Herman:] It's not preparation
[Whitfield:] Maybe he thought he would not and people around him thought it was going to happen. All right. Well, Richard
[Herman:] Clearly, he was not he missed law school the day they taught law. This guy
[Friedman:] Ah, this guy
[Herman:] This is a disgrace. This just shows utter incompetence by the administration to appoint someone like this to the federal bench. It's a disgrace. Even the Republicans are losing their minds over this.
[Whitfield:] I'm no attorney, but just watching it, it was more than cringe worthy. It was painful.
[Herman:] Exactly right.
[Whitfield:] feel for everybody involved here. Richard Herman, Avery Friedman, good to see you both.
[Herman:] Thanks, Fred. Congratulations on your nomination, 49th NAACP Image Awards.
[Whitfield:] Thank you.
[Herman:] You deserve it, Fred, congratulations.
[Friedman:] Absolutely.
[Whitfield:] Thank you so much. I feel really honored. Thank you so much. Thanks to you, Avery and Richard. Appreciate it. Always helping us all shine. Have a great holiday, see you next time.
[Friedman:] You, too, yes.
[Herman:] Take care.
[Whitfield:] All right, we'll be right back.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] It is the top of the hour. What was hurricane Florence is now a tropical storm. And we're now hearing that it has killed at least five people in this area. This tropical storm is battering the Carolinas tonight. We're told that more than 500,000 people maybe up to 850,000 people are without power right now. They are concerned about major storm surges and also catastrophic flooding in the area. I just want to take you out here on the beach. Because this is where the major problem where storm is rolling in and they're concerned about flooding. This is what we've been seeing all day, the storms rolling in, coming in, moving from the north and then coming south down the shore here. And one of those places that is being hit really hard is where colleague, Miguel Marquez is. He is in Carolina Beach. And Miguel, all day, you have been getting inundated with water and wind. Tell us what you're seeing.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn National Correspondent:] Yes, this has been 36 hours of just hell in Carolina Beach, North Carolina, Don. The wind is still blowing very, very hard. The rain is coming in right now, we're not seeing a lot of rain, but the wind is still very, very heavy here. The electricity is out in Carolina Beach and throughout the county. About 108,000 of the 128,000 customers that they have here are without power tonight. Cell phone service is down. Some roofs have been ripped off. Some walls have collapsed in and around Carolina Beach, but officials still waiting to be able to get out into daylight tomorrow to figure out just how much damage the storm has done. Fortunately, they haven't had those really big bad emergency calls for water rescues and the like. About 600 people of the 6200 people who live in this town decided to stay and tough out this storm. And tonight is the final test. Tide is coming in here in a little bit. There are areas of town that flood on a good day so they are waiting to see how bad it gets tonight. I can tell you in the last 24 hours we have seen incredibly hard rain, lots and lots of wind. And water up to the waist in some places. Also a lot of beach erosion. It's devastating to a town like this that depends on its beach for people who come here to enjoy it. About two feet of sand of beach sand is now gone, and a lot of beach erosion. So, a lot of rebuilding already is very evident here for Carolina Beach. Don?
[Lemon:] Yes, they're going to, Miguel, they are going to have some issues when it comes to beach erosion. Speaking to the spokesperson last night for Myrtle Beach. And they said they were supposed to have a beach restoration project that was supposed to start this week. But instead, this hurricane now tropical storm came through and delayed them. It was going to add hundreds of feet of beach to this area. Not going to happen right now for at least a couple of weeks because of the storm. I want to get to my colleague, Ed Lavandera. Ed Lavandera is in Jacksonville, North Carolina where he has been witnessing some of the things going on. Ed, as I understand you were out with people who were rescuing people earlier. What's happening where you are?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Right, we spent the most of our day in the town of New Bern which has been the focus of some of the high water rescues and people being evacuated from their homes there in that town about 300 people having to be more than 300 people having to be rescued from their homes in these neighborhoods. Pockets of neighborhoods where floodwaters rose up overnight and into today. So there was a race to get to these people. And Don, it was very reminiscent what we saw a year ago in Houston during hurricane Harvey where you had private citizens rushing to the scene there and launching their boats to this flood waters to reach the people who were trapped in their homes and wanted to get out. So, it was fascinating to see from that standpoint. We met a gentleman by the name of Jason Wineman who 10 years ago bought an old and a government auction an old military vehicle, high vehicle, used to transport troops. He said he bought it for moments like this. So he dispatched himself into the scene there and was driving it through high water that regular cars couldn't get through and able to load people up and bring them to safety. We met a woman Jennifer Morales who was rescued in Jason's truck and brought out. She was with her husband and 2-year-old son. They said that they told us that they had been calling for help for nearly 12 hours before rescuers could get to the home where they were trapped by floodwaters. So, some very dramatic scenes and stories we heard throughout the day today in New Bern, North Carolina. Don?
[Lemon:] All right. Ed Lavandera. Ed, thank you very much. Ed, you've been doing great work all day. This is not the way that most people who live here and the people came into rescue expected to spend their Friday night and their weekends, but they're happy, especially the rescue folks to be here, helping out. We had seen a lot of that. Usually at this hour, right at 11:00, every evening, we had been getting an update on this storm. I want to go to meteorologist, Allison Chinchar who joins us from the CNN Weather Center to give us the very latest. What is happening Allison?
[Allison Chinchar, Cnn Meteorologist:] Right so, Don, we've seen a couple of changes in the latest update for starters the sustained winds have dropped down now at 65 miles per hour. Still a tropical storm but the forward movement has actually picked up a little bit. Now it rest southwest at about five miles per hour. Had been moving at three. Both of them still indicate a very slow pace. And that is going to be the concern going forward, because as the storm moves so slowly, it's going to dump rain in the same spots. Two particular bands of rain we've been focused on. This first one here, you can see over Moorhead City, New Port up through Jacksonville. This other one now really starting to ramp up around Wilmington. And notice that skinny line, but it's training over the same spots. A lot of these locations are getting two to three inches of rain an hour. On top of that, you also have a tornado watch in effect for most of the overnight hours and even some active tornado warnings that we have off and on throughout the evening. Now the thing is, as this trek continues to make its way in towards portions of South Carolina and then finally takes off, it's that shift as it starts to begin to push southward, one of the big things we are going to notice is the change in storm surge. Up to this point, it's really only been an issue for areas of North Carolina. But as the low sinks back down, that storm surge is now going to begin to shift into portions of northeastern South Carolina, including Myrtle Beach which expected to get about four to six feet of storm surge. Really over the next 12 to 24 hours that is when you really going to start to see the worst of the storm surge for those locations. In addition to that, again, we've been talking about the flood threat. It's a twofold. You have the rain that is coming down from above and the water that is coming up from below. That is the storm surge. The short-term problem is the flash flooding that is going to take place. The long-term problem would be the tributaries. All of that water has to go somewhere. It goes from those tributaries and in bays and inlets into the rivers and creeks and streams. We're expecting 20 of those rivers to reach major flood stage. And nearly 30 of them to reach moderate flood stage and for a lot of these locations they're not even going to crest until Tuesday of next week. So it's really going to be a long time before we finally start to see that water begin to recede. And already, the Cape Fear River at Wilmington reached that record height today at 8.288 feet. And another location along the northeast Cape Fear River, now this is a little bit further inland, we expect that to end up reaching a record crest, as well, Don, but again, that is not likely to get to that point till well into Sunday and more likely not until Monday. So, again even as the storm begins to make its way inland and push away from the Carolinas, this is going to be a problem they are still going to be dealing with for at least the next five days.
[Lemon:] Allison, it's really unbelievable. I mean, just for the last couple of days, this thing has been just sitting here and pouring water on top of people. And as you said, it is going to be until Tuesday till some of these rivers and tributaries and all this, until the rivers crest. I can only imagine what that means for the flooding situation here. This is we are. I just want to take a little bit of walk out here. You may lose me in the dark a little bit, but the concern was that this water from the beach may start coming up to the berms and flowing in there. It's pretty much high tide. So hopefully that is not going to happen. Where we do not know, because we've been getting so much rain. And then there was there is the storm drains here that we have been watching on the beaches. When we first got here, those drains were little trickle, if they were moving at all. Little tiny trickles. And now they've opened up and even some of the water has been flowing from other areas. And expanding those, as well. We've been getting updates, of course, from the National Weather Center, also updates from the National Hurricane Center, as well. Ed Rappaport who has been joining us here every single evening, is going to give us an update now. Ed, do I have you? Can you hear me?
[Ed Rappaport, Deputy Director, National Hurricane Center:] Yes, I can. Good evening, Don.
[Lemon:] So give us an update here. I'm in Myrtle Beach. You can see the bands are coming through right now. And we are getting drenched here and the wind is picking up. What's going on?
[Rappaport:] The center is located just to the west of you now. A lot of rain covering eastern part of North Carolina. It is spread to the west. Your correspondent showed an interesting graph just a minute ago. I want to show another version from another river. And what we're looking here is again the rise of the water, but here we are seeing two different peaks and this is near New Bern, North Carolina. And what we see a rise that occurred yesterday and into today and that is because of the storm surge that went up about five feet or six feet. Then starting to come down, but now it is going back up again. That is really mostly due to the rainfall. Yes, it's high tide. But now the surge is beginning to recede, but the rainfall that is falling over the river area and up to the west which has to drain out now through there is causing the water level to rise even further. And it's up into the major flood stage already.
[Lemon:] So Ed, listen, the big concern here you know there have been rescuing a lot of people, hundreds of people, has been this area called New Bern. And I'm wondering was it forecast to get that high? Because I don't think that there was a mandatory evacuation have given for New Bern. Was it forecast to get that much water, that much floodwater?
[Rappaport:] Yes, we had talked about how the water was going to rise on the order of ten feet along the coast. And also up the rivers. The Neuse River and Pamlico River indeed. That is what we've seen. May be even a little bit higher in a few places. Now of course, we've got the water coming down the river from the rainfall and so we're going to see flooding there well into next week.
[Lemon:] Yes. Ed, can you explain to me and to our viewers why this thing slowed down and stalled? Because that is a problem here. And it's just stalling. And not moving very quickly. And just producing a lot of water.
[Rappaport:] We talked about a lot of water. But a hurricane is very much like a float in a river. It moves where the currents around it steer it. And fortunately, we were able to forecast pretty well what those currents are going to be for this storm and so we knew days in advance and that is why we had all the flood warnings out. Unfortunately, in this case it turned out the forecast was right. The storm slowed considerably and dropping a lot of rain and we are worried about dropping in essence of record amounts of rain. We've already had 20 plus inches of rain in a few spots near Wilmington, near Moorhead City in New Bern, five to 10 inches farther to the west of North Carolina. And by the time the weekend is over, we are going to see almost all of North Carolina, much of South Carolina having had 5 to 10 inches of rain. Half of that area maybe a swathe of 15 to 20 inches. We had seen already 20 plus inches. Some of those locations will get isolated spots to 40 inches of rain. Tremendous flooding to be expected. As we've said, it's going to occur through the weekend and into next week..
[Lemon:] All right. Ed Rappaport, thank you very much, I appreciate your time and explaining it to me and to our viewers, as well. Again, check what I said earlier about New Bern. There was a mandatory evacuation ordered for New Bern, not a mandatory evacuation for every place in the Carolinas or at least in north and South Carolina, the coastal areas. The New Bern was one of them. And that is where we saw so much flooding. And a lot of people there did decide to stay. And unfortunately, you see what happened. We are going to continue on with our coverage here on CNN of tropical storm Florence. We're getting new updates as you see. And we will update you on the other side of the break. Don't go anywhere.

[Camerota:] President Trump facing questions about his son-in-law amid reports that Jared Kushner tried to set up a back channel communication with Russia. The president trying to deflect on Twitter saying, quote, "It is my opinion that many of the leaks coming out of the White House are fabricated lies made up by the fake news media." Joining us now is CNN political commentators, Nina Turner and Jeffery Lord. Nice to see both of you this morning.
[Jeffrey Lord, Cnn Political Commentator:] Hello on this Memorial Day.
[Camerota:] You, too, Jeffery. How concerned should the president and the White House be of these reports, first that Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law is being investigated by the FBI?
[Lord:] Well, I just think frankly this whole thing is ridiculous. Let me bring up two incidents from history. [Inaudible] who was a midlevel diplomat at the Soviet embassy was contacted back channel by Robert F. Kennedy's attorney general and set up what was called in the day a back channel, an un-sharable piece of information known only to the Kennedy brothers that had nothing to do with State Department or anyone else. They were unaware of it. It certainly has been done. And secondly, Jimmy Carter sent [inaudible] when Jimmy Carter was president-elect, tot president, to visit with the U.S. Russian ambassador to open a back channel when President Ford was the president. So this has been done. I'm sure there are other examples.
[Camerota:] OK, so just to be clear, Jeffrey, if Hillary Clinton had won and her son-in-law had tried to set up a back channel with the Russians, you would have been completely comfortable with that?
[Lord:] Look, I believe that presidents get to make these decisions. If President Hillary Clinton wanted to choose Mark [inaudible], if John F. Kennedy wanted to send his brother, Robert. That's the president's choice.
[Camerota:] Back channels outside of the typical line of communication even with adversaries like Russia, fine.
[Lord:] It's normal. It's been done and nobody complained. Everybody thinks it is great. The Justice Department is now named after Robert F. Kennedy. If it is such a terrible thing, maybe they'll take the name off. I hope not.
[Camerota:] I don't know. I mean, as you know Michael Hayden, a former CIA director said he had never seen anything like it. He said it was off the map. He knows of no other experience like this in our history. Nina, your thoughts?
[Nina Turner, Cnn Political Commentator:] I mean, even the former CIA director said the same thing. Listen, let the investigations take place. I'm not sure if Jared Kushner is naive or arrogant or both. I will say about this Russia thing is that we have an independent prosecutor. We have intelligence and judiciary committees within both the Senate and the House doing investigations. This pre-occupation with Russia, this mess that the Trump administration has created is really harming the American people to such an extent that we cannot really focus in on the domestic needs of the people from Flint, Michigan to places like my hometown where there is an opioid epidemic in the state of Ohio. So this is problematic. Let the investigations go forward. Let the chips fall where they may. I'm hoping that people will be able to both let the folks who are dealing with Russia deal with Russia and also be able to handle some of the domestic concerns that we have. But this is something the American people do deserve answers.
[Camerota:] How about that, Jeffery? All of this Russia cloud is getting in the way of the president's agenda.
[Lord:] Well, I partially agree with her in the sense that I think that this is ridiculous stuff and we shouldn't be wasting a second on it because Nina is correct. There are plenty of other problems whether it's Flint, Michigan or health care or tax reform or opioid addictions, I mean, you name it. There are a whole host of things that I'm sure the president really would prefer to focus his attention on. This is being done by political adversaries who practically don't even know their own history, which I find somewhat appalling.
[Camerota:] Hold on second. It is not just political, it's the FBI. I mean, it's not just political adversaries that have brought up the Russia cloud. The FBI, there are intelligence agencies are looking into this. If there was collusion, we know that Russia interfered in the election. That is not a big deal?
[Lord:] Well, they've interfered in a lot of elections. Well, I mean, where were the investigations to the FBI in years past?
[Camerota:] I mean, now, modern day, now. Do you think this is worth investigating?
[Lord:] I, Ali, this just goes to having a single standard, a single standard for President Trump and President Kennedy and President Franklin Roosevelt, et cetera. Same standard. That is all we're asking and I think that's pretty fair.
[Camerota:] Nina, last word.
[Turner:] I mean, the American people are being left behind in this and we really do need to focus. So let the investigations go on. Let the chips fall where they may. People in power need to stop playing Russian roulette with these issues. The Republicans need to act swiftly. For Democrats, this is not necessarily the ticket to win the midterms. The American people need folks who are going to govern. Alisyn, I will say this. Really this weight and cloud should concern the president of the United States of America. He should be concerned about his legacy for this country is going to be. Is it going to be just about Russia or is it really going to be standing up for the American people? The trust is his. Instead of a war room, they need a confessional.
[Camerota:] Nina, Jeffery, thank you very much. Talk to you soon.
[Lord:] Thanks, Ali. Thanks, Nina.
[Gregory:] We'll come back to politics. When we come back, something wild over the weekend. One of the Indy 500 favorites involved in one of the most terrifying crashes you will ever see. How was the driver able to walk away from the wreck uninjured? We will get details in the "Bleacher Report" coming up next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks very much for watching. Our breaking news coverage continues right now with "Erin Burnett OutFront."
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] "OutFront" next, breaking news, the Saudis making a major announcement tonight, admitting after weeks of denials that "The Washington Post" contributor is dead. What would President Trump do now? And Trump doubling down on his praise for Republican who body slammed a reporter. His allies say he was just joking. Was he? Plus, a caravan of thousands of migrants have made their way to Mexico tonight. The President says they're headed to the United States next. Is it just feared mongering? Let's go "OutFront." Good evening, everyone. I'm Kate Bolduan in for Erin Burnett. "OutFront" tonight, we do have breaking news and a major admission tonight from Saudi Arabia. After 17 days, state T.V. finally confirming what the world already expected, "Washington Post" contributor Jamal Khashoggi is dead. The government, the Saudi government, also revealing that 18 Saudi nationals have been arrested in connection with this. And this man, we'll show you, Major General Ahmed al-Asiri, the deputy of the intelligence services, has been dismissed, relieved of his duties. He's a close adviser to Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. This all comes after Saudi Arabia, for weeks, denied any involvement in his mysterious disappearance. But we now know, according to Saudi Arabia, that he was killed after what they claim was a fight inside their consulate in Istanbul. But so many questions remain. What role did the crown prince play in this? Is any of this any of the details coming out true or just a cover story tonight? Let's get to some answers. Clarissa Ward is "OutFront" live in Ankara, Turkey for us. Clarissa, what more are you hearing from the Saudi government tonight?
[Clarissa Ward, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, I think the most significant thing that we probably heard tonight, Kate, in this news bulletin is that not just General al-Asiri, but another man, Saud al-Qahtani, has been dismissed. He has been relieved of his duties. This is as high as it gets. Other than the crown prince, he is one of the top three most senior closest advisers to the crown prince. He is the man who has sort of spearheaded on Twitter, a sort of ugly propaganda campaign against people who speak out against the kingdom, and he is a very senior, important man in Saudi Arabia. He has been dismissed of his duties. Obviously, the Saudis are hoping that on some level, this will deflect or shield the crown prince. But I do want to point out to you that our Tim Lister actually found a tweet that was written by Saud al- Qahtani a year ago in which he said, "Do you think I think without orders? I am an employee. I carry out orders from my king and my crown prince." So, if the Saudis are hoping tonight that they have created some distance, that they have created a plausible story whereby some rogue elements or Saud al-Qahtani ordered this operation without the crown prince knowing about it, Saud al-Qahtani's own words would appear to contradict that. One other thing, Kate, that we're hearing that's interesting, the wording of exactly what happened to Jamal Khashoggi when he went in to the Saudi consulate, according to the statement today, they said that he was interrogated, that there was some kind of physical altercation. I'm being told by sources very close to the royal court that they're preparing to issue a kind of correction or a clarification, rather, to say that it was some kind of a chokehold, that there was some kind of an interrogation and then he was strangled and that apparently is how he was killed, though it's anyone's guess as to whether this will be enough to satisfy the international community, the American people, and of course the Turkish authorities here where the dreadful murder took place, Kate.
[Bolduan:] Absolutely. All right, so much more to learn tonight. Thank you so much, Clarissa. I really appreciate it. I want to go now, though, to the White House. Pamela Brown is there. Pamela, the President promised severe punishment if it turned out that Jamal Khashoggi was killed by the hands by the Saudis. What does the President what does the President do now?
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] That's a big question, and we know that the White House is monitoring the situation. We haven't heard an official response, but the President said earlier today that within the next couple of days, perhaps by Monday, that we would have more answers to who, what, when and where in terms of what exactly happened and whether there would be severe consequences. The question is, how does that square with what we're hearing from the Saudis now, that they've developed this commission and that it could take a month to investigate and to release a report on this. Also, the question is, how will the President respond to the action taken by the Saudis, of course the dismissal of the high ranking intelligence official who was a close adviser to the crown prince. The President's own intelligence officials believe that it's highly unlikely for an operation like this to have taken place without the knowledge of the crown prince. And so that is still an open question, did he know? Was he involved, as the intelligence officials believe? And it's hard to believe that President hasn't been briefed on that. But what is also clear, Kate, is that the President is walking this fine line here because he wants to preserve the relationship with Saudi Arabia. He said it today. He said, "They're a great ally of ours." It's clear that the arms deal is very important to the President, the partnership with Iran, with Syria, very important as well. And so this could be a big test for the President in how he responds.
[Bolduan:] Absolutely. All right, Pam, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. "OutFront" with me now is Democratic Congressman Jerry Connolly of Virginia. He sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman, thank you for coming in. Jamal Khashoggi was
[Rep. Jerry Connolly , Virginia:] Good to be with you, Kate.
[Bolduan:] was your constituent. He lived in Virginia. Your reaction tonight, first and foremost, to the Saudis finally confirming that he is dead.
[Connolly:] Well, it's amazing that it took two weeks of lying and subterfuge for the Saudi government to finally admit, "Well, yes, he died. And he died at their hands and in our consulate." Now, they're engaged in a cover-up to protect the crown prince. And we'll see how that works for them, but I call this another nice try, because there is no way this kind of premeditated operation could conceivably have happened in the Saudi consulate without the knowledge of and approval of the crown prince.
[Bolduan:] Well, and then what do you make of the fact that they're reporting, coming from my colleagues overseas tonight, is that they're putting together basically a group to issue a report in a month and the person heading up this investigative group is the crown prince himself,
[Mbs. Connolly:] Right. I think that's the sure fire sign that a cover-up is under way. And you know, the Turkish government and Turkish intelligence community has been very helpful in leaking details of what, in fact, they know, all of which have pretty much been confirmed so far. And they're the ones, don't forget6, who said not only was there a dispute, he was tortured before he was killed. And after he was killed, he was then dismembered, so this wasn't some rogue operation where it got out of hand. This was premeditated. 15 individuals flew into Turkey with, you know, malice aforethought. They knew what they were doing and there's no way, given who they were, and given how they came into Turkey, there's no way they would have done this without the clear knowledge of and approval of the crown prince. And indeed, there are intercepts, apparently, that the intelligence communities have that the crown prince was actively engaged in plotting at least the abduction of Mr. Khashoggi.
[Bolduan:] Congressman, you do not believe what's coming out of the Saudis tonight, absolutely not.
[Connolly:] No.
[Bolduan:] Do you believe, then, you call it a cover-up. Do you believe that the general that they've relieved, General al-Asiri, do you really see do you think if this is tell you he's just the fall guy?
[Connolly:] I think that's exactly what's going on. It's almost like a classic mafia operation. It's tragic to watch and tragic to comprehend the consequences. But as your earlier reporter just said, you know, I think that gentleman was quoted saying, "I take my orders from the king and the crown prince. I don't use independent judgment before I act." And I think that's exactly how the Saudi system works. It's a very it's both consensual in terms of the royal family, but hierarchical in terms of this crown prince and how the system works.
[Bolduan:] So, Congressman, I think maybe now very quickly the most important question is what does President Trump do? What do you want to hear from him now?
[Connolly:] Wouldn't it be nice if we had a President who actually held murderers to account? Instead with the U.S. president
[Bolduan:] Well, he has said that there will be severe punishment, severe consequences if it is shown that the Saudis murder he was killed at the hands of the Saudis. So now, what?
[Connolly:] You know, Kate yes. Kate, I think that's a throw away line for President Trump. He's also said we can't jeopardize $110 billion in arms sales. This is important relationship. We need their oil. They were going to prevent Secretary Mnuchin from going to Davos in the Desert, Saudi conference on the future of Saudi Arabia
[Bolduan:] Yes.
[Connolly:] because of our distaste for what has happened and now we're learning he's going.
[Bolduan:] What does Congress Congress can act.
[Connolly:] Yes.
[Bolduan:] Will Congress act?
[Connolly:] Yes, I believe we will. I think there is sufficient bipartisan horror and revulsion at what has taken place and clarity about who did it. And that I think Congress is going to take punitive measures, that the range of, you know, on that menu is everything from arms sales to sanctions, to financial cutoffs in terms of international banking as a starters. But the Saudis have to be held to account. And we're not going to settle for cover.
[Bolduan:] First things first, I think everyone is interested to hear now what President Trump has to say after this report coming out.
[Connolly:] That's right.
[Bolduan:] Congressman, thank you for coming in. I appreciate your time.
[Connolly:] Thank you, Kate.
[Bolduan:] "OutFront" next, the President says that he doesn't regret raising praising, rather, the Republican congressman for body slamming a journalist. This, as his defenders say that he was just joking. Who is laughing? Tonight. Plus, Paul Manafort in court in a wheelchair as we learn the Mueller team is still not done with him. Plus, dramatic pictures from Mexico as thousands of migrants make their way north. Could this caravan drive Republicans to the polls?

[Vanier:] Some medical news before we end the show. President Trump accuses his critics of being afflicted by a new illness. He calls it Trump Derangement Syndrome or TDS. Jeanne Moos has a look at the symptoms and at least one possible cure.
[Jeanne Moos, Cnn Correspondent:] The summit pushed Trump critics over the edge in their disdain for the President's behavior
[Unidentified Male:] Slobbering servility. Supine puppy.
[Moos:] Such disdain has triggered a counterattack.
[Senator Rand Paul , Kentucky:] Trump derangement syndrome has officially come to the Senate.
[Moos:] Well, actually, it's been everywhere else.
[Unidentified Female:] Full-blown Trump derangement syndrome?
[Unidentified Male:] Trump derangement syndrome has become a thing.
[Jimmy Kimmell, Talk Show:] Now, I've never heard of Trump derangement syndrome. I'm not a doctor but
[Moos:] You don't need a degree in psychiatry to make the diagnosis.
[Fareed Zacharia, Cnn:] Trump derangement syndrome hatred of Donald Trump so intense that it impairs people's judgment.
[Moos:] The President himself is sitting TDS. On "The View" Judge Jeanine Pirro pointed at Whoopi saying she had it.
[Whoopi Goldberg, Talk Show:] Did you just point to me?
[Judge Jeanine Pirro, Fox News:] Yes.
[Goldberg:] Listen, I don't have Trump derangement. You know, what's horrible?
[Pirro:] What's horrible?
[Goldberg:] When the President of the United States whips up people
[Moos:] It took a commercial break to calm her down.
[Goldberg:] I very rarely lose my cool but I also don't like being accused of being hysterical.
[Moos:] TDS is nothing new. Fifteen years ago someone coined the term Bush derangement syndrome which was followed by Obama derangement syndrome. And now
[Unidentified Male:] She's got a little bit of that Trump derangement syndrome. I'm hoping that one of these comedians will come up with an anti-anxiety medication for this
[Moos:] But who needs a suppository when Jimmy Kimmel has a cure.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you feel like the world is out to get you? You may be suffering from Trump derangement syndrome. Ask your doctor about Rezine. Rezine can get you back to living the life you used to love.
[Moos:] Maybe critics have to resign themselves to feeling deranged. Jeanne Moos
[Rachel Maddow, Msnbc:] It's called Obama derangement syndrome.
[Moos: -- Cnn -- Unidentified Female:] They suffer from what we affectionately call Bush derangement syndrome.
[Paul:] Trump derangement syndrome.
[Unidentified Female:] Make yourself great again Rezine.
[Moos:] New York.
[Vanier:] Ok. Just one more thing before I let you go. When a former NASA engineer builds a water toy, things can get really serious. Designer Mark Rober needs both hands to shoot the world's largest water pistol. Here it is. It uses high-pressure nitrogen to fire water at more than 430 kilometers per hour that's right, 430 kilometers per hour. Check the sausage. It can blow through glass, fruit, hot dogs like butter. The giant super soaker earned Rober his second Guinness world record. The first was the world's largest NERF gun. Maybe he has too much time on his hands. All right. That's it from us. Thank you very much. We're done with me, but good news you've got George Howell and Natalie Allen up next.

[Watson:] You're watching CNN, and this is CONNECT THE WORLD. Welcome back. Despite bans, protests and outrage around the world, the ivory trade is still alive and well. And now African elephants are being pushed closer to the brink of extinction. Many countries including the U.S. and China have banned ivory sales. But a steady flow of Chinese cash has kept poachers in business. In a CNN exclusive, our David McKenzie traveled to the Niassa Reserve in Mozambique, the new epicenter of poaching in Africa.
[David Mckenzie, Cnn International Correspondent:] Just a few remaining villages before the remoteness takes hold.
[Philip Mclellan, Wildlife Conservation Society:] I think, you know, it's one of the last great wildernesses, and this really needs to be protected.
[Mckenzie:] From the plane, Niassa Reserve seems untouched by man's greed.
[Mclellan:] I'm looking for elephant number 30. We're sort of approaching her last known track.
[Mckenzie:] But even with the help of GPS, we struggle to find a single herd.
[Unidentified Male:] What do you see? An elephant, yes, I got one, I got one.
[Mckenzie:] Just like the rest of Africa, here, too, the poachers have found a way in. [on camera]: What's happened to the herds?
[Mclellan:] They've been decimated by poaching.
[Mckenzie:] This should be upwards of 10,000 elephants in this reserve. He estimates there are less than 2,000 left.
[Mclellan:] Just flying over what used to be bountiful countryside, you're now struggling to find animals.
[Mckenzie:] A Chinese government ban on ivory has been heralded as the key to saving the species. The world's largest market should now be off limits, but here conservationists say the slaughter continues. We were in the bush when we found a group of elephants, he says. I shot the first one, and then I shot the second one. We were about to remove the ivory when security officials arrived to apprehend us. Inside a prison yard, this poacher speaks freely. He's agreed to talk to us, because he wants people to know. I had nothing else I could do, he says. This is the only way. He says the demand for ivory hasn't diminished. Who then, are the buyers?
[Unidentified Male:] The Chinese have become strong. I think they've bought their way in here, and they have protection.
[Mckenzie:] This investigator is actively tracking poaching syndicates.
[Unidentified Male:] They know how to get things out.
[Mckenzie:] So, we're protecting his identity. Despite the ban, he says the Chinese continue to control the market. [on camera]: What does that mean for conservation?
[Unidentified Male:] Very, very bad. Very bad. If it continues like that in Niassa, there will be nothing left.
[Mckenzie:] And are the Chinese to blame for this?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, 100 percent. 100 percent.
[Mckenzie:] We wanted to see for ourselves. Using a hidden camera, we follow an investigator as he posed as an ivory middleman at the main Chinese trading center he was invited into. It was remarkably easy to get them interested.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you get 10 meters? 10 meters, yes.
[Mckenzie:] But then China is mentioned. 11:45:00]
[Unidentified Male:] I can't take it there. But it is possible to get it through customs. That's a crime.
[Mckenzie:] It could be a negotiating technique. Drive up the risk to drive down the price, or perhaps the ban's message has made it to Mozambique's Chinese traders. But a massive bust by authorities in Maputo would show otherwise. In mid-April, more than three tons of ivory was confiscated. Police say the container is linked to a Chinese trading company. The suspects fled, and the investigation continues. Why have there not been prosecution of Chinese nationals in Mozambique?
[Unidentified Male:] That one is now the problem, the biggest problem. I think they are buying their way out.
[Mckenzie:] Corruption?
[Unidentified Male:] Corruption. Corruption.
[Mckenzie:] These photos show ammunition still wrapped in government- issued packaging. The poachers caught wearing all too familiar fatigues of the national army. The rot runs deep. Just listen to the government's own prosecutor. We have no doubt about that, he says. Corruption is at the source of poaching. But, he says, there's a commitment by the state to prevent it.
[Mclellan:] I don't believe that it's too late. No. I'm an optimist, and I believe that there are elephants out there in little pockets that we haven't seen. And they will come together and breed and come back strongly.
[Mckenzie:] But their population has reached a critical point. And unless China's ivory ban is felt here, this Eden could be emptied. David McKenzie, CNN Niassa Reserve, Mozambique.

[Berman:] All right. Live pictures from Capitol Hill, great expectations for a great moment for the House majority whip Steve Scalise, returning to Capitol Hill this morning for the first time since he was shot in June. He is due to speak very shortly inside the House of Representatives and he could walk by this place you're looking at right now. Let's go to Phil Mattingly who joins us live from Capitol Hill. A very, very emotional moment, Phil.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, look, no question about it. If you think back three months ago particularly in the first couple of days in the wake of that shooting, during a practice for the congressional baseball game, things were very touch and go. Staff didn't know how Congressman Scalise was actually going to end up. There were a lot of concerns about the depth of his injuries, the damage that had been done. They noted internal organs were hurt. You could just look in a snippet from a "60 Minutes" interview that will be running on Sunday, guys, Congressman Scalise said very frankly they needed to put me back together. That's how bad the damage was internally. There was no head's up that he was coming back to the Capitol today but I can tell you lawmakers have been waiting for this moment since the June shooting. And guys, I think interestingly enough the fact that he's coming back at this time, a very key time in the House as they look forward on legislative opportunities, I'll tell you when lawmakers started to get the sense that he was on the upswing, that he was out of kind of a bad place, was when he started participating in conference calls. And as his role in the House, he is the one who basically gathers the votes for them to be able to move their agenda forward. And all of a sudden he started calling in to their weekly whip meetings and started asking where the votes were. What he needed to do. Could he make phone calls. That was kind of the trigger point for a lot of people as to when they knew Congressman Scalise was getting back into a better place. But still, everybody knew and was fully aware it was going to be a very long process, the rehabilitation was going to be difficult, arduous and lengthy, and the fact that he is back today, as you noted, will be speaking on the House floor, should be walking through soon, if he if I dive out of the way it's for the best of possible reasons, because he's coming back in. And guys, I'll note that it's not just Republican House members that are here, obviously the entire House will be in there. I've also seen multiple senators walk in as well to welcome him back. So yes, when it comes to Capitol Hill obviously there are plenty of days where everybody is mad at one another and maybe things aren't on the right track but this is a very good day. There's no other way to put it.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Berman:] We saw the majority leader walk by the other camera, Kevin McCarthy going by, perhaps Steve Scalise going by very, very shortly, Phil. Any sense what he will say when given the chance, what subjects he wants to address?
[Mattingly:] Look, I've reached out to staff. They're saying, you know, pay attention to the floor, just let the words speak for themselves. If you look back to what happened three months ago, it's difficult to describe how shaken his colleagues were by that moment. How vulnerable they all felt. The reality of one of their own facing this. And I think also you think about the capitol police officers that were wounded as well, a staffer who was also shot, a lobbyist who was also shot in the chest, Matt Mika. All of whom have recovered. The big question now is the unity that was called for at that time, very poignant speeches by Speaker Paul Ryan on the House floor, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on the House floor as well, really calling on the chamber to come together, to try and go away from the kind of politics that have been so almost poisonous over the last couple of weeks. I think you'll hear a lot about that. That is certainly going to be a focus going forward.
[Berman:] All right. Phil Mattingly for us on Capitol Hill. Stand by. We will come back to you very shortly. Again waiting on Steve Scalise, his first trip back to the Capitol, a triumphant return after being shot in June. Stay with us.

[Tapper:] Welcome back in our "TECH LEAD," in a week where one of the biggest social media sites, Facebook, faces scrutiny for taking money from Russian propagandist spreading disinformation to interfere with the U.S. Election. CNN Senior Tech Reporter Laurie Segall spoke to Twitter Co-Founder Ev Williams about the struggle of social media companies face against fake news.
[Ev Williams, Co-founder, Twitter:] In my opinion, the most nefarious feedback loop that drives recent belief and misinformation on the internet and the media, in general, is that it's all driven by advertising and it's all free, and attention is valued. And if you can generate attention, then you can get paid. The thing that we should acknowledge is that anyone selling ads, these ad driven platforms are benefiting from a lot of the fake information and misinformation and these campaigns. And they're also benefiting from people just generating attention at pretty much any cost.
[Tapper:] Williams went on to tell Segall that tech companies struggle to separate political opinions from misinformation and don't believe editorial guidelines fit with their business models but they don't recognize those editorial judgments have been already made every step of the way from the algorithm on. Now, let's turn to our "POP CULTURE LEAD." We wrote the book we read in high school English, but so little is known about the notoriously reclusive author J.D. Salinger. A new film opens nationwide today hopes to capture one previously all but unexplored part of his life. The battle that the author and the World War II veteran waged with post-traumatic stress disorder. He stormed the shores of Normandy, survived the battle of the bulge, married a Gestapo agent and oh yes, he went on to write the Catcher In The Rye.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm Jerome David Salinger.
[Tapper:] Veteran and late author J.D. Salinger became famously private following the monumental success of his first and only novel about a jaded and rebellious teenager. And now Writer, Director Danny Strong is bringing Salinger's life story to the screen with his film Rebel In The Rye.
[Unidentified Male:] Sir Jerry
[Danny Strong, Rebel In The Rye Director And Writer:] This is actually what inspired me to make the film because I thought that that was so moving how a veteran, how someone could experience the horrors of war, could deal with it and how they were able to, you know, take that experience, that horrific experience and then channel it into this masterpiece.
[Tapper:] A 2013 namesake documentary gave the world new images of Salinger. Now strong and actor Nicholas Hoult are bringing them to life. Salinger was a member of the Army's Counterintelligence Corps and wrote much of his holding
[Unidentified Male:] I don't think I would be alive if it wasn't for this
[Tapper:] A traumatic events of war no doubt affected the author.
[Unidentified Male:] Sometimes I wake up and I'm screaming.
[Tapper:] But who talked about post-traumatic stress in the 1940s? This is a time when people didn't know what PTSD was. It was called battle fatigue. They didn't even discuss it. So to see the path that Salinger took, how he took up meditation, how he took up yoga and how his writing in its own way became a form of therapy. I think it could be deeply inspiring.
[Unidentified Male:] What can I do for you, Mr. Salinger?
[Tapper:] Salinger had honed his craft with the help of mentor and one time professor Whit Burnett, played in the film by Kevin Spacey.
[Unidentified Male:] Are you willing to devote your life to telling the stories?
[Tapper:] After fame came flooding in with the 1951 publication of Catcher In The Rye, Salinger retreated to New Hampshire where he did his writing until his death in 2010.
[Strong:] The idea of making a movie about his life would have been, I think, horrific to him. I think this is the last thing he would have wanted. And I wouldn't have pursued it if he were still alive.
[Tapper:] As for a movie version of Catcher In The Rye, Salinger made his feelings clear in 1957 letter, writing, "I toyed very seriously with the idea of leaving the unsold rights to my wife and daughter as a kind of insurance policy. It pleasures me to no end though to know that I won't have to see the results of the transaction." Tune in Sunday morning to CNN's "STATE OF THE UNION." U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nicky Haley joins us for a conversation on North Korea, plus an exclusive with Senator Dianne Feinstein. It all starts at 9:00 a.m. and noon Eastern. That's it for THE LEAD, I'm Jake Tapper. I now turn you over to Wolf Blitzer in "THE SITUATION ROOM." Thanks so much for watching. Have a great weekend.

[Hill:] A growing number of congressmen facing accusations of sexual impropriety, and it comes as Donald Trump is defending Roy Moore and doubting Moore's accusers. So what signal is the president sending? Let's discuss with CNN political commentator Ed Martin and Christine Quinn, the president of Women in Need. So when we look at this, Christine, we can't help but point out what we're seeing from the president in terms of Roy Moore. He was very clear yesterday before or two days ago, I should say, before leaving for Mar-a-Lago. He denies it. He totally denies it. Let me tell you again, he denies it. For the president, it's the end of that story. It's different with Al Franken. It's also different with Conyers. How do we weigh those?
[Christine Quinn, President, Women In Need:] Well, look, I think the president and some of the president and Moore's defenders are very stuck on that. If you say you didn't do it, you didn't do it, which is a very bizarre logic if you think about it. Because then any misdeed committed by anyone ever, if they say, "I didn't do it," it goes away. That's simply not how right and wrong works, and we all know that. But I don't think the issue really should be at the end of the day what the president is saying. Because we know we knew he was going to just king of try to distract us. That he was in some way going to defend Roy Moore because he believes Roy Moore will support his, what I think is a very conservative and dangerous agenda. The issue here is every day you turn on the TV, you turn on Twitter, and there is another person being accused of serious sexual violence or misconduct in this country. And that is the issue. And what we need from the president and all of the leaders is a strong and robust response to that, whether it's in sports, politics, Democrats, Republicans, media. That's where the president is failing. He's sending a message, as he did, in my opinion, in the campaign and in his own behavior that sexual assault and sexual harassment doesn't exist and shouldn't be cracked down upon. And that this really is the shame of our nation. And the president is kind of leading that shame on parade.
[Hill:] So how does that change then, Ed? Because then we have two very different messages and two different narratives in this country right now. We have what Christine is setting up what she sees. Although I will point out, the president quick to weigh in, of course, on Al Franken. And yet, we have what the majority of the country is talking about, and that is this need to address to address these allegations of harassment and to listen to accusers. I would argue it's important for the president to speak out on this but to have a clear message. Can we get that?
[Ed Martin, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, first of all, happy Thanksgiving.
[Quinn:] Happy Thanksgiving.
[Martin:] And I think you're right. Yes, it's such an important issue. Ad I was listening to the show a few minutes ago. And I think Chris was bringing up the comment that, you know, each case is different. And that's one of the things that we've learned in this process that each of the victims, and especially each of the accusers, situations and descriptions deserve both honor and respect. And I think that's I think that's what we're saying. I want to join that chorus. I think in the case of another thing Chris said, is every instance, though, is different in terms of the accusers and the comments. And what the president has said on Roy Moore was he denied it. You know, Al Franken and, to some sense, the congressmen, all the ones we've talked about have either admitted something or apologized for conduct. In the case of Roy Moore, he said the 40 years ago allegation he said didn't happen. Now again, I have said over and over, and I want to say it again we should be very respectful. I'm not saying the women are not telling the truth. I'm saying I don't have a reason to doubt them or know their truth, and neither was Roy Moore. And what we also but what we know in politics, and Christine knows this, things down the stretch of a campaign get tossed up. And the president is saying on that one, focus Alabamans on your choice. And by the way, Mitch McConnell and all the other senators have said after someone wins or loses the election, or wins the election, they're going to take up the issue in Ethics Committee investigation. So we need to have more airing of the grievances. But we also have to be respectful that not every accusation is true in the way it's being presented. And people have a right to deny it if they didn't do it and to face the consequences of the denial. But but I think that's what we're seeing some of. So I think it's actually good.
[Quinn:] I think Mr. Martin confused some of what I said. What's happening here, as you pointed out is, one, the president's hypocrisy. Right? Two, because someone denies it, because Mr. Moore denies it doesn't mean it's not true. Not at all. And I think we're seeing, particularly when you have people and women after women after women coming forward with nothing to gain, right? We've heard story after story of the women and the families of the women who come forward are attacked, are threatened literally. There's nothing to gain. Nothing at all. And I think what we need to be careful, and I'd urge people in Alabama to think about, is do you want someone who is both a sexual predator and a liar representing you in Alabama?
[Martin:] But that's not that's not fair.
[Quinn:] And there is no evidence-
[Martin:] That's just not fair, Christine.
[Quinn:] to indicate that Roy Moore is telling the truth. We now not only have women, we have people associated with the mall. We have other members of law enforcement and law enforcement affiliated entities saying they knew of this. They saw him in the mall after he was supposed to have been banned. The fact that we're having a conversation about someone who wants to be a United States senator being banned from malls because he was stalking young girls and calling them out of class in school-
[Martin:] Yes, I mean, Christine-
[Quinn:] this is a level of specificity in accusations that is very hard to dismiss.
[Martin:] You sound like-
[Quinn:] And that the president is making it about politics speaks to the deep level of hypocrisy and really how the president hasn't dealt with his own sexually-
[Martin:] Christine, OK, we got your point.
[Hill:] Go ahead, Ed.
[Quinn:] harassing and violent behavior.
[Martin:] Christine Christine is in the tradition of the Salem witch trials and the crucible in New York City. It's very famous for people to get so wound up in what they want to see to not describe what's happening. What the president of the United States has said is, with 40 days left in an election, 35 now, we have two candidates who are running. And the Alabama voters are being bombarded with accusations. And if the standard is anyone who says with sincerity that there is something that's happened to them, then they are true, then we then Christine's side of the aisle, every single candidate running for office from now until the end of time will be disqualified, because there will be people who accuse them. So all I'm saying is this. The president has reframed the debate and said, "If someone denies it, you have to at least respect that." Now, you may all disagree, but I think a lot of the country looks up and says, "Hey, we do have a system that balances that." And then the president turned the argument towards there is policy judgments that are going to take place. The next senator is going to vote for a pro-abortion or pro-life Supreme Court pick, is going to vote for the wall funding, is going to vote on crime and other things. And the Alabamans are going to decide. And let's be clear. The Senate says they're going to investigate. And they're not really telling the truth. Because the last two senators thrown out of the Senate, expelled, was in 1862, Missouri senators, for joining the Confederacy. So-
[Hill:] We're going to have to do more on history next time. Because we're getting cut off.
[Quinn:] And Erica-
[Martin:] Thanks very much.
[Quinn:] You just made it loud and clear. For him, it's about aisles, and politics and bills, and not about protecting people-
[Martin:] No. Proof.
[Quinn:] who have been victims of sexual assault.
[Martin:] Proof, Christine.
[Quinn:] He made it very clear we're making it about politics. And that's sad.
[Hill:] I can tell you what it definitely is about. There are a lot of conflicting opinions here.
[Martin:] Right.
[Hill:] And we're getting different messages. We're going to continue to dive into those.
[Quinn:] And it shouldn't be about politics.
[Hill:] We're going to continue that-
[Quinn:] It should be about the truth.
[Hill:] at a later date. Thank you both for joining us. Happy Thanksgiving to both of you.
[Quinn:] Thank you. And your family.
[Martin:] Happy Thanksgiving to you.
[Hill:] It is, of course Thanksgiving day, Mr. Cuomo.
[Cuomo:] They just put my face up there every once in a while, just to show my obvious concern. And that was a great conversation. Thanksgiving, E. Hill, is right. Holiday shopping, big part of the season. We all know about Black Friday. Who is open today on Thanksgiving? Where can you get the best deals? Christine Romans tells you. My credit card is already getting warm.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn:] That the attorney general's report would be more fulsome?
[George Terwilliger, Former Deputy Attorney General & Former Acting Attorney General:] It could be. It's up to him what he wants to put in there. As you see, he committed very forcefully to as much transparency as the law would allow. And that last phrase is important. That's not a dodge. Mr. Mueller is investigating things that apparently, apparently, touch on some national security concerns. And he may well have access to classified information and classified evidence. And I think when Mr. Barr was saying, well, there may be things I can't disclose because the law won't allow me as long as they were classified, he was leaving himself room to make those decisions.
[Keilar:] You think they would have to rise to that level before he would decide to redact it?
[Terwilliger:] I don't know. I think
[Keilar:] Because my point being is you don't know. There was a lot of wiggle room I saw there. I asked but you don't know.
[Terwilliger:] Yes. You're right, I don't know, because I don't know what's going to be in the report. He doesn't know what's going to be in the report. As he said yesterday, he would like to talk to Mr. Rosenstein and Mr. Mueller, assuming he's confirmed, about what they may have discussed or agreed upon already. The important thing is I think he made a commitment to that kind of transparency. And I think, frankly, it's kind of the common sense that you would want to, after all this, get as much information out there as you possibly can.
[Keilar:] George Terwilliger, thank you very much. We really appreciate your time on the program today.
[Terwilliger:] My pleasure, Brianna. Thank you.
[Keilar:] Breaking news from the Senate floor, several Republicans are breaking from the Trump administration. They're joining Democrats to stop the easing of sanctions on some Russians. We'll talk about what just happened.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right, if you have questions about the Russia investigation today, don't ask the White House press secretary. Sean Spicer says that any of those queries should be sent to one man and one man only, the president's outside attorney, Marc Kasowitz.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] So who is he? We know one thing, he's known the president for years. He has been fiercely loyal to the president. And here's more that Tom Foreman dug up.
[Tom Foreman, Cnn Correspondent:] At $1500 an hour, Marc Kasowitz is widely acknowledged in the legal profession as a powerhouse attorney, the toughest of tough guys, and he will be enlisted by the president to beef up his legal team after a special counsel was chosen to lead the Justice Department's probe into Russian meddling in the U.S. election, and after a former CIA director talked about
[John Brennan, Former Cia Director:] Contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign.
[Foreman:] Kasowitz was seen with first daughter and presidential adviser Ivanka Trump over the weekend, even as reports swirled about her husband's Russian contacts. Jared Kushner is a presidential adviser, too. Kasowitz's firm has represented some big names, former FOX News host Bill O'Reilly, actors Robert De Niro and Mia Farrow, and for about 15 years, Donald Trump. When journalists wanted to see records of Trump's divorce from his first wife, Ivana, Kasowitz kept them sealed. He handled a lawsuit over the author of a book on Trump, financial battles over Trump's Atlantic City casinos, disputes about Trump University. And when "The New York Times" wrote a story about two women who said Trump touched them improperly, Kasowitz demanded a retraction. He did not get one, but for a president who prizes loyalty, Kasowitz is a proven ally with a difference.
[Danny Cevallos, Cnn Legal Contributor:] It's a perception that many of President Trump's employees are kept around because they tell the president what he wants to hear. That's not the case with attorney Marc Kasowitz. This is a top notch attorney who will tell President Trump the way things are. Whether or not the president wants to hear it or not.
[Foreman:] One potential issue, Kasowitz also represents a Russian bank as well as a company controlled by a Russian billionaire with ties to the Kremlin. In a previous statement, Kasowitz's firm says it has "never relayed information or facilitated communication" between that client and the Trump team. But for a White House being scrutinized over every brush with Russia, the political optics are not good. [On Camera] Unlike the White House counsel, which is primarily tasked with protecting the office of the presidency, Kasowitz will be looking after the personal interests of Donald Trump the individual in a probe that could go on for a very long time.
[Berman:] All right, our thanks to Tom Foreman for that. Former FBI director James Comey could testify publicly before the Senate Intelligence Committee as soon as next week. It will be a very, very important occasion.
[Harlow:] It will. And our reporting is that he is expected to confirm publicly that President Trump pressured him to end the investigation into former National Security adviser Michael Flynn. We've seen it before, Comey is not afraid of being candid. Walter Mack is here with us. He's a friend of James Comey. He is also a former federal prosecutor. It's nice to have you here.
[Walter Mack, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Thanks.
[Harlow:] So as we watch this public testimony we're expecting any day next week, how candid will he be?
[Mack:] It would be very hard for me to imagine Jim Comey in any situation in which he was not candid and accurate and precise. I think the better question is, what is he going to feel comfortable in specifying and being accurate about, and that's a matter of probably negotiation between himself, people who are advising him, and the other Mr. Mueller and probably others. So I think whatever he has to say will be candid and precise, but whether it covers the full gamut of all the interests the public has in what he knows, I would doubt that.
[Berman:] Why do you think he wants to talk?
[Mack:] Because he's in a setting in which he can say, as almost anybody with his experience would say, is that the public is asking for information on a topic of great significance and importance.
[Berman:] Well, is there anything personal here he feels like that he is being number besmirched in some way by the things the president has said or the fact that he was fired by the president?
[Mack:] I think it would be natural for him to feel that way, but my knowledge of him personally is that he rises above that. And as almost all assistants are trained, hey, take yourself out of the subject in terms of a personal situation and be a professional at all times, no matter what provocation.
[Harlow:] So Comey's friend, another friend of his, Benjamin Wittes, has done the media rounds.
[Mack:] Right.
[Harlow:] And he has been an incredibly detailed in describing Comey's state of mind, his reaction, his aversion to these conversations with the president, how uncomfortable he was. He even described a moment when Comey hid next to the blue drapes when the law enforcement officers were at the White House. Is there any question in your mind that Benjamin Wittes would have gone out there without the blessing of Comey? Do you believe he was a messenger for Comey to the public before this testimony?
[Mack:] I don't know the answer to that, but knowing Jim, I would be surprised if he had asked anyone to speak on his behalf. And as
[I -- Harlow:] Do you think he would have given the blessing to speak on his behalf? There is a difference, right?
[Mack:] There is a difference. But I doubt it. I think Jim knows, having given his experience, that he never wants to be in a situation that he has asked someone to speak on his behalf. And so I'd be surprised. I don't know what I read Mr. Mr. Wittes' column and get it and I've been reading that, but knowing Jim as I do, I would be surprised if he actually told him, be a spokesman for me out there because, I mean, I think he would look to be able to do this on his own under the rules that he is obliged to perform.
[Berman:] The president and the White House has suggested that James Comey is a something of a showman. There's been a heated debate over that over the last few weeks and the last 24 hours even here at CNN. Is there any truth in it?
[Mack:] Well, there is always some truth that people want to present themselves in the best light, but knowing Jim is, as I say, a true believer in what the function is of a prosecutor andor investigator and keeping yourself personally out of it as best you possibly can is the advice that we're all trained to be, because you're in trouble when you do that.
[Harlow:] So is James Comey the memo man that he has been made out to be? Does he incessantly write memos? Is he known to be a great note- taker after meetings?
[Mack:] Well, I would say this, I don't know him as such. I know in other words, as a note-taker. But I do know him as an ultimate professional who would, in fact, you know, work very hard at trying to figure out what was the best thing for him professionally to do. And as I think I've said before, every prosecutor andor FBI investigator is trained that, hey, if you are denuded of your other investigator who's there to take notes, you'd better be certain that you write a very accurate, selfless description of what just happened when you're talking to someone who could be a subject or a target of the investigation.
[Berman:] As a lawyer, Robert Mueller, you know, the special prosecutor, how interested will he be in the content of those memos? How much sway will they have?
[Mack:] Well, you know, they're both former directors. Robert Mueller, I have to say, is a former Marine. And basically accuracy and the ability to make distinctions between show boating and what is an accurate description of a conversation, you're pretty good at doing that.
[Harlow:] Walter Mack, thank you very much.
[Mack:] Thanks for having me.
[Harlow:] Nice to have your perspective.
[Mack:] Bye, Poppy. Be well.
[Harlow:] All right. Coming up, American forensic teams are now on the ground in Afghanistan. That's where the bomb ripped through rush hour and killed 90 people, injuring hundreds more in Kabul. What they're finding, next.

[Sciutto:] Growing controversies just hours before Georgia's candidates for governor face off in their first debate. Republican Secretary of State Brian Kemp is facing allegations in court today that he and other county officials are excessively rejecting absentee ballots, specifically from minority voters. And this morning, the Democrat Stacey Abrams, explaining her presence at a 1992 protest that included burning a Georgia state flag. That protest part of her opposition to confederate symbolism. Drew Griffin joins me now. Drew, let's start with this lawsuit against Kemp. What's behind it specifically?
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Senior Investigative Correspondent:] Basically, it's a big suburban county, Gwinnett County, suburban county of Atlanta, that seems to have a very high rate of rejecting these absentee ballots. Some 600 ballots or so have been rejected. That makes up about, if I'm going to give you statistics, Jim, 35 percent of all absentee ballots state-wide, even though this county, this one county accounts for only 6 percent of the ballots. So what the ACLU and others are doing is asking a judge to get this stopped. To at least have this county, which says among other things it's rejecting these ballots because the signatures either are not there or don't match what's on the voter registration card, get them to hire an actual handwriting analysis if they're going to use this kind of handwriting to throw out ballots. And also, to set up a better system for notifying these voters that their ballots have been rejected so they can still vote in these elections, either early voting or getting another absentee ballot. That's going to take place this afternoon.
[Sciutto:] To be clear, Kemp, as secretary of state, though he's running for governor, he still is overseeing his own election.
[Griffin:] Yes, in general terms, and that's why you're seeing you know these voter suppression allegation lawsuits coming out one after another after another. But keep in mind, you know, Brian Kemp does not run Gwinnett County. So these are county officials who are supposedly denying these ballots. He is being sued because as you say, the secretary of state, who is running for governor, is a Republican candidate, overseas the overall elections in the state of Georgia.
[Sciutto:] So let's talk now about Stacey Abrams, of course, his opponent for governor. "The New York Times" reporting that she attended a protest in 1992 during which the Georgia state flag, which included a confederate design, that it was burned there. What more do we know about that?
[Griffin:] No denial at all. The picture is right there, that is Stacey Abrams, one of the students from Spelman College. This is 1992. They're not denying it was her. They're not denying that they burned that flag, which you know, had the confederate stars and bars on it at the time. The campaign sent out a statement just saying this was "During Stacey Abrams' college years and Georgia was at a crossroads, struggling with how to overcome racially divisive issues including symbols of the confederacy." So they're not denying this. They're just reminding everybody this was 1992, Stacey Abrams, a college student here in Atlanta. This all comes up before the first actual debate between these two people, Jim, which is tonight.
[Sciutto:] Drew Griffin thanks for following that story, fascinating to watch. To another key race, this one in Montana and for the president, a personal one. He blames the incumbent Democratic Senator Jon Tester for derailing his pick to head the veteran's affairs administration. CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger, she has more.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Donald Trump jetted into big sky country and he was on the hunt.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Jon Tester led the Democrat mob in the effort to destroy the reputation of a great man. Admiral Ronny Jackson.
[Borger:] Tester opposed the president's favorite, the White House doctor, to run the veterans administration.
[Sen. Jon Tester , Montana Senate Candidate:] This doctor has a problem because he hands out prescriptions like candy. In fact, in the White House, they call him the Candy Man.
[Borger:] Jackson withdrew, Tester is running for re-election. And Trump has tightly embraced his opponent, Matt Rosendale. And Rosendale hugs him right back.
[Matt Rosendale , Montana Senate Candidate:] I will stand in strong support of President Trump because the work that he's doing really is making America great again.
[Borger:] The race is up for grabs because Montanans pride themselves on their voting independence. Mick Ringsack is a life-long Republican who supports Trump.
[Mick Ringsack, Tester Supporter:] If the election were today, I would vote for him again.
[Borger:] He also supports Tester, in a state with the second highest per capita veteran's population in the country.
[Ringsack:] Jon was working for veterans before he was even sworn in.
[Borger:] You think there are a lot of people who will split their ticket?
[Ringsack:] I do. Montana has a history of splitting tickets. You know, we have a Democratic governor, Republican attorney general, one Democratic senator, one Republican senator.
[Borger:] Donald Trump won the state of Montana by 20 points. So Tester walks a fine line. Careful not to take on the president directly and also point out how many of his bills the president has signed. He's been here three times. His son has been here. He tweeted about you and Dr. Ronny Jackson. Is he doing payback here? What do you think this is all about?
[Sen. Jon Tester , Montana Senate Candidate:] No, I mean, what I think it's about is him loving Montana.
[Borger:] Tester is Montana born and bred, a third generation dirt farmer who still works the land on weekends. He's now asking for a third term. Rosendale, who made a fortune in Maryland real estate, moved to Montana in 2002, became a state senator, and is now the state auditor, but Tester says Rosendale is not Montana enough.
[Tester:] He's a coast developer from Maryland who came to the state and bought a ranch and claims to be a rancher but has no cows.
[Unidentified Male:] Montana will never fall for Matt Rosendale bull.
[Rudy Koestner, Rosendale Supporter:] He was elected in his district as a Montana legislator. That proves he's got to be Montanan.
[Borger:] But not on the issues, Tester says. Not on who controls public lands, health care, or veterans benefits to name a few.
[Tester:] If he runs on his record, he's going to get clobbered. And so, he has to do something different.
[Borger:] So Rosendale is charging that Tester is a D.C. Liberal, out of touch with Montana.
[Unidentified Male:] When he does show up, Tester's like all the other liberals. We need to send President Trump some conservative re-enforcements.
[Borger:] But unlike Trump, who lately is a chatty media-seeking missile, Rosendale drives away from his own Trump rally right past reporters and into the night. Gloria Borger, CNN, Missoula, Montana.
[Sciutto:] One of many bellwether races this cycle. Coming up now, news just in to CNN. Sad news about former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman to sit on the court, she's now telling her family that she has dementia. We're going to have much more on that story just ahead.

[Whitfield:] All right, welcome back. A judge wants to hear from the President's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, before deciding whether to delay Stormy Daniels' civil lawsuit. Daniels wants to void a contract that prevents her from talking about an alleged relationship with Trump before he became President. Cohen's attorneys claim their defense was hindered when the FBI raided his office, seizing computers and documents related to the case. They, like Daniels' attorney, suggest Cohen could likely face an indictment soon.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you think Mr. Cohen is going to be indicted soon?
[Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' Lawyer:] Absolutely, I do. I don't know the scope of that indictment, and I think that was the point that I was raising in court. What I state in the press is not evidence. The court is interested in competent evidence before the court. And look, this investigation could take a long time. There could be subsequent indictments. We don't exactly know. My own personal belief as someone with 18 years of experience who has some knowledge of what's going on. Yes, I believe the indictment will be issued within the next 90 days.
[Whitfield:] All right, let's discuss all of this with my legal panel today. Avery Freedman, a civil rights attorney with us and in for Richard Herman today, Joey Jackson.
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Glad to be pinch hitting.
[Whitfield:] Excellent.
[Avery Freeman, Civil Rights Attorney:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] Good to see you both.
[Freeman:] And you, Fredricka.
[Whitfield:] OK. So, Avery, you first. I mean, what are the potential implications for Michael Cohen? I mean, this is these cases have gotten rather complicated.
[Freeman:] Well, they have gotten complicated, Fredricka. And actually, the showdown 24 hours ago in a federal courtroom in Los Angeles was really dramatic for the wrong reasons. We heard this sort of over caffeinated statement by the lawyer for Stormy Daniels, but at the end of the day, and thank goodness for federal judges, judge James, the federal judge said you know what, you want a continuance for 90 days but how do you know, he asked Michael Cohen lawyer that there's going to be an indictment in 90 days. And the response was, well, Stormy Daniels' lawyer said so. Well, that didn't work with the federal judge. The judge says, give me a statement, give me an affidavit, and then we will consider whether or not we continue it. And you know what, Fredricka? It will be continued.
[Whitfield:] OK. So Joey, what is the strategy behind Michael Avenatti doing, saying something like that? Is that just simply to, you know, rattle the other side?
[Jackson:] Fighting power with power. Now, let me just logistically say, I'm not sure why, right, Trump's people, I'll just put it that way, would want any type of continuance. I know this relates to Michael Cohen, certainly, however it has implications on the President based on potential campaign finance violations and other investigations. But let's talk politics quickly, right. The fact is that we have a midterm election happening in 2018. And as a result of that, when you push something like this for 90 days, it treads upon the political, because now you have fodder out there for your opponents that are going to reference this case. Reference Michael Cohen's close work with the President, reference the President's dirty hands, reference the payoff 11 days before an election, and so, whenever you have a continuance, walk on your own peril, be careful what you ask for. It pushes and it's going to push this case into the political cycle, the political season. Now, quickly, Fredricka, on the merits of it, the fact is that he is entitled, that is Michael Cohen, to a fifth amendment privilege and therefore he could say, you know what? I'm not going to answer that question under the grounds that it may incriminate me. And to the extent that his civil, right, deposition, where he is giving testimony, might implicate him in a little southern district investigation that may not be so little. He has the right, certainly, to remain silent. But boy is it going to be political fodder when you get into political congressional season in terms of his work and his work for the President and his not so clean hands and who knows how clean Trump's hands are going to be.
[Freeman:] You know -.
[Whitfield:] So, Avery, I mean, or does it mean by having continuance after continuance or delay, et cetera, that there is some hope, perhaps, in the Michael Cohen camp that perhaps there will be some momentum lost by the Stormy Daniels side, by dragging things out?
[Freeman:] Well, it may be. But you know what, Fredricka, I respectfully disagree with Joey. Whatever political implications may be out there falls because the constitution prevails. A federal district judge has to make sure those individual personal constitutional rights are protected. So is anybody thinking about politics in a federal courtroom? Absolutely not. The judge Otero is doing the right thing. And you know what? Let the cards fall where they may. Whatever happens politically happens but the constitution has to prevail here.
[Jackson:] Point of clarification, sir. Point of clarification. I'm not suggesting that the judge should at all be involved in politics. What I'm doing is assessing the strategy on Michael Cohen's lawyers. The fact of the matter is, is that, you pushing this off. If you are worried about politics, puts you into political season. So clearly there's a political imperative here.
[Freeman:] I get it but it doesn't.
[Jackson:] Timeout.
[Freeman:] It doesn't matter, Joey.
[Jackson:] Of course it matters. It has to do with politics as well as it has with the law.
[Freeman:] It has to do with the constitution, not with politics. That's what the case is about. And so we disagree. But I think the federal judge is doing it right and we are going to see another continuance after 90 days. Take it to the bank.
[Whitfield:] And then now you have got Stormy Daniels' former lawyer now, Keith Davidson, who is also weighing in, cooperating, apparently, with the federal probe on Cohen and he has actually, you know, complied with a request to provide authorities certain limited electronic information and perhaps it's all related to that $130,000 hush payment.
[Freeman:] You bet.
[Whitfield:] How troublesome is this, Avery, potentially.
[Freeman:] Well, I mean, I think there really isn't much of a choice here. I mean, the fact is, that when this evidence is going to be the FBI has it, the argument of privilege doesn't seem to be working particularly well with judge Kimbal Wood, the federal judge in New York. And at the end of the day, there's going to be an enormous amount of evidence that I think I think although I think the argument by Stormy Daniels' lawyers, again, a little over caffeinated and I think he's right. I think that at the bottom of this thing there is going to be an indictment. And the moment that happens, you can forget about what's going on with this contract and stormy Daniels out in California. Nothing's going to happen until the criminal case is out of the way.
[Whitfield:] Joey?
[Jackson:] So, here's the reality. The reality is, let's disagree again. Forget about over caffeinated. When you are fighting the President and the President's people, you have to fight fire with fire. And the fact is, is Avenatti is taking it to him. You talk about Trump being a power puncher and a counter-puncher, he is being a counter-puncher as well. I believe the development of the cooperation of Keith Davidson on the other side is significant for three reasons.
[Freeman:] Right.
[Jackson:] Number one, you want to address what was the nature of the relationship between Cohen and Trump? I think the other side could speak to that. Was he acting as an attorney? Was he acting as a family member? Was he saying, hey, I'm doing something for a friend?
[Whitfield:] And quickly, two and three.
[Freeman:] He said he would do it for a friend. He is a friend. That's what he's saying.
[Jackson:] OK. Number two, the issue of intent. Remember here, if you are getting to the issue of in kind campaign contributions the other side is going to say, what is the nature of the discussions?
[Whitfield:] All right. Approximate almost out of time. Number three.
[Jackson:] And number three is when you get to ultimately all the issues surrounding this case, I think that you have to look to where the money came from and that's a big point, Fredricka. Where was the money? Was it a home equity loan or otherwise? And so that's why it's important.
[Freeman:] Joey, it's not coming out in California. It's coming out in New York. Everything is shut down.
[Jackson:] It's coming out everywhere.
[Freeman:] It is all about no it is not.
[Whitfield:] It is complicated.
[Freeman:] No, it's not. It's not coming out in California, my friend.
[Whitfield:] I love it. Thank you. All right. That's a lot of good information. We will leave it there for now because you know we will be talking about it again very soon, Joey and Avery, thank you so much. Appreciate it. We got so much more straight ahead in the NEWSROOM. But first, meet this week's CNN hero.
[Unidentified Female:] I found out that I wasn't alone, that there were tons of girls that were also being sexually abused, and I had to do something. I had to use the rest of my life to prevent other girls from going through what I went through. I think the biggest thing is giving the voice back to girls and allowing them to speak up.
[Whitfield:] Wow. To learn more, go to CNNheroes.com. And we will be right back.

[Cuomo:] Word of an explosive lawsuit accusing the White House of working with Fox News and within this wealthy republican donor to concoct a false story about the murder of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich. The network published a story alleging that Rich gave WikiLeaks a trove of DNC e-mails and suggested his death was retribution for his supposed leak. The private investigator enlisted to develop the story now claims it was all designed to discredit U.S. intelligence which, of course determined that Russia had hacked the DNC. The story was later retracted from the Fox News web site, but the story was also far from over. Let's get more now from CNN's Randi Kaye.
[Randi Kaye, Investigative Reporter, Cnn:] When Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich was killed, a conspiracy was born, caught up in it, this man.
[Rod Wheeler, Former D.c. Homicide Detective:] I do believe I was used as a pawn in this entire thing.
[Kaye:] His name is Rod Wheeler. He's a former D.C. homicide detective and Fox News contributor. And now he's filed a lawsuit against Fox News. Wheeler claims he was used to help fabricate a story connecting the murder of Seth Rich to the WikiLeaks release of thousands of e- mails from the Democratic National Committee. The idea being that Rich was murdered by some sort of DNC operative in retaliation for the leaks. All of this despite the fact that police say Rich's murder was the result of a botched burglary and that this is key, authorities had already determined that Russians hacked the DNC e-mails and gave them to WikiLeaks. What was the goal?
[Wheeler:] I think their goal, based on the e-mails and the voice mail messages that I got from Ed Butowsky was to debunk this Russian hacking narrative.
[Kaye:] Ed Butowsky is a GOP supporter and Fox News financial commentator. The alleged goal to detract from the Russia investigation was not only pushed by Butowsky but according to the lawsuit, it was done in coordination with the Trump White House. With Butowsky even arranging Wheeler to meet with then Press Secretary Sean Spicer. Spicer has acknowledged meeting them but said he was unaware of any contact involving the president. Still, just two days before the article was published on Fox's web site, Butowsky left this voice mail for Wheeler.
[Ed Butowsky, Commentator, Fox News:] Hey, Rod, it's Ed. So a couple minutes ago I got a note that we have the full attention of the White House on this. And tomorrow, let's close this deal.
[Kaye:] Hours later, this text from Ed Butowsky to Wheeler, "Not to add any more pressure, but the president just read the article. He wants the article out immediately." And according to the lawsuit, Ed Butowsky sent an e-mail to Fox News producers and anchors encouraging them to push the narrative that Russia wasn't behind the hack. It seemed to take hold.
[Sean Hannity, Host, Fox News:] This issue is so big now, that the entire Russia collusion narrative is hanging by a thread.
[Kaye:] According to the lawsuit, Butowsky had also texted Wheeler before the article was published saying, "The narrative in the interviews you might use is that your and Malia's work prove that the Russians didn't hack into the DNC and steal the e-mails and impact our election."
[Wheeler:] I thought it was horrible because what did that have to do with the murder of this guy that I was investigating?
[Kaye:] Wheeler insists the Fox reporter attributed fake quotes to him, one even suggesting he had information that there had been an e-mail exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks. He called Butowsky to find out why.
[Butowsky:] One day, you're going to win an award for having said those things that you didn't say.
[Wheeler:] Keep your word. Let's tell the truth here.
[Butowsky:] You're going to be begging to own those words.
[Kaye:] In that conversation, was he basically acknowledging to you that yes, it's true. You didn't say these things but they sound good and we're going to use them?
[Wheeler:] That's exactly what he was saying. I mean, he knew it and Ed knew it and so did Malia Zimmerman. They knew I never said these things. And I challenged them immediately.
[Kaye:] Fox retracted the bogus story a week after it was published. Fox News told CNN in a statement today that the accusations that Fox helped to detract from coverage of Russia collusion is completely erroneous and that it has no evidence that Rod Wheeler was misquoted. Ed Butowsky told CNN it was all just a joke. And today White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders pushed back on allegations the White House played a role in this scheme.
[Sanders:] The president had no knowledge of the story and it's completely untrue he or the White House involvement in the story.
[Kaye:] Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.
[Cuomo:] Al right. Thanks to Randi Kaye for that. Joining us now in a live exclusive is Ed Butowsky, the man named in that lawsuit. Sir, thank you for joining us.
[Butowsky:] Yes. Chris, thanks and thanks for giving me an opportunity. That setup, I wish I was taking notes. Because I'd love to go through each one of those and just prove what nonsense that is. So, please fire away, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Well, let me help you, let me help you do that right now.
[Butowsky:] Ok. Thanks.
[Cuomo:] There's a lot of spin out there. So let's try to create a record of fact going in order of what matters most here. The suggestion that the president was aware of the story, he may have seen it in advance, that he had a profound interest in its advancement, what is your response?
[Butowsky:] Not true. You have to understand, Rod Wheeler is dead broke. Rod Wheeler and I can send these text messages, Chris, and you can send them out to everybody had been asking me to get him a job or help, find a way to get him into the Trump administration, not the administration but a job there. I probably have five text messages from Rod saying that. OK? And the part that I heard a second ago I think is really important. The voice mail that I left for him about the full attention of the White House, that had to do with Joe Della-Camera, the D.C. detective and the D.C. detective wanted to come out and talk because he has a lot of information, and Rod...
[Cuomo:] Why would a D.C. why would a D.C. detective equal the White House in your voice mail?
[Butowsky:] Well, that's what I'm trying to explain to you.
[Cuomo:] But I'm saying, help us understand that part. How does a D.C. detective get coded as White House? What does he have to do with the White House?
[Butowsky:] Well, that's what I'm trying to say. So let me finish, OK?
[Cuomo:] OK. Go ahead. Go ahead. Yes.
[Butowsky:] He wanted whistleblower status according to Rod Wheeler because he had a lot of stuff to explain and expose and Rod Wheeler had been talking to him. Matter of fact, Rod Wheeler's notes with Joe Della-Camera is on a web site called debunking Rod Wheeler's claims.com. And it's all listed there. Rod Wheeler's notes. So Rod Wheeler was trying to help him because he was in a lot of trouble for talking to rod Wheeler to get whistleblower status.
[Cuomo:] What does that have to do with saying that the White House is interested? Why wouldn't you say Della-Camera or the D.C. guy. Why did you say White House?
[Butowsky:] Well, what I said was Rod Wheeler had asked me to see what we could do to see if I could help this guy. I just simply made some calls. They never talked to anybody at the White House. By the way, I've never talked to President Trump in my life. And President Trump nor the White House has anything to do with any of this.
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Butowsky:] And as you go back and dissect this, as you ask me questions I'm just going to give you the honest answer. But all of the stuff is like little innuendo and that's why I'm happy to be here to answer these.
[Cuomo:] Well, the problem is...
[Butowsky:] Please, go ahead.
[Cuomo:] The problem is they're your words, Ed. I mean, the text message not to add any more pressure but the president just read the article. He wants the article out immediately. It's now all up to you.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] But don't feel the pressure.
[Butowsky:] And you know what? That was Rod. See, you have to understand, again we take things out of context. You know how that work sometimes. Rod Wheeler had been asking me for a long time, and said, Ed, when I get this case settle, the president is going to hire me. And he was always doing this and saying this to me. So this was tongue in cheek talking just texting. It wasn't serious because Rod Wheeler was always looking for a job because he has no money and by the way, this lawsuit is all about Rod Wheeler trying to get money because he messed up and we'll explain that later.
[Ecuomo:] But Ed, help me understand this. When you say the White House in the voicemail, you say you meant this D.C. cop. When you say the president just read the article, that was a joke that's funny how?
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] Where is the punch line in a joke?
[Butowsky:] Well, look, Chris, it wasn't a joke that was funny how. Rod Wheeler had been, you know, talking to me all the time about how much he wanted to get a job. He said get me on the Trump team. Please get me with Sessions. You've written text messages. Nowadays I'm not going to write any text messages. But it was just two guys me, you know, basically finding a way to chat with him about stuff he's been talking to me about.
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Butowsky:] The other one with Della-Camera, let me finish, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Please.
[Butowsky:] The one with Della-Camera, not a joke at all. Joe Della- Camera has a lot of information and he wanted to come forward. And I told Rod I'll see what I can do to find out about whistleblower status.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Butowsky:] And everybody should go talk to Joe Della-Camera and ask him questions.
[Cuomo:] Well, right, but you know, we have to ask you questions also because what you're...
[Butowsky:] I'm answering them right now. You may not like my answer but I'm answering them.
[Cuomo:] It's not like or dislike.
[Butowsky:] OK.
[Cuomo:] It's about testing them. That's what we do here, right.
[Butowsky:] Test them, go for it.
[Cuomo:] So the idea of what you said in the voice mail is code for something that's completely different, you know, is a curious situation as it the text as, is you being on tape talking to Wheeler acknowledging that you knew that Wheeler had been quoted in ways that were inaccurate. How do you explain that?
[Butowsky:] Yes. That's not true either. So, Chris, let me explain that one.
[Cuomo:] OK.
[Butowsky:] Rod Wheeler called me up and said, "Ed, Malia Zimmerman misquoted me. And I said, Rod, I don't understand because you there's e-mails back and forth that you not only approved the quotes but you added to it. Matter of fact, at that web site that I mentioned Rod Wheeler's claims.com or debunking Rod Wheeler's claims.com, you hear his voice saying the exact quotes he said he didn't say. What Rod Wheeler did is he called me up. And obviously this was all concocted by Rod Wheeler. Because when he called me up he said, Ed, Malia said that I set eyes on the e-mails. And I said Rod, you never set eyes on the e-mails. I know that, you know that. If you set eyes on the White on the e-mails, you would have told me. You never told me. So if Malia Zimmerman who is a wonderful reporter, if she misquoted you, then you know what? Then that needs to be taken back. I said Rod, show me where that quote exists. By the way, Chris, I'll ask anybody, show me where the quote exists where it says Rod Wheeler set eyes on the e-mails. I've never seen and that's what I was responding to.
[Cuomo:] So when you were saying you're going to win an award for those things that you didn't say, what did you...
[Butowsky:] Yes. We were laughing because basically I said how crazy this world is because Rod, you're telling me that you said that you you know, that Malia Zimmerman wrote that you said exactly what I just said a second ago that you set eyes on it. I said, Rod, you know that didn't happen. I didn't happen. We were laughing about what a crazy word this is because somehow you know, you're going to win an award for having said something you didn't say.
[Cuomo:] Well, the good news is there's this is great devices in litigation called discovery. And hopefully all of this will come out because we've only seen the substantiation of his part. We're taking you at your word right now. We'll have to see if there's backup. Let me ask you if this existed.
[Butowsky:] I'll send you any backup, Chris. By the way, I'll send you anything.
[Cuomo:] You should send.
[Butowsky:] Anytime.
[Cuomo:] You should send all of the proof of everything that you're suggesting right now.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] I can't believe it's not out already frankly.
[Butowsky:] I'm going to come up there tomorrow. I'm going to come up there tomorrow and hand it to you, all right?
[Cuomo:] You're welcome. The I'm easy to find, Ed.
[Butowsky:] OK.
[Cuomo:] Let me ask you something about this. Did this happen? Did the Sean Spicer meeting happen or is Wheeler making that up?
[Butowsky:] Yes, great question. So I've known Sean. I was a surrogate for the RNC, and not really that will used that often, by the way. But I was a surrogate. I got to know Sean a little bit. And this there's a recording of a man named Cy Hersh [Ph] that you need to see.
[Cuomo:] Seymour Hersh.
[Butowsky:] Excuse me, Seymour Hersh. I didn't know who the man was. But when after I met the Rich's and offered to pay the bill for a private investigator, and by the way this whole idea that will something was coordinated with Rod Wheeler, that's absolute nonsense. I interviewed tons of different private investigators that recommended...
[Cuomo:] One thing at a time. The Sean Spicer meeting, Ed, did it happen.
[Butowsky:] All right. I'll go back to it.
[Cuomo:] Yes.
[Butowsky:] I have a tendency to do that. I apologize.
[Cuomo:] That's all right. That's why I'm here. Did it happen? The Sean Spicer meeting. I had a meeting with Sean Spicer. I brought Rod Wheeler along. Did...
[Butowsky:] And my meeting with Sean Spicer it was about, let me tell you.
[Cuomo:] Go ahead.
[Butowsky:] It's about this audio recording that Cy Hersh of Cy Hersh saying that there's a mirror copy of the hard drive of Seth Rich's at the cart division at the FBI.
[Cuomo:] Right. You know that Hersh says that you got his you know that Hersh says you got his reporting wrong, right? That he says you took two and two and made 45 out of it.
[Butowsky:] Yes. Well, you know what? Cy Hersh, maybe that's his math but the reality is I'm not saying anything. Go listen to it and listen to his own words.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Butowsky:] I'm not concluding anything. I'm not concluding anything at all, Chris.
[Cuomo:] I'm just saying when the source of the I'm just saying when the source of the material says that your conclusion about it was wrong it should be out there in public space.
[Butowsky:] What's my conclusion? Wait, wait, what's my conclusion?
[Cuomo:] Well, you saw...
[Butowsky:] I don't have a conclusion.
[Cuomo:] Well, I know, but you saw it as something that was important enough to take to it Sean Spicer. Did he know why you wanted to meet with him?
[Butowsky:] No. And as a matter of fact...
[Cuomo:] So he just took a meeting?
[Butowsky:] Yes, because I said Sean I was going to be in town I had something I wanted to talk to you about. And Rod Wheeler was a tag along because I thought at the last minute, I said, hey, why don't you join me because I go to Washington often, I said, why don't you join and kind of get to know, you know, Sean and meet and so on. My conversation with Sean about this recording lasted about one minute. He said "Ed, I don't know anything about it. I don't want to know anything about it. I can't do anything." And we ended up talking about many other things. Believe it or not, including, because he and I both get our shirts at the same place through some company. And we talked about the new cotton material on these shirts. And Chris, that's the truth.
[Cuomo:] Ed, do you think do you think it's coincidental that there seem to be these meetings that Trump officials take that they don't know anything about but they take the meeting anyway and when they get into it they wind up changing the subject away from something else? Like we heard from Don Junior.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] That he didn't know what the meeting was about but he took it anyway because a friend ask him too. Then they start talking about adoption, he didn't understand it. This seems a little similar to that in terms of a scenario.
[Butowsky:] No, it's not.
[Cuomo:] You know Sean but you don't know him that well, you ask him for a meeting.
[Butowsky:] No, no.
[Cuomo:] He said he'll take it without knowing what it's about. And then you come in and you tell him about this tape and wind up talking about shirts. Sounds a little convenient, no?
[Butowsky:] Chris, I think you're trying to twist something and make a point that's not there. So let me correct you, OK.
[Cuomo:] Please.
[Butowsky:] I called up, I have no idea about Donald Trump, Jr. and this and any of that meetings. I'm going to talk directly about Sean Spicer. Sean and I know each other. We're not good friends but we're friendly. I told him I was going to be in Washington I want to come by and talk to him about something.
[Cuomo:] And you never told him what.
[Butowsky:] Sure.
[Cuomo:] You didn't say what it was about?
[Butowsky:] No, no. You know what?
[Cuomo:] Were you surprised that he said he would take a meeting as busy as he was at the time with somebody he kind of knows but not that well.
[Butowsky:] No, it wasn't surprise I was actually happy. So apparently he like me more than I thought. OK.
[Cuomo:] And then when you took the meeting and you told him about the tape, before you switch on to what shirt maker you use, what did he say?
[Butowsky:] Which we really did, believe it or not.
[Cuomo:] I'm not saying you're not telling the truth.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] I'm just saying that when he said to me..
[Butowsky:] Right, I told him after he heard it, by the way, and Cy Hersh can say whatever he wants. I didn't make a conclusion, Chris, like you said. I didn't make any conclusion. Go listen to it and anybody who listens to it will say, hey, there's something here and they should go listen to it @debunkingrodwheer'sclaims.com.
[Cuomo:] You still believe that even though Rod corrected the story? Do you still believe there's something to it?
[Butowsky:] All right. You got to let me finish my point because that's one of the things I really want to be able to do, OK? So, anybody that listens to it will know there's something. I didn't make the conclusion. I sat down with Sean. He and I are friendly. We see each other. I saw him in a debate once or twice. I used to do some commentating on economic matters for the RNC. And you know what? We developed a nice little friendship. The meeting lasted maybe 12, 15 minutes. And then we got the old, by the way, Sean, someone's here to see you which, you know, just means Ed get out of here.
[Cuomo:] And how did you leave it with him?
[Butowsky:] I just left. I thought it was kind of cool and they're been inside the White House...
[Cuomo:] Did he say let me know what happened, I'll follow up with you about this.
[Butowsky:] No. No, he had no interest at all.
[Cuomo:] Were you disappointed?
[Butowsky:] No, I thought it was cool being in the White House.
[Cuomo:] But, Ed, you went there to tell him something you thought was very important. You wanted him to know about this tape.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] When he didn't show any interest then.
[Butowsky:] I wasn't disappointed.
[Cuomo:] You just thought it was cool to be there.
[Butowsky:] I told you he didn't show any interest. He said, Ed he said, Ed, you know what? I'm new here. I don't know. But I can't do anything. Nobody here can do anything. You got to you know, whatever. We just let it go.
[Cuomo:] He didn't tell to you keep him aware of anything or anything like that?
[Butowsky:] No, he had no interest. He didn't even know I was going to talk about anything. Then we ended up talking about other things, about being in here, how cool it was. We start talking. The TV was on. There was some game on. We talked about that. Rod Wheeler did not talk about asking for a job. I told Rod come along and, you know, meet him. Maybe somehow you can smooze and get to develop a relationship with him. Another point Rod Wheeler sent me a text message saying can you get me back in to see Sean. I want to give him some information. I have a text message that I'll send to you or I'll bring to you.
[Cuomo:] All right. Good. The Fox News retracted the story as we now know.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] Do you still believe there is something to the suggestion?
[Butowsky:] I don't believe there's anything in that story that isn't accurate. The reason that Fox News retract...
[Cuomo:] You believe it's all accurate.
[Butowsky:] Let me finish. I believe Rod Wheeler's saying that he was misquoted is the reason they pulled it. Rod Wheeler wasn't misquoted. What Rod Wheeler did the night before, he had a crush or has a crush on a lady named Marina Morocco with Fox 5 Washington and he leaked the story to her the night before. She wrote a lot of stuff. And I have a text message showing Rod saying I need to sue Fox 5 because they misquoted me. So now Fox 5 misquoted Rod Wheeler. And then you got to bring in this lawyer named Wigdor who sues Fox for everything, he's been on your channel many times. And the combination of Rod Wheeler being broke, Rod Wheeler lying and Wigdor putting a case together against Fox, now you have a lawsuit that you're quoting that's just full of nonsense.
[Cuomo:] You know, Ed, why are you getting critical questioning here? Because it matters. Why does it matter?
[Butowsky:] Of course it matters.
[Cuomo:] Because there's a lawsuit. In part because Fox News has come under the microscope for its journalism in part but there's a bigger reason I think. It has nothing to do with politics it has nothing to do with the media. You went to the Rich family. They were in grieving. They were hurting. They had the worst kind of scenario. They lost a loved one and they didn't know what happened. And you went to them with this story about what happened to their son.
[Butowsky:] No, no let me tell you something, Chris. I heard that said before. And I want to be very clear.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Butowsky:] That did not happen.
[Cuomo:] How did you get to them?
[Butowsky:] Let me tell you what happened. But do you know want to know what happened or you want to tell you what happened?
[Cuomo:] I really want to know what happened. I want to know why you would go to this family with this type of stuff.
[Butowsky:] I'm going to tell you exactly what happened. I heard something. Someone told me something about the Seth Rich. I don't know the Rich family.
[Cuomo:] Who told you something?
[Butowsky:] I'm not going to tell you.
[Cuomo:] Why?
[Butowsky:] That's not something I'm going to share with you.
[Cuomo:] Why?
[Butowsky:] Because I'm not bringing that up.
[Cuomo:] I thought you said you will tell me everything. I thought you wanted to be all open. You were going come up here and hand it to me.
[Butowsky:] How about this. I'm going to tell you everything except that.
[Cuomo:] Why? It matters. Because it was so important...
[Butowsky:] No, it does.
[Cuomo:] ... whoever told you this that you would go to a grieving family...
[Butowsky:] Chris, are you...
[Cuomo:] ... and talk to them about the thing that would hurt them the most.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] So I think we should know who told you. Because they must have been damn credible.
[Butowsky:] Right. Chris, before I came on air, I had a discussion with your producer to let me talk. So let me talk.
[Cuomo:] You've been talking plenty, Ed. I', just saying I got to check while you're on cam.
[Butowsky:] You interrupted me. You continue to craft excuse me, Chris, you continue to try to point something out that you think is important and not let me talk. I went to the Rich family after finding them, I got introduced to them. I spoke to them December 17th at 3.17 p.m. for 30 minutes. I started off saying, thank you, I'm sorry what happened and so on. I heard something. I wanted to share with you. And when I told them, I'll tell you exactly what it was. I heard something about WikiLeaks. They said to me, you know what? We don't believe you. I said fine. We started talking about many other things. Started talking about children and life and so on. They said if you ever find out anything, will you please let us know? That's all. You know what? This was very private. I had a private discussion with them. When I left or skuts me, when I hung up the phone, I just let it go. And then at some point, someone introduced me to Cy Hersh [Ph]. Cy Hersh [Ph] then who told me all of this information. I sent that privately to the Rich family. They said, you know what, Ed, if you ever have anything concrete, let us know. And then I said to them this, I said, why don't you hire a private detective. And they said, we would love to. We can't afford one. And you know what, Chris? You don't know the me but a lot of people out there do. You know what I said? I said, I'll pay for it. Now, I'm not a rich guy. I'm not some rich donor. I don't know why you guys keep saying that, OK, because I'm not rich at all. But I said to these people, you know what? I'd be happy to pay for it. I thought as most people would say, no, thank you, that's we don't know than you. They said yes. And I said. I had no idea how much a private detective cost. I started asking people, who knows anybody who is a private detective. I got recommended Rod Wheeler by somebody. I have an e-mail exchange that I'll share with you. And they said why don't you meet Rod Wheeler. The first time I ever talked to Rod Wheeler was February 23rd. So this nonsense that Rod Wheeler said that he had been pinpointed is all B.S. Rod Wheeler wasn't pinpointed. Rod Wheeler spoke to the Rich's for two weeks back and forth with contract. And the whole contract negotiation, Chris, according to Rod Wheeler was Aaron Rich and Aaron Rich's wife saying don't ever look into WikiLeaks. Don't ever talk about e-mails. And if you listen and if you go to debunkingRodWheeler'sclaims.com, there's a 27-minute audio there of Rod Wheeler stating all of this. So Rod Wheeler then is now involved. There wasn't any of this nonsense that he's talking about coordination, trying to do bad things to him. He knows all of that. Rod Wheeler is broke and he's trying to make some money out of extorting maybe me, maybe Fox, who knows. But the facts are, none of this stuff is adding up to what Rod Wheeler is claiming.
[Cuomo:] Is that your full answer?
[Butowsky:] Yes, but thank you for letting me talk.
[Cuomo:] All right. So let me, let me ask you some questions.
[Butowsky:] Go ahead. You're a Trump supporter, yes. I'm a republican. And I didn't donate any money to Trump.
[Cuomo:] You're a Trump supporter, yes?
[Butowsky:] I don't want him to get mad but I'm a republican. I didn't give him any money and I didn't campaign for him. So I don't know what a Trump supporter would be, but I did vote for him? Absolutely.
[Cuomo:] So you voted for Donald Trump.
[Butowsky:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] So we establish that. You go to the Rich family whom you didn't know. You didn't have a pre-existing relationship, right?
[Butowsky:] None whatsoever.
[Cuomo:] You hear something from somebody who you won't reveal the source to be, right?
[Butowsky:] Yes. Yes.
[Cuomo:] Here's why it matters. Because on the strength of whoever that person was, and what they told you which you have admitted on this show was not that much that you actually knew what happened because you learned more after the Rich's when you met Seymour Hersh and then did whatever other investigating that you did, so on the basis of this one piece of information from this one person whom you won't reveal. You go to a family that is in the worst situation of their live and say to them, hey, I have an idea of what may have happened with your son. Does that make sense to you? Is that the kind of thing that somebody does?
[Butowsky:] Absolutely.
[Cuomo:] They go to a family that's grieving, excuse me, let me finish. I let you finish.
[Butowsky:] You know, Chris, I don't appreciate.
[Cuomo:] You go to the family that's grieving and say I heard something, you don't know anything but you heard something.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] And on strength of that have alone and your humanity, you went to this family and offered up to them and that was your only motivation to give them this piece of information?
[Butowsky:] So Chris, I resent you trying to characterize me as an insensitive jerk. Because Chris...
[Cuomo:] Those are your words. I'm asking you a question.
[Butowsky:] .. I thought, yes, I know but you know what? That's what obviously it's coming across, so here's the answer, Chris. I went to this family because I thought I had heard something that would help these people. Because they had said in newspapers and by the way, when I heard that information, it took me about two months after my son went to college and I couldn't imagine what it would be like to have a son murdered. And nobody was telling them. The Washington police according to what I read wasn't telling them anything and they weren't investigating anything. So when I got hold of them, I went to them thinking, I was actually going to try to help these people bring some relief or some knowledge about what happened to their son. My son had just left to go to Vanderbilt. I was an empty nester. Had a lot of time to reflect on my life and you do that when you're an empty nester, Chris, OK? And I'm reflecting and I thought this is weird because if I know something and this is the way I am about somebody's kid or if I think I know something this is how I was growing up excuse me, with my kids, I'm not going to hold on to something without the parents knowing. And anybody who knows me knows that's the way I am. So what I did is a called up, got hold of them and shared with them. As soon as they said we don't believe you, it was over. I just thought I needed to say something.
[Cuomo:] Except that it wasn't. You went and found Wheeler, you went and talked to Hersh and then they wind up that's going to be with the family.
[Butowsky:] No, you're wrong. You're wrong there.
[Cuomo:] Well, that's what you just said.
[Butowsky:] It was over at that time, Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right. I understand. I understand the distinction.
[Butowsky:] Chris, again, you're trying to me look...
[Cuomo:] It wasn't over but that was over. The whole situation wasn't over but that introduction was. I understand it.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] I get it.
[Butowsky:] What you don't know is they asked me to make a donation to the son's memorial. They asked me to come up for a concert in his name. They asked me to find out who this Jack Burkman guy was.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Butowsky:] Rich's asked me. I have a text message or an e-mail. They also said this that guy Brad Bowman just showed up one day and said he was assigned to them from the DNC. And they asked me, why?
[Cuomo:] OK.
[Butowsky:] Now let's remember something. I'm a republican. Seth Hersh excuse me Seth Rich is a huge Bernie Sanders supporter. The Rich's are big democrats. I don't care what somebody's political party is. I care about human beings and I heard something and I felt inside that I needed to share this with a family. I didn't go there there to upset this family. I went there to help them. They were already upset because the D.C. police wasn't telling them anything. They were upset because their son was killed, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Absolutely understandable.
[Butowsky:] And I heard something so I thought I would share with them.
[Cuomo:] That much we know to be true.
[Butowsky:] Right.
[Cuomo:] And we know something else also. The Rich family put out a statement saying they hope that this lawsuit will end the connection of their son and their family to an ugly set of conspiracies. I'm out of time for this. But, Ed, I hope you feel you got the full opportunity.
[Butowsky:] I've got so much more to say.
[Cuomo:] Yes.
[Butowsky:] I want to tell you more.
[Cuomo:] This was a good start. And I'm looking forward to you giving me all the backing for everything that you said. Right. The support material.
[Butowsky:] And have me back.
[Cuomo:] Greatly appreciate it. Let's look at the information you have.
[Butowsky:] I want to come back.
[Cuomo:] All right. Thank you very much, Ed Butowsky. Take care.
[Butowsky:] All right. Chris, I'll come back. When we do come back, the republican senator who is taking his own party to task over President Trump. Why he says the GOP is in denial about the president. And I can hear social media heating up. Social media, tell us what you think of what Ed Butowsky just taught you. You know how to get me.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] Hi, I'm Brooke Baldwin. You are watching CNN on this Monday. Thanks for being with me. Here's the breaking news I have for you. The FBI has fired the agent who sent the anti-Trump text messages during the 2016 campaign. Once that revelation came to light Peter Strzok was removed from Robert Mueller's Russia investigation and he was reassigned within the FBI. Still, President Trump and his Republican allies have tried to use Strzok's involvement on the special counsel's team to discredit the entire investigation. Last month, Strzok was grilled during a ten-hour congressional hearing. Here's a reminder of the fiery exchange.
[Rep. Trey Gowdy,  Chairman, Oversight And Government Reform Committee:] I don't give a damn what you appreciate, agent Strzok. I don't appreciate having an FBI agent with an unprecedented level of animus working on two major investigations in 2016.
[Peter Strzok, Fired Fbi Agent:] I think it's important when you look at those texts that you understand the context in which they were made and the things that were going on across America. In terms of the texts that we will stop it, you need to understand that was written late at night, off the cuff and it was in response to series of events that included then candidate Trump insulting the immigrant family of a fallen war hero. And my presumption based on that horrible, disgusting behavior, that the American population would not elect somebody demonstrating that behavior to be president of the United States.
[Baldwin:] Yes. Remember that? Shimon Prokupesz, our crime and justice reporter is here to discuss this firing. Do we know, was the firing the direct result from those text messages?
[Shimon Prokupesz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] We don't know, Brooke. Because the FBI essentially is not commenting on this. It is a question that certainly we have, certainly his lawyers are asking as to why he was fired and why he was fired on Friday. According to his attorney, according to Pete Strzok's attorney, the Office Of Professional Responsibility which has been investigating Peter Strzok did not recommend that he be fired. In fact, they said that a 60-day suspension and a demotion was what was appropriate in this case. His lawyers taking issue with the deputy director, the deputy FBI director, excuse me, who essentially fired him. He made the decision. He went ahead and fired Peter Strzok. Now Peter Strzok's lawyers have issued a statement saying, quote, the decision to fire special agent Strzok is not only departure from typical bureau practice but also contradicts direct race testimony to Congress and his assurance that the FBI intended to follow its regular process in this and all personnel matters. It goes on to say, this decision should be deeply troubling to all Americans. No doubt, Brooke, his attorneys, Peter Strzok's attorneys feeling this was political, that perhaps the FBI caved to the pressure from the president. Because, as we know, he has been attacking Peter Strzok for quite some time. Also, important to know, this is now the third person, really when you think of this three people now that have been fired as a result this entire investigation. You have the former FBI director. You have the former deputy director, Andrew McCabe. And now Peter Strzok. Who knows who else will succumb. Lisa Page certainly has been under investigation. She has been to the hill, met with congress members. Certainly, think about the impact of this entire investigation on the personnel moves and the personnel of the
[Fbi. Baldwin:] You make great points, we are going to put them to my next guest. With me now CNN law enforcement analyst, Josh Campbell, a former FBI supervisory special agent. Listening in, do you think the FBI caved? Do you think the texts were fireable offense?
[Josh Campbell, A Former Fbi Special Agent:] Two parts. Let's start with the second. Was this a fireable offense? In a sense it was. What it takes to be removed, there is two aspects, performance and conduct. Nobody is saying Strzok was a bad FBI agent throughout his career. I know he had a reputation he was someone who was an excellent investigator. And then there is misconduct, a fireable offense. It is hard to say it is not a fireable offense. With respect to whether or not the FBI caved I don't think they did, I know the people that sit up there on the seventh floor and make those decisions specifically Dave Bowditch. I know him to be a man of the utmost integrity. He doesn't serve at the pleasure of the president. He is a career employee. I think he weighed the facts and how they impacted the operations at the
[Fbi. Baldwin:] Strzok was demoted, taken off of the Mueller investigation. 60-day suspension. Could it be as simple as the investigation had ended and simply, they fired him.
[Campbell:] It could be. I mentioned knowing the person who made this decision. It would be unfair for me to say trust me, I know this man, he made a tough call. He is a good person. But let's put ourselves in his shoes. On one hand, you have allegations of serious misconduct. You talk about the text messages, talk about someone opening themselves up to this scrutiny by this conduct that was taking place. That's on one hand. Then the person making the decision has the figure out how that's going to impact the investigation and what kind of message that signals to the troops. Then you have to look at the recommendation were the internal affairs division of the FBI which as you mentioned didn't recommend firing. They recommended a demotion. Nevertheless, if you are the person in the top seat that is simply a recommend days ago. You have to look and say what do I think is the gravity of these allegations. It is not a great day for the FBI. It's tough for peter Strzok but it is a page being turned on the road to rebuilding confidence in the public in the
[Fbi. Baldwin:] "Agent Peter Strzok was just fired from the FBI," Trump tweets, "finally the list of bad layers in the DOJ and FBI gets longer and longer. Based that Strzok was in charge of the witch hunt, will it be dropped? No collusion, I just fight back." You were saying actually the president's tweets could help Strzok if he tries to appeal his firing. Tell me why.
[Campbell:] Absolutely. Once the word first came out that Strzok had been fired I looked at my watch and knew it was only a matter of minutes before the president would weigh in and overplay his hand. Obviously, he has done this. We were expecting nothing less. This has been an unprecedented action in the history of the country where the president of the United States is actively going after a career civil servient. It's not only unprecedented. It's disgusting of it's destroying a norm that has been long held that the employees have the civil service protection, should remain outside of politics. But I think it helps Strzok because if he does appeal, and I'm sure the decision makers at the FBI who decided to terminate had no question there would be some type of appeal. He being Peter Strzok will be able to look at the president's tweets did and say look the deck was stacked against me. You had the president of the United States, the commander in chief, who oversees the director of the FBI weighing in and saying nasty thing about me. How could I have gotten a fair shake here? I think that's what we can expect.
[Baldwin:] Josh Campbell, thank you. Good to see you. From service as an adviser to the person holding the highest office in the land to being called a low life by Trump, former White House staffer Omarosa Manigault Newman is out with another recording this time, she captured the president himself on tape. She released the audio ahead of the debut of her new salacious mostly unverified book. Omarosa told NBC the clip is from 2017 and it appears the president is unaware his chief of staff John Kelly has just fired her. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Omarosa what's going on? I just saw on the news that you are leaving what happened.
[Omarosa Manigault Newman, Former White House Staffer:] General Kelly came to me and said that you guys wanted me to leave.
[Trump:] Nobody even told me about it. You know they run a big operation. But I didn't know it. I didn't know it.
[Newman:] Yes.
[Trump:] Goddamn it. I don't love you leaving at all.
[Baldwin:] Just one day after another bombshell release of a recording of the chief of staff, John Kelly, the general's words are not as shocking as the fact that Omarosa recorded him from the situation room in the White House, a room the White House describes as the nerve center for the president, a hub of intelligence gathering. It is within that room that Omarosa recorded this.
[Newman:] Can I ask you a couple of questions? Is the president aware of what's going on?
[John Kelly, White House Chief Of Staff:] Let's not go down the road. This is a non-negotiable discussion.
[Newman:] I don't want to negotiate. I never had the chance to talk to you General Kelly. This is my departure. I like to have at least an opportunity to understand
[Kelly:] We can talk at another time. It has serious violation. I'll let it go at that. The staff and everyone on the staff works for me, not the president.
[Baldwin:] After the president called her a low life over the weekend, the president repeated the insult today as he explained the reasons he hired and then fired his former assistance who earned $180,000 a year according to public records. This is what the president tweeted, "wacky Omarosa who got fired three times on the apprentice now got fired for the last time. She never made it. Never will. She begged me for a job, tears in her eyes. I said OK. People in the White House hated her. She was vicious but not smart. I would rarely see her but heard really bad things. Nasty to people and would constantly miss meetings and work. When General Kelly came on board he told me she was a loser and nothing but problems. I told him to try working it out if possible because she only said great things about me until she got fired. While I know it's quote not presidential to take on a low life like Omarosa and while I would rather not be doing so this is a modern-day form of communication and I know the fake news media will be working overtime to make even wacky Omarosa look as legitimate as possible. Sorry. So that is the confirmation that Omarosa was not among the, quote, unquote, best people that the president promised to bring on during the campaign trial. Remember that line?
[Trump:] We are going to make America great again. We are going to use our best people. I'm going to use the best people. We don't want people that are B level C level D level. We have to get our absolute best.
[Baldwin:] So, there is a lot to talk through on this one. Chris Cillizza, I want to start with you, our CNN politics reporter and editor at large. And on the whole best people line, talk to me about the best people he hired.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter And Editor At Large:] As you played, great clip there, Donald Trump loved to talk about the best people, a list, he could bring people in that no one else could. Oops. He rightly notes Omarosa has been fired by Donald Trump either in reality TV or in the White House multiple times. But he fails to note that Omarosa was hired by Donald Trump multiple times. It's not as though he didn't know what he was getting into. This guy blanked wow, nothing there. What that was supposed to be was a picture of Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump, Brooke. What that tells you is Donald Trump he called him beleaguered, called him weak, called him ineffective. Now, this is amazing, over the weekend it got overblown by the Omarosa story. "I have never seen anything, our AG is scared stiff and missing in action." Scared stiff and missing in action. He calls it the department of "Justice." Jeff Sessions and Omarosa are far from the only people who Donald Trump has grown disgruntled with or have resigned or been fired. Seven cabinet secretaries have left under duress or under their own power. George W. Bush, by comparison, four cabinet secretaries. Remember, Donald Trump has been president for 18 months, 57 percent these aren't my numbers. These are the Brookings Institute a think tank down here in DC, 57 percent of Donald Trump's top staff, including cabinet officials have turned over already, 18 months into this. I want to show a picture, because this really speaks to it. Let's quickly run through what we are looking at. Corey Lewandowski. If you don't know Scaramucci, his glasses should have their own twitter feed, Sebastian Gorka, and in the background, that's Rob Porter the former staff secretary. How many of these people these people were all working at the White House when this picture was taken? How many of them work at the White House now, Brooke?
[Baldwin:] Zero. Zero.
[Cillizza:] Zero. All of these people are gone. And I will tell you it's not just this picture, again, six in ten top level Trump staffers do not work at the White House anymore. 18 months. It's the kind of boss he is. He plays people against one another. He is willing to publicly shame people as he has done repeatedly with Sessions, that's six and 10 number, Brooke, that does not include Sessions, who continues to be the attorney general tide despite being scared stiff and beleaguered and weak. It is a remarkable thing, it is not normal piece of the presidency that has redefined not normal to be a president means. Back to you.
[Baldwin:] You are one of our best people for rolling through that. We appreciate that.
[Cillizza:] Always, not A, B or a C list person.
[Baldwin:] I got you. Chris Cillizza thank you so much. We have the security aspect of the whole thing that happened in the situation room. We have so much more. Including legitimate questions about Omarosa's credibility, what was her official role in the White House, what did she do in the last year half? Does anyone really know? Also, in a major development in the stand your ground case out of Florida where a man was shot and killed in an argument over a parking spot. Almost a month later why charges are just now being filed. And any moment now, speaking of the president, we waiting to get eyes on him in Fort Drum New York. This will be the most we seen from him in more than a week. He has been on vacation. He is back in Washington, taking a trip up to New York. We will monitor what he has to say in just a moment. You are watching CNN I'm Brooke Baldwin.

[Becky Anderson, Cnn:] You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson in Abu Dhabi. Breaking news this hour. U.S. President Donald Trump says his summit with North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un will not let me repeat that will not happen. In a letter to Kim Jong-un, President Trump cites, quote, tremendous anger and open hostility from North Korea as his reason for backing out. Sources tell CNN Mr. Trump is infuriated after the North called U.S. Vice President, Mike Pence, a quote, a political dummy. That remark came after Mr. Pence said earlier this week the situation in North Korea could end like the Libya model ended. Well, just a short time ago the U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo read Mr. Trump's full letter to a congressional hearing. Here is Mike Pompeo's reading of what is the President's message to Kim Jong-un.
[Mike Pompeo, U.s. Secretary Of State:] Dear Mr. Chairman, We greatly appreciate you time, patience, and effort with respect to our recent negotiations and discussions relative to his Summit long sought by both parties, which was scheduled to take place on June 12 in Singapore. We were informed that the meeting was requested by North Korea, but that to us is totally irrelevant. I was very much looking forward to being there with you. Sadly, based on the tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I feel it is inappropriate, at this time, to have this long-planned meeting. Therefore, please let this letter serve to represent that the Singapore Summit, for the good of both parties, but to the detriment of the world, will not take place. You talk about your nuclear capabilities, but ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God they will never have to be used. I felt a wonderful dialogue was building up between you and me, and ultimately, it is only that dialogue that matters. Someday, I look very much forward to meeting you. In the meantime, I want to thank you for the release of the hostages who are now home with their families. That was a beautiful gesture and was very much appreciated. If you change your mind having to do with this most important summit, please do not hesitate to call me or write. The world, and North Korea in particular, has lost a great opportunity for lasting peace and great prosperity and wealth. This missed opportunity is a truly sad moment in history. Sincerely yours, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Anderson:] CNN, of course, has every angle of this story covered. Jeremy Diamond is at the White House. Ivan Watson in Seoul in South Korea and our chief international correspondent, Christiane Amanpour, joining us from London. Let me start with you Christiane. This summit off for now, at least and some bombastic language from the U.S. President in his letter to Kim Jong-un. What happened?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Chief International Correspondent:] Well, look, it's really, obviously, difficult to unpick from this faraway, you're not right in the room. But it's clear that we saw in public a series of events unfolding. After Kim Jong-un said that he wouldn't mind, you know, the joint military exercise continuing, that he had stopped nuclear tests, that he would stop intercontinental ballistic tests. He released the hostages. He did a lot to try to pave the way for this summit. Then you started hearing him get upset about the tests that were going on around the joint exercises, but it really went off the skids when twice there was senior American officials talking about the Libya model. That is always been a hornet's nest for North Korea. They have always said we are not Iraq, we are not Libya. We don't give up our weapons of mass destruction in order to just be overthrown and deposed. So, you had John Bolton, I think, you know, a couple weeks ago on CBS, using this Libya model and expounding that model which involves military force. Let's face it, that's what it involves. And the overthrow eventually of Muammar Gadhafi and the death of him. And then President Trump tried to walk that back saying, no, it's not a Libya model. But then Mike Pence doubled down and said, well, it may be a Libya model if North Korea doesn't do a deal. So, this is the message that North Korea was getting. [11:5:00] And, you know, then they started to ramp up their rhetoric and some are saying, that look, you know, both sides had different views of exactly what denuclearization meant. President Trump believed that it was maximalist. That it meant give up everything right now, all at once before you get anything in return. North Korea was like, no. We expected to be give-and-take. We do an action. You do an action. We think denuclearization actually means everybody including the United States. So, it all got a bit sort of out of hand. And in a way, it shows the perils of having this sort of leader summit and agreeing to this without having the, you know, the experts sort it all out and see what they can achieve around a negotiating table before the Presidents and leaders meet to actually sort of ratify it. So, you know, and now this letter which is specifically to Kim Jong-un, you know, looks like it could put his face in it a little bit. Put his back against the wall personally directed at him, revealed by the President on international television. We're going to have to wait and see what their next move is now.
[Anderson:] Yes, OK. We'll try and get to the bottom that as we move through these hours. Jeremy, if this Libya model was clearly such an issue to Pyongyang, then why use it? Did the new national security adviser, John Bolton, for example, purposefully sabotage this summit? And is this, as some are saying, John Bolton, 1, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, nil, at this point?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] Yes, well, John Bolton certainly knew how the North Koreans would react to the mere mention of Libya let alone the Libyan model. You know, so there have been questions for weeks now about whether John Bolton who weeks before coming into the administration had made some pretty bellicose statements about North Korea. Had signaled that diplomacy was not the option. Whether indeed he was trying to sabotage this summit. But it is important to note that John Bolton when he made those comments, he referred specifically to the Libya model of 20032004. He was talking about the denuclearization efforts. He was talking about the complete and verifiable denuclearization of Libya. Of course, the immediate implication is what happened several years later. But what the President tried to do last week was he tried to make clear that the Libya model would not apply as in the model of the overthrow of Muammar Gadhafi, would not apply in this situation if Kim Jong-un agreed to denuclearization. And he said that the Libya model, meaning the overthrow not the actual denuclearization would apply if a deal was not struck. So, what's interesting is that Mike Pence in his comments earlier this week was merely parroting what the president of the United States had said just last week. But the North Koreans had chosen not to go after the President directly but instead to go after vice President Mike Pence who made those very same comments. Clearly, some experts are suspecting that the North Koreans have been trying to save face perhaps with some of these more harshly worded statements but, clearly on the American side, this is something that was not viewed as a face-saving measure in any way, or any way appropriate even if it was going after the vice President and not the President of the United States. We were told that officials and the President himself was very angered this morning by those North Korean statements. And that's why they decided to pull out of the summit in part. Beyond that, of course, we know there have been a lot of distance between the U.S. and North Korea as far as what specifically denuclearization means. How do you accomplish it? And so, because those issues had not yet been resolved there was increasing skepticism on the U.S. side that going forward with this summit was the right move.
[Anderson:] Ivan, you are in Seoul. South Korea desperately wanted this summit. What's been the response there?
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] The latest we can report is that President Moon Jae-in just back from a meeting, a summit with President Trump in Washington at the White House. He has convened an emergency meeting that includes his defense minister, his intelligence chief, foreign minister, unification minister as well. We're hearing that it was convened at 11:30 p.m. local time. That's about 40 minutes ago. And, clearly, in response to this bombshell of a decision coming from President Trump. You'll recall that when President Moon was on his way to Washington for that meeting on Tuesday with President Trump, that one of his top advisers told journalists that he thought there was a 99.9 percent chance that this Singapore summit between the U.S. and North Korea would, in fact, go ahead. And we were hearing that his main message to President Trump at the time was stay the course. Don't get distracted. Don't get disappointed by the recent criticism coming out of Pyongyang. You are the man to make history, to break cut through this Gordian Knot on the Korean Peninsula and bring peace to the region. Well clearly, those arguments were not enough to convince President Trump, at least for the time being, to stick with this summit for June 12th. I was reporting throughout the day here on the most recent North Korean statement bashing Mike Pence. Of course, in response to Mike Pence, very open threat that if North Korea didn't accept a deal with President Trump, that it would end up, like Libya, with its leader killed effectively. That was what North Korea was reacting to when it called Pence a political dummy, when it threatened a nuclear to nuclear showdown. And when it also made the argument the reason North Korea developed nuclear weapons in the first place was to prevent it from ending up following in the footsteps of Libya and its deposed and murder dictator Becky.
[Anderson:] The perspective there in Seoul. Stand by, everybody. CNN's Will Ripley is inside North Korea right now. There on what was a trip to watch what Pyongyang claims was its blowing up its nuclear test site just hours ago. Will just speaking to our colleague Poppy Harlow from a moving train. I want our viewers just to hear some of that. Stand by.
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] Poppy, we were just sitting kind of wrapping up the day. It's now late in the evening here. We're on the train headed back to Wonsan after witnessing the, what North Korea claims, is the destruction of a nuclear site at Punggye-ri. So, we were sitting around a table and I got the phone call and read out the letter for President Trump and I can tell you there was just a real sense of shock amongst the people that I was sitting with. The North Korean officials they didn't give any official comment. But immediately got up and left and are now on the phone relaying the news up to the top. And imagine how they are feeling at this moment given the fact that they just blew up their nuclear site today as a sign, they say, of their willingness to denuclearize. That they were doing this to make a point ahead, and as you mentioned, ahead of the summit in Singapore on June 12th that was scheduled with President Trump. That until literally minutes ago they thought was still going to happen. That said, the North Koreans have said that they'll not going to beg for dialogue and they were infuriated by comments made by the Vice President, Mike Pence, for that President Trump's national security adviser, John Roberts, talking about North Korea saying that North Korea would follow the Libya model. Of course, Gadhafi and Libya gave up his nuclear weapons and was overthrown by U.S.-backed rebels and died several years later.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Correspondent:] And, Will
[Ripley:] They're unwilling to accept that here. The North Koreans have said that they're not going to beg for dialogue. They had said they'd be willing to walk away if they don't like what they're hearing from the United States. But the fact they went through with this trip, you know, they invited us, and we were kind of on hold for 24 hours. I was frankly unsure if this was actually going to happen, but the trip did happen. We were taking to the nuclear site. We spent nine hours. Watched them blow up three tunnels in the nuclear site and all of the buildings on the site as well. And we don't have experts here to verify with us if this destruction is absolute, if it means the nuclear site is unusable as North Korea claims. But they told us we're being transparent here. We're showing you our nuclear site for the first time for journalists. We're blowing up. We're willing to denuclearize. We're willing to talk with the United States. But they don't want to be compared to Libya. A country whose government was overthrown after giving up its nuclear weapons. And that's why they felt they had to respond with they had very strongly worded statement targeting the Vice President, Mike Pence. They've also targeted President Trump's national security adviser as well, saying they don't want him to Singapore. They don't want anybody in Singapore they feel is going to disrespect them. But nonetheless, being inside this country just hours after they blew up the nuclear site and learning of this, it was a very awkward and uncomfortable moment. And we'll have to see what happens in the coming hours and days on the ground here.
[Anderson:] Christiane, you were recently in the region what was a historic inter-Korea summit. What has been going on behind the scenes in North Korea and quite frankly, what happens next?
[Amanpour:] Well, look, that is really what we have to wait for. Because this is obviously, this tit-for-tat situation that we've seen unfold and playing out now on the global stage. Only it's not over some small subject. It's over a massive, massive subject. A nuclear-armed North Korea and the United States both in sort of highly charged rhetoric against each other. I think what strikes me from what Will is that again it threatens to put their back against a wall. They say that they did this for transparency. Of course, there were no technicians, as far as Will could make out there, as he said. They just saw what they saw. They don't know the extent of what the North Koreans did. So, we're taking it on face value. But we understand that. It's on face value. It reminds me of ten years almost exactly when we went to Yongbyon, which is there plutonium processing plant and watched them dismantle it, blow up the cooling tower. Only to see sort of that era of potential rapprochement fade. What also is very important to note is the following. As Ivan said, this is really make or break for the South Korean President. He has been shepherding this along with North Korea. He has been flattering President Bush, telling sorry, Trump. Telling President Trump that he could make history because he believes the diplomatic solution to the North Korean crisis, not the military solution. And I'm afraid it reminds me now of him going to the White House really laying it on thick for President Trump, in much the same way as President Macron did over Iran. President Trump listens and then when they're out of the country, out of the White House, he pulls out of the Iran thing and pulls out of this summit. And if you remember, back in 2002-ish, around then, President Bush, similarly, sold the South Korean President down the road over his sunshine policy with North Korea. And what we got after that was a North Korea racing towards the kind of nuclear capability they have right now. So, with any luck, all sides can put this summit back on track, because obviously important. But it clearly shows the need to have the experts work out the parameters, work out what's possible. Work out the negotiations. Before there's this cart before the horse situation where the Presidents and the leader and they get all excited. And there's going to be a summit and that means there has to be something amazing and tangible and big they can each say is a win. And then it all collapsed. And potentially because it's kind of easier to back out than go there without knowing what you'll come away with.
[Anderson:] Our panel is standing by, including Robin Wright. Who is a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center who has written extensively on North Korea. Let me pick up on something that Christiane just said, Robin. Is that the problem, that this Trump administration doesn't to experts?
[Robin Wright, Fellow, U.s. Institute Of Peace/woodrow Wilson International Center:] Well, one thing that's most alarming about the process that's played out since January 1st and Kim Jong-un's outreach to the South Koreans in the United States, is the fact there's been very little development of the specific ideas. How do you denuclearize? How is this process going to play out? Over the past two days, the President has talked about both the all or nothing approach. But also qualified and said, well, there may be a step by step. You have a sense they haven't worked out the logistics of diplomacy, much less the substance of what exactly denuclearization means. So, you have this tension play out that exacerbates the dangers. It makes the alternatives look like, well, it's either all or nothing, North Korea gives everything up, or there's a military confrontation. The kind of language that's been used over the past 24 hours. Those by the North Koreans and now by President Trump about the nuclear potential, nuclear conflict and again, this kind of, my button is bigger than your button, is very alarming and it does not bode well. If they do manage to resume diplomacy and finally sit down at a table.
[Anderson:] Robin, let me just read out parts of the letter that we have all now seen read out to Congress by the Secretary of State in the past hour. This is the letter from Donald Trump to Kim Jong-un calling off this summit. In part, he says, sadly, based on the tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I feel it is inappropriate at this time to have this long-planned meeting. And he went on to say, to your point, robin, you talk about nuclear capabilities, but ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God they will never have to be used. You have done an awful lot of work, analysis on North Korea. How is this sort of rhetoric going to go down?
[Wright:] Not well. And it's the very thing that North Korea has feared the most. So, this is what they've been reacting to over the past three weeks since John Bolton at the end of April 1st brought up thus Libya mode. Which he may have been talking about in terms of process, allowing access by outside American and Western inspectors. More than what happened to the fate of the leaders. But this does appear to be kind of signaling that if you don't go along with what we want, we in the United States, then there is the danger that we'll not only use nuclear weapons or there will be some kind of military confrontation. But it had suggested rightly or wrongly to the North Koreans that the regime itself was at stake. Now this dates back 15 years and there's a fascinating history that dates back to Bolton's first confrontation with North Korea in 2003 when he was with the State Department during the George W. Bush administration. And he gave a speech in South Korea where he chastised the current North Korean leader's father and talked about the hellish nightmare of life in North Korea. And at the time, the North Koreans responded by refusing to engage in diplomacy that the Bush administration was part of. Refusing to meet with Bolton, whom they called a scumbag and a bloodsucker. And so, this hostility that's been initiated since Bolton's remark this time around really dates back 15 years to an almost identical situation.
[Anderson:] Which, Jeremy, brings me back to a point that we were discussing earlier. Is this convenient for the new national security adviser for all intents and purposes? Some might use the term sabotage. Did John Bolton ever want this summit to happen?
[Diamond:] It's unclear. You know, as I said before, previously before joining the administration, John Bolton had clearly been very skeptical of the idea of diplomacy. And some said that if he was supportive of this summit it was only so that it could crumble, and they could move to the next option which was the military option. That is the key question now. And we saw both of these options, kind of outlined in the President's letter. Where on one hand he's saying, listen, we have bigger and more powerful nuclear weapons than you do, but we hope we don't have to use them. And at the same time saying perhaps he will meet Kim Jong-un someday. So, that is the question now is, where do these talks go? Is there going to be continued diplomatic detentes right now, continued discussions between Mike Pompeo and his North Korean counterparts. Or are we moving towards a military option? Towards once again an escalation both verbally and perhaps even in terms of actual substantive action on the Korean Peninsula.
[Anderson:] Ivan, there will be those who in Donald Trump's defense say that what he has facilitated has been at least a thaw between the two Koreas. He's also had the U.S. hostages returned home, and he thanked the North Korean leader for that. Reminding the world who would be reading that letter between the two, that he had achieved that. So, there will be some wins in this for Donald Trump. For the South Korean President then, though, is this make or break? What happens?
[Watson:] I can't help but look at this as a serious setback for the South Korean President Moon Jae-in. Who had his own summit meeting with Kim Jong-un at the end of last month and described that as a stepping stone towards a North KoreaU.S. summit in Singapore on June 12th. He had positioned himself as a mediator. He had been a great promoter of helping establish this dialogue between Pyongyang and Washington. And recalled it was President Trump who suddenly announced he would meet with Kim Jong-un after top officials from South Korea traveled from Pyongyang to Washington to personally deliver messages that they'd heard from the North Korean leadership. So, Moon Jae-in had an enormous amount invested in this. It was incredibly popular the progress he'd made with Kim Jong-un, according to surveys here in South Korea. There was a certain euphoria here. Where reading reports about land purchases around the demilitarized zone with great hopes that peace would break out there. And hearing about corporations that were getting ready to start conducting cross-border trade that's been suspended for years now, particularly with the Kaesong industrial complex, which is on the other side of the demilitarized zone. And on top of that, Moon Jae-in travelled to the White House to try to convince President Trump to go forward with the Singapore summit. SoU.S. summit.
[Anderson:] Robin Wright, Ivan Watson in Seoul, Jeremy Diamond in Washington, our chief international correspondent, Christiane Amanpour in London. To all of you, a thank you. And let me just wind up before we take a break here with some news that our colleagues in Washington are publishing. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he was involved with the administration's discussions about pulling out of the June 12th summit last night. And this morning which included discussions about the path forward. He characterized discussions as ongoing but insisted they always knew in inverted commas, a quote from him that the summit might not pan out. Pompeo said he was hopeful they could get back in place of working on a path forward, but insisted it was up to Kim Jong-un. He reiterated what President Trump said in that letter that we have been discussing in the past half hour or so to Kim that they welcome a call from him. What now? Well, in answer to that, Mike Pompeo, the Secretary of State of the U.S. said, and I quote, in some ways it is situation normal. The pressure campaign, he said, continues. More after this.

[Unidentified Female:] The train was traveling at 80 miles per hour in a 30 mile-per-hour track.
[Unidentified Male:] We felt a little bit of a jolt, and then we were catapulted into the seats in front of us. Our responders were climbing up and down this hill, trying to get to those victims. The votes of Senator Mike Lee and Susan Collins essentially get this is across the finish line. It was a closed process done with no hearings.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] This tax bill is unpopular. The overwhelming majority believe, clearly, the benefits do go to the wealthy.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] A nation that does not protect prosperity at home cannot protect its interests abroad.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] The president did not specifically call out Russia's meddling in the 2016 election.
[Unidentified Male:] It raises the question why he just has this incredible aversion to criticizing Putin publicly.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Tuesday, December 19, 6 a.m. here in New York. Here's our starting line. The Amtrak train that derailed in Washington state was traveling at 80 miles per hour in a 30-mile-per-hour zone when it left the tracks. This is according to investigators. Three people were killed and more than 100 others injured. Amtrak's president confirmed the technology meant to automatically slow down the train was not activated. As rescuers raced to the scene, President Trump fired up his Twitter account, politicizing the tragedy but promoting his plan for infrastructure improvements. Ten minutes later he followed up with a tweet expressing condolences to the victims.
[Cuomo:] All right. We could be just hours away from the president's first major legislative achievement. The Republican tax bill is expected to pass the House today before heading to the Senate. It could be on the president's desk by tomorrow. A new CNN poll shows the plan is extremely unpopular with most Americans. And there's new reporting on a win the president likes to brag about, the appointment of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. According to "The Washington Post," President Trump considered rescinding the nomination because he feared Gorsuch wouldn't be loyal. CNN has every angle covered. Let's start with Stephanie Elam, live from Dupont, Washington. That's the scene of the deadly train derailment Stephanie.
[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Chris. We have learned that the NTSB has been able to recover the data recorder from the back of the train and has learned more about what may have caused this derailment. Yet to still happen, though, an interview of the engineer.
[Bella Dinh-zarr, National Transportation Safety Board Spokesperson:] Preliminary indications are that the train was traveling at 80 miles per hour in a 30-mile-per-hour track.
[Elam:] Investigators announcing that this mangled Amtrak train was traveling almost three times above the speed limit before jumping the tracks and hurdling over an overpass.
[Anthony Raimondi, Train Passenger:] Things just started to tip over. And as it was going around and then, all of a sudden, just ended up on its side, and everything went dark.
[Elam:] The train, which was making its first run from Seattle to Portland after a multi-million dollar track upgrade, was not yet using safety technology designed to automatically stop a train from speeding when the deadly derailment controlled.
[Unidentified Male:] Amtrak 501. Emergency, emergency, emergency. We are on the ground. We were coming around the corner to take the bridge over I-5 there right north of Nisqually and we went on the ground.
[Elam:] Authorities say the target date to have the safety technology, the positive train control system, working is spring of next year. The mayor of a nearby town expressing separate concerns about the safety of the track earlier this month.
[Unidentified Male:] Come back when there is an accident and try to justify not putting in those safety enhancements, or you can go back now and advocate for the money needed.
[Elam:] The investigation unfolding amid terrifying accounts of the derailment.
[Scott Claggett, Train Passenger:] You start to see the roof kind of peel. It's like, is this ever going to stop?
[Elam:] Army Lieutenant Robert McCoy was driving along the busy interstate when the train cars came trashing down.
[Lt. Robert Mccoy, I-5 Driver:] There were individuals that had been ejected from the train onto the pavement. I heard people in there asking for help and stuff. There were people were yelling. There's people looking for each other, looking for loved ones.
[Elam:] McCoy taking these photos from inside the train as he pulled passengers to safety. President Trump talking politics before sending his condolences to survivors, tweeting shortly after the crash that the derailment, quote, "shows more than ever why our soon-to-be submitted infrastructure plan must be approved quickly." And what we know now is that three people lost their lives in this accident, 72 people were taken to hospitals, including ten in serious condition. What really is shocking here, though, Chris, if you take a look, how that train fell on Interstate 5. All of the losses of life were contained on the train and none were caused on the actual highway in those cars, which is actually quite amazing when you think about the fact that it was rush hour traffic at the time, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Stephanie, you make the right point. However, as you know and I know, because we've covered these situations before, this didn't have to happen. If that PTC were activated it all comes down to money. If it were up and running, that train would not have been going as fast as it was. Stephanie, thank you very much for being there for CNN. Joining us now is a passenger who survived the derailment, Anthony Raimondi. Anthony worked for Amtrak for 17 years. Anthony, can you hear us?
[Raimondi:] I can hear you.
[Cuomo:] All right, good. Thank you for joining us. Thank God you're OK. Were you with anybody on the train? Is everybody OK that you were with?
[Raimondi:] Actually, I was alone on the train.
[Cuomo:] All right. So what can you tell us about what you remember?
[Raimondi:] What I remember is that we were started to the ride started to get a little rough. We started to lean. And then all of a sudden, everything went dark, and stuff started flying around inside the car.
[Cuomo:] You worked for Amtrak for you worked for Amtrak for 17 years.
[Raimondi:] That's correct. Cuomo: It was your job spending time on trains or were you in the office? I'm asking you just in terms of what kind of knowledge you have of what feels right and wrong when you're on the train. I was a ticket agent in St. Paul, Minnesota, but I've ridden many trains, both commuter and long-distance trains.
[Cuomo:] All right. Did you get a sense that the train was traveling at a high rate of speed?
[Raimondi:] To me, it was traveling at a normal rate of speed. That was my that was my take on it. It was traveling at a normal rate of speed. The first this was the first time I was over this line. So I wasn't familiar with the curves or anything like that. But it was traveling at the normal rate of speed.
[Cuomo:] And we know that this was a new route that they were doing with the train. What does it mean to you that it was going 80 miles an hour in a 30 track zone?
[Raimondi:] Well, that's that's probably not good. That's probably why it went off on the side over there. That's, you know that's quite a difference in speed, that's for sure, based on what the speed limit is.
[Cuomo:] And, Anthony, what do you remember about the actual derailment? What was it like where you were?
[Raimondi:] I was in business class, right behind the locomotive and the power car. And as I said, all of a sudden it started to come off track, and the car started to lean. And then everything went dark and stuff started flying around. Picked ourselves up and shook ourselves off and then one of the passengers pushed out the window. I helped the passenger get off of the train. He helped me get off of the train, climbing through the window and then we helped another passenger off. And then we went through the back of the one of the cars was jackknifed. And went underneath the car and got clear of the scene.
[Cuomo:] When you look at the pictures of the damage and how close it was to the highway and how many people were injured, what do you think?
[Raimondi:] I'm just really surprised that more people weren't weren't killed in that thing, especially falling down on the highway. And I also would like to express my condolences to the families that lost their loved ones on that train. I feel very bad about that. But, yes, just surprised me there wasn't more, considering the cars hanging over the edge and that kind of stuff.
[Cuomo:] Did you see people who were injured when you were getting out?
[Raimondi:] After I got out, I seen people come out of the train. One person had a cut over his left eyebrow. And I recall another person, his head was all kind of bloody. And another person was just kind of very stressed and was kind of hysterical and said she couldn't move very well. That's what I remember.
[Cuomo:] It's amazing when I look at the pictures of what happened there how many people walked away. And thank God you're one of them. Anthony, a tough thing to have happen this close to the holidays, but you're in much better shape than a lot of other people who were on that train. So the best to you and your family. Thank you for letting us know what it was like to be on this Amtrak train.
[Raimondi:] Well, thank you. I feel very, very lucky, that I came out with just a bruise here and there and a bump here and there. I just feel very lucky, actually.
[Cuomo:] You are. The best to you and your family for Christmas. Thank you for being with us this morning.
[Raimondi:] And the best to you and your family also this holiday season. Thank you.
[Cuomo:] Thank you. Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Chris. This just in. A new CNN poll shows a growing number of Americans oppose the Republicans' tax reform bill as the House is set to vote on it today. The poll also shows President Trump's approval numbers at an all-time low. CNN political director David Chalian is live in Washington, breaking down the poll numbers for us. Hi, David.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Hi, Alisyn. That's right. The tax bill that you said, you noted that the House is going to vote today on it. Well, 33 percent of the public, if they were to take a look at the opposition, 55 percent, a majority of Americans, are now opposed, according to a brand-new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. And compare that to the November opposition number, when 45 percent were opposed. That's a ten-point jump in just a month on this tax bill. And take a look at it broken down by party, Alisyn. Opposition is growing among all party groups. Among Republicans from 7 percent in November to 13 percent now. Independents, their opposition grew by 12 points to 53 percent. And Democrats' opposition jumped by 10 points, too. I should note, Republicans in favor of the bill jumped even more. That grew by 12 points. So the favorability of the bill among Republicans did grow, as well. This issue that Democrats have been hounding that this favors the wealthy more than the middle class, despite the Republican talking points, it seems the American public is buying that argument, Alisyn. It is 66 percent of Americans, nearly two-thirds say that the wealthy will benefit from this. Twenty-seven percent say that it will be the middle class. And you see the partisan divide there. Obviously, Republicans are more inclined to believe that it will, indeed, favor the middle class. How does it impact President Trump's family is a question we asked the American people in this poll. Sixty-three percent of Americans say that the Trump family will be better off because of this tax plan. Only 5 percent say that the Trump family will be worse off. And then, of course, as you noted, the big question, Donald Trump's approval number now sits at 35 percent in CNN polling. That is a numerical low for him in the entire tenure of his presidency throughout our polling all year long. Fifty-nine percent disapprove. And if you stack that up against all his modern predecessors at this point in their presidency, you see that Donald Trump is at the bottom there. All of his modern-day predecessors were at a much stronger point at this, the end of December of their first year in office than Donald Trump is.
[Camerota:] David, very interesting to see it in context and to see all these numbers in context. Stick around, if you would, because we have more questions for you. We want to also bring in associate editor of RealClearPolitics, A.B. Stoddard. A.B., great to see you. So why do you think opposition to this tax bill has grown so quickly since just last month?
[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor, Realclearpolitics:] Well, I think as the House bill was being sort of, you know, integrated with the Senate bill and a larger discussion was had about which provisions would remain and which ones were too valuable to eliminate and which ones would pay for what, you saw sort of a game of whack-a-mole where a deficit would pop up and they'd smack it down by taking something else out. And this was the kind of thing that was done, according again, I'm not a tax policy expert. I consult them. And people on both sides of this issue, who know the code, who know what it was like when it was done in 1986, say this was a sloppy process put together in the interest of speed and not really a holistic approach. And so as Americans have seen the debate, you know, continue over the weeks leading up to this Christmas deadline, they're they're very concerned about how much it represents a boost to corporations with in regards to a steep cut that's permanent, versus cuts to middle- income families, which are pretty modest and expire in seven years.
[Cuomo:] So the bet here, David, for the Republicans, seems to be pretty clear. They're hoping that this early tax cut, for most of the people in the different income strata, is good enough and the potential that there is a boost to the economy that they can write off to this tax cut, and that's good enough. What happens in five, seven years, leave that to the future.
[Chalian:] I'll add one more piece to their bet, Chris. Which is they're betting that they're going to be rewarded by their voters next year for accomplishing a promise. That was the other piece, the political piece of this that was inside the conversation both on the Senate side and the House side, inside the Republican conferences. Leadership was explaining to members day in and day out the imperative for them to be able to deliver a big- ticket item that they promised to their voters. But you're right. I do think that is, no doubt, the benefit. And in fact, you hear Republicans now it's so interesting. Almost sounding like the Democrats did in 2010 with Obamacare, which is, well, you're going to feel you, the American people, you're going to feel this result once it's enacted. You're going to see it. You can't-
[Cuomo:] Well, the poll numbers aren't that different, by the way, as they were during the ACA. Now, you could argue tax cuts tend to be more popular than legislation of that kind entitlement, essentially, legislation but the poll numbers weren't that different back then, David.
[Chalian:] Yes, no. I mean, it was an uphill battle for Democrats. They passed what was an unpopular piece of legislation. As you know, it has grown more popular with time-
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Chalian:] as people have gotten used to it. And I think Republicans are hoping that this piece of legislation will also grow more popular with time if people feel a little bit more money in their pocket.
[Camerota:] They're banking on it. I mean, they are that's exactly the Nancy Pelosi model of "We have to pass it to see what's in it," David, is what they're banking on. And A.B., I think that the similarities are eerie. And, you know, of course, Republicans railed against that then, and now they're using the same thing, which is you're going to have to live it. You'll have to love it when you live it, basically. And so they're ignoring the poll numbers. Let me just show you what the timeline is for how fast-tracked this is. The House is expected to vote on it today. Then the Senate will take it up shortly after, whenever that happens. And the final Senate vote either later today or tomorrow, and it will be on President Trump's desk, they predict, by tomorrow.
[Stoddard:] Well, they said they were going to have a Christmas law. So that's what they're delivering on. It's been characterized by the president, as we know, as you know, a big Christmas present. This is the exact process that Republicans criticized when Democrats passed a partisan bill that was unpopular. The polling on this tax bill is worse than the polling on Obamacare at the very same time in March of 2010. They passed it without Republicans. They lost the House in a huge wave election in 2010. President Trump's numbers are worse than Obama's were at that time. The tax bill is more unpopular than Obamacare was at that time. And all the generic polling advantage that we see for Democrats in poll after poll, different ones, we're seeing wave numbers, which means between 8 percent and 15 percent advantage. This is really a grave concern for Republicans. They had to deliver, as David said, on this promise. Job done. Box checked. Doesn't mean it's going to get their majority reelected in November.
[Cuomo:] Right. I mean, A.B.'s right. I'm saying the poll numbers were similar. The process, though, was not similar. They did force it through on a party-line vote. No question about that. But it took, like, a year.
[Stoddard:] There was a more comprehensive process.
[Cuomo:] There were all these hearings, and it was chewed up. It was also a much more sophisticated piece of legislation, that was essentially creating a new entitlement. Which some people will like that word, some people won't. But the popularity point of the president is also a big point, A.B. Let's put that up. As David was referring to earlier, this is the lowest number we've seen for the president at a time, David, where this it supposedly his biggest signature achievement. So reconcile the two.
[Chalian:] Well, let's have him have a signing ceremony, and maybe he'll be able to reap some benefit of actually getting something done in the next round of polling. We'll see. But what I think this number reflects, quite frankly, Chris, is a president who has seemed steadfastly opposed to trying to expand that number. He has made a commitment, and if you just look at his public pronouncements, the way this is somebody who has said he tends to really cultivate his base of support and nothing beyond that, this is somebody who has said "If I've got my 35, 36, 37 percent and they don't go anywhere, I'm going to be OK." It is a different model than most presidents who seek majority support and try to craft policies to court majority support that we've seen in the past do. Donald Trump seems very committed to just keeping his most steadfast followers in the poll.
[Camerota:] And A.B., one more time. I do think it's interesting to look at it in context to where every other president in recent memory was at this time in their tenure. And it's just it's striking. First of all, it's striking to see that President Bush in 2001, obviously after 911 was at 86 percent of the country. I mean, the idea that 86 percent of the country would agree on anything, even-
[Cuomo:] Remember what went on in the country.
[Camerota:] Yes, of course. Of course. But still. And now you see, you know, it going down through the years to President Trump, 35. What are your thoughts?
[Stoddard:] Well, I agree with David. I mean, the reason that President Trump is at that number is because he continues only to work kind of a divisive leadership that speaks only to his 35 percent. And that is he absolutely could have come in here and started working with Democrats, meeting with them, being magnanimous. And he really could have been much more popular than he is now. He makes a real strong point of sort of doing the best he can to isolate himself from the 64 percent of the country and keep himself safe with 35. It's a numbers game, and it is not the way politics is the art of persuasion. And it is not the way to be a strong leader. But that's the choice he's made, and he's made it very clear.
[Cuomo:] That's an important point. Is that, you know, people will look at those bars and say, well, but every presidency is different. They're all situational. That's true, and Trump is set up for success. The economy is strong. We don't have anybody attacking us here at home in a major way that he hasn't handled. There's been no cataclysm. And yet his number is in the tank.
[Chalian:] Remember, if you look at those bars with all those previous presidents, you're they're it's worth noting fortunes do turn around.
[Cuomo:] Sure.
[Chalian:] Clinton, Reagan, Obama, are all hovering above Trump there, obviously, with much stronger numbers. But they're still towards the bottom of the list. They were all re-elected in their four-year mark.
[Camerota:] Great point.
[Cuomo:] He could get a big boost.
[Camerota:] Of course.
[Cuomo:] That's the upside of a low number, low ratings. You're not doing great and you get a big boost, you look like a hero.
[Camerota:] Tomorrow is a new day. David Chalian, A.B. Stoddard, thank you very much.
[Cuomo:] All right. So mixed message from President Trump when it comes to his strategy for national security. The official White House position and what he said in this speech, not exactly squaring up. How? We'll show you next.

[Allen:] You know it is bad when Indonesia is warning planes to steer clear of danger in the sky over Bali after this volcano sent giant plumes of ash and steam into the air Saturday night. And it is still erupting.
[Howell:] Indonesia raised its aviation warning from orange to red to signal that threat. Several airlines including Qantas, Virgin and AirAsia canceled or diverted flights late Saturday that left some travelers stranded at airports without too much information.
[Unidentified Male:] We had planned to go back to Adelaide in South Australia, this evening. We actually got here quite early. But now we found that the flights have been canceled. Now we weren't notified by Jetstar in advance of us getting here, so we're very disappointed about that. I would have expected the airline to have had some idea as to when our flight was going to be canceled. To arrive here at such late notice and then not be notified and having had to wait is very disappointing.
[Allen:] I wonder if you can blame the airlines for knowing about the volcanic eruption. I don't know. But Ivan Cabrera will explain it all to us. Coming up here, a historic visit for Pope Francis and a delicate balancing act. He heads soon to Myanmar and human rights groups want him to speak out about what is happening to thousands of Rohingya Muslims there. That's coming up.
[Howell:] Plus two months after Hurricane Maria ravaged Puerto Rico, the exact numbers of victims is still unknown. Coming up, why that number is so hard to pin down. CNN NEWSROOM is live from Atlanta, Georgia, this hour, simulcast on CNN U.S. here in the states, CNN International worldwide. Stay with us.

[Cuomo:] All right. The man you're about to meet is a longtime political ally of Donald Trump. He's been in politics for a very long on in New York state, on the federal level. He's been all over the place. His tweets and communications through the 2016 campaign, predicting damaging information related to Hillary Clinton and John Podesta, have been the subject of discussions for months. So does Roger Stone believe he is a target of the Mueller investigation? Let's ask former Trump political adviser Roger Stone. He's the author of a new book out tomorrow called "Stone's Rules: How to Win at Politics, Business and Style." Thank you for taking the opportunity.
[Roger Stone, Former Trump Political Advisor:] Great to be here.
[Cuomo:] We'll talk about the book. Although, you know, really, my whole discussion with you is woven in and out of what your different rules are.
[Stone:] There's a lot of books there's a lot of rules in there that the president ought to read right now, if you ask me.
[Cuomo:] Yes. Well, you know, we don't know that he's big on digesting information that way, but I'm sure you could pick up the phone and communicate some. Whether he will listen is a different one. A hundred and forty rules. An obvious nod to the old number of characters that were allowed in Twitter. Now it's been extended. Let me ask you something else, just to get some things on the record. The question they set up in the intro there was do you think you're a target? Have you been contacted, directly or through counsel, by anybody from the special counsel's team?
[Stone:] I have not. But for example, you read in the paper, and you reported at MSNBC and CNBC that Mr. Mueller is probing my dinners with Rick Gates and my meetings with him at Trump Tower. Wants to examine the period in which we worked together in the '80s. There's a couple problems here. First of all, based on my recollection, I had one dinner with him with other people to discuss the makeup of the New York delegation to the Republican National Convention. I had no meetings with him whatsoever in 2016 in at Trump Tower. I didn't know him until 2016. We he did not work at Black, Manafort and Stone in the '80s. He was evidently an intern at a successor firm. So I didn't
[Cuomo:] You're saying the connection is not there. What I don't get is this. How does the special counsel not reach out to you? Just your bizarre coincidences, I'll give you a generous read on that until we get into it, with what was going to happen with WikiLeaks and Guccifer and the e-mails. How have you not been called?
[Stone:] Well, first of all, the claim that I knew in advance about either of the the alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee. Since the DNC never let FBI examine their server, we're not even certain they were hacked. But the idea that I had advanced knowledge is speculation.
[Cuomo:] Speculation based on you, though, Roger.
[Stone:] Supposition.
[Cuomo:] You put it out.
[Stone:] Yes, and I'm a political animal. But Julian Assange came here at CNN in June of 2016 and said, "I've got a treasure trove of documents about Hillary Clinton."
[Cuomo:] But you said you were talking to him, meeting with him. You made this
[Stone:] I actually never said that.
[Cuomo:] Well, you did say to Sam Nunberg, "I had dinner last night with Julian Assange."
[Stone:] Which I think I've explained adequately was a joke to get Sam Nunberg off the phone. And I have obviously produced my passport, airline records, customs records.
[Cuomo:] So that the meeting couldn't have been possible?
[Stone:] Well, it was in Los Angeles. And I think I proved that.
[Cuomo:] How about the look, the one that gets you the most in terms of and again, obviously, I'm out of my depth, because the special counsel hasn't called you in yet. And his would be a layup, I would think. At least to talk to you about it. Is "It's coming for Hillary. It's coming for Podesta." And then it came.
[Stone:] Well, first of all, Assange says
[Cuomo:] Right after.
[Stone:] Assange says that he has a treasure trove of devastating documents. He says it in numerous interviews. As far as John Podesta is concerned, my tweet says "the Podestas." "The Podestas." Not apostrophe "S." Meaning John and Tony, referring to the
[Cuomo:] Is that true? I thought it was apostrophe "
[S." Stone:] No. But it still says "The Podestas."
[Cuomo:] Hold on. You read it for me.
[Stone:] But the "the" gets removed, even in the House Intelligence Committee.
[Cuomo:] But there's there is an apostrophe "
[S." Stone:] But it refers to multiple people.
[Cuomo:] You didn't write it that way.
[Stone:] No. But the House Intelligence Committee drops the "the" entirely, as have numerous media organizations. The point being that in April of 2016, the Panama Papers exposed the shady business dealings of John and Tony Podesta. And that is my reference. Nowhere do I predict that John Podesta's e-mails would be hacked, because I had no advanced notice.
[Cuomo:] But you did say his time is coming.
[Stone:] Well, because Paul Manafort
[Cuomo:] And it came, by the way. That's the part.
[Stone:] Yes
[Cuomo:] Is that the truth winds up being a foil for you.
[Stone:] All public information. Look, this is an effort to distract from the content of the WikiLeaks disclosures; were incredibly embarrassing to the Clinton campaign.
[Cuomo:] But it's also about tracking who knew what and when and may have been coordinating or encouraging what would be illegal activities.
[Stone:] There is no there is no evidence whatsoever that I had advanced knowledge of the source.
[Cuomo:] Well, you called it on two days before.
[Stone:] Speculation, supposition, conjecture. But no proof. Where's the proof? There no proof. Yes, I followed Assange's Twitter feed very assiduously. I had a Google Alert for him. I read every interview he gave. You could foreshadow what he's doing just ready by what he says.
[Cuomo:] Direct messaging Guccifer? How about that?
[Stone:] Which I well, which I made available to the House Intelligence Committee. Six weeks after the hacking. So they're ex post facto. You went to law school. How can I have been be involved in collusion in hacking material after the fact? You'd need a time machine. It's chronologically impossible. The content
[Cuomo:] Well, you're assuming that the
[Stone:] of those emails are banal, at least.
[Cuomo:] Well, banality aside, the you're assuming that the timing of it is a full appreciation of what the full context of the relationship was. That would be a case for you to make, if ever asked. Again, the special counsel
[Stone:] Twenty-four words in exchange on Twitter direct messages.
[Cuomo:] right.
[Stone:] Which is innocuous and happens after the fact. So on the basis of the content, the timing and the context, there's no evidence.
[Cuomo:] Why even reach out to somebody like that, who was connected
[Stone:] Thousands of journalists did so. I was covering this. I have to do five shows a day for five shows a week for
[Cuomo:] So it was journalistic curiosity?
[Stone:] You didn't want to know? Of course I wanted to know. I'm a political animal.
[Cuomo:] Right. But it seemed like, if I were to call a guy and find out what he did, and you know, what he wanted to cop to, that's one thing. You seeming to want to encourage and develop some relationship with him is different. Fair point?
[Stone:] I wanted to find out what he knew. It's ironic that we have a movie right now, "The Post," praising the "Washington Post" for publishing the Pentagon Papers, classified information, at the same time we're criticizing Julian Assange and WikiLeaks for publishing classified information, calling it a crime. You can't have it both ways. Which is it?
[Cuomo:] I think that's a conversation to be had. I think
[Stone:] This is what journalists
[Cuomo:] I think that's a conversation to be had. The WikiLeaks folk get sideways with me from time to time. I'm not exactly sure why. When they made the first dump, my caution to people was, hey, if this has classified information, Pentagon Papers case, Blackman's decision aside, we don't know what the Espionage Act means in this new era of caching documents and downloading things that may be classified. There haven't been any cases about it. But as we're seeing right now, you never know what the prosecution is going to do, what the government will go after. Yes, journalists feed off leaked information.
[Stone:] That's what they do.
[Cuomo:] And I say thank God for that.
[Stone:] A legitimate rule role.
[Cuomo:] But it takes us to the same point, truth. What is the truth? Is the truth that you knew what was happening? Is the truth that you were encouraging what was happening because exactly what you say, you are a political animal and you wanted to help your friend? You don't believe those are legitimate questions?
[Stone:] They're legitimate questions, but I've answered them ad nauseam again and again and again
[Cuomo:] Except from the special counsel.
[Stone:] Well, but under oath in front of the House Intelligence Committee, where my testimony is both complete and entirely
[Cuomo:] But they don't have they don't have the teeth that the special counsel does. That's why I think it's odd. And Michael Caputo, who obviously you know very well. He says he sits down with them I'm sure you've heard this from him directly. The that they have collusion, coordination on their mind. They know a lot about it. Does that make you nervous?
[Stone:] No. Because I'm not involved in any collusion, coordination or conspiracy with the Russians or anyone else. And there's no evidence to the contrary.
[Cuomo:] So the book, 140 rules. Some of them in there are just, you know, chapter and verse of what we see from the president and I would argue, using to his media advantage. Deny, deny, deny. Attack the people asking you questions. It's one thing for a consultant to give that kind of advice. And you were sought by left and right alike to figure out how to deal with a sticky mess. Is that the right way for a president to act? That when you're asked legitimate questions, attack the media? You say that they're the enemy of the people? You say in one of your rules, the media is not your enemy. You know, to deny everything, to never admit a lie. Never clean anything up.
[Stone:] This president has undergone the most vicious fake news assault that I've seen in
[Cuomo:] What's fake?
[Stone:] politics. What's fake? Well, we can argue with it. For example, Stone is Mueller is looking at Stone's dinners with with Rick Gates. That's fake. There's one dinner.
[Cuomo:] Well, it doesn't mean hold on, hold on. Roger, the truth of your relationship with Gates may be nothing. All right. That's your supposition. It doesn't mean that the question is fake. It doesn't mean that they're not looking at it.
[Stone:] No, no, no. Let's take
[Msnbc. Cuomo:] Very mean
[Stone:] "Stone worked with Gates at Black, Manafort and Stone." No, I didn't, because he never worked there. That's fake news.
[Cuomo:] All right. But that would be first of all, Ari Malburg can speak for himself. He's a talented attorney. But Ari's point could be wrong, right? You can be wrong.
[Stone:] No, no.
[Cuomo:] And it's not a deception and a lie.
[Stone:] He's not a talented attorney.
[Cuomo:] NBC got a report wrong last week about wiretapping. They corrected it. They were wrong. It's not a lie. It's when you don't correct, when you enforce a deception. That's a lie.
[Stone:] It's a smear. And it begins with the premise, the Russians hacked the DNC. Unproven at best. Guccifer 2.0 is a Russian asset.
[Cuomo:] The intel community doesn't believe that. You pointed to the fact that they haven't looked at the server. They believe that they were part of the crime of interference.
[Stone:] Our intelligence agencies have been politicized. Who says that Guccifer is a Russian? John Brennan, the guy they got caught spying on a Senate committee, looking into torture by the CIA? James Clapper, who lied under oath about whether we had a metadata collection program? And Edward
[Cuomo:] So you believe these men are completely incredible?
[Stone:] I believe that they are politicized, and I believe they are
[Cuomo:] You don't think that's dangerous it's one thing for you to do it, as a proxy. I'll give you that. That's the role of a surrogate. But when the president does the same thing, Roger, it doesn't give you a little bit of pause that he attacks the entire FBI, the Justice Department? It's all deep state?
[Stone:] Not at all. Not at all.
[Cuomo:] these Info Wars friends that you have. Not of a president.
[Stone:] In view of the fact that the president cannot be charged with a crime, according to both Republican and Democrat Departments of Justice under both Clinton and Nixon, what's the purpose of this investigation?
[Cuomo:] Truth.
[Stone:] No. To undo the results of the last election.
[Cuomo:] Truth is the point.
[Stone:] We have not found any evidence of a crime.
[Cuomo:] Who interfered well, we don't know that. And the investigation is not over. Twenty-three people have been indicted. There's plenty of proof of crimes, Roger.
[Stone:] Thirteen of them are Russians who will never who will never come here for trial, including a caterer which means Mr. Mueller has, indeed, indicted a ham sandwich.
[Cuomo:] No. Well, the rule for an indictment is a low level of legal threshold. We know that. But there's much more "there" there than we've seen in other what is described as political prosecutions. Let me give you a last blow on this. What do you say is the best reason to read Roger Stone's book?
[Stone:] Well, what's interesting to me when I post the link to buy this book on Google

[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Host, Amanpour:] Coming up, people, power and conflict. My conversation with the renowned military historian Margaret MacMillan on humanity's complicated relationship with war and how, throughout history, we are repeatedly drawn back into it despite the horrors. Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. We're often warned that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. The message holds particular resonance today with nationalism on the rise across Europe, democracies morphing into autocracies from Asia to Latin America, and civil war plaguing Africa and the Middle East. Old alliances appear strained, and so too is the past 70 years of geopolitical stability that many of us have benefited from. It is perhaps, therefore, timely that a prestigious British lecture series this year is being given by the renowned military historian, Oxford University's Margaret MacMillan. She argues that war, at its heart, is a paradox. We are all appalled by it, but also entranced by it. War is devastating, but it also brings about huge social invention. War appeals to the worst of human's traits, but inspires ideals and qualities that are rarely seen in peacetime. And above all, war is what happens when the things that we want to live for are worth dying for. I sat down with Professor MacMillan to discover why war is such an integral part of our human experience. Professor MacMillan, welcome to the program.
[Margaret Macmillan:] Thank you very much.
[Amanpour:] So, you have named your Reith Lectures "Mark of Cain." Tell us about that biblical reference.
[Macmillan:] Well, I think what we were trying to get at, I was trying to get at, was whether we are so deeply attracted to war and whether war is so ingrained in human nature and in human society that we can't escape it. And so, the Mark of Cain is, are we doomed to fight.
[Amanpour:] And you go back to Cain and Abel. Cain and Abel, yes. Yes.
[Macmillan:] Yes. And fighting between two people who were brothers, fratricidal fighting and you could argue that is one of the earliest civil wars. And so, I suppose what I was really trying to engage in was this long, long debate about is it part of human nature or not.
[Amanpour:] What is it? What have you come up with?
[Macmillan:] Well, human nature, I won't go into in a way because I'm not a biologist, but there are certainly those who would argue it is. I mean, I think that we have to protect ourselves. Fear is a very important motivator. We will often do things because we're frightened. We will be suspicious of others. And I think we still have those instincts. We are creatures after all as well as sentient beings. But I think what is more interesting is whether human society itself is deeply engaged with war and vice versa that once we began to get organized as a species, we seem to have ended up fighting each other.
[Amanpour:] I mean, you say that it is inescapable. It has formed sort of the fabric of our societies. And let's face it, wherever we go, especially here in Great Britain, in England, on the continent, every village has a monument and, of course, that goes back throughout history. War is venerated. Courage is venerated.
[Macmillan:] Yes. And I find it myself. I mean, I don't think I could ever be a soldier. I think I'm much too cowardly. But I do have admiration for people who do this. And what war can bring out is some of the worst qualities in people. It can bring out the brutality, the violence, the cruelty, the malicious cruelty, but it can also bring out sacrifice, nobility, comradeship, which makes it so fascinating.
[Amanpour:] So, it's something we admire. It's something that we fear. It's something that's with us. Let's just get to recent history and let's just get to what President Trump and President Putin were discussing, which, by the way, we do not know in a closed room with only translators. We have no idea what geopolitical, geostrategic deals were or were not made. But afterwards in the press conference, President Putin described the world order like this. Let's just play a little bit of his soundbite.
[Vladimir Putin, President Of Russia:] The Cold War is a thing of past. The era of acute ideological confrontation of the two countries is a thing of remote past, is a vestige of the past. The situation of the world has changed dramatically.
[Amanpour:] So has it? Has the situation changed dramatically? And all that hope and promise that the whole world had for a massive peace dividend after the fall of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War, has it come true?
[Macmillan:] Well, if you look around the world, I would say no. We have conflicts, some of them which have been now running for years. You think of the conflict in the Great Lakes region of Africa, you think of the Syrian civil war, Afghanistan has now been rumbling on for almost two decades, Yemen is a country in crisis, and we have the possibility of wars among other countries. And we still have an awful lot of preparation for war. That doesn't mean we're going to fight, but it's still something that is very much there in our world, I'd say.
[Amanpour:] I was struck by what you said in one of the lectures. You said that, as you've just repeated, that the big powers, big nations are preparing massively for a massive war, even though most of war right now is at a lower level.
[Macmillan:] I think we have this very interesting situation where we have a lot of very lower-level wars where, in fact, you don't need sophisticated weapons. I mean, a lot of the fighting in
[Amanpour:] And I mean not needing a pilot in the next generation of weapons also leads us again to what President Putin said and whether we should believe that the great power rivalry is over because we know that he wants his sphere of influence, that he has bases all over the place. We see the very harsh rhetoric of war coming out of President Trump before he then turns on a dime and does other things. Do you see what is the biggest threat? Is it cyber? Is it and where is the biggest threat?
[Macmillan:] I think it's very hard to say where the biggest threat cyber I think is the new frontier or one of the new frontiers. And the military in all the advanced countries are very, very worried about it indeed. I mean, they're investing heavily in it. Because so much of our societies now depend on those electronic networks and those electronic devices we take for granted. And the possibility of suddenly cutting it off, cutting off the power, cutting off the transmission between different devices, the things that we use our phones for, I mean, it would bring our societies to a complete standstill. But I think what is also always worrying is that when you get great powers preparing for war, they think of it defensively. I'm defending myself, but it doesn't look like that from the other side of the border. And what I think is a real worry in human affairs is just sheer accident and people acting out of fear and misapprehension and misassumption.
[Amanpour:] I'm really fascinated by what you say about the motivation for war on a personal level. The sense of honor, either a president or a government is thinking they're defending their people, defending their country, and you sort of describe that sense of honor as if it was on a local level, it's what gangs do in LA or elsewhere. It's the same kind of motivation.
[Macmillan:] Well, I think it is. I mean, in gangs, you have people who'd rather die than be disrespected. And that has driven a lot of warriors over the centuries. You think of the knights in armor, the people who went off in the Crusades, you think of people in the First World War. They would rather die than lose their honor. And I think nations are still impelled by this. I mean I think one of the reasons the United States is so obsessed with Iran is because Iranians humiliated them when they took those hostages at the end of the 1970s and I think this still affects American policy toward Iran, and lots of other factors, of course.
[Amanpour:] Yes. I was actually going to bring this up because we have a series of soundbites on this sort of issue from President Trump. And you're talking about honor and disrespect. Both President Putin and President Trump believe that they and their countries are disrespected by whoever, I don't know, the rest of the world or by each other. So, I want to play you these soundbites using very strong, sort of warlike Trumpian rhetoric.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. You're not going to be restarting anything. They restart it, they're going to have big problems, bigger than they've ever had before. And you can mark it down. They restart their nuclear program, they will have bigger problems than they have ever had before. The United States has great strength and patience. But if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.
[Amanpour:] So, two bits about North Korea, the middle bit about Iran after he pulled out of the nuclear accord and said they best not start up again. So, I was struck again by what you've said in your lectures that the more inevitable, once you accept something is inevitable, like that kind of language does, you really risk bringing that kind of conflict closer, actually making it happen.
[Macmillan:] Well, I think so because you start planning for it and you start looking at the other side. I mean, one of the things that often goes wrong is you look at the other side and you read the signals wrong or you read them in a way which feeds into your fears. One of the things that seems to be very dangerous at the moment is in both China and the United States, you have policy planners and states people saying things like rising and declining nations are bound to fight at some point. And if you start thinking that, you've already brought it a stage closer it seems to me.
[Amanpour:] And that is a big worry with China, right?
[Macmillan:] I think so, yes.
[Amanpour:] Yes, because they were always worried about I mean, as you say, the whole sort of Sparta, Athens, sort of rising power, risen power, conflict. And we see what China is doing to fill a vacuum that it thinks America is leaving in the Pacific and generally spreading its might around and upping its navy and its military power.
[Macmillan:] And the Chinese, of course, say they're doing this purely for defensive purposes. And they have this rhetoric which they've used for a long time that we have always been a defensive nation. We have never waged war in other nations, which doesn't explain how the borders of China expanded so enormously over the centuries. So, there was an awful lot of fighting and conquest going on there. But I think it is dangerous because, from the United States' point of view, that doesn't look like defensive. It looks like a threat. And if the United States tries to enhance its power in the Pacific, how will the Chinese see it? They won't see it as the United States just defending itself and its allies. They'll see it again as a threat.
[Amanpour:] Let's go back way, way let's go back hundreds and hundreds of years when war first started or maybe thousands of years ago when war first started. And you describe in the lectures how this was linked to the agrarian nature of communities.
[Macmillan:] We'll never know for sure, but I think that a theory which I find persuasive, at least it seems to
[Amanpour:] And then, you talk about how war changed from those early agricultural communities to the end of the 18th century when it became much different prospect and the citizen was implicated. The leaders talked about waging war on behalf of their citizens.
[Macmillan:] There's a very important shift. And I think more is always reflex. The types of war you fight reflects the type of society you are. So, when it was a knightly society, fighting was done mainly by the knights and it reflected their goals and their aims. But what happened at the end of the 18th century rather was you got, not everywhere, you've got a transformation of subjects into citizens. And once you're a citizen, you have a share in your own country, in your own society, but you also have an obligation. And so, the government can call on you to support it because it is your government in a way. And what was also happening in the 19th century was war was getting a lot more complicated because of the Industrial Revolution and the scientific and technological revolutions. So, we were getting, especially in the Western world, an awful lot better at killing each other.
[Amanpour:] Well, just run through because you did put out some amazing statistics about what it looked like, the first time a big war, there was 600,000 people et cetera, et cetera.
[Macmillan:] Well, the size of our armies was always limited by how much they could eat. And in the old days, they would march to somewhere they eat everything in the surrounding, then they'd have to move on. And so, you couldn't have very big armies. But with the railway, it became possible to have much bigger armies and keep them there much longer. And so, Napoleon took to Russia in 1812 something like 600,000 men, probably the biggest army that had ever been seen in Europe and, of course, we know what happened. Most of them died there. In 1870, when the German Confederation attacked France, it was 1.2 million men. In 1914, when Germany went to war, it could put 3 million men into the field and keep them there, which is why the First World War lasted so long.
[Amanpour:] I'm struck by one line in your biography that your great- grandfather was David Lloyd George.
[Macmillan:] Yes.
[Amanpour:] Who was the prime minister of Great Britain during the second part of World War I. How has that sort of informed your study and affected you?
[Macmillan:] I don't know because I grew up in Canada where he wasn't as much of a figure. In fact, at one point, someone said I never knew you were descended from boy George. Boy George.
[Amanpour:] Lord George.
[Macmillan:] Yes. So, there wasn't that much knowledge. I think if I had grown up in the UK, it might have been different. But I think I was always aware of history and I was always aware of politics because my family talked about it. And I suppose, more importantly, I think both my grandfathers fought in the First World War and my father and my uncles fought in the Second World War. So, it was something that you just learned about. If you're someone of my age, you probably have someone who fought in a war in your family.
[Amanpour:] And do you think that people don't know enough about it? People don't remember enough? There isn't enough, I don't know, present-day reminders of what can lead to war and how dreadful it can be?
[Macmillan:] Yes. I think, generally, we don't know enough history and I think history is useful because it helps us to understand how we got here and what mistakes we might avoid. But I think, with war, I think we don't understand enough that it can come quite suddenly. I mean, people in Europe in 1914 thought we don't do war anymore. We are too civilized. We haven't really had a major war since 1815. We don't need to worry about it. It took them less than five weeks to get into a major war. And I just think we need to be careful. We shouldn't be too smug. Wars can often start for very trivial reasons or they blow up suddenly. And then, of course, they are out of anyone's control.
[Amanpour:] I mean, one of the interesting things you say about war is that it has like, many sort of seismic events, necessity is the mother of invention. And you talk about some of the really important things that we have today coming out of wars, everything down to penicillin.
[Macmillan:] It's one of the great paradoxes of war. I mean, we see it as enormously wasteful and destructive, which it is, but it can produce really important changes. It can speed up scientific advances. I mean, the jet engine, penicillin, these were things that had been talked about before the Second World War, but really became possible as a result of the war. Splitting the atom for better or worse would probably not have happened without the Second World War. And there are also huge social changes. I mean, the position of women really changed in Western societies as a result of the First and Second World Wars because women showed they could do the jobs that it had been said before, they can't do, that's too complicated, let men do those jobs. And suddenly, women did them. And so, you could no longer, if you were a male politician, say, well, you can't vote. And so, women began to get the vote, I think, very much because of what they had done in the wars.
[Amanpour:] A recent novel by a great American young novelist, Jennifer Egan, has come out called "Manhattan Beach" and that's all about women who were forced to do work that men couldn't do because they weren't there, they were at war, in the naval dockyards. Then, they had to go back to their homes and their factories and their little lives after the men came back.
[Macmillan:] It's always two steps forward, one step back. And so, women gained a lot during the wars. And then, they did tend to go back. But they never quite lost it. And I think women gained a confidence that they knew they could do these things. But also, I think a really interesting thing in societies as a result of both the World Wars is you got a compression between the very rich and the poor. I mean, the times of greatest equality in Western societies were during and after the World Wars. Now, you wouldn't fight a war to achieve that, but it, in fact, from my point of view was a real benefit.
[Amanpour:] In my career, I came of age covering wars when they were not big set pieces. They were not army against army. The last one of those we saw was the First Gulf War and that's the only one of those that I covered. And then, it was all civil wars, whether it was Rwanda, Bosnia, wherever we went, Somalia, Haiti all those spaces. The citizen, the civilian, the ordinary man, woman and child are much, much worse off in today's kind of wars.
[Macmillan:] I think so. We've always tried to have rules about civilians. And it's another oddity. You're trying to have rules about how to fight wars when there are acts of outright violence. But we have had rules about not attacking women, children, the old, not sacking cities, although, of course, it did happen a lot in the past. But because societies have become much more integrated and because war effort is now seen that something whole society is engaged in, then it's become more legitimate to attack civilians. But the misery, I think, that these low-level wars are now inflicting on civilians who are the targets, the tools, often the recruits for these wars is absolutely appalling. And I see no end to it. That's what's so depressing.
[Amanpour:] You say you see no end to it. We all though the United Nations and the great sort of institutions that grew out of the Second World War were going to be precisely that, the accountability, the negotiated peace in our time, and it hasn't happened.
[Macmillan:] No, it's happened a bit. The UN has been very successful in cease-fires and monitoring cease-fires and it's been very successful in rebuilding post-conflict societies. But what is terribly difficult is to bring conflicts to an end. I read a book recently a wonderful book by Peter Wilson on the 30 years' war in Europe in the 17th century. And it just took on a momentum and people switched sides and they had different motives. But once you get that sort of level of violence and you get the degradation of society where it becomes permissible to get out there and beat other people up and kill them, then it's very difficult to put it back in the box again.
[Amanpour:] I was struck. We were just talking about civil war and rules about civilians. I was struck by one of these again from one of your speeches. When civilians became legitimate targets once they were embedded in the war effort, for instance, the RAF over Dresden. And this is what one of the bombers Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris said, "The aim of our bombing is not to knock out specific factories. The aim is the destruction of the German citizen, the killing of German workers and the destruction of civilized community life throughout Germany." I mean, that to me is really shocking.
[Macmillan:] Well, it means you have no limit on what the targets are. The limits have now expanded, so that anything that is part of a society that is your enemy is now a legitimate target. So, it's OK to kill babies because that will make the people the mothers not want to work as hard in the factories or it's OK to kill the old people because that will also cause suffering and sorrow to the civilians. It's OK to disrupt everything that makes life possible, water, hydroelectricity, whatever. And it is terrifying, I think.
[Amanpour:] And I was really struck as well. When you read about the US military, the
[Macmillan:] I know. It's always so difficult because you want our I mean, what an army is about, it's about discipline and it's about the disciplined application of force. But there is always that narrow line. And armies can so easily go over it. And they can just simply brutal. I mean, I was reading a description of the My Lai massacre again the other day and it makes the most appalling reading. And there was no military purpose in it. And it had no justification whatsoever. But something had happened to them and the soldiers had become brutalized and they didn't see it as illegitimate.
[Amanpour:] OK. That is something that really, really fascinates me. The brutalization of otherwise normal people, whether it's young Americans in Vietnam, young British bombing civilians over Dresden, and particularly young Germans and those who were called up and served in the worst military enterprise that we've seen in any kind of modern warfare. And I just wanted to read this to you because it's just so awful, the dehumanization, which is an effective tool of warfare, so it makes it easier to kill. "Honor in murder." This is Himmler talking to SS death squads. "Most of you must know what it means when 100 corpses are lying side by side or 500 or 1,000, to have stuck it out and at the same time to have remain decent fellows. That is what has made us hard."
[Macmillan:] Now, if you didn't know it was Himmler, you'd think this is a commander telling his soldiers, war is tough and you've got to be tough. What he's talking about is the murder of Jews, helpless innocent Jews. A lot of those people were decent Germans, nice people, went off to war. There's that wonderful and chilling thing that one of the mothers said of her son who was at My Lai. She said I sent my son to war, he was a good boy and you sent him back a killer.
[Amanpour:] It really hits you right here, particularly if you are a mother and you know that that happens. We are in a moment right now where democracies are under assault, where dictatorships keep flourishing in their own dictatorial ways, where truth is indistinguishable from lies, fake news and all the rest of it, the bots, the hacking and where politics even in our democracies is so poisonous and so partisan that you can call it warfare, war by other means.
[Macmillan:] And people are actually using that language, aren't they? They're talking about campaigns. There are talking about fighting the next we've always used a bit of military language, but it seems to be more. I find it poisonous because what you to accept in a democracy is that someone may have a very different opinion to you, but that opinion has to be respected and you have to be able to talk to people. And what we now see, I think, particularly in the United States and I think it's happening in Britain with Brexit is separate camps forming and people socializing only with those who share their views. And I think this is very destructive to the society. We need a middle ground. We really do.
[Amanpour:] Where do you think that's going to take our societies who are not formally at war, but are by other means.
[Macmillan:] I hope what we will do is recognize what it's doing to us and recognize that the level of rhetoric and the mistrust is in the end going to poison it for all of us. None of us want to live in a society where you can't trust your neighbor and we should look at other societies where that has happened. I mean, Beirut is still very tense. Lebanon is very tense. Does anybody really want to live like that? I mean, what's happening is the young Lebanese are leaving. That's what happening because they don't want to live there and a lot of the young have left Northern Ireland. And so, I do think it's incumbent on us all to try and build bridges and to try and understand the point of view of others, but it doesn't help that so much of the news now is the mainstream media trusted and instead the sort of the blogs, the these are trusted more by people who think they're telling the truth. And I think this is very dangerous.
[Amanpour:] And in all the time it took you to prepare for these, to research these lectures and to travel, what surprised you the most?
[Macmillan:] I think I was surprised and quite touched by the concern that people had. And what I found was that people asked very thoughtful questions and they were very concerned. And they were asking the sort of questions you've been asking, how do we avoid war, how do we build a society in which war isn't seen as a default, how do we build trust in society. And a lot of them were young, which I found very encouraging.
[Amanpour:] Do you, as we sit here today and we see what's going on between Trump and Putin and the other big power, China, do you fear another big power war?
[Macmillan:] I don't want to, but I do sometimes. I mean, I just think it's dangerous when people start talking in terms of its possibility. And when you get the United States and China -I've heard too much of people on both sides saying, oh, well, we may well have to fight one day. And that really does worry me. And if you start preparing for it and just the smallness of the area where the United States and China are now in a strategic struggle, it will take one plane to be shot down, one boat to be rammed, and then you get the nationalist feelings on both sides. I mean, that's really what happened in the First World War.
[Amanpour:] And just expand just a little bit on that. I mean, the difference between China and Russia because right now the narrative in the West is that Russia poses the biggest threat to the West.
[Macmillan:] I think Russia poses a threat to the values of Western society because I think what Putin is doing and I think Russia is using the tools of a weak power. I mean, economically, it's a disaster. No, disaster is too strong. But economically, the standard of living is going down. It depends far too much on oil and the price of oil is down. It hasn't really managed to build up a modern industry. Demographically, it's got problems. Its birth rate is lower. It's got a huge China sitting on its southern border which isn't going to be a friend for very long time, I don't think. And so, what Russia is doing is making mischief where it can. But that is very destructive of Western society. The fact that people are even talking about the possibility of the Russians swinging the American election, the last presidential election, or the Russians swinging the referendum vote in the UK is worrying. And the subversion, the support for far right parties that is coming from Russia across Europe.
[Amanpour:] These are scary times, but it's really fascinating to listen to your lectures and to talk to you now. Professor MacMillan, thank you so much. "The Mark of Cain".
[Macmillan:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] That's it for our program. And remember, you can always listen to our podcast and see us online at Amanpour.com. And, of course, you can follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Thanks for watching. And goodbye from London. END

[Paul:] Yes, you've made it to Saturday, here, 8:26 is the time. Good morning, I am Christi Paul.
[Blackwell:] I am Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you. There's been some growing backlash since President Trump announced he is pulling the U.S. out of the landmark 2015 climate deal. This pact was the high point of former President Obama's environmental agenda. More than 190 countries all aiming at reducing emissions of planet warming, greenhouse gasses. The president says the agreement imposed unfair environmental standards on American businesses.
[Paul:] But what Americans do want to know is does the president believe climate change is a hoax as he suggested on the campaign trail. Well, in yesterday's press briefing, for example, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt as well as White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer didn't give a straight answer on that.
[Unidentified Male:] Does the president believe that climate change is real and a threat to the United States?
[Scott Pruitt, Epa Administrator:] What's interesting about all the discussions we had through the last several weeks have been focused on one singular issue, is Paris good or not for this country? That's the discussions I've had with this president. Whether they were good environmental objectives that were achieved as a result of Paris. His decision was no and that was the extent of our discussions. Yes, ma'am.
[Unidentified Female:] [Inaudible] yes or no.
[Unidentified Male:] Does the president believe today that climate change is a hoax that's something of course he said in his campaign. When the pool was in the oval office with him a couple of days he refused to answer. So I'm wondering if you can speak
[Pruitt:] I did answer the question because I said the discussions the president and I had over the last several weeks have been focused on one key issue, is Paris good or bad for this country?
[Unidentified Female:] You are the EPA administrator. Shouldn't you be able to tell the American people whether or not the president still believes that climate change is a hoax? Where does he stand?
[Pruitt:] As I indicated several times in the process, there's enough to deal with, with respect to the Paris agreement and making an informed decision about this important issue. That's what our focus has been the last several weeks. I've answered the question a couple of times.
[Unidentified Male:] Does the president share the EPA's administrator's thoughts on this topic and why is the administration sort of backed away from using the words climate change?
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] I don't I have had not as I mentioned, I have had an opportunity to specifically talk to the president about that.
[Blackwell:] At least ten states mostly blue states led by Democratic governors are defying the president's decision, vowing to continue to support the global agreement.
[Paul:] California's Governor Jerry Brown, for instance, says states have the right to pursue their own policies.
[Governor Jerry Brown , California:] America is a big place. We have 50 states. We have a federal government and we have a federal system. Within the confines of our national identity and constitution, California and other states can pursue their own policies. We strongly support zero emission cars. We have almost 30 percent renewable electricity. We are going for 50 percent in the next few years and beyond that to 100 percent. We're going to do whatever it takes.
[Paul:] CNN's Kyung Lah has more on the mayors and the governors supporting the Paris climate deal despite the president's decision.
[Kevin De Leon, California Senate President:] In California we're not debating if the earth is still flat.
[Kyung Lah, Cnn National Correspondent:] The reaction across the country swift, and nowhere more than in California, from the state's top lawmakers to the governor, this weekend looking to the Far East past President Trump, pledging a separate California-China climate change pact.
[Governor Jerry Brown , California:] We are forming the world against this deviant move on the part of President Trump.
[Lah:] Also working around the White House, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, standing steadfast with the president of another country, France, while defying the U.S. president's decision to withdraw from the Paris Accord.
[Michael Bloomberg, U.n. Envoy For Climate Change:] Americans don't need Washington to meet our Paris commitment, and Americans are not going to let Washington stand in the way of fulfilling it.
[Lah:] Bloomberg, the U.N. envoy for climate change says his charity will foot the $50 million bill, and a coalition of governors, mayors and businesses will meet the Paris environmental standards instead of Washington. They're joined by more than 150 mayors, pledging to uphold the Paris agreement. Local leaders say states and cities set the mission standards and environmental protection can lead to growth, a belief not shared by the White House.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania along with many, many other locations within our great country before Paris, France. It is time to make America great again.
[Lah:] The mayors of two of those cities firing back.
[Mayor John Mcnally , Youngstown, Ohio:] We are a little bit confused how we got thrown into the discussion about the Paris Accords, and U.S. withdrawal away from the agreement is not going to create more jobs in Youngstown area.
[Mayor Bill Peduto  Pittsburgh:] This city does not support the initiatives that he is doing. This city is adamantly opposed to it. For him to then use this city as his example, who he is elected to represent, he is not representing us at all.
[Lah:] Multiple CEOs from Wall Street, Silicon Valley, also responding, loudly. Many saying if the White House won't act, corporations will.
[Richard Branson, Founder, Virgi Group:] All of us know we have a problem. We know we got to do something about it.
[Lah:] So if industry, if the states, if all of these mayors do indeed do the work, something palpable could be done as far as the United States trying to keep up with the Paris Accord, because all of the work of emission reduction is polled at the local level, that's where all the work is done. Mayor Bloomberg says he wants to remain in the Paris Accord, all of it will be unofficial. Kyung Lah, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Paul:] Now Al Gore is going to be a guest on "STATE OF THE UNION" with Jake Tapper tomorrow, talking about climate change. Senator Mark Warner, U.S. ambassador to United Nations, Nikki Haley also on that show. It is "STATE OF THE UNION" with Jake Tapper tomorrow, 9:00 a.m. Eastern right here on
[Cnn. Blackwell:] Up next, Democrats are strategizing to regain power in Washington. The party has to make a crucial decision. Follow leaders of the last 10, 20, 30 years or turn to someone new.
[Paul:] There are more guns than people in the U.S. so how can we stay safe in a country full of guns, some ask. W. Kamau Bell tries to find that out on the next "UNITED SHADES OF AMERICA" tomorrow night.
[W. Kamau Bell, Cnn:] What are your thoughts on guns in this country?
[Unidentified Female:] You just grab your head and scream, and say what can you do?
[Unidentified Male:] How do you convince people that firearms are not the solution?
[Unidentified Female:] So many of my friends were killed because of guns.
[Unidentified Male:] We don't have a gun problem, we have a heart problem. There's no sanctity of life. I think anybody should be able to own a gun. Every round has two things attached to it, a jail sentence and a lawyer.
[Bell:] Is it irresponsible to not do all you can to protect your family?

[Brooke Baldwin:] Breaking news, Iran is warning the United States that it will revert to it's -
[Baldwin:] - previous ways if President Trump pulls out of this Iran Nuclear Deal. Moments ago a top Iranian official telling CNN's Christiane Amanpour that without the U.S. there will be no deal left. So let's go to CNN's Global Affairs Correspondent Elise Labott, revert to it's previous ways.
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well Brooke that essentially means and I - I spoke with - with a group of reporters to the Iranian Foreign Minister last week and he was talking about pretty quickly restarting up Iran's nuclear program. And that means enrichment, that means all the other aspects of what the Iranians call a peaceful nuclear program. We know we've seen these documents from the Israelis in the last couple of days that they say shows that Iran actually was not working on a peaceful program. It was working on military program. But what I think the Foreign Minister means and what the Ambassador speaking to Christiane means is that Iran will start up it's nuclear program. And the Iranian Foreign Minister has spoke about more drastic measures so I think that's for a start.
[Baldwin:] We'll wait for the reaction from Israel. Elise Labott thank you. Ahead on our other breaking story this afternoon, a huge legal shake up as President Trump ramps up his attacks on the Special Counsel. The President's White House lawyer out, a Clinton Impeachment lawyer in. What this means overall for the Mueller investigation.
[Brooke Baldwin:] Kanye West, Kanye West. He is at it again. Just days after voicing his support for President Trump and drawing the ire of fans and fellow artists. The rapper just threw himself into an even bigger controversy after he said this to TMZ about slavery.
[Kanye West, Rapper:] I'm a black person, a black community but I'm not just that. I feel like one thing is people try to minimize me to artist, hip-hop, black community. Yes, I'm always going to represent that but I also represent the world. When you hear about slavery for 400 years, for 400 years? That sounds like a choice. Like you was there for 400 years and it's all of ya'll? You know like, it's like we're - we're mentally imprisoned. Do you feel that I'm feeling - do you feel that I'm being free and I'm thinking free?
[Van Lathan, Tmz Senior Producer:] I actually don't think you're thinking anything. I think what you're doing right now is actually the absence of thought. And the reason why I feel like that is because Kanye, you're entitled to your opinion. You're entitled to believe whatever you want. But there is fact and real world, real life consequence behind everything that you just said. And while you are making music and being an artist and living the life that you've earned by being a genius, the rest of us in society have to deal with these threats to our lives. We have to deal with the marginalization that's come from the 400 years of slavery that you said for our people was a choice.
[Baldwin:] That last voice there, Van Lathan, TMZ Senior Producer. Now Kanye West did tweet quote, "To make myself clear, of course, I know that slaves did not get shackled and put on a boat by free will." He goes on, "My point is for us to have stayed in that position even though the numbers were on our side means that we were mentally enslaved." My next guest is Maxine Crump. She is the President and CEO of Dialogue on Race, Louisiana. Her great-great grandfather was sold a slave or was a slave who was sold to Georgetown University. So Maxine, welcome back. You know, I really wanted to hear from you on - on these comments. Contemptible yes, but for you the subject of slavery is personal. When you heard Kanye West what were you thinking?
[Maxine Crump, President And Ceo Of Dialogue On Race:] Well my first thought that I was listening to someone who wasn't thinking and hadn't thought. And as far as it being personal for me about slavery, it's personal to a lot of African Americans who descended from slavery. That's part of America's population. Those who descended from slavery.
[Baldwin:] But - but - but more than that.
[Crump:] Mostly my thought was that, I was listening to someone who wasn't thinking and hadn't thought much about it.
[Baldwin:] Wasn't thinking, hadn't thought. Let me add to this. Kanye West also did an interview with Charlamagne, a host on a popular morning radio show called "The Breakfast Club". The interview actually happened a couple of weeks ago but the audio was just released and in this clip I want to play Kanye said he didn't like that Harriet Tubman was being put on the $20 bill. Listen.
[Kanye West, Rapper:] Why you got to keep reminding us about slavery? Why don't you show us - put Michael Jordan on the $20 bill.
[Charamagne, Radio:] But Harriet Tubman was a slave who rebelled though. Her and Nat Turner in a different frequency though. They kind were like you when you said you didn't feel like being controlled.
[West:] Yes. You know what. It's funny like, my boy Tremaine tweeted, you know, a picture of me and Virgil and he said Malcom X, Martin Luther King. And all these people got mad, it's like how can you compare them to that? Man, I know this is going to cause an uproar but certain - certain icons is just too far in the past and not relatable.
[Baldwin:] Not relatable he says. I mean, I - I was reading some of your comments your - you - your - - your concerned right. You're concerned with Kanye and maybe other young people is just in how our history books are being written. How - how young people in this country are being taught or not taught about parts of our history.
[Crump:] Yes. I don't want - if I had a conversation with Kanye one on one, I wouldn't have a lot of say which is sort of how you're hearing my response now. Because if I'm talking to someone who's not thinking and I'm going to enter thoughts into a conversation with him, then we're not going to have a conversation on thought. And it sounds like he stands only in the immediate and for some reason does not want to deal with the past. But I'm sure if there was a long enough conversation we would find that he does have thoughts about the past, which may be why he doesn't want to deal with it. But - but I do - I am concerned that there would be people who would be influenced by his thinking and think, well maybe he has a point. That would be the part that concerns me. And if they believe he has a point, it would be someone - because they haven't had that education K-12 education. If you think that 400 years of enslavement is treated as if people lived 400 years and stayed there 400 years, when there were generations of people who came through that system. And it was an American system and it was legal, a legal system. Never right, but legal. And that there were ways of keeping this construct that was beyond those individuals resources to do anything about it. They did everything they could. And what I would want is for everyone who's been through K-12 education and everyone involved with K-12 education at any level, administrators, those who write textbooks. Any level of education needs to be concerned about hearing that and realize that it - not just because he said it but because he's a public and popular person who might influence the thinking of his fans. And obviously a lot of people like him, he's as famous as he is. That I should think that that's an - an OK way to think, it's very flawed and very surfaced. That in K-12 we need to make sure that people who come through our educational system get a clearer understanding of slavery and of how it is still an evolution today. That we're still living with the consequences of and the results of that still needs work.
[Baldwin:] I just wanted to end on your words. I wanted to hear from you. Yes Kanye West has influence. Yes, he's famous, but you as a descendent of slaves with such a powerful voice sitting here on national television, I wanted to hear from you. Maxine Crump, thank you so much for the time and for your opinion.
[Crump:] My pleasure.
[Baldwin:] Appreciate it. Back to our other breaking news is the President threatens the Justice Department saying he could intervene. His White House lawyers quitting and a Clinton impeachment lawyer joining the team. We have those new details ahead. Also, two high profile Republicans undermining the GOP tax law and Obamacare repeal by saying they both hurt Americans. So how will the President respond?

[Stelter:] We talk a lot about how pro-Trump narratives pick up steam through the media. But this next story appears to flip that script. Critics have helped propel a shocking story to the top of many people's social media timeline. The headline here says: Federal agency says it lost track of 1,475 migrant children. This story is actually one month old, but it's getting a ton of press this weekend thanks in part to liberal columnist and other journalists who are calling attention to it. It's agenda-setting 101. The overarching issue is what happens when immigrants enter the U.S. illegally. Unaccompanied minors get placed with sponsors, placed with sponsor families, but some of those kids disappear. Now, that was found at a Senate hearing almost exactly a month ago. Incredibly, it was just a one-day story at the time. It got a little bit of attention and then people moved on. I guess it was missing the human element, the pain and the agony of individual families. But the story is back now in part because of the Trump administration's new policy to break up more families, to break up families across the border. It's supposed to be a deterrent as Jeff Sessions made clear a couple weeks ago.
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] If you are smuggling a child, then we will prosecute you. And that child may be separated from you as required by law.
[Stelter:] OK, that's the policy. But let's back up here, what's really going on. Trump's key issue for the past three years has been illegal immigration, and whenever he watches Fox, he's reminded how his base feels about immigrants. Trump is angry that migrants keep coming across the border. It's so bad that the homeland security secretary almost resigned earlier this month. That was a one-day story too. So but this is the backdrop: more children will suffer now. But let's be clear, this has been going on for years. This is not just the Trump issue. The ACLU released a report on Wednesday alleging widespread abuse of migrant kids dating back many years. But that story about the kids who were missing now is back in the news thanks to some writers and reporters who have forced it back into the news. One day before the ACLU report came out last Tuesday, "Arizona Republic" columnist E.J. Montini helped put the issue back on the map by asking, hey, wait, before announcing a plan to separate more children from families, shouldn't there be a plan to adequately protect the children who are already here? On the same day, NBC News covered it on the ground in Texas with a really great story about the human element, interviewing people actually affected, and that was on Tuesday. And for some reason, I still can't quite figure out, this all went viral on Friday. In some cases, Websites were just repackaging last month's Senate hearing with snappier headlines, making it look more compelling. You can see here there were dozens of stories all of a sudden on Friday. MSNBC's Chris Hayes also called it out by interviewing immigrant advocates.
[Laura St. John, Immigrant Advocate:] What's happening right now is really unprecedented. We've actually seen children who are 2 years old regularly, and just last week, we saw a 53-week-old infant in court without a parent.
[Stelter:] Friday happened to be National Missing Kids Day, that might have been another element to propel this onto the national radar. In any case, we see lots of Democratic lawmakers, liberal columnists, trying to focus attention on this issue and it worked on Saturday when President Trump weighed in and tweeted about it. So, let's talk about it now. John Walsh and Daniel Dale are back with me. Daniel, you called out the president's tweet. He said, hey, he got to put pressure on the Democrats to end this horrible law that separates children from their parents, he misspelled the word there. Daniel, you said this was a big lie. Why?
[Dale:] Because there's no law that requires the Trump administration to separate children from their parents. This is a Trump administration policy that other administration officials have owned as their policy. Jeff Sessions, John Kelly, they said this is our policy you know for better or worse. So, Trump as he as he did with DACA seems to have gotten squeamish possibly because of all the coverage and is now telling Democrats who don't control Congress to end the law that does not exist, pretending that that his own policy is something that he is powerless to change.
[Stelter:] On "Fox and Friends", the other day, the president also said border crossings are down 40 percent right now. That's not true. Border crossings are up. Joan, what do you make of this?
[Walsh:] Well, border crossings are up, and he's very concerned about that Brian. And so, this is a new policy. We saw Jeff Sessions declare it. This does not go back to Democrats. So, it is a lie. Now, there are two things coming together here and I do think it's important that we that we pull them apart. There is a history of we had a tragedy of unaccompanied minors coming into the country. There were many
[Stelter:] During the Obama years.
[Walsh:] During the Obama years. That does go back to that was that happened not his fault but on his watch. There are kids that were probably lost during the Obama years, but what is happening now is while we cannot account for these children that were in our care, we are now cruelly adding more children, putting more children into a system that is obviously not keeping track of them, doing the cruelest thing imaginable and pulling babies little babies from their parents. There was a mother and this is where the symbolism becomes important there was a mother crying as her toddler taken away and she was given a yellow wristband, shades of Nazi Germany to mark her as a mother who had smuggled in a child and that smuggling of her own child is considered a crime. This used to be, if we caught people, often they would go back across the border, they would be deported but they would go together. Now, they're being detained. They're being separated. It is cruel. It is horrible and Trump is lying about it. And yet Trump and Sessions, they may say OK, this coverage it's working. It's having a deterrent effect. This is exactly what we want, to make sure people don't cross the border illegally. That isn't that maybe what they're saying but, you know, shooting people would actually have to be a deterrent effect. Are we going to start doing that? I mean, really, where do we draw the line in our cruelty?
[Stelter:] Daniel Dale, one more question about this: is this sort of the big lie you know we've been talking about when to call things lies when not to. You were saying that sometimes you try to define is falsehood or misleading statement because you don't know what the president's thinking. But in this case, you said it was a big lie. When do you make that determination that something is a lie? How do you do it personally?
[Dale:] You know, Brian, it's subjective. I you know, I can never quite know what the president is thinking. I think often if it's some quantitative complicated policy issue, I tend to give him more leeway. You know, we know he doesn't always understand that. If it's something that we have we were reasonably certain he has knowledge of, if it seems like he's just making something up out of thin air, I think I'm more inclined to call it a lie. But there's no there's no hard and fast formula, and I think you know sometimes even I can be too quick to jump to the word lie. I think we as journalists need to be
[Stelter:] Too quick.
[Dale:] Cautious about sticking to what we what we know for sure.
[Stelter:] I think some Trump fans would say, what do you mean too quick to call it a lie? Y'all are attacking him every day saying he's lying every day.
[Dale:] Well, he often does lie every day.
[Walsh:] He is lying every day.
[Dale:] I think I think it's clear that he is a serial liar. That doesn't mean that each and every instance of his say him say something false is a deliberate lie.
[Stelter:] I was struck by something Don Lemon said on scene another night. He said, this is an extreme crisis and I liked the framing of that because we sometimes lose sight of how it's an ongoing problem to your point earlier, Daniel, we can't let this fade away from the headlines. Joan, last thoughts to you?
[Walsh:] You know, our parents raised us to say be honest and if you lie, people will then never trust you again. So, Donald Trump has lost the presumption of truth and, you know, I rarely give him the benefit of the doubt if it looks like he's lying because he has been lying his whole career, he's been lying his whole presidency I don't think he you know, without evidence, he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. This is a conscious, conscious tactic that he uses. It's a tactic that authoritarians have used from time immemorial to confuse us all, have us fighting amongst ourselves about
[Stelter:] Confuse, I like that word confuse.
[Walsh:] what the truth is. Lose sight of the truth loses meaning and we're fighting were fighting about tangents. But I'm with I'm with Daniel. Bring this story of the lying, the overall pattern of lying. That is a story in itself. It should be part of our beat.
[Stelter:] Joan, good to see you. Thanks for being here.
[Walsh:] You too.
[Stelter:] Daniel, great to have you on the program as well.
[Dale:] Thanks.
[Stelter:] Thanks for being here. Up next, why are top government officials like EPA boss Scott Pruitt trying to work in the shadows? A congressman and a reporter are here to tell you how they're trying to shine some light to it.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Terror strikes again, a deadly attack in the heart of London.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] It's time to say enough is enough.
[Tapper:] As President Trump renews calls for his travel
[Bacon:] , the very latest live from the U.K. And America first? President Trump withdraws from the U.S. from the Paris climate accord.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I was I elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.
[Tapper:] And Al Gore is speaking out.
[Al Gore, Former Vice President Of The United States:] We're going to solve the climate crisis, no matter what President Trump does.
[Tapper:] Why Ivanka thought he could change Trump's mind about the planet a rare interview with the former vice president next. Plus, what really happened? Fired FBI Director James Comey finally speaks out in front of Congress and cameras.
[Trump:] All I want is for Comey to be honest. And I hope he will be.
[Tapper:] What bombshells might he reveal? And how could this influence the Russia investigation? We will preview the hotly anticipated testimony. And the best political minds will be here on what happens next. Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is sending our sympathies across the pond. Terror has struck the heart of Europe again, this time in London, where a deadly attack has left seven innocent people dead and 48 people wounded. The attack began late last night, when a van rammed into the crowds of pedestrians on London Bridge, sending people flying into the air. Police believe three terrorists then fled on foot from the van to Borough Market, a popular spot for food and drink, busy on Saturday nights. There, they burst into restaurants, swinging huge knives and slashing people indiscriminately, sending diners into hiding in bathrooms and under tables. Police arrived on scene just eight minutes after the first call, killing three suspects. In this photo we're about to show you, you can see one of the dead terrorists wearing what appears to be a suicide vest, though police now those vests were fake, designed to stoke yet more year. U.K. police say they have already arrested 12 others in connection to the attacks so far this morning, with searches still ongoing. This is the third attack in the U.K. this year, coming on the heels of that bombing outside a concert in Manchester that killed 22 innocent people just two weeks ago and, of course, another vehicle attack on a bridge in Westminster, England, that killed five people. Prime Minister Theresa May addressed the world this morning.
[May:] We believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face, as terrorism breeds terrorism.
[Tapper:] CNN's Clarissa Ward was there on Downing Street when the prime minister spoke. Clarissa, alarming news from the prime minister this morning about other plots there, some of them foiled by authorities, thankfully.
[Clarissa Ward, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] That's right, Jake. I mean, three terrorist attacks in just three months here in the U.K., and British Prime Minister May saying that five plots had actually been foiled, five significant terrorist plots have been foiled. Now, she did not announce that the terror level would be elevated to critical. It was after Manchester. Now it remains on severe. That is likely because they don't believe that there's any larger network than the three assailants who of course were killed within eight minutes, the prime minister said, after they began their attack. They were shot dead by police within eight minutes. So, the terror threat hasn't been elevated. But we did hear the prime minister not mincing words. She said, listen, the thing that all these attacks have in common, while they're not connected by any sort of network, they're connected been an ideological threat. She talked about the problem of radical Islamist or extremist Islamist ideology. She said that Britain has been too tolerant for too long and needs to review its counterterrorism procedures, Jake.
[Tapper:] And, Clarissa, as all of this is unfolding, organizers north of you say tonight's benefit concert with Ariana Grande will go ahead. Obviously, security remains a big concern. How are authorities addressing that?
[Ward:] That's right. The show will go on. But, obviously, with 50,000 people, a huge amount of stars, they're not taking they're taking a lot of precautions. There will be added security presence on the streets, added security checks at the venue. They have asked people not to bring any bags with them, if possible. They have said that every single person will be searched manually. So, they're doing whatever they can to prevent any kind of an attack or a catastrophe from taking place. But all the artists who are participating have come out and said, you know what, this is not about fear. This is about solidarity. We will come out. We will sing. We will perform for the people of Manchester, and, indeed, for the people of London, too Jake.
[Tapper:] All right, Clarissa Ward in London, thank you so much. Here with me is the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Democratic Virginia Senator Mark Warner. Thanks so much for coming in this morning. We appreciate it. So, this is the third terrorist attack in the U.K. in the last 10 weeks. They have claimed the lives of 34 innocent victims. What can you tell us? What do we know about the perpetrators of last night's attacks? And is there any risk to Americans right now, beyond the normal risk?
[Sen. Mark Warner , Virginia:] I received a brief this morning from our National Center Counterterrorism Center. And, basically, they have pretty much the same information you have gotten, open source. They still don't know for sure whether this was terrorist-inspired or terrorist-directed, so, whether this was homegrown or actually directed by ISIS or al Qaeda. I think that will take a little while longer in terms of investigation. There's no specific threat against the United States, but, obviously, we have seen our strongest ally, Britain, now hit three times. Our hearts and thoughts and prayers go out to them. But I think what you're seeing in Britain is a resoluteness, but also a recognition that, as the British went through three decades of IRA- related terrorism, they will carry on. And I think, in many ways, that's what we need to do here in our country as well.
[Tapper:] The British prime minister, Theresa May, said there's far too much tolerance for extremism in the U.K. Do you think we have that problem here in the United States?
[Warner:] I think we don't have it the same way as the U.K., but it's obviously a challenge in modern society to maintain free societies and freedom of speech, but still recognize that we have to be on guard against some the hateful venom that is oftentimes spewed over the Internet.
[Tapper:] Why do you think it is that we see these attacks in London, but we haven't, knock on wood, seen such a thing happen here in the United States?
[Warner:] I believe, in many ways, the Muslim-American community is better integrated into our society. They I think that's always been our secret sauce in America, that you can come here, first generation, and if you accept our laws and rules, become American. That's not always been the case in so many of the European countries. And I think we're seeing, again, the benefits of that. And that's why it troubles me so much to see the kind of the type of tweets that the president has put out in the last 12 hours or so.
[Tapper:] Prime Minister May also said that she thinks Internet-based technology firms are giving extremism the safe space it needs to breed. She wants new regulations of cyberspace. Take a listen.
[May:] We need to work with allied democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning.
[Tapper:] Facebook, Twitter, Google, do you think that these tech firms are doing enough?
[Warner:] Jake, I think and my background, as you know, was in technology business before I came in went into politics. I think we do have to reexamine these platform companies that, for years, have said they have no responsibility to curate the information that flows across their platforms. They have started to change. Originally, they changed their policies as related to child pornography. Now they're changing their policies as related to terrorism. I was just out on the West Coast last week talking with folks at Facebook. They're now recognizing the weaponization of false information, even around elections. They shut down 30,000 fake accounts right before the French elections. But this is going to require, I think, a much broader conversation than we've had to date.
[Tapper:] You have a lot of big hearings coming up. On Wednesday, you will have the director of national intelligence, the head of the NSA, the acting director of the FBI, and the deputy attorney general, and then, Thursday, of course, the big one, James Comey, the former FBI director. Do so you have any indication whether President Trump will try to exert executive privilege to block Comey from testifying about their conversations?
[Warner:] I would hope that he would not. I think he would be on shaky legal ground, to say the least. Director Comey was fired by the president. And you have the president himself making derogatory comments, in effect, at least reported to the press, calling Comey a nutjob in front of the Republicans. Totally inappropriate. The question I have...
[Tapper:] In front of the Russians, I think you mean.
[Warner:] In front of the Russians...
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Warner:] ... which is, again, just regardless of what you feel about Comey, that's not how he should be treated. And the question we have, and I think most Americans, have is, you know, going back to Watergate, there's a series of rules that have kind of emerged out of Washington, one, that a president shouldn't ask about an ongoing investigation, particularly shouldn't ask if that investigation is connected to affiliates of the president. And it would be absolutely unthinkable if the president of the United States asked the FBI director to basically back off an investigation that was directed at some of the affiliates of Mr. Trump.
[Tapper:] Hillary Clinton said something very interesting this week that reminded me of something that you said in a hearing not long ago. She said that she believes that the Russians, in their interference in the U.S. election, must have been guided by Americans. Take a listen.
[Hillary Rodham Clinton , Former U.s. Secretary Of State:] The Russians, in my opinion, and based on the intel and counterintel people I talk to, could not have known how to best weaponize that information unless they had been guided. And here's...
[Unidentified Male:] Guided by Americans?
[Clinton:] Guided by Americans and guided by people who had polling and data information.
[Tapper:] Is that true? Do you agree?
[Warner:] This is one of the questions we have to sort through, again, one of the questions I was asking when I was out on the West Coast. It does seem strange, it appears, that Russian-paid Internet trolls who created bots were then able to put forward fake news, selective stories in a way that seemed targeted. Now, we don't...
[Tapper:] Targeted at certain states?
[Warner:] Targeted it at certain states, at certain demographics. We don't have fool proof of that. So, I'm not where Secretary Clinton is in terms of jumping to a conclusion. But this is one of the many questions that we need to investigate.
[Tapper:] One of the big questions, of course, is, is there any evidence of collusion that you have seen yet? Is there?
[Warner:] Listen, there's a lot of smoke. We have no smoking gun at this point. But there is a lot of smoke. And, again, one of the questions we will have, not only for Director Comey on Thursday, but on Wednesday for Director of National Intelligence Coats and NSA, National Security NSA Director Admiral Rogers, I'm going to want to ask them, because there have been reports that the president also talked to both of them in terms of asking them to downplay the Russian investigation. That would be very concerning to me.
[Tapper:] Have you heard any accusation yet that you think, if it is proven, in terms of what the president has said to either Coats or Admiral Rogers or James Comey, that, if it's proven, it is obstruction of justice?
[Warner:] Jake, I went to law school, but I'm not a practicing attorney. I will leave that for much better attorneys than I. But, clearly, it would be very, very troubling if the president of the United States is interfering in investigations that affect potentially the president and his closest associates. We have seen already the NSA director, the NSA adviser General Flynn get fired because he didn't fully disclose his contacts with Russians. We've had the attorney general, Sessions, have to recuse himself because he didn't fully disclose his connections with Russians. We see other reports of Mr. Kushner having a series of contacts with Russians and others. And the American people deserve to get to the bottom of this. And what I hope our committee is able to do, and we've I'm very proud of the fact that it's maintained its bipartisan approach is, we're going to just follow the facts. We're not going to be taken out by some of these one-off stories. We're going to continue to follow the facts.
[Tapper:] The FBI's probe of the meddling is also looking at the Trump campaign's data analytics operation, which was overseen by Jared Kushner. Are you focusing on that?
[Warner:] Listen, we're going to follow all of the facts in terms of what kind of contacts and whether the contacts were inappropriate between individuals affiliated with the Trump campaign and the Russians. They are contacts that were made before the election. There have been a series of stories about contacts between the election and the inauguration. And then we have got these very troubling reports about the president intervening and, in the case of Director Comey, fire him because potentially because of his activities with the Russia investigation.
[Tapper:] Senator Mark Warner, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it, as always.
[Warner:] Thank you.
[Tapper:] Coming up after the break, Al Gore will be here. He's speaking out after President Trump's decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord.
[Al Gore, Former Vice President Of The United States:] What were you thinking? Couldn't you hear what the scientists were saying? Couldn't you hear what Mother Nature was screaming at you?

[Becky Anderson, Connect The World:] Tonight, a very public tour and a very secret set of files. CNN's reporting right in the mix, helping explain this Qatar crisis. And you've got to wonder why these erstwhile gulf allies are choosing now to double down. Plus, the pop star, Ms. Universe, Russia, and Donald Trump in a circle together, we'll unpack that report just ahead.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] After the mosques, the propaganda, now we finally see what the Iraqi soldiers say is the true human and defeated face of ISIS.
[Anderson:] With ISIS all but crushed in the city, Mosul is set for another battle, rebuilding itself. We get you on the ground right there. A very warm welcome. It is just after 7 o'clock in Abu Dhabi. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson. Executive mechanisms, supplementary grievance, violations of charters there is an awful lot of syllables being thrown around here in the gulf to signal one very simple fact. Neither side on the Qatar crisis is backing down. U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is in the gulf trying to move things forward. He says.
[Rex Tillerson, U.s. Secretary Of State:] We're hopeful we can make some progress to begin to bring this to a point of resolution. I think Qatar has been quite clear in its positions and I think those have been very reasonable. We want to talk now how do we take things forward. And that's my purpose in coming.
[Anderson:] Right now, Doha and the four Arab states lined up against it are waging a war of words including around CNN's exclusive reporting on agreements Qatar and its neighbors signed in 2013 and 2014. The details were secret until now. Both sides pointing to the document, saying, see, this proves you are in the wrong. CNN's U.S. chief security correspondent Jim Sciutto obtained those documents. He is joining me now from Washington and correspondent Jomana Karadsheh is with us from Amman. She has recently returned from a deployment in Qatar. Jim, these documents were secret before you obtained them. Now, both sides have been publicly reacting and commenting on CNN's reporting. Why are these documents so key to understanding the roots of this crisis? And what does the timing of their release mean?
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn U.s. Chief Security Correspondent:] Well, it gives you such a remarkable view inside these extremely important high level relationships going back to 2013. After all, a handwritten agreement signed by the royals of these countries, of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait and then in 2014 adding Bahrain, UAE, and Abu Dhabi. At the most senior levels, you see that for a number of years now, there have been deep, deep disagreements about who is responsible for what. And in fact, not too thinly veiled accusations, many of them directed at Qatar for continuing to support opposition groups, deviant groups as they're described in here, including it appears terrorist groups, opposition groups within the countries in the gulf region, other groups outside the region in Egypt, Yemen, and elsewhere. It shows you that this has been an issue for some time. And great effort was made at the highest levels in private, in secret, to try to make progress on these issues. And yet now three and four years later, they are coming out in public, as we've seen with the blockade and now with the release of these agreements, and in effect giving fuel to both sides, right. As you say, Becky, both sides pointing to the other to say you did not fulfill your agreements, your commitments here and neither did you. And I think, listen, let's be honest. These agreements coming to the fore in public light because some sides in this division want to make a point, right, about where they think the mistakes were made and who is responsible. Really remarkable to see these laid out in such stark form and so public from what were really the most private senior meetings, senior level meetings, that really could be possible there.
[Anderson:] And Jim, Washington's top diplomat, Rex Tillerson says he is in region to help deescalate this crisis, but his comments about Qatar's position being reasonable as somewhat of a surprise, certainly to I would expect the other side of this. And in stark contrast, it seems at least, two messaging from the White House. Your thoughts?
[Sciutto:] Yeah. It's remarkable. Tillerson has two mountains to climb here in effect. I mean, he has got the mountain of trying to bring these divided parties closer to together, at least finding a path to bring them closer together, really just to avoid escalation. But he has this other mountain in that his commander-in-chief some weeks ago basically via Twitter, as is his way, put himself on one side of this division. President Trump tweeting accusing Qatar of supporting terrorism, et cetera, after his visit to Saudi Arabia. Now, you have the Secretary of State coming in and saying listen, the U.S. is going to be a mediator here. He's not saying explicitly ignore what the president said, but to sit down there next to the Mayor Qatar and call their positions reasonable, you can't have a more diametrically opposed position to what your commander-in-chief said just a number of weeks ago. And this is you know, Becky, and we have talked about this on a number of things, there's a frequent dynamic here where the president will go one way and his senior staff will go another. The question is where is the real power center in the policy and that must be very difficult for the gulf nations to deal with, because they will say, I imagine, well, the president was just here and he said X and now you or here and you're saying Y. You know, how do we circle that square, as it were?
[Anderson:] Jomana, you were in Doha recently for an extended period reporting on this crisis. Rex Tillerson told Qatar that said he's around these parts as everyone's friend. Have a listen.
[Tillerson:] Yes, I'm here as a friend to the region. I'm here with.
[Anderson:] I'm here as a friend to the region, he said. He may be the only friendly face around them at this point. There is really no love lost here in region at present. What has changed and what was this once close GCC club?
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, I think it's very interesting, Becky, to see, you know, the changes. If you look at these documents that Jim has been reporting on, it's interesting to see what Qatar seemed to agree to in 2013, 2014. Perhaps an indication of these issues reemerging every time we see some sort of change in power or change in succession lines in this region. Back in 2013, 2014, when these agreements were signed, this is when you saw that transition of power taking place in Qatar when Sheikh Hamad, the father of the current emir, handed over power to his son. And Sheikh Hamad was seen as the man, he was credited for transforming Qatar, he was seen as you know, Qatar under his rule emerged as a very influential regional and international player. And that time, when Qatar really emerged as a source of irritation for its bigger and stronger neighbors like Saudi Arabia and the UAE. And it was also that time when those agreements were signed, Becky, as you know, it was King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, the last agreement signed just weeks before his death. So, now, we're seeing these issues reemerge. As Jim pointed out, this is not something new. This has been going on for some time. And this is at a time we're seeing this change in Saudi Arabia right now with a new crown prince coming into power. Some see him as having a more confrontational foreign policy. So you do have people in the region today for example some Qataris who are wondering if these countries had this issues with Qatar, if they believe that Qatar was not complying with what it agreed to back in 2013, 2014. Why is this only coming out three years later, why is it coming out as they're seeing this change in Saudi Arabia and a new U.S. administration, Becky?
[Anderson:] Jomana Karadsheh today reporting to you out of Amman, and Jim out of Washington. Thank you so much, both of you. From a war of words here to a real war in the Middle East after three years, at last, Mosul is finally free the grip of ISIS. Iraqis have been celebrating after the prime there declared victory on Monday, the months of fighting taking an obvious toll. Parts of the once thriving city now just look like a wasteland. Rubble and debris where once buildings stood. Nick Paton Walsh was in Mosul as the final fight to free the city played out.
[Walsh:] It's like something supernatural or other worldly did it. This destruction, absolutely breathtaking and really a sign of the dust and bones that ISIS have left in their wake. Old city, Mosul, the damage new, the city gone. And Mosul, almost free of ISIS. Elsewhere, Iraqis are celebrating victory, dancing in the streets. Yet, here, the streets are still being ground to rubble. In the last 100 yards of ISIS, the group that once held swaths of Iraq and Syria, down here to the dust, we're told. There it is. The river that runs through the heart of Mosul that marks the end of ISIS territory in Iraq, really. But between these Iraqi special forces and the body of water marks victory are still just dozens of ISIS fighters still holding out. American air strikes hammered them. That's the intensity and proximity of the fighting here that air strikes are called in right next to Iraqi forces. They even feel the rubble landing in their faces. Perhaps because this really is the end, some of them appear to give themselves up. A sniper still there. They're welcomed. Carry him, carry him, the commander shouts. After the mosques, now we finally see what the Iraqi soldiers say is the true human and defeated face of ISIS. This man appears like he has a disability and is asked how he got here. ISIS forced me here, he insists. They fought the world's war on ISIS here in Mosul and now casually pass dead fighters. How does it feel?
[Unidentified Male:] It feels dark. I try to run the operations here after this all nine months.
[Walsh:] Brigadier General al-Asadi planted the Iraqi flag that says on the river bank, they fall. But this isn't a battle of flags anymore. But for ISIS, the smaller cells of survival. So the fight went on even as the official declaration from Iraq's prime minister announced victory. So it will be for Iraq in the years ahead.
[Anderson:] Nick Paton Walsh now east of Mosul, how does the city rebuild after all that devastation, Nick?
[Walsh:] It is a devastating task for already a devastated city, Becky. We are talking really about a demolition job that initially needs to occur. I'm not a construction engineer, but it's pretty clear it looks like the surface of the moon. This is rubble that is littered the booby traps, even the corps of ISIS fighters and sadly, we have many civilians killed during the intensity of the fighting being held there as human shields by ISIS. So a very staunch task there in the old city where we understand still that there are clashes continuing with small pockets of ISIS fighters, even now still holding out. That's the old city. It's small but it's symbolic for the city itself. The broader issue is how one gets infrastructure and reconstruction going. It's remarkable actually, two miles away from the fighting, you can see people on the streets selling their wares again, grilled chicken, paint shops, traffic jams, signs of life in every street, and obviously a tale of its own suffering. The major task for Baghdad, Becky, now is to get money and assistance in quickly and security, too. This is still an active conflict area, still very much threatened by ISIS'low level insurgence. We will continue for months ahead. And of course, remember as well, there are other towns in the country, in which they do still have a presence involving military operation. So it is a huge task ahead.
[Anderson:] Yeah. And this is going to take some time. Amnesty International said Iraqi and coalition forces didn't do enough to protect civilians who were caught up in the cross fire. Is that a fair assessment, you think?
[Walsh:] It's difficult to know in a war like this, but it is not fair, to some degree. Amnesty's job obviously is to appeal for human rights and say more should have been done. The coalition said they did all they could. And in fairness, frankly, when ISIS are bent or desperate to take as many civilian lives with them as they could in worship. Death is part of a cult- like behavior that's the center of their warped creeds, then it's difficult to imagine how you could save many lives. We have seen civilians come out of the rubble. We have seen the accuracy of the air strikes trying to target ISIS fighters. It's an awfully difficult, messy business, warfare, particularly in an urban environment when civilians are caught in between. Yet, in theory, I'm sure everybody could have done more by simply not advancing militarily. But as on coalition spokesperson points out, when it came to the fight for the old city, those civilians trapped as human shields faced starvation. There was a clock ticking on that. They were running out of food and water. So you have to bear that in mind. There is a pace that needs to be delivered in terms of military operation, to save lives from being lost. So many circumstances here, easy to point the finger, easy to blame, no consolation from a lack of that from those families of those whose lives were lost as innocent civilians in this, too. But frankly, an impossible task taking ISIS on in an urban area like that. I think pretty much everybody does accept that, Becky.
[Anderson:] Nick Paton Walsh out of Mosul now. It is 11:16 in the evening, 7:16 here was declared a victory in Mosul. What's next for coalition forces? The answer is Raqqa in Syria. It is the self-declared ISIS capital. CNN journalists were the first inside the walls of Raqqa's old city. Now, we take you to the front lines of the battle against the terror group there. Tune in, 11 pm Abu Dhabi time, 8 pm in London right here on CNN. Still to come, a new report says Donald Trump, Jr., left out a critical detail in his statements about a meeting with a Russian attorney last year. We're going to see what the New York Times is saying about a potentially explosive e-mail just ahead.

[Unidentified Male:] This is our opportunity to make tax reform.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] The bill is like a fish. It stays out in the sunlight too long, it stinks.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. Chris is off this morning. John Berman joins me. Great to have you.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Great to be here.
[Camerota:] OK. So we begin with several developments in the Russia investigation. Despite repeated denials from the president and the White House, we now have concrete evidence that Mr. Trump was personally told about ties between one of his campaign advisers and Russia. Former Trump national security adviser J.D. Gordon was at this meeting in March 2016 where George Papadopoulos made his pitch to set up a meeting between Vladimir Putin and then-candidate Donald Trump. Gordon says that Mr. Trump heard Papadopoulos's pitch and did not dismiss the idea. Also, the president's son-in-law and White House senior advisor Jared Kushner turning over documents to Robert Mueller's investigators. Sources tell CNN that shows that Mueller is reaching Trump's inner circle and could be building a case for obstruction of justice against the president for firing FBI Director James Comey.
[Berman:] Also, serious new questions this morning about Attorney General Jeff Sessions, his memory and his repeated lack thereof. This after campaign advisor Carter Page, he testified to a House panel that he told Sessions that he was traveling to Russia during the campaign. Remember, Sessions was also in the room with Papadopoulos when he made his Russia pitch. Yet, the attorney general has said as recently as a week and a half ago that he was not aware of any conversations between the Trump campaign and Russia. Democrats say they want to know more about what's going on here. All of this is happening as the president leaves very, very shortly on a high-stakes 12-day trip to Asia. Miraculously, this morning his Twitter account is back and working. It was shut down for 11 minutes overnight. And in a Kafka-esque move, he's tweeting about Twitter this morning. We have it all covered for you. Let's begin with CNN's Joe Johns live at the White House. Good morning, Joe.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] Good morning, John. That departure expected to come up in just a few minutes here from the White House. It's expected to be the president's longest foreign trip so far of his administration, though the focus on foreign policy continues to be overshadowed by the Russia investigation.
[Johns:] The latest bombshell in the Russia probe: President Trump did not dismiss the idea of a campaign adviser arranging a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Trump during a campaign meeting in 2016, according to a person in the room. It's the first concrete evidence that Mr. Trump was personally told about ties between the campaign advisor and Russia, despite fierce denials.
[Trump:] I had nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge, no person that I deal with does.
[Johns:] Court documents reveal that, during this March 2016 national security meeting, former Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos pitched the idea of a meeting between Putin and Trump. Trump campaign advisor J.D. Gordon, seen here with then-candidate Trump, Jeff Sessions and Papadopoulos. Gordon says Mr. Trump listened to his idea, and he heard him out. The White House denying the president had any recollection of this.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Mr. Papadopoulos suggesting that a meeting between then-candidate Trump and Vladimir Putin. Do you recall that?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] No. I don't believe he does.
[Acosta:] Attorney General Sessions rejecting the idea of a meeting with Putin, according to the source. But Sessions never disclosed the conversation during multiple congressional hearings when he was asked directly about communications in the Trump campaign.
[Sen. Al Franken , Minnesota:] You don't believe that surrogates from the Trump campaign had communications with the Russians? Is that what you're saying?
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] I did not, and I'm not aware of anyone else that did. And I don't believe it happened.
[Johns:] Now Senate Democrats want to question Sessions about those denials. The highly-anticipated testimony from former Trump foreign policy advisor Carter Page fueling even more questions about what Sessions knew regarding ties between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Testifying behind closed doors for more than six hours before a House panel, Page revealing that he told Sessions about a trip he was taking to Russia during the 2016 campaign. Though, Page said the trip was unconnected with the campaign. This is another conversation Sessions failed to mention during hearings.
[Franken:] He seems to have problems telling the truth on this subject.
[Johns:] The attorney general forced to recuse himself from the Russia investigation after failing to disclose his own contacts with Russia's ambassador to the
[U.s. Sessions:] I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States.
[Johns:] In the wake of indictments of three Trump foreign policy advisers, the president continues to insist that Hillary Clinton should be the one investigated.
[Trump:] The saddest thing is that, because I'm the president of the United States, I am not supposed to be involved with the Justice Department. I'm not supposed to be involved with the FBI. I'm not supposed to be doing the kind of things that I would love to be doing, and I am very frustrated by it.
[Johns:] Now to the overnight mini-sensation. On social media, the president's Twitter account overnight briefly taken down, apparently by a disgruntled employee on his or her way out the day out, last day on the job. The president tweeting about that this morning. "My Twitter account," he writes, "was taken down for 11 minutes by a rogue employee. I guess the word must finally be getting out and having an impact." Of course, John and Alisyn, I think he was referring to the public impact of this Twitter account. I think it's been felt long before now.
[Berman:] The words finally getting out the president has a Twitter account. Just now. Joe Johns at the White House, thanks so much. Sources tell CNN that the president's son-in-law and White House senior advisor Jared Kushner has turned over documents to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Investigators are looking into what role he might have played into the firing of James Comey. So is the special counsel building a case for obstruction of justice against the president, maybe others? CNN's Shimon Prokupecz live in Washington with more. Shimon, talk to us about these documents.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Correspondent:] That's right, John. So sources tell us that Kushner voluntarily turned over these documents. These are documents he had from the campaign and some from the transition. And they're related to any contacts he may have had with Russia. These documents are similar to the ones Kushner gave to congressional investigator. Now, this comes as investigators have begun asking witnesses questions about Kushner's role in the firing of the former FBI director.
[Camerota:] So but Shimon, why do they think that Kushner had any role in the firing of Comey?
[Prokupecz:] Well, the witnesses have been asked these questions and by the investigators. And we've heard different accounts from different sources. Some say Kushner was a driver in the president's decision. Others say he simply didn't oppose it and that it was something the president solely made the decision on. And sources close to the White House say that, based on what they know and this is important and that we don't know how they know this. But they say Kushner is not the target of the investigation. But this is a sign that Mueller could be building a case for obstruction against the president for the firing of the former FBI director.
[Berman:] So Shimon, how significant do you think this is?
[Prokupecz:] Well, the Mueller's team's questions about Kushner, you know, show that it's a sign that investigators are reaching into the president's inner circle. And it shows that this extends beyond the 2016 campaign to the actions that have been going on, that have taken place at the White House by high-level officials. A White House official says the Mueller's team's questions about Kushner are not a surprise and that Kushner would be among the list of people who investigators would be asking about. A lawyer for Kushner did not comment. And we should add that the White House also declined comment Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Shimon, thank you very much for all of that reporting. Let's bring in our political panel to discuss it. We have CNN Politics reporter and editor at large Chris Cillizza; CNN political analyst David Gregory; and CNN counterterrorism analyst Phil Mudd. Great to see all of you. So Phil, let me start with you. So this we now have this picture of the March 2016 meeting with then-candidate Donald Trump. And you see the players in there. You see Jeff Sessions. You see George Papadopoulos. You see J.D. Gordon. This is the meeting where J.D. Gordon now says that George Papadopoulos made his pitch that he could arrange a meeting between Vladimir Putin and candidate Trump. Is that a big deal? Does that change the investigation for you? And that Trump did not did not dismiss that he heard it?
[Phil Mudd, Cnn Counterterrorism Analyst:] It doesn't change the investigation for me. There's a couple of characteristics here I'd be thinking of. Meetings with the ambassador to me are significant. You're meeting a representative of a foreign power and you can't remember it?
[Camerota:] Jeff Sessions.
[Mudd:] That's right. I'm talking about Jeff Sessions. A conversation, one of a thousand conversations a day with a chump change let's be clear adviser. And a year later, more than a year later, you don't remember that one? If I were back in government and somebody said, you know, "Did you ever talk about X, Y, Z, you had a five-minute conversation with somebody 15 months ago" or whatever, give me a break. I'd write that off. The meeting with the ambassador, or the contacts with the ambassador, those are significant.
[Berman:] A chump change guy who is now a cooperative witness...
[Mudd:] Yes.
[Berman:] ... with the special counsel investigation which, I think, elevates him beyond the realm of chump change perhaps, in terms of the jeopardy he poses to some of the administration. Let me read you from the court documents dealing with George Papadopoulos. "On or about March 31, 2016, defendant Papadopoulos attended a national security meeting in Washington, D.C., with then- candidate Trump and other foreign policy advisers for the campaign. When defendant Papadopoulos introduced himself to the group, he stated in sum, in substance, that he had connections that could help arrange a meeting between then-candidate Trump and President Putin. After this trip to Washington, D.C., defendant Papadopoulos worked with the professor and a female Russian national to arrange a meeting between the campaign and the Russian government and took steps to advise the campaign of his progress." We've seen the picture. Papadopoulos in the meeting. Two people down from Jeff Sessions in the room with President Trump. Jeff Sessions, Chris Cillizza has testified that he never was told by anyone in the campaign that they were meeting with or talking to Russia. Carter Page says he told Sessions. George Papadopoulos in that room told Jeff Sessions. Jeff Sessions met with the ambassador Kislyak.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Political Correspondent And Editor At Large:] Yes. It's so you take any one of those, with the possible exceptions of the meeting with the ambassador. You take the conversation between Page, Papadopoulos and Sessions. And I in a vacuum, I'm with Phil, which is you talk to a lot of people. I understand that. The problem is, is that context matters. Right? We know that under oath, Jeff Sessions said he had not had any contact with any Russian officials during the 2016 campaign. Well, we know he met with Sergey Kislyak on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention. And to me even more damning, in September 2016, he and Kislyak met in his Senate office. Now, the way that Sessions gets around that right now is to say, well, that was in my capacity as a senator, not as a surrogate for Trump. I'm not sure how you draw that line. But it's I've been comparing it little kids so I compare it to my kid not bringing his homework home. Right? The kid forgets his homework the first time, honest mistake, you know. You've got a lot of stuff going on in school. You're playing with your friends, fine. The kid forgets his homework the second time, you're like, "Well, you know, kind of got to get on that." It will be a little bit more than this. The kid forgets his homework a third time, and you think, "You may not want to be doing your homework." I mean, and so context and what's come before matters. And I think that's what's getting Jeff Sessions into trouble.
[Camerota:] It sounds like Chris Cillizza wants to ground Jeff Sessions.
[Cillizza:] My kids are not getting their homework done. That's your basis.
[Camerota:] We hear that cry for help. We hear that cry for help loudly. David, how do you see it?
[Gregory:] I start with where we are now. President Trump is, at the very least, totally indifferent to the impact that Russia had on our election, meddling in the election, an attack on our democracy. Why is it that he is so indifferent? Is it just his own insecurity and narcissism that he doesn't want to believe that Vladimir Putin wanted him to be president and did things that were underhanded to achieve that? Or is it something worse? On the face of it, we also know that Robert Mueller, the special counsel, is beginning to reveal what his investigation shows thus far. And I cannot believe that the fruits of this investigation is to get George Papadopoulos maybe even wearing a wire as a cooperating witness, that he is starting low and that it has got to go higher in terms of what that coordination was. We know from evidence that has been revealed publicly so far that the Trump campaign was open for business, to get dirt on Hillary Clinton from anyone who came, including the Russians. So where do you go from there? And I think that's what we should be focused on, is what we're learning so far and what it potentially leads to, rather than overinterpreting what these contacts alone tell us about whether there was any criminal activity.
[Berman:] So Phil, I've got to change the subject here and deal with something that developed overnight.
[Mudd:] Can we talk about Chris's parenting problems?
[Camerota:] Do we have to take Jeff Session's iPod away?
[Cillizza:] Do we have the whole hour?
[Berman:] So Twitter, right. We know the president uses Twitter. For 11 minutes last night, if you're Paul Ryan, they were 11 glorious minutes. If you're Donald Trump, they are 11, you know, very, very troubling minutes. His Twitter account was down. We learned this morning that it was a disgruntled employee. It says, "Through our investigation, we have learned that this was done by a Twitter customer support employee who did this on the employee's last day. We're conducting a full internal review." And then the president tweeted about it this morning. You know, I've got to find it in the stream of Twitter. "My Twitter account was taken down for 11 minutes by a rogue employee. I guess the word must be finally getting out and having an impact." It sounds sort of funny, and I made jokes about this. But what if this employee on the last day in customer support didn't take the account down but tweeted about North Korea? I mean, that's a serious concern.
[Mudd:] Well, we've already seen that concern in the public space. The president does that already. When I look at a couple of issues, the president's use of Twitter and what he says when he uses it, I think the use of Twitter is revolutionary in politics. And I think I think the president is setting a precedent. Whether you like what he says or not, that's significant. But what we've seen from him already is also revolutionary in foreign policy. You have a nuclear-capable state, and you have a president of the United States who wakes up and says, "Let me just throw something in the water and see what happens with the North Koreans."
[Camerota:] So you're not worried about a national security hack? You're worried about the...
[Mudd:] I'm worried about the president himself saying things with a foreign power where we don't understand how that foreign power thinks. And remember, we don't understand how that foreign power perceives what the president says. Are they going to take what he says seriously?
[Berman:] Sure, but what if Larry from customer support can do it? I mean, I don't know if his name is Larry. You know, Mickey. What if he wants to start a war with North Korea? He took the account down last night.
[Mudd:] Well, I think if I'm at Twitter, I have a fundamental question. When we have a capability by a single employee either to take down an account or to tweet, I think the question is, why doesn't somebody review that? Fair question.
[Camerota:] Gentlemen, thank you very much for talking about all of this with us this morning. Up next, former Trump adviser Carter Page told the House Intel Committee that he gave Attorney General Jeff Sessions a heads-up about a trip to Russia during the campaign. What else did Page tell the Congressmen? A member of that committee joins us next.

[Kirsten Nielson, Homeland Security Secretary:] To date what we've discussed are support activities that are very similar to jump- start.
[Unidentified Male:] It wouldn't be actual enforcement then?
[Nielson:] Correct. As of now. As of now. Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] The President also in a tweet said that he suggested that he would use some of the military appropriations to fund the construction of the border wall. Does the President have the authority to use money that Congress appropriates to Department of Defense to build the border wall?
[Nielson:] So, it's a good question. I'm only going to side step it because I'm not at the Department of Defense and I'm not a lawyer there. What he meant was, there are some lands that the Department of Defense owns that are right on the border. That are actually areas where we see elicit activity as part of what DOD does every day in terms of force protections. We're looking at options for the military to build a wall on military installations on the border. Other than that, I can't speak to the legality of the question.
[Unidentified Male:] Could give a cost estimate to what this will cost?
[Nielson:] I can't unfortunately. I think looking at past numbers should be indicative. But it really depends on a very specific mission sets that they'll provide. For example, aerial surveillance is done by flight hours. So firstly, if you translate that to con ops and number of people and then I could tell you those people will cost. So, were working on real time.
[Unidentified Male:] Approval for any of that?
[Nielson:] To activate the guard under title 32, no we do not. But we will do it in conjunction with the governors.
[Unidentified Male:] How much wall can you build with the money that you currently have?
[Nielson:] The currently appropriated will build about 150 miles.
[Unidentified Male:] The $1.7 billion?
[Nielson:] So, that's for 17 and 18 together. Yes. We have started building as you know. So, we're building real time in Flexia.
[Unidentified Male:] How much
[Nielson:] This an important question. To us it's all new wall. If there's a wall before that needs to be replaced, it's being replaced by a new wall. So, this is the Trump border wall. In many cases it will in many cases it will
[Unidentified Male:] Current wall would count as new wall in your words.
[Nielson:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] And how will it cost to complete the entirety of the wall that you desire?
[Nielson:] Border Patrol as you know has submitted a very specific plan to Congress. Where we need the wall, what type of wall we need? We have finished evaluating all the prototypes. We have a tool kit, if you will. Some of the parts of the border are very different. In one place we even have a wall that almost floats with the sand because of the conditions there. Other places will have taller walls. Again depending. Some places we have levees to do dual purpose. We're continuing to work it out based on the funding we have and what we have learned from the prototypes. We should have a much better estimate soon.
[Unidentified Male:] So, we don't have a total ticket price at this time? It is still unclear what you think it will cost?
[Nielson:] We have the down payments and we're working with Congress real time to let them know what additional funds we need for what.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] I'm not sure I understand what the urgency for this is. Seemed like it ramped up over the last several days and since the weekend. The House is not here, the Senate is not here. Why is this such an urgent priority right now for the President to sign?
[Nielson:] I think what I would say, the numbers continue to increase. April traditionally is a month in which we see more folks crossing the border without a legal right to do so. So, it's partly modelling, partly anticipating. We're seeing more and more advertising very unfortunately by the traffickers and smugglers to the south specific to how to get around our system and enter our country and stay. We have documented cases of borrowing children appearing at the border as a family unit in a fraudulent way. So why today, not yesterday, tomorrow? Today is the day. Today is the day we want to start this process. The threat is real as I mentioned.
[Zeleny:] Why not last year? What responsibility does the White House, or the department have for not urging Congress to do something more permanent rather than having National Guard troops who are stretched thin already?
[Nielson:] Yes, no, it's a great question. I appreciate that opportunity to clarify. We do want Congress to act. We had been hopeful that we would be able to agree on a bipartisan bill. The President has supported two of the four that were offered on the floor this last go around. What we were trying to do is give Congress an opportunity to act. That is not gotten is where we need to be in terms of enforcing the law. We're taking what actions we can as an executive branch and hope that we can soon again start the conversation with Congress. Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] You said you hope deployment begins immediately. What does that mean? Does that mean that troops could be headed to the border as soon as tonight?
[Nielson:] It does mean that. But what it also means that we'll do it conjunction with the governors. There want to be very clear. This is title 32. The governors retain control of the National Guard in their region. I'm not going to get ahead of them. The ones that I have spoken to understand our urgency, our request. The National Guard understands the urgency and the request. So, we'll do it as expeditiously as possible but it's an MOA process. We're working through that real time.
[Unidentified Male:] And follow up with Jeff's question, this is the 440th day of the Trump administration. Talked about the urgency. Talk about a being April. There's a lot of speculation the country that this might have something to do about what the President saw on television Sunday morning. Something to do with the fact that the President was to shore up support amongst his political base. Can you speak to the speculation? Is it true?
[Nielson:] I think what is true is that the President is frustrated. He's been very clear that he wants to secure our border. He's very clear that he wants to do that in a bipartisan way with Congress. What you're seeing is the President taking his job very seriously in terms of securing our border and doing everything we can without Congress to do just that. I do hope as soon as Congress comes back I can work with them.
[Unidentified Male:] How long have you been working on this plan? For how long have you been person working on this plan?
[Nielson:] It's always on the table. It's never been done before. It's not a new concept. It's nothing new. It's one of many things that we have looked at. We're in continuing conversations with the governors, this is a partnership as you know. It's not new. We're just walking through all of the things that we can do. I listed some of the ones that we have done. We can provide you others. Last one.
[Unidentified Male:] You spoke of DACA and other programs as a magnet. The President made similar arguments. That same argument was made against the gang of eight bill some years back. Can you describe what sort of immigration bill that covers people that are here without papers would be acceptable and would not be a magnet or is the only bill that would not be a magnet simply one that restricts immigration?
[Nielson:] A good question. I don't think it's the bill per se. I think in some cases its that the bill wasn't passed. All of that uncertainty gives the conversation wings in the south of us, hurry and get here now.
[Unidentified Male:] At the time Republicans that opposed the bill said that passing the bill will cause a wave of people coming to take advantage of it. You know, the President just made a similar DACA even though people who arrive now are ineligible for it and you just made a similar argument about similar programs. So, what other than a bill that is only restricts immigration do you think wouldn't be a magnet? Because every time
[Nielson:] Border security. I'm not trying to be flip. That's how the two go together. The problem of doing any of them in a vacuum as we continue the problem. We want a permanent solution.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm not being difficult. But every time this issue comes up and every time there's any sort of method where whether it's administratively or legislatively, attempted to address this problem, the same people every time said it's going to be a magnet. People are going to flood the borders trying to take advantage of it. So, I'm curious, if that constantly a problem every time this issue comes up, then how can you entertain any kind of comprehensive immigration bill?
[Nielson:] I understand the question. What I would say is if we put together a package and pass it, the conversation is over. Vote for this tranche. There are those that will receive some sort of permanent status. That's what the President has been clear on.
[Unidentified Male:] He rejected one this year.
[Nielson:] The President also favored two bipartisan bills. What he's been clear on, he will not do half measures. We have to stop the actual pull. We have to have the ability to remove when we interdict. He's been very clear and very strong on this. If we pass a bill that doesn't do either of those two things that would be a pull factor. We're trying to do them in conjunction. There are some people here we've talked about giving permanent status to. But at the same time, we have to close the loop holes. So that when we do that we don't pull up another huge population being told by the smugglers, go now, go now. That's not how it is going to work anymore. I really thank you for your time. Please let us know, Sarah know, we will continue to give you details as we get them. Thank you for your time.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Thank you, Secretary Nielsen. We're running long. We'll jump straight into questions. Sean?
[Unidentified Male:] Back in January, the President told several of us that he was looking forward to willing to answering questions under oath from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. He said she expected it to happen in about two or three weeks. Does the President still intend to answer questions from the special counsel and do it under oath?
[Sanders:] The President is working in conjunction with his legal team and making a determination. I'd refer you to them on anything specific regarding that matter. We're continuing to be fully cooperative with the office of the special counsel and will continue to drive the same message that we've been driving over a year. There was no collusion and we'll continue to be cooperative until that comes to a full conclusion which we hope is soon.
[Unidentified Male:] So, nothing has changed in terms of his willingness to answer questions?
[Sanders:] Again, I'll refer you to his legal team. They would make that determination.
[Unidentified Male:] What is his reaction to learning that he is not a target of the special counsel investigation although he's a subject?
[Sanders:] I'm not going to comment on the ongoing and the back and forth out of respect for the special counsel. As we said many times before there was no collusion between the President and Russia. Nothing has changed. We know what we did and didn't do. So, none of this comes as a surprise. Mara?
[Unidentified Female:] Thank you, Sarah. I have two questions. A Russia question and a DACA question. Does he agree with McMaster that we have failed to impose sufficient costs on Russia?
[Sanders:] What McMaster said, we've been very tough on Russia. He echoed the President's message that he said yesterday during the press conference with the Baltic leaders that no one has been tougher on Russia than this President. What he also said is that other nations could do more and should do more. We that's not different or in contrast to anything that we've said. We have continued to be tough on Russia and continue to be tough on Russia until we see a change in that. At the same time as the President stated yesterday, it would be good for the world if there can be a relationship. We'll have to see what happens. Lot of that is determined by the behavior of Russia.
[Unidentified Female:] The President thinks other nations should be tougher but we've been as tough as we can? Is that what you are saying?
[Sanders:] We've been tough on Russia and will continue to be. We're asking Russia to make a change in their behavior and be a good actor in the process. But absolutely other countries should step up. We expelled 60 Russian operatives. Other countries did four or five certainly rethink everybody can step up and do more. And put pressure to maintain good behavior.
[Unidentified Female:] On DACA, the President tweeted no more DACA deal. Does that mean when the courts resolve this issue he will start deporting the DACA kids?
[Sanders:] I'm not going to get ahead of anything. We have tried and tried. Democrats have continued not to want to participate and actually find a solution. They failed to show up and do their jobs as they were elected to do. The President has been very clear, put multiple proposals on the table to fix the problem and Democrats have not been willing to take a deal. It was a really good deal and went much further than the previous administration. And when further of the things that they previously supported. Frankly, you shouldn't be asking me this question or the White House this question. You should be asking Senate Democrats and members of the House Democratic party why they aren't willing to actually fix something that they claim to want to champion day after day?
[Unidentified Male:] Sarah, Larry Kudlow and the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, both said today that negotiations are the most likely way the trade dispute it's going to be resolved. Does the President agree with that or does he intend to put tariffs on the table, make them real, they're not real yet and see what happens?
[Sanders:] We're going through the review period. We're very lucky that we have the best negotiator at the table, in the President. And we'll go through that process, a couple months before tariffs on either side would go into effect and be implemented. We're hopeful that China will do the right thing. China created this problem, not President Trump. But we finally actually have a President that is willing to stand up and say enough is enough. We're going to stop the unfair trade practices. We're asking China to stop unfair trade practices and we're going to work through that process over the next couple of months.
[Unidentified Male:] Any change in Chinese behavior, these tariffs will take effect?
[Sanders:] I'm not going to get ahead of the process of where we are. We're in the review process right now. Certainly, we expect China to make changes and stop the unfair trade practices that they participated in for decades.
[Unidentified Male:] The tariffs will take affect?
[Sanders:] I just said I'm not getting ahead of the review process but I would anticipate that if there are no changes to the behavior of China and they don't stop the unfair trade practices than would move forward.
[Unidentified Male:] In the meantime, Sarah, all this is taking place, we're seeing some really wild swings in the stock market which represent billions and tens of billions of dollars in real money. Is the President worried that the saber rattling is cause manage people in this country to lose money?
[Sanders:] No, the President is worried that we have countries that have been taking advantage of us for decades and he's not going to allow to happen anymore. We may have short term pain, but we'll have long-term success. We're focused on long-term economic principles and making sure that we have a strong and stable economy. That's exactly what the President is doing.
[Unidentified Male:] Question on Amazon. The Pentagon could potentially award a very large cloud computing contracts to Amazon. Given the President's recent criticism of Amazon, is this something he would have a concern about, Amazon getting this contract, and would he ever personally intervene in the contract competition?
[Sanders:] The President is not involved in the process. DOD runs the competitive bidding process and I would refer you to the Department of Defense on the specifics of how that process would work.
[Unidentified Female:] He's not involved in the process what so ever.
[Sanders:] That's something that the President isn't involved in. Again, this is a process run by DOD. And it is a competitive bidding process. For the specifics, I refer you to them.
[Unidentified Male:] Thanks, Sarah.
[Sanders:] A lot of Johns here today.
[Unidentified Male:] President railed against Amazon over the course of the past few weeks calling the deal that they have with the United States Postal Service a sweetheart deal. My question has to do with another sweetheart deal. The $50 a night payment that the EPA administrator Scott Pruitt paid to a lobbyist with the EPA. President promised to drain the swamp. His behavior and actions seem swamp- like. Why is the President OK with this?
[Sanders:] We're reviewing the situation. When we have a deeper dive on that, we'll let you know. We're currently reviewing that.
[Unidentified Male:] Does the President have confidence in the EPA administrator at this point?
[Sanders:] The President thinks he's done a good job on the deregulation front. But again, we take this seriously and were looking into it and let you know when we're finished. I'm sticking with the theme here and go to another John and then mix it up.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you, Sarah. Two questions. Last week, BuzzFeed reported that Christopher Steele was claiming, in a report, documented evidence the FBI had a second report on the mysterious death of Mikhail Lesin, founder of Russian Television, RT, and former press secretary to Vladimir Putin. He died at the Hotel DuPont. Originally, it was said from a fall, but this report said he was bludgeoned after by people hired by oligarchs close to Putin. Does the administration have any comment on this given the concatenation of commentary on Russia and response to Russian activities abroad?
[Sanders:] I don't have anything specific on that incident at this point.
[Unidentified Male:] The other things is, can we have a readout from the Mexican Foreign Minister's meeting here recently, including with the White House staff, and Jared Kushner?
[Sanders:] I'm sorry, I couldn't hear the last
[Unidentified Male:] I understand
[Sanders:] Are you asking me if we're going to have a readout?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Sanders:] Sorry. We're continuing in the NAFTA negotiation. We feel like we've made significant progress. We'll keep you posted as that continues. Jeff.
[Unidentified Male:] Sarah, was the President persuaded by his advisors that it's important for the United States to stay in Syria?
[Sanders:] The President has maintained all along that our focus has been on defeating ISIS there. We've made significant progress since the President took office and under his leadership with a complete collapse of the caliphate there. We're continuing to make progress. We're continuing to work with our allies and partners in the region, but we want to focus on transitioning to local enforcement and do that over this process to make sure that there's no reemergence of ISIS in and take away some of the progress that we've made. And so that's what we're moving to. As this environment has changed because of the success under the President's leadership, we're evaluating it as we go.
[Unidentified Male:] The President has repeatedly expressed his annoyance or his dissatisfaction with Iran and criticized the Iranian regime. Wouldn't taking U.S. presence out of Syria simply embolden Iran even further?
[Sanders:] No. Because again, the purpose would be to transition that and train local enforcement as well as have our allies and partners in the region who have a lot more at risk to put more skin into the game. And certainly, that's something that the President wants to see happen is for them to step up and for them to do more, and that's what we're working with right now. Julie.
[Unidentified Female:] Sarah, just to follow up on that. The President said yesterday he wanted to see American troops come out of Syria come home from Syria.
[Sanders:] Absolutely. The goal, again, is to defeat ISIS. And once we completely do that we've made significant progress. And when there's no longer a need for troops to be there and we can transition to that local enforcement, that certainly would be the objective.
[Unidentified Female:] Right. So, what does that look like? What is the yardstick for measuring what eradicating ISIS looks like in Syria right now based on the conditions on the ground that military commanders are looking at? And secondly, what did he tell his commanders yesterday during this meeting about how quickly he wants to see that play out?
[Sanders:] As the President has maintained, since the beginning, he's not going to put an arbitrary timeline. He is measuring it in actually winning the battle, not just putting some random number out there, but making sure that we actually win, which we've been doing. We're going to continue doing that and that determination will be made by the Department of Defense and the Secretary of Defense which the President has given authority to do that.
[Unidentified Female:] But what do you mean by transitioning to local forces doing more
[Sanders:] To training and helping transition to local forces to make sure there isn't a reemergence of ISIS in Syria.
[Unidentified Male:] Will that be happening now?
[Sanders:] We've been that's continuing. We've been doing that. And we're going to continue to do that and continue making sure that they're prepared to take that. Cecilia.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm going back to two things that were talked about earlier. This sense of urgency about sending the National Guard to the border the Secretary sort of sidestepped this question: Does this have anything to do with the report that the President saw on Fox News?
[Sanders:] I think it has everything to do with protecting the people of this country. I don't think this should come as a surprise. The President has been talking about securing the border for years, since he started on the campaign trail. He wanted to work through Congress. He asked them to do their jobs. He asked them to pass legislation that actually would close loopholes, that would secure our border, that would build a wall. He asked them to do a number of things. They failed time and time again and now the President is making sure that, in between the Congress actually doing something, he's doing what he can to protect the people of this country. And he's going to continue to do that and look at different measures that he can do that, whether it's through the National Guard, which is what he's doing today; or whether it's through other administrative actions that he has the authority to carry out without having to involve Congress, since they, simply Democrats apparently can't show up and actually do their jobs. Noah. Sorry, I'm going to keep going.
[Unidentified Male:] This announcement of sending the military to the border is coming a week before the President makes his first ever trip, as President, to Latin America. What consideration has the administration given to the signal that sends to a region where the United States has had a long history of military involvement that's been very unpopular in the region? And how does that affect his ability to present the United States' vision of Latin America while he's there?
[Sanders:] Look, they have tough laws on immigration, too. A lot of countries in Central and South America have infinitely tougher laws than the United States. I think they probably understand that the loopholes that we have in this country are a problem, and we want to be able to work with them to address it. We want people to come here, but we want them to come here legally. And we're not going to just have an open border where drugs and gangs and other bad actors can come in. But certainly, we want people from those countries to come here responsibly, and legally, and through the proper process. Peter.
[Unidentified Male:] Sarah, on Syria. Just to be very clear that you were saying earlier, as the White House said, that the military mission is coming to a rapid end. The President, just a couple of months ago just last month said, "We should never ever have left," referring to Iraq. He talked about that vacuum. So why wouldn't leaving control over local forces that allow for a new vacuum just repeat what the President promised would not happen?
[Sanders:] Again, we're going to make that determination. We're evaluating this as we go. Progress has clearly been made with the complete collapse of the caliphate, and we want to make sure that there isn't a reemergence. And we're counting the Secretary of Defense, and our troops on the ground, and our commanders on the ground to help make that determination.
[Unidentified Male:] So, he thinks local forces, at some point he has confidence that local forces, independently, will be able to manage those countries and those situations?
[Sanders:] Certainly, again, we're going to work with those individuals. We're training the local forces, but we also want all of our allies and partners in the region to step up and do more. Again, they have a far greater risk, being right there in that region with ISIS if any chance of them reemerging, they're the ones that are at the greatest risk. So they should be stepping up and doing more. And the President is calling on other countries to do just that.
[Unidentified Male:] Just quickly, on DACA just because, obviously, this is a historic day
[Sanders:] Sorry, I'm just going to keep going because we're running light on time.
[Unidentified Male:] A quick one on Scott Pruitt. The President called him the other night. Why?
[Sanders:] Because he works for the President. It's pretty routine that the President would speak to members of his own staff and Cabinet.
[Unidentified Male:] It was reported that he called to tell him to buck up, to keep fighting.
[Sanders:] I'm not going to get into a private conversation that the President had. I can confirm that they had a call. I can tell you that we're reviewing the allegations, and I don't have anything beyond that at this point. I'm going to take one last question. Mark. Sorry.
[Unidentified Male:] Sarah, thank you. Arizona Congressman Ruben Gallego tweeted, "Using the National Guard to do border security is very expensive. For what it would cost the Guard to make just two arrests at the border, we could give a homeless veteran permanent housing for an entire year." What's your response? And how concerned is the President with the cost of sending the military?
[Sanders:] I don't think you can put a cost on American life. The President sees securing the border as a national security issue and protecting Americans. If that congressman is so concerned, maybe he ought to show up and actually support legislation that would fix these problems instead of blaming the President who's actually trying to do something about it. We'd like to see him work with us in partnership and actually do something instead of just complain about it. Thanks so much, guys. Hope you have a great day.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] So, let's go back to the headline from Kirsten Nielsen. It was on the notion of sending National Guard members to the U.S.Mexico border. As we've heard the last couple days to help curb immigration, how would it work, how immediate would that be. The headline could be as early as tonight, she said. She said with National Guard, they have to work the states and the governors, working in conjunction with them to get the green light. Let me to go retired general mark, we recognize that there were previous administrations to send National Guard to the border. And we know National Guard can mobilize like that. But how do you expect someone to deploy immediately if all the details haven't been worked out yet the states?
[Lt. General Mark Hertling, , Cnn Military Analyst:] You don't. As simple as that. There is a program in the Pentagon I mentioned this last night and one of the CNN programs called Defense Support to Civilian Authorities. We have been doing this for quite some time. There have been, Operation Jump Start was mentioned in the briefing, that was occurring back during the Bush administration, where you had about 6,000 federalized forces, supporting the border agents. That support came in variety of ways. It was logistics support, driving trucks for them, doing meals for them so they could put the massive amount of border security doing their job. Whenever you have a decrease in border agents, the ones who do the arrests in the law enforcement, you have to support and sometimes DOD, Department of Defense is asked to do that. In this case the National Guard is not being federalized under the Northern Command's control. They're being asked to go to the border and provide support. On a daily basis, we have aero stats, the big balloons that have cameras on them and some of the soldiers who are preparing to become UAV pilots actually train on the borders. All of that goes on, on a daily basis. When the secretary couldn't tell what the numbers were, what the costs were, what they were doing, what the deployment plans were, truthfully, I just was shaking my head. This was thrown together rather quickly, and it is not a very good plan when you talk about the border states that will deploy National Guardsmen into these areas.
[Baldwin:] Let me bring in one other perspective, Barbara Starr. Our Pentagon correspondent. You were listening what did you think?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] In recalling the President's original words, he said he wanted to use the military to secure the border. That is not what is happening. The National Guard is of course part of the United States military, but I think most people thought he was referring to active duty troops. That's not happening. We're talking National Guard working with state governors, activated by governors. As a General Hertling said, it is almost routine. It has happened under Democrats and Republicans. No idea yet. Key questions. What will their exact tasks be? They won't be doing law enforcement. They won't be arresting anybody. How long will they stay? We don't know the could start moving within the coming hour.
[Baldwin:] Lastly, Dana Bash, I've got 60 seconds, the politics of all of this. Why is he doing this?
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Well, there are lots of reasons. First and foremost, we have seen the President on Twitter and elsewhere beat the drum on issues that he feels the base is demanding of him. Immigration, obviously, is first and foremost in his mind and has been since the campaign. So, we've seen that go on really for the past week. And it has accelerated every day. I think the fact that Secretary Nielsen didn't have the facts and figures, General Hertling is right, means it is being rushed and you have to keep in mind, as we've heard. The governors have to go along with this. Three of the states along the border have Republican governors, probably won't be an issue. Jerry Brown in California, he hasn't said anything now. He has 140 miles of border with Canada I'm sorry, with Mexico, and the last I saw, I was looking around. He criticized the Texas governor for sending National Guard troops to the border. So is hard to imagine that he would go along with it. There is a pretty large border that has Trump friends who will go along with him.
[Baldwin:] Thank you so much. We'll let Jake continue this conversation. "THE LEAD" starts right now.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] President Trump's one-time point man on national security is now simply hoping to get permission to travel to Rhode Island. Asking a judge for basic freedom is part of Michael Flynn's new life as he awaits sentencing in the Russia probe after taking a plea deal. Meanwhile, the president's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner is not charged with any crime. So he was free to travel to Mar-a-Lago for Christmas. But as we head into 2018, both men remain on Robert Mueller's radar. Tonight, Randi Kaye continues a special series exploring the controversy that surrounds the White House, including the presidential transition.
[Randi Kaye, Cnn Correspondent:] Robert Mueller has his hands on tens of thousands of private e-mails between Trump transition team members. Part of the ongoing criminal investigation into the weeks following the election. Under particular scrutiny, a meeting during the transition on December 1st, 2016, puts Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and General Michael Flynn, his soon to be national security adviser, together in a room at Trump Tower with a Russian ambassador who has long been considered a spy. Kushner asked then Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak about establishing secure lines of communication with Moscow, what some have called a back channel.
[Jared Kushner, Senior Adviser To President Trump:] The record and documents I have voluntarily provided will show that all of my actions were proper and occurred in the normal course of events of a very unique campaign.
[Kaye:] Kushner told a congressional committee that he asked if they had an existing communication channel at his embassy we could use where they would be comfortable transmitting the information they wanted to relay to General Flynn. Later in December, Jared Kushner and another questionable meeting, this time with Russian banker Sergey Gorkov who had ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. What was discussed remains a mystery. But at the time, Kushner was still CEO of Kushner Companies, which was trying to attract financing for a building project in Manhattan. Still, the White House says there was no discussion at the meeting about Kushner's company or sanctions.
[Lt. Gen. James Clapper , Former Director Of National Intelligence:] My dashboard warning light was clearly on. And I think that was the case with all of us in the intelligence committee.
[Kaye:] In a statement about the Gorkov meeting, Kushner said there were no specific policies discussed. We had no discussion about the sanctions imposed by the Obama administration. At no time was there any discussion about my companies, business transactions, real estate project, loans, banking arrangements or any private business of any kind. Around Christmas in 2016, General Flynn spoke again with Ambassador Kislyak by phone. A call the White House did not acknowledge until a month later, saying Flynn was only offering his condolences after the assassination of Russia's ambassador to Turkey.
[Sean Spicer, Former White House Press Secretary:] On Christmas Day, General Flynn reached out to the ambassador, sent him a text. And it said, you know, I want to wish you and a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
[Kaye:] Flynn was fired in early 2017 after misleading the vice- president and others about the substance of phone calls he had with the Russian ambassador. Turns out, Flynn discussed sanctions, a potential violation of federal law. Flynn later wrote this letter of resignation, explaining he'd inadvertently briefed the vice-president and others with incomplete information. Perhaps Robert Mueller will find more answers in all those transition team e-mails now in his possession. Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.
[Berman:] So if you're a Kushner considered it a very unique campaign, how unique was the transition team's behavior? I spoke earlier with Anita McBride, a former chief of staff to then first lady Laura Bush. She also served under the last three Republican presidents. So, Anita, you've served on three different presidential transition teams.
[Anita Mcbride, Served Pres. Reagan, Pres. George H.w. Bush & Pres. G.w. Bush:] Yes.
[Berman:] What's the normal amount of contact between the transition and representatives from other countries?
[Mcbride:] Well, you know, typically the golden rule that applies during presidential transitions is there's one president at any time. And particularly when it does come to relationships with foreign countries or foreign delegations that there is, you know, a procedure or process, you know, that is followed. Now, it's not difficult to imagine and to expect that a presidential candidate or people from their team would encounter a foreign ambassador to this country. I mean they all come to the conventions, both conventions. And so they do hear from representatives of campaigns and later from transitions. But it's in a very general sense. And it's certainly not making decisions or any promises on any future policies.
[Berman:] So the meetings that take place in a transition between representatives of foreign countries and people within that transition, they're supposed to be general, congratulations, hey, how are you doing, not supposed to be making policy?
[Mcbride:] Correct. I mean yes, that's absolutely true. And also, you know, it's well-known what the policy positions are of a candidate. And certainly, foreign countries are following that very closely. The most important thing is they're eager to at least establish a contact, a relationship, just even a meeting face to face. But really the context of the conversations are very general or should be.
[Berman:] And any meetings that get beyond general would have to be run by the current or outgoing administration?
[Mcbride:] Absolutely. I mean there is the rule of thumb honestly now the gold standard for transitions now is the one in 2008 between George W. Bush and Barack Obama. I mean that really set the standard for relationships, conversations between an outgoing administration and an incoming. There always were, obviously, presidential transition processes before that, John. But honestly, the first post-911 transition in 2009 set a different standard on how the outgoing and incoming administrations have regular contact with each other and work very closely with each other so there is a seamless transition on day one.
[Berman:] So we've heard this on many different subjects. But people associated with Donald Trump, many of them not professional politicians. They didn't have a lot of experience in government. Is that enough of an excuse here? Maybe ignorance. They didn't know better.
[Mcbride:] Well, listen, it may be an explanation. But I wouldn't say it's an excuse. I think at the end of the day, what we're talking about is the our government and how our government operates and the very serious discussions that a president has to make at like 12:01 after they are, you know, sworn in. And it's serious business. And I understand there are new people in the process. But there also were people working on the Trump transition who had been involved in other transitions. So I think that it's an explanation, but not an excuse.
[Berman:] Anita McBride, always great to see you. Thanks so much.
[Mcbride:] Thank you, John.
[Berman:] Up next, what a naked selfie has to do with the Mueller investigation. Plus, new insight on the special counsel from some folks who have known him for decades. And a reminder, this New Year's Day at 9:00 p.m. on CNN, don't miss the incredible story of comedy great Gilda Radner. Here's a preview of the CNN films, "Love Gilda".
[Gilda Radner, Comedian & Actress:] Hi. I'm Gilda Radner. And OK. Now.
[Unidentified Female:] People want to know what made you funny.
[Radner:] From the time I was a kid, I loved to pretend.
[Unidentified Male:] She was the very first performer chosen for the cast of "Saturday Night Live." They loved her.
[Unidentified Female:] I basically stole all of my characters from Gilda. I can do almost anything if people are laughing. Gilda was just not quite herself.
[Unidentified Male:] One morning she just said, I don't know what's wrong with me.
[Unidentified Female:] The comedian gets the most unfunny thing in the world. She felt that she could be of help. And that's exactly what she did. How often do we get to know exactly how brave we are?
[Radner:] I always felt that my comedy was just to make things be all right.
[Unidentified Male:] "Love Gilda," New Year's Day, at 9:00 p.m.

[Bolduan:] That's the message from President Trump pushing back against reports that his Chief of Staff John Kelly called him unhinged after a meeting on Syria. According to NBC, called him an idiot after a meeting on immigration. Donald Trump isn't the only one pushing back. John Kelly is as well. Answering reports of his name calling with more name calling, calling it total b.s. CNN's Kaitlan Collins is at the White Bouse, she's no b.s. Kaitlan, what is happening there today?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Kate, John Kelly coming out quickly and publicly to deny this report, shortly after it was published. He issued a statement, we don't often hear from John Kelly directly like this, but he did call this b.s. He said that he spends more time with the president than anyone else and he said he always knows where I stand and he and I both know this story is total b.s. John Kelly said he's committed to the president and his agenda and the country and he said this is another pathetic attempt to smear the president. But he's not just denying it publicly, Kate. We're also told he did so in a face to face meeting with President Trump in the oval office yesterday, saying that this report isn't true and though, CNN hasn't independently confirmed the idiot remark, we have reported that John Kelly has referred to the president as unhinged. We know that the two of them, their relationship is not what it once was, it is quite deteriorated because of several reasons and that John Kelly is not involved in as many decisions as he was when he was first brought into this west wing. But there is a difference here in this report, we reported the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson referred to the president as a moron, that was something Tillerson never denied. He never spoke to the president about explicitly to deny it, so certainly a difference here. But, Kate, we both know this president is not someone who likes to be undermined, he doesn't like someone to question his intelligence. And hasn't publicly said anything specifically about John Kelly, no votes of confidence there yet.
[Bolduan:] Didn't he challenge Tillerson to an IQ test?
[Collins:] Yes, he did.
[Bolduan:] Three and a half years ago. Anyway, thanks, Kaitlan. Great to see you. Let's see what happens next. Let's bring in CNN Politics reporter and editor-at-large, Chris Cilizza, and CNN political analyst and "Washington Post" White House reporter, Josh Dawsey. Great to see you, guys. Chris, this is on this episode, this has been a pretty forceful denial from both Donald Trump and John Kelly. What do you make of it?
[Chris Cilizza, Cnn Politics Reporter And Editor-at-large:] Well, so, I think, Kate, it is possible that maybe the word idiot wasn't used, but I don't think there is any dispute that John Kelly and Donald Trump are not what they once were. Obviously, John Kelly was touted by Donald Trump as bringing discipline, military man, better than what he viewed as an ineffectual Reince Priebus' chief of staff. But I just think it is more evidence that Donald Trump is tough on the furniture, to use that idea, which is it is just hard to work for him. He doesn't really listen, he mostly does what he wants, he scape goats people, he says things that get out in front, you have to try to make policy around it. It is just a very tough job. So, just Donald Trump is unhappy with John Kelly. My strong sense is that John Kelly is unhappy with Donald Trump and his style of management and leadership. I just don't whether you call him an idiot specifically or not, I don't see this lasting that much longer, that partnership.
[Bolduan:] You think Kelly is on his way out? You've been saying that for months?
[Cilizza:] That is true. And John Kelly, by the way, has we have got reporting repeatedly, well, John Kelly threatened to resign or said he would resign and he didn't. Keep that I just think at some point here Donald Trump wears hard on people. I think, you know, six months is like six years with him. And I think that kind of timeline means that John Kelly is probably headed for the exits in the not too distant future.
[Bolduan:] Josh, you spoke with Kelly's deputy about all of this. What does he say about the fact that people around the president are going to the press with stuff like this.
[Josh Dawsey, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, I think inside the White House there say clear realization that John Kelly does not have the support of his staff that he once had, one that he put around the Rob Porter episode when different people thought John Kelly gave conflicting stories about how he handled it. His staff is not disputing that people are telling the press this, just saying he didn't say it. Rarely speaks on the record to any reporter and yesterday did a whole round of interviews. Also seemed according to my sources in the White House a realization that they don't really trust the press shop and others to defend Kelly as much. So, [inaudible] his own personal aide to do it. The central argument was John Kelly is a Marine. He is someone who respects the president. Of course, there are moments of frustration, whether the two of them clash and screaming matches in the oval office. But he respects the president and carries out the orders of the president and did not call him an idiot. We also have not confirmed he used the word idiot. We know he frequently gets frustrated with the president and spoken in divisive terms about him at times.
[Bolduan:] We have heard him talk like that, even in interviews.
[Dawsey:] Yes, I think Josh's point is really important, which is no one is really disputing the fact that they have a contentious relationship. Now Kelly is saying we have an open and frank relationship and, sure, that sometimes means that we're going to clash, but that's good. And the negative side of that is they have a contentious relationship and it is not creativity and positive things do not come from it. It is mostly negative. But I don't think anyone is disputing that, that Donald Trump and John Kelly, first of all, are radically different people. I mean, their backgrounds couldn't be more different. The idea that they would get along perfectly makes very little sense based on what we know of human nature. No one is disputing that they clash. The issue is, is it clashing that is cut right? Is it clashing that gets in the way of John Kelly doing his job effectively or is it something that just, you know, is part of the daily day of dealing with Donald Trump.
[Bolduan:] Josh, what about the what does this all do to the reporting that we see in the "Wall Street Journal" that Kelly is being considered to be the next secretary of Veterans Affairs? What does this do to that?
[Dawsey:] White House officials have pushed back hard on that possibility and are saying that he's not up to be a finalist for that job. The president as we reported, others have repeatedly musings about people, what about this person for that or this person for that. It is hard to know how serious he is. Our reporting indicates that that is not a very likely possibility, but it could happen at 5:00 p.m. today too and, you know, that would be what it was. So really hard to know sometimes with these personnel decisions. The president as we have seen time and time again, different things and leaves everyone guessing.
[Bolduan:] I do wonder what Rex Tillerson is thinking today. The other official who may or may not have said something about Donald Trump behind closed doors, but never denied it when asked directly about it multiple times. Guys, great to see you. I would never call you a moron. Coming up next, the president, the porn star, and the new lawsuit. Stormy Daniels slaps the president with a defamation suit, a stunt or a real case?

[Becky Anderson, Cnn:] Hello and welcome, you're watching CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson for you in Abu Dhabi where it is 7:00 in the evening this hour. We are connecting you to two massive storm systems of awesome size and almost unimaginable power. One snarling right for America. The other rocketing towards Asia where soon a huge super typhoon will ram into the Philippines with winds roaring at more than 250 kilometers an hour. That is strong enough to rip roofs off houses as easy as you might peel open a can of beans. For the next few days it will be pounding and smashing its which along this path towards China. That's more than 1,000 kilometers. Now that is the Pacific. Now to the beast of an Atlantic storm closing in on the U.S. with catastrophic force. Hurricane Florence being dubbed the storm of a lifetime. Right now, she is tearing towards tens of millions of Americans on the country's east coast. What you are looking at here is a brand-new image or images from space as Florence spins her winds faster than 200 kilometers an hour. Speeds that, quite frankly, are going to hurt.
[Jeff Byard, Fema:] This is not going to be a glancing blow. This I this is going to be a Mike Tyson punch to the Carolina coast.
[Anderson:] Right. No one can cover this like CNN, connecting you to the danger zone there now. CNN's Brian Todd who is right by where the hurricane is likely to hit. And CNN's Matt Rivers in China's capital, Beijing for more on that typhoon. Let's kick off with you Brian. People rushing to get away, though it's not easy, correct?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Right, Becky. We are standing at a place that represents for many people the last and somewhat desperate chance to get away from this hurricane, to get away from North Carolina's barrier islands. This is a ferry terminal. Ferries landing here a short time ago. This is Swan Quarter, North Carolina. This is a ferry coming in. This ferry just came in from Ocracoke Island. That's about 25 miles east of here. That island has about 900 people living on it permanently. It is only accessible by boat and that's under normal circumstances. The governor and others have ordered people to evacuate. But they cannot physically force people to evacuate, so they are strongly suggesting, saying that these barrier islands like Ocracoke are going to get clobbered and that you could be isolated on that island for several days if you do not get off. Plus, you could be in a situation where you could be maybe even out in the open and desperate with no shelter. We did see a few moments ago this ferry pulled in with dozens of cars leaving, people taking that chance to get off that island. Another ferry pulled into this terminal a short time later, dozens of cars got off. I estimate probably more than 50 people on both of those ferries got off. And then they are going to moor the ferries over here to ride out the storm. This is the only safe place where they can moor the ferries. Those two ferries are moored. This one will be moored in a short time, Becky. So, again, this is the last attempt for many to get off these barrier islands. And we think less than an hour, the final boat coming in from Ocracoke Island is going to come in here, and after that, nothing more. They're not going have ferries tomorrow, even though there is a full day tomorrow they could conceivably evacuate. They have to get the boots moored down. So, they are telling people, this is your last chance to get off that island. I just spoke to the commissioner of Hyde County, North Carolina. He lives on Ocracoke Island. He is staying there. He estimates that of the 900 or so people who live there permanently, he thinks about 200 have stayed. Those 200 people could be in for real isolation and they could be stranded in the days ahead, Becky. A fairy desperate situation here on the Carolina coast.
[Anderson:] Yes. Back to you shortly. Matt, I want to bring you in. I know that experts are predicting this super typhoon in the region where you are could impact as many as 43, 44 million people. What are people doing to get out of the way?
[Matthew Rivers, Cnn International Correspondent:] It's interesting, Becky, because for all of the talk off the southeast coast of the United States right now, completely justified talk, this is an area of the world that is used to these kind of storms. As opposed to what we are seeing in the United States that doesn't get hit with those kind of storms nearly as often. So, you are not seeing same kind of evacuations here both in Southeast Asia and in southern China that you would necessarily see in the southeastern part of the United States. But that's not to diminish how strong the storm is. What's going to happen here is late Friday evening into Saturday morning this storm is going to hit the northern Philippines with tremendous force. Something equivalent to a category 4 hurricane to the United States. After that it goes south of Taiwan and then it heads towards Hong Kong and Macau in southern China. That some of the most densely populated areas in the world. We are talking incredibly high winds. We're talking lots of flooding. We're talking storm surge. So serious risks there. But there is good news in this sense in a number of different ways. Number one, you're talking about the northern part of the Philippines, not the southern part of the Philippines. So, it's going to hit the northern part, which is far less populated than, say, Manila, which is in the southern part of the country. That would be a bigger problem. And then you are talking about Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao. Those are areas with very good infrastructure. They are used to riding out these kinds of storms. And so, if you are comparing what's going on in the United States, what's going on in Southeast Asia, these are generally speaking equivalent strength storms. They both can cause a ton of damage. But what you're seeing in Southeast Asiasouthern China is places that are generally used to these kinds of things. That expect these kinds of storms this part of the year and I think that that's going to make all the difference. That said, you never know what's going to happen. These storms can change track. But generally speaking, the forecast gives people time to prepare and this is an area that has had to prepare before.
[Anderson:] Sure. Matt, thank you. Brian, let's get the satellite view then from space on Florence coming well right it you, of course. She's always been spinning pretty fast, but once she gets to where you are in terms of moving forward, she will be going slower than we take a walk on the beach. Letting her hang around for days, dumping huge amounts of water. What are the preparations then for the storm surges that you are currently seeing?
[Todd:] Well, Becky, people are boarding up their houses, they're getting out. But as far as preparing for a storm surge, preparing for a flood, it is hard to do that. You've got to try to get your vehicles out of the way. You've got to move whatever valuables you have to higher ground if you can. But a lot of people cannot do that. There are a lot of people we've talked to who are going to stay and ride this out. And some of them aren't too worried about the storm surge and the flooding. And we are trying to tell them, look, this is going to be very serious because this storm, as you mentioned, is going to slow down. It's going to hang over this area even when it makes landfall. You know, a lot of times these hurricanes move through quickly and after the initial hit sometimes you are out of the woods. But this is going to hang over this area. A ton of rainfall will come down. A lot of flooding in an area that has been saturated with recent rainfall.
[Anderson:] To both of you, for the time being, thank you. Well, just coming in as well, brand-new views of Florence. She could be as deadly as she is, well, some might scribe this as beautiful. Right now, we are getting new information coming into CNN's weather center about the storm speed, direction, the works. CNN's Chad Myers can tell us what that new information reveals. Chad, what have you got?
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist:] This storm is slowing down slightly, and we expect that. We just don't want it to stop. If you stop a typhoon or a hurricane, all of a sudden you have days and days of rain, that rain in the same places. And even yesterday we were talking about a meter of rain possible in the Atlantic Ocean and over parts of the Carolinas. Two states, one called North Carolina, one called South Carolina. What happened over the overnight hours is the European model and the American model both agreed for the first time in history. Europe and America have agreed on models, at least. This here is a category 4 making towards Wilmington, North Carolina. Yesterday, both models were one was going up here, one the south. Well overnight hours really changed all of that. All of a sudden both models are turning to the left. Turning towards Myrtle Beach, which is a very populated area that really most of the people were not planning on evacuating. Well now they should be. Turning to the south, turning towards Charleston, probably not planning on evacuating. But if you put 20 inches of rain northeast of Charleston, northwest of Charleston, it's going to run into the ocean. Those rivers are going to flood and that's a real rub right now. It's all a part of a storm system that is running into high pressures to the north, high pressures to the west, and high pressures to the east, west, north, south. And all of a sudden, this low can't go anywhere. And it's going to sit there and spin for a few days and that's what's going to make it finally go away. There is your models. They all kind of agree now. So finally, we are in some agreement, but maybe we wouldn't want to be in agreement because we did want to see this move away. Right now, it's not going to move away.
[Anderson:] Yes, frightening stuff. Chad, thank you. Let's connect you to that life or death choice facing millions of American this hour. On one hand, stay home and hope for the best, or on the other, hit the road and get out of the way. If it seems like a no-brainer for those of us far away, well, as Martin Savage found out, it's not really that simple.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] It's the question everyone asks. Are you staying or going?
[Unidentified Female:] I am definitely leaving. It's going to be bad, no doubt, yes.
[Savidge:] Dava Villapiano has also made up her mind.
[Dava Villapiano, Restaurant Owner:] Oh, I'm going. I'm definitely going. I was here through Bertha and Fran and several others. But this is not the same kind of storm.
[Savidge:] She owns the Silver Dollar bar and grill where the last of the boards are going up on the windows and the last of the food is coming out of the fridge.
[Villapiano:] If it comes in as a 4, this could be, you know, the whole island could be decimated.
[Savidge:] Carolina Beach is under a mandatory evacuation order and the order is simple. Leave. If you're here after 8:00 p.m. Wednesday, you're on your own. At the local gas station, you find folks who are definitely out of here.
[Unidentified Male:] If you don't get out, you're going to be a casualty. Plain and simple.
[Savidge:] And you find some who seem undecided.
[Unidentified Male:] I may change my mind. But right now, I am planning on riding it out.
[Savidge:] So, I got a tip in town. As cliche as it sounds, on this particular street there is a whole group of neighbors that have banded together and apparently, they're going to stay. Are you staying or going?
[Unidentified Male:] Now, we're headed out. I'm take the smarter route.
[Savidge:] That is bad especially with the little one there?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, exactly. Sitting here without power for about five days doesn't seem like a great idea.
[Savidge:] But in a nearby garage I find friends Bill and Stan and they're staying. And they won't be alone. [on camera]: How many people do you think are going to be staying?
[Bill Skinner, Resident:] Let's see. We have one, two, three, four, five, we have about five to six right in the cul-de-sac that are staying.
[Savidge:] Wow. [voice-over]: The guys laugh about it, but both say they are getting calls and texts from friends begging them to leave.
[Unidentified Male:] People are calling me saying, don't stay, don't stay. This is going to be a killer.
[Savidge:] The pair have a brand-new generator and joke about a fridge full of beer. But there is a seriousness as to why they want to ride it out.
[Skinner:] I want to protect what I have and stay with my neighbors and help out if I can on the island.
[Savidge:] Back on the beach, I find Danielle Moody sitting all by herself at the water's edge. She moved here just 20 days ago. [on camera]: What are you going to do?
[Danielle Moody, Resident:] You know, were going to seek shelter. We are going to go and stay with family inland.
[Savidge:] She and her fiance just finished building their dream home, and now have to leave it behind. She's here for a few last moments of peace.
[Moody:] I just wanted to get one more glimpse of it.
[Savidge:] She is going and worries a lot of what she is looking at may soon be gone.
[Anderson:] Martin Savidge reporting for you. The American President wants everyone to sleep easy. He thinks that right now his country is in as good as shape as it's ever been to take on a hurricane.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The safety of American people is my absolute highest priority. We are sparing no expense. We are totally prepared. We're ready. We're as ready as anybody's ever been.
[Anderson:] Well, consider this. Donald Trump also thinks how he dealt with hurricane Maria you are seeing the damage of that now in Puerto Rico was one of the best jobs he has ever done. Keeping in mind what you just heard, have a listen to this.
[Trump:] The job that FEMA and law enforcement and everybody did working along with the governor in Puerto Rico I think was tremendous. I think that Puerto Rico was an incredible unsung success.
[Anderson:] Really? Well, it is pretty hard to see how anyone would be able to get to that. The official death toll for hurricane Maria some 3,000 people. Well CNN's Stephen Collinson, reckoning the quote, a presidency already in crisis simply cannot afford the new hit of a botched response. Stephen, remarkable analyst and good friend of our show, with us from Washington. Can the President weather this, so to speak?
[Stephen Collinson, Cnn White House Reporter:] I think he can if there is not a sort of succeeding political crisis that develops after the storm. In some ways, and it seems crass to say it when so many people's lives are on the line and their property, but this does represent an opportunity for President Trump to show some of the qualities of leadership that have been lacking over a very difficult political period. It also gets the whole issue of the Bob Woodward book, the op-ed by the anonymous official out of the headlines which have been damaging the President. The downside to this, of course, if there is any sign that his administration is deficient, that it doesn't handle this quite well, we know what can happen. We just need to look at President George W. Bush in 2005 with when his government was judged to have botched hurricane Katrina which came ashore in New Orleans in Louisiana. His presidency never recovered that and he admitted that after he left office. So, these are high-pressure times for Presidents to show leadership. Given what you mentioned about hurricane Maria and Puerto Rico and given some of the disorganization and dysfunction we've seen in the White House and government revealed over the last few weeks, I think you have to question how well prepared the White House and the President really are.
[Anderson:] Stephen, we've been hear from a U.S. senator on CNN today, that the White House took $10 million from FEMA, which of course is the emergency agency, and gave it to I.C.E. to help or to use, at least, in helping set up the centers to treat children and parents separated at the border. All this right before peak hurricane season. What do you make of that?
[Collinson:] I think it shows just how sort of dicey the politics of hurricanes and disasters can be. This is not the first time that an administration has raided the Federal Emergency Management Agency to finance programs elsewhere. The fact they did it for such a controversial issue, these shelters for the separations is making this even more difficult for the administration. And the fact, of course, this is sort of playing into the wider issue of the whole questions about Trump's leadership and his motivations. So, I think we are going to see this bubble up in the days ahead. And, you know, it just kind of raises new questions about exactly what is going on in this White House.
[Anderson:] I want to get our viewers a quick listen to Donald Trump, Stephen, describing this storm. Stand by.
[Trump:] They haven't seen anything like what's coming at us in 25, 30 years. Maybe ever. It's tremendously big and tremendously wet. Tremendous amounts of water.
[Anderson:] Yet, maybe the biggest in 30 years. Maybe ever. That's quite a difference, describing it as tremendously wet. I have to say there will be viewers who say that sounds quite simplistic for all the reporting and claims we see coming out of the White House regarding a lack of reading in, shall we say. Do you think the President truly grasps what's coming?
[Collinson:] Well he certainly seems to have an odd fascination often with the size of these storms and seems to focus as much on that as the emergency efforts that are gearing up before they come ashore. I mean, I think no politician can stop a storm, can stop it roaring ashore. The question is how well everything is coordinated afterwards. I think one of the problems that President Trump has had, basically and we saw it last year after the first storm that hit Texas and the storms that hit Puerto Rico and Florida is actually fulfilling that role of the President almost as a consoler in chief. And going down to talk to people and showing empathy. He doesn't find that very easy. And he also finds any criticism of his role impossible to accept. That's why he gets into rather bizarre conversations as he did yesterday about Puerto Rico and what a great job he did.
[Anderson:] Well, more of Stephen's analysis on the website. Where you say, Stephen, quote, the President's refusal to ever admit a mistake and to hype his own perceived achievements strike a jarring note. More on that at CNN.com. Mr. Collinson, Thank you. Still to come, the European parliament takes an unprecedented step to punish a member state for cracking down on democratic institutions. We'll see why Hungary calls it, quote, petty revenge.

[Rene Marsh, Cnn Anchor:] Right now in Texas, residents are preparing for one more hit from Harvey. The storm set to make landfall again before finally turning north. We're live in Texas with more on how residents are helping each other ride out this storm. Welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Rene Marsh.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Dave Briggs. It is 31 minutes past the hour, 3:32 now in Texas. We welcome all of our viewers here in the U.S. and around the world. Harvey set to make landfall one more time bringing death and destruction in its wake. More bands of rain coming in a few hours to add to the already record breaking totals, the highest rainfall total from Harvey so far, almost 52 inches in Cedar Bayou, that's southwest of Houston. That's already a record in the continental U.S. for any tropical system.
[Marsh:] And right now, Houston is under curfew until 5:00 a.m. Central Time, 6:00 Eastern, part of an effort to stem looting of businesses and homes. The Harris County D.A. says 14 people have been arrested for looting in the past 48 hours. He says anyone caught looting in the disaster area faces extra punishment.
[Briggs:] Northwest of Houston, officials say water keeps rising in the Addicks and Barker Reservoirs, even as it flows over the dam's spillways. Thousands of homes in the area have now between three and five feet of floodwater in them. Water not expected to stop flowing from the Addicks Dam until mid-September.
[Marsh:] This morning, there are nine confirmed deaths from Harvey, including a Houston police officer, 60-year-old Sergeant Steve Perez. He drowned trying to get to work during the flood.
[Chief Art Acevedo, Houston Police Department:] We couldn't find him and once our dive team got there, it was too treacherous to go under and look for him. As much as we wanted to recover him last night, we could not put another more officers at risk. For what we knew in our hearts was going to be a recovery mission.
[Marsh:] And "Reuters" is reporting a death toll of 17, including a family of six, four kids and their grandparents.
[Briggs:] Countless others still awaiting rescue. Officials say at least 9,000 to 10,000 people have been rescued in the Houston area alone between police, fire and the coast guard. That includes this rescue, a mother and her baby, traumatic video there. Of course, that's all on top of the huge number of private rescues we've been reporting on.
[Marsh:] And those working to save lives need rest and recharge. Here are exhausted Texas National Guard troops sacking out on brand new mattresses in a sleep store showroom between rescues. Much deserved. Well, that was in Richmond, Texas, which is where we find CNN meteorologist Derek Van Dam. Derek, have people heeded the warnings? Are people in those homes behind you?
[Derek Van Dam, Ams Meteorologist:] No, absolutely not. They have gone and thankfully so, because the water still set to rise here. You have got to see this, Rene and Dave. Check this out. We got here about six hours ago. By the way, I'm standing at the edges of what is now the Brazos River, but it's moved in a little bit of course. That fence behind me six hours ago was completely exposed. It's now about halfway up the fence. That just gives you an idea of this slow rise in the water that keeps taking place. Now, I'm not wearing a raincoat like I was 24 hours ago. Rain is not pelting me in my face. It's come to an end here in Houston, but the threat still remains. The sun came out briefly this evening. It was a glimmer of hope for the residents here, but the threat still continues because the water is rushing into these larger rivers like the Brazos river behind, and it's eventually going to crest. Now, we have seen some incredible things, a lot of community members and volunteers coming together and we're going to show you one example which I have a personal connection with. My cousin calls me this afternoon and says, I saw you on CNN, Derek, and I just want you to know that we had to evacuate from our home in the Buffalo Bayou region. That's in between the two reservoirs that are just west of Houston, the Barker and Addicks Reservoirs. And he got his family to safety and then he decided his time was better spent going back and volunteering his time and saving others. And you can see some of the video on your screen, just how the waters he had to walk about with the various rescue boats. He said there were between 30 to 40 boats that are out navigating the waters of the streets there and there is just several stories, horrendous stories of people having to deal with these flooded homes, but also some heroism as well with people successfully being plucked from their homes and getting to dry land. Now, there's more water to come. That's the big concern here as the storm continues to churn over the Gulf of Mexico, and the forecast going forward is astounding. More rain east of Galveston and Houston. And, Dave, Rene, I've got one last statistic that I just came across. This is amazing. Cox Automotive did an analysis comparing Superstorm Sandy to the current Tropical Storm Harvey, and they found over 500,000 vehicles will be completely destroyed by the time the storm is all said and done. Unbelievable.
[Briggs:] That's why you're seeing these economic impacts, estimated as low as $20 billion, but as high as $75 billion approaching that of Hurricane Katrina 12 years ago yesterday. Derek Van Dam, live for us in Richmond, Texas, thank you. As Harvey makes landfall again, said to pick up some speed finally and hopefully get out of this area. Let's bring in meteorologist Karen Maginnis live this morning in the CNN Weather Center. Good morning, Karen. How long will the rain bands continue in Houston once they pick up later this morning?
[Karen Maginnis, Ams Meteorologist:] Well, the rain for all intents and purposes except for a few isolated showers has shifted more towards the East and towards the Northeast. We're actually waiting for the landfall, but essentially, the bulk of the moisture is well to the north and to the east of the center of the system. What is going to happen now is we're going to see a storm surge and very heavy rainfall because today, we just saw round after round after round of very heavy rainfall between Beaumont and Port Arthur and Orange and headed up through sections of Alexandria, but Beaumont set a record daily rainfall total of nearly 18 inches. And by tomorrow afternoon, 40 to 50 inches total can be expected and assessed for Beaumont, Port Arthur. Here you can see the latest radar imagery. Orange in the path of some of those heavier bands, you are really getting pummeled. It is expected to make landfall again. That is Tropical Storm Harvey, has winds of 45 miles an hour, moving to the Northeast at about seven miles an hour. You can see the shift of the heavier rain toward Shreveport, eventually into the Tennessee Valley Rene, Dave.
[Briggs:] Wow, you are talking about 6 million people who have seen 30- plus inches of rain, 33 states don't have that many resident. Karen, thanks so much. It's incredible.
[Marsh:] And now we have on the phone, John Cannon. He is the spokesman for the city of Houston Office of Emergency Management. Thank you so much for joining us, Mr. Cannon. The first question I want to ask you is, how fast and furious are these calls for rescues and help still coming in even at this hour? I mean, how many are you getting per hour?
[John Cannon, Spokesman, City Of Houston Office Of Emergency Management:] Well, we don't really necessarily you can imagine just the data and the influx of numbers that we have throughout the entire operation. So, we don't have specific calls per hour. I can tell you that at least from our point of view the rescues have gone down compared to a day or two ago. That doesn't mean they're still not being conducted because they are, but numbers are going down, which is a good sign. But I can tell you, you know, the thing about it is, it's a good ray of sunshine that we saw here late yesterday and it's making people down here feel a little bit better. But I heard some of your weather forecasts and such talking about the Brazos River and some of the other waterways and, you know, we said it best yesterday when we said we have 1 trillion gallons of rain that still has to go somewhere. So, we anticipate that our rescues are probably not going to stop. So, they will be continuing around the clock.
[Briggs:] Isn't that number amazing? One trillion gallons of water. That would power Niagara falls for 15 days. Hard to fathom that. Another ray of sunshine though is another opening of a major shelter. If you could talk about what's opened last night at the NRG center and how many people that will hold.
[Cannon:] Yes, that is that's going to be on the Harris County Office of Emergency side. We're working with them to see what the capacity is there. The largest shelter that we have at the moment is at the George R. Brown Convention Center, and that's in downtown Houston. We've got about 9,000 folks who are over there and obviously, we've got a number of Red Cross shelters open. NRG, I don't have a timetable as far as what they're going to be doing today, but obviously, it's going to be a big relief and even the Toyota Center, which is downtown Houston may be taking a couple other thousand people. But at the moment, the largest shelter we have open is at the George R. Brown Convention Center.
[Marsh:] And I want to ask you a little bit about just the sick and people at hospitals, how is that process working? Are people in hospitals able to get out to where they need to get and still get the care that they need and then the sick that are being rescued, are they able to get the care that they need?
[Cannon:] Well, we really haven't had any reports of issues in and around the medical center, which has been a good thing. We've only had really reports as far as since this entire weather event occurred of three deaths that are here in the city, and we're still waiting back on the medical examiner to determine whether or not those three deaths are definitely going to be weather related. As far as the medical center, we haven't had other than one or a couple of hospitals that have had to close down, more toward the east side of town and Northeast, we haven't had any widespread reports of people saying that they can't get in or out.
[Briggs:] On the casualties note, John, CNN affiliate reporting four volunteer rescuers are missing, three others were electrocuted. Any advice for all these civilian rescuers that are out and about trying to stay safe?
[Cannon:] Well, that's just it. I mean, that's human nature, right? I mean, if it were you or I and that's in our neighborhood and our motto that we've been trying to say is neighbors helping neighbors and it's human nature to want to do that and it's tough to talk to people and giving them tips as far as don't go in there. If you do go in there, know what the risks are. I can tell you it's amazing what we've seen and not only just the Houston police officers and Houston firefighters, but look at all the images that you've seen with people who have boats and they're bringing people to safety. Look at all the images you see of people up to their waists in water helping their the elderly or people in their neighborhoods. It's a miracle that we haven't really had more injuries or casualties when you see the images and what people are having to get themselves through. Not only for themselves, but especially if they want to help someone.
[Briggs:] Indeed. That is the best of the stories we're hearing, the rescues and the bottom of your screen, some of the worst. Curfews because looting is happening across the Houston area. That curfew goes on until 5:00 local, 6:00 Eastern Time. How do you expect that to help contain this looting issue and what about the popping up of all these scams, these fraudulent charities, how do you handle that?
[Cannon:] Well, I would say the looting I don't want to really say that looting is widespread. Looting is like it was in past storms in any city around the country. It's going to be isolated pockets of people who are going to take advantage of those in need, especially at some businesses and the chief Police Chief Art Acevedo said yesterday, he put a warning out there that the police department is now back to serving and protecting and that's going to be actually protecting some of the businesses, and as you guys said moments ago, the district attorney in Harris County in Houston said they're going to go after these people with the fullest extent of the law. So, we're out there, but I wouldn't say looting is widespread at all. There are isolated pockets of people, fortunately, and not the majority but they will be caught and we have made some arrests and, unfortunately, crime still occurs. I mean, we were in a vehicle pursuit with a suspect that we took into custody probably within the last couple of hours. So, there are still people who are going to take advantage, but the vast majority of people I can tell you since the curfew went into effect midnight here in Houston have abided by the curfew. And, you know, we even saw a tweet from a local weather forecaster with KTRK who said that he was pulled over on his way home from work about three hours ago and he actually put on social media that he was happy about that because that meant the Houston police are enforcing the curfew.
[Briggs:] You bet. You know, you're talking about 14 arrests in an area of more than 6 million, some is expected. That is a small number. John Cannon, thanks for doing what you're doing, the public information officer, City of Houston Office of Emergency Management.
[Marsh:] And the president surveys the damage from Harvey for himself.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're going to get you back and operating immediately. It happened in Texas and Texas can handle anything.
[Marsh:] Kind words, but did the president show enough empathy for the victims? That's coming up.

[Unidentified Male:] Harry or William?
[Barack Obama, Former President Of The United States:] William right now.
[Unidentified Male:] Suits or a good wife.
[Obama:] Suits obviously.
[Unidentified Male:] Great, great answer.
[Hala Gorani, Connect The World, Cnn:] That is it for kidding around. A warning, Barack Obama told Prince Harry without mentioning any names we should be careful about how some people use the internet to divide up. Also coming up. Living through scenes like that but facing death from their own bodies, children riddled with cancer, kidney failure, blood disease, finally being led out of rebel held areas in Syria. Why is it so few and why so late? That and more coming up this hour. Welcome everybody todays is Wednesday, December 27, I am Hala Gorani, well White House plans to unveil a multibillion dollar infrastructure plan in just a few weeks. You probably wouldn't know that from looking at President Trump tweeter feed. You are thinking of his two favorite targets, the FBI and Hillary Clinton once again over the investigative dossier that Mr. Trump says it quote, bogus and a pile of garbage. Now that is a tweet that echoes comments made by the president over the last few months.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Didn't you spend $12.4 million on a dossier that was a total phony? I think it is very sad what they had done with this fake dossier, I think it is a disgrace, it is a very sad commentary on politics at this country. When you look at that horrible dossier which is total phony, fake deal like so much of the
[Gorani:] And that is Donald Trump over the last several months, now we should note, he is attacking the dossier and its contents, but U.S. investigators have corroborated parts of it. None of the charges relate to the dossier and that is something obviously we should point out as well. Let us bring in CNN Jessica Schneider, she is in Washington with more on Donald Trump and what he is choosing to share with the world via Twitter, Jessica.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] That is right Hala, you saw it there the president has repeatedly railed against the Russian dossier, yesterday he tweeted that it was bogus, but I want to break it down for you, the bogus claim is not entirely accurate so first of all, it is true that the most salacious allegations contained in dossier, those had not been verified however the broadest in the dossier that Russia waged the campaign to interfere in the U.S. election 2016. That is accepted as fact by the U.S. intelligence community, plus it was CNN that reported earlier this year that other aspects of the dossier like communications between senior Russian officials and other Russian mentioned in the memos, those two actually took place. So, it is important to note that the FBI, I has not relied on the dossier entirely and its own investigation into Russian meddling in possible collusion with the rump campaign, in fact as you noted there, four of the Trump associative that had been charge so far they included, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, George Papadopoulos and former national security advisor Michael Flynn in all four of their indictments there's been reference to the dossier or its findings. However special counsel Robert Mueller's team did meet this past summer with the author of the dossier, that is former British spy Christopher Steele, and Hala it is possible that any information that Mueller's team may have gotten from Christopher Steele, that could be used as the probe continues here but we haven't seen any evidence of it in the indictments in those four Trump associates and we do know from our reporting that parts of this dossier you have been corroborated. So the president claimed Hala that this is completely bogus, well it doesn't exactly went through. Hala?
[Gorani:] Now, I got to ask this question though, the tax legislation the President Trump promise did go through, there is a plan to unveil and infrastructure spending plan, why is the president choosing to focus on the dossier on his old rival and opponent Hillary Clinton over twitter rather on what he said or his achievements?
[Schneider:] If I knew the answer to that question Hala, I will be a [inaudible] woman, that had been the continued question, that has been the criticism of this president throughout is administration, we are going on a year now and the president continues to go back and turned the focus on Russia. To tweet about the Russia probe, to downplay the Russia probe, to call it a witch-hunt, the question is with all these legislative priorities up until really on the tax bill that had stalled. Why doesn't the president pour more of his muscle and more of his focus into his legislative priorities, perhaps we will see that turn of the focus in 2018, but yesterday's tweet, if any indication Hala, he will continue to stay focused on the Russia probe. In fact our CNN team did some reporting just about a week ago were the president firmly believes that he will be exonerated in this probe and he believes not only be exonerated but he thinks he will actually get a letter from the FBI or from special counsel Mueller or from this congressional committees specifically clearing him in black and white, that likely will not happen since usually if you aren't indicted or clear in a criminal probe they don't usually send you a letter saying so, but the president, you are right Hala, continues to stay focused on it despite a lot more legislative battles to come in 2018, Hala.
[Gorani:] All right. Jessica Schneider thanks very much reporting from Washington. Now the investigation to whether Moscow was involved in the U.S. election is dragging into 2018 which is just a few days away. The Russian military from pushing ahead its maneuvers are becoming increasingly bold and as Barbara Starr tell that Washington is watching closely.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Correspondent:] A British royal with a helicopters infrared camera tracks the Russian warship Christmas Day is itself close to U.K. territorial waters the latest in what the British government is calling an upsurge in Russian warships to close to its coastline. It is all part of the message from Moscow to Washington the Russian military will be a force to be reckoned with in 2018.
[Unidentified Male:] The Russian are certainly pushing the envelope, a lot of their activities in the naval and aerial arena are certainly hardedge to their design to push us to the limits.
[Starr:] The question now, how much confrontation will President Trump risk? He has taken an unexpected step allowing the export of anti-tank weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian back rebels in a country where pro Russia rebels frequently clashed with Ukrainian armed forces.
[Unidentified Male:] It is important for the United States to tell the Russia that we will support Ukraine's ability to defend itself.
[Starr:] But it's also a risky step.
[Unidentified Male:] If Putin decides that this is sort of a hostile act and a new U.S. policy to push back on Russia, Russia has everything from covert operatives across the region in Ukraine and they're able to push back and escalate very significantly.
[Stelter:] Vladimir Putin's military has also flown aggressively against U.S. pilots in Syria. The Pentagon openly calling it a deliberate violations of an agreement to prevent accidents. After that Moscow appears back off a bit. Putin personally challenging the President's new national security strategy.
[Trump:] We also face rivals powers, Russia and China that seek to challenge America's influence values and wealth. We will attempt to build a great partnership with those and other countries but in a manner that always protects our national interest. UNIDENTIFIED MALE
[Starr:] There is some U.S. leverage. Moscow may be nervous that new back sanctions could be strengthened even further. Barbara Starr CNN Pentagon.
[Gorani:] Fred Pleitgen is in Moscow following this for us and Fred, this reset that people are anticipating and friendlier relationship between President Trump and President Putin, hasn't materialized. It doesn't seem like its going direction in 2018 necessarily.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] No, I don't think it is going in that direction in 2018. One of the interesting things about what the Trump administration has done vis-a-vis possible interaction militarily with the Russians is that they really had an approach that was different as far as different theaters are concerned. One of the things that Barbara that report is that the U.S. has now said it will sell for instance anti-tank weapons to Ukrainians which is something that the Russians heavily criticized, obviously didn't like it at all. On the flip side of that, the Trump administration also decided not to back moderate Syrian rebels anymore which is something that the Russians do like. It certainly seems ashough it's not clear what exactly America's policy is towards the Russians, whether there's going to be a hard line. On the other hand, though, I think it is absolutely correct to assume that the Russians are going to continue to be very assertive and in fact are going assertive than they were before. Ukraine, but one of the things we all need to be looking out for and the U.S. will be looking out for is Russia's moves in the Middle East. If you look at Russia trying to get into bases in Egypt, trying then some of the things we've heard in the past couple days in Syria as well, that is something I think you are going to see the Russian army become more professional but also more assertive in the next year.
[Gorani:] Certainly, that is a very good observation. They're signing commercial deals with Egypt. A lot going on with Russia. Thank you very much we will get back to you very soon Fred Pleitgen in Moscow. The former American President Barack Obama has given his first interview since leaving office, he is getting the royal treatment literally taking questions from Prince Harry on BBC radio's today program. Up for discussion, politics whether the President referred "good wife" or "suits." Very crucial question, the TV show suits star the Prince fiancee Meghan Markle and the power of social media was also a topic of discussion. Let's take a listen.
[Obama:] The question I think really has to do with how do we harness this technology in a what way that allows a multiplicity of voices, allows diversity views, but doesn't lead to a balkanization of our society but rather continues to promote ways of finding common ground. I'm not sure government can legislate that. But what I do believe is that, all us in leadership have to find ways in which we can recreate a common space on the internet. One of the dangers of the internet is that people can have entirely different realities. They can be just cocooned in information that reinforces their current biases.
[Gorani:] Anna Stewart joins me live in the studio. He didn't mention Donald Trump by name. He was obviously referring to him. There were questions as well asked of Prince Harry about this upcoming wedding that everybody's talking about to Meghan Markle. What did he say?
[Anna Stewart, Cnn Producer:] This interview was filled with light and fun as well as you had there on the social media. They spoke about Obama's career. He misses and doesn't miss. He misses the motorcade and traffic. He doesn't miss the early morning get out. After the interview today when Prince Harry was being interviewed he asked will he be inviting President Barack Obama.
[Unidentified Female:] Well enough to invite him to your wedding?
[Prince Harry, Of Wales:] I don't know about that. We haven't put the invites or the guest list together yet. Who knows whether he is going to be invited or not.
[Stewart:] So diplomatic.
[Gorani:] They haven't put the guest list together? I don't know.
[Stewart:] T minus five months.
[Gorani:] Diplomatic about it. How did this come about? This interview was conducted a few weeks ago.
[Stewart:] the interview with Obama was conducted in September. That was before the engagement. A media storm about whether or not the Obama would be invited. It is not a state wedding. We are not expecting heads of state to be invited. We are not expecting President Trump to get an invite. They are friends of the Obamas. Will that be a snub to President Trump?
[Gorani:] Right, especially if President Trump is not invited, but not being an official state event means there no obligation to extend an invitation to heads of state, correct?
[Stewart:] Absolutely. No one would ever pressure Harry to invite or not invite anyone. This is his wedding it is his Meghan. This is all about them this will be very important driven. It's not a state wedding.
[Gorani:] Why did they hold on to it for so along if it was conducted a few weeks, months ago in September?
[Stewart:] We're not quite sure. They had teased ahead. We've been waiting for this for weeks. But we'll have to wait for the wedding.
[Gorani:] It was a fun listen. That rapid question rapid fire section.
[Stewart:] What are you going to say?
[Gorani:] I know really. He should have said the good wife just to figure the reaction. Anna thanks very much, still to come, Syria's civil war, Russia is claiming victory over ISIS while opponents of the Syrian President are suffering under a siege. We'll have that also.
[Unidentified Female:] We felt lonely. We were afraid of losing the fight until you showed up in our life.
[Gorani:] War, a battle field devoid of hope. Anything but the birth place of love. Next a story that defied all the odds, we will be right back.

[Rep. Ted Deutch  Florida:] Do you've been asked about this investigation. Are you concerned that the inspector general can investigate you and issue a report just like this one that says that you should never have done that?
[Peter Strzok, Fbi Official:] Certainly, that's possible. I'd be more worried about the impact on the ongoing investigation.
[Deutch:] I understand. It's a ridiculous position to put you in. The inspect general explains in this nearly 600-page report that the mistake Director Comey made was discussing the ongoing steps the FBI was taking in the Hillary Clinton investigation. Here's what we've heard today. We heard it from the chairman. We heard it and my colleagues. You've got two choices. You can ignore the FBI's policy that has been put in place to protect these investigations. And I'm going to let you talk about that in a second and answer the questions. In which case maybe, you trigger an IG report, or you don't answer those questions and maybe we hold you in contempt. Now can you just again since this has been a really long day, can you explain why it is important not to interfere with ongoing criminal matters?
[Strzok:] There are a variety and I'm sure I won't come up with all the reasons. But the first is we do a lot of investigations where we never charge anybody. And it's simply not fair to give the investigative power we have to do something that would unnecessarily tarnish them and their image. Two, in the cases where we are investigating, talking about it is going to screw up a bunch of things. You might want to do investigative talking to witnesses, talking to the subject, and then finally we want somebody to have a fair trial. And if we're talking about it or putting our finger on the scale it just would be horribly inappropriate and against what we stand for in the criminal justice system.
[Deutch:] And the negative consequences on that outcome of that investigation?
[Strzok:] That would be tremendous. Would adversely impact potentially the ability to get a fair trial, to conduct a competent investigation, to conduct one that arrived at the truth.
[Deutch:] Right. Mr. Strzok, I appreciate that last comment. And I would just urge my colleagues that in the midst of this apoplexy that seems to be breaking out among some of my colleagues, that remember that ultimately what we're really trying to do here is get to the truth and the truth that we need to get to is exactly what a hostile foreign adversary did to interfere with our democracy. Let's please keep that in mind as we move forward. Let's make that the focus. That's what the American people are expecting. That's what they're counting on us to do. Get out of the way, let this investigation go forward. Let's get to the truth. I yield back the balance of my time.
[Trey Gowdy , South Carolina:] The gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Marino, is recognized for five minutes.
[Rep. Tom Marino , Pennsylvania:] Mr. Chairman, Mr. Strzok, I have here, and I'm sure you're familiar with it, the ethics handbook of Department of Justice of which the FBI falls under.
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Marino:] And there are several paragraphs that I want to read to you. First one is general principles of ethical conduct continued. Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law, or the ethical standards set forth. Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with the knowledge of the relevant facts. Next is appearance of impropriety. An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions created in the appearance that the employee is violating the law, or the ethical standards set forth in these guidelines. Furthermore, it states for employees for whom a security clearance is required and you do have a security clearance, correct?
[Strzok:] Today I do, yes.
[Marino:] You've had one for quite a while. Are they then the circumstances?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Marino:] For performance of their official duties, prohibited conduct and more may be grounds for suspension, revocation of clearance. This could also result in adverse disciplinary action, including suspension or removal. Under the Hatch Act. All federal employees you may vote, express opinions and make political contributions under the Hatch Act. Active participation in political activities by federal employees is restricted. And employees and I want you to listen to this very carefully serving in certain positions are more restricted than others. If you are a person that falls into that category as well. I am just actually disheartened about the situation that you are in. And I say this with no prejudice and I think you are your own worst enemy. You have an answer for everything. You have an attitude that is very obvious today and you are the kind of witness that you and I as a prosecutor for 18 years, a district attorney, and a U.S. attorney would love to get on the stand. And the reasonableness of the statements that you made and I am not going to get into the language but the repetitiveness of it, where was your judgment? What were you not thinking when you were sending the e-mails and your statements that you made and the comments of the people in Virginia? I would expect someone of your caliber to be way above that. You got carried away and you got impressed with yourself and you're in a position that I am sorry that's the case. But if you are trying to draw a distinction, a wide distinction between bias and political opinion, there's not the wide distinction that you are drawing at this point. Because I would bet the farm that if you were sitting next to me as the investigating prosecutor and I was the prosecutor, and Judge Puller and other judge were handing in a case whether it's civil or criminal, you and I would be pointing out the biases that I see that you have exhibited here. I just don't understand your judgment based on your background and you may respond to that.
[Strzok:] Sir, I appreciate your comments and I appreciate your concern. The first thing I would tell you is I'm disappointed if you did not understand the amount of regret that I express from the beginning of my opening statement to the harming and damage that this has caused to the people I love
[Marino:] I do understand that now. But it's in hindsight and people like you and I that are here to protect the citizens, we should be thinking of this before.
[Strzok:] Congressman without question and I would absolutely agree with you that there are things that I regret in retrospect and I hope that comes across today. I know a large portion of today have been combative in a way that has nothing to do with my sense of regret and remorse. I would draw since you brought up the ethics manual, I would note in that manual and further restrict employees, every FBI employee, many DOJ employees, other members of the intelligence community are restricted. But within that category, if you read that manual, citing the Hatch Act, it says except for where otherwise prohibited. And that has to do with activities coordinating with a political party. Employees may not only have political opinions, but they are encouraged to express them.
[Marino:] I know it well.
[Strzok:] And publicly. So, sir, I don't draw any disagreement with you about bias where it occurs. What I disagree with you and so many people today is that political belief does not equate the bias and you always have to go to the evidence. If you can demonstrate evidence of acts of bias, well then bias is there. But in the absence of any and truly the inspector general of this committee and any number of people have looked and looked and looked and not a single act tells me it didn't occur. Because really competent people have looked for it. So, beyond me telling you under oath that I know it didn't happen. What's important to realize is it's not just me. It's this entirety of folks looking at it. It is the entirety of structure of the FBI who's built not to do those things and not to allow in other
[Gowdy:] The time of the gentleman have expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois, Miss Kelly for five minutes.
[Rep. Robin Kelly , Illinois:] I know it's been a long day for you, so I will keep it simple. Some questions will be repetitive. But if you can just say yes or no. In your time at the FBI have you ever investigated a member of the Democratic Party?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Kelly:] Did any of those investigation resulted in an indictment?
[Strzok:] No, not to my recollection.
[Kelly:] Have you ever investigated anyone that identifies as independent or unaffiliated with either of the two major political parties?
[Strzok:] Ma'am, I don't know.
[Kelly:] So, you don't know if any of those resulted in
[Strzok:] I don't know that I know when I'm thinking of the Democratic Party, clearly, Secretary Clinton was part of who we looked at and she was very clearly part of the Democratic Party. I don't tend to beyond that. I am not a public corruption agent and political affiliation is not something that we looked at.
[Kelly:] But in your assessment would your work history suggest a bias by you towards anyone political party?
[Strzok:] No, not at you will
[Kelly:] You investigated, as you said, Secretary Clinton for a use of private e-mails.
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Kelly:] She is a member of the Democratic Party.
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Kelly:] We know you have investigated a Republican, provided your participation in the ongoing Mueller investigation. And we know that that investigation has led to an indictment. In fact, it has led to 19 indictments, five guilty pleas and a host of charges filed against former campaign and White House advisers to President Trump, as well as Russian nationals and companies. So, is it fair to say that you have investigated and indicted individuals from the political spectrum or you may not be aware.
[Strzok:] Yes, ma'am, we don't look at that. So, I don't know, but it's a fair assumption.
[Kelly:] There have been news reports that President Trump's advisers, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, Stephen Miller, former White House official, Steven Bannon, Reince Preibus and Gary Cohen, all used private e-mails to conduct official business. President Trump is a Republican. Correct?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Kelly:] So, these individuals where are key staffers for a Republican president. Correct?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Kelly:] These individuals serve or served as senior advisors to the President, White House chief strategists, White House Chief of Staff and Director of the national economic council. It is safe to say that individuals in such high-ranking positions are exposed to sensitive perhaps top street materials.
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Kelly:] To your knowledge has the FBI opened investigations against their use of private e-mails for official White House business?
[Strzok:] I'm going to answer that I can't answer that based on if they are ongoing, it would be inappropriate for me to talk about it.
[Kelly:] OK. I would like to know that neither the House Judiciary Committee, nor the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have open hearings on that issue. And several of those individual's names continue to advise the president of the United States and receive a paycheck paid by our tax dollars. Also, I'd like to say when constituents call my office, they are Dems, they are Republicans, they're independence and they're not involved like all of us. And if you ask them, I am sure that they would say they received topnotch services from my office and I have my biases like everybody else like we've talked about. In listening to the conversation today, I have to wonder about some of my Republican colleagues, not everybody. But since you apparently think that biases preventing people from doing their best job. It makes me wonder what happens when Democrats call your office. Do you not give them the same service as you give your Republican constituents because that's what you keep on implying over and over and over and over? I yield back.
[Gowdy:] The chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Sandford for five minutes. Rep. Mark Sanford, South Carolina: I appreciate Mr. Chairman. And if I might I'm going to yield my time to my colleague from Ohio.
[Rep. Jim Jordan , Ohio:] Thank you, gentlemen, for yielding. Agent Strzok, I want to go back to this e-mail you sent on January 10th regarding the BuzzFeed pending publishing of the dossier. You have that in front of you again?
[Strzok:] I do.
[J:] OK. My last round of questioning, you said you spoke with Bruce Ohr several times in the 2016 and 2017 time period, is that accurate?
[Strzok:] That's correct
[J:] OK. And at the time you are working with Mr. Ohr, did you know that he was meeting with representatives from Fusion including Glenn Simpson?
[Strzok:] May I consult with counsel, sir.
[J:] You sure can. You can hold my time, please.
[Strzok:] Sir, again, I would like to answer your question. And it's a short easily answerable question. But at the direction of the FBI I couldn't discuss the content of the operational matters that that's at the store.
[J:] I appreciate that. At the time you were meeting with Bruce Ohr, did you know that his wife Nellie works for Fusion?
[Strzok:] Again, I believe the same answer, standby, sir, again, please. Sorry about the time. Sir, again I'm sorry. I would like to answer that question. But at the direction of the FBI because it relates to an ongoing operational matter I can't.
[J:] Let's go back to the e-mail. I just want to make sure I understand this. It sounds like in your e-mail you're saying comparing now, sounds like there are three copies but two different versions. The set you're examining and referencing to your colleagues, you say it is identical of what McCain had in referring to the dossier. And then you're saying the one from Corn and Simpson you won't tell me who those individuals are but that one is different. Is that an accurate reading of your e-mail?
[Strzok:] Sir, it isn't. And I think to give you the context of that comment, I would have to tell you sir, this is more frustrating for me than it is for you. Because of to frame that to give you an accurate answer, I have to give you the context of what was going on which includes details that I have been instructed by the FBI that I may not provide.
[J:] Well, there's another e-mail down below on the one that you are looking at. Which talks about BuzzFeed has 16 of the reports. It looks like they have 16 of the I believe 17 sections that made up the entire dossier, is that an accurate reading there?
[Strzok:] Sir, again it's not an accurate reading. I would tell you what the FBI has told me what I may say in answer to the dossier is that
[J:] It's not an accurate reading, that's what it says. BuzzFeed has 16 of the reports.
[Strzok:] Sir, that is a literal reading but understanding what that means, it would require know provide information that is beyond the scope of what the FBI's permitted me to tell you.
[J:] Well, we'd sure like to know. I want to refer you to I don't know if you have this in front of you but this is the House Intelligence Committee's report, chapter 6, there is a footnote on page 113. And it says this, in late March 2017, Daniel Jones met with the FBI regarding PQG, the Pend Quarter Group, which he described as exposing foreign relations foreign influence in Western elections. He told the FBI that PQG was being funded by 7 to 10 wealthy donors located primarily in New York and California who provided approximately $50 million. He further stated that PQG had secured the services of Steel, his associate, and Fusion GPS to continue exposing the potential Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Are you familiar with this meeting Mr. Jones had with the FBI?
[Strzok:] I am not, and I don't know if that's accurate or not. But I am not aware.
[J:] I am going from the intelligence report that the the majority issued from the House intelligence committee.
[S:] I am not aware of that meeting or who that is.
[J:] Have you spoke with Daniel Jones?
[Strzok:] No.
[J:] Do you know Mr. Jones at all?
[Strzok:] I do not.
[J:] All right. I want to go back to one more question I asked you the first round, Mr. Strzok. Mr. Simpson when he did testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee was asked about Fusion, no one from Fusion ever spoke with the FBI. Is there any way that that contradicts what's in the e-mail that I've been referencing with you?
[Strzok:] I don't know. I can tell you I have not spoken to Mr. Simpson.
[J:] Not spoken to Mr. Simpson. I haven't asked you that. I asked you that the first time. All right, I thank the chairman and think the gentleman from South Carolina, for yielding. I go back to the gentleman.
[Gowdy:] The chair would note that several of the questions asked by the gentleman were not answered by the witness on the advice of his counsel. And I assume through the FBI. And we will note those questions so that we can address them at a future time because I find it stunning that they are not allowing you to answer those questions Mr. Strzok. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Gutierrez for five minutes.
[Rep. Luis Gutierrez , Illinois:] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The chairman started this hearing by saying I wish this hearing wasn't necessary. Sorry if I don't believe that. Of course, he wants this hearing and it isn't necessary. And I think there are hearings that are necessary. And we see them every day. There are 3,000 children separated from their moms and dads and the government doesn't know where their moms and dads are and can't bring them together. That seems like something that the judicial committee should be investigating. We start a policy in this country where we ban, ban Muslims from coming in and we make a test, a religious test. Sounds to me something that the judiciary committee should take up. We have a president of the United States there are 16 women who have come forward to say that the President of the United States has attacked them. And what does this committee do? No hearings. Even one of the members of this committee had to resign in disgrace because he asked one of his staffers for a million dollars if she would carry a baby for him. Do we have any hearings on the state and the plight of women in the workplace in America? No. These are all things and issues that are on the American people's minds. We don't want to talk about those issues. Those should be issues that I believe are pertinent and should have hearings before this committee. But what we want to have hearings is to bring Mr. Strzok here so that we can regurgitate and continue to say that he is lying and that he is biased and somehow, he corrupted the investigation to the point that we can't believe Mr. Mueller, that we can't believe Mr. Rosenstein. That we can't believe the new FBI director who was appointed by the current President of the United States and that we should abandon. My members on the other side, if there are two people that are thrilled and excited today, there are two people, the folks over at Fox News and at the Kremlin because they both worked on one thing, electing President Trump President of the United States of America. They've got to be overjoyed today at the Kremlin and they've got to be applauding. And the news reel tonight because a lot of this today is simply what? Auditioning for Fox News and of course, at the clapping at the Kremlin. I never thought I would see a time that the Congress of the United States would do the work of destroying. Because what do we know? We know very clearly that our men and women of the intelligence community have unanimously stated, and this is unrefutable, that the Russians worked to undermine our democracy and to elect Donald Trump President of the United States and that is something that's irrefutable. You can say what you want about Mr. Strzok, that's irrefutable. And yet we do not investigate that. How could we have such an attack on our democracy? And we don't investigate. And we want to investigate Mr. Strzok. So, I want to ask you, Mr. Strzok, because they kept saying you have this bias. When did you learn and how did you learn about the investigation into the possible collusion between the Donald Trump campaign and Russian influence in our 2016 election?
[Strzok:] Sir, I'm limited to what Director Comey was authorized to say by the Department of Justice, but in late July.
[Gutierrez:] So, in late July. And when did the public learn about the investigation into Russian collusion and Donald Trump's investigation?
[Strzok:] I don't remember a specific date, but it was well into the following year.
[Gutierrez:] It was after the election.
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Gutierrez:] So, what we are to believe from our Republican majority that you're so biased, you're such a Democrat that you can't hold back from trying to destroy Donald Trump. Yet you never told anybody that there was an investigation into Donald Trump's campaign and collusion with the Russians? You never told anybody about that?
[Strzok:] No, sir.
[Gutierrez:] You never talk to reporter about that?
[Strzok:] No.
[Gutierrez:] But you had it in your hands or maybe you didn't you know, in America you can do almost anything. But you did have almost a magical bullet in your hand to derail the Donald Trump investigation and did you use it?
[Strzok:] No, sir.
[Gutierrez:] No, you didn't. Right? Are there Republicans that work at the FBI? Because it makes it sound like you are all Democrats. I never heard that before. But are there Republicans?
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Gutierrez:] OK. It would be interesting here is since you like to cherry pick the Democrats that give money the FBI agents that give money to Democrats, why don't you reveal the Republican members of the FBI that give money to Republicans? Why don't you reveal the Republican members of the FBI that are in and state very clearly when they apply have a voter registration they apply as Republicans? They don't because that is not what this is about. What this is about is for the American public, Mr. Strzok. It's really not about you. They want to damage and destroy our democracy. And one of the ways they do it is by taking an institution like the FBI and destroying it. That I think is really regrettable. OK, Kremlin, another good day for you. You influenced the election. You wanted Donald Trump to win. You won that one and now you want to destroy our institutions. Congratulations, Kremlin and congratulations to everybody that is helping them. The gentleman from Illinois yields back to the gentleman from Tennessee, Scott DesJarlais is recognized.
[Scott Desjarlais , Tennessee:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I just have a couple of questions for you, Mr. Strzok, and I would like to yield the balance of my time to Chairman Gowdy. But in light of the last round of questioning it is fair to say that you wanted to stop President Trump from being elected in your own words, did you?
[Strzok:] No, sir. That was my expression that I had a preference not for candidate Trump to be president. But that I did not and would not
[Desjarlais:] Did I not hear you read your text directly that you would stop him? He would stop it?
[Strzok:] No, sir. You misunderstood or misheard me. I said that my sense of not recalling right in that text is that the American populace wouldn't elect
[Desjarlais:] You don't like Donald Trump, do you?
[Strzok:] Fair to say, I'm not a fan, sir.
[Desjarlais:] Yes. And were you the only one who could have done the job you're joining, are you the only one who could have led this investigation in the FBI?
[Strzok:] Sir, it was logical given that I was number two in counter intelligence that I would have a role in this investigation but no there are very qualified folks in the FBI. DAD's there are not that many.
[Desjarlais:] So, in retrospect then should you have recused yourself in this case?
[Strzok:] Absolutely not, sir.
[Desjarlais:] You don't like this man. You didn't want him to become President. You had several very disparaging text messages with your friend about this. But yet you didn't once think that maybe somebody else should take the case?
[Strzok:] No, sir, and I tell you what, there are times that I didn't particularly care for Secretary Clinton and I investigated that absolutely as objectively and aggressively. I think recusing is the all narrative.
[Desjarlais:] OK, that's the one thing I've struggle with here today listening to your testimony. Because I do think a man in your position and power and the respect you should have or that people should have for you because of your position in the FBI that you would have stopped to think that maybe there was somebody that could have done a better job that didn't have such disdain for this President. You claim to be such a patriot but once he was elected you continued to do this. And I think that you have to accept that elections have consequences. But I will yield the balance of my time to our chairman.
[Gowdy:] The gentleman yields. Agent Strzok now I am confused because I thought on that August 8, 2016 text that you did not recall typing it. And then you said that you recalled it was late at night and that somehow mitigated the content of what you typed. So, do you recall it? Or was it late at night? And what else do you recall about the timing of that?
[Strzok:] Mr. Chairman, I think my recollection statements have been consistent across the board. I don't remember typing it. It was late at night. My sense was I can tell you what it was not. It was not a suggestion that I or the FBI take any action.
[Gowdy:] I tell you what, instead of us musing about what you meant why don't we go with what you said.
[Strzok:] I would rather go with what I did because that is at the end of the day that is
[Gowdy:] We'll get to that in a second, I promise you. No, no, he's not. We'll stop it. And I think you've agreed that it was his candidacy. Right? Or his election?
[Strzok:] I don't think again, not recalling writing it, his candidacy, his election I don't recall writing it. And I'm not sure what it means.
[Gowdy:] What did you mean by stop?
[Strzok:] Stop it again, my sense looking at the context was that was no way coming off the heels of insulting the Kahn family that the American and all the other statements that had been made and the comparison of a generable size during the debate and everything else, that there was no way that the American population was going to elect this man. So, my sense was this was an off the cuff, hey don't worry about it, sort of comment. And if you look at the next day when I sent a text saying what was that? It's clear, there is no conspiracy. There is no meeting of the minds. There is no suggestion of actions. It was merely a one-off comment.
[Gowdy:] And of course, there is about a week before you use the word we again in connection with an insurance policy to make sure that he was not elected President. And then we get to the day Mueller was appointed special counsel, the day after. Let's go through this one again and see if it rings a bell with you. Who gives a f, one more A.D. and investigation leading to impeachment with a question mark. Why are you talking about impeachment the day of special counsel's appointment? While you are thinking about that, let me give you other options you could have said. An investigation leading into indictments against Russians. An investigation leading to better election security. An investigation leading into a robust response to what Russia tried to do to our country. But you didn't say any of that, agent Strzok. You went straight to impeachment. Do you know how impeachment works?
[Strzok:] I have a general understanding.
[Gowdy:] How does it work?
[Strzok:] Sir, my understanding is limited to that is something done by the Congress that there are articles of impeachment and the procedure by which that occurs I'm not an expert on.
[Gowdy:] Well, let me ask you this, do you have to be a sitting office holder to be impeached?
[Strzok:] Sir, I don't know the answer to that.
[Gowdy:] Well, I actually do. And I will take note that you never once used the word in connection with Secretary Clinton, did you?
[Strzok:] Sir, I did not, no.
[Gowdy:] No, you didn't. If you did, we don't have it. So that's an investigation where you didn't think about mentioning it, but the day Mueller was appointed rather than punishing Russia or rather than indicting Russians, rather than doing something about social media you went straight to impeachment.
[Strzok:] Wrong. That's incorrect, sir.
[Gowdy:] Well, I tell you what. I'm out of time. And will revisit the issue.
[Strzok:] May I respond to your question, sir?
[Gowdy:] You may when we revisit the issue.
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Chairman, the witnesses permitted to answer the question.

[Cuomo:] All right. We're back. Arizona republican Senator Jeff Flake says politics has turned too destructive and he blames his party and our president, President Trump. It's part of his book, "Conscience of a Conservative." And in it the senator writes, "To carry on in the spring of 2017 as if what happened was anything approaching normalcy required a determined suspension of critical faculties and tremendous powers of denial." Senator Flake also said this to my colleague Jake Tapper earlier today. Take a listen.
[Jeff Flake,  United States Senator:] We've kind of as republicans taken up taken up an unfamiliar banner that you know, this populism and you know, in some cases xenophobia, anti-immigration, protectionism. That's not familiar to us and I don't think that that is a governing philosophy.
[Cuomo:] So the senator is making a very specific argument. Let's discussdebate. We have CNN political commentator Jack Kingston, former senior adviser to the Trump campaign, and republican strategist, Rick Wilson. Gentlemen, thank you very much. Jack, I start with you. What, first of all, good to have you both here. Thank you for joining us. What do you make of the senator's argument about what has happened within the party and what the president means to it.
[Jack Kingston, Political Commentator, Cnn:] Chris, I had the honor of sharing third base on the congressional baseball team with Senator Flake. He got more game time than I did, but I got to know him very well. Jeff has always been an independent thinker, always kind of out there a little bit. He had what we used to call the Flake amendments where he would take on earmarks from either party. So he is fearless when it comes time to criticize. But as I read one of the articles today about him, his conclusions were we needed to protect the filibuster which I think the filibuster is one of the big problems with the Senate. It keeps them arrogant and aloof. I think disconnected with the American people. He said that the president was guilty of playing to his base and I would say no duh, what president doesn't play to his base. And then he said we needed to have free trade. Well, we all support free trade but the other word is fair trade. And what the president has said about NAFTA, it's 20 years old. We need to renegotiate it. What he said about TPP was the same thing Hillary Clinton said.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Kingston:] So, you know, I think his conclusions were on what we needed to do, I think they were a little bit weak on substance.
[Cuomo:] Well, the senator is making a little bit different point. And I'll redirect it to you, Rick. The senator is not talking about the what as much as the how. Another excerpt from the book that makes this point. "Too often, we observe the unfolding drama along with the rest of the country passively. All but saying, someone should do something. Without seeming to realize that that someone is us, the silence from McConnell, the silence from Ryan with outrage after outrage and strange things that come out of White House." That's what the senator is talking about, not the policy, not TPP but how he conducts the business of the White House and being America's leader. What's your take on that, Rick?
[Rick Wilson, Republican Strategist:] There is a very broad sense that Senator Flake has touched on something that a lot of folks inside the party recognize is that Donald Trump is not a conservative. He is not a republican in the sense that we've understood being a republican or being a conservative for a long time. He is not about limited government or individual liberty or the rule of law or any of these things that are the normative forces that shaped consecutives for a very long time. He's a populist is, sometimes he's a very effective populist but that's not conservatism. And the things that he does behaviorally are also very distant from what we've always considered to be, again, normal conservative behavior and the things that we would expect and hope that a president would have, dignity, intellectual discipline, a sense of the majesty and honor of the White House and the role he plays. And I think Senator Flake has identified a lot of these problems that folks inside the party have identified and agree with, many of them are afraid to say anything about it, many of them the afraid the fear of the mean tweet is there. But that's something that he's definitely touched on.
[Kingston:] Rick, those are the party elites. The party elite doesn't like Donald Trump. And they've been saying that same thing. But here's a guy who for every new regulation he's put on the books, he's repealed 19 regulations. That's conservative. Here's a guy who has invested in our military and improved our strength and our stature abroad. The same thing that he proposed...
[Wilson:] Jack, Jack, here's the thing. Donald Trump has proposed Donald Trump has proposed expansions.
[Cuomo:] One at a time. Jack, finish your point and let Rick respond.
[Kingston:] He's working for energy independence, protecting our borders and cutting down on illegal immigration. That those are conservative principles, Rick. And I know that a lot of the elite in town doesn't like the way he's ruffled feathers to get the job done but he is getting a conservative agenda through.
[Cuomo:] Rick, your response.
[Wilson:] The conservative things that Donald Trump does are incidental coincidental and accidental. What happens with this with a guy like Donald Trump, he's talking about wildly expanding the power of the state. I'm a conservative. I don't want...
[Kingston:] You mean evolve in power back in the state government? ... a stronger more powerful government. He's talking Jack, I let you speak. He's talking about expanding the power of the state dramatically. He's talking about engaging in trade wars. He is a guy who lacks the mental discipline to understand the complexities of the foreign affairs challenges that face us right now. So I really don't think that you can just say that the occasional things that you get from regulatory rollbacks with Donald Trump comprise a consistent conservative philosophy. Rick.
[Wilson:] And a coherent intellectual framework of conservatism. And you know, the elites, Jack, have a benefit once in a while is that they don't just respond to the base emotions of the screaming crowd. That is Donald Trump's forte. That's what he loves. That's his gig. I get it. OK? He doesn't have the intellectual bandwidth for conservative philosophy to really talk about conservatism.
[Kingston:] Well, you know, I'm sorry [Inaudible] Rick, but that's what democracy is about is every man, one man, one vote. What did you think about...
[Wislon:] May I remind you we're in a republic, congressman.
[Kingston:] ... his speech in Poland? His speech in Poland in defense of the west and western values, I thought it was a speech not just for the day not just for the week but for the decade. Even for decades to be studied about the difference between the west and the terrorism and the recklessness and the lack of the rule of law in the rest of the world or a lot of the world.
[Wilson:] Right.
[Kingston:] And I thought it was real leadership. And here we get the president of France inviting him back for Bastille Day? And this was the guy who according to the E.U. and all the liberals socialist over in Europe, he is horrible. He is horrible. But guess who invites him back for Bastille Day? The president of France.
[Cuomo:] OK.
[Kingston:] A very significant stride that he makes.
[Cuomo:] Jack, we take your point. Rick, quick button. We have to go.
[Wilson:] Listen, I think we're in a situation now where a lot of conservatives are really looking at the behavior of Trump more than just the promises. The promises aren't being met. The behavior is evident every day and it's a problem for conservatives.
[Cuomo:] Rick Wilson, Jack Kingston. Thank you for the robust debate. I appreciate you both.
[Kingston:] Thanks, Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right. I want to turn now to the latest White House shake up. Is it really going to change the balance of power in the West Wing? How so? What about Ivanka Trump's tweet about the new chief of staff General John Kelly. Here it is. "Looking forward to serving alongside John Kelly as we work for the American people." Working alongside is what caught the eye. Why? Because General Kelly is supposedly everyone's boss now. Everyone has been put underneath him. Does that include the children? Let's discuss. We got Tim O'Brien, executive editor of bloomberg View and author of "Trump Nation," and Annie Karni, White House reporter for Politico. Thank you both for bow being here. So John Kelly, general, military. Trump respects him, we are told, especially when in uniform. He's in charge of everyone. Then Ivanka's tweet comes out. Was this a nudge against power or just an ownership of the obvious which is I'm his daughter. I don't, you know, you don't stand between me and my father. How do you recommend?
[Timothy O'brien, Executive Editor, Bloomberg View:] Jared and I are first among equals. I don't think that I'm doubtful that Kelly will make a difference in this White House. The reality is that Trump is his centrifugal force. He pushes everyone away from him except family members. He is he can't be disciplined. I think that ultimately Kelly is going to be trying to lasso the world in here with trump. And that's the problem in this. It's never going to be an organization that's run in a linear tactical way because that's not how Trump rules. He's in it I think for self-aggrandizement and self- preservation. I think, you know, your previous guest talking about where Trump where trump ideology is. I think it's a mistaken path and to understand he's not about ideology. He's really about almost...
[Cuomo:] People see that as refreshing. He's pragmatic.
[O'brien:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] He's about the empirical. He just does what works. That would be the virtue.
[O'brien:] He think he can get it done. He's got to get it done. So refreshing alone doesn't get policy put in place.
[Cuomo:] So, Annie, respond to that. Let me put my wedding band on my pinky ring for a second so I can make this point more easily. The head rots from the the fish rots from the head down. That was what's Scaramucci into the ether and Mario Cantone and now I can't say it without laughing. But the truth of it is that leadership begins at the top. Tone begins at the top.
[Annie Karni, White House Reporter, Politico:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] So, yes, General John Kelly. People say you look in his eyes and you realize he is no joke. But you also realize he is not the president. So how much change can come from beneath?
[Karni:] Well, I would just say that the fact that there were four rival power centers and a weak chief of staff who couldn't control who the president talked to and didn't have most of the staff reporting to him wasn't didn't just happen. Trump set it up this way and it's the same play book he's been using for 30 years. He likes to see play people against each other to see them fight, to know that they all are trying to fight for his favor. That's the way he ran his business and that's the way he ran the White House for the first six months. I don't know if John Kelly wants to impose some new order and firing Scaramucci was a nice way of showing that things are going to be different. I don't know if Trump will like that. And if Ivanka and Jared have said they plan to abide by the new rules. They wanted Priebus out, they wanted someone who can be more orderly. But what John Kelly can't control is that they have access to the president in the East Wing whatever they want.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Karni:] Even if they technically report to him...
[Cuomo:] But would anybody expect differently, though, Annie? Wouldn't that be unfair if not impractical to say that Ivanka, Jared, that they would have to go to the general before they can go to their father? Isn't just that an impossibility?
[Karni:] It's just, I mean, no chief of staff in history has had to deal with family members reporting to him. And, I mean, they can say they want to report to him but if Jared and Ivanka have dinner with their dad, are they going to go tell Kelly what they discussed and read out every conversation they have with Trump on their private time. It's just so blurry which is the way Trump what happens when you have family members serving in senior positions.
[Cuomo:] Well, also there is a distinction to be drawn, you brought it up there, it's a good point, Annie. Let me bounce it back to Tim. Which is there's a difference between being an intimate and being an instrument. And sometimes people around Trump can confuse themselves for one when they are the other, entertain Anthony Scaramucci. Now, I put to the side these ideas that he was brought in as a single purpose vehicle to get out Priebus. I believe we often ascribe sophistication and strategy so situation with Trump that are random or reactionary. And he's got a good ear and a good gut as we both know. So the idea that the general would get rid of Scaramucci and the president wouldn't know or wouldn't approve I think unlikely. What do you think?
[O'brien:] I think highly unlikely. I think that...
[Cuomo:] So what does that mean about loyalty? Because if Anthony Scaramucci was anything I know I know it is fair right now to attack him and I know that that's very popular. He was loyal to the president. He believed in the president and he's gone.
[O'brien:] Wore his loyalty on his sleeve. And I think that, I think the intimacy thing you point out is spot on. Because the only intimates are his family members, and the only intimate in this White House are Jared and Ivanka and everyone else is fungible beyond that, and that's a problem because Jared and Ivanka in over their heads. They lack the relevant experience and skills to be playing the roles they're playing there. The president himself is in desperate need of wise counsel and he doesn't take it and most of the adults in this administration, maybe with the exception of Mattis have been sidelined.
[Cuomo:] Tim O'Brien, I appreciate it as always.
[O'brien:] Thank you.
[Cuomo:] Annie Karni, thank you very much. Provocative thoughts needed on this occasion. All right. We're going to be in just a second. I mangled one of the best going impersonations out there. You know how you love Melissa McCarthy as Sean Spicer, right, then comes actor singer-performer Mario Cantone, who picked up the mantle of the mooch with a performance of Anthony Scaramucci that went viral. He's back. Here's the taste of his latest attempt. The Scaramucci goodbye.
[Mario Cantone, Actor:] I was a threat. The second I walked through the White House, my days were numbered. Look at me. I'm trim, I'm good looking. I dressed sharp. I smell good. The kind of war. You're going to want to lick me like a popsicle. I smell better than anybody on Trump's team. Those guys smelled like canned corn and that's the first thing in the morning.

[Menendez:] So, Director, this account strongly suggests that the president asked you and Director Coats to interfere with then, FBI Director Comey's, investigations into the Trump campaigns contacts with Russian. Did president what did President Trump say to you and Director Coats in that meeting?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I'm not going to talk about the conversations the president and I had. I think I think it's in this setting appropriate for a president to have an opportunity to talk with his senior leaders. I'll do that throughout the day but I will tell you think, the article's suggestion that he attend he asked me to do anything that was improper if false.
[Menendez:] Did he ask you to do anything as it related to that investigation?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I don't recall I don't recall what he asked me that day, precisely, but I have to tell you I'm with the president an awful lot, he has never asked me to do anything that I'd consider remotely improper.
[Menendez:] When you say you're not going to talk about that conversation, you're not asserting executive privilege, are you?
[Pompeo:] No, Senator. I believe and I think you will agree, we'll talk about foreign policy issues, we'll talk about...
[Menendez:] This has this has a connotation of foreign policy because this is about Russia. And so, at the end of the day, understanding how you responded, what you will do as we're looking at mandatory sanctions that the administration has yet to impose, looking at how we're going to deal with a Russia that not only sought to affect our last elections but is doing so even as we speak both at here, at home and across the world. Those are subsets of questions.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator.
[Menendez:] And so, it's not for me just simply a question of interest, it's a question of understanding what you were asked, how you responded and what you did.
[Pompeo:] Senator, you talked about the important policy issues. I'm happy to talk about this administration's work on Russia. I'm happy to talk about our work on sanctions if that's what you'd...
[Menendez:] Let me ask you this.
[Pompeo:] ... if that's what's your question.
[Menendez:] Did President Trump ever discuss the FBI or Special Counsel Russia's investigation with you?
[Pompeo:] Senator, again, I'm not going to talk about private conversations I've had with the president.
[Menendez:] So, whenever you come, if you were to be confirmed in the future and we want to try to talk about foreign policy and we ask you where is the president at on this or that you're not going to discuss...
[Pompeo:] No, Senator, I'm...
[Menendez:] ... conversations.
[Pompeo:] Senator, I'm happy to answer questions about our administration's policies, the work that we're doing. You're asking about conversations. You should know, Senator, as well I have provided I spoke with Special Counsel Mueller who interviewed me, requested an interview. I cooperated. Your colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee have asked for information for me and from the Central Intelligence Agency as the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. I think the leaders of those two organizations in a bipartisan way that would say that I've been cooperative and in matters...
[Menendez:] Well, you have spoken to Special Counsel Mueller?
[Pompeo:] Yes, that's correct.
[Menendez:] And, what was the subject of the conversation?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I'm not going to speak to that.
[Menendez:] Did the Special Counsel tell you not to speak about these things?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I have cooperated with multiple investigations while the investigation continues. I think that's the appropriate way to approach it and you should know and no one here today should take away any because of the fact that I don't want to speak about it there should be no negative inferences with respect to anything or for that matter positive inferences about the fact that I think it's most appropriate that while these investigations continue I not speak to the conversations I've had with the various investigative bodies.
[Menendez:] I'm sure that if I asked Director Mueller I mean Special Counsel Mueller a simple question whether you were told you couldn't I don't think he would say you couldn't. So it's your choice that you're not seeking to do so. And for me, these questions being answered truthfully in a forthcoming way are critically important because it goes to the very essence of how you approach one of the most critical issues that we have. And your unwillingness to speak to it is troubling to me. Let me ask you this. President Trump has repeatedly said that, quote, "Getting along with Russia is a good thing," unquote. Yesterday he tweeted a quote, "Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it's ever been. There is no reason for this." And he indicated he would like to help Russia with its economy. What behavior, if any, has the Kremlin shown that indicates it wants to get along with the United States, or our allies?
[Pompeo:] Sir, this administration has taken a series of actions to push back against Vladimir Putin...
[Menendez:] That's not my question. Let's start with my question.
[Pompeo:] But, Senator, this this...
[Menendez:] My question is, what what behavior has the Kremlin shown, that it indicates it wants to get along with the United States? Is there any? If so, please share it with me.
[Pompeo:] Senator, I I take a back seat to no one with my views of the threat that are is presented to America from Russia. And if I am confirmed as the secretary of state, I can assure this administration will continue, as it has for the past 15 months, to take real actions to push back, to reset the deterrence relationship with respect to Russia.
[Menendez:] Well, let's talk about that. Because I I see that's in your written statement, and you suggest that there is a robust response to Russia. On February 27th, Admiral Mike Rogers, the head of the National Security Administration and U.S. Cyber Command, warned the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Trump administration has not done enough to stop the Russians. Quote, "I believe that President Putin has clearly come to the conclusion that there's little price to pay here and that, therefore, he can continue his activity." On April 3rd, the outgoing national security adviser, General H.R. McMaster, said, and I quote, "We have failed to impose sufficient costs on Russia and that the Kremlin's confidence is growing." And then, for your reference, here are a series of mandatory provisions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, part of which I helped write, which have not been implemented by the administration. Section 225, Mandatory sanctions related to special Russian crude oil products; Section 226, Mandatory sanctions with respect to Russia and other foreign financial institutions; Section 228, Mandatory sanctions with respect to certain transactions with foreign sanctions evaders and serious human rights abuses in the Russian Federation; Section 231, Mandatory sanctions with respect to persons engaging in transactions with the intelligence and defense sectors of the government of the Russian Federation so there are more. That's not a robust response to Russia.
[Corker:] Thank you. Before I turn to Senator Risch, I want to welcome Senator King to the I would like for the people of Maine to know he does is often. When things are serious, he comes and actually listens to the testimony. We thank you for doing so. Senator Risch?
[Risch:] Thank you very much. Mike, thank you for your service at Intel at the CIA. That that has been great. For those of you on the committee, Senator Rubio and I are the only two that have the cross-pollenization, I guess. We have the the great privilege of serving on the Intel Committee. And we hear from the heads of all of the 17 agencies that we have that engage in intelligence matters. And over the years, over the 10 years I've been on it, we've had numerous heads of agencies come in. And sometimes, frankly, we we feel we're getting stiff-armed. I can tell all of you on this committee that Mike Pompeo has been candid when he came in before the Intel Committee. He has been helpful, and he has always been straightforward with us. So thank you for your service, there. You've earned my respect in that regard and you'll certainly get my vote for confirmation on this job. I think that that service, as head of the CIA, is going to serve you very well. As you as you know, it's served me very well on on this committee, having the some of that in-depth knowledge that you don't necessarily get in the in the public media. Head of the being Secretary of State is is unique, I think, as far as the agency heads are concerned. You, first of all, have the public duties. And as been referenced here, it's a very high-profile job in that you go around the world, being the face face of America and doing the kinds of things that you do. And I and your predecessor was very good at that. I thought he he carried flag as well as anyone could carry it. The job that this job, however, as Secretary of State, has a couple other facets to it that you have to do the same time and it's hard to keep all the balls in the air. One of them, of course, is being part of the management team with the president, as far as managing, really, the United States. And and thirdly, and I think very importantly, is the actual management of the bureaucracy. And I and I don't use "bureaucracy" here in a pejorative way. What with the the thousands of men and women who are in foreign service, who are who are working with the State Department, make us proud every day. They are bipartisan. They do a great job. I think that there has been a fair amount of criticism. Everyone knows that that your predecessor did have was hampered a bit because he didn't have some of those jobs filled that are so important there. And we all know that in order to manage an agency like that, you got to have really good solid people around you to be able to make the bureaucracy work in the things that aren't the high-profile meetings and what have you around the world. Could you tell could you give us your thoughts? Give us all of us your thoughts on on how you're going to go about that. Because it it needs some work. There's no question about it. It's going to make your job better. It's going to make the State Department work better. So could you give us your thoughts on that?
[Pompeo:] Senator, first, thank you for your kind words. I I did, as the CIA director, I have consistently tried to work closely with you and provide you with everything that you've asked for in a timely fashion. I think we've succeeded often, if not always, and we've worked diligently at it. I I promise to do that with this committee as well. With respect to building a team out of the State Department, this is something I've done multiple times in my life. I did it as a tank platoon leader, I did it as a cavalry troop. I did it for two small businesses in Kansas. And then I worked hard at it at the CIA. I'll leave to others to judge the success. But I did it because I knew it was imperative. At State Department, there are too many holes, too many vacancies, too many unfilled positions. When that happens, everyone's stretched thin in the subject matter expertise that is needed to deliver America's diplomacy around the world, to conduct its mission, its humanitarian missions, its development missions. Each of the missions to which are entrusted to the State Department require talented people on station doing their part, working alongside it. The way I'll think about it is the same way I did at the CIA. I'll start with those things that I think are the biggest gaps, and present the biggest risk to America's capacity to execute its diplomacy. We don't yet have an ambassador to South Korea. We need one. There are a handful of other places that have a requirement for immediate attention. With respect each of those positions, I I am a talent hawk. I will find what I believe to be the best fit to execute America's diplomatic mission around the world. And I will encourage, demand, cajole them to come join the team and be part of our organization in a way that can successfully deliver. Some of them will be fantastic civil servants and foreign service officers, others from the outside, but in each case trying to identify the right person to occupy the position at this challenging time in America's history.
[Risch:] Well, thank you very much. You've made reference to the fact that there are ambassadorships that are empty, I think there's 37 of them, and the good the good news is, that, you have a really deep bench at the state department and a good example is in South Korea. I had the good fortune of being there, as you know, recently, doing some things and the [inaudible] that it's that that's in charge there has done a fabulous job, as you know. And we do have that deep bench at the state department, but again, we do need the ambassadorships filled and we do need those, particularly, I think the top positions in the department field. And people with the authority to act and people with the authority to act and people with the authority to do the things that need to be done. So, thank you for that. I have every confidence you'll be able to do that. Your candor with the intelligence committee, I I I can tell you that if you can come in front of that committee and disgorge in a candid fashion, I have every confidence you're going to be able to do that here, so, thank you again for your service. Thank you, Mr. Pompeo
[Pompeo:] Thank you, Senator Cardin.
[Cardin:] Mr. Pompeo, first of all, thank you for your career of public service; I want to thank your family because this, clearly, is going to be a family sacrifice. Already has been, but even be more deeply felt by your family, so I very much...
[Pompeo:] Thank you
[Cardin:] ... Appreciate all that. I want to follow up on the chairman's opening comments about the need for the secretary of state to be a strong independent voice in the White House, particularly, in this White House, and with the president's announced policy of America First, which has been interpreted globally as America alone, which is your mission, if you're confirmed, to use diplomacy to engage the international community. So I want to ask you a couple questions and I would ask that you give your views, not the president's, I want to know your views. Secondly, I would hope that you would briefly answer the questions because I have a lot of questions I want answered, so, please please respect the time restrictions that we're operating under. And let me start first, if I might, with the Iran nuclear agreement that's been referred to. There's no question that Iran's the bad actor here and they continue to be a bad actor. In this congress, with your help that we passed very strong legislation to provide additional sanctions against Iran for its non-nuclear violations, including its ballistic missiles and we want strict enforcement of the nuclear agreement. But it is clear, from what the president has announced that he wants to see changes in the nuclear agreement. It's also been very clear that Europe has said, pretty directly, we cannot unilaterally, the west, modify the agreement, and that Iran's in compliance with the agreement. General Dunford has said, unless there is a material breach, we have an impact in others willingness to sign the agreement if sign other agreements if we pull out of this agreement, with reference to North Korea, the challenges of entering into diplomacy. So, my direct question, if the president determines that you cannot modify this agreement and Iran is in compliance, what is your view as to whether America should withdraw unilaterally from the Iran nuclear agreement?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I know, clearly, what my mission's going to be. And the president's made very clear what the secretary of state's mission has been and I expect no change to that.
[Cardin:] I didn't ask I asked what your views...
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator, I...
[Cardin:] ... I understand that. And we've had nominees come before this committee and express their views and are doing very well in this administration and who've disagreed with the president and the president gets the last word. I understand that.
[Pompeo:] Yes. I've done it many times and...
[Cardin:] I want to know your views.
[Pompeo:] I've done it many times, Senator. I can't answer that question. Here's why, but I'm going to tell how I approach. Let me tell you how I think about it. Here's the I'm going to if you will, if you'll let me tell you how I think about it then you can I want to fix this deal. That's the objective. I think that's in the best interest of the United States of America...
[Cardin:] But if the agreement cannot be changed, my question is pretty simple, we're running very close to a deadline on certification. What is your view, is it better to pull out of an agreement the Iran is in compliance with if we can't fix it, or is it better to stay in the agreement? As the...
[Pompeo:] Senator...
[Cardin:] Yes or no?
[Pompeo:] ... it's not a yes or no question, because it's a hypothetical. We're not at that point. But let me tell you, I'll think about it.
[Cardin:] The president has to certify on May the 12th.
[Pompeo:] Yes, sir. That's that's yet almost a month away. It depends clearly if we're close, imagine for the just as a hypothetical matter, imagine we're close to achieving the fix that the president has asked the State Department to achieve. If we're close, if there is some opportunity...
[Cardin:] You pull out [inaudible]?
[Pompeo:] In the event in the event that it we conclude that we can't fix this deal, that these serious shortcomings that you, Senator Cardin yourself, have identified, then the president is going to be given best advice, including by me. And if there's no chance that we can fix it, I will recommend to the president that we do our level best to work with our allies to achieve a better outcome and a better deal.
[Cardin:] By...
[Pompeo:] Even after May 12th, Senator. Even after May 12th there is still much diplomatic work to be done.
[Cardin:] I think you've answered a question. Let me...
[Pompeo:] And, sir, just to be clear...
[Cardin:] You've been...
[Pompeo:] ... more than just Europe...
[Cardin:] You've been pretty clear about the outcome you would like to see in North Korea, which I believe if I'm misstating, please let me know, which is regime change. Is that...
[Pompeo:] Senator, you have misstated that.
[Cardin:] OK. Are you in favor regime change in North Korea?
[Pompeo:] Senator, my mission is and I've articulated my own personal views on this. We have a responsibility to achieve a condition where Kim Jong-un is unable to threaten the United States of America with a nuclear weapon.
[Cardin:] I understand that. Do you so are you saying now you don't favor regime change?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I have never advocated for regime change. I have all along...
[Cardin:] It's a simple question. You're not you don't believe...
[Pompeo:] I'm happy to answer today that I'm not advocating for regime change, yes, Senator.
[Cardin:] Thank you. Appreciate that. I want to get that clear. Let me go on to...
[Pompeo:] And, Senator, just to be clear, my role as a diplomat is to make sure that we never get to a place where have to confront the difficult situation in Korea that this country has been headed for now for a couple of decades.
[Cardin:] So let me get to the international climate talks and agreements that were entered into in Paris. The fact that every nation in the world has now joined in that, this is, as I explained to you as we talked in our office, you understand these are self-imposed goals and enforced only by ourselves. The president has indicated his intentions to withdraw from the international agreement. It takes a period of time before it becomes effective. But he has already initiated the process. If it, in fact, we would be the only country that is not part of the agreement. Do you support the United States withdrawing from the climate agreements?
[Pompeo:] I share the president's position precisely, which is that the Paris agreements put an undue burden on the United States of America and that we should work to find a place where that is not the case. And when that moment arrives we will be part of that discussion and reenter that agreement.
[Cardin:] So you stand by your...
[Pompeo:] That is both my view and I believe I'm speaking for the administration...
[Cardin:] So you believe self-imposed requirements working at the international community. I think I'm quoting you accurately, as "dangerously wrong," "bows down to radical environmentalists," and "the science is inconclusive." You stand by those statements today?
[Pompeo:] Senator, we need to work to arrange a situation that treats American citizens in the same way that others around the world so there is a shared burden to attack this challenge.
[Cardin:] Do you see the challenge that that's going to make your job, if confirmed, more challenging? Where you where your job is to work with the international community, our friends and foes alike, to try to get diplomacy to work? And yet the United States would be the only country saying, we don't want to talk to you about climate under the arrangements that every other country is dealing with? You don't see a conflict with that position and trying to be the top diplomat of America, the leader of the world?
[Pompeo:] Senator, there are many times that we work with our allies. And there are many other times when we just don't see it the same way. I gave you any indications many examples of where this administration has worked with those same allies. Just recently the work that we did against Russia in response to the attack that took place in Britain, we worked with our European allies. We did so very closely. This would be after the president's announcement that he intended to withdraw from Paris. So it can still work. I'll give you another example. The coalition that this administration has built to put pressure on Kim Jong-un is unique and historic and important. So there will be places that our allies come alongside us and others that they don't. And my task as the chief diplomat will be to get America's position well-known and to rally the world to the causes that benefit America. I look forward to doing that if I'm confirmed, as well, Senator.
[Cardin:] Thank you.
[Corker:] Before I turn to Senator Rubio, I'm going to use 30 seconds of my time. Just on the Iran issue, it's my sense in personal conversation with the president that if we if the international if the Europeans do not come along with a framework agreement by May 12th, it's likely that he will withdraw.
[Pompeo:] The president has made that very clear.
[Corker:] And so I don't think Senator Cardin fully I don't think he heard the same thing I heard. And your sense is that should that happen, then you would continue after that time to try to create a better agreement, if that's what your answer was.
[Pompeo:] Yes. Senator, the president has stated his objective. I've heard him say it to my predecessor or, excuse me, to Secretary Tillerson. I've heard him say it. His goal is to take the three shortcomings they've identified and fix them.
[Cardin:] Mr. Chairman, I need to correct the record. I understand the president's position. I was asking the nominee's position. I wasn't asking the president's position. I wanted to know your view on it, not the president's. I understand the president's view.
[Corker:] But I think again, I know this is going to be highly discussed publicly. I think what Director Pompeo is saying is that's also his opinion, and that should the agreement then be negated, he would work for a better agreement after that, should the framework agreement not come in place by May 12th. Is that correct?
[Pompeo:] Senator, that is correct.
[Corker:] Senator Rubio.
[Rubio:] Thank you. First just an editorial statement at the front end. One of the reasons why I've been apart from how well I know the nominee and the work he has done in intelligence is I think one of the critical components to be a successful secretary of state is that when secretary of state comes to town, leaders and diplomats need to know that this someone who is in the inner circle of the president, that has the president's trust and speaks for the administration. And I can just tell you from experience from the work that we've done with Director Pompeo that when if confirmed, when he comes to town, leaders around the world will know that someone who has not just access to the president but is part of the president's trusted inner circle and speaks for the president and for his policies is just critical for the success of a secretary of state. And I would imagine if you have spoken as you have all the living secretary of states, they would have told you that that component of that relationship is so important. And I would just say anything that would undermine that, obviously, is something that would undermine the ability to do the job in that way. I have a series of quick questions. And they are important because it gives people some context about your views on foreign policy and America's role in the world, which, by the way, predate your time at the Central Intelligence Agency. It includes your time in the House of Representatives and perhaps even before that. You still agree, do you not, on the matter of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, that the United States has an obligation to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator.
[Rubio:] And you still agree that far from being a great public service, WikiLeaks is more like a nonstate actor hostile to the interest the national interest and security of the United States.
[Pompeo:] Senator Rubio, I do believe that.
[Rubio:] And, I think you still agree that Vladimir Putin's government actively interfered in our presidential elections and elections at large in 2016 and they did so because it is part of a long-standing theory or belief that through disinformation and propaganda they can win what, quote unquote, "bloodless wars" against democracies in the West, including the United States.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator, that's correct.
[Rubio:] Of the five main threats facing the United States, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and radical jihadists, they all have one common thread, authoritarianism. Would you agree that today, the major fault line in global affairs repeatedly is the competition really a global competition between autocratic systems of governance and the democratic system that that in many ways is played out over and over again in foreign affairs of this country and in global issues?
[Pompeo:] Senator, that is with striking consistency the case that the countries that share our vision of the world and share our democratic values are not authoritarian and those that don't are not.
[Rubio:] And so in that vein, you would again agree that promoting democracy isn't just a nice thing to do or a good thing to do or promoting democracy is not us butting into other people's business or invading their sovereignty. So it's more than just a moral imperative, promoting democracy is, in the context of that competition as we've just discussed, promoting democracy is in the vital national interests of the United States.
[Pompeo:] Yes, indeed, Senator, and our effectiveness at doing that is an important tool of American foreign policy.
[Rubio:] And there is this ridiculous argument out there when people talk about Russian interference and their efforts and so forth that that's no different than what America does when it promotes democracy. There are huge differences are there not? For example when they interfere in an election, they're trying to influence the outcome. When we promote democracy we're trying to improve the process not necessarily who they elect. Sometimes democracies elect leaders that are not as friendly towards the United States. When they interfered in elections they use they use government and their intelligence agencies and the like. When we promote democracy it's largely through the work of nongovernmental organizations who may receive assistance from our government. When they undermine democracy, they do it in secret. They hide it and they deny it. We do it openly. We brag about it. We're talking about it here today and when we promote democracy we do it at the invitation of someone in those countries, whether it's a political party, an organization. Oftentimes the government itself when they undermine democracy, they do so against the will of the people of that nation and other governments in place. There is no equivalence between the promotion of democracy and Russian and other attempts to interfere in democracy.
[Pompeo:] Senator, there is there is neither an operational equivalence as you've described it that is, the methodologies used are very different. Nor is there a moral equivalence between the two efforts. They are fundamentally different in every way and America's democracy promotion around the world is conducted in the way that America should be incredibly proud of.
[Rubio:] And one of the first things autocratic rulers do almost by definition, is they violate the human rights of their people. And of course have no problem violating the human rights of others and we've recently seen to war crimes and atrocities repeatedly committed by an autocratic government in Syria with the support of autocratic governments in Iran and Russia. Therefore, I believe you would agree that defending human rights isn't just a good thing to do it and again or just the right moral thing to do, which it most certainly is defending human rights is also in the national interest of the United States of America.
[Pompeo:] I do believe that, Senator.
[Rubio:] And it would be a priority...
[Pompeo:] It would.
[Rubio:] ... to the State Department.
[Pompeo:] And I not only do I believe it I think history would reflect that to be the case.
[Rubio:] Now, after the end of the Cold War, we had this belief that history had ended and everyone was going to be a democracy and everybody was going to embrace capitalism as we understand it was free economics and the like. That hasn't really worked out in the case of a lot of places, particularly China. They have most certainly not embrace democracy. They've actually gotten more autocratic and they have embraced the definition of the world economic order that basically means we will take all the benefits of global trade and global economics. But we do not intend to live by any of its obligations. And so I personally believe that it was a terrible mistake that leaders in both parties have made. And now as part of their strategy you see China doing things like trying to create strategic depth in Eurasia. Your efforts to establish all these different programs, the belt and road initiative, Silk Road Maritime, Silk Road, they're just efforts they're not just efforts to create new overland trade corridors, they're efforts to basically make these nations economically, politically and eventually militarily dependent on and vulnerable to China. And their maritime borders in the South and East China Sea you see that they feel vulnerable and insecure. They see American allies in Japan, South Korea, Australia, Taiwan, and so what they're working on now is fracturing our economic and defense alliances in the Indo- Pacific region. That's why they're investing billions of dollars in building up their Navy and their Air Force to be able to establish air and sea denial to the U.S. military and ultimately make the argument that don't count on America's defense andor economic partnership because it's just paper, they can't live up to it anymore. What is what are your recommendations for the president as far as how important that challenge is otherwise we're going to wake up one day and find that we've been driven from the Asia-Pacific region?
[Pompeo:] Senator, the as the CIA director I've often been asked what's the greatest threat to the United States. It is always hard to prioritize and rank. We have a handful. We've got lots of opportunities as well. China certainly presents a strategic challenge to the United States of America. You laid out the various tools and mechanisms that they are using, mostly economic. The United States need to be prepared to respond across each of those fronts so that we can find the right ground, the right place where we can cooperate with the Chinese, where it make sense for America and in those places where it does not, we can confront them and make sure that it is America's vision, a democratic vision that continues to provide strength and resources for the world.
[Corker:  Shaheen:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Pompeo, thank you for being willing to consider taking on this responsibility at such a challenging time for the United States and the world. This morning, President Trump tweeted that much of the bad blood with Russia is caused by the fake and corrupt Russian investigation. Do you agree with that?

[Unidentified Male:] the United States is quite frankly insulting. I think he is overreacting. I don't want to get in the middle of that.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Unanimous concern and disappointment, G7 leaders waging a fierce campaign against the president's new tariffs. Now Senate Republicans are trying to slow the president down.
[Unidentified Male:] You have everything you need. What else do you need? Man up?
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] New claims from the president's legal team if a subpoena is unnecessary. The president cannot obstruct justice. He can pardon himself. His recollection keeps changing. By the way, he dictated that misleading statement about the infamous Trump Tower meeting.
[Briggs:] And many women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer may not need chemotherapy. This groundbreaking study could lead to major changes in treatment worldwide.
[Romans:] This is getting a lot of attention. Chemotherapy can raise risk of heart disease and leukemia later on in life. Amazing to be able to eliminate that for some women.
[Briggs:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to EARLY START. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] And I'm Christine Romans. It is Monday, June 4th. It is 5:00 a.m. in the East. Let's start here. United States is isolated. The Canadians are insulted and the finance ministers of the six largest economies issue a rare rebuke. Unanimous concern and disappointment in President Trump's metal tariffs. The U.S. hit the E.U., Mexico and Canada with steel and aluminum tariffs citing a national security threat, which Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau calls offensive.
[Justin Trudeau, Canadian Prime Minister:] The idea that the Canadian steel in the military vehicles in the United States, the Canadian aluminum that makes your fighter jets is somehow now a threat. The idea that we are somehow a national security threat to the United States is quite frankly insulting and unacceptable.
[Romans:] The president and his team are steadfast on this. Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow says the tariffs are not an attack on Canada.
[Larry Kudlow, White House Economic Adviser:] Mr. Trudeau, I think he is overreacting. I don't want to get into the middle of that. As a fine friend and ally of the United States, nobody denies that, but the point is we have to protect ourselves.
[Romans:] That's what the three U.S. allies say, too. They plan to retaliate with their own tariffs on everything from farm products to blue jeans. That could raise prices for U.S. consumers and risk jobs. Congressional Republicans are fuming here. Senator Bob Corker says they are working on a plan to push back on these tariffs. At the same time, the Chinese are furious too after the U.S. targeted $50 billion in Chinese goods. China warns that those tariffs will kill any possible trade deal overall. The U.S. and China just wrapped up their latest round of trade talks this weekend. Now trade adviser, Peter Navarro, says Trump's China policy is measured, thoughtful and strategic.
[Peter Navarro, White House Trade Adviser:] We love to have a peaceful and friendly relationship with China, but we also are standing firm on the idea. The president is the leader on this
[Unidentified Female:] How far are you willing to go?
[Navarro:] for decades.
[Romans:] He says the Chinese have been going after this country for decades and we must protect intellectual property here. The structural relationship just needs to change and that's where we are here.
[Briggs:] All right. Joining us this morning from Washington, Daniel Lippman, report for "Politico," co-author of the "Politico" playbook. Good to see you, Daniel. Hope you had a great weekend. Let's talk a little bit about the impact of these tariffs. The G7 is on Friday. The president theoretically will not be met with open arms. Bob Corker, the tweet that Christine read, he is working with like-minded Republican senators to push back on the tariffs. How will the tariffs play out in Congress this week?
[Daniel Lippman, Reporter And Co-author, "politico" Playbook:] I think a lot of Republicans in Congress are afraid that these tariffs are going to hit the Midwest and their voters hard because of the retaliatory measures. The farm country like open and free trade. And so, when you get in for a tit-for-tat, no one really succeeds. That is what Trump does not understand. You don't want to get into another great depression when you had the SmootHawley Act that really greatly limited free trade. If the Republicans get womped in November in part because of this, then they are going to have more leverage because, you know, Trump can't say that this helps people around the country.
[Romans:] It is just fascinating to think of the G7 finance ministers meeting over the weekend. For the first time in my memory, you have seven major economies and six of them rebuking the United States. The U.S. could not sign on to the communique essentially because the communique was about how the U.S. is wrong here. This is what "USA Today" says in an op-ed on trade. The president's erratic policies do real harm over the long term. Businesses require stability when they make decisions about major investments. Both the United States and its chief allies need the world's only super power to act in accordance with consistent principles not according to the latest whims of a leader who sees each day as a new episode of reality television show. What is fascinating to me is from inside the administration you hear this is a president pulling the levers. That he had been put off by the globalist in his team to delay and exemptions for the steel, aluminum tariffs. Now the president is saying we are tough on China for stealing intellectual property and protecting our high-tech industries and go after and protect our own steel and aluminum business. This is the president making these choices.
[Lippman:] You are completely right. I think Trump has long since the '80s been a fierce advocate for these types of measures. So, it is not a surprise that he chose to make a stand on this issue. There is a split screen in the next few weeks where he will be chummy with Kim Jong-un. He was smiling with the North Korean vice chairman a few days ago at the White House when Bill Clinton had a policy of you don't smile with these guys. You don't want to lend approval to them. Yet, he is attacking our allies in terms of the measures. You know, John Hudson reported that the U.S. or Singapore may pay for Kim Jong- un's hotel stay. That is just an interesting contrast.
[Briggs:] Yes, think about the next eight days. You've got the Singapore summit and G7. Pivotal week for the president. All of this is the back drop with the economy and it is humming. Job numbers were outstanding. The unemployment at an 18-year low and it appears the president cannot really focus on that. Over the weekend, he had seven tweets about Russia-related matters. Who did they put on the Sunday shows? Rudy Giuliani to talk about Russia. He was on ABC and NBC and then he told "The Huffington Post" this. This is an interesting that will raise a few eyebrows, "In no case can the president be subpoenaed or indicted. I don't know how you can indict while he's in office. If he shot James Comey, he would be impeached the next day. Impeach him. Then you can do whatever you want to do to him." OK, I don't know what the impact of that statement is. But if you are the president, why do you want Rudy talking about the Russia matters and why not have everyone focus solely on the economy and what you are doing for it?
[Lippman:] He thinks that Rudy is a good bulldog defender of him. They have known each other for decades. I'm not saying that he is, but Trump thinks he is because his previous lawyers were either misinformed by Trump or just over their skis. Ty Cobb gossiping at a restaurant and overheard by Ken Vogel who wrote a "New York Times" article. Rudy is someone not making really much legal maneuvers. His main job is to help Trump in the media. If he makes mistakes like shooting Jim Comey thing, how do you even think of something like that? Maybe harkening back to the Fifth Avenue comment Trump made.
[Briggs:] I'm not sure it is a mistake. It's not clear that the president doesn't want him out there saying these things until we find out otherwise, we have to assume it is his agenda.
[Romans:] What is your sense of the 20-page letter that was in "The New York Times?" who leaked that?
[Briggs:] From Dowd to Sekulow to the special counsel, yes, the "New York Times" 20 pages over the weekend.
[Romans:] What is your sense of where that came from and the impact of that?
[Lippman:] It is hard to say who the sources are for the "New York Times." Once these types of documents start floating around D.C., it is a case of a Trump lawyer who wrote that passed along to a friend for review and the friend gives it up to "The New York Times," but leaves a couple months to have the trail tied back to them. When I get a good tip from someone. They say wait a couple days. Once the information starts circulating, it will not look like it came from me. That's a standard journalism practice with sources.
[Briggs:] In the letter, the president acknowledged dictating the response regarding Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with the Russians. We will ask you about that, the impact of that statement in about 30 minutes. Thank you, Daniel.
[Lippman:] Thank you.
[Briggs:] Former President Bill Clinton out there, he says impeachment proceedings would have already begun if a Democrat was president. Clinton who was, of course, impeached thinks Republicans would not be as tolerant if something like the Russia investigation [inaudible]. Here's what he told CBS.
[Bill Clinton, Former U.s. President:] I think if roles were reversed and this is me just talking based on my experience. If it were a Democratic president and these facts were here, most would believe impeachment hearings would have begun already.
[Briggs:] Bill Clinton also took issue with the president's rough rhetoric and name calling.
[Clinton:] I don't like all this. I could not be elected anything now because I don't like embarrassing people. My mother would have whipped me five days in a row when I was a little boy if I spent my time bad mouthing people like this.
[Briggs:] Christine Romans not happy about the mom whipping me reference.
[Romans:] We don't whip kids anymore, Mr. President. I understand your point.
[Briggs:] We should mention the former president out on CBS. He is sitting with James Patterson, best-selling author. They have a political thriller coming out there. [Inaudible] together should be interesting.
[Romans:] All right. Melania Trump set to attend a White House event honoring Gold Star families tonight. The reception is close to the media. It will mark the first time Mrs. Trump has participated in an official event in almost a month. On May 10th, the first couple greeted American prisoners freed by North Korea at Joint Base Andrews. Four days later, the first lady underwent what her spokeswoman called a benign kidney procedure. She has not been in public since. Officials say Mrs. Trump will not join the president for G7 summit or the summit next week with North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un. The latter I'm not surprised by it. The former, she did go to Italy for the G7 last year, so she'll be skipping it this time.
[Briggs:] OK, speaking of that summit, the president eight days from meeting with Kim Jong-un, but another world leader is headed to Kim's front door. What Bashar al-Assad's expected visit to North Korea means for nuclear talks?

[Keilar:] Breaking news, the Trump administration striking out against so-called sanctuary cities and states. Moments ago, in a speech to California peace officers, Attorney General Jeff Sessions talked about the Justice Department's lawsuit against the state over its immigration policies.
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] California, we have a problem. A series of actions and events has occurred here that directly and adversely impacts the work of our federal officers. For example, the mayor of Oakland has actively has been actively seeking to help illegal aliens avoid apprehension by ICE. Her actions support those who flout the law and boldly validates illegality. There's no other way to interpret those remarks. To make matters worse, the elected lieutenant governor of the state praised her for doing so, bragging about and encouraging the obstruction of our law enforcement and the law I'm afraid this is an embarrassment to the proud state of California.
[Keilar:] CNN justice reporter, Laura Jarrett, has more details on this. What do we know about this lawsuit, Laura?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Hey, there, Brianna. The crux of this lawsuit is that the Justice Department is taking a pretty aggressive step, some might say the most significant step to date. In the midst of all of the lawsuits in this administration, this one is quite serious. What they are asking a federal judge to do is block a series of state laws passed last year in California that sought to try to limit the amount of information that local law enforcement would have to share with federal officials. They did that because they wanted to try to stem the tide of deportations under the Trump administration. But now the Justice Department is saying that that conflicts with federal law, federal law takes the day and, therefore, the federal judge should put them on hold. Now, the California officials have really slammed this lawsuit, calling it a political stunt. The governor, Jerry Brown, there, saying this is sad. But they will have their chance to fire back against it later today. The governor and the attorney general in the state are going to make a statement just shortly there in California Brianna?
[Keilar:] Laura Jarrett, thank you. I want to bring back former U.S. attorney, Michael Moore, to talk about this. Michael, how do you see this playing out?
[Michael Moore, Former U.s. Attorney:] You know, I don't know that the Justice Department bringing a lawsuit against a state is a particularly unusual thing. What's unusual is it's different from the past. That is that this administration seems so particularly interested in street crimes and immigration, they are not doing the historical things the Justice Department has done. Usually, you see the Justice Department come in and tell a state, you're not giving your citizens enough rights. Think about the Justice Department when they sued over civil rights, over voting rights. There were people rights of people with disabilities. These are things that expanded people's rights. Here you've got the Republicans coming in under the Trump administration essentially saying, we think the federal government has more authority and more wisdom about how to run things in the state. That's an unusual position for them. We've heard for years about states' rights, states' rights, states' rights. That's about all that the Republicans have talked about and local governance. Now, the federal government is telling California what laws they should and shouldn't pass.
[Keilar:] It's an interesting point there. How much leeway do the states have though?
[Moore:] Well, you know, there's a rule about the supremacy and having federal laws enforced within the state. The question will be here, are the California laws actually specifically opposed to the federal law? Do they cause it to not be enforced within the state or is it the state's efforts to deal with some of the immigration issues that they have internally? So I think, ultimately, at the end of the day, obviously, the judge will make that call, but historically, we do think that states have rights to pass laws affecting their local law enforcement. That's what it sounds like is happening here. Again, this administration has been fascinated with guns and gangs and immigration, and we're back to talking about street crimes, instead of things like Russia, voting rights, making sure people have a right to vote, and access to the polls.
[Keilar:] Michael Moore, thank you so much.
[Moore:] Thank you.
[Keilar:] Now, a man with ties to both Donald Trump's inner circle and the Middle East is reportedly now cooperating with Special Counsel Robert Mueller. His name is George Nader. Sources say he attended secret meetings during the presidential transition between the United Arab Emirates and Trump associates. Nader was stopped and questioned at Dulles International Airport in January when he was on his way to Mar-a-Lago. And he has been talking to Mueller's investigators ever since. Joining me now, we have CNN justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz. Shimon, what more can you tell us about Mueller's interest in Nader?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime & Justice Reporter:] Yes, Brianna, whatever it is that George Nader has to offer to investigators, it's important enough that investigators at the Mueller team and FBI agents and prosecutors there have deemed it important enough where they have put this information before a grand jury that is investigating this. As you say, George Nader was kind of this mysterious character associated with some of the Trump inner circle, with Steve Bannon, with Jared Kushner. He was at the meeting with them in December 2016 during a during the transition where the crown prince of Abu Dhabi was there. It was a secret meeting. The crown prince never notified the U.S. that he was coming to New York to meet with Trump people. George Nader was in that meeting. That was follow-up with a meeting in January in the Seychelles, also never told to anyone it was happening, and only learned of by U.S. intelligence officials and partners after they picked up some intelligence there was a meeting going on, that George Nader was there. We didn't learn that George Nader was at that meeting until he was questioned by the FBI when he returned in January of this year, where they searched his phones and he was given a search warrant and they imaged his phones. He was then given a grand jury subpoena. Ever since then, he's been cooperating with the special counsel. It's true that we don't know exactly what Mueller's interest in George Nader is but, again, whatever it is he's providing, it is evidence in this and that is now before a grand jury.
[Keilar:] Interesting. Shimon Prokupecz, thank you. Joining me to talk more about this is CNN legal and national security analyst and former FBI special agent, Asha Rangappa. Asha, when you look at this, how significant is it that George Nader is cooperating with the special counsel?
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal & National Security Analyst:] To me, Brianna, this is significant because it's showing that Mueller is really expanding the scope of his investigation. It's looking internationally. And that there were potentially even more contacts and connections. We now have the UAE involved, in addition to Russia, and looking at how all of these things tie together with the Trump campaign. So Mueller's investigation is not ending any time soon, I can tell you that.
[Keilar:] I want to ask you about the president's long-time lawyer, Michael Cohen, because it's become clear that he's been involved in a series of pretty shady dealings recently. He paid the porn star, Stormy Daniels, to silence her, to basically keep her quiet ahead of the election. According to her lawyer, he was trying to keep her quiet through binding arbitration as recently as last week. Then you have the special counsel, of course, which is interested in Michael Cohen. He also, it turns out, got some what was supposed to be secret information about some testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, testimony from a staffer about the Christopher Steele dossier. It's a series of things, and it seems like one thing after the other. Could he be in trouble when you look at this pattern?
[Rangappa:] Well, right now, it doesn't look like he is directly a target of any investigation. Let's take each of these things separately. The Stormy Daniels lawsuit is a civil lawsuit. This has to do with potentially private conduct of the president before he entered office. Is not really clear it's going to be tied in in any way with Mueller's investigation or what's happening in these other arenas. With regard to Mueller's investigation, he's looking at two deals that Cohen was potentially involved with. One involved a deal to create a Trump Tower in Moscow. The negotiations, which began in September 2015, Cohen says those never went anywhere eventually. Another is a potential peace plan that was presented that Cohen was involved with that was presented by the Ukraine. And that was the timing of that is very up in the air, but that may have been in the works during the campaign as well. So it looks like Mueller is interested in that. With the House Intelligence Committee, what we have are again, potential leaks. You know, that committee is not functioning very smoothly. And so he's not necessarily in trouble, but it does raise questions about who on that committee is kind of leaking information about other witnesses' testimony to, you know, maybe shape future people who may come before it.
[Keilar:] All right, Asha Rangappa, thank you. Up next, nor'easter, round two. Heavy snow and high winds taking aim at more than 50 million people on parts of the east coast right now.

[Brown:] Happening now in Charleston, South Carolina, Michael Slager who shot and killed an unarmed black man during a traffic stop just pleaded guilty to a federal civil rights charge after insisting it was self-defense. Slager shot Walter Scott in the back five times during the 2015 encounter. This incident was caught on tape and reignited nationwide protests over police killings of black men. Slager pleaded guilty to one felony count using excessive force. Other charges, including the state murder charge, were dropped. His state murder charge ended in a hung jury and was declared a mistrial. Slager could be sentenced up to life in prison. Joining me to discuss is Paul Butler, professor at Georgetown Law School. Convictions are rare for police officers when it comes to on-duty killings.
[Paul Butler, Professor, Georgetown Law School:] That's right. Brown: So, what do you think happened with this plea deal? Do you think he knew he was going to lose this civil case?
[Butler:] Most criminal defendants end up pleading guilty but cops are the exception. They usually are not prosecuted. When they are prosecuted, they usually prefer to take their chances with the jury. Well, officer Slager did that and it didn't work out so well for him. He got a mistrial but reportedly this split was 11 for conviction, 1 for acquittal. So, the state promised to retry him. Officer Slager had to be concerned if he was con convicted of murder, he would face the death penalty. Death is off the table. It's even unlikely that he'll get the maximum punishment, which is life in prison.
[Brown:] What could his sentence be?
[Butler:] Under the federal law, if you accept responsibility, which means plead guilty, you get points, which means you get time taken off your sentence. The prosecutors have worked out other arrangements for him to be punished for a lower level offense. The judge doesn't have to go for this but frequently they do. Both defense attorneys and prosecutors like plea bargains. You never know what will happen when put before a jury.
[Brown:] Paul, thank you for your analysis. Up next, an FBI translator gone rogue marrying an ISIS fighter she was assigned to investigate. The stunning story up next.

[Berman:] All right, breaking news. NSA chief Mike Rogers says that he needs the president or the secretary of Defense to grant him authority to stop Russian cyber threats where they originate, and he doesn't have that authority as it stands now. CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr with much more on this. His words very carefully chosen and very interesting, Barbara.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Absolutely, John. Where they originate. Cyber threats where they originate. We're getting the glimpse this morning, just a glimpse, into some of the most classified cyber intelligence operations that there may be. This is something the Pentagon almost never talks about. What you're talking about is where they originate, going and meeting that Russian cyber threat where it begins in Russia. Meeting the Russians in cyberspace, offensive warfare in cyberspace. You can't say it enough. A fascinating exchange on Capitol Hill this morning when the head of the National Security Agency was finally asked what authorities he does have to meet the Russians in cyberspace.
[Mike Rogers, National Security Agency Director:] But the mission teams, particularly at the origin of the attacks, have the authority to do so. If granted the authority, and I don't have the day-to-day authority to do that. If granted the authority.
[Sen. Jack Reed , Ranking Member, Armed Services Committee:] So you would need basically to be directed by the president through the secretary of Defense
[Rogers:] Yes, sir. I mentioned that in my statement.
[Reed:] Have you been directed to do so given the strategic threat that faces the United States and the significant consequences you recognize already?
[Rogers:] No, I have not, but if I could flush this out, I'll say something in an open and classified, I'd be glad to go into more detail in a classified.
[Reed:] Yes, sir.
[Starr:] So if you want to hear more details, you have to have a security clearance to go behind those closed doors. But a really fascinating glimpse into all of this because it has been a consistent issue for the U.S. military. You can attack them in cyberspace, but the Russians are very savvy, of course. We don't see the Russian state, the Russian government out there conducting these attacks. We've seen evidence, plenty of evidence they work through third parties, through companies, through cutouts of people that are very hard to identify, making it very hard for the U.S. military to go after them John.
[Berman:] Very interesting. The president has not said to stop the Russian meddling at its source. Barbara Starr, I appreciate it. Thanks very much. We have one tidbit of breaking political news to tell you about. Senator Bob Corker, Republican from Tennessee, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is still not running for re-election. He announced some time ago he was not going to run for re-election. But lately has been flirting with the idea of jumping back in the race. He had a somewhat poisonous relationship with the president. That relationship over the last month seems to have gotten better. Corker thought he might jump back in. But his chief of staff just told our Manu Raju, man of many stories up on Capitol Hill, that Senator Corker has not plans now to get back in the race. Plus, we have more breaking news, major political breaking news, the president just announced who will run his 2020 re-election campaign. Who is it? We'll tell you right after the break.

[Kristie Lu Stout, Host, "news Stream":] " The field widens, U.S. Senator, Kamala Harris throws her hat into the ring for the 2020 Presidential race. Presenting Plan B, Theresa May prepares the new pitch as British lawmakers start to take matters into their own hands. An economic slowdown. China's GDP growth stalls growing at the slowest pace nearly three decades. Another Democratic candidate has officially announced her bid for U.S. President in 2020. Just minutes ago, Senator Kamala Harris to California threw her hat into the ring. Kyung Lah, has more on the woman who could be a major player in the race.
[Kamala Harris, U.s. Senator, California, Democrat:] That's why I'm running for President of the United States.
[Kyung Lah, Senior National Correspondent, Cnn:] Senator Kamala Harris, announcing her Presidential campaigns core principles on Martin Luther King Day.
[Harris:] Truth, justice, decency, equality, freedom, democracy. These aren't just words. They are the values we as Americans cherish and they're all on the line now. I intend to fight for truth and transparency and trust. I intend to fight.
[Lah:] California's junior senator is notable both in biography and her two-year tenure in the senate. Supporters hail Harris' rapid-fire questioning in the Senate from Supreme Court nominees.
[Harris:] Can you think of any laws that give the government the power to make decisions about the male body?
[Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice Of The Supreme Court:] I'm not thinking of any right now, Senator.
[Lah:] To Justice Department officials.
[Unidentified Male:] He is has the.
[Harris:] Yes or no, sir?
[Unidentified Male:] He is has the full independence that is authorized by those regulations.
[Harris:] Are you willing to do as has been done before.
[Lah:] Making more than one of them squirm.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm not able to rushed this fast. It makes me nervous.
[Harris:] A lot of the work I've done has been inspired. And so, it's about fighting for justice. It was about fighting to make sure that all people had a say in their future.
[Lah:] Harris graduated from Howard University, returning to Oakland to become a prosecutor. As a San Francisco district attorney Harris crafted innovative programs to reform the criminal justice system, at a time when other prosecutors were taking a tough on crime approach. And despite political pressure from her own party, she refused to seek the death penalty against the killer of a police officer sticking to a core campaign pledge and personal belief.
[Harris:] I'm humbled to be chosen to be the next Attorney General of the State of California.
[Lah:] But she would defend the death penalty as California's first black woman Attorney General. Still personally opposed but upholding state law coming under fire from activists.
[Harris:] I now declare you spouses for life.
[Lah:] When the Supreme Court allowed marriage equality to stand in California, she officiated the first legal same sex marriages in 2013.
[Harris:] Any day that justice is delayed, I would suggest justice is denied.
[Lah:] All part of her pledge to be a progressive prosecutor.
[Harris:] It is a false choice to suggest that one is either in favor of the Second Amendment or in favor of reasonable gun safety rules. We can be both.
[Lah:] That history is both an asset and an opening for attack. A question that may follow her to the campaign as it did on her book tour. Is it possible to be both the top cop and a reformer for progressives?
[Unidentified Male:] What do you say to those who hear that and read that and still say that you're anti police?
[Harris:] Well, it's just not true.
[Unidentified Male:] I mean, I had that out.
[Harris:] And that's why I say we have to talk truth. It's just not true, it's not true, it's not true-period.
[Lu Stout:] That report by CNN's Kyung Lah and Kyung joined just now, live from Washington. Kyung, the field for the Democrats, still wide open here but now we have official, as of what, 30 minutes ago, Kamala Harris along with Elizabeth Warren, with Julian Castro, with what Kristen Gillibrand, possibly Cory Booker, there's Beto" O'Rourke, his name keeps being tossed about. The field was even wider than that. How is this field so wide taking shape? And who's on top there? In terms of name recognition?
[Lah:] Well, we're going to need a whole lot more boxes because the field is expected to grow significantly, Kristie. Of those pictures and of those names that are there. Certainly, Elizabeth Warren is probably the best known. But if you put in Vice President Joe Biden, who has not yet decided if he's going to run or not for President, he is in many polls of name recognitions, certainly the best known but here's the important thing. We're more than a year away from the Iowa caucuses. So that's why you're seeing people jumped in now with a field so wide, with so many new faces coming in. You're seeing people like Senator Harris jump in with the biography, doing a soft launch, trying to get voters to know her, making a book tour, explaining who she is. The time is now for candidates like her and others to jump in to say, give U.S. a look because there are so many potential people who could be out there.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, the time is now and so the publicity blitz begins. Kyung Lah, reporting live first from Washington. Thank you so much. Take care.
[Lah:] You bet.
[Lu Stout:] And now to the partial U.S. government shutdown. Now, in day 31. U.S. President Donald Trump is facing criticism from the left and from the right over his plan to reopen the government. In his speech on Saturday, Mr. Trump offered a plan that would temporarily protect some undocumented immigrants from deportations in exchange for $5.7 billion that he's asking for, in funding for the southern border wall. It was immediately criticized by conservative media commentators and democratic House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi swiftly rejected it. On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plans to put the person's plan up for a vote this week. But there is little chance it's going to pass. Meanwhile in the House, Democratic leaders plan to vote on a new bill that would add an extra $1 billion for border security, not the wall. Let's get more now from CNN's Lauren Fox. She's live for us on Capitol Hill. Lauren, Donald Trump extended what he called the compromise. He's offered to end the shutdown but the Democrats they are not buying it. Tell us why.
[Lauren Fox, Congressional Reporter, Cnn:] Well, that's right. Kristie, Democrats are saying that the President's plan is just too little. First of all, they say, if you want to negotiate over the border, well, do it. But first, you have to open up the government. The President says he's not willing to do that. Democrats also want more permanent protections for recipients of DACA and temporary protected status. That's something else that the President's plan doesn't include. His plan only has three years of protection. Here's what the top Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer had to say about the President's plan.
[Chuck Schumer, U.s. Senate Minority Leader:] It was the President who single handedly took away DACA and TPS protections in the first place. Offering some of those protections that he took away back in exchange for the wall is not a compromise but hostage taking.
[Fox:] And Kristie, as you noted, Mitch McConnell will put the President's proposal on the Senate floor this week, but don't expect enough Democrats to support it to get it out of the Senate. So if House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi and the top Democrat in the senate say, this is a no go, expect the democrats are going to hold firm even as there's growing frustration among rank and file members that the shutdown is going on more than a month now, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Is it going to drag on as we look in a fresh start or fresh week. Last week it got really nasty. It turned into this personal showdown between Speaker Pelosi and President Trump, this offer of what he called, the U.S. President, a compromise here with that offer from Donald Trump. Is that just a sign that there could be some leeway here. There could be moves towards ending the shutdown this week?
[Fox:] Well, you know, certainly moderate members on both sides of the aisle hope that's the case. Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, who's from a state of the President one in 2016. He's newly reelected. You know, he said, "Look, this may be a way forward," but it's going to take some of those moderates in the middle to keep negotiating. And the problem is, even if they find a solution among themselves, moderates in the Republican Party, moderates in the Democratic Party. If the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi and the President of the United States can sit down in a room and negotiate it doesn't matter and that's the issue here. This comes as furloughed workers and folks working without pay will miss their second paycheck this week.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, the shutdown has reached the record of 31 days and the pain is definitely being felt. Lauren, thank you so much for your reporting. Lauren Fox there on Capitol Hill. Now, new explanations coming from President Trump lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, about a stunning report from BuzzFeed. The report, last Thursday, said that the President directed his former attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about a Trump Tower project to Moscow. Now, Giuliani is saying that Mr. Trump may have talked to Cohen about his testimony but it's not a big deal if he did. Listen to what he told our Jake Tapper.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Lawyer:] As far as I know, President Trump did not have discussions with him. Certainly had no discussions with him in which he told them or counseled him to lie. If he had any discussions with him, they'd be about the version of the events that Michael Cohen gave them, which they all believe was true.
[Jake Tapper, Anchor, Cnn:] But you just acknowledge that it's possible that President Trump talked to Michael Cohen about his testimony.
[Giuliani:] Which would be perfectly normal, which the President believe was true.
[Tapper:] So it's possible that that happened, that President Trump talked to Michael Cohen about this incident.
[Giuliani:] I don't know if it happened or didn't happen, and it might be attorney client privilege if it happened, where I can acknowledge it.
[Lu Stout:] The Office of Special Councel, Robert Mueller, which almost never respond to news items challenged the BuzzFeed report, saying characterization of documents and testimony are not accurate. But BuzzFeed is standing by its story.
[Ben Smith, Editor In Chief, Buzzfeed:] We are eager to understand which characterizations Mueller is talking about there. And obviously, we take that incredibly seriously.
[Anthony Cormier, Investigative Reporter, Buzzfeed:] If a further confirmation that this is right. We're being told to stand our ground. Our reporting is going to be born out to be accurate and we're 100% behind it.
[Lu Stout:] A Kremlin spokesman says Moscow did not communicate, "Anyone whatsoever," about the Trump Tower Moscow deal beyond an initial email in early 2016. A new week brings a new Brexit plan from Theresa May. The British Prime Minister is expected to lay out her Brexit Plan B in Parliament in the coming hours. But her historic failure to get the votes needed to pass her deal last week has stirred up a government meltdown. In fact, CNN has learned that a group of cross party members of Parliament has plans to introduce legislation, making it impossible for Britain to leave the E.U. without a trade deal in place. International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has warned the Parliament taking control of the Brexit process would jeopardize democracy.
[Liam Fox, British International Trade Secretary:] You've got to leave population and a remain Parliament. Parliament has not got the right to hijack the Brexit process because Parliament said to the people of this country, "We will make we make a contract with you. You will make the decision and we will honor it." What we are now getting are some of those who were always absolutely opposed to the results of the referendum trying to hijack Brexit and in fact, steal the result from the people.
[Lu Stout:] CNN's Bianca Nobilo joined now from outside the Houses of Parliament in London. Bianca, wow, this is being called a hijacking, this is being called a parliamentary plot. We know that various MPs are working on motions to block a no-deal Brexit, but what exactly are they planning?
[Bianca Nobilo, Correspondent,cnn:] Well, Kristie, we're expecting an onslaught of amendments this week, which will try and stop the Prime Minister from being able to go for a no deal in any scenario. There is a lot of business within the Conservative Party about some of these MPs and the amendments that they're trying to put forward to, as some have said, hijack the political process. However, the reason that some MPs have come forward with these amendments is simply because that there is an impulse, there is a deadlock in this Brexit process. So what these amendments seek to do, and there are an array of them, is to make a no-deal situation legally impossible. That's because they'll try and enshrine in law that if a deal hasn't been approved by Parliament by mid-February, or perhaps March, depending on the amendment, that it will prohibit the Prime Minister going for a no deal and for so to extend Article 50. So that goal is to stop no deal in any circumstance. Now, the Prime Minister's focus is on presenting her plan B to Parliament today. Her hope is still that she can get a deal through to avoid that no deal situation. However, she's still in this situation where parliament is so split on what it wants, that it's very difficult to see anything she puts forward being able to garner the majority support of the House of Commons.
[Lu Stout:] Absolutely. So this brings us to the question that I've been asking you for weeks and months now. What can she do? How can she break the deadlock and bring a majority of MPs on side with her?
[Nobilo:] Well, this is the problem. Yes, she's going to be presenting a new plan today as Plan A didn't work and how government accepts that. But she's facing the same old problems that she's faced through the entire process. The main difficulty is, the Prime Minister, because she faced such a historic defeat on her Brexit deal, knows that a tweak here and tweak there simply isn't going to work and get the numbers on side. Her problem is, is that if she ops for a softening of Brexit and making some allowances there, then she was completely isolating some of her Brexiteer MPs that might support her. So the job of Downing Street at the moment is to try and amend the Prime Minister's existing plan without isolating anybody else who's already supporting it. So she continues to walk this tightrope that she's been walking now, throughout the entire negotiation process. There's been discussion about whether or not the Prime Minister could reach out across the aisle to Jeremy Corbyn and try and work with the Labour Party. She invited him to talk, he declined, because he said that she needs to take no deal off the table first. But there's also so many problems in trying to work with the opposition to secure the main policy of the government because it will mean that labor tries to extract concessions and that's going to put even more pressure on a conservative party that is near breaking point.
[Lu Stout:] Bianca Nobilo, reporting live from London, outside the Houses of Parliament. Bianca, thank you. Now as referred, one of the key stumbling blocks for Theresa May's deal is a contentious Irish backstop in order to get her deal through Parliament. This likely to be the issue she will have to unravel. So what exactly is the backstop? Why is it so unpopular while the backstop is a policy to prevent a hard border between Ireland, which is part of the E.U. and Northern Ireland which is part of the U.K. The whole of the U.K. will stay in the European customs territory during a transition period in a new borderless trade agreement. If that hasn't been reached by the end of 2020 then the backstop would kick in. If that happens, U.K. would remain in the European customs territory and could only leave with permission from Brussels, thus limiting the power of the U.K. to pursue its own trade deals with the rest of the world, backstop or no backstop. Whatever solution is found to the border question will have huge implications for those in the ground. Nick Robertson reports from Northern Ireland.
[Nic Robertson, International Diplomatic Editor, Cnn:] In a few months' time, this could be E.U.'s land border with the U.K. It's giving rise to the most contentious issue in Brexit, the backstop. When I say backstop, what does that mean to you?
[Unidentified Male:] Backstop means, basically, it's an insurance policy but Theresa May and the European Union have taken out.
[Robertson:] In its simplest form, the backstop keeps the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland open. Both the E.U. and the U.K. say they want that. But the E.U. insist the backstop is part of the deal in case the two sides can't get an agreement.
[Unidentified Male:] Whatever's going to happen, it's going to impact on the city more than any other part of the U.K., more than any part of the
[E.u. Robertson:] This city here?
[Unidentified Male:] This city because we are the biggest population center which will be in the U.K. on the border with the E.U. So whatever is going to happen, be it good or bad, it's going to impact most here.
[Robertson:] We are in Northern Ireland's second largest city, Londonderry, also known as Derry. A few miles from the border with Ireland. From the 1960s to the 90s, Gary was at the heart of Northern Ireland's deadly sectarian violence. Twenty something years ago, I heard right here as Catholic teenagers rushed up here to fight pitch battles here with mostly Protestant police, 1998 peace deal has made all that feel like ancient history. But that's what the backstop is about in part to prevent a return to that sort of violence. Is it going to work?
[Unidentified Male:] Better.
[Robertson:] Because?
[Unidentified Male:] I don't know what that's supposed to be like if it doesn't. This place will go back to it was 25 or 30 years old.
[Robertson:] You mean the violence?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Robertson:] Concerns are growing the backstop is blocking Brexit. It could bring back border controls. What would happen if those are no-deal Brexit and to the border?
[Unidentified Female:] Does it mean I have to show my passport or something to go down, I don't know. I was like, I was told that maybe you'll have to show your passport or have a visa to go join over the border to visit family.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't think a man on the street has any idea what's going to happen, especially with businesses. I'm working for a company that does out of cross border trade. So they are particularly worried, in terms of taxes going back and forth over the border.
[Robertson:] What would you hope for with the border yourself?
[Unidentified Female:] Well, we would obviously hope that it's an open border. You know, especially in this area, there's a always been a strong relationship because we're a border area, so we would need free movement. It's very worrying. I don't know what the future is going to hold for myself, for my family and especially for my children.
[Robertson:] The trouble for Theresa May is she needs the support of Northern Irish MPs who oppose the backstop. It makes them feel less British. And so far, she hasn't found the way around it. Nic Robertson, CNN, Derry, Northern Ireland.
[Lu Stout:] The British Prime Minister is skipping the World Economic Forum to deal with Brexit and she's not the only leader staying home. This year's Davos is as much about the no shows as it is about the lineup. We'll take you there next. Plus, we'll take a look at what the latest economic numbers say about the health of the Chinese economy.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Top of the hour, you are in the CNN Newsroom. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Hello on this Sunday, thanks for spending part of your weekend with us. Right now, the family of former U.S. first lady Barbara Bush is thanking the nation for prayers and well wishes for Mrs. Bush with what they're calling, her failing health. Bush family sources say the former first lady is at home in Houston, being cared for there, following her wishes to stay home, instead of going to a hospital. I want to talk more about Barbara Bush with CNN Special Correspondent Jamie Gangel. So, Jamie, Mrs. Bush is 92-year-old. She has been battling a number of health issues, what's your understanding of her condition right now?
[Jamie Gangel, Cnn Special Correspondent:] So, Ana, the family has told us that she is in failing health. She has been suffering for the last year or two from COPD, and from congestive heart failure. If you have seen her in person, she's frequently on oxygen almost all the time. And I think what a lot of people don't know is people have been very aware that her husband, former President Bush suffers from Parkinson's, and we have seen him in a wheelchair for quite some time. But what people don't know is that her health has been so frail, she's been in and out of hospitals quite a few times in the last year, most recently on Good Friday, she went in, she was having some trouble breathing. So I think that what we're seeing now is the family really wanting to let everybody know the state of her health. There's one thing, Ana, Barbara Bush doesn't like people to make a fuss about her. She likes her privacy. If she was here right now, she would be saying, Jamie, why are you talking about this on T.V. But they wanted to let everybody know, and really to say thank you to everyone for all their prayers, and their support, Ana.
[Cabrera:] I know you have spent quite a lot of time with Mrs. Bush. She has spoken to it at length. How do you think this decision of here in near the end of her life to stay home instead of the hospital speaks to the kind of woman she is?
[Gangel:] So, I think it's classic Barbara Bush. You know, her family has a nickname for her. They call her the enforcer. And I'm told that after her last hospital stay, which was about 10 days, she was very anxious to get home, in fact she got all dressed, and was ready to go, and the doctor said not yet. And she was not happy about that. So I think that she has been dealing with these health issues for quite some time. And this is the way she wants to handle it at this time. And no one's going to say no to Barbara Bush, Ana.
[Cabrera:] Tell me a little bit about your experiences with the larger Bush family, how they handle adversity, how they handle loss, how they are likely handling this period when their matriarch is not at her strongest.
[Gangel:] Right. So, they are a remarkable family in handling this. I will say this, three of her children, Doro, Marvin, and neil are with her now, her two other sons, former President George W. Bush, and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush have been visiting this past week, and have been in and out. So they're all around her, and of course her husband, former President Bush is there with her. And I am told it is a very challenging time. You know, they have been married for 73 years. And he wrote in his book, we are two people, but we are one. They are very, very close. But I can't imagine, it is not an easy time for them.
[Cabrera:] Well, we know you will continue to keep us updated on former first lady Barbara Bush's health. Thank you so much, Jamie Gangel.
[Gangel:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] We'll continue to keep Mrs. Bush in our thoughts and prayers. Now let's head to Washington, where President Trump spent some time this morning, again, fuming over the FBI director he fired last year taking to Twitter, and referring to James Comey by a new nickname, slippery. He writes that Comey, quote, always ends up badly, and out of whack, and that the former head of the nation's top law enforcement agency is in the President's words, not smart. Let's go to CNN's White House Correspondent Boris Sanchez now. Boris, the President's hammering of James Comey seemed to go into overdrive with this upcoming release of Comey's book, and all of its criticisms, and unflattering personal observations to say the least, the President clearly not taking those criticisms lightly.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right, Ana. Well, the White House likely, rather be talking about other stories, whether the healthy economy, or these successful airstrikes in Syria over the weekend, the President is on the defensive, going after the former FBI director, on the eve of the release of James Comey's new book. One of which he refers to the President of the United States as being untethered from truth, the President using his preferred method, Twitter, to launch an array of attacks on Comey. At one point, suggesting that Comey should be imprisoned for a different number of acts. Press Secretary Sarah Sanders was asked about that suggestion this morning on one of the Sunday morning talk shows, she wouldn't go so far as President Trump did in one of those tweets. Though she did say that she believe that the Department of Justice should investigate any wrong doing if they feel that James Comey acted inappropriately. I do want to single out another of the President's tweets, because it is drawing increase scrutiny, and one of them he writes in part, that Comey, quote, was making decisions based on the fact that he though, she was going to win, referring to Hillary Clinton. And that he, Comey, wanted a job, slime ball. Now, that tweet is questionable to say the least, when you consider that what's talking about is the announcement from James Comey that Hillary Clinton's emails were being investigated, yet again, on just a few days away from the 2016 election. Something that Clinton has acknowledged hurt her chances of winning the presidency. So it's unclear how Comey announcing something that ultimately heard Clinton politically, might help him carry something favor with her for, in the President's words, a job a job in which he already had. He was in his fourth year of a tenured term as FBI director. Plenty of questions for the White House, specifically about that tweet, also I did ask a number of White House officials on a completely unrelated note, if they were monitoring the health of former first lady Barbara Bush. But I have yet to hear back, Ana.
[Cabrera:] All right, thank you, Boris Sanchez at the White House. Let's get straight to our panel of legal experts now joining us, White House ethics czar under President Obama, Norm Eisen who also served as U.S. ambassador to the Czech Republic, and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. So, Ambassador Eisen, I counted a total of at least five tweets about Comey this morning from the President. Do you see any legal issues that could stand from the President's Twitter attack against Comey today?
[Norman Eisen, Cnn Contributor:] Ana, thanks for having me back. I do. One of the core questions that is being investigated by Robert Mueller is whether the President obstructed justice, that is corruptly tried to shut down an investigation to protect himself from Michael Flynn, or others. Comey is the main witness, and he keeps attacking the witness publicly. So I think that it is at a minimum unseemly for the President to do this, and it does create more of this miasma, the smell that he wants to interfere with the investigation. If I were his lawyer, and if Allan Dershowitz were his lawyer, we would tell him, Mr. President, please don't tweet.
[Cabrera:] Professor Dershowitz, we have heard from the president, and we have also heard a little bit from the President today that we're also hearing more, and more from James Comey, and I want to read an excerpt from his new book, set to come out in just a couple of day. And I quote, I have one perspective on the behavior I saw, which while disturbing and violating basic norms of ethical leadership may fall short of being illegal, Comey said. So how significant is it for the Mueller probe going forward that Comey himself here is saying he saw nothing illegal.
[Alan Dershowitz, Professor Emeritus, Harvard Law School:] Well, he has said this before, when he was fired, he said that the President had complete authority to fire him, which is why if the President is really, really lucky, they will focus on obstruction of justice or collusion, not with standing my former student the ambassador's statements. He has no real risk of being successfully towards with either of those constitutionally protected activist is real risks come from New York in the Southern District of New York, and from the State Attorney General of New York. State Attorney General particularly because he wouldn't have the pardon power in terms of state charges, and the Southern District of New York, because there's very little he could do to stop that investigation from going forward. I have said for months now that he has raised vulnerability for acts that he appears to doing before he became President, because he has no constitutional protection for those acts. And more or less vulnerable for acts that he committed under the authorization of Article II of the constitution. So he ought to be focusing his attention I agree with the Ambassador, that it would be better off if he didn't tweet. But surely as a matter of law, he has the right to defend himself against charges, against leaks of information confidential communications he had in the FBI. He's entitled to defend himself without running afoul of the law, but it would probably be better from a discretionary point of view if he didn't do it.
[Cabrera:] As far as we know, this new probe or what we've just realized is a probe here in the Southern District of New York against Cohen, isn't against President Trump himself, and it is connected, or disconnected, I should say, from the Mueller investigation, so why do you see that as a bigger threat, or the President being more vulnerable in that probe?
[Dershowitz:] Well, there are two possibilities. One, they could try to flip Cohen, and turn him into a witness against his own client, that's been done before by prosecutors, or second, nobody knows what's in Cohen's files. Now, I believe that there ought to be a judge looking through that. Judge Kimba Wood of the Southern District ought to be looking at the files to see if there's confidential material that the government is not entitled and keep the government from getting that, keep the team from getting that. But if there is material that's not covered by the privilege, and the government has the right to see, nobody one knows what's in that material. Cohen's been his attorney for a long, long time, and it's unclear what his vulnerability might be. But he wouldn't have any constitutional protections against activities that he may have engaged in or may not have engaged in before he became president.
[Cabrera:] I want to ask you, Eisen, about Rod Rosenstein, because his name has come up, he's come under fire more and more, especially since this FBI raid, because he had to sign off on allowing those search warrants to go forward. CNN has exclusive reporting now that Rosenstein consulted with an ethics advisor at the DOJ, regarding whether he should recuse himself from the Mueller investigation. And Ambassador, apparently he has taken their advice, and he's still on the job, what does that tell you?
[Eisen:] Ana, I wrote with the Bush ethics czar in USA Today this week, that the ethics rules do not require recusal under these circumstances. So I think it's a correct ethics judgment that they have made, it's proper for Rosenstein to remain where he is, to keep the supervision in tact. And since my professor and friend, Alan, was kind enough to agree with me on the tweeting, I'll agree with him on the jeopardy in New York. That's part of the reason though we need Rosenstein. Of course, he authorized the New York searches to get the Cohen information. There's an established procedure, Alan, in New York of having a filter team, they're following it under court supervision, we need to let that play out, and it is connected, Ana, because we have just seen media reports. They may or may not be true, for example, that Michael Cohen was in Prague. As you know, one of the big issues, and the question of whether the Trump campaign through Cohen and Russia colluded was a supposed Prague meeting. Cohen's always denied it.
[Cabrera:] He hasn't confirmed that either at this point. I just want to make the clear.
[Dershowitz:] Look, if he was a in...
[Eisen:] If there are possible connections possible connections that we need to investigate.
[Cabrera:] Professor.
[Dershowitz:] Look, if he was in Prague, the one thing that's clear is that the Russians have photographs of him in Prague, and they can use that as blackmail or leverage, and we'll find out. Now, I, again, agree with my distinguished former student, I don't think that he should that Rosenstein should stay on the case. Two reasons, one, I think he is required I disagree with the ethic expert on the other side. I think he is required to recuse himself because he will definitely be a witness. But if he wasn't require to do, the better discretion would be that where you're going after the President of the United States, you have to be Caesar's wife. You can't get the other side ammunition. And the idea that he would eventually turn out to be a witness in the case, after having supervised for the prosecution of the case, would raise very, very serious problems, not only of justice, but the appearance of justice. So I think if he was smart, he would have recused himself early on, and he should still recuse himself now.
[Cabrera:] Professor, a final quick question to you, because I know you met with the President recently, did he want legal advice from you?
[Dershowitz:] The President can't get legal advice from me. I only give legal advice to my clients, so I'm not going to become his lawyer. So if he wants to listen to what I say to the general American public on television, he is like any other American citizen has a right to do that. But I want to be clear, I'm not on lawyer, I'm not on his side, I'm on the side of the due process clause, and the constitution, I am doing what the ACLU should be doing. I have never heard I have been on the national board of issuing new and active member 53 years. I have never heard the ACLU issuing a statement praising the raid of a lawyer's office, defending it, without even raising problems about what happens if clients' confidences are being reviewed by taint teams that consist of FBI agents and government agency.
[Cabrera:] Right.
[Dershowitz:] Believe me if this were Hillary Clinton whose office had been raided, the ACLU would be up in arms. But they raised money from anti-Trump people. And so they will not defend our civil liberties if it means not being against Donald Trump, shame on the
[Aclu. Cabrera:] OK. But just circling back to defend, the President does reference you often in his own defense. So he seems to feel like you're on his team. Do you ever feel like you're being used to his political benefit in some way? Or that your words have been mischaracterized?
[Dershowitz:] No. If Hillary Clinton had been elected president, and they were trying to lock her up, I would be doing the same thing, I would be on television as I was for Bill Clinton, and Bill Clinton quoted me, and Hillary Clinton might have quoted me. I am on the side of civil liberties, I am not a partisan, I have defended right of Democrats, Republicans, nonpartisan people. I'm against the investigation of Senator Sanders, I'm against the investigation of Senator Bob Menendez, I will be against politization the criminalization of political differences no matter who the target is.
[Cabrera:] And I see one last thing to add, Norm. Go ahead, and then I got to wrap it up.
[Eisen:] Ana, two things very quickly, the first is, I totally disagree with the position that Alan is taking here, he should be talking about how terrible it is that the White House is considering firing Rosenstein, which would be the final nail in the coffin on obstruction. But I will tell you But I will tell you that these are the same positions he has taken for the past 25 years, the whole time I have known him, he's often been wrong, but he's consistent, and he's not schilling for anyone other than his mistaken view of the law.
[Cabrera:] All right, I have to end it there, guys.
[Dershowitz:] Thanks.
[Cabrera:] Thank you both for joining me. Professor Alan Dershowitz and Ambassador Norm Eisen, I appreciate it, guys. Just ahead, less than two weeks after the saying the U.S. was ready to get out of Syria, President Trump is firmly back in, and today, one U.S. ally is taking credit for convincing him to stay in Syria. You're live in the CNN Newsroom.

[Stephanie Curry, Daughter Of Robert Levinson, American Held Hostage In Iran:] It has been 10 years since our father has been missing and two previous administrations have failed to get him home. And we are very confident that President Trump has the dealmaking skills that are necessary in order to bring him home.
[Camerota:] Well, that was the Levinson family expressing their confidence on NEW DAY a few months ago their confidence in President Trump. Well, today, they're taking their fight to Capitol Hill to again try to bring their father home. Iran has held former FBI agent Robert Levinson for more than 10 years. Last week, the White House released a statement urging Iran to release him, saying the U.S. is prepared to impose sanctions if Iran does not comply. Joining us now is Dan Levinson. He's the eldest son of Robert Levinson. Dan's brother Doug will speak before the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing today. Dan, thanks so much for being here.
[Dan Levinson, Son Of Robert Levinson, American Held Hostage In Iran:] Thank you for having me.
[Camerota:] Do you still share your sister's confidence? That was back in March where she said that she was certain that President Trump's dealmaking skills would allow him to get your father out of Iran. How are you feeling today?
[Levinson:] I do. I think the statement that the White House released on Friday was a great first step. They're holding Iranians' feet to the fire. We need them to follow through and make sure that they keep the pressure on the Iranians, and that they're going to keep up bringing up my dad in any kind of engagement with the Iranians, and they need to be engaging with them as well.
[Camerota:] This is the statement that you're referring to. Let me read it for everyone. "The United States condemns hostage takers and nations that continue to take hostages and detain our citizens without just cause or due process. President Trump urges Iran to return Robert Levinson home, who has been held for over 10 years, and is prepared to impose new and serious consequences on Iran unless all unjustly imprisoned American citizens are released and returned." That is strong language, Dan, but what makes you think that the White House is able to do something beyond issue strongly-worded statements?
[Levinson:] Well, we're hoping that they do. It's going to take negotiations, it's going to take a deal. President Trump, he's known as a dealmaker so I think it's going to take these negotiations. But it's going to take more than just asking for cooperation and help in locating him, which is what we've been hearing for 10 years. And this more strongly-worded statement comes with the sticks that need to accompany the carrots when it comes to dealing with Iran. And they only respond to pressure we've learned this over 10 years and we're going to keep pressuring them ourselves. We're going to pressure out government to, in turn, pressure them as well.
[Camerota:] President Trump made a promise on the campaign trail before he was elected, when he was just a candidate in 2015, about your dad and I want to play this for you.
[Donald Trump, Then Candidate For President:] If I win the presidency, I guarantee you that those four prisoners are back in our country before I ever take office. I guarantee that. They will be back before I ever take office because they know that's what has to happen, OK? They know it. And if they don't know it, I'm telling them right now.
[Camerota:] So Dan, obviously that didn't happen.
[Levinson:] No.
[Camerota:] Was President Trump overly confident there?
[Levinson:] I guess so. He said a lot of things on the campaign trail, including that he knows that Iran knows exactly where my dad is, so we're hoping that he's going to talk about that and keep that pressure. And all we can do is look forward now and hope that President Trump follows through on these things. And that kind of talk we're hoping he continues that as the president as the President of the United States to saying Iran, you're holding him. Send him home or they'll be consequences.
[Camerota:] I mean, I guess my question is was he overly confident and is that helpful? In other words, is he stoking your optimism and making promises that he's not going to be able to fulfill?
[Levinson:] Of course, we're always optimistic that things are that he's going to be home soon. And I can't speak for all we can do is keep pressuring them. And we were at the White House last week. State we met with State Department officials, FBI officials, and we're reminding them that Trump President Trump did say these things and that he's still not home.
[Camerota:] Of course, it's Congress that will impose sanctions and, in fact, there's a bill with Iran, North Korea, and Russia that they are considering. What is your brother Doug going to tell Congress today?
[Levinson:] Well, my brother was 13 years old. He's the youngest of we're seven kids, my dad and mom have and he was the youngest one 13 years old. He's grown over a foot since my dad was arrested. He's event taller than my dad now and he wears his shoes to work these days. He's working on Capitol Hill. He's grown into an adult and he wants to tell our story about how much my dad's missed so many weddings and new grandchildren. I just held his newest grandson in my arms on Saturday. He misses these things. He had seven kids for a reason. He loves babies and he loves small children. He's never going to get these years back and all we can do is hope that he gets home to be able to spend time more time with his family and see the new grandchildren. He hasn't met five out of the six grandchildren he has yet.
[Camerota:] Dan Levinson, we're keeping your family in our prayers and, of course, we're continuing to follow your story on NEW DAY. Thanks so much for the update.
[Levinson:] Thank you. Thank you for keeping us in the press.
[Camerota:] Absolutely. We're following a lot of news this morning so let's get right to it.
[Trump:] Any senator who votes against starting debate is telling America you are fine with the Obamacare nightmare.
[Unidentified Female:] A showdown vote scheduled today on whether to begin debate on repealing Obamacare.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Senate Minority Leader:] We are spending most of our time fighting this awful health care bill.
[Unidentified Male:] Having John McCain come back for this vote is a huge, huge break for Mitch McConnell.
[Camerota:] The president is slamming his attorney general Jeff Sessions, calling him weak.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, what's really disturbing here is that he's really torturing him. President Trump and his aides have been discussing possibly removing Jeff Sessions. President Trump's trying to interfere with the independence of the attorney general. That's absolutely wrong and should not be tolerated.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Camerota:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your new day. It is Tuesday, July 25th, 8:00 in the East. Up first, President Trump making it clear what's on his mind this morning in an early morning tweetstorm. The president calling on Senate Republicans to step up to the plate as they vote today to begin debating a repeal of Obamacare. This comes as Sen. John McCain makes a dramatic return to Washington to cast what could be a deciding vote on health care.
[Cuomo:] The president also continues to publicly bully his attorney general Jeff Sessions. He called him out for having a very weak position on Hillary Clinton and saying he should be investigating his rival. Why is the president attacking the first senator to his presidential campaign as a supporter? Is Mr. Trump just trying to push him out in public? Joining us now, CNN political analyst David Gregory; "CNN POLITICS" reporter and editor-at-large, Chris Cillizza; and congressional reporter for "The Washington Post," Karoun Demirjian.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] A dark cloud surrounds the White House. The president's mood taking a turn for the worse after midterm losses and a public rebuke from his wife.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] The Democrats pick up two more House seats, but Nancy Pelosi's path to reclaim the speaker's gavel faces new challenges.
[Briggs:] Election recount numbers due today in Florida, 3:00 Eastern Time. Which major county could miss the deadline and what it means for major races?
[Romans:] And get ready for an ugly day for commuters along the East Coast. A mix of floods, ice, even snow all the way down south up to New England. Not looks pretty.
[Briggs:] Not really.
[Romans:] Welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. 31 minutes past the hour. Romans, did you know on the way to work I was able to buy cereal.
[Romans:] Did you need an I.D.?
[Briggs:] Without an I.D. 24-hour markets, they did not I.D. me for any of the cereal.
[Romans:] Do you think he meant Sudafed? We're talking about the president who said
[Briggs:] We'll describe that later in the program.
[Romans:] You need an I.D. to buy cereal in America which, of course, is not true as Dave just proved.
[Briggs:] All right. Let's turn to the president. He is reportedly pissed at damn near everyone. The words of one White House official describing President Trump after a series of setbacks and election night drubbing, infighting among aides, and the first lady's public demand to fire a National Security official. Aides tell CNN the president is isolated and getting angrier by the hour.
[Romans:] A week after declaring victory in the midterms, the president's friends tell CNN he is bitter about election losses, he's worried by the intensifying Mueller investigation. He is now openly musing about replacing more top aides and the first one to go is that National Security official Melania Trump wanted gone. Mira Ricardel is out of the White House but out of the administration. CNN's Jeff Zeleny explains.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Christine and Dave, all that talk of a White House staff shakeup is actually leading to one departure. You'll remember that story of the deputy National Security adviser just a couple of days ago in the crosshairs of First Lady Melania Trump. Well, the president finally making a decision to remove her from her position here at the White House. The president has decided to move her to another part of the administration but will indeed be leaving the National Security Council and White House. Now important to point out, she was the top ranking deputy to John Bolton, the National Security adviser, who had you know, had her full support and she indeed was a key part of his team here at the White House. So this is a big departure. But certainly one, even it took the White House about 24 hours or so to acknowledge she was going to leave, it was almost unthinkable that anything else would happen because that would be president essentially ignoring the wishes of the first lady. Many people are wondering why the first lady didn't tell the president privately. Well, sources here are saying that she had done that and there was no action taken. So that is why she called for the public firing of her. But in any case, there is no sense that this will be last shakeup. In fact the president saying that he will make a decision soon on the Homeland Security secretary. The key adviser we're looking for, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. Will he leave as well? Those questions and anticipation is certainly swirling out there. But it is one sign the president is going to make good on his pledge to have a new team around him at least in some respects as he heads into the second two years of his first term in office Dave and Christine.
[Briggs:] Jeff Zeleny, thank you. The GOP facing a new complication, winning Senate confirmation for Trump administration judicial nominees, this morning. Retiring Republican Jeff Flake says he won't vote yes unless bipartisan legislation protecting Special Counsel Robert Mueller receives a floor vote. The threat came after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blocked a floor vote on the special counsel bill that Flake and Democratic Senator Chris Coons are pushing.
[Romans:] Flake and a handful of other Republican senators say legislation is necessary after the president fired Jeff Sessions and named Matt Whitaker acting attorney general. Whitaker has been openly critical of the Mueller probe.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] With the firing of the attorney general and in my view the improper installation of an acting attorney general who has not been subject to confirmation by this body, the president now has this investigation in his sights and we all know it.
[Romans:] McConnell and other Senate Republicans say the measure is not needed because the president is not about to fire Mueller.
[Briggs:] The Democrats gaining two more seats in the House of Representatives as races in California and New Jersey are called. And that brings Democrats total net pickups in the House to 32, with still eight races still to be called. Democrats now poised to hold at least 227 seats in the new Congress. Meantime, a new wrinkle in Nancy Pelosi's bid to regain the speaker's gavel. Seventeen House Democrats have now signed a letter saying they will not vote for Pelosi on the House floor.
[Romans:] Five additional Democrats are pledging not to support Pelosi, although they have not yet signed that letter. If they all stick to their word, she may not have the votes to become speaker. But Pelosi and her allies frankly are confident saying she will call the critics' bluffs. So far no House Democrat has actually stepped forward to run against Pelosi, and that's the key here. But Ohio Representatives Marcia Fudge and Tim Ryan both tell CNN they are not ruling out a bid.
[Briggs:] President Trump announcing his support for a bipartisan prison reform bill yes, bipartisan. Can you believe it? It's called the First Step Act. The legislation shortens mandatory minimums for firearm offenses, eliminates these so-called stacking provisions that result in lengthy consecutive sentences, and reduces the number of nonviolent drug offenders serving mandatory minimum sentences.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're all better off when former inmates can receive and reenter society as law-abiding productive citizens. And thanks to our booming economy, they now have a chance at more opportunities than they've ever had before.
[Romans:] The reform is a key focus for the president's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner. The president's support firmed up after White House officials showed there's growing support for the bill across the political spectrum and among law enforcement. Senate leaders say they will bring the measure to a floor vote if there are 60 votes in favor. The White House says it's optimistic.
[Briggs:] The death toll in California now stands at 58, as catastrophic wildfires ravage the state. At this hour 56 people known to have died in the Camp Fire in Northern California, making it by far the deadliest wildfire in state history. 130 people are unaccounted for, most of them senior citizens. More than 10,000 structures destroyed, most of them homes.
[Romans:] The Camp Fire now estimated to have burned 138,000 acres is 35 percent contained. CNN's Dan Simon traveled with the National Guard that went house-to- house looking for victims.
[Sgt. Steve Collins, Butte County Sheriff's Investigations:] Everybody that's involved here has emotional connection to this. A lot of the people that are from this community have directly been impacted by their losing their home or know somebody that lost their home. They are housing people that lost their homes. It's this hit hard.
[Briggs:] The utility company PG&E could be in deep financial trouble if it's found liable for the Camp Fire. The utility disclosed Tuesday it experienced an outage just 15 minutes before the Camp Fire started. In the face of tragedy, people are stepping up. A California couple took in a 93-year-old veteran after he fled the fire in Paradise. The volunteer organization North Valley Animal Disaster Group working to relocate and shelter animals like these horses.
[Romans:] Donations of things like food, clothing, blankets, piling up at this parking lot in Chico, California. Some donations even being brought by sea. One man filled his 150-foot yacht with supplies, brought to shore by volunteers on surf boards to be delivered where they're needed. Meantime firefighters in Southern California gaining the upper hand on the Woolsey Fire. That blaze is now 52 percent contained. At least two people died in that blaze. More trouble for Facebook. The "New York Times," huge expose of the "New York Times" reports that Facebook hired a political opposition research group after criticism of how it handled Russian interference in the 2016 election. "Times" reports Facebook expanded its work with a group called Definers Public Affairs in October 2017 to combat this growing criticism. Definers reportedly wrote articles attacking Google and Apple and downplaying how Facebook was affected by Russian interference. The "Times" reporting, quote, "Facebook employed a Republican opposition research firm to discredit activist protesters, in part by linking them to the liberal financier George Soros." It also tapped its business relationships, lobbying a Jewish civil rights group to cast some criticism of the company as anti-Semitic. Those articles were then published on NTK Network, an affiliate of Definers, whose content is followed by politically conservative outlets, including Breitbart. Other revelations in the report include Sheryl Sandberg's anger at Facebook's former security chief when Facebook was told about the full extent of Russian interference in 2016. It paints a picture of Sheryl Sandberg and Mark Zuckerberg really behind the ball in some cases.
[Briggs:] Not just behind it, but almost pushing back against what the public should have known.
[Romans:] Exactly.
[Briggs:] And Sheryl Sandberg really does not come out well in this reporting. All right. Get ready to get soaked. Rain, ice, snow all along the East Coast. Your full forecast, next.

[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] But because much of this could be important to the special counsel investigation, it's hard to predict just how far he will go. One thing we do know, though, it doesn't appear the president is going to stand in his way.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Deputy White House Press Secretary:] President Trump will not assert executive privilege regarding James Comey's scheduled testimony.
[Gallagher:] And the senators are ready to grill James Comey on Thursday.
[Question:] What's the big question that you have for the FBI director?
[Sen. Joe Manchin , West Virginia:] The question that's being asked by West Virginians is, if you knew or if you thought there was obstruction of justice, why didn't you act on it?
[Gallagher:] Looking for clarification on a memo written by Comey in which sources say the former FBI director recounts that Trump allegedly urged him to go easy on former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, while a source with knowledge of Comey's thinking tells CNN Comey was quote "disturbed by his interactions with the president," but he felt that he had the situation under control. Everyone is waiting to see if Comey reached the same conclusion himself.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] The tone, the exact words that were spoken and the context are so important. And that is what we lack right now. And we can only get that by talking to those directly involved.
[Gallagher:] In the meantime, the White House isn't commenting on the Russia investigation itself, now referring questions to outside counsel, but the Trump team certainly has no problem talking about Comey.
[Kellyanne Conway, Trump Senior Adviser:] People should also look at the Rod Rosenstein memo again to see what the problem was in the department with FBI Director Jim Comey. Rosenstein clearly points out that the integrity and the morale were down. And he clearly points out said that Comey had tried to usurp the power of the attorney general.
[Gallagher:] Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will likely be asked about the man he recommended be fired on Wednesday, when he appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee to discuss wiretapping authority. Now, Rosenstein told the Associated Press Friday that if he became the subject of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, Rosenstein would recuse himself from oversight of Mueller. Mueller's investigation of Russian meddling in the election is expansive and could look at the firing of Comey. Senator Mark Warner telling Jake Tapper on CNN's "STATE OF THE UNION" that, while Comey may seem like the headliner, there's a full docket of key players to be questioned this week about their interactions with the president.
[Sen. Mark Warner , Virginia:] One of the questions we will have, not only for Director Comey on Thursday, but on Wednesday for Director of National Intelligence Coats and NSA, National Security NSA Director Admiral Rogers, I'm going to want to ask them, because there have been reports that the president also talked to both of them in terms of asking them to downplay the Russian investigation.
[Gallagher:] And that's not all. Tomorrow is the deadline for former NSA Michael Flynn to start turning over the documents and records in response to a set of subpoenas from the committee, so quite the to-do list for Congress this weekend in regards to the Russia probe Jake.
[Tapper:] All right, Dianne Gallagher, thank you so much. Lots to talk about with our panel today. Let me start with you, Alice Stewart. This morning, Kellyanne Conway pointing to Comey having to quote "scurry" to correct his testimony last time having to do with Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner, part of the strategy, it seems, to try to discredit, to undermine Comey's credibility.
[Alice Stewart, Cnn Political Commentator:] I think that's a mistake, because while Republicans and Democrats alike can disagree on how Comey has handled the situation, no one is really questioning his honesty or his character and integrity. And that's what's going to see him through this. I think it was very wise on the part of the White House to say that they are not going to try and exercise executive privilege with this case, because that makes it appear as though they have something to hide. So, I think it's good. Let Comey testify and get the facts out there, get the full information, and let's get this Russia probe behind the administration and get them back on offense driving their message.
[Tapper:] How aggressive do you think we're going to hear criticisms of Comey from the White House and its allies?
[Margaret Talev, Bloomberg News:] I do think you can see it's starting already and it seems that the calculation that they have made is, it would be a bad move strategically to try to stop this, but we can try to undercut it and talking about things that he's done in the past, revisiting some of these issues, the Democratic opposition to him and such and forth. So, even before we see him testify, I think there will be a questioning of kind of his past and his background.
[Tapper:] And we will hear that a lot, Karen. We're going to hear a lot about how Democrats lambasted Comey all throughout the summer and fall of 2016.
[Karen Tumulty, "the Washington Post":] Yes. I suspect the Democrats are going to be pretty quiet here, and they are going to let Jim Comey just spin it out as he intends to. And don't forget that he is a very, very practiced, very experienced at testifying in front of Congress. We have seen him up on the Hill over and over again. He always gets his message through, and he's a very effective witness.
[Tapper:] One of the things, I suspect a lot of the Russia testimony will not be shared in open hearing. I think it will be probably for the closed hearing, but the obstruction of justice questions, I think will probably we will hear a lot about that, the meetings that Comey had with President Trump, whether or not in retrospect he feels that maybe it was obstruction of justice, even if at the time he did not.
[Stewart:] Well, it's kind of hard to question whether or not those conversations were had, given that we know that Donald Trump has mentioned them and even referred to them in writing, talking about I appreciate you telling me three times I'm not under investigation. So, unfortunately, again, this is another situation where it's a self- inflicted wound on the part of the president. But we will see. We will see what Comey has to say, but more than anything I think the more information on this probe we can get out there, the better.
[Tapper:] Go ahead.
[Tumulty:] Well, I think though that what they are going to come after him with is they're going to say, well, if you felt this way at the time, they why didn't you say something at the time? Why didn't you resign at the time? But judging from what we have heard from Comey's allies, his version is going to be, I thought I had brushed it back, and certainly all of that changed when he got fired.
[Tapper:] Yes. It seems from a conversation I had with a Comey friend, it seems that they think that the act of firing him is part of the obstruction in itself, not just the conversations. But I want to change the subject a bit, speaking of self-inflicted wounds, which Alice just brought up. Let's talk about the president's teams which none other than George Conway, Kellyanne Conway's husband and a respected conservative lawyer in town, pointed out in a tweet it undermines the president's own legal argument before the U.S. Supreme Court by calling it a ban, by saying that the watered-down version is politically correct, et cetera.
[Talev:] George Conway's tweet, I'm assuming you felt this way, too, was incredibly surprising to a lot of us who follow this sort of thing. And he's since come back and expressed his ongoing support for the president, but you see it in everything from the president's treatment of the mayor of London to all of the Comey-related issues and now to the travel ban as well. I got an unsolicited e-mail from a group that does like online betting or whatever today talking about what the odds are already for whether the president tweets on Thursday and whether he uses a word like fake or Comey or whatever. So, this has become an entire like separate cottage industry. Is President Trump going to step on his own message via Twitter? This is something we will all be watching, whether it deals with the travel ban on the path to the Supreme Court or what we hear and see from the president on Thursday outside of official events.
[Tapper:] It's not surprising that George Conway would reaffirm his support for the president. But that's the whole point of why it's important. George Conway supports the president. He wants him to succeed. And it's almost like an act of intervention for him to send out a tweet like that.
[Tumulty:] Right, and George Conway was up for a very big job in the Justice Department at one point. He's a skilled lawyer, and, by the way, he's not exactly a frequent tweeter either.
[Tapper:] No.
[Tumulty:] So the fact that he would go to the very medium that the president uses to voice it...
[Talev:] Beg him to stop.
[Tumulty:] And, again, "The Washington Post" had a story today saying that this you know, these tweets could really undercut the president's legal arguments, and George Conway retweeted that had with "Good analysis."
[Stewart:] George's comment is one that you would expect to hear in a meeting, an attorney-client privileged confidential meeting, but people realize the best way to communicate with Donald Trump is on Twitter, unfortunately.
[Tapper:] And this is one of the issues that I tried to get into at the top of the show, which is there are a lot of people who love admire and want President Trump to succeed, and they are so frustrated by his inability to control his impulses to send out tweets about every negative emotion he has at that very moment.
[Talev:] The problem is, to some extent, is that the tweets are not consistent. In one of them, he will have a tweet explaining what really happened with Jim Comey, and then, you know, weeks later, it will be a tweet that completely undercuts the previous tweet or what he sent the administration out to say. Travel ban is an obvious example of that. It's a ban. It's not a ban. It's a ban again. It's not just going public with things that maybe would be better left unsaid, but it's the inconsistency about those messages that's created some of the legal, you know, concerns about either building a case for something affirmatively or bolstering against an accusation that you have done something.
[Stewart:] And I think more than anything, what this does, it takes away from their ability to drive their message. When they do have legislative accomplishments today, they had great announcements with regard to electronic, with regard to the VA and also with air traffic controls. Those are great messages. Drive that.
[Tapper:] Right. It's infrastructure week.
[Stewart:] Certainly, and reinforce that on Twitter. Unfortunately, again, he takes the communications shop off-message.
[Tapper:] And the other thing, Karen, the great piece by Susan Glasser in "Politico" magazine this week about how President Trump surprised members of his own national security staff by going before NATO and not affirming his belief in Article 5 of NATO, which is an attack on one is an attack on all. The European allies wanted to hear that from him, because he had said things to the contrary. And you have this report in Politico suggesting top people thought he was going to do it and were surprised that they didn't.
[Tumulty:] It was in the speech, according to Susan Glasser, a really terrific reporter at Politico. And he did not say that part of the speech. This not only this contradicts actually what they were saying in real time during the trip as well, and I think it really undercuts the credibility of the president's national security team, which really has been seen as kind of the single strongest part of the administration. It's a very important story.
[Tapper:] People really respect General Mattis, H.R. McMaster. Rex Tillerson gets a lot of plaudits. And for them, not only to be disobeyed, but maybe even in some way out of the loop on this decision is a big deal.
[Talev:] Yes. At the time, I was on this nine-day trip. And at the time that his speech occurred, that NATO speech, we all noticed it. I remember, we were like an audible gasp that the speech is over and we're all in this filing center saying, he didn't say he didn't actually reaffirm Article 5, did he? Nobody heard it. Nobody could hear it. Everybody calling the NSC for clarification, what happened? And the messaging at the time from the communications shop at the White House was, no, absolutely, that was an affirmation of Article 5. So, to see...
[Tapper:] Right, his presence.
[Talev:] Yes, his presence there.
[Tapper:] No, that's what they were actually saying.
[Stewart:] They didn't deny it. They didn't...
[Talev:] And the sort of brief messaging like after the 2001 attacks, you know, Article 5 was invoked.
[Tapper:] Right.
[Talev:] But there was the obvious not the rest of it you would expect which is, and, you know, you can always count on the U.S. to be there for you. That's the part that never happened, right? And at the time, it was like don't make such a mountain out of a molehill. It's not a big deal. But maybe it was.
[Tapper:] Yes. Yes. Tell our allies in Europe. Alice Stewart, Margaret Talev, Karen Tumulty, thank you so much, one and all. Be sure to tune in Thursday CNN for special coverage of James Comey's testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. It all starts at 9:00 a.m. Eastern. Coming up, amid alleged ties to terrorism, five Arab nations cut ties with the Qatar, home to one of the largest concentrations of American military personnel in the entire Middle East what this diplomatic rift might mean in the fight against ISIS. And then terrorists can't recruit if people can't see the propaganda. The computer scientist who claims he's invented a system to wipe extremist content from social media, but do social media companies want to hear it?

[Romans:] All right. Finally, the news Wall Street has been waiting for. The president's top officials meeting with moderate Republicans to talk tax reform. According to sources familiar with the matter, national economic director Gary Cohn and the Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin plan to meet with moderate GOP members Wednesday. That's ahead of the first major hearing on tax reform. The group will be crucial in passing any tax package and that is what investors want to hear. Tax reform is the Holy Grail. It is the gift that Wall Street wants. Companies stand to make lots of money on corporate tax cuts so Wall Street wants details, and soon. Experts want details on how the government will pay for it. So far, the White House insists these tax cuts will pay for themselves through growth. However, the tax policy center estimates the proposal, so far that we see here, could reduce revenue by $4 trillion in the first decade. Speaking of taxes, we probably won't be seeing the president's tax returns anytime soon but White House officials say his personal financial disclosure will be filed in a short period of time, so we'll bring that to you when we get it.
[Briggs:] All right. The U.S. says the Syrian regime has built a huge crematorium near a notorious military prison as part of an effort to cover up what the U.S. officials call mass atrocities happening there. The State Department revealing newly-declassified intelligence photos showing the crematorium, saying the Assad government may be killing as many as 50 detainees a day at the prison. Amnesty International says the regime has killed thousands at the prison as part of its crackdown on dissent. The U.S. says the burden is now on Russia to rein in the Assad regime.
[Romans:] A lot on the table when Turkey's controversial leader meets with President Trump at the White House today. President Recep Erdogan is critical to nearly everything the U.S. hopes to accomplish in the Middle East, but the meeting comes a week after Erdogan was angered by the U.S. decision to arm Kurdish fighters in Syria. CNN's Muhammad Lila has a preview for us this morning good morning.
[Muhammad Lila, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Christine, and you know, quite frankly, this is a much more important meeting for Turkey's president than it is for President Trump. Look, a few days ago the United States the Trump administration made a strategic and a tactical decision to start providing heavy weapons to Kurdish fighters on the ground in order to help dislodge ISIS in Syria. Now, for the United States, that's a strategic policy. They're the group that they're putting their efforts behind, but for Turkey, that's really an insult and people in Ankara are outraged because they consider that Kurdish group on the ground to consist of terrorist groups as well. Some of those Kurdish groups have launched terror attacks across the border into Turkey, so Turkey is furious that the United States would make that decision. It's certainly something that's going to come up today in this meeting between President Erdogan and President Trump, as well as Turkey demanding the extradition of a religious cleric by the name of Fethullah Gulen that they believe is behind the failed military coup that took place last year. Fethullah Gulen, of course, is living in the United States and Turkey wants him extradited back to Turkish soil. So, two very contentious points that will surely come up today in this meeting between President Trump and President Erdogan Christine.
[Romans:] Absolutely and we know you'll monitor it for us. Thank you so much, Muhammad Lila, this morning. All right, 50 minutes past the hour. Job cuts coming to Ford. We're going to tell you how many and why, next.

[Romans:] All right. Right now, Russian President Vladimir Putin is wrapping the year with a marathon news conference. He's fielding questions about relations with the U.S. and he's making some news about his own political future as well. CNN's Phil Black is monitoring all of this live for us in Moscow. What's the headline, Phil?
[Phil Black, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, a few things here, Christine. Vladimir Putin was asked to assess Donald Trump's first year in power. He said that's not his job, that's for the American people. But he talked about Trump having a number of major successes and pointed to the state of the financial markets, saying that they indicate that people still trust the American economy and that means they trust the decisions that Donald Trump is making. He was also asked about the many contacts between Russian officials and Trump's people contacts which are now the subject of multiple investigations in the United States. His view and he's kind of said this before is that he believes it's all largely been made up by Trump's opponents to delegitimize his presidency. And he said that in so doing, these people are actually undermining their own country in the process, as well. Nothing unusual, he says, about Russia's ambassador meeting with people from an incoming administration. He also talked about his own political future in the sense that he's running for reelection in just three months' times. That's when the next presidential vote in this country is. And he said that will run as an Independent, not associated with the United Russia Party as he has been in the past. That's the dominant political party in this country. What it seems to indicate is that he is trying to broaden his appeal as much as possible because while he is expected to win this election pretty comfortably there simply isn't another opponent, really what he's battling against is voter apathy so he wants as many people to turn out and vote for him in March at that election, Christine.
[Romans:] All right. Phil Black for us. Thank you so much this morning where it's about two in the afternoon in Moscow. Thank you, sir. Three members of the International Space Station crew landing safely after 139 days in orbit. One of the men who landed in Kazakhstan is from NASA, one from the European Space Agency, and the third, a Russian cosmonaut. On Sunday, a new crew launches. One from NASA, one from Russia, and the third from Japan. May the force be with you tonight. You may need it if you plan to stand in line for "
[Star Wars:] THE LAST JEDI" which opens in North America in just hours. It is expected to top $200 million at the box office, one of the biggest openings of all time. Demand for tickets is so high some theaters in New York will be showing the film on a 24-hour schedule, starting at 6:00 p.m. tonight. Let's get a check on "CNN Money Stream" this morning. Global stock markets are mixed right now. U.S. stocks rose after reports congressional leaders reached a deal on the tax bill. The Dow hit a record high. The S&P, though, closed lower after financial shares fell and when the Federal Reserve raised interest rates. That's the third hike this year. It means higher rates on mortgages, auto loans, and credit cards. The future of how the Internet is regulated is about to change. The FCC is scheduled to vote today on a controversial plan to rollback Obama-era net neutrality protections. The 2015 rules intended to keep the Internet open and fair, barring the blocking or slowing of Internet traffic. FCC chair Ajit Pai says the regulations stifle broadband investment and innovation, but advocates argue that without it consumers would face higher costs and slower speeds. The repeal is expected to pass. Target is speeding up its delivery service in a challenge to Amazon. Target bought delivery service Shipt to begin same-day delivery. The plan here is to offer this at half of its stores by early 2018 and all major markets by the next holiday season. Until now, Target and other store-based retailers had one advantage over online. You could pick up your items the same day. But now, Amazon is making the push to same-day delivery, so there is real fight in the retail space. And I think you, the consumer, are the big beneficiary there. Thanks for joining us. I'm Christine Romans. "NEW DAY" starts right now.
[Trump:] We want to give you, the American people, a giant tax cut for Christmas.
[Mattingly:] Negotiators struck a deal about how to reconcile the House and Senate plans.
[Schumer:] The public knows what's going on and that is tax cuts for the wealthiest.
[Roy Moore , Lost Alabama Senate Election:] We have not received a final count. Our political process has been affected with baseless and false allegations.
[Unidentified Male:] But certainly shows that the voters of Alabama are taking another look at the Trump administration.
[Doug Jones , Alabama Senator-elect:] It was a very gracious call. He congratulated me on the race that we'd won.
[Rep. Jim Jordan , Ohio:] And I think the public trust in this whole thing is gone.
[Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:] Nobody has communicated to me a desire to remove Robert Mueller.
[Unidentified Male:] I would hope to think he's safe. If not, then all hell will break loose.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] Closing bell. Stocks closed up after a terrible week. Last week was a terrible week. We still have the S&P 500 down 8.8 percent from its record hit on January 26th. And this morning it looks as though investors want to buy stocks. Maybe a couple 100 points here higher on the Dow Jones Industrial average will pop up there.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] As if as if it was planned.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Berman:] You say, we should get a couple hundred points, then it goes 160 as you're saying it.
[Romans:] Yes, it should pop here. And here's here's why. You've got a big inflation debate happening right now among stock market participants. You have seen the bond market move here. You have seen bond yields rise to the highest they've been in several years because there is a feeling that inflation is finally going to come back into the economy. And we've seen it already in wage inflation. That was what really started this period of volatility in the stock market. But will it continue? Will there be enough inflation maybe to surpass the Fed's inflation targets? We just don't know yet. So I think until you really see a trend established in inflation in the bond market, you're going to see a stock market that's going to be a little bit choppy here.
[Berman:] Two hundred and fifty right now. All right, Christine Romans, the president's going to introduce this infrastructure plan. It's not a highly developed infrastructure plan. Does the market take it seriously?
[Romans:] They don't really take it seriously quite yet. It's because it's $200 billion of federal spending, right, and some of those are new loan guarantees. It's maybe $50 billion directly to rural states. That could be a really great red state advantage. But they're expecting that state and local governments are going to kick in and private investors will kick in.
[Berman:] Right.
[Romans:] And we just don't know what the funding mechanism yet is about. And that's by design. That's for Congress to figure out. We do need some infrastructure improvements. We really do.
[Berman:] Right.
[Romans:] The Chamber of Commerce, interestingly, saying, hey, by the way, we need to keep DACA workers and temporary protected status people and all kinds of classes of immigrants because even if you had a trillion and a half dollars, an easy passage of all of the projects you want to do, we don't have the workers to do it.
[Berman:] I will also note, an infrastructure plan, stimulus inflationary and it adds to this whole thing.
[Romans:] Yes, it does.
[Berman:] Christine Romans, great to have you with us. Thanks so much. The president is set to unveil this infrastructure and budget plan today, as we were just talking about. But, obviously, right now inside the White House there are questions about how it has handled these accusations of domestic abuse. Joining me now to discuss, Nanette Diaz Barragan, a first term Democratic member of Congress from California. Representatives, thank you so much for being with us. Let me just ask you frankly right here at the top, should the president fire John Kelly?
[Rep. Nanette Diaz Barragan , California:] I think there from what we're hearing and what the allegations have been of I think we need more information about what he knew and when he knew it. But I think there are indicators pointing to the fact that this chief of staff should consider resigning. It's very disturbing on how this was handled. It appears that the FBI flagged that there was an issue and there was a problem and it doesn't look like there was any follow-through or any follow-up. That due process that the president was talking about wasn't done in his own White House. Had they done a due process, I think Kelly would have seen those photos. He said he never saw them and here we are. Now at a time he sees them, and there's been so many change of stories, it's kind of hard to follow. I think it's all
[Berman:] You say you say that chief of staff should consider resigning. Again, the question is, the president could ask him to leave. The evidence seems to be that in the fall we were told CNN has been told that he was you know, the chief of staff was told in November that there were some allegations against Rob Porter. And then in the days surrounding the release of this article, it almost definitely seems that he knew something. Is that not enough for the president to take action here?
[Barragan:] Well, I you know, the Congress has actually sent a number of inquiries to the White House to find out more about their security clearance process and we haven't gotten answers to that. I think if it's true, that Kelly knew about what had what was happening here, if he knew about these allegations and he knew as much as we think he knew, then he should resign. This is a real stain, not just on this White House, but on the country and on the Me Too movement.
[Berman:] You brought up the security issue here. Look, there's the there's a very important societal moral issue about domestic abuse, but there's also a security issue here where this guy did not have a full security clearance and there may be a dozen people still inside the White House without said security clearance. Do you have concerns? What are your concerns about the way this White House handles potentially sensitive information?
[Barragan:] Well, it's a huge concern for me. Look, I sit on Homeland Security. I have myself to go into classified briefings. I can't discuss that information with my own chief of staff and other staff members. And it's a crime to be sharing information with people who don't have that clearance. And so here we have a White House that has no great process as we're hearing and they have no follow through in making sure that they're having their own people follow up on these red flags that the FBI is having. Having people have access to classified information and our nation's secrets is a real concern on the way this is being handled by the White House, which I think is why it's so important that Congress be involved and that Congress have oversight on this White House.
[Berman:] Again, he had temporary clearance. I'm not sure anyone's suggesting that a law was broken by him seeing this information. It's more about the long-term implications of the fact that he didn't have the full clearance. Let me just read you an op-ed from Jennie Willoughby, who, of course, was the second wife of Rob Porter, who has accused Porter of domestic abuse. She responded to the fact that the president spoke out in defense of Rob Porter. She says, ultimately this is not a political issue. This is a societal issue. And the tone has just been reset by the White House. If the most powerful people in the nation do not believe my story of abuse in the face of overwhelming evidence, then what hope do others have of being heard? Your reaction to her broader statement here, the effect of this in this country.
[Barragan:] Well, I read it and I have to say it was pretty powerful. And she's absolutely right. This is sending the wrong message. Look, domestic violence is a serious problem in this country. I think the statistics say something like 20 people per minute are suffering physical abuse from their intimate partners. Here is an opportunity to talk about a societal issue, which is huge. And what kind of a signal is this sending to women who are suffering at the hands of domestic abuse and sexual harassment? Look, it reminds me of the letter that was sent out by 200 women in the national security space saying that they were suffering instances within their own agencies of sexual harassment even when there's policies in place. So this is not a political issue. It really is a bipartisan issue and it's one that Congress needs to take up.
[Berman:] Right.
[Barragan:] But it's also one that this president needs to provide some leadership on, which is hard to do when you have one alleged abuser defending another alleged abuser.
[Berman:] Let me just ask you quickly. The Senate's going to take up immigration tonight. Do you think that the Democratic leadership in both the House and the Senate have handled this well? You voted against the spending bill because of your concerns that it did not include any provisions on immigration.
[Barragan:] Well, there's no doubt within our communities we're hearing that the Senate Democratic leadership feels that they've turned their back on our community. I feel that this hasn't been enough of a priority. Look, this is a top issue for me. I have a district that's 70 percent Latino. There's 800,000 dreamers who today are suffering, who are have anxiety, fear, not knowing what's going to happen and so this is an issue really that we need to get back to Congress. We need to make a focus and we need to find a solution. I think it was a real mistake that we didn't use the leverage we had in the last spending bill. We have a couple opportunities coming up, maybe one, and I think we need to continue to use that. And Congress needs to stay there until we get this done.
[Berman:] Right. All right, Representative Nanette Diaz Barragan, thanks so much for being with us. Appreciate it.
[Barragan:] Thank you.
[Berman:] A new twist in the hunt for the world's most wanted terrorist. Sources reveal to CNN that the leader of ISIS was injured in an air strike. We have exclusive new details ahead.

[Don Lemon, Host, Cnn:] Alabama Judge Roy Moore refusing tonight to quit the Senate race despite heavy pressure from republicans on Capitol Hill. Let's bring in now Beth Clayton, a columnist at the Alabama Political Reporter and contributor to the Voice of Alabama Politics. And John Sharp, a reporter for Alabama Media Group. Good evening to both of you. So John, a defiant Roy Moore he took to the stage tonight at the God save America conference in Jackson, Alabama, blaming attacks on him on the media and vowing to keep fighting. Here's a portion of what he had to say.
[Roy Moore, Candidate For Senate:] I'm now placing allegations, and that's all the press want to talk about. But I want to talk about the issues. I want to talk where this country is going. And if we don't come back to God we're not going anywhere.
[Lemon:] So, John, you were in the room when Moore made these comments. How did it go over with the crowd?
[John Sharp, Reporter, Alabama Media Group:] Well, the crowd loved it, Don. I mean, it fell right to the base. You know, it was spot on for the audience he was before. It was a speech where he really didn't dive into the issues too much, you know, the typical issues we think of. He discussed more or less about, you know, the spiritual battle that he feels that Christians are in. And it was a 32-minute speech and the crowd loved it. They gave him an standing ovation, and he really spoke to the base in which, you know, he's counting on for support on December 12th in the election down here.
[Lemon:] Yes, I watched it from my office here. And he mostly talked about the bible. And sort of, you know, bible issues versus the secular and people who are after him, and so on. But Beth, in addition to the allegations of sexual abuse from Roy Moore, CNN's Gary Tuchman has tracked down a former mall employee who he says he was told to alert police if Moore showed up at a local mall. Take a listen to this.
[Greg Legat, Mall Employee:] We talk about other people and then somebody said don't forget about Roy Moore. And I asked what about Roy Moore? And they said, well, he's banned from the mall. I said why is he banned, and a police officer wouldn't tell me. He said if you see him, let me know. I'll take care of.
[Gary Tuchman, National Correspondent, Cnn:] So what did you eventually learn as to the reason why he was banned to the mall?
[Legat:] I was told that he was bothering girls in the mall.
[Tuchman:] In what way?
[Legat:] I don't I don't know exactly. That he was approaching them and talking to them.
[Tuchman:] Now girls, when you're saying girls are you...
[Legat:] Teenage girls.
[Lemon:] So, what do you know, what have you heard about Moore and this supposed ban from this Gadsden mall?
[Beth Clayton, Contributor, The Voice Of Alabama Politics:] You know, we've heard these rumors for weeks before now. And it's been a thing around Gadsden for the longest time. And you know, it's just shameful that so many women have to come forward to get justice in this situation. And I hope the court of public opinion holds Roy Moore accountable in this. I mean, it's just sad he's looking at this saying that he doesn't know anything about this, he doesn't know, you know, where the mall is or he's never heard of these women. Gadsden is a small town. Everybody knows everybody. It's sad that he's resorted lines that he's so big on the Ten Commandments.
[Lemon:] Yes. What is it like on the ground in Alabama now? Do you think people are turning against Roy Moore, is he still looking a strong support? You first, Beth.
[Clayton:] You know, I think there's going to be a hardened base that's just not going to back down and they are going to use the bible to justify these abhorrent acts that Roy Moore has done. But I think there are a lot of good, you know, God-fearing Alabamians who are listening to this, and they know that these stories ring so true for women across the state and across America. They can't look the other way and they can't vote to let somebody like Roy Moore go represent us in the Senate. So, I think a lot of people are going to stay home and hopefully a lot of people cross over and vote for Doug Jones, the man who prosecuted the murder of a 14-year- old little girl instead of somebody who molested one.
[Lemon:] John?
[Sharp:] Yes. Don, here at the church that we're at, you know, the folks here they're going to support Roy Moore. I mean, there's very little that can be done or said between now and election day that's going to change that. You know, earlier in the day I was in Jackson and I was at a diner, I talked to a gentleman. He described himself as an ardent Trump supporter, someone who does not like Bill or Hillary Clinton, someone that thinks that, you know, we need to drain the swamp, you know, the typical statements that you hear. But he says he's really having a soul search over this. The allegations are troubling to him. I mean, it's something that he feels uncomfortable with. And he describes himself as a strong Christian conservative. So I think there's a little bit of that right now, where folks are digesting some of this news, and they're really struggling with it right now as it keeps coming out.
[Lemon:] What an interesting time to be in Birmingham. I worked there for a bit, and it would be fun to go back and cover this story. You guys are doing a great job. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. When we come back, the Evangelicals in Alabama facing a tough decision. Will they support Roy Moore even in the wake of allegations he sexually abused five women when they were teenagers. I'm going to talk to the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, his name is Albert Mohler.

[Baldwin:] After Brett Kavanaugh was sworn into the Supreme Court, Hillary Clinton says President Trump staged such a spectacle, it undermined the courts integrity She spoke exclusively with CNN's Christiane Amanpour.
[Hillary Clinton, , Former Secretary Of State & Former Presidential Candidate:] What was done last night in the White House was a political rally. It further undermined the image and integrity of the court. And that troubles me greatly. It saddens me. Because our judicial system has been viewed as one of main pillars of our constitutional government. So I don't know how people are going to react to it. I think, given our divides, it will pretty much fall predictably between those who are for and those who are against. But the president has been true to form. He has insulted, attacked, demeaned women throughout the campaign, for many years leading up to the campaign, and he's continued to do that inside the White House.
[Baldwin:] Mary Katharine Hamm is still with us. Joining us, CNN politics reporter and editor-at-large, Chris Cillizza. Chris Cillizza, she called what happened last night a political rally. We know Trump is pretty effective when it comes to rallies. What is Hillary Clinton up to here?
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter & Cnn Editor-at-large:] Well, I mean, I think in her mind she's filling a space that no one else can fill between now and whenever Democrats choose who their nominee is going to be in 2020, which is sort of the face of the Trump resistance. I don't think this is some long con that she's going to run for president again. I think she's done with that. But I do think she believes that there need to be voices that speak up and say this is not normal, this is the sort of thing that we have to call out and she believes herself to be in a position still to do that. You know, I don't know how much she helps the cause. I think she herself is so divisive. She says people are going to line up in their camps one way or another as it relates to the TrumpKavanaugh thing Monday night. WellKavanaugh thing, people are going to line up in their camps, too.
[Baldwin:] Is she the person, M.K., to be
[Hamm:] She's welcome to be who she wants. She's been out there for years. She's been in politics a long time. It's a reflect to be in the political arena. Do I think it's strategically super helpful or she's a vibrant new face for the Democratic Party or resistance? I do not. And there are others who speak out plenty who serve that role probably better.
[Baldwin:] Let me play one other clip. Hillary Clinton weighed in on the confirmation process just on the whole.
[Clinton:] You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about. That's why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House andor the Senate, that's when civility can start again. Until then, the only thing the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength. And you heard how the Republican members, led by Mitch McConnell, the president, really demeaned the confirmation process, insulted and attacked not only Dr. Ford but women who were speaking out. You know, look, I remember Republican operatives shutting down the voting in Florida in 2000. I remember the swiftboating of John Kerry. I remember the thing that even the Republican Party did to John McCain in 2000. I remember what they did to me for 25 years, the falsehoods, the lies, which unfortunately people believe because the Republicans have put a lot of time, money and effort in promoting them. So when you're dealing with an ideological party that is driven by the lust for power, that is funded by corporate interests who want a government that does its bidding, you can be civil but you can't overcome what they intend to do unless you win elections.
[Baldwin:] Chris, we watched this really spectacle volatility unfold during this whole process. It was ugly no matter what. But does running on an anger platform remedy it?
[Cillizza:] Hillary Clinton, whether purposely or not, is running the case for Michael Avenatti 2020. Both parties are driven by ideology. That's why they're parties. They are cohered by a set of ideology and values. It's a little oversimplified. I do, however, think, there will be a real debate as Democrats look to who they want and there's going to be a million 30-plus candidates. There will be a debate do we want to get back to politics pre-Trump, where it was more genteel and civil or do we need for lack of a better word, an Avenatti? Donald Trump changed it and we need to fight fire with fire.
[Baldwin:] Can we go back, Mary Katharine, into a pre-Trump era to a "pre-genteel" era of politics or do you need a Trump to out-trump Trump?
[Hamm:] I think some of that is looking through rose-colored glasses. Trump was a response to what many felt was cultural bullying during the Obama years. They felt like they needed a bully to stand up to that. Hillary Clinton's comments here are sort of a tell that the civility gambit is nonsense. It's not about civility. It's about you shut up until we win. That's not actually civility. And with respect, I am old enough to remember how the Clinton company treated his accusers and paramours over the years. It wasn't civil. It was part of my political coming of age at 18 or 19 to see how that played out. So to hear it from her is somewhat hollow for me. In this process, activists have been abetted by ran with the Avenatti outlandish accusations that did not have corroborations. So that wasn't exactly civil or part of the normal process. I'm not endorsing the ratchet but this is a ratchet situation here.
[Baldwin:] Mary Katharine Hamm, Chris Cillizza, thank you both very much.
[Hamm:] Thank you.
[Baldwin:] As a small community in New York is in mourning after a horrific limo crash that killed 20, we now have details about the owner of the company who owned the limo and new reports of text messages sent by the victims in moments before the crash. What they had to say about the condition of the limo as they were in it. That's next.

[Allen:] Well, the rock star Supreme Court justice, RBG, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is recovering from surgery. Doctors removed two cancerous nodules from her left lung Friday. They were discovered after a fall last month. She fractured three ribs then.
[Howell:] Rock star based on her resilience. Our chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, has more on her treatment.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] They took this cancer out. They don't see any other evidence of cancer within the lungs. So they're treating this as it's the only treatment she will need. Now it is a big operation I think for at any age, certainly if you're 85 years old. The recovery is going to be the most significant part over the next several days. We don't know if she had what's known as a standard thoracotomy, where it's an opening of the chest, or if she had something done less invasively, which would shorten the operation and recovery time as well. What's likely to happen next, we won't know for sure exactly what type of malignant cells these were that were found in the nodule. And that will give us a better idea of what it means for Justice Ginsburg going forward.
[Howell:] Before the surgery, Justice Ginsburg had said that she will serve on the Supreme Court as long as she's able to do so.
[Allen:] We wish her well.
[Howell:] Now to outer space we go and a large asteroid zooming past Earth as we speak. This is a far cry from Santa over the holidays. This thing is shaped like a sweet potato and it is making its way past Earth right now.
[Allen:] The object is about a mile long or 1.5 kilometers. It would make quite a dent if it hit Earth but we're happy to say that won't happen. The asteroid won't be back again until the year 2070, so, sweet potato, thanks for stopping by.
[Howell:] All right. Recapping our top story this day, Americans waking up to part of the government shut down. What it means, hundreds of thousands of federal employees are in limbo, not sure when they'll be paid next for the work they do.
[Allen:] Lawmakers left Washington Friday without a bill to fund the government by midnight. They're deadlocked over the president's demand to fund a border wall. Democrats oppose it. We'll have more on these developments on CNN throughout the coming hours. Thanks for watching. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] I'm George Howell. For our viewers here in the United States, "NEW DAY" is ahead. For viewers around the world, "AFRICAN VOICES" is ahead. You're watching CNN, the world's news leader.
[Allen:] See you later.

[Church:] Britain is paying tribute to the victims of the Grenfell Tower fire one year on from that tragedy. The high-rise in west London is now cloaked in a shroud. It was lit up overnight to remember the 72 people who died there in the early hours of June 14th last year. The United Kingdom will hold a minute's silence in just a few hours. A public inquiry is under way into the tragedy. Investigators and survivors have been asking hard questions about the response to Britain's deadliest domestic fire since the Second World War. And Prime Minister Theresa May is apologizing for her error in judgment.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] I didn't, of course on that first visit meet members of the community or survivors. And I'm sorry for not having met them then. I regret that, because I think people perhaps felt, they wanted those of us in power to know that we had understood and recognized what had happened. And perhaps felt that not meeting them immediately meant that I didn't care enough, and that was never the case.
[Church:] And amid all the apologies and questions of the voices of the Grenfell survivors and the testimonies of bereaved friends and relatives. CNN's Nick Glass, brings us their stories.
[Nick Glass, Cnn Correspondent:] In other circumstances, you probably wouldn't give it a second look. Just another London tower block, one among many. Under the white plastic sheeting is Grenfell tower. And Grenfell is the stuff of nightmares. The tragedy played out mercilessly in front of all our cameras. Strip away the shroud and as everyone knows this is still an incinerated concrete shell, a 24-story tombstone, the relic of a fire that should never, ever have happened.
[Unidentified Male:] My mum and my sister were murdered and cremated on the 14th of June last year. To be more specific, my mum and sister were poisoned by the smoke, they were burned, they were cremated. I had to listen to them suffer and I had to listen to them die. I had to watch Grenfell Tower burn for a couple of days, but particularly the top floors. If that is not torture, then I'm not really sure what else is.
[Glass:] Ahmed stayed on the phone to his younger sister Maryam until she fell silent and all he could hear was the crackle of flames. One year on and Grenfell remains a place of profound sadness. How could anyone forget what happened here? There's grief and dignity, and also simmering anger and an unquenchable desire for justice. The photos of the missing once plastered everywhere have begun to fade and fray, but not the memory of the night or the manner of their dying.
[Unidentified Male:] When I go pass, I look at the tower, I have flashbacks. I know they are just pictures in my head, but I can actually see people behind those windows. I honestly don't it looks to me like it's only the outside bit. Oh, my god.
[Martin Moore-bick, Grenfell Tower Inquiry:] In terms of loss of life, the fire was the single greatest tragedy to befall this city since the end of the Second World War.
[Glass:] The sight of the building engulfed in flame is indelibly imprinted on the memories of those who experienced an event of unimaginable horror. Unimaginable horror, that is the truth of it, that the launch of the public inquiry, they stood in silent for a symbolic 72 seconds. 72 people died in the fire. Here was a room overflowing with the bereaved.
[Hisam Choucair, Witness, Grenfell Tower Inquiry:] I have to live with my family ripped apart for the rest of my life. I don't see this as a tragedy. I see it as an atrocity.
[Glass:] His solution care lost six relatives in the fire, his mother, sister, brother-in-law, and three nieces. For seven tearful days, the bereaved paid tribute to their loved ones. Some made commemorative videos. This artist had just shown her work at the Venice Biennale. It made it all the more heartbreaking. So many children, so young, so vibrantly full of life.
[Marcio Gomes, Father Of Logan Gomes:] He was so peaceful. So restful. He looked like he was just sleeping. As babies do.
[Glass:] At the very top of the building on the 23rd floor, Rania Ibrahim was trapped with her two young girls. In perhaps the most haunting of all the footage from the night, she used her mobile phone to live stream on Facebook. First we hear a woman's voice shouting down.
[Unidentified Female:] We're stuck on the 25th floor! Hello! There's too many people stuck upstairs! Hello!
[Glass:] And then we hear Rania herself. None of them got out.
[Unidentified Male:] This isn't a time for vitriol and hatred. It's a time to come together and hold one another, to hold in embrace. Because we know we're going to go forward.
[Glass:] The hope is for justice and a resolution of some kind. The inquiry has already heard about what experts have described as a litany of failures at Grenfell. Everything caught fire much faster than anyone could ever have imagined. Window frames, fire doors, and perhaps most disastrously of all, the exterior cladding installed just a few years ago. The small fire evidently started in a fridge freezer on the fourth floor, swept up the building in just 19 minutes. The other issue involves the fire brigade. Their initial advice to residents was to stay put in their flats, believing the fire could be contained.
[Unidentified Male:] I will not have peace until I have the truth. I want to know why I was physically stopped from leaving the flat at about 2:00 a.m. Why were we kept inside for so long? What was responsible for that decision? I want answer. If I had not listened to the fire brigade, my son would have been likely alive today.
[Glass:] The London fire brigade has described Grenfell as the most challenging incident in living memory. They say that the firemen on the ground were wholly unaware of fire safety defects in the fabric of the building, and even early on, advice to residents to stay or leave involved substantial risk either way. Grenfell tower will eventually be demolished, but never forgotten. Over 300 other British tower blocks are clad in similar material. The conclusions of the inquiry are keenly awaited. Grenfell will remain a synonym for the cruelest of human tragedies. We all watched helplessly on. How in this day and age could this happen? Why couldn't we save so many of those trapped on the upper floors? Nick Glass, CNN, at Grenfell tower in West London.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn:] Authorities in Las Vegas have recovered a shocking number of weapons from the home and hotel room of the killer, 23 guns in his hotel room, another 19 found at his home. Several thousands rounds of ammunition and explosives. How did he get them and how was he able to make them even more deadly? Joining us now is retired ATF special agent Sam Rabadi. Sam, thanks so much for being here. I want to play just a few seconds of the sound of the gunfire that people caught on their cell phones because I want you then to share your theory on what you're hearing. So, listen to this.
[Camerota:] OK. When experts have analyzed that, Sam, they hear 90 shots in 10 seconds. Clearly, that's an automatic weapon. Correct?
[Sam Rabadi, Retired Atf Special Agent:] Yes. From the sound on the video clip, I think most folks who are involved in this kind of line of work will be able to tell you that is absolutely fully automatic fire.
[Camerota:] OK. But authorities have not found an automatic weapon. I mean, the latest working theory is that he turned his regular rifle into an automatic weapon. And, look, I'm very skittish about having this conversation on TV because, obviously, we don't want to give people a how-to, but it sounds like it's pretty easy to do that. Can you explain if it's easy to convert a rifle into a semi-automatic into a fully automatic?
[Rabadi:] Sure. Well, there are a number of ways to do it. In terms of fully automatic fire, there are some accessories that are available on the market, such as a bump fire stock or a slide fire. That is an accessory that can be used to modify a weapon like an AR-15 to allow it to fire in rapid succession or automatic fire.
[Camerota:] OK, Sam, hold on a second. I just want to stop you right there.
[Rabadi:] Yes.
[Camerota:] So, automatic weapons are not legal, but the accessory to turn a semi automatic into an automatic is legal?
[Rabadi:] The accessory itself is legal and can be purchased online or from a manufacturer directly. It is perfectly legal by definition.
[Camerota:] Sam, Sam, how is that possible? How why would it ever be legal for regular civilians to be able to turn their rifle into an automatic weapon, when automatic weapons are banned?
[Rabadi:] Well, the automatic weapons themselves are banned. In this particular case, the accessory is nothing nothing about it makes it illegal in terms of what it does to the actual firearm, to modify, whether it's the trigger mechanism or some other feature like a drop- in that makes it fully automatic. What this particular accessory does, it uses the gun's own inertia to go or slide, if you will, back and forth to allow the firing of the weapon at a rapid succession.
[Camerota:] But, Sam, my question is, how is that logical? How is it logical? Clearly, we've accepted that automatic weapons are much more deadly. They cause the kind of carnage they saw in Las Vegas. So, why is this accessory legal?
[Rabadi:] Well, by federal law, this particular accessory is perfectly legal. The National Firearms Act clearly specifies what constitutes a fully automatic weapon or machine gun is more of the common term that is used. Probably back way back when, in 1934 when the original act was enacted.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rabadi:] And in the '80s when it was modified again, these types of accessories did not exist. And, you know, as technology has come through in the last number of years, I believe the original authors of the act probably did not envision this kind of accessory being used for modifications of this sort.
[Camerota:] Well, there you go. Listen, you've done this for a living. You devoted your life to making sure that weapons were safe and keeping them out of the hands of the wrong people. If Congress does nothing else, do you think that they should ban these accessories from being available online?
[Rabadi:] You know, that's a tough question, Alisyn, because there are a number of sportsmen who like to use these types of accessories to use their weapons so they can target practice. Throughout my career, I've been doing this 29 years. And our intent, whether it's federal law enforcement or state local partners, is always going after the illegal possessors of the guns. And what they can do. And it's not just your criminal out there, who can cause all sorts of problems on the street with this type of weapon. Unfortunately, and as perhaps as is the case in this situation, is somebody with some form of mental illness. You know
[Camerota:] Right. Look, of course, whatever was behind this guy, the idea that he could do this so easily, why would you be reluctant to say that these accessories shouldn't be in the hands of regular people?
[Rabadi:] No, there's no reluctance on my part. It's more as to the way the law is written. This is something that Congress would have to go back and take a look at. The law itself, the technical language of the law, and whether something like this type of accessory should be made available to the public.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rabadi:] You know, that's more for our folks up on the Hill, to be able to take a look at something like this. But, clearly, clearly, something like this is sort of a workaround the federal law as it relates to automatic weapons and something is probably should be taken a look at as we go forward.
[Camerota:] Sam Rabadi, thank you very much for coming on with your expertise in this. Fifty-nine people
[Rabadi:] Thank you, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] were killed, at least 527 injured. These are staggering numbers. We have a live report from the hospital with a majority of the wounded were taken. We will get an update next as we remember these victims of the attack.

[Lu Stout:] U.S. House lawmakers are just a few hours away from voting on two immigration bills. Those measures promise funds for Donald Trump's border wall, and provide a path to citizenship for people who are brought to the U.S. illegally as children by their parents, but they don't address what will happen to 2,300 children who have been separated from their families at the border. Hungary's government is refusing to soften its hard-line approach to immigration. On Wednesday, the country's parliament made it illegal to help undocumented migrants, including asylum seekers. The new law is expected to take effect in the next few weeks. The wife of Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been charged with fraud, and breach of trust. Prosecutors say Sara Netanyahu used state money to fraudulently pay for hundreds of meals at the prime minister's residence for three years that totaled $100,000. She has repeatedly denied wrongdoing in the past. Now, I want to follow up with the story that we have been following out of Sudan. Noura Hussein was just 13 years old when she was forced into marriage. Now, she is on death row for killing her abusive husband. It is a verdict that has caused outrage around the world, and sadly, it is a familiar tale in Sudan. Now, CNN's Nima Elbagir joins us me now live from London. Nima, you and your team traveled to Sudan to learn more about Noura and this pervasive crime of child marriage and gender-based violence. What did you uncover there?
[Nima Elbagir, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, we were able to obtain through sources Noura's own accounting of what happened to her. And I have to warn you, Kristie, it makes so pretty difficult listening. Take a look at this.
[Unidentified Female:] I had no idea how I got there. I was still carrying the knife. He told my parents that he wanted to marry me. The first time I even saw him was a week after he proposed a marriage to my uncle. I told him, I don't want to marry, I want to study. I was in the eighth grade. And they fooled me.
[Elbagir:] These are the words of Sudanese teenager Noura Hussein. For her safety, this is not her voice, but it is Noura's story in her own words.
[Unidentified Female:] They did all the usual rituals for the wedding. I was overwhelmed with anger. I didn't want this man. I sat in the hairdresser, contemplating suicide.
[Elbagir:] This is Noura on her wedding day. Noura is on death row. Convicted of the murder of her 35-year-old husband. Noura's case has caused controversy across Sudan. A controversy Sudan's government has refused to comment on. Noura's husband's family have withheld activists, threatened violence against her supporters. They also refused CNN's request for comment. The badly-kept secret here is more that more than a third of marriages in Sudan are child marriages, a number that is rising, aggravated by the financial realities in Sudan and a law that sets the legal age of marriage at 10. But some brave little girls are choosing to speak out. This is Emily's story and Emily's own voice. For her safety, we're not showing her face. Emily is seeking a divorce from her abusive husband. When it's all over, Emily wants to be a doctor. Beside her, her father wipes away tears. Unlike Noura, Emily's father is here and supported her. Her father promises only to think harder, the next time a proposal for marriage comes to his underage daughter. Nahid Jabrallah's office walls are adorned with art from rescued child victims. Centre Sima is one of the organizations fighting on Noura's behalf. It works to combat violence against women and forced marriage in spite of a regular diet of threats.
[Unidentified Female:] We arrived at the honeymoon flat. I locked myself inside one of the rooms. I refused to eat. I refused to leave my room. On the ninth day, his relatives came. His uncle told me to go to the bedroom. I said no. So he dragged me by my arm into the bedroom. All of them tore at my clothing. His uncle held me down by my legs. And each of the other two held down my arm. He stripped and had me while I wept and screamed. I was bleeding. I slept naked.
[Elbagir:] A familiar childhood ritual. Part and parcel of growing up. Women and girls across Sudan are fighting for the right to a childhood. Against laws that legalize child marriage, laws that don't recognize marital rape, laws that empower their abusers. Noura still had the knife in her hands when she fled to her parents' home. It was her own father who handed her to the police. And it's there that she learned that she killed her husband. She's now awaiting the results of her appeal. There is absolutely no sense, Kristie, how long that appeal could take. She is essentially watching and waiting.
[Lu Stout:] She is watching and waiting. And the world, we're anxiously awaiting how the judge is going to rule on Noura's fate. And as this is happening, what about sentiment inside Sudan? Are people inside Sudan standing with Noura? And against child marriage and gender-based violence?
[Elbagir:] What has been so extraordinary is that in spite of the Sudanese government's attempts to tamp down on any outpourings of support, in spite of their attempts to stop, our reporting was hampered extensively by state security agents, people were threatened for choosing to speak to us or even attempting to speak to us. But people still did. You saw the Sima Centre director there, willingly showing her face on camera. The only reason we know about Noura is because of brave men and women like Nahid Jabrallah. And they are continuing to stand by her. Actually, it was pretty extraordinary to see up close, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Yeah. May there be justice for Noura. May there be just the basic safety and security for girls and young women in Sudan. Nima, we thank you for your exclusive reporting. Thank you very much indeed and take care. You're watching "News Stream." We will be right back.

[Ashleigh Banfield, Host:] Breaking news tonight, a beautiful woman, a grisly death, exclusive details about that Texas realtor who vanished before a hurricane, where she was murdered and where the killer dumped her body.
[Unidentified Male:] Crystal`s body was discovered by the Chambers County sheriff`s detectives and Texas Rangers in a wooded area.
[Banfield:] Crystal McDowell, strangled the day she disappeared, as police reveal it was the suspect who took them to her body.
[Unidentified Male:] We`ve been able to charge who caused the disappearance.
[Banfield:] A full confession from Crystal`s ex-husband as haunting video of her birthday skydive comes to light.
[Unidentified Male:] Steve, your idea? So she gets hurt, I`m blaming you, all right, buddy?
[Crystal Mcdowell:] He has a really good life insurance policy.
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, cool. Perfect.
[Banfield:] Divorced in June and dead by summer`s end, the sheriff shares exclusive details tonight. Good evening, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. This is PRIMETIME JUSTICE as Tropical Storm Irma continues to pound northern Florida and grind its way up into Georgia and South Carolina. Tonight, we`ve got breaking news on a mystery that we`ve been following since Hurricane Harvey flooded Texas. And that is what happened to Crystal McDowell, the beautiful realtor who disappeared before the rain and the floods inundated Houston. The mother of two she disappeared on Friday, August 25th, and for the next two weeks, her family and her friends desperately searched for her until they stopped searching for her. Their only clues had been a videotape of Crystal leaving her boyfriend`s apartment the morning that she vanished. She was on her way to her ex-husband`s house to pick up her two kids, and until now, we assumed she didn`t make it because her beautiful black Mercedes was found in a flooded Motel 6 parking lot with the keys still in it, doors unlocked. Sadly, just this last Saturday afternoon, they found Crystal`s body.
[Unidentified Male:] Today at 2:45 PM, Crystal`s body was discovered by the Chambers County sheriff`s detectives and Texas Rangers in a wooded area of west Chambers County. This case was about trying to bring Crystal McDowell home, and we`ve made that happen and we`ve been able to charge who can caused the disappearance.
[Banfield:] It didn`t take long before Crystal`s ex-husband, Steve McDowell, was arrested, photographed like this and then charged with murder. And what police say happened is chilling. They say McDowell admits that Crystal, indeed, did make it to his home that morning, but that he strangled her in that home not long after she arrived, with the kids still in the home. Later, in the middle of the night, he took her body and dumped it deep into the woods, according to officials, off of Interstate 10, not far from the home where those kids were. And last Saturday, we`re told that he tearfully led investigators right to the area where he dumped the body of the mother of his two kids and that he offered a full confession. Sheriff Brian Hawthorne is with the Chambers County sheriff`s office. He joins me live right now from Texas. Sheriff, this is not the news that we were hoping to hear. You have been on this case from the very beginning. I guess the first question I have is, how did you get this full confession?
[Brian Hawthorne, Chambers County Sheriff:] Ashleigh, the confession, you know, is a combination of a lot of detective work and a lot of interviews. So you know, as you gather information and you start building your cases and you look at your persons of interest, you tailor your interviews to each individual. And things started coming around for the detectives and the Rangers to start asking a lot more questions of Steve McDowell.
[Banfield:] So can you and I`m going to press you. I understand you`re still now headed towards a murder case with this man, so I get it if you can`t answer, but I`m going to go anyway. Can you give me the answer to the mystery of how her Mercedes ended up at that Motel 6, half submerged in water?
[Hawthorne:] Well, I can tell you that he drove it there and then parked it. And it`s obvious that it was in the hopes that it would be stolen, like I had told you when we found it. And it probably would have been just due to the nature of that intersection of a Motel 6 and everything that takes place there off interstate 10. But because of Hurricane Harvey and the floodwaters, nobody would have been able to drive it out of the parking lot.
[Banfield:] Was this timed, then? Do you think it was a coincidence that the hurricane was happening as this crime happened, or was this planned so that there would be this great cover of being able to dump a car in an area where it might get stolen, might get flooded?
[Hawthorne:] No, I think it`s completely coincidental because I think he would have probably parked it somewhere else had he realized that the flood waters of Cedar Bayou and essentially receiving 50 inches of rain was going to flood the entire hotel and that entire part of town. So I think it was coincidental.
[Banfield:] So if he dropped that car at Motel 6 he lived about, I don`t know, two-and-a-half, three miles away. Did he have another vehicle there?
[Hawthorne:] That`s part of our investigation right now and I really it`s not in my best interests to talk about that aspect of the investigation.
[Banfield:] So let`s get to that morning when Crystal had sent text messages sort of en route to Steve`s house. We didn`t think that she made it. And you definitely do know that she made it. Can you take me to the parts of the investigation you can reveal, when she got there what happened? And what else do you know about what happened in that house with those kids there?
[Hawthorne:] Well, about the only thing that I can say is that she did make it. It appears that the line of text messaging it`s not fully clear to us, but we do know that she did get there. He told us that she did get there and that at some point in her encounter with him that morning is when he strangulated her. And we have what we have today.
[Banfield:] So ultimately, if she died in that house, she eventually was dumped in the woods. Did he put her body in that Mercedes and then make that trip with her in the Mercedes? Like, give me sort of the connect the dots between her dying in the house and ending up in the woods.
[Hawthorne:] Well, a lot of that is still part of the investigation. It is still being documented. But it is our belief that after, you know, the strangulation and the death, he then put her in a car. And you know, we`re still documenting exactly which vehicle it is. But it`s my belief it is the Mercedes. And then drove her to this kind of a it`s not I wouldn`t say deserted, but it is not a frequented area by the public, and had that ability and he did this in the middle of the night, early, early in the morning, where there would not have been any type of traffic, and essentially ditched the body deep into the woods, where it was very difficult to find.
[Banfield:] So if I`m doing my math right, Crystal leaves her boyfriend, Paul`s, house at around 7:00 in the morning on Friday morning. On her way, about 10, 15 minutes away by driving, she would have arrived at Steve`s house, her ex-husband, where the two kids were. She was supposed to pick them up. If she died that morning, but she wasn`t dumped until that night and deep into the night, like even into Saturday morning, literally in the middle of the night, was her body in the trunk of that car while he was looking after the kids all that Friday?
[Hawthorne:] Well, that is our belief, but a lot of that is still part of the investigation and the detectives are still working on that.
[Banfield:] Understand. Can I go a little further and push you? Would he have I mean, if he now is the only parent alive of those two children and is caring for them that Friday, presumably, since they were in the house at the time of the strangulation, they would still be in the house at the time of the dump, the body being dumped. Do we know if they were taken in the car while that happened, or were they left at the house? Do we have any idea where they were at that time?
[Hawthorne:] We believe they were left at the house, and he just took advantage of an opportunity in which it was early in the morning and the children were presumably asleep.
[Banfield:] Was Steve using Crystal`s phone at that time to fabricate text messages, or was he sending text messages after she was dead, suggesting, Just come pick up the kids, and will you be here at any time soon? I`m paraphrasing, but effectively suggesting she was running late. Was that him covering, or do we know if she was already dead by then?
[Hawthorne:] That`s parts of the investigation that we are keeping close. So I would rather not comment on that right now.
[Banfield:] I respect that. Obviously, through and I know that, you know, video played a really big role. Surveillance video played a really big role, great policing. Obviously, you`re in the middle of, literally, a storm and a hurricane and the aftermath, and you`re still able to within two weeks, you know, bring this case to fruition. I think that says a lot about your men and women and your department and you, as their leader, video, interviews, witnesses all comprising sort of the narrative for you. When you felt like you had your guy and he then buckled, he took you to the spot where he dumped her. Is that correct?
[Hawthorne:] He took us to the area. That is correct.
[Banfield:] Can you tell me what I just I`m trying to, you know, imagine what it would be like to be a fly on the wall of that cruiser as it`s heading to that location and he is directing you. What was this like?
[Hawthorne:] Well, you know, he was from everything that I have watched and observed and saw all of on Saturday when that took place, he was extremely emotional. And you know, I like a lot of people that commit these kind of crimes, they later regret that they did. And I think that`s probably the case with Steve McDowell. But we can`t change the actions and the decisions that he chose to do on that Friday morning. So you know, from a law enforcement perspective, I try not to take too much emotion and remorse. I`ve got to act on what the law is and what the expectations of the Constitution are. So I don`t want to put too many feelings in people`s head. Bottom line is he committed the murder, and that`s what we`re dealing with.
[Banfield:] So I can only imagine the personality in the pictures that we`re running right now, but his mugshot is almost illegible. I cannot see what is in those eyes. I cannot see what is in that face, given what you`re telling me. And I can only wonder, did he look like this? Was he despondent, flat affect? Was he devastated? Was he emotional? Was he weeping when he was trying to walk you literally into the woods to find that body?
[Hawthorne:] All of the above. You just you`ve named him all in one sentence.
[Banfield:] It`s it`s hard to fathom. How was this confession? Was it one big verbal logorrhea? Was it a number of different interviews? Was it days upon days, hours upon hours? Like, how did you get all of this information out of him?
[Hawthorne:] Well, the you know, I had told you over the last couple of days that I had asked the Texas Rangers to come in and assist us. And they sent two of the truly finest interviewers probably in the area, or especially in the state of Texas, that you know, between all the information that the detectives and the Rangers had put together, they pretty well would craft the questions. And I just can`t tell you how much I appreciate the two Texas Rangers that worked so hard on this case with us. And it`s just a matter of education and knowing how to ask the right questions. And Steve was very forthcoming. I`ve told you all along he always cooperated with us. We never never he didn`t always tell us the truth, but he always cooperated with us.
[Banfield:] I have one more question about the car at the Motel 6 now that, you know, law enforcement believes he was the one who took it there and who backed it into that spot. Is there truth to the fact that he returned several hours later to check out the handiwork, to see if maybe someone had taken the car?
[Hawthorne:] Yes. We identified that he did return back to the scene, which is a pretty common thing in law enforcement. We quite often see people come back to see their handiwork, or to see whether their plan materialized. And in this case, he returned to see if his plan had materialized, and it had not. So that is part of our case.
[Banfield:] Sheriff, I am not even a fraction into the list of questions I have for you. Can you stay with me? I have so much more I want to ask.
[Hawthorne:] I will.
[Banfield:] OK. Sheriff Hawthorne`s going to stay with me as we continue to just unravel this unbelievable story that, you know, heretofore was a mystery. It is not now. But sad it is because when Crystal disappeared on August 25th, it was her uncle, Jeff Walters, who initially sounded the alarm about Steve McDowell, her ex-husband.
[Jeff Walters, Crystal`s Uncle:] She did not walk away without contacting anyone and just disappear. I know she didn`t. I know her husband has threatened her before and told her that she would never go out of their house. She would never leave him.

[Ward:] In southern California, 20,000 people have all received the same urgent message, get out of your homes as soon as you can. 15 major fires are burning across the state, and we've now learned this one, the holy fire, may have been started deliberately. Authorities have now charged this man with arson and other counts. The charges could carry a life sentence. Nick Watt is in Lake Elsinore, southeast of Los Angeles, one of the communities under the threat. Nick, what is the latest?
[Nick Watt, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Clarissa, I'm right on the edge of Lake Elsinore, a town of 60,000 people. If you can see what's happening behind me the red on the hillside is flame retardant being dropped from the air to stop the flames reaching the northern part of this town, reaching the subdivision. But the flame retardant, they're worried it's not holding. You can see about 20 firefighters going up there just to make sure that that line holds. As you mentioned, this fire they think was started deliberately. A man is under arrest, facing perhaps life imprisonment if found guilty. He is expected to appear in court tomorrow. Clarissa?
[Ward:] And Nick, I mean, we see these terrible wildfires every year in California, but why are these ones different or are they different?
[Watt:] Well, it is getting worse. The statistics do not lie. Right now, between 13 and 14,000 firefighters fighting more than a dozen wildfires in California alone. Across the U.S. more than 100 large wildfires, 650,000 hectares burned, and the governor of California jerry brown is saying explicitly this is linked to climate change and says listen, California, wasn't designed for 40 million people to live here. This is really the problem, where humanhabitation meet the wild and the more people that move to California, the more hazards are built, the more we will see this. Right now, we have the biggest fire in California's history burning right now up in the north of the state. That's burnt an area about the size of Los Angeles, and we also have one of the most destructive fires the state has ever seen, the Carr fire, which has burned over 1,000 homes and we just heard claimed its eighth life. Another firefighter who was fighting that fire died. We have been told. That's three firefighters and four civilians killed in that fire. Right here at this fire, no fatalities so far. They're trying to contain it at under 10,000 acres. This is the job that they're facing. This is what they're having to do in near 40-degree temperatures. Clarissa?
[Ward:] Oh, my gosh. Nick Watt, thank you so much. Four days after the horrendous earthquake in Indonesia a major aftershock has terrified residents on the island of Lombok. Take a look at these alarming images recorded just as the aftershock hit. You can imagine the sheer terror. More than 250 people were killed in Sunday's disaster. Aide workers say some are so traumatized they're afraid to be indoors anymore. To the problem of modern day slavery right here in the UK. The government is reporting a record number of suspects were charged in slavery cases over the past year. These cases involved men, women and children who are exploited for sex, for drug running or for cheap labor. They can be British born or trafficked from abroad. One anti-trafficking group is working to raise awareness in the schools.
[Unidentified Female:] Where the kids get involved. Different scenarios that leads to trafficking and how people are tracked into it. I have their passport. What does that mean? Yes. They can't leave the country. They can't leave the country or they can't leave me. And then from there we do our five things of slavery. These are the signs to keep you safe. Also, the people around you.
[Ward:] CNN is committed to shining a light on modern day slavery with our freedom projects. Erin McLaughlin has been delving into this report and joins me now. A lot more people being charged, but not necessarily convicted. Tell us what you learned about this report.
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. Some progress has been made in the fight against modern day slavery and human trafficking, but it's clear from this report much more work needs to be done. As you mentioned there, the number of people charged has increased compared to last year by some 27 percent. However, the number convicted has actually flatlined with 185 convictions this year, compared to 181 convictions last year. More are being charged, but the number in terms of convictions not keeping up pace.
[Ward:] Why is that?
[Mclaughlin:] There are a number of reasons for that cited in this report. The complexity of the cases coming before the courts, the cases are becoming much more complex. For example, the report cites the statistic it takes on average of three years to pro cute just one of these cases. That is double the time it took in 2015. These cases involve many countries, many perpetrators or suspects as well as witnesses, victims, multiple languages as well. I was speaking to some representatives of NGOs here in the U.K. that work to address this problem and they, you know, they sympathize and understand this is a difficult task. One representative telling me he was aware, for example, in one court case WhatsApp messages introduced as evidence that included eight languages. A complex problem the authorities are dealing with but at the same time more law enforcement resources needs to be dedicated to this problem. That's what we're hearing from these NGOs. There have been government cutbacks in this area when British government is vowing to take the global lead on this issue.
[Ward:] Did you get a sense, because obviously it touches on different kinds of trafficking, did you get a sense of what the biggest problem is in terms of which form of trafficking here in the UK?
[Mclaughlin:] You know, it's interesting, according to this report they're still seeing a number of cases of sexual exploitation, women being trafficked into the United Kingdom for that reason, but they're also seeing an uptick in the number of men, vulnerable men, trafficked into the United Kingdom and forced to work. One case in particular that was cited was a Slovakian family trafficked a number of individuals from the Czech Republic as well as Slovakia, young men, many had mental illness, forced to work in appalling conditions. There was a conviction in that case this year. Seven defendants convicted, sentenced to 40 years in prison. Again, that's great from the perspective of the fight against human trafficking, but what NGOs are saying we need more convictions like that happen.
[Ward:] Basically, what you're looking at presumably you would need to invest so much more money and so much more manpower into this. Are we expecting the government to respond in some way to the report or recommendations to be made to how to improve the conviction rate?
[Mclaughlin:] It is such a complicated problem and what was clear from this report is that they're working on it and taking Theresa May's mandate, asking for the prosecution service here in the United Kingdom to take the lead on this and push for these convictions. Again, incredibly complex problem that they're dealing with. One thing, another thing that NGOs say that could be done, that needs to be done, and hopefully we'll see more movement in this area from the government going forward in the future is support for the victims. In many cases a victim of human trafficking will be left alone, sometimes even deported according to these NGOs and it's difficult to convict when the victim is not even if the country to testify.
[Ward:] OK. Erin McLaughlin, thank you for joining us. Few American companies will be watching Donald Trump's escalating trade wars more closely than Boeing. The aviation giant is America's largest exporter and is worried about the impact of tariffs on its business. Well, our very own Richard Quest has managed to score a spot inside Boeing's massive Dreamliner factory on the U.S. west coast where he will be speaking exclusively with the company's CEO next hour. Richard, what can we expect to hear?
[Richard Quest, Cnn Anchor, Quest Means Business:] Well, we can expect, of course, besides fiesta and an orgy of planes and looking at pictures of planes, which is always worth doing, is some questioning of Dennis Muilenburg to find out where Boeing stands on the issue of trade, tariffs, the risk for the company in relation to China as the U.S. gets harder and difficult with China, the European Union, European subsidies, Brexit, all these issues swirl around Boeing. Of course, just even today, Clarissa, the Spaceforce announced by the U.S. government, that, of course, is going to be part of what Boeing will be interested in. Boeing makes huge money out of defense and space. Put it all together, Clarissa, and he will give us a good insight into how one of America's biggest and most important companies and a true global giant is doing business. One thought, Clarissa, think about the amount of travel that you do and think about the amount of travel that you've done on these sort of planes, Dreamliners, 747s, 777s and now we're going to find out how they are made.
[Ward:] Oh, wow. We will certainly be tuning in for that and looking forward to it. Thank you for joining us. Still to come tonight, why the city of New York is hitting the brakes on Uber and other ride hailing services.

[Camerota:] Well, the thought of Russia continues to grip the Trump administration. The White House failed to disclose a second meeting that President Trump had with Russian President Vladimir Putin without any U.S. aides or U.S. officials or any record of what these two men discussed. Joining us now is CNN national security commentator and former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers. He was the chair of the House Intelligence Committee. Good morning, Mike.
[Mike Rogers, Cnn National Security Commentator:] Good morning. How are you guys?
[Camerota:] We're doing well. Help us understand, should President Trump have had this meeting? It was in public at the G-20. It was a dinner hosted by Angela Merkel. But there was no U.S. translator. The Russian translator did it in between President Putin and Trump. So, therefore, no official document for the U.S. side of what they discussed in this reportedly hour meeting.
[Rogers:] Yes, well, it's certainly unconventional. Now, unconventional doesn't mean it's wrong or criminal or anything like that. The president can do this if he wants. I you know, my caution to the president would be, I wouldn't go into this meeting lightly. A, you've got a translator that is not American, doesn't have American loyalties or loyalties to the president, number one. And, number two, you want to have some record of any follow-up that may come out of this conversation or things that the, you know, President Putin might say that might be valuable to decisions that the United States, either government or maybe even intelligence services may want to look into later. All of that got it was a missed opportunity to me. And then to do it when with all of the scrutiny and all of this everybody running around looking for any Russian connection at all, just seems like a poor choice to me.
[Cuomo:] Well, you don't got to look too far, though, right? I mean in the context of the unknown and what's being learned about this Don Jr. meeting, which has just been, you know, a set of nondisclosure after nondisclosure. Now we learned that someone else who was at this Don Jr. meeting, which wasn't disclosed, is a guy that's known pretty well to you guys in the intel community. Former Senator Carl Levin says, oh, that eighth guy who was at that party, at that meeting, oh, we looked at him. He started like 2,000 shell corporations for Russians, moved over a billion dollars. Why were these people seeking out Donald Jr.? And why would so many top members of his campaign meet with those kinds of people, Mike?
[Rogers:] Yes, and I'm not sure that they properly vetted them before they walked in the meeting. But there should have been red flags. I think that's pretty well established. There should have been red flags even at the e-mail that said, hey, a foreign government wants to provide information. It didn't say foreign individual or foreign company, it said a foreign government. You know, that raises to a different standard. That should have been the first flag that went off and said, whoa, maybe that's that's probably not something we should engage in. But once it happened
[Cuomo:] The president says all you guys would have taken that meeting.
[Rogers:] Well, you can you should not normalize any notion that if any foreign government I don't care if it's an ally foreign government or an adversarial government wants to provide you information specifically to help you do x, it's it is it's time that you stop for a minute and let that flag go up and say, maybe I need to talk to the FBI and see if all this is copasetic. And so we should never normalize a foreign government engaging in providing information. And, you know, an allied government, maybe it could be OK. But I'm telling you, when you have an adversarial relationship with a nation that has a hostile intelligent service, which Russia does, then you need to be extremely cautious. And some of the folks had done business in Ukraine and other places should have known that before they walked into the meeting. I will tell you where investigators are going, though, in my estimation, as a former FBI guy. They're not necessarily saying it was criminal to do the meeting. It was not. They were certainly not out of bounds to take the meeting. But what happened next? That's going to be the next question. And I'm going to guess that that's where the special counsel is going to find out, did they suggest a follow-up meeting, the Russians who were in the room? Did they say, hey, you need to meet this other American that we know and he can have further discussions on certain activities? Because what this likely was is somebody in that room was spotting and assessing everybody in that room to see, is that somebody that we might be able to turn? Might be able to get information out of? Even unwittingly. You know, maybe I can snooker somebody into giving us information that might be valuable to Russian intelligence services. There's no when you look at this collection of individuals, all of their activities, I'm talking about the Russians now, I'm sure that's what the special counsel is looking at. Were the Russians making this kind of an active measure to spot and assess somebody to do something to recruit somebody later on. I imagine that they're all of that is fair game for the special counsel.
[Camerota:] Well, it will be very interesting to hear what Don Jr. and Paul Manafort have to say in an open hearing to Congress. We understand that Robert Mueller has given the green light or said that he's OK with it being an open hearing. So that will be fascinating. Let's talk about season two of "Declassified," your show on
[Cnn. Rogers:] Yes.
[Camerota:] The season premier is this Saturday. What do we need to know about it?
[Rogers:] It's going to be exciting. I'll tell you, the first episode I'd like to tell you I was precedent in all of this, is about Russian illegals coming who came to the United States, took on American sounding names and soul purpose was to recruit Americans, spy on the United States and infiltrate government agencies to steal secrets of the United States. And it's really a fascinating it's just like out of a thriller. You're going to love it. And here's the cool part, it could be a spy next door and you don't know it. And that's what's neat about this first episode. It kind of lays out the tactics and techniques of what the Russians are still up to and were up to when this big case broke by the
[Fbi. Cuomo:] Wow, so you checked three boxes there, American paranoia of the unknown in general, Russia, and fear of immigration.
[Camerota:] And it's timely.
[Rogers:] I'm not sure it's all of that, but it is a it's if you like a good spy story, this is a great spy story. You're going to love it. Even if you're saying, I don't know, I can't take any more Russia stuff, this is really about a
[Cuomo:] Never say that.
[Rogers:] Yes. It's well, this is really about Russian spy tactics and techniques and the agents that we're able to catch, a pretty sophisticated Russian operation happening on U.S. soil.
[Camerota:] Yes. Oh, can't wait to watch it.
[Rogers:] Yes, it's going to be great.
[Camerota:] Be sure to catch Mike Rogers, CNN series "Declassified: Untold Stories of American Spies," and it returns on Saturday, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on
[Cnn. Cuomo:] All right, CNN "NEWSROOM" with Poppy Harlow and John Berman is going to pick up right after the break. Stay with CNN.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] What the president has said doesn't reflect poorly on Haiti. It reflects poorly on him, on his intellect, on his experience or lack of it, and on what is in his heart. Thanks very much for watching. Time to hand it over to Chris Cuomo for "Cuomo Prime Time", Chris.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] All right, Anderson. Well said. Appreciate it. We have a lot to get after tonight. Martin Luther King the III has a message for the president of the United States. Congressman Cedric Richmond, the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus is on. We're going to ask whether he plans to boycott the State of the Union. I'm Chris Cuomo. Welcome to "Prime Time". It has been 50 years since Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated, but his legacy, challenging this nation to live up to its founding ideal that all men are created equal, well, that lives on. Let's be honest, though. Our country is grappling with race and racism still, fueled by a president well known for making divisive statements. President Trump himself declared this MLK Day a day of service, but he spent it on the golf course, taking time out to attack the Democratic senator who exposed the president's s-hole comment, where he expressed a preference for people from Norway over immigrants from Africa and Central and South America. It is an unfortunate think that on Martin Luther King weekend, the president of the United States felt the need to repeat something that he says all too often.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] No, I'm not a racist. I am the least racist person you have ever interviewed. That I can tell you. No, I am the least racist person that you've ever met. Just so you know, I am the least racist person, the least racist person that you've ever seen. I am the least racist person that you have ever met. I am the least racist person.
[Cuomo:] Now, many of you see this as a sad commentary that Trump doth protest too much. But maybe this is exactly the moment we need to act on Dr. King's legacy. After all, underneath all of this soaring imagery and oratory, the imploring of the collective spirit, King's enduring gift is truth. He was speaking the truth, fighting for truth, equality, liberty, justice. All of these are about truth, and that's where we are today, demanding the truth and accountability when truth is abused. And that takes us to a boiling controversy at the White House and our great debate. We have Former Obama Special Adviser, Van Jones with us, along with Former Trump Campaign Strategist David Urban. Gentlemen, thank you for joining us.
[David Urban, Former Trump Campaign Strategist:] Thanks for having me, Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right, so, Van, the question is as direct as it is loaded. Do you believe that this was the straw that broke the camel's back and that you can now say that the president is a racist?
[Van Jones, Cnn Political Commentator:] You know, unfortunately I think you can. I think you have to. I had actually hoped that Trump was a racial opportunist, which is not the same as a racist. Somebody who knows better but he's using racial antagonisms. He's taking the opportunity to get the white people mad at the black people just to help himself but deep in his heart he knew better. The problem you have now with this, he's not in front of reality, he's not getting an ad in "The New York Times". He's in a private meeting, and what he said is a textbook definition of racism. Let me tell you why I say that. If he had said, "I don't want anybody coming here who's not an engineer or a doctor. I don't care if they come from Nigeria or Norway, but send me the engineers." That's elitist but it's not racist. That's not wt he said. What he said was take out the curse word. What he said was, "I don't want people coming from Nigeria no matter what their qualifications are. I want people coming from Norway no matter what their qualifications are." That is the definition of racism. Now, the problem you have now is people will then come out and try to re-change what he said. But when you put a whole group of people in one category, negative or positive,
[Urban:] Sure.
[Jones:] that's a textbook definition of racism. That's what he did. That's what he did.
[Cuomo:] Mr. Urban.
[Urban:] Van, you know, I have much more respect for you than what you just what you said. I know you don't believe that in your heart of hearts, Van.
[Jones:] I do!
[Urban:] Van, listen, you weren't in the room. You didn't hear what the guy said. What I believe the president was talking about and alluding to in a private meeting, right after meeting with the prime minister of Norway, was that he was in favor of skills-based immigration. Chris, this morning
[Jones:] That's not what he said.
[Urban:] Van, were you there? I wasn't there. You weren't there. And Chris wasn't there. This morning, Chris, when I watched your interview with the Haitian Ambassador to the United States, I thought it was very poignant. You asked him a lot of questions about the program the president was specifically talking about, TPS, and you asked him, look, if your country is great, why do you need TPS still? And what was his response, Chris? Do you remember from this morning?
[Cuomo:] Of course I do. What's your point?
[Urban:] So what was his responsibility?
[Cuomo:] His response was they need more time. another 18 months.
[Urban:] Right, the 18-month program, which was put in place how many years ago? Seven years ago. They still need more time. The Haitian people are great, strong, proud people. They're fabulously resilient. But the Haitian government has a lot to be desired. I don't think the president is condemning
[Jones:] What does this have to do with an individual who wants to come to the United States being lumped into a category, a negative category because of the country he or she is from, which is what the president did?
[Urban:] Van, listen, I believe the president misspoke. I believe the president was making gross generalizations.
[Cuomo:] Hold on. Hold on. Let's do this step by step. What do you mean that you think the president misspoke?
[Urban:] I think the president was talking about an immigration system that should be based upon skills, skills-based immigration.
[Cuomo:] But he didn't say anything like that.
[Urban:] So, Chris, who did he meet with immediately, a day before?
[Cuomo:] The prime minister of Norway.
[Urban:] Right.
[Cuomo:] How does that make it OK? If he had met with the
[Urban:] It doesn't make OK, Chris. Chris, I'm not saying it's
[Ok -- Cuomo:] I'm just saying if he had met with, you know, somebody who was the head of a government in South America, you think
[Urban:] What if he had said prime minister
[Cuomo:] that country? I don't think so.
[Urban:] Chris, what if he had said let's have more immigrants from India. He's a huge fan of President Modi and the Indian people. Would we have this debate right now? Would we have this debate right now?
[Jones:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] Van?
[Jones:] Yes. Let me tell you why. First of all, just to correct the record because sometimes we act like these stereotypes are real, but he was just rude about them. Just to be clear, 10 percent of white Americans have advances degrees in the United States. God bless them. Twenty five percent of Nigerians have advanced degrees.
[Urban:] Great.
[Jones:] hold on. Let me finish. Thirty percent of Americans of all colors have college degrees. Forty three percent of African immigrants have college degrees. In other words
[Urban:] We should be admitting on a merit-based system, that we should be admitting more of those folks.
[Cuomo:] Listen, this is a legitimate argument to make, but here's the problem, fellas, and we've been dealing with this so it's good to know just be able to cut through all of it. This is not about s-hole or s- house, OK? It's semantics, OK? He used an ugly word. I say that he used an ugly word because that is what's in his head and his heart when he discusses these things. That's my take on it, but it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter because what he definitely did was he drew a preference between people from Central and South America and Africa and Norway. That's what he did. He wasn't talking about merits. He didn't talk about skills. He was talking about brown people and white people.
[Urban:] He was talking about countries which are in the TPS program and countries that weren't, Chris. Is that a fact?
[Cuomo:] Look, I want to say that you're right. You had Lowry this morning saying, well, he was talking about the lottery system. He wasn't talking about TPS. I believe that's wrong. I believe contextually he had been put on the table a deal to help people who need TPS extension as we heard from the ambassador of Haiti this morning, they need help. They're here for a reason. That's what he was talking about. And he said, why do we need so many of these people? Why don't we have more people from Norway? How do you take that as a non-racist situation? Explain it to me, Mr. Urban.
[Urban:] No. Chris, you can call me David. You don't have to call me Mr. Urban.
[Cuomo:] difference. I'm naturally deferential.
[Urban:] OK, that's fine. You know, again, I think the president was saying, listen, to Van's point, let's take folks from Nigeria. The president didn't lump in Nigeria with the group. We're talking about TPS countries.
[Cuomo:] Is it the whole continent. Van, go ahead.
[Jones:] David, so here's the deal. If the president said something I disagree with, but he could have said this. I only want engineers. I only want doctors.
[Urban:] Sure.
[Jones:] I want them from Nigeria. I want them from Norway. I want them from El Salvador. You sent me the engineers and the doctors, leave the rest of them out, that's not racist. It's elitist. I disagree with it. I'll fight. You don't have to have a college degree to be worthy. You don't have to be rich to be worthy. I'll fight you on it. But it's elitist. The problem is that's not what he said. That's what you're saying.
[Urban:] You and I weren't in the room. We're relying on Senator Durbin who relayed a comment which I think was, you know, I'm not quite certain why he felt compelled to come out of a negotiation to report to the world
[Jones:] But here's the Rubicon that we have crossed. We've crossed the Rubicon now where even people like myself, I've really tried not to say he's racist. I've said he's racially intolerant. I said that
[Urban:] I know and
[I -- Jones:] But at this point you now have crossed the Rubicon where in the privacy of a private meeting, he left the impression with a bunch of people that he was forget the curse word that he was putting a whole group of people, a whole continent in a negative light. That is if that is not racist, then the word has no more meaning. And now you have that along with all the other examples. I don't see how anybody at this point can escape the conclusion regretfully that this man seems to have a racist disposition, and it's sad to say it. I've given him every break you can. But on this one, you can't give the break, man. You just can't.
[Urban:] Well, you know, it's unfortunate you feel that way, Van. I mean, I campaigned with the president in north Philadelphia. We fought for every vote in Pennsylvania, Van. We went after black votes. We went after Latino votes. We went after every vote possible.
[Jones:] I gave you credit for that. I gave you credit for that.
[Urban:] Listen, we went to north Philly on the Friday before Labor Day, and there were more protesters in the street, right? I mean unfortunately the Clinton campaign came out and said we weren't trying to be sincere about our outreach.
[Jones:] David, let me ask you a question. What could someone say that is a racist statement in your point of view, that this president hasn't said or said something like? I mean, just help me understand what is your definition for a racist statement.
[Urban:] Van, I think again, I agree with you. Listen, I'm not on trial here. I agree with you that what the president said was not sensitive. I agree with you it was inartful. I know this president not to be racist, and I'm telling you that the guy fought for every vote in Pennsylvania. He didn't care if you were Latino, if you were a minority of any color.
[Jones:] Let me tell you
[Urban:] by casting your vote.
[Jones:] I gave you guys credit for that, and I was warning people the whole time you guys were doing that. But here's where I think we've got to look in the mirror
[Urban:] So how can you say somebody who sits and campaigns and wants to lift
[Jones:] Because votes are votes.
[Urban:] Listen, he wants to lift all people out of poverty into a better lifestyle. How can you say that guy's a racist?
[Jones:] David, here's the deal. People want the votes that they want, but the thing is you've got to look at the totality. Here's my concern now for the Republican Party, people like yourself and other people I respect who continue to try to figure out a way to defend this stuff. I think it's more important to tell him, look, you've got to change. I'm going to tell you one thing for sure, for sure. If you look the at the entire of Haiti and all you see are people you don't want in the United States, you are putting an entire category of people in a negative light. That is the definition of racism. And we can have the argument about immigration, skills based versus TPS. We can have that argument. I will argue to say it's elitist to say you only want the people with college degrees because you wouldn't have the Kennedy's here if you had that standard. You wouldn't have the Cuomos here if you had that standard. But it's not racist. That's not an argument about racism. That's argument about elitist versus exclusivity.
[Urban:] But unfortunately, Chris, let me make this one point quickly. Unfortunately listen, this is a point that's made against every Republican president. President Bush 41
[Cuomo:] Not like this.
[Urban:] Listen, Chris, hear me out.
[Cuomo:] Go ahead.
[Urban:] Willie Horton ad, terrible, racism. President 43, Katrina, terrible. John McCain voted against MLK Day, terrible, racist. I mean, every Republican, it's trotted out and beaten.
[Cuomo:] But you have to take each one on their face. Look, let's just look at what we're dealing with right now, OK? You and others are arguing, hey, we weren't there. Listen, we know what was said from Durbin. We know how Graham communicated it. We know what he said to Tim Scott before this was even really out there. Jeff Flake, same thing. What happens when we went to the White House? Raj Shaw, what was his statement? No pushback on the language, OK? And why do I say his name slowly like that? Because another part of the distraction here is I forgot Raj's last name this morning. I apologize for that. And then there wound up being a counter-narrative. Well, that makes you racist. See, but, Dave, it's not helpful.
[Urban:] I'm not saying that, Chris. Listen
[Cuomo:] I know you're not saying, but it's being said. It's being said. So instead of having this conversation that you want to have, and even Lowry wanted to have this morning, which is should we do merit based, not look at the countries anymore, has the time for unskilled labor passed? All valid arguments to have. But instead you're saying hold on, Dave. But instead this is what's being said. You guys are lying. He didn't use that word.
[Urban:] I'm not saying that.
[Cuomo:] And now you got Senator Cotton and Senator Perdue, who by mistake, I called Will this morning instead of Dave. I wonder if that means I'm anti-white. But you have those two guys saying we never heard it. So now it's about fake news again. Now it's about a false narrative instead of this real conversation you say you want to have.
[Urban:] I'm not alleging it's fake news. I'm just saying what Van makes a very specific, very detailed narrative, and he wasn't there. I'm saying you can't simply do that. You can't.
[Cuomo:] But, Dave, what was the response from the White House? It was never said. They're using the wrong word. Durbin is a liar.
[Urban:] Am I saying, that Chris? I'm not saying that.
[Cuomo:] But do you condone what it is doing.
[Urban:] Do I condone what?
[Cuomo:] What's coming out of the White House in terms of this counter- narrative. They never pushed back. A White House staffer said that they liked the message. They thought the base would go with it. Now everybody is lying.
[Urban:] I think the message should be we should re-examine here's what the message should be, Chris. We want a DACA bill. The president has said this, right? The president said he wants to sign a clean DACA bill. Let's have DACA plus some border money. "The Washington Post", right, the very conservative Washington Post-opined that would be a great deal for Democrats. They should take it. So we should narrow the focus back to where it was, to where we begin.
[Cuomo:] Good.
[Urban:] Tone the rhetoric down on all this, right?
[Cuomo:] Well, not all of it, but I certainly don't think you should tell people that they're lying when they're just bring things up
[Urban:] I'm not saying you're lying.
[Cuomo:] I know you're not but you're here to represent what's coming out of the White House.
[Urban:] Do we want to get to a solution this country? We want to talk about
[Cuomo:] Absolutely. So let's do this.
[Urban:] So, right. The question is how do we get there? How do we get there? How do we move forward?
[Cuomo:] You know how we do it? We have the foresight to have guys who are really smart coming from opposite directions somewhat like you two to discuss it. And you know what? I'm going to give it a second block. Let's take a quick break. Dave, Van, please stay. We do have to talk about what could be this deal, what should be this deal, what actually matters. Let's have that conversation and strip away all this B.S. about who's lying and who isn't. Up next, they can argue about, and we're also going to have to figure out what our elected leaders are going to do about this problem. We'll have Van and Dave take it on, but we're also going to have the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus. Now, he's calling for President Trump to be censured, but there's also this theory, this rumor that maybe they'll boycott the State of the Union. Is that even possible? Next.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Hello again, everyone. Thanks so much for joining me. I'm Fredricka Whitfield, in New York this Saturday. New developments and new questions unfolding in the Stormy Daniels saga. President Trump's lawyer admits to taking out a home equity loan to keep the adult film star quiet about an alleged affair with Trump. Daniels tells CNN exclusively that the controversy might actually be a boon for her career.
[Stormy Daniels, Adult Film Star:] I think it's pretty clear with the new developments comes new interest.
[Whitfield:] And a possible meeting in the works between President Trump and North Korean Dictator Kim Jong-Un. The president tweeting just moments ago that both Japan and China are supportive and enthusiastic about the prospects of this face-to-face. Could this mark the beginning of the end to a nearly 70-year standoff between the U.S. and North Korea? And the president responds after a deadly shooting at a California V.A. clinic. What we know about the gunman and his victims. All right, let's begin with the latest on the case causing more trouble for this White House. Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, used his official Trump Organization e-mail address and signature to handle the arrangement. Cohen says he took out a home equity line of credit as well in the amount of $130,000 to make the payment to keep Stormy Daniels quiet about this alleged affair between herself and Mr. Trump. Daniels' attorney made his case to CNN's Anderson Cooper last night.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] This took a long time, the negotiation, the drafting, the communication, the routing of the payment, we're talking about hours and hours and hours. What Mr. Cohen and the administration now expects the American public to believe is that he went off half-cocked on his own without any guidance or communication whatsoever with his client. None. He just decided he was going to do this. He was going to draft the document, negotiate it, and draft the document with places for his client to sign.
[Whitfield:] This comes as President Trump prepares to hit the campaign trail today. He will be stumping for a Pennsylvania Republican who is in danger of losing in the district the president carried by 20 points. All right, let me bring in CNN's Boris Sanchez who is covering these developments for us from the White House Boris?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey there, Fred. Yes, Michael Cohen, the president's personal attorney, maintaining that President Trump had nothing to do with his actions that he didn't move forward with this nondisclosure agreement with Stormy Daniels or a payment to her at the president's behest. He's responded to questions about his use of a Trump Organization e-mail address in facilitating this deal saying it had nothing to do with his doing this on his own personally. Here's that statement from Cohen now: "The use of my company e-mail to communicate with the bank and Miss Clifford's former counsel proves absolutely nothing despite the less than convincing comments offered by Mr. Mr. Avenatti. I used this e-mail address for virtually everything as many people do." What's missing from Cohen's statement is a response to the question of one particular e-mail exchange in which he says he can't expedite a payment to Stormy Daniels, Stephanie Clifford, because the Trump Organization offices were closed for a holiday. The White House has tried to put some distance between the administration and this ongoing controversy. Sarah Sanders multiple time this week, asked about the Stormy Daniels' saga, not really giving a full-throated response to a lot of the revelations we've since learned. Essentially, saying the White House has already commented on this and is trying to move forward. I want you to listen to one exchange earlier this week.
[Unidentified Reporter:] You said from the podium you acknowledged that the president knows about the arbitration involving Daniels. Does he remember speaking about his lawyer about that?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White Hiouse Press Secretary:] I've addressed this extensively. I don't have anything else to add. Sorry. I'll take one last question.
[Sanchez:] As you noted, Fred, the president heads to western Pennsylvania tonight to campaign for Rick Saccone, in Pennsylvania district number 18. It is a seat Republicans have held for some time. Though, if you speak to Republican strategists privately, they tell you they're not confident they'll be able to hold on to this district, one the president won by 20 points. Not only is the wind at Democrats' backs because this is the first midterm in a Republican administration but, further, you also have all these swirling controversies, not only about Stormy Daniels but turnover at the White House. This could be an indication to Republicans of what things will look like in November during the midterms. And if they lose, they may be sounding alarms soon Fred?
[Whitfield:] All right, Boris Sanchez, thank you so much, at the White House. All right, let's discuss all of this with our panel. Tim Naftali is a CNN presidential historian and former director of the Nixon Presidential Library. Salena Zito is a CNN contributor and a national political reporter for the "Washington Examiner." Good to see you both. Tim, first to you. New details on this payment and the use of the Trump.org e-mail raising possible campaign election laws. How closely is the Mueller team examining this?
[Tim Naftali, Cnn Presidential Historian:] I don't know what the Mueller team is doing. For those of us trying to make sense of it, step back and compare and contrast the treatment of different women in October of 2016. Do you remember the women who came forward to say the president, the then-candidate, Donald Trump, had engaged in unwanted advances?
[Whitfield:] To the tune of maybe 17 or so.
[Naftali:] Seventeen. To date, we don't know of any of them being paid off. But for some reason, the president's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, decides, of the women who have something to say about Candidate Trump, this particular woman should be paid off and that he should pay her off without talking to anyone in the Trump campaign. And not only should he pay her off, but he should acquire a debt of $130,000 to do it. There is something about this that makes absolutely no sense. Seventeen women, not one gets paid off. This particular woman, the lawyer pays her off. So there is an issue here that has to do with the campaign, campaign finance, the movement of money just before a presidential election. That's why this raises questions that are very different from those that might be raised by a general extramarital affair by a political figure. And that's why Mueller might look into it.
[Whitfield:] Right, so this is really not just about the relationship or alleged relationships. But this really is about back to the whole following the money. CNN's chief legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, actually weighed in on Michael Cohen's claim that he took out this home equity loan to pay the settlement on his own. And this is what Jeffrey had to say.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] This whole idea that Michael Cohen has to go into his home equity line. It's not like he has $130,000 sitting around. He has to take a whole in effect, a home equity loan in order to pay Stormy Daniels to keep her quiet for an affair or relationship that she had with Donald Trump. Lawyers don't do that. They don't do that with their own money. It's not ethical. It's not proper to do that without talking to the client. And it also just doesn't make any sense.
[Whitfield:] So, Salena, how does the White House try to explain all of this? That nearly dwarfs just the idea of an alleged relationship, but it certainly goes to the core of what really is going on here. This is really, you know, the whole alleged relationship thing is just a speck, you know, but something else much bigger seems to be revealed here with this home equity line of credit.
[Salena Zita, Cnn Political Contributor:] It certainly is peculiar, right? It's not anything any of us would do or if you have a lawyer, you have that kind of relationship. I don't know. I believe that the president has had a longtime friendshipbusiness relationship with his lawyer. I'm not totally positive about that. Maybe it goes to that. He certainly has a different kind of relationship with the people that are within his inner circle. Maybe the guy panicked. Maybe the guy was like, look, I'm just going to do this, get it aside, and, you know, deal with it later.
[Whitfield:] Right. But, again, this was all for the relationship that never happened. And the relationship that never happened and then there were these legal documents and attorneys involved and now an exchange of money.
[Zito:] Right. I mean, we don't know. I mean, there's so many gaps that we don't understand. Was there conversation between the president and his lawyer? Was there not a conversation between the president and his lawyer? Did Cohen just do this on his own? Just go rogue? These are the things we don't know. I have a hard time speculating who was committing the more improper, you know, set of circumstances with this thing.
[Whitfield:] Yes, and that this Trump.org, you know, e-mail was used by Michael
[Zito:] Right. Right.
[Whitfield:] Michael Cohen. So, Tim, this Stormy Daniels, you know, not talking specifics about this alleged affair, but her attorney is talking, while appearing multiple times on lots of different networks including last night. He was talking with Anderson Cooper. And then last night, Stormy Daniels herself was talking with one of our reporters outside an appearance in Florida. Take a listen. Well, she essentially said to our Nick Valencia last night she's made a lot of money off of this but, you know, she's not capitalizing off it. It's just all the opportunities are arising as a result of all this being publicized. Meantime, her attorney is saying that much needs to be established because Michael Cohen isn't licensed to work in California to be a part of a deal, et cetera. This is bad because it's difficult for the White House to dismiss it all together.
[Naftali:] The White House is not helping itself. I mean, Sarah Sanders made clear there was an arbitration. Therefore, the president was involved. Therefore, the president knew about it. The issue is this. You have these women with credible stories. And the president in 2016 then-Candidate Trump says none of it true, denies it all. This one woman, Stormy Daniels, puts pressure somehow, we don't know how, and the president's lawyer decides I'll pay her, we'll pay her. What did she know? What evidence did she have? And it strikes me as implausible that Mr. Cohen would do this without talking to the candidate. After all, the candidate denied everything else. The candidate could have well have said to Mr. Cohen it didn't happen. So there must have been a conversation. And we'll learn more I'm sure.
[Whitfield:] We'll leave it right there for now. Tim Naftali, Salena Zito, thanks to both of you. Appreciate it. Stormy Daniels, meantime, is staying fairly prominent, because Nick Valencia did talk to her exclusively last night in Florida where she was making that appearance. Nick, you bring us more, all the things she said willingly and those she wouldn't.
[Nick Valencia, Cnn Correspondent:] Fredricka, we were told last night explicitly she would not be talking to the media, but all that seemed to change after her performance. There was a meet and greet she had with some of her fans who showed up here. She performed in front of about 200 people. Her first live performance since bringing a lawsuit against President Trump over that nondisclosure agreement that had to do with her alleged a fair. Her team agreed to an audio-only interview with us if only we didn't talk about the ongoing litigation or ask about President Trump. We asked anyway. She did talk about how this has all impacted her career.
[Valencia:] So what has this done for your career?
[Daniels:] It's sort of been a double-edged sword. Where a lot of people are very interested in booking me for dancing and stuff like that. I'm getting more dance bookings. I usually only dance once a month and now we're dancing three or four times a month so that's been really great. Because of that, it's sort of overshadowing a lot of adult films I'm supposed to be promoting and a lot of the mainstream projects I was actively working on have indefinitely been put on hold.
[Valencia:] You got a lot of attention. Some of it some negative attention. How are you handling everything?
[Daniels:] I've been in the adult business for 17 years, so to make it that long in that business, you have to have a really tough skin. And so it's most of it rolls off my shoulder because it's an opinion like, oh, you think I'm a whore or ugly or old or I'm too fat or my boobs are too big or too small or whatever. I've heard there's nothing along those lines that someone can say to me I haven't heard. When someone says hey, you're a whore, I'm, that is successful whore to you.
[Valencia:] This is a little different. Has some of it been hurtful at all? What's your reaction to it?
[Daniels:] The stuff that bothers me is the flat-out lie, like people randomly making up stuff.
[Valencia:] Like what?
[Daniels:] Like that I'm broke. I'm actually one of the most successful adult movie directors in the business. I have a contract that's been in place for several years. And I actually just renegotiated and got a new contract that was already the terms were already set before this stuff happened, and I have a huge I got a raise, so I'm doing just fine.
[Valencia:] What do you think about the circus that's happening? This was out in 2011 but now it's like a renewed attention on you and, you know, somebody else that we'll not name here?
[Daniels:] I think it's pretty clear with the new developments comes new interest.
[Valencia:] There you have it. Some pretty candid remarks from Stephanie Clifford, also known as Stormy Daniels. I did ask her, Fredricka, about President Trump. She said she had no comment for the president. But she hasn't been quiet. Not backing down from criticism either. She's been active today on social media, pushing back against her critics criticizing her for the very interview. She also has two more live performances scheduled here in south Florida Fredricka?
[Whitfield:] All right, Nick Valencia, thank you so much, from Ft. Lauderdale. Coming up, the White House insists President Trump will meet with Kim Jong-Un but provides little details about where and when that might happen given the rocky history between the two leaders. What can we expect from that historic meeting?

[King:] Welcome back. A top North Korean official on his way to New York right now. The Trump White House is hoping he arrives with major commitments about eliminating Pyongyang's nuclear program. Kim Yong-chol is here to meet with the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and their talks will determine whether the White House is willing to go ahead with that Singapore summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-Un. A source telling CNN the administration is looking for a big gesture from North Korea, some kind of proof that the country is serious, the regime is serious about negotiating a path to denuclearization. What kind of commitment is big enough? It's a process that would take years. It is a process that everybody, including the President and his team, are skeptical North Korea really is committed to. So what is this essentially right hand man of Kim Jong-un have to come to New York with to get them to think, OK, this is worth it?
[Bender:] I mean, the President has been clear, the post season from this administration have been clear. They want total denuclearization. You know, he's shown a little bit of willingness to hedge on the time period and how quickly that has to happen. But, I mean, he's been adamant about that. So anything short of that is going to raise real questions about what they're going to Singapore for, what they're taking this meeting for. And even inside the White House, inside this administration, there are vastly different viewpoints on what is going to happen just within the next few days. There is a real goal for this thing to happen sooner than later. But there are just a million doubts and a million variables within Mr. Trump's President Trump's own team about whether it will.
[King:] And this is a reminder as Kim Yong-chol comes to New York about the kind of people you have to deal with. If you're going to deal with North Korea, this is who you have to deal with. He is former spy chief. He's allegedly was behind that 2014 hack on Sony, that was a big deal. The top official in charge of relations with the South. Allegedly behind the sinking of a South Korea navy ship. The most senior official from North Korea to visit the United States since 2000. So a bad actor. Named in the United States sanctions against North Korea. Again, if you're going to deal with a rogue regime, you have to deal with rogue people. The question is, can Mike Pompeo get enough to convince the President to go forward. Or maybe the bigger question is, if Mike Pompeo doesn't get enough, can he convince the President not to go forward because the President wants this meeting.
[Martin:] He clearly wants the meeting, right? Isn't the issue like the real issue here that the folks around Trump eventually are going to have to say that you can't do this if this is going to be really bad for us in the long-term? Because the President clearly is dying for that photo op. He wants to be able to have the sort of back and forth, he wants the historic moment. You can just feel it how he's trying to do this, right?
[Bash:] True. But then the question is whether or not they can use if they want to go forward, and he can't be convinced otherwise whether they can use the remaining weeks to change and lower the expectations, that this is an opening dialogue, because he's getting praise from even his biggest detractors for even being willing to sit down with Kim Jong-un. So that is option c maybe to just try to change the expectations and change the parameters and say maybe this is the
[King:] Yes. To that point, or flip the equation to the sense that just weeks ago, everyone said, well, locked and loaded, fire and fury, that's so reckless and irresponsible Mr. President. Could he make the case? Yes, I decided to go ahead with this meeting. Yes, I sat down face to face with Kim Jong-un because I wanted to give it every last chance. He didn't come to the table at any serious commitment. Therefore, maximum pressure, more sanctions and when I get tougher now, they'll criticize me, I tried.
[Summers:] Absolutely. I think that's certainly the case. And obviously if somehow this does work out, they meet, they have this meeting, this would be a huge diplomatic triumph for these two nations that have been clashing. And one thing I'm curious in watching is, you know, you saw the President come out with this letter effectively calling off the summit not so long ago. We still have what, 12, 13 days until the summit is scheduled to take place. What's going to happen then? Will there be changes in the posture towards North Korean.
[King:] Specificity about the agenda. We'll see. Good luck, Secretary Pompeo. Coming up for us, a reality show superstar makes her way to the White House for some at least on paper, serious discussions.

[Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook Ceo:] This was a major breach of trust. And I'm really sorry that this happened. And we have a basic responsibility to protect people's data. And if we can't do that, then we don't deserve to have the opportunity to serve people. So, our responsibility now is to make sure that this doesn't happen again.
[Kinkade:] Well, from offering his first sorry in that CNN exclusive to now. In less than three hours Facebook's 33-year-old boss, Mark Zuckerberg, will take his apology all the way to some of America's most powerful lawmakers. Spending today and tomorrow owning up to his mistakes and answering questions about a massive data harvesting scandal that exposed the private information of 87 million Facebook users. Well, CNN's Laurie Segall is on Capitol Hill for us where this is all going down. Laurie, of course, is that first interview with Zuckerberg after this scandal broke that we just played. So, Laurie, obviously we know Mark Zuckerberg is the type of man that generally likes to lay low, but he has had to prepare for this grilling today. You've got the inside word on that. What is his strategy?
[Laurie Segall, Cnnmoney Senior Tech Correspondent:] Yes, well, in short, his strategy is to be contrite, humble and respectful. That's what I'm told from a source within Facebook. And what they've done over the last week is essentially turn one of the conference rooms into a congressional hearing room and they've been doing these mock trials. And he's prepared to answer a lot of hard questions. They've been trying to throw him curveballs. One thing he's ready to talk about is why he believes he should be leading the company through this tough time. There have been a lot of questions on whether he should step down. So, he's ready to answer that question. I'm also told by this source that, you know, we're going to hear him try to remind people why Facebook is a good thing. I think we have seen a very tough news cycle, tough narrative around Facebook and what it's doing essentially for democracy, for the mental health of users, what it's doing with our data privacy. He's going in and try to tell a different story, the other story of Facebook. And I'm told he's also prepared to push back a little bit, so say, you know, Senator, I respectfully disagree with you. And he's prepared to answer the question of whether the business model is fundamentally broken at the cost of the users, which I think a lot of folks are asking about Lynda.
[Kinkade:] And Laurie, it's no surprise we have heard a lot of criticism of this. Let's just take a listen to what the U.S. president's chief economic adviser had to say.
[Unidentified Male:] Those in reference to The Hill, this week to testify. Does the administration feel that Facebook should be regulated?
[Larry Kudlow, Director, National Economic Council:] Is he going to wear a suit and tie and a clean white shirt? That's my only question. Is he going to behave like an adult? As a major corporate leader or give me the phony baloney what is it? Hoodies and dungarees and what does that kind of say to itself.
[Kinkade:] Is Larry Kudlow there not mincing words. Unusual phrasing perhaps. But also, is there any truth to that, that people as powerful as the man running Facebook, need to essentially grow up?
[Segall:] Well, first of all, I'm told from behind the scenes he's definitely wearing a suit. So, to answer his question. But look, I think this is a point this is a moment of maturity for the company. You know, I've been covering Silicon Valley for nearly a decade and you know, there's an amount of hubris. When you used to go into Facebook's offices years ago, there was these signs that said, move fast and break things. There's this idea that, you know, were doing great work at any cost without looking at the human cost of this. And I think, you know, this is a moment for accountability. And I also think to really shape how were looking at the power in the future of the internet. Our Suzanne Malveaux spoke to Senator Chuck Grassley. And what he said, which I thought was interesting in his interview, he said people have a constitutional right to privacy. I think we're all trying to figure out what did we sign up for when we sign up for Facebook? Should we have trusted them with our data? And what are they doing to be responsible? And if they're not being responsible with it, what kind of regulatory issues are we going to see? What kind of regulation are we going to see? I know that Facebook has been trying to get in front of this in a big way over the last couple of weeks. Ever since I sat down and spoke with Mark, they've rolled out a number of changes, you know, for data protection and data privacy, political ads and issue ad transparency, verifying users within big pages. You know, so, it's been an onslaught of news over the last couple of weeks. I think the frustration, which you'll hear from lawmakers, that you hear from us users, is that this is really the first we're hearing of this after the fact.
[Kinkade:] And I want to get a bit more of your take on that, Laurie, because some of our viewers might have a look at Facebook and see this morning. I want to show the viewers. This warning may pop up when they log into Facebook. That basically their information was harvested. And you can remember that, of course, that the company shied away from ever even telling anyone that it happened back when it took place. So, we have seen this warning, we have seen this apology. But take us through the steps that Facebook is actually taking right now to rehabilitate its image.
[Segall:] Well, even that speech that you just saw, I mean, what you can do is see what apps you sign up for. You can actually kind of opt out of these apps. They've tried to they're now billing their ads with more transparency. Slapping the word political ad or issue ad on them. That'll be rolling out at the beginning in a couple months. And you know, they are taking steps, but there is that 'frustration. You know, is it, you know, are they getting in front of this? You know, when we look back at the Cambridge Analytica data, we still don't know exactly how that was used. And we still don't also know, they said they were going to do an audit. We also don't know if that data has been deleted. Those questions aren't clear. There's frustration around that. And then, you know, they just announced a data bounty program, just literally in my inbox a couple moments ago I saw this, where they are trying to, you know, incentivize people to find misuse of data. And so, I think the big question is, you know, what else are we going to find? What else are we going to see? And how is our data used in all these different ways? And these are important questions and you can argue, you know, from covering this company for a long time, and for me, stepping into Mark's orbit a little bit. You know, he's not used to this setting. This is political theater, too. He was very nervous during our interview because he is very much, I don't want to joke, he's been almost living in his own filter bubble of sorts. He's ruled his constituents of 2 billion people from afar with Facebook live, with blog posts, after the fact. And I think, you know, that's got to change. Because at this point he's a world leader. And the company needs to be more accountable, more transparent and humbled by this big moment in time. And this is, you know, a moment for Facebook. But I think that the tech community as a whole to do some soul searching.
[Kinkade:] Yes, they will certainly have to do that. Laurie Segall on Capitol Hill. We will, no doubt, be covering that testimony when Mark Zuckerberg faces the lawmakers there in three hours from now. Thank you so much, Laurie.
[Segall:] Thank you.
[Jones:] Well, you will remember, of course, Donald Trump's own deadline to decide how to respond to an alleged gas attack in Syria. It is fast approaching. Mr. Trump says nothing is off the table and that issue has been thrown into sharp focus for American allies, too. British Prime Minister, Theresa May, spoke to Mr. Trump earlier on Tuesday while friends say there will be a response if Syria has crossed a red line. One person with firsthand experience of military strategy is our next guest. Cedric Leighton is a retired Air Force colonel and CNN military analyst. He joins us now from Washington. Always good to get your perspective. We heard from President Trump that there will be action and that it will come soon within 24 to 48 hours. And he made that statement late yesterday. Just explain for us what options he has? COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON, AIR FORCE COLONEL
[Kinkade:] But when you look at what happened last year at those U.S. strikes on that Syrian air base, if this was indeed another chemical attack at the hands of the Syrian regime, clearly last year's response wasn't a deterrent as it should have been. So, what else could the U.S. do and what are the ramifications if it goes too far? Especially given the fact that Russia has threatened grave ramifications.
[Leighton:] So, Lynda, this is really the difficulty of planning these kinds of strikes. I think the attack last year had an effect for a period of time. But of course, is not a lasting effect. And the only time you are going to really prevent somebody from using chemical weapons is to take those chemical weapons away from them or take away their ability to use those chemical weapons. So, failing that, we are left with a series of options that are probably not the most palatable. They are the kind of options that are inconclusive, that are not as decisive as many of us would like. But that's the kind of situation that the President finds himself in, unless, unless he's willing to commit ground troops to Syria. And I don't see that happening based on his other pronouncements and on the general political mood in the United States and around the world.
[Jones:] And on that point, Cedric, why hasn't the U.S. gone after the chemical weapons warehouses along with its allies?
[Leighton:] That could be something that would be part of the planning effort that is happening right now. So, it is possible that we might be doing that. I think the reason that I think there's several reasons. One of them is that they are very difficult to find, in some cases, although we do have an intelligence as to some of the locations of the chemicals, especially sarin gas and chlorine. But chlorine is a very tough thing to isolate because it is so pervasive. Everybody uses it for industrial purposes and it is not necessarily a precursor to a chemical munition. And that makes part of this difficult because you've got legitimate uses of chemicals and you have uses of chemicals that are completely illegitimate and immoral, such as we saw in Douma.
[Kinkade:] Right. I just want to play sound that we've got from the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, who spoke yesterday. Let's just take a listen.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To U.n:] The monster who was responsible for these attacks has no conscience. Not even to be shocked by pictures of dead children. The Russian regime whose hands are all covered in the blood of Syrian children cannot be ashamed by pictures of its victims.
[Kinkade:] And Nikki Haley went on to describe Assad as a monster. Very early in this Syrian civil war, there was a lot of discussion about his fate. What happens to him when this civil war is over? That seems to be off the table given the support he has from Russia and Iran. What is it going to take for that to come back on the table of discussion?
[Leighton:] Well, I think that is a very interesting point because all of the that we've seen right now, Lynda, are on the part of Assad or action that are characteristic of a criminal behavior. In that this time of criminal behavior extends very much into the category of war crimes. Assad is frankly, a war criminal. And what would have to happen is the Russians would have to agree that Assad must go. To get them to do that would require a degree of coercive force on the ground in Syria and really around all of Russia's activities globally. And that, in essence, prevents them from doing some of the things that they're engaged in. To include the cyber-attacks that they are committing against European nations and the U.S. It would also include other things such as tightening up sanctions until Assad left. So those are the kinds of things that would have to happen. It would take a really concerted strategic approach to do this. And right now, I don't see the U.S. administration going that route. But it could happen. But it would take a long time for Assad to be in the same court dock Slobodan Milosevic, the late leader of Serbia was. So that would be really the goal of the international justice system or it should be the goal of the international justice system. But for us to get there would require an international agreement on the part of not only the U.S. and its Western partners, but also an agreement on the part of Russia to get Assad out of there. And that is something that is very, very difficult to achieve.
[Kinkade:] Yes, no doubt. Really good to get your perspective. Colonel Cedric Leighton in Washington, thanks so much for joining us.
[Leighton:] You bet, always a pleasure.
[Kinkade:] You are watching CONNECT THE WORLD. Still to come, a city in India that's literally on the way up. Will look at what is behind the boom in our Gurgaon report next.

[Nancy Pelosi, Speaker Of The U.s. House Of Representatives:] We really cannot resolve this until we open up government.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm very proud of doing what I'm doing.
[Schumer, Senator  New York:] We told the President we needed the government open. He resisted. In fact, he said he'd keep the government closed for a very long period of time, months or even years.
[Trump:] Absolutely, I said that. I don't think it will, but I am prepared.
[Ryan Vaugn, Furloughed Government Employee Who Volunteers:] Let us work without having anxiety over our next grocery bill.
[Andrea Popelka, Furloughed Worker:] All of those things are pre- budgeted. So when something like this happens and you're not going to get your next check, it's like OK, what do I do?
[Announcer:] This is "New Day Weekend" with Victor Blackwell and Christi Paul.
[Christi Paul, Cnn:] Well, Happy new day to you, so glad to have you with us. You are waking up to shut down week three. President Trump says, "He'd rather call it a strike."
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn:] It's not a strike, but whatever you call it, he says, if a deal is not reached it could last for months even, years.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm very proud of doing what I'm doing. I don't call it a shutdown. I call it doing what you have to do for the benefit and for the safety of our country.
[Blackwell:] So what's happening next? Well, in a few hours Vice President, Mike Pence will host a meeting with House and Senate staffers. This is a follow-up to yesterday's meeting, which reportedly started with a 15-minute tirade from the President during which he cursed at congressional leaders.
[Paul:] President later called the meeting productive. Democrats called it contentious. But afterwards the President warned, he could go around Congress, if he so chooses, and build the border wall using military funding. With the latest from the White House now, CNN White House Reporter, Sarah Westwood. What are you hearing about this 11 o'clock meeting, Sarah?
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Christi what we heard yesterday were very different outlooks from Democratic congressional leaders and from the President out of those high-level talks in the situation room yesterday with Democrats reiterating their demands to reopen the government while talks continue, and the President saying that he'd be willing to keep the government partially shuttered indefinitely until he gets funding for that border wall. And heading into today's meeting, which will happen at the staff level, it won't have the principals involved this time around. The President is reprising those demands for that $5.6 billion sum that House Republicans passed in a spending bill in one of their last acts in the House majority before Democrats took over. That happened right before the shutdown. And Trump is showing increasing flexibility also as to what might qualify as a wall. Suggesting, he might settle for steel slats or a fence. That he might not need the concrete wall that he ran on in 2016. And Trump is also now saying that he's considered declaring a national emergency over border security in order to get funding for his border wall if he's not able to get that money legislatively. Here's what he said yesterday.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We can call a national emergency because of the security of our country, absolutely. No, we can do it. I haven't done it, I may do it, I may do it. But we could call a national emergency and build it very quickly.
[Westwood:] Now Congressional Democrats are already expressing their opposition to that idea. Congressman Adam Smith, the Democratic Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee threatened to scrutinize the President's military budget requests if he were to proceed with this idea. Saying in a statement last night, "By abusing this authority President Trump would be saying that he does not actually believe all the money he requests for our country's defense is needed for legitimate national security purposes. That would raise major questions about his credibility when he requests his next defense budget from Congress." Of course, Trump would face serious headwinds if he tried to proceed with this national emergency declaration. But heading into today's meeting, there's not a lot of expectation for a big breakthrough, Victor and Christi, because Democrats are showing no signs of moving anywhere closer to a compromise.
[Paul:] All right. Sarah Westwood, thank you so much for the update.
[Blackwell:] Let's talk about this now with Amie Parnes. She's a Senior Political Correspondent at The Hill and Co-Author of the book "Shattered". Amie, welcome back to the show.
[Amie Parnes, Cnn Political Analyst, Senior White House Correspondent At The Hill:] Thanks Victor.
[Blackwell:] Let's start here with what's happening at 11 o'clock. Vice President, Mike Pence is going to meet with congressional staffers on the Hill. The President has undercut and undermined Vice President Pence twice. First, before this shutdown started, when he went to the Hill and said that, "The President will sign this bill", and then he didn't. And then after going to Democrats and saying, "Let's talk about $2.5 billion", the President said, "No, I want 5.6". What's his word worth in these negotiations with the President not in the room?
[Parnes:] Well, apparently, not much, as we've learned from these two specific instances. But, I think, he's going there the Vice President to sort of try to, kind of, come to some kind of compromise, I think. If I were to guess, I would think that some people around him want to make this happen. It doesn't look good for the White House ultimately. I think the White House I think there are some White House officials who kind of know this. No one is urging the President to do anything different. In fact, the sources that I've spoken to are saying that they're holding firm and they're holding their ground and they don't want to compromise. But I think it'll be interesting to see what Vice President Pence can kind of can do in these sorts of situations, and in this in this meeting.
[Blackwell:] I want you to listen to the White House Director of Strategic Communications Mercedes Schlapp. This was before the meeting yesterday between the President, Schumer and Pelosi, and what you said is potentially or could be on the table.
[Hallie Jackson, White House Correspondent For Nbc News:] Would the President agree to some kind of a compromise that protects Dreamers and gives him money for a border barrier?
[Mercedes Schlapp, White House Director Of Strategic Communications:] Well, I think we got to see what happens in this meeting today.
[Jackson:] So it's on the table.
[Schlapp:] I believe that it is on the table. I think we have an opportunity to have these options. For our goal, it is important to say, though, that border security is key.
[Blackwell:] Dreamers, DACA on the table. Now we know from reporting that it was when Ann Coulter wrote that op-ed for Breitbart that said, wall less country, but a gutless President, and criticized him and others in the Freedom Caucus. He then pulled out of the funding deal the continuing resolution. Here's what Ann Coulter said about Dreamers and DACA.
[Ann Coulter, Political Commentator:] I'd deport the Dreamers before deporting MS-13 members. They are you catch them, they at least say OK you got me. The Dreamers are all over Congress, the streets, TV, demanding demanding that we grant. How dare you wait before excusing our law-breaking? No, I want those guys first, then we'll get the felons and then the hard-working illegal aliens doing the gardening and so on. Everybody kind of likes them, they're so friendly, they're such hard workers. But the Dreamers, #1.
[Blackwell:] If that's who the President is afraid of offending and he's scared of what she's going to say, how could the Dreamers or a DACA deal be on the table?
[Parnes:] I don't think it's on the table, Victor. In fact, everyone I've spoken to who had was in that meeting, who knows about the meeting, has said, "Well, it's an idea in theory. It's not something that's plausible". Democrats are kind of holding firm to that notion too. Of course, they want something they want to do on DACA. But they're saying, no, first we need to the government, then we can talk about DACA. Later and you know even President Trump has said as much like, "Let's get this wall built and then we can talk about DACA". So, I don't think that this is anything both sides are kind of in agreement on this that this can't be part of this agreement.
[Blackwell:] Before yesterday, the semantic argument was over wall, steel slats, concrete, fence, see-through, now is it's the President doesn't want to call it a shutdown reportedly, he wants to call it a strike, which is a very different thing. What do you glean from the President wanting to reframe or recast this shutdown as strike.
[Parnes:] He's trying to minimize it, obviously, Victor. I mean, some way to say, this isn't as big of a deal as some people are making it. But the thing is, as long even if this goes months and years, this has ramifications. This is going to he's going to start hearing from more and more Republican lawmakers, increasingly, that say this is a problem for me and this is a problem for my constituents. My constituents are really angry about this. I mean, this is a huge chunk of the population. And so I think that as this kind of carries on and takes on, it's going to be increasingly problematic for him. And I think that's why democrats feel like they have leverage at this point.
[Blackwell:] So what's the argument? I just spoke with one of the members of the Trump Campaign Advisory Board on HR21, which is the bill that would open and fund through September 30th all of the departments, except for Homeland Security, to continue the fight over the wall, that they could get Agriculture, Interior, HUD and the rest back open. What's the congressional argument for not bringing that bill to the floor of the Senate?
[Parnes:] I think because the Department of Homeland Security is critical. There I've talked to a source yesterday who says that it's not as up to snuff as it should be right now and they're kind of concerned about that. And so, I think, it has to a lot of people feel like it has to include the Department of Homeland Security to move forward. It's not enough to just say, OK the rest of these departments will open. So I think they're holding on to that and seeing what how much they can what they can build off that.
[Blackwell:] All right. Amie Parnes thanks so much for being with us this morning.
[Parnes:] Thank you, Victor.
[Paul:] So we're bringing another viewpoint here. Andrea Catsimatidis. She's the GOP Regional Vice Chairman for New York State. Thank you so much for being with us, Andrea, we appreciate it.
[Andrea Catsimatidis, New York State Gop Regional Vice-chairwoman:] Thanks for having me.
[Paul:] Absolutely. So we just heard I want to ask you a question off of what, Amie was saying there. How long do you think the GOP can support President Trump in this until before Congressmen and women in the GOP are going to the President saying, "Listen, my constituents are not going to put up with this much longer".
[Catsimatidis:] I think that they're going to do whatever it takes to support the President. When you're negotiating a deal, you can't tell the other side when you're going to finish negotiating, because then there wouldn't be a negotiation. They would know when it's over and they would know when you cave. So I think the President and the GOP have to hang strong in this endeavor.
[Paul:] For the sake of their constituents? I mean, do you think that GOPers are going to say I'm going to risk my whole job for this wall?
[Catsimatidis:] I mean, the Republican Party really supports the wall, it's a matter of national security. We have to know who is coming into this country. 89 percent of border security agents say that the wall would help improve national security, and I think that's what the American people ultimately care about.
[Paul:] OK. I want to listen to something that President Trump said yesterday about who he believes these people are that are dealing with a shutdown and what they support. Let's listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We can call a national emergency because of the security of our country, absolutely. No, we can do it. I haven't done it. I may do it I may do it. But we could call a national emergency and build it very quickly.
[Trump:] I really believe that these people many of the people that we're talking about, many of the people you're discussing, I really believe that they agree with what we're doing. Many of those people, maybe even most of those people that really have not been, and will not be getting their money in at this moment, those people, in many cases, are the biggest fan of what we're doing.
[Paul:] Do you know what evidence the President has to back that up?
[Catsimatidis:] That was his whole campaign promise, and the reason that he got elected. So-
[Paul:] But how does he know that the people who are suffering through this shutdown agree with him? What evidence is there that all of these people, as he deems and he said, I really believe these people agree with him, that they agree with what he's doing?
[Catsimatidis:] I think Americans want to be kept safe. And as I said 89 percent of border security agents say that it's going to help with our national security. We're having huge problems in America, because not only is this a national security issue, but it's also a domestic security issue. MS-13 gang members get across the border illegally and they commit these heinous crimes in these countries.
[Paul:] We know that there are dangerous people that come across the border. We know that there are people who are not dangerous that come across the border. You are right in that. But here's my question. Right now today we're dealing with week three of a shutdown. There are people who cannot afford to pay their rent, to buy food, to buy clothes, to take care of their children. So at the end of the day, President Trump hasn't had to live paycheck to paycheck. Do you think there is a disconnect for people and could there be a political vulnerability there because of it?
[Catsimatidis:] I really sympathize with these people. And, honestly, I feel like it's irresponsible on the part of the Democrats for passing the legislation on Thursday knowing that the Senate and the President weren't get a vote for it, and therefore the government was going to stay shutdown for longer, and these poor people are going to be out of work for longer. And I think that there needs to be a compromise, so that we can send these people back to work.
[Paul:] But can that compromise be about the number? At the end of the day there is a commonality, Democrats and Republicans both say we need to secure the border. Is it up to the President to come to the table and say, "OK, let's agree on a number".
[Catsimatidis:] So the border wall would cost about $5.6 billion, which is essentially only about 0.1% of the budget. 0.1% is-
[Paul:] So what happened to Mexico paying for the border wall?
[Catsimatidis:] Well, President Trump didn't say-
[Paul:] -paying for the border wall?
[Catsimatidis:] Yes. Well, President Trump didn't say exactly how Mexico would pay for the border wall. They're paying in other ways through our beneficial trade agreement. But, ultimately, I think-
[Paul:] If there being other ways why does he need that much money for the border well?
[Catsimatidis:] It's about national security. I mean, they're paying in other ways, but it would be more beneficial for us to get the wall this way.
[Paul:] OK. So let me ask you this. We just heard the President there too say that he would bypass Congress and declare a national emergency, and in doing so, then he would take money out of the military budget to pay for a wall. Here's my question. Are you and do you think other republicans are comfortable with that idea, knowing that if you're taking money out of a military budget and something huge happens in terms of terrorism, whether it has anything to do with Mexico or not and now we have deflated much of that military budget. That could be a real crisis for us. So would you are you uncomfortable at all or comfortable with the thought that the President would steal money or take money rather. I shouldn't say steal. Would take money out of a military budget to pay for this and bypass Congress?
[Catsimatidis:] The wall is a matter of national security. And I think, ultimately, Americans will feel safer at night knowing that we have that border security. And so to me as a national security issue it makes sense. But would I rather have it come somewhere else? Yes, and I think everyone would as well. But, ultimately, I think that it would be important for us to have the wall.
[Paul:] Andrea Catsimatidis, we appreciate being here. Thank you.
[Catsimatidis:] Thank you.
[Blackwell:] We are following breaking news out of Southern California this morning. At least three people are dead and several others are wounded after a shooting at a bowling alley. This was in Torrance. Officers say there were multiple people with gunshot wounds inside the building and witnesses described it just a chaotic scene.
[Dana Scott, Witness, Bowling Alley Shooting, Torrance:] A lot of people ran into back into the bar area behind the seats, and on the floor, under the benches. People were crying. It was not comfortable. People were looking for their parents. Nisei is a family league, so you got mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, you know everybody's friends in that league.
[Paul:] Well, detectives are investigating the shooting and working to identify those suspects. We're going to bring you more information, of course, as we get it, we'll pass it on to you right away.
[Blackwell:] Plus, it's a test of wills and many other things as President Trump and Congressional Democrats negotiate a deal or try to get close to opening up the government fully. With no end in sight, a growing number of lawmakers on Capitol Hill are calling for compromise. You'll hear from them.
[Paul:] Also, hundreds of TSA employees calling out sick at major airports across the country, the effects that that could have on your travels.

[George Howell, Cnn International Anchor:] Well, I have coast to coast across the United States and to our viewers around the world this hour, you're watching CNN NEWSROOM. Thank you so much for being with us. I'm George Howell.
[Rosemary Church, Cnn International Anchor:] And I'm Rosemary Church. We want to update you now on the main stories we've been following this hour. A high level South Korean delegation has lift the North Korea. It includes South Korea's national security chief and they might discuss direct dialogue between the U.S. and Pyongyang. President Trump said Saturday North Korea wanted to talk but it would have to abandon its nuclear weapons first.
[Howell:] The "Shape of Water" cleaned up at the Oscars. Guillermo del Toro's fantasy love story took home four awards, including best picture and director. The Academy Award show also highlighted diversity by spotlighting groups fighting for the rights of women and minorities.
[Church:] A U.S. navy aircraft carrier is making a historic visit to Vietnam. It's also seen as a message to China. The "USS Vinson" is anchored off Danang, a key battleground during the war that ended in 1975. Analysts say the carrier is meant to send a not so subtle signal to Beijing about its aggressive island building in the South China Sea. Well, it will be a crucial week for President Trump's proposed tariffs on steel and aluminum. The White House says the president could sign the controversial measure in a matter of days.
[Howell:] On Sunday, President Trump wrote this on Twitter. "We are on the losing side of almost all trade deals. Our friends and enemies have taken advantage of the United States for many years. Our steel and aluminum industries are dead. Sorry, it's time for a change. Make America great again." Our Jake Tapper asked a White House trade adviser for clarification on these proposed tariffs. Let's listen.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] So there's going to be no exemptions. That's what it's going to look like at the end of the week.
[Peter Navarro, White House National Trade Council Director:] There's a difference between exemptions and country exclusions. There will be an exemption procedure for particular cases where we need to have exemptions so that business can move forward. But at this point in time, there will be no country exclusions.
[Howell:] Let's bring in Scott Lucas. Scott, a professor of international politics at the University of Birmingham, also the founder of E.A. WorldView live with us in Birmingham this hour. Scott, thanks for your time today. Let's talk about this White House. It blames China mainly for flooding the world market with aluminum and steel as reasons behind these tariffs. But let's put the facts first, as well. It's countries like Canada and South Korea that the United States imports most of its steel. So the question, why does China remain the boogeyman here and how much of this plays into the president's campaign promises to get tougher on China and what he perceives as trade imbalances?
[Scott Lucas, Professor Of International Politics At The University Of Birmingham:] Well, you know, it's because people may not know the details. So when Donald Trump presents it, you go for the boogeyman, you go for the country who he said during campaign was raping the United States by taking advantage of our economy. But of course, there's a paradox beyond the tariffs. The fact is that even as China might be held up wrongly as being the major problem about steel. Donald Trump was praising the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping saying it's great he's president for life. Maybe I should do the same this past weekend. So we're muddled politically and then economically to get back to your core point. The countries that are most affected by this are American allies. That is, Canada, Japan, the countries of the European Union, Brazil. They're the ones that are already threatening retaliation. And then on top of that, when you bring it back home, if you're listening to what Peter Navarro said yesterday, it's total confusion about what happens domestically. These companies that are going to be affected by the price of increased steels and those products do you before you implement go through industry by industry, company by country company by company one by one to agree exceptions? Do you just implement this and then have them apply for an exception? So right now, I think we're going to talk about the tough for it, which is it's easy to shout about steel and shout about China. Now, when it comes to implementing tariffs, then you've got to govern, and that's going to be tricky.
[Howell:] And as you point out, the devil in the details. We do expect to get some clarification as the president makes a clear move forward on this in the week ahead. Let's also talk, Scott, about diplomacy that we're seeing play out between North Korea, South Korea and what the president says was a phone call that he received from North Korea. He said the U.S. is open to talks. He said this to them. That they have to de-nuke. North Korea has responded saying that any idea that it would be nuclearize is, "ridiculous." So the question here is, is the door really open for any progress from what you see?
[Lucas:] Look, if Donald Trump received that phone call, my name is Kim Jong-un, let's start from the reality of what's happening here. U.S. officials are probably involved behind the scenes, but the main players in terms of the talks have been the two Koreas with China trying to bring them together. Now, that is a process that Donald Trump has unsettled in the past by threatening military action. It's now the diplomatic track. And that's probably a good thing. But here's the second cold dose of reality. You cannot start the talks as Trump is doing by demanding that North Korea give up its nuclear weapons. That day has gone. You can try to limit North Korea's nuclear weapons capability. You can try to bring it into a range of agreements but you're not going to go back to the 1990s when we had the framework agreement where at that point, they had not developed nuclear weapons. It's not going to happen. So I think, let's set Trump's bluster aside, look very carefully at the talks, see if the two Koreas get together on the table without preconditions. And that will be the real sign that we got some progress if that happens.
[Howell:] All right. Scott Lucas giving your perspective there. Live for us in Birmingham. Thank you for your time today.
[Church:] And we'll take a very short break here. But still to come, Syria says it's gaining ground in Eastern Ghouta. A live report for you from the region. That story we have it next.

[Cyril Vanier, Cnn Anchor:] Tough on friends, less so on adversaries. Donald Trump makes waves at the G7 summit in Quebec as he calls for Russia to rejoin the group. From Canada to Singapore, in a few hours the U.S. president heads to Asia ahead of a historic meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Plus saying goodbye: we mourn the loss of colleague Anthony Bourdain, storyteller, traveler, chef and friend. From the CNN Center here in Atlanta, I'm Cyril Vanier. It's great to have you with us.
[Vanier:] So no verbal fireworks at the G7 summit in Canada, at least not in public. The acrimony over U.S. trade tariffs didn't boil over. However, whether the seven Western allies manage to produce a joint statement as they normally do is still an open question. U.S. president Donald Trump arrived late to the summit. He'll also be leaving early. he met one-on-one with French president Emmanuel Macron for the first time since their sharp exchange on Thursday over trade policies. Mr. Trump also met with Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, the host. They've been feuding over punishing tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum imported into the United States. Some distance away in Quebec City, protesters marched through the streets to complain about the G7's economic policies. No major incidents were reported there. Shortly before he arrived at the summit, President Trump caused another rift. He openly suggested that Russia be readmitted to the group, making no mention of why it was kicked out in the first place. Here's CNN's Boris Sanchez.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] Donald Trump arriving in Quebec for the G7 summit, a summit that sources indicate that he was hesitant to attend. Though the president greeted his counterparts with smiles and handshakes, he is fighting public battles with some of the United States' closest allies over trade, the Iran nuclear deal, climate change and now Russia, after Trump suggested Vladimir Putin should have a seat at the table in the group of seven.
[Trump:] Russia should be in this meeting. Why are we having a meeting without Russia being in the meeting? And I would recommend and it's up to them. But Russia should be in the meeting. It should be a part of it. You know, whether you like it or not and it may not be politically correct but we have a world to run. And in the G7, which used to be the G8, they threw Russia out, they should let Russia come back in, because we should have Russia at the negotiating table.
[Sanchez:] Other G7 leaders disagreed, including British prime minister Theresa May, telling reporters, quote, "Let's remember why the G8 became the G7. And before discussions could begin on any of this, we would have to ensure Russia is amending its ways and taking a different route." Some within the president's own party also dismissed the idea, Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse writing, quote, "This is weak. Putin is not our friend and he is not the president's buddy. He's a thug, using Soviet-style aggression to wage a shadow war against America. And our leaders should act like it." Another sore spot: trade tariffs. After exchange barbs on Twitter with French president Emmanuel Macron and Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau, Trump touted his ability to strike a deal.
[Trump:] It's what I do, it won't even be hard and, in the end, we'll all get along. But they understand and they're trying to act like, well, we fought with you in the war. They don't mention the fact that they have trade barriers against our farmers. They don't mention the fact that they're charging almost 300 percent tariffs. When it all straightens out, we'll all be in love again.
[Sanchez:] Macron initially suggested Trump may force the other six G7 countries to sign an agreement without the United States. Though he later posted a video of a private chat with Trump, writing, quote, "Dialogue again and again. Exchange try to convince constantly to defend the interests of the French and also of all those who believe the world is built only together with the U.S. president before the opening of the G7." Boris Sanchez, CNN, Quebec, Canada.
[Vanier:] Earlier I spoke to CNN European affairs commentator Dominic Thomas and here's that conversation. Dominic, first of all on the Russia thing, why does Donald Trump want Russia back in the G7? From the U.S. point of view, what's the advantage to that?
[Dominic Thomas, Cnn European Affairs Commentator:] It's quite extraordinary and yet maybe not so. First of all, it's completely inconsistent with U.S. policy, which, just a few weeks ago, saw a brand new round of sanctions
[Thomas:] being imposed on Russia. And secondly, it's completely at odds with the ongoing Mueller investigation and it seems to draw further attention to the complicated relationship, to say the least, between Trump and his campaign. But I think beyond that, when one looks at the context, let's just say, of Russia and the U.S., it's actually probably much more in common than perhaps we've been looking at initially. I think that, first of all, if we just look at Russia in the post Cold War era, so many European countries that used to part of the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union are now part of the E.U. or countries in that region that want to belong to this particular space. And Russian president Vladimir Putin has been working assiduously to try to undermine and weaken those institutions. And we know that Donald Trump himself has a deep dislike for multilateral agreements for the European Union. And in fact, when it comes down to it, there is much more in common between Donald Trump and countries like Hungary, Poland and, most significantly, Italy, that just brought to power a coalition government that has also been saying these kind of statements about bringing Russia back into the fray. So Donald Trump seems to ignore, first of all, or downplaying the significance of ejecting Russia from the G8 because of its total ignorance and respect for international law and because of its undermining of those particular institutions. So when it comes down to it, I don't think Donald Trump shares the values of the people around him at the G7 summit at the moment.
[Vanier:] And this something that's been lost on no one, I think. Trump talks tougher at the moment with allies than he does with rivals. Does he value traditional allies like Canada and Europe?
[Thomas:] I think when one looks at the priorities of the G7 as they're set out at this meeting, starting off climate, total disrespect for the Paris accord and for that relationship and with historical allies. When one looks at the question of security and peace, of course there's support for the attempt at denuclearization the Korean Peninsula but the tearing up of the Iran deal was a further affront to those particular relationships. And, most recently, on the question of trade and jobs, the imposition not only of tariffs on the European Union and its friends and allies but justifying them through the security clause is a further affront to this particular relationship. So I think really, when it comes down to it, and we see this now in the way in which the gathering of this group at the G7, except for the Italian prime minister, are considering yet again an environment in which it's the G6 or the G5 without the United States being incorporated in there. We're seeing increasing resistance in the European Union and from leaders who used to consider themselves allies of trying to figure out how to go about doing business and politics without relying on the United States. But it's profoundly disrespectful to these individuals and leaders.
[Vanier:] Dominic, the specific issue which caused the rift at this summit was trade. Listen to what the French president, Emmanuel Macron, had to say.
[Emmanuel Macron, President Of France:] I think on trade there is a critical path but there is a way to progress all together. We had a very direct and open discussion. And I saw the willingness on all the sides to find agreements and to have a win-win approach for our people, our workers and our middle classes.
[Vanier:] Is it possible to find a win-win solution or is it a zero-sum game? If the U.S. wins, Europe and Canada lose?
[Thomas:] On the previous issue of climate, it was Emmanuel Macron that spoke out, let's make the planet great again, right, in his play on Donald Trump's let's make America great again. I think in this particular case, one should not expect anything out of the U.S. president. But this particular issue of steel and aluminum does not make sense to American industry. So it's interesting to see how he's taken this position, which really has a lot more to do with trade and China and so on and so forth. And I would not be surprised if, on this particular issue, they find some kind of way of reaching some kind of agreement and he does back down on this. But he won't back down on the other issues.
[Vanier:] OK, CNN European affairs commentator, Dominic Thomas, thank you very much.
[Thomas:] Thank you.
[Vanier:] He was one of the greatest storytellers, a CNN colleague of ours, Anthony Bourdain. On Friday, he took his own life. Chef, TV host, modern-day explorer, he was many things to many people. And with his show, "PARTS UNKNOWN," he made good conversation and good food one of the absolute best things on TV. Erica Hill looks at an extraordinary life cut short.
[Erica Hill, Cnn Correspondent:] Anthony Bourdain was found in his hotel room in France, where he was shooting an upcoming episode for his show. He took his own life.
[Hill:] As news of his death broke, the reaction was swift and heartfelt.
[Anthony Bourdain, Cnn:] I don't even know what this is. I love you, noodles.
[Hill:] Called the original rock star of the culinary world, the Elvis of bad boy chefs, Anthony Bourdain was a cultural icon.
[Bourdain:] Oh, delicious.
[Hill:] His mission, to explore the world. Meet the most interesting people. And of course, find the best food.
[Bourdain:] We ask very simple questions. What do you eat? What do you like to cook and everywhere in the world we go and ask these very simple questions, we tend to get some really astonishing answers.
[Hill:] Born in New York and raised in New Jersey, Anthony Bourdain began working in kitchens as a teenager, eventually becoming a celebrity chef.
[Bourdain:] Going to 70 [inaudible].
[Hill:] A best-selling author and TV host.
[Bourdain:] What do you think?
[Unidentified Male:] I love this.
[Hill:] Behind his success, Bourdain struggled with demons, including an addiction to heroin, which he says began in a Cape Cod restaurant when he was just 17.
[Bourdain:] There was some dark genie inside me that I really much hesitate to call a disease that led me to dope.
[Hill:] Bourdain spoke openly about his struggles and about person who inspired him to do better.
[Bourdain:] I have a seven-year-old daughter now who I never would have had. I never thought. I looked in a mirror and I saw somebody worth saving. Or that I wanted to at least try real hard and save.
[Hill:] Using his celebrity to raise awareness about opioid addiction, along with his advocacy, Bourdain remained a passionate explorer, bringing his adventurous spirit to CNN in 2013, where he share his insatiable curiosity with audiences around the world on his series, "
[Parts Unknown." Bourdain:] All right. You're going to I will walk you through this. You're going to have walked me through this.
[Bolduan:] Former President Obama who joins Bourdain on "PARTS UNKNOWN" in Vietnam tweeting, he taught us about food, but more importantly, about his ability to bring us together, to make us a little less afraid of the unknown.
[Bourdain:] People tend to be proud of their food. They let their guard down when they talk to you, you see them at their most vulnerable and revealing in a lot of ways. So even people you have really fundamental disagreements with, maybe the different belief systems. If you're going to intersect anywhere, it's going to be over food. Ah, the real deal.
[Hill:] Bourdain's passion resonated with so many, including millions who never met him, yet who greatly admired everything he introduced them to and the way he opened their eyes and their hearts to the world. His dear friend, fellow chef, Eric Ripert, tweeting, "Anthony was my best friend, an exceptional human being, so inspiring and generous, one of the great storytellers who connected with so many. I pray he is at peace from the bottom of my heart. My love and prayers are also with his family, friends and loved ones." Anthony Bourdain was 61 in New York, Erica Hill, CNN.
[Vanier:] And news of his death shook people around the world. Since his passing, we've been asking for stories of how he touched your life. Thousands of you have offered your heartfelt stories. You can read them at cnn.com and we will continue to update this throughout the weekend with some of your responses. Anthony Bourdain's death is also a reminder of how big a problem suicide is. Take a look at the numbers. In the U.S. alone, suicide rates increased more than 25 percent between 1999 and 2016. That's according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC also found that nearly 45,000 American lives were lost to suicide in 2016 alone. And suicide rates went up more than 30 percent between 1999 and 2016 in 25 states. It also found that 54 percent of those who committed suicide in 2015 did not have a known mental health condition. Startling statistics to take in at this stage. Now if you need help, if anyone you know needs help, a family member or friend, a colleague, reach out to the International Association for Suicide Prevention. They can guide you on how to get help wherever you are, whatever time of day. Go to iasp.info and click on help. Of course we send our deepest condolences here at CNN to Anthony's family and those who loved him. Spent his life bridging cultural divides through food and he was followed by millions. Listen to him explain how he launched his career.
[Bourdain:] I sort of, overnight, had an overnight success with a over- testosteroned, obnoxious memoir of a not-very-distinguished career in the restaurant business. One day I was standing next to a deep fryer and the next, I had this gig, where I'm traveling around the world, making television anyway I want, anywhere I want living the dream.

[Lemon:] Remember when Kanye West said out loud, George Bush doesn't care about black people? Well, today Kanye West has a lot of people wondering if he cares about black people. Rapper Kanye West tweeting today, you don't have to agree with Trump, but the mob can't make me not love him. We are both dragon energy. He is my brother. I love everyone. I don't agree with everything anyone does. That's what makes us individuals. And we have the right to independent thought. Well, the President's response was a simple, thank you, Kanye, very cool. So let's discuss now, CNN Political Commentator, Marc Lamont Hill. He is the author of "Beats, Rhymes, and Classroom Life: Hip-hop Pedagogy" what is that, pedagogy? Say that.
[Marc Lamont Hill, Professor, Temple University:] Pedagogy.
[Lemon:] Pedagogy. That's all about politics I can't see with my new glasses on and the Politics of Identity. And also with me, Political Commentators, Paris Dennard, and David Swerdlick. Thank you so much. I will give you the first question then. So he said he shared about his Twitter love with Ebro in Hot 97, he said that he loves Donald Trump.
[Hill:] Yes, so...
[Lemon:] And that he visited him during the 2016 transition.
[Hill:] Yes.
[Lemon:] Why does he love Donald Trump?
[Hill:] He was at a concert in San Jose the Pablo Tour in '16, and said, if I would have voted, I would have voted for Donald Trump. So he's been shouting out Donald Trump for a long time. I think it's weird. I think it's disappointing to see Kanye go from someone who had the courage to stand up, and say George Bush doesn't care about black people, which was a courageous moment, a protection, and defensive for black people, and the vulnerable in general to go to that to defending someone who's campaign was predicated upon white supremacy, white nationalism, erasure of immigrants, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. It's really disappointing.
[Lemon:] This goes beyond, because this is being framed in a frame, discussed in a frame of, this is liberal versus conservative. This is not liberal versus conservative. This is an idea that everyone should be able to be whatever...
[Hill:] You can believe people have a right to believe what they want. And Kanye has a right to believe what he wants. We have a right to hold him accountable for it.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Hill:] And because he's made so much money off vulnerable people, in the sense that he makes music for black people, and he makes music for brown people, he makes music that poor people love, to then defend the President, and to express love for a president whose policies operate against those interests, it's disappointing. Kanye has a right to do it. I just don't agree with it.
[Lemon:] You write, David, in the Washington Post, you say that Kanye fell for the worst black Republican sales pitch there is. Explain that.
[David Swerdlick, Assistant Editor, "washington Post":] So I started out talking about what I thought was the best black Republican sales pitch. Some one a couple of years ago, Niger Innis, who at the time was a spokesperson for the CORE organization, said to me, the Republican Party is not for people who are rich. It's for people who want to be rich. Now obviously leave aside that there are lots of rich black Democrats, and there are lots of working class Republicans. It's a good bumper sticker, right? That's a good way to pitch your party. But the pitch that Kanye West fell for, Don, was this idea that he's a free thinker, that black Republicans are free thinkers, and the over 90 percent of black people who vote for Democrats are not free thinkers. They're either sheep or worse slaves, which doesn't make sense. The issue legislative policy priorities of black people for the most part line up with the Democratic Party. And so most black people vote for Democrats, which is what all voters do. They look at the two parties, decide which one lines up most with their issue priorities, and they vote for them. It's that simple. And yet somehow, we've gotten to this place that's caught on a lot during the Tea Party era. It was starting to be sort of to fizzle out. But a woman names Candace Owens, who's the spokesperson for turning Point U.S.A., kind of revised this in the last few weeks, this idea that only black people are held to a standard where they can't just vote the issues that they personally prefer.
[Lemon:] Right. OK.
[Swerdlick:] It's crazy.
[Lemon:] So, Paris, you know, I mentioned the former president. You previously, you know, had a big moment. You remember this when Kanye had this moment involving the former President George Bush. Watch this, and then we'll discuss.
[Kanye West, American Rapper:] I hate the way they portray us in the media. If you see a black family it says they're looting. If you see a white family it says they're looking for food. And you know it's been five days because most of the people are black. George Bush doesn't care about black people.
[Chris Tucker, American Actor:] Please, call.
[Lemon:] I'm still laughing because Chris tucker is like oh. Didn't you work for you worked for George Bush, right, Paris?
[Paris Dennard, Member, Trump Advisory Board:] I probably worked for president...
[Lemon:] That was a big deal. Do you think Kanye believes that Donald Trump cares about black people?
[Dennard:] I think that Kanye West does think that the President cares about black people. But I would go back, and say it was not only a big deal to people who knew and knows George Bush's heart. But President Bush years later when asked about one of things that really upset him, or things that he wish he could change, he said that moment was really something that really offended him. And all of the things imagine all the things that people said about him, the wars, and the economy, and all these things, it was that moment. Because when you utilize these throw these phrases out, and call people racist overtly, or covertly, it's offensive, especially when you know your heart, and know what you've tried to do. Nobody can talk about or question what this President had did for things like PEPFAR, and his commitment to reading, and the literacy, and HBC, he was an author, and the like, and so, it was offensive. But I will tell you this about Kanye West, I haven't liked Kanye West since he said that about President Bush, and I don't like his music now, but I will defend Kanye West his right to articulate his opinion on politics, especially if it related to Donald J. Trump, or the make America great again agenda, I think it's his right to do it. I'll defend Chance the Rapper's right to do it. I'll defend Shania Twain's right to do it. Because what happens in society these days, when you say anything that's very close to conservative Republican. Or in support of Donald Trump, you're automatically labeled a racist, or you're attitude about your community, or in this case, Kanye have been called crazy. It's absurd. You are...
[Lemon:] I think you are and as I have said, people are framing this, and that's a small part. Can we can we elevate this conversation because that's not what it's really about.
[Dennard:] That is what it is really about.
[Lemon:] It's not what it's about.
[Dennard:] It's about it fact that Kanye West comes out, and says something that is in support of this President. Chance the Rapper said something in support of this President, and all of a sudden, Kanye uses loses millions of Twitter followers. Why? Just because... Do you support Republicans or this president...
[Hill:] I disagree with your framing of this. When you look at Twitter, and do a search, I mean, this provable stuff. Most people you're saying Donald Trump I mean, Kanye West has a right to say what he thinks about Donald Trump. I agree. I don't think there's a large movement of people saying Kanye West doesn't have the right to say this. This is about right-wing strong argument just to say that he doesn't have free speech. Of course he has free speech.
[Dennard:] He shouldn't be demonized for it is what I was trying to say.
[Hill:] I think thank you for correcting yourself. I also don't think that he's not being demonized here...
[Dennard:] I just clarify.
[Hill:] Same thing, [Inaudible]. I think that he's I think that he is not being demonized as much...
[Dennard:] He is being demonized.
[Hill:] How about this...
[Dennard:] He is being demonized.
[Hill:] I understand you have a different opinion, but let me say mine. And don't cut me off, and I won't cut you off, because I didn't. I think I don't think he's being demonized as much as people are challenging him on his perspective. And I think we have a right to do that as well. I think we do have a right to unfollow people in the same way that you said you don't mess with Kanye anymore, you don't buy Kanye stuff anymore after what he said about George Bush, people have a right to not mess with Kanye anymore after what he said about Donald Trump. I think we both have a right to do that. And no, I don't think that it's a problem to do so, I think it's actually a part of a robust conversation. I don't know if this is a Democrat or Republican thing. And I think the conversation about I think the conversation about Kanye West, and mental health is a reasonable one. I hope Kanye is great. I don't think that his mental health is in question simply because he supported Donald Trump. If that were the case, there's 50 million people whose mental health should be in check.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Dennard:] And that little that little snippet right there is what I'm talking about. That snippet is what I'm talking about. It's important.
[Hill:] I think you missed my point.
[Lemon:] I think you missed the point.
[Hill:] Paris, just let me finish. I think you missed my point. What I am saying is...
[Dennard:] No, I heard you.
[Hill:] OK, I know you heard me. Let America hear me now.
[Dennard:] And they did, and they were offended.
[Lemon:] Let him...
[Dennard:] Fifty million people who you just...
[Hill:] How about this let me get five seconds to speak, [Inaudible] I'm saying you're not crazy for voting for Donald Trump because if that were true, all the 50 million Americans who did were crazy. I'm saying they're not crazy. I'm saying the opposite. I'm saying they're not crazy. So, Paris, if you listened, we will reach conclusion. My point is, is that there are other indicators that makes me concerned about Kanye, the blurting out, the hospital, the fact that he was checked into a hospital a few years ago is under suspicion is a mental issue. I am saying I worry about Kanye, not because a voted or would have voter for, but because of other issues.
[Lemon:] David, quickly because I've got to get to the break.
[Swerdlick:] Yes, two things. Look, first of all Kanye people are rallying around him. And I think part of what Paris is saying is that there's this defense of this idea that black people should be able to be conservative. Black people can be conservative. There are plenty of reasons for black people to be conservative andor Republican. But one of them is not that everybody who's a Democrat is just simply, you know, following along like lemmings behind the Democratic Party. Number two...
[Lemon:] I got to go. I got to go.
[Swerdlick:] Yes, OK. Yes.
[Lemon:] All right. All right.
[Hill:] Ad-libs like a rapper.
[Lemon:] We'll be right back.

[Bolduan:] Right now, the new governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, is being sworn into office as we speak. He's coming into office just as more than a million new voters will be able to vote in the state's elections. Why is that? Starting today, most ex-felons will be able to register to vote, and it could reshape the political landscape in that very important state. CNN correspondent, Rosa Flores, is in Florida with more.
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] Rashawn Welch turned his life around in the nearly five years he spent in federal prison for bank fraud. Now he is a successful entrepreneur in Miami.
[Rashawn Welch, Ex-felon:] Now I'm able to get these young men who had a bad path to be able to change their life now.
[Flores:] But one thing has been out of his reach ever since his conviction, the right to vote. Something forbidden for felons under Florida law until now. The Sunshine State overwhelmingly approved an amendment allowing an estimated 1.5 million felons who have served their sentences and any probation or parole to register to vote, starting today. The new rights don't apply to those convicted of murder or violent sexual offenses. So 1.5 million new voters in a state already infamous for razor thin margin elections and nail-biting recounts.
[Charles Zelden, Political Science Professor, Nova Southeastern University:] We are the swingiest of swing states.
[Flores:] Political science professor, Charles Zelden, says Amendment IV had the potential to dramatically alter Florida's political landscape.
[Zelden:] It doesn't matter what party they are because this potentially changes the political dynamic across the state in every county, in every voting district.
[Flores:] But that no one knows for sure what such a massive potential increase to the voter rolls in such a short amount of time will mean for the political establishment. And that's why Zelden says politicians are rattled.
[Zelden:] They are literally an unknown, which is why the politicians are scared.
[Flores:] The ACLU of Florida, which spearheaded the statewide effort, said getting Amendment IV passed was a battle that transcended party politics.
[Melba Pearson, Deputy Director, Aclu Of Florida:] This was truly a nonpartisan issue.
[Flores:] But acknowledged it's the parties that stand to benefit the fruits of the ACLU's efforts.
[Pearson:] This is an equal opportunity amendment, and whoever takes advantage of it is who may see a change in the coming years.
[Flores:] As for Rashawn Welch, he doesn't plan to waste any time in exercising his new right.
[Welch:] I'm excited to go vote tomorrow. And not only will I go register to vote, I'm going to take some people with me.
[Flores:] And Rashawn Welch kept his word. Take a look at this video. He just registered to vote moments ago. Our cameras were rolling. He had some youth with him as well. And, Kate, we have spoken with both parties here in Florida, and they tell me that they're going to be zeroing in on this new group of freshly new voters ahead of 2020 Kate?

[Whitfield:] All right. Welcome back with this breaking news. Virginia Governor Ralph Northam says he now believes it is not him in a racist photo taken for his yearbook while in medical school and that he has no recollection of taking it. However, that image is on his page as a 25-year-old in medical school. I'm joined again by Larry Sabato and David Swerdlick. Thankfully, I think I'm going to be able to hear you now.
[Sabato:] Ok.
[Swerdlick:] Ok.
[Whitfield:] So this is very perplexing because the governor last night made reference to the photo of him Larry. And then today we understand the governor to be in the mansion and he has taken many phone calls from friends, from allies within the political sphere there in Virginia and beyond urging him to step down. And thus far we are seeing that he wants to hold onto his seat but now the explanation has changed, Larry that he is not in that photo, that that photo is not a representation of him, even though he mentioned that photo in his statement last night. So how much of this is also a microcosm or some sort of representation of where Virginians believe they are, you know. And we're talking about just over 30 years in which this photograph, this depiction is on display and this is now just over a year, barely two years after Charlottesville which led to the death of a woman and on display, white supremacy, a lot of hate.
[Swerdlick:] Right.
[Sabato:] Yes. But I think people understand that Virginians are very sensitive to this issue and should be. We all know the history of the Civil War, Virginia's role in it. We all know Jim Crow and Virginia's role in it. Tragically, Virginia got worse rather than better. It led the Southern Manifesto, it led massive resistance to school desegregation in the 1950s, which I was born in 1952, so there are a lot of us still around who remember pieces of those massive resistance. This is a highly sensitive subject. And probably more so than most states Virginians react very negatively to a photo like that which is just mind boggling. You know, I'm sure the governor is under a lot of pressure. We have a hard time understanding this. We think of this whole thing as bizarre and we are just observers. Imagine if you're governor and in a matter of hours this just started late yesterday afternoon
[Swerdlick:] Last night, right.
[Sabato:] in a matter of hours, everybody you know is talking about your resignation.
[Whitfield:] Yes.
[Sabato:] I'm sure it is mind blowing.
[Whitfield:] Yes. And David
[Swerdlick:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] he's a pediatrician. He was studying to be a pediatrician at the time. And if you are black and if you are a patient or perhaps any number of your children were to be treated by Dr. Northam at the time and now learning of this, you know, a very short space between being a practicing physician, of all people, and a photo like this while he was in medical school. I mean what are people to think? What is his lieutenant governor, a descendant of slaves, to think? People who served with him, who went to school with him at VMI what are they to think now?
[Swerdlick:] Right.
[Whitfield:] Is this incredibly mind boggling or were there other displays that are tantamount to the image here?
[Swerdlick:] Yes, Fred that's one of the things that's so difficult about this situation is that people are left wondering do I really know this person. Look, I sit here, I don't consider myself in a position to judge what is in Governor Northam's heart. Only he knows that. And when I listened to his apology last night, it sounded sincere, and fulsome last night. But then there's this confusion this morning about him saying whether or not he's even in the photo, even though last night he suggested strongly that he was one of those people. Here is what we do know Fred. We know that someone who's 25 is not a kid, certainly not in 1984. That was a grown man in medical school who, if he was in the photo, if he made a decision to dress up in either blackface or in a Klan hood. That's number one. Number two is and I know I keep harping on this point but I want to emphasize it it's about, it is not about the personal, it is about the position of public trust that he is in. If he was in that photo, his friends, his neighbors don't have to shun him. His medical patients can make their own decisions about whether they still want him to treat them. But when you're talking about being the governor of a state, a state that just this month honored in the legislature Robert E. Lee, which seems to me again a problem with separating personal views with people in a position of public trust. That's the problem I think that Governor Northam faces. Can he be seen by all of the people of Virginia to be an honest broker on issues, particularly when it comes to race and all of the things that affects in the administration of his government?
[Whitfield:] Right. And again, I would like us to cue up, my producers if you can hear to cue up the apology from last night. Be in position to play that. That in contrast with what CNN is now reporting based on a conversation, a source having a conversation with him about no recollection of, you know, that photo that photo not being a representation of him. We need to have that at the ready. David Swerdlick, Larry Sabato ok, hold it we do have that apology. Let's listen to it one more time.
[Northam:] That photo and the racist and offensive attitudes it represents does not reflect that person I am today or the way that I have conducted myself as a soldier, a doctor, and public servant. I'm deeply sorry.
[Whitfield:] All right. So Larry and David real quick, you know, your sentiments on that. There is criticism coming from lots of corners that that just didn't go far enough. There is an acknowledgment that he makes of that photo, but then saying it doesn't reflect the person I am today. That in contrast now with the governor, according to a source telling CNN, that he says, you know, he wasn't in that photo. That photo is not of an image of him Larry.
[Sabato:] Well, you can't reconcile all of these pieces. And actually, there's a new dimension now of integrity. What is the truth? I mean we know all of the problems with President Trump and the White House, but there's still a separate and I'd like to think higher standard in other places that people in positions of major responsibility have the obligation to tell the truth, especially on important matters and involving them directly. So this is beyond strange. I can believe in evolution of one's racial views over the course of decades, though hiding this for all these decades doesn't help. What I have a hard time understanding is how he could evolve from a position of acknowledging that the picture was of him last night and then this morning saying no, I wasn't even there. I don't remember it at all.
[Whitfield:] Yes.
[Sabato:] Something is terribly wrong.
[Whitfield:] Right.
[Swerdlick:] Right.
[Whitfield:] And you mentioned the President, we have not heard from the President. He has not commented as far as we know on this. However, presidential candidates have and have all, those who have spoken out, have all said he needs to step down. David at what point must the President comment on this as well?
[Swerdlick:] Well, the President of the United States should be the moral leader of the country and should be able to arbitrate these kind of issues or at least weigh in and provide some clarity, even if American citizens are going to make up their own minds. We'll see whether President Trump weighs in on this. I agree with Larry, what he said a moment ago. I believe people can change and I don't doubt that Ralph Northam believes he is a much different person than he was 35 years ago, but if he was one of the people on that picture, I think it's going to be hard for him to hang on to his office.
[Whitfield:] All right. David Swerdlick, Larry Sabato thank you so much for now. I know I'll be talking with you again very soon.
[Swerdlick:] Sure.
[Sabato:] Thanks.
[Whitfield:] All right. Here also with me now a Democrat from Texas and member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Thank you so much, Congresswoman for being available today. So what are your thoughts on Governor Northam and his apology or statement last night and then today, according to a source saying, he is not even in that photograph.
[Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee , Texas:] Well, Fredricka I have to reflect on my own experience as a graduate of the University of Virginia law school and recognizing the history that the state of Virginia has really passed through over the decades and centuries. Certainly in the last century, it was the state that had the segregated schools. And yet it also had the first African-American governor, Doug Wilder.
[Whitfield:] Doug Wilder.
[Jackson Lee:] What I would say is this is an issue of whether or not this governor can lead this state that is going through such a tumultuous history of segregation, racism and divisiveness. But it's healed itself and has come to a point of not only electing this governor and governors before but electing now an African-American lieutenant governor. And the real question has to be as to whether or not this governor can lead this state, whether or not he can heal this state. And if that is not the answer or the answer does not come back that he can, then I would think that the governor would do the right thing as many of his colleagues in the state of Virginia, congressional delegation has asked him to do, is to do the right thing. I think that that is what he should reflect on as he makes his decision.
[Whitfield:] If the state Democratic Party is condemning this photograph and asking him to step down, if the NAACP is asking him to step down. There are a widespread contingent, you know, of entities that are asking him to step down. And if he refuses to do so, how in your view would he be able to continue to govern without that support, even if his policies are popular with Virginians, would he be able to continue governing knowing that Virginians are happy with his policies, but perhaps people are not happy with this image or this depiction of his history?
[Jackson Lee:] You know, Fredricka that is the real question because it is noted that he's had good policies. I think what is baffling is the existence of the picture, the age of the individuals they were grown persons, I assume grown men. And if he is one of those persons, they go at the very core of hurt for the African-American community and those who are empathetic. And that's the question I have asked. Can you heal your state? Can you stand on the history of the state of which they have moved past? I mean this is the same state that at my campus two years ago individuals when I say the University of Virginia campus, individuals came and acted in the most ugliest of fashions, the most horrid of fashions calling out names of African-American Jews and others in a hateful manner. And that had to be healed. And I can tell you that by the citing of that as one of the more horrific racial incidences around the nation, the history of the nation, it is still something that pierces people's heart. Can this governor lead this state in the healing process that I know is still going on? I would say as others have said to the governor that do the right thing and it might be that he would have to not be in office.
[Whitfield:] All right. Now let's take a very difficult turn, that to the showdown over the President's border wall. President Trump, you know, now growing seemingly frustrated with the negotiation process, lashing out at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in this latest interview with CBS. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, I think that she was very rigid which I would expect but I think she's very bad for our country. She knows that you need a barrier. She knows that we need border security. She wanted to win a political point. I happen to think it is very bad politics because basically she wants open borders. She doesn't mind human trafficking or she wouldn't do this because you know
[Unidentified Female:] She offered you over a billion dollars for border security.
[Trump:] Excuse me?
[Unidentified Female:] She offered over a billion dollars for border security. She doesn't want the wall.
[Trump:] She's costing the country hundreds of billions of dollars because what's happening is when you have a porous border and when you have drugs pouring in and when you have people dying all over the country because of people like Nancy Pelosi who don't want to give proper border security for political reasons, she's doing a terrible disservice to our country.
[Whitfield:] So Congresswoman there's a lot of blame there. That doesn't say respect or willingness to work together. So is he essentially sign-posting that he is moving in the direction of declaring a national emergency; that he is bypassing any hope of negotiations of a bill that he would sign?
[Jackson Lee:] Well, Fredricka, first of all, let me say that the words were shameful and inappropriate for a commander in chief. The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is third in line to the presidency. I wish the President would read his constitution. And she has every right to lead the Congress, to lead the House on views that she has. As she speaks, appropriators are working to find a resolution those who are on the Homeland Security Appropriations Committee as I'm on the Homeland Security Authorizing Committee, Fredricka I have been to the border more times than I can imagine over the two decades that I served. I know every aspect of the border those areas that you have no ability if you will to put barriers or fencing, those areas that are on private land, those areas that face the Rio Grande. What we are saying is we want to be appropriate, thoughtful, and listen to the experts dealing with the question. The President wants a fight. He only wants to be political. He doesn't have any guardrail of leadership that allow him to sit down and understand to do the best plan. Let me tell you what the President
[Whitfield:] But he has changed his jargon a few times
[Jackson Lee:] Pardon me.
[Whitfield:] he has changed his jargon in that he'll say ok, if not a wall, then a fence, a barrier, et cetera. Kind of all encompassing. Does that make a difference?
[Jackson Lee:] But he has said all those things, he has thrown them all up against the wall and then he comes right back again and says forget about it, I'm going to do an emergency order which has certain criteria which includes a national emergency, using the military, and it indicates that the country is in jeopardy, which we are not. And so no he does not stick to all of the above. It is, there are at the border all of the above. Go to the border. There are barriers, there are steel fencing, if you will, there's the Rio Grande. He doesn't say that. But let me say what he doesn't say as well. He cost the nation $11 billion in the shutdown. The Democrats, leadership in the Democrats of the House voted on HR 79 and said that we won't do that. We don't believe in that. We don't believe in holding federal workers hostages. We also raised their pay, which this president who feigns respect for the federal work force and the border patrol agents and border protection cut their wages by an executive order. We raised their wages by 2.6 percent. So this president doesn't have a moral guardrail. We don't know what he stands for. We are working every day one, not to shut the government down, to present a plan that I hope reasonable people in the White House, chief of staff and others will look at this plan and tell the President the best thing he needs to do is to sign this plan, this appropriation, and open the government and pay the people. There is no understanding of what the President stands for except name-calling and I can assure him that the Speaker of the House is a fighter against human trafficking, is a strong supporter for smart border security, has provided a pathway for her appropriators to fund as much as possible to make this nation safe. And it has been safe with Democrats in leadership, focusing on how to safely secure the government without throwing things against the wall and saying anything and then coming back again and telling the appropriators and legislators no, I'm going to order an emergency order. That's not the way to go. If he does it, we'll sue him.
[Whitfield:] the way it's going thus far, are you seeing another shutdown on the horizon?
[Jackson Lee:] I do not. I have said to my constituents that that will not be the way we will go, whatever process we have to use to ensure that this president does not contribute to THE shutting down of the government.
[Whitfield:] Ok.
[Jackson Lee:] We will continue to work, continue to negotiate for the American people.
[Whitfield:] All right. Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.
[Jackson Lee:] Thank you for having me. Thank you.
[Whitfield:] Both the U.S. and Russia are pulling out of a nuclear arms treaty that has been keeping the peace since the Cold War. We'll go live to Moscow and hear why the Kremlin may already be gearing up for a new arms race.

[Robyn Curnow, Cnn Anchor:] I am Robyn Curnow and the top stories this hour. Officials in Florida are set to speak any moment now in the school shooting that killed 17 people on Wednesday. U.S. president is also set to weigh in over the next hour. We'll they are live to both events. In a tweet, the president said he suggested that more could have been done to warn authorities about the suspect. And Cyril Ramaphosa has just been sworn in as the president of South Africa succeeding Jacob Zuma who resigned yesterday. We understand that Cyril Ramaphosa will tackle corruption as one of his first orders of business. One teacher hid 19 students in a closet while a coach lost his life shielding kids from a hail of bullets a day after one of the deadliest school shootings in modern U.S. history. We are learning more about how survivors managed to escape and we are learning more about the victims who did not make it home that day. Our Rosa Flores is at the scene in Parkland, Florida. Rosa, just give us a sense of what people are saying. I mean, in many ways, we don't want to know what happened in that school but people are talking and it's importance that the stories are heard.
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, we are hearing a lot of story that you mentioned of those heroes that were trying to say that's many lives as possible. One of them is the assistant football coach, Aaron Feis. He used his body as a shield to protect students and of course, he is one of the victims and we are learning very slowly about some of the others who perhaps risked their lives to save others. But as you mentioned, authorities are also having to dig little evidence. The school is behind me, you can see flashing lights, you can see police cars driving by, just processing the scene, Robyn, right, as we speak. And this is a very difficult and high due process for crime scene investigators because they are human beings, even though they are trained to go inch by inch to make sure that every piece of evidence is listed. This is difficult for them to scour through the bloody scene. They also collect the not only remains but also, the belongings of the people who were inside. And we're learning more about that suspect as well. He is in a jail. So right now, he is expected to face a judge in a bond hearing in about 1:30 this afternoon and we're learning about the AR-15 style weapon that he purchased about a year ago. He passed the background and we are also learning that he was expelled from this school for disciplinary measures. And so, as the police and authorities of law enforcement start to paint this picture, there is a lot of questions, Robyn, as you might imagine that surface about the motive, why this individual do what he did and what he's accused of. Authorities scouring through his social media trying to look for clues, I ask the sheriff yesterday, where are their clues, and were clues perhaps missed and of course, they always say, if you see something, say something. Now we're hearing about cases of perhaps an individual with the name Nikolas Cruz. It's unclear if it's the same Cruz but someone...
[Curnow:] Somebody know that he did, Rosa. I mean, in many ways, you know, his motive is one thing, but the fact that he was able to execute 17 people with one gun, because he had access to the gun. But he also, I understand, have access to gas mask. Just tell us what he did. How did he gain access to the school because he was a former student I understand?
[Flores:] Yes, you're absolutely right. So this is from the sheriff here in Broward County. He explained that this crime scene actually starts outside of the school. They found one person dead by the street and as investigators progressed and moved closer towards the school, they found two people dead outside of the building, then investigators kept progressing, 12 people were dead inside. And as you mentioned and this is according to Senator Nelson here from Florida, he mentioned he was the one that brief that this individual had access to a gas mask, that he had smoke bombs, and that he used them. Other law-enforcement sources have told us that he activated the fire alarm because in his mind, this was going to help increase the carnage. We've also heard from law enforcement that he had many magazines, which means, he had a lot of ammunition and could have done more harm. But as we've also mentioned, a lot of the teachers acted very quickly, they locked their doors, student hid under desk, and under some teachers' desks, they started text messaging, and calling their parents that even though that they were alive. So we are getting a lot of tidbits of information and of course, law enforcement trying to piece the entire puzzle piece all together.
[Curnow:] OK, thanks. And you are there in the scene in Parkland, and we know that there is going to be a press conference where the police are going to give more details. So, Rosa, we will come back you. We are also going live to that press conference as soon as it start, that appears to be the location of that. So we will bring that live. But for a moment, I just want to go back to our Tom Fuentes. He is a senior law enforcement analyst, he joins us now from Washington. Tom, my go to schools where they practiced lockdown drills, there are bulletproof doors at the entrance, there are policemen roaming around, you know, at the parking lot. But the fact remains that kids in American schools are more vulnerable than kids in school anywhere else in the world. Why does this keep happening?
[Tom Fuentes, Cnn Senior Law Enforcement Analyst:] Well, Robyn, there isn't enough desire on the part of lawmakers or the public to push lawmakers to make changes and this does keep happening. I was on the air five years ago with Wolf Blitzer during the Sandy Hook shooting and here we had dozens of little and thaw was yes, 4-year- olds and 5-year-olds, dozens of them plus the school principal. And you know at that time, the discussions came out of we're going to make changes. We're going to do something. We've got to address the situation. Kid walks in with an assault rifle and begins shooting little children. And not real changes since then. You've had multiple shootings. As we mentioned earlier, 18 this year alone in school, so we just have so many weapons on the streets of America with so little control. We have such a poor mental health control system or treatment system that that contributes to it. We have increasingly less discipline in our schools here which leads to having to hire these schools security officers safety officers. And then we don't let them be armed as if anybody in the building should have a gun that should be the people that do that and we say, no you don't need it. We are not going to let you carry one. We have rules of, you know, where guns are not allowed by off-duty police officers attending college classes.
[Curnow:] I mean, more guns is not going to help stop this in many ways in because there are mass guns in America already. I mean the staff is Americans of 44.4 percent of the world's population. And this country has 42 percent of the world's guns. So a few extra, I don't think if you know...
[Fuentes:] Not at all. I am not talking about extra in the hands of public. I'm talking about, if you put a law enforcement officer in the school to protect the students, that person should be armed. The police officers on the streets of the U.S. during our daily patrol duties are armed. Those are the people and we hear this rhetoric of reducing these guns. We are not taking away nobody is doing anything to diminish the over 300 millions guns in the hands of the general public. What I am saying is knowing that we already knowing that we already have that many guns out there, now what do we do with our schools? You can't lock them down completely. You can't put enough magnetometers, they can't afford it. You can't put enough security guards, they can't afford that. So we are really kind of in a stuck situation where and then the mental health treatment, even with the referrals where the authorities. I mean, I was a police office on the streets for six years before my 30 in the FBI, and years ago, when I was a patrol officer, there were much more options for a police officer who encountered somebody or had a referral from the public of this is an insane person in my front yard, there were much more opportunities for the police officer to have that person get treatment than today. So...
[Curnow:] But I mean in many ways, I mean people have mental health problems all over the world, every country deals with people who, you know, they question their stability, but the difference is the rest of the world, those people and even other citizens don't have access to the kinds of guns that Americans do, no matter what your mental state is. I mean, even Florida for example, you don't need a permit or a license to buy a gun Florida. And you don't actually have to register your gun. I mean, there is a list of you can buy as many guns as you want at one time. It does not regulate assault weapons, large capacity ammunition magazines. This is a very American problem and the rest of the world looks at America and says, why why would Americans allow these kinds of weapons to be on the streets in such numbers.
[Fuentes:] Exactly. Very good question and that is what law enforcement is really in a bind because they can't solve this problem by themselves. They can't take the guns away, they can't arrest people and force them to either seek mental health treatment or be incarcerated because they think bad thought or do postings on social media that says they are thinking about school shootings or whatever. The FBI goes and talks to them just like they talk to people that post that they want to join ISIS or some other domestic terrorist group but there is only so far they can go with that. Here in this country, it is not just thinking bad thoughts, it's you have to act on them. So, if you say I want to join ISIS and you have already bought the airline tickets to go to Turkey and Syria, then that is that gives you the extra step. But in this case, you can say all of these things but you a lawful right, unless you are convicted of a crime, and even arresting somebody or interviewing them is not enough, or a judge mentally judges you insane or mentally ill. And then, go into a database to prevent you from buying a gun, those two things don't happen.
[Curnow:] So there is no so there is no political rule. In many ways, the president's latest tweet, he is going to speak in a little while and we also just make an op-ed while we are waiting for a press conference on the ground outside of the school for more details but the president suggested that people around this gunman should have perhaps paid more attention his social media posts. This is kind of insinuating that the blame is laid at friends and neighbors, because they did not tell authorities that he was making these threatening posts on social media. What do you think of that?
[Fuentes:] Well in this se, we have reports that we have one report of someone forwarding the YouTube message that Cruz posted to the FBI. The FBI sent two agent from its nearest office to interview that person, to see if that person knew more about the individual doing the postings or if he had anymore details about it. Now, we don't know yet, but it's pretty clear that if the FBI took the trouble to send two agents to the person making the complaint, they probably did the same thing to the person that the complaint was about. But then again, like they do in these cases where someone says they are going to join ISIS or a neighbor says that I know this person. He is talking about traveling to the Middle East to join a terror group, in those cases, the FBI file is up, but they can only just expressing these bad thoughts. That is as far as they can really take it.
[Curnow:] And you talk about terrorism, and in many ways, this president in particular has scared people with the swift of terrorism, and the need for America to defend itself from outside terrorist or terrorist within, but in many ways, the real scourge facing ordinary citizens in America, a 19-year- old with big guns.
[Fuentes:] Well, the fact is, it is both. So when the president talks about international terrorism and the threat it could pose. What's radicalizing people in your country to take action drive over people with cars and do any number of methods of killing people, that is a legitimate threat and we are still facing it because the ideology in the postings are still out there. But what you're saying is true also. This is a threat also of mentally deranged individuals.
[Curnow:] And there is no political will to deal with that.
[Fuentes:] But the fact is, we could you know, you can do a count all of all of the terror acts that have been thwarted by the FBI and other federal and state...
[Curnow:] Exactly.
[Fuentes:] ... and local agencies, so we don't know what the body count would be.
[Curnow:] I am not minimizing the threat but I'm just saying, there seems to be, you know, some sort of disconnect between the perception of what is dangerous, because solutions are not being offered to fix these mass shootings. And I think that is the question that is still confuses many in the rest of the world. Tom Fuentes, we are watching the people walk towards what will be microphones at a press. Let's just talk and I might have to interrupt you if they take to the podium or the microphones.
[Fuentes:] OK.
[Curnow:] What happens next? Thoughts and prayers and we will wait for the next one.
[Fuentes:] Exactly. Thoughts and prayers we can't talk about the gun issues now. We have to wait until the period of mourning is over. We will talk about it later. And then of course later never comes because the next one, we have another shooting. Well, we can't talk about it during that shooting, we got to wait and talk about it later. So we keep, you know, putting off, even having this discussion, even having maybe the assembly of a blue ribbon commission...
[Curnow:] Tom, I'm just going to interrupt you and let's listen in on this press conference now.
[Sheriff Scott Israel, Broward County, Florida:] All of the victims' families have been notified. We will be releasing the names of those who lost their lives today. We will released throughout PIO in a very short period of time, but all of the families have been notified. Our detectives worked through the night on this very daunting and challenging task, but it had to be done. It was the right thing to do, and they work tirelessly. This community is hurting right now. There's going to be a lot of conversations over the nest couple of days and weeks and I'm going to be very animated about what I think this country can do to possibly prevent these tragedies in the future. Today is a day of healing. Today is a day of mourning. The suspect is in custody. He will be appearing before the first magistrate today at 2:00 p.m. at Broward County court house. This morning, we he begun working with the FBI, and you will be hearing for a special agent in-charge of the FBI, Rob Lasky in a few minutes. We are also working with the Florida department of law enforcement under the direction of Troy Walker. We will interview every single student or every person in that school that possibly knew something or might not know they knew something, and they will be thoroughly brief and we will make sure that we are able to prosecute this case, and the suspect has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder. And law enforcement, we will do everything was can, the FBI, ourselves, to make sure that this person is convicted of all charges and that justice is served. Sadly, there have been copycat threats made today at other schools. We will respond to every threat. Every threat that we receive, we will not classify it as a copycat or a prank call. We will in full and investigate it. Any call that is made fictitiously, any fake call, any call that is made to take out resources at a time like this and place them in places where we don't need to be, we will do it the full power of the sheriff's office. We will investigate this and charge anyone accordingly with the maximum charge if we possibly could for doing something so horrific, so pathetic. Governor Scott is into come and speak, and then you're going to hear from Special Agent Lasky of the FBI. I will return to the microphone and answer some question. I think it is noteworthy that our next press conference, I will be releasing a timeline based on investigation and video that have captured as to what happened yesterday, and I'd like to take you through it on chronological order. We are now ready to do that at this time, bit when we are, we will be back here and we will release that. And now I would like to introduce Florida's governor, Rick Scott.
[Gov. Rick Scott , Florida:] Thank you, sheriff. Thank you for inviting the sheriff's department for all their hard work to make sure that one, this individual is, we have justice. And two, to make sure this never happens again. So I think everybody up here is going to say the same thing. We our hearts and prayers are with these families, and the families that early lost the loved ones, and that families that have loved ones still in the hospital. And [Inaudible], and then also, we want to make sure that this never happens again. Next week in Tallahassee, I'm going to sit down with state leaders, and we're going to have a real conversation about two things. How do we make sure when a parent is ready to send their child to school and in Florida, that parent knows that child is going to be safe. Number two, do we make sure this individual with mental illness do not touch a gun. We need to have a real conversation, so we have public safety for schools in the state. I have spoken with the Speaker Richard Corcoran and President Joe Negron, they're ready to provide the resources and have a real conversation about how do we maker sure that we have public safety. I want to make sure that my children and my grandchildren, yours, everybody in the state can wake up and be safe. I'm going to stay here and do everything I can, I know all the state resources are going to do a hearing. I know the attorney general, everyone is going to work heard and with the sheriff's department and school district to do everything we can to go forward, and violence has to stop losing another child in this country due violence in the school. There is the many families grieving right now. We've got to grieve with them, mourn with them but give them their space. There will be a time that someone want to want and tell their story but right now, it you talk to individuals and we went through this with the post attack, they want their own time grieve. So I want to thank everybody in the sheriff's department, [Inaudible], they are doing to keep people safe. I want to thank the attorney general for the victim advocates that are coming down here to be helpful.
[Robert Lasky, Fbi Special Agent In-charge:] Good morning, my name is Rob Lasky, special agent in-charge of the division at the FBI. First of all, I want to express the [Inaudible] to the victims, the families, friends, the entire community. We suffer the senseless and horrible act. The FBI continues to stand by throughout country sheriff's office to support them and give every [Inaudible] they need to investigate this heinous crime. In 2017, the FBI received information about a comment made in a YouTube channel. That comment simply said, I'm going to be a profession school shooter. No other information was included with the comment which will indicate a time, location or the true identity of the person who made the comment. The FBI conducted, data reviews, check, who enable to further identify the person who actually made the comment. Again, as native Floridian, my heart goes out to the victims of the families and friends of the entire community. Thank you.
[Israel:] I would like to bring up our superintended in schools, Ron Runcie.
[Ron Runcie, Broward County School Superintendent:] Again, we can't say this enough. Every minute of the day is focusing on how we can support our families, our students and our staff as we work through this horrific situation. We are providing grief counselors at several locations for our students, two in Parkland, two in Coral Springs and you know, we are doing everything that we can to make sure that we are supporting our students. We are also providing counselors on-site for students and staff [Inaudible] middle school which is near here, throughout the district, we are providing guidance to all of our schools on how to have conversations with our students on this particular event. I will tell you that students have been reaching out to me, reaching out to staff, every board members and others to say that now now is the time for this country to have a real conversation on sensible gun control laws in this country. So I still need to ask for that conversation. And I hope we can get it done in this general but if we don't, they will. The second I would say that the governor alluded to it, something that we can do now [Inaudible] in this legislative session is some real funding for mental health support for our youth and organizations in our community, so we can properly provide the kind of interventions. We should not have disconnected youth wandering around in our communities and we know that they need additional support. I get on the phone with members of the legislator, they are going to work with the leaders there and the governor to substantially increase the amount that are being put on the table right now for mental health services, so we can have more counselors, more psychologist, more family council, state workers in our schools are absolutely needed. The last thing I would say is that there have been a lot of inquiries as to where individuals to provide support. I want to thank everyone in the Broward community and around this country for your continued thoughts and prayers, acts of kindness that we see minute by minute. There is a GoFundMe account that has been set up as we talked about yesterday there have been a lot of fraudulent type of activities set up put there. So we worked to establish something that's credible so go find the account, [Inaudible]. Again, that's GoFundMe, that was fund with folks that made contributions, again, please keep our babies, our families and this entire community in your prayers as we go through this healing process. It's going to take quite a while for us to be able to do deal with this. But we are going to do everything we can, every day, the greatest amount of responsibility we can to make sure that we are supporting out families. Again I want to take out law enforcement agency, Sherriff Israel, the FBI, the first responders, they have been incredible. And I want to acknowledge some heroes that have been in our schools. We have an athletic director, campus monitor who responded immediately when there were signs of trouble in the school. Unfortunately, those two heroes gave their lives for our kids and help prevent this from being the worst tragedy than it is today. So we need to acknowledge the heroes that are in our school every single day, who are not only insuring that our kids are learning and [Inaudible], they need to have a bright future. They love them and treat them as if they are their own children. They out the put their lives on the line every single day and that's another thing that we need to do, so figure out how we can better compensate and reward teachers in this country, and just give service to the quality of work that they provide. Thank you.
[Israel:] As I said yesterday when our Attorney General Pam Bondi found out about this tragedy, having dealt with the Pulse nightclub and having a lot of expertise from this are. Unfortunately, she got on the plane and she was down here within hours, and help out going to help a lot of our families out. I would like bring her up here, so can tell you about some of the great things they are doing to try and help out families in Parkland.
[Pamela Bondi, Florida Attorney General:] Thank you, sheriff. Thank you, governor. And thank you, special agent. Last night, there were scenes going on. One at the actual crime scene and Broward Sheriff sources and the FBI, [Inaudible]. They were unbelievable, what they did send. That crime scene from a prosecution point of view was meticulously detailed process and it took as long as needed to take to make sure it was thoroughly process and accurately processed. The other scene was at the hotel where we were with the family members. Having to tell me that the FBI advocates that a child, some 14-years-old that it is one of the hardest things you have to do in your career. These parents, tremendous families are grieving. And again please respect their privacy. We were there until about 3:30 in the morning with these families. And many of them have siblings who are in the school and survived, and then a brother or a sister did not, that was extremely tragic. But we are praying for these families, we are going to continue to pray for these families and that justice is done for the one that brutally, brutally murdered, all of these students. My job now will continue to be, to help the victims and the families. We have gotten to all of the victims who have lost loved ones, to be sure that we can help pay for their funeral expenses. If you are in the hospital with your family, we will be coming to you today to help you to make sure we help with your hospital bill. So you have nothing to worry about. They are we also will be on scene with the FBI and the superintendent who have done a great job. Our advocates will be there to provide counseling. END

[Watt:] Leaders from Russia, Turkey and Iran will meet in Tehran, Friday, to discuss the ominous situation in Idlib Province, Syria's last rebel stronghold. This Summit, probably, the last hope for avoiding a humanitarian catastrophe. Syrian state media and an activist group said that air strikes, Wednesday, targeted the western and southern edges of Idlib, and a government defensive to retake the province is believed to be imminent. The U.N. says about three million civilians live in Idlib. And public anger in Iraq's southern oil hub is turning deadly. Activists say that Iraqi forces fired tear gas and live ammunition at demonstrators in a third day of protests in Basra. Then, Wedeman reports from the growing fury over apparent government neglect and corruption.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn International Correspondent:] The southern Iraqi city of Basra is in revolt. Its residents fed up with crumbling infrastructure, high unemployment, contaminated drinking water that had sent hundreds to hospital and prolonged electricity cuts in a city that swelters in the summer. The protests also spurred on by anger endemic corruption and official incompetence. So far this week, security forces have killed at least six protesters, dozens of others, including police, have been injured. The discontent here is even more intense since many of the troops that helped defeat ISIS, came from southern Iraq.
[Fadhil Qusay, Protester:] Is this the way they reward the people of Basra? Demands protester, by attacking with live ammunition?
[Wedeman:] Basra should be one of Iraq's wealthiest cities. It sits atop much of the country's oil wealth. But little of that wealth has been felt by the residents of this, Iraq's third largest city. The caretaker government in Baghdad, already paralyzed, since an inconclusive election more than four months ago, has promised to address Basra's problems. But so far, only promises have reached the city. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has called for an immediate investigation into the killing of protesters, but he's also blaming the unrest on unnamed troublemakers.
[Haider Al-abadi, Prime Minister Of Iraq:] There are parties that are pouring oil on the fire, who are setting people against the security forces to jeopardize Basra's security, a body told reporters in Baghdad, Tuesday. Basra's many woes are fuel enough, for this fire. Ben Wedeman, CNN, Beirut.
[Watt:] And finally, the scallop wars appear to be over. A compromise between French and British fishermen fighting over the shellfish was announced, Wednesday. The dispute came to a head last week off the Normandy coast when French and British boats rammed each other. The French can fish legally for scallops only seven months a year, and they accused the U.K. of unfair competition because the British boats can harvest the meaty mollusks all year long. The new agreement restricts scallop fishing to certain sized vessels, and apparently, other details will be hammered out on Friday. Thanks for watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles, I'm Nick Watt. "WORLD SPORT" starts after the break.

[Camerota:] Nearly 800,000 Dreamers in America this morning do not know their fate. The Trump administration is expected to end the program that protects them from deportation within six months if Congress does not come up with a solution. Joining us now are two Dreamers. Angelica Villalobos came to America at 11 years old. And, Angel Oaxaca-Rivas was just four when his family arrived in the U.S. We're happy to have both of you here today to tell us how you're feeling. Angelica, let me start with you. When you heard the announcement from the White House that the DACA the Dreamer program was going to change and be over in the next six months, how did you feel?
[Angelica Villalobos, "dreamer":] I was upset and angry. I think it was a fight that we all worked really hard to get and to be in this situation it's really difficult.
[Camerota:] And, Angelica, how would your life change? You are a mom of four children
[Villalobos:] Yes.
[Camerota:] and so if you cannot stay in the U.S., what happens?
[Villalobos:] Well, I'm my husband and I, we you know, we're a team. He's the one that supports the household. I take care of the kids. If I were to be deported it definitely is going to put a burden on our family. I'm that one that, you know, volunteers in the school. I was very active in the community with my kids along and I think that if I wasn't going to be able to be here with them to be a little walk them through, it's going to be very, very breaking for them.
[Camerota:] Angel, you've called the possibility of this terrifying. What do you mean?
[Angel Oaxaca-rivas, "dreamer":] Yes. I think it's terrifying that we can be so easily betrayed by the government asking us to give so much information that we had to give to be accepted into DACA and then to have it turned around on a very exceptional group of people.
[Camerota:] I want to ask you about that because when you heard the idea that there was going to be this DACA program and that Dreamers like you
[Oaxaca-rivas:] Yes.
[Camerota:] brought here at four years old were going to be protected, did you have second thoughts about giving your
[Oaxaca-rivas:] Oh
[Camerota:] information to the government?
[Oaxaca-rivas:] Yes. There was a very significant discussion that my parents had to have with me at that time. I was 17 at the time and that was kind of the first big conversation that I had to have with my parents about my legal residency here and my residency status. And it was a risk. It was a risk that meant giving up exactly where I live. Where I was going to be working was going to be something that had to be turned over also and
[Camerota:] And, did you not know, Angel
[Oaxaca-rivas:] it would not be hard to find me.
[Camerota:] your did you not know your status until you had that conversation with your parents?
[Oaxaca-rivas:] I think the first time I actually figured out my status was when I was in elementary school I was going into middle school. I almost got a scholarship for some private schools and everything was good to go until I needed a social security number on file. And then that's when I figured out what being undocumented really meant. So I think I was about 12.
[Camerota:] Angelica, you had a moment with Speaker Paul Ryan in January where he, I think, tried to kind of assuage any of your anxiety that this fate would ever happen to you. Let me play this for our viewers.
[Villalobos:] It's clear that if DACA gets repealed my daughter will lose her mother and I'm sorry she will lose her mother. And I want you to know that DACA has helped me. Do you think that I should be deported and many of the families in my situation
[Rep. Paul Ryan , Speaker Of The U.s. House Of Representatives:] No.
[Villalobos:] should?
[Ryan:] No. No way in hell could first of all, I can see that you love your daughter and you're a nice person who has a great future ahead of you, and I hope your future's here.
[Camerota:] Angelica, I know that moment comforted you. So today, what do you want to tell Congress those lawmakers that are going to be deciding your future?
[Villalobos:] I think that, you know, it only comforted me in part, and the reason is because after that interview after that moment when I spoke to Paul Ryan, he didn't do anything. And I think I was upset at that time because, you know, he said it on live T.V. and said that I should not get deported, but then Congress and him didn't do anything for the last eight months. We're sitting in a situation right now where it got to this way because they did not act. And I think that, unfortunately, I just really hope that it's not too late for us.
[Camerota:] Angel, what do you want to say to Congress and the lawmakers who are going to try to figure out what the fate of all you 800,000 Dreamers are?
[Oaxaca-rivas:] I think that it's important to think about the work that the DACA population has already put into demonstrating how successful and how good of a how good of citizens we are already in this country. I think it's important to give us a little bit of credit for that going into processes because it's a very humanitarian problem, and that's how it should be thought of. Not necessarily just the numbers here and there, but look at us as the people that we are and what we've brought to this country so far.
[Camerota:] Angelica, have you talked to your children about this?
[Villalobos:] I have.
[Camerota:] And they know this is a possibility that you might be deported?
[Villalobos:] Yes, yes.
[Camerota:] What did they say?
[Villalobos:] They want to step in. I remember when I was telling my daughter that one of the things that worries me the most is losing the driver's license. I live in a state where a minor traffic violation can put you into deportation proceedings.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Villalobos:] And I know my daughter, you know, came up and said well, you know, I have a driving permit now. I can I can help you with that. And, you know, it was it's very hard because you don't I want my kids to be kids. I want them to focus on what they should be focusing and not worrying about whether I'm going to come home or not.
[Camerota:] We understand. Thank you both for sharing your personal story. Obviously, we'll be watching very closely what happens over the next six months and we'll stay in touch. Thank you for being here. We're following a lot of news so let's get right to it.
[Unidentified Male:] We must put maximum pressure on North Korea to change its policy.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] North Korea basically has slapped everyone in the face in the international community.
[Unidentified Male:] We have to find a way of using crushing economic sanctions and diplomacy to solve this problem.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.
[Camerota:] In just a matter of hours, President Trump is expected to end the protections for Dreamers.
[Ryan:] These kids don't know any other home. I think there's a humane way to fix this.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Member, Foreign Relations Committee:] DACA kids should not be punished for the sins of their parents.
[Berman:] The Texans recover from Harvey and Florida braces for Hurricane Irma.
[Myers:] It's already a category four at 150. Category five starts at 156.
[Unidentified Male:] We're really looking at a major impact here.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Camerota:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your new day. It is Tuesday, September fifth, 8:00 here in the east. Chris is off; John Berman joins me. It sounds like we have some breaking storms news, too
[Berman:] Yes, we do.
[Camerota:] for everyone. So let's get to all of our breaking news. We start with North Korea. North Korea may be moving an intercontinental ballistic missile for another launch this week. That's what a South Korean lawmaker tells CNN after being briefed by their intelligence service. North Korea is also making new threats this morning saying they will quote "blow up the U.S. mainland and annihilate Americans."
[Berman:] South Korean warships conducting a second day of live-fire exercises at sea. All eyes on the strained relations between President Trump and South Korea's leader. The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley insists that Kim Jong Un is begging for war. And then, Alisyn mentioned that we have breaking news on Hurricane

[Cabrera:] Immigrants aren't the only boogie man Republicans are pointing to in close races across the country. The real nightmare, many in the GOP are pushing, if the Democrats win the House, is Nancy Pelosi, and the potential of her returning to her old role as House speaker. Now, Pelosi is featured in GOP attack ads in states far from her California home district. And as CNN's Manu Raju reports, in many with those states with House races being very close, Democratic candidates aren't taking the bait. They're running away from Pelosi.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Correspondent:] It has been a decade since a Democrat won a House seat in this conservative eastern Kansas district that overwhelmingly supported Donald Trump in 2016. But in yet another major warning sign for Republicans ahead of next week's midterms, a Democrat, Paul Davis, could pick up this seat as he pitches himself as a middle of the road candidate. If Democrats like Paul Davis do win, that could flip the House and effectively make Nancy Pelosi the next speaker. There is just one problem.
[Paul Davis , Kansas Congressional Candidate:] There isn't a circumstance in which I'm going to support Pelosi. There are times when you just need some new blood, and I think this is the time.
[Raju:] Democrats could face their own leadership struggle as 30 Democrats who stand a real chance of winning next week say they won't support her for the job.
[Unidentified Female:] That's why I won't support Nancy Pelosi.
[Unidentified Male:] I won't support Nancy Pelosi.
[Raju:] Yet, Pelosi is still the heavy favorite to become speaker and has no viable opponent.
[Nancy Pelosi , California:] I think I'm worth the trouble, quite frankly.
[Raju:] She's raised more than $121 million for her colleagues this cycle and has the power to give member spots on key committees. And if they take the House, Pelosi's allies will make this argument.
[Rep. Eric Swalwell , California:] And I think that will have taken away the argument that she is, you know, a drag or affecting, you know, candidates. If we won, then that really wasn't effective and then I don't understand what the case against her would be.
[Raju:] Here in Kansas, Republican Steve Watkins, an Army veteran and first-time candidate, who was also vying for the open seat, is trying to link Davis to Pelosi.
[Steve Watkins , Kansas Congressional Candidate:] He is saying what he thinks he has to say in order to get elected, and Kansas voters aren't being fooled by that.
[Raju:] But a recent CNN poll showed that Pelosi is not a major factor for most voters nationally.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't think it's really having much of an impact. As I said on day one of the campaign, I'm not going to support her, and there's nothing that's going to change that. But whatever the Republicans are going to say, I think, is just, you know, trying to muddy the waters, which they, you know, do time again and time again.
[Unidentified Female:] We've seen this movie before.
[Raju:] It's been a strategy that Republicans have tried throughout the country this election season, dropping nearly $90 million in ads demonizing Pelosi. But as they go door to door in this Chanute, Kansas,-
[Unidentified Female:] Hi, how's it going?
[Unidentified Male:] I'm out here walking for Steve Watkins.
[Raju:] Watkins' aides acknowledges that Pelosi is not the only issue motivating voters.
[Unidentified Male:] I'd say one out of every four people who bring up control of Congress, out of those people, one of four bring up Pelosi.
[Raju:] Now, the race may ultimately come down to character. Now, Watkins has faced questions about whether he inflated his resume, something he denies, while Davis has faced GOP attacks about a 1998 incident where he was at a strip club raided by police. Now, he wasn't charged with a crime, but he did tell me I was at the wrong place at the wrong time. And he said, voters are tired of, quote, "sleazy ads," to the tune of $12 million on both sides in the key House district. Manu Raju, CNN, Washington.
[Cabrera:] Thanks to Manu. No question, if the Democrats take back the House after Tuesday's election, there is unsettled businesses over who will win leadership roles. Thursday, the chairman of the Congressional black caucus, Representative Cedric Richman, made it clear that a black lawmaker should hold one of the top two leadership posts, if House Democrats win big on Tuesday. Now, that demand, of sorts, is seen as a potential threat to Pelosi and minority whip, Steny Hoyer, who are expected to return to their former posts as the top House leaders. Although, there was a little bit of walking back we saw on this issue on Friday. I want to bring in CNN Political Analyst Rachael Bade, joining us now. She's also the congressional reporter for "Politico." And you have a deep dive this week, Rachael, on Pelosi and what she's been doing. How big of a resistance against Pelosi as speaker is there, really, among Democrats?
[Rachael Bade, Cnn Political Analyst:] You know, I would say it's a lot smaller than people think it is. You know, we've been hearing, for the past few months, about this incoming Democratic freshman class that would come in, ban together and take her out. But if you actually look at the 40 Democrats most likely to win, I'm talking about candidates running against Republicans in either toss-up districts, lean or likely Democratic seats, sure, they're calling for new leadership. But most of them are actually not saying I won't again I won't vote against Nancy Pelosi. There are 11 of the 40 who have said that. And I have called all of them, and only five of them would confirm to me that that means no against Pelosi on the House floor which is the vote that matters most. And, meanwhile, Pelosi has been, sort of, ruling these candidates that are
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Bade:] most likely to win in coming to Washington, doing these, sort of, secret fundraisers. They can't be seen with her publicly, because Republicans will attack them for that. But she's raising money for them privately. She's sending out her campaign staff to help these folks. She's doing things like writing personal notes and making phone calls. This is very Pelosi. And there's a reason she's been leading the Democratic caucus for 15 years, and that is because she knows how to woo people. And she knows how to twist arms.
[Cabrera:] I thought it was really interesting, in your piece, you even mentioned that, in some cases, some of these people who have publicly criticized her, in order to, perhaps, get some of the vote that they want, had actually taken donations from her. Is that right?
[Bade:] That's absolutely right. I think there's, basically, a pitch being made from Pelosi allies to these candidates. That, look, you can vote against her privately in the caucus. This is a secret vote. She only needs a majority of the Democrats to get the nomination to be speaker. But then, you can return to your districts and say, listen, I voted against her. But then, Democrats, they chose they chose Pelosi. And now, I have to back the Democrat for speaker. But, see, I don't think that's going to play. I think that a lot of these people, if they end up doing that and coming to Washington, even after saying new leadership and end up voting for Pelosi, you can bet that that is the first ad Republicans are going to cut against them next election cycle. And they're going to be really vulnerable for that.
[Cabrera:] I spoke with David Axelrod earlier. He has seen Pelosi at work behind closed doors. He said she's a master at what she does. And I asked him to explain. Watch.
[David Axelrod, Cnn Host, "the Axe Files":] Nancy Pelosi is a tough competitor. She comes from a political family from the wards of Baltimore. Her father was mayor. Her brother was mayor. I asked her once on one of my "AXE FILES," what she learned by growing up in that family. She said, I learned how to count. And so I think she knows how to count votes, and she knows how to count votes in precincts, and she knows how to count votes in the House. I would not count her out.
[Cabrera:] Is that the consensus among those that have worked closely with Pelosi?
[Rachael Bade, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes, absolutely. Consider this. Last year, Democrats were supposed to take the House, or last election cycle. There was a lot of talk amongst Democrats about ousting Pelosi when they did not. And 63 people voted against her privately in a secret ballot election. But by the time they actually came to the House floor, only four of them voted against her. She was able to twist that many arms. The thing is you have to watch 218. That's the number of votes that she needs. Say Democrats pick up 30 seats on Tuesday. She can only lose seven people on the floor. I have already confirmed five candidates who are voting against her. Last year, there were four. That's nine. There are people who are currently in Congress who are privately talking about banding together to try to push her out and keep her from getting 218. I would not say by any means that she is in the clear, and I think this is going to be the toughest re-election to the speaker's gavel that she has ever had. She's going to face steep and intense headwinds and a steep uphill climb. But, again, she is she's been around for a long time. She knows how to do this. She is clearly making a play and laying the ground work to do it.
[Cabrera:] Rachael Bade, thanks for joining us.
[Bade:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] The U.N. says Yemen's civil war is "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world," and it is unfolding right before our eyes. These images are so disturbing. We have more images, more stories that we need to share with you about the toll of this year's-long civil war that's having on the most vulnerable. Powerful report, next.

[Christiane Amanpour, Chief International Correspondent:] You`ve been watching "Breaking News" on the attacks in Pittsburgh, and we`ll have more on that in a moment. Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." And here`s what`s coming up. The worst-ever attack on America`s Jews. We take stock as the country mourns a spate of hate crimes. Then, Brazil lurches to the far right after the candidate, Jair Bolsonaro, wins the presidency. I`ll ask the former foreign minister, Celso Amorim, why this radical move. Plus, for decades, he helped shape the Republican message. Now, a week from the midterms, he says the country is more divided than ever. Our Hari Srinivasan talk to strategist, Frank Lunz. Welcome to the program, everyone. I`m Christiane Amanpour in New York. Throughout this past week America has suffered a wave of hate-fueled violence. There were racial crimes with an attack on African-Americans at a Kentucky supermarket, political crimes with the pipe bomb mailings to leading critics of President Trump and here to CNN and religious crimes with the vicious slaughter inside a Pittsburgh synagogue, killing 11 worshippers. American Jews are reeling from a resurgence of anti-Semitism in this country, the one they felt the most safe in, where a mass murderer saying he wants, "All Jews to die," seems like a relic from the distant past. But it wasn`t ancient history to Rose Mallinger, the much-loved 97-year-old who was killed that Saturday morning. She was already an adult when 6 million Jews were exterminated during World War II. And now, as America tries to make sense of the violence, one thing is clear, whatever the perceived threat from the influx of migrants coming across the Mexican border, most recent terror attacks in the United States were, in fact, carried out by home grown extremists and just plain haters. A spiritual leader of New York`s congregation, Ansche Chesed, Rabbi Jeremy Kalmanofsky helped lead an interfaith prayer vigil last night to attract an overflow crowd to his congregation on Manhattan`s upper west side. And Reverend Serene Jones heads the Union Theological Seminary where she is a professor of religion and democracy. Both join me here now in New York. So, welcome to the program.
[Jeremy Kalmanofsky, Rabbi, Ansche Chesed Synagogue:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] I mean, it is really a dark day, it`s been a dark week in, frankly, dark times. Can I just ask you because of the proximity to the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre, to what do you attribute this rise in anti- Semitism?
[Kalmanofsky:] Well, I think the Jewish people of the United States have felt extraordinarily comfortable and successful and thriving in this country in many, many ways and I think this really comes, you know, so much out of the blue in the experience of American Jews. What do I attribute the rise to? I`m somewhat at a loss. Certainly, the tenor of American public life in recent years has been to identify people who are perceived as, for whatever reason, outsiders. American Jews have for I think more than a century, felt very much like insiders, very much at home in the United States. And the reality is that we are seeing, once again, that as has been true in the other countries where we lived over hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years in Europe and the Islamic world, they are those who would like to remind us that we are actually not such as insiders, that we are perceived as outsiders. And there are those, we hope, a very small minority and certainly, the smallest of minority who would take violent expression, but there are plenty of people who look at us and find us just a little bit too different and would like to remind us that, in their view, we don`t belong.
[Amanpour:] You know yes, go ahead, Reverend.
[Serene Jones, Reverend, Union Theological Seminary President:] There`s been a dramatic just in the past year-and-a-half, a dramatic increase in the instances of anti-Semitism in the United States. I mean, it`s quite gone up 35 percent in a year-and-a-half period.
[Amanpour:] In a year-and-a-half?
[Jones:] In a year-and-a-half since 2016. What does that correspond to? Well, it corresponds to a campaign that makes its point about the future of America by tying it to hatred of various groups across the country. And anti-Semitism is in the mix of that hatred.
[Amanpour:] And do you see them? Because you have got sort of a wide eye of various of these groups who are being targeted. I mean, we have as we have just discussed at the Tree of Life Synagogue, we had these mail bombings and we`ve had a guy go into a Kroger and kill two African- Americans because he couldn`t get into a church because it was locked. How much has hate crime overall gone up?
[Jones:] It`s escalated dramatically. I don`t know the specific statistics on all the different groups. But in reality, all of these are interconnected hatreds. I mean, targeting African-Americans, targeting the Jewish community, targeting immigrants, targeting Muslims, targeting women, the list can go on and on. But it`s a part of a general dynamic in which a country, people, begins to define themselves by virtue of what they hate, what kind of group they find a scapegoat. And it is as old as religion is to do that but we`re bigger than that.
[Kalmanofsky:] Yes. This is certainly true. But I would say and I do think that the tenor of public life, certainly in the last 24 months, has made it much, much worse as people chant, you know, that so and so should not Jews should not replace us or the immigrants are bringing all sorts of crime, and I think those things are horrifying. But I want to remind people that it was 2001 after the 911 attacks that we started to hearing so much more about Islamophobia and like, Sikh people attacked because they were mistaken for Muslims. So, it`s I think that the current administration and its rhetoric bears a lot of the blame but it`s not exclusive to the recent years.
[Amanpour:] Well, you see, that`s really interesting and let`s dig down into that for a second. First of all, let me play a sort of relevant soundbite by the rabbi at Tree of Life who very fortunately survived, and this is what he said about words and their consequences.
[Jeffery Myers, Rabbi, Tree Of Life:] It starts with speech. Words of hate are unwelcomed in Pittsburgh. And I want to address for a moment some of our political leader who are here. Ladies and gentlemen, it has to start with you as our leaders.
[Amanpour:] So, the rabbi, they are talking about words of hate and how leaders have to take responsibility. Now, this is a very sensitive issue today and, in the aftermath, because many are pointing to the top leadership in this country. Frankly, to the White House, to the president himself. They are furiously pushing back and they`re saying that this is our fault, the media, frankly. The president is calling us the enemies of the people and that we are the people who are creating a climate of anger and hatred. It is a sensitive topic. How should one address this? Because there is so much political anger right now and so much knee-jerk anger. What does one do? Immediately blame the White House? Not blame the what should one do? Rabbi, first to you.
[Kalmanofsky:] First me? You want to go first?
[Amanpour:] Oh, first you, Reverend. Go ahead.
[Jones:] Well, I think we do two things. First of all, we have to reach into the mock of American history and see how old these hatreds are so we can`t treat it like this is a momentarily phenomenon, even something that we can limit to just the past year-and-a-half, but really look at who we are. And then secondly, every single world religion, at Union we teach a number of world religions. They all say that what one is called to do is to meet hatred with love. That`s a mighty thing to do but that`s what this moment calls for.
[Amanpour:] And practically how do you do that? How do you meet I mean, the great civil rights leader in this country, Representative John Lewis, has sent out a statement today and boy, he knows about trying to meet hatred with love firsthand. And he said, as part of his statement if our leaders cannot bring us together and help us and bear their responsibility, then it is up to all of us to try to do what you have just said. How does one do that against, apparently, a crackpot who is on social media, who is in a particularly poisonous group, not even in the mainstream social media, it is in the dark web. Nearly I mean, 600,000 followers spewing this disgusting stuff.
[Kalmanofsky:] Well, I think it`s important to remember that there are always going to be truly unhinged people. There are, so to speak, the mainstream bigots and racists and then there are the completely unhinged people who are going to take assault rifles, and I don`t know how to stop. I`m not expert in such a thing But I would it seems to me that in this country, which has such a great diversity of backgrounds, where people come from, languages and religions and cultures, we are actually so vulcanized and so much so little contact we actually have with one another. You know, we talk about red America and blue America, and it`s absolutely true. I did grow up in much more of a red America. I grew up in Louisville, Kentucky. But living in the upper west side of Manhattan in 10025, I have to say that I don`t meet a ton of people who think very differently than I do and quite in a bubble, and those people who live off in another part of the country they`re in their own bubble. And it`s much easier to hate people when you don`t actually have a relationship with them, when you never actually hear anything of their perspective. And it is much more difficult to hate people and to demonize people and to think that those Jews over there are actually betraying the country or those Black people or those Hispanic people, or those Muslim people, they`re betraying the country, if you never met them. And once you meet them and talk to them, one discovers that human beings are human beings and they are worthy. And this is where, I think, that our religious traditions come into play. Because even though we come difference religious traditions, it is absolutely true that what you just said that we are the corners of human society that teach people that love is the answer to all of our conflicts.
[Jones:] You know, it`s been interesting to me even to listen to the responses and the characterizations of in both instances, the perpetrator. And even there, I happen to believe that for someone to perpetrate acts this horrific there has to be profound mental illness. And even for our leaders to be referring to them as crackpots or I mean, they have done
[Amanpour:] That`s me, I`m afraid.
[Jones:] But they have done horrendous things, but what does it mean to meet those horrendous actions with compassion for the fracturing force of our world upon human bodies? And
[I -- Amanpour:] You have talked about not just this, you know, sort of leadership vacuum or leadership and necessity for leadership right now and sort of just political tribalism that`s happening right now. You have talked about a moral crisis, a crisis that`s actually tearing the fabric of democracy apart. How profound is this kind of crisis? This kind of week we have just gone through on the fabric of American society. What kind of an affect?
[Jones:] Yes. It`s devastating. And what it`s revealing is not just a political crisis. We can see that very clearly on the surface, but a deep what I refer to as a spiritual crisis, a moral crisis. I don`t think that anymore in the United States we can assume that what is a fundamental principle of the democracy, namely that all people are equal and deserving of equal respect and dignity, is a fundamental value shared by everyone. That is simply not the case anymore. And when we get do that point, we have to dig inside ourselves as a nation and say what is it that we value? Have we lost our way? Who are we anymore? If that doesn`t bind us together.
[Amanpour:] And you do actually have to look to leaders. I just want to play this soundbite from President Trump at a rally just last week. You know, he is veered from being statesman like and calling for unity and calling against hatred to then tweeting or saying other things at rallies. And this is what he said about one of these strains that you are both talking about, this nationalistic nativism that we have seen of the last two years.
[Donald Trump, U.s. President:] You know, they have a word. It`s sort of became old-fashioned. It`s called a nationalist. And I say, really? We`re not supposed to use that word. You know what I am? I`m a nationalist. Okay? I`m a nationalist.
[Amanpour:] I mean, what do you make of that?
[Kalmanofsky:] So, when somebody it`s one thing to say I`m a patriot, I care about this country, and I think people should care about the homeland with which they share a past and a future, that`s good. But saying you`re a nationalist, it`s very hard to extricate that from and some of you people don`t belong. And certainly, the experience of the Jewish people in modern nation states, in Germany and in Soviet Union and other states, the Jewish people have we`ve often been like the canary of the coalmines, really, you guys are the ones who don`t belong. You`re the problem. Lord knows African-Americans in this country have experienced this much more than any of the rest of us who have been told that they`re not really part of this country. So, when the president says he is a nationalist, you know, I don`t know exactly what he has in mind, but the tone is, I`m the right kind of American, some of you are the wrong kind of Americans and some of you don`t belong. And while I do think that the absolutely agree, it`s got to be mental illness to take a gun to innocent people who are celebrating Shabbat. It`s also true that these things don`t happen out of context. And in the context in this country, we have ratcheted up the language of some people don`t really belong. And while I do I don`t think that the right has a monopoly on this. They certainly are hitting on those
[Jones:] It`s a match.
[Kalmanofsky:] hitting on those notes. Once it`s a little bit on the left, I don`t mean to make an equivalence because I don`t think there is any equivalence. But in this country, there`s all too much of the view that I represent the right kind of Americans, you other guys are the wrong kind of Americans, either because of where you come from or what you believe and you are the problem.
[Jones:] And for me, I hear the word nationalism and from a religious perspective, nationalism is any kind of movement that makes a God of something called an entity that is the nation, regardless of what those principles are. That`s dangerous. Patriotism is a commitment to the values that are even greater than we are as a nation that found us and bring us together. It`s dangerous.
[Amanpour:] You talk about the nation and what`s at stake. And of course, the midterms are coming up. And actually, there was some polling done which showed that these kinds of attacks, anti-Semitic attacks and hate attacks were predicted to rise ahead of the midterms. President Obama was out stumping for Democrats and he said that the character of this country is on the ballot. Listen to what he said.
[Barack Obama, Former U.s. President:] Maybe most importantly, the character of our country is on the ballot. I would like to think that everybody in America would think it`s wrong to spend all your time from a position of power vilifying people, questioning their patriotism, calling them enemies of the people and then suddenly pretending you`re concerned about civility.
[Amanpour:] I mean, so it`s kind of summing up what we have been talking about. So, what do you what would you as a rabbi and you as a reverend representing different religions and all religions, what would you like to see come from the oval office right now or hear from the oval office right now?
[Jones:] I have not seen anything from the oval office in the last few years that makes me believe that its current occupant has it within him to put something above the accumulation of his own political power and electoral success. But what I think we actually need as a country is not only in the language of Judaism, which is, of course, the language that I speak, but the recognition that every human being is infinitely valuable and infinitely unique and the religious language that I would is created bears the image of God. And if you have if you look at other people with the image of God, you look at other people as infinitely valuable and infinitely unique, it`s vastly more difficult to call them names or to praise people, you know, people who act with violence or body slam people or make fun of people. We haven`t seen from the campaign or while in the office the president exemplify that personal kindness and dignity.
[Amanpour:] What needs to change?
[Jones:] I think that what needs to be coming from the oval office is a vision for who we are as America that is filled with the better angels and reaches into the soul of each of us and speaks about the goodness that is there and our common values, and a future to build together. The oval office needs to be speaking to not even just America but human kind and what it means to be a person and to seek the flourishing of all.
[Kalmanofsky:] The better angels where would we be without Abraham Lincoln? We probably didn`t have speechwriters.
[Amanpour:] Well, you know exactly. On this really terrible day and after this terrible week, I just like to say thank you to you both, Rabbi, Reverend, thank you very much for being with us.
[Jones:] Thank you.
[Kalmanofsky:] Thanks for having us.
[Amanpour:] Try to put it in some context. So, as a counterterrorism expert, Richard Clarke advised several U.S. presidents on threats from both outside and within the homeland. And he is joining me now from Washington. Richard Clarke, welcome to the program.
[Richard Clarke, Former U.s. National Coordinator For Security And Counter- Terrorism:] Good to be with you.
[Amanpour:] So, you`ve listened to the dialogue about compassion and trying to get away from this sort of hate-filled narrative and really try to bring the country together. From your, you know, more sort of law enforcement perspective, what needs to happen right now?
[Clarke:] Christiane, I think we have to be frank about the cause of the problem. We have always had hate-filled Nazis for lack of a better word, Nazis is really fairly accurate word, we`ve always had people like that, lurking in the dark corners of our country, usually afraid to come out. In the last year, year-and-a-half, they have come out of those dark corners. They`re beating people up at Trump rallies, they are beating people up on the of streets of New York. And now, they`re attacking synagogues. There`s a reason for this, and we need to be clear and frank about it. The reason is, that the president of the United States and his allies ally, Steve Bannon, of Breitbart and with connection to the info wars and all of these terrible right-wing hate-filled sites, they have been intentionally, since the campaign of 2016, using dog whistles, code phrases, that the right-wing crazies recognize. And they know what`s being said, what`s being said by the president and his supporters are, "We know you. We`re part of you. We can`t say it publicly. But we believe what you believe." That kind of dog whistle messaging, which they have been intentionally doing since the 2016 campaign encourages these people to go out and beat people up on the street, encourages them to make pipe bombs, encourages them to attack synagogues.
[Amanpour:] Yes. I mean
[Clarke:] Let`s just be frank about it.
[Amanpour:] Well, I can hear what you`re saying and quite a lot of people are making that same point. Obviously, this is being furiously rejected by the White House.
[Clarke:] Well, of course they say that.
[Amanpour:] Well, yes. And pointing the finger at the general tenor of the media, again, calling us the enemy of the people. It`s really
[Clarke:] That`s one of the dog phrases. Enemy of the people.
[Amanpour:] Right. Right. And it is really difficult to see how this moment can be can somehow be used as a moment to sort of do a sharp U- turn. And I`m wondering whether you think that`s even possible.
[Clarke:] It`s not possible with this man, this president. He has had ample opportunity to make that sharp U-turn. If he didn`t make it after the pipe bombs on all of the Democrats, if instead of making that sharp U-turn he attacked the media again. Then he`ll never make that sharp U-turn. With him in office, we have to look to the FBI to do its job, which it has been doing. We also have to look at non-governmental organizations like the anti-defamation league, like the human rights campaign, like the Southern Poverty Law Center. Those are groups that monitor these hate- filled media sites and expose them.
[Amanpour:] OK.
[Clarke:] And we have to them continue the great work when the government doesn`t.
[Amanpour:] Well, to that point then, I wonder what your reaction is. We have heard sorts of different views coming and certainly from Israel and Israeli officer, the current Israeli ambassador to the United Nations that suggested that Israel could give a lot of tips to law enforcement here, particularly people who can monitor certain social media sites, certain, you know
[Clarke:] They don`t need to.
[Amanpour:] platforms. Do they already do that well?
[Clarke:] The FBI is doing a good job within the Justice Department guidelines. But there are guidelines that protect free speech and protect civil liberties and therefore, the FBI can`t, and we don`t really want them to go around monitoring people before they`ve committed crimes. What we can do is send checks and send our support to non-governmental groups that do this very, very well.
[Amanpour:] So, I mean, there`s a lot of statistics out around this right now. I mean, first and foremost, you mentioned the ADL. They published a report just on Friday analyzing millions and millions of twitter messages, seven-and-a-half over only a two-week period over the summer, finding nearly 30 percent of the accounts were repeatedly tweeting derogatory terms about Jews, and most of the accounts automated bots. But, that some of the most virulent were by actual human beings. Now, this person who committed this crime in the synagogue apparently belonged to this online social network group called GAB, which has now been taken offline. But he posts things like HIS likes to brings invaders in that is kill our people. I can`t sit by and watch my people get slaughters. Screw your optics, I`m going in. I mean, you know, this is awful stuff. And it`s apparently got something like 600,000 followers and it`s not mainstream. How does one root out this kind of stuff? Why isn`t the FBI looking at that? Why wouldn`t they have seen that?
[Clarke:] Well, yes. Again, the FBI has to operate within the justice department guide lines and they can`t monitor American citizens for their expressions. They can only monitor them if there`s an indication of a crime being planned or being plotted. And that`s where the non- governmental organizations come in, because they can monitor these individuals and they do. It`s not just the attacks on Jews that had gone up, it`s attacks on LGBTT people have gone up, its attacks on African-Americans have gone up, physical attacks, attacks on buildings. And attacks, verbal attacks on sites like this GAB website, which has, at least, now temporarily been taken down.
[Amanpour:] Should it be taken down permanently, Richard Clarke?
[Clarke:] No, I don`t think so. I know people want to do that. But the thing about freedom of speech is that you have to support it even when it`s hate-filled speech. You have to support it even when it`s speech that you think is on the edge. Because if you do otherwise, it`s a slippery slope. And this is why the ACLU, for example, supported the petition of pro-Nazi people to march through many years ago in Illinois, and they get a lot of criticism for that. But the ACLU was true to what it believes in doing when it did that. No. The way to kill hate
[Amanpour:] But you know go ahead.
[Clarke:] The way to kill hateful speech is not to ban it. It`s to show a light on it and to show who the people are behind it. Drag them out of the dark corners of the internet and expose them and let people know who they are. let their employers know who they are, let their neighbors know who they are.
[Amanpour:] Well, that`s important. That would be a very important development. I mean, you do, of course, mention the famous scope Illinois case but that was decades ago and it was way before they had their message exponentially, you know, paraded around the country and around people`s consciousness. So, you`ve been covering this or rather following this and investigating this and trying to work on this for many, many years. Does language matter? Do enough important centers of power call this domestic terrorism? Should it be? Are you surprised by the one-week explosion of this that I mean, we haven`t seen like this for a long time, this systematic wave of terrible attacks we have had over the past week alone?
[Clarke:] Well, we have had the president of the United States in an unprecedented campaign, running around the country, holding these mass rallies. And many of these people who show up at the rallies are, in fact, this kind of supporter. Not all of them. A very small minority of them are. And they have been encouraged. They have been whipped up prior to this election. Not only by the president`s running around holding these rallies, but by the websites. By info wars, by Breitbart, all the right- wing hate-filled media.
[Amanpour:] All right. Well, Richard Clarke, there is so much more to discuss and thank you very much for weighing in on this. It`s been really a horrendous week. We`ll have much more on how this polarization is affecting every day Americans in a moment. But first, the native wave that swept through the United States and much of Europe is now sweeping Brazil, the biggest, most powerful country in Latin America, where the far-right candidate. Jair Bolsanaro, dubbed the trump of the tropics was declared the overwhelming winner of yesterday`s presidential election. President Trump congratulated Bolsanaro and promised that they would work well together. Until recently, Bolsanaro was thought to be a fringe extremist, best known for his racist, misogynistic and homophobic comments. But with brazil seemingly caught in a cycle of high crime, high unemployment and massive government corruption, Bolsanaro rose to the top by pledging to change the destiny of Brazil.
[Jair Bolsanaro, Brazilian President-elect:] As a defender of freedom, I will lead a government that upholds and protects the rights of the citizens who follow the duties and respect the laws. The laws are for everyone. This is how it will be in our constitutional and Democratic government.
[Amanpour:] Now, Celso Amorim served as foreign minister for several Brazilian governments. And he joins me now from Rio de Janeiro. Minister Amorim, welcome to the program.
[Celso Amorim, Former Brazilian Foreign And Defense Minister:] Thank you. Talking to you again, it is very glad, Christiane.
[Amanpour:] It`s good to talk to you. Now, let`s be clear. You have worked for the opposition party, the worker`s party in the past. And now. this party has taken over. What do you attribute this to and do you admit that the failings of the worker`s party have led to a complete pendulum swing the other way?
[Amorim:] Well, I don`t think we have a problem with the candidate of the worker`s party. I think the candidate was a good candidate. He`s a very - a professor, a very good man. I think the question is that there was some sort of discrediting of politics in general. And so, these military men trying to bring back some of his generals back to power profited from this from this bad opinion that the people have about politics in general. So, I think he`s had just we`re going to do away with all these old things, so that`s the same way as other populist leaders, including he has the advice of Steve Bannon also.
[Amanpour:] Does he? I hadn`t realized that was one of his advisers. But you know, look. Let`s be frank. There`s always ground for these kinds of reactions. These kinds of political reactions. I mean, your most famous, most successful Democratic president was Lula da Silva who did so much for the people of Brazil and brought many, many millions out of poverty and yet he`s now in jail because of a corruption conviction. So there`s a problem with the worker`s party. What I want to know from you is, what do you think will the next year or several six months look like? I mean you even saw Bolsonaro there coming to vote in protection and body armor.
[Amorim:] Well, I`m very worried about what can happen in the next six months. Of course, Bolsonaro was now elected. Although there are doubts about the use of technological means, especially What`s App, influencing the opinion of people who are very vulnerable to this kind of messages which is not rational. It`s just emotional. But, of course, you are right. I mean you are pointing to the paradox that the most popular politician in Brazil is in jail on very fragile accusations. And it`s not only my opinion, it is the opinion of "The New York Times", of "Le Monde" and all of that. Well, we don`t know what will happen. We know that he has been preaching violence. He has been insisting on he has been insisting very much on the including distributing weapons. We`ll have something similar to what happened in the United States which was not the case in Brazil. We have other kinds of violence but not this kind of violence like mass shooting and we may have. So we don`t know yet because this is too early. If we`re going to base our opinion on what he has said in the campaign and all along his life, we have many reasons to be worried. You know this is a very strange combination. If you allow me, a very strange combination of right-wing, extreme right-wing politician which is at the same time an ultra-new liberal in economics. I never saw this combination work so we`re very worried how it will go.
[Amanpour:] Let me just explain you saying about the guns and things. On his campaign, he was saying everybody should be armed and he also said really quite terrible things about a certain woman and women in general, about the gay community. He`s also talked about and people in the environmental community are very worried. Let me just read you what the Amazon Watch Program director said to CNN. Bolsonaro`s reckless plans to industrialize the Amazon in concert with Brazilian and international agribusiness and mining sectors will bring untold destruction to the planet`s largest rainforest and the communities who call it home and spell disaster for the global climate. Do you think that he can drive those policies through?
[Amorim:] Well, I think many things that he has been saying are very contradictory to one another. I think really there is a danger because he`ll have a very strong support by agribusiness. Mind you, during Lulu`s government, agribusiness in Brazil grew very much but without detriment, or at least without much detriment to the environment and also without detriment to the small farmers. And what we see now is an opposition, conflicting points of view, and I think a total neglect for environmental and also indigenous peoples` rights. And the same applies to afro-descendants, the same applies to people, homosexuals. So we are really we never had something similar in Brazil. Even during the military dictatorship in which torture was practiced but it was not praised. It was not admitted publicly. And Bolsonaro not only admitted but said that maybe instead of just torturing the military government, should have killed more people. So I don`t know. I mean if all these things stand or if all is now over and different policies will be taken. But we are very worried and also worried with Latin America because we don`t know. We have always worked for peace and dialogue in Latin America. Brazil has 10 borders with 10 different countries so it`s very dangerous if you have someone with aggressive policies. We cannot say yet. I don`t want to pre-judge what will happen but we are really very concerned.
[Amanpour:] Yes. I was going to ask you because you were foreign minister how you think this is going to spread in Latin America and also whether you think that Bolsonaro will ditch his toxic rhetoric as he said he wants to be a unifier. But I guess what I want to ask you to end with, he is being dubbed the Trump of the tropics. How do you see Brazil`s new relationship with the United States under a President Bolsonaro and a President Trump?
[Amorim:] Well, he has already played his respects to the American flag which raised many eyebrows in Brazil because that`s not what you expect from a military, much less from a candidate for the presidency. But having said that, on the other hand, you have to think for President Lulu, I was the foreign minister at the time. Had a very good relation including with President Bush although having different views because he was a man of dialogue. And that`s not what I see in Bolsonaro. So the same way that he says that he loves the United States and he`ll do things in practice, we don`t know where it will get. And we can get also involved in difficult problems in Latin America because let`s say this lack of empathy towards other candidates and towards other countries. For instance, Mercosur has been the basis for South American integration and his probable minister of finance has said already that Mercosur will not be a priority. So I think it`s very dangerous in many respect but, of course, what I`m concerned most of all is human rights and freedom of speech because these are the thing that Brazil got accustomed, not only with Lulu but also with Cardoza who was let us say more right of center politician. But we had plenty of years of, even more, of experiencing democracy and now we are maybe back to the authoritarian regime with some fascist overtones. I hope it doesn`t materialize but, you know, it is only hope. I mean if I obey on fact or on what was said until now, I have many, many reasons to be worried. Well, you know, I dealt with foreign policy. Our relationship with Africans, with Arab countries, all that is being thrown away. The creation of the BRICS which is very important for the world balance so
[Amanpour:] Yes, the developing country economies. Yes. OK. Celso Amorim, thank you so much, former foreign minister giving us a state of play of what`s potentially at stake in Brazil after Sunday`s election. So as far right extremism spreads from there, we return to the rise of polarization here in America and we ask what`s causing the left and the right to be so angry, too angry even to talk to each other? It`s something our next guest is trying to understand himself as the U.S. midterms approach. It`s just a week away. The Republican Strategist and Pollster Frank Luntz has worked with some of the most powerful Conservative politicians of recent times. Now, working with vice news to try to understand why Americans have such difficulty disagreeing without going so-called nuclear on each other. He told our Hari Sreenivasan why the situation is so dire and what needs to change.
[Hari Sreenivasan, Correspondent:] Frank Luntz, thanks for joining us. So heading into the midterms, where are we as a nation or should I say two nations?
[Frank Luntz, Republican Strategist:] I don`t know if it`s two nations because in some ways it`s a dozen or even more. I`ve never known us to be so angry with each other, so disrespectful, so distrusting that we tend to write each other off within the first moments of what we hear, that you have viewers right here that are going to make a decision about whether they like me or not. And that decision will determine whether or not they stay with the segment. Why have we become so impatient? Why have we become why do we think that we can say and do anything because we have the right to be heard? It used to be that we wanted to learn. Now, we just want to speak.
[Sreenivasan:] There is a clip that we have from a show that you just did, a special for "VICE News". This is some voters in Nevada. Let`s take a look.
[Luntz:] By a show of hands, how many of you would say that you`re mad as hell about all the stuff that`s going on? It`s almost all of you.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Luntz:] What are you so mad at if the economy is so good?
[Ray Kovitz, Small Business Owner:] The economy isn`t everything.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes. There`s a lot more than just the economy.
[Kovitz:] It`s healthcare. It`s the way that they`re treating certain classes of people.
[Unidentified Female:] Immigration.
[Unidentified Male:] Education.
[Kovitz:] Exactly.
[Unidentified Female:] Veterans.
[Kovitz:] These are things that are disturbing. The economy is only one segment. It is great to have money but if you`re living in a society that doesn`t value other things, it`s sad.
[Cheryl Butler-adams, Travel Agent:] We have to be civil whenever we have a discourse. I want my president to be civil. I want him to have more than a third-grade vocabulary.
[Unidentified Female:] I want him to have self-respect. Right.
[Butler-adams:] I don`t want him to go to the U.N. floor and be laughed at.
[Marc Douglas, Truck Driver:] We need somebody that`s going to stand up. We have been abused.
[Unidentified Female:] I don`t see it that way. I think he says things in a different way and I don`t like the last statement.
[Luntz:] I have to ask this question. You`re talking about civility and then it goes to hell the moment that Donald Trump is mentioned. Why is that?
[Janine Kovitz, Small Business Owner:] Because we are learning it from him. I mean, he interrupts people. He bullies people.
[Ernie Domanico, Math Teacher:] And the problem is he`s attacked non-stop by the media every single day. He can`t win no matter what he does.
[Unidentified Female:] I thought we had a conversation. It wasn`t just
[Kovitz:] Well, if he wasn`t doing what he`s doing, he wouldn`t be attacked.
[Luntz:] OK, OK, hold on. Is this America? Do you represent America? You`re nodding your head yes.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes. Unfortunate.
[Sreenivasan:] I mean they`re proving your point. They can`t even stop interrupting each other. And you said this at the beginning of this.
[Luntz:] That was 45 seconds into it. It got worse. By the way, that was them behaving well. They don`t know each other. They never met each other before. And the moment that the word Trump is entered into the discussion, it comes apart. The truth, it comes apart when you say healthcare. It comes apart when you say tax cuts. It comes apart on everything. Tragically, that`s America.
[Sreenivasan:] Have we become more entrenched? Have we backed into our corners even more and how much of that is President Trump responsible for?
[Luntz:] His language is unlike any other president. His presentation is unlike any other president. And the people who condemn him are like any other critics. Where are the people who are saying enough is enough? Where are the people who are saying let`s calm down, get in a room, disagree but come out with some with something? There`s an agreement to be made on immigration. I know it. There`s an agreement to be made on education because I have heard both sides or all sides. But nobody wants to come to an agreement for two reasons. They`d rather yell and be just so harsh at the people they disagree with and you`re punished if you compromise.
[Sreenivasan:] When you talk about the parties in that context, in Washington today, is the Republican Party President Trump`s party? It seems that the ideological conservatives, it seems that the sort of fiscal conservatives, the establishment has lost any ability to challenge him.
[Luntz:] Donald Trump has a higher favorability rating among Republicans than any Republican or Democratic president in modern times with their own political party. And as popular as he is among Republicans is as despised as he is among Democrats. So that`s part of the problem. He used to try to appeal across the country. The president is committed to keeping his promises. And I know this from friends I have who are working in the White House. He is determined that the things that he said on the campaign trail he`s going to do and no one`s going to stand in his way. That`s an admirable approach but we should be reaching beyond our base. We should be reaching to those who didn`t like us back then to say, wait a minute, give me a second chance.
[Sreenivasan:] You know, the thing is and I`m not putting it all on your shoulders but part of this is a reaction to campaigning by polls by seeing exactly what`s going to work with which particular audience and just going after them over and over again.
[Luntz:] I don`t agree with that. Because if you`re campaigning by polls, Donald Trump would not be saying what he is saying and he would not necessarily be doing what he is doing. If you were campaigning by polls, he would not be in a trade war with China.
[Sreenivasan:] It seems like there`s a bunch of people in the manufacturing rust belt that would say, "Hey. You know what, great. This slogan makes total sense, bring the jobs back to the country." That`s exactly what he is doing, whether it hurts the soybean farmer or not.
[Luntz:] And whether or not it`s supported in the polls. The fact is the wall has a minority support. That more Americans oppose building a wall than support it. Now, they want border security and they want barriers where it`s necessary but a wall is not a popular issue but Trump talks about it. In fact, I`d argue that Donald Trump is more willing to challenge what public polling shows than any other president in my lifetime. And I wish that he were more open to reaching out, more open to pulling people in.
[Sreenivasan:] You know, since I have got you here, you know what works in a political ad and what doesn`t. You have been helping campaigns for years now. So we want to play a few different ads and I want you to just tell me why this ad would resonate and what the key themes were that were kind of engineered into it knowing what buttons to push. Let`s take a look at one of the first ads that`s now running in Florida.
[Casey Desantis:] Everyone knows my husband Ron DeSantis is endorsed by President Trump. He`s also an amazing dad. Ron loves playing with the kids.
[Ron Desantis:] Build the wall.
[Desantis:] He reads stories. And then Mr. Trump said, "You`re fired". I love that part.
[Luntz:] Best ad in a primary campaign of anyone running for the Senate, governor or the House. The best.
[Sreenivasan:] Why?
[Luntz:] Because he so wrapped himself around Donald Trump that a crowbar could not have separated them. And that is the worst ad for the general election which is why they stopped running it after the primary because there are an awful lot of people in Florida who have not decided who they`ll vote for, for governor, but don`t have a favorable point of view of Donald Trump. You don`t do that. I know we`re a few days away from the election. I believe the Democrat wins that race and that`s a very historic race for the Democrat to win. There are other extenuating circumstances that are happening as you and I are doing this interview but the Republican is so tied to Trump who has a favorability rating of below 40s in Florida. That`s not what you want to do.
[Sreenivasan:] All right.
[Luntz:] He won the primary but I don`t think he wins the general election.
[Sreenivasan:] All right. Let`s shift gears to Texas. There`s an ad running against Ted Cruz. Let`s take a look.
[Unidentified Male:] Somebody left something on my door the other day. It said, "Ted Cruz, tough as Texas." I mean come on. If somebody called my wife a dog and said my daddy was in on the Kennedy assassination, I wouldn`t be kissing their ass.
[Luntz:] I love that because people don`t know the background behind it. That`s a very famous Hollywood persona who hates Cruz so much that he got in the middle of the race. You don`t do that in Texas. Texans do not like Hollywood and they do not want actors, directors, producers or anyone from the Hollywood community telling them what to think or what to do. And second, it is funny but that doesn`t change someone`s vote. The reason why Beto, the Democrat, has done up to this point so well is because he offered a very positive vision. He offered an alternative to the president, to the senator and people compare him to Barack Obama. I compare him to Bobby Kennedy. But in the last 10 days, last two weeks, he`s gone so negative that he`s no different than any other politician. He would have had a shot of beating Ted Cruz if he actually kept to the end of the campaign this message of not only am I different but we can win without tearing each other apart.
[Sreenivasan:] Let`s take a look at an ad that has a lot more to do with patriotism and fear, Ms. McSally.
[Unidentified Female:] The first female pilot to fly in combat. She has launched a one-woman campaign against a military policy in Saudi Arabia that forced her to wear a long, black Islamic robe over her Air Force uniform.
[Martha Mcsally , Arizona Senate Candidate:] I absolutely refuse to bow down to Sharia law. After eight years of fighting, I won my battle for the religious freedom of American servicewomen. Now, I`m deployed to D.C. to fight for Arizona, supporting our troops and saving the A-10, protecting Arizona jobs and securing the border.
[Luntz:] Arizona is one of the oldest states in the country in terms of the average age of the population and it has a higher than average percentage of Veterans. That`s what that ad is attempting to appeal to. People have been critical of it because she brought in Sharia law and they don`t feel like that`s a legitimate issue. But if you noticed in the visuals, she was always in uniform. When she spoke, she spoke straight to camera, not to some unseen interviewer somewhere and she wanted to say to the people there because swing voters there aren`t pro-military. She wanted to say to them, "There`s no one tougher than me, I will fight for you." And in this election environment, if you`re the one who`s fighting for us, if you`ll be our voice in Washington, you have an advantage.
[Sreenivasan:] There`s another comedic ad talking about some issues that are not resonating. Let`s take a look.
[Unidentified Male:] Sir? Yes? What happens when the average Joe out there realizes that we got, like, the entire Republican tax cut? I mean we got like all of it? Come on, they got a tax cut. OK? Side table, how much was your tax cut? It was not a lot, sir. Yes. But for someone like side table, not a lot is actually quite a bit.
[Unidentified Female:] That`s true.
[Unidentified Male:] I bet he saved enough this week to buy a, hell, I don`t know, a latte at Starbucks, right? Actually Shut up, side table.
[Luntz:] I have not seen that until right now and the reason why I`m smiling because that ad is effective. Only 30 percent of Americans felt they got a tax cut. That ad plays to the 70 percent who feels like they didn`t. The actual statistics, it`s somewhere in the 80 percentile that paid less in taxes because of that legislation but no one knows it. And so that ad says, "Wait a minute, the rich got it. Did you get any?" And what Republicans didn`t realize, two responses here. Number one is they forgot that so many people do direct deposit for their paycheck, that there`s no way for them to know that they got a tax cut. And number two is Republicans, quite frankly, communicated it so horribly. For months, they talked about we needed to get business. We needed to help business so the economy would be stoked and then jobs would be created. It worked. What`s our unemployment rate now? It`s like a 50-year low. Our growth rate at four percent is incredible. The economy is healthier in more places than it has been in decades. And the GOP gets no credit for it because its messaging and its communication completely failed.
[Sreenivasan:] How have your personal politics evolved? If somebody googles you, they`re going to say, " Oh, this is a Republican. He`s worked with Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich. He`s such a student of language he knows the power of crafting a question a particular way to get a different kind of response."
[Luntz:] My whole life has been about supporting things rather than tearing it down, has been about promoting free enterprise rather than capitalism. Because people see capitalism as Wall Street and free enterprise or economic freedom is Main Street. It`s been about promoting hardworking taxpayers rather than the middle class because everyone defines themselves as a hardworking taxpayer. So yes, I do focus on language. But in the work that I`ve done in the inner cities, I recognize, I will acknowledge that telling people to get your act together and pull yourself up by your bootstraps is meaningless to someone who has no parents, no adults in their life and no boots. But I also have seen all this money, these billions and billions of dollars, go to people and have no impact whatsoever. I`m wrong. I was wrong. My philosophy of libertarianism, I guess, conservative libertarianism, does not help kids in the inner city get the education they need to have the life they deserve. It doesn`t.
[Sreenivasan:] Was there a tipping point? Was there a specific issue? What do we need to focus on?
[Luntz:] For me, personally, it was going into the schools, kids that were angry when they were only 15-years-old and you would think they have so much to live for. And the stories that they would tell me would break my heart. And, in fact, I had to stop doing the research because I couldn`t keep going into the schools. I would leave there crying because it`s a lie. The American dream has to be available to everyone. I say this as a Conservative. It has to be available regardless of your gender, regardless of your race, regardless of your income, your parental situation, your geography. It isn`t. I say this to every Conservative. It is not as alive in West Virginia as it is in Massachusetts. It is not as alive in Compton as it is in Beverly Hills. We have always had income inequality and disparity of opportunity and we will always and you have that in socialist countries. It exists everywhere. But we have always said that you had the chance to make it out. And I`m telling you that I`ve now met way too many young people who will never have that chance to make it out and that their future is prison or death. And in my understanding of this country, that is unacceptable and our politics doesn`t address any of that. Who`s talking about poverty in this election campaign? Not the Republicans, not the Democrats. Who`s speaking up for those who don`t have a voice? Donald Trump says he is. He`s speaking up for the working class. He`s speaking up for people who have the skills and have a job. They`re not being paid well but they have a job. I`m talking about the kids who are 25 blocks from here who are attending schools that are crap, that they can`t even read the diplomas that they`re getting, that they`re being passed through for a social promotion so that the teachers don`t get fired.
[Sreenivasan:] You don`t sound very optimistic.
[Luntz:] I`m very pessimistic. If I have had a couple of good days. If I had done this interview a week ago, it would have been hard for me to get into this chair. I believe that we will not I question whether we will come back. Generation after generation, society after society fell when it could no longer solve its problems, when it could no longer
[Sreenivasan:] Frank Luntz, thanks for joining us.
[Luntz:] I don`t think you`ll ever have me back but I appreciate the invitation.
[Amanpour:] I`m sure we`ll have him back and those are real sobering words from Frank Luntz. Before we go tonight, the White House says that President Trump will go on Tuesday to visit the site of that Pittsburgh Synagogue massacre where they hope, of course, for a statesman-like message of unity and solace. And that is it for our program. Thanks for watching. Remember, you can always listen to our podcast, see us online at amanpour.com, and follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Goodbye from New York.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] New indications that Democrats will be taking a much closer look at President Trump's response to murder of "Washington Post" Journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Congressman Adam Schiff, who will be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, tells the "Washington Post" Democrats plan a, quote, "deep dive" on Saudi Arabia and it would include, among other things, finding out what is inside that CIA assessment of the murder, whether Trump is misrepresenting the intel, and if he is, why. The spy agency has said it's highly confident the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman ordered the murder. But President Trump has expressed doubts and defended the Saudis saying the prince hates the crime.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I hate the crime. I hate what's done. I hate the cover up. And I will tell you this, the crown prince hates it more than I do. And they have vehemently denied it. The CIA points it both ways. As I said, maybe he did, maybe he didn't. But I will say, very strongly, that it's a very important ally.
[Cabrera:] With me now, Max Boot, a senior fellow for the Council on Foreign Relations and a CNN global affairs analyst. "The crown prince hates it more than I do." Max, I want your reaction to that.
[Max Boot, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] I'm puzzling that out along with a lot of other things President Trump said. It doesn't make a damn bit of sense. Another thing he said, Ana, in that same interview was, maybe the world should be held accountable because the world is a very vicious place. In other words, he's trying every rhetorical stratagem in the book to deflect blame from where it belongs, which is with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, who is judged responsible by the CIA. And President Trump is lying about what the CIA is saying, saying they just have a feeling. He's trying to say, it's not definitive, maybe he did, maybe he didn't, the entire world is responsible, which is the opposite of this doctrine of personal responsibility
[Cabrera:] Let's play the clip where he blames the world.
[Mike Pompeo, Secretary Of State:] It's a mean, nasty world out there, Middle East in particular.
[Trump:] You look at what's going on in Iran and the vicious situation going on there and the number of people being killed and slaughtered. You take a look all over the world. We're not going to be able to deal let's not deal with anybody. Maybe the world should be held accountable because the world is a vicious place. The world is a very, very vicious place. You look at what's happening in China, you look at what's happening in so many different countries. I could name many countries. You look at what's happening with terrorism all over the world.
[Cabrera:] So first we heard from Pompeo, then the president. Clearly this is a message that they have now been wanting to drill home and we're hearing it from multiple administration officials, the world is to blame, it's a dark and vicious world. That's to blame for Jamal Khashoggi's murder.
[Boot:] They are making it darker and more vicious by absolving the Saudis of this terrible crime. They're engaging in moral equivalence, something Republicans used to castigate, this notion, how can you judge anybody because everybody is guilty of something, that's exactly the moral fallacy that President Trump and Secretary Pompeo are putting out there. It's true, there are human rights abuses around the world in places like Syria and China, et cetera. But that doesn't excuse what the Saudis and this is not business as normal to lure a journalist into your embassy in a foreign country and dismember him, especially when that journalist happens to write for an American newspaper. This is not normal. This is not something we can or should accept.
[Cabrera:] The president has been pretty transparent about his thoughts on the economic issues that are factoring into his decision, what he's saying, the relationship with Saudi Arabia. Here's what Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, who sits on the House Intel Committee, tweeted, "I would be willing to pay a few more cents at the pump if my president would condemn the butchering of a U.S. resident and journalist, #Khashoggi, #freepress." Swalwell might be willing to pay more per gallon but a lot of Americans might not.
[Boot:] There's no evidence we would pay more for a gallon at the pump if we hold the Saudis responsible. They are not selling oil as a favor to the United States. They're selling it because that's how they make money. Saudi Arabia is 13 percent of oil production. We produce more than they do. We don't need Saudi oil. We're energy independent, which is something Donald Trump brags about all the time. So this notion that we have to overlook the Saudi crimes, otherwise, the price of oil will skyrocket, that's flat-out false.
[Cabrera:] Let's listen to former CIA chief, Leon Panetta. Here's what he said.
[Leon Panetta, Former Cia Director:] I think the danger here is that, you know, the president may talk about America First, but essentially what he's saying is America is for sale to the highest bidder.
[Cabrera:] Do you agree?
[Boot:] I agree completely. It's not America First, it's American arms sales first. And Donald Trump is vastly exaggerating the benefits that we get from those arm sales. As we pointed out on this network time after time there's not $110 billion worth of U.S. arms that's being sold to Saudi Arabia. The actual figure is about $14 billion. It is not creating thousands of American jobs. It is creating maybe a few hundred American jobs. And the Saudis cannot readily go to another arms buyer anyway because they are locked into American arms. Their entire military is equipped the American hardware so they can't just go to the Chinese or Russians. So this notion that we have to sacrifice our principles for the price of oil or because we want to sell arms to Saudi Arabia, it's repugnant. We don't need to do that. We are a giant economy. We don't need the Saudis. They need us far more than we need them. And we can afford to hold them accountable for this terrible crime they committed.
[Cabrera:] Max Boot, thanks for being here. I appreciate
[Boot:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] your prospective. Big developments in the Russian probe. An associate of Trump ally, Roger Stone, confirming he's in plea negotiations with Robert Mueller's team. What this means for the investigation. Plus, James Comey fighting a subpoena from House Republicans to testify unless it is opened to the public. Does he have case?

[Brown:] No votes to spare. That's the situation facing Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, as he scrambles to get his fellow Republicans onboard with the latest plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. Two prominent lawmakers, his fellow Kentucky Senator, Rand Paul, along with Susan Collins of Maine already say they don't want even to debate the bill onto the floor, let alone vote for it. MJ Lee is tracking all of the latest developments. She joins me now from Capitol Hill. So, what are you learning MJ?
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] Good morning, Pam. Well, Mitch McConnell quite literally has no room for error as you mentioned. Already, two Senate Republicans have come out to say that they would vote against the motion to proceed. What that means, of course, is that McConnell cannot lose another Senate Republican if he wants to move forward on this bill. Now, as though McConnell needed more pressure, President Trump weighing in this morning on the healthcare issue from his overseas trip. He said on Air Force One that the only thing more difficult than peace between Israel and Palestinians is healthcare. And he also sent out a series of tweets, one of which read, Republican senators must come through as they have promised. Now, it's noteworthy, Pam, that this bill not sitting well with a lot of Senate Republicans despite the fact that Mitch McConnell decided to make some notable changes to the bill. Of those changes, of course, includes the option for insurance companies to offer less expensive and skimpier plans and the $45 billion in extra funding to go towards opioid treatment. But one change, Pam, that McConnell did not make was to Medicaid. This is an issue that really has a lot of moderate Republicans very worked up and very worried. They did not like how steep the cuts were in the original bill and they had hoped to see those cuts be a little bit less. McConnell, again, did not make those changes. That is why we saw a number of Senate Republicans including Dean Heller, Lisa Murkowski, Shelley Moore Capito, those members huddling again with McConnell yesterday after he unveiled that bill. And of course, one thing that they are going to be all watching very closely is the updated score from the Congressional Budget Office to see if there are any positive headlines, any silver linings in that report next week. That, again, is expected sometime early next week, and a lot of Senate Republicans will be paying close attention. Pam?
[Brown:] MJ Lee bringing us the latest there. It is very clear that McConnell is walking a tight rope right now. Thank you so much, MJ. And here to discuss this and more, Republican Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona. Congressman, thanks for coming on.
[Sen. Trent Franks , Arizona:] Thanks for having me, Pamela. I appreciate it.
[Brown:] So first question on the hills of what we've heard from MJ, repealing Obamacare has been at the core of the Republican strategy election, campaign, policy prescriptions and more really for seven years now.
[Franks:] Yes.
[Brown:] What is the impact on your party if this can't get done?
[Franks:] Well, I think it's very significant. And I think probably the untold story here, Pamela, is that right now, they're trying to put a bill together under reconciliation there which is controlled not to be too esoterically controlled by the Byrd Rule. And that means that there's really no room for lateral negotiation. It makes it very hard to get a bill passed in that kind of environment. And the reason that that's necessary is because the 60- vote rule in the Senate doesn't allow for regular order. And we have the same challenge in the House where we have to try to sort of shape our bills to fit through this weirded process in the Senate that none of the American people really understand. And has become so outdated and so impossible in this polarized environment that it makes legislation either dirt in ice cream or nonexistent. And we literally can't get things to the floor in the Senate anymore under regular order. I think the Senate may be one of the few major parliamentary bodies in the world now where the majority cannot bring a bill to the floor for debate and amendment under their own power. And that's pretty that's a unique situation.
[Brown:] All right. I want to turn to what Nancy Pelosi said just in the last hour. She said that Republicans are enablers when it comes to the White House and Russia. Do you agree?
[Franks:] Well, no. Obviously, I don't. But I think that, you know, in all due difference to Ms. Pelosi, I don't think Democrats could find Russia on a map until they found out or concluded that it could somehow be used to beat up Donald Trump. And I mean, that's all they talked about, even this latest situation. I mean, I've had I don't know how many thousands of dollars spent on me doing opposition research. And I think if
[Brown:] But this is a foreign government. I mean, this is the President's son
[Franks:] Well, that's what I'm saying.
[Brown:] going to a meeting under the pretext that a foreign government was trying to help the Trump campaign by offering dirt on the opponent. I mean, that is not
[Franks:] Yes.
[Brown:] And talking to several people on both sides of the aisle who have dealt with campaigns, that is not normal practice.
[Franks:] No. But I think if my opponents had thought that, you know, some Russian told my opponents that they had information on me, I'm sure that they'd been glad to take the meeting. I think a lot of people would have taken the meeting. Now, but he would be
[Brown:] If that happened to you, would you have asked for legal advice? OK, go ahead.
[Franks:] The key would be that if there was something that he learned that was illegally obtained or was somehow an attempt to, you know, create espionage, then he would have the right and the not only the right, but the responsibility to turn that over to the legal authorities. I guess it never came to that, so we don't know anything along those lines. But you are right. If there was something where there was some illegality that occurred, then he had the responsibility. I don't think there's a statute anyone could say he broke. But I suppose time will tell.
[Brown:] It's interesting that you hear Christopher Wray that the president's nominee for the FBI director saying that if someone you know, someone should go to the FBI or seek legal council before taking a meeting like that. And we've also heard in the wake of this that these calls for Jared Kushner to lose his security clearance, others say he should be fired. What do you think, at a minimum, should happen given these new revelations?
[Franks:] Well, I think bottom line is we need to find out what the facts are. And I think as has been so far, that they will indicate if there were no laws broken. And, you know, there was no attention brought when Mr. Obama sent taxpayer dollars overseas to Israel to literally try to defeat Benjamin Netanyahu. We didn't hear much about that. But that was taxpayer dollars. So, I don't think that this is going to come to anything, but the facts are always the key.
[Brown:] And I know that there is frustration among Republicans on Capitol Hill that this sort of put the cloud over the work that you're doing. But at the same time, do you have frustration that from people direct to people in the White House such as Jared Kushner for not being more transparent earlier. Because this additional meeting, according to sources, was discovered in June, six months after Jared Kushner first provided his security clearance form, after they looked at e-mails. Are you frustrated that wasn't done sooner, that they weren't more transparent sooner? Because had that been the case, perhaps, this wouldn't be unfolding the way it is right now.
[Franks:] Well, you know, I recognize that this administration is unique and that it wasn't really spawned out of the political class. And so, they don't have as many experiential references to point to. But I'm much more frustrated in that we can't seem to actually speak of the issues facing the country. I mean, we can't speak seem to I'm on the nuclear committee here and I see some profound implications for America on the horizon. And yet, my friends on the left, all they can talk about is Russia, where they never talked about Russia when they were a real threat to the United States.
[Brown:] But what about the president? What about the president? I mean, he tweets about it. He, you know, attacks the media. Does that frustrate you because he's not always
[Franks:] Well, this president it's fair to say that this president doesn't speak diplomat. But I think the American people realize, at his core, that the man wants to do what's right for America, that he wants to defend our country, that he wants to defend the constitution, he wants to see the economy grow so that everyone can be part of this amazing miracle called America. I'm convinced to that with everything in me. And I didn't start out a Trump supporter. But the more I know the guy, the more I see that, at his core, I think that he is truly committed to America and to each person that wants to uphold it and see the dream of the Founding Fathers be manifest.
[Brown:] All right. Congressman Trent Franks, thank you very much. Have a great weekend.
[Franks:] Pamela, thank you, my lady. Thank you.
[Brown:] Well, Russia is signaling that they may consider expelling U.S. diplomats if they don't get what they're asking for from Washington. Up next, a look at what they want.

[Tapper:] In our national lead, the final farewell. The train carrying the casket of former President George Herbert Walker Bush is pulling into College Station, Texas, right now, the site of his final resting place, at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library. This train is dubbed the "Bush 4141" specifically built to honor his life. It was commissioned in 2005. Now, 13 years later, with his family close behind, crowds lining the route along the way, this train is making its most important journey and its most important stop. CNN's Wolf Blitzer is in College Station, Texas, for this final arrival. And, Wolf, heavy hearts this hour, especially in Texas, at this final ceremony takes place.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Host, "the Situation Room":] Yes, Jake, this is the end, this is the final stop. It will be very, very emotional for everyone involved. It's been six days now since the 41st president of the United States passed away, and right now, the country is saying a final, final farewell. We'll bring back John King with us. Let's talk a little bit about what. So, what do we anticipate unfolding in the next few minutes?
[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] Well, you'll see and you see the cadets here from Texas A&M. Waiting, Bush family friends, some staff, officials from the library, the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library. You see them all lining up here. The train will arrive shortly. You can hear it in the background, and this is final resting place of the 41st president of the United States, and I'm reminded in the scene in the song from "Hamilton", "One Last Time". That was about George Washington's final address. The people will see me, hear me one last time. This is last time we will see the 41st president of the president of the United States, the last time the country will see him, the last time those who respect and honor his memory at this museum and library will see him and most importantly those on the train with him his family and after these days of celebration, we talked about this earlier. This is all hard, I don't mean to say any of it has been easy, but they have been uplifted by the remembrance of their father, the celebration of their father and grandfather. This has to be the hardest part, this is good-bye.
[Blitzer:] Students, faculty, friends of Texas A&M University, they have gathered here, as well as invited guests to issue, to say this final farewell. Dana Bash, the family, the immediate family, is aboard this train as it's about to pull in here to College Station, Texas, for this final goodbye, including the 43rd president of the United States.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] That's right. And you see the images there, what they're seeing, their vantage point and, of course, what they have been the greetings that they have gotten, the outpouring frankly going through rural Texas to get from Houston to where we are in College Station. Really an outpouring, and we said it and need to say it again, to to give tribute to a man but also to take part in a truly American moment, a nonpartisan American moment, to to say good-bye and to and to honor a legacy. And I just have to say that as we've been sitting here. You can see the library is behind us. It's out of camera shot, unfortunately, but there is a long line of cadets behind us, and they have been standing out here in the rain, at times very nasty rain for, I don't know what, two hours, just waiting, waiting for this moment.
[Blitzer:] Mary Kate Cary, you've been watching all of this unfold.
[Bash:] There they are.
[Blitzer:] There are the live pictures of the ROTC cadets. This is a university with a large number of cadets.
[Mary Kate Cary, Former George H.w. Bush Speechwriter:] Yes, they are known for that. You can see the core of cadets here.
[Bash:] You can see the train approaching.
[Blitzer:] You can see it approaching. College Station, Texas right now. You can and these are images there you see the train approaching. Go ahead, Mary Kate.
[Cary:] Just a remarkable outpouring here. He's beloved here on campus by the kids. No matter if they are in the corps cadets or not. Any time he's here, they all turn out, the sort of dancing aggies and the cowboy wranglers, they all come, and he just loved it. And I think there's probably a lot of young people here today who want to be part of something bigger than themselves and want to learn from him and see what they can do. To them, it's not the end of an era, I don't think. I think, as one said earlier this week, an invitation to continue his legacy and to live up to these sort of values that he stood more that go back to the founding of our republic in a lot of ways, and that's what's going through my mind as I see these young people standing at attention for him.
[Blitzer:] There you see 4141, the special name that this president was provided, Bush 4141, the 41st president of the United States. Jake, they've got a really, really moving ceremony that's about to unfold, including all of the tributes that this president clearly deserves.
[Tapper:] It's been it's been quite a week of outpouring of emotion, outpouring of fond remembrances of the 41st president, George Herbert Walker Bush. Here we have the train making its stop. This is the final journey for President George H.W. Bush, the 41st president. And, Mary Kate, I just wanted to ask you as somebody who worked with the former president, as somebody who worked as a speechwriter for him was there any one moment that captured the week for you, any one remembrance or any one comment that you'll think about when you think about this week?
[Cary:] Well, you know, I'm a speechwriter, so I I think that the speeches were out of this world good. All speech writers keep a file of great eulogies because if you get called to write one of these, it's usually on very short notice, so you always have the best of the best ready to go so you can get inspired. And certainly the eulogies this week were amongst the best I've ever heard because they did two things. They elevated the values that President Bush stood for to the founding of our country and what we all stand for, but second, made him a very human person with some real humor and insights into the way he lived his life on a daily basis and we could all learn from him. So that's what jumped out at me was the level of oratory was spectacular.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] And the Train Bush 4141 coming to a stop. You see the casket flag draped inside. It will be escorted, it will be taken out of there and escorted to the former President's final resting place. Many former presidents are buried at their presidential libraries. His former boss Ronald Reagan is buried at his Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. And let's listen in and see what happens as George H.W. Bush comes home. Wolf, we're seeing a shot right now of the train having stopped at the presidential library at Texas A&M University near Texas A&M College Station. Tell us what we're not seeing. How many people are there, where are they, set the scene for us.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] There are they're probably 700 or 800 people who have been gathered here. And then you see you're beginning to see now some of the folks get off this train. It looks like a President George W. Bush is standing right there.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] Yes, he's going to be one of the first off this train. As you know, Jake, this has been so, so powerful, so moving for him. We saw him you know, briefly breakdown at the end of his eulogy at the National Cathedral in Washington earlier in the week. And he's just been so grateful to all the people who have come, all those who have spoken, all those who are paying tribute to his father, someone he clearly loved so much. So he's this is going to be a powerful moment for him, for Laura Bush, the former First Lady, his brother Jeb Bush, Columba Bush, his wife, all of the kids are here, the grandchildren and you see here there's going to be a religious ceremony as well as this casket is taken off this train. It's going to be a powerful moment indeed. You know, John, I know you have a thought. You want to weigh in as well.
[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] Just to see the see 43 standing there. Again, two men in history, president of the father of President George H.W. Bush and John Adams and to watch I'm just remembering Mary Kate mention of the eulogies, George W. Bush saying, you know, the goal in life is to die young as late as possible. And I think that's what George H.W. Bush did. He died young as late as possible, 94 rich years. We were in the library earlier, you see the pictures of him as a young athlete at Yale playing baseball. The pictures of his cigarette boat fidelity which he loved to race off the Maine coast. He was skydiving when he was 85 and he was 90. He died young as late as possible. And to see the family be here, I think again President Bush 43 was on Instagram thanking people along the way shooting pictures out the window, thanking them for me he said making, 41's farewell so uplifting. And again, the mix of celebration and now farewell, I think it has to be incredibly tough for this family and this leader who you're looking at now right there. It used to be George and Barbara, now it's George and Laura.
[Blitzer:] Yes. And you see his daughters Jenna and Barbara there as well, the daughters of President George W. Bush. They're getting ready to begin this process. They're going to be walking down this track, these steps from the train and then there will be a ceremony. Let's listen.
[American Crowd:] To fallen soldiers let us sing, where no rockets fly nor bullets wing, our broken brothers let us bring to the Mansions of the Lord. No more weeping, no more fight, no friends bleeding through the night, just divine embrace, eternal light, in the Mansions of the Lord. Where no mothers cry and no children weep, we shall stand and guard though the angels sleep, oh, through the ages let us keep the mansions of the Lord.
[Unidentified Male:] Ready step! Ready step! Ready step! Forward march!
[Tapper:] George H.W. Bush in his final resting place. The door is closed on the hearse that is now going to the site where he will be buried. It has been a long week of remembrances, of eulogies, of memories of this man, and all that he did for the United States. Jamie Gangel, you've been you've been to this presidential library, where is the hearse going? Where is it driving to right now to deliver him to his final, final resting place?
[Jamie Gangel, Cnn Special Correspondent:] So we'll actually not see the burial. It's at the presidential library, but it's over a hill so that the family will have some privacy. Barbara Bush, of course, is buried there in April. The remains of their daughter Robin who died when she was three from leukemia were moved from Greenwich, Connecticut, and she is buried there so the three of them will be together. And I understand that he asked for a very simple marker, very similar if you can picture the markers at Arlington Cemetery. And he wants his number from the Navy there and something about how much he loved Barbara there, but it's a very simple headstone, I'm told. And I just have to say, you know, this has been an extraordinary week of tributes as state funerals are, but today it's about the family.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Gangel:] They have gone through two services. One that was the formal state service at the National Cathedral where President George W. Bush spoke and was so emotional and then a more personal Texas one this morning. But there is his final resting, and they have lost both their parents within seven months, so I think it's this is it's all hard, but this is the hard part.
[Tapper:] And we have watched this week as George W. Bush has gone from the oldest son of President Bush to the family patriarch. We saw it happen before our eyes, from the landing of the plane at Andrews Joint Andrews Andrews Joint Air Force Base to the moment that his father was memorialized at the funeral. Our coverage on CNN continues right now.

[Baldwin:] A bombshell report involving the Miss America Organization. This is revealing, how some of the page ends biggest stars were fat shamed and humiliated behind the scenes. The Huffington Post and Yashar Ali was the one who broke this published several scathing e- mails exchanged between Miss America CEO Sam Haskell and other top officials. And the one raising all kinds of concerns is this, where he writes: "We are no longer going to call them forever Miss Americas. Please change all script copy to reflect that they are former Miss Americas." The official then responds: "I already changed forevers to the "C- word." Does that work for you?" And CEO Haskell responds, "Perfect. Bahahaha." Now 49 former Miss Americas are calling for the organization's board members to resign immediately. Two of them with me now. They are both the subject of some of these malevolent e-mails, Kate Shindle, who was crowned in 1988. She is now president of the Actors Equity Association. And 2013 Miss America, Mallory Hagan, is on the phone with me now. She's now an anchor at WLTZ in Columbus, Georgia. So, ladies, thank you to both of you.
[Kate Shindle, Former Miss America:] Thanks.
[Baldwin:] And, Kate, let me just start with you.
[Mallory Hagan, Former Miss America:] Hey.
[Baldwin:] Hi. But, Kate, all right, before we get to how all of this feels and especially having it so out there, thanks Yashar and HuffPo, how bad was it at the worst moments and times?
[Shindle:] You know, I'm not even sure we know how bad it was at the worst moments. I have a sneaking suspicion that this is the tip of the iceberg and there's more to come. I have heard conversations about all kinds of things across the spectrum, ranging from financial issues to different types of communications.
[Baldwin:] Well, what about you directly?
[Shindle:] Oh, for me, the worst part was having to call my mom and say, hey, just so you, there is an article that just posted where a bunch of people wished I was dead. What do we do with that? Oh, and, by the way, they all work for the organization that taught me how to be a leader and an activist. But this is how they do it now.
[Baldwin:] How crushing was that to read that?
[Shindle:] It was sad. It was sad. But, you know, you can only go up from here, frankly. And I think that, as long as they were going to say these things, I'm kind of glad they were dumb enough to put them in e-mails, so they could then become public.
[Baldwin:] Mallory
[Shindle:] I shouldn't say that.
[Baldwin:] Hey, you feel it, you say it. Mallory, Mallory, how do you feel? What's the worst of it for you, directed at you?

[Stelter:] Hey, welcome back. Did something feel different about the news cycle this week? It was kind of weirdly calm, right? Maybe that's because while President Trump was on his high stakes trip in Asia, he stayed on script and his Twitter feed pretty much just promoted his trip. It was pretty calm. But then this happened. Look at these brand new 280 character tweets. This was the real Trump coming out. Shocking tweets about Kim Jong-un and other topics and, of course, his troubling comments about Russia's attempts to interfere in last year's election. Trump was asked on Air Force One if he trusts Vladimir Putin's denial of involvement and here's what he said to the press pool. There is no audio or video, but we have the transcripts. He said, every time Putin sees me, he says, I didn't do that and I really believe that when he tells me that, he means it. Now, before leaving Vietnam, Trump held a news conference and I don't know maybe he was trying to clean up his off the cuff remarks. Let's watch.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I believe that he feels that he and Russia did not meddle in the election. As to whether I believe it or not, I'm with our agencies, especially as currently constituted with their leadership.
[Stelter:] So he eventually said what he could have said originally. Let's take about it with Jeffrey Greenfield. He's back with me. And here in New York, John Avlon, the editor in chief for "The Daily Beast" and a CNN political analyst. Jeff, first, your reaction?
[Greenfield:] Well, here's what's so, I don't know, mind-boggling about this. There were a couple occasions on this trip where the press was unfair to Trump. The picture of him dumping the fish food into the pond, that was not a mistake. And he really didn't say that he thinks Japan should put more factories in the United States. It was kind of a garbled transcript. But then you have something like this which is logically inconsistent. He cannot simultaneously believe that Putin believes he didn't do anything but that in fact his agencies say they did. Unless you believe that Russia was doing this behind Putin's back. It makes no sense. And what's so confounding about trying to convey what Trump says and who he is that the very use of his language, which is to be polite confusing, sometimes makes it possible to assume the worst things about Trump and when you realize, gee, that was a mistake, you then see him doing something that says, well, yes, on the other hand, he really does say some really bizarre things. It must drive the people covering Trump on a daily basis completely crazy.
[Stelter:] John, does it drive your staff crazy?
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] Sure. I mean, look, this is an ultra marathon we're in and you got to find exhilaration in the challenges rather than exhaustion. But we also have to stay focused on the facts. And the fact is that Donald Trump sees himself as a tough guy truth-teller in every circumstance except when it comes to Vladimir Putin. And then he will contort himself in any manner of forms just to avoid direct confrontation or questioning the man's integrity. On Veterans Day, as John McCain pointed out, you know, he made this statement. There is nothing America first about taking the word of a KGB colonel over our intelligence services, and trying to clean it up in back end and to saying, well, I sort of take our intelligence service's word, but I still believe his sincerity. It doesn't make any sense, it's contradictory to the best interests of the nation and the way Trump projects himself. So, that's why there's some rotten and
[Stelter:] Well, it doesn't make sense unless you believe I mean, let's be honest about this, John, right?
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Stelter:] What do reporters talk about behind closed doors when they are in the newsrooms? They wonder if Russia has compromising information on the president. That's what's at the root of all this speculation.
[Avlon:] Well, look, again, Trump will criticize anyone about anything on the slightest drop of a dime except Vladimir Putin, who he has refused to take the opportunity to criticize over the course of campaign and even as the president, despite the overwhelming evidence and opinion of the intelligence services that Russia meddled in our election. There is no anger about that. Instead there is anger at the investigation. There's anger at the Democrats. So, it doesn't make logical sense and it is something deeply troubling if you're taking American interest to the heart, if you're thinking really ironically about America first.
[Stelter:] Another quote from that gaggle on Air Force One that's worth showing on screen, this is another comments from the president taking questions from reporters on Air Force One. He said this artificial Democratic hit job gets in the way of trying to have better relations with Russia, and that is a shame because people will die because of it. Jeff Greenfield, these kinds of quotes, they almost sort of miss the media radar. They don't get a lot of attention when they happen, but isn't that a profoundly shocking thing for the president to say? People will die?
[Greenfield:] One of the things that actually Trump has benefited from is that on a daily if not hourly basis, there are things he says that you could never have imagined any other American president left, right, up or down of saying, and they kind of bleed into each other. And you sort of forget, oh, yes, 72 hours ago, he said this. But I think this comes down to a fundamental fact that the way the president argues is, if something is potentially harmful to me or my political interest or to my standing, it could not have happened. And therefore, my definition of reality is this whole Russia story is a Democratic plot and it's all about Hillary Clinton who, by the way, have I told you how many electoral votes I got against her. This the people who covered Trump from back decades will tell you that the way he is behaving as president is totally consistent with the way has behaved since he first became a tabloid figure in the '80s.
[Avlon:] But that's why our job is more important than ever, because in the midst of sort of reality distortion field emanating from the Oval Office, facts do matter, staying focused on what actually happens, insisting that we impose perspective, i.e., presidential history, what is normal in the case of the responsibility of the president, against the Twitter tirades and the somewhat unhinged statements. That's really important. We'll meet resistance and we'll meet fury and pushback for all sorts of partisan reason, but it's absolutely essential to not giving in to normalization.
[Stelter:] And one more challenge for the president is trying to keep up with the drip, drip, drip of Russia news. Let's put on screen just four of the dozens of headlines from this week about the ongoing Robert Mueller investigation and the congressional investigations. John, how does your newsroom at "The Daily Beast" try to keep up with the daily drip, drip, drip?
[Avlon:] Well, we try to pick our angles. We've got a great team of reporters, you know, Betsy Woodruff, Spencer Ackerman really focused on the story. We think about it strategically as we come. We push into individual leads we've got and try not to say simply have the tail wag the dog and follow the pack. Each news organization needs to have original angles it pursues and the cumulative effect is that we keep advancing the ball in this incredibly important story.
[Stelter:] Jeff, thanks for being here. John Avlon, please stick around. Up next, what we know and what we don't know about President Trump and the AT&TTime Warner deal. And most importantly, why it matters to you.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] Nancy Pelosi and the group, you heard her the other day. She wants to raise your taxes. They want to get rid of the tax cut bill and raise your taxes. Nancy Pelosi came out in favor of MS-13. That's the first time I've heard that. She wants them to be treated with respect. Can you imagine having Nancy Pelosi as the speaker of the House? Can you imagine?
[Bolduan:] That was President Trump going after House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi during a speech last night making it pretty darn clear that Republicans think running against Pelosi once again is the path to keeping their majorities. Is that the case? Joining me right now a member of the House Democratic leadership, Congressman Joe Crowley of New York. Congressman, thanks for coming in.
[Representative Joe Crowley , Chairman, House Democratic Caucus:] Thanks, Kate. Great to be with you.
[Bolduan:] So, if Donald Trump is laying out the strategy last night, Republicans are making no secret that they're going to go after run once again against Nancy Pelosi in the midterms. Does the minority leader make it harder for Democrats to win?
[Crowley:] Well, I think what you clearly heard in the last segment was the divider in chief. He's doing nothing to bring this country together and to cast dispersions on Nancy Pelosi and that group. I guess he's talking about me and Democrats in the House and Senate isn't doing anything to bring us together and quite frankly, it's once again, the president and his party are bankrupt of any ideas to move the country forward. They just keep going back to the same old playbook and I simply don't think it's going to work this year.
[Bolduan:] The playbook has worked before running against Nancy Pelosi, is running against Nancy Pelosi, is the Democratic minority leader, is she making it harder for Democrats?
[Crowley:] Well, what I would suggest is if you look at what happened in the elections yesterday, Georgia and Kentucky and elsewhere, we are seeing record numbers of women being selected as Democrats, being our standard bearer this November. And I believe that the enthusiasm that is out there for Democrats across the board and I think, you know, like-minded independents is going to ensure that Democrats take control of the House of Representatives. And I think the attacks upon Nancy Pelosi and upon the party again is reflective of a lack of ideas that they have to move the country forward. They simply want to go back and attack, attack, attack. That's the old playbook and it's not working. We see it poll after poll. It's simply not going to work.
[Bolduan:] Well, Congressman, whether or not Democrats win back the House in the midterms, there's a whole lot of talk about who will be leader of the Democrats in the House come January. Last month "Politico" was reporting that they spoke with nearly 30 Democratic lawmakers and aides and almost all said it is no secret that you're gunning for it if there is a shake-up. Are they all wrong?
[Crowley:] Well, I think, you know, don't always read what you believe, and don't always believe what you read. I think what we are focused on
[Bolduan:] But are they all wrong?
[Crowley:] Let me answer. What we are focused on is winning back the House of Representatives. Nothing else matters. Nothing else matters but winning. Nancy Pelosi is agnostic about winning. She just wants to win. We just want to win, and we'll let the politics deal with itself after that. I've said repeatedly I see no situation by which I would be anything other than supportive of Nancy Pelosi. So, let's move forward. Let's win in November and we'll take it from there.
[Bolduan:] The president said that he has more tax cuts coming before November. Are you aware of another bill in the works?
[Crowley:] I've heard some rumors about that and I think the big difference here, Kate, is going to be that they simply will not be able to pass it with the 50 plus one vote. It will take 60 votes to pass it in the Senate and finally, maybe they'll have to start talking to Democrats. They didn't do that in the last go around in the tax cuts that was passed, and Democrats, we want to offer a better deal to the American people, better jobs, better wages and a better future. And part of that is revisiting that tax bill making it fairer and getting it down to the middle class and working poor in our country and providing $50 billion to invest in our teachers and our schools and make being a teacher a solid part of the middle class once again. Those folks have been forgotten. That's what we are talking about in Democrats side of the aisle.
[Bolduan:] There's a big question, though, what should Democrats be running on right now. The reason I ask is because I have gotten two different answers from two different Democrats, who have come on the show.

[Vause:] Millions of Americans would actually be
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Got to rug up, right. I remember you telling me once, that's a term you guys use in Australia rug up.
[Vause:] Rug it up. Yes.
[Javaheri:] Absolutely. This is the pattern for that, you know. When you're talking 20 below, 30 below, that's one thing. You can certainly layer up for those sort of pattern and temperatures. But when you get to 40, 50, in some cases 60 below zero Celsius pushing in excess of 70 below zero Celsius in portions of the Midwest. Now, we're talking about really nothing you have in your closet no matter how many layers you put on will do much for you. You would need scientifically designed clothing and multiple layers of that from boots, all the way up to your mitten and also gloves and hats and such to be able to kind of protect yourself from these extreme elements. And we're talking about 54 below zero in northern Minnesota. That is minus 65 Fahrenheit. That was the wind chill measured across that region. And this sort of a pattern expected to continue for at least another, we'll say, 36 to 48 hours. And we do have wind chills even at this hour in the city of Chicago at minus 37 degrees. And certainly schools have been closed across this region because of the dangers of the outdoors for any extended period. And notice, upwards of nearly 30 records expected to be set on Wednesday. Another nearly 40 records expected to be set not just from the Midwest but even into the northeast going in towards Thursday morning. And the pattern, as you look at the morning forecast temperatures, the single lowest temp potentially in the city of Chicago in its recorded history is expected over the next few hours. And notice, it warms up dramatically back to what is normal for this time of year. But before we get there it's certainly going to feel the brunt of this. And then we actually climb up above what is average for this time of year. So we go from the minus 30 range in Chicago to above say 7 or 8 degrees come Sunday into Monday John. So a rapid warming trend at least once we get through these next couple of days.
[Vause:] It's so cold in Chicago it's affected the supply of deep dish pizza. That's how cold it is.
[Javaheri:] That's pretty cold, yes.
[Vause:] That's pretty cold. Thanks Pedram.
[Javaheri:] Yes.
[Vause:] What will they say years from now about the U.S. justice system? Justice it seems depends on skin color and social class. A justice system which has seen millions placed in mass incarceration, in many cases private prisons run by publicly-traded companies. The two biggest in the U.S. are Corrections Corporation of America and GEO Group. They have a combined revenue of more than $2 billion. What about a drug war which has lasted a generation but waged almost entirely on poor people of color who once released face the collateral consequences of serving time losing the right to vote or denied a driver's license or decreased access to basic social services like housing or food stamps. Rapper Meek Mill has been a high profile poster child for the racial bias which seems to be part of the DNA of the Justice system. For the past 10 years he's been in and out of prison for a variety of charges and probation violation. "Rolling Stone" reports he spent 30 million in legal fees. In 2017 because of his long criminal record, a Philadelphia judge sentenced him to up to four years in a medium security prison mostly for minor violations including popping a wheelie on his motorcycle and not wearing a helmet. That was an absurdity too far for Mill's friend, Michael Rubin, a billionaire businessman and co-owner of the NBA's Philadelphia 76ers. And from that moment the Reform Alliance was born. Michael Rubin, Meek Mill and a diverse group of wealthy business executives, owners of sports teams, and entertainers dedicated to changing a system which continues to defy serious reform. And Michael Rubin joins us now from New York. And we also have Van Jones with us in Los Angeles. So good to see you both. Thanks for coming in.
[Michael Rubin, Owner, Philadelphia 76ers:] Thanks for having us.
[Vause:] Ok. Michael fill in some of the blanks between November 2017 and that jail sentencing and the event last week which saw the official launch of the self-described Reform Avengers group.
[Rubin:] Yes. For me November 6, 2017 was a life changing event. Sitting in that courtroom to watch one of my closest friends being sent to prison for absolutely no reason and watching a probation officer and district attorney both recommend no sentence and then watching the judge sentence him to two to four years which is something I never believed could have happened. It was completely surreal. I just didn't believe it could actually happen. And as soon as that happened, I said to Meek, I will not stop and Jay-Z said I will not stop until we get you out of prison. And for me what happened was I thought this was a one-off problem for Meek. But what I realized was this was a gigantic issue that I was completely unaware of. And as soon as the original arresting officer came forward and said, Meek didn't actually point the gun which is what he was charged of 12 years ago. And then we still couldn't get him out of prison when we realized that
[Vause:] And then, you know, there's no shortage of data which shows the racial discrimination within the justice system. Back in 2016, for example, the Sentencing Project found "Blacks are nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses. Others they put that number at six times. And 2.5 times as likely to be arrested for drug possession. This is despite the evidence that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate. You know, numbers go on and on and on. You know, this is the end result of not just a generation of discrimination but generations. Where do you even start to try and affect change here? Where do you spend the $50 million Michael and his friends have chipped in?
[Van Jones, Cnn:] What we're going to do is actually start smart. If you look at the six million-plus people who are caught up in the criminal justice system two million are locked up, but there are four million that are caught up on probation and parole. And even the way that you started the segment, now he's gone to prison multiple times. You would think that Meek Mill was out there being a carjacker and doing terrible stuff. He had one phony charge against him when he was 19 and then there was no new crime ever committed. These are non-crime, technical violations showing up late for a meeting or popping a wheelie and then you're being sent back to prison. And not just him. What happens to you when you're 50 minutes late for a meeting with your probation officer and he or she said you go back to prison now for a year. You lose your job. You lose your home. You lose your kids for no new crime. This is happenings to millions of people. So the revolving door that everybody talks about, the form it takes is a punitive dysfunctional probation and parole system. And so Mike Rubin and Meek Mill said let's fix that. And so I'm the CEO to bring all these superstars together to get this done. Once you break this revolving door instead of having a trapdoor, you have a spring board to real help you're going to see a dramatic reduction in the number of people who stay stuck in the system.
[Vause:] You know, the reality TV star Kim Kardashian she's been dubbed the princess of prison reform. She's helped with clemency for a number of inmates. This week, she went to the California state capital of Sacramento. There's a push underway to let parolees actually vote. She tweeted about the trip. She received overwhelming praise and encouragement for the most part. There's one or two snarky comments. Kevin McCarty also tweeted he received just a couple of comments that are mostly negative, you know, like this one. "Photo op, anyone who supports this mess does not deserve my respect. Why the hell would anyone support reform?" There was this one, "Why would you do this? Why should criminals vote? So Michael to you why does it take someone like a Kim Kardashian to try and win over America? For someone like you put this really on the map. You know this sort of high profile endorsement to try and actually effect change? Because it seems that there is a lot of resistance out there to take out the celebrity status or, you know, fix what is essentially a broken system?
[Rubin:] Yes. I think it is sad to acknowledge this. But I think when you're someone who is in the system or you're somebody who comes from, you know, a minority, I think it is hard for people to believe them and that's completely wrong and it's offensive. But I think when you've got people who come from a different background and they come out and show how wrong this is, I think it adds credibility. You know, great example of that I remember when I took Robert Kraft to prison to go visit me. And Robert walked out of there just completely changed. He couldn't believe what he was seeing because it was so offensive to see this great individual he's known for a while stuck in prison for not committing any crime. And I think when Robert Kraft went out and spoke, when I spoke, when some of the other people came and spoke on Meek's behalf, it helped to really bring awareness to the issue. And I think one of the big objectives we have is to really educate people. I never believed before November 6 of 2017 that you went to jail if you didn't commit a crime. I didn't know somebody like Meek could go to prison multiple times. I didn't believe they could go to prison for a day if you don't commit a crime.
[Vause:] I want to play a clip from a documentary which was released a few years ago. It's called "13th" as in the 13th Amendment. And the few words which say slavery would no longer exist except for punishment for crime. The film maker Ava DuVernay makes the argument that the U.S. prison system is actually a continuation of slavery.
[Unidentified Male:] What you got out of that was a rapid transition to a mythology of black criminality.
[Unidentified Female:] beast that needed to be controlled.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] You better believe it.
[Unidentified Male:] It became virtually impossible for a politician to run and appear soft on crime.
[Unidentified Female:] The kinds of
[Unidentified Male:] Millions of dollars will be allocated for prison and jail facilities. Three strikes and you are out.
[Vause:] Ok. So Van you know, what you're trying to do here when you say justice reform it's a lot bigger than just the prison system and the court system and sentencing. This goes to the very core, the very DNA of what this country is about.
[Jones:] Well, you know, this country has always been about two things that don't really go together. You have the founding reality which, you know, does have to do with slavery, has to do with, you know, stolen land from Native Americans, et cetera. But never forget you also have that founding dream of, you know, equality before the law. And the founding dream that, you know, all of us are created equal. And those two ideas have been the founding reality ugly and unequal. The founding dream about equality. And every generation, we've got to close the gap between those two ideas on the side of justice. And so we're not the first generation to do it. We're not the last. But this is that great freedom movement for our generation. You have that freedom movement for women, for African-Americans, for LGBTQ. We have a whole subcategory of people now that are being unfairly treated, put in prison for stuff that kinds are doing on Ivy League campuses every day. People do it in yacht clubs every day. It's wrong. And you now have a great freedom movement building in the country to do something about it.
[Rubin:] The great thing, people are focused on this now. As Van mentioned, there's 4.5 million people on probation and parole. We could cut that number down in half and still keep neighborhoods equally safe. So our goal, getting a million people out of the system over the next five years, I think it's really ambitious from one perspective but from another perspective. I think we need to do better than that. And there's such a big opportunity to see everyone coming together to work on this.
[Vause:] Yes. Not locking people up for crimes they will not commit. It actually saves money and makes people safer. You know, it's a good argument you guys have on your side. I wish you both the best of luck. Thanks for being with us.
[Rubin:] Thanks so much.
[Jones:] Thank you.
[Vause:] Well the FBI has closed its investigation into the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history without finding a clear motive. 58 people were killed when Stephen Paddock opened fire on a Las Vegas concert October 2017. The

[Sen. Mark Warner , Virginia, Vice Chairman, Intelligence Committee:] And my hope, at least from some of the comments of some of the companies, I've heard at least comments that they are they are open to this type of disclosure.
[Sen. Richard Burr , North Carolina, Chairman, Intelligence Committee:] Let me just state fact today. It is illegal, today, for foreign money to find its way into U.S. elections. So, it's not like we've got to rewrite some laws. Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] I just want to get clarification on this. So, so far, have you not been able to verify the intelligence community's assessment that Russia was weighing in on the side of Donald Trump?
[Burr:] We feel very confident that the ICA's accuracy is going to be supported by our committee. We're not willing to close the issue, given the nature of the rest of the investigation, that we might get a thread of intelligence that suggests possibly an area of the ICA that we that our interpretation is different. So, we're leaving it open. It's not closed. And I think any smart investigation would stay open until we've completed it.
[Warner:] And that's, again let me just add onto it. That's one of the things we're trying to be very careful here is, as Richard mentioned some of these meetings and we've talked to most folks. We also know we this has to be talked through with all of the balance of the committee members. That we're being, I think, extra cautious here saying we're not reaching final conclusions until we've had those conversations with all those folks.
[Unidentified Male:] Could there ever be a point with the meddling from Russia was so overwhelming that it could lead to negating the results of the election?
[Burr:] Maybe that's a theory people are working under. All I can tell you is that the votes were countered. One person won. And that's how it's going to stay. We're focused on our investigation. Everybody has their jurisdictional lanes. My hope is that they stay within those lanes. We talk I won't say regularly but when we need to with the special counsel. The special counsel was focused on criminal acts. We're not focused on criminal acts. If we find one, then they are the first phone call we make.
[Unidentified Male:] I have heard you know, the president
[Burr:] Listen, I think the vice chairman alluded to the fact that though it was slow getting DHS to recognize this, it didn't take as long, as it did for last administration, to run the clock on it. So, we're not trying to look back and point to things that were done wrong. Everybody's done things wrong.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, I'm talking about the prospect that does the president now take what you're saying today, speak out against it, and lead some kind of formal effort to protect the country?
[Burr:] We're not asking the president to take the briefing that we give at a at a press briefing about progress and assume that that, in any way, shape or form, fully encapsulates what our final report will say. What I will say is what the vice chairman pointed out. That the Department of Homeland Security has taken a different posture. It's his administration. I'm sure they had his direction or his leadership's direction. We're pleased with the progress that they're making. But some of the things that hopefully we will be able to point out will be important steps to be incorporated in their thought process moving forward. Thank you, guys. We've got to run.
[Warner:] Thank you, everyone.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] The Senate Intelligence Committee chair and vice chair saying that they have more to do, they and their staffers, on the Senate Intelligence Committee, to determine whether there was any collusion between the Russian government or the Russian operatives and anyone on the Trump campaign or in the Trump campaign orbit. The chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Republican Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina, also saying that there's general consensus that they trust the intelligence community's findings from last January that, indeed, Russia meddled in the 2016 election. There's a lot more news to discuss. Let's talk about it with our panel. We have with us our CNN Chief Political Correspondent Dana Bash, CNN Chief National Correspondent John King, who's the anchor of "INSIDE POLITICS," Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger, and CNN National Security Commentator Mike Rogers, former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Chairman Rogers, let me start with you because, obviously, President Trump has called the whole issue of Russian meddling in the election a hoax. I can't find any single other person in the Trump administration who believes that. They all say it's real. And although Chairman Burr wouldn't touch it, when asked about it by our own Manu Raju, they were very clear, they think the I.C. community's the intelligence community's conclusions were accurate. Take a listen.
[Burr:] I think there is general consensus, among members and staff, that we trust the conclusions of the ICA. But we don't close our consideration of it in the unlikelihood that we find additional information through the completion of our investigation.
[Tapper:] Fairly significant.
[Mike Rogers, Cnn National Security Commentator:] I think it's significant. A, that they've both publicly, Republican and Democrat, came out by the way, which is the right way to do an investigation like this. Stood at the podium together and said, we agree with the intelligence community assessment that said the Russians tried to meddle in the election. I think what gets caught up here is the politics of it caused a candidate to win. And that's where a pushback happened in the in the press conference. We're not saying that. And they also said, I found interesting, that it was indiscriminate. Some of that influence was on both sides of that aisle which may which is really interesting. Part of that was the chaos they talked about on race and other things, trying to sow chaos in America. I thought that was significant today that both parties came out and made that conclusion, saying, yes, the Russians were involved. They fired on both sides. This is something we need to worry about. And, oh, by the way, 21 states were impacted directly by this. We're going to have to do something about that.
[Tapper:] And Gloria Borger, the vice chair, Senator Mike Warner of Virginia, a Democrat, making the argument the 21 states, there was an attempt by Russians to I think he said something along the lines of test the vulnerabilities
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Yes.
[Tapper:] of the election systems in 21 states. But underlined by chairman Burr that no vote tallies were altered.
[Borger:] Right. And they were clearly upset at the Department of Homeland Security which they both said took 11 months for the Department of Homeland Security to reveal what those states were because they clearly want to get ahead of it before the next election. What I also thought was very important was on the Comey memos we talked about so much. They clearly made the case that this is now a legal case up to the special counsel. That they they're done with it. They're done with the Comey memos and that's now Mueller's point. And also, on the dossier, they say we've hit a wall here. We can't interview the author of it. We've asked to interview him. Obviously, he's in Britain, Christopher Steele. And so, they've said that the two the chairman would talk to him but they cannot make any statement about the validity of the of this dossier, because they're unable to interview the author of it.
[Tapper:] Do they want to know who paid for the Steele memo,
[Borger:] Exactly.
[Tapper:] and they want to know who the sources were for the Steele memo, Christopher Steele, former British intelligence agency who has worked for American intelligence in the past. Not willing to testify
[Borger:] Not available.
[Tapper:] to them. And they can't he's not an American so they can't compel him to.
[Borger:] Exactly.
[Tapper:] John King, obviously, the big question is not whether the Russians attempted to do this. We've known for a long time that they did and, to a degree, they succeeded. The big question is, did anyone in the United States help them in that task? Here is what Chairman Burr had to say about collusion and how it remains an open question.
[Burr:] We have more work to do, as it reals to collusion, but we're developing a clearer picture of what happened. What I will confirm is that the Russian intelligence service is determined, clever, and I recommend that every campaign and every election official take this very seriously as we move into this November's election and as we move into preparation for the 2018 election.
[Tapper:] That's not a confirmation that the collusion was proven but it's certainly not a denial.
[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] On several occasions, I have at least three in my notes here, he said that's still an open question. That collusion is still an open question. The issue collusion is still open. That's bad news for the president. There were no damning judgments about the president of the United States or the Trump campaign here. Let's be crystal clear about that. Nobody said there was any evidence that they had before that. But the president has said, he said, this is a hoax. The president's team has said repeatedly you know, the president, himself, still says, if Russia meddled, number one. You had two very sober gentlemen there, a Republican and Democrat. The chairman makes an important point about the bipartisanship, saying it happened and it's still happening. And it's a warning to the current campaigns. But if you're the president of the United States, 25 more interviews this month. Some public hearings about the social media. His personal attorney, Michael Cohen, about to be called before the committee in a public setting. They're trying to interview his son, Donald Trump Jr., about the now infamous June 2016 meeting and both of them standing there, especially the Republican chairman who won re-election because of the president's help in North Carolina, saying the issue of collusion is still open. That's not good news for the president. No matter when this ends or what the conclusion is in the end, it just tells you, we have months and months and months to go. At a minimum, a huge distraction over this administration and still the open question of collusion.
[Tapper:] Collusion is still an open question and another major open question, Dana Bash, is the idea of what was what was the role of social media?
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Yes.
[Tapper:] The vice chair, Mike Warner, he's been keyed in on this for months about what exactly the Russians did when it came to Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites? And why they did it. Why, for instance, as CNN broke yesterday, why they targeted Facebook accounts in Michigan and Wisconsin? And now, Facebook and Twitter are going to be will be called before the committee to testify.
[Bash:] Absolutely. Look, this is a huge part of the sowing of confusion and chaos that those two senators were just talking about, using social media to do so. And, you're right, our reporting yesterday, I was told that one of the areas in which they were trying to address this in Michigan, in Wisconsin is targeting people who could be susceptible to anti-Muslim messages, saying that the Muslims are going to change the American way of life. Now, we don't know the exactly what parts of Michigan and Wisconsin, what time frame in the 2016 election. But it happened. And I think the combination of that and I thought that that sound bite you just played from Richard Burr, the chairman, saying that the Russian intelligence is aggressive and you need to look at it, looking forward campaigns, is very, very telling. Combined with Mark Warner saying that they, the Russians, hacked into political files. Now, we know some of that is obvious with the with the e-mails from John Podesta and so forth, WikiLeaks. But maybe there's some that we don't know. And if you add up all of those things, it suggests that maybe there the collusion part of this is open because the Russians got information from political campaigns that they were able to use, whether the campaigns knew it or not.
[Tapper:] I want to bring in retired General and former director of National Intelligence in the Obama administration, James Clapper. General, we also heard Richard Burr, Senator Burr, Republican from North Carolina, effusively praise the Obama administration officials who for being cooperative and coming in, giving an average interview of two hours. I don't think I've heard a Republican praise the Obama administration like that ever. So, kudos to you and your colleagues for achieving that. What sprung out at you, from this press conference, by Burr and Warner?
[Gen. James Clapper, Former Director, National Itelligence Committee:] Well, I think first, Jake, the fact that they I mean, it was gratifying to me, obviously, that they affirmed the intelligence community assessment judgments, the key judgments that we made. So, that was that was gratifying. I also think that just to salute the committee, it has been bipartisan and remains so. I think Chairman Mike Rogers alluded to that, that, you know, the chairman and the vice chairman stood in front of the podium and, I think, gave a consistent presentation. So, that, in itself, was important, particularly after all the months that had lapsed. And I can attest that the approach that they've taken, since I was one of the witnesses that volunteered to appear, they were very thorough and very objective. And one of the things that I thought was remarkable, when I appeared before the staff or staff what's called a staff interview, that I really couldn't tell who was a Democratic and who was Republican. So, that bipartisanship, I think, pervades the entire effort. The other point I think worth making out of all this is, what was the actual impact on the election? And that actually gets down to impact on individual voters. And there's really no way to assess that. We didn't try to do it and made that point when we came out of the RICA on the sixth of January. We didn't see any evidence of voter of voter tallies being messed with. But as far as assessing how any of this, you know, Facebook, Twitter, all this kind of thing, how it actually affected individual voter decisions, there's probably no way to go back and reconstruct this. But you have to wonder where this was seen by, you know, 10 million times or 10 million people were exposed to all this in its totality. And given how close the election was in some of these key states. You have to wonder. But, empirically, I don't think is ever way there's no way we'll ever know.
[Tapper:] There isn't. It is interesting. Obviously, President Trump won Wisconsin and Michigan by approximately one percent of the vote. But I was reading the report that CNN broke yesterday about how some of the fake news, some of the fake ads and information that were spread in those two states by Russian-linked operatives were messages that were anti-Muslim. I don't know that people who would be susceptible to messages like that were planning on voting for Hillary Clinton anyway.
[Clapper:] Well, that's true. I mean, again, I don't have the insight into this into the high fidelity detail here because it would be very interesting to know one aspect I'd be interested in is the timing of when these various
[Tapper:] Right.
[Clapper:] Facebook ads appeared in relation to what current events were. And what both Chairman Burr and Vice Chairman Mark Warner said that I completely agree with, that, you know, this there was a concerted campaign here, first and foremost, and that was our first conclusion in our intelligence community assessment was to sow discord, discontent, dissent and disruption in this country. And the Russians succeed in that objective to fairly well. Thereafter, and, of course, as far as favoring one candidate over the other, well, our intelligence community assessment says they were opposed, the Russians, and this starts with Putin himself, opposed to Hillary Clinton. And that started with based on some personal animus that Putin had for both Clintons, and notably her because of he ascribed blame to her for having fomented or attempting to foment a color revolution in Russia in 2011. So it started out with a very strong opposition to her and as things evolved over time, support to now President Trump.
[Tapper:] Obviously, the one thing that everybody is most curious about is whether or not the Senate Intelligence Committee or the House Intelligence Committee, which, by the way, gives a good example of how bipartisanship when it breaks down what that looks like, as opposed to the Senate Intelligence Committee. And kudos to Mike Rogers for doing it the right way when you were there. But
[Mike Rogers, Cnn National Security Contributor:] Thanks for that clarification, Jake.
[Tapper:] I don't want to blame it on you. But everybody's wondering, obviously, about collusion, whether there was any collusion, whether any American conveyed in any way to these Russian operatives, we could really use you to gin up some votes in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or whatever. And we heard no evidence that there is any evidence, but we certainly did not hear the chairman or the vice chairman beating it down.
[Clapper:] That's true. And I think that is exactly the right position to take. Just as they withheld final judgment on the veracity of our intelligence community assessment, even though right now they trust it. But they have to hold open the option if some future information comes up, which either refutes or hopefully reinforces what we said. So I think they their stance there was exactly right. And I and I do completely agree with you, Jake, about the manner in which the chairman, Mike Rogers, and Ranking Member Dutch Ruppersberger ran the House Permanent Select Committee for Intelligence was the model of bipartisanship.
[Tapper:] I want to turn now to Jim Sciutto and get some reaction from him. And just some other housekeeping notes, Jim, some other items that they said that that Chairman Burr and Vice Chair Warner suggested, they were pretty much done in investigating the April 2016 meeting at the Mayflower hotel between Trump campaign officials and surrogates with the Russian ambassador and others. Also, the changing or the attempt to change the Republican National Committee platform. There was a representative who wanted stronger language about providing weapons to the Ukrainians as they fought Russians or Russian-tied separatists. And they said they were close to finishing up with that. What struck you the most from this, Jim?
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Well, it is important to note that on those two key questions, we've done a lot of reporting on that, with the Mayflower meeting, the question was, was there an undisclosed substantive meeting between Trump officials, including Attorney General Sessions, and the Russian ambassador. It appears they've come to a conclusion on that. He didn't say what the conclusion was, but seemed to hint that they had closed the door on that, that all seven people they had talked to described it in the same terms. The changing of the platform at the GOP convention, I know from very early on in this investigation was something that members were curious about. He did seem to say that they were satisfied with the explanation there, that the Trump team wanted to find some sort of balance, to be a strong ally, he said, to Ukraine, while leaving the door open to better relations with Russia. But on two other questions, in effect, he the GOP chairman of this committee, in effect, contradicted the president and he said that the findings, as you noted, Jake, earlier, that, as the intel community found, that Russia meddled. They agree with those findings, one. And, two, on that collusion questions, it just struck me, there were multiple answers that he could have given there. He could have said, we looked into it, we found no evidence. He didn't say that. He could have said, we're looking into it and as of yet have found no evidence. We've heard that from members sometimes say that in public. He didn't say that either. In fact, he said, we're still looking into it and have to look into that question. That is not an answer that the president wanted. One final thing. And Director Clapper had said this to me multiple times last year before he left his position, is that Russia has not stopped these attacks. A clear warning there to Republicans and democrats alike as 2018 and 2020 comes, I mean his words were, you'd have to be crazy to imagine that Russia is not going to continue these attacks and they are. And when I speak to members of the both committees, Hill, House and Senate, that is a warning they give me repeatedly, that the intelligence they are seeing shows that Russia continues these probing attacks. And the big question, Jake, is, yes, they did not affect vote tallies this time. Will they attempt to do so in future elections?
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] That is very much an open question.
[Tapper:] And before we even get to the midterms, of course there are elections in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the state of New Jersey and elsewhere around the country and there were specific warnings to any campaign operatives to be on their guard. You've been watching CNN's special coverage of the Senate Intelligence Committee's press conference when it comes to the Russia investigation and possible collusion between any members of the Trump campaign and the Russian government. I'm going to throw it now to my colleague Anderson Cooper, who is live in Las Vegas.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Jake, thanks very much. Appreciate that. I want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and also watching around the world right now. As survivors continue to fight for their lives after the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history here in Las Vegas, we want to start this afternoon with breaking news about the gunman's girlfriend, Marilou Danley. She's considered a person of interest in this case and the Las Vegas sheriff has just revealed that FBI agents are going to be questioning her any minute now. Danley was in the Philippines, as you may know, at the time of the shooting. Her family is now saying that the gunman told her to go to the Philippines, likely so she couldn't interfere with his plan to kill as many people as possible. That according to the family. Now, meanwhile, President Trump is here meeting with survivors. He'll also meet with several doctors and nurses and first responders, police officers. Just before leaving Washington, however, the president teased that that new information about the shooter about the shooter would be forthcoming. Here's what he said.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They're learning a lot more. And that will be announced at the appropriate time. It's a very, very sad day for me, personally. Thank you.
[Cooper:] One answer we hope to learn soon, of course, is why. You see this was not a crime of opportunity. This was obviously meticulously planned. It was mass murder. That was the intention. The shooter had 23 weapons in his hotel room according to law enforcement. At his home in Mesquite, Nevada, he had another 19 firearms, explosives as well, thousands of rounds of ammunition. At a separate home in Reno, Nevada, he had seven guns and even more ammunition. And in his car, according to investigators, they say they found ammonium nitrate, which is a chemical that can be used to make bombs. There's a lot to talk about, about what's happening here in Las Vegas. CNN's senior White House correspondent Jim Acosta is traveling with the president. He joins us now. So, Jim, talk about exactly what the president's going to be doing in his time here.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, Anderson, the president and the first lady, they just went inside the University Medical Center here in Las Vegas. They're going to be meeting, as you said, with doctors and nurses. Even some of the survivors of this mass shooting that took place on the Las Vegas Strip. What we don't have is sort of a tick-tock, a play by play, of what the president is going to be doing inside the hospital. The White House very purposefully has essentially made this a closed press event. There are no cameras inside. No TV cameras. No press cameras inside with the president as he goes and visits these folks inside the hospital. We may see some White House official photos later on today. But it is a big contrast with what we saw yesterday, Anderson. When the president was down in Puerto Rico, there were cameras with him at nearly every turn. And as you saw throughout the day yesterday, the president had some moments that just didn't strike the right tone. This is, obviously, a very, very delicate situation in Las Vegas. And so I think because of that, the White House has chosen to keep this much more under wraps. Now, later on, after he leaves the hospital, he is going to be meeting with law enforcement, first responders, members of Congress, other local officials here in Las Vegas. At that point, we may hear from the president. But as you heard earlier this morning as he was leaving the White House, he did indicate that there may be some new information coming out in this investigation. One thing we don't expect to hear from the president today, unless he's asked the question, is this discussion of gun control. The White House has been making it very clear they don't want to have that conversation right now. They even put out talking points to their surrogates all around the country and around Washington essentially urging those surrogates to go on TV, talk to the press, and say, now is not the time to talk about gun control. We want to wait for the facts to come in. Of course, Anderson, as you know, as we all know covering this president, he doesn't always wait for the facts to come in. But in this case, as you can see behind me with this visit to the hospital that's very much under wraps, and with the cautious tone that the White House is trying to strike with respect to this mass shooting here, it does appear, at least at this point, that they're being much more careful, much more cautious in how the president handles this, Anderson.
[Cooper:] So is he going to have any public event where he speaks publicly?
[Acosta:] At this point we don't we don't have that locked down. We don't expect him to make any sort of formal remarks here. But as we've seen in these types of situations, if there's a camera rolling in a situation where he you know, he could be asked a question, obviously, that changes things. Now, we should point out, all of this is occurring as there was sort of a political tempest brewing back in Washington with the secretary of state coming before cameras and being asked whether or not he had call the president a moron. I can tell you, Anderson, that the press secretary, Sarah Sanders, told reporters on Air Force One as they were landing here in Las Vegas that the president continues to have confidence in the secretary of state. However, she put it in sort of cryptic terms. She said, well, you know, the president expresses confidence in all of his cabinet members until they're no longer in those positions. So not exactly a ringing endorsement for the secretary of state. But I think it will be very interesting, Anderson, if the cameras are on anywhere near the president if he's asked that question about his own secretary of state just how he responds to that. And, obviously, there are these Russia questions that are circulating back in Washington, that press conference that was just held a few moments ago with the two ranking members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The president made it very clear he feels the Russia investigation is a hoax. That's clearly not how those members of Congress expressed that in the last several minutes. But if he does speak to the cameras, we'll know pretty quickly here, Anderson. But at this point, no set plan for that to happen. But with this president, all bets are off in terms of, you know, expecting what exactly he'll do moment by moment. Anderson.
[Cooper:] Yes. All right, Jim Acosta, appreciate that. Thanks very much. We're learning a lot more this hour about the Las Vegas shooter's stunning arsenal. The pictures that were taken from inside the shooter's hotel room shortly after police breached the door. The police have verified the sheriff's department last night verified that the pictures are legitimate. They've launched an investigation to see how these pictures leaked out. You can see guns, shell casings littered across the floor. According to police, at least 12 12 of the guns found in this room had what's called fire bump stocks, which is an accessory that can turn a semi- automatic weapon into an automatic weapon. It's basically a work around around the law. It's perfectly legal to buy in the U.S. If the pictures alone don't give you a sense of exactly what first responders were up against when they came to that room, I want to put you in their shoes just to give you an idea. What you're about to see is police body cam footage taken as this massacre unfolded. This was released by police in that press conference around 9:00 last night. Let's take a look.
[Unidentified Male:] That just hit my head. Go that way. Go that way. Go that way. Hey, they're shooting right at us, guys. Everybody stay down. Stay down. Where's it at? Go back! Go back! Get back. Get back.
[Unidentified Female:] Get down.
[Unidentified Male:] Get back. I know you are. There's multiple There's a gun up there. I know. Get in there. Get back. Get in there. We see mussel flash from the Mandalay Bay. From the Mandalay Bay. I can see the room. Everybody get down, get down, get down.
[Unidentified Female:] What? That's not firecrackers? No.
[Unidentified Male:] Get down, get down, get down. I got

[Sen. Orrin Hatch, , Chairman, Senate Finance Committee:] I resent anybody saying I'm just doing this for the rich. Give me a break. I think you guys overplay that all the type and it gets old. Frankly you ought to quit it.
[Sen. Sherrod Brown, , Ohio:] Mr. Chairman, the public believes it.
[Hatch:] I'm not through.
[Brown:] OK.
[Hatch:] I'm get sick and tired of it. It's not true. It's a nice political play.
[Brown:] Well, Mr. Chairman.
[Hatch:] It's not true.
[Brown:] With all due respect, I get sick and tired of the richest people in the country getting richer and richer.
[Unidentified Senator:] Regular order, Mr. Chairman.
[Brown:] and the middle class We do a tax cut
[Unidentified Senator:] Regular order.
[Brown:] over and over again.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] So, with that, what's next for the Republican plan in the Senate? CNN's Suzanne Malveaux joining me from Capitol Hill. Hey, Suzanne. What's up?
[Suzanne Malveaux:] Hey, Kate your and I both have known Senator Orrin Hatch over the years. That is not like him to get that emotional and upset at all. But there were fireworks. And there's a lot of emotion behind this and what we saw folks do yesterday is scramble to get out of town for the Thanksgiving holiday, but they're going to have a lot of people and constituents to answer to, try to explain what it is that they're doing with the tax reform bill. They've got a number of challenges on the Senate side and as you said it goes to the Senate side. This is a proposal here that permanently cuts the corporate tax rate for big businesses but allows it to expire for Households and individuals. That might be a tough sell. This repeals the Obamacare mandate, 13 million people over 10 years, who would no longer have health insurance. Then congressional analysts, bipartisan, nonpartisan analysts, show it is actually the poorest people after 10 years who will see the biggest increase in their taxes. And so this is something that they'll be working on. They're going to bring it back after Thanksgiving holiday for a vote. And the Democrats are certainly working on their part to derail it Kate?
[Bolduan:] That is if anything is evident, that is all evident. Suzanne, great to see you. Thank you so much. All right. Let's discuss this, where does this head, is it going to look any different after turkey day? Jack Kington is here, CNN political commentator, former Republican Congressman from Georgia and former senior adviser to the Trump campaign. Emily Tisch Sussman is here. She is campaign director for the Center for American Progress Action Fund. And Alice Stewart, a CNN political commentator former communications director for Ted Cruz's presidential campaign. Congressman, first to you. A big step forward for Republicans in the House, no doubt. Overnight, that moment between Brown and Hatch, you clearly don't I know who you agree with, don't agree with Brown, but as they head home for the holiday is that some effective messaging they're taking home?
[Jack Kingston, Cnn Political Commentatator:] I don't know. Probably good politics for both of them. Those of us who have served with Sherrod and know and love Sherrod, he's a loud guy, brash guy, can be obnoxious. People who know Hatch know he's reserved. Both of them just wanted to get it off their chest after a long, exhaustive process. In my opinion someone who has spent his life in sales this tax plan is as easy to sell ice or cold drinks on a high July day at NASCAR. This is a great tax plan. It cuts middle class tax cuts taxes for average families by anywhere from a $1000 to $4,000. It cuts the corporate tax rate and small business tax rate in order for us to create more jobs and expand the economy. This is going to be this is an easy sell. And if any Republican can't go back home and sell this, they shouldn't be in office. I think it's going to be a lot easier for Republicans to sell it than Democrats for Democrats to defend a no vote.
[Bolduan:] Really? Emily, do you think that's the case? Do you think this is easier for Republicans to sell than Democrats when heading home?
[Emily Tisch Sussman, Campaign Director, Center For American Progress Action Fund:] That is not the case. Republicans are struggling against the perception even though they are fully in control of the federal government, they can't govern. They can't get anything passed. They're desperate to try to pass anything. The thing that's going to be unfortunate for them is that what is in this proposal is deeply unpopular. Just the House vote they had yesterday, was a number of members of Congress who are actually going to raise taxes on their constituents through the state and local deductions. We know that bill moving through the Senate as well as the House as your reporter just mentioned it is going to increase taxes for those people who are making under $75,000 over the next for the next 10 years. That's really unpopular and not even close to what they are selling on it. If you look at the bulk of what's in the bill it is cuts for the top and corporations. That is very unpopular. And quite frankly not what people who voted for Trump thought they were voting for.
[Bolduan:] And if this was such an easy sell, I'm confused why so many Republicans who are at least right now voicing a lot of concern. Alice, this is a long way from over in the Senate. Republicans have concerns in it, runs the gamut over keeping the Obamacare repeal in the bill, some over the fact that individual tax cuts expire, but corporate tax cuts do not, some over what this bill would do to the debt. And Bob Corker is one of those and he tweeted this just yesterday, we were "We're $20 trillion in debt, and it's party like there's no tomorrow time in Washington." He was specifically actually linking to a story about the budget and what Republicans and Democrats are talking about over the budget. But does that just in and of itself spell trouble for the tax bill?
[Alice Stewart, Cnn Political Commentator:] As you say, Kate, it's far from over. And look, the House bill passed with flying colors without a doubt but the Senate, there's going to be a lot more conversations like we just saw and it's not easy. But look, the bottom line is, Republicans here in Washington, want two main things and they want to follow through on the promises that they've made, and the president has made. Reducing the corporate tax rate from 35 to 20 percent and also making lower taxes for middle-income Americans, that is the cornerstone of both of these tax proposals.
[Bolduan:] But to do both of that, it's hard to stay within the limits of what they're allowed to do on
[Stewart:] Right.
[Bolduan:] in the reconciliation rules. And why you have Jack, that's why you have the individual tax cuts expiring, that's not a good sell when you head home. Individual tax cuts you can expire. Republicans say when asked about that on the Hill, they say, that's 10 years out. There's plenty of time to fix that. That's the message?
[Kingston:] You know what, it's because of some arcane rule they call the bird rule in the Senate which is ironic because
[Bolduan:] Arcane or not it exists. Arcane or not, it exists.
[Kingston:] But let me say this.
[Bolduan:] Answer the question, though. That's how you're going to sell it? Enough time to fix the problem?
[Kingston:] I'm going to let you hold on to your money for 10 years and then we're going to extend it. Hold on to more of your money than my Democrat opponent wants to and if you want to spend more money
[Bolduan:] But it's just, trust me? Trust me when members of Congress' approval rating is in the dirt?
[Kingston:] Here's what I say. The bird is in the hand if you don't want it because it's not perfect send your money to Washington, let those bureaucrats spend your hard-earned money if that's what turns you on. I trust you, I think you can do a better job spending your money. And by the way, when you spend your own money, both Kennedy and Reagan found out that the economy grows, more jobs, more prosperity and your paycheck gets bigger.
[Bolduan:] I still just wonder why do corporate rates stay permanent when individual rates don't. That is just a tough thing to sell. Emily, Republicans, I've been asking a lot of Republicans this question which is, when do they stop caring about the debt and deficit. When did Democrats start caring about the debt and deficit when I hear them talking about it these days.
[Sussman:] It's always been on the table as one of the concerns, but I think the reason it comes up so much when talking to Republicans is the stark contrast between the last administration. And when suddenly, they want to pass these big tax cuts, particularly permanent large corporate tax cuts, and they can't pay for it, and put in things like repealing Obamacare which does bring in revenue, and can't pay for any of the tax cuts, right. So I think it's such an incredibly stark contrast to where Republicans have been over the past couple years they didn't think we could afford anything, programs that were supporting the middle class and people but when we want to give tax cuts to the top debt and deficit is never discussed. Part of the reason it will be harder to pass through the Senate is because there are a couple Senators that seem to recall another day when they actually cared about this kind of thing.
[Bolduan:] Well, it's going to be very, very difficult for Republicans to pass this.
[Stewart:] I just can't wait to see what a good Thanksgiving dinner does to all the comradery in Washington.
[Kingston:] We're going to get it done.
[Bolduan:] It's going to be so much easier in December you're not coming up against any deadlines to get stuff done in December on Capitol Hill. None at all. Or actually a ton of them. Great to see you guys. Let's see what happens next. Any moment now, we're going to be going to Alabama. These are live pictures from Montgomery, Alabama. Roy Moore's wife, Kayla Moore, she will be speaking. These women coming together to defend Roy Moore in the face of the allegations against him as, of course, the clock ticks down on that special election in Alabama. We will bring you these moments live. We'll be back.

[Quest:] Hello, I'm Richard Quest. There's more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in just a moment. When the fed assesses the impact of President Trump's tax reforms, and new year's solutions. Making them is the easy part. You've got to keep them. An executive coach is going to tell me the do's and don'ts of that. Before all of this, it's CNN, and on this network the news and facts always come first. President Donald Trump is blasting his former chief strategist Steve Bannon, saying in a statement, not a tweet, that Bannon has lost his mind and has nothing to do with the White House. Reaction came as excerpts from the new book quoted Bannon who called the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting treasonous. Former Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort is now suing the US Justice Department. The lawsuit challenges the broad authority of the special counsel Robert Mueller, alleges that the Justice Department violated the law and appointing him. Manafort has been indicted on several charges including money laundering. For the first time in almost 2 years, North Korea called South Korea on a special hotline across the demilitarized zone. We know little of what was said, during the 20-minute call but both Koreas have said they want to talk about sending a North Korean team to the Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang. The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards now claims antigovernment protests are over, and that the main troublemakers in their words have been arrested. That word from the semiofficial Fars news agency after six days of unrest. The protester grown to become the largest since mass demonstrations in 2009. The Canadian man who was freed in October after five years in Taliban captivity is in police custody in Ottawa. Joshua Boyle was arrested and is facing 15 charges, including sexual assault and unlawful confinement. His next court hearing is set for Monday. So, to the apparent war of words between President Donald Trump and his former chief strategist, Steve Bannon. The White House Press Secretary said Mr. Trump was livid at the quotes attributed to Bannon.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I think furious, disgusted would probably certainly fit when you make such outrageous claims and completely false claims against the president, his administration and his family.
[Stephen Collinson, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, I actually wrote a story on January the 1st saying that 2018 was going to be even more crazy than 2017. I didn't realize it was going to be as wild and whirling as this already. It is a stunning sort of day in Washington. You have an open field raging between Trump who more than anything was the sort of philosophical guru of his populist, nationalist camp general election campaign, Richard. Quest: Right.
[Collinson:] It is absolutely amazing.
[Quest:] let's go through this in a quick-fire round if we may. Firstly, Trump's statement the Brown was never one on one with him in the oval office much, wasn't that important to the administration. True or false?
[Collinson:] Not true. Bannon had walk in privileges in the oval office, he had a West Wing office very close to Trump, he's even been speaking to Trump ever since he left in June. He spoke most recently to Trump by phone the White House said in early December.
[Quest:] Trump's decision to issue a statement on this, not do it on Twitter. Significant?
[Collinson:] Yes, definitely. He doesn't do that very often. Usually takes as you know straight to his phone, this is one of the most stunning statements that we have ever seen from a president. He basically said that Bannon did not just lose his job, he lost his mind.
[Quest:] Finally, the whole question of why he did it? Why put out this statement in the same way as do tweet about the nuclear button? Well let's focus on the statement first. Why didn't he just let it lie?
[Collinson:] I think the answer to that question is the same answer to the question about the nuclear button. Both Bannon and Kim Jong-on made the mistake, if you like, trying to be the biggest thing in the Trump presidency than Trump himself. Trump does not like to share limelight. He doesn't like to be challenged. When Kim Jong-un started talking about his nuclear button Trump just couldn't resist coming out there and saying I got a much more bigger nuclear button than you, and mine works. When Bannon challenged Trump, went after his family, it was almost certain that he would come back very, very hard and that is exactly what he did in that statement.
[Quest:] Great to have you to interpret it for us. Thank you, Stephen. Good to see you. The minutes were the last fed meeting shed more light on why members were split on raising rates. Some have concerns about how quickly rates could be raised in the year ahead. Inflation could still be too low. There were fears about market stability if monetary policy stays too easy for too long. And now the new wildcard. The tax cuts. The Fed says that the tax cut's impact on business is uncertain. Glenn Hubbard was chair of the George W. Bush Council of Economic Advisors, now Dean of Columbia Business School. Good to see you, sir, thank you.
[Glenn Hubbard, Former Chair, George W. Bush Council Of Economic Advisors:] Likewise, sure.
[Quest:] All right, uncertain as to the effects of this tax cut, but they go on to say they are sure they talk about likely to be used for dividends and buybacks.
[Hubbard:] I think the fed minutes showed some uncertainty, but also showed an upgrade in forecasts as a result of the tax cut. I think the tax law change will boost investment, but yes, it will also raise dividends and share buybacks. It will do all of the above.
[Quest:] And in that case what do you see as being a beneficial aspect, in the short term maybe not that great because as you were talking earlier in the program many large companies are going to have to take a tax charge for losing tax credits. But in the longer-term what do you envisage, the effect on the GDP is going to be?
[Hubbard:] In the longer-term you have two things happening, one is a lower cost of capital for business investment, and the other a greater incentive for all companies were layer U.S. or foreign to invest in the United States. On balance GDP growth could be higher by say 210 to 310 of a percentage point per year. That is not a new order of the ages, but it is about the best policy can do.
[Quest:] Everything that I hear and see and read suggest this idea of getting to four or five or six percent GDP growth, the only reason I raise it is because the president talks about those sorts of numbers. But the idea of getting to four percent GDP growth is not going to happen.
[Hubbard:] Well, you know, anything can happen in a particular quarter. But if you look for long-run sustained growth in the U.S., I think a number like three is more plausible. And even that is a bit aspirational. But three is much different than two, which is what we were stuck in before. So, I think going from 2 to 3 is really big deal, if we get higher that is great. I just don't see it.
[Quest:] No. And yet at the same time, the markets let's take today for example. Records on all three of the markets in a time when internecine warfare seems to have broken out between the president and his former chief strategist. And she is becoming more bellicose on the issue of nuclear war with North Korea. Explain this.
[Hubbard:] I think markets are treating a lot of this as noise, kind of high-frequency political chatter. And are focusing on earnings and U.S. growth. If you chatter goes from rhetoric to a harsher reality, markets will definitely react. But I think at the moment people are focused on growth and profits, both of which look pretty good.
[Quest:] On the infrastructure question, because now everybody turns around and says what's next? It is going to be a balance between whether you have another go for healthcare reform, do you go for infrastructure where there may be bipartisan approach. Which do you go for? If you were in the White House what would you be advising?
[Hubbard:] I think you need to do both, but I think it makes sense to do an infrastructure plan first. The problem is the devil lies in the details. One, it is going to have to be paid for and the question will be where else in the budget are you going to change? And the biggest issue with infrastructure is not even money, it is regulation. And a lot of that is at the state and local level. So, it will be hard for President Trump to really get his arms around it but that's where he should start.
[Quest:] But this idea of an infrastructure package, traditionally infrastructure is done for one of two reasons, it's either falling apart or you need an economic stimulus. The U.S. does not need an economic stimulus, I think you and I could probably agree on that. In fact, it might actually be detrimental because obviously the Fed would raise rates accordingly and faster. But the question of decrepit infrastructure is real here.
[Hubbard:] I think that is really the point, Richard, one, it is going to be raising long-term productivity by making infrastructure better, and second it gives businesses a sense of sustained demand. Infrastructure should not be about stimulus or shovel ready projects, it is about making sure that demand is there for the long term, and that the supply side of the economy works with a real infrastructure.
[Quest:] So, if we take 2018 and it's great to have you on the program tonight, a chance to really get into some of these issues, what worries you most? I mean for the first time in probably a decade we do have synchronistic growth. Europe is growing, Japan is growing, the U.K., well, they have Brexit issues. But everybody is at least growing. World trade still remains a problem of protectionism. What worries you this year?
[Hubbard:] On balance I am optimistic for all the reasons that you just outlined. But if I looked at worries, we've had unconventional monetary policy around the world that is starting to normalize, at least in the United States and soon elsewhere. That's uncharted territory. We have geopolitical risks like North Korea. So, there are things to worry about but on balance growth looks good in 2018.
[Quest:] Allow me to invite you to be joining us more frequently in the year ahead. Thank you.
[Hubbard:] Thanks, my pleasure.
[Quest:] It's all about handmade jewelry, vintage home decoration or even wedding invites, it's what makes Etsy to become a multimillion dollar business. After the break, it's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in New York.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] House Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi, is speaking live on the floor of the House right now. Let's listen in.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi, , House Minority Leader:] tens of millions of working families across America. Trumpcare very clearly spotlights the differences in priorities between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. It is a step forward in the longstanding Republican belief that Medicare should wither on the vine, that Medicaid should be shrunken and that Social Security should be privatized. If you believe in the health and well-being of the American people, you must reject this bill before us now. It is what Trumpcare Here is what it means to the American people. Much has been said about policy here today and over time. Much has been said about politics. What are the politics of this? What's really important is what this means to the American people. And they know. They are listening. They know what it means to them. And it means, Trumpcare does, it forces families to pay higher premiums and deductibles, increasing out of pocket costs. Higher costs. Less coverage. Trumpcare will take away health care from more than 24 million hard- working Americans. A crushing age tax. Trumpcare forces Americans aged 50 to 64 to pay premiums five times higher than what others pay for health coverage, no matter how healthy they are. Steals from Medicare. Steals from Medicare. Trumpcare shortens the life of the Medicare Trust Fund and ransacks funds that seniors depend on to get long-term care they need. That's why it's consistent with their wither on the vine for Medicare philosophy. And if that were not bad enough, and they couldn't pass their bill because it was that bad, they move further away from the American people by gutting key protections. Trumpcare eviscerates essential health benefits, such as, maternity care, prescription coverage, prenatal care, and guts protections for Americans with pre-existing medical conditions. As bad as Trumpcare was the first time around it was dead. It died right here on the floor now it's come back to life like a zombie even more scary than before. And it is even worse. If Republicans have their way, Americans with pre-existing conditions will be pushed off their insurance and segregated into high-risk pools where they will face soaring costs, worse coverage and restricted care. Trumpcare means huge, huge premium increases. It's a frightening future for families who need affordable, dependable care the most. Now on the floor, the Republicans have recklessly, and some would say fraudulently, claimed that Trumpcare covers Americans with pre- existing conditions. It does not. It does not. As Robert Boyce at the Conservative Mercada Center said about the Upton Amendment, the $8 billion amount is a pittance. Spread over five years, it's one-fifth of a pittance. As the Keiser Family Foundation said, the Upton Amendment would cover the cost for only 1 percent of the individual market. Others have given it to 5 percent. 1 percent to 5 percent. Does that mean covering? No. Forcing a vote without a CBO score shows that the Republicans are afraid of the facts. They're afraid of learning the full consequences of their plan to push Americans with pre-existing conditions into the cold, or as my colleague in New York said, off the sidewalk. If Republicans thought they were really protecting people, they wouldn't be afraid of the facts. But they're also afraid of the truth. And the truth that would come forth if we knew the facts. And they're afraid that the American people will find out that this is not a health care bill. This is a tax bill disguised as a health bill. This is a bill that is the biggest one of the biggest transfers of wealth from the middle class to the richest people and corporations in America. It's a tax bill, not a health care bill. That's why they have to do it now so they can get on with their tax bill. But the suffers Trumpcare will inflict on the sick is all too clear. That is why this disastrous bill has been condemned by the American Medical Association, the American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Society, American Diabetes Association, American Heath Association, American Lung Association, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, AIDS United, the Children's Hospitals Association, AARP, the March of Dimes, the list goes on and on, on and on, the American Cancer Society. Instead of reading all of these pages, I will submit them, without objection for the record.
[Rep. Paul Ryan, , Speaker Of The House:] Without objection.
[Pelosi:] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Under Trumpcare, families, seniors, vulnerable children, Americans with disabilities, people struggling to overcome addiction and the sick will lose their health care. Rural hospitals will close. Nearly two million jobs will be destroyed across America. Seven million veterans will lose access to tax credits for health care. And all of this to give a massive tax cut to the richest in America. Trumpcare is a billionaire's tax cut, again, disguised as a health care bill. It's Robin Hood in reverse, one of the largest, again, transfers of wealth from working families to the rich in our country. Today. we have the we honor of visions of our founders who risked everything. They've risked everything, their lives, their liberty, their sacred honor, to advance a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The life, a healthier life, the freedom to pursue your happiness. The freedom from being job locked or policy locked because of what the Republicans want to do today. Today, we fight to preserve affordable health care as the right of every American, again, not the privileged few. Today, we fight for children, like Zoe Madison Lin. Zoe was born with a congenital heart defect in May of 2010. She faced her first of three heart surgeries at 15 hours. By six months old, Zoe was halfway to her lifetime limit her insurer had placed on her. She faced a grim future not only using up her lifetime limit by preschool, by preschool, but by carrying a pre-existing condition that will require attention and care for the rest of her life. Under the Affordable Care Act, Zoe is protected. But President Trumpcare puts her future in danger. I wish that our members who vote for this bill have better I hope you make time to sit down with the parents of a newborn or with a heart condition or a young woman who just learned she had breast cancer, the family of loved ones struggling with a disease or chronic condition, any of the tens of millions of Americans who are rightfully terrified of what Trumpcare will mean in their lives. Mr. Speaker, we have with this bill a wonderful opportunity. This is one of the best civics lessons we can engage in. Because of what happened following the election, the American people are engaged. They are paying attention. I'm not saying in a political way. I'm saying in a personal way. A former speaker said, "All politics is local." In the case of health care, all politics is personal. All politics is personal when it comes to health care. And so this civics lesson will teach the American people a number of things. As special as we think we are when we come to the floor, most Americans don't know who their member of Congress is. But they will now. When they find out that you voted to take away their health care. Am I correct?
[Ryan:] They will know when you put an age tax on them or undermine Medicare and Medicaid and the test. Oh, yeah, they're paying attention because it's really personal with them and their families. So I think we have to get ready for that. Our members, our colleagues who have the mantle of being a moderate, you vote for this bill, you have walked the plank, from moderate to radical. And you're walking the plank for what? A bill that will not be accepted by the United States Senate. Why are you doing this? Do you believe in what is in this bill? Some of you have said, well, they'll fix it in the Senate. But you have every provision of this bill tattooed on your forehead. You will glow in the dark on this one. You will glow in the dark.
[Pelosi:] You will glow in the dark. So don't walk the plank, especially unnecessarily. Our responsibility to the sick and the hurt is Biblical. It's fundamental to who we are. As Pope Francis said, "Health is not a consumer good, but a universal right." So access to health services cannot be a privilege. Today, let us, declare once again, that affordable health care must be the right of the American of every American, not the privileged few. So I ask you, my colleagues, does Trumpcare lower health cost? Does Trumpcare provide better health care? Does Trumpcare protect seniors and families? Is Trumpcare good for our veterans? Is there any caring in Trumpcare at all? For the sake of our values, to honor our responsibilities, to our founders, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, to our veterans who protect us, and to our children whose aspirations are our guide, I urge my colleagues to vote no on this disastrous Trumpcare bill. And you'll back it up.
[Tapper:] I want to bring in CNN senior White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, you're hearing that President Trump is feeling very optimistic going into the vote. What is the latest from the White House?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] They are feeling very optimistic over here at the White House, Jake, but they are cautiously optimistic we should point out. I talked to a White House official in the last hour who said, if this passes, they think it may be down to two or three votes in terms of a margin of victory. That is a squeaker when it comes to votes on something as big as health care here in Washington. But just in the last several minutes, White House spokeswoman, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, has been talking to reporters in the briefing room, Jake, and she said the president has been working the phones over the last 48 hours. He's now up to 15 to 20 members that he's contacted over that time period. And on this very sensitive topic that you heard Nancy Pelosi talking about a few moments ago, this issue or pre-existing conditions
[Tapper:] Jim, I'm going to interrupt. House Speaker Paul Ryan is speaking. We're going to take that live.
[Ryan:] I'd like to thank Chairman Walden, Chairman Brady, Chairwoman Black, Chairman Sessions. I want to thank the members of those committees, Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Budget and Rules. I want to thank all the members who made constructive contributions throughout this entire deliberative, bottom-up, organic process. I want to thank the president of the United States for his steadfast leadership. In his address
[Unidentified Senator:] Mr. Speaker? The House will be in order.
[Ryan:] In his address to this chamber, he called on Congress to act. And today, we take the next step to repeal and replace Obamacare. I want to thank Vice President Pence, Secretary Price, Director Mulvaney, and all of their teams. My colleagues, there is a fundamental and urgent choice at the heart of this debate. We can continue with this status quo under Obamacare, and we know what that looks like. It means even higher premiums, even fewer choices, even more insurance companies pulling out, even more uncertainty and even more chaos. Look at what has happened in Iowa this week. As in as is the case in so many areas in this country, Iowa is down to one insurer. That, of course, is not a choice. But now that one insurer is saying that it will have to pull out of 94 of 99 counties in Iowa. This is happening right now. So tens of thousands of Iowans will go have having one option to no options. That is not a choice. This is a crisis. And it is happening right now. What protection is Obamacare if there is no health care plan to purchase in your state? This is the direction Obamacare is rapidly heading. So we can continue with this status quo or we can put this collapsing law behind us. End this failed experiment. Let's make it easier for people to afford their health insurance. Let's give people more choices and more control over their care. Let's make insurance companies come in and compete for your business. Let's return power from Washington to the states. Let's help get people peace of mind. Let's put the patient, not the bureaucrats, at the center of the system. This bill does all of those things. This bill delivers on the promises that we have made to the American people. You know, a lot of us have been waiting seven years to cast this vote. Many of us are here because we pledged to cast this very vote to repeal and replace Obamacare, to rescue people from this collapsing law. Are we going to meet this test? Are we going to be men and women of our word? Are we going to keep the promises that we made? Or are we going to falter? No. After all of this, after all of this, after seeing what is happening in Iowa and around the country, after seeing this law collapsing, while we witness it across the country, doing all this turmoil that is coming, we will not falter. We will replace. And today is the day that we're going to do this. Today, this House has the opportunity to do more than just fulfill a promise. We have the opportunity to raise our gaze and set a bold course for our country. We have the opportunity to show that we've got the resolve to tackle the big challenges in this country before they tackle us, to stop the drift of arrogant big government policies in our lives, and to begin a new era of reform based on liberty and self-determination. Giving people choices, letting them control their own destinies. That is the day that is before us right here. So let us pass this bill to take the next step to put Obamacare behind us. Let us pass this bill to build a better health care system for American families. Let us pass this bill to leave this country better than we found it. Because that is why we are here. That is what is at stake today. And that is why I'm going to be so proud to cast my vote for this legislation. And I urge all of my colleagues to do the same.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] The speaker of the House Paul Ryan with a strong plea for representatives to vote in favor of the legislation. That roll call is about to begin. Earlier, we heard Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader, the minority leader, making a strong plea to vote against the legislation. Joining us now, David Axelrod, our CNN senior political commentator and former senior adviser to President Obama. David, leading GOP lawmakers say this version of the GOP health care bill will pass. Your reaction to the possibility of this beginning to this becoming the potential end of Obamacare?
[David Axelrod, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] Well, Wolf, we'll see what happens. This is a win, no doubt. This is a win for Paul Ryan and the president, who had stumbled so badly out of the gate on this promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Whether it's a win in the long run is yet to be seen. I think Nancy Pelosi's summation was pretty brutal when she turned to those members in swing districts and said, recited all the things that people will lose as a result of this, and told them that they are walking the plank from moderate to radical, and for what, for a bill that won't come back from the United States Senate. There's a good reason the Senate won't return this bill that is being passed today, so there may be people who cast the vote for putting people with pre- existing conditions in jeopardy, for cutting back on Medicaid for millions of people in this country, for tampering with employer-based health care and some of the benefits that are offered, mental health, drug prescriptions, and so on, for nothing, because the bill won't come back. So I think this is the first step. It's a short-term political win for the president he badly needed one for the Republican leadership in Congress they badly needed it. But it's very unlikely this bill will become law.
[Blitzer:] As Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader, was speaking, the president was tweeting. He tweeted this, "I'm watching the Democrats trying to defend, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan and premiums will go down. Obamacare lie." So clearly, he's getting ready to gloat, presumably, if this passes.
[Axelrod:] Yeah, but you look there's a reason why they wanted to get this bill out today before the recess. There's a reason why they wanted to get the bill out before the Congressional Budget Office had a chance to score it. Again, the last time the CBO scored a bill, a CBO that's led by their appointees, the Republicans, they said 24 million Americans would lose their health care, and in the short-term, premiums would go up. And now there's this new feature that allow states to opt out in terms of covering people with pre-existing conditions. And there is going to be a backlash. If this were ever to become law, and I don't think the Senate will allow it to become law, President Trump will learn what President Obama learned, which is when you pass these bills, you own the whole system. And this is a particularly egregious thing because they are rolling back benefits rather than expanding health care benefits. It would be a political disaster for the president in the long run if this actually became law.
[Blitzer:] David, I want you to stand by. Coming up, it's come down this, the Republicans seven-year quest to repeal Obamacare faces its first real test on the floor of the House of Representatives. Our special live coverage continues right after this quick break.

[Cyril Vanier, Cnn Anchor:] Unconstitutional: a federal judge in Texas strikes down ObamaCare. The law stands for now but will it survive this latest legal challenge? The special counsel isn't done. CNN learns Robert Mueller still wants to interview the president. And CNN is in Guatemala with the family of the little girl who died in the custody of U.S. Border Patrol. Live from the CNN Center here in Atlanta, I'm Cyril Vanier. It is great to have you with us.
[Vanier:] At this hour, the law that brought health care to millions of Americans has been struck down by a U.S. judge. The Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare as it's known; it was former president Barack Obama's signature piece of legislation but a judge has ruled it unconstitutional. Right now it remains in effect. That means those who want it can still sign up but that ends in just hours on Saturday evening. If the judge's decision is upheld, millions may end up losing their health care. President Donald Trump, who tried to repeal this legislation earlier in his presidency, tweeted, the ruling was not surprising and it was, quote, "great news for America." Why the top Democrat in the House promises to intervene to uphold what she calls the lifesaving protections for people "with preexisting conditions and promises to reject the Republican efforts to destroy the Affordable Care Act." Former assistant U.S. attorney in Los Angeles, David Katz, joins me for an indepth look at this. The Affordable Care Act has survived legal challenges before. So what's different this time around?
[David Katz, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Well, there were about 70 efforts to repeal it. It's also been litigated. It's gone up to the United States Supreme Court and it's been affirmed. But that was the earlier version. So what just happened now is not going to be the last step. But it's a troubling first judicial step. It's troubling for 130 million Americans with preexisting conditions. It's very disturbing to 12 million people who are on ObamaCare as of 2018. And tomorrow is their signup day, so it's critical that people realize they need to go tomorrow and sign up because this is not the last word and many people think the appeals will succeed and that this district court, trial court ruling, will be struck down.
[Vanier:] So ObamaCare has been found you say ObamaCare was affirmed. It was found to be legal by the Supreme Court and lower courts. The individual mandate, because that's what's at issue here, the individual mandate was found to be legal by the Supreme Court. And fining people who did not purchase health care that's the individual mandate that was also legal. But once that fine was set at 0 by Congress, as it has been in the latest federal tax law, then this whole thing becomes illegal? That's the basis for the judge's thinking, right?
[Katz:] Well, the Republicans tried to get rid of ObamaCare, the ACA, a million different ways. And if these zealots were really clever maybe they did it. Maybe they booby-trapped it in a way that the judge said, you know what, now the whole package is unconstitutional. But that's very dubious, Cyril, whether that's really going to stand up.
[Vanier:] Detail the argument for me. I want to make sure I understand it.
[Katz:] The argument goes like this. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the ACA was constitutional not because the commerce clause there were five votes to say it was no good, it was unconstitutional under our federalist commerce clause. But five justices were willing to say, including Chief Justice Roberts, that it was OK as a tax. The argument goes
[Vanier:] And that's the individual mandate, right? If we consider the individual mandate as a tax, then that is legal?
[Katz:] Yes, that certainly was the ruling 5-4 that it functioned as a tax. That if you didn't buy the insurance, you had to pay a tax. And that was within the taxing power of the United States federal government, even though
[Vanier:] So what changed with this Texas federal judge?
[Katz:] Well, as of next year, there is no more individual mandate. That was what the Republicans put in the new ACA. And so that's why I say maybe they have booby trapped it in a way that at least satisfied that trial judge down in Texas. Now mind you, there's 1,000 trial judges in America. This case was in front of the dream judge, the go-to judge for the zealots who were challenging ObamaCare. And the case was heard by a judge who's ruled against ObamaCare provisions before. He's a conservative Republican appointed by George W. Bush. And as I say, this particular judge had ruled against ObamaCare, so people don't think it's a total accident that the state attorneys general ended up in front of him. And then the Trump administration refused to defend the legislation, although it's the law of the land. That's why Democratic states' governors and attorneys general came in, like California's, and defended it. So that's who the appellants are going to be. And, of course, Pelosi said that the Democrats, once they're in power, are also going to ask to intervene in the lawsuit. So it'll be as appellants, the ones challenging what the Texas trial judge just did, it'll be the House of Representatives, once it's Democratic, and a couple of dozen states, like California with their state attorneys general, complaining that Californians and other state citizens can't get ObamaCare and this ruling is wrong to throw out ObamaCare.
[Vanier:] So one important thing I have to say for our viewers this comes from the White House statement this law stands as we speak, right? The quote is this from the statement, "We expect this ruling will be appealed to the Supreme Court. Pending the appeal process, though, the law remains in place." So that's important for everyone to know. We don't have a conclusion right now. The law is still what it is and what it was before this ruling. Look, Donald Trump has appointed two conservative justices to the Supreme Court. Does that mean if, this case goes all the way back to the Supreme Court, it is more likely to be struck down than last time?
[Katz:] Well, it's a little frightening, as I say, in terms of the people who need this care. We don't want to return to the days Republicans say we're going to return to the days when people had choice. But the reality was 20 million Americans, poor Americans, in particular, people who had pre-existing conditions, the only choice they had was to go to the emergency room and hope they could get care when they were
[Vanier:] But there's a matter of law in this new Supreme Court with a new bench?
[Katz:] Well, Scalia voted with the four. So Gorsuch or Kavanaugh will vote as Scalia did, let's say. The question is, will one of them vote like Kennedy? If one of them votes like Kennedy, there's the four. Then what will Chief Justice Roberts do? Now you have to look at the new law as a whole. And I don't buy it, that it's still not a tax. I believe it's still a tax. It still has punitive aspects if you don't get it when you look at the law as a whole. On top of that, I've always thought they were wrong about the commerce clause. Once you look at the case again with the new act, I believe it is within the commerce clause. They found other things didn't violate federalism. In America, the idea is that the states have all these rights and they retained a lot of rights and the federal government has to be careful not to encroach on the states. But the idea of controlling health care, it's the biggest part of the economy. It's a huge part. The idea they're reaching into everyone's life regarding some trivial matter, this is the most important matter in many, many people's lives, their health care.
[Vanier:] David Katz, former assistant U.S. attorney, thank you so much.
[Katz:] My pleasure, thank you.
[Vanier:] CNN has learned that special counsel Robert Mueller still wants to speak with President Trump but his lawyers are dead set against it. Pamela Brown has the details from Washington.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Special counsel Robert Mueller's team continues to be interested in interviewing the president, two sources familiar with the matter tell me. Now Mueller's stance on interviewing the president has been constant for a year and a half. We're told nothing has changed in that sense from the first day, the sources said. The president and his lawyers are still very much opposed to any potential interview. The president's legal team have resumed some discussion with the special counsel In the weeks since the president responded to written questions, mostly regarding collusion and the time period before the inauguration, these sources said. And the two sides have agreed to hold off on discussing any interview while the president wrote responses to the questions, which were returned just before Thanksgiving. That was seen as a first step to concluding more than a year of back- and-forth between the two sides. And the president's lawyers had hoped it would bring Mueller closer to finishing his probe. But we're told Mueller's interest in talking with the president continues and it includes an interest in asking questions about the president's state of mind in regard to actions under scrutiny in the obstruction probe. There has been no indication Mueller is moving to subpoena the president, one of these sources said. And asked in Mueller had follow up questions to the president's written responses, the source declined to comment. Now the president's attorney Rudy Giuliani reiterated that opposition to mean on any potential interviews, stressing the mistrust by the president's lawyers of Mueller's aggressive investigation in their view. He said, "I am pretty disgusted with them." The office of the special counsel declined to comment Pamela Brown, CNN, Washington.
[Vanier:] "I will not be "the villain of his story," the words of Michael Cohen. Donald Trump's former attorney gave his first interview since pleading guilty in a case stemming from the Russia probe. And he told ABC News he's done being loyal to the U.S. president. He said Friday that his then boss directed him to pay hush money to women who alleged affairs with Mr. Trump. He said the scheme was directly tied to Mr. Trump's presidential ambitions.
[George Stephanopoulos, Abc:] He's saying very clearly that he never directed you to do anything wrong. Is that true?
[Michael Cohen, Former Trump Attorney:] I don't think there's anybody that believes that. First of all, nothing at the Trump Organization has ever done unless it was run through Mr. Trump.
[Stephanopoulos:] He was trying to hide what you were doing, correct?
[Cohen:] Correct.
[Stephanopoulos:] And he knew it was wrong?
[Cohen:] Of course.
[Stephanopoulos:] And he was doing that to help his election?
[Cohen:] He you have to remember at what point in time that this matter came about, two weeks or so before the election, post the Billy Bush comments. So, yes, he was very concerned about how this would affect the election.
[Vanier:] President Trump denies ordering those payments but Cohen accused him of lying and said prosecutors have evidence supporting his claims. Meanwhile, President Trump has picked an acting White House chief of staff. There he is. He announced Mick Mulvaney will take over the job at the end of the year after current chief of staff John Kelly leaves. The White House said Friday that he will keep his current job as director of the Office of Management and Budget. A senior administration official says there's no time limit for Mulvaney to remain as chief of staff. CNN political commentator and Republican strategist Alice Stewart joins me now. She's also the former communications director for Ted Cruz, who ran against Donald Trump in 2016 and, more recently, against Beto O'Rourke for a Senate seat in Texas. That will become relevant later on in this conversation. Let's start with Mick Mulvaney. He'll be the acting chief of staff now for Donald Trump. Do you think this changes anything to the Trump presidency?
[Alice Stewart, Cnn Political Commentator:] Not really, Cyril. I think Mulvaney, evidently two jobs weren't enough for him so he needed to have one more. But this has always been and we always knew this was an unconventional presidency. And in terms of who holds what job and what job title people have, this is going to be different than what we've seen in the past. And I wouldn't be surprised if we keep him in this interim position for quite some time. I will say this, of all the names that have been run out there, in terms of who would fill the slot, Mulvaney is a good one. He's been a loyal soldier to President Trump in whatever position he has had. He is a good advocate for this president and his policies and he's someone certainly very well respected amongst the staff.
[Vanier:] I'll just jump in loyal and respected but not a heavyweight. Chris Christie was in the running and then he withdrew his name. Nick Ayers made some waves earlier, some high profile congressmen as well. Mick Mulvaney flies a little bit under the radar when you compare him to those names.
[Stewart:] And that's not a bad thing. This next person who fills this role is going to be different than when the president came in. With all going on, certainly as we're moving closer to 2020, this person has to be someone who can work with Congress and understand the legislative aspect of the role. He has to be political and manage those aspects as we're moving towards 2020. And now that the Mueller probe is really tightening and he has to understand the investigative part of the role moving forward and work with the staff to oversee the staff, the staff part of that role. So this is the dynamics have changed with the administration, which means the dynamics of the chief of staff are changing. So you don't need to be heavy-handed. You just need to be able to do exactly what the president wants.
[Vanier:] Absolutely. Work with the staff but first and foremost work with this president. The president tweeted on this topic, he said, "For the record, there are many people who wanted to be White House chief of staff. Mick M. will do a great job." That's sort of eyebrow raising when you know at least three people withdrew their names from consideration over the last 8-9 days. It's been overall a terrible week for the president. Nobody wanted to be his chief of staff for a while. His former associates are falling one by one. We saw Michael Cohen going to jail after implicating the president now in felonies. Donald Trump's friend, David Pecker at AMI, cooperating with investigators. Trump's inaugural committee is under criminal investigation. Has this been one of the worst weeks for the president so far?
[Stewart:] I think a lot of Fridays that is a statement of the week.
[Vanier:] I have asked the statement before.
[Stewart:] But this has been an especially busy and troublesome week, as the Mueller probe zeroes in. But I can tell you this, I was at the White House today for some meetings and I can tell you that the staff there are focused on their mission at hand. Whether they're dealing with the economy and creating jobs and pushing that agenda or whether they're focusing on immigration and building the wall or whether they're looking at foreign policy issues. They are not being sidetracked by a lot of what they view as the palace intrigue as to who fills what position.
[Vanier:] It's beyond palace intrigue when we're talking about people going to jail implicating the president or when we're talking about criminal investigations. It's beyond palace intrigue.
[Stewart:] Oh, I agree with you on those issues. I totally agree with you, that is serious and that is a concern. I'm referring to the chief of staff and how and when that position will get filled. And they view that as people getting too wrapped up in the day to day staffing positions.
[Vanier:] big picture.
[Stewart:] But all of those other issues, absolutely, yes. Those are serious. And we don't know what will happen with Michael Cohen, the new revelations with him and the Mueller probe is getting closer. And that is serious. But I'm just referring to their job inside the White House. They're looking at their individual job and responsibility and they're not getting sidetracked. But, yes, the Mueller probe is certainly becoming an issue and it's something that not just the president but a lot of those inside the White House will be focusing on in the days and weeks to come.
[Vanier:] Thank you very much, Alice Stewart, for joining us.
[Stewart:] Thanks, Cyril.
[Vanier:] The U.S. opens an investigation as a family mourns the young migrant girl who died in U.S. custody. We'll hear from her family when we come back.

[Baldwin:] And we're back on this Thanksgiving Thursday. Happy Thanksgiving to you. I'm Brooke Baldwin. President Trump's recent back and forth with the father of a UCLA basketball player has revived questions about the president and race. The president was outraged that this father LaVar Ball refused to thank him for helping free his son LiAngelo Ball from custody, one of three athletes arrested for shoplifting. The president called LaVar Ball, quote, an ungrateful fool and the poor man's version of Don King without hair all over Twitter who could have spent, quote, the next five to ten years during Thanksgiving with your son in China but no NBA contract to support you. So adding to that today, the ghost writer to the president's best- seller Art of the Deal is saying this about why the president crossed the line to cut down LaVar Ball.
[Tony Schwartz, Trump's Ghostwriter For Art Of The Deal:] I think Trump is half awed and half frightened by black people and his only way of dealing with them is to attack them. And on the other hand, I think he has a zero tolerance for any criticism of any kind.
[Baldwin:] Let's start there. CNN political commentators Paris Dennard and Sally Kohn are with me. Happy thanksgiving first and foremost to both of you. Paris, you heard Tony Schwartz saying the president is half awed and half frightened by black people. What do you think that means and would you like to comment on that?
[Paris Dennard, Cnn Political Commentators:] I mean, first of all, Happy Thanksgiving. I think Tony is ridiculous in his statements. I find it interesting that after this man becomes the president of the United States is when he decides to really become so negative, rude and political. But the fact that President Trump is awed by African-American people is not a bad thing. I think a lot of people are awed by successful groups of people, people who are accomplished. I think the president likes and is awed by a lot of people who are successful, who are who are the best at their game, who strive and overcome obstacles and become number one, who are winners.
[Baldwin:] Do we think that's how Tony Schwartz meant it?
[Dennard:] I don't know if that's I don't know if that's how Tony Schwartz meant it. I doubt it. But that's how the president is. I've interacted with him many, many times. I've seen him with large groups of black people and that is not a man who is by any means frightened by African-Americans. I think that notion is absurd and I think it's highly offensive to have him equate that to this man. If you are a racist, you don't appoint or put the first African- American woman to be the your press secretary to the campaign. If you are a racist or you're afraid of black people, you don't invite the largest number of HBCU presidents and chancellors in your office to meet with them if you're afraid of black people or if you're somehow a racist. This is not something that is racist or someone who is a scared of black people does. And so I think these comments just reinforce a false narrative about this president because we were all surprised to see the president did so well with the African-American community. He has a long positive history with the black community going back for many, many years, many decades and it is continuing now with his agenda, especially when you look at the tax cut plan that will impact small business owners, as well as middle class Americans, which is a lot of African-Americans just like myself. So this is something that is unfortunate and I don't know why Tony is doing it, but I guess it's just for him to get more publicity off the back of the president of the United States.
[Baldwin:] OK. Paris, that's how you see it. Sally Kohn, how do you see it?
[Sally Kohn, Cnn Political Commentator:] I'm glad Paris brought up a false narrative. I agree there is a false narrative here. The false narrative is about how we see racism in America today. So let's be really clear about something, Thomas Jefferson when he wrote that all men should be created equal, hundreds of African-American slaves.

[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Hear more from officials here shortly.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] OK, we'll look for an update then, Miguel. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. We'll update you when we have that. Thank you so much for joining me though. "INSIDE POLITICS" with Dana Bash starts right now.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm Dana Bash. John King is off. The president said, take the vote. Now he's looking past ongoing negotiations to settle these questions, if, when, and how Brett Kavanaugh, and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, will testify. Ford's attorneys say the only deal breaker now would be requiring their client to tell her story on Monday. And the president, who artfully waded through this controversy surrounding the Supreme Court nominee, is pressing control, alt and delete on caution, hitting send on a new Twitter grenade. One that alleged attack couldn't have been as bad as she says if Ford didn't tell anyone. Now, he may have missed this minutes before on the White House lawn.
[Kellyanne Conway, Counselor To The President:] There's no reason to attack her, is the reason, there's no reason. Let her tell her story under oath here in Washington. The Senate Judiciary Committee has offered for her to do it privately, for her to do it publicly, for her to do it in Washington, for her to do it somewhere else, I guess in her home state of California. They've been quite accommodating to her. There's no reason to attack her.
[Bash:] And we begin there with the president, no longer restrained, no longer on message, and now publicly doubting Christine Blasey Ford's account of what she says happened 36 years ago. From the president's Twitter account this morning, quote, I have no doubt that if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, changes would have been immediately filed with local law enforcement authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn date, time, and place. It couldn't have been that bad, the president says, otherwise Ford, then 15 years old, would have told her parents, who would have told the police. Now that's something, of course, anyone who knows anything about victims of abuse, especially young women, know often does not happen for a myriad of reasons. Now, the alleged incident, now familiar to most of us, which the president says couldn't have been as bad as Ford describes, a party in 1982, Ford's lawyer says Brett Kavanaugh would have raped her if he weren't so drunk. Now, we should also note that, once again, that Brett Kavanaugh denies any of this happening adamantly. Minutes ago, the president, on Twitter, added this, let her testify or not and take the vote. Let's get straight to CNN's Abby Phillip, live at the White House. Abby, what are you hearing from your sources about why the president has done an about-face on his tone here?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, hi, Dana. All week the White House has been wondering and perhaps holding their breath, waiting to see how long President Trump would remain restrained on this issue. He has been very careful to praise Kavanaugh, to worry about the damages that this has done to him and his family, but not necessarily to attack his accuser. And now that has all shifted. And it's very likely that the White House is going to have to go along with the tone that President Trump is setting here. Just minutes before, the president sent those tweets, as you just played. His counsellor to the president, Kellyanne Conway, was just saying, let's not attack her. Now that has all changed. Now, what is different about today compared to where we were say 48 hours ago is that now the talks are very real and it seems more likely than not that in some capacity Dr. Ford is going to testify. She's going to be out there giving her side of the story. President Trump is now on the offensive. Just a few days ago he was saying, we have to hear what she has to say and then make a decision. Now he's saying, she can either testify or not. But, either way, he wants his nominee confirmed. Going forward, it's going to be interesting to see how the White House deals with this new tone, whether or not they are going to try to continue to strike a more measured tone. But, clearly, President Trump is going on the attack, as he has many times in the past when it comes to accusations of sexual misconduct involving people close to him and his administration. Dana.
[Bash:] It's just so interesting because I know you were hearing, I was hearing, that he was boasting privately about the fact that he was being so presidential and so restrain and then that changed. He was with Sean Hannity last night. Maybe they got a poll. We're going to continue to dig on that and I know you are too. Abby, thank you so much. And here at the table to share their reporting and their insights, Catherine Lucey with "The Associated Press," CNN's Phil Mattingly, Sahil Kapur with "Bloomberg" and Lisa Lerer with "The New York Times." Welcome to all of you. Let's start with something else that has happened this morning on this fight, and that is the man in charge, who you know quite well, Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, was speaking at the Values Voters Summit early this morning and was very clear on how he saw the situation ending.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] You've watched the fight. You've watched the tactics. But here's what I want to tell you. In the very near future, Judge Kavanaugh will be on the United States Supreme Court. So, my friends, keep the faith. Don't get rattled by all of this. We're going to plow right through it and do our jobs.
[Bash:] That really struck me, Phil Mattingly. Don't get rattled by this, speaking to a group of ardent supporters of the conservative base. What do you make of it?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] And it's the it's the latter part there that was probably most important
[Bash:] Yes.
[Mattingly:] Where he was and who he was speaking to. Those are going to be the individuals that they will need, particularly if there is a public hearing, which is, as you know better than anybody, the majority leader likes to control every aspect of what's about to happen, particularly if it's a high stakes nominee on the highest court in the land. He can't control what would happen in a public hearing should they get to that point, which means that outside groups, the base, outside supporters are going to play a big role. A big role in supporting the nominee, which it's very clear McConnell still supports the nominee, but also helping to pressure from the right the senators that are going to have to vote yes. So a lot of people have
[Bash:] Rally and reassure
[Mattingly:] Exactly.
[Bash:] Which we'll talk about later in the program. What do you make from your perch covering the White House of what the president has done today?
[Catherine Lucey, White House Reporter, "associated Press":] Well, it's interesting. I think the thing that we heard from advisers all week is that they wanted him to keep this under control. They liked the measured tone. They didn't want to rock the boat. But it's hard to keep this president on message for this many days. Once the deadline, if you will, got moved to Monday, people were saying, it's just that much more time. Can he keep it together? And we saw last night we all saw he was he's out of the White House. He had a rally last night. He was in front of supporters. He did a Fox interview. Maybe that. And he sort of he edged a little closer to
[Bash:] Woke up in his hotel room, was watching cable news.
[Lucey:] Yes. So, I mean, all of those things could be factoring into it. The question now is, does he continue to escalate these attacks, I mean, which are potentially damaging with women voters, you know, with some key votes, you know, going into next week. He has another rally tonight that I think will be key in Missouri. McCaskill has said she will not support Kavanaugh. So I think that's another moment when we could really see him come out with more of this.
[Bash:] Definitely a shift in tone and you said off message. But is it off message or is it a new message that they think might be more necessary right now politically.
[Lisa Lerer, National Political Reporter, "the New York Times":] It may be a new messages, but I think Republicans are really walking a very, very delicate line. And I think it's important to point to the second half of what McConnell said, which was, we're going to plow right through this. Plow right through this, meaning, we're going to plow right through this woman's, you know, accusations and she's, you know, presumably, if she does testify, it's going to be her trauma and her it's going to be a very emotional kind of presentation. I'm not sure you want to say that you want to plow right through something like that. And it's really important, you know, they could there definitely could be a scenario where Republicans get Kavanaugh confirmed, but they pay a price and they pay a big price in November. So balancing the confirmation politics and the politics politics, I think, is a difficult sort of very they have to walk a very careful line. And I think having the president kind of balancing the back and forth are switching messages in the middle of that doesn't make it easier for any of these Republicans as they try to walk this fine line.
[Sahil Kapur, National Political Reporter, "bloomberg":] Yes, it's very bold and it's pretty daring on McConnell to be so categorical. And I agree with Phil, I read this less of a as less of a prediction because he cannot guarantee 51 votes. He doesn't hold all their cards. And more of it a pressure and attempt to keep the pressure on to rally the conservatives who are working hard to confirm this nomination and to keep the heat on senators like Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Jeff Flake, who, at least the former two of them, they do respond to pressure on this. They consistently vote with the very conservative judges, many of whom they probably agree disagree with on some ideological issues. And this is the dilemma for Senator McConnell. He does need suburban women in places like Missouri and Tennessee to hold on to his majority, you know, but he also needs Republican voters to turn out. And one major Republican donor messaged me early this morning saying, all hell will break loose if they cave on this nomination. There is pressure they're facing from their own base as well.
[Bash:] OK. And so let's talk about the potential for this hearing, what's at stake here and the negotiations going on. We know from an e- mail that the that Professor Ford's attorney sent to the Judiciary Committee last night that they want to talk about how many rounds of questioning, the scope of examination, whether the committee will subpoena Mark Judge, the other individual who she says was there in the room, talking about the day, providing for her safety and saying that she that they want the senators, not outside counsel, to question. Phil, you were reporting earlier that there was a conference call. I think it I believe it maybe just wrapped up.
[Mattingly:] Yes.
[Bash:] Got a call you. We're both looking at our phones trying to maybe see if we can report and talk on the air at the same time among Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which might be an indication of where they are in these negotiations. It's really important.
[Mattingly:] Yes, it's a really important call because it will dictate what Chairman Chuck Grassley, and with McConnell beside him, respond to what Debra Katz, the lawyer for Christine Blasey Ford, laid out in terms of the conditions that they wanted. And, look, let's set something straight, when people are going into hearings, they want conditions that are favorable to them. What's happening right now, the negotiation process, is not rare for a congressional hearing, particularly one where the stakes are positively enormous. I think the interesting element of the call that happened between Judiciary Committee members today is, roll back to Monday. That was when they had a meeting with the Judiciary Committee and the plan going into that meeting was not to schedule a public hearing.
[Bash:] Right.
[Mattingly:] Inside that meeting, Senator Jeff Flake, and I'm told one or two other members of the committee said, there has to be a hearing, it has to be public. McConnell and Grassley were forced to shift and schedule a hearing. That's why this call is so important. While Republicans say we're not going to add witnesses, we don't think that some of the conditions can possibly be met. If one senator in that group on that conference call says this has to happen or I'm going to oppose the nomination, they can help set the terms. Will it happen? I don't know. I think people just kind of want to move this process forward at this point. But it's an important call and it will go a long way to deciding what happens next in this process.
[Bash:] All right, I'm go to take an audible. I'm going to go to break because we all have a little reporting to do and maybe we'll have some new information for you on the other side of the break. But up next, we're going to keep talking about this. And Republicans hunting for the perfect mid-term message to prevent a blue wave from hitting Congress. Stay with us.

[Burnett:] Breaking news at this hour. A top nominee of President Trump dropping out. Mark Green was Trump's second pick, second try for army secretary, made a host of controversial comments including saying that being transgender is a disease. Green justifying his withdrawal saying, unfortunately due to false and misleading attacks against me, this nomination has become a distraction. Athena Jones is OutFront near President Trump's golf club in New Jersey toight. And, Athena, look, this is the second try. He had made those comments about transgendered people. What is the administration saying tonight?
[Athena Jones, Cnn White House Correspondent:] All right. Erin, well, the White House is declining to comment. So is the Pentagon. But as you mentioned, Green is with drawling after coming under fire after past controversial statements have come to light, not just on transgender issues but also on Islam and evolution. Green is a retired army sergeant, a West Point graduate, and is serving right now as a state senator in Tennessee. And, as you mentioned, he's the president's second pick for this post. The president tapped Green in April after his first choice, billionaire Vincent Viola had to withdraw because he had issues related to divesting from his financial holdings. Now, Green is accusing the, quote, "liberal left" of distorting some of his remarks. But it isn't just liberals who have been critical of Green. Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain, both Republicans, have also expressed concerns Erin.
[Burnett:] All right. So, obviously, a blow I mean, in terms of they need to get those positions in. Now they have to find someone else for that. There was, though, very big news and good news for the president today, the latest jobs report, 4.4 percent for unemployment in April. That is the lowest rate in the decade. How big of a deal is this? Does the president think this is?
[Jones:] Well, this is a big deal. This is a president who ran on being a jobs president. In that video the White House put out last week, a week or so ago, touting his accomplishments in the first 100 days, one of the data points was about the number of jobs the economy has added while he's been in office. So, it's a bit surprising to not see him take to Twitter early this morning to celebrate as we've often seen him to do. He did tweet late in the day, sometime after 3:00, tweeting out a link, saying "Jobs, jobs, jobs," and a link to a FOX News clip that talks about this, what they call an exceptional jobs report. So, the White House not making as big a deal out of it today as you might expect, Erin. Not as big a deal but, of course, he did come out with all caps and, you know, finally come out with his personality in that tweet. Thank you so much, Athena. And OUTFRONT now, a former senior economic adviser to the Trump campaign and senior economics analyst for us, Stephen Moore, and the president of the Economic Future Group, Democratic strategist Jonathan Tasini. Jonathan, 4.4 percent, lowest level in a decade. That puts it back to the peak of the incredibly strong job market before the Great Recession. How much credit do you give President Trump?
[Jonathan Tasini, Democratic Strategist:] Very little credit and I think in fact any honest economist would tell you that presidents don't have that much effect on jobs at that level. Certainly, Trump's only been in office, as we know three months, and it has very little to do with him, even though he's been a pathological liar about this, and I have some standards from this. "Fortune" magazine actually looked at the claims he's made over the last three months, looked at dozen or so examples and found most of them either false or misleading, including your reporter mentioned his claim that he had created 600,000 jobs. That was a claim he made back in April, when in fact the BLS said in that time period since he'd been in office, only 533,000 jobs had been created. "Fortune" gave that a false grade. I could go through a whole lot of others. But he gets very little credit for this.
[Burnett:] Steve, very little credit?
[Stephen Moore, Former Trump Campaign Senior Economic Adviser:] Well, I think this is confirmation that there has been a Trump bounce in the economy. We saw it the day after the election with the stock market really taking off. By the way, there's relief in the White House, Erin, because we had a bad jobs report as you recall last month.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Moore:] And the GDP number that came out a week or two ago for the first quarter was pretty weak, very weak, you know, less than 1 percent growth.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Moore:] So, I think there's a sigh of relief right now that it looks like the economy's back on track. You know, it's interesting with these numbers right now, we have a situation where we're getting while we still have a lot of we still have a lot of people out of labor force, that's a problem.
[Tasini:] Right. I agree with that.
[Moore:] But we're getting close to getting to pretty full employment where more and more employers that I talk to, Erin, are telling me that one of their biggest problems now, or one of their biggest problems is finding workers.
[Burnett:] So
[Moore:] And filling these jobs that are out there.
[Tasini:] Let me take off on those points. I agree with Steve that certainly it's a sigh of relief but it is one month and we have to look, you'll agree, several months
[Moore:] Sure.
[Tasini:] and see how that plays out. Here are the two points. I think the first one Steve will agree with me. Part of the problem is that people's wages are still low, and that there's been the buying power of people, particularly in an economy that's powered 70 percent on consumer spending, people wages are too low. Now, on this point, you may not agree that this is one of the reasons we've been pushing for a hike in the minimum wage to $15 an hour. I know Steve don't agree with that, but the minimum wage should be actually, if you look at productivity over the 30 years, about $20 an hour. So, we have to if I can say one last thing
[Burnett:] OK.
[Tasini:] If the Affordable Care Act is repealed the Milliken Institute estimates that we will lose 3 million jobs and we will lose in GDP $1.5 trillion between 2019 and 2023. So, that's another reason that repeal is
[Burnett:] OK, I want to ask you about this, Steve. The president came out today, jobs, jobs, jobs, OK?
[Moore:] Uh-huh.
[Burnett:] He's proud of this report. Here's the thing and this is what I love about the president. He has a trail 50 miles long and he doesn't try to hide his trail. Here is what he said in the past about the jobs numbers and whether we can trust them.
[Trump:] The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction. I hear 5.3 percent unemployment. That is the biggest joke there is in this country. The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in American modern politics.
[Burnett:] OK. If 5 percent was the biggest hoax in modern politics, I don't know what 4.4 is, Steve.
[Moore:] Well, I'm a little guilty here, because, you know, I was one of the advisers of Donald Trump and I was telling him, look, these unemployment numbers are misleading, and even this latest numbers misleading because we have so many millions of people outside of the labor force. That's simply true that, you know, there's another statistic that I don't want to get in too much details that takes into account people who have dropped out of the workforce, people cannot find a fulltime job.
[Burnett:] Right.
[Moore:] And that's a lot higher number. And, frankly, I think that should be the number we should be using. Now, another quick point about the jobs report that I think is interesting because I've talked about this on your show and others and been criticized for it. You know, in terms of the mining industry, another 8,000 jobs created in the mining industry this month.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Moore:] That's 44,000 since Donald Trump
[Burnett:] Which he promised he would create mining jobs.
[Moore:] Yes, and he's creating them. Coal is back.
[Tasini:] Mining jobs are not the future of this economy but health care is. And we're going to lose if the ACA is repealed.
[Moore:] Well, you know what? I got to address that. There are two things that deterred employment in the Obamacare bill. One was the 50-worker rules, which a lot of employers became 49ers, they capped their employment at 49 workers and the other was the 30-hour week rule that if you had somebody over 30 hours. And people cut back on hours as well. So, both those things actually hurt employment, not helped it.
[Burnett:] All right. As we go, I don't know whether it was you guys or what it was, but anyway, the president has just tweeted, "Great jobs report today. It is all beginning to work!" Somewhere in the depths another tweet has emerged.
[Tasini:] I'm not taking responsibility for that at all.
[Burnett:] Thank you both. I appreciate your time tonight. OK. OUTFRONT next, rape charges against two undocumented teens dropped. What's the White House saying now? After all, it had used that story to crack down on illegal immigration. And one state may have found a way to force Donald Trump to release his taxes, so says the United States attorney general. He's my guest OUTFRONT. Tonight, the White House not backing down, refusing to retract its comments on an alleged rape case used that they used as an example of why the United States should crack down on illegal immigration. Prosecutors have dropped rape charges against two teens who entered the United States illegally and were accused of attacking a 14-year-old class mate in a bathroom stall. Ryan Nobles is OUTFRONT with the story.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] A startling case that drew national attention. A 14-year-old girl allegedly attacked and raped by two teenage boys in a Maryland high school bathroom. The fact that the boys has entered the United States illegally just a few months ago was enough to draw a strong rebuke from the White House.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] This is a tragic event and it's horrendous and horrible and disgusting what this young woman in Rockville went through. I can't possibly imagine.
[Nobles:] Press Secretary Sean Spicer didn't stop there, framing the case as an example of the need for tougher immigration standards.
[Spicer:] But I think part of the reason that the president has made illegal immigration and crackdown such a big deal is because of tragedies like this.
[Nobles:] But that story that drew such a strong reaction from the highest perched of American government has changed dramatically.
[Maria Mena, Attorney For Jose Montano:] I commend the state's attorney's office for doing the correct thing and dropping the rape charges and doing the right thing, because, obviously, this young girl was not raped.
[Nobles:] Prosecutors today dropping the charges against 18-year-old Henry Sanchez Milian and 17-year-old Jose Montano after determining that there was not enough to corroborate the girl's initial claims.
[John Mccarthy, State's Attorney For Montgomery County:] We have concluded that the facts in this case do not support the original charges filed in this matter.
[Nobles:] The suspects' attorneys have argued from the beginning that the encounter was consensual. At this point, prosecutors have introduced new child porn charges because of sexual images shared between the teens on their phones prior to the incident. Attorney Maria Mena believes the rush to convict her client was in part because of he political furor over immigration.
[Mena:] This case blew up because they immediately assumed they were immigrants and as a result, they immediately assumed they were rapists.
[Nobles:] But despite the new dynamics in this case, the White House refuses to retract its earlier statements.
[Reporter:] Is there a general danger that the White House in its rhetoric are animating too many people to jump to conclusions against immigrants and in the process diminishing the entire immigrant community, whether they're law abiding or not?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Deputy White House Press Secretary:] Not at all. The president has been incredibly outspoken against crime in any form, fashion. Look, this is a law and order president. He's focused on restoring law and order.
[Nobles:] Meanwhile, the Maryland school district where this took place has no interest being the focus of a political argument here in Washington. At the time, the Montgomery County Public School superintendent Jack Smith said that the district serves, quote, "every student who walks through the door." Today, he said that the focus of the district is on the safety and security of every student in their schools Erin.
[Burnett:] All right. Brian, thank you very much. And next, President Trump's tax returns may be released, whether he likes it or not. New York's attorney general is my guest. And Madeleine McCann dominated headlines. If you remember the sweet face when she disappeared decades ago. Will new witness details reveal what happened?
[Unidentified Female:] They saw what they described what they called an ugly, pockmarked or spotty skinned man watching apartment 5A.

[Sahil Kapur, National Political Reporter, Bloomberg Politics:] They just need to write it in a way that both parties can claim, you know, didn't violate the red lines. There'll be some gimmicks, there'll be some funny money in there. But the issue that has held this up constantly has been immigration and DACA, and I don't see a deal quite coming together on that. The two parties remain far apart on the issue of specifically family-based green cards for siblings, for adult children and Democrats are saying that they're not going to with that. And it remains unclear if House Republicans will support any kind of a legalization program even the majority of them even for the dreamers. I find it very significant earlier today that Speaker Ryan had said he's not going to put an immigration bill on the House floor unless President Trump supports it. And we don't quite know how far President Trump is willing to move of off his core principles.
[John King, Cnn Anchor:] All right, so let's come back to immigration a second. Let's stand the spending plan here. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, Secretary Mattis made a pretty good point this morning. He's running a multi-billion, multi-trillion dollar operation. He has troops in the field. He wants to buy new aircraft carriers and new ships. How do you do long term planning when you get a four-month budget followed by a four-month budget, maybe by a six-month budget, by a four-month budget. It's ridiculous.
[Molly Ball, National Political Correspondent, Time:] Well, yes. I mean to your point, it's like trying to make car payments when you're working a temp job and you don't know when your where your paycheck is going to come from a little bit down the road, right? And the entire government is in that situation. The Pentagon is not the only important department of the United States government that depends on Congress to act and allow them to plan ahead. So, it would be a big deal if they could come together. I think what they learned the reason this is different than that same episode that your viewers might have seen a few weeks ago is that, they learned from the three-day shutdown that it was no fun for anyone. Nobody wins in a shutdown. Nobody wants that shutdown, I don't think. And Democrats in particular although they were determined to hold the line on immigration and there's going to be a lot of grumbling if they agree to this immigration attach to it because they have been repeatedly promised by Republicans that DACA would get filed as part of funding the government. But what they learned from the last shutdown was that they were actually not willing to hold that line. And so that may have gone by the way and DACA now has its own independent deadline for when that program expires.
[Lauren Fox, Cnn Reporter:] Well, we have to also remember that McConnell made the promise that we would debate immigration only if the government was still open. So that is why this budget caps bill could be really important, because it really could create some bipartisanship, some goodwill as they head into
[King:] So to that point, the spending bill will come first, there has some grumbling among the Democrats but it looks like they will separate immigration from the spending bill at least for now. If it blows up, then he knows what happens after that. But assuming they're on that path, you have a great piece on cnn.com today, Mitch McConnell, who then will bring you have to bring a bill to the Senate floor, won't tell anybody what's going to be in that bill. We know we'll have something to protect the Dreamers, we know we'll have some wall money for the president, but what else, he won't say. John Thune, who's his number three in the Senate leadership, "You'll have to ask him. He'll have to decide what he wants to do." The majority whip and number two Senate Republican, "Senator McConnell hasn't announced his intention. Then an administration official who was part of the meeting with Senator McConnell or after meeting with Senator McConnell says, "Total poker face, he's not to going to tip his hand." Probably smart strategy but it frustrates people.
[Fox:] Absolutely. And I think that what McConnell has been saying repeatedly is, this is going to be a fair debate on the floor. This is going to an open debate on the floor. Something that some freshmen members may not be that, you know, comfortable with. They haven't seen it before, and I think a lot of members are sort of looking at this. That bill that McConnell puts on the floor, that is a choice within itself. If he puts the White House framework on the floor of the Senate, that's going to make a lot of Democrats pretty upset. So there's a lot of questions as to what he brings to the floor.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] And Republicans largely think that they won, at least at the White House. They believe that Democrats sort of coward. There's no guarantee that that scenario is going to repeat itself. So there is I think some inclination on all sides to try and get this deal done because the DACA deadline is hanging out there, and the White House seems, you know, not movable on that. We'll see if that changes as well. But I just get the sense that you can't keep trying this every month. There are packs on both of the Houses, incumbents suddenly are in huge trouble on both sides here. So, I get the sense that the attributes are done, but it's only Tuesday so it's hard to make the decision.
[King:] Sixty hours. I mean, if you

[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] Targeted. The are working very closely, they say, with their German counterparts, having searched his home over the weekend in Germany seizing a number of electronic items. Now, as for the Americans, they're in serious, though not critical condition. The U.S. embassy saying they're in close contact with the victims and their families. We are expecting an update from authorities later today. Alisyn.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] OK, please bring us that update whenever you get it. Erin, thank you very much for the reporting. So a tropical storm warning has been issues for parts of the southeast U.S. A potential storm is gathering strength. CNN meteorologist Chad Myers has our latest. What are you seeing, Chad?
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Very heavy rainfall now across south Florida, Alisyn. And we can see the spin with this storm as well. So it is already out there trying to churn. Years ago we'd call this a tropical depressions, but now because the models are so good, and because this is really going to turn into a tropical storm, they moved up to potential tropical storm, potential tropical cyclone seven, and it is going to get into the Gulf of Mexico. And when it does, it's going to get into very warm water. And so far we're only 45, 50, maybe a 60 mile per hour storm. But I will tell you and every meteorologist will tell you the models do a terrible job on intensity. A really good job on direction, but they could be terrible, 20 plus or minus 20 miles per hour on intensity. So we'll keep watching this for you as it moves toward the Gulf Coast. It will leave south Florida for today. You could even get a water spout on land in south Florida for today. We'll watch that. And then into the Gulf of Mexico, into very warm water, and then producing six to seven inches of rainfall. Finally it's finally done, though, I think, on Wednesday and Thursday. We get rid of this thing, but not before we make some flooding rainfall across the southeast and the Gulf Coast. Biloxi, Gulf Port, Pass Christian, all those places that got hit so hard with Katrina going to get very heavy rainfall. John.
[John Avlon, Cnn Anchor:] Of course. Thank you, Chad. We'll be keeping an eye on that. And the confirmation battle for Brett Kavanaugh begins tomorrow. And it's what lawmakers will not see that's causing the controversy. Details, next.

[Cabrera:] Monster waves are a surfer's dream, right? But the waves pounding Hawaii right now are so extreme and dangerous, people are being told to stay out of the water. Some waves are expected to reach 60 feet high. I'm telling you this because my next guest is considered to be the best female big wave surfer in the world. She is one of a handful of women profiled in a new "New York Times" magazine article this weekend, the fight for gender equality in one of the most dangerous sports on Earth. And she's also seen shredding the waves here in a new documentary called "She is the Ocean" which captures her prowess on the waves and her love of the sport. Keala Kennelly is joining us now from Oahu, Hawaii. Thank you so much for being with us. I'm fascinated by what you do. I know just because a wave is big doesn't mean the conditions are right for surfing, but does this swell this weekend have you chomping at the bit?
[Keala Kennelly, Professional Surfer:] Unfortunately this swell this weekend is coming with a really nasty storm front, so it's a kind of victory at sea, so not really anything that anybody should be riding this weekend.
[Cabrera:] It's a no go. We're looking at some of the amazing scenes from the documentary "She is the Ocean." As we look at you are riding these big waves, I mean, that is the definition of an extreme sport. Why do you do it?
[Kennelly:] Well, I heard you on the break say that I'm fearless and that's absolutely not true, Ana. To be fearless is to be completely ignorant of what the consequences are. I'm fully well aware that the consequences are, like, extremely bodily injury and possibly death. But the rush that you get when you actually ride one of these waves is so incredible that it just makes it all worth it.
[Cabrera:] As we mentioned, you and some other women are highlighted in a really interesting piece in the "New York Times" magazine this week and that I encourage everyone to read it. And this article highlights a speech you gave after winning Barrel of the Year, in a category that includes men and it was the first time a female surfer had ever won. And you said in part this, "When I was a little girl, I kept getting told you can't do that because you are a girl. Women can't surf. OK, women can surf, but women can't get barreled. Women can't surf big waves. So, who I really want to thank is everybody in my life that told me you can't do that because you're a woman, because that drove me to dedicate my life to proving you wrong. And it's been so damn fun." So let me ask you, have women achieved gender equality in the world of big wave surfing and how does that translate, do you think, to society at large?
[Kennelly:] Well, I think that, you know, yes, like I said in that speech, I had so many people telling me I couldn't do things. And I think, you know, I was lucky enough that my father was there encouraging me when there was so much discouragement. It was just so important for me to just at least have one person that was encouraging me and making me feel like I could do it. And I think that's kind of what we need the narrative needs to change and young females need to be encouraged to do things because they need to believe that they can because they can. And I hate to think of all the little girls that were told they couldn't do something and they just took that at face value and didn't try.
[Cabrera:] And you obviously are a role model for other girls who or are surfers, who may be interested in exploring big wave surfing. I know you've been fighting for not just yourself but all of them and trying to achieve this equality when it comes to pay and even just being respected at the same level as men. Do you feel like you've done it? Have we gotten there yet?
[Kennelly:] I mean, getting pay equality, the WSL announcing that they will pay women the equal prize money, is just like a huge step in the right direction. I think as far as like the endorsement deals, we're not there yet for women. But I think that that's going to be coming soon. So I'm stoked.
[Cabrera:] We spent a lot of time in the past year here on my show and just in general talking about the "MeToo" movement, the record number of women running for office, taking on other roles that have traditionally been male-dominated position. Why do you think women are having such an awakening right now?
[Kennelly:] Well, I think, you know, you go back a couple of generations and women couldn't even vote, you know. And then for the longest time, a women's place was like, you know, get in the kitchen and make me a sandwich, you know. And it took women kind of moving into these positions of power, becoming doctors, becoming lawyers, become CEOs, to kind of show other women and uplift other women and encourage other women and just showing them with like yes, you can do this.
[Cabrera:] And you're doing it. Keala Kennelly, thanks so much for joining us.
[Kennelly:] Thank you so much. Aloha!
[Cabrera:] Aloha. We're back in a moment.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor, Newsroom:] and displays of military might from South Korea.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor, Newsroom:] Talking about the United Nations, the US ambassador has accused Kim Jong-un of begging for war Nikki Haley also says the UN strategy is not working She now wants the strongest sanctions possible on Pyongyang.
[Sesay:] In South Korea, more live-fire drills intended to show solid ability to wipe out Kim's regime, plus a new willingness from the South Korean defense minister to review plans for US tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula.
[Vause:] We being our coverage now with Kristie Lu Stout live in Seoul Kristie.
[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn International Correspondent:] John, South Korea and the US are increasing the military pressure on North Korea President Moon Jae-In and Donald Trump spoke by phone finally on Monday. They agreed to lift restrictions of just how powerful Seoul's ballistic missiles can be Barbara Starr has more on the South's show of force.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent: Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] This live fire exercise by South Korean forces, a direct military response to the North's largest nuclear test. Army and air forces simulating an attack on North Korea's nuclear test sites even as North Korean state media issued new threats to the US, including Guam One editorial saying, "Every time the US goes crazy talking about sanctions and war, our will of vengeance will become hundred and thousand times stronger." UN Ambassador Nikki Haley very much in the hard line mode back at Kim.
[Nikki Haley, Us Ambassador To The Un:] His abusive use of missiles and his nuclear threats show that he is begging for war War is never something the United States wants We don't want it now.
[Starr:] Rising tensions pushing Defense Secretary James Mattis to exactly where he never wants to be, center stage at the White House.
[James Mattis, United States Secretary Of Defense:] Any threat to the United States or its territories, including Guam or our allies, would be met with a massive military response, a response both effective and overwhelming.
[Starr:] But are there credible military options without thousands of casualties.
[Gen Michael Hayden, Former Cia Director:] What I think Secretary Mattis was doing was simply trying to convince the North that we have this option and they cannot be certain we would never use it under certain circumstances.
[Starr:] It may be the most critical decision ever for Donald Trump
[Steve Warren, Cnn Military Analyst:] How much of a price we're willing to pay, how much we are willing to bleed to accomplish our objectives This is a decision not for military members This is a decision for elected political leaders to make And they always have to weigh the cost versus the benefit.
[Starr:] Short of US attack, the Pentagon could send an aircraft carrier offshore The Ronald Reagan is nearby More bombers could be sent South Korea and Japan both upping their missile defenses and cooperation with the US, but there is no indication Kim Jong-un is listening.
[Jang Kyoung Soo, South Korea Acting Deputy Minister If Defense Policy:] We predicted North Korea could fire an intercontinental ballistic missile to show that they have obtained the means of delivering a nuclear bomb to the United States.
[Starr:] Some US military assets could move closer to the Korean Peninsula in the coming days Nothing has been announced yet But the bottom line is, would any of this change Kim Jong-un's mind about proceeding with his weapons program? The betting money is it won't Barbara Starr, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Stout:] CNN has reporters covering this story around the world Ian Lee joins me here in Seoul and Alexandra Field is standing by for us live in Tokyo. Let's go to Ian first Ian, another day, another live fire military drill by the South Korea military, this time involving the navy Tell us what happened and the intended message here
[Ian Lee, Cnn International Correspondent:] Kristie, this message is the one we've been seeing since that sixth nuclear test, and that is a strong show of force that South Korea can retaliate against the North Korean regime and their nuclear program in the event of a war And this time, we're seeing the navy carry out these live-fire exercises So, now we've seen the navy, the army and the air force conduct these exercises. Now, we also are following this phone call between President Moon Jae- In and President Donald Trump that happened earlier today In it, they talked about further strengthening the cooperation between the two countries. And they also talked about, as you pointed out, lifting the limits on the size of their ballistic missiles that South Korea can develop Currently, they're at 500 kilogram warheads They want that to be an unlimited amount. They also talked about buying weapons, billions of dollars of weapons that South Korea is going to buy and that would definitely beef up their arsenal. The one thing also that has been brought up here in Seoul is the potential of bringing US nuclear missiles to South Korea Now, the president here has said that he's committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, but the minister of defense said that he's willing to look at that option. I asked people here on the street what they thought of it and they were split about 5050 Some people saying that it's a good idea, it's a good deterrence Others saying that it would just further escalate the crisis. The one thing that they were all united behind was their president They say they believe that he has the tools and the ability to bring down the temperature in this conflict. Then when I asked them about President Trump, they were less enthusiastic A lot of them saying that he is unknown Some calling him even reckless, even though they say that the United States is South Korea's most important ally. But, right now, the real push seems to be in the international community to further isolate North Korea, both diplomatically and economically, Kristie.
[Kristie:] All right Got it, Ian Let's bring up Alexandra Field for us standing by in Tokyo And, Alex, South Korea, we've seen another day of that show of force We have yet to see a similar visual display response from the Japanese, a response to that North Korean nuclear test Why is that and what are Tokyo's options?
[Alexandra Field, Cnn International Correpondent:] Right You don't see that flexing of military muscle coming from the Japanese military forces This is a country with a pacifist constitution But we do know that they are regularly engaged in drills with the US military and they say that that is towards the end of maintaining a defensive posture. And, certainly, the defenses of this country are top of mind right now They've actually got sniffer planes that have been up in the air the last few days, trying to scan and look for any signs of hazardous materials after that sixth nuclear test. Don't forget also, we have seen this barrage of missile tests from North Korea in recent months, really an unprecedented amount that have continued to threaten the safety and security of Japan You've had a number of these missiles splashing down in the waters off of Japan and, most recently, you have that intermediate range ballistic missile that actually flew over the northern island of Hokkaido right here in Japan. Certainly, the government has been doing everything that it can to maintain preparedness should they need it and to reassure people that Japan's defenses are ready to combat a threat from North Korea But as far as a solution, as far as what kind of position Japan finds itself in now and how you proceed forward, well, government officials have made it clear that they see diplomacy as the solution there You've had Prime Minister Shinzo Abe making a loud case for further sanctions against North Korea
[Stuout:] All right A flurry of diplomatic activity ahead Alexander Field joining us live from Tokyo Ian Lee live in Seoul Big thank you to you both. Now, Daniel Pinkston joins us now, he is a Professor of International Relations based here at Seoul, the Troy University He is also the author of a book called "The North Korean Ballistic Missile Program." Thank you for joining us And it's through all these tests, we have a sense of North Korea's weapons capability, right, but we don't know its motivation And that's the question I want to ask you Why is Kim Jong-un doing this? What does Kim Jong-un want?
[Daniel Pinkston, Professor Of International Relations At Troy University:] Right That's a very important question So, over the past two or three decades, we've watched them go through this progression to acquire these weapons. Now, since they have them, we have to realize or we need to remember that these weapons are not an end They're a means to an end So, how are they going to use them we have to ask, under what conditions, against whom and to achieve what. So, we have to start paying close attention to their military doctrine, their nuclear doctrine and their nuclear posture.
[Stout:] There's a number of theories out there Survival of the Kim family business Is that the reason why? Survival?
[Pinkston:] Well, of course Survival is your first agenda item You have to survive to achieve any of your other goals. So, of course, during the famine in the 1990s, they were under extraordinary stress The regime was in the threat of collapse But, now, things are much better and they can look beyond simple survival, I think. There are other objectives and they say it very clearly If you look at their media and their literature, they often speak of achieving the final victory, completing the revolution in the South, which means, as they say, liberate the South and unify Korea on its terms. Secondly, they'd wish to expel the United States from the region, terminate the alliance system that the US has with other countries in the region and, of course, lift all sanctions, so that they can maintain a normal economic relationship with the rest of the world.
[Stout:] Yes And that's a long view Another thinking that's out there about why North Korea is amassing these weapons and testing them is blackmail, to get back to the negotiating table or to earn some sort of international prestige Your thoughts on that.
[Pinkston:] Oh, yes Particularly when states acquire nuclear weapons, early on, they will try to see how they can use them for coercive purposes or to use them for blackmail. No one has been able to demonstrate how you can use them for blackmail other than deterrence It is very difficult to use nuclear weapons There would be certain situations in a war, I think, where they would resort to their nuclear chord if, in fact, they were on the verge of suffering a conventional defeat Then they would use that as a last resort.

[Howell:] Welcome back to our viewers here in the United States and all around the world, you're watching CNN NEWSROOM. It's good to have you with us I'm George Howell.
[Allen:] I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] All right, we're following some new and important developments out of Pakistan. Police there say 100 people have been arrested. Nearly 100 police and others have been injured at an Islamabad protest. Let's go to live to CNN's Sophia Saifi in the Pakistani capital. Sophia, what more can you tell us about the root of these protests?
[Sophia Saifi, Cnn Producer:] Well, George, the root has to do with
[Howell:] All right, Sophia, and we're looking at images of what's been happening there in Islamabad. What more can you tell us about the fact that the Pakistani TV stations, many of the private stations, have been taken off the air?
[Saifi:] Yes, this is a development that's only happened about an hour and a half ago. There were a lot of images being broadcast across the country. And the Pakistani electronic media regulatory authority sent out a notice, calling all cable news channels to resist and sensitively report on the matter that's happening between the cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. According to some people in the government that I've spoken to, this has caused more protesters to come out. We're hearing of reports that protesters in Karachi and Lahore and Islamabad, which are the three major cities across the country. But the fact that there's a major media blackout like this is something unusual. It hasn't happened in at least a decade, when former President Musharraf called for a blackout, called for an emergency in the country and there was a summer blackout. So there's a lot of rumors. There's a lot of unease and a lot of unknowingness of what's going to happen in the hours to come.
[Howell:] CNN producer, Sophia Saifi, live for us in Islamabad. We'll stay in touch with you as developments continue out of the region. Thank you.
[Allen:] In Zimbabwe, people are hoping for big changes from their new president, Emmerson Mnangagwa. He was sworn in Friday following Robert Mugabe's resignation this week.
[Howell:] A Catholic priest mediated the talks that led to the transition of power. He spoke exclusively to our David McKenzie about this historic process.
[David Mckenzie, Cnn Correspondent:] With each passing day, the calls grew louder, the pressure on Mugabe mounted.
[Unidentified Male:] When you hear two bulls wanting to fight, you have to know how to tame both.
[Mckenzie:] And this priest persisted.
[Unidentified Male:] Did I feel the pressure? I'm a tough nut.
[Mckenzie:] As a mediator between Mugabe and he military, it was up to Father Mukonori to make sure the guns on the streets stayed silent. And the only sounds that the former president heard were the cries of his people and the reasoned voice of a long-time confidant. What did those crowds mean to former president Mugabe? What did he say?
[Unidentified Male:] He saw that they spoke.
[Mckenzie:] And he listened to them?
[Unidentified Male:] What are the results? You see the results. That's a sign that he listened.
[Mckenzie:] Did it break him?
[Unidentified Male:] It moved him. It moved him in this sense that he realized they are speaking to say, this is enough.
[Mckenzie:] The negotiations were long.
[Unidentified Male:] Sometimes in a day, we'd go to three different places.
[Mckenzie:] But they were always civil.
[Unidentified Male:] It was not a fight. It was a discussion.
[Mckenzie:] The generals even saluting the man they look to overthrow.
[Unidentified Male:] In a few weeks from now...
[Mckenzie:] It was during this address that the world thought Mugabe was ready to go. The resignation letter was already drafted. But before sending, Mugabe asked for just a few more weeks.
[Unidentified Male:] Listening of a 93-year old is not the same as listening of a 25-year old.
[Mckenzie:] Adversity, says the priest, the cries were heard and a new president of Zimbabwe took the stage. Stripped of his office, Mugabe still wishes there was a more systematic transfer of power, says Father Mukonori. He said he is available to Emmerson. He is available. He's at his disposal. He does not vanish from life, he is not dead. But he's vanished from limelight. A man who ruled with an iron fist, perhaps not willing to completely let go David McKenzie, CNN, Harare.
[Allen:] We're joined now by "The Washington Times" correspondent Geoff Hill to discuss this historic change in Zimbabwe's leadership. Geoff, thanks for talking with us with. First of all, the euphoria we just saw from those people, such a beautiful thing to see. But now it's up to Mnangagwa to come through for them. Do you think he can and he will?
[Geoff Hill, "the Washington Times":] Yes, I do. And perhaps I'm putting naive confidence in Emmerson, who I have met several times and spoken with many times. Emmerson is a pragmatist whereas Mugabe was more of a philosopher, sometimes a very violent and bad philosopher. Emmerson understands what needs to be done to get this country back on track. Words are not going to do it. He will have to show very quickly and very clearly that this is the change before Western countries reengage financially.
[Allen:] That's encouraging that you've met him and feel good about his taking over the country. He struck a very inclusive tone in his remarks to the country. What stood out for you?
[Hill:] The fact that he said the past was the past and he didn't want any retribution, that he wanted to go forward inclusively. This was so important, not just in terms of white and black. Remember at the height of Rhodesia in the 1970s, there were only 320,000 whites. There now 12 million black people, 4 million of them living in exile. And Zimbabwe has a number of tribes. The Shona tribe, the Shona's Mnangagwa's own
[Allen:] Ninety percent unemployment in Zimbabwe. Is job one the economy? And where does he start?
[Hill:] This is so critical. You've hit it there. Not 90 percent unemployment but Mugabe, a former school teacher, insisted that all schools do algebra and Shakespeare. You have the most literate and well-educated country in Africa. And of course, you can't expect kids who have done their education to go and grow pumpkins. They want real jobs in the city. They're on Twitter, they're on Facebook and they insist on their voice being heard. And the first voice, the loudest voice is, we want jobs.
[Allen:] Well, hopefully he can start to create that. He certainly reached out to the world, saying, we're open for business. One journalist we spoke recently with said she was a tad disappointed he didn't account for his role in the past when he spoke, working alongside Mugabe, who put the country in this downward spiral. Should he have addressed that?
[Hill:] Very difficult because, of course, he was involved in the genocide of the 1980s against the Ndebele people in the south of Zimbabwe. This would have him in The Hague, essentially. So he has to be very careful. But you remember that when Gorbachev came to power and he'd been a Soviet strongman, so had Boris Yeltsin, neither of them said sorry for the past. They simply changed the future.
[Allen:] Geoff Hill with "The Washington Times," thanks so much for joining us.
[Howell:] Still ahead here on CNN NEWSROOM, the biggest shopping day of the year in the United States. Consumers fought crowds and long lines to be part of it. And the retailers fought the competition. Stay with us.

[Hill:] People close to the president say that he is obsessed. That's their word. Obsessed with finding out who wrote that opinion piece in "The New York Times" this week. Whomever is behind it, that person is described as a senior official in the administration. And there's no more mysterious whodunit this weekend than that author's identity. Nearly 30 people, all senior officials, have publicly declared, it wasn't me. Even the vice president came out to deny it. President Trump telling supporters, aboard Air Force One, he has a good idea of where the person works.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you think Jeff Sessions should be investigating who the author of the op-ed piece was?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I think so because I think it's national security. I would say Jeff should be investigating the author of that piece. Because I really believe it is national security.
[Unidentified Female:] And is there action that should be taken against "The New York Times"?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're going to see. I am looking into that right now.
[Hill:] CNN's Ryan Nobles is at the White House today. Ryan, I just want to point out a tweet from our colleague, Ana Navarro, who writes, the vice president had to put out a statement saying he was not the author of an op-ed about the president of the United States behaving like a mentally unstable toddler. In her words, this is not normal. How are things feelings in that building behind you this weekend? Business as usual? Normal?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, Erica, it's actually been relatively quiet at the White House this weekend, which that is abnormal for this administration. But we know that the president is stewing inside, angrily trying to figure out exactly who is the author of this op-ed. We're told that the White House has a sense that they've got it narrowed down to a small number of individuals who they think are or maybe could be responsible. Now, we don't know who those individuals are, but we may have gotten some clue into their thinking, based on this interview that Kellyanne Conway did with Christiane Amanpour. Take a listen.
[Kellyanne Conway, White House Counsel To The President:] I'm not interested in the investigation. Those who are investigating, great. I really hope they find the person. I believe the person who suss himself or herself out, though, because that's usually what happens. People brag to the wrong person. They brag that they did this or they did that because they I assume part of this isn't the goal here not what the op-ed portends the goal is, Christiane. Isn't the goal here really to try to sew chaos and get us all suspicious of each other?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn International Correspondent:] Is that what's happening? Are you all getting suspicious of each other?
[Conway:] No, that isn't what happened.
[Nobles:] And Kellyanne Conway went on to tell Christiane that she believes, likes the president, that it's someone from the national security apparatus. And also, that they don't believe this person actually works inside the White House. Now, that doesn't really narrow down the field all that much, Erica. There are thousands of people that fit that description. And we don't really know if the White House has any evidence that leads them to believe that this is the direction that they're going. We know the president is putting on the pressure. As you said, he is considering asking Attorney General Jeff Sessions who's outright asked him to launch an investigation. At this point, the Department of Justice has not commented on whether that's something they plan to do Erica.
[Hill:] And no word on whether anything is moving in that direction. Ryan, appreciate it. Thank you.
[Nobles:] Thank you.
[Hill:] The president's former fixer, Michael Cohen, wants his hush money back from porn star Stormy Daniels. He wants all $130,000, and he wants it now. Cohen, in fact, wants to rip up his original pre-election deal with Daniels, and he wants it voided permanently. He wants to rescind the agreement. Remember, he had paid Daniels $130,000 in exchange for her silence over her claims of an alleged affair with Trump years ago. Well, her attorney, Michael Avenatti, says Cohen's move is just an attempt to keep him from deposing President Trump.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney:] It's pretty transparent, at least at first blush to me. What they're trying to do is they don't want me to get a chance to depose Michael Cohen and Donald Trump. And this is a hail Mary to try to avoid that.
[Unidentified Male:] What's the chance Cohen gets his money back?
[Avenatti:] Well, I mean, ultimately, if the agreement is rescinded, then the chance is 100 percent. He gets his $130,000 back. There's no question.
[Hill:] The White House has said President Trump denied any alleged affair with Stormy Daniels. Fourteen days, that is the prison sentence for former Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos. The crime, lying to FBI investigators about his contacts with Russian operatives before the 2016 election. The president, in response, tweeting, 14 days for $28 million, $2 million a day, no collusion, a great day for America. Just before his sentencing, Papadopoulos sat down with CNN's Jake Tapper. Talked about how he handled the Russian's operatives offer of dirt on Hillary Clinton.
[George Papadopoulos, Former Trump Campaign Advisor:] So, I sat down and I looked at the candidates I looked at candidate Trump directly in his eyes and said, I can do this for you, if it's in your interest and if it's in the campaign's interest. And the collective energy in the loom room of course there were some dissenters. And but the collective energy in the room seemed to be interested.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor, "state Of The Union":] The collective energy. Was Donald Trump interested?
[Papadopoulos:] Well, he gave me sort of a nod. He wasn't committed either way. But so, it was I took it as he was thinking.
[Tapper:] Senator Jeff Sessions was there, too,
[Papadopoulos:] Yes.
[Tapper:] at the table. What was his response?
[Papadopoulos:] My recollection was that the senator was actually enthusiastic about a meeting between the candidate and President Putin.
[Hill:] Michael Zeldin, former special assistance to Robert Mueller at the Justice Department, is with us now. So, Michael, first things first here. When we look at this, 14 days in prison for Papadopoulos. I mean, what does that tell us about what he may have told investigators? Because this is for lying. Fourteen days for lying.
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] That's right. And, remember, the special counsel wanted a longer sentence. They didn't believe that Papadopoulos gave them all the type of information they were hoping to get from him. But the judge felt that Papadopoulos, who was at the time 28 years old, was remorseful. And that he understood the mistake he made and that 14 days was adequate. Now, listen, anyone who's ever been to a federal prison will not poopoo the notion of spending 14 days behind bars. It's a serious place to spend any amount of time. So, he's got 14 days in jail. A year's probation. Two hundred hours of community service. A$9,500 fine. You know, for a 28-year-old kid who made a mistake because he was, you know, sort of, enamored of the bright lights on a candidate who thought this was a witch hunt, probably fair enough.
[Hill:] So, you say it's fair enough. But, listen, we've already seen a reaction. We saw the reaction from the president and others who are saying, look, he's only getting 14 days. I mean, clearly, he didn't have anything good, if the sentence is that light. And Mueller's team was asking for far more. Is that I mean, can you make that connection?
[Zeldin:] Well, I suppose you can say, if Mueller wanted more time, he felt that Papadopoulos didn't give them all that they thought he could give. And the big question was, and remains, did Papadopoulos tell the campaign about his contacts with operatives who claimed to have information about the Hillary Clinton e-mails? He says he doesn't remember that. I think that's the $64,000 question that's still outstanding. But, all in all, the judge credited that he was trying to be forthcoming and that the sentence of 14 days was appropriate. Remember, you put this against the attorney who got 30 days, that was a mature adult who was, as an attorney, lying. And this was a kid who made a mistake. And so, you know, my view of this, having been both a defense attorney and prosecutor is, fair enough. Let the kid move on with his life.
[Hill:] The president, once again on Friday, raising concerns about what he seems to think could be a perjury trap, in his words, if he were to sit down with Mueller. The president apparently so concerned that he may not be able to tell the truth. Although, listen, if you lie and you get 14 days, maybe there's nothing to worry about. I don't know. But, in all seriousness, as we look at this, do you think that an interview is, sort of, dead in the water, at this point?
[Zeldin:] I don't think so. I believe that the real lawyers, working on behalf of the president, and that does not include Rudy Giuliani, are trying to work out an agreement, with Mueller which will start with written questions on collusion. And then, they'll see what happens with that. With respect to the obstruction questions. I think they are still trying to figure out a way to have that first be done in writing, and then determine whether or not oral questions are required. So, I think this is still a work in progress. I think we'll see more progress on it this coming week because it seems like the issue has been joined. And the Raskins and Flood, the real lawyers, are working closely with Quarles and Mueller to figure out what deal is doable.
[Hill:] Well, we'll be watching for that deal. Look, I want to get your take on something else. The government admitting now that it was wrong in claiming that the accused Russian spy, Maria Butina, had actually offered to trade sex for political access. Federal prosecutors saying they misunderstood some text messages there between Butina and her boyfriend. House significant is that error?
[Zeldin:] Well, from her reputation standpoint, it's very significant. And I'm glad the government said, I'm sorry. We made a mistake. And that's not what she did. From the legal case of whether or not she did what she's accused of, I think that the sex aspect of it is not as significant.
[Hill:] Does it hurt at all, public opinion, when it comes to this? Because so much of what we're seeing in all of these cases, right. For many people, it's boiling down to public opinion, especially for things that we know nothing about. Like, for example, the investigation with the special counsel. So, how damaging is this headline, if at all?
[Zeldin:] Well, I don't think it's all that damaging, in that the you know, sort of, the heart of this matter is her relationship with the National Rifle Association and the potential funneling of money into the NRA, an then into the Trump campaign. And I don't think, therefore, the did she trade sex for favors allegation is really all that germane to that more overarching support of NRA money and the Trump campaign and foreign nationals.
[Hill:] Michael Zeldin, always good to talk to you. Thank you.
[Zeldin:] Thank you.
[Hill:] And you can catch Jake Tapper's full interview, with former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos, tonight at 8:00 p.m. Eastern right here, only on CNN. In an unprecedented move, the New York attorney general opening an abuse investigation into every catholic archdiocese in the state. Sounds like a great headline. Is it too little too late? Up next, we will hear from a survivor. Stay with us. You're live in the CNN newsroom.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] Let's get after it.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] I'm pulling my ear. See you later. It's 10 o'clock.
[Lemon:] Let's get after it.
[Cuomo:] I'm not anything like that.
[Lemon:] I know.
[Cuomo:] You don't need glasses.
[Lemon:] OK. Well, these are prescription.
[Cuomo:] Yes, sure.
[Lemon:] Tell my eye doctor that.
[Cuomo:] I will.
[Lemon:] All right. Al right, Chris, thank you. Have great weekend. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. We have breaking news in the Russian investigation to tell you about. The Special Counsel Robert Mueller is recommending a sentence of up to six months in jail for former Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. And we have more breaking news to tell you about as well. President Trump doubling on his enemies list tonight. The White House has reportedly drafted multiple documents revoking security clearances of the critics the president wants to punish. And one senior official says they have discussed timing the release of those documents as a distraction during news cycles unfavorable to the president. That's according to the Washington Post. And this latest efforts to distract and deflect comes as 60 former CIA officials have signed a letter warning President Trump that, quote, "the country will be weakened if there's a political litmus test before seasoned experts are allowed to share their views." That's on top of 15 former officials who have already issued a similar statement in response to the president's decision earlier this week to revoke the security clearance of ex-CIA Chief John Brennan. But the president he says this.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] There's no silence. If anything I'm giving them a bigger voice. Many people don't even know who he is. And now he has a bigger voice and that's OK with me because I like taking on voices like that.
[Lemon:] That's as President Trump tries to defend his former campaign chairman as a jury in Virginia ends a second day of deliberations in the Manafort trial with no verdict in sight.
[Trump:] I think the whole Manafort trial is very sad when you look another what's going on. I think it's a very sad day for our country.
[Lemon:] Well, now that is absolutely true. It is a very sad day for our country. It's a very sad day for our country when a candidate for the highest office in the nation puts his campaign in hands of man like Paul Manafort. The man Donald Trump chose to help him get elected is on trial on charges that could land him in jail for the rest of his life if he's convicted on all of them. But the president rather than keeping quiet and letting justice take its course lashing out at the man prosecuting Manafort and that's Robert Mueller.
[Trump:] Mr. Mueller is highly conflicted. In fact, Comey is like his best friend. I could go into conflict after conflict. But sadly, Mr. Mueller is conflicted. Let him write his report. We did nothing. There's no collusion.
[Lemon:] Here we go again. The old I know you are, but what am I strategy. Robert Mueller is a former director of the FBI who was nominated by President George W. Bush. His appointment as special counsel has been upheld by four federal judges. Most recently by a judge appointed to the bench by President Trump himself. But that didn't stop Trump from returning to the baseless charge he's thrown around again and again.
[Trump:] Look, I say it. I say it again. That whole situation is a rigged witch hunt. It's a totally rigged deal. They should be looking at the other side.
[Lemon:] So the fact is, Mueller's investigation has already resulted in 191 criminal charges against 35 defendants and five guilty pleas so far. In the face of all this, the White House is scrambling to spin the president's actions. Kellyanne Conway today offering a defense you might call pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
[Kellyanne Conway, White House Senior Advisor:] Why is everybody so obsessed with the president of the United States? He can't even begin or finish the sentence in [Inaudible] lifetime. It's kind of weird.
[Lemon:] Well, Donald Trump is man who always needs an enemy. Someone to blame especially now. With ex-aide Omarosa holding as many as 200 secretly recorded tapes of team Trump and with the possibility of a presidential interview with Robert Mueller looming. Mueller who is investigating Russia's attack on our democracy during the 2016 election. And whether anyone from the Trump campaign was involved. But President Trump doesn't see it as an attack on our democracy. One that should be battled with all the weapons at our disposal. He sees it as an attack on him on his legitimacy. He sees it as questioning his election victory and if there's one thing Trump cannot tolerate, it's anybody who questions his most cherished belief. That he's a winner. I want to bring in CNN Political Analyst, Carl Bernstein, CNN Presidential Historian, Douglas Brinkley, and CNN National Security Analyst, Juliette Kayyem. Good evening, everyone. Happy Friday to you.
[Douglas Brinkley, Cnn Presidential Historian:] Good evening too.
[Lemon:] Juliette, let's start with this breaking news tonight about the special counsel recommending up to six months of jail time for George Papadopoulos. Remember, he is one that pleaded guilty to lying to investigators. But the special counsel is arguing that lies have consequences. Because he, they are saying the impeded the investigation and that his cooperation has been disappointing. What's your reaction?
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] So, actually it's quite interesting and enlightening to see what happened with Papadopoulos who has been sort of a hero of the resistance. A lot of people thought he's giving this much information. It's clear from the documents tonight that were filed that he's been anything but. He's not been forthcoming. That they actually believe him to be stalling on information. And the key point for your audience to know is that there was a professor who basically [Inaudible] who basically was sort of the potentially central point of linking the Russians with the Trump campaign. He was in the United States and Papadopoulos lies, essentially made it very difficult for the Mueller team to be able to interview him or to even detain him. He's no longer in the United States and they are unable to have those conversations with this professor. So it's based on one person and sort of a missed opportunity but the bigger point is you don't lie. And even if you're lying and say you want to be helpful, if you're not helpful, we want you to go to jail.
[Lemon:] So we now have two letters, Juliette, protesting Trump over the handling of the security clearances. One by 15 former senior intelligence officers.
[Kayyem:] Yes.
[Lemon:] One by 60 former CIA officials. I just want to read from this letter, from the second letter, OK? And it says, "We believe equally strongly that former government officials have the right to express their unclassified views on what they see as critical national security issues without fear of being punished for doing so." So, these two letters are a striking rebuke by 75 former officials who worked for Republican and Democratic administrations after Trump revoked John Brennan's clearance.
[Kayyem:] That's exactly right. So let me just begin with how sort of, you know, how odd this is for this group of people, both letters actually, but mostly these are people that you and I have never heard of. They don't like to be in the rough-and-tumble of politics, they consider themselves political. But because the Trump presidency has been so undermining of America's not only legitimacy in the outside world but of course our own internal national security when it comes to our voting integrity, they spoke up. I just, you know, put it in perspective, Bill Shine who is now the communications director in charge of sort of hiding, you know, decades of harassment at Fox News and Sarah Huckabee Sanders who essentially lies every day to the American public, a public that's paying for her, they are in charge of determining who who's security clearances are going to be revoked at what time, right, because the Trump people want it to be done at times in which he is facing bad news. And what they don't realize, right, not only it's that absurd, is the Trump White House every day is facing bad news. I mean, it's like the idea that they are waiting for some quiet. I mean, they are the bad news, right? I mean, it's not like the outside world is creating it for them. So we're going to see these happen. It's, as you've heard all night, it's pathetic. I mean, in the end it's just pathetic.
[Lemon:] And it was striking to see the names scrolling of the 60 people who signed the letter as you were there, you know, speaking about it. Carl, I got to ask you, The Washington Post" is reporting tonight that the White House has drafted more clearance cancellations. I'm going to read from that. This is Trump wants to sign most, if not all of them, said one senior White House official who indicated that communications aides including press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Bill Shine, the newly named deputy chief of staff have discussed the optimum times to release them as a distraction during unfavorable news cycles. Juliette touched on this a little bit. So they're going they're going to be pulling these clearances and putting this information out when they need to distract from something. That's blatantly political.
[Carl Bernstein, Cnn Political Analyst:] Of course it's blatantly political. We have to go to the very basis of what Trump is doing here. And that is, he is, as part of a cover up is trying to undermine and bury the Mueller investigation at every turn. And that includes through all this diversionary action. I've talked to people in the White House, lawyers involved defending some former White House people, people in his administration and all of them say that Trump is both in panic about the Mueller investigation and where it is leading in terms of investigating collusion involving key members of his administration and his campaign, perhaps himself. Perhaps his family. And we are also witnessing right now an unprecedented revolt. Let's look at what these statements by these 65 officials of the intelligence community really are. Since the establishment of the intelligence apparatus of this country in 1947 and 1948, there has never been anything like this a revolt. Let's call it for what it is by the most highly regarded intelligence professionals against the conduct of the president of the United States. A stinging rebuke in which they picture him as a despot who does not believe in free speech. And that's really what this is partly about. It's part of enemies of the people and trying to characterize those who might question him as being enemies of the people.
[Lemon:] Douglas Brinkley, I want to play this for you. This is John Brennan on MSNBC tonight and then we'll talk about it. Here it is.
[John Brennan, Former United States Cia Director:] He's drunk on power. He really is. I think he's abusing the powers of that office. I think right now this country is in a crisis in terms of what Mr. Trump has done and as liable to do. And so, are the Republicans on the Hill who have given him a pass, are they going to wait for a disaster to happen before they actually find their backbones and spines to speak up against somebody who clearly, clearly is not carrying out his responsibilities?
[Lemon:] What's your reaction, Douglas?
[Douglas Brinkley, Cnn Presidential Historian:] That Brennan is an American hero for speaking up. His tenure at the CIA was impeccable. We owe him so much. And he's now leading the crusade to tell people that Donald Trump is unfit for command. He's these are the best and the brightest, the wisest people on foreign policy and intelligence that are writing these letters. Someone of retirement saying this president is a disaster for the country going on right now. And it's not partisan. It's patriotism. People need to speak up. The shock in history is going to be how timid that these Republican senators are. They are so worried about the midterms. So worried about Donald Trump tweeting against them. So paranoid being mocked by Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity that they are cowering right now. And it's GOP that at best they are saying well, let's get through the Kavanaugh hearings. Let's get a Supreme Court justice and then we'll grapple with Donald Trump after the election. So I-
[Lemon:] Well, won't there be something else down the road, Douglas? Will they say, well, now that we have gotten through that, let's just get through this. And then it will just continue to go on. Go on, Douglas. Sorry to cut you off.
[Brinkley:] That's the problem. No, Don, you're right. That's it. And that's the problem here. But we're in dangerous waters right now. And just like Omarosa's doing her 200 tapes every week. She's a student of Donald Trump who is now going to be taking away security clearances from people with you know, 20, 30 plus career serving the United States in the best and most noble way. Everybody needs to speak up and defend Brennan right now. I've been surprised that former President George W. Bush staying so quiet. Eight years a president of the United States. His father had been head of the CIA. The CIA is named after Bush. Speak up and denounce Donald Trump because some of these other people in the list aren't household names where Bush is.
[Lemon:] Juliette, is this how a purge starts?
[Kayyem:] It is. But as most things that Trump tries to do, it is backfiring, you know, as Doug just said. The amplification. I mean, basically what happened with John Brennan is you got people who really had been relatively quiet during this period. You know, they were part, they still believe in the bipartisan national security establishment. They all went to all the fancy conferences. And then, you know, you fire John Brennan and all of a sudden this group of 15 or 16 is now unified to say what a disaster Donald Trump is for our national security and how seemingly over his head he is in terms of being able to understand a larger need that the United States has an interest outside of Donald Trump. So it's how Donald Trump would like a purge to begin and we have to anticipate more will happen. But I think we should be heartened by the push back. It's not the same as being president of the United States. But there is a significant push back that people are talking about in the agencies and that the leadership is certainly expressing. I've always said I can't believe no one has quit this administration. I think it's time for Dan Coats to man up, so to speak. I think it's been clear he does not like some of the behaviors by the Trump administration. He's the head of national intelligence. He was caught off guard at the Aspen Institute in terms of the invitations of Putin and he did not know of this purging. He's, and somewhere where Coats is expendable unlike Mattis, who I think would be a disaster if he left. And I think it's time.
[Lemon:] Yes. OK. Stand by, everyone. We're going to talk more about clearances. And when we come back, no sign of a verdict from jurors in the Paul Manafort trial. The first trial to come out of the Mueller investigation. The president is already trying to defend his former campaign chairman calling the whole thing very sad. But in the sign of things to come Mueller's team is almost three times the evidence for Manafort's upcoming second trial.

[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn Anchor:] Iran's supreme leader on a Twitter tirade after Donald Trump pulls out of the nuclear deal. And the U.S. allies are criticizing the decision. Back in Pyongyang, the U.S. Secretary of State is meeting with top North Korean officials ahead of a landmark summit. And questionable payments, the Mueller investigation reportedly asks a Russian oligarch how hundreds of thousands of dollars led in a bank account run of Donald Trump's attorney.
[Lu Stout:] Iran is lashing out at the U.S. for dropping out of the nuclear deal, and its supreme leader, not mincing words on Twitter. He is blasting President Donald Trump, the U.S., and the E.U. as well, saying that they can't be trusted. Meanwhile, Iranian lawmakers set the American flag on fire after Mr. Trump made his announcement. And Iran's parliament is set to vote on a motion that could call for proportionate and reciprocal action. Now, America's European allies are doing their best to save the agreement with the French Foreign Minister insisting that the deal is not dead, but Mr. Trump remains defiant.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Today's action sends a critical message, the United States no longer makes empty threats. When I make promises, I keep them. We will be instituting the highest level of economic sanction. Any nation that helps Iran in his quest for nuclear weapons could also be strongly sanctioned by the United States. America will not be held hostage to nuclear blackmail.
[Lu Stout:] CNN is covering every angle of this story from around the world. Let's get more on the latest reaction on Iran with Frederik Pleitgen. He joins me live on the line from Tehran. And, Fred, I mean, all out anger in Iran directed squarely at the U.S. Tell us more about the reaction there.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, absolutely right. I think directed squarely at the U.S. is specifically, of course, at President Trump after that speech that he gave last night. But I think it's also somewhat evolves as well. I thin you did have the [Inaudible] of lawmakers in the Iranian parliaments set the American flag on fire. By the way, a [Inaudible], a nuclear flag was also set on fire there as well. They are saying that they think the United States can't be trusted. And that obviously, all of this is squarely on the United States. But then you have President Hassan Rouhani who came out, and he said he believes that potentially, a version of a deal might be able to survive. And that would be the same terms of the original nuclear agreement, minus the United States. Now, the Iranian defense, they won't guarantee that a deal like that could actually work. And they said they're going to give it a few weeks. They will see if the Europeans are really committed to it because they're really the most important ones with that. It's European companies right now that again [Inaudible] because they feel they could quickly expect the retaliation from the United States on these European countries out committed, and they can't keep the deal alive, but whether or not that visibly a reality in this phase of American threat is something that remains to be [Inaudible]. It's interesting because even Iran [Inaudible] European nations, he does seem to be digging some sort of leak to President to Hassan Rouhani to see whether or not a smaller version of the Iran nuclear deal might be possible. But yes, they're a lot of anger here. There's a lot of disappointment here. And as you can see some of the comments that are coming out, there's a lot of retaliations as well. Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Fred Pleitgen live from Tehran, thank you. As Fred mentioned, the big question now, could there be a new deal. We have Atika Shubert in Berlin now where the European leaders are reacting at the prospects of another new deal. Atika, U.S. sanctions can be very punishing for European countries. So do E.U. leaders really believe that somehow the Iran nuclear deal can be preserved without the U.S. on board?
[Atika Shubert, Cnn Correspondent:] Absolutely. As the Foreign Minister of Germany Heiko Maas said last night, this deal is not dead. And in fact we heard from Chancellor Merkel Angela Merkel just a few minutes ago, she held a press conference, and what she said was that we must make sure Iran adheres to its obligations in the agreement. Iran has so far stuck to its obligations, and then she addressed, you know, whether or not there would be new deal. She said rather than questioning the Iran deal currently, we need to talk about a broader deal that goes beyond it. So, her view very much in line with what France and Britain have also been saying is that this current deal, the JCPOA, must be preserved, but there is scope to try and expand upon it. That it's not a perfect deal. But it needs to be kept so that we can they can keep Iran to its obligations, and then make it bigger, make it broader. That's Germany's position, and it's in line with both France and Britain.
[Lu Stout:] What Trump did can be seen as a really bitter defeat for America's top allies in Europe including Germany. And they have been ignored by Trump. They have been alienated by Trump. What does this mean for the relationship between the U.S. and the E.U.?
[Shubert:] Well, this is a huge transatlantic risk. I mean, both Chancellor Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron had gone to the White House, and trying to convince President Trump to keep the Iran deal. They work together intend among this, and clearly their efforts failed. And now President Trump by pulling out of the Iran deal has really left it up to Europe to try and salvage what remains. So it's really up to Europe now to convince Iran to basically ignore the United States, to stick to its restrictions in the deal, and at the same time, try and keep protect its own companies which may now be hit by U.S. sanctions. So, what President Trump has done is rather than put pressure on Iran. He's actually put tremendous pressure on his E.U. allies, and it's now up to Europe to try, and hold it together.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, and for Europe, a very complicated fight to hold it together. Atika Shubert reporting live from Berlin, thank you. Now, the President of Turkey says the U.S. decision to withdraw won't just affect the region, but the entire world, and he's worried that it could trigger new crises in the Middle East. Recep Tayyip Erdogan sat down for an exclusive interview with Becky Anderson. And she joins us now live from Ankara. And, Becky, just how concerned is Mr. Erdogan about the geopolitical and economic fallout from Trump's decision on Iran?
[Becky Anderson, Cnn Correspondent:] Very, I think the answer to that is. Look, it is no surprise that some key U.S. allies in this Middle Eastern wider region are applauding Donald Trump's moves, mainly Saudi Arabia and Israel, but it is clear that these could drive a significant wedge between Washington and its key NATO ally, Ankara. I sat down with President Erdogan at what is an incredibly important time for this region. When it feels like the very order of the Middle East is at stake. And I put it to him, I asked him, what do you think the impact of the U.S. pulling out of this Iran deal will be on this region. This is what he said.
[Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Of Turkey:] This nuclear deal was previously called unattainable, but it was rendered possible after years of negativity raising hope all around the globe in the end. And Trump in the hat turning this deal around and retrieving from this deal possibly is not just going to impact the region, but also the entire world. The whole economy is at stake, and that is the reason why [Inaudible] will be hit. And the United State might gain some certain positivity of the withdrawal from this or the rising oil prices, but many of other countries in poverty will be hit even harder and deeper, and at the same time we hear new crises will break out would break out in the region. We don't new crises in the region.
[Anderson:] So here is what we know, the most immediate effect of this decision by Donald Trump to violate the rules of this deal will be reimposition at some point seeing over the next couple of months well it seems of sanctions against the oil, and banking sectors. Upon of what the President of Turkey was telling me there was simple this. And we saw this yesterday. The upping, the serge in oil prices ones this decision was made. Now look, Turkey and Iran have upped the stakes so far as trade volumes are concerned between the two countries over the past couple of months. And a lot the oil that imported into Turkey for example comes from Iran. But I think he was talking about the wider picture here. What will be the effect on oil prices as when the Iranian oil sector is sanctioned once again. So that is one issue. But I think the wider issue that he was talking about is want to hear that those in Washington and in capitals in the west will be worried about. This is the increasing influence that we've seen across this regional, of Turkey, along with Iran and Russia at the expense of influence of the U.S. Many people in this region quite simply say there is a complete vacuum of U.S. policy in the Middle East into which Iran, Russia, and Turkey are stepping. We have seen Turkey on a collision of course with Washington over the past few months or so at the U.S. support for anti-regime troops on the ground in Syria and Turkey says terrorists, the tit-for-tat hostage, diplomacy that we're seeing. The U.S. evangelist pastor here being held in detention on terrorism charges, the Turks saying they won't fit to [Inaudible] extradited of course from the U.S., the Muslim critic, that the president here accuses of closing the coup the attempted coup in Turkey last year. So there is a lot of sort of infrastructure issues between Washington and Ankara at the moment. Some will say this is a collision course and this is not doing that relationship any favors whatsoever, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Becky Anderson live in Ankara, thank you. And tune in later today for Becky Anderson's, again, exclusive interview with the Turkish President. Coming up on Connect the World 4:00 p.m. on London, and 7:00 p.m. Abu Dhabi time, that's 11:00 p.m. here in Hong Kong only on CNN. And Ali Khamenei, the Iranian Supreme Leader is still on Twitter. Moments ago he said this, quote, if we agree with them on the issue of our presence in the region, and our missiles, the U.S.'problem with Iran won't be over, and the U.S. will create a new problem. And oil markets, they have seen wild swings since Donald Trump made an announcement that the U.S. is going to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal. For more on that, the economic impact of the decision, John Defterios at CNNMoney joins me now live from Bahrain. And, John, what has been the overall economic fallout of Trump's decision.
[John Defterios, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, couple of interesting twist to this, Kristie, the financial market fallout is quite limited, but all the attention is really on the oil market after the decision by President Trump. We're right near a four year high that we saw overnight, $77 on international benchmark which is ICE Brent, and WTI or NYMEX out of New York, trading around $71 a barrel. This reflects the course of future supplies of Iran. For context here, Iran has added nearly 1 million barrels a day since the sanctions were lifted in 2016. Under the sanctions, they were limited to just over 1 million barrels a day who would replace that supply at how quickly without supply drop-down because of the U.S. sanctions is a huge question mark. We know the White House is trying to face in tougher sanctions over the next six months. We don't think 1 million barrels a day is going to come off to the market, but it could be $200 to $300, U.S. is even thinking about incentives against those who are importing that Iranian oil would get them to look for different supplies going forward. We have to watch the OPEC, non-OPEC agreement that was struck at the end of 2016 which took 1.8 million barrels a day off the market to sop up the extra crude that was out trading in the market, the biggest supplier is Saudi Arabia. If Iran's supplies drop with Saudi Arabia fill the void or some in Riyadh would like to see higher prices ahead of the Saudi Aramco IPO, but if history tells us anything, Saudi Arabia has always filled the void during conflict, during the Iran-Iraq War, during Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, many times in the past, even the Iraq war in 2003 with U.S. invasion, Saudi Arabia was there to fill the void. The OPEC Secretary-General told me in our exclusive interview yesterday, nothing is safe site in the market, we will step in if necessary. We will get better indications of that towards June if price of crude continues to rise. Now, for some context here, it took four years to build the oil market back up from $75 a barrel. Those in OPEC don't want to see the price shoot up and shoot back down again because demand would drop and the price rises too quickly. They are very aware of it. Saudi Arabia would probably step in, in fact they put out a statement suggesting they would do so if necessary to mitigate the risk in their words, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] John Defterios live from Bahrain for us, thank you for that. You are watching News Stream. I'm coming to you live from Hong Kong, and up next, Pyongyang is playing host to the U.S. Secretary of State at the top of the agenda, of course, a historic upcoming meeting between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un. And the potential release of three U.S. detainees. Also ahead, the U.S. Special Counsel questions a Russian oligarch about the money paid to a former Trump attorney, Michael Cohen, after the 2016 election. We've got the latest from Washington, coming up.

[Richard Quest, Host, Quest Means Business:] It's been a very ugly day for the start of the new week, and the start of the new quarter. The market was up by about 700 points, a slight rally later in the day has pushed things around and that's what you want to bring trade into an end. A solid gavel. It is over and when we show you the numbers you'll be grateful on Monday, it's the 2nd of April. It's welcome to Q2. Brutal markets and a brutal way to start a new quarter. More for you as the share drop after Elon Musk makes a wedge and talks about bankruptcy. And it's Mark Zuckerberg versus Tim Cook in a Silicon Valley showdown. I am Richard Quest live tonight as always from the world's financial capital, New York City where it knows where I mean business. Good evening, it is a new quarter for Walls Street, but there are definitely old fears on tech and trade and it was an extremely ugly day on the market. All the major US indices are now officially what would be described as a correction, in other words, they have dropped by more than 10% and the final number is pretty unpleasant. Broad selling across the boards. If I take you to the trading post, we can get a little bit more detail on exactly what is necessary and what should count. These records by the way all seem a long time ago. All three down, so please, red, I think is the color of the day. Not, I think, I know it is. You have the Dow off 459 and it closed at some 2%. It was about 3% at one point during the day, so a bit of a rally. Two and a quarter percent for the SMP and the NASDAQ. That would have been well over 3% earlier. In other words, all 11 sectors were down on the SMP over the course of the day. If you look at FANG and this is the institutional FANG Facebook alphabet, and Apple, Netflix and Google, then you've got Facebook now 20% off from its peak, Amazon fell sharply after that little Trump tweet, President Trump tweet and accuses Amazon of abusing the postal system and killing retailers. CNN's Clare Sebastian is at the New York Stock Exchange. She joins me now. Clare, the market as we are looking at these numbers, and the CNN Fear and Greed Index remains in extreme fear, but the market at one point, the Dow was often having 700 points, so a marginal rally, but still a very unsettled day.
[Clare Sebastian, Correspondent, Cnn:] Very unsettled, Richard and you certainly get a sense of it down here. Volume picked up over $600 million ahead of the close, that's around double what it was at lunch time. But what we are seeing really here is a confluence of factors. We've got the trade laws, we've got the issues surrounding tech in the Presidential tweet. He put manufacturing numbers that came in a little below what was expected, along with reports there of worries from companies about those tariffs and the impacts that it is having on their business. So, I think this is the start of the second quarter. I don't think we're seeing any of the volatilities that we saw in the first quarter dissipate.
[Quest:] It's the we'll talk about this with the next guest, but put into perspective it's the various catalysts for what takes place and the severity and extremity of the move that seems to be unsettling.
[Sebastian:] Yes, so they don't need much at the moment, Richard. The fundamental that you know, it feels stronger. The earnings have been pretty strong and those really are the things that underlie the market. But it is these triggers that we have seen recently, be it chaos in Washington, be it talk of a trade war. That talk of a trade war really is something that can have the power to roil these markets. So, I think, as you say, triggers is the thing, but volatility is something that is playing around with the market at the moment.
[Quest:] Are they talking about buy on the dips?
[Sebastian:] Today, I don't think that was the case. Obviously, we came off the lows of the [inaudible] in the Dow is now about 750 or so points at its worth and we have come off that, which is something of a change, Richard throughout February and March where we really saw where the selling taking place in the last hour of trading. So, perhaps, we are in a slightly different, slightly more measured approach to the selling at the moment. There wasn't a technical level on the SMP 500 that was breached today which did spark some of that selling in the afternoon. But as of buy on the dip, I think, tomorrow will be a big teller on that. It was about the Spotify IPO coming out tomorrow. What a time to be listing a tech company?
[Quest:] Clare Sebastian at the Stock Exchange. Thank you. Volatility is the key of the day. You saw that with the VIX which was at 10% to 12%. Joining me now, Ross Gerber, the Venture Money Manager; leads Gerber, Kawasaki which has more than half a billion dollars in assets under management joins me from the West Coast. Very difficult to know what to make of a day like today. When you, you know, look, Ross, we saw the presidential tweet on Amazon. You've seen the trade and the China retaliation, are these the reasons that the market is deciding to sell off?
[Ross Gerber, Venture Money Manager:] Absolutely, I mean, when you have such an...
[Gerber:] ...unstable President who constantly is meddling with the status quo in a negative way, it's very hard to build confidence to make term investment on the future of America and that's making investors pause and say, "Hey, despite everything looking amazing in the business environment here in the United States and globally, maybe something we can't even quantify can happen with the sky. And I think that is a legitimate risk.
[Quest:] So, where is the money going? Once it comes? I mean, is it staying in cash money markets and the like? It doesn't look at the moment like there is a rotation in to bonds?
[Gerber:] Well, we've seen a little bit of a bid on bonds, but everybody is scared of higher rates and we're definitely creating an inflationary environment in the United States based off of our immigration and trade policies as well as government spending and the need to borrow more. So, bonds aren't necessarily the safe haven they used to play and so, I think cash is piling up and that's what's happening at my firm. The number one position we actually have is cash at my firm because as we actually like these opportunities to get in to our favorite names during corrections like we are seeing now. But it's been a long run up and you know, I have to say, this is just more volatile than people are used to in the last two years, but this is pretty normal actually.
[Quest:] I mean, this is the new normal, and it is predicated on the back of algorithmic trading and then the forms of movement, but look, you know, when this latest down leg began say a week ago, 10 days ago. Then I would have thought to myself including this, do I take profits off the table? Do I you know, money that I have banked already, do I so money I have made, should I just keep? Well, I didn't and others won't have and I guess now, I have got to write this out.
[Gerber:] Right, and you know, I always say you want to be positioned for the correction before the correction, not after and we tend to build portfolios around the concept of stress test of what happens if and so, we were prepared for this type of downturn, it doesn't make it any more fun. But as long term investors and somebody who has been doing this my whole like, you're always going to be somewhat invested in the stock market even during the worst of times and I have to remind people that when you feel the worst about the stock market, it's usually actually a good time to invest. So, it's very, very hard to market time, so you build a good portfolio. You stick with great names and you'll make it through.
[Quest:] And Ross, I come back to your first answer. You know, and I take what you have just said and you see it through or you stick through it, but there is this I mean, we're making a political comment here, but there is this mercurial element which cannot be predicted which is the next tweet in the President of the United States. You know, there used to be rule in constitution law that governments don't target individuals or governments don't target individual companies. It's always been a contract tenet of common law as well. This President is doing both.
[Gerber:] Well, you know, honestly, I have turned off his tweets and I do everything to avoid any information I am getting because it is constantly changing and constantly wrong in a lot of cases where they will do one thing and then reverse it the next thing. So, you know, the political risk is huge and I am not trying to minimize it, but the stock market is ultimately about money and making money and corporations are making a ton of money, they have so much opportunity to use this money right now. So, it makes us bullish on business as much as we are bearish on government, so the real issue that you are bringing up is how much can the government really screw a business especially a government that is supposed to be helping business?
[Quest:] I love that, Ross. Stay with me. Bullish on business if we are bearish on government. Stay with me because we are going to talk more about Tesla after just briefed on the subject. Elon Musk's efforts, to shrug off Tesla's words, aren't helping the share price. Join me at the screens and you'll see what I mean. All right, the Tesla share price, the stock is down nearly 6% today and 20% so far this year. You can see how the stock literally fell off a cliff over the course of the day. And the reasons can be quite simply seen. First of all, Model 3 sales are likely to miss expectations because the ramp up in production has not been possible. And Elon Musk's April fool joke about the company's health fell flat. He was poking in front of his critics and he tweeted a picture of himself slumped against a car with a sign saying, "Bankrupt." Now, Tesla is also in trouble with the NTSB, the company who has blogged about a fatal crash involving the Tesla which was in auto pilot mode at the time of the crash. The NTSB then happy about the release of the information. The crash is still under investigation. So, Ross Gerber... ... you were an early investor in Tesla, you see these problems of sales on Model 3, safety with the NTSB, are you concerned? I mean, I guess everybody is sort of writing off Tesla. Is it time to write off Tesla?
[Gerber:] Well, absolutely not and we're not concerned actually. You know, what we are concerned about is Elon's media presence has actually become detrimental to the company because I get where he is coming from, but as I have personally learned myself, you know, Twitter is a dangerous place, so you know, I get his joke, but unfortunately, you know, not everybody has a great sense of humor. That being said, Tesla is the safest car on the road. Okay, let's be real. If you fall asleep on auto pilot at 75 miles per hour and the thing is beeping for seconds after seconds, and you don't touch the wheel, I mean, you know, we can talk about this all day. The second thing but the fact is that Tesla is one of the safest cars on the road and autonomous driving is here, it's a very early technology and there's a lot of bumps on the road, but this is going to make the world a lot safer place to drive, automobile desks are a huge amount desk especially people under [inaudible]... And so we are very bullish on the technology and the company despite it being a high risk investment.
[Quest:] Ross, good to see you. Please come back again from the West Coast.
[Gerber:] Thank you for having me.
[Quest:] Love to have you on the program. Thank you very much to you. Now, as we continue tonight in "Quest Means Business," stop the migrants or lose the trades, so really, straightforward choice being offered by President Trump as he threatens to stop NAFTA if Mexico doesn't act. All right, China has made good on its tariff threats against the United States as we have been throughout this trade dispute, battle, war, we're tracking it in our trade war room. So, let's talk about what China has done. It's imposed tariffs on three billion dollars' worth of goods against the United States, so it has done it for pork, it has done it for fruit and it has done it for steel pipes, $3 billion worth of exports from the US. It is in direct response for the aluminum tariffs that the US imposed and of course, those of steel which were also imposed against China. Now, there has been no response yet to a possible second round of tariffs that would target Chinese aerospace and tech. Now if they were tariffed in some shape or form, that would be goods worth around $50 billion. And at the same time, you have NAFTA which is very much on the agenda as Donald Trump is threatening to stop NAFTA over the question of the war and some incendiary tweets over the last 24 hours where he has been talking about sending things across. The President has complained Mexico makes a fortune from the trade pact. In a tweet, he calls on Mexico to use that fortune to stop drugs and migrants passing from Mexico into the United States, migrants like these Central Americans seen in Southern Mexico who are heading towards the US border right now. As Trump said, it is up to Mexico to use its powers which is a much stronger than U.S. laws, and stop them. CNN is on both sides of the border with this, Boris Sanchez is at the White House, Leyla Santiago is in Mexico City. Boris, stand by, I want to get to Leyla first. The reaction in Mexico which has a presidential election coming up in July to the incendiary suggestions that Mexico could do more to stop the drug traffickers and the opioids, but isn't?
[Leyla Santiago:] Well, listen, a lot of people and the candidates are certainly talking about President Trump and using that as a sort of platform saying hey, listen, I will be the one who stands up to President Trump. One in particular, the front runner which is Amlo, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador just yesterday said we will not be a pinata to any foreign government and said we will respect the U.S. but we demand that same respect. Now, I do want to know that I have checked in today with the Mexico President's office, the foreign ministry, just checked in with the economic minister and none of them are making comments in response to this morning's tweets from the President, now the President of the United States. But yesterday when President Trump tweeted about Mexico, the foreign minister did make it a point from Mexico to tweet back and say hey, listen, we are working with the U.S., that is just a fact, we are trying to solve these same problems but never has Mexico said that they believe the wall is the right way to do it or a threat like this.
[Quest:] Boris, has he managed to start construction of the wall yet even though plans we have seen prototypes. From the White House's point of view, what purpose does it serve to offend the Mexicans at the time of a presidential election that could be highly disadvantageous in the long run?
[Boris Sanchez:] Frankly Richard, I don't know that the White House is considering whether or not they are offending the Mexican leadership. Frankly, if you look back at what President Trump said on day one of his campaign, they are not sending us our best, they are sending drugs, their rapists, et cetera, et cetera, throughout the campaign trail and even in his time in the White House in conversations that he has had, not only with the Mexican leader but even allies to the United States, close allies and Malcolm Turnbull of Australia, et cetera, et cetera. President Trump has a certain way of speaking, a certain way of carrying himself, he believes that the United States has been taken advantage of by other countries, that is one firm ideological perspective, one of the few that he has held for years and so this instinct of his to try to challenge Mexico, to threaten to end the North American Free Trade Agreement if Mexico doesn't help him build the wall or at least does more to prevent immigration to the United States, I'm not exactly sure that it's a calculation on his part in trying to affect Mexican politics.
[Quest:] All right, to both of you, start with you, Leyla, the reality of abandoning, discarding, getting rid of whatever you want to say, NAFTA, is Mexico realistically facing up to the possibility? And then Boris, when Leyla is finished speaking, your question would be, you know, is it likely they will do it? Bearing in mind the damage that will happen? To you, Leyla, first.
[Santiago:] Well, I think most Mexican government officials will tell you anything is possible, that is what they have learned from President Donald Trump, but they also have said that they are willing to back out if their demand or if their compromises are not something that the U.S. is willing to do. They have several things that they have said, they said, look, this is not about the wall, this is not in Mexico's interest, I'm out. So I think right now, you know, these negotiations started in August, President Trump could back out, he would require six months worth of notification, that hasn't happened yet. And so I think everyone is just sort of on a wait and see but really, I mean we have been at this since August on this wait and see. It seems like they were making some progress and coming to those compromises but what will happen now is sort of like well, let's see what the next week is about. Yes, I think Leyla is right, you can kind of expect the unexpected when it comes to President Trump, I can tell you though that I have spoken to a number of Republicans specifically one key Republican operative with close connections to the White House who firmly believes that these NAFTA discussions are going to continue on ad nauseam, endlessly, because the Presidents isn't really going to get a deal that he is looking for and frankly, it serves him as a point drives his America First base. Potentially what we could see if there is some kind of deal would be similar to what we saw recently with South Korea where there was a reworking and a trade policy that was largely symbolic but not something necessarily that totally changes the way that the United States trades with Canada and Mexico. To add one more point, we saw the President say that he was going to enact a steel and aluminum tariff across the board for all countries and then he took a couple of steps back days later in offering you know, exceptions for certain allies. We may potentially see that kind of movement backward on NAFTA as well, it's a threat that the President has made many, many times, one that he has yet to really follow up on, Richard.
[Quest:] Boris is in Washington, Leyla is in Mexico City, both sides of the position. Colleagues, thank you very much indeed. Now our next guest says it will take more than a wall to fix the situation on the Mexican border, the issue is what needs to be fixed. Howard Buffett is Chairman and Chief Executive of the Howard Buffett. Good to see you.
[Howard Buffett:] How are you, sir? Nice to see you.
[Quest:] Good to see you. Thank you for joining. And you are a former businessman and a law enforcement officer, and of course the son of Warren Buffet, now you have been a sheriff and a volunteer deputy and you see a connection between America's border issue and the drug epidemic. Our 50 State Border Crisis, How The American Border Fuels The Drug Epidemic. Who is at fault
[Buffett:] Well, I don't think I mean you could say everybody is at fault or nobody is at fault, I mean it's very hard to see someone specifically at fault but at the end of the day, we haven't secured our border and we have 90 plus percent of the drugs that are getting used in this country illegal drugs coming across the Mexican U.S. border.
[Quest:] Yes, but you say we haven't secured the border, and you know, arguably, it takes two to tango and both sides can work towards securing our border.
[Buffett:] Absolutely, Mexico has and if we don't have Mexico as a trusting serious partner in this effort, we cannot secure our border.
[Quest:] So does a wall I know you must get sick and tired about the wall, I mean you surely agree that a wall is not the answer as I said in my introduction, a wall is not the answer?
[Buffett:] No, it's not.
[Quest:] It's part of but what is the answer then?
[Buffett:] Well, it's that what I write about...
[Quest:] Right.
[Buffett:] But I mean basically, the answer is that we need probably more of everything that we are doing but it is important to go back to your point which is without Mexico, we can't succeed at this?
[Quest:] So the tweets like today's tweets, I mean, you know, I don't want to take into heavy politics but one has to because these the tweets today poison the well of diplomacy that would enable cooperation on board.
[Buffett:] You can't expect people to respond well when you call them names.
[Quest:] Okay, that was good. You put that much better than I do, sir much better.
[Buffett:] Well, and that does hurt us, I mean the border patrol will tell you their most valuable asset at the end of the day is the intelligence and the cooperation they get from Mexico, and they get that but it makes it a lot harder when you know, you have all this rhetoric going on at the top and they already have a tough job, Mexico, Mexico has more violence a day than I mean it was ranked second not too long ago, it was the second most violent country in the world, and there are cartels down there that when we look at what's we see things on TV from Syria or Yemen and we think it's terrible, it's going on everyday in Mexico, that is our neighbor. And eventually that becomes across our border and into our country and threatens our rule of law.
[Quest:] On this question of the drug crisis, you know, we are a business program, we can put it in business terms, it's supply and demand and this is as the narco program were you know, the narco program make it, they would arguably say hang on a second, you are not exactly doing a very good job, United States...
[Buffett:] We're not.
[Quest:] Dealing with the demand side of the equation.
[Buffett:] Yes, we're not, I mean we have our problems as well. There is one way to stem demand and that is to cut supply, and you know that as well..
[Quest:] No, not necessary.
[Buffett:] It's happened before in the United States.
[Quest:] It has but that just raises the price.
[Buffett:] No, not if you really cut supply, it depends on what you are talking about. You know, we had that happen in World War 2 and they couldn't bring in heroin into this country. We went from 200 and some thousand addicts down to like 10,000, I mean if you truly cut supply, but I'm not advocating that that is the only solution, I mean I deal with people on my job as sheriff all the time they need help so you can't just simply push it off on something else.
[Quest:] Final question, in your job as sheriff, the tragedy of the immigration crisis, whatever one may think that you are having to deal now with human beings threatened with deportation and potentially nowhere to go back to anyway and the breakup of families. As a law enforcement officer, how can you deal with that?
[Buffett:] Well, typically, as a sheriff, we don't deal with that very directly, we honestly don't, I mean where I have experience with that is the hundreds of millions of dollars that we spend over the last decade or two through our philanthropic efforts and I can tell you it's heartbreaking. It was heartbreaking.
[Quest:] Does law enforcement in its totality, is involved and has to bear witness to what is taking place?
[Buffett:] Well, that is where some of the confusion comes. I mean some of the confusion is that local law enforcement can enforce immigration rules and laws and we can't so where we see it, as we see it in our jail, we see it on the street when we arrest people but it's very disconnected from the actual immigration debate.
[Quest:] Right. Thank you for coming in and talking about it.
[Buffett:] You bet.
[Quest:] Thank you.
[Buffett:] Thank you very much, I appreciate it.
[Quest:] Good to see you, sir. Thank you.
[Buffett:] Yes, thank you.
[Quest:] As we continue tonight, Spotify is holding its closely watched IPO tomorrow, now unlike most tech and unlike most IPOs the executives won't be ringing the opening bell or popping champagne corks, it's a very strange way that they have done this IPO, we'd explain after the break.

[Dave Briggs, Early Start Show Co-host:] President Trump hereby demands to know if the Feds infiltrated his campaign. It heeded the following reports a long time intelligence source assisted early in the Russian investigation. Russia may not have been the only foreign power to look in the influence the 2016 election. A new reports says Donald Trump Jr. and a second unknown meeting an emissary with two gulf nations.
[Unidentified Female:] Why don't we not do finds, why don't we do moments of action, why do we don't do moment of change? Why don't we change what is happening? Because it's horrible.
[Briggs:] Anger, sadness, frustration after another school shooting claims 10 more lives in an American school. Texas lawmakers are searching for answers that may have nothing to do with guns. You are hearing about school exits, violent video games even riddling. Good morning everyone, Welcome to Early Start, I'm Dave Briggs. Christine Romans is off today. It is Monday, May 21st, 4:00 a.m. in the East. Hope you had a great weekend. Here is where we start. In just a matter of hours, President Trump expected to formally demand his Justice Department review itself and the FBI to determine whether they spied on his Presidential campaign for political purposes. This development comes on the heels of reports last week that the FBI dispatched a confidential source to speak with aides to the campaign about its possible links to Russia. U.S. officials had already confirmed to CNN that no source was embedded in the campaign, but in the interest of heading off a larger showdown, the DOJ says, it is going along with the President's command. More now from Ryan Nobles at the White House.
[Ryan Nobles, Washingon Correspondent, Cnn:] No doubt the President was active on Twitter this weekend taking aim at the Department of Justice and the FBI, because he is upset over reports that there was an informant. A source attempting to gain information and access about the Trump campaign. He capped off his weekend of tweets with this tweet calling out the Department of Justice in quote, I hereby demand and will do so officially tomorrow, that would be Monday, that the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI and DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump campaign for political purposes and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama administration. And that tweet quickly got some results. The Department of Justice put out a statement not too long after where they said they were going to essentially expand the investigation that was already taking place. The deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, said the following, quote, if anyone did infiltrate or surveilled participants in the presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take an appropriate action. So they are essentially expanding this investigation to find our and rule in or out, whether or not if there is anyone attempting to launch the investigation for anything other than the reason that they thought there was something inappropriate or illegal going on. So, this at the very least, also appears to be an attempt by the President to try and discredit Robert Mueller and his investigation. We will have to see if that has any impacts on the Special Counsel going forward.
[Briggs:] All right. Ryan Nobles, thank you. The Justice Department inspector general is already investigating whether proper protocols were followed when the FBI applied for FISA surveillance orders. But House Republicans want more information. Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, demanding documents related to the confidential source much to dismay of Democrats.
[Sen Mark Warner,  Virginia:] I have no information that would indicate that the President's tweets or theory of the case is at all based in truth. I find it outrageous that the President's allies are playing fast and loose with confidential information.
[Briggs:] Intel officials warn the release of information about a classified source could pose a grave risk to them. The source's identity already though revealed by several media outlets over the weekend. According to Rudy Giuliani, Special Counsel, Robert Mueller intends to finish his Russia investigation by September 1st. The president's lawyers says Mueller's team shared its timeline about a month ago, in the course of negotiations over whether the president would agree to an interview and Guiliani says the impression he got was that the president did an interview, the investigation could be wrapped up by September. A spokesman for the Special Counsel declined to comment. New questions this morning about another questionable meeting involving Donald Trump Jr. According to the New York Times, the President's oldest son met at Trump Tower with an emissary for two Arab Prince's three months before the 2016 election. And they are offering assistance to the Trump campaign. The first indication a country other than Russia tried to influence the election outcome. The Times identifies the emissary as George Nader, a Lebanese-American businessman already cooperating with the Mueller investigation. He reportedly inform the president's son, the crown princes who led Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates were eager to help his father win. According to the Times, Israeli social media expert Joel Zamel, was also at that meeting as company put together a quote, multimillion dollar proposal for social media manipulation efforts to help elect Trump. Now, it is unclear whether that plan was executed. Prominent Trump supporter Eric Prince, reportedly organized the meeting. He is the former CEO of the controversial private security firm, Blackwater. Prince, previously testified his involvement in the Trump campaign was limited and did not mention the August 2016 meeting. Lawyers for all parties downplayed that meeting, request for comments from the White House and Erik Prince were not return. Schools in Santa Fe, Texas will be closed today and tomorrow. The city, still reeling from Friday's school shooting that left ten people dead. It was the nation's 22nd school shooting this year. Shocking there have been more deaths in our schools in 2018 than in our military. The Galveston County Sheriff says the entire incident lasted 30 minutes. That included a 25-minute exchange of gunfire between police and the shooter. The suspect telling police, he spared some people so they could tell his story. The mother of one victim, 16-year-old Shana Fisher say her daughter rejected the suspect's advances for months.
[Sadie Baze, Daughter Shana Fischer Killed In Shooting:] My daughter was going up to my mother and telling my mom the past four months and my brother that he had been making advances on her and that she finally stood up to him, because her younger sister was being bullied in school. And she was showing her look, this is what you do. You have to stand up to him and tell him that say no. It is not right.
[Briggs:] There was a funeral prayer service Sunday for one of the shooting victims. Sabika Sheikh. She was the 17-year-old exchange student from Pakistan. Listen to the President of the Islamic society of greater Houston.
[M.j. Khan, President Islamic Society Of Greater Houston:] All of you young people sitting in the audience, don't look at the Austin or Washington to solve your problems. You must solve your problems yourself. Take the lead from those students in Florida. They stood up and they said no more.
[Briggs:] The suspect's family says they are as shocked and confused as anyone here. What they have learned was quote, incompatible with the boy we love. Authorities say the guns used by the suspect were legally owned by his father. Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo, asked if the father should face legal consequences.
[Art Acevedo, Houston Police Chief:] Anyone who owns a firearm who doesn't secure it probably and it ends up in the wrong hands and used to kill innocent people that should carry some significant consequences. We need to think about that on a national level across these country.
[Briggs:] Chief Acevedo posting these comments on Facebook, quote, I know some have strong feelings about gun rights, but I want you to know I hit rock bottom. This is not a time for prayers and study and inaction. It is time for prayers and action and the asking of God's forgiveness for our inaction. Especially the elected official that ran to the cameras today, acting on a solemn manner, called for prayers and once again will do absolutely nothing. Many officials, including politicians are still pointing fingers at video games, broken families, too many school entrances and more, but not guns. Many officials still insisting more teachers need to be armed.
[Gov Dan Patrick,  Lieutenant Texas:] We cannot sit back and say it is the gun. It is us as a nation, George. On this Sunday morning, when we all go to church and pray or go to the synagogue or mosque, or wherever we go, let's look in within ourselves at the nation.
[Oliver North, Incoming Nra President:] And the disease in this case, is not the second amendment. The disease is the youngsters who are steeped in the culture of violence. If you look at what is happened to the young people. Many of these young boys have been on riddling since they were on kindergarten.
[Briggs:] President Obama's Education Secretary, Arnie Duncan, thinks, students should boycott schools until stronger gun laws are passed. He say the idea is tragically necessary and ask what if no children went to school until gun laws change to keep them safe? My family is all in, if we can do this at scale. Parents, will you please join us? Since 2009, the United States leads the world with 288 school shootings. Mexico is second with eight. Staggering. Ahead, the U.S. and China agree to dial back the rhetoric on trade. What each side gives and gets. Next on Early Start.

[Hala Gorani, Cnn International:] We are getting you up to speed on two major international news stories this hour. Hello and welcome, everyone. I'm Hala Gorani. Hurricane Florence is hammering the coast of North and South Carolina. Take a look at the video on the screen shot at a marina at Wilmington. And further inland, the massive storm is trapping people in homes, flooding entire towns and threatening more devastation. But this hour, we are also tracking another huge storm. This one heading for the Philippines. It is super typhoon Mangkhut, equivalent of a category 4 hurricane and 4 million people are currently in the path. The country deployed soldiers to help people in the northern part of the country get to safety. We will have a report from the Philippines soon. Let's get the latest on Hurricane Florence. It made landfall as a category one storm just after 7:00 a.m. in North Carolina. The punishing winds brought down this gas station's entire awning basically. And take a look at these pictures from New Bern. The storm's powerful surge completely flooded that town. About 150 people are waiting still to be pulled out of the area. And we are also seeing water rescues under way taking place in River Bend among other places. We are hearing from FEMA, that's the federal emergency agency, that 1,300 people deployed to help local authorities. Also, Florence has knocked out the power to more than 600,000 people. Our colleague Derek Van Dam was out in Carolina Beach when he experienced that for himself.
[Derek Van Dam, Cnn Meteorologist:] Let's say 30 minutes as we noticed that inner eye wall. There it goes. There goes the lights. That's it. All right. That's what I expected.
[Gorani:] Despite days of dire warnings to get out, some are riding out this storm. Our Scott McClean spoke to a Myrtle Beach resident saying, well, he is not going anywhere.
[Unidentified Male:] I've stayed here in Hugo and I hadn't left. Didn't leave in Matthew. And I just going to ride it out.
[Scott Mcclean, Cnn Correspondent:] This is supposed to be worse than Matthew.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes. But I think because winds blow offshore, I think it won't be a surge problem. So
[Mcclean:] You're not worried about flooding?
[Unidentified Male:] No. We are up on the Sand Hill.
[Gorani:] Now, CNN has correspondents fanned out across the region. Look at this video of John Berman. He was in Wilmington, North Carolina, as the storm made landfall. Maybe you can make him out between the wind gusts and the sheets of rain. How does it feel to be inside this storm? Let's bring in Nick Watt in North Myrtle Beach. Obviously, you're raining very heavily. What's the situation now where you are?
[Nick Watt, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Hala, where we are, I just spoken to local officials here and they have suspended basically the emergency service. 911 calls, they will not send first responders out unless it's a life-threatening situation. And the reason for that is the gusts of wind. Up maybe 130, 140 kilometers an hour. Expected this afternoon. They have been picking up since last night when the first bands of this hurricane started coming over where we are. We are actually staying in a house right on the beach. The house is on stilts so that any storm surge passes underneath the house but the flip side of that is during the night it was hard to sleep because the house was actually moving in the wind. The winds were that strong. The gusts were that powerful. Now, water is the big story, though, of this hurricane. And, you know, we have already had 50 centimeters of rain reported in places. There's a forecast for 100 centimeters of rain to fall in just a few days in certain parts of the Carolinas and that could be devastating. The issue where I am in North Myrtle Beach, we are on this beautiful 60-mile stretch of sand, the grand strand, attracts 14 million tourists a year. Should be sunny right now and holiday time. Instead at the grim reality of what people face on the ground. About 2,000 people have decided to tough it out here. And stay in North Myrtle Beach. You know, since the storm was downgraded category-wise from a 3 to a 2 to a 1 people said it won't be that bad. I'll stay. Those categories are just for wind speed. You know? This storm is still, you know, 15,000 miles across. Twice the size of the state of Massachusetts. And packing so much rain that, you know, 10 trillion gallons to fall on North Carolina alone. Where we are, the issue is going to ocean you can see behind me. Coming up to high tide now and the issue is going to be that water comes in and inundates this is village, this town. 2016 Hurricane Matthew, this whole place flooded. We are if between the ocean and something called the intercoastal waterway, a big sort of canal that runs a couple of blocks inland from us so later today there could be a time when the eye of the storm is actually inland from us and we are in between the eye of the storm and the ocean. That's when it's bad. But the other major thing about this hurricane, it is moving so slowly and because it's moving so slowly it dumps a lot of water. Previous hurricanes moved with very, very high wind but they have moved faster through here. This one is crawling. You could jog faster than this hurricane and going slowly and just dumping, dumping, dumping rain. That's going to be an issue. That's going to be the story of the next few hours and weeks maybe.
[Gorani:] Certainly, we're going to be keeping an eye on that. You mentioned potentially that the water could rise still and flood parts of north myrtle beach. Has the worst of the storm in terms of wind gusts passed now?
[Watt:] Well, the winds in this hurricane are dropping but the gusts are still up at, you know, 90 miles per hour, 140 kilometers per hour. That's another issue with the storm being so slow so, you know, can a building sustain winds of 100 kilometers a hour for 24 hours? You know? That's the issue. So, you know, even if the winds drop a little bit, the fact it's so slow, there's wind damage and seen downed power lines around where we are already right now. This town about half the people here have lost power and only gets worse because the storm actually hasn't started to move down towards us so here in North Myrtle Beach it's only going to get worse. Hala?
[Gorani:] Nick Watt, thanks very much, in north myrtle beach, North Carolina. Miguel Marquez is inside the storm. He is in Carolina Beach, North Carolina, right now. Miguel, tell us what's going on where you are.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, struggling to stay standing because the wind is blowing so hard and in knee-deep water because the storm surge has come in and even though we near a waning tide it is still very high. It goes several hundred meters back up into the town of Carolina Beach. This is Carl Winter Boulevard and myrtle avenue in Carolina Beach and inundated. This area does flood often in this town but they have folks I have been talking to this morning haven't seen it come up quickly. In a half hour, the area was flooded and not sure when it goes back down. I spoke to the city manager a little while ago and he said that it may be Saturday or Sunday before they're able to open the bridge that will allow people back in and out of this area because there's just so much water. This storm will not quit. It just continues and continues to dump rain and wind and bring the storm surge. We were up during the eye of the storm. There was literally not a breeze in the air and now it is back to hurricane conditions. What you are looking at right now is the marina here in the Carolina Beach. It is clearly overflowing. All of the boats in there remaining moored and in good shape. But the one thing that emergency managers are asking here, they haven't had a lot of major issues other than flooding and some minor damage. But what they're asking across the county, New Hanover County, if you need assistance, make sure that it is dire and life threatening because their 911 operators are overwhelmed. Hala?
[Gorani:] Yes. I was just going to ask you about that. The structures are still standing. The boats are fine. But the big concern of what you are saying is sustained rains. Right? And then that you have water levels that are high for many, many days. This is not a fast-moving storm.
[Marquez:] Yes. It is just sitting on top of us not going anywhere. So, rain coming down from the heavens and then water pushing in from the ocean. That storm surge, the two of those together just a mix that's going to make life miserable here for days to come. Hala?
[Gorani:] All right. Miguel Marquez, thanks very much, Carolina Beach, North Carolina. Joining us, I want to speak to Natalie Gomes now. She lives in Wilmington, North Carolina. One of the areas hit hardest by the storm and took pictures of downed trees in the neighborhood. She joins me now on the phone. Thanks for being with us. We're showing the viewers all over the world pictures of trees coming down. A lot of them caused damage to homes. Is your home OK?
[Natalie Gomes, Resident, Wilmington:] Yes. We are just fine. We don't have power and lost power around midnight here. Other than that, we're OK.
[Gorani:] What's the situation in your neighborhood? Because it looks like there was a lot of damage in a short period of time.
[Gomes:] Yes. We had really, really intense winds come through last night. We don't have power and lost power around midnight here. Other than that, we're OK.
[Gorani:] What's the situation in your neighborhood? Because it looks like there was a lot of damage in a short period of time.
[Gomes:] Yes. We had really, really intense winds come through last night. They were really loud. About 3:00 in the morning. You know? I could feel the house just sort of moving with the wind, as well. Lots of tree limbs down. We don't have any flooding here thankfully.
[Gorani:] Thankfully. Did you sleep in your basement or I mean, it must be scary with winds so strong.
[Gomes:] Absolutely. Most of the houses here don't have basements actually. We spent it in our bedroom and just sort of heard the onslaught of leaves on the windows and things like that from the big gust of wind.
[Gorani:] I imagine that most people were expecting at least some damage. But is this more than you thought would happen so quickly in just a few hours?
[Gomes:] Honestly, we have so many big pine trees here and they're the ones that tend to break in the storms. So, it isn't necessarily more in my area than I was expecting but from some of the friends around town with pictures there were definitely places around town hit harder.
[Gorani:] You don't have any flooding. That's a good thing. Those standing waters are absolutely terrible. I hope everyone around you, the neighbors, is safe. No one was hurt?
[Gomes:] Everyone appears to be fine. There were a lot of people that did evacuate in our neighborhood. But my neighbors who did stay appear to be just fine today.
[Gorani:] Good. And you obviously stayed in your home. Why did you make that decision?
[Gomes:] We have seven dogs.
[Gorani:] Oh wow.
[Gomes:] And a few cats. And honestly, evacuating would have been really difficult. We looked at the directions the winds would be coming from and the direction our house sits and actually sort of figured out that we thought we would be OK with it.
[Gorani:] Going forward, you've looked at the forecast. What's in store for your part of North Carolina?
[Gomes:] Continued rain, continued winds. It should probably be raining through tomorrow is what we're expecting. And the winds have died down a lot. That's a good thing for us here.
[Gorani:] But the issue, obviously, I used to live in Atlanta and sometimes after the storm, the trees were standing and a little gust would take one down. They come down from the root. Hopefully there's you don't have any issue, any trees like that that could potentially fall on your home, your structure.
[Gomes:] My husband went out and measured the distance to the trees and calculate the height. He's in the military and kind of preparing for these sorts of big events and figured out we didn't have any at risk of falling on us.
[Gorani:] That's good news. I'm glad you're safe. Thank you so much for sending us the pictures. It gives the viewers everywhere around the world an idea of how quickly, quickly a storm like this and high winds can cause a lot of damage to buildings. Thankfully everyone is safe on your street. Thank you. A storm like this carries obviously many risk factors, given the projected path. Florence set to make a slow meandering crawl on to land for days of rain and flooding. Ivan Cabrera at the CNN Weather Center with more. So, we have been saying over and over again it is not the wind. It's the rain. It's the rising water levels. What's the forecast for this weather system?
[Ivan Cabrera, Cnn Meteorologist:] Hey, Hala. That remains the case over the next several hours. We have 120 kilometer per wind hurricane. One tick down, 119, a tropical storm. I haven't seen anything near 119 kilometers an hour for the wind speed. That's not an issue. The wind direction, though, still poses a threat because it is still pushing water on shore and that water has nowhere to go. I'll show you some of that in detail in a second but here's the latest radar with Hurricane Florence continues as you mentioned. Wobbling down to the south and west. Incredible amounts of rain and of course the story, as well. We just checked in with Nick down across North Myrtle Beach. Not as heavy as far as the rainfall and the wind direction changes in a couple of hours and then push the water ashore so I think they're actually going to get in trouble in the next couple of hours as far as the surge. There is Miguel. Continuing to see that stream of wind coming in off the water. And I'll go ahead and zoom in here to see some of the rainfall here. Incredible amounts. Taking the radar out. I think that gives you perspective as far as why we have a significant issue here, look at these rivers here. The water has nowhere to go. The wind continues to push the ocean in and continue to pile up. You add the high tide on top of that. A few cycles, higher water and then there's the water falling from the sky. That's also adding to the problem. That water's trying to drain out, Hala, but it can't go anywhere until the winds turn direction and they're not going to for quite sometime and holding the storm surge in. Here's the wind gusts. 80 in Wilmington. 78 in Myrtle Beach. Nothing to sneeze at here and not what we had when it first landfall. The wind speed not as much of an issue, diminishes. The wind direction is still a problem and the while dumping several well, at this point here talking the potential for half a meter of water additional rainfall coming in. Happening in the next three days as the storm slowly heads off to the south and west and curls up to the north. We'll track this throughout the weekend because the danger is going to continue I think through next week.
[Gorani:] Yes. Right. Absolutely. We are going to be covering this with our team of correspondents and meteorologists because this is a story that will go that will certainly last throughout the weekend. Thank you. A larger threatens southeast Asia. We'll hear from a storm tracker and an aid official as the super typhoon hurdles toward the Philippines. We'll be right back.

[Cyril Vanier:] A mixed day for the White House. Great economic news but a very messy fight between the U.S. president and his former attorney Michael Cohen. Plus, from Greece to California record temperatures in many parts of the world are feeding devastating wildfires and Princess Leia lives on. The late Carrie Fisher will be featured in the next "Star Wars." Live from the CNN Center here in Atlanta, I'm Cyril Vanier. It's great to have you with us. U.S. President Donald Trump is fighting back against the latest acquisitions from his former attorney Michael Cohen. The president on Friday again denied knowing ahead of time about a meeting with Russian at Trump Tower in 2016. But sources say that's not how Cohen remembers it. Now if he is telling the truth it could become very problematic very quickly for the White House. Still the president had something to cheer about on Friday. The latest government figures show the U.S. economy is firing on all cylinders and Mr. Trump was more than happy to take full credit for it.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Good morning.
[Vanier:] All the same. The president has plenty to worry about as Special Counsel Robert Mueller cracks Mr. Trump's inner circle. CNN's Manu Raju breaks it down for us.
[Trump:] Going to make America great again...
[Raju Manu, Cnn Correspondent:] [voice over] President Donald Trump has repeatedly denied knowing about a meeting his son had with Russians in the heat of the 2016 campaign.
[Unknown:] The next president of the United States...
[Manu:] But his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, now prepared to contradict the president under oath. Sources tell CNN that Cohen is ready to tell Special Counsel Robert Mueller that Trump knew in advance about the now infamous Trump Tower meeting in which Donald Trump, Jr. was expecting that he would get dirt from the Russians on the Clinton Campaign. Cohen has privately asserted that he and others were present when Donald Trump, Jr. informed Trump of the Russian offer and that Trump gave the go ahead to have the meeting. The bombshell claim directly contradicts what Trump, Jr. told congressional investigators last year. Asked by the Senate Judiciary Committee, did you inform your father about the meeting or the underlying offer prior to the meeting? Trump, Jr. responded, "No I did not." He also said he did not know the identity of the person he called three times before and after that meeting and who's number was blocked and whether that person was his father. The news also calls into question Cohen's own testimony before Congress and his past public statements. A source tells CNN that Cohen did not tell the House Intelligence Committee last year that Trump had advance knowledge of the meeting. After Trump Jr. said he did not tell his father about the meeting.
[Donald Trump, Jr., Son Of Donald Trump President Of The United States:] There's nothing to tell.
[Manu:] Cohen tweeted: "So proud of Donald Trump, Jr. for being open, honest, and transparent to the American people." Trump also took to Twitter to push back on his longtime personal fixer. "I did not know of the meeting with my son, Don, Jr. Sounds to me like someone is trying to make up stories in order to get himself out of an unrelated jam." Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani also denied Cohen's claims and accused him of lying in an interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo.
[Rudy Giuliani:] I expected something like this from Cohen. He's been lying all week he's been lying for years.
[Manu:] But that is not how Giuliani characterized Cohen just weeks ago on CNN's State of the Union.
[Giuliani:] I do not expect that Michael Cohen is going to lie. I think he's going to tell the truth and if he does that we're home free.
[Manu:] Democrats said this opens a new front on the Russia probe.
[Rep. Adam Schiff,  California:] It effectively bring the issue of collusion or conspiracy right to the President's feet.
[Manu:] This claim wrapping up a week that saw a stunning public fallout between the president and one of his closest confidants starting with the recording revealed by CNN of Trump and Cohen...
[Unidentified Female:] I tried to tell him yes...
[Manu:] Discussing paying off a model who alleged an affair with Trump.
[Trump:] [Inaudible].
[Unidentified Male:] No, no.
[Manu:] And Thursday's revelation in the "Wall Street Journal" that the chief financial officer at the Trump Organization, Allen Weisselberg, has been subpoenaed to testify in a criminal investigation involving Cohen. Now in light of these contradictory accounts about that Trump Tower meeting from 2016, Democrats want to hear from Michael Cohen again on Capitol Hill. Some are asking him to come back, testify before the relevant committees and just in exactly explain what happened especially if it appears that he is saying something different to the special counsel than what he told lawmakers in Congress. Now at the same time, Donald Trump, Jr. also under renewed scrutiny from Democrats who are saying he should come back and are also calling in the Republican counterparts to issue subpoenas to the phone companies to determine who Donald Trump, Jr. called before and after that meeting took place in 2016. Of course that number has been blocked out but Republicans have resisted this for months and they're showing no signs of jumping on this now. Manu Raju, CNN, Washington.
[Vanier:] Criminal Defense Lawyer Troy Slaten joins us from Los Angeles. Troy, what is Cohen's strategy here?
[Troy Slaten, Actor, Attoreny, And Legal Analyst:] It's hard to guess. We've got truth, lies, and video tape. In the past he had said to congressional investigators under oath to Congress that President Trump didn't know about this meeting and now he's dangling out there that President Trump did know. This goes to the very heart of the allegation that the Trump Campaign colluded with the Russians in order to get an advantage in the 2016 election. Now collusion itself is not a crime but it looks very bad politically and it also puts both the president and Michael Cohen in hot water potentially legally.
[Vanier:] So how could Michael Cohen be using this to his advantage because we don't really know why he's doing what he's doing, why he's talking about the president, why his lawyer is releasing the tape that he released earlier this week. We can only try and read into his mind why do you think that could serve his own interests?
[Slaten:] Well one of the dangers of a special prosecutor or of any prosecutor really concentrating on one person or one set of facts is that the people that they are looking at will not only sing but compose meaning not only will he tell everything he knows in order to get out of trouble but maybe he will even invent facts that he thinks that prosecutors might want to hear in order to save his own skin. He's looking at protecting his family and his children.
[Vanier:] I want to ask you about that. I was wondering about that because that is the argument that Donald Trump is making in his tweet, right? He says, "Sounds to me like someone is trying to make up stories in order to get himself out of an unrelated jam. Taxi cabs maybe?" Apparently a questionable personal business dealing of Michael Cohen's. But can you really do that? Can you go to a prosecutor and just lie in order to get some kind of advantage or does the prosecutor bite on that?
[Slaten:] Cyril, you can try but it's a very dangerous game and we saw that with General Michael Flynn who lied to investigators and now has pled guilty to that federal crime. And so yes you can try and make something up but if the prosecutor finds out that you were lying to them when you were what they call being queen for a day, telling them everything you know, you have to make a proffer about every single thing that you know and if it's found that you lied about anything then not only is the deal off but everything you said can be used against you. So he is really playing with fire if he's inventing facts in order to save his own skin.
[Vanier:] Is it reasonable to infer from what you just said that Michael Cohen is probably telling the truth because he has a lot to lose if he's not.
[Slaten:] It's so hard to say because he had so much to lose when he was testifying before a congressional investigators and he was reportedly asked about this very thing about whether or not the president knew about the Trump Tower the infamous Trump Tower meeting before it happened and he said no and he even tweeted that in the package that you had right before our discussion he said oh it was so nice that Donald Trump, Jr. told the truth where he said his father didn't know about this. So this is putting potentially Donald Trump, Jr., in trouble. It's putting his father, the President of the United States, in the awkward position of maybe having to protect his son and it's putting Michael Cohen in the position of being asked were you lying then or are you lying now?
[Vanier:] And real quick, what do you make of Mr. Trump's and his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani's response, defense in the face of all this so far?
[Slaten:] Well he has to take this position of really beating down on Michael Cohen because look there is clearly no love lost between the two of them. He is now his former lawyer. He's leaked through his attorney private conversations that were had between himself and his client. As an attorney I shudder that that would ever happen but I think that the president and his lawyers really have to go on the attack in order to paint Michael Cohen and the special prosecutor and the entire investigation as being a witch hunt.
[Vanier:] Well that's precisely what they're doing. Criminal Defense Lawyer Troy Slaten. Thank you for joining us.
[Slaten:] Thanks for having me Cyril.
[Vanier:] Now new data shows the U.S. economy grew at its fastest rate since 2014. In the last three months, the U.S. GDP grew 4.1 percent over the same period last year. That surge is a result of a number of factors. First of all business investment rose as companies invested some of the money that they saved thanks to tax cuts. Second of all consumer spending and government spending also increased and somewhat counter intuitively the trade war has also actually helped as well because U.S. exports rose as foreign buyers stocked up on American products before they were hit with tariffs. If the economy grows at 3 percent for the entire year, and remember that's just a quarterly number, it will be the highest growth rate since 2005, a fact touted by President Donald Trump.
[Trump:] During each of the two previous administrations, we averaged just over 1.8 percent GDP growth. By contrast, we are now on track to hit an average GDP annual growth of over 3 percent and it could be substantially over 3 percent. Each point, by the way, means approximately $3 trillion and 10 million jobs.
[Vanier:] Despite what Mr. Trump said, the last two administrations had some strong economic quarters as well. George W. Bush hit a 6.9 percent GDP growth rate in 2003. That's a quarterly rate mind you comparing like with like. Then the Obama Administration reached 5.2 and if you go back to Bill Clinton's economy back in 2000, he hit 7.8. Monica Mehta joins us now, managing principal at the investment firm, Seventh Capital. Monica, if you had to grade Donald Trump and his economic performance. Out of 100, how much would you give him?
[Monica Mehta, Managing Principal At Seventh Capital:] I think in his own words he would give himself 110. I think right now I would give him an A, an A-. In general, you can't really complain about the economy right now. There are consumers feeling confident. In general, if you want a new job, the job market is good enough that you can leave your current position and find something new. Consumers generally feel confident and when they feel that way they're spending. Businesses have gotten a huge boon from the tax cut and you saw that play out in terms of spending in the first quarter which was up by 11 percent and in this last quarter it was up by 7 percent for things like infrastructure, equipment, intellectual property. But I think in this last set of GDP numbers that came out today, there was definitely a big give me in there for Donald Trump which came in the form of a one-time advance with a lot of companies that are fearing trade war that rushed to push exports now before tariffs come in in July and you saw in particular with soybeans. So there was a huge rush to export soybeans. When you look...
[Vanier:] So if that means that there's a temporary surge in exports then what happens when that trade war actually really kicks in and the tariffs really start to bite. That's got to go down then.
[Mehta:] Absolutely. So the reason that they're rushing to export is because they're expecting demand for U.S. goods to go down from China once the 25 percent tariffs hit and they're already starting to see in the category of soybeans where we did see this big rush to export, we're already seeing China, the buyers in China moving deliveries towards Brazil. So they are anticipating an impact for the categories that are going to face these tariffs.
[Vanier:] So I want to put up on the screen the Wall Street numbers for Friday because you would expect Wall Street to be exuberant, jubilant on a day when we understand that there's 4.1 percent economic growth for the second quarter. In fact Wall Street was down -0.3 percent. Not a huge number, but it's still down; it's still in the red. Why?
[Mehta:] Well I think in the short term when you look day to day markets are not perfect. There could be a number of different data points that cause markets to behave a certain way but I think looking into the third quarter and the fourth quarter there's another really important nugget that came out with today GDP numbers which is business inventories. So business inventories are much, much lower than they are typically low enough to the point that economists are actually projecting that this 4 percent GDP number that we saw for the second quarter could actually actually be closer to 5 when they come back and report for the next quarter. The other you could see is as businesses build up these inventories that are not currently shown in the numbers, a boom to third quarter and fourth quarter production. So those are two things that could continue to push this economy along that also were sort of highlighted in today's numbers.
[Vanier:] So does that mean these numbers are sustainable and that we might be even seeing even better numbers in spite of the fact that we're moving into a trade war with China.
[Mehta:] You know I think I think there's two big things that people should be looking at. One is what's going to happen with these tariffs and what's going to happen with trade wars. I think that is actually the biggest risk factor that we're facing for the markets and for the economy and it can just be as little as the threat of a trade war that can make people and businesses pull back. The second thing is interest rates. So what's going to happen to interest rates? Are they going to continue to go up and at what point do short-term rates get higher than long-term rates? That's what we call interest rate inversion. When that happens, almost for the last 40 years you see this very predictable pattern of the stock market basically hitting its peak within six months and then another six months after that bottoming out; it's almost like clockwork. So when you start to see that movement happening with interest rates, you know that you're up for trouble.
[Vanier:] Monica Mehta, thank you very much for coming on the show. Always a pleasure to speak to you. A deadly inferno engulfing homes, this one in California but it's just one of dozens of devastating fires across the globe right now. We'll tell you about that when we come back.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you for being with me on this Friday. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN. Let's get to it. The president has just left, Air Force One wheels up there at Joint Base Andrews on his way for this first overseas trip. But he is carrying some heavy baggage, his frustration over the appointment of a special counsel to investigate if his campaign had any ties to Russia, new revelations in the timeline and perhaps reasoning behind the president's decision to fire James Comey, the now former FBI director. Today, you had the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, telling House members he knew it was going to happen, it being the firing, a full day before he wrote that letter of recommendation. Remember, this letter was sent to the president to highlight James Comey's behavior and recommend new leadership. Today, Rosenstein refused to answer questions on who specifically asked him to write the letter. With me now, CNN political director David Chalian. David Chalian, if he knew that Comey was going to be fired before writing the memo, why write the memo?
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Well, remember, there was a meeting that we have previously reported on with Rosenstein and Sessions and the president before that final decision was made. And so it's not terribly surprising, I guess, that Rosenstein knew beforehand. Here's the discrepancy. This is what is so odd of where we are right now, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Chalian:] You will recall that, initially, after the firing, everything that the White House did was sort of hanging on this Rod Rosenstein memo. But then the president completely walked away from that, told NBC News, no, no, no, I was going to fire Comey regardless of the memo. That was after we had learned that Rosenstein, according to sources, was not very happy with the way that the rollout of the Comey firing went and that everything was sort of being hung on him. And so then all of a sudden the White House changed its tune and went to, you know, the president said he knew regardless of the memo that he was going to fire Comey, and, remember, said in that same interview that Russia was on his mind when thinking about it. Why are we now back, after the president's press conference yesterday...
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Chalian:] ... with Rosenstein on the Hill to the original explanation, which, by the way, nobody was buying, that this was all about Comey's poor treatment of the Hillary Clinton investigation?
[Baldwin:] OK. With everything you have just said, and add on several layers of complications and stories swirling in Washington, you have now the president up in the air heading first to Saudi Arabia. David Chalian, is this trip coming at exactly the right moment for him or exactly the worst time?
[Chalian:] It depends on how the trip goes. If it goes well, it's at the right moment. If there are problems on this trip that expose either, you know, some lack of preparation or lack of competence or what have you, that could dangerously feed a narrative that's out there. But just watching the images, as you showed them, of Air Force One taking off, of him crossing the tarmac with the first lady to board the plane, it struck me watching that like, wow, we haven't seen President Trump be sort of operating in the traditional visuals of the presidency because of all of this controversy around the firing of Comey and the rationale and whether or not he shared intelligence and pictures with Russians in the Oval Office. And all of a sudden, you look at this, you're like, wow, this is an opportunity for him to try, at least from a day-to-day messaging perspective, to get the presidency back on course, because it clearly has left their control in terms of day-to-day messaging. And this does open that opportunity to try to put forth some proactive messaging that they want to get out there about their world agenda.
[Baldwin:] Looking presidential, meeting with these foreign leaders overseas.
[Chalian:] Exactly.
[Baldwin:] If it goes well, to your point. Mr. Chalian, thank you very much.
[Chalian:] Thanks, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Let me bring in thank you. Let me bring in a couple more voices, including someone who has worked alongside Robert Mueller at the FBI. Michael Zeldin is a former independent counsel and federal prosecutor. And also with me, CNN legal analyst Paul Callan. So, gentlemen, good to see both of you. And, Michael, let me just begin with you sort of on the same question I posed to David Chalian and his whole point about this like alternating narrative between the Comey firing was because of the Rosenstein memo and then not because of the Rosenstein memo and then back because of the Rosenstein memo. Let me read a piece of this. This is from the DOJ. This is part of Rosenstein's statement quote "My memorandum is not a statement of reasons to justify a for-cause termination. My memorandum is not a survey of FBI morale or performance." So, was it written to justify the president's actions, or what?
[Michael Zeldin, Former Federal Prosecutor:] So, exactly. My question to you, essentially, was, so then what is it?
[Baldwin:] Right.
[Zeldin:] If it's written just a chronology of things, complaints about the Comey press conferences and treatment of Hillary Clinton for the historical record of it, fine. But it was used to be the pretext for the firing. Then, as David said, it was not the pretext. And now it's really hard to understand, why would you write that memo knowing that the president is going to fire Director Comey? It seems like it gives cover to something that didn't really need to be part of Rosenstein's mandate. The thing also that you touched upon in the earlier segment when you were talking with the Ben Wittes interview...
[Baldwin:] Right.
[Zeldin:] ... remember, Comey says about Rosenstein, he was a survivor, meaning that he's been in the department a really long time under Republican and Democratic administrations. And in order to do that, Comey says...
[Baldwin:] Compromising.
[Zeldin:] ... or implies, you make compromises. And so you wonder whether this is the exact type of example that Comey was alluding to in his Wittes conversation, that this guy will do things that are compromising that he, Comey, might not do, which he, Comey, felt uncomfortable about.
[Baldwin:] Point taken, as his point was Comey or Rosenstein has worked under the Bush administration, Obama and now confirmed for Trump. Paul Callan, you have an interesting theory, that simply the president is acting as he would in the private business sector.
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Contributor:] Yes. The more I have thought about this, in the private sector, if you don't like somebody and you want to fire them...
[Baldwin:] You have made up your mind.
[Callan:] You're going to fire them, and now you have to have a reason to justify it so you don't get sued later on. So you call in the H.R. department and you say, take a look at his record. I want to know if I have got grounds to fire him, if there's something there that would justify it. You may call your lawyer in to say, would there be any danger in firing him? And the other example that I thought of, Trump is running the White House like he did with the set of the celebrity. Remember about people get fired...
[Baldwin:] "The Apprentice"?
[Zeldin:] "The Apprentice." Remember about people get fired on "The Apprentice"? He will go around the table asking one person to criticize another in how they sold the product or displayed the product, in much the same way he went to Rosenstein and said, I want you to give me reasons, problems that have to do with Comey. Maybe he doesn't tell him, I'm going to use those reasons to fire Comey. And like a good lawyer, Rosenstein goes back and he drafts a memo of the problems that he has seen. And all of that, then, is used by Trump to justify the firing.
[Baldwin:] Sure. Maybe that is a piece of it. And I'm actually being told hold on just a second, Paul Callan. And, Michael, as well, stand by, because we are getting some breaking news here. Sorry to cut that conversation short. But now we have "The New York Times" reporting that President Trump told the Russians one day after firing James Comey that removing the FBI director would take the pressure off involving the investigation over possible campaign ties to Russia. He has also apparently, according to this paper, referred to Comey and I quote as a nut job. We're going to talk about that. We will be right back.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] We will hear from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo live shortly.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] It's a one- time shot and I think it's going to work out.
[Briggs:] President Trump striking an optimistic tone as he prepares to make history. We are monitoring a White House briefing expected to begin in just moments.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] But digging in his heels on trade after a rocky weekend at the G7, why he is isolating himself from U.S. allies and the global reaction? Good morning, everyone. Welcome to EARLY START. Monday morning. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. Monday, June 11th. We welcome all of our viewers here in the U.S. and around the world. It's 5:00 a.m. Eastern Time, 5:00 p.m. in Singapore time, and that's where we begin. President Trump getting ready to do something no U.S. president has ever done. In just hours, he'll be face-to-face with the leader of North Korea. It is late afternoon in Singapore. It has been a busy day there. President Trump met with Singapore's prime minister and other government officials for a working lunch. The president joined by top aides and members of his cabinet including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Chief of Staff John Kelly, and National Security Adviser John Bolton.
[Romans:] President Trump is insisting this is a one-time shot for Kim Jong-un to achieve peace and prosperity for his people.
[President Trump:] I think within the first minute I'll know.
[Unidentified Female:] How?
[President Trump:] Just my touch, my feel. That's what I do. I think I'll know pretty quickly whether or not in my opinion something positive will happen.
[Romans:] North Korean state media reporting Kim is open to discussing denuclearization and durable peacekeeping on the Korean Peninsula. CNN White House Correspondent, Kaitlan Collins, live in the briefing room where we are expecting to hear from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Kaitlan, fill us in.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's right, Christine. We are waiting to hear from Secretary of State Pompeo. He is going to brief reporters in the next half hour. likely we will let us know a little bit more about what tomorrow will look like and that first handshake between President Trump and Kim Jong-un. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his delegation have been meeting with North Korean officials all day hammering out those last-minute details ahead of this historic meeting. He sent out a statement earlier today saying that the president is prepared and that one thing we should note the U.S. position remains clear and unchanged. Of course, that position has been that they want the north Koreans to commit to denuclearization. That is complete, verified and irreversible denuclearization. The words of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other State Department officials ahead of this meeting. But we are learning a little bit more about what tomorrow will look like before Secretary of State Mike Pompeo even briefs reporters. That is President Trump and Kim Jong-un will meet one-on-one without advisers and without staffers, the officials with them in the room when they do get started tomorrow. That it means it will just be President Trump, Kim Jong-un and their translators in the room. That underscores two things. One, this meeting is really about underscoring that personal relationship between the two of them, that first meeting. Something President Trump said he will know and get a sense within the first minute of sitting down with Kim Jong-un, what he is really serious about and what he is serious about committing to. But also, one thing that we can take away from that is the accounts of both of these men is all we are going to have from that meeting. What is said, we are only going to know from Kim Jong-un and President Trump. There will not been any one else in the room to corroborate what happened. So, there could be two sides of what unfolds in that meeting and that is what we'll be waiting to see. But yes, Secretary of State Pompeo will be here soon. He will let us know what we are going to be expecting to see in less than 24 hours away from that meeting Dave and Christine.
[Romans:] OK, thank you so much, Kaitlan. We see the room filling up behind you. Come back when you have more. Thank you.
[Briggs:] So as President Trump tries to make peace with the long-time enemy, he's simultaneously driving a wedge with America's relationship with its closest allies. Overnight, the president attacking members of the G7 on Twitter complaining about massive trade surplus. He says the U.S. paying almost the entire cost of the NATO. The president refusing to sign the G7 communique once he heard Prime Minister Justin Trudeau say Canada plans to retaliate against Mr. Trump's steel tariffs.
[Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister Of Canada:] I have made it very clear to the president that it is not something we relish doing, but it is something that we absolutely will do because Canadians are polite and reasonable, but we will not be pushed around.
[Briggs:] President Trump calling Trudeau's comments dishonest and weak. And listen to the president's top advisers piling on.
[Larry Kudlow, Director, White House National Economic Council:] He really kind of stabbed us in the back. He really actually, you know what, he did a great disservice to the whole G7.
[Peter Navarro, Assistant To The President:] There is a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump.
[Briggs:] That's a special place in hell for the Canadian prime minister. Let's go live to Berlin and bring in CNN Senior International Correspondent, Atika Shubert. Good morning, Atika, what is the E.U. response to all of this?
[Atika Shubert, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Clearly very disappointed, but not surprised at this point. I mean, Chancellor Merkel had an interview last night where she said, look, it would be nice to have a good relationship with the United States, but it is not something she can count on anymore. And it's precisely if anybody was doing a disservice to the G7, Germany believes that was President Trump. If anything speaks about the way Germany sees how the G7 went, it is this photo. This is on the cover of almost every newspaper here. It says, "Europe will not be intimidated." It shows Chancellor Merkel leaning over and almost lecturing President Trump as he sits there with his arms folded. This picture went out the same day that President Trump was leaving for the summit in Singapore. It shows how clearly and released by the chancellor's office. It is very clear that they feel that the G7 countries are sticking together on this despite the fact that President Trump seems to want to pull out of the international agreements, whether it's trade or climate change Dave.
[Briggs:] Atika Shubert live for us in Berlin. What an image it was, one that explains just so much about our relationship with our allies. Thank you.
[Romans:] It is viewed differently. People who are Trump supporters like to see? It is all the liberal elites. Let's bring in Global Affairs Analyst, David Rohde, online news director for the "New Yorker." Gordan Chang is a columnist for the "Daily Beast" and author of "Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes On The World," and in Washington, our friend, CNN Political Analyst, Josh Rogin, columnist for "The Washington Post." Good morning to you all. Gordon, I want to start with you. I guess, let's go around here. What are the expectations for this summit? One-on-one, these two men and translators, one-on-one before this thing gets started is remarkable.
[Gordon Chang, Columnist, "the Daily Beast":] Well, it certainly is remarkable. You know, up to now, it's only been the North Koreans who have made concessions. They've released the three Americans last month. Also, Kim Jong-un through the South Korean president has made denuclearization pledges. But at this summit, it changes, because just by having this meeting, we give North Korea a big victory. Those photographs will be played throughout North Korea for as long as Kim Jong-un is ruler. What did we get in return for this? I don't think we got very much. They are still hammering out the details. I don't think they will come to agreement on what we really need.
[Briggs:] David, realistic expectations for this summit?
[David Rohde, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] I think there will be some sort of communique and I think President Trump will declare it a historic breakthrough. The devil is in the details. This has to be better than the Iran nuclear deal. There must be more inspections, Americans with total unfettered access to every site they want in North Korea. That's the bar that President Trump himself has set.
[Romans:] You know, Josh, on denuclearization, it is having nukes that got him here in the first place. He's done what his father and grandfather couldn't have done. He has now appeared on the world stage. What do you expect from the meeting?
[Josh Rogin, Cnn Political Analyst:] Right. Like David said the devil is in the details. What we're talking about, Mike Pompeo is talking about is complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization. That's the end goal. No one thinks we are going to get that anytime soon. So, the question is what will he promise and what is the timeline and what do we give in return? And remember, there is no way to really enforce this in the near term, right? We don't know what they have. We are not going to have inspections for a long time. They have a huge program that is spread over the country. So, basically, what we are getting is a promise. In exchange for that promise, we have to give them something. Then everyone is going to have to decide is that sufficient for what they promised, and we start this months-long process with the north Koreans. That will test all of our diplomatic skill and administration's range and it will include our allies as well. That is a big project we are only that we're only beginning to wrap our minds around.
[Briggs:] A lot of questions for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. We will hear from him shortly and join that in its entirety. But Gordon to that point, denuclearization, what does it mean to North Korea? What do they want in exchange for it?
[Chang:] Well, for them it means basically the U.S. getting off the peninsula. Breaking alliance with South Korea and even Japan. In the past, if you go back two or three years, they have been talking about the U.S. giving up its nukes. So, there is a whole bunch of things that that term covers. From our point of view, of course, it is them dismantling their program and infrastructure for the program and also verification as Josh talked about.
[Romans:] All of that a win for China, by the way, too, right. I mean, a retreat from the U.S. on the peninsula and less of a U.S. role there.
[Chang:] Yes, I mean, certainly, if that were the case. I don't think the U.S. will walk away from South Korea and Japan. China has a lot of risks here. you know, Kim Jong-un ended up in Singapore on Air China flight. That's the flag carrier for China and basically what Beijing is saying to Trump is, look, this is my vessel. He is my boy. Don't hurt him.
[Briggs:] They've met twice. Xi and Kim ahead of this summit, important context.
[Romans:] David, meanwhile, there's not just this happening. I mean, the president is spinning these plates, right. He is blasting NATO. He is insulting Justin Trudeau over a relatively small $600 million in dairy trade. He's wanting Russia back into the G7. He is insulting Angela Merkel. What is the strategy here?
[Rohde:] I'm not sure. I want to be fair to the president. Maybe it is I'm tough with everybody presentation. I'm sorry, he is wrong on the facts. Overall, when you include services the U.S. actually has a trade surplus with Canada. We protect tobacco just as they protect dairy, all countries do this. So, he's wrong on his facts and that is why, you know, Trudeau and these European leaders are so angry. He keeps exaggerating these issues that he said he's doing to defend American workers, but he's false in the claims he makes.
[Romans:] Is he trying to look strong for the North Koreans?
[Briggs:] Let's talk about that because Larry Kudlow, the chief economic adviser to President Trump told Jake Tapper that this is about North Korea and showing strength ahead of the summit. Here is Kudlow yesterday.
[Kudlow:] He is not going to permit any show of weakness on the trip to negotiate with North Korea nor should he.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] This was about North Korea?
[Kudlow:] Of course, it was in large part.
[Tapper:] Trudeau said as Trump was going to Singapore
[Kudlow:] One thing leads to another. They are all related. Kim must not see American weakness.
[Briggs:] So, Josh, if you are North Korea, what do you take from all this?
[Rogin:] I mean, it is really a baffling explanation because we don't know what the North Koreans can take from this. They are just as likely to see that and think here is the president who can change his mind on the plane after the meeting and tweet away everything that we just did based on a perceived slate that didn't exist. The other thing they could take away from this is that United States is not really standing by its allies. This is about the Koreans and Japanese. If we are going to throw the Canadians under the bus, the Japanese must be freaking out right now.
[Romans:] Again, to go back to the dairy point, the $600 million annual trade in dairy where the Canadians are protecting small farmers in rural Canada the same way that David points out, the Americans try to protect small industries. That is just the way it works. I want to read something from "The Wall Street Journal" about how the president is a disrupter, but at some point, you can't just disrupt. It says this, "Donald Trump has proven in 18 months that he can disrupt the global status quo for better Iran and worse trade. The question as he brawls with his G7 allies after their annual summit and now meets with adversary Kim Jong-un. Whether the president knows the disruption isn't enough? Sooner or later he has to contribute to a better world order instead of nearly blowing up the old one. And David, I guess, to your point, you don't know what the strategy if there is a strategy there, but at some point, you have to stop disrupting and sort of have a legacy.
[Rohde:] This is important. This is an editorial page that supported Trump throughout this. You are right. Where is the strategy? Why start a trade war just before you have this historic meeting with North Korea? That's what makes no sense. You can put off the fight with the G7 if you want, but there's no strategy here. It's all, you know, reactive and chaotic, and I don't think chaos makes you look strong.
[Briggs:] To the point, we've gotten out of the TPP, Paris Climate, and NAFTA negotiations going nowhere, the Iran nuclear deal. Can the president build consensus among our allies or even our enemies? We will discuss that in just a bit. Gordon, David, Josh, thank you.
[Romans:] A lot going on this morning. The president suggesting Russia should have a seat at the table after the G7 Summit? A live report from Moscow next.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us. Just moments ago, President Trump couldn't get Congress to repeal Obamacare, so now using executive power to roll parts of it back.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] This will cost the United States government virtually nothing. And people will have great, great health care. And when I say people, I mean by the millions and millions.
[King:] Plus, more accounts of presidential anger and mood swings, an unhappy chief of staff, a former top aide said to be worried about a cabinet coup. It's members of the president's team who are the sources of all this. But
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It's frankly disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write and people should look into it.
[King:] And the president says Puerto Rico was a disaster before Hurricane Maria and the federal government can't help indefinitely. Then his team, yet again, tries to clean it up.
[Ben Carson, Hud Secretary:] It should not be abandoned.
[Rep. Maxine Waters , California:] And you don't think that they should be shamed for its own plight, is that right?
[Carson:] There is no question that there have been a lot of difficulties in Puerto Rico. The ended up
[Waters:] Should they be shamed for its own plight?
[Carson:] In debt. I don't think it
[Waters:] You talked about
[Carson:] I don't think it is beneficial to go around shaming people in general.
[King:] Just moments ago at the White House, President Trump taking the matter of health care into his own hands, signing a new executive order to begin dismantling parts of the Affordable Care Act. President Trump says this executive order, especially because Congress was unable to act on Obama, is good for all Americans.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The competition will be staggering. Insurance companies will be fighting to get every single person signed up. And you will be hopefully negotiating, negotiating, negotiating and you'll get such low prices for such great care. Should have been done a long time ago and it could have been done a long time ago.
[King:] The president says it will cost the government almost nothing. It will help millions. Your premiums will go down. Is that what this executive action will really do? Let's get straight to CNN Money's Tami Luhby in New York. Tami, is the president right here or is he perhaps overpromising?
[Tami Luhby, Cnn Money Senior Writer:] Well, we still don't know all of the details and it may take months before we do. More broadly, the executive order aims to increase competition and consumer choice at lower prices. Critics, however, are very concerned that this is going to dismantle or not dismantle but further destabilize Obamacare by syphoning off all of the young and healthy people into these new health care options that he's offering and leaving the exchanges with the sicker people, which means that they're going to be having having to pay higher prices. So let's look specifically. He's looking at allowing more small businesses to form or join association health plans. These health plans allow groups of businesses, like bakeries, to go across state lines and join together to buy coverage. But the concerns are that this coverage may not adhere to all of the Obamacare protections and then the people in them, they would be able to have cheaper plans. However, so the people who may not be able to get into them would be left again with more expensive plans. Then also the administration want to offer more of these short-term policies. Right now these policies are available for 90 days. They used to be available for up to a year. The administration wants to make them more broadly available. But these plans don't have to adhere to Obamacare at all. They can, you know, base their coverage on your medical history, they can charge whatever premiums they want, they can deny you coverage, they can also offer skimpy plans. So, yes, for the young and healthy people, are these good options? Sure, if they don't need coverage. But for the sicker people, not so good. And then finally, the administration also want to allow more employers to put money into these employer-funded plans to let their employees buy coverage on their own in the exchanges or elsewhere.
[King:] Tami Luhby with the details. And an important point, we have to wait to see the executive order and then see how it's implemented in the marketplace. But the president making his announcement today. Thanks so much, Tami. With us here to share their reporting and their insights, CNN's Dana Bash, Olivier Knox with "Yahoo! News," "McClatchy" Franco Ordonez, and Molly Ball of "The Atlantic." The president stepping in here, in part because he's been frustrated time and time and time again that his Republican Party his Republican Party has not been able to do anything for the first nine months. I was listening to Dr. Zeke Emmanuel, a, you know, an Obama-ite, you know, who was helped part of Obamacare, did made an important point politically. Now that the president is doing this, now that the government is getting involved under Trump letterhead, we don't know exactly how this is going to play out. The president says it's going to cost nothing. It's going to lower premiums for millions. It's going to increase competition. Everybody's going to win. He is putting his personal stamp on this. You can't just blame Obamacare anymore.
[Olivier Knox, "yahoo! News":] Yes, it's not the first time, though. I think you really need to look at this in conjunction with something else that they've been doing much more quietly, which is to say that they've cut back on the advertising ahead of the open enrollment period, which starts in a few weeks. They have reduced the amount of navigator health, in other words, that the professionals who were helping Americans sign up for the Obamacare exchanges. This is sort of a companion piece to that. You're right, it does put his stamp of approval on it. He talked about how it should have been done long, long ago. It was tried long ago. Or something very much like it was tried very long ago and the nonpartisan investigative arm of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, found vast problems with what roughly what he's proposing. Although Tami's right, that we need to actually see the order before we really draw a conclusion.
[King:] We need to see the order. But just days ago the president was saying, I had a phone conversation with Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, trying to work on a temporary bipartisan fix to Obamacare. Isn't that inconsistent with executive actions that then strip away key pieces of Obamacare? Which is it that the president really wants?
[Molly Ball, "the Atlantic":] Well, the president being inconsistent I would argue is nothing new. But it's but what was clear, I mean, I think what those actions had in common was that he just wanted to get something done. And he was tremendously frustrated. Where have we heard that before, a president who couldn't get Congress to bend to his will and decided to issue executive orders and, according to his opponents, governed by fiat instead. It sounds a lot like President Obama.
[King:] Sure does.
[Ball:] And, you know, Trump was critical of that at the time. But, you know, it's always been the case with Trump that he wants to do the deal and he doesn't really care what's in the deal. Just he just wanted something in front of him that he could sign to say that he did something. But the potential problem, depending on how this plays out, is that as you as you said, it does put him on the hook for whatever the consequences are.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] He might not care about the details of this, although, you know, maybe it's an accident, maybe it's not. This is a really core conservativeRepublican policy initiative that they have been pushing for a very long time, to be able to buy insurance policies across state lines. During the Republican primary process, I remember asking him about health care and this is the one thing that he would seize on. H would talk about he would draw circles with is finger and talk about the state lines and say that you have to be able to to buy across state because he knew that that was a really important part of the conservative credo. And that's the main reason why you saw Rand Paul sitting there making a speech, which even the president remarked was a big feat.
[Franco Ordonez, "mcclatchy":] Right. Let's also remember that Steven Bannon's white board back when, and he had his list of priorities, repeal and replace was right there. Now, a lot of critics are saying that he's a big hypocritical by doing an executive order. But, really, will his base care? I mean this is such an issue that is so important them.
[Bash:] No.
[Ball:] Well, his base will care if their health care costs keep going up despite his promises.
[Ordonez:] Right.
[Ball:] And to your point, that was the core promise was repeal and replace and this isn't that.
[King:] Right.
[Ball:] It may, according to some experts, gut Obamacare, but it is not repeal and it is not replace.
[King:] And he says, maybe we'll come back to that. He wants Congress to come back to that. That won't happen in 2017. This president, and the Republican leadership, said that would be top priority this year. It's not going to happen, repeal and replace. The infrastructure is not going to happen. Everybody mentioned Rand Paul. Rand Paul was there. He actually got to speak at the White House event introducing the vice president, who introduced the president. A key player in this. Also a key player when the Senate votes on a budget agreement next week. His vote is not there yet. They need that for tax reform. Listen to the president talking about, hey, I got Rand Paul on my side.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I can say, when you get Rand Paul on your side, it has to be positive. That I can tell you. Well, I I was just saying, as he's getting up and saying all these wonderful things about what we're going to be announcing, I said, boy, that's pretty unusual. I'm very impressed.
[King:] It is remarkable in the sense that if you rewind the tape just a few weeks, just a few weeks, it was Rand Paul who was one of the roadblocks to repealing and replacing, which is that signature promise they were all supposed to do. He kept calling it Obamacare light. We weren't really doing it. And
[Knox:] And and he disclosed on Twitter that he and the president have been working on this plan for months.
[King:] Months.
[Knox:] Right. So that overlaps with his opposition to repeal and replace, which had the president describing him as a malign influence on the debate. But if they were working on this for months, Rand Paul knew the entire time that he could oppose repeal and replace with no significant costs in terms of his relationship with the president since they were working on this. It's an amazing little bit of sort of behind the scenes
[King:] I know I can defy you and my own leadership here and hold out because we've got a plan b.
[Knox:] This is all for show, in effect, is what he was is what he was telling us.
[Ball:] Well, but it's also a very neat illustration of the difference between someone like Rand Paul and the president, right? For Trump, politics is personal. It's about relationships. It's, are you on my side or not? For Rand Paul, it's about policy. And he opposed the Senate plan on policy grounds. And I think that if Trump thinks that he can get Paul on his side on the budget, no matter what's in it, he's sorely mistaken because Paul is again going to be looking at what's in that in terms of policy.
[King:] It was interesting. Listen to the president's interview with Sean Hannity last night. We'll get to some other parts of it later in the program. But the president making the case that, you know, he's acting with executive order on this point, in part because he can't keep his own party together, but he says the Democrats somehow manage to stay together. Oh, we don't have that. I'm sorry. Let me read it to you. It's interesting, one thing with the Democrats, they oh, let's go.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It's interesting. The one thing with the Democrats, they stay together like glue. They are lousy politicians and their policies are terrible, but they do stick together. We have great policies, but the Republicans tend not to be as unified.
[King:] To your point about using executive action, it sounds a lot like President Obama, looks a lot like President Obama. That's exactly what the Democrats said throughout the Obama administration, the Republicans stick together and we're all over the place.
[Bash:] Yes. It's a lot easier to stick together when you're in the opposition.
[King:] Right.
[Bash:] It's just that's just the way it works. I do think that he has a point. And I've talked to so many Republicans I'm sure you all have as well about when Democrats were in charge, the way it wasn't easy, it was very hard, but the way that Nancy Pelosi in the House, Harry Reid in the Senate, and then, of course, the Obama presidency, found ways to bridge the very big gaps between Democrats, within the Democratic Party, to get things like Obamacare passed. They weren't successful at other things, like increasing the coal issue, things like that. But they were on that. And that is the difference between kind of the DNA of how the Democratic caucus works and the Republican caucus. It is different. Much easier with the minority.
[Ball:] Well, it also took a lot of effort, right?
[Bash:] A lot.
[Ball:] And that and that effort is not being exerted to bring the Republican Party together. It took a lot of negotiation and compromising on the part of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to bring together the caucus that has very different political and policy priorities. We don't see Trump doing the same kinds of things, or the Republican leadership able or willing to do the same kinds of things to get everybody into the tent and behind this particular policy.
[Ordonez:] Well, they also have so many openings with they have so many issues, whether it's immigration and others, where they're pushing issues that they know Republican leadership is actually on their side. These are opportunities for them to jump in. And they know they can they can rally their own base around that, but they also know that under the surface there's a lot of Republicans who would like to jump in there too.
[King:] Everybody sit tight. One second, sit tight. Got to work in a quick break. But when we come back, stories of chaos in the Trump White House are almost daily, if not hourly. But here's a new nugget in one. Did chief strategist Steve Bannon warn the president, the biggest threat to you is not impeachment but a coup within your own cabinet?

[Berman:] All right, we do have some breaking news for you this morning. There's been an incident reported at Royal Air Force Station Mildenhall. This is in Suffolk, England. And this air base there has a significant U.S. military presence. CNN's Phil Black watching the situation for us, joining us with the details. Phil, what have you learned?
[Phil Black, Cnn International Correspondent:] Yes. So, John, it was described by the ministry of defense here as a significant security incident. What we have since learned just recently is that it seems someone in a car has tried to force their way, ram their way on to this particular base by driving or trying to drive through a checkpoint close to the main entrance. We don't know how far they got onto the base but that one person we now understand is in custody. The base went into full lockdown. But, just moments ago, we are told the all clear was given. So one person is in custody. The local police are now leading the investigation into just what this person was trying to do, what the motivation was here. It is technically a Royal Air Force base. A British air force base. But you're, right, it is largely used by the United States. And that's where there is a significant contingent of air-to-air refueling aircraft. That's their home, their current home at the moment. So a significant security incident. One person in custody. This guy tried to, we understand, ram his way on to the base, but didn't make it and the all clear has now been given. John.
[Berman:] All right, that is good news. Phil Black for us. Thanks so much, Phil.
[Harlow:] So, President Trump predicting he will be exonerated in Bob Mueller's special counsel Russia investigation and that he will get that in writing. It's CNN exclusive reporting. We have it for you, next.

[Baldwin:] More HR troubles for Fox News, host Eric Bolling has suspended by the network as the investigation complains that he sent lewd photos to female coworkers. His profile has been scrubbed from the company's social media. He took to Twitter and said, overwhelmed by all the support I received. Thank you. I look forward to clearing my name asap. Let me bring in CNN Money senior media reporter, Oliver Darcy. What exactly are the allegations here?
[Oliver Darcy, Cnn Money Senior Media Reporter:] Huffington Post reported on Friday that Eric Bolling a few years ago had apparently sent lewd text messages to some of his female colleagues and it had been kind of rumored around, one reporter from "The Daily Beast," noted that he had chased the story around for a while, but no one had actually reported this until Friday. And now he's been suspended from Fox News as they investigate.
[Baldwin:] OK. On a Facebook page, this one accuser, Caroline Heldman said, my only surprise is that it took so long for people to come forward about Bolling's behavior Which has been wildly inappropriate for years. In fact, some of his behavior happened on TV.
[Unidentified Female:] But we have the American Revolution and the Boston Tea Party, we have the civil rights movement and the Montgomery bus boycott. This is part of America's fabric. I am happy to see it playing out in Wisconsin. The senator from Wisconsin, one of the senators thinks this is illegal. Eric?
[Eric Bolling, Suspended Fox News:] I'm shocked the great Dr. "McHottie" said it's the most American thing you can do.
[Baldwin:] Dr. "McHottie?"
[Darcy:] Clearly it seems
[Baldwin:] No. Not OK.
[Darcy:] It seems like he was joking but that doesn't necessarily mean it's OK, right? It seems like he was joking but that doesn't necessarily mean it's OK, right? I think that clip happened when Roger Ailes was still at Fox, and that may have been more acceptable back in Roger Ailes' era.
[Baldwin:] What is Fox saying now?
[Darcy:] Fox is saying they're investigating whether or not he sent these messages. They're not commenting beyond that. Of course, Bolling is denying this vociferously. But it does sort of speak to the larger culture at Fox. You have Roger Ailes who was forced out over sexual allegations, you have Bill O'Reilly who was forced out. You have two others, you have Charles Payne at Fox Business and Eric Bolling on suspension as Fox investigates allegations.
[Baldwin:] That's a list. Oliver Darcy, thank you so much. Coming up next, Stephen Miller becomes the latest Trump team member to get a celebrity impersonator after stepping into the White House briefing room. Actor and comedian Pauly Shore joins us live to explain the backstory of this funny or die spoof.

[Sciutto:] Well, this just into CNN. Charlie Rose is now out at both CBS and PBS. The company says it's fired Rose as his job of co-host of the morning show. PBS has just announced it's terminating its contract with the broadcast legend. It comes after "The Washington Post" published a story based on interviews with eight women who accused Rose of making unwanted sexual advancements. The women either worked for or wanted to work for "The Charlie Rose Show." His co-hosts addressed it at the top of the show.
[Gayle King, Charlie Rose's Co-host:] I certainly echo that. I have to say, Norah, I really am still reeling. I got one hour and 42 minutes of sleep last night. Both my son and daughter called me. Oprah called me and said am, I OK, I am not OK. After reading that story in "The Post," it was troubling to read. The women who spoke up because they were afraid, I hope now they will take the steps to speak up to that this becomes a moment of truth. You know, I've enjoyed a friendship and partnership with Charlie for the past five years. I've held him in such high regard. And I'm struggling because what do you say, how do you say when someone that you deeply care about has done something that is so horrible. How do you wrap your brain around that? I'm really grappling with that. That said, Charlie does not get a pass here. He doesn't get a pass from anyone in this room. We're all deeply affected. We're all rocked by this.
[Sciutto:] I should note that Rose has apologized, said he's embarrassed by his behavior, but has added he does not believe all of the actions are true. The Washington Post" said, since the story's publication, more women have come forward with similar stories. I want to bring in Hadas Gold, CNN media reporter. Remarkable timing. "The Washington Post" report came out yesterday. Swift action by PBS and CBS since then?
[Hadas Gold, Cnn Media Reporter:] Exactly. Time moves at a different pace it feels though. You're right, both PBS and CBS have taken swift action, most of it surrounding Charlie Rose's show by PBS. CBS said they received no official complaints about his actions at CBS. Nonetheless, they did take action. This is from a memory that the president sent out, he said, "Despite Charlie's important journalist contribution to our news division, there is absolutely nothing more important in this or any organization than insuring safe and professional workplace. We need to be such a place". And PBS, just minutes ago, announced they're terminating their relationship with Charlie Rose, where a lot of these allegations took place around the show. They said, "In light of yesterday's revelations, PBS has terminated its relationship with Charlie Rose and cancelled distribution of his programs. PBS expects all the producers to be treated with dignity and respect." Clearly, companies moving very fast when these revelations come forward. We're in a new sort of world here where companies don't sit by anymore. People are losing jobs. Movies are changing. Kevin Spacey, the movie is being reshot, millions of dollars. It's a different environment right now.
[Sciutto:] CBS did not have any H.R. complaints about Rose. Did PBS say the same thing?
[Gold:] In the statement, PBS did not specify whether it had such complaints. According to "The Washington Post" story, some of these stories were brought up with a supervisor of the show. We'll see more reporting on who knew what and where.
[Sciutto:] Shared responsibility or inaction. Hadas Gold, thank you very much. More breaking news. A historic moment. After decades in power, Zimbabwe's controversial president has been forced to resign. Celebrations, as you're seeing, erupting in the streets. We're going to take you there, live, right after this.

[Cooper:] More on our breaking news tonight, Matt Lauer out at NBC facing sexual misconduct allegations. He had his media figures, like Lauer, quickly condemned and fired, politicians referring differently when sexual misconduct allegations come out. Men like Congressman John Conyers, Senator Al Franken are staying in office, that's on top of at least two yet unnamed lawmakers who reportedly settled with their accusers using taxpayer money but are still serving. I spoke to Democratic Congressman Kathleen Rice about the issue. Here's what she said.
[Rep. Kathleen Rice,  New York:] Where are the professional consequences for the abusers? We in Congress, right here right now at this seminal moment in this country's history have the opportunity to say we are going to lean on this issue and we are not going to allow this kind of abusive environment to exist anymore.
[Cooper:] I want to bring back in our panel. Is there a double standard here for how people in the private, you know, private businesses are finally being how it's being addressed and how it's being addressed in the public realm, I mean the political realm?
[Powers:] Yes. I mean there seems to be a higher standard for morning news hosts than there is for members of Congress. I mean that's the way it looks right now. So morning news anchor gets held to a higher standard. This idea of due process, I mean due process is a legal issue. I mean, nobody is actually going to through a trial and have real due process. You're going to have somebody look at it and say is this a credible accusation. Like the "Today Show" presumably what did with Matt Lauer and different people have done, I mean, for some reason, the Democrats seem to think that, you know, a John Conyers or an Al Franken deserves some sort of higher level, you know, or shouldn't be held at the same standard as Matt Lauer. And I just don't think that's right thinking they're held to a higher standard.
[Cooper:] Well, this
[Carpenter:] I would say, here's what blows my mind politically about all these for the Democrats. The closest thing that the Democrats and progressives have to the Tea Party was the woman's march that materialized out of nowhere the day after Donald Trump's inauguration. That political power has nowhere to go. If I were a Democratic operative, I would be trying to find a woman in Congress to somehow become the leader of that, early supposed or person for that. And note, where that Nancy Pelosi blew that in the Sunday morning interview by saying that, well at John Conyers is an icon. Elizabeth Warren could conceivably lead that movement but she doesn't seem up for the job. Kathleen Rice, I see potential for her there because that energy needs somewhere to go as a response to Donald Trump. I would think if they want to be successful but until they figure out a way to do that, it's just going to further away.
[Schultz:] And there's a huge debate going on in the private sectors that relates to these types of cases and the labor and employment roles. The employment role world where the plaintiff's bar who represents the victims and the Defense Department represents the corporations. A lot of times, you are agreeing on the fact that the confidentiality agreements are a good thing. Because what it does is encourage it keeps it from heading to litigation, where, you know, all of this gets aired out in the court of law. And there won't be settlements and folks who were confidentiality agreements don't exist. They maybe say, OK, we're going to take this to the Matt and I'm going to defend my reputation to the end, regardless of the allegations, because I feel I that the person who has been accused feels that they need to be vindicated in court. So the whole issue that changes when it relates to the public sector, I think. So there's a real question as to when taxpayer dollars are involved, what is the accountability of Congress? What's the accountability, what's the process there to hold folks accountable and look at these issues and determine whether they need to be made public or not.
[Begala:] And I'm just Dana Bash was reporting today about the process though which a victim reports harassment by congressman.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Begala:] But in the Matt Lauer case, apparently the woman and her attorney went to NBC H.R., they investigated immediately, and within 48 hours, the guy was gone. Apparently, there's four, five, six hoops that a victim has to go through.
[Cooper:] Right, it's clearly stuck against the victim.
[Begala:] It completely stuck against the victim. And then these agreements are sealed, we never know about them and they're paying them off with our money. Shareholder's money is one thing that's for the corporation and the shareholders aside. But this is taxpayer's money, they got to reform that.
[Carter:] The news a news organization, it has to be transparent with how could they cover this, how do they cover any of the other stories if they cover up their own
[Cooper:] But that thing, you now look at Matt Lauer grilling Bill O'Reilly about, you know, text messages and
[Carter:] And it looks ridiculous and embarrassing that that happened. But for news organization and media organization, they can't play the game that the politicians are playing with this. And say, you know, it's not so serious, and we're going to cover it up or we're going to deny it. And I think that when NBC they sort of listen long ago, but at least they acted when this story was come, they acted, they did act.
[Schultz:] And there's certainly needs to be mandatory training. Some states, like California require attorney on behalf of the corporations to require training on these issues, certainly that needs to happen in Congress. And
[Carpenter:] Does it matter when you elect somebody like Roy Moore? I mean seriously.
[Begala:] Or Donald Trump, who had 12 women by name have accused him of harassment. And the American people more voted for Hillary, but still, enough voted for Donald Trump that he could sneak through the Electoral College.
[Cooper:] Yes, Kirsten, are you going to say something.
[Powers:] I was just going to say, well, the other thing is but the Congress is non this NDAs where you can't talk about the new thing. But then Conyers can continue talking and his lawyer can continue talking.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Powers:] But the woman can never come out and say anything. And so I think that she needs to be released from that anyway.
[Schultz:] Well, if you look at it in the context of the private sector world, where both parties come to an agreement on a confidentiality agreement, that's strikingly different from mandating it upon staff in the government.
[Cooper:] We got to take a break. Thanks, everybody, for being on the show. Coming up, something to makes you smile in a long day kind of weird day. The Ridiculist is next.

[Church:] Welcome back, everyone. Well, U.S. air safety inspectors have launched an investigation into the terrifying 22-minute nightmare that killed one passenger on a Southwest Airlines jet and ended with an emergency landing. It has prompted airlines around the world to inspect their Boeing 737 planes. The Southwest flights problems started when the engine on the left wing broke in midflight. It shattered a window next to passenger Jennifer Riordon, who died from her injuries. An investigator explained how difficult it was to land the plane after the accident occurred.
[Robert Sumwalt, Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board:] The aircraft began a rapid uncommanded left roll for about 41 degrees of right angle. So usually when you're flying on an airline you get rarely go about 20, 25 degrees of bank, this went over 41 degrees. The pilot's level for the wings and throughout the rest of the flight there was one I'm going to describe is a fair amount of vibration throughout the airframe.
[Church:] And the woman who was at the controls Captain Tammie Jo Shults is being hailed a hero. She is a former Navy fighter pilot who managed to land the damage plane. Our Alex Marquardt has more on her flight record.
[Tammie Jo Shults, Pilot, Southwest Airlines:] Yes, we have part of the aircraft missing so we're going to need to slow down a bit.
[Alexander Marquardt, Senior National Correspondent, Cnn:] Not a hint of nerves in the voice of Captain Tammie Jo Shults as she radioed in the emergency to the control tower.
[Shults:] OK, could you have the medical medics there on the runway as well, we've got injured passengers.
[Unidentified Male:] Injured passengers? OK. And are you is your airplane physically on fire.
[Shults:] No, it's not on fire but part of it is missing. They say there's a hole and someone went up.
[Marquardt:] With engine one blown up, smoke billowed into the cabin, yelling, screaming. The oxygen masks dropping.
[Marty Martinez, Passenger, Southwest Airline:] I truly thought that these were going to be my last moments on earth.
[Marquardt:] Marty Martinez had no idea that amid the chaos calm and collected 56-year-old Shults was actually guiding the plane in for a landing.
[Martinez:] We're all freaking out, you know, thinking, you know, wondering if we were going to make it home to our loved ones or not, but I just feel so lucky to have some with that type of experience.
[Marquardt:] Shults' experience, Martinez soon learned is deep and groundbreaking. As a teenager growing up in a ranch in New Mexico she wanted to fly in the Air Force but was told there were no female pilots. So she tried the Navy. After waiting a year she got in. One of the first women to be a naval aviator. Saying in a book, "I had finally broken in to the flight club." Women were barred from combat so she became an instructor, eventually selected again one of the first women to train on the coveted FA-18 Hornet fighter jet. By the time Shults retired from the Navy she'd reach the rank of lieutenant commander. So, on Tuesday morning, when the last engine blew out, it's a little surprise she showed no fear.
[Miles O'brien, Aviation Contributor, Cnn:] Compared to her previous experiences is one of the first female F-18 fighter pilots carrier based I suspect this was one walking depart for her.
[Marquardt:] Shults' extraordinary landings quickly compared to the miracle on the Hudson Captain Sully Sullenberger lost both of his engines but could rely on his plane's automatic systems to keep the plane under control. Captain Shults had no automatic help bringing the plane down manually.
[O'brien:] They drill this over and over again. So this becomes ingrained in their memories, their muscle memory. It becomes almost routine for them and in the case of Tammie Jo Shults it was evident that that training just came right through.
[Marquardt:] That historic training now being credited by Martinez and the other surviving passengers for getting them to the ground safely.
[Martinez:] I tell her that, you know, thank you for giving me a second chance on life. Now I walked in and I take these breaths and I feel like I'm going to move forward with this new found sense of purpose.
[Church:] Truly heroic effort on her part. And that was our Alexander Markquardt reporting there from New York. Over decades, our colleague and friend Richard Blystone brought the world to us, whether it was the Gulf War of the slaughter in Rwanda. His reporting drew us in and made us pay attention. And that maybe the greatest legacy a journalist can leave. Richard died earlier this week. He was 81. Christiane Amanpour remembers a CNN original.
[Blystone:] If hell had a national park, it would look like this.
[Christiane Amanpour, Host, Cnn:] From the burning oil fields of Kuwait to the killing fields of Cambodia. If the narrative of news had a poet laureate it was this man, Richard Blystone. Word seems small for a person who looms so large.
[Blystone:] So we flew over oceans of Civil War when we came down we walk through the islands of misery.
[Amanpour:] Who always had the right turn of phrase to explain the unfathomable.
[Blystone:] The sharp angles of the starving reflect the implacable geometry of their predicament. They tether on a knife edge of survival that does not take much to tip the balance.
[Amanpour:] To make the seemingly Monday meaningful.
[Blystone:] The conformity, the blind obedience, the numbing routine, the regulation, the herd mentality, the barriers shackles of feathers of curved. The obliteration of individuality. What a neat symbol of life and work under communism, just find yourself a bottle in plant.
[Amanpour:] And to make the apparently insignificant consequential.
[Blystone:] A long way from Berlin, John F. Kennedy would come to this wall to boost spirits by declaring Ich bin Ein medley writer.
[Amanpour:] Elmira, New York was where Blystone started his life. The Associated Press is where he started his journalism career reporting the Civil Rights movement and later the War in Vietnam and it's there he started his family. Risking his own life to save someone else's when he rescued A.P.'s Cambodia newsman, Chaay-Born Lay, along with his wife and children.
[Blystone:] When this cast was filled Jimmy Carter was president of the United States.
[Amanpour:] Blystone joined CNN in 1980, just before this pioneering network went on the air, becoming one of the so-called originals.
[Blystone:] As for the gas.
[Amanpour:] A true original who witnessed seismic events at the end of the millennium and showed us what most couldn't see and stood up to men others feared.
[Blystone:] Can I go a little farther, Mr. President. You have seen the magazine covers, now doubters say beast of Baghdad or butcherer of Baghdad.
[Amanpour:] The best of colleagues Richard was wedded to the truth and he knew how to find it in everyone.
[Blystone:] And Marion Gaberik [Ph] knows not only the thrill of catching something but the pleasure of setting something free. Freedom of thoughts, freedom of speech, freedom of worship to the freedom to go down to the river and fish and rankle with those, well, maybe it does.
[Amanpour:] Following the collapse of communism, he traveled thousands of miles along the old Iron Curtain.
[Blystone:] An Iron Curtain Churchill had it right. Not only it wasn't meant to keep the Germans from one another but to blind them from what was going on with one another.
[Amanpour:] Not afraid to play the fool or show the foolish side of the world.
[Blystone:] I got the shop right here, the better is all reveal and they would all bet [Inaudible] if they have a beer. I can't do. I can't do. The loss has the shop. I can't do.
[Amanpour:] And remembering those who should never be forgotten.
[Blystone:] All imperfections past they march now in foughtless order keeping the hard-won heights over Omaha Beach, a field of pattern leaving their many origins into their common destiny. A field that was then so far from tranquil. Nine thousand Americans have earned the place they rest but their marble Requiem would be sterile as stone if it didn't belong as well to all who come or are led here. Burning cling of what it was like a grasp of what it was full. For the dead they're all one nation. As soon as the place of prying eyes now-
[Amanpour:] CNN's own poet laureate leaves a world of mourning friends, followers, and colleagues, but we will always have his words.
[Blystone:] My side in Modlareuth is in Thuringia state, your side is in Bavaria. Walls crumble and fall. Bureaucracy is forever. Richard Blystone, CNN, Modlareuth, Germany. Beirut, Paris, Lockerbie, Amsterdam, Stratford-upon-Avon, Leon, Bond [Ph], Iraq, Northern Iraq, Kuwait, West Germany, East Germany, Elton, England, Loch Ness, Wales, Belfast, Dublin, Sarajevo, Tuzla Airbase, Christian [Inaudible]. From Marsaxlokk Bay in Malta. Mogadishu. From Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Richard Blystone, CNN, London.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon. Here's our breaking news. The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell moving Brett Kavanaugh's nomination forward, a final vote could take place on Saturday. That is as Brett Kavanaugh's Yale roommate is speaking out. And what he said on CNN just a little while ago is really pretty stunning. He said he thinks Deborah Ramirez, who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her is telling the truth and he said Kavanaugh lied under oath about his drinking and about the meaning of some clearly sexual references in his yearbook, but has he said this to the FBI? No, because they have not interviewed him. Not for this investigation or he says for any of the other investigations over the years.
[Anderson Cooper, Breaking News Show:] You say that Judge Kavanaugh lied under oath when he testified before the Judiciary committee last week. Can you explain how you know that he lied?
[Jamie Roche, Brett Kavanaugh's Freshman Yale Roommate:] I can. I wasn't able to watch the testimony. I was in an airplane, but I read the testimony the next day and I was struck as I was reading it that you know, I know Debbie. And
[Cooper:] Debbie Ramirez.
[Roche:] Debbie Ramirez and I know from my experience with her that at least from my perspective, there is zero chance that she is making up the story and I heard Dr. Blasey Ford's or read Dr. Blasey Ford's testimony and heard some of it later. You know, I believe that she is telling the truth, but then when Brett started saying things about his drinking and his use of certain words, sexually oriented words, I knew he was lying, because he was my roommate. We were in a room together. Our beds were ten feet apart for a couple of months. What struck me and made me more interested in speaking out about it is not only did I know that he wasn't telling the truth, I knew that he knew that he wasn't telling the truth.
[Cooper:] You say that he was a, I'm quoting you, a notably heavy drinker even by the standards of the time. That is obviously not sort of how he described himself. Just since this is knowledge you say you specifically have, can you describe what you mean when you say he was a notably heavy drinker?
[Roche:] Well, sure. This is a time not long after animal house was shown, and people drank a lot. He went to parties and drank beer, many, many people did, but there were even within that environment there were people who were loud drunks, who are sloppy drunks, who were belligerent drunks. But even by those standards my memory of Brett was that he was he was on the far edge of this. He was notably heavier in his drinking than other people.
[Cooper:] Can you I don't know if there's any specific examples or can you say how often was this just something on weekends? I've read some accounts that there was a keg in the main room of the room that you the suite of rooms that you had between the three roommates.
[Roche:] You know, it was an awful long time ago. I can't say he was drunk on this date or not. But I can tell you that my recollection of my experience with him was that he was drunk frequently, that it wasn't drunk to the point of having trouble getting up every month or two, it was frequently. I would say with some confidence it was at least once, maybe twice on the weekends. It may have even been during the week. I was listening to the radio, gosh, I want to say a week ago and they were talking about Brett having been interviewed by the FBI backgrounds done on five or six occasions prior to this. And it struck me that you know, I was his freshman year roommate. If you wanted to know how somebody behaved in college, which is a time where especially that transition from high school to college where people are likely to have done something that expressed thing that might have been a problem, that they would have contacted me, right? Five or six FBI interviews. Now, I started talking to friends. I said is this just sloppy work or why would somebody not contact a freshman college roommate? His only freshman college roommate to try and figure out what this guy was like. And this person was quick to say listen, the FBI are good. They're good guys. They take it very seriously. They do the work that they're told to do. You know, if they didn't contact you, it's because whoever was doing the background check wasn't interested in what was going on at that time.
[Cooper:] So just for the record, you've never been contacted either now or in any past investigation?
[Roche:] I've never been contacted about Brett by the FBI ever.
[Cooper:] So you actually, for people to know the situation, it was you, Brett Kavanaugh and another roommate in this basically there were two bedrooms you and Brett Kavanaugh shared a bedroom and there was a common room, as well. Your bed was as you said, a feet away from his. Did you ever see him black out? He has testified that he was asked about blacking out. He said he didn't. He said maybe sometimes he went to sleep. Did you ever see him blackout?
[Roche:] You know, I didn't socialize with Brett, but being in the same room where he slept, I saw him when he arrived at home regularly and I saw him in the morning. And I can tell you that he would come home and he was incoherent, stumbling, he would sometimes be singing. He occasionally would wary I think it was an old leather football helmet. And he would throw up. And then in the morning, would have a lot of trouble getting out of bed. You know, I wasn't an angel back then either. There were times when I did the exact same thing. So we commiserated on this issue and so the answer to your question is yes, I saw him both what I would consider blackout drunk and also dealing with the repercussions of that in the morning.
[Lemon:] So much on to discuss right now. David Gergen, John Dean, and Asha Rangappa are here. Good evening, everyone. I appreciate you joining. Listen, we heard what he said, but in spite of what he said, it has been so short, Senators haven't even heard or seen I should say the investigation and the report. Mitch McConnell is moving forward.
[David Gergen, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Absolutely. Well, he does what he says. He plays a real serious game of hard ball. Very objectionable in many regards, but he delivers. That is why he is majority leader.
[Lemon:] Why is he moving forward so fast?
[Gergen:] To get it done. I don't really think he gives a damn about whether there is a lot of questions about it, you know, what he cares about is getting it done. We just heard from a man apparently struggling with his conscience whether he ought to come forward and do this TV interview or not. Took him a lot to do that. CNN had to check him out to make sure his reliability seemed strong. And I think he gave a remarkably credible statement about what happened in the freshman year at Yale. What's astonishing is that the FBI is disinterested in his tale. And the tales of at least 30 to 40 other people that these women have recommended go look at and talk about. And so we're going to wind up with tomorrow and then on a vote Friday, Saturday, is a situation in which I think the odds favor a confirmation unless somebody shows more backbone than we've seen. And the country's going to feel like we were had. You know, we thought this was, they were going to push through. They're going to have a full week. They've had five days including a weekend. They've had very little time. They've shut the investigation down and most importantly haven't gone to all these witnesses and when you've got a guy like Roche who said look I don't remember this. I can tell you this though, and he is lying about his drinking and that is relevant not only to whether he will would forget something like a relationship with Ford, an incident with Ford, it is also extremely relevant to his truthfulness in front of the committee under oath. So all of this is very disturbing.
[Lemon:] Asha, I want to follow up on some of David just said, he said the FBI seems uninterested or disinterested in speaking to people like James Roche. Why is that? Why wouldn't they contact him or someone like him?
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal And National Security Analyst:] You mean right now or back when before? We
[Lemon:] He said this time and also even in previous background checks he is never been contacted.
[Rangappa:] Yes. So I do think it's important to understand that these background checks typically go back 10 years. And so really the time when Judge Kavanaugh's college drinking would have been within the scope of the background check would have been in one of his earliest background checks, perhaps when you went to clerk for the federal courts or when he joined the Starr prosecutorial team. After that it would have covered later and later periods of his life. And so, you know, those college days, those references probably would not have been within the scope of those interviews. So that is just to the put that out there since those six background checks are mentioned frequently. In this one, I am you know, concerned that he hasn't been interviewed, because you want the FBI to interview people like this precisely so they can probe and make sure they get full context for what the person is saying. That they can not only get what they know, but explore things like motivation and biases and all the context in order to actually be fair to the person that the subject that they are speaking about. And I think what we need here is some transparency on exactly what the direction and restrictions were placed by the FBI in this interview, because in my opinion, I don't believe that the FBI would not follow leads that were logical if they had the freedom to do so.
[Lemon:] OK. John, do you think that there were restrictions, because remember, John, we were talking about before they were saying well, you know, the White House is controlling the investigation and they are determining the scope of the investigation and then there was an argument on the other side saying no, the FBI would never allow that. What do you think, John?
[John Dean, Former Nixon White House Counsel:] It got awfully murky on the front side of the investigation as to what their scope was, their mission, and a lot of confused and conflicting reporting. Don, I had a flashing thought that the FBI cut this short, because maybe Mr. Judge fessed up. He was there. His girlfriend said she had been told by him that this had happened. So that was one that was the that would be the most amazing result.
[Lemon:] That would certainly be a block buster.
[Dean:] That it would be a blockbuster, but that could explain also why they didn't go further.
[Gergen:] There is a rumor like that, John that is passing around on the Internet.
[Lemon:] It's not confirmed obviously. I haven't read it.
[Gergen:] It's just a rumor. I have no reason to believe it to be true.
[Lemon:] Yes. And I think if do you think that the Senators have some idea with what's in this report?
[Gergen:] I think they probably do, yes.
[Lemon:] That is why if anything like that was true, do you think they would be setting a vote?
[Gergen:] You know, the words rigged and fake and sham have been so overused it's almost difficult to talk anymore what's going on in Washington, but there is no question, but that intentional restrictions were placed on this so-called investigation. And that we the public were not told about them. And I do think that going back, I think this question of transparency is really important to rebuild trust in a way we conduct our public business and to end frankly to preserve trust in the Supreme Court. This ought to be much more transparent. We ought to see the report tomorrow, we ought to see for ourselves, not just selective leaking from one side or the other taking a phrase and trying to make it into a big headline.
[Lemon:] Do you think, Asha seeing the report and knowing what happens with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies, do you think seeing that report would help some people feel better about the results?
[Rangappa:] I do. Because that report would contain, a, what derogatory information, if any the FBI found among the people they interviewed. And they would also reveal, because it would lay out the contents of the interview that they had whether there were clearly other leads or other people referenced that would have been logical for them to follow up with and weren't. So you wouldn't be able to hide kind of the scope of what they were looking at and what any investigator might do at that point. Alternatively maybe it would make clear that this was really all they needed to know. That I think would go a long way. And I agree what is at stake right now is the institutional legitimacy of the Supreme Court.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Rangappa:] And to have half the country believe that it's politicized and the fix is in is really the last thing we need right now.
[Lemon:] John, how does the country react to this do you think having gone through something similar with Watergate?
[Dean:] Well, I actually saw a justice put on the court during the Nixon years who had disassembled during his confirmation. Bill Rehnquist. It's sort of haunted his reputation with scholars. So it won't be good. As historians look back. I don't think they should jam this through and we're only having cloture vote initially. That is kind of a test vote. And who knows what will happen during the debate. That is where a lot of this might be flushed out.
[Lemon:] Yes. Thank you all. I appreciate it. Well, "The New York Times" says President Trump inherited $413 million from his father. He inherited a booming economy from President Obama, better to be lucky than good.

[Chiou:] Welcome back. Let's get you caught up on the developing news out of Indonesia. Authorities say Saturday tsunami killed at least 222 people when it slammed into parts of Java and Indonesia. More than 800 others are injured and hundreds of homes are damaged. A volcano may have triggered this disaster by setting off underwater landslides. One official says the disaster struck without warning adding that Indonesia lacks the equipment to warn about underwater tsunami threats. It is day two of the U.S. partial government shutdown and no signs of it ending anytime soon. Talks on Saturday went nowhere and the Senate Majority Leader sent lawmakers home for Christmas. The Senate isn't back in session until Thursday so that means barring some dramatic and unexpected deal the shutdown will drag on for days to come. At the heart of the issue, President Donald Trump's a border wall funding demands and no one is budging. President Trump is staying in Washington instead of spending Christmas as his Florida resort due to the shutdown. CNN's a Ryan Nobles joins me now alive from the White House with the latest. And Ryan the President says he wants $5 billion for this border wall. The Democrats say no way, no deal. So how do you see a way out of this?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] I don't see a way out of it, Pauline. To be honest with you, this seems to be a prolonged staring contest between the powerful people here in Washington and neither side appears to be budging. And there doesn't appear to be a whole lot of communication between the Senate Democrats and the White House which appear to be the two most important players in this conversation. Listen to what Mick Mulvaney had to say this morning on one of the Sunday talk shows. He's of course the current Budget Director but he has an important job. He's the incoming acting chief of staff for President Trump. This is what he had to say about where the negotiations currently stand.
[Mick Mulvaney, Director, Office Of Management And Budget, United States:] New Mexico has now agreed for the first time in history to keep asylum seekers, folks who are trying to get into the USA on the Mexican side of the border. So this if folks in Mexican facilities maintained by Mexican officials, they're actually doing more for border security than many Democrats in Congress. So we really think we're in a good place in terms of getting the wall built and also getting Mexico to participate in our border security.
[Unidentified Male:] But none of that is Mexico paying for the wall? Let's just be clear about
[Mulvaney:] You and I both know that it cannot work exactly like that.
[Nobles:] So Mulvaney they're talking about how all throughout the campaign the President promised that Mexico was going to have to pay for the wall so why do American taxpayers have to foot the bill in the form of this $5 billion which has now held up the government in totality here and making at least 30 percent of the United States government grinding to a halt. Didn't seem to have a very good answer for that, Pauline, and it kind of shows you where these negotiations currently stand.
[Chiou:] And in the meantime, during this week, as long as this goes on, essential government workers still have to work without pay. We're talking hundreds of thousands of people in airport security, customs, immigration. How long could this continue?
[Nobles:] Well, I think it's realistic to expect it to extend into the new year. And then, if you forecast it out you know, the situation does not seem very positive because this is only going to become a more difficult process for Donald Trump because Democrats will now take control of the House of Representatives. And so if they have no inclination to deal with him when they're in the minority, once they become the majority they're going to have even less incentive to do so. So this could be a prolonged staring contest and you know the President is not necessarily taking advice from those who have his best interests in mind. You know, he initially had agreed to this short-term continuing resolution to open the door to more conversations and then there were very strong opinions from the conservative media here in the United States that told him that he should think otherwise and then he reversed course. They are now applauding this move by the President. And if this is where he is taking his cues, it stands to reason that this could take some time before there's a breakthrough in these negotiations.
[Chiou:] Yes. That was a surprising on 180 that we saw earlier this week. Ryan Nobles, thank you so much for bringing us up-to-date live at the White House. Meanwhile, President Trump is losing yet another key official over his decision to pull troops out of Syria. The U.S. envoy in the fight against Isis is heading for the exits on the heels of the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis. President Trump is reacting by calling Brett McGurk a "grandstander whom he doesn't even know." Elise Labbott has more on the impending departure.
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well, the U.S. envoy in charge of the fight against Isis has resigned. Brett McGurk told Secretary Pompeo on Friday night that he would be leaving his post on December 31st. Now, McGurk was expected to leave in February to take up a post at Stanford University but his decision to leave early came on the heels of President Trump's sudden announcement that he would be withdrawing all troops from Syria. Now, McGurk just days earlier was talking to reporters about the new U.S. policy to stay in Syria not only to defeat the remnants of Isis but also to counter Iran. In fact, McGurk was in the region meeting with coalition partners to discuss this policy and was sitting with Iraqi leaders talking about the U.S. commitment to stay in Syria when President Trump tweeted that the U.S. would be withdrawing from Syria. And people familiar with McGurk's thinking say that not only did he feel his credibility was on the line but also he didn't feel he would be able to defend let alone execute that policy. McGurk has been the Envoy dealing with the 70-plus member coalition to fight Isis since 2013 first serving as the deputy to John Allen and then taking over as envoy himself, clearly has done a lot to reduce the presence of Isis. But as he said there are still remnants on it. He said it would be reckless for the U.S. to withdraw precipitously. I'm also told that the decision by James Mattis who he was very close to affected his decision. McGurk is saying that he could no longer serve the President in this policy against Syria. Elise Labott, CNN Washington.
[Chiou:] And to discuss the fight against Isis and the government shutdown let's bring in CNN Political Analyst and Princeton University Professor Julian Zelizer. He joins me now live also from New York. Julian, we've got Jim Mattis resigning, Brett McGurk resigning. These are outright protests of resignation. So how do you see the U.S. government trying to conduct foreign policy?
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, it seems like it's a one-man show at this point, and that was the point of the resignations. Meaning, their debates about the policy in Syria, there are many people who support the president's idea of pulling troops out. But at the heart of the protest is the way the ad hoc way in which the president has done this. He's left allies not really knowing what the United States is up to. He's not even seeking the counsel of his own advisors and that led to high-level officials to leave. So we don't really know how this is being conducted but it certainly seems that the President is pretty much acting alone.
[Chiou:] In the middle of all this, we've got this partial government shutdown. We saw that 180 that Trump took earlier this week which surprised both parties and even his vice president. Could this shutdown have been avoided?
[Zelizer:] Absolutely. If the president had not insisted at the end in response to right-wing critics that the funding for the border wall be restored or be put into the bill, this would have been solved for now at least until February the short-term fix was agreed to. So this really has resulted from one demand from the president. And at this point the Republicans although again they complain about what the president is doing, they're not really putting pressure. They're not threatening to vote with Democrats to override him and that's really you know, the major thing that we're looking for right now at least until January really begins.
[Chiou:] In January 3rd, we will have a new Congress seated. The House of Representatives will be democratically controlled. What will the first order of business be? Well, the first order of business might be actually getting the government up and running. It doesn't it's not clear it will be running by that point so that will be number one. Number two, you're going to hear from House Democrats a dual front of investigation and legislation. They're going to be pushing for oversight that has been lacking under a Republican Congress and they're going to be pushing for ideas that have a small chance of passing but that at least move the debate in a different direction than where it's been since January of 2017. So it's going to be high velocity politics in Washington starting in January. And Julian, give us your perspective on where the I word fits in here, impeachment, because it's a delicate issue. The Democrats would want to go for it but they also don't want to mobilize the base and they also have to see what comes out of the Mueller report if it's even made, parts of it are even made public. So how does that fit into the whole legislative landscape looking into next year?
[Zelizer:] Well, if an impeachment process starts it will consume all of the attention of Congress, there's no real way around it. That's the you know highest priority issue if it takes place and nothing else will be discussed. But it might be that House Democrats have no choice. It might be that the investigations force their hands regardless of the politics where someone like Congressman Nadler has no choice other than to start the proceedings based on these facts. What would really matter is not simply do they start an impeachment process, but how does the House Judiciary Committee handle it. Do they handle it with restraint and care so that it's seen as legitimate or does it look like it's sloppy and partisan like many people saw the Republicans with Bill Clinton in the 90s. That's really the issue rather than whether impeachment will destroy everything for Democrats.
[Chiou:] And if it does move forward from the House and it gets to the Senate, we've got even more Republicans in the Senate in the new Congress, is that where it stops or does there have to be something so egregious that the proceedings move forward?
[Zelizer:] Yes, it has to be really egregious even if the house votes to impeach the president as they did with Clinton, then the Senate needs to by a super majority basically vote to remove the President, to follow through on that. Right now, the Senate won't do that and House Democrats know that but scandals take on a life of their own and it could be that the facts are so egregious that it changes the political calculation of Republicans, that saving the President is no longer worth it to them or to their party. We're far from that at this point. We don't even have an impeach impeachment process that's begun. But don't assume the dynamics can't change as facts come out.
[Chiou:] Julian, as we're heading into the end of the year, it's worthwhile looking back at the year and at past presidencies. Do you find any other presidency comparable to the Trump presidency?
[Zelizer:] No. This is now in real unique territory. Obviously, many presidents and their second year in difficult circumstances, Congress has flipped to the other party or there's low approval ratings, but President Trump is you know, taking things to a new level. He's broken convention, he's ignored norms, and introduced ways of governing from the White House that we have not seen in more into history. So I do think it's fair to say that there's many parts of the Trump presidency which are truly unique and we don't even know how to react or how they will unfold in real time.
[Chiou:] Yes. It's keeping journalists, history professors, and everyone busy. All right, Julian, thank you so much. Great seeing you, Julian Zelizer, a friend of the show and Professor at Princeton University. The partial U.S. shut down means roughly 25 percent of the government is no longer funded and hundreds of thousands of federal employees must work without pay. But those worried about holiday travel or Christmas gifts arriving on time, need not worry. Border checkpoints and airports are staying open at usual and the U.S. postal service is funded separately so presents in the mail won't be affected at all by this shutdown. Live from New York, this is CONNECT THE WORLD. Coming up, a devastating tsunami kills hundreds in Indonesia and officials say the death toll will most likely rise. The latest on the recovery efforts there after this break.

[Burnett:] And back to our breaking news tonight: a surprise shakeup at the White House. Anthony Scaramucci out as White House communications director after only ten days on the job. His short foul-mouth tenure wreaking havoc and leading to two high profile resignations or firings. OUTFRONT now, Democratic Senator Mark Warner from Virginia, who is ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. And, Senator, I very much appreciate your time. Scaramucci, of course, now holds the record for the shortest tenure in American history, as communications director. Reince Priebus, the record for shortest serving chief of staff. Michael Flynn, the record for the shortest national security adviser. How do you explain what's going on at the White House?
[Sen. Mark Warner , Vice Chairman, Intelligence Committee:] There does seem to be a pattern here. Well, I don't you know, I keep saying I didn't think the president could surprise me anymore and he continues to surprise. I hope this is a sign that his new chief of staff, General Kelly, is going to try to bring a little more order to the White House and try to maybe restore a little bit of a respect that the office of the presidency deserves. Clearly, Mr. Scaramucci made quite a bit of news in his short tenure, but news that frankly couldn't be broadcast on family networks for the most part. So, it's probably a good sign for the president, frankly, for his White House that you're seeing General Kelly step in and hopefully try to bring a little order out of chaos. But at the end of the day, you know, it's not going to be the chief of staff. It has to be whether this president himself is going to change his behavior and so far, we have not seen those changes.
[Burnett:] So, when you say could there be order out of chaos, obviously, the president is saying that the White House is not in chaos today. But it raises a crucial question, Senator. Is Anthony Scaramucci's spectacular failure, which I think it's fair to say it was, given how much coverage he got and how brief he served, is that a reflection on him or is it a reflection on the man, the president of the United States, who had hired him?
[Warner:] Well, I think at the end of the day, the buck stops in the old Harry Truman line at the office of the president, and I would think the president would have known the character of Mr. Scaramucci and, clearly, it appears some of his language and techniques were not unexpected. And what bothers me is that this is not so much Democrat versus Republican, it really is, as sitting on vice chair of the intelligence committee, the words and actions of the president of the United States matters domestically, but they also matter abroad in terms of how our country is viewed. And what we've seen over the last week or so from Mr. Scaramucci's comments to the president's outrageous and inappropriate comments at the Boy Scout Jamboree, to their lack of focus on health care, it does not paint a pretty picture.
[Burnett:] So, the Russian sanctions bill, I want to ask another question here on an important topic on the president's desk. You supported it. It's on his desk. He hasn't signed it yet. Yet is the operative word. Russia is retaliating though, slashing the diplomatic staff that America is allowed to have in Russia, warning of more retaliation to come. What should President Trump do?
[Warner:] What President Trump should do is sign that legislation that passed overwhelmingly in both the House and the Senate. In the House, it was 98-2, and the Senate I think was north of 400 votes. Do what the Congress has set here. And what's remarkable, Erin, is that in many ways, this legislation would not have been necessary with President Bush or President Obama. In many ways, this legislation reflects the fear that we in Congress have that the president might arbitrarily roll back these sanctions on Russia, the sanctions were put in place because Russia attacked our democracy and everybody on the Hill and I think the vast majority of Americans understand and agree with that. Maybe the only person that doesn't and still does not completely acknowledge that attack is the president himself, which raises a whole host of other questions.
[Burnett:] I want to ask you about some other major news today and that is, of course, North Korea, for the second time launching an intercontinental ballistic missile. It's a significant thing. It happened incredibly quickly after the last one. And experts are saying had this been in a more standard trajectory, it could have hit, with the ability to hit Los Angeles, Denver, even Chicago. The president spoke about it today, Senator, and said he would solve this, no problem. Here he is.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We'll handle North Korea. We're going to be able to handle them, right? It will be it will be handled. We handle everything.
[Burnett:] Is it that simple?
[Warner:] No, I wish it was that simple. And candidly, North Korea has been an emerging threat through now three administrations, back to Bush 43, the Obama administration, and now, during the Trump administration. We can't lay all the blame, by any means, at the feet of the Trump administration. There are options we have but one of the options is to portray an era of strength and to have China be a partner in reining in North Korea and so far, we've seen the president has not been able to portray that. And, frankly, instead, we've seen the Chinese government, in effect, offer a series of trademarks to the Trump family in an era that is, again, a question that seems a bit inappropriate and I think restricts the president's ability to really force China to be a partner against North Korea that we need. But this is this has been a problem that's been developing for more than a decade but the idea that it can be handled this simply, as the president said, shows enormous naivety.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Senator Warner. Appreciate your time.
[Warner:] Thank you, Erin.
[Burnett:] And next, staff shakeup, a stalled agenda, growing frustration in Trump country on the president's performance.
[Unidentified Male:] The jury is out. The jury is out.
[Burnett:] And Jeanne Moos on Anthony Scaramucci's 10-day legacy and the Internet sensation he has become.

[Cuomo:] Major breaking news, a major upset in the race for governor in Florida. CNN projects progressive Andrew Gillum will be the Democratic nominee. We're going to be bringing in our Harry Enten to talk to us about this. He's been following the race. 20 But I have to tell you, people didn't see this coming. It is proof of a couple of things, a division in what the Democratic Party is about, especially in big states like Florida, and two, the power of people, Brother Enten. Tallahassee mayor went after the state about guns, an unpopular thing. He worked with the parkland kids. He was down there, really religiously for their cause against "stand your ground", a progressive on different ways. Bernie Sanders came in and campaigned late. How did this happen?
[Harry Enten, Cnn Politics Enior Writer And Analyst:] I think you hit it exactly right. I mean, you saw maybe a late surge at the end for Gillum. But at the end of the day, this was a big, big surprise. And it happened for two reasons. Number one, progressives really came out and voted, young progressives specifically, and huge turnout in African-American communities throughout the state of Florida. If you look at the major cities, Jacksonville, Tallahassee, Orlando, down to Broward County, this is where Gillum picked up major votes and came well, a big surprise because if you look at the early vote, Graham actually was winning in the early vote, but when the election day vote came in, you saw the big surge for Gillum.
[Cuomo:] So, is it true he won Miami and some of those other southern population centers? Did that offset the ratios? Because I think the state, you know, county over county is just about 30 percent African- American, right? I think it's like 27 percent. So, he was playing to population centers not just the black vote.
[Enten:] Yes, he was definitely playing to population centers. I mean, Miami-Dade is another great example where if you look at the early vote, Philip Levine, who was the former mayor of Miami Beach down there won in that early vote. But when Election Day vote came in, Gillum overtook him and was able to overtake Graham in the state as well.
[Cuomo:] Yes, you know, Harry, what's your take on this? You know, Mel was just in my ear, my EP, saying, you know, don't forget, this is that Bernie Sanders momentum of being to the left of what is otherwise seen as a centrist party. I'm slow on that with Gillum because so much of his politics are personal to him you know, the guns, the stand your ground, the need for populism. Yes, he is Medicare for all. I don't know what the meat on the bones is of that yet, though. He does advance different progressive types of issues. But what do you think it was? Was it his posture or do you think it was the populism?
[Enten:] I think it is probably a little bit of everything, right? I mean, populism didn't play well a African-American voters back in the 2016 primary and obviously, Gillum did particularly well there. And the other thing I will point out is Gillum was a Hillary Clinton surrogate. So, this is not just a story of Clinton and Sanders, and the Sanders wing kind of coming up. It's a story of a candidate who has a very good personal story and was able to connect with different parts of the party. And what will be interesting is whether or not those different parts of the party come out in the fall to help him against Ron DeSantis.
[Cuomo:] Boy, it really came out of nowhere. And how does he look against DeSantis?
[Enten:] The early polling shows a tight race. But I'll tell you, the difference between the two candidates here is probably going to be the greatest in the nation. Republicans wanted Gillum and Democrats wanted DeSantis as the Republican nominee. So, both sides got what they wanted and there's going to be a real contrast come the fall. It's going to be one of the top races I'll certainly be watching.
[Cuomo:] You couldn't have picked somebody who is less like Trump on the Democratic side than Andrew Gillum. I wonder if that reads in, as well. Hey, Harry, thanks for scrambling into that chair.
[Enten:] Thank you so much.
[Cuomo:] I appreciate it.
[Enten:] No problem, anything for you.
[Cuomo:] We need you and you were there. Thank you. All right. And thank you for watching. "CNN TONIGHT" with Don Lemon starts right now. History made. First African-American nominee for governor in a major state like Florida.

[Banfield:] You know the name Elizabeth Smart. And if you remember her story, you might remember two other names as well. Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee, the couple that held the 14-year-old girl captive for nine months. After Mitchell kidnapped her at knife point from her bed inside her family home in Salt Lake City, he raped Elizabeth multiple times, almost daily, claiming that this was the Christian thing to do. And sometimes it was Wanda helping him to execute the plan. And Wanda keeping Elizabeth from running, grabbing Elizabeth hard by the knee when a police officer approached them in a public library and questioned them, warning her, stay quiet. It took nearly 10 years to bring the couple to justice after Elizabeth was finally rescued because both Mitchell and Barzee claimed incompetent, that they weren`t capable of standing trial. But Mitchell was finally given two life sentences. And Barzee, for her part, 15 years behind bars. And if you can believe it, this woman is already up for parole. And if you can believe it, the parole board is already talking about whether or not they might just let her go. Even as concerns are raised about whether Barzee is a changed woman, or taking responsibility for what she`s done. I want to bring in CNN correspondent Jean Casarez. She`s interviewed Elizabeth Smart and attended Brian David Mitchell`s trial. Also, Elizabeth Smart`s former attorney, Greg Skordas, is with me. He is also a former Salt Lake County deputy district attorney. And Eric Johnson remains with me as well. Jean Casarez, let me begin with you. Why does it feel as though this just happened? Why does it feel as though those two were just sent away, as opposed to almost up for parole?
[Jean Casarez, Correspondent, Cnn And Hln:] Right. Well, in regard to Wanda Barzee, she is the one that`s eligible for parole in 2024, which is not too far away. And she was sentenced to a federal term of 15 years and to a state term of 15 years. But the prosecutors, believe it or not, recommended they be served concurrently, which, of course, we all know means together. And so that is why that the time is running short now at this point. And Elizabeth Smart is speaking out that she doesn`t want her released.
[Banfield:] Yeah. It`s hard to believe when you see these pictures. We all covered the story when Elizabeth was captured. She was 14. For much of her captivity, she was 15. But now she`s 30. That tells you how long this ordeal has gone on. I want to read, if I can, from Elizabeth`s Instagram post. She just posted this yesterday regarding a parole hearing for Wanda Barzee. In part she says, what I find troubling is that regardless of her threat level, she will be released in 2024, six years from now. It is possible that she could be paroled before then. Hopefully not. I do not think I`m a vindictive or vengeful person. If change were truly possible in her case, then perhaps parole release could be justified. But I have recently learned that she is still carrying around a manuscript called "The Book of Immanuel David Isaiah" and is reading from it. In this manuscript were the revelations that Brian David Mitchell received from God to kidnap myself and six other young girls to all become his wives. It goes on from there as well. I want to play this moment, Jean, if I can, where you interviewed Elizabeth Smart on this program to talk a little bit about Wanda`s role in that nine months of captivity, what Wanda did, what she was like, and what Elizabeth thinks of her. Have a look.
[Elizabeth Smart, Kidnap And Rape Victim:] I think it is easy to overlook her because Brian Mitchell, he`s the one that forced his way into my home, he`s the one that held me at knife point, he`s the one that raped me, he did all these terrible things. But she was a mother. She had came from a prior marriage. She had six children. And honestly, part of me feels like she`s more evil because of that, because she was I don`t want to say mother, but she did have six children. And how can you have that many children and allow that to happen to another child? And let rape and torture and abuse continue. And not only continue, but she she encouraged it.
[Banfield:] Greg Skordas, it`s hard to imagine what Elizabeth went through. I don`t think any of us ever could. You have spent so much time with her as her former attorney. How much of the process was she involved in? Meaning, when a plea bargain is struck, victims are often part of it. How much did Elizabeth play a part in the 15 years that Barzee got?
[Greg Skordas, Former Attorney For Elizabeth Smart:] Both the federal prosecutors and the state prosecutors conferred with her quite a bit throughout the entire process, and she very involved. And even though, as Jean indicated earlier, these sentences were run concurrently, she Wanda Barzee served her entire 15-year federal sentence. And with good time, you do 85 percent, so essentially 13 years, and now is serving the state sentence. So it`s not as though she`s going to simply do 15 years. By the time she gets out in 2024, if that`s the case, she will have served closer to 22 or 23 years. But the family was very involved in the plea bargaining process and the sentencing process and in the ultimate time that Wanda Barzee will ultimately serve.
[Banfield:] I mean, this has got to be sort of victimization all over again as this young woman who has done such an incredible job getting her life back on track, owning it and being a victim`s rights advocate, she`s written books, she`s been out on she is such an amazing citizen and then to have to sort of go through this. When we come back after the break, I want to ask you if there`s any possibility, Greg, that Wanda Barzee could be held longer, if there`s anything that the system could see in this woman and say she`s not ready. And then I also want to play a moment from Elizabeth Smart where when she was dressed like this and veiled by her captors and a policeman approached, what was it that held her back from saying help me, help me, rescue me, these people have captured me, because that didn`t happen. That`s next.

[Cooper:] It's an argument that would seem right at home on the "Real Housewives of Washington" except that series ended seasons ago. President Trump's first and third wives are in broiled in a public spat. That after the first wife Ivana called herself the first lady in an interview today. The actual First Lady Melania Trump and felt moved to put out a statement of her own and just a reminder, this all actually happened. Our Randi Kaye breaks it down.
[Donald Trump, United States President:] It is Melania.
[Randi Kaye, Cnn Correspondent:] The shot across the bow came from Ivana Trump on "Good Morning America" this morning.
[Ivana Trump, Former Wife Of Donald Trump:] I have the direct numbers to White House but I no really want to call him there because Melania is there and I don't want to cause any kind of jealousy or something like that, because I'm basically first Trump wife, OK. I'm first lady.
[Kaye:] As you might imagine, Ivana calling herself the first lady didn't sit so well with the real first lady. In a tersely worded statement, First Lady Melania Trump fired back through her spokesperson. "Mrs. Trump has made the White House a home for Barron and the president. She loves living in Washington, D.C., and is honored by her role as first lady of the United States. She plans to use her title and role to help children, not sell books." The statement went on to say, "There is clearly no substance to this statement from an ex. This is unfortunately only attention-seeking and self-serving noise." That statement certainly a different tone than we heard from Melania Trump back in 2005.
[Unidentified Male:] You know his exes?
[Melania Trump, United States First Lady:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] Get along with them?
[M. Trump:] I don't see them much. I don't you know, we don't see them
[Unidentified Male:] They were at the wedding though.
[Kaye:] Ivana Trump and Donald Trump met more than four decades ago and were married eight months later. She is the mother of the president's three eldest children, Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric who would later become his second wife. Over the weekend, Ivana told CBS she doesn't speak to Marla Maples but that she gets along with Melania Trump, explaining her reasoning this way.
[I. Trump:] Ivana's nobody and Ivana his first lady.
[Kaye:] First lady, a title Ivana took for herself just 24 hours later during another network interview. Ivana's shot at first lady ended when her marriage to Donald Trump ended. But as she tells it, she did have a chance at an ambassadorship.
[I. Trump:] I was just offered to be American ambassador to Czech Republic. And Donald told me said, Ivana, if you want it, I give it to you. But I like my freedom, OK. Why would I go and say bye-bye to Miami in the winter, bye-bye to San Tropez in summer? And bye-bye to spring and fall in New York. I have the perfect life.
[Kaye:] The perfect life far from the east wing of the White House. Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.
[Cooper:] So to really understand what is going on here, I had to call in reinforcements. My friend, Andy Cohen, who is executive producer of the "Real Housewives" franchise as well as host of all these "Real Housewives" reunion. Here's part of that conversation.
[Andy Cohen, Executive Produce, Real Housewives:] I was watching this play out today and just thought, you know what, and I would like to be, you know, I'm here on CNN, open invitation to the first lady, to the honorary first lady Ivana Trump. I'd like to get Marla Maples in there. I think she maybe has unresolved issues. And I feel it would be great to have Ivanka Trump there as well. I will set up two couches, get this going, and just put me in the game, I can do this.
[Cooper:] We're going have more of my conversation with Andy at the 9:00 hour including tips from Andy's "Housewives" playbook. Up next the escalating fight between the president and the sitting Republican senator, a powerful sitting Republican senator who says the president is putting the country at risk of World War III.

[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] General Kelly will do a good job. He will bring some order to the West Wing.
[Unidentified Female:] The White House looking to reset in the wake of a failed health care bill.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I said from the beginning, let Obamacare implode and then do it.
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Vermont:] It seems incomprehensible that we have a president that wants to sabotage health care in America.
[Unidentified Male:] In the White House's view, they can't move on in the Senate.
[Gov. John Kasich , Ohio:] We don't make it as a country when we spend our time fighting all the time.
[Mike Pence , Vice President Of The United States:] Russia's destabilizing activities are unacceptable. The president will sign the sanctions to reinforce that.
[Unidentified Male:] Russian President Vladimir Putin now confirming the staff at U.S. diplomatic missions will be cut dramatically. This retaliation is long, long overdue.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] And we want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Monday, July 31, 6 a.m. here in New York. Chris is off today. John Berman joins me.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] What could possibly happen next?
[Camerota:] What could go wrong? Great to have you here. Here's our starting line. President Trump hits the reset button after one of the most chaotic weeks of his presidency. In just hours, the president's new chief of staff, General John Kelly, will be sworn in. Now President Trump will finally come face-to-face with his embattled attorney general, Jeff Sessions, after repeatedly attacking Sessions. So what will happen when they meet at a cabinet meeting today?
[Berman:] That will be super comfortable. The president also launched a flurry of statements about health care, casting blame for the failure of the repeal efforts squarely on Congress, not him. The president is threatening to cut off payments to insurers, which could be a serious blow to low-income Americans. And now the president is even threatening the plans belonging to members of Congress. Then, there are new threats from overseas. Russia has ordered the U.S. to cut its diplomatic staff by more than half in retaliation for new U.S. sanctions, while the Trump administration increases pressure on China after North Korea's new missile test. We have to all covered. Want to begin with CNN's Sara Murray, live at the White House. A busy day, Sara.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right and John Kelly's first day here at the White House. As you guys noted, he will be sworn in this morning followed by that cabinet meeting. But everyone has the same question on the top of their minds: Can Kelly really bring order to this very wild West Wing?
[Trump:] Reince was a good man. John Kelly will do a fantastic job.
[Murray:] President Trump turning to retired four-star general John Kelly for help rebooting a stalled White House agenda and reigning in a chaotic West Wing. That's after Reince Priebus became the latest in a string of high- profile Trump officials to be pushed out in the first six months.
[Mick Mulvaney, Director, Office Of Management And Budget:] I think the president wants to go a different direction, wants a little bit more discipline, a little more structure in there.
[Murray:] It remains unclear how Kelly's appointment will impact the chain of command at the White House and if the former homeland security chief will exert any influence over the president's own behavior, including his use of Twitter.
[Corey Lewandowski, Former Trump Campaign Chairman:] You have to let Trump be Trump. Anybody who thinks they're going to change Donald Trump doesn't know Donald Trump.
[Murray:] The president remains at odds with many in his party over his repeated public attacks on Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] Well, it's kind of hurtful, but the president of the United States is a strong leader.
[Murray:] The two men are expected to come face-to-face today at the president's cabinet meeting. Trump also turning to health care this weekend, blasting the Senate's failed efforts to dismantle Obamacare, tweeting, "Unless the Republican senators are total quitters, repeal and replace is not dead." Despite the fact that it would have had no impact on Friday's defeat, the president also urging GOP leadership to change the Senate's rules so legislation can pass with a simple majority, saying that Republicans "look like fools who are just wasting their time."
[Trump:] I said from the beginning let Obamacare implode and then do it.
[Murray:] Trump also threatening to end subsidy payments to insurance companies and even eliminate some health benefits for members of Congress if the bill is not passed.
[Mulvaney:] What he's saying is, look, if Obamacare is hurting people, and it is, then why shouldn't it hurt insurance companies and more importantly, perhaps, for this discussion, members of Congress?
[Murray:] Senator Susan Collins, one of three Republicans who voted against repeal says Trump's threats wouldn't change her vote.
[Collins:] We need to go back to committee, to the Health Committee and the Finance Committee, identify the problems, carefully evaluate possible solutions through hearings, and then produce a series of bills to correct these problems.
[Murray:] Now, on top of the domestic agenda and organizational challenges, John Kelly, of course, will be here at the White House as they're confronting a number of foreign policy threats, including escalating aggression in North Korea and the U.S. relationship with Russia. We are waiting to hear when exactly Trump will be signing the Russia sanctions bill. Back to you, guys.
[Camerota:] OK, Sara, thank you very much for setting all of that up for us. Let's bring in our political panel. We have here CNN political commentator Errol Louis, CNN political analysts John Avlon and David Drucker all in the house. This is a fun morning for us. Let's start with you, Errol. General John Kelly, what is likely to change with him as chief of staff?
[Errol Louis, Cnn Political Commentator:] Probably not as much as people would think. The reality is, if you already have General Kelly, General McMaster, General Mattis, at very high levels of the administration. They have not exercised any restraint that anybody can see. So I think people should disabuse themselves of the notion that simply having a general walk into the White House into the highest levels of the administration is going to set everything right. I suspect that one thing that will change is that he is going to get an education. He, General Kelly, is going to get an education. He has spent most of the last couple decades of his life having people stand up and literally salute him when he walks in the room. That ain't going to happen anymore. He's going to be, I think, probably a little surprised at how people are inclined to, I think in White House parlance leak, from our point of view, simply sort of conduct a public dialogue and sort of have discussions broadly across the government and with the press. I don't I don't think we're going to see as much change as people would like to see.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, I'm going to push back on my friend a little bit, maybe the triumph of hope over experience. But look, the military members of this administration have been the most effective, in part because they've been working in concert, trying to contain the president. Now chief of staff is not going to supplant the president's own chaos, his own lack of discipline. But Reince Priebus clearly didn't have the confidence of the president, and this chief of staff is a difficult job. You're not going to have, literally, Anthony Scaramucci reporting to this chief of staff. That seems to be a declaring problem. The president's daughter and son-in-law don't really report to the chief of staff. But if anyone can make this work coherently, it's going to be a general working within the White House in concert with the other military members. Now, that raises other concerns, but Kelly has got a good reputation; and maybe he can get this administration working.
[Berman:] You know, John Avlon, to control this president, in case people were asleep for the last six days...
[Camerota:] Or just forgotten.
[Berman:] Or just forgotten. Let us remind folks...
[David Drucker, Cnn Political Analyst:] Six days? What about 48 hours?
[Berman:] Let's remind people what happened last week. Right? Let's walk people down memory lane. On Monday, the president attacked the attorney general on Twitter and then he went to the Boy Scouts and gave a speech to the Boy Scouts later had to apologize before. On Tuesday, he said he could be more presidential than any president but Lincoln; and he also attacked Jeff Sessions to the "Wall Street Journal." And he talked about him in the Rose Garden. On Wednesday he tweeted new military policy, apparently without talking to the actual military of the United States of America. And that's when the new communications director, Anthony Scaramucci, started saying things about Reince Priebus behind his back. On Thursday, this whole West Wing war went incredibly public, with our friend Ryan Lizza printing words we cannot speak out loud and writing about things that humans cannot do. And then on Friday on Friday, health care went down in the Senate, and the n his chief of staff got fired. Now, any one of these days... CAMEROTA They're bad monopoly pieces. Or maybe Clue, or maybe Clue, and someone is about to get whacked, because Reince Priebus did. But David Drucker, any one of those days, enough. You know, a month's worth, a year's worth of problems in an administration; and they happened every day last week. There's a short-term problem for John Kelly as chief of staff right now. He's got to stop any of those things from happening.
[Drucker:] Like a yellow brick road to hell you just described there for this administration. Look, I think that both Errol and John make some good points about Kelly. There are two kinds of people that President Trump respects, people who have made a lot of money, made a lot of money, and generals. And so Kelly comes in with an opportunity and a possibility of commanding the president's respect where Reince Priebus never could, because the president thinks political people are dopes. He just doesn't think they know anything and or are good for anything. The problem is that it isn't Priebus' fault that he couldn't contain a president who won't be contained. Twitter, policy that veers left, right and center at any given time, for any given reason. Look at the six sides of the Obamacare issue that the president has been you know, on any given day. And so I think the question here is not so much can Kelly bring order to the White House staff? I think he can. And I know from talking to Republicans that the president really likes John Kelly, that he has been consulting with him over the phone about things outside of his portfolio at DHS. And so they've developed a relationship. But the real question here is will Donald Trump, will the president empower Kelly to bring order, and will he participate in that so that when Kushner or his daughter or Scaramucci walks into the Oval with a question and he says, "Hey, did you talk to my chief of staff about it?" And they'll say "No, I'm coming directly to you," will he say, "Turn around. Good to see you. Go talk to the chief, let him bring it to me"? That's what's required here.
[Camerota:] Yes, let's talk about Jeff Sessions's future. It will be very interesting to see what happens this morning at their first cabinet meeting, where they come face-to-face. And do you think, Errol, that this is all just one big sort of chess game where, now that John Kelly has been moved out of DHS, that that's a natural fit for Sessions and that that's where he'll be headed?
[Johns:] There's some interesting commentary around that, the notion being that Sessions gets moved to DHS as a way a less confrontational way of getting him out of the way, all as a prelude to trying to sort of stop the investigation, fire Mueller or some other kind of chaotic possibility. I wouldn't put anything past this president when it comes to the Justice Department, when it comes to the probe. There's almost nothing, it seems, that sort of sways Donald Trump, although he goats in a lot of different ways on a lot of different issues. He's been straight as an arrow on this. He doesn't want the investigation. He doesn't want a Justice Department that's going to look into it.
[Berman:] You think actually Republicans are nervous about this. They don't want this to happen, and they think this is a possibility.
[Drucker:] Yes, they do. Look, I talked to them last week about the possibility of Sessions being fired or pushed out. And they were super concerned. It wasn't, "Hey, just kick him around. Stick him in a different office." They're worried that pushing Sessions out of the A.G. post could be effective and where he belongs. It could be a prelude to going after Mueller. That would force them to get off the sidelines and confront the president. This is what they told me. And the signals they're sending is leave Sessions alone. And that's one of the big reasons they're worried about this.
[Avlon:] And this is also like idiot cunning, you know: "We'll move him over and not fire him and maybe nobody will notice." Like, everyone will notice, because it's really transparent what you're trying to do. You're trying to move him so you can fire Mueller. And the Senate's already said they've got a problem. In addition to the fact that it's a functional demotion in terms of the portfolio of power. The Senate has been really clear about this from Chuck Grassley on down, that if you remove the A.G., we're not going to be falling all over ourselves for a confirmation. And those confirmations hearing, if they were to occur, would be incredibly tough. The president needs to recognize it. They're setting up a constitutional crisis if they move down this path, one way or the other.
[Camerota:] OK, last, health care. Where are we today, Errol, with health care?
[Louis:] If you talk to members of Congress, they've moved on. They're thinking about tax reform. They're, in some cases, in think, trying to sort of hunker down because some of their adversaries who managed to defeat their repeal effort have actually mounted a public campaign. Even after winning, they're going to hit the road. They're going to target some of the marginal congress members, that they think they they can sort of make this stick on. And they're going to go and say, "Why did you vote for repeal?" So there's a handful of members that are going to have a problem. The rest, I think, are more than willing to move on. They're going to have, of course, a math problem, because it was supposed to be the savings from repeal that was going to fund the tax cuts that are central to their tax plan. So they're kind of stuck right now. But they are going to move ahead with tax reform.
[Berman:] And it is a very real decision the president, Kellyanne Conway claims the president will make this week, which is whether to continue the subsidies to insure $7 billion that actually goes towards helping low-income people pay for their insurance, John Avlon. Do you think that the president really will take this money away?
[Avlon:] I mean, look, you know, the president's rhetoric has been let it fail on its own. If he were to take this money proactively away, this is an arsonist complaining about a fire problem. And it does run against the basest obligation on a president to to actually help people. Let's not forget, I mean, this is the existing situation. A president shouldn't proactively make it worse to score political points. What's heartening is that there's a pushback in the House. There are 40 centrist members, both parties trying to find a reform package to at least keep the system solvent. That's the kind of thing that needs to be supported. But the fact that the president is considering sort of pouring, you know, this sort of fuel on the fire is a sign of someone who's not thinking about the national interests as much as self-interests.
[Berman:] All right, guys. Stick around. We have two international crises confronting the president, the nuclear threat from North Korea and Russia retaliating against new U.S. sanctions. How will the president respond to these issues? We'll discuss that next.

[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] We have kicked the can down the road long enough. There is no more road left.
[Kosik:] Ambassador Nikki Haley telling the United Nations that North Korea must face strong sanctions as South Korea suggests Pyongyang may test another weapon.
[Briggs:] The Trump administration expected to end the immigration program that protects young, undocumented immigrants. Can Congress fix the program that shields Dreamers?
[Kosik:] And, Hurricane Irma strengthens to category four. Florida and Puerto Rico bracing for impact.
[Briggs:] Welcome back to EARLY START, everybody. Five thirty-five Eastern Time, 6:35 p.m. in Seoul, South Korea. We'll be live there in a moment.
[Kosik:] And good morning, I'm Alison Kosik. It's 30 [sic] minutes past the hour here and we begin with North Korea defying international condemnation over its latest, largest nuclear test with signs of more tests to come. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley arguing at an emergency Security Council meeting that the international community must exhaust every last bit of leverage over Pyongyang to avoid a nuclear war.
[Haley:] The time has come to exhaust all of our diplomatic means before it's too late. We must now adopt the strongest possible measures. Kim Jong Un's action cannot be seen as defensive. His abusive use of missiles and his nuclear threats show that he is begging for war.
[Briggs:] Among North Korea's few remaining pressure points that could be targeted with sanctions, oil imports, textile exports, and the regime's other sources of foreign currency. Pyongyang slamming the U.S. via state media, bragging it will use its quote "nuclear strategic weapons to eradicate the land of the U.S. with no trace left on earth."
[Kosik:] All of this as South Korea says it has spotted continuous signs the North is preparing another ICBM test. CNN's Ian Lee joins us live from South Korea where that country has been conducting exercises off the east coast of the Korean Peninsula. Good morning to you, Ian. Do you see any reaction from the North about these exercises from the South?
[Ian Lee, Cnn Reporter:] Well, North Korea has come out time after time again with these threats against the United States and against South Korea when these live-fire exercises take place. This latest one, the South Korean Navy having a live-fire exercise off the country's east coast. We've also seen the Army, the Air Force really, the whole the whole breadth of the South Korean military showing that they're ready in the event of a war. And this is also coming as we're tracking developments in North Korea. South Korea's National Intelligence Service saying that they're tracking a projectile they believe could be an intercontinental ballistic missile on the move, and this is significant after Sunday's developments with North Korea saying that they can put a nuclear weapon on top of an ICBM. They also had that nuclear test, that hydrogen bomb, which they said could go on top of an ICBM. Also, President Moon had a conversation with President Trump last night. In it, they discussed continuing the military cooperation between the two countries. President Moon also brought up South Korea's own ballistic missile program, talking about how they want to lift the limit of the payload that their missiles can carry. Also, they talked about purchasing billions of dollars' worth of U.S. weapons and equipment Alison.
[Kosik:] And this coming with the backdrop of very strong words from North Korean state media saying that North Korea will blow up the U.S. mainland and annihilate Americans. Very disturbing. CNN's Ian Lee, thanks very much.
[Briggs:] More, North Korea has evolved from a regional menace to a global threat. Some strong words from Yukiya Amano. He's the head of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency. He called Sunday's test of what Pyongyang claims was a hydrogen bomb a new dimension of threat. For more on the diplomatic efforts to cool tensions on the Peninsula let's bring in CNN's Nic Robertson live from the IAEA in Vienna, Austria. Nic, tell us what the head of IAEA agency told you.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] Yes, Dave, what I really wanted to understand from him from his perspective, his expertise everything that he knows is, effectively, North Korea in a position now of having a nuclear weapon system that can threaten the world, as they say they can. His view on this was we can't say that for sure. But what he said we do know is that when North Korea says it's going to do something it generally follows through. And his assessment of this massive test of the weekend of the tests of the nuclear tests in recent years shows that North Korea is making rapid progress those were his words rapid progress towards this goal and, therefore, they've shifted from that regional to a global threat. This is how he put it.
[Yukiya Amano, Director General, International Atomic Energy Agency:] I think North Korea a North Korean threat is a global one now. In the past, we believed that is a regional issue. It is no longer the case. Everyone is aware that this is a global threat.
[Robertson:] So, the IAEA's hands are really tied until there is some kind of international diplomatic agreement and Amano says he's trying to get inspectors ready to go if that happens. But where do we stand for diplomatic agreement? Well, the United States could not be further apart from China and Russia at the moment. The principal players are going to be required to get a U.N. Security Council resolution to stick because it's going to be China who is going to be the principal player that would have to enforce an oil ban, for example oil being exported into North Korea and textiles being exported back from North Korea out to the rest of world, principally through China. So having China onboard is key. And right now, China and Russia are saying there should be a freeze- freeze scenario which is an anathema to the United States and much of the rest of the world. This is not a situation of equals here of reciprocity between
[Briggs:] Right.
[Robertson:] North Korea's nuclear weapons systems and what South Korea and the United States is doing in response to that. So, diplomatically, a long way to go.
[Briggs:] Vladimir Putin adding that he thinks further sanctions are useless and ineffective. Nic Robertson live for us in Vienna. Thank you. Later today, the Trump administration expected to announce a program protecting young, undocumented immigrants will end. They will offer Congress a short window to come up with a fix here. Can they possibly pull it off? We'll ask Chris Deaton of the "Weekly Standard," next.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now in the NEWSROOM. The President under fresh fire over HIS vulgar comments.
[Unidentified Male:] I think he is a racist. Of course, I think that is ridiculous. You are saying flat out definitively, the President did not say those words? I'm saying that this is a gross misrepresentation. I didn't hear that word either. You are saying it did not happen or you haven't or you just don't recall. I didn't hear it. And I was sitting further away from Donald Trump and Dick Durbin was.
[Savidge:] All as the state of Hawaii is reeling from a phony missile alert.
[Unidentified Male:] I wanted to check out and head to the airport because I didn't want to stick around to see if it is getting this is going to get blown up or not. I just told him, let me use your phone and let me call my wife and tell her I love her.
[Unidentified Female:] I think traumatic under states the experience of the people of Hawaii went through yesterday. This was unacceptable that this happened but it really highlights the stark reality of the people of Hawaii are facing.
[Savidge:] CNN NEWSROOM starts now. Hello there. I'm Martin Savidge in for Fredricka Whitfield. Thanks very much for spending some time with me. We begin this hour with the growing argument over what the President did or did not say in a crucial immigration meeting. The conflicting reports over the use of vulgar language firing up again today.
[Unidentified Male:] Coming out of that meeting with a gross misrepresentation of what happened to that meeting. Can you it was a gross misrepresentation? Senator Durbin has been very clear. Senator Graham has told others that the reports were basically accurate. Are you saying the President did not use the word so widely reported?
[Sen. David Perdue , Georgia:] I'm telling you he did not use that word, George. And I'm telling you it is a gross misrepresentation any time you want me to say that.
[Sen. Tom Cotton , Arkansas:] I didn't hear that word either. I certainly didn't hear what Senator Durbin has said repeatedly.
[Unidentified Male:] So you are saying in that room you didn't hear any of this sort of lumping everybody together. Is that what you are saying?
[Cotton:] I did not hear derogatory comments about individuals or persons, no.
[Unidentified Male:] OK. So this sentiment is totally phony, as well, that is attributed to him.
[Cotton:] Yes.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] All I can say is that I was in a meeting directly afterwards where those who presented to the President our proposal. I spoke about the meeting and they said those words were used before those words went public. So that's all I can tell you is I heard that account before the account even went public.
[Savidge:] The President is at his Florida golf club today and tweeting, blasting Democrats and declaring that a bipartisan deal on DACA is probably dead. Let's start our coverage with CNN White House correspondent Boris Sanchez who is near the President's resort in Florida. Boris, what do we know about what the President is doing today?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, there, Martin. President Trump spent the majority of his day so far at Trump national golf course. He returned to Mar-a-Lago estate just a little bit over an hour ago. And as you noted, he is further driving a wedge between Democrats and Republicans at a very tenuous time because the government is set to shut down in five days unless both parties come to an agreement over budgeting and funding for the government. The issue at heart of the disagreement is the legal status of these DREAMERs, these 800,000 or so young adults that were brought to the United States illegally as children. And while there was already some contentious disagreement between Democrats and Republicans on that issue the question of the President's comments this week on Haitians, on African nations further driving a wedge between the two parties just based on what he allegedly said. We should note the President, as you said, was on twitter earlier today saying that a deal on DACA with Democrats was possibly dead. He then further tweeted quote "I, as President, want people coming into our country who are going to help us become strong and great again. People coming in to a system based on merit. No more lotteries. #Americafirst." The head of the department of homeland security Kirsten Nelson Nielsen I should say, was on the Sunday morning talk shows backing up the President, the argument to convert the United States to a merit base system, she kept the possibility of a DACA deal still open though she made the case for separating any kind of immigration issue from the question of funding the government which as we noted was set to shut down midnight on Friday. Some Democrats however are saying they simply will not discuss a budget deal unless DACA is a part of that deal including Congressman John Lewis. Here is Kirsten Nielsen and John Lewis speaking to the media earlier today.
[Kirsten Nielsen, Homeland Security Secretary:] We need to fund our troops. We need to protect them. We need to increase homeland security. These are vital national security interests we need to fund to tie it into a DACA deal where the actual expiration date is in March is irresponsible.
[Rep. John Lewis , Georgia:] Well, I for one would not vote for government funding until we get a deal on DACA.
[Sanchez:] The key thing to keep in mind here, Martin, is that Republicans are going to need Democrats to pass any kind of budget deal. So Democrats are now using that leverage to get something done on DREAMERs and DACA, a program that is said to end in March. Because of the urgency and limited amount of time that lawmakers have to get something done, some in the Republican party have suggested just passing a continuing resolution, another stop gap bill that will keep the government funded and then further move the can down the road on this argument as we have seen them do several times since September Martin.
[Savidge:] Yes, we have Boris. Thank you very much. All right. Plenty to talk about here. And joining me to do just that Josh Rogin, a CNN political analyst and columnist for "the Washington Post." Also back with me is Julian Zelizer. He is a CNN political analyst and Princeton University historian and professor. So thanks to both of you. Josh, I will start with you and the President's tweet that DACA is probably dead and it is the Democrats' fault. Is the President by just putting that out there, hurting any chance of a bipartisan deal now?
[Josh Rogin, Cnn Political Analyst:] He is definitely not helping. I mean, all we have seen the President Trump do over the last few days is harm the ability of these lawmakers to come up with a bipartisan compromise that gives the President much of what he wants and allows alas the DACA DREAMERs to stay in the country. And that bipartisan compromise were actually rolled out on Thursday. There is a deal on the table. It does accommodate what the President is saying he wants about the visa lottery and chain migration. Gives a little bit of money for this wall or border security, whatever you want to call it, and fixes the DACA problem for these 800,000 DREAMERs. Why can't he just take that deal? Well, it seems that they are pushing for a better deal. And meanwhile, the President is just creating controversy after controversy really throwing the entire process into chaos. And why he is doing that? I mean, basically because he seems to lack the self-control not to do it.
[Savidge:] Yes. I mean, the supporters may think that there is a grand plan. Others may say no. He has no plan at all. We will have to see. Julian, you wrote a story for CNN.com about the President's remarks. And you say that it's a mistake to dismiss Trump's vile words as a distraction and to normalize the President's behavior would be absolutely reckless. So explain that a bit more.
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, I think if you take these comments and put them in the context of the many, many, many comments he said on twitter, in public about immigration from the very start of his campaign you see exactly where he stands on a lot of these issues. And the rhetoric of a President matters. And we speak of it as a distraction from the real stuff, the legislation and the regulation. But I think he has given legitimacy to a lot of arguments that come from nativist organizations and individuals about immigration that are extraordinarily damaging to hear from the President of the United States. And I think that is part of why you have this backlash and the risk we have is that eventually this is normal.
[Savidge:] Can I ask you this, Julian, especially from your historian perspective?
[Zelizer:] Yes.
[Savidge:] You listen to White House tapes of previous administrations, you know. And I'm going back to LBJ and I'm going back to Nixon. And you hear some really bad stuff. At the same time as they are trying to negotiate bills even as LBJ was trying to push forward, you know, civil rights, there is a time a President has private conversations or no?
[Zelizer:] There is. This wasn't a private conversation at least this meeting. You are right. The previous Presidents have said horrendous things. But we shouldn't use that as the measure for what president should do today and the hope that -.
[Savidge:] No, I'm not. And I do agree that what the President said was absolutely outrageous. I guess what I'm saying is that in trying to negotiate and work a deal it wasn't a totally open meeting, he is expressing something. And it was a question, actually, to which he got a response in a very good moments said here is why. So I guess this whole idea, you are always having to be on your guard even when trying to negotiate?
[Zelizer:] I think it is correct. I mean, I think it would be good to have some space for Presidents and legislators to negotiate as they did decades ago. The reality is that doesn't exist. For many reasons from social media to polarized Washington environment where there is an incentive to report what has happened, I don't think we are going back to that. So I think Presidents will just have to deal with that. But again, that is separate from the comment itself which, you know, fits a broader pattern we have heard from the President.
[Savidge:] No, I'm with you. Josh, sorry, just had the opportunity to talk to a historian there. Today "New York Times" reporting former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney texted a friend saying he is running for the Senate in Utah to replace retiring senator Orrin Hatch. So Romney was somebody who has been pretty critical of the President. And I'm wondering how might a senator Romney impact Trump and his agenda?
[Rogin:] Well, I know that a lot of people in the Republican party especially people who have been especially upset with the way that President Trump has handled himself are looking towards Mitt Romney to be a leader, a statesman in the Senate who stands up for what we used to know as traditional Republican values especially traditional Republican positions on things like foreign policy and national security that the President has abandoned. He could, because of his sheer gravitas his relationships and the large and well known step that he is like to bring on become a counter weight to the President in the Republican Party and the Senate. That is the scenario that I think a lot of people are looking for. You know, we are seeing a lot senior Republican leave the Senate who play that role now. Bob Corker, you know, Jeff Flake, you know, we hope that Senator John McCain will be with us for a very long time. But in the coming years, it seems that this sort of Republican Party that we knew before 2016 lacks a standard bearer. And the hope at least amongst those people who still believe that the Republican Party can head in that direction is that Mitt Romney would take up that role. I think we are a long way before we actually get in there. First, he has to run, then he has to get elected.
[Savidge:] Yes, interesting point. Next weekend, by the way, is the one-year anniversary of the President's inauguration. And times seems to have gone remarkably fast. And while a 2020 election is still far away today former Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe was on "STATE OF THE UNION" and he hinted that he might run against Trump.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Chief Washington Correspondent:] Are you going to challenge him in 2020?
[Terry Mcauliffe , Former Virginia Governor:] What I'm going to this year, 36 governors are going to take a big lead. I am doing a big project on redistricting mode. That will be my focus on 2018. And we will see what happens after that. But could you imagine, you know, hypothetically, if that ever happened you would have to sell tickets to me.
[Tapper:] That would be enjoyable.
[Mcauliffe:] But I'm focused on this.
[Tapper:] But you are focused on that but you are thinking about a debate with President Trump.
[Mcauliffe:] I think everybody sits around and dreams about a debate with President Trump and how much fun that could actually be. Get the truth out there and let the facts speak for themselves.
[Tapper:] OK. I'm not going to qualify this as you throwing your hat in the ring, but there is a hat there. Governor McAuliffe, thank you so much. I really appreciate your being here.
[Savidge:] Julian, do you think that this is the beginning of where the Dems could have big, huge crowded field in 2020 kind of like what the Republicans did?
[Zelizer:] Yes. I mean, midterms are at least in recent years the moment you see people throw their hat into the ring. I wouldn't be surprised if more people start to at least speculate that they might be in the mix. And it will depend on the midterms. Look. If Democrats retake control of one or both chambers, you are going to see a lot of Democrats jumping in because they are going to sense that this President is vulnerable to losing in 2020. And that is when everyone starts to raise their hand and say I'm in.
[Savidge:] Well, we will see how it goes. All right, Josh Rogin, Julian Zelizer, thank you very much.
[Zelizer:] Thank you.
[Rogin:] Thank you.
[Savidge:] Hawaii, that state still is reeling. And officials are demanding answers. Ahead, the details on that false alarm of an incoming ballistic missile that launched panic across the state and beyond.
[Unidentified Male:] We put the baby in the bathroom. Didn't know what else to do in the stroller and cape after run.

[Baldwin:] We want to take a moment and honor the American woman. This series is an idea I had after covering the 2016 presidential election, listening to so many women who showed up and wanted to be involved. I had a hunch that something was about to happen as women were speaking up and showing up in record numbers. And standing on stage at the women's march. Just like so many of you, I witnessed the collective strength of those who traveled great distances to be seen and heard and it was overwhelming. And so I just decided the next chapter of my career would really focus on women. I got to talk to Ashley Graham, Diane von Furstenberg, Tracy Reese, Pat Benatar, Betty White. Yes, these are all incredible women who shattered glass ceilings, whether in fashion, music or film. But these are trailblazing women who shared with me some very personal stories of success and failure, who are not afraid to talk politics, frustration and hope. And they want to help other women realize their dreams as well. Here is American woman, Sheryl Crow.
[Sheryl Crow, Singer:] Hi, I'm Sheryl Crow. I'm an American woman because I was born here, and it's a small town in the Midwest. And I am grateful that I live in this country.
[Baldwin:] What would you say to just young women who are still trying to find their footing in this new era of America?
[Crow:] I find when there's discomfort that can be a galvanizing moment for people. And I also find hope in the fact that when our people are going through real unrest, like what we did in the '60s, some of the greatest art came out of that. That will be whatnot only documents who we were at this moment in history, but it will create a collective experience and voice for us. I feel like it's a necessary moment for artists to get busy.
[Baldwin:] Sheryl did get busy, with the release of the single, "Halfway There," which reflects how divided the country became during the 2016 presidential election.
[Crow:] It speaks to the ugliness that we were as neighbors to each other in our towns of not actually being able to hold a discourse that revolved around disagreement with moderate of decorum or even dignity. The differences we bring to our nation are what makes us strong. But to not be able to value that in a way that is respectful, even in our dialogue, is the undermining of civilization. [on camera]: What would you offer up to women? Feminism, I think, at its best, is when you're not becoming more masculine to exist in the world, but actually becoming more feminine. I think that's one of the reasons I would love to have seen a woman in the White House. I want to tell all the young women, the power that exists within you cannot be quietened by a man. Tap into that on a daily basis. Call it up.
[Baldwin:] Love that so much. Please, check out my entire interview with Sheryl and all these other women. Go to CNN.comAmericanwoman. And just one other ask, because I love hearing from you. We all need a little inspiration, don't we? Go to my Instagram, @BrookebCNN. Upload a video and you tell me. Tell me your name. I'm so-and-so. I'm an American woman because, and tell me what defines you as an American woman. And don't forget the #Americanwoman. I've been reposting so many of you. Thank you so much. Coming up here, former White House Adviser Omarosa making some pretty interesting comments on her time in the White House, including talking about haunted by tweets every single day. We'll show you the clip in just a second. Hi, there. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thanks for being with me here on CNN. Again, just a heads up, the White House briefing will begin in minutes. Officials there, will, no doubt, be confronted with tough questions, necessary questions about how accused abuser, Rob Porter, could have kept his job at the White House, often times right by there he is, with the paper there often times right by the president's side. What's more, the accusations of beating not just one, but two of his ex-wives, kept Porter, the White House staff secretary, from getting security clearance. A fact known since last fall, by senior White House officials, including chief of staff, John Kelly, according to our sources. And yet, in a just-released statement, the chief of staff said he was, in his words, "shocked" by the, quote, "new allegations" against Porter. Now, Porter's star certainly has been on the rise in the administration until he resigned Wednesday. Here is a look of what he has been involved in. He helped draft the president's State of the Union. He went over to Switzerland and attended the World Economic Forum in Davos with President Trump. And Porter was one of a select few who shook the hands of the Chinese president when the president traveled overseas to Beijing. So why did it take until now for Rob Porter to leave, just a day after these pictures of his alleged abuse against his first wife went public. Porter denies all the abuse allegations against him.

[Hala Gorani, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Hala Gorani. Let's get right to our breaking news. A major defeat for ISIS in Mosul is looming. Iraqi forces have recaptured a mosque compound at the very heart of the terrorist self-declared caliphate. This is leading the prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, to say that we are now seeing the end of the fake ISIS state. However, despite that huge symbolic victory, the battle for Mosul itself is not over. You're seeing CNN video here shot inside Mosul as the battle rage today. In a moment, we'll have full analysis of the military challenges on the ground for anti-ISIS fighters. But we begin with Nick Paton Walsh, who has been covering the fight from the frontlines giving us an incredible firsthand look at the street by street warfare. Nick joins me now from Erbil. Tell us a little bit more because we did hear some conflicting information from Iraqi sources that first that Mosul was just about liberated but then from others that it could still take a few days. What did you see on the ground today?
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] We heard some surprise announcements from Iraqi military officials that the mosque has in fact been taken by their soldiers because we were still witnessing an intense battle for it. Now that was continuing at 3:00 this afternoon when we left and frankly the commanders there said to us they hadn't taken the mosque and they didn't feel necessarily in the hours ahead that was imminent. But still if you were to cast the statements you might say that because the mosque itself has been destroyed and it's impossible for anyone to get inside at that moment because they are worried about booby-traps and technically nobody has it because ISIS has been pushed away from it. So maybe by default it falls into the hands of the Iraqi government. But that's technical frankly apart from those enduring the fighting on the ground. This is a political announcement by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi that Mosul was technically been liberated and that spells the end of ISIS or Daesh within Iraq. We've heard from the coalition, the Pentagon saying they can confirm the mosque has fallen and that is too confusing to be honest. But also too they still believe there are days more ahead of fighting in Mosul. That is more realistic. There are about 700 or 800 meters from that mosque compound to the river that marks the end of the remaining territory ISIS hold. But we saw it ourselves today, civilians desperately fleeing from the rubble where they were being shelved talking of how they barely survived on water, had no food. Absolute terror in [inaudible] and there could be thousands still stuck in there amongst the bunch of diehard fighters, some of them who appeared to have blown something in the street today. An incredibly bloody chapter still ahead despite the overall political aura of mission accomplished Hala.
[Gorani:] Yes, and also mentioned that these fighters left whether it's a hundred or 200 or however many of them there is left in the old city. They've booby-trapped the alley ways. They have IEDs as well to slow the advance of Iraqi forces and there are civilians there to take into account as well. What did you see on the ground with regards to that?
[Walsh:] What is remarkable how painstakingly slow the advance is with these Special Forces. You know, this morning's operation had frankly been heralded for a couple of days, and you know, given the political stakes really here, it was extraordinary how this one elite unit, valiant as they were, but smaller in number seemed to do a lot of the fighting themselves. But they had a very difficult task going to the fact that pretty much wherever you look, there is the risk potentially of a booby-trap being installed by ISIS, by the human shields too. We saw how they frankly had to use bulldozers to clear vast amounts of rubble out of the way to gain access towards the mosque compound. But the real question of how many civilians are still in that area held by ISIS is sort of the north, east, southeast chunk of the old city. Very dense series of war like streets that lead towards the river itself behind it. The key [inaudible] how many civilians are in there is really hard to find. It's incredibly difficult to know. We know they are being held as human shields to some degree. There are some suggestions some may in fact be closer to ISIS as family members and others simply being held hostage there. We are dealing with a very difficult few days ahead, not simply because the Baghdad government has kind of brushed this under the carpet to some degree by saying victory has been achieved, but because there are so many thousands of innocent lives hanging in the balance Hala.
[Gorani:] Right. And we just saw those bulldozers, by the way, in some of that footage there from your report, which we'll see later in the hour from the frontlines there getting rid of some of the rubble in order to make their way toward the mosque and other significant sites. Nick Paton Walsh, our senior international correspondent, on the ground in Erbil. Thanks very much. Let's get more now on the significance of all of this in Mosul. We are joined by retired Lt. General Mark Hertling. He spent 37 years in the U.S. Army serving of that time in Iraq. So I mean, whether it's one day, 10 days, 15 days, I mean, really in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter. Mosul is lost to ISIS. The question is what comes next?
[Lt. General Mark Hertling, Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, Hala, that's the key question and great reporting by Nick Paton Walsh. What I would say there are still a lot of fighting that needs to be done in Mosul as Nick said, the [inaudible] have been extremely brave and courageous over these last some nine months that this fight has been ongoing with Iraqi Security Forces around the perimeter of Mosul. I've fought there before. It's a very difficult city and even in saying that, I'm a little hesitant to even say that, Hala, because when I fought there, it was several weeks of fighting. They have been doing this for months. The energy of the ISIS fighters is much greater than al Qaeda. They have provided a much tougher enemy to the Iraqi Security Forces, and the ISF has unfortunately received many casualties during this operation. But the fight isn't over. Mr. Al-Abadi wanted to declare a psychological victory to the people of Iraq that Mosul has been regained. There were still be a lot of soldiers in that city continuing as you said a minute ago, getting rid of IEDs, taking care of sniper positions, finding where the tunnels and the booby-trapped complexes are, those will always be there. But there is also ISIS throughout Iraq remaining that needs to be taken care of. Though it is not wiped out
[Gorani:] Absolutely. But that was going to be my next point because yes, though, you regained this city. It's in ruins, so much of it, so much of the beautiful parts of old Mosul. Then you hold it as best you can, but these fighters and this presence and this group so long as the fundamental issues of Iraq and Syria aren't resolved will pop up somewhere else. How do you how do you confront that? How do you plan for that?
[Hertling:] Yes, that will Mr. al-Abadi's key action next because while he's continuing a fight ISIS in places like [inaudible] and Kirkuk Province and still in Anbar and [inaudible] out on the Syrian border. He is going to have to get rapidly humanitarian assistance and rebuilding aid to Mosul. I've seen Mosul destroyed in the past, nothing like it is right now but it is just wiped out. So it is billions of dollars that he is going to have to supply to that city and he is going to have to make sure it is appropriated correctly and overcome the kind of corruptions we've seen there in the past. At the same time, you had the Kurdish fighters and Mr. Barzani has been somewhat open recently about talking about perhaps a reform for independence here soon for the Kurdish region. That is going to affect Mosul and the continued fight of the Iraqi central government in Baghdad to pull all of their operations together and continue to do the things that they need to do the things that they need to do as an emerging nation.
[Gorani:] Right. But you have all these issues, of course, Prime Minister al-Abadi. You have the Kurds wanting more autonomy to the point maybe perhaps of asking for independence, complete independence from Baghdad, and then you have the Sunni population there as well. And if they continue to feel disenfranchised that's not solving the fundamental issue.
[Hertling:] That's correct. And Mr. Abadi has been very good about reaching out to the Sunnis, but they will continue to remain distrustful to a degree. They have to see action from this Shia-led government in Baghdad before they say the fight is over. So his biggest part of the fight is coming up next and that's what he does with the money and the aid and the rebuilding. The fight against ISIS was difficult. This next part will be even harder.
[Gorani:] Mark Hertling, thanks very much for joining us with more of our breaking news and our reporting from the frontlines. Mosul perhaps days away from total liberation, perhaps the fight will be harder with deeply entrenched ISIS combatants inside the old city. Well, ISIS, they certainly going to come up in the meeting between these two men in July. We are now getting word that the American president, Donald Trump, will meet with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, face- to-face, at the G20 Summit next month in Hamburg, Germany. News of the meeting came during a briefing by National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. McMaster also said the president had directed him to confront what he called Russia's destabilizing behavior and deter Russia from future conflicts with the U.S. The president has another important meeting on the agenda. He'll have dinner with the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, in about three hours. The problem is North Korea is expected there to dominate the agenda. Mr. Trump seemed to spend, though, a lot of time tweeting about an entirely different subject today that had nothing to do with North Korea and nothing to do with ISIS. Let's bring in CNN political commentator, David Swerdlick, from Washington. Want to get to that tweet, get it out of the way, and then talk about these foreign policy issues because even when you I'm sure you watched and listened to White House briefing today. The tweet that Donald Trump posted about Mika Brezinski at MSNBC morning show "Anchor" saying that she'd come to Mar-a-Lago in January and she was bleeding badly from a face lift, et cetera, et cetera. All the questions I mean, it just sucks the oxygen, right, out of the press briefing. Practically all of the first 10 questions were about this tweet, David?
[David Swerdlick, Cnn Political Commentator:] That's right, Hala. Look, in my view, it's a sexist comment. Totally beneath the dignity of the office of the president and as you say it distracts from the real issues of the day. And then you have the deputy press secretary go out to the press briefing today and complained that the media were not covering more substantive, more important issues yet the president started the news cycle with these tweets toward a host on another network, which were totally irrelevant to anything and just a really cheap shot about someone's looks. All around a poor form and you've had both members of the president's own party and the opposition party and people all over criticizing him and rightly so for it.
[Gorani:] Right. And without sort of going into the tweet itself, we have heard, you know, senior Republicans on the Hill reacting to this saying it's inappropriate. It's beneath the office of the presidency. But I guess the question in terms of what our international viewers I'm sure are asking themselves is will this have an impact or will this be yet another thing that will be forgotten in two days until the next outrage.
[Swerdlick:] Well, look, I think this is far below a line that's already been set. We've gotten accustomed for better or for worse to President Trump sending out tweets at all hours of day and night that are unlike any other statements that his predecessors have issued. That being said even though we are getting used to them, Hala, this is something you know, a public tweet about someone's looks, someone he knows, someone who has interviewed him, it really I think is going to take a few days for the dust to settle on this one. Even though, yes, you are right eventually we will go back to talking whatever the next issue is, the next crisis is, the next outrage is. That's how it goes in this presidency.
[Gorani:] We were showing there a tweet by the Republican senator from Nebraska, Ben Sasse, saying, "just stop it."
[Swerdlick:] Yes.
[Gorani:] Let's talk a little bit about now this meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, which is scheduled to take place we understand according to H.R. McMaster on the sidelines of the G20 meeting in Germany. H.R. McMaster said he's been advised or he's been directed essentially to find a way to stop Russia from being a destabilizing force, but the White House at the same time issued a statement saying they wanted to the relationship between Russia and the west to become a better friendlier relationship. So that's kind of a contradiction there. What can we expect?
[Swerdlick:] Well, look, there's plenty as you say, there's plenty for President Trump and President Putin to talk about. You've got an opportunity I don't know if he'll take it for President Trump to give a private strong statement to President Putin that the reported and documented by our intelligence services meddling in our electoral process by Russian intelligence should seize. And what if any action the U.S. will take in response to that. There is still the ongoing issue since 2014 of Russian incursion into Crimea and then there is all of the issues around the military involvement of Russia and other countries in Syria. That being said, there is still this weird dynamic where President Trump throughout his campaign made these very friendly overtures, friendlier than he was to many allies of the United States toward Russia and toward President Putin. So we'll just have to see what comes out of that meeting in terms of whether or not President Trump will take the opportunity to press the interest of the United States with the head of Russia.
[Gorani:] I'm sure everybody will be looking at the body language after his very manly handshakes with Emmanuel Macron and others. But yes, you're mentioning the weird dynamic there. It's going to be very interesting to see what comes out of it and whether it will just be a pull aside, which is more informal or whether it will be a formal one-on-one. Anyway, David Swerdlick, we'll talk soon again. We're expecting, by the way, Donald Trump to make some remarks a little bit later this hour. We'll take that and we will speak with you later. Now to this, a chief adviser to Pope Francis and the third highest ranking official inside the Vatican is staring down multiple charges of sexual assault in his native Australia. Cardinal George Pell claims he's innocent, but the claims have been swirling around him for years. We will go live to Australia in a moment, but first Anna Coren with this report.
[Anna Coren, Cnn International Correspondent:] For decades, allegations of covering up sexual abuse within the Australian Catholic Church have dogged him. But it never stopped George Pell from rising through the ranks to become one of the Vatican's most powerful. But now the 76-year-old cardinal himself has been charged with multiple sexual assault offenses. The result of a two-year investigation sending shockwaves through the Vatican and around the world. Police offering few details.
[Shane Patton, Deputy Commissioner Of Police:] Today, the Tory Police have charged Cardinal George Pell with historical sexual assault offenses. Cardinal Pell has been charged on summons and he is required to appear at the Melbourne Magistrate Court on the 18th of July. Cardinal Pell is facing multiple charges in respect to a start sexual offenses and there are multiple complaints.
[Coren:] Cardinal Pell is one of Pope Francis' top adviser as the secretary to the economy, he is in charge of the Vatican's finances. He was also handpicked to sit on the pope's eight-member advisory council fit out to address issues including sexual abuse within the church. Reading a statement from the Vatican just hours after the charges were laid, Cardinal Pell says he has endured a relentless character assassination and that he is innocent.
[Cardinal George Pell:] I'm looking forward finally to having my day in court. I'm innocent of these charges. They are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is apparent to me.
[Coren:] Last year, Cardinal Pell refused to return to Australia to testify before a Royal Commission into the church's mishandling of sexual abuse.
[Pell:] I regret that I didn't do more at that stage.
[Coren:] Instead he gave four days of testimony from a hotel in Rome. His doctors claiming he was too ill to fly. Survivors of sexual abuse at the hands of clergy overseen by Pell were angered by his answers that they felt showed a lack of understanding and empathy. This will be a monumental test for Pope Francis, who up until now has stood by the cardinal. There is no extradition treaty between Australia and the Vatican. However, the pope has given Cardinal Pell a leave of absence to return to Australia to defend himself. Anna Coren, CNN, Hongkong.
[Gorani:] Journalist, Sara James, joins me now live from Melbourne and our senior Vatican analyst, John Allen, is also editor of "Crux" is with us via Skype from Denver, Colorado. Sarah, first of all, how do we expect the cardinal to defend himself? Do we have any idea what his plan is? What his strategy is?
[Sara James, Journalist:] We don't his strategy yet, but what we do know is that Cardinal Pell has said consistently and frequently that these charges are false. He's always maintained he's innocent. That goes back a long way. And I think we can expect while not knowing the strategy to expect a similar line of commentary coming from him as this unfolds. Of course, we'll know more on that very first day July 18th that is the day that he is required to appear. We also know I think what's important is and you heard some of that in that report that what is crucial is what is that the base of this is this Royal Commission. Now this is the highest level of investigation that is offered here in Australia and this went on for a long time. It was called for in November of 2012 and it started in April of 2013. And day after day of harrowing testimony from victims who were raped by priests, who suffered all sorts of abuse and who were there to talk about what had happened at the hands of pedophiles in the Catholic Church and also in other institutions. Because that was what this Royal Commission had been called for, to look at this institutional abuse. So that's the backdrop but he is saying that he did not do any of this.
[Gorani:] And I'll get to John in just a moment, but speaking of backdrop, we are seeing a beautiful church behind you. How is it connected to George Pell?
[James:] Well, this is St. Patrick's Cathedral here in Melbourne and Cardinal Pell started in a town about an hour from here, a gold rush town called "Ballarat," and that's a country town. And he really had a meteoric rise and during part of that time, he served behind me, at St. Patrick's as the archbishop of the Arch Diocese then went from here to Sydney and from Sydney on to the Vatican. And again, has this illustrious career, but the questions really up until this were really about had he done enough to kind of root out the problem of these pedophile priests, and now the question, was he guilty of these historical sexual assault offenses. And exactly what those are, we don't know. Those were not released by the police.
[Gorani:] All right, and John Allen, is this a big crisis for Pope Francis? I mean, he's the third highest ranking official at the Vatican?
[John Allen, Cnn Senior Vatican Analyst:] Well, I think exactly how big a crisis it turns out to be, the pope, Hala, depends upon what happens when George Pell returns to Australia and undergoes this trial. If he's exonerated and if that finding is received and accepted, this might be a sort of blip on the radar screen and George Pell himself as he returned to the Vatican in a strengthened position. If on the other hand, this trial goes forward and he is indeed found guilty and that verdict is seen to be based on reasonable evidence, then sure, this is a major problem for the pope. I mean, there is nothing in recent memory that stands up alongside sexual abuse scandals the Catholic Church is facing. But in terms of what cancer it has been, some people think you have to go back to the process of information to find something else the church to its core quite like this. And if the very first [inaudible] is convicted of sexual abuse and their very senior Vatican official is connected to sexual abuse then obviously that puts a massive exclamation point on just what a nightmare this has been for the Catholic Church. But that of course is getting ahead of ourselves because we always have to say an indictment is not the same thing as a conviction and even the police in the state of Victoria had acknowledged that Cardinal Pell is entitled [inaudible] of innocence until he's found guilty of a crime.
[Gorani:] Right. And Sara, John, was talking about how it could be a crisis if indeed he goes through a trial and is found guilty. How long is this all expected to take?
[James:] No one has given us any estimate of how long it's going to take, but I will say one thing, it has taken a long time so far and the police have proceeded very slowly and painstakingly and were right to mention the fact that they said in that press conference, and it was really quite extraordinary. You know, they've really laid out the point that this is not none of these charges have been seen in the courtroom yet, so due process, they also said something else. They said that they treated this situation in exactly the same way that they preceded with any other similar cases that they didn't do anything differently despite the fact that this is such a high ranking person. So again, it's time to get to this stage and the cardinal has said that he is innocent of the charges and everyone will have their day in court.
[Gorani:] Thank you so much, Sara James in Melbourne, John Allen in Denver. We appreciate it. A lot more to come this evening. "I took a deep breath and then charged in," a policeman hailed as a hero describes the moment he confronted three attackers near London Bridge.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] The Russia story is a total fabrication. This Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. The entire thing has been a witch hunt.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Thirteen Russians indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for meddling in the 2016 presidential election.
[Unidentified Male:] The Russians also recruited and paid real Americans.
[Unidentified Female:] The goal here was simple damage Hillary Clinton and elect Donald Trump.
[Unidentified Male:] We truly regret any additional pain that that has caused. The FBI has determined that protocol was not followed. In this situation, the system clearly failed us.
[President Trump:] The doctors did a great job.
[Unidentified Male:] I sent her to school yesterday. She was supposed to be safe.
[Unidentified Female:] I don't really care what people who defend the Second Amendment have to say. Their arguments are invalid unless they've experienced this.
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. I'm Rene Marsh in for Christi Paul.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Victor Blackwell. We are live in Washington this morning where we are following major developments on our top two stories. Up first, President Trump, you know, spent more than a year calling it a hoax and a witch hunt and a total scam, but now Special Counsel Robert Mueller has indicted 13 Russians for interfering in the 2016 election. Now in documents, the Department of Justice claims the Russian effort involved unwitting Americans, including Trump campaign officials, and despite any concrete proof, the president says these charges have vindicated him in the Russia investigation.
[Marsh:] Our other top story, a stunning admission from the FBI. The bureau says it failed to act on a tip about the Florida school shooter. Now some are asking could that tip have prevented the massacre that killed 17 students and teachers.
[Blackwell:] More on the latest in the Florida investigation in a moment. But we'll start with CNN's Jeff Zeleny and new details on how Russians allegedly worked to influence the 2016 election Jeff.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] President Trump spending the weekend at his presidential retreat in Mar-a-Lago, Florida. Of course, in the wake of the indictments back in Washington, certainly hanging over the Trump administration once again. For more than a year, the president has been saying the Russia meddling investigation is a hoax, a witch hunt. That was proven to be not true, at least in the view of the Department of Justice. Handing down 13 indictments, the most sweeping case yet of Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Of course, the president has said that simply nothing happened. He's recounted the fact that when he talked to Vladimir Putin last November in Vietnam during the APEC Summit that he believed Vladimir Putin's denials of any Russian meddling. The Department of Justice today said that was simply not the case. They went song and verse in a 37-page sweeping indictment about how the St. Petersburg internet factory simply meddled in the election, in this U.S. election here. The president, though, had this to say on Twitter in response. He said this, "Russia started their anti-U.S. campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for president. The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong. No collusion." Certainly, President Trump seizing on the fact that he said there was no suggestion there was collusion. He did not talk about the fact that Russia, indeed, meddled in the election at least in the view of the Justice Department that follows in line with all of the thinking of the top U.S. intelligence chiefs here in the United States. So, as this goes forward, of course, this is the beginning, not the end of the findings of the Mueller investigation. Steve Bannon, the former chief strategist at the White House, spent more than 20 hours this week alone before Robert Mueller's team. What was he asked, what did he tell, that, of course, will come in the days, weeks, and months to come perhaps. The president for now spending the weekend here at his retreat in Florida. Perhaps playing some golf. But, clearly, the Russia investigation still weighing on the Trump presidency. Jeff Zeleny, CNN, West Palm Beach, Florida.
[Marsh:] Well, for more on how Russia is reacting to this latest news, we're going to go to CNN international correspondent, Matthew Chance, who is live for us this morning in Moscow. Matthew, what sort of reaction are you hearing from the kremlin this morning?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, Rene, as soon as any suggestion is made to Kremlin officials about these allegations of meddling in the U.S. election, the traditional response is being one of denial. It's been no different this time. As soon as these 13 indictments were put out there by the U.S. Justice Department, there were more denials coming from the Kremlin. The most recent one from the Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov. He said this, "If there was any fire there, the smoke would be immediately visible. We could not and did not interfere. They are still talking about state interference in the pre-election process, but I have not seen a single fact." He said that speaking at the Munich Security Conference just a few hours. There have been similar rejections as well from other Russian officials. Basically, we're seeing the Russians retreat back to their traditional position of denial, even confronted with these latest indictments by the U.S. Justice Department.
[Marsh:] All right. And Matthew, there is there was one Russian who was actually named in the indictment. Tell us a little bit more about him as well as this Internet Research Agency also named in the indictment.
[Chance:] Well, there were 13 Russians in that indictment, but you're right, there was one man there, a billionaire oligarch from Russia, known to be very close to Vladimir Putin, who was basically said to be the person who bankrolled this whole Internet Research Agency, the notorious kremlin troll farm, which originally had its offices in St. Petersburg, the Russian city there in the north of European Russia. This is an agency, which according to the indictment, had a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system. For instance, they organized anti-Muslim rallies in various cities. One in particular, a rally took place in May 2016, in Houston, Texas. They intervened in blogs and chat rooms, trying to sort of turn opinion against Hillary Clinton and towards Donald Trump. It's this troll factory that set out basically to try and distort the process in the United States and of course, to sow discord. Yevgeny Prigozhin is the man who is indicted for bankrolling that organization. He's a deeply controversial figure in this country. He owns a network of businesses. He is a billionaire. Again, he's known locally as Putin's chef because one of his businesses has a catering contract for the kremlin.
[Marsh:] All right. Matthew Chance live for us this morning in Moscow. Thank you.
[Blackwell:] All right. Let's bring in now Abby Phillip, CNN White House correspondent, Sarah Westwood, White House correspondent for "The Washington Examiner," Michael Moore, former U.S. attorney for the middle district of Georgia. Good morning, everyone. And Abby, I want to start with you with the list that we have collected from the president over the years a hoax, it's a witch hunt, it's fake, it's totally made up. I'd imagine that high note is harder to hit after we're getting the indictment from the Department of Justice?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Definitely. And as he's gone on, it shifted to no collusion, but you saw from the White House yesterday a shift in tone about this and also from Republicans more generally. Now they're acknowledging that Russia interfered and that is a serious problem
[Blackwell:] Calling them a bad actor.
[Phillip:] Calling them a bad actor and now they're blaming the Obama administration, of course, for not acting sooner. But clearly, the White House understands that they can't go on repeating the president's comments that it's a hoax. We saw hints at this earlier this week when Mike Pence was speaking in an interview. He talked about it in a way that was far different from the way that the president did. But the White House and the president are also jumping to a certain conclusion here, which is that these particular indictments, these 13 Russians that were indicted, point to the fact that there is no collusion. I think that the indictments actually make no judgment on that at all. In these particular indictments, they say no one was wittingly involved, but we also know that the Mueller investigation is still ongoing. The conclusions haven't been fully reached, and there is a degree to which there are unanswered questions still out there. The White House wants to say this is case closed.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Marsh:] And you speak about the president saying that, look, this clears me, no collusion. We have that tweet. Let's put that up for a second there. This was the first reaction we got from the White House was the tweet from the president essentially saying, "All that you see in this indictment shows that we did not collude with the Russians." I want to ask you, Sarah, this very question. You know, we're not long away from the midterm elections. You have the president saying, look, this frees me, but we have not heard him say what he plans to do as far as actions to prevent this sort of thing from happening again as we approach the midterms. How prepared do you think that we are?
[Sarah Westwood, White House Correspondent, "washington Examiner":] I think that because a lot of Democrats have conflated the certainty with which we know Russia interfered in the election with the certainty with which we know that the Trump campaign colluded with Russians, we're not at all certain that that happened. And because of that, President Trump has tried to shy away from talking about Russian interference at all. We know that Russia interfered in the election. We knew that before the indictment. We knew that because of the report that the intelligence community put out under President Obama. And just from a strictly political standpoint, these indictments weren't really a clean development for either narrative because it did give Republicans, Trump's allies, the ammunition to say there was no collusion named in these indictments. That Russians organized against Trump as well as for him. For Democrats, this is more irrefutable proof that Russia did meddle in the election in a really significant way.
[Blackwell:] Michael, I want everybody to listen to Christopher Wray, director of the FBI, as the intelligence heads were on Capitol Hill at the Senate hearing this week. Here's what he said about direction from the president on what to do now.
[Chris Wray, Fbi Director:] We're taking a lot of specific efforts to blunt Russian
[Unidentified Male:] Have you been directed by the president?
[Wray:] Not as specifically directed by the president.
[Blackwell:] No specific directions from the president. I'd imagine that's even more consequential in the context of what we've learned from this indictment.
[Michael Moore, Former U.s. Attorney, Middle District Of Georgia:] That's absolutely true, Victor. When the leader of the country has been so hesitant to actually acknowledge the fact that Russia meddled in the election despite the intelligence agencies for many months saying that that was a fact, I think that's put us behind the curve a little bit. Let me say this I think that for Trump to come out and say that there's no election meddling or collusion at this point is like the rooster crowing too early before dawn. I mean, there this is just an indictment. This is an indictment against 13 Russians. An indictment is just a document that lays out the facts relative and relevant to the accused defendants. So, the indictment is not intended to be a blanket document that tells everything the administration found out. In fact, I think it's interesting at this point when we're talking about some of the people charged here, we're not sure you know, Trump wants to say, look, I hadn't even announced that I was going to run for president back in 2014. That's what makes the financial documents, the tax returns, and the business transactions so important that we haven't seen yet. We don't know exactly what financial arrangements the Trump team or Trump himself had with Russia. So, those things may play in to why Russia got involved. They didn't do it for fun. There was a reason that they got involved and stayed involved and tried to get Donald Trump elected president. We may see that now that we don't have sanctions in place despite the fact that Congress passed them.
[Marsh:] To that point, Abby, I mean, last month the president kind of passed up an opportunity to add sanctions to Russia for their Russian meddling. What is your sense, you cover the White House, what's your sense as far as what is the administration doing to protect our elections from this point on?
[Phillip:] Well, I think the president is hesitant as you heard from Christopher Wray. The intelligence community is not getting their direction on this from the president and Mike Pence indicated when he was also talking about it this week. He said, he is helping to lead the call of government response to the threat of Russian meddling in the midterms. So, if this is going to happen, it's going to be because the president's deputy maybe empowered by him, is leading the response, is helping the Department of Justice work with states in order to prevent this kind of meddling from happening. I think it's been reluctant and perhaps a little bit slow. I mean, we are in 2018 right at this moment. Everybody has been saying in the intelligence community for months and months that this meddling is going to happen. It's already happening and needs to be acted on immediately. I also think it's interesting, you know, based on what Michael was just saying about the financial transactions here. What's interesting about these indictments is that they do kind of suggest that these Russians were trying to get Americans to work with them unwittingly. If in fact, the White House is happy with the indictments because they've shown no collusion, it would really make you wonders why did the president go to such great lengths to try to step in the street of this investigation. If the investigation was going in a direction that didn't lead to him, it probably would have been better for him to let it go.
[Blackwell:] All right, a lot to unpack in these 37 pages, including the persons known and unknown to the grand jury, which we want to talk about. We will have this conversation later this morning. Abby, Michael, and Sarah, thank you all.
[Marsh:] Coming up, a stunning admission from the FBI about a missed opportunity to prevent the Florida school massacre. The latest on that is coming up next.
[Blackwell:] Also, students from Marjory Stoneham Douglas High are grappling with how to deal with losing their friends in the school shooting. I sat down with five of them to get an idea of how they're coping. Where they are in their own words, that's coming up.
[Unidentified Female:] How can you not be scared after something like that happens? People I know, people I pass in the hall every day, just gone.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. John Berman here. It is a stunning basket of allegations against a man the president nominated to care for our nation's veterans. This morning new claims that the Secret Service had to get involved after Dr. Ronny Jackson got drunk while on an overseas trip with President Obama and loudly banged on the door of a female employee. This on top of the claims that he fostered a hostile workplace environment. This after reports that the doctor casually and perhaps inappropriately handed out prescription drugs.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] I understand he had a nickname in the White House among some of the White House staff?
[Sen. Jon Tester , Veterans Affairs Committee:] Yes. And it was the candy man because he handed out prescription drugs like they were candy.
[Berman:] It really is important to note that right now these are just allegations, albeit from multiple sources, but it is not clear if they are true. What does appear clear is that this White House did not know about any of these allegations when the president announced Dr. Jackson's nomination on Twitter. It begs the question, is there really any vetting at all when picking people for the top posts in this administration? This morning the president is standing by the nominee, we think. Abby Phillip at the White House for us. Abby, it's interesting, the president sort of hung Dr. Jackson out to dry yesterday and then overnight unhung him out to dry if that's such a thing.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That seems like the way these things go in this White House. President Trump saying one thing publicly and then privately saying another, but there is no question that these new allegations against Ronny Jackson have caught the attention of both Republicans and Democrats in Congress who have effectively put his nomination on hold. Now Jackson, a rear admiral in the Navy, has served both Republican and Democratic administrations and he's been promoted in his position, but there are some allegations being brought to Congress by whistleblowers who say that in one incident when he was on a foreign trip with former President Obama, he was knocking so loudly on a female employee's door that the Secret Service had to step in because it was so loud it might wake the president. And also there are some allegations that on foreign trips, he would hand out sleep aids to staffers and others traveling on these long haul flights. Now as you just mentioned, these are just allegations, but after President Trump made those comments in a press conference yesterday morning, he and Ronny Jackson actually met in the Oval Office where they talked, according to our sources, and the president delivered a message to him saying essentially, stay and fight, and after that the White House then has now come out with a number of pieces of evidence that they say support Jackson's nomination. They are standing by him for now and among those are some notes written by his former boss, his former presidents, sort of job recommendations in some ways and this one from former President Obama in 2014 where he said, "Ronny's positive impact cannot be overstated. He is a tremendous asset to the entire White House team. Already at a level of performance and responsibility that far exceeds his current rank, promote to rear admiral now." Now it is not clear when Ronny Jackson's nomination is going to move forward. That committee hearing that was supposed to be today has been postponed indefinitely and for now, Jackson is not withdrawing, although that as always can change at any moment John.
[Berman:] All right. Abby Phillip for us at the White House. Keep us posted, Abby. In just a few minutes, I'm going to speak to Senator Jon Tester, Democrat from Montana, the ranking member of the Veterans Affairs Committee. You heard him last night with Anderson Cooper laying out some of these allegations against Dr. Ronny Jackson. Even more have come to light since that interview. So we will talk to Senator Tester to see where things stand right now. Stay tuned for that. In the meantime, joining me, CNN political analysts Amy Parnes and Rachel Bade. Amy, I want to start with you here. It really has been striking the sheer volume and specificity of these allegations against Dr. Jackson. I really haven't seen anything quite like this come out of the blue about a Cabinet nominee. What do you make of it?
[Amy Parnes, Cnn Political Analyst:] I make a lot of it because it's not just coming from Democrats, it's coming from Republicans. Republicans for the last few weeks have been kind of scratching their heads wondering what's happening here, why would President Trump even go ahead and pick this guy. He wasn't vetted. They had a problem with that. A lot of people you know, one senator came to President Trump and said you know, was trying to convince him not to get rid of the former VA secretary. So I think you're seeing a lot of people kind of ruminate about this and it only continues to get worse since these allegations come out, I think.
[Berman:] And both parties clearly taking it seriously, they delayed the confirmation hearing indefinitely, which is something you don't see. Rachel, the other part of this, which is hard to understand, it's hard to reconcile, the statements that come from the Obama White House itself. I've spoken to David Axelrod, Dan Pfeifer, over the last several months, who have only the best things to say about Dr. Jackson, and then there are the words from President Obama himself. Abby read one of the quotes out loud. Here's another. Ronny does a great job this is from President Obama. "Ronny does a great job. General enthusiasm, poised under pressure, incredible work ethic and follow through. Ronny continues to inspire confidence with the care he provides me, my family and my team. Continue to promote ahead of peers." This is from President Obama, theoretically roughly at the same time that these whistleblowers are saying that Dr. Jackson was drunk, you know, casually prescribing prescription drugs and knocking on women's doors.
[Rachel Bade, Cnn Political Analyst:] You know, the tell-tale sign of a good boss is how he or she treats their underlings. Of course he's going to be treating the president of the United States, both Obama and President Trump, with the very best and top respect that he has and behaving very professionally around them, but look. If you're going to run the VA, this is an agency with more than 350,000 underlings and employees. This is an agency that deals with the United States Military veterans, people who have served this country. This is a very tough job and just because you treat the president of the United States with respect and professionalism that anyone else would do, doesn't mean that you're going to be treating your underlings the same way. And I think that's why Republicans and Democrats on the Hill are very concerned about this, apparently there are allegations, 20 military men and women coming forward to the committee and saying he created a very hostile work environment, they called him the candy man because he passed out prescription medications so liberally, and the whole thing about drinking on the job. Think about this, if you were just a regular private practice doctor, your profession would be in jeopardy from these accusations let alone a person who is potentially to be the secretary of one of the most complex and important agencies in the United States government.
[Berman:] To be clear, Dr. Jackson has apparently told some Republican senators like Jerry Moran that these things are not true and he never misbehaved on the job. We will see, perhaps, if he gets to a confirmation hearing. And, Amy, just finally, one last point in this, this may be less of a Dr. Jackson story than a White House story. It's a vetting issue right now.
[Parnes:] Right.
[Berman:] They should have known these stories one way or the other.
[Parnes:] Right. John Kelly, his chief-of-staff, has a problem with this. There are people inside the White House who are kind of concerned about why he wasn't vetted, why they had to get to this level where people are concerned about it. And so you have this kind of, you know, push-pull between the president and his top aides. And so it's another one of those inside the White House kind of, you know, infighting. That's what's happening right now.
[Berman:] You're also seeing go ahead, Rachel.
[Bade:] I was going to say, just to follow-up on that. We're hearing that it's gotten so bad at the White House that certain White House sources, administrative sources, have started leaking negative information on people that the president wants to be named to certain Cabinet posts including Jackson that there's actually a covert campaign to try to get this out in the media because the President Trump will not listen to these advisers and so they have to go public with these things they're sort of seeing.
[Berman:] Right.
[Bade:] And that's just incredible.
[Berman:] Keep your eye on this, keep your eye on Scott Pruitt the next few days. I want to ask you about another member of the Cabinet, Mick Mulvaney, the head of OMB, the temporary head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, was speaking to some banking officials and he said something that I think startled people. He says, quote, "We had a hierarchy in my office in Congress," he said. "If you're a lobbyist who never gave us money I didn't talk to you. If you're a lobbyist who gave us money I might talk to you." Now he did also say that he would always speak to constituents one way or the other, whether they gave him money or not, but this ranking of if you're a lobbyist who gives me money, I may speak, that sort of feels like pay-to-play. If you're a lobbyist who pays you can play.
[Parnes:] Yes, I mean, as soon as he said that, I think a lot of people were thinking, you know, what is happening here? You're essentially saying lobbyists come first and, you know, this is part of Donald Trump wanted to drain the swamp and here's this guy kind of doing the opposite. So I think that's problematic for him and that's going to be a problem in the days to come.
[Berman:] He did say his constituents come first, then lobbyists who pay, then lobbyists who don't pay. But still the notion that paying gets you something more than it might not was fascinating. Rachel, one other big political story overnight, and it's interesting because the president tweeted about it and said the media should be talking about it. I'm not quite so sure he's going to like how we do talk about it. There was this Arizona special election where the Republican candidate did eke out a victory. But the victory was by five points. Debbie Lesko won by about five points in a seat that was plus 21 in the last presidential race. What are you hearing about Republican concerns about this result?
[Bade:] Yes, it might seem counterintuitive. Republicans won this special election but this is not cause for celebration for the GOP at all by any means. This, as you mentioned, is a district that Trump won by 21 points. It has been held in GOP hands for decades. I know the previous lawmaker who had to step down amid sexual harassment allegations back in his district. He was one of the most conservative members of the House. The reality is that Republicans should have won this district by at least double digits, but again, this is another sign that a Democratic wave is coming and that districts around the country that Republicans considered strongholds could be in jeopardy. There are almost 150 districts that are less conservative than this one and this one, Republicans only won by five points. That is cause to be concerned.
[Berman:] And they fought for it and spent in it. Amy Parnes, Rachel Bade, great to have you with us. Thank you very, very much. All right. Big showdown at the Supreme Court today in just a few minutes. Arguments begin over the president's travel ban. Already crowds and protests outside the court. Our Jessica Schneider is there. Jessica, what are you seeing?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, John, long lines of people waiting to get into this historic argument as well as protesters here. You know, the interest in this argument is so high that people, members of the public, they've been lined up out here since Sunday, hoping to get into the court for these arguments that will begin in an hour. Of course the president's signature immigration plan will finally have its day in the nation's highest court. All nine justices will be hearing arguments over whether or not this third version of the travel ban, whether or not it violates federal immigration law, whether or not it violates the Constitution's establishment clause. Now of course these arguments have been a long time in the making here. We are on the third version of this travel ban. The first version of course went into effect about a year and a half ago. It was very disruptive, very controversial, and then this past September the Trump administration after previous versions had been struck down in lower courts, they issued this third version of the travel ban. Of course, earlier this year, the Supreme Court decided that this version of the travel ban could go into effect while those appeals were taking place in the lower courts and now the Supreme Court will hear the arguments on it. Of course, this third travel ban, the administration argued was tailored after a nationwide review of security procedures and vetting. This travel ban is currently in effect. It applies to seven different countries including Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Venezuela and North Korea. So the challengers today, they'll get up before the justices and they'll say that the president has just taken these immigration measures too far, that it is not permitted under federal immigration law and of course they'll also bring up the president's own comments on the campaign trail, his anti-Muslim statements saying that he wanted to implement a Muslim ban. They'll also likely bring up the president's re-tweets back in November of anti-Muslim videos. But the Department of Justice, the government lawyers here, they all along will say that this is well within the president's right to restrict travel, to make sure that this country is safe. In fact, just a few minutes ago, the Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a statement on this and Attorney General Sessions said, "President Trump has been steadfast in his commitment to the safety and security of all Americans. The Constitution and acts of Congress confirm the president's broad discretion and authority to protect the United States from all foreign and domestic threats." So of course that will be the government's main argument here, John. In just under an hour, those attorneys will get up, the challengers will get up before the Supreme Court on what will be a monumental argument determining whether or not this travel ban is legal John.
[Berman:] And, Jessica, another major legal decision overnight. This had to do with the issue of DACA, another federal judge ruling against the administration. Explain.
[Schneider:] Yes. That's right. Another blow to the Trump administration when it comes to DACA. So this was yet another federal court judge who rules that DACA had to go into effect. We've heard from other federal court judges before who said you have to continue renewing these applications. This was a bit different. The federal court judge in this case said not only do you have to renew these applications you also have to accept new applications here. The judge however in this case delayed this order for 90 days allowing the Trump administration to submit memos challenging his decision, but if this were to go into effect, the DACA program not only would have to accept the renewals but also have to accept these new applicants which again is a huge blow to the Trump administration that has talked about the fact that Congress has gone too far when it implemented DACA and has tried to shut this program down John.
[Berman:] All right. Jessica Schneider, outside the Supreme Court, thank you very much. Up next the top Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee who heard from more than 20 current and former military employees about allegations against Dr. Ronny Jackson. Senator Jon Tester will join us shortly. Plus after he called it insane, the president signals a possible breakthrough on the Iran deal so where does it stand now? And Melania Trump gets her moment in the spotlight with the visit of the French leaders. Stay with us.

[Robyn Curnow, Cnn:] Hello and welcome back to our continuing coverage of the attack in London. I'm Robyn Curnow. At this hour, we are waiting to hear the names of three men who are responsible for Saturday's terror outraged in London. The Prime Minister says those responsible have been identified. Theresa May says the names will be released when the investigation permits. London Mayor Sadiq Khan called the attackers perverse and poisonous and he says he's furious the terrorist are trying or using his faith to justify what they did. Meanwhile, police are restoring barriers on some bridges in London to make them safer for pedestrians. The Prime Minister is talking more about the victims and the different countries they came from.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] The police are working hard to establish the identity of all of those who were tragically killed or injured in the event on Saturday night. But it is now clear that sadly victims came from a numbers of nationalities. This was an attack on London and the United Kingdom, but it was also an attack on the free world.
[Curnow:] Theresa May there. Well, let's go straight to New Scotland Yard, the London police headquarters. Samuel Burke was there. You back now, Samuel. Just give us some sense of this investigation. Where are we at the moment? What do we know?
[Samuel Burke, Cnn Correspondent:] Sorry about that, Robin. It's starting to rain here at Scotland Yard. We do know that raids were carried out this morning and that 11 people had been detained. And we know that the police know the identity of these three attackers. But the real reason it's so important that we learn the name of those three attackers and that the public does so that we can get a better sense of if they were on the radar of the U.K. authority. Melissa Bell, our correspondent, has done some reporting and that she spoke to somebody who lives near what is believed to be one of the attackers. Woman says she recognized him from the footage that we have seen. And this woman says that she flagged him up to the authorities. Now, we also know that some people said in the Muslim community up in Manchester that they have flagged up the terrorist attacker behind the Ariana Grande concert and that maybe that had bond to the crafts. We heard that from U.K. media today that it looks like maybe that phone call didn't go to the right department. And just a short time ago, we had the commander of the police out here with members of the Muslim community and they said point-blank, Muslims need to do more, but I said, how can you reconcile the possibility that Muslims up in Manchester were flagging up some and abated to the authorities and it may have fallen through the cracks? And this is what the police commander told me.
[Mak Chishty, Police Commander For Engagement:] Unlike a single person, a lone wolf kind of attack, they may keep everything to themselves. When you got three people in concert necessarily there must have been some discussion around that and some people even the closest point to them must do something. And we're saying that had a duty, the Muslim community say, they had that duty to report it.
[Burke:] So, Robyn, essentially what he is saying there it's not enough for Muslims to just flag up the suspicions that they may have about their fellow community members. That commander who is Muslim himself currently fasting on Ramadan. He said that people need to also flag up the attack and he's saying that if three people knew about it then four people must have known about it, that's his assumption, and that they should have flagged it up. I spoke to members of the Muslim community, those leaders who are there pictured next to him, afterward and they say that they are pushing the police given the reports that they heard that members of the Muslim community flagged up some [inaudible] and they want to know that the police if they're receiving these calls are caring through on the information, Robyn.
[Curnow:] Samuel Burke, today, outside a west and rainy in Scotland Yard. Thanks so much. Now, Prime Minister Theresa May called terror rampage an attack on the free will, as we heard a little bit earlier, let's get straight to Downing Street now. Nic Robertson is there for us. And what is also so critical is the timing of this attack in election this week.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] And it pushed Theresa May in a very, very difficult position as well as the other political leaders here. They want to be sensitive to people's concerns about this attack. But at the same time the election is too close to cancel, and as they have as most the politicians in Britain have said is the attack is an attack on the democracy and the election is the sort of fundamental points of that democracy. So, the election and the campaigning will go ahead. In fact, Theresa May has now sort of switched really from focusing on the terrorism investigation that the police and intelligence services are handling. And she is going comeback to political campaigning today. That said, it does in a way put Theresa May open for criticism on the her leadership at the British Home Office. She oversaw reduction in the number of police officers, that does been criticism as well, and there aren't enough armed police officers. So, has just been prime minister for 10 months and the Home Secretary responsible for police prior to that and given that there's now been three terror attacks in the space of three months. There is political criticism of the decisions that she has made over the past few years that could have contributed to this. This is certainly something that the leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, has fixed on. He said that she should actually resign for the accounts that she's made to the police force under her leadership. And his Labor Party is saying that they will increase the police force by 10,000 officers but they not been played how they'll fund that however, Robyn.
[Curnow:] And so that's the criticism of her job before she became prime minister which might have an impacts on response now, but what does this mean for voters when they go to vote? Do you think this attacking in many ways buzz him? Did you actually put take the box or do you think it gain, there is still that exhaustion that we spoke about last week?
[Robertson:] There are lots of things that play here. You know, before the terror attack in Manchester and London, Theresa May was campaigning on a very personality driven focus that she is the only one that can give the country stable and secure leadership and strong leadership going into the Brexit negotiation that begin less than two weeks after this election, that the leader of the Labor Party, Jeremy Corbyn, isn't strong enough, isn't the right figure. That resonates to a degree with the voters across the country. That there are other issues that resonate as well the state of the British Health Service, State of the Police is another one, the State of Education in the country as another one. So, there's a lot of other things out there other than the terrorism issue. But rightly, people are going to be have concerns when they go to vote, that this concerns about safety and security either the coastal politicians there are encouraging the people to go out and vote that there will be and are additional police officers on the streets on police officer in London, and a higher visible presence in other places around the country. But in such circumstances it wouldn't be unexpected if there was a slightly lower turnouts and, obviously, depending on the level of turnout and who it is a younger, older that come out that can also tip the scales of election. So, will this cast a shadow over the election? Undoubtedly. Will it completely reshape it? Probably not. But will it impacted in some way? How much? I think we have to say yes it will. But how much will it have real consequence? It's just not clear at the moment, Robyn.
[Curnow:] Nic Robertson, currently reporting at this comprehensive in the last 48 hours or so. Thanks so much coming to us from 10 Downing Street. Well, let's focus on the ongoing fast-moving investigation into the event of Saturday night. We know that 11 individuals are currently in police custody. Sajjan Gohel is the International Security Director for the think tank Asia-Pacific Foundation. He joins us now from London. We've heard the prime minister and other people say enough is enough, but what more needs to be done? What needs to change?
[Sajjan Gohel, Intl. Security Director, Asia Pacific Foundation:] Well, Robyn, one of the problems I'm afraid, is the fact that ISIS through its what they call just terror tactics, are able to carry out attacks spontaneously, sporadically, they are able to do it without the plot has been is stopped. And this is the challenge now is that, how does one try and preempt this type of terrorism? The other aspect that is connected to this is the fact that they are using encrypted messaging programs to communicate to plot and plan attacks, so ISIS handlers, the intelligence operators as known as the EMINI, for example, are able to use these programs to communicate with people in the UK and give them guidance and that is partly what the prime minister is talking about, is that that needs to be looked at. And that's going to be a very difficult discussion coming up in the aftermath of the elections because that means looking at potentially preventing people from accessing these type of social media tools.
[Curnow:] And it will be a conversation about free speech and also backdoors in terms of what kind of access governments gets too many of these media company, that itself is a tough question, what else needs to be done?
[Gohel:] Well, one thing is the fact that the ideology of ISIS needs to be clearly identified and exposed, very often, they are allowed to use the pulpit of social media to get that propaganda out and it's never checked. It is never scrutinized. People don't look at the fine print about this difficult, the fact that they are killing Muslims in Iraq and Syria, many of them women and children. They portray themselves as representative of a faith but actually they do not discriminate in terms of who they kill a lot of those people in the U.K. that may think that somehow they represent something genuine. They are actually misguided into thinking that with the fact that ISIS has been responsible for creating massive graves of people in Iraq and Syria. They're finding them those massacres. For example, in Mosul City, ideology needs to be looked at that there is something very warped and twisted about this death cult, and it is to come out clear needs to be illustrate to the fact that they are killing people in Iraq and Syria, as well as in the west.
[Curnow:] And this also talks about there in England you I mean there have been literally three attacks that are three months in the U.K. Is it just bad luck that these three have got through because just in the last few weeks he heard security chief say they were dealing with up to 500 potential terror plots. Up until now the U.K. had been relatively unscathed kind of terror hitting Paris and Brussels, for example.
[Gohel:] Well, I would argue that the British security services, the police authorities are some of the best in the world. They have disrupted many plots. Since the Westminster attack a few months ago, five plots have been disrupted. It's kind of old adage, I guess that they have to be lucky all the time. The terrorist need to be a lucky just that one since it is part of the problem that ISIS had, two years ago, focus on France and the bed met many of the attacks in Europe than last year. The focus moved to Belgium and Germany., and now the U.K. is unfortunately having to deal with this. It's also connected to the fact that the more territory ISIS loses in Iraq and Syria. They will want to try and show that they retain power and control and as they slowly get dismantled, they will try and carry out as many attacks as possible to take down as many people as possible. And the other thing that is important is the timing of this technologist before the general elections but during holy month of Ramadan. Last year they carried out some eight attacks across the world in the Islamic world and in the West. And it is no coincidence that the trying to do it during this time for their own nefarious purposes.
[Curnow:] Yes. Let's not forget many families in Iraq and Afghanistan also lost loved one and isn't loved ones last week. This is not just isolated U.K. this week, it is been a bloody Ramadan so far already. So with that in mind what more does the U.K., this is specifically talked about the U.K. here, all we going to see more armed policemen on the street. Is there going to be a change in lifestyle despite the fact that the British say keep calm and carry on where to find our life is not to change. Do you think that they can be lawfully lasting impact in terms of how the states tried to protect these people?
[Gohel:] Our lives are going to change. It's OK for the politicians to give sound bites about how this one impact on us. But it is impacting on us. The fact that there are more armed police for a country that has never really had police officers carrying weapons, they are in now in greater numbers. That is a sign of the reality, the fact also with the police themselves having targets for terrorism. So things will continue to alter as we move forward that needs to be also more front-line police officers to engage with the communities because if communities are effectively the best source of intelligence there has to be greater interaction between the police and the community, which is already very good level. Far better than countries like France and in Belgium, but they need to be more police officers. And there's already been some controversy over the fact the police numbers have been reduced over the last few years is also going to have to be greater cooperation with other countries. We keep talking about that some 16 years after 911, but that is something that still is required in. I think, Robyn, one thing that is reminds me a lot of the problems that exist now is that these type of attacks are becoming the new normal. There is almost virtually nothing one can do to stop somebody getting into a car turning into a lethal weapon. It is something that we can try and contain. So for example when the British police landed near London Bridge, they were able to activate themselves within eight minutes that was very important. So they can stop the attack, but they control them from proliferating.
[Curnow:] And of course people around them incredibly vigilant and often act of bravery, a help that contain the situation even more. Sajjan Gohel always great to have you on the show, thanks so much for joining us.
[Gohel:] My pleasure.
[Curnow:] Well Donald Trump has strongly condemned Saturday's terror attack and he is also renewed his feed with the London Mayor. We will have the latest from the White House after this.

[Romans:] Two passengers and one flight attendant taken to the hospital after a delta connection flight bound for Seattle hit severe turbulence. This, right there, is what it looked like inside of the plane. One of the passengers said the aircraft did a nose dive twice. Here's audio from the flight moments after it happened.
[Unidentified Male:] 5763 turn right at papa. And do you know if there was any damage to the aircraft? Round papa and we are not sure, we don't believe so. Compass 5763, do you know how many people on board are injured? We were never able to get an actual count. We know there are a couple possible more serious injuries.
[Romans:] The plane forced to make an emergency landing in Nevada. Customers boarded an alternate flight to Seattle later in the day. The Denver Broncos have a new quarterback, picking up former Super Bowl MVP Joe Flacco from Baltimore Ravens. The deal will not become official until the new league year begins on March 13th. The Ravens are expected to get a mid-range draft pick in return. The trade means Baltimore is officially committing to Lamar Jackson as its quarterback.
[Briggs:] Disney releasing the first trailer for "Frozen 2," the long awaited sequel to the 2013 mega hit. The original cast is back for "Frozen 2" led by Kristen Bell and the royal sister, the wickedly talented Idina Menzel. The original "Frozen" made more than a billion dollars at the box office. It's the highest grossing animated film of all time. "Frozen 2" will hit theatres on November 22nd.
[Romans:] Oh, that's going to be great.
[Briggs:] The games all back.
[Romans:] Yes, pre-holiday smash there
[Briggs:] I can't wait.
[Romans:] OK. No more plea deal for Paul Manafort. A federal judge says Trump's former campaign chair lied, lied to Mueller investigators about his contacts with the Russians. The story, next.

[Michael Smerconish, Cnn Anchor:] as the writer. Is that a possibility?
[Smerconish:] Yes, that is a possibility. I'll see you next week. Thanks.
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to Saturday. I hope it has been good to you so far. I am Christi Paul.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] I am Victor Blackwell. Good to see you. So, who wrote it, the anonymous op-ed criticizing the president from inside his own administration? Days later, the president still wants to know, and his aides say they have now narrowed the search to just a few people.
[Paul:] A source close to the White House says the president is, quote, obsessed with finding out who it is, even chief of staff John Kelly tells him to let it go.
[Blackwell:] Now, after a week is a saw strong job numbers and a Supreme Court nominee a step closer to confirmation, President Trump says the anonymous op-ed writer may be a threat to democracy.
[Paul:] And the president said this is a matter of national security, in fact. The question is, is he going to try to involve the Justice Department?
[Blackwell:] Joining us now live from the White House with more, CNN White House reporter Jeremy Diamond. Jeremy, what do you know?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Victor and Christi, the hunt is still under way here at the White House. White house officials informally scrambling to find out who this senior administration official who penned an op-ed in the "New York Times" really is. And Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, has offered some indication. She said she doesn't believe it's somebody in the White House. But here's what she said the president believes.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you think that person is inside the White House?
[Kellyanne Conway, Counselor To President Trump:] Most of us don't think that. The president just today said he believes it's somebody in national security. But what I do believe is that who has said that ought to come forward and say it, or ought to resign because the loyalty is not to the president only, or at all. It's loyalty to the presidency, it's loyalty to the constitution.
[Diamond:] And Kellyanne Conway there explaining part of the reason the president has been so upset in recent days over the op-ed, fuming about it both privately and publicly, calling the author of this article a gutless coward. And the president also saying that he has concerns about the national security implications of this. Listen to what he told reporters just yesterday.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Supposing I have a high level national security and he has got a clearance, we talked about clearances a lottery centrally, and he goes into a high level meeting concerning China or Russia or North Korea or something, and this guy goes in. I don't want him in those meetings.
[Diamond:] And the president is now invoking national security, trying to go a step further. He really wants to escalate this informal investigation happening at the White House, turning it over to the Justice Department, saying just yesterday that he wants the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to investigate the author of the anonymous op- ed to uncover that person's identity. Of course, the president has yet to offer any indication of a crime that's been committed. And the "New York Times" is responding to that in a statement, saying "We're confident that the Department of Justice understands that the First Amendment protects all American citizens and that it would not participate in such a blatant abuse of government power." And as I mentioned, the president and the White House yet to offer allegations of a crime that occurs. That's typically what's required for the Justice Department to get involved. Back to you guys.
[Blackwell:] Jeremy Diamond for us at the White House. Thank you.
[Paul:] Douglas Brinkley, CNN presidential historian and history professor at Rice University is with us now, as well as CNN contributor Michael D'Antonio, Donald Trump biographer and author of "The Truth about Trump." Thank you for being here. Douglas, I want to start with you. Do you see this situation putting Attorney General Sessions in somewhat of a precarious position? He already seems to be on thin ice with the president, and now the president of course calling for him to get involved in this.
[Douglas Brinkley, Cnn Presidential Historian:] The Donald Trump-Jeff Sessions relationship is so dysfunctional at this point, one doesn't know what to make of their tit for tat game they play. We have a book coming out by Bob Woodward in which the president of the United States reportedly calls Jeff Sessions mentally retarded, mocks his southern accent. There are drumbeats on the right. All you have to do is watch FOX News and you'll hear the right drumbeat to get rid of Jeff Sessions because of his failure to recuse himself. So I think Donald Trump is just trying to divert people now. This is the week of the Woodward rollout. Instead he is hoping he could ferret out who anonymous is. He wants help from the Justice Department. Rand Paul is recommending maybe lie detector tests. He's shaking down staff any way he can. Instead of looking for Al Qaeda, in a segment we saw on CNN, he is doing the mad hunt for who wrote an op-ed piece because it wounded his ego so mightily.
[Paul:] So Michael, he made such a good point. And coming off this week where there are great economic numbers to discuss, is the president essentially sabotaging himself by keeping this going?
[Michael D'antonio, Donald Trump Biographer:] I think he is. Your comment about him sabotaging himself is really apt. This is a man that's practiced self-sabotage most of his life, everything from his personal relationships to his business bankruptcies to much of what goes on in his presidency really boils down to Donald Trump sabotaging himself. And as I was listening to the opening to the program, I noticed that just about everything everyone said was the opposite of reality. So the president says that this is a national security problem. Of course, we know that it is not. Kellyanne Conway talks about disloyalty to the presidency, and it's not. Actually, this op-ed was an attempt to reassure Americans the presidency is under some watch, that there's somebody looking out for us at least preventing the most extreme things from happening. So this is all, as you say, deflecting attention not only from Bob Woodward's book but from the accomplishments or the good news that the president could be bringing to our attention.
[Paul:] I want to run some sound here of Josh Rogin, we speak with him a couple hours ago on "New Day." And here's what he said about where this is going in terms of who is anonymous.
[Josh Rogin, Cnn Political Analyst:] I have been getting contacts from White House official ever since the thing published, and every single one of them has floated the name of the person who they already had a grudge against, OK, and they're all different, OK. So just based on what I am hearing from many White House officials, they're all pointing fingers at each other in different directions. They don't know anything.
[Paul:] Douglas, how much time can be spent on this and do some possible real damage?
[Brinkley:] Well, that's what I was intimating, that Donald Trump is obsessing over this and it's not good. He needs to follow the advice of General Kelly and move on. If you're going to spend weeks now doing a hunt for this person you very likely may come up empty handed. One thing I can tell you for certain is that the "New York Times" isn't going to reveal who anonymous is, so you would have to be basically interrogating your staff, creating a toxic environment in the White House that everybody sees a potential enemy, a trojan horse living amongst you. You can take the paranoia up to such a high level that it becomes radioactive, and Donald Trump has paranoia problems. So he is keeping exacerbating his problem, he's keeping the story alive. It's going to meld this week Bob Woodward doing 100 interviews. And instead of talking about what he could be, the economy and the fact that unemployment is what it is, there's many positives he can talk about, he's obsessing over this. I think in the long run it hurts him.
[Paul:] I wanted to ask you real quickly about Nikki Haley, Michael. We just have a couple of seconds left here, but she, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. wrote of anonymous that, she said "As a former governor I find it absolutely chilling to imagine a high ranking member of my team would secretly try to thwart my agenda." She said it is cowardly. On the other side of that we have Norm Eisen who is senior fellow from Brookings who wrote in a CNN opinion that anonymous, he said "I believe the author is doing the ethical thing in resisting Trump from within and writing about it openly." He called anonymous an American hero. In your opinion is anonymous a hero, is he or she a coward?
[D'antonio:] I think anonymous is a hero. I think Norm is correct. Nikki Haley is a normal public leader. She's applying a metric that doesn't apply here. Donald Trump is not normal, he's not up to the duties that he's assumed, and I think this writer is doing what he or she can do to alert us to the reality at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
[Paul:] All right, Douglas Brinkley and Michel D'Antonio, gentlemen, we appreciate you both taking time for us today. Thank you.
[D'antonio:] Thank you.
[Brinkley:] Thank you.
[Blackwell:] President Trump's former fixer says he wants his money back. Michael Cohen says he wants to tear up the nondisclosure agreement he reached with adult film star Stormy Daniels. This was in the months before the 2016 election. Revoking the agreement would require Daniels to payback the $130,000 she received to stay silent about an alleged affair with then candidate Donald Trump. So joining me to talk about this, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Shan Wu. Shan, welcome back. Let's start here. Is it as simple as we tear it up, you return the money, we're good?
[Shan Wu, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Definitely not, Victor. Although it is possible Cohen could use that money to pay his mounting legal bills, I don't really think that's the legal strategy at work here. This is part of a pattern that he is doing trying to drop some of these suits which could expose more information he doesn't want exposed. Obviously having to go forward with the suit in a civil situation you're going to have what's called discovery, you'll have depositions, and with regard to the president, there is some legal precedent dating back from Clinton days that the deposition, civil suits, might not be stayed. So all of that is the can of worms that he will want to avoid. In addition to that, of course, Cohen personally has the issues going on with the Justice Department's investigation and his criminal liability. All of these types of issues where he would have to participate exposes him to further jeopardy. He might have to take the Fifth Amendment. So it has become impractical for him to proceed on this or, for example, those libel suits they had against "Buzzfeed" as well. It is becoming an overwhelming dead end for him.
[Blackwell:] You remember, as our viewers will, an attorney, a friend of Mr. Cohen coming on and saying that every time Michael Avenatti or Stormy Daniels talked about the president or talked about the details to which this deal was made, was $1 million fine. They would have to pay $1 million and it's racking up. Whatever happened to that? Was that ever plausible?
[Wu:] That does not seem plausible. While you can argue each instance of the alleged breach is another amount of damages, you'd have to quantify damages. And that's one of the big issues in civil lawsuits which are all about money as opposed to criminal, which is about going to jail. You have to have a damages expert establish what kind of damage arises from those individual breaches. And particularly if you're talking about a situation where someone like President Trump is trying to allege that damage arises from breach of a questionable NDA to begin with, he is already a public figure. There's so much back and forth about him that I think it would be very, very hard to establish what kind of damages he has.
[Blackwell:] We'll see where it goes next. Shan Wu, thank you.
[Wu:] Thank you, Victor.
[Paul:] Former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos is going to spend 14 days in prison for lying to investigators about his contacts with people connected to Russia during the 2016 campaign. CNN's Jake Tapper spoke to Papadopoulos exclusively in his first interview, and he maintains that he doesn't remember telling anyone on the Trump campaign that he was told the Russians had Hillary Clinton's e-mails, but he also left open the possibility that it did happen.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] There are going to be people out there that think there's no way George Papadopoulos didn't tell anyone on the campaign. Did you tell anyone on the campaign?
[George Papadopoulos:] As far as I remember I absolutely did not.
[Tapper:] You didn't tell Corey Lewandowski?
[Papadopoulos:] As far as I remember I absolutely did not share this information with anyone on the campaign.
[Tapper:] Not Sam Clovis?
[Papadopoulos:] Anyone.
[Tapper:] Dearborn, Mashburn?
[Papadopoulos:] Anyone.
[Tapper:] Walid Phares, none of them?
[Papadopoulos:] I might have, but I have no recollection of doing so. I can't guarantee it. All I can say is my memory is telling me that I never shared it with anyone on the campaign.
[Paul:] You can see the rest of that interview tonight in a CNN special, "The Mysterious Case of George Papadopoulos." That's tonight on CNN at 8:00 p.m. eastern.
[Blackwell:] Friends and family of the man killed by a Dallas police officer who shot him after entering an apartment she believed was her own say they want justice.
[Unidentified Male:] There are people who are very angry. They're calling me, what are we going to do, we must take action.
[Blackwell:] We'll have some of the growing list of questions in this case ahead.
[Paul:] Also, deadlines to register to vote for the midterm elections are coming up. So we're going to look at how people for some, it seems like a simple task can be made more complicated just because they cannot get their
[I.d. Blackwell:] And we are watching the tropics. Meteorologist Allison Chinchar is tracking a few storms out there.
[Allison Chinchar, Cnn Meteorologist:] That's right, not one but three tropical systems to keep an eye on. We'll talk about what impacts will be to the U.S. coming up.

[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] I think it is important that as leaders we have shown our fierce determination to ensure that we use every tool available to us to fight against terrorism and protect our people.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] That was the British prime minister, Theresa May, at the G-7 summit in Sicily. Meanwhile, the U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is in the U.K. today meeting with the British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson. Both signed a condolences book for the victims of the Manchester attack. Part of Tillerson's visit is aimed at smoothing over some pretty ruffled feathers. The U.K. is angry at the U.S. over leaking investigation details to the U.S. news media.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] We take full responsibility for that. We obviously regret that that happened. In terms of how to fix the relationship between the U.S. and Great Britain, this special relationship that exists between our two countries will certainly withstand this particular unfortunate event.
[Blitzer:] Meanwhile, new raids and a new arrest. Police in Manchester now have eight people in custody in connection with Monday's terror bombing. Libyan militia says the bomber Salman Abedi spoke with his brother in Libya only 15 minutes before he launched the attack. For more on these developments, let's bring in our senior international correspondents, Fred Pleitgen and Arwa Damon. Fred, you're in London. What are they saying about the investigation?
[Fred Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correpondent:] Wolf, they're saying the investigation is still very much high paced. They've been making progress. You've mentioned some of the arrests. They say that is something they hope will help contain this network that they believe is behind this bombing. However, the big question here, is there still someone at large who is capable of building explosive devices like the one that was used in the Manchester bombing. The authorities hear say they're making progress on that but at this point in time they simply cannot be sure. They say they are working around the clock though. Listen really quick to what the state secretary for security affairs had to say earlier today.
[Ben Wallace, U.k. Security Minister:] We're following up the network and roll it out and try to contain it and get to the bottom of how big it is and how many are involved. We're getting to a stage where we're working it through. As you've seen from the number of arrests we're hopeful ne the right track to contain it and make sure that people that pose a further risk are being picked up and we're making sure that we can hopefully get back to normal.
[Pleitgen:] But at this point in time they're not even close to getting back to normal. The threat level here is still at critical which is the highest that country has. You still have soldiers on the street in London who are guarding key installations. A lot more armed police as well. As the authorities are trying to sift through that network and has the minister there said, trying to contain the network and through these arrests really trying to get more and more of those people off the street and stop them from being a danger to the public here in the U.K., Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Arwa, what can you tell us about the conversation between the suicide bomber Salman Abedi and his brother and the father role in all of this as well?
[Arwa Damon, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] At this stage the most recent information we're gets suggest from the spokesman for the special deterrent force. This is the armed group that actually detained Salman's brother as well as his father. And it's basically an armed group that nominally falls under the control of the ministry of interior. According to the spokesman, he says that Salman and his brother spoke about 15 minutes before the attack took place. He says that the brother only really knew about his brother's movements. He knew he was planning on not going to the religious pi- as he told his father knew that he was going to Manchester, knew that he was planning some sort of attack but he did not know when or where it was going to be happening. It is believed at least by the Libyans that both brothers were somehow involved in plotting this attack. They do believe that plans for it began as far back as the end of 2016. Libyans are saying there wasn't a lot of plotting or planning trying to put together the device that took place while the two brothers were in Libya. At this stage, they're trying to piece all of this together. The brother's father also detained at this stage. We don't know what he is being accused of, what he's being investigated are. Remember he yanked both brothers from Manchester, brought them back to Libya about a month before the attack took place because he was concerned they were getting wrapped up in some sort of criminal gang activity. The boys' mother as well as two other siblings were also taken in for questioning, but they were released shortly thereafter. So still a lot of effort under way at this stage trying to piece together exactly where it was that these two brothers were radicalized. Remember the brother who was detained according to the Libyans at least under interrogation and we do not know exactly what those circumstances were. Did confess that he and Salman were members of ISIS. But exactly where they joined the organization, were they became somehow radicalized in Manchester? Did it happen in one of their trips back and forth? Those are going to be key points in trying to determine how it is that two brothers, it would seem who were born and raised in the U.K., who were both on their way to getting an education and not exactly from an impoverished family, ended up being drawn into this violence.
[Blitzer:] Arwa Damon and Fred Pleitgen both doing excellent reporting on these investigations. Thanks very much. All of the victims, by the way, in the Manchester terror attack have now been identified. A family friend says 15-year-old Megan Hurley was killed in the blast. She's just one of 22 victims that were killed during that suicide bombing attack this week. We'll be right back.

[Erin Burnett, Cnn:] OUTFRONT next, is President Trump dangling another pardon. Trump praising Roger Stone, saying he's got guts for staying silent. Plus, the stunning turn around. The CIA Director Gina Haspel now preparing to brief a few lawmakers on the murder of Washington Post Columnist Jamal Khashoggi. Why did it take so long? Senator Rand Paul is OUTFRONT. Plus, a final farewell. President George H.W. Bush's former staff and the public paying their respect at this hour as President Trump and the First Lady are getting ready to go to the Capitol Hill to say goodbye also this hour. Let's go OUTFRONT. Good evening, I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT this evening, dangling another pardon. Is President Trump doing it again? Trump lavishing praise on his former Campaign Adviser Roger Stone, the man whose ties to WikiLeaks are a focus of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation. During a morning tirade on Twitter, the President congratulating Stone for his guts and defending him tweeting, "I will never testify against Trump." This statement was recently made by Roger Stone essentially stating that he will not be forced by a rogue and out of control prosecutor to make up lies and stories about President Trump. Somehow that's in quotes, "nice to know some people still have guts." The President tweet comes after Stone publicly insisted that he had nothing on Trump.
[Roger Stone, Former Adviser To Donald Trump:] There's no circumstance under which I would testify against the President because I'd have to bear false witness against him. I'd have to make things up and I'm not going to do that.
[Burnett:] Stone already named in at least one Mueller indictment charging others in the Russia investigation. Stone himself has not been charged but he is important to Mueller and that is developing and he has known Trump of course a long time. The President clearly thinks that he has a lot to gain from Stone standing by him. And dangling pardons, of course, has become par for the course for this President.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And one of the reasons I respect Paul Manafort so much, is he went through that trial. You know, they make up stories. People make up stories. I must tell you that Paul Manafort is a good man. I feel very badly for Paul Manafort. He happens to be a very good person and I think it's very sad what they've done to Paul Manafort.
[Burnett:] Trump going so far as to explicitly say a pardon for Manafort is on the table. And today George Conway, a conservative attorney, of course Kellyanne Conway's husband, responding to the President's tweets about Stone with a U.S. code number. A U.S. code number, if you look it up, is a reference to the statute for obstruction of justice and witness tampering. Democratic Senator Mark Warner who is the top Democrat in the Senate Intelligence Committee which is investigating Russia and Trump in a bipartisan and highly respected manner also tweeting, "This is serious, the President of the United States should not be using his platform to influence potential witnesses in a federal investigation involving his campaign." So, why is the President so vocal, so public about calling out witnesses in the Mueller investigation if this is true?
[Trump:] Now, here's the good news, I did nothing wrong. Look, I did nothing wrong. Is this one here, I did nothing wrong. I did nothing wrong.
[Burnett:] Kaitlan Collins is OUTFRONT live. She's outside the White House tonight. Kaitlan, why is the President so focused on this today, that Twitter tirade of course as I was sharing the tweet about Mr. Stone?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Erin, he seems to have bottled up his anger while he was in Argentina over the weekend for the G20 summit. And then he unleashed all of it on Twitter this morning saying not only those things that Bob Mueller is trying to people to lie instead of telling the truth which would seems to go against with the Special Counsel has done since they prosecuted so many people for lying to them, but also really directing his anger at Michael Cohen as well. Saying that he believed he should get the maximum sentence for his crimes that President Trump says weren't related to him even though of course two of these was high profile guilty pleas have been for one. He's admitted he violated campaign finance laws, which he said he did at the direction of President Trump. And two, lying to Congress, which he said he did out of loyalty to President Trump. Now, it wasn't that long ago, Erin, that President Trump said he didn't believe Michael Cohen as someone who would cooperate with the prosecutors, but now we know that he has spoken with them for at least 70 hours. And clearly, that is something that is unnerving the President and that is why we were continuing to see him go on this tirade lashed out not only of Robert Mueller but also at his long-time former attorney. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Kaitlan. I want to go now to Harry Sandick former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District here in New York, Laura Coates, former Federal Prosecutor and Patrick Healy, Political Editor with the New York Times. Harry, could Roger Stone see this as a pardon offer for your silence, for your guts, the reward is coming.
[Harry Sandick, Former Assistant U.s. Southern District Of New York:] I think he might implicitly take it that way and I think he might implicitly understand that by continuing to remain silent, he is demonstrating loyalty to the President. I think the President either intentionally or otherwise was careful in the way that he framed the tweet. It's not an express offer of a pardon. He didn't even say it's on the table. I'm not even sure that it actually rises to the level of witness tampering because he framed it as, he's telling the truth and it's not a crime to encourage someone to tell the truth.
[Burnett:] To tell the truth.
[Sandick:] So he endangers the rule of law by talking about this at all. But I think also implicitly sends a message that maybe a pardon is at the end of the rainbow.
[Burnett:] So, Laura, you know, one of the most interesting parts of the Stone tweet is that this one, "He", referring about Roger Stone, "will not be forced out by a rogue and out of control prosecutor to make up lies and stories about President Trump". Again my obsession with this tweet why is President Trump is put in quotes. But let me ask you, Laura, rogue and out of control. Trump has gone after Mueller before but he is up and ante, right, of characters assassination against the Special Counsel. Does this matter to Mueller? Does this influence Mueller?
[Laura Coates, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Well, I don't think Mueller has thin skin. And it's part of a larger pattern what the President is saying, this is a witch hunt, and he is not justified or justified in being able to pursue this matter. I mean, that's not true, Erin. He's got a mandate to look into at matters like this, and this mandate includes the type of action that Roger Stone has been on being investigated as a part of in terms of what Trump has said, in terms of what Michael Cohen has done in the past and plead guilty to Manafort. Michael Flynn list goes on and on about the ways in which Mueller is filling his mandate and taking it too. But the President I think is trying to throw almost spaghetti at the wall at this point. To stick with the party line that he has, this is a rogue investigator who is completely going above rank that he has no business doing what he's doing. That's not actually true. And the more the President seems to sweat about this matter, the more we wonder why he seems so concerned now after he turned in written answers.
[Burnett:] Right. And, of course you know, it's a point we keep making on this program. You've got 23 Russians indicted, charged by Mueller. So, to say that, the whole thing is that, you know, a hoax and rogue is frankly on the face of it, patently observe. And Patrick, you also have the President, you know, encouraging people not to lie, to your point. OK. That would be OK. But it's ironic, because Papadopoulos has lied, Manafort has lied
[Patrick Healy, Politics Editor, "the New York Times":] Right.
[Burnett:] Cohen is now very publicly admitting to believe in lies all to protect this President.
[Healy:] Yes. No, the culture of lying has very much become clear around Trump, but it's something that Trump himself has encouraged. But, I mean, that the tweet also begins with in the phrase, I, you know, I will not test I will never testify against President Trump. A pardon may not be on the table, but President Trump is literally telling the world, but especially these people around them, this is exactly what I want you to say. Loyalty matters so much to this President. You know, he said it when he talked about Eric Holder as protecting President Obama and how that was something that was a great thing, a good thing, this is what an attorney general should do, should protect the President. Even at, though, that is a completely irresponsible position for an attorney general to hold. Just still the sense of what loyalty means, even if you have this cascade of people who, you know, who have been caught lying basically in order to protect him.
[Burnett:] And Harry, when it comes to Michael Cohen, right, Michael Cohen has admitted to lying about things, relevant to the President of the United States, right, whether Russia-related, Stormy Daniels- related, OK? However, Michael Cohen the tweet that from the President today, doesn't mention those particular lies, it mentions this, "Michael Cohen asked judge for no prison time. You mean he can do all the terrible unrelated to Trump, things having to do with fraud, big loans, taxis, and not serve a long prison term? He makes up stories to get a great and already reduced deal for himself. And get his wife and father-in-law, [who has the money?] off Scott Free. He lied for this outcome and should, in my opinion, serve a full and complete sentence." Again leaving off the lies relevant to him, mentioning those other lies, Scott Free, though, is that even possible for Cohen?
[Sandick:] No. I mean, first of all he has a criminal conviction, second of all the judge is going to pick a sentence that he believes is fair given to circumstances. Just like every other defendant in every case, from the lowliest person who steals a piece of mail to someone who steals billions of dollars in a security's broad case. He'll get the sentence that's correct and proportional for him or at least he's supposed to.
[Burnett:] Depending but, obviously, even given you're saying that it will most certainly, or I suppose extremely likely be reduced for the cooperation as Mueller is suggesting that he wants to do, right, against the President?
[Sandick:] It could be reduced, but the government actually isn't going to tell the court to reduce it based on cooperation, based on substantial assistance. They're simply going to put all the facts before the court and say, this is the crime he's committed. This is what he's done, but they're not going to file what they call a 5k letter stating to the court that there's substantial assistance provided by Cohen. They're just going to let him know what he's done and the judge will, in his wisdom, pick the right sentence. So, it's not a matter someone serving a complete sentence or fair a complete sentence, he'll serve the complete sentence when it's imposed.
[Burnett:] What do you make, Patrick, I guess to that the President's obsession about this today?
[Healy:] It's I mean
[Burnett:] I mean, that's everyday but today as Kaitlan, you know, said it boiled over.
[Healy:] Yes. I mean, I think a part of it there was Roger Stone and I comment on Sunday. Very few people know President Trump's mind and the way that it works, and how they sort of get inside his mind like Roger Stone. Roger Stone basically going on television saying, you know, I'm not going to testify, because it would mean lying about the President that I like so much. I mean, it plays so deeply into how President Trump feels like the people around him should act that this is that Roger Stone who has been caught, you know, in so many, you know, mischief making, let's say situations.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Healy:] And lies, you know, still sort of the example for how one should behave if they want to stay in President Trump's good graces.
[Burnett:] Laura?
[Coates:] Well, you know, what's odd about this, so the President is presuming that he should get a good lenient sentence should he cooperate. Remember, Michael Cohen was not cooperating at the time he made his first guilty plea just a couple months ago. That was one of the most shocking things about it, there was no cooperation agreement. And he had at least what, five to six penalties at that point in time. For him to have accountability plea did not have a cooperation at all would be odd. Second of all, the idea that the President is touting as Roger Stone as I recall to talk about him being an exemplary person, remember, perhaps the reason he has not testified against Trump is because he hasn't been invited to. Mueller is the Special Counsel in a prosecution team often does not and in fact never would try to interview the person who they see as an ultimate target or defendant. So while the President may be trying to tout this as an example, perhaps he should be more wary and realize that perhaps the reason no one talking to him is because he may himself become a defendant.
[Burnett:] Which is interesting, we're saying about Stone. I remember back to a lunch I had with Michael Cohen. He said, yes, they haven't called me. Do you think it's strange they haven't called me? And I remember my

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We have done the deal and signed the deal with South Korea, which a lot of people said was not going to happen, would be impossible. It's a good deal. It was a horrible deal. It's a good deal. I think a lot of this has to do with the fact, though, that already companies are moving back into our country that have left our country, in some cases. In some cases they're moving back because they want to be here, but in many cases these are automobile companies that have left and gone to other countries, and now they're coming back to the United States. So it's nice to see. One of the things that's so beautiful to watch is 3.2 percent wage growth. That hasn't happened in so long for our country. That's an incredible thing. That means people are actually getting more money, taking home more money, and that's something that's really nice to see. A lot of you have been following me when we were on a thing called a campaign that was an exciting campaign, a great campaign and I used to talk about wages going down, not going up, but going down for years, 19 years, and now they just went up 3.2 percent. And yet there's no inflation because other things are going down, like the price of your gasoline at the tank. It's low. And that doesn't happen by luck. I work hard on that. That's like a tax cut for people. So a lot of good things are happening. Labor participation rate increased to 63.1 percent. That's an incredible number also. So I just wanted to bring that out. The economy is very good. And, remember, from the time of my election, the stock market's gone up very close to 30 percent, and that's with all of the things that are happening, and there are a lot of things happening. We have a massive trade negotiation going on with China. President Xi is very much involved. So am I. We're dealing at the highest levels and we're doing very well. We're doing very well. In the meantime we've taken in billions and billions of dollars in tariffs from China and from others. Our steel industry has come roaring back and that makes me very happy. I think we'll have to build a steel wall, as opposed to a concrete wall, because we have steel companies again. There's something awfully nice about that sound. So we had a productive meeting today with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer. I thought it was really a very, very good meeting. We're all on the same path in terms of wanting to get government open. We're going to be meeting I have designated a group and we're going to be meeting over the weekend, that group, to determine what we're going to do about the border. Really, I want to thank a lot of the Border Patrol people and ICE people who came up yesterday. They had a tremendous impact on, I think, a lot of Democrats, frankly, but a lot of people. Because they were able to lay out exactly what the problem is. And one of the problems described to me as an example, your ports of entry. We're going to agree with Chuck and Nancy and Steny and Dick Durbin was there. We're going to agree that and we want to make the ports bigger, more powerful, able to handle more traffic. Have very, very powerful drug equipment there. So they make very good stuff, now. We don't have it because of budgets and other reasons. But we're going to make our ports of entry very powerful, very strong. We're going to have the best drug-finding equipment anywhere in the world. They make it much better today than they made it even two years ago. And I explained to them, the problem is though, we can have a wonderful port of entry. But you have 2,000 miles of border between the United States and Mexico. And if you take a look and you see, like we do, through certain technology, including cameras and airplanes, not just drones. You'll see vast numbers of vehicles driving through the desert and entering where you don't have a very powerful fence or a wall. That happened this week, where a wonderful young police officer I spoke to his wife yesterday where he was shot, viciously shot for simply stopping a person that came over the border illegally. Got shot and killed. And took the most beautiful picture just hours before, a Christmas picture. We don't want that happening. But I always explain, too, and I explain to people because it's really common sense. So you have ports of entry. We have great security at the ports of entry. And then you may have fencing or walls up and down, left and right, east and west. But they stop. Because we don't have proper border security. These people have vehicles. And they drive to the right. They're not going through where we have great border patrol officers and ICE officers and military, now. I tell you, the military's done a fantastic job. They don't stop. They go right to the easiest part and the weakest part, sometimes out in desert. But you have miles and miles and miles of unprotected area. And you can see where they drive over. You even have people walking that trek. That's a very dangerous trek. And they bring children or even worse, they use children. You know, children are the biggest beneficiaries of what we want to do. Children are hurt more than anybody else. These coyotes, what they do with children. All because we have open borders, because they think they can get away with it. They don't come in through the port where we have a lot of protection. They come in through empty areas, vast spaces. Empty areas. Just like this terrible person came in when he shot Officer Singh. They come in through these vast open areas. You don't even have a sign saying, "Mexico-U.S." There's no sign designating, "You have just entered the United States." It's just open space. And I explained that to the meeting today with Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and a lot of other people at the meeting. And I said, "One of the things that happens there is human traffickers." Maybe that's the worst of all. Where you'll have traffickers having three and four women with tape on their mouths and tied up, sitting in the back of a van or a car. And they'll drive that van or the car, not through a port of entry where we have very talented people that look for every little morsel of drugs or even people or whatever they're looking for, they're not going to go there. They get off the road and they drive out into the desert and they come in, they make a left turn usually it's a left, not a right most of them come out because in San Diego and in areas of California, we just finished brand new walls, beautiful walls, steel walls. And they wanted them badly. They were asking us, that's why we did it there. I said let's not do it in California, California always complains through their great governors. They're always complaining, I said let's not do it, let the governor ask us. But we did it anyway because they really needed it. They were having a tremendous problem, so we built a brand new wall in San Diego and it's working really well. You should go and look at it. It's amazing, it's incredible how well it works. But these coyotes and these human traffickers, they make a right turn before they get to the port of entry, they go as far as the wall is or as far as the barricade is and then they make a left, welcome to the United States and what they do with usually the women, sometimes children, that they're trafficking with and in, you don't want to know about. So the only way you're going to stop that is by having a solid steel structure or concrete structure, whether it's a wall or some form of very powerful steel. Now the steel is actually more expensive than the concrete, but I think we're probably talking about steel because I really feel the other side feels better about it and I can understand what they're saying, it is more expensive. We mentioned the price, that we want $5.6 billion very strongly, cause numbers are thrown around 1.6, 2.1, 2.5. This is national security we're talking about, we're not talking about games, we're talking about national security. This should've been done by all of the presidents that have preceded me, and they all know it. Some of them have told me that we should have done it. So we're not playing games, we have to do it. And just remember, human traffickers, remember drugs. The drugs are pouring into this country. They don't go through the ports of entry. When they do, they sometimes get caught. When we finish and the Democrats do want this they want ports of entry strengthened and I want to do that, too. In fact, we have it down, it's about $400 million and we can have the best equipment in the world. Now what they'll do if we have the protection and we have strong ports of entry with this incredible drug-finding equipment, I don't know what they're going to do, because they're not coming in through past the steel gates or the steel walls or the concrete walls, depending on what's happening, because we are meeting this weekend. We have a group I've set up a group, they are going to tell us who their group of experts and probably people in the Senate and Congressmen and women are going to come and we have three. I said give us three, then I said you know what, send over nine or six or three or two, doesn't matter, send over whoever you want, but it's common sense. So now when they make that turn, they make it and now, all of a sudden, they can't go any further and they have to go back. And that's going to stop the caravans for two reasons. Number one, they're not going to be able to get through, but when they realize they can't get through, what's going to happen? They're not going to form and they're not going to try and come up. And they can apply for asylum and they can most importantly, they can apply for citizenship because the companies that I told you that created these great job numbers they're incredible job numbers beyond anybody's expectations. I don't think there was one Wall Street genius, of which I know many of them, but they're not geniuses there's not one that predicted anywhere close to these job numbers. I thought they were going to be good, but there wasn't one that I saw. So now we have everything so beautifully handled. We need to have, however we need border security and all of this security, if we do what I think what the Democrats want, all of the border things that we'll be building will be done right here in the good old USA by steel companies that were practically out of business when I came into office as president and now they're thriving. You call up the heads of U.S. Steel and I could name 10 companies you look at what's going on with the steel industry, it was almost a miracle. It was a dead industry. We need steel for defense, we need steel for a lot of things steel and aluminum. But those industries were in deep trouble. The steel industry was almost dead, and now it's a very vibrant, vibrant industry. So what I'm going to do is ask first of all Mike Pence, Vice President to say a couple of words cause Mike is we put together a team of people that will work over the weekend and they'll be negotiating on the border, on the look, on different things having to do with border security, including at the ports of entry. And I think they're going to be very successful, cause I found that Democrats really want to do something. So we're at $5.6 if you look at it, $5.6 billion, but we are able to also, in addition to that because what we want to do has to be done properly and we're negotiating very tough prices very, very tough, cause you heard much higher numbers. Those higher numbers were very much a misnomer you heard $20 and $25 billion in DACA. What happened is when a judge incredibly cause it was an incredibly I will say wrong decision. In fact President Obama, when he signed the DACA with the Executive Order, made a statement to the effect this isn't going to work and some judge from the Ninth Circuit, here we go again, upheld it, and then it was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Appellate and now it's going before the United States Supreme Court and hopefully that will be properly adjudicated, because if it is, talks will begin on larger immigration matters, having to do with DACA, having to do with other things. So that is taking place. We may add a few things onto our discussions over the weekend, but I'm going to ask Mike Pence and then I'll have Leader McCarthy say a few words and we'll take a couple of questions. But we're very proud of the jobs and the jobs numbers, that was incredible. And I think I'll be even more proud if we can have great border security for the first time in really the history of our country. The southern border is a dangerous, horrible disaster. We've done a great job, but you can't really do the kind of job we have to do unless you have a major, powerful barrier, and that's what we're going to have to have. So first we start with Mike Pence. OK, Mike?
[Pence:] Thank you, Mr. President. We are nearly two weeks into a government shutdown, but our nation is also in the midst of a crisis on our southern border. And today President Trump convened, for the second time this week, Republican and Democrat leaders from the Congress to address both issues. And we are truly grateful for the candid and constructive dialogue that took place today here at the White House. With Speaker Pelosi and Leader Schumer, with with our Republican Senate leadership as well. And we look forward to continued dialogue over the course of this weekend. Make no mistake about it. We are in the midst of a crisis at our southern border. Every day, nearly 2,000 people are apprehended or stopped, attempting to come into our country, that have no lawful claim to be here. Last year alone, 17,000 individuals with previous criminal records were apprehended attempting to come across our southern border. Every day all across this country, in a single week, 300 Americans lose their lives to the scourge of heroin addiction. Ninety percent of the heroin in this country flows through our southern border. And the human trafficking that the president just described so compellingly. Last month alone, 20,000 minors were brought, alone, across our border or interdicted by border patrol personnel. You heard the president's passion today here at the podium. And we all Leader McCarthy and all the leaders, gathered in the Situation Room today you heard the president's passion for the better part of two hours. Not just to address a government shutdown, but to address border security and this crisis at our southern border. And today, President Trump provided the kind of leadership that the American people expect in such a moment. He made it clear that we are committed to achieving border security as we resolve this budget impasse. He made it clear that we are going to build a wall on our southern border. As I said, the conversations were constructive and substantive. And at the close of the meeting, the president directed me and Jared Kushner and Secretary Nielsen to meet with top-level staff of Democrat and Republican leadership in the House and Senate over the course of this weekend, and see if we could build on the common ground that we identified in the discussions today. Our aim will be to find a solution, not just simply to end the government shutdown, to provide funding to end the crisis at our southern border, to achieve real border security and to build a wall on our southern border. And Mr. President, I promise I promise you, as you promised the Republican and Democrat leaderships today, that we will work earnestly over the weekend. We will work in good faith. The American people deserve nothing less. And we we enter this weekend and these discussions, hopeful, again, not simply that we will end a budget shutdown but that we will make, finally, meaningful progress on securing our southern border to prevent the flow of narcotics, human trafficking, illegal immigration that has so beset our country now for more than a generation. And with the president's leadership and direction, we'll hope to accomplish just that.
[Trump:] Thank you, Mike. Thank you very much. Kevin?
[Mccarthy:] I came down for the second time this week. Basing on the meeting that we had earlier in the week, I didn't expect the meeting to last very long. It was two hours. This was much more productive than we've had at any other time. I think there's places that we can find common ground. The president was very strong on what he needs to have happen here. We need border security. We want the government to open. What I found in our discussion, sometimes we're tough, but there is areas that we can find agreement on. That's when the president interjected that he actually thought what we be best that he would designate three individuals, with the vice president being the lead, that work through the weekend, build on this progress, and that each leader would also sit the president was very kind to the speaker. I think he said she could bring twice as many, right, if need be.
[Trump:] Five thousand.
[Mccarthy:] I know Mitch McConnell Leader McConnell's sending down, I'm sending members down, staffers that could work throughout the weekend. I know the president said he would call us back next week, invite us back as well. We want to solve this problem. There is a great need to do it, and we can get it done. It just has to have the will. But I see the will from this administration. I will promise you this: I will work with anybody who wants to move America forward, secure our border, and put this government back on path. And I'm making that pledge here and I hope every other leader will make that pledge as well. And if that means that we're staying the room to get it done, we will stay in the room and get this job done. And there was progress today. I look forward to solving it.
[Trump:] Thank you, Steve. Steve, please.
[Scalise:] Thank you, Mr. President, and I thought we had a very important and productive meeting today. And what this has always been about is securing the border and keeping America safe. I want to thank the president for the commitment that he's made for over 2 years now to achieve what many presidents promised and we've seen the promises but it was never followed through with actual law that gets this job done. Secretary Nielsen has gone over the numbers, and the numbers are alarming. You know, one of the numbers that jumps out is last year, in 2017 actually, over 3,700 known or suspected terrorists tried to enter into this country. Now these are serious numbers. When you seen the human trafficking, in 2017 our ICE agents saved over 900 kids 1 year alone, saved over 900 kids from sexual assault and human trafficking, things that are happening at the southern border because there's no wall, there's no physical barrier. There's no way to actually control ports of entry. If somebody wants to seek asylum, there's a way to do that. There are legal ways to come to this country and legal immigration has made this country great. We by the way, America let in over a million people every single year, by far the most generous nation in the world. And yet we have laws that need to be followed to keep Americans safe and to protect the integrity of a system where right now there are millions of people who are waiting in line to come to America to seek the American dream, like Officer Singh did when he sought his chance at the American dream. That dream was taken. It was taken because we don't have a secure border. We can't let this continue. As we work to open the government, let's always keep the focus on what this is about. It's about securing this country. The Secretary of Homeland Security has made it clear what it's going to take to secure our border. President Trump is following through on that commitment to keep America safe, and hopefully as we work through the weekend we can get a resolution that achieves all of those objectives.
[Trump:] Thank you very much, Steve. Thank you. Major, go ahead. Sure.
[Question:] Mr. President, Senator Schumer came out and said that the meeting from his point of view and Speaker Pelosi's was contentious. He also said you said in the meeting this is him quoting you, I just want to check that the shutdown could go on for months or even a year or longer. Did you say that? Is that your...
[Trump:] I did, I did.
[Question:] Is that your assessment of what we are?
[Trump:] I did say that. Absolutely, I said that. I don't think it will, but I am prepared, and I think I can speak for Republicans in the House and Republicans in the Senate. They feel very strongly about having a safe country, having a border that makes sense. Without borders, I've said it many times, we don't have a country. I hope it doesn't go on even beyond a few more days. It really could open very quickly. I told them that bring who you want. We have three people. You can ideally bring three, but you can bring six, you can bring nine, you can bring twelve. And they're going to be working over the weekend. I think it may have been somewhat contentious, but I think it was very productive. I have to say that, and I think he said that, too.
[Question:] What was the productive part from your point of view, Mr. President? Did the Democrats move at all in your direction on funding of a border barrier?
[Trump:] Well, I don't want to get into that, because I don't want to put them in a position where they have to justify anything to a lot of the people that they have to make happy. We want to save lives; we want children to be safe. The children are being decimated, and I'm not talking about necessarily children in our country; I'm talking about wonderful children that are coming up from other places, whether it's Honduras or Guatemala or El Salvador or Mexico or other places. And we have to take care of those children, also; we can't let them die on the way up. What's happening to women on those caravans, you're not talking about it, but it's horrible, what's happening. If they know it's not going to take place because they can't through, because we have a great border wall or fence or barrier, they're not going to come up, and you're not going have the problem. At the same time, they can apply to come into our country legally, like so many people have done. And we need people, Major; we have to have people because we have all these companies coming in. We need great people, but we want them to come in on a merit basis. They have to come in on a merit basis; they can't come in the way they've been coming in for years. I get calls from the great tech companies, and they're saying we don't allow people at the top of their class, at the bets schools in the country, we don't allow them to say in our country. So they end up going back to China and Japan and so many other countries, all over the world, and we don't keep them. They get educated in our finer schools, and then we don't allow them, through a various set of circumstances, to have any guarantees of staying. So we lose out on on great minds; we can't do that. We have companies that, if we don't change that and we're working on that, and we discuss that with the Democrats, and I think they agree, we're working on that, but we don't to lose our great companies because we have a ridiculous policy that we won't accept smart people. So call it politically correct or not, but we have to let these great brilliant companies have the smartest people in the world. Yes, ma'am?
[Question:] Mr. President, why not reopen the government to create more space to have that broader conversation about immigration reform?
[Trump:] Well, we think it can go very quickly. No, we won't be opening until it's solved. We think this is a much bigger problem; the border is a much more dangerous problem. It's a much bigger problem; it's a problem of national security. It's a problem of terrorists. You know, I talk about human traffickers, I talk about drugs, I talk about gangs, but a lot of people don't say we have terrorists coming through the southern border, because they find that's probably the easiest place to come through. They drive right in and they make a left. Not going to happen, not going to happen. So we're not going to do that. We won't be doing pieces; we won't be doing it in drips and drabs, and I'll tell you what. I've seen a lot of people over the last week and a half. I've been right in this magnificent structure right behind you. It's called the White House, and I was here on Christmas and I was here my family was in Florida. And I didn't even find it to be a lonely place. There's something very special about the White House. But I was here Christmas, I was here on New Years Eve, and I will tell you the people that I've spoken with and I've gotten to meet a lot of people that I wouldn't have met. A lot of people have been coming through the White House and explaining different things and different attitudes. A lot of people that you think are upset and certainly they're not thrilled, but they say, "sir, do the right thing. We need border security." And these are people that won't be getting paid. Border patrol yesterday was saying, "sir, we're affected by it. Do what's right. It's time." This is after many, many decades. Many, many decades. This should have taken place a long time ago. We're going to get it done. Yes, ma'am?
[Question:] Thank you. Two questions for you. Was DACA a part of the discussions today?
[Trump:] Yes.
[Question:] And also, why did it take this many days for a working group to come together? Why didn't you just hash the details out today?
[Trump:] Well, sometimes that's what happens in a negotiation. It does take longer than it should, and sometimes you agree to things that could have been agreed to two weeks ago, but that's just the way a negotiation is. I mean, we set out a number $5.6 billion. We're very firm on our number. We also explained that, as you probably understand, the military's very effected. We may use the military for parts of it. Homeland Security obviously is very effected. We may, in addition to the $5.6 billion, we will use homeland security funds. So we have things happening in addition to the $5.6 billion, but we have to get a discussion built.
[Question:] Was DACA part of the discussion? Just a follow up.
[Trump:] Please, go ahead.
[Question:] Thank you, Mr. President. To follow up on that question, when with respect to the DACA program, were you discussing that in terms of a pathway to citizenship being included and end the partial government shutdown?
[Trump:] Well, we discussed it a long time ago as you remember. That was when they had this mythical number of $25 million. Well, actually it was $25 billion but only $1 billion upfront, and we talked $2 billion, $1.5 billion. The rest of it the government couldn't guarantee because it's not set up to guarantee. You remember those discussions. But where it really ended was when the judge ruled against and it was I said as soon as that happened because that was a shocking decision. It was shocking to the Democrats and it was more shocking to the Republicans. It was an incorrect decision. It was a political decision made by a judge.

[Tapper:] Yes, that's CNN election music. I like it. Tonight, President Trump weighing in on the heated Texas race in Senate Texas race, tweeting that, "Democrat Beto O'Rourke wants higher taxes and far more regulations," and calling him a "flake." A flake. Follows a fiery debate between O'Rourke and Cruz, a debate in which we saw O'Rourke throw some real punches for the first time.
[O'rourke:] He's dishonest. It's why the President called him Lyin'Ted and it's why the nickname stuck.
[Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas:] Its clear Congressman O'Rourke's pollsters have told him to come out on the attack. So if wants to insults me and call liar, that's fine.
[Tapper:] The big question, of course, will Beto O'Rourke's strategy work? Ed Lavandera is "OutFront" with our "Race of the Day."
[Unidentified Male:] Senator Ted Cruz.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Ted Cruz has mastered the postcard size political punch.
[Cruz:] If you want a big government gun-grabbing liberal, well, the Democrats have given you one.
[Lavandera:] The rapid fire jabs at Democrat Beto O'Rourke are designed to deflate the El Paso congressman's soaring campaign.
[Cruz:] On job-killing regulations, he's for them, I'm against them. Guns, I'm for them, he's against them. On taxes, he's for them, I'm against them.
[Lavandera:] In the last few weeks, Senator Cruz has unleashed a wave of television ads criticizing O'Rourke, painting him as dangerous and radically liberal. O'Rourke has been hesitant to fire back directly, saying he prefers to follow the positive path that has brought him to this point so far.
[Unidentified Male:] Beto O'Rourke is no friend of Texas energy.
[Lavandera:] The Cruz television campaign and laser- focused message seem to have halted O'Rourke's forward march in the polls. A CNN poll shows O'Rourke 7 points behind.
[Unidentified Male:] Beto O'Rourke wants to be a senator.
[Lavandera:] For weeks, as O'Rourke has literally run and barn stormed through every corner of the state, we've asked him how he would respond to the Cruz campaign's criticisms, which seem to be working. [on camera] Are you worried that those critiques and those things are going to stick?
[O'rourke:] Yes.
[Lavandera:] Are you fighting back with them?
[O'rourke:] I think people are sick of the pettiness and the partisanship and the smallness.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you take the gloves off and fight a little bit tougher and dirtier if you have to?
[O'rourke:] We're fighting for a positive future for this country. We're not fighting against anyone. It's not against another party.
[Lavandera:] But with early voting starting next week, O'Rourke is shedding the nice guy approach.
[O'rourke:] Senator Cruz is not going to be honest with you. He's going to make up positions and votes that I've never held or have ever taken. He's dishonest. It's why the president called him Lyin'Ted and it's why the nickname stuck because it's true.
[Lavandera:] Democratic Strategist Harold Cook worked for Ann Richards, one of the last Democrats to hold statewide office in Texas. Cook says O'Rourke must sharpen his attacks before it's too late.
[Harold Cook, Democratic Strategist:] You can be high-minded while you're drawing a clear contrast between yourself and your opponent.
[Lavandera:] And Beto hasn't done enough of that.
[Cook:] He hasn't done it yet and he needs to get on it because it's time.
[Lavandera:] An anti-Ted Cruz PAC has rolled out an ad roasting Cruz for cozying up to President Trump who once said the Texas senator had done nothing for Texans.
[Unidentified Male:] If somebody called my wife a dog and said my daddy was in on the Kennedy assassination, I wouldn't be kissing their ass.
[Lavandera:] O'Rourke has rarely talked about Ted Cruz and President Trump in his campaign speeches, but in recent days, that has changed.
[O'rourke:] We need a full-time senator.
[Lavandera:] He ripped into Cruz for shutting down the federal government and rolling back health care protections and even unleashed his sharpest criticism yet of the Texas senator for campaigning with the President.
[O'rourke:] Senator Cruz will put his political ambition, his prospects in the next election ahead of anything else, including his family, including those he's sworn to represent here in Texas. Texas has lost its voice in the U.S. Senate in Senator Cruz.
[Lavandera:] The showdown will continue for another three weeks in a race that's captivated a state not used to this kind of political clash. And Jake, Cruz'campaign manager reacted to this new O'Rourke strategy by saying last night after the debate that, "When an unconventional candidate goes conventional, that's typically when they get split open like a cantaloupe." Now, Cruz's embrace of Donald Trump which he has fully done on the campaign trail has pitfalls of its own. CNN poll released yesterday shows that even though Trump won the state of Texas by nine points in 2016, his approval and disapproval rate here in the state are even at this point Jake.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] All right. Ed Lavandera, thank you so much. OUTFRONT now, Karine Jean-Pierre, senior adviser and national spokesperson for moveon.org and Scott Jennings, former adviser to Senator Mitch McConnell and former special assistant to President George W. Bush. Karine, I'll start with you. Beto O'Rourke now sharpening his attacks against Ted Cruz but with less than three weeks until the election, O'Rourke is down by seven points among likely voters in the CNN poll, 89 percent of whom say their minds are made up. Can he really actually hope to make up any difference here?
[Karine Jean-pierre, Senior Adviser & National Spokesperson, Moveon.org:] I think it's I think he can. Look, we're talking about Texas, deep red Texas, and you have someone who is and you have someone, Beto O'Rourke, who's actually making it competitive. And like you mentioned in 2016, Trump won it by nine points. In 2012, Mitt Romney won it by 16 points. He has this amazing war chest which I think also is showing the grassroots energy around him, small dollars, not accepting money, PAC money or corporate money. And another thing, too, is since the midterms, it was 1.6 million new voters on the voter rolls in Texas, 1.6 compared to 2002 and 2004 where it was 100,000. So, Beto O'Rourke can take that money and really do a ground game, I think that it will be a very tight race at the end and we'll see if he can pull it out.
[Tapper:] Scott, in races all over the country, we're seeing Democrats outraised Republicans. According to "The National Journal", 92 House Republican incumbents were outraised by their Democrat challenger. Obviously, we see a stark example of that in Texas. Does that concern you as a Republican?
[Scott Jennings, Former Adviser To Sen. Mitch Mcconnell:] Well, it concerns me in a lot of these House races, absolutely. I think some Republicans are going to lose House races because they didn't raise enough money and they didn't prepare themselves. I think in the case of the Texas Senate race, though, Democrats are going to look at this the day after the election and wonder, boy, oh boy, if only we'd had another couple million in North Dakota or Missouri or Indiana or West Virginia or Florida or any of these other states where Democrats are actually running close races. You know, Democrats every cycle, they're always looking for a southern messiah, they're looking for the next you know, which Democrat can compete in the South and they fall in love with these candidates and they pour money into these races and it never pans out. A Democrat hasn't won in Texas in 24 years, one's not going to win this year. This is not a close race. I can't believe any Democrat in Texas is getting a good night's sleep given the loud flushing sound of flushing $61 million down the toilet trying to knock off Ted Cruz. It's not going to happen.
[Tapper:] Karine, I know you disagree with everything he said.
[Jean-pierre:] Everything he just said.
[Tapper:] But I want to ask you, President Trump is campaigning with Cruz in Texas on Monday. You heard Ed say the president's approval ratings in Texas, even though he won that state handily, it's pretty even, 49 percent, 48 percent. Do you think that Trump actually will be a boost to Ted Cruz, especially considering the bad blood between them historically, not anymore, but historically and the fact that, as Beto O'Rourke puts it, you know, he went after his family. He insulted his wife, he insulted his dad.
[Jean-pierre:] And Ted Cruz still goes back to the person who started all of it, insulting your wife and your dad? That's pretty low. That's lower than we've ever seen, even if people do this in the past where they go after each other and then come back together. Look, Beto O'Rourke just recently had a event where 55,000 people, Donald Trump said he wanted the biggest stadium, and he's going to one of the smallest stadium of 8,500. I'm not worried at all.
[Tapper:] You're really not worried. Scott, President Trump and Ted Cruz obviously have had a really ugly relationship. Here's just a small sample.
[Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas:] Donald, you're a sniveling coward, and leave Heidi the hell alone.
[Donald Trump, Then-presidential Candidate:] His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald being, you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous.
[Cruz:] The man cannot tell the truth, but he combines it with being a narcissist.
[Trump:] Lying Ted Cruz, Lyin'Ted. Lies. Oh, he lies.
[Tapper:] So is it all just water under the bridge now?
[Jennings:] Well, I think Republicans want it to be water under the bridge, and look, if I were Ted Cruz, I'd still be super pissed about some of the things that Donald Trump said. But I'm not a U.S. senator and I don't need to get reelected, so I guess I could be super pissed about it. Look, Ted Cruz has done what he had to do. He's gone to the Senate, played nice with the White House, helped Trump, and he's helped the Senate leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn when he used to be a thorn in their side, so Ted Cruz learned a lesson. He was chastened by the presidential campaign and he's now become more of a team player, which is precisely what the Republicans in Texas want him to do. The reason they have a good voice in Texas right now is because Ted Cruz has actually started playing ball with the party and the party is getting results, and that's the agenda that the people in Texas most want to see.
[Jean-pierre:] I just want to say one thing. A year ago, Alabama, we had we didn't win that U.S. Senate seat in 25 years and it happened. So, just wanted to throw that out there.
[Tapper:] All right.
[Jennings:] Whoa, whoa, are you saying Are you saying there are comparable conditions in Alabama and Texas? That is an outlandish assertion.
[Tapper:] I don't think she's saying that. Anyway, Scott Jennings, Karine Jean-Pierre, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Don't miss the special CNN town hall on the Texas Senate race with Dana Bash. That's tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m. Eastern. OUTFRONT next, this is what happened when a reporter dared to ask Jared Kushner a question on an airplane.
[Errol Barnett, Washington Correspondent, Cbs News:] Hey there, Jared. Errol Barnett with CBS. Any comment on
[Tapper:] Why did the Secret Service react like that? Is that their job? Plus, a stunning eight-month investigation into the Trump Organization and what was uncovered is a troubling history of lies and deception. Stay with us.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] as soon as possible. He came in through the diversity program as you know, and we're going to stop that. We're going to as quickly as possible get rid of chain migration and go to a merit-based system. Terrorists are constantly seeking to strike our nation, and it will require the unflinching devotion to our law enforcement, homeland security and intelligence professionals to keep America safe. We will take all necessary steps to protect our people and our communities and to protect our nation as a whole. We have to get much tougher. We have to get much smarter. And we have to get much less politically correct. We're so politically correct that we're afraid to do anything. And that's not only our country, that's other countries too that are having very similar problems. And we have to get tough, we have to get smart. We have to do what's right to protect our citizens. We will never waiver in the defense of our beloved country. Ever. And we'll never ever forget the beautiful lives that have been taken from us. That was a horrible event and we have to stop it, and we have to stop it cold. We also have to come up with punishment that's far quicker and far greater than the punishment these animals are getting right now. They'll go through court for years. At the end, they'll be who knows what happens. We need quick justice, and we need strong justice. Much quicker and much stronger than we have right now. Because what we have right now is a joke, and it's a laughing stock. And no wonder so much of this stuff takes place. And I think I can speak for plenty of other countries, too, that are in the same situation. So, with that being said, we will be starting our cabinet meeting today. It will be a discussion that will focus on vital issues of tax cuts and tax reform. It will be the largest tax cuts in the history of our country by far. The House is doing very well. They have taken an extra few hours, which will go into tomorrow and they'll be announcing and I'll probably be standing with them. We leave, as you know, for Asia. We're leaving on Friday morning so I'll be standing with them sometime tomorrow. We'll be announcing massive tax cuts and reform. Not just tax cuts because tax cuts which to me is the most important but it will be tax cuts and reform. We've now had two straight quarters of 3% or more economic growth, GDP. But our economy and country cannot take off the way it really should so it's really, really competitive with the rest of the world unless we get the kind of tax cuts for our companies and our middle class, our workers, unless we get the jobs we need. It can't really take off until we get the tax cuts and reform passed. This week the House Ways and Means Committee will unveil a historic tax plan that will create new jobs, higher wages, which hasn't happened in many years and now it's starting to happen. I'm happy to tell you. Many, many years. People making less money today than they made 20 years ago. You heard it many times before. But it will lead to tremendous prosperity for American families, communities, and also for our job producing businesses. At the center of our plan are tax cuts for the working Americans. We will reduce tax rates, increase the amount of income that is taxed at zero, and increase the child tax credit which is very important to families. We'll make the tax code simple and fair so that the vast majority of Americans can file their taxes on a single sheet of paper. We will be simplifying. It will be called simplification, our tax code. We will restore America's competitive edge by lowering taxes on America's businesses for the first time in more than 30 years and it will be a historic cut. Right now other countries are so far below us and then when you wonder, you see all of these companies leaving one after another. They leave. That's not going to be happening. And I must tell you I've stopped it even before this but we're going to be stopping it in full. People will come back. We'll be announcing very shortly possibly right after I get back a major company that's moving back into the United States. It's going to be a major name. People are going to be very surprised. Especially the country from which they are leaving will be surprised. Under our plan, we'll go from being one of the highest taxed nations in the world to one of the lowest. Meaning more jobs, more factories, more plants, more opportunities right here in America where we want them. We will reduce taxes for businesses of all sizes. I must add that we're also negotiating right now. We have my full team here, tremendously different trade deals. Our trade deals are horrible. They were made by people that honestly, it's sad. It's very sad for our country. Every trade deal we have is disastrous. We're renegotiating our trade deals. And if we have support from Congress, we'll make trade deals that are horror shows into very good and respectable trade deals and trade deals that are good for both countries and in fact many countries. But very important is that we renegotiate our trade deals with Mexico as an example, we have a trade deficit of $71 billion. That's NAFTA. We have trade deficits with China that are through the roof. They're so big and so bad that it's embarrassing saying what the number is but you know what the number is. And I don't want to embarrass anybody four days before I land in China but it's horrible. And you look all over the world, no matter where we do trade, we have bad trade deals. We're renegotiating those deals as I said I would during the campaign. And that's going to be a big factor in our growth. Finally, our plan will bring back trillions of dollars from offshore. Trillions. We have in my estimation, $4 trillion that will come pouring back into our country that will be put to work and will be spent by our companies that could never get the money back for many years. And interestingly, it's something that Republicans and Democrats have agreed on for years bring the money back. What's not to agree? Bring the money back. And they couldn't get it done because it was a lack of leadership. They couldn't get it done. They all agree it should be done. They couldn't get it done. So we will be bringing that money back for rebuilding America. I'll be announcing tomorrow the new head of the Federal Reserve. That will take place sometime tomorrow afternoon. You'll be notified as to the time. I think you'll be extremely impressed by this person. As part of our push to renew our prosperity, I'll also be making a very historic trip on Friday as I said. Our visit will take us to Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam, the Philippines. And you remember the Philippines the last trip made by the President that turned out to be not so good. Never quite got to land. And we will host meetings with world leaders across the Indo-Pacific region. I look forward to it. We're going to meet a lot of presidents and leaders of countries that have been friends and had become very good friends of mine and we have great trade relationships other than the fact that we are right now being taken advantage of. But I think they'll start changing them pretty quickly. Key administration officials including Secretary Mnuchin and Gary Cohn will be staying back from the trip in Asia to remain vigilant and making sure the tax cuts pass. So if I have any problems, I will be blaming Mnuchin and Cohn. Believe me. They'll be hearing from me. But I think they're going to do very well. We are doing very well. And the House, I must tell you, they've been working really hard and they're coming up with a great plan, and the Senate is coming up with a great plan. And they're going to be put together and something is going to come out of that that will be I think really, really something very special. Again, we're doing Senate, we're doing House. Let's put together and then we have our beautiful new tax cuts and reform. And I think it will be very special. I'm also counting on our great vice president, Mike Pence, and the rest of my cabinet to continue to push forward the tax cuts and reform while I'm away, and they're going to be all over the country. They'll be all over the country working on it. But specifically, they'll be working on the members of the House, members of the Senate. We think we'll actually get some Democrats to join us in the Senate because frankly I actually think they'll lose their elections in those communities and those states because the people of those states and the people of all states need tax cuts. Again, we're the highest taxed nation just about in the world. We need tax cuts. So with that, we'll start our cabinet meeting. We have a wonderful group of people. We have a great cabinet. They're doing an incredible job. I don't think they've been given the credit they deserve but that doesn't matter quite yet. We'll let you know when it's time to tell you about it but we have done. At the border we've done a fantastic job. We've done great with the military. ISIS is being decimated. They're being decimated. But they quickly move to other places in the world like Africa and others and we're there to meet them. This has never happened. We have done more to annihilate ISIS than eight years of the previous administration. So we are doing a real job. We're actually making tremendous strides in Afghanistan also. And I think you see what's happening. You see what's happening. So, we've done a largely really a job that's been very, very well respected by many. One of the things that has happened that nobody is paying attention to but you're going to see it this week are judges, federal judges. Not only Justice Gorsuch who's doing fantastically on the Supreme Court but we have many judges that are being approved at the district level, federal district judges and court of appeals judges. We'll have at this moment we'll be up to fairly soon the approval of 145 federal judges. And the Court of Appeals about 17 at this moment. So we will have a big percentage of the court will be changed by this administration over a very short period of time. I don't believe, other than perhaps when they started the whole process, I don't believe anybody has come close. So we'll have 145 and that number will be increasing with time. A 145 district court judges and we'll have 17 Court of Appeals judges. And I must tell you, the Wall Street Journal gave us great reviews on that. Really fantastic reviews. But I think it's a very important element that should be pointed out because a lot of people don't know it. So, again, tomorrow is a big announcement. And we'll have another announcement having to do with the tax cuts. That will be out tomorrow pretty early. And I appreciate it and I will see many of you on the trip to Asia. Thank you very much. Thank you. [Off-mic]
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. President, do you want the assailant from New York sent to Gitmo?
[Trump:] I would certainly consider that. Yes. I would certainly consider that. Send him to Gitmo. I would certainly consider that. Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] And how did the diversity program fit into his plot do you believe sir?
[Trump:] Well, they say he came in through that program so we'll see. We're looking at it but they say he came in. I don't want I want look, it's very simple. What we are demanding is merit-based immigration. We want people that are going to help our country. We want people that are going to keep our country safe. We don't want lotteries where the wrong people are in the lotteries and guess what? Who are the suckers that get those people? And we want a merit-based system. And we do not want chain migration where somebody like him ultimately will be allowed to bring in many, many members of his family and we don't want that. Thank you all very much.
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. President, do you believe any members of his family represent a threat? Do you believe any members of his family represent a threat to the country, sir?
[Trump:] They could. They certainly could. He did. They certainly could represent a threat. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you very much. [Off-mic) Unidentified Female Mr. President, have you decided not to reappoint Janet Yellen?]
[Trump:] Thank you very much. I think Janet Yellen is excellent. I think she's excellent. I didn't say that. I think she's excellent. Thank you very much.
[John King, Cnn Anchor:] The president of the United States in the cabinet room speaking on a number of issues. One, his promise to name a new chairman or chairwoman of the Fed tomorrow. Number two, promoting his tax cut plan. Most of it though spent on his reaction, his assessment of the terror attack in New York City, his home city. A terrorist attack, a deadly terrorist attack on President Trump watch in his home city. With me to continue to the conversation, CNN's Nia-Malika Henderson, CNN's Dana Bash, our counterterrorism analyst Peter Bergen, Law Enforcement Analyst, Art Roderick. I want to go back if we have the tape and just play at the top as he was responding to this. He said we need to have strength, we need to have resilience, this is the president of United States saying what he thinks has to happen in this terrorism case and others.
[Trump:] We have to get much tougher, we have to get much smarter, and we have to get much less politically correct. We're so politically correct that we're afraid to do anything.
[King:] I'm struck sometimes at these moments by the fact that is the cabinet room at the White House and he lives there. Does he realize he's the president and has been for nine months. Is there anything the Trump administration has proposed that would make us much tougher or much smarter if that's necessary? And I'll leave that to the law enforcement experts. The budget they have proposed cut counterterrorism programs, cut aides to the cities like New York City
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Twenty-five percent.
[King:] Yes, like New York City they have to deal with this everyday and probably more than American city. But whether it's large or small local police will tell you this is their biggest nightmare right now. Some guys got a rented truck and into drive into a crowd somewhere. What can we do to be much tougher or much smarter? And, again, please correct me if I'm wrong, has he proposed anything that would be much tougher or much stronger?
[Art Roderick, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] When you look at this just from a law enforcement perspective and the police are going to do whatever they're going to do and they're going to figure out how to get it done. Whether there's a cut in budget, whether there's not a cut in budget, whether there's more money coming in or not. I think when you look at the police officer on the ground they're going to respond like they responded here to this particular incident. Is there anything that he's done? I think cutting budgets, that's not a good thing, that doesn't help.
[King:] Nothing happened, it's a proposal.
[Roderick:] Right. It's a proposal
[King:] It's a Trump administration proposal.
[Roderick:] You know, I think now with this particular point in time, maybe they'll relook at that and possibly put more assets out there and do more around the country what New York City has been doing.
[King:] But he sounds like the candidate.
[Unidenatified Female:] Yes.
[King:] He sounds like the candidate who ran for president of United States and not the president I've come back. He was trying to explain and I don't think he did it quite the way it works. The diversity of visa program which he now says he wants to eliminate.
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[King:] Again, if this is such a bad program, he's the Republican president. The Republicans control the House of Representatives, the Republicans control United States Senate. This was a bipartisan proposal when it was signed into law by a Republican President George H.W. Bush. If, a, if it was so bad, why haven't they proposed doing something about it? And B, all of the information we have before us right now, Peter, is that this suspect was radicalized here in the United States. Whether he came in through the diversity visa program, whether he came in illegally, whether he came in on a student visa, however he came into the United States, what does that matter if years later after he was here is when he was radicalized?
[Peter Bergen, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well that's a subject that is clearly a matter of debate. I mean but the fact is that people radicalize here. But I want can just return this question on how to get tough. I mean the conviction rate in federal terrorism cases in this country is 99%. So you've got one percent chance of requital when this goes to a court in the southern district of New York very close to where it happened. I mean we know what's going to happen. Now the president again, said, send this guy to Guantanamo. That's a guarantee that thing that go on for decades. I mean the operational commander of 911 Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has been in American custody in Guantanamo, you know, now for almost decade and a half. He still hasn't been charged. So one way to guarantee a lack of justice is to send him to Guantanamo, plus, this guy is a legal permanent resident and the people in Guantanamo are far it is. So this is not a sensible idea and it's not a way to get quick justice in a way the president suggested.
[Bash:] But that's the kind of big debate right now is whether it should be about quick justice even for somebody who is a legal resident here for a terror attack. Somebody who, you know, sort of claims that ISIS is behind what he does or the law should be changed dramatically so that even someone like that could be charged as an enemy combatant. And it's a huge, you know, culture clash and obviously a clash of questions of civil liberties versus, you know, kind of the global terrorist issue that we're on right now. One thing that I want to also point out is the way that the president made the diversity visa program he made it sound like, you know, everybody has a got a lottery number and you've, oh look, they picked b four, five, six, seven, eight come on in. And then they just come in and nothing happens. No, that's not how it happens. Ye it is a program as he said that was setup in a bipartisan way where people from countries where the immigration levels are very low can come in. But they are subjects to the same screening as everybody else who comes into this country. Now, whether that screening needs to be stepped up, that's a different question. But if you're just going to really get rid of this program and maybe, you know, keep out people who could be really good citizens for this country and that seems like potentially a short-term knee jerk solution instead of looking at the more global question because this guy could have been coming in on a different kind of visa and it would've potentially had the same outcome.
[King:] Yes. And so the point I made earlier about that he we have a Republican president and all Republican controls Congress. There is a proposal to eliminate this program. It's in the House Judiciary Committee which has a Republican chairman and a Republican majority. I know president is beating up on Senator Schumer because Senator Schumer was part of this.
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[King:] Senator Schumer was part of this. He was part of this back in the day. Another interesting point is that, Nia-Malika Henderson, is that is the president's hometown. Maybe he feels more personal about it. But quick justice mean strength, resolve, the tweets yesterday that this guy was a sicko. Much tougher than were a month after Vegas, 58 people were shot dead, the president could pick-up a phone and call his treasury department and bureau of alcohol and tobacco and fire arms and have them by regulation rewrite what the Obama administration did and say bump stocks are illegal. You can't sell those things anymore. That hasn't happened.
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] That's right. That hasn't happen and, you know, immediately after that he was very much saying he didn't want to politicize it. He, you know, was too early to talk about gun control or gun regulations. And since then nothing has been done. I mean this was a presidential who very much ran on law and order and getting tough. And Republican voters very much believe that he would have a different course and a different vision in terms of how to prosecute the war on terror, how to treat of prospects of terrorists in the country. But you do get the sense that he is so always going from pillar to post like he doesn't necessarily have a focus or discipline on one particular topic. And you saw that today in many ways in that press conference and he was repeating himself a lot. Kind of all over the place in terms of what message he wanted to drive, whether it was about tax reform, whether it was about, you know, any other subject Guantanamo Bay. And so I think it is interesting to see him sit there in the Oval Office and very much sounds like sort of the bystander president as if he hasn't been in office for the last many months and able to drive a vision and drive American course in terms of how to treat terrorism, how to treat terrorism. how to reshape the laws. And to essentially just spout off in the same way he did as a candidate. I mean if you look at to the things he said as a candidate, it's almost word for word. This idea of we need to get smarter, we need to get tougher. People are too PC. What that means in terms of what he actually wants to do is still very much unclear.
[King:] What have they done? You heard his chief of staff I don't know if we have the sound, tell me if we do. An interview on Fox News the other talking about he was asking it's just define extreme vetting. What does that mean? Do we have that? We don't have that. We'll try to get that. But what have they done? I mentioned if you want to change these things, there are legislative proposals he could make. The budget they lay down which a lot of people would say it's just marker and they knew a congressmen never approved those cuts, but they did proposals cuts. What have they done? We've gone through the travel ban, Uzbekistan was not to covered.
[Unidentified Male:] Right.
[King:] But by the travel ban this guy came in in seven years ago but Uzbekistan is not covered. And just sit up I think we have another chief of John Kelly staff asked pretty fair question define extreme vetting.
[Laura Ingraham, Host, The Ingraham Angle:] How was extreme vetting what is extreme vetting?
[John Kelly, White House Chief Of Staff:] Extreme vetting is we simply interview people and have to satisfy ourselves that the person we're talking to is indeed the person who they claim.
[Ingraham:] Pretty tough to do in some cases. Because I know records
[Kelly:] But then it's possible to do in some cases.
[Ingraham:] Right. So they won't come in that. If you can't really verify that, they aren't coming in.
[Kelly:] If we can't verify, I don't think we should let them into the country.
[King:] This is clearly their view about immigration in the looking out the windshield and looking out the front view. In the rearview, again, this guy came in seven years ago through a program with no such vetting in place number one, number two, the New York City authorities who were pretty good at this say he was radicalized when he got here until we have other information, there's no reason to think otherwise, right?
[Roderick:] No. I agree. I mean from purely a law enforcement perspective, clarity is the key. And
[King:] Is that clarity?
[Roderick:] That to me I'm not sure what extreme vetting is I know what vetting is. And I think we probably have a very good vetting system out there from what I've seen in my time over at homeland. But law enforcement needs clarity because the last thing you need to be doing is asking questions when you're in the middle of investigation as to whether somebody is legally over here or not and they've been properly vetted.
[King:] And I'm just getting new information just as we're checking all the agencies from the government. The Department of Justice does confirm he did come in 2010 under diversity visa program that homeland security I'm not sorry not the justice department. It's the morning after the day after terrors attack happened just a little over 20 hours ago. The president went on Twitter this morning and blamed Chuck Schumer saying he's responsible for this program, you saw Governor Cuomo, the Democratic revenue of New York firing back pretty intensely saying this should be a moment for unity not for finger pointing. Again, any Republican watching and saying the Democrats come out after the shootings and go for a gun control right away and have that debate right away. Would it be best and possible perhaps in this age, would it best that people just understood maybe for 24 or 48 hours and set all that aside or am I asking too much?
[Bash:] Yes and yes.
[Henderson:] Yes. It's too much. And yes, and we know that the president use this very reactionary, a lot of a talking points come from conservative media. It seems like this talking point around Schumer came from that. And then particularly when it comes to terrorism and sort of Islam having a role in a Muslim terrorist, he likes to react in those situations because it fits into his larger narrative about banning Muslims about diversity being a problem. And he want to point to us that maybe we should surveil a mosque. So it fits into that. So I think he often can't help himself but to find a bad guy, right, in this instance is Chuck Schumer. It's the Democrats and then keep up with this narrative he has about the influence of Muslims and the possible impact that they could have on a country.
[King:] He's entitled to his words. He's right we need strength and resilience after things like this. But he's also the president of the United States. If he wants to change something, he has the power to propose it. And we'll pick up that conversation on another day. thanks for joining us today on Inside Politics and doing for some of breaking news Wolf Blitzer picks up our special coverage with the New York City terror attack after a just a quick break. Have a good day.

[Johns:] Tropical storm Michael on track to slam the U.S. this week. Forecasts have Michael strengthening to a hurricane and hitting the Florida Panhandle on Wednesday. Meteorologist, Ivan Cabrera has the latest.
[Ivan Cabrera, Cnn Meteorologist:] Hey guys. Good morning. As we check in on tropical storm Michael. This will be hurricane Michael. We get hurricanes in October. In fact we had one last year that was Nathan, and I think it took a similar track to what this is going to do. Where are we here? 60-mile-an-hour winds, the rain that you are going to see in Miami today is already the outer bands of the storm as it continues then heading into the gulf in north. It will intensify perhaps even rapidly here. We are going to be looking at a category two storm. In fact that is the forecast at about 100 miles an hour. Inland, it will be 85. The timing of which, I will be specific here, zoom in, what we are talking about here in around Panama city beach, a category two hurricane with 100 plus miles an hour winds, Wednesday at 3:00 p.m. As you know, this area is vulnerable to storm surge that could be catastrophic there. We will continue to keep you posted as advisories come out. Guys.
[Johns:] Ivan Cabrera, thanks for that. Now, try to get your head around this. You pay $1.4 million for a piece of art. Then this happens. Shortly after the auctioneer's gavel fell. The girl with a balloon, one of Banksy's best known images self-destructed. The art work passed through the bottom of the golden frame producing a partially shredded canvas.
[Romans:] On this incident, they account the British base street artist, released a video showing the shredder being built into the painting in case it was ever put up for auction. Still a mystery this morning, how he got it to shred right as it was sold. The video of the captions with quote from Picasso, the urge to destroy is also a creative urge.
[Johns:] Wow.
[Romans:] The quintessential art anarchist.
[Johns:] Absolutely, not anarchist. You know, you have a how-to video on it. But to do that.
[Romans:] All right. 25 minutes past the hour. The worst transportation accident in this country in 10 years. Just a tragedy. 20 dead. Including young married couples and four sisters. What investigators are looking for this morning?
[Johns:] And Brett Kavanaugh is now Justice Kavanaugh. How both parties plan to use the messy confirmation in the midterms?

[Gorani:] A site many had prayed they'd never see again in Germany. The far-right is gaining visibility and so are those dreaded symbols of hate. Some groups have found ways to get around Germany's hate speech laws which are some of the toughest in the world, as you know. One cafe though is proudly selling not so veiled neo-Nazi merchandise. Our Atika Shubert went to see it firsthand.
[Atika Shubert, Cnn Correspondent:] Schnitzel topped with a fried egg is the special at the Golden Lion, but you don't need a menu to see what this place is all about.
[Tommy Frenck, Owner, The Golden Lion:] I buy the guest house because we didn't we can't go in out to guest houses. Every time the police come or the government or some organizations from them or the leftists, and say don't let the right-wings in, don't let the Nazis in.
[Shubert:] Proprietor Tommy Frenck wears his politics on his skin. The word Aryan tattooed around his neck, yet he denies he's a Neo-Nazi.
[Frenck:] I'm proud of my nation. I'm proud of my heritage. That's the thing in Germany. If you're proud of your heritage, you are a bad guy.
[Shubert:] At the back of the restaurant, Frenck shows us his other business, right-wing extremist merchandise. Germany has some of the toughest hate speech laws in the world. It's, for example, illegal to display a swastika and that's led to a kind of coded language like this. 88. That might not mean much to somebody looking at this, but to somebody who knows, H is the eight letter of the alphabet. This means HH or Heil Hitler. And if that's too subtle for you, well, there's merchandise like this for sale. Frenck won't explain what his t-shirts mean and denies that he is spreading Nazi ideology, but he claims that his sales have grown by 10 percent in the last three years, echoing the rise of far-right politics across Germany, like the alternative for Germany political party that he voted for, Frenck wants to ban Islam in Germany and stop immigration. That party, the AFD, won nearly 13 percent of the national vote.
[Frenck:] Most important for me is that German government make politics for German people and not for the European Union and not for refugees in Africa. They have to be for the German people.
[Shubert:] He's not a white supremacist, he claims, pointing to his world map of travels. He just doesn't like globalization. You make it?
[Frenck:] The thing is, they want to make from all these nice cultures, one big nonculture, you know what I mean?
[Shubert:] So you don't want that mixing basically?
[Frenck:] No. I didn't like the mixing.
[Shubert:] These are some of his clientele. This summer, Frenck helped to organize a concert of right-wing rock bands and political speeches by the local AFD. Under the watchful eyes of police. But police say they know Frenck as a right-wing extremist. Stefan Herdigan is using a long lens to zoom in and identify concert goers. He's an activist who keeps tabs on the growth of Neo-Nazi activity in the area. Tommy Frenck is less of an important Neo-Nazi and more of an entrepreneur of the Neo-Nazi scene, he tells me. Superficially, some of the t-shirts try to be funny. They are not funny. They are serious, because they promote Nazi ideas to people and that is dangerous, he says. So, we've got some heavily armed police coming in with us because they're worried that there could be some violence, even with media coming in. Let's see how it is. No punches thrown, just a few glares, one concertgoer had a message for us after learning we were CNN. This is a typical rock concert against foreign infiltration into Germany happening here, he says. More and more illegals, criminals coming in. The U.S. should be careful too. Better build your wall to Mexico, he says. At the restaurant, Frenck is busy serving beers to concertgoers. He chides us for attending the concert without him. That, he says, is why we didn't get a friendly reception.
[Frenck:] The media can talk over me what I want. It doesn't matter for me, because all people, they know me. They know I'm a normal person.
[Shubert:] Exactly what some fear, that what Frenck is selling may be accepted as normal. Atika Shubert, CNN, Themar, Germany.
[Gorani:] Well that cafe owner certainly was comfortable enough talking about it to CNN and displaying all that merchandise. Remarkable. Now, utter devastation in India. At least 164 people are dead after a monsoon rain sparked severe flooding and landslides in the southern state of Kerala. The official say the rains are as much as 50 percent worse than in previous years and they're still coming, unfortunately. Look at that torrent. Look at that it looks like a river. As always, where there is tragedy, there are stories of rescues and bravery. Chad Myers has that.
[Chad Myers, Cnn Correspondent:] They're being rescued by helicopter, by truck, by boat, and many are being carried to safety. The death toll keeps rising and tens of thousands of people have been displaced after unprecedented monsoon rains led to widespread flooding and landslides in the southern Indian state of Kerala. Authorities and residents alike tried desperately to reach those stranded in the floodwaters. Weather experts are calling it worst flood in almost a century.
[Unidentified Female:] The water has gotten into both floors of our house. We went to our neighbor's place and stayed on the second floor of their house. All of our things have been destroyed by the water. They are destroyed.
[Myers:] India's national disaster response force has deployed 53 teams across the state. The country's army, navy, and coast guard have all been called in to help. Even local fishermen have been asked to assist. Over 1,000 personnel from military and disaster authorities are now involved in the rescue mission. The Indian navy shared dramatic video of a pregnant woman being rescued by helicopter. She later gave birth to a healthy baby boy. A reporter from CNN-News 18 describes the flooding in one district.
[Unidentified Female:] As you can see behind me, this is the situation. This place is completely inundated. This entire town is under water.
[Myers:] Flooded out roads and bridges and railway shutdowns are hampering emergency efforts. Over 100,000 residents have sought shelter in relief camps.
[Unidentified Female:] They're providing us with clothes and other things. We've been given clothes, cots, and blankets as well as food.
[Myers:] Monsoon rains are common at this time of year but experts say these have been abnormally heavy. And with more rain expected in the coming days, the situation could go from bad to worse. Chad Myers, CNN.
[Gorani:] The Indian meteorological department has issued a warning for heavy rainfall in the state for the coming days. Let's get over to Allison Chinchar. She's live at the CNN weather center. So, is it going to rain even more there?
[Allison Chinchar, Cnn Meteorologist:] Yes, unfortunately, it is. And you're likely going to see what we call bursts, these heavy pockets of rain that just keep coming over the same areas. And you can take a look at the paths. You can see not only some showers in the southern region, but we've also have rain elsewhere. The main concern, however, has been in the extreme southern portion of India, especially that southwestern region. That's where you have that state, the main state of Kerala that we've been talking about. Look at some of these rainfall amounts. Kochi, for example, 259 millimeters in just the last 72 hours. Again, while monsoon rains are normal for this region, it is uncommon to get these heavy bursts one after another after another for these long periods of time. Now, overall, for India, in general, so far, the monsoon season is about up eight percent below average up to this point, but specifically for the state of Kerala, we're about 11 percent above average. So just this one particular state has seen an inundation of those rains. And one of the districts in that state, every single road is covered in water, which makes it almost impossible for travel, not only for the people to get out but for aid and supplies to get in. So keep that in mind. The forecast again continues to bring more rain. Here, you can see pretty much almost the entire western coastline has additional rainfall coming in in just the next 48 hours. That's going to be the short-term. The long-term aspects are how many more of these bursts can these people take in terms of the rainfall? Because the amounts that they're expecting are still likely, Hala, to be between about 50 and 100 millimeters total of rain, and that's just in the next couple of days.
[Gorani:] Allison Chinchar, thanks very much for that update. In the U.S. State of Georgia, unbelievable story, police tased and arrested an 87-year-old grandmother who was picking dandelion. And now her lawyers says she's considering legal action. The pensioner was spotted holding a knife to cut the flowers. Her daughter-in-law says the woman didn't understand police commands. But the police chief is defending his staff. Kaylee Hartung has that story.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Hala, Martha's Al-Bishara's granddaughter says this elderly woman has been known to wander into the woods near her home, go looking for dandelions and cut them with a kitchen knife. But her most recent outing to do this to go very unexpected turn, when this 87-year-old woman was taken down to the ground when she was tased by a police officer and then arrested. The actions of the officers from this small rural community in Georgia are under intense scrutiny. Listen first to the 911 call they received last Friday.
[Unidentified Female:] 911, what's your emergency?
[Unidentified Male:] Hey, I'm at Boys and Girl's club. I'm a staff here. There's a lady walking on the bike trail, she has a knife. And she won't leave. She doesn't speak English. It looks like she's walking around looking for something, vegetation to cut down or something. She has a bag big.
[Unidentified Female:] But she came at someone with a knife, though, right? Or did she just have it?
[Unidentified Male:] No, she's just bringing the knife onto the property with her hand. She didn't try and attack anybody or something.
[Hartung:] You hear the caller say he didn't see this woman as a threat. But police officers must have felt differently. They say that they reputedly asked Al-Bishara to drop the knife. She didn't respond, she didn't comply. They say she even had a calm demeanor when they had their guns out and the taser out. The police chief, who was among the responding officers, he continues to defend his officer's actions saying he believes they were justified. We've since learned from Al-Bishara's granddaughter that the woman is originally from Syria. She speaks only Arabic and she has dementia. And yet the police chief says nearly everyone should understand the universal command for stop. Hala, this woman is being charged with trespassing and obstruction and she's expected in court next month.
[Gorani:] Thanks, Kaylee Hartung. Don't forget you can get all the latest news, interviews and analysis from the show online, facebook.comhalagoranicnn. Check me out on Twitter, @HalaGorani. Now, Syria's war has been brutal and horrifying, but in the country many are trying to look forward in some parts of the nation. But the momentous task is proving to be complicated. Russia says it wants financial help from western nations. But the U.S. and its allies are hesitant to back anything having to do with the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad who, of course, Russia has propped up and helped retake parts of the country. He's been accused of course of war crimes, and crimes against humanity. CNN's Fred Pleitgen has been accompanying the Russian military in parts of Syria.
[Fred Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] The territorial gains that the Russian military has helped the Syrian government forces achieve are really are quite impressive. The Russian military has driven us on this trip from the southern border of Syria all the way up here to Homs. That's several hundred kilometers, without having to make way for any sort of area still controlled by opposition forces. At the same time, you do see a lot of the problems that Syria still faces. You look at the city that we're in right now, Homs. There's still so much reconstruction that needs to be done. We're in the central part of the city. Of course, people are trying to rebuild. You see some scaffolding. You see people cleaning up, but a lot of money and a lot of resources are needed. Homs' governor says the city is doing its best with what it has.
[Gov. Talal Barazi, Homs, Syria:] In May 2014, rebels have abandoned the old city of Homs leaving behind major damages. The very next day when fighters left, we allowed people to come back to the old city.
[Pleitgen:] One lighthouse project, Homs' historic market has just reopened after being almost totally destroyed in the fighting that raged here. This is what the market looked like four years ago when CNN was on hand as Syrian government forces retook the old town of Homs from rebels. Some reconstruction is going on in Syria, like this bridge in the town of Rastan. But hundreds of billions of dollars will probably be needed to get the country back on its feet. And Moscow wants western nations to pitch in.
[Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov, Russian Army:] Of course it's very hard because the scale of damage is large, and people no doubt need help, especially those who are coming back to their homes. They need help to get back to normal life and make the economy work.
[Pleitegn:] Western countries are reluctant to provide reconstruction help with both the Assad government and its Russian backers accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity, claims they vehemently deny. The Russian army took us to a military food and medical aid station, handing out rations to Syrians still struggling just to get by and uncertain who will provide aid to repair the massive damage this war has caused. Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Rastan, Syria.
[Gorani:] A lot more to come this evening. Family members in North and South Korea are preparing to see each other, in some cases, for the first time in decades. The emotional story is coming up.

[Unidentified Male:] The 29-year-old Horizon Airline employee has been identified is Richard Russell. Commercial aircrafts are complex machines. I don't know how he achieved the experience. It's going to disappoint them to hear that I did this. I would like to apologize to each and every one of them.
[Jeremy Kaelin, Worked With Richard Russell:] I was just shocked to see that someone who was so nice, so helpful, and caring
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY WEEKEND with Victor Blackwell and Christi Paul.
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] Stunned and heartbroken. That is what we are hearing from the family of a man who died when he crashed a stolen plane. We have more on that story in just a moment.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] Also ahead this hour, a year after violent racially charged protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, white supremacists and counter protesters are expected to rally again. This time in the nation's capital.
[Paul:] A CNN investigation forces Twitter to finally admit info wars violated its rules with its twisted messages of hate and racism.
[Blackwell:] And NASA launches a probe that will travel closer to the sun than any spacecraft before it as scientists try to unlock its greatest mysteries. Your NEW DAY starts right now.
[Paul:] One minute past 6:00 and so grateful for your company. Thanks for being here. You know, as he was flying that stolen passenger plane near Seattle Richard Russell calls himself a broken guy.
[Blackwell:] Now his family members say they are stunned and heartbroken after Russell was identified as the airline employee who took off from the Seattle airport in that empty plane and then crashed it an hour later.
[Mike Matthews, Friend Of Richard Russell's Family:] This is a complete shock to us. We are divested by these events. And Jesus is truly the only one holding this family together right now. As the voice recording show, Beebo's intent was not to harm anyone. He was right in saying that there are so many people who have loved him.
[Paul:] We are learning morning about Russell training on the ground there where he was authorized to tote planes to the gate but they do not believe he had a pilot's license.
[Blackwell:] And now as the criminal investigation begins, officials are working to recover the plane's data recordings and Russell's remains. Airport security experts point out numerous flaws in the system revealed by this incident. CNN correspondent Dan Simon is live in Steilacoom with an exclusive interview with one of Russell's former coworkers. The family is shocked and stunned and heartbroken. Did this coworker see any potential signs?
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning Christi and Victor. We are getting a clearer sense of what Richard Russell was like as a friend, as an employee, as a coworker, and some of what you're about to hear may surprise you. I can tell you that Jeremy Kaelin worked alongside Russell for eight solid months. They primary handled the luggage there at the airport. And he says he got to know him well. He says this is somebody who had a lot of integrity, somebody who worked very hard, and somebody who had great sense of humor. He is also not surprised that Russell was able to learn a few things about aviation given certain aspects of his job. Take a look.
[Simon:] When you learn that it was your friend and former coworker Richard Russell who did this, what did you think?
[Kaelin:] Shock. He was really just super nice. Always laid back but super nice, super funny. And he would always go out and help others with his flights that he wasn't even assigned to help out with, or and when he was working with you on your flight he would work as hard as he could.
[Simon:] You saw the home video of him doing those maneuvers.
[Kaelin:] Yes.
[Simon:] He seemed like, to a certain degree, he knew what he was doing as a pilot or behind the controls.
[Kaelin:] Yes. Well, you can learn how to fly with flight simulators if you buy them. You can literally just run them on your PC, Mac, whatever. But it was also part of his job description on tow team was to operate some of the systems that were he was trained to do by Horizon Air which is part of the tow team. And so, essentially, he just took that knowledge and then built off of it.
[Simon:] Now Kaelin says there is so much information out there including YouTube instructional videos that can teach people how to turn on aircraft and how to do basic maneuvers so he is not surprised that somebody like Russell who had access to aircraft was able to do what he did. The key thing is access. Remember he passed a security check. Now of course all of this is being investigated by the FBI. They are going to be talking to friends and the coworkers, perhaps even Kaelin himself. And of course the investigation is also centered about 10 minutes from where I'm standing at that island where I can tell you dozens of investigators have been sifting through the debris. Victor and Christi, back to you.
[Blackwell:] All right. Dan Simon, live for us this morning. Dan, thank you very much.
[Paul:] We want to bring in CNN transportation analyst Mary Schiavo. She's a former inspector general of the Department of Transportation. Mary, so good to see you. Again, thank you for being here. So this is what maybe some perplexing to some people. The tower knew that this was unauthorized departure. There were no routine procedures we had learned, the ramp, the ground, the take off clearances. None of that was given. So with that said let's put ourselves in the tower's position. You have got a guy in a plane who says, I'm taking off and I'm going, what option did they have?
[Mary Schiavo, Cnn Transportation Analyst:] At that point once he's literally once he's on the runway and rolling down the runway, none. I mean, we've all seen Hollywood blockbusters where police cars or fuel trucks are racing to try to get in front of a plane to stop it, but in reality the controller didn't have time to do anything. They well, from what we have learned, they knew that he was moving and he wasn't authorized to do that. But if he was heading straight to that runway and starting that takeoff role, that's it. You're going up at 134 miles an hour. That plane is lifting off.
[Paul:] As I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong, he was towing it but when you're towing it there is supposed to be by protocol somebody in the plane. There was not. At that point, does the onus fall on the airport or the airline?
[Schiavo:] It's the airline. The airline has the authority and ability to control their ground operations. They have their own dispatchers, their own sort of ground controllers. And so the tower might not have known. There would be no reason to tell the tower that they are moving and repositioning a plane on the ground. So they wouldn't have known that there was not someone in that aircraft. They they there's two different functions. You have ground control and then you have the tower that controls the takeoffs. So the tower probably didn't know that it was just one guy moving the plane around.
[Paul:] Now that somebody has seen this, is there concern, Mary, that it could happen again at another airport?
[Schiavo:] Well, sure. And it's been a concerned, literally, since September 11th, 2001. Controlling the 900,000 airport workers at the 450 airports, commercial service airports across the country has been a big issue. Congress addressed it again last year, the committee on Homeland Security. And there is you know, just a big question as to what to do as to keep the airports and the traveling public and the citizens over whose heads we all fly safe when you have that many workers and they have to be able to do their job. So I do assume that it will come up again but there was one clue that just leapt out at me and this is when this fellow was flying and he said to the controller he said, can I get the plane can you tell me how to turn on the plane's pressurization so I don't feel so light- headed? Well, he wasn't at 14,000 feet where you got light-headed or even over at 10 thousand where you need oxygen, so to me that was a clue and I think they will focus in on that too. Something was wrong, physically, I think, and mentally.
[Paul:] OK. So you're you're intimating that that because he felt light-headed at an altitude that you wouldn't normally be
[Schiavo:] Right.
[Paul:] perhaps there was something else going on with him?
[Schiavo:] Yes, yes, that was to me a clue.
[Paul:] OK. Mary Schiavo, thank you so much for sharing and for sharing your expertise with us. As always we appreciate you.
[Schiavo:] Thank you.
[Richard Preston, Imperial Wizard, Confederate White Knights Of The Kkk:] I've never terrorized a black person in my life.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] Why not join the Kiwanis club? Why not call it something different?
[Preston:] Because again
[Sidner:] Why the Ku Klux Klan?
[Preston:] Because I want to see the clan to become what it once was.
[Rep. Tom Garrett , Virginia:] About Charlottesville with the director of the FBI amongst others and asked if Russian inter-meddling had to do with fomenting the flames of what happened in Charlottesville. I was told, yes, it did.
[Frank Meeink, Former Supremacist Skinhead:] Am I the guy who always brings anger and hatred towards every conversation I'm in? Or am I the guy who can bring peace and resolution to something by not degrading other human beings?
[Blackwell:] There is a state of emergency in Charlottesville one year, exactly one year after the violent and deadly protests in that small Virginia town.
[Paul:] Yesterday, hundreds of demonstrators marched through the streets of that city. Police came forward for the worst but the protests were mostly peaceful. Take a look here. They are going to be there is going to be the same show of force today when white supremacists hold the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville but a second rally is also planned at Lafayette Square near the White House in Washington. And that is where find CNN's Sara Sidner is right now. Sara, you've had some pretty interesting conversations around this.
[Sidner:] Yes. I think Charlottesville, for anyone in this country, and even outside of the United States, has seen that as a real example that this country is still struggling with deep racial divides. We went to a town in Pennsylvania that is struggling with the question, what to do about a neighbor who is outspoken and a neo-Nazi and fires off his guns that night. In the calm of this rural northern Pennsylvania town, a sign that hate lives here. Are you a neo-Nazi?
[Daniel Burnside, Pennsylvania Director Of Far-right National Socialist Movement:] Do I embrace it? I don't try to push it away.
[Sidner:] Well, you're wearing a swastika on your shirt
[Burnside:] Exactly.
[Sidner:] and you've got swastika flags. Why the flags? Why the shirt? Why these hateful symbols in this town?
[Burnside:] I don't think they're hateful. I think it's an ideology that has been completely misinterpreted since the Third Reich.
[Sidner:] OK. Now, I have got to stop you. Misinterpreted, misinterpreted six million Jews were killed?
[Burnside:] No, no. You'll never sell me on that.
[Sidner:] I'm not trying to sell you.
[Burnside:] Yes.
[Sidner:] It's reality. It's history that cannot be denied. [voice-over]: Daniel Burnside is lightning rod of discord in Ulysses, Pennsylvania, population 690. With the help of the Internet, his message has spread far and wide, giving his town attention it doesn't want.
[Burnside:] Rural America spoke up when he they elected Trump. Rural America.
[Sidner:] And by rural America, he means white America.
[Burnside:] We are staring down the barrel of a gun here in white America. There's still 193 million white Americans. Yes, the vast majority of them are in their 60s and 70s, will be in the ground in the next 20 years and, therefore, we have the possibility of becoming a minority in our own country. A possibility
[Sidner:] It sounds to me
[Burnside:] of becoming a minority.
[Sidner:] like you're afraid of being me. And being me
[Burnside:] It's my country.
[Sidner:] is great. This is also my country.
[Burnside:] You guys didn't win the culture war.
[Sidner:] He invited us on his property to talk, but when he doesn't like our conversation, he explodes.
[Burnside:] Get the
[Sidner:] We do. Just down the street, we're met by a dozen residents who say Burnside does not speak for this town. [on camera]: There are families in this county that blame politics for people like him sort of being able to come out and be very loud. Is that fair?
[Ivan Lehman, Ulysses Resident:] Our president we've got right now hasn't helped the situation a whole lot. You know, he has done a lot of the same believes. You know, he won't speak against them, OK? This guy feeds off that stuff.
[Sidner:] Among the crowd, many with grandfathers or fathers who fought the Nazis in World War
[Ii. Carm Barker, Ulysses Resident:] They're good people and he is stepping on all of us. He is stepping on all of us. We are all one we're all one tribe. Who does he think he is?
[Sidner:] Teacher, Debbie Hamilton says she just returned from touring concentration camps in Poland.
[Debbie Hamilton, Teacher:] One of the things that we spent a lot of time talking about was passive resistance versus active resistance.
[Sidner:] So far, they have chosen passive resistance with Burnside. On the other side of Potter County, Joe and Lashina Leschner are convinced passive resistance is the wrong choice.
[Joe Leschner, Ulysses Resident:] I'm not saying you should go to their houses with pitch forks and guns. I'm saying hold a peaceful protest against them.
[Burnside:] Traditionalists, American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan neighborhood watch.
[Sidner:] After seeing KKK flyers appearing in their neighborhood and Burnside's decorations in the county, Joe did protest only to receive a threat by one of the supremacists he stood against.
[Leschner:] They would look at me and gave me the finger and even make little gestures, you know, that they were going to shoot me.
[Sidner:] Joe says the racial hatred intensified with when his Jamaican bride arrived. LASHINA
[Leschner, Wife Of Joe Leschner:] In Walmart, you know, I get a lot of that. It's
[Sidner:] In their minds, if more people stood up against hate, the racist would be forced to leave and let love stand. Now we are here in Lafayette Park. And a lot of people who are standing against the Unite the Right rally that is scheduled here on the very day that Heather Heyer was killed in Charlottesville during the counter protest to the Unite to Right protest. People see it as spitting in the eye of the victims of that protest to have yet another one here in Washington, D.C., right across the street by the way from the White House. But there counter protests that are also scheduled and there expected to be more people at those protests than at this one. The Unite the Right organizers got a permit for about 400 people whether or not that number materializes we won't know until this evening. They are expected to start and end up here at about 5:30 in the evening. They will also be faced with those counter protesters who are here. They are calling it D.C. shut it down Shut It Down D.C. They are supposed to end up in this park right outside the White House, just giving you another example of the racial divide in this country.
[Blackwell:] Certainly. And let's hope everything remains peaceful there. Sara Sidner, thank you so much.
[Paul:] Sara, thank you. And Sara just mentioned Heather Heyer. This is a woman who people are remembering today. They left messages for her on the walls of downtown Charlottesville. One reads, teach love, not hate. And this is such as you can imagine a really tough weekend for her mother. But her mom says even though this was not her goal in life necessarily, she was a teacher, she was with her family. She says it is now her job to stop fighting for the social injustice that her daughter was fighting for. What do you think Heather would say to you one year later, if she could? And what would you say to her?
[Susan Bro, Heather Heyer's Mother:] I would say, I need you. I hope she would say I'm proud of what you're doing. I'm helping from up here, mom.
[Paul:] Do you feel her helping you?
[Bro:] I do. She makes things come together.
[Paul:] What is your wish for Charlottesville this year?
[Bro:] Don't be in such a rush to heal, that you don't fix the underlying problems. I know Mayor Walker is working hard to get some of those things done. I know some other people are working hard. If you rush to heal it over, if you rush to just spackle on top of the black mold on the wall, then it's only going to fester and grow and we are going to have this problem again in a short time. And I really don't want to see another mother, black, white, Asian, Latino, in my spot.
[Paul:] And by the way, Susan Bro there says that she is going to go to Heather's the place where Heather died on Fourth Street. She's going to lay some flowers there today.
[Blackwell:] Well, on this one-year anniversary, we are learning more about the Russian interference after Charlottesville. A GOP lawmaker says Russian trolls fueled that hate and anger, meddling online in the aftermath of the Charlottesville rally last year. We'll learn more about how he says
[Paul:] Also a security guard opens fire in a store in Las Vegas. We have new video to show you here of some frightening moments there as shoppers were hiding from that shooter.
[Blackwell:] Also, a multimillion dollar settlement for the man who says a popular weed killer caused his cancer. Coming up, what this landmark verdict could mean for the hundreds of patients suing the makers of Roundup.

[Brown:] Now to California where there's good news and potentially bad news. Heavy rain is expected this week and not only could it drench northern California's Camp Fire, but it could also snuff out the risk of new wildfires for the rest of the year. But fire evacuees are bracing for the threat of flash flooding, mudslides and rivers of debris that could hit cities already devastated by the wildfire. I want to bring in CNN's Nick Watt, who joins me from Chico, California. Nick, what are you seeing?
[Nick Watt, Cnn Correspondent:] Pamela, where we are now is one of the few bright spots in northern California. You can see the shock blond hair that is Guy Phiery and you have Chef Andreas, and they will be cooking Thanksgiving dinner for 15,000 people. Over here, this is another interesting angle. Costom Vallone from Sonoma, which suffered wildfires last year, they caravanned yesterday with their smokers, preparing these Turkeys, 90 Turkey breasts in each one. But as for the fire itself, as you mentioned, the rain is going to be an issue. The fire is 90 percent contained, but we had heavy rains last night and we'll get more heavy rains tonight. That is when the fear of mudslides and debris flow coming in. Some evacuation orders have been lifted this morning. Some people are going back in to see if there's anything left of their homes but no one yet allowed back into the town of Paradise, that town of 27,000 people, which was pretty much burnt off the map. We're talking about, in total, nearly 14,000 homes have been destroyed by this pain. A lot of pain and hurt here this Thanksgiving. This, one of the few bright sports. They will serve dinner here, two other locations, and also delivering food to shelters to bring Thanksgiving cheer in an otherwise desperate situation Pamela?
[Brown:] They are certainly heavy our hearts this Thanksgiving. Thank you so much, Nick. I'm going to turn to Dallas and a special reason there to be grateful this Thanksgiving. We'll show you why. A raging fire sweeps through an apartment building. If you look closely in the highlighted circle, a baby is dropped out of a window. A 21-year-old man who rushed to the fire safely caught the child. Other Good Samaritans stacked mattresses to soften landings for trapped residents who had to jump. Remarkably everyone in the 24 units safely escaped. The cause of the fire is still under investigation. Wow. Still ahead, people are calling it "The Match." Two golf superstars, Tiger Woods versus Phil Mickelson, and there's a lot of money at stake, not to mention bragging rights. That's next. Stay with us.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Sandoval is live there. Polo, you're still experiencing all the elements there. Tell us what's happening.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. Yes, it's amazing, Fred. Almost on cue it's seems somebody was listening, right, when you mentioned that tropical storm, the 70-mile-an-hour winds, they certainly did kick up. But just like that they stop. It really is incredible. I've covered many hurricanes and always surprised by just how fast these things can change because these cyclones have the bands that are sweeping across the region. And that's something we continue to see here in Victoria. Yes, it's been downgraded now to tropical storm category or status, but yet we continue to see those howling winds that are keeping many people still indoors. Authorities, however, have been able to get on the road, begin damage assessment. We've driven around a little bit and have seen some damage, however much of what we've seen so far has been really superficial structural damage. Let's say a couple of tiles or siding that's been ripped off buildings, maybe some windows that have been broken, but nothing compared to what perhaps some of our friends south of here have seen. And of course plenty of debris. There's plenty of branches, plenty of tree limbs and street signs all over the place because earlier today if it was not grounded or it was not bolted to the ground like this garbage can, it certainly was swept away. As for other neighboring cities I could tell you that we have seen very similar damage there. We've seen some flooding on the side of the roads in getting here when we left San Antonio earlier this morning. And that's been somewhat of a concern for authorities. We've heard officials call it devastating flooding. There's the wind. And we did see some of that on the roads, the water level slowly rising the closer we got to the coast. And that is a concern that perhaps some of these roads could be impassable later on. But at this point we did not have any problem getting in. Authorities still recommending, though, Fred, people shelter in place if you're finding yourself in these kinds of weather conditions.
[Whitfield:] All right, Polo Sandoval, thanks so much for that perspective from Victoria, Texas. Let's move onto Houston, Texas, now, north of there, and Rosa Flores is live for us there. So Rosa, we had rising bayou waters. What are the conditions now?
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, we're getting a little break from the rain, Fred, right now. Every now and then we are getting some gusts of wind. You can see that this bayou still very swollen. It's still gushing out towards the Gulf of Mexico. But weather and flooding is bizarre. And I want to show you exactly what I'm talking about. Last hour this step was under water. You can see some of the debris here. Now in an hour or so it went down about 17 or 18 inches, that quickly. It's bizarre. It's bizarre. Again, we're still bracing for hurricane Harvey here. And the ebbs and flows of this water, I mean, it's just moving. It's been moving a lot. And you can see to my right here on that grassy knoll where those ducks are, you can see the line of debris, where it was probably about an hour ago and where it is now. Now, we're not saying that by any means that this is good news or bad news. We're just kind of showing you the ebbs and flows of this water. And as it's gushing because, again, one of the most dangerous things about water like this is it's very unpredictable. You never know what's going to happen. That's why city leaders here and first responders are prepared with resources all over the city because even though they do know historically that some areas do flood and some areas are more prone to flooding than others, they're prepared for everything because you just don't know what this water's going to do. So as you can see, where these two bayous converge it's turned into a gushing river. And Houston expecting between 15 to 25 inches. And in some isolated areas they're expecting up to 35 inches of rain, Fred. So, again, city leaders asking people to shelter in place, to be patient, to be vigilant, to stay in their homes as they brace for hurricane Harvey.
[Whitfield:] And are you getting a sense oh, OK, well, Rosa Flores, thank you so much. We're going to go to Austin, Texas, now because Governor Greg Abbott is about to hold this press conference we've been awaiting. Here we go.
[Gov. Greg Abbott,  Texas:] Well, thank you all for being with us here today. A lot has happened in the past 24 hours since the last briefing. I'd like to bring you up to speed on what I know and then take a few questions. Let me first start with some generalities and then get down to some more granular details. First, now that the hurricane has come onshore, our primary concern remains dramatic flooding. According to information that I was provided, there's been about 20 inches of rain in the Corpus Christi area, about 16 inches of rain in the Houston area, and our biggest concern is the possibility of between 20 and 30 more inches of rain in areas ranging from Corpus Christi over to Houston. Because of the flooding, one of the top focal points that we are concerned about is ongoing rescue and recovery. We want to do everything we possibly can to keep people out of rising water. Part of that is by constant warnings to the public about being vigilant, about observing rising water around you. As you're traveling, if you are traveling out on the road, always watch for water on the road, remembering that when you come across water it could be far deeper than what your eye observes or the swiftness of the current can be far stronger than what you perceive. You all know the well-known phrase, and that is turn around, don't drown. Don't risk your life. Still the most important thing that all Texans can do who are affected by this storm is to put your life and the protection of your life first and foremost. In addition to that, the state and various agencies remain very active in the search and rescue process, and that will be one of the foremost tasks that we undertake in the coming days. We have focused on working with and supporting evacuees, especially from around the Corpus Christi area, now expanding to some larger areas. I had the opportunity yesterday afternoon to go to San Antonio to visit with evacuees as they were getting off of buses that had come in from the Corpus Christi area. You could sense a sense of relief on their part that they were out of the way of what was an increasingly threatening storm. They were happy to be alive, and they were at peace in that regard, but obviously also concerned about what they had left behind, about the possibility that they had lost or would be losing the place they lived as well as some of their property. But most importantly they were just happy to be alive. I have issued a disaster declaration that originally included 30 counties. And this is a state disaster declaration. And we have now added 20 more counties for a total of six counties. As you probably know, I requested a federal disaster declaration that the president granted last night. This is incredibly important and extremely fast. What the presidential proclamation about our disaster declaration does is it immediately triggers the implementation of FEMA and FEMA's assistance for individuals as well as cities and counties for all of us to begin the rebuilding process as quickly as possible. Something else that I did yesterday is I issued a proclamation waiving hotel occupancy taxes for all evacuees and first responders. So any place in the state of Texas where there's an evacuee or first responder who is affected by this storm, they will be able to have the hotel taxes waived. I just got word from the Fort Bend County judge who has issued a voluntary evacuation for the Brazos River area in Fort Bend County and a mandatory evacuation along the San Bernard. This is one of the foremost regions in the state of Texas that already has flooding and we anticipate the flooding to grow worse in that area. This morning I had the opportunity to make phone calls to several of the mayors who were affected by the hurricane last night. I spoke with the mayor of Victoria and spoke with the mayor of Port Lavaca. I made phone calls to the mayors of Corpus Christi as well as Rockport, and with the latter two I did not have the ability to connect with them but left messages for them. For the mayors of Victoria and Port Lavaca, they seem to be in strong spirits. They obviously preside over cities that have suffered some very meaningful damage, but they are working very aggressively to try to help their citizens respond to their challenges, and I offer them as well as the mayors of Corpus Christi and Rockport any and all help that the state of Texas can provide. Now, for some more granular detail as a result of the briefing that I just had, looking at the Texas military division, there are more than 1,300 service members who are currently activated. And we anticipate increasing that amount by 500 more, giving up above 1,800 service members who will be activated to assist in responding to the hurricane and its aftermath. As far as the Texas Department of Transportation, they are already undertaking cleanup operations around the Corpus Christi and Yoakum areas, working to clear pathways along roadways there, which is impressive that they were able to get in that quickly and begin that process. With the PUC, they say that there are more than 338,000 outages. And it will still be several days perhaps before those outages will be able to be addressed. The reason for that is because the wind speed in the area of where they're going to be able to take care of those outages has to decrease below a certain level before they are able to respond. As far as emergency services are concerned, which includes the Texas military, includes Texas parks and wildlife, it includes Texas task force one and Texas task force two, one of their primary focal points is search and rescue. They've already made several search and rescue operations, primarily hoisting through the helicopter process. And we have about 1,000 personnel in the state of Texas who were assigned to search and rescue. The Texas parks and wildlife has about 1,500 evacuees at state parks. And, again, any cost that would normally be incurred at a state park has been waived for evacuee. For the Texas department of public safety, they have assigned about 80 troopers to the Corpus Christi area to assist in law enforcement needs in that region. For the Red Cross, they have 21 shelters open already with the population of about 1,450, and they have 42 more shelters on standby to be ready. Importantly, those are Red Cross shelters. There are so many other shelters across the state of Texas, whether they be local churches or other local facilities. And we are very, very appreciative of everyone in the state of Texas who is providing shelter, food, and other supplies. Along those lines I do want to express my gratitude at the shelter I was at yesterday. There was a need for towels and for blanketing and bedding for the people who were there. We made a public plea and that plea was answered very swiftly. So thank you to the people of San Antonio for responding to the needs of the people from Corpus Christi who have shelter in San Antonio. On transportation, we have 228 buses that are available to continue to move evacuees and more than 100 bus trips for evacuees have already been undertaken. We have across multiple agencies we are in the process of getting water, ice, food and supplies to need areas. We're in the process of working to set up staging areas where those supplies will soon be able to be delivered to those who need them. With that, why don't I take a few questions? Yes?
[Question:] Governor, what guidance have you been given about how bad the flooding and flash flooding can be? Are we expecting homes to be swept away off river banks like we saw in years previous flooding events? And as that pertains to your search and rescue crews ready to mobilize, what would you say to those people who are in their homes being advised to evacuate?
[Abbott:] Sure. The best information we have are predictions about the rainfall that will come on top of the rainfall that's already occurred. And that is that in various key regions ranging from Corpus Christi to the Houston area perhaps as much as between 20 and 30 more inches of rain could be coming down. That is coming down on already saturated ground and already filled up waterways, whether they be creeks, bayous or rivers. And so there is the potential of very dramatic flooding. It's essential for people near those flood zones to do several things. One is to obviously be aware of your surroundings. Two is to listen to warnings given out by local officials and heed those warnings. And three, whenever you do venture out by car or any other way, be very cautious, knowing that not only is it rising water, but oftentimes it will be swift moving water that can carry you away. For everybody in the state of Texas your top responsibility is to protect your life. So whenever you're near water, be sure you're doing everything to stay safe.
[Question:] Sir, any confirmed fatalities from the storm?
[Abbott:] We don't have any information right now that we can confirm any fatalities. That's information that we will be working with local officials seeking confirmation that we can report later.
[Question:] Do you expect to report
[Abbott:] Well, whenever we receive confirmation of fatalities and confirmation that it was a result of the storm as opposed to some other cause, we will confirm it. But we cannot confirm it at this time.
[Question:] Have you received any unconfirmed reports that you're looking into?
[Abbott:] No.
[Question:] Do you know about how many rescues have been performed?
[Abbott:] So what's happening right now is our first responders are absolutely putting their lives on the line to get out there and do search and rescue for any of those that are still in need. And I think what you're going to see over these next few hours and probably into days is that is the wind conditions and the weather conditions allow they are going to get out there and do as many rescues as they possibly can. The message to those that may need help or rescue, make sure you put that signal out there that you are still there and you still need help. If you still have electricity or phone service at all and battery, send those messages out, make sure we can see them. But I need you to keep our first responders in your thoughts and prayers because they are absolutely risking their lives to get out there in these dangerous conditions to look for those that are in need.
[Question:] Can you share with us some of the human contact you've had talking with the evacuees?
[Abbott:] Right. It was so heartening to shake the hands of these evacuees as they got off of these buses. And I walked around the school that they were being housed in and got to visit with them. And they are what I call typical Texans. They were resilient. They were strong. They were strong spirited. They were happy. They were just happy to be there and be alive. But obviously they were in need. There was a part of them that were facing a sense of the
[Whitfield:] We just lost the signal from Texas Governor Greg Abbott. But you get the gist of it. He says, you know, while hurricane Harvey has been downgraded to a tropical storm, there are conditions they do expect to worsen. Let's continue to listen in on the Texas governor.
[Abbott:] I'll take two more. It's way too early to make any estimates about that. What I can say is we are so pleased that the federal government and the White House have stepped up in the strong way they have by granting our disaster declaration that will enable Texas and Texans to be able to better deal with the financial consequences of the storm.
[Question:] We heard in the field of undocumented immigrants being turned away at shelters. Can you speak to that?
[Abbott:] I have no information about that.
[Question:] Sir, you suggested earlier in the week that there were people not heeding the evacuation calls, maybe more than expected. Is that still the case?
[Abbott:] Well, I'll correct that. I didn't suggest that they were not heeding it. What I was suggesting is that if a local official has warned people to evacuate, it is very important that citizens heed those warnings by their local officials. Great. Thank you.
[Whitfield:] All right, you've been listening to Texas governor Greg Abbott there. And he says there are conditions during, in parts of the state that are expected to worsen because still upwards of 20 inches of rain is expected. There are ongoing rescue and recovery efforts underway, including helicopters and the use of some 1,800 military service personnel. They are indeed focusing on evacuees right now. The city of Galveston is also an area that's expected to experience two to four foot storm surges. Our Ed Lavandera is there. And so Ed, any indications as to whether any rescue or recovery efforts that the governor spoke about are underway there in Galveston?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Not on Galveston Island, but some of the areas they were talking about is just a little bit further north from where we are. You've got to cross the bridge, get back onto the mainland to get into those areas we're talking about. We've been checking in with authorities here on Galveston Island throughout the morning. And we have had several hours of a really strong heavy rain band that had been moving through here. And it is finally died off. And you can see here just how much the storm we're here standing on the edge of the seawall, and the storm surge was getting there just to the banks of it throughout most of probably the last 15 hours or so. And you can see how much all of that has receded back into the Gulf of Mexico. So that's kind of a good sign. And since that has happened you actually start seeing people coming out here rushing out to walk along the beach and see what's been left behind. Traffic and power pretty well intact here on the island, but this is one of the areas that, you know, just because this particular band is over, that precaution and that anticipation that more rain could come at any moment or might start moving this way, you don't want to give people a false sense of security through all of this, especially since the tropical storm is still hovering over the area. Some of the computer models as we watch forecasters talk about had even talked about at some point this storm making its way west, perhaps even going back out into the gulf, re-strengthening and then coming back toward this way. So there's always that concern. That is in the back of the mind of a lot of the emergency management officials here in this part of southeast Texas. But for the most part, Fredricka, everything holding up rather well. Now that the rain has stopped, there had been some minor flooding in various streets that we came across this morning, but the kind of flooding would recede rather quickly. So for the most part every indication here on Galveston Island is that everything is working smoothly and we'll continue to monitor that as well. That can change at any time.
[Whitfield:] All right, Ed Lavandera in Galveston, Texas, thank you so much. So as this storm kind of continues to move toward the inland portions of Texas, they're not out of the woods yet. Meteorologist Chad Myers is here. You heard the governor particularly very concerned about floods, standing water. He was reminding people, you know, turn around, don't drown. What could the rest of Texas be bracing for?
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Well, I think the models said it best even a couple days ago, Fredricka, when they said 30 to 40 inches in any one spot is not out of the question. And a widespread, a swath of 20-inch rainfalls everywhere, almost the size of the state of South Carolina right there over parts of Texas. Think about that. Think of 20 inches of rain on any state or for that matter any country, you're going to get flooding because it can't all get off at one time. Here's Houston proper. Talking about three to four inches around Houston so far. But just west of there, especially here the Brazos River you've already got some spots between 12 and 14. That water's going to get into the river and head down towards Sugarland and the lake. All the way down to Corpus Christi, he talked about that, somewhere between 10 and 12 inches already on the ground, already has fallen. And guess what, this thing only made landfall 14 or 16 hours ago. So we have a long way to go. And we've had this much rain already as the storm came onshore in the overnight hours making all that wind damage. And then now I think the real threat has changed from a wind damage maker to a flood maker where there's the latest number 14 inches of rainfall in one city. Not every city. It just depends on if you're getting lucky or unlucky under one of these bands. Right here was our Ed Lavandera. If you would have went to Ed Lavandera 20 minutes ago, he was getting pounded with thunderstorms. But right now that storm has moved just far enough to the east and now Ed's in the clear. Every time one of these bans comes onshore, that's when you're going to see the wind pick up and the heavy rainfall pick up. In between the bands we're going to see basically nothing. Sky's clear, winds die, and all of a sudden you wait for the next one. But something else coming onshore are spinning thunderstorms. And some of them do have tornadoes with them. Not large tornadoes, but you can go on Twitter and look at the pictures from Katy, Texas, overnight, and see what happened there with a small tornado. It doesn't take a big tornado at 110 or 120 miles per hour to do damage. That's what we saw last night. Even already Houston, Texas, has issued 50, 50 tornado warnings just since the storm started. And here's what we're expecting for the next few hours all the way into about what's that say 6:00 tomorrow morning, heavy, heavy rainfall on the eastern part. Here's what I would call the eye, although it's not truly the eye. It's just the center of circulation now because it isn't a hurricane anymore. But look at all of this rain. Very close or just to the north of Houston. And now all of that has to go right back into the Gulf of Mexico somehow. And if it goes through the city of Houston, that's where the catastrophic flooding will be occurring later on this week.
[Whitfield:] Wow, still a long way to go. All right, thank you so much, Chad Myers, appreciate that in the CNN weather center.
[Myers:] You're welcome.
[Whitfield:] And we'll be right back.

[Marsh:] This morning, strong rejection of new sanctions and a warning from North Korea on state TV, North Korea said if the U.S. wishes to live safely, it must abandon its hostile policy towards the country.
[Blackwell:] Now this response is a day after the United Nations Security Council adopted a new set of sanctions that further straps the country's economy. North Korea called the sanctions rigged by the U.S. They say they are an act of war, violating peace along the Korean Peninsula. They also said that countries that supported the resolution will pay a heavy price.
[Marsh:] The U.S. ambassador to the Netherlands is apologizing after lying and accusing a reporter of spreading fake news. In 2015, he told a panel he told a panel the Netherlands was in chaos because of what he called an Islamist movement and a stealth jihad. Well, when a reporter asked him about it and those comments specifically, he denied them and called it fake news, but he did say when the cameras were rolling.
[Peter Hoekstra, Former U.s. Representative:] The Islamic movement has now gotten to a point where they have put Europe into chaos. Chaos in Netherlands
[Marsh:] Well, Hoekstra asked for forgiveness and says he regrets the exchange with the reporter.
[Blackwell:] Christmas is happening in Jerusalem now but the holiday is in some parts being overshadowed by a political policy.
[Marsh:] Well, protests continue over the decision by President Trump to recognize Jerusalem as Israeli's capital. CNN's Oren Liebermann joins us live from Bethlehem this morning. Oren, do you notice any sort of difference this morning with the celebrations?
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's not uncommon for religion and politics to very much mix here especially in Bethlehem and Jerusalem because of the sensitivities of these holy places and that's certainly the case here on Christmas Eve in Manger Square. First a look at the Square here behind us. It is not nearly as full as it would otherwise be on the morning of Christmas Eve, especially as the parade has begun and the celebrations leading up to the entrance of the Latin patriarch of the holy land. That of course leads into the big event of the evening, midnight mass. But President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has affected these festivities in two very distinct ways. First as I mentioned the mixture of religion and politics. Around Manger Square here are signs that Jerusalem will always be the eternal capital of Palestine. That's directly a shot back at Trump's announcement that his recognition of Jerusalem is the capital of Israeli. There's another very concrete way it has affected these celebrations. Because right after that there was an expectation from the State Department that there will be demonstrations around here so they issued a travel warning for Bethlehem. That means hotel reservations were cancelled and the stores here lost tourists and the Square itself as I mentioned is empty. So two very serious ways that it has affected Christmas Eve here. You feel it even though there is still very much a festive mood here in Manger Square as we count down the hours until midnight mass.
[Marsh:] Oren Liebermann, thank you.
[Blackwell:] Moscow Ballet is trying to promote good relations between the U.S. and Russia performing the Nutcracker in the U.S. but not the original version. We'll tell you the difference here.
[Marsh:] And first, we want to show you how you can help our 2017 top 10 CNN heroes continue their important work and have your donations matched dollar-for-dollar.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Anderson Cooper. Each of this year's top 10 CNN heroes proves that one person really can make a difference. And again this year we are making it easy for you to support their great work. Just go to CNNheroes.com and click "donate" beneath any 2017 top 10 CNN hero to make a direct contribution to that hero's fundraiser on CrowdRise. You'll receive an e-mail confirming your donation, which is tax deductible in the United States. No matter the amount, you can make a big difference in helping out heroes continue their life-changing work. And right now through January seventh your donations will be matched dollar-for-dollar up to a total of $50,000 for each of this year's honorees. CNN is proud to offer you this simple way to support each cause and celebrate all these everyday people changing the world. You can donate from your laptop, your tablet, or your phone. Just go to CNNheroes.com. Your donation in any amount will help them help others. Thanks.
[Marsh:] Well, nominations for 2018 are open and we are waiting to hear from you. Go to CNNheroes.com to make your nomination.

[Cooper:] First lady Melania Trump took to Twitter today one day after her unexpected trip to South Texas to visit a shelter where immigrant kids were being housed. Of course, the most visible aftershock of that trip was the jacket she wore both leaving for Texas and returning to Washington, the one that said on the back "I really don't care, do you? The jacket her spokesperson said had no hidden message. And the one that the president said had a message after all it was explanation about being about the media seem to defy a logic. Today on twitter she didn't mention the jacket saying her visit was, quote, "very touching." And she added, "It's my sincere hope Congress will be able to reach across the aisle and find a solution." This followed by a tweet a couple of days ago by President Trump's daughter Ivanka who wrote in part, "Congress must now act and find a lasting solution that is consistent with our shared values that so many come here seeking as they endeavor to create a better life for their families." A.B. Stoddard and Amanda Carpenter join us now. Amanda, I mean, the idea that the first lady is supposed to be one of the moderating influences on the president, certainly regarding immigration. I'm wondering how much of that capital do you think was squandered by the sign on the back of her jacket. Whatever the intent was. And I'm not even clear it's really I don't know that anybody exactly knows what the intent was other than there was some sort of intent.
[Amanda Carpenter, Cnn Political Commentator:] Yes. I have a theory. I agree with their team that there was no hidden message. I think there was a message broadcast loud and clear not to us in the media, not to the migrant children, but to her husband. Melania Trump speaks with fashion and has in very controversial ways to her husband. Let's recall after the Access Hollywood tape, she donned that beautiful cozy bow blouse which generated a lot of coverage because everyone understood that message. After the Stormy Daniels affair was revealed she wore a beautiful white pantsuit to the state of the union address as a sort of clap back to Hillary Clinton's white pantsuit in suffrages women. I think this jacket which she put on leaving Washington and once again in Washington was a message to her husband saying I just don't care, do you. She did not care to coordinate that trip with the White House. It was unannounced. She would unilaterally. I think she is speaking to Trump and she doesn't care what anybody else thinks because she is consumed with that drama.
[Cooper:] A.B., I mean, I am wondering what you make of this jacket which is still kind of a topic of discussion. A designer Zara which apparently she doesn't really wear very much, Ivanka Trump wears a lot. I don't know perhaps if there might have been a message to Ivanka Trump in some way. What do you think?
[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor, Realclearpolitics:] You know, I do think because the President brought it up and he had his own theory about the jacket that he expressed in his tweet that it is he sort of made it the news, right? We shouldn't be too focused on it. But now he is focused on it. And that makes it more of a story. But I couldn't have said it better than what Amanda said. I think that she came out as his first state visit when the Emmanuel Macron came she appeared in the white suit with that white hat and absolutely sucked all of the oxygen out of everything the entire day was about the hat. And she knows exactly how to focus the attention on her. And I think she sort of trolls her husband. And I do think that is a message. I think wearing be willing to wear a Zara Jacket that cost $39 is great for her. Now I admit this whole time that I'm about a double standard that we would be alarmed if Michelle Obama or Laura Bush had done this. We would be, we would say, what's going on? You know, did they fall over and hit their head, what is this message? But Melania Trump is in a very bizarre situation. She's making the best of it. She's incredibly dignified. She's a polar opposite of her husband. She doesn't use the media to and she doesn't like the spotlight. She doesn't want to bring attention to herself. She didn't wear the jacket in the facility. And so that was really that was very obvious and intentional. At the facility it was about the children. But she made the story of the day all about her. No matter how much ranting was going on, on that cabinet room when the President tried to return the attention back to him.
[Cooper:] You know, Amanda, I do find it funny that some supporters of this President are saying, look, this is ridiculous that people are focusing on what the message was on the back of the first lady's jacket. But to A.B.'s point, I mean if Michelle Obama had worn a jacket with a sign on the back of it, you know, on a trip that was supposed to be about caring and said I don't care, I mean, people's heads would have exploded. It's there is such this double standard. And so I mean, it's almost like one of these, on 24, you see a hostage video when people are blinking a secret message to something you can't ignore when the first lady of the United States is wearing a sign on her back in the most public way possible?
[Carpenter:] Yes, or when he makes her platform be best to combat cyber bullying when her husband is the biggest cyber bully that, you know, the world has arguably ever seen. And so, I think we can say, OK, this is the message he is sending to her husband, she is trying to be this influence but it's also an incredibly unnecessary juvenile dramatic move.
[Cooper:] It was like high school?
[Carpenter:] Caught up in the drama between her and her husband. She did take the focus away from those children. But I was really rooting for her on this trip. I thought it was excellent that she was going. I have been really tough on Ivanka for supposedly talking to her father about the images but not going down there. And so I was thrilled that the first lady went down there. But once she decided to put on the jacket for whatever reason, she took the focus off the children and she made it controversial for what I think is no good reason.
[Cooper:] A.B. I mean, Ivanka Trump has kind of always pitched herself as someone compassionate to mothers and children and decent tweeting presumably she could go to visit a detention center just a normal jacket. It seemed like she was getting attention for having had an influence on her father. I'm wondering if Melania Trump has some sort of if this may have been directed toward Ivanka for kind of grabbing credit because the President referenced Melania Trump as being an influence on his opinion?
[Stoddard:] This is a very interesting tension. Remember, I sort of talking about Melania Trump who ended up in the situation where the President won the presidency and she stayed in New York. She obviously was hesitant about this whole role to begin with and living in that bubble, that fish bowl. And now, you know, she didn't sign up to be a senior advisor the way Ivanka Trump did. Ivanka Trump could come and take serious accountability of this issue. She could see to it that they decide on a policy that they get out of a state of confusion, that they find a system where these 2,000 kids can be located. Melania, I think just wanted to make a statement about how important this issue was, but I see it through completely different prism than Ivanka.
[Cooper:] A.B. Stoddard, I appreciate it. Amanda Carpenter as well, thanks very much. Coming up next, how this is playing out in the border through the eyes of the people now struggling to implement the President's executive order.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] The first lady at Walter Reed Medical Center after a procedure on her kidney. She is expected to stay there the rest of the week. Details in a moment.
[Raj Shah, White House Deputy Press Secretary:] It's going to be dealt with and has been dealt with internally. This is an internal matter. It's being addressed internally.
[Romans:] The White House unable to put the brakes on the story that could have been resolved last week. Now, pressure builds from John McCain's colleagues to apologize from mocking the senator's cancer battle.
[Briggs:] This jarring split screen, celebration in Jerusalem as the deadliest protests escalate in Gaza. More protesting expected this morning. Eight children among the dead yesterday. We have reports from Gaza, Beijing, Tehran, Hawaii and England, around the world this morning on EARLY START. Welcome back. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] And I'm Christine Romans. It is 31 minutes past the hour this Tuesday morning. We begin in Washington, though. First Lady Melania Trump recovering this hour at Walter Reed Medical Center after undergoing a procedure to treat a benign kidney condition. The White House reporting all went well. No complications. Mrs. Trump is expected to spend the rest of the week in the hospital. Our chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta finds that unusual. He says patients who undergo this type of procedure are typically hospitalized for just one night.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspodent:] Embolization procedure, it's not really surgery. It's basically threading this catheter near this near the kidney and injecting a glue type substance to try and stop blood flow, to an area of the kidney where this abnormality is. Benign obviously is good. We don't want to be anything other than benign. But what exactly is it that was treated here? Some of the benign things that happened to a kidney are things like cysts. But those are not treated using embolization. So, what was it? Was it some sort of mass? Was it something else?
[Briggs:] The first lady's hospitalization caught everyone off guard. She is certainly out in public more frequently lately attending the state dinner for the French president and greeting three U.S. detainees from North Korea last week with her husband. President Trump tweeting yesterday, quote, heading over to Walter Reed Medical Center to see our great First Lady Melania. Successful procedure. She's in good spirits. Thank you for the well wishers. We here at CNN would like to wish the first lady a speedy recovery.
[Romans:] All right. It has been five days and the White House still refusing to apologize for the aide who dismissed the influence of Senator John McCain because, quote, he's dying anyway. The silence from the administration and aide Kelly Sadler only inflaming the controversy. The White House focusing instead on the leak that brought Sadler's remark to life, not the unfortunate remark. The president calling the story an over-exaggeration, even referring to members of his own staff as traitors, traitors for leaking.
[Briggs:] Wow. White House counselor Kellyanne Conway selling the same message. She expects changes because of these leaks.
[Kellyanne Conway, White House Counselor:] Some leaks exist to hurt I guess colleagues. Some leaks exist because they disagree with the policies that are being forth. But none of them are helpful. It's not so much leaking as using the media to shiv each other.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you expect personnel changes as a result?
[Conway:] I do. Actually, yes, I do.
[Briggs:] Sources tell CNN Kelly Sadler's job is safe. White House spokesperson Raj Shah reluctant to say much of anything.
[Shah:] I understand the focus on this issue, but it's going to be dealt with and has been dealt with internally. The matter has been internally. It is being addressed internally. And I don't have anything further to add.
[Reporter:] Is she being reprimanded? Can you explain how it's being addressed internally?
[Shah:] Obviously, if I explain all that, it won't remain internal.
[Briggs:] That's a good point.
[Romans:] I'm gob-smacked on that one. All right. The administration's stunning refusal to offer an apology and its constant focus on deflection and the leakers, not what was leaked, even has Republican lawmakers frustrated. Listen to Louisiana Senator John Kennedy.
[Sen. John Kennedy , Louisiana:] I don't know Ms. Sadler. So, I don't know whether she is stupid or not. But she sure made a bad decision.
[Romans:] Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas, a member of leadership, also demanding an apology. When asked who should apologize, he replied, the person who said that really dumb thing.
[Briggs:] Peace seems more improbable than ever in the Middle East. Just as the U.S. opening the embassy in Israel in Jerusalem, protests along the Gaza border turn deadly. Israeli defense forces opening fire on the Palestinian protesters, killing 59 and wounding thousands. The Israelis blame the Palestinian militant group Hamas for inciting terror attacks. Ian Lee is live for us from Gaza where protests are expected today. Ian, good morning.
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave. We also heard from the White House blaming Hamas. Hamas though says the blood of yesterday's violence is on the hands of the United States. But when we talk to people about what brings them out here, a lot say they are frustrated and angry. They're frustrated with the current situation. They are living in Gaza, has been under an Israeli and Egyptian blockade for over a decade. And they're also angry about the United States moving the embassy to Jerusalem and the declaration that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. And so, we saw thousands of people, tens of thousands of people up and down this border yesterday and we could see why that death toll was so high which included eight children and one infant. Infant dying of gas asphyxiation from the tear gas that was fired. But it was black smoke up and down the border as protesters try to push across that border fence, they say trying to return to lands they lost during the 1948 war. For Israel, though, Israel says that is their red line. That they reserve the right to use whatever means necessary to protect what they say is their sovereignty. They say their worst-case scenario is a mass rush across that border. Today, we are expecting to see funerals. After those funerals, we are expecting more people to come where we're out here on the border, Dave.
[Briggs:] Everyone is hoping that calm can continue, 11:37 there in Gaza. Ian Lee live for us, thank you.
[Romans:] All right. President Trump defending his decision to save a Chinese smartphone maker. First, he said he wanted to save Chinese jobs. Now, the president says he doesn't want to hurt U.S. suppliers to ZTE. It's a remarkable reversal. Just last month, Trump's Commerce Department crippled ZTE by banning it from buying U.S. parts for its phones for seven years. Punishment for violating U.S. sanctions and lying about disciplining the employees involved, a behavior Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross calls egregious. Now, Ross says it did some inappropriate things.
[Wilbur Ross, Commerce Secretary:] The question is, there are alternative remedies to the ones that we put forward. And that's the area we will be exploring very, very promptly.
[Romans:] It's a very decisive move from the Commerce Department. Now, the Commerce Department is looking for new ways, other ways to punish ZTE without hurting U.S. suppliers. In return, U.S. wants concessions from China like removing tariffs on agricultural products. Now, the president threw ZTE a lifeline Sunday, saying he's working to get it back into business. Now linking ZTE's fate to broader trade talks, calling it reflective of the larger trade deal we're negotiating with China. A Chinese delegation heads to Washington today. There is a trade angle here, also, there is a national security angle. Just a couple of weeks ago, the Defense Department, the Pentagon, banned ZTE products from being sold on U.S. bases for national security concerns. And the top intel agencies
[Briggs:] Well, Tom Cotton, Republican senator from Arkansas, asked our intel chiefs. Would you use or would you recommend ZTE products by show of hands? Here's what they said.
[Sen. Tom Cotton , Arkansas:] Will you please raise your hand if you would use products or services from Huawei or ZTE? None of you would. You're obviously intelligence services, so that's something of a biased question. Raise your hand if you recommend that private American citizens use Huawei or ZTE products or services? None again. Thank you for that.
[Romans:] All of those people appointed by Donald Trump.
[Briggs:] Yes, those are not Obama holdovers.
[Romans:] No, they are not. And this is the company that the president now wants to save. So, what's the view on this from China on the president's sudden about- face? CNN's Matt Rivers live in Beijing. Matt, good morning to you. Whiplash from the American voters, from the administration. What is the reaction there?
[Matt Rivers, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the reaction from China's government is, well, this is great. This is exactly what we were hoping for. The Chinese government we know has made the ZTE issue a top priority in these rounds of trade negotiations that started about two weeks ago now when the U.S. trade delegation led by Secretary of Treasury Steve Mnuchin came here to China. It didn't make a ton of progress, and other rounds set for this week in D.C. But we know the Chinese government has been very upset with the U.S. calling this decision paranoid, calling it a cold war mentality. That's one of their favorite phrases. And so, the fact that the United States is seemingly reversing that decision is great in the eyes of the Chinese government. The big question is, is that enough for them to concede something that the U.S. would want them to? Could they concede tariffs on agricultural products? Could they look at intellectual property theft? Could they look at forced technology transfer? That's what the U.S. wants out of these negotiations. So, will the ZTE concession from the U.S., if it goes forward, be enough? One other thing, national security remains a concern. Senator Rubio tweeting out it would be crazy to allow ZTE to continue to operate in the U.S. without limiting them in some way Dave, Christine.
[Briggs:] Boy, President Xi has barely blinked in all of this. Matt Rivers live for us in Beijing, thank you.
[Romans:] I don't know
[U.s. Briggs:] One in 10, I think, cellphones here in the United States.
[Romans:] All right. Who can forget the chemistry between Superman and Lois Lane?
[Margot Kidder As Lois Lane:] Don't move! Sure you can move. Just don't fly away, all right?
[Romans:] Remembering actress Margot Kidder, next.

[Blackwell:] 16 minutes after the hour now. This morning Russia is reacting to Michael Flynn's guilty plea to lying to the FBI calling it a sack of smoke and empty and labeling the Russia investigation an attack.
[Paul:] But Flynn's actions could have far-reaching consequences for the Trump administration here. Experts say investigators are hoping to get more information from the former National Security advisor. We're going to talk about that in a little more in-depth in just a moment.
[Blackwell:] First, though, let's take a look at what got Flynn into trouble. To start with CNN Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto has that for us.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] The ongoing Russia investigation has reached President Trump's innermost circle. Trump's former National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, said that he is cooperating with the special counsel's probe into possible cooperation between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government. Flynn pled guilty to repeatedly lying to the FBI, including making false statements about his December 2016 conversations with Russia's then-Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. According to the statement of offense, Flynn lied when he told the FBI he did not discuss sanctions with Kislyak. On the same day that President Obama expelled Russian diplomats from the U.S. and boosted sanctions on Moscow in retaliation for Russia's meddling in the presidential election. Flynn also sought Russia's help during the transition to block a U.N. Security Council vote that the Obama administration was abstaining on. The White House said, "Nothing about the guilty plea or the charge implicates anyone other than Mr. Flynn." However, court documents make clear that Flynn was not acting alone. According to prosecutors, Flynn communicated with senior members of the president's transition team about the conversations, and in at least one instance was directed by transition official to reach out to Russia. CNN has learned that the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is the very senior member of the presidential transition team identified in court documents. Kushner directed Michael Flynn to contact the Russian ambassador and other countries regarding the U.N. Security Council vote on Israeli settlements, this according to sources familiar with the matter. Flynn's guilty plea belies President Trump's repeated denials of any contacts or involvement between his campaign and Russia. In your view, has the president lied about what communications his team had with Russia?
[Rep. Adam Schiff , California:] Well, abundantly, and frequently, and in about just about every way. But most significant in denying that this happened, saying it's a hoax.
[Sciutto:] After the court proceeding, Flynn went immediately to the home of his son Michael Flynn Jr. Michael Flynn Jr., central to Michael Flynn Sr. is thinking in this case. We reported recently that Flynn Sr. was concerned about the legal jeopardy his son might face. He has not mentioned, not charged in any of these documents, and it certainly raises the question as to whether cooperation from Flynn was in exchange partly for protecting his son. Jim Sciutto, CNN, Washington.
[Blackwell:] Jim, thanks. Let's bring back now, Kelly Jane Torrance, and bring in Paige Pate, CNN Legal Analyst and Criminal Defense Attorney. Paige, good morning to you. Good morning again to you Kelly Jane.
[Torrance:] Good morning.
[Blackwell:] Paige, I want to talk with you. Just days ago, CNN reported that Mueller's team question Jared Kushner in early November, specifically about Flynn's conversations with the Russian ambassador. Well, now that Flynn says he was directed by very senior transition officials to have those conversation, and sources tell CNN that official was Kushner. How does that change your read of that Mueller interview with Kushner?
[Paige Pate, Cnn Legal Analyst And Criminal Defense Attorney:] Well, Victor, it's not uncommon at all for federal prosecutors and agents like this to know everything they can about the case before they sit down and talk to potential targets or subjects of the investigation. And they will often people in that interview room, look, we know more than you do, so be careful about what you tell us and make sure it's true. And so, I'm certain that when the investigators were asking Kushner these questions about those conversations, they already had some idea of what Mr. Flynn was going to say about them. So, I think a lot depends on reviewing the transcript if there is one of those conversations, those interviews with Kushner, and whether or not he made a false statement to one of the investigators. Because if he did, as we've seen with Flynn and others, that's a federal crime.
[Blackwell:] Kelly, so Flynn says that a very senior member of the transition team told him to have those conversations. And it takes us back to the question that we asked when we learned about the Don Jr. Trump Tower meeting, and we learned about the communications between Don Jr. and WikiLeaks, what did the president or then-candidate or president-elect know and when did he know it? We know that President Trump was very involved because he had a small team, some would say micromanaging, is it plausible that these conversations would happen and Donald Trump would have no idea about them?
[Torrance:] I would say it seems unlikely, Victor. But with President Donald Trump and candidate Donald Trump, you can never say anything absolute, right? This was not a campaign that was a normal campaign. And you would think that a guy would know what his son-in-law is up to, if his son-in-law is running his campaign, and, you know, getting someone like Michael Flynn who President Trump was also very close to, you know. Notice that Michael Flynn is one of the few people that Donald Trump has really stood behind, and, you know, he really likes the guy. And, you know, I was just talking to Asawin in the green room earlier, he said that Donald Trump had actually sent him a written note saying stay strong in the days leading up to Flynn's guilty plea. So, you know, you don't know what the president knew or what he didn't, but it seems, you know, a normal person, it would be highly unlikely they don't know what their son-in-law is instructing their top national security official to do.
[Blackwell:] Yes. We really don't know how long Mr. Flynn has been cooperating with the special prosecutor here, and how much he knows about these communications. Let me get to you, Paige, about this Logan Act, that's an 18th-century law that essentially says there's one government at a time and makes it illegal to intervene on the business of the sitting administration, especially for incoming administrations. Is this something that is really at play here?
[Pate:] Oh, I think so. I really think this is the heart of the case now. And what's interesting is: no one's really been effectively prosecuted under the Logan Act before. I mean, it's on the books, it's been there a long time, as you noted, but no one's really been convicted and sent to jail because of a violation of the Logan Act.
[Blackwell:] But wouldn't it suggest that it's possibly off the table here when there is with the case of General Flynn so much that can be on the table?
[Pate:] Yes, and I think what Flynn ended up entering a plea to, the false statements, was an attempt to cover up for this potentially nonexistent crime. So, I don't think they had any idea Kushner, Flynn and the others that they may be violating the Logan Act until after the fact. And then, they took these steps: talking to themselves, lying to investigators to try to cover up what may never have been prosecuted anyway. So, I think the Logan Act is important here. But I think you're right, I don't see any prosecutions under the Logan Act going forward.
[Blackwell:] You know, Kelly, two people I've been thinking about of the last 16, 18 hours: Rick Gates and Paul Manafort. What does this potentially mean for them, in this game of let's make a deal, who can you offer if we're flipping up? How does this potentially, I guess, jeopardize their value in any potential deal that they might have wanted to make. If you've got Flynn who was there during the candidacy, during the transition, and then in the White House, he seemed to be far more valuable.
[Torrance:] Now, it's an excellent point, Victor, and he is more valuable, especially since now it's been become clear that he is providing names of people very close to the president, who instructed him to talk to Russia. And I have to say though, I mean, how credible is Michael Flynn as a witness? It's a good question I think. I mean, how did this guy, who was, you know, in the government before, he was the head of DIA, how did he not know that his conversations with top Russian officials would not be overheard? Of course, America spies on its Russian officials just like the Russians spy on American officials. And it's kind of incredible to me that this man did not consider when he called the Russian ambassador on his cell phone that this would be overheard. And that's why it's shocking that he thought he could lie about it to the FBI, and you have to wonder, can you trust this guy? He seems kind of kind of ridiculous and not really a serious guy. And again, keep in mind, this was the national security advisor for a month of United States, and he's someone who doesn't even seem to understand how the national security apparatus in this country works.
[Blackwell:] Paige, let me take that to you. I mean, how reliable is a liar?
[Pate:] Well, that's a great question. I mean, I think in every federal case, you're going to see people who've cut deals with the government, and, of course, the other side. In this case, lawyers for Kushner, Trump and the others will attack that person's credibility. I mean, they were so supportive of Michael Flynn before, but now he's going to be somebody you can't trust at all according to them. And he has cut a deal, and that's fair game. They can say, look, he'll say whatever the special counsel wants him to say, otherwise, he's going to face much more serious criminal charges. So, he does have that issue of credibility, but I think it helps him that he entered a guilty plea because he's come forward now in front of a federal judge and said, look, what I did back then and with other people around me was illegal. It was a crime. So, admitting that actually helps his credibility to some extent.
[Blackwell:] All right. Paige Pate, Kelly Jane Torrance, thanks so much.
[Pate:] Thank you.
[Torrance:] Thank you, Victor.
[Paul:] So, tax reform passes the Senate. Coming up, the next steps for this bill and what it means if it becomes the first major legislative victory for the Trump-era.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] Thanks for joining us in the second hour of "360". On the table tonight, day eight of the White House cover-up of the Rob Porter scandal. The White House changes its story and tries to blame a new office. Russia threat ignored. The country's intelligence chiefs agree Russia is targeting this year's elections as well. Is the White House turning a blind eye? The President said he hires the best people, so why one out of three of them left in the first year? A lot to get to in the hour ahead. We begin at the White House with CNN's Jim Acosta. So, Jim, explain what Sarah Sanders said today about what the White House knew and when about Rob Porter.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] Well, there have been shifting explanations as you know, Anderson, for the past week and today was a new one. We had not heard the words White House personnel security office before today, but we heard it in the White House briefing. The White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders was asked about some of these conflicting stories. Why the FBI director was up on Capitol Hill testifying that his agents had completed their investigation last July when we were told by Raj Shah, the Deputy White House Spokesman and Sarah Sanders that that process was on going and her explanation was, well, the office of personnel security had this matter and that they were still looking at it and that process had not been completed. And so, Anderson, by my count, that is the fourth or fifth different explanation officially that we've heard from the White House as to why this information about Rob Porter's past was not being shared publicly.
[Cooper:] You know, it's interesting because it's just yesterday, she was pointing, saying it, it was law enforcement intelligence communities who hadn't finished the review process, which is I mean after Chris Wray said what he said, it was very clear the FBI had completed the background check.
[Acosta:] That's right. And one of the things that we're hearing, Anderson, is that there are some growing frustration behind the scenes among White House officials as to what two of the principals who have been involved in all this have been doing and what they've been saying. The White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, as we've been reporting over the last week, has been called to the carpet a number of times by White House officials to ask privately saying, you know, what is John Kelly talking about in terms of his handling of all of this. And then this evening, Anderson, I talked to a White House official who is raising questions about the White House counsel Don McGahn, who we understand was pretty aware of the situation last year, heard about these allegations on the background check last July. And according to this White House official, was not sharing enough of that information behind the scenes with White House officials. Now, you talk to other White House officials who say, no, no, no, both Kelly and McGahn have been doing everything possible. But, Anderson, I think the one thing that is constant in all of this is what we heard today from the FBI director, who really without being prompted had this answer ready to go to say, listen, we completed this investigation last July. Anderson, that just does not explain does not fully explain what the White House has been telling us over the last week. Apparently this information went to the White House office of personnel security, as Sarah Sanders said, but we don't have an explanation as to what they did with that information after that. And of course the ongoing problem in all of this is that the President, time and again, is asked about all of this and the only thing he really has said publicly is that Rob Porter says he's innocent and that we wish him well. But the President has had multiple opportunities to correct that statement and he hasn't taken hat opportunity. Anderson?
[Cooper:] Yes. Jim Acosta, appreciate that from the White House. Thanks. Very few Americans have ever heard of the White House personnel security office, but it does exist. For some guidance, we're turning to Chris Lu, who in 2008, ran the presidential transition for Barack Obama and worked as a White House Cabinet Secretary and is familiar with that office. Chris, how does this White House personnel security office actually work? I mean do they conduct investigations into staffers and issue recommendations to the White House on clearances?
[Chris Lu, Former Obama White House Cabinet Secretary:] This is an important office. It provides an administrative function in helping to facilitate those investigations. But to be clear, they're not conducting the background investigations nor are they the final decision makers. They're the conduit of information from the FBI to the West Wing and back. And so what Sarah Sanders here has tried to lay out really doesn't make sense and is not consistent with the function of the office when we were there in the Obama administration.
[Cooper:] So they wouldn't get the finished background investigation from the FBI and then sit on it for months and months and conduct their own investigation, you're saying?
[Lu:] You know, look, it's conceivable that there's additional paperwork that needs to be done. But what's important to understand is that Rob Porter wasn't just the typical White House staffer. He was one of no more than 25 assistants to the President. He was the gatekeeper of all paperwork that went to the President. So whatever they got from the FBI should have been moved along very, very quickly. And let's be clear, there also this is not an issue that needed much analysis. You know, there were abuse allegations against him from two ex-wives. I'm frankly not sure what additional analysis would have needed to be done in this case.
[Cooper:] Sarah Sanders also said they, "Had not finished their process." If this office is mainly sending information from the FBI to the White House, what process exactly would they be finishing over the course of several months?
[Lu:] I'll be honest, I don't get it either. There's not additional process. Look, I can understand if, you know, this was a case where a staffer had a lot of foreign contacts, foreign relatives. You might have to dig through that a little bit to make some sense. This is pretty cut and dried abuse allegations. And so if you're going to have a zero tolerance policy about this, as General Kelly said, that should have been a pretty easy determination after they got this information from the
[Fbi. Cooper:] The White House now says that they have about 100 to 200 people working in this office. Does that make any sense to you?
[Lu:] That makes no sense at all. My understanding is both during the Clinton administration and the Obama administration, there were probably no more than a half dozen people that worked in this office. So I don't really know where they're getting that. There are only total in the whole White House complex several hundred people, maybe 500, 600 people. It's inconceivable that there would be this many people in one office.
[Cooper:] I read that this is an office that basically hands out badges, is that right?
[Lu:] Well, they have many functions. Yes, they're in charge of the badging system at the White House. They're ensure they're in charge of ensuring that when a White House official is traveling, that we understand what security procedures we're supposed to be taking. So they do provide an important function. There are, as I understand it, former law enforcement people that are there. But they're not in the business of doing background investigations. The FBI does that.
[Cooper:] Chris Lu, appreciate your expertise. Thanks so much.
[Lu:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] Let's talk about with the panel. Joining me now is Ryan Lizza, Jason Miller, Maria Cardona, Mike Shields, Asha Rangappa, and Paul Begala. Ryan, you heard what Mr. Lu said. I mean, certainly seems like the White House's argument has shifted yet again from yesterday, pointing the finger at the FBI and intelligence agencies as not completing their background check. Now, it's this relatively obscure office which doesn't actually do investigations.
[Ryan Lizza, Political Commentator:] And what changed is the FBI came out and said, hey, we investigated this. We sent it to the White House. It was their ball from there, their responsibility to do what they should have done with this information. One of the things this points to is perhaps as president you don't want to be at war with your own FBI. In a normal administration, you might have some coordination with the FBI about how to handle the sort of public relations on something like this. But handing off the responsibility to an obscure bureaucratic office at the White House, which does not have nearly the responsibility from all the experts that have talked about this today that the White House is claiming they have, seems like just passing the buck.
[Cooper:] Yes. I mean, Paul you worked at the White House, how does the process work within the White House personnel security office as you understand it?
[Paul Begala, Democratic Strategist:] Yes. Back in my day, my recollection is like two to four people. And they are the were fine people that they gave you your pass, the FBI, so this person clears, you go over there and on your last day is the next time you see them when you turn in your gun and your badge and you head out, you know. It's inconceivable they would be doing investigations. We have the FBI, the world's greatest investigative agency. And here's the problem with this, shifting the blame and passing the buck. There was a national security risk every minute that Rob Porter was handling classified information. He may be fully innocent, but he was susceptible to blackmail. And if the Daily Mail or Mirror or whatever they are of England could find the ex-wives and girlfriends he allegedly beat and the temporary emergency protective order from the city of Arlington, Virginia, which might be a public document, the North Koreans could have found it, but maybe they didn't but the Chinese or the Iranians or the Russians. And that's the problem here. If you can possibly set aside the alleged manifestly evil conduct and criminal conduct if true, you still have this national security risk. And that's why the notion that it would languish in Room 86 at the basement of the Eisenhower Executive Office building is nuts. It's unimaginable.
[Cooper:] Well, Asha, I mean, it is also interesting, according to reporting, that is there are dozens of people in the White House who do not have or, you know, have not passed their background checks?
[Asha Rangappa, Former Fbi Special Agent:] It's astonishing. So it's been over a year now, and the whole point of conducting these background checks is to determine whether the people who have access to the most sensitive information are trustworthy, have good judgment, have good moral character. You go through training as an FBI agent on how to ask the right questions to suss these things out. This is clearly something that would have come to the surface in a background check. But, Anderson, remember that this is an administration that hasn't been hypervigilant about security issues. They kept on Michael Flynn for two weeks after Sally Yates came and told them he was a national security risk. They've been cavalier about filling out their SF 86. They don't seem to think that it's a big problem to omit things. So I think that they believe that this process is an annoyance and not something that's actually there to protect the country.
[Cooper:] Jason, just from a communication standpoint, I mean we are now in week two of this story. Had they handled this directly in forthrightly early on? I don't know that we that we would still be here talking about this. And Chris Wray coming forward and basically saying actually, no, what they've been saying, this is what happened.
[Jason Miller, Former Senior Communications Advisor, Trump Campaign:] Well, the number one rule of crisis communications is when you're in a hole quit digging and don't go and give new variables for your opponents to go and chew up. I mean the messages are real simple here. Rob Porter is a bad guy. Domestic violence is a crime. We have zero tolerance. If there's even a hint of anything about this, then you're out of here. I completely agree with both what Paul and Asha were saying with regard to the fact that someone like this shouldn't have been this close to the president. This person shouldn't have been a chief of staff on Capitol Hill. They shouldn't have gotten into the transition office. They shouldn't have been a part of the administration at the very beginning here. And so what people want to see going forward, supporters of the president and I think most Americans, they want to know the vetting system has been fixed. They want to make sure that no one else who could be blackmailed or anything like that is anywhere near the president. And they want to see strong leadership from that side. But the other thing too is that if the administration is looking in the rearview mirror, if they're going back and talking about time lines and process and things like that, I mean that's just not going to be a winning message. I mean, people voted for President Trump because they believe in his agenda, and they want to see what he can go and do. Put the president out there going and doing that as opposed to having other people talking about time lines and things like that. That's just going to get him jammed up, and it's not going to get him out of this.
[Cooper:] But it doesn't help, Maria, when, you know, Sarah Sanders refuses, you know, the obvious question is point blank when did General Kelly know about this information, and she says, well, I'm not going to get into the details of this, but we all knew, you know, shortly after it was published, we being everyone in the White House, which is just avoiding the question. It just sort of drags it on.
[Maria Cardona, Democratic Strategist:] That's exactly right. And that's where I think what Jason laid out, while, yes, that would be the ideal, that would never happen in this White House. First of all, because in order for this to be really cleaned up, you have to have somebody that actually admit that there was something wrong and that there actually needs to be something cleaned up. Trump on down refuses to ever say that anything was wrong. John Kelly himself said, "The Wall Street Journal" asked him today or yesterday, do you think that this was handled, you know, in a wrong manner and would you do it again differently? He said one word answer. He said, no. That doesn't point to an administration who understands that there is something wrong here. And as much as they want to blame it on the vetting process, to me right here, the vetting process works. The FBI told them the information. The vetting process was not what was wrong here. The vetting process was not what failed. What failed was the moral character and the understanding that having a wife beater in the White House is not something that you should have in the White House, in the Oval Office, having to do with national security, but also because it's not the right thing to do.
[Cooper:] Mike, I mean, does it seem to you I guess there's one alternative explanation, which is they, you know, it was sort of held up in this White House, obscure White House personnel office just to string this along, just to kind of delay answering something which they either didn't know how to deal with or didn't want to deal with, which is neither, which is appropriate?
[Mike Shields, Former Rnc Chief Of Staff:] Right. I mean I agree with Jason and they're trying to figure out what happened. It seems to me that there's some people in there that don't actually know what happened. And so I think that both Sarah Sanders is sort of being hung out to dry because I don't know that she's getting the whole story. I don't believe the president knows the whole story. They're trying to figure it out. I think they are trying to get to the bottom of it. And eventually we are going to figure this out. This is going to be and we are talking about these things will be made public. We'll find out exactly when did somebody know about this and what should they have done about it. And so, you know, Rob Porter apparently, his former wife that came on with you said that he had contacted them saying, quit saying this. You're stopping me from getting my background check. So he knew that this was a problem for him. So that means that somebody sort of knew in the White House and they should have done something about this.
[Cooper:] Do you think the White House has been honest about all that went on?
[Shields:] Well, when you say the White House, I mean
[Cooper:] There's Sarah Sanders, the public
[Shields:] Yes. This is what there's multiple things to say when you say "the White House." I mean, I believe that the president is not being served by some of his staff here, and I believe that Sarah Huckabee Sanders is sort of having to go out and do something when she and she said today many times, this is the best information that I have.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Shields:] That sounds to me like people that are trying to get to the bottom of this and fix the problem. They're not going to come out and tell us that's what happening. Eventually something will be fixed and they'll come out and tell us when they the problem.
[Miller:] And that's Sarah's job. And that's in, you know, quite frankly anyone else even on the communications team. I mean, they have people in place that are supposed to be doing that and that's I completely agree with what Mike was saying, is that the President has been let down here. And that we cannot have people if there was anyone, and, again, we don't know exactly what piece of paper went in front of what staffer at what point, or if it ever did. But if it were to come out that someone knew in absolutely undeniable terms that this was a wife beater that was this close to the President, I think that's a real problem. I think they're probably
[Cooper:] You pull that thought, we're going to continue the discussion after a quick break. Also ahead, the FBI Chief says President Trump has not directed him to stop Russian meddling and the Russians are at it again, already targeting this year's midterm elections.

[Burr:] And in that timeframe, there were more than the DNC and the DCCC that were targets.
[Comey:] Correct. There was a massive effort to target government and nongovernmental near-governmental agencies like nonprofits.
[Burr:] What would be the estimate of how many entities out there the Russians specifically targeted in that timeframe?
[Comey:] It's hundreds. I suppose it could be more than 1,000, but it's at least hundreds.
[Burr:] When did you become aware that data had been exfiltrated?
[Comey:] I'm not sure, exactly. I think either late '15 or early '16.
[Burr:] And did did you, the director of the FBI, have conversations with the last administration about the risk that this posed?
[Comey:] Yes.
[Burr:] And share with us, if you will, what actions they took.
[Comey:] Well, the FBI had already undertaken an effort to notify all the victims and that's what we consider the entities that were attacked as part of this massive spear phishing campaign. And so we notified them in an effort to disrupt what might be ongoing. Then there was a series of continuing interactions with entities through the rest of '15 into '16, and then, throughout '16, the administration was trying to decide how to respond to the intrusion activity that it saw.
[Burr:] And the FBI, in this case, unlike other cases that you might investigate did you ever have access to the actual hardware that was hacked? Or did you have to rely on a third party to provide you the data that they had collected?
[Comey:] In the case of the DNC, and, I believe, the DCCC, but I'm sure the DNC, we did not have access to the devices themselves. We got relevant forensic information from a private party, a high-class entity, that had done the work. But we didn't get direct access.
[Burr:] But no content?
[Comey:] Correct.
[Burr:] Isn't content an important part of the forensics from a counterintelligence standpoint?
[Comey:] It is, although what was briefed to me by my folks the people who were my folks at the time is that they had gotten the information from the private party that they needed to understand the intrusion by the spring of 2016.
[Burr:] Let me go back, if I can, very briefly, to the decision to publicly go out with your results on the e-mail. Was your decision influenced by the attorney general's tarmac meeting with the former president, Bill Clinton?
[Comey:] Yes. In in an ultimately conclusive way, that was the thing that capped it for me, that I had to do something separately to protect the credibility of the investigation, which meant both the FBI and the Justice Department.
[Burr:] Were there other things that contributed to that that you can describe in an open session?
[Comey:] There were other things that contributed to that. One significant item I can't, I know the committee's been briefed on. There's been some public accounts of it, which are nonsense, but I understand the committee's been briefed on the classified facts. Probably the only other consideration that I guess I can talk about in an open setting is, at one point, the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me. But that was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, I have to step away from the department if we're to close this case credibly.
[Burr:] Director, my last question: You're not only a seasoned prosecutor, you've led the FBI for years. You understand the investigative process. You've worked with this committee closely, and we're grateful to you because I think we've we've mutually built trust in what your organization does and and what we do. Is there any doubt in your mind that this committee can carry out its oversight role in the 2016 Russian involvement in the elections in parallel with the now special counsel that's been set up?
[Comey:] No no doubt. It can be done. It requires lots of conversations, but Bob Mueller is one of this country's great, great pros. And I'm sure you all will be able to work it out with him to run it in parallel.
[Burr:] I want to thank you once again, and I want to turn to the vice chairman.
[Warner:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, again, Director Comey, thank you for your service. And your comments to your FBI family, I know, were heartfelt. Know that, even though there are some in the administration who've tried to smear your reputation, you had Acting Director McCabe, in public testimony a few weeks back and in public testimony yesterday, reaffirm that the vast majority of the FBI community had great trust in your leadership and, obviously, trust in your integrity. I want to go through a number of the meetings that you referenced in your testimony. And let's start with the January 6th meeting in Trump Tower, where you went up with a series of officials to brief the president-elect on the Russia investigation. My understanding is you remained afterwards to brief him on, again, quote, "some personally sensitive aspects" of the information you relayed. Now, you said, after that briefing, you felt compelled to document that conversation, that you actually started documenting it soon as you got into the car. Now, you've had extensive experience at the Department of Justice and at the FBI. You've worked under presidents of both parties. What was it about that meeting that led you to determine that you needed to start putting down a written record?
[Comey:] A combination of things, I think the circumstances, the subject matter and the person I was interacting with. Circumstances first: I was alone with the president of the United States or the president-elect, soon to be president. The subject matter: I was talking about matters that touch on the FBI's core responsibility and that relate to the president president-elect personally. And then the nature of the person: I was honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meeting, and so I thought it really important to document. That combination of things, I'd never experienced before, but it led me to believe I've got to write it down, and I've got to write it down in a very detailed way.
[Warner:] I think that's a very important statement you just made. And my understanding is that then, again, unlike your dealings with presidents of either parties in your past experience, in every subsequent meeting or conversation with this president, you created a written record. Did you feel that you needed to create this written record or these memos because they might need to be relied on at some future date?
[Comey:] Sure. I created records after conversations, and I think I did it after each of our nine conversations. If I didn't, I did it for nearly all of them, especially the ones that were substantive. I knew that there might come a day when I would need a record of what had happened, not just to defend myself, but to defend the FBI and and our integrity as an institution and the independence of our investigative function. That's what made this so so difficult, is it was a combination of circumstances, subject matter, and the particular person.
[Warner:] And so, in all your experience, this was the only president that you felt like, in every meeting, you needed to document, because at some point, using your words, he might put out a non-truthful representation of that meeting? Now...
[Comey:] That's right, Senator. And I I as I said in my written testimony, as FBI director, I interacted with President Obama. I spoke only twice in three years, and didn't document it. When I was deputy attorney general, I had one one-on-one meeting with President Bush about a very important and difficult national security matter. I didn't write a memo documenting that conversation either sent a quick e-mail to my staff to let them know there was something going on, but I didn't feel, with President Bush, the need to document it in that way, again, because of the combination of those factors just wasn't present with either President Bush or President Obama.
[Warner:] I I think that is very significant. I think others will probably question that. Now, our chairman and I have requested those memos. It is our hope that the FBI will get this committee access to those memos so that, again, we can read that contemporaneous rendition, so that we've got your side of the story. Now, I know members have said, and press has said, that if you were a great deal's been made of whether the president you were asked to, in effect, indicate whether the president was the subject of any investigation. And my understanding is, prior to your meeting on January 6th, you discussed with your leadership team whether or not you should be prepared to assure then President-Elect Trump that the FBI was not investigating him personally. Now, my understanding is your leadership team agreed with that. But was that a unanimous decision? Was there any debate about that?
[Comey:] Was it unanimous? One of the members of the leadership team had a view that, although it was technically true, we did not have a counterintelligence file case open on then-President-elect Trump. His concern was, because we're looking at the potential again, that's the subject of the investigation coordination between the campaign and Russia, because it was President Trump President-elect Trump's campaign, this person's view was, inevitably, his behavior, his conduct will fall within the scope of that work. And so he was reluctant to make the statement that I made. I disagreed. I thought it was fair to say what was literally true: There is not a counterintelligence investigation of Mr. Trump. And I decided, in the moment, to say it, given the nature of our conversation.
[Warner:] At that moment in time, did you ever revisit that as a in in these subsequent sessions?
[Comey:] With the FBI leadership team?
[Warner:] With the team with your team.
[Comey:] Sure, and and the the leader who had that view it didn't change. His view was still that it was probably although literally true, his concern was it could be misleading, because the nature of the investigation was such that it might well touch obviously, it would touch the campaign, and the person at the head of the campaign would be the candidate. And so that was his view throughout.
[Warner:] Let me move to the January 27th dinner, where you said, quote, "The president began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI director. He also indicated that lots of people" again, your words "wanted the job." You go on to say that the dinner itself was seemingly an effort to, quote, "have you ask him for your job," and create some sort of, quote-unquote, "patronage relationship." The president's seems, from my reading of your memo, to be holding your job, or your possibility of continuing in your job, over your head in a fairly direct way. What was your impression, and what did you mean by this notion of a patronage relationship?
[Comey:] Well, my impression and, again, it's my impression. I could always be wrong. But my common sense told me that what was going on is either he had concluded, or someone had told him, that you didn't you've already asked Comey to stay, and you didn't get anything for it, and that the dinner was an effort to build a relationship in fact, he asked specifically of loyalty in the context of asking me to stay. And, as I said, what was odd about that is we'd already talked twice about it by that point. And he'd said, I very much hope you'll stay, I hope you'll stay. In fact, I just remembered, sitting here, a third one. When you've seen the picture of me walking across the Blue Room. And what the president whispered in my ear was, "I really look forward to working with you." So, after those encounters...
[Warner:] And that was just a few days before you were fired.
[Comey:] ... yeah, that was on the 20 the Sunday after the inauguration. The next Friday, I have dinner, and the president begins by wanting to talk about my job. And so I'm sitting there, thinking, wait a minute, three times, we've already you've already asked me to stay, or talked about me staying. And my common sense again, I could be wrong, but my common sense told me what's going on here is that he's looking to get something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job.
[Warner:] And again, we all understand I was a governor, I had people work for me. But this constant request and, again, quoting you, him saying that he despite you explaining your independence, he kept coming back to "I need loyalty." "I expect loyalty." Had you ever had any of those kind of requests before, from anyone else you'd worked for in the government?
[Comey:] No, and what made me uneasy was I'm, at that point, the director of the FBI. The reason that Congress created a ten-year term is so that the director is not feeling as if they're serving at with political loyalty owed to any particular person. The the statue of Justice has a blindfold on because you're not supposed to be peeking out to see whether your patron is pleased or not with what you're doing. It should be about the facts and the law. That's why I was that's why I became FBI director: to be in that kind of position. So that's why I was so uneasy.
[Warner:] Well, let me let me move on. My time's running out. February 14th again, it seems a bit strange. You were in a meeting. And your direct superior, the attorney general, was in that meeting, as well. Yet the president asked everyone to leave, including the attorney general to leave, before he brought up the matter of General Flynn. What was your impression of that type of action? Had you ever seen anything like that before?
[Comey:] No. My impression was, something big is about to happen. I need to remember every single word that is spoken. And, again, I could be wrong, but I'm 56 years old. I've been seen a few things. My sense was the attorney general knew he shouldn't be leaving, which is why he was lingering. And I don't know Mr. Kushner well, but I think he picked up on the same thing. And so I knew something was about to happen that I needed to pay very close attention to.
[Warner:] And I I found it very interesting that, in the memo that you wrote after this February 14th pull-aside, you made clear that you wrote that memo in a way that was unclassified. If you affirmatively made the decision to write a memo that was unclassified, was that because you felt, at some point, the facts of that meeting would have to come clean and come clear and actually be able to be cleared in a way that could be shared with the American people?
[Comey:] Well, I remember thinking, this is a very disturbing development, really important to our work. I need to document it and preserve it in a way and and this committee gets this, but sometimes when things are classified, it tangles them up. It's hard...
[Warner:] Amen.
[Comey:] ... to share it within an investigative team. It's you have to be very careful about how you handle it, for good reason. So my thinking was, if I write it in such a way that I don't include anything that would trigger a classification, that'll make it easier for us to discuss, within the FBI and the government, and to to hold on to it in a way that makes it accessible to us.
[Warner:] Well, again, it's our hope, particularly since you're a pretty knowledgeable guy and you wrote this in a way that was unclassified, that this committee will get access to that unclassified document. I think it'll be very important to our investigation. Let me just ask this in closing: How many ongoing investigations, at any time, does the FBI have going on?
[Comey:] Tens of thousands.
[Warner:] Tens of thousands. Did the president ever ask about any other ongoing investigation?
[Comey:] No.
[Warner:] Did he ever ask about you trying to interfere on any other investigation?
[Comey:] No.
[Warner:] I think, again, this speaks volumes. This doesn't even get to the questions around the the phone calls about lifting the cloud. I know other members will get to that, but I really appreciate your testimony and appreciate your service to our nation.
[Comey:] Thank you, Senator Warner. You know, I just I'm sitting here, going through my contacts with him. I had one conversation with the president that was classified, where he asked about our an ongoing intelligence investigation. It was brief and entirely professional.
[Warner:] But he didn't ask you to take any specific action on that...
[Comey:] No, no.
[Warner:] ... unlike what he had done vis-a-vis Mr. Flynn and the overall Russia investigation?
[Comey:] Correct.
[Warner:] Thank you, sir.
[Burr:] Senator Risch?
[Risch:] Thank you very much. Mr. Comey, thank you for your service. America needs more like you, and we really appreciate it. Yesterday, I got, and everybody got, the seven pages of your direct testimony that's now a part of the record, here. And the first I read it, then I read it again, and all I could think was, number one, how much I hated the class of legal writing when I was in law school. And you were the guy that probably got the A, after after reading this. So I I find it clear, I find it concise and, having been a prosecutor for a number of years and handling hundred maybe thousands of cases and read police reports, investigative reports, this is as good as it gets. And and I really appreciate that not only not only the conciseness and the clearness of it, but also the fact that you have things that were written down contemporaneously when they happened, and you actually put them in quotes, so we know exactly what happened and we're and we're not getting some rendition of it that that's in your mind. So...
[Comey:] Thank you, Senator.
[Risch:] ... so you're you're to be complimented for that.
[Comey:] I had great parents and great teachers who beat that into me.
[Risch:] That's obvious, sir. The the chairman walked you through a number of things that that the American people need to know and want to know. Number one, obviously we're all know about the active measures that the Russians have taken. I think a lot of people were surprised at this. Those of us that work in the intelligence community didn't it didn't come as a surprise. But now, the American people know this, and it's good they know this, because this is serious and it's a problem. I I think, secondly, I gather from all this that you're willing to say now that, while you were director, the president of the United States was not under investigation. Is that a fair statement?
[Comey:] That's correct.
[Risch:] All right. So that's a fact that we can rely at this...
[Comey:] Yes, sir.
[Risch:] ... OK. On I remember, you you talked with us shortly after February 14th, when the New York Times wrote an article that suggested that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians. You remember reading that article when it first came out?
[Comey:] I do. It was about allegedly extensive electronic surveillance...
[Risch:] Correct.
[Comey:] ... communications. Yes, sir.
[Risch:] And and that upset you to the point where you actually went out and surveyed the intelligence community to see whether whether you were missing something in that. Is that correct?
[Comey:] That's correct. I want to be careful in open setting. But...
[Risch:] I I'm I'm not going to any further than that with it.
[Comey:] OK.
[Risch:] So thank you. In addition to that, after that, you sought out both Republican and Democrat senators to tell them that, hey, I don't know where this is coming from, but this is not the this is not factual. Do you recall that?
[Comey:] Yes.
[Risch:] OK. So so, again, so the American people can understand this, that report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?
[Comey:] In in the main, it was not true. And, again, all of you know this, maybe the American people don't. The challenge and I'm not picking on reporters about writing stories about classified information, is that people talking about it often don't really know what's going on. And those of us who actually know what's going on are not talking about it. And we don't call the press to say, hey, you got that thing wrong about this sensitive topic. We just have to leave it there. I mentioned to the chairman the nonsense around what influenced me to make the July 5th statement. Nonsense, but I can't go explaining how it's nonsense.
[Risch:] Thank you. All right. So so those three things, we now know, regarding the active measures, whether the president's under investigation and the collusion between the the Russian the Trump campaign and the Russians. I I want to drill right down, as my time is limited, to the most recent dust-up regarding allegations that the president of the United States obstructed justice. And, boy, you nailed this down on page 5, paragraph 3. You put this in quotes words matter. You wrote down the words so we can all have the words in front of us now. There's 28 words there that are in quotes, and it says, quote, "I hope" this is the president speaking "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go." Now those are his exact words, is that correct?
[Comey:] Correct.
[Risch:] And you wrote them here, and you put them in quotes?
[Comey:] Correct.
[Risch:] Thank you for that. He did not direct you to let it go.
[Comey:] Not in his words, no.
[Risch:] He did not order you to let it go.
[Comey:] Again, those words are not an order.
[Risch:] He said, "I hope." Now, like me, you probably did hundreds of cases, maybe thousands of cases charging people with criminal offenses. And, of course, you have knowledge of the thousands of cases out there that where people have been charged. Do you know of any case where a person has been charged for obstruction of justice or, for that matter, any other criminal offense, where this they said, or thought, they hoped for an outcome?
[Comey:] I don't know well enough to answer. And the reason I keep saying his words is I took it as a direction.
[Risch:] Right.
[Comey:] I mean, this is the president of the United States, with me alone, saying, "I hope" this. I took it as, this is what he wants me to do. Now I I didn't obey that, but that's the way I took it.
[Risch:] You you may have taken it as a direction, but that's not what he said.
[Comey:] Correct. I that's why...
[Risch:] He said he said, "I hope."
[Comey:] Those are exact words, correct.
[Risch:] OK, do you you don't know of anyone that's ever been charged for hoping something. Is that a fair statement?
[Comey:] I don't, as I sit here.
[Risch:] Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Burr:] Senator Feinstein?
[Feinstein:] Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Comey, I just want you to know that I have great respect for you. Senator Cornyn and I sit on the Judiciary Committee, so we have occasion to have you before us. And I know that you're a man of strength and integrity, and I really regret the situation that we all find ourselves in. I just want to say that. Let me begin with one overarching question. Why do you believe you were fired?
[Comey:] Guess I don't know for sure. I believe the I take the president at his word, that I was fired because of the Russia investigation. Something about the way I was conducting it, the president felt, created pressure on him that he wanted to relieve. Again, I didn't know that at the time, but I watched his interview, I've read the press accounts of his conversations. So I take him at his word there. Now, look, I I could be wrong. Maybe he's saying something that's not true. But I take him at his word, at least based on what I know now.
[Feinstein:] Talk for a moment about his request that you pledge loyalty, and your response to that and what impact you believe that had.
[Comey:] I I don't know for sure, because I don't know the president well enough to read him well. I think it was because our relationship didn't get off to a great start, given the conversation I had to have on January 6th, this was not this didn't improve the relationship, because it was very, very awkward. He was asking for something, and I was refusing to give it. But again, I don't know him well enough to know how he reacted to that, exactly.
[Feinstein:] Do you believe the Russia investigation played a role?
[Comey:] In why I was fired?
[Feinstein:] Yes.
[Comey:] Yes, because I've seen the president say so.
[Feinstein:] OK. Let's let's go to the Flynn issue. Senator Risch outlined a "I hope you could see your way [sic] to letting Flynn go. He's a good guy. I hope you can let this go." But you also said, in your written remarks, and I quote, that you had "understood the president to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December," end quote. Please go into that with more detail.
[Comey:] Well, the the context and the president's words are what led me to that conclusion. As I said in my statement, I could be wrong, but Flynn had been forced to resign the day before, and and the controversy around General Flynn at that point in time was centered on whether he had lied to the vice president about the nature of his conversations with the Russians, whether he had been candid with others in the course of that. And so that happens on the day before. On the 14th, the president makes specific reference to that. And so that's why I understood him to be saying that what he wanted me to do was drop any investigation connected to Flynn's account of his conversations with the Russians.
[Feinstein:] Now, here's the question: You're big. You're strong. I know the Oval Office, and I know what happens to people when they walk in. There is a certain amount of intimidation. But why didn't you stop and say, "Mr. President, this is wrong. I cannot discuss this with you"?
[Comey:] It's a great question. Maybe if I were stronger, I would have. I was so stunned by the conversation that I just... ... took it in. And the only thing I could think to say, because I was playing in my mind, because I could remember every word he said I was playing in my mind, what should my response be? And that's why I very carefully chose the words. And, look, I I've seen the tweet about tapes. Lordy, I hope there are tapes. I I remember saying, "I agree he's a good guy," as a way of saying, "I'm not agreeing with what you just asked me to do." Again, maybe other people would be stronger in that circumstance but that that was that's how I conducted myself. I I hope I'll never have another opportunity. Maybe if I did it again, I would do it better.
[Feinstein:] You described two phone calls that you received from President Trump, one on March 30 and one on April 11, where he, quote, "described the Russia investigation as a cloud that was impairing his ability," end quote, as president, and asked you, quote, "to lift the cloud," end quote. What how did you interpret that? And what did you believe he wanted you to do?
[Comey:] I interpreted that as he was frustrated that the Russia investigation was taking up so much time and energy, I I think he meant, of the executive branch, but in the in the public square in general, and it was making it difficult for him to focus on other priorities of his. But what he asked me was actually narrower than that. So I think what he meant by the cloud, and again, I could be wrong, but what I think he meant by the cloud was the entire investigation is is taking up oxygen and making it hard for me to focus on the things I want to focus on. The ask was to get it out that I, the president, am not personally under investigation.
[Feinstein:] After April 11th, did he ask you more, ever, about the Russia investigation? Did he ask you any questions?
[Comey:] We never spoke again after April 11th.
[Feinstein:] You told the president, I I would see what we could do. What did you mean?
[Comey:] Well, it was kind of a slightly cowardly way of trying to avoid telling him, we're not going to do that that I would see what we could do. It was a way of kind of getting off the phone, frankly. And then I turned and handed it to the acting deputy attorney general, Mr. Boente.
[Feinstein:] So I wanted to go into that. Who did you talk with about that lifting the cloud, stopping the investigation back at the FBI, and what was their response?
[Comey:] Well, the FBI, during one of the two conversations I'm not remembering exactly. I think the first my chief of staff was actually sitting in front of me, and heard my end of the conversation, because the president's call was a surprise. And I discussed the lifting the cloud and the request with the senior leadership team, who in in typically, and I think in all these circumstances, was the deputy director, my chief of staff, the general counsel, the deputy director's chief counsel and, I think, in a number of circumstances, the number three in the FBI, and a few of the conversations included the head of the national security branch, so that group of us that lead the FBI when it comes to national security.
[Feinstein:] OK. You have the president of the United States asking you to stop an investigation that's an important investigation. What was the response of your colleagues?
[Comey:] I think they were as shocked and troubled by it as I was. Some said things that led me to believe that. I don't remember exactly, but the reaction was similar to mine. They're all experienced people who had never experienced such a thing. So they were very concerned. And then the conversation turned to about, so what should we do with this information? And that was a struggle for us, because we are the leaders of the FBI.

[Berman:] All right, the breaking news. We now know that Michael Cohen is expected to be in a federal court next hour for a hearing concerning the raids conducted by the FBI earlier this week. That will be fascinating to hear what happens inside that courtroom. Now, what we don't know is what the FBI might have found, which has led to a big question this morning, does the FBI have in their possession tapes? Taped conversations that the president's personal lawyer might have made perhaps with the president himself, perhaps with Trump campaign workers? Our Kara Scannell joins us now with the details on this. Kara, friends of Michael Cohen, associates, say he taped conversations often.
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Reporter:] That's right, John. I mean sources tell Gloria Borger, Sara Murray and I that Michael Cohen routinely taped conversations before the campaign and during the campaign. These sources tell us that Cohen often played those conversations back to candidate Trump. And a lot of these conversations, we're told, had to do with how Trump was being perceived in the media. And they also involved conversations that Michael Cohen was having with other in the political sphere. Now, what's very interesting is that, you know, it's very likely that these conversations were scooped up in the FBI raid on Monday. And this is something that a lot of Trump allies are concerned about, were they recorded? It was kind of known within those within the campaign that they were warned and kind of secretly discussed among themselves that if they were in Cohen's office, perhaps they would be recorded. And I think this is why we're seeing the drastic and very unusual action taken by Cohen's attorney to file a temporary restraining order. And, of course, you know, as Shimon was reporting, we're going to start to hear those arguments in court in the next hour. So, John, I do think there is some concern among Trump allies that these recordings, since no one knows what they are, is something that will be in the hands of the FBI. And that's really going to be the focus of this court hearing today.
[Berman:] All right, Kara Scannell, thank you very much. Terrific information there. Let's try to understand it some more. Joining me is Kendall Coffey, former Florida U.S. attorney. Kendall, thank you so much for being with us. First, on the subject of the tapes, a couple questions. If they exist, number one, wow. And, number two, a guarantee they would be admissible or useable in an investigation?
[Kendall Coffey, Former Florida U.s. Attorney:] Well, it's a double wow in terms of the existence of tapes. And with Cohen's reputation as something of a recording artist who was taping a lot of people, that could be a major focus of the FBI's early interest. I don't think too many of them are going to be privileged unless he was recording Donald Trump, assuming he was recording third parties, and there's not going to be a privilege issue there. And we all know that very few things are as probative, except perhaps for video, than an audio recording. Witnesses just can't deny it. So everybody that's spoken to Michael Cohen in the last group of years has got to be pretty nervous this morning.
[Berman:] And just to be clear, the conversations with the president would only be privileged if he was acting as his lawyer on the subject they were discussing, a, and, b, assuming there wasn't this crime fraud provision that they were plotting some furtherance of a criminal activity, correct?
[Coffey:] Two very important points. If he's talking to the president just about politics, if he's talking to the president just about frustrating, vetting venting, then that's not going to be privileged. It's got to be legal communications and legal subject. And the crime fraud exception is going to be a very tricky subject. It's pretty gray. But it's obviously something that the government intends to pursue here and that could be one of the things that's explored in the hearing today, how are the determinations going to be made about privilege, and will there be a judicially active process, because not everything is privileged. A lot of things are. And that's got to be determined judicially at some point. Maybe not now, but certainly down the road.
[Berman:] All right, Kendall, we just learned about this hearing this morning. Our Kara Scannell, a terrific legal reporter, calls it a drastic and unusual act by the lawyers for Michael Cohen to place to try to argue for a restraining order on some of this evidence that has been collected. Now, there's so much that we don't know about what they have in their hands and also exactly what Michael Cohen's attorneys will be doing. But what do you see here?
[Coffey:] Well, what I see is that Cohen is, you know, to use a legal term, freaked out. And he knows he knows better than any of us all the things that are in there. And it's something of a longshot because the government has a right to execute search warrants. It's already been judicially approved or the warrant wouldn't have gone forward. So when you file an action to enjoin the execution of a search warrant, you know that isn't going to keep that isn't going to happen. What you're really trying to do is get some information about what they've got, about what they're looking for, and perhaps to put some restrictions or some system to have the materials reviewed and have judicial determinations made about privilege issue rather than let the FBI look at everything. Of course there's a separate taint team that's supposed to be separate from the prosecution team going through these documents. But most people in Michael Cohen's position are not only extremely worried right now, but they don't trust the idea that a taint team of people separate from the investigation is going to make an accurate determination about attorneyclient privilege issues.
[Berman:] Very quickly, Kendall, Michael Avenatti and Stormy Daniels, this other civil case, there's a deadline for some filings on that. Is it likely now that there's clearly some kind of criminal investigation happen, that that will be delayed or put on the back burner?
[Coffey:] Well, for sure there's a criminal investigation. And, yes, Cohen has got to take the Fifth. He'd frankly be reckless not to. That's going to affect the civil case. But it could just mean that the civil case goes forward in other respects but doesn't count on the testimony of Michael Cohen, who will be taking the Fifth, I suspect.
[Berman:] Kendall Coffey, great to have you with us to understand these legal machinations that are happening this morning before our very eyes. Appreciate it.
[Coffey:] Thanks for including me.
[Berman:] All right, now this morning, we're learning that top military officials have warned the president about the risks of getting more involved in Syria. We have a live update from the Pentagon, next.

[Bolduan:] Visitation services are under way for 97-year-old Rose Mallinger of Pittsburgh. She will be laid to rest this afternoon. This marks the last of the funerals of the victims for the horrific synagogue shooting. CNN's Jean Casarez has been on the ground covering this tragedy in Pittsburgh all week she's there still. Jean, tell us about this remarkable woman.
[Jean Casarez, Cnn Correspondent:] Remarkable is the word; 97 years old and she was at the service last Saturday right behind me in the Tree of Life Synagogue with her daughter sitting right next to her when the gunman started shooting and Rose was a victim. Her daughter was injured in the attack. Rose was the matriarch of her family. Her family and friends tell CNN that she was the one who continued to prepare the traditional family holiday recipes for all of the high holy days. She was the mother, of course of three and grandmother of five and a great grandmother. When she was working, she was the school secretary. So she was the one the children would come to get hugged. She was the who knew everything. She was the one that had all the information. Her family and friends said she should have been able to live so many more years, Kate.
[Bolduan:] Absolutely. Tonight also begins the first Shabbat since the killings. There is a nationwide campaign under way, Jean, to use the moment to bring people of all faiths together. What are you hearing about it?
[Casarez:] That is right. Sundown tonight begins the Jewish Sabbath, and around the country it is the global effort, grass roots to go visit your synagogue this weekend. Encouraging all Americans to do that and to fight hate and promote love and promote unity. It is something that gained traction on social media, but it is "Show up for Shabbat," that is what the encouragement is doing this weekend to everyone.
[Bolduan:] Jean, thank you so much. Thank you for being there in this horrible moment but one that we're showing the true heart of that community coming together. I appreciate it. Thank you so much.
[Jean Casarez:] Thank you.
[Bolduan:] Of course Jean. Before I go, I want to share this with you. It struck a lot of people today. Today in honor of all of the victims, "The Pittsburgh Gazette" front page, begins with, you see right there, the first words of the Jewish Mourner's prayer, the Kaddish, such a moving tribute to these people, to this community after this deadliest attack against Jews in American history. Rose Mallinger and all of the victims, all 11 victims right there. May they rest in peace and may their memory be a blessing. Thanks so much for joining us.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Most of the 11 people arrested so far following this terror incident are women. London police say they have been raiding apartments in the barking section of the city looking for people who know the attackers and who may have helped them in their deadly rampage. Witnesses say three men drove this van across busy London Bridge, plowing into people, aiming for them, trying to kill them. After crashing the van, the men then set out on foot with knives stabbing and slashing more people before London police shot all three of them dead. The entire horrible incident lasted just 15 minutes. Let's go live to London right now. CNN international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson is there and CNN senior national correspondent Alex Marquardt. Nic, I just mentioned ISIS has claimed responsibility for this attack. How are they making that claim and what role are they saying they played?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] Well, they're making it on a Web site they used before but they put no they put forward no sort of details on how they could make this claim credible. There's nothing there that makes the claim credible whatsoever. They haven't mentioned the names, they haven't put their faces up. They haven't put statements forward from these people. So at the moment you have to look at this claim by ISIS and put it to one side and wait for the police investigation to run its course. The police say that this investigation is moving with speed, that they believe that they are able to identify these three attackers. Indeed they've been to four premises, raided four premises in the east of London today. They've arrested 12 people. Of those 12 one has been released. Significantly seven of them were women. But if you look at the ages of the people who are arrested and the police have released those ages, there were six people there, three male, three female, in their mid to late 50s, one of them was 60. And what we've seen before after attacks like this is the police raid the premises where the attackers were most recently living, close friends and associates. It appears to be that's what they may have done this time as well Ana.
[Cabrera:] And they're still not releasing the identity or any information about those attackers, as you mentioned, Nic. Now this is the third terror attack in the United Kingdom in three months. What is the response from the Theresa May government?
[Robertson:] Theresa May says this is a new type of terrorism. We have to combat it in a new way. She said there are four ways to do that. We must we have difficult conversations in communities where she said extremism is tolerated. She wants to see, you know, increased military strikes on the areas that ISIS operates in the world, Iraq and Syria. She wants to close down the Internet space, she calls it, where ISIS is able to recruit people. She wants to put international pressure on Internet service providers, social media companies she said should be should work harder to prevent extremist groups, propagating their propaganda on their sites. And the other thing that she said, and this is something that will resonate with her base here in Britain is she wants potentially to have stronger legislation for the police and the intelligence services because she says this terror threat has changed. And therefore the way that Britain needs to tackle it must change. And that could mean tougher legislation.
[Cabrera:] Nic Robertson in London for us. Thank you. There was chaos, there was confusion all around London especially on London Bridge last night during these attacks. One man talked earlier with our Becky Anderson about what he saw when he came upon the scene just shortly after the violence began.
[Tyson Oladokun, Eyewitness:] As I drove closer towards the incident I saw a man lying on the floor. He was cradled by another man and had blood on his chest. At first it looked like a bicycle accident or motor accident. But as I moved closer towards him I could tell that the blood was concentrated in his chest area. So it looked like he had been stabbed. I saw another person lying down next to him. And they had covered his head with a blanket. But it looked like this guy may have died. We were stuck there for around 30 minutes or so. We weren't moving. There was a lot of commotion. People were going crazy. The police seemed relatively calm at the time. It was only subsequently I saw quite a lot of police. And they were chasing people across the bridge. This was normal civilians, normal pedestrians, over the bridge and screaming at them to run, run, run for your lives, terror.
[Cabrera:] 48 people were wounded in these attacks, 36 remain in the hospital including 21 people in critical condition. CNN's senior international correspondent Alexander Marquardt is near London Bridge. Alexander, what are you now learning about the victims?
[Alexander Marquardt, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Ana, that's right. Most of the people who were wounded last night are still in the hospital. As you mentioned, 21 in critical condition, which means that the death toll which now stands at seven could potentially still rise. Now we're not being told too much about the identities of those who are still in the hospital, of the wounded. But we are starting to hear some of their stories including one about a British transportation police officer who according to his boss, the chief constable, stood down and went after the attackers with just his baton. He had been on the job for just two years an tonight is being commended for his courage. CNN also spoke with the mother of one of the wounded, Elizabeth O'Neill, who said that her son Daniel is struggling with what happened last night. Take a listen.
[Elizabeth O'neill, Mother Of Victim:] He only stepped outside the pub for a second. And a man ran up to him and said, this is for my family, for Islam. Looked him straight in the face and stabbed him. Daniel pulled back. Then he went into the pub. He wasn't really aware he had been stabbed. Then there were shouts for everybody to get down on the floor. And then they had to go downstairs into the pub. And his friends had a tourniquet on him. And they were holding pressure. Brought him downstairs. Parts of it he doesn't remember. When the police came, two police officers had him in the back of the car. If it wasn't for his friends' quick action and for the police who have been absolutely fantastic and I thank God to them all night Daniel I don't think Daniel would be here.
[Marquardt:] Elizabeth O'Neill also telling CNN that Daniel is suffering from survivor's guilt. For her part, Elizabeth would like to meet the police officers who saved her son to thank them Ana.
[Cabrera:] So moving. Alex Marquardt, thank you. A few numbers I want to bring to you from this latest terror incident in the United Kingdom. Three attackers they are all dead. Seven innocent people just walking on London Bridge or spending a Saturday night at a restaurant, they're also dead. Dozens of people are hurt, many of them critically. And 11 people are now in custody. Police in London are working to figure out their connection to the attackers and if they played any part in the terror. CNN law enforcement and former Secret Service agent Jonathan Wackrow is here with us. Also our national security analyst, Juliette Kayyem. Jonathan, in a place like London.
[Jonathan Wackrow, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] On a Saturday night, it's a beautiful evening. People are not ever going to be thinking that something like this could happen.
[Wackrow:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] And it comes at a time where they're using a van and knives. How on earth do you stop that from happening?
[Wackrow:] Well, listen, these are very dynamic situations. Law enforcement is, you know, looking and searching for a way to respond to this changing face and changing tactics of terrorism. If I couldn't look back at the last six months we're seeing vehicles being weaponized. We're seeing knives being utilized to cause terror. Again this is the, you know, third attack we've seen in, you know, Great Britain.
[Cabrera:] In Great Britain.
[Wackrow:] Exactly. One location. But throughout Europe. I mean, look at what happened in Nice, the truck attack there. Now look at the people that they have in custody, mostly women. So the face of terrorism is changing. The tactics are changing. Law enforcement needs to have the tools and the intelligence to counter that.
[Cabrera:] Juliette, these attackers killed seven people. Again they rented a truck. They used some knives. You can buy at any store. If ISIS is indeed to blame for this they've claimed responsibility. There's no proof that they are behind it but does it say something about the state of that group that they've gone low tech with this attack.
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, I think they've gone all tech at this stage. I think that if you put, you know, a lot of attacks going on during Ramadan not just in the west but of course in Iraq and elsewhere you're seeing high tech, low tech, easy, coordinated, you know, lone wolf. I mean, it really is all of the above unfortunately. And what that means is of course from the perspective of law enforcement and public safety you don't exactly know what is the exact threat you're looking for. So in London was as we were saying last night, you know, it was you know, it was orchestrated amongst three men but all they had to do was buy a car and get some knives. So that's sort of coordinated but it's not lone wolf. And so I think that's the challenge right now is that it is sort of all of the above and that means that you're going to have to minimize the risk in these big public spaces. Know that you cannot make soft targets hard, otherwise you won't be able to go out and live our lives. And then also as we've been talking about is really focus on the response capabilities of police officers, ambulances, public health to protect those who might be in harm's way.
[Cabrera:] Jonathan, the response of police law enforcement has been widely praised in this incident. But you know what it's like to mitigate risk.
[Wackrow:] Absolutely.
[Cabrera:] The main focus now is how do you prevent something like this? And obviously for these individuals they were able to do what they did in the preparation under the radar. Anybody can rent a truck, anybody can purchase some knives.
[Wackrow:] Well, when you start looking at all these incidents, law enforcement, you know, on their heels. They're being reactive to situations. They have to become more proactive. They have to you know, through different legislation have more intelligence gathering capabilities to get ahead of these of these identified threats. Listen, we know that the tactics are changing. Last six months have proven that. Law enforcement needs every single pathway available, every single resource available to them to identify these vulnerabilities and then develop mitigation plans. You know, protection of soft targets, how do we do it. Just a week or two ago in Times Square we saw a car ram into the sidewalk. It was not terrorism-related but again it speaks to protecting soft targets and allowing police and emergency responders to have every resource available to respond to these dynamic and, you know, quickly changing situations.
[Cabrera:] And we talk about resources, Theresa May, the British prime minister, laid out some potential solutions in her mind. She says, you know, we need to work together to regulate cyber space. She also even talked about Britain potentially changing some of the laws to be able to more aggressively go after these attackers including potentially longer detention for terror suspects. Juliette, do you think those types of things would be effective?
[Kayyem:] It simply depends. You know, obviously, I just have to say that you need to use every you know, give law enforcement every available resource, it doesn't work that way. I mean, in these constitutional democracies, one of the reasons why law enforcement doesn't have all the tools that they would necessarily want is because people have an expectation to privacy or right to assembly. And I think so part of the challenge is figuring out at what stage, right, do you want to give government the authorities and what kind of review do you want and how
[Cabrera:] All right. Got to leave it there. Juliette Kayyem and Jonathan Wackrow, I was determined to get your name right.
[Wackrow:] Thank you, Ana.
[Cabrera:] Thank you both for being with us. Now despite the horrible attack in central London there has been this beautiful benefit concert for the people affected by the other attack that happened in England at the Ariana Grande concert just couple of weeks ago. This concert went on and we'll be live in Manchester with the highlights next. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[Cabrera:] Welcome back. Elon Musk says he is going to Mars. Well, a 70 percent chance anyway. The Tesla and Space-X founder told "Axios" he thinks he will take a rocket to the red planet. And in as soon as the next seven years possibly even move there. Meanwhile, NASA is headed there tomorrow. It's the first space mission to study seismic waves on another planet and found out what mars is made of. A NASA sideways craft plans to blaze through the Martian atmosphere and land on the red planet's surface, that's if it can land in one piece. It won't be easy. More than half of all missions to mars don't make it safely to the surface. It was one of the biggest headlines during the thanksgiving holidays, do not eat romaine lettuce, and we found out earlier this week that an outbreak of e-Coli across the country now seems to be linked specifically to lettuce in California, this according to the FDA. More than 30 people were sickened in this outbreak. The FDA says it is hoping to create a new labeling system that would require companies to state where lettuce is from and where it's harvested. Vani Hari better known as the food babe and joins me now. Vani, you have studied where our food comes from quite a bit. So how does an outbreak like this happen?
[Vani Hari, Creator, Foodbabe.com:] You know, it's a really serious situation, especially when someone like the CDC comes out and says throw away your romaine lettuce. Do not eat it. And there are so many ingredients in the food supply that harm Americans every single day, but when you when the CDC comes out with a recommendation like this, we want to take it seriously. And unfortunately, lettuce, anything that is raw, unfortunately, cannot be washed off and cannot wash off e-Coli. E-Coli is presented on lettuce and other raw fruits and vegetables by either contaminated soil. You know, E-coli is actually found in animal intestines so it comes through, you know, manure or some type of sewage sludge that gets into the factory farm where the lettuce is being grown, or it can happen with a bird just simply dropping poop on lettuce and it somehow, you know, is contaminated. And then, what's the worst part of this situation is that we do not have a supply chain check and balance in place. Once your romaine is grown and harvested, it has so many different touch points of contamination possible. You know, that romaine is taken to one factory to get washed. Then another factory to get banged put into different bags of lettuce and then combined with other kinds of lettuce. And every single time it gets cut or washed it touches different machinery so there's so many different points of contamination that can happen. And if we don't know where our food is coming from, we can't really trust it. And so that's why when I go out and I buy romaine lettuce or any type of lettuce, I avoid the bag and box lettuces and I really go for like the whole head of lettuce. Now, that's not going to always eliminate the entire risk because, again, e-Coli stays present and alive on raw fruits and vegetables.
[Cabrera:] So you go for the head versus bagged, and that's because it's less processed?
[Hari:] Absolutely, and the touch points are definitely less. You know, one of the things that we have a problem with in this country is we have things grown in one place and processed in another. So we really can't found that's why it takes so long for the CDC and other government officials to figure out where these contaminations are coming from and how to contain it without sickening more people.
[Cabrera:] What do you see as the solution in order to prevent the contamination in the first place?
[Hari:] Well, one of the things that we have to just become entrenched with other in America is we need to know where our food comes from, right? We need to make sure that we get it from a source that we can trust. And, you know, that's not going to always prevent 100 percent of disease, but it will prevent some. We also need to reduce the use of growth-promoting antibiotics in our food supply, the things that are given to livestock like chickens and cattle to make them fatter. And what's happening is the overuse of antibiotics is creating superbugs that can't be treated with antibiotics. And so that's another point of contention in our food supply that we real very to pay attention to, so when you are out there choosing to buy meat, make sure it's not raised with antibiotics. Make sure you are going to a fast food chain that has actually decided, you know what, we are not going to sell meat that is raised with these antibiotics.
[Cabrera:] OK. Thank you so much, Vani Hari. Good information. We appreciate it.

[Cyril Vanier, Cnn Anchor:] As cheers and celebrations Nicolas Maduro waves to his supporters, as he wins another term as Venezuela's President.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. President Trump lashes out, demanding an investigation over alleged FBI spying on his political campaign.
[Vanier:] Plus, new dangers in Hawaii as dangerous clouds of acid steam are spread from molten lava reaching the ocean.
[Allen:] One man apparently hit by what's called a lava bomb, we'll have more about it. Thank you for joining us, I'm Natalie Allen.
[Vanier:] I'm Cyril Vanier, it is great to have you with us.
[Allen:] We begin in Venezuela where the President, Nicolas Maduro, is celebrating victory in Sunday's Presidential Election, but the vote is being criticized both inside and outside the country as a sham.
[Vanier:] Officials say Maduro won a second six-year term with 68 percent of the vote. However, voter turnout was only around 46 percent, despite the fact that the government kept many polls open late so more people could vote.
[Allen:] Maduro won despite an economy in turmoil with many Venezuelans struggling to get even basic necessities like food and medicine, but the president is promising to turn things around.
[Nicolas Maduro, Venezuelan President:] Today I am a president with more experience. I am a human being more prepared. I swear to you I will fulfill my promise and will dedicate myself entirely to recover the economic growth, to heal our economy, to prosecute criminal mafia. You will see me throughout the country in the streets to activate the motors of the economy.
[Vanier:] The main opposition boycotted Sunday's vote calling it illegitimate and Maduro's main opponent, Henri Falcon, is calling for a new election.
[Allen:] Eric Farnsworth is vice president of the Americas Society and Council of the Americas, he joins us from Washington. Eric, thank you for being with us.
[Eric Farnsworth, Vice President, Americas Society And Council Of The Americas:] Thank you.
[Allen:] Maduro wins again, no surprise there. How is he managing to stay in power when his country is crumbling? Its people are starving. Is he selling something that people are still buying? Is it manipulation? False promises? What is it?
[Farnsworth:] It's a combination of all of the above. He's selling promises to people and he can't cash the checks that he's trying to give them, but more to the point, he's taken steps that have put the opposition back on its heels. He's jailed opposition leaders. He has dominated the press and refused to allow the opposition access to it. He has taken steps, which have put the resources of the state at the disposal of his own electoral ambition. So the military and the national energy company are all at his service. So, he's not just building support among his base by direct benefits and gifts, but he's also doing everything he can to make the life of the opposition very, very difficult. So, that combination has, at least for the time being, kept him in power.
[Allen:] We hear from people who are desperate there that they're scared to let go of Maduro because it could get worse. They're barely eating, he gives them a little food, you have to stand in line for about 37 hours to get that. So, the question is, though, are people starting now to pull away from him? Even poor people, is his support waning at all?
[Farnsworth:] You know, the support has clearly been decreasing over time and people are voting not just with their votes, but with their feet. We're seeing hundreds of thousands of people leaving Venezuela as refugees across the border to Columbia, to Brazil, into the Caribbean's and the islands there, and seeking asylum as well in the United States and other countries. So, people are leaving the country, there is a certain desperation that has set in and the people that depend on the regime - you're right, they feel that if they're going to stay, they really have no alternative, but to continue to support the regime, because their livelihoods, their jobs, their access to food and limited medicine may depend on that. And, the regime does know who its supporters are, because it's - it's - it's keeping score by who receives the benefits and who is in their system. So, they know who the people are and it's become a very, very authoritarian state, almost dystopian state.
[Allen:] So, a lot of people left, I think almost 1.5 million, where does this go? How does this end if he just continues what he's doing, which is nothing for his people and everything to keep himself in power?
[Farnsworth:] It's hard to see how the economic situation gets any better at all. In fact, Maduro himself has said that he's going to double down on the revolution, he's going to make it even more - you know, take it in the same direction it's been going now for the past several years. [01:05] Meanwhile, the production of Venezuela's primary commodity, oil, is decreasing by the month and that's because of incompetence in the sector, and a lack of investment, a lack of skilled capital people who are leaving. So, they're going to have less and less resources. So, people of Venezuela are going to have to make a choice. They can leave, and again that's what may people are doing, or they can try to find a different way to try to change the circumstances within Venezuela. Obviously, the vote is now a path that circumscribed to them, that's not going to be available, so they're going to have to look for something else. And, I think what a number of people are beginning to think about is the possibility of additional public protests, additional civil disobedience perhaps and perhaps violence, not that anybody wants that, but that could be something that we will see increasingly after this election result concludes fully.
[Allen:] Alright. We're out of time. Wanted to talk to you about what the U.S. is doing and what the world is doing, but next time we'll discuss that. Thank you so much for coming in and talking to us.
[Farnsworth:] Thank you.
[Vanier:] U.S. President, Donald Trump, wants to know if the Obama administration had the FBI spy on his campaign for political reasons and he's demanding a justice department investigation into that.
[Allen:] This follows reports the FBI had a confidential source talk to Trump campaign aides about possible ties to Russia. CNN's Ryan Nobles has more on the justice department's response.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] President Donald Trump busy on Twitter this weekend.
[Vanier:] So, the political implications, the legal implications, let's try and untangle all of this with political analyst, Peter Mathews, also a criminal defense attorney, Troy Slaten. Peter, first to you. The president wants an investigation into those who are investigating him. Now, he'concerned that perhaps his campaign was spied on for political reasons. Does he have good grounds to - to - to believe that?
[Peter Mathews, Political Science Professor, Cypress College, Political Analyst:] We don't really know that yet.
[Vanier:] About that letter, Troy, Donald Trump's going to officially ask the department of justice on Monday to begin this new investigation into the investigation. Is he allowed to do that? Can he tell the department of justice what to do and what to investigate?
[Troy Slaten, Former Prosecutor:] Well, if you ascribe to the theory of the unitary executive then he absolutely does.
[Vanier:] So, it's not interference? Because usually it is said that the department of justice needs to be independent.
[Slaten:] Yes. So, for the last 30-40 years, even a little bit longer, the White House has taken the position that the department of justice is to operate independently. However, the president is entitled to be kept abreast of any investigations, if he wants to.
[Vanier:] Peter, Donald Trump wants to know whether the investigation of his campaign was politically motivated, but don't we already have a pretty good idea of how that investigation began? I mean, the FBI was informed by foreign diplomats - we've found out, of a conversation that they'd had with a Trump campaign staffer and that set off alarm bells to them and then they applied for a FISA warrant, so that they could wiretap that particular former Trump campaign staffer. So, there are objective elements that sent the FBI looking into this.
[Mathews:] Absolutely and those elements were pretty real. You know, this former advisor - he was actually a foreign policy advisor for President Trump and he had lost of ties to Russia, for example, and - here's the thing, though, about the internal unitary executive. The justice department is - is - is the cabinet department, the FBI is under the cabinet within the justice department. It has to have some independence or you'll have just a mockery, because it's investigating the president himself and his campaign. How can you have the president in charge of his own investigation? That's where you're talking about we call a unitary executive. [inaudible] checks and balances within the executive branch itself, in that sense.
[Vanier:] Troy, I'd like you to cast your lawyer's eyes for me on the deputy attorney general's statement. Rod Rosenstein, he said, "If anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take appropriate action." What's it look like to you? Because to me it looks very carefully crafted.
[Slaten:] Well, certainly - look, if - if - if the Obama administration implanted informants into the campaign of an opposing party, that would be a huge scandal, if they did it for some sort of political gain. So, if there was some sort of evidence that that was occurring, it should certainly be investigated. The whole purpose of the special counsel investigation is to look at interference in the campaign, whether it be from the Russians - now we're hearing information that Gulf States may have been trying to exert influence. So, we're trying to figure out what exactly happened and certainly if that did happen by the current administration - meaning the Obama administration during the campaign, to look into and try and affect the campaign of the opposing party, that would be a huge scandal and we'd definitely need to know about it.
[Vanier:] Peter, the president's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, says he want to know what the source reveals.
[Mathews:] It does and I guess that's what they're grasping onto, because other things look quite bleak for the president this time in the investigation. I do agree with Troy, though, that it needs to be known whether or not there was any kind of political influence in that particular counterintelligence operation and political counterintelligence. So, that's very important that we get to the bottom of that. However, I think that should not derail the major investigation which is to see whether or not there was any interference from foreign countries, not just Russia. Now it looks like possibly the UAE and Saudi Arabia may have been involved, their representatives met with Trump, Jr., I believe. But, that's really a problem there and that has to be focused on and this shouldn't be a distraction, but on the other hand I do believe the rule of law does call for any kind of untoward to be exposed, if it was political. I agree with Troy on that one.
[Vanier:] Alright. Troy Slaten, Peter Mathews, thank you very much for answering our questions.
[Mathews:] Thank you, Cyril.
[Slaten:] Thank you for having us. [01:15]
[Vanier:] Coming up, the latest on the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii.
[Allen:] Also ahead here, a Pakistani exchange student is being remembered as a bridge between two cultures. We'll take a look at her life cut short in the Texas school shooting.

[Allen:] Welcome back. This is CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] And I'm George Howell with the headlines.
[Allen:] Alive, the journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, wasn't afraid to ask hard questions. Even when doing so put his life at risk and sent him into exile.
[Howell:] His reporting exposed corruption and secrets in the Saudi kingdom. CNN's Nic Robertson explores Khashoggi's life work.
[Robertson:] Jamal Khashoggi, a leading Saudi journalist and former government adviser, came from humble roots, getting his first boost studying journalism at Indiana State University, benefiting like many of his generation from a Saudi government grant for U.S. education. Returning home, he reported for Saudi and regional newspapers. His first major break came in the late 1980s, an overseas assignment to a war zone, Afghanistan. At the time Saudi intelligence services were working with the CIA to oust the Soviets. A source close to Khashoggi says he got to know many of the young Saudi jihadists flocking to the fight, including Osama bin Laden. He had connections and caught the attention of the then Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Turki al Faisal. The pair became close, despite Khashoggi's sometimes critical reporting. Following Al Qaeda's 911 attacks, Khashoggi dared to ask the question few other Saudis would. Why did 15 of our young men attack America in so brutal a way? In 2002, the Saudi authorities battled Al Qaeda on their own streets. His knowledge of the terror group led to a job advising Prince Turki, which made him useful as the country struggled to contain the chaos of an insurgent movement at home. In 2003, when Turki became ambassador to the U.K., then D.C. two years later, Khashoggi followed him. Eventually he returned to reporting. His criticism of the kingdom's conservative clerics would cost him his job. Khashoggi supported reform and modernization in the kingdom but opposed the methods used by crown prince Mohammed bin Salman in stifling criticism.
[Jamal Khashoggi, Journalist:] I received a phone call ordering me to go silent. With no court decree, with just someone from the royal court, an official from the royal court, who was close to the leadership and ordered me to be silent. That offended me.
[Robertson:] He left Saudi and his family to begin a new life in America writing for "The Washington Post."
[Khashoggi:] Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince, enjoys a great support from the Saudi republic and he is seen as the savior by young Saudis and by me and other Saudis. So he doesn't need this environment of intimidation, of cracking down on dissent.
[Robertson:] Days before he disappeared, he told an interviewer that he didn't think he'd ever be allowed to return to Saudi Arabia. Friends say he knew the risks of angering the Saudi establishment. Khashoggi went to the consulate in Istanbul to get papers so he could marry his Turkish fiancee. He had been apprehensive about the visit. What happened here, Tuesday, October 2nd, remains a mystery though it is now clear it was Khashoggi's last day alive. One of the few critics of the Saudi inner circle with a public profile in the West is gone. And the consequences of his death for the crown prince, for reform in the kingdom and for the region at large are only just beginning to be felt.
[Howell:] Nic Robertson there. And now to talk more about this, we have Natasha Lindstaedt, a professor of government at the University of Essex in England. Thank you so much for your time today. Look, there are a lot of key players involved in this clearly. Let's start with what we're hearing out of Saudi Arabia, that Khashoggi died the result of a fist fight. The U.S. president says that is credible, believes it is credible. The narrative though certainly begs many more questions. Your thoughts.
[Natasha Lindstaedt, University Of Essex:] Well, I think what the Saudi government is asking us to do is believe things that completely defy logic. We're supposed to believe that crown prince Salman has an elite inner circle and members of the security apparatus that have almost gone rogue, that have gone on their own to commit this act. And that is very difficult to believe, given what happened last year when the crown prince had basically purged anyone that was going to be viewed as disloyal to him. We know he has complete control over his elite inner circle. They are incredibly loyal to him. And then we're also supposed to believe that this death resulted from a fist fight? I mean all of it sounds completely implausible.
[Howell:] And the one remaining question, where is Khashoggi's body? The explanation provided from Saudi Arabia does not answer that very basic fundamental question. Let's talk about Turkey now. Turkish president there, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, really in the driver's seat, with this investigation playing out in his nation. And every new revelation putting new pressure on the Saudi explanation, on the Saudi crown prince and even on the U.S. president.
[Lindstaedt:] Right. And with Erdogan, the president of Turkey, he is a master of creating opportunities out of a crisis here. And he sees this as a great opportunity to really shape the narrative here and also distract from his own problems that are going on in Turkey. He has been very aggressive in providing the world with intelligence about what has been going on, almost on a daily basis. And this has really pressured the Saudis. In the beginning, Saudi Arabia was saying that he probably left on his own. And now they have actually had to admit on TV that he indeed was murdered.
[Howell:] Now to the U.S. president. Mr. Trump again seems to accept the Saudi narrative. Is this the off-ramp that allows the president to continue on with business ties as he has indicated that he hopes to do?
[Lindstaedt:] President Trump signaled a while ago that he would accept the Saudi narrative. He almost seems to be a spokesperson for the Saudi regime. And a lot of this has to do with the history of U.S.- Saudi relations since the 1930s. The U.S. considers Saudi Arabia still to be a major strategic partner in the Middle East. But also if we look at Trump, Trump has very close relationships with the Saudis, not just in terms of personal relationships but he thinks they are very important to his own financial interests. He bragged about this several years ago. And he really wants the story to go away. If he can just say yes, we believe this narrative and let's move on.
[Howell:] We'll see whether lawmakers they continue to put pressure on the U.S. president even though he does seem to accept what is coming out of Saudi Arabia. Natasha, thank you for your time and perspective.
[Allen:] Keep in mind the context here. The disappearance and now confirmed death of a journalist. President Trump praised a U.S. congressman who body slammed a journalist.
[Trump:] Any guy that can do a body slam, he's my kind of a great guy, tough cookie.
[Allen:] On Friday, Mr. Trump was asked about his remarks the night before praising Montana Republican Greg Gianforte.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you regret bringing up last night at your rally the assault on a reporter by a congressman?
[Trump:] No, no. Not at all. It is a different world, a different league, a different world. No, he is just a great guy.
[Allen:] The president went on to say there is nothing to be embarrassed about. This again centered around an assault during Gianforte's election campaign. That was in May 2017 and there was audio that captured the whole thing.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, and you just broke my glasses.
[Allen:] He went on to plead guilty to misdemeanor assault in June of last year after he was convicted of body slamming Ben Jacobs. That was the reporter for "The Guardian." And Gianforte also won the election after that.
[Howell:] After three years, some Afghans will have to wait even longer to vote for parliament.
[Allen:] We'll have the latest on what's behind the delay.

[Becky Anderson, Cnn:] Hello and welcome to CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson. We are coming to you with a special show this hour from the Jaffa Gate in the old city of Jerusalem. We've been watching history unfold over the last few hours. A long-awaited day of celebration for Israelis ushered in by U.S. President Donald Trump just a short time ago. The U.S. embassy officially opened in Jerusalem, relocating from Tel Aviv in solidarity with Israel's declaration that Jerusalem is its eternal undivided capital. Here was the moment of the official unveiling. Just a short distance away from the celebrations, a totally different deadly scene. Israeli troops once again using live bullets to control mass Palestinian protests along the Gaza border. According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health at least 43 people have been killed in what officials call a terrible massacre. Israel blames the violence on Hamas saying rioters are burning tires, throwing Molotov cocktails and trying to breach the border fence. CNN's Oren Liebermann joining me now live here with more. And Benjamin Netanyahu calling it a glorious day, Oren, that will be engraved in the memory of her Israelis for generations. The Prime Minister lavishing praise on Donald Trump for, quote, having the courage to keep his promises. Let's just listen in.
[Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister:] Remember this moment. This is history. President Trump by recognizing history, you have made history.
[Anderson:] An emotional day then for Israel. There is no doubt that this has been an emotive one across the city and beyond.
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn Correspondent:] From Israel's perspective the last few weeks, today and the next few weeks couldn't have gone better. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was pushing President Trump to leave the Iran nuclear deal, he did. He'd been pushing for a long time for him to move the embassy, he did. Recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, he did. And next month to continue essentially what has been this good wave for Israel, there's a royal visit expected from England. So, from Israel's perspective this all could not have gone better. And when Netanyahu spoke, he was genuinely happy at how well this has all gone for him. And he knows that regardless of what happened in Gaza, 43 Palestinians shot and killed, there's likely no serious international consequence. Because he knows the Trump administration will protect Israel at the United Nations.
[Anderson:] Let's have a listen to what U.S. President Donald Trump said at the ceremony. He didn't attend, but he sent his congratulations to Israel in this video message.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital. Yet for many years we failed to acknowledge the obvious the plain reality that Israel's capital is Jerusalem.
[Anderson:] Your thoughts?
[Liebermann:] This is a statement he echoed or a statement he made when he recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital back in December and he tried to frame it as a recognition of reality and history. The Prime Minister sits here, foreign leaders from the U.S., Europe, and around the world, meet Israeli leaders here. The Knesset, Israel's Parliament, is here and the Supreme Court sits here. The government functions from Jerusalem. So, he tried to say, look, I'm just recognizing that this is how diplomacy works with Israel. He tried to add a hedge there in saying, look, I'm not determining Israeli sovereignty in the overall city, boundaries, borders are still open for negotiations. And yet ever since that declaration the Palestinian authority has frozen contacts with the Trump administration. So, even if he tried to hedge it and add some subtlety, it hasn't worked, and it's been Israel's moment from then on with the Trump administration.
[Anderson:] Much of what Donald Trump said echoed by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, it's not often that we hear from Jared Kushner. But he did play a key part in today's ceremony. Saying the United States is tipping the scales in favor of the righteous. Again, let's just have a listen to what he said moments ago.
[Jared Kushner Senior Advisor To Donald Trump:] Today also demonstrates American leadership by moving our embassy to Jerusalem, we have shown the world once again that the United States can be trusted. We stand with our friends and our allies and, above all else, we've shown that the United States of America will do what's right, and so we have.
[Anderson:] The United States of America will do what's right and so we have. There will be people here and around the region saying what is right would be the details of a new peace plan. And this has been touted by the U.S. administration. Did we hear anything about today?
[Liebermann:] Well, Kushner said all of the right things in terms of trying to pursue a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians and yet it doesn't change the fact that only a handful of people in the Trump administration and probably even fewer in the Israeli government have actually seen what it is this peace plan has in store. And then it faces a very difficult political reality on both sides, not just the Israeli, not just the Palestinian. The Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas, is trying to hang on to his own power as he becomes increasingly unpopular on the streets. Netanyahu has a coalition not geared for a peace plan, a peace process to make concessions to the Palestinians either for Jerusalem or for any of the other major central issues.
[Anderson:] Donald Trump's advisers say that they are fairly optimistic that this decision will ultimately create greater stability rather than less here and in the region. There are those who say that this move of the embassy makes an already impossible mission more so and, in the process, it has undermined the credibility and effectiveness of the U.S. as a mediator. Has it?
[Liebermann:] Well, we've that echoed. The Palestinians have said that all along. We heard Turkish leaders say it today. The fact of the matter is that even if the Palestinians don't trust the U.S. as a mediator, the U.S. has truly been the only mediator, the main mediator over past decades. And even European leaders who are much more sympathetic to the Palestinians have said, look, you can't count the U.S. they've always been the leaders of the peace talks. The Palestinians would like to see somebody else take over. The Russians, the UN, the EU, somebody and yet nobody is willing to say that you can just count out the U.S. The U.S. still has to have a role according to what we're hearing from everyone who wants to play a part in this. There simply too important to both the Israelis and the Palestinians in the bigger picture to suddenly be cut out of whatever a peace process at this point looks like. If it were to start.
[Anderson:] It has been a historic day for Israelis, the opening of the U.S. embassy here in Jerusalem. Oren, for the time being, thank you. Just a short drive away from here and, well, you enter another world. While Israelis celebrate in Jerusalem, Palestinians mourning the biggest death toll in Gaza in years. At least 43 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces during mass protests near the border fence. More than 1,600 others are injured according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health. Israel calls the demonstrators violent rioters and says, several tried to plant an explosive device near the border fence. Let's bring in Ian Lee who is on the Gaza side of the border. What have you witnessed and heard today?
[Ian Lee Cnn Correspondent:] Quite a bit, Becky. I'll give you a rundown of kind of what we've seen and what we've heard. What's been taking place is behind me. Now it's a bit quieter. People have gone home. But earlier in the day tens of thousands of people were here. You would see thick, black smoke from tires that were being burnt to obscure the site of Israeli snipers. Well, here we have an ambulance, looks like it's actually heading down towards that fence. But also, we've been hearing heavy gunfire all up and down this border, in the north of me heavy machine gun fire earlier in the day. And that's because protesters have been trying to breach that border fence and Israel says that's just not going to happen. They say they're going to use nonlethal means. But if they get too close, then they will start shooting at the people who are trying to cross over. But the people say that they are going to cross over. Also, we've heard is heavy artillery in the southern part of Gaza. And then in the northern part the Israeli Air Force says it struck five Hamas targets today as well. So, you can see that there's just been this chaotic atmosphere even with the tear gas drones they've been flying over us dropping it into the camp as well as Palestinians lighting kites on fire, flying them into the air and trying to fly them over the border to light fields on fire. We've seen a number of wildfires on the other side. And so, you know, when you have this many people trying to do one single objective, cross that border, you are going to get a day like today where you have the highest death toll since the 2014 war in Gaza. But they tell us that they're going to keep trying. Tomorrow we're expecting the same thing Becky.
[Anderson:] For Palestinians the timing of what has been this embassy move here to Jerusalem shows, and I quote, administration officials great disrespect coming as it does, they say, just a day ahead of the day of al- Nakbah day, which in Arabic of course means, stay of disaster or catastrophe. And just ahead of what will be the start of Ramadan. You just set out what you believe the goals of those protesting where you are. What does happen tomorrow?
[Lee:] Well, we're expecting the same thing because the people keep telling us that they're not going to stop. And you see these high death tolls and yet still people try to cross that border. You know, this just shows, though, how angry Palestinians are at the current situation. Whether that be the political process, the peace process as well as the United States moving their embassy to Jerusalem. And as we heard from Oren just a while ago, he was talking about the difficulties of trying to kick start this peace process. Where you have the Palestinians saying essentially, they don't want to be a part of it. Well, let's just entertain the idea the Palestinian leadership does want to be a part of the peace process. When you have the death toll that you're seeing here in Gaza, and the anger that your seeing on the Palestinian street, even if the leaders wanted to negotiate, even if the U.S. comes out with the peace process, it's just going to be very difficult to appease the street after they believe that this is a huge slight against them. You know, yesterday we were out at this camp as well talking to people and they were chanting, no, no, Trump. So, that sums up kind of the current situation. And tomorrow we're expecting to see more of it Becky.
[Anderson:] Ian Lee there in Gaza. Well, my next guest has a message to critics of this embassy opening. He says if you don't think the U.S. embassy belongs in Jerusalem, get over it. Naftali Bennett is Israel's education minister and leader of the Jewish Home Party joining me now live. And you were at the inauguration event today. Just describe the atmosphere, if you will.
[Naftali Bennett, Israeli Education Minister:] It was a sense of an historic day, making history. We've been here for 70 years as a state and almost 4,000 years as a people and being recognized and having the world's greatest power inaugurate the embassy in Jerusalem means a lot. I'm confident that within months or a few years we're going to see many, many other countries follow suit. And Jerusalem will be recognized universally as our capital as it should have been long ago.
[Anderson:] An undivided capital or a capital that can be shared with the Palestinians?
[Bennett:] Well, Jerusalem has always been the Jewish capital, it's never the capital of any Palestinian state.
[Anderson:] The Palestinians let's just be absolutely clear. The Palestinians would like to see this as their capital, too. Is that a possibility?
[Bennett:] No, it isn't. Because it never was their capital. And just as, you know, the United States would not consider dividing up Washington DC or British, London. Even if someone desires it to be divided we're not going to divide Jerusalem again.
[Anderson:] So, you say Jerusalem is off the table, any future negotiations to your mind, Jerusalem is now off the table. I want to get some clarity on that.
[Bennett:] Absolutely. I mean, if you look it at the city right behind us, it's very peaceful and it's peaceful because it's undivided. If you, God forbid, divide it, we'll going to have this square mile will become the deadliest place on earth.
[Anderson:] But, sir, again, with the greatest respect, that means effectively any future negotiations are going nowhere, and the United States, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump, today suggesting that they have a plan. They will release this plan and they expect everybody to get engaged and onboard. So, are you saying today that you're not interested in what that peace plan is going for?
[Bennett:] No, I'm not. I'm saying we won't divide Jerusalem. I've not heard anyone suggest dividing Jerusalem. That would be a ridiculous move -
[Anderson:] Well, the U. S. says it's for final status negotiations.
[Bennett:] Mark my words, Jerusalem will not be divided again. We will not give up our holiest location on earth and our national center for thousands of years. Even if some Arabs feel they want it. We will always allow all Muslims, all Christians to exercise their faith. We've kept it open for all religions and we always will, not like the Arabs did that forbid Jews to go up and pray. So today it's a free city for all three religions and we will keep it that under Israel's sovereignty.
[Anderson:] So, Donald Trump and his son-in-law are aware of your position? Because it seems to me that they both kept it doesn't just seem to me they both kept Jerusalem on the table today.
[Bennett:] Have you ever heard them talk about dividing Jerusalem?
[Anderson:] They have both alluded to the fact this will be a city which will be part of final status negotiations. You know that, sir, with the greatest of respect.
[Bennett:] What I know is that my great-great-great grandparents and their thousands of years back always prayed to this city and were not about to divide it. And I don't think President Trump wants to do it nor Jared Kushner. Because they know that's the only way to create a massive war is to divide this great city.
[Anderson:] Earlier I spoke to the head of the Palestinian Authority's delegation to the United States, a man that you all know, Husam Zomlot. This is what he told me.
[Husam Zomlot, Head Of The Palestinian Authority's Delegation To The U. S:] This act by the President Trump's administration is an act that recognizes illegality and it's an act that really gives up on the prospects of peace and gives in to the fanatics and the extreme religious leaders.
[Anderson:] What happens tomorrow and going forward?
[Bennett:] Going forward I think the long-term prospects for peace have improved dramatically. Because
[Anderson:] How, sir? How, sir? Explain.
[Bennett:] Because any peace that was predicated on divided Jerusalem was never going to succeed. Have you ever asked yourself, why is it always failing? Because Jerusalem was going to be divided. And it's not going to work. It's just not going to work. By taking Jerusalem off the table effectively all sides face reality. And now we can talk peace. We want peace. We don't want to fight them. I've lost my best friends in battle. I don't want to do that. I've got four kids. I want them to be secure as do the Arabs. But only by mutual respect and not by carving out our capital will we achieve peace.
[Anderson:] You've just talked about your own kids, and I talked to a 17 12-year-old Palestinian while we were here who's just got into Georgetown University.
[Bennett:] Sure.
[Anderson:] And I know that you will absolutely applaud that success from her. One thing that struck me when we spoke was a term she used to me. She said, being stateless is just grueling. Do you recognize that as an emotion from a young Palestinian Jerusalemite?
[Bennett:] Well, you know, the Palestinians already have one state in Gaza, a full-blown state.
[Anderson:] She grew up here in Jerusalem.
[Bennett:] That's fine. That's fine. We pulled out of Gaza back to the '67 lines. Gave them the keys, Mahmoud Abbas. They have a state. They want a second state. The first state has become a terror state that's undisputed. They've been shooting rockets. We're not about to make that mistake again. We can make one mistake. We're not going to make it a second time.
[Anderson:] Naftali Bennett is the Israeli Education Minister and leader of the Jewish Home Party. Sir, thank you for joining us.
[Bennett:] Thank you very much.
[Anderson:] Live from Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem this is CONNECT THE WORLD. Coming up, today is not a day of celebration for all. For many it has become a day of anguish. More on that after this.

[Zain Asher, Correspondent, Cnn:] Good evening, everyone. I'm Zain Asher in New York and let me tell you, it has been an extremely busy day of breaking news, specifically in Washington. Donald Trump actually has just announced a deal that will temporarily reopen the U.S. government. This comes after a day of major flight delays across the East Coast, triggered by air-traffic controllers calling out sick. And before all of this, we had a major political earthquake. Roger Stone, a high-profile adviser to Donald Trump, was indicted as part of the Mueller investigation and protested his innocence amid a media frenzy, a media circus outside the courtroom in Florida. I want to begin though in Washington. I'm talking about the longest government shutdown in U.S. history is almost over. President Trump has actually announced a temporary deal to reopen the government and fund it for three weeks. The President began by thanking government workers and saying he'll make sure they get back paid as quickly as possible. But the shutdown about the border wall or barrier is not over. Sources tell CNN the agreement does not include money for a border wall. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle say they will negotiate on border security issues. If the issues aren't resolved, the President warned, the government could shut down again in three weeks' time. Take a listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] If we don't get a fair deal from Congress, the government will either shut down on February 15th again or I will use the powers afforded to me under the laws and the Constitution of the United States to address this emergency.
[Asher:] Donald Trump there making a very clear, clear threat. I want to bring in Stephen Collinson, he joins us live now from Washington. So just in terms of the announcement today, Stephen, what was it? A lot of people talk about how the President sort of caved to Democrat demands, what was it that specifically forced the President to surrender here?
[Stephen Collinson, White House Reporter, Cnn:] I think it was gradually building political pressure and those pictures today of air traffic over the East Coast stacking up because of a shortage of air-traffic controllers that really gave the impression that this thing was spiraling out of control. But Zain, this was really a complete climb down by the President. He closed down the government in December to get money to fund the wall that was at the center of his campaign in 2016 and is crucial to his political identity. He is opening the government, as you said, without getting any money for the wall, he could have had this deal inasmuch as it is a deal a month ago with Democrats. That's what they were offering. So it really is abject cave by the President and by a President who styled himself as the man to come to Washington and fix it because he was the greatest deal maker of all time.
[Asher:] So literally, Stephen, in three weeks from now, we could actually end up exactly where we started. The President talked about declaring a national emergency. Just walk us through what the legal ramifications of that are because it is complex.
[Collinson:] Right. Well, one of the reasons why the White House has not taken that step so far is because it is so legally controversial. In the United States governmental system, it's the Congress that's in charge of appropriating money for various projects. The President can't just decide, okay, I want to have move some money from here to here to here to here. He has to go through Congress. So it's almost certain that as soon as a national declaration was made, it would be challenged in the courts, there would likely be a stay on that action, so the President wouldn't, in fact, be able to go ahead and construct the wall. Having said that, it seems very unlikely that having been humiliated in this first government shutdown showdown with Nancy Pelosi, the President would go down that route again presuming he can't get any money from his wall from the Democrats in the next three weeks. so although a declaration of national emergency might not actually get the wall made, it could end up being the best face-saving exit from the President because he could turn around and say, "Look, I've been thwarted again by courts, by judges who were appointed by President Obama." That's a politically sustainable situation with his base and is probably better for him than going right down into this shutdown debacle, which he probably would lose yet again.
[Asher:] Despite the fact that 800,000 people were furloughed, struggling to pay their bills, feed their families, it does unfortunately come down between both sides to saving face. In fact, President Trump over the next three weeks has talked about the fact that he is confident that Democrats will negotiate in good faith. Moments ago, the Democratic Leader in the Senate said the President must do the same. Let's listen to Chuck Schumer had to say.
[Unidentified Female:] Democratic Leader?
[Chuck Schumer, U.s. Senate Democratic Leader:] Madam President, the longest shutdown in American history will finally end today. The President has agreed to our request to open the government and then debate border security, which is great news for 800,000 Federal workers and millions of Americans who depend on government services. I want to thank President Trump and Leader McConnell. As just outlined, we have agreed to pass a clean three-week continuing resolution to reopen the government.
[Asher:] Now, Stephen, you and I were just talking about the fact that it is about saving face. Obviously, it is partly about optics here. Who wins the PR battle between President Trump and the Democrats? Who do you think comes out on top here?
[Collinson:] I think it's very clear that the Democrats won this PR battle, and it's a very important battle because it's the first one between the new Democratic House and the President that has a good chance of setting the tone for the interaction between the President and the White House and Congress over the next two years. The Democrats now have even less incentive to agree to a final deal that gives the President money for his wall. Polls during the shutdown show that the wall remains unpopular among Americans. They don't believe the government should be shut down over trying to get funding for a wall. And now, they have had this affirming victory over the President that has forced him to climb down. So the chances of the Democrats as the President hopes are going to do a deal that gives him money for the wall, you know, it's much less. Now, there's possible there could be some kind of congressional fudge whereby the Democrats say they are funding border security and allow billions of dollars for that, but are not allowing funding for the wall, and the President could present perhaps money put aside to restore existing fencing or existing border barriers on the border, and he could perhaps present that to his supporters as saying, "Look, I got the wall," but in reality, it seems very, very clear that the idea that President Trump is going to follow through on his promise to build a wall on the southern border is even further away today than it has been over this last 35 days.
[Ashesr:] Yes, I mean, that's highly unlikely that he is going to get his wish. But what do you actually make of the content of that press conference in terms of what the President actually said? Obviously, at the top, he made a few comments at praising Federal workers, for what they've been through over the last month or so, and then he talked about why the border wall is needed. I mean, I am just curious because he didn't really explain in any sort of detail at all why he caved to the Democrats' demands.
[Collinson:] It was very bizarre in many ways. The President came into that press conference trying to give the impression that he was the victor of this. That's his prerogative. That's what politicians do. But it's a very hard sell. It was interesting that members of his Cabinet were there and applauded the President as he walked down and indeed when he finished that sort of rather difficult to follow speech, at times he sort of slipped into his campaign rhetoric and his, you know, well-known stories about illegal, undocumented migration and crime and he made very questionable assertions about how much crime was coming from people who came over the border. So it was very confusing and I think it was a symptom of a President who was exposed by this shutdown. He was unable to get his wish, and he was unable to change the politics of this to convince the American people that there does need to be a wall and that is probably the most worrying thing from the President's point of view at the end of all this.
[Asher:] We'll see what happens in three weeks' time when that continuing resolution ends. Stephen Collinson live for us there, thank you so much. Good to see you. Okay, shackled at the waist and at the ankles, Donald Trump's longtime ally roger stone appeared in Federal Court a few hours ago. He's been indicted on charges brought by Robert Mueller, the special counsel alleging stone sought stolen e-mails from WikiLeaks in order to damage Mr. Trump's opponents in the 2016 election. Mueller says Stone did this in coordination with senior Trump campaign officials. By dint of good instincts and by following key clues, CNN was actually waiting outside Roger Stone's Florida home when the FBI came to arrest him. They caught it all on camera. Stone says he will be exonerated. Take a listen.
[Roger Stone, Longtime Adviser To Donald Trump:] I will plead not guilty to these charges. I will defeat them in court. I believe this is a politically motivated investigation.
[Stone:] But I have made it clear I will not testify against the President.
[Asher:] Just watching that live earlier, I mean, that was what you call a media circus. Nick Valencia was actually at that media circus. He's in Florida and he joins us live now. So just walk us through the specific charges of sort of lying and witness tampering brought against Roger Stone. Just give us more detail.
[Nick Valencia, Correspondent, Cnn:] So he's facing an obstruction of justice charge, four false statements to Congress, lying to a special committee, as well as witness tampering and it was all laid out in a 24-page indictment that was released earlier today, Zain. And it was really a sight to see Roger Stone in that courtroom, a man who's usually dressed, you know, head to toe in a tailored suit was wearing a dark blue polo. You noted, he was shackled around the waist and ankles, his hands cuffed, resting in front of him, and he looked tired. He was woken up this morning by the FBI as they knocked on his door, going to his residence to take him into custody. And you saw him in incredibly good spirits as he left the court, throwing a victory sign, made famous by Richard Nixon after he was impeached and took a helicopter ride away from the White House. Very serendipitously, we were able to catch up with Roger Stone after he made that statement to the press. I talked to him one-on-one as he was leaving surrounded by this crush of reporters. I asked him about the accusations listed in the indictment, the charges, I should say, listed in the indictment, the charges he's facing, and what it was like when the FBI showed up at his house this morning.
[Valencia:] Mr. Stone, any comment for CNN?
[Stone:] Nice to see you guys at my house this morning.
[Valencia:] What do you say about the charges, Mr. Stone?
[Stone:] They are false and I will be completely vindicated.
[Valencia:] What was it like when the FBI showed up?
[Stone:] Not surprising.
[Valencia:] The indictment says that you were coordinating with senior Trump officials, campaign officials. Who were the officials?
[Stone:] False.
[Valencia:] No indication of who those officials were, Mr. Stone?
[Stone:] They don't exist.
[Valencia:] Anything that you'd like to say to clear the record?
[Stone:] I think I've been pretty clear on this. Tune into some of the shows tonight. You'll see. I support the President. I've made my statement. Nothing further.
[Valencia:] So you heard him there, Zain, defiant as ever, Roger Stone in his own words Zain.
[Asher:] Yes, and I think it's really interesting because he said it was not surprising the FBI showed up at his house. Obviously, he saw this day coming. Just the fact that he actually decided to talk to the media and have a press conference after his indictment was announced, I mean, what was his goal there? I mean, what does it also say about Roger Stone as a person?
[Valencia:] Well, his counsel came out and, you know, they said initially starting before he gave a statement that Roger Stone has always spoken for himself and he was going to do that today. I asked him in that interview that you just heard if he wanted to clear the record, and he said he's been very clear and implied he was going to be on the television tonight, on television talk shows tonight, talking about what he went through today. He's been released on a $250,000.00 signature bond, which means that he didn't have to put any money forward. He has some conditions to his release, restricted travel, only allowed to go to the Eastern District of New York, Eastern District of Washington, D.C., and Virginia, and here in South Florida. He has also been asked to hand over his passport. He said he doesn't have a valid passport, so he's not allowed to apply for a new one. And very interesting to note here, very quickly, Zain, he is going to have to submit to standard substance abuse testing as agreed to at pretrial. He is also under the conditions of his release going to be allowed to see a doctor. But really, the most remarkable thing as you noted is him coming out after he made his first court appearance here in Fort Lauderdale. Chatty as ever, agreeing to an interview with us. You heard him there. I was caught off guard that he was going to answer any of our questions but he did, and he is presumably going to talk some more tonight. Zain.
[Asher:] And actually, Nick, at the beginning, he said, listen, the only thing that's worse than being talked about is not being talked about. So that gives you an insight into his thinking. Nick Valencia live for us there, thank you so much, appreciate that. All right, still to come here on "Quest Means Business." pushed past the breaking point. Planes in the United States were unable to land, can you believe it, after air-traffic controllers failed to show up to work. A lot of sickouts today. The shutdown is now almost over. Travelers are hoping the delays are, too. We'll be at the airport with the latest, right after this quick break.

[Sciutto:] NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will give his annual State of the League address later today. He might talk about a little football game that's going on this weekend, I think. Sunday, is it? Sunday. Yes.
[Harlow:] We're getting him there. We're getting Jim excited for Super Bowl LIII. Andy Scholes is outside of Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta. Good morning. What can we expect today?
[Andy Scholes, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Hey, Jim and Poppy. Well, we can expect Roger Goodell to get a lot of questions about what happened in the NFC championship game. You know, for some reason, Goodell and the league, they decided not to address that big blown call in that Saints-Rams game, you know. And this was despite, you know, CNN, many other outlets reaching out to them, trying to get a comment about what the league thought about what happened. So that blown call, and the officiating, and just, you know, why the league has decided not to say anything at all, will surely be a topic during the press conference this afternoon. Roger Goodell going to take to the podium at 1:00 p.m. Eastern. In the meantime, the NFL cancelling Maroon 5's halftime show press conference that was scheduled for Thursday. The NFL said the artists will let their show do the talking as they prepare to take the stage this Sunday. Now, this year's act has been in the news because, you know, many artists had said they would not do the Super Bowl halftime show in support of Colin Kaepernick. Now, Tom Brady, he, of course, a big topic of conversation for this year's Super Bowl. He's 41 years old now. He'd be the oldest quarterback to win a Super Bowl if he can beat the Rams on Sunday. And Brady said, you know, as he's gotten older, he appreciates this opportunity to play in this game so much more. And he had some fun with the media yesterday, when he was asked if he thinks him and LeBron James are alike.
[Tom Brady, Quaterback, New England Patriots:] We're similar athletes, LeBron and I. Both great size and speed, jumping ability, shooting, not quite. No, he's a much better athlete than me. I wouldn't change anything. And you know, I just love being here. I love representing our team. I love trying to go out there and win a world championship.
[Scholes:] Now, on Sunday, Tony Romo's going to call his first Super Bowl alongside Jim Nantz on CBS. This season, you know, fans have been in awe of Romo's ability to predict plays before they happen on the field. And I caught up with Romo yesterday and asked him how he does it.
[Tony Romo, Former Quarterback, Dallas Cowboys:] You just try and look at plays, players, mannerisms, everything. And then you try and just hopefully make it fun for the viewers at home. And, you know, just passion comes out and you're trying to, you know, show that passion to people at home. And, you know, you study something long enough in your life, hopefully you get lucky once in a while.
[Scholes:] And with your ability to see what's happening on the field, many people think you've got a future in coaching. Will we ever see Coach Romo in the Super Bowl?
[Romo:] Not any time soon, but I'm sure at some point in the future, I'll want to do that part of it. But just not right now. Just like where life is, and I got young boys and I want to spend time with them.
[Scholes:] So there you go, guys. We could see Coach Romo in the future. And he did give us a prediction on the score of the Super Bowl. He said it's going to be 28-24, but he didn't tell us who was going to win. So we'll wait and see
[Sciutto:] Oh, we know
[Scholes:] if that happens.
[Sciutto:] we know who he thinks is going to win. Come on.
[Harlow:] Andy, thank you. My do you get to go to the big game, by the way?
[Scholes:] Looks like it, Poppy. Fingers crossed that, you know, I'll have that credential. But, you know. Looks like it's going to happen.
[Harlow:] Lucky man. All right. We'll see you tomorrow, Andy.
[Scholes:] All right.
[Harlow:] Thank you all for being with us. We will see you here tomorrow morning.

[Carl Azuz, Cnn 10 Anchor:] I`m Carl Azuz for CNN 10. An American businessman, lawyer and campaign worker named Paul Manafort has been formally charged with a number of crimes. It`s significant because Manafort also temporarily worked as campaign chairman for U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump. Here`s what this is all about. Yesterday, a special counsel for the U.S. Justice Department announced that Manafort and a business partner of his named Rick Gates have been charged with conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder or hide money, making false statements and failing to report that they had foreign bank accounts. Starting in 2006, Manafort had worked on a number of projects in Eastern Europe, which included helping former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. He was ousted in 2014. But a report came out last year that Manafort had secretly been paid millions of dollars by Yanukovych`s political party, which was friendly to Russia. Manafort denied receiving secret payments. But when the report came out, he and Gates were working on the Trump election campaign. Manafort was its top official for a couple of months and he resigned days after the accusation was made. Gates also eventually left the campaign. Both of them pleaded not guilty to the charges announced yesterday. Those charges are not related to the Trump campaign and the White House says all this has nothing to do with the president. But separately, another announcement was made yesterday involving a man named George Papadopoulos. He also worked on the Trump campaign as a foreign policy adviser. And according to "The Hill", an American political publication, U.S. investigators say Papadopoulos repeatedly tried to set up a meeting between Donald Trump or members of his campaign and members of Russian President Vladimir Putin`s office. The meetings did not take place, but investigators said yesterday that Papadopoulos had pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with officials connected to Russia`s government. The White House says Papadopoulos had a limited volunteer role and that his lying had nothing to do with the campaign. Meantime, the special investigation continues into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Russia has denied meddling and President Trump says his campaign did not collude with Russia.
[Azuz:] Bit of a morbid, random fact for you on Halloween. Madame Tussauds was a real person. Here name was Marie Tussaud. She was a French woman who learned wax modeling and inherited a wax museum from another artist. But during the French revolution, Tussaud was in prison and forced to make masks of famous people who`d been executed. She survived and decades later, she settled in London, U.K., continuing her work on wax models and living to old age. Now, that`s how we wax random! So, like speaking of Halloween, the National Retail Federation estimates that Americans will have spent $9.1 billion on this year`s holiday, works out to more than $86 per person. That would mean a new record for spending on costumes candy, decorations and cards and it takes into account the fact that roughly 45 percent of Americans don`t participate in Halloween events. So, those who do are spending more on average than they did last year, which set the previous record. The federation`s annual survey indicates that among those who planned to take part, 48 percent of adults, also a record figure, we`ll put on a custom. What people spend is influenced by the economy and for those who likes to scary movies, what they watch maybe influence by science.
[Ramy Zabarah, Cnn Tech, Multiplatform Editor:] What scares you? It could be spiders, clowns, roller coasters. For me, it`s flying in airplanes. But even though our triggers may be different, the effects are mostly the same. So, why is it when October rolls around, people are excited, foaming at the mouth, practically begging to be scared out of their minds? When something really scares you, certain neurochemicals get released in your brain. Some of those like dopamine or endorphins also get released when you`re happy or excited.
[Unidentified Male:] We`re going to have some laughs.
[Zabarah:] And in a strange way, researchers say fear can also be a form of stress relief. If you`re feeling down, succumbing to the horror of the gruesome hunted house can activate your body`s fight or flight response, making you forget about all the terrors of your real life, or just a movie.
[Frank Pallotta, Cnn Media And Entertainment Reporter:] Hey, do you guys say something about movies? So, movie theaters have been struggling lately to get people to actually go to the movies. But one genre that has had a really big year is horror. Why? Because a film in a theater with a screaming audience is a much different experience than watching it home alone.
[Zabarah:] Humans are social creatures, and we like to do things together.
[Pallotta:] No, we don`t.
[Zabarah:] When you see something horrifying with other people, that shared experience makes you feel closer to them. In fact, psychologists have observed the phenomenon called emotional contagion. That means your reactions can be intensified by the reactions of others. So, if you`re watching a scary movie and you hear your friends screaming next to you, your own fears might be amplified.
[Pallotta:] Nope, I`m done. Nope, nope.
[Azuz:] Up next, a rescue at sea. In early May, two amateur sailors and their dogs left their home in Honolulu, Hawaii. They brought along extra food and provisions in their 50-foot boat, just in case the trip took longer than the two and a half weeks they planned. Almost half a year later, they were adrift and almost without hope when they were picked by the U.S. Navy.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] As a warship approaches dry land, two civilians onboard embraced. These American women and their two dogs, euphoric and grateful after the U.S. Navy rescued them from a month`s long odyssey across the Pacific Ocean.
[Jennifer Appel, Rescued At Sea:] Had they not been able to locate us, we would have been dead within 24 hours.
[Watson:] Last spring, Jennifer Appel and Tasha Fuiava first set out from Hawaii with their dogs aboard a 50-foot sailboat the Sea Nymph.
[Appel:] We left on May 3rd, thinking that we`re going to have a nice swift 18-day journey down to Tahiti.
[Watson:] But soon after departure, they say storms badly damaged the mast and the engine, as well as their radio and satellite communications.
[Appel:] They are dependent on the antenna. And when the antenna went out, everything went out.
[Watson:] Do you know anything about this stuff?
[Tasha Fuiava, Rescued At Sea:] Honestly, I started this trip without knowing anything about sailing.
[Watson:] The Sea Nymph ended up drifting very far off course. Several times, the women said passing ships ignored their calls for help, as did U.S. authorities stationed on Wake Island. That missed opportunity led to despair.
[Appel:] I cried all afternoon.
[Watson:] That day?
[Appel:] Yes. And the dogs licked our faces and give us hope.
[Watson:] This is Valentine and this is Zeus. They`re both rescues and they look pretty good considering they just spent five months adrift at sea. [voice-over]: On October 25th, the U.S. Navy Ship Ashland got a distress call relayed from a passing Taiwanese fishing boat, urging them to rescue the Sea Nymph. This was the joyous scene when Navy sailors first approached the stricken sailboat. Instead of sailing to Tahiti, the Sea Nymph had drifted to this location thousands of miles from Hawaii. Thanks to a water desalination unit, months of stored food and a bible, the passenger survived an ordeal that`s left career naval officers in awe.
[Cmdr. Patrick German, U.s. Navy:] They are amazing tough women who endured a lot and my hats off to them. No kidding.
[Watson:] Though out of danger, the women`s odyssey is far from over. [on camera]: Do you have a home to go back to Hawaii?
[Appel:] No. The boat was our home and everything that we own is on there.
[Watson:] The travelers had to abandon the Sea Nymph in the Pacific as they embark on the next leg of their incredible journey. Ivan Watson, CNN, White Beach Naval Beach, Okinawa.
[Azuz:] Under the canopy of things you don`t see everyday it`s amazing how calm these people are crossing the street, considering they`re right next to a bunch of stampeding T-Rexes. This recently took place in downtown Nashville, Tennessee. Organizers say it started out as a joke, but two years in, they hope it will become an annual tradition. This time around, it involved 25 runners and Tyrannosaurus Rex costumes who ran around in sweet Tyrannosaurus Rex costumes. It might have been a stampediment to traffic, but there were no T-Rex reported. Maybe next year, they`ll have bicycles to bipedal, donning a Tyrannosaurus costume, even if it leaves some of them dinosaur, would make for a great pair of podcast and help everyone work up a carnivorous appetite. I`m Carl Azuz for CNN 10 and we`ll roar-turn tomorrow. END

[Baldwin:] She is a porn star who accepted hush money, and now Stormy Daniels is offering big bucks for people to speak out specifically about this man. This is a sketch that they just released today during Daniels' appearance on "The View." She says it shows the person who threatened her back in 2011 when she was first planning to go public about her alleged affair with Donald Trump. Her attorney says they're now offering up a $100,000 reward for information on the suspect. Daniels said the man approached her in a Las Vegas parking lot while she was with her newborn.
[Stormy Daniels, Adult Film Actress:] He had at his hands in his pocket. And he looked at my daughter. And I just remember him saying, like: "Oh, it's a beautiful little girl. It would be a shame if something happened to her mom. Forget about this story. Leave Mr. Trump alone." And it was like it didn't even register to me at first, and then he turned and walked away. And all like I said, his face is burned in my memory. I would've gone to the police and would have gone, OK, a man approached me, this what he said to me. He told me, leave Mr. Trump alone. And their very next question, the detective would have asked me, why would somebody tell you to leave Mr. Trump alone? And I would have had to answer that question, which was not public at the time, and I would have to tell an entire police department and police reports are public record I know that for a fact I had sex with Donald Trump.
[Baldwin:] Now, Stormy Daniels spent a lot of time with the forensic artist Lois Gibson in to develop the composite for this sketch. "The Guinness Book of World Records" lists Gibson as the world's most successful at her job, with her sketches helping to identify more than 700 criminals. Joining me now, forensic artist Diana Trepkov, author of "Faceless, Voiceless: From Search to Closure, a Forensic Artist's Inspirational Approach to the Missing and Unidentified." Diana, welcome back. You Lois. I'm going to ask you about Lois, who did the sketch, in a second. But, guys, let's flash the sketch back up, because Stormy Daniels' attorney, Michael Avenatti, was saying this high level of detail shows it's more a real person his words more proof that Stormy Daniels is not fabricating this whole story. What do you make of the sketch? And what do you think about what he said?
[Diana Trepkov, Forensic Artist:] I think the sketch is great. It looks very real He's got high cheekbones, nice eyes. He's fit. You can tell he's fit. He's got that smirk on his face. It's a very high-quality drawing from a very forensic artist. And I agree it looks real.
[Baldwin:] Why is Lois so good at her job? Why was she perfect for this task?
[Trepkov:] She has the experience. She's done many, many composites, sketches of criminals and stuff. And she had that experience. She's good at what she does. She has a good personality. And it's important to get the witness calm. You look into their eyes and they stay calm for the drawing and you trust each other and then you talk about the different triggers of the event, a threat. And, yes, it's a great drawing. Therefore, I have a lot of faith in what Lois did.
[Baldwin:] Is it hard describe the process for me a little bit more between Lois and Stormy Daniels.
[Trepkov:] Sure.
[Baldwin:] Because we're also keeping in mind this is seven years after this alleged incident. Walk us through what Lois had to do to jog her memory.
[Trepkov:] OK. Again, I can say what I would do to jog someone's memory from seven years.
[Baldwin:] Sure.
[Trepkov:] It's triggers, like 911 or Princess Diana, anything traumatic. That's traumatic. Like Stormy said, it burns in your mind, the image. So, things stay in your mind. And then you would talk about the triggers, like, what was the weather like, what were you wearing? Certain things will bring you back. And then you can get the image that's in that person's head. Like11, where you were, I could probably bring you back there. And then it's all about the eyes are the mirror of the soul. You have to really trust the person you're working with. So, I would, like, look into the witness' eyes. And then, when I would feel we had that confidence, that trust

[Ward:] Welcome back. I'm Clarissa Ward, in London. Ariana Grande just took to the stage at the "One Love Concert" in Manchester, England. It is an all-star concert for the victims of a suicide bombing in that city less than two weeks ago, 22 people were killed. The performers refused to be silenced by the latest act of terror here in the U.K. Despite yesterday's attack in London, the show goes on right now with heightened security though, of course. And now we're hoping to have joining us CNN International Correspondent Phil Block who is there at the concert. Phil, the crowds are just staggering. Tell me what is the mood of the crowd?
[Black:] Staggering, they were loud. I thought they were loud and then Ariana Grande came on stage. We're going to pan the camera and show you a little of what we could see at the moment. Ariana Grande is on stage right now. She just finished a huge rendition with the Black Eyed Peas. And if there in no miss-hit "Where is the Love?" If there was a roof it would have came off. It was really so extraordinary to see. This crowd is enjoying this so much. The atmosphere, it is warm, it is loud, they are singing, they are dancing as one. As I said, it is just an absolutely extraordinary event to witness, really. And from the atmosphere, the mood here, you could not really think that this is a community, a city that was torn apart by terrorism just two weeks ago. And remember, a good part of this crowd were actually at Ariana Grande's concert in the Manchester Arena two weeks ago just before that terror attack. Many of them ran for fears as they heard the explosion that took place outside. Today, this is a gesture that says we're not going to be we're not going to take any of that too seriously. We're not going to worry about that. These people, some 50,000 of them, have been waiting outside for hours. They've come here under very strict security. They've all been searched individually. They haven't allowed this to ruin their mood in any way, shape, or form. And they are having a truly phenomenal time. Ariana Grande hasn't done much talking. It's all been about the singing. She hasn't explained why she thought it was important to come back. She left that to her manager who came on the stage and said that Ariana had called him after the terror attack and said that if we don't do anything, I don't think I could live with myself. And so, this is the result. This extraordinary event pulled together at very short notice. One that the organizers say was initially all about the attack in Manchester, but now it means so much more after last night's attack in London as well. Clarissa, back to you.
[Ward:] And, Phil, I mean an extraordinary event and also an extraordinary responsibility, though, for security services. Give us a sense of the, you know, the protocol or procedures that they're taking to make sure that this all goes off safely.
[Black:] Indeed. That is one that the Manchester police seem to have embraced wholeheartedly. They are in full support. There's the ones that have provided all the security in the streets surrounding this area while also maintaining a very heightened level of security and visibility across Manchester as a whole. Across this city, so many things appear to have gone back to normal. But for the security presence, the police presence, you still see it everywhere. Today, they have help make this happen. They acknowledged that it was something of a controversial decision to do this so soon, but not all the victims of the attack supported the idea. For some it was just too soon to come together in this way. But the majority of the victims are said to have supported it. And so, the decision was made to proceed. The crowd and the community has gotten behind it entirely. And so, that's why you've seen this huge gathering of people come together and what can only really be described as a truly joyous event so soon after such a terrible period of suffering and trauma for the people of this city, Clarissa?
[Ward:] Phil Black, just awesome to see those crowds in Manchester. Thank you so much. Well, still to come, Donald Trump sparking a backlash among U.K. leaders after criticizing London's mayor in the aftermath of the terror attacks. What he said and how they're responding, next.

[Baldwin:] Got some breaking news for you from Capitol Hill. Republican aides say Republican lawmakers have just added a repeal of the Obamacare individual mandate now to this whole new senate tax bill. So why did this happen? Phil Mattingly, let's go to you, congressional correspondent there on Capitol Hill, who saw how Obamacare went or didn't this year. Why do this?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, poorly would probably be the best way to describe it or the nicest way to describe it. Revenue. That's the primary issue, Brooke. No question about it, Republicans are opposed to the individual mandate. Opposed to Obamacare altogether. But Republican leaders despite President Trump calling for this, despite several rank and file members of the U.S. Senate calling for this, have been very wary of including this in the tax proposal for one primary reason, what happened to health care reform. They don't want a repeat of that. They don't want to co- mingle two things. Particularly because in their view right now the tax reform process, it's already moving through the house. It's moving through the senate committees right now. Has actually been going very well. There was only one way this was going to be added to the bill, that's if they needed money. We've gone through this a couple of times, Brooke, but I'll do it quickly again. Why this actually adds money. According to the CBO this will be about $338 billion in deficit savings over a decade. Why is that? Well, fewer people will enroll in Obamacare exchanges and therefore the government will save money on subsidies. Also, fewer people will enroll in Medicaid. So, the government would save money there, $338 billion total. Why is that important? Two primary reasons, one they believe in order to kind of shore up the support from their own Republican members. Doing things related to middle class tax cuts, making sure taxes don't rise toward the end of a 10-year cycle or they could make corporate cuts more permanent, things like that. They need money for it. Even more importantly, the budget rules that will allow them to pass this on a simple majority vote requires them to have more money. This was not something they wanted to do. I can't stress that enough. This is something that Republican leaders have been very wary of. But it's something that they have decided and made the calculation they have to do to move this bill forward, Brooke. Obviously, the president supports it. Rank and files up until this point supports it. The big question now is, can they keep from happening to tax what happened to health care now that they're including health care into this? Because the bottom line number you're going to hear about repeatedly in the days and weeks potentially months ahead, CBO also calculates that because of the repeal of the individual mandate, 13 million fewer people will have health insurance. That's what they're worried about. That's the headline they don't want. But that's what they're going to have to deal with now they've decided to make this play Brooke.
[Baldwin:] I get it. Revenue. We are already hearing those Senator Susan Collins. She's already concerned. Might Moore, you know chime in? That's the concern for these rank and file so far. Phil Mattingly, thank you so much for the update on all things tax reform. Let's get to some encouraging news, though, from Capitol Hill here from speaker, Paul Ryan, moments ago announcing That the House will now require training to prevent sexual harassment and discrimination. This just happened as two female lawmakers have accused two sitting members of Congress, both men, of harassment.
[Rep. Jackie Speier , California:] In fact, there are two members of Congress, Republican and Democrat, right now who serve. Who have been subject to review or not have been subject to review, but have engaged in sexual harassment. These harasser propositions such as, are you going to be a good girl? To perpetrators exposing their genitals. To victims having their private parts grabbed on the House floor. All they ask in return as staff members is to be able to work in a hostile-free work environment. They want the system fixed and the perpetrators held accountable.
[Rep. Barbara Comstock , Virginia:] Somebody who I trust told me the situation. This member asked a staffer to bring them over some materials to their residence and the young staffer is a young woman went there and was greeted with a member in a towel. It was a male. Who then invited her in. At that point, he decided to expose himself. She left and then she quit her job. She left. She found another job. But that kind of situation, what do you you know, what are we doing here for women right now who are dealing with somebody like that?
[Baldwin:] Let me bring in several incredible fellow CNN ladies who have been working hard on reporting on this important issue from Capitol Hill. CNN national politics reporter MJ Lee. You were in that hearing. Juana Summers is a senior writer for CNN politics. CNN correspondent. Sarah Ganim. And we should also give a shout out to Sunlen Serfaty, who is not here. But the four of you who put this incredible piece together for CNN.com. Where you interview 50 people, you know, current, former, Hill, staffers, aides, et cetera, on their stories and what hasn't been done. But, MJ, first to you. Just hearing from Congresswoman Speier about these two current members of Congress accused of sexual harassment. What more do we know about that?
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] Yes, Brooke, this was a really stunning hearing. I think, first of all, the fact that this hearing even happened is pretty significant. It's sort of this recognition on Capitol Hill right now that this is a serious problem in both the House and the Senate. And members are interested in having a discussion about how these antiquated policies can be changed. And then the stories that Congresswoman Speier and Comstock told of various stories they've heard about sexual harassment on the Hill. They were pretty jaw-dropping. And if I could I know you played sound of Congresswoman Speier and her telling of the story, but I think it's worth repeating that some of the stories that she's heard about have involved harassers exposing their genitals and also victims having their private parts grabbed on the House floor.
[Baldwin:] Unbelievable.
[Lee:] I want to take a moment to let that sink in. I mean, I'm just a couple of steps away from the House floor right now. We are talking about some of the most grotesque and horrible behavior reportedly taking part on the House floor, in this room where members of congress, elected officials, do their business and take their votes. So, really stunning about these stories are now starting to come out. I will note, though, these members are so far not named. A lot of folks who spoke to us for this story, they're very hesitant to go there. They don't want to face the potential repercussions of naming these members by name. And that goes for female lawmakers as well, the ones who have shared their stories say they don't feel like they can go forward and name some of these male congressmen who are their colleagues.
[Baldwin:] The stories coming out. Juana, to you. I mean, the piece in the article where you all talk about some of the stories just even from these member-only elevators. Right, if you're a member of Congress you can hop in the elevator and is part of these unwritten rules you ladies write about about if you are a lady by yourself, don't get in one. Tell me why?
[Juana Summers, Cnn Politics Senior Writer:] Absolutely, we heard from a number of women who said that when those elevator doors close and it's them alone with a male member of Congress, a male superior on the Hill. There has been indecent behavior, groping, inappropriate hand gestures, inappropriate language. We spoke to one woman who said years later, she's been off the Hills for years, she still doesn't like to get in elevators with men. Think it's important to point out that as reporters when we're gathering, talking to lawmakers, these are things that we're seeing firsthand, too. And this is something that came up to us time and time again is that a number of these women say they try to steer clear of these elevators. But then again, that leads to a really important question, how does that impact the access these women have? If they're aides who are looking to climb on Capitol Hill if they can't be alone with these men who hold position office power? How can they climb and become more successful on the Hill and rising to you these jobs like being chiefs of staff and being lawmakers themselves one day? It's something I certainly found very troubling during the course of our reporting Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Explain this to me. I wish I had so much more time. I've got two more minutes. Sara Ganim, here's this to you. You think about sexual harassment in Hollywood and you think of Harvey Weinstein, and the Kevin Spacey and the Louis C.K. and the consequences they are already facing. Why is it not the same in politics?
[Sara Ganim, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, we really did see that. But we heard time and time again from people that they did not believe that there would be thought there would be some watershed moment that was imminent on the Hill as we've seen in the entertainment industry and in the media industry. A lot of this is about the power dynamic of Capitol Hill. You have very young staffers working directly for very powerful men. That was something that I heard repeatedly. That it's a very insular place. So, if you move on or complain and then you become labeled a complainer, you're less likely to get another job working for someone else on Capitol Hill, or even in politics in Washington. You know, one of the things that we heard, MJ and I and many of us, that there is sort of like an informal list of people to stay away from. And this is not something we just heard from women, it's something we heard from men, too, on the Hill. They know who the so- called creeps are and not only do the women stay away from them but also the men try to keep women protected from them. I mean, think about that for a second. The fact that everybody sort of knows who these people are, that the same names kept coming up over and over and over again. Yet you really don't see people stepping forward saying that they want to do something about this publicly Brooke.
[Baldwin:] This hallowed ground, and it makes you wonder how many years this all goes back, the unwritten rules, the creep list, and finally men and women strong enough to speak out. Ladies, I thank you so much for your reporting. Please check it out on CNN.com and thank you all so much for being with me. We're going to continue this discussion tomorrow, I can promise you that. In the meantime, I'm going to send it to Washington. I'm Brooke Baldwin. "THE LEAD" starts now.

[Watt:] Tensions are rising on the border between Israel and Lebanon. Where Israeli forces have uncovered tunnels, they say, were dug by Hezbollah. And in his most forceful rhetoric, yet, Israel's Prime Minister is calling this an act of war. CNN's Ben Wedeman reports from the Lebanese side of the border.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] The line that separates Lebanon from Israel is tense at the best of times. Ever more so, now, Israel is searching for tunnels it claims Hezbollah has dug into Israeli territory. A soldier keeps a close eye through his scope on the CNN crew on the other side of the fence known as the Blue Line. Since the Israeli operation, dubbed Northern Shield began more than two weeks ago, they've uncovered at least four tunnels. Hezbollah closely aligned with Iran has no comment. Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, declared the tunnels amount to an act of war. The rhetoric on both sides is taken on a menacing tone. Last month, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, warned his fighters would respond if Israel strikes. "Any aggression toward Lebanon," he said. "Any raid on Lebanon, any shelling of Lebanon will definitely, definitely, definitely, be answer." Lebanon and Israel have been officially in a state of war since 1948. In the summer of 2006, Israel and Hezbollah fought for more than a month, but since then, the point is prevailed. The possibility of small incidents, however, sparking a broader conflict always looms large. We are right on the border between Israel and Lebanon. And just to give you an idea how close everyone is to one another, this is a Lebanese Army position. Over there under the camouflage are Israeli troops. And right there are U.N. peacekeepers. Hezbollah's forces are nowhere to be seen. Many of them simply local residents who joined the group. On this hilltop, we met two young men who said they had come to enjoy the view. This man who identified himself simply as Abu Wahab, told me, "God gives strength to the army and the resistance, we are with them." The U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon or UNIFIL is tasked with implementing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which brought an end to the 2006 hostilities, but also stipulated that armed groups, meaning Hezbollah should disarm. But in Lebanon's complicated political landscape, Hezbollah has managed to keep and build up its arsenal and send its fighters to bolster the Syrian army in its war against the rebels. Israel, worry Hezbollah is growing ever stronger almost daily sends its warplanes into Lebanese airspace. The Lebanese government has responded to the tunnel report, saying the Lebanese army has been instructed to take all necessary measures to implement Resolution 1701, and maintain calm on the border. UNIFIL spokesman, Andrea Tenenti, stresses the importance of continued calm despite violations by both sides.
[Andrea Tenenti, Spokesman, United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon:] Yes, there been violations from both sides of 1701. What's important to emphasize, that's there have been a violation but it will bring the stability in the South of Lebanon.
[Wedeman:] Stability, yes. But one wrong step and it could blow. Ben Wedeman, CNN, South Lebanon.
[Watt:] Korean air has been ordered to pay nearly $18,000 thousand to the flight attendant excoriated in the infamous nut rage incident. This happened back in 2014, Heather Cho, then the vice president of Korean Air and the daughter of the company's CEO demanded the attendant be removed because he served her macadamia nuts in a bag instead of a porcelain bowl. The court also ruled the attendant is entitled to another $27,000 for Cho's assaults and insults, though it's unclear if he's received that amount. And after nine after months apart and an international outcry, a Yemeni mother will see her son in California before he dies. She landed in San Francisco a short time ago after winning a small victory against Trump's U.S. travel ban.

[Banfield:] Playing dress-up can be a lot of fun if you`re a kid, but normally, if you see a grown-up wearing a mask and heading for a cash register, it`s a good bet something`s about to go down. So when this fellow walked into a California Starbucks wearing a Transformers mask, waving around a gun and a knife and a plastic bag and then started to demand money, I guess it`s no surprise that a good Samaritan decided to step in and save the day. And he did. Wasn`t easy. Now, that good Samaritan got knifed in the neck, needed six staples to close that wound. But robbery averted. Bad guy arrested. Wouldn`t you know it that that good Samaritan is the one who actually may end up being sued because the guy in the mask got hurt. I`m going to wait for you to sit down, maybe even get a bourbon for this one. I want to take you to the tape so you can see exactly how everything played out and you can be Judge Judy. On the right-hand side of your screen, you can see the good Samaritan, arrows pointing to him. He`s got his drink. And on the left, you can see the man walks into the Starbucks, makes his way to the counter, pulls the gun out of the yellow bag, begins yelling at the barista, then to up the ante, pulls out a knife, points that at the barista. Cut back to the front of the store, you can actually see a worker who`s on her phone calling the police. And our good Samaritan`s now heading for the counter armed with a chair. And he slams that chair over the back of the perp, knocking the mask off his face, but the attempted robber doesn`t flee. He goes after the good Samaritan, fighting back with his knife. The battle intensifies. Customer grabs him in what looks like a chokehold. They knock over a store display and some tables. It is really intense. Perp is stabbing wildly with that knife, is taken down to the ground. He`s being punched over and over. Oh, look at this. There`s the knife and it is coming straight for the good Samaritan`s neck. The struggle for both the knife and the gun continued. At one point, you can see that customer wrestles away the knife and then begins using it on the alleged robber. Down for the count. You should know that both of these men suffered serious injuries, OK? But when the smoke cleared and the cops arrived, it was Ryan Michael Flores, the alleged robber, who ended up behind bars charged with some serious stuff, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon. But that alleged robber`s mom and dad are mad that he got hurt by the good Samaritan, and they say they`re thinking of suing that good Samaritan, say that, you know, using that chair and then stabbing their son with their son`s own knife well, they say that amounts to excessive force. Aaron Abeytia is the afternoon anchor for KMJ newsradio, joins me from Fresno. So did I get all those facts right, Aaron, just to be clear because it seems a bit crazy, so I want to make sure I`m right with all that. Am I?
[Aaron Abeytia, Kmj News Radio:] You did. As strange as it sounds, that`s in fact what occurred.
[Banfield:] OK, so there`s got to be some back story, like the alleged robber`s got to some have story, a reason for all this to try to be a little more sympathetic. What is it?
[Abeytia:] He does. He says that he at the time was high on Xanax. He didn`t have any money for his wife and child. So he drove around this is almost on the outskirts of Fresno, highway 99 going through California`s major route. And so he said that he had contemplated holding up a gas station, but he said that he didn`t feel right taking advantage of the owner of that gas station, so he saw a Starbucks and thought, Why not Starbucks? It`s a corporation, nobody will be personally harmed.
[Banfield:] OK. So is there a little bit more to it? Because I think I read somewhere that he was high on meth and Xanax, which doesn`t give our audience...
[Abeytia:] Methadone and Xanax.
[Banfield:] Or methadone. OK. SO doesn`t give our audience a lot of sympathy for him except when you hear the reason, because as I understand it, he had originally had had a motorcycle accident...
[Abeytia:] Right.
[Banfield:] ... and because of the painkillers became an addict. The addiction led to being broke, wife and kid, no money, spends it all on drugs, ends up robbing. Is that sort of the chain of events?
[Abeytia:] That`s what they`re saying, he and his parents.
[Banfield:] So did you see the video as I saw the video? Because it looked like when Ryan Michael Flores turned and, you know, got hit in the back with the chair, he didn`t run. He didn`t run for the door. He actually went for the good Samaritan, Cregg Jerri.
[Abeytia:] Right. It looked as though he wanted a confrontation. I mean, I don`t know what exactly was going through his mind, but watching that, what else could you think? I mean, he very much tried to retaliate and to continue the confrontation. And then at one point, he struck Mr. Jerri in the neck.
[Banfield:] So let me bring in Paula Chiminienti because Paula Chiminienti is Ryan Michael Flores`s mom. She`s the mom of the man that you saw with the mask and the gun and the knife. Pamela, you know, I feel sympathy when I hear somebody who becomes an addict because of an accident or because of a football injury, and you know but I have a very tough time seeing someone menace a poor barista with a knife and a gun, and then sort of turning and attacking the person who`s protecting her. And you think it`s the person who was protecting her who`s at fault here.
[Pamela Chiminienti, Mother Of Alleged Robber:] I`m not here to discuss what Ryan did. I`m here to what you`re discussing is the beginning of the confrontation. My son was brutally and violently attacked when he was unarmed and stabbed 17 times and 16 while he was on the ground, on his belly, his back. And the perpetrator of that not willingly at one point stopped because you haven`t seen the entire video. And what you`ve shown your viewers is only the part of the robbery and when the good Samaritan...
[Banfield:] So I hear you. But I will say this, Pamela. I understand what you`re saying. If I were, you know, your son`s mom, I would be devastated, too. But then you have to realize the good Samaritan saw a man with a knife and a gun robbing a place, and when he tried to stop it, he himself was attacked. He himself got a knife to the neck, which is a lethal injury. And he ended up in a struggle for a gun and a knife. By the way, the struggle for the gun on the floor was when your son was on his belly not giving up the gun that this Samaritan thought, Well, if I took a knife to the neck a few seconds ago, I`m about to take a gun to the head. Can you not see where his mindset would be at?
[Chiminienti:] I think your facts are incorrect on the gun...
[Banfield:] I`m looking at the video.
[Chiminienti:] ... was plastic, and the good Samaritan knew it was a plastic gun.
[Banfield:] How does the good Samaritan know it was a plastic gun? I`m sorry?
[Chimienti:] Because it was on the floor. The gun was already gone.
[Banfield:] So, OK, what about that knife? Was that plastic? Because it caused a knife wound to his neck.
[Chimienti:] It couldn`t have been, Ashleigh, because the good Samaritan stabbed my son 17 times with it.
[Banfield:] Sure, but you know what I mean, right? Like, the good Samaritan took a knife to the neck which could be a lethal knife, and then they`re struggling for those weapons on the floor, right? And you`re telling me that the gun you`re telling me that for sure the gun was fake? Because you know that`s still a felony, right? You still go to prison if the gun is real or fake?
[Chimienti:] Yes, we know. We know. But they don`t know there`s no for sure time or even how the injury occurred. It could have been while he was wielding the knife at my son 17 times.
[Banfield:] So let me get this straight. Your son, if he is this sympathetic character that he says he is, you know, because he`s got this addiction, he`s got a wife and kid he`s trying to support, he chose a Starbucks because it`s supposed to be a victimless crime. I don`t buy that. I think crime is crime. That barista will never be the same. She is now faced down what she thinks is a real gun and a very sharp knife and a man with a scary mask who she doesn`t know maybe has a laundry list of felonies behind him and has no compunction whatsoever to use those those weapons against her. So, she never ran for those two exits. And I`m going to show the video over and over so everybody can see there`s daylight to the right and there`s daylight to the left. He had two escape routes he could have left the minute that chair hit him in the back, but he didn`t. He did not, Mrs. Chimienti. He instead went after the man who tried to stop the robbery.
[Chimienti:] He went for the one in the back.
[Banfield:] He didn`t. Look at the video.
[Chimienti:] He went for the one in the back. The baristas actually thought it was a joke. She testified under oath. She thought her co-workers were playing a joke on her. That`s why she`s laughing in the video. You can clearly see it.
[Banfield:] So, do you think that when she see blood gushing out of the man`s neck that it`s funny and that she`ll still get over it?
[Chimienti:] Oh, no. Actually they had to bring in Starbucks brought in counselors for the baristas because of what they witnessed that man did to my son.
[Banfield:] It has nothing to do with the robbery. The good Samaritan got a knife wound in his neck. Nothing like that? No?
[Chimienti:] They had to bring people in because they were horrified what they saw, what he did to him. He took the
[Banfield:] I know you`re not cemented in on the idea of a lawsuit, that you`re still considering it. But are you seriously considering suing that good Samaritan who stopped the robbery, who stopped your son right there in the video from wielding a knife on anybody in that store?
[Chimienti:] Not my choice.
[Banfield:] What`s not your choice, to file a lawsuit?
[Chimienti:] Yes. I`m not going to be the one to file the lawsuit.
[Banfield:] Who is going to file the lawsuit then?
[Chimienti:] Gee, who got injured, my son.
[Banfield:] So, your son is the one that wants to file the lawsuit?
[Chimienti:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Not you. We were misinformed. We were told it was you.
[Chimienti:] Before you put people and report stuff, do your homework. Get the facts right.
[Banfield:] I would say before you pick up a knife and a gun and put on a mask and menace society, do your homework. You could get hurt. Doesn`t that make sense? Doesn`t it make sense that your damn son could have really have hurt somebody? Doesn`t it make sense that your son committed a crime? Doesn`t it make sense that someone else tried to stop a crime and got seriously hurt and nearly died and you`re blaming him? Are you kidding me? Are you seriously here saying you`re going to sue that man?
[Chimienti:] Excessive force under any circumstances
[Banfield:] Saving your own life from a knife wielding crazed man! You think that`s excessive force? I think the apple doesn`t fall far from the tree. Good luck, Mrs. Chimienti, with your damn lawsuit. I hope you lose and the sheriff
[Chimienti:] I have no intention of suing
[Banfield:] Wow, now I know where your son gets it. Some people! Coming up next, another one of these people. A woman going berserk when she sees a veteran, a U.S. army veteran with PTSD and a service dog to help him. Gosh, couldn`t you imagine he brought that dog into a restaurant? How dare he? The whole thing is caught on tape.
[Unidentified Female:] It`s disgusting to have an animal inside of a public restaurant. And

[Cuomo:] The problem was the storm. Now it's time. It's waiting for things to happen despite all the best efforts. FEMA says every house in the Keys was somehow impacted by this monster of storms. CNN's Martin Savidge is live in Florida City as residents tried to get back to their homes. Martin, what are you finding?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good morning, Chris. This is one of those places where you'll likely to run into friction between those wanting to return and those who say, hold on a minute. It's one of the many checkpoints that you'll hit on Highway 1 as you head south. Traffic is moving for now but there are other checkpoints that are going to stop these folks. Talking about good news, electricity is starting to come back. The two power companies here in the Florida Keys, the one that covers the northern keys, say they've gotten about 40 percent back. Key West, though, they went from 12 percent to 20 percent yesterday. A lot of good progress but still 70 percent of their customers have no electricity. They also have other problems down there. They were able to make repairs to U.S. Highway 1. Now let's get to the frustration that's building here. Because you hear that kind of progress, residents are saying, hey, come on, I want to go home. Here's the issue. They still don't have good water down there that is to drink and they don't have good water as far as sanitation. Historically those two problems have probably killed more people than just about anything else. We're talking dysentery and cholera. On top of that, the medical facilities down there don't have the power or the staffing yet to take on the medical emergencies that would likely come from thousands of people returning to damaged homes. So that's why health officials why county officials are saying you can't go back yet. It'd just be a worst disaster Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Yes. Great, great information and warning, Martin. Thank you for that. So Tropical Storm Jose is expecting to regain hurricane strength. Where is this one headed? CNN meteorologist Chad Myers has our latest forecast. What are you seeing with this one?
[Cuomo:] So that's what we're looking at. It's about we're about a week out from being able to predict with any kind of certainty where it will be.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Four days out from that prediction, seven days out from any kind of potential landfall. Yes.
[Cuomo:] I loved you before, but now I am a whole type of different disciple when it comes to Chad Myers.
[Myers:] Stop it.
[Cuomo:] Chad, thank you very much, my friend.
[Myers:] You're welcome.
[Cuomo:] I appreciate what you did for us down there also. It helps to know
[Myers:] Great. Great work, Chris. Thanks a lot.
[Cuomo:] Thanks. All right. So there are new details emerging about that White House dinner that you had President Trump, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi. It wasn't so much about who was there as it was about who was not there. What's the current state of play? Maggie Haberman has new reporting next.

[Alison Kosik, Cnn Anchor:] The president continues to push for tax reform, something investors have been cheering since the election. This meeting of the minds taking place at the White House yesterday. President Trump was joined by Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, economic advisor Gary Cohn, one as well as House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Now, Trump is slated to meet with a bipartisan group of lawmakers today and then President Trump is going to fly off to North Dakota today to continue his push for tax reform. And the administration is saying they want a bipartisan tax reform proposal, but so far, talks have only been in Republican circles. So
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] They've got a lot on their plate. All right. A major update on Hurricane Irma when EARLY START continues right now.
[Briggs:] Hurricane Irma is churning through the Caribbean. U.S. territory set to get hammered by one of the strongest storms ever. Now, a new update from the National Hurricane Center shows Irma could hit Florida head on.
[Kosik:] Just hours after his administration ended the program to protect DREAMers, President Trump says he now may revisit the issue. What's the next move for Congress? Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Alison Kosik, sitting in for Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. It's Wednesday, September 6th. It's 5:00 a.m. in Miami and Puerto Rico where there are concerns about this monster storm on the way. That's where we begin, with Hurricane Irma, the most powerful Atlantic hurricane in a decade, hitting the Caribbean with an eye on the United States. Right now, Irma, a category 5 hurricane, packing 185-mile-an- hour winds and the latest update shows Irma could hit Florida head on this weekend.
[Kosik:] President Trump declaring emergencies for Florida, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to help with storm preparations. We're going to have the full hurricane forecast in a moment.
[Briggs:] Now, the most immediate concern is for people in the north eastern Caribbean. Overnight, a 36-hour curfew was issued for the entire territory of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
[Kosik:] And the biggest evacuation in history, in the history of the Bahamas has been ordered. Residents of six southern islands have been told to evacuate. The potentially catastrophic storm bearing down overnight on the northern Leeward Islands. Those islands are under hurricane warnings as are other areas including Puerto Rico.
[Briggs:] Several South Florida counties are operating in emergency mode hoping for the best, but indeed preparing for the worst when and if Hurricane Irma hits. The mayor of Miami-Dade County signing an emergency declaration. They'll start evacuating special needs residents today. All county offices along with schools will be closed Thursday and Friday. Officials also expected to issue evacuation orders for Miami Beach later today or early Thursday.
[Kosik:] Neighboring Broward County is planning to set up dozens of shelters that will be able to accommodate as many as 33,000 people. Broward schools will also be closed on Thursday and Friday. And in Monroe county, that's home to Key West, there's been a mandatory evacuation of visitors, tourists and nonresidents, that taking effect in just a few hours at 7:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The evacuation of residents, that begins tonight at 7:00.
[Briggs:] Florida Governor Rick Scott ordering the deployment of 7,000 National Guard members, 1,000 high water vehicles, more than 700 generators on stand by. The governor suspending tolls across the state, allowing people to more easily and safely evacuate. More than 5,000 people based at Naval Air Station Key West have received mandatory evacuation orders.
[Kosik:] Meantime, Florida residents are stocking up on storm supplies. You look at aisles there at some stores. They've been left bare by the mad rush. Lines of people wrapped around the Costco and Pembroke Pines. They stocked on fuel, water and materials to protect their homes. And NFL's opening week has been impacted. The Miami Dolphins home opener for Sunday has been postponed.
[Briggs:] They might find a neutral field for that. Let's get the latest track on the storm, with meteorologist Pedram Javaheri. Pedram, what's the update from the National Hurricane Center?
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Yes, the update just coming in here, changing the track a little bit here and you want to break this down because you look at this, and a lot of people tend to really focus on the center of that track, really important to not do that and to keep in mind that even the western periphery could be a possible point of this storm, or the eastern periphery could be a possible point of this storm. But you can break down model by model and see exactly which one it is favoring and we go through that and you notice, here we go, the concentration very strong belief around Cuba sometime Friday night into early Saturday morning. But beyond that, look what happens, we have a high concentration shifting more toward eastern Florida. In fact, when you break this down based on these models, I would even venture to say this could skirt the coast of Florida, potentially making the hardest point a second impact on portion of the Bahamas and then go somewhere north in towards parts of Georgia, into the Carolinas early next week. So, significant variations between all of that. Here is where we stand with one of the strongest hurricanes on record and into the Atlantic Ocean, Anguilla, St. Martin, St. Barts, 100,000 people in the direct path of this storm that has gusts well over 200 miles per hour. And with the storm surge, of course, in islands that are at essentially as flat as they come, just sandy beaches and very little elevation change. You know, most of these areas, that would be directly impacted by such a storm would be uninhabitable for a period of weeks, if not months. So, breaking down this further, looking at the American model and also the European model, the European in blue and American in red. Notice the incredible confidence in where this would be going into Friday and Saturday. Directly on top of one another so we think parts of Cuba could be in line for this storm system. But at the turn, still a lot of confidence in here. So this has changed in the last 24 hours. This time yesterday, one model was taking it back toward western Florida. Another one wanted to go to the east. Continue this going from Sunday into Monday. Just little difference on timing on where it would be. But again, same general location potentially favoring the eastern side. And I leave you with this hear, looking at the specific models under the umbrella of those models and again, high concentration shifting it to the east. So, this could potentially put parts of eastern Florida on the outer bands of this and take it up toward the Carolinas. So, we'll continue to monitor this.
[Kosik:] All right. That track just continues to change. We'll keep an eye on it with you. Thanks very much, Pedram.
[Javaheri:] Thank you.
[Briggs:] All right. Ahead, President Trump says ending protections for DREAMers is necessary.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Really we have no choice. We have to be able to do something and I think it's going to work out very well and long-term, it's going to be the right solution.
[Briggs:] So, why then is the president now suggesting he may revisit the issue next year and legalize DACA?

[Church:] Welcome back, everyone. The Caribbean needs help after Irma ravaged a series of popular islands. Thirty-eight people were killed when Irma plowed through as a category 5 storm. Many people are running low on food, water, gasoline and other essentials. European countries are starting to deliver some aid after they were criticized for not doing enough fast enough. This is one of the destruction of St. Martin, one of the islands that is reported significant looting. The situation there is desperate. The north is administrated by France, the south by the Netherlands. Both were leveled when Irma roared for the Caribbean as a category 5 hurricane as we mentioned. Just look at the rubble the storm left behind across the island. Our Cyril Vanier reports St. Martin's residents are anxious for aid to get there.
[Cyril Vanier, Correspondent, Cnn:] I want to show you the first impression you get when you get to St. Martin. We're on the Dutch side right now and when the sun sets. This is it. There's no light. There's little power on the island right now. So all along down that street, there's an insurance, there's a pizzeria, there is furniture store and many other stores. Only two of them still have a light that's running. We're actually very fortunate because the biggest newspaper on the island, the Daily Herald, has agreed to let us sleep here. They've got power. They are one of the rare people, for them, the power is working. So the power company is actually going house-to-house, one by one, they've got to make sure there are no live wires before they turn it on. We're very fortunate. But let me show you a couple of things that are absolutely necessary right in St. Martin. This is a generator. The few lights that are on in the island, either they are one of the fortunate ones that have the power turned back on, or they have a generator. If they have a generator, then they need some of this. They need the gasoline. But the gas stations they're all closed. And that buys you in this building about two hours of power. Let me show you this way. So these are the guys who are have allowed us to stay here. And that's the only reason we can even put this broadcast out there. One of the few things Tom, I know you're camera-shy. I know you didn't want to talk about this. But when you talk to people, this is what happens. Where why are you sleeping here?
[Unidentified Male:] The roof of my house is gone.
[Vanier:] You can't sleep in your house anymore?
[Unidentified Male:] Once it gets better fixed I will. But yes, but that's going to be a while.
[Vanier:] All right. So for the moment, Tom is one of the very one of the many, many people whose homeless and you can put it that way. And he's sleeping here with his wife. He's one of the sports sections of the paper. Let me show you this. This is the lifeline. I was telling you about the gasoline, we consider that this is about two hours of power. And with everything that's been filled up, we have maybe two days of power. Once that goes out, not much we can do. And this is the printing press. They can't print anymore because this requires water. There's no water. It's essentially what the Dutch marines are giving you in terms of water. This is the last newspaper they printed on Tuesday. It was the day before the hurricane hit. And this is the headline. Businesses must close at noon. Curfew, 8 p.m. Now with all this, there's one glimmer of hope, which is we've learned now, that tomorrow, two things are going to reopen that are key to a normal functioning life here in St. Martin. And that is supermarkets. A couple of supermarkets have said that they are reopening on Wednesday. That's going to bring up great relief if they do open to the population of St. Martin. And gas stations, as well. A couple of them have warned that they would reopen. There will be security to ensure that it's done in an orderly fashion. It's is the very, very beginning of life restarting in St. Martin.
[Church:] Cyril Vanier reporting there. And French President Emmanuel Macron is pledging to rebuild the French territories devastated by hurricane Irma in the Caribbean. He visited St. Martin on Tuesday to survey the devastation firsthand. Officials say 95 percent of the island was destroyed. Mr. Macron assured residents that life will eventually return to normal.
[Emmanuel Macron, President Of France:] The days that follow are the days for returning to normal life and for reconstructing. And it's important that as many people as possible, everyone who can and who wants to, stays on the island of St. Martin. And I say this because St. Martin has a future, one that needs to be reconstructed. And today, we should think about reconstruction in the short, medium and long-term.
[Church:] The storm left many of the Caribbean islands unrecognizable. Some people in the British Virgin Islands lost everything and are now all but stranded. But CNN's Polo Sandoval reports there are glimmers of hope on the island of Tortola.
[Polo Sandoval, Correspondent, Cnn:] When you think you've seen some of the worst damage caused by hurricane Irma, you come here to the largest island in the British Virgin Islands. And you can see the devastation is widespread here on Tortola. You can see what's left of one of the marinas here. This is certainly one of the hardest-hit regions. People here had been struggling to find food, to find water. However, supplies are slowly making their way here. And also neighboring Caribbean islands that have been hard hit. Many of the residents that call some of those places home have had to evacuate to nearby Puerto Rico, the United States. Many people who live here are trying to make it back to the U.K. But we've also heard some remarkable stories of survival. People who have essentially had to huddle inside their homes to ride out the storm. And then had to scrap whatever they can to try to eat and drink. And that is the reality for many people here. Resources are slowly but surely making their way to some of these regions that were devastated by hurricane Irma nearly a week ago. But it certainly not at the rate that many locals would like to see it happen. What does stand out after our time here in the Caribbean have has been the resilience for many of the people here who are determined to clean up. They were determined to rebuild. And they are particularly determined to get their piece of paradise back. But for now, the reality if that long road to recovery, people are just getting started on that journey. Reporting on the Island of Tortola, Polo Sandoval,
[Cnn. Church:] The United Kingdom is defending its response to Irma in the Caribbean. The U.K. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson is visiting British territories there after the British government was criticized for not moving quickly enough to help victims.
[Foreign Secretary:] We have every sympathy for the suffering of the people who are being hit by this extraordinary hurricane, the biggest in 150 years. So, I think most fair-minded people looking at the deployment that the U.K. has made. This is the biggest military deployment that we've seen since Libya. The point that the message that we want to give. The reason I'm here is as far as secretaries, because of course these are our, these are overseas territories, these are British people, work here to show our support, not just for the short-term, but for the long-term.
[Church:] And CNN's Nina Dos Santos joins us now live from London. Good to see you, Nina. So, politicians from both major parties say Britain's response to hurricane Irma in the Caribbean has been found wanting. That's pretty telling, isn't it? Why was Britain so slow to respond? And what all is it sending so far?
[Nina Dos Santos, Corresppondent, Cnn:] Well, the foreign office and the British government at number 10 have been saying that people have to remember that these aren't the same types of jurisdictions that France's Emmanuel Macron, the French President is dealing with where territories like French Guadeloupe and St. Martin are actually part of French territories. These countries, in particular, the British Virgin Islands they are actually part of the British overseas territories and they are self- governing which means that the U.K. doesn't have the same military infrastructure, permanent military infrastructure out in this region from which it can deploy military personnel and also the badly needed food and water items, water purification tablets, and so on and so forth. Having said that, though, the government has earmarked about $41 million worth of relief aid. They've already deployed about 1,000 military personnel across this British overseas territories in the Caribbean to help specifically with the relief effort. And also there are about 50 police officers who have been sent from the U.K. to help shore up security in islands like, for instance, Tortola, that you heard Polo Sandoval reporting from before. Where obviously, there's big concerns about issues like looting, and so on and so forth. And there will be more aid on its way from here. HMS Ocean, which is a big ship that is set sail from Gibraltar carrying about 50,000 water purification tablets, 5,000 hygiene kits and 10,000 buckets for collecting rainwater so that people can drink something clean. That is on its way over towards these islands. But of course, it will take about 10 days to get there. So in the meantime, what we've had is government ministers like Boris Johnson turning up, albeit a day later than France since the king of the Netherlands and the French president. And they're probably going to have to try and rely on places like the United States to mobilize food aid, to buy food aid over from the mainland in the U.S. to help people who need water, food, and medical supplies before the U.K. can manage to get them over from Europe. Rosemary?
[Church:] Yes. Ten days is a long time when you're in need. Many thanks for that live report. Nina Dos Santos joining us from London, where it is nearly 8.30 in the morning. Marco Island, Florida, was also pummeled by hurricane Irma. Coming up, we will talk to a resident about how she rode out the storm alone. Back in a moment with that.

[Ashleigh Banfield, Hln Host:] Washed overboard sailing to the islands.
[Unidentified Male:] There are some inconsistencies...
[Banfield:] Her husband says one minute she was on deck, the next she was gone.
[Unidentified Female:] They were arguing a lot.
[Banfield:] But is he telling the truth?
[Unidentified Female:] Everything changed after the baby was here.
[Banfield:] What happened to beautiful Isabella, and why is the FBI involved?
[Unidentified Female:] Maybe there`s a miracle that is going to happen.
[Vonda Evans, Wayne County Circuit Judge:] Be quiet! Take him back. Take him out!
[Banfield:] It is never good when a judge gets this mad at you in court.
[Evans:] Take him out now!
[Banfield:] That`s a sex offender who just told the judge "F you." While his behavior could cost him, will her behavior cost her?
[Evans:] No, you
[Banfield:] She`s charged with manslaughter, though her boyfriend killed himself.
[Unidentified Male:] Ms. Carter is alleged to have strongly influenced his decision.
[Banfield:] Text after text suggesting that he do it.
[Unidentified Female:] "You just have to do it. You said you were going to do it."
[Banfield:] But when are words considered deadly weapons?
[Unidentified Female:] "And you can`t make a promise. You need to just do it. No more waiting."
[Banfield:] Will Michelle Carter go to prison for all the things she said? It`s the body slam heard `round the block. Short skirt, high heels, a sorority girl goes down, with broken bones and bruises. What happened to the cops? Not what you`d expect. A car swerves through a red light, its driver wracked by seizures.
[Unidentified Male:] I was praying that he wasn`t going to hit the gas.
[Banfield:] But a man`s leap of faith may have saved the day, and a whole lot of people.
[Unidentified Male:] I didn`t think about it. I just did it.
[Banfield:] And remarkable survival. An out-of-control car nearly kills a woman and child. How that woman`s heroic actions may have saved his life. Hello, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. This is PRIMETIME JUSTICE. Have you ever dreamed of grabbing the one you love and setting sail for the islands? It`s like the perfect honeymoon. And that is exactly what Isabella Hellman was thinking as she planned and packed and posted about her big adventure with her new husband, Lewis Bennett. They were off on a 37-foot catamaran, nothing but blue skies and a full sail and the ocean spray. Isabella could not contain herself, gushing on Facebook, "Caribbean, here I come." But somewhere between Cuba and the Florida Keys, the deep ocean blue became a dark night of terror. And it all started when Lewis put in a distress call about 1:00 AM. He said the boat was taking on water. They`d hit something in the blackness of night. Isabella was nowhere to be found. So Lewis jumped into the raft and escaped with his life. For three days, they searched for Isabella, the U.S. Coast Guard finally calling it off after 7,000 square miles. But the grieving husband did not get a comforting welcome from his in-laws. He was instead met by accusations that he killed her. Isabella`s sister recalls the last phone call she had before Isabella disappeared at sea.
[Dayana, Isabella`s Sister:] She called me and said, Oh, hi. We disconnected the phone. It`s been really hard for us to connect it because his friend told me it`s hard. And then she said, I`m in the middle of the ocean right now. We left Cuba. She didn`t tell me what time, but she said, We left Cuba. And that`s it and she said, I`ll see you tomorrow.
[Banfield:] While the Coast Guard called off the search for Isabella, the FBI is just getting started on its search for answers. I want to start with Karen Curtis. She`s the news director for WFTL radio in West Palm Beach, Florida. Karen, where does this case stand? Where is this husband right now?
[Karen Curtis, Wftl Radio:] Lewis Bennett is has not been declared an actual suspect. He`s a known person in an investigation. The FBI is involved because this happened on the high seas. It`s an accident, but if there needs to be an arrest, the FBI would be the agency to do it. So Lewis Bennett we didn`t even know the FBI was involved here in Florida until Lewis Bennett called the Bogota Police Department to go to his in-laws` apartment to get some items that he felt were stolen, and he wanted a civil assist from the police department to go with him. And when the police showed up, the sister started yelling that, you know, you killed my sister. So the...
[Banfield:] So wait go back. Wait. Go back. Items that were stolen. He came back to his home, and as I understand it, he`s now missing an iPad, clothing, handbags, an engagement ring, and he suspects that they are at Isabella`s sister`s place?
[Curtis:] Yes, he did, and he says that he has videotape to prove it. But the police said, Look, you need to leave, and that`s when they called the Coast Guard and the FBI, and the FBI said, Yes, we`re looking into this...
[Banfield:] Well, why all the suspicion?
[Curtis:] ... disappearance.
[Banfield:] Why on earth would they not think right away, My God, our sister has had this terrible accident with her newlywed husband? Why all of a sudden the suspicion that he did it, in their mind?
[Curtis:] Well, this happened, ironically enough, on Mother`s Day. And she really didn`t want to leave the 9-month-old. She had the baby. They got married in February in Atlanta, and then they went on this honeymoon a couple mounts later. And she was telling her sisters that and her friends that they weren`t really getting along, that Lewis was, you know, not letting her pierce the baby`s ears, and you know, she didn`t wasn`t able to spell the baby`s name in the Colombian way. And there were just all kinds of arguments on how to feed the baby. And he wanted to take the baby to Australia, she did not want to leave Dell Ray Beach. So there was that. But we don`t even know where he is right now, quite honestly, Ashleigh, because he did tell someone that his passport went down with the boat, but it`s possible that he`s either in England or he is either in Australia. And he did say that...
[Banfield:] So he`s left the country? He`s not in the U.S. right now?
[Curtis:] He may not be, but he did say he lost his passport, but he said he went to Cuba last week to look for her. So it`s very strange.
[Banfield:] OK. So listen, I`ve been the mother of a 9-month-old, and I can tell you firsthand that first year, there`s a lot of nasty words exchanged. You`re lacking sleep. You`re exhausted. So if there was some consternation between the two of them over the baby, it could be explained away by first year of parenting. And I look at Isabella`s Facebook, and on May 2nd from Culebo, Puerto Rico, she posted "Another day in paradise" and had this photograph where it looked as though they were really having the time of their lives. And none of her posts suggested anything was wrong. Instead, that this vacation was fabulous.
[Curtis:] Yes, he went down they had just left Cuba, and he went down about 8:00 PM to go to sleep and left her up on deck with a lifevest. But she was piloting the boat. Then at 1:00 AM, he says that the boat hit something. He went up top and she wasn`t up there. He was able to get a beacon and the lifeboat, and that`s when the Coast Guard found him at 4:00 AM somewhere about 40 miles west of the Bahamas.
[Banfield:] Is there something weird about that, Karen? I mean, he`s a sailor. I don`t know how much Isabella was a sailor, but to go down below at around 8:30 at night, I`m tired, and to be sleeping until 1:00 AM while your wife is on the helm and then mysteriously, they hit something in the darkness. The hull is damaged. She`s presumably, if you believe his story, swept off the boat. Was she a sailor who could man the helm by herself at night?
[Curtis:] They had met on line four years ago, and she would meet up with him. He was really never on Florida. She would meet up with him on the boat here and there around the world. And so there I guess she did sail with him a little bit, but it`s not been established that she was actually a mariner, you know, could sail a boat at night, which is not easy.
[Banfield:] No. I don`t want to suggest for a minute that a woman can`t do that. I sailed around
[Curtis:] You`re right. The timeframe is a little bit long because it is only 90 miles through the Florida Straits. So they were just off of the Bahamas, about 40 miles off of one of the keys there. So it`s not clear what happened and why it took them so long.
[Banfield:] OK, one other question, the damage to the hull. There is a suggestion that the authorities say an unknown submerged object came in contact with that hull. Have they forensically looked at that hull to see about the damage, whether it actually was consistent with that story or whether it was, say, perhaps man-made damage?
[Curtis:] Well, they were able to find the boat. It`s a 37-foot catamaran, and they do have it in their possession, the FBI does, in a warehouse. So they are examining it forensically to see, you know, exactly what happened, if things match up with his story. You know, it`s odd to hit something in the middle of the ocean, what it would be. It`s very odd.
[Banfield:] Well, that brings me to Steve Moore, who`s a former FBI agent and a CNN law enforcement contributor. Steve, you just heard those facts and the pattern. I can see this both ways. How do you see it?
[Steve Moore, Cnn Law Enforcement Contributor:] Yes, I can see it both ways, but one way is really concerning me. There are some things in here that are just it would each each one of these individual things could possibly have happened, but they would be unlikely. To have five or six unlikely things happen in a row plus, you have some information that`s hard to explain it makes me very suspicious. It turns on the FBI investigator switch in me.
[Banfield:] So would you be thinking right away, OK, they`re kind of newlyweds. They have a 9-month-old baby together. Let`s look for life insurance, or would you be going the other route, and that`s the forensic route? I want to see where the damage to that hull came and whether it looks like it was man-made or it was, say, maybe a container that was floating in the deep blue sea at night that no one could ever see if they were sailing at night?
[Moore:] Well, Ashleigh, as an FBI agent, I wouldn`t be called in on this unless somebody already had suspicions. The FBI doesn`t sit out at the yacht harbor. What happened here is almost undoubtedly the Coast Guard called the FBI and said, From our professional opinion, something`s not matching up here. And then when you read the story I, as an FBI agent, I`ll read his statement and he said that, We hit some submerged object. If you were down. Well, if you were down in the cabin asleep and came up and she was gone, how do you know what you hit? How do you know it was submerged? How do you know you didn`t hit something something that was...
[Banfield:] I`ll answer that question. I`ll answer that question. If you`re in real deep water and you hit something, it`s a submerged object because it ain`t a coral reef, and maybe that`s why. I feel like I have an answer to every one of his statements, but I feel like I can actually back up every one of his statements, as well. I do have this question. And I know that you wouldn`t be out there, you know, ticking away with the forensic tools on the hull of the yacht, but would you be curious as to whether there was anything in the liferaft, meaning if this was all a plot that he actually orchestrated, would he get into a liferaft in the middle of the night between Cuba and Florida and risk his life with no water, no food, nothing?
[Moore:] If he hypothetically, if the boat was the scene of a murder and he wanted to get the boat under salt water, that`s his main option. And he had an eperb. He had the tracker, so it wasn`t a low probability that he was going to be found. The other thing... No, but it no, you better have an eperb. But the fact that he knew he had an eperb would especially in good weather, would kind of ease any concern you might have about whether you are found if you had to abandon your boat. The other thing was, how hard did he hit it that she was thrown off? And if she was wearing a lifevest, why isn`t she floating?
[Banfield:] It is so mysterious! Real quickly, Karen Curtis, if you`re with me, do we know thinking about a life insurance policy? Do we know whether there was one, whether it`s been accessed or is that all silence?
[Curtis:] No, we don`t know anything in terms of any life insurance policy that he may or may not have had on her. They had only been married since February, so but he does have the baby, and the family said, Please don`t take the baby out of the country because that`s the last vestige that we have of our sister, you know, is this baby, and he`s somewhere with the baby.
[Banfield:] Well, the plot thickens, and clearly, with the FBI involved, this story is not over. We`ll keep track of the clues as they come in and we`ll update our audience. Karen Curtis, Steve Moore, thank you both. Do appreciate it. An outburst I think it`s Fair to call it an outburst in a courtroom and a judge`s response to it, and it is unlike anything you have ever heard in a courtroom before!
[Anthony Thornton, Convicted Of Rape:] I`m innocent.
[Evans:] Be quiet! Take him back! Take him out! Take him out now!
[Banfield:] Those are "F" bombs. Not just from him, from her, too. What caused this shout-down between these two? And could it possibly cost this convicted rapist at sentencing, or could it cost the judge an appeal? We`re going to look into that in a moment. Also, a jury found a former MMA fighter guilty of brutally beating and sexual assaulting his porn star ex-girlfriend. Tonight, War Machine finds out how long that`s going to cost him behind bars.

[Camerota:] A former CIA station chief who spent five years in Moscow is speaking out about Russia's efforts to undermine the U.S. election. He's now detailing a possible motive behind the meeting of Donald Trump Jr. and that Russian lawyer. In a "New York Times" op-ed, he writes: The clearest evidence that this was a Russian influence operation is the trail of bread crumbs the Kremlin seems to have deliberately left leading from Trump Tower to the Kremlin. This operation was meant to be discovered. That CIA that former CIA station chief, Daniel Hoffman, joins us. Daniel, great to have you here in studio.
[Daniel Hoffman, Former Cia Station Chief:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] We should mention that you have retired, which is why we can now blow your cover and say that you were in the CIA for many decades.
[Hoffman:] Correct.
[Camerota:] OK. What do you mean that meeting between the Russian lawyer and Don Jr. and others was meant to be discovered by that it was planted basically with a trail of bread crumbs by the Kremlin?
[Hoffman:] I think the evidence from that meeting points to an effort by the Kremlin to influence rather than some sort of a covert back channel for collusion. Vladimir Putin wants to soil our democratic institutions, and I think he found the best way to do that would be to tie us to the Kremlin.
[Camerota:] But it seems that you're suggesting in your op-ed that the Trump team were serving as dupes, basically. They were unwitting pawns. They didn't know what they were walking into. So, it wasn't active collusion, though Don Jr. said I le it when offered the dirt on Hillary Clinton that may or may not have ever been produced, but this is what the Kremlin does, they try to find unwitting pawns.
[Hoffman:] I think I think what Vladimir Putin did, remember, his former experience was serving as a KGB offer and serving as director of the FSB. So, espionage is quivering his bow, and it's not just about recruiting sources. It's also about running these sort of operations. I think what he felt was this would be the sort of bait that maybe someone might not want to refuse. And so, I think they took a gamble and won out and the meeting took place and that was really all that they needed.
[Camerota:] One of the things I thought so interesting in your op-ed is you say one of the favorite Russian tactics, Kremlin tactics, spy tactics, is to dangle something that looks to be of great value for free, and that that should be an instant red flag. So, in other words, I'm going to just hand overall this great opposition research, this dirt on Hillary Clinton for free, and that that really in real life rarely happens and that should have set off some alarm bells.
[Hoffman:] Yes, I think it would have set off alarm bells for Russians who grew up in Russia and understand what this is all about, but it might not for us in the United States. You know, the other formative experience in Vladimir Putin's life is he's a black belt in judo, and that one of the key principles in judo is to use your opponent's strength against them. In the United States, we have freedom of the press and we don't necessarily think the way a Russian might about this idea that someone was baiting you with something.
[Camerota:] OK, just help me to understand one more time, the point of all this. If it wasn't active collusion and they wanted it to be discovered, if the Kremlin, in fact, wanted us to follow this trail of bread crumbs, why?
[Hoffman:] Vladimir Putin has his sight set on March 2018, when he will stand for election. And he knows many of his opponents, many of whom will risk their lives by protesting on the streets of Russia as they have before, derive much of their ideological inspiration from the United States. And I think that's why Vladimir Putin wants to soil our electoral process and democratic institution.
[Camerota:] President Trump has said, basically, I'm paraphrasing, yes, maybe Russia tried to meddle, but so do other countries. Is Russia in a different category?
[Hoffman:] I think Russia is in a pretty special category when it comes to their sophisticated capability for intruding into our cyberspace. And we've seen that. We've seen that in our efforts to target our infrastructure and target our news sites. They're very good at what they do.
[Camerota:] You spent 30 years in the CIA, is that right, focused on Russia?
[Hoffman:] I spent the bulk of my career focused on Russia, yes.
[Camerota:] OK. So, from where you sit, in your expertise, since Russia will always try to launch disinformation campaigns and try to upset our democracy, what's the best way to stop them?
[Hoffman:] I think one of the best ways to stop them is to be transparent about what they're doing so our citizens are armed with the knowledge that this is a Russian tactic and this is what they're trying to achieve. I think it starts there, frankly.
[Camerota:] But meaning that the more we talk about it openly, the more people will understand when they're receiving disinformation? I mean, what do you mean by transparency?
[Hoffman:] I think being transparent and honest about what the Russian tactics are, the full all of their intelligence efforts to target us in this country, whether those are human intelligence efforts. They've got lots of Russian intelligence officers in this country, ruthlessly targeting our people here and their efforts to target us through cyberspace as well. I think we need to educate our people about that threat. I think that's the first step. And then we need to counter them and counter their themes.
[Camerota:] And do you think the White House has done a good job of being transparent and presenting that evidence to the American people?
[Hoffman:] I'll leave it to others to grade the White House on how well or not so well they've done. I think it's certainly a major challenge.
[Camerota:] If you're calling for transparency and you think there needs to be an education program for Americans so we know what we're up against, do you think the White House has done that?
[Hoffman:] I think you know, from my perspective, what I might like to see is, for example, when Ronald Reagan made the speech at Brandenburg Gate and told Mr. Gorbachev to tear down the wall, that might be something of that sort might be of value.
[Camerota:] If the president says something more forcefully.
[Hoffman:] Or someone in the administration.
[Camerota:] Daniel Hoffman, thank you very much for all of your expertise on this. Really fascinating to read that op-ed. Chris?
[Cuomo:] All right. Thank you very much. Mixed messages from the Trump administration about the North Korean nuclear threat. The president saying they will feel the fire and fury if they do anything. Diplomats saying something much softer. Is this the way it should go? Let's debate it, next.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] We continue on hour two. You are watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Breaking news this hour, a source close to Republican senator Republican Marco Rubio now saying he is a yes in support of the Republican final version of the tax plan. He had been holding out for bigger child tax credit refunds but looks like the Florida senator won that fight. Republicans raising the refundable child tax credit to $1400 in this final version due out very shortly. We are also keeping a close eye on ailing senators John McCain of Arizona and senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi. We did learn that a procedure that senator Cochran had to remove a skin cancer into that apparently being more extensive than the doctors had planned. What that means for him physically getting to Capitol Hill for a vote next week that is unsure. But let me be crystal clear. These stakes could not be higher. President Trump is looking for his first major legislative win since becoming the President nearly a year ago. And Republicans who have control of the House and Senate want something to show for it as well. So let's go to Capitol Hill to our congressional correspondent Sunlen Serfaty here. And Sunlen, this is a big, big deal that Rubio is now a yes.
[Sunlen Serfaty, Congressional Correspondent:] That's right. It is, Brooke, essentially, the big hurdle removed for Republican leaders and it increases their momentum and it increases the chances that this bill could go through next week when they vote on it. Rubio clearly was satisfied by the concessions that were made. The changes he wanted to see over the child tax credit, the fact that you said it got boosted up, more money thrown in going from $1100 to $1400. But Rubio specifically moving to yes column, it is battle won for Republicans but not out of the woods yet. There are still a lot of wild cards here. You have senator Mike Lee who had same concerns of Marco Rubio over the child tax credit. It will be interesting to see if that appeased him as well. Right now he is still undecided. Susan Collins, Jeff Flake, Bob Corker, they never relied on him being a yes vote. Still no indication how he will vote. He says he still has the same concerns over this bill. But so certainly a battle won today, Brooke, you also have the dynamic with senator McCain as you mentioned whether or not he will be table to return to Washington. So Republican leaders feeling confident at this moment. Certainly Rubio coming out and saying yes is a huge boost of momentum but still some work to be done before they move to a vote next week.
[Baldwin:] Give me a list, as far as we know, that the tick tock as we would say, that the timeline for votes next week?
[Serfaty:] Yes. Well, tonight we will see the formal bill tax bill released 5:30 this evening. And then going into next week, the expectation as of now is that the House will go first Tuesday, the Senate will vote next potentially Tuesday night maybe into Wednesday. Everyone here seems to think that they are pushing towards and driving towards getting a bill to the President's desk to be signed, that's of course given it passes both Houses up here by Wednesday. An incredibly ambitious timeline but one everyone here seems to be pushing for.
[Baldwin:] All right. Sunlen Serfaty, thank you so much. As Sunlen reported this Republican bill, it is finalized. It is locked. No more changes as of noon today. But the key question, do they have the votes to pass it through next week. Let's talk it over with two Republicans. Ana Navarro, CNN political commentator and in just a moment we will sell Joseph Borelli, New York City councilman. So Ana Navarro, good to see you.
[Ana Navarro, Cnn Political Commentator:] Hi, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Let's pop up guys if we have the tweets from senator Marco Rubio that had just been tweeted out so we can see maybe where his mindset set is and how he had gone from potentially a no to a yes. He says for far too long Washington has ignored and left behind the American working class, increasing the
[Navarro:] No, I'm not surprised. I think it's kind of his playbook. It was what we have seen him do over and over again under the Trump administration. Where he initially comes out as iffy opponent, talking, you know, and tries to get some sort of concession for his vote. We saw him do it for example during the Rex Tillerson hearings and vote and he got some concessions on Cuba as I result. I think it's the same thing we did here. Rubio skeptics will say to you, look, it's what he always does. Makes a lot of noise and then caves at the end. I think Rubio supporters will say, look, he got something for it. He got a 15 percent increase on child refundable tax credit. He something on behalf of, you know, the working families of America. So really I think it depends where you come at this and what glasses you are seeing it through. If you think he is, you know, he always caves, you think he just caved. If you think he doesn't, you think he just got something for his efforts.
[Baldwin:] So, all right, Joe Borelli, good to sea see you, sir, as well. We know that he is a yes. There are still a number of unknowns as they head into the vote next week. And this isn't a guarantee. A political imperative. Surreal. You know, the idea of doing something by the end of the year has according to our sources on the Hill and aides I know our crews have been talking to, you know, has been a driving force. My question to you is what's the fallout for failure for Republicans?
[Joseph Borelli , New York City Councilman:] Well, in this case I don't think failure is not an option. I mean, for better or worse, we did have an electoral loss in Alabama. And the GOP in the Senate really does have to justify its raise own, the reason why elect Republicans there. I think the GOP can afford a failure. And with Rubio coming on board finally now, and the fact that I don't think they wouldn't have finalized in text in the bill this morning if they didn't have the results, almost certain, you know, anything could happen. But I'm almost certain that this bill passes and we do have a big Christmas gift from President Trump by December 25th.
[Baldwin:] That is what he is hoping for. Certainly sounded pretty confident when we saw him departing for the FBI academy a little while ago. Speaking of that, I want to play a moment as he was leaving, he stopped to talk to the media, Joe, this sends to you. And I want you to listen how he answered a question as to whether he would consider a pardon. He was asked about this, whether he would consider a pardon for Michael Flynn.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I don't want to talk about pardons for Michael Flynn yet. We will see what happens. Let's see.
[Baldwin:] So much to do about that, let's see, and the yet part of what he said. We know the White House council Ty Cobb has been pushing back saying there is no considering Flynn pardon. This isn't the first time, you know, they have been on the same page. But what do you read into that, the let's see, and not yet?
[Borelli:] Well, I think the one thing we have seen time and time again from Donald Trump is use of the phrase "we will see" when he's not ready to make a decision.
[Baldwin:] What's that about?
[Borelli:] I don't know. I think it is just one of the default, you know, phrases that he likes to use, like huge, and bigly and some of the more, you know, creative words that he likes to throw in his speech. I don't necessarily see a Flynn pardon coming down the pike any time soon. Although that said, you know, there is stuff that Flynn pled guilty too isn't really they are more of a process crime in terms of the Russia investigation and anything he did, you know, just jeopardize security of America.
[Baldwin:] A crime is a crime is a crime, Ana Navarro.
[Navarro:] Look. The reason he pled guilty to that smaller crime is because he is cooperating with Mueller's investigation. And so what you saw today from Donald Trump was he was speaking directly to Michael Flynn through the TV camera telling him, hey Michael, don't snitch, don't sing like canary, don't tell anything you know and, you know, maybe I'll be nice to you and I will offer you a pardon for what -.
[Baldwin:] You think that's what he was doing?
[Navarro:] Of course, that's what he was doing. He had an audience of one. Look, you know, if I had Michael Flynn cooperated with Mueller, I would be sweating
[Baldwin:] Can he I mean, I'm not a lawyer here, and Ana Navarro, I don't think Joe Borelli I mean, none of us are lawyers, to see whether that's even OK for the President to be, you know, sending messages to cooperating witness who is doing a deal with the special counsel in this case, but nevertheless perhaps that is what he was doing. Also President Trump was slamming the current system of immigration. Here he was.
[Trump:] Visa lottery. They have a lottery. You pick people. Do you think the country is giving us their best people? No. What kind of a system is that? They come in by lottery. They give us their worst people, they put them in a bin, but in his hand when he's picking them is really the worst of the worst. Congratulations. You are going to the United States. OK. What a system, lottery system.
[Baldwin:] So the White House admitted this week that even the people who are picked in the lottery, Joe Borelli, are vetted, so why is he being misleading?
[Borelli:] I think he is really speaking to the broader GOP goal of ending chain migration, you know, and giving people an advantage simply because they have family connections to people that have come before them, you know. And I think you heard it right there, people in the FBI seem to be laughing and cheering when he was saying that. You know, this is something that the President had promised to do from when he was running for office. Be tougher on immigration. Be more careful of who we let in. And despite people who predict that he wouldn't be able to move forward on this type of agenda, I think you actually see him going forward with the support of Republicans in Congress.
[Baldwin:] Ana Navarro, what do you think they are up to?
[Navarro:] Look, a lot of what he said is incorrect. It is not countries don't put names in a bin. Applicants apply themselves. Pro-actively apply. It is a random process. And then people are fully vetted just like anybody else wanting to come into this country. So it is nothing like what he described. That being said, a lot of Republicans don't like the lottery system. Think there is a better way that better addresses the needs of this country, the economic needs, the modern economy that we have now, than a random lottery system. I think, look, I think that we can't just cherry pick things we like and don't like. Really, the immigration system is broken. It has to be addressed in a comprehensive way. OK, if you are going to get rid of the lottery visa, what will you get on the other side for it? Maybe legalize those TPA people, the people who had temporary protective status that he ended a couple of weeks ago, and who have been here being part of our economy and our society and have jobs, and businesses here. You are talking about, what, 60,000 people. I mean, I don't know, there is going to have to be a grand bargain. There is going to have to be bartering. You take from here and you give there. And I do think that there needs to be some focus on how do we use immigration to address the economic and social needs of the United States to make this a stronger better country.
[Baldwin:] Let them get the taxes through and then we shall see what happens with this immigration. Last question, Ana, on a bit of a lighter note, Gallup poll numbers just in on Melania Trump. You see it now. She has higher approval rating than her husband. And Ana Navarro, we know the President doesn't really like to be out shined by anyone, including his wife. How is that going to go down over the holidays?
[Navarro:] I don't know. Look, I don't know how to interpret that marriage. But I'm not surprised, you know. We have seen her, you know, be a first lady. We have seen her be a hostess. We have seen her go read to sick children. She really, you know, has not been politically involved. And, you know, she seems to be a grounded person. So I'm not surprised. Look, she's not up in the middle of the night sending offensive tweets to anybody and there brothering causing international incidents through offensive tweets. She is being a normal human being. Any normal human being would have higher numbers than Trumps. Maybe he should take a page out of his wife's book.
[Baldwin:] OK. We have to go. Joe Borelli, Ana Navarro, thank you both so much.
[Borelli:] Thank you.
[Baldwin:] Happy Holidays to you. Thank you.
[Navarro:] Merry Christmas.
[Baldwin:] Thank you. Same to you. For the very first time in decades, the American secretary of state sat at the same table with North Korea ambassador. They didn't hold back, though, with their messages to one another. What the U.N. meeting means as nuclear tensions are on the rise. Plus, a Republican senator hammers one of Trump's judicial nominees about his credentials. The awkward exchange and the new White House response. And more breaking news from Capitol Hill where this crucial vote on the Republican tax bill just gained a big yes from this man, Republican senator Marco Rubio. We are back in la flash.

[Christine Romans, Cnn:] Controversial Senate candidate one week to Election Day.
[Unidentified Male:] Frankly, the idea that our president is above the law is Nixonian.
[Davi Briggs, News Day Co-host:] The president's legal strategy causing widespread confusion even as the lawyers not on the same page. We have the latest on the Russia investigation.
[Billy Bush, Former Access Hollywood:] You're reopening wounds on them too. Enough is enough. Stop playing around with people's lives.
[Romans:] And Billy Bush venting in his first public interview since the access Hollywood tape went public. What he say about the president in the way that sexual misconduct claims, now resurfacing. All right 30 minutes half an hour welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. It is 4:30 eastern time. We start with the Alabama Election, one week before voters go to the polls in Alabama, a new fracture in the Republican Party over senate candidate Roy Moore. On Monday President Trump for the first time threw his full support behind Moore, the accused child molester, first in his tweet. Democrat's refusal to give even one vote for massive tax cuts is why we need Republican Roy Moore to win in Alabama.
[Romans:] And then in a phone call to the candidate the campaign say the president called Moore, called him a fighter and finished up by saying "Go Get them, Roy." Last night the Republican National Committee joined the president in backing Moore after walking away from him last month over those allegations of improper sexual conduct. And officials say the RNC will transfer money to the Alabama Republican party.
[Briggs:] But Moore's potential Senate colleagues are refusing to budge. And the National Republican Senatorial Committee Colorado's Cory Gardner sticking to the position he laid out last month. He said then he believes Moore's accusers and added if he refuses to withdraw and wins the senate should vote to expel him because he does not meet the ethical and moral requirements of the United States Senate. Many other Republican senators not so thrilled with the idea of working side by side with Moore.
[Sen. Jeff Flakes , Arizona:] I still think it's unfortunate. We're going have a tough enough time in the coming years and being the party of Roy Moore is not going to help.
[Sen. Bill Cassidy , Louisiana:] I've learned long ago that voters don't want to be told from Washington who to vote for. I've made my position clear on Mr. Moore. But again it's not up me or the president. It's up to the people of Alabama.
[Romans:] And then this digging in as a committed Moore opponent former Republican nominee Mitt Romney he tweeted, "Roy Moore in the U.S. Senate would be a stain on the GOP of the nation. Lee Corfman and other victims are courageous heroes, no vote, no majority is worth losing our honor and integrity."
[Briggs:] Not shying from a fight, Moore responded, "Either Mitt Romney has lost his courage or he doesn't care about truth anymore. Sad day America's reawakening was led by Donald Trump not you Mitt", ironically the hash-tag during the swamp appearing on that tweet. Poll showing that he raised the Washington Post. Moore's Democratic opponent Doug Jones is up by 3 points well within the poll's margin of error.
[Romans:] The president set to attend the opening of the Mississippi civil rights museum on Saturday after holding a rally in Florida on Friday which means the president will be in two states that border Alabama without ever actually being in Alabama before the election.
[Briggs:] Series of new twists and President Trump is constantly shifting legal strategy for the Russia investigation. The president opened the
[Romans:] That claim drew howls of protests from critics and by late Monday a White House lawyer Ty Cobb was down playing it telling "The Washington Post" the theory is not the president's official legal strategy. Cobb said, "It's interesting as a technical legal issue. But the president's lawyers intend to present a fact-based defense not a mere legal defense." As for whether the president can in fact obstruct justice it is worth noting that articles of impeachment against both Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton did include obstruction charges.
[Briggs:] As we've now also learned another White House lawyer told President Trump in January, he believed Flynn had misled the FBI as well as Vice President Pence. That raises new questions about what the president knew when he urged then FBI Director Jim Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn, something by the way the president says never happened.
[Romans:] It also appears the testimony of a former deputy to Michael Flynn does not line up with core documents. K.T. McFarland told the Senate Committee she was not aware of any communications between Michael Flynn and the Russian Ambassador Sertgey Kislyak. That contradicts a court filing that says Flynn spoke to a senior transition team official about what to discuss with Kislyak.
[Briggs:] CNN has reported McFarland was the senior transition official. But she is not mentioned by name in the court filing. A representative for McFarland could not be reached for comment.
[Romans:] FBI Director Chris Wray responding now to President Trump's claims that the bureau's reputation is quote in tatters. Wray sending an agency wide e-mail that reads "because of the importance of the mission, we are also entrusted with great power and we should expect and welcome people asking tough questions about how we use that power. We find ourselves under the microscope each and every day and rightfully so."
[Briggs:] Wray finished off with one of his favorite work ethics slogans. "keep calm and tackle hard." Wray did not mention President Trump by name though. The president's criticism of the FBI intensified after it was revealed one of the bureaus top experts have been removed from the special council's investigation over a potential anti-Trump bias.
[Romans:] CNN has learned that the expert Peter Strzok is the person who changed a key phrase when James Comey described how Hillary Clinton handled classified information. He changed it from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless."
[Briggs:] Billy Bush speaking out for the first time since NBC fired him. Overnight he sold Stephen Colbert he felt like he got hit in the gut when he first heard himself Donald Trump on that infamous Access Hollywood tape days before it leaped. And that the president delivered a second gut on by recently questioning the tapes authenticity.
[Bush:] He last week, for some reason came out with, "That's not my voice on the tape." Like I said you can't say that. That is your voice I was there, you were there, that's your voice on the tape. And what that does though is multiple I told you about my own personal problem with it. But then you've got 20 women at the time. I don't know what the exact number because there's more, but 20 women who used their names. We've got powerful people being held accountable now. And sometimes there's unanimous sources. All of these women came out with their names and told their detailed accounts. Twenty women don't get together and say, "Hey, you know, what would be really fun let's take down a powerful guy together ha, ha." No, they don't. And their names should and I said OK. You're reopening wounds on them too. Enough is enough. Stop playing around with people's lives that upset me.
[Romans:] One interesting side note, Billy Bush told Colbert former "Today Show" host Matt Lauer spoke privately to NBC executives trying to save Bush's job when the tape leaked last year.
[Briggs:] Michigan Congressman John Conyers will make an announcement on the radio this morning. No official work on the content though. But the "New York Times" reports Conyers plans to announce he will not seek reelection amid allegations he sexually harassed former members of his staff. The Times sites Ian Conyers the grandson of the congressman's brother who tells the Times he plans to run for the seat.
[Romans:] The 88-year-old Conyers is the longest serving current serving member of the House. He already gave up his position as ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee as Speaker Paul Ryan and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi have both said Conyers should resign. The younger Conyers expects the congressman to finish his term.
[Briggs:] All right, breaking over night, a fast-moving fire in California, charring 10,000 acres. Hundreds of thousands without power, one person is dead. That's next on "EARLY START."

[Kristie Lu Stout, Host, "news Stream":] " Global economic turbulence, Huawei's leadership discusses damaging effects from the U.S.-China trade war as Davos gets underway. An open letter and talk of extradition the diplomatic rift between Canada, China and the U.S. takes a series of wild new turns. And who is in and who is out? We are minutes away from learning the 2019 Academy Award nominees. And we start with the diplomatic tango between the U.S., Canada and China that has become ever more complicated. Canada now says that the United States will soon make a request for the extradition of Huawei's CFO. Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada last month for allegedly helping her company dodge U.S. sanctions on Iran. China has accused the two countries of abusing their extradition treaty, and this comes as former diplomats, academics and activists sent an open letter to the Chinese President, Xi Jinping, in the letter, calling for the release of two detained Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. China says that they were detained for endangering national security. The letter says that their arrests, quote, "Will lead to less dialogue and greater distrust and undermine efforts to manage disagreements and identify common ground." Both China and the rest of the world will be worse off as a result. We are covering this story from both sides of the world. We have CNN's Will Ripley joining us from Beijing, but first let's go to Paula Newton in Ottawa, Canada. And Paula, the pressure is building with this open letter and the expectation that the United States will formally request the extradition of Meng Wanzhou.
[Paula Newton, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, and I can't say the Canadian officials expected anything else, but in listening to Canada's Ambassador of the United States, he's saying David MacNaughton he is saying, look, if you're going to file that paperwork, we want guarantees that this entire situation with Huawei does not turn into some kind of bargaining chip for trade. We are following the rule of law, which means you have requested this extradition and we will file the paperwork before January 30th and we are meeting our treaty obligations. But there is nothing, Kristie, more glaring to tell you the fact that Canada is being squeezed by both the United States and China and the fact that its own Ambassador to the United States is pleading with U.S. officials to say do not use this as a bargaining chip in trade. Having said that, it is not just the letter at this point, Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister is reaching out to as many allies as he can, garnering support and we know that behind the scenes, a campaign will begin also in Davos for Canada to be basically lobbying with its allies to say, "Look, it's Canada now, it could be any country next time." China needs to be aware that this will severely impair its ability to wield any kind of soft power around the world.
[Lu Stout:] All right, now let's go to Will Ripley standing by in Beijing. And Will, how is China responding to the open letter and the possibility that Meng Wanzhou, the Huawei CFO will be extradited to the U.S.?
[Will Ripley, Correspondent, Cnn:] In terms of the letter, Kristie, I think you could sum up the Chinese response in two words, "butt out." They say that these academics, you know, 27 former diplomats, 116 scholars from 19 countries are interfering with Chinese sovereignty and interfering with China's justice system. And they say that they do welcome normal and friendly activities. They're not trying to discourage scholars and business people and diplomats from operating in the country, but they say this case was different that these two Canadians essentially endangered Chinese national security, and therefore, they deserve to be charged and China buckling down and saying they will continue to face charges. In terms of Meng Wanzou, they call Canada's actions a grave mistake. A mistake that China believes needs to be corrected immediately. They continue to call for Meng Wanzhou's immediate release. The Huawei CFO, the daughter of the company's founder, a company that is a pillar of China's economy, her arrest really has hit a nerve here in China and has made the Chinese feel that it is blatantly apparent that this is not a legitimate case. As you said at the top, they feel that Canada and the United States abused their extradition treaty and that they feel this arrest was politically motivated having to do with trying to put pressure on China when it comes to the trade war and trying to sully the name of Huawei, which is one of China's most important companies, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Tension continue to rise over Huawei. We've got Will Ripley reporting live from Beijing; Paula Newton live from Ottawa, a big thank you to you both. Former Canadian Ambassador to China, Guy Saint-Jacques is one of the signatories of that open letter to President Xi Jinping and he joins us now from Montreal via Skype. Sir, thank you for joining us. In this letter, you warned that the detention of Canadians will leave China worse off. Do you think that Xi Jinping is receptive to your message?
[Guy Saint-jacques, Former Canadian Ambassador To China:] Well, I do hope so and I think that's the main message there because this is not only a problem that involves Canada and China, but it's something that could happen to any other country. And here is a group of people who love China, who have worked in China most of their life in many cases, where you have there, great experts, people who have played a very useful role in explaining what's happening in China to the world. And of course, everyone is concerned about what could happen to them in the future, so I hope that the Chinese leadership will pay attention to this letter.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, a lot of concern about the fate of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, and what about the Canadian sentenced to death after a court convicted him of drug smuggling? Are you also calling for the release of Robert Schellenberg?
[Saint-jacques:] Well, in that case, I think you know that the initial sentence of 15 years that was handed to Mr. Schellenberg back in October might have been justified. You know, he claims that he is innocent, but what is peculiar about this case is the speed at which the hearing of the appeal took place and when it took place, the three judges didn't want to hear about his supposedly new evidence that the prosecutors wanted to table. They said put this in the file. And after it concluded, it took them about 67 or 68 minutes to turn the initial sentence into a death sentence, and even Chinese lawyers have said that they were surprised by the speed of this hearing and the wait was conducted, so for me, clearly, there was political interference and it was additional pressure that China wanted to put on Canada to return Mrs. Meng.
[Lu Stout:] And meanwhile, we've been reporting that the Canadian government says that the United States will soon make a formal request for the extradition of the CFO of Huawei. Do you fear that when that happens, there could be more detentions, more retaliation from China?
[Saint-jacques:] Well, if we look at the playbook of the Chinese, and I have seen this in the past when we went to a similar case that was less publicized back in 2014, I suspect they will want to apply further pressure on Canada, but I hope that the strategy pursued by the Canadian government to rally international support will make the Chinese leadership think twice because China remains concerned about its international image despite what they say, like what Mrs. Hua, the spokesperson at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing said today about the signatories of the letter. I think that they are taking note of what's happening and I hope that they will tone down their messages, and I also hope that we will be able to soon to sit face-to-face with China to try to resolve this issue.
[Lu Stout:] All right, so you remain hopeful that China is concerned about its international stature and international reputation, but in the meantime, a personal question for you, given the current political climate and the ongoing detentions, would you travel to China right now?
[Saint-jacques:] Well, I think in my case, I would delay travels because I know what can happen. And if you look especially at the case of Mr. Kovrig, what the Chinese are doing contravenes the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relation. This Convention says that you are covered by diplomatic immunity while you work in a country, but there is also this notion of residual diplomatic immunity whereby a country cannot question you on what you have done while you were a diplomat. And so in my case, of course, China could say that I was involved in all kinds of activities that threatened the national security. So I think that I will probably abstain for a little while before going back to China.
[Lu Stout:] Guy Saint-Jacques, sir, thank you very much, indeed, for joining us on the program and take care. Business and government leaders from around the world are gathering in Davos for, of course, the annual World Economic Forum. Optimism is in short supply these days. The CEOs warn that Brexit, trade wars, other sources of uncertainty threaten to drag down global growth. One of those companies feeling that pain is of course, the company we've been talking about, the Chinese telecom giant, Huawei. Now, CNN business editor-at-large, Richard Quest is on the ground for us. He joins us now live from Davos. And Richard, Huawei's Deputy Chairman is there. He, in the last few hours, addressed delegates there. What were you able to glean from him? What did he say?
[Richard Quest, Editor At Large, Cnn Business:] It's fascinating, actually, because first of all, Huawei does have a presence there. They have got a rather smart shop, porta cabin or whatever right on the promenade. You would hardly know looking at it that they were supposedly telecom's pariahs at the moment. They have got a presence here in this shop I mean, shop, as in terms of invited people in to talk and the Deputy Chairman is speaking on a panel today was quite clear that you know, we get this perception that Huawei is somehow an arm of the Chinese government or a spying arm of the Chinese government. Well, he said, "If that's true, they, too, are being hurt by the trade war."
[Ken Hu, Deputy Chairman, Huawei:] We've seen, you know, the effect on many of the companies, including Huawei, and some of the sectors from the trade war, and as a technology industry, we're highly reliant on the global supply chain and the global innovation ecosystem. So we are probably now suffering the most right now.
[Quest:] So there you have it, I mean, it's the best you're going to get in that sense, but any idea what I think is perhaps the most fascinating, any idea that somehow this company is going to pull up its tent and retreat to the hills and not be seen while these accusations swirl around is simply not the case. They are here in full force and they are making themselves open.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, and addressing that, yes, they're getting the hit. They're feeling the damage from the ongoing trade war, one of many risks to the global economy. That's being discussed there at Davos. We heard that warning from Christine Lagarde yesterday that the global economy is slowing down, and it could get worse? Richard, according to the people that you've been talking to so far, what is emerging as the single well, the biggest risk to global growth?
[Quest:] The biggest risk at the moment remains the trade dispute with China, most people seem to tell us, but they are not telling you how they are going to solve it or who has to give in first. But fact that the ripples are being felt and will continue to be felt, by far and away, that is the number one risk. In terms of the immediacy, as before, you've got climate change, democracies, threats, all the other issues, pessimism that are on the bigger issues.
[Lu Stout:] All right, Richard Quest joining us live from Davos. Richard, thank you so much for joining us. And you could join CNN for ongoing coverage of the World Economic Forum live in Davos, "First Move with Julia Chatterley" continues the week-long coverage that will kick off in less than an hour right here on CNN. In the meantime, you are watching "News Stream" and coming up, a U.S. citizen detained in Russia makes a court appearance today. We are going to tell you what happened at his pretrial hearing and the latest details from his lawyer. And a model linked to a Russian oligarch with apparent ties to the Trump campaign is due back in a Moscow court. We are live in the Russian capital with all of the details, next.

[Berman:] Self-restraint is all that's stopping the U.S. and South Korea from going to war with North Korea, those words from a joint statement by General Vincent Brooks, commander of combined forces in the South, and the chairman of South Korea's joint chiefs of staff. This was not impromptu, not off the cuff. It's a message, and they don't get much blunter than that. As for what military action could look like, the options and the outcome range from difficult to nightmarish, in part because China is nearby and especially because Seoul is within artillery range of the north. Joining us now with more on all the mentions of this really difficult problem, CNN chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto. Jim, first tell us what U.S. officials are saying happened during this missile launch.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Well, when they look at it, they're saying one, it's new. And that's interesting, because the U.S. and the international community has been aware of most of North Korea's missile classes and they've been seeing advances in each class, but this one is a new category. Two, it does appear to be an attempt at an ICBM, an intercontinental ballistic missile. And what you need for that is something that can be multiple stage, can go high, can go outside the atmosphere and come back. This one did all that. One remaining question is did that so-called reentry vehicle, did it come down to Earth in a situation that was controlled, meaning they had control from start to finish. That's not clear yet. But they're certainly getting closer here. That's a lot of the ingredients, a lot of steps to get to that eventuality that everybody has been fearing, which is that North Korea has the ability to hit across continents, including hit the U.S. continent.
[Berman:] Well, and that's just the point here, theoretically how far could this type of missile potentially reach?
[Sciutto:] To Alaska. If successful, it could go to Alaska. Then the question becomes, can they take the next step of reliably miniaturizing a nuclear warhead to put on the tip of that missile? That's another step that the U.S., U.S. intelligence believes North Korea is moving closer to. They don't believe that they're at that step today. But they know they're making progress. It's interesting. James Clapper, former director of national intelligence, he told me this last year, he said that our footing is we have to assume that North Korea can do that. It's a pretty remarkable and alarming assumption to have to make that today.
[Berman:] And we heard from the generals both U.S. and South Korean saying self-restraint right now is operative. It's the only thing keeping the U.S. from going to war here. If that changes, realistically, what are the U.S. options?
[Sciutto:] Well, here's the thing, the military option, at least in terms of a preemptive strike, taking out North Korea's nuclear facilities preemptively is really not an option because of the consequences. And you named them. Seoul is very close to the North Korean border. North Korea has got a lot of weapons, rockets and artillery trained on Seoul, so that the price of a U.S. or international military strike would be very high. James Mattis said it would be unlike war we've seen in decades. Because of that, your actual options that are going to be familiar to ones that everybody listening tonight have been tried before, right? Pressure on China, economic sanctions, the possibility of talks. Where does that lead you in the end? Really, the reality that's approaching, the world recognizing that North Korea is a nuclear power and contain North Korea. That's a remarkable and alarming reality, as well.
[Berman:] That's what Richard Haass, chairman of the Council of Foreign Relations, calls acceptance. An Acceptance is not something that a lot of diplomats are willing to deal with. Jim Sciutto, thank you very, very much.
[Sciutto:] Thank you.
[Berman:] Perspective now from someone who dealt with North Korea and Kim Jong-un's father as defense secretary during the Clinton administration, William Cohen, former Republican senator from the state of Maine and currently CEO of the global consulting firm bearing his name, the Cohen Group. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being with us. When you hear the commander of U.S. forces in the Korean peninsula say that self-restraint is all that is preventing war with the North, to a lot of people watching tonight, that sounds pretty terrifying. How long do you believe that this self-restraint can or should last?
[William Cohen, Former Defesen Secretary:] Well, it's been lasting for some time now. The North has been engaged in provocative action for years, has been building its nuclear capability and missile technology, is engaged in attacking South Korean boats, killing a number of sailors, et cetera. So, this has been going on a long time. And the South has exercised, as has the United States, great restraint, because of the fact that there are some 800,000 troops on the border of South Korea that could from the DMZ, at least that could rain havoc on Seoul and other places. So, nothing has changed except it's gotten worse. And it's gotten worse because his allies, the North Korean allies, China and Russia, have been helping his economy grow. We used to say you can't have guns and butter. Well, he's had guns, but he's also had butter, furnished by the Russians and the Chinese and others. And so, the reaction is going to be on the part of the United States, to go after those countries who are, in fact, supporting the North Korean regime, saying if you do business with them, you can't do business with us. That raises the issue of China itself. Now, we're not going to get into a trade war with China, but we are and should take a number of sanction steps against those companies, and those banks who have been, in fact, moving money through in order to help the North Korea have the butter as well as the guns.
[Berman:] You said this has been going on for some time. But everyone we've spoken with has said this time it's worse, the fact that it's an ICBM, that it's a device that now in theory soon could reach Alaska, changes the calculus here. So, you know, at what point do you have to go beyond the diplomatic scolding? At what point or how can you force China to do what you're saying needs to be done?
[Cohen:] I'm not sure you can force them. We still have two very important thing we have deterrence and we have defense. When we talk about beefing up our capability, I think we can do more in South Korea and Japan. For example, the South Korean president was just here, I spoke with him. He has had some apprehensions about the deployment of THAAD, because he wasn't aware of the implications. I would see this as an opportunity for him to say we're going forward with a full-scale THAAD. I think the same should be said and encourage Japan to do the same, not only to employ Aegis land-based systems in Japan, but I'd even start talking about Japan having a cruise missile capability. So I think we can do things on a defensive basis that will make life much tougher for the North Koreans if we, in fact, really imposed the sanctions that need to be imposed and say to the North Korean regime, if we're going to negotiate, we're going to negotiate on a basis which you don't gain, as you have been in the past.
[Berman:] Such so our viewers all know, THAAD is a missile defense system that has been placed in South Korea that the current South Korean leader has actually had some opposition to because they felt it might be too provocative to the North Koreans. It's there, but the question is how long will it stay? Maybe they will enhance it even more. You know, I was thinking today how remarkable it was, while you were secretary of defense, your counterpart in the State Department, Madeleine Albright went to North Korea. It seems like a generation I mean, it was a generation ago, but it seems like, you know, a world ago. We're looking at this video right now. Should negotiations, should the idea of direct talks with North Korea at this point be on the table, and if so, in what way?
[Cohen:] At some point, there can be direct talks, but not at this point because what you've seen is the North Koreans have simply engaged in extortion after extortion and now at a much higher level. They would say, let's just stop things the way they are. So, then, they can sit down and start talking some more so they continue their testing and research and development, and then we're at a much more difficult place. So, I met with the North Koreans, as well. I think there is an opportunity to make a deal at some point. But we're not ready yet, because they're not ready, and the Chinese and Russians have to be a part of it, and they've been too willing to allow the regime to continue to enjoy the benefits of that commercial relationship.
[Berman:] U.S. says it won't talk unless North Korea gets rid of its nuke. North Korea says it will never get rid of its nukes and won't talk unless the U.S. stops doing military exercise in the peninsula, which the U.S. won't do. It doesn't seem like there's a starting point.
[Cohen:] Well, there is. The notion that we should give up our exercises with the South Koreans, well, that means, if you don't exercise, you don't train and you become less capable. And over time, that capability erodes. And so, therefore, when the time comes to negotiate with the North Koreans, you're at a great disadvantage in terms of capability. So, there is a way to negotiate this. It has to be done from a position of strength and I think we have to talk in terms of even talking about regime change in North Korea, because we haven't been doing that. [20:25:001] And I think if this regime continues on the path it's going, we should at least start talking about it, if not considering
[Berman:] How do you do that? How do you change the regime?
[Cohen:] You change from within. You start, again, crushing the economy. We haven't done, but I think we can do more to make it much more painful for the North Koreans to continue to do what they're doing and enjoy an increased quality of life. The South Korea's president said, the economy of North Korea has increased. It's been improving. Why is it improving with all these sanctions? Because other countries have been evading it, helping them to continue their guns policy, and also helping to feed and fuel them. That has to stop if we have any hope of ever coming to a negotiated settlement.
[Berman:] Secretary Cohen, fascinating discussion. Your perspective really from the inside over the last several decades, thanks so, so much.
[Cohen:] Thank you.
[Berman:] President Trump's first face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin just days away. Forget the fact that he said he'd already met with him during the campaign. What is on the agenda or lack thereof and whether the small matter of Russians meddling in the U.S. election will come up. That's next.

[Allen:] Well, you're going to pay a little more for that vino. Derek's here to tell you Derek somehow wrapped drinking wine into his weathercast. Blame it on the weather. Now we even pay more for wine.
[Derek Van Dam, Ams Meteorologist:] Well, you promised not to whine about it.
[Van Dam:] I'll be here all day, folks. No, really, this is going to affect us your favorite bottle of wine will see an uptick in the price at the supermarket. And some countries impacted more than others. The global wine production slumped to its lowest level in 60 years in 2017. This is according to data from the International Organization of Vine and Wine. That's a decrease of 8.6 percent compared to 2016. This is due mainly to poor weather conditions across some of those major grape-growing areas across the world, from Europe into South Africa. So we are talking about a major decline in our global wine production. We are talking about a 60-year low in terms of how much wine was produced in 2017. Where was it impacted? Spain, France into Italy and also South Africa. That area is also in the midst of one of the worst droughts in over a century. Combine drought with wildfires, frost, hail, you name it, the impacts have been felt across the wine industry throughout the world and some areas hit worse than others. France, your bottles of wine expected to increase by 10 percent in terms of cost; Spain, 45 percent increase and Italy, up to 74 percent increase in some of your favorite wines as you head to the store. Now this particular gentleman, a global beverage strategist, said that wine companies targeting low prices will be hit the worst because their margins are so low. So that cheap bottle of wine, that is where they expect to see the greatest increase in wine.
[Allen:] All right. We'll make a turn here to a horrible tragedy that occurred in this country. Last October, the Las Vegas mass shooting killed over 50 people. Many who made it out alive are still recovering both mentally and physically.
[Howell:] CNN's Nick Watt reports, one survivor is making it his mission to help others affected by this massacre.
[Unidentified Female:] You're so beautiful and
[Luca Iclodean, Las Vegas Shooting Survivor:] I'm glad you're here.
[Watt:] Hug after hug.
[Unidentified Female:] So good to see you.
[Watt:] Luca Iclodean was shot that Sunday night in October, lost most of a lung, has more surgeries to come.
[Unidentified Female:] How you doing?
[Iclodean:] OK. Hanging in there.
[Watt:] But money his colleagues and bosses here at the Hard Rock Hotel gave him, Luca is now giving to other survivors.
[Unidentified Male:] You are you are truly amazing.
[Watt:] $1,000 each, $11,000 in all.
[Unidentified Female:] Please do not lose hope.
[Watt:] Luca's shy, wouldn't be interviewed and strangely I like him more for that. Is the sentiment and the emotion behind this, you know, as important as the money itself?
[Unidentified Female:] It's actually more important just really somebody who's there to say, hey, I'm going to hold your hand and we're going to go through this together and you're going to be OK. That was the most important thing to me. More than money.
[Watt:] But that $1,000 will help take care of some bills.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm not going to say no. What a beautiful thing he's doing and makes me want to see what I can do to help the next person.
[Watt:] Shaina Cataldo and Zanni Manjabi were bartending that night at the Route 91 Festival. Zanni tried to help the injured.
[Unidentified Female:] Even during the day, I feel like I'm still having nightmares. Like, flashbacks of what happened and things that I felt I could have done and didn't have enough time to, you know, maybe saved more lives. I carried all that weight with me.
[Watt:] There's no real clear motive as to why this guy did it. I mean is that
[Unidentified Female:] one of the biggest things. If we had some kind of reason of why it happened, it would kind of put some of us at a little bit of peace.
[Watt:] Millions have already been raised by other charities in the state but given mostly to families of the dead and the physically injured. The need goes on.
[Brian Claypool, Las Vegas Shooting Survivor:] I mean there are thousands of people who were at that concert who are in need of financial assistance to help with things like medical bills and mental health treatment.
[Watt:] Brian Claypool was there that night under fire, then on CNN's "
[New Day". Claypool:] Everybody was screaming. You know and, you know, you you didn't know what to do.
[Watt:] With fellow survivor Lisa Fine, they co-founded Route 91 Strong.
[Lisa Fine, Las Vegas Shooting Survivor:] Our team is unstoppable and our team is going to move mountains for you survivors.
[Watt:] They're holding a fundraising concert in June and, right now, distributing Luca's donation. There were thousands of people who were there, like you and who are scarred by this.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, definitely. That scar, it's inside us, you know, for the rest of our lives. Thank you.
[Watt:] Nick Watt, CNN, Las Vegas.
[Allen:] And the day's top stories are just ahead.
[Howell:] The next hour of NEWSROOM right after the break.

[Howell:] Three twenty-nine a.m. here on the U.S. East Coast, welcome back to viewers here in the United States and all around the world. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM. It is good to have you with us. I'm George Howell.
[Allen:] And I'm Natalie Allen. Let's update you on top stories this hour. In South Korea this hour the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford is set to meet any moment now with South Korean President Moon Jae-in. Dunford is in South Korea amid the latest missile threats from Pyongyang. How to deal with North Korea is at the top of their agenda..
[Howell:] Protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia shouted down the organizer of the white nationalist rally when he tried to make a public statement on Sunday. That comes the day after a car plowed into a crowd of people protesting against that same white supremacist rally. One woman was killed by the car that rammed into the crowd of people.
[Allen:] U.S. President Donald Trump is being slammed for what he didn't say about that violence in Virginia. Mr. Trump convince hatred and bigotry but he failed to denounce white nationalism by name. A neo-Nazi web site even celebrated the president's remarks as, quote, "really good." Now the White House is trying to clarify the president's remark. One official said the president said very strongly in his statement yesterday that he condemns all forms of violence, bigotry and hatred and of course, that includes, white supremacists, KKK, neo-Nazi and all extremist groups. He called for national unity and bringing all Americans together.
[Howell:] It is important to point out a footnote here. That statement comes from an official at the White House who asked not to have his or her name revealed. And many critics are pushing the president instead to say the words himself. So, just pointing out that footnote to the statement. Our Sara Sidner spoke with CNN's Wolf Blitzer about these white nationalists and what they expect to gain.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] You got the white nationalists and that's probably the largest group because there's a lot of different people underneath this umbrella. They support white supremacist ideologies which make them white supremacists. To say some openly use racial slurs to incite violence, others claim they are nonviolent organizations but then you have other categories like the KKK, the neo-Nazi. The neo-confederates. There's also the alt-right and alt-light, two groups that talk a lot about white nationalism and they want to be in a place where white history, in other words, European history is the sole history that people learn and that they can be proud of. I do want to talk about the fact that Donald Trump did not specifically name neo-Nazi and specifically white nationalist and specifically name white supremacists, if you don't think words matter, you would be wrong. Words matter. And I want you to hear what one of the most extreme groups, the Daily Stormer, who's got a web site out there. The person who runs that, Andrew Anglin is one of the most racist hateful people in these groups and he's definitely a part of this march, some of his people at the march. I want to read what he said after Donald Trump spoke those words but failed to mention neo-Nazi and failed to mention white supremacists. He said, quote, "Trump comments were good. He didn't attack us," talking about white supremacist, "he just said the nation should come together, nothing specific against us. When asked to condemn he just walked out of the room. Really, really good. God bless him." This is from one of the most extreme people in this whole white supremacists movement and he's basically saying, well, the good thing is Donald Trump didn't say anything condemning us specifically so we're good. And he is good because he's basically saying to us, we're OK doing what we're doing, but we need to do keep doing this. This was really a recruiting tool, we should mention that as well as far as all of these different groups going out and marching together with this tiki torches definitely for recruitment. That is what these groups are looking to do, include and bring in more young people. Hoping that they will see there are so many people that are for this sort of white supremacy or white nationalism that will join alongside them. Of course, they don't want blacks to join, don't want Jews to join, they don't want Hispanics to join. They want to get rid of everybody else, but they certainly want whites to join. And that's what you're seeing here, a recruitment tool. Wolf?
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] You know, Sara, these white nationalist groups they are pointing fingers at what they say is other side violent groups. Tell us about that.
[Sidner:] Look, it is fair to say that there are a section of anti- fascists or antifa as they're known, they're known as block black that often come out and they do end up pushing and shoving and screaming at one another. They were created in the 1930's. They targeted, they usually target racism, fascism, Nazism. They are known for destruction and violent acts. Just one section of it known as a block black is known for coming out and burning things. And we saw some of that in Berkley over these past couple of years. And this year especially we've seen some of their reactions there, you see some of the fighting that went on that was a Trump rally that happened in Berkeley. There was another rally against a white nationalist or alt-right, if you will, speaker who came to University of California at Berkley. And the block black, so to speak, you see them there getting arrested come they usually their faces are covered, they're wearing all black. And their point is to be destructive. Their feeling is look, non-violent hasn't worked we are going to do something different. It often that's destructive and violent. But we should be very clear here in saying that what started all this was this march with the tiki torches and the things that were being said by the neo-Nazis, by the white nationalist, or white supremacists, call them whatever name you want, that is what is sparked some of this reaction. People terrified and worried that this is going to grow. And one of the biggest reactions of that was that Donald Trump did not condemn these groups specifically, that's a real problem. Because these groups are taking that as a thumbs up to what they're doing.
[Howell:] Sara Sidner there breaking us a breakdown of the criticism against President Trump's talk.
[Allen:] Yes, and even if he were to say something now, a while later, would it really matter? Too much time has passed.
[Howell:] Yes.
[Allen:] So.
[Howell:] Yes. It's a point. I mean, you can look back at the interview that Jake Tapper had within a while back during the campaign where he asked him about David Duke. David Duke supporting him. The president in that interview did not disavow David Duke, did so later and some critics say that pause, that beat was basically sort of the dog whistle, so to speak to people, you know, that there was support there. Still ahead here, President Trump's controversial chief strategist Steve Bannon, he's been criticized for his previous role as editor in chief of Breitbart News, a right wing publication that has been publish and it's published inflammatory articles.
[Allen:] And now people close to the president are hinting the knives are out for Bannon. First, listen to former White House communications director, Anthony Scaramucci speaking for the first time since getting fired.
[Anthony Scaramucci, Fmr. White House Communications Director:] If the president wants to execute that legislative agenda that I think is so promising for the American people, the lower middle class people and the middle class people then he has to move away from the sort of Bannonbart nonsense.
[Unidentified Male:] You mean Steve in Breitbart, Steve Bannon.
[Scaramucci:] Yes. The whole thing is nonsensical. It's not serving the president's interest.
[Howell:] And now take a listen at how the president's national security advisor, H.R. McMaster responded when he was asked, not once, but twice three times, if he can work with Bannon.
[Chuck Todd, Nbc Host, "meet The Press":] Can you and Steve Bannon still work together in this White House or not?
[H.r. Mcmaster, National Security Advisor:] I get to work together with a broad range of talented people. And it is a privilege every day to enable the national security team.
[Todd:] You didn't answer can you and Steve Bannon work in that same White House?
[Mcmaster:] I'm ready to work with anybody who will help advance the president's agenda and advance the security and prosperity of the people.
[Todd:] Do you believe Steve Bannon does that?
[Mcmaster:] I believe that everyone who works in the White House, who has the privilege, the great privilege every day of serving their nation should be motivated by that goal.
[Allen:] Never quite directly answered that question. That was national security advisor H.R. McMaster who is said to be under attack from both inside and outside the White House.
[Howell:] A report memo, a reported memo, rather, is highlighting the power struggle between two of President Trump's closest advisors. Here's CNN's chief Washington correspondent, Jake Tapper.
[Tapper:] While the president's national security advisor and the National Security Council are trying to provide guidance to President Trump as he attempts to navigate and escalate in high take showdown with North Korea, they're also facing attacks from outside the White House and from within the White House. Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, the National Security Advisor to the president has been fending off an information and sometimes disinformation campaign against him by a warring faction vying for power under the same White House roof, allies to the president senior strategist Steve Bannon and those of his first fired National Security Advisor, General Michael Flynn.
[Michael Allen, Fmr. Majority Staff Director, U.s. House Intel Committee:] It's a fight for the soul of President Trump as he grapples with should I be more of a traditional national security national president or should I try in be a foreign policy president in my campaign voice.
[Tapper:] Bannon received a special waiver to continue to talk to his former employees at Breitbart News where he serve as chief executive in which he once described as a, quote, "platform for the alt-right." It's a web site that is launch attack after attack against McMaster in a slew of recent articles. Earlier this week the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research labs noted that many of those stories as well as other attacks against McMaster by fringe web sites and figures including info wars have been pushed on social media using the hash tag fire McMaster by a former Breitbart employee who now literally works for the Russian government as an employee of Sputnik News. Fire McMaster has also been pushed by fringe conspiracy theorists with social media presences who have occasionally been granted access to the White House briefing room by the Trump team. Also pushing this propaganda, someone not particularly influential but extremely noteworthy. Michael Flynn, Jr., the son and one-time top aid of the man who used to have McMaster's job, General Michael Flynn. The Digital Forensic Research Lab notes that the hash tags spread partly because of fake or automatic accounts or bus. They say the campaign against McMaster began in earnest after McMaster ousted the first of five controversial officials of the NSC who have been brought in by Flynn. Why Rich Higgins, a strategic planning aid who work on the Trump campaign was fired by McMaster is subject to debate. Some sources say he and others exemplify McMaster's view that Flynn hired unqualified sub-standard staffers. But there is also the matter of this memo Higgins wrote, rife with conspiracy theories reminiscent of those in the fevered corner of the paranoid internet.
[Jana Winter, Contributor, Foreign Policy Magazine:] If you are on the McMaster side, you do not like this memo because you read it and you say, is he talking about me? Is he talking about someone in leadership who may disagree with the president by that guy?
[Tapper:] The memo obtained by foreignpolicy.com purports to unravel a bizarre conspiracy theory about a coordinated effort between the establishment, the media, globalist, bankers, Islamist, Black Lives Matter, the ACLU, the organization for security and cooperation in Europe, the United Nations, cultural Marxist and the so-called deep state or permanent government apparatus, all of whom the memo claims are banding together to delegitimize and destroy President Trump and prevent him for making America great again. Quote, "For this cabal," the memo states, Trump must be destroyed."
[Allen:] To me it was really a declaration of war on some of the choices for personnel that the president has made. He's this memo's message essentially was hey, those that are perhaps generals or those that had been in the process, that's not your brand. That's not who you are.
[Tapper:] The memo also compares Trump to Abraham Lincoln casting Trump's struggle as a battle between good and evil. Quote, "In the same way, President Lincoln was surrounded by political opposition both inside and outside of his wire and both overt and covert forms, so too is President Trump." Higgins writes. "Had Lincoln failed, so too would have the republic." Though President Trump, it should be noted defended McMaster just yesterday.
[Trump:] He's our friend, he's my friend, and he's a very talented man. I like him, and I respect him.
[Tapper:] Evidence the campaign is having an effect. While McMaster is trying to give a sense of national security adviser to the president during his critical, he's also forced to fend these attacks from the far right both from outside the house and the memo makes pretty clear from inside as well. CNN reached out to the National Security Council and they said the memo was not an official NSC document. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington.
[Howell:] Jake, thanks for the report. With independence came decades of tension, a look at the milestone anniversary of the end of colonial rule in India. Stay with us.

[Berman:] All right. This morning Russia is facing accusations that it is hindering the fight against ISIS in Syria. Coalition official says that Russian military officials turned down their request to strike ISIS targets near a key base used by U.S. troops.
[Harlow:] Our Barbara Starr has the latest from the Pentagon. I mean, this is an interesting, potentially disturbing turn. Why did this happen? Do we know?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] We don't know. U.S. officials are telling our own Ryan Browne that they're confused and they don't know why the Russians turned down the request to bomb what the U.S. strongly believed were ISIS militants that were threatening this this base that the U.S. uses in southern Syria. The U.S. went to the Russians on the deconfliction line, that telephone line essentially that keeps the two sides from having accidents in the sky. And the Russians said no, you can't bomb it. It's really interesting because it comes at a time, of course, when the world is so focused on the big Russia meddling scandal in the election and it really underscores there still are these day-to-day strains in the U.S.Russian military relationship, especially in Syria and that Russians, having their own problems there. They are now publicly acknowledging that their bases have been attacked by anti-regime forces, by insurgents. They have suffered airplane damage from attacks that they have had from drones flying over their bases. They've even had two service members killed in an attack, so the Russians feeling the strain of their own presence in Syria and making things a bit difficult for the U.S. presence there. Right now the U.S. has not conducted the air strikes we are told. That it wants to conduct in this area of southern Syria to push ISIS back. So this is a big stay tuned to see if the U.S. and Moscow can work it all out John, Poppy.
[Harlow:] All right. Barbara Starr at the Pentagon, we appreciate the reporting. Thank you so much.
[Berman:] All right. We are just minutes away now from a high-stakes, bipartisan meeting at the White House. This is crucial. At stake right now is a possible, although not right now attainable, apparently, deal on what to do with hundreds of thousands of Dreamers in this country and whether or not to build the president's proposed border wall. New developments ahead. Stay with CNN.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news. Collision path. After tearing through a series of Caribbean islands, bringing death and destruction, Hurricane Irma is on a collision path for Florida. Millions of people are now at risk from this catastrophic storm. Storm surge. Alongside a hurricane watch, South Florida is under a storm surge watch for the enormous wall of water that could be pushed ashore, bringing deadly flooding as high as a House to coastal areas. Fleeing Florida. Hundreds of thousands have been ordered to flee their homes. Many more aren't waiting to be told to evacuate. Highways heading north are clogged, and fuel shortages could lead to gridlock. And White House interviews. A CNN exclusive: sources say Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team wants to interview White House staffers who were aboard Air Force One when the misleading statement was drafted about Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news, the new forecast that's just coming in for Hurricane Irma, pounding the Caribbean with winds of 175 miles an hour. The epic storm, one of the most powerful ever, is taking aim at Florida, and hurricane watches have been declared in the southern part of the state. The mayor of Miami Beach calls Irma a nuclear hurricane, and Florida's governor warns it's a catastrophic storm like the state has never seen. Mandatory evacuations are spreading. So far, 650,000 people in the Miami area alone have been ordered to leave, and others are being warned to be ready on short notice. Countless Floridians aren't waiting to be ordered out. Highways are clogged with people heading north, but fuel shortages could further snarl the exodus. Georgia and South Carolina also are ordering coastal evacuations starting Saturday. Spurring the urgent warnings, the trail of destruction and devastation and death already carved out by Irma. The prime minister of Barbuda says 95 percent of the buildings there have been destroyed. The island of St. Martin was devastated, and the storm knocked out power to a million people in Puerto Rico. Still in Irma's path, the Turks and Caicos islands and the Bahamas. I'll speak with Congressman Ted Deutsche of Florida and the director of the National Weather Service. Our correspondents, and specialists and guests, they are all standing by with full coverage of the storm and other stories breaking tonight. Let's begin with the breaking news. A new forecast is just coming in for Hurricane Irma. Our meteorologist, Tom Sater, is at CNN Severe Weather Center. So what's the latest, Tom?
[Tom Sater, Cnn Meteorologist:] Well, just a few minor changes. Again, what we have is a formidable hurricane, Wolf, no doubt. We're losing time now because those that have a evacuate have to do by tomorrow morning if they're going to do this. Now, I will show you a significant change, at least 20, 30 miles when it comes to the track towards Miami, which could be significant for Miami and everyone, Monroe County, Miami-Dade and elsewhere. We are now watching the storm surge start to plow into the Turks and Caicos. That's why they were evacuated, looking at at least 15 to even possibly 20 feet or more in some areas. The warnings extend across the Bahama islands, but this is new today, and this, Wolf, is significant. These watches posted by the National Hurricane are not just slapped up on the U.S. without considerable discussion and analysis of the data. It costs millions and millions of dollars to place a hurricane watch somewhere in the U.S. because of the federal, state, the local need, the equipment, the personnel, and the evacuation process that's taking place and, of course, closing up businesses and so on and so forth. This will become a warning as time rolls on. We will see more watches extended up the East Coast and the West Coast, because again, keep in mind, this storm is so large, once it makes its way to the southern tip of Florida, the entire peninsula will be covered with tropical storm-force winds. I want to point out here the tracks. A couple of them still deviate down to the south over Cuba. Almost ready to kind of erase that, but we cannot knock that possibility out. But again, the spaghetti plots are different than the European and the U.S. models. So we look at all of them. And again we continue to see quite an array and focus along that east coast. The difference in the track from the National Hurricane Center from yesterday to today is quite interesting. But for planning purposes, I just want everybody to look at this color codes. This is when the tropical storm force winds meet your area. You do not want to leave on Saturday, driving through Florida with tropical-storm-force winds. So you want at least want to leave, I'd say at the very latest if you're even considering, Friday morning. But everybody needs to consider this. Here's why. The path now, shifting back westward. Twenty-four hours ago, we saw a 60- to 70-mile shift to the east, and now it looks like it's shifting. Even though it may be just 20 miles, it puts Miami right in the worst possible position. Because when you look at the formidable storm, the strongest winds, the strongest storm surge, the bands of heavy rain are always in that north, northeastern quadrant. So as the system stays, more just toward, I would say, just toward the west of Miami, then they're putting Miami and the millions of people even northward in that range. As we continue to go along, let's take a look at the European model and the U.S. There have been some changes with this, as well. They have all shifted a little bit westward. Yesterday, the U.S. model was a little bit more off the coastline, and it still is. And it still brings it up toward landfall near Savannah. That's still a big possibility. So everyone on alert on, of course, the coast of the Carolinas and Georgia. But for the European, a week ago, last Thursday this model was still south of Miami. And here it is again today. So you've got to take that in consideration, this grasp it has on the environment. If we get in closer, and take a look at each one, it is quite interesting. And this is probably the worst-case scenario, although there's going to be suffering anywhere. So there isn't a great outcome, any way you look at it. But again, with those stronger winds, as this moves in toward Key Largo, this is our problem spot for the strongest winds, the greatest storm surge that could be and I think it's conservative to say ten feet, really. I mean, we could see 15. The Turks and Caicos are getting 20. It depends a lot on that slope of the ocean floor. But again, this is going to be a problem. This is going to be like winds near the center of an EF-3 tornado. And we know what that does when it hits any community in the southern plains or anywhere in the U.S. But consider those kind of winds around that center of the eye, hour after hour after hour all the way from the south to the north, straight up the center of Florida. The other model, of course, we're going to be watching is the U.S. model. But again, as the European moves in, you are not safe in Key West, as well. As the winds wrap around, you're going to see a storm surge on the northern side coming in, as well. But real quickly for you, here's the U.S. model, and this is a little different. Still has a very close landfall near Fort Lauderdale. This is much like Matthew last year that scoured the entire coastline, keeping the catastrophic damage offshore but creating quite a bit of activity and damage, as we know, well into the Carolinas.
[Blitzer:] Yes, clearly, it could be a worst-case scenario for Miami, Miami Beach, Hollywood, Fort Lauderdale, up towards Boca Raton and Palm Beach. We're watching that area very, very closely. We're going to keep checking back with you. I know, Tom, you're getting more information all the time. Stand by. This path of destruction carved across the Caribbean by the hurricane, Hurricane Irma's, adding great urgency right now to Florida's preparations for one of the most powerful storms ever. Our Brian Todd is joining us from Palm Beach right now, not far from the president's Florida estate at Mar-a-Lago. Brian, officials are sounding some very dire warnings.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] They certainly are, Wolf, because we're standing in a spot now that could take a direct hit when Irma comes ashore in earnest on Sunday. This island behind me, the barrier island Palm Beach, could be inundated. They could see five to ten feet of storm surge, which would inundate this area behind me, including as you mentioned, the president's winter White House, Mar-a-Lago. Mandatory evacuations are going to be ordered in a few hours. This comes as people throughout south Florida are getting a harrowing preview of what they could see. People seeing very disturbing images of what Irma did to the Caribbean.
[Todd:] This is the kind of devastation that has hit the Caribbean and could be headed directly into Florida. Flooded roads and buildings in Antigua, cars and boats ruined in St. Barts. Trees torn apart in St. Thomas, the destruction seen from the air, extending for miles across St. Martin. Barbuda took a direct hit; 95 percent of buildings are estimated damaged or destroyed.
[Gaston Browne, Prime Minister, Antigua And Barbuda:] What I saw was heart-wrenching. I mean, absolutely devastating.
[Unidentified Male:] The roof is about to come. Yes, there it is.
[Todd:] Hurricane Irma has maintained 185-mile-per-hour winds for longer than any hurricane in recorded history. Almost 16 million people are in the potential path of the storm. Puerto Rico suffered high winds and flooding, leaving a million without power and 56,000 without water. The storm churning near Santa Domingo the Turks and Caicos, with the Bahamas and Cuba up next. Tonight, Florida officials urgently warning citizens statewide to get ready.
[Mayor Barbara Sharief , Broward County:] If you choose to remain in your home, please rush your preparations to completion today. Emergency personnel will not be able to assist you once sustained tropical-storm-force winds arrive.
[Todd:] Some interstates seeing heavy traffic as mandatory evacuation orders now cover the Keys, low-lying parts of southern Florida.
[Gov. Rick Scott , Florida:] I cannot stress enough, do not ignore evacuation orders. Remember, we can rebuild your home. You can get your possessions again, but you can't get your life back.
[Todd:] Gas has become scarce in some places. Around 40 percent of gas stations in Miami-Dade County are out of gas, according to Gas Buddy. Some fuel trucks now getting police escorts. And to get sandbags, the line was two hours long at a location near Orlando. Flights and cruises are being cancelled and at least one Miami hospital has started evacuating patients. Authorities say the most exposed nuclear plant, at Turkey Point, sits 20 feet above sea level and weathered a direct Category 5 hit from Hurricane Andrew in 1992. But no one wants another disaster like the Fukushima meltdown, where a tsunami knocked out the cooling system while the reactors were still hot.
[Robert Gould, Florida Power And Light:] We will safely shut down these nuclear plants with the well in advance of hurricane-force winds.
[Todd:] Even the winter White House, Donald Trump's treasured Mar-a- Lago estate at Palm Beach, whose stucco walls have weathered countless storms since it was built in 1927, could be in the path of the unpredictable storm.
[Scott:] Look at the cone. The cone has our entire state. And this thing's bigger than our entire state right now. So take this seriously.
[Todd:] And starting at 10 a.m. Eastern Time tomorrow, mandatory evacuation orders will be in place for this area, especially the area behind me, the barrier islands of Palm Beach, those low-lying areas. That's going to cover about 123,000 people under mandatory evacuation orders. But another 138,000 are going to be under a voluntary evacuation notice, Wolf. And again, people here, just like they are throughout the state, are being told by officials, do not call first responders during the height of the storm on Saturday and especially on Sunday, because they are not going to be able to get to you in those conditions.
[Blitzer:] So all of Palm Beach is going to be evacuated as of tomorrow morning? Mandatory evacuation, is that what I'm hearing?
[Todd:] Well, Wolf, you have to specify between Palm Beach right behind me, this barrier island, the lower lying areas. That's going to be under mandatory evacuations starting at 10 a.m. tomorrow. West Palm Beach, some of that is going to be under mandatory, but most of that's going to be under voluntary evacuation orders tomorrow. West Palm Beach is a little bit higher elevation. So they are, you know, not insulated, but they're a little safer than the people right behind me on that barrier island.
[Blitzer:] Yes, Palm Beach as opposed to West Palm Beach. All right, Brian. Thank you very much. We'll get back to you. Stand by. Right now the core of this extremely dangerous storm is passing near Haiti. CNN's Paula Newton is on the scene for us over there. So Paula, what are the conditions like right now getting ready for this hurricane?
[Paula Newton, Cnn Correspondent:] We've had a few hours now of some fairly severe gusts with some rainstorms, but the worst is yet to come still for Haiti. The good news, Wolf, is they're not taking a direct hit. Bad news is that even the southern edge of this storm could do catastrophic damage to Haiti. This is one of the places that's most ill-prepared for this. Wolf, we had local officials here on the northern shore tell us, "Look, we are not prepared for the storm, and not only are we not prepared for the storm, we're not prepared for the aftermath." Critical supplies that were supposed to come from the capital, Port au Prince, are still not in place. People are not heeding evacuation orders. At risk Wolf, about 100,000 people in low-lying areas, and that's for the storm over the next 10 to 12 hours. After that, Wolf, we're still waiting to see what the flooding does and if it triggers those mudslides, those deadly mudslides that we saw from Hurricane Matthew in the south of this country last year that killed hundreds of people, literally swept families away with their homes. It has become a real problem here, Wolf. And still no understanding it's been unsettling that there is any preparation here. And quite frankly, Wolf, right now it's too late. People already have to hunker down as best they can and just wait it out.
[Blitzer:] Well, let's hope for the best in Haiti, which has gone through so much over these many years. Thanks very much, Paula, for that. We'll get back to you, as well. Joining us now, the director of the National Weather Service, Louis Uccellini. Louis, thanks very much for coming in.
[Louis Uccellini, Director, National Weather Service:] Thank you for having me.
[Blitzer:] So you you've been involved in a lot of these hurricanes. A Category 4 or a Category 5 storm hitting Miami, Miami Beach, Fort Lauderdale, that area with millions and millions of people, what would it mean?
[Uccellini:] Well, we have to understand, too, it's only hitting that area; it's coming in on an angle to the coastline, which makes it particularly dangerous for the storm surge on the eastern side of the low. The very strong winds. We're still predicting that the storm will maintain its intensity to at least a Category 4. Very strong winds. You can't evacuate up in winds like that. So very concerned about the response to this storm. The emergency management community is taking all actions to local officials, to state officials to get people out of harm's way. But it's a very dangerous storm both from a wind perspective and from a water perspective.
[Blitzer:] Louis Uccellini's going to be with us throughout the two hours here. Stand by. I want to bring in Democratic Congressman Ted Deutsche of Florida. His district includes parts of southeast Florida that could be hit hard by Hurricane Irma. Congressman, thanks for joining us. How should people in your district and we're talking about, what, Boca Raton and other areas just north of Fort Lauderdale, between Fort Lauderdale and Palm Beach, West Palm Beach, how should they be preparing for this disaster?
[Rep. Ted Deutsche , Florida:] Well, Wolf, they should be doing several things. First and foremost, they should listen to what the local officials tell them. There is a mandatory evacuation in Broward County for the low-lying areas, mobile homes, the coastal areas, Palm Beach County. That's going to go into effect tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. They need to plan to evacuate. For people who aren't evacuating, right now, they have to have a plan in place both to secure their homes. They have to have everything they need to get through a hurricane, and they need to make sure that they're prepared the day after a hurricane. Write down all of the information that they need, because there's a very good chance they're going to lose power. Be sure that they have the numbers that they need, and communicate that to their families outside of Florida, as well, so that everyone is aware of what they'll be going through and the steps that they'll be taking to deal with the storm.
[Blitzer:] We're already seeing, Congressman, very, very heavy traffic on the interstates in Florida. So many people are concerned they won't be able to get out in time if they're not out by now. They maybe have a few hours left. Do you trust the evacuation procedures that have been put in place in your state of Florida?
[Deutsche:] Well, I think there are two important pieces to this, one the decision to evacuate the areas along the coastline is very important, because as you've been discussing with the experts before I came on, the storm surge could be immense, which puts all of those areas and the people who live there at great risk. So those people need to evacuate from their homes along the coast. There are people who are leaving the state, but the other piece of this is the shelters that are now open in South Florida, the people who need those shelters who can evacuate from their homes to the shelters for protection, that's another way for them to stay safe.
[Blitzer:] The people of Florida, certainly, are counting on FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to help with the recovery process, but the agency as you well know, Congressman, is on the brink of running out of cash. Is Congress going to make sure FEMA is funded to deal with not only the crisis, the hurricane disaster we saw in Texas and Louisiana, but now about to unfold in Florida and maybe in South Carolina and Georgia, some other states up the eastern seaboard?
[Deutsche:] Wolf, there's there's no question that Congress must. This isn't a question of whether or not Congress will. Congress must ensure that FEMA has the resources to be able to continue to help the people of Texas who are, whose lives were devastated by the storm there last week. But this is a large, dangerous storm with high winds and high storm and high surge that's coming up, potentially, right through Florida. Six million people at risk in South Florida alone, 20 million people throughout the state. I know that FEMA has food and water and generators ready to come into the state, blue tarps ready to help people who lose their roofs, but they need to be funded. And Congress needs to do that right now. We can't leave the people of Florida to wonder whether or not FEMA's going to be there for them. They have to be there for them.
[Blitzer:] The House speaker, Paul Ryan, says FEMA funds are being quickly depleted, a lot more quickly than normal because everyone seems to be affected by Hurricane Harvey. Everyone who was affected by Hurricane Harvey out in Texas and Louisiana is applying for relief over their smart phones, and do you accept that explanation?
[Deutsche:] Well, I think that people are seeking relief because of the damage that Harvey caused. We've all seen the horrific images of the floods and people whose lives were turned upside-down, so of course they're seeking they're turning to FEMA. In Florida, we know that if that storm like this comes through the state, that there will be massive damage to people's homes, that the flooding will be dramatic, and that the needs will be enormous. So we're going to have to come together. Wolf, I was at the emergency operations center earlier today with Governor Scott, and the federal government, the state government, local governments, the nonprofit community, all of them were together figuring out how to address the needs that will exist after the storm comes through, not just to prepare for it, but anticipating what will come next. FEMA plays a vital role in that, and Congress has to ensure that FEMA is equipped to help take care of those needs.
[Blitzer:] In the worst-case scenario and everybody's fearing now that worst-case scenario, according to to the National Hurricane Center parts of south Florida where you are could be uninhabitable for weeks or months. Are you worried that some of your constituents may may never be able to rebuild their lives?
[Deutsche:] Well, Wolf, we people have seen images from Hurricane Andrew. I remember what we went through after Hurricane Wilma in my own community. There there is going to be, if this storm follows the current track, there's going to be massive damage. But that's when the community has to come together, as we have in those other instances, to help ensure that people can get back on their feet. This could be this could be a horrific outcome like we've seen in the islands, but we have to hope that that's not the case. But if it is, then again, we're going to have to all work together to ensure that people get the care that they need. There's going to be a lot of looking out for one another and a lot of turning to those who can offer support. That's why there has been such a welcomed push to get volunteers. People have signed up already, because whatever happens, they know that we're all going to be there for one another. That's the kind of community that we have. We know what these storms can do. We've seen it before. And Florida, if this is if this follows this current path, it will be a very, very difficult time, but we will work with each other, turn to each other, and we'll get through it, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Congressman Ted Deutsche of Florida, joining us from Pompano Beach, along the Atlantic. Very quickly, where are you going ride out the storm?
[Deutsche:] I'm going to be I'm going to be home with with my family, and we're just finishing securing our own home. Something that I was out with my neighbors doing just before I came over here. And then we'll be out in the community and doing our best to assess what happened and again, to help make sure that people get the support that they need.
[Blitzer:] Well, be careful and good luck to you. Good luck to everyone in Florida right now.
[Deutsche:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] I know this is an awful, awful situation. Congressman, thanks for joining us. We'll have much more on the breaking news coming up here in THE SITUATION ROOM. Urgent preparations as Hurricane Irma takes direct aim at Florida. We're tracking the storm's path, the latest forecast, much more right after this.

[Lu Stout:] All right. Coming to you live from Hong Kong. Welcome back. This is "News Stream." A second woman is accusing Democratic U.S. Senator Al Franken of inappropriately touching her. Lindsay Menz says she asked for a photo with Franken in 2010 at the Minnesota State Fair, but she was horrified when he grabbed her bottom during the picture. She posted the picture on Facebook at the time, commenting that the senator was a creeper who molested her. Franken tells CNN he doesn't remember taking the photo, but he feels badly that she felt disrespected. A long-time journalist, Charlie Rose, is also facing accusations. CBS suspended him after eight women accused him of sexual harassment. The Washington Post published accounts from the women who described groping and nude calls from Rose. Some said Rose got naked in front of them. CBS says it is investigating. PBS and Bloomberg said that they have stopped airing Charlie Rose's show. Rose apologized in his statement to the Post, and says he accepts responsibility for his actions though he doesn't believe all of the allegations are accurate. The U.S. Justice Department has filed a lawsuit to block AT&T's takeover of Time Warner, CNN's parent company. It says the deal violates anti-trust laws because AT&T could use its control of programs to harm competition, but the company's hired lawyer says the vertical merger is one that is routinely approved because it doesn't remove competition. The case has raised eyebrows because the U.S. president said he will consider blocking the deal while he was home to campaign. A lot to get to hear. CNN's senior medial correspondent Brian Stelter is with us from New York. He joins us now. Brian, before we get into that political cloud of suspicion, CNN versus Trump
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] Right.
[Lu Stout:] How is AT&T and Time Warner responding to the DOJ lawsuit?
[Stelter:] The companies say it's inexplicable that the government has decided to step in here because it breaks with decades of legal precedent, normally a so-called vertical merger like this one where it is a content owner and a distributor coming together. Normally, those kinds of deals are approved by the U.S. government with some typical predictable conditions attached. That's what happened seven years ago when Comcast and NBC got together. This deal is pretty similar, but the reaction from the government is very different. The Trump administration decided to take a very hard line on this case, saying that this deal would be anti-competitive, it would harm consumers and thus has to be blocked. So that is the battle line. The battle lines have been drawn in this case. We are going to have a judge appointed today and then this battle begins for months. I think at the very least, this will take several months to be litigated.
[Lu Stout:] The legal battle begins. We know how Donald Trump feels about CNN through his speeches on the campaign trail, his tweets. Last year, Trump spoke out and on the record against any sort of merger between Time Warner, again, the parent company of CNN, and AT&tT. So, how strong is the feeling that his lawsuit is really a political power play?
[Stelter:] Certainly AT&T and Time Warner executives are privately suspicious. I don't think they necessarily want to say that publicly. But we heard AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson say to press conference yesterday, he doesn't know if the Trump and CNN is a factor, but her understands why there are so many questions, giving them usual nature of the government's objection to this deal. So AT&T in court if this gets to the point where there is discovery process. We will try to find out if there were communications between the Trump White House and the Justice Department. What is of course so unusual about this entire year, 10 months of the Trump presidency, is that President Trump shares all these feelings on Twitter about CNN, about the Justice Department, about his enemies. You know, he has publicly said that Hillary Clinton should be investigated by the same Justice Department that right now is suing AT&T. So because of President Trump's vocal criticism of his opponents, it creates a much more interesting court battle. You know, this issue of whether Trump tried to interfere is going to be a key issue. But to be clear, the White House and the DOJ have basically denied there has been interference from the White House. According to the government, these are career officials who decided to bring this lawsuit because they are trying to stand up for consumers.
[Lu Stout:] Got it. And this is why you call it the antitrust battle for the ages. Brian Stelter reporting for us live. Thank you, Brian.
[Stelter:] Thanks.
[Lu Stout:] Now, LaVar Ball, the father of one of the U.S. college basketball players recently arrested in China says he doesn't know what role President Trump played in getting his son and teammates out. The three UCLA students were allowed to fly back to the U.S. last week after being arrested for shoplifting. And they thanked President Trump for his help. Mr. Trump was upset over LaVar Ball's reaction, calling him ungrateful in an angry tweet. Now, Ball since told CNN's Chris Cuomo, he rather thank the Chinese leader.
[Lavar Ball, Father Of Ucla Player Accused Of Shoplifting:] If he said he helped, that's good for his mind.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] What do you mean good for his mind?
[Ball:] If you helped, you shouldn't even have to say anything. If I helped somebody, I don't walk around saying, you know, I helped you now, come on now, you give me some love, I helped you. Come on, for real? I would say thank you if he would have put him on his plane and took him home. Then I would have said, thank you, Mr. Trump, for taking my boys out of China and bringing them back to the U.S. There's a lot of room on that plane. I don't know.
[Cuomo:] Why do you
[Ball:] I don't know. If I was going to thank somebody, I'd probably thank President Xi.
[Lu Stout:] Referring to President Xi Jinping of China. Now, there was this somewhat positive end to the interview though with Ball wishing the U.S. president a happy Thanksgiving. Now, in the hours ahead, President Trump is said to wield his power on to turkeys. The birds named Drumstick and Wishbone, they arrived in Washington over the weekend for this longstanding tradition. They had been nestling in a suite at a luxury hotel, apparently relaxing before their big day, and the president plans to grant them clemency from Thanksgiving dinner plates at a Rose Garden ceremony. After that, they will join pardoned turkeys from previous years at the Gobbler Rest exhibit at Virginia Tech University. And that is "News Stream." I'm Kristie Lu Stout. Don't go anywhere. "World Sport" with Christina Macfarlane is next.

[Unidentified Female:] The president floated replacing Sessions with Pruitt. Scott Pruitt himself proposed it to the president.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm not happy about certain things but he's done a fantastic job running the
[Epa. Unidentified Female:] He is actively sacrificing our clean air, our clean water to line his own pockets.
[Unidentified Male:] They're running out of options.
[Unidentified Female:] We are expecting heavy rains in the next couple OF days.
[Unidentified Male:] We're not out of the woods yet. This is just the beginning of the actual rescue phase. This is a special edition of NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Happy Fourth of July everyone. Welcome to a special holiday edition of NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, July 4th, 8:00 in the east on this Independence Day, America's birthday. John Avlon is here with us. We are all representing the flag right here.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] We are. Maggie somehow is a subterranean way
[Maggie Haberman, Cnn Political Analyst:] Red here.
[Camerota:] I see that.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Maggie represents freedom of the press which is the most American thing of all, so God bless Maggie Haberman and God bless America.
[Camerota:] We're going to get to you in a moment, Maggie.
[Berman:] Even on camera, not just the disembodied voice.
[Camerota:] That's right, because we do have big news. The Republican- led Senate intelligence Committee is now the backing the intelligence community's conclusion that Vladimir Putin meddled in the 2016 U.S. election to help Donald Trump win. President Trump, for whatever reason, continues to repeatedly reject that finding. It will make for an interesting one-on-one meeting with Vladimir Putin and President Trump 12 days from now.
[Berman:] The scandal surrounding embattled EPA chief Scott Pruitt read like a scroll. A senior administration official says Pruitt is, quote, inching forward toward the tipping point, perhaps gliding forward toward the tipping point now that we know he asked a security detail reportedly to go get him a certain kind of lotion. We are getting new information about his future. Sources tell CNN Pruitt personally lobbied the president to fire the attorney general Jeff Sessions and replace him with a guy named Scott Pruitt. Joining us to talk about all this, CNN political analyst, "New York Times" White House correspondent Maggie Haberman. Long time no see, Maggie.
[Haberman:] It's been at least 10 hours.
[Berman:] It's been at least 10 hours since you and I last spoke. And the Senate intelligence committee put out this finding which says their assessment is that Russia meddled in the 2016 election under the direction of Vladimir Putin. They did it to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump. This is the assessment from the intelligence community that we first heard way back on January 17. Yet on July 3rd, 2018, the intelligence committee comes out and says yes, this is the case, and it does fly in the face of what we hear regularly from the president and his allies in the House Intelligence Committee.
[Haberman:] It does. And I think it's interesting, because remember, Senator Burr is a Republican who leads this committee, and there is nothing equivocal about this report. It doesn't do what the House version of this report does, which is create some seed of doubt. This goes in a very different direction. It takes issue I think with two things the intelligence community did but nothing that would have impacted the outcome was in terms of their determination on what happened. The president has sort of mouthed acknowledgment that Russia he said things like it could have been Russia, but it could have been a lot of people. A lot of people meddle. His aides will routinely point to that as an example of look, he has repeatedly said he realizes this. He has not done that and he has on his Twitter feed every day as we have seen continued to undermine the Mueller probe. The Mueller probe, again, is primarily looking at possible collusion between Russian officials and the Trump campaign. And in order for that to have happened Trump has to then acknowledge to some extent that that is real. He is doing everything he can to suggest this probe is a fake. And people can speculate as to what his reasons. It is interesting that this report is coming out shortly before he's going to meet one on one with Vladimir Putin in a meeting where he reportedly does not want notetakers or any other people in the room.
[Camerota:] What's that about?
[Haberman:] He does that with all of these meetings. It's going to raise a red flag on this one because it's Putin.
[Avlon:] This meeting is not like the others for reason the Senate intel report makes very clear. It's Independence Day. The opposite of celebrating American independence is a foreign power influencing our election outcome, and that's what clearly happened on President Trump's behalf at the behest of President Putin, who is one of the few people on earth Donald Trump refuses to criticize. All these things raise red flags as does this insistence that they meet alone without aides at the outset.
[Berman:] There's no record. There will be no record of the conversation.
[Camerota:] Why does he want to do it? So he can say whatever he wants happened in there or because why?
[Haberman:] He has done this with other leaders, and my general understanding of what the reason then is he likes to get a feel for them, he likes to understand who they are, where they are coming from, and I think there is probably something to that. But again, what most presidents would do given this fact set is say, you know what, I'm going to have some other people come in the room for this one. That is not ever where this president goes. And again, to your point about how Putin is the one person he won't challenge, he also is one of the only people who he will just take his word for it. He keeps saying, well, he says he didn't do it. Well, then that's that. This is a president who routinely disregards facts, statements, anything that don't fit with his preexisting belief. And yet this is something where he has taken his word on invasion of Crimea, he has taken his word on all manner of things that cut against what U.S. policy has been.
[Berman:] We played before in the show, Maggie, back in February when the intelligence chiefs were all asked if they had been directed by the White House to do anything to stop election meddling going forward. They all said no, no, no, not really. Not exactly. You report on the White House every day. Are there some huge organized efforts or even small, disorganized efforts right now to battle election meddling in 2018 that we're not hearing about every day?
[Haberman:] Not that I know of, and I think you've seen the same reporting I have, which is that tech leaders recently had a meeting with members of the intelligence community, and they apparently came away with a general sentiment that they're on their own for 2018, that there's not going to be some organized effort. We do know the president doesn't talk about it very much and we certainly that know a red flag has been raised internally. I don't think a whole lot has been done and it has been made clear from intelligence community officials over and over again, it's not they might meddle. It's they are meddling. We're not necessarily seeing it.
[Camerota:] And how surprising is it, Maggie, that national security adviser John Bolton also says that he doesn't that he was assured by a Russian translator that no meddling. Listen to this. It's not just the president. Listen to this moment.
[John Bolton, Former U.s. National Security Adviser:] The president has already said that he's going to raise the question of Russian meddling again with Vladimir Putin. He said it this past week.
[Unidentified Male:] Does he believe what happened?
[Bolton:] I'll tell you what President Putin said to me through the translator of course. She said there was no meddling in the 2016 election by the Russian state. So I think it still raises the question. I think the president will want to have a conversation about this and say we don't want to see meddling in the 2018 election.
[Camerota:] Is he kidding? The translator told him that? Case closed?
[Haberman:] I think John Bolton likes his job and wants to stay in it, and I think he knows this is going offend the president.
[Berman:] But it's different than what we saw in the assessment from the intelligence committee. The intelligence committee said that Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian meddling in the election, and as far as I know Vladimir Putin is part of the Russian state despite what the translator apparently told John Bolton.
[Avlon:] But we've also, and Maggie has written extensively about this, the gap between this administration and the White House is stark and perhaps never so stark at these intel committee hearings where Dan Coats, the DNI, and other have said watch out. The Russians are targeting our upcoming elections. I think we've got that tape.
[Dan Coats, Director Of National Intelligence:] There should be no doubt that Russia perceived its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 U.S. midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations. We need to inform the American public that this is real, that this is going to be happening, and the resilience needed for us to stand up and say we're not going to allow some Russian tell us how to vote, how we ought to run our country. And I think there needs to be a national cry for that.
[Avlon:] And I will say just to add to that, though, Trump's Department of Homeland Security still has not released the names of the individual states. And the estimate is 18 and 21 that voters rolls were broken into by Russian hackers. They have still not released the names of those states publicly. That is troubling. Why?
[Haberman:] It's also worth remembering just going back to John Bolton for a second, John Bolton was a Russia hawk. It's so striking.
[Camerota:] What happened?
[Berman:] I'm old enough to remember a few months ago.
[Haberman:] I think what's happened is he wants to keep his job. I don't think it's more complicated than that. I think the president has set the tone on this front and I think that John Bolton is following along. Whether he is going to say something more definitive after the summit, but again he says the president President Trump will confront Putin and say we don't wanted meddling in the 2018 election. That's going to be very hard to confirm when no one else is witnessing this meeting.
[Berman:] Who is the biggest loser in this Senate Intelligence Committee report? It strikes me that they went out of their way well, they did dump it on July 3rd to contrast themselves with the House Intelligence Committee. It seems to me they're saying sorry Chairman Nunes over in House Intel, you got it wrong here.
[Haberman:] I think that Burr is I don't know that that was his goal. I think that Burr is actually really concerned about what happened in 2016. I think that you have a lot of members of the Senate who are genuinely concerned about what happened and don't want to see that happen again and are concerned about the fact that this administration appears to be complacent at best about trying to grapple with this going forward. And I think that is mostly what it's about. I don't think it's meant to put a thumb on the scale, and I don't even think it's meant to rebuke their colleagues in the House. I think it is just meant to offer further, laying down a marker, this is what took place.
[Berman:] This is not nearly enough Maggie Haberman.
[Camerota:] No, never enough.
[Berman:] So stick around. Stick around. There's more to talk about, including Scott Pruitt, the embattled EPA chief.
[Camerota:] We've run off the rails with this one.
[Berman:] Scott Pruitt, will he last another day?

[Jim Sciutto, Co-host, Newsroom:] In just minutes, President Trump will head to the Supreme Court for a formal welcoming ceremony for Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Also there, the new acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, his first day on the job, Whitaker will speak at the event in place of the ousted, the fired Jeff Sessions.
[Poppy Harlow, Co-host, Newsroom:] Meanwhile, calls continue for Whitaker to recuse himself from overseeing the special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe. He has made very critical remarks about the probe, the scope of it in the past. Joining us now, our Justice reporter Laura Jarrett who broke all the news yesterday as it was happening, remarkable reporting by you and the entire team
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] As this was going down yesterday, Laura. What should everyone this morning waking up know about the man that will now oversee the entire Russia probe.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Well, Poppy, Whitaker has fiercely defended the president in the past, writing both for cnn.com, appearing regularly on TV, always talking almost as a surrogate for him. And I want to read a piece that he wrote for Cnn back in August of 2017 before he was Sessions Chief of Staff where he talked about how he agreed with the president, that there would be a limit, perhaps a bridge too far that Mueller shouldn't cross if he tried to go after the president's personal financial information. And he says this, quote, "the president is absolutely correct. Mueller has come up to a red line in the Russia 2016 election meddling investigation, that he is dangerously close to crossing." And then he goes on to say, quote, "if he were to continue to investigate the financial relationships without a broadened scope in his appointment, then he would raise serious concerns that the special counsel's investigation was a mere witch-hunt" Echoing there, of course, the president's derision catchphrase that we hear all the time about a witch-hunt. Again, something that we would hear from a surrogate. But now of course, he's the top Justice Department official as the acting Attorney General supervising the Mueller probe. And I also want to play for you just a little bit of sound to give you a color of what he said with our Cnn Don Lemon. Take a listen.
[Matthew Whitaker, Acting Attorney General, United States:] I could see a scenario where Jeff Sessions is replaced with a recess appointment and that Attorney General doesn't fire Bob Mueller, but he reduces the budget so low that his investigation grinds to almost to a halt.
[Jarrett:] In the meantime, Democrats on the House Judiciary, Intelligence and Oversight Committees, the Democrats who plan to take the lead in these investigations in January have already sent preservation letters over to the Justice Department and the FBI asking that officials maintain and preserve all documents related to both Sessions firing and the Mueller investigation guys.
[Harlow:] And Laura, before you go, let's just make people aware of the checks here, though, right? I mean, yes, he has the power to fire Mueller if he wanted to, but he would have to have good cause to do so, conflict of interest, he'd have to defend the decision before Congress, right?
[Jarrett:] That's exactly right. So under the Justice Department regulations, Whitaker can't just fire Mueller because he wants to. Now, of course these are not normal times, but the regulations do contemplate oversight. And I should mention it's not just the firing of Mueller, it's also if he curtails the probe in any significant way. If he says Mueller, you've gone too far, he actually has to report that to Congress, Poppy.
[Harlow: Ok -- Sciutto:] Laura Jarrett, thanks very much. Joining us now, Cnn chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin as well as former Ohio Secretary of State and former Mayor of Cincinnati, Ken Blackwell. He also happens to be a long-time friend of Jeff Sessions. Thanks to both of you. Jeff, if I could begin with you, just on the power that Whitaker now has over the Russia investigation, and there are limits we should clear and Laura laid some of those out. Is the issue less him outright firing Mueller ending the investigation and more limits barriers that he could put around it. For instance if I have this right, Mueller would have to OK indictments with the Attorney General before he goes forward?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Yes
[Sciutto: Ok -- Toobin:] That's right. And I wouldn't say it's one or the other, I would say it's both. I mean, yes, of course the new Attorney General has the power to fire him, but he also has the power to restrict the investigation, limit his budget, reject indictments, reject requests for travel and investigative options for Mueller's office. That's you know, that's what he's advocated in the past.
[Sciutto:] Right
[Toobin:] That, it appears, is the reason the president named him in the first place. And, you know, the checks that you and Laura were talking about, they're not really big checks. All they are
[Harlow:] Maybe because of the makeup of the Senate
[Toobin:] Yes, well, because of it just because they are simply requirements to testify and explain to Congress.
[Harlow:] OK, no teeth.
[Toobin:] Yes, I mean, Congress can't really do anything about it except impeach him
[Harlow:] Oh,
[Ok -- Toobin:] Or impeach the president which they're not going to do.
[Harlow:] Look, you said when this news broke yesterday, this is a president now in charge of the Mueller investigation. The Senate is going to do exactly nothing about it. But then I kept asking myself, Jeffrey, OK, but what about Senators Lindsey Graham, you head members of Congress Thom Tillis, et cetera, who had proposed and backed legislation to protect Mueller.
[Toobin:] Never happened. Never happened in a million years. Mitch McConnell, given the Republicans gratitude to the president for what he did for them, which was a lot during this campaign, they are never going to pass legislation that restricts or protects Mueller in any way. Yes, it is true Thom Tillis has this piece of legislation with Chris Coons; the Democrat from Delaware, that is going exactly nowhere.
[Sciutto:] And then to have a bigger majority, may make that even less likely
[Toobin:] Right
[Sciutto:] Ken Blackwell, you knew Jeff Sessions, friends with him, I'm curious, does he believe that he was wronged here?
[Ken Blackwell, Former Ohio Secretary Of State:] Look, there are those of us who thought that he had earned a more graceful exit. He had been in the forefront of advancing the president's agenda, but in the final analysis, it was the president's call. You know, one of the things that I think is important to underscore here is that he and now Attorney General Whitaker got along. They, in fact, are friends. I happen to know Mr. Whitaker, and I actually think that he will color within the lines. He will understand what he can do and what the president can do. But I think he will advise the president as to what he should do that stays within the framework of constitutional governance and common sense.
[Harlow:] So, gentlemen, to you both, to you mayor and to you Jeffrey Toobin. Whitaker also wrote this last Summer on Cnn opinion piece. If he, meaning Mueller, were to continue to investigate the financial relationship without a broadened scope in his appointment, meaning of the president, then this would raise serious concerns that the special counsel's investigation were a mere witch-hunt. The fact that he used the word witch-hunt, which the president has used
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] Over and over about the probe, compare that with this. This is an exchange he had that really struck me reading it again this morning with our Jake Tapper.
[Whitaker:] I don't see any current reason or good reason that Bob Mueller shouldn't stay in that special counsel role. There is no honest person that sits in the world of politics and the world of law that can find anything wrong with Bob Mueller.
[Harlow:] So Jeffrey Toobin, which do we to you first, which do we believe?
[Toobin:] The first, not the second.
[Harlow: Ok -- Toobin:] I mean, why was he appointed? There was only one reason. I mean, you know, with all respect to Mr. Whitaker, he is a person not with the stature, nor the experience to be Attorney General of the United States. He was briefly U.S. Attorney in Des Moines, which is an honorable position, but it is not the kind of position that leads to this usually. He was appointed to limit the Mueller investigation. Whether he will, how he will, I don't know. But, I mean, who is kidding who here?
[Harlow:] You don't have any question about that
[Toobin:] Yes
[Harlow:] What do you think, mayor?
[Blackwell:] Well, look, I think here's the fact that it gets passed by Mr. Rosenstein actually is conflicted. So the issue is can Mr. Whitaker now provide oversight, stay within the lines of constitutional governance and, in fact, you know, keep Mr. Mueller on the straight and narrow. The fact of the matter is that he didn't get a blank check, he didn't he didn't get a license to go into a whole variety of areas. There was a very precise course of action that he was supposed to be pursuing. So, look, there are no free lunches for anybody in this. I think we are lucky that folks will, in fact, stay within the lines and act within constitutional governance norms.
[Sciutto:] Jeffrey, just very quickly, Comey's firing sparked the Mueller investigation.
[Toobin:] Correct.
[Sciutto:] Can Sessions firing spark another special counsel investigation?
[Toobin:] I don't think it would spark another special counsel investigation. It could be evidence in the existing Mueller investigation
[Sciutto:] For obstruction of justice.
[Toobin:] For obstruction of justice. Laura Jarrett and others, our colleagues have reported that even while he was Attorney General, Jeff Sessions gave interviews to the Mueller about his own involvement
[Sciutto:] Right
[Harlow:] Right
[Toobin:] In this case.
[Sciutto:] So we know it's another inquiry
[Toobin:] I assume that the Mueller office will interview him again.
[Sciutto:] Right.
[Toobin:] Because it is all part
[Sciutto:] Maybe this will
[Toobin:] Of the same
[Harlow:] Well
[Sciutto:] Maybe it don't have to be a self-inflicted wound, we don't know, yes
[Harlow:] And we know that those four top Democrats are now asking the you know, to preserve the documents for their own investigation
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] As well. All right, thank you both very much, Ken Blackwell and Jeffrey Toobin. Also we're getting new details right now about the shooter in this horrific mass shooting overnight in California. We'll have more on that after the break.
[Sciutto:] And we are just moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. Dow expected to drop slightly, investors will be watching the Federal Reserve announcement this afternoon on interest rates. A hike another hike could come as early as next month.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back. And we're still chatting with our panel about that moment at the Bush 41 funeral, when the Trumps walked in and the air turned ice cold as he hit the pew. And Paul one thing I have seen with a lot of criticism of President Trump on social media and elsewhere, I have seen some conservatives criticizing Hillary Clinton, who nodded at Melania Trump, but did not acknowledge the president of the United States.
[Paul Begala, Cnn Political Analyst:] He didn't reach all the way across two or three other people to shake her hand.
[Tapper:] So it's his fault.
[Begala:] Of course. It always is. But so what? You know, our president met the minimal standards of decency. And that's news. OK? I'm more impressed with the Bush family, having worked against George H.W. Bush, helped defeat him. What largess of spirit that they included our president. But they did, because Urban served in the Army, he went to West Point, and he knows, you salute the uniform, not the man or the woman. And the Bush family honored the office of the presidency today by including our president, even though he has said some rather unkind things to George W. Bush, Jeb Bush and even George H.W. Bush. I think that shows a largess of spirit on the part of the Bush family that far overshadows some maybe tiny micro-snub from Donald Trump today.
[Tapper:] Can I say one thing? I want to show this. Willie Geist tweeted this information. Jon Meacham, the historian, the former journalist who gave a eulogy at the funeral today, a lovely eulogy, it turned out, according to Willie, Meacham read that to George H.W. Bush before obviously he passed away, and H.W. Bush's response was, "That's a lot of me, Jon. That's a lot of me," which is classic H.W. Bush. Whatever you thought of him, whatever you thought of his policies, he was a man who was uncomfortable talking about himself. He didn't go to the ticker tape parade after the first Gulf War. He didn't go to Berlin after the wall fell. And that's one of the things people like about him.
[Karine Jean-pierre, Democratic Strategist:] Yes. And this funeral was classic George H.W. Bush. It was about tradition, it was about family. And it was about country. And I think that's what he gave us today, and he was very involved in planning this day. And so, you know, kudos. Kudos to the Bush family and kudos to the president.
[David Urban, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, I think there has been a lot of debate about this and discussion about this, that, regardless of what kind of president you think President Bush was, 41 was, you have to admire him as a man. You have to admire the individual. He was a good man, a decent man, a guy that everyone should aspire to be, a person everyone should aspire to be in our country. Whether you're a president or not, when service and country and family, this guy should be kind of chiseled up there on Mount Rushmore as a fixture. I know there is a lot of debate about the Gulf War and other things. But he really is a decent human being.
[Tapper:] Amanda, one of the things that's so interesting in terms of the differences between Trump and Bush, without getting into the personality right now, is policy. George H.W. Bush, somebody who really was into international relations, alliances, international organizations, he is the one who negotiated NAFTA, which Bill Clinton signed. And President Trump having a difficult time right now with China in these negotiations on tariffs. He called himself tariff man. The stock market not doing so hot. And he tweeted this morning quote "Very strong signals being sent by China, once they returned home from their long trip, including stops from Argentina. Not to sound naive or anything, but I believe President Xi meant every word of what he said at our long and hopefully historic meeting. All subjects discussed." It is unclear what exactly is going on right now when it comes to this so-called pause in the trade war.
[Amanda Carpenter, Cnn Political Commentator:] When it comes to Trump's tariff policy, I don't think it's any more complex than Trump views it as a way to punish people he doesn't like. It's a way listen, taxes or tariffs. This is about winners and losers, and Trump exerting his power and influence abroad. I don't think there's any principles behind it.
[Urban:] Sure there is.
[Carpenter:] And that's why it's so jarring and you're seeing the effects in the stock market day-to-day.
[Urban:] This is about basic fairness. The president has stated this out over and over. If there are no tariffs anywhere in the world, he would not be for tariffs. He's simply for leveling a playing field here.
[Carpenter:] And there is an argument on China. But it's so willy- nilly.
[Urban:] You're going to steal I.P. from us, if you're going to tax our products, we're going to do the same. And we're going to level the playing field for American workers.
[Carpenter:] Sure, but you don't announce it by tweet.
[Tapper:] After the president called himself tariff man on Twitter, Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of the Commonwealth of Virginia responded quote on Twitter: "Tariff man? Reminds me more of the Beatles' nowhere man. He's as blind as he can be, just sees what he wants to see." Your response?
[Jean-pierre:] All right, Tim Kaine. Wow.
[Tapper:] You like that. Not the hippest pop culture reference.
[Jean-pierre:] I think here is the problem. The problem is that he has Donald Trump has no strategy. And it is impacting workers. Just ask the workers at GM. It is problematic.
[Urban:] The GM workers had nothing to do with the tariffs.
[Jean-pierre:] No, but he said last week that he trusts his guts more than the brains of his economic advisers. And that's scary. I mean... This is somebody who bankrupted businesses.
[Urban:] Nothing to do with the tariffs.
[Tapper:] I want to let Paul in.
[Begala:] Politically, it is interesting. Tariffs are taxes. And they do fall disproportionately on our country on Trump voters and Trump counties. That's what is so amazing about this politically. Soybeans, China has somewhat diminished its importation of American soybeans. By somewhat, I mean 95 percent reduction. Eight of the top 10 producing states of soybeans voted for President Trump. And so he's punishing his own voters out of these fits of pique. And maybe over time he will get us out of it. But he certainly got us into it and he's hurting his own voters.
[Tapper:] All right, so I wanted to shift gears here on our national lead. There is now a criminal investigation into the apparent election fraud in North Carolina's 9th Congressional District. And apparently it's even worse than many thought originally. CNN has learned potentially more than 1,000 absentee ballots may have been purposely destroyed and some Republican operatives may have taken partially completed absentee ballots from voters with the envelope still open and then filled out the rest. All of this calling into question of course the results in that House race, where Republican candidate Mark Harris edged out the Democrat Dan McCready by 900 votes. "The Charlotte Observer"'s editorial board today issued a challenge saying it's time to hold a new election in North Carolina's tainted 9th District. CNN's Drew Griffin is in North Carolina for us. Drew, how strong of a case are investigators building here?
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Investigative Correspondent:] Well, we don't know exactly, Jake. But what we do know is this investigation has been going on for nearly a year. And it's not just involving the vote fraud allegations, but also campaign finance operations behind it. All of this, as you say, bringing into question the outcome and the validity of North Carolina's 9th District Congressional race.
[Griffin:] The voting irregularities in North Carolina's Ninth District congressional race are part of a criminal investigation that began in January and include possible vote fraud that could have affected the outcomes in three elections. Among the allegations, more than 1,000 absentee ballots from likely Democratic voters were gathered and destroyed.
[Lorrin Freeman, Wake County District Attorney:] You're looking at several thousand or approximately 2,000 absentee ballot requests from this most recent election. About 40 percent of those, it appears at this point, may not have been returned.
[Griffin:] Lorrin Freeman, the district attorney for Wake County, North Carolina, was sent this letter back in January by the district attorney of Bladen County, asking for help to investigate voter fraud allegations and possible false statements to affect election outcomes allegedly perpetrated by McCrae Dowless. Dowless is this man, a political operative hired by Republican congressional candidate Mark Harris. Harris won the 9th District race in a squeaker, just 905 votes. But that vote count is now in doubt, because the operation run by McCrae Dowless could have affected more than 1,000 of the votes. Freeman says her office and a North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation are also looking at these hundreds of absentee ballots which were cast, but with suspicious witness signatures on them, a second part of the alleged scheme, where absentee ballots were only partially filled out by voters, then gathered up unsealed, allowing political operatives working for the Republican to fill in the rest. [on camera]: Does it appear that there was a scheme for one or a couple or a group of people to stamp a bunch of ballots the way they wanted to stamp them and send them in?
[Freeman:] I think this, again, is a matter that is very much under investigation. Those are the types of allegations that we are reviewing currently.
[Griffin:] Voters like Aubrey Atkinson say McCrae Dowless showed up at his door to help him fill in his absentee ballot.
[Aubrey Atkinson, North Carolina Voter:] I had to get them to spell it out to me, because I can't read and write.
[Griffin:] He can't remember who he voted for. Lacy Allison had help, too. He remembers voting for sheriff, but not for Congress. [on camera]: What about the congressional race, a guy named Harris and a guy named McCready?
[Lacy Allison, North Carolina Voter:] I don't remember which one, but I do remember those two names.
[Griffin:] Jake, Mark Harris, the Republican candidate who won this race, denies any knowledge of illegal behavior done on his behalf. But it turns out he may have at least indirectly paid for some of that behavior. Mark Harris' campaign paid a campaign group $400,000. That group hired this fellow named McCrae Dowless. As for Dowless, he continues to ignore our calls for comment Jake.
[Tapper:] All right, Drew Griffin, thank you so much. Coming up: a billionaire New Yorker looking to shake things up in Washington. No, not that one. A different one, who is making huge 2020 waves today. Stay with us.

[Whitfield:] The editorial board of the New York Times slamming U.S. Secretary Rex Tillerson for his leadership of the State Department. The paper writes quote, "Rex Tillerson is widely seen as ill suited to diplomatic leadership. The department is being undermined by budget cuts at failure to fill top jobs. An erratic President and a Secretary who has called reorganization rather than policy is most important priority." CNN Global Affairs Correspondent Elise Labott joining me now. So Elise this is a scathing editorial from the New York Times on Rex Tillerson's ability to leave the State Department. But what kind of reaction is coming from The State Department?
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Fred, nothing specific on this particular editorial. Some of his aides have kind of forwarded tweets supporting President-Tillerson in response. But this is really the longest list in a recent wave of criticism bite of Secretary of State Tillerson by top members of Congress, lawmakers very concerned about the state of the State Department, particularly what they call the hollowing out of the Foreign Service. On Friday, the State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert acknowledged that there was very poor morale of the State Department and urged diplomats to hang in there. Take a listen.
[Heather Nauert, State Department Spokeswoman:] I know that times may seem tough right now. I know that the headlines coming out of the State Department do not look good, do not look promising. We have a lot of work to do here at the State Department. From the crisis that unfolds in Burma right now to what is going on in Iraq and that the good defeating of ISIS that we are doing, we have so much work that has up to be done to what is happening in Cambodia right now. Their work I can just say from a personal point of view is valued, is needed. We need the Foreign Service officers to keep doing what they have committed. There are lives to do. I hope that they will stay on. It breaks my heart to hear that some feel that they aren't wanted or aren't needed or aren't appreciated.
[Labott:] Now this career Foreign Service officers serve across Republicans and Democratic administrations. But particularly in this Trump administration, there's been this feeling that, you know, they're part of the so-called deep state, the old guard. And this administration really, across the government, has been very wary of those career officers. Now Secretary Tillerson does meet with employees when he goes to embassies across the world, Fred, that I think those diplomats here on Washington, here at the State Department are looking for Secretary Tillerson to bring them in more. You've seen this kind of having a little bit of insular attitude and not. There are career officers that are working with him, but certainly not enough, Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right, Elise Labott in Washington. Thanks so much. And we'll be right back.

[Sciutto:] Today, the White House announced that Vice President Mike Pence will be in Hawaii on Wednesday to receive the remains of U.S. service members killed during the Korean War. North Korea is returning these remains as part of an agreement President Trump made with Kim Jong-un during their summit in Singapore. CNN's Will Ripley joins us now live from Seoul, South Korea. Are the North Koreans is there any evidence, Will, that the North Koreans are honoring the other parts of the agreement, specifically on giving up their nuclear program?
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] At this point, you know, you have seen some signs, Jim, of North Korea dismantling some of its older, less relevant weapons facilities while upgrading the kind of facilities that are producing missiles that could pose a threat to the United States. And what we saw here in South Korea, the first repatriation of Korean war remains in more than a decade, Trump administration is touting as a step in the right directions. Well, let's be honest here, it's a very small step down a very long and difficult road when it comes to getting North Korea to give up their nukes.
[Ripley:] Just one week after his Singapore summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, President Trump made this triumphant announcement.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We got back our great fallen heroes, their remains. In fact, today, already 200 have been sent back.
[Ripley:] But it took five more weeks for just 55 sets of remains to arrive at South Korea's Osan Air Base, Friday, on the anniversary of the Korean War armistice. Pyongyang did not even approve the mission until the final hours, keeping U.S. officials guessing.
[Trump:] And I want to thank Chairman Kim for keeping his word.
[Ripley:] But few expected this relatively simple confidence-building measure would take more than six weeks. Raising serious questions about the far more complex, and far more contentious negotiations over denuclearization.
[Mike Pompeo, U.s. Secretary Of State:] The North Koreans understand
[Ripley:] This week Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the Senate Intelligence Committee: North Korea is still producing fuel for nuclear weapons. Pompeo, fresh off a disappointing trip to Pyongyang, little if any progress on key issues. And a widely perceived snub by Kim Jong-un, who did not meet with him. The U.S. was later criticized by North Korea for making what they called gangster-like demands. In May, North Korean officials took CNN to what they claimed was the destruction of this nuclear test site. These new images show they may also be dismantling a satellite launching station. But U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korea is upgrading other key weapons facilities, including a ballistic missile plant and nuclear reactor. Their assessment: Kim Jong-un has no plans to give us his nukes any time soon.
[Sen. Jeff Merkley , Oregon:] They have not done another nuclear test, so that's a positive. They haven't done another ballistic missile test, that's a positive. North Korea is playing its normal game in which it agreed to a concept of its own definition of denuclearization, whatever that means. And then freezes activity to let the heat go down.
[Ripley:] An official telling CNN this week, North Korea wants sanctions relief and a peace treaty, formally ending the Korean War, or Kim Jong-un may consider walking away from the talks, emboldened by his increasingly friendly relationship with traditional allies, Russia and China. Both could make it nearly impossible for the U.S. to continue its maximum pressure campaign, even if negotiations with North Korea break down. So, here we are, more than six weeks after the summit in Singapore. There's still no timetable for denuclearization, no transparency from the North Koreans about how many warheads they possess, where they're producing nuclear fuel, where they're hiding their warheads. All of those things the United States said they need, they still don't have. What they do have tonight, those 55 set of Korean War remains that took significantly longer to return than anyone in the administration would have expected.
[Sciutto:] And of course, the president said that the North Korean nuclear threat was over a number of weeks ago. Will Ripley in South Korea, thanks very much. Coming up, the president denies a claim by his former fixer and lawyer, Michael Cohen, that candidate Trump knew ahead of time about the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russians who promised dirt on Hillary Clinton. Where is this investigation now headed?

[Paul:] It's 40 minutes past the hour right now. So glad to have you with us. We're going to keep our eye obviously on Florence there that continues to makes its way further inland into the Carolinas. But want to talk about President Trump because he is doubling down on his questioning of nearly 3,000 person hurricane death toll in Puerto Rico. "No way," he tweeted, "that the number jumped from 16 people to 64 people," and I quote here, "like magic to 3,000 people killed." President Trump first disputed this death toll Thursday. He claimed the Democrats put out those numbers to make him look bad. The island's governor formally raised the death toll from hurricane Maria following a study that was conducted by researchers at the George Washington University. So Maria Cardona, CNN political commentator and Democratic strategist is with me, as well as Scott Jennings, CNN political commentator and former special assistant to President George W. Bush. Thank you for being with us.
[Maria Cardona, Cnn Political Commentator:] Good morning, Christi.
[Scott Jennings, Cnn Political Commentator:] Good morning.
[Paul:] Good morning to both of you. I want to read something after all of this, late last night the governor of Puerto Rico, Ricardo Rossello, had this tweet out. He said "Mr. President, I would very much be willing to walk you through the scientific process of the study and how GW arrived at the excess mortality number estimates. There's no reason to underscore the tragedy we have suffered in the aftermath of hurricane Maria. In the meantime, I hope you consider sending a message of support to show you stand with all of the U.S. citizens in Puerto Rico that lost loved ones. It would certainly be an act of respect and empathy." Scott, is it time to switch focus from numbers to people because there's so much that needs to be done there?
[Jennings:] Yes, no question. I don't understand why the president is obsessed with this number, frankly. It was a devastating storm. We all agree on both sides of the aisle, the storm one of the most devastating to hit any part of the United States ever. They had massive electrical failure, massive water failure, almost all roads were impassable, it was devastating by any measure. So you can easily see how loss of life of magnitude that was found by the researchers could occur. The most important thing a federal government can do, of course, in the aftermath of something like this is exactly what FEMA Director Brock Long said they did, which is study it, learn from it, and update their procedures and protocols for the future. So the real issue here for the president is not the numbers, not the statistical death toll, but what did we learn from the aftermath of the storm and how are we applying it to future storms. That's what the American people want to hear. And it would be best for him to take that messaging advice and move on.
[Paul:] Maria, I wanted to ask you, because this is very personal to you. You have family there. What do they need there, what do you want to hear from the president, you personally?
[Cardona:] Well, I wish that he would listen to people like Scott, but what we have seen from this president is that he is incapable of showing respect. He is incapable of showing empathy. I grew up on that island. My brother, as you said, lives there with his family. I saw this devastation when I was there over the summer personally. What the president just said in terms of questioning the 3,000, and frankly, a lot of people think it was more than 3,000 lives that were lost, I can't even begin to describe to you how offensive and hurtful that is to the American citizens not just that live on the island but the American citizens who live in Florida, who live in Texas, who live in Pennsylvania. Guess what, elections are coming up. I think this is not only offensive and just completely ridiculous on behalf of the president, but it is politically stupid.
[Paul:] Scott, do you agree with that? Is there a risk politically for the president here?
[Jennings:] Well, he is putting Republicans in uncomfortable positions. I noticed the governor of Florida, Rick Scott, who is now running for the United States Senate, had to distance himself from the president on this issue. So his political allies like Governor Scott are having to take a step back from him. Speaker Paul Ryan had to take a step back from him because everybody basically agrees that this was a devastating storm in which there was massive loss of life, and you don't want to look insensitive to that because objectively speaking, it is true. And so yes, when you put your closest political allies in a position of having to step away from you, you're not only making your own life hard, you're making their life hard. So just speaking of the raw politics of it, it leaves the president a little bit isolated when the rest of political America tends to agree with the facts as they have been reported by the researchers.
[Paul:] All right, speaking of truth, Scott, since you brought it up, I want to talk to you about Paul Manafort. He is now pleading guilty, pleaded guilty I should say, and agreeing to cooperate with Mueller and his investigation. Take a look here. We have a screen of the people already in the Trump team who have either pleaded guilty, have plea deals, and are cooperating with Mueller. We have got George Papadopoulos, we've got Flynn, we've got Cohen, we've got Rick Gates. Now we add Manafort to that mix. And he has agreed, the cooperation agreement he signed, states that he will testify fully, completely, and truthfully before any and all grand juries at any and all trials of cases or other court proceedings in district of Columbia and elsewhere. This is very broad. He now essentially has to talk to anybody at any time about anything it sounds like. Scott, what does this mean for the president?
[Jennings:] Well, we don't know exactly because Manafort may have information that's germane to investigations that have nothing to do with the president, or he may have information that's germane to things going on with the central question of the inquiry, of course, which is was there collusion with Russia, which is so far unproven, alleged but unproven. Even Bob Woodward today said, I noted, that he looked hard for two years and found no evidence of Russian collusion. So it would be difficult to speculate what Manafort is going to do. Obviously his choosing to cooperate must be worrisome for the White House, but he was with the campaign a short period of time, he is connected to things that have nothing to do with the campaign. So I think before we go down the road of speculating that Manafort is going to bring down the president, it is important to remember, he may say things about people and other situations, lobbying situations, for instance, that are completely unconnected to Donald Trump.
[Paul:] Right, right. And so in that sense we had this other Mueller investigation targeting attorney Greg Craig, who is a prominent Democrat. Maria, what do you make of where that's going, and how many people might be sitting back right now, because Scott's right. There is nothing yet leading to collusion with Manafort.
[Cardona:] That we know of.
[Paul:] Nothing that he is doing thus far that he has said. But now that he is dipping into a Democratic line, a Democrat here, is there reason for Democrats to be worried?
[Cardona:] No, not at all. In terms of what I know about the connection with Greg Craig has to do with his law firm doing work for some kind of foreign agent work that they were not registered for the Ukraine. So again, all of this leads to the connection of Paul Manafort. And while I agree with Scott, we don't know if Paul Manafort is going to bring down the president, I think the president is going to bring down the president because he is the one at the end of the day who has been at the center of all these connections. Clearly, Paul Manafort was his chairman. Michael Cohen the chairman of his campaign. Michael Cohen was his personal lawyer for years. Michael Flynn was his national security adviser. All of these people who have been indicted, who have pled guilty, have close connections to the president as much as he now wants to distance himself from it. And so this does not spell good news for the president moving forward. We don't know what else Mueller has, but clearly there have been indictments in this. There have been again, people who have pleaded guilty. So, of course, the president is shaking in his boots. And so I wonder if his ridiculous and offensive statements about questioning the death toll in Puerto Rico are efforts to distract from all of this other stuff that is going on. What we do know is that going into an election where everybody, including Republicans, are so nervous about this president, his connection to the Republican Party, I think that Republicans would do themselves a great service by distancing themselves finally from the president and calling him out on his incompetence and on his unfitness to lead.
[Paul:] Maria Cardona, Scott Jennings, I'm so sorry we have ran out of time. But also so good to get your perspective and your insight. Thank you both.
[Jennings:] Thank you, Chrisit.
[Paul:] Absolutely. Kaylee Hartung is in Pender County, North Carolina, and she's going to walk us through what they're seeing there. It's a pretty dicey situation I understand. Stay close.

[Whitfield:] Some health insurance companies now saying it's the uncertainty with the new health care bill that's driving up their premiums. Blue Cross-Blue Shield of North Carolina is now predicting a 23 percent rate hike. And this is happening as criticism continues over President Trump's medicaid plan which could cause millions to lose their health care benefits. CNN's Miguel Marquez traveled to Kentucky, a state Trump won by 30 points for a look at what could happen there.
[Unidentified Male:] Open that for me.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Doctor Anthony Young said hazard's constants healthcare is in motion. Today he employs 50 people, his practice expanding.
[Dr. Anthony Young:] I would 70 percent of our economy is driven by healthcare.
[Marquez:] Do you think 70 percent high I mean that's just you're living that's what you see?
[Young:] Yes. That's just like an adding [inaudible] about this healthcare is the driving economic force in our area.
[Marquez:] Kentucky, which expanded medicaid and created its own insurance exchange under Obamacare, has seen both patients and the healthcare workers who serve them skyrocket.
[Dr. Jonathan Piercy, University Of Kentucky's Center For Rural Health And Hazard:] It takes a big team to run a clinic like this.
[Marquez:] Doctor Jonathan Piercy at University of Kentucky's Center for Rural Health in Hazard trains future doctors.
[Piercy:] We've seen a lot of clinics open lately. We've seen some new clinics that have come around. We've just built a huge new wing on the hospital.
[Marquez:] All of that comes with jobs, jobs now at risk if the Obamacare Medicaid expansion is eliminated by 2020 as Congress is now considering. Since 2014, as states expanded Medicaid, some 1.1 million jobs were created nationwide. Eastern Kentucky, Coal Country, the 5th Congressional District stands to lose more jobs than any other district in the entire country.
[Uindentified Male:] By one study we would lose 20,000 jobs in the 5th Congressional District.
[Unidentified Male:] 20,000 jobs. 20,000 jobs, which is about double the number of jobs we've lost in the coal industry. It would be the other shoe to drop on the economy of Eastern Kentucky.
[Marquez:] How good is it to be a nurse in Eastern Kentucky right now.
[Unidentified Female:] I mean if you love taking care of people and that kind of environment, it's really good. I mean there's no like I said there's not a shortage of jobs.
[Marquez:] Nurses in high demand here and well paid, evidence of a thriving healthcare industry everywhere. This mall, once a Walmart now a super-sized medical center.
[Unidentified Female:] We're constantly growing.
[Marquez:] Kentucky River community care now has 70 facilities, has hired more than 150 employees in the last few years and can't expand fast enough. How big a piece of that is, is the fact that they can pay for it with Medicaid?
[Unidentified Female:] Eighty percent. I mean because, you know, for our programs we have to look at revenue to expand.
[Marquez:] Health care jobs on the rise here, ending the Medicaid expansion, another devastating blow. Miguel Marquez, CNN, Hazard, Kentucky.
[Whitfield:] And the next hour of the CNN NEWSROOM starts right after this.

[Cabrera:] We take you to Canada where police are investigating a terrifying and violent attack as terrorism. This is Edmonton in the province of Alberta. Watch now as that white car crashes into a uniform police officer, throwing him to the ground. The driver of that car in dark clothing then runs to the fallen officer and begins stabbing him. We stop this video because it really is so graphic. The violence did not stop there. Police say the suspect then led them on a vehicle chase. He struck at least four pedestrians before crashing. That man, the attacker is now in custody. On the phone with us now, crime reporter for the Edmonton journal, Catherine Ghiwkowski. And Catherine, first of all, that policeman and the others, do you know how badly they were hurt and what their condition is right now?
[Catherine Ghiwkowski, Crime Reporter, Edmonton Journal:] Thanks for having me on, Ana. So miraculously, despite being stabbed and thrown through the air, that police officer is released from hospital today. We are being told he's in good spirits. Two of the other pedestrians who were hit have also been released from hospital. Two more are still in hospital. The worst was a brain bleed skull fracture, but that person is now in stable condition and is conscious.
[Cabrera:] That is all good news to hear that they appear to be doing OK, given the gravity of this situation. Unbelievable that the police officer is out of the hospital. Who's the suspect? What do we know about him?
[Ghiwkowski:] So he is actually a Somalia national and a refugee. He's 30 years old and he is known to police. In 2015, he was investigated by the national police force. But he was released because they don't have enough evidence despite the claims that he was espousing extremist views.
[Cuomo:] Is he connected in any way to known terrorist groups? I understand there was perhaps an ISIS flag involved in the scene?
[Ghiwkowski:] Well, police confirmed they did seize an ISIS flag. They have also stated that there's no indication as of yet he was working directly with ISIS. They are saying he was more of a local of operative.
[Cabrera:] So, you mention and police have said that he is from Somalia. Have there been any more events involving this Somali community there in Edmonton?
[Ghiwkowski:] A few years back, there was a rash of violence involving Somali-Canadians. And tension had grown between police, but and the small community but sense then, there had been a lot of work building bridges.
[Cabrera:] All right, Catherine Ghiwkowski for us, thank you there in Edmonton. As we continue to follow a terror attack as the officials are now named it. Attack on a police officer and pedestrians. Again, everybody at this point has survived. Let's take you to Spain now. There were 800 people injured in incidents there after fighting with police. Now, this is in northeastern Spain near Barcelona. The region called
[Unidentified Male:] If you can't treat someone with dignity and respect, then you need to get out.

[Paul:] There's a desperate search underway right now in China where more than 120 people are missing after a landslide there. This thing started near at the top of the mountain and has buried part of the village in the central part of the country there. Emergency responses have been activated now. The Chinese president calling for an all-out search, and you're looking at some of it right there, people trying to find those who may be buried there. Eight hundred rescuers and staff on the scene as you see, they are digging through all of that mud and rubble. The good news, they were able to save one couple as well as that couple's newborn baby. That happens just a few hours ago, but still trying working this hour to find others.
[Blackwell:] There's morning, there's a growing list of GOP senators who are opposing and therefore threatening to derail the Senates Republicans new bill to replace Obamacare. There are now five GOP senators who say they cannot support it in its current form. You see there are also three there who say that they have some serious concerns. Now, GOP leaders could only afford to lose two members of their caucus in order to pass the bill potentially next week. And the latest to voice opposition, Senator Dean Heller of Nevada, he's a blue state Republican, facing a tough reelection campaign in 2018. And he talked about these issues with the bill in a news conference. Watch this.
[Heller:] I'm telling you right now I cannot support a piece of legislation that takes insurance away from tens of millions of Americans and hundred of thousands of Nevadas. You have to protect Medicaid expansion stakes. That's what I want. Make sure that we're taken care up here in the State of Nevada. Biggest lie in health care in the last ten years was if you like your doctor, you can keep them. That was the biggest lie in health care. Here's the second biggest lie. This bill passes, second biggest lies are premiums are going down. And there isn't anything in this piece of legislation that will lower these premiums.
[Blackwell:] Now, just hours after that announcement, a pro-Trump Super PAC told us they are launching a major television, radio and digital ad by against Heller. That's remarkable. Heller is a member of the president's own party. His seat is in danger in 2018. And they're willing to spend more than a million dollars to pressure him potentially to vote yes.
[Paul:] And of course as Republican and Democrats try to fight this out on Capitol Hill, there are people on the front lines of health care in America, the doctors, the medical professionals, who say their voices are being ignored because they have something to say about how to fix health care.
[Blackwell:] CNN Correspondent Martin Savidge sat down with a group of doctors who say, it's time to put patience over politics and work together.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Kitsap County, Washington State, an hour's drive west of Seattle. Like anywhere in America, a place where people need health care and a way to pay for it. Kristan Guetenberg is a surgeon. Peter Lehmann, a primary care physician. And Niran Al-Agba, a pediatrician. Different doctors, different politics.
[Dr. Peter Lehmann, Family Medicine:] I voted for Gary Johnson.
[Savidege:] The libertarian.
[Lehmann:] The libertarian candidate.
[Dr. Niran Al-agba, Pediatrician:] I voted for Donald Trump.
[Dr. Kristan Guetenberg, General Surgeon:] I voted for Hillary Clinton.
[Savidge:] You might think there's little they agree on. Wrong. They all believe the current health care system is unsustainable.
[Lehmann:] Can I say it's broken?
[Savidge:] Yes, I know.
[Lehmann:] Can I say it's unequivocally broken.
[Al-agba:] Yes.
[Lehmann:] Ask any patient.
[Al-agba:] Yes.
[Lehmann:] Do they think it's a system that serves their needs and that they're happy with?
[Savidge:] Under programs dominated by health insurers, they say doctors are stressed to see more and more patients to make ends meet. Patients are frustrated because they can't get an appointment to see a doctor, and when they finally do, only get a few minutes. It's all about numbers.
[Guetenberg:] We're kind of looking the wrong direction, I think. We need to be looking at how to provide quality care for patients without driving up price.
[Savidge:] That's the Democrat doctor criticizing Obamacare, and the Trump doctor says the new GOP plan is just as bad and will cover fewer people.
[Al-agba:] Well, I don't think its better. I think we're probably on the wrong track.
[Savidge:] Dr. Al-Agba even told Trump that in a letter she posted online begging, "Please go back to the drawing board and start again." The problem they say is not on the talk about which party's health care plan is better, is that Washington's having the wrong conversation. We're spending too much time talking about how do we cover people with insurance rather than what?
[Al-agba:] Rather than talking with patients about the price for care and what is really what is the real cost.
[Savidge:] The skyrocketing cost of everything in health care they say is what makes it unaffordable, in their mind, inaccessible. And because they daily battle with cost versus care, doctors have a lot of good ideas on how to fix things. Except whenever Democrats or Republicans discuss health care reform, the doctors say there's always something missing, which they noticed again in a photo of Trump and his team.
[Lehmann:] There were no physicians.
[Savidge:] Why?
[Lehmann:] Not one.
[Savidge:] What about the doctor Trump appointed secretary of health? Tom Price, they say, has for a long time been more politician than physician. Why wouldn't we come to you? I mean you all are on the front lines, so to speak.
[Al-agba:] Front line practicing physicians have a long history of not necessarily being at the table and I think it's a shame that we haven't been because if we had been more involved from the beginning we might be in a different position.
[Savidge:] I should probably point out that these doctors don't want to come across this just dumping on health insurance. They believe that health insurance has a role to play. It's just not the whole solution. And they want to be part of the active discussion because they say maybe more than anybody. They know that whether it's Obamacare or the latest Republican plan. When it comes to health care in America, we just can't keep going the way we're going. Martin Savidge, CNN, Washington.
[Blackwell:] New reports say Vladimir Putin ordered the Russia hackings themselves but could the Kremlin really have anything to do with it? We'll ask a former KGB spy in a moment to give us a glimpse inside Putin's playbook.
[Paul:] Plus, the second mistrial in a police shooting case. Will the prosecution try for a third time?

[Isa Soares, Cnn Anchor:] You are watching CNN's continuing coverage of Hurricane Irma. I'm Isa Soares coming to you live from Miami.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm Michael Holmes in Orlando, Florida. Time to update you now on Irma's progress. Hurricane Irma yet to make landfall in the U.S., but conditions across South Florida rapidly deteriorating already. The storm back up to a dangerous category 4. It was category 3 for a while. It is expected to keep gaining strength as it crosses warm open water between Cuba and Florida. The projected tasks have shifted slightly west, putting Florida's Gulf Coast on high alert. And we'll show you now some video that gives you an idea of the area of downtown Miami that is starting to flood as the outer rain bands move in. All told 6.5 million people have been told to evacuate the state of 20 million. More than 70,000 people are now in emergency shelters throughout the state. And you can expect to see a lot more images like this of downed trees across Florida. Almost 300,000 customers without power at the moment. That is a figure that will likely go into the millions in the days ahead.
[Soares:] And although of course the hurricane has shifted, has strengthened to category 4, it has shifted northwest, really Miami is not out of the woods yet as authorities keep reminding us. Why? Well, the rain is quite intense. There are storm surge. The concern of a storm surge, but also debris that might come from those stronger winds once we do start to feel them. Bearing in mind that it hasn't even made landfall yet. This is just the outer part of Irma. Let's get the very latest from Karen Maginnis. She has been breaking it all down for us, making sense of it for us. She is following the track, the path of Hurricane Irma. And, Karen, where is Irma right now?
[Karen Maginnis, Cnn Meteorologist:] It is less than 70 miles from Key West, Florida. But over the hours, we have seen the steady increase of winds from tropical storm force. Making winds of 58, 63 miles an hour. Then 74-mile-an-hour gusts, then 83-mile-an-hour gusts. I've been looking at it. I haven't seen a recent update on that. But it's still just less than 70 miles away. Another thing that really got my attention while I was waiting to go on the air is to look at some of these outer bands and some of that moisture that reaches up really far to the north across central, even northern sections of Florida. But there was another thing as our meteorology group was huddled together, looking at these images. Boy, really steadying. What that eye is doing? What these outer bands are doing? What the core of the hurricane-force winds are doing as it pulled away from the coast of Cuba. And really increased. We saw that very dynamically on a satellite imagery. Now has supporting winds of 130 miles an hour, but it's undergoing an eye replacement cycle. You've probably heard that a lot over the last few days. That means the inner wall starts to collapse in on itself, and there are indications now that we are seeing that eye wall replacement cycle, because it's not a really concentric look to the eye, to this hurricane. And it kind of almost see like two blobs together. That's not a very sophisticated way of saying that. But it lets us know that this hurricane is evolving. Coming under the influence of other factors. Mainly, it's interacting with land. Although that land is up very sturdy. It's the Keys. And they're looking at quite the storm surge across this region. The highest point in the Florida Keys or around Key West is about 18 feet. The storm surge is going to be between 5 to 10 feet. We could see 10 to 15 inches of rainfall. There are a lot of things that will happen across the Keys. None of them are going to be good. This is the RPM. This doesn't really forecast where Irma is going to make landfall. It shows you the overall wind field. And there you can see it. It goes past Naples. It goes past Fort Myers. It goes past Tampa, St. Pete. Heads up towards the bend area. Nobody is going to escape Irma's path. No one. A lot of people have been second guessing what's going why you move from the east coast of Florida to the west coast of Florida. Did you go far enough to the north? The impact has been great. It has been broad and wide. And here we can see some of the outer bands here really looking very impressive. Still have that tornado watch out for South Florida. And even over here in Miami and Fort Lauderdale, you're looking at storm surge still here. You're looking at strong winds. I just took a look at the Dade County power outages, Florida light power and light, and they are saying about 170,000 people without power there or at least customers are. That's just one county and it's going to continue because we're watching these very, very strong convective lines moving from the outer bands of Irma and it looks like for this West Coast all the way from Naples, Fort Myers, Captiva, Santa Belle, Marco Island, Sarasota, Cape Coral, Bradenton, all of those area, the storm surge is going to be a huge impact and it's not just the amount of rain you're going to see, it's that wall of water that's going to come up and you probably are going to be not probably, it looks like you are going to be in the worst possible position in relationship to Hurricane Irma. Michael?
[Holmes:] Yes, scary stuff for a lot of people, up and down that west coast of Florida. Appreciate it, Karen. As always, Karen Maginnis there in Atlanta. Our Ed Lavandera is back with us now from Naples in Southwest Florida, which is a place that has been battered by hurricanes before. A lot of damage done in the past and a place where the storm surge is a major fear. Ed?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Michael. Hurricane Wilma back in 2005, that is the storm that many people who live here in this corner of Southwest Florida measure all storms by. And even talking to the mayor today asked him like, you know I asked him, what do you expect, what do you anticipate, what do you fear the most here as the worst of Hurricane Irma will make its way on shore. And he says, you know, as the storm surge, 10 to 15 foot storm surge, obviously being on the right edge of that eyewall could also create some of the fiercest winds and obviously that is of great concern. But even the mayor here, who was here in 2005 during Hurricane Wilma isn't sure that you can really compare what that experience was to what this experience is going to be here over the course of the next 24 hours. But that's the way it is here. You know, people along these coastlines kind of measure their experiences by previous storms. So people here bracing for the worst. The good news here, Michael, is that many people heeded those warnings. They took off. Not only did they take off here in the last 24 hours. According to the mayor here of Naples, they took off earlier. They had seen for days that Hurricane Irma was making its way up here to the Florida coastline. They didn't care if it was the east side or the west side. The mayor here says that many people took off much earlier. We also spoke with the police chief on Marco Island. A popular tourist destination. About 16,000 people call the island home full time. That's about a 30 minute drive south of where we are. I asked the police chief there. There were a number of people who refuse to evacuate, who decided to ride out the storm perhaps in some of these high rise condominiums. I asked the chief, is it too late to leave? This is what he had to say.
[Al Schettino, Marco Island Police Chief:] It's too late. It's called. When we say it's right now, we're at shelter in place. What you would do, when we ask people to do if they're in a home is to vertical evacuation. That means if they have a second story, they go to high above the water line as they possibly can. If they're in a single family home or one story home, we ask that they get to a neighbor's house that has a second story where they could get high or above the water line.
[Lavandera:] We heard from a couple of people here today, too, Michael, as well that when the storm track on this hurricane had it going more toward the Miami side, the east side of the Florida Peninsula, a lot of people moved over here to Naples to escape it. And now that they're over here, they find that they're now more in a direct line with the storm. And they actually, some of the people that did leave today headed back to Miami. So a lot of anxiety about what is coming. And everyone trying to get themselves to the best, safest place possible. Michael?
[Holmes:] Yes, indeed. Ed, thanks so much for all of your reporting. Ed Lavandera there in Naples, Florida. We can take a short break. When we come back, we'll continue our coverage of Hurricane Irma. We will go live to Miami Beach for the latest on this devastating storm. Stay with us. We'll be right back.

[Becky Anderson, Connect The World, Cnn:] Very warm welcome and this is "Connect the World" and it is 7:00 p.m. in Abu Dhabi. I am Beck Anderson for you. We are tracking some huge global stories this hour. Reverend Billy Graham known as the American pastor decides more on his life and legacy. Plus, Donald Trump Jr. facing questions over his ethics, and we will get you to New Delhi for why, and that as a second person very close to the Israeli Prime Minister turns state witness as the corruption and investigation tightens. We will go to Jerusalem, and that is all ahead this hour. We start tonight, taking you what is perhaps the closest place to hell on earth and why? Because you need to see what it is really like? Warning, these images and the sounds will haunt you.
[Anderson:] Children, kids, dug out from beneath the remnants of their homes. Their small bodies are smashed to pieces by large metal bombs, bombs dropped on them by order of their countries own President. Kids like anyone else's, their moms and dads, mothers and fathers just like us, just unlucky to be there in eastern Ghouta one of the last Syrian rebel strongholds under siege, and for four years, this regime now wants this suburb of Damascus back for itself, and back it seems at any price even obliteration. More than 300 people there killed since Monday evening. That is a single person dead every 10 minutes. CNN Ben Wedeman is following this war along with us from the beginning as we burn through in every superlative of what you can think of what the people are going through. And Ben is with us from Beirut tonight. Ben, it seems impossible to show just how bad things are as it is quite frankly too graphic for TV, but there are rooms full of bodies lined up next to the one another, and side by side, and just help take us through what is going on inside of eastern Ghouta right now.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Becky, this is a part of Syria that has been under rebel control for several years now, but it has been under siege, and the situation has always been very difficult there, and what we have seen in the last few week, and particularly in the last few days is onslaught by the Syrian regime against these approximately 400,000 inhabitants there. What we have gotten today is a statement from the international committee for the Red Cross saying that the few medical facilities in eastern Ghouta are running out of medicine. They also point out that the residents of a Damascus are also living in fear from the mortars being fired from the eastern Ghouta into the capital. The statement says that this is madness and it has to stop. Certainly there is no question that it is madness, but appears that there's no one restraining that madness at the moment. This report that we are about to show you, however, we have to warn the viewers that the images are indeed very disturbing.
[Wedeman:] Nadal weeps over to the body of his daughter. His other five children went missing. The Syrian government subjects the eastern Ghouta the rebel held suburb of Damascus to the most intense bombardment since the war began. Bodies line the floors in this hospital's morgue, and a bed sheet is a child simple death shroud. It is the children who suffer the most in the war without mercy. According to local tradition Ghouta was the original Garden of Eden, and now it is perhaps the closest thing to hell on earth. Home to as many as 400,000, it has been under siege for many years. Tuesday, the United Nations children's fund UNICEF issued a blank statement for this situation in eastern Ghouta, and a small footnote at the bottom explains we no longer have the words to describe the children's suffering and our outrage and to those inflicting the suffering still have words to justify their barbaric act. CNN reached out to the Syrian government for comment, they have no words. These are the worst days of our lives, a hospital Director told CNN by phone from the eastern Ghouta. It could not get worse than this she said, but she may be wrong. It is widely believed that the bombardment is a prelude to the offensive to retake eastern Ghouta, one of the last opposition's strongholds. Many of this disturbing images are captured by the local civil defense unit the so-called white helmets rushing from one bomb site to another. Here there are no bomb shelters and people huddle in their home, and all too often die in them. Beyond that, there are no words. And their words of course that were hearing are those of shock. We are hearing Theresa May the British Prime Minister is calling the situation and the eastern Ghouta appalling, but there doesn't seem to be any effort underway beyond the words to stop the fighting and one Damascus newspaper today is saying that the worst may yet be to come what within the next coming days it says that there may be a full-on offensive to retake the eastern Ghouta, Becky?
[Anderson:] Absolutely shocking, Ben. Local tradition holds Ghouta was once the Garden of Eden and days that must now seem almost forever ago, and the once that you will keenly remember. What was it like back in the day?
[Wedeman:] I lived in Damascus in the late '70s and the early '80s and the Ghouta back then was vast oasis and it was very popular during the weekend. People would go there to go on picnics. I remember going there with my family on picnics with my friend, and playing backgammon underneath the tree, there were water canals bubbling through the groves there. And during the 80s and the 90s, there was a lot of construction in the area and a lot of the poorer people moved to those suburbs of Damascus and of course, it is there where many of the supporters come for the uprising against the regime of Bashar al Assad. Today, the Ghouta obviously even before the war didn't remember anything of my youth, but of course now it is a moonscape, Becky.
[Anderson:] Ben Wedeman reporting on the story out of Beirut, Lebanon this evening. And let Syria crumbles back in to being [inaudible] and becoming more complex. We want to step back for a second. Give you a sense of the broad sweep of how the war stand now in three arenas. Bear with me on this. Arena 1 where we just were eastern Ghouta, the regime they are attacking rebels same as Idlib in the east, I mean the two that is where the war on ISIS is playing out. Back towards the north, I mean three a newly extreme intense front of the multi-faceted conflict. A month a Turkey launching a massive assault against Kurds in Afrin and in just the last 24 hours, Turkey shelling a convoy militia loyal to the regime as they head into Afrin and you can see the cloud of Turkish artillery firing here. There is a lot to take in, I know, but it is really important stuff. Joining us is now CNN Sam Kiley to help us make sense of it all for you. After Aleppo Sam, we thought had seen the worst of the sort of the scenes out of Ghouta and indeed Afrin and dual offensive from the Syrian government, is that what we are seeing here?
[Sam Kiley, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Yes, it is. In short order what east Ghouta was supposed to be as you see one in that map up to Idlib, and they were supposed to be de-escalation zone, and what had that proves to be is giving the Syrian regime a period of consolidation and ability to rearm and re-plan, and now what we had seen in Idlib and our Arwa Damon with the dramatic report reporting there. And then again in eastern Ghouta a massive assault being carried out by the Syrian regime. With the critical support of Russia and Iran without whom the Syria regime would have collapsed of the rebels at least two years ago, I think the tactic is to smash the place in to submission and then move in. That is exactly what happened in Aleppo, many though it was the end of it and the handful of survivors can be shipped out, sent to a place of safety, ironically the place of safety for them was Idlib where they are moved under pressure again by the regime. The regime is feeling much more emboldened even though territorially, they are invaded by the Turks.
[Anderson:] "The New York Times," and you are talking about the regime, and pick apart why exactly you say that you have alluded to it with the support of Russians and the Iranians. And The New York Times is quoting that the leader of the government's elite tiger force warning Ghouta, I promise to teach them a lesson in combat and in fire. Going on. You won't find a rescue and if you do, you will be rescued with y water like boiling oil, and you will be rescued with blood. How is it that seven years in that as you have rightly described, were looking at a Syrian government seemingly so emboldened?
[Kiley:] Well in the beginning, the Turks were calling for an air explosion zone, no fly zone for anybody on any side. That is what prevailed in Libya and then this allied forces started to attack the Gadhafi regime. And the collapse of Libya in to anarchy spooked the very people who could have imposed a no-fly zone. A no-fly zone would have been problematic, because the Syrians have a very powerful air defense, and quite relatively they started getting Russian support and started to boost the air defenses, and then the point at which the Syrian regime looked like it would collapse, similar to maps that CNN was showing three years ago an embattled Damascus and the growing rebel ownership and in came the Russians enforce with the doctrine of the overwhelming force. If you are recall in Aleppo, the deliberate attacking of the medical facilities breaking the back of spiritually and physically of are rebellion, and that is being repeated again in Ghouta.
[Anderson:] Very briefly, the Russians they have said that it is all over for them in Syria, and they are sort of scaling backed and is that true?
[Kiley:] Well, they are sneering of the Americans for getting stuck for so long and the American allies in Iraq, and now Syria. It will very interesting to see indeed whether the Russians can extract themselves in the way they want Or whether they want to want but the more they stay there they will hemorrhage blood and treasure as others this have. This is a quagmire of sand and it is extremely difficult to get out. But if they leave, they will leave that regime vulnerable, and whether it is to ISIS 2.0, the Kurdish rebellion or the reconfiguration of the rebel movements. They will permanently need the defense of that outside power.
[Anderson:] Sam Kiley in the house. Thank you, Sam. We will be on top of this story throughout the hour. Later I will to talk to the U.N. regional humanitarian coordinator for Syria crisis. Those all too well the complexities and the horror facing the people of the country right now. I want to get you to the U.S. State of Florida at this point where in the wake of last week's horrific school shooting, students are walking out of classes calling for gun control, these images are just coming into CNN. And we are looking at literally hundreds of kids walking out of schools in Florida. We have already seen the sea of activism earlier on in the week. The kids want their voices heard. Never mind what politicians are up to. It is these students who want some action, and they are certainly out there asking for that now. We'll have Jake Tapper's town hall later today on CNN talking specifically to this issue, but those are the kids. They are not waiting for politicians. They are out there. One of America's most famous ministers passes away. We look back at the life and legacy of reverend Billy Graham. That is next. And later, teenaged survivors of the school massacre take their message directly to Florida lawmaker, and they want stricter gun law in the hopes of saving lives. All of that coming up this hour. Stay with us.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news: out already. After only 10 days as White House communications director, Anthony Scaramucci is forced to step down, as a new chief of staff takes charge of a chaotic White House. This hour, new details on Scaramucci's implosion after his profane rant and nasty feuds. Angry and hurt. As the president lavishes praise on his new chief of staff, we are learning retired General John Kelly said he considered quitting the Cabinet job he held until last week. We are going to tell you what Mr. Trump did that left Kelly fuming. It will be handled. After North Korea's most threatening missile launch yet, President Trump tests U.S. defenses and promises action. Kim Jong-un now claiming all 50 states are potential nuclear targets. And Russia retaliates. Vladimir Putin orders the U.S. to slash its diplomatic staff on his turf, hitting back at new sanctions. We will take a closer look at the impact of an aggressive move with echoes of the Cold War. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking tonight, Anthony Scaramucci forced out as communications director only 10 days after he was hired. Sources tell CNN the president soured on Scaramucci, and the new White House chief of staff, John Kelly, wanted him removed after he unleashed a vulgar tirade against two White House officials. Also tonight, the White House says Scaramucci has no role in the administration. We are told he was escorted off the White House grounds. Retired General Kelly clearly is trying to take charge of the turbulent Trump White House, but tonight we have exclusive new reporting suggesting that Kelly recently had his own doubts about his future in the administration. Sources telling CNN that Kelly was angry about the way the president fired James Comey as FBI director, so angry that he called Comey afterward to tell him he was thinking of resigning as homeland security secretary. Also breaking, the White House says Mr. Trump is reviewing his options after Vladimir Putin ordered the U.S. to dramatically cut its diplomatic staff in Russia. The Kremlin leader hitting back at new U.S. sanctions that the president is expected to sign, but still hasn't. The president declining to speak publicly about the new slap by Putin, while Vice President Pence had tough words for Russia during a trip to Eastern Europe. This hour, I will talk about those stories and more with the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jack Reed. And our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. First, let's go to our senior White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, another abrupt exit from the Trump White House today.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. As it turns out, the Mooch was a bit too much. Just hours after President Trump insisted there was no White House chaos in his West Wing, his staff once again descended into turmoil with his new communications director, Anthony Scaramucci, stepping down, a shakeup apparently orchestrated by the new chief of staff here, John Kelly.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We just swore in General Kelly. He will do a spectacular job. I have no doubt.
[Acosta:] Another wave of White House chaos swept through the West Wing. Just hours after President Trump welcomed his new chief of staff, retired General John Kelly to the White House, his recently hired and embattled communications director, Anthony Scaramucci, suddenly stepped down.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] General Kelly has the full authority to operate within the White House and all staff will report to him.
[Anthony Scaramucci, Former White House Communications Director:] I love the president.
[Acosta:] It was just 10 days ago when the man nicknamed the Mooch pledged to improve White House messaging and praised outgoing Press Secretary Sean Spicer and then Chief of Staff Reince Priebus.
[Scaramucci:] As it relates to Sean, it speaks volumes to who he is as a human being, who he is as a team player, because his attitude is Anthony is coming in, let me clear the slate for Anthony. And I do appreciate that about Sean and I love him for it. But I don't have any friction with Sean. I don't have any friction with Reince.
[Acosta:] The following week, he went to war with Priebus, savaging the then chief of staff in a profanity-laced rant to "The New Yorker," suggesting he might be the source of White House leaks.
[Scaramucci:] As you know from the Italian expression, the fish stinks from the head down. But I can tell you two fish that don't stink, OK? And that's me and the president.
[Acosta:] The White House said in a statement: "Mr. Scaramucci felt it was best to give Chief of Staff John Kelly a clean slate and the ability to build his own team." But sources told CNN new Chief of Staff John Kelly had lost confidence in Scaramucci. It was an immediate sign that Kelly is aiming to bring order to a White House that's been rocked by near constant staff turmoil. The president had praised Kelly as a miracle worker in his previous job as secretary of homeland security.
[Trump:] You look at the border, you look at the tremendous results we have had. And you look at the spirit. And with a very controversial situation, there's been very little controversy, which is pretty amazing by itself. So, I want to congratulate you on having done a fantastic job, General. And we look forward to, if it's possible, an even better job as chief of staff.
[Acosta:] But earlier in the day, the president took to Twitter to insist all is well, touting the nation's stock market and unemployment rate before insisting, no White House chaos, a message echoed by Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
[Huckabee Sanders:] If you want to see chaos, come to my house with three preschoolers. This doesn't hold a candle to that.
[Acosta:] The new chief of staff will find rival factions still in place. Even with Scaramucci gone, there are still sharp elbows being thrown by strategist Steve Bannon, counselor Kellyanne Conway, even the president's family all competing for the president's attention. Daughter Ivanka Trump hailed Kelly in a tweet as a true American hero. In the president's Cabinet turned board room, Kelly was able to observe another source of White House tension, the damaged relationship with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who has gone from being trashed publicly by Mr. Trump last week to sitting across the room from him silently today. And sources close to the White House say not only was John Kelly unhappy with Anthony Scaramucci's performance. The president had also soured on his new communications director. As for that article in "The New Yorker," according to White House officials here, the president did not approve of Scaramucci's language in that article when talking about Reince Priebus, the former chief of staff, and other staffers here at the White House. According to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the president viewed that language as inappropriate. That's despite the fact the president has used lots of inappropriate language himself in the past Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, Jim, thank you, Jim Acosta at the White House. And while we heard the president lavish praise on his new White House chief of staff, John Kelly apparently has had a serious disagreement with the president. We have some exclusive new CNN reporting on that. Let's go to our justice correspondent, Pamela Brown. What are you learning, Pamela?
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, my colleague Shimon Prokupecz and I have learned that incoming White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was so upset with the way President Donald Trump handled the firing of FBI Director James Comey that he called Comey shortly after he was terminated to tell him how upset and angry he was. This is according to two sources familiar with the conversation between Kelly and Comey. And at the time, Kelly was secretary of homeland security. Apparently, he was so angry that he even told Comey that he was contemplating resigning from his position as secretary of homeland security in a showing of solidarity. Comey apparently responded in this phone conversation by telling him not to resign. Now, both sources caution that it was unclear how serious Kelly was about resigning and, of course, that never happened. And fast-forward a few months later, now he's chief of staff at the White House. But the sources say he was particularly upset by the way Comey was treated, how it all went down, by the fact Comey learned he had been fired on the news, rather than by the president. And the call took place while Comey was traveling back from Los Angeles to Washington on May 9. For context here, Wolf, the sources said Comey and Kelly are not particularly close friends, but that they had a professional relationship and a deep mutual respect for each other. Comey declined to comment to us about this story. The White House and DHS did not comment, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Pamela Brown reporting for us, thanks very much. Let's get some more on all of these developments. Senator Jack Reed is joining us. He's the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator, thanks for joining us.
[Sen. Jack Reed , Rhode Island:] Thanks, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] First to the breaking news. What does the White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci's dismissal after only, what, 10 days or so on the job say about the influence of the president's new White House chief of staff, General John Kelly?
[Reed:] Well, I think it says a great deal about General Kelly's influence. He is someone that I have known and respected for many, many years. We have known each other for more than a decade. He's a patriot who sacrificed for his country. I think he went in and he wanted to not only organize the White House, but reorient it, get a strategy in place. And I think it was his influence probably more than anyone else that was decisive.
[Blitzer:] So, does this give you a little bit more confidence in the president of the United States? Can General Kelly really bring order to the White House? I know you like him.
[Reed:] I think General Kelly will establish more stricter guidelines. He will try to control the access to the president, not exclude people, but make sure it is an orderly process. But, ultimately, it's the president and his attitude and his approach to these issues. And that's the key factor. I think you can bring in new staff, but you have to have the president willing to listen to the staff, willing to change some of his behaviors. Some of the tweets that he puts out are not helpful strategically, and I think that's going to be the test.
[Blitzer:] I want you to react, Senator, to the latest CNN reporting that the White House chief of staff, General Kelly, was so upset with how President Trump handled the firing of FBI Director James Comey that Kelly actually called Comey afterward and said he was considering resigning, this according to two sources familiar with the conversation between Kelly and Comey. What does that tell you?
[Reed:] A, it wouldn't surprise me at all. John Kelly has dedicated his life to the country and the Constitution, and he is somebody who believes very firmly in fair play, for want of a better term, that people should be treated fairly, decently, the expectations should be made clear to them, and they should be allowed to do their jobs. And I think, again, that's not inconsistent with my knowledge and my experience with General Kelly.
[Blitzer:] As a reaction to the Russian sanctions bill that was overwhelmingly passed in the House and the Senate, the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, says he will make the U.S. reduce its embassy and consulate staff by 755 people by September 1, including diplomats. How much of a blow is this to the United States?
[Reed:] Well, it's a significant loss of diplomatic presence, obviously, but, ironically, it's going to be a loss also to Russia. Many of those individuals are involved with organizing and approving visas both going to the United States and people entering Russia, tour groups, tourism, so, economic collaboration to the extent we have it. It's not just a penalty to us. I think in the long run it will be a penalty to the Russians. And, again, the one thing we have to do is not allow Putin to see this as a moral equivalence. We imposed these sanctions because of Russians' activities in Crimea. They seized territory of another country. They are encouraging a separatist movement in the Donbass in Ukraine, supporting it militarily. They have interfered in our election. They have interfered with other elections. And I think the president should be speaking out very strongly about how this underscores not what we have done inappropriately, but what the Russians consistently do inappropriately.
[Blitzer:] The White House says the president is now reviewing his options. He hasn't responded yet to what Putin has ordered, 755 people to leave U.S. embassies and consulates in Russia. What do you think about that? What's the delay all about?
[Reed:] Again, it's been a delay not only responding to this, but a delay in signing the sanctions bill. In fact, there was a moment where it was unclear whether the president would sign the bill. So, I think we have to take a much more explicit tone towards the Russians. There are issues where we are significantly in disagreement, the Crimea, their activity in Ukraine, their threats to the Baltic, their actions in interfering in elections. And then there are areas where we have tenuous cooperation in Syria and elsewhere. It's not a black-and-white picture, but I think we should seize quickly the high ground and talk about what they're doing so wrong in the world and that this is another aspect of their attempts to upset diplomatic relations.
[Blitzer:] The president said today he will quote "handle" North Korea. Respond to that comment. Is he handling that crisis?
[Reed:] I think there is much more he has to do and has to do it quickly. This is an existential threat to the United States as they develop their nuclear capacity and their long-range missile technology. I think there has to be a much more coherent structure. He should consider appointing a special envoy. He should use sanctions against companies, including Chinese companies, that are doing business with the North Koreans. He should do it on a very a scale where he increases the pressure, but the pressure keeps ratcheting it up until we get some cooperation. We all understand any that type of military operation on the Korean Peninsula will be horrendous, so we have to exhaust every diplomatic option. We have to do it coherently, too.
[Blitzer:] How serious is the North Korean threat to the U.S. mainland?
[Reed:] Well, it's serious, in the sense that our intelligence agencies are suggesting that within a year they will have the technology to reach targets within the United States. And that in itself is very disturbing. So, we have to start now with what time we have to use diplomacy. The Chinese initially indicated they might be supportive. They have not been supportive. But we have to use whatever tools we can. And we have to also, I think, understand one of the concerns the Chinese have. That is the regime in Pyongyang collapses and they are confronted with literally millions of people trying to flee into China. We have to work on that dimension, too, that that would be treated as an internationally humanitarian disaster, and the world would assist. So, there's several dimensions. But I just don't get the sense that there is a regular coherent process in which the president is intimately involved. It seems to be more or less, you know, a tweet here, a tweet there, and not the consistent thorough details of policy-making and diplomatic activity.
[Blitzer:] Senator Jack Reed, thanks for joining us.
[Reed:] Thanks, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Just ahead, we will have more reaction to the breaking news, Anthony Scaramucci now the shortest-serving White House communications chief in modern history. So, how will this ouster impact the president's inner circle? And why is Mr. Trump staying quiet about Vladimir Putin's aggressive new move, demanding a drastic cut in the U.S. diplomatic presence in Russia?

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] CNN special report, "A ROYAL MATCH, HARRY AND MEGHAN," airs tonight 8:00 p.m. Eastern followed by another special, "DIANA, CHASING A FAIRY TAIL," at 9:00 p.m. Eastern. Thank you for being with me today. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. NEWSROOM with Ana Cabrera starts right now.
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] It's 3:00 eastern. I'm Ana Cabrera, in New York. You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. Glad to have you with us on this Saturday afternoon. The news this hour, more words, more problems and more confusion about what the president did or did not do. Today, the president's lead lawyer outside the White House, Rudy Giuliani, tried to correct the record and undo his own mistake. In an interview last night, Rudy Giuliani tried to defend the president for suggestion companies paid off his long-time attorney and fixer, Michael Cohen in exchange for influence and assets. One of the companies in question, AT&T, paid $600,000 to Cohen's consulting firm. Rudy Giuliani said the president had no knowledge of the payments and AT&T wasted its money. He told the "Huffington Post," "Look at this for evidence no further than the drama playing out in court. He did drain the swamp." The president denied the merger, Giuliani said. They didn't get the result they wanted. That would be a remarkable contradiction of the official White House line that the president had no role in the decision to try and block the deal between AT&T and Time Warner, CNN's corporate parents. Today, Rudy Giuliani walked back what he told the "Huffington Post," now telling Dana Bash he got a different story from his boss, the president. Quote, "He told me directly he didn't interfere." Boris Sanchez is live at the White House. Boris, where is the White House on this ongoing back and forth between Rudy Giuliani and Rudy Giuliani?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, Ana. Yes, the White House has maintained their position that the president did in the interfere in this decision by the Department of Justice to try to block the merger between AT&T and Time Warner. Sarah Sanders said earlier today it was the Department of Justice's decision, not President Trump's. This leads to a series of questions. First, just how much influence does this president have over the Department of Justice? We know he sees it as an extension of his political power, the way that he's suggested that they should carry out investigations into some of his political opponents, and he's very publicly opposed this deal between Time Warner and AT&T. The question of influence lingers. It also beckons a question about Rudy Giuliani's role with the legal team. He was brought onto help defend the president into the Special Counsel's probe into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. He's waded into waters he certainly perhaps should not have waded into, whether it was announcing that North Korea would be releasing prisoners or, as you noted, this merger situation, or his comments on the Stormy Daniels saga, contradicting some of what the president previously said and having to walk his comments back. You'll recall the president initially said about that that Rudy Giuliani didn't have all his facts straight. No indication about what the president thinks about the latest walk-back. It's another unforced error from the president's new attorney Ana?
[Cabrera:] Meantime, Boris, new reporting on a White House meeting about the wildly inappropriate joke made by an aide at John McCain's expense. What can you tell us?
[Sanchez:] Publicly, Sarah Sanders, the press secretary, would not weigh in on that comment by a communications staffer, Kelly Sadler, when she said that McCain's opinion on Gina Haspel's nomination wouldn't matter because he would be dead soon anyway. We understand that privately during a meeting yesterday with some of her communications staff, Sanders did call it an inappropriate joke. But apparently, according to at least one source, she took exception to the fact that this was a leak that she believed was designed to hurt Sadler in public. Sanders, from the podium, refused to even apologize for the comment, seeming to focus on the idea that this was a leak, and that it should not have been something that was put out there in the press. We should note that sources have told us that Sadler is still safe in her job. There's no indication that this controversy or her comment will affect her role within the administration Ana?
[Cabrera:] All right. Boris Sanchez, at the White House. Thank you. Let's bring in our panel, reporter and co-author of "Politico's" "Playbook," Dan Lippman, and CNN legal analyst, Paul Callan, a former New York City prosecutor. Dan, what do you make of Sarah Sanders being more upset about the leaks than the comments? And the White House is still not condemning what Kelly Sadler said about John McCain, quote, "dying anyway."
[Daniel Lippman, Reporter, Politico & Co-author, Politico's Playbook:] I saw Sarah Sanders last night at a performance by Rob Lowe. Clearly, she is not letting this get to her. She's still having fun. But I think it speaks to an indication at the White House that Sanders wanted to protect Sadler from getting fired. There's been so much turnover in the communications shop at the White House. And if Sadler did this every day, then she would clearly get fired, but I think they think one error by her is not enough to get canned. But in most White Houses, this would be a firing offense.
[Cabrera:] Paul, on the controversial Rudy Giuliani comments, the president, if he personally denied the AT&TTime Warner merger, as Rudy Giuliani initially said was the case, what would be the legal implications of that?
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, you know, the Justice Department faced wrong arguments during the trial, the antitrust trial going on, that this was done because the president ordered it and not because there were the merits to the opposition to the merger.
[Cabrera:] Right, but AT&T also dropped that argument as part of its case.
[Callan:] Well, they absolutely well, they absolutely took the position, by the way, that on the merits they had a very, very good case, and yes, there was an issue about whether the president should be deposed. This was a big court battle going on about this. And for Rudy Giuliani to stick his nose into it and say the president was opposed to the merger and, therefore, the investment that AT&T made in Cohen was a bad investment. So, I mean, why is he sticking his nose into litigation where the lawyers have a carefully planned defense? It makes no sense. Giuliani is like a freight train that's ran off the rails.
[Cabrera:] And he was supposed to be focused on the Russia investigation. He keeps on talking about Cohen or Korea. It seems, Dan, every time Giuliani speaks, he gets his client into more trouble. How much rope does Trump have when it comes to letting Rudy Giuliani be his mouthpiece?
[Lippman:] It's remarkable for someone who worked at the Department of Justice, he was the number three official a couple decades ago, for him to make these types of statements, he knows the president should not get involved in this. And as to whether Trump will ever get rid of him, I feel like if you have a couple more weeks of this, then clearly Trump will try to get someone else on his team. But the problem is there aren't that many high-powered lawyers willing to work for this president, and so you're kind of are stuck with Rudy for now.
[Cabrera:] And Rudy Giuliani's biographer has called him, a, quote, "drama machine." James Comey has written about Giuliani in his book saying he always has to be the center of attention. Paul, you worked in the same circles as him in New York. What do you know about his style as a lawyer?
[Callan:] I've been watching him as lawyer, and he was the United States attorney. He's always been a flamboyant attorney looking for a headline, but he has never been as undisciplined and off the tracks as I've seen him lately. There's something going on with Giuliani. I don't know what it is. Whether it's personal. He just filed for divorce with a wife of 15 years. That's always a high-pressure situation. And representing the president. Rudy Giuliani is being criticized for some of the things he's saying, but everything he says is something the president himself said at one time. It's just hard for a lawyer to keep up with the ever-changing positions of the president. The president was against the Time Warner merger. Then he had no comment. The president said he never knew about the Stormy Daniels' payoff. Then he apparently is now taking the position through Cohen that not only did he know about it, but he approved it. So Rudy Giuliani, it's tough to figure out which of the many positions Rudy Giuliani should adopt.
[Cabrera:] Rudy Giuliani's not the only one changing his story or changing his position. We saw the chief of staff, John Kelly, putting his foot in his mouth when he talked about the Russia investigation. He told NPR this. Quote, "It may not be a cloud, but certainly the president is somewhat embarrassed, frankly." He's now backtracking on that statement saying, "I actually corrected it to say distracted. It's untrue. It's a witch hunt. Right? It distracts him. Not too much, but it's unfair." So from embarrassing to distracting. I'm curious, Dan, you think Trump, what he thinks about this comment?
[Lippman:] I don't think Trump actually listens to NPR. Because most liberals are big fans of that radio station. I'm sure Trump saw the comments. I think sometimes he's happy to see his aides get put into the fire instead of him when here walking about Rudy Giuliani. I think the heat is on Rudy instead of Trump, and I think Trump is willing to let John Kelly kind of wave in the winds as long as he doesn't make these types of comments more often. Because Trump does not like to be a person who is embarrassed. Kelly was a little too truthful here.
[Cabrera:] Isn't that still embarrassing his administration? These are people who work for him and are supposed to be his right hand, left hand men.
[Callan:] If I can jump in for a second.
[Cabrera:] Go ahead.
[Callan:] I also think that you have a flamboyant, undisciplined president of the United States. And, of course, he got elected, maybe because he was flamboyant and undisciplined. What he needs is a careful, tempered, discipline spokesperson, and attorney representing him. Instead, he goes out and hires a former politician, Rudy Giuliani, who's crazier than he is in terms of making wild headline- grabbing statements. Doesn't strike me as a good press or defense strategy. It's going to blow up on the president. I'd be surprised if Rudy Giuliani lasts more than another three weeks.
[Cabrera:] You heard it here first. We'll see. Thank you, Paul Callan and Dan Lippman. I appreciate it. Thank you. Ahead this hour, tensions rising, U.S. flags on fire, signs mocking President Trump as anti-American protests fill the streets in Iran. What this means for stability in the region. Plus, hostage plea. He was last seen more than a decade ago, and now the family of Robert Levinson, a retired FBI agent, who vanished in Iran, is growing increasingly worried. His son, Dan, joins us live. And later, acting fast. A Florida deputy is being hailed a hero for saving a three-month old baby boy. We'll show you the remarkable dash cam video. More of this live in the CNN NEWSROOM. Don't go anywhere.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Democrats produce mobs. Republicans produce jobs. This November, vote for jobs, not mobs.
[Hill:] President Trump using one of his new campaign lines there against Democrats, who are leading in polling on generic ballots. But a new poll shows 50 percent of those polled want Democrats to control Congress. And 47 percent want Republicans to keep control, 41 percent there. The president's numbers are seeing a spike. And 47 percent of those polled approve of the way the president handles his job. In campaign appearances, the president says he's not on the ballot, but let's be honest, he's on the ballot. If he's right, the Democrats, could they be in more trouble with the election than they think at this point? Joining us, Kevin Madden, CNN political commentator and Republican strategist, and CNN political commentator and former manager for Hillary for America, Robby Mook. Good to have both of you here. As we look at this, Robby, for all this talk of the blue wave, as we know we have heard, Republicans do seem to have momentum today. So where do Democrats need to be focusing with 15 days to go, Robby?
[Robby Mook, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, these are the highest numbers we have seen for the president so far. Some polls have shown it lower, but that aside, there are all the indications here of a very good year for Democrats. They are leading on the generic ballot, as you said. By the way, by the same amount the Democrats won the popular vote in 2006 when we picked up 31 seats in the House, which would be enough to win the majority here. Huge gender gap, leading by 25 with women. Historic number of Republican retirements. The list goes on and on. This is shaping up to be a good year. I think the important thing for everybody to pay attention to is there are really two elections going on here. One is in the House of Representatives whereas I said we have very good prospects. We need to work hard. We can't take it for granted, but it's a good map for us. A lot of governorships, these are really good races. I think we're going to pick up a number of governorships. I wouldn't be surprised if we get the majority of governors in the country coming out of the elections. The Senate is different. It's a ruby red map. So after election day, there's going to be something for everybody to point to here. And say that they won. But I would argue that the House map and the gubernatorial map, that is much more representative of the country as a whole, and Democrats are going to do very well there.
[Hill:] That is a rather diplomatic answer in many ways. But interesting to see all of the things you're pointing out as you head into the final two weeks. Kevin, on the Republican side, we're seeing and hearing more from President Trump. We know his happy area is out there in an area where he's well loved. What do you think is breaking through at this point for Republicans? Is it Kavanaugh, is it President Trump simply being out there? Is it sort of this narrative that President Trump is weaving about the caravan of migrants?
[Kevin Madden, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, I think it's a confluence of all of those different elements. I think what's key about the president's approval rating is that it is an indication that Republicans are coming home. If you look at the headlines from even just two months ago, Erica, the Republican Party was listless and had a big enthusiasm gap. And while Robby is right, pointing out a lot of the elements that are factoring into Democrat enthusiasm, what we have seen now with these recent numbers, with the generic ballot and the president's standing is Republicans have narrowed the enthusiasm gap. I think the question that we're going to have on election day is where is that enthusiasm being applied? If it's in some of these suburban areas where as Robby pointed out we have a gender gap, where you have suburban women coming out, registering much more favorably for Democrats, we'll be able to maybe compete or win a couple seats Democrats had already put in the win column. That will minimize, I think, some of the losses that the party that is aligned with the incumbent in the White House usually has in midterm elections.
[Hill:] As we're looking at all of this, and even just touching on, Robby, some of what we're hearing from the president on the campaign trail, he's throwing out some wild lies, and downright misinformation as we're hearing when it comes to the caravan and jobs related to arms sales to Saudi Arabia. But we know historically speaking that going toe to toe with Donald Trump doesn't work. It tends to backfire. So what is the plan on the part of Democrats to counter some of that misinformation over the next two weeks?
[Mook:] Well, you see Democrats out there, a number of the debates going on, Republicans are attempting to also distort information out there, comparing them to other elected officials, making up outright lies about their careers. They're speaking out on that. But I will say, I think Trump's strategy is limited. Again, this is where this comes down to two maps. I think he's doing everything he can to pull out the Republican base and some of those really red states. That might help them protect or pick up some Senate seats. But I don't think it's going to save them, as Kevin pointed out, in the suburban area that are so important for the House map and the gubernatorial map. We saw in the Virginia elections last year, those were really the first, quoteunquote, "elections we had since the presidential." Turnout was high. Ed Gillespie, the Republican, got more votes than anybody who had been governor before that, who had won that race before that. But the Democrat got so many more votes because that Democratic intensity was so high, and in fact, for the first time, we're seeing that likely voters, Democratic likely voters, that that turnout intensity is higher than ever before. That's a big deal for Democrats. So I think turnout is going to be incredibly high across the board. Trump is going to do everything he can to push it up with his base, but I think Democrats are going to have that advantage going in.
[Hill:] Just real quickly, before I let you go. I want to play you sound from over the weekend. People are fired up, outraged. The way it's manifesting has people on both sides of the aisle upset.
[Unidentified Male:] Look at this piece of
[Hill:] Nancy Pelosi being confronted. Mitch McConnell as well. Kevin, I'll let you kick it off, but I would love to get an answer from both of you. How important is it for candidates and lawmakers to address this issue of civility moving forward? Kevin?
[Madden:] Well, very important because the key to successful policy is bringing together coalitions from across both aisles. And in order to do that, Mitch McConnell is going to need Democrat support, and if Nancy Pelosi were to become speaker, she's going to need some Republican support in order to get things done. They have to address it if they're hoping to be successful. But I think this just is a reflection of where we are two weeks away from an election day where both parties believe that juicing their bases is the path to victory. They're very focused on drawing a contrast with the other party. As a result, you see the most vocal based supporters showing up in public like this with demonstrations like that.
[Hill:] Robby, I have 15 seconds or I'm in big trouble.
[Mook:] I largely I'll be bipartisan. I agree with Kevin on this. I will say, our president has normalized this kind of behavior. As long as he's in office, it's going to be the norm, unfortunately.
[Hill:] Robby Mook, Kevin Madden, always a pleasure to speak with you both. Thank you.
[Madden:] Great to be with you.
[Mook:] Thank you.
[Hill:] I want to share more information. Nancy Pelosi just telling our own Dana Bash, "If the election were held today, the Democrats would handily win the House," she said. "I can only speak in the present tense, though," she went on to say, "because you never know." She's speaking with Dana Bash right now at the citizen event here at CNN. We'll bring you anything else of importance that is said as it happened. Stay with us. You're watching CNN.

[Quest:] All seems so ordinary and so obvious. Think about it, how many times have you sort of gone through this process and well, the rest is just obvious. Now, McDonald`s in the U.K. is getting rid of the plastic straws at its restaurants in Britain and Ireland and it`s starting in September. Instead, it`s going to use environmentally friendly paper straws. The fast-food chain with a number of firms that are looking to reduce their plastic waste. Craig Leeson is the director of the film "Plastic Ocean" joins us now, good to see you sir and thank you for taking the time. This is a victory for you.
[Craig Leeson, Film Director:] It is a victory and any recognition by a corporation or a government or even an individual, last thing, will use plastic is something that we don`t need that is damaging to the environment, that causes human health problems is the victory. And so for McDonald`s to admit this, sends a message to other corporations that this kind of product shouldn`t be tolerated anymore, and certainly the next generation is being left with the problem of dealing with this. And they don`t want to deal with brands that are involved with single use of plastic.
[Quest:] What`s fascinating though is the way in which this is very much being taken off in the U.K. largely due many campaigns and things like the evening standard newspaper and the like. But when the issue of plastic straws were raised by McDonald`s shareholders in the U.S., they voted to continue with them. So there`s still opposition to getting rid of the plastic straw.
[Leeson:] We`ve seen opposition amongst many companies. I mean, Malibu in California bans single use of plastic items, there`s one company that has resisted that and is paying the penalty for doing so, which is Starbucks. And they feel that their clients want plastic straws whereas everybody else within that community thinks that that`s not acceptable. How acceptable that remains to their clients will be seen because consumers are starting to spend more
[Quest:] Right
[Leeson:] Wisely, they`re making smart choices with their dollars. And as we`ve seen, single-use of plastic items are causing such damage to the environment that they don`t want to be a part of that. So corporations that are continuing to perpetuate the single use of plastic items are engaging in what we call brand damage.
[Quest:] And that brand damage, for example, when does it end? I`ve got a plastic straw in my hand, but I`ve also got a plastic lid on the cup. Now, arguably, that is also single-use plastic, but we definitely need the lid to prevent the hot drink or whatever from spilling. So it`s I guess, if it was as simple as saying get rid of all single use plastic, everybody would get on with it. But there`s a complexity to the issue
[Leeson:] Yes
[Quest:] That doesn`t are you, go on, go for it.
[Leeson:] Yes, but Richard, you don`t need that cup in the first place. You can take your own steel container to the coffee shop and have them put the coffee in your steel container which you can re-use time and time again. The in most coffee shops, even the paper cup which you think is paper, most instances, it contains 27 percent plastic, which is a line that
[Quest:] Right
[Leeson:] Presents prevents the cup from going soggy because of the liquid contained within it. But you can solve that
[Quest:] Right
[Leeson:] Problem, you can stop that waste going into the stream by taking your own cup to the store and in many cases, we`re seeing companies that are enlightened by the problem, actually offering discounts to customers
[Quest:] Right
[Leeson:] Who bring their own keepy as they`re called.
[Quest:] Good to see you, sir, thank you. You got up early in the morning to join us from Hong Kong and we`re very appreciative, thank you very much sir, have a good weekend.
[Leeson:] Thank you.
[Quest:] We will take our profitable moment after the break.

[Gov. Rick Scott, , Florida:] Remember, Hurricane Andrew is one of the worst storms in the history of Florida. Irma is more devastating on its current path.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] "The catastrophic storm like the state has ever seen," strong words from Rick Scott, telling people they must evacuate from the coast if they are under evacuation orders. Hurricane Irma is threatening all of south Florida, especially Miami's low-lying coastal areas, with the deadly storm surge. What could it look like? A lot of people want to know. CNN's Meteorologist Chad Myers is digging into this. Chad, people are concerned when it comes to a hurricane about the winds. They are scared of the surge. What could they be up against?
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] The low pressure that it is, sucking in water and making a bubble of water higher than normal, higher than sea level, under the eye and slightly to the right of the eye of the path. So, it's what we saw in Katrina that knocked down Base St. Louis, Waveland, Biloxi, Gulfport. It was that 24-foot surge of water. People call it a wall or water. It's not a wall. It's not a wall of water that splashes on shore. It's a surge. Every wave is a foot higher than the last one. Another foot higher, another foot higher. Every time that water pounds you, it knocks things down. Now, we know that the European model is going to bring the hurricane very close to Marathon, the center of the eye. The American model, close to Isle of Mirada. This would be Worldwide Sportsman and the like here and Islander Resort. Here is Vaca Key, Marathon, Marathon Airport right there. It doesn't matter which is right. The storm has wind that does this for a long time before it makes landfall. The surge is from Plantation Key through Key Largo, up to almost Ocean Reef. Then there's nothing "there" there. Then you are back into Key Biscayne. You'll get water in Lake Surprise. You'll get water along the stretch and parts. All of this area here will fill up with the wind just blowing it on shore, plus that bubble of water we talked about that is just here. This is what Miami will look like downtown with a six-foot surge. So, John Berman, right there, he has to get out, clearly. Everyone else should get out. All the water, back into the city, at six feet. Now, there are estimates this could be 10 or 12 feet, which brings it way back here. All of a sudden, we are not only seeing a little storm surge. It's a big storm surge. That could get into the water supply. I'm fearful about this. We get salt in the fresh water, because we don't need that. The aquafer is what we drink down there. You put enough salt in the aquafer and that makes the water undrinkable. Let's not even think about that. People get cut off, can't go anywhere, the power is out, the water is out. It's no place to be after a storm surge.
[Bolduan:] And how quickly they can get things back up and running. It's not just the impact, it's the days after that is a concern. The storm surge, you shouldn't be anywhere near it now. Chad, great to see you. Thanks for laying it out. Appreciate it.
[Myers:] You're welcome.
[Bolduan:] FEMA says Florida has never been hit by a storm like Irma. President Trump says federal officials are ready to handle what is on the way. A short time ago, the president tweeted, "Irma is of epic proportion, perhaps bigger than we have ever seen. Be safe and get out of its way if possible. The federal government is ready." My next guest has been dealing with hurricanes in Florida for years. David Halstead is joining me now. He is the former director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management. David, I appreciate you joining me and bringing your perspective. From everything you have seen up to today, is Florida ready?
[David Halstead, Former Director, Florida Division Of Emergency Management:] I will tell you what, I think Florida is ready. I think the message that the governor has, about get out and evacuate, get out now, is critically important. Now, let's talk about after the storm. We are focusing on the storm coming. After the storm, say you stayed in the Keys, what are you going to do? First of all, we can't get to you because, guess what, the storm is coming up the center of the state. No one is going to come help. No one is going to bring you water and food. That's what you are going to hear. We are going to hear the tragic stories of people stuck on the Keys or stuck somewhere that didn't evacuate. That's why it's so critically important. Remember, this storm is going to affect the entire state of Florida.
[Bolduan:] David, Jeb Bush, to your point, the former Florida governor, said most of the deaths, from his perspective, most deaths that occur directly after the storm rather than during it. Why is that?
[Halstead:] Well, I did a study after the '04 storm season. We had four large storms hit us. We had 117 or so confirmed deaths. It went through the coroners reports on those. Most were either drowning or after the storm. Carbon monoxide in the garage because generators were left in closed spaces. People falling off the roofs because they are trying to do temporary roof repair. Trees falling on people, electrocutions. The list goes on and on. Typically, the majority of the people are not going to die from the storm itself. It's going to be drowning, flooding and that terrible storm surge we have been talking about all morning.
[Bolduan:] Looking ahead, as this approaches, there are reports there are thousands of people not heeding the warnings and folks deciding to not evacuate the Keys. They have ridden out the storm in the past. I know you have heard that before, they are not changing, now what now. What do you say to them this time?
[Halstead:] This is a different storm. They have been through Wilma and Hurricane Andrew. This is a bigger storm. This is a catastrophic storm. That can't be emphasized more. We had reports of 30-some-odd thousand people that evacuated the Keys. Well, there's about 80,000 that live there on a normal basis. That means barely not even touched half of the folks to get out of there. The question is, what are they going to do when they are cut off. Say the eye rolls over the center of the Keys and cuts off the causeway and doesn't allow us in or out of the Keys? They could be stuck there weeks without help. Are they prepared to handle weeks without power or weeks without food and drinking water?
[Bolduan:] In terms of the government preparation and government response, I mean, as far as preparations go, they are pleased with how the government, the governor and local officials are preparing. But, emergency management, in terms of preparation, they can only go so far, no matter what. You have to wait to see where the storm hits and what it is going to do.
[Halstead:] Right. It's a four-step approach. First, personal responsibility. You know, if I live at the base of Mt. St. Helens, like Mr. Truman did, and it blows, it's not the government's fault he perished. If I don't evacuate and the storm comes over, I only have myself to blame. However, local government is going to go in as quickly as possible and they'll do what they can. State government will back them up. Remember, the storm is coming through the state. Where do I pre-stage these assets? We've done a little bit of that already, but it's a dangerous chess game because you don't know where the storm is coming. And FEMA is doing the same thing. They will back up the state.
[Bolduan:] What is your biggest a lot of folks are going to say people are hyperventilating. Officials are saying this, they are doing a good job, they are hyperventilating about the storm. This is a cat 4 rather than a 5, like Andrew was, so it's different, it's less. What is the final message to folks? They have hours before this is about to hit the Keys.
[Halstead:] I would say to them, first of all, again, this is a bigger storm than Andrew. Are the wind speeds a little less? A couple miles less. Are you going to quibble about a couple miles an hour? You should leave now. This is probably your last chance this afternoon, if you are in the Keys, to get out. If you don't, your time is about up. You are hoping and praying the storm doesn't cause you great damage and injuries andor death.
[Bolduan:] David, you have the experience. I appreciate you coming in. I appreciate your expertise. Thank you very much.
[Halstead:] Yes, ma'am.
[Bolduan:] Coming up for us, how deadly could the storm be for those who stay on the coast near Miami? We are going to take you there, live. Watching Irma churn over the Bahamas toward the United States as we speak.

[Bash:] If you thought America was divided and Washington is broken, what happened last night may have just helped your case. Two competing events, one hosted by the president actually outside of Washington, a rally for his supporters in Michigan, but the other right here in the nation's capital hosted by the White House Press Corps, those who covered president, the White House Correspondents Association. It was a big annual dinner here in D.C. and here's what you heard if you watched the president's rally.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Is this better than that phony Washington White House Correspondents' Dinner? I could be up there tonight smiling like I love where they're hitting you shot after shot, these people, they hate your guts.
[Bash:] And here's what you heard if you tuned in, rather, to comedian Michelle Wolf performing at the Correspondents' Dinner.
[Wolf:] And of course we have Sarah Huckabee Sanders, we are graced with Sarah's presence tonight. I have to say I'm a little star struck. I love you as Aunt Lydia in "The Handmaid's Tale." I actually really like Sarah. I think she's very resourceful. Like she burns facts and then she uses that ash to create a perfect smoky eye. Like maybe she's born with it, maybe it's lies. Probably lies.
[Bash:] Some White House staffers were so offended by Wolf's jokes that they got up and left the dinner and the president has since tweeted, calling it a very big and a very boring bust. So what does my panel think? With me now CNN political commentator and former senior adviser to the Trump campaign, former congressman as well, Jack Kingston, and CNN political commentator and former national press secretary for the Bernie Sanders campaign, Symone Sanders. Symone, you were there. What did you think?
[Symone Sanders, Cnn Political Commentator:] I was there. You know, Dana, the room was tense. I remember saying that wow, Michelle Wolf was standing up there giving her jokes. I thought some of her jokes were in fact a bit crass but I thought she was funny. I laughed. And the White House Correspondents' Dinner is always this place where the comedian comes and they make fun of usually the president and sometimes the people that work in the White House, and so I thought it was all in good fun and I appreciated the Sarah Huckabee Sanders did not get up and leave.
[Bash:] You've been in Washington a while. You've seen sort of the goings on and dinners like this, people try to have a sense of humor, that is what these dinners are all about to kind of let loose and also inherently show the respect that each institution has for the other. It hasn't been that way for a while. At least this dinner for lots of reasons. You were not there but you certainly have watched a lot of it. What's your take?
[Jack Kingston, Cnn Political Commentator:] I've been to my share, and I think in the past what you've seen is a little better sense of fair play. You know, it's OK to jab fun at politicians and the press and at each other, it's OK, but do a little on the right, do a little on the left. Make people feel comfortable. Instead this was as Trump has said it was just attack after attack after attack, why should he go? And if we're going to call it the White House Correspondents' Dinner, don't we want to make it such that a Democrat or Republican president could go and have fun and, you know, you understand you're going to be the brunt of the joke but you don't have to be the brunt you know, the viciousness, the hatred that I think Michelle Wolf had.
[Sanders:] Look, I just want to remind folks that Sarah Huckabee Sanders and other people from this White House come on this network and other networks every single day on a regular basis vilify and attack the press. And so if you literally cannot take a joke, I think it's problematic.
[Kingston:] Then don't get mad for them not coming.
[Sanders:] So no one's I don't think people are necessarily too broken up about the fact that Donald Trump wasn't there. I think the White House Correspondents Association would have liked the president to attend. I think they're hoping he attends next year as is tradition but many people from the White House were there. Kellyanne Conway, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Mercedes Schlapp, Matt Schlapp, were there. Many people were there.
[Kingston:] If you strip off the bark, really, I mean, this town is cynical. But if you strip off the bark, being in politics is a noble profession. Being in journalism is a noble profession. We've let our cynicism rule the day. I don't think the press took the high road. I think the press could have taken the high road and had some But you know what Robin Williams was very hard on President Reagan, for example, but it's OK if he's on Comedy Central. That's what they do on Comedy Central.
[Bash:] OK, guys
[Kingston:] This is the press.
[Bash:] On that note. On that note, look, you're right, she's not a member of the press corps. She was invited to do what she did. She but there were cringe worthy moments for those of us who are not used to hearing that. It's not the first time this has happened, both with a Democratic administration and a Republican administration. Let's show our viewers a reminder.
[Don Imus, Radio:] When Cal Ripken broke Lou Gehrig's consecutive game record, the president was at Camden Yard, doing play- by-play on the radio with John Miller. Bobby Bonilla hit a double and we all heard the president in his obvious excitement, holler, go baby. I remember commenting at the time, I bet that's not the first time he said that. Remember the AstroTurf in the pickup? And my point is
[Stephen Colbert, Comedian:] I stand by this man. I stand by this man because he stands for things, not only for things, he stands on things. Things like aircraft carriers and rubble, and recently flooded city squares, and that sends a strong message that no matter what happens to America she will always rebound with the most powerfully staged photo-ops in the world.
[Bash:] And those were with the President Clinton and Bush actually sitting right there and both of those comedians got a lot of pushback for first kind of being over the top. I guess it sort of begs the question whether or not we've reached the point where this we're beyond this kind of dinner because of the intensity of the partisanship and the very tough relationship that this president has with the press, that maybe we need to completely go in a different direction for that moment when we try to come together and show some respect for one another.
[Kingston:] You know, if I had taken my 17-year-old next door neighbor Hunt Anderson and who's a very idealistic guy, he wants to grab this town and he wants to come to Washington whether it's in the press, whether it's in the politics or whatever, had him sit next to me while this woman is talking about abortion jokes, while she's making fun of the way Sarah Huckabee looks Sarah Huckabee Sanders, how she looks, talking about empty boxes of feminine hygiene products, I just would not feel good about it. Now if we were at Comedy Central
[Bash:] But that's about
[Kingston:] that's what you get. This is if you're trying to build a better you know, a loftier ideal in society, I don't think the press should invite somebody like that.
[Bash:] Guys, stay with us. We have to take a quick break. But there's a lot of conversation going on about that very thing. It wasn't Michelle Wolf's fault. She came to do what she was asked to do, sort of the whole notion of where we are right now. We're going to talk more about but first this week's "Before the Bell," here's CNN's chief money correspondent Christine Romans Christine.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] Hi, Dana. A busy week of company news this week. Quarterly earnings have been phenomenal and the big question, can it last? Now earnings season began with huge profits for the nation's big banks, then last week Caterpillar and 3M reported big outlooks. McDonald's, Merck and Pfizer report this week, as well Apple and Tesla and watch Snap. It's the parent company of Snapchat, the stock tanked last week after it launched a redesign of the redesign of its app. It's still trading below its IPO price of $17 a share. Investors worry Snap will not be profitable enough to live up to the hype before it went public. We'll get a good read on the strength of the economy this week. Reports on consumer spending, trade, construction and manufacturing and the monthly jobs report on Friday. And if that all weren't enough the Federal Reserve starts a two-day policy meeting on Tuesday. Now don't expect a rate hike. Investors think the next one will come after the June meeting, but any hint from the Fed about the future pace of interest rate hikes could move the stock market. Christine Romans, CNN, New York.

[Burnett:] Welcome back to "OutFront." We are following breaking news on the terror attack right here in New York City. At least eight people are dead, multiple people injured after a truck driver slammed into bicyclists in a bike lane. The attack coming just hours before New York City's major Halloween parade. Officials, including Governor Andrew Cuomo, are vowing a major boost in security.
[Gov. Andrew Cuomo , New York:] We will be vigilant. More police everywhere. You'll see them in the airports. You'll see them in the tunnels. We're not going to let them win. And if we change our lives, we contort ourselves to them, then they win and we lose.
[Burnett:] Jason Carroll is "OutFront." And, Jason, look, this is the sort of thing that many people had said would be a horrific attack and could happen. It did not happen for years and years after it happen in so many other places. It is not yet happens here until today. What is New York City doing tonight to secure this major parade where you're going to have thousands and thousands of people on the streets to secure it after the terror attack?
[Jason Carroll, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, thousands of people you're absolutely correct. And the staging area actually not that far from where we are right now at Sixth Avenue and Canal just about 15 blocks, that's also in Downtown Manhattan as well for folks who aren't familiar with that. But you heard the governor, you heard city and state officials encouraging people to go along with their lives, to be vigilant. And what the NYPD will do will what they are going to do is increase the police presence there. They didn't give numbers, Erin, but what they did do is give a sort of list of what folks who are coming out to the parade might expect and that included several things. Not only more officers on the streets, but heavy weapons teams are going to be lining the parade route, especially along key and iconic sites along Sixth Avenue. Also something that's called blocker vehicles, these are sort of heavy vehicles that will be stationed along streets meeting into and out of Sixth Avenue along the parade route, that way vehicles that aren't supposed to be on that street won't be able to get there. And also, sand trucks will be there as well. So once again, you're going to have an increased presence of heavily armed officers, some of those blocker trucks, sand trucks along the parade route, as well that parade just getting underway just around 7:00 tonight, expected to end around 11:00 tonight. And you heard the governor there, same thing that we heard before that's been echoed so many, many times in the past, asking folks to be vigilant, but also asking New Yorkers as they have been asked so many times in the past to go on with their lives. That's what they are attempting to do tonight. They're going to be doing it under a heavy police presence. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right. Jason, thank you. And President Trump speaking out on this attack moments ago in a series of tweets saying, "In NYC, looks like another attack by a very sick and deranged person. Law enforcement is following this closely. Not in the USA!" He also said, "We must not allow ISIS to return or enter our country after feeding them in the Middle East and elsewhere. Enough!" And then, "My thoughts, condolences and prayers to the victims and families of the New York City terrorist attack. God and your country are with you." Let's go now to Athena Jones. She's at the White House tonight. And, Athena, what more are we hearing from the White House about this tragedy right now?
[Athena Jones, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hi, Erin. Well, that last tweet from the President coming just a few minutes before the hour. And just a few minutes ago, the White House putting out a statement from the President reiterating some of those tweets saying, "Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of today's the terrorist attacks." The President went on to say, "My administration will provide its full support to the New York City Police Department, including through a joint investigation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation." The statement goes on to thank the first responders. And, of course, we know that President was briefed on this incident some time ago by Chief of Staff John Kelly. He's going to get continual updates as the situation develops. And we should mention that the first lady, Melania Trump, was in New York today for meetings. She put out a tweet a while ago saying, "My heartbreaks for NYC today. Thoughts and prayers as we monitor the situation." Melania Trump just one of several members of the Trump family to tweet about this incident, including his daughter, Ivanka, his son, Don Jr., and Don Jr.'s wife, Vanessa. So this is something the White House is going to be closely watching. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Athena. My panel is back with me. Let's just start here. We have just confirmed the breaking news at this moment, Art, that the suspect rented that truck at a Home Depot in New Jersey today. So, what does that tell you? Obviously, he had not had it for a period of time. And even though we know he have links to Florida, it's not as if he rented it there or anywhere along the way. He was in New Jersey and he rented it there today. You can see the condition it was in after his rampage there on the video.
[Roderick:] I think, you know, we always ask what the motive is here. You know, right now, we're hearing the motive is a terror attack. But what triggered him to do that today? I mean, we're starting to get ready to enter into the heavy holiday season. You know, there's going to be gatherings of people in a lot of locations. Why did he pick today? Was it because today is Halloween and he knew a lot of people were going to be out there? Luckily he didn't do this later. It was 3:30 in the afternoon. And although there's a lot of people around, they wouldn't have been around, you know, much more people later tonight that would have been out enjoying the parade and the festivities. But this is going to be taking apart this case completely and putting this individual's life together for at least the last five years since he's been or seven years since he's in the United States. So this is going to take some time, but I'm sure they've already peeled back this onion far enough and they can at least figure out, you know, what's the real motive behind this and what caused him to do this today.
[Burnett:] And, Juliette, that is the big question. What caused him to do it today? And also, where he chose to do it? It wasn't just that it was New York City. It is just a couple blocks away from Ground Zero, the scene of course at 911. We know he has links to Florida. We don't know if he was living there or what or whether he was living in New Jersey, even though we do now know he rented the truck there today. But the location here obviously could be hugely significant as well, right?
[Kayyem:] That's right. And remember before 911, of course, the World Trade Center had been attacked in the 1990s. And so, you know, he is alive. We don't know what condition he's in. And so he sort of forms the center of a series of investigations that are going to be domestic, New York. We've already mentioned New York, Florida and New Jersey. And then, of course, international ties to Uzbekistan or anyone else. I should say you know, Uzbekistan, I mean, this is the challenge that Bob was talking about. I don't think Bob means to sound fatalistic. I found the say way, which is the challenge is you have these guys radicalizing potentially and we have multiple soft targets because we love living in cities like New York City. That is the benefit as well. And so one of the challenges with the way we talk about terrorism now for example is Uzbekistan is, of course, not on the travel ban list, right, because this, you know, the radicalization process isn't tied to a country. It's tied to a mentality about how these men are thinking about the world. And until we begin to understand that, we are going to focus our counterterrorism efforts on countries, rather than a radicalization process, which even if we could stop it, it is never going to get the risk down to zero.
[Burnett:] Right.
[Kayyem:] The benefit of living in New York City is sort of, you know, the flow. People are out and about.
[Burnett:] What does this mean, though, Bob, in terms of this is the sort of thing that has happened elsewhere? I mean, there's a long list of places where people have done vehicular attacks, right, whether you're talking about in France, or whether you're talking about in Germany. This has happened but now that this has happened in New York City. This is the first time.
[Baer:] Well, Erin, you know, I think we talked about this last week with the fall of Raqqah. You can have a lot of people sympathizing with the Islamic state, whether they're in direct touch or not. And they are going to look at this as a great defeat for Sunni Islam. And they don't recognize our government as a legitimate government in this country. There should be a government of Islam and they are radicalized, of course. And all they really need to do is find a weapon. And the easiest weapon to find or weapons, easily available like box cutters and airliners on 911 and now its trucks. And they can get the same number of casualties as they can instead of using acetone and peroxide bombs and they know this. And they are learning. They are learning to stay off the internet communicating with the Islamic state or other groups. I think Paul is right. We'll find out there is connections between this man and other groups as they look into it, but they are not obvious connections, which makes it so difficult to get. And what do you do about somebody? You know, you can watch truck rentals, but then they're going to start stealing trucks. And we are just very, very vulnerable, especially a large city likes New York City.
[Burnett:] Right. And, of course, we don't know, again, Paul, just to emphasize anything about, you know, when Juliette, I think
[Cruickshank:] That's right. And in fact, as we reported in
[Erin Burnett, Cnn:] But the reality of it is, is that it's already here.
[Paul Cruickshank, Cnn Terrorism Analyst:] That's right. And in fact, as we reported in March, there was a DHS assessment of people getting involved in violence extremism in the United States. And they found the majority of people actually were radicalized after arriving in the United States in terms of foreign-born people. So, there's a problem in the United States. People have access to this jihadi propaganda over the internet, over social media. There are ISIS cyber coaches in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere. Also, Libya reaching out to Americans all the time trying to encourage them to launch terrorist attacks. So, we're going to have to wait and see where this individual was radicalized, whether they had any overseas connections. They will be looking at all those foreign travel patterns after they did the same thing with the Boston bombings, where there was travel back and forth to the Dagestan region. So, all of that now is being investigated, Erin.
[Burnett:] And obviously, Juliette, the similarity to Boston with the survivor, right? You have the attacker here who has survived. We understand out of surgery, right? So, they have someone to question, someone is going to be punished, according to the full extent of the law for this.
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Look, the public safety exception to the Miranda will apply to make sure there's no threat to New York. I have every reason to believe the mayor and the police commissioner that there isn't. And then the sort of more familiar legal proceedings will occur. And in that process, the investigation will be ongoing in terms of co-conspirators. That to me is really sort of the open question and it really has to do with the van. And that will be determined relatively quickly. Was someone with him? Did someone help him? Did he use his driver's license? Once you determine it's just him, then you're really only looking at, as Paul was describing, a potential radicalization process with others abroad.
[Burnett:] Bob, you know, one of the things, though, when you look at the images here you know, we mentioned this, there was a school bus. And the two adults and two children on that school bus survived. Eight others obviously were slaughtered, were killed by this terrorist. But there was a school bus that was hit. People were able to get out of it. You see the bikes, the mangled bikes. This is someone who just got on a bike path in a major city and just plowed down. This is a city, right? It happens to be the biggest city in the United States, but any city is full of pedestrians and bikes and strollers and people going about their lives. And that is what is now at risk because from what we know about this guy, which is nothing leading into this, the question is, how can you stop it?
[Robert Baer, Cnn Intelligence & Security Analyst:] You can't. You can't put up stanchions or HESCO barriers and the rest of it. If New York City does, then they will move it to Cleveland, Ohio, and then to Los Angeles. And these people are very mobile. They've got money. They are dedicated. And the car is everywhere. It's omnipresent and it's lethal and probably the way it looks to me is that school bus when he hit the school bus stopped this attack. You know, he could have kept ongoing and it could have been a lot worse than eight people. And, you know, this is a horrible, hideous problem we have here. And as long as these problems in the Middle East continue, we're going to be facing this danger and I predict there will be more attacks like this.
[Burnett:] All right. Let me just also raise something that some people may not want to hear, but I'm going to say it any way. That is this was a horrific attack. He had two guns. It was a BB gun and paintball gun. Even either of those had been a real gun, a lot more people could have been killed.
[Art Roderick, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Yes, and I think that's a good add on to Bob's point. That bus stopped him from continuing driving that vehicle and killing more people. I mean, there's no doubt this was this was a suicide attack. It was going to be suicide by cop. Any time you commit a crime and pull out a fake handgun, you're only looking for one thing. A law enforcement officer to shoot you. And that's exactly what occurred here. And I think because this individual is alive, this is the best piece of evidence we have as to what's going on in this individual's head and what's going on in his life and where he traveled to. So, I think we've got we're lucky he didn't get gunned down. It's horrible that he killed as many people that he did. He probably could have killed a lot more if it wasn't for hitting the school bus. But he's the best piece of evidence we have in it this whole crime right now.
[Burnett:] Juliette, what comes next for the Trump administration? This is a crucial moment. The president is now saying not in the United States. He's going to stop them in the Middle East and elsewhere before they come to the United States. This is a crucial moment for him.
[Kayyem:] It is. And it has two pieces. One is operational, which is going to go on whoever the president is. It's the FBI lead FBI investigation, resources of the Department of Homeland Security to educate state and locals. All that stuff that sort of goes regardless of politics. Then, there's going to be a political side. So what the president has said so far is sort of, you know, calling it terrorism or talking about ISIS. So there will be a political consequence. As we have seen, the Trump administration is more prone to make politics out of this kind of terrorism than they would say with Las Vegas where many more people died. So, you know, I can't predict how this is going to sort of become a political moment, but this will be a moment where Donald Trump will likely talk about Islamic terrorism and those abroad. And just to remind people again, you know, this idea of a travel ban, you know, he's already here. That's one. And number two, he's not on the right country list. So, the idea that we can stop all of this, we have to brace ourselves, and prepare ourselves, but the idea that we can stop it through politics is just not going to happen.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you all very much, staying with me. And next, the witnesses. This was a very busy area. There were a lot of people there. They are telling us what they saw as the attack unfolded.
[Unidentified Male:] He's in the bike lane, clearly in the bike lane. I see when I go down I see two gentlemen laying in the bike lane.
[Burnett:] And we'll take you through the attack as the suspect moved from one block to the next terrorizing people block after block.

[Anna Coren, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour, a diplomatic gamble. U.S. President Trump touts a potential deal with North Korea ahead of a historic meeting with Kim Jong-un. Plus the mystery deepens as to whether or not President Trump knew of a deal to silence a porn star during the 2016 election. And the tragedy of Afrin: how the once thriving Syrian city has been reduced to ruins. Hello and welcome. I'm Anna Coren in Hong Kong. CNN NEWSROOM starts right now.
[Coren:] It appears the historic meeting between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and U.S. President Donald Trump is on, despite some cold water being thrown at the prospects earlier Friday. A few hours ago, President Trump tweeted, "The deal with North Korea is very much in the making and will be, if completed, a very good one for the world." Well, that came after White House press secretary Sarah Sanders had this to say.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Deputy White House Press Secretary:] The maximum pressure campaign we're not letting up. We're not going to step back or make any changes to that. We're going to continue in that effort. And we're not going to have this meeting take place until we see concrete actions that match the words and the rhetoric of North Korea.
[Coren:] Then there's the question of who would get what at the meeting.
[Unidentified Male:] This is the president giving Kim Jong-un exactly what he wants, which is respect and stature on the international stage?
[Sanders:] Not at all. I think that the president is getting exactly what he wants. He's getting the opportunity to have the North Koreans actually denuclearize.
[Coren:] Japan's prime minister spoke with President Trump Friday. Shinzo Abe said the U.S. and Japan are on the same page.
[Shinzo Abe, Japanese Prime Minister:] Until North Korea takes steps toward denuclearization, that is completely verifiable and irreversible, we will continue to apply maximum pressure. This U.S.-Japan stance is solid and unwavering
[Coren:] There's also word that South Korean envoys relayed another message to from the North Korean leader to President Trump when they met with him on Thursday. It's not clear what that message was but South Korea says it was aimed directly at the U.S. president and meant to build trust. Let's bring in our Andrew Stevens. He's live for us in Seoul, South Korea. Andrew, North Korea, as we know, has agreed to freeze its nuclear weapons program in the past under President Clinton, President Bush and President Obama. And every single occasion, they reneged. Why would this time be any different?
[Andrew Stevens, Cnn Asia Pacific Editor:] Well, Anna, the background to this looks like it is sanctions which are beginning to bite in North Korea and also the saber rattling by Donald Trump, the threat and, in many cases and particularly in Pyongyang, it seems, that he may actually follow through with some sort of military strike. We heard the rhetoric build and build just a few months ago to sort of critical levels. But it is interesting at the moment because the White House does seem to be backpedaling. You heard Sarah Sanders there talking about they want to see some sort of preconditions met before this summit takes place. She said that North Korea has promised to denuclearize. That's actually not quite the case. North Korea has promised to talk about denuclearizing. It has its own conditions to see that through. We don't know what they are yet. But the White House is now saying that North Korea has to take verifiable, concrete steps before these two meet. Now it was clear that Kim Jong-un sent a message through the envoys to Donald Trump saying that he wanted to talk about denuclearization and he was prepared to freeze the tests of missiles, of nuclear weapons but not to denuclearize ahead of that meeting. So the White House seems to be backpedaling and putting in these preconditions to any sort of talk with Donald Trump.
[Coren:] It's always interesting when you look at the finer detail. That, of course, could see a breakdown in the talks between now and May. But as you mentioned, those sanctions look like they're biting and that's what the South Koreans are certainly saying. But we know that North Korea is a poor country and that the people have been suffering for a very long time. So who in North Korean society is hurting now under these sanctions?
[Stevens:] Well, it does seem to be aimed, a lot of these sanctions, they tried not to target obviously ordinary North Koreans. But, again, a lot of the latest round of sanctions, it talks about limiting textiles. It talks about limiting the amount of seafood that North Korea exports. This is all about trying to restrict the amount of hard currency earnings that the North Koreans are getting and this is going to hurt ordinary people in North Korea. There is also evidence and suggestions that we hear from the intelligence community that the annual military exercises, which are taken by North Korea, the winter military exercises, have been curtailed quite a lot this year because there's just not enough fuel. They're running out of fuel and it's expensive to hold these sort of military exercises. So you see from this, these anecdotal stories, that North Korea is starting to really feel the effect of these. And, remember, the sanctions are now in place. But it's expected to take a few weeks before they really, really start to bite. So it is going to get worse in North Korea. So we haven't heard yet from Kim Jong-un any demands about lifting sanctions before there are talks or anything. But certainly it is thought by analysts in South Korea, in the U.S., that these sanctions are pivotal in getting Kim to the negotiating table in the first place,
[Coren:] Andrew Stevens, we always appreciate your insight. Good to see you. Many thanks for that. Steve Chung is an assistant lecturer at the Global Studies Program at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. And he joins us now. Steve, great to have you with us. How likely is it that this face-to-face meeting between Kim Jong-un and President Trump will actually happen?
[Steve Chung, Chinese University Of Hong Kong:] I think in the coming few weeks or maybe months, like before the end of May, I think we will know that, whether the summit will be happening. Because I think in the coming few weeks, both sides have to sit down and talk. And they will have to agree that which destination they have to choose where the meeting will be held, either in North Korea or will Kim Jong-un fly to the U.S.? Or will there be any in between, probably some other people suggesting that probably they may choose the place like in China or in Russia that can play an intermediating role between the U.S. and North Korea. So I think in the coming few days or few weeks, both sides have to sit down and talk and probably there will be even more confrontation afterwards. I think what President Trump and Kim Jong-un agree at this moment is that they really want to have meetings very soon. But in the technical terms, there will be even more problems afterwards.
[Coren:] That's right, the devil is always in the detail. Steve, just five months ago, President Trump dismissed the idea of talks with North Korea, saying that presidents and their administrations have been talking to North Korea for 25 years and have been made to look like fools. Now there is a real danger that President Trump could be made to look like a fool, isn't it?
[Chung:] Yes. I think that's the reasons why the U.S. has been a little bit quite reluctant to North Korea very soon because I think they have been dealing with North and the issue for decades. And they have been cheated for several times when North Korea agreed to freeze the nuclear weapons or even they really want to go denuclearize sometimes before, in the last two decades. But afterwards we've seen the North decide to take the agreement as a scrap of paper and they do not want to put their words into action. So that's why the U.S. nowadays, they have to be very careful about what North Korea want to say and what they're going to do. And I think especially at the time of Obama administration, currently Donald Trump really want to have a very cautious way to look at what North Korea is trying to do. So instead of what concentrate more about what they're saying.
[Coren:] Steve, we know that, from reports out of the White House that President Trump caught his advisors and the rest of his administration off guard when he agreed to this meeting. Trump obviously sees himself as a master negotiator and can achieve things that his predecessors were unable to achieve because of his personality. But this isn't a business deal. This isn't a reality show. This is international diplomacy at the highest level with so much at stake. Can we trust him to deliver the goods?
[Chung:] I think it's still too early to say because I think, as I mentioned, that we still have to see the some of the sanctions. So I think both sides, they have good faith in talk to each other. But it all depends on whether it's only a business deal or a grand bargain for either side.
[Coren:] All right, Steve Chung, great to get your analysis. Many thanks for that. Turning to other news now, new details are emerging in the Stormy Daniels scandal. Donald Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, says the $130,000 he paid the porn star came from his own home equity credit line. Daniels' attorney says that's just an excuse.
[Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' Attorney:] We have heard explanation upon explanation. They are ever changing. It's nonsense. I don't care if you're on the Left or on the Right or in the middle. The American people deserve straight talk, not spin on this issue. They deserve facts. They deserve the truth. They deserve evidence. This is not complicated. The questions are simple. Did Mr. Trump know about the negotiation of this agreement?
[Coren:] Daniels says she had a sexual relationship with the president, which he denies. But another piece of evidence that could tie Trump to the payment is the email address Cohen used to allegedly used to negotiate Stormy Daniels' silence, though Cohen says he regularly uses that account for personal matters. Our Drew Griffin has more.
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Sr. Investigative Correspondent:] The e-mails are brief. First Republic Bank, advising Michael Cohen the funds have been deposited into your checking account. Cohen forwards that message to Stormy Daniels' attorney. What is potentially damaging for Cohen, the e-mail account he used @trump org.com, is a Trump company e-mail account, which could indicate the Trump Organization was somehow involved in a $130,000 payment to silence a porn actress.
[Unidentified Female:] Please tell me what the hell is going on.
[Avenatti:] I think this development is significant because it shows that, at all times during the communication process relating to the negotiation surrounding this hush payment, that Mr. Cohen was utilizing his Trump Organization e-mail in those communications, not just when communicating with Mr. Davidson. Ms. Clifford's attorney at the time but also internally when he was communicating with the bank about the specific issue of transferring the money.
[Griffin:] While there is no evidence Donald Trump knew about the e-mail or the payment, if the payment did involve Mr. Trump, it could be considered illegal, a violation of campaign finance law, because it was never reported to the Federal Election Commission.
[Avenatti:] The coverup is that you have attorney Cohen claiming that Donald Trump never knew anything about this. You have the White House claiming that Donald Trump never knew anything about this. That will be shown to be patently false. We have substantial evidence and facts that were not included in the complaint. And when that evidence and those facts come to light, the American people are going to conclude that attorney Cohen and the White House have not shot straight with them on this issue.
[Griffin:] And there may be more than just e-mails. The so-called hush agreement, written by Michael Cohen, says Stormy Daniels, under her real name, Stephanie Clifford, came into possession of certain confidential information about D.D., Donald Trump's alias, including information, certain still images andor text messages. Cohen goes to write, included in those are images Donald Trump previously represented to his counsel to exist; i.e. text messages, between P.P, Stephanie Clifford, and D.D., Donald Trump. In other words, it implies Trump told his personal attorney Trump and Stormy Daniels shared text messages.
[Coren:] CNN's Drew Griffin reporting there. Let's discuss this now with political analyst Peter Matthews. Peter, this is messy. North Korea and the tariffs that Trump is imposing certainly haven't knocked the Stormy Daniels story out of the headlines. If anything, this is gaining momentum. How does it play out?
[Peter Matthews, Cypress College:] It's going to be amazing because, if you look at it, this is not just about campaign finance. It's also about national security. But let take the two issues. Campaign finance: if the president knew about it and if he was actually part of the person who gave the money or at least that money was related to his knowledge of it, then he's broken the campaign finance laws in which he has to report every single contribution, his in-kind contribution, that was made to the campaign. Plus that money is way above the in-kind contribution maximum of $2,700. It's $130,000. It's way above it. So in each case, it's a campaign finance violation but it's also a national security issue because it looks like Trump has paid people to be silent. And this is a very dangerous situation when he has allegedly had affairs with them and then paid them to be
[Matthews:] silent. That's perfect fodder for any kind of blackmail, possible blackmail by other countries or other people who are nefarious toward our country and toward him.
[Coren:] Peter, obviously Trump's longtime lawyer has now claimed he paid Stormy Daniels out of his own pocket. Surely that raises more questions as well.
[Matthews:] It certainly does and it's hard to believe that he would do that without any kind of assurance of reimbursement or some kind of favor by the president. He is his lawyer, after all. Then if he pays out of his own pocket, that's pretty unusual for any lawyer to even think of doing that. It would also raise questions about whether or not he was involved, in a sense helping the campaign. That's considered an in-kind contribution because it helped the campaign for Stormy Daniels to not say a word about any of this before the election in November. There's no doubt it's going to be considered some type of contribution toward the campaign, toward his victory. And if a lawyer was involved with it, that's also against the law for anyone to contribute that kind of money to a campaign. So a hard way to get around it either way.
[Coren:] And now that there is obviously this evidence that Michael Cohen sent emails from his Trump Organization email account, how do we read into that?
[Matthews:] That's even worse because, there you go. It's evidence that the organization somehow was connected to this situation, which means the organization, it was covered up, that Trump denied everything at the beginning. And so there could be the coverup could be worse than the violation itself. And since that e-mail was sent on Trump Organization e-mail, it's really nefarious for him, very dangerous situation at this point for the president.
[Coren:] Now we know that Trump is Mr. Teflon and just survives scandal after scandal.
[Matthews:] So far. So far.
[Coren:] so far. That's correct. Yes, exactly. So far. It doesn't affect his base. People still support him, his constituents. But could this hurt Trump in the long term depending on how this all plays out?
[Matthews:] It certainly can, Anna, because, first of all, the fact that he has been seemed to be Teflon doesn't mean he's always going to remain that way because eventually the Teflon will wear out if it's hit hard enough. He's also got this part of the coalition is this fundamentalist Christian base and some may of them may have had enough with this, in their view, immorality, very blatant immorality and they may just all stay home and not vote for him. And don't forget, he's only got about 34 percent support right now and that's his loyal supporters, who will vote for him again regardless of all of this. Yet he needs much more than that to win the election against one single Democrat who runs against him. However, if there's a third-party candidate, he could possibly hang on to that base and still win if there's three candidates. That's unlikely though. So I think he's going to have a very difficult time with this situation and his base is not going to be enough to put him over the top next time around.
[Coren:] Watch this space. Professor Peter Matthews, great to see you. Thanks for your time.
[Matthews:] My pleasure. Thank you.
[Coren:] Coming up next, British investigators have called in the military to help with the mysterious poisoning of a Russian double agent and his daughter. An update on the hunt for who tried to kill them. That's next.

[Lemon:] So here's the breaking news tonight on who tipped off the National Enquirer to the romance between Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez. I want to bring in now CNN Reporters Oliver Darcy and Chloe Melas, hello. Boy, this story gets more interesting by the second. You've learned who leaked these Bezos photos and texts. Who is it?
[Chloe Melas, Cnn Entertainment Reporter:] Yes. So drum roll, please. It is her brother, Michael Sanchez. So two sources have told Oliver and I that Michael Sanchez took it upon himself to go to the National Enquirer, tip them off that his sister was in a relationship with Jeff Bezos. He provided text messages and proof to the National Enquirer. And that's when the National Enquirer then launched their investigation and started trailing them for months across multiple states, and got photographs of them. And they broke the story that they were both allegedly cheating on their spouses and in this relationship with each other.
[Lemon:] Why would he blow up his sister's spotlight like that?
[Melas:] That's a really good question. I just don't know. I can only imagine the holidays will be super awkward for them.
[Lemon:] Why do you want to blow me up like that?
[Melas:] I do want to tell you though, Michael Sanchez, when we went to him today for comment. He would not give an on the record comment as to whether or not he is the leaker. He has spoken to other outlets, saying that either, a, to "The Washington Post: that he had no involvement at all or, you know, to "The New York Post" he said something a little bit different, but...
[Lemon:] Yeah. So in his blog, Jeff Bezos has been suggesting that the Saudis or President Trump had something to do with exposing his relationship with Lauren Sanchez to the National Enquirer. What do you know?
[Oliver Darcy, Cnn Senior Media Reporter:] Well, again, Bezos made a number of explosive suggestions in that blog post, right? He mentioned the Saudis. He kind of talked about Trump. And basically in effect, what he was saying was really that maybe Trump or the Saudis played some sort of role in getting this out to the National Enquirer, or maybe the National Enquirer curried favor with Trump. And so Jeff Bezos has launched this investigation. But they have not provided any sort of evidence to substantiate those revelations or those suggestions in his blog post. We've asked a number of questions to Jeff Bezos' representatives, asking if they can share details of the investigation, conclusions that they found. They declined to provide an on the record comment. And I really think at this point, you know, six days out after Jeff Bezos went and made these explosive suggestions in his blog posts. Journalists should really be asking him what evidence do you have. Why did you mention the Saudis? Why did you mention Trump in your blog post? Because it was about blackmail, but he went out of his way to mention these things, and we don't have any answers as to why he did that.
[Lemon:] And he also I think suggesting it had to do with Khashoggi, right, with Khashoggi's death.
[Darcy:] That was a suggestion that maybe that "The Washington Post," which Jeff Bezos owns, their aggressive reporting on Khashoggi and his murder, had made them enemies with Saudi Arabia, or maybe, you know, Trump who's good friends with David Pecker, who is a chief executive at the National Enquirer. Maybe Trump doesn't like Bezos because of the critical reporting The Washington Post did there. The suggestion there were a lot of suggestions in there, a lot of explosive suggestions if true, too. And there has been no evidence provided by Bezos' camp six days later to substantiate any of this.
[Lemon:] All right. Oliver, Chloe, thank you. I appreciate your time. Good reporting. We'll be right back.

[Baldwin:] ESPN coming under fire over a Confederate general's name that sounds oddly familiar to one of the sports network's play-by-play guys. So the announcer's name is Robert Lee, not Robert E. Lee, as in the general who led the South in the civil war. Just plain Robert Lee. Lee, the play-by-play guy, was set to call the home opener for the University of Virginia in Charlottesville but ESPN worried Lee's name might create a bit of a distraction, so they pulled him. They reassigned him. Social media went absolutely bananas over this. ESPN laid out its reasoning in a statement, quoting here, ESPN saying, "We collectively made the decision with Robert to switch games as the tragic events in Charlottesville were unfolding, simply because of the coincidence of his name." So I have sports journalist Clay Travis with us who broke the story on his FOX Sports radio show, "Outkick the Coverage." Clay, good to see you. I mean, I realize this is just a total coincidence, name-wise, but really? Because of his name? This is how insane the world has become. This is a little insane.
[Clay Travis, Sports Journalist Who Broke Story On Espn Uva Decision:] That a situation like this could even arise, that anybody could even think of it is I think just testament to the fact that we basically live in a world where "The Onion" can't even come up with fake news articles anymore because the real ones are more absurd than the ones they can think of.
[Baldwin:] Yes. I'll go with you on that.
[Travis:] Right? I mean, it's crazy.
[Baldwin:] It is a little crazy. I mean, when I saw this this morning, I was like, this is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Has the journalist has Robert Lee spoken up?
[Travis:] No, he has not. And you know, ESPN in that statement that you read, that they initially provided to my Web site, "I'll Kick the Coverage," tried to contextualize why they made this decision, but I think this is an example of where you need to take a step back and think about, OK, what's the worst case scenario here? He is showing up as an Asian man named Robert Lee to call the University of Virginia against William and Mary game. Maybe 100,000 or 200,000 people are watching this game. Maybe a few people think it's funny, we have a few laughs, look, Robert E. Lee's under fire, he's trying to sneak into Charlottesville any way he can, he's now disguised himself as an Asian play-by-play man. It's something that the Internet has fun with for like 45 minutes on a college football Saturday when you're down in Atlanta and there are many more big games going on. Right? Florida State's playing Alabama. I mean, Michigan is playing Florida. There's all these games that people care about. Nobody cares about William and Mary against UVA and so this story would have disappeared. Instead, ESPN overreacts, removes the guy from the story. People at ESPN to, their credit, reach out to me and say, have you seen how insanely sensitive my network is becoming? You've got to see this story. We write about it and now it's been not just major national news. It's international news. People are reaching out to me to come on all over the world because they can't believe this is a real story from the United States.
[Baldwin:] Listen, in a sense, you understand the sensitivity at first, but I think we're all grown-ups and realize it's a different person and case closed. Real life onion. Clay Travis, thank you so much. "Outkick the Coverage." Good to see you. Thank you for that. We have this, though. More charities parting ways with President Trump's Mar-a-Lago down in Florida following the president's Charlottesville response. Those new details next.

[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn:] Tonight, a suspicious death of a Canadian national in an Iranian prison. Authorities call it suicide, but the family of a prominent environmentalist demand an investigation.
[Mehran Seyed-emami, Son Of Kavous Seyed-emami:] I want people at home to just close their eyes and realize what it's like to lose their father, for someone to lose their husband and to grow through this real, chaotic experience. They're not even able to grieve in peace.
[Amanpour:] Why we should care. Plus, can Israelis and Egyptians make beautiful music together? A smash new musical brings harmony to the Middle East and I talk to the rising Broadway star composer David Yazbek. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the program. I'm Christiane Amanpour in New York. Amid upheaval in the White House, the Iran Nuclear Deal faces a perilous future. President Trump could pull the United States out mid-May when another deadline looms. Inside Iran, this uncertainty is playing into a bitter struggle between the moderate government of Hassan Rouhani against the hardline Revolutionary Guards. Caught in the middle are the Emami family. Iranian authorities claim that Kavous Seyed-Emami, a 63-year-old Iranian Canadian professor, who cofounded the Persian Wildlife Heritage Foundation, committed suicide after confessing to spying. But Emami's family disputes this and is calling for a transparent investigation. After his death, his widow was barred at the very last moment from leaving with her sons Ramin and Mehran. This week, the two brothers did come here and join me in the studio to talk about fighting to bring their mother home, struggling to cope with the death of their father and struggling to get the truth about what really happened to him. Gentlemen, welcome to the program. Mehran and Ramin, firstly, our condolences for the death of your father. It is really so sad. How are you coping several weeks on?
[Ramin Seyed-emami, Son Of Kavous Seyed-emami:] Right now, we're trying to just get our mother back. After everything we've been through, these nightmarish several weeks, the fact that they barred our mother from leaving the country to come with us to Vancouver, Canada was just the final nail in the coffin for us after going through this ordeal.
[Amanpour:] Well, can I just then start with your mother, the immediate case at hand right now? And then we'll go into what happened to your father. Mehran, what happened? You were trying to leave Iran after the death of your father and they, at the last minute, wouldn't allow your mother onboard the flight.
[M. Seyed-emami:] We decided that we have the opportunity to be able to grieve in peace and we wanted to leave the country to feel just feel more relaxed and leave all the tension that was surrounding us. The last seconds, right before we were about to board the plane, all of a sudden, someone came up and called my mother's name. And we immediately knew that something was wrong. We were surprised. We were shocked. And they told us you have one minute to decide whether to leave the country without your mom or for all of you to stay. And my mother told us that, please, please just leave; I'll be OK and I just don't want you guys to come back; I just want you guys to go and be safe. And it was a heartbreaking decision. I mean, it was such a difficult decision to make, but we thought that it's the right one.
[R. Seyed-emami:] Well, we were actually just joking around about this. It seems like the ending to "Argo" as if we were trying to get on the plane
[Amanpour:] Why do you think your mother was so insistent that she stay and you leave?
[R. Seyed-emami:] She wanted us to be safe because we were being constantly threatened, harassed and bothered the past several weeks. Since our father was arrested, our home was raided twice. The house was probably bugged and we were getting threats and messages from a lot of dangerous people. They would bump into me in the streets and tell me we're watching you. So, we don't feel comfortable in that environment. My brother and I are not afraid of anything. We were willing to speak up because that's what we felt kept us safe and secure during these past several weeks. And, more importantly, because we know of our father's innocence and that he was taken away for no reason and we were left in the dark the whole complete time. We weren't told what he was accused of until his unfortunate and suspicious death in Evin prison.
[Amanpour:] And it is just awful, the story of how your mother found out that actually what had happened to your father. Describe that to us.
[R. Seyed-emami:] You know, the
[Amanpour:] It's awful. I know. Do you want to take it, Mehran?
[R. Seyed-emami:] No, I can do it. It's just that they give her a phone call on Friday, February 9th, and told her that we have some good news for you. And she is kind of hoping that she is going to see her husband and they take her and interrogate her and grill her for hours with ludicrous questions and accusations and just threatening her and telling her that we'll put you in the same place that your husband is. And finally, they tell her, after they can't get anything out of her because she doesn't know anything, she's just a housewife who was happily married and had a wonderful family, like now you can go see your husband, you can see his body. And what kind of cruel, inhumane person would do such a thing to a mother, to a wife couldn't you put yourself in the position of that woman? Why would you instill such horrible, horrible feelings upon someone?
[Amanpour:] So, here comes the really hard bit, even harder than what you're describing now that they immediately said that your father, after all an environmentalist, and we'll get into that in a second, committed suicide in prison. You don't believe that?
[M. Seyed-emami:] No.
[Amanpour:] Why not?
[M. Seyed-emami:] For someone who loved life, who loved his family, who just a few weeks prior to that was hiking in the mountains with his dogs and had such a hopeful and optimistic view of life, for someone to, all of a sudden, decide to take his own life is completely absurd and non- believable to us. We don't know under what conditions he was held or what ultimately led to his death or who committed this act. These are questions that are very difficult to answer.
[Amanpour:] He was the leader of the most important, the best known, the most transparent Iranian wildlife and nature NGO. So, there was no reason for you to think that anything that he did was at all suspicious. We're going to get some of what the prosecutors have said. But, first, I want to ask you, they showed you know some surveillance video, right, to try to convince you, in fact, that he had committed suicide. What was on the surveillance video?
[R. Seyed-emami:] I was the one I was the only one member of the family, along with our two lawyers, who saw the video. I didn't want anybody else to watch it. God knows what kind of psychological torture he had underwent to be in that sort of state of mind from being this completely kind, compassionate loving person, to all of a sudden this with very last person in this cell. It shows the room and there is what they say is a toilet beside the room cell and the most suspicious thing about this whole situation is that my dad is pacing around the room. He takes off his shirt and he's thinking and he just doesn't feel good. And then, once he goes into the room, eight hours later, they call him. They want to give breakfast. And they see he is not there and then they go and they bring his body out of the room out of the bathroom. And that's like the first like suspicious part of this whole event, in this case, is because if he was such a high-profile prisoner, why wasn't he being monitored because I know, like, firsthand from my friends one of their fathers that are imprisoned who had tried to commit suicide twice. In a matter of seconds, they stopped him. Other people's also stories if you talk to other people who have been prisoners in Evin, they will say the exact same thing. It's impossible to do something suspicious in your room and without them torpedoing into the room and stopping it.
[Amanpour:] I think the video shows that, as you said, he took his shirt off and put it around his neck and then walked into this partitioned area, which apparently was the toilet area?
[R. Seyed-emami:] Yes.
[Amanpour:] Do you have any fears that that shirt was I mean, that he was thinking of doing that. Can you rule out suicide?
[M. Seyed-emami:] It's impossible to know for sure. But based on what we knew, it's easy to speculate, it's easy to come up with different theories. But based on the man we knew, the father we knew, the person he was and the impact he had left on so many several generations of students, of people who loved nature, who loved the wildlife, environmentalists, this is not the impression he gave to a single person in his lifetime.
[Amanpour:] They have got some line that environmentalists and scientists are somehow wrapped up in spying. And your father had set up a series of trap cameras that one sees on wildlife videos to explore and investigate a rare species, right? The Asiatic cheetah.
[M. Seyed-emami:] They say that you are normally afraid of what you don't understand. And these camera traps are one of those cases. I mean, these are cameras with only up to 50 meters' worth of range. And very cheap. Discardable in case someone steals them. They're not that valuable. Not very high in technology. And they said that they'd used these to record military activity.
[Amanpour:] Were they anyway close to military activity?
[M. Seyed-emami:] Not at all. I mean, it's impossible to fathom in this day and age with Google satellite or with any kind of technology, you can monitor or see such activities. So, the fact that they make such absurd and ridiculous claims means that they don't have anything.
[R. Seyed-emami:] It's so absurd, the claims. And they even told they say our dad was responsible for the drought. I mean, these accusations, every day, they become bigger and bigger and more ridiculous.
[Amanpour:] I wonder what you make of this. This is in the very conservative, hardline Kayhan newspaper. Why is the cheetah becoming such an important issue? Why are too many foreigners entering Iran for this? What are the real identities of US, European experts coming to Iran? And why are they so keen to search the deserts all day and night? I mean, there's a level of paranoia. When you read this, what did you think?
[M. Seyed-emami:] Well, we chose not to reply to every single accusation because we'd be losing the point or drawing further away from why my father was arrested in the first place. But, people their intelligence is being insulted when they hear such claims. And from everyone we spoke to, absolutely no one believes the things that they're being told.
[Amanpour:] You are Canadian-Iranians Iranian-Canadians. And the Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland has basically said that she was outraged that your mother had not been allowed to leave Iran and she's called her in a show of support. And we know Amnesty International has called for an independent panel an independent commission. But Canada has no direct diplomatic representation in Iran. Turkey represents Canada's interests. What do you expect and who do you think can help you right now?
[M. Seyed-emami:] Well, our expectation is for the Canadian government, and specifically the prime minister, Mr. Trudeau, to speak up, acknowledge this issue and to open a serious investigation as to what happened, to make this request formally and officially. And not only from Canada, but to have international pressure on Iran to raise transparency towards this case and to ensure that my mom will be home safely and for this case to open up.
[Amanpour:] What do you hope that coming here and telling your story will achieve?
[M. Seyed-emami:] Our goal is to seek the truth, to raise awareness towards this issue. Unfortunately, we've never heard good stories come out of staying silent. And, therefore, we are not afraid. We chose to speak up. And we just want the truth about this man to be revealed. I want people at home to just close their eyes and realize what it's like to lose their father, for someone to lose their husband and to go through this surreal, chaotic experience. They are not even able to grieve in peace, where their family is separated from each other. I just want people to realize what it's like to go through this. We've tried really hard not to be angry, not to get emotional, not to make rash decisions. We only seek transparency, truth and to share our father's legacy with the world.
[Amanpour:] Mehran and Ramin Seyed-Emami, thank you very much indeed for joining me.
[R. Seyed-emami:] Thank you for having us.
[M. Seyed-emami:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] And while instability and conflict continue to plague the Middle East, we turn to a different story of harmony that's playing out on Broadway in a new smash hit musical that shows what that region could be. It is called "The Band's Visit" and here is how one character tells the story. Once not long ago, a group of musicians came to Israel from Egypt. You probably didn't hear about it. it wasn't very important. Now, it's a small story that actually is important because it offers great hope. It shows us that there was a time in the bygone days of peace, treaties and political connections when Israelis and Arabs could actually come together and make beautiful music.
[David Yazbek, Composer, "the Band's Visit":] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] So, this is an amazing musical, packed houses every night. And awards season is coming up. Fingers crossed. Yes.
[Yazbek:] No, that's bad luck.
[Amanpour:] But what happens when a producer calls you up and says, you know what, David, shall we do a Broadway musical about a flyblown, nowhere town in Israel, based on an art house Israeli movie?
[Yazbek:] The truth is when any producer calls me up and asks me to do anything, my first answer is no.
[Amanpour:] Oh, really. I thought you would say yes.
[Yazbek:] No, I go charging away. And then, I will call back and I'll say, could you just give me a few weeks, let me think about it, let me see it. And with this one, seeing the movie was enough to make me turnaround and say yes.
[Amanpour:] Well, before we get to the actual nitty-gritty of the story and all that inspired you, I just want to play for you the legendary Andrew Lloyd Webber, who has got four Broadway musicals on, for the first time since Rodgers and Hammerstein, and this is what he said about storytelling making good musicals.
[Andrew Lloyd Webber, Composer:] I mean, we not only have "Hamilton", which sounds like an unlikely idea, I mean the idea of an American founder father and hip hop doesn't sound immediately like the greatest idea for a musical, which is why it's a good one. Then you've got "Dear Evan Hansen", which, of course, sounds like it's not a good idea because it's about social media and rejection. Therefore, it's a good idea. Then, you've got "Come From Away" about planes coming in to Gander, not necessarily a good idea, therefore, a good idea. Even worse idea, the idea of an Egyptian band, military band turning up in Tel Aviv.
[Amanpour:] "The Band's Visit".
[Webber:] "The Band's Visit". Great idea. Yes, fantastic music. I mean, the moment where the band plays is one of those moments you get up in your seat and you say, yes, this is what musicals are all about.
[Amanpour:] That really is great endorsement, isn't it? And you do feel that way when you go to watch it. That lost moment when the band plays for the first time, you keep it to the very end. Why?
[Yazbek:] Well, I mean, these are these people you've seen on stage acting and moving around, they are world-class musicians. So, when they play, it's the deepest expression of connectivity, which is what the show is about, and joy and it's very cathartic. And when Andrew Lloyd Webber raises both hands like that, you know you've
[Amanpour:] You're in the sweet pot.
[Yazbek:] Yeah, this is the sweet spot.
[Amanpour:] So, look, it is about the Alexandria Orchestra the Police Orchestra, right? The band. Coming to this nowhere town in Israel, Beit Hatikva instead of Petah Tikva and it's a mistake that leads to this extraordinary encounter. And I think we have a little bit of yes, the characters describe the town of Beit Hatikva in this song, "Welcome to Nowhere". Let's play it.
[Yazbek:] It's a town called Yeruham in the Negev where the film was shot and it really is a nowhere town, but even people in a nowhere town are people and they are endlessly fascinating.
[Amanpour:] And was studiously avoiding the politics of an Egyptian band in 1996 taking the wrong turning basically, to getting the wrong bus ticket and ending up in the wrong town in Israel. It is this sort of quiet political story. You're not facing politics head on here by any stretch of the imagination, but nobody in the audience can avoid the fact that this is about the most contested part of the world today.
[Yazbek:] If we had included a scene talking about someone's traumatic experience during a war or something, that would have lessened the impact of not speaking about the politics. There's a scene in the movie where one of the Egyptians, they're dressed in these kind of powder-blue uniforms, he is sitting in a little restaurant and there is a picture of a tank. This is Israeli tank. He just takes his hat off and hangs it over the picture and that's him saying, we're people and there's a very elemental thing about they're lost, they need food, they need a place to sleep and other people give them that.
[Amanpour:] And, again, you hang this whole notion and this whole play on the idea of boredom. There is no effort to sort of sex up the city, so to speak.
[Yazbek:] No. There is always that first impulse to sex it up for Broadway. And almost immediately, all of us, David Cromer, the director, and Itamar Moses and I looked at each other, and Orin Wolf, who is an amazing producer, and just said we're not going to do that because if we do that it won't be it won't have the emotional impact. And we made the right move.
[Amanpour:] And you started your career after college. You went to be a comedy writer I remember this; we've known each other a long time for David Letterman. And then, your own music career and lots of Broadway and now these amazing successes. How much of you is it this play, this musical compared to the other works you've done?
[Yazbek:] I'm glad you asked that. This is really me. I've made albums. I've made five albums. And when I make them, I feel like that's a personal expression. I do what I want to say. I say what I want to say. When this came along, I wasn't exactly sure if this would happen, but it did. I was able to really say what I wanted to say in every song. This almost feels like one of my albums to me, an album that I made with the best musicians I could find and the best singers I could find.
[Amanpour:] And let's not forget that you yourself, your mother is Jewish, your father is Lebanese Christian.
[Yazbek:] Yes, Catholic. Yes, Catholic. This was my first trip to Lebanon with my father. We were visiting his father. We were in a cab on the way from the airport to the mountain where my grandfather was. And there was this very exotic I don't like using that word. There is this pungent new flavor of music coming from the radio in the cab. And I asked my father to ask the cab driver what it was. The scales and the rhythms and the orchestra sound, but mostly this voice, this female voice. And he asked. And it was Umm Kulthum. I didn't know who that was, but it really stuck. Like, that song stuck, her voice stuck. She was bigger than Sinatra, if you looked at the whole world. And really, that was the first trip for me that inserted that kind of music.
[Amanpour:] And let's not forget, you were seven at the time.
[Yazbek:] Well, yes, and I was listening to everything.
[Amanpour:] I want to just play the song that Dina is singing about Umm Kulthum. Well, for people of a certain generation, we will remember Omar Sharif, the great Egyptian actor, "Doctor Zhivago" and everything and Umm Kulthum.
[Yazbek:] "Lawrence of Arabia".
[Amanpour:] "Lawrence of Arabia", not to mention, and Umm Kulthum, the great singer. And it's interesting that you show the story of the other that each side is able somehow to connect with the other side.
[Yazbek:] The pull is always there. It's the stuff that gets in the way of it. That stuff usually has to do with money and power. I was just in Tel Aviv. When you go to Egypt or to Israel, the food in Israel has become great and mostly because they love the food from all around them. The music, the art, the food, that's a connecting point. That's possibly the most important connecting point. And that's why when we or any administration cuts funding for the arts, they're really cutting just yet another one of those connections.
[Amanpour:] We'll talk about that just a little before we go on regarding your play. The arts are being given a short shrift. No matter where you look around the world, whether it's in the United States, in schools in Europe or whatever. In fact, Andrew Lloyd Webber has his own foundation, his arts foundation, where he tries to enable people at state schools, kids should have some art and music in their life. From your perspective, what is an education, an adolescence without the arts?
[Yazbek:] It's a one-way ticket to Trumpsville. That's how it feels to me. And when I say that, I mean, there is this move towards authoritarianism everywhere that you're talking about. And if you really are invested in the arts, you almost can't really go there. When we play music, and I say we, because I get to play with them sometimes, not on stage, but it's this very deep connection. I have a band that I've been playing with some of them for 20, 25 years. We love each other the way a family does, especially while we're connecting through music. And I think "The Band's Visit" is really about that and I think it comes pouring off the stage.
[Amanpour:] I was going to say, I mean, do you feel every night, every matinee that the audience really gets that thing that you're saying. What do you think resonates most with the audience? Because they do leap up at the very end.
[Yazbek:] I was going to make a joke and say every night. Yes, every matinee.
[Amanpour:] No, they did. I was in a matinee.
[Yazbek:] Yes, I know. You were in a matinee.
[Amanpour:] I think the audience when you're doing a show, if everyone in the show is on a more superficial level, just having a great time, making each other laugh backstage and on stage, that floods out. The show doesn't even have to be that great, but the audience, just like when someone laughs, it's infectious. They feel it. When you're making music together, a lot of it is being improvised. You are connecting very deeply, and I'm sure, if you did some kind of a test of brain waves or something, you would see the entire audience get on the same track. David Yazbek, thank you so much.
[Yazbek:] thank you.
[Amanpour:] And that's it for our program tonight. Remember, you can always listen to our podcast and see us online at Amanpour.com and, of course, you can follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Thanks for watching. And goodbye from New York. END

[Hill:] Let's get a closer look at the growing crisis in Venezuela. Where huge protests are erupting. The acting President taking to the streets disrupting traffic and the latest wave of protesters as maduro says he's willing to negotiate with the U.S.-backed. He tweeted the willingness to negotiate after new pressure with sanctions. We're also learning President Trump has spoken with Guaido for the first time offering the White House's continued support that Guaido is in fact Venezuela's rightful leader. Joining us to discuss the new developments is retired Rear Admiral John Kirby, a former spokesman for both the State Department and the Pentagon. Currently a CNN military and diplomatic analyst. When we look at all of this, we have maduro posting this new video that he warns that a new Vietnam could be happening in Venezuela if the United States does not reverse course. It's an interesting choice of words. Clearly targeting a certain sentiment in the
[U.s. John Kirby, Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] This is a reaction to the claims that Bolton was looking at sending thousands of troops to Columbia. And it also supports Maduro's long-held contention even before Trump that the United States was interested in taking over Venezuela, invading Venezuela. I dealt with those questions myself when I was at the State Department which of course is not now and was not then U.S. policy. He's trying to raise the specter of a quagmire in Vietnam and say we should stay out of it.
[Hill:] Is that going to be effective in any way?
[Kirby:] I don't think so. I would make a couple points. One, it's good to see that the protests are peaceful. You're not seeing any violence yet. You're not seeing the Venezuelan military react to the protesters. They are out in the streets protesting peacefully. That's a good sign. I don't know if Trump's tweet is accurate, but if it is and maduro has indicated a willingness to negotiate a settlement, that's a positive sign. We need to take it all with a grain of salt. Maduro was willing to make changes and wasn't able to come through with that. The situation is desperate. The humanitarian needs are acute. So, it's really important that we try to find a way through this led by the international community, not the United States. And that we keep our optimism somewhat in check going forward.
[Hill:] I also want to get your take on Afghanistan. The ambassador to Afghanistan writing an op-ed in the "Washington Post" and frankly the headline says it all. I was ambassador to Afghanistan. This deal is a surrender. That's stark. Would you agree?
[Kirby:] If you read the piece, what his main point is the reason it's a surrender because we're only talking to the Taliban and not including the Afghan government. I agree in that regard. No negotiated settlement to the Afghanistan war is going to be enduring or sustainable if the Democratically elected government in Kabul led by President Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah are behind it and involved in it.

[Banfield:] In Texas, a Houston mother showed up for court today facing a judge on the charge of child abandonment. Child abandonment I know you`ve heard it. It`s one of those legal terms that can mean so many things, right, like, you know, going to the bar while your 5 and 7-year-old are left home alone. This case is not that. This mom is charged with the unthinkable, giving birth at midnight on her kitchen floor and then marching down the stairs of her apartment building to street level, where she`s accused of just dumping that living, breathing newborn into the bushes, leaving the baby for dead. That baby did not die. That baby cried and cried and cried, possibly for upwards of five hours. Somebody heard the cries, stopped, and then rolled tape on what he saw. And what that tape shows is devastating because it is the reality of what it is like when people abandon their babies in this way. So I will warn you,it is not easy to see. This little baby was naked, no diaper, no cotton blanket, just naked on the ground, umbilical cord still attached. She was crawling with ants. She was covered in bug bites. Probable cause statement said she was lying partially in the grass and partially on the concrete sidewalk. It was a neighbor who ultimately called the police about this. The police say they simply showed up, and then followed the trail of blood right back up those stairs and straight to the apartment of 21-year-old Sydney Wotasic. Police say Sydney told them she never checked on that baby after leaving her outside. CNN affiliate KTRK also reports that she says she had no idea she was pregnant, and allegedly neither did the dad. The investigators say they believe that she was trying to hide the pregnancy from her boyfriend. The infant was treated for ant bites and a blood infection that`s believed to have developed because the umbilical cord was just lying there on the ground and still attached to her. If convicted, Ms. Wotasic is facing 2 to 20, 2 to 20 years in prison. It`s really hard to digest that kind of cruelty when it comes to little tiny baby, whose toughest job is just to lean how to breathe. But the people of Carlisle, Ohio, not far from Cincinnati are coping with the same kind of thing tonight. Only this story involves a very unlikely cast of players and a crime that was much more serious, more deadly. A former high school cheerleader destined to head off for her freshman year in college in just a few weeks instead is cooling her heels at home in an ankle monitor. That is, when she`s not making a court appearance like she did today. That is Brooke Skylar Richardson`s ankle with the monitor on it because she`s charged with killing and then burning and then burying her brand-new baby just two days after her senior prom. She stared straight ahead walking down that court hallway. The charges that she`s facing, extraordinary, aggravated murder, involuntary manslaughter, abuse of a corpse. And during her short time in this Ohio courtroom with her family, we learned a couple of new and interesting developments about the former cheerleader. We know that Skylar, as she`s known Skylar`s trial is now set for November. And we also found out that prosecutors just might have a lead on who the father is of that baby that she`s accused of killing.
[David Fornshell, Prosecuting Attorney, Warren County, Ohio:] We`ve collected DNA, a DNA sample. Anecdotally, we think we know who the father is. But we want to make sure before we say definitively that we know who the father is, that the DNA matches up.
[Banfield:] Prosecutors have said they believe that the baby was killed because Skylar and her mother were obsessed with appearances and how it might look to the outside world if she were pregnant, or God forbid, a teen mom. As for the defense, they still maintain Skylar at just 18 years old is innocent.
[Charles Rittger, Skylar Richardson`s Attorney:] I can tell you that Brooke Skylar Richardson did not kill her baby. And I will have more to come as we receive the discovery, which is what the prosecutor claims supports his indictment.
[Banfield:] Stefano Dipietrantonio is a reporter for CNN affiliate WXIX, and he joins me live now from Cincinnati. All right, Stef, trial is going to be November 6th, as I understand. But there`s a gag order. And all I can think of when I hear gag order is that this is the kind of story that is sensational and thus gets a lot of headlines and thus is dangerous for anybody who may end up serving on a jury. Is that the thought here?
[Stefano Dipietrantonio, Wxix:] That`s exactly what`s happening. Of course, the judge wants to ensure that both sides have a fair case here. But ever since we broke this story on July 14th, it was a Friday, this thing started exploding on social media. Then the following Thursday it wasn`t bad enough that they carried the corpse of a baby out of the back yard of their house on that Friday. But within just a few days, they were back with dozens of bright orange buckets, like the kinds you get at Home Depot, and collecting samples out of the family fire pit on the side of the house, in several parts of the yard, that`s when I think the gravity really set in for this neighborhood, that there`s so much more happening here that we don`t know. But it`s been exploding on social media for the last few weeks. I think that is what is going to be one of the big players in this case, there`s so much out there, that can`t be suppressed because it`s been out there for weeks now. Also, one of the key factors in this case is, the prosecution right now, unless we hear more from the forensic anthropologist that`s looking at all the DNA samples they collected from the yard, but right now, it`s going to be incumbent upon them to try and prove medically how this baby girl, who was full term, by the way, 38 to 40 weeks we`re told, how this baby girl died. It cannot medically be proven right now how the child died because of the condition the corpse was in. I did ask the Warren County coroner in an interview we aired, was the baby intact when we saw the chief investigator carrying it out of the grave? And he said, well, I can tell you the sex of that baby, it was fully intact. I said, no, I heard other things. Were the baby`s arms and legs and other parts attached? Was it fully intact? He didn`t say yes or no. But his answer was, why would we have a forensic anthropologist on the case right now? I think there`s a lot coming in the court that we don`t know.
[Banfield:] That`s just so sad. We were just talking about this brand-new little baby, again, the hardest job is just to learn to breathe. Hold your thoughts for a minute there, Stef. I want to bring in Michelle DuPre, a forensic pathologist and a medical examiner. She joins me from Columbia, South Carolina. Dr. DuPre, they have said that they know, that the authorities know this baby was alive for a few hours. Can you help me sort through how on earth they could have that information, because you just heard Stef telling us the condition of that baby, buried for two months and burned. How could they know that?
[Michelle Dupre, Forensic Pathologist And Medical Examiner:] There would be a couple of things to look at, Ashleigh. One of them is, the body might not be totally decomposed. There may be still some internal organs left. We would do microscopic examination of those, in particular the lung tissue, and that would certainly tell us if the baby ever breathed before. And then there are a few other tests we might also be able to do, just looking at the body for injuries and things of that nature.
[Banfield:] You can tell if the baby breathed just by getting a sample of the decomposed organ? Honestly?
[Dupre:] If it`s not too badly decomposed, looking at the lung tissue, yes. Because as you know, when a baby takes a breath, the lungs expand. Once those lungs have expanded, they do not collapse again. So if there is enough viable lung tissue, and there may be, we may be able to tell that microscopically.
[Banfield:] OK. Just quickly, Stef, I only have about 10 seconds left. What`s the story on the father? Are they going to tell us who the father is? Do they actually know? Did he know?
[Dipietrantonio:] That was news to us today, in fact. We have heard that and this is all just what we have heard from people who know the family, they have said that the current boyfriend is not the father of this baby girl. But we are not sure if it`s between one or two others who it may be at this time. We`re still trying to dig in and find that out for ourselves.
[Banfield:] That`s difficult. Stefano, thank you. Michelle, thank you as well. I want to take you to Missouri right now where an autistic girl who loves animals goes missing. And unidentified remains are then found. Recent discovery has the community searching for answers.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] paper or on social media. So, we know that the president's staff and family, now report to the man you're seeing in the screen right there, the new chief of staff, General John Kelly. But does the president's Twitter account report to him as well? CNN Kaitlan Collins at the White House with the very latest, this story of presidential dictation, Kaitlan, very significant.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Yes, it is, John. "The Washington Post" is reporting now that Donald Trump personally dictated this statement that was first given to "The New York Times" about Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting at Trump Tower with that Russian lawyer. Now, the word was that they drafted the statement as they were flying back on Air Force One from the G20 summit in Germany. And that it was the president's idea to say that the meeting was primarily about Russian adoption and not about campaign issues. Now, this is according to that story in "The Washington Post" from last night. Now we know that later on that came to not be true, that this meeting was more about that Donald Trump Jr. was under the impression that he was meeting with a Russian government attorney who had incriminating information about Hillary Clinton. The subject line of these e-mails was literally Russia, Clinton, private and confidential. So, we later found out that that was not true. Now, the Trump lawyer, Jay Sekulow is saying that this whole new revelation that the president personally dictated this statement is not relevant. Let's put his statement up on the screen what Jay Sekulow said today. Saying, "Apart from being of no consequence, the characterizations are misinformed, inaccurate and not pertinent." Now this is the same lawyer who went on television two times after all of this came out to strongly deny that the president had any role in drafting this Donald Jr. statement.
[Berman:] All right, Kaitlan Collins for us at the White House. I think we do have one question we want to get to you, Kaitlan, about General John Kelly and so far, his role inside the White House. What are you learning about whether or not the situation inside is getting more buttoned up?
[Collins:] Well, we're really seeing John Kelly impose some order on this very divided West Wing. And it's very evident how much power the president is giving John Kelly. We were told yesterday that all staff, including Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump will be reporting to John Kelly and not directly to the president as they have been doing these past few months when Reince Priebus was in the White House. So, we are clearly seeing just how much power Donald Trump is giving to John Kelly to impose some order on the West Wing.
[Berman:] All right. Kaitlan Collins, thanks very, very much. Appreciate it. All right, joining us now on our panel joining us Asha Rangappa, CNN legal and national security analyst, Craig Fuller, former chief of staff to vice president George H.W. Bush and Ryan Lizza, CNN political analyst. Asha, I want to start with you with the legal implications here. It is not against the law to lie to the press or the American people, which is shocking and unfortunate in many ways. However, however, if the president was as involved as "The Washington Post" reports in dictating this message, this answer that was quite misleading about the nature of the meeting, what could it expose him to and those around him?
[Asha Rangappa, Cnn Legal And National Security Analyst:] So, John, we need to get away from looking at each isolated event and seeing whether or not that it's legal, whether or not it's legal. When a prosecutor is building a case, they are going to look at everything in the totality. And so, what this shows is a level of direct involvement and actually directing the way that this is being put out in an attempt to conceal. So, if we go back all the way to Comey's firing, his desire for this Russia investigation to go away, we need you know, we start to wonder, what are the motives for that? And now there's certain there's a personal investment in covering this up. So this is just adding to evidence that Mueller can connect, collect and connect. And it will expose everyone who is around him on that day when he was, when that message was being created for them to explain and give their accounting of events. And I think it's going to start putting people in a position of having to decide whether they are going to be loyal to the president or whether they are going to tell the truth and people are going to get tripped up in that process. So, I think it's not just exposing the president to potential liability. It's exposing everyone around him to it. This has been going on for a long time and I think it's going to get even more complicated as the story continues.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Craig, as someone who was a chief of staff, albeit to a vice president, so you get the role and you get the inner workings of the White House. How bizarre is it, the extent to which according to "The Washington Post" reporting this morning, the president was involved in drafting this initial statement on behalf of his son? I mean, pull aside the G20, then dictating it on Air Force One, despite the repeated sort of pleas of those around him to be more transparent.
[Craig Fuller, Former Chief Of Staff, Vp George H.w. Bush:] So, I think, Poppy, from the beginning, this White House has done a very poor job managing the story. And this is just one episode that's perhaps more interesting because of the specifics that are now becoming known. But, honestly, shaping a statement, trying to shape this story is probably not that unusual. The notion that it was somehow dictated is a little different. A big question, in my mind, is what did the president actually know when he was dictating a statement? Was he just trying to put a good spin on something? Did he actually know what the facts were? Did he really intend to mislead? And if that's the case, it's another shot at the veracity of this White House. And I'd say
[Harlow:] But even if he didn't, then should he be shaping any message if he hadn't seen the e-mails. If he didn't know the extent of it, right?
[Fuller:] Classic answer is if you don't know the facts, you don't shape the message. You're absolutely right.
[Berman:] Ryan Lizza, lay the political ground work here. How big of a deal is this coming right now as it does in this moment of you know, turmoil inside the West Wing?
[Ryan Lizza, Cnn Political Analyst:] I mean, it seems pretty significant I mean, what "The Washington Post" reports is that the president personally overruled other administration officials who wanted to put out a full a more full account of this meeting and that's why this question of what did he know. It seems like maybe I need to re-read more closely The Post piece, but it seems that the whole debate was, that he was being told, hey, we want to put out a more accurate account of this and he was overruling his aides and saying, no, we are just going to say it was about adoption. And so, you know, not to put too fine a point on it, but you have the president of the United States covering up an explosive e-mail that. Of course, we know was evidence that the Trump campaign was at the very least open to the idea of colluding with Russia, which is the one thing the president and all his advisers said was not the case. So, pretty big deal. As you just pointed out, it's not illegal, but from what most of the legal analysts have pointed out is when you have a special counsel out investigating potential obstruction of justice and you are in the middle of what arguably is this cover up of this meeting. That seems pretty dicey for the president and it opens up all the people who were on that plane and involved with this at the very least, getting a call from Bob Mueller to get to the bottom of what was happening.
[Harlow:] Asha, from a legal standpoint for any liability for the president here. How much does it matter how much he knew about the intent of this meeting, the fact that as we learned from the e-mail chain, that Don Jr. released himself, that it was a concerted Russian government effort, for example. Is that the line that matters a lot for the president, what he knew?
[Rangappa:] Well, certainly, if he knowingly concealed something then that is going to have a greater weight in terms of going to his intent to cover up potential you know connections with Russian government officials. But, I think, it was already mentioned, even if he didn't know, I think that there's there is a question that's raised of why he would get directly involved to even shape this message. Now, it's possible that he just simply he is thinking politically and does not grasp the kind of criminal liability that he may be putting himself and his staff out to. And maybe he's not worried about it because in many ways, as the president, he enjoys many privileges and immunities that make it very difficult for any kind of criminal charge to be brought against him. But that is not true for the people around him. And he's making it more difficult for lawyers, for his family's lawyers and for his staff. And so, I think, no matter how you slice it, this is not good.
[Berman:] So, Craig, you know we just got a statement from the president of the United States on Twitter, he writes this morning, "Only the fake news media and Trump enemies want me to stop using social media [110 million people]. Only way for me to get the truth out!" Now, Poppy and I were arguing. I actually think this is incredibly innocuous.
[Harlow:] We don't argue. Don't believe him.
[Berman:] I think this is innocuous. I think this actually fall within the realm of president to restraint on social media.
[Harlow:] But I think this shows that Kelly is not holding the Twitter handle right now.
[Berman:] Craig Fuller, what do you think most importantly what does this show about the extent of General John Kelly's reach in power inside the West Wing?
[Fuller:] I think we are going see more discipline with General Kelly there. I don't think you are going to stop the tweeting. But I did think that at least there was time taken today to try to consider what message to put out. And I suspect that is what will happen in the future, you'd simply especially on this Russia case, you simply cannot have the president tweeting about it and expect him not to bury every other news story that his administration is trying to put out.
[Harlow:] All right. So, that's one point Berman. Lizza, can I get you on my team on this one? Come on, we go way back.
[Lizza:] Let me just start in an anecdote that I reported yesterday in a piece. Kelly was out in Aspen talking to national security officials and he told this was two weeks ago a week and a half ago and he told these officials that he believed he had convinced President Trump that he didn't actually need to build a full, physical wall on the border, that you could start calling it a barrier, and you could do it with surveillance and technology. And he said, he was telling his national security officials many of them were very skeptical of Trump, very skeptical of Kelly for working for Trump. That he thinks he's got this relationship with Trump where he can change his mind about things. And some people were impressed with that. And then he added, but you never know with Trump, he could tweet something and change his mind and that's it. So, he's going into this I took from that anecdote that he's going into this job, one, with a sense that he thinks he can manage Trump. He thinks he has good enough relationship with him, and two, that but he also understands the sort of volcanic nature of Trump and he could change it at any time. But, he clearly doesn't have the Twitter password, you know, considering the president is still tweeting. But that tweet is not does not even rank in the top 50 or 100 of Trump's most controversial tweets.
[Berman:] Yes! So, I win.
[Harlow:] No, that is that is one point Poppy. Sorry, we are out of time. And we have to go now. Craig Fuller
[Lizza:] Poppy always wins.
[Harlow:] It's a great lesson. Ryan Lizza, Craig Fuller, Asha Rangappa, thank you. Flake fires off. The Republican senator telling his own party it needs to stop rationalizing the president's behavior. Plus, an e-mail prankster dukes top White House officials. What did he find out and how did he do it?
[Berman:] And a new Russia sanctions. Are new Russian sanctions coming soon? Vice President Pence standing his ground as the Kremlin retaliates.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] But the president and our Congress are unified in our message to Russia, a better relationship, the lifting of sanctions will require Russia to reverse the actions that caused sanctions to be imposed in the first place.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Following breaking news. The Senate Judiciary Committee's ranking member, the top Democrat, Dianne Feinstein, now says the Special Counsel Robert Mueller has given the committee the all-clear to go ahead and interview Donald Trump Jr. and Paul Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman, in a public session. It comes as we learn more about the eighth person who attended last year's meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian attorney. For all the latest developments, let's bring in our senior congressional reporter Manu Raju and our CNN justice correspondent Pamela Brown. Manu, tell us a little bit more about Senator Feinstein, what she had to say about the Judiciary Committee's Russia investigation.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] Yes, a significant development here, Wolf. The Senate Judiciary Committee now getting the green light from Bob Mueller's office to go ahead and interview in a public session Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman to Donald Trump, as well as Donald Trump Jr., in light of that meeting that he had last year with Russians after he was told that he could get dirt on the Clinton campaign. Now, this is a significant development because last week both Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Chuck Grassley had reached out to Bob Mueller's office to make sure that they would not conflict with his own investigation into Russia meddling. And what they got back from Bob Mueller's office is that it's not a problem. They can go forward with their own public hearings as long as they have really no issue there. This is according to Senator Dianne Feinstein, who I just talked to moments ago. Now, also, Wolf, another significant development. I talked to the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr. I asked him specifically if he wants to learn more about what happened at that Trump Tower meeting. And he gave his most extensive comment to date about the fact that he does. And also wants to hear from those as well. Take a listen to Richard Burr.
[Raju:] Do you also feel like you understand everything about what happened in that Trump Tower meeting at this point?
[Sen. Richard Burr , Chairman, Intelligence Committee:] No, absolutely not. I think that there's a lot to learn from that. And we've reached out to the appropriate people and asked them to provide information for us and to testify possibly publicly. But it's too early in that to draw any conclusions. But I, you know, our job is to put the facts on the table and follow wherever it goes.
[Raju:] Do you want Don Jr. in public do you want that Don Jr. to
[Burr:] I think you've got to ask Don Jr. to come in. Whether that's public or whether it's private or how you proceed and at what pace still yet to be determined by information that we learn between now and the time we make that request.
[Raju:] Has he been cooperative, Don Jr.?
[Burr:] Oh, I think everybody in this administration has been cooperative up to this point, yes. Yes.
[Raju:] Thank you, sir. So two significant developments there, Wolf. Two separate committees. The Intelligence Committee ready to move forward with hearings, either publically or privately, including with Don Jr. And now the Senate Judiciary Committee can move forward with that possible public testimony. The question is whether or not both Donald Trump Jr. and Manafort agree or whether they'll be hit with any subpoenas if they don't, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] What about Jared Kushner? He was also at that meeting. He's a senior adviser to the president right now, the president's son-in-law. Is he going to be called to testify as well?
[Raju:] Well, certainly before the Senate Intelligence Committee there have been negotiations going back and forth about bringing him forward and then ask for records in light of that meeting. The Senate Intelligence Committee has done that. The question is, when does Jared Kushner come? We're not sure yet. One other thing before the Senate Intelligence Committee today, Wolf, former Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough is meeting behind closed doors as part of that Russia meddling investigation. But we'll see when some of those big Trump associate, including Jared Kushner, also agree to come possibly behind closed doors as well, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, Manu, stand by. Pamela's with us as well. Pamela, the eighth person in the meeting a year ago, June of last year, at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. has now been identified. You broke the story. You reported the name first. What can you tell us about this eighth person at the meeting?
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] There's been so much mystery surrounding this eighth person, Wolf, and CNN has learned that he the person who attended this June 2016 meeting with Donald Trump Jr. at Trump Tower is named Ike Kaveladze. His identity was confirmed by his attorney, Scott Balber. And Kaveladze is a senior vice president at Crocus Group, the real estate development company run by Russian Azerbaijani oligarch Aras Agalarov, according to his LinkedIn. Now, his personal web site says, quote, he holds responsibility for multiple elements of the company's Russian development projects. So he has multiple projects in Russia. He studied at the Moscow Academy of Finance and also got an MBA from the University of New Haven in Connecticut according to his web site. Now, Kaveladze is a U.S. citizen according to his attorney and he has worked for the Agalarov's business since 2004, which means he was with the company when it partnered with the Trump Organization to pull off the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow. In fact, it appears, Wolf, that he is seen in video from 2013 exclusively obtained by CNN with the Agalarov family and with now President Trump. So he is seen in this video that we obtained exclusively that we presented last week. So he apparently goes way back with the Agalarovs. The special council investigators, they have reached out to his attorney seeking information from Kaveladze as part of this Russia probe. And his attorney says that he is fully cooperating, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, fully cooperating. Let's see if he shows up and testifies as well. He is a U.S. citizen. Presumably he's not going to have much choice, especially if he's subpoenaed. All right, Pamela, thank you very much. Manu, thanks to you as well. Good reporting on both of your parts. Let's discuss all of this and more with our panel. I'm joined by our chief political analyst Gloria Borger, CNN politics reporter, editor at large, Chris Cillizza, and Shannon Pettypiece. She is the White House reporter for "Bloomberg News." You know, Gloria, this meeting, take eight people now in the meeting, a translator from Russia. This was a this was a big deal, this meeting.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Well, it was a big deal and the Agalarovs are, that family, really looms large in all of this. They're not an unknown quantity to the Trump family. Donald Trump Jr. has a relationship with the patriarch of this family. They did the Miss Universe Pageant together. Don Jr. has a relationship with Emin, the son. And I think that and clearly they had somebody in there representing them in this meeting. Rob Goldstone is the publicist for the son. And so the Agalarov family is a family that I'm sure that the special counsel, as well as the congressional committees, are going to be looking to, particularly given Don Jr.'s e-mail in which Rob Goldstone said, you know, we have the stuff to deliver the connection. And between Hillary Clinton and Russia and we're going to give that to you. And Don Jr., of course, responded, "love it." So I think that this is just, you know, another link in the chain here to this family, and this family between and to the Trump family.
[Blitzer:] How do you see these late developments? We're learning a lot more about a meeting that initially was supposed to be about adoptions and all of a sudden it's a lot more than that.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter:] And was dismissed as a 20- minute nothing burger, my words, not Don Jr.'s but essentially, nothing happened. I agree with everything that Gloria said. I'll add that the fact that the Russian lawyer was someone the Agalarovs sort of deputized to represent this information. That they had another representative in the room, which we now know the identity of although we did know that that we knew there were eight people in there speaks to the fact that they took whatever information was being passed or the meeting itself quite seriously. This was not a, hey, let's go and say hi to Don Jr. and Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner. This was something that they clearly were invested in. In terms of raw people attending it, and wanted to make sure that that information was conveyed in a way that was appropriate with what they believed it to be. So, again, dismissing this given the number of people and the "who" is involved, it's just getting harder and harder to do.
[Shannon Pettypiece, White House Reporter, "bloomberg News":] I also think it seems unlikely to this characterization that, oh, after a few minutes, Kushner and Manafort lost interest and got up and walked out. So now it's sort of like a large, formal meeting. There are eight people in the room and you're you just stand up in the middle of it and walk out. You know, which is one more thing that just doesn't seem believable. But, of course, nothing about what happened in this meeting seems believable at this point since this story has changed, I don't know, five times now, and we keep getting more information about who was there.
[Blitzer:] Well, the big problem, Shannon, that the president's son-in- law, Jared Kushner has is, he didn't disclose this meeting with these Russians on his security clearance questionnaire. Later he updated it and he disclosed it once they saw the black and white of the e-mail which described what this meeting was all about, namely getting dirt about Hillary Clinton, opposition research, from these Russians.
[Pettypiece:] Right, so why didn't he disclose it if
[Blitzer:] Why didn't he?
[Pettypiece:] This wasn't a back of the hand you know, a last-minute type of meeting. This was a large meeting. It should have been on his calendar. Why didn't he disclose it? And we do now know that he, on the security clearance forms, they disclosed more than 100 other meetings. I've been asking and trying to find out, what are those other meetings? That's a question I want to know. So you had 100 other meetings. What were they? What else haven't they told us about their time during the campaign?
[Blitzer:] Does he have a problem right now with security clearance, Jared Kushner?
[Borger:] Well well, he dos, only in the sense that Democrats are demanding that his interim clearance be revoked. But, you know, in the end, this moves up the food chain and it's really up to the president to decide who he wants around him and who should get security clearance or not. So I doubt that Donald Trump would actually say, well, I don't think Jared Kushner should have security clearance. I mean, everybody, the FBI does its investigation, but the president can decide what he wants to do.
[Blitzer:] And very quickly, do you think that Jared Kushner would remember a meeting with eight people, including a Russian translator, a Russian lawyer. That's something you probably would remember.
[Cillizza:] Yes. Yes. I mean we were led to believe at the start of this that this was essentially the equivalent of passing in the hall, hey, we all know each other. It clearly was more than that. And to Shannon's point, the probably here is that it wasn't initially disclosed, both the meeting and the nature of the meeting, which as we've come to find out, you know, I haven't sat in a meeting with eight people in quite some time. I mean, you know, this is a this takes organization. This takes time. This takes investment. You have two three of the top officials in the Trump campaign there. It's hard to believe that this was just a, well, we figured out, it was kind of about adoptions and then nothing. They're going to have to have a better explanation than that.
[Pettypiece:] Well, I think there's definitely concern in the White House about Kushner among those close to the White House.
[Blitzer:] About his security clearances.
[Pettypiece:] About his fate in the White
[Blitzer:] If he doesn't have security clearances, he can't do his job.
[Pettypiece:] Yes, about his role or fate in that White House in general. There's definitely concern among those close to Trump about Kushner.
[Cillizza:] And it's important to note too, Wolf, just to close a loop. It's basically saying, we should get rid of Jared Kushner's security clearance means you should fire Jared. I mean Jared Kushner can't have that job
[Blitzer:] Right.
[Cillizza:] You can't say, hey, Jared, could you step out? Hey, Jared, could you step out, every two seconds, right?: I mean that job, the nature of the job he has, requires it.
[Blitzer:] Right.
[Cillizza:] So it's one or the other.
[Blitzer:] Can't negotiate can't negotiate Middle East peace without having security clearance.
[Cillizza:] No. Right. It would be tough.
[Blitzer:] That would be very all right, guys
[Borger:] All right, but let's see what the president does.
[Pettypiece:] Right.
[Blitzer:] We'll see what the
[Pettypiece:] You are right, he does have the decision at the end of the day.
[Borger:] It's up to the president.
[Blitzer:] Gloria, Chris, Shannon, guys, thanks very much.
[Cillizza:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] The promise to repeal and replace Obamacare served certainly as a major pillar of President Trump's winning campaign. So what is the bills collapse now reveal about the party's future, the party's ability to push ahead with an agenda?

[Doug Jones , Alabama Senate Candidate:] I think they've seen in Doug Jones a partner for a long time and they sure don't see a partner in Roy Moore if you look in the history of what he has said about slavery, secessionists, getting rid of amendments that were passed right after the Civil War. It's only natural, I think, that the African-American community rally around someone who was there for them and prosecuted a heinous crime that occurred decades ago.
[Question:] Sir, following up on the question about Roy Moore, if the day doesn't go like you're hoping and he wins, should the Senate immediately
[Jones:] I am not going to I'm not going to answer that question. I mean I, you know, look, that's not going to be me. First of all, I don't think we're going to get that. You know, we in Alabama, we have come so far with too many things. And there's this saying, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Alabama is not going to let that shame happen again.
[Harlow:] He is betting clearly that he is going to win today. With us, Bill Britt, editor and chief for the news site Alabama Political Reporter. Someone who has interviewed Roy Moore many times, including the last really last interview he did over the weekend. Thanks for being with us, Bill.
[Bill Britt, Editor-in-chef, Alabama Political Reporter:] Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be with you on it's a cold morning here in Alabama and it's going to get colder.
[Harlow:] Spoken like a true Minnesotan, you know nothing about cold, but I'll give that to you. It is election day in Alabama. What will decide the victor tonight?
[Britt:] Well, it's going to be turnout. I mean if turnout is 800,000 or less, Roy Moore wins. If it's a million or over, I think most experts would agree that Jones did get out the vote and they'll win. A lot of enthusiasm on both sides. The momentum right now is looking in Mr. Jones' favor. But, again, this is Alabama. Nothing is a given.
[Berman:] You know, some of the prognosticators are looking at some of the absentee ballot requests in some of the countries that are up or way up.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Berman:] Tuscaloosa, Madison, Lauderdale, Franklin, Morgan, Limestone, Montgomery. Anything that you see in some of these? I know Montgomery is a more Democratic area. Tuscaloosa might be a student area. What do you see here?
[Britt:] Well, yes, and the other fact is that Montgomery is holding a special election to replace a house a state house seat and a state senate seat. And those are both seats are going to be won by African-Americans. So that will help with the turnout. As far as what we're seeing in Jefferson Counties, you know, that's going to go Jones' way. I think we have to look at Shelby County, which is a suburb of Birmingham, a Jefferson County suburb, and see what happens there. I think that's the place to watch. Mobile County is a place to watch. The rural counties. If voters show up in the rural counties, it's probably all over for Jones.
[Harlow:] The polls were wrong, needless to say, in the general election, and there turned out to be what the Trump team had said there was going to be and the sort of secret Trump vote. Is there a secret Roy Moore vote right now in Alabama?
[Britt:] I tend to think so. I mean we have spent the weekend in Etowah County, which is the home of Roy Moore. My wife, you know, is from here, of course. And we talked to folks at the grocery store and at the filling station. And by and large, if people will talk at all, they say that they are they are voting for Moore. Now, this is just one small county and people here do know Roy Moore for years and years, but people say they're leaning that way. Again, it's going to come down to, can Mr. Jones motivate the African-American community.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Britt:] I mean Hillary Clinton did not motivate them very well in the general last year.
[Berman:] So there have been outsiders coming in. Steve Bannon has been in there campaigning. Charles Barkley, who's not an outsider, is actually from Alabama, was campaigning for Doug Jones. There have been phone calls in from each side. Does any of that have an effect?
[Britt:] Well, you know, John, I've said this a million times, we're the
[Berman:] Hopefully that was the first wave of exit polls coming back, someone telling you where things stand at 9:47 Eastern Time. Bill Britt, great to have you with us. Thank you for walking us through this Alabama election. We think this is the final one today for some time, so we'll talk to you soon, Bill, thank you.
[Britt:] All right, thank you. You, too. You all have a wonderful day.
[Harlow:] You too.
[Berman:] All right, a Colorado family faces a heartbreaking choice, pay their mortgage or pay for their son's medicine. Why? They depend on the Children's Health Insurance Program, which Congress has not renewed.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Shutdown averted. Congress kicks the can another month. But major issues remain as lawmakers and the president leave out for the holidays.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Testimony from the deputy FBI director suggests he can backup Comey's claims about President Trump.
[Briggs:] And the U.S. is not backing down after a lopsided U.N. vote criticizing the president's Jerusalem decision. The response of a former CIA director, calling the president a, quote, "narcissistic vengeful autocrat." John Brennan with one heck of a debut on Twitter yesterday. Welcome back. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] I'm Christine Romans. We're 30 minutes past the hour this Friday morning. And the lights will stay on. The government running for another month. Crisis averted. The Senate approving a stop-gap funding bill last night to keep federal agencies open through January 19th. The House approved the measure earlier in the day. Pushing the measure through means lawmakers get to go home for the holidays.
[Briggs:] The president also getting away for the holidays. He heads to Mar-a-Lago after signing the Republican tax bill this morning. But after averting a shutdown, many issues still remain. CNN's Phil Mattingly has more from Capitol Hill.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Christine and Dave, in the end, the scent of jet fumes overwhelmed the idea of having a fight when it came to a potential government shutdown. House Republicans having the votes on their own to keep the government funded through January 19th. the Senate following suit shortly thereafter. There will not be a government shutdown, at least for now. What is actually in the bill they passed, it's more than just funding through January 19th. It's also funding through the end of March the Children's Health Insurance Program, a program that lapsed in September. This bill will have # billion to keep that moving forward. This bill will also extend through January 19th a key FISA surveillance program, a warrantless surveillance program the intelligence community says it desperately needs. It will also have some elements of funding for community health hospitals as well. Key components, but no doubt, setting up major fights for January. DACA, obviously, the program that President Trump said he would wind down by the end of March, that has been punted to January as well. And you also have a disaster supplemental bill basically funding for hurricane-ravaged Texas and Florida and Puerto Rico. While the House passed that with a vote, the Senate put that aside, so they didn't have the votes for it this time around. That will have to be addressed in January as well. Republicans and Democrats agreeing not to shut down the government, low bar, but that's progress on some level. But what it does do, again, is set up major fights in January. For now, though, everybody is going home to celebrate the holidays with their families Christine and Dave?
[Romans:] All right, Phil, thank you for that. Still reported no deal on DACA, the law that protects DREAMers, young undocumented immigrants brought here as children. Just before the vote on the short-term spending bill, more than a dozen members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus marched on Senator Chuck Schumer's office, calling for a no-vote on the spending bill, unless it contains a DACA fix.
[Briggs:] They say Schumer only committed to galvanizing support for the nation's DREAMers. Earlier this week, Republican Senator, Jeff Flake said he has a commitment from majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to vote on a bipartisan immigration bill next month.
[Romans:] Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe wrapped up more than 16 hours of testimony this week before members of three House committees. Multiple sources from both parties tell CNN McCabe described interactions with his one-time boss, former FBI director, James Comey.
[Briggs:] Testimony suggests McCabe can back up Comey's claim the president asked him to pledge his loyalty and to go easy on the Michael Flynn investigation. That's because McCabe told lawmakers Comey informed him about conversations with President Trump soon after they happened.
[Romans:] McCabe's closed-door testimony came amid growing calls for his firing from Republicans critical of the FBI's handling of the Russia and Clinton e-mail investigations. Democrats, like Congressman Jerrold Nadler, were pushing back hard, pressuring Republicans to stop demonizing Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
[Rep. Jerrold Nadler, , New York:] Republican attempts seemingly at the behest of the White House to discredit, interfere and undermine Robert Mueller and his team must be called out and exposed as a systematic attempt to provide cover for the president as the walls close in on him and on his family and his inner circle.
[Briggs:] Another CNN poll shows a majority of Americans, 56 percent, disapprove of the president's handling of the Russia investigation. Meanwhile, 47 percent approve of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's approach to the probe. Polls also are sharply divided along party lines. No surprise.
[Romans:] Nikki Halley taking names, as promised, after a U.N. vote condemning President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capitol. The America's ambassador to the U.N. calling the United Nations a, quote, "hostile place for Israel" after a 128 to nine vote against the U.S.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The U.n:] The United States will remember this day in which it was singled out for attack in the General Assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation. We will remember it when we are called upon to once again make the world's largest contribution to the United Nations. And we will remember it when so many countries come calling on us, as they so often do, to pay even more and to use our influence for their benefit.
[Briggs:] Haley's remarks triggering a harsh response from former CIA director, John Brennan. His second ever tweet. Quote, "The Trump administration threats to retaliate against nations that exercise sovereign rights in U.N. to oppose U.S. position on Jerusalem is beyond outrageous. It shows Donald Trump expects line loyalty and subservience from everyone. Qualities usually found in narcissistic vengeful autocrats." Thirty-five countries abstained from the U.N. vote and 21 others were absent.
[Romans:] Ambassador Haley inviting representatives from all 65 nations that did not vote against the U.S. to a thank-you reception in January. Part of the invitation reading, "Think of this as just a first symbolic step of the U.S. taking note of who supports us and who doesn't." Let's go live to Jerusalem and bring in CNN's Oren Liebermann. Oren, what is the reaction to the U.N. vote there?
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, the Palestinians very much see the results of this vote, 128 voting against the United States, as a success. Only nine states voted with the U.S. They see this as a stinging rebuke of U.S. foreign policy and President Trump's unilateral recognition of Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel. In speaking to the Palestinian representative to the United States, he says it's a rejection of unilateralism, moves done by only one country, and a sweeping acceptance of multilateralism, international law and a global approach to the IsraeliPalestinian conflict, and the goal of recognizing and establishing a Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capitol. Strangely enough, this is a situation where even Israel is celebrating the results of the vote to an extent. That's because of a third number, 35 abstentions. They see that as a diplomatic success, at least partially, by getting that many countries to stay out, nearly two dozen countries that were absent during the results of the vote. So both sides claiming are a measure of success. And yet, as you pointed out, this is largely symbolic because it's a nonbinding resolution and doesn't affect anything on the ground here. And it certainly doesn't change President Trump's recognition as the capital of Israel Christine?
[Romans:] All right, Oren, thank you for that, live from Jerusalem for us this morning.
[Briggs:] A federal judge dismissing an ethics lawsuit against President Trump. An organization called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, claim Mr. Trump's business interests are causing conflicts of interest and violate the Constitution. Their argument resting on the president's decision not to sell his business holdings before the inauguration. On Thursday, the judge ruled CREW did not have legal standing to bring the suits since Congress must raise the issue first. CREW calls the ruling a setback and vows to appeal.
[Romans:] Mike Pence is now the highest-ranking Trump administration official to visit an active U.S. combat zone. The vice president making a secret visit to Afghanistan Thursday night, meeting with top Afghan officials and rallying the troops.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] Today, on behalf of your commander-in-chief I say to all of you, in the days ahead, mind your mission, take care of one another, respect the unified chain of command, and never doubt every day every operation and every decision that you make matters.
[Romans:] The vice president has departed Afghanistan, we're told, and is heading back to the U.S. for the holidays.
[Briggs:] President Trump paid a holiday visit to wounded troops at Walter Reed Medical Center.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Some of the bravest people anywhere in the world. We're just going to wish them a merry Christmas and happy new year. And we love those people.
[Briggs:] During the visit, the president awarded the Purple Heart to First Lieutenant Victor Prado, of the 127th Airborne engineer battalion, who was injured last month while deployed in Afghanistan. This is Trump's second visit to Walter Reed as president. His two predecessors also visited servicemembers there, wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. Breaking news overnight, legendary sportscaster, Dick Enberg, has died.
[Dick Enberg, Former Sportscaster:] Oh, my, what an exciting day.
[Briggs:] Oh, my, what a voice. Family members of the beloved Hall of Fame announcer confirm Enberg was found dead in his home in California Thursday. His family suspects the cause of death was a heart attack. Long-time voice of UCLA basketball and the San Diego Padres, Enberg was heard for decades on NBC, CBS and ESPN. He covered 28 Wimbledons, 10 Super Bowls and eight NCAA championships. Dick Enberg, dead at the age of 82. But on that Mount Rushmore of sports broadcasters we grew up with, one of those legendary voices and talents.
[Romans:] All right, 49 minutes past the hour. Strong signups for Obamacare, even as the White House refused to help enrollment efforts. We'll crunch the numbers, next.

[Reince Priebus, White House Chief Of Staff:] You have to accept the fact that there is 1,000 opinions. I mean, so, I'm so used to it, that I don't I don't even care. It doesn't bother me.
[Question:] You're not pulling out your hair.
[Priebus:] Not no, I'm not. People assume, oh, you must be miserable. You got a horrible job. But I don't see it that way. I'm not that's what I'm saying. I'm not pouring Baileys in my cereal. I'm not sitting here trying to find the Johnnie Walker. This is fun.
[Question:] Is it Baileys in his Fruit Loops now, Jamie?
[Jamie Gangel, Cnn Correspondent:] I think it's Baileys. I think it's Johnnie Walker. I think he's pulling out his hair.
[Linette Lopez, Business Insider:] Sounds great.
[Gangel:] I don't think he's having fun, is the bottom line. Just to put this in some context, we're only six months in.
[Baldwin:] Right.
[Gangel:] This is not the first go-round where Reince Priebus is out and there are all of these rumors that he's not long for this job, and his allies are pushing back, saying he's not going anywhere. That said, the level of the rumors, the dysfunction, the push is certainly different this week than we have ever heard before. But let's not forget, he serves at the pleasure of one person. That's Donald Trump, and that's when we will know if he's in the job or if he's out.
[Baldwin:] Yes. Ladies, thank you so much. Not enough time. Let's talk more Scaramucci, the Mooch, next week.
[Lopez:] Any time you want.
[Baldwin:] OK. Thank you so much. Let's continue on, hour two.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Baldwin:] We continue on. You're watching CNN on this Friday afternoon. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We have more now on the stunning defeat of the Republicans' effort to repeal Obamacare. Moments ago, President Trump, going off-script, sounding off against Congress.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They should have approved health care last night, but you can't have everything. Boy, oh, boy. They have been working on that one for seven years. Can you believe that? The swamp. But we will get it done. We're going get it done. You know, I said from the beginning let Obamacare implode and then do it. I turned out to be right. Let Obamacare implode.
[Baldwin:] "Let Obamacare implode," he says. In the end, it was just 19 seconds that dashed the seven years of hope. After debating into the wee hours of the morning, it was Senator John McCain right there who shocked a lot of his colleagues on the Republican side, casting the third no vote, giving the dramatic thumbs down on the Senate floor. There you go. Joining me more to talk about this and what happens next for health care in this country, Jake Tapper, host of "STATE OF THE UNION" and "THE LEAD." Jake Tapper, what do you make of the president first off just there in Long Island saying, let Obamacare implode?
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Well, I mean, as a policy, it's not really optimal. I mean, Obamacare is failing in several parts of the country, with premiums going up, with very few options, with health insurance plans withdrawing from the exchanges. And the idea of letting it implode means millions of Americans continuing to have skyrocketing premiums or have very few, if any, options when it comes to health care. It means, let Americans suffer. So it's not really a policy prescription in any sense.
[Baldwin:] On health care, we just played the moment, the thumbs down with Senator McCain. There's so many story lines, you know, President Obama's former opponent saving Obama's signature piece of legislation or coming back from cancer diagnosis to cast this deciding vote, or the senator who hasn't seen eye to eye with President Trump delivering a major blow to his agenda two years and a week from Donald Trump saying he wasn't a hero. Whatever it is, did it seem that Senator McCain took one for the team, defending other senators who have been vulnerable for voting yes? How do you see that?
[Tapper:] From talking to people around McCain, it really comes down to the idea of his lack of confidence in the process and the fact that there was this possibility out there that so-called skinny repeal, which was ultimately what the Republicans were voting for, except for three of them, and the Democrats were voting against., skinny repeal that's banning any federal dollars going to Planned Parenthood, the repeal of the individual mandate, the repeal of the employer mandate, and also the removal of the medical device tax that that the fear that that would actually become the health care law. That was what McCain was concerned about. Obviously, we know all the back and forth. The Democrats I'm sorry the Republicans in the House passed their bill. Republicans in the Senate couldn't come up with one. The pitch was to Republicans, just pass skinny repeal, and then we will have a conference committee, where Republicans in the House and Senate will sit down and actually write legislation. But Speaker Paul Ryan would not really guarantee and could not, could not really guarantee that skinny repeal wouldn't just be passed by the House and then signed by President Trump and become law. And that was what McCain was really worried about. He did not want he didn't trust this idea that it was just going to be a vessel or a vehicle for this big successful Republican health care legislation that would come down the pike through conference committee. He was afraid that it was going to be a trap, that ultimately House Republicans were just going to pass skinny repeal, President Trump would sign it into law, they would be able to check the box, we repealed Obamacare, we did this successful thing, and that, ultimately, it was lousy legislation. So that's why he voted the way he did.
[Baldwin:] So that's the why on Senator McCain. But what about the other two no's? You had two ladies, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, also no's as well. Just want to mention that. And between this, Jake, and then the Russian sanctions bill, and the defense of the A.G., Jeff Sessions, it seems like more and more Republican lawmakers are starting to stand up to the president, stand up to the White House.
[Tapper:] Yes, it's not as surprising from Collins and Murkowski, who have been more mavericky...
[Baldwin:] Mavericky.
[Tapper:] ... than even John McCain in a lot of ways, especially when it comes to health care legislation. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski have been expressing a lot of concerns about original drafts of the bill that took away funding for Medicaid, the health program, the government health program for poorer people and for disabled people. They expressed concern about banning not allowing women to spend their Medicaid dollars to get checkups or birth control with Planned Parenthood. There are a lot of things that they were upset about. What's more surprising is when you see Dick Shelby, the Republican of Alabama, or Chuck Grassley, the Republican of Iowa, who's chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, those gentlemen saying things to the White House like, I'm not going to confirm another attorney general. That's not what the Judiciary Committee's doing. Or their deep offense they have taken at the way President Trump has been treating Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who, of course, is a former colleague of theirs.
[Baldwin:] Right.
[Tapper:] That's where you see a lot of these Republicans starting to stand up. And then, of course, very significantly is this Russia sanctions bill which passed the House and Senate overwhelmingly with veto-proof majorities and then some, even though the White House has been lobbying against it. There's a real lack of confidence expressed in what President Trump's doing in any number of these incidents that I just mentioned.
[Baldwin:] Thus the more and more people standing up against him. Jake Tapper, thank you so much for all that. We will see you, as we always do, on "THE LEAD" at the top the of the hour. Thank you, sir.
[Tapper:] Thanks.
[Baldwin:] Let's talk North Korea now. The Pentagon is telling CNN that Pyongyang has fired another ballistic long-range missile, this one up in the air for about 45 minutes, about eight minutes longer than the last, landed just about 80 miles off the coast of Japan. Kim Jong-un has now launched a dozen missiles this year, and this comes as fears grow about progress toward developing a nuclear weapon. CNN's Will Ripley is live in Beijing. He has spent a lot of time inside of North Korea. And Jamie Metzl is here with me, a former staff member on the National Security Council and a senior fellow on the Atlantic Council. And he's also just back from China, where he held meetings about the future of North Korea. So, Will Ripley, just first to you, tell me more about the trajectory of this ICBM, the significance that it was so close to Japan, and any sort of reaction.
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] South Korea's saying, Brooke, that this is more advanced than the ICBM that was launched on the Fourth of July. Its highest altitude was 3,700 kilometers, around 2,300 miles. It traveled a distance of about 1,000 kilometers, landing within 100 nautical miles of Japan in those waters known as the Exclusive Economic Zone. This trajectory is significant because they launched it really high and then it kind of went over and down like this, but had it been launched at a normal trajectory, it could have put much of the United States within striking range. We're talking about cities as far away as Denver, maybe even Chicago. And, of course, the analysts have been saying now, at the State Department, that, by early next year, so a matter of months from now, North Korea could have a reliable ICBM, so a missile they could launch at any moment that could carry a nuclear warhead to the mainland U.S. with pretty decent accuracy. That's very frightening for people who are watching North Korea and weren't even predicting this rapid of pace of a development even as recently as six months ago, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] That's Jamie, good to see you.
[Jamie Metzl, Former State Department Official:] Hello.
[Baldwin:] That's when people's ears start to perk, though, when they hear cities Denver and Seattle thrown in the mix. First, just your response to again yet another ICBM test, but also the fact that it went higher, was up in the air longer, which change the arithmetic around, it can go much farther out.
[Metzl:] So, it's very, very clear North Korea's goal in this is to develop a deliverable nuclear weapons capability capable of hitting anywhere in the United States, and, frankly, that means anywhere in the world. So, each one of these incremental steps is an increase, but the core problem is the same today as it was yesterday, which is that North Korea has an advanced missiles program, an advanced nuclear weapons program, and that's all going to come together into more and more and greater and greater precision in their ability to deliver these deadly payloads. And that leads us, again, to this same situation about what needs to be done. The Trump administration policy has been a total tatters. There's no known policy. The United States has weakened its critical alliances with South Korea and Japan. It's undermined its leverage with China.
[Baldwin:] What about China? You were just there.
[Metzl:] Yes, I was just there and I was speaking to top Chinese leaders.
[Baldwin:] Did they say?
[Metzl:] And what they were saying was, well, this is your problem. The United States needs to do more.
[Baldwin:] Your problem? Check the geography.
[Metzl:] Exactly. That's exactly what I was saying to them, because North Korea nuclear weapons, we need to the United States will continue to do more of what we have been doing, which is try, in spite of the problems we're having under this administration, to strengthen and shore up our alliances, rebalancing of military assets, building of our strategic missile defense capabilities. All of those things weaken China. And if North Korea develops further develops its nuclear weapons, there's going to be a lot of pressure, as there is now on South Korea and then possibly Japan, to develop their nuclear weapons. And that makes that environment much more complicated. And so the Chinese really need to step up in a much bigger way than they have so far.
[Baldwin:] All of this as the U.S. has shortened our own timetable and calendar of when we think they will be nuclear-capable. That said, we wait for more fallout and the response for President Trump. Thank you so much, Jamie, for coming by. Appreciate it. And, Will Ripley, for all your trips to North Korea, we thank you as well. Ahead here, two of the people closest to the president in this feud we have new reporting today about the fate of the chief of staff, Reince Priebus, and the vulgar attack he received from the new guy at the White House. Plus, Russia retaliating as Congress sends a new sanctions bill to the president's desk. The key question, this is what Jake Tapper was alluding to, will he sign it? And from the Boy Scouts speech to the president declaring himself as the most presidential president ever, let's take a look back at the week that was, a week that might have been his wildest yet. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

[Lemon:] Some breaking news right now on the tapes that Donald Trump and his former fixer, Michael Cohen. To tell you about The Washington Post reporting the feds have received more than 100 recordings. So joining now to discuss, CNN Political Analyst Carl Bernstein and CNN Political Analyst Laura Coates, lots to discuss, so Laura, let's get right to it. Good evening by the way. The Washington Post is saying that the most substantive exchange involving the President is the one that was released by Cohen's attorney on Tuesday. But what is the danger for Trump in these other tapes?
[Laura Coates, Political Analyst, Cnn:] Well, remember. The danger here is whether or not those conversations are going to be privileged. Just because you speak to a lawyer does not actually mean it's going to have the attorney-client privilege stamp on it. In fact, if the nature of it is not about a legal matter or in further of trying to get legal advices or legal counsel or [Inaudible] trying to get a crime to go forward. Then it's not going to have the protection. So the President right now is probably wondering to himself how much is out there and how much exposure do I gave on these non-privileged conversations.
[Lemon:] Yeah, because he has no idea of what they have, what was recorded, what wasn't. I want you guys to take a listen to this new enhanced exchange between Trump and Cohen. It's involving paying AMI either in cash or check.
[Unidentified Male:] I need to open up a company for the transfer of that info regarding our friend David so that I am going to do that right away. I've actually come up on [Inaudible] and I've spoken to Allen about how to set the whole thing up.
[Pres. Donald Trump , United States President:] So what are we on?
[Unidentified Male:] With funding, yes. And it's all the stuff, all the stuff because you never know where that company, you never know where he's going to be. Correct. So I am all over that. And I spoke to Allen about it. When it comes time for the financing, which will be...
[Trump:] [Inaudible]
[Unidentified Male:] No, no, no. I got it, no, no, no.
[Lemon:] So Laura, an independent audio expert and his colleague who enhanced the tape and who both knew nothing about this story agree that the President says, I will pay with cash. The opposite of what Rudy Giuliani has been saying. What's your take?
[Coates:] Well, this of course, is a credibility game here where Giuliani is trying to in some way insinuate that the person to believe here is the President of the United States, and that you can prove by the exchange. Well, in reality it tells you that it's not exculpatory as he promised. But it's not so damming as everyone is talking about, because in reality, it doesn't move the needle so far ahead that it makes this [Inaudible] in particular exchange maybe commonality. And going for it, the Stormy Daniels case, different story, does lay the foundation this is an exchange that happens often times. It wasn't even one that was shocking to President, which is going to be a problem for the future cases.
[Lemon:] So Carl, now that the expert says that Trump says I will pay with cash, right. His attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has a statement, a new statement obviously. He says dueling experts who come to different conclusions. In context, using cash would make no sense because the transaction is between two corporations. What's your response to that, Carl?
[Carl Bernstein, Political Analyst, Cnn:] I think we're being very myopic in the way that we're looking at this tape as being the most important thing that's going on right now. I think that two experts could have it out in a courtroom and Rudy Giuliani is probably right about that. The real thing that's happened here is that the President's lawyer has gone rogue. He's fired a shot across the bow of the White House, and the question is whether or not he is going to get immunity, which he is seeking from Mr. Mueller. It's not at all sure that this is going to work for Mr. Cohen. But what is going on is it is clear that he believes and those representing him believe that he has information that could be very damaging to the President of the United States in the Russian investigation. I think that's what we need to keep our eye on here. What we see with this tape, it sounds like a couple of thugs, one whom happens to be a candidate for the President of the United States, the other one his lawyer trying to make something go away. It shows Trump lying once again. What else is new there? Let's look at the big picture, which is Michael Cohen really a threat to the President of the United States in the Russian investigation. And there are some real indications that he is.
[Lemon:] Well, let's also look at the strategy too here, because Trump is the one, Carl, who waive privilege on this tape. And some say it's in order to get ahead of the bad news. But if that is a strategy, don't you have to tell the truth about it?
[Bernstein:] Yeah. You're supposed to tell the truth about it. But again, I think that this is not a big development because of what is on these tapes. I think this is a big development because of where Michael Cohen is now and what his interaction with Mr. Mueller will be. I don't think the southern of New York prosecutors are very happy about the way he went about this. But Mr. Mueller might find a reason that he thinks immunity is in order for Cohen. But there's a long way to go. And look, he had proximity to Donald Trump. That's why Trump is unhinged. If you listen to the people around Donald Trump, who those of us who are reporters talking to people in the White House talk to. They say the President is unhinged about Michael Cohen and the fact that Cohen was a witness to many, many things that the President never thought his lawyer would possibly discuss with anybody.
[Lemon:] And he can't be happy that they're saying that now 100 recordings, maybe 100 recordings. Can I talk a little bit more about strategy, Laura with you because?
[Coates:] Sure.
[Lemon:] Could Cohen's decision to release the tape hurt his chances of making a deal with prosecutors in the southern district of New York.
[Coates:] Yes. Well, first of all, he has not been charged with a crime as of yet. And so it's difficult to see whether he is trying to have a preemptive conversation before there is any grand jury indictment, which is one of the points in time where prosecutors gives the sweetest deal before all the work has to be done, before the grand jury has brought in if there are charges that are pending. The reason it hurts is because what he really did was play to the hand of Rudy Giuliani, who is trying to get everyone to quibble about cash versus check. Either way, there was a payment discussion about trying to suppress information prior to an election. That's really the meat of the matter, not the tomato-tomato semantics argument about cash versus check. And so he played into the hand of that in many ways, and then when he did so, he called into question whether or not he was going to give information to both the press as well federal investigators. And as you remember, one of the problems with the dossier is the FISA warrant was that they decided to no longer use that person as a reliable source going forward in the future [Inaudible] because he gave information to both sides and undermined his credibility for the FBI ultimately in the long run. The same is true in a prosecutor's strategy. Well, what is your incentive here to have the court of public opinion or a court of law? If your choice is the court of law, mum's the word. And he plays to the hand of Rudy Giuliani.
[Lemon:] Well, Carl mentioned that it's important that Michael Cohen because Michael Cohen is in close proximity to Donald Trump.
[Coates:] Yes.
[Lemon:] Someone else who is in close proximity to Donald Trump, a new name came up in the tape. And we'll talk about that right after the break.

[Sesay:] Vatican treasurer Cardinal George Pell has pleaded not guilty to multiple counts of historical sexual abuse. In Northern Australia, a magistrate ruled the 76-year old will stand trial and the process gets started Wednesday.
[Vause:] The ruling follows a month-long hearing, during which witnesses gave evidence after the original charges against Pell were dismissed. The cardinal, though, has repeatedly and strenuously denied all the allegations. Journalist Lucie Morris-Marr joins us now from Melbourne. Lucie, there's still pretrial hearings to come, some results in procedural issues but it is not entirely clear when the criminal trial itself actually begins. LUCIE MORRIS-MARR, JOURNALIST; That's right. Tomorrow morning at 9:00 am the cardinal is required to You have to stress, this is Cardinal Pell is the third highest ranking official with the church. So has there been any reaction at this point from Rome? And in particular has they actually moved to force Pell to step down as the Vatican's finance chief, now that this criminal trial is set to be underway at this time?
[Morris-marr:] Well, the attitude from the pope when he was charged in June last year was very pragmatic and pretty fair considering the circumstances. He thought that Cardinal Pell deserved a fair justice system, a fair trial, if that was to happen. And he said he would comment once the justice system had commented itself. And so we are not expecting him to resign or be slapped from his post. He's currently on leave so his standing as Vatican treasurer still stands today. But what is remarkable and extraordinary about this case is this whole subject of historical sexual abuse
[Vause:] Lucie, very quickly, during this hearing, this pretrial hearing, the lawyers for Pell said there was voluminous evidence to prove all the allegations were actually impossible. Have they indicated what that evidence could be?
[Morris-marr:] There was lots of attacks on the credibility of the accusers because what we have, which is common in trials, especially with historic natures of accusations, that go back up to 30 and 40 years, is it's their word against his, which for prima facie evidence in a sense. And so what they were doing was attacking the reliability of the evidence that either they were very strong, they got quite brutal at times. He accused the alleged victims of actually lying, of using Cardinal Pell as some kind of scapegoat, for the reaction of the Catholic Church as a global problem of historic sexual abuse. And so it got very, very tense and harsh at times. But of course,
[Vause:] Yes, a case of
[Sesay:] Journalists were the target of the latest attacks in Afghanistan; 31 people were killed on Monday. Among them, this photographer for Agence France Presse and eight others, who'd rushed to the scene of an earlier blast in the Afghan capital. They were killed by a bomber disguised at a TV camera man. Journalist Ali Latifi joins us now from Kabul. Ali, why do you think journalists were targeted in this way?
[Ali Latifi, Journalist:] I think they were targeted because, you know, we have to remember that this is the second attack claimed by the so- called Islamic State in the capital in about a week's time. So I think it's their way of showing that, A, they have strength in the city and they have a presence in the city and inciting fear in people because that's the thing that's really upsetting people, is the fact that journalists were targeted. People are wondering why it's journalists that are targeted and kit is really interesting because people, you know, from here, people who have been here for years, they're really taken aback by this more than any other attack because of the fact it was journalists. So I think in that sense, it a kind of works to their propaganda aim.
[Sesay:] When we talk about the threat journalists are facing in Afghanistan, when we spoke last hour, you said it's a reality that a lot of you, you've just kind of factored into the job. But do you think it will cause some people to rethink, to pull back from certain stories, certainly to respond to bombings in a different way?
[Latifi:] Like I said previously, this isn't the first attack against journalists and this is isn't necessarily the first time that journalists have been attacked and killed on the job. I think hopefully it will lead to some kind of a change but I don't know if it can because, you know, we have to remember that these are people doing their job. These are people trying to make money. These are people that are very committed, that's the one thing that I really appreciate about the journalist community here amongst ivon journalists, is that they are very committed to their job and they really take it very seriously and in a very deep, important way. So I think it will be interesting to see if people start making these calculations again. You know, what story is worth it and what isn't. And whether it's worth going immediately to these sorts of scenes.
[Sesay:] Yes. It is worth pointing out, there's another attack in Afghanistan, where children were killed, women were killed. These groups are terrorizing all segments of the population. But on this particular day, where so many journalists lost their lives, our hearts go out to you there in Afghanistan. Thank you, Ali.
[Latifi:] Thank you. Thank you.
[Vause:] Oh, boy. OK, well, the meeting has not even happened, the time, date and location has not been announced and then there's that small detail of the endless possibilities it could all go so badly wrong. Plus, already the campaign is on for Donald Trump to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for the diplomatic thaw on the Korean Peninsula.

[Church:] Welcome back, everyone. Well, across Western Europe, hotter than average temperatures have been making life miserable for millions of people. More than that in Portugal, the heat is stoking forest fires which are threatening dozens of villages. CNN's Ian Lee is covering this for us. He joins us now live. So Ian, what is the latest on these fires and how is the government dealing with them specifically in Portugal?
[Ian Lee, Cnn International Correspondent:] Rosemary, these fires are still continuing to rage. You have hundreds of firefighters, over 700 battling them as we speak. Also, over a dozen aircraft trying to keep them under control. But, Rosemary, fire needs three things. You need oxygen, heat, and fuel. And with these high temperatures, it's definitely bringing the heat and it's drying out this foliage which is making it very difficult for these firefighters to bring these massive blazes under control.
[Lee:] A wall of flame rages on the Spanish-Portuguese border. Hundreds of firefighters battle the blaze fuelled by drought and hot air from Africa. Aircraft struggle to keep the flame at bay. All the while, residents keep watch ready to flee as the inferno moves closer.
[Unidentified Female:] We have the cars ready. We always have everything ready like extinguishers, hoses, anything to be ready to act.
[Lee:] Portuguese authorities already evacuated two villages seeking to prevent more deaths after two massive fires killed dozens last year. Europe is in the grips of an extreme heat wave sparking wildfires from Greece to Sweden. The continent is experiencing near record breaking temperatures. Some places soaring to 47 degrees Celsius just shy of the 48 set in Athens in 1977. The beach offers little relief to those escaping the heat.
[Unidentified Male:] It's very hot. During the trip yesterday, the temperatures didn't drop below 43 degrees Celsius completely suffocating. The more water you drink, the better. I'll try to stay in the shade in avoid to sun because if it reaches that temperature, I can imagine what's like in
[Ian James Lee, Cnn Foreign Correspondent:] Mother Nature is set to give firefighters and beachgoers a break as forecasters predicted the temperatures will drop by Wednesday.
[Lee:] And Rosemary, the Portuguese government has sent out text messages to people learning them about the fires. Telling people they're in that area to keep a close watch out on government announcements in case they too need to evacuate. You know, they say this is their worst heat wave in over a decade. And for everyone else, though people in the cities are on the beaches, you know, the most important thing is to watch yourself, make sure you're not in the sun too long, and, of course, drink plenty of water.
[Church:] Good advice at there. Ian Lee, joining us live from Paris where it is 8:45 in the morning. Many thanks to you. Well, there's no rest in sight for the thousands of firefighters battling17 major fires in California. It's gotten so bad, crews from Australia and New Zealand are on their way to help. Now, over the weekend, the biggest fire nearly doubled in size. That is the Mendocino Complex fire in Northern California. Meanwhile, the so-called Carr Fire has now killed seven people as it tears through homes and other structures. And Yosemite National Park will remain closed indefinitely. Fire has impacted all the roads used to access the valley and dry and dead trees are creating dangerous possibly explosive conditions. Well, the National Hurricane Center says, Hurricane Hector will cross into the Central Pacific Basin as a Category 4 storm. Hawaii's Big Island has already been coping with eruptions from the Kilauea Volcano for the past three months. Now, the islands are on alert as Hector moves toward them with maximum sustained winds of 220 kilometers per hour, about 137 miles per hour. Now, the key to rebuilding relations between the U.S. and Russia might not be a trade deal or a treaty, it could be 1990's Hollywood action star, Steven Seagal. We'll back in a moment with that.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] What does that tell us about the status of the Russia investigation? And Paul's conversion. Now that Paul Manafort flipped, there's intense speculation about what the former Trump campaign chairman is telling the special counsel. The Russia probe is clearly in a crucial new phase tonight. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news tonight, a Republican senator now says there will be a full opportunity for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and his accuser to be heard in public. We're learning more about that as Kavanaugh is talking by phone tonight with staffers on the Senate Judiciary Committee. His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, is offering to talk to committee members under oath about her claim that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both teenagers. I will get reaction from Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth. And our correspondents and analysts are also standing by. First, let's go to our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, the president, he is standing by Kavanaugh.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. The White House has just released a statement about this late-breaking development that there should be a hearing next week for Brett Kavanaugh to address these allegations of sexual assault dating back to his high school days. The White House just issuing this statement a few moments ago. We can put it up on screen. This from White House spokesman Raj Shah, saying that: "Judge Kavanaugh looks forward to a hearing where he can clear his name of this false allegation. He stands ready to testify tomorrow if the Senate is ready to hear him." Wolf, the last part of the statement is interesting, that he is ready to testify tomorrow. It sounds like it may have to wait until next week, delaying the nomination process, as the president said he would allow earlier today, but the White House is showing no signs of abandoning Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court at this point, Wolf. President Trump dismissed the notion earlier today that Kavanaugh would even step aside.
[Acosta:] President Trump is sticking with his Supreme Court pick, Brett Kavanaugh, brushing off the notion the embattled judge would withdraw from consideration.
[Question:] He has offered to withdraw?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Next question. What a ridiculous question.
[Acosta:] Asked about the accusation of assault facing Kavanaugh, the president didn't hesitate to defend the judge.
[Trump:] He is somebody very special. At the same time we want to go through a process, we want to make sure everything is perfect, everything is just right. I wish the Democrats could have done this a lot sooner, because they had this information for many months and they shouldn't have waited until literally the last days. They should have done it a lot sooner, but with all of that being said, we want to go through the process.
[Acosta:] Still, the president did not push back on the possibility of a delay in the confirmation battle.
[Trump:] If it takes a little delay, it will take a little delay. Oh, I think he's on track, yes. I mean, I think he's very much on track.
[Acosta:] Kavanaugh made an appearance at the White House earlier in the day, as sources tell CNN the president is fuming over the allegation rocking his selection for the high court. But top aides, including the normally combative White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, were keeping their powder dry.
[Kellyanne Conway, Trump Senior Adviser:] Let me make clear, on behalf to the president, whom I have spoken at length about this, put aside all the nonsense that's on TV and in print from people who couldn't possibly be a source familiar his thinking. She should not be ignored or insulted. She should be hear.
[Acosta:] The accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, says Kavanaugh and a friend were drunk when they assaulted her while in high school more than 35 years ago. In a letter detailing her ordeal, she writes: "They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh's hand over my mouth, I feared he may inadvertently kill me." Her attorney insists this was an assault.
[Debra Katz, Attorney For Christine Blasey Ford:] He was ignoring the fact she was attempting to scream and having a difficult time breathing. And she believes that, but for his inebriation and his inability to take her clothes off, he would have raped her.
[Acosta:] Both Ford and Kavanaugh are willing to testify. Kavanaugh maintains he's innocent, saying in a statement: "This is a completely false allegation. I have never done anything like what the accuser describes to her or anyone. Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday." The friend, alleged to have played a part in the assault, Mark Judge, said in a statement: 'I never saw Brett act that way." A sign of just how poisonous the debate over Kavanaugh has come, just look at this Instagram post from the president's son Donald Trump Jr. It mocks the words in crayon, with the words: "Will you be my girlfriend? Yes, no? Love, Brett." The Kavanaugh saga presents the president with a familiar challenge.
[Trump:] Hello. How are you? Hi.
[Acosta:] Mr. Trump, who once bragged to "Access Hollywood" that he could grope women and get away with it, has sided with men accused of this conduct in the past, whether it was his ex-aide Rob Porter.
[Trump:] He says he's innocent and I think you have to remember that.
[Acosta:] Or Alabama GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore.
[Trump:] He says it didn't happen and, you know, you have to listen to him also.
[Acosta:] The president may have learned to show some restraint. He has so far not tweeted about the allegations facing Kavanaugh. As we heard earlier today, he was tempered in his remarks. With the midterms just 50 days away, Wolf, and women voters critical to whether the GOP maintains control over Congress, the president may have temporarily found his own mute button. And, Wolf, I should point out I talked to a source close to the White House earlier this afternoon who is in touch with a lot of the conservative groups that are watching this nomination process very closely. This source said the president could not afford to botch this nomination by making some kind of comment that would derail the process, saying the president with many Christian conservatives has quote "run out of Mulligans" Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right. Important point, indeed. Jim Acosta, thank you. Let's go to Capitol Hill right now for the latest on the Kavanaugh nomination and what happens next. Our congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly, is working the story for us. Phil, what do we know about how this is about to play out?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it is still developing at this moment, Wolf. Just a few hours just about an hour ago Senate Republicans on the Judiciary Committee met behind closed doors with Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, the chairman, Chuck Grassley, to map out the process forward. And basically what's been going on behind the scenes for the last four or five days has been a pure scramble, trying to address the allegations, trying to figure out what the allegations are, and then trying to figure out those steps. And we now know one of those next steps will be a public hearing. As to why? That goes to how do they get the votes. One of the key outstanding votes, moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins, who spoke to reporters earlier. She had a private phone call with Brett Kavanaugh on Friday and she wants to hear more. Take a listen.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] There are an awful lot of questions, inconsistencies, gaps. And that's why, to be fair to both, we need to know what happened. If Judge Kavanaugh has lied about what happened, that would be disqualifying.
[Mattingly:] So, Wolf, any public hearing would obviously have enormous stakes right now, but the reality on the ground right now is this. For Majority Leader McConnell and for Chuck Grassley, it is a matter of how do they best figure a way to get the votes, votes that they assumed they would very much in line by the planned committee vote on Thursday of this week. That at this point looks like it is certainly going to be pushed out. There's still a lot of work both behind the scenes and a public hearing to see if they can get the votes back to that place by the time Kavanaugh reaches the Senate floor, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, he also spoke out about this just a little while ago. What did he say?
[Mattingly:] Well, Wolf, if you want to know kind of how deep the divide between Republicans and Democrats have gotten, not just over the nomination, but over this issue specifically, Senator Feinstein, the top Democrat on the committee, her spokesman just put out a statement saying this is all news to us. The hearing, they aren't even aware of. They decided not to participate in a staff call with Brett Kavanaugh earlier today. McConnell believes there are a lot of real questions about how the allegation came to light. Take a listen.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] An accusation of 36- year-old misconduct, dating back to high school, has been brought forward at the last minute in an irregular manner. It is an accusation which Judge Kavanaugh has completely and unequivocally denied. It is an accusation which the ranking member of the committee of jurisdiction has known about for at least six weeks. Known about for six weeks. Yet chose to keep secret until the 11th hour.
[Mattingly:] So, Wolf, really reflecting where Republican leadership is on this right now. They understand the allegation is serious, but a lot of questions on their end as to why it came out now and what the genesis was of it from the beginning. For the Democrats' purposes right now, Wolf, they want a renewed FBI investigation into things. They're not even willing to consider the public hearing at this point. What we know for sure, this divide is very real. There's no bridge to it any time soon, and right now it looks like the best observation anybody is going to get to see some type of clarity in this is a public hearing next week, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] We will see when that happens. Phil, thank you very much. Let's bring in our CNN Supreme Court reporter, Ariane de Vogue. Ariane, you have some new information about Kavanaugh's reaction to the allegations.
[Ariane De Vogue, Cnn Supreme Court Reporter:] Wolf, I have been talking to a lot of his friends through the week. And one person told me he was absolutely flabbergasted by the allegations. And then finally when the woman did come forward, Christine Blasey Ford, he vaguely remembered the name. She went by Chrissy at the time. Keep in mind, it was about 30 years ago. It was when they were in high school, but he's absolutely adamant in his denial. We saw it again this morning. He said it is absolutely false. He said, "Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself." One thing that's interesting, Wolf, is this morning there was some reporting that there would be sort of a scorched-earth policy going after the woman. We have not seen that at all. We have seen the focus on Kavanaugh, on his judicial record, on his church, on his public service. We even heard the president say, he never even had a little blemish on his record. So they're going after they're talking about Kavanaugh's record. They're talking about the Democrats and how they really don't like what the Democrats have done, but they're not saying anything about Ford. That's an interesting issue.
[Blitzer:] And Christine Blasey Ford, she is adamant in her allegations.
[De Vogue:] Absolutely. And she what is interesting about that is that she said now she's willing to come forward, but she didn't in the beginning. Remember, that letter to Dianne Feinstein was dated in July, and one of the reasons Dianne Feinstein couldn't do anything about it is that she said she didn't want to come forward. And then things changed. It started to seep out a little bit and she was really clear with "The Washington Post," she said, "Now I feel like my civic responsibility is outweighing my anguish and temporary about retaliation." So now she is ready to come forward, and that's a change from the early weeks there.
[Blitzer:] And they're both apparently ready to testify in open session before the Senate Judiciary Committee under oath, and if one of them is lying, that's perjury.
[De Vogue:] That's where we are, and they're eager to do it.
[Blitzer:] All right. Let's see what happens. Ariane de Vogue, thank you very much. Joining us now, Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois. Senator, thanks so much for joining us. Are you encouraged to hear Senator Kennedy say that Kavanaugh's accuser will be heard in a public hearing?
[Sen. Tammy Duckworth , Illinois:] Well, I am encouraged to hear that. I hope that she gets a fair hearing and that we give her a chance to really talk about and tell her story. You know, I have dealt with victims of military sexual trauma, and one of the things that I learned doing that work is that we must, first and foremost, protect and support the alleged victim as they come forward. This is a very difficult thing that she is doing, and I applaud her for her courage.
[Blitzer:] Kavanaugh will also have this chance to respond publicly to this allegation, but Senator Hatch already said that Kavanaugh denies being at the party to begin with and says his accuser might have mistaken him for someone else. What is your reaction to that?
[Duckworth:] Well, I have heard, you know, many, many predators say and refute allegations against them. I think what we need to do is, we need to hear from both sides, and this is why it is so important for the FBI to investigate these allegations so that it doesn't become a he saidshe said kind of issue. Again, I learned about this through my work with military sexual trauma. This is why we must have an independent investigation into it and trust the victim as they come forward, and we must take it with all seriousness and not let partisanship get in the way of really finding out the truth. This is, after all, somebody that's being nominated to the highest court in the land for the rest of his life.
[Blitzer:] Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator, say they still haven't received a response from the FBI on whether it is investigating this allegation. And President Trump says he trusts the process. So should he request that the FBI follow through on this investigation?
[Duckworth:] Well, I will be perfectly honest with you. I don't have much trust in what the president says he will and won't do when it comes to our intelligence agencies. He has spent most of his time in office so far bashing our intelligence experts. I will say this. I have the utmost trust in the FBI. I hope that they handle this justly and that they stick to the facts and do this investigation. The American people deserve to know what is happening here.
[Blitzer:] Christine Blasey Ford was extremely reluctant, as you know, to publicly identify herself. Do you have how concerns about how she would be treated in an open hearing?
[Duckworth:] Well, of course I have grave concerns of how she would be testified how she would be treated if she testified, not just by my fellow senators, but by folks out there in the public. I'm hearing of people staking out her home. She can't go home already. This is very, very touchy in terms of her personal safety. And I don't blame her for wanting to remain private as long as possible. Again, this is normal behavior from victims of sexual trauma who wait until the last minute, if possible. They you know, in fact, being brought before the press, being criticized is almost like being victimized all over again. We must trust and allow the victims to speak out, allow her to have her day. Lord knows Judge Kavanaugh has had many days in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Let's let her have her chance to speak and tell her story.
[Blitzer:] And he will have his chance as well. Did Senator Feinstein make a mistake by not alerting her fellow committee members to this allegation? She's known about it since July. Was there a way to address the serious charges while still protecting the accuser's identity?
[Duckworth:] Well, I don't know what she could have done. I think she did everything that she could in terms of being you know, her legality, her legally required she did contact the FBI and she stuck with what the accuser asked her to do. If you read the letter from the victim, she said that, please, please keep this confidential. And I think, again, I have to reiterate, this is what a lot of victims of sexual trauma want. They want complete privacy. And in the military, it wasn't until just a few years ago, when the military installed completely anonymous reporting processes, that more and more victims of sexual trauma came forward, many times decades after the incident happened, to say, you know what? When I was a young 20-year- old ensign, when I was a young 20-year-old private, this happened to me, and I didn't feel safe to do this until now, 20, 30 years later. So, her Dr. Ford's actions are very consistent with many, many victims of sexual trauma.
[Blitzer:] Senator Duckworth, thanks so much for joining us.
[Duckworth:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Just ahead: President Trump is ordering a declassification of documents related to the Russia investigation. We are going to have that breaking story. Stick around. Also, we will have a report from the disaster in the Carolinas as the rivers and death toll keep rising.

[Christiane Amanpour, Cnni:] Tonight, the U.S. Supreme Court approves the latest version of President Trump's controversial travel ban. NPR's award winning Legal Affairs Correspondent, Nina Totenberg joins me from Washington; and from New Mexico, reaction from Deb Haaland who's campaigning to become the first Native American woman in Congress; also ahead, the politics of patriotism, sports journalist and author Howard Bryant on the rebirth of activism among black athletes in America. Good evening everyone and welcome to the program. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. Seventeen months after first signing a travel ban, the U.S. Supreme Court has now given Preiseint Trump what he wants, approving his third attempt to restrict travel primarily from Muslim countries in a 5-4 decision, the Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that Trump's order is quote, "squarely within the scope of presidential authority." Multiple federal judges and nationwide protest challenged Trump's original orders. The latest version slaps restrictions on Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, North Korea, and Venezuela. Those last two added perhaps to dilute the religious, the Muslim flavor of this ban. Joining me now to discuss the implications is NPR's Nina Totenberg, the doyenne of supreme court correspondents. Nina, welcome to the program.
[Nina Totenberg, Npr Legal Affairs Correspondent:] It's my pleasure Christiane.
[Amanpour:] So, you know, what is so different about this version than the original version that allowed the Supreme Court or prompted the Supreme Court to approve it?
[Totenberg:] Well this version is in fact very different than the first version. First of all the Administration prodded by the courts finally did undertake a complete administrative review asking the various cabinet departments, the State Department, the CIA, et cetera, to weigh in and decide which countries, why, how thorough the ban should be, et cetera. And it set up a complete regimen for re-reviewing it every 180 days and it also provides for a system of waivers so that people who have a really good reason for coming to the United States can, in fact, get a visa from these companies. You may recall the earlier version was so chaotic and so un-thought out that it actually included people with green cards who couldn't back into the country. So this is a far cry from the first one but the decision still gives the President this President and any President very broad authority under the statutes and under the Constitution to enact this kind of a ban.
[Amanpour:] So critics obviously and the plaintiffs particularly called this a Muslim ban in everything but name. Do you agree and why do you think North Korea and Venezuela are on this list?
[Totenberg:] No, I think they did add North Korea and Venezuela for cosmetic purposes but I do think that if you look the court was very clear, even the majority opinion which gave this enormous deference to the President, spelled out all the anti-Muslim things he has said but it basically concluded that in fact, the final ban as it now stands, meets with all the crossed T's and dotted I's and what the statute allows the President to do and it also specifically sound that as enacted, the third version of the ban does not so explicitly ban Muslims. And it doesn't deny that the President said what he said but Chief Justice Roberts writing for the court says Presidents have always given their opinions to the people. Usually they've given nice opinions; opinions of tolerance and things like that. President Washington, the most recent President Bush after 911 and the implicit suggestion was this was not such a nice way to conduct yourself but it wasn't enough to invalidate the ban because of the broad authority vested in the President by the Constitution and the statute.
[Amanpour:] So you've been covering the Supreme Court and legal affairs for years, do you agree are you surprised by the approval, and obviously we know it was very close, 5-4 along sort of partisan lines as we've seen over the last several years. So A, are you surprised and B, what did the dissenters say in this case?
[Totenberg:] Well I wasn't particularly surprised because this was the sort of the suggestion or argument that this was going to be 5-4 and there were two justices who dissented orally from the bench. Four justices in all who dissented, it was 5-4. And justices Breyer and Sotomayor are both dissented from the bench this morning making clear their strong disagreement with the opinion. Justice Sotomayor talked for almost 20 minutes and it was a very impassioned dissent that compared this case to the Supreme Court's decision upholding the Japanese internment during World War II. And in response to that the Chief Justice took the opportunity to explicitly overturn that decision saying it was wrongly decided on the day it was decided. But the critics of this decision, including the dissenters, basically are saying there's not that much difference between what happened in the Japanese internment and what happened here.
[Amanpour:] So Nina, do you think that this is going to, for instance going to close the door now to let say refugees from Syria, I mean almost none have come in. I mean a very tiny number in 2018 compared with several thousand in 2017 and many more than that before.
[Totenberg:] If there's any wiggle room left in this litigation, it's over the visa waiver process and if the challengers can show that people are being systematically denied when they have very good reasons to be granted visas, they may be able to pressure the Administration with litigation through litigation.
[Amanpour:] OK.
[Totenberg:] .into being a little more lose and a little more generous in granting visas.
[Amanpour:] All right.
[Totenberg:] But I would say at the moment, the Administration has won and just about every respect and there's no reason to think that they're going to behave differently in the future.
[Amanpour:] Nina Totenberg, thank you so much. And of course, all of this emerges in the heated and often ugly atmosphere of the whole Zero Tolerance Program at the U.S Mexico border. Deb Haaland, the Democratic candidate for Congress from New Mexico is running as a passionate advocate for immigrant and refugee rights and what is most ironic, Haaland is a member of the Laguna Pueblo Tribe, one of the first American's whose ancestors were victims of genocide by European immigrants. Now, she's on track to make history as the first Native American woman ever elected to Congress. Deb Haaland joins me from Albuquerque to discuss this and the issues of the day. Deb Haaland, welcome to the program.
[Deb Haaland, New Mexico Congressional Candidate And Member Of The Laguna Pueblo Tribe:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] So let me ask you about this Supreme Court decision. It was very narrow, along parties and lines 5-4 majority, but do you agree with the decision that the Presidential decree is well within presidential authority?
[Haaland:] You know I don't agree. I am I am distraught over this decision. From the time President Trump has taken office it seems as though his racist attitudes have guided his policies across the board and I'm disappointed and just distraught over the decision.
[Amanpour:] I want to ask you, why you are so pro immigration. Of all people, Native Americans should kind of be anti immigration given your history. Tell me how your family history informs your immigration policies and views.
[Haaland:] It's been, you know, 500 years since Europeans came to this country and so that's a long time and it's essentially too late for us to go back, right? We, my grandparents who were products of the assimilation era, worked extremely hard to insure that our family moved into the future if you will because they realized that there wasn't any going back. So the best they could do is preserve our culture, our language, our traditions so that we would have that going into the future. My grandparents were very, very supportive of education and work ethic and all of those things that helped us move into the 20th Century where we are now and yes, even though I'm a 35th generation New Mexican on my grandparent's side, my dad's grandparents immigrated to the United States in 1881 from Norway. I realized firsthand how important immigration is to the betterment of our country. Immigrants helped to build our country as it is today. And I think that the best we can do is to be a welcoming society and that's exactly how my Laguna grandmother was. She she welcomes people into our village, into her home, and and we need to do that. We need to have good relations with our community in order to be successful.
[Amanpour:] So let me ask you then about some of the issues that President Trump raises. He talks a lot about crime. He talks a lot about security on the border. You're from New Mexico, you're hoping to become a Congresswoman and New Mexico is a border state. So when the President says that Democrats are essentially, you know, basically pro-crime. I mean, he's basically saying that Democrats are weak on immigration and they want open borders. But the last few times the issue came to a vote, Democrats voted overwhelmingly for enhanced border security. So what is your view on border security and do you think there're legitimate concerns about that?
[Haaland:] There's a difference between protecting our borders and targeting parents; moms and dads who are are working to find their kids a better life. There's a difference between working to, you know, to find criminals and incarcerate them then it is to just, you know, take parents off the streets; wait outside of their churches and hospitals and court houses to take them to jail in front of their children. There the the leap between, you know, arresting the key members of the drug cartel and arresting parents of immigrants who are coming out of church on a Sunday. That is a vast difference and and and I don't think one has anything to do with the other, which is why I have stated that we should defund ICE. ICE is not actually protecting our border. It was it was implemented to fight terrorism and and quite frankly it's not doing that. It's its arresting moms and dads off the streets. And so if we really are serious about protecting our borders, we should do just that. And stop just taking people when they're not committing any crimes.
[Amanpour:] So I want to talk to you about crime because that's another thing, as I mentioned, the President is saying over and over again. That crime is sort of going up amongst the immigrant community. He basically says immigrants bring crime and violence but many, many studies show actually the opposite is true. That immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than people actually born in the United States. So obviously, for you, as a politician, how do you push back against a narrative from the White House that is factually incorrect and you know, demonstrably, untrue?
[Haaland:] Well you I mean, you push back anyway you can and you definitely push back against the policies that are emanating from the White House right now. We not all immigrants are criminals. Absolutely. And so when we allow that language to be to be you know, spit out into the air every single day that is something that needs to stop we we we can organize rallies. We can organize people. We can make sure that we're getting the folks out of office who aren't willing to take a humane stance on immigration. And and I and I believe that the American people will do just that this time around.
[Amanpour:] Well interestingly, President Trump's job approval has dropped sharply. According to Gallup, it was 45 last week to 41 now. I'm I'm wondering if you think it is because of this zero tolerance policy. But given your history, how does it feel to be potentially the first Native American woman; if you're lucky, if you win; to become a Congresswoman?
[Haaland:] I would be proud, of course, to have an opportunity to bring my background, my culture, the way I was raised by my parents. My dad was a 30 year career marine. My mom was a federal employee for 25 years. Parents who served our community selflessly, all of that background comes with me when I get into the halls of Congress. And I'm not saying that I could represent my tribe or any tribe in this country but what I can do is speak from the perspective. And also bring tribal leaders to the table when there's issues that affect their communities. And I think that's very important to help to further the the trust responsibility of the United States government toward Indian tribes.
[Amanpour:] I just wonder how seriously you think that you are taken as Native Americans and you know President Trump said several things in the past and he keeps doubling down. For instance, he was just in Nevada campaigning against a Senate Democratic candidate. And he said the following, I'm just going to play this and just get your reaction.
[Trump:] She's campaigning with Elizabeth Warren, sometimes referred to, affectionately of course, as Pocahontas. They wanted me to apologize. No. I did though. I did. I did apologize to Pocahontas [inaudible]. To the memory of Pocahontas, I apologize.
[Amanpour:] How does that affect you?
[Haaland:] It's disgusting quite frankly. I it's it's terrible that the President of the United States would use a name in as a racial slur toward a sitting member of the Unites States Senate. I I'm appalled that he insights his followers also to to move toward racism in that way. It's terrible. In my culture, we honor our ancestors, folks who have gone before us and and we would never ever use a name in that way without respecting that person.
[Amanpour:] On that note, Deb Haaland, thank you so much indeed for joining us from New Mexico.
[Haaland:] Thank you for having me.
[Amanpour:] And now we turn to yet another divisive issue that has to be addressed in America and that is the police shooting, killings of unarmed black men. An officer shot and killed a black teenager in Pittsburg last week and this has prompted more calls for [inaudible] from law enforcement. Antwon Rose, was shot three times as he ran away from a police car and this is the issue that prompted some NFL players to take a knee at games during the National Anthem as a form of protest. Colin Kaepernick and others have taken a beating from the President, the public, and team owners but the truth is that black activism in sports is not a new phenomenon in the United States. And Howard Bryant has written a fascinating and important new book about the power and the history of protest on the playing field. He's a senior reporter at ESPN Magazine and the book is called, "The Heritage: Black Athletes, a Divided America, and the Politics of Patriotism" and Howard Bryant, joins me now from Hartford, Connecticut. Welcome to the program.
[Howard Bryant, Espn Senior Reporter And Author:] Hi Christiane, and thanks for having me.
[Amanpour:] So, you know, what is it that that first made you write this book? What actual incident was it that caused you to take a look at what's going on right now?
[Bryant:] Well, I think it was actually two issues. I think the first thing was what was taking place in Ferguson in 2014 when Michael Brown was killed by police. And then the series of incidents that took place after that with Eric Garner and Tamir Rice following that. And I began to look at this rise of athletes getting involved when for so many years we didn't hear from them. For some many years the player stayed away from political issues but that, Christiane, was also combined with something else. And that was the rise of the flags and fly-overs and militarism and patriotism taking place of sporting events. You saw this collision and what was interesting to me was that you had this rise of patriotism in a place where sports are supposed to bring people together combined with this rise of athletes getting involved and the collision was taking place in a in a place where in sports where we really weren't expecting that. And where sports were supposed to be the place where everybody had either you had your team, I had my team but sports is really the most divisive place in American culture right now.
[Amanpour:] So what do you make I mean, let's go to the Colin Kaepernick issue because that really has been so emblematic, so prominent, and he's really paid a price. I mean some of his teammates say that, you know, he was turned into public enemy number one. He was hung out to try. He still doesn't have a job. And this whole business of taking a knee, I think people sort of thought that this was sort of an unwarranted first kind of public protest in an arena that should just be about sports and not about politics. But you delve right back into the history of this.
[Bryant:] Well, no question. And I think when you talk about the price that players are paying, you see that there's political capital here. You see what happened with the President today with with the travel ban. You see the fact that these players have become part of a political narrative when we talk about the devisiveness in this county, where now the President is using these athletes as being unfit to be in the country. He's called them SOBs for protesting. You've seen him say that maybe they don't belong in the United States for their protest against police brutality. So what's taking place now in sports, is there's political capital to be gained by by the political opposition to protest. And the players are paying a serious price. And now we're trying to find out, we're going to see what the players are going to do about this. What's very interesting Christiane about this, is that in football, the players are paying a tremendous price. But in basketball, you see players like Lebron James and-
[Amanpour:] Yes.
[Bryant:] And Dwayne Wade and these multimillion dollar super athletes, using their power. And the president doesn't attack them-
[Amanpour:] Right.
[Bryant:] In fact, their capital is a positive.
[Amanpour:] Well right, and Lebron James, Kobe Bryant and others, they've been wearing icon [inaudible]. We're seeing the picture, that's obviously referring to Eric Garner, who was who died shouting to the police. And he couldn't breathe in a sort of a headlock a body lock. Why are they not taking the heat from the president? And by the way, before before I just ask you respond to that, let's play that [inaudible] from the president that you referred to about the protest.
[Trump:] Wouldn't you love to see one of the NFL owners when somebody disrespects our flag, to say get that son of a off the field right now, out, he's fired. He's fired!
[Amanpour:] I mean it's red meat. But again, we'll get to the NFL owners in a second. But why do you think the basketball players are allowed to well, can do it without encoring the presidential wrath?
[Bryant:] Well, I think the first thing is because the president's a bully. And I think that you know that Lebron James would fight him back. And you know that Steph Curry, the coach of the Gold State Warriors and Gregg Popovich, the coach of the San Antonio Spurs, they fight back. They do not allow themselves to be bullied by anybody. And so you see that relationship you also see a great relationship between between the league and the players and coaches. The difference between the NFL and the NBA, is that the NBA has encouraged its players to use their voice. They don't find themselves at risk of losing their jobs and losing their careers by speaking out politically. They have a national anthem policy, so the players in the NBA do not kneel against the flag during the national anthem. And they're encouraged to use their voice. So you see the power of Lebron James is not going to back down from the president.
[Amanpour:] So, what we've now seen is the NFL by contrast, tell the players that they must stand. And if they don't want to stand, they have to stay in the dressing room. But we also know, according to the Wall Street Journal, that some of the NFL leaders, owners have said that it is President Trump and pressure from President Trump in conversations that influence their decision on how to handle these protests.
[Bryant:] Well, no exactly. And that's one of the reasons why when you hear people in the public and why it's so disappointing when you here people in the public use this a as a first amendment issue. And say well, it's not a first amendment issue that the the private owners have a right to do and say what they want. And that the players have no power. When you have the president, who is a public figure, who is th government essentially attacking these athletes and telling them that they shouldn't be employed and creating pressure on the owners who do employ them. That has become a first amendment issue. And you also have the other two branches of government as well attacking these players. So, it's disappointing when you see how easily the public is willing to silence the player. And I think what's also interesting about this too, is when you look at the combination o not just the flags and the flyovers and the police and the authoritarian elements that are taking place at the game. The fact that you also have the federal government, and you have the the pentagon essentially paying for these these patriotic displays at the same time when the player are being silent-
[Amanpour:] And I wonder whether many Americans-
[Bryant:] In sports right now.
[Amanpour:] Whether I did not know that by the way. And I'm in the news business, I had no idea that they were paying for these patriotic flyovers and visitations from military and others. And that that was happening right now int h post 911 world. But I do want to go back, and we've got a whole load of pictures of people like Paul Robeson who most know as as an entertainer, but he was an athlete. Jackie Robinson, Muhammad Ali, all of them had public moments of protests. And and of course the black power salutes at the 1968 Olympics. Again, protest there. And [inaudible] who didn't even play at the 1968 Olympics because of of protesting, civil rights in the light. So so people have forgotten this. Remind us of the history then through some of these black athletes of the past.
[Bryant:] Well, absolutely, will you have a break here? If you're of a certain generation, you remember Muhammad Ali and you remember Bill Russell, and Ji Brown, and Tommie Smith and John Carlos as you mentioned that there is a long history, a heritage and inheritance of African American athletes being involved. And the argument that I make in the book, is that the black athlete is the most important, most influential, most visible black employee this county's ever produced. So, they felt that they had a responsibility to get involved, because they were the ones who made it. They were the ones who integrated the country. Let's not forget that it was in baseball that integrated the country before the military. And then from a forty year period after that, in the 1970's, `80s, and `90s starting with O.J. Simpson and Michael Jordan, and Tiger Woods you had another generation of players. And those players did not get involved, very much controlled by corporations, very much not interested in risking whatever political capital they may have had. And certainly not risking whatever money they had, because they didn't want to get involved in these issues. And so for the player today to get involved, it's a departure from the Michael Jordan era, and it's a reminder to the fans that there's a history that took place long before 911.
[Amanpour:] Really important that you've been bringing this up with your book, and talking about this because, again, I think people really do need to know where these athletes stand in the battle for civil rights, and human rights. Howard Bryant, thank you so much for joining us. And that is it for our program tonight, remember you can always listen to our podcast and see us online at amanpour.com and follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Thanks for watching, and goodbye from London. END

[Howell:] Welcome back to "CNN Newsroom." The world is watching and pressure surely growing around the case of a teenage wife facing execution in Sudan.
[Allen:] Amnesty International has sent her country Sudan, 150,000 letters demanding the government release Noura Hussein from her death sentenced. CNN's Melissa Bell tells us about what is behind one woman campaign for Noura.
[Melissa Bell, Cnn Correspondent:] This is all the world has seen of her, but the story of Noura Hussein, sentenced to death in Sudan for killing the husband, who raped her, has already inspired a global campaign partly thanks to this girl. Zayoub Azinnih, is just 16 years old and still in school near her home [inaudible] in northwestern France. From the ground floor flat she shows with her Nigerian mother, two sisters and brother, she decided to fight for Noura's life.
[Zaynab Azinnih, Fighting For Noura Hussein:] I don't know her. I never spoke to her. I don't know who she is. But she is my sister, she is not my sister like my sister from my mother, but she is my sister in humanity. I can't let her die for defending herself against the man who raped her. This always happens and we can't just close our eyes and be like, well, it happens so we cannot do nothing about. No, we are part of the problem. Because we're letting this happen every time. And it's awful, because we know it, but we don't act.
[Bell:] Zaynab did act, creating a petition online, a petition that has already collected more than 700,000 signatures. Zaynab said she hopes to reach a million, because she believes that Noura's story has touched a nerve.
[Azinnih:] the truth about made people angry is that she is going to get killed for using self-defense. That she didn't murder him. If he hadn't come to her to rape her again, would she have killed him?
[Bell:] It's a good point. I mean in a sense, Noura's story is the story of so many women around the world every day, Zaynab. The difference is she killed him.
[Azinnih:] Yes. There is no difference in the reports from doing this. They are going to punish her for defending herself. So expected her to be quiet and to be like being rape every day.
[Bell:] Zaynab's campaign has been run from her bedroom and she believes that Noura can be saved.
[Azinnih:] I would like to meet her. She is say hero. And yes, she defended herself. She is not scared.
[Bell:] You admire her and you have given her a voice that she didn't have. Was that the point?
[Azinnih:] Yes and she is representing all the women who had been opposed in their life repressed. There is all the other Noura's.
[Bell:] Melissa Bell, CNN.
[Allen:] It's a patriarchal country, but everyone hoping that the justice system will have mercy on this young woman.
[Howell:] A lot of pressure on this case.
[Allen:] There are fears, a deadly Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, can soon become an even bigger threat the outbreak has now spread from rural areas to a city of more than one million.
[Howell:] The world health organization has raised the national public health risk of this outbreak to very high, but the global risk remains low. CNN's David McKenzie has details.
[David Mckenzie, Cnn Correspondent:] Officials are calling it a new phase of the deadly Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Now the most worrying thing is this confirmed case of Ebola in an urban center in Mbandaka, a city of more than one million people which is close to the Congo River. The main [inaudible], as well as two neighboring countries that could further complicate the efforts of the World Health Organization and others to stamp out this outbreak which has seen suspected deaths already. It was announced in early May. Now, the next step is getting this experimental vaccine out to the field operations of the health teams. More than 4,000 doses, are in the capital, they are setting up a cold bridge. An air bridge of cold storage all the way to the epicenter where they will, administrator the doses to the contacts of those suspected cases and the contacts of those contacts. A fast roll out of that is the key in stopping this outbreak, of course the World Health Organization wants to avoid the catastrophic scenes we saw [inaudible] in 2014 in West Africa, where more an 11,000 people were killed by Ebola. David McKenzie, CNN Johannesburg.
[Howell:] All right David, thank you. Yet another fissure, the 21st fissure has opened up around Hawaii's Kilauea's volcano. On Thursday a big eruption shot a smoke and ash nine kilometers that is some five miles into the air. The area has been inundated by lava and toxic gas for a couple of weeks.
[Allen:] The rain kept the ash from going very far on Thursday but authorities are not taking chance. They have given people thousands of masks so they don't inhale particles as you can see that raining down.
[Howell:] The power of nature. Our meteorologist Derek Van Dam has been following this. Derek?
[Allen:] Hi, Derek. It would be a while.
[Derek Van Dam, Cnn Meteorologist:] It has. It has, you know, the masks that they handed out protect from inhaling the particles, but they don't protect from inhaling the sulfur dioxide which is a noxious and poisonous gas. Well, that is one of the danger here as well. Lots to talk about with this latest eruption. It was captured by the Hawaiian volcano observation unit and what an incredible sight, this volcanic ash shooting 30,000 feet roughly nine kilometers into the sky. A very big hazard for the aviation industry. We will talk about that in just one moment, but this eruption was so large that it was actually captured by one of the local weather radars. You can see that little blurb on the screen, that shading of red is actually the volcanic ash plume sending into the sky. Now, what volcanologists are starting to notice are seeing similarities to a 1924 eruption, a very dangerous and large eruption with the same volcano, the Kilauea volcano, but look at the size of the boulder that was hurled into the sky? In fact, one mile into the sky. This was an eight-ton boulder. Now, volcanologists are seeing similarities between this events, because we are noticing that the lava is starting to recede into the magma chamber. Lava is just magma but above ground. And the issues that volcanologist are seeing is that when this lava recedes into the magma chamber, rocks also fall into that magma chamber and it creates a kind of a blocking mechanism and you can imagine the amounts of pressure that are starting to build up within this particular magma chamber and it starts to erupt very, very quickly and eventually could blow its top. But the big question is, is this the big event that occurred on Thursday? Well, it may not be, so, volcanologists are warning once again that this could be a concern for an even larger eruption going forward. Now we know that this plume shot 30,000 feet into the sky, but look at what it can do in the aviation industry. It's very, very, very dangerous, because 30,000 feet or nine kilometers as roughly of a height of a jet airliner. And when it starts to take some of that volcanic ash, which is vapor, basically vaporize and pulverized rock and sand particles, it can actually melt it in the turbine and eventually cooling it and hardened it on the turbine and preventing airflow from coming through the actual engine causing failure of that engine. And that is going to obviously cause for concern as people try to take to the skies in and around that region. The forecast going forward calls for dry weather through the weekend which is good news, but there is some rain at the end of the weekend. So, lots to talk about here. Natalie, George, I will send it back to you in the meantime.
[Allen:] All right. Scary, but fascinating for the most part as you think.
[Howell:] I agree.
[Allen:] Thank you, Derek.
[Howell:] Thanks, Derek.
[Allen:] All right. We are about, let us see, less than 24 hours from that what was it?
[Howell:] A big wedding.
[Allen:] Yes. The cake and things like that. All right. So, coming up is here, yes, the cake. How Meghan and Harry are putting their own stamp on the culinary side of their wedding. Coming up.

[Reporter:] Did you ask Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker to change the leadership of the investigation into your former personal attorney Michael Cohen?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] No, not at all.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Anchor:] A pause and a denial from the president. "The New York Times" reports he tried to get a supporter put in charge of the Michael Cohen investigation.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Could Roger Stone end up in jail as he awaits trial? A judge summons him back to court after a controversial Instagram post.
[Sanchez:] Plus, rain, sleet, ice, snow, half the country in for wicked weather and round two is not far behind.
[Romans:] Suicide is not fashion. Anger at fashion giant Burberry, the company is pulling a hoodie that had a noose around the neck. They said it was a marine theme. I don't know. Good morning. Welcome to EARLY START, everybody. I'm Christine Romans. Nice to have you here.
[Sanchez:] Great to be with you, Christine. I'm Boris Sanchez in for Dave Briggs. It's Wednesday, February 20th, 5:00 a.m. on the East Coast. And we start with President Trump facing more obstruction of justice questions in the wake of a wide ranging "New York Times" report. "The Times" says the president pushed to have a federal prosecutor appointed during his administration to oversee the Michael Cohen investigation. Mr. Trump by that point had already been implicated in the Cohen probe.
[Romans:] But "The Times" reports that late last year, he still called then Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker to ask if the U.S. attorney in Manhattan could supervise it. The report is raising concerns about obstruction of justice even in places that usually downplay them.
[Shep Smith, Fox News Anchor:] The phone call would be evidence of what?
[Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst:] Corrupt intent. That is, an effort to use the levers of power of the government for a corrupt purpose.
[Smith:] Would that be obstruction?
[Napolitano:] Yes. Well, it would be attempted obstruction.
[Sanchez:] It's still unclear what Whitaker did in response to the president's call. There's no evidence that he took any action. The Justice Department says Whitaker made no commitments, but it does not flatly deny that the investigation was discussed. Trump, however, making this denial.
[Reporter:] Did you ask Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker to change the leadership of the investigation into your former personal attorney Michael Cohen?
[Trump:] No, not at all. I don't know who gave you that. That is more fake news. There is a lot of fake news out there.
[Sanchez:] We get more now from senior White House correspondent Pamela Brown.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Christine and Boris. President Trump is denying that he ever made that ask of former A.G. Matt Whitaker to have the U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Berman unrecused and oversee the Cohen probe. Now, this denial was in response to "The New York Times" that he, in fact, did make that ask because he viewed Berman as an ally. As sources tell me and my colleague Laura Jarrett that Trump was upset about the Cohen probe and how it implicated him in the payments of two women during the election, you recall that, and that he did talk to Whitaker about it over the phone. The president thought Whitaker should do a better job with controlling the investigators in the probe that he oversaw as acting attorney general. During recent congressional testimony, Whitaker would only say he won't discuss conversations with the president when he's asked if he spoke to him about the SDNY investigation.
[Unidentified Female:] I want to know whether you talked to President Trump at all about the Southern District of New York's case involving Michael Cohen.
[Matthew Whitaker, Acting U.s. Attorney General:] Congresswoman, as I've mentioned several times today, I'm not going to discuss my private conversations with the president of the United States.
[Brown:] In contrast, he told the committee he never spoke about the Mueller probe to President Trump.
[Whitaker:] At no time has the White House asked for nor have I provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel's investigation or any other investigation.
[Brown:] But this latest reporting about Trump fits into a pattern where he believes that officials in DOJ roles should show loyalty to him and do his bidding. As you will recall, the president was furious that Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia probe and he never got over it Boris and Christine.
[Romans:] All right. Pamela Brown at the White House. Thank you. According to that "Times" report, the Whitaker controversy is one example of a pattern of deception and intimidation applied by the president concerning those investigations around him. That includes orchestrating a lie about the firing of national security adviser Michael Flynn. Flynn resigned after reports surfaced about his contacts with Russia's ambassador at the end of 2016.
[Sanchez:] Yes, he claimed he was stepping down because he misled Vice President Pence about it, but when an adviser mentioned that House Speaker Paul Ryan was telling reporters the president asked for Flynn's resignation, something that "The Times" points out they don't know where Ryan got that information, Mr. Trump reportedly liked that version better so he ordered his then press secretary Sean Spicer to use that version in his briefings.
[Romans:] "The Times" also reports President Trump asked his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to pressure Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign. Privately, Mr. Trump tried to have Sessions removed. The White House aides dodged the president's orders to secure that resignation.
[Sanchez:] A new bombshell from Andrew McCabe as the former acting FBI director asked by CNN's Anderson Cooper if he still believes President Trump could be a Russian asset. Listen to his response.
[Andrew Mccabe, Former Acting Fbi Director:] I think it's possible. I think that's why we started our investigation. And I'm really anxious to see where Director Mueller concludes that.
[Sanchez:] That comment by McCabe coming just days after he revealed the president's own words and actions led to the counterintelligence and obstruction investigations that were opened. McCabe also telling CNN that he briefed top congressional leaders about President Trump being under investigation. Both Democrats and Republicans. He said no one objected.
[Romans:] Wow. All right. Roger Stone has been ordered to appear at a court hearing tomorrow after an Instagram post that seemed to threaten the judge overseeing his case. It featured a picture of Judge Amy Berman Jackson with crosshairs. The post could jeopardize the lenient gag order, also could jeopardize his bail. Stone whose motto never apologize apologized officially to the court. He told CNN it was a volunteer who made the post and it was in no way to threat to the judge. Stone was indicted on charges he coordinated with top Trump campaign officials white he sought stolen e-mails from WikiLeaks during the 2016 election. President Trump's Space Force is a step closer to becoming a national security reality. The president signing an order taking a first step towards a Space Force that would become the sixth branch of the U.S. military. The aim is to protect assets in space and China last month landed a spacecraft on the far side of the moon. The Defense Department will draft a proposal to submit to Congress which must approve any new military branch.
[Sanchez:] I think you can tell that I'm very pumped about space force. Bernie Sanders' second act is off to a hot start. The Vermont senator's presidential campaign raking in $4 until in donations already from nearly 150,000 supporters. That has Sanders thinking ahead already talking about possible running mates.
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Presidential Candidate:] We would look for somebody who is maybe not of the same gender that I am, and maybe somebody who might be a couple years younger than me and somebody who can take the progressive banner.
[Sanchez:] You heard Sanders reference his aides there. Late night comics also took notice.
[Seth Meyers, Comedian:] Senator Bernie Sanders announced today that he will run for president in 2020. If successful yes. If successful, he would be the oldest person. That's it.
[Jimmy Fallon, Comedian:] At age 77, Bernie is the only candidate who toss his hat and his teeth into the ring.
[James Corden, Comedian:] At 77 years old, Bernie Sanders would be the oldest president in history which explains his brand new campaign yard signs, get off my lawn.
[Sanchez:] President Trump could be facing another challenge from within the Republican Party. CBS is set to air an interview today with Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, he is not ruling out a White House bid in 2020, citing the president's weak poll numbers.
[Romans:] All right. Half the country is in for ugly weather today. Two systems merging into one forming a powerful winter storm, folks. It's packing a mixture of snow, sleet, freezing rain like you see in these pictures. These are live pictures from Des Moines. More than 150 million people from the Plains, the Midwest to the Mid- Atlantic and the Northeast under some kind of weather advisory right now. 11 million others facing flood advisories in the south. Washington, D.C. and Baltimore expected to take the brunt of the storm. Federal offices in the nation's capital to be closed today.
[Sanchez:] Another reason to be happy to be here with you, Christine.
[Romans:] Good.
[Sanchez:] Here is a live look at St. Paul, Minnesota. All Minnesota public schools are shut down today. Schools also closed in Philadelphia. About 1,000 flights are already canceled. Most of them in and around Washington, Chicago and Philly and another storm system is moving into California. It's expected to follow the exact same pattern for another round of punishment this weekend. We turn now to meteorologist Pedram Javaheri.
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Boris and Christine, yes, about a 130 million people underneath these alerts, advisories and warnings. And notice, a multi-storm setup here over the next couple days. One coming in for the next 24 hours, and then another one coming in, going towards late this weekend and early next week. So where it is not heavy rainfall, it is a wintry mix or heavy snowfall across parts of the Midwest and also the intra mountain west and parts of the northwest as well. And notice, the current storm brings in heavy rainfall across portions of the south and north of St. Louis into parts of the Great Lakes, it becomes all snow and all of this pushes on in toward the east as we go in through later on tonight and into early tomorrow morning leaving behind about 4 to 6 inches of snowfall across that region. But again, plenty of flooding threat in place as well from Nashville down towards Birmingham, even northern portions of Mississippi and eastern areas of Arkansas whereas much as 4 to 6 inches of rainfall could come down in the next two days. And, again, as this system moves on, we do have another system right on its heels and temps are struggling to warm up across the south. Atlanta only 49, Charlotte, 41 degrees, and up in the Midwest, looking into the middle 30s while this system exits, another one follows a similar track going in toward the upcoming weekend.
[Romans:] All right. Thank you.
[Sanchez:] If you couldn't get enough there's more on the way. Teachers in West Virginia got their wish, so why are they still on strike for a second day? We will explain.

[Blackwell:] Welcome back. I'm Victor Blackwell.
[Gallagher:] And I'm Dianne Gallagher in for Christi Paul this Saturday. So there's a lot of talk about the 25th Amendment. It's swirling around Washington and really the whole country lately. Yesterday afternoon we learned that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein reportedly discussed wearing a wire and trying to recruit cabinet members to invoke that 25th Amendment. Earlier this month in the now infamous "New York Times" anonymous op-ed, a senior White House official says that there were, quote, whispers of using it to remove the president from office. So what exactly is the 25th Amendment we're hearing so much about. Our digital director of CNN politics Zachary Wolf is here to explain. Zachary, a famous amendment, is everyone really quite sure what it does though?
[Zachary Wolf, Cnn Politics Digital Director:] Yes. It was enacted in the wake of the Kennedy assassination. It has to deal with presidential succession. And most of it, there are four sections of it, and the first three mostly have to do with if the president dies or is no longer able to perform duties, power goes to the vice president. But then there's this fourth section about how the cabinet and the vice president can essentially vote to overturn the president, to take power away from him temporarily. And that triggers this complicated process where the president can disagree with them, then they vote again, and then it goes to Congress where two-thirds majority essentially would have to agree to take power from the president, and then the vice president takes over for the president. So it is this sort of long, complicated process that would play out over the course of three weeks, and it is like a sideway, it is not impeachment, it's not death, it is a different way for the president to leave office without being voted out. And people just for some reason keep coming back to this. We've heard that Steve Bannon was obsessed with it. We know that Trump has been thinking about it, with the anonymous op-ed and now with this Rosenstein story, people inside the White House talked about it. It is so fascinating because it makes you wonder how they're dealing with the president on a daily basis.
[Gallagher:] Zachary Wolf, thank you for breaking down the amendment down for us.
[Blackwell:] We are now just four hours away from the deadline Senate Republicans set for Christine Blasey Ford to decide if she will testify about sexual assault allegations she's levied against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Joining me now for a breakdown on this and today's other political headlines, Tharon Johnson, the former south regional director for the 2012 Obama campaign, and Brian Robinson, former spokesman for Georgia Republican governor Nathan Deal. Gentlemen, welcome back. Let's start. There are four points on which that we know that Ford's attorneys and Senate Republicans are on either side of on, so we'll see if we can get some of those solved here. Let's put them up on the screen. First, with the opening statement, Miss Ford would like to or Professor Ford would like a statement with no time limit. Do you think she should?
[Brian Robinson, Republican Strategist:] Look, give her her say. I think Republicans have bent over backwards to make sure she can tell her story. So don't set any arbitrary rules. And obviously we don't want her to filibuster this. We have given her enough time. This process does need to move forward. But give her as much time she wants as long as it's reasonable. Let her tell her story because we're going to confirm him, he's going to be on the Supreme Court. And we need to get going on this. We've been more than fair.
[Blackwell:] You're going to, and I want to get to the other points, but you're going to confirm him, it doesn't matter what she says?
[Robinson:] Look, no.
[Blackwell:] Clarify that, Brian.
[Robinson:] More than likely he is going to be on the Supreme Court, right, because nothing that has even been alleged to this point, and I don't know why you would hold anything back, but nothing that has been alleged up to now is disqualifying from the Supreme Court. There's a reason what we treat 17-year-olds different in our criminal justice system than we do adults. Their brains aren't even fully formed. We have a lot of growing up to do when we are 17. We don't even know that this is true.
[Blackwell:] Nothing she has alleged has disqualified him from the Supreme Court. Tharon?
[Tharon Johnson, Former South Regional Director, Obama 2012:] I agree she definitely has got to be heard. Look, at a time we know that this is a lifetime appointment, it is the Supreme Court of the United States of America, it's the highest court of the land. So anyone who has decided to put themselves and their family through this grueling nomination process had to be able to be open to whatever may come their way. I think that in this case with Miss Ford is that she should take as much time as she possibly wants, because I think that when she goes and testifies, I think it should be unlimited, because she's now exposing herself and all her family about something she alleged happened at a very young age. And so I do want to commend the Senate Republicans, particularly to Chairman Grassley, for giving her a little bit more time, but it has been sort of this air that we should rush this woman. And more importantly, what is the rush to get this confirmed? Let's not forget, Republicans spent enormous time and months blocking Judge Garland who should have been given a hearing and should have been given an up and down vote.
[Blackwell:] More than 400 days. Let me come back to this statement from you, though, that nothing that she has alleged has disqualified him from the Supreme Court. Even if it is true. Even if he sexual assaulted her when he was 17 and she was 15, that's not disqualifying. He should be confirmed?
[Robinson:] Look, there's one eyewitness to this and that witness says what she is saying happened didn't happen. Both have been named. We know who they are. They say that didn't happen. But this was not a rape. Everybody was fully clothed. Is it inappropriate? Absolutely. Is that how any young man should treat any young woman? Absolutely not. But if we went back and put this in a larger context, they were 17 years old, no crime was committed. Something terribly inappropriate that we should teach young men not to do for sure, but this is not something for a 17 should disqualify them when they're in their 50s and have shown to be responsible adults. No other accuser has come out. And what I am looking for is a pattern of behavior. And if we haven't seen any other example of this
[Blackwell:] One sexual assault is a give-me?
[Robinson:] As a 17-year-old, sexual assault is, look, there are gradations. There are different grades of sexual assault. And I think we need to be careful about criminalizing 17-year-old behavior.
[Blackwell:] And this is an acceptable level of sexual assault?
[Robinson:] I said it is inappropriate. It is not a crime.
[Blackwell:] All right, you have been clear about that. We can't press any more on that because you have been clear this is an acceptable level of sexual assault.
[Robinson:] That's not fair.
[Blackwell:] I've asked you that. You said it is not a crime. He was 17 years old. And it should not prevent him from being confirmed, even if he did it.
[Robinson:] If the story as we know it is true, this should not prevent him being confirmed.
[Blackwell:] OK, that's your position. We've tested it, and you still hold to it. Let's go to another one here, that she should testify second after Judge Kavanaugh. Why should he defend himself and then she'll accuse him? Why is that order appropriate?
[Johnson:] I don't think that order is appropriate. I think that, again, I want to commend the Senate Republicans, particularly the chair of the Judiciary Committee, for giving her enough time. They have been working with her lawyers to really make sure that if this testimony happens that they feel she will be put in a fair and proper setting. But I think you should give Kavanaugh opportunity to respond, but you've got to hear the alleged victims' points of what she thinks happened and what she encountered on this day. And so I think to have him go first and to have her go second will completely discredit her statement. And I think at the end of the day, the American people deserve to hear what this woman wants to say if she chooses to testify. But I do believe that Kavanaugh should have an opportunity to defend and actually give his version of what he remembers happening when he was the age of 17.
[Blackwell:] Why don't Republicans want to hear from Mark Judge under oath?
[Robinson:] I'm sorry?
[Blackwell:] Mark Judge, under oath, the other person, the third person that Dr. Ford, Professor Ford alleges was in the room. Why don't they want to hear from him under oath?
[Robinson:] I don't know. Again, I think that Republicans serve themselves by being as open as possible. And I think that's why you see them moving the deadline back, working with Dr. Ford and her attorney to make sure that she feels comfortable, that she feels secure, that she can tell her story like she wants to. I think they're bending over backwards. And I think it would keep with that if they let Mr. Judge testify as well. Look, he's already said this didn't happen.
[Blackwell:] It is different to have an attorney release a statement and to say it under oath under penalty of perjury, right? Why not subpoena him, make him make his case in front of the committee?
[Robinson:] I would love for him to come make his case before the committee. I would absolutely love for him to do that.
[Blackwell:] One more thing here. We've talked about Kavanaugh. I want to talk about this ad that came out overnight that's gone viral. This is in an Arizona house race from a candidate, David Brill, against the incumbent there, Paul Gosar. Watch this.
[Unidentified Female:] Paul Gosar the congressman isn't doing anything to help rural America.
[Unidentified Male:] Paul is absolutely not working for his district.
[Unidentified Female:] If they care about health care, they care about their children's health care, they would hold him to account. If they care about jobs, they would hold him to account. If he actually cared about people in rural Arizona, I bet he would be fighting for Social Security, for better access to health care. I bet he would be researching what is the most insightful water policy to help the environment of Arizona sustain itself and be successful.
[Unidentified Male:] He is not listening to you and he doesn't have your interests at heart. My name is Tim Gosar. David Gosar.
[Unidentified Female:] Grace Gosar. Joan Gosar. Gaston Gosar. Jennifer Gosar. Paul Gosar is my brother. My brother. I endorse Dr. Brill.
[Unidentified Male:] Dr. Brill. Wholeheartedly endorse David Brill for Congress. I'm Dr. David Brill, and I approve this message.
[Blackwell:] That is cold.
[Johnson:] We have been doing campaigns for almost two decades now. And there's not this unknown thing where you have sort of debates and tension privately with your siblings, even with some of your parents. My brother, who sometimes is my biggest critic, but he's also my biggest fan, would never go out and sit down and actually participate in a 60 second ad in this great forestry scene and tell people don't vote for
[Blackwell:] Not just one sibling, six.
[Johnson:] Out of nine. This is bizarre.
[Blackwell:] We have to wrap it. Tharon Johnson, Brian Robinson, thank you both. Dianne?
[Gallagher:] It could be the start of a major environmental crisis. North Carolina flood waters trigger a dam breach that could spill coal ash into the river. We've a live report from Wilmington, North Carolina, coming up next.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Brianna Keilar stars right now. Have a great afternoon.
[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Brianna Keilar, live from CNN's Washington headquarters. Underway right now, Bernie Sanders returns for a 2020 sequel, but this time he's got a lot more competitors to share the screen time. Get me Roger Stone says the judge presiding over his case after Stone appeared to threaten her on social media. Plus, the revelations from the fired deputy FBI director are getting even more surreal. He says the FBI and Justice officials feared the president was working for Russia. And he told top leaders in Congress at the time. And the oversight of President Trump just took a new turn involving cash, the Saudis and sensitive nuclear technology. Roger Stone being ordered back into court after a post on his social media account appeared to threat the judge in the case. This is the image on Stone's Instagram account, now deleted. It shows a picture of Judge Amy Berman Jackson with a set of crosshairs behind her. The post appears to be in defiance of a gag order imposing in the case just last week. Now Stone's attorneys filed a letter of apology with the court Monday, and eventually that post was taken down. CNN political analyst Sara Murray here with us, along with Jack Quinn. And we have former White House counsel or he is the former White House counsel from the Clinton administration. So this is going to be an interesting court appearance. When is it going to happen?
[Sara Murray, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, he's supposed to be back in court on Thursday afternoon, and the judge basically said, OK, if you want to, you know, behave like this, be up to these shenanigans on Instagram, you can come to my courtroom, you can answer to me, and you can explain to me why you should continue to operate under this pretty lenient gag order. I mean he's not allowed to speak in and around the courthouse, but he's allowed to continue to be out there publicly talking about the case. But also you can explain to me, Roger, to the judge, why we shouldn't change the conditions of your release. Also, you know, Roger is released. He's out. He's able to travel when he noifies the court. He's able to stay at his home in Florida and show up in D.C. for court appearances. But you can tell that the judge is pretty peeved and she wants to see him in person.
[Keilar:] So it does because the lawyers have more restrictions, right, on what they can say than Roger Stone actually can?
[Murray:] Exactly. The gag order was actually harsher to the lawyers than it was to Roger.
[Keilar:] Yes. So what might happen to Roger Stone? What might the judge decide as he does have this rather lenient arrangement for his movements and what he can say even under this gag order?
[Jack Quinn, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, if stupidity were a crime, he'd be in jail for a long time. It's not. So I expect the gag order will be tightened in light of this. It's questionable whether the gag order has, in fact, been violated. Threatening a federal judge is a crime, but I'm not sure that this, frankly, violates that statute. It's not clear that it's a threat as that was meant. You have to take into account there are some First Amendment considerations. He's able to speak his mind. But clearly here this was this was really bad, really stupid, and I expect that Judge Jackson will express her displeasure, tighten the gag order on him and give him fair warning that anything like this in the future is going to put him behind bars.
[Keilar:] That's going to be difficult for Roger Stone if it's tightened, Sara, because he likes, obviously, to be out there.
[Murray:] He does. And, you know, I think that when Judge Amy Berman Jackson was grappling with this idea of putting a gag order on the case, she thought first to what happened in the case of Paul Manafort. She put a gag order on that case very early and got some criticism for it. But, secondly, Roger Stone and his attorneys made it pretty clear that if there was some kind of very tight gag order they were going to try to fight it because he said it's his livelihood
[Keilar:] Yes.
[Murray:] To be out there, to speak publicly and also he has a First Amendment right, you know, to speak, and then to defend himself. And I think that she really did take that into consideration when she was fashioning this. But then, when you have him going out there and he didn't just post, you know, this image of her once with the crosshairs, which he denies are crosshairs behind him, then he put up another photo of the judge. Then he proceeded to post two follow-up posts sort of explaining the initial two photos. So he didn't handle this well a number of tries.
[Quinn:] And I think the you know, Roger may be dangling bait here.
[Murray:] Right.
[Quinn:] And I think the judge won't take the bait. I mean he probably would like her to come down really hard on him so that he can convince people that she's biased. You know, an Obama judge, a Clinton friend and so on, all of which is not true. But I think he would like to posture it that way so that he can really paint her as someone who's antagonistic to him and his cause.
[Murray:] And I think it is worth noting that even though, you know, he sounds very apologetic in the note he wrote to the court, he's still back on Instagram today saying that this is a fake news story, that the media is ginning up all this controversy. So he may be taking responsibility with the court, but he's certainly not doing it on his social media.
[Keilar:] Maybe his lawyers helped put that apology Sara Murray
[Murray:] It's possible.
[Quinn:] I think his lawyers had a lot to do with a lot to do with it.
[Keilar:] Had a lot to do maybe all of it to do.
[Quinn:] Yes.
[Keilar:] All right, Jack
[Quinn:] I think they're apologizing for themselves, too.
[Keilar:] Oh. Jack Quinn, Sara, thank you so much. Senator Bernie Sanders is now officially jumping into the presidential race. The Vermont independent will join the Democratic field for his second presidential run. A source on his campaign says they've already raised a million dollars in online donations since he declared this morning. Sanders, who is now the ninth declared candidate on the Democratic side, pointed to the current president as part of his reason for running.
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Presidential Candidate:] You know as well as I do that we are living in a pivotal and dangerous moment in American history. We are running against a president who is a pathological liar, a fraud, a racist, a sexist, a xenophobe and someone who is undermining American democracy as he leads us in an authoritarian direction. I am running for president because now more than ever we need leadership that brings us together, not divides us up.
[Keilar:] So while this is Sanders' second attempt, the political landscape has shifted dramatically since 2016. Sanders is joining a diverse field of Democratic candidates. And while some lean heavily to the left, candidates such as Senator Amy Klobuchar are taking a more moderate and pragmatic approach. At a CNN town hall last night, she laid out her positions.
[Sen. Amy Klobuchar , Presidential Candidate:] First of all, I believe this is unconstitutional, what he is doing, OK? I will, as first day as the president, sign us back into the international climate change agreement. That is on day one. I think that they are aspirations. I think we can get close. I don't think we are going to get rid of entire industries in the
[U.s. Don Lemon, Moderator:] What do you mean by aspirations?
[Klobuchar:] Well, there's going to be compromises. It's not going to be exactly like that.
[Lemon:] So no Medicare for all?
[Klobuchar:] I it could be a possibility in the future. I'm just looking at something that will work now. I always look at every proposal and say, would this hurt my Uncle Dick in the deer stand? To paraphrase Martin Luther King, if you you can do all you can to integrate a lunch counter, but if you can't afford a hamburger, what good did you do? Am I tough boss? Sometimes, yes. I have pushed people too hard? Yes. But I have kept expectations of myself that are very high. I am not for free four year college for all, no. If I was a magic genie and could give that to everyone and we could afford it, I would.
[Lemon:] We're on a college campus. So you know many of the questions
[Klobuchar:] I know that. I know that.
[Lemon:] Many of the college
[Klobuchar:] But I've got to I've got to tell the truth. I mean we have this mounting
[Keilar:] White House correspondent for American Urban Radio Network April Ryan here with us, along with CNN political analyst David Gregory. So what this was pretty stunning because normally you know, we've seen a lot of candidates who are promising the world to voters and she's saying, look, I'm going to keep this very real with you about what we can and cannot do. What did you think, April, about this approach and whether it's going to be received well by voters?
[April Ryan, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, she's practical and that's what she was trying to convey. And, you know, I've talked to some people who have live in Minnesota and they're like, look, that's what we deal with. We deal with practicalities. But at the end of the day, being practical is one thing, but people want to believe that there is light at the end of the tunnel for their pain. Politics is personal. And, you know, you heard some people clap when she said something about, you know, I believe it's too costly for a four-year college to pay for a four-year college. But then she's thinking about possibilities of paying for two-year colleges. You know, associate's degrees. You know, but she's looking at the practicality of it all, but she's going to she's going to find that she's going to some at some point have to break out of looking at things with the glass half empty versus the glass half full because you're going to have more people coming up talking about hope, what we can do and what we how to find ways to do it versus being, this is what we have this and this is what it looks like here and this is what it could look like down the road.
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] That's an interesting point I think, actually, because you are going to find that she's going to be up against people who are who are movement politicians, like say a Beto O'Rourke is in the race and he has a lot of what Obama had, which is people projecting their hopes and expectations on to him separate from what he came what he's offering. I think Amy Klobuchar, Senator Klobuchar, is a very serious person. She's a very good senator, very highly regarded in her state. You know, to start applying labels, I mean, as a moderate, she is pragmatic, and I think what she was saying there is, look, I'm not going to sell you everything. I'm not going to overpromise you. We have certain things we have to deal with. I think that's very appealing. She also knows that right now in this ever-crowded race we have all these lanes of voters that you're trying to appeal to. And Amy Klobuchar is clearly a progressive, but she's also but she's probably not going to appeal to the most left wing voters in the party. And I think she knows that. And I think that's partly her why she gave those answers.
[Keilar:] She's in a different lane than Bernie Sanders, who I want to ask you about.
[Gregory:] Right.
[Keilar:] OK, so I have heard a lot of people say, look, Bernie Sanders now has a lot more competition, which is true. He's got people who are closer in his lane for, let's say, policy prescriptions. But I also think that in 2016 he had this chance to build a brand and a real cultivate personality around him. So I wonder, as you look at what is different in 2020 compared to 2016, I mean what do what do you think is going to be different for Bernie Sanders or won't be different?
[Gregory:] Well, I what's different is that he's perceived differently. And a lot of what he represented in 2016 is what has fueled the changes in the Democratic Party. And I think you look back at 2016 and say, oh, the way the establishment, you know, the empire struck back and Hillary Clinton kind of stomped on him, that has left a real bad taste in a lot of voters' mouths. And you have more progressives now who are saying, yes, Bernie was right. And Bernie was really the tip of the spear of where we need to go as a party. Now, whether he can manage that being the standard bearer of all those ideas, more of a frontrunner now, more establishment within that progressive wing, that's what we're going to have to test. What's clear is that he's going to get a lot more attention, a lot more scrutiny and his lane is now a lot more crowded with people with similar ideas.
[Ryan:] Well, you know, the test of Bernie Sanders, we have the results of the test. When he ran the first time, Democrats in the party were very concerned, particularly Hillary Clinton's camp, because they did not know who he was, what he was really about because he was not a true Democrat. Now we know who he is. He's still an independent. Independent thinking. I mean just look at what he did when the Democrats had their official response for the State of the Union Address with Stacey Abrams. He said, no, I'm going to do it my way. And that's how he's going to do it. The ground has been laid. But you have to remember, Bernie Sanders may be older. It's not necessarily about the age, though, for Bernie Sanders, it's about the message. He's got young people.
[Keilar:] That's right.
[Ryan:] The life blood. You know, but he's going to have a problem with the black community now versus when he ran against Hillary Clinton. You've got and he brought this up. You've got two black candidates right there that's in there now. There could be another coming in very soon. And he's concerned about that. And he didn't do so well in dealing with some of the issues in the black community when he ran for president. He had they had there was a coming to Jesus moment, if you will, with Black Lives Matter. So Bernie Sanders is going to again try to find his way in a different way in this crowded field. We know what he's talking about, but how can he navigate the message through these different group of people he's trying to get.
[Keilar:] I can't get enough of you guys, so stay with me because there's more April and more David ahead. We do have a programing note. Wolf Blitzer is going to moderate a presidential town hall with Senator Bernie Sanders on Monday at 8:00 p.m. You don't want to miss that. How is Bernie from 2016 going to bring in Bernie from 2020? Maybe we'll get a sense. House Democrats sounding the alarm on the White House pushing to give sensitive nuclear technology to the Saudis. An effort backed by Michael Flynn. Plus, the fired FBI deputy director today saying agency investigators feared the president may have been working for Russia. Hear who Andrew McCabe warned in Congress. And, as states sue President Trump over his national emergency, he dares the courts to stop him from building his border wall.

[Keilar:] There are growing fears that Israel may once again be on the brink of war with Palestinian militants in Gaza. Hundreds of rockets and mortars have been raining down on both sides of the IsraeliGaza border in the most intense exchange since the war back in 2014. There have been casualties on both sides. Escalation of violence began after a secret Israeli mission failed and ended up in a bloody gun fight. CNN's Oren Liebermann is in Israel, joining us now. What do we know about the word of a new ceasefire?
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn International Correspondent:] There are statements coming from Gaza, Brianna, from the Joint Operations Room, which is the spokespeople for the Palestinian militants in Gaza, saying they reached a ceasefire brokered between the Egyptians, between Israel and Gaza. That took place about 4:45 p.m. local time so just a couple of hours ago. It seems the ceasefire has held. And this is the longest period without rocket fire and without Israeli air strikes. Israel has denied knowledge of a ceasefire. And yet, in looking around, it seems to have held. That brings to an end the most violent 24 hours we've seen since the end of the 2014 war. Israel said more than 400 rockets fired over the course of the last 24 hours, one killed in those rockets, as well as seven Palestinians killed, according to the Ministry of Health, in the more than 150 air strikes in Gaza over the last 24 hours. Brianna, the obvious question, will the ceasefire hold?
[Keilar:] We will watch with you. Oren Liebermann, thank you so much, from Israel. Now to Turkey where there appears to be new evidence linking the murder of Jamal Khashoggi to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman. The "New York Times" is reporting that a recording shows a member of the team sent to Turkey to kill Khashoggi can be heard on the phone afterwards saying, "Tell your boss." "The Times" says intelligence officials said the reference is to the crown prince. CNN's Jomana Karadsheh is in Istanbul. What can you tell us?
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn International Correspondent:] Brianna, as you mentioned, the reporting from the "New York Times." And we have spoken to three people familiar with the audio recording of the killing of Jamal Khashoggi that Turkish authorities have. They say, in this reporting is captured a phone call by one of the 15 members of this hit squad. We know, based on his name, CNN has reported on him extensively in the past. He's a member of the inner circle of the crown prince. He makes a phone call to his superior, in which he said, quote, "Tell your boss," something like the deed is done. They don't specifically mention the crown prince, Mohammad bin Salman. But as you mention there, intelligence officials in the United States believe that is a reference to the crown prince, something we've heard from U.S. officials in the past saying that something like this that involved members of the inner circle could not have taken place without his knowledge. It's not irrefutable evidence, but some in the intelligence community believe this is as close it gets to a smoking gun linking him to the killing Brianna?
[Keilar:] Jomana Karadsheh for us, in Istanbul, thank you. A pilot's group told CNN that Boeing withheld information about potential hazards on the model of the plane involved in last month's Lion air crash. The "Wall Street Journal" first reported that Boeing was aware of problems with new flight control features, and those features may have played a role when the Lion air flight crashed off of Indonesia, killing everyone on board. I want to bring in aviation and government regulation correspondent, Rene Marsh, here with me. This is so sad, the idea that maybe this could have been preventable if more information had been shared.
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Aviation & Government Regulation Correspondent:] Right. That's the bottom line. I spoke with the Allied Pilots Association, a labor union representing several pilots, and they say they were not told about the potentially dangerous feature, especially on the 737 Max Eight and Max Nine. These are high-tech new aircraft by Boeing. This new feature with the flight control system is supposed to help the pilot avoid stalling the plane. In other words, preventing the pilot from raising the nose of the plane too high. What the system does and what the pilots say they didn't know is that the plane's system could actually automatically push the plane's nose down in such an unexpected drastic way that the pilots can't recover from it. The spokesman for the Allied Pilots Association, who is an American Airlines pilot, said the plane is safe, but the problem and the danger comes in when the pilots do not know how the system works. Boeing is saying they are still investigating and that the plane is safe. One last thing. This affects 246 planes worldwide, 45 of them right here in the United States.
[Keilar:] It makes you wonder if that's why the information was not shared. It's important to share that information. Rene Marsh, thank you so much.
[Marsh:] You're welcome.
[Keilar:] It was called a national emergency, an invasion of America's lands by gangsters, terrorists and thugs and also maybe a political stunt. Up next, a reality check on the caravan. Plus, Vice President Nikki Haley? My next guest says the president should dump Mike Pence in 2020. He'll make his case after the break.

[Gorani:] In the U.S., some lawmakers are crying foul after President Trump's vicious tweet attack against the female senator who called on him to resign over a sexual assault allegation. Trump tweeted this morning, "Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office begging for campaign contributions not so long ago and would do anything for them is now in the right fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill and Crooked used." Fellow Democrats are defending Gillibrand including Senator Elizabeth Warren who accused the president of trying to bully slut-shame. Senator Gillibrand herself called the president's tweet a sexist smear.
[Senator Kirsten Gillibrand , New York:] It was a sexist smear attempting to silence my voice. And I will not be silenced on this issue neither will the women who stood up to the president yesterday and neither will the millions of women who have been marching since the women's march to stand up against policies they do not agree with.
[Gorani:] Let's go to CNN's Dan Merica live in Washington. So, this is once again he created the president has over Twitter created a feud with an elected representative. I mean, where is this going to go?
[Dan Merica, Cnn Political Reporter:] Well, the White House hasn't commented on this, especially on what he meant, by saying she would do anything for those donations. Clearly, it's a sexually suggestive tweet. Democrats have blasted it. Many Democrats on Capitol Hill are rallying around SEN. Gillibrand. Privately, though, number of Gillibrand aides and top Democrats say that they're actually excited about this fight, that Gillibrand is willing to have this fight, and has been out and front on sexual assault issues for really not only just for months, but for years. She's been a top Democrat on that issue. Sarah Sanders is briefing the press at the White House right now. You've got to expect she's asked about this and that would really be the first time the White House has tried to clear up
[Gorani:] Let me let's just go to Sarah Sanders now and listen to what she has to say about it.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] political contributions to the senator that the president referenced. Steve?
[Unidentified Male:] Does the president want Roy Moore to be seated in the Senate if he wins tonight? And does he plan to call him tonight?
[Sanders:] In terms of calls, I'm not aware that anything is scheduled, win or lose. In terms of being seated, I can't speak on a hypothetical, certainly not one that could potentially influence an election one way or the other due to the Hatch Act. John?
[Unidentified Male:] Sarah, does the president agree with his outside legal counsel that a special prosecutor should be appointed to look into the goings-on at the Department of Justice during the election campaign in 2016 since the revelation about Bruce Ohr, the former associate deputy attorney general?
[Sanders:] I think it's something that certainly causes a lot of concern not just for the president and the administration, but I think probably for all Americans, and something that if we are going to continue to investigate things, let's look at something where there's some real evidence and some real proof of wrongdoing. And this looks pretty bad, and I think it's something we should certainly look at. Dave?
[Unidentified Male:] So, would he support the appointment of a special prosecutor to look into this?
[Sanders:] I haven't asked him that directly, but I know that he has great concern about some of the conduct that's taken place and something that we certainly would like to see looked at. Dave?
[Unidentified Male:] Thanks, Sarah. Congressional leaders are saying that they have no plans to reimpose sanctions on Iran by the deadline tomorrow that the president initiated back in October when he decertified Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal.
[Gorani:] So, we're going to break away from this now. Dan Merica, you're still with me in the Washington bureau. So, Sarah Sanders, the press secretary, in reference to we missed that particular bit. So, I'll update our viewers. In reference to his tweet about Kirsten Gillibrand, said the president has used that phrase many times before that she's begged for donations, but I don't know about the would do anything for it. I personally hadn't seen that before.
[Merica:] I think what Sarah Sanders was trying to say is that he was commenting on corruption in the political system by, as she said, both men and women. What really strikes me about that statement is that the president actually donated money to SEN. Gillibrand's numerous campaigns when he was a businessman in New York, about $8,000, based on FEC reports, he donated to SEN. Gillibrand. His daughter Ivanka Trump also donated $2,000. So, he was as much of a player in that system by donating to her. It really reignites the conversation about the fact that President Trump was a prolific Democratic donor before he ran for president as a Republican, Hala.
[Gearan:] All right. And thanks very much for that update, Dan Merica in our Washington bureau. We'll keep our eye on that. There was a question about Roy Moore in that press briefing and let's turn back to that bitter and divisive Alabama Senate race where voting is well underway. Joining me now is CNN political commentator and assistant editor at "The Washington Post" David Swerdlick. So, we were discussing earlier in the program that Roy Moore's voters in a deeply conservative state like Alabama are most likely to propel him to a win this evening and you would have Roy Moore as a sitting US Senator. Do we expect the establishment Republicans in Washington to then try to get rid of him at that point?
[David Swerdlick, Cnn Political Commentator And Assistant Editor, "the Washington Post":] Yes. Good afternoon, Hala. I think that you can expect senators in Washington to maybe instigate an ethics investigation against SEN. Roy Moore or into Roy Moore's conduct, but I don't think we have any indication yet that senators are automatically going to jump to having him removed from the Senate. The rules are that they do have to cede him if he is the duly elected winner of the Alabama race and then they would subsequently have the opportunity to expel him from the Senate. But I think we are way ahead of ourselves in thinking that he is just going to be injected based on allegations that are made so far, given the inconsistencies in the statements that Senate Republican leadership have made up to this point.
[Gorani:] Because, I mean, going into the midterms, having someone like Roy Moore in the Senate, someone who has made outrageous types of remarks that we know he's made a few years ago, saying every amendment after the 10th in the US Constitution is useless, and one of those amendments by the way was to give women the right to vote and abolish slavery. Those were at least two of them. And his wife, as late as yesterday, saying one of our attorneys is a Jew. I mean, this type of language, this type of politician sitting in the US Senate, if you're purely cynical about it and you're a Republican, you think to yourself, this is going to hurt us.
[Swerdlick:] Well, that's not the that they've made though. I think the observations you're making are very similar to what a lot of people in Washington, what a lot of people throughout the United States have made. But in a fire engine red state like Alabama where the Republican Party has a built-in advantage going into the race, and then some of these specific allegations accrue, the Democrat is still sort of playing catch-up and we're seeing that reflected in the polling. You have three polls come out yesterday. One said that the two candidates, Jones and Moore, were running neck and neck. One had Jones up by 10 percent, one had Moore up by 9 percent. So, the idea that we can really tell what's going to happen tonight, I think it's kind of tough to make a prediction. That said, as you just described, we are in slightly uncharted territory here with a candidate who already had controversial positions on same-sex marriage, on religion generally, has been expelled from the Alabama Supreme Court twice, and then our "Washington Post" reporting showed that he had serial allegations of trying to date or in, at least, one case molest teenage girls against him. This is really a test for Republican voters in that state where many have said, up to and including President Trump, even in spite of all this weight on one side of the ledger, they say we can't afford to have a Democrat in Congress. Republicans clearly want that seat. They don't want to reduce their margin in the U.S. Senate.
[Gorani:] And then, there was that bizarre testimonial from one of his supporters who served with him in Vietnam, who in order to illustrate the fact that Roy Moore is not interested in young women told the story of the two men visiting a brothel.
[Swerdlick:] Yes. I mean, I don't see how I don't see how his campaign thought that would help them in any way, but, I mean, you have people who are not political professionals going out there at the 11th hour thinking that they're explaining one thing and it turns out, in fact, they're just raising further questions about Judge Roy Moore's character and raising further questions about his background and how they are even approaching this issue. It's one thing to say these are the allegations and we simply deny them flat out. It's another to offer a series of justifications. He apparently in this anecdote was at a brothel when he was serving in Vietnam, but didn't go in at an earlier stage. The justification for allegedly dating teenagers was I would never do it without asking their parents first. None of these things is a flat denial. And that I think is the problem they face.
[Gorani:] David Swerdlick of "The Washington Post", thanks very much. Coming up next, legendary musician Roger Waters is dedicating a song to President Trump. The Pink Floyd front man tells me what it is and shares his thoughts on American politics.

[Hill:] As we near the end of week one of the bank fraud and tax evasion trial of President Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, today could be the day jurors hear from the government's star witness, that's Paul Manafort's longtime business partner, former co-defendant Rick Gates. After laying out some eye-popping evidence to paint this lavish, luxurious lifestyle that Paul Manafort led, including everything he bought with the millions that he allegedly hid from the IRS, prosecutors turned yesterday to the fraud he allegedly committed to get loans when his lobbying business tanked. And that's where testimony resumed this morning. It brings me to our expert next, CNN legal analyst, former federal prosecutor, Shan Wu. Shan, good to have you with us here. So interesting to see as we saw this shift, the judge we know in the beginning was not loving all the details about the lavish lifestyle. Now that we're really getting into the nuts and bolts of the bookkeeping, what was there, what wasn't there, folks saying that there was definitely a shift in the judge and how he is even dealing with this. What does that tell you?
[Shan Wu, Cnn Legal Analyst:] That tells me that Judge Ellis is very concerned about keeping the trial on focus. I think he sensibly pointed out that too much focus on very ostentatious lavish lifestyles, I think his comment was it could engender resentment with the jury. And he wants to protect the verdict. If there is a conviction there'll be an appeal, he wants to make sure that the record is a good one. Now as they move more into the document evidence, really the meat of the case, I think he is more pleased on this going in that direction.
[Hill:] There's a lot of anticipation, obviously, for Rick Gates, what he will say when he takes the stand. We have a sense, obviously, of what the prosecution wants to get out of him. But it will be fascinating to see what the defense does with Rick Gates there on the stand.
[Wu:] Absolutely. He's critical to both sides. Anything I'm talking about of course is not based on attorney-client privilege information. I represented Rick briefly. And he is going to either be devastating for one side or the other. I think it's a been a very bold move by the defense to really put all their eggs in one basket. They're pinning everything on him. It's very clever really because the prosecution needs to rely on him as being at the center of everything. So by attacking the center, they're able to really attack all aspects of the case without having to necessarily get bogged down in individual details. It also offers them a further defense, very typically used against immunized witnesses. They're going to be attacking them, but they can also attack Rick through his guilty plea saying, you know, you got a good deal, you'll say anything that the prosecution wants you to say.
[Hill:] Although to your point, that's something that we would often hear. I mean, that's not new to hear that from the defense.
[Wu:] Absolutely. And
[Hill:] No matter the trial, right? I mean, no matter the charges, really.
[Wu:] That's right. That's exactly right. But what's a little bit unusual is they have so many immunized witnesses in this case. So it does give the defense a little bit more of a hook and leverage to use against the prosecution for that reason. And, you know, Rick's a very smart man. I know him a little bit. I think he will do well on the stand. And I don't it's revealing any confidences when I say about his personal style he's not prone towards the ostrich leather.
[Hill:] Well Nor many of us but, you know, I guess there's a certain market for it and there you have it. As we look at this, as we're all waiting to see what happens obviously today, there are a couple of other headlines that I just want to get your take on here. Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski telling CNN, President Trump actually hasn't asked him, but that if he did he would tell him he should not sit down for that interview with Robert Mueller. Surprising to you?
[Wu:] Not surprising. I think any lawyer, any staffer, any handler for the president who knows him is going to be very leery of him sitting down. I mean, one is always cautious with a client sitting down for an interview with prosecutors and FBI agents. But President Trump has shown such an inability to stay on message or stay disciplined that if I were his lawyer, I would absolutely be petrified of that.
[Hill:] Right. And we know we've heard that, right? We've heard from his legal team in the past. They don't want him sitting down. The president has at least been making the case or sources have been making the case for the president that he really wants to. Is there a chance, too, that that could also be part of the legal strategy, even just putting that out there in the ether? The president really wants to sit down but nobody will let him because that could help him in the court of public opinion.
[Wu:] Absolutely. I think that part of Giuliani's public relations strategy has been working well. I mean, they seem very much geared towards heading off a possible impeachment type of trial. And I think by putting this out there, they reserve the right to say if, let's say, Mueller does not get to interview him, puts out a report, they can say gosh, you know, we wanted to talk, but they were just unreasonable about it. So we never heard our side of the story.
[Hill:] We will be watching and waiting with baited breath. Always appreciate it. Thank you.
[Wu:] Good to see you, Erica.
[Hill:] The Trump administration says immigrant advocates like the ACLU, well, they should really find the hundreds of parents who were deported after they were separated from their children. Justice Department lawyers said the government would turn over whatever information it could on the parents who were deported. CNN's Dianne Gallagher joining us now with more on this. So what's the ACLU's reaction to all of this?
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] You can imagine, Erica, this once again sounds like the government asking someone else to clean up the mess that it made. A lot of this comes from court filings that came through this week where essentially, they were working through how to locate these the parents of these children who have already been deported while the children remain in custody because they were separated from their parents under the zero tolerance policy. Now, look, the ACLU has said, we are eager to help with this. We want to reunite these families. But maintains that the onus should be on the U.S. government because the U.S. government is the one who separated them. And they have more resources. I want to read a quote from ACLU attorneys here. They said, "Not only was it the government's unconstitutional separation practice that led to this crisis but the United States government has far more resources than any group of NGOs." Now in this court filing the government actually proposed that they meet every Monday with the ACLU and they can then turn over information to them about parents, about children, what research and abilities they've done to track them down. But, Erica, the ACLU said that in certain instances, 12 of the parents that they tracked down in their home countries, they had already been contacted by the U.S. government. That once again, as we have seen from the start of this saga here, the government is not communicating with these NGOs and at the same time asking for their assistance. In all of these reunification efforts when we have been down at the border, down in these communities when they do this, Erica, we have watched these NGOs and these volunteer organizations kind of pick up the slack and take the lead when the government appears in many cases to be doing the bare minimum. Now according to testimony, there are still more than 500 kids who remain in custody, at least 400 of them, according to court supplemental filings, they have parents who are outside of this country. So there is a lot of work still to be done. And Erica, according to the ACLU, the government has resisted giving them entire case files. So it makes it even more difficult to work with them on this. Again, they're saying that there is red tape and that there is a lack of communication which is making this even more difficult as deadlines start to come closer and pile up.
[Hill:] Right. Yes, but don't worry, they're going to meet every month I mean, every week, rather, and they'll get an update so I'm sure it will all get worked out. It is remarkable once again. Dianne, appreciate the reporting. Thank you. Still ahead this hour, the president steps up his attacks on what he now calls fake, disgusting news while repeating claims that have no apparent basis in fact.

[Sanchez:] Tonight, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's frustrations with the Trump White House are out in the open. Sources tell CNN Tillerson had a testy exchange with a White House aide during a meeting last week that was described as intense and uncomfortable. Apparently, Tillerson is not pleased with the pace of filling crucial staff positions at the State Department and wants more control over who gets hired. He actually admitted his frustration in public. Watch this.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. Secretary, are you satisfied with the pace of the staffing at the senior position at the State Department?
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] No, I'd like it to go faster. Thank you.
[Sanchez:] Let's talk it over with former Obama State Department Spokesman and CNN Military Diplomatic Analyst, Retired Rear Admiral John Kirby. Admiral, to be fair, there's always tensions between cabinet agencies in the White House over appointments, but it's really urgent to get these positions filled. A lot of them are Under Secretary and Assistant Secretary positions.
[John Kirby, Cnn Miltary Diplomatic Analyst:] That's right. Now, it seems important for the State Department to be fully staffed so that they can conduct the business of foreign policy around the world and just as critically, Boris, to be able to provide policy guidance from Washington that's credible to our outposts around the world, embassies and consulates all over the place. So actually, look, I'm very encouraged that from the reporting that Secretary Tillerson is this concerned about it and trying as hard as he is to get these jobs filled quickly. I think that's actually an encouraging sign.
[Sanchez:] The White House is pushing Tillerson to make some major cuts at the State Department, slashing 30 percent of his budget. When you combine that with the slower pace in hiring, that has to impact the State Department's ability to function and just execute basic foreign policy.
[Kirby:] Yes, I think I think that's exactly right. And this is one area of leadership where actually I'm disappointed in Secretary Tillerson, that he did not fight back a little harder to try to preserve the funding for the State Department. As Secretary Mattis over at Defense has said, if you don't fund the States Department fully, I'm going to have to buy more ammunition. There's a real give and take between diplomacy and defense. They go hand in hand. And I think this is a this is a tough time for our diplomats around the world facing these cuts, facing staffing issues while the world is still turning and there's still crisis all over the place. So I think I think this is a this is a tough issue for them. It's making it harder, just as critically, Boris, it's making it harder for some of our foreign counter parts around the world in trying to figure out where the where America's going to go on any of these issues. What our national interests are that we pursue. It's very confusing.
[Sanchez:] There are quite a few mixed messages, one of them being on our commitment to NATO and Article 5. I do want to get your perspective on this. President Trump asked his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to be his point man in the Middle East and to try to restart brokered peace talks. It's interesting that he asked him and not the Secretary of State. Is Rex Tillerson now playing second fiddle to some degree?
[Kirby:] No. I actually don't think so, Boris. It's not unusual for a White House to assign special envoys for this or that foreign problem. President Obama did that too. That's not so unusual and this is a very targeted issue, Israeli-Palestinian tensions. I don't see any indications that Secretary Tillerson is actually cut out of that process, and from what I'm hearing, he actually has very good access to the President, he meets with him one-on-one at least once a week, if not more. And he, you know, I think he's trying to develop a sense of inertia and energy there at the State Department. What's holding him back is the staffing, it's the funding, and, frankly, maybe a two insular organization at the top, that he's not reaching out enough to the career service, foreign service diplomats that are right there in foggy bottom.
[Sanchez:] Admiral, we have to talk about the G-20. The President set to go face-to-face with Russian President Vladimir Putin just a few days from now. CNN Global Affairs Analyst Kimberly Dozier actually had a report earlier, she writes, "Moscow believes its Leader, ex-spy master Vladimir Putin can extract major concessions from President Donald Trump when the two meet for the first time next week." Vladimir Putin has this ability to charm people. I think of George W. Bush saying that he looked into his eyes and saw his soul and that he's a good man, President Obama with the reset button only to disappoint these leaders later with invasions in Crimea and Georgia. Are you worried the same thing might happen under President Trump?
[Kirby:] Well, a couple thoughts here. One, it is true that he does try to charm his way into getting concessions and deals. I don't think that we should look at this meeting on the sidelines of the G-20 as necessarily some sort of Summit where there's going to be a specific outcome or tangible sort of deliverable by either side. I really doubt that's going to happen. But I do think that everybody surrounding the President or his National Security Staff are very experienced. They know this man, Putin, for what he is and how he tries to operate, and I'm sure that they're giving the President good strong guidance about going into this meeting and how to play not play, that's not a good word how to interact appropriately and effectively with Vladimir Putin. I think they need to go into this meeting you know, with their shields up, and not, you know, being willing to fall for anything, but they but they also have to look for opportunities to try to make some points and put some points on the board for themselves in terms of working with Russia on issues where we can agree and making clear that we're not going to cooperate with Russia in effective fashion on those issues where, obviously, they have proven unwilling or incapable of helping the international community out such as on Syria.
[Sanchez:] Yes. The President considers himself a master of the art of the deal. We'll see how that works out during the G-20 summit. Rear Admiral John Kirby, thank you so much for the time.
[Kirby:] My pleasure.
[Sanchez:] Coming up, President Trump taking aim at seemingly every aspect of Obama's legacy but he's hardly the first president to target his predecessor. A look back in history when we return.

[Vause:] Well, it's good to be a billionaire. It's pretty cool to fly to the moon, but what's even cooler is buying every seat on a commercial flight bound for the moon, and that is what a mega wealthy Japanese entrepreneur is doing just because he can. Here is CNN's Kristie Lu Stout.
[Yusaku Maezawa, Japanese Billionaire:] I choose to go to the moon!
[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn International Correspondent:] Yusaku Maezawa, announcing his plans to make history as the first tourist to ride around the moon on a SpaceX commercial flight. The Japanese billionaire purchased all of the seats on board the SpaceX Big Falcon Rocket. He wants to fly to the moon with a group of artists.
[Maezawa:] At the moment, I have not decided which artists I'd like to invite, but if possible, I'd like to reach out to top artists that represent our planet from various spheres.
[Stout:] SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, says that they are working on a redesign to the Big Falcon Rocket to get Maezawa and team to the moon, more than 384,000 kilometers away, about a five-day trip. It is a big challenge for 3333SpaceX and for the new crop of space tourists.
[Elon Musk, Ceo Of Spacex:] It's dangerous, to be clear. This is dangerous. This is no, you know, walk in the park here, you know. This will require a lot of training. But whenever it's the first flight of something on a new technology and we're talking about deep space, you know, you have to be a very brave person to do that. This is not no small matter.
[Stout:] Maezawa has taken big leaps before, but all of those have been with his feet on the ground. The musician-turned-entrepreneur is known for his relaxed management style in usually conservative Japan, and he has made a name for himself as a big-spending art collector. In a promotional video of his planned space trip, Maezawa says he believes art has the power to promote world peace. SpaceX says it is enabling access to space for everyday people. Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos and Virgin boss, Richard Branson have also entered the space tourism race. When they are ready to fly, a ticket on one of their rockets would set you back some 200,000 to $250,000. That is a little out of reach for most people, unless you're one of the lucky artists with an invite from Maezawa.
[Maezawa:] By the way, if you should hear from me, please say yes and accept my invitation. Please don't say no. OK.
[Stout:] Blast off for Maezawa and his guests may not happen until around 2023, a trip of a lifetime to make history and inspire art that will be out of this world. Kristie Lu Stout, CNN.
[Vause:] Good for him. Thanks for watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause. Stay with us. "WORLD SPORT" is up after the break.

[Vause:] At his investment conference in Riyadh, the Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman made his first public comments about the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. And he vowed those responsible will be held accountable.
[Mohammed Bin Salman, Crown Prince, Saudi Arabia:] The crime was really painful to all Saudis and I believe it is painful to every human in the world. It is a heinous crime that cannot be justified. Today Saudi Arabia is carrying out all legal things to finalize the investigation, to cooperate with the Turkish government and to present the perpetrators to the court and take their judgment.
[Vause:] CNN's Nic Robertson live this hour in Istanbul, has the very latest on the investigation. But Nic, I just wonder, how seriously can you take those promises from the crown prince to find those responsible and bring them to justice? Is there any evidence on the ground to support the claim there's this investigation ongoing and they're cooperating?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] John, it is a great question. What we have heard from President Erdogan here is he says that since he has started a direct dialogue with King Salman in Saudi Arabia, the crown prince's father, that the cooperation has improved. But what Turkish officials will tell you here and the evidence that we've seen is that cooperation is not in a good place. Take the consul general's residence behind me. He fled the day before Turkish investigators were allowed in. Of course it took several weeks before they were allowed in there. But we've learned that once the Turkish investigators got in there, the Saudi officials in there would not let them look in the well, in the basement of the building, which, you know, really just defies logic. Investigators looking for a missing body, Jamal Khashoggi's body, logic would say they should have free access to the whole building if there's this genuine cooperation. That was over a week ago. The fact that Turkish investigators haven't been able to go back in and haven't been back in, speaks to a lack of cooperation rather than an abundance of it. What is being said in the in the Turkish media here, in many of the outlets both on TV and in the newspapers, is that the Turkish investigators are right now again talking to Saudi authorities about getting into the residence and they could get into that well finally. That hasn't happened. Look, we're here this morning. There's no sign of anyone coming and going from there. So if there was this real cooperation and Turkish authorities, as we understand from officials, do want to get into the basement, do want to see if Jamal Khashoggi's body is in there, the president, Erdogan, said just two days ago it was hugely important to find Khashoggi's body, hugely important to have that cooperation. It just doesn't seem to play out on the ground as the crown prince in Saudi Arabia says it is, which begs the question, what is going on? It doesn't seem to be cooperation.
[Vause:] In some ways this comes back to this excuse which the Saudis put forward, saying it was a rogue operation and that the crown prince knew nothing about. The rogue operation, he knows nothing about the lack of cooperation on the ground. So in many ways it brings into question, well, who is running the place?
[Robertson:] Yes, top to bottom, lots of questions as you say. If the crown prince knowing let's look at the evidence that we see so far. We know Gina Haspel, the CIA director, heading back from her visit to Turkey here, "The Washington Post" at least reporting that she was able to listen to some of that recording of the Turkish officials that have been quietly saying was the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. "The Washington Post" reporting that she's been able to hear that. She'll get a report back to President Trump Thursday, that this newest and latest evidence she's got. And we understand from what the State Department has already done, which is rescinding visas for people inside the royal court as well as the intelligence and foreign ministry in Saudi Arabia, certainly points to the fact that the United States has reason to believe that people very close to the crown prince were responsible. The Saudis themselves have removed a couple of very senior people close to the crown prince from their jobs. But is there is a smoking gun, is there evidence that directly ties the crown prince to this operation? We don't know at the moment. But every official that appears to be briefed on this seems to suspect that is the case. Everyone who knows well how authority works in the Saudi kingdom, you know, knows it passes through the hands of the crown prince. So it is at this stage, given the lack of clarity, the inconsistencies in the Saudi narrative so far, is another inconsistency that the crown prince wasn't involved. The evidence is not all out yet. It does really beg that question. If the crown prince wasn't involved, how come he didn't know to some degree what was going on, this effort to what the Saudis say, a rogue operation that went too far that was supposed to bring him back to Saudi Arabia just doesn't add up.
[Vause:] A snatch and grab operation with a bone saw does not make a lot of sense. Nic, thank you, Nic Robertson live for us there in Istanbul. The Khashoggi killing overshadowed a major investment conference in Saudi Arabia. High-profile companies and big names pulled out. But even so, deals were made. Pakistan walking away with $6 billion from Riyadh, details from Amara Walker.
[Amara Walker, Cnn Correspondent:] As Riyadh feels the international outrage over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Pakistan is finding a friend and financier in Saudi Arabia, sending investors buzzing as Pakistani stocks soared Wednesday.
[Mohammad Javed, Equity Trader:] We expect that the market will further gain. The market will boom even more when the Saudi package is actually inducted in the system in Pakistan.
[Walker:] Pakistan's prime minister, Imran Khan, was quick to secure $6 billion of financial support from Riyadh at Saudi Arabia's so-called Davos in the desert. Several business leaders and government officials have pulled out of the investment conference over the death of insider turned critic Khashoggi. But the Pakistani prime minister says he needs funds fast. He reportedly told news service Middle East Eye, "We actually won't have in another two or three months enough foreign exchange to service our debts or to pay for our imports. So we're desperate at the moment." He reiterated that desperation to shore up Pakistan's economy in Riyadh as well.
[Imran Khan, Pakistan Prime Minister:] So we are talking to both IMF and also we are talking to friendly governments that we could have gone through this difficult period to have get loans.
[Walker:] Saudi Arabia said that they would help, agreeing to $3 billion in foreign currency support for a year and a further loan worth up to $3 billion in deferred payments for oil imports. It is a deal that has earned Khan both praise and criticism at home, some asking whether Saudi Arabia will now expect the Pakistani president to side with them over one of their key allies. Turkey, where Khashoggi's death inside the Saudi consulate there, has rattled officials and the president is openly voicing his disdain.
[Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Of Turkey:] We are determined not to allow a coverup of this murder and to make sure all those responsible, from those who ordered it to those who carried it out, will not be allowed to avoid justice.
[Walker:] But in a cash-strapped Pakistan, Imran Khan has just secured financial assistance that's much needed and larger than many analysts expected. Now the question is how Pakistan's recently elected leader will manage a loan with potentially longstanding implications and the complex regional dynamics that follow Amara Walker, CNN.
[Vause:] The chilling acts of terror, the search is on across the United States for whoever sent multiple pipe bombs to prominent Democratic figures as well as CNN. We'll speak to a former investigator about how this case is being handled. Also it's Kumbaya to the DMZ. North and South Korea clearing out the weapons and making nice, trying to take the hostilities just down a bit, a little notch.

[Manu Raju, Cnn Anchor:] Looking again at live pictures of the total solar eclipse, a rare event. You can actually see from the United States this in Hailey, Idaho. We'll monitor this of course throughout the course of this afternoon. But now Steve Bannon leaving the White House last week, he promise to keep fighting for his brand of conservatism. Now back at the helm of Breitbart, he told Bloomberg this. "If there's any confusion out there, let me clear it up. I'm leaving the White House and going to war for Trump against his opponents, on Capitol Hill, in the media, and in corporate America." Those opponents apparently include some of his former colleagues at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Today, Breitbart blamed the National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster for Trump's impromptu, that's too bad comment, on the USS John S. McCain accident. This comes as a lot of questions about what role Steve Bannon is going to play outside of the White House. What do we think is his red line here? Is there something that's going to cause him to go after the White House, a specific issue, or is he just going to go after the people, his enemies that he's created during his time at the White House?
[Julie Hirschfeld Davis; White House Correspondent, The New York Times:] Well, I would expect it to be fairly broad-based. But I do think that Steve Bannon is going to focus a lot on the wall and this issue of border security. And we heard we saw the President tweet earlier this year about maybe we need a good shutdown. And that's going to be an issue this fall, whether or not they choose to go to the mat over border wall funding. I wouldn't be surprised if Steve Bannon got pretty exercised about that from his new perch, uncentered by any of the constraints that he had in the White House which is not totally clear to me that there were that many constraints. But I mean, the fact that he's been in an influential position on the outside to really make a lot of trouble for Donald Trump and frankly for congressional Republicans if he wanted to. I also think tax cuts is something to look at. I mean, he talked openly or somewhat openly about, you know, raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for middle-class tax cut. That's not something that's going to sit well necessarily with Republicans on the Hill and Donald Trump shut it down, but, you know, he's not in the White House anymore.
[Raju:] And just look at some of the people that we expect him to go after based on his own comments and what we know about his personal relationships in the White House. John Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Dina Powell, Gary Cohn, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, among the people that the President his advisors may be targets of Steve Bannon. But the President seems to be trying to butter up his former chief strategist saying this on Twitter over the weekend. "Steve Bannon will be a tough and smart new voice at Breitbart News, maybe even better than ever before. Fake news needs the competition." The President saying that on Twitter. What do you expect from Bannon?
[Jonathan Martin, National Political Correspondent, The New York Times:] I think the question, Manu, is Bannon, in some, will going to be eclipsed? There's the fun.
[Raju:] Wow. And there is it. Wow.
[Martin:] Look, I think the question in all seriousness is, you just put up that graphic with the folks in the White House that could be a Bannon's targets. Well, guess what? They're all still there. They have the President's ear. Steve Bannon has Breitbart. Look, that's a weapon that should not be dismissed. But I think that the President's instincts are much more Bannon-like but now there's nothing somebody there to reinforce those instincts. In fact, just the opposite. There'll be more folks there who either reinforce and kind of centrism that his daughter and son-in-law reflect or a more traditional kind of, you know, market-based conservatism that folks like Mike Pence reflect. Another case, is a Bannonism law, right?
[Raju:] And will the President listen to this criticism from Breitbart who is clearly reads in this clips from?
[Jeff Mason, White House Correspondent, Reuters:] I think the President has shown he pays a lot of attention to outside sources. I think that means he speaks to outside advisers. I have no doubt that he will continue to speak to Steve Bannon and Steve Bannon will have his ear. Of course, it's different from being inside the White House. But a lot of those instincts that President Trump have came and were reinforced by Steve Bannon, he's going to reinforce that whether he's at the White House or whether he's out.
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] And that story that you showed earlier, the Breitbart story, it was leading the website for most of this morning. I don't know if it still is. And I thought it was interesting. It said, the story said that it showed disrespect for the President and the manipulating the information that was given to him, similar to the decision with Afghanistan. I mean, that is going to be a space to watch, right?
[Raju:] And it's clearly wasting our time right away jumping into that position. Thank you all. Coming up, high-profile viewing event and even special performances all for today's historic eclipse. Singer Bonnie Tyler was on CNN this morning as she prepare to sing her hit "Total Eclipse of the Heart" during the actually total eclipse of the sun. Here's a preview.
[Bonnie Tyler, Singer:] I need you more than ever. And if you only hold me tight, we'll be holding on forever.

[Allen:] And the U.S. says the strikes launched with France and the U.K. were a success. They targeted Syria's chemical weapons program after that suspected chemical attack last week.
[Howell:] Syria, on the other hand, says most of the missiles were intercepted. But the United States says all of them hit their targets. Iran and Russia are critical of the strikes but many NATO countries have been supportive of it. The survivor of one of the first chemical attacks attributed to the Syrian regime is praising President Trump's decision to strike. The gas attack in 2013 targeted Ghouta, not far from the scene of the latest apparent chemical attack.
[Allen:] Then President Barack Obama was criticized at the time for not enforcing his so-called red line on the use of chemical weapons. Kassem Eid survived that attack in 2013 and he spoke with our colleague, Ana Cabrera, about it.
[Kassem Eid, Survivor, Syrian 2017 Sarin Gas Attack:] just want to tell Mr. Trump like directly, I'm a Syrian refugee who survived chemical weapons attacks. Who lived under two years of siege and bombardment by the government. I would love to like, buy you a beer and just sit in front of you and tell you how bad it is in Syria. how you should listen to your heart, not listen to your generals. You proved once again yesterday that you have a big heart. At least a lot more bigger than Obama.
[Howell:] Now of the missiles used, the Tomahawk cruise missile has been the military's go-to in the United States, the main weapons in airstrikes like the one against Syria.
[Allen:] It's been using cruise missiles, the Tomahawk, for many, many years. And Gary Tuchman got a rare look inside the factory where they are made.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] The Tomahawk is considered the world's most advanced cruise missile. It's been used in combat more than 2,000 times by the U.S. Navy from Syria to Sudan to Serbia. And all the new Tomahawks come out of one factory, this one in a city and state we've been asked not to reveal for security reasons. The 20-foot-long Tomahawks are manufactured by The Raytheon Company. Kim Ernzen is one of Raytheon's top missile executives.
[Kim Ernzen, V.p., Raytheon:] This is the final configuration before it goes out the door to our customer. In this facility is where we do the integration of the rocket motors and the warheads, what we call the energetics elements of the missiles. Other components and set assemblies come from our other factories, located here. And then we do the finally assembly here, test it, fuel it and get it ready to go out the door.
[Tuchman:] How soon will these be going out the door?
[Ernzen:] In the next couple of days.
[Tuchman:] In this factory, 14 Tomahawks are about to be shipped out. Workers here are performing what they call a roll test to make sure there is nothing loose inside the missile and that everything is connected properly. Historically, Raytheon's contract with the Navy is for at least 196 missiles each year.
[Ernzen:] Tomahawks can fly 1,000-plus miles. So it can get launched from a ship or a submarine. It can go up and loiter, as we call it, where it can fly around in a figure 8.
[Tuchman:] So in other words, once it's sent off, if you want to change where it's going just goes in a circle
[Ernzen:] It can be redirected and rerouted to a specific target.
[Tuchman:] The Tomahawk has been around since the 1980s. But this is the newest version of the missile, manufactured since 2004. It can be used for up to 30 years and Tomahawks that haven't been used come back after 15 years for recertification and upgrades.
[Ernzen:] So this is the rocket motor that launches it out of the vertical live system. So it is what propels it out. So when you see the footage of a missile coming out of a ship, it is the plume that gets it out of that vertical launch. As you move more up toward the front is the navigation, communications system and then ultimately up here at the very end is the warhead. And it is a 1,000-pound warhead.
[Tuchman:] With their GPS guidance, the Tomahawks can strike within mere feet of a target. They're launched from ships or submarines.
[Ernzen:] It comes from a submarine, it will then swim through the water. The rocket motor will take it up out of the water and then will eventually get it up into the airplane mode, which is where it will fly and perform its mission from there.
[Tuchman:] So it swims and it flies?
[Ernzen:] It swims and it flies.
[Tuchman:] The price tag per missile, about $1.1 million. Each Tomahawk weighs about 3,500 pounds. So when 66 of them are fired toward Syria, that was about 231,000 pounds of firepower. People who work here tell us this isn't just a job.
[Ernzen:] It is an honor to be able to work for the men and women in uniform and to be able to supply them with a competitive advantage when they're put in harm's way. And that's what we do. We make sure that they have an unfair advantage out in theater.
[Tuchman:] So that's what you say, that this gives the U.S. military an unfair advantage?
[Ernzen:] Absolutely. And we want to keep it that way.
[Tuchman:] Gary Tuchman, CNN.
[Allen:] Thank you for watching this hour. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] And I'm George Howell. "NEW DAY" picks up our coverage from here.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Sources are now telling CNN some of the suspicious packages may have come from Florida. The FBI bomb lab is looking for fresh clues tonight. Blaming others. We are told President Trump has no plans to acknowledge that his verbal attacks on his critics might have inspire a serial bomber. Instead, he is renewing his criticism of the news media. And considered dangerous. Police are asking for help in finding other potential bombs that may be on the way to the homes or offices of prominent public figures right now. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You are in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] We're following breaking news on the search for one or more of the political terrorists who have sent packaged bombs to prominent figures who have been criticized by the president. Tonight, sources tell CNN that authorities believe several of the packages went through a mail facility in Opa-locka, Florida, this as police are warning that additional devices may be in the mail right now and should be considered dangerous. Authorities say they're treating all 10 packages that have been intercepted so far as live devices. Three more were discovered today. One was sent to the office of the actor Robert De Niro. Two others were addressed to the former Vice President Joe Biden. I will speak with the New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and with the former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta. And our correspondents and analysts are also standing by. First, let's go to our national correspondent, Miguel Marquez. He's in New York City for us. Miguel, we got an update on the bomb investigation from police and the FBI late today.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. And I want to underscore what you have talked about there, that many of these devices, they believe, originated in Florida because they were processed through a facility there and Opa-locka, Florida. Several of those devices were. Many of these devices either at or on the way now to Quantico, Virginia, where the FBI has his headquarters, desperately trying to get at who is behind planting these devices.
[William Sweeney, Assistant Fbi Director:] We continue to advise the American public to remain vigilant.
[Marquez:] A dire warning for all Americans. There could be more potentially explosive devices out there.
[James O'neill, New York Police Commissioner:] This is something that should be taken seriously. The NYPD and the FBI, we're taking this seriously. We are treating them as live devices. As you see the way our bump squad detectives went into CNN yesterday, this has to be taken with the utmost seriousness.
[Marquez:] But offering assurances hundreds of thousands of postal employees are tracking packages for any potential dangers.
[Phillip Bartlett, U.s. Postal Inspection Service:] We have over 600,000 plus employees out there right now. So we have their eyes and ears looking for these packages.
[Marquez:] At least 10 bombs now discovered from New York to Washington, Florida and California, the latest, two suspected bombs sent to former Vice President Joe Biden. At least one was misaddressed, both earlier today sitting in the U.S. postal facilities in Delaware just miles apart.
[Robert De Niro, Actor:] I just want to make a note of the apology for the idiotic behavior of my president.
[Marquez:] Overnight, another package discovered addressed to actor and Trump critic Robert De Niro at his downtown Manhattan film offices, TriBeCa Productions.
[Bill De Blasio , Mayor Of New York:] The device was removed successfully. Thank God, there were no injuries. The really quick- witted work of a security guard there at that facility in Tribeca is to thanks for the fact that nothing happened and no harm was done to anyone.
[Marquez:] The package sent to De Niro similar to the one addressed to former CIA Director John Brennan and sent to CNN, six U.S. flag forever stamps, but no postmark. The bomb sent to CNN ultimately delivered by courier, the return address, the Florida congressional office of Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz. The device is now in the hands of forensics experts, who will look for the bomb-maker or makers' signatures on the packaging and the devices themselves.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] A low I.Q.-individual, Maxine Waters.
[Marquez:] Two devices also sent to Trump critic California Congresswoman Maxine Waters, one intercepted at a congressional mail sorting facility just outside D.C., the other at a post office facility in Los Angeles. Similar packages sent to President Obama and Hillary Clinton were intercepted before reaching their homes. The package to billionaire and Democratic donor George Soros appeared to be placed in his mailbox. The device to Former Attorney General Eric Holder was sent in the mail, but was returned to Wasserman Schultz's office in South Florida, which, like, the others, used her address for the return. Law enforcement sources calling the devices rudimentary, but functional, and at least one was packed with projectiles meant to inflict greater damage, the FBI calling them potential explosive devices.
[Sweeney:] Any device could be considered potentially dangerous and treated as such until proven otherwise.
[Marquez:] Now, authorities are using that term potentially because they can't quite understand why none of them have exploded or if they were even designed to explode. They're now trying to understand that. Were these actually live devices that could have exploded, or were they meant to just appear as they could have exploded, using all the elements of a bomb, but not actually creating a bomb? Also, one other piece, there was an ISIS flag on some of the bomb pictures that we saw it. They're not taking any of that any credible they're not making that anything credible, they say. They think it was a parody ISIS flag that they could have pulled off the Internet. A lot of questions for investigators as they're trying to dig in to each of these devices to figure out who was behind it Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, Miguel, thank you very much, Miguel Marquez reporting. Let's talk a little bit more about the investigation. Joining us now, our law enforcement analyst, the former FBI special agent Josh Campbell. Anthony Ferrante is with us. He's a former FBI bomb technician. Pamela Brown is our senior White House correspondent. Josh, you're getting some new information the manhunt, the nationwide manhunt for the person or persons who may have been responsible for sending these devices. What are you learning?
[Josh Campbell, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] That's right, Wolf. Thus far, we understand this to be a nationwide investigation. If you look at the number of incidents, this is spanning coast to coast from Los Angeles to the New York area. And now all eyes on Florida. We're getting new information about this mail facility where some of the suspected devices were believed to have processed through. This has been a clue that investigators have been looking for, trying to track that back to the actual location that may have processed some of these devices, because it's a potential treasure trove of intelligence. Now, since the Unabomber case, since the anthrax cases after 911, the U.S. Postal Service has increased their capability technologically, analytically, as far as tracking mail as it transits through the U.S. Postal Service system. So, again, once law enforcement officers are able to track that back to a particular facility, they can then work backwards from there, trying to determine, is there evidence to help determine who actually may have dropped off a mail package at this location? We're talking to some of our law enforcement sources who indicated that it could be as simple as scanning the vicinity of the area. There could be a bank on the corner with CCTV that saw someone coming or going. This is now the focus for law enforcement officers. Again, we're told that they don't they haven't honed this into a particular person. But having the location is a key development for investigators Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Pamela, officials are saying there could be more packages out there. How are law enforcement authorities now looking for potential bombs?
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, they're holding press conferences like what we saw today asking the public for help, not only in trying to determine who could be behind this, whether it be an individual or a group of people. So that is really key and also keeping law enforcement on high alert. It's already paid off in terms of what the FBI has done seeking public help. In the Robert De Niro case, Wolf, the retired police officer recognized the parcel based on the images that had been released through the media, said, wait, this looks like the same type of package. And it turns out that that is now considered one of the suspicious packages, making it 10. So that is a big part of this, is just keeping everyone on high alert and working with the U.S. Postal Service.
[Blitzer:] The investigators, Anthony say that the devices are now being examined at the FBI Quantico lab, not too far away from here in Virginia. What clues are they looking for?
[Anthony Ferrante, Former Fbi Bomb Technician:] So, Wolf, this is an all-hands-on-deck effort right now in the federal government, state and local. Right now, the U.S. government has dedicated a jet to fly around the country to transport this evidence to Quantico. I wouldn't be surprised if this jet is taking off from La Guardia Airport at least twice a day. Having worked some of these crisis incidents before, the Boston bombing, for example, this is all hands on deck, and they're not going to waste time transporting evidence. You're right. They're going to bring it to Quantico to TEDAC, the Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center. This is the preeminent explosive laboratory on the planet. Experts who have analyzed the bombing situations of the last 25, 30 years are there, the USS Cole, Boston bombing, Austin, Benghazi. Globally, this is where they collect all the components of an explosive device. And they're going to analyze it. They're going to determine where it came from. I mean everything, from the ends of the devices, to the wires used, to the material found in the device, to the tape used. And they're going to pull fingerprints from it and the device manufacturers.
[Blitzer:] Let's be precise, because you're a former FBI bomb technician. You have worked in these kinds of cases. Officials are now saying these were potential explosive devices. Yesterday, they were saying they were bombs. So what's the difference?
[Ferrante:] I mean, that's a really tough line to walk. The fact of the matter is, is that to make an explosive device, it must have certain components right? You must have power, a power source. You must have an explosive material. You must have wires, of course. And you must have a detonator, a blasting cap, something to initiate that charge, right? Heat, shock, friction, that's what bomb technicians think about. That's what it takes to ignite one of these devices. Some of that could be simply unscrewing the ends of the pipe, right? The friction from unscrewing that pipe, that cap of the pipe can actually cause enough friction to ignite that. That's why these are so fragile and so dangerous. And until a certified bomb technician clears it, everybody, the American people should consider these extremely dangerous.
[Blitzer:] You speak as a certified bomb technician. You worked in these cases. I want you to stand by, Pamela, Josh. Everybody, stand by. Joining us on the phone right now, the New York governor, Andrew Cuomo. Governor, thanks so much for joining us. We have got a bunch of questions for you. The police, as you know, in New York, they held a news conference over the past few hours. They didn't reveal a whole lot of new details. Are there new leads? Or, frankly, Governor, are the police stumped right now?
[Gov. Andrew Cuomo , New York:] No, I think the investigation is proceeding very well. As you have been talking about on your show, Wolf, the federal government, the FBI, the JTTF, they are all over this. They are working very hard. And you can see how quickly it's progressing. The information about possible mailing from other states, that then gives them a specific location to do research. There have been some caveats to that. If it's a post office that's not in New York, how did they how were their quote "couriers" that delivered packages in New York? They're not necessarily inconsistent, but they're not obviously consistent either. So that is proceeding. The sophistication of the bomb, I think, is the issue that people are talking about. But, even with that, let's remember, you can now download from the Internet information on how to build a bomb, and you don't they don't have to be that sophisticated and work. We have seen that in New York with terrorist attacks where we have had the quote, unquote "lone wolf terrorist" download information and ignite bombs. Some have been successful, some have not been successful. So I think that's a question that they're debating, is the sophistication of the bomb. And then you have a question of, was the purpose was the individual purposely not sophisticated in the construction because they wanted to intimidate, or it was just the best job they could?
[Blitzer:] Have you learned anything, Governor, as far as you know, about the courier who delivered that bomb to the Time Warner Center at Columbus Circle in New York City? Has that person come forward? Do you think the person who delivered the package is the bomber or simply a courier who unwittingly was used by the bomber?
[Cuomo:] That is unknown at this time, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Authorities also believe at least some of these packages went through a facility in Florida. What have you learned about that facility?
[Cuomo:] They are now that is the subject of an intense investigation and in many points a focal point, one of the focal points of the investigation, going through that facility, the cameras in that facility, and who may have seen people come in, et cetera. But that is no doubt one of the focal points of the investigation. You're right. It then brings you back to the courier theory in New York, for which there is no answer right now.
[Blitzer:] Apparently, some of the bombs or packages were delivered through the Postal Service, the postal system. I suspect that there are some reports out there that maybe all of them at least went at least partially through the Postal Service. What does that tell you?
[Cuomo:] Well, the Postal Service has strict regulations after past incidents on how they track packaging. I'm sure this is going to open up another chapter of practices and procedures within the Postal Service, when should they be doing screenings, et cetera. If it turns out to be true that these devices did go through the Postal Service, then I think there that is going to be a serious line of that's going to be a serious line of investigation. But, remember, on a lot of these situations, Wolf, we that's how we learn, right? Things are revealed, flaws in the system are revealed because people exploit them. But, if it is true, then I think one of the first things the federal government has turn to is better precautions at the Postal Service.
[Blitzer:] I know you spoke with President Trump today. How did that phone call come about, and what did he say?
[Cuomo:] The president was it was about the investigation. And the president wanted to make sure that every everyone was coordinated. We chatted about the investigation and some of the things from the investigation, and how well the federal government was providing resources, and were we satisfied in the state of New York? Was there coordination? Was there anything else we needed? He basically ended by saying, anything you need from the federal government, let me know. If they're not doing what we need them to do, he would intervene personally.
[Blitzer:] Did he initiate the call, or did you?
[Cuomo:] We had missed each other yesterday. The days have blended together. I think we missed each other yesterday, and then we went back and forth this morning. I'm not even sure who called whom.
[Blitzer:] All right, Governor, good luck to you. Good luck to all the men and women who are trying to find the bomber or bombers out there. Appreciate it very much. Thank you for joining us.
[Cuomo:] Thank you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, just ahead, we're going to have more on the search for the serial bomber or bombers why investigators are now focused again on Florida. And after first calling for unity, President Trump is now blaming the news media for what he calls anger in U.S. society. But what about his own hostile rhetoric?

[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm George Howell live in Atlanta. Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. Other stories we're following this hour here on CNN. The roar of lava spewing into the air on Hawaii's Big Island. New fissures opened up, posing a new threat and causing new evacuations. Plus, this is the week Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tie the knot. We'll take you live to Windsor to see how people are marking the occasion with a beer.
[Anderson:] We are just a few hours away from what is an historic event here in Jerusalem. For the first time since the country's founding, the U.S. embassy will be located here. U.S. President Donald Trump making that decision late last year to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move the embassy from Tel Aviv. Well, a high level U.S. delegation is now in town including the treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin and President Trump's daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner. Mr. Trump will appear in a pre-recorded message, but not everybody here is celebrating the move. Palestinians are planning a day of protests. Jerusalem is a Holy City of course to them as well, and they say recognizing it as Israel's capital undermines their claim. They say the U.S. decision disqualifies Washington as an impartial broker in any IsraeliPalestinian peace talks in the future. And they are getting support from Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan says, and I quote, "Jerusalem, especially East Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine. We know this, he said, in an Islamic world." Well, that is in stark contrast to comments from Israel's prime minister. Have a listen.
[Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister:] You can't base peace on a foundation of lies. You base peace on the foundations of truth. And the truth is that not only has Jerusalem been the capital of the Jewish people for millennium and the capital of our state from its inception, the truth is that under any peace agreement you could possibly imagine, Jerusalem will remain Israel's capital.
[Anderson:] Well, CNN's Oren Liebermann here with me in Jerusalem at the start of what can only be described as a very, very politically emotive charged week, Oren.
[Oren Liebermann, Correspondent, Cnn:] Absolutely. Probably the most sensitive most volatile week in the entire calendar, and that's because of everything that's going on this week. And that begins with Jerusalem day, which was the festivity yesterday where Israelis mark what they consider the reunification of the Holy City. It's marked with a provocative parade of Israeli Jews through the Muslim quarter of the old city. That leads into embassy movement today, which is today. A number of festivity, ceremonies, reception, press conferences around that, and that leads right into Nakba Day where Palestinians mark what they consider the catastrophe of the creation of the state of Israel. On top of that, this week is also the beginning of the holy month of Ramadan. That comes with its own tensions. So, all of that gives so many flash points to this week. But one thing is absolutely for certain. This is a week where Israelis will be celebrating.
[Liebermann:] Israel recently marked its 70th birthday with celebrations and speeches. Among the reasons for the Israeli leaders to celebrate was this.
[Netanyahu:] We are delighted with President Trump's decision to move the embassy here. It says a simple thing. Peace must be based on truth.
[Liebermann:] But why is this such a big deal? Israel has always seen Jerusalem as its capital city. Why not the rest of the world? A bit of history here. Israel was established in 1948. Jerusalem was a split city between Israel and Jordan for nearly two decades after that until 1967 when Israel occupied east Jerusalem and the West Bank. When Israel annexed east Jerusalem in 1980, countries pulled their embassies out of the city in protest. That's because east Jerusalem is supposed to be the capital of a future Palestinian state. The U.S., meanwhile, had its embassy in Tel Aviv. In 1995, the U.S. passed a law requiring the country to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, but every president since then, Republican and Democrat, has waived the move, citing national security concerns. President Donald Trump promised during his campaign to move the embassy, a promise he kept in December.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] But today we finally acknowledge the obvious, that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. This is nothing more or less than a recognition of reality.
[Liebermann:] So where will the new embassy be located? Right here behind me in what is now the U.S. office for consular services. This is where you would come to renew a passport or apply for a visa. The building itself sits right next to the green line which delineates east from west Jerusalem. It sits firmly in west Jerusalem but an expansion to the building to make it the embassy will require some building in no-man's land which is sort of a buffer zone between east and west Jerusalem. It holds very little practical significance in terms of modern day Jerusalem, and yet that zone contains incredible political importance. The mayor of Jerusalem celebrated the official opening by posting the new road signs.
[Nir Barkat, Mayor, Jerusalem:] It sends a very, very clear message to the Jerusalemites and others the intention and the back and the support Israel has in the sovereignty of the city of Jerusalem.
[Liebermann:] Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said more countries were looking at moving their embassies to Jerusalem as well. So far only Guatemala and Paraguay have committed to taking that step.
[Anderson:] John Bolton, the new U.S. National security adviser echoing many in the Trump administration when he says recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital makes peace easier. Not as far as the Palestinians are concerned. What are we hearing from them?
[Liebermann:] Not at all. That is also a line we've heard from Benjamin Netanyahu himself, but it's a recognition of reality. When Trump said that he tried to frame it by saying this is where foreign leaders meet with Israeli leaders. This is where the Knesset sits, the Supreme Court, this is where the government is held and yet that's not how it was taken at all. Palestinians are furious about this. Jerusalem's final status was supposed to come at the end of negotiations. And this anger hasn't abated at all. In fact, we just got a statement a short time ago from Palestinian secretary general PLO Secretary General, Saeb Erekat and I'll read you a part of that statement. It reads, "This infamous hostile act against international law and against the people of Palestinian places the U.S. on the occupying power of Israel which continues to oppress the Palestinian people and colonize their lands towards destroying the possibility of region of just, comprehensive, and lasting peace." The anger hasn't abated, hasn't dissipated at all from the Palestinians and that's why they consider the U.S. no longer able to act as a mediator and arbiter of peace negotiations, which they have done for so many decades.
[Anderson:] We have no details on what the next plan is, of course, for the U.S. vis-a-vis peace negotiations. We await to hear this seemingly intractable conflict continues. Thank you for the time being. That's the latest from Jerusalem. A lot more to come in the hours ahead, though. George, back to you in Atlanta.
[Howell:] Becky, certainly we know that security has been raised there in Jerusalem ahead of what could be a volatile week. We'll be back in touch with you later in the hour for more of your reporting from Jerusalem. Now to the Iran nuclear deal. Iran's president says that Europe has a limited amount of time to preserve the nuclear agreement. Hassan Rouhani says that Iran will remain committed to the accord just so long as its interests are ensured, but there is opposition to that from hard liners. In the meantime, Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif continues his international tour trying to convince other signatories to keep the agreement despite the U.S. backing out of it. He is now in Moscow, following his first stop in Beijing. The U.S. president, Donald Trump reinforced his opposition on Twitter, saying this. "Remember how badly Iran was behaving with the Iran deal in place? They were trying to take over the Middle East by whatever means necessary. Now that will not happen." And the U.S. national security adviser John Bolton telling my colleague Jake Tapper European firms that do business with Iran could face possible sanctions. Listen.
[Jake Tapper, Host, Cnn:] So President Trump said this week, quote, any nation that helps Iran in its quest for nuclear weapons could also be strongly sanctioned by the United States. Is the United States going to sanction European companies that do business with Iran?
[John Bolton, United States National Security Adviser:] I think the issue here is what the Europeans are going to do. If they're going to see that it's not in their interest to stay in the deal, we're going to have to watch what the Iranians do. They'd love to say in the deal. Why shouldn't they? They got everything they wanted from the Obama administration. But I think the Europeans will see that it's in their interests ultimately to come along with us.
[Howell:] And CNN covering this story with our correspondents around the world. Our Fred Pleitgen standing by in Tehran, Iran. But first our Matthew Chance, following the story live this hour in Moscow. Matthew, first to you, of course with Javad Zarif's visit to Moscow there, it again puts Russia again in a unique position here to be a power broker in the Middle East, working even closer with European nations that are at odds with this U.S. decision to back out of this deal.
[Matthew Chance, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, I mean, and it's true that Russia does occupy this unique position between those European signatories of the Iran nuclear deal and with Iran itself. It's got really good relations with Iran because it's fighting side by side with Iran to support their joint ally in Syria, Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president. They've got a long-standing nuclear relationship with Iran as well. They're kind of building or have been planning to build a network of nuclear reactors for some decades now in Iran. And of course diplomatically, they've always supported that country when it came to the negotiations to forge that nuclear deal. So yes, Russia is in this unique position to try and encourage the Iranians to stay within the framework of the nuclear deal, despite the fact that the United States has pulled out. And that means Russia is increasingly essential to the efforts of the European signatories as well. Because without Russia encouraging Iran, Iran is much more likely to leave the framework of the deal. Of course, Russia is acting in its own interests as well, because it sees this deal as important. That's why it signed it. It sees it first of all, as the best way of preventing Iran developing nuclear weapons, which is why it was such an integral part in forging that deal. But it's also concerned, Moscow that is, also concerned about what comes next, what the plan B is as it's called of the United States. And the concern in Moscow is that it's regime change. And of course Moscow is fundamentally opposed to any kind of action to change a regime in the Middle East and elsewhere that is sympathetic towards itself. And so, yes, that's what is driving the Russians. They want Iran to stay in this deal as much as all the European partners do as well.
[Howell:] Matthew Chance, thank you for the reporting. Let's cross over to Fred Pleitgen live in Tehran. Fred, again, as we heard from the Iranian president, the pressure is on Europe. Iran wants this deal. It does mean investment but is there just as much concern there that these U.S. sanctions will bite and keep business away regardless of how this deal is tried, they try to salvage it?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, there certainly is a lot of concern about this country's economy here in Tehran. Of course, and the rest of the country as well. I think right now as far as Iran's position is concerned, there is really three main factors. On the one hand, you have the economic impact that you were just talking about. That's been severe even before the United States pulled out of the agreement. I mean, even in a run-up when it start to became clear that the Trump administration was not going to go forward with the U.S. inside the nuclear agreement, the currency here in this country essentially tanked. There was lot of economic concern. Right now, there is restrictions on how much money can be exchanged. So, yes, there is a lot of concern going forward about that. Then of course the question is, what is the reaction here inside the country? There is a lot of people who said that there would be a lot of turmoil between the hard liners and the moderates. That's only happened to a certain extent. I think one of the things that's really interesting is that Iran's supreme leader who in the end has to sign off on any anything that happens in this country, he said look, we don't trust the Europeans to try and salvage this deal, to try and maintain Iran's interest but at the same time they are going to give these negotiations a chance. They're going give the moderate government under Hassan Rouhani and especially the foreign minister right now Javad Zarif who, of course, worked exceptionally hard to get this deal going in the first place under the last U.S. administration, we're going to give them a chance and see if all this works out. But they're also saying Iran's interest needs to be maintained, which of course means direct investment in this country, especially by European companies. And that's what then brings us to Javad Zarif's trip that he is doing to China, Russia, and then Europe next. And that is of course absolutely essential. And I think really, the trip to Europe, the one that he is doing tomorrow in Brussels where he is meeting representatives of the European Union, and then also those key European countries, Germany, France and Britain, that is going to be really a pivotal moment for the future of the nuclear agreement, because that's where the Europeans, as far as the Iranians are concerned, are going to have to decide what they're going to do. Are they going to push back against the United States and try and protect and insulate their companies that want to do business, or are they going to feel that that's not in their interest or they're not capable of doing that. The Iranians are saying it has to be clear that European companies who invest in Iran cannot be stopped by the United States, can't feel pressure or fear by the United States. That's a pretty tall order considering obviously these European companies are long-term and very strong allies of the United States. Notwithstanding the fact that all of them are pretty angry at the United States for pulling out of this agreement, especially after you have the French president and the German chancellor go to Washington and try to speak to President Trump. A lot of them really feel like the U.S. really has not really sold them out, but certainly has not acted in Europe's interests. So it's going to be a pivotal meeting tomorrow, but certainly there is a lot of concern here in Tehran, George.
[Howell:] You took the words right out of my mouth, pivotal indeed, especaily with these long-time allies, you know. Where does this go from here? Fred Pleitgen live for us in Tehran, thank you. Still ahead here on CNN Newsroom, the latest on a wave of deadly terror attacks in Indonesia. Some shocking details to tell you about given Sunday's suicide blasts. Stay with us.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] OK, more breaking news. President Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, is live on television. He is responding, just moments ago, to the president's apparent change in the story on the Stormy Daniels payment. Listen to this.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Attorney:] He didn't know the details of this until we knew the details of it, which was a couple of weeks ago. Maybe not even a couple maybe 10 days ago. Remember when this came up, October 2016. I was with him day in and day out then. I can't remember the details of what happened.
[Unidentified Male:] Why
[Giuliani:] And this was I know $135,000 I don't want to demean it but $130,000 sounds like a lot of money. It's not when you're putting $100 million into your campaign. It isn't pocket change
[Unidentified Male:] Right.
[Giuliani:] but it's pretty close to it at the end.
[Cuomo:] All right. Let's bring back CNN political analyst David Gregory and CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. Let's start with the law and move to the B.S. Jeffrey, what you're hearing there right now from Rudy, what does it mean?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Well, I mean I mean, speaking of B.S., I mean, what are they talking about? All of a sudden Donald Trump doesn't remember whether he reimbursed Michael Cohen for $130,000 paid to Stormy Daniels? Is that remotely credible, especially since the president just said on Air Force One a couple of weeks ago he knew he didn't do it? So, I mean, like how I mean, what are they doing? You know, look, I'm not someone who throws around the word lying but, I mean, they're just lying about all this stuff. I mean, there is no plausible explanation other than they are just lying about this entire series of events.
[Camerota:] Well, for sure, somebody's lying since the story has changed so often. But their story OK just so that we know it, based upon last night that Rudy Giuliani said for the first time publicly on Sean Hannity's show he said that Donald Trump had been paying Michael Cohen a retainer of $35,000 a month and so that is how Rudy Giuliani sees this repayment. That adds up over four months. You get to $130,000. And Donald Trump didn't need to know what that was going to because it was a retainer that he paid automatically every month.
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] But it's not I think Jeffrey would agree that and all the lawyers that I've spoken to say that it's just not plausible that you have a lawyer who is going to make a payment who's going to resolve an issue like this and not share it with the client. And that why, by the way, was the Stormy Daniels accusation the one that had to be dealt with and settled. But what about all the other allegations? Those were not important and this one suddenly was? This was the most important one? I mean, it doesn't make sense that you're going to you have all this money, even if it's in a retainer doesn't know specifically that he's not going to share oh, this is a big one that we've got to settle because it could become a big P.R. disaster. So you have to believe that a lot of this lying and covering up about this is because they think it's a totally inappropriate expansion of a potential expansion of the Mueller investigation and they think it doesn't have anything to do with anything else. And now, it's gotten too far gone that they now have to try to explain it.
[Cuomo:] Right. Now and Jeffrey, let's just shed a little light on what's going on here which is very evident from the president's tweets, OK? This isn't getting in the weeds. This is a different standard. Obviously, they're lawyering up and they are preparing to deal with any legal exposure.
[Toobin:] Right.
[Cuomo:] And very often, the standard is different. For the court, it's you only know what you show, Mr. Judge and people of the jury listening to this prosecutor. So this all works what Rudy Giuliani is saying -in terms of the burden of proof that might be applied to any prosecution. But this is a very different standard. When stories evolve, that is a lack of credibility. When people tell you different things it's a lack of credibility. That's the court of public opinion but this is the President of the United States. He owes a duty to the people and not just to his own behind in covering for legal exposure.
[Toobin:] Right. Now, what Giuliani seems to be focused on is and this is proper for an attorney is was there any violation of law by Donald Trump in connection with this whole Stormy Daniels story? Now, the one theory of the possible illegality was that there was some misuse of campaign funds that was used pay her or that there was some sort of unlawful campaign contribution. He is saying that there was no campaign money used and he's saying further that Donald Trump was not using was not making a campaign contribution when he was paying this money to Michael Cohen. That may be a debatable proposition. But as you point out Chris, he's focused on is there any illegality here and asserting no.
[Camerota:] OK. David Gregory, Jeffrey Toobin, thank you very much. We have so much news. We need to move on because we're now seeing new video of the officers who were trying to stop the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. When they what they encountered when they stormed the Las Vegas killer's room, next.

[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, and happy New Year's Eve. I'm Ryan Nobles, in for Brooke Baldwin. It's 3:00 in New York, but it is officially 2019 in Dubai, Oman and parts of Russia. Live pictures here from Dubai. Looks like a pretty good party there. But, when the clock strikes 12:00 back in the United States, the East Coast will be hit with heavy rain showers.
[Nobles:] Now let's go to our team of reporters covering celebrations across the United States and beyond. Randi Kaye drew the tough assignment. She is in St. Barts. And it looks like she has a golf bag behind. We're going to get to we're going to get to Randi in a second, because we have to go to Miguel first, who's in the pouring rain in Times Square. Randi, Miguel's just slightly mad at you right now.
[Randi Kaye, Cnn Correspondent:] That's OK.
[Nobles:] Miguel, it looks like the crowds there...
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Randi Kaye, I will get you!
[Nobles:] Miguel, what are the crowds like there right now at Times Square? I mean, we're pretty far away from the ball drop, but it looks like they're already starting to fill in.
[Marquez:] Well, it's not St. Barts, but we are enjoying the purifying celebratory rain that only New York City can bring. It is gorgeous here. And there are already tens of thousands of people who are packed in here. And look at those happy souls over there under plastic. They may be they may be having an issue with too much carbon dioxide in that one bag. I'm a little concerned about those people. But these folks have been packed in here for many, many hours. Why? Because they have front-row seats. Those are the good seats, folks, because that's the pole where the ball actually drops at midnight here in Times Square. This is a little sense of the crowd a little closer up now. We have people from all over. You guys ready for this? Happy new year!
[Crowd:] Happy new year!
[Marquez:] Japan's represented here, Korea. Where you guys from? The Persians or here. Oh, my God. Kansas City in the house, newlyweds, and Wisconsin just north of Madison.
[Nobles:] All right, we are going to go now sorry about that, Miguel to Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is speaking about her presidential bid. Here she is.
[Sen. Elizabeth Warren , Massachusetts:] ... the United States. I never thought I would run for anything ever in my life. But America's middle class is getting hollowed out and opportunity for too many of our young people is shrinking. So I'm in this fight all the way. Right now, Washington works great for the wealthy and the well- connected. It's just not working for anyone else. But I am optimistic. I believe in what we can do together. I'm going to build a grassroots campaign. It's already got people from all across this country who are going to be part of it. And, together, we're going to make change. And if people out there see it and want to be part of it, I hope they go to ElizabethWarren.com and join us, because this is how we're going to build the movement that will change America. So, thank you all for being here. You have a question?
[Question:] You know the urgency that a lot of Democrats feel about defeating Donald Trump in 2020.
[Warren:] Yes.
[Question:] What's your message to the Democratic primary voters who says, I love where Senator Warren stands on the issue, but I worry about electability, I worry about a campaign more about Native American ancestry than the middle class?
[Warren:] Well, look, I'm in this fight because I understand what's happening to working families. I grew up in a paycheck-to-paycheck family, and my big chance was a commuter college that cost $50 a semester. I run for office because I'm grateful down to my toes for the opportunities that were given to me. And I am determined that we will give those same opportunities not just to some of our kids, but to all of our kids. I think when we fight for something positive, for something big, when we show, not just tell, but show what Democrats will get out there and make happen, I think that's how we win.
[Question:] Do you think your politics are too polarizing for a national audience?
[Warren:] Look, the way I see it right now, Washington works great for giant drug companies, but just not for people who are trying to get a prescription filled. Washington works great for for-profit colleges and student loan outfits, but not for young people who are getting crushed by student loan debt. And you could keep going through the list. The problem we have got right now in Washington is that it works great for those who've got money to buy influence. And I'm fighting against that. And you bet it's going to make a lot of people unhappy. But at the end of the day, I don't go to Washington to work for them. Our government should be working for the people. And that's the movement I'm going to lead.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] You articulated this very point throughout the course of your career. And you saw a real estate developer from New York expropriate that message in 2016. How do you basically convince people that this message is still a message that belongs to the Democratic Party, given that it's again, it's been expropriated and used effectively by a real estate developer?
[Warren:] We have to get out there and be clear about what we're fighting for. And then we got to show we're willing to fight for it. It's not enough just to talk the talk. We have actually got to be willing to get out and walk the walk. And that means we have got to stand behind the kinds of changes that will matter in the lives of everyday people. And when that means standing up to big drug companies, we won't do what this administration has done. And that is said, raise prices whenever you want. We will say, we're going to make real change.
[Question:] A follow-up. How does your message compare to you that of Sherrod Brown, for example, and others who are making some of the same points?
[Warren:] I think it's great that we have a strong and growing group of Democrats who are making these arguments, who are fighting these fights. That's how we build a movement. We do it together.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] Do you expect that you need to go head to head, toe to toe with him and hurl it right back at him, as you know he has already started to do to you? Is that part of winning this?
[Warren:] Look, I think the central part of winning this is to get out and talk with people about what we're fighting for. We want a government that works not just for the rich and the powerful. We want a government that works for everyone. And we can make that happen. We have to do it together. I think that's how we win.
[Nobles:] All right, we are going to break away from this, Elizabeth Warren, who today announced that she's forming an exploratory committee to run for president of the United States speaking to reporters for the first time since that happened. Harry Enten joins me now, senior political writer and analyst for CNN, CNN. Harry, I'm surprised I'm not surprised, but impressed that she didn't just come out and make a blanket statement, but actually answering questions from reporters. I don't know how much she's answering them in specificity.
[Harry Enten, Cnn Political Senior Writer And Analyst:] Sure.
[Nobles:] But this, I think, demonstrates that she's taking this seriously and that she's ready to get her foot out there and take that first step.
[Enten:] I mean, she's definitely taking it seriously. And the fact that she was really the first major candidates to put her foot into the ring, I think, suggests that she recognizes that she's going to have to work hard for this nomination, just as any other candidate will. But it was very interesting to me to hear the questions and her responses to them on the questions of electability, as well as on the question of, she's not going to be the only progressive voice in this campaign.
[Nobles:] Right. Right.
[Enten:] Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown are most likely to get into this race. And how is she going to separate herself from them in order to win the nomination?
[Nobles:] It's interesting. I have heard a lot of Democrats answer very similarly along the same lines that she did, by saying the more the merrier, let's get more voices out there who think in similar ways that I do. The more of us talking about it, the better that is for the country. At some point, though, you have got to draw some lines of distinction between you and these other candidates, right?
[Enten:] Absolutely. I mean, keep in mind, it's still December 31, right? We haven't even gotten into 2019. But, as we get closer to 2020, I think you will see those progressive voices start to go at each other. But, at this point, I think they're just happy to be in the race and want to see, before they go negative, can they make a step going positive?
[Nobles:] OK, Harry Enten, thank you for being here...
[Enten:] Thank you, sir.
[Nobles:] ... to hear this latest from Elizabeth Warren here. You're very interesting, but you're not nearly as interesting all as this next person that we're going to go to or where she happens to be.
[Enten:] Oh.
[Nobles:] And that is our Randi Kaye. Randi, basically, everyone here in the New York City bureau is jealous of you. We know Miguel is jealous of you because he's out in the pouring rain.
[Kaye:] I know.
[Nobles:] Explain to us where you are and what is going on in St. Barts and how they're going to ring in the new year.
[Kaye:] Well, I am in St. Barts. And I am at Gustavia, which is the main port here. And this is really a billionaire's playground, because this is where everybody comes for New Year's Eve. But, as you remember, Ryan, many year well, last year, there was 170 mile-an-hour winds here from Hurricane Irma, destroyed much of St. Barts. There was more than a billion dollars' worth of damage. But you can see that they have rebuilt. And if you take a look at this scene here behind me, these are all multi, multi, hundreds of million dollar yachts. It's incredible here, just absolutely incredible. As we pan around, these are owned by mainly billionaires. They come here for the New Year's Eve celebration. It's a huge party. A lot of celebrities are here. Paul McCartney's here. Mariah Carey is performing tonight. But we are on a yacht called the Gene Machine. Thanks to Super Yacht St. Barth and Gene Machine for hosting us. And let me just tell you about this yacht. It's 180-feet-long. It has jet skis here. I'm not sure if you can see. It has a Jacuzzi. It has a swimming area in the back, a Jacuzzi, and then it also has a rope that you can climb up the side with for fun. It has a water slide that you can go out. They put it out in the water when they're not tethered here in port and you can go down the water slide. It also has what I'm standing on here, a golf green, can you believe it, right here. So I'm no golfer, but just for kicks, and so everybody can have a good laugh at me, I am going to give it my best. Now, there's some boat traffic. So we're going to yell fore, and we're going to make sure that I don't hit anybody. But let's see. OK. Ryan, I don't know if you're a golfer. But I'm going to try my best here. Hold on. We got a boater going by. Stand by. One moment. It's busy. It's busy time here, so lots of traffic. But we're going to be on we're going to be on this yacht tonight for the big New Year's Eve show at 8:00, and starting at 8:00 p.m. OK, here we go. Oh, did you see it went? It was perfect. I know you didn't follow it. We're going to do one more before I let you go. Here.
[Nobles:] All right.
[Kaye:] There's a green out there. You see that? There's a green. I'm going to try and hit that before any other boats come by.
[Nobles:] Did you hit it?
[Kaye:] You ready? Here we go. We're going to try it. One more.
[Nobles:] All right, very close.
[Kaye:] Ooh, I got about halfway there. Anyway, we're going to have a great party tonight. So much fun. I hope you will join us from sunny St. Barts back to you, Ryan.
[Nobles:] All right, Randi Kaye definitely drew the short straw for CNN today. Excellent swing, Randi. We're all very impressed back here in New York.
[Kaye:] Thank you.
[Nobles:] Thank you, Randi. Still ahead: Comedian Louis C.K. walks into yet another controversy by mocking the students who survived the Parkland shooting in his routine. You will hear the tape for yourself. But, first, here's a look at more of Dubai's spectacular New Year's show. Look at that. Unbelievable. That's from just moments ago.

[King:] Arizona Senator John McCain's emotional return to Washington adds a compelling human drama to the high stakes political debate over ObamaCare repeal and replace ideas. Senator McCain's vote was critical to moving forward. But the senator, just days removed from a brain cancer diagnosis, made clear he has giant doubts about his party's ideas on health care reform and more broadly about its ability to get much of anything done.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] We're getting nothing done, my friends, we're getting nothing done. And all we have really done this year is confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. Our health care insurance system is a mess. We Republicans have looked for a way to end it and replace it with something else without paying a terrible political price. We haven't found it yet and I'm not sure we will.
[King:] His lecture included this McCain prescription for improving the country's polarized politics.
[Mccain:] Stop listening to the bombastic loudmouths on the radio and television and the internet. To hell with them. Let's trust each other, let's return to regular order. We've been spinning our wheels on too many important issues because we keep trying to find a way to win without help from across the aisle.
[King:] It's a fascinating speech, most of us had to watch it on television. Dana Bash was in the Senate Chamber when they played out. You've been there for number of remarkable moments over the year. You've covered Senator McCain for quite a bit there. A lecture to his colleagues there. Some would say hypocritical that he claims to be the maverick and vote against with the Republicans. But take us inside the room.
[Bash:] It really was remarkable. First of all, it was obviously up against the backdrop of legislative drama. The question of whether or not they would be able to go to debate. And that all have just kind of evaporated from the moment when Senator McCain walked on to the doors of the Senate Chamber and everybody applauded which you could see on T.V. What they couldn't necessarily see was, that there was an impromptu kind of receiving line that happen. And that McCain, you know, we have covered them both for so long. He was so happy to have, you know, the respect, and he has such friendships that he really cherishes. But you can tell he was a little uncomfortable because, you know, he knew why this was happening because of his very bad prognosis. But for me, watching that was one thing but then I looked up at the visitor's gallery just above, and his wife Cindy McCain was sitting right in the front row and she was looking over watching that scene before he even spoke. And she's wearing this bright yellow dress, as if she was trying hoping that that would kind of make her feel better but she couldn't help that. I mean, she was pushing back tears, she was clutching a tissue. And, you know, it was really, really emotional to see that especially, you know, people who have gotten to see their relationship and their partnership through all these years of politics.
[King:] And we don't see here in Washington that often. So she's sensing as well the scope of this moment, the gravity of the moment. Thanks for joining us in the INSIDE POLITICS. We'll see you right back here same time tomorrow. Wolf Blitzer is up after a quick break. Have a great day.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] You are in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Thanks for being here. President Trump today taking to Twitter more than usual. All of these messages related to the hurricane disaster. Not all of them positive. Now in the most startling tweet, he called the mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico, a poor leader. He wrote this this morning. "Poor leadership ability by the mayor of San Juan and others." Also this referring to Puerto Ricans in general. They want everything to be done for them when it should be a community effort. That's poor leadership comment he was aiming at San Juan's Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz Soto. She had been pleading with the U.S. federal government to move faster and more efficiently and with less red tape, to get food and water and medical help to desperately needy people in her city. Here is an update on where the recovery stands right now in Puerto Rico. And most officials say, just five percent of electricity has been restored. Also, about half of the island's water service is back. Just 11 percent of Puerto Rico's cellphone towers are working. Electricity has team covering this recovery work from Puerto Rico to the White House and we want to start with our Ryan Nobles who is just getting right now more reaction from the President who is continued to tweet this out this afternoon. Ryan.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Yes, that's right Ana, it is been a busy day on Twitter for the President of the United States. He's tweeted 15 different times about what's happening in Puerto Rico. Most of those tweets about him defending himself and defending his administration from the criticism of their response to exactly what's happening in Puerto Rico. Much of his criticism aimed at the mayor of San Juan who has been very critical of the administration in general but is actually never specifically criticized President Trump himself but has pleaded for his help in the administration to help the people of Puerto Rico. But I want to talk a little bit about the time line of the President's tweets today. We do know that he's at his golf course in New Jersey. This is the second weekend in a row that he is been here and his tweets started early this morning at around 8:07 a.m. And then there was a gap of about six hours before the President started tweeting again at around 2:04 p.m. The President then took a series of calls for about 45 minutes with various leaders from the region in Puerto Rico, including the governor of Puerto Rico, the former governor of Puerto Rico, the congresswoman there and as well as the governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Then at around 3:19, after those calls wrapped up, the President begin tweeting again, basically giving a read out of these calls and saying complementary things about these leaders that he spoke to. Now, we don't know what happened between those six hours between when the President started those tweets and stopped the tweets and then began again. But we did specifically ask the White House if the President golfed at all today. And they did not respond one way or the other. And they generally do not comment on whether or not the President has been golfing. But Ana, it's important to point out that he is again at this golf course, he was at the golf course last week as well. Just a few days after hurricane Maria had hit land fall in Puerto Rico. And the devastation there was already apparent. Now he did hold a series of briefings and tele-conversations with leaders in Puerto Rico a little bit before this storm and after. But that following weekend as the devastation was really starting to set in, there were no phone calls or conversations that we know of that took place. Now, he was a little busier this weekend, obviously pushing back on this criticism that he's received for the response to the situation and there are now tens of thousands of troops and FEMA personnel on the ground in Puerto Rico with a specific goal of trying to help the citizens there. And of course, the President will travel to Puerto Rico on Tuesday. First Lady Melania Trump will be joining him. The question is Ana, what type of reception will he receive after he was so critical of the mayor of San Juan and truly was critical of the people on the ground there saying that they need to do more to help themselves in his tweets this morning. We certainly saw a very welcome reception when he visited other parts of the United States. Now, he's heading to an American territory filled with American citizens who are in desperate need of the federal government's help Ana.
[Cabrera:] Ryan, talking more about the President's upcoming trip to Puerto Rico. Do we know what the agenda looks like? Does he plan to meet with the mayor of San Juan, perhaps?
[Nobles:] That's a great question, Ana. And at this point, there are no plans for him to meet with the mayor of San Juan. And the two of them have had no communications throughout this entire situation. Now we should point out that they are of different political parties and in the past before hurricane Maria blew in, Mayor Cruz was very critical of Donald Trump on a variety of other issues that have nothing to do with the hurricane response. But since the hurricane blew through, she's made a number of desperate pleas to try and get more help for her people. And she was critical of the acting director of Homeland Security Elaine Duke who said that the response was going very well. And that's when she made an emotional response to that on CNN where she said that that just wasn't the case. But in terms of her interaction with Donald Trump, they have all been through television screens and through the internet, they have not had any formal conversations one on one or even in a group setting. We'll have to see if that changes when he travels to the region on Tuesday. As we said, today he had five different phone calls today and she was not among the leaders that he spoke with.
[Cabrera:] Ryan Nobles travelling with the President in New Jersey. Thank you. Let me take us now to San Juan and CNN's Leyla Santiago. And Leyla, I know the President as we discuss is planning to visit Puerto Rico on Tuesday given what he has been twitting today. What kind of reception will he get there?
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, it is actually been pretty mix. A lot of people are not happy with what the President had to say. Because they believe Puerto Ricans are doing everything they can to help each other out right now. And one example of that, you know, I was today with super star Daddy Yankee, the musician who is here and he's working with the food bank to do everything he can to get food, to get aid out to the people of Puerto Rico. We rode along with him as he distributed a week's worth of food to more than 4,000 families. And when that help arrived, Ana. I saw elderly with medical needs. I saw young children with their mothers waiting in line because help had not arrived. They told me that FEMA has been in that area which is somewhat close to San Juan. And they told me that FEMA had been in the area to distribute water. But beyond that, many of them are still without power. So, let's actually go over some of those numbers. Right now 33 percent of the communication infrastructure has been restored. Fifty percent of the water services has been restored. But when it comes to power, only five percent of this island has power right now. Everybody else is running on generators and those generators are running out of diesel. So, that means people are getting desperate because FEMA maybe here and FEMA maybe doing damaging assessment but when it comes to those remote areas, those areas of the most vulnerable people, that help is still not arriving Ana.
[Cabrera:] What is your sense of what they need most right now, Leyla?
[Santiago:] Medical aid. A lot of people are getting desperate because hospitals are down. Diesel, the lines for gas. The lines for diesel because the diesel powers the generators. And when you have an island of only five percent of power, those generators are crucial. Crucial in the hospitals, crucial in the homes, crucial in the homes of elderly. And so, right now there are long lines and people are waiting in line for hours at gas stations and trying to get their hands on gas. The water seems to be a better situation today especially given that we heard that FEMA is already distributing that in areas that were really hitting hard by Hurricane Maria. And 50 percent of water services have been restored. That is according to FEMA and the governor's office backing them up on those numbers. But communication is still a major problem. People who have not been able to reach families, to let them know they are okay. People who can't get news. We have no idea how to reach FEMA because there is no communication.
[Cabrera:] That must be so weird for so many people to feel in this information, black hole. Leyla Santiago, thank you for your wonderful reporting. And our best to your family. I know you are from Puerto Rico and you have family there and had an emotional reunion with them in the last 24 hours or so. Our Ivan Watson is also there, has been surveying the damage, has been speaking with the Americans there. And Puerto Rico who need the help. And Ivan, based on what we are hearing, it sounds like electricity is a big thing. But these basic necessities, food, water, gas, medicine are also hard to come by for a lot of people, given there are still areas that are more disconnected than the main city like San Juan, how is all of that getting to those people?
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] That's the big question here. You know the roads, the highways that I have traveled on out of the capitol here in San Juan have been opened and inside roads as well through smaller towns and that's one remarkable achievement of these ten days since the hurricane. You can drive to places. Then when you get to those places, you are struck that only 45 minutes out of San Juan and an hour out of San Juan, there is no electricity and people say not only there is running water and there are gas lines and people are spending the night in to get these diesels and gas for their vehicles that you've already heard about from Leyla that also the cell phones signal is to non-existence, so there is no information of where to go. I mean, I saw a line yesterday in a town and people had spent the night in line waiting for fuel. They did not know whether or not a fuel truck would come. But they had heard rumors that perhaps one would come and so they were spending the day there when we passed that fuel line again in the afternoon for morning to afternoon. The fuel trucks still have not come. So, people have been there for more than 24 hours. There are incremental improvements particularly here in the capitol when we were driving back from the countryside on Friday evening. Puerto Rican guy, Michael, who was driving us, got a text message when we got back into cellphone range at the edge of the city from his wife, saying, hey, the water has been turned back off. And another man I spoke with about an hour ago, he said, you know, the water is on in my house. I have a one year old and a three year old, the water is running. I don't have electricity, we are running by flashlights and candles but at least for the water to be on, that's what I need right now. And he went onto say, he probably won't get electricity by his estimates until Christmas. So, that gives you a sense of some of the conditions people are living in both here in the capitol where things are starting to pick up a bit, shops and businesses and restaurants on the streets are opening up after they have been closed for eight or nine days. And in the countryside where the situation is much, much dire Ana.
[Cabrera:] All right. Thank you so much, Ivan Watson, Leyla Santiago, thank you both. And thank you for your reporting on a tough situation there. I want to talk more about President Trump's comment of attacking San Juan's mayor and the people of Puerto Rico. Let's talk it over with Brian Stelter. CNN senior media correspondent and host of "RELIABLE SOURCES." Juana Summers, CNN politics senior writer and John Phillips, CNN political commentator and KABC talk show host. Brian, I know you had been monitoring the reaction on this President's favorite platform, media platform Twitter and other source of media sites today. What are you seeing?
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] I am struck by how many conservative commentators as well as liberals or moderates have chime in and said, what the President is saying was inappropriate. His tweets about the San Juan mayor this morning. And then there is been many, many more as you know this afternoon. At one point, the President is saying, we are all united. And then the next says, don't believe the fake news. It's a confusing sometimes contradictory messages coming from the President. But I want to put his tweets into perspective. The most popular tweet from the President today. About 15,000 re-tweets meaning 15,000 people who shared it on their own twitter feed. Lin- Manuel Miranda, the star of the creator of "Hamilton," he tweeted this morning saying, Mr. President, you are going to hell. And that's how four times as many re-tweets. There are a lot of messages out there critical of the President. And in some cases gaining a lot more attention. For example, former President Obama's tweet from a few days ago, encouraging Puerto Rico relief efforts. That's way more popular than the post from the current president about what's going on in Puerto Rico. So, that signals to me that his words are newsworthy, his words are shocking. I would argue that some of his words today are beyond the pale. But a lot of the reactions to him, in some cases even more popular and getting even more attention online. John, what strikes me about some of the comments on Twitter, from the President himself is he seems to be patting himself on the back for his administration's response. But when you look at the reality on the ground, five percent have electricity, less than half of the people have water restored about ten days after this. He's calling this great.
[John Phillips, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, what's the saying in politics where you stand depends on where you sit. And so, the mayor of San Juan is critical of the federal government, she's asking for more resources as any mayor would do if their city was hit by two huge storms like she was. That is why she was on TV so much and she's probably getting bigger after pension than me. And if you are the President, you have a finite amount of resources and you have a country that's been hit by three hurricanes in a neighbor that was hit by a 7.1 magnitude earthquake. So, you do as much as you can. He sent 10,000 people down there. He sent a general down there to coordinate the efforts. He relaxed the Jones act. This is not a president that's sitting by and watching as islands is destroyed doing nothing. He's acting. I've lived during the "94 Northridge earthquake. When 57 people were killed, 8,700 people were injured. And 44 billion with the B dollars" worth of damage was done to my city and my region which was bigger at the time than most state budgets. And Mayor Dick Weirden and Governor Pete Wilson worked like Trojans to get this region back-up and running and people were still critical. When you are suffering, it cannot come fast enough.
[Cabrera:] A short time ago, I spoke with Texas Democrat, Congressman Al Green who represents parts of Houston that was devastated by hurricane Harvey. Here is what he had to say.
[Rep. Al Green , Texas:] If they were all Anglos, I don't believe the President will have the attitude that he has because you don't hear that kind of dog whistle of people not wanting to pull themselves by their bootstraps when the people are Anglos. That's something reserved for people of color. And it sends a signal to others as to what the defense would be for the President. So now they all know. When they get on these programs, they are supposed to talk about the budget and what is going to cost. We don't worry about cost when people have their lives at stake. A lifeguard doesn't ask about the death of the person that is about to drown, the lifeguard has a duty to die and save the life. The President is the lifeguard for the United States of America. He's the guy in charge, and he ought to act like every American life has equal value. All of us are the same.
[Cabrera:] John, what was your reaction to those remarks?
[Phillips:] I think he's race baiting and I think he has no basis in fact. Is Houston not a diverse city? Is South Florida not a diverse place?
[Cabrera:] The President did not say this about those places. The President did not say, they want everything done for them.
[Phillips:] He did the same thing for Houston and the same thing for South Florida that he's doing right now for Puerto Rico which is getting them as much as possible, as fast as possible.
[Cabrera:] He did not criticize the victims of the natural disaster. I'm sorry, he did not do the same.
[Phillips:] Puerto Rico is bankrupt. They are in sovereign. When you are dealing with FEMA, you are aiding local authorities, you're aiding local first responders, if you are dealing with the state or territory that is financially insolvent, you have less to deal with. The guy is doing as much as he can. He's the President, not a miracle worker.
[Stelter:] There is not a lot of evidence that he is doing as much as he can. He was not in front of the cameras and the days after the storm, promising to do everything that was possible. He went to a rally in Alabama and then he took the weekend off at his resort in New Jersey. That was last weekend. Now we're seven days later and he's back at the golf resort. But I think the reason why this racial conversation happens, in this case, it is the female, it is a woman of color criticizing the President. This day last year, it was Alicia Machado, woman of color who was criticizing the President, this is during the campaign of course. And the President was tweeting to her calling her "disgusting." So, there is a pattern of who he chooses to attack and who he chooses not to. And I think
[Phillips:] Okay. Rosie O'Donnell is as white as red.
[Stelter:] It's easy to pull one and I can name, Mika Brzezinski as well. That is absolutely true. Those are both women by the way.
[Phillips:] Joe Scarborough.
[Stelter:] But they said there is a history here from Charlottesville
[Phillips:] Chuck Schumer, Jeb Bush.
[Stelter:] to Puerto Rico this weekend that is rubbing a lot of people the wrong way. And I am surprised the President given that he knows that continues to tweet. So, you know un-presidentially.
[Cabrera:] Juana, I want to bring you into the conversation. You cover a lot of diversity about race and politics. And is there a racial component and arguments to be made regarding the President's response to Puerto Rico and the disaster facing the citizens there.
[Juana Summers, Cnn Politics Senior Writer:] When I was reading these comments, I want to look really carefully at the words the President used. I think there is a lot of questions that he talks about they, who should be doing more for themselves not expecting other people to give more for them. The fact of the matter is, we don't know what "they" the President is talking about. And as of right now, I reached out to the White House several hours ago to ask them exactly what the President is getting this back and forth about who he is talking about. And they have not responded. So, based on that evidence, I kind of look at it and see that he is seeking about these disaster victims where as Americans as those in taxes as Americans and those in Florida. For some reason he's chosen to single them out for criticisms for what they are not doing. And I think that we, these comments as Brian said are really kind of beyond the pale. It's not that they were used of hearing, I can't imagine what the response would be. Making a different American city. A different mayor. The President of the United States is at a golf course right now disparaging a mayor who is cutting out and regardless of whether or not you like how much is on TV, she is pleading for help for people that are dying. That is just seems really striking to me and I think something we cannot ignore.
[Cabrera:] Go ahead, John, if you have a response to that.
[Phillips:] He was referring to the bankruptcy of Puerto Rico because as the governor of New York said earlier in this program, the role of FEMA in the situation like this is to aid the state local authorities. When they're bankrupt and they don't have an infrastructure, more of the burden has to be taken on by the Feds. And when you are geographically in a place that's difficult to get to, sometimes it takes longer. It is unfortunate but they are trying as hard as they can.
[Cabrera:] All right. John Phillips, Juana Summers and Brian Stelter, thank you all for that. See how people more than a thousand miles from the Caribbean are coming together to support the people at Puerto Rico. We'll have a live report from our Polo Sandoval, next. This is CNN, you are in the newsroom.

[Robyn Curnow, Cnn:] Non-negotiable complaints speaking from North Korea on its nuclear program, a defiant rebuke to an international diplomatic push. Key meetings at the ASEAN summit seem to have come to nothing. We've got a full update from Manila in just a moment. Also, life getting back to normal. CNN has an exclusive look inside government-held Syria where peace comes at a price. Also, the nine political lives of Jacob Zuma. We are in South Africa as it's announced the president status of secret ballot, no confidence push. Hello and welcome to "Connect the World." I'm Robyn Curnow in Atlanta filling in for my colleague Becky Anderson. And we begin with North Korea's refusal to back down in the face of international pressure. The country's foreign minister says new U.N. sanctions will not stop its nuclear program. In fact, he says North Korea won't even negotiate over the program or its ballistic missiles. He met with his South Korean counterpart on the sidelines of a regional security summit. Our Ivan Watson has been at that summit in Manila and he has more on the crisis.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Robyn, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, he said that his goal in coming here to Manila to this international gathering was to try to diplomatically isolate North Korea and he's had some success about that. First with a United Nation Security Council resolution unanimously backed even by China and Russia who had major differences with the U.S. of late which slapped new sanctions on the North Korean regime banning the exports of coal, iron and even seafood in an effort to try deprive North Korea of large sums of export revenue that are vital for its economy. Then you had the assembly of southeast Asian nations which put out their own statement at the start of this gathering expressing grave concern about North Korea's two intercontinental ballistic missile launches that happened just last July arguing that they were a threat to world peace. I've learned that the Philippines foreign minister, the host of this gathering personally delivered these comments to the North Korean foreign minister and read them out loud to him essentially lecturing him on North Korea's pursuit of ballistic missile technology and nuclear weapons, all of which are banned under multiple United Nation Security Council resolutions. And then you have China and its foreign minister who also conveyed a similar message to the North Koreans in a face-to-face meeting here in Manila. Well, North Korea is not responding as if it's really learned anything from this. It's responding with characteristic defiance seeking to frame this entirely as a confrontation between Pyongyang and Washington. Arguing that it must have nuclear weapons as deterrence, as self-defense against potential U.S. threats and arguing that none of the other countries that are criticizing its pursuit of nuclear weapons that they do not have the moral right to criticize the Pyongyang regime. So it doesn't seem to have earned itself any friends here at this gathering in Manila. And we do have to point out that it is Southeast Asian nations that stood up for North Korea saying, hey, we should not expel North Korea from the Asian regional forum because it's better to talk to help reduce tensions on the North Korean on the Korean Peninsula. So at the end of the day, you've got more pressure, international pressure against Pyongyang that has been lead by the U.S. and a North Korea that is more defiant than ever insisting it will continue with its nuclear weapons program, its ballistic missile test despite growing pressure against it from many different corners internationally, Robyn.
[Curnow:] Thank you Ivan for that report. Now, it's not just North Korea. The U.S. also confronted another major feign policy challenge at that summit tensions of course with Russia now. Tillerson met with Russia's foreign minister. He says he told him point blank that meddling in the U.S. election created serious mistrust. Let's go straight to Moscow for a reaction. Oren Liebermann joins us now. Hi Oren.
[Oren Liebermann, Cnn Correspndent:] Hi Robyn. Tillerson had perhaps the hard job stuck in the middle of all this between the U.S. and Russia and he acknowledge this in his statement. He said confronted Russia about election meddling but also had the tough job of trying to make these two countries get along and cooperate in certain areas. Obviously the key one of those especially at the meeting they were at was North Korea and that is where the U.S. and Russia see eye to eye. Beyond that there are a few areas but now certainly especially after President Trump's signing of the Sanctions Bill, there is more tension than cooperation. Tillerson would have tried to cut through some of that saying that the relation is the worst it's been in years if not decades. Tillerson had some harsh language when he talked about election meddling there and there the U.S. is presenting essentially a united front with some very harsh criticism of Russia. And we also saw that from Vice President Mike Pence last week. In fact it seems the only person in the Trump administration who is not openly criticizing Russia is Trump himself, who is directing most of his anger towards Congress. Remember, Trump was riding a wave of popularity since he was elected some seven months ago. His inauguration I should say seven months ago. Now it seems especially after the signing of the Sanctions Bill that popularity has come to an end.
[Liebermann:] The champagne flowed freely on inauguration night. Russia in adoration for President Donald Trump on display. Trump was giving fawning press coverage. A favor he returned.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Wouldn't it be nice if we actually got along with Russia? Wouldn't that be nice?
[Liebermann:] In Trump, Russia saw someone's who's world view aligned with their own. Seven months later, the TrumpPutin bromance has come to an end and with it the Russian love for the American president his approval rate sliding. The leading weekly talk show saying Donald Trump shot himself in the leg, starting limping and lost a good chunk of his powers. Now, they see a weak president, a Congress suffering from what they call russophobic hysteria and an expanding Russia investigation the Kremlin calls absurd and groundless. What do you think of President Donald Trump? "I don't think things have changed with Trump in the office. Of course we expected that there will be changes for good," this woman says. "He gave us some sort of hope but think nothing has changed." " "My opinion of him has changed a bit," says this woman. "There is little hope now that our relations will get better. He behaves more like a businessman not like a president." Trump's signing of the Sanctions Bill hitting Russia's energy and finance sectors dispelled any notions of the two countries getting along any time soon, the anger playing out where else but on Twitter. Trump tweeting, our relationship with Russia is at an all-time and very dangerous low. You can thank Congress, the same people that can't even give us health care. Trump's frustration against Congress seen us submission in Russia. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev tweeting, the Trump administration has shown its total weakness by handing over executive power to Congress in the most humiliating way. Trump and Putin have avoided criticizing each other directly. That hasn't saved the American president's image in Russia now portrayed as impotent and weak. A different image of Putin on holiday in Southern Siberia, seizing the moment. The president proudly bearing his own popularity.
[Unidentified Female:] Putin better. He's the best president of the world. I think so.
[Liebermann:] In a further response to U.S. sanctions, Russia has said it would look to remove the U.S. dollar as its reserve currency. That's more of a symbolic statement because the dollar is so critical to oil and natural gas trading, which is what Russia's economy relies on. But it is a symbolic statement, another push back against the implementation or tightening of the U.S. sanctions, Robyn.
[Curnow:] And what else could they possibly pushback on?
[Liebermann:] Well Putin, and this is a few days ago now about a week ago, talked about all the other areas the U.S. and Russia get along. Key of those was space, cooperation on Syria, Russia could try to push back on any of those and cut ties on those, that would be a mellow response to U.S. sanction. Remember, at this point, they've already closed two U.S. diplomatic compounds and have told the U.S. they need to cut some 750 members of the staff here.
[Curnow:] OK, Oren Liebermann keeping an eye on all of that there in Moscow. Thanks so much. And we'll have much more on President Trump, U.S. President Trump later o in the show. He may be out of the public eye for a couple of weeks. He's on a working vacation but he certainly has a lot to say to the public on twitter. All details ahead on that. Well, let's get you up to speed on some other stories that are on our radar right now. In Venezuela, a manhunt is under way for what those who took part in what the government calls a paramilitary terrorist attack. President Nicolas Maduro's office says 20 people carried out the assault on a military base in the city of Valencia. Ten are said to still be on the run. And a storm battering Japan with heavy winds and torrential rains is weakening. Noru has been downgraded from a typhoon to a tropical storm. It's reached central Japan early Monday after slamming the southwestern islands over the weekend. And a British woman is speaking out after she says she survived a brutal kidnapping. She says she traveled to Milan to work as a model and photo shoot only to end up in handcuffs. Police in Italy arrested the man who brought her to safety on kidnapping charges. And are we witnessing the beginning of a new alignment in the Middle East? Now the world is watching as Israel follows in the footsteps of four Arab nations and targets the Al Jazeera television network. Israel has moved to shut it down. Its communications minister announced plans to pull Al Jazeera broadcast from local cable and satellite providers after accusing it of inciting violence. But Al Jazeera denies the claim. Ian Lee joins us now from Jerusalem with more in all of this. Hi Ian.
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi. Yes, Israel has been known for years it's known as a country where there's a strong free press but that is coming into question after these recent statements by the minister of communications here in Israel who said that they're going to go after Al Jazeera for what they say is the terroristic journalism and saying that this isn't about freedom of speech and that it's about incitement. And that's something we've heard from the Israeli government for quite some time saying that Al Jazeera is inciting the Palestinians to violence. They were saying that late last month where there were two weeks of clashes here in Jerusalem and saying it for quite some time. But now we're seeing the government saying that they're going to take steps to shutting down Al Jazeera by revoking their press credentials, also trying to find a way to turn off the broadcast coming into Israel and the Palestinian territories. They say they're going to start working on legislation to do that. This move has been condemned by the foreign press association here in Jerusalem saying that Al Jazeera is a member of good standing. They'll be monitoring this. Also, the committee to protect journalists has said that censoring Al Jazeera or closing its offices will not bring stability to the region but it will put Israel firmly in the camp of some of the regions worst enemies of press freedom. So, some strong condemnation there. Also Al Jazeera of course coming out against it. But the one thing that they said that really stood out was that their journalists cover the news professionally and in an objective manner in accordance with the common journalistic standards set by the relevant international organizations such as the British broadcasting code of Ofcom. So saying that basically that their broadcast is monitored by the British so if it's good enough for the British it should be good enough for the Israelis, Robyn.
[Curnow:] Broadly though this move, I mean, in many ways people are suggesting it's some kind of realignment particularly Israel following in the footsteps of four Arab nations. What do you see? What is the conversation there where you are?
[Lee:] So you got three theories really about why Israel is doing this at this particular moment. One is it's a smoke screen. The ending of the violence late last month, the government the measures the government took were deeply unpopular for many Israelis. So, they say that this could be a side show. It could also be a side show to the prime minister's current legal woes. But you also have people saying that this is an alignment with especially the Arabian Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. It's an open secret really that Israel has relations with these countries although they have no formal diplomatic relations. But as all these countries, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E., view Iran as a growing threat, you really have to remember that old ancient expression, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. So this shutting down of Al Jaseera is just seen as one step in alignment with those countries as well as countries like Egypt and Jordan, Robyn.
[Curnow:] Thanks so much to you. Ian Lee there on the ground in Jerusalem. Thank you. Well still to come, CNN exclusive inside Syria. A firsthand look at the ceasefire bringing peace that was a major battle field. Could this town be a model for other

[Harlow:] All right. Now more on that new reporting out of the "Washington Post" on the president and his handling, of all things, Russia and the interference in the U.S. election. Sources tell the "Washington Post" that the president refuses to accept the claims that Russia meddled in the election. We've seen that firsthand from the president. Really importantly, he has never held a cabinet meeting, cabinet-level meeting on this issue.
[Berman:] All right. Joining us to discuss Democratic Representative Eliot Engle of New York, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has skin in this game to be sure. Congressman, the fact that the president has never convened a cabinet-level meeting on Russian meddling, what does that tell you?
[Rep. Eliot Engle , New York:] Well, it tells me that he's not serious about trying to find out what the Russians did or didn't do in the election, and also not serious about confronting Russia. It just makes me scratch my head. I mean, you don't have to be a scholar to understand that the Russians interfered with our democracy. They try it with not only the United States but with our allies in Great Britain and France and Germany, and only the president denies. Everybody else knows it's true.
[Harlow:] OK. But the devil's advocate, the White House did not revoke the sanctions that were passed almost unanimously by Congress against Russia, and Nikki Haley said, in fact, they have already been implemented. The White House has not handed back those two big diplomatic compounds in the northeast that we took from Russia at the end of the Obama administration. You could make the case, sir, whatever the president thinks, his actions are not reflecting that. Fair?
[Engel:] No, I think it's not fair because I think that we need to look at this in a much more serious way. It's not a matter of giving penalties back to the Russians, it's a matter of finding out what really happened. The president is in denial. He's in complete denial. He was in denial from day one. He likes Putin and he thinks Putin is a great guy. Putin, I don't have to tell everybody, and everybody knows Putin invade Crimea and Ukraine and tried to disrupt the NATO alliance in the European Union Putin is not a friend of the country, but the president is in denial because Putin smiles at him and he thinks he's a friend. I think it's ridiculous. I think we need to investigate and let the chips fall where they may, but we can't do that if the president keeps to deny it.
[Berman:] If I can, I want to ask you a little bit about the investigation right now into Russian meddling, and it's not part of that investigation directly, but it has to do with these text messages sent by Special Agent Peter Strzok, who was fired from the Mueller investigation, removed from it and reassigned.

[Dana Bash, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm Dana Bash. John King is off today. President Trump launches his most aggressive attack against the Russia probe, telling his attorney general to end the investigation, quote, right now, and has us asking, what is going on that has the president so agitated. One thing missing from his morning tweet storm, any outrage or really any mention at all about FaceBook taking down a network of pages and accounts believed to be linked to Russia. And this is all coming from a commander in chief in full entertainer mode on the campaign trail.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It's a lot easier to act presidential than to do what I do. Anybody can act presidential. You are tremendous people. And I will leave now because I am boring you to death. Thank you.
[Bash:] We begin with yet another escalation from the president to end the special counsel's Russia investigation. For what appears to be the first time President Trump tweeted a direct demand to his attorney general saying, quote, Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this rigged witch hunt right now before it continues to stain our country any further. We should note, of course, that Sessions has recused himself from all things Russia. And the tweet, which came mid-Twitter rant about the investigation more broadly, sure seems to be a tell that despite his aides saying they're not worried about the trial underway of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, the president is, in fact, very worried about something. Now, Manafort is on trial for bank fraud and tax evasion. And on Tuesday, we got our first glimpse at Manafort's defense strategy. Namely, to blame his former deputy, another former Trump aide, Rick Gates, as well as Ukrainian oligarchs for whom he worked. Manafort's attorney says Gates had his hand in the cookie jar, attacking him as the star witness and an embezzler. Now, the prosecution, meanwhile, is working to highlight Manafort's extravagant lifestyle, saying he had a cash spigot while working for his Ukrainian golden goose. They say he's a liar and that he, quote, orchestrated these crimes. Two officials tell CNN that President Trump is keeping a close eye on the proceedings and asking for frequent trial updates from his team. I want to get straight to CNN's Shimon Prokupecz, joining me now. And, Shimon, let's begin with these tweets from the president and the significance of them. What are you hearing from your sources at the Justice Department? Are they taking this as a demand or are they just saying, this is the president blowing off steam?
[Simon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Well, yes, Dana, I mean certainly significant. I think you said it right, this is an aggressive move, aggressive words from the president here. So far the Department of Justice has not responded in any way to these tweets, to essentially the president demanding that this investigation that Sessions end this investigation. You know, it's a longstanding practice, as we know, that the president does not interfere in investigations by the Department of Justice, does not comment on them, does not offer suggestions. And clearly by this morning's tweets, that is not anything that the president follows and certainly has not followed. And when you think about why there is this obstruction of justice investigation by the special counsel, what started it off, what set it off was words, was what he did to the FBI director, the former FBI director, James Comey. You know, and I sort of wanted to point out sort of what he told the then-FBI Director Comey about the Flynn investigation and then what he's tweeting today. If you look at what he tweets today, he's telling the attorney general essentially, you should end this investigation. And then when he met with Comey, as you will recall, he told Comey, I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go and letting Flynn go. Certainly, you know, those words perhaps one could interpret as a little softer than the words today from the president. But if you see and you think about that that's what set off was part of what set off the obstruction investigation and then certainly the words by the president today, certainly significant and it goes into the obstruction investigation. It's something that I think the president and his lawyers know the special counsel will be looking at.
[Bash:] So interesting. I'm really glad that you pointed out the similarity and language there, particularly since there are reports that the special counsel is actually looking at whether tweets can be used as obstruction of justice.
[Prokupecz:] That's right.
[Bash:] Let's look at the trial. What's happening in the Manafort trial as we speak, Shimon?
[Prokupecz:] Well, today's really been so there have been two witnesses so far that have testified. One of them, I think the important witness here that's just on the stand now, the FBI agent who entered Manafort's home. They did a search warrant at his home in Alexandria, Virginia. And they're talking about some of the documents that they found. And this really goes to the meat of the prosecution's case. These are documents about his loans, bank records, things that they found with his name on it, wire transfers. Sort of goes really to the meat, sort of to the heart of the case and the evidence that the FBI has gathered and now the prosecution is using in the case. Significant there also today from the FBI agent is that he's describing how they entered Manafort's home. They said they came to the home at around 6:00 a.m. They knocked on the door three times announcing that they were there. When no one answered the door, they entered. They had a key and they went in. There was some questions about the FBI's tactics here back when this happened. People close to Manafort were saying that the FBI was very aggressive in how they went into the home. Clearly today, the FBI disputing that account saying they did everything right. They knocked on the door, no one answered, and then they went in.
[Bash:] So interesting. Shimon, thank you, as always, for your excellent reporting. Appreciate it. And here with me at the table to share their reporting and insights, CNN's Phil Mattingly, "Time's" Molly Ball, CNN legal analyst Shan Wu, who represented Rick Gates briefly after he was indicted, and CNN's Kaitlan Collins. Hi, everybody. Oh, my goodness. So, let me just start with something that was tweeted by the president shortly before we came on the air. And it kind of brings all of these questions of the morning together. And I will read it. Looking back on history, who was treated worse? Alfonse Capone, legendary OK, we'll hold that for a second legendary mob boss, killer and public enemy number one, or Paul Manafort, political operative and ReaganDole darling, now serving solitary confinement, although convicted of nothing. Where is the Russian collusion? Now putting aside that we've all taken tours of Alcatraz and it wasn't exactly nice digs, what do we make of this? Kaitlan, I'm putting this to you first.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, I think the last thing that Paul Manafort's legal team wanted on the second day of his trial was for the president to compare him to Al Capone.
[Bash:] Alfonse Capone.
[Collins:] Yes, Alfonse
[Bash:] Yes.
[Collins:] But Paul Manafort was there for a very crucial period of time
[Bash:] Yes, he was.
[Collins:] Including how he attended that Trump Tower meeting.
[Bash:] I mean they can say all they want that they don't really care and they're not paying attention, but every tweet that the president sent this morning completely undercuts that argument in a big way. What do you think it means?
[Shan Wu, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, it's a little surprising he's so worried about it because actually
[Bash:] Do you think it do you think there's something there? That he's worried for a reason that we just don't know about?
[Wu:] That could be. I think it's just the pressure of the trial actually commencing getting to him because, frankly, I thought the first day went pretty well for the defense, actually. It was like a break-neck pace. It's incredible they got through the jury selection, openings and got to a witness. That's just amazing. But Ellis interrupted the prosecution during their opening.
[Bash:] The judge.
[Wu:] Yes, the judge, Judge Ellis did, and that's very disconcerting for the prosecution. And I'm sure Manafort's team liked what he said. He pointed out that there's nothing wrong or illegal about having a lot of money. And I think they probably put that in the win column for the day.
[Bash:] Yes. OK. So you might be right. Were you going to say something about what you think this could be about?
[Molly Ball, National Political Correspondent, "time":] I just thought well, I thought that the president's tweets about Manafort this morning were very striking because they were sort of a reversal, as Kaitlan was saying, from this distancing act. Rather than say whatever he did, he might have he might have been terrible, but it had nothing to do with me. He's expressing sympathy for Manafort. He's saying Manafort's being treated unfairly. He's saying that, you know, Manafort had these glorious credentials working for Reagan and Dole. Now, one of the things that was discussed in the trial yesterday is that the activities of Manafort's, the money making, that allegedly illegitimate money making that they're talking about was 2010 to 2014. So that's well after he would have worked for Ronald Reagan or Bob Dole. To answer the president's question about why didn't anybody bring this up when he was working for Reagan or Dole.
[Bash:] Yes. and, I mean and that's another question the president was tweeting about this morning, why didn't anybody tell me? I mean that's the gist of one of his tweets this morning, why didn't anybody tell me about the bad stuff that Manafort allegedly did. Well, really? Just pick up the phone and call somebody or ask him or ask anybody. What happened to hiring only the best people?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] I think the interesting element with Paul Manafort is, it wasn't a secret, kind of, these circles with which and within he operated in, in Washington,
[D.c. Bash:] Exactly.
[Mattingly:] If you look through disclosures to the extent that he made them, and sometimes that ended up being a problem legally it turns out, he wasn't representing necessarily Fortune 500 companies. He was dealing in the areas of lobbying or influence peddling that kind of operate in the darker areas of D.C. And some of his partners, and some of the people he worked with, if you talk to anybody who covered K Street or covered Paul Manafort coming up, or covered Roger Stone coming up, any of those guys, there's an understanding of kind of the place that they were operating here that could potentially lead him into trouble. I will note, as a random aside since he brought it up, solitary confinement. He's meeting with Republican senators on criminal justice reform today. If he has a huge problem with solitary confinement, it can be addressed at 2:45. That's important. That would be a step forward.
[Bash:] For white collar criminals? I don't think that's exactly what what the topic is.
[Mattingly:] Not quite, but
[Collins:] Things to keep in mind as they are downplaying the role that he had, is that the president stayed in touch with Paul Manafort for months after he left the campaign. He left in August and then they stayed in touch for months after that. The president has often done this with people who left the White House or left his campaign.
[Bash:] It's what he does.
[Collins:] But also with Rick Gates, Paul Manafort's deputy, who is testifying against him. He left as well shortly thereafter Paul Manafort. But he and the president stayed in touch and he served on one of his inauguration committees. So it's not like the president completely cut off access with him when all of these questions started coming up, which is why Paul Manafort left. They stayed in touch for months after.
[Bash:] Shan, I want you to react to this because the president's the whole gist of what he's saying this morning and in a very aggressive way and what he said in the past, well particularly when he's saying that Sessions, who technically has nothing to do with this because he recused himself, should end this because the collusion, the whole question of this is a witch hunt, let's go back to what the deputy attorney general, who actually appointed Mueller, actually said the investigation should be about. Certainly collusion was part of it. But the core the core of it was the following, to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. Why, Mr. President, would you not want the Mueller investigation to find out the answer to that, particularly as it is happening, according to his own government and according to FaceBook, as we speak?
[Wu:] No, that's exactly right. And I think one other aspect of that tweet that he sent about being in the dark is he could be trying to now set up sort of his defense generally that the bad FBI, the bad Justice Department, didn't really tell me about what was going on, so don't try to blame me for anything. He's kind of like talking, as usual, out of both sides of his mouth here, I mean, saying he was kept in the dark. He's saying this is an unfair thing and yet he's being told that the same type of thing is reoccurring right now. The one interesting thing about this in terms of the timeline is the Manafort and Gates indictments were first out of the box, we're now seeing a pattern with Mueller of handing off some of these investigations to the Southern District of New York. It's not inconceivable that had this come later down the pike, if it was compartmentalized to being just tax issues, that maybe it wouldn't have stayed with the special counsel. This first out of the box and during the trial now.
[Bash:] Well, I know there's a lot that you can't say because you did represent Rick Gates briefly. But if you, knowing what you know, if you're the White House and the president, do you have a reason to be concerned watching this trial?
[Wu:] Looking at what's happened in the trial, not yet. But I think it may be just dawning upon the president that, oh, my gosh, they really are taking Manafort to trial. He knows what dangers Manafort may have. And once this trial commences, the pressure is much, much greater on Manafort. And there are deals cut during trials. People have plead guilty midtrial. That
[Bash:] Deal cut and pardoned. Is this a signal to Manafort that a pardon could be coming? Just stick with me?
[Mattingly:] I defer to
[Collins:] Well, he's never ruled this out. The president the president has never ruled it out.
[Bash:] No one wants to get into the head of the president on that one.
[Collins:] Well, it you shouldn't.
[Bash:] Sure has.
[Collins:] And then flew down to Palm Beach and the president ripped him a new one over it because he was so frustrated about it.
[Bash:] And we are all talking about and trying to dissect and get into the president's brain, but we should not forget about the fact that it is so unheard of and inappropriate for a president of the United States to be saying in any medium, Twitter or anywhere else, that an investigation that is going on and was ordered by his own deputy attorney general should end. Not OK.
[Mattingly:] Yes. One real quick thing about that.
[Bash:] Please.
[Mattingly:] Can you imagine if what he tweeted was discovered by reporters in a memo that had been sent
[Bash:] Exactly.
[Mattingly:] Like we're kind of numb to 280 characters and now he operates and certainly that's a way that got him elected and it's a central tenet of who he is. But can you imagine
[Bash:] No.
[Mattingly:] If that would have been found in a memo that was uncovered somehow?
[Bash:] Very different. Good point, Phil, as always. Up next, enemies posing as friends to disrupt the November election. FaceBook reveals a bunch of fake accounts that stirred up real political activism. And this is not about 2016, folks. This is happening right now.

[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] And thank you for staying with us. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause with the headlines. Donald Trump Jr. is defending his meeting with a Russian lawyer last year, told by getting damaging information on Hillary Clinton. He released e-mails to say which claimed the information was part of Russia and its government support to his father who is now the U.S. president. Meantime, Donald Trump arrived in Paris on Thursday where he could actually face questions about his son's meeting with that Russian lawyer. Mr. Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron will probably joint news conference later in the day. Early this hour expected to try and find common ground after disagreeing on issues like climate change and immigration. Qatar is promising to fight terrorism and stop those who finance it in a new agreement signed with a U.S. A number of Gulf States have isolated Qatar for over a month now accusing the country supporting terrorism. Thursday they say the agreement is a good first step but not enough to ease their concerns. So, with a reality T.V. star in the White House perhaps on entirely a surprise over Russian pop singer is playing a key role in the latest Trump controversy. His name is Emin Agalarov and he recently posted a picture of himself on Instagram with the caption, finally, sunshine, what news. He and his father have been in the news quite a bit for their tie to the U.S. president. Here is CNN's Ivan Watson.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn International Correspondent:] Believe it or not this pop music video is at the center of a political controversy that's riling Washington. A Russian pop star, miss universe contestants and a celebrity cameo.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] What's wrong with you Emin? You're fired. [voice-over]: The Russian pop star Emin is now one of a colorful collection of Trump associates linked to a controversial meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer. Trump Jr. says, he met the lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya for the first time June 9th, 2016 in New York. She spent years lobbying against the Magnitsky Act, U.S. legislation that punishes Russians implicated in human rights abuses and corruption. She promoted this documentary film aimed at undermining the law. Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr. organized by Rob Goldstone a British P.R. agent in the music industry, and once a judge on the Trump owned Miss USA Beauty Pageant. Goldstone told CNN Veselnitskaya stated she quote, Had some information regarding illegal campaign contributions to the DNC which she believed Mr. Trump Jr. might find important. In an interview Tuesday, Veselnitskaya denied working for the Russian government. Goldstone says he set up the meeting at the request of his client, the singer named Emin. Emin partnered with Trump in hosting the Miss Universe Beauty Pageant in Moscow in 2013. A year later, Trump sent Emin a video message on his birthday.
[Trump:] You're a winner. You're a champ. You're great at real estate and boy, can you entertain. [voice-over]: Emin boasted of his close ties to the Trumps last year on Russian State
[T.v. Emin Agalarov, Russian Pop Star:] His daughter, Ivanka was in this office two years ago when we discussed the Trump Tower project. I met many times with the sons, Eric and Donald. We message each other constantly. [voice-over]: In addition to music, Emin is an executive at Crocus Group, a real estate company run by his billionaire father Aras Agalarov. The patriarch is an associate of Trump. This Trump tweet in 2013 suggests they had plans to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. The billionaire Russian businessman also has ties to the Kremlin. In 2013 he received a medal of honor from Vladimir Putin. In e-mails published by Trump Jr., Goldstone wrote that the father met with a Russian prosecutor and wanted to share sensitive information to help Trump's campaign. Now, these alleged attempts to meddle in U.S. politics may have landed this Russian businessman in hot water.
[Trump:] What's wrong with you Emin? Emin
[Vause:] And CNN's Matthew Chance managed to track down the Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, the Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump's son says she offered no compromising information about Hillary Clinton despite e-mails showing that Donald Trump, Jr. was keen to accept sensitive information from her. Natalia Veselnitskaya says she arranged the meeting which took place at Trump Tower in New York last June to lobby for the repeal of the U.S. Magnitsky Act, which targets Russian officials accused of corruption and human rights abuses. The Kremlin banned U.S. adoptions of Russian children in retaliation, which she also wants overturned. Well, we caught up with Veselnitskaya as the explosive e- mails sent to Trump Jr. by a British music publicist to arrange the meeting were made public. Take a listen.
[Chance:] Was it real it the Kremlin that sent you to lobby to Trump?
[Natalia Veselnitskaya, Russian Attorney:] Just a second. When it was suggested that I meet with Donald Trump, Jr., I met him in a private situation. It was a private meeting, not related at all to the fact that he was the son of the candidate. And the whole story which I had was spelled out. It was the same for everyone, including for Donald Trump, Jr., who having listened to my story didn't understand based on our conversation how he could help me.
[Chance:] Is that what it was? A way of getting a meeting? Was that was it a way? Was it a way? Is that why? So, Veselnitskaya denies offering compromising information to the Trump campaign, and being sent to New York on the orders of the Russian government. The Kremlin also denies any connection with this lawyer, saying they don't even know who she is. Matthew Chance, CNN, Moscow.
[Vause:] When Donald Trump Jr. posted those e-mails on Twitter, many were less stunned. A brief almost universal jaw dropping moment which is quickly followed by a lot of legal experts by a mean the president's son may have committed a crime. But exactly, what law could he have broken? A closer look at the legal jeopardy facing Trump Jr., CNN contributor and former ethics down at the Obama Administration, Neil Mason, joins us now from Washington. Neil, it's always god to see you.
[Neil Mason, Cnn Contributor:] John, nice to be here again.
[Vause:] OK. Let's look at the big picture first specifically with regards to what we now know in those e-mails about from Donald Trump Jr., do those e-mails relate to perjury, violation of campaign finance laws or, you know, some have even suggested possibly treason?
[Mason:] Well, John, when I was in law school, they used to give us for examinations complicated hypotheticals that potentially implicated a variety of laws and this is one. The e-mails of course show Donald Trump Jr. embracing an offer which the e-mails indicate, are coming from the Russian government to help the Trump campaign and hurt the Hillary campaign. The most likely criminal violation that's shown and it's still too soon to say if there was a violation. But the most likely is a campaign finance law violation. That's because under U.S. law, campaigns are not allowed to solicit help from foreign governments or foreign individuals in the form of contributions whether that's contributions of cash or what we call in-kind contributions. So there is a serious issue there. And there are a variety of other legal questions as well.
[Vause:] OK. So, with the campaign finance Lawrence Meyers specifically June 3rd last year. The e-mails show that Trump Jr. was promised information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be useful to your father. And that was in one of the e-mails. And just to avoid any doubt whether information was coming from the e-mail is going to say, this is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump. Seventeen minutes later, Donald Jr. replies, if it's what you say, I love it especially later in the summer. So explain why that is so significant.
[Mason:] Well, from a campaign finance law perspective and a variety of other perspectives as well. What you have is a foreign government saying, hey, we're going to help. This is evidence of the much talked about collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. It's not this positive evidence. It's not final evidence. But it's another piece in the puzzle. And potentially could see some serious penalties levied, including criminal ones.
[Vause:] OK. Getting back to the campaign finance laws and in particular what it means to receive something a value, essentially there seems to be an exemption here. That same law goes on to say, 'the value of services provided without compensation by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or a political committee is not a contribution. Some have sort of argued that maybe this means information offered up is not something a value and that might be the exemption for Donald Trump Jr.
[Mason:] Well, certainly the argument has been made. I think the better view. The majority view is that that exception is not intended to cover opposition research or other dirty tricks by a foreign government. Think about it, John. If it were, it would be a loophole large enough to drive a truck through. You'll have candidates soliciting foreign government help all over the world. So the law is not there's an argument about it. But the majority view is that that exception does not apply in this case.
[Vause:] OK. Last month President Trump twitted out this, the reason that President Obama did nothing about Russia after being notified by the CIA of meddling is that he expected Clinton would win and did not want to rock the boat. He didn't choke. He colluded or obstructed. And it did the dems and crooked Hillary no good. Could the president come to regret that tweet? He's essentially saying collusion is knowing that something illegal is going on and doing nothing to stop it.
[Mason:] I do think that when the history of the age of the Trumps is written, it'll show that Twitter did them some good but did them a lot of harm. In those tweets, Donald Trump Sr. is essentially implicating Donald Trump Jr. after the information we have today. President Trump has done plenty in his Twitter account to harm himself, including creating evidence of the obstruction of justice charges that are now being investigated reportedly in connection with the president's firing of Jim Comey. Now, we have tweets that may come back to harm President Trump's son. Neil, as always good to see you and I'm sure we will speak again before it's too long. Thanks for having me, John.
[Vause:] A year on since she became British Prime Minister, Theresa May is now attempting a kind of re-launch. Mrs. May has faced widespread criticism within her party after a gamble on an early election backfired. This speech Tuesday she said, she recognizes voter's frustrations.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] A clear understanding that E.U. referendum result was not just a vote to leave The European Union but a deeper and more profound call for change across our country. I believe that at the heart of that change must lay a commitment to greater fairness in our country as we tackle the in justices and best of interests that threaten to hold us backed and make Britain a country that it works for everybody, not just the privileged few.
[Vause:] Mrs. May is looking to show up her position as prime minister before publishing the great repeal bill on Thursday. The legislation is a critical first step to replacing European law in the United Kingdom. Just a few hours from now, Spain's king and queen will begin a state visit to the U.K. the first for Spanish monarch in 31 years. Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip will greet them with a ceremonial welcome at Horse Guards parade. Later they will attend a state banquette at Buckingham Palace. Well coming up, a new study with the catastrophic outlook for the world's wildlife, why scientist think the planet might just be in the midst or a mass extinction event.

[Baldwin:] Now to the 2020 race. Not for president, not for Senate, but for the seat vacated by the passing of John McCain. Winning his spot next year has become the next mission of former astronaut, Mark Kelly, a Democrat. Kelly is also the husband of former Congresswoman Gabby Gifford, who was nearly murdered in 2011 in a mass shooting. The couple has become vocal gun control advocates. Gifford, who suffered major brain trauma was featured prominently in Kelly's announcement.
[Mark Kelly, , Arizona Senate Candidate & Former Astronaut:] You remember when you first entered Congress for the first time?
[Gabby Giffords, , Former Congresswoman:] Yes, so exciting.
[Kelly:] It was exciting. I thought then that I had the risky job.
[Giffords:] Yes.
[Kelly:] Turned out that you were the one who had the risky job.
[Giffords:] Yes.
[Kelly:] What I learned from my wife is how you use policy to improve people's lives. I've decided that I'm launching a campaign for the United States Senate. We've seen this retreat from science and data and facts, and if we don't take these issues seriously, we can't solve these problems.
[Baldwin:] Right now, the Arizona seat is filled by Republican Martha McSally who will hold the seat until special election next year. It is a significant week for gun control advocates who are about to see a big move on Capitol Hill in their favor. This Thursday will mark the one-year anniversary of the shooting at the time Parkland, Florida, high school where 17 people were killed. The Democratic congressman, who represents the area, plans to introduce a bill to ban high-capacity magazines. So let's go to Capitol Hill to CNN Congressional Reporter, Liz Landers. And, Liz, there are no Republican co-sponsors for this bill. So how likely that it becomes law?
[Liz Landers, Cnn Congressional Reporter:] Brooke, this is going to be an uphill battle for Democrats right now, but it's a battle that they are willing to fight. As you said, it's been a year since that Parkland shooting happened and there's been no meaningful legislation in either the House or the Senate on gun control. Today, Congressman Deutch, who represents that district in Parkland, joined with Bob Menendez to reintroduce a ban on high-capacity magazines for guns. That means any device that attaches to a weapon that has 10 rounds of ammunition or more. Deutch spoke just a few moments ago at a press conference. Here's what he said about that bill. "The few seconds that it takes to reload a weapon matter. And those seconds can take can save a life." As you mentioned, there's no bipartisan support for this bill quite yet. I asked Senator Bob Menendez why he's optimistic that anything can happen with this, especially in the Republican-controlled majority Senate. Listen to what he had to say about why he's optimistic about that.
[Sen. Bob Menendez , New Jersey:] The reality of a Democratic majority sending legislation I believe this week they're starting on background check, if I'm not mistaken. But that creates an impetus and a challenge for the Republican leader in the Senate. Are you going to silence the voices that want to see reasonable gun safety measures or are you going to give it an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor? We're going to test in every way we can that proposition.
[Landers:] Now, Brooke, as you can imagine, the NRA has been critical of this new reintroduction of this bill. And I'd also point out that this has been introduced in the past. So what the NRA says is, you know, this is an arbitrary limit that's pulled out of thin air with no evidence that this limit would even improve public safety. But today, at this press conference on the Hill, Manny Oliver, who lost his son in that Parkland shooting, said of gun legislation action, "We are not asking, we're not begging, we demand" Brooke?
[Baldwin:] We demand. Liz Landers, thank you very much. Now I just want to take a minute to read a special letter, not just because Valentine's Day is Thursday, it's the same day as Parkland shooting from a year ago. The words I'm about to read are from Lori Alhadeff, to her daughter, Alyssa, who was just 14 when her daughter was killed just one year ago. So few. I'll try to get through this. She writes, "Dear Alyssa, it is Valentine's Day, a day full of love, chocolates and flowers. For me, it is more than that now. Last Valentine's Day was the last time I saw you. Whew. You wore a black and white dress. Your long dark hair dangled, your make-up looked just right. Of course, your white sneakers protected your feet as you walked into the high school. Valentine's Day is now about memories. Today, like all days, I remember you. I remember you weren't looking forward to going to school that day. And like many 14-year-old girls, you wanted a valentine and were disappoint that you didn't have one. High school love is magic. I was 14 once, and those butterflies had whirled inside of me, too. I wanted that for you." I want to get through this because these words matter. "I remember the golden gift bag I gave you that morning. It held a pair of diamond earrings to make you feel pretty. A chocolate bar to make you smile. And a hair tie so you wouldn't ask for mine. I touched your ears putting the stems of the earrings through your lobes. You said you were ready to go to school after that. You opened the car door. "I love you,'I said. 'I love you, too," you said. Valentine's Day, the last time I saw you alive." She continues on. "A year has been a long time without you. So much has happened I want to tell you about. I watch your brother's miss you terribly. They want to know that they miss fighting with you. They say thank you for convincing dad to get unlimited Wi-Fi. Dad fights for you every day. He is your voice. Grammy has honored you and became a school safety activist. We got a dog. Her name is Roxie and she's a soccer player like you. She kicks the ball around the yard but sometimes puts it in her mouth. And your soccer team, wow, what a group? They wear your number eight on their sleeves and have started using it sideways to honor you, Infiniti. Oh, and I found out about the time you jumped off a bridge. Alyssa, you jumped off a bridge! There are things I do in your memory that I never thought I could or would ever do. You see a mother's protective instincts don't leave when we lose the ones we love. I talk to other moms who have lost children. We talk about you. We talk about their kids. But when we look into each other's eyes we see it, a fire. I ran for the school board. I won. I screamed on national TV words of rage directed at the president. I started a nonprofit called Make Our Schools Safe. And there's a law named after you in New Jersey, Alyssa's Law." She goes on. "But I just want to include her closing. It's Valentine's Day. As I remember you, grief washes over me, but that grief emboldened me to fight for change. I wish I could take all the bullets for you. It has been a year since I saw you. You in the black-and-white dress, those Converse on your feet and that smile. I'll never forget that smile. It feels like yesterday. I just want to you back. Love forever, Mom."

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] At least a thousand people were rescued overnight. That number has been climbing really exponentially throughout the day. Helicopters swirl overhead looking for people trapped on their roofs. Volunteer rescuers are coming in their boats. The head of FEMA says this is a storm the United States has never seen before. One that'll require teams to be on the ground not for days or even weeks but years as some areas brace for up to 50 inches of rain before this is all over. President Trump tweeting, "Wow, now experts are calling Harvey a once in a 500 year flood. We have an all out effort going and going well." We just learned the president will visit the flood on Tuesday. In a moment I want to talk with the mother who, along with her 5-year-old daughter, had a harrowing escape from their Houston home as flood waters rose all around. But first, I want to bring in our teams on the ground. CNN's Brian Todd is in Houston and our Ed Lavandera is in a rescue boat in Dickinson, that's southeast of Houston. Ed, you've had some of the most incredible pictures where you are right now on a boat with a volunteer rescuer. Talk to me about what you've seen in the last hour?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Ana. Well, this is really our first chance to get an up close sense of just how devastating this flooding is across many parts of Houston. Get you a sense of where we're at. This is the neighborhood of Bayou Chantilly, which is in a small town of Dickinson, Texas, just along Interstate 45. I think we're about 25 miles south of downtown Houston. These are the images. And it is just striking to see. Look, this is a home where you can see the family had used a ladder to scale up on top of the roof. They have an American flag that they were using to wave down for help, they have a box of supplies and blankets, and that sort of things. All of that left behind. The garage still open to their home. As we've floated through this neighborhood, Ana, we've seen a number of homes where you see holes in the roof where they had chopped their way out through the attic. In fact just here to our right passing these other house, this is an example of what we've seen in the number of homes where people had escaped into their attics and used their ax or some sort of heavy tool to sort of punch their way and chop their way out of the rooftop through the ceiling of roof so they can get pulled out to safety. The water and flooding damage in this particular neighborhood has been absolutely breathtaking and unreal to see. We've volunteers have been coming in the similar boat that we're in. We're in a boat with a young man by the name of Austin Seth who drove an hour from Lake Jackson, Texas, to volunteer. He's pulled about a dozen people out of this area and pulled them out to safety. Interstate 45, Ana, is essentially being used as a boat launch today as hundreds of volunteers and other first responders have been coordinating and launching boats into these floodwaters. This is just one of many, many neighborhoods across the city of Houston that have been just devastated and in dire need of help. These are people in this neighborhood, Ana, who went to bed last night not thinking that their neighborhood was ever going to flood in this storm, thinking that they were on higher ground, that there'd been enough people who lived here in this neighborhood for generations who felt that they were going to be safe here. And they woke up this morning to water inside their homes, water quickly rising. So incredibly emotional for people. We've seen throughout the day a number of people who have been rescued here, some other folks being pulled out. How you guys doing? Thumbs up from them. These are, again, a number of people who have been rescued throughout the day. For the most part here in this particular neighborhood that we're in, we've seen people kind of coming and going throughout the day. They have been pulled out to safety, so that is the good news. From what we can tell, very, very few people left behind in this neighborhood. But it has been a small Navy of volunteers that have gone up and down the water here. And these guys coordinating amongst themselves, Ana, here making sure that every last person who wants to get out of here is able to do so. So this is a scene that we've seen here repeatedly. And this is looking down one of the main roads here into this neighborhood. And the images, I think, speak for themselves just to how dreadful and devastating this day has been for these people Ana.
[Cabrera:] The images are so chilling and the stories that you're telling us are so heartwarming in so many ways to hear and to see the volunteers and this effort of people who are just laying it out there, trying to save lives and do what they can to make a horrible situation slightly better for some of the folks in that neighborhood. Ed Lavandera, thank you very much for that. Please do let us know as you continue to encounter new images and new people and new situations. Brian Todd is also among those survivors who are also escaping from the floodwaters. You're in Houston, Brian. We know there have been at least two deaths confirmed in the storm. One of them in Houston. A woman who apparently drove into high water. I see you have some folks among the people who are trying to get out.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Ana. We're hear just about six miles west of Houston near the Omni Hotel, which apparently has been flooded. There are dozens of people stranded there. They're being pulled off by private rescuers. We've got one family here. Abraham
[Unidentified Male:] Pretty much this morning when we woke up, the whole place was flooded and the power is out. We went down, looked around, and they provided, like, you know, some food and some water. And pretty much, OK, we're going to hang tight for right now. But then the water just continued to raise throughout the day.
[Todd:] And so that made your decision easier to come out. We're told some people are staying there.
[Unidentified Male:] Some people decided to stay there, yes. There's cats there, too. So because it's a pet friendly hotel. I think that they were just deciding to hang it out there.
[Todd:] And we did hear also that there are fumes in there. Were you kind of worried about that as well?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, definitely when I woke up and I walked in the hall, I started noticing some fumes. So that was another thing that was a little bit alarming.
[Todd:] All right. Colin and Abby, how scared were you guys?
[Colin:] We were pretty scared. Basically we woke up with just a lot of water. We thought it was going to come up to the second floor.
[Todd:] You ever see anything like this before?
[Colin:] No, never.
[Todd:] And Abraham, you live around here.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Todd:] You came to the hotel. Why?
[Unidentified Male:] Just because we had a generator, we just moved here about a year ago. We don't a generator and all that kind of staff so we're just worried about, you know, we've never been in a flood like this in our house that we live in now and we thought maybe it would be safe if we're in the hotel. So.
[Todd:] And where are you going to go now?
[Unidentified Male:] I don't know yet. I think they're going to take us to another hotel that apparently is dry and has electricity. The other Omni. OK.
[Todd:] All right. Well, thanks very much for joining us guys. And good luck to you. All right. Thanks, kids. They're directing them to get to arrive to another hotel now, Ana. And you can see another boat full of people coming from the Omni Hotel. They're actually staging wave runners, too, because another boat ran out of power as it was coming from the hotel. Again private rescuers in wave upon wave, just going to put people out of that hotel, we're told maybe between 60 or 80 people are stranded there, but some people are electing to stay even though we're told that there are diesel fumes throughout that hotel. We're trying to get over there and to see what the conditions here but it's tough to get over there right now Ana.
[Cabrera:] And people without power. So obviously that's a problem, too, for those who are trying to call for help and obviously their cell phone battery go down and took down. Brian Todd, thank you for that report in Houston. The elderly of course are among the most vulnerable in this catastrophic flooding. Some in nursing homes can't physically move themselves. And this is just one of the shots of the chilling images across the county in Galveston. This picture is not PhotoShopped. It was taken at a nursing home in Galveston County early today. The owner sent this picture to her family members begging for help, and around noon thankfully help came. The owner and residents about two dozen or so were rescued. The county commissioner saying some were found up to their waist in the water. And those who were wheelchair bound, you see in this picture, were found up to their chests or even their necks. And we spoke with the daughter of the owner who took this picture. She says that her mom sent her this picture in a text, and her cell phone was dying, please get some help, and she obviously went out on a frantic mission to try to get them help. And she posted this on social media to attract the attention to get the help they needed. And that is what did it. We have learned from the county officials that every single member there was rescued and was taken to a hospital in Galveston County. One Houston mother meantime, though, she had to laugh to keep from crying after seeing the incredible damage done to her home by the floodwaters. You can see just how high the water went. This was earlier today filling room after room and leaving the family no other option but to try to leave to escape with a 5-year-old child. The mother who shot that joins us now by phone, Darnica Burns. Thank you so much, Darnica, for spending time with us during a difficult time, I know, for you and your family. I understand that part of the reason leaving your home was so frightening is not only because you have a little girl, but you can't swim. So take me through what happened?
[Darnica Burns, Flood Victim:] It just happened so fast. The water just kept rising. At first I thought, you know, it was going to go down. But it just kept rising, and it got up to maybe our knees. And about 30 minutes later it's like it's gone, you know, almost our chest. So we had go ahead and leave out the house. And we walked to the nearest gas station and it was kind of hard because of the pressure from the water. And I had my baby on my back trying to walk through it. It was some guys there and they asked if we needed help. And they had a ladder and
[Cabrera:] So where are you now, Darnica?
[Burns:] My uncle picked me up so I'm at his house right now.
[Cabrera:] OK. Thank goodness you were able to get somewhere safe and warm and dry. Have you ever seen flooding like this in Houston?
[Burns:] Never. I've never see anything like this. It was just so scary, especially with my daughter.
[Cabrera:] Right. How is she doing?
[Burns:] She is braver than me. She kept saying, mommy, why are you crying? I kept saying, baby, it's my allergies. But she wasn't scared at all. She was more brave than me. So I had to keep it together so she wouldn't be scared.
[Cabrera:] Darnica, thank you so much for sharing your story, for sharing your images. And our best to you and your family. I want to go back now to our Ed Lavandera in Dickinson, Texas, there. There's another rescue underway right now. Ed, talk to us about what's happening. OK, he can't hear us right now, I'm told. But we will just continue to stay with this picture. There's a rescue happening. You'll recall this is in Dickinson, Texas. He's been on this boat and he's assisting right now. This is live, that's why the camera's a little bit shaky. They don't have contact with us. Obviously some technical issues being in the middle of nowhere and all this flooding. But we saw a dog being loaded onto a boat. Ed is on a boat with a gentleman named Austin who got the social media call for help. And he brought his boat to this area. Officials actually went online and said we need more help. We don't have enough rescuers. We don't have enough resources here as this flood was just overtaking neighborhoods. And so Austin took his boat out there. And Ed told us he's helped to rescue about a dozen people today in the last few hours. Ed made it in on this boat from the interstate. And now I think we have a connection with Ed. What do you what can you tell us about what's happening where you are right now, Ed?
[Lavandera:] Ana, there's a woman we're about to leave this neighborhood and there was a woman who kind of flagged us down and her two elderly parents who were stuck inside the home. So I'm going to put the microphone down. We're going to help them try to get back into the boat so we can get them out of here. So I'm going to put the microphone down while we help them get into the boat.
[Cabrera:] OK. I'm just going to let this play before our eyes and I'm not going to say much. But if you are just joining us, this is live right now on CNN in Dickerson, Texas. And Ed Lavandera is in a boat with one of the volunteer rescuers helping people out of their homes who have been stranded.
[Lavandera:] Jason, you want to come up here and help?
[Unidentified Male:] I can help lift you if that's OK? OK. You ready?
[Lavandera:] You ready?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Lavandera:] You got it?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Lavandera:] OK. I got you. I got you. Not too bad.
[Unidentified Male:] Just sit wherever you feel like, you know, is the most comfortable for you.
[Lavandera:] Whenever you feel like moving you can sit right there on the edge. Are we taking on water?
[Unidentified Male:] No, it's all that rain we had earlier the day and I never bailed out.
[Lavandera:] You all right? Long night.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Lavandera:] All right. We got hey, Ana, we've got this gentleman's wife and their daughter that still need to be pulled out of here. So Austin Seth, who is the volunteer, who has been taking us around I tell you what, we were just about to leave and we just happened to hear this woman so ask for help. So that's Austin here, they have two dogs as well. Come on this way, little fella. So they're trying to get her out. We'll keep working on this and doing that. I got to be honest, the daughter told us that her mother has Alzheimer's so that's complicating the situation.
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Lavandera:] So let's be a little bit delicate here because I don't know what kind of condition her mother is in. Let's give us a second
[Cabrera:] I got you. We want to be sensitive to the family.
[Lavandera:] You know what I mean?
[Cabrera:] Sure. We want to be sensitive to this family.
[Lavandera:] I want you to see here
[Cabrera:] Amazing things happening right now in Dickinson, Texas, where this gentleman was just rescued. Ed, we'll let you do the work that needs to happen there on the ground and we'll check back in with you and that family when the time is appropriate. But for more information on how you can help the victims there of Harvey just log onto CNN.comimpact. We're going to take a quick break. We're back in just a moment.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] In just hours, former acting attorney general Sally Yates and former director of national intelligence James Clapper are set to testify before the Senate Judiciary's Committee their hearing on Russia's interference in the U.S. election. So what can we expect to learn today? Joining us to discuss is CNN national security analyst and former CIA and NSA director, General Michael Hayden. General, thanks for being here. Great to have you.
[Gen. Michael Hayden, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] Sally Yates will be hamstrung, of course, by classified information stuff that she cannot share
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] This is an open session.
[Camerota:] with the open session, so what do you expect to learn today from her?
[Hayden:] Well, I think it's going to be fascinating, Alisyn. And let me go out on a limb here, all right, to say that at the end of the day the White House is not going to be enthusiastic with regard to what's said in the committee hearing and this isn't going to settle this issue down. And so what we have here are two career professionals, one in Justice, one in American intelligence not the deep state, not politicized individuals, although that's the charge that's been made against one personally and the other's institution. These people are simply going to candidly answer questions from a very knowledgeable interrogator, Senator Lindsey Graham. So I actually think even though we've got this cabin because of classification concerns for both witnesses, we're going to learn an awful lot that we hadn't had really detailed knowledge about in the past.
[Cuomo:] All right, so let's dialogue it out a little bit. So, Sally Yates says it wasn't a heads-up. I went in there I went in there early, I told them we know what he said what Flynn said to this guy and it's not the story that's coming out of the White House. He could be compromised by Russia because of what he exposed himself to. Now what?
[Hayden:] Well, first of all, Chris, I think we know that objectively. I think I mentioned the last time we chatted that if the acting attorney general insists on seeing the White House counsel, that's a tectonic thing in its own right. But she's going to put on exclamation point on it by putting some of the human interest the details of the narrative of the plot line into the story. So it suggests a couple of things. One is the chaos in the Trump White House. Second is the inordinate distrust of the officials from the government they were replacing. And third, it's going to feed that darker narrative out there with regard to the relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russian federation.
[Camerota:] And so, General, why is that you were saying that you don't think that lawmakers will be enthusiastic about what they hear today?
[Hayden:] No, I don't I think the White House will not be enthusiastic
[Camerota:] Oh.
[Hayden:] about what they hear.
[Camerota:] OK, and so what will James Clapper then add to this?
[Hayden:] I think what Jim will do and David Sanger suggested this a few minutes ago when you were speaking with him. I think Jim is going to lean a little bit more forward in terms of what kind of intelligence backs up that public white paper that the DNI's office pushed out the door in January. Now look, even I, as a career professional, was a little disappointed that what we got were the conclusions of the American Intelligence Community with regard to what the Russians did to influence our presidential election, but we got none of the supporting data. Now I understand you've got to you've got to protect sources and methods but I think Jim's going to be a little more forthcoming with at least the kind of sources and methods that were relied on to get to those conclusions. And remember, Alisyn, those were high confidence conclusions on the part of the Intelligence Community.
[Cuomo:] You know, with what we just saw in France it's obviously so important that we get to the bottom of how Russia did whatever they did here, how it was disseminated, and how we protect against it. You do have this parallel concern about collusion. Clapper had been used a lot by Trump defenders saying hey, Clapper when he was leaving was asked about this and he said I've seen no evidence of collusion. What do you say in your experience to those who say if there proof we'd know it already, General, and we haven't been told anything so this is a fool's errand.
[Hayden:] So I wouldn't believe that we'd know it already. This deserves to be played out. That's why you've got these multiple investigations going on. That's why you've got the FBI on point here trying to find out what, if any, collusion took place. But Chris, you bring up a great point and let me be very candid and perhaps a little dark here. Perhaps the only collusion that would have been required to make the Russian effort successful was a presidential campaign that incessantly chanted "lock her up" and threatened a special prosecutor to put his political opponent in jail if that campaign won. And a candidate, himself, who seemed to endorse WikiLeaks by saying "I love WikiLeaks." Maybe that was all the precondition you needed inside the American political process to make the Russian effort more likely to succeed.
[Camerota:] General, what's happening with North Korea? There are now four Americans being detained being held in North Korea. What is this about?
[Hayden:] Well, number one, as I think most people believe, the Kim regime is going to try to provoke the Americans to show that they've got cards to play in this contest. And I think, frankly, Alisyn, this is about bargaining chips. Kim is kind of going to the cashier to get more chips to play with when he confronts the American administration, and this is really hard for us. We owe these people protection because they are American citizens. But, Alisyn, if we overemphasize this, if we over-focus on this, we simply incentivize Kim Jong Un to take even more Americans because he's getting the desired effect.
[Camerota:] General, thank you for all of your experience
[Hayden:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] and sharing your expertise with us.
[Cuomo:] All right, we have another story to share with you this morning. The disturbing new details emerging in the death of a fraternity pledge at Penn State. Now, evidence just released is leaving parents in shock. Why? We'll show you next.

[Baldwin:] After the recent indictments of two former Trump campaign officials, a lot of people have been asking, where in the world is former national security adviser Michael Flynn? Well, today, an indication he may be talking. Sources tell CNN that Flynn is expressing concern about the potential legal exposure of his son, Michael Flynn Junior. Flynn Senior has been under federal investigation even before Robert Mueller became special council. And Flynn Junior has played a key role in the family's consulting firm. And while the father here, Flynn Senior, has been largely absent from public view and from social media, his son frequently weighs in on this Russia investigation. Just four days ago, this is a tweet from Mike Flynn Junior. Quote, the disappointment on your faces when I don't go to jail will be worth all your harassment. Let's go to Shimon Prokupecz, our CNN crime and justice reporter, on this. Do we know what legal questions Bob Mueller is focusing on regarding Flynn Senior and where the son may fit in here?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Yes, Brooke, so we have some insight into it based on witnesses who we've talked to who have been interviewed by the special counsel investigators and they say to us that the investigators are asking questions about the former about Mike Flynn, the former national security adviser's business dealing. His son was his top aid, was his chief of staff at the time. So they're asking questions about the son's role in the businesses and some of the work that they were doing overseas and making money off of that. Income that they were getting from their work overseas. As well as some interest in Flynn, Mike Flynn's efforts, lobbying efforts, on behalf of Turkey. Those are just some of the things that we have been told the special counsel has been asking questions about.
[Baldwin:] OK. Shimon, thank you. Shimon Prokupecz for us in Washington on just this piece of the investigation regarding the Flynn family. We're going to continue on. And we'll be right back.

[Matt Lauer, Former Host, Nbc News:] What a great job we have.
[Unidentified Female:] Some of what is being said about me is untrue or mischaracterized.
[Lauer:] You were accused of sexual harassment. A long and difficult process to get these actresses to be identified and go on the record with their allegations. But you don`t let your number one guy go unless you have information that you think makes him...
[Unidentified Female:] But there is enough truth in these stories to make me feel embarrassed and ashamed.
[Lauer:] Anne Hathaway, good morning. Nice to see you.
[Anne Hathaway, Actress:] Good morning, Matt.
[Lauer:] Seeing a lot of you lately.
[Hathaway:] Sorry about that.
[Lauer:] Let`s just get it the other way. A wardrobe malfunction the other night. What`s the lesson learned from something like that?
[Meredith Vieira, Co-host, Nbc News:] I went into your office once. Do you remember this?
[Lauer:] Yes?
[Vieira:] So being and you have a huge bag of sex toys and you do remember this?
[Lauer:] Wait a minute. We had a guest on the show who was a what was she? A sex therapist. She gave each of us a shopping bag of stuff.
[Vieira:] I didn`t get...
[Lauer:] So when you look you realize all the things we get to do. And it has flown.
[Unidentified Male:] And Matt Lauer, and Matt Lauer.
[Unidentified Female:] That`s your version.
[Lauer:] I guess when I play at home. Bye.
[Banfield:] They said it could never happen. A morning show icon dethroned over allegations of sexual misconduct, but it did happen. Actually, it happened twice. In a week. First Charlie Rose, and then Matt Lauer. And today Matt Lauer did the mea culpa of shame owning up to the same kind of sexual misconduct that he had often covered himself on the today show. So, tonight, there are at least three women who have come forward with stories about things Matt Lauer reportedly did to them or around them at the office like giving a colleague a sex toy and telling her what he would want to do with it. Or dropping his pants in front of another and getting angry when she reportedly didn`t engage. Variety reporting both of those stories, while the New York Times reports that a woman claims Matt Lauer sexually assaulted her in his office until she passed out. Not to mention the inappropriate sexual behavior at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. Today was Matt Lauer`s second day off the job, and he was spotted in the Hamptons where his wife and children live still wearing his wedding ring. And he formally issued a statement just in time for the Today show this morning.
[Unidentified Female:] In fact, we just moments ago received a statement from Matt. And let me read it to you. "There are no words to express my sorrow and regret for the pain I have caused others by my words and actions. To the people I have hurt, I am truly sorry. As I`m writing this I realize the depth of the damage and the disappointment I have left behind at home and at NBC. Some of what is being said about me is untrue or mischaracterized, but there is enough truth in these stories to make me feel embarrassed and ashamed. I regret that my shame is now shared by the people I cherish dearly. Repairing the damage will take a lot of time and soul searching and I`m committed to beginning that effort. It is now my full time job. The last two days have forced me to take a very hard look at my own troubling flaws. It`s been humbling. I`m blessed to be surrounded by people I love. I thank them for their patience and grace."
[Banfield:] God help me, I`ve not had to do that in my career, apologize to the people I work with. Joining me now, CNN senior media correspondent and host of Reliable Sources, Brian Stelter. Also attorney Benedict Morelli, he represented one of the women who sued Bill O`Reilly for sexual harassment. And defense attorney Randy Zelin is still with me. So, Brian, you have been on the lead for reporting for CNN and HLN on really the seismic, you know, reality that everybody is kind of...
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] ... trying to digest still today. Still doesn`t feel right.
[Stelter:] Yes. I think a lot of his fans are still devastated by this.
[Banfield:] Yes.
[Stelter:] To find out this was happening in his office behind the scenes and it was kept a secret for a long time. I think it`s notable, NBC now says there were three complaints filed this week, one before he was fired, two others after he was fired. On top of those three complaints there been these other suggestions of inappropriate behavior as well. We don`t know if any new complaints filed today, Ashleigh. But the three complaints from earlier in the week are certainly very disturbing.
[Banfield:] So there`s something else that`s happening. Amidst all the devastation, the frustration, the understandable anger that I think a lot of people have in this movement, I`m one of them.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] I have dealt for 30 years with this garbage. So I`m happy to see sort of the lancing of the boil.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] But I hate to see people I like go through this suffering that they go through, both the accusers and those, like Matt Lauer, who I worked with and I liked as well.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] I`m on there with Savannah saying he was good to me, he never did anything like that.
[Stelter:] Right, right.
[Banfield:] But then there`s the piling on that I feel is happening as well. And I want to play something in particular because everybody with a microscope is looking at every single thing that Matt Lauer has ever done and then ascribing this behavior to it and I`m not sure it`s fair. So I want you to look at this Meredith Vieira clip with me. Savannah and Matt were on the show talking about, you know, all the fun things that morning show hosts do. And Meredith ask him a question about sex toys. Let`s watch and I`m going to ask for your assessment.
[Vieira:] I have to say, I went into your office once. Do you remember this?
[Lauer:] Yes.
[Vieira:] Snooping. And you had a huge bag of sex toys. And do you remember this?
[Lauer:] Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
[Vieira:] Yes, you did. In your in your closet, Matt. You did. You had a big...
[Lauer:] OK. Can I explain what happened?
[Vieira:] OK.
[Lauer:] Because you were there. We had a guest on the show who was a what was she? A sex therapist. And so when she left, I think you did the segment, actually.
[Vieira:] I didn`t. I didn`t.
[Lauer:] And when she left she gave each of us a shopping bag of stuff.
[Vieira:] I didn`t get a bag of stuff.
[Lauer:] True story, I didn`t know what to do. I put it in my closet, my dressing room. The next day we had Laura Bush on the show. The secret service came with the dogs to sweep our dressing rooms and I watched I said, no, I`ll get out. Go ahead. You can stay. We just need to bring the dog in. They open up the thing and I see the guy pick up the bag. I`m like, My god. It`s true.
[Banfield:] I mean, hilarious, right?
[Stelter:] It`s a pretty funny anecdote. But you know, a lot of web sites only picked up on the first sentence, that he had a bag of sex toys in his office.
[Banfield:] Because that`s the way since the reporting.
[Stelter:] I think there are things being taken out of context. Right. And look, there could be very disturbing things that he was doing. The allegations are chilling, but I think in some ways cherry picking jokes that were said on the air five or ten years ago actually might dilute the real allegations against him.
[Banfield:] Thank you for saying that, because I worry about the jump the shark. I worry about all the women who want to come forward and now are going to be looked at as opportunists because you get good coverage for it. Look at this next clip specifically, it`s a short one, it`s one of those in-between takes. So cameras were rolling but they weren`t on the air as Meredith I think was getting ready to go outside.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Gathering her stuff off the table near the couch where Matt was seated. And Matt made a comment about the sweater she was wearing and the position that she was in. Have a look at this.
[Lauer:] I`ll meet you outside. Bye.
[Vieira:] Bye-bye.
[Lauer:] Pretty sweater. Keep bending over like that. It`s a nice view.
[Banfield:] Keeping bending over like that. It`s a nice shot. Now I could see that. I can see you saying that to someone who is your great friend. And I`m not so sure that there`s a power dynamic between Meredith and Matt. Neither one can fire the other. Is that an unfair example or given in the context of what we know now, all`s fair?
[Stelter:] Yes. I think it`s an embarrassing clip. And I`d like to know more about it. I thought the frustration with Lauer`s statement today is that some of the things out there being mischaracterized but he`s not giving any details. I said to his P.R. person say, if he said parts of these allegations are untrue, tell us which ones. And he`s not doing that. Instead he`s saying enough of the claims are true that he`s very sorry and ashamed. So he`s leaving a lot left open to interpretation but I do think a lot of these clips might being taken out of context. Lauer, he had an incredible career. He was beloved by millions of viewers, people chose to start their day with him. We can`t throw that away. But at the same time if we spend too much time focusing on his accomplishments that takes away from the stories of these accusers. It`s a very delicate situation.
[Banfield:] yes. I don`t I don`t want anything to think for a minute that I`m an apologist for this kind of behavior or for Matt Lauer for Charlie Rose or anybody else that does this crazy brutal business of hitting on your employees.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] It`s a power structure, period.
[Stelter:] Right.
[Banfield:] Step up your game. Someone at MSNBC, Stephanie Ruhle said, step up your god damn game.
[Stelter:] That`s the great way to put it.
[Banfield:] Step up your game if you`re the boss. Period.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] I don`t care if he thinks he`s the prettiest thing on earth or he`s the hottest guy on the planet, you can`t.
[Stelter:] Right.
[Banfield:] Period. So I want to bring in, if I can, another kind of dynamic that`s going on here. Benedict Morelli. You represented Andrea Mackris.
[Benedict Morelli, Former Plaintiff For Bill O`reilly:] I did.
[Banfield:] She was one of the first accusers of Bill O`Reilly.
[Morelli:] She was the first.
[Banfield:] More than 10, somewhere around at least a decade.
[Morelli:] Ten or eleven years ago, yes.
[Banfield:] It`s a long time ago. And people might not remember but people might remember the branding of this story as having involved a loofah.
[Morelli:] Yes.
[Banfield:] And what Bill O`Reilly on tape wanted to do with the loofah regarding Andrea Mackris. Mackris, did she ever work again?
[Morelli:] She never worked again.
[Banfield:] She never work again. Repeat that. How much did she after being fired or being let go from?
[Morelli:] Well, there were it`s now been reported that four women she was the first, and three others got 13 million altogether. I could only tell you that she got the most of that 13 million. It was very interesting because at one point, she was so upset. She said, I want to take him down. And I said, well, Andrea, you didn`t retain me for that. I don`t do causes, I do cases.
[Banfield:] OK. So, I want to ask specifically want to get to this
[Morelli:] And and because you may never work again, you need the money.
[Banfield:] Honestly, Benedict, I think a lot of people are watching saying these women are just looking for payouts. And I think they forget, you need a payout when you`re not working. When was the last time Gretchen Carlson was on the air paid?
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] That`s a very good point. She was paid $20 million by Fox, but one of the reasons is because was she was making a lot of money before she lost her job.
[Banfield:] How many years?
[Stelter:] And it`s unclear if she`ll be back on
[Tv. Banfield:] Is it two? Is it three? Two or three years since she`s not been on the air?
[Stelter:] It`s been well over a year. And you know, there is
[Morelli:] Over a year.
[Stelter:] there is speculation about whether she has been trying to get a job on TV or not. Whether networks are willing to hire her or not. I certainly hope networks are willing to hire her. But these are open questions when we see people lose their jobs.
[Banfield:] I say that two or three, because she was marginalized off the morning show where the big money
[Stelter:] That`s a very good point, yes, that`s correct.
[Morelli:] I would like to say one point that you have to differentiate her from my client, because my client`s an unknown person, one of the producers, not an online personality.
[Stelter:] And she was even more vulnerable.
[Morelli:] So much more vulnerable.
[Banfield:] I`m with you.
[Morelli:] And needed the job. And I said to her, you need to collect this money. And we also have to understand that many of the women who are now coming forward against many of these other men, the statute of limitations is gone.
[Banfield:] Right. I just want to
[Morelli:] So they can`t get a payday.
[Banfield:] do this quick math, so that when someone hears oh, $20 million, you know, for Gretchen Carlson, boo hoo, you know what Gretchen Carlson could have made in one year? $25 million! Because that`s what Matt Lauer was making. And Gretchen Carlson as a morning show host could have risen to the very top. She could have been the next CBS morning news anchor or the next NBC News anchor. If she hadn`t gone through the marginalization and then out the door, sweetheart. So $20 million is a drop in the bucket. I wanted to ask you this, Randy, because this is sort of going And guess who else is looking for more than that. Matt Lauer is reportedly looking for a $30 million contract payout. The reporting is that his contract was either up in 2018 or shortly thereafter. Therefore, he wants the balance. I`m sure his agents would want the balance. They get a good chunk of that. Explain how this works, Randy Zelin. If you`re out the door for cause, can you get that money?
[Randy Zelin, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Good luck.
[Banfield:] Really?
[Zelin:] And there is something that I`ve been waiting to say for 27 years having been a criminal defense attorney, what judges love to say to my clients at sentencing. Are you sorry or are you sorry that you got caught?
[Banfield:] I mean, that`s really what it`s going to come down to for the morals on it, but for the contract payout, I don`t think it`s going to matter.
[Zelin:] I don`t know what rhymes with termination with cause, but I know that what probably doesn`t rhyme but it doesn`t matter is, you ain`t going to get your money
[Banfield:] Yes.
[Zelin:] if you are terminated with cause.
[Banfield:] And especially if you cop to it. Last question, and i think this is what a lot of people who like the "Today" show, liked Matt Lauer, are upset about the whole basket of deplorable behavior that went on, what`s next? Who gets the job? What happens in the landscape of morning TV? Who is going to go broke? Who is going to lose their jobs over this? If advertising goes down, do 50 producers get cut next quarter? What`s next? What happens?
[Stelter:] Whenever someone falls, someone rises. And this is one of the situations where either some younger man at NBC or maybe a woman is going to take that job. You know, there`s been some talk about maybe there should be an all-female lineup at CBS or NBC, given this moment in American history and society. It`s unclear how NBC is going replace Lauer. It is going to be very difficult. And you`re right. If the show does lose audience share, if rivals benefit because of this scandal, then there`s going to be an advertising revenue impact and there are going to be troubles behind the scenes. It would be a shame to see other people suffer as a result of Lauer`s alleged behavior. But, you know, we saw that with Charlie Rose last week. A number of producers at Charlie Rose`s show who are going to lose their jobs at the end of December. They`re going to be without pay after Christmas because of Charlie Rose`s show being canceled.
[Banfield:] It`s not just the guy.
[Stelter:] That`s right.
[Morelli:] It seems to me that Matt Lauer because I`ve been on both shows. I`ve been on with Matt Lauer a few times. I was on the Charlie Rose two months ago. Matt Lauer was more of a focus on that show. You know what I`m saying? I`m not saying that Charlie Rose
[Banfield:] Oh, I know what you`re saying, 25 million reasons why he was the main focus.
[Morelli:] Not that Charlie Rose wasn`t an icon, because I was shocked when I heard that.
[Banfield:] But he didn`t have 20 years in the chair.
[Morelli:] But it was different. Five years with them. And he was 20 plus years. He`s a different focus. I`m asking the same question. Is it going to be another woman or is it going to be a guy? I mean, I`m thinking about who I think it is going to be.
[Banfield:] You know what I want to know? I`ll be honest. I don`t think anybody is really asking this question. I know I got to get to break. But can you answer this quickly?
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Is Matt Lauer ever going to work on TV again?
[Stelter:] I know America loves a comeback story, but I would be shocked to see him back in a big job.
[Zelin:] He should disappear for a while.
[Banfield:] Yes, so some rehab for all of this? There`s a rehab for everything. I got to go. I`m so sorry. I wish we could do the entire hour on this. Brian, as always, great reporting today. Keep it up. Benedict Morelli, good to have you on. Thank you, Randy.
[Zelin:] You`re welcome.
[Banfield:] You can`t go anywhere.
[Zelin:] I won`t.
[Banfield:] I`ve got breaking news tonight in a desperate search that`s on for a missing Texas teenager who is believed to have been lured away by a much older man that she met on Snapchat. And if you think that she has an incredible resemblance to Elizabeth Smart, you`re not wrong. It was sort of a jaw-dropping moment when this crossed our wires. Guess what? Both 15, both missing from their bedrooms. We have quite a development in this, next.

[Baldwin:] A Grand Canyon visit may soon cost you twice as much as it normally does for park entrance fees. The National Park Service wants to charge $70 for admission. That is more than double the current prices to 17 popular parks during peak season, that includes Yellowstone, Yosemite, Mount Lanier. The hiked fee would help pay for infrastructure improvements. Critics say it could become unaffordable for a lot of Americans. The National Park Conservation Association say, quote, "The administration just proposed a major cut to the National Park Service budget, even as parks struggle with billions of dollars in needed repairs." With me now, Don Hafner. He and his wife have visited all 59 national parks in 59 weeks. I'm so jealous. I said my New Year's resolution was to visit more parks. So I'm jealous of you Don Hafner. Can you tell me your favorite park and why?
[Don Hafner, Has Visited All U.s. National Parks:] Hi, Brooke, and thanks so much for having me today. That's a question that we get all the time. And it's really difficult to pick a favorite. But I would suggest to everyone, if you can get to Denali National Park in Alaska, it's a very special place.
[Baldwin:] That's a good one. Bucket list. Bucket list.
[Hafner:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] All right. So the fact that potentially the entrance fee could go up to $70. I understand you are saying it's a necessary evil. Why?
[Hafner:] My understanding of the history of the national parks is that they have been chronically underfunded for 100 years. And that's an indication to me that Congress is not going to do a lot to fund them further. So it's really going to be up to the people of the United States, whether it's through charitable contributions or user fees, to help fill in that gap a little bit.
[Baldwin:] OK.
[Hafner:] I'll tell you I was a little surprised yesterday when I read the amount.
[Baldwin:] You were?
[Hafner:] But a lot of the money is going to have to come from us.
[Baldwin:] I understand you do have a solution of sorts, you know, advice to other potential park goers. What is that? The wake of this rate hike?
[Hafner:] Well, there are a lot of things that people can do to lower their costs. For example, Yellowstone has an annual pass just for that park of $60. And that's one way that you can save some money. But the national parks offer an annual pass. And the highest cost that anyone would have to pay for that is $80. And that gives you access to the parks that have a fee for an entire year unlimited.
[Baldwin:] Did my annual pass last year in Wyoming in Tetons National Park. So there you go. I just have like 53 more to go. Don Hafner, thank you so very much.
[Hafner:] You can do it.
[Baldwin:] Nationalparks.com. I can do it. I'll get to Alaska. Thank you so much. Let's continue on our breaking news. A day after the divide in Republican Party appeared to be going deeper, the president of the United States said, moments ago, he believes there's great unity in the Republican Party. Coming up next, my CNN colleague, Breanna Keilar, joins me to do a story that hit close to home, when she was filling in for me as anchor chair a week ago. It happened amid an ugly feud that dragged Gold Star families into the public eye. Do not miss this. That's coming up.

[Brown:] A majority of states won't be sending your voter information to a White House panel on voter fraud. Secretaries of states who are Democrats and Republicans for more than 40 states and the District of Columbia are expressing concerns and pushing back on the request made the Commission on Election Integrity with some states flat out refusing outright to provide any information. Among other things the commission asks for names, addresses, party affiliation, felony convictions and whether the voters lived overseas. Many states say it legally cannot provide all of this information. Others express concern about how the information might be used. Joining me now with more is CNN White House reporter, Jeremy Diamond. Jeremy, as I look through the list and read the CNN article about this, what struck me is that even some red states are pushing back against this request.
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's right. You know, we've seen some fiery pushback from some of the secretaries of state from some of these Republican states, including from particularly fiery response from the secretary of state of Mississippi, who said, quote, "My reply would be they can go jump in the Gulf of Mexico and Mississippi is a great state to launch from." There's also been a lot of criticism, of course, from Democrats, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe saying, "I have no intention of honoring this request. This entire commission is based on specious and false notion that there was widespread voter fraud last November." The White House, though, is pushing back on a lot of this criticism both from Republicans and Democrats. The president on Saturday took to his favorite medium of course, to Twitter, to say, quote, "Numerous states are refusing to give information to the very distinguished voter fraud panel. What are they trying to hide?" I just spoke a little bit ago with the vice president's spokesman, Mark Lauder, the vice president, of course, is chairing this commission. He is pointing out what the commission is asking for, they are not asking for any private information. The letters that were sent to these states are largely the same and they list a number of pieces of information that this commission would like to get from some of these states. But the letter does point out that they would only like this information if it is indeed publicly available and so that's where there seems to be a little bit of a disconnect at least between this Voter Fraud Commission and some of these states that are pushing back. You know, we've had some of these states pushing back and saying we're not going to provide any private information. We're only going to provide publicly available information, and that in effect would be it appears complying with this request. But nonetheless, as you point out there has been a lot of criticism of this in part driving from the intentions of this commission, number of states pointing out that voter fraught is not as widespread as the president and some of the members of this committee have tried to portray. You'll remember, of course, the president soon after coming into office said he believes several million people had voted illegally in the 2016 election.
[Brown:] Right, and in the confusion you sum this up, Jeremy, but some states are eagerly complying with this it seems and other states say it's illegal to hand over this information. So how does that square?
[Diamond:] Yes, that's right. You know, there seems to be two things happening here. One of them is concern from some of these states over states' rights and not having the federal government involved in elections, which is supposed to be something ruled by the states. And then another part of this is the politics of it, right. Some of these states particularly the Democratic states taking an opportunity to point out that this commission was set up on a flawed premise. The premise that the president believes millions of people voted illegally in the 2016 election, something for which of course there is no evidence at all and the White House has not put forth any evidence to that effect.
[Brown:] All right, Jeremy Diamond, thank you so much. And joining me now to discuss CNN senior political commentator, former Senator Rick Santorum, and Basil Smikle, executive director of the New York State Democratic Party. Great to see you both. Senator, I want to start with you. Good morning. This effort seems over before it even began. Does this hurt the president's credibility on these claims of voter fraud?
[Rick Santorum, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] No. I mean, look, I think the letter was very clear. They're asking for whatever information that can be provided publicly to the commission so they can begin the process of looking through this data and determining the extent of voter fraud. Look, the bottom line is that the system, if you don't have a voter I.D. law in your state, the law is pretty much an honor system. We're just trusting people that they are who they say they are and that they're going to vote properly or not vote more than once or not vote for other people. That's not a way to conduct an election, and what the president is saying is when you have a system that is basically an honor system, there's a penchant, a potential for fraud and we want to examine it to the extent we can whether fraud was committed.
[Brown:] But what about Senator Chris Cobach, who is overseeing this, his own state of Kansas pushing back, the guy who was in charge of this.
[Santorum:] Yes, I don't understand what the pushback is. The letter says as your reporter just reported, please give us all the information you can that's permissible, that's public. They're not asking for any private information. If this information is available in a public forum in your state please provide it to us. If it's not then don't, and so I don't really see the rub that a lot of these secretaries of state are having with it.
[Brown:] Let's ask Basil because Basil, you run the Democratic Party in New York. Right. What's the problem here if as the senator says they're asking for publicly available information? What's not legal about that?
[Basil Smikle, Executive Director, New York State Democratic Party:] Well, part of the problem is this question of intent, because it's not that the president has just said at this very moment that there may be issues of fraud. He is actually made that claim throughout his entire campaign, and against evidence to the contrary. And so there is a concern and our governor has said that we will not comply with this because it does seem intrusive and the fact is that there were reports of voter intimidation last year. So if the president and the White House can't come up with a better reason for why they need this information, I think it's incumbent upon secretaries of state governors, political parties and again, this is bipartisan. This is not just a Democratic issue, that the administration has to come up with a better reason for why they need this information, and we have to tell our voters in our state why we're handing over this information to the federal government. If you're a Democrat because there are concerns about vulnerable populations, yes, I think this voter intimidation does carry a tremendous amount of weight, but if you're in a red state, you're going to be concerned about states' rights and the federal government's intervention here. So I think there's a lot that the Trump administration has yet to discuss with the public about why this is actually necessary.
[Brown:] Because so far, Senator, the president has only tweeted without any proof to back it up this claim that millions of people voted illegally. So what is your response to Basil that the White House needs to put forward evidence to back these claims of widespread voter fraud before states hand over the information?
[Santorum:] Yes. I guess, I would say this. It's been very, very difficult as we've seen to prove voter fraud because, well, let's just use an example, say for example in the city of Philadelphia, which was my home state. We do know that on Election Day there's money put out on the street on Election Day to, quote, "encourage" people to vote. Both sides will put that money out there. Let's say that someone went and they got a list of people who were let's say deceased or people that had moved and they were going to organize something to have some folks go up and claim that they were that person and vote. How would you catch them? So I mean, unless you were actually there and you caught them in the act, how would you catch them? Because you wouldn't know who came in, I mean, the voters the people at the poll wouldn't know. It's impossible to catch voter fraud unless you catch it at the moment it's occurring and that's not happening. There was a study done by, in New York by the New York Bureau of Investigation, they went in and actually had 63 people go out and actually try to vote in an election. And 61 of the 63 fraudulently voting for dead people, people who moved, et cetera, and 61 of the 63 people were able to vote. One of them was caught only because the person who showed up was the son and tried to vote was trying to vote for the son of the person that was checking them in. Otherwise everyone was able to vote. That's the problem with an honor system. You can't it's almost impossible to prove fraud, but it's very easy to commit.
[Smikle:] It's impossible to prove it in part because it doesn't exist in this notion that political parties are throwing money
[Brown:] There have been in some cases, just not widespread.
[Smikle:] Yes, very, very few and significantly not significant actually in statistically not significant in a lot of these studies, so having said that, look, I think when you are looking at, as the senators talked about individual states and their voting laws. Even the Supreme Court has stepped in and said you know what? Particularly states like North Carolina, your laws are too restrictive. The movement isn't toward more restrictions, it's actually toward fewer restrictions to allow more participation. So this idea that the parties are engaged in just throwing money on the street and getting voter rolls of dead voters just doesn't exist.
[Brown:] All right, really quickly, I want to switch topics while I have both of you gentlemen here with me. Basil, about two dozen Democrats are backing this bill that aimed at evaluating president's mental health and ousting him if he's unfit to serve. Basil, constitutional scholars have come out and said that this is completely unrealistic. It is premature at this point. What is the point of this?
[Smikle:] You know, I saw that story. I'm not sure what the point of it is. I'll just tell you this really quickly, I was at a rally in Queens, New York, on Saturday, about 400 people came out on a morning on a holiday weekend, Deputy Chair Keith Ellison was there and spoke, I spoke. Those are the folks that really care about policy and what the Democratic Party will do about being an economic and social justice organization. That's what I think most voters care about and what the party needs to focus on. If these individuals want to sort of take up this as an issue, there perhaps is a philosophical or legal sort of scholarly investigation into whether or not this is useful, but the truth of the matter is the voters aren't looking at that right now and I want us to be more focused on that.
[Brown:] Right, so Senator, are the Democrats playing right into President Trump's hands with this effort in your view?
[Santorum:] I think this is overplaying their hand and dangerous. Dangerous talk, period, and as Basil pointed out look, the problem here is the Democratic Party in their fixation on beating up on Donald Trump is ignoring the problems of ordinary Americans. The headlines in the paper today are how increasing number of states that don't have insurance carriers to offer insurance in the individual market anymore. This is the problem that's confronting America. We should be focused on trying to get a health care bill passed that actually can repeal and replace Obamacare with something that will work for more Americans. That's what Donald Trump and the Republicans are going to focus on here in the next few weeks and I really believe particularly if they listen to our nation's governors that they can get this done.
[Brown:] All right, Senator Rick Santorum, Basil Smikle, thank you both. Coming up, the pope's hospital offering to take in a terminally ill child at the center of a legal dispute. Why the Vatican is stepping in despite acknowledging there is little hope, up next.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] This just in, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee says there is no evidence to contradict what the intelligence community has been saying all along that Russia meddled in the 2016 election. So, let's go to our CNN senior congressional correspondent, Manu Raju up on The Hill. Manu, you just talked to Senator Warner. What did he share with you?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] This is in response to what the House Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee concluded in their report. In that conclusion it said that nothing they have seen and none of the underlying intelligence supports the notion that Vladimir Putin and the Russians did anything to favor Donald Trump in the 2016 elections. They contradicted what the intelligence community said and in that January 2017 assessment. I spoke to Mark Warner, top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee which is also investigating whether or not that conclusion was accurate, this is what he said.
[Raju:] Senator, House Republicans concluded that there's not enough evidence to support the notion that Vladimir Putin was trying to help Donald Trump become president. What's your reaction?
[Sen. Mark Warner, , Virginia:] My reaction is that since that whole investigation has broken down on partisan lines, we basically have a group of folks who appears to me will say or do anything to protect this president, I believe in the intelligence community's assessment. They spent months working on across the board, saying that the Russians had a favored candidate. That candidate was Mr. Trump.
[Raju:] Do you have evidence to substantiate the intelligence community's assessment that Putin tried to help Trump?
[Warner:] We have been on this now for now about 14 months. We have seen nothing that takes away from the unanimous intelligence community's assessment.
[Raju:] Now of course there are other big questions as part of this investigation is whether or not there's any conclusion that there was any collusion between Russian officials and Trump officials as part of the 2016 campaign. We know the House Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee believe there's no evidence of collusion. When I spoke to the Senate Republican Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Richard Burr earlier this week, he told me there's no evidence yet of collusion. Now Mark Warner sees it a different way.
[Warner:] I'm going to continue to reserve my judgment. But I've never seen a political campaign in my life where a candidate or that campaign has had as much contact with a foreign government before the election and immediately after.
[Raju:] Are you months away from finishing the collusion aspect of this?
[Warner:] I'm not going to get into a timeline. Unlike some others we're actually going to follow the facts and not try to overtly politicize this. Next week we'll take a very important step. We are going to come out with a series of bipartisan recommendations on election security. One of the great frustrations I have is that we know the Russians intervened in 21 of our states, electoral systems in 2016, they did it with impunity. He didn't change vote totals. But they basically left a lot of digital fingerprints and we're now going the primaries already, we're now going into another election season. Every one of Mr. Trump's appointees has acknowledged that our election systems our vulnerable yet in open testimony, when asked if whether they've been directed by the White House to make this a priority, none of them have said the White House has directed them. So that I find back to your earlier question, I find that very peculiar that the President of the United States doesn't view election security as a top priority.
[Raju:] Now Warner also said there are further witnesses they want to interview, beginning next month, including some Trump associates, who the committee wants to bring back for a second round of interviews. People, probably like Jared Kushner, Donald Trump Jr., but Brooke, Republicans have not yet agreed to bring back some of those key officials back for a second round of interviews. Of course, as you see there, a major difference in opinion about whether or not there was collusion, whether or not the intelligence community's assessment is accurate that the Russians actually tried to help Donald Trump become president. So, clear division on Capitol Hill along party lines, certainly on the House side. We'll see the Senate side has any more luck of coming to a bipartisan consensus. Something that has been elusive on Capitol Hill so far.
[Baldwin:] Manu, thank you. Got to pull away. We want to dip into the United Nations and listen to Nikki Haley speaking.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] Let me make one thing clear. From the very beginning, the United States stands in absolute solidarity with Great Britain. The United States believes that Russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the United Kingdom, using a military grade nerve agent. Dozens of civilians and first responders were also exposed. Police officer Nick Bailey was the first to arrive on the scene and remains hospitalized in serious condition. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this atrocious crime. No two nations enjoy a stronger bond than that of the United States and the United Kingdom. Ours is truly a special relationship. When our friends in Great Britain face a challenge, the United States will always be there for them. Always. Alone, Russia's crime is worthy of this council's action. But this is not an isolated incident. The assassination attempt in Salisbury is part of an alarming increase in the use of chemical weapons. Last year, the North Korean regime used the nerve agent VX to publicly assassinate Kim Jong-un's brother in a Malaysian airport. In Syria, the Assad regime continues to kill its own people with chemical weapons years after this council passed resolution 2118 to remove the threat from Syria's chemical weapons program. When the Security Council created a mechanism to investigate chemical weapons attacks that mechanism was targeted. When it began to shine a spotlight on Assad's role in killing his own people. A growing concern in all of this dangerous and destabilizing activity is Russia. Russia failed to ensure Syria destroyed its chemical weapons program. Russia killed the joint investigative mechanism when it found Assad liable for chemical attacks. Russia used its veto to shield Assad five times last year. It has also provided cover for Syria in The Hague at the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons. The Russians complained recently that we criticize them too much. If the Russian government stopped using chemical weapons to assassinate its enemies and if the Russian government stopped helping its Syrian ally to use chemical weapons to kill Syrian children and if Russia cooperated with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons by turning over all information related to this nerve agent, we would stop talking about them. We take no pleasure in having to constantly criticize Russia, but we need Russia to stop giving us so many reasons to do so. Russia must fully cooperate with the U.K.'s investigation and come clean about its own chemical weapons program. Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council. It is entrusted in the United Nations charter with upholding international peace and security. It must account for its actions. If we don't take immediate, concrete measures to address this now, Salisbury will not be the last place we see chemical weapons used. They could be used here in New York or in cities of any country that sits on this council. This is a defining moment. Time and time again, member states say they oppose the use of chemical weapons under any circumstance. Now, one member stands accused of using chemical weapons on the sovereign soil of another member. The credibility of this council will not survive if we fail to hold Russia accountable. Thank you.
[Unidentified Male:] I think the representative of the United States
[Baldwin:] OK, so strong words from the United States and from Ambassador Nikki Haley. This all in the wake of the attempted assassinations of a former Russia spy in Salisbury, England, and also his daughter, with a specific kind of nerve agent that can only be made in Russia. And so finally from the U.S. you have this condemnation on Putin and on Russia and, of course, the U.S. standing by our ally in the United Kingdom. For more, let's go to CNN contributor Jill Dougherty, she's a global fellow we the Woodrow Wilson Center and she's also our former CNN Moscow Bureau Chief. A and so you had earlier in the week, Rex Tillerson, now outgoing Secretary of State condemning Russia. You had Trump yesterday stopping short of condemning Russia and saying he would condemn if it's proven that it's Russia. Then you just heard Nikki Haley. What did you think?
[Jill Dougherty, Former Cnn Moscow Bureau Chief:] I think they did what they are supposed to do, which is -and this is kind of the pattern that has existed, Brooke, for a while. Forget about what the president said for a second. The structural people, the Nikki Haley, the Secretary of Defense, et cetera, they usually say things that comport with usual U.S. policy. And what the United States would normally do under an extraordinary circumstance like this is say exactly, number one, absolute solidarity with our ally, the U.K. Russia carried it out. In essence what they're saying is that special relationship continues. But then she goes on. I think is broadening this now to really talk about chemical weapons in general. She's accusing Russia not only of using chemical weapons in this particular case, the nerve agent, but also in Syria, and saying this is a more serious problem that could spread. We want to have some accountability for what Russia is doing with its chemical weapons. Knowing, of course, that Russia is a member of the Security Council, if they tried to pass anything, Russia could veto it. But I think what they're doing is they're using our representative, our ambassador to the U.N. to make this public statement, to get it out there. Again, strongly standing by the U.K. and then a warning to Russia about chemical weapons.
[Baldwin:] That was an extraordinary moment at the U.N. I'm glad we caught it. Jill Dougherty, good to see you. Thank you so much. Back here at home, thousands of students walking out from schools and classrooms all over the country today in protest of gun violence. And on Capitol Hill, the father of one of the victims in Parkland makes an emotional plea to lawmakers. You will hear from them in moments.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour, reality bites. The White House admits Mexico won't directly pay for a border wall and says the president's position is evolving on other key campaign promises.
[Sesay:] North and South Korea will march under the same flag in next month's Olympics. Is it pure symbolism or a sign of real progress?
[Vause:] And few supplies, little hope but no shortage of desperation. The migrants who ignore all the warnings and try to cross the French Alps despite the danger.
[Sesay:] Hello and thank you for joining us. I'm Isha Sesay.
[Vause:] And I'm John Vause. This is NEWSROOM L.A.
[Sesay:] Well, as a presidential candidate, Donald Trump promised to cut immigration and build a border wall that Mexico would pay for. Now just days away from his first year in office, his chief of staff says Mr. Trump's attitude is evolving.
[Vause:] Trump clearly told lawmakers some of candidate Trump's positions on the border wall were not informed. He also addressed the president's stance on DACA, the program that protects hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children by their parents.
[John F. Kelly, U.s. Homeland Security Secretary:] He's very definitely changed his attitude toward the DACA issue and even the wall. He has evolved in the way he's looked at things. Campaign to governing are two different things. And this president has been very, very flexible in terms of what is within the realm of the possible.
[Vause:] Joining us now, David Siders, senior reporter for Politico; Ethan Bearman, a California talk radio host and Lanhee Chen, research fellow at the Hoover Institute and former public policy director for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Not every campaign promise is kept but not every campaign promise was like this one.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I will build a great, great wall on our southern border and I will have Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words. It will be a great wall. Mexico's going to pay for the wall. Mexico is going to pay for the wall. Mexico will pay for the wall. And Mexico's going to pay for the wall and they understand that. Mexico is going to pay for the wall. Believe me. 100 percent. And who's going to pay for the wall? And who's going to pay for the wall? Who?
[Vause:] Yes, no, not now. David, this is a big one to walk away from, acknowledging that the government won't directly pay for the wall. They're going to have to find other ways to do this. And on top of that, I'm trying to work out, is it a good idea to have the chief of staff break this news? You know, presidents announce good news; cabinet secretaries announce bad. But how is this going to go over with the Trump base?
[David Siders, Politico:] Well, the chief of staff is breaking what I think most people knew all along, which is that Mexico was not. But this will not go over well with the Republican base. So you're already seeing Trump surrogates outside the White House coalescing and saying, well, maybe in negotiations over NAFTA, that's how Mexico pays for the wall, which just isn't the case in any normal understanding of what it means for somebody to pay for the wall. So it's a danger, I think, for the base. But we'll see. I mean, they haven't had a president with this kind of rhetoric on immigration ever. So I'm not sure that it diminishes him entirely in their view.
[Vause:] OK, so, Ethan, on David's point, everyone kind of realized that it was never going to happen. But there's this hardcore base that really thought that Mexico would pay for this.
[Ethan Bearman, Talk Show Radio:] No question that it was going to be this gigantic, big, beautiful wall, because they're ignorant to the Big Bend region of Texas, for example. If you've ever been there, there's no way to build a wall there. It's ridiculous. Secondly, that base doesn't care about reality, truth, facts. They don't matter. They still believe that Mexico will pay for the wall and they're going to spin it exactly as David just said. Well, it's going to be through NAFTA but they're going to pay for the wall.
[Vause:] Right, OK, so this is all part of the evolution, of the changing positions of Donald Trump on certain issues. This is what the Senate majority leader, Republican Mitch McConnell told reporters on Wednesday.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] I'm looking for something that President Trump supports. And he's not yet indicated what measure he's willing to sign. As soon as we figure out what is he for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.
[Vause:] So, Lanhee, that was Mitch McConnell talking about Donald Trump's position or lack of position, when it comes to immigration. Do the evolving views of the president mean that there should be hope that there can be or does it just add to the confusion of where all this is heading?
[Lanhee Chen, The Hoover Institute:] Well, I think that the president actually, because he has demonstrated a willingness to be flexible, let's say, on some of these things, suggests that there's a greater possibility or probability that there will actually be some kind of deal that can get struck on this. The challenge for Republicans, particularly the House and the Senate leadership, is that if the goalposts keep on moving, it's going to be very difficult for them to determine how much support they'll actually get from the Republican base, the Republican members of Congress. So Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan need to have a sense of where the president's going just for anything else to know how many votes they need, who they need to have in favor of a particular resolution. So, yes, in one sense it does open the floodgates for a potential deal. On the other hand, it makes the job of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell that much more difficult.
[Vause:] Ethan, do you see this as a way toward a compromise deal or is it just adding to what's out there and no one knows where it's going?
[Bearman:] It's adding to what's out there. What makes this worse, when you listen to Mitch McConnell, e sounds like a Democrat. He could have been Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer right there because the president we don't know what he's going to do. Is he going to tweet out, oh, the Republicans are it's terrible; this style of negotiation maybe worked for him in the real estate world. It's sure not working out for him very well in the political world. And I actually oddly feel badly for Mitch McConnell right now.
[Vause:] That's a first. OK. We are learning more about John Kelly, the chief of staff. Here's part of our reporting on Kelly. "He's a fierce advocate for hardline policies that drastically limit the number of people entering the U.S. and he'll remain so, even as the government barrels toward a potential shutdown over the issue. "'Kelly is a hard ass,'said one Republican lawmaker, who requested anonymity to discuss Kelly's approach to immigration. 'Some people might think he's softer; he's a hard ass also and a straight, straight shooter. He doesn't sugar coat things.'" David, it also seems Kelly is now playing a much bigger role in this administration, way beyond this guy who brought some discipline to this disorderly White House.
[Siders:] I think we've seen iterations of this over and over with Trump. There was going to be this person or this person or this person controlling Trump. And I do think you heard from lawmakers this week frustration with what they viewed as staff interference with the White House. But the fact that we're talking about this right now, Donald Trump watches television and this is likely to infuriate him if he feels he's being undercut, especially in public, like we heard from General Kelly.
[Vause:] Here's how Kelly describes his relationship with the president.
[Kelly:] He and I talk constantly weekends, early mornings, late at night. We talk constantly. He bounces ideas off of me. I'm very proud of the fact that he respects my opinion. But, again, he's the President of the United States. He's got his own way of doing business. But, again, I see a man who is can change his mind when the facts and the and the data and the staff work and the conversation brings him to a different conclusion.
[Vause:] Lanhee, is this an outsized role for a chief of staff? Or is this pretty much business as usual?
[Chen:] Well, I think a lot of Republicans, probably a lot of Democrats, too, are probably breathing a sigh of relief that General Kelly is the chief of staff. I think different administrations have had different models of what the chief of staff is like. For some administrations, the chief of staff has been more of an administrator in chief, running the White House staff, thinking about the operation of the White House staff. In others, the chief of staff has been more like the consigliere to the president. So it doesn't surprise me that General Kelly is playing multiple roles. It doesn't surprise me that he's in fact the one who's helping to steer the ship here. And I think actually we should all have some degree of comfort that this is going on.
[Vause:] OK, well, if there is no deal on immigration, the Democrats may not support a budget measure to keep the government funded past Friday, which is when the money runs out. If it gets to that point, the White House is pretty clear it knows who will get the blame.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Deputy White House Press Secretary:] The president certainly doesn't want a shutdown. If one happens, I think you only have one place to look and that's to the Democrats.
[Vause:] David, history would indicate that Sarah Sanders is completely wrong about that, that it is the party in power; when you control the lower house, when you control the Senate, when you control the White House, as the Republicans do, they're the ones who are in charge. They're the ones to get blamed.
[Siders:] I would say yes with one caveat. Republicans control Congress, obviously. But the reason that they will blame Democrats is on immigration. And it has been, for a long time, that I think immigration is a good talking point. It's a good issue for Republicans. I'm not sure that that's the case anymore, now that we're into this land of television cameras, watching people getting deported out of a Detroit airport. I'm not sure that it's good anymore for them, even in the short term, that they have been using it. I never thought it was a good move long-term. But this will be a real test of that because it will be Democrats saying, you have the majority. And it will be Republicans putting their political lives really on the immigration issue.
[Vause:] And Ethan, if in fact the Republicans do get blamed for the shutdown, which, if history is a judge, that's what usually happens, what will be the consequences for the administration and for Republicans in Congress?
[Bearman:] Well, I think this is important. It's going to cost a lot of money. We learned it from Ted Cruz's stunt, that it was $21 billion was the cost of shutting down the government, is what it actually cost the American people. I think that the Democrats can play that, we can demonstrate that this is going to cost a lot of money. And it's because the Republicans will be unwilling to compromise, to David's point, on issues like immigration. Compromise, find some middle ground. I've been asking for this for a long time. We have such acrimony, nobody wants to compromise. I think we saw some inkling of it and then Donald Trump tweeted and it ruined it again.
[Vause:] Let me give you some bipartisanship, some middle ground on the issue of Steve Bannon, the former White House strategist, the former Trump campaign manager, the former editor of Breitbart. Ladies, he's single. He infuriated both Republicans and Democrats on Tuesday by refusing to answer questions about Russia and the Trump campaign. Listen to Republican congressman Trey Gowdy.
[Rep. Trey Gowdy , Chairman, Oversight Committee:] I am frustrated whenever people assert privileges that do not exist. And I am really frustrated when witnesses have all the time in the world to talk to the media on and off the record and they can help people write books but they can't talk to the representatives that are elected by their fellow citizens. I mean, picture that. He's happy to tell an author about treasonous, unpatriotic acts but he won't tell members of Congress when he's pressed on it.
[Vause:] So, Lanhee, explain this, why is Bannon playing hardball with Congress but he plans to cooperate with the special counsel investigating the Russia collusion?
[Chen:] Well, quite frankly, because the special counsel can actually bring charges that could cost Bannon some time and maybe his freedom. So you know, obviously he sees that as a much more serious threat than the threat from Congress, which he sees more as political. And look, there's no one there anymore, to give Bannon even political cover, now that the president has turned on him, pretty much everyone in the Republican Party has turned on him as well. So Steve Bannon, as you alluded to, is the one figure that draws unanimity amongst Democrats and Republicans. And that's unanimity with an element of scorn.
[Vause:] And, Ethan, there was this admission from the White House that it instructed Bannon not to answer questions from the House Intelligence Committee, which many are saying that amounts to a gag order.
[Bearman:] Yes, and I'm not sure I fully agree with Trey Gowdy. He is exceptionally intelligent. He's a prosecutor before becoming a congressman. But executive privilege does apply, if they were asking questions about times when Bannon was working with the president. There is executive privilege. So I don't fully agree with him. It will be very interesting to see what happens, though, when Bannon goes and speaks with the Mueller team. And that is what really counts in all of this, is the criminal investigation with the Russia collusion and what Bannon might actually know about it.
[Vause:] And, David, how crucial or how key is Steve Bannon when he goes and talks to Robert Mueller? How much damage, I guess, could this guy do to the administration?
[Siders:] Well, I think the answer to that question is in watching him today and how frequently his lawyer is on the phone with the White House. And that, I think, suggests that at least people in the White House are very concerned about what he might say and I think that plays out there.
[Vause:] OK, finally, the president and his physical exam, does he or does he not have heart disease?
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] He does have heart disease, is that what you said?
[Dr. Ronny Jackson, White House Physician:] He does not have heart disease, no.
[Gupta:] You have a CT scan on the report that showed his calcium and his coronary heart
[Jackson:] He does. He did. He had a so I think so, technically, he has nonclinical atherosclerotic coronary coronary atherosclerosis. So that's been mentioned in previous physical exams. So I think overall his coronary calcium score is very reassuring and goes along with the rest of his cardiac workup.
[Vause:] Ethan, it's not just Dr. Gupta who's raising this question about heart disease and it does raise the issue about that assessment. How can Trump be in excellent health if he's at risk of heart disease with high cholesterol and doesn't do any exercise?
[Bearman:] It's a very interesting exchange; I'm not a doctor, so I can't address it from that end. But I think it's very interesting that we still are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the psychiatric evaluation, that I would like to see somebody I think this should become part of the process for presidents to have a basic psychological evaluation that is done, so we can understand if these people are psychopaths, sociopaths, connected with reality or not. Heart disease, look, a lot of men in that age group are at risk. So it's not as big a deal.
[Vause:] There's confirmation he had a heart. I guess about his mental situation. OK, Ethan and David and Lanhee thank you all for being with us. Appreciate it. OK, new details are emerging about an alleged affair between President Trump and an adult film star dating back to 2006. Details from CNN's Brian Todd.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] More news outlets are now coming forward, acknowledging they had information about an alleged affair between Donald Trump and a porn actress, who goes by the name Stormy Daniels. New accounts that raise questions about President Trump's denial of the affair. CNN has learned that FOX News and ABC's "Good Morning, America" had information about the alleged affair in the weeks leading up to the 2016 presidential election but didn't publish it. The "Daily Beast" and "Slate" say they had it, too, and didn't publish it. CNN was told about FOX's decision by four people familiar with the matter. And despite FOX's pro-Trump leanings, a top editor at the network told CNN, "In doing our due diligence, we were unable to verify all of the facts and publish a story."
[Oliver Dancy, Cnn Media Correspondent:] Despite the on-the-record confirmation from the porn actress's manager at the time and despite the reporter having seen documents about a settlement, it just did not meet their standard for publication.
[Todd:] "Slate," the "Daily Beast" and sources at ABC News all say they communicated with Daniels shortly before the election about doing interviews but that Daniels suddenly stopped corresponding with them or backed out of interviews. On Friday, "The Wall Street Journal" reported in October 2016, Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, arranged a $130,000 payment to Daniels to keep her silent about the alleged affair. Cohen, the White House and Daniels have denied the affair happened. Daniels in a statement sent by Cohen denied getting hush money. Now new accounts are surfacing. Alana Evans, a porn actress who says she is a friend of Daniels, described to NBC's Megyn Kelly what she said Daniels told her about Daniels' alleged first encounter with Trump at a Lake Tahoe, Nevada, resort in 2006.
[Alana Evans, Adult Film Actor:] And she says, well, picture this, Donald Trump chasing me around the bedroom in his tighty whities isn't something that you ever forget.
[Todd:] No one is saying the alleged affair wasn't consensual. And now the gossip magazine, "In Touch Weekly," is out with a personal first-hand account from Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, about the alleged affair. Daniels describes in some detail her alleged first sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and says, quote, "He told me once that I was someone to be reckoned with, beautiful and smart, just like his daughter." An editor at "In Touch" tells CNN, they had this information back in 2011. Why didn't they publish it then?
[Unidentified Male:] Why wasn't it published before? I can't really speak to. In fact, I don't have the answer. But when I was made aware of it just a few days ago, I immediately realized that had to be the next cover at "In Touch."
[Todd:] "In Touch" magazine would not tell us whether they pay for interviews or not but the magazine's editor said they did not pay Stormy Daniels. Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen, sent us a new statement, saying, quote, "This is not breaking news. This is old news that wasn't true then and isn't true now. An old and debunked story that Ms. Clifford denied in 2011, 2016 and 2018," end quote. Another attorney who represents Stormy Daniels did not return our calls Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
[Sesay:] Quick break here, North and South Korea find common ground in talks about the upcoming Winter Olympic Games. How they'll stand together ahead.
[Vause:] Plus, migrants have already crossed the desert and the Mediterranean Sea and must now brave the bitter cold of the Alps, sometimes on foot and barefoot, rather, all in search of a better life in France.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] Good evening. Thanks for joining us. Today, an adult film actress was in a courtroom. The lawyer for the president of the United States, a lawyer who paid to keep her quiet about an alleged affair with that president and that wasn't the bombshell in the hearing, not even close. At the hearing in New York, the judge decided whether the president and Michael Cohen's legal teams will get to review files seized by the FBI before prosecutors do. More in that a moment. But also, that was not the bombshell. The most stunning moment probably came when Michael Cohen was forced to reveal the identity of a mystery client whose name he tried to keep quiet and that client is Fox News host Sean Hannity. So, it would seem the president and Sean Hannity share more than dinners and frequent phone calls in a mutual love of Fox News programming. They also share an attorney. This did not come out willingly in court. Cohen's attorney said the client had asked not to have their name revealed. The judge said that wasn't a good enough reason to keep the name concealed, ordered Cohen's lawyers to reveal the name and that name as I said was Sean Hannity. So, Michael Cohen's clients that we know of, the president, former RNC official Elliott Broidy who paid off a woman he had an affair with which led to an abortion, and Sean Hannity of Fox News. Here's the way Sean Hannity explained it on his radio show after the news broke, after Michael Cohen's legal team said explicitly in court, Sean Hannity is Michael Cohen's client.
[Sean Hannity, Fox News:] I've known Michael a long, long time; and let me be very clear to the media: Michael never represented me in any matter. I never retained him in the in the traditional sense as retaining a lawyer. I never received an invoice from Michael. I never paid legal fees to Michael. But I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective and I assume that those conversations were attorney-client confidential.
[Cooper:] So, he seems to be saying I was not really a client of attorney Michael Cohen's but our conversations are confidential because he is an attorney and I am his client. Now, regardless of the exact nature of their attorney-client relationship, even if it is as Hannity says on Twitter almost exclusively about real estate, let's not forget that one week ago today, there was a raid on Michael Cohen's office and Hannity reported on it on Fox News as if he had absolutely no connection to the story.
[Hannity:] This is a Fox News alert. President Trump's longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen just had his office, his home and his hotel that he was staying in raided by the FBI today in an early morning raid. Now, what that means as Mueller's witch-hunt investigation is now a runaway train that is clearly careening off the tracks.
[Cooper:] So, no disclosure, no disclaimer, not even the casual mention that, oh, yes, this guy also represents me in some form or fashion, mostly real estate, no mention of that, that he passes along for your legal advice and private consultations. Sean Hannity also talks about it on his radio show.
[Hannity:] This opens up an area where it seems that there's no there's no limit at all into the fishing expedition that Mueller is now engaged in. And if he has access to everything that his personal attorney has, I can only imagine where that's going to lead.
[Cooper:] He could definitely imagine at least one place where it might lead, to his own name. Sean Hannity is already starting to fuss and fume that the media is going crazy with this and it says that there's no there there. Perhaps there isn't but not disclosing a business or legal relationship with someone you report on and have had as on your guests at least 16 times since the president since Donald Trump declared his candidacy, that doesn't sound either fair, nor balanced. CNN Crime and Justice Reporter, Shimon Prokupecz was in the courtroom today. He joins us now. So, talk about the first of all the judge's ruling today.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] So, essentially, it was a small victory I would say perhaps for Michael Cohen and his legal team there. Their whole point in filing this motion was to be able to review the materials that the FBI seized the week ago and they wanted to review it. They wanted to have an opportunity to discuss about what is privileged and what the government should not have access to. So, today, the judge ordered prosecutors, the government here to turn over, to make copies of various documents, some 10 boxes, it was revealed today, in court of the FBI now has with material that they seized from Michael Cohen, electronic devices and hard drives. And all of that now has to be copied and hand it over to Michael Cohen's attorneys. So, is it clear based on what happened in court today whether or not Sean Hannity actually is Michael Cohen's client?
[Prokupecz:] Well, much like everything else since Friday with this hearing, it's been a little confusing because for since Friday, the judge has been saying to Michael Cohen and his attorneys, tell us who Michael cone represents and there's always been this blurred line and I think this goes to the argument that prosecutors have been making that Michael Cohen has these interesting relationships with people that aren't necessarily people he's representing. It's there's just this vague sort of line here that prosecutors say does not always mean that these people are his clients. Sean Hannity, as you as you played earlier, denied that he that Michael Cohen represented him. But Michael Cohen's attorneys used the argument that Michael Cohen was his attorney and, therefore, should not release who this third client was that wound up being Sean Hannity. Certainly, Anderson, I can tell you, you know, having been in this courtroom when that happened, it was a stunning moment. I mean, there was just the audience, people sitting around the courtroom, the reaction was quite audible and many folks were certainly, certainly shocked after the judge ordered him to release the name of this client, Anderson.
[Cooper:] So, just what does the ruling mean in terms in the investigation moving forward? It certainly seems to be a delay, yes?
[Prokupecz:] Yes, absolutely, Anderson. This is definitely a delay. The prosecutors did not want this. They've been arguing since Friday that this was stall tactic by Michael Cohen and his attorney, by the president's attorneys who have now intervened, who also want to view this material. So, this prevents the investigators from looking at any of the information, any of the documents that were seized in the raid. It's now up to a taint team that is run by the government that has no access to the investigation, to go over some of the materials that are going to be provided to Michael Cohen's attorneys. But in terms of the investigation, in terms of this material that was seized, the investigators will not have access for it until the judge decides what they should look at Anderson.
[Cooper:] All right. Shimon Prokupecz, thanks. Lots to sort out. Joining me now, Gloria Borger, Anne Milgram and David Axelrod. None of whom have ever I have ever consulted with for private legal advice or free legal advice, nor real estate advice. So, Anne, we'll get to the Sean Hannity thing in a moment. But just the substance of the hearing, who's happier tonight, the Michael Cohen, President Trump's team, or Stormy Daniels?
[Anne Milgram, Former Federal Prosecutor:] I think I do think it's a mix, but I think I wouldn't classify it as a win for Michael Cohen and the president. I mean, they're asked their first ask was really, let us decide what's privileged and what isn't, give us all the information back, let us go through it and then we'll give to the government what we don't think is privileged. The judge said absolutely no to that. And so, the government what the government wants is the ability for their taint team to review all the materials and then push out anything that is questionable to debate with the lawyers for Michael Cohen and the president. And what Michael Cohen's lawyer said is, OK, if you won't give it all to us, appoint a special master which would be an independent third party, that would go through all of it.
[Cooper:] Instead of the taint team.
[Milgram:] Instead of the taint team. And the challenge for the government with that is that and, look, I think it's clear in a case like this that nothing that's attorney- client privilege is going to be reviewed by the investigators. The question is how they get there, and the government does do this regularly. The question is, will the judge defer to the government as would normally be the case or which he appoint a special master? The issue with the special master really becomes one of timing, that it tends to take longer and puts a little bit more delay, but I think that's what she's weighing now and she hasn't decided that yet.
[Cooper:] So, she hasn't decided who the special master is?
[Milgram:] She hasn't decided whether for certain, she'll do a special master. But she asked to have four names given from each side, and that's an indication that she's seriously considering it. And so, the lawyers have said that they'll provide those names to her tomorrow.
[Cooper:] Who would normally be like a former judge or something?
[Milgram:] A former judge, a former attorney general, former prosecutor or someone who might have been a U.S. attorney, but someone who would be a very well-respected lawyer.
[Cooper:] Gloria, I mean, the longer that the Cohen's team can run out the clock on this process, does it take some of the pressure off him to cooperate with the government, whether it's federal prosecutors or Manhattan or potentially a special counsel?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Well, you know, it might because it's significant for them to get judicial review and that could obviously, if you've just been talking about take longer, but I was speaking with a source today, a legal source who's close to this case who said, look, the reason they got this search warrant in the first place leads you to believe that they they're close to something. And so, we don't know that what they are looking for was key evidence that they need in order to complete their case against Michael Cohen or whether it's confirming evidence that they would just have liked. So, if they were close and they wanted to just secure this evidence as additional evidence, then maybe they can go you know, they can do whatever they wanted to do with Michael Cohen in the first place without waiting for all of this, that they could continue to move. On the other hand, if they felt that they needed this evidence to indict say, then it will take longer and then it will help, you know, then it will help Michael cone because this is a process and, of course, they have the opportunity during this process to appeal.
[Cooper:] David, I mean as for the Sean Hannity revelation, he says he wasn't Michael Cohen's client in the, quoteunquote, traditional sense. Do you have any idea what that means?
[David Axelrod, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] No. First of all, my instinct when I heard this was that somewhere, there's a "Scandal" writer or TV writer or "House of Cards" writers slapping their head and saying, why didn't I think of this? I mean, it is so unbelievable, this twist of the plot. But I don't know what it could be. And, obviously, the fact that they said he was a client and he'd be he was embarrassed to have his name released I think was telling. If I were Hannity, I'd be embarrassed as well having gone off on the rampage he did about this Cohen business without revealing that he was in file. Now, Sean Hannity is not at the end at the end of the day, a journalist. He's not a reporter. He's an infotainer. And so, perhaps, he doesn't hold himself to those standards. But can you imagine how the folks on Fox would have howled, Anderson, if you, for example, had shown up as a as a client in a situation like this? So, you know, I think it's a sticky wicket. And if he's not a client, why did his lawyers say he was? So, it raises all kinds of questions.
[Cooper:] Yes. Anne, I mean, if you're not a if you haven't paid somebody and you've consulted them for advice Sean Hannity claims about real estate primarily, although I don't know what that it means exactly, what the other stuff would have been, can you can you automatically say it's privileged?
[Milgram:] Well, you can still be a client even if you haven't paid a lawyer yet, and sometimes you get advice and will pay later. Sometimes you don't pay. But the real question is, were you asking for legal advice and guidance. And then the second piece of this is always that, you know, Sean Hannity had this conversation with Michael Cohen and somebody else was in the room, then it's not privileged. You know, if they were talking about committing a crime, for example, or engaging in criminal behavior, fraud, it's not privileged. So, it really does come down to this question about
[Cooper:] But he's asking about some real estate deal.
[Milgram:] Sure, you know
[Cooper:] If it's a business deal
[Milgram:] If it's a business deal, then it's not legal advice, right? You could be on either side of that. And so, I think, you know, if it's for legal advice, look how should I structure you know, how would you think about this legal arrangement, then that could be attorney-client related.
[Borger:] Right.
[Cooper:] Gloria, I mean, Hannity's I get you know, he's not a journalist certainly. He's essentially at this point a shadow spokesman for the president. I guess, though, I will say I'm even surprised that he would not you know, just to inform his viewers in the some 16 times that Michael Cohen has been on that we counted since Donald Trump announced a candidacy, that he would not at least say, you know what, I've consulted Michael Cohen for advice over the years
[Borger:] Sure.
[Cooper:] on real estate stuff.
[Borger:] Right. You know, you would expect you would expect that someone would do that and say, you know, in the interest of full disclosure, I've gone to Michael Cohen for advice informally over the years about real estate. That didn't happen. You point out he's not really he's not really a journalist and, you know, my sources say to me, look, he didn't 2specifically when he was having these conversations with Michael Cohen, he didn't specifically say, oh, this is covered under attorney- client because it was so informal, that it wouldn't need to be said. But at this point, at this point, it's very clear when you look at the court proceedings that Hannity expects it and didn't want his name mentioned, you know, even mentioned today. And I think there's a sense that Michael Cohen kind of threw Sean Hannity under the bus here.
[Cooper:] Well it also, David, it's interesting to me because you know, for if that if Sean Hannity is one of his three clients in the last 10 years, that says a lot about what he's doing for President Trump. I mean, the second client was this you know, this RNC guy, you know, this Republican donor Elliott Broidy, you know, and with the hush payment to a former, you know, playmate I think it was or a Playboy model or penthouse model, I get them confused playmate I'm told it does seem to then be really his client is Donald Trump.
[Axelrod:] Right, and I don't think that Michael Cohen has been spending late nights rifling through legal documents and journals and catacells. He is you know, he is what he has been advertised to be, he is a fixer and he has been Donald Trump's fixer for the last so many years. And I think what the government is arguing and would know better than I is that he really is bet hardly a lawyer at all, that much of what he does has nothing to do with law in the traditional sense. He's out there and he's fixing stuff.
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Axelrod:] And so, I think that's why they feel like the privilege doesn't apply too much of the material that they have gathered on it.
[Cooper:] Yes, it's fascinating day. Gloria Borger, Anne Milgram and David Axelrod, thanks. Up next, Hannity, Cohen and the president, the love that dare not speak its name. The president pushes his TV program, the TV host pushes the president, and Michael Cohen seems to whisper in both their ears. Details than that. Plus, Stormy Daniels was in court today. You'll hear what she had to say and I'll speak with her lawyer Michael Avenatti. Stick around.

[Baldwin:] Three weeks of volcanic activity in the Kilauea summit still bubbling over. More incredible pictures and a live look at the lava gushing thousands of feet into the air. And now a new danger on the roads. You'll see blue burning flames. Like the ones you see on your stove popping up on the streets. There are methane gas exploding in between cracks in the ground and this home is close to being swallowed by cracks in the front and backyard. We talked to a homeowner injured by one of the hot lava bombs.
[Daryl Clinton, Hit By Lava Bomb:] It came right through there somehow and at an angle and just crashed into my leg about right here and snapped it in half at the ankle and foot to where my leg was basically broken in half. It was like a hinge point, ankle, foot, leg, so then I got caught on fire. Fell on floor and grabbed my foot and leg and held them together.
[Baldwin:] I mean, unreal. James Webster is with me, a geologist with the American Museum of Natural History here in New York. Jim, I don't even know what to say. I went to Kilauea as a kid and seeing a guy in a hospital because of a lava bomb. What is that?
[James Webster, Geologist With American Museum Of Natural History:] So, a lava bomb is actually it was molten material that was blown out of a fissure or a small cone in the ground. And it is cooling as it moves through the air but still very high temperature. I'm not quite sure what temperature it was that hit the gentleman, but I guess it was just a massive amount of energy when it hit the leg and broke the bones from the ankle down.
[Baldwin:] How does it burst up and and how is it propelled through the air?
[Webster:] It is expanding gases. Just like I used a car with expanding gases to get here, steam expands, and you have lava at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit and just add water and that is what happens.
[Baldwin:] And can you put the pictures back up with the blue flames and the methane. This is the first I've seen of those pictures. Here you go. Can you just walk us through what we're look at?
[Webster:] So, what is happening, you could see the trees are damaged. The tremendous heat from the lava, if it slowly moves and heats the vegetation, like the grass and such, in the air it will burn the ground. But if it moves over it quickly enough and covers it, will t will cook it and make methane gas which is extremely flammable. So once that ignites you get the blue flames.
[Baldwin:] I mean just crazy what is happening and the fact this guy gets injured over a lava bomb in his house. Jim Webster, I have a feeling we'll be talking again. And I should mention CNN has a live lava cam 24 hours a day showing the pictures. All you have to do is click on CNN.com to watch it. Breaking news in Washington. A source tells CNN that Jared Kushner just had his security clearance restored. What that means for his role moving forward in the White House. Quick programming note before we go, fans sits down with CNN for a live town hall this evening. Do not miss it. It airs at 9:00 eastern here on CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thanks for being with me. Go Washington and "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts right now.

[Sciutto:] Day 27 of the government shutdown, nearly a month. Eight hundred thousand federal workers still not getting paid. Many struggling, as you would understand, to make ends meet.
[Harlow:] The impact being felt coast to coast
[Text:] Spotlight on Shutdown; Feeling the Effects; California [San Jose] Federal workers given short-term loans; Ohio [Cleveland] Food Stamp benefits sent out early; Maryland [Baltimore] TSA workers stage protests; North Carolina [Near Durham] School lunches reduced in one district; Florida [Miami] Coast Guard not getting paychecks; Georgia [Atlanta] Long lines as TSA workers call out sick; Colorado [Denver] Denver helps workers pay mortgages; California [Joshua Tree Nat Park] Trees destroyed in National Park
[Harlow:] as you hear every day on this network from people living it. A lot of folks trying to help. Short-term loans going out in California, food stamp benefits sent out early in Ohio.
[Sciutto:] All this as TSA protests and long security lines you may have seen them continue at airports around the country.
[Fabrizio Sasso, Executive Director, Sacramento Central Labor Council:] These families are struggling. It's hurting our communities. They're having they're having a hard time keeping the paying their bills and putting food on the table. And it's about time that government does something about it.
[Sciutto:] CNN's Vanessa Yurkevich is in Ohio. That's a state that Trump won by eight points in 2016. So when you're there, you're asking people about they're what they're going through. What are they telling you? And who do they blame?
[Vanessa Yurkevich, Cnn Digital Correspondent:] Well, the Trump supporters in this area are still very much behind the president, Jim and Poppy. This is an area that, like you said, overwhelmingly supported the president in 2016. The president even came to this area of Canton, Ohio and campaigned. He was also able to deliver on some promises here. People are feeling a little bit more money in their paycheck. They're seeing more money in their 401 [k]. Right now, we're at a local restaurant and ice cream shop, Taggart's, which is getting ready to open for lunch. But we caught the dinner crowd last night, and we spoke to some Trump supporters about how they're feeling about the president and how the shutdown is affecting their take on him.
[Richard Pero, Retired Dairy Farmer:] I support him hanging in there as long as he can, until we can see what see what happens. But I think he's going to be successful at it too, in the long run. I don't know. We'll see. I thought he was going to be president, and that worked out.
[Tammy Corregan, Worker, Electric Company:] Yes, I want security. I do. But not at the price of what's going on.
[Unidentified Male:] Other people?
[Corregan:] Yes. Of their lives, you know? Yes. I like I'd like the border, you know, be secure better, whether it's a wall or more hire more people to help, you know, patrol it. That's great, but we have to get our fellow Americans back to work.
[Yurkevich:] So would you say to the president, "Let's table this for a second until we can get the government back up and running"
[Corregan:] Yes.
[Yurkevich:] and then let's start with this fight again?
[Corregan:] Yes, yes. Yes. Let's come together as Americans. We can figure this out.
[Yurkevich:] And you heard from Tammy there, that she's really feeling for her fellow Americans. But President Trump won here largely because he promised to bring back the steel industry, and he was able to do that in many ways, by providing more jobs in the area. But I asked Richard and Tammy how they felt about 2020. Would the president get their support? For Richard, it was a definite yes. For Tammy, she said she was willing to look at the field, Jim and Poppy, and might even vote for a Democrat. And that is important because this state is a swing district excuse me, swing state and this county has swung back and forth between elections. So when you hear people like Tammy saying that they might vote for the other party, that might raise a little bit of concern for the president Jim and Poppy.
[Harlow:] That's how he won a lot of the rust belt, right, Vanessa? It flipped the other way in favor of the president. So can he maintain that, or does it flip back?
[Sciutto:] Well, a lot of it is showing up in broader national polling as well, some of those questions. Vanessa Yurkevich, thanks very much.
[Harlow:] House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls on President Trump to wait until the government shutdown is over to hold the State of the Union address. We'll hear from her any moment.

[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] The ayes are 51, the nays are 48. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is passed.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Breaking news this morning, historic. A major rewrite of the tax code on the way. The Senate passed the bill early this morning. It gives Republicans their first major win of the year. Could it cost them in the midterms and what does this bill mean for you?
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] And a government shutdown could be days away. What's holding up lawmakers and what's most likely to happen by Friday. I love those congressional deadlines. Welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] Especially when they come on the Friday
[Romans:] Right before Christmas.
[Briggs:] before Christmas. I'm Dave Briggs. Thirty minutes past the hour. Thanks for joining us this morning. Historic news on Capitol Hill. Republicans' big tax overhaul is all but a done deal. In an early morning vote just a few hours ago, the Senate approved the final version of the bill, scoring Republicans their first significant legislative win since President Trump took office. The measure has proven unpopular in most polls. It passed along party lines 51-48.
[Romans:] The approval came over the objections of Democrats on the Senate floor and protesters in the gallery.
[Protesters:] Don't kill us. Kill the bill, don't kill us. Kill the bill, don't kill us.
[Pence:] The sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery.
[Romans:] President Trump celebrating on Twitter moments after the vote. "The United States Senate just passed the biggest in history tax cut and reform bill. Terrible Individual mandate [Obamacare] repealed."
[Briggs:] Now you see the president inviting Republicans to join him at the White House this afternoon to tout passage of this major legislation. The only hitch, the House will have to vote to pass the bill again. CNN's Phil Mattingly up all night on Capitol Hill. He has the details.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Well, Christine, and Dave, without any question at all, the biggest hurdle Republicans face as they tried to pass their tax overhaul something that hasn't been done in 31 years and getting it through the U.S. Senate. And early on Wednesday morning, that's exactly what they did by a vote of 51-48 along partisan lines. Every Republican that was in attendance voted for their $1.5 trillion tax plan. Now, Republicans say this is something that will benefit the middle- class. That on the corporate side will completely overhaul how the code currently stands. It's something Democrats have attacked, saying that the corporate cuts are skewed heavily in the favor of business. The individual cuts, they expire at a certain point and aren't nearly robust enough. Republicans say even though current polling shows that Americans don't trust this bill and aren't sure what it will actually do, they're willing to sell it. Take a listen to how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell responded to my question after the vote. Do you believe there's a need for Republicans to go out and sell this bill given how Americans are currently viewing it?
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Senate Majority Leader:] Absolutely. I mean, we're looking forward to it. My view of this, if we can't sell this to the American people we ought to go into another line of work.
[Mattingly:] Now guys, in an interesting wrinkle this vote wasn't the final vote. The House still has to vote again. That's right. The House voted on Tuesday to pass the bill 227 to 203 another big vote. The expectation was the Senate vote would be it. It would be headed to President Trump's desk. Well, not anymore. Because of the Senate budget rules, three small provisions technical corrections, mainly were pulled out of the Senate bill. That means it has to go back to the House. Now, this isn't any type of big problem. The bill is no danger at all. House Republicans will pass it Wednesday, probably shortly after noon Christine and Dave.
[Romans:] All right, Phil Mattingly. Another long day for him today. Democratic frustration boiling over leading up to that vote. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer pausing his closing arguments to scold Republicans who were talking during his remarks.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Senate Minority Leader:] Nearly 145 million middle-class families under $200,000 will either get tax hikes can we have order, Mr. President?
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] The Senate will be in order.
[Schumer:] This is serious stuff. We believe you're messing up America. You could pay attention for a couple of minutes.
[Briggs:] No shortage of reaction after the vote, including this tweet from Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, former vice presidential candidate. "This secret, rushed, partisan tax bill in no way truly reforms the system. What we need to reform is Congress, and that's what we'll do in the midterms."
[Romans:] The White House standing by claims that the tax bill will cost the president a fortune. Here's CNN's Jim Acosta yesterday.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] The president did say that this tax cut bill would cost him a fortune. That was false, right?
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] No, because on the personal side this actually could impact the president in a large way.
[Acosta:] As you look at this now would it balance out corporate versus personal if he's going to come out ahead.
[Sanders:] I'm not sure if he's done a side-by-side but I know that there are a number of provisions that would negatively impact the president personally.
[Romans:] We don't know what they are for sure. It's impossible to know for sure because the president keeps his tax returns secret. Key measures, though, will help the president, his family, and his businesses, like doubling the estate tax exemption or lowering the tax burden on pass-throughs. Pass-throughs pay taxes through an owner's tax return, not at the corporate rate, and make up the majority of the Trump business empire. In fact, there are many tax goodies for the family business commercial real estate, like reducing the tax on income from real estate investments and larger deductions on commercial property.
[Briggs:] All right. Let's bring in CNN political analyst David Drucker, senior congressional correspondent for the "Washington Examiner." He joins us
[Romans:] Welcome back.
[Briggs:] from D.C. Good to see you, sir. Look, we'll never know because we will never see the president's taxes, but the bottom line is this is a major win for President Trump at the time he desperately needed just that.
[David Drucker, Cnn Political Analyst, Senior Congressional Correspondent, Washington Examiner:] Yes, it is a big win for him politically in that it's his first big legislative victory. Everything that he's done up until now that's been an achievement has been executive action. He has not been able to work with Republicans in Congress where they hold majorities to get something major done. Now that is no longer the case and I think that that has shown at least Republican voters concerned about whether or not it was worth giving their own party full control of government, that they can actually get something done. He could build momentum off of this. Republicans could see, at least short-term, a political benefit to being able to work with the president. And I think one of the things the president did differently with tax reform versus health care is he didn't spend months beating up his own party and his own party's bill on Twitter and through other avenues while the negotiations were happening. He didn't antagonize members of his own party and he seized the results of what happens when you act in a more conventional, if you will, presidential way.
[Romans:] And now excuse me and now he has the repeal of the individual mandate which is, some would say, a death now to Obamacare right here inside of this tax reform. So he did get that Obama that repeal of Obamacare individual mandate through there. You know, the approval is not very high and we heard from Paul Ryan and others yesterday who sort of blamed the media for that. They were focusing on the negative, or we keep talking about how it's a corporate-tilted tax plan, which it is. But you look at this CNN poll here. Today, 55 percent oppose a tax plan. Compare that with last month when 45 percent did. Here's what the "Journal" says. "The Wall Street Journal" editorial board says this. "We'd dislike this bill, too, if all we knew what was the media reported. The polls show that most Americans don't even think they'll get a tax cut when nearly all taxpayers will. Perhaps voters will find that irrelevant in 2018, but the result is certainly better for Republicans than explaining another legislative failure." All along, you heard from Republicans who said failure is not an option here on taxes.
[Drucker:] Yes, and ironically, the failure of health care probably helped facilitate this win on this accomplishment in terms of tax reform because coming out of that, Republicans from all factions of the party even the reddest of districts and the reddest of states were concerned that if they couldn't get anything done, their own voters next year would sit on their hands, not show up, and that was a guaranteed loss. And so they looked at an imperfect tax bill something that voters don't yet appreciate and thought to themselves it's a better position to be in than another failure. And I think that's true. If you look at where the Republican base was they weren't going to blame President Trump but they were going to blame Republicans in Congress, and they're the ones on the ballot. Now, the challenge for Republicans, obviously, is to get voters to like this thing and there's a lot you can say about the bill. I think the danger for Republicans even for Democrats who keep focusing on in their view this being tilted toward the wealthy is actually the more well-to-do, upscale, suburban voters. They're not independently rich but they are
[Romans:] Right.
[Drucker:] doing pretty well. They think this thing is going to hurt them. They tend to vote Republican and they tend to vote Republican because they want tax cuts. And if they don't think this bill helps them if they think it actually penalizes them it's going to be very it's going to be more difficult for Republicans to hold the House majority next year.
[Briggs:] You have two different narratives on this bill. The New York tabloids summing them up. "It's A Wrap," "Positive or Art of the Steal." So we will see which really takes shape over the next year or so. Friday, government funding runs out. Are we headed for a shutdown?
[Drucker:] I think they're going to avoid it. I don't think they're going to want to step on their own message, the Republicans, in terms of the tax reform victory and trying to sell that. If the government were to shut down it would be on them, most likely. They would look like they are incompetent and can't govern. After what is happening this week I don't think that's where we're headed.
[Romans:] All right. We saw this tweet from Jeff Flake shortly after the passage of this thing last night. This is what he said. "Bipartisan DACA bill will be on the Senate floor in January." Do you think the deals that were made with some of the holdout Republicans will be those promises will be kept?
[Drucker:] Well, we're going to have to see. I mean, I think that if Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, made a deal with his Republican colleagues to do certain things, he's going to do his part to honor the deal. But they have to get legislation through the House. They have to keep a president, who can often change his mind, on board with something, so we're going to have to see. But I think the intent is there, at least, from Mitch McConnell and that we'll have to see how far they can push this. Obviously, the president's base is going to be resistant to a DACA fix but the broader Republican universe of voters, I think, will be OK with it, especially if it's paired with border security.
[Romans:] You know, something that doesn't get a lot of attention but, you know, the Federal Reserve is starting to raise interest rates again. The economy is doing very, very well. Ironically, you could see the Fed have to be raising interest rates to sort of counteract the stimulus that comes from tax cuts, you know. It's really kind of an interesting juxtaposition there.
[Drucker:] You know, well look, it's a good problem to have. I mean, look
[Romans:] Sure.
[Drucker:] the country, coming out of the recession, has the economy has grown and job and unemployment is obviously down. But there are a lot of people that have felt that the growth could have been more robust. That Americans could have experienced more wage growth and therefore been more mobile and had more choices. And so, I think the test for this tax plan is whether or not it creates the kind of economic environment that Republicans have said for the last eight to 10 years that was missing. And now, the onus is on them. If the economy does now grow in the manner in which President Trump and the Republicans are promising it's going to give Democrats something to crow about, especially the next time they control government, and that will happen eventually. They're going to want to make changes to the tax code and that would give them more political ammunition to do so.
[Briggs:] If it does grow, though, you've got 10 Senate Democrats up for reelection in Trump states so that could be a huge risk for them. David Drucker from the "Washington Examiner," thank you, sir. Appreciate you being up early.
[Romans:] Nice to see you.
[Drucker:] Thanks a lot.
[Briggs:] All right. President Trump's eldest son suggesting a high-level conspiracy is at work trying to block his father's agenda. Speaking at a Conservative Student Conference in Florida, Don Jr. lashed out at Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe and the media's coverage of the Russia investigation. He said government higher-ups were backing a scheme to undermine the Trump agenda.
[Donald Trump, Jr., President's Son:] My father talked about a rigged system throughout the campaign and people were oh, what are you talking about. But it is, and you're seeing it. There is, and there are people at the highest levels of government that don't want to let America be America. They don't want to let the little guy have a voice.
[Romans:] Don, Jr.'s comments drew serious concern from former CIA and NSA director Gen. Michael Hayden on CNN last night.
[Gen. Michael Hayden, Former Director, Central Intelligence Agency And National Security Agency:] When I first heard that earlier this evening, that was a little scary. I mean, that is that is an appeal to the heart of autocracy and challenging the patriotism of those folks who work in the United States government.
[Romans:] Don, Jr.'s remarks come as some on the right, including him, are ramping up attacks on the special counsel's probe, claiming it is politically compromised. Earlier this month, the special counsel removed FBI official Peter Strzok from his team after an investigation turned up anti-Trump texts he sent during the campaign.
[Briggs:] A single vote shifting the balance of power in the bellwether state of Virginia. A recount flipping a seat from Republican to Democrat in the state's House of Delegates, leaving the lower chamber evenly split. Democrat Shelly Simonds emerging from the recount as the apparent winner in the 94th district and one single vote taking the seat from Republican David Yancey. The outcome ending 17 years of Republican control of the House, forcing the GOP into a rare power-sharing scenario with Democrats. A three-judge panel still must certify the election results later today. Don't let anyone tell you your vote doesn't count.
[Romans:] It sure does.
[Briggs:] Virginia proved it does.
[Romans:] It sure does. All right. A Florida police officer is lucky to be alive this morning after this. The suspect takes off with the officer hanging onto his car. We'll show you how it ends.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] CNN's Ryan Nobles is live in Tallahassee. What do you know, Ryan?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Fred, it sure looks like we're headed to a recount in Florida in these big races between the governor, the Senate, and the agriculture commission, all statewide races in Florida. It's important to point out, even though Broward County said they're ready to move ahead with that automatic recount, we're still waiting on the secretary of state here to put out the official word that, based on these final vote tallies, that that's where we're headed. Based on all the votes we see, which is posted on the secretary of state's Web site, all of the counties have now reported all the votes that must be in by the noon deadline on this day. There's a batch of votes, military and overseas ballots, that have a 10-day deadline, which haven't been counted yet. But this important group of votes, the vast majority of the votes here in Florida have now been registered and are in the secretary of state's office. According to those final readouts, it looks as though Ron DeSantis, the Republican nominee for governor, has a lead of about.41 percent over Andrew Gillum, the Democratic nominee. That would be enough to trigger the automatic recount. In the race for U.S. Senate, that's even tighter. The current Governor Rick Scott has a lead over Bill Nelson, the incumbent Senator, of only.14 percent. That, too, would be enough to trigger that automatic machine recount. If that does happen, and we're expecting it any minute from the secretary of state, we have a process of up until next Thursday when that machine recount has to take place. They'll then look at the numbers another time, and if the margins show a gap of less than a quarter of a percent, they'll begin a hand recount of just the undervotes and overvotes. So this is just the beginning of what will likely be a very lengthy process, Fred. But as we await word from the secretary of state of Florida, it seems we are very likely headed to what could be an historic recount here in the Sunshine State Fred?
[Whitfield:] Ryan Nobles, thank you. We'll check back with you a bit later, from Tallahassee Meantime, in Broward County, CNN's Jessica Dean is there, where the Canvassing Board has been meeting and made a decision to have a recount at least in that county. But then what next? The secretary of state has to weigh in before it happened?
[Jessica Dean, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Fredricka. We're kind of in a holding pattern now. We have come outside. We were inside when the Canvassing Board was getting prepared to present their unofficial results to the secretary of state's office. They went all through the morning continuing to look at various votes and deciding if they were valid or invalid, going through that process. This has attracted a lot of attention from people on both sides, supporters on both sides. We've seen protesters here throughout the morning and afternoon. They've moved them now to my right. You're hearing vocal protesters on both sides. People who are saying let every vote count. Other people who are very critical of Brenda Snipes, who is the election supervisor here. They keep chanting "lock her up." As we've been telling you, there's a high-energy, high- emotion here. A lot of eyes on Broward County, which historically has found itself in the spotlight for this type of thing. If you want to go back to the year 2000, it was right there in the middle of all that. There was a press conference earlier. We want to let you listen to some of what was said.
[Eugene Pettis, Attorney To Board Of Supervisor Of Elections:] We're here. There have been allegations of fraud. Those are serious charges to recklessly off route there. There's no basis for it. To give a claim of fraud without any evidence I think is unacceptable. Should be unacceptable in our electoral process. The votes have all been counted. The votes have been transmitted to the state. As you may know, that was a deadline of noon today. They had that through the Canvassing Board. The preliminary certifications went up there in advance of 12 noon. That is what the law requires. That has been complied with. We've have complied with the judge's order.
[Dean:] So there's the official statement right now from the supervisor's office here. Fredricka, we're going to keep an eye on this and we'll privilege you more information as we get it.
[Whitfield:] All right, thank you so much, Jessica. I appreciate it. Let's talk more about this and what's at stake overall. Toluse Olorunnipa is with us, White House reporter for "Bloomberg News," and Patrick Healy, a political editor for the "New York Times." Good to see you both. You hear the word recount and people start thinking about 2000 presidential race all over again, Florida, Florida, Florida. So, Toluse, there's a lot at stake. We're talking about two very important and vital races, for the governor as well as the U.S. Senate with the incumbent, Bill Nelson. So now we've got a one county's Canvassing Board that gives a green light to a recount. But the secretary of state still has to weigh in here. People are on pins and needles, not just in Florida, but all the way to the White House. Why is the White House so incredibly invested in these races?
[Toluse Olorunnipa, White House Reporter, Bloomberg News:] Yes, these are two races that are seen as referendums on President Trump. He went down to Florida several times. He endorsed the gubernatorial candidate early in the race, got him through that primary, and campaigned for him multiple times. Also, Governor Scott, President Trump spent a lot of time trying to boost his campaign, tweeting out his endorsement. This is a place where the president spends a lot of time, Mar-a-Lago. Looking forward to 2020, the president wants to make sure he has not only a Senator that's in place from the Republican Party in Florida, but also a governor who will be in charge of helping him try to secure Florida's 209 electoral votes. That's part of the reason why the president has gotten so involved. He started to spout various conspiracy theories about fraud and problems in Broward County without putting forward any evidence. But it's clear the president and the White House are very interested in what will happen in Florida and how those races will ultimately be called. Those two states, if they end up being called for Republicans, will be just a couple of bright spots in what was a pretty bad night for the president on election night, where we're seeing a growing number of Democrats that were able to flip seats. We're seeing a growing number of governors' races that actually flipped to Democrats. So the president is trying to hang on to Florida as one of the few bright spots on Tuesday night if the recounts end up with the Republicans remaining in the lead.
[Whitfield:] Patrick, when you talk about the recount and, you know, the gaps, in the U.S. Senate race and the governor's race, in one case, it's 14,000 votes that separates the two. In another, it's in the realm of 30,000, even with a recount. What messages are being sent by don't appear to be huge gaps when they break it down to people, 14,000 versus 30,000-something. What are the likelihoods that the recount will narrow the differences here and lead to whether it be recounts or perhaps even runoffs?
[Patrick Healy, Political Editor, New York Times:] Right, Fred. It's two issues going on here. One is the practical politics. One is the principle. Let's deal with the principle first. The principle is every vote should count. Every vote should be counted. Every vote matters. There should be a nonpartisan process in this country where votes are tabulated. And if there are questions about votes, you know, counties and states are set up to handle that, you know, in due order. It's not as if the election happens on a Tuesday night and, suddenly, you have to have a winner by 5:00 a.m. Wednesday. You know, problems occur and we're supposed to let a process play out. What we're seeing is principle coming up against the fact in Florida and in Georgia, you do have Republicans in charge of a process that they are also deeply invested in the outcome of. In the case of Georgia, former secretary of state, overseeing his own election. There's the principle issue. The practical politics, Fred, and what you're getting at is, in Florida at least, the margin in the governor's race, between Ron DeSantis and Andrew Gillum, you know, is pretty is relatively large in recount territory. You may see a recount. But there's a reason why Andrew Gillum conceded to Ron DeSantis in the governor's race. It looked like the votes were going DeSantis' way. It's really unclear if a recount will change that. Now, in the Senate race, that vote is very narrow. We've seen cases before where a recount, where a look, you know, in a margin as close as Rick Scott and Bill Nelson, you know, can narrow. And if there are votes in Broward County and Palm Beach County, two Democratic counties, you know, that haven't been fully incorporated into the count, that could end up going Nelson's way. The key thing here is counting the votes and letting that vote count unfold. At least right now, it's a little bit more, you know, on the Senate side where they're
[Whitfield:] Yes. And, Toluse, you had Gillum tweeting out, "Every vote counts." Just repeating exactly what Patrick Healy was saying. Then you have a counter message coming from the president in his tweet, while he's saying, "Thank you, you know, Marco Rubio, for helping to express the potential corruption going on with respect to election theft in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, the world is now watching closely." Again, no evidence that there's corruption or even fraudulent practices, even though you even had Rick Scott who used those words at a press conference last night. So what is the message being sent, you know, if all of the tallies or the votes are still being counted up until noon time today's deadline, how undermining is it, the message that every vote should count and be counted?
[Olorunnipa:] Like Patrick said, that's a normal principle of our democracy, everybody gets a chance to vote and everyone who voted should have their vote counted. They voted according to the laws. It's not something that happens at a snap of a finger. It takes a while. There are mail-in ballots coming in from overseas. We're hearing messages from top political leaders about how there's fraud and how there's an attempt to steal an election. It's incredibly damaging to the faith Americans have in their democracy for these accusations to be made without any hard evidence.
[Whitfield:] Right, no evidence.
[Olorunnipa:] Yes. It seems like, when you look at Florida, a number of these leaders are saying we should certify the election as soon as possible and don't worry about all these extra votes. But when you look at Arizona, where the Democrat has taken the lead in the Senate race, it seems like a number of these Republican leaders want more time for more votes to be counted and there should be more of process there and every vote should count in that race. So we're seeing a little bit of a conflicting message there. And I think it will be positive if everyone would take a step back, allow the process to play out. If there's any evidence of fraud, I'm sure law enforcement agencies that are involved will take a look at it. But I don't think we've seen any evidence of that, and definitely not enough evidence for there to be these conspiracy theories thrown about by the people in the highest levels of our politics.
[Whitfield:] Yes, thus far, none revealed. All right, Toluse, Patrick, good to see you both. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Still to come, wildfires raging in both northern and southern California. One woman recorded her harrowing trip you see it right there trying to get out of the fire zone. A live report straight ahead.

[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Anchor:] And we start this hour with breaking news. An empty commercial airplane stolen by an airline employee; that man taking the plane on an hour-long joy ride with armed military fighter jets chasing after him before nose diving and crashing into the ground. Thank you for joining me. I'm Ryan Nobles in today for Fredricka Whitfield. This alarming story still developing in Seattle. The sheriff's department says the 29-year-old man who stole the plane was a ground service agent for Horizon Air. He took off unauthorized around 8:00 p.m. local time at Seattle's busy international airport and then minutes later the military sent two F-15 jets up to follow it. Then for the next hour, a bizarre story unfolds as the man attempts to do barrel rolls and air traffic controllers calmly try to talk the man down. CNN has those disturbing audio recordings. Listen.
[John Waldron, Horizon Air Employee:] I got a lot of people that care about me and it's going to disappoint them to hear that I did this. I would like to apologize to each and every one of them. Just a broken guy, got a few screws loose, I guess; never really knew it until now. Hey, you think if I land this successfully, Alaska will give me a job as a pilot?
[Unidentified Male:] You know, I think they will give you a job doing anything if you can pull this off.
[Waldron:] Yes, right. Hey, pilot guy, can this thing do a back flip you think? Try to do a barrel roll. If that goes good, I'll go nose down, call it a night.
[Unidentified Male:] Let's try and land the airplane safely and not hurt anybody on the ground.
[Waldron:] All right. Damn it. I don't know, man, I don't know. I don't want to. I was kind of hoping that was going to be it, you know?
[Nobles:] CNN's aviation and government regulation correspondent Rene Marsh joins us now. She's been working this story all morning long with her sources. Shilling to listen to that audio, so calmly that man talking to air traffic control. I mean what do we know about this man and his level of access at that airport?
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Aviation And Government Regulation Correspondent:] So we know that he is 29 years old. He works for Horizon Airline which is a subsidiary of Alaska Airline. And when you talk about people who are airport workers who have access to secure parts of the airport, he is certainly one of them. You know, he is one of those individuals who has access to an aircraft. As a ground crew, he would, you know, as an aircraft lands or takes off, they would direct them into the proper position. They would handle luggage as well. So he certainly had the clearance and the credentials to be in the most secure parts of the airport. And really when you look at the story, and as unbelievable as it is, I mean we're talking about a major airport like SeaTac
[Nobles:] Right.
[Marsh:] you saw it was bright outside. So the sun is still up and he manages to steal a commercial plane. You know, it really raises several questions. How did he get it from that secure ramp onto the runway and then take off? You can't take off a commercial plane from a commercial airport without getting clearance from air traffic control. Perhaps he ignored their instructions, but they had to know relatively quickly that something was up with this plane. So I suspect that investigators right now, they're looking at all of the video from all aspects of this airport to piece together the time line so that the airlines and even airports can try to figure out, is there something we missed. But I will tell you this is a tough one, because this is what you call that classic insider threat.
[Nobles:] Right.
[Marsh:] This is not someone not someone who walks in off the street this is someone who had the credentials to be up close and personal with that aircraft. He took advantage of that access.
[Nobles:] And obviously there's going to be all kinds of questions that are raised about security going forward. But pretty remarkable that this ended as safely as it did, given how difficult and how scary it could have been.
[Marsh:] Certainly. When we talk about busy airports, there are other aircraft come in, landing on the tarmac. So this could have been a lot worse.
[Nobles:] Ok. Rene Marsh stick around. I know you're going to continue to follow your sources. We'll check back with you in a little bit. And after the plane took off and headed away from the airport, witnesses saw it flying erratically including Nick Junka who is a former employee of Horizon Airline. Nick joins me now on the phone. Nick just tell us your story, your perspective. What exactly did you see when this airplane was up in the air?
[Nick Junka, Former Horizon Air Employee:] My wife and I were in the back alley. We live in Eatonville. It's about 60 miles south of Seattle. And my wife looked at me because she knew I knew airplanes and said what is up with that airplane. And I looked. I said oh my gosh that is a Q400. And that should not even be in this area at all. And she started shooting video. I told her get video. There's possibly 75 people or more in the plane. We have a small municipal airport here in town but not big enough for one of those planes. So it was literally like 300 feet off the ground and it's heading south just straight in line with the main drag here. And it started to turn and go towards Mount Rainier. And it looked like it was going to go down and then he pulled it back up. And it looked like he was going to circle around to land at our airport. So I told my wife, grab my keys and my wallet. I'm heading to the airport. And I had phone in hand and I got halfway to the airport and he turned and headed northwest towards JBLM. At this time there was no fighter jet with this airplane. Not knowing the situation, I was concerned about 75 people that could be on that plane.
[Nobles:] Right. Incredible. And we later learn he was the only person on board the plane which thankfully was the case in this situation. I want to talk to you a little bit about your background as a ground service agent. You don't need to talk specifically about the individual that was on the plane, but from your perspective, what kind of access would an employee have to an aircraft like this?
[Junka:] We are ground service agents, ok. These airlines do a great job at doing security clearances and background checks. We have access to these planes all day long. We secure them. This is the most outlandish thing. I worked with this guy. He was a good guy. It was a couple of years ago, year and a half ago. I would have never dreamed of this individual doing this never.
[Nobles:] Well, I guess that's part of what makes it all remarkable.
[Junka:] We've really got to start looking at we really got to start looking at mental illness and something he even said it himself, he is broken.
[Nobles:] Yes.
[Junka:] How he even got that plane off the ground is astonishing.
[Nobles:] Let me ask you about that Nick. Let me ask you about that. I mean obviously there's a conversation that's going to be had around what you're describing. But just about the scenario itself, having done this line of work for as long as you did, could you have ever even dreamed up a scenario like this? It seems almost impossible.
[Junka:] No. I would have never even thought anything like this would ever happen ever.
[Nobles:] Well, talk to me a little bit about the type of security screening that you have to go through before you can even be hired for a job like this. Obviously you have to go
[Junka:] Well Horizon, Horizon
[Nobles:] Yes.
[Junka:] Horizon has their security process. All airlines have a security process. SeaTac airport has their processes they follow. There's cameras I mean, you are monitored the whole time when you're there, ok. So how this guy was able to even get the plane off the ground is astonishing. I mean we're all going to be looking at this. And it is a learning lesson. Thank God nobody was injured except for him. But it's a learning lesson. And this has to be a learning lesson. And I don't know what the lesson is. I don't know how you know, they're the professionals. But I know they do an amazing job. We have amazing workers. These rampers, they work great, they're all about getting passengers safely on and off. And you know, I don't know the answer to that. You know, if this is just a one off and hopefully, you know, they can get the answer of why he did this.
[Nobles:] Right. Well, Nick Junka, I certainly appreciate your perspective. Obviously we are thankful for the fact this individual didn't appear to be inclined to hurt anyone other than himself. Obviously still, a tragic situation. And I think you're exactly right. There's going to be a ton of questions about what happened here and how that could change protocols going forward. Nick thank you so much for your perspective. We really appreciate it. And we're going to continue to follow that breaking story. We have more breaking news this morning though. Indicted New York Congressman Chris Collins has announced he is suspending his campaign for re-election. The Republican representative was charged this week with insider trading. CNN White House reporter Sarah Westwood, I believe, is following the latest developments oh, it is actually going to Athena Jones. I'm sorry. Athena you've been following the latest information about Chris Collins. Tell us what do we know at this point?
[Athena Jones, Cnn National Correspondent:] Hi Ryan. Well, we're just learning in the last hour or so that Representative Collins is now going to be stepping aside. This comes just a few days after he vowed that he would fight these charges. He would continue to work for the citizens of his congressional district New York 27 this is in upstate New York, a reliably red district. But let's read you part of the statement that he posted a short while a go. He said, "After extensive discussions with my family and my friends over the last few days, I have decided that it is in the best interest of the constituents of New York 27, the Republican Party, and President Trump's agenda for me to suspend my campaign for re-election to Congress." Now, you talked briefly about what Chris Collins is facing in terms of these charges. He, his son and his son's fiancee's father are facing 13 counts of securities fraud, wire fraud, and false statements. This involves a pharmaceutical company, an Australian pharmaceutical company that was testing a multiple sclerosis drug. Representative Collins learned while attending the White House congressional picnic in June of 2017 that that drug had failed its drug trial. Now, the indictment does not allege that Representative Collins himself traded on the information but it says that he called his son immediately after learning about this, and that his son, Cameron Collins, passed that information on to his fiancee's father and that those two were able to trade on the information and to save or avoid, I should say, more than $768,000 in losses. This is, of course, illegal. When it comes to the ramifications here, we have Representative Collins vowing that he is innocent. He's going to fight these charges that he calls meritless. But now that he is stepping aside, it is not entirely clear what's going to happen to that race outside of Buffalo. As I mentioned, that district is a reliably red district. But it is very difficult to remove a nominee's name from the ballot in the state of New York, this is according to the New York Board of Elections because of various reasons. So it is not entirely clear what is going to happen with that seat. But Collins was the first member of Congress to endorse President Trump. We have not heard any response from the President on this latest news Ryan.
[Nobles:] All right. Athena Jones thank you for that update. Representative Chris Collins not seeking re-election after being indicted. Athena we appreciate that report. Still to come Charlottesville, Virginia on edge today one year after white nationalists clashed with counter protesters in deadly riots that stunned America. Today, the President is condemning racism and calling for calm as those same white supremacists plan to hold a rally next to the White House this weekend. We'll have a live report coming up.

[Baldwin:] We are back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Authorities are investigating yet another suspicious package. This one addressed to the CNN world headquarters in Atlanta. The package was intercepted at a post office near the CNN center today and appears identical to other mailings. Investigators believe it was sent by a serial bomb suspect who is in a federal courtroom in Florida right this very moment. The 56-year-old man is already accused of mailing more than a dozen pipe bombs or IEDs as the head of the FBI referred to it last Friday to two former Presidents and several other prominent Democrats, critical of President Trump, as well as the media. Law enforcement sources now telling CNN the list the suspect, rather, had a list of more than 100 people to whom he intended to send these packages. Investigators are now reaching out to alert those people on the so-called hit list. So, let's go to Miami, where we find joe Johns upside that Miami courthouse where the suspect is making his very first appearance. Joe, tell me about what's happening in this hearing.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Justice Reporter:] This is all about due process in the first place, Brooke. I think he's going to be advised of his rights. He's going to be advised of the complaint that was filed against him on Friday, in the Southern District of New York. And there's going to be questions about an attorney for him. We do know that an attorney from Ft. Lauderdale, just north of here, is expected to put in an appearance for him. We also know that the Feds want to get Sayoc out and up to New York, where five of those packages actually were addressed, as well as where that complaint was filed by the United States prosecutor there. The question is, how long will that process take? It could be a very short process or it could take a little longer. So those are the kinds of things we're going to find out here in court today, as Sayoc makes his first appearance before a federal judge. Federal magistrate I should say.
[Baldwin:] Stay in close contact with you, Joe Johns. Thank you very much in Miami. We are also following another attack seemingly fueled by hate in Kentucky. A white man is charged with killing two African- Americans last week at a grocery store near Louisville. Police say just moments before the shooting, the suspect was seen on surveillance video, trying to get into a predominantly black church. So, for more on this, let's go to Ryan Young in Jeffersontown, Kentucky. And Ryan, tell me more about what happened at that grocery store.
[Ryan Young, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, Brooke, as you well, as you can understand, there are people in this community who feel like this case is not getting enough attention. And in fact, they believe that Gregory Bush was trying to get into the First Baptist Church, which is just down the street from where we are, and he couldn't get in. In fact, someone was getting in the parking lot watching him try to violently open the doors. He just could not get in. And then he ended up in the Kroger that's behind me. And that's where this story takes a disastrous turn. He walked in and trained his gun on a man who was standing there with his grandson and he opened fire and killed Maurice Stallard right there in front of his grandson. They were there to buy school supplies when this happened. He then ran outside into the parking lot, according to authorities, and shot Vickie Jones, killing her in the parking lot, as well. And that's when another man with a gun approached and tried to stop this shooting, and there was an exchange of gunfire at that point. So, you can understand why people are upset in this community, because they're trying to figure out exactly what happened. In fact, there was a vigil here in the parking lot at one point, and people were asking questions about why would this happen here? They want to know how this is going to move forward later on, especially whether or not he's going to face hate crime charges.
[Baldwin:] You know, I remember, Ryan, when we were when I was reading about this last week, as it happened on Wednesday, and you tell me, but apparently when he was in the Kroger, thank goodness, unsuccessfully, you know, not able to get into that church, someone else was heard saying or he was heard saying, you know, "whites don't shoot whites." This seems entirely targeted.
[Young:] It is. And that's something we've been trying to confirm ourselves, trying to talk to that witness. And haven't officially confirmed that, but obviously, that has been spreading throughout this community. Had a man stop by to talk to us earlier and said, look, this doesn't happen in this community. And even some of the workers here say, if you're not safe at the Kroger, where are you safe? You understand people having that desperation, but then you think, another house of worship, the First Baptist Church, just up the street had a bunch of people on the inside, he was trying to get in and he couldn't get in. Thank goodness those doors were locked.
[Baldwin:] Thank goodness. Ryan Young in Kentucky, thank you. What is going on in America? Let's have that conversation. With me now, Randy Blazak, the chairman of the Oregon Coalition Against Hate Crimes. He's been studying hate crime for more than 30 years. Randy, Ryan was talking about what happened in Kentucky. We've been talking about the attacks on people because of the color of their skin, the place they worship, and the political views they hold. What is happening?
[Randy Blazak, Sociology Professor, Hate Crime Researcher, Chairman Of The Oregon Coalition Against Hate Crimes:] Yes, frightening. It's just sort of gut wrenching. As somebody who studies this academically, I have to remember there's a real human cost associated with this. And you know, I think one of the reference points we should be thinking about is the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. A lot of people are unaware that McVeigh was trying to start a race war in America. He believed in these anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, fueled by a book called "The Turner Diaries." It's about racial patriots overthrowing the government and purging it of the sort of global Jewish cabal that they believe runs the world. And we're just seeing the latest manifestation of that thinking. It's nothing new, but it's just been intensified over the last few years. And there is this rhetoric in this country that's happening on the extreme right about a second American revolution or a civil war. And that more carnage like this is coming. So those of us that study this think that we've probably got more of this ahead of us.
[Baldwin:] I hope your studies are wrong. I hope, I hope, I hope. But the fact that you said that you've seen more of this, and you point to the rhetoric, and you point to the far right. Can you pinpoint what is causing this uptick in violence?
[Blazak:] It's always been there. It's something that goes back, these conspiracy theories and the beliefs that the government is controlled by alien influences. But what we're seeing right now, and of course, you have to talk about the role the President plays in this is a magnification of two things. One is the rhetoric about enemies, us versus them. Instead of us together, we have enemies, including within our government, including the media, including Democrats. You know all of these people are sort of listed as enemies. So, there's more of that polarity, of that binary thinking. But the other part of it is this conspiratorial thinking that used to be something on the fringes. When people talked about Roswell, New Mexico, or who killed JFK, now this conspiratorial thinking, thanks to the internet, and largely thanks to the bully pulpit the President has, have become mainstream. The conspiracy theories about the caravan or about global warming or about who's controlling the media, who's controlling the federal reserve. We've seen all of this before, but it never has seemed so legitimate and mainstream that it has now. So, there is this bleed-over effect into mainstream political discourse. When I started doing this 30 years ago, I was studying a relatively small subculture on the political fringes of America. And now I'm talking about masses of people who are buying into this way of anything.
[Baldwin:] I wanted to ask you about Charlottesville, you know, as part of our special coverage on Saturday night and the head of the ADL brought it up to me and he reminded me, you know, the violence last august sort of almost lost in the unrest and the racial component and the death of certainly Heather Heyer, there was the chanting, Jews will not replace us. And of course, you brought up Trump, you know, the "both sides" comment. But, you know, anti-Semitism was front and center and hate is nothing new for Jews.
[Blazak:] Yes, and that's why this community has to be feeling an incredible level of anxiety right now. There's a reason we call hate crimes acts of terror. They are meant to terrorize entire communities. They aren't the same as all crimes. I get so frustrated when people say that all crimes are hate crimes. These are crimes that are meant to create discord and fear and anxiety in large groups of people. And we've seen that this week. So, it really has that impact. And that's why it takes leadership. And I'm just going to say, it takes real leadership to understand what the threat level is and what is happening to this country. And I think we're clamoring for a leader who sort of understands the depth of this and doesn't just go back into the old rhetoric of us versus them and really brings us together, because that's what this country needs.
[Baldwin:] We are about to get the first White House press briefing in just about a month. And you know, you talk about real leadership. What needs to be said to help stop this?
[Blazak:] Yes, well, it's kind of an uphill battle for the President. He's dug himself such a deep hole. But there has to be a recognition of how real the threat is and how we are all, us, all of us, included in the blame game that, instead of blaming them, we have to kind of look at our own role in it and the President has to be willing to take a look at his role in it and have that honest discussion about how we, all of us Americans, participate in this divisiveness and it's time for it to change. And I would really billion impressed if he could say, look, I've been participating in this divisive rhetoric
[Baldwin:] Randy, I'm going to cut you off. Thank you very much. Here's Sarah Sanders at the White House.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] as you know, the shooter is in custody and the FBI is on the scene leading the investigation with the support of state and local law enforcement. This atrocity was a chilling act of mass murder, it was an act of hatred, and above all, it was an act of evil. Anti-Semitism is a plague to humanity and it is responsible for many of the worst horrors in human history. We all have a duty to confront anti-Semitism in all its forms and everywhere and anywhere it appears. The American people reject hatred, bigotry, prejudice and violence. We are a nation that believes in religious liberty, tolerance, and respect. And we are a people who cherish the dignity of every human life. Today, America grieves for the precious lives that were cruelly stolen. Our hearts ache for every person who lost a loved one. The 11 Jewish Americans who were horribly murdered represented the very best of our nation. They were brothers and sisters who looked out for each other, they were doctors who cared for citizens in need. They were proud grandparents who taught their grandchildren to value faith, family, and country. And they were the religious heart of the tree of life community. Our nation mourns the loss of these extraordinary Americans, and we also pray for those who were wounded. Our hearts are with the four brave police officers who were shot and injured while trying to stop the attack. We thank god for these officers and for every member of law enforcement who responded swiftly and bravely. In the wake of the attack, we have witnessed Americans of every faith and tradition coming together to mourn with their fellow citizens, to support one another, and to stand in solidarity with America's Jewish community. The President cherishes the American Jewish community for everything it stands for and contributes to our country. He adores Jewish Americans as part of his own family. The President is the grandfather of several Jewish grandchildren. His daughter is a Jewish American and his son-in-law is a descendant of holocaust survivors. Tomorrow, the President and first lady will travel to Pennsylvania to express the support of the American people and grieve with the Pittsburgh community. And with that, I will take your questions. John?

[Harlow:] Breaking news, Customs and Border Protection says it expects all children in their custody who are separated from their families will be reunited with them by tonight. That's according to an administration official. That is good news for them, but this would only apply to those children taken by the agency within the last three days. There are still more than 2,000 kids that Health and Human Services in their custody that will not be reunited tonight. That includes one boy whose mother is detained and is frantically trying to track her son down. Ed Lavandera is OUTFRONT.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] The phone call came from inside the Port Isabel Detention Center in South Texas. On the line is an undocumented immigrant who asked that we not identify her by name. She's from Honduras and was separated from her nine-year-old son 11 days ago after crossing the Rio Grande illegally.
[Lavandera:] I asked her how she's feeling. Not good at all she says. It's a trauma we will never forget. All of the mothers who are here as well as the kids. The truth is we never imagined this would happen. I asked her how he was separated. They betrayed us, she said. They told us they weren't going to separate us from them and we never imagined it was going to be for so long. Department of Homeland Security officials have vehemently denied that immigrants have been misled in anyway.
[Jodi Goodwin, Attorney:] There are things that you can do specifically to help out with the children.
[Lavandera:] From inside her South Texas law office, Jodi Goodwin is trying to find 22 children. She represents 25 undocumented immigrants who've all been separated from their children for about two weeks. Most of them don't even know where their kids are at this point?
[Goodwin:] None of them know where their kids are. I don't know where their kids are.
[Lavandera:] Goodwin says her clients have tried calling the numbers provided by the federal government to track with their children were sent, but that hasn't worked. Only three of her clients have even spoken to their children.
[Goodwin:] It's just not a system where you punch in a parent's name and it pops out the child's name. That it just doesn't exist.
[Lavandera:] Can be highly frustrating for them.
[Goodwin:] Very frustrating. It's very frustrating. And each time I see them, you know, they ask, you know, any news? Do you have news?
[Lavandera:] While there have been a number of emotional reunions between separated families, there are still many families struggling to just connect over the phone. The Department of Homeland Security says there is not a publicly accessible database to track the shelters where undocumented children are being kept. The DHS says the adult detention centers have phones where their parents can call their children. The Honduran immigrant on the phone tells me she's in a wing of a detention center with 70 other mothers who are also trying to communicate with their children. I asked her what message she would like the world to hear. She says, President Trump for one second put yourself in our place. The only thing we want is for them to give us our children back. And Poppy, government officials say one of the reasons why this database of children isn't widely accessible is for security concerns and predators in that sort of thing. But the fact of the matter is, tonight, dozens if not hundreds of people even though they have been in custody for weeks in many cases still trying to at least even make the most of the simplest phone calls to identify and at least reach out to their kids. I spoke with another man just within the last hour who's in custody in the detention center. And he says his main concern here tonight is the anxiety and insecurity that his daughter must be feeling since they've been separated since June 4th. Poppy?
[Harlow:] Absolutely. Ed Lavandera, such important reporting. Thank you for being there. OUTFRONT now, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, Efren Olivares. His group is representing 381 undocumented immigrants who have been separated from their children. Efren, thank you for being here tonight. And I want to get your reaction of the breaking news just in that Customs and Border Protection says all the children in its custody will be reunited with their parents today. Your reaction to that and does that include any of those you represent?
[Efren Olivares, Director, Texas Civil Rights Project:] That is good news if that is in fact true. It is good news because for those parents and those children, the separation will have ended. We have not confirmation have not received confirmation if that includes for example the 17 parents we interviewed yesterday who had been separated. But it should because they had been arrested three days ago so it should include them. The remaining question is the other 2,500 children who are still separated from their parents.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Olivares:] When are they going to be reunited?
[Harlow:] Of course, so what can you tell me about the process that your clients, your nearly 400 clients are going through right now dealing with the government to be reunited with their children? I mean, are you aware? Is there any federal database that they're using to track down these kids? Is it clear they where everyone is?
[Olivares:] It's not clear. I hope there is such a database that the government is using to kept track of them. I know we are tracking them on a database with the parents and the children. Most of the children are either en route or at a shelter and the parents are either at a detention facility or some of them are no long in that system, which means they either have been released or deported. So we're trying to get confirmation of that. But I hope that someone of the federal government is just keeping track of these 2,500 2,400 families.
[Harlow:] So if they're listening right now, representatives from the federal government, I mean, what do you need most from the government to help in this reunification and to make it as expedient as possible?
[Olivares:] First of all, a clear plan to reunite them. Including the plans and process and safeguards to make sure that no parent is deported without a child. That no child is deported without a parent if that hasn't already happen. As well as some clear numbers, how many children, how many parents, what state of the country are they, and what conditions are their children. That, the government should held accountable on that information.
[Harlow:] When the first lady visited one of these facilities just yesterday, she spoke to the children at length and one of the things she said is how can I help. Listen.
[Melania Trump, First Lady:] Also like to ask you how I can help. To these children to reunite with your families as quickly as possible.
[Harlow:] So answer that for us from your perspective. Dealing with these parents. What can the first lady do to help reunite them?
[Olivares:] She could have visited facility where the children are separated their parents actually are located. And she could have reunited those children with their parents when she was here. She chose to visit a different facility, and as far as I know, her visit did not directly result in a single reunification.
[Harlow:] Appreciate your time and please keep us posted on how these reunifications go and what you're running into in the process. Thank you. OUTFRONT next, Michael Cohen's new strategy? Re-tweeting this picture? Is this a message to the president? The man he's with, actor Tom Arnold who met with Cohen just last night. He joins us next. Plus, are the images of separated families at the border phony? The president says he thinks these are phony stories made up by the Democrats for political purposes. We'll debate.

[Paul:] All right. The President Trump and Russia probe moving full speed ahead right now. The House and Senate investigators firing of a litany of requests from former FBI Director James Comey's memos after his sworn testimony against President Trump. The President's response, Comey is a liar and a leaker.
[Unidentified Male:] The Flynn investigation, you could like
[Trump:] I didn't say that.
[Unidentified Male:] So he lied about that?
[Trump:] Well, I didn't say that. I mean, I will tell you, I didn't say that. No collusion, no obstruction. He's a leaker. But we want to get back to running our great country.
[Savidge:] Independent special prosecutor Bob Mueller appears to be paying very close attention, no surprise there. According to the National Law Journal, Mueller has now recruited Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben from the Justice Department. Dreeben is a top criminal law expert who has argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court. His edition to Mueller's team signals that the probe might be looking at the obstruction of justice caused by the President.
[Paul:] And Attorney General Jeff Sessions by the way is set to testify next week before the Senate about the Justice Department's budget. One topic almost certain to come up is the latest revelation about his relationship with the Russian ambassador to the
[U.s. Savidge:] That revelation reportedly came from James Comey when he met with senators behind closed doors on Thursday. Sources tells CNN Comey told them that Sessions may have had a third, undisclosed meeting with Sergey Kislyak. All of this as the Attorney General's relationship with the President appears to be on pretty shaky ground. CNN's Jessica Schneider has details on that.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] The embattled Attorney General facing new scrutiny as he's about to be grilled on Capitol Hill about his interactions with Russians. CNN has told James Comey revealed to senators Thursday in a closed door briefing, that Jeff Sessions may have had a third undisclosed meeting with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It's an encounter Comey alluded to earlier in his public testimony.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] We also are aware of facts that I can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia related investigation, problematic.
[Schneider:] The possible meeting took place April 27th, 2016 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington. Where then candidate Donald Trump was delivering his first major foreign policy address. Investigators cautioned the encounter learned about through Russian intercepts may have been exaggerated, sources say. A Department of Justice spokesperson has said the meeting never happened. If it did, Senator Richard Blumenthal told Erin Burnett it could put Sessions in serious legal jeopardy.
[Sen. Richard Blumenthal , Connecticut:] Denied, possibly in violation of the law. That denial as former Director Comey
[Erin Burnett, Cnn Anchor:] Could be perjury?
[Blumenthal:] Could be perjury.
[Schneider:] The allegations arrived as a source close to Sessions says, President Trump and the Attorney General have been at odds in recent weeks engaging in a series of heated exchanges. The tension sparked after Sessions stepped aside from the Russia investigation in March.
[Jeff Sessions, Attorney General:] I have recused myself in the matters that deal with the Trump campaign.
[Schneider:] That came after the Attorney General admitted that he failed to disclose at its confirmation hearing two meetings with Ambassador Kislyak during the election. But the Justice Department and Sessions maintained the recusal was solely because of his relationship with the Trump campaign. That recusal left the President livid, according to a source. At one point, Sessions offered to resign. But a source says, the President knows accepting that resignation would ignite another fire storm.
[Unidentified Male:] Are you going to resign, Mr. Attorney General?
[Savidge:] That was CNN's Jessica Schneider reporting. So, let's bring back our panel. Eugene Scott, CNN politics reporter. Kelly Jane Torrance, deputy managing editor of The Weekly Standard. Joey Jackson, CNN legal analyst and criminal defense Attorney. Tom Fuentes, CNN's senior law enforcement analyst and former FBI Assistant Director. Eugene, to you. If AG Sessions did have a third meeting, what does that really mean for him, the Attorney General politically?
[Scott:] Well, this means that this would be another example of the Attorney General engaging in some type of interaction with Russia that he did not reveal. And it certainly brings questions about his integrity just up and resurfaces them for people who trusted what he said and that hearing was actually true. He's been found to have left out some information, already, from that time before lawmakers. And this would just raise another red flag. I think what's much more interesting to pay attention too is what this is say about the relationship between Sessions and Donald Trump. The President, I think, as Jessica just reported is very aware that he really does not have a lot of room on his plate for another controversy. And so, if this ends up being one of those, the future of Attorney General Sessions I think is up for question.
[Paul:] Kelly, I want to listen to Senator Blumenthal here. He says, Sessions is emerging as a key figure in the Russian probe. Let's listen to what he said to Erin Burnett.
[Sen. Richard Blumenthal , Connecticut:] What we have here is a pattern. And I can't confirm what may have been provided in a classified setting, but with a third meeting and even without it, what we have is a pattern of contacts with the Russians by Flynn, by Sessions, by Kushner, secret, and then concealed.
[Erin Burnett, Cnn Anchor:] Do you think Attorney General Sessions is he's going to stay in that job?
[Blumenthal:] He's emerging more and more as a key figure here.
[Paul:] So how key, Kelly, not just to the independent investigation, but to this congressional investigation?
[Kelly Jane Torrance, Deputy Managing Editor, The Weekly Standard:] Well, he was smart, by the way, to recuse himself, you know, relatively early on. And it's strange that the president that's why he's angry with the attorney general because he really had no choice. And if he hadn't, he would be in much more trouble than he is now. Now what's interesting is, you know, Comey gave this information in a closed door hearing. But of course we know what he said, it wasn't very closed door. And apparently they don't have evidence, they don't have proof that Attorney General Sessions had this third meeting. They think he did, but they don't have definitive proof. So it's again going to come down to a he said-he said kind of thing, perhaps. But the main point is, it looks bad if you have Trump officials who have met with the Russian ambassador and other Russian officials and somehow forgot about them and didn't mention them. I mean, you know, this is the ambassador to, you know, perhaps America's biggest rival in the world. How would you possibly forget such a meeting? And it kind of blows the mind to think it's possible.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Tom, you know, I listened to Comey as he talked about the attorney general and the way he spoke, obviously, made you feel like there is a whole lot more to this. But of course, then he said, you know, I can't talk about it. This, again, seems to go to Comey and the way he is speaking publicly about things that maybe should remain semi under investigation before you speak about them because it's very damming against the attorney general, even the implication.
[Tom Fuentes, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Just appears that Comey is trying to get even with everybody. He takes revenge out on the president and Attorney General Sessions and, you know, drop these innuendos that get blown, you know, way out. Now it's just they referred to as a meeting. Did they actually speak to each other at this meeting? Was it at a public event, you know? And I can tell you, when I went through every five years, my reinvestigation to maintain my top secret and everything about that set of clearances, you know, questions like that would come up. Well, how many foreign adversarial officials, how many communists did you meet with? I don't know, a couple of thousand at various events. Eight trips to China. How many trips to Moscow? How many trips, you know, on bureau business, on executive order. You can't remember every little one. And they're not necessarily nefarious that you're having, you know, they're off in the corner discussing how they are going to sabotage the presidency or collude with the Russians and all of that. I just think that Comey did a tremendous disservice in a closed-hearing dropping that hint that Sessions somehow met with the ambassador when we don't even know if that was if it even qualifies as a meeting. Did they actually rub elbows in the entry line or how did this actually work? We don't know.
[Paul:] OK. So, Joey, let me throw another name at you here. Jared Kushner, we understand he's going to meet with Senate Intel Committee this month. What kind of questions do you think he's going to he will answer?
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, first, Christi, if I can just address something briefly. I didn't get the impression from Comey that he was trying to get even with anyone. I got the impression that he was testifying under oath to the best of his recollection. And as it relates to a closed-door session, if you are asked a question under oath, you have to answer that question. And if you have some knowledge and your agency is investigating a potential third meeting to leave that out, it subjects yourself to some issue. And so I don't know that this is an axe to grind as much as it's a guy trying to be as truthful as possible who's put in, in an impossible position. Now in terms of Jared Kushner, and just in terms of the whole Russian investigation, just to be clear, there's nothing wrong. There's nothing inappropriate, there's nothing improper about meeting with anybody or Russian officials. But not disclosing that is the improper thing. Why not say something about it? And, you know, Jared Kushner, you're asking about, Christi, is, you know, indications that you're asked on a form. Right? You're asked on a form about who you met with, who you spoke to. And you omit that. Now it could clearly be an innocent thing that you just decided that, you know, you just didn't recollect it at the time or it could be something more significant. And so I think Jared Kushner, along with everyone else who is questioned here, the committees are going to want to know. What was the extent of your involvement? What was the nature of any communication you had? What did you discuss? Was it purposes for governmental? Was it private purposes or anything else? Because at the end of the day, Christi, it's about getting to the issue of whether or not there was any collusion between the two. And they will ask each and every question to get to that bottom line.
[Paul:] All right. Joey Jackson, Tom Fuentes, thank you so much for sticking around with us. Eugene Scott, Kelly Jane Torrance, thank you as well. I know you are going to stay for just a little bit longer. So we appreciate your voices in all of this. Thank you, guys.
[Savidge:] And with the eyes of the political world on James Comey this week, the House and Senate took major steps on financial regulations and health care. Next, what you may have missed.

[Harlow:] An Iowa community is grieving this morning after the body of what is believed to be 20-year-old Mollie Tibbetts was found in a corn field. An autopsy will be performed later to confirm how and when she died. Authorities spent a month searching for her. While they have yet to confirm the body is Tibbetts, police arrested Cristhian Rivera on first degree murder charges. You see him there. He is an undocumented immigrant. He confessed to approaching Tibbetts after he saw her running. He told investigators he, in his words, pursued her and then abducted her. The grizzly news crushed the hopes of family and friends and local authorities who had scoured the small town for weeks looking for her. She was studying psychology at the University of Iowa and has been missing since she left on July 18th for a run in the evening from her boyfriend's house. Let's go to Ryan Young. He is in Iowa for us following this this morning. What can you tell us about what the authorities are saying and also just how that community is responding?
[Ryan Young, Cnn Correspondent:] And, Poppy, this is just so very tough. We talked about this last night. And you can see the reaction throughout this community. We met a young lady last night who had to take her poster down and she almost started crying with us saying she can't believe that Mollie's gone. So you understand just the emotion here. This is the headline. I think it pretty much sums it up for a lot of people here. It just says the word here murder. And so you can understand the pains. Look, she used to run cross-country. She was running through an area and, according to investigators, they got video from a homeowner. The video was detailed enough for them to watch some of this happen. And, in fact, they went back and that's how they developed the suspect. But from what we're told, that homeowner's video had the black car go by. And Mollie was also running by. And what they described to us, Cristhian Rivera actually tells investigators that he was driving along. He had circled back a few times and then was riding alongside Mollie. He then gets out and was running alongside of her. And she said that she was going to call 911. He tells investigators that he blacked out and from there he doesn't know what happened next. But we know from the affidavit that he ended up putting her in the trunk. We're not sure what happened next after that, but we do know he eventually took her to a corn field where he put corn stalks on top of her to try to conceal the body. So there's so many questions in this area because they want to know what happened to her? Why would he attack her? We want to know the motive. And I want you to watch this video. This was yesterday at the news conference where we saw friends gathering here who were so very upset. This was a very painful moment, Poppy. Something that will stand out to a lot of our memories because you could hear people sobbing as investigators were talking about the details of this case, the idea that this young lady could be running and someone just attack her. And that big question is just why. Why would someone, Cristhian Rivera, apparently, according to investigators, attack this woman? And, of course, at this point there's so many questions more. And there is a court appearance today at 1:00, as well.
[Harlow:] You know, as we wait for that and as we look at the pain on the faces of all of those who loved her, who knew her in this small community, we're learning some new details about who employed Rivera, right? He was an undocumented immigrant. And who hired him?
[Young:] Yes, that is a good point there. He apparently worked at a dairy farm. And investigators say he's been in this area for four to seven years. He kept a very small footprint. But Craig Lang, who's a prominent Republican in this area, apparently employed him. And so that is the point right now where a lot of people are trying to figure out exactly what happens next and what was his documentation? A lot of questions in this community.
[Harlow:] Right. I think he said he cleared through the government e- verify system, but a lot of questions about how that could happen. Ryan, thank you. We'll talk to you next hour for more. Ahead for us, the White House's new strategy, to discredit the man who once said he would take a bullet for the president, this just hours after Michael Cohen implicates the president in federal court. We are following all of it.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn:] So many songs that are hers forever. Celebrities, family, friends are all paying tribute to the queen of soul, Aretha Franklin, dead today at the age of 76. These are live pictures from her star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The legendary Apollo Theater today changing its sign to honor Aretha Franklin, but the picture they tweeted was a file picture from the 1970s. Franklin's star on the Walk of Fame will soon have a memorial wreath. Much more being left there by fans of hers. Lionel Richie wrote" "Her voice, her presence, her style, no one did it better. Truly the queen of soul. I will miss you." Paul McCartney: "Let's all take a moment to give thanks for the beautiful life of Aretha Franklin, the queen of our souls, who inspired us all for many years. She will be missed, but the memory of her greatness as a musician and a fine human being will live with us forever." Then there was Elton John: "The loss of Aretha Franklin is a blow for everybody who loves real music, music from the heart, the soul, and the church. Her voice was unique. Her piano playing underrated. She was one of my favorite pianists." Joining us now, someone who knew just what a talent she was, Ralphe Armstrong, Aretha Franklin's bass player for decades. Ralphe, thank you so much for taking the time with us today.
[Ralphe Armstrong, Bass Player For Aretha Franklin:] Thank you for calling.
[Sciutto:] Tell us how you, how the people who knew her best, who spent so much time with her, tell us how you're doing now.
[Armstrong:] Well, I'm a little right now, but I know she's in the hands of god because she was truly a great person, an intellectual, and a great American.
[Sciutto:] Tell us a story about her, the time you spent with her.
[Armstrong:] Oh, let me tell you something. If you didn't play for Aretha, she will let you know it. She said, you got to give 100 percent. If you didn't get it, the queen beheads you.
[Sciutto:] No one would want to face that.
[Armstrong:] Right. But the thing about her that made her special and made her a queen, and a lot of singers don't understand this, she knew music. She knew what key she was singing in. She knew what chord you were playing. She could tell you what to play. She was an intellectual. She knew about different topics, opera, musical terminology. She was a perfectionist, and she worked very hard so nurture her craft, and she truly deserved the title of being the queen of soul.
[Sciutto:] You know, I've seen it written many times that she couldn't read music, that she was a true natural. You're saying, of course, and we heard in her songs that didn't mean much.
[Armstrong:] Right, but she could read a little bit. She was not ill literal. No, she could read some. I don't know where they got that from.
[Sciutto:] Self-trained. Was she aware of the influence
[Armstrong:] She could read music, yes. I'm telling you.
[Sciutto:] I'll believe you. I'll believe you over the obituaries, trust me.
[Armstrong:] OK.
[Sciutto:] You spent a little time with her. Was she aware of the influence she had
[Armstrong:] A lot of time with her.
[Sciutto:] Was she aware of the influence she had beyond music, as a voice for civil rights, as a voice for feminism?
[Armstrong:] Yes, yes, she did. One thing that she did, which a lot of people don't know, she always paid into pensions for musicians. She always paid union wages. She paid above union wages. She was strong for working people.
[Sciutto:] And I know that's important as well because through her life, she didn't have consistent financial success. She was a star, of course, but she was not. She had her own issues at times.
[Armstrong:] Yes, but you know, she worked around that. But she was a very good businesswoman. She worked hard. She studied the business. She took care of business. She was excellent and was very generous to me. There were times when I was struggling, she paid me thousands of extra dollars.
[Sciutto:] There are too many songs, and I know you've been playing with her since 1987. So many songs you performed with her. Is there one that was your favorite to perform with her?
[Armstrong:] Yes. The one I recorded, "You Are My Joy." The other one was "Respect."
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Armstrong:] And she deserved that.
[Sciutto:] There's "Respect" right there. I love the idea that "Respect" was originally recorded as a song from a man singing to a woman, and she turned it around from a woman singing to a man.
[Armstrong:] That's right. That's right. Now you got that one right. Yes, sir.
[Sciutto:] Ralphe
[Armstrong:] But the thing about Aretha, she was a great person. She was a people person in treating people. If you did her right, she did you wonderful. I loved her.
[Sciutto:] Ralphe Armstrong, thanks for sharing your memories.
[Armstrong:] Thank you. And keep up the good work with CNN. Thank you so much. Bless you guys.
[Sciutto:] You take care of yourself. There will be much more on Aretha's life and legacy. Plus, an explosive response from the former CIA director whose security clearance the president revoked. Why John Brennan says the notion that there's no Russian collusion is, quote, "hogwash."

[Howell:] In Japan, authorities are investigating the cause of a massive explosion near a pub in Sapporo. At least 42 people were injured there, one person critically. The blast on Sunday night was so strong, so powerful it shattered windows across the street. A fire that followed caused the building to collapse. Witnesses said they smelled gas after that explosion, but a gas leak has not been confirmed. A prominent pastor is calling China's moves against Christians, a wicked unlawful action. Wang Yi is one of 100 Christians who were taken into custody last week. Western governments and civil rights advocates are condemning Beijing for its mass arrest of religious community. It is just the latest move in China's stepped up crackdown on independent religious practise. Let's go live to Hong Kong. CNN's Alexandra Field is following the story. Alexandra, what more can you tell us about what compelled the Chinese government to take this action on this group?
[Alexandra Field, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Wang Yi is a 45-year-old pastor, George, of an underground church, but he has got hundreds of congregants. He is very outspoken and his writings and his speaking is very public in China despite the fact that this is an underground church. He has been a vocal critic of the communist party, of government, of President Xi Jinping and China himself and increasingly of the strengthening regulations against religion in China. All that has put him in the crosshairs of authorities before and it seems to have put him on the radar of authorities again. This is a pastor who presumed he could, in fact, one day be arrested. He had even written that manifesto to be published in the event of his arrest which talked about what he perceives to be the persecution of the church in China. Recently we have seen of course China cracking down on unregistered churches, demolition of those churches, demolition of crosses, the banning of the online sale of bibles. All of this is seen as the part of the communist party's wider goal of establishing and asserting and maintaining more control. Their view towards organized religion as being something that could be a threat in terms of its very ability to organize people and to invite in foreign influence. We have seen these measures to curtail religion. Certainly it is legal to practise religion in China but houses of worship are of course subject to surveillance by the communist party. Wang Yi was the pastor of an unregistered church which is something that would put him on the radar of authorities, not to mention the fact that he was certainly fiery and outspoken in his criticism. He is facing very serious charge now, George. If convicted, he could face up to 15 years in prison. So, this is the kind of arrest that is absolutely raising alarm among activists in China and internationally as well as among some western governments, so they're keeping a careful eye on what is going on inside China.
[Howell:] All right. Alexandra Field with the report, thank you. Now to a story that has sparked outrage here in the United States, and now the grieving family of a child who died while in the custody of the U.S. wants answers. Seven-year-old Jakelin Caal Maquin of Guatemala died in a hospital in El Paso, Texas. It happened on December 8. She had been detained by Customs and Border Patrol. The cause of death is not yet determined, but her family wants to know exactly what happened.
[Ruben Garcia, Family Spokesman:] The family of Jakelin Caal Maquin is still coping with their profound loss. The death of a child is the most painful experience that a parent or family can endure. The family is seeking an objective and thorough investigation and are asking that investigators will assess this incident with a nationally-recognized standards for the arrest and custody of children.
[Howell:] As I said, it has sparked outrage and now U.S. lawmakers are getting involved. Some will be heading to the state of Texas on a fact-finding mission. Our Ed Lavandera has that report.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] On Tuesday, a congressional delegation will travel to Lordsburg, New Mexico to tour the border patrol station where 7-year-old Jakelin Caal Maquin was taken just hours after she started showing signs of distress and vomiting. It was from that border patrol station that she was flown to El Paso hospital and where she later died. So, there have been a number of calls for investigation as to how all of this enfolded and why this young girl became sick hours after being taken into border patrol custody. Department of Homeland Security officials say that the agency did everything it could to save this young girl's life. And over the weekend, we heard from the father of the young girl for the first time who also echoed those statements that he felt that the agents on that bus and the medical professionals did everything they could to save his daughter's life. However, the father did dispute some of the initial accounts that came from the Department of Homeland Security. DHS officials initially said that the young girl had gone days without food and water. The father of the young girl says that's not true, that she had properly fed and hydrated throughout their journey to the border. So all of this continues to unfold here. The father remains in El Paso, Texas as calls for investigation and criticism of the Trump administration immigration policy continues here along the border. Ed Lavandera, CNN, El Paso, Texas.
[Howell:] Ed, thank you. Still ahead here on Newsroom, she is only 15 years old, but a young activist says world leaders who are not mature enough to deal with global warming should be called out and she is doing just that and it is going viral on social media. Also, who better to offer words of comfort about losing an election than Hillary Clinton? We will have that story ahead.

[Cabrera:] President Trump is doubling down in his public battle with the NFL. He just tweeted this, this evening. Very important that NFL players stand tomorrow and always for the playing of their national anthem. Respect our flag and our country. Now, today, we are learning that more NFL teams may answer that call and stand for the anthem this weekend. Drew Brees from the Saints tweeting: as way to show respect to all, our Saints team will kneel in solidarity prior to the national anthem and stand together during the anthem. Now, a new CNN poll shows that more Americans think these athletes should stand. Overall, 49 percent of Americans say the players are wrong to protest during the national anthem. Forty-three percent say it's the right thing to do. Joining us now, former NFL player and retired Green Beret Nate Boyer. Nate, thanks so much. You got player Colin Kaepernick to go from sitting to kneeling during the anthem. Now, the cover of the new "TIME Magazine" is depicting President Trump as an inflatable tackling bag with the title, "Why Always Bounces Back." Nate, is the President right on this one? Is more of the country with him on this issue?
[Nate Boyer, Former National Football League Player:] I mean, it's first of all, it's not a right or wrong thing. It's not, is it right to do to stand and wrong to kneel or vice versa. Like, we're getting so in the weeds on that. I mean, it's definitely and it's not and I also think it's not necessarily disrespectful. They're not disrespecting the flag or the anthem. They're demonstrating about something else during that time. So we have to understand that. We've got to get past that. I agree in the sense that I think we should all stand, personally, because of my experiences, but these guys have a message. All these players, most of these guys that are leading the way are very read up on this issue and very intelligent on this issue and are passionate and feel strongly about it. So I will always support our rights as Americans regardless of whether I agree with them or not and but I think that unity is the key. The NFL did show quite a bit of unity last week. And I do like personally seeing, you know, that maybe taking that knee as a group before the anthem itself and then standing for the anthem like Drew Brees is saying there, I think that's a good call.
[Cabrera:] Now, I want to play you something the President said this week on this.
[Trump:] I have so many friends that are owners and they're in a box. I mean, I've spoken to a couple of them. They say we are in a situation where we have to do something. I think they're afraid of their players, if you want to know the truth. And I think it's disgraceful.
[Cabrera:] And most of the players, as we all know, are African- American. Do you believe that comment was a dog whistle to his base as others have suggested?
[Boyer:] I mean, I don't know. I'm proud of a lot of the owners from this last week because they were down on the field, many of them embracing their teammates, arm in arm, locked. Some of them taking a knee along with the team before the anthem. And just seeing that, because the short time I spent in the league and just, you know, my limited knowledge of it, there are so many instances where the players and ownership, the organization, just don't really communicate well. They don't really get along. And to see them sort of come together for that, I feel like it's brought them together in a lot of ways, this whole situation. I mean, you know, Roger Goodell and D. Morrie Smith, who's the head of the NFL P.A., usually are at odds about everything. And they've been on the same page with this in trying to stay bonded as a league and come together. And I think some players are listening to others' point of views where they haven't really before. And I think those relationships are maybe developing in those locker rooms like they haven't before through all this. So it's very interesting. It's an interesting time for the league and for America, but I'm proud of the way the league has kind of banded together. And we're moving forward with this. I think the owners and players are communicating on a different level, probably not in every circumstance but in most cases like they haven't before.
[Cabrera:] Nate, very quickly, do you think, at the end of all of this, we'll see Kaepernick hired because, in part, of the attention that's been drawn to this issue?
[Boyer:] I'm not sure. I mean, that's a tough one. He's absolutely qualified as far as a player. You know, the fear from these owners, I believe, in the organizations is, you know, they see him as a backup quarterback right now. And usually a backup quarterback doesn't garner this much attention or in a lot of cases, what they may feel is a distraction or someone, you know, they worry their fan base will fear having on a team like them and they don't want to lose those people. They don't want to lose that viewership. And so that's where that worry is in signing him. I think it's much more that than or blackballing him because of his beliefs or we don't think he's capable. I think it's just that worry of the bottom line because, at the end of the day, it is a business.
[Cabrera:] That's right. Nate Boyer, thank you so much for your perspective, and thank you for your service. Now, yesterday, the Mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico begged for help. Today, she woke up to attacks from President Trump. Anderson Cooper is in San Juan and just spoke to the Mayor. Find out how she is reacting, next. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[Church:] Donald Trump called his speech a message of peace, but in his debut address to the United Nations, he said he would totally destroy North Korea if he had to. The U.S. president warned that evil will triumph if the world does not stand up to a small group of rogou nations. He blasted Iran, calling it a murderous regime, and also criticized Venezuela and Cuba. CNN global affairs analyst David Rohde joins me now to talk more about the speech. David, always good to talk with you. Thanks for being with us.
[David Rohde, Global Affairs Analyst, Cnn:] Thank you.
[Church:] Now, in his address, President Trump again referred to Kim Jong-un as rocket man and threatened to totally destroy North Korea. How does language like that impact a delicate and tense diplomatic relationship with a country led by such an unpredictable leader and has a U.S. president ever spoken to the U.N. like this?
[Rohde:] I don't think a U.S. president has used such a language before. I think it reflects a sincere belief I think, you know, among President Trump himself and his advisors, that more delicate language, more threats of force will actually work. That President Obama was too soft-spoken and that if you do threaten military action that will lead to a change in behavior in North Korea. Others disagree with it, but I think that's what the president sincerely believes.
[Church:] Does that work?
[Rohde:] There is much evidence of that and the danger that after you make this kind of threat of military force, you know, Kim Jong-un and other leaders that are threatened could, you know, will think that it's an empty threat of force. So it's sort of a dangerous step by making this threats so openly and so publicly on such a global stage. You know, it will I expect more defiance from North Korea and then what does Trump do then, how does he respond?
[Church:] Yes. I mean, that's what we'll wait for now to see how Kim Jong-un does respond to being called rocket man and of course, this threat to destroy North Korea. Overall, how did the U.N. General Assembly react to Mr. Trump's speech that target that not only Kim Jong-un but also the leaders of Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba?
[Rohde:] There is this general feeling that it was a speech for a domestic, you know, U.S. audience. It continued the theme of seeing international alliances as bad for the United States, so that's an inherent sort of repudiation of the United Nations and this whole, sort of post-World War II system that so many American presidents have worked so hard to create. So, I think it alienated many diplomats, but I think President Trump's goal was to, again, appeal to his American political base and he alienated foreign leaders and that's his calculus that's more important to strengthen his base.
[Church:] So, what's expected to be the next step now in Mr. Trump's game of brinkmanship with North Korea and of course with the Iran nuclear deal?
[Rohde:] There is a deadline coming up in the next few weeks where President Trump can decide whether to certify that Iran is complying with Iran nuclear deal. He could decide to not certify that and that would instantly add to tremendous tensions with Iran. Most European countries don't want him to do that. That's the next clear state. And then if there is another North Korean nuclear test or missile test, that will again call his bluff, so to speak. So, it's a very tense situation. To be fair to Trump, I think North Korea has hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. He has inherited a very difficult problem, but his strategy is saber rattling and it hasn't work so far. We'll see if somehow the speech finally causes a change. But I'm not sure it will.
[Church:] We'll be watching for the next step. David Rohde, great to get your analysis. Many thanks.
[Rohde:] Thank you.
[Church:] Former U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is also weighing in on Mr. Trump's speech at the U.N. She appeared on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert a little earlier.
[Hillary Clinton,  Former United States Presidential Candidate:] I thought it was very dark, dangerous, not the kind of message that the leader of the greatest nation in the world should be delivering. What I'd hoped the president would have said was something along the lines of, you know, we view this as dangerous to our allies to the region, and even to our country. We call on all nations to work with us to try to end the threat posed by Kim Jong-un. And not call him rocket man the old Elton John song, but to say it clearly we will not tolerate any attacks on our friends or ourselves.
[Church:] And coming up, Christiane Amanpour's exclusive interview with French President Emmanuel Macron, why he says it will be a big mistake for the U.S. to scrap the nuclear deal with Iran. We'll have that next.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] Breaking news coming out of the Supreme Court on the health of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She is resting now in the hospital after undergoing surgery today to remove two cancerous nodules from her left lung. We're going to get to that in just a moment. Also right now, the Senate is taking its first key vote on a series of bills that would fund the government until February. Senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju is on Capitol Hill for us. Tell us what's happening here.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, right now they're in a vote to determine whether or not to proceed to that House passed measure that would keep the government afloat but also add $5 billion to for the president's request to build that wall along the southern border, as well as border security. Now, this bill ultimately has no chance of passing the Senate. So this is just a first procedural vote. They're going to need a simple majority of senators to agree to take that bill up. And already we've seen one Republican senator vote against it. Jeff Flake of Arizona voted against it. I just had a chance to talk to him. He says this is not the way that he wants to proceed on this. So Republicans really can't afford to lose many more votes because all the Democrats are voting against this. And even if they were, Brianna, to get enough votes to take up the measure, they will not have enough to get it out of the Senate, where they're going to need 60 votes to do that. And there's only 51 Republican senators. The president you already have Jeff Flake voting no. So you do the math. They don't have the votes. So then what's next? And that's the big question going forward. Bob Corker of Tennessee just told me moments ago they're going to have a meeting over at lunch right now with the Republican leaders to discuss how they can get out of this. He himself has not decided how he's going to vote, Corker, but McConnell Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had a meeting with the president earlier today with other senators. They said they had a good conversation. They're going to continue to discuss how to proceed. But at this point, Brianna, the question is, will the president accept any deal that does not include funding for his border wall because getting that money out of the Senate is just simply not going to happen. The votes are not there. So where do we end up? Which raises a lot of expectation they're headed into a partial government shutdown by the end of the night. Brianna.
[Keilar:] All right, the clock is ticking. Manu Raju, thank you. Meanwhile, the president of the United States writing his own chaotic script, surprising his advisers with a tweet announcing a military withdrawal from Syria. That was the last straw for Defense Secretary James Mattis, who resigned after being unable to change the president's mind. I want to bring in CNN chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta there on the North Lawn of the White House for us. So this is not a quiet time before Christmas as it sometimes is. What are you hearing on both the reaction to the Mattis resignation and the shutdown?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] Well, Brianna, I think at this hour what is probably more critical is this looming shutdown
[Keilar:] Yes, this shutdown scheduled at a critical moment with Jim Mattis retiring, really sending shock waves through all of Washington and around the world on that. Jim Acosta, thank you so much.
[Acosta:] All right.
[Keilar:] We have a lot to discuss. I want to bring in Senator Tim Kaine, the Democrat. He's a Democrat on both the Armed Services Committee. He's also on the Foreign Relations Committee. I want to talk to you about the resignation of Jim Mattis. I think this is such a critical story.
[Sen. Tim Kaine , Virginia:] You bet.
[Keilar:] I want to touch first on the shutdown because we are keeping an eye on the Senate floor here as these votes are proceeding. So let's just talk about that very quickly.
[Kaine:] OK.
[Keilar:] This would happen at midnight without a deal on the border wall or on border security. You hear Democrats stressing more border security. The president is blaming Democrats when it comes to not being able to get an agreement. Would you be OK with a $5 billion price tag if it's about border security but not the border wall, or is the price tag the issue too?
[Kaine:] Brianna, actually it's neither that's the issue because Democrats have voted again and again for border security money. We did a comprehensive immigration bill in 2013 with $44 billion in it. The Republicans killed it in February with $5 billion of border
[Keilar:] If he doesn't, as he seems disinclined to do, is the $5 billion OK if it's more broadly for border security?
[Kaine:] You're going to have to well, what, it letting him bully us by threatening to lay off federal employees? You can never accept that as a negotiating tactic. I think when you take an oath of office to be president or senator, threatening to shut down the government is a violation of the oath of office. And there's only one person that's been talking about a shutdown with a gleam in his eye, in tweets and in press conferences as recently as 10 days ago saying, I'm glad to take it on my shoulder, Donald J. Trump is about to be the Grinch that stole Christmas for all these people. He's the only person who wants a shutdown and he seems intent on doing it.
[Keilar:] Let's talk about the resignation of the defense secretary, Jim Mattis, who says he's not aligned with President Trump. You tweeted that this should alarm every American. Why?
[Kaine:] Absolutely, Brianna, because if you read Secretary Mattis' letter, it's very powerful. I come from the state that is the most connected to the American military. I'm on the Armed Services Committee. I have a son who's a United States Marine. Secretary Mattis basically said this, I've been doing this for four decades. The two pillars of American national security have to be build strong allies and stand up to authoritarian adversaries. Those are our pillars. And, Mr. President, you do not share either of these values. And for that reason I have to step away from the job. When somebody with Secretary Mattis' background, who's one of the finest public servants that I have ever worked with, say about the commander in chief that he does not believe in supporting allies and he is willing to kowtow to authoritarians, that should make every American very, very nervous.
[Keilar:] The president has not well, he hasn't said, but reportedly, and we've reported this at CNN, he wants to not only pull troops out of Syria, but cut the troops, the American troops in Afghanistan in half.
[Kaine:] In half.
[Keilar:] So you're talking about bringing home 7,000 of the 14,000 who are there.
[Kaine:] Yes.
[Keilar:] Lindsey Graham, your Republican colleague in the Senate, said that this could create essentially another 911 attack. Do you worry about that?
[Kaine:] I do. There are a number of problems with the proposal. At a minimum, Brianna, this is what's puzzling, we've had two hearings about Afghanistan in the last two weeks here in the Senate where we've had Pentagon officials before us, once open and one in a closed hearing, and I specifically asked, are you going to be making any recommendation to change troop strength up or down? And they said, no. Similarly with Syria, they've been up briefing us about what they're doing. So the president's actions are clearly sort of both counter the advice of the Pentagon leadership, but in some ways he's not even asking for their advice. And the combination of these announcements, we'll pull out of Syria, what about the Kurds? They fought side by side with us in Syria to defeat ISIS on the battlefield. If we pull back from them, we leave the Kurds open to being slaughtered by the Turks. The fact that this announcement was made apparently right after a phone conversation between President Trump and Erdogan of Turkey, who has said that their plan is to go try to wipe out Kurds is extremely suspicious. If somebody who has allied with the United States and fought side by side with U.S. troops on the battlefield then finds the U.S. abandons them and they get wiped out, no one will ever want to stand with the U.S. military again because they won't be able to trust us.
[Keilar:] All right, Senator Tim Kaine, thank you so much for joining us on this very busy Friday.
[Kaine:] Absolutely.
[Keilar:] Up next, we have more on our breaking news out of the Supreme Court. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had two cancerous nodules removed from her lung this morning. We'll give you details on that. Plus, questions mount over the Russia investigation, as President Trump's acting attorney general rejects advice from an ethics official and chooses instead to not recuse himself.

[Zain Asher, Host, Quest Means Business:] Hello everyone, I'm Zain Asher, coming up in the next half hour of QUEST MEANS BUSINESS, Woody Allen is suing Amazon of the claims it breached a big contract. And we'll go inside the so-called cult of Facebook as the company launches its 15th birthday. But first though, these are the headlines we are following for you at this hour. A deadly fire has struck the Youth Team Center for one of Brazil's biggest football clubs. According to state-run media, fire tore through dormitory as players were sleeping at the training ground for the Flamengo Football Club. At least, ten people were killed and three others are injured. The cause of the fire is under investigation. Thailand's king has denounced his oldest sister's candidacy for prime minister, he calls the 67-year-old princess' run for office extremely inappropriate and against Thai world traditions. Her bid to become prime minister could upend a political landscape in the country. A fiery hearing just wrapped up on Capitol Hill. Donald Trump's acting Attorney General was grilled by a House Committee for many questions focusing on his oversight of the Russia investigation. He testified he hasn't spoken to the president about the probe, but wouldn't answer if he agrees with Mr. Trump that it's a witch-hunt. All right, let's return now to our top story. Jeff Bezos' extraordinary accusations against the "National Enquirer", its parent company "AMI" and its CEO David Pecker. Bezos say he won't participate in AMI's blackmail, corruption or political favors. Instead, the world's richest man says I prefer to stand up, roll this log over and see what crawls out. Here's what he's uncovered so far. First, potential connections between Saudi Arabia and AMI. Jeff Bezos says an investigation into those links seemed to hit a particular nerve with Mr. Pecker. Second, connections to President Trump, we already knew President Trump was a long-time friend of David Pecker and a beneficiary of AMI's coverage. In the e-mails that Mr. Bezos published, AMI's counsel demanded that Bezos deny that AMI's coverage was influenced by political forces. And third, other targets of blackmail by AMI. The journalist Ronan Farrow said "AMI" tried to blackmail him in an effort to stop him from reporting on links between "AMI" and President Trump. And this is all happening, of course, in the wake of the murder of that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Alex Marquardt is in Washington for us, Michelle Kosinski is there as well. So Alex, just walk us through the extent for us in detail. What exactly is the connection between "AMI" and the Saudis?
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Senior Correspondent:] Well, this is part of the allegation that what Pecker and "AMI" did here was part of a political attack. And so essentially, it has two parts. And what is being alleged here by Bezos is that, one, that because Trump and the Saudis are so closely aligned, that they would carry they would do an expose like this. And the second part is he's alleging that Pecker has close ties with the Saudis because they he needed funding. And one example that he gave is there was a White House dinner and he brought a high-level of Saudi who had connections to the royal family. So this is part of his larger allegation that this huge expose that "The National Enquirer" ran about Bezos' affair was part of was politically motivated. And if you go if you play that out, and he doesn't actually put this in his lengthy block post, you can see evidence of those very close ties between "AMI" and the Saudis. For example, last year, when Mohammad Bin Salman; the Crown Prince was coming to the U.S. for the first time, they put out a 97-page, essentially promotional magazine that was just fawning all over the Crown Prince and his vision for Saudi Arabia. Now the Saudis denied of course that they had any connection to that. But the "Associated Press" has reported that, in fact, embassy officials here in D.C. got advanced copies. And then there's the Khashoggi situation where the "Washington Post" which Jeff Bezos obviously owns has not only lost one of its one of its star columnist, but it has gone on to accuse as has the rest of the mainstream media including Cnn of reporting that the CIA and other intelligence agencies believe that, that was done at the behest of Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman. So essentially, Zain, what's being alleged here by Bezos is that the that "AMI" has cushy ties with the Saudis for their own reasons, but also because the Trump administration is very much in bed with the Saudis. And there's this long history between Trump and AMI. Now, we have heard from Adel al-Jubeir, who is the State Minister for Foreign Affairs, who is in D.C. today. He said that there was no evidence of any sort of connection between the Saudis and "AMI" or that they put any sort of pressure on "AMI" to put out pro Saudi stories Zain.
[Asher:] Alex Marquardt, stand by, I want to bring in Michelle Kosinski. Michelle, something interesting happened today. The White House is actually supposed to submit a report to Congress about the killing and the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. And now they're not doing that, why not?
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn Senior Diplomatic Correspondent:] Right, well, they say that they have the discretion to do that, which legally is true. But you look at the pressure that's been on them here. I mean, Congress can't force the White House to do certain things like issue sanctions. There is a separation of powers under the American constitution. So yes, there is a division there. Congress can't say, generally to the White House, you must do this even when there's a law that exists, that says something to that effect. But the point of it is, it can certainly pressure the White House to the point that everyone looking at this says, well, why not? You have the CIA determining that the Crown Prince ordered the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. You have the Senate voting unanimously that they condemn the Crown Prince for this murder, and they're urging the White House to take a look at this. So Congress introduced this law calling the Global Magnitsky Act, the White House within 120 days is supposed to submit a report, even just saying yes or no, we believe the Crown Prince committed a human rights violation here in this murder. And yes or no, we're going to sanction him and why? But the White House has said, well, we reserve the right to decline to do this when appropriate. Now, that is the same kind of language that President Obama used when he signed this very law into effect. So, he himself disagreed with the constitutionality of Congress, forcing the White House to issue a report like this. So, yes, there are legal issues with that aspect of it, it seems like the White House is in its right to decline. But there's this big question mark hanging over it. If the CIA believes that the Crown Prince was behind this murder, why does the White House so much not want to say the same thing?
[Asher:] And that's a very interesting question a lot of people are asking that. Michelle Kosinski live for us, Alex Marquardt, appreciate you both coming on, thank you. So add all of this to the pile of Jeff Bezos' problems, Woody Allen is suing Amazon as well. There's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS, next.

[Allen:] Welcome back to CNN NEWSROOM. In Iran, President Hassan Rouhani was sworn in for a second term Saturday and he did not waste any time addressing new U.S. sanctions and the Iran nuclear deal. Our Nick Paton Walsh has more from Tehran.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Despite Washington's desire to isolate Iran, today's inauguration very much aware of them showing they have the support of dozens in their minds of other nations. The audience seeing Hassan Rouhani take the stage and become the 12th president of Iran including North Korea, Zimbabwe, but also to the EU and France, other European powers there as well. And the message he delivered was quite blunt in the face of Donald Trump's clear skepticism of the Iran nuclear deal that his predecessor Barack Obama signed. Hassan Rouhani had simply to say that the actions of the U.S. regarding the implementation of the deal showed that the U.S. can't be trust. And a clear dig at the new occupant at the White House, Donald Trump, he says, "We do not wish to engage with those who are newcomers to the political arena, but wish to tell the veteran politicians and diplomats that they can maintain and continue working in the framework of the joint plan." Clearly a snub there to Donald Trump, who he wants to pain as a neophyte on the political stage, diplomatically that despite his skepticism of the deal there are others who wish it to continue. Remember the U.S. is not the only signatory. There are European powers, too. But
[Allen:] South Sudan's four-year civil war has forced nearly 1 million people to flee. Each day thousands of refugees cross into neighboring Uganda. They arrived to makeshift housing and they share their traumatic stories. John Ray of CNN affiliate ITV has that for us.
[John Ray, Reporter, Itv News:] A young girl cries for the mother she's lost along the road and clings to her brother, not much older, for protection while watched by the militia accused of appalling crimes, another family threads wearily across the border. Ahead the uncertainty of exile, behind them the horror of war. Safe now but the fear still lingers. Emmanuel's manuals escape was a journey through hell.
[Emmanuel Amule, Refugee:] First I get skeletons, skulls, bones, and bad things that are smelling rotten flesh.
[Ray:] And you can smell the death?
[Amule:] Yes. We can smell.
[Ray:] In the back of lorry, we find an entire village on the move, dazed after days on the road. Close to a million have made the same journey to be met by chaos. Uganda is overwhelmed. Aid agencies struggle to cope. Joyce has no shelter for her baby but at least here she says there is no murder. Her own husband one of countless killings.
[Joyce Sadia, Refugee:] They take my husband five meters away from the road. They slaughter him in front of me.
[Ray:] They shoot him?
[Sadia:] Slaughter with a knife.
[Ray:] They cut his throat?
[Sadia:] Yes. They say let me see the example. If I want to do it, take me and they lie me near my husband.
[Ray:] Less than a year ago, this border land was wild countryside. Now for mile after mile all you can see are the tented towns of refugees. They're fleeing a war that has set tribe against tribe, fueling such enmity that even in the camps the rival ethnic groups have to live apart. Among the survivors of a failing state, the youngest suffer the most. In South Sudan's long civil war, there are no winners, only losers. And none has lost more than that nation's children. Most arrive here without a mother or a father. Many are entirely alone, and all are scarred by what they have witnessed.
[Grace, Refugee:] They just slapped me because it was a big man.
[Ray:] Grace is 16, her childhood sacrificed along the road.
[Grace:] They turned on us. They started raping me. After that we shouted for help. There is no one that come help us.
[Ray:] Just before the rape her mother had been taken, and their older brother shot dead. She was defenseless. Now she's pregnant with her attacker's baby.
[Grace:] If it was a boy, it will be my brother. If it is a lady, that will be my sister.
[Ray:] But of all the basics of life these South Sudanese lack hope is in shortest of viable. John Ray, News at 10, Uganda.
[Allen:] Authorities say a homemade explosive device apparently caused the blast at a mosque in the U.S. state of Minnesota. It happened around the time of morning prayers of the Dar Al Farooq Islamic Center in Bloomington, Minnesota, Saturday. No one was hurt. The FBI is trying to determine of course who set off the explosive and why. The community, though, was rallying around the members of the mosque. The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations is offering a $10,000 reward for information. Italian police say a British model was kidnapped in Italy and was going to be auctioned on the dark Web, sold. Police arrested this man, a 30-year-old Polish national, after he took the woman to the British consulate in Milan. Authorities say the 20-year-old woman was kidnapped when she went to a photo shoot last month and was stuffed in a travel bag, and was handcuffed to a wooden chest in a bedroom in this house here for a week. Police say the suspect told the model's agent he was working for the Black Death Group, that's an illegal trafficking organization that operates on a dark Web. Authorities are searching for at least one more person in connection with the case. She is safe but no doubt traumatized. Typhoon Noru was blasting Japan and a blistering heat wave grips much of Europe. Karen Maginnis joins us now with both of these stories Karen. Karen, thank you. A stunning upset for the world's fastest man. American Justin Gatlin beat Jamaica's Usain Bolt in the 100 meters at the World Track and Field championship Saturday. In London Gatlin finished a 9.92 seconds. Fellow American Christian Coleman was second. Bolt, the world record holder, took third. After the race he said it's time to hang up his running shoes while his opponent expressed just how much the Olympic legend has meant for his career.
[Usain Bolt, Track And Field Athlete:] I keep telling myself I need to get that start and I knew I had to get it to get into the race or I'll be in trouble. And what happened, I think I might have panicked. I wouldn't say I did but it didn't work out that well. You know what I mean? My body is telling me it's time. You know what I mean, my legs are hurting now, it's the first time I've ever done running and my legs are hurting, so it's time to go.
[Justin Gatlin, Track And Field Athlete:] I was a little crazy and jumping in the stands and everything like that, but it was still a moment of respect to him because what he meant to me and what he's meant to my career and the first thing I did was I paid homage to him, I got down on one knee and I you know, I respected him.
[Allen:] Bolt is retiring after one final race, a relay, next weekend. That is CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Natalie Allen. I'll be right back, though, with our top stories. Thanks for watching.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor, Newsroom:] More updates, effects of the shutdown. A full ground stop now at LaGuardia Airport in New York. That is a major hub. There are delays at Newark Airport, just outside New York, also a major hub. Chad Myers putting this into perspective for us. Chad, tell us what effects this has, not just at those airports but then the carry-on effects because, you know, you've got a lot of flights stopping there on their way somewhere else, coming in, et cetera.
[Chad Myers, Cnn Weather Correspondent:] Exactly. Exactly. If you're in Jacksonville right now, watching on the little TV screen, and you're parked over in the penalty box, not being able to take off, that's what a ground stop is. Ground stop does not mean the airport is closed. Ground stop means no planes from certain zones can take off until they clear the ground stop, so that they can clear the volume that's in the air. Right now, Newark has some staffing issues there you go 30 to 45 minutes. The staffing issues are actually centered over the zone of D.C. I'll get to that zone thing in a second. And LaGuardia, now, 15 to 30 minutes. So let's go back here. If you are in any of these zones: B.W., N.Y. New York, O.B. for Buffalo, I.D., D.C., Atlanta, Z.L. or J.X., you are not allowed to take off for Newark until they clear the ground stop. That likely will happen. Then they're going to meter you in there, not get try to get 60 or 80 planes in the air all at one time, but I believe that's probably already going on because when we look at the airplanes that are going into LaGuardia right now, we only see 31. Many of them are on the West Coast. You still can take off for LaGuardia if you're on the West Coast because you have four hours to get there. They'll have this all cleared up by then. But what we don't see? We don't see planes here, here, all the way up into Buffalo, up here. No planes from the Eastern zones are in the air to LaGuardia right now because they don't take very long to get there. So you say, "Wait a minute, we can't get a 45-minute plane in the air because we may not have room for it when it gets here." These are all the planes that are in the sky right now, 7,100 planes are in the sky. Now, this is what LaGuardia should look like on the way in, almost 70 planes on the way out. There should be an equal number on the way in. There's not. That's what the ground stop means. Airports are still open, they're just a little bit slow. We'll see what happens throughout the afternoon.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor, Newsroom:] That was so telling and interesting
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] and important. Thank you, Chad. Appreciate it.
[Sciutto:] Can you believe, Poppy? Whenever
[Harlow:] Yes?
[Sciutto:] you see that picture of all the planes
[Harlow:] I never can, no.
[Sciutto:] in the air at one point, you realize what a what an orchestra it is, right? In the skies.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] And if you start closing airports like this or delaying them, that the ripple effects, nuts.
[Harlow:] It's such a good word, an orchestra that we're, you know, apparently, you know, the government, lawmakers don't think it's important to keep these folks up and running and paid right now. It's sort of unbelievable that this is still going on. David Soucie's with us, former FAA safety inspector. Let's get to the safety aspect of it because, David, we just got the statement from the FAA. And one key line says that the results have been minimum impact to efficiency while maintaining consistent levels of safety. That's the FAA, right? You used to run the safety ops for them.
[David Soucie, Former Faa Safety Inspector:] Yes.
[Harlow:] But then the woman who heads the union who represents the air traffic controllers just told Jim and I there is a major safety issue.
[Soucie:] Yes, there definitely is. I mean, the it's an intertwined network, to be able to make a safe airspace system. And that's not what's happening right now. There's a with the furloughs, there's what they call the "critical people," the critical safety aspects. And those people are not furloughed until at not at this point. But those people are systemic people, they're not operational people. So what they're saying is that there has to be people in place overseeing safety, which like, I was the safety inspector
[Harlow:] Right.
[Soucie:] safety inspector who goes out and is overseeing particular airlines. Now, when you're talking about safety in the airspace, now you're talking about operational things, and those are not protected. So it's a set of dominoes. And this is only the first domino that's being tilted over, saying, "Hey, we're going to slow down the airspace." So now we're talking about operational safety, which typically lies with the airlines themselves, and their operations. But now we're talking about things that it's only going to get much, much worse.
[Sciutto:] As you look at this, David, I imagine so you've got three airports now. But if we're being told that "You don't have enough air traffic controllers. They're not getting rest, they're not getting paid, some aren't showing up." The likelihood of others being affected by this as you have the carry I'm not asking you to look into a crystal ball here, but you know how delicate this whole operation is. And if you don't have enough air traffic controllers today, if this continues another day, another week, I imagine those problems snowball.
[Soucie:] Absolutely. Because now what we're talking about is not just local and airports, we get into the regional and what they call the TRACONs, which are areas where, after the airplanes leave the departure or the arrival areas of a particular airport, they go into the regional areas. And those regional areas are the ones that coordinate those airplanes when they're not landing, they're not taking off, they're just in between. And that becomes extremely critical because that's when they hand off from one particular local area to another local area, and that's the part that hasn't been affected yet, but that's the next step, that's the next domino to fall in this system, safety.
[Sciutto:] David, thanks so much. Always good to have you. Joining Poppy and I, now, Jackie Kucinich, she's Washington chief bureau chief for "The Daily Beast," and CNN's senior political analyst, John Avlon. Jackie, I wonder. Let's get to the politics of this right now
[Jackie Kucinich, Washington Bureau Chief, The Daily Beast:] Right.
[Sciutto:] because this is the result of politics. Is this the straw that breaks the camel's back for the president? We already saw support for this whittling away yesterday. Six Republican senators went against the president on reopening the government, to then negotiate border security. You start having issues like this. Is this going to be over soon?
[Kucinich:] So there's already some talk about a deal being hatched on the Hill. We're still waiting to find out what exactly that is. But certainly, the pressure is on. Talking to Republican senators, even the ones that tend to side with the president, someone like John Kennedy from Louisiana, they were saying the pressure has been ratcheted up in recent days. And I have to imagine, when you and we've been saying this for a while when it starts affecting the airlines like this, there's going to be movement. And certainly, if the president sees his support among some of the strongest Republicans starting to dwindle, he's going to have to make a move.
[Harlow:] John Avlon, some of important reporting on the thinking in the White House by Kaitlan Collins and Jeremy Diamond that has just crossed that you know, the fact that this is happening now, but the prospect of this is something an air traffic meltdown, essentially. The prospect of that, John, has long loomed in the minds of the White House
[John Avlon, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Yes.
[Harlow:] and congressional officials as something that might end the stalemate. I suppose if you're in Congress, you have screaming constituents, businessmen and women who can't get to their meetings, parents who can't get home to their kids, on and on and on. And if you're in the White House, you get the same thing, right? I mean, is this going to be it?
[Avlon:] Yes. Look, well, we've been playing chicken with this for quite a while. And the difference is, is that those 800,000 federal workers who have now missed a full month of paychecks, and the pain they've been feeling, has apparently been kind of abstract for a lot of folks in the White House and the cabinet
[Harlow:] Right.
[Avlon:] who don't seem to be able to empathize with their pain. But all of a sudden, this hits the business class, the upper middle class. It clogs major arteries of our travel. And that has a tendency to get folks' attention in the corridors of Washington, much more, unfortunately, than folks on Main Street who are trying to figure out how to pay a mortgage or pay a bill. So I think this does make it much more real and much more visceral for people in Washington, the real costs of this self-inflicted government shutdown.
[Sciutto:] So are Jackie, our colleague Manu Raju, of course, covers the Hill.
[Kucinich:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] He's reporting from a Hill source, that what Democrats are trying to do is see what the president would accept as a down payment for border security, though not for a wall. What would he accept as a down payment to end this logjam here? Is that is that what looks like the end result would be, in that the president would back down on wall funding but claim, I suppose claim a victory by saying he's getting more money for border security?
[Kucinich:] Jim, your guess is as good as mine, as to what the president would accept. And not only my guess. I think Republicans don't know what the president would accept, and that's been one of the biggest problems through this entire negotiation. Back in December, he stuffed Mitch McConnell, essentially, by not accepting what they had passed. So it really is an open question. We've also seen the president say he'll do something and then turn around and not do it because he has his hardliners this is particularly on issues of immigration that pull him back. So that is the biggest question of the day. What will the president sign? What will the president
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Kucinich:] accept? And you have to imagine, that's what that's the conversations that are going on, particularly between Mitch McConnell's office and that of the president.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] John, how important is the owning of the shutdown? Because, you know, it was the president who said, on camera, "I will own this shutdown." This is after he turned down, repeatedly, offers, even bipartisan ones. And I know the polling is not in his favor here, by about you know, by about a two-thirds margin against him on this one. But it hasn't swayed him until now. So why would that not sway him and this would, perhaps?
[Avlon:] Well, I think this ratchets up the pressure among core constituencies that Republican congressmen and senators and folks in the White House might listen to. It makes visceral not just the inconvenience, but the frustration and the pain for folks who are more likely to have a direct line to the White House. Look, nobody wins a shutdown. But Republicans in recent years keep losing them. You know, they lost them in the confrontation with Barack Obama that Ted Cruz led in the during the last presidency. Polls show that this president, who offered to own it at the giddy-up, has been getting his butt kicked by it over the course of it. And there's no way to win a shutdown, it just is a self-inflicted infliction of pain and it shows an absolute absence of leadership, which is what the senators were criticizing Mike Pence about, yesterday, behind closed doors.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Avlon:] The president hasn't led. They're not offering a vision for how to get this done. And this goes way beyond theoretical. This is real people's lives. And this is the greatest nation on earth, showing itself to be a pitiful giant because the president of the United States can't make a plan.
[Sciutto:] Flight safety at stake. Of course, the other option is not that they find something the president will agree to, but that the party breaks with him, right? Enough senators break with him to
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] approve something without his support, but we'll see. Jackie Kucinich, John Avlon, thanks so much as always. We're going to have much more on all of our breaking news, right after this break.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] You are in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera, in New York. Great to have you with us. Let's start with breaking news on CNN. The chaos that awaits President Trump after he arrives back home in just a few hours is the latest and potentially the most damaging development in the growing investigation of the Trump administration's ties with Russia. The news involves the president's son-in-law and close advisor, Jared Kushner. The sources confirm to CNN that Kushner discussed a plan after Election Day to set up a secret communication channel for the White House to communicate with the Kremlin. That source tells us Kushner talked about this idea with Russia's ambassador to the U.S., a man that current and former intelligence officials regard as of one of Moscow's top spies. That secret line was never set up. It is not clear in Kushner brought it up or if it was suggested by the ambassador. The idea was this, Kushner and the son-to-be-named national security advisor, Michael Flynn, would have been able to talk to Russian military officials directly, secretly, and unmonitored through a channel set up at Russian diplomatic facilities. One other thing, Reuters is reporting that Jared Kushner failed to disclose at least two phone calls with the Russian ambassador between April and November of last year, conversations that should have been included in his security clearance paperwork. Meantime, the FBI is also very interested in a data operation that may have helped Donald Trump win the White House. That data operation was supervised by Jared Kushner. So much to pull apart on this story. CNN Washington correspondent, Brian Nobles, is in Washington, and CNN international correspondent, Claire Sebastian, is in Moscow. Ryan, to you first. Air Force One is in the air, President Trump will be back in the United States tonight. What administration officials are saying of these developments involving Jared Kushner.
[Brian Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Not a whole lot, Ana. This speaks to the larger message about the White House of these lengthy trips the president had overseas. They conducted no significant press conference on camera. The president took few if any questions from reporters. As a result, we haven't been able to ask direct questions about these controversies swirling around Jared Kushner. This morning, two White House senior officials, Gary Cohn, the senior economic adviser, and General H.R. McMasters, the national security advisor, did take questions from reporters. It wasn't on camera but they did record what they said. And they were asked about Jared Kushner and this is how they respond.
[Gary Cohn, Senior Economic Advisor:] We are not going to comment on Jared. We're just not going to comment.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Generally speaking, General, would you be concerned if somebody on the national security council or in this administration were to seek a back-channel communication system with the Russian embassy and with the Kremlin? Would that generally concern you not to address Kushner specifically but in general terms?
[Gen. H.r. Mcmaster, National Security Advisor:] No. I mean we have back channel communications with any number of countries. So generally speaking, about back channel communications, what that allows you to do is communicate in a discreet manner, so it doesn't predispose you to any content or conversation or anything. I would not be concerned about it.
[Nobles:] Now, as for Jared Kushner himself, he has not responded directly to this report about attempting to set up back-channel communication with the Russian government. He did respond to the Reuters report through his attorney. His attorney saying that they are not sure specifically of the phone calls or conversations that Reuters is speaking about. Ana, we are not getting a lot of answers from the White House about this specific issue, and a lot of these questions are going to be waiting for them as they arrive here in Washington tonight.
[Cabrera:] No doubt about it. Thank you, Ryan. I want you to stay with me. And bring in Claire Sebastian who is in Moscow for us. Russia's foreign minister has responded to these reports. What is the Kremlin saying?
[Claire Sebastian, Cnn International Correspondent:] Nothing officially from the Kremlin, Ana, as of yet. What we got was a text message of the foreign ministry today saying, essentially, calling that story by "The Washington Post" McCarthyism or simple internal political squabbles. No official confirmation or denial the story is true. We press the foreign ministry spokeswoman on whether they were aware of this request or suggestion by Jared Kushner of a secret channel of communication to be set up through Russia's embassy in Washington. She would not be drawn on that. We assume that they were aware of this since this report came from an intercept from Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the U.S. She would not comment on that. We have no comment, as I say, from the Kremlin. It's interesting that Russian tactics in recent weeks, there are various stories coming out of these stories coming out about links to the Trump administration and Russia have been deflect, dismiss and even deride the reports and point them as a political chaos in Washington. And this was no different. We're sensing an increasing exasperation. The foreign ministry spokesperson warning U.S. media earlier in the week to not spread lies about the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Ana?
[Cabrera:] Claire Sebastian, Ryan Nobles, thank you to both of you. Take a listen to how former CIA Director Michael Hayden reacted to Jared Kushner discussing this secret line to Moscow.
[Michael Smerconish, Cnn Host, Smerconish:] General Hayden, is this nefarious or is this naivety?
[Gen. Michael Hayden, Former Cia Director:] Well, Michael, right now, i'm going with naivety, and that's not particularly comforting for me. What manner of ignorance, chaos, hubris, suspicion and contempt would you have to have to think that doing this with the Russian ambassador was a good or appropriate idea? Again, naivety, but it does not make me feel good about many things.
[Cabrera:] Let's talk more about all of this with California Democrat who said Kushner should be prosecuted for not disclosing all of his Russian contacts on his security clearance form. Joining us, Congressman Ted Lieu, a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Thank you so much for joining us, Congressman. What is your reaction to this latest reporting on Jared Kushner?
[Rep. Ted Lieu, , California:] Thank you, Ana, for your question. Jared Kushner should resign and he should be prosecuted for lying on his security clearance forms, if these reports are true. We know on his first security form he failed to disclose the meeting with the Russian ambassador. That was a significant meeting where they discussed secret back-channel communications. You would not forget about that meeting on his security clearance form. When he was told to revise the form, he lied again, because Reuters reported there were two additional contacts with the Russians that he failed to disclose.
[Cabrera:] The White House has admitted to the communication that happened in December, a meeting of some sort. Back to what we are hearing in terms of the reports of "The Washington Post" and what officials, I should say, are confirming to CNN that this back-channel communication line was indeed discussed, what do you make of the conversation and the content of that conversation?
[Lieu:] I think General McMaster is misleading the public. The issue is not having a back-channel communication with another country. The issue is that Jared Kushner wanted this done with Russian equipment at a Russian embassy. The only reason he would want to do that is to hide those communications from U.S. intelligence. It makes you wonder whose side is he on and what is he hiding.
[Cabrera:] This communication happened between Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, and Moscow. It was picked up in an intercept by U.S. intelligence, in which Kislyak reported to Moscow that it was Jared Kushner who suggested this line of communication. That never happened. But is it possible or have you considered the fact that it is possible that Russia may have been lying about this communication all together in an attempt to mislead U.S. officials if they believe this U.S. officials were listening to their conversations.
[Lieu:] This whole incident, again, shows that Russia is not America's ally. They tried to undermine our elections last year and they're trying to undermine our democracy this year. For a Jared Kushner to not have disclosed this meeting on his security clearance form, that's simply a violation of federal law. I have filled out SF86 security clearance forms and right on the form it says, if you make a false statement, you are liable for punishment up to five years.
[Cabrera:] We put up a tweet, in fact, where would you reference that specifically. You talk about false statements punishable by imprisonment. Here is what Kushner's attorney is telling CNN in response to the Reuters report, that he didn't disclose at least, a couple of phone calls between April and November. This is from Jamie Gorlick, his attorney. He said, quote, Mr. Kushner participated in thousands of calls in this time period. He has no recollection of the calls as described. We have asked Reuters for the dates of such alleged calls, so we can look into it and respond but we have not received such information." Congressman, what if he does not remember those additional contacts?
[Lieu:] The most significant takeaway from the attorney's statement is they don't deny the CNN reporting or "Washington Post" reporting about the meeting with the Russian ambassador. He failed to disclose that on his first security clearance form. That's a violation of the law. On the second security clearance form, when he was told to revise it, he fails to disclose these Reuters contacts, that the Reuters talked about. Why we are calling Russian ambassadors? Why is the administration doing that? If you were to do that, Jared Kushner would have remembered those phone conversations.
[Cabrera:] Michael Hayden suggested that it was naivety, the reason behind some of these. Could it be that? Do you agree?
[Lieu:] Suggesting a back-channel communication with Russians who are not our allies maybe it's because Jared Kushner is naive, but to do it, to say that we need to use Russian equipment at the Russian embassy, now he's trying to hide something. And separate from that, there was pure lying on his security clearance forms. Those are serious federal offenses.
[Cabrera:] Congressman, have you discussed any of this new reporting with some of your colleagues on the two committees investigating Russian ties and meddling in the election, House Intelligence Committee or House Oversight Committee?
[Lieu:] No yet. These are breaking stories that just occurred less than 24 hours ago. Only in a Trump administration that you have breaking news that's interrupted by more stories.
[Cabrera:] What would advise to your colleagues?
[Lieu:] They continue forward with the congressional investigation. I am pleased there is a special counsel, Robert Mueller, who's investigating not just Trump's Russian collusion but any facts that rises from it. The significance of today is it does not matter what happens with the TrumpRussia collusion investigation. You got separate federal crimes being committed by Jared Kushner because of his lying on his security clearance forms.
[Cabrera:] You are accusing him of lying? That implies intent, does it not?
[Lieu:] Absolutely. When you have a major meeting with the Russia ambassador, talking about secret back-channel communications using Russian equipment, you don't forget it on your security clearance form. That is a lie. He intentionally failed to disclose that. That's a federal crime.
[Cabrera:] And in your mind, is this a game changer?
[Lieu:] It is. But keep in mind, the last few weeks have been a game changer, a turning point for America. We watched the president of United States commit obstruction of justice in real time. He fired Director James Comey, he went on national TV saying he did it because the Russian probe was on his mind. Now the White House no longer denies that he did it to relieve pressure on him from the FBI Russia investigation.
[Cabrera:] Congressman Ted Lieu, stay with me. More to discuss. Another bombshell report on how Russia may have infiltrated the FBI with fake intelligence and how it impacted then-Director James Comey's decision to go around the Justice Department with his announcement in the Clinton e-mail investigation last summer. Stay with us. We now know a controversial move by James Comey was sparked in part by fake Russian intellig3ence. That's what multiple officials involved tell CNN. CNN's Dana Bash has the detail on what caused Comey to act on some information he knew was false during the 2016 presidential campaign.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] CNN has learned that then-FBI Director James Comey knew that a critical piece of Russian information related to the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation was fake, but he felt he needed to take action anyway because he was concerned if the information became public, it would undermine the investigation and the Justice Department itself. This, according to multiple sources talking it my colleagues, Shimon Prokupecz, Gloria Borger, and myself. These were a major factor in Comey deciding to publicly declare that Clinton probe was over last summer without consulting then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch. You may remember that earlier this week "The Washington Post" reported on this intelligence and doubts about its credibility. The fact that Comey felt he had to act based on Russian disinformation is a stark example of how Russian interference impacted decision making at the highest levels of the U.S. Government during the 2016 campaign. The Russian information at issue claimed to show that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch had been compromised in the Clinton investigation because of e-mails purported e-mails between then DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and a political operative, saying Lynch would maybe the FBI Clinton probe go away. According to one government official, in classified briefings, Comey told lawmakers that he was afraid the information would drop and undermine the investigation, but Comey did not tell lawmakers he doubted the accuracy of the information, even in a classified setting. According to sources close to Comey the FBI director felt that the validity of the information didn't matter because if it became public they had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. Think about the chain of events this helped set off. When Comey held his press conference in July of 2016 announcing no charges against Clinton, he took the extraordinary, and many people say, inappropriate step of calling her extremely careless. Clinton aides are convinced that her reputation was damaged with voters and she never recovered. That probably wouldn't have happened without Russian interference. Also, talking to many officials on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, dissemination of fake information is still a major issue. Multiple sources tell us that Russia is still trying to spread false information in order to cloud and confuse ongoing investigations. Dana Bash, CNN, Washington.
[Cabrera:] So the plot thickens. We are back with Congressman Ted Lieu, a California Democrat. Congressman, thank you for staying with us. After everything we learned and what Dana just reported, did Comey make the right call in holding that press conference publicly ending the investigation without the Justice Department's approval?
[Lieu:] I disagree what many of Director Comey's actions last year. I cannot second guess his integrity or judgment. He knew that if this fake Russia e-mail got out to the public that the Trump's campaign and major concerned media sites were going to promote it and disseminate it and promote the fake Russian propaganda. That's what they did last year with all sorts of fake stories. There was no way the FBI would be able to respond. I can understand why Director Comey did the action that he did last year.
[Cabrera:] Would you have done the same thing?
[Lieu:] I would not. I would have stuck to the FBI's traditional policy of not talking to the press about ongoing investigations. I think that's what he should have done. Again, it is hard to second guess his judgment because we saw last year a lot of fake news that the Russians put out that were repeated by conservative media sites.
[Cabrera:] Congressman, the reason Comey gave for publicly holding that controversial press conference was the infamous tarmac meeting of Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. Watch.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] I struggled as we got close to the end of it with a number of things that had gone on, some of which I can't talk about yet, that made me worried that the department leadership could not credibly complete the investigation and decline prosecution without grievance damage to the American peoples' confidence in the justice system. And the capper was, and I am not picking on the attorney general, Loretta Lynch, who I like very much, but her meeting with President Clinton on that airplane was the capper for me.
[Cabrera:] In retrospect, what's your take on that?
[Lieu:] There was nothing false about what he just said. Because at the beginning, he did reference that there are things that you cannot talk about yet. Their meeting probably had some sway in the decision making. Clearly, this Russian intelligence fake document did have a tremendous sway over his decision making, and it is unfortunate that the Russians were so successful last year, and they're still attacking the U.S. this year with fake information.
[Cabrera:] Multiple sources tell CNN, until this day, that Russia is trying to spread that false information as you mentioned, inside the U.S. through elected officials and American intelligence and law enforcement operatives, and still nor attempt to cloud and confuse the ongoing investigation. Right now, could there be other fake documents flowing around Washington and possibly influencing probes?
[Lieu:] Absolutely. That's why I am calling not just for a special counsel, which is great happening, but also because we need now commission to look at exactly what we just said, the Russian operations that are happened last year and continuing this year to under mind U.S. democracy and the elections.
[Cabrera:] What do you do about that?
[Lieu:] We first need the non-fake media to continue promoting real stories. We need elected officials not to propagate what they know is fake Russia news. We need our intelligence services, the FBI and others, to step up their game and really fight back against the Russian intelligence operations that have been so successful both last year and now.
[Cabrera:] Congressman Ted Lieu, thank you for your time.
[Lieu:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] After the attack in Manchester, security is being ramped up around the U.S. We are live at the Indy 500 this weekend where fans can expect tight security. And the vice president is also expected to attend. We'll take you there, live, in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] It's a conflict that could put Trump and Putin on a collision course. THE LEAD starts right now. Breaking news. Just days after saying he wants the U.S. out Syria, President Trump is about to hear from his military leaders, weighing his options after an alleged chemical weapons massacre. We're getting a clearer picture. Stormy Daniels' lawyer teases a sketch of the goon who allegedly threatened the adult film star and her baby over her willing to spill the beans about her alleged affair with Donald Trump. Plus, questions about President Trump's response to a fire that killed a tenant in his flagship building. Where were the sprinklers and why did Donald Trump reportedly lobby against them years ago?
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Tapper:] Thanks for joining us. We're at THE LEAD. We're going to listen to United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley addressing the Security Council about the suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria. Let's listen in.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] This time, I'm not going to hold up pictures of victims. I could. There are many. And they are gruesome. Worse are the videos imprinted in our minds that no one should ever have to see. I could hold up pictures of babies lying dead next to their mothers, brothers and sisters, toddlers and infants still in diapers, all lying together dead. Their skin is ashen blue that is now tragically familiar from chemical weapons scenes. Their eyes are open and lifeless, white foam bubbles from their mouths and noses. Pictures of dead Syrians who are not soldiers, people who are not armed, people who are the very definition of innocent and nonthreatening, women and children hiding in basements from a renewed assault by Bashar al-Assad, families that were hiding underground to escape Assad's conventional bombs and artillery. But the basements that Syrian families thought would shelter them from conventional bombs were the worst place to be when chemical weapons fell from the sky. And Saturday evening, the basements of Duma became their tombs. It's impossible to know for certain how many have died because of access to Duma is cut off by Assad's forces. But dozens are dead that we know of and hundreds are wounded. I could hold up pictures of survivors, children with burning eyes choking for breath. I could hold up pictures of first-responders washing the chemicals off of the victims, putting respirators on the children, first-responders walking through room after room of families lying motionless with babies still in the arms of their mothers and fathers. I could show pictures of a hospital attacked by the chemical weapons. I could show pictures of hospitals struck by barrel bombs following the chemical attack. Ambulances and rescue vehicles have been repeatedly attacked, maximizing the number of dead civilians. Civil defense centers have been attacked in order to paralyze the medical response, to increase the suffering of the survivors. Who does this? Only a monster does this. Only a monster targets civilians and then ensures that there are no ambulances to transfer the wounded, no hospitals to save their lives, no doctors or medicine to ease their pain. I could hold up pictures of all of this killing and suffering for the council to see. But what would be the point? The monster who is responsible for these attacks has no conscience, not even to be shocked by pictures of dead children. The Russian regime, whose hands are all covered in the blood of Syrian children, cannot be ashamed by pictures of its victims. We have tried that before. We must not overlook Russia and Iran's roles in enabling the Assad regime's murderous destruction. Russia and Iran have...
[Tapper:] We're going to break away from Nikki Haley's testimony before the U.N. Security Council. We have breaking news just in. "The New York Times" just reported that the FBI today raided the offices of President Trump's longtime attorney Michael Cohen, seizing records related to multiple topics, including on that payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, alleged hush money. "The New York Times" also reporting that the FBI also seized e-mails, tax documents and business records, and that the records include communications between Michael Cohen, the president's attorney, and President Trump, which would likely require a special team of agents to review, because conversations with lawyers and clients are protected in most instances. This is a breaking news story. My panel is here with me to discuss the breaking news and react. And let me start with you, Bill Kristol. The fact that the FBI, apparently with a referral from Bob Mueller, the special counsel, is reading Michael Cohen's offices, this seems rather significant.
[Bill Kristol, Editor, "the Weekly Standard":] And I assume they would need a warrant to do that, which means a judge would have had to have found and I'm not a lawyer, so don't hold me to this but some reasonable reason to do this. The FBI can't just go raid offices on its own. So that's interesting, what a judge found, that there was some reason to take a look at these records in Cohen's office.
[Tapper:] And also "The Times" is reporting that they seized documents related to a whole host of issues, not necessarily just relating to the underlying allegation or question about whether or not there's collusion, David Urban.
[David Urban, Cnn Political Commentator:] Right. So, as we know, as everybody on this panel knows, as you know, Jake, that the special prosecutor's mandate here is very broad. And he can look into anything he would like. He's going to turn over every. Bob Mueller's incredibly thorough. When he did the investigation of Ray Rice, when UPS packages arrived at the Raven facilities the guys is incredibly thorough. I think that'll help when he's done here and finds there's no collusion, there's no crime committed in the fall. That will make everybody rest that much easier.
[Tapper:] Angela Rye, your reaction to the news Michael Cohen, the president's attorney, his offices being raided by the FBI as part of special counsel Bob Mueller's probe into a whole host of things, it looks like?
[Angela Rye, Cnn Political Commentator:] Right. And I don't know how to react to that or David's confidence in this. It's astounding.
[Kristol:] It's fake. It's fake.
[Rye:] Turns out an apple is apple. So, no, I think what is interesting I'm looking at this "New York Times" piece it says the search does appear to be directly related to Mr. Mueller's investigation. However, I think what is alarming and what should alarm the American people is that there are so many issues of ethics, or the lack thereof, crimes or potential crimes being committed, collusion or potential collusion. There are so many issues surrounding this president, it's just phenomenal at this point that he's able to get anything done. There are issue after issue and they continue to skirt ethics guidelines that every other presidential administration has had to follow. And this Cohen piece, I said on Don's show several weeks ago the dark and stormy night. And this is the longest dark and stormy night we have seen in some time.
[Tapper:] Sorry to interrupt. It's stunning, just the idea. Michael Cohen is his attorney. And usually I think would think prosecutors would be very reluctant to raid the offices of the attorney of an individual, even if he's not the target of the investigation. He is in some sort of role in the investigation of President Trump. And that would seem to suggest that they have at least some suspicion, based on more than a hunch, that Michael Cohen has done something improper, because the client-lawyer relationship is generally considered fairly sacrosanct, unless there is an illegality.
[Urban:] And as you noted, as Angela noted, this originated in the Southern District of New York, I believe, not out of Mueller's office. This is not from the special prosecutor. I believe the search warrant originated from the Southern District is what is what the article said.
[Rye:] No. After receiving a referral from the special counsel, Robert...
[Urban:] I think they have to go to him since he's got broader...
[Rye:] Well, I'm not going to opine on that.
[Tapper:] We will bring in more lawyers to talk about this. I want to read a statement right now from Stephen Ryan. He's the lawyer for Michael Cohen. "Today, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York executed a series of search warrants and seizes the privileged communications between my client Michael Cohen and his clients. I have been advised by federal prosecutors that the New York action is in part a referral by the office of special counsel, Robert Mueller." I have Laura Coates on the phone, former federal prosecutor. Laura, your reaction to this? I'm no lawyer, but it seems rather unusual for an attorney's office to be raided by the
[Fbi. Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] It is normally very unusual for that to happen, because you have the attorney-client privilege. Normally, you would have to circumvent to get any information that's worthwhile. But you have to understand this is yet again another instance of the special counsel's office, who by surprise attack, likely in an effort to ensure that nothing that may be fleeting will disposed of, any hard evidence or anything that would not fall under either attorney-client privilege or otherwise would be preserved in an effort to get it. We saw the same thing happened almost a year ago now, when you have the no-knock-and-announce warrant executed on Paul Manafort, somebody else who has been very close to the president of the United States in a different capacity, as a way of trying to get information. Normally, we have these what are called protocol and etiquette and rules of etiquette that suggest we can kind of negotiate the terms of having somebody information handed over through discovery. But if the special counsel's office or another prosecutorial division understands or believes that the information they're seeking is going to be destroyed or not going to be given over voluntarily, they everywhere right to do in this fashion.
[Tapper:] I want to read from "The New York Times"'story. Again, if you're just tuning in, "The New York Times"'Matt Apuzzo reporting that Michael Cohen, President Trump's attorney, his offices have been raided. Documents have been taken, including documents that Michael Cohen attorney says are privileged communication. Obviously, the FBI and the special counsel, Robert Mueller, will dispute that. Mr. Ryan said Mr. Cohen this is from "The New York Times" story "has cooperated with authorities and turned over thousands of documents to congressional investigators looking into Russian election meddling. The payments to Ms. Clifford" that is Stormy Daniels "are only one of many topics being investigated, according to a person briefed on the search. "The FBI also seized e-mails, tax documents and business records, the person said." Laura Coates, that seems rather significant, that tax documents are also being seized.
[Coates:] Extremely significant, because, remember, we have always had these questions about what the president United States' tax documents would actually reveal or allude to. And now you have somebody who just a few days after the president United States has confirmed in that off-the-cuff interview in the back of Air Force One that he was unaware of the nature of or the origin of a payment made by his attorney, you now see the special counsel's office going back to try to confirm or find out information about perhaps other payments not related to Stormy Daniels or unrelated to things we may know about. But what you see here is a pattern by the special counsel of asking and then failing to trust, which is exactly what every prosecutor would do who has the discovery in front of them or behind them, would say, I would like you to give me everything you have, and then, except they didn't get everything over. For example, the Trump Organization, they had the same thing happen a few weeks ago, when they said, I would like everything, and they have been cooperating over time. And then it turned out they had a subpoena and wanted to have more information. So that skepticism is there, but it's a very significant, Jake, to think that someone who normally would have the protections of the attorney-client privilege a few days after having to confirm that he has gone rogue in other respects, would have the special counsel's office knocking at their door to ensure they actually they do have full compliance. We're not in the game of voluntary cooperation anymore. We're in the game where a court has said that there is some reason to believe this person has not corroborated or cooperated in all respects.
[Tapper:] Laura Coates, thanks so much. Stay with us. I want to now to CNN's chief political analyst, Gloria Borger. And, Gloria, seizing information about Stormy Daniels, seizing tax documents, Bob Mueller signing a warrant for the FBI to raid the president's lawyer's offices, this is fairly stunning.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, it is stunning. Look, he's been his attorney, his personal attorney since 2006. And the money that was paid to Stormy Daniels was through an LLC. And I have to believe that what they are looking at is the way that Mr. Cohen has done other real estate deals potentially for Donald Trump over the years. And let's not forget that, during the campaign, when the president was saying I have no business dealings with Russia, it was Michael Cohen who was trying to set up a Trump Tower Moscow with a letter of intent, which, as we all know, went nowhere, but he was very involved in this. And you also have to think that, in terms of perhaps helping shield Mr. Trump from taxes, et cetera, et cetera, that this was this was something that Michael Cohen did routinely. In speaking to people who worked in the Trump Organization, they always said to me, we never quite knew what Michael Cohen did, but we knew that he did whatever Donald Trump needed him to do. And I think that is the nature of their relationship. And what struck me recently, Jake, was that, when the president spoke for the first time about Stormy Daniels, he said, "Michael Cohen is my lawyer, period." And so that made me think, OK, attorney-client privilege applies here and they wanted that known. But this raid, as Laura Coates was saying, is kind of stunning.
[Tapper:] It is stunning. Stormy Daniels, otherwise known as Stephanie Clifford, her attorney, Michael Avenatti, just tweeted quote "An enormous amount of misplaced faith has been on M.C." meaning Michael Cohen's "shoulders, in my opinion. If he does not hold up, this could end very, very badly for Donald J. Trump and others" unquote. I want to bring in Evan Perez. Evan, clear something for me because I think there's some confusion here.
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Right.
[Tapper:] The U.S. attorney's office for the southern district of New York, they execute this executed this series of warrants, this search of Michael Cohen's office but this action is in part a referral by the Office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
[Perez:] Right.
[Tapper:] So, is this part of the Mueller probe or is it separate from the Mueller probe? Or both?
[Perez:] All indications are this is not part of the Mueller investigation.
[Tapper:] Then why does it say it is a referral in part a referral by the Office of Special Counsel?
[Perez:] Right, and I think that's the way it works, Jake. So, I think what there was information or at least according to Stephen Ryan, Michael Cohen's attorney, what he seems to be describing is that Robert Mueller's investigators came across information that they thought constituted reason for perhaps a possible crime, that constituted reasons for the southern district of New York to actually investigate this. So, what Mueller is doing is saying, look, this is not my area, this is outside of what I'm supposed to be doing, but you guys should take a look at this because we think that there is something here. And so this is what has happened now. The southern district of New York, the U.S. attorney's office there in Manhattan has executed this warrant and is apparently conducting an investigation into something that doesn't fall squarely in the four corners of what Robert Mueller is doing. Now, I should say we've heard from people who have gone in to see Mueller recently that he was asked that people the Mueller team asked the witnesses whether they knew something about these payments to women, including Stormy Daniels.
[Tapper:] Hush payments?
[Perez:] Hush payments, correct.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Perez:] So, the fact that those questions were coming from the Mueller team really aggravated people inside of the White House. People in the White House wanted to know, why is Mueller even getting to this question
[Tapper:] This has nothing to do with election interference.
[Perez:] This is nothing to do with election interference. And I think Mueller has arrived at same conclusion, that even if there is something here to be investigated, it is not for him to do and it is the jurisdiction of the Manhattan U.S. attorney. So that appears again, according to what Stephen Ryan has told "The New York Times," again, Michael Cohen's attorney, that the southern district of New York, the U.S. attorney there in Manhattan, is the one doing whatever investigation is into perhaps the hush payments, whether there is any other violations. I mean, look, beyond the push payments, there could be some violation of election laws, if, for example, you did not declare these payments as a gift to the then candidate Donald Trump. Again, these payments were made just before the election and there is a way for you to registered gifts and if you don't do it properly, it is a violation of federal election law. So, again, we don't know exactly what the attorney's office in Manhattan is doing, but based on what Stephen Ryan, the attorney for Michael Cohen is describing, that appears to be what happened. Mueller has kicked this over to to the U.S. attorney's office.
[Tapper:] Thanks for that clearing that up, Evan. Appreciate it. Bill?
[Bill Kristol, Editor, Weekly Standard:] I would say based on my just a little bit of knowledge of how these things work, if Robert Mueller asked the southern district of New York not to do this now, they would have held off. I mean, he has sort of precedence here. So I'm a little doubtful this is not part of the investigation or in accord with his wishes. I mean, this is a huge escalation. They can't use privileged documents and they are set aside and they'd be reviewed by as I understand, a third party reviews them and they set aside what's privilege or not, but this is war. I mean, if you were I believe this shows that we're very close now to the end game. You do not go bust in with a to get a judge to give you a warrant to search the president's personal lawyer's office unless you think you are close to the end of this, you were getting important information. The president is now the president is now going to go to war against him. If the president thought about firing Mueller, or pardon people, this is the moment where it goes to the front of his mind. I worry we might be under-interpreting this in the sense that I think this is a big Mueller could have put this off, could have tried to make more cooperation from Cohen. The idea that he signs off and goes to a judge to get a judge to sign off on a warrant to do this, I think that is a big deal.
[Perez:] I think, you know, look, again, part of what happens in these cases your concern is that there'd be destruction of evidence and documents, so often
[Tapper:] That is why they did the no-knock warrant search of Manafort.
[Perez:] Exactly. So, even though it's an extreme step to go raid the house of the former chairman of the Trump campaign, I think you do it because you are in fear that there will be evidence destroyed.
[Tapper:] Gloria Borger?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] The relationship between the president and Michael Cohen has not gone away. If you recall, he invited Michael Cohen just I guess a week ago when he was in Mar-a- Largo to visit him and have dinner to show support for him. And shortly thereafter, he came out and said he is my lawyer. And we also know from our reporting that witnesses have been asked about Michael Cohen, vis-a-vis Trump Tower Moscow and the whole question of his involvement in him and shortly there ever he came out and said he is my lawyer. And we know from the reporting that witnesses have been asked about Michael Cohen, vis-a-vis Trump tower Moscow and the whole question of his involvement in trying to get to get that branding for the president during the campaign. And so the relationship between Michael Cohen and this president is like he's as he proudly calls himself, his Ray Donovan. And so, it does not surprise me that either Mueller found something in his interviews that he thought should be investigated by New York, or that he is also continuing to do so on his own. But there is some, as Evan rightly points out, that is completely outside his purview and he thinks that however it should not be left untouched or uninvestigated.
[Tapper:] All right. That is interesting. David Urban, you want to weigh in.
[David Urban, Cnn Political Commentator:] Let's just dial it back for a second here. Remember, we do live in the United States of America where everybody starts out as a presumption of innocence. As I sat in your set many times, in this studio, when Senator Menendez was facing trial and some of the Democrats on the panel was saying, he's done, he's gone, he's baked, I said, there's a jury here, we're going to come to conclusion, let them make the case, let's them make the decision. We're not even close to that here. There's the FBI and some folks have taken some documents, presumption of innocence. We're way far, far away from anything here yet.
[Tapper:] Absolutely. Let's go now to CNN legal analyst Michael Zeldin, He's on the phone. He is the former special assistant at the Department of Justice to Robert Mueller. Mr. Zeldin, your interpretation of what just happened, this FBI raid, southern district of New York, U.S. attorney's office raiding the personal attorney, Michael Cohen, his offices. He's the attorney for President Trump.
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Right. So it seems what you're seeing, Jake, is Mueller coming across in the course of his investigation evidence of criminal wrongdoing which is beyond the scope of his mandate, so most likely he went to Rod Rosenstein pursuant to the regulations that governs Mueller's conduct and said, what would you like me to do with this, and Rosenstein said or Mueller and Rosenstein agreed that this is best handled by the southern district of New York, U.S. attorney's office and probably a Manhattan financial crime or perhaps real estate related inquiry. They obtained a warrant to search which means they presented to a court evidence of probable cause to believe there was relevant evidence to a criminal investigation and the warrant was signed and off they went and seized the documents that they needed to seize. We just can't tell, yet, what the scope of it is and why it is why Mueller and Rosenstein feel it is outside of his mandate when you look at Paul Manafort and Gates' indictments which seem untethered to the primary mandate of coordination and yet he pursued that. So, this must be something that is sort of ring fenced within Manhattan and relevant to financial dealings of Cohen, either as his as a lawyer in and of himself or as a lawyer for the Trump Organization. We just don't know because Cohen claims to make representations with respect to Stormy Daniels, said he is acting on his own and then he makes representations with respect to Donald Trump that he's helping build the Trump Tower in Moscow and other international properties. So, we just don't know yet where it falls. But it's clear that Mueller found something that he thinks the U.S. attorney should investigate and the judge agreed.
[Tapper:] But, Michael Zeldin, let me ask you, as somebody who used to work closely under Robert Mueller. Bill Kristol posited here as a theory that even though this was a referral from the special counsel office to the southern district of New York, U.S. attorney, meaning the southern district of New York was told about something that they should look into, that Bob Mueller and his team had found, but they are actually not not Mueller but the southern district of New York they are actually investigating this and they are raiding the office, et cetera. Bill Kristol interprets this as it's possible that Bob Mueller had to sign off on this search warrant anyway since the information started with him and that whether or not this is related to the election interference investigation, this is part of muscling and showing people like Michael Cohen and maybe even President Trump that they are going to be investigated, whether they like it or not and they need to be honest, whether they like it or not. As somebody who worked with Robert Mueller, what do you think of that theory?
[Zeldin:] Well, I'm not sure why he would need the southern district to do that. He could have done that on his own as he did in Gates where they investigated what was originally a Eastern District of Virginia tax case that the U.S. attorney there was looking at and Mueller took it over. So, I'm not sure he would need the southern district to do his work in Manhattan. I think he has authority to do that under his current mandate, which is why I think that perhaps it is not directly connected to his mandate and he's trying to be true to the mandate which is to investigate and coordination of matters related to Russia and the 2016 presidential election. But, you know, Mueller works in mysterious ways as we've learned and he doesn't leak. So, we're all speculating. But my speculation would be that this is something that is I call it a ring fence, meaning it is unique to New York and not connected to Bob's investigation directly.
[Tapper:] Let's bring in CNN's Josh Campbell, who's a former FBI supervisor special agent and he's a former special assistant to James Comey. He now works as a legal analyst for CNN. Josh, how do you interpret what happened just now?
[Josh Campbell, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Yes, I think we've heard some of the political commentators say we need to dial this down. I think the opposite. The Department of Justice has showed they are ready to dial this up because in a situation like this, and, obviously, there's a lot that we don't know about the specifics, the underlying potential crime, but any time you're dealing with an elected official, it falls under the category what the Department of Justice, what the FBI call a SIM, a sensitive investigative matter, and that means if you have someone who's a politician, a member of the media, maybe a member of the clergy, those types of legal action or any type of enforcement is going to be signed off on at the highest levels of the Department of Justice. So, that's number one. The second part is because in this case, with Robert Mueller, he's not simply going to task out to the southern district some work or some allegation for them to do with on their own. Again, that's going to be feud right at main justice and again will be signed off at the highest level before it goes over to another district to start an investigation. I think that this shows that, you know and folks can be warned that if during the course of investigating a crime, if investigators unearth some other type of crime, they don't simply turn a blind eye.
[Tapper:] David Urban, I want to give you a chance to weigh in.
[Urban:] Yes. So, as we've heard you know, in the Gates and Manafort case, Bob Mueller had no problem, no knock, guns pulled raid which I've talked to folks in law enforcement, say they reserve those kind of raids for bad guys with guns who are going to put up a fight. It is very rare for folks to do no-knock raids on that case. And in that case
[Tapper:] All right. Josh, we'll come back in a second.
[Urban:] Josh, you had your chance. And in this case as well, you had you had Gates and Manafort on things happening in 2013, completely unrelated to this election. You know, if this were the case that you're talking about here, you could have the same kind of thing. Like, if it were that would that tightly tied to this president, Mueller could easily have done it.
[Kristol:] The president of the United States had dinner with Michael Cohen one week ago said Michael Cohen is my lawyer. The highest level of justice, as Josh just said, has just signed off on an FBI unannounced raid on the president's personal lawyer
[Urban:] we don't know everything.
[Tapper:] We don't know.
[Urban:] But it doesn't stop from opining in the thousands
[Kristol:] I'm saying that I suspect to say this is not a big deal strikes me
[Tapper:] I do want Josh as a former special agent, you are saying it is not true that the no-knock midnight raids are only done on bad guy drug dealers with guns. Go ahead.
[Campbell:] That's right. And this isn't any disrespect for Mr. Urban. I mean, points for creativity. I understand the position he's in. I'm just saying that as a law enforcement officer and you were focusing on a crime, it doesn't just involve those who are dangerous, involves those who maybe destroying evidence, but the fact is the point that was made has nothing to do with what I just said a moment ago.
[Urban:] Josh, it's normal for the FBI
[Campbell:] and the Department of Justice.
[Urban:] So, Josh, it's normal for the FBI to knock no knock and guns drawn on a matter like Mr. Manafort? That is a normal procedure.
[Campbell:] I didn't say normal, you just said it's not case.
[Urban:] So, I'm just asking, is it normal?
[Campbell:] I'm saying that in order to preserve evidence, the FBI will approach the situation in that manner.
[Urban:] Josh, answer my last question, is it normal or not normal for the FBI to no-knock and guns drawn in a Manafort type of raid? Yes or no.
[Campbell:] I'm saying it requires a judge to sign off on it.
[Urban:] I'm just asking, Josh.
[Campbell:] In this case, the FBI agents convinced the judge that it was warranted in this case. So, the argument really is superfluous and I guess
[Urban:] I guess that's a no. It's not normal.
[Campbell:] This is separate than what Mueller is doing.
[Tapper:] But I guess we could all agree that Mueller and now the southern district of New York are using rather aggressive tactics.
[Urban:] Yes, absolutely.
[Kristol:] And the judge signed off on it.
[Tapper:] And the judge signed off and
[Kristol:] And the reason it is not whether the guns are drawn. The fact is there was reasonable suspicion if they didn't go in in this unannounced ways, documents would be destroyed and a judge, not Mueller, a judge must have convinced that was a reasonable thing to worry about. So, this is a big deal
[Angela Rye, Cnn Political Commentator:] The question, is not is this normal? There is nothing normal about this administration, about anything that is an outgrowth of said administration or any investigation whether we're talking about the Senate, the House or the special counsel there is nothing normal about this. So, let's not normalize any of this. It's crazy.

[Keilar:] No punching back 10 times harder, no Twitter attack, no name calling. Publicly, President Trump is staying uncharacteristically silent about porn star, Stormy Daniels, despite her jaw-dropping interview with Anderson Cooper on "60 Minutes," when she told the world in detail about unprotected sex that she says she had with Trump, which the White House continues to deny. I want to go to CNN White House reporter, Kaitlan Collins, for details on this. Kaitlan, the president reportedly was among the nearly 22 million Americans who were watching this CBS News interview. What are you learning?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Brianna, the White House alluded to as much yesterday when they said they couldn't say if the president watched the interview, but later said the claims Stormy Daniels made in the interview were inaccurate. But the president has not commented on this publicly. It's been noteworthy for a president who doesn't ignore the smallest slight. But he certainly isn't ignoring this privately because we know that he's been polling his advisers, allies, whether or not he should respond publicly to these allegations. So far, they have advised him against that. It is unclear how long he will heed that advice. We know he's complained about what he says is the wall-to-wall coverage of the allegations on cable news. And that his friend, Chris Ruddy, said it was a hoax, and he believed it was meant to damage him politically. And now "The Washington Post" is reporting that the president has even gone as far as to tell people that Stormy Daniels is not his type here, Brianna. But back to whether or not he's going to publicly comment on this, it is hard to see just how much longer that lasts. People close to the president say they do not believe he'll be able to exercise that restraint much longer. Of course, Stormy Daniels' lawyer has been taunting the president, doing all these interviews. Stormy Daniels herself appearing on television, the president's favorite medium. Now the question is, Brianna, just how long does it take the president to actually come out and say something about these allegations.
[Keilar:] We saw a little crack. He said fake news was very I think he said voluminous yesterday in a tweet. We know what he was probably talking about there. I want to ask you about something else, Kaitlan, and that is Rob Porter, the president's former aide, who left the White House after being accused of abusing, both physically and emotionally, his first wife as well as his second wife, we saw the alarming photos. Apparently, he's in touch with Rob Porter?
[Collins:] That's right. "The New York Times" is reporting the president has not only stayed in touch with Rob Porter, asking his advice on some issues, but has also floated the idea of having him return to the West Wing. Now, it is not that surprising that the president kept in touch with Porter. It is a little bit stunning, given the allegations made against Porter and the nasty departure that he had here from the White House, very frustrating, not only because of those very serious allegations but also because the president believed that that departure was botched here by aides in the White House, including the Chief of Staff John Kelly. But the president has stayed in touch with him. He does this with people who leave the West Wing or his orbit. They don't often leave for very long. And we're seeing that here with Rob Porter. The thing you have to keep in mind is the context here. This is coming as the president's inner circle here in the West Wing has continued to shrink over the recent weeks. Not only the departure of Rob Porter, but Hope Hicks, Keith Schiller, Johnny McEntee, several aides close to the president as well. But a word of caution. Aides in the White House do not think it is likely that Rob Porter will return, given the seriousness of the allegations made against him. But it does go to show just how close he and the president were here Brianna?
[Keilar:] Kaitlan Collins, at the White House, thank you. I want to turn to the latest legal maneuver in the Stormy Daniels saga. The porn star is suing President Trump's long-time lawyer, Michael Cohen, for defamation. CNN's M.J. Lee is joining us now on this story. What is the defamation suit all about, M.J.?
[M.j. Lee, Reporter:] Brianna, what Stormy Daniels is doing right now is staying on offense. As you know, she already had launched a lawsuit against Donald Trump earlier this month. And that lawsuit had to do with trying to get out of this NDA, make that void so she can speak out freely about her alleged affair with Donald Trump in 2006. Now that lawsuit has been amended to include Michael Cohen, Cohen. Cohen, of course, is Donald Trump's personal lawyer, who was responsible for making that $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels in 2016 to keep her quiet and to keep her from speaking about this affair. Now, what this lawsuit now says is that Cohen is being accused of defamation. What Stormy Daniels is saying is he is essentially calling her a liar even though he's not directly saying that. Here is Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' lawyer, talking about all of this on "A.C. 360" last night.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] Mainly, he made statements earlier this year, whereby, he basically said that the affair never happened, in not so many words, and made my client out to be a liar. So we're going to test the voracity of his statements against those of my client.
[Lee:] I also want to quickly note, you remember in the "60 Minutes" interview on Sunday, Stormy Daniels said that she was threatened in a Las Vegas parking lot in 2011, and this had to do with her being quiet about the Donald Trump affair. Well, Michael Avenatti is saying, since that interview aired, they have several new leads on who was responsible. He says that it wasn't directly Michael Cohen or Keith Schiller, Donald Trump's bodyguard, but the question remains, are they going to be able to produce that kind of evidence. The hearing for this lawsuit is set for July of this year.
[Keilar:] Stormy Daniels hinted at that in the interview. She said she would be able to identify that person again. We will see. M.J. Lee, thank you. Still ahead, critics pushing back on the Trump administration just hours after a controversial citizenship question is added to the 2020 census, whether you're a citizen or not. Why it matters to you, next.

[Rep. Darrell Issa , Foreign Affairs Committee:] If true, it represents the greatest crisis probably since let me rephrase that undoubtedly since the Cuban missile crisis. And the correlation is very similar. This is something that can hit us and our allies, and it's with a rogue nation that we suspect would use it.
[Camerota:] Well, the escalating rhetoric between the U.S. and North Korea has many drawing comparisons to the Cuban missile crisis, but not our next guest. Let's talk about it with CNN's Global Affairs Analyst, Aaron David Miller. He's also the author of The End of Greatness. Aaron, great to see you this morning. I'll read the tweet you sent out yesterday about this, "Idea that we're on the verge of nuclear war or this is the Cuban missile crisis is absurd. But Houston, we do have a problem, intemperate rhetoric, North Korean nukes." How do you see it?
[Aaron David Miller, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] I mean, you know, certain historical parallels are often, you know, critically important to sum it up. And I think it was Mark Twain who said that history doesn't repeat, it rhymes. So you look for the rhythmic patterns. Yes, there's tension. If, in fact, there was a confrontation, a military confrontation between the United States, South Korea, Japan on the Korean peninsula, it would be worse than the Cuban missile crisis and it would be a catastrophe. But it's not the Cuban missile crisis now. We don't have ICBMs stationed 90 miles away. The continents the great continent with United States right now is not threatened. This is not
[Camerota:] But how do you know that? I mean the thinking is that maybe one of their missiles can hit the mainland of the
[U.s. Miller:] No, I don't want to trivialize the threat at all. But just take the Guam issue. I mean they've been threatening Guam now for years and they have intermediate range missiles that could probably reach Guam. Do they have have they perfected a reentry system? Could they cause damage? I don't want to trivialize the threat. But on the other hand, I don't want to exacerbate it and create a kind of panic to some degree that was reflected in the President's rhetoric yesterday. Now is the time for reassurance, it's time for cool, calculated moves and a possible strategy. In large part, Alisyn, because look at the options. Sanctions will not work. You're not going to alter Kim Jong-un's behavior, no matter how punishing they may be. And they don't put oil
[Camerota:] Well, then I mean why is the Security Council, you know, the U. S. Security Council going that route? I mean if that's hopeless and that's just a futile exercise, then where does that leave us?
[Miller:] I mean it's part of the package. It's necessary perhaps, but not sufficient. Sanctions isn't going to work. I don't think. If working means bringing Kim Jong-un and the regime to its knees on nuclear weapons, that's not going to work. So then you're left with the default position. You contract to China and China is an important player. But China cannot give Kim Jong-un what he wants. Only we can do that. And finally, military options, which as Hertling and Kirby said in eloquent and compelling fashion, it's huge risk right now. That leads to the default position and the default position is some kind of dialogue, at least, to try to diffuse the rhetoric.
[Camerota:] Yeah.
[Miller:] Back channel, discreet, to test the proposition, Alisyn, that, in fact, there is a diplomatic solution to this. I'm not entirely persuaded there is. But not to pursue it, as long as he isn't dead because frankly, we haven't really tried it.
[Camerota:] Yes, they're in. Look, North Korea is the one saying our nuclear program is not on the table. So how does that where does diplomacy start with that position?
[Miller:] I mean diplomacy needs urgency, but it also needs an outcome that's going to find a balance of interest. And frankly, on this one, there is nobody in this city, there is nobody in this country, there's nobody in this world right now that can reconcile the reality that this administration and its predecessor, particularly this one, wants denuclearization. They want to basically wish North Korea as a nuclear power away, and the fact is that is no going to happen. On the other hand, over time, five, ten years over time if, in fact, Kim gets what he wants, maybe it's possible to see a rollback. But right now, we're talking about diffusing and preempting the prospects of confrontation and maybe beginning to set of confidence building measures, some sort of freeze on production, testing, and some mutual, symmetrical freeze on the part of the United States on actions that Kim fears
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] in an effort to set this in a much more stable mode.
[Camerota:] But when you say what Kim Jong-un wants, what is that in a sentence?
[Miller:] You know, the guy is, what, in his 30s? Conceivably, he could be running this place for the next 50 years. Maybe he wants a modified China model. Maybe he wants to seek the economic development of North Korea. Maybe he wants the end to prospects of regime change and the environment in which he and look, I'm not painting I'm not working for this guy. This is a despotic regime
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] serial human rights abuser. Look what they did to that poor kid, Oliver Warmbier.
[Camerota:] Otto.
[Miller:] I mean that's not the point. The point is can we find a way to deescalate
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] and test the proposition that in fact, some modus operandi with the North Koreans can be found.
[Camerota:] OK. Aaron David Miller, we always appreciate talking to you. Thanks so much for being here.
[Miller:] Thank you, Alisyn.
[Weir:] Leakers are a threat to the democracy, so says the Trump White House. So then how do they explain President Trump retweeting a Fox News story containing leaked classified information? Our media experts are here to discuss next.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] As a Democratic arm of Congress who who, without question, without question, would take that step.
[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] One way one way or another.
[Tapper:] The other question is, would any Republicans in Congress raise their voice and support that effort?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, maybe Lindsey Graham would, because he has...
[Tapper:] Lindsey the same Lindsey Graham from South Carolina?
[Borger:] The same Lindsey who has said Mueller has to finish his investigation. But there are so many dominoes here really to think about. First of all, who's in charge? Is Whitaker now in charge of Rosenstein, who is in charge...
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] If he's the acting attorney general.
[Borger:] If he's the acting. And he is in charge I'm sorry in charge of Mueller and in charge of Mueller as a result? Because they were thinking of Whitaker to replace Rosenstein, remember, when Rosenstein, they all thought he was going to get fired because of what he said in a private meeting about the president? And so Whitaker was on deck. Whitaker was on deck. And so Rosenstein still remains, but if he has lost his authority, and he has expressed faith in Mueller, which he has publicly, will he resign? So is this one other way of decapitating the Justice Department? And then Congress also I mean, Schumer just said this, but there's been legislation that you got to protect the Mueller investigation. And you could get that passed in the House in five seconds now.
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] Does Rosenstein stay, number one? And if he's not overseeing the investigation and he resigns, if Whitaker oversees that investigation, remember, one possibility is that he fires Mueller, tries to end it. The president said something very different today. The other thing is that Whitaker could curtail, could limit the scope of the investigation, could start to weigh in on privilege questions that come up once the report is out. These are our big questions.
[Blitzer:] Let's not forget, Jeff Sessions, among Republicans in the Senate was very well-liked. He's a former us senator from Alabama. He was the first Republican senator who endorsed Donald Trump, and the way he was treated by the president after all those rallies in Alabama and all that it was a pretty sad moment. And a lot of Republicans in the Senate right now like Jeff Sessions, and they are not going to be happy the way he...
[King:] But here's a point, to Gloria's point, though. Are the post- election statements of those Republicans, do they match up with their pre-election statements? Lindsey Graham said Jeff Sessions might have to go at some point, but we have to leave Mueller alone. John Cornyn, the number two Senate Republican, just issued a statement saying Jeff Sessions is a great man, he has served great downgrade service. It says nothing about what to go what about the key investigations? John Cornyn had been one of those saying, everybody, calm down. Let Bob Mueller finish his work.
[Blitzer:] And Laura Jarrett, our Justice Department reporter, is now saying that Whitaker is expected to take charge of the Mueller...
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Look how prescient the words of Rod Rosenstein were just two weeks ago, or three weeks ago, when he was talking about how the American people should be assured that there is a lot of faith to be had in the Mueller investigation, in the probe, that it's not a witch-hunt. Perhaps he read the tea leaves far sooner than even Jeff Sessions did today. And notice that the line of succession normally would be, if Jeff Sessions leaves, he automatically becomes the acting attorney general, would never disrupt the actual line of investigation over the Mueller probe. Now that we have the president saying, I'm going to name a successor who would not normally be in the line of succession, he essentially is saying, given the op-eds that have been written before, given the notice of noticing that the president believes that this person will serve the country well, in light of Mueller's probe going too far, in Matthew Whitaker's own words, you have the writing on the wall. Now, the question will be, where does the report go? Because while people been have looking at the midterm elections, Mueller has not been sitting around twiddling his thumbs. He's been waiting to abide by the Justice Department's internal rule. He will not disrupt the election. So the expectation could be perhaps there's already things ready to go. Now, whether or not Whitaker will curtail or undermine the expose of what's already been done is a question. But he still is in a very powerful position.
[King:] Plus, the Southern District of New York. We're talking about Bob Mueller. A lot of the Trump finances, Trump Organization, the things Matthew Whitaker wrote about in that CNN op-ed, that's been handed off to the Southern District of New York. They cut the deal with Michael Cohen. They cut the deal with the chief financial officer of the Trump Organization. Those investigations that get to the president's company, the president's business, the president's associates are not Robert Mueller's anymore. They have been handed off. So that's another question for the new acting attorney general.
[Tapper:] I want to bring in a CNN legal commentator Jeffrey Toobin. Jeffrey, your response to this? What do you think this means, President Trump effectively firing the attorney general, and instead of having the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, act as acting attorney general, bringing in the chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker, who is on record supporting the president's interpretation of the unfairness of the Mueller probe?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Senior Legal Analyst:] Well, it means that the president is taking charge of the Mueller investigation. And the Senate is going to do exactly nothing about it. I mean, remember, we just had this election yesterday, where Trump Republicans did great and expanded their majority. So the idea that this Senate will exercise any sort of reluctance, hesitance, control over the president, I think is folly. I think this is a going to be a rubber stamp Senate. The fact that Jeff Sessions was is a former senator and liked by several of his colleagues I think is totally irrelevant at this point. Donald Trump cares deeply about limiting the authority of Mueller, if not firing him altogether. And I think he's taking steps right away to take charge of the Mueller investigation. And I don't think the Senate, this Senate, is going to do a thing about it.
[Tapper:] Very interesting. Thank you so much, Jeffrey Toobin. And one of the things, David Chalian, that's going to be an interesting test is what happens with this incoming Republican Senate. What happens? What will their reaction to this be? Will there be enough I guess if they have 55 votes seats, then the question is, will five of them, will six of them be willing to join with the Democrats to take action to protect Mueller? I don't know that that's actually needed. Maybe the House can just hire him if actually Mueller is fired, which hasn't happened. But are there five or six Republicans willing to buck President Trump? I don't think so.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] I don't know. And to your point earlier, you said you called this Senate Republican Conference Trumpier than before. So the numbers don't stack up that way, who these are. Now, does a Ben Sasse or a Mitt Romney all of a sudden come in and feel that they want to play...
[Chalian:] And Collins and Murkowski.
[Tapper:] That's four.
[Chalian:] Well, they may only be...
[Tapper:] That's not six.
[Chalian:] It's not six, but they may not need six. We don't know how the total numbers are going to go.
[King:] I'm sorry to interrupt, but McConnell has said let Bob Mueller finish his job. Post-election, answer. Speak up.
[Chalian:] He says it and he moves on from it. I really think if you listened to the president at the press conference today, the president of the United States to my ear was reasserting his belief that he has total control over the Mueller probe and that he can end it no matter what and, yes, he hasn't done it and he's let it play out.
[Blitzer:] He said he could fire any of them.
[Chalian:] But I think he was sending a message in that press conference today that was just about, this is up to me. I get to decide if the Mueller probe ends. And this is the now step that...
[Gregory:] Can I just add a contrarian thought? Maybe I'm just being naive here, which is do you really think I know the president likes all flights. Do you think he wants this fight?
[Tapper:] Sure.
[Borger:] Yes.
[Tapper:] Why not? Why would you not like it? He maintains he's done nothing wrong. It feeds into his sense of grievance. He doesn't there's...
[Gregory:] Right, but he invites a war. Like he said today, there's nothing to hide, let it play out, they won't find anything. He uses that as a bigger club before 2020 and in the run-up to 2020, more than if he completely cuts it off and has everybody on him.
[King:] But he does like fights. It does bait the Democrats. At this moment, where Nancy Pelosi tried to be calm and measured, now this happens an hour later. The progressives who want to impeach him are going to come running out, saying, see, there he goes?
[Dana Bash, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Time is up for Mueller. I was kind of leaning down in my corner on the phone. I just spoke with Rudy Giuliani, the president's lawyer on this issue, who said the following, because the obvious question was, is he going to shut it down? The answer was: "It's gone on this long. I can't imagine he would end it now." OK, that's the...
[Gregory:] Who said that?
[Bash:] Rudy Giuliani just said that to me, meaning, can't imagine that the president would end it now, which backs up what you just said. Let it play out. They claim and they insist that they have nothing to hide. We have been reporting that the president has or his lawyers, I should say, has questions, written questions, about whether or not there was collusion, limited to the time before the presidency started during the campaign. And we will see where that goes. Now, I also want to caveat, a big caveat. Not ending it, allowing it to play out is very different from a president guiding it and how it plays.
[Borger:] Well, that's the point.
[Bash:] And that is really important.
[Borger:] Well, that's what he's doing. That's what he's doing by replacing Sessions, putting in somebody who agrees with him on the Mueller investigation. We don't know what this means for the status of Rod Rosenstein. And so what he's doing is, he's being the puppet master here.
[King:] And it's at a time we know the question soon to come from Mueller to whoever his boss is at the Justice Department, what do I do with this Roger Stone piece of the investigation? I have had everyone before the grand jury. Here's my evidence. Roger Stone, was he or was he not coordinating with WikiLeaks? Did he pass on some heads-up to the Trump campaign that the Russians or at least that the WikiLeaks had, whether or not he knew they got them from Russia, had these e-mails and they were going to release them? And should we weigh in on when they released them? We don't know the answer to those questions, but we know Mueller's investigating them and we know the grand jury has been very busy. And we know he was waiting until just after the election bring it to the fore.
[Blitzer:] Jerry Nadler, the congressman from New York, who is the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, he is expected became the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, he just tweeted this in response to the president. "Americans must have answers immediately as to the reasoning behind Donald Trump removing Jeff Sessions from the Justice Department. Why is the president making this change, and who has authority over special counsel Mueller's investigation? We will be holding people accountable."
[Tapper:] We have an answer. Laura Jarrett has already told us that now Matthew Whitaker, the acting attorney general, has the supervisory role over the Mueller investigation, taking it away from Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general. So we have an answer to that. In terms of his reasoning, the president doesn't have to have reason. He can fire the attorney general if he wants. But can I just say one thing, which is I think we're missing the bigger picture here, which is after President Trump fired James Comey, I said that we are all going through a slow-motion, multi-month Saturday Night Massacre. When President Nixon fired, was it Leon Jaworski, the special counsel looking into Watergate, and there was a whole bloodbath that went through with the attorney general, Elliot Richardson, resigning, and then the deputy attorney general resigning, et cetera. And, ultimately, Robert Bork, I believe, was the one who fired Jaworski, that was called the Saturday Night Massacre, for people who don't remember. And it was the president trying to President Nixon at the time, get away from any sort of accountability from the Justice Department. President Trump has been doing that in slow motion. I'm not saying he's responsible for anything like what happened after Watergate. We have no idea what happened and what Mueller will turn up, and maybe he will turn up nothing. But it has been a slow-motion Saturday Night Massacre, starting with the firing of James Comey and now with the firing of the attorney general.
[Blitzer:] Hold on one moment. Laura Jarrett, our Justice Department reporter, is getting some more information now. What else are you learning, Laura?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Hey there, Wolf. I just wanted to update you. As we're learning more and more about how all of this went down this morning, I'm now told by a senior administration official that the president did not even call the attorney general to fire him or ask for his resignation himself. Instead, the chief of staff, John Kelly, did it. And that's the person that Sessions had his hand-delivered resignation letter delivered to just a short time ago. But it gives you just sort of a picture of even, at the end of the day, the president did not even call this attorney general to deliver this news. After all of the tweets, after all of the berating, he did not even do him that courtesy. Now, we're also told that Matthew Whitaker, Sessions' chief of staff, is expected to take over the Mueller probe. But, again, this is all very fast-moving. And as everyone has mentioned already, Whitaker has a checkered past when it comes to the Mueller investigation. He has not been quiet about times where he thinks that Mueller has overstepped, particularly in relation to the president's finances. And I'm also told there's no word yet on whether Mueller actually got a heads-up on whether Whitaker could potentially be his boss. So we wait to find out more information about how all of that will shake out and whether Mueller said anything to that news. As of right now, Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein are still here in the building Wolf.
[Tapper:] Very interesting.
[Blitzer:] Didn't even have the courtesy to call him up well and say, you know what, it's over.
[Tapper:] It's a grand irony of the Trump presidency that somebody who is best known for the catchphrase "You're fired" actually in real life never has the stomach to actually say it to anybody, whether it is James Comey or Omarosa or now the attorney general, Jeff Sessions.
[Borger:] Can I ask a question? Maybe, Dana, you know the answer to this, which is, could Democrats try and do something with like-minded Republicans in a lame-duck session over this?
[Bash:] You mean to try to get to get the legislation to protect Mueller?
[Borger:] Yes, I mean, is there is there anything that could be done if they're feeling...
[Bash:] Maybe.
[Tapper:] Theoretically, sure.
[Bash:] Theoretically, yes. There could be so.
[King:] Paul Ryan, on the way out the door in the middle of this, Jim Jordan, Steve Scalise, Kevin McCarthy... ... and House Republicans are going yes.
[Bash:] But bigger question is the Senate, because that's where this started. And Mitch McConnell has been resistant.
[Borger:] Exactly.
[Gregory:] I just think that you the question of whether this has been a slow-motion Saturday Night Massacre, again, I'm trying to think this through. What made the Saturday Night Massacre so surprising is that it was a massacre all at once.
[Tapper:] Right.
[Gregory:] The president could have shut this investigation down. He could have fired Rosenstein and had a basis to do it based on the reporting that came out of "The New York Times." We have there's a reason why he didn't do it or get rid of Sessions before now. Presumably, one of those reasons would be that he was worried about doing it before the midterms. So you have to believe he at least holds on to the idea that there is some risk, that if he were to actually completely shut down the investigation I think there's other things he could do that it would be a tremendous risk and could actually lead to his defeat in 2020. Again, it's a theory. I may be naive. You may be right. I'm just I'm wondering whether there is a level of caution in him on this that he has actually exercised, despite what he's done.
[Tapper:] I'm sorry. We will get to you in one second. The guardrails that have been there include Speaker Ryan, soon to be former Speaker Ryan, telling him not to do it, Mitch McConnell.
[Gregory:] Don McGahn.
[Tapper:] Don McGahn, who is gone. Jeff Sessions obviously advocating for his own job. John Kelly. He is surrounded by people telling him not to do it. And he's listened to them so far, but he has been getting rid of these guardrails.
[Gregory:] Can I make one point, before you say that, just because you would appreciate this?
[Borger:] Sure.
[Gregory:] But the thing about Sessions too that's amazing, first supporter in the Senate, such a hard-line guy, what he understood that I think the president often forgets about the presidency is that his job as attorney general was bigger than him, right? And it's bigger than the country. And he whether you like Sessions or not, he held up to that principle, and then he gets treated this way.
[Coates:] Jeff Sessions was politically emasculated from the very beginning. And I think, obviously, it was a protracted Saturday Night Massacre. But I will not give the president credit to think that perhaps he is just now throwing caution to the wind. He knows the midterms are over and the consequences to him politically are gone. But there is still hope, because Mueller anticipated this. Of course, he did, knowing that there was a chance that Rosenstein would not be his boss. So, what do you got, Mueller? Time is up for you to take a protracted approach to this at this point.
[Blitzer:] And a lot of us are wondering what Rosenstein himself might do now, after he's been humiliated, for all practical purposes.
[Coates:] Right.
[Blitzer:] Evan Perez, you're getting some new information?
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, that's right, Wolf. One of the big questions, obviously, given the fact that Matt Whitaker is or at least is expected to take over the investigation, the oversight of the Mueller investigation, the big question is whether the Justice Department Ethics Department and whether they the ethics people at the Justice Department tell him that because of some of the writings I think Laura Jarrett made some mention of some of the things he had previously written here at CNN whether that requires him to recuse himself. And then the president has the same recusal problem all over again. So one of the things I think in the next couple of days we're going to be watching for is whether the ethics officials at the Justice Department tell Matt Whitaker that because of his previous comments, including, by the way, in last year on Don Lemon's show, he made comments about how an acting attorney general could come in and essentially reduce the budget for the Mueller investigation as a way to starve it of the resources, and in that way make it shut down. So those are the comments that Matt Whitaker has made previously. He made them here on CNN. And those questions those comments are now going to come into play for the ethics officers at the Justice Department as they review whether he can indeed oversee the Mueller investigation.
[Blitzer:] Yes, let me just read one sentence from that article that he wrote, Matthew Whitaker, for CNN, CNN.com, Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far. And it's very significant because he's now going to be in charge of overseeing the Mueller investigation quote "It is time for Rosenstein, who is the acting attorney general for the purposes of this investigation, to order Mueller to limit the scope of his investigation to the four corners of the order appointing him special counsel."
[Tapper:] Evan Perez, let me just ask you. When Jeff Sessions sought advice from the ethics attorneys at the Department of Justice, and they told him he needed to recuse himself, that wasn't because of his opinion about the Russia investigation. It was because he had talked and met with Russian officials while he was a surrogate for the Trump campaign. That's that's not legally binding, though, right? That's advice from ethics lawyers. He doesn't have to take it.
[Perez:] Right. Well, the way the rules of the Justice Department are, Jake, is that, by and large, people accept that opinion, because if you don't accept it, then any decisions you make could be challenged, it becomes a legal problem for the department. So that's the reason why, when you seek that ethics opinion, you respect it. And that's why Jeff Sessions himself has said he had no choice but to accept that, because anything that he did in oversight of the investigation would then be questionable because of that. So, once you have the ethics opinion from the Justice Department, by and large, I mean, you generally have to accept it, simply because, again, it calls into question anything that you would touch that has to do with the investigation. And so that's reason why I think it's going to be very interesting to see whether or not the writings and the comments that Whitaker has made in the past, whether those are enough for the ethics officers there at the Justice Department to say that he needs to recuse. Keep in mind, it's just his role here or his comments. It's any appearance of bias that might come into play. So people at the Justice Department are required to avoid any appearance of bias. So that's the big question that I think is going to be decided by the ethics officers. The former Attorney General Eric Holder during the Obama administration just tweeted this. And I will read it: "Anyone who attempts to interfere with or obstruct the Mueller inquiry must be held accountable. This is a red line. We are a nation of laws and norms, not subject to the self-interested actions of one man." Very strong statement, Laura, from the former attorney general. But, Pamela Brown, you're getting more reaction at the White House as well.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, I can tell you, Wolf, that some senior officials here at the White House were caught by surprise with the timing of this announcement, with the president asking for the resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. And we're finding out more about how this all played out. In fact, a source telling my colleague Laura Jarrett it was the president's chief of staff, John Kelly, who called the attorney general this morning, the former attorney general, we should say he has now resigned, Jeff Sessions to tell him that he needed to submit his resignation letter. So, the president himself did not even call his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to ask for the resignation letter. This was all before the press conference that the president had today, where he was asked about Jeff Sessions and what would happen to him. And he sort of tap-danced around it, saying, essentially, I will get to that at a later date, but I didn't want to make any moves before the midterms. And now we know that this had already happened even before the press conference, and it is pretty significant. We know, Wolf, that he has had discussions with Matt Whitaker in the past, the now acting attorney general, about taking on this role, but at the time those in the White House told the president that there could be issues where he would have to recuse himself because of his past writings and his past comments, as Evan pointed out, his comments about the Mueller probe and suggesting that his budget should be suppressed. All of this, of course, will now be under scrutiny, and the White House knows that.
[Blitzer:] Yes, very as you were saying, Jake, the president, he may have had the phrase "You're fired" when he was a TV reality star, but in reality he doesn't like to personally fire anyone.
[Tapper:] No, we don't have any examples of him actually doing it himself. He always has somebody else do it for him, whether it's Comey or Omarosa or whomever. This is just another example of the president destroying basic norms when it comes to law and order. Earlier today, the president of the United States threatened Democrats if they intended to investigate his administration. He said that he would investigate them and he said and he thinks he's better at that game than they are, in a sense, in fact, threatening to use the FBI as a way of threatening Democrats who want to do their constitutional duty and investigate and conduct oversight. And now we have the president of the United States, because of Jeff Sessions' recusal on the Russia investigation, he fires him.
[Borger:] Can I just posit something here about the timing of this and why he did this? And, David, you spent your whole night looking at the exit polls. One exit poll that struck me was that Bob Mueller's popularity was underwater. And, remember, his popularity had kind of gone up and then it went down. And in the exit polls last night, where was he at?
[Chalian:] Forty-six disapprove, 41 approve of the way he handled the investigation.
[Borger:] Right, so his disapproval was higher. I'm sure the president noticed that poll on Bob Mueller. And clearly he's been planning to do this, because he could use the Vacancies Reform Act and put someone in there for a couple hundred days, and sort of go around go around the Congress and may feel that he has public opinion on his side right now when it comes to when it comes to Bob Mueller.
[Coates:] That's why Jeff Sessions is so witty in a way in this, because you're right about the Vacancy Reform Act, that he can appoint somebody if they resign for about 210 days, right, or until the next Congress lapses in January, or you could have the recess appointment. I think the Senate has been out for at least 10 days. It could qualify. But Jeff Sessions that actually you can't force the firing of the person. They have to actually truly resign. That's kind of the question in the law. So when Jeff Sessions talks about, at your request, I am submitting a resignation, he's almost signaling to his colleagues in the Senate and the House to say, remember your old friend and the rule of law? Well, we know the Vacancies Reform Act says I actually have to really resign. Otherwise, it would force the Saturday Night Massacre again. So it may be that was more than simply a comment on, I am not going of my own accord, but also a signaling of, excuse me, it's not just bucking the norm. There's a protocol in place under the act itself.
[Tapper:] Yes, I want to bring in Pamela Brown at the White House now. She has some new information Pamela.
[Brown:] I just spoke to a source close to the president who tells me that the idea of the new acting attorney general, Matthew Whitaker, ending or suppressing the Russia probe is not part of the plan as of now. The feeling here at the White House and among the president's legal team is, they want this to wrap up and they feel like they're on the homestretch. We know that Mueller's team has submitted questions to the president and they have been looking at those questions. And the expectation is that Robert Mueller will submit a report to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein about his findings before the end of the year. And so we're sort of in that window now where they expect this to wrap up. And the plan, as of now and, of course, as we know, it can all change is for there to be no interference in terms of the Russia probe and this new acting attorney general.
[Blitzer:] Yes, and I just want to point out that when he was interviewed by Don Lemon in July of 2017, Whitaker, who's now going to be in charge of the Russia investigation, said this: "So I could see a scenario where Jeff Sessions is replaced with a recess appointment, and that attorney general doesn't fire Bob Mueller, but he just reduces his budget to so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt."
[Tapper:] Well, we can't say we weren't warned.
[Blitzer:] Yes.
[Tapper:] I mean, he said it to Don Lemon and then, magically, President Trump has decided to put him as acting attorney general. So, I mean, this idea that sources and I'm sure Pamela's sources are believing what they're saying that that's not the plan as of right now to limit and curtail the Mueller investigation, I'm sure it isn't the plan, their plan, as of right now. But who knows what President Trump will do in 15 minutes?
[Chalian:] No doubt about it. Laura used the word witty. Is that you you described Jeff Sessions?
[Coates:] I tried. Clever?
[Chalian:] OK. Yes. I just want to highlight a piece of Mitch McConnell's statement on this, another glowing statement about Jeff Sessions, former colleague, dedicated public servant. Ends with this line of the statement. "I wish him well and look forward to working with him in any future endeavors." Doug Jones, the Democrat from Alabama, in for Jeff Sessions, is up for reelection in 2020. And wouldn't it be the sweetest revenge for Jeff Sessions to actually run for the Senate again, assuming that Alabama behaves like Alabama behaves politically, gets elected back to the United States Senate, and becomes a thorn in this president's side.
[King:] Will he get a MAGA rally in Alabama?
[Chalian:] It just is a really interesting line here that we may not be done from Senator McConnell's perspective with Jeff Sessions.
[Blitzer:] Well, let's get some more reaction from Capitol Hill right now. You make a good point, as you always do, David. Manu Raju and Sunlen Serfaty are standing by. They're both getting reaction. Sunlen, first to you. What are you hearing?
[Sunlen Serfaty, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, certainly, Wolf, on Capitol Hill, still digesting this information. This, of course, was something that it was talked about for many weeks and months leading up to Election Day. But I think certainly the timing is taking many people by surprise. The immediate reaction certainly coming from Democrats is, as we have been discussing on air, the concern over what this means, potentially, for Bob Mueller's investigation. And that's what we heard from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer just a few minutes ago. He says he finds the timing of this very suspect and he said that this certainly he hopes and believes that this would spark a constitutional crisis, he says, if this was just would limit or this is the first step in potentially pushing towards ending or limiting the Mueller investigation. Here's more of what he had to say
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] Oh. Well, I would say this. I have just heard the news, but I would say this. Protecting Mueller and his investigation is paramount. It would create a constitutional crisis.
[Serfaty:] Now, meantime, we all are also hearing from House Democrats too. Jerry Nadler, Congressman Nadler, he's the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, who stands to likely indeed be that chair next January when that new Congress is sworn in. He said he wants to hold the administration accountable here. He wants to know, of course, why the specific change and specifically who has authority over the special counsel? And, certainly, as Congress continues to react, the discussion very quickly, very likely will turn to what legislation potentially can be put in place and can be proposed again to potentially protect the special counsel? And you will remember that this is something that a bipartisan group of senators brought before Mitch McConnell earlier in the year. And he said at that point that he did not think this was necessary, so he was not going to bring such legislation to the floor back to you guys.
[Blitzer:] Sunlen, stand by. Manu Raju, you're also getting some reaction up on Capitol Hill. What are you hearing?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Well, Republicans are actually meeting this news with a collective shrug of sorts, saying that they expected this happen, and not raising concerns about the prospects of taking up a new attorney general nominee, someone they probably they have to deal with the new Congress, when the Republicans will have more seats in the Senate. Now, for weeks before, Republicans had been raising serious concerns about the prospect of removing Jeff Sessions.

[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn News Stream Show:] You're watching "News Stream." These are your world headlines. U.S. authorities haunting a serial bomb maker are examining a mail facility near Miami, Florida. All 10 pipe bombs sent to prominent Democratic figures, CNN and others went through the U.S. mail system. Investigators are treating the incident as domestic terrorism. In China, at least 14 children have been wounded in a knife attack at a school. Video circulating online shows the victims being rushed to a local hospital. Police say a woman stormed into the school and stabbed kindergartens as they return from morning exercises at a nearby park. It happened in the city of Chongqing. The suspect is now in custody. Cathay Pacific Airlines is under fire for waiting seven months to reveal a massive data breach. It affected more than nine million passengers. The airline says back in March, hackers accessed personal data including names, passport numbers, birthdays. Some credit card numbers were hacked. No passports were compromised. China is denying a New York Times's report that claims it is listening in U.S. President Trump's phone calls. Mr. Trump reportedly uses unsecured phones against official advice to make personal calls. In a tweet, he says this, that the Times wrote a boring article that was so incorrect he did not have time to point out the errors. The report alleges both China and Russia routinely listen to the president's conversations this way. A spokeswoman for China's foreign ministry dismissed the claim of Chinese's eavesdropping as fake news and appear to offer some cybersecurity advice.
[Hua Chunying, Deputy Director, Foreign Ministry Information Department Of The People's Republic Of China:] Reading this news report makes me feel that some people in the United States really are sparing no efforts to contend for the Oscars for best screenplay. For those who fear iPhones are being hacked, Huawei mobile phones can be good alternative.
[Lu Stout:] Cliche, OK, but are the U.S. president's phone habits a threat to national security? Earlier, CNN U.S. security analyst Samantha Vinograd spoke to my colleagues Amara Walker and Michael Holmes.
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn U.s. Security Analyst:] When I worked at the White House, all of our personal cellphones were locked away in a special box whenever we were at the White House. And President Obama had a very specific government-issued cellphone that didn't really have a whole lot of services on it, so that he would minimize a risk of a foreign intelligence service being able to access what he was doing and who he was talking to. This president since day one has worn his Twitter heart on his sleeves which really signals to foreign intelligent services what he is up to, what gets under his skin, and what makes him tick. And if he is using his personal cellphone, he is literally opening up the line to highly advanced foreign intelligence services from Russia and China, which of according to his own director of national intelligence, have the most advanced counter-intelligence capabilities than anyone in the world.
[Lu Stout:] Insight there from CNN U.S. security analyst Samantha Vinograd. Google has addressed the harassment allegations detailed in "The New York Times" article. In an e-mail to employees, top Google executives including its CEO stressed that the firm is "dead serious" about providing a safe and inclusive workplace. This comes after "The New York Times" published a report saying that Google stayed silent about sexual misconduct allegations against three executives over the past decade. One of them, the creator of Android, Andy Rubin, who left the company in 2014 with the reported $90 million exit package. A shipwreck thousands of years old in a virtually perfect condition is captivating archaeologists around the world. Why it is so uniquely well- preserved and what researches have learned about it. That's next.

[Whitfield:] The special counsel says there's a lot, a lot of line rather going on in the Russian investigation. We are getting the specifics of the lies that led to the unraveling of a plea deal for President Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Robert Mueller says Manafort lied about five major issues after agreeing to cooperate, including his contact with the Trump administration officials as recently as this spring. With me now is CNN politics reporter Jeremy Herb and political reporter Daniel Lippman. Good to see you both. So Jeremy, you first, so specifics on the kind of lying that may have been taking place in this sentencing document.
[Jeremy Herb, Cnn Politics Reporter:] Yes, that's right, Fred. The Mueller document lays out five separate lies that he accuses Paul Manafort of committing after agreeing to cooperate with the special counsel earlier this year. Among the most significant, the interactions with Konstantin Kilimnik who is a Russian national that prosecutors have said has ties to Russian intelligence services. He is also close to Manafort and the two of them were involved in, you know, what the prosecutor said was witness tampering earlier this year, which eventually sent Manafort to prison before he was convicted of charges. In addition to that, we have seen the accusations that Manafort lied about his contacts with White House and administration officials. Mueller says that there are multiple contacts that Manafort had with officials in the administration including in February and in May of 2018. And Mueller has the text messages he says that show these engagements happening. Now what we don't know is who Manafort was talking to and why. And more importantly, why did he lie about those contacts to the special counsel.
[Whitfield:] Right. And Daniel, I mean, lying says, you know, you just don't want to share perhaps the context of the discussion. But I mean what could they possibly have been talking about, Manafort and the White House? Any White House officials? Was it, you know, potentially this is what they asked me, this is what I told them, this is the story. I mean, what do you think?
[Daniel Lippman, Reporter/co-author Of Playbook, Politico:] It is almost like they were trying to get on the same page. And especially for someone who just got convicted of ten felonies or pled guilty to some of them, the fact he continued to lie to Mueller's folks is just extraordinary. Does he not realize the amount of prosecutorial firepower? This is the best in the business going against, you know, the Trump team. And so you could see a scenario where, you know, Manafort reached out to White House officials when he knows that certain members of this people are going to be witnesses against him or, you know, talk about their interactions with him. And so, if they say if he goes to them and says, well, don't say I talked to you, you know, you can see that happening.
[Whitfield:] And Jeremy, you know, are these contacts between the White House and Manafort, part of a larger pattern perhaps?
[Herb:] Well, it's interesting. This wasn't the only contacts with White House officials that we learned about yesterday. In the Michael Cohen filing, there's also a separate note that Cohen, part of his cooperation with the Mueller team, was that he had described contacts that he had among officials close to the White House in 2017 and 2018. Again, we don't know what that is getting at and what Mueller is getting at. But you know, the fact this was in both filings suggest there probably is something still there involving these contacts with some of the targets of the Mueller probe.
[Whitfield:] All right, Daniel and Jeremy, thanks so much. I'm going to leave there for now. We have got this breaking news.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Whitfield:] Particularly tumultuous times this White House not just dealing with the sentencing documents but now this information into us that President Trump says chief of staff John Kelly will leave at the end of the year. CNN's Boris Sanchez is at the White House for us. These comments coming before the President is to board air force one there.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right, Fred. The President departing the White House just now on his ways to Andrews air force base to depart on air force one headed to Philadelphia to the ArmyNavy game. The President began his comments to the press talking about heading to that game. He's going to flip the coin there. He also talked about Mark Mille, his new pick to lead the Joint Chiefs of Staff which he announced this morning on twitter. Then he answered some questions from the press about the Russia investigation. The President was asked point-blanc if he directed Michael Cohen to make payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. Remember that in the special filing yesterday by the special counsel, it reveals individual one told Michael Cohen to effectively pay off these women as part of the 2016 campaign to keep a sex scandal from preventing President Trump to get to the White House. Any way you read that filing, individual one is clearly President Trump. But he denies ever having directed Michael Cohen to do that. Something that could potentially be a felony. After that, I asked the President specifically if he was aware Paul Manafort was still having conversations with administration officials as recently as May. He ignored my question, Fred, and moved on. That is another revelation coming from the filing by the Robert Mueller yesterday that Manafort as recently as May while he was under indictment was still communicating with the senior administration officials. And lastly, as you noted, the President making the announcement as we've been speculating in recent weeks that chief of staff John Kelly will be departing at the end of the year. He did not state who his successor will be. But sources here at the White House have indicate that the President is likely going to select Nick Ayers. He is currently the vice President's chief of staff Fred.
[Whitfield:] OK. And so, "Politico" Daniel Lippman, I want to bring you back in to the equation here as you are hearing this reporting from Boris. While the President didn't make any announcements on who might be next, but there's a suspicion it might be the vice president's chief of staff Nick Ayers. What do you make of this potentially at the end of this year that the President says John Kelly is out?
[Lippman:] Yes, just remember that this is an administration
[Whitfield:] And by the way, we are looking at marine one heading to Andrews air force base before the Presidents gets off the Marine one and then gets on air force one. So go ahead.
[Lippman:] Yes, there was promising that John Kelly would be here until 2020. And last I checked, next year is 2019. I think there were a lot of people that were concerned that the relationship between Trump and Kelly had really frayed over the last few months. And they view Nick Ayers as a good choice because he has sharp political instincts. He is a guy who can lead Trump into the, you know, next year which is going to be a huge fight with Democrats in control of Congress. But we should say that there are a number of White House colleagues who might quit because of Ayers. He doesn't have that many internal, you know, friends in the building except for people like Jared and Ivanka and Mike Pence. So, he has friends that matter but some of his White House colleagues view him as sharp elbow.
[Whitfield:] Right. I was going to say in Trump's world that really may be the only thing that matters. That you know, he has an affinity for the person and that his daughter and son-in-law also endorsed him. So let's listen now to President Trump. This is at the White House before he got on to marine one which you just saw there. Let's listen in.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm going now to the ArmyNavy game. I think we are going to flip a coin. And I know both teams are going to do great. General Mark Mille as you know was just appointed the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to be determined date a little bit later in the year. They usually quite a bit
[Trump:] Go ahead. Yes, go ahead. No, no, no.
[Unidentified Male:] John Kelly
[Trump:] Say it.
[Unidentified Male:] Does John Kelly still have a job?
[Trump:] John Kelly will be leaving. I don't know if I can say retiring, but he is a great guy. John Kelly will be leaving at the end of the year. We will be announcing who will be taking John's place. It might be on an interim basis. I will be announcing that over the next day or two. But John will be leaving at the end of the year. He has been with me almost two years now as you know between the two positions. So we will probably going to see him in a little while. But John Kelly ready, are you ready? So John Kelly will be leaving towards the end of the year, at the end of the year. And I appreciate his service very much. Thank you. Thank you all.
[Whitfield:] Very short there. Boris Sanchez at the White House there. So the President, you know, addressing a few things. Like you mentioned his, you know, the chair of the joint chiefs. Mueller actually saying he is happy about the way things are going. The way we are reading it. It's turning around very nicely. But that, you know, he really was kind of bearing the lead on that with his chief of staff who is on his way out, John Kelly. It had been reported, Boris, that they hadn't been speaking recently. That the relationship was rather tenuous. What are your sources telling you about their relationship and how it has crumbled or how this has led to how their relationship has led to this demise that is leaving?
[Sanchez:] Well, Fred, it's gone through a number of tasks. As was noted earlier, John Kelly had been asked to stay on as chief of staff through 2020. Now it appears he is going to be leaving before the end of the year. As you recall, when he first came in, he was replacing Reince Priebus who many in the administration felt was too lax on the President and didn't do enough to try to rein in who was seeing the President and when. There was sort of an open door to the oval office and many felt that contributed to what was perceived as chaos within the White House. When chief of staff Kelly came in, he installed new rules about who could see the President and when. He tried to tamp down on leaks by preventing staffers from taking their cell phones into certain parts of the White House. They would have to leave them in lockers and so forth. But ultimately, Kelly faced a number of controversies himself with comments that he made about people enrolled in DACA as well as the controversial phone call the President had with the family of sergeant David Thompson. Recalled that he passed away in Niger and there was a dispute between his family and the President over specifically what was said. And ultimately, John Kelly tried to defend the President. That got him in hot water as well. Over time what we have seen is essentially a reversion to that sort of chaos that we saw early on in the administration where John Kelly's power was reduced within the administration. There were reports of him having shouting matches with the national security adviser John Bolton and continuously threatening to resign a number of times. Ultimately, it appears their relationship frayed and now John Kelly is on the way out. Nick Ayers is as I noted previously, who many here at the White House have pointed to as a potential successor. There is some friction between he and others within the administration. He really built rapport with the President through lunches that the President would have with vice President Mike Pence. Sources tell CNN at one specific lunch late last year, the President invited Ayers and John Kelly in to be sort of a team of people having lunch and that continued throughout and that's how Ayers continued to build a rapport with the President. Ayers, of course, is a very distinguished political background, having worked for a number of prominent Republicans including Sonny Perdue of Georgia. He also work for the Republican governors association. He brings a pedigree of political awareness that many have complained to the President John Kelly does not have. That will likely serve the President going into 2020 if he, in fact, does replace the current chief of staff, Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right. I also want to bring into the conversation "RELIABLE SOURCES" anchor Brian Stelter. So Brian, the President, you know, boarding air force one there. He is on the way to Philadelphia for the ArmyNavy game where he will be, you know, doing the coin toss. This is his opportunity also to change the subject. While he did address Mueller, he also dismissed it as you know it's turning around nicely. He doesn't seemed threatened all by it. But now that he has mentioned his chief of staff who has been with him for a couple of years now, close to a couple of years now. John Kelly on the way out this year. What signals is the President sending?
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] I think he's trying to change the subject, but he is changing something from one bad story to another bad story. This amount of turmoil is never good for any White House. And even if the President enjoys drama and infighting and he enjoys this kind of turmoil and turnover, it's not good for the country than if it might good for the President or he might think it is good in the short term. Look, I think the big headline here is that John Kelly was expected to stay on until 2020. That's what Trump said he wanted. He wanted the chief of staff to stay on for a while longer. All of a sudden, that's not happening anymore. And our colleague Kaitlan Collins reporting was spot on. She said yesterday morning this was going to happen soon. The question is how soon. Collins said in the coming days we would see John Kelly leaving and sure enough, here we are with a confirmation from the president. Two details from Kaitlan's reporting I think were really important. First was that, she said Kelly and Trump had stopped speaking in recent days. The two men were no longer speaking. Obviously, you can't be the chief of staff if you are not speaking to the boss. And number two, Kaitlan pointed out on twitter that Trump is allowing Kelly a graceful exit. That is pretty rare in the trump administration. Maybe at some point down the line Kelly will be called dumb as rocks or whatever she said about Tillerson yesterday. But for now at least trump is trying -.
[Whitfield:] It depends on what he says publicly, right?
[Stelter:] Exactly, right. For the moment, at least, they are departing on positive terms so that might be a positive sign. But overall, it's never positive to see this much turnover in a White House. It is rare to see another chief of staff change so soon in the first term of the presidency.
[Whitfield:] OK. Political reporter Daniel Lippman also back with us. So Daniel, what message does this send that this relationship that at first between John Kelly and the President, you know, seems so great, and now, you know, no speaking terms and an exit?
[Lippman:] Yes, it's kind of a reminder what people have told me which is, you know, working for the President almost never leads to good things for you. And so, while it may be great to have this big White House job or be the secretary of state, inevitably things turn on a coin. And things go south. And that's what we see with almost every person that has worked for Trump. Paul Manafort, he, you know, has ten felonies no. Michael Cohen, he is facing, you know, three to four years in jail. Reince Priebus, you know, his reputation, you know, took a little bit of a hit when he was chief of staff.
[Whitfield:] With that precedence then, you wonder why anyone would now say yes to an opportunity.
[Lippman:] It's hard to just get a job in the White House or it's hard to find people in the White House who would face such a harsh working environment. And so that's just the case with Trump world. Now it's very tough to attract top talent. Nick Ayers is kind of the only one left standing who would want that job and is trusted by the family.
[Whitfield:] So what do you know about Nick Ayers and why he would? I mean, we don't know he said yes. But you know, that the President did say it. We know reportedly that he would likely be the one. But then why would Nick want that job?
[Lippman:] I think Nick is a very ambitious person. And he is also built a rapport with Mike Pence that has led him to this point. And he feels he is a loyal Republican. And so he feels he can make a difference. And he might be the most successful chief yet. We don't know. But it also depends on what his priorities are. He doesn't have a huge background in policy. And so, that's a question some Republicans are wondering if he wants to build some policy, wins next year with a Democratic House. Does Nick have those relationships on the Democratic side of the aisle? Probably not.
[Whitfield:] OK. And Brian, you have something more to add on John Kelly?
[Stelter:] Yes. I think it's interesting to think back four months ago, the end of July, that is when Kelly announced to his entire senior staff that the President asked him to stay on through 2020 and that he agreed to stay on through 2020. Because back in over the summer, it was one of these periods of rumors that Kelly was about to leave, you know, there had been rumors about that all along the time of Kelly's tenure as chief of staff.
[Whitfield:] Yes. There had been like some really loud exchanges that precipitated that kind of brand.
[Stelter:] Yes. But back then, at least at the end of July, Kelly said yes, I'm going to stay on through 202. The President might have asked me to stay even longer but I'm committing through 2020. So you have to wonder what has led to this blowup now. Well, one answer may be our colleague's reporting yesterday about Mueller, about the fact that Kelly did speak to the Robert Mueller investigators who were looking into obstruction issues obstruction of justice by the President. That could be one of many factors. But what we know from our colleague Kaitlan Collins is that the two men did stop speaking recently. And obviously, the chief of staff job is one of the most important unelected roles in the United States. He has to decide who goes in, who goes out. So for the two men not to be on speaking terms means this was going to have to come to an end. And it will be interesting to hear Kelly's version of events because right now Trump is being relatively kind to Kelly on the way out.
[Whitfield:] Right. And everyone always seems to be eventually talk I mean, Rex Tillerson. It may take a few months, but they eventually express themselves.
[Stelter:] I always think back to what Reince Priebus said, right. Reince Preibus, the first chief of staff, he famously said to an author, whatever you have heard, whatever you think, it's always worse. It was 50 times even wilder than you can imagine. So Kelly tried to bring order. Kelly tried to bring some sort of structure. Some folks thought of Kelly as an adult trying to supervise. But we started the year, Fred, with the book "Fire and Fury," Michael Wolfe's book. That was the first week of January. All about the chaos in the White House. And here we are now in December at the end of the year once again seeing a period of turmoil.
[Whitfield:] Playing it out now in real time. OK, Brian, Boris, and Daniel, thank you so much. As air force there one takes off on the way to Philadelphia. The President will be doing the coin toss there at the ArmyNavy game. We have much more straight ahead after this.

[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] U.S. officials have been negotiating their release. In fact when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went to North Korea over the Easter weekend as CIA Director, he had mentioned and this has been going on for some time. But U.S. officials very clear they don't want to kind of tie that to the whole issue of denuclearization. They feel these three men should be released on their own. But today the State Department saying while it would be welcomed news if they were released they can't verify those reports.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn:] It seems it could I mean if you say eminent to stay close to the Twitter feed is what it sounds like right now. Elise thank you so much. We'll keep you updated on that. Also coming up for us, no more than two to three hours and he'll need all the questions submitted in advance. Those are some of the demands Rudy Giuliani is making for an interview between President Trump and Special Counsel Robert Mueller. But will Robert Mueller agree to the conditions?

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington. Thanks very much for joining us. Up first, five days and counting until the midterm elections and the candidates are bringing out some of the big guns. The vice president, Mike Pence, and Oprah Winfrey, they're holding they've been holding dueling campaign events. In Georgia, Oprah is campaigning on behalf of Democrat Stacey Abrams in the race for governor. The vice president is stumping for Abrams' opponent, Republican candidate Brian Kemp. Polls suggest the candidates are deadlocked in a very tight race. Our correspondent Kaylee Hartung is joining us. She's at the Abrams event in Marietta, Georgia. Kaylee is joining us on the phone right now. Kaylee, Stacey Abrams campaigning to become the first black female governor in the history of the United States. How much of a factor is that in Oprah's decision? We just heard her live here on CNN speaking on her behalf.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, well, Wolf, when Oprah took the stage, she told Georgia voters, you're on the precipice of an historic election. And that is a word that so many people throughout this state have used to describe the situation that Georgia voters find themselves in, two candidates on polar opposite ends of the spectrum, both trying to appeal to their respective bases. Oprah took the stage and said she is a registered independent voter, an independent woman who has earned the right to be what she wants, when she wants. She said nobody asked her to come here. Nobody paid her to come here. She said she took it upon herself when she saw Stacey Abrams, the message she was sharing from Georgia, and from the way she was responding to so much that she encountered on the campaign trail. Oprah said she was impressed by this woman and her message and she wanted to come here to ensure Georgia voters understood she stood beside Stacey Abrams. Oprah so rare make an appearance on the campaign trail. We saw her in 2008 support Barack Obama. She endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016 but never went on the trail. Listen to more from Oprah in front of this crowd in Cobb County.
[Oprah Winfrey:] This is what I came here to tell you. I am an independent woman. And I have earned the right to do exactly what I want to do. I have earned the right to do what I want to do when I want to do it. I've earned the right to think for myself and to vote for myself. And that's why I am a registered independent because I don't want any party and I don't want any kind of partisan influence telling me what decisions I get to make for myself.
[Blitzer:] All right, so there you have Oprah campaigning for Stacey Abrams, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Georgia. The vice president, Mike Pence, says he's not intimidated by Oprah's star power. Here's what he told a crowd of Kemp supporters just moments ago.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] I'd like to remind Stacey and Oprah and Will Ferrell, I'm kind of a big deal, too. And I got a message. I got a message for all of Stacey Abrams' liberal Hollywood friends. This ain't Hollywood. This is Georgia.
[Blitzer:] Meantime, critics are calling it perhaps the most racist campaign video in decades. And they're accusing President Trump of fear mongering only days before the midterm election. The president posted the video on his Twitter page that goes out to about 55 million followers and shows a Mexican man convicted of killing two California deputies while in the country illegally. And he threatens to kill more police. The video accuses Democrats of plotting to allow him and other dangerous criminals into the United States.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't
[Blitzer:] All right, let's bring in our legal analyst Laura Coates, CNN political analyst Ryan Lizza, and our chief political correspondent Dana Bash. Dana, tell us a little bit more about this video. It's not a campaign ad.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] It's not.
[Blitzer:] They're not paying it. But it's obviously getting a lot of exposure.
[Bash:] That's right, not a campaign ad. Not a video done by the campaign in particular. And, no money behind it, which kind of tells you everything you need to know about the understanding that the president has of the power of his Twitter feed. It is a message that is unmistakable. It is a message that is it's not even there aren't even racist under tones. There are racist overtones. I mean that's just the way it is. And it really is sort of the pinnacle of this strategy that has been incredibly transparent, that the president and several of the Republicans actually on the ballot have been going after, which is to try to gin up the base by scaring people, in some cases, frankly in most cases, unnecessarily so. There it's the ultimate scare tactic. So we're going to wait to see, you know, if any of the actual Republicans on the ballot come out and denounce this. Unless I've missed it, I haven't heard any of them do that, which is very noteworthy. I've called a couple and the comment was no comment.
[Blitzer:] No comment on this really, you know, awful video.
[Bash:] Correct.
[Blitzer:] Laura, what went through your mind when you watched it?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Two words, Willie Horton. That came to mind from the 1988 Democratic versus Dukakis versus George H.W. Bush. We had a political action campaign who was geared towards trying to have race baiting fear mongering talking about the weekend furlough program in Massachusetts that actually Governor Dukakis was a fan of and how the person was able to get out on the weekend and committed an assault and a rape of a white woman. It was used to stoke fears. It resonated with the birth of a nation, frankly, and the KKK propaganda. Now you have a different tactic, not one about black Americans and about the about a black male, now you have the idea, using that same level of race-based fear mongering being used towards people who are undocumented persons in this country. The person who was featured in the particular advertisement, we'll say, was somebody who was convicted of having killed two California deputies and was the antithesis of the president's law and order society and using this notion of who is coming here and who else Democrats let in. So I looked back and had to check my calendar for a second to figure out what year I was in. And it's very clear that, as Dana talks about, it's not about just the covert methods, it's about these overt uses of trying to show that the Democrats are not law-abiding or law and order and that the president's party and the Republicans are instead. And you see this from time to time going on and on and it was very disturbing to see.
[Blitzer:] You know, it's you look at the rest of the video, and I don't even want to play it and give free advertising to those out there
[Ryan Lizza, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] But if you look at the rest of it, you see hordes of invaders coming into
[Lizza:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] Threatening to come into the United States, tearing down walls and fences and threatening the American people. It's really pretty awful.
[Lizza:] IT's pretty awful. And, two things. One is, Trump himself is nationalizing this election around issues that he personally cares about. I don't think there was a lot of coordination with the Senate and House campaigns on this thing, right?
[Bash:] No.
[Lizza:] This is this is Trump's issue. And he uses the issue in a way that even a lot of people in his own party wouldn't use it, although they don't often speak up if they disagree. I think the other thing that is just sort of amazing is, these two issues, crime and illegal immigration, are not actually issues that are at peak problems, right? The crime rate has been going in '88, crime was a pretty serious problem and Democrats really did have a vulnerability on that issue, as controversial as that ad was.
[Bash:] That's right.
[Lizza:] We know that since then violent crime has been on a decades long decline. There was a little bit of dip up in some cities. And, two, illegal immigration is not a massive problem the way it has been in certain years. So Trump's ability essentially to manufacture an issue, to create a sense that people are coming to harm you and that people that non- white people are coming to harm you and playing up this, you know, this invading force that's, you know, in Central America, not even close to the U.S. border, his power to demagogue that issue is remarkable and it's not new. In his first speech he gave in 2000 in the summer of 2015, he called Mexican immigrants he broadly described Mexican immigrants as rapists. So he's going back right back to where he started.
[Bash:] And one of the this is one of the big challenges, I'm sure you'd agree, in figuring out how to report and cover on Donald Trump.
[Lizza:] Yes.
[Bash:] And the reason is because he is the president of the United States.
[Lizza:] How much oxygen
[Bash:] He does have millions and millions of followers on Twitter, the medium that he used to send this video out. But how much oxygen, as you said, do you give? Because he is so transparent in what he cares about, this issue, the fact that he wants to demagogue on it, whether he believes it or not, you know, he wants it to be part of the conversation. And so this is him very transparently making this part of the conversation with a distraction. And so what we're doing is talking about it, but putting it in context. But even that, you know, takes away from the actual issues that a lot of people are talking about.
[Coates:] And if I may say, he's the art he's the master of conflating two topics. The video, I know we're not showing the full thing, talks on the one hand about an undocumented person who's been deported and returned to commit a crime in the United States of America, against an unidentified, geographic
[Blitzer:] You know, they announced the president is going to be giving a speech later this afternoon at the White House on immigration.
[Lizza:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] And our Sarah Westwood is reporting, he's expected to announce what would be a significant change in the asylum laws of the United States. It would it would seek to require migrants to request asylum at legal points of entry, prevent them from claiming asylum if they are caught crossing the border illegally. Under the current system, migrants can request asylum once they are on U.S. soil.
[Lizza:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] In fact, we checked with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and we asked the question, who is eligible to apply for asylum in the United States and the official answer this is from the U.S. government you may apply for asylum if you are at a point of entry or in the United States. You may apply for asylum regardless of your immigration status and within one year of your arrival in the United States. So this would be a significant change.
[Lizza:] So, again, he's making things harder for the most vulnerable outside the country. And unlike most previous presidents recent presidents, he does not see America at or want America to be seen by the rest of the world as a place that is welcoming the most disadvantaged, right? And, you know, I was talking to a Democratic congressman about this, this week about how they were just like we in the media have to figure out how to respond and cover this stuff. Democrats are constantly there's so many outrages to them. They have to figure out how to do it. And he was saying with Trump raising these issues, what it forces Democrats to do is constantly talk about justice issues, right? The rights of the vulnerable. People seeking asylum, right? Those aren't people who are necessarily the voters they want to they want to get out, but they Democrats are constantly forced to talk about this other set of issue that a lot of voters they want to speak to are not really captivated by or interested in, right? It forces Trump to change the conversation and for Democrats to switch topics.
[Blitzer:] The president, Dana, clearly thinks this is five days before the election
[Bash:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] A huge winning issue for him.
[Bash:] Right. And look, his political instincts, his raw, political instincts, have been right for years, since he got into this race and people thought it was a joke. His political instincts and the way that he markets them and himself as part of it have been right. But I also as we're on the precipice of this election, it's kind of hard to wrap your mind around. It was only six years ago that the Republican National Committee, following the 2012 election, when Mitt Romney did so poorly with Hispanic voters, six years ago that the RNC came out with this autopsy and said, we have to do a better job of talking to and talking about Hispanic voters.
[Lizza:] Yes.
[Bash:] That was only six years ago. It seems like 600 years ago.
[Lizza:] Yes. And Trump has figured out, just as Republicans during the worst days of the red scare and communism, to demagogue that issue, just as some Republicans during the worst days of the threat from al Qaeda could demagogue that issue. Trump has seized on something new and using non-white immigrants as the issue to demagogue.
[Blitzer:] Ryan, thanks very much. Laura, Dana, guys, thank you. With just five days left until the midterms, President Trump ensures his party there's nothing to fear.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, I think the blue wave is dead, frankly.
[Blitzer:] But new poll numbers just in say otherwise. A closer look at the very close Senate races in Tennessee and Florida. Plus, chilling new details behind the mysterious deaths of two sisters found on Manhattan's waterfront. Officials now say they were alive when they entered the water.

[Whitfield:] Republican women only make up 10 percent of Congress and while a record number of women are running for election this year, most are doing so on the Democratic ticket. So what's it going to take to get more red state women on Capitol Hill? Here's CNN's Kyung Lah.
[Kyung Lah, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] 5:30 a.m., a single digit dawn in South Dakota. Congresswoman Kristi Noem's daily ritual. The path to make history. Running to be the first woman governor of South Dakota. [voice-over]: The one thing that Washington is known for is the smoky bar, the late night drinks. For you that just doesn't work.
[Rep. Kristi Noem , South Dakota:] Well, I mean, I'm married. It's not good testimony for me to be sit in a bar late at night when my family is all the across the country. I sort of thinking it about. How can I get to have interaction with other members? And for it was the gym. We exercise together, but we talk about legislation. My name is Danny, how are you doing, huh?
[Lah:] Breaking the norm, hardly new for the conservative Congresswoman born, raised and still rancher on the 6,000 acre family plot.
[Noem:] We have had cattle and horses and raised our family here. So we'll always be here.
[Lah:] Noem made the leap to state lawmaker then in 2010 defeated the popular incumbent to go to Congress. Despite her success, this is what she heard as she announced her historic run for governor.
[Noem:] I had a few people tell me that maybe I didn't have the right body parts to be a governor. So
[Lah:] Really?
[Noem:] you know, there's just Yes. But, you know, it's a small minority of folks that we just have to change their perspective and I said, you know, that's unfortunate but we're going to win. You all have come alongside me over and over and over again. How are you doing?
[Lah:] Noem is as uncommon here as she is in Washington. Republican women make up about 10 percent of Congress. The unprecedented surge of women running for office this year has been almost completely among Democrats.
[Rep. Ileana Ros-lehtinen , Florida:] It is sad, it is depressing and the numbers are getting worse.
[Lah:] Republican Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen has represented South Dakota for nearly three decades. She says gender diversity is an afterthought for House leadership. She's retiring this year, leaving with this ominous message for her party.
[Ros-lehtinen:] Just stop with the name calling. It turns women off.
[Lah:] Do you look at the White House because
[Ros-lehtinen:] Absolutely. The rhetoric coming out of the White House is recruiting tool for liberal women to come out and counter that. And as long as we are a party that's seen as homogenous, not heterogeneous, a party that doesn't invite minorities and women, we're not going to be a welcoming party for the future. The growth for GOP women in elective office is at the local level and at the state capitols
[Lah:] Why this year are a record number of women saying that they can run in government?
[Noem:] You know, I think it's all about not missing an opportunity. Timing is everything in politics.
[Lah:] Congresswoman Noem's time may be now. She is regarded as the front-runner, pledging to govern with the innovation of a national lawmaker and a transparency of a local farmer.
[Noem:] This is about a million miles away from
[D.c. Lah:] This is far.
[Noem:] This is I live two totally different lives, that is very true.
[Lah:] You prefer a tractor to an airplane?
[Noem:] I do. You have control over your own destiny.
[Lah:] A path she hopes to forge at home. Kyung Lah, CNN, Castlewood, South Dakota.
[Whitfield:] All right, President Trump in Ohio right now. Will he speak to reporters as the chaos inside his administration and his legal team grows?

[Harlow:] After President Trump's response to the deadly violence in Charlottesville, the tone of late night has shifted dramatically to outrage and condemnation. Watch.
[Jimmy Fallon, Late-night:] We all need to stand against what is wrong, acknowledge that racism exists and stand up for what is right and civil and kind.
[Seth Meyer, Late-night:] President Trump this afternoon gave a press conference that can only be described as clinically insane.
[Jimmy Kimmel, Late-night:] It started supposed to be a press conference about infrastructure, and it ended with our president making an angry and passionate defense of white supremacists. The president, I feel like I can say this is reasonable certainty, the president is completely unhinged.
[Stephen Colbert, Late-night:] I'm still recovering personally, still recovering from President Trump's kamikaze press conference yesterday where Donald let Donald be Donald. The consequences and our country be damned. And it was truly one for our ages, specifically 1931 to 1945. Let me just
[Harlow:] Joining us now, CNN media analyst Bill Carter. Bill, some laughs there, but, you know, what they're saying rings so true and it's unbelievable what's happening. You have a new column on it this morning. You talk about what is the new normal, comedy outrage.
[Bill Carter, Cnn Media Analyst:] Yes, it seems like they're not just for laughs. They're definitely putting a point of view out there, and it's angry. I mean, it's truly angry and outraged that the president could possibly be taking these positions. It's very unusual. I mean, late night people, they really want people to have fun when they go to bed, and they're being challenged now, coming right in their face and saying this is something we've never seen before.
[Cuomo:] What do you make of the president's response, which is this kind of dual prong, one is I said it, I own it, I won't back off. But then, he is backing off. He's saying Lindsey Graham got it wrong. He didn't state a moral equivalency between the KKK and people like Ms. Heyer. Yes, he did. And then he says it's fake news misrepresenting. It's his own words. Just go look at the transcript.
[Carter:] And that's the thing, that's the thing. We're seeing it all over everywhere on TV. It's him saying it. The media is not twisting it or presenting it in a different way. They're just covering what he says.
[Harlow:] So, but how big of an impact does late night have? Because you interviewed Seth Meyers and he had an interesting take on the change he thinks he can or can't effect.
[Carter:] Exactly. He knows he's preaching to the choir. People have already self-elected. They're not going to support these shows if they really support President Trump. They know he's going to get hammered every night. But I think there's a cumulative effect going on. It's all over the place now. People are playing these clips. A lot of these comments are funny but also really pointed and effective. I do think this is a sense that this is not like anything we've seen in late night before. They took on George Bush after Katrina, especially Jon Stewart. But it wasn't personal. Two late night guys, Jimmy Kimmel and Seth Meyers said, we've got to get this guy out. They basically called for him to be out of office.
[Cuomo:] But they've never had an opportunity like this. We've never seen that you don't have to exaggerate reality to create parody.
[Carter:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] They've never been in this situation. We've never heard of anyone of any standing, let alone the president, saying the KKK, the Nazis, they're terrible, but they're not the only terrible ones. We've never heard that before.
[Carter:] Yes, it's mindboggling and some of the lines they write themselves. When you say, well, there's not many side, there's only one side and that side has Nazis on them.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Carter:] It's very easy to sort of pick that out. The joke comes very easily. I think the late night hosts are saying can we do something else? They're overwhelmed by Trump. He overwhelms everything about comedy now.
[Harlow:] Fallon, Jimmy Fallon with that monologue that got so much attention early this week. Now, he faced so much criticism during the campaign, going light on then candidate Trump, tussling hair, et cetera. This was a 180, credibility?
[Carter:] I think Jimmy has realized and the show realized they're out of tone here. Most of the comedy community has one particular point of view on this. Jimmy is not a political comic. To his credit, he has his thing and he should stick to it. But I think even looked at this and said I have to address this. This is over the top. And he did it in an interesting way, talking about his own kids. And he basically said what the president did was shameful. He used the word shameful. That was really a pretty strong statement for him.
[Harlow:] Nice to have you.
[Cuomo:] Bill Carter, and so it goes.
[Carter:] We'll see it more every night I'm sure.
[Harlow:] Great column. Go to CNNmoney.com. You can see it morning. We appreciate it. Thank you.
[Cuomo:] All right. So, the president decided to fight back, kind of. He says he owns what he said but now he's saying people are taking him the wrong way. We'll give you what his defense is. We have it all covered, next.

[Vause:] Welcome back, everybody. In his final moments on board to a flight, it seems the football star, Emiliano Sala was calling friends and family about his fears the plane would crash. Cardiff City's new star recruit and the pilot were flying from France on Monday when their single-engine Piper Malibu disappeared over the English Channel. We have more details now from Patrick Snell.
[Patrick Snell, Cnn International Sports Anchor And Correspondent:] Well, the search continues for the South American footballer Emiliano Sala who'd recently signed for the English Premier League Club Cardiff City. Now, the Argentine who'd just been transferred by French Ligue side Nantes to the Wales capital for just under a reported $20 million was traveling along with the plane's pilot from western France when their light aircraft went missing over the English Channel on Monday night. Now, audio has emerged of Sala on board the flight speaking to his friends in a WhatsApp voice message. We don't know when he made the call. Though in it, he appears to be making sarcastic jokes about the condition of the plane.
[Emiliano Sala, Forward, Cardiff City Football Club:] Hello brothers, how are you doing crazy people? Brothers, I'm so tired, I was here in Nantes doing things, things, things, and things. And they don't end they don't end they don't end they don't end. So, guys, I'm on the plane and it looks like it's going to fall down in pieces. And I'm on my way to Cardiff tomorrow, yes. We start in the afternoon, we start training guys with the new team. Let's see what happens. So, how are you doing guys? All OK? If in an hour and a half you don't have news from me, I don't know if they would send someone to look for me because they won't find me, but you will know. Dude, I'm so scared.
[Snell:] It's now being well over two days since the plane and those on board went missing. And the authorities say that what began as a search and rescue operation is now a recovery mission. On Wednesday, efforts to find the aircraft were suspended, saying the decision on whether to resume the search would be made early on Thursday. Patrick Snell, CNN, Atlanta.
[Vause:] Well, the Democratic Republic of Congo is about to mark its first democratic transfer of power in almost 60 years. Despite accusations of fraud in December's voting, Felix Tshisekedi was certified by the National Constitution Court and is set to be sworn in as the new president. Outgoing President Joseph Kabila, who has been in power since 2001, says he is stepping down without regret. CNN's David McKenzie, live this hour from Johannesburg, said So, David if there was this, at least, one call from a disgruntled loser in the election basically saying that the vote was rigged, get out there and protest, and mostly went unheeded. Which I guess is a sign that this will be a peaceful transfer of power. I think we're having a few problems there with David's audio. I can see his here we go.
[David Mckenzie, Cnn International Correspondent:] South Africa.
[Vause:] Start again from the top, David, some audio issues.
[Mckenzie:] Sorry about that, John. So, base that's all right. So, the issues with this election have been running for more than two years. I think there's a sign a sigh of relief within this region that this might be a peaceful transfer of power, John. And in the last few days, you've seen the shift from serious questions being asked from the African Union and others about the election results. And now, this is all sort of getting a bit quieter. And the latest was the U.S. on Monday saying that this, at least, tentatively they are happy with this announcement from the Supreme Court that certified the results over the weekend. As you say, there hasn't been any major protests on the streets of Kinshasa and elsewhere. The losing opposition candidate Martin Fayulu has said that he is the president of the country. But it appears in the coming hours that's just going to be shown to be just, of course, not the case. John?
[Vause:] OK, David. I'm glad we got there in the end. If you're taking a problems but worth getting off on. Thank you. OK, we'll take a short break. When we come back, a lot more news right here on CNN.

[Allen:] Welcome back to our viewers here in the United States and all around the world. I'm Natalie Allen. Let's update you on our top stories. Hundreds of thousands of anti-independence protesters are calling for a unified Spain. Madrid dissolved Catalonia's parliament after the region declared independence Friday. New elections are set for December. Spain has threatened to charge the suspended Catalan leader with rebellion. The U.S. Navy is investigating whether two of its elite members killed this U.S. soldier. Staff Sergeant Logan Melgar with the Army Special Forces was found dead in June at a U.S. government compound in Mali. A medical examiner says the Green Beret may have been strangled to death. Saudi Arabia says it will let women into three sports stadiums as spectators starting early next year after long baring women from arenas. The Saudi crown prince is promising other ambitious reforms for women. Starting next June, women will finally be allowed to drive on Saudi streets. We are waiting to find who will be indicted into investigation into Russian election meddling. The charges were approved Friday and an arrest or arrests could come within hours. The White House has not made an official statement, but President Trump has been tweeting. He calls the probe a witch-hunt and demands an investigation into an Obama era uranium deal reportedly involving bribes to Hillary Clinton. So says the president. Russia is at the heart of both of these political controversies in the U.S. Let's go to Moscow now where Oren Liebermann joins us. And Oren, Russia has often called this story hysteria by the U.S. media. Any new response to news about these pending indictments?
[Oren Liebermann, Correspondent, Cnn:] Russophobic hysteria, a term we've heard quite often in terms of how Russia views the U.S. investigation into election meddling. But there has been no response since CNN broke news on Friday that charges could be maybe public as early today. And that's not surprising because Russia tends to be conservative with their answers and their comments and they hedge quite a bit until they have the full details. So, although they might say something like they're concerned or they're watching, a full response will only come after we learn more that is after the charges are made public and we find out who is being charged, who those charges are against. But from a big picture perspective, it's important to remember that Russia has continuously and repeatedly denied the purpose of the investigation which is to say into election meddling. Russia has continually denied any involvement in the U.S. elections and any attempts to meddle there. So that's not likely to change regardless of what these charges are or who has charged. They call the investigation. And again, hysteria and an attempt by the U.S. to essentially smear Russia. That's not likely to change, regardless of what we learned either today or later on this week, Natalie.
[Allen:] Right. At all times, you know, the U.S. and Russia are not in a good place when we've got the North Korea situation where they should be working together on that. So that's quite unfortunate. Oren Liebermann for us there in Moscow. Thank you, Oren. Now we turn to the amazing saga at sea. Two friends along with their two dogs lost and adrift in a damaged boat for five long hope-starved months. The two women set off on a trip from Hawaii to Tahiti, but were knocked off course by a storm that incapacitated their boat. They lost communications. And after months of drifting, they also lost hope. But last week, the women were rescued by the U.S. Navy. And now their feet and their dogs' are on dry land. Ivan Watson is there at White Beach, a U.S. naval facility in Okinawa, Japan. You've got the talk to these women. And certainly every time I've seen them make comments, they are just ecstatic to being rescued, ecstatic to be alive.
[Ivan Watson, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Absolutely. Euphoric and incredibly grateful to the mean and women of the U.S. Navy who aboard this large vessel the USS Ashland, rescued these women from their stricken sailboat, 50-foot sailboat which was effectively floating at sea for more than five months of what was supposed to be an 18-day journey from Hawaii to Tahiti. Instead, because a very different ordeal when successive storms knocked out the mast and the engine, and the communication devices aboard their sailboat. Take a listen.
[Jennifer Appel, Rescued After Five Months At Sea:] We had no VHF, no range on it. No weather com, no SSB, single side band. We didn't have our ham radio. And our radio telephone inside the boat was not working. And also our Iridium sat phone was not working. So we had no way to realize that we were about to enter a typhoon that had winds of 100 to 150 miles an hour and minimum wave heights of 40 foot in height.
[Watson:] How it is possible that all of these different communications devices malfunctioned?
[Appel:] They are dependent on the antenna.
[Tasha Fuiava, Rescued After Five Months At Sea:] Yes.
[Appel:] And when the antenna went out, everything went out.
[Watson:] So how did the women and their two dogs survive this long period at sea? They say they depend very heavily on a desalinization unit that basically purified ocean water for them to drink on board the sailboat. They also had months and months of stocks of dried food that they relied on as well. They claim that at some point along the journey their vessel was being hit by tiger sharks, which were circling the vessel and of course scaring them. They also say there were opportunities for possible rescue when they drifted past Wake Island, a U.S. island in the Western Pacific, and they were able to connect with a coastal station there. But by their communications device, but were told that they needed to get to the southern end of the island to the harbor to be rescued. And they could not do that since their engine and sails would not function. That was one of their darkest days. That's when Jennifer Appel said she started crying for the whole afternoon as they drifted out of sight of the island. And she credits the dogs who licked the tears from her face for giving her hope. Natalie?
[Allen:] And you also told us that they turned to their bible to try to keep themselves hopeful and optimistic. I know that they were really sad that they had to leave their boat behind that was their home and that was their dream. When will they be reunited with their families? And what's next for them, do we know?
[Watson:] I think that's a very big question mark. And as one of the women said, we feel very lost right now like we're in kindergarten again. Because it's true. That 50-foot sailboat was their home. They lived on it on Hawaii before embarking on this incredible nautical adventure. And when the USS Ashland got a distress call and steamed to their rescue, and technicians went aboard the sailboat, they deemed that vessel unseaworthy. And the women had about an hour, they said, to decide to leave their home behind as well as most of their material possessions. The good news, as they came out alive with their two very lovable dogs. I got to pet them and hang out with them some. But yes, they had to leave their homes behind. And now they have to find their way in this world again. Again, there is a happy ending. They were able to make satellite phone calls from the ship to very concerned family members on the U.S. mainland to say we're alive. And as far as I know, the father of one of the women told the commanding officer aboard this ship, thank you. You save my daughter's life. Natalie?
[Allen:] All right. We don't know what's next for them. But these women are resilient, and they survived. I think they're going to be all right. Thank you so much. Ivan Watson for us there in Okinawa. Oscar Winning actor Kevin Spacey is apologizing after another actor accused him of an unwanted sexual advance. Anthony Rapp claims the incident happened back in 1986 when he was 14 and Spacey was 26. Spacey responded with a statement on Twitter saying, "I'm beyond horrified to hear his story. I honestly do not remember the encounter. It would have been over 30 years ago. But if I did behave then as he describes, I owe him the sincerest apology for what would have been deeply inappropriate, drunken behavior." Spacey added that Rapp's allegation encouraged him to go public about his sexuality. He wrote, "As those closest to me know in my life, I have had relationships with both men and women. I have loved and had romantic encounters with men throughout my life. And I choose now to live as a gay man. I want to deal with this honestly and openly, and that starts with examining my own behavior." CNN has not independently verified those allegations from Rapp, and we reached out to both Rapp and Spacey's representatives. Still ahead here, Puerto Rico's national rainforest used to be sprawling with tree and animals and life. But after hurricane Maria, you can't recognize it. That's coming up.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back. It's Friday. Many of us stake stock of the work week as we headed into the weekend. Here are some highlights of President Trump as he looks back at this Monday through Friday. The head of the Boy Scouts apologized to scouts and their parents because the president used some salty language in a speech at the Annual Scouts Jamboree in launching some political attacks. The Whitewater Special Counsel Ken Starr, spoke for many conservative when he asked the president to, quote, please cut it out. Meaning, please respect the rule of law and stop attacking the attorney general. On Capitol Hill, Republican after Republican also staged an intervention of sorts. Warning the president he was wrong if he believes he can easily replace his attorney general.
[Sen. Ben Sasse , Nebraska:] If you're thinking of making a recess appointment to push out the attorney general, forget about it. The presidency isn't a bull and this country isn't a China shop.
[King:] Interesting choice of words there. The Pentagon pushed back also against the president's Twitter announcement banning transgender individuals from serving in the military. And today in the Wall Street Journal, this from Reagan era wordsmith Peggy Noonan. "He's whiney, weepy, and self-pitying", Noonan writes at the president. More of her take in a moment. But just trying to sum up the week, you mentioned it, it was mentioned by several earlier. This was an interesting week. We may look back at this week in terms of Republicans being more open in their criticism, John Cornyn said the president should get together with Jeff Sessions and work it out like men. You can imply what they meant there. And Lindsey Graham going public and saying the president is weak. What do we make of this week and is it just a lot of little interesting pieces of drama, or does it mean something?
[Karoun Demirjian, The Washington Post:] It's not just little interesting pieces when it happen was concentrated. That's the thing. You can take each one of these things and say, OK, the thing that happened this week, maybe if they get past it. But the fact that it's it struck a nerve this both political, policy related, personal for a lot of these Republicans. And the fact that it'll happened within a few days of each other means that you're really seeing a break. And the fact that it happened the same week where the health care policy bill falls apart. This doesn't seem like it's good of a bet anymore as it seemed to a lot of these members of the
[Gop. Michael Shear, The New York Times:] Look, I think he question is, is it kind of an ultimate break or does the ideological
[Molly Ball, The Atlantic:] Well, and the other thing that happened this week was that, you know, the president spoke at the Boy Scout thing and then the next day he had a campaign rally in Ohio. And he's just announcing doing another one next week. And so I think there's a sense that he's sort of checking out. There's a sense that he's going and doing the one thing that brings him joy. Which is be in a big crowd of people who love him. And the rest of the Republican Party is sort of realizing it's time to go it alone. It's time to just try to just shut out the noise, pretend he's not there. Let him do his thing which is travel around the country saying stuff. And when it comes to something like tax reform or all the other things on the agenda, they just have to do it themselves.
[Demirjian:] I think the other things to keep in mind, though, is that we have to take are we talking about the Republicans as like a body in Congress or as the party? Are we talking about the margins? But I think one lesson of this week was, it doesn't really matter where the body of Republicans are if you have enough of people on the margins that won't play ball. That was a lesson of health care in the Senate. If you have people like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, and maybe a few others who just lost their patient as this point, it doesn't matter where the rest of the party is, because they can jam everything else up.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] And I think it's not a question to see how big that group is. I mean, you know, Ben Sasse, God, I love him. He gave those quotes, and so with Lindsey Graham, but these are two people how have voted with the president on his priorities and had not shown any indication that they're going to split with what the president wants, despite getting the tongue lashing now and again. Now maybe that'll be different when we see how the president deals with the Russia sanctions bill and maybe if it'll be different when we get to tax reform. But, as of right now I mean, John McCain was out there alone. There was no one else who was going to you know, we knew that Collins, we knew that Murkowski weren't getting onboard with this. But there was no show of course alongside John McCain. It was one man who went out there and decided to take the political bullet on that.
[Shear:] And I'm still not convinced that the base, you know, that 30- whatever percent. I'm still not sure that even a week like this does
[King:] But they love him.
[Shear:] Yes. You're right and so
[King:] But they love him. But they it's just interesting. Again, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford sent a memo around the military saying, the president goes on Twitter, and says we're banning transgender individuals from serving in the military. Now the Pentagon has no idea what he means. They have no idea they have no specifics of what he means because he blindsided them. And so you have the top general in the United States military sending a memo saying, "There will be no modifications to the current policy until the president's direction have been received by the secretary of defense and the secretary has issued implementation guidance. In the meantime, we continue to treat all of our personnel with respect." The ban is just a stunning realization example of the dysfunction in government when the top general has to say, well, the president tweeted something but we have no idea what he means. And so stand by, stand down. Keep everything normal. But that's nuts.
[Shear:] And says it publicly. I mean, you know, there might be times in the past when generals and presidents had to sort of go back and forth privately in disagreement. Like to do it publicly is pretty amazing.
[Ball:] Well, and that's because they don't really have
[King:] And the president's on his way up to Long Island for an event. That's where Anthony Scaramucci is from. David Nakamura of the Washington Post just tweeted out a picture. I believe we have it, Anthony Scaramucci on the plane with reporters here. Reince Priebus, the chief of staff is also on that plane. Wish I was. That would be an interesting place to be. A fly on the wall in disguise as an Air Force steward as you can make your way back and forth through the cabin. One last point on this, again, Peggy Noonan, not a fan of this president. Although after his big speech in Poland, she was somewhat complementary of him. I heard what she writes in the Wall Street Journal today. "He's whiney, weepy, and self-pitying. He throws himself sobbing on the body of politics. He's a drama queen. Half of the president's tweets show utter weakness. They are plaintive, shrill little cries usually just after dawn. Meanwhile, the whole world is watching, a world that contains predators. How could they not be seeing this weakness, confusion and chaos and thinking it's a good time to cause some trouble?" That in the Wall Street Journal this morning. Again, it's one editorial voice. A constant critic of the president but that traditionally that's a friendly place for a Republican president.
[Ball:] I would not call her a constant critic. I think she actually gave him a lot more of a chance than a lot of other sort of establishment conservatives. She wasn't out there with George Will and Charles Krauthammer saying, by no means can we attack this person. She's actually being quite open to the one version of Trump, the populist version of Trump and the idea of that. But what she's finding and what a lot of people who wanted to believe in that fantasy version of Trump are finding is that the reality doesn't live up to that.
[King:] It's amazing. Everybody, sit tight. Next, the moment Republican lawmakers have been waiting for seven years and they, well, I think they blew it. We look back at how we got to this point in the health care debate excuse me. And what might happen next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks very much for watching. Erin Burnett OutFront starts right now.
[Erin Burnett, Cnn Anchor:] OutFront next, breaking news, America's top general breaks his silence on the Niger ambush that killed four American soldiers. Nineteen days out, why are there still many more questions than answers? Plus, Trump gets in a last word to the widow of a fallen hero. Why did he use a tweet to suggest she's a liar? And Trump about to declare an emergency on opioids. Dr. Sanjay Gupta goes to the U.S.Mexico border, and that is have Trump's wall will or won't stop the drug 50 times stronger than heroin. Our special investigation. Let's go OutFront. Good evening, I'm Erin Burnett. OutFront tonight, the breaking news, new information on the deadliest combat loss of Trump's presidency. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs taking 50 minutes of reporter questions about the Niger ambush. Dramatically changing the timeline of the fire fight that left four American soldiers killed by ISIS fighters. General Joseph Dunford saying a full hour passed with the fire fight raging before U.S. troops called for air support, and then, it took another full hour for that help to arrive. It has been 19 days since the ambush. This is the first time a member of the Trump administration has taken questions. And General Dunford acknowledged the nation deserves answers.
[Gen. Joseph Dunford Jr., Joint Chiefs Chairman:] We owe the families as much information as we can find out about what happened. And we owe the American people an explanation of what their men and women were doing at this particular time. And when I say that, I mean men and women in harm's way anywhere in the world. They should know what the mission is, what we're trying to accomplish when we're there. And so those are all fair questions, in my judgment.
[Burnett:] While Dunford, though, welcome those fair questions and he said again and again they were fair, and that the families of the fallen and the American people deserved answers. Again and again. Again and again he did not have answers.
[Dunford:] We don't know that definitively right now. I can't answer it definitively. I don't know how this attack unfolded. I don't know why the mirages didn't drop bombs during those initial passes. I don't know if the unit on the ground asked them to do that. I don't personally know how the soldiers that they were equipped, if they were wearing body armor.
[Burnett:] That was how General Dunford answered these questions. Why was Sergeant La David Johnson's body found a mile away? Is General Dunford sure the U.S. soldiers didn't call for help for a full hour after coming under fire? Why didn't those French mirage jets that came to help the American troops drop bombed? And a basic question, were the U.S. troops wearing body armor? The answers, I don't know. I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. Ryan Browne is at the Pentagon tonight and Ryan, let's start with the timeline because this is a very big change tonight.
[Ryan Browne, Cnn Pentagon Reporter:] That's right, Erin. We learned new details about the timeline of this attack from General Dunford in a rare appearance by him in the Pentagon press briefing room, and he laid out a much different timeline than military and defense officials had been saying previously saying that it took almost two hours before air support arrived to support the U.S. troops on the ground. Let's have a listen.
[Dunford:] It's about an hour after the initial contact was made, they requested support. When they requested support, it took the French aircraft, the French were ready to go in 30 minutes and then it took them 30 minutes, approximately 30 minutes to get on the scene. So from that, I think it's a fair conclusion to say that about two hours after the initial contact was made, the initial French mirages arrived overhead.
[Browne:] Now, one of the reasons it took an hour for the team on the ground to call in that air support, General Dunford said was potentially that they thought they could handle the ISIS fighters on their own. But as General Dunford said, that consisted of some 50 militants with RPGs, light machine guns and vehicles. So, again, many questions, though, remain unanswered about what exactly happened during the fire fight. Were the local villagers that the team meeting with, were they complicit in that ambush? Some officials told CNN previously that they might have been. These are other questions that need to be found out. There is an investigation on the way. But one thing that's definitely not known at this time is how Sergeant Johnson became separated from the rest of his team and was missing for almost 48 hours. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Ryan Browne. As Ryan said, no answers yet for that as well as whether they were wearing body armor. The mission, itself. OutFront now, Retired Brigadier General Donald Bolduc, he until June commanded special operation forces on the African continent, knows more about this than anyone. Our Senior Political Analyst Mark Preston is with me, senior writer and terror correspondent for the New York Times Eric Schmitt joins us, along with former CIA operative Bob Baer. Bob, we've been talking about this over the last few days. Nineteen days later, we got a big 50-minute long press conference from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. What do you make of the news? A big change in timeline. It went from 30 minutes, that's what has been reported last week. It was 30 minutes from when help was requested to when it arrived to two hours.
[Robert Baer, Former Cia Operative:] Erin, I think what's clear and this was clear from the beginning, those guys were surprised in an ambush. They weren't prepared, they weren't wearing body armor. They didn't have armored vehicles, they didn't expect combat. And what's crucial in this, and what lost lives, is there was no quick reaction force. Every one of these special operations and the military people will tell us better than I will that you need backup for one of these things if you expect to get into a fire fight. You just don't go on into a war zone without some sort of support. And I think the military is at a loss to explain how those guys got up there, and why the intelligence was so bad because you get 50 people, 50 ISIS fighters, all together and you're, you know, you're outgunned. No doubt about it. And, you know, those questions they can't answer those questions because they don't know. And I think a mistake was made along the line. And they're trying to determine who made that mistake.
[Burnett:] Right. And of course, and I just want to be clear here, when I say two hours, it was two hours from when the fire fight started, one hour from when help was called for. And again, the original report was a half an hour. General, you have been on the ground, you have run operations like this, and we learned something else today which was that a U.S. drone arrived an hour after that attack got under way. So pretty much General Dunford said within moments of the troops on the ground asking for help, that drone showed up. The remote-pilot vehicle, it has full motion video and it was right over the scene. How crucial is this video, General?
[Ret. Brig. Gen. Donald Bolduc, Deputy Operations Director, U.s. Africa Command:] I think the video is very crucial and, of course, the investigation that is ongoing will determine how crucial that is. But you have to realize that Niger is you know, the operational area in Niger is larger than the operational area in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and Syria. So, this is a very large area where the special operation forces count on their partners to provide the security necessary and of course as General Dunford said, you know, the situation is that enemy contact will be unlikely. They were doing a civil military operation mission that is part of the special operation force missions there on the ground. So they were decentralized and dispersed, they were working in and among the populous. The commanders on the ground used their judgment with helmets and body armor. You know, the enemy gets a vote here so to speak by watching them. They
[Burnett:] General, were you interested today I mean, I was curious, one of the things General Dunford said was that the troops were on their way back from another mission. He didn't know whether the mission had changed. That was another of the answers he didn't know the questions he didn't know the answer to. But he said they only slept a couple of hours the night before. Did that surprise you?
[Bolduc:] No, that doesn't surprise me at all. It's an operational environment in which people must do security, and which there's 24 hour operations going on. The support of our partners, you know, everything is tightly integrated to include the coordination with our French partners and the close air support that they provided was, in my experience, part of the plan. The quick reaction force, there is nothing quick in Africa given the terrain and given the distance that needs to be traveled. So they go out and they go out ready to go.
[Burnett:] So, Eric, General Dunford admitted that the questions out there, and there are a lot of them. He admitted that they are fair which is an important thing. Here he is.
[Dunford:] What you're asking is a fair question but we don't know that definitive right now. It's a fair question but I can't tell you definitively the answer to that question. All those are fair questions but, again, I would just ask for your patience and just giving us the time it takes to do the investigation.
[Burnett:] One of those "it's a fair question but I can't tell you definitively" answers, Eric, came to whether a question of whether the mission itself had changed. A lot of these I don't knows came in response to very central and very basic questions. Were they wearing body armor, what were they equipped with? Why aren't there answers to some of these questions 19 days later?
[Eric Schmitt, Senior Writer And Terrorism Correspondent, New York Times:] I think, Erin, one of the reasons there aren't full answers is, the investigation still has to interview a number of other people. They need to interview the French that intervened. They have to interview the Nigerian troops who are involved in the mission as well. They may hold key clues as to what happened and whether they were diverted as the New York Times reported on, guys on motorcycles dashing away toward the border of Mali and whether these whole patrol took pursuit. But the general said also said was that the key clues as to what happened and whether they were diverted as the New York Times reported, guys on motorcycles dashing toward the border of Mali and whether the what the general said today they spent overnight, a night out in the desert. That might have given time for some of the militants to mass and launch their ambush later on with perhaps, complicity with the villagers. Those are some of the things they're still trying to sort out. They're sending a team to the region. They're actually going to walk the ground where this all took place to see if they can find more clues.
[Burnett:] And Mark, you know, after the General Dunford presser, Senator John McCain, chairman of the Armed Services Committee who of course have been very critical of the lack of information he's been getting, had threatened even to issue subpoenas if he wasn't satisfied with the information flow, was asked about the presser. And here's what he said.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] What is still your biggest question that you have after
[Sen. John Mccain  Chairman, Armed Services Committee:] It's about the whole operation. Come on. Questions about it, why four men died. T hat should be the that's the question most Americans want to know.
[Burnett:] Not satisfied from the Senate, Mark.
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] And he's right, you know, Senator John McCain is correct in saying that he's not satisfied and that the American public should be more focused on why did this mission fail and more importantly, why did we have four service members die in the line of duty? This is what you call a textbook case of how not to handle a crisis. Not to wait 19 days to go out and to hold a news conference, to basically deliver no answers. Now, I don't hold anything against General Dunford for not having answers because it's the fog of war, I'm guessing as Eric said. There are still a lot more questions to be answered. Had they handled this, though, 14 days ago, 15 days ago, we would be in a much different situation. And to add to this, President Trump in his interaction with the widow, you know, has really, really heightened this to an incredible another level. And in fact, just try to politicize it with his tweets when he went after the congresswoman who was the first to talk about the fact that the phone call didn't go as smoothly as it should. So, again, I think General Dunford did what he thought he had to do today. He tried to do his best today. It was just a little too late.
[Burnett:] And perhaps right perhaps all those non-answers, you know, two weeks ago would have felt different than they felt today. Bob Baer, you know, when you look at this, you told me that this ambush in Niger was worse than Benghazi because in that situation, the actual decision to go into the line of fire was made by an ambassador and in this situation, it was ultimately made by the Pentagon. Chairman Dunford was asked about that comparison, specifically, today, about whether this is Benghazi and here is how he answered the question.
[Dunford:] I personally see no utility in comparing this incident to any other incident. What I will tell you is we lost four Americans in this incident. We had two others wounded. What's most important to me, aside from getting the facts, is identifying those things that we can do better in the future.
[Burnett:] Bob?
[Baer:] Well, Erin, he's right. I mean, the ambassador in Benghazi decided to go to Benghazi and heroically lost his life. He was doing his job but that was his decision. In this case, it's the military. And I think what we're really dealing with here is we're fighting too many wars on terror. The military, given its
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Baer:] How many of them were shooters? American shooters, maybe 50 to 100. That's not enough in a country the size of Niger and it's a very dangerous country. ISIS has been operating there for the last 12 or 13 years. Sort of at will, they've been kidnapping French engineers. It was 14 years ago or something like that. So I mean, we're too thin. The military needs more support. We got to fight these wars but they also have to have the support.
[Burnett:] Right, and of course, a big part of this investigation is going to be who was complicit. Who gave up this information? Whether that was someone in the village or very damningly for the conversation we're having whether that had any possibility of coming from the Niger forces, themselves. Thank you all so very much. I appreciate it. And next, Trump essentially calling the widow of the fallen soldier, Sergeant Johnson's widow, a liar today. Plus, John McCain mocks Trump over his bone spur draft deferment. Will Trump keep his threat and fire back? And it's hard to believe, but a package this small, this small, this amount of powder, could be used to make a million pills of fentanyl and bring in tens of millions of dollars. So what's being done to stop it? Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins us for our Special investigation tonight on the heroin crisis.

[Carl Azuz, Cnn 10 Anchor:] Hi. I`m Carl Azuz for CNN 10, your daily down- the-middle explanation of world events. We`re starting with news concerning Saudi Arabia. Significant changes are being made in the Middle Eastern country. This is an absolute monarchy. Its crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, was appointed by his father, King Salman, two years ago. And since then, the nation has gone through what one CNN reporter describes a top to bottom overhaul. We reported in late September how the government had decided to allow women to drive. Saudi Arabia was the last nation on earth where that was illegal, but it`s also what experts call one of the most religiously conservative Islamic countries, and there were some Saudis who disagreed with the decision. Crown Prince bin Salman has promised to destroy what he called extremist ideologies and work to return Saudi Arabia to a, quote, more moderate Islam. He`s trying to reshape Saudi Arabia`s economy, reducing its dependence on oil sales. The nation is leading in international group to fight terrorism. It`s executed dozens of people on terrorism charges. It`s playing a major role in the civil war of neighboring Yemen, with Saudi Arabia leading international airstrikes, targeting rebels who were supported by Iran and trying to take control of Yemen. And over the weekend, more than 17 Saudi princes and top government officials were arrested on corruption charges. This includes people who`ve been described as some of the wealthiest figures in the Arab world. Regarding all of this, experts and observers have been using words like shocking, historic and even revolutionary. And globally, Saudi Arabia`s changes have been met with criticism, as well as praise, and caution, as well as trust.
[Subtitle:] The One Thing: Saudi Arabia`s changes.
[Becky Anderson, Cnn International Anchor:] One thing you need to know about what is going on in Saudi Arabia is the phase of change is fast and unprecedented. The person driving these changes, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a 32-year-old who rose to power just two years ago. He`s the man calling all the shots and his latest moves inside and outside the country show that he means business. Take this for example. Earlier this year, he said in an interview, he won`t tolerate corruption at any level by anyone. Now, a newly formed anti-corruption squad has gone after a high number of high profile princes and businessmen, sending a clear signal of the prince`s intent. His critics say the crown prince is just making a power play and removing potential rivals before he ascends the throne. But to his supporters, it`s all part of his plan to transform the kingdom. And that same zeal for action can be seen in Saudi foreign policy, with a much more muscular posture towards its arch rival Iran, in places like Yemen and Lebanon. An active new leadership upending traditions, we have ended a new era and no matter what, the results will be dramatic.
[Azuz:] It wasn`t a presidential election. That`s was last year, and the next ones in 2020. It wasn`t a congressional midterm election. Those are every two years and the next one is 2018. But it was the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, and that means Americans across the country went to the polls. They were voting in state and local elections, from Washington to Georgia. A lot of the attention was centered on the governor`s races in New Jersey and Virginia. Why? Because at recent decades, the political party that loses the presidential election usually wins the next year`s gubernatorial races in those two states. So, last year, a Republican won the presidency, so Democratic candidates were expected to be chosen as governors in New Jersey and Virginia, though the race in Virginia had tightened up, according to polls before the vote. You can get results on the races at CNN.com. Both major parties will be scrutinizing the outcomes of yesterday`s votes to help form their strategies for next year`s congressional midterm elections. Ten-second trivia: Which of these world capitals has the largest population? Washington, D.C., London, U.K., Beijing, China, or New Delhi, India? With more than 25.7 million residents, according to the CIA, New Delhi is the most populated capital on this list. And it`s one of the most polluted. In fact, an Indian doctor says air quality conditions in New Delhi right now are so bad that breathing there is like smoking 50 cigarettes a day. The Indian medical association has declared a state of medical emergency. It`s asked the government to take urgent action to cancel an upcoming marathon. Some officials have been asked to consider shutting schools, extreme air pollution in New Delhi is nothing new. Fires, traffic, dust, industries, they all contribute. But right now, there`s not much wind to blow pollutants away. And according to the British Broadcasting Corporation, Delhi`s problem is worst in winter because farmers in nearby areas burn crops double at that time. That adds to the haze hanging over the capital. Some air quality instruments can`t even measure the spikes in pollution. They`re literally off the scale. The government is trying to address this by regulating traffic. But even that may not be enough.
[Alexandra Field, Cnn Correspondent:] This is worst than bad. Not the traffic, actually, there`s less about the normal. It`s the air. To help clear it, Delhi`s government says these steps are necessary. A temporary ban giving odd numbered cars off the road on even days, and even numbered cars off the road on odd days, an attempt to target a toxic problem, pollution. [on camera]: When you walk through the streets of Delhi, you can`t help but see it, of course, and smell it. But the most disturbing part is you can actually taste it in your mouth, if you`re not used to being here, you can feel it burning in your throat. In fact, the city`s highest court recently said that living in Delhi was like living in a gas chamber. So, those are the conditions that some 20 million people face every single day. There are 9 million registered cars on the streets of Delhi, 1400 more cars come on the roads each day. So, while cars are only part of the problem, every driver is being asked to be part of the solution, and the reason people who are out here to remind you. [voice-over]: Following the rules,
[Unidentified Female:] That`s like one hour and 15 minutes to reach office.
[Field:] So, is this working?
[Unidentified Female:] Without taking emergency action, pollution levels would have been much higher. And so, what this scheme has done is to play a role to moderate the high pollution levels.
[Field:] Clearly, cars are part of the city`s pollution problem because of their numbers, because of congestion, because of toxic emissions. But the odd-even rule doesn`t cut Delhi`s pollution in half. There are a lot of exceptions, public vehicles, high ranking officials, motorcycles and women traveling alone. It`s just a temporary measure, just one of a number of attempts to fight pollution, including a ban on large diesel SUVs and higher taxes on commercial trucks coming into the city. [on camera]: When it comes to a long-term solution, odd-even exchange wouldn`t be enough to move the needle?
[Unidentified Female:] No, absolutely not.
[Field:] There is a consequences that too many other factors contribute to the city`s pollution, and the more practical matter on everyone`s mind. Delhi`s public transit system couldn`t handle it.
[Unidentified Female:] So, for the first time, I think people in Delhi are talking about public transport and I think that`s the pressure that needs to be built on government for the systemic change.
[Field:] That would be the giant leap. Activists hope it starts with these smaller steps.
[Azuz:] Over the weekend, I had the chance to see autumn paint the great Smokey Mountains bright yellow, orange and red. It`s a typical sight this time of year in the U.S. state of Tennessee, but not for everyone. One man who`s color blind says this looks like all one color to him. The Tennessee Department of Tourism changed that. It installed new viewfinders at scenic places that allow people with color blindness to see the vivid changes and color. It was a first for several visitors to spot over Gatlinburg, including a man who described as simply awesome and said he now understands why people come up here. For the trees, of course, the changes are autumnatic. But all things being equinox, it`s often worth the harvestment to take leap of a city and season your life with a beauty that`s easy to fall for. I`m Carl Azuz for CNN 10. END

[Natalie Portman, Actress:] One year ago, on this stage I was very pregnant, and we talked about the beginning of a revolution. Today, my new daughter is walking. And because of you, the revolution is rolling. I was so excited at 13 when the film was released, and my work and my art would have a human response. I excitedly opened my first fan mail to read a rape fantasy that a man had written me. A countdown on the local radio show to my 18th birthday so I euphemistically would be legal to sleep with. A world in which I could wear whatever I want, say whatever I want and express my desire however I want without fearing for my physical safety or reputation, that would be the world in which female desire and sexuality could have its greatest expression and fulfillment.
[Baldwin:] Natalie Portman speaking at the women's march in Los Angeles, one of dozens of cities, hundreds of thousands of people back on the streets today on the one-year anniversary of President Trump's inauguration. That was San Francisco. And now we go to San Francisco, and Dan Simon is standing by there. Dan, how's the crowd?
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Brooke. First of all, it is a beautiful sunny day here in San Francisco, and that means that you will have a lot of people flooding downtown San Francisco. We are here in city hall. Things are underway about 30 minutes ago, and this being San Francisco, one of the most liberal towns in America, you do, of course, have a strong anti-Donald Trump undercurrent here. And I would say a majority of the signs have Donald Trump messages. But I do have to say that the organizers here are trying to keep the focus off Trump and trying to get more women elected. I wanted to introduce you to one of the organizers here, Sophia Andary, who helped to lead the march here in San Francisco. And what is the main message that you want to convey to people out here.
[Sophia Andary, Women's March Co-organizer:] Thank you so much for having me. And last year was more about mobilizing and we talked about hearing our voice, and getting out on the streets and doing that, and this year we want more action, so we are doing it based around here our vote. Talking about registering to vote and the importance of it, and actually getting out and voting, voting for women and progressive allies and then for women to run for office. I think it is very important for anything to change we need to be represented in all government, all right. Whether it is local, whether it is for the Senate or the House, we need to be at those tables for things to start changing.
[Simon:] Understood. Thank you for talking to us.
[Andary:] Thank you so much.
[Simon:] And it is looking like a very large turnout. And you will be marching through downtown all of the way to the embarcadero which is a very famous landmark in San Francisco. We appreciate your time. Brooke, back to you.
[Baldwin:] Dan, enjoy the beautiful weather in San Francisco. Listen, people, as I mentioned, hundreds of thousands of men and women and children out protesting and speaking up throughout the country, and the president has recognized it in his own way. I will read the tweet and bring in the panel here. The president tweeted early this morning, "Beautiful weather all over our great country. A perfect day for all women to march. Get out there now to celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success, the wealth creation that has taken place over the last 12 months. Lowest female unemployment in 18 years." Mark Preston, you first. What do you make of how the president put that?
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] It could have been worse. He was trying to do a play on words and really trying to point out the accomplishments that he has had and specifically the tax cut which is the accomplishment for President Trump this past year. But taking a poke at those who it appears are several thousands across the country.
[Baldwin:] Mary Katharine Hamm, what do you think?
[Mary Katharine Hamm, Cnn Political Commentator:] It's trolling but it is good-natured trolling, and he does have a strong suit. He does have a product to sell on the economy and it is good one, and even for many women, even though many of them oppose him. So as Trump responses go, give me more of that. That is A-OK.
[Baldwin:] OK. Let's get to the substance of this impasse. We heard from the White House briefing last hour, essentially, they are saying that they are anxious to get the government back up rocking and rolling again, and they are frustrated. They are pointing the finger at Democrats, and specifically those Senate Democrats who did not quite give them that 60 they need for this to pass. And, Juana Summers, I don't know if you heard Luis Gutierrez here from the Hispanic National Caucus, because of this notion of the wall discussed between Chuck Schumer and the president, which was huge news, he said, I will go to build it myself to get protection for the DREAMers. What he was saying and I want you to the respond, too that the White House would not take that, and they don't want to deal with this illegal immigration issue.
[Juana Summers, Cnn Politics Senior Writer:] What's interesting, and I want to point out, having something done with the so-called DREAMers is popular politically. It is fascinating to watch it breakdown because most people want to do something for these young people.
[Baldwin:] Most people.
[Summers:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] Republican and Democrat.
[Summers:] Yes. Most people don't want a shutdown. And most people want to expand the Children Health Care Program. And it is incredibly popular. And yet, we saw two sides who could not get it together and, yet, most people would say they agree on these thing, and that is bewildering.
[Baldwin:] Beyond the bewilderment, but the fact that Chuck Schumer put on the table, and he would infuriate members of the base for saying that we will help you the build this wall, and why not a deal? The president himself said that when there was a shutdown in 2013 about President Obama, he is the guy who should get into the room and make the deal, and where is the deal, Mr. President?
[Paris Dennard, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, it is an unfortunate time for the American people, because at the end of the day, the American people are losing. The president is a great negotiator and dealmaker, and when you have a party who is willing to make a deal with him, and what we have seen is that the 47 Democrats are unwilling to make a deal to not include the DACA piece right now.
[Baldwin:] But wasn't the fact that that the leader of the Democratic Party in the Senate, the fact that he came down the White House yesterday to negotiate, and isn't that the epitome of the willingness to deal?
[Dennard:] It is a willingness of Chuck Schumer. And the president and Chuck Schumer is willing to, but that is not how it works. He has to go back to the people who make up the caucus and this is what we need to do, and they are not willing to do it. If that is the case, they would have voted, and the government would be open.
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] But, Paris, that also means, if I may jump in, that President Trump has to go back to Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, and House Speaker Ryan that this is the deal, and when Chuck Schumer went down there and we have been told through our sources that the congressional Republicans were frightened, you know, to use the word, because they didn't know if he would cut a deal, so it does cut both ways on this.
[Mary Katharine Hamm, Cnn Political Commentator:] And if that is indeed a good-faith proposal and you mentioned it earlier, isn't this is a beginning point. Great, sure. You vote for the thing that you agree w and give it three weeks and figure the deal.
[Hamm:] It seems that we are in a decent place if both sides have good faith intentions
[Nadeam Elshami, Cnn Political Commentator:] Let me set the record straight here. The C.R. that was passed by the House and Senate to the Senate rejected the Democrats were not at the table negotiating that. That is one. Number two, if President Trump was talking to Chuck Schumer, Chuck Schumer went back to the Senate and talking to Mitch McConnell and Mitch McConnell got a call from Speaker Ryan and said, hold on, don't talk on anymore and no more negotiations and move forward with the bill that you know is not going to pass, and we are done. So this is a party that has problems negotiating with the Democrats and themselves and President Trump and within their own conferences as well.
[Hamm:] It is the Democrats who walked away for the table. And ultimately, last night, it is the Democrats who walked away from the table because there was a deal to be made and there was a negotiation ongoing, but they shut it down.
[Elshami:] And three times, three times the president walked away from the agreement. First one was with Durbin and Senator Graham. The second time was with when Pelosi and Schumer went down there and the third time, it was with Chuck Schumer. And then the fourth time just to cap it all off is when Speaker Ryan called Leader McConnell and said no more.
[Baldwin:] Which is why you had Leader Schumer today saying that n negotiating with the president is like negotiating with Jell-O, and how do you respond to that some.
[Hamm:] That is not making sense.
[Baldwin:] He doesn't move? Jiggles a little bit?
[Hamm:] Well, the idiom does not make sense, nail the Jell-O to the wall.
[Dennard:] And you are at a place where you can have a deal and get something done on DACA and put a fork or a pause on it, and say, listen, keep the government open, and real Americans, and the lives are being impacted and not just the billion workers who are working at HUD or the White House, but talking about the military, and talking about the CHIP program, and so, let's keep it going, and talk about 2013, and President Obama actually said, I am not going to negotiate on the debt ceiling and health care when we need to keep the government open. So even he
[Baldwin:] You are looking at President Obama has a guiding grace, Paris Dennard?
[Dennard:] Well, I am saying if the Democrats are willing to look back at that and if the president back then was unwilling to tackle on all of the extra things to keep the government going, why can't we do it today.
[Elshami:] President Obama did not create the debt limit problem.
[Dennard:] But he created the DACA problem.
[Baldwin:] Jinx.
[Elshami:] President Trump got rid of President Obama's executive order.
[Hamm:] Because he did not do it legislatively and so he opted not to, and he did it in an extrajudicial way. and he didn't work, and put these people in a bad position, and it is a sad thing.
[Elshami:] The last thing they want to do is to vote on the immigration bill. And you are hearing in the messages right now, and all of the sudden, talking about the Democrats shut down the government because of illegals. What happened to the DREAMers? All of a sudden
[Hamm:] Well, we just heard a Republican Senator just say that.
[Elshami:] Look it on Twitter, every single message from President Trump on down, and the Democrats shutdown the government because of the illegals and what happened to the DREAMers.
[Preston:] And so, the Democrats and the Republicans both shutdown the government, OK. The blame doesn't just fall in one party. And I mean, we could talk for hours here how the government was set up as Senator Kennedy said by geniuses, OK, and now, run by idiots, right. Well, the geniuses are the ones who set up the 60-vote threshold in the United States Senate. So the bottom line is that Chuck Schumer, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and every Democrat and Republican needs to come together. And to your point, Paris, I agree with you, it is ridiculous that the government is shutdown right now, and it is absolutely ridiculous, and ridiculous point that there is no deal on DACA.
[Baldwin:] OK, have to hit pause. Hold on.
[Hamm:] The priority for the American people is 56 percent to keep it open, even though DACA isn't
[Baldwin:] And we will keep talking about shutdown and nailing Jell-O to the wall, although Mary Katharine is correct, it's impossible.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Donald Trump Jr. was told the Russian government was providing damaging information about Hillary Clinton. This in a stunning new report this morning from "The New York Times." We've got those details ahead.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] And 16 people killed in a Marine Corps plane crash in Mississippi. A huge debris field, no survivors. Many questions this morning, with the FBI on site. The latest information we have just moments away from a devastating scene in Leflore County. Welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] And I'm Christine Romans. It is 30 minutes exactly past the hour. Let's begin here. Up first, not only did Donald Trump Jr. meet with a Russian lawyer, there is new reporting this morning that Don Jr. was told the Russian government was directing her efforts to spread damaging information about Hillary Clinton. That is according to "The New York Times" citing three sources familiar with an e-mail sent to Trump Jr. That e-mail reportedly says the information about Clinton was part of a Kremlin effort to help the Trump campaign.
[Briggs:] Now, the e-mail was written by British publicist Rob Goldstone, an entertainment business associate of the Trump Sr., with connections to Moscow. Although Goldstone suggested the damaging material originated with the Russian government, there is no evidence it was related to the Russian hacking of the DNC. Now, last night, Don Jr.'s newly hired attorney dismissed this "Times" report, calling it, quote, much ado about nothing. His statement reiterating that Don Jr. didn't do anything wrong by taking the meeting and that nothing came of it.
[Romans:] The White House consumed on Monday by questions about this meeting. Spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders insisting the campaign did not collude, describing the meeting as very short and absolutely no follow-up. Sanders had fewer answers about the White House pattern of denying any possible wrongdoing, only to backtrack and offer amended answers when presented with contrary evidence. Listen to this from this off-camera White House press briefing.
[Reporter:] How are we to take all of these blanket denials that occurred through the transition and now when it has been proven and recognized by the president's attorney and Don Jr. that those blanket denials were not factual?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Spokeswoman:] Look, I think the point is that we've tried to make every single time today and then and will continue to make in those statements that there was simply no collusion, that they keep trying to make that there was.
[Briggs:] Sanders adds that President Trump only learned of his son's meeting with the Russian lawyer in the last few days. The president himself has been staying largely out of sight. Today, the second straight day with no public events on his schedule. CNN's Jeff Zeleny with more from the White House.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Christine and Dave, the White House is still facing a new round of questions here over a meeting that happened in 2016 about Donald Trump Jr., the president's son, his oldest son, as well as Jared Kushner, and the former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. Now, the White House spent a lot of time on Monday devoted to this question what happened at that meeting, what happened with that Russian lawyer they were talking to. Now, the White House wants to talk about anything but this. They wanted to turn the page on this, of course. But there's word from the Senate that they want to talk to the president's son. Take a listen to Senator Mark Warner, the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
[Sen. Mark Warner , Vice Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee:] It's also a continuing pattern that we've seen since the election of Trump campaign and Trump administration officials who have conveniently forgotten meetings with Russians only when they are then presented with evidence they have to recant and acknowledge those kind of meetings. It is why we've got to continue this investigation.
[Zeleny:] Now Donald Trump Jr. has retained a New York lawyer to represent him in these matters here in Washington. It is also Jared Kushner as well as Paul Manafort. So, what this does is sort of adds more fuel to the fire, adds more questions here on what exactly were the relationships, was there any collusion at all between the Trump campaign officials and the Russian lawyer operatives here. Now, this is all going to come to a head later this week. The Senate Intelligence Committee will be meeting for the first time interviewing some Trump campaign officials Christine and Dave.
[Romans:] All right. Jeff Zeleny, thank you. More questions this morning about the players involved in setting up that meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and the Russian lawyer. The latest additions to a growing cast of characters, music publicist Rob Goldstone and his client, Emin Agalarov, a pop star a pop star who asked Goldstone to make the meeting happened. Helping us sort out who's who, senior international correspondent Matthew Chance live in Moscow. A pop star who I have not heard of but who is popular in the former Soviet republics. Walk us through the web.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] I can't believe you haven't heard of him. He's massive in the former Soviet Union. His name's Emin. He sold more than a million records apparently. And, you know, he's got this sort of playboy image. You know, he's often sort of photographed with very beautiful women. And actually Donald Trump Sr., the president of the United States, before he was president of the United States, appeared in one of his pop music videos playing the role of the sort of boss like he did in "The Apprentice," saying, Emin pictured daydream being a beautiful woman Emin, I'm tired of you, you're never awake, you're fired. And that's one connection between the president and this pop star in the former Soviet Union. The main connection, though, is that the pop star's father is a guy called Aras Agalarov, and he's one of Russia's biggest property developers. He owns Moscow's biggest shopping mall, for instance. He's the man, he's the businessman who Donald Trump partnered up with to stage the 2013 Miss Universe competition in Moscow. So, this is the business relationship that Donald Trump has. Donald Trump Jr. has, as well, obviously. And which led to Rob Goldstone. The British national who is a music publicist who represents Emin sending that e-mail to Don Jr. saying, hey, can you meet with this Russian lawyer, a Russian lawyer who was closely linked with the Kremlin. The suggestion is that it was the Kremlin working through its business contacts in Russia of which obviously it has strong contacts to try and access the Trump campaign. That's, of course, an allegation and something the Kremlin denies.
[Romans:] Fascinating. All right. Matthew Chance, keep us abreast of the developments and players. Thank you, sir.
[Briggs:] Meanwhile, potential make-or-break day for Senate Republicans and their health care reform efforts. All of them back from holiday recess. They're getting their first opportunity to discuss the status of their measure to repeal and replace Obamacare. It could give us our first real idea when a new bill could emerge.
[Romans:] Lawmakers didn't exactly receive a warm welcome in Washington. Eighty people arrested on Capitol Hill protesting the GOP health care plan. Demonstrations breaking out in 13 different locations in House and Senate office buildings. Let's get more this morning from CNN's Ryan Nobles.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Dave and Christine, good morning from Capitol Hill. And there's no doubt that the trip that most of these senators took to their home states during the July 4th recess was not very helpful to the overall debate as it relates to this health care bill. Many of these senators getting an earful from their constituents about the progress of this bill. And that's made the debate here and the negotiations even more complicated. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell continues to offer tweaks to the bill, fixes here and there. But there are many senators, both conservative and moderate, who feel that tweaks are just not enough. Listen to what Susan Collins of Maine told me yesterday.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] I do need a complete overhaul in order to get to yes. I hope that our colleagues will take another look at the bill that Senator Cassidy and I introduced earlier this year. I'm not claiming that bill's perfect, but it provides a foundation from which we could proceed.
[Nobles:] So, the big question is, as these senators continue to deal behind closed doors, are they making subtle fixes to their original plan, or are they doing a major rewrite? It could potentially be a combination of both. We still haven't seen this new bill. In fact, many of the senators haven't even seen this new bill. So, it's likely that the earliest that we'll see any kind of vote on health care could be sometime next week. And there are many here who wonder if even that will happen as the prospects for this current bill seem to be very bleak Dave and Christine.
[Briggs:] Seems unlikely. Ryan, thank you. Sixteen people killed when a Marine Corps plane crashed in Mississippi. The FBI is at the scene investigating. No one survived this crash. This hour, it's not clear what went wrong on the KC-130 that went down in rural Leflore County, Mississippi, late Monday afternoon. KC130, one of the military's most widely used aircraft. A local fire chief says the debris field from the crash is five miles in radius, 4,000 gallons of foam were needed to put out the fire.
[Romans:] All right. We'll continue to follow the developments on that story. A U.S. Army soldier arrested, accused of providing material support to ISIS. What officials say they found during a year-long investigation. We've got that next.

[Sen. Mazie Hirono , Judiciary Committee:] Sure that that especially boys and the people who are in power know that this is totally unacceptable. It's been going on for way too long. So I look forward to that kind of change occurring. I'm hopeful.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Senator Hirono, thanks so much for joining us.
[Hirono:] Yes, thank you.
[Blitzer:] There's a lot of breaking news we're following today on CNN. And our special breaking news coverage right continues right now with Brooke Baldwin.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] Got the breaking news at the top of the hour. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN. Thanks for being with me. Today where to begin? We are following breaking news on several major stories. First up here, you have embattled Alabama Senate Candidate Roy Moore. He is expected to speak here, live pictures out of Birmingham, at this faith leaders press conference. So we'll take that. As now you have more and more women, more and more accusers, coming forward with additional allegations sex allegations against him. Also today the Democratic senator, Al Franken, is now apologizing in a lengthier statement after this news anchor in Los Angeles accused him of groping her a decade ago. And now the reverberations are being felt on Capitol Hill. Here's the photo that's now being circulated. And, yes indeed, this was then private citizen Al Franken's hands in places that just, quite frankly, shouldn't have been there. She revealed this picture showing his hands over her chest as she was asleep. On top of all of that, the White House today is holding its first on camera briefing at the White House in two weeks now that the president is back from his big trip in Asia. So we have all of that happening. But let's go straight to Capitol Hill because we have breaking news there. Moments ago, the House of Representatives just passed its plan to overhaul the nation's tax system. This is the first step in what could be not just the first major legislative victory for President Trump, but an historic act from Congress. Keep in mind, the last significant tax reform was passed 31 years ago. So let's go straight to our guy on The Hill. Phil Mattingly is standing by. Phil Mattingly, you know, obviously this is huge, huge news for House Republicans. Not a massive surprise, though. But talk me through what just happened.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, no question about it. Look, they were comfortable going into this vote. You heard things like, we've got this locked up. There will be no drama. And I think if you've been watching the Republican conference over the course of the last few years or even the last 10 months, no drama is a bit of a surprise statement when it comes to one of their House floor votes. But they were right, they had a big vote, 227 to 205. That was a lot of room. They needed 218 votes in the game where one or two votes is usually the margin of error here. Having nine or 10, that's a big, big step. But I think, Brooke, you made a really key point here, this is but one step of a multi-step process. And while House Republicans are certainly celebrating and are acknowledging that this is the first time it's happened in 31 years, Senate Republicans are now where all eyes have turned as everybody tries to kind of sus out what's going to happens next. And already we're seeing a lot of complications bubble up over there, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] All right, Phil, we hear the hustle and the bustle behind you. It's a big day for House Republicans. All eyes now onto the Senate where I'm sure we're going to come back to you in just a little bit. But I've got a business analyst, Alexis Glick, joining me now here as well. So, you know, everyone's turning their focus to the Senate. There are a number of names obviously to watch who have myriad concerns based upon different issues, right? And so can you just talk me through some of the biggest sticking points here on the Senate version?
[Alexis Glick, Financial Expert:] Yes. Absolutely. So here is the biggest thing, right. You recognize that when you look at the bill that just passed, if you were actually whether it's the CBO estimate or any one of the estimates you've seen out there, the lion's share of the tax breaks are really advantageous for corporate America, whether it's a combination of a reduction in the corporate tax rate or the repatriation of funds that have been sitting across overseas coming back here into America.
[Baldwin:] Alexis, forgive me. I'm going to cut you off mid-sentence because this is a big day for the man we're looking at right now here. This is the speaker of the House, Paul Ryan.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , House Speaker:] This country has not rewritten its tax code since 1986. The powers of the status quo in this town are so strong, yet 227 men and women of this Congress broke through that today. That is powerful. Of course, I want to thank not just the members who made this possible today, I want to thank the president, I want to thank his administration, and I want to thank our partners in the Senate who are doing their work as well. From the very start we've said that failure is not an option. And the president and his team have worked so constructively every step of the way with us. He's been a tremendous partner on this issue. And, you know, I've just go to say how proud I am of this conference. Tax reform is so very hard. But we know that there are people who are really struggling in this country. We know that we are just coming through a decade of real economic anxiety. And we know that this is a nation that has so much more potential that is not yet been tapped. That's what this day is about. That's what getting this done is about. This is about giving hard working taxpayers bigger paychecks, more take home pay. This is about giving those families who are struggling peace of mind. It's about getting this economy to grow faster so we get bigger wages, more jobs, and we put America in the driver's seat in the global economy once again. This is about giving people hope and a new opportunity. And it's about making sure that America continues to be the best place in the world, the best place in the world to live, to thrive, to start a business, to create a job, to grow, to construct. We've got a long road ahead of us. This is a very, very big milestone in that long road. We've got a long road ahead of us and we have a timeline to get this done by the end of the year. We have the Senate right now working on doing this. We're excited about going through the legislative process, going to conference, getting this done, making this bill even better. But, most importantly, I am excited on behalf of the American people who are waiting to see us get this done. The last thing I'll say is this. We collectively asked the country in 2016 to give us a chance to go work for them. We asked the people of this country who are struggling, give us a chance to make good by you. Give us a chance to make life better for you. Give us a chance to improve your life. This conference today did one of the greatest things we could possibly do to make good on that promise, and I'm so proud. Right now I just want to thank one of the women of our leaders of our Congress. She has been at the forefront of making sure that we get our message out, of making sure that we communicate, and making sure that we have two ears and one mouth and that we use them in that proportion. Ladies and gentlemen, our chairwomen of the Republican conference, Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
[Baldwin:] OK, so we'll stay on this picture, but let's go back to Alexis Glick. And again, listen, just to be clear, and Speaker Ryan alluded to this, they've got a bit of a road ahead. Not a huge surprise this did pass the House. You know, we know that the Senate is working on its own version and that needs to pass and then they need to sort of build a bridge between the two. We know that the House Republicans wanted to be able to lock in a number of their members so that, you know, those may not have want to wiggle out of the yes vote the second go around once they take a look at what the Senate passes. Just to make sure everyone who's watching, we're all on the same page. But we were talking Senate version, Alexis Glick, and you were talking sticking points before I had to interrupt you. Please continue.
[Glick:] No worries. Yes, so, look, if you look at this pass bill, about 75 percent of the benefits of the House bill go to corporate America, go to businesses, go to the wealthy individuals in this country. About a quarter of those benefits go to individuals who are the majority of this country. Of course 92 percent of them would get a tax cut, but the issue is whether there's a phase out or not. As we head to the Senate bill, we're going to be talking about whether or not the repeal of the Affordable Care Act should be part and parcel of it. It's something that Senator Susan Collins has come out and said, if that's a part of it, I can't vote yes. So one is this whole issue of the health care mandate and that credit and how that influences the outcome. The other thing is, there are little differences. For example, on the House bill, you could only deduct mortgage interest up to $500,000. In the Senate bill, that remains at $1 million. When you look at medical expenses, there are differences on what those deductions are allowed on the House bill versus the Republican bill versus the Senate bill. Here's the thing I'll say to you, Brooke, it is a big day for Congressman Ryan. It's a big day because they are making a move in a direction that frankly, whether you look across both members of Congress or whether you look at Wall Street, the stock market, business leaders, there is an enormous sense of urgency that they get tax reform done. The question is, will they get tax reform done by the end of the year and can that stimulate job growth. And, ultimately, how big is the cost going to be to the deficit? You know, when you look at the CBO estimates of $1.7 trillion, that is an issue, right? That's issue number one. But also issue number two is, we looked at a stock market that has climbed north of 20 percent in anticipation of tax reform. If they now cannot deliver tax reform and give what what not only Americans are looking for but what businesses and small businesses in particular, 95 percent of our businesses in the United States are small businesses. They create 70 percent of the jobs in the United States. They need this tax reform bill because we need to stimulate job growth. We need to get GDP well above 2 percent. And we need to ensure that everyone is sharing in a piece of this tax reform strategy, much like we saw back three decades ago in the Reagan administration.
[Baldwin:] Sure. And, you know, would it be a boom for larger corporations, yes. But talk to someone like Senator Ron Johnston and he's no so thrilled how this would be affection, you know, small businesses. You mentioned Susan Collins. As you said, there are a couple other Republicans who are hesitant as of yet, although Senator Johnston has said he wants to come around to yes. Alexis Glick, thank you so much. We'll come back to taxes here in just a second. But this other huge story has been breaking in Washington as well. This recent ground swell of sexual harassment allegations in Hollywood and across the country to Washington, D.C. This radio news anchor is now accusing Senator Al Franken of forcibly kissing and groping her while she was asleep. KABC's Leeann Tweeden posted this photo from this incident when she was on this USO tour back in 2006. She also spoke out publicly just a short time ago.
[Leeann Tweeden, Host Kabc Radio:] He's like, well, we need to practice the kissing scene. And I'm like, OK, whatever, and I just sort of blew him off because I didn't like, we don't need to practice the kissing scene. It's just a quick little thing, you know. And then he persisted and he's like, no, we really need to practice the kissing scene. And OK, Al, you just turn your head right, I'll turn my head right, we got this, you know, whatever. And he kept persisting. And I'm like, Al, this isn't "SNL." We we're not really going to kiss, so we don't really have to practice. And he just kept persisting. And it just reminded me of like the Harvey Weinstein tape that you heard the girl when she was wired up for the the NYPD and he's just persistent and badgering and just relentless, you know. And so I was just like, OK, fine, just so he would shut up, you know. And he just sort of came at me and we did the line and he came at me and before you even know it, I mean you kind of get close and he just put his hand on the back of my head and he mashed his face against I mean it happened so fast and he just mashed his lips against my face and he stuck his tongue in my mouth so fast. And all I could remember is that his lips were really wet and it was slimy. In my mind I called him fish lips the rest of the trip because that's just what it reminded me of. I don't know why. And he stuck his tongue down my mouth. And I remember, I pushed him off with my hands, and I just remember, I almost punched him so because every time I see him now, like my hands clench into fists, and I'm sure that's probably why. And I said, if you ever do that to me again, I'm not going to be so nice about it the second time. And I just walked out away from him and I walked out and I just wanted to find a bathroom and I just wanted to rinse my mouth out because I was just disgusted, you know. They give you CDs as you leave that have, you know, behind the scenes photos of you on the entire tour that they give you when you leave. And I get this and I open it up when I get home. I probably opened it the next day. And it was a photo of Al doing his, you know, this on my breast, like looking at the camera, just kind of smirking and smiling like, hey, look at me. And I took that as the, you know, the final like, ha ha, like, I got the last laugh, you know. I mean he knew I wouldn't see it until I got home and, you know, was away from everybody else. I mean, yes, there's no reason why I shouldn't accept his apology. You know, I mean, if that's sure.
[Baldwin:] So let's go to MJ Lee, our CNN national politics reporter on this story. And so we know that Senator Franken initially put out a couple line statement, and then, you know, sometime later, several paragraphs, including the I'm sorry out of the gate.
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] Yes, Brooke, and, first of all, let me just tell you that we are standing outside of Al Franken's office and we have been here all morning. We have not seen him yet. So we have heard so far from the victim, obviously, very vivid and disturbing details. We've heard those words directly from her. We have not seen Senator Franken yet. But, you're right, he did put out, just a little while ago, a very detailed and lengthy statement apologizing for what he did. I want to read a part of that statement. He said, the first thing I want to do is apologize. I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture, but it doesn't matter. There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture. He goes on to say, while I don't remember the rehearsal for the skit as Leeann does, I understand we need to listen to and believe women's experiences. I am asking that an ethics investigation be undertaken and I will gladly cooperate. Now, the statement is significant for a couple of reasons. The first one is what you alluded to, Brooke, is when he first, Senator Franken, was asked about these allegations when the allegations first came out this morning, his statement was a lot shorter. Now this new statement is much longer, much more extensive, and much more remorseful. And I think just goes to show that he clearly recognized that that initial statement was not enough. And the second point, of course, is that Franken himself is now saying that he will cooperate with this investigation and that he thinks it is appropriate. And I can tell you, having been here all day, this is the same message that we are hearing from all of Franken's colleagues who have spoken out so far. They agree that his actions were clearly inappropriate and disturbing and that an investigation is going to be appropriate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said this. Senator Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has said this, and others, men and women, Democrats and Republicans all agreeing that this investigation will be necessary. And, Brooke, just to point on something that I know you understand really well. This is so important because we now have a sitting member of Congress being named by a woman for past conduct, for sexual harassment allegations. Up until this point, there were a lot of allegations that were being made, but often these members were not actually being named or these members were former members who are no longer on Capitol Hill. So the fact that this morning we have name
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Lee:] That we have a current sitting member being named, that is potentially really significant.
[Baldwin:] And, by the way, you're the one, you know, who has been covering all this sexual harassment investigations on Capitol Hill and the cries for, you know, official training, and how it just hasn't been done right for years and years and years. And it was Congresswomen Jackie Speier who's told her own me too story, who was the one, you know, speaking the other day about how there are two members of Congress, and I don't even think Al Franken is part of the two, who are active members, who have been accused of sexual harassment. And so in the wake of this Al Franken story, now we have reaction from Jackie Speier herself. Here's the sound from the congresswoman.
[Rep. Jackie Speier , California:] I think there should be an investigation. And then we'll look at the conclusions of the investigation and make decisions then. But it's the Senate's decision.
[Question:] Do you feel this about Roy Moore?
[Speier:] I feel that they should both be treated equally. I think the president can't speak from a position of independence and
[Question:] What was your reaction when you saw that picture today? What was your what was
[Baldwin:] And there she goes, but just an important piece of this conversation, Congresswomen Jackie Speier. MJ Lee, thank you so much. I've got Gloria Borger and Emily Jane Fox sitting next to me here. Just on reaction and I want to get to what, you know, the congresswoman was just saying about how the president's not even going there because of his own personal issues with regard to allegations of sexual assault. But just out of the gate, the fact that you have, Gloria, you know, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer, right, from the left and the right both saying there needs to be an ethics investigation. I realize that this was years and years ago, the story, and he was a private citizen at the time, but can he survive this?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] It remains to be seen. I mean I we should say that Leeann did not call for him to step down or say that she thought he ought to step down. And when she was told that they had to have a they were having an ethics committee investigation, she said that's on them.
[Baldwin:] And he said, yes, I will participate.
[Borger:] Right. And I think, look, we have to look at the context in which all of this is occurring, which is Moore.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Borger:] Judge Moore. And that has been, you know, brewing and percolating, whatever you want to say, for days and days and days.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Borger:] And so then now you have a Democrat and these charges. And I can be sure of one thing, which is, this is not the last. This is just
[Baldwin:] The last which? For the Congress?
[Borger:] The last woman who will come out against a member of Congress.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Borger:] This is just kind of scratching the surface here. He was not a member of Congress at the time this occurred. He was just a comedian.
[Baldwin:] Right. We'll see if her coming out gives other women sort of, you know, more purpose and allows them to talk about people who are currently in positions of power who could affect them. Franken has no effect on her at this particular time in her life. It's a little bit more difficult for women who were working in the Congress. But I think what you're going to see is more and more on this, as we've seen around the country. Congress is always a lagging indicator and in this it is as well. OK. She just also to mention, when you read her whole her whole Leeann's piece, the reason why I think maybe one of the reasons why she finally spoke up was because the woman we just played the clip of
[Borger:] Right.
[Baldwin:] Congresswoman Jackie Speier was on her radio show and she thought, all right, if she can tell her me too story, then I will as well. What do you think?
[Emily Jane Fox, Senior Reporter, "vanity Fair":] It's interesting, what you think about what Judge Moore and his supporters must be thinking about as they watch this. If he does continue on in the election and win a seat in the U.S. Senate, this is the climate that he's going to enter into. He's sitting there watching what the Senate colleagues on both sides are saying about these allegations and Senator Franken, what are they going to do with the allegations against Judge Moore? And I think that that's a really important thing for the people who continue to support Judge Moore, that this is the climate he's going to enter into and it's not forgiving for anybody for any kind of allegation and certainly the ones against Judge Moore are more serious.
[Baldwin:] Can I bring a legal voice in, just briefly, and then I want to come back to you, Gloria. Faith Jenkins is joining us as well here, from a legal perspective. Faith, you know, this was something that when you looked at the statement, the more lengthily statement that Senator Franken has put out, he says he doesn't remember the kissing incident as she does, and that was 11 years ago. That was two years prior to when he became a senator. We've heard, you know, both from the left and the right calling for this ethics investigation. He says he would absolutely welcome that and participate. What do you make of the next moves and his whole I don't totally he apologizes but he says I don't totally remember it the way that she does?
[Faith Jenkins, Criminal Lawyer/former Criminal Prosecutor:] Well, I think that Leeann Tweeden today, when she gave her statement, she comes across as very credible. He may not remember, but she seems to have a very vivid memory and gives a lot of and gives a lot of detail. But, Brooke, in like most of these cases, you're talking about incidents where a statute of limitations has passed so there won't be criminal charges per se. So it's all about what happens now with his job as a sitting member of Congress. And it's also really important because you're talking about when people like Gretchen Carlson come when they come out and say, we need new legislation that helps victims of sexual harassment in the workforce. You're talking about going before Congress and ask for that legislation. So it's really important that, yes, there is an investigation. And, you know, perhaps there may be other allegations against members of Congress that come out. It's really important that these investigations take place, that members of Congress are held accountable for their actions, just like any other private citizen.
[Baldwin:] Yes. And what about the president? I guess I'm left wondering and, Gloria, here's my question to you. You know we apparently questions have been shouted at the president, as he was coming, as he was going, from meeting with the House Republicans today before the big vote on The Hill. Nothing. You know, according to Jeff Zeleny's reporting, part of the reason that he hasn't commented on the Roy Moore piece of this whole story is, because, as I mentioned, his own personal, let me let's just rip the band-aide off, and it's his own issue with all these women who have come forward through the years alleging sexual, you know, assault and harassment against the now president. But how long can the White House just sit on this and not say anything?
[Borger:] Well, you're going to see Sarah Huckabee Sanders come out and perhaps she will be the mouthpiece for the president in this.
[Baldwin:] Especially as a woman.
[Borger:] But, you know, don't forget, when during the campaign when he was confronted with all these women, who are now, by the way, they might come out again if they haven't already, and I believe one or two have and said, what about us?
[Baldwin:] Yes. Yes.
[Borger:] Are you for getting us? He said they were lying. He said he didn't believe them and that it was completely fabricated. So it's very difficult for him to say to Moore, who is saying the same thing, that this is fabricated, et cetera, et cetera, it's very difficult for him to say, well, you should have believed me that they were lying, but, you know, I want him to step aside. Everybody understands that this is very difficult for him politically. However, I would argue this is about something larger than Donald Trump.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Borger:] And it is about the Republican Party. And it is about the values of a country. And it is about women and the way women are treated in the workplace.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Borger:] And elsewhere.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Borger:] And that presidents are supposed to speak on these kinds of issues. And if he can't speak on that issue, his silence is very telling.
[Baldwin:] Agree. Very curious to see how Sarah Sanders handles this in just a little while.
[Borger:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] It's the first White House press briefing since, of course, this big Asia trip. So how she what she says and maybe what she doesn't say will be quite telling. Ladies, stay with me. Live pictures from inside that briefing room. We're going to take that when that begins this afternoon. Also, though, as we've been talking about this embattled Republican Senate Candidate Ray Moore, he is also expected to step behind that very microphone there in Birmingham at the faith leaders press conference. As now you have these two additional women, these two accusers, coming forward and telling their stories to "The Washington Post." So we're going to stay on that. Also breaking today, the judge in the Senator Bob Menendez corruption case declares a mistrial after the jury lands in a deadlock. We'll tell you what led up to that decision and we'll play some sound where the senator speaking once the mistrial was declared got pretty emotional there. So, stay with us. A heck of a lot to talk about on this very busy Thursday afternoon. Stay here.

[Cuomo:] All right, this was a pretty big deal in the world of football. For the first time since the deflategate saga, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was in attendance at a Patriots home game. Andy Scholes has more in this morning's "Bleacher Report." And if he was thinking bygones be bygones, he is forgetting whose house he was in.
[Andy Scholes, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Absolutely, Chris. You know, Patriots fans had been anxiously awaiting Roger Goodell's return to Foxborough so they could give him a nice warm welcome. You know, they haven't got to see him in person since he suspended Tom Brady for deflategate. But, you know, unfortunately, no one really knew Goodell was even at the game. This was a surprise visit. The broadcast never even showed Goodell. All we have really is this grainy pic of the commissioner in Patriots owner Robert Kraft's box. But, check this out, there were at least three Patriots fans that aren't still mad at Goodell. They took this smiling pic with the commissioner. Fans in New England will get another chance to see Goodell soon as she's scheduled to be at the NFL season opener in Foxborough on September 7th. So, Brianna, the fans there in New England will get a chance to formally great the commissioner just in a few weeks.
[Keilar:] Greet with air quotes you mean?
[Scholes:] Yes, greet.
[Keilar:] Greet. OK, we will see. Andy Scholes, thank you, sir.
[Scholes:] All right.
[Keilar:] New York City is often thought of as a concrete jungle, right? And for many families living in poverty, green spaces and affordable fresh food can be hard to come by. This week's CNN Hero was volunteering at a school in Harlem and was shocked to discover that many students could not properly identify vegetables, let alone incorporate them into their diet. So he planted the seed for a solution. Meet Tony Hillery.
[Tony Hillery, Cnn Hero:] The children come in here and they fall in love with the land. Got it. That's lunch tomorrow. In a bustling city like New York City, to find an oasis like this where you can go in and everything seems to slow down, this is their green safe place. Look at that. It's not just growing the vegetables. It's growing the children.
[Keilar:] Find out how Tony's urban farms are sowing seeds of hope. Just go to cnnheroes.com. And while you're there, nominate someone that you think should be a CNN Hero. All right, two extraordinary statements that ramped up the hot talk between North Korea and the United States. Is this a show of strength that will help cool it down? Is this a way of aiding diplomacy or is it boxing us into a response? David Axelrod has "The Bottom Line," next.

[Baldwin:] There is no end in sight. Another explosive volcanic eruption in Kawai Kilauea summit and producing those stunning images of plumes of lava bubbling like a fountain and reaches the Pacific Ocean and producing what is called "laze," a mixture of haze and lava and dangerous acid that could produce glass particles. Scott McClain is in the town of Pahoa. I can't get over the pictures. How dangerous is this Laze?
[Scott Mcclain, Cnn Correspondent:] It is certainly a localized threat. But first, Brooke, let me show you the origin of this. And it is the lava. So, this is the fissure that is causing all of the problems. It is actually five fissures in one. And just look at it. It is shooting high into the sky, it is an amazing, amazing sight to see. Obviously though that lava has to go somewhere. And so, all of these this dark stuff here, this is lava that was flowing just a couple of days ago, so you get a sense of how quickly this moves. If fact, about 50 yards into that lava flow that is dry, we're doing live shots in there just a few days ago. Now if you look on the horizon quickly, that white smoke, that is the laze that we're talking about. The mixture of hydrochloric acid and steam and the glass particles. And that makes it dangerous. And if the lava isn't what is pushing people out of their homes and it is for some people, it might be the gas. Sulfur dioxide on parts of the island have tripled in the last couple days.
[Baldwin:] Unreal. Pahoa, Hawaii, so many people having been to Kilauea as family vacations and now this. Scott McClain, thank you. Coming up next, a gay man describes a surprising meeting with the pope. Hear what Francis told him.

[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Anchor:] Bereft of reason and letting out a load of nonsense. That's North Korea's take on President Trump, as Pyongyang levels a new specific threat at a U.S. territory. What will President Trump do now?
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] And were employees at the U.S. embassy in Cuba targeted with a covert device? Hearing loss for some in Havana raising many questions this morning of some sort of acoustic attack.
[Marquez:] Bizarre.
[Romans:] Good morning, and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Marquez:] And I'm Miguel Marquez, in for Dave Briggs this week. It is Thursday, August 10th, 4:00 a.m. here in the eastern part of the United States, 5:00 p.m. in Seoul, South Korea. Just a day after the president promised fire and fury if North Korea made another threat against the U.S., Pyongyang does just that, leveling a very fierce, very specific threat to attack a U.S. territory, taking some personal shots at the president in the process. Now, the world waits to see if anything the commander-in-chief decides to do in response.
[Romans:] North Korea says it is, quote, seriously examining a plan to launch a missile strike targeting the sea about 20 miles off the coast of Guam, where the U.S. has two military bases. State-run media says the launch of four ballistic missiles would signal a crucial warning to the U.S. Pyongyang says its plan to launch missiles will be in place within days.
[Marquez:] Now, the statement also marks President Trump for speaking from a golf range where he's it says he, quote, let out a load of nonsense about fire and fury, failing to grasp the ongoing grave situation. The North Korean statement says, sound dialogue is not possible with such a guy bereft of reason and only absolute force can work on him. Joining us live with CNN's Anna Coren. She is live in Seoul, South Korea Ana.
[Anna Coren, Cnn International Correspondent:] Miguel, that's right. What we heard from North Korea earlier today was that it was considering, seriously examining, in fact, a plan to strike Guam, that island in the western Pacific. It would involve four intermediate range missiles with nuclear tips, nuclear warheads, that, as you say, that would be ready to go in days. The military saying it will present to North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, by the middle of August, and then it will be up to him. You mentioned those comments, that dealing with Donald Trump is bereft of reason, which obviously comes following the fire and fury language we heard a few days ago from the president. Obviously, his supporters saying that he's getting on Kim Jong-un's level, talking in a language that perhaps he understands as opposed to diplomatic language. His critics believe however that that is bringing certainly this part of the world, the Korean peninsula, and also the region, closer to war. Now, Miguel, it's important to note that Jim Mattis, obviously, defense secretary, retired four-star general, that he also spoke up earlier and warned North Korea mind you, he called them the DPRK, which really I wouldn't say necessarily is a sign of respect, but certainly an acknowledgment of what they call themselves, saying that if North Korea should stop provocations, it could bring destruction to the regime and its people. And as far as South Korea is concerned, well, a national security council meeting is held as we speak. We have yet to hear news from that. But certainly, earlier today, they said that the plan to strike Guam is absurd, that any provocation will be met with response. The South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, he has certainly said that he's open to dialogue, and the only way to resolve this is peacefully. But with what's happened in the last couple of days, South Korea now is also looking to beef up its military presence Miguel.
[Marquez:] Sounds like statements and reactions across the board, a very mixed situation. Anna Coren for us in Seoul, thank you.
[Romans:] So, now, with President Trump and Kim Jong-un trading insults and threats, reaction among Asian nations has been mixed. The governor of Guam stressing the importance of remaining calm, despite being targeted by the North Korean regime.
[Gov. Eddie Baza Galvo , Guam:] This is not a time to panic. These are many statements being made out there by a bellicose leader. But, at this point, there's been no change in the security situation here in Guam.
[Romans:] Let's bring in CNN's Sherisse Pham live from Tokyo. What's the situation there, Sherisse?
[Sherisse Pham, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, here in Japan, government officials are saying, we will not tolerate any provocations from North Korea. And they're taking a passive stance, which is the stance that Japan has maintained since the end of World War II. It's a little bit different from its neighbor, its nearby neighbor, South Korea, which has warned to North Korea to, please, look, dial it back or face military retaliation from us. So, there's a little bit of a mixed bag going on across the region. And China coming out the most forcefully telling, look, all parties, everybody, please back off a little bit and tone it down. Now, all of this in Japan comes at a sensitive time, because this week marks the anniversary of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a very strong reminder that Japan is the only country to have suffered under the attack of an atomic bomb. Now the people across the region in Japan, in South Korea, and China, they are carrying on with their daily lives here, because look, they are used to this bellicose language from North Korea. They are a little bit startled at the war of words coming out of the United States. But for now, life continues as usual. And we will see if the posture changes a little bit in the coming days Christine.
[Romans:] All right. Sherisse, thank you so much for that, live from Tokyo this morning. I mean, that timing is really interesting, Miguel, you know, when you talk about the anniversaries of those bombings, it reminds you that when you're talking about nuclear threats, there are moral, environmental, and just human questions that have to be asked about a nuclear
[Marquez:] The sensitivities to nuclear warfare in Japan are so on the surface still, this many years after the incidents. So far, no official reaction from the White House to North Korea's latest threat. We have learned President Trump's fire and fury warning to North Korea was improvised. Sources tell CNN it was not part of a scripted statement. The White House says chief of staff John Kelly and members of the president's national security team were well-aware of the tone the president intended to use, though the words were his own. A State Department spokeswoman says everyone in the administration sees things the same way.
[Heather Nauert, State Department Spokesperson:] The United States is on the same page. Whether it's the White House, the State Department, the Department of Defense, we are speaking with one voice.
[Romans:] That's debatable. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis struck notably different tones in their statements. Mattis focused on U.S. military capabilities and the risk North Korea would be taking if it attacked.
[Marquez:] He said: North Korea must choose to stop isolating itself and stand down its pursuit of nuclear weapons. The DPRK should cease any consideration of actions that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people. Meantime, Rex Tillerson stressed diplomacy, saying he thought the president just wanted to be clear to the North Korean regime in order to avoid any miscalculation on their part.
[Romans:] But those reassurances seem to clash with the president's "fire and fury" message in his early tweets yesterday: My first order as president was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal. It is now far stronger than ever before. Worth noting, the president has made nuclear spending a budget priority, but nothing has actually changed yet.
[Marquez:] He also tweeted: Hopefully, we will never have to use this power, but there will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world. He added that exclamation point. Today, President Trump meets the vice president for lunch at Mr. Trump's New Jersey golf club.
[Romans:] All right. Rising tensions with North Korea is finally breaking Wall Street's calm. Global stocks down after U.S. stocks closed lower. A response to the president's warning to North Korea and its then-threat to Guam. For months, stocks have coasted to record highs. But now, investors showing signs of caution. For example, gold, a typical safe haven, rising more than 1 percent. It's at a two-month high. Meanwhile, Wall Street's fear gauge is up 21 percent this week. The VIX index has previously been trading at historically low levels, and the U.S. dollar, once a safe bet in the global economy, is down 8 percent this year. Of course, North Korea isn't the only catalyst for caution. Companies released some disappointing earnings reports this week. But overall, corporate profits remain strong this season. 2017 is on track from the strongest profit growth in six years. All three stock market averages are still up by double digits this year. Defense stocks, by the way, had a big boost yesterday as the broader market fell. Shares of Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, among others, hit record highs. So, you saw energy and the defense stocks yesterday as tensions rose with North Korea.
[Marquez:] I'm going to have a fear gauge installed in me.
[Romans:] Fear gauge.
[Marquez:] Now, the State Department believes several of its employees at the U.S. embassy in Havana were targeted last fall by a covert sonic device that caused them to suffer hearing loss. Two staffers experienced such serious health problems they had to be returned to the United States for treatment, according to the State Department. An official there, the workers were not in the same place at the same time, but also reported a variety of concussion-like symptoms. Bizarre.
[Romans:] The FBI is now looking into this case. The Trump administration responding to the incident by expelling two Cuban diplomats from their embassy in Washington in May. Cuban officials call the expulsion an overreaction. But the Cuban foreign ministry says it is taking the matter with great seriousness. Acoustic, some kind of acoustic device they're investigating.
[Marquez:] You can make people sick with that stuff. Whether they were listening or trying to affect their health.
[Romans:] Sounds like Cold War spy games, you know? It seems like something from a time past.
[Marquez:] Bizarre.
[Romans:] All right. A Republican senator's theory of why John McCain voted against the Senate health care plan left even a radio host stunned.
[Sen. Ron Johnson , Wisconsin:] He has a brain tumor right now. That vote occurred at 1:30 in the morning. Some of that might have factored in.
[Radio:] Really?
[Romans:] More of Ron Johnson's comments and what he's saying now.

[Camerota:] OK, it's time for "CNN Money Now." President Trump signing a revised trade agreement with South Korea, the first major trade deal he's finalized since taking office. What does this mean for all of us? Chief business correspondent Christine Romans joins us with more. Hi, Christine.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent, Anchor, "early Start":] Hi, there, Alisyn. Well, the president has signed his first trade deal with South Korean President Moon Jae-in on the sidelines of the U.N. Monday.
[Trump:] It was a long time in coming and it's a basic redoing of the agreement that was done before, which was a very unfair agreement for the United States.
[Romans:] It's really a revision, not an entirely new deal. It's meant to sell South Korea more U.S. cars, medicine, and Ag. The U.S, last year, bought $23 billion more of South Korean goods than it sold, driven mainly by autos. Trump hates that deficit and wants South Koreans to buy more Chevys and Fords. Now, South Korea gets a break on U.S. steel tariffs. This, just as other trade negotiations break down. China canceled planned trade talks and a senior Chinese official, overnight, said the U.S. is putting a knife to its neck, making it hard to negotiate in good faith. That knife is tariffs now on $250 billion in Chinese goods and the president has threatened another $276 billion. It's meant to punish China for years of stealing technology and trade secrets and putting unfair barriers on U.S. business. Now, the president, I am told Alisyn, wants nothing less than a reset of America's relationship with China a reset. The president is not concerned about higher prices for American consumers because of his trade taxes. The feeling is the U.S. economy is strong, the stock market is near record highs. Now is the time for this president to crack down on China. He is not backing down Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Christine. Thank you very much for explaining all of that. We're following a lot of news this morning so let's get right to it. All right, good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Tuesday, September 25th, I'm told. It's 8:00 in the east. I'm also told that. I will never take another day off. Look at how rusty I am.
[Berman:] No, you can't take a day off because everything falls apart.
[Camerota:] So that was my fault what happened yesterday?
[Berman:] Yes.
[Camerota:] OK. Well, that's obvious. The White House, who is facing these dual crises that cropped up yesterday and these are shaping up to be the most possibly consequential week of the presidency. The future of embattled Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, the man who oversees Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, is now in limbo. What would that mean for Robert Mueller's probe? After a day filled with drama and confusion, Rosenstein meets with President Trump in person on Thursday at the White House to learn his fate.
[Berman:] And, of course, Thursday is the day that Brett Kavanaugh will be in Washington, along with Christine Blasey Ford, who accuses him of sexual assault. And there is a new development in the Supreme Court showdown. Moments ago, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said that President Trump is open to having the Senate hear from Deborah Ramirez. Now, Ramirez is the woman who told "The New Yorker" that Brett Kavanaugh put his genitals in her face in college, which Kavanaugh denies.
[George Stephanopoulos, Abc News Chief Anchor:] You said that everybody's voices should be heard. So does the president want Ms. Ramirez to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee as well?
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Certainly, we would be open to that and that process could take place on Thursday. Again, the president's been clear let them speak. But let's also let Brett Kavanaugh speak and let's let him tell his side of the story.

[Camerota:] The president, again, lashing out at his former personal attorney Michael Cohen. In return for decades of devotion to Donald Trump, Mr. Trump now says Michael Cohen should face stiff punishment and serve a long prison sentence. By contrast, President Trump is praising Roger Stone who, at the moment, is refusing to testify against the president. Joining us now are former House Intelligence chairman and CNN national security commentator, Mike Rogers. And, director and president, and CEO of the Wilson Center and former U.S. congresswoman from California, Jane Harman. Both of your credentials are too long to read. I only this is only a 3-hour show, OK, people?
[Jane Harman , Director, President, And Ceo, Wilson Center, Former U.s. Congresswoman From California, Former Ranking Member, House Intelligence Committee:] His are.
[Camerota:] So, number one, as my grandfather would have said, that's a fine how-do-you-do for Michael Cohen, first of all, and all of his devotion to Donald Trump. But here is the tweet that some people think puts the president in legal jeopardy, OK? This is the president yesterday. "I will never testify against Trump. This statement was recently made by Roger Stone, essentially stating that he will not be forced by a rogue and out of control prosecutor to make up lies and stories about President Trump. Nice to know that some people still have guts!" Jane, is that the dangling of a pardon? Is that witness tampering, to your mind?
[Harman:] Well, I am a trained lawyer but I'm not a litigator and I don't want to opine about that. But I think it's a careless statement and let's see what happens in a year or so if the evidence if the evidence shows that not only that he lied this Roger Stone we're talking about but that the future for him is absolutely grim. I assume he has a family, and kids, and grandkids, et cetera. And, you know, the moment of truth hasn't yet arrived for him.
[Camerota:] They haven't even reached out to him, which is notable. Mueller's prosecutors have not, as far as we know, reached out to Roger Stone.
[Harman:] What I was going to say is the sadness is here were are at the time of the Bush funeral in Washington where people recall decency, courage, restraint, good manners, et cetera, and we have this coarse exchange going on on the airwaves certainly, not in this room
[Camerota:] Of course, not.
[Harman:] not by him or you or John Berman. But I'm just saying this is sad. And, Donald Trump seems totally transactional. If you're loyal to him this minute, you get praised. And I just don't know how this wears over time. And the last thing I want to say about the Mueller inquiry is I do know him and Mike knows him, too. He came to the FBI right around 911. I was a very senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and worked closely with him. His tradecraft is meticulous, he's a Republican. And what he wants to do is find out what the truth is, and that's what he should be doing.
[Camerota:] And so, because you were both on the House Intel Committee, as chair, Mike, would something like this have gotten your attention?
[Mike Rogers, Cnn National Security Commentator,  Former Chairman, House Intelligence Committee:] Well, listen, I think it's bad form. And as a former FBI guy, I just don't think that rises to the level of a crime. But you don't want your President of the United States out there talking about this in any way or encouraging people not to cooperate with a prosecutor of any form special prosecutor, U.S. prosecutor, local prosecutor.
[Camerota:] But that is what this is doing. I mean, by saying the people who don't cooperate have guts, you don't think that that's a crime. It's a
[Rogers:] I don't think it's a crime. Listen, I think it's terrible bad form, it's unseemly, it shouldn't happen. Then but, you know, the fact that these people are flipping I worked organized crime when I was in the FBI and if Sammy "the Bull" Gravano, who was the lieutenant who killed, you know, dozens of people on behalf of John Gotti, the head of the Gambino crime family if he flips, all of these people will flip eventually. So all of these statements that the president's going to make I'm telling you, when one of those prosecutors or those agents walk in and say guess what, you're going to jail. And these folks, I wouldn't say, are the toughest hombres on the block, right? They think they're tough where they're at.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rogers:] They start going
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rogers:] and talking prison time, they are going to cooperate. I just would again, the whole thing is unseemly and it's very unpresidential and I wish he wouldn't do it.
[Camerota:] There are things in the Mueller investigation that are going to be revealed this week. This is an important week.
[Harman:] Yes.
[Camerota:] So there will be Michael Flynn's sentencing memo. So we will know in the public, for the first time, really what Michael Flynn has offered up, what Michael Flynn did. What the deal was with Sergei Kislyak, the ambassador who he was trying to work a backroom deal with sanctions. Paul Manafort we will also know more about his sentencing. An interesting development from "The New York Times" this morning. There was talk that Paul Manafort had gone to Ecuador to do something with Julian Assange. Here's a little bit more information for you both about that. "In at least two meetings with Mr. Manafort, Mr. Moreno" who is the incoming president at that time, in Ecuador "and his aides discussed their desire to rid themselves of Mr. Assange in exchange for concessions like debt relief from the United States, according to three people familiar with these talks. They said Mr. Manafort suggested he could help negotiate a deal for the handover of Mr. Assange to the United States." What's interesting about this is that yes, he did go to Ecuador. Yes, he did have these conversations. Now, that was his job. He often did these sort of backroom international deals as a consultant. We don't know if there was any connection here to, at the time, Donald Trump. What does this tell you about where we are, Jane?
[Harman:] Well, I like Mike's analogy to the mob prosecution. It tells you that the circles are closing. That one person talks about the next person who talks about the next person. And who's in the center of the circle? Hmm, we'll just see. But again, it I don't want to get ahead of
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Harman:] what's going on with them.
[Camerota:] Agreed, because there have been no direct links. I mean, actually, there's been nothing that we know of that suggests that Donald Trump directed Michael Flynn to do what he did or that Donald Trump directed Paul Manafort to have these talks.
[Harman:] No.
[Camerota:] I hear you.
[Harman:] But the story is being told through these pleadings and the legal documents that the Mueller group is filing. And he has personally signed a couple of the recent ones, the point being that he's ready to put his own credibility on the line for this. And as people are speculating, by the time we get to the end of this we may not need a report because the report may be through the court system, and through a series of indictments, and through a series of plea deals. And I think that's how our court system is supposed to work. And again, the goal is the truth. The goal isn't to get people.
[Camerota:] And if he did?
[Rogers:] You know, I just think the Flynn what's the Flynn document is going to be very interesting to me because he's been pretty quiet
[Camerota:] What are you looking for?
[Rogers:] You know, obviously, he was close to the campaign, close on the national security front throughout the campaign and then became his national security adviser. So he is the one person that was inside the White House and so he could talk not only about what happened pre-campaign but during his first few weeks at the White House. That will tell you where the focus of the prosecution is, I think, if whatever you'll get in the sentencing guideline they won't give you everything but they'll give you very important clues about where they're going and why that's important to understand. Is he going after the president? Is Mueller going after the president? Is Mueller just going to lay out the cause of what happened on Russian
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rogers:] interference in the election?
[Camerota:] President Trump, obviously, isn't the first person first president to have to face some sort of scandal or controversy in office. Do you worry when you watched the G20 and what happened, and how he presented the U.S. on the international stage that it is too distracting for him? That it is getting in the way of doing the U.S. business?
[Harman:] Well, I actually thought that was his best summit meeting. And some things may have happened, like the dinner with President Xi, may lead to some kind of reasonable stand-down on the U.S.-China trade dispute. That's important because having a reasonable trading relationship with China matters to the U.S. It matters to U.S. jobs, something the president cares about. I also think that we have a very competitive relationship with China and China is doing some things wrong. But it matters, again, that we try to find a way forward. I just want to say one thing, which is Gina Haspel is now going to testify the CIA director before some members of the Senate chairmen and rankers of four committees and that's, obviously, to stave off a resolution on Yemen. I think, frankly, that resolution should proceed. But I also think it's a good thing, and I'm sure Mike agrees with me, that we have testimony from her about what happened in the Khashoggi matter.
[Camerota:] Yes. Look, I mean, Sen. Lindsey Graham was on record of how frustrated he was that she hadn't been sent last week to do all of that. Jane Harman, Mike Rogers, thank you both very much.
[Harman:] Thank you.
[Rogers:] Thanks so much.
[Camerota:] As always, great to have you here
[Rogers:] Appreciate it.
[Camerota:] with us John.
[Berman:] All right, thanks so much. A new day and a new data breach. While we were getting ready to tell you all about the huge Marriott hack, another one came along that stopped us dead in our tracks. Why these cyberattacks are worse than you think. A CNN reality check, next.

[King:] Welcome back. Republicans today putting political survival ahead of any interest in finding the truth or their own party's credibility. Again, it's important to note the Trump Justice Department asserts in court papers that the president, as the Republican nominee, directed an illegal campaign finance scheme. That's a big deal, right?
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] Naturally, it makes you very concerned. But, you know, the president shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of people that he's trusted.
[Sen. Chuck Grassley , Iowa:] What about Michael Cohen?
[Question:] He's accusing
[Grassley:] He's he's he's plead he's plead guilty and that's the way the Constitution works.
[Question:] So what about
[Grassley:] So so what else so what else so what is what is there about him to worry about?
[Sen. John Kennedy , Louisiana:] Mr. Cohen's credibility is going to be challenged. I don't think the full story has been written yet.
[King:] The top GOP leadership, silent so far. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declined to respond to questions. House Speaker Paul Ryan said he needs more information. Among Democrats, there's across the board outrage, but mixed opinion over how to channel that outrage. Some saying everything should be on the table, including impeachment, even indictment. Others say, let's be a little more cautious.
[Sen. Elizabeth Warren , Massachusetts:] Protect Robert Mueller. Let him finish his investigation. And when we've got that, then we can make a decision on what the appropriate next step is.
[Sen. Tammy Duckworth , Illinois:] I don't think that we should be talking about impeachment.
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Illinois:] At the very minimum, we should be withholding this decision on the Supreme Court nominee until the air is cleared.
[Sen. Richard Blumenthal , Connecticut:] We should talk about all the remedies. Every single remedy, including indictment of the president, should be on the table. The president can be indicted.
[King:] Let's get straight to CNN's Phil Mattingly, who's been racing around Capitol Hill. And interesting day up there. Phil, what's the most surprising thing, if anything, that you're hearing?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] I think the most surprising thing is that nothing's really surprising right now based on kind of trolling the hallways for the last 19 months, generally trying not to be scooped by Seung Min over there, the kind of reaction here is similar to what we've seen. Dramatic, seemingly cataclysmic moment for the administration x occurs and then the next day or the couple hours later you go talk to Republican senators. Some have concerns. Some didn't see it or don't have the information on it. And others outright defend the president. And that is exactly what has happened this morning. And I don't think you're going to see any shift. The red line has always been, John, and we've talked about this a lot, the firing or efforts to get rid of the special counsel, Robert Mueller. Anything short of that, you're just not going to see many people bite. The one interesting element obviously you heard from Senator Richard Blumenthal, what I've picked up from Democrat after Democrat is, nobody wants to go anywhere near the impeachment question and they're aware of kind of the political problems with that on their side. They want to talk about Mueller finishing his investigation. But on the Republican side, this is very much aligned with the rhythm that we've seen on Capitol Hill from Senate Republicans and House Republicans over the course of the last 19 or 20 months.
[King:] The grand ostrich party I would call it. Phil, the Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, says delay Brett Kavanaugh's hearings for the Supreme Court nomination because of this. Connect those dots for me.
[Mattingly:] So basically the way Democrats are putting it right now is when they talk when they've gone through the record of Brett Kavanaugh, when they've gone through what he did with the Starr independent counsel, what he's done in his judicial ranks, that his view on executive power doesn't align with a president that's currently either been implicated or perhaps under investigation. Here's the reality here. That's their push right now. You already had Senator Mazie Hirono, Judiciary Committee, cancel her meeting with Brett Kavanaugh, her one-on-one meetings. Cory Booker saying they need to postpone the meetings, instead hold hearings on the Cohen issue. The reality is, in talking to senior GOP aides, as one told me, this train is moving. It's not going to stop. Democrats, as you know well, don't have power to actually stop anything on their own and they don't have the power to block the nomination on the Senate floor without help from Republicans who, as it currently stands, that's clearly their position. They're trying to get grassroots and the base riled up to put pressure on Republicans there. But at this moment, it doesn't look like anything of that sort is going to go their way, John.
[King:] At this moment. We'll see if tomorrow is like today. Phil Mattingly, appreciate it. A busy day up on The Hill. Let's bring it into the room. It is it is a fascinating moment for everybody. But you do get the sense from Republicans, this is bigger than the past Trump crises where they just try to, you know, walk away or, you know, pretend they don't know what they're talking about or duck the questions or just hope tomorrow is a new question. Their calculation now seems to be, there's an election in 11 weeks. We need Trump voters. If we don't have Trump voters, we lose our power. Therefore, we're going to take wash our hands of this and try to stay away from it. Is that fair?
[Kim:] Exactly. And I think while the news may seem to be bigger, the Republican reaction really isn't. For example, I spoke with I was up on The Hill with Phil earlier and I spoke with Senator Chuck Grassley of the Judiciary Committee and I asked him, all the news from yesterday, what does that mean for the prospects of the Mueller protection bill that we have seen languish in the Senate? And he's like, look, it's up to McConnell. And I don't see the calculus changing before the midterms at all. And you talked about Trump voters at the rally last night. It was as if this news hadn't even happened. And we heard the chants of "lock her up," but that was not in reference to anyone connected in Trumpland. It was to Hillary Clinton herself.
[King:] Yes, the president's personal attorney pleads guilty. The president's campaign chairman is found guilty and Trump voters say "lock her up."
[Kucinich:] The only the only, I guess, thing that could happen on The Hill, you had Warner and Burr come out shortly after the Cohen plea deal was announced and say that they were going to they wanted Cohen to come back in because it was clear that he wasn't telling them the truth. So will that happen? We'll have to see. Cohen seemed open to coming to The Hill and testifying in public. I don't see that happening. That's that is the one bright spot in a whole flurry of ostriches, I think.
[King:] Right. It is foolish to expect or ask for consistency, but I covered the Clinton White House when he was impeached. I mean it had nothing to do with Whitewater, which is where Ken Starr began.
[Collins:] Exactly.
[King:] I don't remember Republicans jumping up to Bill Clinton's defense saying, how dare you, Ken Starr, that has nothing to do with Whitewater. So now when they say it and we don't know where Robert Mueller's going to end. We just know we're in the early chapters of the Mueller part. And so when the Sean Hannity's and members of the United States Senate say this has nothing to do with Russia, why are we doing this
[Shear:] You know, it's interesting, you haven't you have, for the next, you know, number of weeks before the election, you have an interesting PR battle. And we're going to see which side wins, right? On the one hand, the Republicans that you saw there are betting that they can make the PR case that they can undermine the credibility of all of these people. You saw them trying to undermine, well, Cohen's going to have trouble. He doesn't have any credibility. The same way they've been consistently trying, with the help of the president, to undermine the credibility of Mueller and the angry Democrats and all of that. On the other side, the Democrats are going to are having been given a gift of, you know, being able to describe a culture of corruption, right? And that's what their message is going to be. And the question is, which of those
[King:] Not just with the administration. Two Republican congressmen, one yesterday, one a couple of weeks ago indicted as well.
[Shear:] Absolutely. And all of everything else, Scott Pruitt, and Zinke and everybody else. And so you've got these two competing messages that are going to play out over the next 10 or 11 weeks and the question is, which one is going to be more powerful. You know, are the and the Republicans right now are betting that they're going to be able to sort of destroy the credibility so by the time the voters get there, they sort of shrug.
[Collins:] Well, and the defense of there's no Russian collusion is not exactly rock-solid messaging for them when the in the wake of what happened yesterday. But I do think some of the president's allies over the last, you know, 16 hours or so are worried of what they're hearing from Republicans because they may not be coming out and condemning what happened, condemning Michael Cohen, but they are saying that these are really serious allegations, that they're very concerned or either they're not saying anything at all, like Mitch McConnell. And I do think they're worried that this could come out, that they're not immediately defending the president or defending anything, anyone he's surrounded himself with, and I do think that they fear that that could eventually turn on them because as soon as the voters turn on the president, the Republicans on Capitol Hill will turn on the president, too.
[King:] And they
[Kucinich:] That's very true.
[Collins:] All they care about is
[King:] To the Republicans on Capitol Hill, they keep getting surprised by the news. They keep getting surprised by what's happening in court and they don't trust what they're hearing from the White House. We'll continue the conversation about the politics in a moment. Up next, though, the special counsel with new validation and now some say fresh leverage over Paul Manafort.

[Paul:] Well, Republican Senator Rand Paul is apparently recovering this morning after he was assaulted. An acquaintance of his has been charged in the attack. Now, the senator suffered minor injuries, we are told, when he was tackled at his home in Bowling Green, Kentucky. This happened Friday afternoon. According to police, Paul's neighbor, Rene Albert Boucher, intentionally attacked him. Boucher is charged with one count of fourth degree assault. Still not clear why Boucher went after Paul, but police are investigating.
[Savidge:] Meanwhile, new details are emerging from former DNC chief Donna Brazile's book about the inner workings of the Democratic Party. According to "The Washington Post", Brazile considered taking Hillary Clinton off the 2016 ticket and replacing her with then Vice President Joe Biden. The move came after Clinton fainted at 911 memorial in New York City during the campaign. And we're also learning that Brazile thought Clinton's campaign headquarters lacked passion and energy and thought that it felt like someone died. A lot of heavy words there. Joining me to discuss all of this is political commentator Errol Louis and CNN political analyst Julian Zelizer. Book comes up right in time for the holidays. And the drip, drip, drip just seems to build up all the anticipation. Julian, first of all, this idea that you would replace Hillary Clinton mid campaign, does that even seem feasible? No, it really doesn't. This seems more like a speculative moment for Donna Brazile than something that was about to happen and she couldn't have done this single-handedly. She would have had to have a lot of support and the vote of many other Democratic officials. And so, this is in the category of bad timing for Democrats to be relitigating the election and the tensions during the election. Right now, when they are probably poised to do pretty well in the mid- term elections, it's just it's a problem for Democrats that this book is coming out right now. And, certainly, we know the Clinton staffers are outraged. I was going to use another word. And they have put out a statement, including Huma Abedin and John Podesta, in which they responded to Brazile's accounts in her memoir, saying, "It is particularly troubling and puzzling that she would seemingly buy into the false Russian-fueled propaganda spread by both the Russians and our opponent about our candidate's health. We do not recognize the campaign the chief portrays in the book. We are pretty tired of the people who were not part of our campaign telling the world what it was like to be on the inside of our campaign and how we felt about it" Errol, how damaging is this? Julian is already alluding to it here. Is it just a fight between Clinton staffers and Donna Brazile? I mean, Donna Brazile was head of the DNC. It was like she's just sort of a person on the sideline.
[Errol Louis, Cnn Political Commentator:] No, that's right. And those of us who have worked with her, she was, of course, a contributor on CNN, have a great deal of respect for her. Look, I thought that the particular revelation that she had sort of at least considered some of the machinery that is in the DNC charter, that gives her the power, I imagine, in some kind of a health emergency to replace the nominee, if need be, I thought in some ways that was both interesting, but a little bit routine. You know? If you can go back to a 911, I mean, there was a great deal of discussion about what happened. She collapsed, for God's sake. She was carried into her car. There was sort of a blackout period when nobody knew what was going on. Under the circumstances, for Donna Brazile to sort of say, if I have to, I have to at least be thinking about what we might do. And she also reveals in the book, in the excerpt at least, she was contacted by Biden's office, by Martin O'Malley's office, the former mayor of Baltimore who was a candidate for president. So, she wasn't the only one who was thinking we don't know how serious this health thing is. Maybe it's nothing, but if it's serious, we are going to have to take some steps.
[Savidge:] But what about her reasoning for not doing it, in which she sort of says, I'm paraphrasing here, so it's not really fair, but something to the effect of she thought of all the women that were supporting Hillary Clinton and just couldn't bring herself to disappointment. That's what it made it sound. It's kind of a throw-away there. A lot of people supported Hillary Clinton.
[Louis:] Well, just I don't know if it was her call to make. I read it more as her sort of not feeling that we could step beyond what the facts of the situation really allowed for.
[Savidge:] Julian, I'm sorry. I cut you there.
[Zelizer:] The problem with that excerpt is, on the one hand, there is the natural concern the head of the DNC would have if there is a health issue. And, at that moment, Errol is talking about, it's reasonable to think that Donna Brazile is just looking at the options on the table. But then the next line suggests it was a more conscious debate about whether she needed to be replaced because the campaign wasn't doing well and Brazile couldn't imagine doing it. So that kind of throw-away line will play into the debate, whether not only was there a problem with the Clinton campaign, but were Democrats wrestling with the idea of removing her, and removing her for someone who didn't really run, which is the other odd part of the story, meaning Vice President Biden as opposed to Sen. Sanders, which will also fuel the flames from that primary.
[Savidge:] I got a feeling there is more to come on this book. Errol Louis and Julian Zelizer, thank you.
[Louis:] Thanks.
[Paul:] Well, still to come, CNN'S Jake Tapper sits down with actor Woody Harrelson, talking about his role as LBJ, Lyndon B. Johnson in that new film "LBJ". You're going to see Woody Harrelson like really you've never seen him before.
[Savidge:] Plus, "Saturday Night Live" takes on a busy week of news for the Trump administration. They put Trump, Paul Manafort and Jeff Sessions together in a shower scene.

[King:] Just now the acting attorney general responding angrily to the House Democrats on the Judiciary Committee after they voted this morning to authorize a subpoena to compel his testimony. The Justice Department now says Matthew Whitaker won't show up tomorrow in Capitol Hill unless he gets guarantees from the Democratic Committee Chairman, Jerry Nadler, that the subpoena will stay in Nadler's back pocket. Let's go live to CNN's Laura Jarrett she obtained this. Laura, what does it say and what does it tell us?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Well, John, no shortage of drama here between the Justice Department and Capitol Hill over this closely watched testimony that was supposed to happen. Matthew Whitaker's first oversight hearing on Capitol Hill set for tomorrow morning now in jeopardy over this whole issue of a subpoena, the one that Jerry Nadler's committee authorized this morning in case he doesn't answer questions on the grounds of executive privilege. But the Justice Department now pushing back very hard, saying this was a breach of the agreement that he voluntarily wanted to testify and now saying that if they don't get a reassurance from the committee rather an assurance in the first place from the committee by 6:00 p.m. that they will not use that subpoena, he will not show up for that hearing tomorrow. Now, it's interesting, they do say if they go forward and they can work it out with negotiations, he will answer some questions. The Democrats really keyed on, his communications about the Special Counsel's investigation on the Russia investigation. And on that part I just want to read to you a little bit, John, of what the Justice Department is saying the he would be willing to testify to. They say the acting attorney general will testify that at no time did the White House ask for or did the acting attorney general provide any promises or commitments concerning the Special Counsel's investigation. Obviously that's a hot topic as many of the Democrats have been sort of suspicious about what Whitaker was doing here in the first place, wondering if he was supposed to be the eyes and ears of President Trump over here at the Justice Department as he's been the acting attorney general since early November. But he is saying he would be willing to talk about that, but he goes on to say, John, we do not believe, however, that the committee may legitimately expect the acting attorney general to discuss his communications with the President. So that's a bright line that they're drawing here and Whitaker saying based upon today's action, it's apparent that the committee's true intention is not to discuss the great work of the Department of Justice but rather, to create a public spectacle. So now, he has his ultimatum. If he doesn't get reassurance by 6:00 p.m. tonight that they will not use that back pocket subpoena, he's not coming.
[King:] We'll see how this one plays out. Laura Jarrett, I appreciate the breaking news from the Justice Department. Let's quickly go around the table here. And let's get back to the question we talked about it at the top of the show. Number one, will the administration comply? Number two, will Democrats when administration officials do say, I'm willing to sit in the chair decide to, you know, to play a little Tarzan. We have a subpoena for you when he says he's willing to come. Let him testify, then subpoena him. Is that the right way or the Democrats have some fear that they needed that power? What's the argument for subpoena?
[Lee:] I think we can say with certainty that the community's goal is not to talk about the great work that the Justice Department has been doing. No, this is the Democrats sending in a warning shot to Whitaker that, it's all, you know, well and good that you're going to come testifying tomorrow. But the bar is going to be really high. We are not going to be satisfied unless you answer very specific questions about the Mueller investigation, particularly pertaining to any conversations you might have had with the President. And then, in terms of the recusal process, why you decided not to recuse yourself from the Mueller investigation. They don't want him just sitting there answering questions vaguely, they want specifics and I don't know that this letter is going to satisfy Democrats who want him sitting in that chair behind that table answering very, very specific questions.
[King:] We are off to attest this start, shall we say?
[Shear:] It just does seem a little bit clumsy to have done the subpoena before the guy even gets there. From a political standpoint, you could have they can always subpoena him after. And that sort of give him a little
[King:] That's the way it used to work.
[Shear:] And it does seem to It gave Barr it gave Whitaker in the Justice Department an opening.
[King:] Democrats always say the President blows through the norms in this town. They're blowing through a norm with that one. And just before we leave you this out hour, the senate Judiciary Committee has just voted to approve the nomination of William Barr to be the next Attorney General of the United States, the vote was 12-10 excuse me, along party lines. Thanks for joining us in INSIDE POLITICS, hope to see you back here this time tomorrow. Stay with us, a lot of breaking news as you can tell this day, Brianna Keilar starts after a quick break. Have a good afternoon.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The nations of the Middle East will have to decide what kind of future they want for themselves, for their country, and, frankly, for their families and for their children. It is a choice between two futures. And it is a choice America cannot make for you. A better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and drive out the extreme.
[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn:] A shift in tone during the President's second day in Saudi Arabia. Let's talk more about all this with CNN political analyst Julian Zelizer and Rom "Time" magazine contributor Jade Newton-Small. Good to see both of you. All right. So Julian, you first. Because on the hills of his speech, we have also just learned from his senior White House official that President Trump and gulf nation leaders have agreed to meet on an annual basis now. In your view what's the significance of that new agreement?
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Contributor:] Well, it's significant and it is part of a broader strategy that President Trump has said he wanted to pursue. He wants to try to create some regional stability and peace, combined with the fight against ISIS by working with the Gulf States. Again, this is not totally new to President Trump. This builds out of several decades since the 1980s where Saudi Arabia's been a key ally. But I think it's been a successful trip in terms of cementing that agenda for now.
[Whitfield:] And Jay, those Gulf Nations that includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. How does this help set the next stage of his stop which is Israel?
[Jay Newton-small, Contributor, Time Magazine:] Fred, they think that they the closeness with Iran was something that really, really worried all the gulf states especially Saudi Arabia but everybody. And the idea of the Obamas' treaty with Iran something that really upset them. And so -.
[Whitfield:] So this is the opposite. You heard Donald Trump essentially name -. This is the enemy and everybody agrees on.
[Newton-small:] Exactly. He is really coming back forcefully. The Sunni nations is rebuilding those alliances. And so, I think that is very comforting for them. This is the big push that Saudi wanted. And it sort of that's right. They have turned such a blind eye to his really hot rhetoric in the last during the campaign sort of calling Islam an enemy of the people, calling for bans on people traveling from a lot of these countries, United States. And so, what they see this as is a real victory. And that same thing is what brings them together with Israel, ironically. Is that Israel was very worried about this treaty with Iran and they are very happy that Trump is turning away from Iran as well. So going into Israel it is going to be a very similar scene where Israel is, likewise, like Saudi Arabia, very relieved to see the United States coming back to more of what they see as more of their camp.
[Whitfield:] And Julian, the White House probably would like to say this was a very successful trip. What a way to begin what will culminate into an eightnine days, you know, overseas visit. The next stop is Israel. But it might be a bit more complicated.
[Zelizer:] Absolutely. They shouldn't be holding their breath too much. This trip will only get more complicated diplomatically as they get deeper into the discussions of some regional peace agreement. This is obviously an issue that has tripped up almost every single President other than President Carter. And at the same time, in no way does this wipe away the very significant scandal and investigation that the administration is struggling with back here in the United States. That will be front page again this week with everything from Robert Mueller's investigation to Comey testifying. So the President is dealing with something difficult in the Middle East, at the same time that I think there will be a resurgent story about the scandal by Monday and Tuesday.
[Whitfield:] And so, Jay, you know, before he embarked on this overseas trip it was described by many people that he was just simply seething. He was upsets with so much controversial swirling around the dark cloud hanging over. Did he have a little bit more, you know, boost in his step? Was this confidence building? Did we see a different Donald Trump abroad?
[Newton-small:] We certainly have seen a different Donald Trump abroad that is more on message, right. It is the most on message Donald Trump I think has been composed and really sedate. Almost having gravitas, giving these very measured speeches, these incredibly sort of calm and almost trying to look Presidential abroad. And that is in absolute stark contrast to the tweet storms we have been seeing over the last two weeks and just the fury going of what has been going on in terms of Comey and the firing and, you know, and Russia and all these different leaks that have been happening, the rumors that he is firing his press staff. These kinds of things. And so, so you see it. And that is absolutely an image that they wanted on this trip. They wanted to be to turn the page from all the turmoil here in the United States, and then go abroad, and then come back and hopefully reset that whole sort of dynamic. But I think Julian is right that they are coming back into this incredible storm that is not going away. It is only going to get worse.
[Whitfield:] This is the President's trip, but it can't go unnoticed that he had quite the contingent. And family was something that was also being showcased, Julian, for the Trump family. He has got his wife, Melania, you know, there alongside. And also not far, you know, behind is Ivanka and Jared Kushner. And even Ivanka taking his place today in what was expected to be an address to the younger audience during this twitter, you know, forum. And instead of President Trump, it was Ivanka Trump who addressed them but not really with a huge message. So what's your expectation as to what potentially happened here, Julian? Is it a mistake that the President didn't live up to that expectation, that promise?
[Zelizer:] Not necessarily. I mean they have always been his best surrogates. I think Ivanka has served an important role in the campaign and in the early administration as kind of stronger voice for the administration with a broader constituency. And I think maybe trying to target millennials, the idea was to bring her out rather than the President himself who doesn't really resonate with millennials here or around the globe. But it is part of this image remaking effort which I'm not convinced will be successful, that the Donald Trump you heard on the campaign and with the Muslim ban, it is a different Donald Trump that we have now. But my guess is that's part of the effort. And Jared Kushner has always been central to working out this Middle East peace agreement. So it is not a surprise that he will have a prominent role in the days ahead.
[Newton-small:] And Fred, if I can just add to that. Like Ivanka is so popular in Saudi Arabia. It is this weird freakish obsess with her that they actually call Donald Trump Abu Ivanka, which means father of Ivanka because they just love her. And so, I think having her stepped in, in this case was a nod to how absolutely popular she is there and they wanted to be prouder a little bit more there.
[Whitfield:] All right. Jay Newton-Small, Julian Zelizer, thanks so much to both of you. Appreciate it.
[Zelizer:] Thank you.
[Newton-small:] Thanks.
[Whitfield:] All right. I also want to bring in now CNN's Nic Robertson. He is our international diplomatic editor. So Nic, perhaps you can expound a bit more on exactly what happened, why is it that Ivanka Trump stepped in for the expectation of Donald Trump's message to this younger audience?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] You know, through the whole afternoon here, Fred, the events have been running later and later and ultimately well over an hour late. So by the time President Trump got to the opening of the counterterrorism center, which is a big deal for the Saudis. There was a big explanation sort of a sound and light show with them and demonstration of how it would work, and all the big TV screens explaining how they were going to track this type of use on social media and how they could differentiate who was pro ISIS and who was anti-ISIS from social media. That all seemed to run on and take much longer than anticipated. And the king was at that event and the President was at that event. And it clearly seemed to run on so long that the tweet event which was set up and ready to go at another location, all the people involved in that were waiting, waiting, waiting. They had various speeches and it was clearly, it seems, that President Trump wasn't able to get back to that. And the introduction came, and there was a surprise. We were told an introduction, it wasn't going to be President Trump and the camera caught off Ivanka. So and she gave a very eloquent introduction and thanked all the hosts, the king, the crown prince, the deputy crown prince, you know, before giving an explanation of the importance of reaching the young population in all these countries in the region, young population being such a large proportion for the population here. Those are the ones targeted by the terrorists. So, you know, getting this message out, an important thing to the younger generation. But the real precise nuts and bolts, if you will, what was it that slowed the whole day up? You know, when you stand back and look at this, the Saudis have organized three summits in the space of two days. They had the whole GCC, which is a big deal in itself. And normally set aside and happening by itself. And you had the Arab, Islamic and American summit as well 55 leaders plus President Trump plus everyone else. It ran late. I think it's that simple. It was so big it ran late.
[Whitfield:] All right. Nic Robertson, thank you so much from Riyadh. Appreciate it. So much going on. Next up, Israel. So meantime, as the President tackles issues abroad, his problems back at home still plaguing him and the administration. Next, why the house intel committee is now sniffing around a former Trump campaign advisor and his possible ties to Russia. Stay with us.

[Baldwin:] All right. Let's go out to federal court to my colleague Jessica Schneider who has been watching the comings and goings here in the news with regard to Paul Manafort and Rick Gates here and these indictments and how they pled and the bond and how figures that were set, Jessica. What did the judge grant them?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Brooke. We are learning all about the conditions of release for both Paul Manafort and Rick Gates. Of course, both of them pleaded not guilty, but still they will be confined to home arrest. That means that they cannot leave their home unless for certain specified reasons like seeing the doctor or meeting with their attorneys or of course, appearing here at court. Now we know that the government requested these very tight conditions of bond. In fact, Paul Manafort released not only on home arrest, but also on a $10 million unsecured bond. Rick Gates on a $5 million unsecured bond. And the government had argued that both of these men considering the seriousness of their charges and also their net worth in addition to the fact that there might be a flight risk as reasons for asking the government for that home arrest and that high bond and, of course, the judge did acquiesce to the government's request, setting that high bond. Both Paul Manafort, and Rick Gates they will have to stay at their home. Again, not leaving, only for those specified reasons. And they will have undergo daily monitoring. They will have to check in with their monitors daily. Rick Gates at the eastern district of Virginia. Paul Manafort will have to check in with authorities in D.C. He'll also be monitored by the authorities in D.C. What was also interesting about this is that the net worth of both of these men coming out in this proceeding. Paul Manafort said to be worth $20 million to $100 million. Rick Gates the government said he was worth between $2 million and $30 million. Of course, their extreme high net worth, a factor in this, the fact that they will have to be in their homes being monitored, checking in on a daily basis and not being allowed to leave except for those very specified reasons including being here at court. And Brooke, we know that they will be back in court on Thursday at 2:00 p.m. So, this will likely be months of court hearing, because this is an extremely lengthy indictment, 31 pages. Each of these men facing 12 counts and now while they wait this out they will be forced in that home arrest Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Yes, Jeffrey Toobin saying this one's going to take a long time looking at the details in the indictment. Jessica, thank you so much. We did have cameras pointed outside that courthouse, as well as Paul Manafort's attorney Kevin Downing spoke. It was quick, but here he was.
[Kevin Downing, Attorney For Paul Manafort:] I think you all saw it today that President Donald Trump was correct. There is no evidence that Mr. Manafort or the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government. Mr. Manafort represented pro-European Union campaigns for the Ukrainians and in that he was seeking to further democracy and to help the Ukraine come closer to the United States and the EU. Those activities ended in 2014. Over two years before Mr. Manafort served in the Trump campaign. Today you see an indictment brought by the office of special counsel that is using a very novel theory to prosecute Mr. Manafort regarding a thera filing. [15:40:00] The United States government has only used that offense six times since 1966 and only resulted in one conviction. The second thing about this indictment that I myself find most ridiculous, is a claim that maintaining offshore account, to bring all your fund into the United State as a scheme to conceal from the United States government is ridiculous. Thank you.
[Baldwin:] There you have it. Jamil Jaffer is with us. He's a former associate White House counsel to President George W. Bush. He's an adjunct law professor at George Mason University. Professor welcome back. You just listened to the brief statement from Mr. Downing ending with this is ridiculous. What do you make of what he just said?
[Jamil Jaffer, Former Associate White House Counsel To President George W. Bush:] Well look, I mean obviously, he's representing his client and he's defending his client's position. And he obviously makes a good point about the use of foreign registration violations. But you know, it's clear that Mr. Manafort thought he had to register or he had to register more recently and the fact that they're bringing charges about his prior failure to register and then all the transactions that went around it. The question of whether they were trying to evade taxes or bringing money to the U.S. improperly are valid claims by the special prosecutor and we'll see how it plays out in court. But not surprising his attorney will take that position. He's defending his client.
[Baldwin:] Sure. If you were White House counsel right at this very moment what would your biggest concerns, be seeing the former campaign chairman adviser is in a bit of trouble?
[Jaffer:] Yes, I mean, look, I think the obvious concern is that these charges are not really brought to bring Paul Manafort to justice for those issues, but to put pressure on him to cooperate either fairly or unfairly in the ongoing investigation the special counsel has. And so, if I were White House counsel that's what I would be concerned about.
[Baldwin:] The other players in the Trump orbit, both current and past, Jared Kushner, Michael Flynn and you have the timing of today's indictments coming earlier than expected. Papadopoulos cooperating with investigators. You know, it seems like on that same vein, the White House should be concerned.
[Jaffer:] Well, look, it's hard to know. When nobody saw the Papadopoulos plea coming, and I think in part because the plea and the online charges are about lying in the course of the investigation. This oftentimes happens in the special counsel investigations. In fact, more often than not the charges you've seen in prior special counsel investigation whether it Whitewater and the Clinton era or during the Bush administration. They're about some ancillary figure, about the smaller issue that don't go right to heart of the investigation. So, I wouldn't read this as a sign that they're on to something in the larger investigation, but just that they're able to make charges and try to put pressure on folks within the orbit in order to try and see if they can't get something more.
[Baldwin:] Jamil, what do you read into just the scope? What we've learned reading through this Manafort indictment? Going back to financial dealings way before the campaign into his life circa 2006. What does this tell you about what Mueller and his team is doing?
[Jaffer:] I think it's clear that Mueller doesn't see his ambit restriction just to the election-era things and that's actually been a problem and issue for a lot of other special prosecutors. They've been coitized roundly for going well beyond the scope of their original focus. But as I mentioned before, you know, this is what happens a lot in special counsel investigations. And more often than not when we've seen special counsel doing before, they've indicted folks. Something's not directly related. Look at the Monica Lewinsky matter. You know, not directly related to the underlying investigation. That's been a source of criticism. So, we'll see what happens here. Now Bob Mueller is a sharp guy. He's a serious prosecutor and he'll do the right thing here. And so, I think we'll see how this investigation plays out. But clearly, they'll try to pressurize the folks involved to see if they can't get more to move up the chain.
[Baldwin:] Jamil Jaffer, thank you. As Paul Manafort's attorney called the charges against his client ridiculous. We're going to dig into the back story on the former Trump campaign chairman and his right-hand man Richard Gates. Stay with me.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Kelly takes over the office from Reince Priebus, squarely in the crosshairs of Trump's colorful new communications director, Anthony Scaramucci. The man who calls himself the Mooch referred to Priebus as a, quote, "paranoid schizophrenia." Reince Priebus is the sixth member of the organization to resign or be fired since February. All this changed when President Trump began his morning today in a very familiar way on Twitter. He tweet-slammed Republicans for failing to pass health care reform and complained about the Russia investigation. Our reporters are covering every angle of this new shakeup. Kaitlan Collins is live on the North Lawn. And correspondent, Dianne Gallagher, from Washington as well. Kaitlan, we know Priebus has been often considered the source of those White House leaks. Did that have anything to do with his resignation?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn Correspondent:] Ana, it's safe to say that there are multiple factors that led to Reince Priebus' resignation this week. This has been a long-rumored departure that we've been waiting on for months now. And it finally came to a fever pitch this week. But it's hard to see how the new communication director's allegations that he was leaking White House information to reporters was not a big factor in that. In fact, Reince Priebus was asked about this during his first interview with CNN last night after it was made known that he had resigned. Listen to what he had to say to Wolf Blitzer.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Host, Wolf:] Are you the leaker in the White House?
[Priebus:] That's ridiculous. Wolf, come on. Give me a break. I'm not going to get into his accusations.
[Blitzer:] Why not respond to
[Priebus:] Because I'm not going to. Because it doesn't honor the president. I'm going to honor the president every day. I'm going to honor his agenda. And I'm going to honor our country. And I'm not going to get into all of this personal stuff. So
[Blitzer:] Is there a leaking problem in the White House based on what you've seen?
[Priebus:] Yes. I think that General Kelly should see if he can get to the bottom of it and figure it out.
[Collins:] So as you can see there, Ana, Reince Priebus downplaying the tensions between him and Anthony Scaramucci and the tensions between him and the president. But what's clear is that the president no longer had confidence in him to be a strong chief of staff and to lead the White House. And that's what was made obvious by his resignation this week.
[Cabrera:] So now, Dianne, there's a lot of talk about who might replace General Kelly. And one name raising some eyebrows is, of course, Embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions. What more can you tell us about this?
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Ana, so this is sort of a wild theory that's being tossed around by politicos and talking heads right now. Look, we need to be clear, there's no evidence right now to suggest that this is anything more than that. But essentially some believe that President Trump would slide attorney general Jeff Sessions over to Homeland Security to replace John Kelly, who, of course, is the new chief of staff. Trump has, of course, made it no secret that he's not happy with the attorney general for recusing himself from the Russia investigation, among other things. And that's treatment that's angered conservatives who genuinely like Sessions and think he's doing a good job. So this theory contends that if Sessions was moved to Homeland Security, Trump could satisfy Republicans, and he'd also get a chance to name a new attorney general who then perhaps could fire special counsel Robert Mueller, who Trump has repeatedly said is on a witch hunt in his investigation of possible collusion between the Trump administration and the Russia connection to the 2016 election. Now, again, it's just a theory, but one Senator, Lindsey Graham, has already tried to pour water on today. In two retweets of an article that was talking about this possibility, Ana, Graham applauded Sessions' credentials as attorney general. And then he wrote, quote, "DHSs Secretary Jeff Sessions doesn't sound right, doesn't feel right, bad idea." Graham obviously getting out ahead of things, Ana. But even if all of this did happen, look, we got to point out that the Senate would still have to confirm a new attorney general. So even if it was the plan all along, it's not exactly a perfectly wrapped package for the president to get that done.
[Cabrera:] All right. Dianne Gallagher, Kaitlan Collins, thank you both. I want to talk more about this. The man who knows how a White House chief of staff can make or break an administration. Chris Whipple is author of "The Gatekeepers, How the White House Chief of Staff Defines every Presidency." Chris, great to have you with us.
[Chris Whipple, Author & Documentary Filmmaker:] Thank you, Ana.
[Cabrera:] First, your reaction to this shakeup.
[Whipple:] Well, it's no surprise. This is a broken White House. Reince Priebus presided over a White House that can't do anything right. They can't pass legislation, they can't issue executive orders that are enforceable, they can't prioritize the president's agenda.
[Cabrera:] Was that Priebus' fault?
[Whipple:] Look, he made rookie mistake after rookie mistake, but ultimately, the responsibility is President Trump. And, you know, what troubles me is that every sign so far since this announcement of the shakeup and the replacement of Priebus, every sign points to this ship just continuing to sail toward the rocks. And the reason for that is Donald Trump doesn't get it, doesn't understand what Ronald Reagan understood from day one, which is that an outsider president has to empower a savvy White House chief of staff to execute his agenda, to act as a gatekeeper, and to get things done. And until Trump learns that lesson, he's headed for the rocks.
[Cabrera:] So you don't think Reince Priebus was empowered, just to give our viewers a little bit of insight about the dynamics between these two.
[Whipple:] No, in fairness to Priebus, that's true.
[Cabrera:] "The Washington Post" has reported that at one point during Priebus' tenure, Donald Trump, the president, summoned Priebus to the Oval Office to get rid of a fly.
[Whipple:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] I mean, what does that say about the role Priebus had in this administration and how the president viewed his White House chief of staff?
[Whipple:] Well, it tells you everything. It tells you what is the really central question right now as we speak. It tells you that Donald Trump doesn't understand the importance of respecting a White House chief of staff and empowering him to get the job done. There's no replacement for that. I mean, you can have robust debates, you can have internal ideological battles, but at the end of the day, everybody has to fall in behind that White House chief. And let me say something about leaks because one of the troubling things is that Kellyanne Conway suggesting that somehow Kelly's going to be a big bad guy who intimidates leakers. I interviewed every living White House chief of staff, Republican and Democrat, going way back, here's what they would tell you. The way you prevent leaks, the way you minimize leaks, is by telling the truth and by running a competent White House staff that engenders loyalty instead of fear. That's how you prevent leaks. You don't do it by strapping people up to polygraphs, you don't do it by acting like Scaramucci. I mean, another really bad sign that this administration is off track is that nobody's taken Scaramucci and thrown him over the White House fence.
[Cabrera:] He's been empowered, clearly.
[Whipple:] That would be a good start.
[Cabrera:] Well, you know, we've talked a lot about the shakeup within this administration just in the last week. We had Sean Spicer, Scaramucci replacing him, now we have a new chief of staff. I want to put out a tweet there that the president made before he was president back in 2012 as he commented on a chief of staff change within the Obama administration saying, "Three chiefs of staff in less than three years of being president, part of the reason why Barack Obama can't manage to pass his agenda."
[Whipple:] You know, that has nothing to do with whether Barack Obama was effective or not effective. The truth is that every president learns, with the exception of our current president so far, sometimes the hard way, that you have to empower a White House chief to get something done. It took Jimmy Carter two and a half years to figure that out. He thought he could run the White House by himself. That didn't work out so well. It took Bill Clinton a year and a half to realize he had to really empower a White House chief to discipline him. They took Leon Panetta, the OMB director, to Camp David and virtually locked him in a cabin and wouldn't let him out until he agreed to become White House chief. But Panetta had conditions. Panetta wanted to be empowered in the way that H.R. Holderman was under Nixon to execute the president's agenda, and he was.
[Cabrera:] So when you look at John Kelly a general, we know the president likes generals do you believe that he has what it takes to have a successful run as chief of staff? That the president respects him and perhaps the dynamics between these two men would be different?
[Whipple:] Look, he's obviously going to be given a chance. We're going to find out. The generals have not succeeded, generally speaking, as White House chiefs. Al Hague was the only general to become chief in the modern era, and he lasted a little over a month. Priebus way outlasted him. The reason was that Gerry Ford had a White House structure one of the reasons had a White House structure just like Trump's. Nobody was empowered. Everybody came and went from the oval willy-nilly. He called it the spokes of the wheel with the president in the center. It was a disaster. It's very much like Donald Trump's model of governance.
[Cabrera:] So you don't think John Kelly and making this switch will make the difference?
[Whipple:] The fact that Kelly you know, so far, at least there's no indication that he has asked for or made conditions that would show that he understands the nature of the job. He's got to be the guy who is in charge of executing the agenda. People need to report to him through him to the president. If Scaramucci is going directly to Trump and reporting directly to Trump, that way lies disaster.
[Cabrera:] All right. Chris Whipple, thanks for the insight. Great to see you. Thank you.
[Whipple:] Thanks for having me. Let's bring in our panel now. With us, political analyst and historian, professor at Princeton University, Julian Zelizer. White House correspondent for "Politico," Tara Palmeri. And national reporter for Real Clear Politics, Rebecca Berg. Tara, I'll come to you first. Do you think there's something to this idea of attorney general Jeff Sessions now being named as John Kelly's replacement?
[Tara Palmeri, Cnn Political Analyst:] It would be a very convenient move for Jeff Sessions to move over. It would keep the Republicans, who are really annoyed with Trump and the way he's been treating Sessions, at bay. Not sure if it means he doesn't need to go through another confirmation hearing. That's going to be a problem. It's never good for a president or for the Senate to be wasting their time on confirmation hearings, which tend to really sully the candidate. And Jeff Sessions has had a rocky road so far with his relationship with Donald Trump. But it would be a convenient place to put him. I personally have not heard from my sources that it's a real option.
[Cabrera:] We heard the tweets from Lindsey Graham mentioned earlier by our reporter, Dianne Gallagher. Let's show viewers what was referenced there. This is according to the idea of Sessions just being named DHS secretary, is the response from Lindsey Graham, saying bad idea. Listen to what he said earlier this week about the possibility of Sessions being fired.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham, , South Carolina:] If Jeff Sessions is fired, there will be holy hell to pay. Any effort to go after Mueller could be the beginning of the end of the Trump presidency, unless Mueller did something wrong.
[Cabrera:] Rebecca, are GOP lawmakers more willing to accept Sessions being reassigned perhaps rather than fired, or would either option turn out badly for President Trump?
[Rebecca Berg, Cnn Political Analyst:] You know, I don't think that would be an acceptable course of action from the perspective of Republican Senators to reassign Jeff Sessions or to fire him. In either sense, this is going to be seen as a major shakeup. If it were to transpire. And Republican Senators have been sending a very strong signal to the White House this week that they want Jeff Sessions to stay on as attorney general. And anything else would just create this chaotic sort of environment when you already have an administration that is by all accounts in disarray. And Republican Senators we should note actually Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, said that he would not entertain a confirmation process for a new attorney general. So that's sending a message that if the president wants to fire Jeff Sessions or get rid of him and send him somewhere else in the administration, then you're going to have an acting attorney general at least for the rest of the year because it's up to the Judiciary Committee to hold these hearings. And that's Chuck Grassley's call ultimately. So very strong signals that's not going to be acceptable.
[Cabrera:] Grassley put out that statement prior to this new staff shakeup with the chief of staff position. That was after all of the tweets about general Attorney General Jeff Sessions by the president earlier in the week. Now, Priebus' stint at White House chief of staff, if you look back in the history books, it's now the shortest since the position was first created in 1946, Julian, if you take out the interim chiefs of staff who might be in the mix here or there. Meantime, he joins a growing list of Trump administration officials who have either resigned or been fired, at least six by our count. When a shakeup of this magnitude happens, what's really going on?
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, if there's a shakeup of this magnitude, it means there's something wrong with the president and with the Oval Office. It's not always about the person. So when Ronald Reagan replaces Don Regan with Howard Baker, it's because of the Iran-Contra scandal that's taking place in an effort to create order in the White House. And that's always the case. And the problem is it's not clear that this shakeup will change the behavior of the president or the basic infrastructure of this White House. So my guess is that Kelly will be facing the same problems in two weeks or two months that Priebus was facing in the last few weeks.
[Cabrera:] But let me push back on that because
[Zelizer:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] General Kelly is his own man. Couldn't his behavior change the outcome here?
[Zelizer:] It could. I can't see him though reigning in President Trump. Very few people can do that. At this point, no one can. And he also has some liabilities. He doesn't have very strong relations on the Hill. He's already admitted that he's taken aback by the toxic nature of Washington. And political warfare is different than military warfare. And so I think, in some ways, he doesn't have some of the assets that Priebus had with those relations with members of the Republican Party, who as we heard from Lindsey Graham, are pretty openly upset with this president right now.
[Cabrera:] Tara, the "Wall Street Journal" editorial board wrote this, quote, "This shuffling of the staff furniture won't matter unless Mr. Trump accepts that the White House problem isn't Mr. Priebus, it's him." Does it matter who the chief of staff is for this president?
[Palmeri:] I would take some exception to that. I mean, my reporting showed that Priebus had a really strong he had a really hard time getting a strong hold of President Trump and his staff. He was very preoccupied with his own image. And the truth is that not a lot of people either feared him or respected him in the White House, and that came from Donald Trump. He took on Priebus very reluctantly. He was told that he needed Priebus because of his relationships on the Hill. And the second those relationships didn't work out, after the first health care bill didn't make it to the floor for a vote back in March, Priebus was on the chopping block. And Trump did not stop from that point saying talking about how much he was unhappy with Priebus. He expected him to deal with the House. He expected him to move his legislative priorities forward. And when he couldn't do that, even though it was a really big ask from someone considering the kind of disarray that was happening, the Russia investigation, how legislative priorities were kind of a mess, but I wouldn't say it all, you know, it's all on Trump. A big part of it is. But Priebus was never empowered and he was taken on reluctantly. And he didn't have the kind of organizational skills you need as a chief of staff. He didn't have the command. He wasn't actually willing to be fired. That's another problem. You have to be in that position and be so sure of yourself that you're willing to stand up to the president of the United States, not idolize him and adore him.
[Cabrera:] Rebecca, both Priebus and Spicer were part of the establishment, right? They came from the RNC, the quoteunquote "swamp" in Washington. What do their oustings mean for President Trump's relationship with the GOP moving forward?
[Berg:] It certainly puts a big question mark on whether Donald Trump will continue to work very closely with the Republican National Committee, as his administration was doing under Priebus as chief of staff. And he was sort of that connective tissue between the RNC and the White House. And we do know that Donald Trump has always sort of approached the Republican Party and Republican lawmakers with some skepticism because of what happened in the campaign, because there were so many Republicans who resisted his candidacy, and then were slow even when he was the Republican nominee to support him. And so there's always been a little bit of tension or a lot of tension, in some cases, between Donald Trump and the Republican Party. When he brought on Reince Priebus as chief of staff people said this is proof he's going to try to maintain strong relations with the party. Now we're not so sure. Reince Priebus obviously still talking glowingly about the president in his interviews yesterday, including with CNN. So that suggests he is going to try to keep things very positive in terms of the working relationship between the White House and the Republican Party. And, look, in this case a rising tide lifts all boats. If the president is doing well, Republicans are doing well, and vice versa. So it's in his best interests, I would think, to continue that relationship with the party.
[Cabrera:] Rebecca, Tara and Julian, thank you all. Now of all the things that happened this busy, busy week in news, few stand out more than that expletive-laced phone interview given by the new White House communications director, Anthony Scaramucci. The reporter on the other end of that call is "the New Yorker" Ryan Lizza. I talked with Lizza about their interview that he calls the most insane he's ever had.
[Ryan Lizza, Cnn Contributor:] The communications director of the White House, who speaks for the White House, called me up to ask me about sourcing for a tweet I'd written about who he was having dinner with. And then, from there, it turned into I turned it into an interview. But, you know, this is someone who speaks for the White House, calling a reporter, having a clear on-the-record no-ground-rules conversation just as if he were coming on your air and sitting in this chair and talking to you. So we run into this every once in a while in journalism where sometimes we call it source remorse where, you know, people regret saying things. And I think that's what he was saying with that tweet. Although, in the previous tweet, he didn't seem to have much remorse. He just said, you know, he just joked that he used some off-color language. But, you know, from a reporter's perspective, the important thing is, one, was it on the record, were there any ground rules. It was on the record, no ground rules that he asked me to commit to. And then, two, was it newsworthy? And if the most important communicator at the White House calls you and tells you he's going to fire all the communications staffers at the White House, tells you that he has brought in the FBI to investigate the chief of staff, tells you that the chief of staff is a paranoid schizophrenic and says
[Cabrera:] That was putting it lightly.
[Lizza:] That was putting it lightly. That's just what we can say. And then, you know, goes on a rant about the president's chief strategist, I would say that's all pretty newsworthy stuff. I'm in the business of reporting on the White House.
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Lizza:] Explaining these people to the public. So this is just a straight, how journalistic transactions work in Washington.
[Cabrera:] Do you have any regrets of how you did your reporting? Because he says it was a mistake in trusting you.
[Lizza:] No. I mean, that would be as if I were sitting here and I got off air and said, wow, that was a real mistake in trusting Ana, I can't believe I sat there and answered her on-the-record questions. No, when the communications director of the White House calls a reporter and speaks to them on the record, there's no ambiguity about what's going on there.
[Cabrera:] Right. So when he started letting all of this vulgar language fly, I've just got to know, what was your gut reaction when you're hearing all this? Have you ever heard anything like this from a White House official before?
[Lizza:] Honestly, no. I got off the phone and I needed to talk to someone about it because it was, frankly, the most insane conversation I'd ever had with a government official. I downloaded the recording from my recorder into my computer. And I haven't actually told anyone this, Ana, but I named it "Insane Scaramucci Interview" because it was just so completely unlike any on-the-record conversation I'd had with a spokesman for the White House in 20 years of covering Washington. And I knew how newsworthy it was. And so that's why I spent, you know, sort of yesterday going over the piece, going back to Scaramucci, talking to him about it, going to Steve Bannon, trying to get Reince, and just, you know, putting the piece together and doing all the due diligence on it.
[Cabrera:] Right. Does it surprise you that Scaramucci still has a job?
[Lizza:] You know, someone said that yesterday, do you think he's going to get fired? I said he's either going to get fired or promoted. You never know with this White House and this president. Trump himself speaks in sort of, you know, colorful language. And Trump himself sometimes makes internal fights public. We saw this recently, obviously, with the way he's treated his attorney general, Jeff Sessions. I haven't learned this myself, so I want to be careful. But I did notice there was some reporting in the press today that where people close to Scaramucci were saying the president liked this. Now, to be very honest
[Cabrera:] But is this really what the president had in mind when he hired Scaramucci?
[Lizza:] I think probably not.
[Cabrera:] I hope not.
[Lizza:] It would be unusual if this is what he was looking for. But he had to know that he was adding someone to his White House who did not get along with other senior people in his White House. So he had to know that he was creating a new faction within the White House that is already riven by several other factions. It's like a multifront civil war and then you're adding another army from another country. And so he had to know it would cause some friction.
[Cabrera:] Right. Ryan Lizza, thank you very much for your time. Great to have you with us.
[Lizza:] Thank you. My pleasure.
[Cabrera:] Coming up, experts say the new missile North Korea tested yesterday could now hit cities like Los Angeles, Denver, even Chicago. Plus, protests today outside the White House after the president's tweets about banning transgender soldiers from serving in the military. We'll speak to one former Navy SEAL, who is transgender, and challenging the president, to say it to her face. You're live in THE CNN NEWSROOM.

[Nia Malika Henderson, Cnn:] Thanks, Erica. Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm Nia Malika Henderson. John King is off. The president clear and concise in a new interview today, Michael Cohen's only crime was flipping. And new taunts, too, for his attorney general who rewarded the president's loyalty with inaction. But he said Paul Manafort, now a convicted felon, deserves great respect for not cracking. And the president's national security adviser confronted with an uncomfortable question abroad. Do you think your boss could be compromised?
[Unidentified Reporter:] Were there ever concerns that your own president is a security risk?
[John Bolton, National Security Advisor:] Of course not. That's a silly question. And I just spoke to him literally a few minutes ago. Honestly, have a little faith in the American people who elected him president.
[Henderson:] A clarifying day today. The president, who seems to prize personal loyalty above all else, now suggests it should be a crime to cross him. The president in an interview that aired this morning on "FOX & Friends" insists that the crimes that Michael Cohen admitted to in court aren't really crimes.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He pled to two counts that aren't a crime, which nobody understands. What he did and they weren't taken out of campaign finance. That's a big thing. That's a much bigger thing. Did they come out of the campaign? They didn't come out of the campaign. They came from me.
[Henderson:] Instead, the real crime that Cohen committed is telling New York prosecutors the truth as accepted by a federal court and implicating the president.
[Trump:] People make up stories. This whole thing about flipping, they call it. I know all about flipping. For 30, 40 years, I've been watching flippers. Everything is wonderful. Then they get 10 years and jail and they flip on whoever the next highest one is, or as high as you can go. It almost ought to be outlawed.
[Henderson:] For the president, who made his bones in 1980s New York, there are few sins worse than becoming a cooperator. Another person guilty of disloyalty in the president's view, his own attorney general.
[Trump:] He took the job and then he said, I'm going to recuse myself. I said, what kind of a man is this? And by the way, he was on the campaign. You know, the only reason I gave him the job, because I felt loyalty. He was an original supporter. He was on the campaign. He knows there was no collusion.
[Henderson:] CNN's Abby Phillip is live at the White House. Abby, the president just had an event where he met at the White House with Republican lawmakers. Did he clarify anything today?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Nia, the president just let reporters into the room for that meeting. It was originally scheduled to have been closed, but he said nothing. He didn't respond to questions about any of these issues floating around him. He didn't expand on any of his comments or explain, you know, his view of the situation. But what he has been doing over the last day or so, specifically in a lengthy interview with FOX News that aired last night and today, is really take the lead in the administration's response to all of these problems. There's no question the White House staffers were caught by surprise by a confluence of bad news stories, Paul Manafort's verdict and also Michael Cohen's guilty plea. But President Trump has been the one left to test out various strategies for dealing with these problems, specifically also for dealing with Michael Cohen. President has gone from talking about Michael Cohen as someone who was barely involved in his business and in the campaign to saying Michael Cohen didn't commit a crime and then saying that Michael Cohen is also not to be trusted. So there's a lot that the president is trying to test out, but it's clear not a whole lot of this is really sticking. Yesterday, White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders, came to the podium, didn't answer many questions. She repeated these talking points, saying there was no collusion, that President Trump didn't commit a crime. But clearly this is a White House struggling to settle on something that will work, that can get this off of their plate and turn them to something else, some other subject that will be a better story line for this White House and for this president Nia?
[Henderson:] Thanks, Abby, for that update. Here with me to share the reporting and insights, Catherine Lucey, with the Associated Press, Michael Warren, with the "Weekly Standard, Rachael Bade with "Politico," and Perry Bacon, with FiveThirtyEight. A lot to discuss today. Abby mentioned there basically the strategy of this White House. Catherine, do you sense there's a strategy that they've settled on, or is it, as Abby said, they're just throwing things at the wall to see what sticks?
[Catherine Lucey, White House Reporter, Associated Press:] No, I think what Abby says is right. What we've been hearing from people inside and outside this White House is it's not really clear how they're trying to frame a counternarrative, a response, a way forward. Folks who go on cable news to talk about this presidency, to defend this presidency, haven't heard much in how they should be sort of explaining this, what they should be talking about. It's an issue. So right now the main person who's talking is the president. As you saw just now, he's saying a variety of different things. And it's not really clear how they're going to move this forward.
[Michael Warren, Senior Writer, Weekly Standard:] I think it is clear, though, that to the extent they do have a strategy, it's sort of the old playbook, right. It's deny any wrongdoing. We heard that from Sarah Huckabee Sanders yesterday in her briefing, saying over and over that the president did nothing wrong. And the president, of course, sort of allying himself to those who are loyal with him and disparaging those who are disloyal. That seems to be again, as Abby said, he seems to be taking the lead on this strategy. The same as usual. The difference here is, is this a different moment here? Are things now different that require from the White House a new strategy or different approach to dealing with this problem?
[Henderson:] And on that "FOX & Friends" interview, he went on at length about Cohen. It's this strategy that we've seen before with him, essentially distancing himself from Cohen. Here he is.
[Trump:] Well, he was a lawyer for me for one of many. You know, they always say the lawyer. Then they like to add the fixer. I don't know if he was a fixer. I don't know where that term came from. But he's been a lawyer for me, didn't do big deals, did small deals. Not somebody that was with me that much. You know, they make it sound like I didn't live without him. I understood Michael Cohen very well. Turned out he wasn't a very good lawyer, frankly, but he was somebody that was probably with me for about 10 years. And I would see him sometimes.
[Henderson:] I would see him sometimes. Not very often.
[Perry Bacon, Senior Political Writer, Fivethirtyeight:] It's like I talked about Manafort. Manafort was involved in the campaign. He was the chairman who helped the president win the campaign, of course. The one strategy I do see is Steve Bannon brought it up, so did Trump this morning is this idea of the Democrats are obsessed with impeachment. I think that is one strategy you're going to see. If you listen to Nancy Pelosi, she expressly keeps saying we're not going to do impeachment. She's the Democrat. That said, you are seeing this idea in terms of rallying the base, to say the Democrats will use this against me for impeachment. I think you're going to hear that more and more and we go forward.
[Henderson:] And this idea, Rachael, that whatever Cohen did wasn't really a crime. You heard that from Donald Trump in this interview.
[Rachael Bade, Cnn Political Analyst:] Right. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not going to try to speak to the legal analysis of that, but yes, obviously that's part of the talking point right now. I do think there are questions right now about Cohen going out there saying the president told me to do this. Well, lawyers are saying he's going to have to prove prosecutors are going to have to prove intent, and did the president know this was a crime. It probably won't be that hard to do that, given he used to tweet a bunch about John Edwards and his mistress situation and when he paid money to keep that quiet. Then he gets in trouble with the law. The president back then, you know, used to tweet about that. So clearly he knew that was not allowed. But, yes, of course that's going to be a way to deflect right now. I think privately, out front, they are obviously pushing back on this, calling it a witch hunt, but there was a great nugget in the post story this morning where the president apparently called in his top advisers and said, tell me honestly, how bad is this. That just shows the tweet in the middle of the night last night that he's worried. He's staying up and concerned.
[Henderson:] Yes, that tweet at 1:00 a.m., which was no collusion, rigged witch hunt, again, part of what he's been saying for many months now.
[Lucey:] We've heard that he's upset about betrayal. You see that also with these questions of loyalty. Loyalty is so important to him. The idea that someone would flip, as he's putting it, and you heard his complaints about flipping this morning on FOX. This goes very deep.
[Henderson:] In this way, he very much sounds like a mob boss. This idea that snitches get stitches, a kind of petty gang member philosophy.
[Bacon:] It's alarming to hear the president, the chief executive of the country, the way he's talking about flipping done by prosecutors everywhere. He's attacking that. He's attacking the attorney general. You also hear this language other places. Duncan Hunter, now under indictment, is saying, hey, they just make it up, the DOJ is full of liberals. This is now affecting other people, the way Trump is talking about it as if the prosecutors around the country are led by Jeff Sessions, a very conservative person, who's the head of the Justice Department.
[Henderson:] Speaking of Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham commented about Jeff Sessions and whether or not there will be a new attorney general at some point. Here's what he had to say.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham, , South Carolina:] And I think there will come a time, sooner rather than later, where it will be time to have a new face and a fresh voice at the Department of Justice. Clearly, Attorney General Sessions doesn't have the confidence of the president and the president has a right to have an attorney general he feels comfortable with. Jeff Sessions has done a fine job. He's an honorable man. Replacing him before the election, to me, would be a nonstarter. The idea of having a new attorney general in the first term of President Trump's administration, I don't think is very likely.
[Henderson:] This is interesting and new from Lindsey Graham, the idea this is inevitable not before the midterms but certainly could happen after.
[Warren:] There has been a question ever since the president started attacking Jeff Sessions over a year ago that he would fire Sessions. The question has always been, well, would the Senate, controlled by Republicans, but very narrowly, would they even confirm a new this was seen as a political retribution act by the president. But what's sort of tying all this together, and I think you can include the president, is nobody's really sure whether there are staff at the White House, supporters in the media and in the Republican Party you certainly talk to Republican Party conservatives about this as I have nobody is quite sure what's coming down the pike next. Everybody is kind of I think that is what has changed from tuesday, this sense that
[Lucey:] Anything could happen.
[Warren:] Right, and we have to be careful to not overplay our hand before we know what everybody else has. Most importantly, what Mueller has.
[Henderson: Henderson:] Up next, if you're wondering whether or not the president will pardon Paul Manafort, just remind yourself he's been through hardships before, and he always does just fine.
[Trump:] I've always had controversy in my life, and I've always succeeded. I've always won. I've always won. I would honestly give myself an A-plus, and so would many other people.

[Donald Trum, President Of The United States:] Puerto Rico was absolutely obliterated.
[Unidentified Male:] The rain has not stopped, flooding all throughout the island.
[Unidentified Female:] Maria hit us very hard, but she is nothing compared to the force we're going to unleash to rebuild.
[Unidentified Male:] They continue to hear people's cries. I don't think I've ever seen quite such a mobilization of volunteers as I've seen here. We're not wasting time. Right now, time is our enemy. The Graham-Cassidy bill is the right solution at the right time.
[Barack Obama, Former President Of The United States:] This is the worst of the worst. It will hurt America.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I think we're going to get 50 Republicans, and I'll make a prediction. A couple of Democrats are going to come on board.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is your NEW DAY. It's Friday, September 22, 6 a.m. here in New York. Here's our starting line. The death toll is rising in Puerto Rico. At least nine people are dead after Hurricane Maria. First responders caution that number is preliminary. They are shocked there isn't massive loss of life. FEMA already on the ground, has large-scale relief on tankers. Those tankers have to wait for the port to open back up. There are aid flights to Puerto Rico beginning today. They're going to bring water, food, and large-scale generators for the millions of Americans that are in need. The entire island has no power. And in Mexico, the search for survivors after that massive earthquake continues in several collapsed buildings. At least 286 people are known to have died so far.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] And another top story. The rhetoric is escalating once again between President Trump and Kim Jong-un. The North Korean leader slamming President Trump, calling him, quote, "mentally deranged" and saying Mr. Trump will pay dearly for his U.N. speech. The reclusive regime now threatening to test a hydrogen bomb over the Pacific Ocean. All of this as Facebook announces it will turn over to Congress thousands of political ads linked to Russia. What does this mean for the Russia investigation? We have a lot to cover. CNN's Leyla Santiago, she is in San Juan, Puerto Rico, on the hurricane's aftermath Leyla.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] As Maria ripped through the island of Puerto Rico, this is what she left behind. The first images of utter devastation 10 miles west of San Juan. A Cat 4 hurricane with enough power to turn roads into river, residents trudging through floodwaters to reach their homes. Many arriving to homes without roofs. To get around here, four-wheel- drive, kayaks or walk like Luis Guzman, whose home was destroyed.
[Luis Guzman , Home Destroyed By Hurricane:] The toilet's in my neighbor's house.
[Santiago:] Rescue teams are now going home to home, finding anyone who needs new shelter. But everyone here seems vulnerable. Thea Equinome fighting back tears after firefighters and the National Guard reached her 84-year-old neighbor. [on camera]: She says she's like a grandmother. [voice-over]: Sixteen-year-old Maria Perez Santos had to cross floods to get to the rescue team. Her family of six filled vans with snacks, toiletries and pillows, grabbed their small dogs and left to find help when the water got too high.
[Maria Perez Santos , Hurricane Survivor:] I'm scared what's going to happen now to us. Where are we going now? The family is here now.
[Santiago:] It's difficult, but at least they're alive. She believes if they're alive it means it can be a new start. Once at the evacuation shelter, some safety. A new future ahead already filled with uncertainty.
[Camerota:] Thanks to Leyla Santiago there. Joining us now on the phone is the governor of Puerto Rico, Ricardo Rossello. Governor, thank you very much for taking the time to talk to us. I understand that they're the death toll is rising in Puerto Rico. Can you give us the latest numbers?
[Gov. Ricardo Rossello, Puerto Rico:] Good morning to everyone. We have been receiving partial information. Let me be clear that still part of the island is lacking communications. So what we have is some preliminary assessments about 13 deaths at this at this juncture. So we're we will keep you abreast of what's going on. But certainly, still, some of the western part of the island, southern part of the island, southeast part of the island, we're still trying to break through. Keep in mind we're 24 hours just post-hurricane warning. And right now our efforts are to make sure that we have everybody safe and that we can rescue people. Our efforts have already produced almost 700 rescues. So we're clearly focused on that.
[Camerota:] Yes, of course, Governor. It's just hard to really wrap our heads around what's happening in Puerto Rico this morning. We're looking at the video. I mean, whole neighborhoods and towns are underwater. Can you give us a sense for what the conditions are for the 3.5 million people there?
[Rossello:] Yes. Well, the flooding areas, as we anticipated, were were going to get several feet of water. It's been significant. Yesterday during the morning I had to go to one of the towns to help rescue people that were on the rooftops because of water flooded more than anticipated. So we have a lot of flooding. We have reports of, you know, just complete devastation of vulnerable housing. Of course, it's still raining over here, which is one of our main messages right now. Keep safe. Still seek shelter. Because mudslides and surges as well as flooding continues. So that's essentially the landscape. And and we're still trying to see some of the hardest hit areas such as the southeastern part of the island. We still are lacking in communication there. But that's essentially a major disaster here in Puerto Rico, and what our focus is, again, is trying to save as many lives as we can.
[Camerota:] Of course. I mean, some of the areas have gotten 40 inches of rain. I mean, and this is the aftermath. What we're looking at right now, we're watching some of the 700 rescues that you're talking about. Can we talk about the power grid? I mean, when we've spoken to you, as well as when we've spoken to the head of the Power and Light Company, I mean, the estimates are just really disheartening that it's going to be between some I mean, do you still believe it will be between four and six months to get power restored there?
[Rossello:] We'll get a better sense today. Today we will fly over Puerto Rico. We will see how the transmission lines handled the storm. If there is severe devastation in those transmission lines, it's going to take weeks and months to repair those. However, if the devastation is not as severe, then we can restore it quickly. But our warning, you know, when we came in eight months ago to this administration was that we had a very weak energy grid here in Puerto Rico, and we needed to restore it. So of course, that takes time. But now, certainly, with the help of FEMA and working together, we're going to have to not only restore it but make sure we mitigate future impact so that we can restore energy quicker.
[Camerota:] But Governor, what's that going to look like for all of the people in Puerto Rico? I mean, how are they going to work and live and function without power?
[Rossello:] Well yes, well, it's tough, but we've been we've been working on mitigation strategies. We have plenty of of generators that are coming in. Mind you, the estimates of time of getting power is getting full power. So we expect to start getting power in different areas of Puerto Rico as we start restoring the system. So there's been a lot of solidarity, I would say, however, Alisyn. And this is one of the silver linings here. Puerto Rico became a platform to help U.S. citizens. After Irma blazed through the islands, we rescued and repatriated over 3,500 U.S. citizens. But now there's a lot of people, a lot of governors. You know, the federal government has been phenomenal. FEMA has been great.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rossello:] So now our efforts, you know, obviously still within the warning signs and danger making sure that people are safe, saving life. But immediately after that, start rebuilding Puerto Rico stronger than ever.
[Camerota:] Governor, I know you spoke to President Trump last night. What did you ask him for and what did he offer?
[Rossello:] Well, the president has been phenomenal in this situation. He's been, both in Irma and Maria, he has offered an pre-landfall emergency declaration. He's already declared most of the island a disaster area so that we can start the rebuilding process quickly. And he just said that he loved the people of Puerto Rico, and that he would help, that he would stand by us in our rebuilding process.
[Camerota:] Governor, obviously, we know that you have weeks and months ahead of you that are going to be really challenging. We appreciate you giving us a status report. Governor Rossello, thank you very much for being on
[New Day. Rossello:] Thank you, Alisyn. And thank you for all of the people that have poured their hearts, their prayers, governors, congressmen. Just regular American citizens calling and pouring out their help. Thank you for all of that. Puerto Rico is going to need you at this juncture, and we're very grateful for your consideration at this time.
[Camerota:] Everyone is thinking of you, Governor. We'll speak to you again soon. Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right. The answer to a frequently-asked question. The reason you're seeing so much federal aid in Puerto Rico is two-fold. One, humanity demands it. And second, Puerto Rico is not a sovereign. It's a commonwealth of the United States. It's a territory. Those are Americans there. So you're going to see continued resources from the United States government. Now there's a very different story on the island of Dominica. It's considered almost a complete loss, and it's mostly inaccessible after Hurricane Maria. CNN is one of the only reporting teams on the island right now, and the widespread destruction is everywhere. CNN's Michael Holmes is there Michael.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Correspondent:] Chris, I've got to tell you, I haven't seen anything quite like this. We've been covering Irma and then Maria for a couple of weeks now. This is by far the worst we've seen. Dominica is an island of 70,000 or so people. It has been decimated from end to end. We're in the capital, Roseau, at the moment. Everywhere I look around me, I can see roofs torn off and, in many cases, down below, houses completely demolished. There are massive trees. This is an island of rain forests. Massive trees, washed down the rivers and banged up against bridges. There is no power. There is no running water. Very little aid has gotten in so far. You mentioned the isolated villages. There are many of these villages, hillside villages all around this island. We flew around the island a day or so ago before we could actually land. And those places have all been decimated, as well. You look around, there is there is debris littering like confetti around the fields and the hillsides. There have been a lot of mudslides. This we talked to the prime minister yesterday. This is an agriculture-based economy. Cane fields. You've got banana plantations, citrus growth. Gone. Everything. There's not a leaf on this island, Chris. The rain forest, you can't see where they are. They're just not there. Look at before pictures of this online and look at it now, and you've just got to shake your head. It's total devastation. The prime minister is heading off to the U.N. G.A. today. He's going to go there and make a plaintive cry for help. They're worried here they're going to get forgotten. This was the first-place hit by Maria. Category 5. Full-on hit. They're worried they're going to get forgotten because of other places that have been hit by Irma and Maria. Further down the line, of course, the devastation in Puerto Rico and other places like that. This little island basically has nothing and has nothing going forward in terms of an economy. The nascent the tourism industry, done. The agriculture industry, done. They need help. They need it now. No power. No water. Precious little food Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Michael, the video is just incredible. The aerial shots of what it looks like today. Thank you very much for the reporting from there. So Hurricane Maria is still a powerful Category 3 storm as it takes aim at the Turks and Caicos. CNN meteorologist Chad Myers has the latest forecast. What are you seeing this morning, Chad?
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist:] Alisyn, I've seen the storm now going into the Turks and Caicos away from the Dominican Republic. Still 125 miles per hour. It did gain a lot of strength as it got back into the water, as we expected. But still traveling to the north and to the northwest. Now, there is still a little chance that this makes a slight left turn back toward the U.S., and I'll show you why. A hundred and ten miles per hour, though, in the middle of the Atlantic. Missing Bermuda, too. See that little jog to the left? Why did they push it back? This is the Hurricane Center forecast five days from now. Why did they push it to the left? Because the European level has a slight jog as it tries to interact with Jose. This will rotate around each other. And that's this part of the wiggle. So that's why the model turns a little bit farther to the left, and so does the official hurricane track. But for now it stays onshore and makes a right-hand turn. Maybe making a run at Atlantic Canada but for now the Atlantic Ocean Chris.
[Cuomo:] Got to keep an eye on it. We know you will. Chad, thank you very much. All right. So now to Mexico and the race against time. There are human chains of volunteers and workers, often digging by hand through rubble for survivors. The death toll from that magnitude 7.1 earthquake right now stands at well over 250 and continues to rise. CNN's Rosa Flores is live in Mexico City Rosa.
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Chris, there are at least 10 collapsed buildings here in Mexico City who are believed to have people trapped inside. The building that you see behind me is one of them. At this hour, rescuers telling us that operations here have stopped because of the rain that pummeled Mexico City overnight. That rain added weight to the building that is already unstable. And this rain just one added stress to an already very dangerous operation to save lives.
[Flores:] Search-and-rescue teams frantically combing through collapsed buildings, desperate for signs of life amid the mangled rebar and blocks of concrete. Mexico's president telling the public that authorities believe there are still people buried alive. The emergency officials using high-tech cameras and rescue dogs, hoping it isn't too late. These workers build a makeshift ladder to reach the top of the rubble before calling for silence to listen for any survivors. These scenes playing out across Mexico City and surrounding towns as thousands work together removing buckets of debris and piece of wood, one piece at a time. A painstaking task done carefully to avoid a further collapse. Amid the chaos, moments of joy as people are pulled from the rubble. Workers celebrate as this survivor is brought to safety. Other efforts coming up empty, like the urgent seven for a young girl authorities believed was trapped under this collapsed elementary school. The world eagerly awaited news of her fate before officials announced that all of the students and teachers had been accounted for, either at home, in hospitals or dead. Nevertheless, rescuers remained hopeful and determined as the global community rallies around Mexico. Volunteers from around the world coming from as far away as Japan and Taiwan, working together with hundreds of ordinary people who have flocked to the area to do whatever they can to help save lives.
[Sofia Broid, Mexico City Resident:] I'm a mom and a graphic designer. I'm not prepared to to do any of this. But there's always something you can do.
[Flores:] And as we take another live look here, I can tell you that rescue workers have been saying that, while operations have seized here for the moment, while they wait for this delicate building to settle after the rain from overnight, they do believe that people are trapped in what they are calling capsules, Alisyn. And these capsules, they say, were created when that building collapsed, but it allowed people to stay in these crevasses, in these areas. And the reason why they believe that there are people trapped inside is because they say they used heat sensors. And there were positive readings coming from those sensors and the sophisticated equipment that they're using here in Mexico City.
[Camerota:] Oh, my gosh. Let's pray that they can get to them today when daylight comes up there. Thank you very much, Rosa. So North Korea. Kim Jong-un firing insults at President Trump and issuing an ominous new warning to the United States. We have all the new details for you, next.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] So it turns out President Trump met a second time with Russian President Vladimir Putin. There was no U.S. official with him and there was no record of what they discussed in this reportedly hour-long conversation at a G-20 dinner? Is that OK? And what is the way forward on health care? Are the Democrats in control as President Trump suggests? Let's discuss with Democratic senator and former governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin. He is a member of the Senate Intel Committee. Senator, always good to see you.
[Sen. Joe Manchin , West Virginia:] Good to be with you, Chris.
[Cuomo:] The second meeting with Putin, we didn't know about it for a number of days. Do you have any concerns about this meeting?
[Manchin:] Absolutely. It's very concerning and it's something that we should know about.
[Cuomo:] Do you have a larger concern about transparency and the simple fact of unknown when it comes to either President Trump or the people around him and any potential conflicts of interests or financial obligations to Russian-sourced money?
[Manchin:] Well, let's talk about transparency first. Transparency in the public sector is much different than transparency in the private sector. When you're in the public sector, you have to gain the trust of the constituents and your people and everybody you represent. Those that are for you and those that are against you. They don't have to agree with you, but they have to respect how you come to your decision. And in a transparent way, it makes it easier to respect that. That's what you build up in the public trust. And that's what's missing. And I think it's what we need to be working on. All of us have to be cognizant of that. And I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that everything that we do is in the open. And on intelligence committees, you as you understand completely, Chris, there are certain things that we can't have open meetings because of people that we want to make sure that we protect.
[Cuomo:] Sure. Sure. And what do you make of the fact that the former head of government ethics says, you know, that Trump's lawyer didn't want him to sign his disclosure form certifying that it was accurate. And that we now know that people in this meeting with Don Jr., one of them was looked at by members of the Senate for moving money, over $1 billion, into different corporations. And they seemed, at a best read, to want to work Don Jr. about Putin's money being tied up in sanctions revolving around the Magnitsky Act. All of these circumstantial things, do they matter or is it just smoke?
[Manchin:] They matter. First of all, Carl Levin, former Senator Carl Levin from Michigan is one of the most honorable people you're ever going to meet. Respected by everybody in this institution who ever served one day with him. So Carl has been when he was here, that was his thing and he was on it continuously. He dug into it. He had staff working on it. And he was concerned about an awful lot of this this dark money moving around and who was responsibility and who was benefiting by it. So that is credible what Carl is telling you. All this other stuff here, again, this is in Robert Mueller's court. I, looking forward, like every other Intel Committee member, of bringing all the people of interest before us so we know what's going on and we can hear from them. They have a right to tell their story also. And with that being said, our Intelligence Committee is working diligently, Chris, putting all the pieces of the puzzle together so we have a clear picture when they do come before us.
[Cuomo:] And to the simple proposition of, you've had a long time, you've found no collusion, cut it out, this is all politics.
[Manchin:] Well, there's no this is not a witch hunt. I let me tell you, I've seen witch hunts. I saw the Benghazi witch hunt. I went over and sat into that hearing because you can get a different feeling if you're sitting in a room if people are trying to find answers or if they're just trying to accuse. I can tell you, every meeting I've been in, and intel and any other setting, whether it be Democrats, Republicans, or a combination of both of us in a bipartisan way, no one's accusing anybody. We just want the facts. They're not out there slinging mud. And that's not going to happen. But we will get to the facts. And the facts will give you the decisions that need to be made.
[Cuomo:] Another big policy consideration going on in Washington, D.C., healthcare, of course.
[Manchin:] Yes. Yes.
[Cuomo:] The president meeting with the Republicans today. He suggested yesterday that they should just let Obamacare fail on its own and then put it in your lap, the Democrats, to come to them and beg them to save it.
[Manchin:] Well, I don't think that's an answer that we agree on. It's something I don't subscribe to. I was sent here to do a job. I'm not blaming anybody how I got to where I got to or the things that have been handed to me. I've got to fix problems. As a former governor, that's what we did. And there was a group of us met informally. Just a group of governors met informally, bipartisan, just to talk. That hasn't happened since this has been going on for how many months now. And we wanted to see if there's a pathway forward. We all agree there should be an orderly process. There should be regular order. We go through a process of committees. The committees have the hearings. Amendments are placed. We discuss the differences we have. We come to agreement and cohesion where we can. That process has never been allowed to happen up until now. Maybe with the votes and the defeat of the Republican's plan to just repeal, maybe now we can come together and move forward. That's what we're hoping for, Chris.
[Cuomo:] The president seems to be washing his hands of all of you down here. He just tweeted, I'm going to be having lunch at the White House today with Republican senators concerning health care. They must, all caps, keep their promise to America. What about the president's promise to America?
[Manchin:] Well, the only thing I would say, the promise to West Virginia, he won it by a tremendous amount, about 43 percent, he won the state of West Virginia. That was mostly Democrats voting for him. Democrats that were upset with the previous administration that felt that Washington left them behind, didn't care. I know exactly because, you know, coming from West Virginia, born and raised in West Virginia, and it's these are the greatest people on earth. They'll do anything. They work hard. They'll give you all they have. But they just want government to be their partner. They thought government left them. Well, now, every demographic of my state of West Virginia, Chris, and you know my state, they're hit, whether they're elderly, pre-existing conditions, the poor, the young, everybody. Opioid addiction, they are all be devastated by this piece of legislation that's repealing. So we're saying repair it.
[Cuomo:] And the ACA has changed the reality for a lot of lower income people getting health care in your state also. I mean that goes to the fact premise that the ACA is dying. It's in a death spiral. It will fail. The numbers don't support that. It's got trouble. You guys have to make fixes to it. But the idea that it's dying, that's disingenuous, is it not?
[Manchin:] Oh, most certainly. We know it's had problems. We've always identified that. I wasn't there. I was not there when they passed it in 2010.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Manchin:] I was head of the Governor's Association for a period of time. We were talking about this. And I said, listen, I think that mandate that you're saying for certain types of insurance, certain types of coverage, and you have to pay this or pay a fine, that's going to be a tough pill for West Virginians to swallow.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Manchin:] We've got to be working on that. But they went ahead with it. They knew that needed the private market needs to be saved, Chris, and no one's made that effort to save the private market. On the other hand, we gave 20 million people, almost 180,000 West Virginians, the greatest wealth that they could have, which is a health care. And we never gave them one word of instruction of how to use it. I knows there's great savings, but just to be callous to say we're going to throw you off because we have to reduce the cost of this, well, first of all, don't give the taxes back right now until we stabilize the health care markets. And then make sure that people are earning their way to have a good health care, to live a quality of life. Give them a chance. Don't just throw them out. And that's all we've said. So we can come to I think some agreements here.
[Cuomo:] Well, we look forward to that. Let us know how we can report and promote the conversation among bipartisan lawmakers to make positive changes for the American people.
[Manchin:] We'll definitely keep you informed, Chris, and, thank you.
[Cuomo:] Senator, thank you. Alisyn.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Well, a tropical storm is making waves on Twitter. But it's not what you'd think. CNN's Jeanne Moos explains, next

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Deal rejected.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] One of the worst and most one-sided transactions.
[Tapper:] President Trump disavows the Iran nuclear agreement negotiated under President Obama.
[Trump:] In the event we're not able to reach a solution, the agreement will be terminated.
[Tapper:] Now U.S. allies are distancing themselves from the president's decision. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson joins me live next. And dismantling Obamacare. President Trump wipes out subsidies to insurance companies.
[Trump:] Taking crucial steps toward saving the American people from the nightmare of Obamacare.
[Tapper:] And pressures Democrats to get on board, or else.
[Trump:] They're like obstructionists. If they came over, maybe we could make a deal.
[Tapper:] But even some Republicans say it's the American people who will pay the price. Key Republican Senator Susan Collins is here to react. Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is changing course. This week, President Trump moved to undue two cornerstone policies of the Obama legacy, Obamacare and the Iran deal, the president disavowing the nuclear deal, saying Iran is not in compliance with the terms of the agreement. But President Trump fell short of terminating the deal altogether, though the president did leave that option on the table.
[Trump:] In the event we are not able to reach a solution working with Congress and our allies, then the agreement will be terminated.
[Tapper:] This morning, U.S. allies are speaking out against President Trump's decision. Just hours ago, Great Britain and Germany reiterated they are quote "firmly committed" to the agreement. This follows a strong rebuke from the European Union's foreign policy chief.
[Federica Mogherini, Foreign Policy Chief, European Union:] It is not a bilateral agreement. It does not belong to any single country. And it is not up to any single country to terminate it.
[Tapper:] Here to discuss this and much more is the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson. Secretary Tillerson, thanks so much for joining us. We appreciate it.
[Rex Tillerson, U.s. Secretary Of State:] My pleasure, Jake.
[Tapper:] So, before we get to what the president did, I want to ask a question. You said recently that Iran is in technical compliance with the deal. But President Trump said on Friday that the Iranian regime has quote "committed multiple violations of the agreement." So, which is it? Is Iran in technical compliance, or has it committed multiple violations?
[Tillerson:] Well, the answer is really both, Jake. Under the nuclear agreement, the JCPOA, that is a multilateral party agreement, there have been a number of technical violations, carrying too much inventory of heavy water, having materials that are used to construct high-speed centrifuges. But, under the agreement and this is part of the weaknesses and the flaws Iran has a significant period of time to remedy those violations. And so they have remedied the violations, which then brings them back into technical compliance. I think, though, that demonstrated pattern of always walking right up against the edges of the agreement are what give us some concern as to how far Iran might be willing to go to test the limits from its side of the agreement. Our response to that has been to work with the other parties and demand that we be much more demanding of the enforcement of the agreement, much more demanding inspections, much more demanding disclosures. And that's what we are shifting since we have taken our seat at the table of the joint commission.
[Tapper:] OK. President Trump decertified the deal on Friday, but he did not withdraw from the deal, as he could have. Did the president want to withdraw unilaterally before people in the administration such as yourself, Secretary Mattis and others, successfully persuaded him to pursue what might be described as a middle course?
[Tillerson:] No, what the president wants is a more comprehensive strategy to deal with Iran in its totality. I think, for too long, and certainly the last administration really defined the Iranian relationship around this nuclear agreement. This nuclear agreement is flawed. It has a number of weaknesses in it. But and so the president said throughout his campaign even, he said, I will either reform the agreement, I will renegotiate the agreement, basically saying, I will either fix these flaws, or we will have to have a different agreement entirely. And I think his decision around the new policy is consistent with that. So, now we want to deal with the nuclear agreement's weaknesses, but we really need to deal with a much broader array of threats that Iran poses to the region, our friends and allies, and, therefore, threats that they pose to our own national security. The policy itself really has three components. And I think it's important that people understand this. And the president described these in his speech. There is the nuclear agreement, which we are going to undertake an effort to see if we cannot address the many flaws in the agreement, working with partners. It may be a secondary agreement. Maybe it's not within the existing agreement, but we may undertake a secondary agreement. But then there's a much broader array from threats from Iran, its ballistic programs, its support of terrorist organizations in the region, Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas. These are all very threatening organizations. And its destabilizing activities in Yemen to support the rebels, the Houthis, to support the rebels in Syria, the Assad regime. Everywhere you look in the region, Iran's activities destabilize the region and threaten others. But the third element of this policy and the president touched on it in his address is, this is not about the Iranian people. This is about the regime in Iran, this revolutionary regime that, ever since it came to power, has been intent on killing and harming Americans and harming others in the region. We do not hold the Iranian people accountable for that. So, our effort is to support the moderate voices in Iran, support their cries for democracy and freedom, in the hope that, one day, the Iranian people will retake control of the government of Iran and restore it to its rich history of the past, reintegrate, and become a fruitful member in trade, commerce in the region. So, that is really the endgame here. But that's a very long game, and we realize that.
[Tapper:] Before the Senate not long ago, your counterpart at the Pentagon, Secretary Mattis, was asked if he thought staying in the agreement was in the best interests of the United States, not a question about whether or not he wanted to improve upon the deal or add a secondary deal, as you just discussed, but whether or not the U.S. should stay in it or leave. And he said staying in it was his course. It sounds like you agree with that as well, that you would not want Congress to immediately impose sanctions that would end this deal.
[Tillerson:] No, I do agree with that. And I think the president does as well. That's why he took the decision he took that, look, let's let's see if we cannot address the flaws in the agreement by staying within the agreement, working with the other signatories, working with our European friends and allies within the agreement. But that as I said, that may come in a secondary agreement as well. So, we want to take the agreement as it exists today, as I said, fully enforce that agreement, be very demanding of Iran's compliance under the agreement, and then begin the process of addressing these flaws that we see around not the absence of addressing ballistic missiles, for instance, the concerns we have around the sunset provisions, this phase-out of the agreement. You know, we we know what that looks like. We have seen this in the past in the '90s with North Korea, agreements that ultimately phase out. What happened has put us on the road where we are today with North Korea. We don't want to find ourselves in that same position with Iran.
[Tapper:] Speaking of of North Korea, you talk about working with European allies. As you know, our European allies are very concerned about the step that President Trump took on Friday. I want to show you what the German foreign minister had to say quote "My big concern is that what is happening in Iran or with Iran from the U.S. perspective will not remain an Iranian issue, but many others in the world will consider whether they themselves should acquire nuclear weapons, too, given that such agreements are being destroyed." And I guess the question there is, as voiced by the German foreign minister, why should North Korea believe anything that the United States has to say if the president has shown his willingness to walk away from agreements about nuclear weapons?
[Tillerson:] I think what North Korea should take away from this decision is that the United States will expect a very demanding agreement with North Korea, one that is very binding and achieves the objectives, not just of the United States, but the policy objectives of China and other neighbors in the region, a denuclearized Korean Peninsula. We intend to be very demanding in that agreement. And if we achieve that, then there will be nothing to walk away from, because the objective will be achieved. The issue with the Iran agreement is, it does not achieve the objective. It simply postpones the achievement of that objective. And we feel that that is one of weaknesses under the agreement, so we're going to stay in. We're going to work with our European partners and allies to see if we can't address these concerns, which are concerns of all of us.
[Tapper:] All right. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, stay right here. We are going to take a very quick break. We have got a lot more to talk about, including your role in establishing a dialogue with North Korea, something the president said is a waste of time. Stay with us.

[Berman:] A political earthquake in the primary elections overnight in Florida, and this evening, the aftershocks are just as strong. The Republican winner in last night's primary, Congressman Ron DeSantis, is a fervent supporter of President Trump. And this is what he had to say on Fox News about his Democratic opponent, Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, who would be Florida's first African- American governor if elected.
[Ron Desantis , Nominee For Florida Governor:] Let's build off the success we've had on Governor Scott. The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state.
[Berman:] So that phrase "monkey this up" set critics on fire. Many saying it amounted to a dog whistle of racism. Gillum himself reacted later on day as it happened on Fox News.
[Andrew Gillum , Nominee For Florida Governor:] It's very clear that Mr. DeSantis is taking a page directly from the campaign manual of Donald Trump. But I think he's got another thing coming to him if he thinks that in today's day and age, Florida voters are going to respond to that level of derision and division. They're sick of it. What we're trying to offer in this race
[Shepard Smith, Fox News:] Was that racist or was that racist or a figment of speech?
[Gillum:] Well, not the handbook of Donald Trump, they no longer do whistle calls. They're now using full bullhorns.
[Smith:] And that was bullhorn?
[Gillum:] And what I've got to say than is we've got to make sure that we stay focused I think on the issues that confront everyday people. I'm not going get down in the gutter with DeSantis and Trump. There is enough of that going on. I'm going try and stay high and try to talk about the North Star and what the future is for the state of Florida and the people of this state. I think that's what people want. They're just so sick of this.
[Berman:] So, Fox News anchor ultimately said on the air that the network did not condone the language DeSantis used and noted the congressman had clarified his statement. Obviously, the stage is set for dramatic and possibly polarizing showdown in November. Joining me now, former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo, Amanda Carpenter and Marc Lamont Hill. So, Marc, the DeSantis campaign is denying that this was any kind of dog whistle. They say the congressman was, quote, obviously talking about Florida not making the wrong decision to embrace the socialist policies say that Andrew Gillum espouses. Do you buy that explanation from them?
[Marc Lamont Hill, Cnn Political Commentator:] I do not. This is a classic strategy where you throw out something like this which will anger people, which will outrage people, which will insult people. And then when we respond, as we're supposed to, the other side, those who are supportive of him come out in defense of him. It's really a way to rally his own base around racism. And as the mayor said, it's not even a dog whistle at this point. It's a bullhorn. The relationship that's often asserted between black people and monkeys in white supremacists' logic is one that's deeply know, it's well-known. And very rarely do people use phrases like "monkey it up" in everyday speech.
[Berman:] Michael Caputo, should Congressman DeSantis have known better?
[Michael Caputo, Former Trump Campaign Aide:] Oh, I suspect you know, listen, Andrew Gillum, it surprised everyone. He shocked the world with his come-from-behind victory. I don't think that Congressman DeSantis has faced off against a candidate as promising as Andrew Gillum. I think he made a mistake with his words. I don't believe for a second that Ron DeSantis is a racist nor that he uses a racist coded language. I think that's a tactic of the left and the supporters of Andrew Gillum and the opponents of Ron DeSantis to muck this up.
[Berman:] Amanda, you know you're in trouble, Amanda, when Fox News comes on not long after you say something and knows that we do not condone this language. And I'll also note that DeSantis campaign hasn't apologized for it yet.
[Amanda Carpenter, Former Communications Director For Sen. Ted Cruz:] Yes. The DeSantis campaign said anyone who would characterize this as racist is acting absurd. Well, the fact that Fox News had to issue a statement said that they will not condone that language tells you something, that it's not absurd, that it is offensive, that the network that gave this candidate millions of dollars in free air time is putting him in the time-out box for a little while. And here's a thing. Ron DeSantis is a smart, educated man. He went to Yale undergrad, Harvard law, became a JAG lawyer in the Navy. He knows how to use language. So, that's where I'm kind of stuck on this, because I think he does know better. And even if it were a mistake show, he should be smart enough to try to repair it. And here's what I think is really sad. He is a good credible candidate with a great story that is turning himself into kind of a carbon copy of Trump. If you go on his website, it's just pictures of him and Trump. I've been endorsed by Trump. And he's clearly trying to ride Trump's coattails into the general election, where I think he would be a better stand alone candidate. And if he is going to tie himself to the Trump train, you know, if it wrecks, you know, that just makes it all the easier for interest Democrats.
[Berman:] Marc, how much of a factor do you think race will be in this election?
[Hill:] I think it will be a huge factor. I don't think it will be the only factor. What we've seen over the last 24 hours is that this is a populist election. In many ways, this is like a proxy battle between Trump and perhaps Bernie Sanders in terms of values. And so, I think, ultimately, Florida voters are going to want someone who has the right values, who has the right vision for the state. But very clearly, Republicans know that they can win this race with heavy turnout. One of the ways to rally that Trump base to turn out in November is by pushing the race button, by stoking the racial fire and by forcing people on the left to react in the way that we did in the last 24 hours. So, it's a very careful strategy. That's why it's important for people to not just react, but also vote.
[Berman:] Hey, Michael, what's wrong with saying sorry? Hey, I didn't mean that I'm sorry if anyone perceived that it way? And the second part of that question I suppose would be, is this the general election launch that you think DeSantis' campaign was hoping for?
[Caputo:] Of course not. I think DeSantis campaign lost its first battle today in the general election. It won't be the last one they lose against Andrew Gillum. He is a strong candidate. Let me tell you something. In Florida, where the Democrats and the general need to get young people and African Americans out, running an established politician who is African-American and young is a pretty good way to do it. So, he actually DeSantis faces a more difficult race than he would have say if another Democrat had won. But in my mind, the socialism that is behind Andrew Gillum's policies, the idea that he is the first and the highest ranking person out there calling for impeachment of the president, those are themes that are not going to fly in Florida, especially when a goodly a double- digit number of people who have escaped from socialism in the western hemisphere have come to Florida will vote against it. But in addition, I think the people of Florida are smart enough to understand that this is a ploy where the left, including Andrew Gillum, are trying to accuse racism where it just doesn't exist.
[Berman:] Amanda, you want to weigh in there?
[Carpenter:] Yes. I do think the national component to this gubernatorial election is interesting and not good at all for Florida voters. If you're scanning the headlines to learn about these candidates today, you would learn that one is for impeachment, the other is against the rigged witch-hunt. You know, one is for Medicare for all. The other is for repealing Obamacare. But these are people who are running for governor. You know, where is the talk about the toxic green slime washing up on Florida shore or the people being shot up all over the place in the state of Florida? It seems to me this race is becoming so nationalized, they're both taking the ball off state issues, and that's not a good strategy for either of them to win.
[Berman:] I want to make one more note and we're going to have to end this segment here. Michael Caputo said that Andrew Gillum is a socialist, he does not call himself a Democratic socialist. There are plenty of candidates around the country who are. He does not adopt that label. Michael Caputo, Amanda Carpenter, Marc Lamont Hill, great to have you with us tonight. I do appreciate it. All right. Coming up, the day after Puerto Rico said the death toll from Hurricane Maria is nearly 3,000. The President was asked about the government's response to the natural disaster that killed so many Americans. The President said, quote, "We did a fantastic job in Puerto Rico". We're keeping them honest on that claim, next.

[Unidentified Female:] It is a timeless and cherished honor to serve in our country's armed services. That honor has been Brent's since he served in the Utah National Guard for the past 15 years. And it has been mine for just as long, as I have proudly stood by his side.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Brent Taylor touched a lot of lives. An Afghan officer who served alongside him also testified to his character in an emotional letter written to Taylor's wife. And we have a copy of it here. He wrote in part, Major Abdul Rahman Rahmani, "Your husband taught me to love my wife Hamida as an equal and treat my children as treasured gifts, to be a better father, to be a better husband, to be a better man." That is the legacy that Brent Taylor leaves on this election day. A very good Tuesday morning to you.
[Sciutto:] It is election day. I'm Jim Sciutto. Thanks so much for watching today.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] We are live for you in Washington. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow. It's 10:00 a.m. out East, 7:00 a.m. in the West. Polls coast to coast are open now from sea to shining sea. Every state except Alaska and Hawaii where it's still super early. In Oregon and Washington, which do their elections by mail. If you are not one of the 33 million voters who cast their ballots early this year, and that's an astounding number, by the way, for a midterm, then today's your chance. Your last chance to help choose 435 House members, 35 senators, and 36 governors.
[Sciutto:] You know, we talked to see many midterm elections about not enough people voting.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] It does not appear to be a problem this time around. Literally thousands of offices, judgeships, ballot questions are on the line today, but no question looms larger than this one. Will voters decide to break the Republican monopoly on power here in the nation's capital or give President Trump another two years of virtual free reign. We have reporters and crews this hour from New York to Texas, Wisconsin to South Florida, across the country. We begin with Gary Tuchman, he's in Powder Springs, Georgia, just outside Atlanta. The man in charge of running elections in that state happens to be running in the state. The secretary of state running for governor. It's quite a tight, quite an acrimonious race.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn National Correspondent:] Jim, Brian Kemp, the Republican, is a player in the election. And he's also a referee in the election. He's the secretary of state in charge of the elections yet he's running in it. And he's running against Stacey Abrams, she's a Democrat. If she wins, and this race is too close to call, she will become the first African-American female to ever be a governor in the United States. This is Cobb County, Georgia. This precinct in this church gymnasium has been crowded all day. We can tell you, we got here at 6:00 a.m., it opens at 7:00. It was pouring rain outside. We came inside to capture people entering. And it looked like a Black Friday sale when the doors opened at 7:00. There were more than 100 people waiting to vote, and it's been a steady stream since then. We've been talking to people, unsolicited here. We haven't talked to them before. We don't stage anything. We just want to get an idea. Can I ask you a quick question, ma'am? Turn around this way. I hope it's not too nervy for me to ask you this. First of all, what's your name?
[Diana Claire, Georgia Voter:] Diana Claire [Ph]
[Tuchman:] OK, Diana, it sound nervy, but can you tell me who you're voting for for governor? Is it Kemp or Abrams?
[Claire:] I'd rather not say.
[Tuchman:] That's OK. You don't have to say. You're not required to in this country. But I do want to ask you another question which you are required to answer. OK. Because it won't give away who you're voting for. The president of the United States, Donald Trump, is he helping you determine who to vote for, either for him or against him?
[Claire:] Yes and no.
[Tuchman:] Yes and no. And yes in what way?
[Claire:] Yes in certain issues that they are covering that they feel is important for us is what we feel is important.
[Tuchman:] But he is influencing you, Trump, in some way, shape, or form?
[Claire:] Yes. Yes.
[Tuchman:] OK. And that's the question. Thank you for talking with us.
[Claire:] Thank you.
[Tuchman:] I didn't mean to grill you so hard. Everyone is very nice to me when I asked them who they're voting for. No one ever hits me or anything like that, because I set it up like that, that way they don't have to answer the question, but we have been asking everybody if Donald Trump is a reason they're here. Almost everyone we've talked to, Jim, has said that the president of the United States has some influence in why they're here, either pro or con. Jim, back to you.
[Sciutto:] Yes. And you can sense some of the sensitivity there. You know, politics are always sensitive. They're particularly sensitive in this time. Gary Tuchman, thanks very much.
[Harlow:] Only Gary can ask those tough questions with a smile and make it work.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] All right. Let's get to the battleground state of Virginia. That is where our correspondent Brian Todd is in Sterling, Virginia. So much talk about Virginia, Virginia 10th, what it all means. How the president weighs in there? What are you hearing?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Poppy, this is the heart of that Virginia 10th voting district. We're four hours into a very energized morning here in northern Virginia. This is one of those a suburban battlegrounds that's going to be so crucial to determine whether they Democrats will take control of the House of Representatives. That's going to play out here where Democrat Jennifer Wexton is challenging the Republican incumbent Barbara Comstock. I heard Gary talking about you know, talking to a voter about what drove them to the polls. I've got a voter here. This is Joe Schuler [PH], he's been a voter here in Loudon County for seven years now. Joe, tell me what brought you out today. It's a very energized turnout. What brings you out?
[Joe Schuler, Virginia Voter:] The conservatives and especially the Trump administration leading this country in a disastrous direction and completely unethical direction as well.
[Todd:] And so Donald Trump is was he may be the sole reason that brought you out or there are other things that you care?
[Schuler:] Not the only reason. I generally vote, but he was definitely an energizer.
[Todd:] And what about the people you talk to, your friends, family? Does Donald Trump play a big role in their decision-making against whether to come out and vote or to stay home?
[Schuler:] Many of the people I know, yes. He's playing a big decision in them coming out.
[Todd:] And what about issues? You know, we hear that immigration, health care are the big issues. What's the thing that you care about most that brings you here?
[Schuler:] I'm not generally a single-issue voter, but the complete gutting of the ACA and
[Todd:] Affordable Care Act.
[Schuler:] Yes. It's just it's horrible and it's exactly the opposite direction the government should be moving in.
[Todd:] All right, Joe. Well, thank you very much for talking to us. Pleasure to meet you, and that kind of gives you an idea, guys, of what brings people out here. For better or for worse, for positive or negative, President Trump is driving a lot of people to the polls. People now have roughly nine hours to vote at this polling station. We're told that if people are still in line when they come in here, they're going to get a chance to vote. And let me swing something around here and show you really quickly, this is a handicap space. They have been helping people who have come here to vote by actually coming to their cars if they can't walk in, giving them ballots, and taking them back in. So they're making it very conducive for people with challenges to come here and vote. Poppy, back to you.
[Harlow:] That's great to see. They're going the extra mile for all those folks so everyone can cast their ballot. Brian Todd, important reporting. Thank you very much.
[Sciutto:] Well, imagine this. Florida, a key race, couldn't have an election without Florida being at the center of a high stakes race. Hialeah, Florida, is where our Rosa Flores finds herself today. What are you hearing from voters there today about what's bringing them to the polls?
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, Jim, I talked to one voter who said that this is the best country in the world. We enjoy democracy. We enjoy freedoms, and how do you maintain that democracy and those freedoms? By exercising your right to vote. That's why one voter said that she was here very early this morning. Take a look over my shoulder. Polls here opens at 7:00 a.m. and we do have an update from the secretary of state here in Florida. Updated early voting numbers. Hear this. 39 percent of registered voters in Florida have already voted. That's more than five million people. Now Florida is known for its nail-biting races because races usually are here won by razor thin margins. You've got to look at these numbers with me. Republicans, the breakdown this is the breakdown by party. Republicans make up 40.1 percent of those votes. Democrats, 40.5 percent of those votes, with no party affiliation and other making 19.4 percent. Again, nail-biting races here in the state of Florida. And there are
[Sciutto:] Rosa, sorry to interrupt. We're just seeing a live picture now of Andrew Gillum, who's Democratic candidate for governor in Florida casting his ballot in Tallahassee, Florida, where he happens to be the mayor as well. Just one of the most hotly contested governors races, bellwether for which party is going to have the upper hand. A little bit of a difficult signal from inside there.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] But that was Andrew Gillum casting his ballot. Rosa Flores, thank you very much from outside a polling station there as well.
[Harlow:] OK. Rosa, thank you. On a day when millions will go to the polls, where is the president? Our White House correspondent Sarah Westwood joins us live outside the White House. You know, Sarah, ahead of today, the president has talked a lot about that Florida race and a lot about that candidate who just voted, Andrew Gillum.
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right, and President Trump had endorsed Gillum's Republican opponent, Congressman Ron DeSantis, in the primary. There was a lot of controversy around that decision, given that this is one time considered a very winnable race for Republicans, and there was some thinking in the party that perhaps DeSantis' primary opponent could have been a better match against Gillum. And this is just one of the many races that the president will be watching closely today. We're told by Press Secretary Sarah Sanders that the president will be making calls today, keeping tabs on those House, Senate, and gubernatorial contests. We're also told that the president is likely to stop by the war room that his political team has set up in the East Wing of the White House to keep tabs on voting throughout the day, and then later the president will be inviting friends and family into the White House residence to watch the election results. There's no clear answer yet on whether the president will make some kind of statement or appearance tonight once the verdict to voters becomes clear. And the president has already started to set expectations when it comes to the House. He's acknowledged that there's so many districts across the country that he wasn't able to visit them all or at least that's the excuse that he gave for focusing primarily on the Senate in the final weeks of campaigning when he visited those eight states, held those 11 rallies just in the past week. The president seems to be staking more of Republican hopes on the Senate, and of course, he'll be watching those returns tonight from the White House residence with his family Poppy.
[Harlow:] OK. Sarah Westwood, thank you. Appreciate it.
[Sciutto:] Coming up next, we are focusing on your vote today. We have reporters across the country following all the key races. We're going to bring you updates from each of those races as we go forward.
[Harlow:] It's not just the names on the ballots today. Amendments in several states could have very significant implications on voting rights across the country. Stay with us.

[Berman:] Again our breaking news tonight, President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani tells PBS that is as recently as last night attorney's for the Mueller team were in contact to the presidential lawyers about narrowing questions for possible interview with the President. And as you just heard President Trump acknowledge the one year anniversary of the start of the Mueller investigation by incorrectly calling it "illegal". For more certainly of interest to the ranking Democrat in the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia's Mark Warner, the committee's report yesterday left zero doubt that that committee does believe there was Russian meddling in the 2016 election that it was designed to help Donald Trump. I spoke to the senator just before the broadcast. Senator Warner, your committee put out a joint statement saying that you have no reason to question the findings of the intelligence community that the Russians meddled in the 2016 election and they did so with the intent of helping Donald Trump. The House Intelligent Committee put out a report that said the opposite they said they saw no evidence of that. How is it that you guys are at odds?
[Sen. Mark Warner,  Intelligence Committee:] Well John, let's be clear. The House Intelligence represented only the majority, the Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee did not agree with their finding. They agreed with our finding. I think any reasonable person following who is been following the story. And we interviewed over 100 individuals many of them that will part of putting together the intelligence community assessment. We interviewed officials from the Obama administration, the Trump administration, and literally every person that is in the intelligence community that has been in effect confirmed by the Senate. One of the first questions we would ask is, do you agree with the Intelligence Committee assessment and every one of them 100% agreed. So, I would argue it's a very small minority of people who are not connected to any kind of factual basis that don't agree with our assessment, which the intelligence community. They put this the report together fairly quickly. But they got it right. They realized the Russians massively intervened in our elections. They touched 21 of our state's electoral systems. They radically used social media in ways that never have been used before and they did it with the intent to help Mr. Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.
[Berman:] Chris Stewart, a congressman Republican congressman from Utah who was on the House Intelligence committee was telling me earlier today, he spent hours overt the CIA looking at things. And he saw no evidence he says that the Russians were trying to help Donald Trump. How is it that he says he's seen no evidence?
[Warner:] I don't have the foggiest idea. I know that we had in Mike Rogers, Jim Clapper, John Brennan, the previous heads of the three of the intelligence agencies, they all reconfirmed that, you know, our conclusion, their conclusion that should be, they also indicated that there was even further proof when Bob Mueller brought a series of indictments against individuals connected to the internet research agency, the group that was doing a lot of the social media posting, that that, those indictments further confirm that the goal of the Russians was to help Trump and hurt Clinton. Now, I can't you know, I frankly have stopped listening to some of the stuff that comes out of the House majority, because it's been so disconnected from any kind of factual basis. And candidly, that's why it's been so important that in the Senate we keep our efforts bipartisan, the chairman and I and our committee, we go from Tom Cotton on one end to Kamala Harris on the other. We've all stayed united on our reports so far.
[Berman:] How much more work or what does your committee need to do to complete its investigation and when will that be?
[Warner:] We've still got three very important pieces to finish. We've finished the election security, we've now done the assessment of the intelligence community. We've got more work to do on what happened well and where there were mistakes made by the Obama administration. We got to make sure that we get a more conclusive report on social media as well as some policy, outlines on where we need to go, because that problem and misuse not just by the Russians but the others in social media is only growing. And then we've got the question that everybody is still waiting for and I'm reserving judgment on, and the question of collusion between individuals connected with the Trump campaign and the Russians.
[Berman:] You say reserving judgment on that, because we are a year into the Mueller investigation right now. And you say you're reserving judgment on that, you talk to Republicans, you talk to the White House. And they say they have seen no evidence of it to date. Have you seen any evidence of it to date?
[Warner:] If there was not more to be investigated, and more facts to come out, I don't think we would have had at this point a year today into the Mueller investigation five guilty pleas, 14 indictments, including the indictment of the President's campaign manager Mr. Manafort, including the indictment of a number of key Russians who were involved in further bolstering the evidence about Russians helping Mr. Trump to hurt Clinton. You know, in terms of the clue, I felt and others are, we're going stay silent until we see all the witnesses.
[Berman:] Well, staying silent is different than reserving judgment. So, are you staying silent or your just refusing to answer whether have you seen evidence?
[Warner:] However, John, you want to ask the question, I'm not going to weigh in until the committee finishes its work. And we've got more work to do. We there is actually one of the things that is a bit frustrating, because I wish we had been further along at this point.
[Berman:] One of the things the President said today is that the Mueller investigation is disgusting. He called it illegal. His personal attorney Rudy Giuliani is out there almost every day saying the same thing on television. Do you worry that their argument is starting to be heard? Particularly among supporters to the President? Do you worry that it's working?
[Warner:] I worry that this President's relentless attacks and his allies attacks on the Mueller investigation, their relentless attacks on the integrity basically on everybody that works at the FBI. Their relentless attacks on, in effect, the whole Department of Justice, really raises to me the concern that some of Mr. Trump's supporters may start thinking well, you know, not only is the Mueller investigation not accurate or not fully credible. But, you know, it also in effect gives a green light to people deciding. Well, I don't want to follow this law or this rule because everybody that's involved in the FBI and Justice Department is somehow corrupt. That gets us into very dangerous territory. And I think those who've made those kind of ad homonym attacks, do so extraordinarily irresponsibly and are not reflective of what our nation is, rule of law.
[Berman:] Senator Warner, thanks so much for being with us.
[Warner:] Thank you John.
[Berman:] So both President Trump and his Republican allies continue to pound away on the theme that the Russian investigation is a witch hunt and a total waste of time. Coming up a detailed look at their game plan and how it has been working.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us. President Trump angers key Republicans with his mocking attack on Christine Blasey Ford. The big question is, does it just anger them or does it impact their votes on Brett Kavanaugh. The new FBI investigation is the other wildcard. It could be wrapped up as early as today. And the Senate's Republican leader then wants to move quickly to a Kavanaugh confirmation vote. The mood here in because is raw, worse, but one of the president's closest Kavanaugh allies reminds us today, we have been here or at least pretty close to here before.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] Everything he said was factual. He's frustrated his nominee has been treated so badly.
[Unidentified Male:] Factual. It was a personal degrading attack on someone who's a private citizen.
[Graham:] Yes. Well, you know you know, here's what's personally degrading. This is what you get when you go through a trailer park with a $100 bill. I see, this is not the first time this has happened.
[Unidentified Male:] That's actually a reference to something somebody said.
[Graham:] James Carville.
[King:] And we begin there with what the president really thinks and whether that hurts where it matters the most, with the jury of three Republicans who will decide if Judge Brett Kavanaugh becomes Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This morning, the Republican majority leader's mantra, the same.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] Mr. President, it's time to put this embarrassing spectacle behind us. The American people are sick of this. The Senate will vote on this nomination this week. The Senate will vote on this nomination this week.
[King:] That from the majority leader, even as the FBI background investigation into the judge, as of this hour anyway, still ongoing. Senator Mitch McConnell wants to close the book, wants to move quickly towards a final vote. But this morning new anxiety from the majority leader, brought on in a familiar variable. The president's words and their ricochet effect on Capitol Hill.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I had one beer. Well, do you think it was nope, it was one beer. Oh, good. How did you get home? I don't remember. How did you get there? I don't remember. Where is the place? I don't remember. How many years ago was it? I don't know. I don't know.
[King:] The Senate's top Democrat, Chuck Schumer, says the president should apologize. More importantly, though, two of the three Republican senators who have the power to stop Kavanaugh's nomination saying the president should not have said that.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] There's no time and no place for remarks like that. To discuss something this sensitive at a political rally is just is just not right. It's just not right. I wish he hadn't have done it and just say it's it's kind of appalling.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] The president's comments were just plain wrong.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Is it going to affect your vote, senator?
[Unidentified Female:] Did you believe her? How can you vote for him
[King:] CNN's Manu Raju, live up on Capitol Hill. Manu, that last question you tried to ask Senator Collins, that's the key part. She doesn't like what the president said. Jeff Flake doesn't like what the president said. The question is, will that impact their mood? Will it impact their vote?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, no question about that. And we don't know the answer to that. But I think if you from my discussions with Republicans, Republican sources, people who are familiar with their thinking, more likely what's going to impact their vote is the outcome of whatever FBI report eventually comes to Capitol Hill, what they find in these interviews with these witnesses about Brett Kavanaugh's past. That will ultimately determine those three key senators' votes. But no question about it, the president's comments at this time not received with open arms by Republicans at this very sensitive time. At a time when Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, wants to begin the procedural steps as soon as today to force a vote as soon as Friday to end a Democratic filibuster ahead of a confirmation vote potentially this weekend. But, John, that timetable could be complicated if that FBI report is not provided to Capitol Hill today. Their the Judiciary Committee is telling us just moments ago they have not been told by the FBI when that report will come to Capitol Hill. So will McConnell still try to run the force this vote on Friday if that report is not there? He will probably will hold off if he gets resistance from those three key senators, John. So a lot of discussion about to happen behind closed doors at a lunch just momentarily. We'll see what McConnell decides to do.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Certainly Senators Collins and Flake. I think there's no question about that. I think Senator Lisa Murkowski has some other issues that are very specific to her state that she's also been going through in terms of Judge Kavanaugh's record. But I think the interesting element Manu made the key point there, which is, throughout the course of the last year and a half, those senators have been able to raise concern about the president's comments and then push them aside and make decisions on the merits that they see fit. What's most interesting is you've got kind of a this plays into almost like a dual prong game that's happening right now. On the ground a brutal, bare knuckle brawl between Democrats and Republicans, opposition research, people attacking one another on a daily basis on the Senate floor, through letters, through you name it. And then you have these three senators who are almost being treated as if they're in bubble wrap right now. The majority leader making clear, what you need, we will get you. If you want changes to things, we will try and get them for you. I don't like this FBI investigation, but you need it to get to yes, we will make sure that happens. And I think the problem, when the president does what he did last night, and that's upsetting them as they go through this process, is that veneer is kind of poked a little bit or stripped down a little bit. I think if the majority leader had his way, and he's had conversations with the president about this over the course of the last couple weeks, leave those three alone, let them do their thing. And to your point, if the FBI supplemental background investigation comes back with nothing damning or things that are exonerating, it's very likely that Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed as a Supreme Court justice.
[King:] And one of the big debates has been, how many people should be interviewed. And one of the big complaints, Deborah Ramirez's lawyer saying they haven't interviewed some of the people we gave them as potential witnesses. Deborah Ramirez was interviewed. Professor Ford's team says, why isn't the FBI, why aren't the professionals coming to interview us. So far it seems, based on everything we know, the FBI is prepared to just let her Senate testimony speak for itself. One of the questions is, would that be enough for this Republican jury of three? Listen to Jeff Flake. He seems to indicate he's fine.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] We have the statement of Dr. Ford and then we have hours of testimony. So, frankly, when we talked about an FBI investigation, it was to follow up leads that might corroborate her account. So I don't I'm not troubled by that as much as if we came back and found out that the FBI only followed a couple of leads or interviewed just a couple of people.
[King:] To me that's a very important point because you're going to have a big debate in the next 24, 48, 72 hours and then onward that this wasn't fair, it wasn't comprehensive, they didn't go everywhere. And I'm not saying that Democrats' opinions don't matter. They have every right to have their opinion. But what matters most is those three votes and Senator Flake seems to be, I'm OK with this.
[Michael Warren, Senior Writer, "the Weekly Standard":] And those
[King:] Sorry, we've got to go straight up now. Senator Flake talking some more about this point. Let's listen.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] Sensitive and appalling, frankly. This is no time or place, but particularly to discuss something so sensitive at a political rally, it's just it's wrong.
[Raju:] You said that there are demonstrable falsehoods, you know, lies that you would that would be disqualifying for him. He there have been instances where it appears that he did not was not fully forthcoming with the Senate Judiciary Committee about his past, his antics with during college. Does that bother you?
[Flake:] You know, I don't know, you know, specifically what you're talking about. But if you're
[Raju:] His drinking and
[Flake:] If everybody, you know, accurately portrayed their high school years, you know, I'd say now I gained more yards than I really did in football, you know, as a running back.
[Raju:] But he was under oath before the committee.
[Flake:] Yes, yes, maybe so, but I you know, on the drinking thing, I don't know how to gauge that. I really don't. How many would admit to being to drinking in excess when they really haven't. That's a that's a different world from what I grew up in. So I just don't know. I've said all along, you know, if somebody lies under oath, that that's not something we can deal with. But exaggerating or diminishing, you know, your success or your failures, that's something that a lot of people are used to and you take that into account.
[Raju:] Do you think the FBI should investigate that?
[Flake:] You know, I think that what the FBI ought to do is and I think is doing is looking at credible allegations to corroborate what Dr. Ford or Debbie Ramirez brought forward. And that, I think, was mostly what was hanging over that we hadn't hadn't done well enough. And so that's that's where they were headed. And I hope that they're doing that. I'm confident that they are.
[Raju:] Has McGahn been filling you in about this regularly?
[Flake:] Yes. Yes, I've been I've been talking to them and encouraging them. And we've been getting, you know, things to our office. I think a lot of offices have. We've been passing them on. But the FBI is doing what they do. They're professional. I think people have confidence in what they do. That's why this is important. It was important to wait a week. We needed this. Would you be comfortable for a Friday vote if McConnell were to move for a vote on Friday before this report comes? Well, we won't have a vote before the report comes. I mean that was the deal. We would not have a cloture vote until we had the report. So I would be uncomfortable with that. But I I'm fully confident we will have the report by then.
[Raju:] Today or tomorrow?
[Flake:] I would assume so. I mean it was one week was what we had agreed on, that Chris and I had put forward, and that his colleagues had expressed confidence in. That would be Friday. So I'm confident that we can get that. The Anita Hill investigation was four days. They turned up, I think they talked to 22 people or 22 witnesses. And so this the FBI is professional. They move quickly. They informed us that they could do this and it looks like they are.
[Raju:] Did they talk to Christine Blasey Ford?
[Flake:] You know, I
[Raju:] OK. All right, thank you, senator. Appreciate it.
[Flake:] You bet.
[King:] You've been listening there to Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, doggedly pursued by CNN's Manu Raju. We appreciate that. Some key points from that. Number one, Democrats will like what he said about the timing. That we're not going to have a vote, it was part of the deal, no vote to move forward on this nomination of Brett Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court until we get the report. The majority leader has suggested at times that maybe he'll start the process and wait from the report. Senator Flake saying, no, that's not going happen. So Democrats will like that. What they won't like, and maybe some of you at home, many people viewing this through their partisan reflex won't like, he was pretty clear there that, yes, he's not doesn't think maybe Judge Kavanaugh wasn't completely honest with the committee about his drinking, but he views it more as exaggerations and hyperbole about his high school days. He wants to know, can you corroborate Professor Ford, can you corroborate Deborah Ramirez. Jeff Flake essentially that's where he draws the line on the box. And the other stuff to him, unless the FBI comes up with something stunning, doesn't seem to him it doesn't seem relevant. Fair characterization?
[Warren:] Yes, I think that's where this is all going. And this is what Jeff Flake was asking for essentially, to have somebody independent, the FBI, to come in and try to figure out where the gaps in the story are. You have these two stories from Dr. Ford and from Judge Kavanaugh that are so different from each other. He categorically denies it. She claims that there's missing pieces to it. The FBI ought to either be able to find those missing pieces, or they can't. That seems to be what he's asking for, what he's getting. I wouldn't be surprised and you mentioned the objection from Democrats about who's not being interviewed by the FBI. Sort of a process question, a process argument about the FBI investigation. I think Republicans, Jeff Flake, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, are also very frustrated with the process question on the Democratic side going back to when Senator Feinstein got the letter, heard about this from Dr. Ford, holding it back from Chuck Grassley and the rest of the committee. So there's a lot of process frustration going on, on both sides of this issue and I think there is the sense that, can we just finish, know what we know, and get through this and make a decision.
[King:] And there's been a big debate in town both sides trying to do this, move the goal post, if you will. What is the FBI supposed to be looking at? What are the big questions before we move forward with this vote. To the people who matter most, those three Republican senators, it seems to be, can you corroborate either Professor Ford or Deborah Ramirez. They are less interested in, did Brett Kavanaugh drink and was he aggressive after he drank. Unless you can connect it to sexual aggressive sexual behavior, they're less interested in that and a lot of Democrats are saying, well, that's a question of temperament, that's a question of judgement or it's a question of honesty.
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Political Reporter:] And, remember, it was Senator Flake who said earlier this week that he didn't want an FBI investigation that just provided cover for some of the Republicans who are sitting on the fence. But the reality is that it is going to provide cover for some of these Republicans who are currently undecided because they get to use the report to say there has now been an investigation and from that investigation I've drawn x, y and z conclusions and now I feel comfortable voting this way or the other. And the other thing I just quickly want to say about Flake too is that, when you're watching the president last night and you're watching him openly mocking Christine Blasey Ford, that creates a really problematic optics issue for someone like Flake. I think he has to have been having sort of flashbacks of the elevator moment because he was confronted by sexual assault victims who specifically said to him, I feel like I'm not being heard. You will be sending a message that victims are never heard if you support Kavanaugh. If Flake does decide to support Kavanaugh in the end, I think that support gets very closely associated now with this very jarring and callus image of the president openly mocking this woman who says that she was sexually assaulted.
[King:] Right. And we'll pick up the conversation there. There is it is no surprise and it is perfectly within bounds for supporters of Judge Kavanaugh to say, she was credible, but where's the corroboration. She was credible, we don't have any corroboration. That's one thing. That's one thing. To do what the president said is something else. A tweet just now from the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, I have a long history of respecting people with courage to step forward. The Judiciary Committee gave Dr. Ford the serious consideration she deserved as soon as I learned about her. People can decide who to believe, but I plead with all, stop personal attacks and destruction of Dr. Ford and her family or Judge Kavanaugh and his family. So the chairman of the committee weighing in there on a debate that has divided the country. Next, the president changes his tone, as we just discussed, and a Fiery ally says he went too far. But, in Lindsey Graham's view, listen here, so have the Democrats.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I don't like what the president said last night. I'm the first person to say, I want to hear from Dr. Ford. I thought she was handled respectfully. I thought Kavanaugh was treated like crap.
[Crowd:] Boo.
[Graham:] Yes. Well, boo yourself.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] CNN Newsroom starts now. Hello again everyone and thank you so much for being with me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We're continuing to follow a major story this hour. Judge Roy Moore, the Alabama Republican running for a U.S. seat in the U.S. Senate, is fighting back against claims of sexual misconduct from nearly 40 years ago. Take a listen.
[Roy Moore,  Alabama Senate Candidate:] "The Washington Post" established, or published, rather, yet another attack on my character and reputation in a disparate attempt to stop my political campaign for the United States Senate. These attacks involve a minor, and they're completely false and untrue. We get older, ladies sometimes put
[Whitfield:] That was Judge Moore's first public appearance since the scathing allegations surfaced claiming he assaulted a then 14-year-old girl decades ago when he was in his 30's. CNN's Alex Marquardt was at that event earlier today. So Alex, what more was said?
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, he's trying to paint this as a liberal conspiracy spearheaded by "The Washington Post" to thwart his campaign in these final few weeks. He rejected any sort of sexual misconduct from these alleged events around 40 years ago. He's also saying that it's absolutely unbelievable that these allegations are coming out in these final few weeks and that they are from so long ago. Take a listen.
[Roy Moore,  Alabama Senate Candidate:] I've been investigated more than any other person in this country. To think that grown women would wait 40 years to come before, right before an election, to bring charges is absolutely unbelievable.
[Moore:] Why now?
[Marquardt:] Why now? That's what we're hearing from the Moore campaign, that's what we're hearing from the man himself. To answer that question very simply these women didn't come forward on their own. They were found by "The Washington Post," and after a bit of time agreed to tell their stories. We're also answers that question through one of the women herself. The lawyer for Gloria Deason, who is one the women named in that report, says today "Moore knows full well why these women did not tell what he did to him before this week. As young teenage girls in the late 1970s in a small rural southern town, they had no way of knowing their rights especially against him considering that he was a district attorney at the time. As he gained more power within the Alabama judiciary, they likely feared that he would publicly persecute them precisely as he has done this week." Now, as these allegations have come to light, we are hearing more from the people who knew the women who are corroborating their stories. We're also learning more from people who knew Roy Moore at the time, specifically a woman named Teresa Jones who has spoken to CNN. She was a deputy district attorney at the time working alongside Jones. She tells CNN "It was common knowledge that Roy dated high school girls. Everyone we knew thought it was weird. We wondered why someone of his age would hang out at high school football games and at the mall. But you really wouldn't say anything to someone like that." So we are learning more and more in the wake of this story. The big question, how will it affect Moore's campaign, how will it affect his supporters? Fred? And during that event today, it was veteran's day event, but then Roy Moore, after commenting about those who served, had these remarks. You could also audibly hear people cheering him on, Alex, if you're able to hear me still. No, doesn't look like he's lost us. Thank you so much Alex Marquardt. Let's talk about this with my panel. Tara Setmayer is a former communications director for Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, and Jack Kingston is a CNN political commentator and former senior adviser to the Trump campaign. Good to see you both. So Jack, you first. I want to get your initial reaction to how Roy Moore overall is handling these allegations.
[Jack Kingston, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, I think if he's innocent he's doing what an innocent person would be doing, which is going out front. Of course yesterday he was on a national radio show and then today he knew he had a national audience, and so he was forthcoming about it. I think he's going to have to continue that and he's going to have to have his wife there. And he has witnesses on his side that he should bring them forward himself. But I also think, frankly, from a political standpoint, shifting it to this is a matter of politics, "Washington Post" is certainly not a pro-Republican publication and the timing is very suspect. And I think if he can convey, hey, listen, I'm going to go out there to fight the establishment. I'm going to go to Washington, D.C., and fight for you, and they don't want me there. I fought establishment people for 40 years and you know me. And you've known that I'm going to be a fighter, and if these allegations were true there's been plenty of opportunities to attack me in the last several decades, but it hasn't come forward. And I think politically
[Whitfield:] And he said that in his statement, that, you know, for these women to wait 40 years is unbelievable. He went through a litany of investigations that he has been part of from five statewide campaign, judicial investigations, controversies on religious liberties, et cetera. And so he was saying if ever there was anything, why wouldn't it come out sooner? So Tara, that is his you know, his best defense or that is part of his defense. Is that enough?
[Tara Setmayer, Former Communication Director, Gop Congressman Dana Rohrabacher:] No. I can't even believe that as a Republican, as a conservative, that I'm sitting here discussing and debating with other Republicans that are trying to excuse away the reprehensible behavior
[Kingston:] Tara, that might be fine for you to say that but that's not true.
[Setmayer:] Let me finish my statement, Jack.
[Whitfield:] Wait a second. Hold on a second, Jack, because you were just talking about going down
[Kingston:] And I was talking about
[Whitfield:] So now it's Tara's turn.
[Setmayer:] You know, the truth hurts, so of course we're going to have this kind of reaction.
[Kingston:] Tara, that wasn't true. I answered the question of what Roy Moore should be doing plain and simple.
[Setmayer:] Did I name you? I'm talking I'm speaking in general.
[Whitfield:] So now I want to hear what Tara has to say about this. Go ahead.
[Setmayer:] Thank you. What I've seen over the last few days coming from people in Alabama, elected Republican officials in Alabama, others on this program, on this network, that have tried to go engage in political gymnastics to try to excuse away what Roy Moore is alleged to have done is really pathetic. I remember a time I've been around the Republican politics for over 20 years, and I remember a time when principled Republicans would not even allow mere allegations of moral deficiencies move forward. I remember when Mark Foley was run out of Congress for texting underage pages. I remember when Republicans didn't allow Chris Smith, they weren't happy with what he did when he texted pictures of himself without a shirt on. I remember
[Kingston:] Chris Smith from New Jersey never did anything like that.
[Setmayer:] Not that one.
[Kingston:] Let's get it right.
[Setmayer:] So I remember
[Kingston:] Chris Smith never did that.
[Setmayer:] when Republicans were cheering on Steve Bannon and the Trump campaign when he paraded out women who had allegations against former president Bill Clinton and his behavior. So we're supposed to believe those people. But in this situation where you have a woman who has contemporaneous witnesses at the time that corroborate her story, "The Washington Post" did their due diligence, 30-plus people went on the record. We have more people now coming out who worked with Roy Moore in the last report who said that this was something that was well known. The reason why these women are coming out now is because there's been a watershed moment in this country where women are starting to feel that they can safely come out and make these accusations against and discuss what happens to them against powerful men. With the Harvey Weinstein issue and what's going on in Hollywood, with what happened with others, that I think now they feel safety in numbers. That's why. They didn't come out. "The Washington Post" found them.
[Kinston:] Let me say this.
[Whitfield:] All right, now Jack.
[Kingston:] Filibuster over. Let me say this, Tara, and I respect your right to come to the conclusion that he is guilty. The question asked of me was, what should Roy Moore do. And I prefaced my remarks, if he's innocent, he should do what he's doing. He should deny it and he should get witnesses on his side if he can find them. And that's plain and simple.
[Setmayer:] So then, Jack why is it that there are some
[Whitfield:] Why is it that your preface is that why is it that there are some members of Congress who are saying these allegations mean that he is not fit for office. You've got John McCain who said that, you've got Bob Corker who tweeted. Look I'm sorry but before these reports surfaced, Roy Moore's nomination was a bridge too far. So, you know Let the chips fall where they may.
[Kingston:] Well, as you know, politicians' first instinct is to protect their own politics, and some of that is going on. But I also think that they're very uncomfortable with what they've heard and what they've seen on the newspaper. And they absolutely have the right to come to that conclusion. My point is if he's an innocent man, which I know doesn't mean much. Mitt Romney said innocent until proven guilty except in politics and then called for his resignation. There's a little bit of a circus going on, but I do think that he's got to go out there and give his side of the story. Now, not the first politician to be in that position, as you know. That's why we know the name wan neat Juanita Broaddrick and Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones. All this stuff has been there before. And people in public office, even people in public office, do have the right to defend themselves. And I think that's what he's got to do, and he needs to do it credibly.
[Setmayer:] The fact that you're even comfortable with defending this, it's disturbing to me.
[Kingston:] There you go again, Tara.
[Setmayer:] That's a double standard, Jack, because you have yet to come out and condemn this.
[Kingston:] Tara, there you go again. There you go again.
[Setmayer:] You can try to use the Reagan line on me.
[Kingston:] What should he do?
[Setmayer:] Are you I'm asking you. Are you comfortable with someone like this not it's not even this. He was unfit before with all those other problems, but are you comfortable with that?
[Kingston:] I note you're out there in California an expert of what's going on in Alabama.
[Setmayer:] No, actually I'm right in New York. And I'm from New Jersey.
[Kingston:] New York. That's a lot better. But let me say this.
[Setmayer:] I don't know what has to do with anything.
[Kingston:] He has been in I hope I'm not on trial with you, the judge. I'd love to see some evidence and some procedure discussion.
[Setmayer:] You'd better be glad you're never in a court of law against me.
[Kingston:] I'll keep my eye on you, Tara. Here's the question. This guy has been in elect the office for 40 years. I absolutely, positively know that there have been opportunities for people who have been aggrieved to step forward. During that period of time, the Alabama public, the Alabama constituents have gotten to know him. There has to be some trust level out there. So he's accumulated good will. Now he's got to be able to use that good will to say these are false, and here's why. And frankly, if some of it is partially true, for example, if he went out with an 18- year-old, he could say I did go out with an 18-year-old. In fact I believe he said that, but he also said but I never served her alcohol. Something like that, people, OK, we'll buy that. But the people of Alabama in the court of public opinion are going to have to make this decision.
[Whitfield:] And they will decide in four-and-a-half weeks on December 12th. All right.
[Setmayer:] Politics is a judgment call, it's not at court of law. Judgment in what people are looking at here, I'm sorry, but it doesn't look good for Roy Moore and people are still making excuses for him.
[Whitfield:] All right, thanks to both of you, Tara Setmayer, Jack Kingston, appreciate it, thank you. All right, President Trump again defying his own intelligence community, this time saying he believes Vladimir Putin's election meddling denials. We'll ask a former U.K. ambassador to Russia for reaction next.

[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] Twenty- six-year-old Brittany Tagliareni needs help fixing her hair and tying her shows. But give her a tennis racket and she turns into an ace on the court.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm glad that she found something where she can be successful.
[Gupta:] As a baby, Brittany never learned to crawl or make babbling sounds.
[Unidentified Female:] So every time I went to the pediatrician that went, oh, don't worry, don't worry. Some babies are later.
[Gupta:] Brittany was diagnosed with motor control issues and an auditory processing disorder.
[Unidentified Female:] But it wasn't until she was nine that we heard the word "autism." Before tennis, she didn't have any friends. She has always loves her brother. So now, A.J. started tennis, Brittany wanted to start tennis.
[Unidentified Male:] Love it.
[Gupta:] She picked up the racket and with patient coaching and repetition, she started winning.
[Unidentified Male:] Good job.
[Unidentified Female:] When she plays Special Olympic competitions they pair her up with men because she's always usually in the top division.
[Brittany Tagliareni, Competitive Tennis Player:] I like competing and the trophies and beating the men.
[Gupta:] She also competes against people without disabilities.
[Tagliareni:] I am very happy about tennis because it is a lot of fun.
[Gupta:] And it has helped her improve her social skills.
[Unidentified Female:] Being out there and being able to be more independent and think for herself, that has changed her life.
[Gupta:] Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN, reporting.
[Unidentified Male:] Good job.
[Whitfield:] President Trump's firing of James Comey and his tweet seemingly threatening the former FBI director, his phrasing, both those things are raising questions if there is something in the Russia investigation worrying the president. This weekend the president didn't want to elaborate on his suggestion that there may be taped conversations between him and Comey.
[Pirro:] What about the idea that in a tweet you said that there might be tape recordings?
[Trump:] That I can't talk about. I won't talk about that. All I want is for Comey to be honest, and I hope he will be. And I'm sure he will be, I hope.
[Whitfield:] House Speaker Paul Ryan wouldn't comment on Trump's tweet about Comey, saying he's focused on other issues.
[Rep. Paul Ryan,  Speaker Of The House Of Representatives:] I'm going to leave it to the president to talk about and defend his tweets. You know what I am focusing on? I'm focused on what is in my control, and that is what is Congress doing to solve people's problems? I am working on healthcare reforms. I'm working on tax reform. Those are the things that I got elected to do. Those are the things that are within our purview in Congress. So I am working on making good that we actually make good on our promises and fix people's problems. That's what's in my control and that's what I'm focused on.
[Whitfield:] Let me bring in CNN political commentators Jeffery Lord and Ana Navarro. It is good to see both of you. Jeffery, you first. The D.C. attorney general, among 20 attorney general with a letter demanding a special prosecutor. He says that Republicans are silent about this firing and that it is cowardice. Are Republicans paying a price by their silence?
[Jeffrey Lord, Cnn Political Commentator:] I think Democrats want to make them pay the price. Democrats used to love special prosecutor when they were going after Richard Nixon. And when Nixon fired Archibald Cox, they were agog and made the idea of the special prosecutor into something like a secular saint. Then we got Ken Starr investigating Bill Clinton, and he was sleaze on earth. And then went out there every day with the White House, in the lead, I might add, smearing Ken Starr.
[Whitfield:] What now where today there is very little utterance from Republicans about a special prosecutor or about whether the White House is actually right or wrong. So let's talk about the silence and how potentially damaging
[Lord:] Sure, sure.
[Whitfield:] Is it potentially damaging?
[Lord:] No, I don't think it is damaging. I think they ought to take it right to it. There is no there, there, with this investigation. So what is there to say? Democrats keep on pushing this. Where is the proof? There is none. If they want a 911 style commission, then do one. But leave the special prosecutor alone. They are the ones who made the idea
[Whitfield:] So nothing should be said about the Republicans even of the firing of James Comey and the manner in which it was done? Jeffery?
[Lord:] Well, the president has the right to do that. And I think he did the right thing. There is a column I believe in "The Washington Post" this morning from former attorney general William Barr, a Republican, who says that no Democrat or Republicans who has held these positions or attorney general or deputy attorney general disagrees.
[Whitfield:] OK, so, Ana, I heard you said early the GOP lawmakers are enabling Trump, and you said if you the shoe were on the other foot, if this was the kind of sequence of events and it involved Hillary Clinton if she were in the White House, it would be a very different story and there wouldn't be the silence that is so deafening right now.
[Ana Navarro, Cnn Political Commentator:] Definitely. Does anybody doubt that if it had been Hillary Clinton who had won the presidency and fired Comey after the things he did in October and July regarding her campaign that Republicans would have investigated her to an inch of her life. If you ask me today what the biggest problems we face in politics and government is and why Congress has gotten an approval rating in the teens and President Trump has got an approval rating of 36 percent, I would tell you it's the combination of polarization we live in a polarized world where we see everything as blue or red, and add to that, hypocrisy and inconsistency where is good for the goose ends up not being good for the gander when you are the gander.
[Whitfield:] Are you disappointed that Republicans, Republican lawmakers are not saying more about every increment of what we've been seeing this week?
[Navarro:] First, there are some lawmakers who are speaking. Certainly John McCain, Ben Sasse, Jeff Flake. Some of them have expressed reservations. They've been disturbed. They've been asking for a select committee. They've been asking for a special prosecutor. They've been asking for an independent commission, some sort of entity that can investigate this is a bipartisan or nonpartisan way. So let's just say there are some honorable exceptions in the Republican Party.
[Whitfield:] A handful who have been outspoken.
[Navarro:] But by and large, I think a large swath of the country feels like the Republican Party is Nero playing the violin while Rome is burning, in this case while Washington is burning. And I just think it is this level of unbelievable tone deafness towards the feeling by so many Americans that this government is in crisis.
[Whitfield:] So Jeffery, Paul Ryan says he is focusing on other things. He says he wants to concentrate on things, quote, in his control, "in my control" in his words. But can anything really get done, is anything is in control right now in terms of him and other leadership on the Hill to be able to carry through an agenda?
[Lord:] Speaker Ryan is exactly right. That's his job, and he did his job here with much criticism, I might add, including some from me.
[Whitfield:] But he's the House speaker. He is leadership in the House.
[Lord:] Correct. Correct. And that's his job is to get that healthcare reform bill passed, to get tax reform passed, to get legislation passed. That's his job. Ditto with Senator McConnell over there in the Senate. That is their job. They need to stick to their knitting and get this stuff done.
[Whitfield:] OK, Ana, what's your challenge to Republicans?
[Navarro:] Look, I hate picking a bone with Paul Ryan. He's a friend of mine. I happen to love the guy. But I think he needs to walk and chew gum at the same time. I think you can applaud President Trump's efforts on healthcare if that's where you lie. I think you can applaud his naming of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. But I think that when he does something like threaten, make a veiled threat against the former FBI director, I think that when he tries to intimidate Sally Yates on the day of her testimony, I think that when he tweets out against judges, I think people expect for leaders to step up and condemn that. That you are a Republican leader does not mean that you are a cult member of the Donald Trump cult. It means that you call him and you see them, and that when he does things that should be applauded you do, when he does things that should be condemned, you have a spine, you have a conscience, and you have loyalty to the country and the Constitution of the United States that you will speak up, you wake up, and you act on it.
[Whitfield:] All right, we'll leave it right there. Ana Navarro and Jeffery Lord, good to see both of you. Thank you so much.
[Lord:] Thanks. Thanks, Ana.
[Navarro:] Happy mother's day to your mom.
[Whitfield:] And happy mother's day to you, too. Thank you so much. And to the mother of your world as well, Jeffery Lord, appreciate it. All right, coming up, a virus locking up thousands of computers around world, holding files for ransom. But one man says he has found a key to disabling it. We'll talk to him live, next.

[Ward:] Former Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak, one of the men at the center of the Russian controversy, he is downplaying meetings with members of the Trump campaign. He hasn't granted an interview to anyone in the Western media until now. Our CNN's Matthew Chance just wrapped up an exclusive interview with Kislyak. He joins me now live. Matthew, what did he tell you?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, we got a chance, Clarissa, to ask him some of those key questions that so many people in the Western media at least have been trying to ask him really since this whole scandal about the Trump administration, the Trump team's alleged connections with the Kremlin really first broke. This is a figure after the conversations with whom Michael Flynn, Trump's national security adviser, had to resign. Jeff Sessions, the attorney general of the United States, had to recuse himself from the investigations about Russia because of the conversations he had with Sergei Kislyak. So there's a load of questions about the nature of those conversations. Again, we traveled here, which is about 400 miles from the Russian capitol, to track him down and to put those questions to him. Take a listen.
[Chance:] Did you discuss lifting sanctions with any members of the Trump team when you were in the United States?
[Sergei Kislyak, Former Russian Ambassador To The U.s:] With your respect, I'm here to talk to Russian people.
[Chance:] I understand that. You say you have no secrets.
[Kislyak:] I have said everything I wanted prior to this.
[Chance:] Did you discuss opening secret channels with the Kremlin with Jared Kushner, for instance?
[Kislyak:] I have said many times that we do not discuss the substance of our discussions with our American counterparts out of respect to our partners.
[Chance:] Fair enough. But when you met Donald Trump, the president, were you surprised when he disclosed secret information to you about Syria?
[Kislyak:] I'm not sure that I heard anything that would be secret. But it was a good meeting. And we were discussing things that are very important to your country and to mine.
[Chance:] What about the allegation that you are a spymaster, a spy recruiter?
[Kislyak:] Nonsense. Nonsense.
[Chance:] Did you attempt to recruit any members of the Trump administration?
[Kislyak:] You should be ashamed because CNN is the company that keeps up pointing to this allegation. It's nonsense.
[Chance:] It was U.S. security officials, intelligence officials that made it.
[Kislyak:] I heard that in the statements by them. Also by former head of the FBI who said it. I was a diplomat. I had no no reason to doubt that he knew what he said.
[Chance:] Sergei Kislyak, a diplomat to the end, very much following the towing the Kremlin line on all of his responses to those questions. Those questions are not going to go away. There are multiple investigations in the United States to try and get more full answers to them Clarissa?
[Ward:] They're not going anywhere. Matthew Chance, fantastic reporting. Thank you so much. Just a few months ago, President Trump declared to the Middle East, we are not here to lecture. But now, the president put the brakes on millions of dollars in aid into Egypt. And we will be taking a look at his at Jared Kushner, his son-in-law's trip to Egypt where he has been snubbed. That's next.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] First responders shared by the congressman's colleagues, those who were with him on that baseball field this morning, and others in the House and the Senate, across Washington and, of course, back home in the congressman's district in Louisiana. Listen here to Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky among those who was at the baseball field this morning.
[Sen. Rand Paul , Kentucky:] Our lives were saved by the Capitol Police. Had they not been there, I think it would have been a massacre. And you are completely helpless. And, you know, having no self-defense and no way to get to somebody, the field was basically a killing field. I mean, if you were to run out there while the shooter was still shooting, he would have shot anybody.
[King:] The FBI taking the lead in this investigation because a member of Congress was among those shot. The FBI says it's too early to know whether this was an act of terror or whether the lawmakers were targeted for assassination. Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks was there and actually used his belt as a tourniquet to help that wounded lobbyist. He's given us some of the most riveting accounts of this morning's horror.
[Rep. Mo Brooks , Alabama:] Well, I was on the third base side of home plate getting ready to have batting practice and the first shots were pretty much past the third base dugout, maybe 10 or 15 feet, hard to ascertain for sure. I'm looking at it from an angle. And I hear the big blam and I thought it was a car backfiring at first until I see the rifle barrel and a white male taking careful aim at congressmen, staffers, whoever he could get ahold of.
[King:] I spoke just moments ago with another Republican congressman who was at the field who was leaving just before the shooting who says he is certain he saw the shooter. He said the shooter approached the car and asked weathered those were Democrats or Republican out there on the field practicing. We'll bring you that interview with Congressman Ron DeSantis in just a moment. I want to begin our coverage, though, with CNN producer Shimon Prokupecz with new details on this gunman. Barbara Starr's at the scene as well. Shimon, tell us the new details we know about this gunman.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Producer:] Well, we know his name. We've learned that his name is James Hodgkinson. He's from Belleville, Illinois. He's 66 years old. Police were able to learn his name fairly quickly. They believe they found a van or some or maybe another type of vehicle on the scene believed to belong to him. And from that, they were able to trace his identity. And since then, they've learned quite a bit about him, including an extensive social media presence, some anti-Trump postings. He was also pretty well- known in Illinois, in Belleville, where he was part of some anti-GOP groups, we're told. And, John, just two days ago, according to a law enforcement official I've spoken to, said that Hodgkinson had posted an angry either tweet or something on FaceBook about Donald Trump. So all of this now obviously part of the investigation. It may go to intent. It may go to motive. Clearly with the FBI now leading this investigation, they believe that may play a role in this. And so now, you know, their process is to go through a timeline trying to find out where he's been the last few days, where the alleged shooter has been in the last few days, who he was talking to, looking for more social media postings. It's not entirely clear if he was on anyone's radar before this. But you know, just a general scrub of his social media, you can see some of his views, some of his what one law enforcement official said anti-Trump views. And that now is playing a large role in this investigation.
[King:] And as they try to piece that together, Shimon, do we know anything as yet confirmed? You hear a lot of first reports often not true in situations like this about the type of rifle that was used and any idea, you say, as they try to trace this back together about how long he's been in the area? Do we know that yet?
[Prokupecz:] No. So, you know, I just spoke to a law enforcement official who said that this is something they're still trying to determine. There are some media reports that his wife claims he had moved to Alexandria recently or had been there in the last two months. We have not been able to confirm that. And law enforcement is still trying to confirm that, as well. And that's part of what they're doing now to trace his moves, to see where he's been, to see who he's been talking to. You know, also, where did he get the weapons from? That is all part of it. You know, we've been told it is some sort of long gun. As to what kind, we've heard different descriptions of it. So that still also has not been confirmed, John.
[King:] Shimon, appreciate that. Continue your reporting. We'll come back to you as soon as new information comes to us. Let's go straight to the scene now. CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr has been there since very early this morning. Barbara, tell us the latest.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] John, we are about two blocks just over my shoulder from the baseball field. Some of the police presence winding down a bit here now. But the investigation in full swing. They are continuing to gather evidence, interview witnesses. We've had two briefings this morning here on site from law enforcement. They are making very clear they have a long way to go on this. They want to learn everything they can about how the incident unfolded, the motivation of the gunman. The FBI now in charge, of course, because this is an attack on the U.S. Congress. This is a federal crime, of course. Some indication of security being ramped up in areas at federal sites across Washington even though the inclination may be at the moment that this is a lone gunman, that there is not a broader plot. The FBI agent in charge making very clear they were not ready to rule anything out, that it is very early on, that they are investigating all avenues, lone shooter, terrorism, all of it. They're not closing off any avenue of investigation at this point as they continue to gather evidence. It was at 7:09 this morning the Alexandria Police chief tells us that the first 911 call came in from the baseball field. Alexandria Police say they were able to respond in three minutes, able to back up the Capitol Hill security detail that was already at the baseball site. Five people transported to hospitals here. I just want to emphasize for people who may be watching, this is really a lovely, quiet neighborhood in suburban Washington. We're about five, ten minutes south of the Pentagon in Virginia, across the Potomac River. About 20 or 30 minutes perhaps south of Capitol Hill. This is a neighborhood where people at 7:00 in the morning are out walking their dogs, getting the kids ready for school. It is known that they practice here, that they practice for the baseball game here. And people, neighborhood people, were telling us, you know, sometimes they come out and watch in the early morning. And it's a very friendly neighborhood. I don't live very far from here. I can tell you, I've already run into friends who live here this morning. Very much a neighborhood, very much a place where people generally have lived her for many years. And all of that, John, really adding to the shock this morning about what happened on these streets. John.
[King:] Barbara Starr at the scene for us, great perspective. And also important to note, so many good Samaritans from that great neighborhood helping out in the response this morning as people scattered from the field, offering them shelter and the like. Barbara, thank you. We'll come back to you as developments warrant as well. Let's get to CNN's Brian Todd right now. He is at the hospital where victims are being treated. Brian, what can you tell us?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] John, I can tell you, a short time ago, hospital officials confirmed that there are two victims from the shooting being treated here at Medstar Washington Hospital Center. One of them is Congressman Steve Scalise, the majority whip. He was medevacked here on a helicopter, landing on a helipad to my left just a short time ago. He is currently in surgery. His staff says he is in stable condition. A second person, a second victim from the shooting, is being treated here, as well. Hospital officials not releasing that person's name or their condition at this time. We hope to get an update for you on that very soon. This hospital, of course, known for treating trauma cases, emergency surgeries, shooting incidents. Victims come here all the time from those shooting incidents. Thy have a helipad here. It's easily accessible by medevac. So that was the choice in this case. The congressman's staff said that he is he was in good spirits here before he went into surgery and that he was able to talk to his wife on the phone. Interestingly enough, Senator Jeff Flake, Republican from Arizona, who was at the baseball field when the shooting occurred and gave some very vivid, graphic accounts of what he saw, he said he was able to grab Congressman Scalise's cell phone as they were transporting him off the field and call Scalise's wife to tell her what had happened so that she wouldn't necessarily have to hear it on the news. And as you've been hearing all morning, some very riveting accounts from members of Congress and others who were eat that ball field with Congressman Scalise. They said that he was lying motionless on the field after he was hit in the hip and that, you know, it took some time to get him off, but that they were able to get him off there. And also that if it wasn't for the presence of the two U.S. Capitol Police officers who were at the scene, that this could have been much, much worse. They're saying that these two officers engaged the shooter and helped take him down and saved lives in the process, John. So a lot of gratitude being handed out to those two officers who were on the scene. Not clear if one of them is the second person being treated here or not. We'll hope to get that information for you soon.
[King:] Brian Todd at Medstar. Brian, thanks for that information. We'll keep in touch. As Brian noted, Steve Scalise, he's a feisty Republican conservative member of Congress, very colorful, very funny, very entertaining guy when you talk to him. He's the second baseman for the Republican team. I talked moments ago with another infielder, Ron DeSantis and Jeff Duncan, the short stop and the third baseman. They left the field a few minutes before the shooting. Out in the parking lot, Congressman DeSantis says they were approached by a man he is now certain was the shooter. Listen. And, sir, you're in your suit now, but you were at practice this morning and you believe now, based on what we now know, that you actually heard the shooter, saw the shooter right before this happened.
[Rep. Ron Desantis , Florida:] Right. So I was actually at third base. Jeff Duncan, from South Carolina, short. Steve Scalise, who obviously got shot, at second base, was at second taking ground balls. Jeff and I looked at each other and said, hey, we've taken a lot of ground balls, we've hit, let's beat the traffic back to The Hill. So we left practice a little early, got in Jeff's one of his aide's cars. I was in the back seat. A gentleman walked up to us and wanted to know whether there were Republicans or Democrats practicing out there. Congressman Duncan said that it was Republicans. And then he immediately turned around and went towards the field. It was a little weird because, you know, no one's really out there at that time. But we just kind drove back. Once we got to The Hill, we got word that there was a shooting. Immediately Jeff and I looked at each other and we said, we've got to report this individual. So we reported him, you know, with the best description we could get. Since he's been identified, the picture on the individual's Twitter page matches the individual who approached our vehicle probably about ten minutes before the shooting started.
[King:] And you have no doubt about that?
[Desantis:] I'm very sure. I mean like it would it's the type of thing where I probably saw him for ten seconds. So having seen someone for ten seconds, I think I'm as sure as I could be.
[King:] But you communicated with Congressman Duncan, who shares your view, that it was the same individual?
[Desantis:] Jeff thinks it's him too, yes.
[King:] And, I want to go back to as, obviously, there will be a lot of conversation now about potential political motivation. So can you think exactly what you heard him say? Was it just a simple question, are those Republicans or Democrats? Did it have any bias to it?
[Desantis:] It had, I think, a little bias. Not enough that I thought he was going to go commit acts of violence.
[King:] Right.
[Desantis:] But it was just it was a little abrasive. I kind of thought to myself, I was like, you know, that's strange, but it was strange enough that as soon as the news hit, Jeff and I both had the same thought.
[King:] And you were in the back seat of a car at the time.
[Desantis:] I was in the back seat of the car.
[King:] So do you remember or could you see whether at that moment, was he carrying anything? Was he carrying a bag with a rifle or anything?
[Desantis:] So I saw him I saw him from chest up, because I was in the back seat. So I did not see that. I couldn't see below his chest. So I can't say that he did or didn't have that.
[King:] Right. Obviously, Whip Scalise had his security detail there because of his position in the leadership. Hindsight is always 2020 and often overly judgmental. Do you think, as you deal with the emotions of this day, was that enough security there? Should members of Congress be out in a public setting like that? It's a crazy question to ask. Anybody should be able to go and practice baseball, but
[Desantis:] But here's the thing. I mean today Paul Ryan told Steve this morning, I need you. We've got a we've got a meeting at 7:00. I've got something. There would have been no security out there. I mean the only reason there was security is because Steve rates it as a member of the leadership. They usually stage behind the first base dugout. They have the SUV. They usually will stand outside the vehicle. You know they're armed and you know they're security. This guy, the shooter, was obviously on the other side of the diamond. But had Steve not been there, I think you would have seen many more injured and probably many killed. I think it would have been a really gruesome day. So having the Capitol Police there really saved lives today. I think there's no question about that.
[King:] All right, take me back into the parking lot. I want you to describe again just in every last detail that you can recall the gentleman who asked that question.
[Desantis:] So I got into the car first. So I'm in the back seat. Jeff Duncan's walking up into the front passenger seat. His aide is driving the car. And as Jeff's getting in, there's an individual that's kind of approaching our general direction. I wasn't sure he was approaching our car. Then did he come to the car and then asked the question, are those Republicans or Democrats out there? Not really a friendly guy, not nice. Jeff said they were Republicans. And then he immediately kind of clicked and he turned around. And again, I didn't think I thought it was a little weird, but not at the weirdness level where this guy's a security risk. But, he in the picture, it does it matches the type of guy. I thought it was probably late 50s, early 60s. I think they reported he's 66. So that probably fits pretty good.
[Blitzer:] What did he look like?
[Desantis:] He you know, he was like, you know, late 50s, early 60s. I mean he had kind of like darker hair with maybe some gray in it. I think he had some facial hair, as well. And he just he was dressed kind of not nicely dressed at all, but not like he was wearing rags. Just the kind of the type of guy that if you were talking down the street there with 30 other people, you probably wouldn't pick him out and think anything of him.
[King:] And that's all he said? He asked one question and then turned and walked away?
[Desantis:] That's right.
[King:] All right, how dos it how did it feel to get back and realize you walked off this field, what, five, ten minutes before this happened?
[Desantis:] I don't think it's still hit me. I mean when I get out so we went to the gym to shower. And I see on the screen on the TV, "Representative Scalise shot," and I'm thinking to myself, we left five, ten minutes before this. I was it was just so crazy. And, obviously, the initial thing is, you know, I hope Steve is OK. And Steve, incidentally, I mean, he loves this baseball game. I mean we've raised 650,000. Steve, he's always wearing a nice uniform. You know, I hadn't been playing lately because I've been banged up and he always said, Ron, we need you out there. So I play I'm playing this year. Every time on the House floor, he'll be like, man, you're playing. Like, that's awesome. Like, he really so, I don't know if they're going to play the game tomorrow night. I mean I'll be there if they do. But it will be if they do play it, I think it will be sad that Steve's not there just given how much it meant to him.
[King:] And we learned just moments ago, Congresswoman Martha McSally telling Republican colleagues they will play that game, that charity baseball game, tomorrow night at Nationals Park. The house floor now is beginning. Let's take you there live.
[Unidentified Male:] Let us pray. Almighty God, on a day when violence has come to this assembly, we ask your blessing on our brother, Representative Steve Scalise, the two officers and the staffer who have been shot. Bless the hands of those who tend to their injuries. We, as Americans, are blessed by a free and open society with rights secured by law and the Constitution. But, once again, we are reminded that there is a vulnerability that comes with that openness. May we all be vigilant in being good citizens, neighbors, and defenders of our way of life at a time when so many challenges to our way of life and government seem under siege. We thank you for the men and women who respond to the crises that befall us, especially the Capitol Police and all first responders. May their heroism and generosity of spirit be an inspiration to us all and may they be assured of our appreciation of their service. And in this great silence as we are gathered most dramatically as this assembly, the people's house, may Republicans and Democrats be mindful of the rare companionship they share, men and women who have taken very public responsibility for our country, that carries so many burdens. And today the reminder, shared danger. May this day be characterized by kindness, good will, and compassion one to another. God bless America. And may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen.
[Crowd:] Amen.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , House Speaker:] The chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House its approval thereof. Pursuant to Clause One of Rule One, the journal stands approved. The chair will lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance and invites the members of the gallery to join.
[Crowd:] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[Unidentified Male:] For purposes, the gentleman from Wisconsin seek recognition.
[Ryan:] I ask to advise and extend my remarks and address the House for one minute.
[Unidentified Male:] The gentleman is recognized.
[Ryan:] My colleagues, there are very strong emotions throughout this House today. We are all horrified by this dreadful attack on our friends and on our colleagues and those who serve and protect this Capitol. We are all praying for those who were attacked and for their families. Steve Scalise, Zachary Barth, Matt Mika, Special Agent David Bailey, Special Agent Krystal Griner. We are all giving our thoughts to those currently being treated for their injuries at this moment. And we are united. We are united in our shock, we are united in our anguish. An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. I know we want to give our thanks to the first responders and to the Alexandria Police Department who were on the scene in minutes. And I know this house wants to state unequivocally that we are as ever awed by the tremendous bravery of the Capitol Police. I spoke with Special Agent Bailey and Special Agent Griner this morning. One was being treated and one was about to go into surgery. I expressed our profound gratitude to them. It is clear to me, based on various eyewitness accounts, that without these two heroes, Agent Bailey and Agent Griner, many lives would have been lost. I know that we all want to learn as much as we can about what happened. We just all received a briefing from the sergeant of arms. I have complete confidence in the investigation that's being conducted by the Capitol Police, the FBI, who are also working with local law enforcement. I know we want to extend our gratitude for the outpouring of support that we've received from throughout the capital and from throughout the country. And now, knowing Steve Scalise as we all do, he is likely really frustrated that he's not going to be able to play in the baseball game. I also know that Steve wants all of us to commend the bravery of those who came to the aid of the wounded. In the coming days, we will hear their stories and we will have the chance to hold up their heroism. My colleagues, there are so many memories from this day that we will want to forget. And there are so many images that we will not want to see again. But there is one image in particular that this House should keep, and that is a photo I saw this morning of our Democratic colleagues gathered in prayer this morning after hearing the news. You know, every day we come here to test and to challenge each other. We feel so deeply about the things that we fight for and the things that we believe in. At times, our emotions can clearly get the best of us. We're all imperfect. But we do not shed our humanity when we enter this chamber. For all the noise and all the fury, we are one family. These were our brothers and sisters in the line of fire. These were our brothers and sisters who ran into danger and saved countless lives. So before this House returns to its business, let's just slow down and reflect to think about how we're all being tested right now, because we are being tested right now. I ask each of you to join me to resolve to come together, to lift each other up, and to show the country, to show the world that we are one House, the people's house, united in our humanity. It is that humanity which will win the day and it always will. God bless. I yield.
[Unidentified Male:] For what purposes does the gentle lady from California seek recognition?
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , Minority Leader:] Mr. Speaker, I rise to join the distinguished speaker in paying tribute to the brave men and women of the Capitol Police force and also in sadness for the assault that was made on our colleagues and members of this staff. To my colleagues, you're going to hear me say something you've never heard me say before. I identify myself with the remarks of the speaker. They were beautiful remarks, Mr. Speaker. Thank you so much for the sentiments that they represent. Thank you so much. Again, we are not one caucus or the other in this House today, but that we speak for each other in saying that we send our thoughts and prayers to our colleague, Steve Scalise. Personally, we have our Italian-American connection, so as soon as I heard his name, I was filled with concern, as I would be for anyone here, but we have that special connection. So our hopes and prayers. And I said to the speaker, I'll be asking you every five minutes, how is Steve coming along. And also to for Zack Barth in Congressman Roger Williams' office, Matt Mika, who was a former staffer, and, of course, as the speaker acknowledged, Krystal Griner and David Bailey. And acknowledging their sacrifice and the how fortunate we all were that they were on the scene because other lives would have probably been lost, I want us to remember that every single day the Capitol Police protects all of us, takes risks for us. And while a day like this is a time where we can focus on it, so sadly, it doesn't mean that other days aren't as challenging. And I especially want to call attention to Detective John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut, who almost 19 years ago, 1988 it was in July, lost their lives protecting the Congress, the Capitol. Not just the members of Congress, the staff, the press, and our visitors, people who come to see this Capitol, this great edifice to democracy known throughout the world. So they are protecting a great deal. And it is an attraction, and that makes it all the more risky. You may not know this, my colleagues, but every time I pray, which is very frequently and certainly every Sunday, I pray for all of you. All of you together. In the earlier years, I used to pray for your happiness, for the fact that we would working together, heed the words of President Kennedy in the closing of his inaugural address when he said, may God's God's work must truly be our own. How do we view what God's will is for us? How do we come together to give confidence to the American people? That as our founders intended we would have our disagreements and we would debate them and we would have confidence in our beliefs and humility to listen to others. But in more recent years, I have been praying not only for that, but for our safety, because I, above anyone in here, and I can say that quite clearly, have been probably the target of more a lot of the political target and therefore the target of more threats than anyone, perhaps other than the president of the United States, Barack Obama. And so I prayed for Barack Obama. And now I continue to pray for him and I pray for Donald Trump, that his presidency will be successful and that his family will be safe. Because it is about family. We are called for a purpose to this body. It's a great thing. And we know what it means to each of us to serve and we recognize that in others. And we also recognize that you have your constituents, we have ours, and we respect you and your constituents who sent you here. All worthy of respect. But we do have our differences. And so I pray, my prayer is that we can resolve our differences in a way that furthers the preamble to the Constitution, takes us closer to e pluribus unum. And today, again, it was it's again, it's in the family. It's an injury in the family for the staff and for our colleague and for his leadership. As I mentioned just a minute ago in the

[Smerconish:] You're looking at a life shot of the G7 Summit. We'll go there momentarily. Charlevoix. I've been getting my pronunciation right. Papadopoulous. Papadopoulous. Charlevoix. Meanwhile, this week the same day that the Miss America Organization announced it was ending swim suit and evening gown competitions, a former Miss America won the Democratic primary for Alabama's Third Congressional District. Mallory Hagan was Miss America in 2013 and after working as a local news anchor in Columbus, Georgia, this week she won the primary in Alabama to represent the Third Congressional District in the Democratic Party. She will face Representative Mike Rogers in the fall. Hagan was one of the former contestants was fat shamed in emails by the Organizations' Chief Executive Sam Haskell who ended up having to step down. Mallory Hagan joins me now. She's the author of a recent vox.com piece titled, "I'm a Former Miss America Winner. Good Riddance to the Swimsuit Competition." Mallory, how come? Give me the take that you have on this.
[Mallory Hagan, 2013 Miss America And Politician:] Hey, good morning. You know, here is the thing, throughout my year as Miss America I did so many wonderful things that most of the general public knows nothing about and partially that's due to poor branding and poor marketing by the former board of directors and the former executives at Miss America but a part of that is also because this telecast reflects nothing of what we do throughout the year. And so what we're really trying to do is just marry what Miss America does with what the general public sees in the pageant and I think it's going to really help people understand that Miss America is a job. It's a very well paid job. It's a very demanding job and it's one where you're expected to be an advocate and speaker throughout the year and not a bikini model.
[Smerconish:] Okay but will anybody watch?
[Hagan:] I certainly hope so. You know, we have enough models and aspirational body types out there in the entertainment industry. I want to see young women have a spokesperson to look up to and someone to aspire to be and perhaps Ava DuVernay or Emma Emma Roberts or Oprah or anyone one of these inspirational women across the country who doesn't necessarily use their body in order to create change and do good and I think that we need more young women in public eye who our young people can look up to and aspire to be and I hope that people will tune into Miss America to see that we have a lot of young women across this country who are just that and now we need to showcase them the way that they should be showcased.
[Smerconish:] But can't we do both? Listen, I do this as a compliment not to be demeaning.
[Hagan:] Sure.
[Smerconish:] We have the image of you when you were Miss America. You're stunning in that bikini. What I'm thinking about when I remember by the way, don't embarrass her but we can put it on the screen. It's OK, she looks great, she won. Yes, there it is. You know Mallory, it's not just guys who like to look at beautiful women. Women like to look at beautiful women. My mother is 1 of 11; 8 sisters and 3 brothers. When I was growing up, I remember when, before the cell phone era, they would all be working their push button phones and calling one another and saying, "My God, look at Miss Mississippi and look at Miss Texas and Pennsylvania." They loved getting caught up in all of it.
[Hagan:] Sure. We can absolutely do both and there are women everyday out in the community doing wonderful things that are both beautiful and service driven and you know, no one is saying that moving forward in the Miss America Pageant, the young women who participate shouldn't take care of their bodies, they shouldn't be healthy and shouldn't be beautiful. Listen, the Miss America Organization is not going to change their public's perception of what is beautiful or what is desirable and in every judge's minds and in the public eye, they're going to be drawn to the young woman that they are attracted to and that is totally acceptable and a part of human nature. But what we're trying to do is let people know that Miss America is a spokeswoman for Children's Miracle Network Hospitals. She is an advocate for her platform; mine had to do with child sexual abuse prevention, and she's a spokesperson for many brands across the board throughout her year and so we just want people to see that on stage. It's not to say you can't be beautiful and can't do both because you certainly can and we celebrate that. We just want to show our audience what it is that Miss America does and that's she's a spokesperson.
[Smerconish:] Mallory, good luck in your Congressional bid.
[Hagan:] Thank you so much, appreciate it.
[Smerconish:] Let's see what you're saying on my Smerconish twitter and Facebook pages. Smerconish, I'm not understanding why everyone thinks the beauty is going away because they're getting rid of bathing suits, they are not one in the same. Well, that's a great point, Krissy, isn't it? I mean you're still going to see beautiful women, I imagine, albeit not as of them. How is that? One more if we have time for it. Smerconish, archaic. Ditch the entire stupid degrading thing. Well, I wonder if it's not now on a downward spiral if they get rid of this aspect of it. Time will tell. We'll see what the ratings hold. Right? We're going to go live to the G7 summit in Charlevoix, Canada I think I did it where the President has been tardy to this morning's breakfast on gender equality and has generally been at loggerheads with the other leaders.

[Unidentified Male:] Most of the staples are out. A lot of isles are empty.
[Sarah Murray, Cnn Correspondent:] The President and First Lady, Melania Trump are going to get a firsthand look at the devastation.
[Unidentified Male:] There's our house.
[Unidentified Female:] My husband sleeps in the truck. I sleep on the tailgate. Not only is the water contaminated, it is highly contaminated.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We will continue to coordinate with them and bring all of the relief and the comfort and everything else that we absolutely can to the gulf coast.
[Unidentified Female:] Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, has new details about the real reason President Trump fired FBI Director, James Comey.
[Unidentified Male:] There is a serious obstruction of justice investigation going on, against the president of the United States.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] We will be fully transparent with his investigation. And frankly, I don't have anything to add beyond that.
[Murray:] All of this as the president weighs whether to bring to an end the deferred action for childhood arrivals or
[Daca. Unidentified Male:] I actually don't think he should do that.
[Trump:] We love the dreamers. We love everybody.
[Announcer:] this is NEW DAY weekend with Victor Blackwell and Christi Paul.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] Good Saturday to you. Thank you for being with us. Today, the president will get a chance to look at Harvey's devastation. A few hours from now, the president and first lady will head to Texas and Louisiana. The waters there, we know, are starting just starting now to recede, but the misery, unfortunately, the death toll as well are rising this morning.
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] The president and first lady will leave the White House about 9:00 a.m. Eastern. Their first stop will be meeting with victims of Harvey. They're going to do at an airfield on the outskirts of Houston.
[Melania Trump, First Lady Of The United States:] I just want to tell them to be strong and everything will be OK.
[Blackwell:] The president's promise of swift government response is now handed over to Congress. The White House is requesting $7.85 billion in disaster aid, that's a couple billion more than initially expected. A vote on the aid money has been scheduled for late next week in the House.
[Paul:] And in political news, the New York Times reporting Special Counsel Robert Mueller has new details this morning about the reason President Trump fired former FBI Director, James Comey. The Times reports the Justice Department handed over a letter drafted to Comey, but one which was never sent, in which the president explains his rationale for the firing. The White House Council reportedly thought the letter dictated by the president to a top aide was "problematic." And so, it has a lot of people wondering if this new information is pointing to where the investigation goes from here.
[Blackwell:] Also, the futures of about 800,000 young undocumented immigrants said to be decided by the president next week. His decision on the dreamer's program is coming on Tuesday, and he's not giving any hint, yet.
[Unidentified Female:] The dreamers, they're worried.
[Trump:] We love the dreamers. We love everybody.
[Blackwell:] Let's start with the aftermath of Harvey. This morning, the death toll is at 50. Let's go to CNN's George Howell, he's live in Houston at the George R. Brown Convention Center. George, good morning to you. I assume people are starting to wake up, 6:00 local time there. What's happening, what's going to happen on the day ahead?
[George Howell, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. Victor, we are starting to see more people out and about after another night's sleep here, this home away from home. Many people who don't now have a home left to they can turn to. We're starting to see also the numbers diminish here. The latest estimate that we got from the Red Cross, somewhere between 1200, perhaps, people that are still here. The number, just a few days ago, 8,000 people. So, what we are seeing now, Victor, we're seeing people go into these communities to determine the extent of the damage. I want to give you guys a couple stats though because it really tells a story. According to the governor of the state, Greg Abbott, some 440,000 Texans, as we understand, have applied for federal aid. So, you really get a sense of how many people are asking for help from the federal government at this point. $79 million has already been doled out in aid. And at this point, some 42,000 Texans are in shelters of a various kind throughout the state of Texas. To talk about this shelter, again, the numbers are starting to diminish, but Producer Leslie Perrot just went out and determined, there are so many services being offered just quickly from FEMA assistance, housing assistance, legal advice, free transportation, play areas for the kids, Sunday worship services and counselor assistance. So, you do get the feeling that people here are getting a lot of help as they take those steps to get back out there and see what's left of their homes.
[Paul:] All right. George Howell, thank you so much.
[Blackwell:] Well, a lot of the volunteers and first responder who've been working to help people have been at it for days. And one of them in Houston is Chris Eves. These are a few of the pictures that he has taken over the last couple days of the flood. He's been a volunteer firefighter for 24 years now, and he and his wife have hosted displaced people in their home since the storm began. Chris is on the phone with us. Chris, good morning to you. I first want to start with the decision to welcome some of the people into your home. There are firefighters who were doing God's work there trying to rescue people, help people, but not everybody invites people into their home. Why have you and your wife decided to?
[Chris Eves, Volunteer Firefighter:] I mean, it's the right thing to do. You help your neighbors. You help a fellow man in a time of need. You know, you just hope that people would return the favor to you if you needed it.
[Blackwell:] Chris, how many rescues are still happening? Is that phase over or are people still being pulled out of their home?
[Eves:] No, sir. That phase is over with. We're pretty much just in clean up mode right now.
[Blackwell:] How many people do you have with you in your home?
[Eves:] Nobody right now. They were all kind of place, found hotels for them to stay. So, right now, it's just my family.
[Blackwell:] Give us an idea, if you can, from your perspective, the gravity of what you were seeing, being there, how this has impacted your community.
[Eves:] It's just, I mean, devastation. I mean, I don't have figures on hand, but I thought it was, say, 60 percent of Dickinson flooded.
[Blackwell:] What do people need most from authorities?
[Eves:] They've really right now, people need clean clothes. They need somewhere to take a shower. They need somewhere to sleep.
[Blackwell:] Yes. It's the basic things that so many of us take for granted; a place to do laundry, a place to take a shower, electricity, if you can get to it.
[Eves:] Right.
[Blackwell:] They've had a good fortune. At least, some people to be welcomed into your home. Chris, thank you so much. Thank your wife as well. And thanks for being with us on
[New Day. Eves:] Yes, sir. If I could just thank just a couple of people for all the help that we've had. Our initial response was only ten people. And from our station of volunteers, until we got help from the Texas Interstate Farm Mutual Aid System, we had a strike team from the Dallas area that is still here and still assisting us. So, I just want to thank them and the state of Texas.
[Blackwell:] Absolutely. You just did. Chris Even, thank you so much.
[Eves:] Thank you.
[Blackwell:] All right.
[Paul:] In just about two hours, the president and first lady are leaving Washington, and they're going to go to that area on the gulf coast. They are set to meet with survivors of Hurricane Harvey in Texas and in Louisiana. Live from the White House right now, CNN White House Reporter, Jeremy Diamond with us. Jeremy, what do you know about this trip?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] That right. Well, in just a few hours, we'll see the president and first lady heading to Houston as well as to southwestern Louisiana. This will be the president's first chance to visit actually and meet with some of the survivors of this storm. This comes, of course, just as yesterday the president's administration requested $7.85 billion in emergency federal disaster relief aid from Congress. The House of Representatives is expected to vote on that next week. And of course, the president here is hoping that Congress will swiftly approve that request for aid. Most of that aid will go to FEMA, which is, of course, handling the primary, federal response to Hurricane Harvey and the ongoing flooding there. The president, today, with this visit, you know, will have a chance to really demonstrate that empathy, that many of his critics said he lacked in his first visit to the area, which came just a couple days after Hurricane Harvey first made land fall. Vice President Mike Pence visited the area just two days ago, and he set a pretty high bar for what the president will have to do to demonstrate some of that empathy, you know, hugging survivors, clearing some debris even in the area. So, we'll have to see if the president meets that. But even as he is leaving Washington, of course, a lot of new changes happening at this White House. The president is dealing with the changes implemented by his Chief of Staff, John Kelly, aimed at putting a little bit more rigor here. But the president will also be losing, it seems. At the end of the month, one of his closest and most loyal advisers, Keith Schiller, the president's Director of Oval Office Operations, who was his former body guard for nearly two decades. Sources telling me, Dana Bash, and my colleague, Noah Gray, that Keith Schiller has told people in the last couple of weeks that he is planning to leave the White House. That, of course, could leave the president feeling a little bit more isolated.
[Paul:] All right. Jeremy Diamond, quite a wrap up of headlines this morning. Thank you so much.
[Blackwell:] Well, police are now managing mandatory evacuation in the Los Angeles area.
[Paul:] Firefighters are working to protect homes from a growing wildfire. Take a look at some of the images we're getting in here this morning. This has burned 2,000 acres in a matter of hours. We know at least 200 homes have been evacuated, thus far. The fire is burning in the mountains there above Burbank, and the things it's moving downward. Now, firefighters say strong winds are helping fuel this fire and it's causing it to burn in four different directions, which really makes their job tough.
[Blackwell:] Yes. A report from the New York Times, suggests the special counsel may be targeting the president over his firing of FBI Director, James Comey former director now. And it centers around a problematic letter, as it's described. All of this as the president weighs whether to bring an end to the Obama-era program that protects undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children from deportation.
[Paul:] Also, from infectious diseases to snakes, health officials are warning of possible lasting dangers from Hurricane Harvey. Stay close.

[Cabrera:] Welcome back to the NEWSROOM. There will be no triple crown this season.
[Unidentified Male:] Cloud Computing has defeated classic empire and the Preakness.
[Cabrera:] Cloud Computing, holds off AN upset to win today. Preakness take that win and the Triple Crown hopes on the odds on favorite and always Kentucky derby Always Dreaming. Horse races focus now shifts to the Belmont stakes on June 10th with the big question can Cloud Computing win two in a row. It wasn't technically a royal wedding, but it sure felt like it. PIPPA Middleton, the sister of Britain's ditches of Cambridge tied the knot today with Hedge Fund billionaire James Matthews. And their wedding party included Hippa's niece and nephew, Prince George and Princess Charlotte. And as CNN Erin McLaughlin reports, the wedding was a feast for the eyes of royal watchers everywhere.
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn International Correspondent:] It's the society wedding of the year. Newly-weds Pippa Middleton and hedge fund manager James Matthews were all smiles and a kiss for the crowd. Pippa stunned in a scope dress by British designer
[Cabrera:] Thanks so much Erin. Coming up, the Senate intelligence committee has announced James Comey will testify publicly. How much will he reveal about the Russia probe and whether there was any pressure from President Trump? We will discuss here in the NEWSROOM.

[Kristie Lu Stout, Host, "news Stream":] " Critical trade talks China's top negotiator arrives in Washington as the diplomatic battle over Huawei hits alarming new heights. Mass protests, Venezuela braces for outrage on the streets as President Nicolas Maduro tells Russian media he is ready to talk to the opposition; and the deep freeze, how people in the U.S. are preparing for historic and life-threatening temperatures. At a time on of dramatically escalating tension between the United States and China, crucial trade talks are beginning today. Beijing's top trade negotiator, Liu He is in Washington for two days of critical meetings with a deadline to reach a trade agreement just over a month away. If a deal isn't reached, there is a risk that the U.S. will impose tariffs on $200 billion worth of U.S. China imports, but hanging over those talks are U.S. charges against Huawei alleging the Chinese telecom company tried to steal trade secrets and violated sanctions on Iran. The U.S. has now formally requested the extradition of its CFO, Meng Wanzhou, who appeared in a Canadian court on Tuesday on a separate set of charges. But let's not ignore the elephant in the room. Could President Donald Trump get involved in the case against Huawei? A reminder, here is what he told Reuters last month, quote, "If I think it's good for what will be certainly the largest trade deal ever made, which is a very important thing, what's good for national security, I would certainly intervene if I thought it was necessary," unquote. Now, CNN's Matt Rivers joins us now from Beijing, but first, let's go to our Paula Newton. She is standing by at the New York Stock Exchange. And Paula, ahead of these talks, Steven Mnuchin, the U.S. Treasury Secretary has been making the rounds saying that the Huawei case is separate from the trade talks and also adding that there will be significant progress, but not everyone shares that optimism.
[Paula Newton, Correspondent, Cnn:] No, and we're dealing with a deadline where at the beginning of March and you highlighted what President Trump said. Not only did the Chinese take the President at his word, but also even Canadian officials took the President at his word. The fact that unfortunately, this Huawei case has become far too politicized and politicized, Kristi, because it goes to the heart of the issue that will be at the negotiating table today and that's the way China conducts itself in the United States and around the world when it comes to intellectual property. And it is not just the deal that they can arrive at the table, but how they can trust that kind of deal, how they can trust China to not go back on its word at the table. And I have to tell you, Kristi, that at this point in time this market that I'm sitting in right now has not priced in an escalation to this trade war and that is what has a lot of American companies worried. If we go back to where Steven Mnuchin talked about the fact that the trade is separate from national security issues, there are companies even here in the United States who just don't believe that. You had Christopher Wray, who is the Director of the FBI, stating very bluntly and very clearly that these Chinese companies are beholden to the Chinese government, a government that does not hold the same values as the American government, and that is very stark. It will be something that will be top of mind, not necessarily for American negotiators, but certainly for Chinese ones.
[Lu Stout:] These are high level negotiations. These are high stakes talks. Let's go to Matt in Beijing, and Matt, these talks take place against this backdrop of rising tension other Huawei. So there must be deep skepticism there in China about what these talks can achieve.
[Matt Rivers, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, I mean, if you're pessimistic about these talks, one thing you can point to in addition to the Huawei case, which of course is a point of national pride for China. It is going to be interesting to see how much that case influences these talks, but the other thing, we're talking about companies that are beholden to the Chinese government. You know, you can certainly make the case that private Chinese companies are, but you can definitely make the case that state-run companies are, and if you're looking for some intransigence on the part of the Chinese government, what the United States wants to see, for example, is China to stop giving preferential treatment to its state-run companies, to give all kinds of subsidies in key industries that the United States believes makes for an un-level playing field in addition or when you combine that with a lack of market access here to China for U.S. firms. But China's government has basically made that a priority. Over the last couple of years under Xi Jinping's guidance, China's government has prioritized state-run firms by basically giving them preferential loans and all kinds of subsidies. So if China's government has made that a core policy and the United States wants to change that policy, where is the middle ground there?
[Rivers:] And that is going to be a big reason for pessimism here is that you've got the United States wanting to see structural changes to China's economy that would essentially require an about face in a lot of ways from what from what we've seen in China's government over the past couple of years.
[Lu Stout:] Got it, so let's take things back to Paula, and Paula, the U.S., they want to see structural changes, they want free trade, they want better IP protection. Do they have the leverage in negotiations to gain that? Because as you know, companies like Apple are reporting falling sales. We know that the government shutdown there in America has caused the country billions of dollars is the U.S. losing leverage in these talks?
[Newton:] Certainly not in the short-term. One has to say that this is hurting China, as well, in terms of these trade talks and the United States continually says that in this strong economy that we have right now, we can suffer through a little bit of pain to get that ultimate gain that Matt was talking about, to be able to push the Chinese government to the point where they're saying that Made in China 2025, a point where they prioritize subsidies for those state-run enterprises will be off the table. The thing here, though, Kristi is the fact that when you look at the Trump administration, people are wondering what does a win take? And I can tell you, Kristi, having followed the NAFTA re-negotiations quite closely, you could have Robert Lighthizer who is the U.S. Trade Representative who is at the table today thinking one thing, you take that same package back to the White House and the thinking changes, I wouldn't say daily, but at least, weekly in terms of what a win looks like and what an enforceable win looks like against China. So that will be another dynamic at play today during those talks in Washington.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, it's going to be really hard to secure a win, a win that is definable and enforceable, let alone happening this week. Paula Newton live for us in New York. Matt Rivers live for us in Beijing. A big thank you to you both. Now to Venezuela now where more massive protests against the country's President Nicolas Maduro are expected in the coming hours. The U.N. says at least 40 people have been killed in recent clashes between authorities and supporters of the opposition leader Juan Guaido. But there are signs that the embattled President, Nicolas Maduro, might be ready to talk. In fact, he told Russian state news that he is willing to meet with the opposition, but he ruled out new presidential elections until 2025. Maduro was re-elected last year, but the U.S. and more than a dozen other countries don't recognize his presidency as legitimate. Now, in a moment, we're going to be hearing from Nick Paton Walsh from Bogota in neighboring Colombia, but first let's go to Fred Pleitgen in Moscow. And Fred, Nicolas Maduro, he has turned to Russian state media to broadcast his message to the world and he's effectively saying "I'm ready to talk."
[Frederik Pleitgen, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, that's exactly what he is saying, Kristi and it certainly is quite interesting that he would be sending that message through Russian media. Obviously, the Russians the big ally of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela, they keep saying they're firmly in the corner of Nicolas Maduro. They say they believe that he is the legitimate President of Venezuela and they will continue to stand by him. Now, you're absolutely right, in that interview with the RIA news agency, he said that yes, he was willing to negotiate with the opposition for the good of Venezuela and as he put it, for the good of the world, as well. He also did rule out those Presidential elections saying, "Anybody who was calling for him to step down for new elections to take place, that that is neo-colonialism on the part of the Americans and on the part of the Europeans, as well." He said he would be willing to conduct early Parliamentary elections, but a lot of the things that he said in that interview was basically praising the Russians saying the Russians are the true allies of his own government and of Venezuela as he put it, but then also ripping into the Americans and specifically the Trump administration saying essentially that he believes that the U.S. is behind all the troubles that he's facing in Venezuela right now. Let's listen in to some of what Nicolas Maduro had to say in that interview.
[Nicolas Maduro, President-elect Of Venezuela:] First time that this happened, this is simply the frustration in the White House because they cannot take Venezuela. It is very sensitive. What am I doing? I'm exercising my leadership. I'm being the Commander-in-Chief constitutionally. We have Russia's full support at every level and we welcome it gladly and gratefully. What did I ask President Putin? To stay in permanent contact.
[Pleitgen:] So as we know, President Putin and Nicolas Maduro have been in touch over the days since the uprisings there started in Venezuela. Also quite interesting to see that setting there, quite informal setting that Nicolas Maduro was giving that interview in. One of the other things that he also said to RIA and this was quite interesting is that he believed that President Trump was flat out, out to kill him that he said that all of this was being done in conjunction with the Colombians and what he called the Colombian mafia. And that if something happens to me, he believes that that would be on President Trump. It's interesting, of course, Kristi, also because there were some questions about whether or not the Russians may have sent some contractors to try and protect Maduro. Over here, the Russians were denying that. Maduro was asked that question, as well, his comment to that was, "No comment," Kristi.
[Lu Stout:] Fred Pleitgen reporting live from Moscow. Thank you. Let's go to Nick Paton Walsh standing by in Bogota. He is keeping a close eye on the situation inside Venezuela and Nick, the opposition leader is under pressure. We've got the Attorney General of Venezuela, the Supreme Court making moves against Guaido. How are they trying to limit his power?
[Nick Paton Walsh, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, I mean, essentially, Juan Guaido is in a complicated position now because he has been recognized by external powers as the President of the country, but he doesn't really have any power over the government inside the country. The U.S. wants to get him to be able to distribute some of the billions potentially in Venezuelan state bank accounts that are currently held under sanctions, but quite practically, how you do that, we simply don't know. He is barred, it seems, by the Attorney General from leaving the country. He's had his bank accounts frozen. But they've stopped short of calling for his arrest and that's part of a delicate balance, frankly, here that the Venezuelan government has held with a man who has declared himself a rival government entirely. They have not had him arrested. He briefly was arrested over a week ago and then released owing to popular outcry, and Nicolas Maduro saying the whole thing had been a terrible mistake. Not quite clear of the accuracy of that. But, he, today is calling Venezuelans into the streets in large numbers, potentially. The last time we saw this on the 23rd of January, it was peaceful. It lasted a number of hours. There were clashes with riot police on the fray, on the edges of those protests with sort of young protesters who quite regularly have faced off with riot police in that kind of way. We have to see if today is really different and quite how Juan Guaido takes himself from this position as sort of being the figure head that some critics in the Trump administration say they prematurely recognized as the President before he really had any actual grip on the leaves of power. I have to stress again while he is still appointing diplomats abroad, some of them went to the White House to meet U.S. Vice President Mike Pence yesterday. There is another parallel institution that when you're inside Venezuela, it's very much the one that is running the country and so the essential question moving forward is does Nicolas Maduro still have enough money at his disposal in order to keep the military and the elite around him happy? To keep them fed and in power? And, therefore, willing to keep their subordinates in check or does that start to fray? Or do the numbers of people on the street we see today and everyone is hoping for no bloodshed or violence here, but that could tip people's opinions, too. Do the numbers on the streets make the military's generals who are key here begin to change their mind. Nicolas Maduro from the beginning has said he'll talk to the opposition, but he's also had caveats there where he is simply not going to relinquish the presidency. The important point today is quite how Juan Guiado will take this show of support on the streets and see whether or not he can turn it into some effective control inside the country. At the moment, he's a fresh face man offering a very positive message with a lot of international support and potentially, billions at his disposal to get the country out of an economic crisis. But that's a long jump away from practically actually having something he can do to ease the plight of ordinary Venezuelans Kristi.
[Lu Stout:] Got it. We have to follow the turnout of this expected mass protest in the streets of Venezuela today and also follow the money to figure out how this leadership crisis and political crisis is going to pay out. Nick Paton Walsh reporting live for us. Nick, thank you. The British Prime Minister Theresa May will push ahead with new Brexit talks in the next couple of hours. She was given a mandate to reopen discussions with Brussels by a Parliament vote on Tuesday. European leaders have repeated that they will not renegotiate the deal. Mrs. May will meet with opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn shortly before talking to the European Council President, Donald Tusk. Erin McLaughlin is in Brussels for us. But first, let's go to Nic Robertson, he is standing by at 10 Downing Street, and Nic, in the end, Parliament was not able to wrestle control of the Brexit process. It is still in the hands of Theresa May.
[Nic Robertson, International Diplomatic Editor, Cnn:] It is and on the basis that she says she wants to go to Brussels and switch the backstop, the contentious backstop for alternate arrangements. She was pressed today by the leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbyn during Prime Minister's Question Time. Of course, this coming ahead of what will be a private discussion between the pair expected later in the day. But Jeremy Corbyn asked her very specifically, what are these alternate arrangements? And she indicated that this would be essentially a potentially time limited backstop, essentially a backstop that Britain could unilaterally step out of. All ideas that the European Union has shot down. Nevertheless, Theresa May said that the E.U. does want to get a deal with her. This is what she said.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] What has been absolutely clear is my contacts with the European Union leaders is that they want a deal. What this House voted for last night is to leave the European Union...
[May:] ... with a deal, but it also crucially showed what it will take to see support in this House for a deal in the future. I think the plan that was set out last night shows that we can attain a substantial and sustainable majority in this House.
[Robertson:] I think the expectation here in Britain at the moment is that Theresa May will have these conversations with E.U. leaders when they go to Brussels, but in a couple of weeks' time, the U.K. is going to be back where it was with her plan, having essentially not got what she needed in Brussels to convince the hardliners who she got on board yesterday, and to push the withdrawal agreement through. I think that the sense here that what she goes for in Brussels is beyond her reach.
[Lu Stout:] All right, thank you. Let's go to Erin now in Brussels. And Erin, what are the chances that the E.U. is willing to negotiate and what are her chances for Theresa May to get a better Brexit deal?
[Erin Mclaughlin, Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, you know, Kristi, ever since the Brexit deal was signed off at a Brexit Summit here in Brussels over and over and over again, we've heard from E.U. leaders say that this is the best and final deal, that this is the best agreement that both sides were able to reach in some two years of tense negotiations. The issue here is British lawmakers don't seem to believe them. And we heard again this morning from Michel Barnier in European Parliament saying explicitly that this is the best deal on the table. Take a listen to what he had to say.
[Michel Barnier, Chief E.u. Brexit Negotiator:] The only part I want to make is to confirm that the E.U. Institution remain united and we stand by the agreement we have negotiated with the U.K.
[Mclaughlin:] We also heard today from the Spanish Foreign Affairs Minister, Josep Borell say that last night, the E.U. learned three things from Westminster. First and foremost that Westminster does not want a no-deal scenario, that Westminster does not want to extend the Brexit deadline, and that Westminster wants Theresa May to negotiate. The problem is, March 29th is right around the corner. He said it takes two to tango and at this point, he says he believes the U.K. will come around to Barnier's thinking on this and that the best deal is the deal on the table Kristi.
[Lu Stout:] All right, Erin, thank you. And let's take it back to Nic Robertson. And Nic, we're just learning that Theresa May will be speaking with her Irish counterpart later on Wednesday and of course, that includes talking about the backstop and talking about alternative arrangements to the backstop. What is meant by that?
[Robertson:] Yes, Leo Varadkar, the Taoiseach, the Irish Prime Minister. We heard from the Foreign Minister in Dublin over the weekend, Simon Coveney, he indicated where there may be some latitude. He was very clear as have all the European Union officials who have spoken that the E.U. is not ready to open up the withdrawal agreement, that the backstop was the result of many, many months, indeed, a couple of years of negotiations where various ideas were put forward, various technical solutions, potential technical solutions were talked about, but nothing was forthcoming. And, therefore, from the Irish perspective and undoubtedly, it is what Theresa May will hear from Leo Varadkar this afternoon when they talk via the phone. From the Irish perspective, they are in lock step with the European Union, that the backstop cannot be opened up. But listening to what the Irish Foreign Minister said at the weekend, these alternate arrangements, he indicated that if Britain does want some help on its position with the backstop, it could look to the future relationship, the political agreement that will come between Britain and the European Union, remembering the withdrawal agreement is the divorce, the future relationship is how the relationship looks going forward. And within that, he indicated that there might be some help for Britain if Theresa May doesn't change her red lines on the Customs Union and single market and these issues. So potentially, that's what may come up in the conversation. We don't know. But I don't think anyone expects it to be an easy conversation Kristi.
[Lu Stout:] Not an easy conversation, but definitely, a critical one. Nic Robertson reporting live for us from 10 Downing Street. Erin McLaughlin live from Brussels, a big thank you to you both. You are watching "News Stream" and still to come right here on the program, disgraced former Nissan Chief Carlos Ghosn is laying out what he says led to his detention in the first interview since his arrest. Tens of millions of Americans are being warned to stay indoors as a deep freeze grips the middle of the country.

[Jones:] It's been barely 24 hours, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced that they were expecting. But there was a downtime for either one of them. Harry and Meghan are in Australia kicking off a 16-day tour. And as Max Foster explains, they are getting baby gifts already.
[Max Foster, Cnn International Correspondent:] A first glimpse of a royal baby bump. The secrets finally out for Prince Harry and his new wife, Meghan, as they begin their first major overseas tour as a couple in Australia.
[Prince Harry, Duke Of Sussex:] And we also genuinely couldn't think of a better place to announce the upcoming baby. We had a boy or a girl, so thank you very, very much.
[Foster:] Well-wishers congratulated the couple who announced her pregnancy on Monday, confirming weeks of rumors. Their first baby is due in the spring. Congratulations also came from one of Harry's oldest fans, 98- year-old Australian Daphne Dunne, whom the prince has met twice before. This time, he was able to introduce Daphne to Meghan. Daphne told Meghan, "It's wonderful the two of you," and that she was just what Harry needs. Meghan said she hopes the next time they see Daphne, they would have a little one in tow. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also met Australia's unofficial ambassador, the Koala at Taronga Zoo in Sydney where they open a new learning center. And the official welcoming committee, Australia's governor general, Peter Cosgrove and his wife Lynne, served them tea and beer. And presented them with a toy kangaroo with a baby roo in its pouch, awesome tiny kangaroo. The royal couple also post in front of Sydney's royal opera house and met representatives of the fourth Invictus Games. A sports competition that Prince Harry founded through wounded veterans which kicks off on Saturday. Back home in the U.K., speculation is already ripe for the name of the new royal baby who will be so in line to the throne. Albert, Victoria, and Diana are amongst the favorites for the British bookies, at least. The child won't automatically become a prince or a princess, though the queen may decide to give them that title as they did with Prince William's children. Harry and Meghan continue their 16-day tour with visits to Melbourne and Queensland before flying to Fiji, Tonga, and New Zealand. Max Foster, CNN, London.
[Jones:] Now, we'd like to end on a happy note, but we should just give you a reminder of our top story, a very important story indeed. The Turkish official has told CNN they believed Jamal Khashoggi's body was cut into pieces after he was killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Turkish police had nine hours searching that building on Monday. They've continued searching as well today. And in the last few minutes, we've heard from President Trump who's taken to Twitter to make his most recent comments on this, Mike Pompeo being in Riyadh saying, "Just spoke with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia who totally denied any knowledge of what took place. He was with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, during our call and told me that he has already started full and complete investigation into this matter." He end the tweeting, "Answers will be forthcoming shortly." Well, we're all ears waiting to hear, of course, our correspondents remain across it. Thank you so much for watching tonight. Appreciate your company. Stay with CNN. "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" comes up after this break.

[Sesay:] More now on our breaking news. U.S. President Donald Trump has agreed to meet directly with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. We don't know where just yet. But South Korean officials say the face- to-face meeting will happen by May. The White House says sanctions and pressure on North Korea will remain in place and the stunning announcement came after a South Korean delegation met with Mr. Kim in Pyongyang earlier this week, then traveled to Washington to deliver the invitation to Mr. Trump.
[Chung Eui-yong, South Korean National Security Adviser:] North Korean leader Kim Jong-un said he's committed to denuclearization. Kim pledged that North Korea will refrain from any further nuclear or missile tests and he expressed his eagerness to meet President Trump as soon as possible. President Trump appreciated the briefing and said he would meet Kim Jong-un by May to achieve permanent denuclearization.
[Sesay:] CNN's Andrew Stevens is live in Seoul and joins us. Andrew, as the world processes the news that President Trump is set to meet Kim Jong-un, we're hearing that the man in the middle of all of this, South Korea's president Moon Jae-in, has described the upcoming meeting as almost miraculous. And it's kind of hard to disagree with him.
[Andrew Stevens, Cnn Asia Pacific Editor:] It is. If you think of just a few short months ago, Isha, the amount of rhetoric coming from both North Korea and the U.S. and the level of tension on the Korean Peninsula, the threats of military action by the U.S., the threats of retaliation, missile strikes, nuclear tests, you name it. And now we have, in the space of a week, not one but two summits. The key summit obviously the U.S. and North Korea, which most people thought this would not happen, certainly not for long time, at least. President Moon, as you said, described the meeting as almost miraculous and also thanking President Trump and Kim Jong-un for making it possible. It's important to remember here that this is a big win for Kim as well because both his father and his grandfather had also been pushing for meetings with the United States leader and, for various reasons, they all fell apart. This one is going through. The question, of course, is why Kim is pushing this completely different policy when we say than just a few months ago. It seems to be the reason is sanctions. We can't say definitely because we still haven't heard anything official from North Korea on this whole process. The only thing we've seen from North Korea are the pictures. So we can't say definitely it's sanctions, Isha, but certainly if you look at the anecdotal evidence, everything points to the fact that the North Korean economy was being squeezed. It was going to be squeezed harder as more and more sanctions came into force. And Kim, who's looking at his longevity, sees this as a best way forward. And Donald Trump representing the best U.S. president, if you like, to actually agree to a meeting. Trump likes to pride himself on the art of a deal being a businessman, making executive decisions. Well, he certainly made an executive decision today on that. The South Koreans weren't even scheduled to meet him but they did meet him, explaining what the Kim offer was, which is a verbal, not a written offer. And Trump pretty much agreed on the spot, catching his advisers completely off guard as well. And this obviously is what Kim had been hoping for. It is said that he studies Trump very closely and he played to Trump in some ways. And this is the result. Whether something comes out of it, that is the $64,000 question. Kim is still putting conditions on this, this denuclearization offer. So whether the U.S. is prepared to agree to the conditions, that's the big one, obviously.
[Sesay:] $64,000 question, Andrew, I think it's worth a bit more than that, this one. The question has to be, where are they going to meet? I mean, because this is not just a simple question of you know, just pick a spot. It carries significance, it sends a message, the optics are important.
[Stevens:] Absolutely, the optics are incredibly important in this. There's three potential places and maybe a fourth we don't know about yet, is Pyongyang. It's the DMZ, the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea, and there's Washington. It's very difficult to see a U.S. president going to Pyongyang. That would be giving too much face to North Korea, which I just don't see that happening. The a meeting in Washington, would Kim Jong-un be prepared to go to Washington? That's debatable. We have heard reports from Washington that it's probably not a starter, either, which leaves the DMZ. We know there's a summit there in April between the leaders of North and South Korea and we know that Donald Trump has said that the meeting with Kim Jong- un will take place by May. So maybe the DMZ is the place to do it. It really is a momentum game at the moment, given that five days ago, Isha, all we knew that was two senior level enjoys were going to Pyongyang to talk to Kim Jong- un. We had no idea or we certainly weren't told what they were going to be talking about. Five days later, we've got these two big summits. So it's momentum at the moment. So I expect we'll find out fairly soon, given the unorthodox style of Donald Trump so far on this whole issue, fairly soon where the Americans want that summit. And I suspect it will be in the DMZ, you know, which has face.
[Sesay:] Everyone looking at this very closely, particularly those in the region; I'm thinking specifically Beijing and Tokyo. Give me a sense of how they view the road ahead. Obviously Beijing wanted these talks sooner rather than later. Japan a little bit more circumspect and concerned and part of that concern may be a sense that they're being left on the sidelines. Talk to me about the regional perspective on this.
[Stevens:] There has been a concern in Tokyo that events were perhaps getting ahead of them. It's important to note here as well that Japan and the U.S. and South Korea are in lockstep on the fact that the sanctions, this maximum pressure that Donald Trump talks about, the U.S. strategy towards North is maintained. All three countries are in total agreement on that. Now with Beijing, their longstanding position on the whole nuclearization and the tensions on the Korean Peninsula is that dialogue is the only way forward. They've suggested this freeze for freeze, that the U.S. would freeze, for example, the military drills and, in return, the North Koreans would freeze the missile tests. So we've gone way beyond that. But certainly the bottom line for Beijing has always been about negotiations. Japan has welcomed this and Japan is also very cautious. They point continually to the fact that we have been down this path before, there has been overtures made from North Korea and to North Korea and none of them have actually led to anything. At the 11th hour, the North Koreans have moved back from any sort of denuclearization at all and kept with that nuclear program because remember, Isha, this is fundamental, it's written in the constitution. Nuclear deterrent equals regime survival. It's always been thus in North Korea. Has that changed?
[Sesay:] That is the I'm going to raise you. I'm going to go that's the million-dollar question. Andrew Stevens, joining us there in Seoul, South Korea, appreciate it.
[Stevens:] A billion.
[Sesay:] Yes, exactly. Thank you, appreciate it, Andrew. A story we'll continue to follow for you. Also, that storm that's brewing over the White House; coming up, how the Trump administration is dealing with the latest developments in the Stormy Daniels saga.

[Blitzer:] As North Korea threatens nuclear attacks on the United States, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Bob Corker, held an extraordinary hearing today, the first in more than 40 years to examine the president's powers to order nuclear attack. Senator Corker says a number of members, both on and off the committee, have raised serious questions about that issue. Listen to what Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy had to say.
[Sen. Chris Murphy, , Connecticut:] We are concerned that the president of the United States is so unstable, is so volatile, has a decision-making process that quixotic that he might order a nuclear weapon strike that is wildly out of step with U.S. national security interests.
[Blitzer:] Very strong words. With us now to discuss, Tony Blinken, our CNN global affairs analyst, former state deputy national security adviser during the Obama administration as well. What's your reaction to Senator Murphy's very strong remarks?
[Tony Blinken, Cnn Global Affair Analyst:] Wolf, this is extraordinary. Because, as you said at the top, this is the first time in more than 40 years Congress has held a hearing on the question of the president's authority and command to use nuclear weapons. And there's a reason this hearing is happening now. It's because of concerns that the president acts erratically, particularly with his tweets, and that is sending all sorts of messages around the world that are potentially the source of miscalculation. If someone like a North Korea thinks that on the basis of something the president tweets that he may be prepared to use nuclear weapons and by the way, they don't have the ability to detect incoming nuclear weapons that could produce an unintended conflict. So that's the basis for this hearing. Now we have institutions and process that is should be able to withstand any individual.
[Blitzer:] Including the president.
[Blinken:] Including the president. But I think Senator Corker, Chairman Corker is right to hold this hearing to try to get a grip on this and to see if anything needs to be done. Now, there's also a larger question that goes beyond any particular president, including President Trump, which, is should the president have the authority to basically launch, on his own decision, without consultation of Congress, a first strike without there's no imminent danger or threat to the United States. That's a larger question that goes beyond the question of President Trump.
[Blitzer:] Another sensitive issue has come up, and the president responding to it, the relationship he now seems to have with the president, President Duterte, of Philippines. In defending his policy, the president's policy, took a serious jab at the previous administration you're very familiar with. Listen to the president.
[Trump:] In the Philippines, we just could not have been greeted nicer. And as you know, we were having a lot of problems with the Philippines. The relationship over the past administration was horrible. To use a nice word, I would say horrible is putting it mildly. You know what happened. Many of you were there.
[Blitzer:] I want to you react to that. The relationship with the Philippines during the eight years of the Obama administration, he says, were horrible.
[Blinken:] Actually, the relationship was excellent and getting very, very strong. Then President Duterte came in, launched this war on drugs that has now featured, by Amnesty International's county, tens of thousands of extrajudicial killings. Even the government of the Philippines itself acknowledges about 3,000. And that really soured the relationship. Because President Obama criticized Duterte for the way he's conducting this war on drugs. President Trump, unfortunately, seems more at home with autocrats than with Democrats. And the idea that he's cozier with President Duterte than he is with his own predecessor and, indeed, is criticizing his predecessor on foreign soil, is really unfortunate. The other thing, Wolf, is this sends a terrible message of impunity to Duterte to continue prosecuting this war on drugs without any regard for basic standards of rule of law. And it sends a message around the world that we are OK with this kind of conduct.
[Blitzer:] Because the White House says that the issue of human rights did briefly come up in the president's meeting with President Duterte, the Philippine government says it never came up.
[Blinken:] I suspect the president said to Duterte, you're right, that's was probably the extent of the discussion of human rights. So, look, this is the president has said previously that he applauded the way that President Duterte was conducting his war on drugs. He has embraced him. And this is part of a larger pattern. Unfortunately, the president, again, seems to be very comfortable with autocrats around the world and much less comfortable with Democrats.
[Blitzer:] He did seem to get a major achievement in convincing the Chinese leader, President Xi, to go ahead release the three UCLA basketball players, who were accused by the Chinese of shoplifting. Potentially, they could have faced many years in a Chinese prison, a labor camp. But they are on their way home right now.
[Blinken:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] And the president is taking some credit for that.
[Blinken:] Yes, that's good news. President was right to do it. Glad that he did it. Good that he got the result. It would have been good as well if he had a few words for the many Chinese, unfortunately, who are feeling the heavy hand of repression in China. Including, for example, the widow of the man who won the Nobel Peace Prize and was put in jail by China. So you have to get that piece of it right, too. The larger question here, Wolf, is, in China, we saw two presidents heading in different directions. Xi Jinping, whose power is at a maximum, his own law is enshrined now in the Chinese Communist Party's constitution, and President Trump, as you said earlier, opinion polls showing him with lowest ratings ever. And both of them are heading in different directions in terms of where they are taking their countries. China is opening to the world. President Trump is closing in. That's going to put China in a much stronger position and us in a weaker position.
[Blitzer:] He says he's improved this relationship with China and we'll see some dramatic results. And he says there will be a speech he'll be delivering in the next
[Blinken:] I look forward to that.
[Blitzer:] Making some major announcements as well. We'll see what he does. All right, Tony, thanks very much for coming in.
[Blinken:] Thanks, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] That's it for me. Thanks very much for watching. I'll be back 5:00 p.m. eastern in the "THE SITUATION ROOM." In the meantime, the news continues right now, right here on CNN.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] Looking for a deal that he could get a piece of. None of that was true. Why lie? So, tonight we see that the president's concern that the Democrats may be out to impeach him is a justifiable concern. Do they have a case? Here's my final point. That's up to you. A lot of pressure, but all of this will come down to you. This is not going to be about a criminal prosecution. I don't see it. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first one to admit it. But impeachment is about an echo effect of the public sentiment on the same. There will be polls. There will be reporting. There will be chances for you to be heard on this. That's what will drive what happens next. Thank you for watching us tonight. Happy Monday. So much news. Let me get you right to Don. "CNN TONIGHT" starts now.
[Don Lemon, Cnn:] He lied about the lies that he lied about. It's in both.
[Cuomo:] Indeed.
[Lemon:] Yes, he did. He's like, let me tell you why I lied, and even in those statements, there is some factual errors in the statement as well. To me, it's just I think it has been sort of accepted that this president lies and normalized in a way, and that is bothersome no matter who the president is. But that's just bothersome to me and what it does to the fabric of our society.
[Cuomo:] From the beginning, I took a lot of heat because you're calling out lies. Maybe they matter. Maybe they don't. But it's so pejorative. Lying is the basis of all criminal prosecution.
[Lemon:] Right.
[Cuomo:] And political upheaval.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] He has been lying about things. It is now becoming a matter of fact in terms of the understanding of what happened around him with respect to Russian interference. There going to be there is going to be trouble ahead.
[Lemon:] He's saying, well, they were private transactions, right, speaking of the payments that-
[Cuomo:] You're talking about the payments to the women.
[Lemon:] To Karen McDougal, to the women. But then if they were private transactions, why didn't he disclose them, right? And then he comes back to try to explain why he didn't, and then he lied about it. And then, if, so why, again, you brought it up. Then why keep lying about the Trump Tower thing knowing that somehow I don't know. I don't get it. I don't get how so much lying is acceptable. It's just not for me. I know that politicians have issues with the truth sometimes, but this is on steroids, Chris. I mean it's outrageous.
[Cuomo:] Mueller is going to give us a set of facts, but then the game begins.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] And what happens with those facts, I believe and, again, I could be wrong. Nobody will have more fun with that proposition than you. But if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If I'm right, it means what politicians will do will be a function of what people want them to do. And it's going to be a big burden, and we haven't had one like it in a long time.
[Lemon:] Well, it's going to I think public opinion is going to shape a lot of this, whether people believe it or not, and that is what he's banking on. But the truth is the truth is the truth. And people should dig down within themselves and think about it. If you're a Trump supporter, how would you feel if Barack Obama had done the same thing or Bill Clinton or even George W. Bush? If they had done the exact same thing, how would you feel? I think they would be feeling a whole lot differently than they feel about this because nothing seems to matter right now. Truth doesn't matter unless the truth only matters for Trump supporters when it's a Democrat.
[Cuomo:] But that's not the truth.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] And look, it could cut both ways. For the Democrats, this is a daunting proposition. What do you do with your power? And, you know, because it's not too long until 2020.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] You know, we have another election a couple of years from now.
[Lemon:] Wait now. They should wait. They have time. Wait to see if something actually does transpire. And again, you don't want to talk about impeachment if it's not a real possibility. You want to get on with the business of the American people. And that is ultimately what will keep you in good stead with the American people.
[Cuomo:] Nancy Pelosi said the same thing to me the day after the election.
[Lemon:] Thank you, sir. I'll see you tomorrow.
[Cuomo:] Yes, sir.
[Lemon:] This is CNN tonight. I'm Don Lemon. President Trump out of sight, staying behind closed doors inside the White House today. But we know what's on his mind. Breaking news tonight. Sources telling CNN that the president has expressed concern that he could be impeached when the Democrats take control of the House in January, OK? And also, tonight, 44 former U.S. senators writing an op-ed in the Washington Post. Here it is. They are warning that the country is entering here's the op-ed entering what they call a dangerous period and calling on current senators to zealously guard our democracy. They say they feel an obligation to speak up about serious challenges to the rule of law, to the Constitution, our governing institutions, and our national security. When have you heard of anything like that? This is at the same time as prosecutors for the first time implicate President Trump, implicate him in possible criminal activity, accusing him as a candidate for office of directing his former personal lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, to pay hush money, to buy the silence of two women who claim to have had affairs with Trump. Prosecutors writing in the Cohen document this. "As Cohen himself has now admitted with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of individual one." You know who prosecutors say is individual one? They identify him as Donald Trump. The president lashing out at the accusations this morning in a tweet, misspelling by the way the word smoking. Here's what he writes. "He says, Democrats can't find a "smocking'gun tying the Trump campaign to Russia after James Comey's testimony. No 'smocking" gun. No collusion. That's because there was no collusion. So now the Dems go to a simple private transaction, wrongly call it a campaign contribution, which it was not. Lawyers liability if he made a mistake, not me. Cohen just trying to get his sentence reduced." All right. There's a lot in there, and we'll talk about it. So, let's break down some of what he is claiming there, OK? He's admitting payments were made. Now he's admitting it. He didn't before. But he's admitting payments were made to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, but he is dismissing them as simple private transactions. There's always an excuse for why he lied. But he can't keep his story straight. So, remember when he lied about the payments when questioned by reporters on Air Force One? This was back in the spring. Let me remind you. Here it is.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, did you know about the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] No.
[Unidentified Female:] Then why did Michael-
[Trump:] What else?
[Unidentified Female:] Why did Michael Cohen make this if there was no truth to her allegations?
[Trump:] Well, you'll have to ask Michael Cohen. Michael is my attorney, and you'll have to ask Michael.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you know where he got the money to make that payment?
[Trump:] No, I don't know.
[Lemon:] OK. Well, here's what prosecutors have to say about it. In their court filing, they flat out call the payments illegal campaign contributions. Illegal campaign contributions. I want you to listen to this closely because this has been bugging me for the last few days. I just want to scream at the television when I see it. President Trump and his apologists OK? If you're one of them, listen. Working very hard to claim that this is business as usual. And even if it wasn't, it's just like what Obama did during his campaign. That is a flat-out lie. Legal experts will agree. Do a fact check, will you? And let me give you some now, and we'll talk about it more in the show. The Obama campaign did miss filing deadlines and did not promptly refund excess contributions, which they admitted, and they paid, and they paid the fines. My guest well, some of my guests will tell you campaigns are fined for doing that all the time. Sometimes there are clerical errors. Sometimes there are other reasons. That is not the same at all as creating a shell company or using a media company to pay hush money for affairs with a porn star and a playboy model during an election so that the public the voting public wouldn't find out. It is not the same at all. Come on. Don't be stupid. Don't think that people are stupid by pretending that this is equal and the same thing. It is not. Democrats who are about to take over key House investigative committees with subpoena power issuing warnings to the president. Listen.
[Rep. Jerrold Nadler,  New York:] They would be impeachable offenses. Whether they are important enough to justify impeachment is a different question, but certainly they'd be impeachable offenses.
[Rep. Adam Schiff,  California:] My takeaway is there's a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him, that he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time.
[Lemon:] So, after Robert Mueller and the New York prosecutors filed their sentencing documents on Friday, President Trump incredibly tweeted this message. "Totally clears the president. Thank you." I'll say that again. "Totally clears the president. Thank you." How he came to that conclusion is mind-boggling. The filings say nothing of the kind. And Mueller points out that Michael Cohen was working on the Trump Tower Moscow project well into June of 2016 and keeping Trump in the loop about it. When Trump basically had the GOP nomination in hand and the Russians were interfering in the election. But as usual, President Trump's deflecting, saying this at the White House on Saturday.
[Trump:] On the Mueller situation, we're very happy with what we are reading because there was no collusion whatsoever. There never has been. The last thing I want is help from Russia on a campaign.
[Lemon:] That is an interesting statement, especially in light of reporting that now shows at least 16 associates of Donald Trump had contact with Russians during the 2016 campaign and the transition period following Trump's election victory. Remember, Russia, if you have e-mails, send them out? Didn't need Russia's help, though. The walls are closing in, and we can expect Trump's tweets to get even more and even angrier and more unhinged. And if that's not enough, tonight a source is telling CNN that accused Russian spy Maria Butina is cooperating with federal prosecutors as part of a plea deal. A plea deal where she admits to spying in the U.S. for Russia. Max Boot is here. He's with me to talk about that in just a few minutes, OK? Also, tonight, though, the president has another immediate problem. He needs to find a new chief of staff and is said to be super pissed that's a quote because the person he wanted for the job, Vice President Pence's chief of staff, Nick Ayers, said no. The president didn't have a backup plan and is now starting the search from scratch, all over again. He wants someone in place soon, someone with political savvy. Word is from the White House is that the president, President Trump is becoming increasingly concerned about Democrats taking over the House come January with all their oversight and subpoena power at the ready. So, there is a whole lot to get to, but we begin with the news that accused Russian spy Maria Butina is cooperating with federal prosecutors as part of a plea deal. So, let's bring in Max Boot. He's the author of "The Corrosion of Conservatism, Why I Left the Right." Max, thank you so much. What kind of information could Butina provide to American investigators?
[Max Boot, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Well, it's very interesting, Don. I mean, this really seems like something out of a sequel to the Manchurian candidate, but this is fact, not fiction. And the reality is Robert Mueller has already indicted 25 Russians on charges of interfering in the U.S. election, but Maria Butina is the first one who is actually in U.S. custody and who is cooperating with American prosecutors. So, it's quite possible she could shed more light on what the Russians are up to, especially because she was quite close to Alexander Torshin, who was the deputy governor of the Russian central bank and somebody who was close to Putin and was somebody who was focused on infiltrating the NRA and through the NRA, Republican politics.
[Lemon:] I want to play this for you. This is a clip of Butina asking then-candidate Donald Trump, right, a question. It was at a campaign event in 2015. Here it is.
[Maria Butina, Accused Russian Spy:] I'm visiting from Russia.
[Trump:] Putin. Good friend of Obama, Putin.
[Butina:] My question-
[Trump:] He liked Obama a lot. Go ahead.
[Butina:] If you would be elected as president, what will be your foreign politics especially in the relationships with my country, and do you want to continue the politics of sanctions that are damaging both economy, or you have any other ideas?
[Trump:] OK. Obama gets along with nobody. The whole world hates us. I know Putin, and I'll tell you what. We get along with Putin. I believe I would get along very nicely with Putin, OK?
[Lemon:] So, she asks if sanctions will continue, which is pretty clearly a major foreign policy goal for Russia, right?
[Boot:] Right. Very bizarre situation where you wonder if that was a setup with her asking that question. But it just points to the fact that there was a massive Russian penetration of American politics and specifically of the Republican Party, and Maria Butina was part of that operation.
[Lemon:] We have to remember at the same time this was when they were trying to get at least Trump, his business-
[Boot:] Yes.
[Lemon:] the business part of what he does.
[Boot:] Yes.
[Lemon:] trying to get this tower in Moscow, this Trump Tower in Moscow.
[Boot:] That's right. I mean you kind of have to laugh at Donald Trump constantly protesting, no collusion, no collusion, no collusion, no smoking gun, et cetera, when you see more and more evidence of collusion, with the fact that there were at least 16 Trump aides who had contacts with the Russians, a total of almost 100 contacts that we know about. And some of them incredibly suspicious, things that if they had come out during the campaign could well have sunk the Trump campaign. I mean imagine if we had known that the Trump high command was meeting with Russians who were promising dirt on Hillary Clinton right before they actually started leaking dirt through WikiLeaks. I mean that is highly suggestive, and so is the fact that Trump and his aides have consistently lied about that and not just lied about it, but Donald Trump has also obstructed justice to stop the investigation of what happened. So, I mean you can't imagine a more nefarious or suggestive set of facts, Don.
[Lemon:] I want to read this and get your reaction to this. This is a letter by 44 Democratic and Republican, former senators in the Washington Post tonight, OK? And they write, Max, "whatever united or divided us, we did not veer from our unwavering and shared commitment to placing our country democracy and national interest above all else. At other critical moments in our history when constitutional crises have threatened our foundations, it has been the Senate that has stood in defense of our democracy. Today, is once again such a time." What are the former senators getting at here, you think? What would it look like for the Senate to stand up for the rule of law?
[Boot:] Well, for starters, they should pass the bill protecting Robert Mueller from being fired by Donald Trump. But I think more broadly, I think what we're seeing is evidence potentially of high crimes and misdemeanors for which the House would certainly be willing to impeach Donald Trump if they thought that there was any chance of removing him in the Senate. And so, the question becomes, will senators examine the evidence fairly and on the merits, or will the Republican senators put their partisan loyalty above their patriotism to the country? And clearly, these former senators, stress former, are telling their current colleagues, please put your patriotism and your devotion to the country over your faith to the Republican Party.
[Lemon:] Or to just-
[Boot:] Or Donald Trump.
[Lemon:] There you go. Thank you, Max Boot. Federal prosecutors for the first time implicating President Trump in possible criminal activity, campaign finance violations. How much legal jeopardy could he face? We're going to talk about that next.

[Cooper:] Reaction to yesterday's terror attack continuing from the White House today after letting loose with a string of tweets, including one slamming New York senior senator, Democrat Chuck Schumer. The president then proceeded to say this about the justice system in America.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We need quick justice and we need strong justice, much quicker and much stronger than we have right now, because what we have right now is a joke and it's a laughingstock. And no wonder so much of this stuff takes place.
[Cooper:] Saying a joke and a laughingstock. Later this afternoon, his press secretary said in short, he didn't say what you just heard him say. CNN's Jim Acosta asked her about it. He joins us now. So, the president had obviously the strong words on Twitter and on camera about the New York attack and the U.S. justice system. What more can you tell us?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] That's right. Contrast what the president said today, injecting politics into the aftermath of a terrorist attack, the one in New York City. Contrast what he did in Las Vegas, Anderson. You were out there, you remember in the days after that attack in Las Vegas, the president said, hang on a second. We can't politicize this tragedy. We can't talk about gun control right now. He did the exact opposite today. He seized on the issue of immigration and said we need to get rid of chain migration, which is when people come into the country, they can sometimes bring in their relatives, and also talked about getting away from this diversity lottery system, saying that it does not have the proper vetting and screening measures in place when in fact, that program does have screening and vetting measures in place. He also blamed that system, as you said, on the Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, despite the fact that that was signed into law as a program by former President George H.W. Bush. So, the president playing a lot of politics with terror today.
[Cooper:] And we just heard the president saying that the justice system in America is a joke and a laughingstock. Then, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders basically tried to clarify some of those comments or basically just flat out deny them.
[Acosta:] That's right. I tried to ask Sara Sanders during the briefing why did the president say that the U.S. justice system is a joke and a laughingstock. Here is what she had to say. She denied that the president said that. Here's how it went down. Why did the president call the U.S. justice system a joke and a laughingstock during his comments
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] That's not what he said.
[Acosta:] He said that the system of justice in this
[Sanders:] He said that process. He said the process has people calling us a joke and calling us a laughingstock. Look, I think as I told Margaret, he's simply pointing out his frustration of how long this process takes, how costly this process is and particularly for someone to be a known terrorist, that process shouldn't move faster. That's the point he's making, that's the frustration he has.
[Acosta:] Now, you heard Sarah Sanders there, Anderson, say that people are calling us a joke and a laughingstock, that's what the president was referring to.
[Cooper:] That's just not what he said.
[Acosta:] That's just not what he said. You go back to the quote: we need quick justice, we need strong justice, much quicker and much stronger than we have right now because what we have right now is a joke and a laughingstock.
[Cooper:] Let'me just play that. It's on video. Let's just play it.
[Acosta:] Perfect, yes.
[Trump:] We need quick justice and we need strong justice. Much quicker and much stronger than we have right now, because what we have right now is a joke and a laughingstock, and no wonder so much of this stuff takes place.
[Cooper:] Now, I mean, Sarah Huckabee Sanders knows what the president said. She just is pretending he said something else.
[Acosta:] She was pretending that he was saying something else, Anderson, and it's disappointing because we count on Sarah Sanders to sort of give us the straight scoop in the briefing room. That is just not what happened today, and that it goes straight to the credibility of those questions that we talked about when Sean Spicer was the White House press secretary. You can't have the White House press secretary come into the room as Sean Spicer did and say, it was the largest inauguration crowd in the history of the United States as Sean Spicer did. That is a kind of statement that shatters the credibility of a White House press secretary. And so, when you ask Sarah Sanders as we did today, why did the president call it a joke and a laughingstock, the U.S. justice system? For her to pretend that he said otherwise was just not playing straight with us, Anderson.
[Cooper:] Right. Especially, I mean, it is on video. It's one thing to lie about something that wasn't actually recorded and then, you know, it's easier, I guess. But when it's actually to say you believe what Sarah Huckabee Sanders just implies that everybody who doesn't is just an idiot because we heard what we heard. Anyway.
[Acosta:] Right. Yes, I was reaching for my cue tips, Anderson, to make sure that my hearing was OK.
[Cooper:] Yes. Jim Acosta, appreciate it. Thanks very much. Joining us now is former Obama White House ethics czar, Norman Eisen. Also, constitutional law scholar and George Washington University law professor, Jonathan Turley. Ambassador Eisen, what do you make of what, first of all, what the president said, not what Sarah Sanders said he said, but what he actually said?
[Norman Eisen, Former Obama White House Ethics Czar:] Well, Anderson, Jonathan and I were watching the stories of these precious individuals who perish at the hands of terror in New York City, and it was so striking to see that a number of them were foreigners who had come to the United States to visit from other places. What the president did today lying, dishonoring the Constitution, disdaining American justice by calling it a joke and a laughingstock, attacking due process by saying we need quicker, stronger results as if our American courts were not good enough. He dishonored their memory and he dishonored the United States. And he served that dishonor sandwich between two lies where he first smeared a senator falsely for the visa program and then he says at the end, Anderson, no wonder there's so much of this. Come on. The amount of time that the courts in the United States are not what is causing the terror. It was a disgraceful performance in an administration that has been full of them, perhaps a new low.
[Cooper:] Professor Turley, when the president also said today that America needs far greater punishment for terrorists, is it clear to you what that means and what it exactly far greater punishment would look like? I mean, the Boston marathon bomber, for example, is on death row.
[Jonathan Turley, Professor Of Law, George Washington University:] Right, I'm not too sure what it means, quite frankly. I've been lead counsel in terrorism cases in the United States. I refuse to take enemy combatant cases in Gitmo because of the due process limitations. I don't what the president was referring to, the penalties in terrorism cases are, as you've noted, extreme. And this idea takes too long. This man will never see a free day for the rest of his life. While these cases can stay in courts a long time, these people are in jail and in this case, a conviction is hardly going to be difficult. I mean, he left quite a trail. He seems eager to admit his guilty. So, I just don't know what the president was thinking of when he wants a faster system. But I think the danger of these comment is we can't bend to the thread of people like this. We can't give up our values. That's how you defeat al Qaeda is by remaining true to who you are. And we're defined by due process and it's expensive and it takes time. But it works. And the punishment, as you've noted, quite heavy.
[Cooper:] I mean, Ambassador, it sort of harkens back to the time the president was speaking to law enforcement officers and talk about, you know, don't be so gentle with them, don't put your hand on their head when you're putting them in the vehicle, which then law enforcement, you know, agencies put out statements and said to their officers, this is not how we handle you know, this is not how we deal with systems, not people who have even be convicted, but with suspects and people. It does seem like it's the kind of thing in a barge. One thing to say, you know, it's a joke. It's a laughingstock. It's another thing for the president of the United States to be saying this.
[Eisen:] Anderson, it's so true when our nation is attacked and lives are lost here. We look to the president for leadership, to help us heal, to help us respond with strength, but also to defend the Constitution, our founding documents, and the virtues that make America great, not to attack them. And, you know, it actually was very similar to what happened with those prior law enforcement comments because the president also said he might consider sending this gentleman to Guantanamo. Well, now, we're hearing reports that in fact the man by the president's own Justice Department is going to be charged as he should be in the U.S. justice system. So, you have a repudiation there by the president's own Justice Department. My heavens, the attorney general was sitting right across from President Trump. He should have stood up and walked out.
[Cooper:] Professor Turley, what do you say to those who are watching and say, look, this guy should go to Guantanamo, you know, put him away forever and never think about him again?
[Turley:] Well, I I think people have to think seriously about the implications of what they're suggesting. First of all, Guantanamo has been a colossal failure. There had been very few trials that have come out of that. It's been a rallying cry for extremists around the world. And in many ways, it really undermines our credibility both inside and outside the country. But I think the people also have to consider in the administration what this case would mean if the president changes its course and sends him to Guantanamo Bay. You know, the legal status of these trials in Guantanamo Bay has always been somewhat precarious. For an individual like this would be the worst possible case to test those principles. Bad cases can become bad law and they should think very seriously whether they really want a case of a lawful resident being sent to Guantanamo Bay to be the next case before the Supreme Court. That's not the case that I would bet on if I was on their side.
[Cooper:] Professor, is the record of trying terrorists in American courts better than the record of trying them through Guantanamo?
[Turley:] Yes, it's much better because they get tried. Most people at Guantanamo Bay were not tried. And I can tell you, as someone who's been lead on the defense side of these cases, the idea that they're mollycoddled or that they play fast and loose with the system is simply not true. The conviction rate among terrorism cases is one of the highest of any crime in the United States. It's very rare to have people acquitted in terrorism cases. But what they do get is a fair trial. And then when we impose the punishment, we impose it on our terms, not theirs. And they get a fair trial, the type they deny other people.
[Cooper:] Professor Turley, appreciate it. Norman Eisen, as well. Ambassador, thank you. Coming up, we keep learning more about the radical Islamist suspect in yesterday's attack, including why he specifically picked Halloween and what police found on his phones. The latest on that and his background in Uzbekistan.

[Church:] Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is celebrating the suppression of what officials call a rebellion. Authorities say there was an attack of the military base on Sunday and two people were killed. Mr. Maduro says government forces beat terrorism with bullets. Here's our Leyla Santiago in Caracas.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] The government is calling this a terrorist paramilitary style attack. They say they have several people in custody and they're actively searching for others. And we've even seen the stronger military presence on the streets. Now this revolt came shortly after a video was posted online by a group of uniformed men saying that this was a legitimate rebellion; that they wanted to reestablish constitutional order in Venezuela. According to the government, these were all civilians except for one person involved in this group. And the government also claims that this group was backed by outside influences, specifically naming Colombia and Miami. And this comes on the same day that the now ousted Attorney General Luisa Ortega-Diaz has spoken out yet again. She's been a very vocal critic of the government. Even though she once supported President Maduro, she is now saying that his actions are illegal, are not legitimate. And she claims that she is still the Attorney General of Venezuela despite who the new constituent assembly may have named as her replacement. Remember this new constituent assembly is very controversial. It is expected to rewrite the constitution and could give President Maduro extended powers. The new constituent assembly has already that it will establish a truth commission. One that the president said was put in place today and will move forward or risk getting to the bottom of the political unrest, the violence that has played out on the streets of Venezuela. But many in the opposition, the critics fear who that commission will target next. Leyla Santiago, CNN Caracas.
[Church:] A British model is now safely home in the United Kingdom following a terrifying ordeal. According to Italian police the 20- year-old woman was kidnapped when she went to a photo shoot in Milan. Authorities say she was to be sold for auction on the dark web. One man is in custody. Our Barbie Nadeau has the latest now from Rome.
[Barbie Nadeau, Cnn Contributor:] But we know that we are looking for at least one other suspect who was involved in the original drugging of this young woman before she was taken into this hiding place near the French border on the Italian side of the French border. The suspect that they have in custody is Polish. He has claimed to be part of the group called the Black Death Group. There was a letter in some of his belongings that the Italian police have released to us that indicated that they had to decided to release because she was the mother of a young child and that was against the so-called company policy in terms of selling sex slaves. This is according to this letter. The Italian police are investigating whether or not that group exists or whether or not that letter is obviously authentic or not. But let's take a listen to what the Italian police had to say about this particular aspect.
[Paolo Storari, Italian Prosecutor:] Analyzing his e-mails, we understand that this person was, or said that he was, part of a group called Black Death Group. Now whether this group exists or not, I quite frankly don't know. But there is a Europol report from 2015 that notes the existence of this group in the deep web, the hidden web.
[Nadeau:] Now, of course, that's all to be verified by the Italian police as they look into this. One of the big problems with cases like this is anything on the dark net or the so-called deep web these are all unindexed Web sites that aren't even available for standard browsers so it's very difficult for people to get to the sources of these Web sites. This particular man apparently told the model that he's made 15 million euro on the selling of women for sexual slavery on the deep web. Obviously that isn't confirmed either. But even just the allegation of that is very disturbing. Police are very, very concerned though that there may be other women like this young model who are being held captive and who are being sold for sexual slavery on the deep web.
[Church:] Very disturbing story there. Barbie Nadeau reporting. When the U.K. leaves the E.U., the freedom of movement between Britain and the rest of Europe will likely end. E.U. citizens working in Britain and their employers face an uncertain future. And the hospitality industry could be hit especially hard. Our Nina Dos Santos looks at how one London hotel is dealing with it.
[Nina Dos Santos, Cnn Correspondent:] In the heart of Westminster, the Georgian House Hotel is preparing for a new day. With 60 rooms to clean, it's a busy operation but one thing they can't prepare for is Brexit which could cost a small hotel like this more than half of its employees. Staff like Gabi from Romania in Britain just two years she may have to go when freedom of movements comes to an end in 2019. And with debts to pay back home and a daughter to support, she doesn't know how she'll manage. GABI CARDOS,
[Hotel Worker:] I am alone. I'm a single mother. When I came here three years I start my life all over again. And it's very hard and I don't know if I can do that again. I'm hoping that I don't need to leave.
[Dos Santos:] Keeping people like Gabi is one immediate concern. And recruiting more is another.
[Serana Von Der Heyde, Owner, Georgian House Hotel:] Already we have seen a change as far as it's become more difficult to recruit. Whereas before we would place an ad, soon we would have 50 applicants. We now get 10. So to get the kind of person that fits here we have to look longer and harder. And then during the day we have the bar here.
[Dos Santos:] With up to a quarter of the 4.5 million workers coming from the E.U., the U.K.'s hotels, restaurants and bars and particularly vulnerable to any changes in the labor force. It's estimated over 60,000 new staff will be needed for a year after Brexit, a shortfall hoteliers doubt Britons would want to cover.
[Von Der Heyde:] British kids are not interested in going to housekeeping. That's because they're interested in more glamorous areas of the industry.
[Dos Santos:] This hotel offers a microcosm of the challenges that the hospitality industry faces after Brexit, the sector which is the fourth largest employer in the U.K. and one which is uniquely dependent upon foreign tenants for its [inaudible] to grow. And though businesses have raised their worries with the government, confusion reigns.
[Vernon Hunte, British Hospitality Association:] It's crucial that the government avoids bringing in a change of circumstance after 2019 representing cliff's edge. It's crucial that across government, there is a joined approach to supporting our industry and those discussions will continue.
[Dos Santos:] In the meantime, people like Gabi and millions of others live in limbo, wondering if they'll have to check out for good in less than two years' time. Nina Dos Santos, CNN London.
[Church:] It's a welcome relief from relentless fighting. Coming up, an exclusive look at the calm inside one Syrian camp. We're back in a moment.

[Unidentified Male:] The Democrats don't want to give the president a win. They're that dug in. We're going to be here for a long time. Democrats should not give an inch. Donald Trump owns this.
[Unidentified Female:] Outgoing White House chief of staff John Kelly told "The Los Angeles Times" that this administration abandoned the idea of a concrete wall early in Trump's presidency.
[Unidentified Male:] We need to know what the president wants. We need some predictability.
[Kellyanne Conway, Counselor To Donald Trump:] The president does not these children to come on the perilous journey to begin with.
[Unidentified Male:] The buck stops at the top. At the end of the day you had two young children die in our custody. That should never have occurred.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. John is off. Erica Hill joins me on this New Year's Eve morning. Happy New Year's.
[Erica Hill, Cnn Anchor:] Happy new year.
[Camerota:] It's so exciting.
[Hill:] I know. It's, like, your favorite holiday. I had no idea.
[Camerota:] It is my favorite holiday. I am the one person on earth who does not think it's overrated. It's filled with so much promise of the new year.
[Hill:] It's true.
[Camerota:] And it's so poignant to "Auld Lang Syne." And you stay up past midnight. It's all so great.
[Hill:] That alone for you is huge. You're staying up past midnight.
[Camerota:] I know. Let's see if I make it. Seventeen hours and counting until the ball drops here in Times Square. We are now in day ten of the partial government shutdown, and there appears to be no deal in sight, though who knows what today will bring? President Trump is dug in on his demand for billions of dollars to fund his border wall. Sources tell CNN he's unwilling to compromise. He's privately told lawmakers that he will not agree to a deal with $1.3 billion for border security. Democrats are not budging either, and there is no indication that any progress will be made before they take control of the House on Thursday.
[Hill:] Meantime, in an extraordinary interview with "The L.A. Times," outgoing White House chief of staff John Kelly says the Trump administration abandoned the idea of a physical concrete wall along the southern border months ago. So then why is President Trump still touting a wall? And also, just what is Kelly referring to when he says his tenure as chief of staff is best measured by what President Trump didn't do? All this as the president adopts yet another line of attack, blaming Democrats for the death of two Guatemalan children who were in U.S. government custody at the time of their deaths. Mr. Trump claiming, without proof, the tragedies could have been prevented by the construction of his wall. We have it all covered. Let's begin with CNN's Boris Sanchez, who is live at the White House this morning. Boris, good morning.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, good morning, Erica. It is day ten of the government shutdown, and there is no breakthrough on the horizon, just more controversy. The outgoing chief of staff, John Kelly, not going out quietly, Kelly doing an interview with "The L.A. Times" in which he blasts the former attorney general, Jeff Sessions, suggesting that Sessions sprung his family separation policy on the administration unexpectedly, something that the administration denied at the time. Remember, they said there was no family separation policy. Kelly also attempted to redefine what the president means when he says a border wall with Mexico. Look at this quote that Kelly gave "The L.A. Times." It was published on Sunday. Quote, "To be honest, it's not a wall. The president still says "wall.'Oftentimes, frankly, he'll say 'barrier'or 'fencing." Now he's tended towards steel slats. But we left a solid, concrete wall early on in the administration." Let's not forget that just a few days ago, President Trump tweeted that the only solution to the immigration crisis was a good old- fashioned wall on the border with Mexico. We also heard from Senator Lindsey Graham this weekend, Graham having lunch with the president here at the White House. And he says he presented the president with a newishnot-so-new idea for how to end the shutdown. Listen to this.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] The president didn't commit, but I think he's very open-minded. I know there are some Democrats out there who would be willing to provide money for wallborder security if we could deal with the DACA population and TPS people. And hopefully, we can get some serious discussions started, maybe as soon as next week.
[Sanchez:] Let's not forget: Republicans and Democrats tried to strike a deal like this in the spring: $25 billion for border wall funding in exchange for legal status for DREAMers. That deal fell apart then. And it's unlikely that Democrats are going to pounce on it now, considering there is a court case involving the legal status of DREAMers moving through the courts right now, potentially likely to get to the Supreme Court. That may resolve that legal status of those DREAMers without any action from Congress. As you noted, there are still some 800,000 federal workers furloughed, or without pay. And the president potentially added insult to injury this weekend by freezing the federal pay of all workers or I should say the pay of all federal workers for 2019 Erica and Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK. Thank you very much for us for setting us up for all of that. Joining us now, we have CNN senior political reporter, Nia- Malika Henderson; Washington bureau chief for "The Daily Beast," Jackie Kucinich; and executive editor of the Sentinel Newspapers, Brian Karem. Brian, I'll start with you. You could be forgiven for being a little confused about exactly what President Trump is calling for with his wall, because even he seems to be having a hard time defining
[Brian Karem, Cnn Political Analyst:] Shock.
[Camerota:] what it is exactly that he wants. Let's remind people of the things that he has said about the so-called wall.
[Karem:] Well, he said
[Camerota:] Hold on. Hold that thought.
[Karem:] OK.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] We actually need 1,000, because we have natural barriers. It's going to be so big. It's going to be so powerful. It's going to be as beautiful as a wall can be. The wall, also called so that I give them a little bit of an out, steel slats. We don't use the word "wall" necessarily. It's not going to be open until we have a wall or fence or whatever they'd like to call it. So we're looking at between 500 and 550.
[Camerota:] OK. A 1,000-mile concrete wall.
[Karem:] Right.
[Camerota:] It was 32-feet high. That's where we started. Now he says he's giving "them" an out. Not sure who he's referring to. But it's
[Karem:] Himself.
[Camerota:] Himself, in the plural.
[Karem:] Yes.
[Camerota:] And now it's steel slats or a fence, and it's 500
[Karem:] Pipes with heads on them. I don't know.
[Camerota:] Five hundred miles.
[Karem:] Yes.
[Camerota:] So how how are Democrats to know what to negotiate with here?
[Karem:] How is anybody to know what to do? First of all, happy new year to all of you.
[Camerota:] And to you.
[Karem:] Let's start out that before we unpack this action-packed episode. Look, the president started out picking this up on the campaign trail. It was 1,900 miles long, and he was going to cede parts of the United States to build it, because I've got news for you: if you've ever been to the Big Bend area of Texas, you can't build a wall there. It's like the Grand Canyon. As recently as last week, I tried to get specifics on where the wall would be built. Like, for example, the say, 55 miles around Laredo, Texas? Well, what 55 miles? Where is it going to be placed? What is it going to be built there? How far back is it going to there's no specifics on this. This whole thing is very fluid. And as the Democrats pointed out, and has been pointed out time and again, he didn't spend the money last year in the budget that was allocated for border security, so why give him more? I think that he has not a clue as to where it's going to be or what it's going to be. The Democrats don't really know what he wants. And so you're left negotiating in quicksand. You're going to be back where you were at the beginning of all this mess before Ann Coulter shot her mouth off and, you know, hardened pharaoh's heart. He was going to compromise. Ten days ago on a Wednesday, he said, "Look, we have a compromise," he will sign a C.R. And he didn't sign that continuing resolution, because the base came out and hammered him on the fact that he didn't go after the wall. It is a pointless issue. It will not stop anything that it claims it will stop. And the cold-hearted nature of the president of the United States blaming Democrats for the death of those two children disgusts me on a level that I can't even it's hard to even talk about. I mean, he will blame Democrats for the death of two children with no evidence. And mind you, he said he'd own the shutdown. But here's the big thing: Why hasn't he come out and demanded some retribution or at least accountability from the Saudis on the death of Jamal Khashoggi? Here we have real evidence of someone causing someone's death, but he doesn't go after them. He goes after Democrats on a wall. And it's horrid. It's just a horrid issue all the way around. And it was an issue that was built, basically, around appealing to his base. And you're left in this quagmire
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Karem:] of trying to figure out what it is that will actually be built when everyone agrees, Democrats and Republicans on the Hill, that we need more money. We need to reinforce
[Camerota:] And border security.
[Karem:] the fencing. Right.
[Camerota:] Yes, I mean, that's the absurd thing about all this.
[Karem:] Right.
[Camerota:] There actually is a consensus, but you wouldn't know that from day ten of the government shutdown.
[Karem:] No, not from Trump.
[Hill:] No, you wouldn't. And what's fascinating is, yes, we'll see Democrats take control of the House later this week. We know that there's that issue that the president's going to have to deal with for the next two years. But when it comes to the Senate, there's still obviously a large number of Republican there, right? They're still a majority in the Senate. And the fact that even Republicans, Jackie, aren't sure where to go on this and don't want to speak out publicly, because the president so publicly burned them, that in and of itself, is a major issue moving forward.
[Jackie Kucinich, Cnn Political Analyst:] What this goes down to, it's basic. It's trust. There isn't trust between the Congress and the president on both sides of the political aisle, because as you said, Erica, they have been burned. Lindsey Graham coming out and saying that the president is interested in striking a deal having to do with DACA recipients and TPS recipients. Sure, I'm sure the president said that to Lindsey Graham. However, has Stephen Miller, one of the president's most hawkish immigration advisers, gotten to him yet? Because after he does, the president might not be there anymore. So when you look at the polling about a couple weeks ago before the government shutdown, a majority of people did not want to see the government shutdown. They wanted to see the president and the Congress compromise. Now when you break it down and you look at Democrats, independents and Republicans, Republicans don't want the president to compromise on this. They don't want him to to back down, and that's the numbers he's looking at. This is a president who is going to be increasingly political as he gets closer and closer to reelection. And we're just seeing the beginning of that now.
[Camerota:] Well, John Kelly reinforced this. He gave this extraordinary interview for two hours on the phone to "The Los Angeles Times." It was basically his exit interview. I guess he felt unencumbered, or whatever, unplugged, and was able to talk to "The L.A. Times." And he talked about the ever-evolving vision of the wall, and he said something surprising, which is that it's not a wall. It hasn't been for a long time. So here's what he said: "To be honest, it's not a wall. The president still says "wall.'Oftentimes, frankly, he'll say 'barrier'or 'fencing." Now he's tended towards steel slats. But we left a solid, concrete wall early on in the administration." And so Nia, I mean, what are we even arguing over? It's not a wall. Everybody wants border security. If the Democrats, I think, should seize on this, and say, "OK, we'll give you some money towards a towards border security. You're not going to call it a wall any more. You're not going to get concrete, and we're done."
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Yes, and in some ways you can see the president's aides out there backing off of the idea of a wall. He does keep calling it a wall, slats, whatever, but they are now talking about barriers. They are talking about border security. I don't think any of them that have been out there the last couple of days Mick Mulvaney, as well as Kellyanne Conway specifically said anything about a wall, certainly nothing at all about a concrete wall that's 900 miles long, which is where the president evolved to eventually, and apparently, he's somewhere else now. I think for the president, the president is going to have to figure out what he can sell to his base.
[Kucinich:] Exactly.
[Henderson:] He wants to apparently maybe go down to the wall at some point. He's got a very hawkish base on this issue. So what is he going to be able to sell as a win to his base?
[Karem:] That's it.
[Henderson:] And will they buy it? I think that's the question.
[Karem:] What he wants is a win. That's all he wants
[Henderson:] Yes.
[Karem:] is a win. He doesn't even care. That's the whole the whole this is so disingenuous. And nobody trusts him on either side. And I think Jackie pointed out, you know, who is he going to talk to? Has Stephen Miller weighed in? It's the Ann Coulters and the Sean Hannitys. I'm left back to where I was when, after Anonymous, you know, came out. Who's in charge in the White House?
[Camerota:] You know what? I'm
[Karem:] Who gets the last word?
[Camerota:] I'm literally texting Ann Coulter right now to see if she'll settle for a 500-mile 500-mile fence.
[Karem:] Yes. Yes. Let's call Ann up.
[Camerota:] Ann, I'm asking.
[Hill:] See if she knows, too, what the 115 miles the president was referring to last week. Have we figured out, by the way, what that was?
[Henderson:] Yes, that's right.
[Karem:] We don't know what it is.
[Henderson:] It's him making stuff up. I mean, he you know, in many ways this has always been a figment of his imagination.
[Karem:] Exactly.
[Henderson:] It's like there's going to be a concrete wall. Originally, Mexico was going to pay for it. And he's evolved since them.
[Karem:] Remember when it was going to be see-through, Nia, and it was going to be eco-friendly.
[Henderson:] That's right. There were solar panels, I think, at some point.
[Karem:] And then it was
[Kucinich:] And I think this is bottom line, this is why there's such a problem negotiating on this, because he keeps on moving the goal post or the metal slats, as they were, in this in this debate. And
[Karem:] It would be funny if it weren't so dag-gone serious. I mean, it's like a bad open-mic night. It's just horrid for
[Hill:] But also, as we're watching this, too, Jackie, we're seeing I mean, as we're talking about, "Oh, you know, we're moving the goal posts or the slats, or whatever they may be," and as we laughed, you're right
[Camerota:] The goal posts.
[Hill:] Right, goal posts, you know, things from people, I don't know at this point. We've seen so much. The beaded curtain, according to Nancy Pelosi.
[Karem:] Spikes with heads on them.
[Hill:] Spikes, exactly. But as you as you look at this, you know, Nia, you touched on a little bit how the messaging is changing. I think Kellyanne Conway made it very clear yesterday what the new messaging is, in trying to put it back on Democrats once again, which plays into the point of this has to be a win for the president, by saying, "But it's not about the wall, and everybody's trying to make it about the wall, and it isn't." I mean, Jackie, when you look at all of that, the messaging is very clear.
[Kucinich:] I think it is and it isn't. I think by inserting all of these things about border security and the wall and metal slats, I think they are muddying the waters quite a bit to give the president some room. But you're right in that, you know, blaming Democrats is the name of the game, be it, you know, the wall, the shutdown, even though the president himself said, "This is my shutdown." I was I was Googling around. It's funny. The Schumer shutdown actually was, when you Google "Schumer shutdown," on a lot of things from 2018, January of last year come up. So we're seeing a lot of this just replay itself.
[Karem:] Well, let's
[Kucinich:] And it's I can't imagine how frustrating it is for these federal workers who are currently on furlough
[Karem:] Right. There you go.
[Kucinich:] or working without pay watching this.
[Karem:] And let's be honest. When you mention Erica, you mentioned Kellyanne Conway, she has zero credibility. She's the one who gave us "alternative facts." OK?
[Camerota:] But she has insight. I mean, she does have insight into
[Karem:] She does have insight, but
[Camerota:] what the president is saying.
[Karem:] she just spins. She spins everything.
[Henderson:] Yes.
[Karem:] She is like the president in the fact that she will take words and speak them, but that doesn't mean that they have any relationship with reality. And then we will come back later and spin something else. They will spin this into a victory, no matter what goes down, even if we end up going back to the C.R. or something reasonably close, including DACA. That will be a victory, as far as the president goes and as far as Kellyanne goes.
[Camerota:] OK.
[Karem:] Facts do not matter when they speak.
[Camerota:] Thank you all. Great talking to you.
[Henderson:] Happy new year.
[Karem:] Always fun.
[Hill:] Happy new year.
[Henderson:] And to you.
[Hill:] Speaking of new year, it is already 2019 in Auckland, New Zealand, the first major city to welcome in the new year about an hour ago. And in case you missed it, here's a look and a listen. I think they are already enjoying the first few moments of 2019 there. Of course, here in New York City we are expecting, I believe, about a million people to pack Times Square tonight to ring in the new year. Security expected to be tight, as always. CNN's Miguel Marquez is live in Times Square with more. We should point out, too, Alisyn Camerota will be there tonight to help drop the ball, Miguel.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Alisyn Camerota is usually pressing everybody else's button. Tonight she gets to press the button
[Camerota:] Woo!
[Marquez:] to bring the ball down. That's so that's when the ball is going to come down. Daylight is starting to break. We can see those rain clouds that are going to be here later. But that pole at the very end of that building there, that's where it will come down. And yes, there will be security. They're expecting a million they're planning for up to 2 billion [SIC] revelers to be in this area, over a ton of confetti, and lots and lots of security. Hundreds of police and agents from over 50 different agencies, the local, state and federal levels. They're going to have bomb-sniffing dogs, magnetometers. The bomb squad will be here, as well. Police will embed themselves in hotels around the area. And those pens that they allow the revelers into, those open up at 11 a.m. in the morning. And it's a little like Hotel California, in that you can check in anytime you want, but if you have to leave you're out. You can't get back in, unless you have to wait in line again. So you better have your restroom strategy figured out before you go into those pens if you are going to be one of the few, the strong, the brave and with the serious bladders of steel there. One thing extra this year for security they will have is drones.
[John Miller, Nypd Deputy Commissioner Of Intelligence And Counterterrorism:] We will be deploying NYPD drones for overwatch. We haven't done that before, but that's going to give us a visual aid and the flexibility of being able to move a camera to a certain spot with great rapidity through a tremendous crowd.
[Marquez:] Now, those drones will actually be tethered to a building, so if there is a technical fault with them, they won't actually fall onto the crowd. Also, Alisyn, Erica, if you're going to be bring your drone out here and try to fly it over the crowd, there're going to have anti-drone technology that can bring those drones down somehow. They're not saying exactly how. The biggest issue this year may be the weather, not the cold as it often is here, but the rain. They're starting about 1 p.m. or so. It's supposed to start raining, and it is going to be soggy, soggy, soggy for much of the afternoon. So let's hope it clears up by the new year; and everybody goes nuts and all that confetti doesn't get stuck to people's faces in the weather.
[Camerota:] Great point. That would be unpleasant. But it's still just so exhilarating. It's such an exciting night. It just gives you goosebumps when you're down there. So I can't wait to be there. I'll tell you more about pressing the wall later in the program. Miguel, thank you very much. Now this story. There's this disturbing video from a detention center on the border, and it shows workers mistreating these migrant children. It's really upsetting when you see the video. We'll tell you what's being done about it.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor: 10:] 00 a.m. Eastern, top of the hour. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. So glad you're with us. Right now the senior FBI agent who sent anti-Trump text messages during the campaign is about to get grilled on Capitol Hill. Peter Strzok, you see him walking in right there moments ago, facing lawmakers behind closed doors just days after losing his security clearance and being escorted out of the FBI building. Strzok once worked on the Russia investigation and the Hillary Clinton e-mail probe. He sent anti-Trump text messages to a fellow agent, Lisa Page, who was also involved in those investigations, even a message suggesting that they would, quote, "stop Trump" from becoming president. This was all just days before the election. And after an internal review, the Department of Justice's inspector general said he could not conclude that Strzok's decisions were, quote, "free from bias." Manu Raju joins me on the Hill with more. This is significant. This is something the president has called to be held in public, though.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes. That's right, and we just talked to a number of lawmakers going in about whether or not this should be a public session including the chairman of the committee, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. I asked specifically, should this be a public session? And he said it will happen soon. I said before August recess, and he sort of shook his head, it sounds like it's possible this will happen eventually in public. You know, this is the first time that Peter Strzok has come before this before any committee in Congress in light of all the text messages that have been revealed both by the inspector general and through these various investigations, some that have revealed some anti-Trump sentiment between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the FBI attorney with whom he was send text messages. Democrats note the finding in that inspector general report that the ultimate outcome of the Clinton investigation was not influenced by the political bias. There's no evidence to show that political bias led to the decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton, but that same report sharply critical of Peter Strzok's conduct including questioning whether his decision to pursue the Russia investigation late in 2016 over re-opening the Clinton investigation was, quote, "free from bias." So expect all those matters to be asked to Peter Strzok today during what is expected to be a very lengthy closed-door interview. Peter Strzok would not answer questions coming in. But interestingly, also, Poppy, he is just the fifth witness to come before these two committees in which the Republicans announced this broad investigation last fall into what happened in 2016 by the FBI. And that's frustrated a lot of conservatives on this committee who believe its chairmen are not pushing hard enough on this issue. So we'll see if that changes today and we'll see if and when Peter Strzok eventually comes to a public setting after this closed-door interview that's starting momentarily Poppy.
[Harlow:] Yes. I mean, look, I know you'll try to get answers from him. We have not heard an ounce from him since all of it. I mean, no one has gotten an interview, said nothing. So we'll see what you can get. Manu, thanks for the reporting on the Hill. Let's discuss all this with our chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. Jeffrey, good morning to you. Let's just talk good morning, you've had a busy few days. I'm glad you're here. The implications it was kind of bizarre. He was subpoenaed, but then his lawyer has said he would appear voluntarily. What are the implications for someone who admits to sending these text messages and whom the inspector general has said cannot definitively say was completely free from bias?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Well, the risk when you're testifying in any circumstance is that in a criminal investigation the statements can be used against you. That's why people take the Fifth rather than testify. Strzok's statements seen highly inappropriate, it's hard for me to envision any context in which he could be criminally prosecuted for what he did. I don't see any reason, how he could be how, you know, his statements to Lisa Page could be seen as a crime. They were embarrassing. They potentially could lead to some sort of disciplinary action against him by the FBI. So I can see why he's not taking the Fifth because this is not really a criminal matter. It's deeply embarrassing for him. It's been embarrassing for the FBI and we'll see what explanation he comes up with if we get to hear either indirectly from the closed-door session or in a public session what his defense and his behavior is.
[Harlow:] Yes. Jeffrey, I'm glad you're here because we have breaking news out of the Supreme Court this morning. Final day they're handing down decisions. Let's go to our justice correspondent Jessica Schneider outside of the high court. What is this ruling on?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] This is essentially, Poppy, a major blow to the public unions. This law or this opinion specifically pertaining to an Illinois law. So the court saying today that this Illinois law that required all public sector employees to pay in with this fair share fee into unions, they're saying that that law essentially violates the free speech of these employees who did not want to pay in. This was a case that resulted from a man, Mark Janis. He said I don't want to pay into these fair share payments because essentially unions use these fees that I pay and I'm not a member, but they're using these fees for political speech even though they say they're only using it for collective bargaining or wage disputes. I don't want to pay in. What's interesting to note here is that there are 22 states throughout the country that have similar laws that require public sector employees to pay into unions even if they're not a union member. So this decision today really a blow to these public sector unions and this opinion has overturned a previous Supreme Court opinion, Abboud, in 1977 that said that these fair share fees were, in fact, appropriate. So the Supreme Court here overturning previous precedent from the 1970s and also saying to public unions, you cannot continue if these employees don't consent. You can't continue collecting fees from these non-member employees to your union and it could create real problems for these public unions, public sector unions who might not get these fees in the future and of course, that could dilute their power here Poppy.
[Harlow:] They won't get as many fees, I can tell you that, talking to union members across the Midwest about this issue. Thank you very much. Jeffrey Toobin, back to you. I mean, my reporting across the rust belt, so many union workers and folks that work in these factories have told me that they don't think it's fair that they have to pay in to these fees if they are not, you know, supportive of it or part of the union, et cetera, but they were mandated up until today. This is a First Amendment case. How significant is it at a time when we're already seeing the decline of unions in this country?
[Toobin:] Well, it's a real blow. This has been a long, long-running fight at the Supreme Court. The union's argument has always been, look, you as an employee of this company are the beneficiary of the contracts we negotiate. We are doing your bidding. You are obligated to pay in. That argument was rejected, but remember, Poppy, this is another 5-4 conservatives winning decision like
[Harlow:] Right.
[Toobin:] the travel ban case yesterday, like the abortion free speech case yesterday. Three opinions in two days, all of which illustrate how successful it was that Mitch McConnell would stop Barack Obama from appointing Merrick Garland and saved that seat from Donald Trump.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Toobin:] Many believe stole that seat from Donald Trump. Barack Obama had more than almost a year left in his presidency when Antonin Scalia died. That seat was held open. This seat it went to Neil Gorsuch and just in the past three days we have had three 5 to 4 decisions where the conservatives won which they almost certainly would not have won if Merrick Garland had been on the court.
[Harlow:] Well
[Toobin:] Just an enormously consequential difference in the Supreme Court because of Mitch McConnell's decision to keep that seat open during 2016.
[Harlow:] Again, no one can know how Merrick Garland would have ruled, but I can tell you this is why Mitch McConnell tweeted out that photo yesterday, right? Mitch McConnell shaking Gorsuch's hand and how consequential that all was. Jeffrey Toobin, thank you. I'm glad see, I'm glad you were here because we knew something important was going to come out.
[Toobin:] But wait a second.
[Harlow:] Yes?
[Toobin:] I mean, we still have to wait until the end of today's session at the Supreme Court
[Harlow:] Kennedy?
[Toobin:] Because Anthony Kennedy may retire.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Toobin:] Clarence Thomas could retire. I think those are the only two.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Toobin:] It's remotely likely, but it's not required, but there is a somewhat of a tradition at the Supreme Court when people retire they announced it on the last day of the term.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Toobin:] So as they say on television, stay tuned.
[Harlow:] Although I think Sandra Day O'Connor waited like five days. So you don't get to go anywhere for five days, OK, Jeffrey Toobin.
[Toobin:] OK.
[Harlow:] Thank you. Thank you very much. All right. Switching gears to a stunner, a political stunner overnight. Democratic newcomer, 28-year-old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ousting powerful 10-term congressman, Joe Crowley, in the New York primary, in the 14th. This as Republicans and President Trump back in their own winning streak. David Chalian, our political director, here with me to break it all down. What a night.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] It was stunning indeed. Let's take a look at some of these results. You said Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez, she is the big winner in that race against Joe Crowley. This is an earthquake inside the Democratic Party, no doubt about that, Poppy. This isn't just generational, which it is.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Chalian:] It has a racial component but it is also ideological, and Joe Crowley representing sort of the old establishment guard inside the Democratic Party with a new grassroots insurgency happening. Look at that, it wasn't just a squeaker of a win.
[Harlow:] No, it isn't.
[Chalian:] It was 57 percent to 42 percent. 15 points there.
[Harlow:] Wow.
[Chalian:] We should also note that Donald Trump had a pretty good night last night, too, in these results on Staten Island, in the 11th congressional district in New York. Dan Donovan, the incumbent, won big there against Michael Grimm. Trump came in and endorsed Donovan even though he voted against his tax cut plan because he thought Grimm, who just got out of prison, would be a not so great candidate for the fall.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] And if you also look in South Carolina, Henry McMaster, the governor of South Carolina, emerges he got 54 percent of the vote there nearly in South Carolina from the runoff. President Trump was just down there the other day campaigning for him. Vice President Pence over the weekend. McMaster was one of Trump's earliest supporters in 2016. In Utah, Mitt Romney, the 2012 nominee, emerges big with his win here and he's most likely in a very red state like Utah headed to the United States Senate.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] Everyone wonders, will he be sort of a conscience inside the Republican Party to take on Trump on certain
[Harlow:] He will.
[Chalian:] And he may be, but he also may, as he told Dana Bash, where he agrees with Trump's policies he's going to support it. And the progressive wing also in the Democratic Party got a win in Maryland last night. Ben Jealous.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] Former head of the NAACP. He won there by 10 points in a crowded Democratic primary field. He supported Bernie Sanders and worked for him in 2016. Sanders came in and was campaigning for him. This is another big win for a big job potentially if he wins in November from the Sanders' progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
[Harlow:] Such a fascinating night and let's hone in on that, what this means for Democrats and for progressives, and just looking at Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who was just on with me last hour. Made a lot of news she did in that interview.
[Chalian:] A lot.
[Harlow:] So let's pick through some of it because I just asked her, David, why did you win? Here's what she said.
[Alexandria Ocasio-cortez , New York Congressional Nominee:] We won because we organized. We won because I think we had a very clear winning message, and we took that message to doors that had never been knocked on before. We spoke to communities that had typically been, I think, dismissed and they responded.
[Harlow:] I mean, she is sending such a message there, David, to the Democratic Party. You are not doing enough.
[Chalian:] Yes. She's sending a message that there is a new generation here and she's also part of this year of the woman that we are seeing inside Democratic Party politics.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] Specifically so many women emerging through these nomination battles, these primaries, really fueling what may potentially be a big Democratic year come November. But you're right. She's also pushing the party to the left. It's not yes, organizing and knocking on doors that haven't been knocked on and trying to argue against complacency in Democrats.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] But also trying to bring it further to the left ideologically.
[Harlow:] There are some, though, and you've read this analysis this morning that argue that this is an anomaly, this is district-specific, this is because it's a safe blue district, she's a Latino, a 20 I can just tell, look at your face, you're skeptical, and I'm skeptical as well, because there is something happening here. There is something happening. When it comes to 2020 and the race for the White House, I asked her two or three times, give me the name of the Democrat that you think could beat Trump in the White House. I named, you know, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, she refused to put a name on it, meaning I read it as she's not confident in the prospects right now. Listen to her answer. All right. And the names that is top of mine for you when it comes to the Democrat you think should run against President Trump in 2020? I want one name. What is it?
[Ocasio-cortez:] Man, I do not have one right now. There are a lot of great ones.
[Harlow:] Problematic for the party?
[Chalian:] I'm not sure it's problematic. You know, competitive primaries are not necessarily a bad thing for any party, right? And it battle tests a lot of candidates and makes them battle ready for the general election. Clearly the Democratic Party is going through a process by which the establishment, the grassroots, the more moderate versus the liberal wing are going to duke this out and battle it out.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] And we know that the energy right now is on the sort of insurgent progressive side. And they're going to so I think the primary, it's not so problematic that she doesn't want to delve in and she just won her primary last night.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] But I do think it speaks to there is no clear frontrunner.
[Harlow:] Right. A few notable things I will just say, she did say she would push for Articles of Impeachment against the president if she was to make it to the House. A lot of Democrats warned against running on that. She is she said she would abolish ICE. And she
[Chalian:] Which Bernie Sanders doesn't even yes.
[Harlow:] Right. Which Bernie Sanders, a lot of Democrats don't take that stand. They want reform. And she also endorsed on the program Cynthia Nixon for governor of New York against current sitting governor Andrew Cuomo.
[Chalian:] Well, there's a similar kind of dynamic playing out.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] Cynthia Nixon clearly harnessing that energy, the resistance energy, the anti-Trump energy, the liberal progressive grassroots energy into this battle against an incumbent governor running yet again here in New York. So I don't know if Cynthia Nixon will have the same fate here come the September primary for that position in New York, but clearly, you could just see, Andrew Cuomo has moved a little to the left about this nomination even because he understands that challenge.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Chalian:] The other thing she told you was she's not ready to vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker.
[Harlow:] How could I forget that. I mean, that's huge because Crowley was the heir apparent to Nancy Pelosi's, you know, seat should they retake it.
[Chalian:] Right. So this Crowley defeat really does shake up what is the next leadership battle like for Democrats in the House. I will just say, we were talking about the year of the woman, it is hard to imagine if the Democrats win in November that the first female speaker is somehow going to be ousted by her own party to serve in that role again. But we'll see.
[Harlow:] Yes. Well, good point. David Chalian, glad you're here.
[Chalian:] Thanks, Poppy.
[Harlow:] Thank you very, very much. Still to come, a major legal setback for the Trump administration. A federal judge orders the U.S. to stop separating most families at the border and reunite all families that have been separated. Ahead, how the administration may fight back and minutes from now, we will hear from the district attorney who just charged an East Pittsburgh police officer in the shooting death of Antwon Rose. We're on it.

[Bolduan:] The Russia investigation back in the spotlight because of a lunch date. "The New York Times" reporting members of President Trump's legal team debating just how much to cooperate with Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller's investigation. How does "The New York Times" know this? Because of a lunch. A "Times" reporter snapped this photo of White House Attorney Ty Cobb and one of Trump's personal attorneys, John Dowd, casually and loudly according to the reporting discussing the Russia investigation at a popular D.C. restaurant. Outside nonetheless. CNN's justice correspondent, Jessica Schneider is here with more details on this. Jessica, what exactly were these two talking about?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, Kate, as you saw it can be a small town and two of the president's top lawyers discussed at that lunch very sensitive strategy about the Russia investigation, all at that sidewalk table at BLT Steak here in Washington, just a few blocks from the White House. As you said it was overheard by a "New York Times" reporter and the "New York Times" is reporting that White House counsel, Don McGahn, erupted at Ty Cobb for discussing the matter in public and saying Chief of Staff John Kelly reprimanded Cobb for the carelessness. So, the question, what exactly did White House lawyers, Cobb and John Dowd, talk about? Well, Kate, they aired their suspicion with the president's legal team and talked about a White House lawyer who they didn't name calling that person a, quote, "McGahn spy." Now it seems that Ty Cobb and Don McGahn, the White House counsel, are a bit at odds and Ty Cobb apparently says he wants to be transparent and turn over documents for the Russian probe but McGahn might not be of the same mindset. Saying that McGahn, quote, "has a couple of documents locked in a safe" and then Cobb blamed a colleague for some of the earlier leaks that we've seen throughout the past summer pointing to that same colleague trying to push Jared Kushner out. So, really, Kate, a lot said in open in public on a sidewalk and that's where you're seeing questions about what kind of executive or attorney client privilege the president might try to assert in this investigation. And Kate, what's key here is that the question was this public discussion on this sidewalk any sort of waiver of that attorney-client privilege because the White House attorneys discussing it all right there in clear earshot of that "New York Times" reporter Kate.
[Bolduan:] It might be a small town but that's right by where "The New York Times" Washington bureau is. It's not like it's
[Schneider:] Exactly. It's right underneath and just a few blocks from the White House.
[Bolduan:] It's not like some obscure restaurant that no one goes to. I mean, seriously. There's also this, I want to ask you about, President Trump's long-time personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, set to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee tomorrow for an interview. What are you hearing ahead of this?
[Schneider:] Right. So, Michael Cohen, long-time Trump associate and attorney will go behind closed doors tomorrow in a voluntary interview, sort of the same setup we saw with Donald Trump, Jr. just a few weeks ago when he went before a Senate Judiciary. So, what Senate investigators might want to talk to Michael Cohen about, well, his own disclosure he reached out to the Russian government at the height of the campaign all to discuss or maybe pitch a potential deal to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. Cohen did admit that he had three conversations with then Candidate Trump about the proposal, but then eventually abandoned the idea. But of course, Kate, you know, President Trump repeatedly stated out on the campaign trail, that he had no deals in Russia throughout the campaign. So, this could be a major point of inquiry for congressional investigators when they do talk face to face with Michael Cohen tomorrow Kate.
[Bolduan:] Absolutely. Great to see you, Jessica. Thank you so much. Be careful where you do lunch. So, there is that but also this, a search warrant issued and Facebook forced to respond, a spokesperson for the social media giant now confirming yesterday they handed over Russia linked ads and television about the accounts associated with them to Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller. What does this exactly mean for the Russia investigation right now? CNN senior reporter for media and politics, Dylan Byers, has all the details and also joining us Michael Zeldin, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor who worked with Bob Mueller at the Department of Justice. So, Dylan, what exactly do we know about what Facebook turned over and I guess even how much?
[Dylan Byers, Cnn Senior Reporter For Media And Politics:] Well, we know that Facebook turned over everything

[Joined In Progress Anna Coren, Cnn News Stream Show:] Hello, I'm Anna Coren in Hongkong. Welcome to "News Stream." Well, CNN goes inside western Mosul as only pockets of ISIS resistance remain in what was once the stronghold in Iraq. Donald Trump Jr., admits he met a Russian lawyer during the presidential campaign but his father knew nothing about it. And why refugees struggle to find acceptance in Japan which rejects almost every asylum application it gets. For three years, it was the largest ISIS stronghold in Iraq, but now it looks like Mosul is closer than ever to be being free from terrorist rule. The Iraqis prime minister walked through the city declaring victory but also saying pockets of resistance remain. Still the mood is celebratory for troops who have fought for months to reach this point. Mosul is Iraq's largest metropolis after Baghdad. CNN's Nick Payton Walsh is the only western journalist in the part of Mosul known as the old city. Intense fighting is still going on there and he was embedded with the Iraqi troops.
[Nick Payton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] About 100 yards until they hit the symbolic river that runs through the heart of Mosul. What was once the capital in Iraq of ISIS caliphate, now reduced to a tiny number of buildings simply and snipers picking up the tiny remnants of ISIS. Many of them have been emerging from the rubble seemingly wanting to give themselves up. Today's forces are led by Brigadier General Assadi from the Iraqi Special Forces, American trained, American equipment and we've seen ourselves from a vast amount of air strikes that have come in here to support this advance. Startling to see the rubble around us here, the devastation of this city, but they are so close to their final goal here. Talk of political announcements being made possibly from this particular area. But minute by minute, ISIS appear to be running out of ammunition, handing themselves in, fear is filled of potentially human shields trapped inside there. The occasional snipers rounds fired at them here but the territory is so small now and so they're here together and that is the point in which the declared their victory. Nick Paytn Walsh, about 100 yards from the Tigris River in the old city of Mosul, Iraq.
[Coren:] Well the fighting to retake Mosul has driven hundreds of thousands of people out of their homes. Many are living in displacement camps with the need for clean water, food and medicine. We have links on our website to organizations working on the ground. Just go to CNN.comimpact. Well some of the people fleeing conflict in the Middle East are seeking safety in Japan. Immigration is a controversial topic there. While the country donates billions of dollars to international refugee programs, it rejects almost every asylum application it gets. CNN's Will Ripley met Kurds living in limbo outside Tokyo.
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] A rare taste of Kurdish hospitality in Japan. This family of refugees welcomes us into their home their home at least for now. About 2,000 ethnic Kurds live in Japan most seeking refuge from sectarian violence. This family fled the Turkish-Syrian border more than a decade ago. They've learned Japanese, local customs and live quietly in a small Kurdish enclave north of Tokyo. But they don't have a permanent home. Japan can deport them at any time because of a strict policy that only gives refugee status to a select few and leaves everyone else in limbo. Misut Gul has been living temporarily in Japan for 11 years. He re- applies at the immigration bureau every two months. When he tried to re- apply in December, something he's done more than 60 times, immigration workers told him he was being deported. His requests for refugee status finally denied. Locked in detention for five months, Gul became seriously ill. Officers took him to the hospital in shackles. It sounds to me like you're describing a prison. Did you feel like you were in prison? Yes, it is he says. I was living faithfully and honestly, following Japanese laws. I believe I'd be accepted but I ended up being detained. Gul is appealing his deportation order. He says even this life is better than what he'd faced back home. Japan's justice ministry says nearly 11,000 people applied for asylum last year, a record. The immigration bureau accepted just 28 refugees. The government tells CNN people abuse the system that many seeking refugee status are actually economic migrants and that Japan is the world's third largest economy already donates billions of dollars to refugee programs. But this homogenous insular society is fiercely reluctant to take in migrants. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says Japan needs to focus on restarting its economy before considering changes to its refugee policy. Is Japan's immigration system designed to grind people down to make them want to leave? "From my 35 years of experience in immigration, I would say Japan wants to send them back," says Hidenori Sakanaka The former head of Tokyo's immigration bureau is trying to change the system. "The time has come for us to accept more refugee and immigrants," he says. Not one Turkish Kurd has ever been granted refugee status in Japan. Instead, they get temporary permits, renewed every few months. Many cannot work legally, don't qualify for health care and can't even leave their city without permission What's it like to live without residency here?
[Unidentified Male:] This means you are not officially not exist in here.
[Ripley:] You just don't exist.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, that is the main problem.
[Ripley:] A constant state of uncertainty even for students like the 19- year-old Ramazan Durzon. His parents brought him here as a child. "I dream about having a future in Japan," he says. "But If I am deported, everything I learned, everything I built here will disappear." In Japan, he and other refugees find safe harbor but no home. Their lives, their futures in limbo. Will Ripley, CNN, Kawaguchi, Japan.
[Coren:] We're shifting now to an admission by the eldest son of U.S. president Donald Trump. He says he met with a Russian lawyer after being promised information about Hillary Clinton and that individuals connected to Russia were funding her Democratic National Committee. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux has the details.
[Suzanne Malveaux, Cnn Correspondent:] The "New York Times" reporting that Donald Trump Jr. was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with a Russian lawyer with ties to the Kremlin at Trump Tower on June 9th, two weeks before his father became the Republican nominee. Trump Jr. admitting on a statement that potentially helpful information was a pretext for the meeting, but insisting that nothing meaningful was provided, noting the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee an supporting Ms. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. The president's son insisting that his father knew nothing about the meeting. A statement reiterated by Trump's legal team.
[Reince Priebus, White House Chief Of Staff:] It was a nothing meeting.
[Malveaux:] In Donald Jr.'s initial statement released Saturday, he gave a different explanation for the meeting, explaining that they primarly discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children and making no mention of Hillary Clinton. Both statements noting that the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner and then campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, were also in attendance.
[Rep. Adam Schiff , California:] I think we're going to want to question everyone that was at the meeting about what was discussed.
[Malveaux:] This is as President Trump is facing scrutiny over his response to Russia's election hacks after meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump walking back a tweet about forming an impenetrable cyber security unit with Russia to guard against the threat.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] I am sure that Vladimir Putin could be of an enormous assistance in that effort since he's doing the hacking.
[Malveaux:] Facing backlash, President Trump reversing course 12 hours later, tweeting, "the fact that President Putin and I discussed a cyber unit doesn't mean I think it can happen. It can't but a ceasefire can and did."
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] It's not the dumbest idea I've ever heard but it's pretty close.
[Malveaux:] President Trump insisting on Sunday that he strongly pressed President Putin about Russian meddling during Friday's meeting. But not indicating if he accepted Putin's vehement denial, saying only, "I've already given my opinion."
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I think it was Russia but I think it was probably other people and to our countries and I see nothing wrong with that statement. Nobody really knows.
[Malbveaux:] This is after the Russian foreign minister said Friday that President Trump heard and accepts Putin's denial, a claim that president's aides denied on Sunday after initially declining to answer questions about the matter during a gaggle aboard Air Force One.
[Priebus:] The president absolutely did not believe the denial of President Putin.
[Coren:] Well now Suzanne Malveaux now joins us from the White House, and Suzanne obviously a lot to discuss. Let's start with Donald Trump Jr. changing his story over the weekend, that's why he met with this Russian lawyer, how is this going down Washington D.C.?
[Malveaux:] Well, Anna, there is a lot of criticisms and a lot of skepticisms about this, that the fact that the story had change or at least the emphasis behind that meeting, that story changing just within a day or so. We have heard from numerous lawmakers, Democrats and some Republicans who are really wondering whether or not this damages in fact the president's credibility and his team's credibility when it comes to whether or not there was close associations or ties with these Russian officials and what was behind it. We have heard from the Democrat who is the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, saying that he wants to talk to all of those people who were in that meeting with that particular Russian lawyer. So don't be surprised if we do see some formal request going to those members. We'll see if that actually happens or not, but there is a lot of curiosity about this. Also, the White House hitting back very hard this morning, Kellyanne Conway an adviser, close adviser to the president, saying a couple of things. First of all, pleading ignorance saying that Don Jr. didn't even know the name of this woman, this female lawyer who he was meeting with prior. Secondly, making the point that the White House or at least not the White House but Don Jr. has made it right and that they have added to the disclosure forms these statements that they fill out, adding these additional conversations that they've had with this particular Russian lawyers so that that box has been checked so to speak. And then finally, she's down playing this, this morning, saying look, there is no real significance coming out of these meetings, nothing that really happened. No information that was useful to them that rather that this was something that came up in the beginning of the conversation, quickly turn to the issue of Russian adoption and going on to say look, we have all these different kinds of meetings and some of them are not fruitful or helpful. So, that is the line that the White House is taking this morning and trying to explain this. But there are still a lot of questions and it really does go to the heart of some of those federal investigation just how close were the Trump's team to some of these Russian officials or Russian actors if you will and just how willing were they to cooperate with them, potentially collude with them to benefit Donald Trump.
[Coren:] Yes, questions investigators will no doubt be looking into. Suzanne Malveaux, good to see you. Thank you for that. Well for the Russia perspective on the story, let's turn to our Matthew Chance in Moscow. Matthew, tell us, what is the reaction to these latest scandal involving Russians and the Trump camp.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, in terms of this meeting in Trump Tower with Donald Trump, Jr., the Russians are trying to distance themselves from it as much as possible. We spoke to the Kremlin's spokesperson earlier on today within the last hour and we said, look, was this woman, this lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, was she sent by the Kremlin to advocate the repeal of the Magnistky Act, which was the act which was imposed by the United States to punish people involved in a massive tax fraud here. And Dmitry Peskov who's the spokesperson for the Kremlin said, look, we don't even know who this person is. We certainly didn't send her and we can't monitor the meeting that Russian lawyers have both in Russia and abroad. And so the Kremlin is trying as much as they can to distance themselves from this. And so that's the situation here and again, the Russians dismissing these continuing allegations of collusions as absurd and as nonsense, Anna.
[Coren:] Well, the Russians trying to distance themselves and is this lawyer. She told the "New York Times" the she wasn't there doing business on behalf of the Kremlin and yet she has very close ties to the Kremlin. What more do we know about her?
[Chance:] She certainly has close ties to companies that do big business in this country and in fact she's been the lawyer for a company that has been based in Cypress, a Russian company that's based in Cypress that's been implicated in trying to launder the proceeds of the Magnitsky fraud $230 million were allegedly taken as part of that fraud by corrupt Russian officials. And this company she represented was trying allegedly to launder it. So, it may be in that capacity that she went to New York and lobbied for the repeal of this law because it would have affected her clients directly rather than the Kremlin. It just happens that her client and the Kremlin have a similar aim and a similar interest in this act being lifted. But certainly, she's been linked she's a high profile lawyer here in Russia and she's been linked with repeated attacks on this Magnitsky Act and she's become quite a prominent advocate for the repeal, for the drive to repeal the act by the United States.
[Coren:] Matthew Chance in Moscow, we appreciate the insight. Thank you. Meanwhile, the top U.S. diplomat heads to Kuwait to play peacemaker in Qatar's dispute with its neighbors. Rex Tillerson stopped in Istanbul to meet the Turkish president who has criticized the isolation. Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called the move a death sentence on Qatar. And there's another conflict on Tillerson's agenda. Violence in eastern Ukraine. He met with Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko in Kiev and said Russia must do more to aid the fighting. The latest twist in the case of a terminally ill infant as the British high court is set to hear that a new medical option that could prolong his life. Stay with us. And it's the competition before the competition. Paris and Los Angeles are making their final Olympic bids. Paris lost to London in 2012, but can it prove that it has what it takes to host in 2024. That's ahead. A beautiful evening here in Hong Kong as we look out over Victoria Harbor. Welcome back to "News Stream." Well a huge fire broke out over night in London's popular tourist attraction Camden Market. Emergency services say they have put out the flames but a crew remains on the scene to make sure it doesn't reignite. Phil Black has more.
[Phil Black, Cnn Correspondent:] Authorities said the emergency calls started coming in around midnight local time, and there were lots of them because the fire was so visible across a wide area. Images and videos posted to social media give a sense of just how dramatic it looked on the nighttime London skylight. The authorities responded with some force around 70 firefighters, 10 fire engines. They battled the fire for about three hours before declaring that it was out and then working through the morning to ensure there were no issues with any of the smoldering ruins and showing there was no risk the fire could take hold once again. Crucially, there were no reported injuries as a result of this fire. Camden Market is without a doubt one of London's best known market areas. It's very busy during the day but at that time of the night, there would have been very few people around. The human cost here will be in the businesses and livelihood that are affected as a result of the damage that has been caused. There was another large fire, bigger than this, in this same area back in 2008. It took many months for the businesses in this area to recover from the fire on that occasion. The authorities here say it's too early to know precisely what the cause of this fire was. Phil Black. CNN, London.
[Coren:] Well, Paris wants to host the Olympics and in 2024 it may have a chance if it conveys its only competitor, Los Angeles. Well the city has been spending tens of millions of dollars on elaborate shows and promotional events to convince the International Olympic Committee that Paris has the infrastructure, finances and enthusiasm to host the games. Just today, both committees will make their final bid of presentations. Well the French president Emmanuel Macron is throwing his weight behind the Paris bid. Melissa Bell is in Paris with much more, and Melissa, what are Paris' chances of winning the bid?
[Melissa Bell, Cnn Paris Correspondent:] They're actually looking pretty strong, Anna. Of course, we're going to have to wait not just until tomorrow. This will be a crucial phase happening in
[Coren:] Melissa, it has been 100 years since Paris hosted the games so, it seems likely or timely I should say that it goes to them. But, I have to say security must be an issue that perhaps could hamper the bid.
[Bell:] Clearly security will be an issue in France and it could remain in a state of emergency for the time being, will be until autumn. So there are particular set of security concerns that will have to be considered certainly. One of the facts that you mentioned a moment ago, Anna, was enthusiasm. That's one of the crucial things that perhaps give the lady advantage. More people in L.A. backed the L.A. bid that do
[Coren:] Melissa Bell, joining us from Paris. Thank you. Well the British High Court's will hear a new evidence today in the case of the terminally ill infant Charlie Gard. His parents are seeking permission to take their son to the United States for medical care. It comes after a group of doctors say there is an experimental treatment that might help prolong the Charlie's life. Erin McLaughlin joins us from outside the High Court in London. Tell us, the family had exhausted all legal avenues in the U.K. but then late last week, the Great Ormond Street Hospital asked England's High Court to review the case, why the change in heart?
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the hospital says that there has been a claim of new evidence put forward by two international hospitals not saying the nature of the evidence put forward or the hospitals involved, but clearly they're thinking that this claim is significant enough to want the high court to weigh in on this matter. At the same time though, the hospital is saying that it is not changing its views on this case and a statement that it put out saying, "our doctors have explored every medical treatment including experimental nucleoside therapies. Independent medical experts agreed with our clinical team that this treatment would be unjustified. Not only that, but they and it would be futile and would prolong Charlie's suffering... our view has not changed. We believe it is right to seek the High Court's view in light of the claimed new evidence." And its preliminary hearing that we expect to begin here at the Royal Courts of Justice in some 30 minutes time really comes as the hospital is under increasing international pressure even thought really it's not up to the hospital to decide this case. At this point, this is a legal matter. Nevertheless, over the weekend, the parents of Charlie Gard delivered a petition signed by over 350,000 people calling for Charlie to be able to travel to the United States for treatments. Take a listen to what Charlie Gard's mother had to say.
[Connie Yates, Charlie Gard's Mother:] He's our son. He's our flesh and blood. We feel that we have the right as parents to decide to give him a chance of life. For medication, it's just all medicine, no known negative side effects, you know, there is nothing to lose. He deserves the chance. [END VIDEO CLIP]
[Bell:] And Charlie Gard's parents have received support and help from outside organizations especially coming from the United States. A pro-life organization has helped the family organized that petition that delivered over the weekend. Also U.S. lawmakers weighing in, two Republicans expected to propose legislation that will grant Charlie Gard and his family permanent residency status inside the U.S. Although British legal experts tell me that that would have absolutely no bearing on this case but it does give you the sense, Anna, of the kind of international interests we are seeing and what happens to this baby.
[Coren:] Absolute worldwide attention on this case and we can only try and imagine what those parents must be going through. Erin McLaughlin, joining us from London. Thank you for the update. Still ahead on "News Stream," President Trump's eldest son admits to meeting a Russian lawyer to get information on Hillary Clinton. We'll hear from members of both presidential campaigns. That's after the break.

[Unidentified Male:] We're engaged in an epic battle. It looks like voters will have a real choice.
[Unidentified Female:] If there really was going to be an enormous blue wave, a lot of people did expect it to happen in California.
[Unidentified Male:] It was a good night for Democrats. The likelihood is they will not get locked out of any targeted seats.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] We always proudly stand for the national anthem.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] The president plans on making the NFL and patriotism an issue throughout the 2018 midterm campaign.
[Lebron James, Professional Basketball Player, Cleveland Cavaliers:] It's typical of him. No one wants an invite anyways.
[Bill Clinton, Former President Of The United States:] It looked like I was saying I didn't apologize. And I was mad at me.
[Unidentified Male:] I would have wanted him to say, "I'm never going to stop apologizing," and then be that great example. You are not going to see him campaigning at the level we have seen him do in previous election cycles.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] We will be getting to the developments on all of those stories, none of which are going away.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] A lot of bloodshot eyes in California. And this time it's because of the election. Right?
[Camerota:] Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Wednesday, June 6, 6 a.m. here in New York. And we do begin with breaking primary news. Democrats appear to have averted sudden death in the most consequential primaries of the season thus far. The votes are still being counted. It is very early in California. But Democrats appear confident that they will have candidates in every competitive congressional district as they try to recapture the House in November. California has this so-called "jungle primary," where the top two vote getters, regardless of their party, advance to a run-off in November.
[Berman:] It could take days to know exactly which Democrats will face off against the Republican nominees in the House district. But still, the Democrats are singing "California Dreaming," "Going to California, "Hotel California." You pick the song, they're singing it. Republicans are kind of humming a little bit, too, this morning. They avoided a shutout in the state's governor's race. Businessman John Cox, who was backed by President Trump, he came in second, so he will challenge the Democratic lieutenant governor, Gavin Newsom this fall. All kinds of races to cover for you this morning on this huge election morn. Let's begin with CNN's Miguel Marquez, live in Los Angeles with the latest results Miguel.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] The real song, John, here is "Who is No. 2? It's all about the No. 2 in this sort of weird "jungle primary" that California has. As you said, Republicans were very concerned they were going to have nobody at the top of the ticket across the state. Now they have the possibility for two. The John Cox, the business man, will face Gavin Newsom, former San Francisco mayor, for the governorship. And in the Senate race, Dianne Feinstein, it's not clear who she will face, whether it will be somebody from her left, Kevin de Leon, or Jim Bradley, a businessman from Orange County. The other concern that Democrats here had, they were targeting ten different districts of Republican, trying to flip those seats. Seven of them are seats where where Republicans where Hillary Clinton won those districts. They were concerned they were going to get locked out of one, two, possibly three. It looks like, in all of those districts, that Democrats will be No. 2 in all of them. There are two that are still somewhat of a question. Number District 10, Jeff Denham, the Republican, will face either Josh Harder or Ted Howze. And in the 48th, there are two Democrats and a Republican vying for that No. 2 spot. All of this could take some time to figure out, because in one case, 188,000 were left off the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, so they had to fill out paper ballots. Those had to be counted. And mail-in ballots. People could walk up on election day and even mail them in on election day. Those will take time to count. So we may see this a couple of these races that may be days, if not weeks, before we know the final answer. Back to you guys.
[Berman:] All right. Miguel Marquez, in Los Angeles. We were discussing if "Who is No. 2" was actually a song. We'll wait for Miguel to come back to us and sing a few bars of that.
[Camerota:] And sing some of that, yes.
[Berman:] Let's bring in CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein and CNN political analyst John Avlon. And Ron, I want to start with you. You live in California. Democrats are going to hate what I'm about to say. But deep down inside, they know it's true. The headline this morning is "Democrats didn't blow it," though they came awfully close.
[Ron Brownstein, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] No, it was a good night overall for Democrats across the country. I mean, you go from east to west. I mean, they got the candidates they wanted in New Jersey, every race, which has the potential to flip as many as four seats. They had record turnout in Iowa. And then in California, as you say, they averted disaster in this top two primary system, which isn't really accurately called a primary at all. It's this kind of very chaotic hybrid between a primary and a general election. And there was a real risk in as many as three seats that Hillary Clinton carried in Orange County, which had been reliably Republicans for decades, where Ronald Reagan got his start but which voted for Clinton in 2016, the first Democrat to carry it in 80 years. It was a real risk in three districts there that Democrats would have been shut out. Instead, it certainly appears they're going to be on the ballot in all of those is and all of the others. And you know, the Democratic congressional campaign committee gets a lot of grief from party activists for when it does intervene and when it doesn't intervene. But in this cases, they threw the kitchen sink at trying to avoid disaster, and it appears they did it. By the way, they got the candidates they wanted in those seats.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes. Yes. But Ron
[Brownstein:] So you're set up for some very competitive races in the fall.
[Avlon:] Ron, I think there's a lot been a lot of angst on the part of party activists about the top two primary.
[Brownstein:] Right.
[Avlon:] The reality is, you do have representative turnouts. You've got a Republican in the second seat second place running against Newsom. John Cox, significant in that sense. You'll have competitive general election races. And what's most significant, the reason the top two is actually a representative result, even though it makes party operatives anxious, is that independent voters now are the second largest registered party in California.
[Brownstein:] Yes.
[Avlon:] Ahead of Republicans. They got to participate this time around. So that's a good thing. You've got high enthusiasm, a turnout
[Brownstein:] That's right.
[Avlon:] A lot of competitive general races across the country. And I agree with Ron, though, that fundamentally, it looks like Democrats have gotten a lot of the candidates they want in these open and swing seats.
[Brownstein:] Not to
[Camerota:] Is the jungle primary unique, Ron, just to California?
[Brownstein:] Yes.
[Camerota:] Because it's this, like, you know, sort of death match, and people were thinking that it could have gone really differently. It's just an election. It could have gone really differently. Does California only do this?
[Brownstein:] Washington does it, too, as I understand it. It's not exactly by the way, it's not correct to call it a jungle primary, because a jungle primary technically is if anybody gets to 50 percent in the primary, that election is over. California really is a top two. And I don't even like calling it a primary, because it has it can have the consequence of a general election. And there's a big debate. First of all, turnout was not high. It has been dropping in California. And then and then second point, independent voters did not participate, at least in the mail-in, in big numbers. I mean, the question of the top two primary is, you can end up in a situation, as I think in the end you probably will, for example, in the Senate race two times in a row where millions of people in the state who are Republicans will not have anyone to vote for, you know, who reflects their views in a general election. I mean, the question is whether there are ways to bring open, allow independents to participate. Because as John notes, they are now the second biggest category in California. Are there ways to allow them to participate without having the potential of a quarter of the voters, potentially, deciding the general election for which party will hold House seats or the Senate seat. That just seems to there's a lot of anxiety in California.
[Berman:] Let the record show Ron Brownstein just said the jungle primary in California, neither a jungle nor a primary. So
[Brownstein:] Neither one. Neither one.
[Berman:] So misnomer. Guys, if we can cycle through, I just want to see the boards right now for the three most closely watched races. It was 39, 49 and 48. That was Ed Royce's seat. He's retired. Dana Rohrabacher's seat, he's running for reelection, facing you know, all kinds of questions about his feelings toward Russia. And then California 49 is generalized. And this is 39. This is the Ed Royce seat. You can see you know, look, you do the math there. It's about evenly split. But clearly, a Democrat, at this point, it looks like will go through. And then we also have 48 and 49. I'm not going to talk about those, but we can show people how close it is in what's going on there. And again, the reason this matters as much as it does and Miguel Marquez mentioned it, seven districts in California that Hillary Clinton, she won that congressional district but currently a Republican serves as the member of the House. Democrats need 23 nationally to take over the House. If they could get those seven districts in California, that gets them a lot of the way there. And this morning, as we all wake up, they're no worse off than they were yesterday in that quest.
[Avlon:] But I think, actually, significantly better. I mean, Hillary Clinton doing as well as she did in conservative Orange County was extraordinary, historically. But now, all these seats are incredibly in play. The states have become more polarized, particularly California. And so these safe Republican seats that were drawn to be safe, and have historically been Republican, no longer a sure thing for Republicans. If they can pick off these seven seats, they are almost a third of the way to the number they need to hit. And as Ron noted earlier, New Jersey, also really significant in terms of the candidates Democrats got and Republican seats that have been trending left that could be very much in play.
[Camerota:] Go ahead, Ron.
[Brownstein:] Two points real two points. First, as I said, Hillary Clinton was the first Democrat to win Orange County since Franklin Roosevelt in 1936. And she did it, because the county is being reshaped by the two same forces that are making other suburban areas around the major metros more Democratic. It's growing more diverse. It is no longer majority white. And white-collar whites are voting more Democratic. So those forces are real. On the other hand, as the people who study California elections will tell you, she is the only Democrat to carry any of these congressional races in any statewide race in the last several years. So it's it is still a challenge. But they got the Democrats got the candidates, strong candidates in all three of those. And that could be a big part. Not only New York and not only California and New Jersey; Illinois, New York, Minnesota, Pennsylvania. A lot of the ground Democrats have to cover can be won in blue states in November.
[Camerota:] OK. We'll have much more dissection as the results as they come in and throughout the morning. Thank you both very much. So President Trump celebrated without the Philadelphia Eagles and then escalated his feud with the NFL. Why this controversy is not going away any time soon.
[Berman:] Without the Eagles and without all the words to "God Bless America."
[Camerota:] That's true, that's true, as well. So we'll sing them. We'll see.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] ... reckoning. It will be decided by the people of Alabama and what those voters do when they go to the polls in just a few hours. Will they put politics ahead of principle? Will they vote for Roy Moore, the candidate who's accused of child molestation and sexual abuse of teenagers? The man who said America was last great under slavery?
[Roy Moore,  Senate Candidate:] I think it was great at the time when families were united, even though we had slavery, they cared for one another. People were strong in the families. Our families were strong. Our country had a direction.
[Lemon:] So this is a man who once said getting rid of all of the amendments after the 10th would these are his words "eliminate many problems." It would also eliminate, by the way, the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery. And the 19th, which gave women the right to vote. And there is a lot at stake tomorrow for women. Roy Moore faces multiple accusations that he pursued relationships with teenagers. And that he molested a 14-year-old and sexually assaulted a 16-year-old when he was in his 30s. Moore has denied all the allegations. And Alabama's voters, men and women alike, will have to decide if they believe him. But one man who apparently does believe Moore is President Trump, who is openly endorsing, and let's be real, campaigning for Roy Moore, even if he did it just across a state line, he still campaigned for him and also doing robo calls. The president faces his own accusations from at least 15 women ranging from sexual harassment and sexual assault to lewd behavior. One of those 15 women is Jessica Leeds, and she says Trump once groped her on a plane. She 2spoke out today.
[Jessica Leeds, Trump Accuser:] He grabbed me and he was trying to kiss me and everything. And as I recall, he didn't say anything and I certainly didn't say anything. I didn't yell or ask for help. I remember at one point looking over at the guy sitting in the across the aisle and thinking, well, why doesn't he come to my aid? I wondered where in hell the stewardess was. But it's when he started to put his hand up my skirt. And that was the last time I wore a skirt traveling.
[Lemon:] There's a lot at stake here. A lot at stake on Alabama's Election Day for people of color. Not just because of Roy Moore's disgusting comments about slavery or because of his reference to Native Americans and Asians as, quote, "reds and yellows," unquote. But because Roy Moore's biggest supporter is the man who began his entire campaign for the highest office in the land with these racially charged comments and then kept defending them.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems. And they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. Somebody is doing the raping, Don. I mean, you know, it's you know, somebody's doing it's women being raped, well, who's doing the raping? Who's doing the raping?
[Lemon:] Yes. Actually, that wasn't the beginning. President Trump built the foundation of his run for office on the racist birther lie that Barack Obama was not born in the United States. And as president responded to deadly white supremacist violence in Charlottesville by claiming there were his words "very fine people on both sides."
[Trump:] You also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group excuse me. Excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did.
[Lemon:] So in spite of that, in spite of what you've heard with your very own ears, Donald Trump says he's not racist. Are you racist?
[Trump:] I am the least racist person that you have ever met. I am the least racist person.
[Lemon:] Are you bigoted in any way?
[Trump:] I don't think so, no. I don't think so.
[Lemon:] Just as he says he is not guilty of any of the accusations that women have made against him. So here we are. Just days away, one day away from a day of reckoning for the people of Alabama. They will decide. For Roy Moore. For women. For people of color. For the Republican Party. And now it is up to the voters. And this is where we start. So with all of that, the eyes on Alabama tonight, and the election just hours away, I want to bring in now the always-outspoken Charles Barkley. He is a son of Alabama who is campaigning for democrat Doug Jones. Good to see you. How you doing, Charles?
[Charles Barkley, Nba Analyst, Turner Sports:] Nervous. Nervous. I got to say, I can't believe we're in this situation, where the people of Alabama are going to turn a blind ear to blind eye to all the accusation accusations, all the rhetoric, all the racist B.S. Steve Bannon Steve Bannon is down here again, who's a white nationalist, who's a white separatist. He's campaigning for the third time for Roy Moore. And I can't believe the people of Alabama will let them get away with that, to be honest with you, Don.
[Lemon:] I want to talk to you a lot more about this, Charles, but I want our viewers to hear some of what you're saying because you have been campaigning there. I know all weekend, you were on stage today. Let's listen to some of it and then we'll talk.
[Barkley:] At some point, we got to stop looking like idiots to the nation.
[Lemon:] It wasn't an easy decision, I would imagine, for you, maybe it was, to go down there and take, you know, away from your personal life, your business, your family and start campaigning for Doug Jones.
[Barkley:] Well, I wanted to look my family and my friends in the eye and tell them they've got to get out and vote. I think sometime a lot of people are disillusioned with the American dream. They just become nonchalant. But this is about the big picture for Alabama. Listen, Alabama is a wonderful place. We've got some great people here. But these people have been held down for so long, they hide under the umbrella of religion. Don, when I got here, I'm looking at those Roy Moore ads, and they're the same ads that I saw 30 years ago, against gay marriage, against abortion, against any form of illegal immigration, and talking about, if you believe in God, the Washington insiders don't like you. It's the same religious facts that they've been using to win elections. And I wish some time people would look past, quoteunquote "their religious beliefs" and just try to do the right thing. You can't just win elections talking about, I'm against gay marriage. I'm against abortion. I'm against illegal immigrants. That's not a way to win an election. This is 2017. We are already behind the times here in Alabama. I mean, and it's just sad more than anything. We need to get everybody out and vote for Doug Jones. It's a really big deal.
[Lemon:] Do you think people, though, are hearing the people who need to hear you, Charles, do you think they're hearing you or are they just tuned into conservative radio or media that's just going to, you know, say to them what they want to confirm or reconfirm their own beliefs about Roy Moore? Because as I listen to the sound bites, I'm a son of the south, I can't believe the way some people are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to, you know, figure out a way that they can vote for Roy Moore. Why do you think people are so willing to dismiss credible allegations and crazy things that he has said on the record?
[Barkley:] Well, because in the south, one of the reasons the south is always behind the times, they use like I say, I looked at his commercials. All he talks about is, I'm a Christian, and Washington, they don't want my Christian values in Washington. He's against abortion. He's calling Mr. Jones, because he's pro-choice, he's calling him a baby killer. And he just showed all these pictures, talking about you know, Trump says the same thing in your thing. Listen, I think these Hispanic people are amazing. I think they do work that whites and blacks don't want to do. And to act like illegal immigration is the biggest problem in our country or in our state that's disingenuous. But there's a faction of people in the south who they got all the money and all the control. They just want to keep us dumbed down and keep all the money and the power. That has always been the case in the south and it's really unfortunate. I'm just hoping that the people realize, and you know, they always want to make this thing about black and white, Don. What America has become is rich people screwing poor people. That's what this whole thing is about. You look at Trump and his tax proposal. Who's going to benefit? People like myself. They don't do anything for poor people or the middle class. All those tax cuts are designed to help rich people like myself. And that's sad.
[Lemon:] Do you do you think that do you worry that what you're doing, Charles, may end up helping Roy Moore, because the people of Alabama will think you're talking down to them, you're condescending. Don't come down here, Charles Barkley and tell me how to run my life or what Alabama should be doing. Do you worry about that?
[Barkley:] You mean if I don't say anything? See, Don, that's the cache-22. If you say something, they complain, and when you don't say something, they complain. Hey, listen. I came down here because I listen, Don, you take all of these cameras, CNN, I've been watching CNN every week. You guys do a fantastic job. So at Doug's rally tonight, you think all these news people are down here because they're in shock. They can't believe that these people are going to try to elect Roy Moore. They're here to see a train wreck. I don't think they really care who's a senator in Alabama. All these news people are here because they want to see, are these people that stupid to vote for Roy Moore?
[Lemon:] Listen, I've said it over and over, I cannot believe, Charles, that we're in a place that someone will probably, maybe elected to be the next U.S. senator from Alabama who has the beliefs he has about slavery, about racism, about women and the accusations I can't believe that we are actually considering this in 2017 and then his own party is backing him, which is supposed to be the party for moral values. I can't believe that we're in this position. I think that you're right about that.
[Barkley:] Well, what makes me sad, like I say, Steve Bannon has been here three times. And like I say, he's a white nationalist, which is a white separatist, does not believe in race mixing. I don't understand if you're a good-hearted republican, why you think that's the right person who should be out-front campaigning for Roy Moore. Listen, this United States senator is supposed to represent everybody in Alabama. Black people, white people, Hispanics, Jewish, everybody. But if you're going to have a guy leading your campaign who you know for a fact, and it's been well proven, does not believe in race mixing, how is that acceptable in 19 in this century?
[Lemon:] Yes. Let's listen to Steve Bannon. Here he is.
[Steve Bannon, Former White House Chief Strategist:] Judge Moore is a good man. Judge Moore is a righteous man. And Judge Moore, they've tried to destroy Judge Moore like I told you they would. Remember, I told you this? Months ago, I told you, politics of personal destruction. They tried to destroy Donald Trump and they tried to destroy Roy Moore. You saw how they did this. There's nothing too low for these people to do. They don't a bottom, right? When we go high, there's not only go low, there's no bottom to how low they'll go.
[Lemon:] Who's they and what is he talking about?
[Barkley:] Well, first of all, I don't know anything about those eight women, but this and like I said, I don't ever comment on people's personal lives, because that's not my business. But this notion that they got eight women to put their reputation on the line to smear Roy Moore, I think that's absurd. I don't ever want any woman to be sexually assaulted or harassed, but the notion that the democrats got eight independent women together to smear this guy, I think that's absurd. But not even that. Listen, I told you, I'm bothered by that. But the notion that a guy and let me go out on a limb here. I don't think that thing was that great for the slaves. Let's get that out of the way. He was talking about, it was great back in the slavery days. I'm going to go out on a limb, Don, I don't think it was that good for the slaves.
[Lemon:] I don't think that's going out on a limb. I get your sarcasm there. But I've got to say this. And again, back to my point. Someone who says what he has said, has the history that he has, has a record that he has on racism, on women, and defying the Constitution, being kicked off of the bench, he says the craziest things. And even sometimes members of his family say crazy things. Roy Moore's wife, Kayla, spoke at a rally tonight. She said this about her husband. Pay close attention to this, Charles.
[Kayla Moore, Roy Moore's Wife:] Fake news would also have you think that my husband doesn't support the black community. Yet, my husband appointed the very first black marshal to the Alabama Supreme Court.
[Unidentified Male:] That's right.
[Unidentified Female:] Amen.
[K. Moore:] Fake news would tell you that we don't care for Jews. I tell you all of this, because I've seen it also. I want to set the record straight while they're here.
[Lemon:] What do you think, Charles? What's your reaction to that?
[Barkley:] Let me say, Don, I've got plenty of white friends, but racism still exists. Listen, just because hey, just because I got white friends, Hispanic friends, Jewish friends, that don't mean I'm stupid enough to think that racism does not exist. Listen, this guy talks about slavery was a good time. I just don't understand, if and I just feel bad for the people of Alabama, because they've got some amazing people. And we've got all of these news organizations down here, laughing at us, like we're a bunch of backwoods idiots. And I just feel sad. Because you got a few people who muddy the water for the great people of Alabama. Don, if somebody actually sent me a movie script and showed me these two candidates, there's no way that you say, there's no way that candidate can get elected. With all the things that's been all the accusations, all the times he's gotten let go, fired, kicked off benches. Some of the things he's said. There's no way that person would win an election. And I'm talking about just common sense. If somebody sent you this as a movie, you say, well, we know who's going to win this election, Doug Jones. But unfortunately, here in Alabama, this dude has a chance of winning this election and that's just sad.
[Lemon:] Well, Charles, what I want people to know, too, is that when by criticizing Roy Moore, who happens to be a republican, this is not about left versus right, conservative versus liberal. This is about someone who has had some reprehensible behavior, and for the most part, most people in America, in this great country of ours, cannot believe that we are at this point that this person is actually considered a viable candidate for the U.S. Senate. This isn't about this is not really about politics, is it?
[Barkley:] It has nothing to do with politics. I tell people, they throw these words around, these talk shows have gotten so out of hand, they're right-wing or they lean to the left, I hate both of those terminologies. Whether you a democrat, a republican, a liberal, or a conservative, listen, Roy Moore does not need to represent the State of Alabama. He does not need to represent our state. Doug Jones has never embarrassed us the way Roy Moore has. And think about it. Other than talking about religion and Ten Commandments and things like that, Judge Moore hasn't done anything for Alabama. He became well-known just because of the Ten Commandments thing. He's never accomplished anything other than that, and being controversial catering to his base.
[Lemon:] Charles Barkley, good luck. Thank you, sir. I appreciate your time.
[Barkley:] Hey, thanks for having me, man. It's going to be a long 24 hours, but I can't wait until Doug wins.
[Lemon:] All right. We'll see you back here, Charles, and we'll see you on the road. Thank you, sir. When we come back, President Trump's accusers step up and speak up today detailing their sexual allegations against Trump. The White House firing back, claiming there are eyewitness who refute the women's stories. But do their stories hold water?

[King:] Welcome back. When you're faced with conflicting information, which source do you trust often becomes the question. Yesterday's testimony from the former acting attorney general and the former director of national intelligence put that question front and center here in Washington, repeatedly. President Trump paid attention to the hearing and twitted this reaction. "Director Clapper reiterated what everybody including the fake media already knows. There is no evidence of collusion with Russia and Trump." But the testimony on the collusion question, sorry Mr. President was hardly so clear cut.
[Sally Yates, Former Acting Attorney General:] My answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information and so I can't answer that.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] Well, I don't get that because he just said he issued the report. And he said he doesn't know of any. So how would you know that's not in the report?
[James Clapper, Former United States Director Of National Intelligence:] Are you asking me or?
[Graham:] No, her.
[Yates:] Well, I think that Director Clapper also said that he was unaware of the FBI counterintelligence investigation.
[Graham:] Would it be fair to say that the counterintelligence investigation was not mature enough to come to his to get in the report? Is that fair Mr. Clapper?
[Clapper:] That's a possibility.
[King:] That's one important point. And listen here, the president back in February describing his take on the Sally Yates warning.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] As far as the general's concerned, when I first heard about it, I said, huh, that doesn't sound wrong. My counsel came, Don McGahn, White House Counsel and he told me, and I asked him. And he can speak very well for himself. He said, he doesn't think anything is wrong. He really didn't think
[King:] Doesn't sound wrong, the president said. But McGahn listened yesterday. Yates repeatedly said, her message to the White House was it was beyond wrong.
[Yates:] The Russians also knew about what General Flynn had done. And the Russians also knew that General Flynn had misled the vice president and others. Not only did we believe that the Russians knew this, but that they likely had proof of this information. And that created a compromise situation, a situation where the national security adviser essentially could be blackmailed by the Russians.
[King:] You can't square these circles. What the testimony is very different from what the president and his team have repeatedly tried to say. They say this is clear cut. Those two public servants say no, it isn't.
[Philip:] Yes. I mean, to Jeff's point earlier it's important for us to find out in some way what was the president actually told about what Sally Yates told Don McGahn. That seems to be an increasingly important question because Trump has ever since that day that Easter press conference defended Michael Flynn and repeatedly suggested that he did nothing wrong even in the face of all of this talk about the risks of blackmail. So, there's that problem and I think in general on the collusion question, the folks who are looking at this situation fairly need to be more comfortable with the idea that we don't know what the answer to the collusion question is. It is not as the president says that there was no collusion. The answer is unsatisfying we don't know. And I think that's what James Clapper and Sally Yates put out there was that there is no definitive yes or no answer to that right at this moment. And even folks on the left I think need to be a little bit more comfortable with that.
[King:] I think the Democrats have gone beyond at least the public information some of the things they say. But when you have it look, I understand people work for the president and the president himself is a politician. But he's also the commander-in-chief, he's a politician. I understand the idea that they want to shape things in a favorable lights. But there's a difference between shaping things in a favorable light and saying things that are factually untrue.
[Viser:] And Sean Spicer yesterday too said, you know, President Trump did the right thing. He believes he did the right thing at that time and he stands by that decision to stick with Flynn, you know, for those things he did.
[King:] Eighteen days after being told he could be blackmailed by the Russians and an hour long call with the Russian president.
[Viser:] So, I think no you have I mean, put aside for a minute the Russian collusion question. But you have a sort of a mismanagement standpoint of the president keeping somebody despite repeated warnings from top officials that this guy's compromised.
[King:] And part of his brand was he hires the best people. Before you jump in I just want to put in one more example here. When this first came up, the Washington Post story that Sally Yates had warned the White House that General Flynn possibly could be subject to blackmail by the Russians, here is how the press secretary described it.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] The acting attorney general informed the White House counsel that they wanted to give, quote, a heads up to us on some comments that may have seemed in conflict with what the he had sent the vice president out in particular. The White House counsel informed the president immediately
[King:] Now, the immediately there is important to the question you raised early. We don't know what Don McGahn told the president. But the immediately if it's true matters there. But again, gave us a heads up, sounds pretty casual. Listen to Sally Yates.
[Yates:] I had two in-person meetings and one phone call with the White House counsel about Mr. Flynn. We told them that we were giving them all of this information so that they could take action. The action that they deemed appropriate. I remember that Mr. McGahn asked me whether or not General Flynn should be fired. And I told him that that really wasn't our call, that was up to them. But that we were giving them this information so that they could take action.
[King:] That's not a heads up. A, it's a big deal when the attorney general actually turns up goes to meet with the White House counsel about somebody on the White House staff who's under FBI investigation. That is a big deal in its own right. I mean, if you say nothing, just to even but the idea that and again, Sean Spicer is a political appointee, works for the president, but like it's not a heads up. It wasn't a heads up, it was a warning.
[Henderson:] Yes, this was sounding the alar.
[Kings:] In triplicate.
[Henderson:] Yes, in a major way. Her saying that some sort of action needed to be taken. They obviously didn't fire him for 18 days or accept his resignation, unclear of whether or not they did anything, right. Did they bar him from meetings or did they bar him from briefings or anything? And, you know, everyone talks sort of about loyalty and Donald Trump being loyal to people around him. He's sort of also loyal to whatever set of information he has. He's not very curious in terms of finding, you know, other information and processing that information. So this seems to be another of those instances when President Obama said listen, Flynn, this might be a problem. He seem to sort of
[Zeleny:] I can see how he wouldn't sort of accept that advice. So all he did say we had great meetings with President Obama at that moment. He was saying, you know he was locking arms with him. But why did they invite her back to the White House? The point you made earlier today that they invited her back to the White House but then by that evening she was fired because she refused to enforce the travel ban. To me, why did they invite her back? You know, there are more questions here. And it's OK right now to not have the answers. These things take a long time to develop.
[King:] We don't have the investigative answers. But I do think you might you're right there are fundamental questions about judgment and management style and who did what? We want the answer to so we don't have the answer to get to right conclusion probably about those. But those are additional questions now put on the table as the investigations continue. Everybody sit tight. We'll be right back.

[Baldwin:] Just in to us here, this ridiculous war of words about what happened inside that White House meeting in which the President, we're told, made vulgar comments about African countries. He just gave us a new chapter and a new nickname. Let me read this President this presidential tweet for you that he just put out moments ago. He tweets Senator Durbin totally misrepresented what was said at the DACA meeting. Deals can't get made when there is no trust. Durbin blew DACA and is hurting our military. So with me now, former RNC spokesman and Mitt Romney adviser, Kevin Sheridan. Hello, my friend.
[Kevin Sheridan, Former Spokesman And Director Of Regional Media, Republican National Committee:] Good to see you.
[Baldwin:] Listen I mean, you listen to all these different voices of these different people who were in the room. We know someone is lying. We know that. On policy, though, Kevin, the President is setting this up to be a Democrat versus Dreamers and the military.
[Sheridan:] Yes, and his you know, his tweet is obviously very Trumpian and kind of incendiary in the way that it makes fun of Dick Durbin. But there is a lot of truth to that, that the Democrats don't necessarily want a DACA deal. It seems that they would rather play politics with it despite what they're saying publicly. So, you know, he is putting his own spin on it, but this is the argument. And it's making it tougher for Republicans to come to the table because Democrats really, at the end of the day, aren't giving anything to Republicans. They're just demanding a clean DACA that they what they call a clean DACA, a different version from what the President calls a clean DACA, but they don't want to give anything for that. And so I think we're more likely probably now to be looking at kicking the can down the road again and having to do another extension into February for a temporary short-term spending. That's unfortunate, but, look, the sides just don't seem to be very close right now on
[Daca. Baldwin:] Sure. And just because we don't have a Democrat sitting here, obviously, they would take issue with, you know, the playing politics point and that they talking about the 700,000 or 800,000 Dreamers in this country and that they're just, you know, looking out for them. But the real question, I think, to your point, is, are they willing to shut the government down over this? And that, we don't know yet. In this whole firestorm, you know, the leader of the Republican Party in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, is still silent. Is that stunning to you?
[Sheridan:] Well, he hasn't been asked in the public setting about it that I'm aware of. But if he is
[Baldwin:] But does he need to be asked
[Sheridan:] I'm sure he will say something.
[Baldwin:] to make a comment about the President and racism?
[Sheridan:] Look, every one of these senators and members of Congress have been asked a hundred times about different tweets and different things that President Trump has said. They almost always have critiqued him on it, and I expect they will continue to. When Paul Ryan was asked about it, he said it was unfortunate and not helpful. I think you'll see others continue to do that, but they're in the middle of tough negotiations right now. They're not going to be putting out, necessarily, statements, all of them, on this and but when they are asked, I think you're going to hear more from it.
[Baldwin:] So listening to you, though, he hasn't put out a statement. Should he put out a statement? He is the leader of the Republicans on the Senate side, and the President is being called a racist.
[Sheridan:] Technically, I don't know. I think you could go either way on that, but I don't think there's any mistaking that Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump are not the same people. You know, Paul Ryan and anybody that knows Paul Ryan or knows Mitch McConnell knows they're very different types of Republicans from
[Baldwin:] OK.
[Sheridan:] or types of leaders from President Trump. They just don't talk the same way. They don't approach issues the same way. But their agendas overlap, and they do work together where they can.
[Baldwin:] OK.
[Sheridan:] And I think that's what's important to remember.
[Baldwin:] Quick question, 20 seconds, Mitt Romney, if he runs, would he be friend or foe of the President?
[Sheridan:] I think he's going to be Mitt Romney, and I think Governor Romney brings a lot to the table. He'd be excellent for Utah if he decides to do it. He won that state by, you know, almost 50 points in the 2016 election. I think he would he'd be an excellent addition to the Senate. I think when he can agree with the President, he will. And when he disagrees with him, like today, he'll probably speak out again. You know, he comes at this from a very unique position. He's an elder statesman in the party. And he is somebody with a constituency that's not necessarily going to care so much if the President is mad at him, so he'll have, actually, more leeway to speak out when he wants to. And I think you'll continue to hear his honest take on things.
[Baldwin:] Very diplomatic answer of you, Kevin Sheridan. Thank you.
[Sheridan:] Thanks.
[Baldwin:] Thank you so much on that. Next here, Queen Elizabeth says her crown is heavy enough to break her neck, five whole pounds. One of the many candid admissions in this rare interview with the Queen.

[Question:] You won't tell us where he stands on climate science. So I'm wondering why did the president choose to accept certain facts, but dispute and reject others?
[Sanders:] I'm not aware that he accepts certain facts. I think we accept all the facts.
[Question:] ... popular vote totals, climate science. You still haven't told us where he stands on...
[Sanders:] Look, the president won the election. I don't know why we have to continue debating this. The Democrats lost because they didn't have a message. They had a poor candidate. We had a message. And the president won. I'm not really sure what fact we're disputing here. There's only one winner and he was it. Jeff?
[Question:] Yeah, going back to [inaudible] started. Is the president concerned that surveillance is being conducted against him at the White House?
[Sanders:] I don't know specifically if there's a direct concern. I do know that he's concerned with the number of leaks that do come out of our intelligence community. I think all America should be concerned with that.
[Question:] But he did make clear in that clear that he didn't have any recordings, but he raised the prospect that somebody else might have them.
[Sanders:] OK. Again, I think that it's very clear what he meant there. But as far as surveillance... I wouldn't know, Jeff. Mike?
[Question:] Two questions, first on health care if I can. Since the president won't be weighing in specifically on any of the details of the Senate bill, can you help explain what his role will be exactly during at least the Senate phase of the process? Will he be whipping for votes to pass the Senate bill even if he doesn't necessarily agree with everything that's in it, just to try to advance the process along?
[Sanders:] We'll keep you updated as his involvement takes place. Again, right now I know that he's got a large number of members of his administration that are involved in the process and continuing those conversations.
[Question:] And I have another question, if I can the president's meeting today with the International Olympic Committee. Can you talk a little bit about what that meeting is for? And will he use it as a chance to lobby for Los Angeles's bid for the Olympics?
[Sanders:] I know he's certainly supportive of the committee, and we plan to have a readout after the meeting. I don't want to get ahead of that before it takes place.
[Question:] [inaudible] or the [inaudible]?
[Sanders:] I mean, obviously the committee itself. And again, we'll have a readout for you after the meeting takes place. I won't get ahead of that.
[Question:] Sarah, yeah, listen, I want to, if I could [inaudible], I want to go back to what Jeff was asking you a moment ago. I know you said his tweet is clear. But it talks about recently reported electronic surveillance intercepts unmasking. Is that activity that is being carried out by the CIA, the FBI or other U.S. law enforcement agencies? Is that what his reference is to?
[Sanders:] I think those are questions you'd have to ask those law enforcement agencies, whether or not they're engaging in those activities.
[Question:] The president tweeted this. The president is the one who's actually put this information out.
[Sanders:] I I think it's there's public record that talks about surveillance, that talks about unmasking. We know those practices take place. I think if you're asking about specific instances, you'd have to refer to those agencies.
[Question:] Can I follow up on China? The president tweeted obviously the other day that the Chinese had had failed to change the situation with respect to North Korea. I just wonder, in light of that, given how he had put China at the center of his North Korea strategy, what the next steps are. How does the U.S. bring pressure to bear on North Korea, if the Chinese are not willing to help?
[Sanders:] Look, I think the president's been extremely clear on this process. Of course, he hopes to work with China and continue to work with them to put pressure on North Korea. But if that doesn't work, then the president's been clear that he will do whatever it takes to protect America.
[Question:] Any details on what that would be?
[Sanders:] The president's never going to, you know, outline his strategy in a public way, but I think he's been clear that he would certainly do what it takes to protect American citizens.
[Question:] Thank you. Thank you, Sarah. Two questions. First, on health care. The Senate wants to vote in less than a week, or in about a week. Can you say whether the president supports the bill as it is right now? Because we don't know how many changes can be made in the course of a week.
[Sanders:] Again, I think he wants to bring the stakeholders to the table; have those conversations. And we'll get back to you as we go through that process. But I think right now, we're in a negotiation process.
[Question:] Does the president think that the process on health care is moving too fast? [inaudible] wants to take time and talk to people? I mean, they're talking about having a vote next week. I mean, there's going to be like...
[Sanders:] I mean, we've been talking about reforming health care for a number of years. I don't think it's moving too fast when it's been nearly eight years.
[Question:] [inaudible] health care [inaudible] what it is now [inaudible] president's desk. Will the president support a bill that funds Planned Parenthood?
[Sanders:] I'm not sure. I'd have to get back to you on that question.
[Question:] [inaudible] wouldn't support a bill [inaudible]?
[Sanders:] He has. I would have to get back to you on a specific totality of the bill.
[Question:] [inaudible] the bill allows the use of health care tax credits to buy coverage for abortion. Would he support that?
[Sanders:] Not that I'm aware of, but again, I think it would have to be in the context of the larger legislation. I can't speak to a hypothetical [inaudible] one piece of the bill.
[Question:] I wanted to ask some more about the China question [inaudible]. Can you tell us more? When you said the president will what it takes with regards to North Korea, so that would mean a military option. Can you tell us more...
[Sanders:] I think he's been said all along that we're not taking any options off the table, but we're not going to broadcast what those might be. Hunter?
[Question:] Thank you, Sarah. The intelligence community has been pretty unified [inaudible] that the Russian interference in the election was a very real and serious issue. Yet the president just called it a, quoteunquote, "Dem hoax." Does he believe that members of the intelligence community are colluding with the Democrats or did collude with the Democrats? And what would he do about that?
[Sanders:] I believe the the reference in the hoax is about the fact that they're trying to delegitimize his win in the election process and less about the hack itself. I think he's said several times now that he believes that Russia was part of it, but he also some of those same members have said that they don't think it influenced the election. And I think that's what a lot of this process is about. It's about trying to make excuses for why Democrats lost. And the president, I think, has been pretty clear on where he stands with that. Zeke?
[Question:] Thanks, Sarah. [inaudible] questions about the president's tweet earlier to the various intelligence agencies. Is the president accusing elements of the U.S. government of wiretapping the Oval Office?
[Sanders:] That's not what I said. I said if he was asking about specific instances, he would have to ask them.
[Question:] So specifically, does the president believe that he's being surveilled in the Oval Office?
[Sanders:] Not that I'm aware of. John Gizzi?
[Question:] Why is he tweeting about it?
[Sanders:] Because he was asked if he had tapes and he's answering that question. So. John?
[Question:] Thank you, Sarah. A question and a follow-up. In his speech last night, the president said that several of the major news corporations are not telling the truth to the American people. Are you willing to name any of those corporations? And also are you keeping a list and following corporations that may not be telling the truth?
[Sanders:] I think there are quite a few instances where there have been false reports out there. And I would be happy, when I'm not standing up here, to help provide a list to you, John.
[Question:] All right. And the other thing is, are you keeping this list ongoing?
[Sanders:] I I don't have, like, a folder on my computer for it. But I certainly think we've got some knowledge of very specific instances that have taken place. John?
[Question:] Are you going to release them?
[Sanders:] I'll let you know.
[Question:] Thanks a lot, John Sarah. Will you give a heads up...
[Sanders:] We look we look pretty different, but you know...
[Question:] It's off-camera.
[Sanders:] I mean, hey, John, if hey, John, if you're looking for instances of fake news, there's a good one for you.
[Question:] Were you given a heads up about the president's tweet?
[Sanders:] Yes.
[Question:] And was the general counsel given an opportunity to vet what the president tweeted out?
[Sanders:] I'm not sure. I'd have to double-check on that.
[Question:] Sarah?
[Sanders:] Dave?
[Question:] Sarah, the president talked last night about Governor Branstad going to China to become the ambassador. Is it consistent with the president's pledge to drain the swamp that he's giving so many of these first wave of ambassadorships to political supporters and campaign donors?
[Sanders:] Look, I think it's pretty traditional that you would have somebody supportive of you and your agenda to go out and be an ambassador to speak on behalf of the administration. And Terry Branstad is somebody who has, I think, some of the best qualifications that you could have to send there. He's got a personal relationship with senior-level members of the Chinese administration, as well as a very strong understanding of trade practices given his background. And I think he's a perfect fit for that role. Alex?
[Question:] Is legal status for DACA beneficiaries on the table as the White House conducts its review of the program?
[Sanders:] As of right now, that's still under review. And I don't have any announcements on the specifics of the program at this time.
[Question:] Bloomberg reported that the president first raised the prospect of tapes strategically to make sure that Comey told the truth. Is that your understanding of the president's motivation for tweeting about it? And does he feel it was effective?
[Sanders:] I'm sorry. I can't [inaudible].
[Question:] The whole thing? OK.
[Sanders:] Yeah, sorry. It's hard to hear.
[Question:] Bloomberg first reported that the president first raised the prospect of tapes strategically to make sure that Comey told the truth. Is that your understanding of the president's motives for tweeting that? And does he feel it was effective?
[Sanders:] I certainly think that the president would hope that the former director would tell the truth. But I think that it was more about, you know, raising the question of doubt in general, so. Thanks, guys.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] All right, let's take it. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN. Here's the deal. There are no tapes. There never were any tapes. And the president apparently doesn't regret a thing. That as the White House refuses to allow the public to see its daily press briefing before what you just heard. This is the tweet that we're all talking about. Quote, "with all the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are "tapes" or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make and do not have any such recordings." You remember it was just about six weeks ago President Trump is the one who floated this idea of tapes. That was May 12th. Within minutes of the president's admission today, one of the president's associates told our colleague who covers the White House, Jeff Zeleny, quote, "if he doesn't regret this, he should." Adding that the president has been "amused" at all the "obsessing" over this. Let's begin with you, David Chalian. First, just on the timeframe. We waited 41 days. Maybe this was to you know, he had to come clean with Congress tomorrow, right, that was the deadline. Do you feel like, I mean, the credibility of the president really is in question?
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Well, certainly, there was no reason given by Sarah Huckabee Sanders in that briefing as to why he waited this long right up against this congressional deadline. I will say that the last point you just made, Brooke, I think is a good place to pick up, which is a clear break between, as you noted, Jeff Zeleny's reporting, a Trump associate who spoke with President Trump this week saying he should regret this if he doesn't and Sarah Huckabee Sanders saying he doesn't regret it. So there is a divide between those around him that speak to him, associates of him, who believe he should regret this, that this was an error to do this, and clearly as the deputy press secretary said, his own thinking on this.
[Baldwin:] So, he does regret it, Dana, and apparently over the obsession he's amused.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] That's obvious. I mean look at the way he, frankly, is trying to play with everybody. Last week saying, you know, I'm not going to tell you now, boy, that there are tapes. I'll let you know another time. Basically like tune in for the next episode. And then, today, he did what he did. I mean it's obvious that he is trying to have fun with this. The problem for the president is that it's, you know, the public part of it may be amusing to him, the obsession, but at the end of the day, if he did, as one administration source told me, send the initial tweet about tapes to force James Comey to tell the truth, the truth that he was talking about at the time was, get out there that I'm not under investigation. The events that he sparked with that tweet ended with Comey getting out a lot more than maybe the president bargained for, including allegedly that the president told James Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, which now means there's a special prosecutor that actually potentially is looking into the president.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Bash:] So, you know, this is such a cycle that, as David said, there are so many people who are close to the president who were just dying that he actually started in his quest, in his desperation for the public to know that he wasn't under investigation, going as far as just saying things willy-nilly like, he better hope there aren't tapes to try to call his bluff.
[Chalian:] Brooke, just to underscore Dana's point there.
[Baldwin:] Ys.
[Chalian:] You can draw a direct line
[Baldwin:] A direct line.
[Bash:] Exactly.
[Chalian:] If you listen to Jim Comey's testimony
[Baldwin:] Totally.
[Chalian:] From the tweet about tapes to the fact that Special Counsel Bob Mueller has been appointed and is now looking into potentially Trump
[Bash:] Totally.
[Baldwin:] This is self-inflicted.
[Chalian:] A direct line.
[Baldwin:] It's self-inflicted. Shawn Turner, you know, going from the firing to the tweet to the special counsel to now where we are today and the no-tape tape situation. As far as national security, presidential, you know, credibility, where do you stand on all of this?
[Shawn Turner, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, I would say, first, Brooke, I think that with regard to whether or not there are tapes, I think on some level we all kind of expected that this might be the outcome. You know, I think we can all agree that if the president had tapes that would directly refute what Director Comey had said, then I don't think they would have wasted much time in getting those tapes out there. But, you know, I have to tell you that this tweet that the president sent out today, and I try not to pay a lot of attention to the president's tweets, but this tweet today really concerns me because the president takes a direct and deliberate swipe at the men and women of the intelligence community in this tweet today. Brooke, the intelligence community collects collects information
[Baldwin:] Guys, let's throw the tweets back on the screen as you're making your point. I want everybody to be able to see what he tweeted.
[Turner:] Sure.
[Baldwin:] Go for it.
[Turner:] The intelligence community collects information. They conduct surveillance on foreign targets. In order to provide this president, every president, with the information that they need so that they can protect this country, that is the president's number one job. And so for the president to take this swipe at the intelligence community and suggest that while he doesn't have tapes, that maybe the intelligence community or people in government are surveilling him, is just an unnecessary thing to do for the people who are trying to make it easier for him to do his most important job, and that's protecting this country.
[Baldwin:] Brian Stelter, how do you see it?
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] Do y'all watch HBO's "Veep"? Because I feel like we're living through an episode of "Veep," talking about, you know, this bumbling president who's making it up as he goes along, who's trying to figure out a rationale for something he said 41 days ago. Now, maybe this was all deliberate and maybe it was all orchestrate and maybe it was very strategic, but it just feels to me like something a lot less than that. Now, clearly this will be viewed in two different ways, though. In the media world, through a media lens, pro-Trump media will play this as a press overreaction. Journalists cared too much about the question of tapes. But I think for the rest of the country, it's another example of that kind of chaos inside the White House.
[Baldwin:] Do we have Mark O'Mara, because I do think there is an important legal piece of all of this. Do we have Mark? Mark, you're with me.
[Mark O'mara, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] Let's throw the tweet back up. This is the original tweet, May 12th, before I ask you this question, this was what sort of got a lot of this started. "James Comey better hope that there are no tapes of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press," right, that was just after he had fired James Comey, which sort of led to all of this. My question to you, sir, you know, when it comes to obstruction of justice, that endeavors to influence, was this intimidation, would this fall under that purview?
[O'mara:] Well, in my opinion, yes, because let's understand what the practical definition of obstruction of justice really is. And that is if you intend to somehow impede, get in the way of, or to waylay an investigation that should otherwise be ongoing. So the idea that the president of the free world, the president of the United States comes out and says something to Comey or to the rest of us threatening that he has tapes certainly could be suggested to impact it. It's funny, Brian sort of said "Veep." I was going to say it remind me of "Veep" meets "The Emperor's New Clothes" as far as trying to understand this
[Baldwin:] But, guys, this is real life. This is really happening.
[Stelter:] Great point. Thank you, Brooke.
[O'mara:] But it's really trying to figure out, what do we look at and now say that he that 45 days ago he says he has tapes when he really didn't and then he jokes about us when he comes back in to say I didn't really have tapes and now I'm amused because you've obsessed over it. But we've obsessed over the fact that our president wouldn't tell us for 45 days. And that's the real concern. When we look at obstruction of justice, you look at the overall perspective of what somebody is doing. When you take what he did with Comey and those tapes or the suggestion of tapes, when you then look about what was said to the intel chiefs that they have now suggests that he said suggests there's no connection, I've had people arrested for not giving their telephone their name to a law enforcement officer. That's enough obstruction of justice to get you arrested. And we have to take it within the context of what prosecutors will be looking at when they look at obstruction of justice.
[Baldwin:] Let me pick up on some of that, but just to remind all of us what some of the president's recent comments on this tape controversy has been.
[Unidentified Male:] Do tapes exist of your conversations with him?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Yes. Well, I'll tell you about that, maybe, sometime in the very near future.
[Unidentified Male:] When will you tell us about the recordings?
[Trump:] Over a fairly short period of time.
[Unidentified Female:] Why won't you tell us now? Tomorrow? Now? Are there tapes, sir?
[Trump:] Oh, you're going to be very disappointed when you hear the answer. Don't worry.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] The president made clear in the Rose Garden last week that he would have an announcement shortly.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you have any sort of timeline on when that announcement will be?
[Spicer:] When the president's ready to make it. The president has said that he will make an announcement on this. I expect it this week. And so when he's ready to make that announcement, we'll let you know.
[Baldwin:] So, David, let's just remind everyone why this whole tapes thing is so, so important, right, because we have what the president has said this is all regarding this investigation, you know, Flynn, what Comey testified, what the president apparently told the former FBI director, and everyone was thinking, OK, if we have tapes, then that proves, all right, either the president's telling the truth or, you know, the now-fired FBI director is telling the truth. Now that we are sans tapes, David, now what?
[Chalian:] Well, as you pointed out earlier, there's a huge credibility hole blown deeper into this presidency. That's nothing new for Donald Trump. He's got a credibility gap to begin with on a lot of this. And so this this makes that problem worse for him, no doubt. I don't think any of us really thought that there were tapes. But it is your conversation with Mark and pay attention to what Sarah Huckabee Sanders said when she was asked flat-out in the briefing today if indeed the original tweet that we're talking about there, about possible tapes, was a threat of some sort or an intimidation of some sort. "Not that I'm aware of. I don't think so." That that seems to me that President Trump is still going to need to answer that question because Sarah Huckabee Sanders made it just about her awareness, didn't definitively say no.
[Baldwin:] That's a great point.
[Chalian:] And so I think that we are going to need to hear from President Trump at some point about if indeed this was intended as a threat. And the other note on this, Brooke, this is this is the normal course on this topic, and this shows you how uncomfortable people in the White House were with this. Every time Sean or Sarah or another official was asked about this, we asked tons of times about the tapes, they really wanted to leave this just up to the president. You're going to hear from him. He said he's going to make an announcement. They rolled it out on his Twitter feed. They didn't make this announcement from the podium. They wanted President Trump to own this the moment that he sent that original tweet that many folks were not expected inside the White House.
[Baldwin:] Well, as I'm listening to you, I'm also thinking of where we were in the news cycle before everyone went, oh, let's talk about the tapes, which is, you know, we're all talking about this, you know, on the Senate side, the Republican, you know, health care bill, which would affect tens of millions of Americans. Do you think, Dana, is there is there any connection here or is the timing just random?
[Bash:] It's funny you say that. It's the first thing I thought. I thought, OK, what are we trying to bury today if we're in the White House in terms of news. And I was wondering if it is potentially health care, but I think perhaps we're giving them a little bit too much credit because
[Baldwin:] That's why I was asking.
[Bash:] Because but it's I certainly thought the same thing. You know, because, yes, OK, we are talking about this right now, but I'm assuming shortly we're going to be talking about the fact that there is a very, very difficult vote coming on an incredibly important issue to every single person's constituents back home, which is their health care and their health insurance and how it's going to work. And that is, even though we're talking about this, that is certainly consuming members of Congress and probably those are the calls that they are getting in their offices right now.
[Baldwin:] Yes. Yes.
[Bash:] Not, can you believe this issue about the tapes. We are rightly talking about it because this is a big deal, but I but I don't think that even if there was an attempt to bury that, that it would even be
[Baldwin:] It's not going to work.
[Bash:] Right.
[Baldwin:] Yes. Yes. And I think you're telegraphing where we're going because we know there are senators who will be speaking
[Chalian:] Once a producer, always a producer.
[Baldwin:] I got you. I know where you're going. I'm right there with you. Well, let's stay on this just for a little bit longer. Brian Stelter, here's a question, because David Chalian mention that we need to hear, you know, from the president himself. He doesn't do interviews. You know, instead, he does these rallies. He drops all sort of policy bombs without being challenged. No accountability whatsoever.
[Stelter:] And today's the greatest example yet. You know, look at that chiron at the bottom of the screen last hour. It said, live coverage banned of the White House briefing. They were allowing audio, but only on a time-delayed basis. And we, of course, broadcast the entire audio briefing because you should be able to hear what this White House is telling reporters and telling the public about what's going on. But this briefing was pretty much literally held in the dark. I mean, yes, there were lights on in the briefing room, but the cameras were not allowed inside the briefing. It's the latest example of this White House being resistant to transparency. But, good news, if you want to hear from the president, he is giving his first interview in almost six weeks. He's giving it to "Fox and Friends," which is a pro-Trump show, but we will hear from him tomorrow morning. And one question I'd like him to be asked is, are you going to start making tapes now? So you didn't record Comey. Are you going to start taping people in the Oval Office? Would it be helpful to you in the future? It would be curious to see what he says on this issue in that interview tomorrow.
[Baldwin:] Shawn, here's my question to you. You know, the White House's source who's talking to Jeff Zeleny says, in addition to the president being amused and for people being obsessed over this, is that this tapes episode is what led to a special counsel, and this is part of what David and Dana were saying about the direct line from the tweet to the, you know, the Mueller memo, rather the Comey Mueller Comey memo leak to then Bob Mueller. Do you agree?
[Turner:] Yes, I do. I think that, you know, if when the president sends out a tweet like this, he's clearly sending a message that he is trying to accomplish something here. So I think if we go back and we were to do a timeline and we look at what the president did in response to each and every step that Comey took, and it's pretty clear here that what the president was doing is he was trying to effect some outcome. He was trying to have an impact on the narrative. And I think this tweet is no different today.
[Baldwin:] All right. As we have been talking, and as some of us on this have predicted, you know, another Republican senator has come out against this new Senate health care bill. Keep in mind, when you do the math, the Republicans can only afford to lose two Republicans. So let's listen. Here is Republican senator from Kentucky, Rand Paul.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] On the floor, I mean if it the choice could be this or Obamacare. Are you willing to let the country be under Obamacare and let this bill fail if that's the choice?
[Sen. Rand Paul , Kentucky:] I don't think there's anybody in America that's more against Obamacare than myself. As a physician, I've seen the ravages of it. I've traveled to 42 states running on repeal of Obamacare. I just didn't run on Obamacare lite. I didn't run on replacing it with more government programs. I didn't run on allowing the death spiral of Obamacare to continue just to subsidize it with taxpayer money. Look, we're $500 billion in debt right now. There is no money to keep subsidizing insurance. There is no money to expand Medicaid unless you want to raise taxes. We're actually cutting taxes.
[Unidentified Female:] You're
[Paul:] So you have to you have to be honest with people and it has to be paid for. So if we're not going to pay for it and we're going to keep a lot of the stuff that was in Obamacare, I think we can do better than this. And my hope is not to defeat the bill but to make the bill better.
[Raju:] Should Senator McConnell give
[Ryan:] No, I think I think what will happen, and the reason we're coming out now is, that now the discussion begins. But the people that are in favor of the current bill know that there's not 50 votes for it, perhaps the discussion will begin in earnest to make the bill better.
[Unidentified Female:] Senator Paul, if there's no hearing, will you vote on the bill?
[Paul:] Yes. We're supposed to be given a draft. And this is supposedly a draft form. And at our meeting this morning, everyone said that there still ought to be changes. But I think you can only get changes if you show you have the power to, you know, not vote for the current bill. And that's kind of where we are.
[Unidentified Female:] Senator Paul Senator
[Raju:] Senator, what do you think of the senator, what do you think of the process what do you
[Paul:] You know, it seems like a short talk. You know, I've been in favor of reading the bills before we pass them. It's on my desk but I haven't gotten started yet. I will read it. But I have legislation that says you should wait one day for every 20 pages. So that would be about at least six or seven working days just for this bill. And that, I think, would be a minimum. Not only do we need to read it. Now I think we also need to negotiate over what's good, what's bad and what we can get in the bill to make it better. So, yes, I think it could take longer. Well, you have to get to 50 votes. And if you've only got 48, I think that means you're going to need to negotiate.
[Unidentified Female:] Senator Paul, if there's no hearing, will you refuse to vote on the bill?
[Paul:] If there's no what?
[Unidentified Female:] If there's no hearing, will you refuse to vote on the bill?
[Paul:] No hearing?
[Unidentified Female:] No hearing. Public no public hearing, will you refuse to vote on the bill?
[Paul:] Well, no, I mean, I was in favor of having committee approach to it, but that is not a do or die on whether I'll vote for the bill. I'm going to vote for the bill on the contents of the bill.
[Unidentified Female:] So you're OK with
[Paul:] No. No, we're a no I'm a no on the bill currently.
[Raju:] What do you think about the way that Senator McConnell tried to cut this deal behind closed doors with the with only the members, without no hearings and having a vote within a week? What do you think about the process?
[Paul:] My preference was always for a committee hearing. But absent that, I'm very concerned about the content. To my mind, the most important thing is we promised to repeal Obamacare. The current bill looks like we're keeping large parts of Obamacare. In fact, one of the architects, Jonathan Gruber, has come out and saying, hooray, it looks like they're not really repealing Obamacare. And I think he's probably accurate. We're keeping the subsidizes, we're boosting the subsidize for stabilization or risk pools and I think it looks a lot like Obamacare, actually.
[Unidentified Female:] Senator
[Paul:] Thanks, guys.
[Baldwin:] OK, so the number you've had on your screen, here it is, four. Just in terms of doing the math, so we know that the Senate Republicans have finally unveiled this their version of the health care bill, right? So we saw the House pass it some weeks ago. This is what the Senate's done today. That number four is not good news for the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, because he really only can afford two. Dana Bash, you covered Congress for years and years and years. The deal is, if they're 5050, if they lose two Republicans, then the vice president would be that tie-breaker to get them over the threshold for this thing to pass. You have Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, these four Republicans saying no for now.
[Bash:] Exactly. For now is the key. Someone like Rand Paul, I personally I it's hard to imagine him getting to yes. Maybe I'll be surprised. But it's hard to imagine, given everything that he has said up until now him ultimately getting to yes. The others that you talked about have more of a chance. And the reason why they put this statement out so quickly is one word, and that's leverage. They understand that it's not just this bill and that's it and they get to vote on this and it's done. There will be an amendment process. They will have an opportunity to make changes. Whether it is an open in the open, on the floor, or it will be maybe in wheeling and dealing and negotiations with the Republican leadership. That is what this is all about right now, trying to lay down a marker saying, you're not going to get the votes unless you come to us on x, y, and z, things like Medicaid expansion, going a little bit too far from their perspective, retaining the Medicaid expansion from Obamacare, and not going far enough to ease up on what they call egregious regulations from Obamacare. Things like that. Ted Cruz, for example, he's one of the four that we're talking about that released a statement together. He just released his own statement because he was actually one of the one of the men in the room. He was one of the the 13 senators who

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] All right. So, a friend of President Trump goes to the West Wing, doesn't meet with the president, but comes out and says that he thinks the president is considering firing special counsel Bob Mueller. So, the media goes to the White House says is this true? Sean Spicer says Ruddy speaks for himself. Then some hours go by because that's not an answer and it turns out that he says well, the president speaks for himself and he doesn't think Ruddy ever spoke to the president about this. So then, Chris Ruddy, the friend of the president, attacks Sean Spicer. This is what he just said. "Spicer issued a bizarre late- night press release that a] doesn't deny my claim the president is considering firing Mueller, and b] says I didn't speak to the president about the matter when I never claimed to have done so. Memo to Sean focus your efforts on exposing the flim-flam" which is a term that means deceptive nonsense "Russian allegations against POTUS and highlighting his remarkable achievements. Don't waste time trying to undermine one of your few allies." Which is exactly what Chris Ruddy is doing, is undermining the legitimacy of the press secretary of the man to which he claims to be a friend odd. Let's discuss. Congressman Chris Collins of New York. It is a laugh or cry moment, Congressman. What is going on?
[Rep. Chris Collins,  New York, Energy & Commerce Committee:] You know you know, Chris, why don't we talk about Aaron Judge and the Yankees? Now, there's something we can agree on.
[Cuomo:] Well, I'll tell you what. You know, the you know, the Yankees have a little way to go but, yes, we're also pro-New York, you know that. But we're not going to dwell on this too much but I don't get it. How do you make sense of this? Is the guy a friend of the president or not? I mean, what's going on here?
[Collins:] I can't make any sense of it. It is hearsay. I think the important thing to note is it would be a disaster a true disaster if that ever occurred. And from what I've heard Rosenstein say the deputy attorney general Mueller couldn't be fired even if someone wanted to. So I think, you know, we'll put this into, you know, kind of a bizarre category because I guess Ruddy's saying he didn't meet with the president. I don't know why he would have made those statements then, so
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Collins:] Yes, what we've got to say is it's not going to happen anyhow.
[Cuomo:] You don't think it will happen? I mean, look, it could happen. It would be complex. Rosenstein would have to do it. The president could order him to. He could refuse.
[Collins:] Oh, Chris, it would be a disaster. It would be
[Cuomo:] And you've heard nothing to suggest the president is considering this?
[Collins:] No. It would be a political disaster. We I mean, certainlythat's obvious, so I think we'll leave it that Rosenstein has said it can't happen anyway so I don't understand the back and forth with Ruddy
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Collins:] and Sean Spicer so we'll let it go at that.
[Cuomo:] All right, and we'll leave the it could happen but we'll leave that to the side. You have not heard
[Collins:] Sure.
[Cuomo:] any reason to
[Collins:] No.
[Cuomo:] believe that the president is considering. We'll take you on record at that.
[Collins:] None whatsoever.
[Cuomo:] Jeff Sessions, the attorney general do you believe that he should refuse to answer any category of questions before the Senate today?
[Collins:] No, I don't not. As you know, Jeff Sessions is a good friend of mine. He's a man of integrity. He will speak very directly. I am confident he has nothing to hide and I think at this point everyone should speak clearly, directly with giving answers to questions because America needs that. We need clarity on this. It's got to run its course but at this point in time we just don't need more questions. Comey left more questions unanswered than he answered, and I think Jeff Sessions can fill in the blanks very directly. I'm assuming there's going to be some disagreement, both of them under oath, but they're going to still disagree is my guess on some of what the conversation was when Comey supposedly said don't ever leave me in the room with the president alone again. We'll see how that goes. And I think Sessions will be forthright. I know he's a man of integrity and I look forward to his testimony.
[Cuomo:] What do you think was the right thing to do if, in fact, the president asked him to leave the room so he could speak privately with the FBI director?
[Collins:] Well, the President of the United States, if he asks someone to do something in that regard, I don't know anyone who would say well, I'm sorry, Mr. President, I'm going to stay right here. That doesn't work that way. I think you know that. And I'm assuming if the president did direct him and I'm not thinking that may have happened, but if it did I'm sure Jeff Sessions left the room.
[Cuomo:] Boy, that would be some development. If the attorney general says that never happened that will certainly be a twist in this tale.
[Collins:] Sure.
[Cuomo:] Let me ask you about a couple of things that we know did, in fact, happen one political, one policy. The political one, the cabinet meeting that turned into this you know, this profession of faith and love of the president is getting a lot of heat. What did you make of this?
[Collins:] I'm not sure which one you're talking about.
[Cuomo:] Well, there's only one to discuss. He had a cabinet meeting let me play for you a little taste of it.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] to serve as vice president to a president who's keeping his word to the American people.
[Alexander Acosta, Secretary Of Labor:] Mr. President, I am privileged to be here. I'm deeply honored and I want to thank you for keeping your commitment to the American workers.
[Tom Price, Health And Human Services Secretary:] Mr. President, what an incredible honor it is to lead the Department of Health and Human Services at this pivotal time under your leadership. I can't thank you enough for the privilege that you've given me and leadership that you've shown.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] Mr. President, thank you for the honor to serve the country. It's a great privilege you've given me.
[Reince Priebus, White House Chief Of Staff:] On behalf of the entire senior staff around you, Mr. President, we thank you for the opportunity and the blessing that you've given us to serve your agenda and the American people.
[Cuomo:] So that's how it went. It went around the room, all complimenting the president, and it seemed to be a reflection of the president's feeling that people aren't nice enough to him. What's your take?
[Collins:] Well, I do know that he's assembled the best cabinet that's ever been assembled, bar none. And I think it is important with all the turmoil in the country today to reassure the president, quite frankly. He's being attacked at every front, much of it inappropriately. And like any human being, I'm assuming the cabinet would say, you know, we know things are going well. The accomplishments are real. We've got a great team and, Mr. President, I'm honored to be here. So, not surprising. I did not know about that until, you know, you just played the tape but I know most of the folks in the cabinet and I would find it quite appropriate to reassure the president all is good because, I mean, the attacks are coming left and right, unrelenting, so good for them.
[Cuomo:] Why is the criticism of the president inappropriate?
[Collins:] Well, because it is based on a lot of fake news and there are distortions and exaggerations left and right. I've been in the middle of it myself.
[Cuomo:] How so?
[Collins:] Oh, I've been attacked by Sen. Schumer, Elizabeth Warren. I've been attacked by Louise Slaughter. I actually had "The Buffalo News" had to retract a story. You know, that happens about once every 100 years. The story wasn't an exaggeration, it was not a distortion, it was outright fabrication. So, I mean, I've been living in the middle of
[Cuomo:] Oh, but you find yes, all right but all I'm saying is, Congressman, you know, you've got one story from "The Buffalo News" that someone had to retract. I'll look into why it was but that certainly can't serve as proof of all media coverage being inappropriate and wildly wrong, and based on fake news. You've got one little example of that. Isn't most of it pertinently appropriate because it all stems from what the president says and does.
[Collins:] Well, but we know the press tends to lean in a particular direction and when things are reported, whether it's true or not or hearsay or not, it gets reported as though it is true. So if, you know we could agree to disagree but I believe, and I know many of the Trump supporters in my district would agree, the press has certainly exaggerated the negative and has, you know, not talked about some of the positives. And, you know, what's the shame is we're not talking about our rollback of Dodd-Frank and what it's going to do for the community.
[Cuomo:] Well, we should be. Look, that's something that we really want to talk about because rolling back some of the only protections put in after that huge fiasco to keep it from happening again, done under the cover of the Comey moment, seemed like a real sneaky move, to be honest with you.
[Collins:] Oh, we've wanted to talk about this. I mean, 25 percent of the community banks in America have shut down because of the onerous regulations they can't afford.
[Cuomo:] But those regulations were put into place because you guys in Congress had allowed wild speculation and then bailed out the same people who wound up bankrupting thousands of Americans.
[Collins:] It went way too far and if we're going to get this economy moving with small businesses they tend to borrow from these community banks who are going down every day because of the regulatory burden. The fact that they have to set aside reserves for mortgages that they've written for Aunt Sally down the street.
[Cuomo:] But it but what you roll back is going to help a lot more than just community banks. Isn't that true, Congressman?
[Collins:] Oh well, what we're rolling back and by the way, we are keeping the Durbin Amendment on the debit card fees, so that's an acknowledgment that at least one part of Dodd-Frank that's good.
[Cuomo:] Big banks are going to be able to get freedom to speculate in a way that they couldn't before because of what you just rolled back. Isn't that true, Congressman?
[Collins:] Look, sure, we are removing regulations. This is America and
[Cuomo:] So it's not just about community banks and the little guy and who the little guy borrows from, and Main Street versus Wall Street. You also freed up the Wall Street guys that wildly speculated and caused the problem. Isn't that true?
[Collins:] They're well, lessons learned, Chris. You know, some of that speculation clearly was not well, clearly after the fact, not in the best interest of America.
[Cuomo:] And now they can speculate more because of what you just rolled back.
[Collins:] They can run their business the way they see fit for their shareholders. We're not going to bail them out. If they make a mistake, they make a mistake. This is this is
[Cuomo:] You cannot guarantee that you will not bail them out right now. That is nowhere codified in law and it happened the last time and now, you made it easier for them to speculate again. True or false?
[Collins:] Well, I can I can assure you I would never support bailing them out.
[Cuomo:] That's one vote.
[Collins:] The shareholders bear the risk. The shareholders ultimately elect the board who picks the officers
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Collins:] and if some bank does stupid things and they overspeculate and something happens, they can go down.
[Cuomo:] Well, we'll see what happens but, certainly, it's more possible now than it was before. Congressman, always a pleasure to have you on the show
[Collins:] Yes, good to be with you, Chris.
[Cuomo:] always. Be well.
[Collins:] Thank you.
[Cuomo:] Alisyn
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn:] Chris, there is a heat wave in the East and wild weather in the Midwest. We have the video to show you, next.

[Soares:] British Prime Minister Theresa May will probably be on the defensive when she faces questions in parliament in just a few hours. Opposition leaders Jeremy Corbyn will likely criticize Mrs. May over how her government is handling ongoing threats at negotiation.
[Vause:] Earlier the Prime Minister warned her cabinet to show unity and stop the leaks after reports of infighting over terms of the divorce from the European Union.
[Soares:] Well, global business executive Ryan Patel joins us now from San Francisco. Ryan thank you very much for being here. Look, we were in the second round now, second day of the latest round of we're losing track of all the rounds of these Brexit talks. And it seems really that negotiators are still looking pretty unprepared. How is all this uncertainty being felt would you say on the market?
[Ryan Patel, Global Business Executive:] If you've heard of chess pieces, this is more than chess pieces. It is there are so many backups of plans from even like [inaudible] Citibank wanting to now start doing stuff with Frankfurt, Japan deal with Europe. The European Union getting stronger, and then Canada and the U.K. potentially doing side deals after the exit. And on top of all that, what's really going on no one really knows about how hard the stance is going to be. I think that's where the confusion is happening. But what's different from this and maybe potentially the U.S. economy companies and international countries are actually having backup plans that, you know what, this is what we're going to go for and we're going to put these contingency plans kind of in advance. And that's kind of if I'm in the U.K. right now, government you kind of don't want people to make decisions before you actually make the negotiation done.
[Soares:] Absolutely. But when you don't have a plan it's always quite hard and you don't say what the plan is, it's quite hard for people to plan ahead. And there seems to be no more really good news. I saw today from consultancy PWC really painting a really worrying scenario for the U.K. Economy, they say, will likely basically call the next two years; this, because of rising inflation, arising from that weak sterling, from the weak pound. On top of all this, of course, there are signs of slowing consumer confidence, consumer spending, and increased reluctance, as you say, among businesses to invest. This is really troubling.
[Patel:] No and it is. And you mentioned that report. There's multiple other reports also talking about why business not going the way it's supposed to. And I think that's kind of the confusion on there. And there are not really where do they make a stance? And they've got to decide. And what's different about these reports are other again other companies are taking the initiative to go forward on, you know what, we're not going to wait. We think it's going to be the worst outcome. What's best for us? And you know, even in the E.U., right Italy and Spain and even Germany. Germany right now is could be beneficial, you know, benefit from this. But also they would be also exposed to the outperforming quite a bit. So it's very interesting to see the implication also in Asia as well with Australia, New Zealand and even in Japan and China.
[Soares:] Look going into these negotiations, you can almost understand why it would be so much inserting, so many questions, you know. No one's been there before. But Brexit, let's remind viewers it was actually on June 23rd of 2016. That's more than a year ago. And still the cabinet looks like they're unprepared. They're divided. I mean there's bickering within the conservative party. You've got leaks basically in, you know, going on. And in the meantime, if you're looking at this video right now, the rest of the world pretty much laughing as, you know, David Davis goes into the meeting looking unprepared with no papers. This is a cartoon from the "Guardian" newspaper, portraying how basically this whole meeting has turned out. There is Europe waiting, [inaudible] on to the table, under the table with a lot of bickering. This does what kind of image does it give to the rest of the world in terms of being open for business and being prepared for the next stage.
[Patel:] I hate to say this. This is actually showing how they don't have any leverage in this situation. And that the E.U. has more leverage to it. And it's sad to see this because obviously, there was a little bit of shock with it from June and you would think that you'd give them three or four months to get to this point. And it's not like there's no new news that's happened. They've known that this is going to happen and move forward. And I feel like they're running out of positions on what to do. And while they continue to bicker, I hate to tell you this, other countries and the E.U. are getting stronger in their positions even though that I believe the U.K. has a lot to offer, obviously in other industries. But you know, they all are at pause right now and that's the problem in the U.K. They've got some initiatives that are going from digital economy and to these other places. But they can't do anything just yet until in the home it gets decided.
[Soares:] Yes. And the reality, Ryan, it's really hard to find a positive story on Brexit. I mean, I was looking at
[Patel:] That's right.
[Soares:] what, any positive news coming out of Brexit when it comes to London. It's hard. I mean you're talking about some of the companies. But I did some digging, I mean, already had JPMorgan, UBS and Goldman Sachs have already said they'll move jobs and investments or both out of the U.K., so very troubling. Important, of course, to get these negotiations under way and to get some clarity, very important. So let's see what comes out today of bringing the parliament, bickering no doubt. Ryan Patel thanks very much. Wonderful to see you.
[Patel:] Thank you likewise.
[Vause:] Bringing in parliament never heard of it. Ok. Coming up, there is growing outrage in Australia after U.S. police shot and killed an Australian woman and the officer who pulled the trigger has declined to be interviewed by investigators.
[Soares:] All that as people back home are mourning the woman's loss, as well as demanding answers. Some are even calling the U.S. a police state run by quote, "out of control officers".

[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] those tiny babies who were once so close to death are now thriving.
[Lt. Gen. Russel Honore , United States Army:] Boy, you guys grew up in 12 years.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you for saving our lives.
[Honore:] Well, God bless you.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you for saving our lives and our mom's life.
[Honore:] God bless you. God bless you.
[Elam:] A bond forged in devastation, unbroken by the passing of time.
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Great to have you with us tonight. A side of President Trump the public rarely sees. More personal, more compassionate, and embracing his role as consoler-in-chief. He was on the ground in storm-ravaged parts of Texas and Louisiana today giving hugs and kissing children and taking selfies with the victims and the first responders. Images like these of the President giving out food and loading up supplies, all the more striking because it was just days ago that he was criticized for a lack of empathy. The White House is now seeking nearly $8 billion in relief funds as the death toll from this storm reaches at least 50. Today, the President told the crowd he thinks the cleanup can happen quickly.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And the water is disappearing. And we do we have a long way to go, but the water is disappearing. And you look at the neighborhoods and you see it's we just rode through this. And two days ago, even yesterday, they had water. And today, it's all swept up and cleaned up. They say two years, three years. I think that, you know, because this is Texas, you'll probably do it in six months. I have a feeling, you know.
[Cabrera:] Here's the reality, though. Floodwaters are receding but the damage is staggering. Families returning to clear out their flooded homes, their possessions are now trash on the side of the street. I want to go to Ryan Nobles. He's joining us from Lake Charles, Louisiana where the President and first lady ended the day, thanking some first responders there. Ryan, tell us about who the President met on this trip.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Well, Ana, the President spent the day meeting with a variety of different people from all walks of this tragedy, including evacuees in Houston who had weathered the storm and now are waiting to go back into their homes. He also met with military members who were on the front lines of the rescue and recovery effort. And here in Lake Charles, Louisiana, he met with Louisianans who once went through Hurricane Katrina who were actually spared the brunt of the damage from Hurricane Harvey, and instead were here to help their fellow Texans. This National Guard armory behind me was one of the staging areas for the troops that went in to help the recovery effort, particularly in east Texas which was very hard hit. He also met with members of the Cajun Navy, that volunteer group of folks who got in their trucks and their boats and came to the aid of so many of those people who were in need of help me. The big message from the President today, Ana, was that the federal government will be there to help, and not just after the floodwaters recede, but for the months and perhaps years that it takes before this recovery is complete. One of the things he promised today is that he is beginning the process of requesting billions of dollars in aid from Congress. They've sent that over to Congress. That work will begin next week. The President wanting to make sure the people of Texas know that he is going to be there to help them for the long haul Ana.
[Cabrera:] Ryan Nobles in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Thank you. Meanwhile, we have some other breaking we're following, this time out of North Korea. The regime now claims it's able to attach a hydrogen bomb to an intercontinental ballistic missile. Now the country's state-run news agency sent out these pictures today. This is apparently of Kim Jong-un a short time ago and purportedly show the leader inspecting the new weapon at the country's nuclear weapon institute. It's important to note, though, that U.S. officials have not confirmed that North Korea has this new capability or that these pictures are authentic. I want to bring in CNN's Ian Lee in South Korea. He is joining us from Seoul. Ian, this is the latest provocative move from the regime.
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, and a significant development, Ana, if it is turns out to be true that they are able to put a hydrogen bomb on top of an intercontinental ballistic missile, an ICBM. For experts, for a while now, have wondering when they would reach this stage. This comes a lot sooner than most experts had predicted that they would be or have this capability. But what they also say, KCNA, North Korean state media, is that they have the capability of making many more. So we're waiting to hear any response from the Americans, from the South Koreans, to this latest development. And as you said, experts on both sides, the Japanese, the Americans, the South Koreans, are going to be studying these pictures very carefully to see if they are authentic, what they can glean from them. But also, Ana, this comes as President Moon of South Korea and President Trump have a phone call. They said that they want to put more economic and diplomatic pressure on North Korea so that they abandon their nuclear program. But from these pictures, it doesn't look like that's working.
[Cabrera:] All right. Ian Lee in Seoul, South Korea. Thank you. I want to bring in here in New York, Jonathan Cristol. He's a fellow at the World Policy Institute. Jonathan, how much credence should we give this new claim?
[Jonathan Cristol, Fellow, World Policy Institute:] I mean, I think that there are a lot of ifs here. I think, without question, North Korea would like to develop such a weapon, but we don't know if they have the capability to put any sort of nuclear device onto an intercontinental ballistic missile. We don't know if they are able to fire that missile with a degree of accuracy. We don't know if it would be able to survive reentry. And we don't know if they have a hydrogen bomb. Now, I, personally, don't think that the hydrogen bomb versus nuclear bomb aspect really changes the political situation around it. It doesn't really change the policy around it because their capabilities to destroy a significant part of an American city wouldn't really change based on the science behind the weapon itself. There's a psychological element there, but it doesn't really change the political aspect of it.
[Cabrera:] Do those pictures surprise you?
[Cristol:] It does surprise me a little bit that they are making the claim, particularly so soon after the missile flyover of Japan.
[Cabrera:] Which happened on Tuesday.
[Cristol:] Right. It seems that they are ramping up. They're escalating much more quickly than I or a lot of people would have thought. It does come I don't think it was timed to, but it also comes on the heel of President Trump's statement about the South KoreanU.S. trade agreement, that he's thinking about withdrawing from that. And so while it may not have been timed for that, it is part, I think, of the North Korean strategy of trying to create tension between the U.S. and South Korea and show the divisions in policies on a wide range of issues.
[Cabrera:] Let me read you a statement I was just handed this, a new statement from North Korea KCNA, their state-run media. And it says, if the U.S. acts rashly despite our repeated warnings that the U.S. should ponder over the disastrous consequences to be entailed by its reckless military provocation, we will take a more powerful counteraction. What are we to make of that?
[Cristol:] Well, I think that they are, once again, trying to show that they if the U.S. launches a military strike of some kind against them, that they will retaliate with some sort of devastating force. Now, the reality of this is that it doesn't take this particular weapon to mount a credible deterrent capability on the part of North Korea. Their artillery, which can produce tens of thousands, at minimum, casualties in South Korea, their ability to target U.S. forces in South Korea and in Japan, as well as that country, really makes it very difficult for the U.S. to have any sort of serious military option against them. They know that. And they're kind of sticking it to us a little bit and saying, look, you might be talking the talk about this, but we're going to keep needling you and showing you what really we're capable of and what are you really going to do about it.
[Cabrera:] And the President this week saying maybe the time for talk talking is not the answer, actually, is his direct quote. Jonathan Cristol, thank you, as always, for giving us your expertise and helping us to assess the situation. We do appreciate you coming in.
[Cristol:] My pleasure.
[Cabrera:] Coming up, the Justice Department has just announced they have found no evidence to back up President Trump's claims that Trump Tower was wiretapped by President Obama. Details on that coming up. Also, look at some shocking video out of Utah tonight. Police have now launched a criminal investigation after a nurse was arrested and forcibly removed from this hospital for refusing to let officers draw blood from her patient.

[King:] Welcome back. Mike Pompeo likely to make a little history today, not in a way he would like. Barring a last minute change of heart, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this afternoon will vote against Pompeo's nomination to be secretary of state, with all of the Democrat and Republicans Rand Paul opposed. Pompeo, who's currently the CIA director, still likely to be confirmed by the full Senate, but he would be the first secretary of state to take office after being rejected in committee. The president making clear he's not happy, tweeting this morning, hard to believe obstructionists may vote against Mike Pompeo for secretary of state. CNN's Phil Mattingly live on Capitol Hill counting the votes. Phil, is this about Pompeo's resume or is this about his boss, the president?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, John, look, Democrats have certainly cited the former's kind of resume, whether it's his posture in which they consider far too hawkish for a diplomatic position, past comments related to LGBT issues or Muslims, just kind of his overall consideration on that front as their rational for voting no. But they also kind of give away a little bit in what they say next, which is they're concern about how close he is to the president, which underscores the fact that the latter idea, the president himself, is really looming large over this nomination. The fact that he is very comfortable with Mike Pompeo. The fact that Mike Pompeo's role in his cabinet will only grow and perhaps not check the president where Democrats say he should. You know it's interesting, you talk to Republicans and they say, look, go through the guy's resume, whether it was at West Point, whether it was at Harvard, whether it's his time as CIA director, which even Democrats who were opposed to his nomination say they're pretty much they applaud that up to this point. The reality remains that he's on the president's team. He's comfortable with the president. And Democrats are uncomfortable with that fact. If you roll through kind of where past nominees have been, whether it's the unanimous approval of Colin Powell, secretary of state, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry both getting 94 votes in favor, there's a dynamic that has shifted on Capitol Hill right now and Mike Pompeo is certainly on the receiving end of that. If the president nominates somebody, frankly Democrats are likely, at this stage in time, whether because it's political or because of the issues they have with that nominee, they're going to be opposed, John.
[King:] And, Phil, is my math right, two Democrats now, Joe Manchin of West Virginia today says he's a yes. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota said that at the end of last week. Two at the moment?
[Mattingly:] Yes, that's exactly right. Joe Manchin coming out today in a tweet. I want to read part of it. It says, after a meeting with Mike Pompeo discussing his foreign policy perspectives and considering his distinguished time as CIA director and his exemplary career in public service, I will vote to confirm Mike Pompeo. Heidi Heitkamp, on Friday, I'm told, expect at least potentially at least one, potentially two more Democrats will come on board and will give him enough votes to get over the finish line when he gets to the Senate floor. But a rather ignominious distinction, not just getting an unfavorable recommendation from the committee, but also the fewest votes in favor of any secretary of state nominee. The person who held that record or currently holds that record before Mike Pompeo, well, that would be Rex Tillerson with 56. Mike Pompeo probably going to end up somewhere around 52, 53 range, John.
[King:] Welcome to the politics of the moment. Phil Mattingly live on Capitol Hill. Phil, appreciate that. Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Manchin, the two Democrats on the record of yes. Now they share this. They're both up for reelection this year and they both come from states Donald Trump carried West Virginia by, what, 42 points. I think North Dakota was only 30 something. But they get it. They get the dynamics there. But are is that is that just it, that the Democratic base is calling these guys up and saying you cannot vote for Mike Pompeo? Because to Phil's point, let's just put this up. Look at this list of secretary of state nominees here. Rex Tillerson, 56-43, but then John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Madeline Albright, Warren Christopher, James Baker, George Schultz, back to Alexander Haig. Things were political in the Reagan administration and in the Bush administration and in the Clinton administration, and in the next Bush administration and even in the Obama administration. But especially for secretary of state, usually it was, OK, the president deserves his team.
[Raju:] Yes.
[King:] This is this is mostly about Trump, if not all about Trump, isn't it?
[Raju:] Yes, it is. And you're a Democratic member who's not from a red state, who's not up for reelection, you're listening very closely to what your base is saying, and they want to resist. They want to fight Trump at all costs. It doesn't matter if there's someone who Mike Pompeo both sides agree is qualified for this position, even if they disagree with his ideological point of view. But very clearly, more most of the Senate Democratic caucus is a very progressive caucus, a very liberal caucus, wants to fight Trump tooth and nail. You do have those handful of red state Democrats who view this as an opportunity to break from the natural party, to side with the president, which is why you're seeing Manchin and Heitkamp vote for this nominee, but you'll also probably going to see Joe Donnelly vote for this nominee. You probably are going to see maybe one or two more. So you'll barely scrape by. And one other point. There are two other nominees that are coming through, Ronny Jackson to be the VA secretary, Gina Haspel to be the CIA director. Some of these members don't want to be voting no every single time, particularly those Democrats from red states. Maybe they'll vote for one or vote against one of them, but not all three of them, as liberal members will do.
[King:] Right. And, again, traditionally the argument is, the president deserves his team, even if I disagree with the president's views or with just the ideology of the person in place. And so, with Pompeo, that's why it is surprising to see so many no's in the sense that if you do look at him, he was top of his class at Harvard. He was top of his class at West Point. He did serve in the House of Representatives. Most Democrats, as Phil noted, give him pretty high marks, not only for the job he's doing as CIA director, but for his openness to them when they have questions. That he's actually, unlike some people in the government in all administrations, he's actually answering the questions when Congress calls. So there's that. But to the VA question, now, that is a that is a seems to be a legitimate, bipartisan question of qualifications. Everybody likes Dr. Ronny Jackson. He was President Obama's physician. He's President Trump's physician now. I haven't heard anybody speak an ill word of him. But listen to these senators, two Democrats and two Republicans. Senator Jerry Moran of Kansas, doesn't have the experience you think would traditionally be required at the VA. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, he's got a great bedside manner but it doesn't mean he'll be a good leader of the VA. John Boozman of Arkansas, I do have concern about his experience so far as managing people. Patty Murray of Washington, he has some issues with management. He hasn't really overseen a large group. Two Democrats, two Republicans, what they share are seats on the Veterans Affairs Committee where Ronny Jackson has to make his case later this week.
[Collins:] And Veterans Affairs hits home for a lot of people, for your constituents. You cannot vote for someone and put them in that position if you do not have full confidence in how they are going to run the VA, which, of course, has a lot of problems. So I think it hits home for a lot of people. So the White House is saying that these Democrats need to get him confirmed, that he has impeccable credentials, which Ronny Jackson does. He is very well liked in the White House obviously by the president. They hold him in very high regard. But that doesn't mean that he has the experience to run an agency of this caliber. So that is the question here now. And the White House says it's just Democrats. But it's not just Democrats. It's a lot of Republicans too who are if they have not voiced their opposition to him, they are very skeptical of having him be confirmed for this. So he is going to be grilled in his confirmation hearing.
[Raju:] And watch how the veterans service organizations comes out. That's going to be key to determining whether or not he's ultimately confirmed and how he resolves any of their concerns. They've been quiet so far, but if the come out and say they're opposed, expect some Republicans to say no as well.
[Collins:] Yes.
[Lucey:] And it really speaks, I think, to looking ahead. We've just been through a period where the president has seen a lot of turnover, has brought in a lot of new people. If it's this kind of process every single time he needs a confirmation, it really raises questions about whether he can afford to make any make more changes.
[King:] As the that's the Pruitt question, front and center. No time to talk about that one, but that one's front and center. And if Ronny Jackson can't secure the votes, when you have another one. It's hard anyway given the political environment. It's even harder because Republicans don't want to be doing this in an election year, especially on something you mentioned the VA. You want to talk about an issue that they they have to answer when they go home to some of so they don't get asked a lot about the secretary of state when they go home and do town halls. They get asked a lot about the Department of Veterans Affairs and the hospitals.
[Collins:] Exactly.
[King:] All right, a quick break. When we come back, just want to let you know, we're awaiting a press conference in Tennessee where a massive manhunt has been underway for the gunman who killed four people at a Waffle House early Sunday morning. Again, police saying a news conference coming up soon. We'll follow that. But next for us, is this a Republican primary race or a family feud?

[Baldwin:] Thousands of workers at General Motors will soon be without jobs as the American auto giant announces a major restructuring plan. The stunning move means that GM will shut down five plants in North America, four of those auto factories are in the U.S. and one in Canada. GM says it's reducing its workforce by 15 percent, including a quarter of the company's executives. The company says the plan will make it more efficient, saving about $6 billion a year by the end of 20. The United Auto Worker's Union vows to fight these cuts. With me now, CNN's Richard Quest, our business editor at large. And you were making not just shuttered, they've been unallocated.
[Richard Quest, Cnn Business Editor At Large:] This is the awful part of their announcement. It goes through the way that GM believes they'll need resources through the next 10, 15 years. It says, we allocate this and this. And then it says at the end, the following plants will be un-allocated.
[Baldwin:] Instead of being shut down, trying to soften the language.
[Quest:] Exactly. You've not been fired, you've been un-allocated. Which I thought was an extraordinary way to put out such a strong announcement. But GM says these moves are necessary for the car company to remain competitive particularly as it moves to autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicles, and also as it moves towards
[Suv. Baldwin:] This has to be devastating for these communities, Ohio, Michigan. These are places that went for Trump in 2016. And if he wants to win again in 20, is that going to prove to be problematic?
[Quest:] I think he's going to have to come up with some strong action. And you might see that yet, as to what he knew about these GM. Did he negotiate? Did the U.S. government negotiate? Did the states negotiate to try to keep the jobs? What was possible? Because you're right, it's going to be extremely embarrassing on the back of a NAFTA announcement or a NAFTA deal, the USMCA that suddenly this all comes out and that the jobs are going to go anyway. I think voters in those states will quite rightly turn to the President or be asking, so what was this all about if our jobs are going anyway?
[Baldwin:] And what can he say to make them feel any better about losing all this work?
[Quest:] I think he's going to turn on the I don't know, but I think he'll turn on GM. I think he'll use GM as the scapegoat. He'll conveniently ignore the fact that GM has a business to run and will run it in the most efficient and effective way for GM and all its employees, its stockholders, et cetera, et cetera, and I think he'll turn it on them. It will be an attack on the company. Let's watch and wait and see. But anything we've seen so far, whether it's against AT&T, our parent company, Boeing, any of the others, it's always turned into an attack on the company.
[Baldwin:] I'm sure you're right.
[Quest:] Harley Davidson.
[Baldwin:] That's another one. Richard Quest, thank you very much. Next here, police in Alabama admit they shot the wrong man. And now the family of the 21-year-old victim is demanding the release of police body cameras, as they want answers. We'll have a live report for you from Alabama. Also, just in, new numbers on President Trump's job disapproval rating. Now hitting record territory.

[Blitzer:] This coming in to CNN. U.S. Senate will work overtime. The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is cancelling the scheduled August recess. He is in the process blaming Democrats. In a statement, McConnell says, quote, "Due to the historic obstruction by Senate Democrats of the president's nominees and the goal of passing appropriations bills prior to the end of the fiscal year, the August recess has been canceled. Senators should expect to remain in session in August to pass legislation, including appropriations bills and to make additional progress on the president's nominees." That is the statement from Mitch McConnell. No recess in August for the U.S. Senate. Other news we are following, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is hosting a working lunch with the foreign minister of Singapore as preparations for the U.S. and North Korea move full speed ahead. John Bolton may be side lined from the process. CNN has learned that tension with Pompeo and Bolton have reached a boiling point, we're told. We are told that there was a heated exchange with the two men following Bolton's Libya model comments which angered North Korea and Kim Jong- Un. Bolton was not invited to Friday's meeting where North Korean top official delivered a letter from Kim Jong-Un to President Trump over at the White House. You see the picture. Both men smiling there. That was Friday in the Oval Office. Joining us from Capitol Hill is the Hawaii Senator, Mazie Hirono, a democrat. A key member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Judiciary Committee. Senator, what do you think of the behind-the-scene drama, the tension with the national security adviser and secretary of state over North Korea?
[Sen. Mazie Hirono, , Hawaii:] This does not set a reassuring stage for any diplomatic resolution and agreement with North Korea. This is the kind of diplomacy that takes months to set up and you have two key people at odds with each other which is typical for this administration. Not to mention that you have a president who is about to engage in negotiations ill prepared and who changes his mind every other day and you have on the other side Kim Jong-Un who already is known to not keep his promises. This is not a great setting of the stage for fruitful negotiations.
[Blitzer:] Do the tensions between Pompeo and Bolton, who keep players in the national security realm in Washington, will it impact the potential for progress in the talks a week from today in Singapore?
[Hirono:] I would think so. You would want to have the national security adviser engaged and involved and on the same page. To the extent of conflict with Pompeo and Bolton, two key players in the administration, that has got to not bode well for the president's thinking on this strategy and most of us have serious concerns about the president's ability to concentrate and to be focused on what we really need to do with regard to North Korea. We have received very little by the way in terms of how he will approach the negotiations. Heaven forbid he thinks he can go in and have a chat with Kim Jong-Un and use his powers of persuasion. Are you kidding me? This is not reassuring at all.
[Blitzer:] What would you like to see emerge from the meeting with the president and North Korean leader?
[Hirono:] There has to be a complete and verifiable denuclearization of the nuclear program and domestic missile and chemical weapons programs. It has to be verifiable at all times. If North Korea doesn't live up to the agreement, sanctions should come back. Those agreements we should have. Not to mention that I would say South Korea and Japan are interested in particularly Japan with the ICBM missile program. If North Korea denuclearizes, they need to be aware. We need to keep our allies in the loop. Russia is getting into the situation as well as China. This is a complicated circumstance and environment. Yes, we would all like peace in the Korean peninsula. As I said, we have a president who is likely to change his mind at any moment and we have Kim Jong-Un who cannot be relied upon to keep his side of the promise. You know, you need to have some level of assurance that these two leaders will negotiate in good faith and come out with something that can be verifiable and leads us to a peaceful North Korea. We are not reassured that is what's going to happen.
[Blitzer:] Let me get your thoughts on a couple of issues. Senator, the president keeps attacking the Attorney General Jeff Sessions, including once gai again today, including the Russia probe again. What is your reaction?
[Hirono:] It shows the president is desperate as to what his concerns regarding the Mueller investigation. For him to come out and say that he could pardon himself and some of the other outrageous statements he is making. He should put a crown on his head because he is acting like a king and that is not our country. He thinks he is a dictator and king. He says all of these outrageous things. It shows he is really afraid what the Mueller investigation will show with regard to his own actions and particularly, of course, with his efforts to side track the investigation. His continued attacks on Jeff Sessions is just another example of fear that he is expressing.
[Blitzer:] Very quickly. Finally, the announcement made by Mitch McConnell to keep your Senate in session in August. He is blaming the Democrats. You guys, he says, are not doing what you are supposed to be doing.
[Hirono:] That is ridiculous coming from the person who stopped the hearings from going on and kept open the Supreme Court seat open for a year. Mitch McConnell will do anything to keep all of us from going back to the constituents and touching base with them. This is a politically motivated action on his part. It is totally not true that we have not been voting on the president's nomination. If anything, there have been more confirmations fast tracked by Mitch McConnell to lifetime appointments to the judiciary. Appointments of people by people who fit the ideological conservative right-wing Federalist Society perspective that Trump wants on the judiciary for lifetime appointments. That is where Mitch McConnell is coming from today.
[Blitzer:] Senator Hirono, thank you so much for joining us. Please convey our best wishes for the Hawaiians who have been is suffering on the big island in Hawaii. Thank you so much. Good luck to all your fellow Hawaiians.
[Hirono:] I'm very much in touch with our people there. Thank you.
[Blitzer:] I know you are. Senator Hirono of Hawaii. Right now, voters in eight states are headed to the polls in the biggest day of the primary season so far. Many tight races. Most of the attention on California, the state that's crucial for Democrats trying to win control of Congress in November. Today's consequential primaries will give us a better sense of the pulse of the country. Let's go to politics reporter, Chris Cillizza. He'll break it all down for us. Chris, what is the big picture of what's on the line?
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter & Cnn Editor-in-chief:] Happy primary day, Wolf. I love these days. Voters are voting democracy in action. Yes, let's start broad. You are looking at the House. 218 needed for control. Democrats need 23 seats. 23 seats net in the fall in order to win control. I'll explain why California matters to that in a minute. Let's look at the Senate. The Senate is closer. Democrats are down one seat. Republicans have a one-seat m majority. Close in both cases. House is better for Democrats than the Senate. Let's talk about California. You mentioned it, Wolf. The big one from the primaries today. It has something called a jungle primary. It is strange. Here is what it means. It means the top two vote getters, regardless of party, in the primaries today advance. It could be two Democrats. A democrat and Republican. Could be two Republicans. It was done in order to try to prevent polarization. A lot of people in the middle get left out. But Democrats have a huge number of candidates running all over the place in the seats. From the Senate to the governor on down to the House. What that means is you have lots and lots of vote splitting. Here is what is important. The races unless you live there, don't worry about the individual races. Look at this. These are CNN ratings. Six races rated as possible switches. You go out a little further in vulnerability. You are talking eight to ten races that Democrats need to net which is a big deal. Last one. Let's go to Donald Trump. He weighed in a bit here. Vote for Devin Nunes. 21st district. He will be fine today. Vote for Kevin McCarthy. Second ranking House Republican. He will be fine. Roger Wicker, we thought he may have a primary. He will be fine. This is vote for my friends. Obviously, Devin Nunes and the House Intelligence Committee, he and Donald Trump have been allies relating to the deep state. Kevin McCarthy and he are close. McCarthy rumored to be a chief of staff replacement at one point. And Roger Wicker is somebody he gets involved with. He is involved, but not the wing, contested races. He endorsed John Cox for governor. If the Republican can be in the top two slots for governor in California, it is a surprise, Wolf, given the Democratic nature of that state. Big day and a huge day for Democrats chances of winning back the House come November. Back to you Wolf?
[Blitzer:] We will have extensive live coverage as they come in later tonight. Chris Cillizza, thank you. Still to come, Melania Trump made an official appearance at the White House last night to honor Gold Star families. It was her first event in weeks after the week-long hospital stay. She also makes her first public appearance tomorrow. That, and more when we come back.

[John Vause, Cnn International Anchor:] A high-profile Saudi Journalist missing and Turkish officials believe he was killed in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. The Saudis call that baseless. The very latest in live reports just ahead. A primetime victory speech for Donald Trump and his newest Supreme Court Justice with Brett Kavanaugh promising he'll judge with no bitterness after a brutal confirmation process. The experts warning of a climate catastrophe just 12 years left they say to stop it. Hello and welcome to our viewers all around the world. I'm John Vause and this is CNN NEWSROOM. The Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. has emphatically denied that a prominent journalists and dissidents been killed while visiting the kingdom's consulate in Istanbul. Jamal Khashoggi visited the consulate a week ago and has not been seen since. The Saudis insist he left alive but Turkish officials believe he was killed inside that building, an allegation which the Saudi Ambassador in Washington called absolutely false and baseless. On Monday Turkish President demanded the Saudi to produce evidence of proof of life.
[Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President, Turkey:] I feel responsible as president for getting to the bottom of this case. The consulate officials cannot save themselves by simply saying he has left but they have to produce concrete evidence. If he left then they must have video to prove it.
[Vause:] Jomana Karadsheh, joins us now live from outside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. And Jomana, the U.S. Secretary of State is now running a transparent investigation by the Saudis into what may or may not have happened here are. The U.S. Vice President a few hours early tweeted this. Deeply troubled, I hear reports about Saudi Arabian journalist Jamal Khashoggi. If true this is a tragic day. Violence against journalists across the globe is the threat to freedom of the press and human rights. The free world deserves answers. Putting aside all the irony here about the Trump administration claiming about violence against journalists but these statements coming from the Trump administration are pretty timid especially when compared with what we're hearing from other countries especially U.S. allies.
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn Correspondent:] Absolutely, John. You know, and everyone here has been waiting to hear from the United States. You know, they were there was some hope that he would come out with stronger statement, stronger action to back its NATO ally Turkey in this situation. You know, talking to colleagues and friends of Khashoggi over the past week, you know, they were saying only one country. You know, you hear all these statements coming from other European countries. They say the one country that really matters and has an obligation to step in to this situation is the United States because of the leverage it has over Saudi Arabia, the strong relationship it has with the Kingdom and that personal relationship that President Trump has with the royal family, with young Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman MBS who has been praised on so many occasions by President Trump. So when you hear the president saying yes, he is concerned about these reports but he's hoping that it will sort itself out as he puts it, that's really not going to impress many people here who were hoping that the president would have much stronger words and action in this case. John?
[Vause:] Obviously, we're now at the case of what the Saudis are saying, what the Turks are demanding and the sort of back and forth. It seems pretty simple that you know, if there is video out there to prove that he left, turn it up and, the claim that the cameras weren't rolling whether they were here for the Saudis doesn't seem very credible.
[Karadsheh:] No. And this is what we've been hearing, John, from Turkish officials for days now. You heard it yesterday from President Erdogan saying, OK, Saudi Arabia is saying he left the consulate, show us the proof that he did. And you know, we've observed this. Over the past week you've got so many cameras around this consulate. If he did indeed leave, why not release the video showing that. And as you mentioned they say that you know, some reports are quoting Saudi officials saying that the cameras were not recording that day. And this is where you hear Turkish officials saying that the answers they've received so far are not really convincing. So we'll have to wait and see what Turkish investigators have right now. This is not a remote area of Istanbul. This is a very busy commercial business district of the city. So there's a lot of surveillance cameras around here and we know that they are going through all that footage to try and see what happened. But as the Turkish president, other officials have said, it is on Saudi Arabia to prove what they're saying that he did leave the consulate. John?
[Vause:] Jomana, thank you. Thank you for the update. We appreciate it. Jomana Karadsheh there live in Istanbul. The major television moment at the White House in front of a room full of reporters and cheering Republicans, Brett Kavanaugh has been sworn in again as the newest Justice on the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh actually took the oath of office on Saturday within hours of his Senate competition. On Monday, President Donald Trump used a nationally televised ceremony to apologize to Kavanaugh and his family for the pain and suffering they've enjoyed during his Senate confirmation.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] On behalf of our nation I want to apologize to Brett and the entire Kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you have been forced to endure. Those who step forward to serve our country deserve a fair and dignified evaluation, not a campaign of political and personal destruction based on lies and deception. What happened to the Kavanaugh family violates every notion of fairness decency and due process.
[Vause:] Well, on Tuesday Justice Kavanaugh will take his seat alongside his eight colleagues and hear his first case. And during that White House ceremony, he promised to be a force for stability and unity.
[Brett Kavanaugh, Associate Justice Of The Supreme Court Of The United States:] The Senate confirmation process was contentious and emotional. That process is over. My focus now is to be the best justice I can be. I take this office with gratitude and no bitterness. On the Supreme Court, I will seek to be a force for stability and unity. My goal is to be a great justice for all Americans and for all of America. I will work very hard to achieve that goal.
[Vause:] Earlier in the day though, the President did not hold back. He called Democrats and all those who oppose Kavanaugh's nomination evil. Jim Acosta has details.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] With his nominee Brett Kavanaugh heading to the high court, President Trump is still delivering some low blows.
[Trump:] False charges, false accusations, horrible statements that were totally untrue that he knew nothing about. It was a disgraceful situation brought about by people that are evil and he toughed it out.
[Acosta:] At a speech to law enforcement officials in Orlando, Mr. Trump did not make it clear whether he considered Kavanaugh's accuser Christine Blasey Ford as being evil as well. But before he left for Florida, the President's signal he could already see the battle in political terms predicting that many Democrats are suddenly going to abandon their hopes for a blue wave in the upcoming midterms.
[Trump:] A man that was caught up in a hoax that was set up by the Democrats using the Democrats lawyers and now they want to impeach him. I think a lot of Democrats are going to vote Republican because I have many friends that are Democrats. The main base of the Democrats have shifted so far left that will end up being Venezuela.
[Acosta:] The President's Kavanaugh playbook was on display at a rally over the weekend in Kansas where Mr. Trump accused Democrats of using mob tactics pointing to the protesters shouting as senators up on Capitol Hill.
[Trump:] It's unthinkable. In their quest for power, the radical Democrats have turned into an angry mob.
[Acosta:] The President may be forgetting he too has repeatedly encouraged unruly behavior as a candidate.
[Trump:] I like to punch him in the face. I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this, they'd be carried out on a stretcher folks. I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK.
[Acosta:] Still, the anger flowing through both parties after the Supreme circus is palpable when GOP Senator Lindsey Graham's emotional defense of Kavanaugh.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I've never been more pissed in my life. I voted for Sotomayor and Kagan. I would have never done this to them. This is character assassination. This is wanting power too much.
[Acosta:] To the Democratic outrage directed at Republican Senator Susan Collins who now says she does not believe Kavanaugh assaulted Ford.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] I do believe that she was assaulted. I don't know by whom and I'm not certain when but I do not believe that he was the assailant.
[Acosta:] Even Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell got testy over the weekend when he left open the possibility he could support filling a Supreme Court vacancy during the next presidential election. Something he would not do when Barack Obama selected Merrick Garland in 2016.
[Unidentified Male:] If you can't question a direct question, are you saying that
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Senate Majority Leader:] Well, the answer to your question is we'll see whether there's a vacancy in 2020.
[Acosta:] The President wasn't completely focused on Kavanaugh as he invited Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to ride on Air Force One. Rosenstein no longer appears to be on thin ice after he once talked of secretly recording the president and even having him removed from office using the 25th Amendment.
[Trump:] We had a very good talk I will say that. That became a very big story actually folks. We had a good talk.
[Acosta:] As for that meeting, the President had with Rosenstein, the White House told reporters the two men discussed general Justice Department business but there weren't many other details. Those details could be illuminating as Rosenstein is the Justice Department official overseeing the Russia investigation. Jim Acosta, CNN the White House.
[Vause:] For more now, political analyst and author of Standoff: How America Became Ungovernable, Bill Schneider is with us now from Washington. Bill, good to see you. If this was anything but your run-of-the-mill swearing-in ceremony and by that I mean it was actually a fake ceremony in some ways as Kavanaugh had taken the oath on Saturday and listen now to how the room reacted when Donald Trump walked in. And we also just moments ago from the President apologizing to Kavanaugh on behalf of the nation. In many ways, it seems Donald Trump just kicked off the Republican campaign for next month's congressional elections, the Midterms.
[Bill Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] That is predictable. Donald Trump makes sure that the news is all about him. He obviously played any president plays an important role in a Supreme Court appointment nomination but still, the whole fight has really been about Donald Trump as much as it's been about Judge Kavanaugh.
[Vause:] Yes. And not long after this, you know, made for television but not legally required swearing-in ceremony, New York Times ran with this headline. Trump seeks to make Kavanaugh furor a campaign asset, not a liability. And so he goes on to detail a strategy by the president focusing on the treatment of men during this MeToo era and a lack of due process and how unfair all those crazy liberals are and the progressives have been. Given the incredibly low support among women to this administration, is this strategy best explained all the lines of what do we got to lose?
[Schneider:] Well, that's an explanation I think it works. And look, men came out for him in 2016. He's dependent on them to win. There is a big gender division over Kavanaugh's confirmation but there's an even bigger partisan division. That's the real division in the country. The difference between men and women was big but the difference between Republicans and Democrats was even bigger. And President Trump has really governed in an unusual way more than any president I think in certainly in memory and maybe in history, this president is a divider. He makes no pretense like most of his predecessors of trying to heal the division in the country.
[Vause:] We mentioned the polling numbers and there are new numbers out from CNN and it shows a slim majority of Americans now opposing Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court. At the same time support for his confirmation has actually in stop as well. That's because a poll taken back in August, many didn't declare a preference either way but. But now they do and this growing opposition, it's coming purely from the Democrat side. Republican support for Kavanaugh is actually higher than it's ever been. It since top you know, a few points there as well. You know, as you say, it seems this president with his divide-and- conquer strategy which is work to the past but this is about the Supreme Court and it seems that this is now at a whole new level, a level the country has never seen before.
[Schneider:] The Supreme Court even, the senator is supposed to be above partisan politics. Well, that hasn't been true of the Senate in a long time and it's certainly not true now. This was a historic division in the United States. I even compare it to what historian is called the great division in France during the Dreyfus Affair 100 years ago where all France was divided left and right. The left and the right dreamed of annihilating each other. Well, that's what's happened in the United States now. The Senate now which is supposed to be the place where partisan passions cool, the Senate has now become the real hotbed of partisanship and unfortunately, so is the Supreme Court becoming a partisan division. And that's very unfortunate because the Supreme Court is the voice of the Constitution and it's not supposed to be partisan.
[Vause:] Yes. The one major driving factor in politics in the U.S. right now seems to be anger at the other side. And you know, after he made this to the controversial appearance before the Senate committee last week, on Monday Kavanaugh tried to reassure those who doubt that he'll be an impartial, unbiased judge. This is what he said.
[Kavanaugh:] Every litigant in the Supreme Court can be assured that I'll listen to their arguments with respect and in open minds.
[Vause:] Now, compare that guy from the other guy at the Senate Committee hearing last week.
[Kavanaugh:] This is a circus. The consequences will extend long pass my nomination. The consequences will be with us for decades. This grotesque and coordinated character assassination will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from serving our country. And as we all know in the United States political system of the early 2000s, what goes around comes around.
[Vause:] OK. So, who do you believe here, your mild-mannered, calm, reasonable Supreme Court sworn in Judge Kavanagh or angry, hostile, beer-loving you know what, goes around comes around frat boy like who testified last week?
[Schneider:] Well, we don't know yet. We're going to have to see what he does on the court. He would probably defend himself by saying, when he talked about partisan division and passion, he was talking about the Senate and the confirmation process. We can only hope so because when it comes to passing judgment, the Supreme Court is the final word. It has authority over both executives in the legislative branch. It is the Constitution, it's the voice of the Constitution. And for that to become partisan in the United States is a very severe blow to our democracy.
[Vause:] Yes, and it has just become more, more partisan since. Bill, as always so good to see you. Thank you.
[Schneider:] Sure.
[Vause:] Well, what could be a new revelation in the identity of the second suspect in the Skripal poisoning in the U.K. back in March? The intelligence Web site, Bellingcat, says the big details will be in public on Tuesday at the British Parliament. For your details now from CNN's Fred Pleitgen.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] After claiming to have revealed the identity of one of the two alleged assailants of Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia in the Novichock poison that happened earlier this year, the British investigative Web site, Bellingcat, now claims to also know the identity of the second man alleged by British authorities to have taken part in the poisoning. Now, British authorities have always said they believe that two men were using aliases and the second man they named as Alexander Petrov. But Bellingcat now says that they believe that his true name is Alexander Mishkin. That he's 39 years old, a military doctor and that he was also recruited by Russia's military intelligence service, the GRU. Now, Bellingcat issued a press release because ahead of what they say tomorrow will be a larger press conference as to what exactly their methodology and also their sources was. But they do say that they talked to several sources both in St. Petersburg and also in the home village of Mishkin which they say is called Loyga, north of Moscow. Now, the Russian authorities we've been asking them for comment on this. We reached out both to the spokeswoman for the foreign ministry and to the Kremlin, as well. So far, they have not answered. In the past hour, of the Kremlin and the foreign ministry have said that they don't believe that any of the reports from Bellingcat are credible. But, of course, all of this comes after several days with embarrassing revelations for the Russians the GRU, of course, being accused by the Americans, the Dutch and also the British of having conducted cyber operations against these countries. And some of the alleged evidence was made public. So far, we're seeing a fairly muted response to the by the Russians to a lot of those allegations. But clearly, a lot of people here in Russia believe that this is a big setback and has been a big string of setbacks for the Russians and for their military intelligence service. Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Moscow.
[Vause:] Still to come here. Hundreds are mourning Victoria Marinova, a Bulgarian television journalist found dead last week. She's the third journalist killed in the European Union this year, and E.U. officials demanding a speedy investigation to find her killer. Also ahead, the former head of Interpol now the target of a criminal investigation. The latest senior official caught up in China's anti- corruption crackdown. We'll explain.

[Howell:] 1.5 degrees. Let's turn to those crucial climate talks that are taking place in Poland. Many scientists agree that if the earth's temperature rises more than 1.5 degrees, then it could produce disastrous environmental results. Delegates from nearly 200 countries at the COP 24 summit are trying to negotiate a plan to limit global warming and move the Paris climate agreement ahead. But reports say disputes over finances have been a major sticking point. Ironically, the very place where these talks are taking place is the heart of Poland's coal country. Our Nick Paton Walsh has that part of the story.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] If there's a glimmer of hope for climate change on the planet it's not down here. A thousand meters mining underground, women are seen as bad luck, and everyone greets each other with "God bless you". [on camera]: It's quite startling this far below the earth to see how divorced this world is from the global challenge above of COP 24. [voice over]: This coal helps make steel even for cleaner technologies so nobody feels change is coming soon. "Global warming is overrated," he says. "It's based on political motives to lower coal use." Poland has the motherload of coal. It does indeed. Black gold is at the core of life and prestige here. Mining hasn't lost any of its sparkle. In this tiny block of flats, coal this is how in the damp they keep themselves warm, the real constant in this former miner's life. But it's also what they wear, how they wash and even in where they worship. This was once a mining community. But now the men in overalls are here to fix gas supplies and former teachers know change can't be stopped. "We care about the environment," she says. "But it is regrettable our families won't have jobs. The coal stoves are going away," another adds. "I even use gas now." They were teaching three-year-old children how to separate rubbish, she asks and what to do with it. A paradox too, then for a summit about how the world will measure emission reductions. Technicalities that are both easy to dismiss but also vital to ensure a drop and save our planet. [on camera]: A lot of this is about presentation, and about convincing people of the trillions of dollars they've got to spend to prevent catastrophe. But there is something also utterly vital missing. And that's a message of international consensus. The summit thrown by a refusal to welcome a key scientific report last weekend led by Russia, you have space here but few people from the United States who were are listed as here on floor mat. People keep coming to ask him where is America. Their joined by Kuwait who share a space around this engine with Saudi Arabia who mark their office like this. [on camera]: No one inside. This is the Saudi room, though, yes.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Walsh:] but the joke isn't funny anymore, not with 12 years to avoid global disaster. The U.S. instead found itself chanted down by protesters as it promoted fossil fuel use. It's a different world here for Barack Obama's former climate change envoy Todd Stern.
[Tood Stern, Former Climate Change Envoy:] There's been a certain amount of chucking those eggs at a more political level as well. And having the U.S. not engaged in that instrumental way and not engaged that that senior political way from the President and you know down to really to my level. That's that makes it more difficult here. The worst thing you can do is look at the ITCC report and say oh, my God, look where we are, and put your, you know, put a pillow over your head and say I can't think about this. And let's just go see walls.
[Walsh:] But even if there is success here, it is outside these walls in daily lives globally, but the great change must come. Nick Paton Walsh, CNN Katowice.
[Howell:] Nick thank you. Still ahead here on NEWSROOM space tourism may be a giant leap closer as a supersonic plane reaches incredible new heights.

[Vause:] Well, Donald Trump is doing his part to continue the controversy over NFL players kneeling during the national anthem.
[Sesay:] Late Monday, he tweeted this. "A big salute to Jerry Jones, owner of the Dallas Cowboys, who will bench players who disrespects our flag. Stand for anthem or sit for game."
[Vause:] Joining me now from Atlanta, former NFL defensive back, Tyrone Poole. Tyrone thanks for coming in. I know it's late there in Atlanta so we appreciate it.
[Tyron Poole, Former Nfl Defensive Back:] Thanks.
[Vause:] There is all the [inaudible] for Jerry Jones from ESPN Chris Mortensen who spoke to the owner of the Cowboys a few hours ago. He tweeted this out, "Jones adamant the policy is in best interest of players, who need consequences to stand up to peer pressure." So how is this decision by Jones in the best interest of the players and can he do it? Does he have the authority to bench players in the first place?
[Poole:] Well, again he is the owner but at the same time, players I believe have a right amongst themselves to display their displeasure or their likes about certain things. And I think you start to divide and really kind of go into excessive jeopardy when you start to take away individuals' rights to express themselves.
[Vause:] You know, the NFL isn't really talking about the stand taken by Jerry Jones. But the "Washington Post" has reported that prompted a response Monday by DeMaurice Smith, the executive director of the NFL Players' Association who said that he and the players have been assured last Tuesday by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and New York Giants co-owner John Mara that they would respect the constitutional rights of our members without retribution. Will the NFL have a confrontation with Jones over this? Or will they just let him sort of quietly do what he's doing?
[Poole:] Well, I think it's not going to go away. I'll put it to you like that. It's not going to go away. This is an issue that stems way beyond NFL football. It actually revolves around life itself. Even if you want to go back into the 80s and I'm talking about demonstration for injustice and equality. There was a certain rap group back in the 80s and they were talking about issues that they were dealing with in their neighborhoods and they used music to actually let the world know what was going wrong. So I think here in the NFL guys have a platform to where they can show their displeasure to let the world know what is still happening and needs to be corrected. So I don't think it's going to go away. But I do think we need to form some type of alliance to where everyone understands what each other is feeling. And until we do that, then it's not going to go away quietly.
[Vause:] Do you get a sense that there's not a lot of listening to both sides here going on?
[Poole:] Well, again, unless you spend time with a person, if I live on the east side and you live on the west side and it's easy for someone who is on the west side to say what their opinion is about the east side. But until you come and spend time with me, then I feel like you have an opportunity to understand my frustrations. As vice versa as I go and live on the west side, I gain opportunity to see how your frustrations call you to be who you are.
[Vause:] Yes. If you're not listening, if you're not talking then you don't know really what's going on. So a day after Vice President Mike Pence walked out of the 49ers-Colts game in Indianapolis, the Trump campaign sent out a fundraising e- mail, there it is, praising the action taken by Pence adding "Please make a contribution of at least $5 to show your support and our team will send you an "I Stand for the Flag" sticker." If someone wasn't convinced that the walk-out by Pence was not a political stunt, does this e-mail sort of remove all doubt?
[Poole:] Well, I think, again my opinion. I look at the word "premeditated". Premeditated basically you're doing something that you already know was going to happen. And players have been kneeling from the beginning of the season, all the way back to Colin Kaepernick. So you knew that this was going to happen. So me, personally, I think it was a publicity stunt to continue to draw attention to an issue that basically I think is secondary to a lot of other issues that are going on in this country and around the world. So for me, I say it was premeditated.
[Vause:] Yes. It you know, was a principal issue that possibly, you know, Mike Pence shouldn't have gone if he can get a guarantee that they would not stand and that will be done. But that's not clearly what happened. But Tyrone good to see you. Thank you so much.
[Poole:] Yes. Thank you.
[Sesay:] All right. Switching gears now. And we're learning new details about the gunman behind last week's deadly massacre in Las Vegas 58 people were killed and more than 500 wounded. Authorities initially said a security guard interrupted the shooter as he opened fire on the crowd. But now, now they're saying this.
[Sheriff Joseph Lombardo, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department:] He was injured prior to the mass volley of shooting. What we have learned is Mr. Campos was encountered by the suspect prior to his shooting to the outside world.
[Sesay:] Well, authorities can't point to a specific event in the gunman's life as a motive but they say he indeed carried out a purposeful plan to take lives. CNN's Kyung Lah tells us about a deposition that could give us some insight into this man.
[Kyun Lah, Cnn Correspondent:] Before the gunman unleashed his murderous assault on an innocent concert crowd, he called himself the biggest video poker player in the world, gambling up to a million dollars in a single night, overnight, sleeping during the day, prescribed valium for anxiousness. These are the killer's own words as he testified in 2013 in this lawsuit against the Cosmopolitan Hotel in Las Vegas where he slipped in the walkway. He says he moved from Las Vegas casino to casino, at one point staying maybe upwards of three weeks out of a month. A high-roller, his hotel stays were comped 95 percent of the time, that's ranged from $100 to $1,350 each time I pushed the button. When he says on a given night he'll bet a million dollars, an attorney replied, that's a lot of money. "No, it's not". He called video poker a game of discipline, at times appearing condescending and sarcastic as he explains to his attorney why he stays sober while gambling. "At the stakes I play, you want to have all your wits about you." The gunman's home in Mesquite, Nevada suggests an upper middle class retired life. For easy access to a doctor, he paid a yearly retainer fee to Nevada internet Dr. Steven Winkler. He says Winkler prescribed him valium. Why, it's for anxiousness. Rage, aggressiveness and irritability are among the possible side effects of taking valium, according to the manufacturer of the drug. The "Las Vegas Review Journal" reported that Dr. Winkler prescribed him valium in June of this year. CNN could not independently confirm that information. Despite all the claims about his high-rolling ways, he testified on the day he fell in the Cosmopolitan he wore his typical clothing saying "I always wear black Nike sweat pants that are nylon or polyester." On his feet, black flip-flops that he wore 98 percent of the time. "Life was better before the economic meltdown," he testified saying Vegas casinos comped less and less, meaning he visited Sin City less. "What happened to the economy in 2007", he said, "it tanked. Las Vegas went into the gutter with a lot of other things. They quit giving away freebies. It just wasn't coming out here as often." Kyung Lah, CNN Las Vegas.
[Vause:] Well, coming up here on NEWSROOM L.A. with Catalonia on the verge of declaring independence from Spain, the standoff with Madrid is reaching a tipping point.

[John Vause, Cnn International Anchor:] Hello everybody, thank you for being with us. I'm John Vause. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM. Ahead this hour, protesters return to the streets of Venezuela demanding an end to Nicolas Maduro's regime while the U.S. tries to bolster the legitimacy of the man who would be the next head of state. How many ways can they say no? European leaders did not waste any time rejecting new Brexit talks as concern grows the U.K. could crash out of the E.U. without a deal. And Donald Trump opens a Twitter war on his own intelligence chief claiming they should go back to school after a public takedown of the U.S. President To begin this hour, Venezuela and the growing pressure on the embattled Nicolas Maduro to step down as president. Thousands of protesters turned out on the streets of Caracas responding to a call from the leader of the National Assembly and self-declared president Juan Guaido. In a telephone call Wednesday, U.S. President Donald Trump congratulated Guaido for assuming the role of interim president last week. The U.S. had more than a dozen other countries consider Moduro's reelected last year to a second term is illegitimate and recognized Guaido interim head of state. Chris Sabatini from Columbia University's School of International Public Affairs is with us now from New York. Chris, Juan Guaido, he has written an opinion piece in the New York Times and partly explains why he's in fact the legitimate interim president arguing because you know, the last part of the international community considers Maduro's re-election as illegitimate, that gave him the authority as you know, the head of the National Assembly to assume the role of interim president. He writes this. My ascension as interim president is based on Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution. According to which, if at the outset of a new term there is no elected head of state, power is vested in the president of the National Assembly until free and transparent elections take place. This is why the oath I took on January 23rd cannot be considered a self-Proclamation. It was all of my own accord that I extreme the function of president that day but in adherence to the Constitution. OK, so just purely from a legal and a constitutional point of view, is he unsafe or he's on shaky ground?
[Chris Sabatini, Professor, Columbia University:] Well, first of all, his point about that the media is portraying him as a self-proclaimed president is a good one and it's true. We can argue the constitutionality of this but the taglines self-proclaimed president makes this sound like he just put on a presidential sash, stood out in a balcony and proclaimed himself to the people. He didn't. You know, there is a constitutional basis for this. Now and he represents the only democratically elected institution in Venezuela right now. So arguably the only democratically legitimate institution. Now Article 233, John, that you mentioned basically says the president is incapacitated. Now, the question is having a president that is was elected under clearly fraudulent elections, that were moved, that were gamed, that had that were denounced by over fifty governments, does that amount to him being capacitated? That's really that's a legal issue, but that's really what the it's the that's the read that Guaido is leaning on in the interpretation.
[Vause:] OK. So there isn't you know, a legal basis there which you can certainly argue you know, the strength of. OK, the White House welcomed a senior diplomat for Venezuela on Wednesday. He was appointed by Juan Guaido. This is Carlos Vecchio. He was greeted in the Roosevelt Room by the Vice President. I will say the U.S. President telephoning Guaido to great him on becoming you know, the interim president, these are all gestures intended to boost the credibility of Guaido as you know, the head of state. Is this a good strategy by the United States?
[Sabatini:] Well, let's take a step back because it's complicated, John. I think this was a bold move diplomatically. And we have to remember that Canada and eleven countries in Latin America have recognized Guaido even the socialist international, the party network globally has accepted that National Assembly as being legitimate. So there's it is a good diplomatic move. It's clearly a collective effort to put pressure on the Maduro government to have some peaceful democratic transition. Now, to your point though, John, is it so good to have this administration embraced Guaido and Carlos Vecchio so closely? I'm not so sure. Obviously the U.S. has a very spotty history when it comes to intervention in the region stretching back even to the Monroe Doctrine of 1823. So you know, it risks making this government is legitimate. We could claim that it is Guaido, it risk making it look like a U.S. puppet or an interlocutor for U.S. interests. And so you know, I think this administration would be wise to step back and let other governments embrace it. We have to meet with Prime Minister Trudeau or something like that because the U.S., it is a damaged brand sometimes when it comes to objective legitimate support for transitions and change in Latin America.
[Vause:] Yes. The reputation isn't the best at times.
[Sabatini:] No.
[Vause:] After meeting at the White House, Carlos Vecchio did the television rounds and then include appearing on CNN. This is part of what he said.
[Carlos Vecchio, Venezuelan Opposition Charge D'affaires:] In my view, the majority of the military force are with us. They are just stopped by a small elite on the top of the military institution. But at the end of the day they are Venezuelans. They have family. They are suffering the same thing that we are suffering as ordinary people. So at the end of the day in my view, with this pressure that we are putting on the streets from our institution of the National Assembly and from the international community, I hope they can just be the in the right side and supporting and what our Constitution says.
[Vause:] OK, so Vecchio representing Guaido believes the military is with them. We also saw Nicolas Maduro appearing on state television Wednesday and he was also out there rallying the support of the military
[Nicolas Maduro, President, Venezuela:] [Speaking Spanish]
[Venezuelan Military:] [Speaking Spanish]
[Vause:] OK. So the basic question here is where is the loyalty of the military right now?
[Sabatini:] Well, first of all there are two militaries. There are the soldiers and non-conscripted officers who truly do not have benefit to a lot of the corruption that this army and armed forces and national guard have been have access to. They are suffering. I mean, in the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, food and medicine, they are suffering and their families are suffering and their salaries aren't keeping up with inflation. But then there's the officer corps. And Maduro has done a very wise thing if you want to build an autocracy is what he's done he's promoted an inordinate number of generals. There are more generals in Venezuela than there are in NATO countries combined, OK. So what he's done is he's promoted and built a loyalty within the officer corps. And that loyalty is not just based on their ties to his him personally but also he doles out basically access to corruption, the best the most plumbed position to have in the Venezuelan military is a border of Colombia because you get to extort money from narco-traffickers for cocaine flights. But the military is also involved in food distribution. It's involved it runs the oil company, PDVSA which was recently sanctioned by the United States. It is rife with corruption and the question is, will these high-level military ops be willing to break with Maduro given they're going to be subject to criminal investigations and trials and sentences perhaps, they will and they will lose access to a pretty rich resource. So yes, we're talking to militaries. It's a tough sell for some of these guys.
[Vause:] Yes. More generals than NATO. That's a fact I did not know and it says a lot as you say. Chris, great to have you with us. I really appreciate your insights. Thank you.
[Sabatini:] Thank you very much, John.
[Vause:] At least now there is agreement in the U.K. Parliament and that is for the Prime Minister Theresa May to return to Brussels and come back with a better Brexit deal. In particular, there is a majority in favor of an alternative to the unpopular backstop provision. The part of the Brexit withdraw deal meant to keep the Irish border open but already the E.U. is saying no, won't happen, not a chance, no way together which means the chances at the U.K. crashing out of the E.U. without a trade deal in place are more likely. And members of parliament have agreed to something else. That would be bad. A no deal should not be an option. But that amendment passes a non-binding measure more aspirational than anything else which kind of irritated the Prime Minister.
[Theresa May, Prime Minister, United Kingdom:] That's not the house did vote to reject no deal but that cannot be the end of the story. The only way the right on the gentleman says of course not. I think that's I think that's the first time he's actually accepted that you can't just vote to reject no deal, you have to vote for a deal otherwise you leave with no deal.
[Vause:] The E.U. seems almost as frustrated with the U.K. as it complains especially over the Irish backstop while fairly to offer any concrete proposals in response to that. Now, the European Council President Donald Tusk tweeted, "The E.U. position is clear and consistent. The withdrawal agreement is not open for renegotiation." Yesterday we found out what the U.K. doesn't want but we still don't know what the U.K. does want. That point was driven home by the head of the European Commissioner Jean-Claude Juncker.
[Jean-claude Juncker, President, European Commission:] Sometimes from time to time I have the impression that some hope that the 26 other countries will abandon the backstop and so Ireland at the last minute. But this is not a game and neither is it a simple bilateral issue. It goes to the heart of what being a member of the European Union means. Ireland's border is Europe's border and it is our union's priority.
[Vause:] But not everyone in the U.K. sees a no deal Brexit it on March 29th is Armageddon. Some economists even believe it could affect be a big boost for Britain's bottom line. Here's CNN's Nina dos Santos.
[Nina Dos Santos, Cnn Europe Editor:] It's the biggest question on Britain's minds and one their Parliament's tried to make sure the country would not have to answer.
[May:] The house did vote to reject no deal but that cannot
[Dos Santos:] What would happen if the U.K. left the E.U. without a deal? The official predictions have been sobering. From immediate shortages of food and medicines as ports block up to a nine percent fall in GDP. A 30 percent drop in house prices and sharp interest rate hikes. In other words disaster says this campaigner who fought for Parliament to have the final say.
[Gina Miller, Campaigner And Founder, Lead Not Leave:] No deal will be an absolute catastrophe. No deal means no transition. So that means in the morning of the 30th of March, everything would have to be in place. So we would have to start from scratch. And also this idea that we were we will be able to replicate exactly the same is impossible. Because if you think about it we are 65 million people compared to half a billion in the E.U. so we just don't have the same clouds.
[Dos Santos:] But with unemployment at a 43-three year low and exports still growing, Brexiters say the country is well equipped.
[Edgar Miller, Convener, Economist For Free Trade:] It shouldn't be thought of as no deal. It should be thought of as a different deal. We, in fact, have generally referred to it as a world trade deal where you stop the obsession about trying to have a special arrangement with the
[E.u. Dos Santos:] The E.U.'s own research predicts the line share of growth over the next decade will come from outside the bloc and levers want Britain to be able to capitalize on that trend.
[E. Miller:] The biggest benefit is that you can do free trade deals with all the countries in the world and we run we calculate that to be about a four percent increase in GDP. Secondly, you have your own regulation that is tailored to the U.K. You can get rid of the dead hand of E.U. regulation and we calculate that, it's about another two percentage points increase in
[Gdp. Dos Santos:] Whether no deal Brexit ends up being a blessing or a curse depends to a large extent on whether the U.K. can trade under World Trade Organization rules after leaving the E.U. Now, aside from the fact that that could make a whole range of goods including some of these clothes on this London High Street subject to significant tariffs, it's also unclear as to whether the WTO rules today would need to be brought up to date with more modern aspects of the British economy.
[G. Miller:] Leaving with no deal means leaving every single E.U. institution and we would have to have those replicated on the morning of the 30th of March. So that's a medicals agency and a chemicals agency, the list goes on and on. We have not one ready.
[Dos Santos:] As ever with Brexit, the theory paints one picture of the practicalities another and until March the 29th, no one will really know if no deal is or isn't the way to go. Nina dos Santos, CNN London.
[Vause:] This time it's different. Donald Trump has criticized and question his intelligence chiefs people but not like this. Ahead, it's all out this time. It's all out in the open and the President publicly standing by his assessment of what is and is not a national security risk. Plus staring out the polar vortex, our winter blast paralyzing parts the U.S. with temperatures plunging way below zero.

[Cabrera:] For the first time, an American admits he helped foreigners funnel money to President Trump's inauguration. Longtime lobbyist Samuel Patten in court pleading guilty yesterday to failing to register as a foreign agent. Patten revealed he helped a Russian and a Ukrainian illegally purchase tickets to the January 2017 inauguration. Patten has ties to a Russian associate of President Trump's former campaign Chairman Paul Manafort. And he has agreed to cooperate with special counsel Robert Mueller. The president's attorney calls the indictment irrelevant.
[Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump's Attorney:] What does this have to do with President Trump? Not a single thing. It has nothing to do with collusion. Some guy who donated to the inauguration. My goodness. There are 500,000 people that donated to President Trump.
[Cabrera:] Joining us now prosecutor turned defense attorney Randy Zelin. Randy you are kind of laughing as you listen to Giuliani. Is this guilty plea irrelevant?
[Randy Zelin, Defense Attorney:] Nothing is irrelevant. And the fact that the former mayor and counsel to the president is saying that it's irrelevant reminds me of the old maxim doth protest too much. I wonder of those 500,000 people who donated how many of them were Russian?
[Cabrera:] That's the question we want to know, too. And this is obviously one person now who we have learned, which is why this is a big deal because this is the first time we actually see Russian money or in foreign influence, he also worked with Ukrainians, going directly to President Trump.
[Zelin:] We have a lot of firsts. And what happens over time, those firsts, they build, and they build, and they build, and they build like building blocks. And suddenly you get to the top of the first.
[Cabrera:] Well, we have George Papadopoulos, who is also part of the president's team revealing more in a recent court filing, this is according to some documents just last night. According to George Papadopoulos's defense team, "Papadopoulos told investigators that when he pitched the idea during the campaign of a meeting between President Trump or then candidate Trump and Putin, Trump nodded in approval. And Attorney General Jeff Sessions seemed to like the idea." Now, if there was never a meeting, Randy, does it matter, this conversation, and how it exactly went down? What do investigators do with this?
[Zelin:] Nothing in a vacuum seems to matter. But remember something put it in context. As I understand the swirl of evidence out there, Attorney General Sessions has gone before Congress and denied exactly what Mr. Papadopoulos said just took place. So it puts Attorney General Sessions in some potential jeopardy. It's yet another story that rings hollow. It's yet another piece of the puzzle that, again, you look piece in a vacuum, what the hell does it mean? But when you have it all kind of laid out there on the table and you start clicking them together, this is yet something else where we left we are left as citizens saying, my God, is it really possible.
[Cabrera:] In the mean, we have the president continuing to attack the investigation. This week he called it illegal in an interview with Bloomberg. He also went to rally. He threatened to get involved. In the meantime, let's take a look at the bigger picture. We have the special counsel investigation securing more than 191 criminal charges against 35 people and entities. Six of those people have now pleaded guilty. One, Paul Manafort was found guilty. On top of that, four separate federal judges have upheld Mueller's appointment and constitutional authority. Randy, do innocent people try to shut down probe that are securing convictions and guilty pleas if in the end they will not be convicted because they are completely innocent?
[Zelin:] That is an extraordinary question, because the flipside of that question that you hear most of the time is the opposite, which is, don't innocent people speak up? Don't innocent people protest? The accusations? And of course as a defense attorney, I remind everyone, the smartest thing you can do as an innocent person is keep your mouth shut. And what's happening here is that the president is teaching us that I'm right. Imagine, if you will and your viewers imagine for a moment if the president never tweeted, if the president never spoke and simply carried on the business of being the president, let the investigation do its thing, let White House counsel and everybody else surrounding him, his experts, do their thing and simply focused in on running the country and maybe saying a kind word about Senator McCain. Imagine how different all of this would feel. So I would respectfully submit to you, it's really the opposite. You almost can't win when you are innocent. Do you open your mouth and run the risk of getting jammed up because you are always one word away from saying the wrong thing? Or do you keep your mouth shut in which case people say, well, wait a minute, if you didn't do anything wrong, why not say so. I will always opt for the latter.
[Cabrera:] There is always the question about whether or not the president ends up being implicated in a crime, whether Robert Mueller would be able to act on that. Instead, the typical route would be to go to Congress and they could impeach. The president talking about impeachment this week. Saying he thinks it would be impossible to impeach a popular president. And it's not the first time he mentioned the "I" word. Reportedly he refers to it behind closed doors often. Let's listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'll tell you what, if I ever got impeached, I think the market would crash. I think everybody would be very poor because without this thinking, you would see you would see numbers that you wouldn't believe. In reverse.
[Cabrera:] Does his making such a case indicate he fears this is getting closer?
[Zelin:] I don't think so. I think our president is one of the more difficult people to read. And I guess he likes it that way. It is interesting to note, though, what he focuses in on in terms of almost justifying why it would be ludicrous to go after him. Saying the markets would crash is really not responsive to the question of, what do we do with you? The real response to the question is what do you do with me? I haven't done anything wrong. What do you do with me? Let me do my job. What do you do with me? Nothing, because all I'm trying to do is run the office of the presidency the best way I can. And I haven't done anything wrong. And to answer the president's question or the statement of the investigation is illegal, I simply put two questions out there. And I would hope that someone would answer it. If the Mueller investigation is illegal, please tell us two things. How? And why?
[Cabrera:] And again I go back to it's been asked. That question has been asked and it's been answered by four separate judges. Two of them appointed by Republicans.
[Zelin:] One of the things we do as a lawyer, objection. Asked and answered.
[Cabrera:] Exactly. Randy Zelin, always good to have you with us. Thank you.
[Zelin:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] Now the president tests out a tactic in the Russia probe, insisting that what he said on camera about the firing of James Comey isn't real. We've got the tape for you next. Live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[Blitzer:] Tonight, the Trump administration is still struggling to reunite families after missing a deadline to return the youngest children to their parents. We heard the health and human services secretary claim right here in THE SITUATION ROOM that the process is a great act of generosity and charity for immigrant children. Separated families, though, are angrily disputing that. Let's go straight to CNN's Ed Lavandera. He's in Texas, near the southern border. Ed, you've been seeing some of the family reunions and you've also been hearing some heartbreaking stories.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, emotional day of a few of the stories we've been able to gather of those families reunited. The last number we had, 38 children have been reunited with their families. That's far short of the 102 that the federal government was mandated to have reunited by yesterday, almost 24 hours ago. And what's even more remarkable, Wolf, today is that despite our efforts to ask about how many more reunions have taken place, we have received no updates from the federal government today.
[Lavandera:] Two fathers, one from Guatemala, other from Honduras, were some of the few who have been reunited with their children in El Paso, Texas. Pablo Ortiz says he was separated from his 3-year-old son on April 30th and says he was only able to speak with him three times. He says they were going to deport me, but since my child was here, I couldn't leave him. I wanted to take my child, how am I going to leave him? He's little. This man who only wanted to be identified at Roger says his son was taken away from him in February. They took me by the arm, he says. They took me by the shoulder and took me to a small room. I saw when they took my child, because there was really a small window. In Arizona, Joshua Rodriguez hugged and kissed his three-year-old son after separated 40 days. He says his son has asked, daddy where were you? Rodriguez described the experience as nightmare. We're humans, not animals, he says. And not even animals are separated from their child. How are humans going to be separated from kid? Trump administration officials say the process of reuniting separated families is moving slowly in part because of efforts to verify that children are being placed with their biological parents. The secretary of health and human services says he's proud of the work the federal government has done to bring families back together.
[Alex Azar, Health And Human Services Secretary:] One of the great acts of American generosity and charity, what we're doing for these unaccompanied kids who are smuggled in to our country or come across illegally. And so, we don't have anything to hide about it. We just have to protect privacy.
[Lavandera:] For the lucky families who have been reunited, the trauma seems far from over. One mother told "The New York Times" her 3-year- old son didn't know who she was. He didn't recognize me. My joy turned temporarily to sadness. Another mother said her 3-year-old daughter cried for the social worker and tried to escape her mother's embrace, an embrace many are still waiting for. And, Wolf, the federal government is expected back in court later this week, to update that judge in California that issued these mandates for these reunions to take place to an update. Yesterday, that same judge was wondering why 63 of the 102 couldn't have been reunited by yesterday. But as I mentioned off the top, still no word if more than 38 children so far have been reunited across the southern border Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, that's heartbreaking stories. They continue. Ed Lavandera, thank you very much. Just ahead, is President Trump a captive to Russia? We'll talk about his slams on Germany, and on NATO, this upcoming summit with Vladimir Putin. CNN's Chris Cuomo, he's standing by live.

[Cabrera:] As thousands of Honduran immigrants' journey closer to the United States, President Trump is reigniting his demands for a stronger border. He sent Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Mexico City. He meets with President Pena Nieto next hour. Meantime at a rally in Montana last night the president made it clear that immigration will be one of his biggest attack lines in his final push for the midterms.
[Donald Trump, U.s. President:] As you know, I'm willing to send the military to defend our southern border if necessary. All caused because of the illegal immigration onslaught brought by the Democrats because they refuse to acknowledge or to change the laws. They like it. They also figure everybody coming in is going to vote Democrat.
[Cabrera:] Meantime as the White House faces pressure to find out what happened to Khashoggi, the President praised a congressman who assaulted a reporter during his campaign for a House seat in Montana. Listen to this.
[Trump:] But Greg is smart. And by the way never wrestle him. You understand that? Never. Any guy who can do a body slam is my guy.
[Cabrera:] Joining us, Julie, a White House correspondent for the New York Times. Montana yesterday, Arizona tonight, Nevada tomorrow. President Trump is on the move. Can his closing argument help Republicans save the house?
[Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Cnn Political Analyst:] I think he's certainly going to do as much as he can to try to make that happen. What we're seeing now is the same Donald Trump that you saw | the campaign trail in 2016, the same Donald Trump who we've seen at rallies throughout this year, but he's really stepping up the pace of them now. And clearly enjoying being able to be himself, being able to talk tough about things like body slamming a reporter, things like cracking down on illegal immigration at the border. I think to some degree Republicans need for him to be doing this. They need for him to be activating the conservative base, they need to be activating the, you know, sort of Trump coalition that came out to elect him if they have any hope of holding on to the senate and the house. What's not as clear is whether the backlash from some of this kind of rhetoric in some of these places might swamp whatever advantage the Republicans are getting from it. We know that this kind of message doesn't really resonate with a lot of the voters that Republicans who are trying to hold on to competitive districts need to turn out, you know, women, college-educated white voters, younger voters, certainly voters of color are not going to respond well to this and might be even more motivated to turn out for Democrats if the President is making this case. But I think Republicans really have no choice looking at the map other than trying to use the President and the President is enthusiastically pushing that line.
[Cabrera:] As we point out, these rallies have been more than just a ticking through of his successes. We've seen the President return to the issues that drove candidate Trump in 2016, immigration, and attacking the media.
[Davis:] Absolutely. These are lines that worked for him then and that his base really loves. It's interesting when you look at these rallies how little, for instance, he talks about the tax cuts. That's sort of the signature legislative achievement he's been able to put in place through his two years in office. We hear very little about that. We hear a lot about how good the economy is. I think with an eye toward really trying to reawaken that spirit of fighting back and trying to retake the country that's a little harder to do now that the Republicans are in control of the White House, the house and the senate. So I think he's trying to push those wedge issues in a way that he thinks can be helpful to turning out Republicans.
[Cabrera:] The President likes to attack, that's part of his M.O., part of his brand, but were you surprised he was actually praising physical assault?
[Davis:] Yes, well, you know, he does like to talk tough and all of his rallies all feature a pretty sizable section of booing and jeering at the press. You know, his crowds often will chant, you know, derisive chants at the press. We haven't seen since the campaign him seeming to egg on violence. When he was running for President, he talked about getting rid of the guys who were protesting in the back of one of his speeches. That came pretty close to seeming to exhort people on to take violent action. He clearly was praising this member of Congress who did that to a journalist. At the very least it's unfortunate timing given all the attention that's now being paid rightly to the murder the apparent murder of Jamal Khashoggi.
[Cabrera:] I want to turn to the Democratic message right now. In recent days a lot of Democrats have been tempering their calls for the President to be impeached. But last night Presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke said this
[Beto O'rourke , Candidate For Texas Senator:] I would liken impeachment to an indictment. There is enough there to proceed with a trial for a full vetting of the facts and to make the best informed decision in the interest of this country and our future. As you know, under the constitution as a member of the senate, it's a far different bar.
[Cabrera:] Julie, were you surprised to hear him say that? And does that actually maybe work to the President's advantage in some way?
[Davis:] Well, he certainly is somewhat unique in that you don't hear Democratic candidates really campaigning on this and in fact they go generally to great lengths to avoid talking about it. They don't want to be pigeon holed as the party that just wants to take down the President at all costs.
[Cabrera:] Especially in a place like Texas, right?
[Davis:] Exactly. But you have to look at what O'Rourke needs to do to win. If you look at the polls, it's an uphill slog for him. But what he does need to do is signal to this groundswell of grass roots supporters that he's going to be at least willing to go there and consider that because there is such antipathy among a lot of his voters and the Democratic base for the President. I haven't talked to anyone in his campaign but my guess is that he's made the calculation here that to rule something like that out when he has a chance to really intensify Democratic turnout and what he will need to be even close to defeating his Republican rival Ted Cruz, he's going to have to signal he's at least open to those things. We've seen him be successful really appealing to the progressive base. They don't want to hear that's off the table. He's approached this in a different way than most Democrats have I think for that reason.
[Cabrera:] Julie, thank you. Good to see you. We have new details on how Turkish officials tried to stop a suspected Saudi hit squad they believed killed Jamal Khashoggi, even dressing up as airline workers to inspect the plane they were traveling in. We'll ask a personal friend of Khashoggi why Jamal feared for his life.

[Lemon:] Steve Bannon singing the president's praises tonight in an interview with CNN's Fareed Zakaria. Is the former White House chief strategist looking for a way to work his way back on to team Trump? I want to bring in Kurt Bardella who used to work he's our really Bannon whisperer. He work with Bannon at Breitbart, and CNN political analyst Joshua Green, the author of "The Devil's Bargain: Steve Bannon, Donald Trump and the Storming of the Presidency." Listen, one minute, Kurt, he, you know is on team Trump, the next minute he's not on team Trump. What happened, he was fired from the White House. Trump called him sloppy Steve. He says he lost his mind and claims that he had nothing to do with his big election win. But here's Bannon tonight. Watch this.
[Steve Bannon, Former White House Chief Strategist:] He's Donald Trump, I think he's doing a fantastic job. Look, every day is going to be different. So you just to you just to you just got to swing with it. And you know, I know Trump for many, many years first off from the campaign not really-
[Fareed Zakaria, Host, Cnn:] Did he try to call you to tell you, Steve, I'm just kidding?
[Bannon:] No, trust me, he does not do that.
[Lemon:] Two things there. He looks a lot better. Maybe he's gotten some rest. I don't know what's going on. But-
[Kurt Bardella, President And Ceo , Endeavor Strategies:] Italy agrees with him.
[Lemon:] But you worked well with him, I mean, why do you think he is still so complimentary of the, I mean, you saying nice things about the president?
[Bardella:] I think Steve just used CNN to have a 60-minute infomercial, to use the network that Trump loves to hate to watch to suck up to him-
[Lemon:] But watches all the time
[Bardella:] But watches all the time, you know, and Steve knows that. There is a reason why he did this this type of access. Steven isn't someone that you often times see on television, he isn't the one to give a lot of T.V. interviews, and certainly nothing this expense. I think he's done maybe two of these in all the years that you've really seen him in the public eye. The reason why he picked CNN, the reason why he picked Fareed to do the interview was so that he could basically have the 60-Minute commercial on a network that he knows Trump is going to hate watch. And see him saying complimentary things about him, seeing and calling him a great president, seeing that he's still on the team, and trying to give sound advice and council. I always thought even though Steve was in the dark house, and Trump took him to the woodshed, and obviously was disparaging of him, there's still a belief that at some point that there had be a reuniting somehow.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Bardella:] And that would happen of things got bad for Donald Trump, and the worse that we for Trump that when he may turn to Steve Bannon.
[Lemon:] He also went to a place where he thought that he would get the most credibility, and that's on this network. Josh, does it sound like Bannon is trying to get back to Trump's inner circle, and if so, why would he want that?
[Bardella:] Oh, sure he is. You know, the reason he's want to do that is because, you know, in the age of Trump, anybody that wants to have influence in Republican politics has got to be square with Trump. And you saw what happen when Trump ex-communicated him back in January, he lost his Breitbart, he lost his benefactor in the Mercer Family. And you basically exile the Europe where he's been over with the populous nationalist over these. But you know, the reason that he's complimentary of Trump, despite the way Trump has treated him is that if you look at what the Trump administration has done especially over the last few months, big fights over immigration, in over trade, which are the two issues that Steve Bannon cares about most.
[Lemon:] Yes. So, Kurt, you know, we've been talking a lot about the up coming midterm elections, Steve Bannon says that the midterms will be Trump's second presidential race. Watch this.
[Steve Bannon, Former White House Chief Strategist:] This is going to be an up or down vote on November 6. And I think he understands that. The reason of that impeachment, the tax cuts, all the economy will go underneath this. But the Republicans have been running these ads on tax cut alone, it's not going to resonate. There's going to be an emotional, you know, with Nancy Pelosi or with Donald Trump. Trump's second presidential race will be on November 6th of this year.
[Lemon:] Pretty strong statement, isn't it, Kurt?
[Bardella:] Well, it's interesting, because for Democrats, they're hoping Steve is right. They are hoping that this is a referendum on Donald Trump, that all of their messaging that we've seen is about trying to stop Donald Trump, and having a check, and balance to hold him accountable. Republicans on the other hand are praying beyond prayer that this is not a referendum of Donald Trump because if it is, they know that their majorities in parallel net that pretty much screwed at this point. They're trying to make Donald Trump a side issue. You don't see Donald Trump going to a lot of these congressional districts. But if you're campaigning right now a targeted race that's on the map right in this midterm, the worse news you can get is the White House calling you saying, hey, Donald Trump wants to come to your district, they don't want him anywhere near this election.
[Lemon:] But, do you think Bannon really believes that Trump will do well in the midterms? I mean, let's face it, especially without someone like Bannon in his administration. He's saying, hey, listen, if you want to do well, I think what you said earlier about this interview, if you want to do well, then you need to have me back on your team, correct?
[Bardella:] Right. And I think as this election tightens, as we get into this after the summer season, and the fall campaign really heats up, and it looks like things are going to be bad for Republicans. They are preparing to lose the majority. Steve is positioning himself to be the savior of this midterm election.
[Joshua Green, Cnn Political Analyst:] Exactly.
[Lemon:] So, Josh did you want to respond, Josh?
[Green:] Yes, I do think that, look, you know, Bannon has an ulterior motivate around here. And in nationalizing the election around Trump, which I think it basically will be regardless of what Steve Bannon says if Republicans get smoked in November, and lose the majority. You know, Steve Bannon will be often in Europe. You can't you can't hold him to blame. And Trump, as we all know is not one to take responsibility on his own shoulders, blame himself for the losses. So he's going to be angry, and going to be looking at the team of advisers around him. And he's probably going to want to get rid of them, and bring in some new guys. You have Steve Bannon out there all along saying that, you know, Trump is great, and he is misserve by the people around him. Well, then maybe that clears the path for Bannon to work his way back, if not in the White House at least into Trump's inner circle, and back into a position of influence in the Republican Party.
[Lemon:] They talked about Jeff Sessions as go ahead. Go ahead, Kurt.
[Bardella:] I just want to say too, one of the key things for the Bannon revival to even happen is if the media allows this to happen. If they keep if they give him 60 minutes of prime time air time to do this, you know, bring-back-to-life campaign that's he's trying to do, Bannon is begging, just as he did remember when he put out Clinton cash, they went to 60 Minutes, and they went to the New York Times.
[Lemon:] You're a very smart man, and he is more telegenic now. He's do you know what I mean. That's why I said he certainly looks better, so-
[Green:] I don't know what you're talking about, Don, he looks terrible. He looks like Kenny Rogers.
[Lemon:] No, no, I said better. I didn't say-
[Green:] All right.
[Lemon:] I didn't say it. I said better, right? So, listen, I want to get this in, they talked about Jeff Sessions and recusing himself, watch this.
[Bannon:] I think the President's wrong been wrong from the beginning about if I can respectfully disagree with the President of the United States, I think that I think the whole concept of recusal is not even an issue. I think that Rudy Giuliani, or Chris Christie, Jeff Sessions, anybody associated with the campaign would have had to recuse themselves. I think if you look at what Jeff Sessions' done on immigration, on migration or all key issues of the Justice Department, I think Sessions' has done an excellent jobs.
[Lemon:] Yes, so what do you make to see Bannon stand up for one of the President's favorite targets?
[Bardella:] Yes, absolutely.
[Lemon:] Josh. That was for Josh. Sorry.
[Green:] Yes, well he is. But look, you know, again, Bannon wants influence, but he also cares a lot about a certain set of issues, trade, immigration, these sorts of things, and Jeff Sessions, long before Donald Trump came alone was somebody almost the only person in the Senate who represented that. You know, people forget that before Donald Trump ran for president, Steve Bannon tried to talk Jeff Sessions into running for president. So clearly, this is someone that Bannon wants to keep in place as a lot of Republicans do, wants to keep in place in the Attorney General's job because that job comes with so much power. It's been difficult for Sessions to stay in that job, he's been humiliated, and emasculated, you know, beyond, even what Trump has directed at Bannon, but there are a lot of Republicans in there, and I think Bannon is trying to give support to this contingent that want to see Jeff Sessions survive.
[Lemon:] All right thank you. Kurt, you've get to talk more next time. Thank you very much. Have a great weekend. When we come back, we'll dig into why the President pardoned a very controversial conservative pundit. Here's a hint, it may have had to do with President Obama.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Stunning shift. The president accuses a fellow Republican of being afraid of the NRA as he meets with lawmakers on gun violence and seems to side with Democrats on some key issues. Will he follow through or revert to the GOP script? Battle Sessions. The attorney general of the United States refuses to stay silent as the president escalates his public smear of his own Cabinet member. Tonight, Jeff Sessions is defending his launch of an independent investigation that Mr. Trump calls disgraceful. And expanding Russia probe. CNN has learned that the special counsel is looking into the president's business dealings in Russia before the 2016 campaign. Is he looking for links between the Kremlin and Mr. Trump's decision to run? We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking tonight, one of the president's most loyal allies that allies in his chaotic White House is calling it quits. Hope Hicks is stepping down as communications director. The announcement coming about 24 hours after she testified before Congress in the Russia investigation. And it caps a very busy day that included a dramatic escalation in the president's feud with his Attorney General Jeff Sessions. There's a lot of talk about with former U.S. attorney Preet Bharara, who has been on the receiving end of the president's anger, and the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, is joining us as well. And our correspondents and analysts are also standing by. First, let's go to our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, first of all, what do we know about Hope Hicks' reason for resigning?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] Well, as you said, President Trump has lost Hope, as in Hope Hicks, his communications director here at the White House and longtime trusted aide. She announced earlier today through the White House that she's stepping down over the next several weeks. The president put out a very glowing statement about his longtime and trusted aide here at White House. He said quote "Hope is outstanding and has done great work for the last three years. She is as smart and thoughtful as they come. A truly great person. I will miss having her by my side. But when she approached me about pursuing other opportunities, I totally understood. I am sure we will work together in the future." Now, I'm told by a White House official over here, Wolf, that there is quote "nothing nefarious" about Hicks leaving at this time. The official denied that this had anything to do with the Rob Porter scandal that broke over the last several weeks and that it was not about her testimony up on Capitol Hill in front of the House Intelligence Committee behind closed doors during which she told that panel that she had to from time to time tell little white lies on behalf of the president. Wolf, they don't have a plan yet for naming her replacement over here at the White House as communications director. As you know, that is a very big job at any White House. And that her departure is expected over the next several weeks, but no firm date for her final departure here, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jim, there were also some stunning statements from the president today about guns and his own attorney general today. Update us on that.
[Acosta:] That's right. We thought this would be the most remarkable thing to happen over here at the White House today. The president at one point telling a group of lawmakers in the White House here in front of the cameras, at least one of them, that they're afraid of the NRA, but some of these lawmakers who were gathered here in the room with the president, they fired right back and told the president that unless he stands up to the NRA, nothing will be done on the issue of gun control.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We have to act.
[Acosta:] This time, President Trump promised new gun control measures are on the way. But first he professed his love to the lawmakers from both parties gathered at the White House.
[Trump:] I see some folks that don't say nice things about me. And that's OK, because if you turn that into this energy, I will love you. I don't care.
[Acosta:] The president then vowed action is coming, first on the use of bump stocks, attachments that effectively turn semiautomatic rifles into machine guns.
[Trump:] I'm going to write that out. You will have that done pretty quickly.
[Acosta:] Mr. Trump then reaffirmed his interest in raising the age limit to 21 for purchasing some firearms after some waffling from the White House on the issue.
[Trump:] I think it's something you have to think about. So, I will tell you what. I'm going to give it a lot of consideration.
[Acosta:] Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein showed the president data that shows how the assault weapons ban passed in the '90s cut down on gun deaths.
[Sen. Dianne Feinstein , California:] When it ended, you see it going up.
[Acosta:] Also on the table was the influence of the National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby closely tied to the president.
[Trump:] I'm the biggest fan of the Second Amendment. Many of you are. I'm a big fan of the NRA. But I had lunch with them, with Wayne and Chris and David, on Sunday and said it's time. We have got to stop this nonsense. It's time.
[Sen. Chris Murphy , Connecticut:] The reason that nothing has gotten done here is because the gun lobby has had a veto power over any legislation that comes before Congress.
[Acosta:] On the proposal to expand background checks sponsored by Senators Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey, the president criticized the measure's GOP sponsor, Toomey, as fearful of the
[Nra. Trump:] You know what? Because you're afraid of the NRA, right?
[Acosta:] The president also made the stunning comment that people with mental health issues should have their firearms confiscated.
[Trump:] A lot of times, by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court, to get the due process procedures. I like taking the guns early. Take the guns first. Go through due process second.
[Acosta:] The president staged the gun discussion as the West Wing is still trying to get a handle on why so many of its top aides lack top- secret security clearances. Mr. Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, recently had his clearance status downgraded from top-secret to secret. But CNN has learned other White House staffers have been notified their clearances were bumped down as well. That's despite promises from the president during the campaign to properly handle classified material.
[Trump:] This was not just extreme carelessness with classified material, which is still totally disqualifying. This is calculated, deliberate, premeditated misconduct. If elected, Hillary Clinton would become the first president of the United States who wouldn't be able to pass a background check.
[Acosta:] Another headache for the president appears to be Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his handling of alleged abuses in the Russia investigation. The president tweeted: "Why is A.G. Jeff Sessions asking the inspector general to investigate? Will take forever. Why not use Justice Department lawyers? Disgraceful." Sessions announced he's letting the Justice Department's inspector general inspector to look into it.
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] We believe the Department of Justice must adhere to the high standards in the FISA court. And, yes, it will be investigated. And I think that's just the appropriate thing. The inspector general will take that as one of the matters he will deal with.
[Acosta:] Today, Sessions fired back at the president's tweet with a blunt statement. "As long as I am the attorney general, I will continue to discharge my duties with integrity and honor. And this department will continue to do its work in a fair and impartial manner, according to the law and Constitution." Now, the president is already getting some blowback from conservatives for that meeting on gun control over here at the White House. Take a look at these headlines from Breitbart. They pretty much sum it up, Wolf, at this hour. This is stunning stuff. "Trump, the gun grabber. Cedes Dems' wish lists, bump stocks, buying age, assault weapons, background checks." That's on the front page of Breitbart right now. He also is being criticized by Breitbart for essentially telling Steve Scalise, the House majority whip, that they will not be bringing up the concealed carry bill that he would like to see passed in Congress and be made a part of a comprehensive gun control bill. The president saying at one point during that session that he supports Scalise on that piece of legislation, but he doesn't want it to be a part of a big comprehensive bill. Wolf, we should point out we have seen this movie before. It was a different subject, though, in early January. You will recall on the issue of immigration, the president had this big meeting over at the White House. He brought all these lawmakers here from both sides. And it sounded like they were going to reach some sort of compromise. Of course, nothing came out of that meeting as a result of that. And ever since then, the president has blamed Democrats for the failure to pass any kind of measure on that issue Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jim Acosta, thanks very much for that report. Another White House official is heading for the exit as the Russia investigation weighs in on many current and former allies of the president. Let's go to our justice correspondent, Jessica Schneider, for us. Jessica, Hope Hicks is resigning, but she remains a key witness in the Russia probe, right?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] She does, Wolf. Hope Hicks was interviewed by the special counsel's team in mid- December, and it was just yesterday she spent nine hours behind closed doors in an interview with the House Intelligence Committee. What she said in the testimony raised eyebrows. A source tells us that Hicks admitted to telling quote "white lies" for the president, but she said that those were minor and she never spread falsehoods about anything substantial, including the Russia investigation. When it does come to Mueller's investigation, Paul Manafort was back in court today, where a September 17 trial date has now been set.
[Schneider:] Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort is maintaining his innocence, pleading not guilty to money laundering and false statements as part of a new indictment, this time without his former co-defendant Rick Gates, who pleaded guilty Friday to two charges of false statements and conspiracy to assist Manafort in criminal schemes and agreed to cooperate with the special counsel. Manafort also faces 18 additional charges of bank fraud and alleged tax crimes in federal court in Virginia. The special counsel's team also appears to be following the money when it comes to the president. CNN has learned investigators have questioned witnesses about Donald Trump's business activities in Russia prior to the 2016 campaign as he considered a presidential run. The president has repeatedly dismissed questions about any financial ties to Russia.
[Trump:] I have no dealings with Russia. I have no deals in Russia. I have no deals that could happen in Russia because we have stayed away. And I have no loans with Russia.
[Schneider:] But prosecutors have asked wide-ranging questions about Trump's financial ties to Russia in interviews, according to sources, including why efforts to brand a Trump Tower in Moscow fell through, and whether or not the Russians may have any compromising information about the president. All of this indicates Mueller may be reaching beyond the campaign to explore how the Russians may have sought to influence Donald Trump when he was discussing deals in Moscow, and whether Trump was contemplating a presidential run at the same time. The president has previously said any investigation into his family finances would cross a red line.
[Question:] If Mueller was looking at your finances, your family's finances unrelated to Russia, is that a red line? Would that be a breach of what his...
[Trump:] I would say yes. I would say yes.
[Schneider:] Sources say Mueller's team has also asked about the financing behind the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow, where Trump partnered with billionaire Russian real estate developer Aras Agalarov and his son Emin. These sources tell CNN they don't know if the Mueller team has concrete evidence to indicate wrongdoing, but pointed out: "You ask everything, even if you don't think it's credible. The allegations are out there, and it was checking the box." And new tonight, we have learned the banking regulator in New York is digging into more financial details from Jared Kushner. The head of the Financial Services Department in New York has asked Deutsche Bank and two other small lenders about their financial relationship with Kushner, his family members, and his family's real estate business, according to a source. This request follows an updated financial disclosure from Jared Kushner which revealed now debt and uncertainty over the future of his heavily indebted Manhattan office tower 666 Fifth Avenue. And, of course, we previously reported that Mueller's team had been asking questions about Kushner's efforts to try to shore up financing for the building and his discussions with foreign investors during the transition Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, supposedly about a $1 billion debt as far as that property, 666 Fifth Avenue, is concerned. Jessica Schneider, thanks very much. Let's get a little bit more on all of this. Congressman Jerrold Nadler is joining us. He's the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. Congressman, thanks very much for joining us.
[Rep. Jerrold Nadler , New York:] You're welcome, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Let me get your reaction to the breaking news you just heard from Jessica, that your state, New York state's banking regulator is investigating Jared Kushner's financial relationship with Deutsche Bank and two other smaller lenders.
[Nadler:] Well, I'm glad they're investigating it. The whole question of Trump and Jared Kushner and all their financial relationships with Russia, with Deutsche Bank, which is an agent of Russia in many cases...
[Blitzer:] Why do you say it's an agent of Russia?
[Nadler:] Because there have been a lot of deposits from Russia in it, I gather from news. And a lot of its capital came from Russia.
[Blitzer:] But is that just from news reports, or do you have other information?
[Nadler:] No, no, no. No, I do not have other information. It's from news reports.
[Blitzer:] Just to be precise. Because that's a serious allegation, that Deutsche Bank is an agent of Russia.
[Nadler:] It's just from news reports.
[Blitzer:] OK.
[Nadler:] In any event, there are a lot of questions, obviously. I mean, we know that Trump Jr. said back in 2008 lots of our money, a disproportionate part of our money comes from Russia. We know the Russians tried to help the did help the Trump campaign. Whether he colluded on it is another question. But there are all sorts of relationships and motives that have to be examined.
[Blitzer:] Do you believe the Russia investigation played a significant role in the decision by Hope Hicks, the communications director at the White House, a longtime aide to the president, to resign?
[Nadler:] I don't know. I have no facts on that. All I do know is that when the communications people for the president admits she lied to the American people, that's a terrible betrayal. And it's a terrible thing that the representative of the president lies to the American people.
[Blitzer:] She says she was engaging in what she called just little white lies, nothing substantive.
[Nadler:] So she says, and maybe they weren't too substantive. But when you're the spokesman for the president, you should not be lying to the American people.
[Blitzer:] Let's get to another sensitive issue. And you're on the Judiciary Committee, which looks at the Justice Department. The president tweeted this today about the attorney general of the United States. "Why is Attorney General Jeff Sessions asking the inspector general to investigate potentially massive FISA abuse," Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse? "Will take forever, has no prosecutorial power, and already late with the reports on Comey, et cetera. Isn't the I.G., the inspector general, an Obama guy? Why not use Justice Department lawyers? DISGRACEFUL." What do you think the president's goal was in this extraordinary tweet?
[Nadler:] The president's goal was to undermine Sessions for some reason, and to take more attention away from the investigation. This whole question of the FISA warrant, first of all, it's based on lies in the Nunes memo, which have definitively shown to be lies by direct quotes from the underlying documents in the Democratic memo. They showed quite clearly that the court was told that some of the allegations came, formed the basis of the warrant came from politically motivated sources. They were told that. And any allegation to the contrary was not true. It also showed that the entire investigation was not even based on that. So the whole question of the FISA court and that particular warrant is a distraction, a deliberate distraction from the Mueller investigation, which, as far as we can tell, there have been no leaks from it, has been a very substantive investigation, which has gained a number of guilty pleas, a number of indictments. And the president apparently believes that the walls are closing in on him and he is trying anything to divert attention.
[Blitzer:] Is this public humiliation by the president of his attorney general, the attorney general of the United States, designed to get Sessions to resign?
[Nadler:] It may very well be, because if Sessions were to resign remember, he's recused from the Russia investigation. The president could appoint someone else who was not recused who might then be able to fire Rosenstein or Mueller and sabotage the investigation. And that clearly would be very much to the detriment. We must get to the bottom of the Russian interference in our election. And we must get to the bottom of why the president refuses now to authorize our intelligence agencies to protect us against the Russian interference in our next election, which Admiral Rogers, the head of the NSA, said yesterday in I think it was the Senate. That, to me, is one of the biggest questions now. The president is tasked, his oath of office is to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. And he seems to be refusing to do that, because we know that the Russians attacked our election. We know that they're going to do it again. And he is refusing to give the NSA and the other intelligence agencies the directive and the authority to properly protect us.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Admiral Mike Rogers, he did testify before the Senate, the head of the National Security Agency, also the chief of the U.S. Cyber Command. He said he hasn't received any orders to do so. And as a result, he can't go ahead simply on his own.
[Nadler:] And the question is why the president won't do anything to offend Putin. And maybe it has something to do with financial entanglements in Russia. That ought to be investigated.
[Blitzer:] They're investigating, I suspect, as well. Congressman Nadler, thanks so much for joining us.
[Nadler:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Just ahead, we will have more on Hope Hicks' surprise resignation and her role in the special counsel's Russia investigation. I'll talk to former U.S. attorney Preet Bharara about that and more. Also, the president's newest attack on the attorney general of the United States, Jeff Sessions. We will get Preet's analysis of that. Is the president crossing a constitutional line?

[Unidentified Female:] They don't want this deal. What deal will work for them?
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. This morning, two of the world's most important democracies are experiencing political chaos. Here in the U.S., the longest shutdown in American history goes into day 26. And White House economists now believe the shutdown will be twice as bad for the economy as originally projected. As a result, the White House is ordering tens of thousands of federal workers back to work without pay.
[John Avlon, Cnn Anchor:] So a government shutdown here and government turmoil there. In the United Kingdom, they are staring at unprecedented uncertainty. The prime minister, Theresa May, is fighting for her political life a day after suffering the worst parliamentary defeat in decades over her Brexit deal. We have live pictures right now of Parliament. We are waiting to hear from the British prime minister ahead of a no- confidence vote. This will be one those question sessions where she will face withering questions and criticisms from members on both sides there. Joining us now to understand what we will see and what just happened, CNN chief international anchor, Christiane Amanpour. Christiane, there are really two big questions here: what just happened and what will happen? The first one is a heck of a lot easier to answer than the second. So just put this in perspective. How big of a political defeat was this for Theresa May?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Chief International Anchor:] It was very, very big for her personally, and it was very, very big for a bill and a deal on the most consequential issue to face Britain in decades and decades. And as you've already said, it was the biggest government defeat in nearly 100 years. But here's the incredible thing. In any other country or any other democracy, if you lost such a massive and consequential vote, you would either be run out of town or you would resign. But in this case, she is not saying she's going to resign. She will not step down. She says she's going to continue. And it is believed that she might and is most likely to win this vote of no confidence. Why? Because her own party and a group of Northern Irish MPs, who give her a majority in Parliament, don't want to see the opposition Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn, win an election. So if that holds, she's likely to win. But what will happen next
[Berman:] Yes.
[Amanpour:] is the most important question. We have no idea what's going to happen over Brexit. And that is a big, big deal right now.
[Berman:] Well, when you say no idea what will happen over Brexit, let's listen in. In fact, the British prime minister, Theresa May, beginning to speak right now.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] The whole House will join me in condemning the appalling attack in Nairobi and in sending my thoughts and prayers to all those who have lost loved ones. Our high commissioner has confirmed one British fatality, and we're providing consular assistance to British nationals affected by the attack. We stand in solidarity with the government and people of Kenya and will continue to offer our support to meet the challenge, the security and stability that is posed by terrorism in the region. Mr. Speaker, this morning I have meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.
[John Bercow, Speaker Of The House Of Commons:] Charlie Elphicke.
[Charlie Elphicke, Member Of Parliament:] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. May I join with the prime minister in her strong condemnation of terror? And you will know, Mr. Speaker, and the prime minister will know that I first sought election to this House because I believed in more jobs, lower taxes, a stronger economy, more investment in the public service on which we all rely. And does she agree that, since 2010, Conservative governments have delivered time and again for the British people. And the biggest threat to that has sat on the opposition front bench with a leader whose policies would mean less jobs, higher taxes, a weaker economy, and less investment in our public services?
[May:] My my honorable friend is absolutely right. What have we seen under the Conservatives in government? We've seen 3.4 million more jobs. That's more people earning an income, earning a wage, able to provide for their families. We've seen more children in good and outstanding schools. More money into our national health service. What would put that in danger? A government led by the right honorable gentlemen. More borrowing, more taxes, more spending, fewer jobs.
[Bercow:] Jeremy Corbyn.
[Jeremy Corbyn, Member Of Parliament/leader Of The Labour Party:] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. May I start by connecting the record? Last night, I suggested this was the largest government defeat since the 1920s. I would not wish to be accused of misleading the House. Because I've since been informed that it is, in fact, the largest ever defeat for a government in the history of our democracy.
[Unidentified Male:] Resign.
[Corbyn:] So, Mr. Speaker, shortly after the prime minister made her point of order last night, her spokesperson suggested that government had ruled out any form of customs union with the European Union as part of her reaching-out exercise. Can the prime minister confirm that's the case?
[May:] I say to the right honorable gentleman that the exercise that I indicated last night is, as I said, about listening to the views of the House, about wanting to understand the views of Parliamentarians so that we can identify what could command the support of this House and deliver on the referendum. And what the government wants to do is, first of all, to ensure that we deliver on the result of the referendum. That's leaving the European Union. And we want to do it in a way that ensures we respect the votes of those who voted to leave in that referendum. That means ending free movement. It means getting a fairer deal for farmers and fishermen. It means opening up new opportunities to trade with the rest of the world, and it means keep going ties with our neighbors in Europe.
[Bercow:] Jeremy Corbyn.
[Corbyn:] Mrs. Speaker, my question was about the customs union. The prime minister seems to be in denial about that, just as much as she's in denial about the decision made by the House last night. I understand the business secretary told business leaders on a conference call last night, we can't have no deal for all the reasons you've set out. Can the prime minister now reassure the House, businesses and the country and confirm that is, indeed, the government's position, that we can't have no deal?
[May:] I think the point that the business secretary is making and that he has made previously is that, if you don't want to have no deal, you have to ensure that you have a deal. Now, I will give this I will give this to I will I will say this to the right honorable gentleman. There are actually two ways of avoiding no deal. The first is to agree a deal. And the second would be to revoke Article 50. Now that would mean staying in the European Union, failing to respect the result of the referendum, and that is and that is something that this government will not do.
[Bercow:] Jeremy Corbyn.
[Corbyn:] The prime minister has
[Berman:] You've been watching the British Parliament right now. British Prime Minister Theresa May facing a vote of no confidence in a little bit. What we just saw there, support from Conservatives, which Christiane Amanpour was noting she likely will not be voted out today. Her government will not fall. But the bigger question: what happens with Brexit? And the two polar sides are no deal no deal to exit the European Union or perhaps another referendum. But we don't know which way it's going to go, Christiane.
[Amanpour:] We don't. As you heard, she kept saying there, "My deal or the highway." Basically, this is the best deal. And I've just spoken to the vice chairman of the European Commission, and he says, "We are not reopening this negotiation. So don't look at us from London and hope that we're going to save you in this regard." He said it's up to the British people to decide what they want. So what a no-deal means, it's a default option. If there is no actual deal voted on, Britain will crash out with a cliff edge, as they call it, just fall off the cliff with nothing in place. I mean, there are some things in place to keep planes flying and the like. However, in all the big issues, there will no deal. And so we it really is uncharted territory. We don't know. And the Bank of England and other economists have said that will significantly hurt the economy. So I guess the best way to put it is you can see what's happening in the United States over the wall and the shutdown and the political game of chicken there. Well, here it's over a different kind of wall, as somebody said earlier today. It's the English Channel, the wall that separates, the watery wall, Europe from Great Britain. And there's a political game of chicken happening here, as well. And this is what's got to be unlocked if there's going to be a sensible future that's more rational than just crashing out with no clear plan for the future.
[Berman:] One of the things I've been wondering: who is watching this, this uncertainty in the United Kingdom, and I do like the comparison between what's happening in the United States, as well? But who's watching this and smiling? Who exactly is this good for right now? And I think the answer is Vladimir Putin.
[Amanpour:] Well, perhaps outside you're right. He's and anything that can destroy the institutions of democracy, absolutely. But inside, it's members of her own party, the hardliners, who already took a gamble and took their own leadership vote of no confidence and lost; and they're still acting as if they won. They're running around saying, "We're not going to do this. We're not going to do that. We're going to crash out without no a deal, and we're just going to be fine." And that, you can see, is who she is still trying to appease. She doesn't get that she won that vote. She's still trying to appease her very hardline vote. And she keeps talking about democratic rights, but only of the small majority that voted for Brexit. And I think that's what's beginning to rattle the country.
[Berman:] Very interesting to see a good day for people who like drama, a bad day for people who want answers. Christiane Amanpour, thanks so much for being with us. Appreciate it Alisyn.
[Amanpour:] Thank you, John.
[Camerota:] John, back here at home, no solution yet for the government shutdown. The White House now conceding it is having damage, more than expected, in fact, on the economy. We explore that.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] And good evening from Houston, where the clear skies above us are deceiving and conditions remain very dangerous in many places throughout this region. The rain might have moved out from Houston but this remains very much an unfolding crisis. Rescues have been happening every minute of every hour by boat and increasingly by helicopter, especially in Beaumont and Port Arthur, which is east of here in Houston, hammered by what used to be Hurricane Harvey as it made second landfall overnight along the Texas-Louisiana border. Naval aviators, Army and Coast Guard choppers, have all been flying, often in very risky conditions, and they are pulling people to safety. It is not over yet. Port Arthur's mayor says the entire city is underwater. It is much the same we're told in Beaumont. Water clear to the horizon. I just want to show you a picture that pretty much says it all. It only looks like a storm tossed bay that you're looking at until you see that interstate road sign. This body of water south of Beaumont is not a bay, it's a stretch of I-10. Logan Wheat, who snapped that photo, also shot video this from the small boat he was in which is the only way to get around, and around much of the Beaumont-Port Arthur area. And this was not taken by the way as Harvey came ashore on Friday. It was taken last night when it struck the second time, not over yet by any means. Here in Houston, water still covers entire neighborhoods across this enormous city, block after block, mile after mile still under water. Not over yet. I do want to show you a live shot, you're looking at right now. It gives you just a sense of this is in Houston just a sense of how big this is and how many the kind of flooding we are still seeing in neighborhood that this is by the Addicks Reservoir, one of the two reservoirs that areas around them had not flooded until more recently when water began to come out of that reservoir they had to release some water, so that to relieve some of the flooding in that area. Gives you just one sense of one neighborhood behind me, there's members of the state a Texas state marine unit who have been undertaking rescues all day in this area of Houston where I am. You see them now. Their work is done for the day. They stop because it's starting to get dark. They're probably going to resume here tomorrow as well. They say they have taken out as many as 600 people, 610 people. And it wasn't just them there's an army of volunteers, people who I talked to one young man earlier today who actually just bought a boat two days ago because he wanted to come here, didn't live here, but he bought a boat, he drove it here and he has been helping bring people out of their homes. The images just keep coming, along with some of the horror stories as well. We have seniors trapped, some for 24 hours, according to CNN's Drew Griffin in the flood water. Shelters flooding, others filled to capacity. The death toll rising, now at 28. But I mean, the truth is, there's no way to really get an accurate sense of how many people may have been hurt in this, how many people are still missing and how many people may have died. It's I was talking to the sheriff of Harris County who said it's really going to it's going to take a lot of time until the flood waters dissipate, that they can really get a sense of the toll. The grim work of recovery soon to get underway around us, but still days in the future, across other parts of the region, it is not over yet. Luckily, neither is the truly remarkable outpouring of volunteers that we talked about. Their flotilla of small boats and big trucks, ordinary people just doing extraordinary work at a time of such great need. Joining us right now by phone is Becky Ames. She's the mayor of Beaumont, Texas. Mayor Ames, I appreciate you've been with us. I'm sorry it's under these circumstances. This morning, you said that every single body of water around you was at capacity and overflowing. What's the situation right now where you are?
[Mayor Becky Ames, Beaumont, Texas:] Well, it is still that way unfortunately sometimes we were near bodies of water like bayous and rivers that we have, so many around Beaumont, the aftermath is worse because when they crest, some of the flooding
[Cooper:] Do you have any idea of how many of your residents still need to be rescued or maybe unaccounted for? I mean, did you have a sense or is it are you not at that at that stage yet?
[Ames:] Well, we are still assessing because what we are asking them to do, we have a customer service hotline that we've turned into a non- emergent call center where we have 311, and we've asked the residents if they need to be rescued and it's not emergent, or if they think they might need to be rescued that they call that 311, and we prioritize that. I would assert that most of the people that are going to need help out of called us, unless they're going to get hit later with the rising water
[Cooper:] Right. What do you I mean, do you have what you need? Do you need more boats, more high water trucks? I'm wondering what's your message to state and federal authorities right now.
[Ames:] Well, actually, they have been very responsive and I'm sure there will be some things in the future. Right now, they have been extremely responsive. Our biggest issue right now is we don't typically shelter in Beaumont. So we've opened we have three shelters open. They were not at capacity until they started getting at capacity today. So, we're looking at open another shelter, that the issue is not the space. We have plenty of space, but a shelter you don't just put up there and ask people to come. As you know, you have to supplies, cots, blankets, food and someone that really knows how to run it. And the Red Cross because of all of the devastation in Texas is very, very spread thin and our limited resources for them too. So, I think that would be our biggest issue, the resources that we need to put into the new the secondary shelter that we're setting up and then someone to actually run it. We partner with the Red Cross and helping, but we don't actually run shelters, that we will partner like it's nursing and I was helping with resources but not actually running it. So, that's probably the biggest challenge right now. I have been here for
[Cooper:] Mayor Ames
[Ames:] and has been the mayor for 10 years
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Ames:] never seen as many people that need a shelter.
[Cooper:] Well, we hope we hope you're able to open up that other shelter, Mayor Ames. I appreciate so much you taking the time
[Ames:] I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt, I'm having a hard time hearing. We have already opened it, we just don't have all the resources we need to complete it, but we are getting them. We will not wait no one has been turned away, no one.
[Cooper:] That is certainly good news. Well, Mayor, I hope to speak to you tomorrow night as well and I just wish you and the people there the best. As we mentioned the top the broadcast, the military ramped up rescue operations. We have been watching a number of those all day. Two U.S. Navy warships, the USS Kearsarge and the USS Oak Hill are being deployed to the area, along with 690 Marines, according to our Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Medical, communications, other support teams are already in place or are on their way. CNN's Martin Savidge has been out and airborne with the Navy rescuers over east Texas. He's been capturing some remarkable images. He joins us now. So, Martin, you're still on the chopper, returning to base. Tell us what you've been seeing up there.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, this one boat
[Cooper:] Martin, we're having trouble to hear Martin, we're having trouble hearing you. So, we're going to come back to you when we get contact, or maybe when you get back down on the ground. And we're going next to Beaumont and CNN's Drew Griffin who has been having quite a remarkable day as well. Drew, you've been on the ground all day. Talk about what you've been seeing there.
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Senior Investigative Correspondent:] It's a violent night and to add on to what the mayor was speaking to you about, Jefferson County, which is where Beaumont is, it's really a series of islands, Anderson. So, you have these people rescued, they're put on an island, and then as water continues to rise, that island gets smaller and those people need to be rescued off of that island, to another island, to another island. So, that's why you have this day after day after day of rescue and the water in some places is still rising in this county. We just heard about a levee breach that is flooding another subdivision just west of here. It can happen in a split second. That's exactly what we found out this morning. We're setting up for a live shot when, all of a sudden, we heard a noise and we found this guy in really dire straits. Take a look.
[Griffin:] Look at this. Get out, dude! You got you got a power cord? You got a rope? Hold on, I'm trying to get you a rope. All right, buddy, come on, get off of that water. Backwards. Are you all right? No, no, ma'am. No, ma'am. We got a car in a ditch. We just pulled a fellow out. All right, Marcy. Are you all right now, buddy?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Griffin:] All right. Take your breath and we're going to pick you up, we're going to get you off of this bank, OK? We're going to get you off of this bank. Sixty-six-year-old Jerry Summerall. He was just out looking for food. He got in trouble. He's doing OK. We talked to him later. But this is the danger right now, Anderson. This water this intersection was flooded just about an hour ago. In fact, the police are over there trying to deal with flooded cars that were just left here. But the water continues to move throughout the county, so it drains here, it's got to go somewhere else. People are not used to these areas being flooded and they're getting in trouble, which is why right now, this emergency is not only continuing for people who need to be evacuated, but for all the people who have been cooped up for days want to get out and see something and they find themselves getting in trouble just like that fellow did this morning Anderson.
[Cooper:] Well, Drew, that's one of the really deceptive things here is you can't tell obviously how deep this water is unless there's you know a submerged car that you just see the top of it or something. I mean, even in the area that we're in right now, if we just pan over here, you have really have no sense of how deep this water is and it just goes on, it's really as far as the eye can see. I'm told, you know, further down there, it gets it gets up to about the waist. Here, it's pretty shallow. But, Drew, that's I mean I assume that's what happened to that that man who you helped rescue. He had no idea that the water he was driving into was going to be so deep.
[Griffin:] Anderson, he thought he was driving onto a road. He had no idea that that was a actual drainage ditch. It was a ditch that he was driving into. He thought he was just crossing a parking lot, crossing a road that was covered with water and he was gone, it's floating. And just after we pulled him out, his truck, his four wheel drive truck sank. It happens that quick. People do not recognize the difference between standing water that's overrode standing water that is actually a raging river as a drainage ditch and it's happening all across southeastern Texas right now.
[Cooper:] The images you're seeing on your screen are from Orange, Texas. Those are those are the first images I'm seeing from that air and again you get a sense of just how much water there is on the ground. Drew, I appreciate that. That's near the border of Texas and Louisiana, we should point out. I want to get some perspective now from a pair of experts, CNN contributor and retired army lieutenant general, Russel Honore, who, of course, headed up the Hurricane Katrina effort and also joining us at Jon Connors, a former marine, a member of Team Rubicon, which is an organization that brings together of veterans and first responders, volunteers, for moments just like this. General Honore, first of all, what's your assessment of where things stand now in terms of rescue operations, in terms of the flooding?
[Lt. Gene. Russel Honore , Cnn Contributor:] Well, the problems got bigger. I mean, we now go from Corpus Christi to in the Cameron Parish, with search-and-rescue missions, on warrant. And this is the hard part after we do the initial picking people up with helicopters and using emergency signals to find people. Once this water go down, Anderson, and every house has to be checked and that cannot be done by a civilian volunteer. Without these volunteers we've really been in a mess because the military have been slow to scale up I've spoken about that for days now that they should have been scaling up, we should have Navy ships follow hurricanes in. We learned that in Katrina. We learned that in Rita. Yet, the one of the biggest hurricanes predicted as of last Thursday didn't have Navy ships following it. We've got to get this fixed because we're at the beginning of hurricane season. That being said, the shelters look great. Everybody is getting along as far as the government agencies. We don't have the bickering and the fighting.
[Cooper:] And the volunteer efforts, I got to say, are just incredible.
[Honore:] Yes, but I was here today with a boat, we came on this very road to go search, nobody to talk to, no communication systems. We need to tie that together with a disruptive technology that allow the police and fire to talk to civilian and they're coming into a region and saying, go here, we mission you over here, this is your mission. When you get there, the link up with this way, and then be able to communicate.
[Cooper:] Jon, from Team Rubicon, you guys are veterans, volunteers, you've worked in a lot of a lot of different areas. What are you seeing on the ground?
[Jon Connors, Team Rubicon:] Yes, so as you mentioned, we're veterans based disaster response organization. We pair our skills with first responders sometimes. We're trained to respond to chaos right we're ready to go when this kind of thing happens. So, our folks got on the ground on Monday and we've been doing boat operations since Monday. We will continue to do those until, you know, the community doesn't need it anymore.
[Cooper:] But you're really focused also on long-term.
[Connors:] Yes. So, right now, our teams are setting up for the long term. We expect we're going to be here for a few months. What we generally do is wait for the waters to recede so it's safe for our volunteers to come in and then we just start working on long-term operations where we can help the community get back on their feet.
[Cooper:] Because that's the thing. I mean, General Honore, you know, obviously, there's the adrenaline now for folks here. That lasts for a couple days, it gets you through. But you know, once the water recedes, there's the grim reality of recovery operations rebuilding.
[Honore:] And the things that they're volunteers can't do. Now, the volunteers their big mission is to come help people run from muck houses. Last year in Baton Rouge, Katrina, for years, the hurricane volunteer groups came from all over the world. You see that over there, Anderson that water does turn every one of those catch basins got to be clean before the next storm. Every drain, every culvert, every bridgehead between here and the gulf's going to have to be clean because if it took 40 inches this time, this time, it'll take ten because what the impact the flood is head on the drainage system.
[Cooper:] Is that I mean, that's one of the things says there's attention on storms when they happen in the immediate aftermath, and we saw this group strain and we went back down in New Orleans, I don't know times or something over there over the years. But a lot of people, once the water dissipates, they kind of think oh, it's over, but it's not.
[Connors:] Exactly. And Team Rubicon is still to this day working on houses in New York and New Jersey that were wrecked during Superstorm Sandy. So, you know, everyone else forgets about it, but we're going to stay there with the community until everyone gets back on their feet.
[Cooper:] What do you see in terms of organization at this point?
[Connors:] You know, what our teams have been seeing every day is the armada of the community that has stepped up to help each other and that's amazing to see, and to see everyone working side by side with the government agencies is really encouraging.
[Cooper:] You exist Jon, you exist, Team Rubicon exists basically from donations. They're not getting to get government funding. It's Team Rubicon, what's the Website?
[Connors:] TeamRubiconUSA.org.
[Cooper:] OK. Thank you.
[Connors:] We need donations. Thank you.
[Cooper:] Thanks very much.
[Honore:] Twelve years ago today.
[Cooper:] I know. It's crazy. I want to talk to you about that. Take a look at these live pictures again what area is this now? OK, this is Orange, Texas, and it just gives you a sense of I mean, this thing is not over. I mean I know a lot of folks saw Houston today, they saw the rain stopped and they thought, oh, you know, well, the worst is over and that may be the case for some neighborhoods here in Houston. But check out what's happening right now in Orange, Texas. You get a sense of just how deep those waters are. When we come back, what began as a truly life-saving rescue or rest the resuscitation in fact has now turned into something a mystery. No one seems to know where certain know for certain where this survivor now is. She apparently still needs medical attention. We'll have details on that next. We'll also hear from some of the survivors, even now still making their way to safety with the health of an army and flotilla volunteers we've been talking about. We'll be right back live from Houston, and all the along the region. And welcome back. We're here in Houston. I just want to give you a sense of what's happening right behind me. This is a Texas state maritime unit division, excuse me. They were supposed to be stopped for the night but someone just came up to them and said that their grandmother is in the house and needs to get out need some rescuing. So, they're actually mounting up again. They're going to take out some of their boats out. They'd stop because it's starting to get dark and they were going to resume tomorrow, but they look like they're going to go out to try to find that person. You can also see another boat just coming in right now if you just pan over here a little bit. I don't know if they're bringing somebody out or if this is just a boat that's returning after a day of rescues. Again, this that looks like a group of volunteers. We've seen so many rescues just from this area today, more than 600 people we were told were brought out over the course of the day, and again some of these folks are just volunteers. They had a boat, they brought the boat here. They're not even people in the shell you who live in this neighborhood. So, we're going to continue to follow what's going on here. We'll obviously bring you any updates. Now, if recent experience is any guide they're going to be scenes like this unfolding around the area. Rescues whether by police troops or the volunteers from the area around the Gulf, as well as across the country. There's a lot to talk about. I want to go now to Ryan Nobles who is in Orange, Texas. Ryan, we've been seeing some of the images from Orange tonight. What's happening there on the ground right now?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Anderson. So, Orange is just on the LouisianaTexas border. So this is an area that was hit hard by the second wave of Harvey after it went back out to the Gulf of Mexico and then came back inland. So, a lot of the flooding here began around 1:00 this morning, and you can see this area where we are now. This is a shopping market area. It's become kind of a central locating point and you can see in the distance there, there is a supermarket now. We understand that supermarket is closed but from time to time, they're getting in food and water shipments. And so, there is a line of people out in front of this supermarket, hoping to get stocked up on provisions so that they can take care of their families. And the rescue effort has gone on here all day, starting early in the morning and continued. Like what you're seeing in Houston, it is by and large a volunteer force. There are certainly, first responders from both Louisiana and Texas helping to guide them. But one of the problems they had earlier today, Anderson, and even into the night is that there are many boats willing to get people out of their homes and to dry land, but there aren't necessarily buses and cars and trucks able to take them to shelters. So, that's one of the holdups now in this rescue effort, but it is going to take some time before all these people can be rescued and to be put in somewhere safe, and the water at this point has not started to recede Anderson.
[Cooper:] Ryan Nobles, appreciate it. As you heard just then, so many people in Houston and East Texas are wondering about their loved ones, whether they're OK, whether they're alive, and as you see behind me, these are some folks who are just being brought out. They're thanking the folks who brought them out and also you have now, this maritime division, which are going to start out. They've got helmets on. You know, it may not seem like I mean, this water is not particularly fast-moving but they have to take all the precautions they possibly can because some of that water is very deep, you're getting some areas of eddies. It can it can turn bad very, very quickly. Many of those survivors who did escape the waters are still now looking for other ones. Many local survivors are now in the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston. Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo is there now. He joins us. Chief, if you could just tell us what the latest is tonight in terms of rescue operations, do you have a sense of how many people were rescued today, how many people do still believe may be in need of help?
[Chief Art Acevedo, Houston Police:] Well, I can tell you that the rescue operations have continued in our west area of the city, in the memorial area, where we notice the water has creeped up and continue to creep up. I don't have a current number. This is really day six for the Houston Police Department, where our people haven't gone home. As a matter of fact, this will be the first time tonight that we're going to let some of them go home to get some rest. But the numbers are every hour that passes, they're going down, and as certainly what the thousands of people have been rescued, we're down to probably a matter of a hundred or so.
[Cooper:] I wondered to the people you know who see the waters receding and maybe think Houston is out of the woods, what is your message to those people tonight?
[Acevedo:] Well, first the messages that were not quite out of the wood because we know we still have a water event going on in our west side of the city, of the Memorial City Mall area, and we still haven't gone into these neighborhoods to do our secondary searches. You know, my heart still aching all of us fearful that we still might find more folks in homes and know these flooded out areas. I mean, Anderson, you look at the destruction here. Two-story homes completely, just completely engulfed and covered by water, where you can't even see the rooftops. We just fear what we might find. And so, while we're hopefully and we're glad we have had such a few deaths, it sets an event of I think biblical proportions because of the number water we got, we're still concerned about what they're still might find in days to come.
[Cooper:] And that that actual toll, you may not know is my understanding until I mean, really until the waters recede and as you said, until you can do those secondary searches.
[Acevedo:] Correct and so that's and, you know, secondary searches, our first responders, it's still very risky to go back into those neighborhoods where power lines are down and gas mains and everything else, and a lot of debris you know, a lot of things that they have to deal with. And so, we're thankful that there are additional strike teams with search and rescue capabilities. They're headed towards our area of operation here and those strike teams are going to help us complete those secondary searches.
[Cooper:] Yes. Well, chief, I wish you the best and all of your officers. I appreciate it. Thank you so much for talking with us.
[Acevedo:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] Chief Acevedo doing incredible work here in Houston, so much need, so many people are to respond to so many neighborhoods to try to cover. Up next, what you're seeing here is not a bay. Take a look at this video. It's an ocean, but it's not an ocean. It's actually the freeway. It looks like a ocean or a bay. We're going to talk to the man who took this video when we come back.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] All right, welcome back. I just things are moving very quickly obviously on the ground. I want you to meet Frankie Aziz who just came over to this area. These guys who have been out here all day rescuing people from this neighborhood, which is still very flooded, they were done for the night. Frankie, you got a call from your aunt.
[Frankie Aziz, Relatives Stranded:] My aunt, yes.
[Cooper:] Explain what happened.
[Aziz:] Everything was fine settled with communication with them throughout the family. And all of a sudden this morning we had a call from them, like there's waters rising on their street.
[Cooper:] And that hadn't happened until this morning in this area?
[Aziz:] Until this morning. And then, I said, let me come and get you. And she was like, no, we're fine, we're just going to ride it. You know, we don't think it's going to be a big deal.
[Cooper:] How old are your uncle?
[Aziz:] My uncle is 90, my aunt is like 83.
[Cooper:] OK.
[Aziz:] And there are other uncle, living in the house.
[Cooper:] So they saw the water coming but they thought they could ride it out?
[Aziz:] Yes. And then all of a sudden about half an hour ago, I get a call from my aunt. She's like, the water is up to the house. We can't we need help.
[Cooper:] So you just drove here?
[Aziz:] I took off from the house, I live by the
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Aziz:] We thought ridge is going to drive into the neighbor with the higher truck.
[Cooper:] But the water is pretty deep?
[Aziz:] Oh, it can. It can, yes.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Aziz:] It's unbelievable.
[Cooper:] So likely, these guys were still there?
[Aziz:] Absolutely.
[Cooper:] And they've agreed to go?
[Aziz:] Yes. I just given the information, the address and the location and then they just took off to of the coast guard.
[Cooper:] And are you still in communication with your aunt?
[Aziz:] Yes. I'm talking to her.
[Cooper:] To let her know they're coming?
[Aziz:] I just talked to her like about a minute ago.
[Cooper:] How were they holding up? I mean
[Aziz:] They're just they're there. They're scared. It's getting to that point where it's like, you know, it's coming. It's a matter of life or death for them and they're ready to come out.
[Cooper:] That's the thing. I mean, I think for so many people who woke up today, it wasn't raining, the neighborhood hadn't flooded.
[Aziz:] Yes.
[Cooper:] But, then a certain reservoirs started to flood and overflow. New neighborhoods start to flood that didn't flood before.
[Aziz:] Yes. Yes.
[Cooper:] And that's what happening?
[Aziz:] Yes. It's going like the opposite from where, they were fine until everything calmed down from the storm and the rain, and now this whole entire
[Cooper:] You've been here since the early '90s, have you
[Aziz:] '91.
[Cooper:] Have you seen anything like this? I mean, you live to
[Aziz:] Yes, like all of them and never flooded for a day or two in certain areas. Never seen where we have like a river
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Aziz:] You know, for the whole entire subdivision or the entire area. It's covered up a large amount of area.
[Cooper:] I appreciate you talking to us. And I know, you will be staying here. I just wish you the best.
[Aziz:] Thank you. Thanks for all the help for the coast guard. They're doing an amazing job. Thank you guys.
[Cooper:] Thank you very much, Frankie Aziz. CNN's Brian Todd is been all day out in the water, he joins us now. Brian, I mean, you've been out there, I've been watching you throughout the day follow and rescue effort in Houston. Also obviously for days, what exactly are residents facing right now? What have you been seeing today?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Anderson, they're devastated and they're actually just trying to process this because they were taken by surprise with this wave of flooding that occurred, because it really just started in this neighborhood in earnest at about 1:00 a.m. in the this morning overnight, after the brunt of the storm had passed. These people thought they had actually ridden it out without too much flooding, but that controlled release from the Addick's Reservoir, which flooding the Buffalo Bayou, not far from here, is what really brought all of these flood waters on. I'm in a high water vehicle now. I'm about eight feet above ground. Just huge wheels on this pick up truck that we're riding in the back of here. But you can see behind me here just how deep the water is. We were on an airboat with some private rescuers earlier today, and we're just going around doing door knocks and, you know, watching for people flogging us and several dead. But my estimation, we pulled probably 20 people out of these homes. And Anderson, look at this. This
[Todd:] Some of the people now being rescued have thought they dodged a bullet.
[Dennis Kittler, Houston Flood Victim:] Yesterday afternoon, the sun came out. It receded a little bit. We put everything back that we had put upstairs. And then we had a little hurricane party last night until about midnight. And at 1:00 we had a foot of water.
[Todd:] Volunteers like air boat pilot, Mark Malfa and his partner Joe Ferchild are out looking for victims to help, especially any place with a towel or other distress signs. Inspite of the dangers and reports that two rescuers maybe missing. Do you think about the danger out here?
[Mark Malfa, Air Boat Pilot:] Not really?
[Todd:] Why not?
[Malfa:] You just come and do it. You know, I've run a boat all the time. I do it horrible crap on a consistent basis. I just I'm used to help. I don't think twice. People need help, I come and help them.
[Todd:] And we talked to a lot of these people when they got out and got to safer ground. And I asked them do they want to return to their neighborhoods? And some of them were conflict, some of them said they wanted to stay. But others said they had to make an excruciating decision as to whether to return home to all of this. Anderson?
[Cooper:] Brian, do you have any sense of exactly, you know, how long these rescue teams plan on staying or how they're planning for days ahead
[Todd:] You know, a lot of the time, Anderson, they gauge it by how exhausted they are at the end of a given day. The rescue teams that we were with today, again, these were all private boat operators, they said that they planned on staying. But, you know, one of the guys who operated a boat said he was just completely fried by the end of the day. So these guys kind of assess it on a day by day basis. But they wake up the next morning and they seem to want to go out. So I think a lot of them are going to be here until these waters completely recede.
[Cooper:] Yes. Well, there's a lot of people certainly who appreciate what they're doing. Saving lives. Brian Todd, thank you very much. When we come back, we'll going to hear from the man who shot this just incredible video on I-10. It looks more like the open ocean. We'll be right back. Welcome back. We're waiting to see what happens, we just talked to a guy, Frankie Aziz, who is worried about his aunt and uncle. His aunt thought they could ride out the storm in this neighborhood, but the water started to come up just this morning. They're an elderly couple. She just called him and said that we need some help. So some boats have been launched by state authorities here in Texas to go and get the couple out of their home. So we're waiting for them to come back. You know, with each passing day, we're seeing more and more images that the people have taken on their own. I want to show you this image that we've looked at several times tonight. But I want you to hear from the person who actually took this image, it's some video that was taken on I-10. You would never know it's I-10, you would never know, this is a highway. I talked to the man who took this a short time ago. Listen. And I think for some people the video is kind of hard to wrap your mind around. What we're seeing is the interstate just completely under water, right?
[Logan Wheat, Witness To Flooded Interstate:] Yes, sir. Six, seven foot of water.
[Cooper:] Seven foot? And how for who long did that go for, I mean, how far was that?
[Wheat:] The street that we drove across with the boat was about two miles.
[Cooper:] Wow, two miles with water that deep on the interstate?
[Wheat:] Yes, sir. I mean, as you got closer to the interstate, it got shallower and shallower, but where we were out in the pasture and the docks in the canals, it was seven foot or more.
[Cooper:] That's just incredible. Logan, I appreciate you taking the time to talk to us. Thank you so much. Be safe.
[Wheat:] Yes, sir, no problem.
[Cooper:] That's Logan Wheat. The images are just extraordinary. There are 28 people confirmed dead in the aftermath of hurricane Harvey. 28 lives ended far too soon, each with family and neighbors and friends who right now are grappling with grieve. Joining me now are two people in the midst of that pain. I want you to meet Lindsey Jordan Gay and Roger Lee Jordan, they lost their dad, Ruben Jordan, a beloved high school track and football coach. Lindsey, I'm sorry for your loss and I appreciate you're spending some time with us, to tell us Can you tell me when was the last time you spoke to your dad?
[Lindsey Jordan Gay, Father Died In Flooding:] I actually spoke to my dad Saturday morning. I'm a physician. I had gone into work Saturday morning, checked on my patients and got out around noon and spoke to him. And you know, he was we all kind of thought Harvey had come and gone and there wasn't much going on and he was kind of just hanging at the house. He told me to be careful getting home and that was the last time I talked to him.
[Cooper:] And Roger, did you speak with him at all about the storm?
[Roger Lee Jordan, Father Died In Flooding:] Yes, sir, I spoke to him Saturday, Saturday night around 8:00, 8:30. And we were just conversing about the Floyd Mayweather and Conor McGregor fight, just having casual father-son talk, trying to place a personal bet as to who was going to win. And he had mentioned wanting to out and to see those fight at a local sports bar. And that was the last that I had spoken to him, as well.
[Cooper:] Lindsey, tell me about your dad, what kind of a man was he?
[Gay:] My dad was an amazing man. He has been a coach in lake city area for 28 years. He's been a pillar of the community. He is now well, prior to him retiring, he was teaching the kids of the kids that he taught when he first started
[Cooper:] Wow, that's incredible.
[Gay:] anywhere without someone knowing him and talking to him. Yes, yes.
[Cooper:] What legacy that he's taught the kids of the kids. I understand his grandchildren were the light of his life and then he actually told you that you had done everything in his life that he had done everything in his life that he ever wanted to do after he was able to meet your son.
[Gay:] Yes. I have an 8-month-old, and my dad, for everyone that knows him, he's a big guy. He's a big guy and he keeps a serious face most of the time. But with my son, he was a teddy bear. I had personally never seen him like that. And he has enjoyed this eight months with my son so much.
[Cooper:] Roger, I know there's been a huge outpouring of support from your community. As you said, your dad, which is beloved, what do you want people to know about him?
[Jordan:] He was a very determined, caring, and nurturing soul. He was adamant on encouraging today's youth to be as great as they could. He's a loving individual. He taught us to carry ourselves with class, with dignity and ensure each and every one that we came across the most respect and that would actually return in our favor.
[Cooper:] Roger and Lindsey I'm just so sorry for your loss. I know those words sound so hollow in your grief, but we're thinking about you. And I wish you both the best. Thank you so much.
[Jordan:] Thank you.
[Gay:] We appreciate it.
[Cooper:] 12 years ago tonight, all eyes were on the city of New Orleans. It's had to believe it's been 12 years ago. It was the day after hurricane Katrina hit. I'll speak with the mayor of New Orleans next. Local authorities say they've received as many as 70,000 calls for help over the last several days and they have given so much answering those calls. One veteran police Sergeant Steve Perez has given his life. The work is dangerous and at times, it can seem endless, even for the professionals who are trained for these kind of moments, which makes their effort and that of the volunteers that we've had, worth taking note of again tonight. Randi Kaye reports.
[Randi Kaye, Cnn Correspondent:] The air national guard if the midst of a dramatic rescue. On the other end of that rope line is a newborn baby. This other child from the same family was also rescued. It went on and on until the whole family was safely inside the chopper. They were let out on dryer land. Strangers came together to rescue an elderly man trapped in his car. He was being swept away by flood waters when the group quickly formed a human chain, stretching from dry land to the man's car. The car appeared to be sinking fast and rescuers yelled to those closest to the man to bust the window. They finally got the door open and the man out. He was taken to a local hospital and reunited with his son. A human chain would also help save the life of Annie Smith and her soon-to-be-born baby. She was 9 months pregnant, going into labor, and trapped in her Houston apartment. She and her husband, both doctors, had just moved to Houston last month and had never experienced a hurricane. They began to prepare for a home birth, boiling water and sterilizing equipment. Then, they sent out an alert in their apartment complex, calling for an OBGYN. Strangers, some with medical backgrounds, came running. One quick-thinking neighbor stopped a dump truck outside. Neighbors formed a line, holding hands, so Annie could safely walk to the dump truck, which would take her to the hospital. One neighbor posted this video on Instagram, writing, my incredible neighbors made a human chain to help the woman and her husband to the truck. Moments like these are incredibly precious and remind me of all the good in the world. The couple's daughter was born hours later, in a real delivery room. There were countless rescues by boat, too. And when a boat wasn't handy, there was a cowboy on horseback.
[Unidentified Male:] This is what we do. We help livestock.
[Kaye:] This man and his son set out to rescue horses, posting this video on Facebook.
[Unidentified Male:] You can come out now, son. Go ahead and careful with him.
[Kaye:] He later posted, we were able to swim in and save four of these horses today. One of the greatest feelings in the world is having my best partner by my side. My 17-year-old son. In a storm this bad, every rescue counts. Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.
[Cooper:] Incredible images. For some people, right now, it might be hard to have hope here in Houston or in Beaumont or in Port Arthur, tonight, which is seeing a lot, a lot of water on the ground. A lot of that city, Port Arthur, submerged. Twelve years ago yesterday, hurricane Katrina made landfall. And I wanted to talk to the mayor of the great city of New Orleans, Mitch Landrieu, who joins me now. Mayor Landrieu, you've helped bring New Orleans back from the brink. You've helped make New Orleans the extraordinary city it is now. As you see what's happening here in Houston, as you see what's happening in elsewhere in Louisiana, and in Beaumont and in Port Arthur, what goes through your mind tonight?
[Mayor Mitch Landrieu, New Orleans:] It's really unbelievable. Those images, they're just hard to watch, actually. You interviewed me 12 years ago, and it was just incredible to watch these individuals go through what we went through. For those of us that were in the water, helping people out, you know, you saw the most unbelievable tragedies that you can imagine. Yet at the same time, miraculous, you saw people who would just walk across the street from other people normally, helping each other out. And it just lifted your spirit about our capacity to help each other in the darkest hours. And so even though it's hard to watch, you're witnessing this in realtime, how human beings can really rise above all the differences that we have and reach down and lift each other up. And it's just incredible. Painful, but incredible.
[Cooper:] And it is, I mean, rebuilding is possible. And for New Orleans, it took, I mean, obviously, a lot of help from the federal government. A lot of help from the state. But also, incredible volunteer efforts by churches, by veterans, by school kids, by college students. Just people coming for years and years and years.
[Landrieu:] Well, I would just say a couple of things to the people of Houston and Port Arthur and Beaumont and Lake Charles. I know it's hard right now and I know it's painful. I know you're scared, and I know you're frustrated and then you feel like you lost everything. But there's going to be light out at the end of the tunnel. You can actually see it happening as you speak. And the truth of the matter is, New Orleans could have never come back on our own. We relied on the great help of the federal government, but the fate-based group, not for profits. Kids from all over America came and helped lift us back up. And essentially, that's where you get the great hope for our country. You know we're going to survive because of what we're actually seeing on the ground right now, as tragic as it is. And it's going to be OK. And the one lesson that we learned that really transcended everything else is that in our darkest hour, we're all in the same boat. We're all the same, and it's an amazing thing to be a part of. It hurts, but at the end of it, there's a rainbow and it's going to get better.
[Cooper:] What is I mean, as you see the rescue efforts that have been underway here, what is the key? What is the next step for Houston, for Port Arthur, for Beaumont, for all the communities that are so badly affected?
[Landrieu:] There are couple of things going on right now that are unbelievable. 28 USAR teams have been dispatched by FEMA. That's the largest in the history of the country. The governor actually created a dual commandership, so that north com now, military assets are helping, so there's a rescue effort going on, that you can see. There's also a lot of folks that are in shelters. I think there are 146 shelters that are open, upwards of 22,000 people. The last statistic I heard was that 100,000 homes were hurt. So what's got to happen is people have got the get back to normal as quickly as possible, but they may not be able to go as quickly as they want. And so those shelters have to stay in front of, if you will, the storm. Unfortunately, there are a lot of electrical outages. But if they can get electricity back, get that water down and start to pick up that debris, then everybody will start to lift everybody else up. One of the keys for us was getting the schools back open as quickly as possible and then trying to help people clean out their homes. And then what happens is, you create a virtuous cycle. But here's the thing, the cameras are going to leave and the hard work is going to just be starting. And you just have to remember, put one foot in front of the next, love your neighbor and help each other up. At the end of the day, it's going to get better, but it's is not going to be easy. And I think everybody understand that, knows that. But Houston is strong, Texas is strong, and the rest of the country is going to be there for them, like they were for us. No doubt about it.
[Cooper:] Well, that's I mean, that's the thing. Houston was a city which opened its arms to a lot of folks from New Orleans, you know, who got on buses and ended up here.
[Landrieu:] I tell you, Anderson, it was unbelievable. I saw a story today about Mayor Bill White who had to get evacuated. He was the mayor of Houston at the time that opened up the entire city for us with the county judges and then he had to get rescued this week. It was heartbreaking for me to watch him walking out of that water. He was a giant when the recovery happened. And all of the people of Houston, where they received the people from New Orleans, opened up their schools to us, they opened up their homes. We want to do the same thing for Houston if the need arises. We're hosting the LSBYU game this weekend and we'll do anything we can to help. I just think right now it's hard. You've got to let the USAR teams do their work. You have to let all the experts and the shelters work with the individuals that are there, help them work through their pain. But you can imagine how scared everybody is who think they lost everything, and they can't see tomorrow. But at the end of the day, though, they'll be able to stand back up. And I know that the whole world and the country is going to help.
[Cooper:] Well, I know you just marked, obviously, the 12th anniversary, more than 1,800 people lost their lives in Katrina. There's a beautiful memorial to them in New Orleans. My thoughts were with the great people of New Orleans yesterday on that terrible anniversary. I appreciate, Mayor, you're being with us tonight.
[Landrieu:] Well, thank you so much, Anderson. Thank you for all the work you all are doing.
[Cooper:] Take care. We'll see you soon. We're going to take a short break. We'll have more from Houston. Oh, actually, sorry, we're actually going to go to Chris Cuomo, who oh, sorry, Ryan Nobles is standing by in Orange, Texas. Let's check with Ryan. Ryan?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] It's OK, you can call me Chris Cuomo. That's an honor to be called Chris Cuomo, Anderson. And we are here in Orange, Texas, which is right on the TexasLouisiana border. And the rescue effort here is ongoing. In many of these communities, water is as much as four feet up in some of these houses. And they really weren't expecting it. This is not a town that traditionally sees a lot of flooding. So we were in one neighborhood that's about a mile down the road from where we are right now. And I talked to a grandfather who said that the water started seeping in, at around 1:00 this morning, and he just did not expect it. He got his family up, he had several of his grand kids that were staying with him in the house. And they started the process of trying to evacuate. He had a jet ski, but that wasn't enough to get everybody out. But that wasn't much longer into the day that the Cajun Navy came through and there were boat after boat, going through these neighborhoods and getting people to safe. That continues tonight. There is a shopping center that's here behind me, that the market itself is actually closed right now, but they've been getting in supplies of provisions, water, and food. They've actually been giving it out free to people that can get here. And there's been a steady stream of trucks, trucks pulling boats. We've seen national guard come through, with the high-water trucks, trying to get people into safe areas. The one concern that we've found is that they can get people out of their homes, they can get them to dry land, but getting them to shelters has been a bit of a problem, because they haven't had enough buses and cars to get these folks to. So this is just the beginning of what is going to be a long recovery for the folks here in Orange, Texas. Anderson, back to you.
[Cooper:] Ryan Nobles, you stay safe out there. I just want to show you, one boat has come back, but we're still waiting for that boat. A young man named Frankie Aziz came earlier, told some of the rescuers who had actually stopped for the night that his aunt had just called him, she's elderly, she's with his uncle in his 90s as well, saying that the water has risen faster and much higher than they anticipated in their home just today and they need help. So a group of rescuers went out. We're still waiting for them to come back in. We'll bring you the results of that when they do come back. Chris Cuomo is going to take over our coverage now. I'm going to be back also at 11:00 p.m. Eastern time live from here to bring you all of the latest. Right now, let's go to Chris Cuomo Prime-Time. All right. Thanks, Anderson. And thank you for helping us, coming up, as well.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] All right, thanks Anderson and thank you for helping us coming up as well. I am Chris Cuomo and this is Prime Time.

[Whitfield:] President Trump says a location has been picked for his next summit with Kim Jong-un, but he is not saying where. An agreement on a second summit was announced after the president and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo held a meeting in the Oval Office with North Korea's lead negotiator on nuclear talks. Here's the president earlier today.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We had a very good meeting yesterday with North Korea. That was an incredible meeting. It lasted almost two hours. And we've agreed to meet sometime, probably the end of February. We've picked a country, but we'll be announcing it in the future. Kim Jong-un is looking very forward to it, and so am I. We've made a lot of progress that has not been reported by the media, but we have made a lot of progress.
[Whitfield:] CNN International Correspondent Will Ripley joins me now from Beijing. So is there any indication of where this second summit might be?
[Will Ripley, Cnn International Correspondent:] We're hearing that Vietnam is probably the most likely of the locations that have been thrown around. Hawaii, I highly doubt, along with Bangkok. I also was reading a report that it could happen again in Singapore, but I don't see that happening either. I think Vietnam is, again, probably the most likely. That's what my sources are telling me based on the fact that it's close to North Korea, it has a good relationship with both the U.S. and North Korea, and it's a country that was once at war with the United States and has since risen from the ashes, transformed its economy, and could potentially be a model for North Korea as they try to grow their own economy. But location aside, there are a lot of other things that need to be sorted out. President Trump, you heard him just now, obviously he is very optimistic and he says that there is lots of progress being made behind the scenes. But keep in mind, the president shortly after Singapore, he famously tweeted that the nuclear threat from North Korea was over. And then there were these U.S. intelligence reports showing them expanding their missile bases, and analysts have been telling me that North Korea probably has more nuclear weapons now than they did at the beginning of the diplomatic process. Even the Pentagon put their missile defense strategy on Thursday, the same day the North Korean delegation was arriving in Washington, and they called North Korea an extraordinary threat to the U.S. So there's still some very significant issues here. North Korea has an arsenal. The U.S. wants them to get rid of it. And North Koreans say the U.S. needs to get rid of sanctions in order for them to do anything. They still need to build a lot of confidence, a lot of trust. So there are some talks happening right now in Sweden, in Stockholm, lower level negotiations with the U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun and his negotiating counterpart Choe Son- hui, who is North Korea's Vice Foreign Minister. If those lower level talks can hammer out some preconditions and they can come to a compromise on easing sanctions and also actually taking tangible steps toward denuclearization, then the second summit might actually be something as opposed to a photo op with another vaguely worded statement, Fred.
[Whitfield:] Will Ripley in Beijing, thank you so much. Let's bring in Gordon Chang, he's a columnist for "The Daily Beast" and the author of "Nuclear Showdown, North Korea Takes on the World." Gordon, good to see you. So how crucial do you believe this second summit is?
[Gordon Chang, Author, Nuclear Showdown, North Korea Takes On The World":] I actually don't think it's that crucial at all. President Trump actually talked about this last May, he said look, maybe we need one, two, three, maybe even more summits. And that really diminishes the importance of any one of them. And I can see why Kim Jong-un wants this summit. He wants to be able to delay more. He wants legitimization. He wants to use it to drive a wedge between Seoul and Washington. I don't understand why we want it, though.
[Whitfield:] And this is already a pretty big win for North Korea, right? Getting to, a, having the first summit, and then having this Oval Office meeting, and now a second summit that is on the schedule.
[Chang:] Yes, the first summit in Singapore in June was an enormous win for Kim Jong-un because it showed him on the world stage as an equal to the world's most powerful figure, President Trump. And so that helped him back home I think in terms of solidifying his hold on the regime. And it certainly allowed him to reach out to South Korea and to other countries as well. So they got a lot from that first summit. We didn't get very much at all, if anything. So I don't see why we're going to have another of these photo opportunities unless there's some real agreement.
[Whitfield:] So how will you game real progress? If there is indeed another summit, how will you assess what has been learned from the first summit, what may have been the U.S. gains from it, and how the U.S. builds on that?
[Chang:] Well, there are two things that people are talking about as really crucial for coming out of this second summit to show progress. One of them is a declaration from North Korea of its missile and nuke sites, and the second is a firm table for disarmament. If you don't get those things, then this is just another opportunity to talk and stall, which means another win for North Korea.
[Whitfield:] What do you want to see, besides a document, what would you want to see in this second summit, that would, I guess, look more serious or more convincing to you that there was something gained on both sides from it?
[Chang:] I'd like to see this summit not occur. I'd like to see President Trump go back to doing what made him successful prior to the June summit, which was maximum pressure, sanctions. What we've seen in the last seven or eight months is open violation of the sanctions, not only by the North Koreans, not only by the South Koreans, not only by the Chinese but the Russians as well. And this is really allowed Kim Jong-un to do what he wants, to think he can just sort of just play out this process. So I think we need to go back to those sanctions rather than talking.
[Whitfield:] Gordon Chang, always good to see you. Thank you so much.
[Chang:] Thanks, Fred.
[Whitfield:] And don't miss former U.S. secretary of state John Kerry as he joins CNN's David Axelrod for "The Axe Files" tonight at 7:00 eastern only on CNN.

[Asher:] Returning now to our top story, "AMI" is not just known for the national inquiry or "National Enquirer" rather, although it may be its most notorious publication. "American Media" titles include "Touch Men's Journal", "Muscle & Fitness" and teen titles like "J-14". But the "Enquirer" is also known for its ties to President Trump as well. Cnn Senior Media reporter Oliver Darcy joins us live now. So Oliver, here's my question to you. What we're seeing with this battle between Jeff Bezos and "AMI" and the "National Enquirer", is this a watershed moment in tabloid journalism to seeing the world's richest man stand up to being blackmailed and allegedly extorted as well?
[Oliver Darcy, Cnn Senior Media Reporter:] Right, if this isn't the watershed moment, I don't know what would be. I mean, this story is absolutely explosive. Jeff Bezos of course started it yesterday when he published a 2,000-word blog post detailing blackmail allegations against "National Enquirer's" parent company, "American Media, Inc.", and it's been going on since then. The "American Media, Inc."; the parent company of "National Enquirer" denies basically any legal wrongdoing in a statement. But they said they're going to investigate Bezos' allegations. But this really started when the "National Enquirer" published a story a few weeks ago to telling and reviewing that Bezos had been involved in an extra-marital affair. In that story, there were text messages that they obtained between Bezos and his mistress. Bezos wanted to know how they got those text messages, and so he launched an investigation into this. And from the e-mails that Bezos published in his blog post yesterday, "AMI" basically was saying, if you do not stop your investigation, if you don't cease this investigation, we're going to release more risque photos of you. We have these photos of you in compromising positions and we're going to release those. And that's what Bezos said. In his blog post, he said he's not going to give into, and he sort of blackmailed and he published the post, and now here we are.
[Asher:] Good, I mean, honestly, good for him. We actually polled our audience and asked them, what would you do if you were in the same situation, most people saying that they would do what Bezos is doing, which is standing up and fighting. My question to you is from a journalist perspective, just in terms of "AMI's" argument, is there any or could there ever be any news worthiness in publishing nude pictures of the world's richest man? That is what "AMI" is saying.
[Darcy:] I mean, I can't imagine. The National Tabloid" the "National Enquirer" of course traffics in tabloid gossip and things like that. So maybe they would argue that this is, you know, relative to their arguments. But they've already published a lot of things about Bezos. And I think at this point, it was clear at least, seemingly clear in the e-mails that Bezos published from the "National Enquirer" to him, that they were basically saying, we have these photos and we're asking you nicely to cease your investigation to say that there was no political motivation for us publishing that story. And if you don't by the way, we have these photos and it might come out. It seemed clear what they were trying to do, and Bezos put a very black and white term, saying it was blackmail and extortion.
[Asher:] He was very smart in how he responded actually. Oliver Darcy live for us, thank you so much, appreciate that
[Darcy:] Thank you.
[Asher:] So working at Facebook apparently is like being in a cult or in "Game of Thrones", that's according to current and former company insider speaking with Cnn. For the past year, we've been telling you about all of the myriad problems plaguing Facebook and how top leadership have responded as Facebook turns 15. Laurie Segall goes inside to understand the culture in the C-Suite.
[Alex Stamos, Former Chief Security Officer, Facebook:] The truth is there is a bit of "Game of Thrones" culture among the executives. And one of the problems about having a really tight-knit set of people making all these decisions, if you keep the same people in the same places, it's just very difficult to admit you were wrong, right?
[Laurie Segall, Cnn Senior Technology Correspondent:] The company is powerful, and after spending time behind Facebook's walls, there's another thing that emerged, folks who had something to say, but were afraid to say it.
[Unidentified Male:] Working at Facebook can feel a little bit like being part of a cult.
[Segall:] This former employee asked us to protect their identity.
[Unidentified Male:] Speaking out against the company is not welcome. There is a career impact where you might get blacklisted, and you're not going to get hired.
[Segall:] Ironically, in a place that's connected billions, this home employee cites a disconnect with them.
[Unidentified Male:] People aren't really encouraged to bring bad news to Mark because generally Mark doesn't handle bad news well. In public setting, he politely argues against it. In private setting, he's more likely to really, aggressively go against that information or challenge the source, to challenge the assumptions, to honestly not believe the bad news.
[Segall:] Facebook is in transition, many executives have left over rumor disputes about the company's direction including the founders of Instagram and WhatsApp. And they saw the controversy, there's been speculation. Should Zuckerberg who is CEO, Chairman and the majority shareholder in Facebook step aside?
[Mark Zuckerberg, Founder, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Facebook:] That's not the plan?
[Segall:] That's not the plan. Would anything change that?
[Zuckerberg:] I mean, if I could eventually over time, I mean, I'm not going to I'm not going to be doing this forever.
[Asher:] Not going to be doing this forever, interesting. Laurie Segall is joining us live. So Laurie, it's interesting because it's not just privacy and fake news that Facebook has to deal with, but it's also their own culture. They have to clean house themselves. How does a company like Facebook
[Segall:] Yes
[Asher:] Go inside and change culture.
[Segall:] I think that's what they're dealing with now, I think it's been a tumultuous time for the company. And in all fairness, you know, not every employee feels this way. But you know, there was this pattern because we shot this documentary over six or seven months. You know, in talking to, a lot of former employees who want to speak a little bit more openly. Maybe not even saying terrible things about Facebook, but having a more nuance conversation about some of the challenges that the company is facing. They were too afraid to go on the record, they just said it wasn't worth it for the career impact in Silicon Valley. This is a close-knit place and you know, I think that's part of the problem. And I think at this time at Facebook, where these you know, these problems need to come out in the open, there need to be a lot of debate over them. That's an issue, you know, I know there have been a lot of changes internally with a lot of these executives leaving, but that group, that closer group next to Mark Zuckerberg is still very much intact in there.
[Asher:] It's interesting. So we've seen how the company has evolved over the first 15 years. Where do you see it going over the next 15 years? Will Facebook still when my son is 15 years old, will Facebook still be around in the same format as it is now?
[Segall:] I think it's always evolving. Mark Zuckerberg was very smart here, he had a lot of foresight when he bought Instagram, and he bought WhatsApp because I think in many ways, a lot of these acquisitions he believed would be the future of Facebook. So your son might be using Instagram, and Instagram is owned by Facebook, and I can see a lot more innovation coming in that room. I know they've focused on virtual reality, and that could be something kind of down the pipeline. And Mark Zuckerberg's mission which we covered a lot in this documentary is to connect the world, and that is not slowing down. You know, he plans to do that in every way, shape or form, which will mean a whole new set of problems that will come along with that. And I think it will be up to Facebook to better anticipate those problems and get on top of them quicker than they have in the last couple of years.
[Asher:] All right, Laurie Segall, thank you and speaking of my son, there's going to be a social media ban in my house
[Segall:] I can only imagine
[Asher:] For sure. Laurie Segall, thank you so much
[Segall:] Thank you
[Asher:] Appreciate that. OK, so be sure to set your DVR for Laurie's special report, "
[Facebook At 15:] It's Complicated", that airs Sunday at 9:00 p.m., that is U.S. East Coast time, and by the way, that's 10:00 a.m. Monday morning in Hong Kong only on Cnn. After the break, we are in a dying minutes for trade in a Friday afternoon right here in New York, we're going to check those markets in a moment.

[Vanier:] Hi, everyone. Welcome back to the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Cyril Vanier. Let's look at your headlines this hour. Cries of "No to slavery" filled the streets outside the Libyan embassy in Paris over the weekend. The demonstration came just days after a CNN exclusive report shone a light on auctions in Libya, where human beings are bought and sold. Following our report, Libya's government said that it launched a formal investigation into the migrant slave trade, which will be overseen by its anti-illegal immigration agency. Officials say their goal is find those who have been sold, bring them to safety and then return them to their countries of origin. During CNN's investigation, Nima Elbagir and her team witnessed a dozen men, sold like commodities at auction. Here's part of her report.
[Nima Elbagir, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] We were ushered into one of two auctions happened on the same night. Crouch at the back of the yard. A flood light obscuring much of the scene. One by one men are brought out as the bidding begins 400, 500, 550, 600, 650, 700. Very quickly it's over. We ask if we can speak to the men, the auctioneer, seen here refuses. We ask again if we can speak to them, if we can help them. No, he says. The auction is over with. And we are asked to leave. That was over very quickly. We walked in and as soon as we walked in, the men started covering their faces. But they clearly wanted to finish what they were doing. And they kept bringing out what they kept referring to in Arabic as the merchandise. All in all, they admit that had there were 12 Nigeriens that were sold in front of us. And I honestly don't know what to say. That was probably one of the most unbelievable things I have ever seen.
[Vanier:] CNN was told of auctions at nine locations throughout Libya. But many more are believed to take place each month. CNN's Robyn Kriel now has more on the impact of this investigation.
[Robyn Kriel, Cnn Correspondent:] Images from Libya that shocked the world. An exclusive CNN investigation that revealed the ugly slave trade that's happening on Europe's doorstep. For the past year, a CNN team has $worked tirelessly to shine a light on this dark practice. And the scenes they filmed inside Libya have provoked both protest and promises of action. On the streets of Paris, hundreds of demonstrators shout, "No to slavery," demanding that Libyan authorities investigate, which they say they will do. Protesters could barely contain their anger. The leader of the African Union, Alpha Conde, also reacted harshly. "On behalf of the African Union, I express my outrage at the despicable trade of migrants currently taking place in Libya and strongly condemn this practice of another age." As thousands continue to make the perilous journey from Libya to Europe, the International Organization for Migration warns that smuggling networks in Libya are, quote, "growing stronger, more organized and better equipped," all of which allows the hidden horrors to flourish. A glimpse inside a nightmare many didn't even realize still existed in the 21st century Robyn Kriel, CNN.
[Vanier:] Opium production in Afghanistan is up 87 percent this year. That's according to a new U.N. report, which calls the increase "frightening." Opium is a major source of cash for the Taliban insurgency. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh filmed this next report back in July, taking a close look at the reasons for the uptick in the drug's production.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Sr. Intl. Correspondent:] Heroin, setting Afghanistan aflame, its opium fields targeted for eradication. Just as it tears up America's streets in the new opioid crisis, both the misery and the money here.
[Walsh:] Even the sparkle from the solar panels
[Unidentified Male:] We also believe this year, we might have a bit higher
[Walsh:] Only about 1 percent of America's heroin is Afghan; most of it hitting Europe. But that could change. Syrian field that hide a potential time bomb, the heroin spread in the West Nick Paton Walsh, CNN, Helmand, Afghanistan.
[Vanier:] Still to come on the show, in a medical emergency, the fight to survive is much harder when there's no hospital close by. Next, we'll take you to a town that's been dealing with that terrifying problem for years now. Stay with us.

[Blitzer:] The president has been slammed with growing backlash for his failure to specifically call out white supremacist after that atrocious attack in Charlottesville, Virginia. President Trump said that many sides are responsible for the fatal rally, but many republicans are saying that's not enough. Here's Senator Cory Gardner on the "State of the Union" earlier today.
[Sen. Cory Gardner , Colorado:] This is not a time for vagaries. This isn't the time for innuendo or to allow room to be read between the lines. This is a time to lay blame. To lay blame on bigotry and to lay blame on white supremacist, on white nationalism and on hatred. That needs to be said. This president has done an incredible job of naming terrorism around the globe as evil, a radical Islamic terrorism, whether it's in Europe or the Middle East. He has said and called it out time and time again and this president needs to do exactly that today. He called this white supremacism, this white nationalism with evil and let the country hear it, let the word hear it. It's something that needs to come from the oval office and this White House needs to do it today.
[Blitzer:] Let's go to our white house correspondent Athena Jones. She's joining us now from Bridgewater, New Jersey. She's covering the president, not very far away right now. He's continuing what he calls his working vacation. Athena, what is the latest, what has been the reaction, the official reaction, from the president, if any, today?
[Athena Jones, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hi, Wolf. We have not heard from the president today. I was just checking his Twitter feed to see if he's tweeted just in the last few minutes and he has not. So no word on exactly what he's up to. But we did hear from his daughter Ivanka Trump on Twitter earlier this morning. She is, of course, a senior adviser to the president. Here is what she tweeted earlier today. She said, "There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacism and neo-Nazis. We must all come together as Americans and be one country united, #charlottesville. This morning, we also heard from a White House official who put out a statement that went further than what we heard directly from the president yesterday. Let me read that statement as well. The White House official said, the president said very strongly in his statement yesterday that he condemns all forms of violence, bigotry and hatred. Of course, that includes white supremacist, KKK, neo-Nazi and all extremist groups. He called for national unity and bringing all Americans together. I just want to note one more thing we heard this morning on "State of the Union" from the White House's homeland security adviser Tom Bossert, he after being pressed repeatedly by Jake Tapper said that he said, "I condemn white supremacist and racist and white Nazi groups and all the other groups that espouse this kind of hatred. What's interesting here, Wolf, is that these words that we're now hearing Tom Bossert, from an unnamed White House official and the president's daughter, all go much further than what the president said yesterday and that is what has drawn all of this condemnation from not just democrats but also from republicans like Senator Cory Gardner and it is a growing list of republicans, allies of the president, who want to see him do more. What's also interesting here, Wolf, is that the president had a chance to respond directly, to go a little further. The press who were there for that press, that brief appearance before the media yesterday, tried to ask him questions as he was leaving the room. Shouting, specifically, whether he wants the support of white nationalists? The president clearly heard those questions and chose to ignore them. For the remainder of the day, I and my colleagues press White House officials for more on why the president made the statement in the way that he did. I asked several people where he stands on white nationalism, and it took until today to get some sort of answer. So I think that there are going to be a lot of people who still aren't satisfied and won't be satisfied, until they hear the president himself condemn these white nationalists and white supremacists who staged these demonstrations yesterday.
[Blitzer:] He could easily do that. There's a pool of reporters including you. There's camera crews over there in New Jersey. He could go out and make a statement, or at a minimum, he could simply retweet Ivanka Trump's tweet. He hasn't done that either. Here's something that's perplexing. The statement that the White House put out simple, as you point out, an "unnamed" White House official. Do we know who that official is? Why is that official unnamed? Why doesn't somebody come forward and specifically say this is a statement from the press secretary or a statement from the chief of staff? Why is this an unnamed official making such an important statement?
[Jones:] That's the question we're all asking here as well, Wolf. No answer so far. It seems to me that, or it seems to many of us, that if the White House is trying to perhaps clean this up a bit, seeing the reaction that the president's remarks got yesterday, that they would go further and at least attach someone's name to it, because it has more force that way. This is really what it all comes down to. This is why there's so much criticism of President Trump himself. Because it's a bully pulpit for a reason. A lot of folks would say and they argue that the president isn't showing leadership. He talks about wanting to unite the country, to bring people together and yet won't name, won't specifically talk about the facts on the ground that led to the violence we saw unfolding on the streets of Charlottesville yesterday. So it is curious to have this White House official not wanting to put their name to this statement.
[Blitzer:] Very curious, indeed. But if the president does want to make a statement, of course, all the major TV networks, all the cable networks, we will be there we'll have live coverage of any statement that the president is ready to make, if he decides in the coming hours to go before the cameras. There's so many people, including many republicans, are strongly urging him to do it. The fact he hasn't done it yet, raising a lot more questions. Athena, we'll get back to you as soon as you get word if the president will make a statement. We'll get right back to you as well. Thanks very, very much. Coming up, we're going to speak to someone on the ground of Charlottesville, Virginia, who is at the rally and saw a former Ku Klux Klan leader speak out what he witnessed and his thoughts on what happened. We'll take a quick break. Our special coverage continues.

[Cabrera:] Get ready for midterm madness. In 100 days voters will deliver their verdict on President Trump's first year, two years now, in office. And while the political landscape could shift dramatically in three months, right now the wind is at Democrats' back. CNN's chief national correspondent John King explains.
[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] One hundred days now until the midterm elections a new CNN rankings, brand new rankings give the Democrats even more reason to feel bullish about their odds of retaking the big prize, control of the House of Representatives. To the campaign trail in a second. First, though, a reminder of the current state of play. Let's look at the House as we speak today. 235 Republicans. That's the majority. You see the red seats down here. Democrats in the minority with 193. But that's the state of play here in Washington. Let's take a look at our new rankings out on the campaign trail and you will see 235 Republican seats. Well, we rank only 158 of them as solid Republican going into the final stretch of the campaign. 29 likely, 18 lean Republican. You see the yellow, the gold? That's 27 toss-up seats. Strong number for the Democrats. 182 solid, nine likely, 12 leaning Democratic seats. So how do the Democrats get to the majority? Here is their dream scenario. Win the likelies, win the leans. If they could sweep these toss-ups, that's the gold down there, 230 if the Democrats essentially run the board. 230, well in excess of what they need to be the majority. Again, that's a dream-o vision. But it does show you how this is well within their reach heading into the final stretch. One of the reasons they're so bullish, let's take a closer look at the toss-up seats. See the red on top? Of the 27 toss-up seats, 25 are currently held by Republicans. 25 of the 27 toss-ups are currently Republican-held seats. Only two held by the Democrats. Again, with the wind at your back, a reason the Democrats are optimistic more Republican seats moving from the red into the competitive side of our map here. Another reason the Democrats are optimistic heading into the final hundred days, their standing today is even better than it was at the beginning of the year. They were optimistic then. Look at the Republican numbers. 177 solid to begin the year. Down to 158 solid now. More seats have moved from dark red, solid Republican, this way toward the Democrats. The Democratic numbers are up. 182 solid now, up from the beginning of the year. So this map looks good for the Democrats now at 100 days out. Even better than it was in January. A lot can happen between now and then, but heading into this final stretch, Democrats believe their odds are quite good of retaking the biggest prize this November, control of the House.
[Cabrera:] Our thanks to John King. Joining us now, CNN presidential historian Timothy Naftali and the Washington bureau chief for the "Chicago Sun-Times," Lynn Sweet. So, Tim, the traditional midterm dynamic, especially in one of these election years is that there are some flips going on, right? What do you think is going to happen this year, especially now that the economy is so strong?
[Tim Naftali, Cnn Presidential Historian:] Oh, Ana, I can just see this clip being run over and over again when I make a prediction that turns out to be totally wrong. Here's what I think people should be looking for. Right now the president's approval rating is so low that if you compare that to presidents with similar low approval ratings in a midterm period you can expect to see a switch, a large number of seats go away from the president's party to another party. That's if we follow precedent, right? There's something else that's very interesting, however, which makes this different. I'm not saying it changes the outcome. It makes it different. The president is now in part running against his own party. In the sense that today's tweet, where he talks about he wants funding for the wall and he wants funding for tougher immigration laws, he's saying to Republicans, if you don't give me what I want I'm going to go out there and I'm going to campaign, I'm going to campaign for Trump people, people who only want what I want, which means the dynamic we're going to see in the fall is that not all Republicans are going to get the support of President Trump. And to hold on to his to hold on to the Republican majority in the House he needs every Republican to win. So
[Cabrera:] That's an interesting dynamic when you take a look at how he has made enemies about with some in his own party.
[Naftali:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] But, Lynn, regardless of whether Republicans want the president to stay quiet or not, he apparently has no plans to do so. He's going speak his mind. Here's what he told FOX News.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] You know, the famous quote, it's the economy, stupid. Well, if it's the economy, then we should do very well. I just don't know any reason why we shouldn't do well. The economy is the strongest ever and I think that's going to have a very positive impact and I am going to work very hard. I'll go six or seven days a week when we're 60 days out, and I will be campaigning for all of these great people that do have a difficult race and we think we're going to bring them over the line.
[Cabrera:] Lynn do you think he can do it? And where can he do it?
[Lynn Sweet, Washington Bureau Chief, "chicago Sun-times":] Well, I'll tell you one place I know he that Trump is going to be unwelcome, in one of the biggest competitive House races, it's in Illinois. It's the 6th Congressional District. Congressman Peter Roskam is fighting against Democrat Sean Casten. President Trump coming would be no help and would be a negative. Also if you look at of those 27 tossup seats that John King was talking about, the ones where you have Republicans running in districts won by Hillary Clinton and there are a handful of those, you won't see these candidates beseeching the president to come in and help them. Maybe case specific, Pence could help, Vice President Pence. So every House race is usually its own story. So in broad brush President Trump will not be welcome in every district. You know, by the time President Obama was in his second term, you know, he didn't have a calling card open in every place either. So you have to pick and choose. And that's what I think President Trump will discover. And he will be very powerful in the districts where he does need to nudge someone across the line. But those are districts probably that were going to be in his favor anyway.
[Cabrera:] The president has been tweeting a whole lot today, as we've been discussing. He's playing shutdown politics. He said, "I would be willing to shut down the government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for border security, which includes the wall. Must get rid of lottery, catch and release, et cetera, and finally go to the system of immigration based on merit. We need great people coming into our country." Tim, do you think Republicans really want to be talking about a shutdown 100 days before the election?
[Naftali:] No. But I think President Trump does. And I think President Trump is saying this because he believes the turnout will determine the midterms and he's going to turn out his base. And he is hoping that he can beat the odds in 2018 that he beat in 2016. I am sure there are people trying to tell the president this is not the best approach or maybe they've given up. But he doesn't care. He won in 2016 playing the game the way he wants to play it. He's trying do it again. He thinks by pressing the buttons that his base care about they will come out and vote and there will be enough of them to hold on to a slim majority in the House.
[Cabrera:] Lynn, I want to turn to the president's attacks against the media. The president met one-on-one with the head of "The New York Times," we've learned, A.J. Sulzberger. "New York Times" is revealing disturbing details about that meeting. The paper writing, quote, "Mr. Sulzberger recalls telling Mr. Trump at one point that newspapers have begun posting armed guards outside their offices because of a rise in threats against journalists. The president," he says, "expressed surprise that they did not already have armed guards." At another point Mr. Trump expressed pride in polarizing the phrase popularizing the phrase, I should say, "fake news," and said other countries had begun banning it. Mr. Sulzberger responded that those countries were dictatorships and that they were not banning fake news but rather independent scrutiny of their actions. Lynn, what is Trump's end game here? I mean, state-run media?
[Sweet:] Well, his end game is the multiple stories in this is that he still has a craving for the approval of the "New York Times." And that is evidence, even though that's the newspaper that one of the newspapers that's under attack because he gave time and you know, to the publisher. I don't know whether or not this very important message that was sent to the president today by the publisher of the "New York Times" will have any impact at all. Someone who is proud of popularizing the term "fake news" may not care what the publisher of the "New York Times" thinks about it. Sad to say, but what is important is that the news organizations keep doing its job, as CNN does, as the "Sun-Times" does and every one of our colleagues do, because the stories still have to be done and maybe at some point President Trump will understand the news and the job of the news in a different context. I don't think so. I think what's important is for us to make sure that the infection that the president is spreading when it comes to journalism and the free press in America is limited.
[Cabrera:] Tim, are you surprised to hear this from an American president?
[Naftali:] One of the things that keeps us together is a combined joint love of our Constitution. When Mr. Trump, President Trump, speaks this way, he is not speaking like someone who loves our Constitution. At the basis of our Constitution is the First Amendment. He is president of the United States. So an American president is saying this. It is unprecedented for an American president to say this publicly. Nixon sometimes said it privately. But the fact of the matter is it's up to Americans to decide if this is what they want to hear from their president and whether their love of the Constitution, which as I said binds us, requires or not an understanding and commitment to the First Amendment. I suspect Americans are committed to the First Amendment.
[Sweet:] And may I just add, Tim and Ana, very quickly, for a president to be it would be something if the president could be as committed to the First Amendment as he is to the Second.
[Cabrera:] Lynn Sweet, Timothy Naftali. We'll leave it there on that poignant moment. Thank you. Coming up, our special series about the Alaska wilderness and the Trump administration's controversial plans to drill and mine there.
[Bill Weir, Cnn Special Correspondent:] In nearby Catmine National Park my team learned firsthand that this part of Alaska is nirvana for bears.

[Cabrera:] Big developments in the Russia probe. An associate of the president's friend and a longtime adviser, Roger Stone, is in, quote, "plea negotiations" with Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Jerome Corsi is his name. He's a well-known conspiracy theorist. And his role in this investigation revolves around the possibility he may have been an intermediary between Stone and WikiLeaks, the site that released the hacked e-mails of the DNC and Clinton campaign chairman, John Podesta, in the leadup to the 2016 election. During a radio interview, Roger Stone was on the defense and he said there's no way he could be incriminated as a result of this deal with Corsi.
[Roger Stone, Political Operative & Trump Advisor:] This idea that Jerry Corsi could implicate me, there's simply no evidence whatsoever that would show that I knew about the source or the continent of any allegedly stolen e-mails or any allegedly hacked e- mails that were published by WikiLeaks. Just not so.
[Cabrera:] Stone also said Corsi is under a tremendous amount of pressure and he is being asked over and over to say things he does not actually believe occurred. Meantime, disgraced former Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, is learning the hard way Robert Mueller is keeping an eye on his Twitter feed. In two days, on Monday, Papadopoulos is set to begin serving a 14-day prison sentence as part of his plea deal that he struck after lying to the FBI in connection with the Russia probe. His lawyers want that sentence postponed but the special counsel is saying, no way, noting in court documents that Papadopoulos' initial statement of remorse doesn't line up with what he is saying publicly, including a tweet in which Papadopoulos declares the FBI investigation is, quote, "the biggest case of entrapment," and another tweet in which he says he was considering withdrawing his guilty plea because he believed he was framed. Joining us now to discuss, defense attorney, Randy Zelin. Randy, if Mueller is reading Papadopoulos' tweets, he must be reading the president's? What message does that send?
[Randy Zelin, Defense Attorney:] Where to begin? These people have such a curious relationship to the truth. You have Mr. Papadopoulos saying, I lied, now I lied about lying, so do they cancel each other out? That means I told the truth. You have Dr. Corsi who basically is more or less admitting he lied when he met with the special counsel and testified to the grand jury.
[Cabrera:] Because he was expecting an indictment
[Zelin:] Exactly. Now you have Mr. Stone, who doth protests too much and, by the way, he's under a tremendous amount of pressure, so he must be lying that he lied. It really it's fascinating.
[Cabrera:] Like you said, where do you begin? Let's talk about those tweets for a moment. Do you think the president should be worried if he's seeing what's happening in the Papadopoulos situation?
[Zelin:] I don't know that the president is necessarily capable of worrying. Right now, if I were Mr. Papadopoulos, I don't think he understands that just because he's been sentenced that he is insulated and can only be looking at 14 days. Because based upon those tweets, he has admitted to having committed perjury. Because when he went before the judge and entered a plea of guilty, he was sworn under oath, and the judge, I can assure you said, Mr. Papadopoulos, think carefully, because anything you say from this point forward, if you're lying, you will go to jail for perjury. Those tweets are an admission that he lied to the judge when he admitted lying to the
[Fbi. Cabrera:] So you're saying he could actually be in deeper trouble than he was to begin with?
[Zelin:] He could be in a whole world of hurt. And if I were him right now, I would make a motion for a stay of my surrender date because he's got one argument, which is, wait for Andrew Miller to go to all the courts to say that the special counsel has no business being there. It's unconstitutional. Therefore, my investigation, my prosecution was unconstitutional and let me go home.
[Cabrera:] Right. That's another case. I don't want our viewers to be confused. Andrew Miller is another person who's been subpoenaed to testify who is now fighting that because he says that he believes Robert Mueller's appointment was unconstitutional or his investigation.
[Zelin:] It should all go out the window.
[Cabrera:] Let me talk about Corsi, a Roger Stone associate, who now talking about having a plea deal or in negotiations. If he's in negotiations right now, does that mean he's kind of already given up the goods to them or that he's willing to give up the goods as long as he gets a good deal?
[Zelin:] The federal government works like this. You want to rent a car. The government walks in and says, I'm going to drive your car, I'm going to put a few thousand miles on it, and if I like it, I'll pay you. That's the way that it works. So, no, you don't dictate to the government. What happens is you come in, you come in to the government, you sit in a conference room with your lawyer and the prosecutors and the agents. You get a piece of paper that says that you will not get in trouble for the words that come out of your mouth so long as you tell us the truth. And the government tests you. And you audition for the government. That's what we call a proffer. And that hopefully will lead you to a cooperation agreement. But the government makes no commitments until they're satisfied that they're happy with what you have to say. So Dr. Corsi, if he's looking for a cooperation agreement and why he wants a better sentence.
[Cabrera:] Right.
[Zelin:] He wants the government to go to the judge and say don't worry about
[Cabrera:] The government has to think he has thing beneficial to the
[Zelin:] Before that happens. Yes.
[Cabrera:] investigation, right?
[Zelin:] The key is substantial assistance. And before the government determines if you can provide substantial assistance, they want to hear everything you have to say, not only about other people, but they want to know they can trust you, so you have to implicate yourself, which means your own case is over.
[Cabrera:] Oh my goodness. This investigation gets more complicated with more characters all the time. That's why we keep on hitting it week after week, because we want to keep you with each step. Thank you, Randy Zelin. Good to have your expertise as always.
[Zelin:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] Just ahead, the chilling last words from the American who was killed on a remote island by one of the most isolated tribes in the world. What his diary reveals, next.

[Lemon:] So we have more now on our breaking news. CNN projects that John James wins the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Michigan. James is an African-American Iraq war veteran who was endorsed by President Trump. He's going to face Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow. Now we want to get to some other news, and we'll get back to our election coverage in just a moment. My dream team is standing by. But I want to get to some other news here. Paul Manafort's longtime deputy Rick Gates facing tough cross-examination on Tuesday. Let's talk about this now with CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem. Juliette is a former Department of Homeland Security official. And Michael Moore, a former U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia. Hello, both of you. Thank you for coming on. So, Juliette, the defense got their first crack at cross-examining Rick Gates. How did he hold up?
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, obviously we're all interpreting this from the outside, but it appears a couple of things happened that are worth repeating here. One is that he was contrite. He addresses the jury, apologizes, says he's trying to make things right. And I think the second thing which is key here is that at no stage during this cross-examination was the defense able to separate Gates from Manafort. In other words, the defense strategy has got to be Gates acted by himself, right? That he was doing this all on his own. And I think that just from the testimony that we've seen so far the defense failed in that regard. Manafort is clearly pushing Gates or conspiring with Gates to do all of these illegalities. In fact there's a line in one of the documents where Manafort says to Gates, you told me you were on top of this. That's the statement of the leader to the worker bee, you know, fix this. And so I think that in that sense the defense did fail to do the one thing they needed to do, which is basically Gates was doing all this illegal stuff on his own.
[Lemon:] But he was forced to admit an affair and that he had embezzled money from Paul Manafort. Do you think the defense succeeded in painting Gates as a flawed witness? Juliette?
[Kayyem:] So yes, so I think that, you know, obviously the corruption and the sort of icky-ness of all these characters is rampant. And so it's for the jury to decide whether the guy who's trying to come clean now is better or more, you know, trustworthy than the guy who's not speaking. So and I think that the prosecution sort of, you know, prepared the jury for the bad news about Gates. But what we have to remember about Gates, and this is true in all these national security cases, is it's not like Gates is just saying something and there's no corroborating evidence. What Gates is doing is that he's essentially validating the documentation the prosecution already has, the e-mails, the tax forms, the faulty financial dealings. And then remember the five witnesses who have already testified, the bookkeeper and others, in the office saying, yes, this was all illegal. So I'm not saying Gates is irrelevant, but he's not he's just simply validating the documents, the electronic information and the other witnesses. So so in that sense he's more valid.
[Lemon:] So, Michael, Rick Gates claimed that Manafort tried to secure jobs for associates in the Trump administration. This trial is really about bank and tax fraud. Is this testimony something you expect the prosecution to pursue further?
[Michael Moore, Former U.s. Attorney, Middle District Of Congress:] I don't know how far they'll go into it. I mean, at this point it's really about showing that Manafort was trying to use his position. He used it to manipulate to get money. He used it to have influence with overseas money. And so I don't know how far they'll dig into it. Let me say this, i think
[Lemon:] But his attorney said he had a great day, Michael.
[Moore:] Well, you know, that's fake news, I mean I guess, that's what his attorney is saying out there because, you know, they didn't have a good day. It's never a good day when you have to come out and say it's a good day in court like that. And so, really, Gates came in. He stuck to his deal. He's told he was contrite in some things. We knew he was going to have to talk about that. But he was prepped and there was nothing new that the Mueller team did not know, going in. And so, all this information was, you know, would came out. I mean, the bottom line is that, he is piecing together and corroborating evidence that's already in the case. And they had to bring him in because if they didn't bring him in, the juror is sitting there thinking, well, why didn't they bring this guy in? You know, and the Manafort team is going to argue it is all Gates. Well, now Gates is here, and Gates has come in and said, look, I did some stuff wrong too. But I'm here to tell you that I did wrong, and now, you know, Paul should have done the same thing.
[Lemon:] But, Michael, it's tough because Gates worked for Manafort for 20 years.
[Moore:] Sure.
[Lemon:] And so, you know, do you think it's potentially a mistake for the defense to paint Gates as a corrupt liar without even painting Manafort with the same brush?
[Moore:] Well, I think they've probably splattered paint all over Manafort through their cross-examination today. I mean, I and really, what do they have? I mean, at the end of the day, you've got these e-mails, you've got these statements, you've got the bookkeepers and accountants saying that Manafort told them what to do. So, what other choice does the defense have? I don't think it's a winning strategy for them. I've said this, I think, I have every expectation that Manafort's going to be convicted. But they really don't have great facts on their side. So, the only thing knew is kind of
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Moore:] So, the only thing they can do is, kind of, come and throw darts at Gates and hope that, you know, they can deflate him somehow. But, you know, it's hard to change some of the things that Manafort puts in e-mails and directives.
[Lemon:] Well, Juliette, I heard you say yes when he said that he's going to be convicted. This case is Special Counsel Robert Mueller's first real chance to show what he's got. How is he doing?
[Kayyem:] I mean, it appears to be a very strong case, and I think you'd want to lead with a very strong case and just to remind everyone, this is camp this is Trump's campaign chairman and deputy campaign chairman. This is not the case. It's not about Trump, but obviously, that's the atmospherics. And what I want to remind people that while we're talking about the legalities or the illegalities of this basically corrupt enterprise that they had established that put Manafort in debt, sort of, then drew him to Trump as, sort of, the money train. The Trump campaign is a money train. He was so in debt that he was willing to work for free because he knew on the other side of this, he might make money. But I just from the National Security perspective, take a step back. Think of how corruptible Manafort and Gates are through this whole process because they're getting foreign money to support this lifestyle. They are doing all sorts of illegal things that are pretty well-known to probably their clients. And so from the perspective of the National Security perspective, these guys are so easily corrupted by a foreign entity, and I think that's where the Trump aura and the and the Mueller stuff, all is in play here. These guys were, you know I mean, they were just, you know, ripe for a foreign entity to take advantage of them.
[Lemon:] All right. Listen, thank you both. I appreciate that. Listen, if you want to stick around, you can, just a moment. But I want to bring Alice Stewart in because, Alice, you went to the courtroom. You visited this morning. Give me an impression. What were your impressions?
[Stewart:] It was clear Gates was being forthright. He was putting it out on the table. Manafort sat there, and he seemed pissed, you know, that he was everything was being laid out there on the table. And while we spent so much time talking about Manafort spending money on the ostrich jacket and now we know Gates spent money on a love shack in London, those were the juicy details. But a lot of what there was today, was document after document after document, which clearly outlines what they were doing to hide money, to set up shell corporations, to claim income as loans, and it was all very dirty and underhanded. And I think so far, they've made a very good argument that they broke the law. And I don't see how they can jury can come to any other conclusion.
[Lemon:] You think Manafort is guilty?
[Stewart:] Clearly he's guilty. But the key is, what we didn't hear a lot of I tell you, we didn't hear anything about Trump. We didn't hear a lot about key things that really directly connect them with the Trump organization.
[Lemon:] They can't really bring that up.
[Stewart:] They cannot bring that up. And the judge was very clear. And the one time that Gates had the opportunity, he said, a presidential campaign and talking about some other people that were sitting in there, they have done a good job of separating. This looks like two crooks who capitalized on their ability to get clients overseas, and they are two dirty guys, one is coming clean, and the other is not.
[Setmayer:] But what they did bring up today was the Bank of Cypress.
[Stewart:] Right.
[Setmayer:] And that is significant because of the role of who owned the Bank of Cypress, was one of the Russian oligarchs who bought that mansion from Trump in Palm Beach for $98 million, where Trump got that $50 million, whatever, $48 million profit on, which was questionable because the property was overinflated in price. And also, our current commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, took over that bank. And the Bank of Cypress is notorious for Russian money laundering. So, you know, that aspect of it and Paul Manafort and Rick Gates' involvement in using the Bank of Cypress to launder money, and the connection to our commerce secretary and Russian oligarchs and Trump, is of significance and shouldn't be ignored.
[Lemon:] Interesting. Thank you very much. And again, our thanks to Michael and Juliette, appreciate it. When we come back, how Robert Mueller's investigation could be playing with voters. Will it affect any of the candidates at the polls? What Lindsey Graham warned the President about? That's next.

[Harlow:] New this morning, a major development in the Russia investigation. President Trump squarely in the sights of Special Counsel Bob Mueller. The "Washington Post" is reporting that now Mueller's investigation is looking at the president for possible obstruction of justice. It comes as CNN learns that Mueller will interview several top intelligence officials as soon as this week as part of the probe. Those include director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and NSA director, Admiral Mike Rogers.
[Berman:] Last week, Coats and Rogers both denied to the Senate Intelligence Committee that they were pressured by the president to intervene in an FBI probe of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election. And the president this morning wrote, "They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story," he's not talking about Coats and Rogers there. He's talking about others. "Found zero proof, so now they go to obstruction of justice on the phony story, nice." And also this, "You are witnessing the single greatest witch hunt in American political history led by some very bad and conflicted people." Here to discuss, CNN White House correspondent Athena Jones and Paul Callan, CNN legal analyst. The White House, Athena, going very hard, directly after the special counsel's investigation.
[Athena Jones, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hi, John. That's right. With those two tweets this morning, this is not the first time we've heard the president call these investigations in general a witch hunt, but he's made it very clear how he feels about this latest report. This is exactly the kind of headline that the president was trying so hard to avoid, a headline saying that he himself is under investigation. But it's important to remind our viewers that it's the president's own words and actions that have raised the question of obstruction of justice. Take a listen to what he had to say to NBC about the firing of James Comey and then what Comey had to say about his firing.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] There's no doubt that it's a fair judgment, it's my judgment that I was fired because of the Russia investigation.
[Jones:] And so there you see that it was the president himself saying that Russia was on his mind when he fired the former FBI director. And this isn't even touching on that separate conversation that Comey says he had with the president, where he says the president urged him to let the Flynn investigation go, the investigation into his former national security adviser. So it is the president's own words and deeds that have helped raise this issue John.
[Harlow:] All right, Athena Jones. Thank you very much. And Paul Callan, to you, the legal side of all of this. What stands out to you most? I mean, Admiral Rogers and DNI Coats were stonewalling, really, to Congress in all of those questions. Is it possible because the "Washington Post" is reporting that it was just shortly after May 9th when Comey was fired that this investigation really branched out into potential obstruction of justice, looking at that. Is it possible that they were not answering questions because they were being questioned by Mueller in this expanded investigation?
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I doubt that that's the reason. I think they were just honoring sort of this traditional idea that, you know, confidentiality applies to presidential discussions, direct presidential discussions. I mean, you know, I find the ultimate irony here with the president saying this is the biggest witch hunt in American history, well, it's his Justice Department that's doing the witch hunt. He's the guy in charge of the Justice Department, which is now investigating him for obstruction of justice. So if it's a witch hunt, his administration started it. This is not emanating from the Democrats. And by the way, it doesn't surprise me that, of course, Mueller would interview the intelligence chiefs. They're going to have relevant information not only on a potential obstruction charge, but if there was collusion with the Russians, who better who would have better knowledge of that than American intelligence authorities? They're going to know what American citizens are reaching out overseas and acting properly or improperly. So I'm not surprised that he would interview them at the beginning of his investigation. That's just being a smart prosecutor or a smart investigator.
[Berman:] Yes. And one thing to note here, James Comey testified while he was FBI director. The president was under investigation by some interpretations. Now perhaps he is at least being investigated for possible obstruction of justice, so that status may have changed. Paul Callan, Dan Coats, Admiral Rogers, Jeff Sessions refusing to questions, holding out the specter that at some point the White House might try to use executive privilege here. Would executive privilege prevent Bob Mueller forever from getting the information he wants from Jeff Sessions, Dan Coats, Admiral Rogers?
[Callan:] No, I think Mueller will be able to get the information from them, even if there's an assertion of executive privilege. There's a process the courts follow. And what it is is Mueller will have to establish in court that the information from them cannot be obtained from other sources, and it is essential to a criminal investigation. In that case, the courts have traditionally said executive privilege falls the need for information in the court system is a greater public interest. And so I think in the end he'll get his information.
[Harlow:] All right, Paul Callan, thank you very much. We appreciate it. Athena Jones at the White House as well. We are waiting for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to speak in just moments. That, of course, comes on a day where we are seeing a lot of unity here at the nation's capital. This is ahead of the big congressional baseball game tonight. What will we hear from her? You'll hear it live right here. Stay with us.

[Howell:] Another day, another high-level resignation at the Trump White House. This time the U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke set to step down at the end of the year. Zinke's faced multiple ethics investigations and was reportedly under pressure to resign. In fact, "The Washington Post" reports Zinke was given an ultimatum: leave by the end of the year or be fired. CNN's Boris Sanchez picks up the story from Washington.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] We can tell you the White House was closely watching Ryan Zinke's legal situation amid his departure as the Secretary of the Interior. Zinke's been accused of misusing agency resources to advance his own personal finances. There are more than 15 different inquiries that were opened by the inspector general of that agency into Zinke's behavior, questions about his lavish spending on travel, whether his wife was using government vehicles, his involvement in a casino deal in Connecticut and one that's now being investigated by the Department of Justice, this land deal that he struck in his home state of Montana with the head of Halliburton. Zinke has denied all allegations against him. In a tweet, he justifies his departure by saying he didn't want to spend thousands of dollars to try to clear his name. He is a favorite target of Democrats, who are relishing his departure, including the minority leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer. He wrote on Twitter, quote, "Ryan Zinke was one of the most toxic members of the cabinet in the way he treated our environment, our precious public lands and the way he treated the government, like it was his personal honey pot. The swamp cabinet will be a little less foul without him." We should note Saturday night was the congressional ball here at the White House, with President Trump greeting several members of his cabinet as well as members of Congress. Zinke was here on hand. The reports out there that the White House forced him out, CNN still trying to confirm that. We can tell you that the administration certainly wanted to put some distance between yet another member of the president's cabinet with questionable ethical behavior and the White House Boris Sanchez, CNN, at the White House.
[Howell:] Boris, thank you. And Zinke is not the only one leaving the White House. He joins a big group of people who have either left or are in the process of leaving. You see all the faces and names there from the Trump administration and more could be coming. Here is what President Trump told "60 Minutes" on CBS about this situation two months ago.
[Trump:] I think I have a great cabinet. There's some people I'm not happy with.
[Lesley Stahl, Cbs News:] Who are you not happy with?
[Trump:] I don't want to say that. I have people I'm not thrilled with. I have other people that I'm beyond thrilled with.
[Howell:] Now to the issue of health care in the United States. The Affordable Care Act, better known as ObamaCare, is still the law of the land, despite being struck down by a federal judge on Friday as unconstitutional. The deadline to sign up for the ACA has now expired except for a handful of states where the deadline is January 31st. President Trump welcomed the judge's controversial decision, as you'll hear here.
[Trump:] I believe we're going to get really good health care. Exciting things happened over the last 24 hours. If everybody is smart, because we have a lot of Democrats here tonight and I'm very happy about that. People don't realize that I have a lot of friends who are Democrats. We have Democrats here. If the Republicans and Democrats get together, we are going to end up with incredible health care which is the way it should have been from day one. It's going to happen.
[Howell:] The current president there. And we also heard from the former U.S. President Barack Obama, who is quick to reassure Americans that their health care was not going away because of this ruling. Mr. Obama posted a lengthy response on social media, that you see here, telling those who depend upon ObamaCare that the judge's decision, quote, "changes nothing for now at least." Let's bring in Steven Erlanger to talk more about this, the chief diplomatic editor in Europe for "The New York Times." Always a pleasure, Steven, to have you on the show. Let's start with ObamaCare. The law was struck down by this federal judge and certainly has been hit in the kneecaps plenty of times since the U.S. president took office. Politically, the question, where does this put Democrats as far as campaigning toward 2020? And what does it mean for Republicans, who are surely satisfied, optimistic about seeing this law struck down?
[Steven Erlanger, "the New York Times":] Well, I think everyone should take a breath which is pretty much what Obama said. It's a very sweeping ruling, it's probably too sweeping to hold up under appeal. And nothing will change in the meantime. It does give the Democrats an opportunity to work out a better deal, perhaps, with the Republicans in Congress. It's a way of showing a sort of bipartisanship. But I think the issue of pre-existing conditions, all that has been very popular for the Democrats in the midterms. And any attempt to really get rid of ObamaCare in all of its particularities would be very unpopular for the Republicans. So I think everybody has to be a bit careful. But the judge's ruling itself I think will be too sweeping to stand up.
[Howell:] It will be interesting, because Republicans may view health care differently than Democrats. The difference between, is it a right or is it a privilege? We'll have to see if the parties can come together on this. Let's talk about the changing of the guard. "The Washington Post" reporting that the U.S. Interior Secretary was given the ultimatum to leave by the end of the year or be fired. Here is the thing, Steven. He reportedly wanted to stay on at least through his Christmas party, Zinke did, where he invited lobbyists, conservative activists and even posed for a photo in front of a large polar bear wearing a Santa cap, despite being mired in investigations. What do you make of this situation where the White House is pushing him out?
[Erlanger:] But everybody loves Christmas, everybody loves a good Christmas party. He's been a real embarrassment for the Trump administration. He's done environmentally some of what Trump really wants. My guess is he'll be replaced by someone who is also very, very tough on all these efforts at conservation. But in terms of his personal behavior and all the investigations he's involved with and the money he's spent on his office and everything else, I think really he looks so out of touch with the people who are supposed to be Trump's base. I think, whether the White House pushed him out or not, it's probably good for Trump that he's going because he's likely to be indicted down the road.
[Howell:] And continuing on the topic of the revolving door, the current chief of staff, General John Kelly, on his way out; the director of Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney, is on his way in, at least on a temporary basis. There's an interview, though, from Mulvaney back from a debate he took part in, in 2016, that's catching some attention where he had a very specific description of his boss. Let's listen.
[Mick Mulvaney, Acting White House Chief Of Staff:] Yes, I'm supporting Donald Trump, doing so as enthusiastically as I can
[Mulvaney:] given the fact that I think he's a terrible human being. but the choice on the other side is just as bad.
[Howell:] It's another case where words come back to haunt and a president who has thin skin for criticism. What do you make of that statement and how it plays into Mulvaney taking this new role?
[Erlanger:] Well, Mulvaney was quite a conservative congressman from South Carolina. He was speaking after the tapes came out about Trump's famous expression about how to treat women by grabbing their genitals. So I think he was responding to his constituency and saying what a lot of people who ended up voting for Trump felt, which was that this was not a very nice thing to say. It will haunt him. It's very hard working for Donald Trump, that's for sure. He's flighty, he runs by instinct, he changes his mind. He falls in love and out of love with people very, very quickly. So my understanding is that Mulvaney actually asked for the title of acting chief of staff because, when Trump gets tired of him, it will be easier to go. Somebody has got to do the job. And he gets on with Trump. They play golf together. He's apparently well known for bringing lots of bright, sharp graphs into the White House with his, that Trump likes. So let's see. Somebody has to try to run the White House. So why not Mr. Mulvaney?
[Howell:] The old saying, it's a tough job but somebody has got to do it. We'll see how this plays out. Steven Erlanger, live for us in Brussels, Belgium, thank you for your time.
[Erlanger:] Thanks, George.
[Howell:] Around the world and in the United States, you're watching NEWSROOM. Still ahead, Brexit is turning into a major headache for Theresa May, the British prime minister. We'll discuss what's next for Ms. May after her own party triggers a confidence vote over her handling of Brexit. Plus another country could soon follow Britain's lead, Italy. The budget battle with the E.U. is raising concerns it may also try to leave the E.U. We'll have details from Rome as CNN NEWSROOM continues.

[Gorani:] Let's return now to our top story, that school shooting in Florida. Seventeen people killed in a massacre. The suspect, a former student of the school. He appeared in court just last hour. CNN's Kyung Lah was inside that hearing. Here's some of her reporting.
[Kyung Lah, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] We heard from the top public defender here. He became so emotional, he had to step away from the camera a couple of different times as he described the young man that his office will be defending. He said that this defendant is on suicide watch, that this is a deeply troubled young man, that throughout his entire life he has suffered from and this a quote, "significant mental illness," that while they are in the process of gathering all of his mental health history, they say that he suffers from brain development and that and he suffers depression and that all of this came to a head, that one of the moments that really came to a head is the loss of his mother in November of last year.
[Gorani:] Kyung Lah reporting there. Seventeen people dead at a school. And by the way, some of them are so on very much critical condition in hospital. Teachers were killed, students were killed. In most countries, the scene is unthinkable, right? Once in a lifetime, once in a generation atrocity. But in the United States with grim regularity. It happened eight times this year, 48 times last year. Young survivors of Wednesday's shooting are describing the horror they witnessed. They're also reacting with anger and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're predicting that these rampages will continue.
[Kelsey Friend, School Shooting Witness:] People said there's gunshots downstairs. I'm like, I talked to my teacher and I said I am scared, I don't know what's going on. And then we heard the gunshots.
[Unidentified Female:] And then you turned around and you went back to your geography classroom?
[Friend:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] And then what happened?
[Friend:] My geography teacher unlocked the door and I had ran in and thinking he was behind me, but he was not.
[Unidentified Female:] What happened to your teacher?
[Friend:] He unfortunately passed away in the doorway of our classroom.
[Unidentified Female:] Did you see him get shot?
[Friend:] I did not. I heard the gunshots and I've heard the shooter walk down the hallway shooting more kids. I've heard a young man crying for his mother dying. And it was just hard, because you don't imagine this happening to you. You see it on the news, you see it everywhere and you don't think this is not you think it's not going to happen to you but until it happens. You just like this is terrible. We had rumors going around the school that the police would do a fake code red with fake guns, not actual, but sounding real. And I thought at the beginning that this was just it was all a drill, it's just a drill, until I saw my teacher dead on the floor.
[David Hogg, School Shooting Witness:] And people are going to keep saying, oh, this is just another shooting, it's never going to happen to me. But what happens is when you don't take action, things like this eventually will happen to you. And that's not acceptable. And that's why I'm calling people to stand up. Talk to your congressmen, talk to people and don't stop fighting, because children will continue to die if we don't take a stand now. What we really need is action. Because we can say, yes, we're going to do all these things, thoughts and prayers, what we need more than that is action. Please, this is the 18th one this year. That's unacceptable. We're children. You guys are the adults. You need to take some action and play a role, work together, come over your politics and get something done.
[Gorani:] And it's interesting that this is really the youngest generation, the ones that will be voting in the future saying, do something, because clearly politicians have not done enough to prevent these. Now, the young man in the interview said it was the 18th school shooting. It's not incorrect. But it's the eighth school rampage of the year in the United States, so far. So there have been eight. To discuss, I'm joined now by two guests, Brian Klaas is a fellow at the London School of Economics. He's with me here in the studio. I'm also joined by David French. He's a constitutional lawyer and a writer with the National Review. He is in Nashville, Tennessee. I want to start with you, Brian. So we heard from that young man, do something. Politicians, get over the politics and keep us safe, we're only kids. Why in America this is what many people around the world ask do these shootings happen time and time again?
[Brian Klaas, Fellow, London School Of Economics:] Well, there's easy access to guns for people who shouldn't have guns in the U.S. And it's the major outlier where the U.S. is out of step with the rest of the world. You think about this country. We had 26 gun murders in the U.K. last year. There are 11,000 in the U.S. and there's a five times the population of the U.S., but 423 times the gun murders.
[Gorani:] So it's not just easy access to guns. You have almost just as many guns in Canada per capita.
[Klaas:] Well, there's much more regulation around them. And I think there's also the aspects here where you have a series contagion effect that's happening where people are copy catting. They're getting more deadly, because also no political will to solve this. It was only 139 days ago that somebody in Las Vegas shot over people, 58 of them killed, 850 wounded. And that person used a device called a bump stock which turns a semiautomatic assault into a fully automatic weapon. There was chatter for maybe three or four days about banning that and they did nothing. And every single time this happens there's discussion and then nothing. And my point of view is simply, we have to stop this. There has to be some way. It's not good enough to just say this is part of life now.
[Gorani:] David French in Nashville, what is the right approach in your opinion here, more regulation, more laws?
[David French, Writer, National Review:] No, I don't think more regulation, more laws, unless somebody can point to me what additional regulation or which additional law would have mattered. So for example, if you look at this case, like, many, many cases, what you will have seen is that people actually did take action as that young man rightly urged and somebody drop the ball. There were reports of at least one report to the FBI about this individual, perhaps up to two reports to law enforcement about this individual, obviously nothing effective was done. If you look at the Sutherland Springs shooting, what you have is the circumstance where the actual background check system failed because the military didn't report a disqualifying conviction for this shooter. And you go through these shootings time and time again and we'll see that there are existing policies, there are existing laws, and time and time again they fail.
[Gorani:] But David, there's empirical evidence. You have countries that had their own school massacres, whether it was Britain was done blaming in Scotland or in Australia where they offered gun amnesties and tightened gun control laws and then you didn't have any more shootings after that. That can't be a coincidence.
[French:] So there's a couple of things in play. Number one, if you're talking about confiscation, which is something that happened in
[Gorani:] No, an amnesty, not a confiscation.
[French:] What happened in Australia was there was -if you tried do in Australia what you did in the if you tried to do in the United States what you did in Australia, it would break this country, because you would be running straight up against the second amendment of the United States constitution. You would need to amend the constitution. It would be an unprecedented intrusion of the government into the private sphere in this country. And there might be parts of America that would be acceptable to that. It would not be acceptable in the large part of the country. And that's why not even democrats propose this. Not even democrats. So when you're talking about the United States of America, you have to talk about a public debate that is conducted within the bounds of the second amendment. And you also have to understand that this public debate occurs against the backdrop of a 25-year long drop in gun violence. The gun violence has dropped significantly over the last 25 years, even as access to guns has been liberalized.
[Gorani:] I'm not familiar with that particular statistics, but school shootings and mass shootings have increased. That's undeniable, right?
[French:] Right.
[Gorani:] Brian Klaas, what is your reaction to that, the fact that known you restricted gun laws and in fact what was done in Australia and in Britain couldn't be done in America because it would be technically unconstitutional?
[Klaas:] So I think that there has been a decline in gun violence, but still to the tune of 11,000 murders a year, which is too high. And in terms of actual common sense legislation, universal background checks are a no- brainer. They need to be fixed. I mean, the idea that this is just a failure of the system, well, there's no real discussion about how to fix it even. Right? Universal background checks, 90 percent of Americans support it. They're still not enacted. The idea that we can actually enact other common sense goals that most people have like assault rifle bans, right? 70 to 80 percent of Americas straight with that. And the AR-15, by the way, is commonly used in these mass shootings. It can be banned. It was banned until 2004 and that was repealed.
[Gorani:] But, David, I want to ask you that, because is it going against the constitution to say these semiautomatic weapons that can kill 20, 30, 40 people in 10 minutes, the constitution was not written when those weapons existed. Why not adapt to the legislation to these new weapons? How can a boy, 19 years old who can't buy a beer passed a background check to buy this assault rifle? I mean, in the entire world, people are saying this is nuts.
[French:] Well, the entire world's opinion about what is or is not nuts is not terribly relevant to the American debate, to be honest. The fact of the matter is, what we have seen happen is since 1999 when the Columbine shooting occurred, there has been a very complex, very troubling social cultural phenomenon where young men have been increasingly likely to engage in these spree killings. Now, the problem is when you talk about common sense gun restrictions, not one of these common sense gun restrictions has been shown to have any effect or would have any effect on the actual mass shootings. And why is this? These killers are some of the most pre- carefully premeditating killers alive. They plan for this for months. Sometimes they planned for this for years.
[Gorani:] I get that. David, I need to pick your brain on this. What then is the particularity of the United States' problem? Why is it if you say there's no law that can prevent because this is a premeditated crime, no law could prevent these crime from happening, why then in America and literally nowhere else? What's the reason?
[French:] Well, since Columbine in particular, because if you look before Columbine, these kinds of things that's referencing a 1999 school massacre, it actually created a weird cult following in the United States, a kind of cult following to that to my knowledge doesn't exist elsewhere. If you look at before Columbine, these kinds of spree shootings were remarkably rare. Post-Columbine, they were more common. And then what begin to happen is we saw that time and time again existing laws failed to stop the most determined killers. And then when you go into Congress, these marginal additional changes such as, quote, unquote, "universal background checks" I don't think anyone's arguing that universal background checks would have stopped anyone of these spree killers. Enforcement of existing laws would have stopped a few.
[Gorani:] I need to get one last, because you've been shaking your head, Brian.
[Klaas:] When the idea that the rest of the world thinks that the U.S. is nuts when it comes to guns is relevant. It should be a wakeup call. We have children in Florida in November who are buying inserts into their backpacks that are bulletproofs so they can survive a massacre like this. That is not normal. These children had to go to drills to figure out what to do when an active shooter comes in and then they came in yesterday. It is totally crazy. But are the state of our debate is such for around the edges discussing this when we are the only country that this happens regularly. And the attitude of politicians that nothing can be done when it's been sold everywhere else is insane.
[French:] What's the proposal? What is the proposal?
[Klaas:] So the proposal is universal background checks, way less easy access to guns
[French:] The universal background checks wouldn't have stopped one of these things.
[Klaas:] 300 million guns in circulation? This 19-year-old kid had a very easy time obtaining a weapon of war legally. That is nuts. Because an AR- 15 can kill dozens of people in a very short amount of time. We cannot solve every problem with every law, but we can make it harder to commit massacres and we should try to do that. The Republican solution to this has been nothing. And that is
[French:] That's not correct. That's not correct. The Republican response is to enforce existing law. Many legislators say it would be better
[Gorani:] We need to end it there. We need to end it there. And some Democratic politicians were also in charge at times when no significant laws were passed as well. But we want to keep this decision going another time. Thanks to both of you. Brian Klaas and David French in Nashville, Tennessee. I'll have more news ahead for you. But first, I want to share and because just refocusing the issues on the victims. I want to share some of the names and photographs of some of the people who were killed.

[Lemon:] Don Lemon here live in Las Vegas the scene of the worst massacre in modern American history. The killer Stephen Paddock killing at least 59 people, wounding 527 with a hail of bullets from his hotel room at the Mandalay Bay right behind me. CNN's Tom Foreman has more on why the attack killed so many people Tom.
[Tom Foreman, Cnn Correspondent:] Don all you have to do is look at the map to understand why this attack was so deadly. There is Las Vegas strip running through the middle of things this area where the festival was is right over here. And the window from which this man was shooting at the Mandalay Bay, you can see right up in here. From this vantage point he really had an over arching view of the entire area of this concert. Yes, it was about 400 yards away, but he was able to take advantage of certain things that made this extremely dangerous. For example, instead of trying to place shots, it seemed as if he was simply sweeping the ground with this very rapid fire. With people packed densely together like this, that was a way that he could hit an awful lot of people even if he wasn't aiming that well. Secondly, there were exits here from which people could leave, but many eyewitnesses say people tried to head back out toward the boulevard because that's where they came in along those gates, you can see on the left there. That led them actually closer to the gunman, not further away. And lastly, a lot of people because they didn't know where the gunfire was coming from, simply hunkered down in the middle of that space trying to tend to the wounded, and that left them completely under the guns of this man up here. And he was prepared for the attack. Authorities say when they finally managed to get into the room where he was already dead, having killed himself they believe, he had thousands of rounds of ammunition between there and his home. They say that he had 35 guns total 17 at the hotel that he apparently brought in, in ten suitcases over a period of days. He had scopes for some of the rifles. He also had a hammer that he used to smash out two of the windows. And in his car he had ammonium nitrate which could have been used to fashion a bomb if that's what he had in mind. Bottom line, a lot of preparation for an attack here and that's another reason it was so deadly Don.
[Lemon:] Thank you Tom. Appreciate that. And the number of guns now up to 42 a little bit more than when Tom taped that for us just before the show. Now I want to bring in Cory Anne Langdon. She is a Las Vegas cab driver who helped panicked concert goers escape in her taxi. Let's watch some of it.
[Unidentified Male:] Broken leg. Broken leg. Drive. Drive. Broken leg.
[Unidentified Female:] All right. Ok. Ok.
[Unidentified Male:] Broken leg. Broken leg.
[Unidentified Female:] Please. Ok. What happened?
[Unidentified Male:] Let's go. Is there somebody out there? All right. Gun. That's what happened.
[Unidentified Female:] All right. Go. Go. OK. All right. Oh, God, there is an active shooter. OK. Are you kidding me? No. Go. Go. Go.
[Don Lemon, Cnn Anchor:] Unbelievable. She's telling you so many people are dead. You didn't know, right?
[Corianne Langdon, Cab Driver:] No, I didn't know. I had it was unbelievable to me.
[Lemon:] Where were you when the gunfire started?
[Langdon:] I was actually staging at the Mandalay Bay in my taxi cab and it was very quiet. And we first I first heard a couple of pops and I just thought it was fireworks or firecrackers coming from across the street at the venue, the harvest festival venue. And after a while, then you started hearing a lot more and that's when I decided to turn my video camera on and my cell phone. And then it just continued to keep going and going and going. And but nobody was doing anything at the Mandalay Bay. Everybody was just kind of standing there. The taxis in front of me, were they weren't doing much of anything. And they you know, nobody was doing anything. I decided to get out and go check it out and the doorman wasn't doing anything. And then my fellow taxi drivers, on our dispatch radio, started saying, hey, they're shooting at the Mandalay Bay. Everybody get out of there. And I looked at the Mandalay Bay and I looked at the Bally and there wasn't anything going on. Everybody was just kind of walking around, doing whatever.
[Lemon:] It was happening above you.
[Langdon:] Yes, it was. And I could tell that it sounded like automatic gunfire. I don't know that much about guns but it sounded weird. And so I got out of line and I went around and I came back around and I looked up. And I could see the gunfire and the shots. Again, I don't know much it just looked like the lights going off. Yes, I guess.
[Lemon:] So then when you came around, and where did you pick up people between the hotel and
[Langdon:] No, actually, no. I got out of there and I came back down and I went around across Las Vegas Boulevard, over by where the entrance and exit of the harvest festival was. I knew something was going on because then that's when I saw all the cops there. I drove by and there were cop cars and cops on the ground with their rifles and everything. And as I came around, all these people some people were just walking, though. It was crazy. And then I looked over and there was people climbing over the fence and people started screaming and running. And then two people came up to my car and said, "She's got a broken leg," and I said, "OK, get in." And I don't know, me being the consummate taxi driver I turned on the meter and said, OK, where are we going? And we they said "Go, go, go. Just go, go. There's an active shooter. There's people dead everywhere." And then suddenly all these other people started trying to get into my cab and I think I had at least like five or six people in my car. And so I said, OK, nobody else, nobody else. There were still people trying to get in. I feel so bad. There was one guy in front of my cab, he was going, please, please and I didn't want to I couldn't take anybody else.
[Lemon:] Where did you take them all?
[Langdon:] I took them they wanted to go back to the Luxor, New York New York and, I said, no, I'm not going to take you that way. I'm going to take you away from the Strip. And they were screaming. They said they were covered in blood and they said that there was people laying on the ground dead and the active shooter and, you know, and the lady behind me, one of the ladies said, oh, my God, the guy behind me was shot dead and it was just so surreal. It was like the "Twilight Zone" for me. I was in denial that this could actually be happening in my town, my beautiful city.
[Lemon:] People think taxi drivers, you see everything. Especially nothing every you put six years you've been out here.
[Langdon:] Yes. Six and a half, yes.
[Lemon:] Nothing like this.
[Langdon:] No, nothing like this. And I feel so bad for the families and the victims and it's just so sad. And so awful. And I you know, the heroes are the people that the first responders and the cops and the EMTs and ambulance drivers and then the doctors and nurses at the hospital, and then the people that were on the ground, covering their loved ones.
[Lemon:] You said you're not a hero.
[Langdon:] No.
[Lemon:] You told me off air don't call you a hero.
[Langdon:] No.
[Lemon:] Because the first responders are the heroes.
[Langdon:] Yes, yes, definitely, yes. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time and I had a video camera with me and I think that's why I'm here, so...
[Lemon:] How do people get through this? How do you get in a crowd and feel safe ever again?
[Langdon:] You know, I guess I'm just I'm not going to let the terrorists win. I'm not going to be afraid and I don't think that we should be afraid, because then they do win. I'm going to go on with my life. I have a story to tell now and I think we need to grieve and feel terrible but still live our lives and don't live in fear and don't be afraid to go to a concert. You know, they have this wonderful concert here every year and it's just a tragedy what happened. But go out and live your life. Thank you.
[Lemon:] Thank you. Appreciate it.
[Langdon:] Sure.
[Lemon:] Did a good thing. Thank you so much. At least 59 people lost their lives and last night here in Las Vegas in this shooting. We're learning more about them tonight. Twenty-year-old Angela Gomez is being called a fun-loving, sweet young lady with a great sense of humor. That's according to her high school English teacher and her cheer coach in Riverside, California. Lisa Romero-Muniz from Gallup, New Mexico, also died in the shooting. She was a secretary for her local school district. Twenty-year-old Bailey Schweitzer from Bakersfield, California, was at last night's concert, watching some of her favorite bands. She also lost her life in the shooting.

[John Kelly, White House Chief Of Staff:] If you elect to call a family like this, it is about the most difficult thing you can imagine. There's no perfect way to make that phone call.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] A rare and highly personal moment in the White House. Chief of Staff John Kelly, retired four star general and father of a service member killed in Afghanistan, defending President Trump's handling of a condolence call made to an army widow.
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Anchor:] And two former presidents both warning in strong terms against the forces of division that propelled President Trump to power. Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Rene Marsh.
[Briggs:] That is an extraordinary moment.
[Marsh:] Yes.
[Briggs:] Good to see you, my friend. I'm Dave Briggs. It's Friday, October 20, 4:00 a.m. in the East. It is 1:00 a.m. in Los Angeles when they are partying, celebrating the World Series. We don't start with that sadly. The White House chief of staff, John Kelly, making an emotional appearance in the White House briefing room. Thursday, Kelly defending the way President Trump handled the condolence call for the widow of La David Johnson, who was killed in an ambush in Niger. Kelly also condemned Florida Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, who has sharply criticized the president for using insensitive language on the call, Kelly did not hold back.
[Kelly:] I was stunned when I came to work yesterday morning and brokenhearted at what I saw a member of Congress doing. A member of Congress who listened in on a phone call from the president of the United States to a young wife, and in his way tried to express that opinion that he's a brave man, a fallen hero. He knew what he was getting himself into.
[Marsh:] And late last night, President Trump weighed in with a tweet: The fake news media is going crazy with whacky Congresswoman Wilson, a Democrat who was secretly on a very personal call and gave a total lie on content. It is worth noting Sergeant Johnson's widow invited Wilson to listen to the call. For more on this, we bring in CNN's Sara Murray. She is at the White House.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning, Rene and Dave. White House chief of staff and retired four-star general, John Kelly, making an appearance in the White House briefing room. He talked about something he rarely speaks publicly about, which was losing his own son in Afghanistan and provided a window into the advice he gave to the president about how to talk to family members of a soldier who's paid the ultimate sacrifice.
[Kelly:] And he said to me, what do I say? I said to him, sir, there's nothing you can do to lighten the burden on these families. But let me tell you what I tell them. Let me tell you what my best friend Joe Dunford told me, because he was my casualty officer. He said, Kel, he was doing exactly what he wanted to do when he was killed. He knew what he was getting into by joining that 1 percent.
[Murray:] Now, Kelly offered up the explanation when President Trump is under scrutiny for the tone and words he chose when speaking to the widow of Sergeant La David Johnson. That's one of the soldiers who was killed in that military operation that went awry in Niger. This is not the narrative the White House wants but how difficult it is to get away from all sides, whether it's Kelly, whether it's the congresswoman, whether it's President Trump, politicizing the death of a U.S. soldier. Back to you.
[Briggs:] Sara Murray at the White House thanks. In another eyebrow raising moment from Kelly's press briefing, the chief of staff cited a building dedication ceremony he attended with Miami Congresswoman Wilson. Kelly said the congresswoman claimed credit for getting funding for the new FBI building. Listen.
[Kelly:] A congresswoman stood up and in the long tradition of empty barrels making the most noise, stood up there in all of that, and talked about how she was instrumental in getting the funding for that building. And how she took care of her constituents because she got the money and she just called up President Obama and on that phone call, he gave the money, the $20 million to build a building. She sat down. And we were stunned, stunned that she'd done it. Even for someone that is that empty a barrel. We were stunned.
[Briggs:] This is where we are, folks. Congresswoman Wilson last night blasted Kelly for making the issue totally personal. She said he got the story completely wrong. Wilson told a newspaper the "Miami Herald" newspaper that Congress approved money for the building before she got to Washington and that she only sponsored legislation to name the building for two fallen agents, not to fund it. "The Herald" reports even Miami Republicans praised Wilson for that bill.
[Marsh:] Well, now to the ambush that left four U.S. soldiers dead in Niger. Senator John McCain announcing he might seek a subpoena to get more information about the deadly attack. He believes the White House may be withholding details as the Defense Department launches an initial review. We get for from CNN's Jim Sciutto in Washington.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] It is more than two weeks since this ambush and we really just know only the basics about what happened. Here's what we know. A team of 12 soldiers went to visit village elders in a village close to the border between Niger and Mali. As they were leaving that meeting, they came under attack by some 50 ISIS affiliated fighters. They were better armed. They had machine guns but also rocket-propelled grenades. Those soldiers, they only had their rifles and they were traveling in vehicles that were not armored. There was a 30-minute firefight. Thirty minutes in, a French aircraft comes over, flies over, not authorized to drop bombs but to just scatter the fighters attacking the Americans on the ground there. Then later, French aircraft and a contractor aircraft came into to take out the survivors, the wounded and the dead, some of the dead, we would learn because it turns out that one was left behind, separated from his unit. And for 48 hours U.S. forces, Nigerien forces, French forces, looked for that soldier. They eventually found him. Unfortunately, he was dead at that point. But questions remain. What happened? The military pushing back at the idea he was left behind, just saying he was separated from his unit. But the fact is he was missing for 48 hours. The question is, when will those military families and when will the public learn what happened actually there? Rene and David?
[Briggs:] Yes, a lot of questions remain. Jim Sciutto, thank you. A major step forward overnight in the Republican effort to overhaul the U.S. tax code. The Senate voting 51-49 to pass a budget resolution for next year. The measure will allow the GOP to push through tax legislation the Senate with 50 or more votes. Senator Rand Paul, the only Republican to vote no, insisting the budget plan does not reduce the deficit and could expand it by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years.
[Marsh:] Well, a bipartisan plan to stabilize the Obamacare market place is still alive. The bill's sponsors, Senators Lamar Alexander and Patty Murray rolling out a list of Republican co-sponsors backing the bill. Notables include Senators Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Bill Cassidy. The Alexander-Murray bill would restore Obamacare cost- sharing payments for two years. President Trump flip-flopping again, now signaling he may support the bipartisan deal one day after saying he could never support bailing out insurance companies.
[Briggs:] House Speaker Paul Ryan not exactly known for his side- splitting sense of humor let loose last night. Ryan was keynote speaker at the annual Al Smith charity dinner. By tradition, the Al Smith keynote is supposed to be a roast. And Speaker Ryan sure turned up the heat starting with the joke about Donald Trump's speech at the fundraiser one year ago.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , Speaker Of The House:] I know last year that Donald Trump offended some people. I know his comments according to critics went too far. Some said it was unbecoming of a public figure and they said that his comments were offensive. Well, thank God he's learned his lesson. Every morning, I wake up in my office and scroll Twitter to see which tweets that I will have to pretend that I did not see later on. Every afternoon, former Speaker John Boehner calls me up, not to give advice, just to laugh. A Hollywood Republican, that is an oxymoron, which clearly the word Rex Tillerson was searching for. I learned that God is always listening, as is Vladimir Putin. When people ask me if I believe everything I see on Facebook, I answer nyet.
[Briggs:] Well done, Paul Ryan. All right. Open enrollment in less than two weeks but six in ten Americans say the White House is not doing enough to help Obamacare run the way it should. That according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. In fact, 60 percent say that right now, the administration should be shoring up Obamacare, not trying to replies it. President Trump upset the health care market by stopping subsidy payments. A recent bipartisan deal would restore that money, but Trump has publicly waffled on backing this plan. So, 63 percent of Americans doubt health care reform will pass this year. And even with the GOP-controlled Congress, only half of Republicans are optimistic. Overall, a majority of Americans disapprove of how the president is handling healthcare. But they still blame former President Obama for Obamacare's performance, 56 percent to be exact. Only 37 percent put responsibility on the Trump administration, which is now managing the law.
[Marsh:] Well, in a clear rebuke of President Trump, former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama are speaking out publicly, urging Americans to reject the politics of division.
[Barack Obama, Former President:] If you have to win a campaign by dividing people, you're not going to be able to govern them. You won't be able to unite them later if that's how you start.

[Brown:] Lawmakers are racing to prevent a partial government shutdown at midnight on Friday. A short time ago, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate would take up a simple measure today to keep the government running until February when the new Congress convenes. This comes after the White House said there are other ways to get the $5 billion the president wants for the border wall. CNN's Abby Phillip is at White House. Abby, any word from the president, the White House on whether he is on board with this?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's the million-dollar question or maybe the $5 billion question that we are facing this week. The White House is being close lipped about where the president is in favor or opposed to this short-term bill. We did ask counsellor to the president, Kellyanne Conway, this morning about whether he might sign it. Her answer was he would certainly look at it. That is not a no or ruling that out. In effect, what that means stat this White House is backing down from what had been a claim that they wanted $5 billion for the wall and would refuse to fund the government otherwise. Now it sounds very much like the president is signaling that he might be willing to get the money elsewhere and that he might have the military pay for the wall I'm sorry, build the wall rather than the Department of Homeland Security. But I asked Kellyanne Conway this morning about whether or not that really meant that the American public was actually paying for the wall and not Mexico as President Trump has claimed. Here is what she had to say in response to that.
[Kellyanne Conway, Senior Advisor To President Trump:] He believes that through the USMCA agreement that Mexico in the savings from that that Mexico would be paying for the wall. But what I think is more important, Abby, is I have been in some of the meetings the president has been asking the relative agencies and principles, is there money for not the wall, for border security. And he has said one way or another he will get the money. He is asking the question government wide.
[Phillip:] If you are listening carefully, what that amounts to is President Trump is asking federal agencies to find the money for border security. That is, in fact, taxpayer money. If you ask economists, the USMCA, the new NAFTA trade deal, is not going to result in more money that is miraculously going to be used for the wall. It's not clear where the claim is coming from. But clearly, this is a White House trying to find a way out of this problem. And by Friday, we will either have a government shutdown or President Trump will sign some sort of short-term bill to fund the government until February Pam?
[Brown:] All right, Abby Phillip, thank you so much from the White House. Joining me now to discuss, Democratic Congressman Josh Gottheimer, of New Jersey, chair of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus. Thank you for coming on. I want to get right to it. Mitch McConnell just announced he is going to bring a continuing resolution for a vote later today that would fund the government through February 8. Chuck Schumer has said he is open to that right now. Do you think a shutdown will be averted?
[Rep. Josh Gottheimer, , New Jersey:] I think this is good news. I think it is signaling that we are seeing we are not going to have a shutdown. What I am hearing from folks at home, this is not how they want the country to run. They don't want to see shutting things down. They want to see solving problems. This is very promising.
[Brown:] You are saying people at home don't want the government to shut down. They want you to solve problems. What do you say to the critics who say you are kicking the can down the road? We are going to go through this again in February.
[Gottheimer:] It is much better we have had two years where we are trying to deal with health care and immigration reform and we can't get a debate on the House floor. I'm eager, come January, to start addressing issues like infrastructure and health care and start dealing with issues. But jamming it in the next couple of days makes no sense. I would also say the good news as you see in criminal justice reform where both sides come together and something that the Problem Solvers Caucus worked a lot on to actually get done. And I think that's an example. And if we actually talk to each other and work together we can get things done.
[Brown:] We are going to talk about criminal justice reform shortly. That is a very important development. But staying on this, what do you say to those who claim border wall funding is dead now because the Dems are taking over the House in the new year? The president is not going to get his $5 billion from Congress.
[Gottheimer:] I think these are issues you saw the bipartisan agreement a few months ago for tough borders and making sure the DREAMers can stay here and live up to our values. I think we need to keep working on this. We had the votes. If we could have gotten a debate on the House floor we could have passed this. I'm hopeful new year we can address the issues and do it the right way and talk to each other and work together. I think there's strong agreement that we need tough borders but also to make sure we live up to our values and address issues like the DREAMers.
[Brown:] I want to go back to criminal justice reform, because this really was a rare moment of bipartisanship. It's unfortunate that it is so rare, but it was truly a bipartisan effort. It passed the Senate by a vote of 87 to 12. The Problem Solvers Caucus has been supportive of this bill. As someone who spends a lot of time talking about bipartisanship, why was it that this issue brought Democrats and so many Republicans together?
[Gottheimer:] I think, first of all, you saw a lot of time where people are talking to each other from both sides. They found there were several issues where they did see eye to eye, whether that is making sure we had people leave prison and not come back by getting more training or saving taxpayers money, which appeals to both sides. I think you found that or sentencing guideline disparities. You found issue after issue where people engaged, saying we can agree on this. The problem is that people aren't willing to sit in the room together and work on these issues. The Problem Solvers Caucus, which I co-chair, is half Democrat and half Republican. We brought in all different folks. Saying we should look at this issue and this might be a good bipartisan one. And we had other folks come in and we started working on this and we talked to one another and said we can get behind this. There are so many issues like infrastructure and health care, we can make sure we can get premiums down. There are plenty of issues where we can work together. I'm hoping that in the next Congress we will continue to do that. I think people are sick and tired of us screaming at each other and actually want us to solve problems for them and work together.
[Brown:] Perhaps this is a good template how so men different sides came together on criminal justice reform. President Trump made clear he will support it. His adviser, Jared Kushner, was deeply involved in putting this together. How much credit does the president deserve here?
[Gottheimer:] Yes. Van Jones and Jared Kushner came to talk to our group. Van Jones, on your network. Normally, you wouldn't get these folks together. I think there are plenty of topics, and infrastructure is a great one, where we can immediately come together and say I talk to a lot of members on both sides. We both agree we have to deal with crumbling roads and bridges. We have a problem with the gateway, a tunnel in New York and New Jersey, in my district. They know these are things we have to fix and we can't just ignore. I think it is a matter of us and I think when people go home, they will see a lot of positive feedback for getting something done. I'm hoping that this becomes a habit and not a rare thing.
[Brown:] Congressman Josh Gottheimer, thank you for coming on.
[Gottheimer:] Thanks. Happy holidays.
[Brown:] Happy holidays to you, too. Coming up on this Wednesday, CNN obtains the letter of intent that then-Candidate Trump signed for a Trump Tower Moscow Project, even those the president's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, claimed that Trump never signed it. That's up next. Stay with us.

[Trump:] The era of strategic patience with the North Korean regime has failed. Many years, and it's failed. And, frankly, that patience is over.
[Paul:] A warning from President Trump to Kim Jong-U.N. we are out of patience. These comments come as President Trump hosts the President of South Korea, looks at ways of increasing pressure on the communist regime to stop missile tests. Now, U.S. officials are watching North Korea very closely and say the country could be preparing for another missile launch or a nuclear test.
[Blackwell:] In just a few days, President Trump will meet Russian President, Vladimir Putin. That's at the G20 Summit in Germany. Now, this will be the first time the two will be face-to-face since Trump took office, but is this the first time they've met? That depends on who you ask and when you ask them.
[Trump:] I never met Putin. I don't know who Putin is. He said
[Blackwell:] It's a claim President Donald Trump made many times during the campaign.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm asking you
[Trump:] I never met Putin. I don't think I've ever met him. I never met him. I don't think I've ever met him.
[George Stephanopoulos, Abc News Anchor:] You would know it if you did, wouldn't you?
[Trump:] I think so.
[Blackwell:] The White House says next week's G20 Summit in Germany will offer the first opportunity for President Trump to meet Russian President, Vladimir Putin, face-to-face. However, all the denials contradict what candidate Trump said in an October 2015 radio interview.
[Michael Savage, American Radio:] Have you met Vladimir Putin?
[Trump:] Yes.
[Savage:] You have?
[Trump:] One time, yes, a long time ago.
[Blackwell:] Mr. Trump did not say during that interview when or under what circumstances the two men met. And days before their meeting in Hamburg, there are several unsettled opposing claims about their history. The White House says Trump and Putin have spoken by phone at least three times since the 2016 election. But on conversations before the election, more contradictions. In July 2016, candidate Trump said this.
[Trump:] I have nothing to do with Putin. I've never spoken to him. I don't know anything about him, other than he will respect me.
[Blackwell:] Well, that contradicts what he said two years earlier.
[Trump:] I was in Moscow recently and I spoke indirectly and directly with President Trump, who could not have been nicer.
[Blackwell:] During the campaign, candidate Trump denied any relationship with Putin.
[Trump:] I have no relationship with him, other than he called me a genius.
[Blackwell:] But when asked about their relationship during a 2013 MSNBC interview, another contradiction.
[Thomas Roberts, Msnbc Anchor:] Do you have a relationship with Vladimir Putin, a conversational relationship or anything that you feel you have sway or influence over his government?
[Trump:] I do have a relationship.
[Blackwell:] The G20 Summit begins on Friday. All right. So let's bring in now Kimberly Dozier, CNN global affairs analyst and senior national security correspondent at "The Daily Beast." Kim, good morning to you.
[Kimberly Dozier, Senior National Security Correspondent, The Daily Beast:] Good morning, Victor.
[Blackwell:] All right. So we're going to set aside, for the moment, if this is the first time they're actually seeing each other in person. But you've got a piece out that I want to get to in "The Daily Beast," in which you have some information from European officials who are concerned because they believe that President Putin is going to try to play President Trump in the room and get something out of it.
[Dozier:] Well, according to their intelligence, that's what Moscow thinks it will be able to achieve when they put Putin and Trump in the same room. Putin is the ex-head of Russian intelligence. He is good at charming world leaders. He has charmed previous U.S. presidents. He had both George W. Bush and President Barack Obama thinking that Russia and the United States could reach some sort of cooperative arrangement on things like counterterrorism. But every time, according to the officials that I have spoken to who dealt with Russia in the past, that they were near to what they thought was a good give-and-take, Russia would sort of use that relationship to get one over on them. Like, if Russia invaded Ukraine and the U.S. said, well, you've got to stop doing that, Russia will say, well, in that case, we're not going to share XYZ counterterrorism information with you.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Dozier:] So they worry that this is what Trump is going to get convinced to do, enter into some sort of partnership where it's one- sided, with the U.S. giving everything and Moscow not giving very much.
[Blackwell:] That President Trump, essentially, is going to be rolled right there in the room. Let me go to this next element because we know that this meeting comes in context, right? The Russian potential collusion with Trump associates through the campaign. That investigation continues, although President Trump has called it a hoax. There is the investigation into Russian meddling in the election that goes on that President Trump has never 100 percent bought into. What role do you think those two will play in this meeting?
[Dozier:] Well, the fear is that Trump will emerge from a Putin meeting saying, we had a great meeting and our relationship is going to be able to go forward now against the back drop of possibly continuing revelations that there was some sort of conversation during the campaign between Trump administration officials and Russian officials. So that that would put the Trump administration in sort of a compromising public position. So you have to think about going into this. You have the national security officials who want to start getting on a better footing with Russia, but you've got the political side of the house saying, we've got to handle this delicately and not give the farm away to Moscow.
[Blackwell:] So, you know, this meeting between Trump and Putin, those aren't the only meetings we need to watch, of course. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said this week, Thursday, it was, the German Parliament, that these discussions at the G20 will be difficult. She talked about trade. She talked about the climate deal. Did not name the President outright, but she said this: anyone who believes they can solve the problems of this world with isolationism and protectionism is making a big mistake. And she also went to talk about the climate change agreement, their first meeting since President Trump pulled the U.S. out: we cannot wait and will not wait until the last person in the world can be convinced by the scientific findings. Beyond the rhetoric here, what is the significance of what we are hearing from Angela Merkel?
[Dozier:] Well, we're seeing Merkel emerge as one of the key European leaders who is willing to stand up to Trump, and there are polls that show that her people want her to do that. So she is going to be the counter point in the room, and if the U.S. wants a good relationship with Europe, with the European Union, they are going to have to deal with Merkel. So I think you're going to see her as one of the people when Trump stands up and does what he did in NATO, for instance, when he balled out NATO leaders right in front of them for not investing enough in their own defense, count on her to be the person to speak out on that. So we could be in for a little bit of fireworks at this meeting in Hamburg.
[Blackwell:] All right. Kimberly Dozier, thanks so much.
[Dozier:] Thank you.
[Paul:] Well, the Pentagon is delaying a decision now on allowing transgender people to enlist in the military. Today was the original deadline for Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to make that decision. According to a memo obtained by CNN, the Pentagon will not make the announcement for at least another six months. Remember, former Defense Secretary Ash Carter originally said, last year, transgender recruits would be able to openly serve in the armed forces. And President Trump waking up at his New Jersey golf course this morning. Back in Washington, however, you know the GOP health care bill is stuck still in the Senate. What does this mean moving forward? We'll take you live to New Jersey in a moment.
[Blackwell:] Plus, an official says the liberation of Mosul from ISIS is now imminent, but the battle continues.

[Quest:] Coca-Cola. Welcome back. The Chief Executive of Coca-Cola says he wants all his packaging back. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just there's far too much of it being dumped. Coke says it's pushing for a waste-free world. James Quincey told me it's become a major priority in a market that's become increasingly volatile.
[James Quincey, Chief Executive Officer, The Coca-cola Company:] I'm hearing a lot of noise on all fronts actually. I think there's more uncertainty and more volatility, there's been for a number of years. It's not like we're facing a new headwind, there's less tailwind perhaps, but there's not a new massive recession
[Quest:] In the in the slowdowns, one has always thought of Cola as being recession proof. In the sense you're one of those barometers like biscuits in a recession. People always buy it. In that sense, when you look at your sales numbers, do you see a slight dip or do you are they holding on?
[Quincey:] When macro economy is when the economies slow down, we tend to see a slight slowdown
[Quest:] Yes
[Quincey:] But it's not a big swing
[Quest:] Right
[Quincey:] Like durable goods is. So you know, in the end, we go look, we're going to go through the cycle, they'll focus on what we can control and the things we can do and we'll manage through the ups and downs.
[Quest:] You've been trying to get rid of waste for ages. So what's new?
[Quincey:] What's new? Well, this time last year, we set ourselves a very clear ambition. We wanted to you know, we've made progress, we were up well over half of collecting all our bottles back. We set ourselves a target, we want to get all the packages back, 100 percent to the packages by 2030, and we want to use half of them again in our own bottles.
[Quest:] OK, but is this an individual thing or is a philosophical? In other words, when I throw away my bottle of coke zero, plastic or glass or plastic, and I throw it away in my into the recycling bin, and it goes off into the building. You don't physically get that bottle back.
[Quincey:] Yes, I do. It depends on the country, but yes, I do. I buy back huge bales of those bottles, and then I take them to one of my facilities, I basically chop them up, melt them and make new food grade bottles again. So the it's all about creating value for the bottle. We then create a circular economy. You don't have to give it back to me, but if you put it in the recycling bin, eventually, one of those waste management companies will put them all together and sell them to me, and I'll use them. It absolutely can be solved. And I think there's a lot of energy around bringing governments, retailers and manufacturers together to get it done.
[Quest:] So what's your next target? So when we speak next year on this subject, what will you be hoping to tell me?
[Quincey:] I am not even hoping, I am absolutely going to come and tell you we made progress. Because if we don't make progress every year, we're not going to achieve our goal. And we've got a lot of projects with governments around up and running with our peer manufacturers to really make progress this year.
[Quest:] All right, the other area where of course one has to make progress, and I know you have strategies, is the amount of sugar.
[Quincey:] Yes.
[Quest:] It is simply extraordinary the amount of sugar in both in a full throttle of beverage of yours or your competitors?
[Quincey:] Well, I mean, some people, you know, they're very active, they have a coke and it's part of a diet that's fine. But in the end, we're absolutely committed to helping people manage or moderate or reduce their sugar consumptions. So we've invested a lot in R and D, we've invested a lot in innovation, Coke Zero, sugar tastes even better. You just threw away your Coke Zero Sugar bottle, there's no calories in that. And those are growing, Coke Zero had its fastest year of growth last year, diet coke in the U.S. started to turn around last year.
[Quest:] Why do you have both?
[Quincey:] We have both
[Quest:] I spent most of my life trying to work out.
[Quincey:] Well, Coke Zero tastes more closer to coke. We've had more time to perfect the formula of Coke Zero. Whereas Diet Coke was the original diet drink and it stayed as it was many years of
[Quest:] Are you going to get rid of it?
[Quincey:] No.
[Quest:] You going to get rid of it?
[Quincey:] No.
[Quest:] I think you will.
[Quincey:] No, I think I would have to go at the same time that I got rid of Diet Coke
[Quest:] Careful. Choose your color, sir.
[Quincey:] I think there's only one color I can choose
[Quest:] And yes, go on oh.
[Quincey:] Red for Coca-Cola.
[Quest:] Yes
[Quincey:] I could have gone with Coke Zero with some black, but then I'll leave that for you.
[Quest:] No, but I thought you might go for green for, you know, renewable or blue for blue skies.
[Ok -- Quincey:] Or oceans.
[Quest:] Or oceans, yes, but you were OK, what are you going to do?
[Quincey:] Look, you know what? I'm tempted to just put a circle around the whole thing.
[Quest:] Feel free.
[Quincey:] But I'm actually
[Quest:] Feel free
[Quincey:] Going to write in here.
[Quest:] Twenty first century social compact. What do you mean by that?
[Quincey:] I think that all of those issues speak to some fracturing of the 20th century social compact which created an explosive emergence of the middle class in U.S., in Europe, in China and lots of other places in the world. And what drove and created that is being broken off in pieces. All of those all of those other points represent a fracture line in the model from the 20th century, and we need to recreate something that people can believe in.
[Quest:] Is it OK, is it possible?
[Quincey:] It's not going to be easy. It has to be doable. It has to be done. It is possible, but I think it will take time, it will layer in pieces that can be solved in the short term and it will have to bring pieces to the long term.
[Quest:] And do you see part of your role and responsibilities as CEO to engage on that?
[Quincey:] Absolutely.
[Quest:] CEO of Coca-Cola. I have no idea whether Sydney Snowbot prefers a coke, a Diet Coke or a Coke Zero, but I do know why we decided this year to have a snowbot. It's all about how many jobs will be taken over in the fourth industrial revolution. Will Sydney take my job? We'll be talking to the Guy Ryder of the ILO about this industrial revolution and the workers who will lose out.

[Berman:] When President Trump sits down with Russia's President Vladimir Putin tomorrow at the G20 summit, he won't be dealing with a typical politician. The former KGB officer has a history of intimidation and threats beyond typical political maneuvering. CNN's Randi Kaye has more.
[Randi Kaye, Cnn Correspondent:] When German Chancellor Angela Merkel met with Vladimir Putin back in 2007, they were not alone. The Russian president brought along his big black Labrador, even though Merkel was afraid of dogs. She's been attacked by a dog back in 1995. She sat with her hands in her lap clearly uncomfortable while the Russian president seemed to smirk.
[Matthew Rojansky, Russia Expert:] It was absolutely a power play, it was an intimidation tactic. This is a way of showing that the Russian people, hey, I'm a powerful man, I'm a manly man.
[Kaye:] Years later, Putin tried to explain to a German newspaper, "I wanted to do something nice for her. When I found out she doesn't like dogs, of course I apologized."
[Rojansky:] It's well known that Putin is a former KGB officer and in that role he was trained to be a handler of people. What that means in an espionage context is of course exploiting people's vulnerabilities but also their desires, their ambitions, their insecurities to achieve your objectives and that's not always to shame that person. It's not always to have dominance, but it's to advance your interests.
[Kaye:] This wasn't Putin's only apparent ploy involving a dog. Former President George W. Bush shared a story recently, about how Putin, "Dissed his dog, Barney."
[George W. Bush, Former President Of The United States:] Putin says, would you like to meet my dog? Laura and I are with Putin in his dacha outside of Moscow. I said, yeah, I like to meet him. And out comes a giant hound kind of loping across the birch-lined yard, and Putin looks at me and says bigger, stronger, and faster than Barney. And, you know, it speaks volumes when you listen to what somebody says. And so in other words, he's got a chip on his shoulder.
[Rojansky:] Putin, at the end of day, is a human being. He's certainly has his ego, he's got his insecurities.
[Kaye:] Putin is also well known for keeping important people waiting for a long time. In 2014, he left Germany's Angela Merkel waiting more than four hours to see him. He kept the prime ministers of Japan and Ukraine each waiting three hours. He even made the Pope wait almost an hour. The waiting game, it seems, is just part of the power play.
[Rojansky:] It puts them in a position of being appreciative of that time, and automatically taking Putin more seriously, even if they are actually there to chide Putin or to try to pressure him into changing his views.
[Kaye:] In a meeting with Putin back in 2011, then Vice President Joe Biden referenced to conversation he'd had with the Georgian prime minister. Putin's response seemed to hint that Russia had eavesdropped on that conversation. His response to Biden according to the "Washington Post" was, "We know exactly what you're saying." Biden reportedly laughed. Putin did not. And in 2007, Putin may have succeeded at unnerving the president of France. In a documentary that aired on French public broadcasting, a journalist said Putin berated Nicolas Sarkozy in a private meeting, leaving Sarkozy visibly shaken for his press conference that followed.
[Rojansky:] And this is, again, a way of setting a tone in a relationship where, you know, if you have anything resembling empathy for the story that he tells, you kind of feel like you owe them something, what are we going to do to make up for it, how to we apologize, how do we make it right?
[Kaye:] Vladimir Putin's power play, his next target could be President Donald Trump. Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.
[Berman:] All right, lots to discuss now with an expert on each president, Ben Judah is author of "Fragile Empire: How Russia Fell In And Out of Love with Vladimir Putin." And Michael D'Antonio is a CNN contributor, author of "The Truth about Trump." And, Ben, I want to start with you here, knowing what you know about Vladimir Putin, which direction do you expect him to go in tomorrow? Are we talking about a power play intimidation here or maybe flattery?
[Ben Judah, Author, "fragile Empire":] I think it's very important to remember that Vladimir Putin is hugely experienced in meeting and dealing with world leaders. Vladimir Putin first started meeting the western ruling class when he was deputy mayor of St. Petersburg in the early '90s and got a chance to meet
[Berman:] So you think perhaps more the charm route tomorrow in this first meeting. Michael, what about you? Obviously, President Trump likes to fashion himself as a big negotiator here, but we see a fighter or a charmer on his side?
[Michael D'antonio, Author, "the Truth About Trump:] Oh, I think he'll try to be charming. That's usually his set point in an encounter with someone he hasn't met before. And despite what President Trump has said over the years he's never actually met Vladimir Putin, never dealt with him face-to-face. But I also think it's important to remember that there are really three presences in this meeting. One is the Russian interest which is represented by Putin. The second is America's interest, which is represented by President Trump, but the third interest is Donald Trump's ego. I think Vladimir Putin will have the ability to set aside his own feelings and he'll have a purpose that is nationalistic and pretty set. I think in Donald Trump, we have a person who's already capitulated in a way by having this meeting in the first place and the second part of this is that he is far more wounded and far more vulnerable than Vladimir Putin is and will have a need to satisfy. He wants to be recognized by Putin far more than Putin needs to be recognized by Trump.
[Berman:] Interesting. And Ben, you know that one of the best analyses of Vladimir Putin might be a KGB assessment of Putin and that's what the U.S. should be looking at right now to get some direction. Explain.
[Judah:] Well, this is one of the more fascinating documents that exist on Vladimir Putin. When Vladimir Putin was sort of training to sort of join the elites of the KGB to participate in Foreign Service, an assessment done on him found that he was not at all vulnerable to flattery or women or drink, but he was very vulnerable to a lowered awareness of danger. And what does that mean? It means rushing into conflicts or situations without having properly mapped out how dangerous these could be for you as an agent or perhaps, indeed, as a world leader.
[Berman:] He doesn't know when he's in trouble, in other words. Michael, just a bit of time left here. You do think that President Trump may draw a line when it comes to Syria?
[D'antonio:] I think he may. And I actually think President Trump may recognize that he has an opportunity here. This is if he has capitulated by having this meeting, he now has an opportunity to show himself to be forceful. Syria is probably one place where he can both be direct but also seeks out accommodation, the shared interests that he talked about during the campaign when he said, wouldn't it be great if we got along? So, let's hope from America's point of view that the president sees an opportunity here, has the presence of mind to put forward our interests and make something happen.
[Berman:] It will be fascinating to watch. Ben Judah, Michael D'Antonio, fascinating perspective. Thanks so much. We'll be right back.

[Max Baucus, , Former U.s. Ambassador To China & Former Senator:] I think it's internal consumption. I think President Kim every once in a while he does this, stirs up the people in his country with some outrageous charge against the United States. I think that's basically it. He also might be a little bit piqued that President Trump withdrew Pompeo's visit over to the region, but this is standard North Korean operation.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Does it complicate the relationship between the U.S. and North Korea?
[Baucus:] No question the relationship is much more complicated, in part, though, because the United States is losing its stature. I think we're in a worse position now compared to where we were before Singapore. That is Singapore, nothing has happened. China and Russia are starting to amp up a little more of their help to North Korea. Trump looks even more inconsistent. I think because the United States is perceived as losing a little bit of mojo that that's giving a little more impetus to Kim to be a little stronger than he has been in the past. I just we've got a real problem ahead of us, the United States does, in dealing with North Korea and we're not doing a good job.
[Blitzer:] Yes, it's a serious issue. The stakes are clearly enormous. While I have you, Senator, I want to switch gears. I know you and Senator John McCain were very close friends, former colleagues for many, many years in the U.S. Senate. You worked for him for nearly 30 years. Give us a thought or two about this extraordinary man.
[Baucus:] John McCain had a very strong code of conduct, military code of conduct in his DNA. That enabled him to stand up to the military, that is say when he thought the military was doing wrong. John McCain had the credibility. Second, he's a real patriot. People knew that he was standing up for America, didn't have an ulterior motive. Add to that because of his strong code of conduct, he was trusted, no guile, not a deceptive bone in his body. Now, he had strong views and sometimes they were not totally accurate and sometimes he'd lose his temper and blow up, but he always came back when he realized he made a mistake and wanted to do the right thing. There's nobody like him. It's going to be very hard to find somebody to replace John McCain. A great example is what he did on Obamacare. He stood up, he did what he thought was right and that was not repeal Obamacare because he felt that was the right thing to do. In part, maybe because he knew his health was a little bit shaky, but he says what he thinks, and, man, oh man, do we need more of that.
[Blitzer:] We certainly do. Senator, Ambassador, thank you so much. Used to be a Senator, used to be an ambassador. Appreciate it very much.
[Baucus:] You bet. Thanks, Wolf. Good luck.
[Blitzer:] Rick Davis, who served as John McCain's campaign manager and long-time aide, is speaking out about funeral arrangements for the Senator right now. I briefly wanting to listen in.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Cindy McCain is under consideration to fill the Senate seat. Can you talk about that at all?
[Rick Davis, Former Campaign Manager & Aide To John Mccain:] No, I'm not going to address that at all. Yes, ma'am?
[Unidentiied Reporter:] I'm with the local ABC station.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Along with vein, let me ask you this. Has the Senator talked about what kind of person he hopes comes after him in serving Arizona in the U.S. Senate?
[Davis:] You know, I think throughout the years he would he would contemplate what a succession would look like. I think he had a different plan in mind in those days. I think he was looking forward to retiring after this last term of office and enjoying that back porch in Sedona. But it's hard to say. You know, he's always been someone who has encouraged participation in politics, especially in the Republican Party with minorities, women. I think a Hispanic woman probably would have been his pick for a successor if he had lived long enough to do the opportunity. But it's just too sad to say what that would have looked like because he never got that far. Go ahead. Hey, Brian.
[Unidentified Reporter:] He welcomed Joe Biden into the family.
[Davis:] Yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] How did his relationship with Senator McCain start and continue over the years?
[Davis:] They have known each other for a very long time. At one point, in time, in the Navy, he was the Navy liaison to the United States Senate and one of the people he befriended was Joe Biden. Long before John had any political ambition, he was exposed to people like Senator Cohen, Senator Biden, some of the great luminaries as the chairman of committees that he worked with. So he's always had an incredibly close and personal relationship with Joe Biden. It has been tested over the years on issue after issue. And yet, they remain steadfast in their personal relationship. If there's any better exemplification of what you can accomplish in politics to debating vociferously and then at the end of the day maintaining a relationship with the people you do battle with is the model of governance that John McCain so much adhered to. And that relationship with Joe Biden was clearly in that category. I would say bar none, Joe Biden has been an incredible comfort to the family, a source of wonderful amount of information about the disease when John McCain was first diagnosed with glioblastoma. And I know Cindy and Meghan and the whole family have been comforted by his prayers and counsel, and for that reason they have asked him to be here at the first stop along the way. Yes, ma'am? Yes, ma'am.
[Unidentified Reporter:] How is the family holding up?
[Davis:] Well, they have been steeled by fire. This is a family that's been in the public for as long as they can remember. And it's almost as if the Senator prepared them for this moment. They are tough. But even talking about it makes you a little weak-kneed. They're doing great. They appreciate so much the reporting that you all are doing about John's life and the prayers and the well wishes that they see every day. On the street, the memorials at the funeral home, there's a memorial at his office. People have just poured out their sympathies to the McCains and they greatly appreciate it. Over here. Yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Also will Mr. McCain's mother attend any of these ceremonies?
[Davis:] Good question. Keep trying on that Web site. It probably got more traffic than even we had anticipated. So the best I can tell you is just keep pounding away on it. It's getting more information on it updated a lot, so they take it down sometimes or freeze it in order to be able to fill that information in, so you might be just experiencing some of those things. But just keep trying. It's really the best single opportunity to get credentialed and that kind of thing. If at all, you continue to have problems, we have a lot of the team here to help you with what you need.
[Blitzer:] Rick Davis, Senator McCain's long-time very close aide, the former campaign manager for his presidential campaign, outlining some of the details of the upcoming funeral arrangements. And here they are. Let me put them up on the screen. You can see, on Wednesday, Senator McCain's body will lie in state at the Arizona state capitol. Thursday morning, there will be a memorial service at the North Phoenix Baptist Church. We understand that former Vice President Biden will be speaking there. And then Senator McCain's casket will be flown to Joint Base Andrews outside of Washington, D.C. On Friday, Senator McCain will lie in state at the U.S. capitol rotunda. There will be a formal memorial service at the National Cathedral here in Washington Saturday. Former President Obama, former President George W. Bush, they will both be speaking there, along with family members. On Sunday, Senator McCain will be laid to rest at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. We'll be right back.

[Cuomo:] All right, there's a new complication in the war against ISIS. U.S. troops are once again in harm's way now patrolling the Syria's border with Turkey. Not to fight ISIS, but keep two important allies from fighting each other. CNN's Barbara Starr live at the Pentagon with more Barbara.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Good morning, Chris. Syria already dangerous for U.S. troops and getting more dangerous by the day. They are now patrolling in armored vehicles along the Turkish-Syrian border. American flags flying, very visible to all to see. They want to be seen. Why is this happening? There have been a number of skirmishes on this border between the Turkish military and Kurdish forces up there. Many of them backed by the U.S. in the fight further south to retake Raqqah and other areas to push ISIS out. So as these skirmishes have continued, the U.S. moving in trying to keep peace in the region so those rebels that the U.S. wants to fight Raqqah can continue to do that and not be diverted to this fight along the border. But it is also politically vital and sensitive. The U.S. wants continued access to those Turkish air bases. The Turks are very upset that the U.S. troops are in the region Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Barbara, thank you very much for that update. Meanwhile, instead of getting roasted at the White House Correspondents Dinner, President Trump staged a rival event attacking, guess who?
[President Trump:] Let's rate the media's 100 days. Should we do that? They are a disgrace.
[Unidentified Male:] Every time Donald Trump goes golfing, the headline should read. Trump golfing. Apocalypse delayed. Take the "w."
[Camerota:] All right, we have much more of this for you. Our media experts are here next.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Now, that process was not enough for then- Congressman and currently the vice president, Mike Pence, who in early 2010 tweeted: "It's simply wrong for legislation that will affect 100 percent of the American people to be negotiated behind closed doors." And that was right, what Congressman Pence said. And it's right now, as was this from then-Congressman, now Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Tom Price quote "With Democrats discussing health care in secret, they're sacrificing the trust of the American people." Or, for instance, Senator Orrin Hatch, now the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, who wrote back then quote "The real bill is currently being written behind closed doors in the dark corners of the Capitol." I could do this all day, frankly. But what about today? What does Hatch have to say today, such as, for instance, this month when he was challenged about whether his committee would hold a public hearing?
[Unidentified Female:] Will there be a hearing? Democrats have been invited to participate in this process, and we are open to all ideas and suggestions.
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] Well, I don't know that there's going to be another hearing, but we have been invited you to participate.
[Tapper:] The only thing that's changed is the party affiliations of those behind closed doors and those locked out. If you apply a principle only to your opponents, it's not a principle. It's just a cheap partisan attack. Senate Republicans say a bill could go to the Congressional Budget Office for analysis as soon as this week. CNN's Phil Mattingly is live on Capitol Hill. And, Phil, Republicans want estimates from the CBO before a vote. That would leave them with about seven or eight working days before the July 4 recess. Is that enough time to debate such a huge piece of legislation?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] Jake, the most interesting element probably of the last week or so is the number of Republicans who have voiced their own unease about this process, acknowledging it's too secretive, acknowledging particularly rank-and-file members have no idea where this is all going to end up, despite the fact that senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced today that there would be a working draft available to everybody on Thursday. And there still are major key outstanding issues, major issues that need to be resolved before Thursday. An interesting element here is really twofold, Jake, first off, the frustration about the process, and second off, that they're not there yet. Take a listen to this.
[Unidentified Male:] But when the Affordable Care Act came through, so- called Obamacare, fellows, just give us a sense of that process compared to...
[Mattingly:] Jake, one of the elements here is when you talk to people like Senator John McCain, very frustrated with the process, very sarcastic with us all day today, but not willing to acknowledge that they will stand in the way of the process moving forward. Here's kind of the cold reality here. If three Republican senators out of 52 tell the Senate majority leader, look, we need to slow down, we need to wait until after we have full amounts of time to digest the bill or have a hearing on this bill, then that would be what would happen. The only goal here is to get 50 senators in line. And if three say no, then they don't really have an option. Up to this point, despite the frustration we've heard publicly, no senator has actually come out and said that. And another key element here, as I noted, they don't have final agreement on some of these key outstanding issues. Short of that, it's tough to figure out how they are going to get 50 votes. But one thing was made clear by the Senate majority leader today, Jake. They're moving forward. They expect to have a CBO score at some point next week. And they expect a vote on this as well.
[Tapper:] We haven't seen a draft of the legislation. In that, we're no different than Senator Mike Lee. But Republicans aides are saying that being considered are deeper Medicaid cuts than the House bill. Is that getting any pushback on Capitol Hill?
[Mattingly:] No question about it. Look, this is something that conservatives look very favorable towards, and it's how they would peg the growth rate. As it currently stands, at least in the House legislation, it would be pegged to inflation, plus or medical inflation, essentially. What the Senate is actually considering right now is pegging it to just inflation. Now, the House bill, Jake, would cut $800 billion over the course of 10 years. That has moderate senators concerned on its own. The Senate bill, if it were to follow through with this proposal that I'm told is on the table right now, would cut it a lot more. You talk to senators like Rob Portman of Ohio, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, they made very clear today that they don't think they can support something like that. So, the big question is, will that be taken off the table before that discussion draft leaves the premises or at least comes out on Thursday? And obviously we're keeping an eye on Democrats, too. You kind of highlighted their frustration through all of this. They don't have much of a role here. They can try and slow things down. They can try not and draw attention to the process. And that's pretty much what they're doing. Today, we had senator Cory Booker, Senator Brian Schatz and Senator Chris Murphy actually go on a scavenger hunt of sorts over to the CBO office trying to track down some of the drafts of certain provisions of this legislation in order to get some sense of what's in the bill. They failed in that process, just as just about everybody in the Senate has up to this point. It looks we're all going to have to wait and see until at least Thursday morning what's actually in the bill.
[Tapper:] All right, Phil Mattingly on Capitol Hill for us, thank you so much. One of the Democrats speaking out on the Senate floor last night and again this afternoon was Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, who joins me now from Capitol Hill. Senator, thanks for joining us. In response to complaints about transparency, the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, said that there will be quote "ample opportunity to read and amend the bill." Your response?
[Sen. Jeff Merkley , Oregon:] Hi. Greetings, Jake. Pleasure to be with you. I got to tell you, it's incredible secrecy that we're engaged in. And I heard that clip that you had with Senator Hatch saying that we're welcome to participate. I believe Senator Thune said we are welcome to the meetings. So, I have got my RSVP card here. I have already signed it. I just need to know what the date is and what the location is, because, despite the invitation, so far have absolutely no idea how to participate. This is the secret 13 holding these meetings and deciding what's going to happen in health care in America with absolutely no committee hearing, no opportunity for the public to weigh in. This is not the way a legislature is supposed to operate in a we the people republic.
[Tapper:] Looking back on it, did Democrats make a mistake by not opening the process more open and having more debate and having more openness and transparency when Obamacare was being written?
[Merkley:] Let's count the ways that we were open. In the Senate alone, we had over committee meetings, roundtables and walk-throughs. We considered over 300 amendments in a public setting. We considered over 300 Republican amendments. We adopted over 100 Republican amendments. We went to the floor with 25 days of debate. People held town halls back home. The public weighed in. It was about as lengthy a process as you have seen in modern United States history. This is the opposite end. This is zero, zero, zero.
[Tapper:] Isn't this an example of elections having consequences? The Republicans control the Senate, and it does seem, according to many polls, that Americans do want Obamacare overhauled, if not replaced.
[Merkley:] Well, just I would invite to join me on my town halls out in Oregon. This weekend, I was in four conservative counties, four red counties, completely open town hall. Everybody knew about them. And people came out. And they terrified, absolutely terrified of this secret process and what might happen to their health care. So, I think it's very clear, whatever polling there might have been in the past, right now, the Trumpcare is creating enormous anxiety and opposition at grassroots rural America.
[Tapper:] What do you think Republicans could do that would satisfy you and your Democratic colleagues? Even if there were public hearings, you would still oppose their efforts to change Obamacare or undermine Obamacare on such a grand scale.
[Merkley:] There's so many ways that the current health care system can be improved. So, what I would like to say, at a minimum, one month for the public to weigh in, one month for the two committees to hold hearings and take expert testimony, one month for us to hold town halls and discussions among ourselves and offer amendments in those two committees. Then bring it to the floor. That's not too much to ask.
[Tapper:] So, there are problems with Obamacare, you acknowledge, and, as you must know, premiums are rising up to 30 percent in your home state of Oregon. What changes would you make, if you could make them right now?
[Merkley:] The first is that there has to be a lockdown on cost- sharing. Companies are bailing out of states because the president will not commit to cost-sharing. That's the difference between, say, a 7 percent and a 30 percent rise in the cost of health care. Second of all, a company can't go into a new market without re- insurance in case they get a disproportionate share of sick individuals. And the Republicans destroyed the re-insurance program in Obamacare. And so those are just two examples of ways that currently the administration and my Republican colleagues are undermining the exchanges. And, by the way, those exchanges were the Republican idea for health care. Marketplace, where private companies compete, that was their idea. But they chose, on a completely partisan basis, to instead just try to undermine a presidency, rather than do the responsible thing and work together to make health care that will serve, affordable quality health care for every American.
[Tapper:] Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, thank you so much. Good luck with that RSVP card.
[Merkley:] You're welcome. Thank you. I'm hoping to get that date and time.
[Tapper:] Georgia is on Republicans' mind and Democrats' minds tonight, as voters head to the polls in the most expensive U.S. House race in American history. But will the results be a referendum for either party? Stay with us.

[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] He was telling the reporter to go back and look at what he said. Of course, John and Poppy, we both know that on that flight he denied knowing anything about the payment to Stormy Daniels from Michael Cohen and also denied knowing where that money came from. But there the president is saying go back and look at what I said. Something we can easily do. We do have it on tape. And he said no, he did not know about that payment.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right, Kaitlan, stand by at the White House. As we said, there has been so much that has developed just over the last few minutes. Want to bring in our political director David Chalian. Not only has the president sort of undercut the legal strategy his new lawyer seems to have put out, but he walked across the tarmac there at Joint Base Andrews with his chief of staff John Kelly, talked about how great their relationship is despite the consistent reports that there is tension there. And then something I haven't seen before with the two of them, John Kelly goes to the microphone to affirm what the president is saying, and as he puts it, note how brilliant the administration has been. What did you see there, David?
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Yes. It made me wonder, how much longer is John Kelly going to be in this job? It's like right the next moment after the big hug like that. It makes me wonder, as you said, John, with all that reporting about their relationship just how much longer John Kelly stays there. But to your first point about the undercutting, John, we got to go back to that interview that Rudy Giuliani did on FOX News, he went on with Sean Hannity, the friendliest environment, to in his own words what he told reporters afterwards was to implement and execute on a deliberate strategy that this is something he and the president discussed, that he was going to get this information out there, that Trump had made the repayment at some point as soon as he saw the opportunity to do so. This is something that was cooked up between the president and Rudy Giuliani. And that he went with full blessing and then Giuliani, remember, reported that the president was very pleased with his performance. This is a complete reversal of that. This is a statement coming out soon, to give you proper facts, because Rudy Giuliani doesn't have his facts right, said Rudy Giuliani's client, the president of the United States. It's astonishing.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] It is astonishing. And David Chalian, the president even said it's actually very simple, explaining the payment to Stormy Daniels, although he wouldn't explain them to the reporters, he said there is a lot of misinformation and then he said, quote, "learn before you speak. It's a lot easier." But to your point, these two men strategized at a meeting before he went on Hannity
[Berman:] Allegedly. I mean, that's their story. What can we believe? How do we know we can we believe any of it now?
[Harlow:] It's a very fair and important point. I mean, what do you think there is any strategy now from the president in the White House on this one or is this just muddy the waters, muddy them, muddy them, muddy them, scream fake news and hope people forget?
[Chalian:] It's hard to discern a strategy other than they seem to be playing catch up. They're behind developments. So I think what you see now is the president responding to the overall coverage he's seen about Rudy Giuliani's comments and realizing that whatever their goal was to try to clean things up and perhaps wall off the president from the Michael Cohen investigation and the Southern District of New York, that didn't seem to work well, and so here's the president sort of saying, you know what, I'll get out there and I will have to clean this up myself which, of course, is a position that no White House likes to see the president in. But this president, as you know, believes he's his best advocate and his best communications specialist to get out there and try to clean this up himself.
[Berman:] You know, insofar as there may be a strategy here, it's facts be dammed. I mean, you know, Rudy Giuliani may not have the facts right, will present another set of facts. You determine what you will. But, you know, we will go partisan here.
[Harlow:] Yes. Yes. That's a great point.
[Berman:] You know, we will bring up the facts that we believe that the Mueller investigation is tainted.
[Harlow:] With Mueller.
[Berman:] It's something we hear every night from Sean Hannity and I don't think it's any coincidence that you're hearing it from the president, you know, the morning after he gets the Hannity notes here. That is, you know, it is a political strategy and maybe that will work, David.
[Chalian:] It is. And by the way, John, it is working. I mean, we have seen how Republicans are responding in the polls.
[Harlow:] Yes. You're right.
[Chalian:] And looking at the Mueller investigation. This constant hammering and politicizing this investigation, it does seem to be working with the president's supporters and beyond that a little bit inside his party which is key. But what I do think is important to note here too is that the president seems committed to a strategy on fighting back on the obstruction of justice charge, the potential charge, that he laid out in January when, remember, he met with reporters in John Kelly's office in a sort of stop by, and he we're still in the same place all these months later, he calls what he did fighting back. And he thinks that's what investigators are calling obstruction of justice and he still seems committed to a strategy that that is the case he's going to make, that that is simply just fighting back.
[Harlow:] We have seen so much shake-up is an understatement on the legal team. So Emmet Flood is now coming into the team and what's interesting about Emmet Flood is that Giuliani said in that interview on Hannity that Emmet Flood was going to be dealing with things like immunity, et cetera. So you have the president just saying now to reporters, if I thought it was fair, the investigation, I would override my lawyers. He just said I will not listen to any of my lawyers. I will make the ultimate decision, which is why John Dowd left. That was significant to me.
[Chalian:] Hugely significant, Poppy. But of course, in the same breadth, he's saying it is not fair. Right? To your point about the partisan argument, he's saying this is stacked against me. It sounds to me he's determined that at the current moment he doesn't think it's a fair setup. So therefore one would follow his logic to say well, then he won't sit down with Mueller. But of course, he doesn't want to rule out that possibility and he doesn't want to invite the scrutiny and the potential, you know, ultimate perhaps constitutional crisis at the court over it so he's leaving over the possibility. But all his other words indicate that he's saying this is not a fair investigation.
[Harlow:] He all but called Mueller a Democrat. He tried to did that. He said only thing he said about Mueller is that he worked for Obama. He forgot that Mueller is a registered Republican
[Berman:] And was appointed by
[Harlow:] By Bush.
[Berman:] By Bush.
[Harlow:] Unanimously confirmed by the Senate.
[Chalian:] I think he said he worked for Obama for eight years.
[Berman:] For eight years. That's a math thing. I've give him a pass on the math there. I mean, it was wrong. I want to bring in Shimon Prokupecz who covers the investigation for us, the Mueller investigation, for us right now. Any sense where they are in the negotiations, you know, between the Mueller team and the president's new legal team on this interview. The president keeps on saying he loved to do what his lawyers are saying, you know, I'm not sure if we can even believe that because it's a good political argument to say I want to do it.
[Harlow:] But they won't let me.
[Berman:] But my lawyers say no. But where do things stand right now, Shimon?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] I think it's fair to say, John, you're absolutely right. You know, this is a political argument for him. This witch hunt, this whole idea that he doesn't want to that his lawyers don't want to do what he wants to do. But we know that negotiations are under way. Certainly things drastically changed after the Michael Cohen raid. He felt it was extremely unfair. It caught his team, the president's legal team off guard. But the bottom line is, John, and really is that this investigation cannot come to a close without the president's participation. It's clear that the special counsel wants to talk to him, the FBI agents there, the prosecutors there, want to talk to him, right? We know that also because they threatened a subpoena if that was necessary. That is not something his legal team the president's legal team wants to go through as well. So it is an ongoing negotiation. And as far as we know, those talks continue. Whether or not he actually agrees to sit down with the special counsel, of course, that's still up in the air. His legal team we know does not necessarily want him to sit down before the special counsel because they're just concerned about some of the things he may say and that is the other thing, there are still not a whole lot of agreement on the team about what to do next. There are some who want him to sit down and there are some who don't. And certainly bringing Rudy Giuliani into the mix now has thrown everything for a loop because no one there seems to know what is going on. Some are saying to us that Rudy Giuliani and the president are doing their own thing. And it's clear, and now the president comes out and essentially is saying that what Rudy Giuliani has said may not all be accurate. We have also heard that Michael Cohen has had some issues with some of what Rudy Giuliani has been saying. So it's really unclear, John, in the end, when this interview is going to happen. But the fact is that this investigation, as much as the president wants it to end, probably cannot come to a conclusion without his participation.
[Harlow:] And Kaitlan Collins Shimon, thank you, stay with us. Kaitlan Collins at the White House. I know, Kaitlan, you have something to add on Giuliani here.
[Collins:] Well, Poppy, it was very interesting the way that the president talked about Rudy, because though he did praise him, he said he was a great guy, he did seem to throw him under the bus a little by saying that he had just started, even though he was hired two weeks ago, he said he didn't have all of his facts straight. He was still learning the subject matter. Heavily implying that Rudy Giuliani got something wrong when he made his comments on FOX News Wednesday night, those explosive comments about the president. The president also said they'd be publishing a full list regarding the payments that he made to Michael Cohen, of course, the president tweeted yesterday that there had been this monthly retainer, but he did seem to be sending a message to Giuliani, one of the latest additions to the president's legal team by saying that, saying he hasn't gotten his facts straight, he's still learning the matter, he's not totally familiar with everything and they're also saying that if he decides that Robert Mueller is fair, he's going to override his lawyers and sit down with him. So certainly the president did seem to be sending a message there to Giuliani.
[Berman:] I will say, he didn't just throw Giuliani under the bus. He threw him under the bus at the White House then ran over him again at Joint Base Andrews.
[Harlow:] That's true.
[Collins:] Backed up. Yes.
[Berman:] He brought it up twice. Independently. This was a choice by the president to make sure that we heard it the first time, so this is clearly a message from him. One other point I'll make, he said that Rudy Giuliani will be coming out with a statement, they're going to put some official version of this together. So not only do we not know the truth at this point we don't even know what their version of events is right now to assess it.
[Harlow:] And it's a great point. It's not just about the Stormy Daniels payment. Rudy Giuliani said something incredibly significant about the reason that the president fired James Comey.
[Berman:] And that's a great point to bring up. And Michael Zeldin, if we can bring you into this discussion on that point, the president brought up the issue of obstruction. He continues to say there was no obstruction, the whole investigation into obstruction is a fraud. Maybe what was in his head is when Rudy Giuliani said that the president fired James Comey because Comey wouldn't publicly exonerate him. The president says, you know, I'm just fighting back. They think it's obstruction. Is there a fighting back exemption to the notion of obstruction of justice?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, not in law. Maybe in politics. You know, this Giuliani was dammed by faint praise. There's just no question about that, which the president did. But as it relates to the Mueller investigation, remember, Giuliani was supposed to be brought in here for his gravitas and his prior existing relationship with Mueller in order to help facilitate, you know, an interview and then, you know, a sort of closure. And the president said Rudy Giuliani knows about witch hunts better than anybody. So essentially Rudy Giuliani is confirming the president's belief that this is a witch-hunt, and yet he's supposed to be the emissary to Mueller to negotiate the terms of an interview which I think has to occur as Shimon said before this investigation is over and which the law probably will be on Mueller's side to demand. So I just don't understand strategically what Rudy Giuliani is doing that can be seen in any way as helpful to the president's legal cause. He's just not helping.
[Harlow:] David Chalian, let me bring you back in here and let's remind people that Rudy Giuliani in an interview with the "Washington Post," said he sat down with the president, they discussed a few days ago that they were going to reveal the details of the reimbursement, because as Giuliani has since confirmed, the Southern District has these documents because of the raid, right? And they're going to get out there at some point. And then here is a quote from Giuliani to the "Post." Quote, "He," meaning the president, "was well aware that at some point when I saw the opportunity I was going to get this over with." So now doesn't the president essentially have to say Rudy Giuliani was lying in that if he's going to walk back what Giuliani said?
[Chalian:] Look, the president Poppy, I think the president clearly stated Rudy Giuliani did not have his facts right. He said he's going to get his facts straight. That implies his facts haven't been correct at this point according to the president. And so two things you have to ask there, either Rudy Giuliani was not telling the truth to the "Washington Post" about this being a strategy.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Chalian:] And that the president agreed and the president was pleased with this and wanted this out there, that that's one possibility or the other possibility is the president didn't like the coverage of what he saw after Rudy Giuliani made those comments and is now shifting and trying a different approach here in order to explain to the American people in a way that he thinks might be more acceptable. We'll see when we get the Giuliani statement about what Donald Trump claims the facts are here. One of those two things here are true. Either Donald Trump is shifting stories after the fact, or Rudy Giuliani wasn't accurately portraying what the strategy was going in. I'm not sure, you know, Sean Hannity, when he's posed with whether or not he believed what Rudy Giuliani told him or what the president tells him now, it will be curious to see how he tries to adjudicate that situation between two guests that appeared there on friendly turf, but there is a clear contradiction right now.
[Berman:] All right, guys. Stick around if you will. There is so much more to discuss. The breaking news, if you're just joining us, the president of the United States just did a full walk back, undercutting his new attorney, Rudy Giuliani, saying Rudy is a nice guy, but he just started a day ago. He will get his facts straight eventually, indicating he doesn't think he has them straight now. So much more to discuss. Stay with us.

[Baldwin:] The website for touted plans for 3D printed firearms went dark overnight. Federal judge blocked a deal the Texas based non- profit reached that essentially makes it illegal to print them online after president Trump said 3d guns don't seem to make much sense, Sarah Sanders is blaming the Department of Justice for approving the settlement.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] The Department of Justice made a deal without the president's approval. On those regards, the president is glad this effort is delayed to give more time to review the issue. In this administration supports the decades-old legislation already on the books that prohibits the ownership of a wholly plastic gun.
[Baldwin:] CNN Money tech correspondent Laurie Segall is with me. I wanted to follow up on this today because we know that the group Defense Distributed, the company behind, right, they have already distributed the plans for these guns. So, what now?
[Laurie Segall, Cnn Money Tech Correspondent:] Over a thousand people have already downloaded this. They were teasing they were going to put it out today. They actually put it out a couple days ago. And Brooke, I spoke to Cody Wilson yesterday and this was before this really, before the temporary halt and didn't seem so worried. Listen to what he said right then.
[Cody Wilson, Founder, Defense Distributed:] I already uploaded the plans. The ship has sailed. It's public domain information now. It's irrevocable. No one can take it back.
[Segall:] Those blue prints are out there. You go to the site now, you don't see them. There is another hearing scheduled next week August 10, so we will hear more. And the judge said before there are some very serious issues, First Amendment issues here. So, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. As we said yesterday, tremendous implications from this case.
[Baldwin:] Laurie Segall, thank you very much. Back to our breaking news, the White House denying that the president is obstructing justice by tweeting that is on Attorney General Jeff Sessions should end the Russia investigation. His attorney, Rudy Giuliani, just weighed in. Stay with me.

[Baldwin:] We're getting some breaking details now about the ambush in Niger that left those four American soldiers killed and how the U.S. team actually ended up separated into two separate groups. Let's go to chief national security correspondent, Jim Sciutto, with some of the details here. How did they separate?
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Well, Brooke, we are learning that this fire fight was more complex than we knew initially. This one U.S. team splitting into two groups in the midst of the fire fight. One vehicle had been disabled. So, one of these groups continued on foot as this fire fight, this ambush was under way. And this group was attempting a counter attack. They were attempting to outflank the attackers. And in the midst of this they did manage did manage to kill some 20 ISIS fighters. But we are also learning during the two groups at one point they lost communications between one group and another. And that group that had those four American KIA. That helps explain some of the confusion as they were trying to sort out as this fire fight was ending who was killed, who was missing. In fact, you may remember that the first reports back to the White House were of multiple U.S. forces missing, four missing. Though that was quickly updated to be three killed and one missing. So, the key here, this was a complex fire fight, and in the midst of it these U.S. forces were trying to fight back. They split up into two groups. One though they had lost their vehicle, they continued on foot. They tried to out flank their attackers. In the midst of this they managed to take out their attackers, some 20 it is estimated. But again, adding as I said to that they lost communication in the midst of this as well.
[Baldwin:] So, we don't know why they lost communication, that's still unclear.
[Sciutto:] It's not clear yet. But keep in mind in a fire fight there is a lot of ways that could happen. One vehicle was disabled. Could be that the radio in the vehicle was destroyed. Also, possible they were carrying their communications equipment that is destroyed on their person, a bullet, a grenade, et cetera. That's not clear at this point, how it was lost. But the fact that it was lost adding to go the confusion here as one group tried to keep track of the other group of Americans involved in this ambush.
[Baldwin:] Jim Sciutto with the scoop here on this just tragic story out of Niger. Thanks, you so much, Jim. We appreciate that.
[Sciutto:] Thank you.
[Baldwin:] U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, she is wrapping up a three-nation tour. She is in Africa. Traveling with her is CNN global affairs correspondent Elise Labott, who just had some moments specifically with the ambassador. And so, Elise is with us live there in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Tell us what Ambassador Haley shared with you.
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Brooke, it's been an incredible week here with Nikki Haley. We've traveled to some parts of Africa that we really haven't traveled before. Ambassador Haley went to Ethiopia to South Sudan to really get a look at the refugee crisis and the conflict there. And then we've been throughout Democratic Republic of Congo. Yesterday visiting displaced people who are stuck in a camp, can't leave because there's violence surrounding them. And Nikki Haley said she came here to Africa to get a firsthand look at how these nations of conflict, with instability, with humanitarian disaster, can become a breeding ground, if you will, for terrorist groups. And in fact, she's trying to come here to prevent the next situation where we found in Niger where U.S. serviceman was killed in a country like that is threatening the United States. Take a listen to secretary excuse me to Ambassador Nikki Haley.
[Labott:] You know, you said you made the argument that why Africa is important to Americans. But you have to solve these problems before they erupt. Because we could be looking at the next conflict zone that is going to turn into a safe haven for terrorists. And we have seen that happen in other places like Syria and Somalia.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] You know, it's so important that everybody not just talk about the Middle East and how we have to be careful of the Middle East. You know, you see the actions that the administration is taking in the Middle East is all because we want to deal with the situation there. So, we don't have to deal with it in the United States. It is the same thing for Africa. We have to deal with the situation here on the ground so that we are not dealing with it in the United States. What you have to look at is these African countries and all countries, if they take care of their people, if they respect the voices of their people, then you get true democracy. If they don't listen to the voices of their people, conflict will erupt. Extremism will happen. And the United States will have to deal with it. This is all about making sure we don't get to that point.
[Labott:] And Nikki Haley said that if the U.S. doesn't do more to help solve these conflicts, these kids, hundreds of thousands affected by the conflict will grow into adults with no future resenting the U.S. for not doing more. That's the very kind of person that ISIS and other extremists are looking to recruit Brooke.
[Baldwin:] So, you mention all these countries and how substantive this trip is for her, and I know you slipped, she's not the secretary, but, Elise, there has been speculation that perhaps this
[Labott:] Not yet.
[Baldwin:] this could be an audition for Nikki Haley to become the next Secretary of State. What are your thoughts on that? What are you hearing?
[Labott:] Well, look, I mean, look, she's really doing the kind of work that is the provident of the Secretary of State. Sitting down, head to head with world leaders, with African dictators, and giving them the kind of lay down the law of the United States. But if you remember back when we met with Nikki Haley in July, she told us that the President Trump offered her the job and she said no, I don't think I have enough foreign policy experience. I said, look, there is a lot of rumors that Secretary Tillerson is not happy in the job. Would you take it if offered now? And she said I don't want it. I don't want to move to Washington. I don't like the drama. And I'm very happy doing what I'm doing in New York. And I have to say, Brooke, it's a good gig for her, because she gets to act as one of the top diplomats for the U.S. But isn't kind of under the thumb of the president in Washington where cabinet members are subject to a lot of drama, a lot of distraction. And you know, the presidential very eagle eye.
[Baldwin:] Glad you asked her. It's an important question. It's on the minds of so many. Elise Labott, excellent, excellent reporting there out of Africa. We can't wait to see your full interview with Ambassador Nikki Haley on "THE SITUATION ROOM" with Wolf Blitzer, tonight here on CNN. Thank you so much for the preview. Coming up next here the release of the secrets of JFK files. Touching on everything from Marilyn Monroe, to the question about whether Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA agent. Stay with me.

[Chris Cuomo, Host, Cnn:] ... the candle at both ends. I'm happy I did it to test power for you. I thank the people here who gave you the facts first. They worked very hard. And I appreciate everything that this opportunity brought us. So thanks for tonight. Anderson Cooper is back for a special edition of AC360. That starts right now.
[Anderson Cooper, Host, Cnn:] Welcome to a special late edition of 360. We begin with President Trump determined to release the so-called Nunes memo. A new reporting on how that determination originated and grew. The reporting comes from the Washington Post. Here's the lead of the story. President Trump was only vaguely aware of a controversial classified memo about the FBI's Russia investigation when two House conservatives brought it to his attention in a January 18th phone call. The conversation piqued Trump's interest. Then the Washington Post report goes on saying, quote, "Over the next two weeks according to interviews with eight senior administration officials and other advisers to the president he tuned into cable television segments about the memo, he talked to friends and advisers about it. And before he even read it, Trump became absolutely convinced of one thing, the memo needed to come out." Josh Dawsey is one of the Post reporters sharing the byline on this breaking story tonight. He joins us now by phone. So, Josh, talk to us about the president's decision making process when it came to this memo.
[Josh Dawsey, Reporter, Washington Post:] Right, so this whole [Inaudible] Anderson, at first, the president was told by conservative lawmakers there is an intriguing memo that alleges abuses at the FBI that can help you. The president, as you said, was vaguely aware of it. As conservative lawmakers is often his inner circle talked to him advising him on the memo. He became convinced that it could be a puzzle in the Russia investigation that could show wrongdoing by Rod Rosenstein, into deputy attorney general overseeing special counsel Bob Mueller's probe and he wanted the memo out, the four-page classified memo. Even as his FBI Director, Chris Wray, as other DOJ officials, as intelligence officials showed some consternation about this, said maybe we should do some redactions, maybe we should not release this at all. In fact, the FBI said we had great concerns with it. The president became increasingly convinced it should be released and this week even until he did not see the memo, our reporting shows he saw it for the first time yesterday afternoon, Wednesday afternoon. The president by all accounts had heard it would be in his best interest to release it and was resolute and determined to do that.
[Cooper:] So the president was watching a lot of television, assume Fox News played a decent sized role in all this.
[Dawsey:] It did. Anderson, we in our story tonight reported that one segment that particularly intrigued the president was actually on CNN. As the president was going to Davos last week, he was watching the segment with Trey Gowdy, the South Carolina conservative republican, who was calling for memo to be released. That particularly invigorated him and, you know, drove him to tell his advisers, hey, all of these guys, eventually you're saying it should be out there, it should be out there. So it's some Fox News, some CNN. And there are a number of people around him on the outside, even John Kelly, his chief of staff, had pushed back against DOJ officials who say it should be released. It's a mix of TV and his inner circle and from the president, you know, I withstood eight, nine months of damaging stories about me and this Russia investigation, as he has professed time and time again, he thinks it's a witch hunt and a hoax. And here's information that can actually benefit me and I want to release it as soon as possible.
[Cooper:] Did John Kelly where was he in all this in terms of what he felt the impact of this memo would be?
[Dawsey:] So our reporting indicates that on Monday, Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who's overseeing the Mueller probe and Christopher Wray, FBI director, came to the White House to express concerns about the memo. And we saw John Kelly, we don't think you should release it. John Kelly told them in return, the president didn't plan to release it and we plan to release it. John Kelly has frequently talked to the president about it including yesterday afternoon bringing the president the memo, reviewing it with him and telling the president we do not think there are actual national security concerns that should prohibit its release. John Kelly has been based on all of our reporting, Anderson, pretty simpatico with the president, in saying that the memo should be out there and that he supports a quick release of it.
[Cooper:] Did John Kelly, I think I read in your article that John Kelly perhaps didn't think it would be as big a bombshell as some republicans were saying. Is that correct?
[Dawsey:] Right. That's kind of a concern that many in the White House share. I think even some of the conservative lawmakers, there's been such a buildup on this for the past week, week and half, where there's been a steady drum beat that's increased day in and day out that this memo is going to have bombshell accusations that's really going to change the trajectory of the investigation. I think some folks close to the president are saying, you know, the revelations are not that severe. You know, what was really remarkable to us, Anderson, is that for two weeks, more than 200 republicans on the Hill have seen this memo. The intelligence community has. The DOJ had. The president had not seen it until yesterday but still wanted it released. We heard him on the hot mic on Monday night, the state of the union, saying 100 percent we're going to release it. So the sense is among many of the folks who talk to the president, who he trusts, were telling him this is in your benefit and even having not seen the text, he wanted it out.
[Cooper:] So for all the talk of by Paul Ryan and others on Capitol Hill, republicans, saying this is not going to this is not an attempt to impede the Mueller investigation, or is not going to have any impact on the Mueller investigation, or it's not an attempt to delegitimize the investigation. The president, according to your reporting, I know according to CNN's earlier reporting as well, clearly thinks this will have that impact.
[Dawsey:] We reported this, others have as well. But he shard to DOJ. He obviously fired Jim Comey, he's tried on several occasions to oust Jeff Sessions as attorney general. Even seeking his resignation letter. He has berated Andrew McCabe, another senior FBI official who recently left, for his wife's political donations. He's frequently mocked and chastised Rod Rosenstein. The president, one of his greatest frustrations in office is then that DOJ is going beyond his control and this investigation is beyond his control. And what our reporting indicates, Anderson, is that he sees this to expose what he sees as overreaches and things that he believes are unethical at the Justice Department. And by highlighting this memo, it gives him some ammunition, some fodder to really go after his critics who have led this investigation. I don't want to say his critics but the officials who have led and oversaw this investigation.
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Dawsey:] The president sees this memo as a repudiation of them.
[Cooper:] Josh Dawsey from the Washington Post. Again, the story just breaking just a short time ago. Thanks very much, Josh. More on the president's expectations. CNN's Jeff Zeleny joins us now from the White House. You got reporting what the president has been telling friends about this memo and the impacts he hope it has.
[Jeff Zeleny, Senior White House Correspondent, Cnn:] Indeed, Anderson. The president we're told in recent days has been telling friends and associates he's speaking with on the phone after the state of the union address and since then that he believes the release of this report will be a vindication of sorts and will also discredit the Russia investigation largely because he believes it will expose what he sees as a prejudice deep within the top ranks of the FBI. Now, this in some respects is the culmination of a months of disgruntlement really and the president believes he's been treated unfairly by the FBI. Of course, it's one of the things that led to the firing of James Comey last May. The appointment of the new FBI Director, Christopher Wray who's been on the job six months exactly today. Now he finds himself locked in this confrontation with the president. The FBI said they have grave concerns about the release of this memo. The officials here said the president listened to those, but, again, never wavered in releasing that memo. We saw him say in an unvarnished way after the state of the union, 100 percent, I plan to release it. He didn't read it until the next day. On Wednesday, we're told. So, Anderson, there was never a question here if it was going to be released, the only question was when, and now it appears it's tomorrow.
[Cooper:] Fascinating. Jeff Zeleny, I appreciate that. With us now, a democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler, ranking member of the House judiciary committee. Congressman, I'm wondering what you make of this. The idea that the president was talking about releasing it saying 100 percent we're going to release it without having even read it.
[Jerrold Nadler,  United States Representative:] Well, he obviously expected that this would in some way discredit the investigation. This is the latest step in a concerted campaign by the president to disable, discredit and attack the Russia investigation.
[Cooper:] You have no doubt that's what it's about.
[Nadler:] It's clearly about that. And the real significance one of the real significance of this is that the republicans in Congress have now crossed the Rubicon. Until now we would criticized them for standing idly by and doing nothing while the president trashed the FBI and the Department of Justice and the other agencies we depend on to protect us and to protect our security and did everything he could to sabotage an investigation of the Russian interference in our election. Now you have to say that they're actively complicit, they're accomplices in this.
[Cooper:] What I don't understand about what the republicans have been saying, I mean, Monday we had a member of the House intelligence committee, a republican on, and he said essentially what Paul Ryan later on said, which was, look, Chris Wray looked at this memo, didn't have any changes to it, didn't raise factual objections to it implying that the FBI essentially had a chance to look it over which is clearly not the case.
[Nadler:] Clearly not the case and stated not to be the case. The FBI objected Wray objected. Now I read the secret documents underneath the...
[Cooper:] You read the underlying documents.
[Nadler:] I read the underlying documents. I've read the memo.
[Cooper:] Which Nunes apparently has not.
[Nadler:] Which Nunes apparently has not. I said last week I think it was that the memo based on the documents that I read on which this is supposedly based is profoundly misleading. Now...
[Cooper:] Misleading because I mean, the FBI is saying it's misleading because it ignores certain facts.
[Nadler:] I can't get into details on this. It's profoundly misleading based on the document based on the underlying documents. Now, Wray comes out, the head of the FBI, and says that this I is that releasing of this would compromise classified information, which it would, although I'm not the judge of that. The FBI is the judge of that. This would compromise classified information. He asked for the opportunity for the FBI to vet that for that purpose and was denied that. And it's not surprising that the head of the FBI would be concerned with compromising classified information. What was shocking was that he was willing to go further and as the head of the FBI say that it is misleading for...
[Cooper:] Whatever is that.
[Nadler:] ... lack of context, but that it's misleading. He's seen the underlying documents. For the FBI to say not only that it's compromising classified information, but it's misleading, is really surprising. I'd point out also that the republicans all criticized, said she should be locked up, Hillary Clinton, for being allegedly careless in handling classified information through e-mails. And here they are deliberately releasing classified information that the FBI says is would compromise our security.
[Cooper:] You know, I talked to Chairman Goodlatte earlier from the judiciary committee who said that this is the result, this memo is a result of a lengthy investigation by the republicans, by that committee. But when I talked to Congressman Hines, a democrat, he said there really has been no investigation. There have been no witnesses called, there been no, nobody from the FBI called in and confronted about this.
[Nadler:] Right. Yes. I think what Nunes, you said Chairman Nunes, right?
[Cooper:] No, I was talking to Chairman Goodlatte from the judiciary committee.
[Nadler:] Well, clearly I'm the ranking democrat in judiciary.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Nadler:] We've had no hearings, we had no investigation. None on this. There was some there was one witness or two witnesses came in and testified in a confidential setting, not classified confidential, on things tangential to this. But we never really we never went into any of this stuff.
[Cooper:] I want to bring in the rest of our panelists. I know Gloria have some questions.
[Gloria Borger, Chief Political Analyst, Cnn:] Yes. Congressman, is it possible that the FBI did not conduct a totally by-the-books operation?
[Nadler:] Based on, well, I think they conducted a totally by-the-books operation and the burden of proof is on anyone to say they haven't. And if there's no evidence of that at all.
[Borger:] You've seen the documents.
[Nadler:] I have.
[Borger:] So why do you think Devin Nunes is doing this?
[Nadler:] Because he's willing to lie in order to obstruct the investigation. This is a very high-stakes game. We had an intervention in our election by the Russians, we had apparently collusion by people clearly collusion by some people in the Trump campaign with that. Starting with the president's son and Manafort, going to a meeting for the purpose of getting negative information on Hillary from the Russians. That was why they went to the meeting. We know that the e-mails that are public. So there was that. It's got to be investigated to make sure to find out exactly what happened to make sure this doesn't happen again. And we also know all of our intelligence agencies are telling us the Russians will do it again to our next election. They will sabotage our next elections. We have to protect ourselves. And we know from Sessions, we're doing nothing to protect ours ourselves. And we can't do anything to protect ourselves because the president won't admit the possibility that this is happening.
[Cooper:] David?
[David Axelrod, Senior Political Commentator, Cnn:] Congressman, based on I know you can't disclose what's in the memo that you read, but base on your reading of it could you see it as a way to set up a pretext for removing Mr. Rosenstein? Does it appear to you to be constructed in that way?
[Nadler:] It could be. It could be use that's all I can say.
[Axelrod:] And do you anticipate bringing we now know the FBI director gave his opinion on this, this reporting in the Post says the DNI Dan Coates was opposed to this. The Justice Department has been public about their concerns. Do you anticipate represent the FBI director and others coming before your committee to are you going to ask for that?
[Nadler:] We already asked for it. We asked specifically in a committee hearing the other day, on I think Tuesday, that it was Tuesday. We asked that the committee go into executive session to discuss inviting the FBI director in front of us. We asked that in letters to the chairman. The letters have been denied. The request through executive session has voted down on a party-line vote. I sent the letter today to Chairman Goodlatte asking that the FBI director be invited to the committee on a formal or informal basis, and I awaited response but based on the responses so far, it's going to be stonewalling.
[Cooper:] Kirsten?
[Kirsten Powers, Political Analyst, Cnn:] I just think it's an incredible thing what you just said, Devin Nunes is essentially lying for the president, and, but it's not just him. It's all these other members of Congress as well.
[Nadler:] That's why I said that the republicans have crossed the Rubicon and become accomplices and complicit in this huge cover-u cover-up.
[Powers:] So you're saying, because they basically led everyone to believe there's going to be something in this memo that's going to show that there's some sort of bias in the FBI and you're saying there's just absolutely nothing in the underlying documents that would suggest that there...
[Nadler:] I'm saying the underlying documents, you will see that I'm not saying there's nothing in the underlying documents. I'm saying if you read the underlying documents, you would see that is profoundly misleading.
[Borger:] If you would, like, describe without giving us particulars about what you saw, would you say it's a bombshell, would you say the public would react in a with outrage? I mean, how would you...
[Nadler:] I think, my own personal opinion, is that people when they see this memo, a lot of people are going to react by saying, that's what it is?
[Cooper:] Gloria, you have some new reporting about the lead-up to this, the drumbeat.
[Borger:] Right. I mean, there are people I'm told who are familiar with this process that are worried about just exactly what you're saying which is that this could be overhyped and that that's probably why the White House will send it back to Congress and let Congress release it. That the process has been so messy that it may not be as clear-cut as the people who originally talked to the president about it would have liked.
[Cooper:] Congressman, do you believe that Devin Nunes or his staffers have had contact with the White House or direction from the White House? Because...
[Nadler:] I don't I don't know, but I certainly suspect it.
[Cooper:] He was asked this question pointblank, he said he did not have contact, a member of his committee asked him, but when asked of staffers, he didn't answer the question.
[Nadler:] And, therefore, I suspect that they certainly did. Not only because of that, but because I think it's very evident that they're working hand in glove. But I can't prove that.
[Cooper:] Congressman Nadler, I appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Everyone else, we got to pick this up after a quick break. Two former federal prosecutors join us as well. And later, House Speaker Ryan who has the power to stop the memo coming out but is not. We'll look closer how he got on board with it and why even some republicans are questioning the speaker's decision. With the Nunes memo expected out tomorrow, and Washington already pretty hyped up about it. Fired FBI Director James Comey is weighing in, tweeting quote, "All should appreciate the FBI speaking up. I wish more of our leaders would. Take heart. American history shows that in the long run weasels and liars never hold the field so long as good people stand up. Not a lot of schools or streets named for Joe McCarthy." Back now with the panel. Joining us is former RNC chief of staff, Mike Shields. Also, former New Jersey attorney general and former federal prosecutor Anne Milgram. And Michael Zeldin, former special assistant to Robert Mueller at the Justice Department, as well as Kirsten Powers and David Axelrod and Gloria Borger. Michael Zeldin, you see the tweet there from James Comey on the eve of what we believe to be the release of this. Does it feel to you like a spurious attack on the FBI?
[Michael Zeldin, Legal Analyst, Cnn:] The Nunes...
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Zeldin:] ... memo is a spurious attack, a politically motivated spurious attack on the FBI that is unnecessary for the redress that he says needs to be happening.
[Cooper:] What the republicans are saying is, look, this is about educating the American people, the American people need to know what's going onn at the highest levels of the
[Fbi. Zeldin:] Right. So there are two ways to do that, you can invite the inspector general to investigate those improprieties or you can hold oversight hearings and, in fact, FBI Director Wray asked to brief the full committee in closed-door session to answer any and all questions with respect to their concerns about the issuance of this FISA warrant that they're so worried about and they declined that opportunity. So there are opportunities here to gather the information. These memoranda, because the underlying classified information that gave rise to them will never be distributed. Do not provide that education that you hope for.
[Cooper:] Mike, why not do what Michael Zeldin was...
[Mike Shields, Political Commentator, Cnn:] You know, it's interesting to me about the FISA law, so the FISA law was something that Devin Nunes actually worked on and at the time that it came up, a lot of democrats opposed it, right? It was something that became a partisan fight about FISA. And republicans said, look, when there's abuses of FISA, we need don't worry, we're going to call it out. So Devin Nunes has been working to call out abuses of the FISA law. There have been other examples where they've tried to bring DOJ and FBI witnesses up and Schiff has fought it. He doesn't want this to happen. And so the partisan nature of this committee, I think we have to talk about how partisan...
[Cooper:] No, I get that, but to Mike right.
[Shields:] Adam Schiff is being...
[Cooper:] To Michael's point about the inspector general as being one avenue to address this or have open hearings and call in...
[Shields:] Yes, look, I understand that. When you have a broken committee that is as leaky and as a clown show that I would call it that Adam Schiff is running, they took a vote in the committee. By the way, a vote did happen amongst elected members of Congress to do this and send it to the White House. There's a process that is legal that is going through that is the way to do this if you want to do it. And as we talked about before, that happened with the torture memo on the Senate side with democrats when they were in charge. They took a vote and said we're putting it out. And so, look, in the end there will be a big debate about this. The left is going to look at it one way, the right is going to look at it another way. There will be a memo from the democrats and there will be a big public debate about it.
[Zeldin:] It doesn't help our national interest to have that debate. Because if you're a foreign intelligence officer in the great in Great Britain or in France or Australia or any place else and you think, well, I'm thinking about sharing information, but wait a second, maybe I shouldn't be sharing that information because this could be the end result of it. It gets put into a political I can't say that word, political process, and, therefore, we're not going to participate with you. There are very severe consequences...
[Cooper:] Anne, how concerned are you about the memo's release?
[Anne Milgram, Former New Jersey Attorney General:] I'm unbelievably concerned about it. And I think there's sort of two levels to think about. First, we are talking about classified information, and exactly as was just said, how we gather that information which we do not release publicly, first of all. The second piece is that I think it's really important to remember that the memo is not facts. It's one person version of facts. And if we go back to why and how FISA warrants are issued, this is when we come to Rosenstein, this is probably the third approval of a FISA warrant, where to get through this process you have to go through extraordinary levels of showing evidence, about someone, about having probable cause that here Carter Page was a part of was an accessory to the Russian government. And so, we're really we're starting with this conversation about the memo, but to me, it is critically important that we have the conversation about what would have been truly outrageous here, in my view, as a former prosecutor, is if we didn't actually do a FISA warrant on someone who is known to have been a target of the Russians, who wanted him to become a spy, who continually had business dealings, who was constantly in Russia. He was a senior member of a campaign who'd already provided public information but had provided information to the Russians.
[Borger:] And you know, Carter Page was kind of had a pre-existing condition here, Carter Page had been surveilled before this renewal of this.
[Milgram:] Yes. And warned by the FBI that he was a target.
[Borger:] And warned by the FBI. So the renewal of this surveillance which is what the FISA court does, the renewal of this was not was not something that was so extraordinary that they just initiated it. I mean, this is somebody they had been looking at and had reason to believe they should continue to look at.
[Milgram:] What's also really important about the renewal is you can't get a renewal based on the original evidence. The only way to get a renewal is to show that during that 90-day period, there has been evidence that it is, in fact, true that someone is basically essentially turned or being turned by another by a foreign government.
[Cooper:] But that seems, Kirsten, to be part of the allegation here is that the evidence I mean, again, I haven't seen this memo nor the underlying intelligence. But the reports that have come out is that questions about the use of the so-called Steele dossier without a description of the origins of the Steele dossier given to the judges.
[Powers:] Yes. I mean, we're really hamstrung because we don't actually know what's going to be in it. And we're getting reports I've talked to people who have talked to people in Nunes' office, they say it's going to show some broad pattern that goes way beyond the things that we're talking about. So, you know, I asked Congressman Nadler about that, like is there any possibility that there is some sort of bias? He didn't dismiss the idea that there might be some bias over there. The problem is, is you know, you're sort of dismissing it like, well, it's such a clown show, but there's nothing really stopping the republicans, forget the democrat, the republicans from actually letting, for example, the Department of Justice despond to the accusations. That would be the basic part of an investigation, right?
[Axelrod:] Well, I mean, this is the thing that kind of undercuts the this is just a partisan scrum argument. When you have the president's own appointee as director of the FBI, when you have his Justice Department and when you have his director of national intelligence all urging the president not to release this memo, then it's more than a partisan scrum. It's a national security concern.
[Shields:] Right, but that's why you would think democrats would want more oversight and, yet, Schiff tries to stop oversight of FISA abuses over and over again on that committee for partisan reasons. That's a fact.
[Zeldin:] That's beside the point of what we're talking about. We're talking about whether or not in the application, in the renewal of a FISA warrant on a specific individual there was an abuse of process. That's what this is about. And what they're concern is...
[Shields:] We think.
[Zeldin:] Well, that's what Nunes has said publicly. What we're really faced with is the reality that they don't like the Steele dossier and they want to try to discredit it because that has implications for the Mueller investigation. The one point that we need to understand about the FISA court is that they don't take raw intelligence as the basis for a finding of probable cause, so the Steele dossier, irrespective of who paid for it, was a raw intelligence document. And these prosecutors are going to scrub it, corroborate it, and make it so that probable cause can support it. And if you look at the testimony in the 702 renewal, you'll see that the majority of the House subcommittee on intelligence said these are like the best of the best of the judges appointed by the chief justice of the United States for particularly reviewing this type of probable cause. You don't get a chance to...
[Cooper:] Yes. We got to take a quick break. We're going to have more with the panel ahead. Up next, what Ambassador James Woolsey has to say about the intelligence community concerns over this memo as a former CIA director and a former senior Trump adviser.
[Anderson Cooper, Host, Cnn:] It looks like the concerns of the intelligence community including the president's own choice for FBI director probably won't be enough to keep the Nunes memo from seeing the light of day. A senior administration official says the White House will tell Congress, quote, "probably tomorrow," when, quote, "that the president is OK with it." Joining me now is former CIA Director James Woolsey. Director Woolsey was a senior Trump adviser. So, Director, do you believe the White House should sign off on releasing the memo despite what the FBI says of grave concerns.
[James Woolsey, Former Director Of Central Intelligence Agency:] It depends entirely on sources and methods. That's what's at risk when something is disclosed in intelligence. That you lose an agent, somebody gets killed, or you lose a telecommunications link that you penetrated that nobody knows about. On the other hand, you have the public's right to now, and this is an important public issue. So, those two tendencies or judgments conflict. And you got to decide how to handle the conflict. I think I haven't heard anything so far about a really careful review of any damage to maintaining sources and methods.
[Cooper:] It's interesting, though, the...
[Woolsey:] Being undertaken. Go ahead.
[Cooper:] It's interesting, though, the FBI, it doesn't seem it's just about sources and methods, that's something that theoretically could be redacted. The FBI put out this extraordinary statement saying that it's the omissions of facts that basically create a misleading picture. If that is, in fact, true, and you know, to your point, the public deserves the right to be educated about what's going on, if it is, in fact, a misleading picture, and the democratic response is not being released at the same time, is that appropriate?
[Woolsey:] Well, it's entirely appropriate for them to express their views. It's a free country, but this decision is the president's. He's the ultimate classification authority. And I think that if he decided for whatever reason, that if it should or should not be disclosed, he's within his rights.
[Cooper:] So, clearly he's within his rights under the law. But just as a matter of principle, if the president's making that decision, which according to our reporting and first of all from the Washington Post the president decides to release this before he even read about it, just as soon after her heard the existence of the memo, watched a lot on cable television. But if the president told friends and advisers as we've been reporting that he believes it will have an impact on the Mueller investigation, that it will perhaps weaken confidence in it, or raise questions or doubt about it, is that does that does that raise any concerns with you? It's certainly legal for him to do it for whatever reason, but is that a proper reason?
[Woolsey:] He can have whatever reason he wants as long as he's not breaking the law and as long as, I think, the judgment serves a real purpose, either to improve thoroughness with which somebody could understand what's going on or to hide something because disclosure would damage sources and methods. The president can have any reason he wants. This is his turf.
[Cooper:] But if it misleads the public, you say, you know, it's educating the public, if it's actually misleading the public, or is that is that fine?
[Woolsey:] I don't see how he gets that authority taken away from him, and misleading, you've got to, I think, look at the whole document. And somebody who does this all the time looking at questions about sources and methods decides whether or not the intelligence capability of the country will be damaged, or on the other hand, not be damaged. And that to me, is the only major issue. The rest of this is kind of down in the grass.
[Cooper:] Does it does it concern you at all that the person behind this memo is House intelligence committee Chairman Devin Nunes? This is the man who after it was revealed that he orchestrated basically what seemed to be a stunt with the White House back in March regarding classified information had to recuse himself from his own Russia investigation until late last year. Do you have concerns about where this is stemming from?
[Woolsey:] This is not where the judgment comes in. If his colleagues don't agree with Mr. Nunes, they could try, I suppose, to vote to replace him as chairman. There are measures that can be taken in the Congress if a member is not behaving properly. They're complicated and they're not easy, but I don't think you depart from them because somebody has said they are troubled. There has to, I think, be some type of serious problem with respect to sources and methods. Before you come in, try to come in from the outside and it's not clear where that would be from.
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Woolsey:] And say, OK, you don't get to be chairman anymore or whatever.
[Cooper:] Director Woolsey, I appreciate your time. Thank you. Coming up, we're going to expand on this with the panel as well as the breaking news from the Washington Post about the president's eagerness to put the memo out. We'll be right back. Just to quickly refresh you on the breaking news, the Washington Post reporting the president was eager after watching cable news and talking to conservative lawmakers to make the Nunes memo public even before he's actually read is. Some of the reporting tracking [Ph] with our Gloria Borger who's bringing us today. Back now with the panel. Michael Zeldin, you were listening to former CIA Director Woolsey who was basically saying unless this is critical unless this is revealing sources and methods, there's nothing sounded like he was basically saying there's nothing, no reason the president shouldn't be able to release this.
[Michael Zeldin, Legal Analyst, Cnn:] Right. Which I found to be stunning for an intelligence officer because this is that which compromises the entire national security apparatus that we have come to rely upon. Countries rely on our integrity. Remember what happens when the president shared Israeli intelligence on ISIS with the Russians, what a big dustup that was, and whether or not they would continue to share because of that mistake. This is not dissimilar to that. We are going to potentially share opinions about how intelligence was gathered in a FISA application against an American who is accused of associating with people against our interest. It's just not acceptable to say it's in his constitutional right to do so and if sources and methods aren't revealed, let's have at it. It's just not acceptable.
[Gloria Borger, Chief Political Analyst, Cnn:] But let's say, as Mike points out, let's say that there needs to be some revisions in how FISA the FISA court works and how the whole process is managed. I mean, let's just...
[Zeldin:] Or that there are abuses.
[Borger:] Or there are abuses. Let's just stipulate that. That doesn't erase the fact that the president, himself, is telling friends that this is going to help me and that that's his reason for doing it because it's going to hamstring or delegitimize or destabilize the Mueller investigation. And he has a way to go after Mueller without going after Mueller directly because he's going he's going after the investigators who work for Mueller, the investigation and he doesn't have to stick his finger in the eye of Bob Mueller, personally. So from the president's point of view, it's more personal than it is about anything else.
[David Axelrod, Senior Political Commentator, Cnn:] I was interested in what Congressman Nadler had to say about the memo which he's read, and that it might be to make the case that Rosenstein should be removed because one way to limit this investigation would be to remove him and put someone else in charge of that investigation.
[Cooper:] For those who don't know, he's the number-two man at the Department of Justice.
[Mike Shields, Political Commentator, Cnn:] Right. But now we're speculating that the president is going to fire people based on...
[Axelrod:] Who can imagine him doing something like that?
[Shields:] Well, but my point is right. And so why don't we bring this up as a topic and make a partisan hit out of the fact, you know, the memo we haven't seen yet, let's talk about the things the president might do with that memo. I mean, look, the president is clearly frustrated there are things he thought went on in the Hillary Clinton campaign that were not investigated. And by the way, a lot of people on Capitol Hill are frustrated with that, too. And so, you know, shocking that we've gotten to a place now where this is turned into such a partisan football that we do speculation that we haven't had any evidence of collusion, and now people are saying it's not about collusion...
[Axelrod:] I don't understand what the Hillary Clinton but I don't understand, Michael, the Hillary Clinton matter has to do with this issue. That's not what this memo is about.
[Shields:] No, what I'm saying is...
[Axelrod:] That's what I'm talking about.
[Shields:] Right.
[Axelrod:] I'm not talking about anything else.
[Shields:] I know. But you're making an assumption and I'm trying to challenge that assumption.
[Kirsten Powers, Political Analyst, Cnn:] But I also think that there is, you know, at least from the people I've talked to, they believe that this partisan bias isn't just against Trump. That it's actually in favor of Hillary Clinton. You know, so that's a broader thing. Look, I have just a slightly different view on it. I actually don't think there's any problem with criticizing the FBI or the DOJ. I don't think they're above reproach. They have done bad things. And they are people. And people do bad things. It is entirely possible that there's partisanship there. We don't know that there is. We don't know that there isn't. The problem is this investigation that we had Congressman Goodlatte explaining to you, I mean, it's just, it's laughable.
[Cooper:] There wasn't an investigation.
[Powers:] And the Washington Post report that we're referencing says the president first became aware of it January 18th. It's February 1st. Like, how not enough time has passed to have a real investigation.
[Axelrod:] And, as has been mentioned, there are forums including the committees, themselves, in which the FBI director could be brought in and others could be brought in, and...
[Cooper:] Right, in fact, I mean, the FBI, I mean, Chris Wray wanted people from the FBI to appear before the House intelligence committee and the republicans on that committee said no.
[Anne Milgram, Former New Jersey Attorney General:] Yes, very much so. I mean, he's asked for the opportunity, and, in fact, he's made a statement which is an extraordinary thing for the director of the FBI. The head of the national security division has made a statement saying there have been no abuses. Also an extraordinary thing. I think it's important when we watch Director Woolsey and we think about this that, I agree it's legal that the president can declassify this. There's no question that it's lawful. But one of the things I think is particularly troubling here, is that we're talking about a FISA warrant, someone who works for the president as part of the campaign and the president as the subject of a criminal investigation that's ongoing that relates to this. And he's personally very invested in the outcome of all of those things. And so it does feel to me as, you know, in addition to compromising national security and intelligence, it also does strike me as, you know, we're not the way the director described it made it seem like it was sort of the president was an objective arbitrator in this and really it's not. He's judge and jury. And he's personally invested in the outcome of this. I think...
[Zeldin:] So you add the two points of, one, the Devin Nunes' staff seems to have been coordinating with the White House on the drafting of the memorandum, and to Ggloria's point, the president has been, to our reporting, telling friends that one of the by-products of the release of this is going to be that it provides a basis to tarnish the Mueller investigation. So, to exactly your point, he doesn't come into this with clean hands. It's a personal decision over a national security interest which is what I found so problematic about Woolsey, he didn't say, you know what, the president in this case is putting personal interest above national security interests and as much as I love the president, I just can't as a career intelligence officer accept that. That's what he should have said.
[Cooper:] We got to take a quick break. Coming up, why the White House why the House Speaker Paul Ryan is going along with the release of the memo chorus. What he said today. And our panel weighs in. As we've been reporting House Speaker Paul Ryan is fully onboard with releasing the Nunes memo high pressure. Here is what he said at the republican retreat in West Virginia today.
[Paul Ryan, United States Speaker Of The House:] This memo is not indictment of the FBI, of the Department of Justice, it does not impugn the Mueller investigation or the deputy attorney general. What it is, is the Congress' legitimate function of oversight to make sure that the FISA process is being used correctly and that if it wasn't being used correctly that needs to come to light and people need to be held accountable so that we do not have problems again. Because this does affect our civil liberties.
[Cooper:] Back with the panel. Mike, if this is the way oversight is supposed to be done and executed, how come this is so extraordinarily rare that the only time that I mean, anybody in the last couple of hours I've been asking can think of is when democrats released against over the objection of republicans, the so-called torture memos.
[Shields:] Yes. I think two reasons. First of all, well we don't know. I think we need to see the memo before we can start answering the questions. Hopefully the memo, the material in the memo will explain some of the reasons why it was done this way. And if that can't be satisfied then you better believe that the people released it are going to be criticized by everybody for there not being enough material for this other than being released for what's being sort of sort of a theorized here.
[Cooper:] Because I mean, oversight has been done for decades by committees legitimate oversight and it's done in a much different process.
[Shields:] Right but this one goes through what is the intelligence committee, which has become unfortunately, it used that the intelligence committee was actually one of the most bipartisan committee because it's so much about national security and now it's turned into a completely partisan committee where there is this fighting. And it was partisan when that that was one of the shocking things about that torture memo where the democrats put theirs out and the republicans put theirs out. Because that's one of the first times we've seen how partisan the intelligence committee could be. It really hadn't happened that way before.
[Axelrod:] Mike, why didn't they why didn't the republican chairman of the House intelligence committee why was he not willing to share the memo with the republican chairman of the Senate intelligence committee?
[Shields:] You and I neither one of us knows the answer. What I'm trying to tell you...
[Axelrod:] I know but it doesn't seem like a partisan dispute.
[Shields:] Sure. What I'm trying to tell you is that we are now in a zone where there are leaks, where this being used as a partisan football where democrats seem to want to get a political advantage over republicans. So perhaps the chairman said, you know what, this is something we need to get out there before I start handing out to a dozen people where they just turn it into something that it's not. We'll find out when the memo I don't know...
[Axelrod:] So you think Senator McCrory a guy from his own party would do that? I can't believe it.
[Shields:] Or the staffs or the democrat staffs on the committee? Look, I don't know the answer to that.
[Borger:] And remember the president had those confusing tweets. Because he was against it before he was for it. That morning. And it sent Congress sort of concurring about it and maybe this is what was on his mind when he was sort of confusing what it was. And so if you want to have the debate on FISA and this particular section have the debate.
[Cooper:] But he only learned about it from the Washington Post. The 18th. I mean, the time now all just blends together.
[Borger:] Right.
[Cooper:] I can't remember when the
[Fisa. Borger:] I can't either. But I think this may have been a part of it because he has felt maligned.
[Shields:] Yes. And look the issue of FISA like I said before. Republicans are for fight, I left hearing the defense of the FISA legislation. We had to fight democrats to get it done, and so it's one of the interesting changes in this. Suddenly now suddenly now journalists and democrats are not for sharing information. And we're talking we're saying things like protecting sources. Those are the sort of things republicans say when we don't want intelligence to be leaked through the New York Times and other publication that might damage national security. Democrats are so partisan about it that they switched positions purely because they try to attack the president of the United States on this which makes republicans do think...
[Cooper:] But it does but it does seem though everybody has switched. I mean, like the republicans this is not the Republican Party...
[Shields:] Yes, I don't disagree with that. I don't disagree with that. So that's why I start calling things a circus. Because that becomes the answer to a lot of weird questions we had.
[Cooper:] January 11th by the way the president's tweet about the FISA thing. It was before that.
[Borger:] Yes. It might be on his mind.
[Axelrod:] No, I think the circus thing, I think it's an important thing to remember. Because I do think that part of the strategy of the White House is to try and turn the entire discussion into a partisan circus. So, if there is a bad result from the special counselor or if he wants to fight against a request the request to sit down with the special counsel.
[Borger:] Exactly.
[Axelrod:] He can say I'm not doing this because it's part of a partisan circus.
[Shields:] And their amateur in this White House compared the Clinton White House was going after Ken Starr with many of the members of the Congress that are democrats were still in congress. So they've learned the play book...
[Borger:] Well, but they understand from Ken Starr that a special counsel has to have public opinion with him. And what they're trying to do is destabilize the special counsel so he doesn't have public opinion with him. I mean, Bob Mueller is a hard guy to attack because he is so silent and so well respected. So you attack everything else. And you kind of muddy the waters that way. They want to you know, they when he finally issues whatever he issues or goes and asks Donald Trump to sit down with him or subpoenas him or what they want to raise all these all these questions about Mueller without without raising questions about the man himself.
[Zeldin:] So quickly back to one second, to Ryan's statements, he made three statements. He said this is about oversight. And it's not. I think we fairly discussed that this is not an oversight process. He said this is not an attack on the FBI. The director of the FBI says it is. He says this is not about attacking Mueller. But the president says it is. So it's just not acceptable to anyone who disagree with that point of view to let it be out there. It's a problem.
[Cooper:] We got to we got to take a quick break. Again, more news ahead. We'll be right back. Thank you that's it. This is it for us. That's it for us. Thanks for watching 360. Jim Sciutto with Pam Brown is up next with a CNN special report. More news ahead.

[Newton:] The U.S. Senate health care bill could be in trouble. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says the plan would leave 22 million more people uninsured by 2026 than under Obamacare. Now, right now, it appears there are not enough votes to even begin Senate debate on this bill this week, and that's a problem. Scott McLean has more.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] CBO's report today makes clear that this bill is every bit as mean as the House bill.
[Scott Mclean, Cnn Correspondent:] 22 million that's how many more Americans would be without health insurance by 2026 if the proposed Senate GOP health care passes according to the Congressional Budget Office. Like the House version of the bill that passed in May, this version would end enhanced Medicaid expansion, eliminate coverage mandates and allow insurers to charge older people more. And wore premiums would be down about 20 percent over the next 10 years for the average customer, those in the individual market would be hit with dramatic increases for services. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell is scrambling to shore up votes for the bill, but these new numbers may not help.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] Obviously it's not good news and so it'll have to be a factor. But the important factor is my state is a Medicare expansion state and so we have a lot of issues right now. The governor's initial impression of this that it's not helpful to his state.
[Mclean:] Senate Republicans unveiled their version of the Obamacare last Thursday to an underwhelming response by many in their own party.
[Sen. Dean Heller , Nevada:] This bill, this bill is currently in front of the United States Senate is not the answer. It's simply not the answer. And I'm announcing today that in this form I will not support it.
[Mclean:] Only two Republican senators can vote against the bill in order for it to still pass and as of Monday afternoon, at least five are opposing it. In Washington I'm Scott McLean.
[Newton:] Joining me now, political analyst Michael Genovese. He is also the president of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University. Thanks so much for joining us. I mean we kind of have to take a deep breath on a news day like today. And there was so much in the news that was both political but also substantive in a policy sense. If we start first with health care. It looks like that, as everyone said, even after seven years, the Republicans are saying, not yet. We need more time.
[Michael Genovese, Global Policy Institute:] Well, you know, this was a big test for Donald Trump. It was the signature issue of the Republicans going into the campaign. They voted against Obamacare 50 some odd times while Obama was president. And if they can't get this done they're in trouble. So for the President, the problem is he doesn't have enough leverage. He ran behind almost every member of the House and Senate in their own districts. And so he can't go to them and say, you need me to get re- elected. They can go to him and say, no, we pulled you in. And so the leverage that most presidents have and promise that if you support me I can bring votes in Obama had a little bit of it, Trump has very little of it. And so how does he bargain? How does he negotiate? What does he offer? He doesn't have a lot to offer right now.
[Newton:] Not only does he not have a lot to offer but he is running against what is a CBO, the budget office that is saying, look this is the way the numbers add up. I want to go to a tweet that he said, "Fact: when Obamacare was signed CBO, Congressional Budget Office, estimated that 23 million would be covered in 2017. They were off
[Genovese:] He's nasty.
[Newton:] by 100 percent. But only 10.3 million people were covered." What is interesting and we should add that Trump's own budget director claims that that Congressional Budget Office is partisan which even conservatives come out and said what are you saying? This is an arbiter of policy. What I'm trying to get at here is t every turn, the Trump administration seems to be undermining government, period.
[Genovese:] Well, that's kind of their mode of operation. They're concerned about what they call the deep and they think the intelligence agencies are out to get them; the Democrats who probably are out to get them. But he sees enemies at every turn. And I'm not trying to say he's paranoid but he seems very suspicious. He doesn't have that sense of deep politics that someone who's been in there for 30 years has who can go back and forth and argue. When he argues, he takes it very personally. If you throw something at him, he will turn it right back and throw it at you. So whenever Trump is confronted by something, he goes on the attack which is not a very good negotiating tool.
[Newton:] Ok. But Michael we keep saying it's not a good negotiating tool. Look, he's just had a really big victory in the Supreme Court. If this health bill fails, some people would say who cares. He didn't leverage a lot on it. He didn't stake a lot of his own capital on it. So in a sense, with his base and perhaps more, what he's doing is working.
[Genovese:] Well, his base is going to be with for a long time. But you can't govern with one-third of the population. And to say that, you know, well he didn't stake his presidency on it that was a big issue in the campaign. It was a big Republican issue. They have control of the House and the Senate and the White House. If they can't get this done, then they will appear to be at least to many people, inept, incapable of getting the simplest thing that they promised all along to get done.
[Newton:] And in the middle of all this we have these continued leaks, this continued investigation. I want to pick up on something that you said that was interesting. You try and use something against you try and use something against Trump, any mud that's flung at him, he picks it up and throws it right back at you. Case in point, a Trump tweet, you know, talking about in fact the fact that, you know, this whole issue of a collusion and obstruction. He's now turning it around on Barack Obama and the Democrats and saying that in fact, by not doing more with all of that Russia investigation before the election, starting in the summer of 2016 that they were the ones. He says that Obama he didn't in the tweet he says he didn't choke. He colluded or obstructed, and it did the Dems and crooked Hillary no good. There are the words colluded or obstructed the same words that the Democrats have been using against Donald Trump for so many months now. What do you think the impact of that will be? Not just on his base but if we're looking at, you know, Americans at large.
[Genovese:] Well, you know, when you were four years old in the playground someone called you a name. You say, no I'm not, you are. And that's what Donald Trump does. He needs to get past this because it keeps him in the background when he needs to be at the center of the argument. And the argument is about substantive issues. This is a nice distraction. He likes to attack President Obama and heaven knows President Obama dropped the ball on this. There's no question about that. President Obama's response was tepid and hesitant and he wasn't looking out for out for our national interest. But on the Russia thing, if you look at President Trump now, he's been in denial for most of his presidency, and instead of going after the Russian's he's become the cheerleader for Vladimir Putin. And so I think Donald Trump has a problem with there's no core to him. He'll respond to issues, go on the attack and gets easily distracted if someone throws mud, that's where he puts his attention.
[Newton:] It's interesting though in terms of what you say because at the end of the day, his supporters, his base is sticking with him. It will be really interesting to see some of those swing states as those races come up again in 2018 just kind of where voters are sitting on all that.
[Genovese:] And if the Obamacare repeal takes place. A lot of people in those states are going to suffer right. That's going to be the test to see if his base stays with him.
[Newton:] Yes. A lot on the line in the next few weeks. Michael thanks so much. We really appreciate it.
[Genovese:] Thank you.
[Newton:] Next on NEWSROOM L.A. an exclusive glimpse of the frontline in the battle against ISIS. Undercover footage from inside the Syrian city of Raqqa. You don't want to miss this. And just ahead a look at the high cost of the Philippines new war with ISIS militants on the country's home court.

[Tapper:] Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION. I'm Jake Tapper. Retired Four-Star General John Kelly was hired to bring order to President Trump's White House. Now the chief of staff is under fire for allegedly mishandling the domestic abuse allegations against White House Staff Secretary Rob Porter. The scrutiny reached such a fever pitch that, according to a source, Kelly made clear he would resign if that's what President Trump wants. Kellyanne Conway, you just heard, just told me that the president has full faith in Kelly. But a source tells CNN the president has been asking friends about other potential chief of staff replacements. Joining us now to discuss this and other issues is someone who has worked with General Kelly, the man who preceded him as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, under the Obama administration. Secretary Johnson, good to see you. Thanks for being here.
[Jeh Johnson, Former U.s. Secretary Of Homeland Security:] Thanks for having me, Jake.
[Tapper:] So, I have to ask you, you have described Chief of Staff Kelly as a friend of yours.
[Johnson:] Yes.
[Tapper:] Obviously, we all respect his service to this country, the great sacrifices he and his family have made. Reports are emerging that key figures in the West Wing were aware of the allegations about Rob Porter, including Kelly, and did nothing about them for months until they became public. You have worked with General Kelly. You said he is a man of character and integrity. Are you surprised by how Kelly has handled this situation?
[Johnson:] You're correct that John is a friend of mine. We got to know each other at the Pentagon when he was the military aide to the secretary of defense and I was the department's general counsel. When I was secretary of homeland security, he was commander of U.S. Southern Command. We have both been to Robert's grave site together at Arlington.
[Tapper:] His son who died in Afghanistan.
[Johnson:] His son. And I hope John continues to be a friend. I think my friendly advice to him is less press that may be contrary to the interest of people in the press fewer public statements. Leon Panetta once said that the chief of staff is someone who should not be the issue. And so I encourage John to hunker down and do his job, fewer public statements. Now, this issue with Porter...
[Tapper:] You think he should stay in the job, though?
[Johnson:] I think, as long as Donald Trump is president, our government is best served if John Kelly is in the job of chief of staff. That is my view. It may be a minority view among my Democratic friends, but that is my view.
[Tapper:] You were talking about Porter.
[Johnson:] Yes. This issue should have surfaced in the initial background check, in the initial security clearance process. I have been through it a number of times. And so there had to be a reckoning of this issue sooner or later, and, apparently, he was sitting there with an interim security clearance. That's not an ideal situation in national security, to have people with access to very sensitive documents and information who are operating on an interim security clearance. So, in that respect, it is quite surprising and disconcerting.
[Tapper:] So, to play devil's advocate, if you were a chief of staff or secretary of a department, and you had a very trusted, close, and efficient aide, top aide, who did an excellent job and let's, in this hypothetical, say that perhaps it is a somewhat chaotic environment and it came out in the FBI background check that he had two ex-wives, two ex-wives accusing him of domestic abuse, what would you do?
[Johnson:] Well, it's I don't know Mr. Porter, so it's hard to say. I don't know his strengths. I have heard others describe his strengths.
[Tapper:] Let's assume he is the best staff secretary in the history of staff secretaries.
[Johnson:] When you're in public office, you have to assume, sooner or later, everything is going to get out, whether it's tomorrow or the next year. And you have to balance the blowback from something like this that has not come out, that should have come out much earlier, against the strengths of the person who is in the job. And some sort of calculation was made there, and we're seeing the effects of that right now.
[Tapper:] But you wouldn't necessarily say, you need to go?
[Johnson:] An issue like this, you have to realize that it is going to be a big deal when it becomes public news. It's going to become...
[Tapper:] And it will come and it will become public news.
[Johnson:] And sooner or later, something like this always comes out. And in this particular environment, this was going to be big news. And, sometimes, you have to make the hard choice to move on and try to find somebody else.
[Tapper:] I want to ask you about the president's decision to send back the Democratic memo from the House Intelligence Committee which is rebutting the Republican Nunes memo...
[Johnson:] Right.
[Tapper:] ... alleging FISA abuses by the Justice Department and the
[Fbi. Johnson:] Right.
[Tapper:] The president President Trump OKed the Republican memo,, over the objections of the FBI and the Justice Department, which said it was misleading. He released it anyway. The Democratic memo, he has said has too many sources and methods, and he sent it back. What is your take on all of this?
[Johnson:] Well, I do think that the full story should come out. Apparently, the Democrats feel that the Nunes memo is misleading by omission in a number of respects. So, I do believe the full story should come out.
[Tapper:] Not just the Democrats. The FBI and the Justice Department think so as well.
[Johnson:] Very definitely. If taken on face value, what the president is saying is, rewrite the memo and then we will declassify it. So, there ought to be ways in which the Democrats, the House Intel Committee, can rewrite the memo without compromising sources and methods, and get the full story out about what they feel is misleading about the Nunes memo. And it should not be an issue. I hope it is not an issue.
[Tapper:] I want to turn to North Korea. The Winter Olympics began in South Korea on Friday and featured South and North Korea marching under a unified flag. Kim Jong-un's sister is attending the Games. She met with the South Korean president. She's even invited him to visit North Korea, Kim Yo-jong. The sister is the first member of the North Korean ruling family to set foot in South Korea since the Korean War. Do you give any credit to President Trump's North Korea's policy? Maybe it's working? Maybe it's driving the North Koreans to some sort of rapprochement with South Korea?
[Johnson:] I think time will tell. I don't believe that the rhetoric between the two leaders has been helpful. And if you know history, you know that great nations can stumble into armed conflict. Great nations can miscommunicate, misunderstand each other, and, in an overheated environment, stumble into armed conflict. And that is my great concern here.
[Tapper:] Do you have any concern with the fawning coverage that the North Korean the sister of Kim Jong-un is getting and the fact that maybe she is actually managing to score a propaganda coup here, not just with some people in the press in this country, but also with people around the world, including the South Koreans?
[Johnson:] Well, I find the overture from the North Koreans to South Korea to be interesting. It's an interesting dynamic in this whole issue. And you're correct. She has captured a lot of attention. Who knows? We will have to see. Again, my concern is that we not stumble into something that is not necessary.
[Tapper:] That's an eye on the bigger picture. Secretary Johnson, thanks so much for being here.
[Johnson:] Thank you.
[Tapper:] We really appreciate it. He helped lead the movement behind Trump's election victor. Now former Trump insider Steve Bannon says there is a movement quote "even more powerful than populism" that might be able to bring President Trump down. What is it? It might surprise you. That is next.

[Cabrera:] Drones are dropping drugs nice alcohol and other contraband to prison inmates. CNN's Deborah Feyerick explains how prison officials are now training to crack down on this new aerial smuggling threat.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn National Correspondent:] At prisons throughout South Carolina, trees are being cut down and cleared. More guard towers are being built. And patrols have been added to bolster security beyond the razor wire fence. It's all because of these. Drones, a high-tech threat to prison security, delivering drugs and other contraband to prisons across America. Prison officials say an inmate will coordinate with somebody on the outside, setting the date, the time, and the location of the drop. The inmate will then do counter surveillance, warning the drone operator if an officer is coming, and the drop has to be made someplace else. The ability to access contraband, how much more power does that give to the inmates?
[Bryan Stirling, Director, South Carolina Department Of Corrections:] It gives a lot of power. I mean, they're making a lot of money behind bars in dealing with contraband and the scams that they can run on the contraband cell phones.
[Feyerick:] Bryan Stirling is the director of South Carolina's 22 prisons and detention centers. He says this is about five months' worth of drugs, tobacco, cell phones, chargers, and other contraband smuggled in the old-fashioned way, hidden in things like books or body cavities. Now, add drones.
[Stirling:] So I talked to a sheriff and he said, you know, it was like Washington National. They were just around Christmas. The drones were coming in, dropping and going, dropping and going. And they had numbers on them. And the numbers were corresponding to inmates, and that's how they were getting in.
[Feyerick:] The problem has become so significant, lawmakers in the South Carolina senate recently passed a bill, making it a misdemeanor to fly drones within 500 feet of prison walls or 250 feet above the prison itself. The penalty is a $500 fine and 30 days in prison. Other states like Arizona, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Tennessee have or are considering similar legislation. The problem is not just in the U.S. but Europe as well. In London, an inmate here signaling his precise location to a drone operator. The British media also reporting drones may have been used to smuggle in wire cutting tools used in a prison escape. Stirling says South Carolina is spending millions to secure its prison perimeters, making it harder for people smuggling contraband to hide. Several drone operators have been prosecuted and are now serving time.
[Stirling:] We looked at shooting them down, but, I mean, there's a lot of innate dangers there, too. So, I mean, we feel like our hands are tied.
[Feyerick:] The drone assault is not likely to let up. Drone sales expected to surge from 2.5 million in 2016 to 7 million by 2020. Deborah Feyerick, CNN, Columbia, South Carolina.
[Cabrera:] Coming up, we take you back to Paris, France, where celebrations after today's presidential election will go late into the night. CNN's Christiane Amanpour will join us live. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. Back in a moment.

[King:] Remind you, we're standing by. That's just outside the West Wing at the White House. You see the marine at the door. The podium set up there for Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law. He's on his way back to the White House from Capitol Hill. He's just given question and answer session with the Senate Intelligence Committee staff. We are told he will make a rare public statement. We're going to keep our eye right there as we continue the conversation here about related issues. Forget that ironclad conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community or the certainty voice by every leading member of Congress. The new White House communications chief, Anthony Scaramucci disclosed just yesterday to CNN's Jake Tapper that he has a secret source. All those hacks and other election meddling, well, this big source says, it was too amateur to have been orchestrated by the Kremlin.
[Anthony Scaramucci, White House Communications Director:] Somebody said to me yesterday, I won't tell you who, that if the Russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those, those e-mails, you would have never seen it. You would have never had any evidence of them. Meaning that they're super confidence in their deception skills in hacking.
[King:] Wow. Oh, never mind.
[Scaramucci:] How about it was the president, Jake?
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] OK, it's the
[Scaramucci:] I talked to him yesterday. He called me from Air Force One and he basically said to me, hey, you know, this is maybe they did it, maybe they didn't do it.
[King:] Today is Mr. Scaramucci's first full day so maybe we can help. These guys run the big U.S. intelligence agencies and the first two hand-picked political appointees by the president of the United States, Donald J. Trump.
[Mike Pompeo, Cia Director:] I am confident that the Russians meddled in this election as is the entire intelligence community.
[Dan Coats, Director Of National Intelligence:] There is no descent and I stated that publicly. And I stated that to the president.
[Adm. Mike Rogers, National Security Agency Director:] No doubt at all and I stand behind the intelligence. The intelligence community assessment that we produced in January.
[King:] Why?
[Perry Bacon, Fivethirtyeight:] I think Anthony
[King:] I mean, just, why? Look, I understand, he has an audience of one especially in these early days. I'm not going to be contrarian and say maybe he's going to use this platform, maybe this early appearances to impress the president. I'm out there fighting for you Mr. President,
[Laura Meckler, The Wall Street Journal:] Well,
[Michael Bender, The Wall Street Journal:] And Anthony Scaramucci is definitely confident in his own abilities. And you're right John, we'll give him some time to see if that plays out and that can affect this White House. The fact is he's a brand new to government, coming in from business, and he's going to have the same problems that Kushner and that Donald Trump has seen as well here. You know, he's made his mark. He's made his sort of first mandate here to get rid of the leakers. You saw on the Jake Tapper show, he just blurted out what he and the president talked about on Air Force One. To say nothing of what we saw all day long on Sunday of the mixed messages coming from his shop, including him. I mean, he was asked about the Russia sanctions bill, say the president wasn't ready to sign it. Almost the same time Sarah Sanders was just saying that the White House favors it. You know that and there are several examples of this throughout the day.
[King:] And that I was going to get to that early in program and the chaos on Capitol Hill took time away from us. That's important though. There was as whether you know, you could say, Anthony Scaramucci not fully up to speed yet. He said he wasn't sure, he would have to talk to the president. Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the president will sign a very important bill. He may have no choice in the sense that Congress is going to pass a sanctions bill this week. Looks like overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate, veto approved majorities in the House and the Senate. The president could have picked this fight. It appears, we'll see if the story changes. Sarah Huckabee Sanders suggesting he will sign it. On that issue of leaks, the president just complained repeatedly about leaks and a lot of times the Team Trump has suggested they come from holdovers or they come from people in that so-called deep state. People out in the agencies. A lot of leaks come from people who work for the president. Anthony Scaramucci seems to understand that. Listen to this about day one on the job today.
[John Dickerson, Face The Nation:] What happens to leakers on your watch?
[Scaramucci:] They're going to get fired. We're as strong as our weakest leak. So if you guys want to keep leaking, why don't you guys all get together and make a decision as a team that you're going to stop leaking. But if you're going to keep leaking, I'm going to fire everybody. It's just very binary.
[King:] That is his right and it's one of the reason that president brought him up. But again, we are six months and a week into this administration. Yes, they've done some things through executive power. Yes, the economy is going at a pretty good pace but no ObamaCare repeal and replace. Tax reform is nowhere, at least sitting at the starting line. Infrastructure, and you still have an administration that appears to be trying to figure out how to manage itself. [Off-mic]
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] One, I'm curious to know whether Anthony Scaramucci spoke with the president on full record or on background because he certainly give away the source. Look you know, he spent the weekend, you know, walking back some of his earlier criticism of the president from during the campaign. And he did that because he clearly is now working for the president. But I think he's about to find out that that awkwardness is going to be nothing compared to how impossible this job is to be a spokesperson for the president. The president is constantly off message. He's constantly veering from one thing to another and sometimes even erratic and, you know, going back and forth in what he wants, and what he's expressing. So what he has faced this weekend in trying to explain his earlier criticism of the president is not going to be anything. And I think the Jeff Sessions thing was a perfect example that as the president said today that the attorney general is beleaguered. Remember, a couple of days ago, Sarah Huckabee Sanders went out there and told the press, look, the president clearly has confidence in the A.G. These two things do not go hand in hand.
[Bacon:] I'm not sure if Scaramucci was lying or clueless, but the idea that leaks are from
[Meckler:] You know, one thing that President Trump and President Obama have in common, not a lot in common. One thing they have in common when things weren't going well, blaming the communications. That's the problem. As how we're talking about is the leak. It's the messaging. As opposed to the actual policy itself, or actually in the case of
[Bacon:] Lack of policy.
[Meckler:] Trump's lack of policy or the congressional investigation. I mean, this is not a communications problem primarily.
[King:] And consistency in the sense that the president candidate Trump then President Trump, President-elect Trump
[Jay Sekulow, President Trump's Personal Attorney:] We have not and continued to not have conversations with the president of the United States regarding pardons. Pardons have not been discussed and pardons are not on the table.
[Scaramucci:] I'm in the Oval Office of the president last week, we're talking about that. He says he brought that up, he said, but he doesn't have to be pardoned. There's nobody around him that has to be pardoned.
[King:] Depends on your definition of "we."
[Bacon:] It looked like
[King:] But one of the things that was troubling and I don't think you can put the idea that he considered the president, the president told him still, maybe when it comes to the issue of Russia meddling. If you work for the president of the United States you want to help him through that. You don't want to enable that because look at every again, every intelligence agency, every leading member of Congress, people appointed by President Trump who have access to this intelligence believe it to be true. The other was in his debut performance at the White House last Friday, he was asked, does he agree with the president that the president would have won the popular vote if there were for 3 million to 5 million undocumented in this country illegally voting?
[Unidentified Male:] 3 million people voted illegally and
[Scaramucci:] OK. So, if the president says it, OK, let me do more research. My guess is that there's probably some level of truth to that.
[King:] I mean, if you say 3 million to 5 million and you can find a couple thousands, there's some level of truth to that. But again, why?
[Bender:] Yes, this is the he's speaking from the White House here. This is the podium. He's speaking for the White House, for the president here. And it's going to come back here quickly that this is not, you know, this sort of the sort of P.R. that Anthony is used to and he's going to have to he's responsible for what he says here. And if the issues at the White House, leaking is one of them. Among but a bigger one I believe is credibility and Anthony, I'm not sure he did much to sort of solve that this weekend.
[King:] We'll give him some time to get settled. This is his first full day at the White House. We'll see if things change going forward. Again, we're showing you that live picture just outside the West Wing because Jared Kushner due to make a statement after his return from Capitol Hill. Key Q&A with the Senate Intelligence Committee about the Russian election meddling. We'll bring you that as soon as that happens. And, when we come back, Democrats hitting the reset button, rolling out what they call a better deal for America. Their plan for winning back crucial blue collar worlers who voted for Donald Trump.

[Don Lemon, Cnn Tonight News Show:] " I'm Don Lemon. 11:00 p.m. here on the East Coast live with all the new developments tonight. Including the latest on ABC canceling the hit reboot of Roseanne after the star of the show Roseann Barr unleashed a racist tweet comparing former Obama aide Valerie Jarrett. Roseanne is paying the price for what she did. But has America become more openly racist under President Trump? Plus we're learning tonight that the President didn't just blast Attorney General, Jeff Sessions from recusing himself from the Russia investigation, he demanded he reverse his decision. Sessions stood his ground, but now Robert Mueller is very interested in that confrontation and what it means for the obstruction of justice or obstruction investigation. That is according to "The New York Times" and in a moment I'm going to talk to one of the reporters who broke that story. So, thank you so much for joining us, everyone. I want to bring in now CNN contributor, Frank Bruni, of "The New York Times," and also CNN contributor, Michael D'Antonio the author of "Truth about Trump," and CNN political analyst, April Ryan, White House correspondent for American urban radio networks. So, Frank you said, there is a true line between President Trump and Roseanne. Are they both traffic in conspiracy theory and they both traffic in bigotry, that Roseanne is Trump's avatar?
[Frank Bruni, New York Times Op-ed Columnist:] Well, that is what I thought honestly this morning. If you're talking about using Twitter in a sort of, you know, incredibly divisive, in his case borderline racist or racist in her case overtly racist way, this idea though, what I think really connects them and what I think is disturbing about this moment, is this idea, which I think Donald Trump has promoted although she gets full credit, so to speak for what she did. This idea that divisive, nasty, hateful language is just blunt talk that rebels against political correctness. No, sometimes it is just racist as it was with these Roseanne tweet. And I think people are really confusing plain-spokenness with outright racism and it's disturbing. Because this is outright racism, and the happy part of this story is ABC did the right thing. It did not violate her freedom of speech. No one is sending her to prison. She is free to get back on Twitter tomorrow, she is free to go out in the public square and say anything what she wants to. ABC does not have to endorse or support that.
[Lemon:] I knew that was going to happen. As soon as the alert came over, I said in three, two, one, needs stifling conservative voices. Barr, you know what is coming.
[Michael D'antonio, Cnn Contributor:] It's really hard to be plainspoken and direct and honest and thoughtful. This is the problem. So Roseanne Barr has done this before. She is almost exactly the same term to talk about Susan Rice. So are we surprised that this person lacks the intelligence and creativity to get beyond her racism and actually say something?
[Lemon:] Do you believe this is part of the bigger climate of racism or racist behavior that has happened since this President has taken office or at least since he is come onto the scene?
[D'antonio:] He is done this his whole life, so we know that this is his M.O. And I think that he has open the door to the worst in us. This is a President who is chosen not to elevate us, but to diminish us and to teach us that, well, it's OK to talk this way, because the most important person in our body of politics and really the most powerful man on earth does this too. So, why not me?
[Lemon:] So, April, a lot of folks are wondering why the network even hired Roseanne, given her history of bigotry and spreading of conspiracy theory, she spread so many conspiracy theories, but our own President shares our won president shares conspiracy theories. I mean, just today President Trump continued his false Twitter tirade against Robert Mueller and the Russia investigation. April?
[April Ryan, Cnn Political Analist:] Well, Don, you know, yes, this whole situation of this President and conspiracy theories and Roseanne, these are people who really, and it's unfortunate to say, who really have no understanding of how government works. I mean, you know, we have had conspiracy theories since the grassy knoll theories or conspiracies and beyond. But at issue is a President of the United States who is friends with or supports this comedian slash actress or whatever you want to call her, and they sit down and just make these things up or hear from somewhere and say, oh, this sounds good, let me go with it. This kind of thing causes problem and can cause people to get hurt. I mean, we saw what happened with the pizza situation at Comic Pizza in Washington, D.C. things have to stop. There needs to be responsibility, there needs to be responsibility with the President and with people who have these great megaphones and have this wonderful perches, Roseanne Barr, she had a great perch that she abused. People understood she was controversial. Sometimes that makes people say, I like her, because she is against the grain. But you know what, she is gone too far. And she is not the only one. If you look on Twitter and we've talked about this. If you look on Twitter, you see people saying guerilla, you see people saying planet of the apes. I mean, I just got it this weekend, but you know what, goodness prevailed today. And maybe this president maybe just maybe, he got a glimpse of it and that is why he left it alone tonight.
[Lemon:] Yes, I wouldn't hold my breath on that, April.
[Ryan:] I'm taking goodness in.
[Lemon:] I'm still getting people sharing the fake Whoopi Goldberg t- shirt that says that Whoopi Goldberg had a picture of the president being shot. It's fake, it is not real, it is a conspiracy theory. People are still spreading all those things and many even still believe in and some of them don't believe it, they just love doing it. So, look, I don't give a rat's you know what someone says about me on Twitter unless, you know, they threaten my life or unless it puts me in danger. Listen, I want this is another conspiracy theory that I just talked about. Just a short while ago Republican, Trey Gowdy supported the FBI's the FBI's use of an informant. Watch this.
[Rep. Trey Gowdy, , South Carolina:] I am even more convinced that the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens did what they wanted them to do when they got the information they got and it has nothing to do with Donald Trump.
[Lemon:] Go, Frank, what did you think?
[Bruni:] I didn't hear the end of what he said.
[Lemon:] He said it had nothing to do with Donald Trump. It is supported that he thinks that the FBI did the right thing and that is what most citizens of the United States would want them to do, it had nothing to do with Trump.
[Bruni:] Well, I mean, I would agree with him. And I am very glad that he said, you are talking about Spygate and all of those stuff. I mean, yes, the things is, we need more Republicans like Trey Gowdy to come out and say that. I mean, when I listen to that. I'm glad that he is not buying into what Donald Trump is selling. But the thing that remains so disturbing is how many Republicans either buy into or pretend they buy into it or just look away. And it remains the norm, most Republicans in D.C. are still turning their gazes away were they are biting their tongues. And every time they do that Trump is getting to normalize this sort of conspiracy theorizing. We worried at the beginning what would he normalized? Now, Roseanne gets full credit and blame for what she did. And she might have done it without him, but one of the things Donald Trump is normalizing is the notion that if you believe something might be true, it's OK to put it out there.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Bruni:] You know, if you have a bad feeling about someone
[Ryan:] It is not normal. It is not normal.
[Bruni:] Yes. That should never become normal. And as Michael said so eloquently when it is done by a person at the apex of our government, it is impossible for some people not to see that as a green light and as permission. And that is something Donald Trump has never had to answer for.
[D'antonio:] And it's abject cowardice by the members of congress to not confront this. We now have a conspiracy caucus among Republican that are on the friend one of them happens to be my members of congress and they promote these conspiracy theories as if there's something to it. It's destructive to our society, it is destructive to our democracy. And we're not going to recover that quickly.
[Lemon:] Do you remember?
[D'antonio:] He's Alvin. And he is a guy who thinks that there's now a conspiracy in every FBI office.
[Lemon:] He also represents me on the Long Island as well. So, listen, Roseanne has paid the price now. But, I mean, when you look at, you know, in President Trump's calls
[Ryan:] Has she really, though?
[Lemon:] Go on. I am going to ask you the next question. What do you mean by that?
[Ryan:] You know, OK, ABC did this major move and some people were saying I'm shocked. But they made this major move, but it's not over yet. The question is will another network pick her up, and if they do it just negates everything that happened. And a television executive, a good friend of mine sent me a text and said, look, let's see who picks her up, if she is picked up. So, it is not over, we have to wait and see. Because trust me, Roseanne Barr is also a businesswoman and it's about the economics as well. A lot of people are out of work, and I guarantee you she is working the phones trying to revamp her image and trying to see if this can fly.
[Lemon:] OK. I mean she took an action. She paid the consequences for the action. ABC did act on this. Whether someone picks her up, listen that is their right. I mean, maybe, someone people who traffics in conspiracy theories and pick her up, this is America.
[D'antonio:] She'll have a standup tour.
[Bruni:] She will be having an economic sec on his.
[Lemon:] Bill Cosby doesn't really
[Ryan:] How long though?
[Lemon:] he tried.
[Bruni:] I mean, he tried.
[D'antonio:] But she will go out will play the red states and now she'll be the hero. Yes, I can imagine her
[Lemon:] Yes, but I think I wouldn't
[Bruni:] That is too there will be a pocket of people Of American world rallies to her and make her a hero. America who will rally to her and make her a hero.
[Lemon:] There will be a pocket of people I wouldn't say all red states.
[D'antonio:] That is too there will be a pocket of America who will rally to her and make her a hero.
[Lemon:] OK then so let's talk about because you know, Roseanne paid the price, so to speak. April said it's not over yet. Billy Bush, Bill Cosby you mentioned, Matt Lauer, Harvey Weinstein and the list goes on. But there's no consequence for this President.
[D'antonio:] Well, there is no consequence because he was elected as he reminds everyone with help, and we're not allowed to ask about that, and he is now gained the system. The way that he claims that it gains again him. We have no alternative, but the Democratic process.
[Bruni:] It is simpler than that. All of these other people had bosses, Donald Trump's boss is the American people. And he gets his judgment when we get to vote again. And it is my, if not quite my belief it's my fervent hope that once Americans on mosque get to weigh in on this again they will say, no, no, this is not who we are.
[Lemon:] All right. Thank you all. I appreciate it.
[Ryan:] But Don, I want to
[Lemon:] Go on, if you can do it in five seconds, April.
[Ryan:] Real fast. I believe black America, black leaders weighed on this President's mind today. And that is one of the reasons, but he did not say anything about Roseanne in Nashville, because he is working with black leaders behind closed doors on an urban agenda as well as prison reform, and black leaders are not happy about what happened today, so he kept quiet.
[Lemon:] I don't know. I don't know if I'm buying that.
[Bruni:] Well, he is a politician.
[Lemon:] We shall see.
[Bruni: 5:] 00 a.m. to 6:30 a.m. is his Twitter spot.
[Lemon:] Too late. When we come back, why has calling out racist behavior become a political issue? We're going talk about how tribal minded political thinking seems to prevent people from calling outright and wrong.

[Dana Bash, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm Dana Bash. John King has the day off. President Trump and the first lady are about to board a plane together to go to Ohio. But they'll go their separate ways when they hit the ground to sell different parts of the Trump agenda. And if you thought the memo drama was over, think again. Tonight, the House Intelligence Committee is facing another big vote, this time it's the Democrats' memo. And Republicans are pushing back on the president's claim that the GOP memo undermines the special counsel's Republican excuse me Russian probe. But how far are Republicans willing to go to challenge Trump?
[John Brennan, Former Cia Director:] I wonder when the Republican leadership in the Congress is going to come to their senses. I had a lot of respect for Paul Ryan. I thought he was taking these matters seriously. But the things that I've heard him say and do over the past several months really question makes me question whether or not if there's going to be a removal of Rod Rosenstein, as well as Bob Mueller, what will the Republicans do? Will they allow that to happen? It cannot because, to me, that clearly would be obstruction of justice.
[Bash:] We begin this hour counting down to a vote in the House Intelligence Committee on another potentially explosive memo, this one from Democrats hoping to discredit Friday's Republican memo. Democrats say Republicans cherry-picked facts to fit a narrative, that the FBI acted in bad faith when seeking a warrant to spy on a former Trump campaign official. Democrats are arguing that their memo puts the underlying evidence into better context and knocks down GOP talk of a bias-driven conspiracy at the upper levels of the FBI. Test one, likely today, a vote inside the House Intelligence Committee, making the Democrats' memo public. Test two, whether the president will sign off. And that may well be the stickiest of sticking points. And the reason is because the president insists that the Republican memo vindicates his argument that the Russia investigation is a partisan witch hunt. The only problem he has is Republicans on Capitol Hill spent the entire weekend on TV saying just the opposite. Well, here with me to share their reporting and their insights, CNN's Manu Raju, "The Daily Beast's" Jackie Kucinich, John McCormack of "The Weekly Standard" and "Bloomberg's" Margaret Talev. Hi, everybody. Happy Monday. Manu
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes.
[Bash:] What's your sense of give me the latest. I know you've been doing reporting all morning long on this vote impending vote.
[Raju:] Yes. We expect it probably will get approved tonight. 5:00 the House Intelligence Committee meets behind closed doors. It will be the opportunity for them to send Adam Schiff's memo, the one rebutting the Nunes memo, to the president's desk. We've been talking to Republicans all morning. We expect the Republicans to vote in favor of its release. This after last week Republicans opposed doing just that because they said they had just been presented with the Schiff memo. They needed time to review it. And they moved ahead with the Nunes memo, allowing for that to go ahead publically. Democrats, of course, complained about that saying, why not wait for the Nunes memo, to send this out at the same time as the Schiff memo, so both the country gets both sides of the argument. So after the vote tonight, the question is going to be, what does President Trump do? He'll have five days to decide whether or not to agree to its release, redact anything he may want to redact, or object to its release. And if he objects to it, then the full Republican House could vote to override him. We'll see if it gets to that point, though.
[Bash:] Wouldn't that be unbelievable. Jackie, Manu's talking, of course, about the thing they're waiting for, the president and whether he will say, OK, fine. This is something that Democrats on the committee are already expressing their concern over. Listen to Mike Quigley of Illinois and what he said.
[Mike Quigley , Illinois:] My concern isn't with what the Republicans will do at a business meeting that I'll be part of this afternoon, it's what the president will do. This is a president that we have seen would do anything to obtain power. I can't imagine why anyone would imagine that he won't do anything to retain that power. Yes, I'm concerned he won't sign off. I'm concerned that he will try to redact or change the memo.
[Bash:] What are you hearing from your sources, Jackie?
[Jackie Kucinich, Washington Bureau Chief, "the Daily Beast":] Yes, I wouldn't be I mean these are these seem to be valid fears. I mean look at what the president was doing today, he was attacking Adam Schiff, who is the Democrat on the panel, as someone who isn't telling the truth, who is saying who is saying as is leaking information classified information. So it seems like he's already setting up kind of an adversarial relationship to give himself an excuse to say, well, listen, this is classified information and he was trying to put it out there. This is not beyond the realm of possibility when you talk about this president.
[Bash:] Which, you know, so was the Republican memo based on information that was previously classified
[Kucinich:] Sure.
[Bash:] Which is why he personally had to declassify it, but maybe I'm getting to far into the facts.
[Kucinich:] Well, and I think
[Bash:] Never mind the
[Kucinich:] I think what this does, I mean take a step back from it, having both these if the other memo comes out, you do have these two opposing viewpoints, and it makes this it muddies the water and it clouds the Russia issue even further, particularly when talking about the House probe and how they can move past that. It doesn't seem like they're going to be able to.
[Bash:] So you mentioned the president on Twitter this morning. Let's look at some of what he was doing and the response that the got. Here's what the president said this morning. Little Adam Schiff, who is desperate to run for higher office, is one of the biggest liars and leakers in Washington, right up there with Comey, Warner, Brennan and Clapper. Adam leaves closed committee hearings to illegally break confidential information. Must be stopped. Then Adam Schiff had a response. Mr. President, I see you had a busy morning of executive time. Instead of tweeting false smears, the American people would appreciate if you turned off the TV and helped solve the funding crisis, protected dreamers or really anything else. Now, this is, you know, kind of the 7th grade side show that I say happens with a lot of very important things in Washington these days, but it does expose a very real question that Jackie and Manu are bringing up about what the president is going to do and whether he's going to use Adam Schiff and the partisan nature of how the Democrats are acting in some ways as an excuse not to release this memo.
[John Mccormack, Senior Writer, "the Weekly Standard":] You know, I don't know exactly what he'll do. I think that we probably will get the Democratic memo. We've got the Republican memo. What you'd really like to have is the underlying FISA application, because people on part on both sides do tend to leave certain facts out or they do mislead at times. So what you'd really like to do is, if it weren't if it wouldn't compromise sources and methods in a significant manner to actually let the American people see for themselves
[Bash:] Can you imagine if that happened? I mean already what we saw with the Republican memo, giving information about a FISA application, was unprecedented.
[Kucinich:] Right.
[Mccormack:] Well
[Bash:] Do you think that's even really possible, to get the underlying FISA application?
[Mccormack:] I think that, you know, in general, you want to protect sources and methods. And if that could be compromised, obviously you can't do that, but, I mean, we're already past such a point where I think that is necessary. Transparency is necessary that you actually get this out. I mean the Republican memo doesn't even allege wrongdoing, I don't think, because it says that, you know, the dossier was essential to getting this warrant. We don't know if that's true. But it also doesn't say whether the specific information in the dossier about Carter Page was true or not. And that's the most important question in my mind, is this information true? The fact that it comes from a partisan source raises concerns. But, again, if, you know, if the Republican National Committee dug up true facts of criminal wrongdoing among Democrats, I think that people would say it's OK to investigate as long as the information was substantiated. And we still don't know that.
[Margaret Talev, Senior White House Correspondent, "bloomberg":] This is about the court of public opinion in a really difficult midterm year. There are already, obviously, processes in place if there are real concerns inside Congress about the FISA process. And as half a dozen or so Republicans now have pointed out, certainly not a majority, but it is an interesting minority because they all have ties either to military service or to having worked in intelligence or having been prosecutors. But as they've all pointed out, this actually has no bearing at all on whether or not the Mueller investigation goes forward and how it goes forward.
[Kucinich:] Right.
[Talev:] So to a large extent, I'm not sure it makes a difference whether or not the Democratic memo is released intact or with some redactions or with the whole preface on Twitter because, really, it seems to be, at this point, about shaping the way voters perceive all of this and perhaps applying a little bit of pressure or support if President Trump decides he wants to make kind of like a hail Mary move on justice and FBI officials. But, for the most part, this is about shaping public opinion.
[Bash:] I totally agree with you, it is about shaping public opinion, but it just was really striking this weekend how the way that Republicans who were on television were at odds with how they wanted to shape public opinion with the president of the United States.
[Talev:] Absolutely.
[Bash:] And you mentioned it, that Republicans who came on television said, this has no bearing on the Mueller investigation. Let's listen to some of that.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor, "the Lead":] Do you agree that it that it vindicates Trump?
[Unidentified Male:] I think this is a separate issue.
[Chris Wallace, Fox News Anchor:] Does the GOP memo vindicate the president? Does it end the need for the special prosecutor's investigation?
[Unidentified Male:] No, it doesn't.
[George Stephanopoulos, Abc Anchor:] So you don't agree with President Trump when he says this vindicates him in the entire Russia investigation.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't. The memo has no impact on the Russia probe?
[Rep. Trey Gowdy , Intelligence Committee:] No not to me it doesn't, and I was pretty integrally involved in the drafting of it.
[Bash:] But when you have the president of the United States, who has a bigger megaphone than all of those people combined saying the opposite, even again today, does it matter?
[Raju:] I mean that's this has been the common theme throughout his presidency, him saying one thing and oftentimes his party on Capitol Hill saying the opposite. But the members are correct. I mean the what the Nunes memo does is it goes after one specific FISA warrant, one specific effort to get surveil one Trump campaign foreign policy adviser when the Russia investigation is much broader, when the obstruction probe is completely separate from how the Carter Page surveillance warrant was obtained. So it doesn't vindicate him in any way because we know the investigation is much, much broader and any fair reading of that, even if you agree with the facts of the Nunes memo, which we know have been disputed by the Democrats, if you agree with the facts, it still says that there's a lot more to this investigation.
[Kucinich:] Right.
[Bash:] And are the Democrats going to run into the same buzz saw as Republicans did, releasing a memo that is partisan, that was put together just by one party?
[Kucinich:] Sure. And we've seen this pattern, right? And they're going to dispute this is what I mean. I think it devolves. I don't think it matters what's in their memo, frankly, at this point. As Margaret said, this is about shaping public debate. I mean there could be facts in them, but partisans will look at that and dismiss them. Not that that matters. But, you know, when as things have been going back and forth in Congress, it seems like once you go down this path where it's Republicans versus Democrats, the information sort of gets lost in the shuffle.
[Talev:] But the Democrats' view has always, I think, has been that they didn't see the need to release it anyway. But if it was already going to be released and if the sensitive information was going to be considered declassified, they might as well get a crack at the same information. I'm not aware of entirely different trenches of classified information that would have to be declassified in order for the Democrats' version of this to be released. So I think like on the merits, you're looking at the same fact basis and two different memos. But the point is that the water the waters already have been muddied, as we say.
[Kucinich:] Right.
[Bash:] And as we discuss this, I just want to point out to our viewers what they're looking at on the screen. The president and the first lady departing on the South Lawn of the White House to board Marine One. They're heading to Ohio today. Certainly a very standard scene of a president and a first lady walking together. It's just not something that we've seen in a while, in a month or so, the two of them together. And we're actually looking at a live picture, that they are actually at Joint Base Andrews and the two of them are going from Marine One about to board Air Force One to go on to their to go on to their trip to Ohio. John, you were about to say something and I interrupted you.
[Mccormack:] Oh, on the on the memo, I think that one important point is that the memo itself undermines this claim from the president, that it discredits the entire Russia investigation.
[Bash:] Right.
[Mccormack:] I mean the last point is that the investigation began back in July with Papadopoulos, and we're talking about a potential allegation of FISA abuse that took place in October. So I think that's the biggest point to make on the Schiff memo.
[Bash:] OK. Everybody stand by as we watch the president and soon to be the first lady going up the stairs. Actually, let's just take a beat and wait for him to give the wave before we go to break. The president and the first lady getting on Air Force One, about to go to Ohio. The president will be making a speech to promote the tax reform legislation, now law, that the Republicans have been begging him to go out and tout. And, meanwhile, the first lady is going to go and talk to people at a children's hospital in Ohio about the opioid crisis. Up next, another month, another deadline to fund the government or risk a shutdown. That's just a few days away. Stay with us.

[Cabrera:] Republicans return from their Thanksgiving break in just a couple of days with big plans for their tax reform bill. It will be a make or break week as the Senate is hoping to hold a vote as early as Thursday. Let's get to chief business correspondent Christine Romans joining us to break down where we stand on this bill. And Christine, so we've had a little bit of time for this Senate plan to simmer just a little bit. What are your top takeaways?
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] Well, the most important thing here is there's a House bill and there will be a Senate bill, and then they have to reconcile them. So it's going to be a lot of horse trading. But what we know about kind of the basics of this Senate bill, and again, there are differences with the House, seven tax brackets, seven tax brackets, lower tax rates for everyone in those, a $2,000 child tax credit, that's a little richer than in the House bill. Now the Senate bill keeps the estate tax and doubles the exemption, and repeals something called the state and local tax deduction so that's pretty important. Also the alternative minimum tax. So these are the things that we're sort of chewing over and we'll see if it ends up in the final Senate bill.
[Cabrera:] So it sounds like, with the SALT tax in particular, that where you live matters.
[Romans:] Yes. If you live in one of these high tax states, this is going to be a deduction that you could lose here if, indeed, the final bill pulls out the state and local tax deduction. I'm talking Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Illinois, California. There are few other states where people really write off their local and their state taxes. The House version of the bill keeps about a $10,000 allowance for your property taxes, but in high tax states that would be a big difference in your tax bill.
[Cabrera:] Well, of course the Senate bill also has that Obamacare mandate repeal.
[Romans:] Absolutely.
[Cabrera:] Which is getting a lot of talk. We'll see if it stays as they work through a vote, but are there any losers? Because the Republicans say this is a win for everybody.
[Romans:] Well, look, it depends. I keep saying it depends. It depends on what it looks like in the end but the optics of this are that most of the benefits or a majority of the benefits go to rich people and companies. This is a corporate tax cut that has been packaged as a middle class tax cut which it really isn't, right? The strategy of the White House and Republicans has been that if you can give corporate tax relief to large and small businesses that's going to create jobs, grow the economy and create jobs, and that's how it's going to help the middle class. This week it will be interesting to see if that's a sell that they can give to Ron Johnson from Wisconsin and Susan Collins and other senators who are concerned about the optics that this looks like it's more for business and less for the average guy.
[Cabrera:] We only have like 20 seconds here, but a yes or no answer, I mean they saw this as going to for sure increase wages. Is there any evidence to back that up?
[Romans:] There's no guarantee. There's no there's no guarantee. Recent history, it has not worked, but it has worked in other cases when you've cut taxes simplifying the corporate tax rate is something that Democrats and Republicans agree needs to happen. Is this the vehicle? Is this the time? They think this has to be the time right now to do it.
[Cabrera:] All right. Christine Romans, thank you for simplifying it all for us. We are following breaking news out of Egypt. A horrific terror attack. 235 people now dead. The very latest next.

[Cuomo:] President Trump has yet to weigh in on the three way battle for the GOP nominations in the race to succeed Senator Jeff Flake in Arizona. Now, Politico says the National Republican Senatorial Committee wants Trump to endorse Congresswoman Martha McSally, who is the establishment favor. Fear is that the alternative, Joe Arpaio and Dr. Kelli Ward, a former state senator are unelectable. That is the reporting. What does Kelli Ward think about? Welcome to primetime.
[Kelli Ward, , Arizona Senate Candidate:] Hi, Chris. It is great to be with you. Well, I mean, I think that is another establishment miss that they try to create fear in the minds of the voter thinking that we have to settle for what we have. I say the status quo has got to go. It is time for big changes in Washington and we need new blood there, new ideas, stronger backbones so that we could continue to move the country in the right direction.
[Cuomo:] Why no love from Trump to you?
[Ward:] Oh, Trump, I think Trump likes all of the people in the race, you know I think that is why he is kind of sitting back and watching. I can tell you the people of Arizona are the ones that I really want their endorsement.
[Cuomo:] More than Trump? He is become the golden ticket from Willy Wonka for people in the primaries and in the elections if he takes a side.
[Ward:] Well, unfortunately, President Trump doesn't have a vote in Arizona. So, I need those votes in Arizona to come across the ballot box for me.
[Cuomo:] No question, but I got to check you on this, one more time, Doc.
[Ward:] Sure.
[Cuomo:] You know that Donald Trump being behind you and your party right now, especially coming from your perspective on issues is the golden ticket from Willy Wonka, I love that because I just love the movie. You got to want it.
[Ward:] I do too, it is one of my favorite. Of course. I think that having the support of the President as a Republican in a time when we're going to have a heat wave and bring the heat to drain the swamp, of course it would be wonderful to have the President on board. And you know, but, it's not the most important endorsement. The most important endorsement is the people of Arizona who want a thoughtful, effective, results oriented leader with a proven track record of success. And I'm the only one in the race that has those credentials.
[Cuomo:] Why are you better than Joe Arpaio?
[Ward:] Well, because I have a proven track record. When I was in the state Senate, I got 19 bills signed into law based on excellent policy. Not on political pandering or you know, any kind of extreme partisanship. Great policy that I brought forward. And people on both sides of the aisle agreed that it would be good for the people that they represented. And then I was able to navigate that swampy murky process of getting things from the Senate to the House and to the executive's desk. And that is why so many people wanted me to run for the United States senate. They're tired of the gridlock in Washington. They're tired of the partisanship. They are tired of the head butting. They want someone to go there and get things done. And then that is what I am going to do when I get to Washington
[D.c. Cuomo:] You and Arpaio have been coupled often in different analysis of the race. And you are both attributed with the same potential plus and minus which is they have a tendency to demonize the immigrant population and source them as a huge problem for Arizona. Do you think that is fair treatment of you?
[Ward:] I don't really. I think that, you know, people who come here illegally and illegal immigration really have it has affected every aspect of our society. Not just in Arizona, but across the entire nation. It's not just an Arizona border crisis.
[Cuomo:] For better or worse?
[Ward:] You know, it affects education. It affects health care. I've seen as a physician up close and personal. Education as a mom it's affected public safety. It has affected corrections. All of those things are affected by illegal immigration which is why I'm such a staunch supporter of border security and building the wall. I think that
[Cuomo:] Do you believe that most of these illegal immigrants are criminals, bad people?
[Ward:] I don't. You know, I mean, I heard you talking earlier or stuff that you talking about your family and how they got here. My family came the same way. My great grandparents came from Hungary and from Poland. They were fleeing communism. The communist were coming in taking over their farms. They couldn't survive. So they came through this great land, through LS Islands. They came the right way. And my grandparents, both of my grandfather's became coal miners. They went into the scariest darkest most dangerous profession in order to provide for their families. My grandfather, my dad's side, died in a mine explosion and his body was never recovered, but they did that so that my parents, my mom and dad could both become teachers. And my parents worked hard so that my brother and I could both become doctors. And that is the American dream. And I want people to experience that. I want people from all over the world to be able to come here to experience that. I just want them to come the right way. And the reason we need a wall is because we need a symbol of a right and wrong way to come in, not only symbol, a significant deterrent.
[Cuomo:] Right. It's a pretty expensive symbol.
[Ward:] But it is also a significant [inaudible].
[Cuomo:] A lot of people think it wouldn't work. That people would get over just like they got over anything else. Ten foot wall, 11-foot ladder.
[Ward:] My opponent, Martha McSally, says walls don't work. And we're never going to have one. No matter what she says on the campaign trail?
[Cuomo:] What is wrong with that?
[Ward:] What we do know is that not having a wall hasn't work. Back in 1986, President Reagan, one of my favorite Presidents, great American, conservative, happy warrior. He granted amnesty and then trusted Congress to secure the border. It didn't happen then and it's not going to happen now.
[Cuomo:] But what you said earlier about the dream, you know, a lot of people who come illegally have that same dream. They work themselves to death here and they get paid subpar wages and a lot of industries here and a lot of households here are dependent on them and a lot of the analysis show that they are a benefit as well as how you would define them as a burden. The second part is that legal immigration is under attack by people in your party as well. Donald Trump, specifically wants to limit immigration legally in way that would have kept his own in laws out of this country. That is not embracing the same spirit of inclusion that we see at the foot of the statue of the liberty. Fair point.
[Ward:] Well, I think that people need to come here the right way. I think that proposing
[Cuomo:] Are you trying to limit who can come the right way. That is what I am saying to you.
[Ward:] Well, we're trying to change the system.
[Cuomo:] Limit.
[Ward:] So it is something that work. It's right now it's so bogged down by the people who have come here illegally. In my state, the federal court dockets are clogged with people who are have come back through illegal re-entry again and again and again. And that slows down the process for people who wanted to come here legally. That is not fair. I just talked to a man yesterday. He is going to be having his citizenship ceremony next week on the 17th, he came here from Brazil as a teenager, the right way. His parent's came here legally but it took him 19 years to obtain this citizenship ceremony that is going to happen next year. That is too long. We've got to be able to get people to come in who will be assets to our society and our economy as wells as to their own.
[Cuomo:] Good, then you should be against Trump administration policy they are trying to put through that men like him who are here on a visa that could be approved or not renewed, that if there's any sign that they used the government benefit like the earned income tax credit or anyone related to them has, they can be nixed. What an unfair thing to do. Do you agree with that?
[Ward:] I don't think that is what he was on. But I think it's something we have to look at. When people come to our country for economic benefit that is paid for by the taxpayer that is something that is unacceptable to most people across the country. They want people to come here, they want them to be prosperous on their own. They want them to have skills to be able to take care of themselves to be able experience the joy and success of having their own job and being able to take care of themselves and their families.
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Ward:] And so, you know, we have to look at all of those signs because it's not fair to burden the American taxpayer with people who come into our country.
[Cuomo:] Remember, as we heard from the CEO's the other day, they just a burden. All right. Not only are immigrants the people that built this country in the first place, but now you have CEO's asking the President to give them more. And he said he would help them in the White House tonight. Dr. Ward, thank you for making the case. We'll be following your race very closely.
[Ward:] Thank, Chris. It is great to be here.
[Cuomo:] All right. President Trump ramping up tensions with Turkey and NATO allies. We are going to get after this growing crisis with counter terrorism analyst, Phil Mudd. There's more to it than you may know.

[Pamela Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Just moments from now Sean Spicer returning to the podium for the White House briefing, and the president himself speaking live, as the White House launches a new theme week. But, first, new developments in the Russia scandal that is enveloping the Trump White House and Trump campaign associates. The Senate Judiciary Committee confirming to CNN it is now considering delaying a hearing this week where Senate leaders hoped President Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort would testify. And this, of course, comes after dramatic revelations about a secret meeting Manafort, the president's son Donald Trump Jr. and son-in-law- turned-top-adviser Jared Kushner had with the Russian lawyer and a Russian operative. CNN senior congressional reporter Manu Raju is live on Capitol Hill for us. Manu, why is the Judiciary Committee considering delaying this hearing?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Well, in fact, those two leaders of the committee, the Republican chairman, Chuck Grassley, and the top on the committee, Dianne Feinstein, have reached out to the special counsel's office, Bob Mueller, to make sure if they heard testimony from Paul Manafort, make sure it was not conflict with whatever Bob Mueller is doing as part of his own investigation into Russian meddling and any collusion that may have occurred between Trump associates and Russian officials. Now, in a statement from the spokesman for Chuck Grassley, the statement says that Bob Mueller's office actually has not responded to the questions raised by the committee leaders about whether or not it would conflict in any way by having Paul Manafort before the committees. As a result, Pam, they're considering delaying a hearing that was going to be on a separate topic about the issue of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which, of course, is a statute that requires anyone who represents a foreign government to disclose that work. Paul Manafort of course worked for the Ukrainian government. And they're considering delaying that Wednesday hearing to next week to work out a deal potentially with Bob Mueller's office to see if Paul Manafort could testify, but also, Pam, of interest to this committee is Donald Trump Jr., Chuck Grassley confirming to our colleague Suzanne Malveaux, Suzanne Malveaux, earlier today he may even subpoena for Donald Trump Jr.'s appearance if he doesn't agree to appear voluntarily before his committee. So, those discussions happening as well, Pam.
[Brown:] That would certainly be a dramatic development. Manu, thank you very much. A new theme week in Washington. At any moment, President Trump will kick off his Made in America Week, highlighting companies who create their products here in the United States. Now, the event will feature companies from all 50 states, but critics point out a bit of irony here. The Trump Corporation relies heavily on a dozen other countries to produce its products. Kaitlan Collins, CNN White House reporter, joins me now for more on this. So, Kaitlan, this begs the question, will Made in America Week prompt the Trump Organization or Ivanka Trump's companies, for that matter, to make more of their products in the United States?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's a great question. The White House was asked that yesterday when they first debuted these next three weeks that will center around made in America, America heroes, and American dreams. And when they were asked if that is a commitment for Donald Trump's organization and his daughter's clothing line to start making their products here in the United States, which is what they're asking other businesses to do, they were noncommittal. They said, we will get back to you on the. And when Sean Spicer was asked about that just now in the press briefing, he said he couldn't comment on business matters, but said the president was a businessman who understood the challenges of being in business in America. So we didn't really get an answer on whether or not that will spur that. We do know that Ivanka Trump will not attend the event on the South Lawn or in the White House today, where there's a fire truck, a yacht, Marine One and other products from the 50 states that are made in America, and the other staterooms of the White House. And like you said, the irony of all of this is not lost on the president's critics. Many of their products are made overseas. And it's we are not sure if the White House will start if they will answer whether or not they will start making their products here.
[Brown:] You have some reporting as well, if I'm not mistaken, about the president meeting with senators tonight, right?
[Collins:] Yes. As the White House focuses on these weeks, they're trying to distract from the Russian narrative and the Russian investigation and the big health care debate, which we know has been delayed because of Senator McCain's health. And we found out today the president will host senators at the White House tonight. This is one of the few pushes that we've seen from him on this health care bill. He hasn't traveled or done any solo speeches or press conferences advocating for the health care bill, and he will hope to woo some senators tonight here at the White House
[Brown:] Yes, it's interesting because he really has kept his distance. Kaitlan Collins, thank you.
[Collins:] Thank you.
[Brown:] Speaking of health care, another setback for the Republican plan to replace Obamacare. A potential vote on the controversial plan already in jeopardy has been delayed, as Senator John McCain recovers from surgery to his skull. Surgeons removed a blood clot above his left eye, this as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell scrambles to get enough votes. He can't afford to lose more vote. The senators have balked, some senators, two of them actually have balked at the current GOP bill, Senator Susan Collins and Rand Paul saying flat-out no, and Collins tells CNN that several of her colleagues remain "concerned" about the bill.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] There are about eight to 10 Republican senators who have serious concerns about this bill, so at the end of the day, I don't know whether it will pass.
[Brown:] The vote could hinge on how much time Senator John McCain spends recovering. But there are Now, concerns about whether McCain's condition is more seriously than previously thought. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN's chief medical correspondent, joins me now. The big question everyone is asking today, Sanjay, is how long could McCain spend recovering here? What can you tell us?
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Senior Medical Correspondent:] It could be a little bit of time. I think the initial reports, Pamela, were that he had this blood clot that was above his eye, and that was going to be removed. It was removed on Friday. But to be clear, what he had done was a bit more aggressive than that. Let me just show you what I'm talking about. The incision was in his eyebrow. That's to sort of hide the incision, but you feel underneath your eyebrow, you have bone there. And what I think people didn't realize initially was that that bone I'm showing you on the skull model was actually removed as well to try and get access inside the skull to the brain. And this blood cot was within the brain, not just underneath the skin, which may have been what people thought reading those initial descriptions. So it's definitely a more aggressive operation. It's a brain operation. It's general anesthesia. He's 80 years old. As far as how long it takes to recover, there's no hard and fast rules with this, Pamela. People recover at different rates. He's 80 years old, but he's tough, we know that. But he's had a history of various medical problems. We don't know how this ties in exactly. We know he's up and about now, but just the swelling, just the pain, the recovery, typically a couple of weeks.
[Brown:] Thanks so much, Sanjay Gupta. Stand by. We want to go to Sean Spicer. He's back at the podium for a White House briefing off-camera. Let's listen.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] And with that, I'm glad to take your questions. Margaret.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] Question for you, two, one on Iran. Will this administration certify Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal?
[Spicer:] The JCPOA authority was delegated to the State Department. And the secretary of defense excuse me the secretary of state will have an announcement very shortly on that deal. I think you all know that the president has made very clear that he thought this was a bad deal, a bad deal for the United States. And I will wait until the State Department makes further action before going any further.
[Question:] And, secondly, your counterpart in Russia, Dmitry Peskov, who speaks for Vladimir Putin, said today that they expect their properties that were seized by the prior administration to be returned, and without any stipulations or attachments to that. Was this discussed with the president? Does the president have a strong view? What is it that the president would like to see in return before handing this property back?
[Spicer:] I know that Secretary Tillerson, that falls under his purview. He's been having discussions. And I would refer you to the State Department.
[Question:] This came from Vladimir Putin's office.
[Spicer:] I understand that, but in our country right now, the secretary of state is handling that portfolio. And so I would refer to you that.
[Question:] Did the president bring this up at all in his conversations in Hamburg with Vladimir Putin?
[Spicer:] I don't know. I would be glad to find out on that. I don't believe it did, but I would glad to find out.
[Question:] Thank you, Sean. The president tweeted earlier today that most politicians would have gone into the meeting like the one Don Jr. attended in order to get info on opposition, that that is politics. His FBI director nominee said that anyone who was approached by a hostile government for opposition research should contact the FBI, rather than taking the meeting. Who is right? And what is the White House's position on whether or not it's OK to meet with a hostile government for opposition research?
[Spicer:] Well, you know I'm not going to get into the specifics of this. But I will say that it is quite often for people who are given information during the heat of a campaign to ask what that is. That's what simply he did. The president has made it clear through his tweet and there was nothing as far as we know that would lead anyone to believe that there was anything except for discussion about adoption and the Magnitsky Act. But I would refer you back to counsel on that one.
[Question:] OK. And I can ask about counsel, about Marc Kasowitz? Reportedly, he exchanged e-mails with a private citizen with a number of threats and a profanity-laced set of comments. Does the White House and the president still have confidence in Mr. Kasowitz to speak for the administration on this Russia matter?
[Spicer:] Yes, he does. And I know Mr. Kasowitz has issued an apology in that matter. Zeke.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] The president's tweet this morning regarding the Russia investigation, did Ty Cobb vet that? Can you talk a little bit about his role? Is his job here to manage the president's personal response to the Russia investigation?
[Spicer:] Mr. Cobb as you know, within the Counsel's Office, there are various attorneys that have different portfolios. And while we have outside counsel, a lot of times, the requests that we get from this room require to us go to counsel and say, can we answer this question? What can we say or can't we say? You do you do your best a lot of times to get us to make a case why this should be answered by the White House. And so we end up spending a lot of time talking to the counsel's office about what can and can't be referred to outside counsel, what still remains in our purview. And so it was the decision of the White House to bring someone on board that, like in a lot of other areas that we have counsels dedicated to that, that there was significant interest in the subject to do that.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] the president's tweet this morning [OFF-MIKE] went through Mr. Cobb?
[Spicer:] I don't believe so.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] Made in America. You mentioned the [OFF-MIKE] helicopter on the [OFF-MIKE] South Lawn [OFF-MIKE] Marine One. Who paid for that to fly here from I guess probably Quantico? And also is it appropriate to use military resources for a political event?
[Spicer:] Well, it would be at Bowling is where I believe that's held. But, you know, I think we're very proud. The idea is to showcase this week things that are made in America. And I know Sikorsky and the state of Connecticut are very proud of the fact that they contribute to our national security, that there are, I assume, hundreds, if not thousands of people whose job depends on that. And I think, like most Americans, we're all proud of the helicopter and other military equipment that so many Americans work tirelessly to do. So, of course it is appropriate to highlight that. Hunter?
[Question:] Thank you, Sean. I'm wondering whether you can tell us if Made in America week will include the Trump Organization or Ivanka Trump brands committing to stop manufacturing wares abroad.
[Spicer:] Say that I'm sorry. If the...
[Question:] As part of Made in America Week, if the Trump Organization or Ivanka Trump's brands will make any kind of commitment to stop manufacturing gifts, clothes and other wares abroad?
[Spicer:] So, there's a couple of things that are interesting about that question. First, I think what is really important is the president's agenda, regulatory relief and tax relief, our focus on trying to make sure that all companies can hire here, can expand here, can manufacture here. That's something that he wants for every company. And you have seen him talk about that extensively. With respect to his own companies, obviously, it is inappropriate to discuss how anything would affect their own companies. But I can tell you that, in some cases, there are certain supply chains or scalability that may not be available in this country. I'm not going to comment on specific products. But I will tell you that the overall arching goal, of course, though, is to grow manufacturing, to grow investment here in the United States and to grow U.S. workers here. So, that remains the overall objective.
[Question:] Obviously, it might be a sacrifice, given certain questions about going rates and stuff, but wouldn't it sort of be a way to show leadership...
[Spicer:] Again, it would be it's not appropriate for me to stand up here and comment about a business. I believe that's a little out of bounds. But, again, I would go back to the president's broader goal, which is to create investment here, to bring back the manufacturing base. And I think when you look at these indices that measure confidence, both in terms of CEOs, manufacturers, and that they're all-time highs. And I think part of that is, is there's a lot of confidence that the president's agenda is going to accomplish that. Charlie?
[Question:] Just a question about the DHS decision to allow 15,000 new temporary worker visas. How does that not conflict with the president's hire American message?
[Spicer:] Again, I will refer to DHS on this. But I think one of the things that you're seeing through this is it's not just the number. It's a lot of the qualifications and a lot of the a lot that goes through there to ensure that we are hiring and bringing in the people. As you know, the president has been supportive of the RAISE Act by Senators Cotton and Perdue, which seeks to really look at more of a merit-based immigration system. And that is something that he continues to push for and will continue to work with Senators Cotton and Perdue and others to help get that in a place that will focus more on merit-based and really provide the overall reform that he's been talking about for a long time. Dave.
[Question:] Sean, thanks. What is the White House reaction to the government of Iran announcing that the they have sentenced the Chinese-American student from Princeton to 10 years for espionage? And, also, could you fill us in on any new sanctions on Iran?
[Spicer:] I'm not going to comment on any new sanctions, if there are some. At that point, Treasury would be the one to make that announcement when that is appropriate. Obviously, we're disappointed in that. And with respect to that individual, he is someone that we're keeping an eye on.
[Question:] Sean, with regard to I want to ask you about steel tariffs. The president told reporters on the plane last week that he was considering tariffs and quotas with regard to foreign steel.
[Spicer:] Right.
[Question:] This being Made in America Week, can we expect him now has the president made up his mind on whether he is going to do tariffs, quotas or both?
[Spicer:] I think that the president's comments on Air Force One speak for themselves. When he's ready to make an announcement on that, we will share that with you. But that's something that the team is still discussing with him. John Decker.
[Question:] Thanks a lot, Sean. Is the president resigned to the idea that it seems unlikely that the Senate will vote on any type of a repeal and replace bill any time in the immediate future?
[Spicer:] I know that Senator McConnell has made it clear that he would like Senator McCain back. We obviously wish him a speedy recovery. And as soon as Senator McConnell as soon as Senator McConnell can travel back and Senator McConnell feels it is appropriate, he will schedule that vote. We feel very confident about where we are now and we look forward to getting that bill on the president's desk and getting it signed.
[Question:] I just wanted to ask a real quick question. I realize you can't speak, as you said, specifically about the President Donald J. Trump Organization's companies. But just wanted to get a view from you on what critics are saying about whether the president is the right vessel for this message. After all, he has shirts made in China and Bangladesh and India, other products made, like Trump Vodka, made in the Netherlands. So, give me a sense, if you will, could, about whether the president is the right vessel for the message that he's going to deliver later today before the press.
[Spicer:] I actually look at it in a very different way, which is the president has been a very successful businessman on a number of fronts and a number of areas and industries. And to understand very firsthand what the tax burden and what the regulatory burden do to a business that wants to grow or expand here or here or hire here, so I think he actually is in a very unique way understands the challenges that our regulatory system and our tax system put on businesses that want to hire here, that want to grow here, that need scalability and capacity here in a way that maybe isn't because of some of our arcane trade laws, our regulations, or our tax laws. So, I actually think that he's in a very unique way able to talk about the challenges that so many of these companies face as they choose to expand and some of the tariffs and quotas that they face in other markets. I know that some of the stuff you look at a company like Caterpillar who is out, and then you talk to them about some of the tariffs that they face going into other countries, when you're talking about an earth mover, you know, a D-11 or something else, where you're talking about a million-plus-dollar piece of equipment, a 20 percent tariff is $200,000. So, if you're going into a country where our company, our countries, our companies are disadvantaged by a huge tariff, that's immediately putting them at a disadvantage. And the president understands what that means to a company that wants to grow and expand throughout the globe, and meet new markets and go into other places. So, I think he understands it probably very, very uniquely. Brad. Brad. Fred.
[Question:] Thanks, Sean.
[Spicer:] We will get to you Andrew. Don't worry.
[Question:] Thanks. Couple questions on the voter integrity commission meeting on Wednesday. Want to ask you, without full cooperation of all of the states, would the commission consider buying some of the registration information, sort of the way campaigns do, or using [OFF-MIKE] private organization like [OFF-MIKE] international?
[Spicer:] Most of this information is available. I mean, all those companies are doing it is buying it from the states. So, I don't think there would be any reason to go to a private vendor. I think we should be able to do this utilizing official resources that exist within a state. Again, I think there's been some miscommunication on what they're seeking. The commission has asked that each state provide that information that is public, that they share, and because that varies from state to state what they're willing to give out, the commission was illustrative in its letter in trying to describe what it was looking for. But I think we're going to move forward very well. Trey, yes.
[Question:] I'm sorry. I do have another. [OFF-MIKE] There was hacking into voter registration rolls. [OFF- MIKE] South Carolina, it was reported. Is that going to be something the commission will look into at all?
[Spicer:] I think the commission has got a very broad mandate to make sure that there's the greatest degree of integrity in our voting system and confidence in it. And so I don't want to get ahead of their agenda. But I think all areas like that are going to probably get brought up. But the first meeting is Wednesday. We will see what comes of it. Trey.
[Question:] Sean, two foreign policy questions for you. First, what steps is President Trump taking to ensure that the Israelis are comfortable with the U.S.-brokered cease-fire in Syria?
[Spicer:] So, obviously, with respect you're talking about Prime Minister Netanyahu's comments. One, I would refer you to him to that. But there's a shared interest that we have with Israel making sure that Iran does not gain a foothold, military base-wise, in Southern Syria. So while we're going to continue those talks, obviously, we want to have a productive cease-fire. But we also want to make sure that we're not one of our other objectives is obviously remains to make sure that Iran does not gain a foothold in Southern Syria. So, we need to continue to have that discussion with Prime Minister Netanyahu about his concerns. But I think there is a shared goal there. Eamon.
[Question:] Thanks, Sean. With the health care bill in limbo, what is the administration's intention to move forward on tax reform? Can you do it without having moved on health care first?
[Spicer:] Well, obviously, the Senate is still on track to vote, which is great. And the president will sign it as soon as it's you know, as soon as it's possible. We are going to continue to plan. We have had well into the hundreds if not close to 1,000 listening sessions with different entities. So, not the number of entities, not the number of meetings. So, they will continue that outreach, continue to hear with folks. There has been a very robust discussion with House and Senate leadership and the committees of relevant jurisdiction. And we're going to continue that. But we're going to keep moving that along. I expect there will be some activity in August, and then into September. But we're still on track to do that. And we hope to have the health care bill completely locked up as soon as Senator McConnell deems it appropriate.
[Question:] There is concern among those who support the health care bill that this extension is going to give the opponents of the bill more traction. What specifically is President Trump going to do to try to get this bill over the finish line? What [Off-mike]
[Spicer:] Well, I mean, he's been very active on the phone. He is going to continue to meet with senators. I think he will another some senators over tonight. He's been very active over the weekend. The vice president has been extremely engaged as well. We will continue those discussions. So, you know, I think we're going to do what we did the last time, be very the president is going to be engaged. He's going to get this done. And then it's been said before, but there's no one better than Mitch McConnell when it comes to knowing how and when to make a bill successful in the Senate. So, we have every confidence in the majority leader's ability to get this done and the president will do whatever he has to, to support those efforts.
[Question:] And who is going over tonight? Is it just...
[Spicer:] I don't have a list for you right now.
[Question:] And one quickly on Russia. President Trump has referred to the Russia investigation as a hoax, a witch-hunt. Given the meeting that Donald Trump Jr. had, does he now acknowledge that special counsel has a legitimate investigation?
[Spicer:] I think Mr. Sekulow answered that question very extensively this weekend.
[Question:  Spicer:] Again, I think it's been asked and answered. I think we did...
[Question:] Sean, can you tell me how these products were selected in each of the 50 states? And do you know if most of the owners are Trump supporters?
[Spicer:] I don't. You're free to ask them. I think the pool will be out there. I think there are some folks, so feel free to talk to hem. This was an engagement where we asked for suggestions from governors and members of Congress to give us a list. And then working within the different offices here, an ultimate selection was made. But we sought input from the governors and the congressional delegation. Abby.
[Question:] Since Friday, the president has tweeted four times about health care, but he has also tweeted six times about U.S. [OFF-MIKE] private property that is owned by his company. So, the question is, is it appropriate for him to essentially advertise his private business using his Twitter feed and his time, when comparatively less time is being spent on health care, an issue that, as you know, is the most important issue to Americans right now?
[Spicer:] Well, I respectfully disagree with that. In the sense that you sending off a tweet takes, what, five, 10 seconds. As I just mentioned to Kristen, he's been extremely engaged throughout the weekend with making phone calls, talking to folks, meeting with his team, getting updates. So, to compare a tweet with a meeting or a phone call of substance is probably a little...
[Question:] But he did spend time a lot of his weekend [OFF-MIKE] U.S. Women's Open and seemed to be very engaged in it. Tweets perhaps are a second-long, but its seems to indicate what the president is spending his time on. So, how do you assure the country that he actually is, in fact, engaged on health care?
[Question:  Spicer:] Right, because I would suggest to you, one, I just told you that he's been extremely engaged in talking to different senators. I know that some of them have mentioned that they had extensive discussions with him. Number two, this is the same group we got a lot of that it will never get through the House. We worked, and continued to work hard, continued to be engaged then, and it came out. We continue to do what we have to do and we will make it work. But we're going to get this done. We will go move on. We will do tax reform. We're going to do infrastructure. The president has got a very robust agenda. And I think when you look at the amount of activity that he's been able to do and the results that he's getting, I think that speaks for itself. Andrea. Yes, sure.
[Question:] Ivanka Trump the head of Ivanka Trump's business said that there it is currently not possible to make her product here in the United States. So, what is the White House or this administration's policy remedy for companies like who say there's just no way to do it? How do they make their products here in America?
[Spicer:] Well, I mean, I can't answer that question, in the sense that I'm not but I can tell you that it depends on the product. Right? There are certain things that, certain industries that we don't do as much anymore, and there are certain things that we do do more. There's a certain thing that certain aspect of technology and labor. But, as I mentioned before, in terms of scalability, there are certain things that we may not have the capacity to do here, in terms of having a plant or a factory that can do it. The beautiful thing about a capitalistic society is that, if there's enough of a demand for it, it will happen. And I think that's what the president is trying to do, is, if you lower the tax rate, if you lower the regulatory burden, you know, you will hopefully grow businesses and hope grow manufacturing. I have talked to several CEOs and business leaders in the past couple of weeks about tax reform. And it is amazing how many of them tell that you they pay the 35 percent rate and you say to them, what will you do if that rate drops? And the number one thing they talk about is they're going to invest and build more in their company. And I think that is what we need to do. But some lines, some industries, some products may not have the scalability or the demand here in this country. But like so many on other things, that if that demand, if there's enough of a demand, then hopefully someone builds a factory and does it. But we have seen that in your own industry, where you saw the decline of newspapers, for example, and you have seen a lot more online source online content and online publications. That's the evolution sometimes of some industries. But I'm sure around the world, newspapers still get delivered every day in a much greater way than they do here.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] If there's [OFF-MIKE] handbags, shirts, purses, whatever, if there's no capacity, is it appropriate to make those things overseas?
[Spicer:] Well, think about all of the things that we buy every day. Of course there's a market, because we depend in this country for so many goods and services, some of which are made in America, some of which aren't. Obviously, we want to create an environment in which more things are made here, more things exported from here. And that's what the president's agenda sets out to do. So, I got to go to birthday girl, Kayla. Oh, I'm sorry, Sarah.
[Question:] Sarah. Oh, thanks. It's not my birthday, but...
[Spicer:] No, I I don't even want to get into it. It's Kayla's birthday. She's not here. I saw Eamon. I thought CNBC. My apologies.
[Question:] I will take a second question.
[Spicer:] No, you already and then I will go to you.
[Question:] Back to the JCPOA, I really don't want to get ahead of the announcement about the recertification, but the administration has been reviewing it for some time now, even though the president has already made definitive statements about what he thinks should be done on the Iran deal. So, did he make those statements without having sufficient information about the Iran deal, or is the review ongoing because he's open to changing his position on the Iran deal if new information came to light?
[Spicer:] Yes, I have got to say, I think the president, from throughout the campaign until now, has made very clear that he thinks it's a bad deal. And, initially, he recertified it because he was had the luxury of having an entire team here both from State, national DOD, NSC to review it. That time is up. And State will make its announcement very shortly. But I think he has been very consistent with the fact that he thought it was a bad deal. So, Andrew?
[Question:] Thank you, Sean. Two questions and then a short follow-up. When the president took office, one of the things he ordered was 90-day cyber-security review. That deadline came and went. It's been several months. Can you update us on where that report is? Has it been completed? And, if it hasn't been completed, why?
[Spicer:] I will get back to you on the report. He did sign an executive order on cyber, making sure that we have the resources necessary to protect our key, critical infrastructure.
[Question:] Right. And second question. Last week, there was a large online day of action on net neutrality organized and participated in by many of the largest companies in America, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, a lot of the technology economy that's driving the U.S. economy. Granted, the FCC is an independent agency, but does the president believe that network neutrality is an important thing and an open Internet is important to the American economy?
[Spicer:] Well, again, I as you noted, the FCC is an independent agency. I would refer to you them with respect to...
[Question:] I asked if the president believes...
[Spicer:] I don't I have not addressed net neutrality specifically.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] The most concrete evidence to date of Russian efforts to influence the election and the Trump campaign's apparent receptiveness of those overtures. Moments ago the president weighed in on this major development. Here's what he wrote. "Few people knew the young, low-level volunteer named George who has already proven to be a liar."
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Well, there is at least one person involved in the Trump campaign who did appear to know volunteer George a little. His name was Donald Trump. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] George Papadopoulos. He's an oil and energy consultant. Excellent guy.
[Berman:] That was the voice of President Trump introducing excellent guy, Papadopoulos. You can also see this photo meeting with the "Washington Post" and Papadopoulos and other foreign policy advisers. However much the president knew about him before he might be about to learn a whole lot more because the special counsel's office calls him a pro-active cooperator which to legal insiders screams wire, wire, wire. Let's begin at the White House with Joe Johns and a president, Joe, this morning on the attack.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] That's absolutely right. And the president's tweets this morning referencing the fact that George Papadopoulos that surprise guilty plea that we heard about just yesterday and was accused of making false statements to the FBI. Let's look at the president's tweets. "The fake news is working overtime as Paul Manafort's lawyer said there was no collusion and events mentioned took place long before he came to the campaign. Few people knew the young, low-level volunteer named George who has already proven to be a liar. Check the Dems," the president tweets this morning. So referencing the fact that yes, he's a cooperating witness but also has been accused of false statements. And this may seem a little extreme, certainly, to call someone like this a liar on Twitter, but on the other hand it is, if you will, trial practice 101, trying to impeach a witness, perhaps even before that person gets on the stand. Also an indication that despite the fact that we have heard the president very upset, even seething over yesterday's developments. It's clear that the legal strategy is making its way into his tweets. The president has also at times indicated that he did not know George Papadopoulos. Also, we have been told by sources here at the White House he was seldom seen at Trump Tower. All of this, obviously, part of a strategy to discredit this individual who appears to have the potential to play a big role in this case as it develops. Back to you.
[Harlow:] Joe Johns at the White House. Thank you very much. Let's go now to our justice correspondent, Jessica Schneider. And, Jessica, a member of Mueller's team made it clear yesterday that what we have seen so far is a, quote, "small part of a large investigation." So what's next?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] So this story really developing on two fronts, Poppy. So first of all, we'll go to the case against Paul Manafort and Rick Gates. That is moving full steam ahead. Both men due back in court Thursday. But meanwhile the restrictions on them are extensive. Both are under home confinement in addition to $10 million and $5 million bond respectively. So really what does that mean? Well, both men can't leave their homes. They're only are allowed to when they meet with their lawyers, attend court or for medical or religious purposes. And Manafort and Gates must check in daily by phone with federal authorities. Now as for that bond, they'll be forced to pay on it, $10 million and $5 million only if they violate the terms of their release. Then, of course, there's the George Papadopoulos guilty plea. That is packing the most punch here in Washington. Papadopoulos is called a pro-active cooperator by prosecutors meaning he's been assisting them with this wide-ranging Russia investigation. And Papadopoulos, he's admitted to repeated contacts with Russian nationals after he became a foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign, and the fact that they promised him dirt and e-mails on Hillary Clinton and that he even tried to set up meetings with Russian officials and members of the campaign team. Now of course we saw this morning the president calling Papadopoulos a liar. Sarah Sanders yesterday referred to him as merely a volunteer in the campaign, but we've seen the e-mails released in the federal and the court paperwork and it makes clear that Papadopoulos did communicate with Paul Manafort and even Trump campaign national co- chair Sam Clovis, who encouraged Papadopoulos at one time to travel to Russia to get that alleged dirt on Hillary Clinton. Now Clovis has since told the "Washington Post" that he was just being polite and he actually supposed opposed the trip. But, you know, John and Poppy, more information, it is likely to come out from Papadopoulos. And prosecutors have even put it ominously saying that his guilty plea is just a small part of what's to come so stay tuned John and Poppy.
[Berman:] All right. Jessica Schneider, thanks so much. Who exactly was George Papadopoulos talking to overseas?
[Harlow:] Right.
[Berman:] Who were these foreign contacts? We have new developments on that. CNN's Nic Robertson in London with much more. Nic, what are you learning?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] What I'm learning from a source here is that he met with George Papadopoulos in the context of Papadopoulos telling him that he wanted to explain some of the president's comments President Trump's or candidate Trump's comments at that time about the Middle East, and that was the context that this source met him in. This was in this sort of middle of April last year, that the course met with George Papadopoulos. He describes him as a nice guy who really on the issue of foreign affairs appeared to be quite out of his depth was the way that this particular source characterized Papadopoulos. Out of his depth in terms of foreign affairs, didn't really sort of know the details of what he was talking about. My source was introduced to George Papadopoulos by the gentleman known sometimes known as the professor, Joseph Mifsud, who was running a diplomacy school at that time in London. This was the conduit for which my source met Papadopoulos. The source knew Mifsud for quite a number of years. His conversations around about that time with Mifsud, Mifsud was telling him that he had good connections in Russia, that he knew had met Putin and had dinner with Putin, and he added as well that Mifsud told them that they, the Russians, had a bunch of stuff on Hillary Clinton.
[Berman:] All right. Nic Robertson for us in London. Fascinating piecing this altogether.
[Harlow:] Yes, many more pieces still to be put in place. But we appreciate that, Nic. Joining us to talk about all of this, our legal analysts Laura Coates, Michael Zeldin. Of course, Michael, formerly a special assistant to Bob Mueller, now the special counsel. And CNN contributor Norman Eisen, and he worked on cases in the past with, again, Mueller. Thank you all for being here. Let me begin with you, Michael Zeldin. All that experience you have working with Mueller. So the president's attack this morning is to call the guy who has already flipped a liar. Smart?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, he is a liar. He's a convicted liar. He lied to the FBI about the nature of his contacts on behalf of the campaign with Russian intermediaries so he is a liar. I don't think that's what the president
[Harlow:] I don't think that's the context the president was saying it in.
[Zeldin:] Exactly. But the reality is, is that this fellow, Papadopoulos, presents a very interesting problem for the president. In the statement of facts Papadopoulos says these are not all the facts. When he pleaded guilty, he said there are more facts here, this is not everything. So Mueller has more stuff. Then it says this is a small part of a larger investigation. And then it says this guy is a proactive cooperator, so he's been cooperating for three months, which means he probably had recorded communications with others in the campaign, which means that they're going to have testimonial evidence and transcripts of what they said. It's a very dangerous political and legal gambit. I think Ty Cobb is correct to tell the president keep cooperating. If there's nothing there, Mueller will decline the prosecution. He's got the backbone to do that and just go along. But that's not apparently in the president's
[Dna. Berman:] Laura, a small part of a much larger investigation, as Michael notes, in this statement of offense about George Papadopoulos. And note that the facts that we know do not constitute all the facts known to the party. The big hint that there's a lot more out there.
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] That's very foreboding for people in Washington, D.C. and who may be close to the president's inner circle or on the Trump campaign team to hear that information, to know that they're not going to be forthright about everything they might know, which tells you, you're probably going to have an influx of people, who previously spoke to the FBI or somebody else and want to correct their statement in some way, or say, you know what, since I know that you want to prosecute people for false statements let me ensure that my statement was not at all misleading. And remember, it is true that he has been convicted of pleading guilty to making a false statement to the FBI, but the FBI was aware of that false statement as of January 2017, and they've been building that case every since and he pled guilty a few weeks ago. The underlying substance about what the FBI was aware of, the contact with foreign agents and the substance of e-mails and communications, he could not lie about that. They've already seen it with their own eyes. And so to discredit this person Papadopoulos is not going to hold much water when the FBI was already aware of the information substantively about what he lied about then.
[Harlow:] And when you have a picture meeting with him.
[Coates:] Right.
[Harlow:] And your team, and you call him an excellent guy. Norm, to you, what does it tell you, and even more significantly, what message do you think it sends to other, you know, potential targets, potential witnesses that they were able to seal this guilty plea until yesterday?
[Norman Eisen, Cnn Contributor:] Well, it demonstrates that Mueller is using every tool in the prosecutor's tool kit to look into all the allegations here, including the collusion. And ultimately the biggest question of all, did President Trump know about any of this and did the president obstruct justice? So by sealing this and waiting until yesterday, Mueller is a very savvy prosecutor. He knows that there's going to be arguments, oh, the Manafort and Gates indictments don't relate to collusion, so he waited until the day that those arguments were going to pop up and he released his collusion intensive guilty plea. The president is on the bubble on his obstruction liability and the attack on one of Mueller's witnesses this morning is probably against the advice of Ty Cobb and John Dowd, against the strategy and puts the president in more peril. Prosecutors don't like it when you attack their witnesses publicly.
[Berman:] You know, Michael, it is interesting. If you look at the pattern here, you have this person you know, this professor offering George Papadopoulos information, dirt on Hillary Clinton and thousands of e-mails. Well, Donald Trump, Jr., was offered dirt on Hillary Clinton also by someone connected to the Russians there. Is that a pattern there that is something that this special counsel will be looking into?
[Zeldin:] Absolutely. These offers were essentially the same. And the heart of it is the e-mails. Everyone is, on the Trump campaign, trying to get these e-mails. And these are two offers with respect to the Hillary Clinton e-mails. And what's interesting, when you look at the timeline is there's an offer made and then President Trump makes statements publicly. There's an offer made for the e-mails and President Trump says, Russia, if you can hear me, or I love WikiLeaks, or there's an offer made to Don Jr. meeting and the president says there's going to be a big speech coming up about Clinton and the dirt. So there seems to be a connection between offer to the campaign on information and then statements publicly by the president.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Zeldin:] I can't dismiss that as just coincidence.
[Harlow:] So, talking about the timeline, which Michael, Laura, is right to bring up, you had the Papadopoulos statement about the thousands of e-mails being offered by the Russians in April then it was July that the president said, you know, Russia, if you're listening, why don't you get these e-mails, we all want to see them. But it is important to note, is it not, Laura, that none of these offers from Papadopoulos for these meetings with Russians were actually accepted and granted? You know, yes, you know, Sam Clovis responded, he said, to be polite, but no actual meetings that we know of came from these. Significant?
[Coates:] It is significant. Of course you have to first suspend all disbelief you're just trying to be nice when you're encouraging somebody to engage in conspiracy to commit a crime of getting the hacked e-mails or whatnot to assuming he actually was just being nice for a second for the sake of argument. I will say that it is significant that he did not have a response, but it's not significant legally that he still attempted to commit a crime. There's a whole code in the federal code, a whole section devoted to the idea of attempting to commit felonies, and those carry the same amount of weight and jeopardy oftentimes as the completion of the crime. And so simply the attempt is not going to be enough to exonerate these individuals if there are more to come.
[Berman:] You know, Norm, it struck me yesterday the lawyer for Paul Manafort in this public statement, the first thing he said is, the president was right, there is no collusion. Isn't his number one role to defend his client Paul Manafort? So why does he think that statement helps his client? Could it be he wants something from the president?
[Eisen:] He was starting the process of advocating to the president for a pardon for Paul Manafort. You saw two very dramatically different strategies yesterday. One is the what appears to be the scorched earth defense that Manafort is launching, and the other, the cooperative strategy, the guilty plea from Papadopoulos. You know, ultimately Manafort's fate to some extent rests in the hands of the president so his lawyer wants to please the president. Not totally, however, because these are also state crimes.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Eisen:] the president. Not totally, however, because these are also state crimes, which the president doesn't have the power to pardon, and there are reports that Mueller is working with the New York State AG, Eric Snyderman, so that it's a very complicated chess game going on. But I think that was a pardon ploy yesterday.
[Berman:] It was a notable statement. All right. Laura Coates, Michael Zeldin, Ambassador Norman Eisen, thanks so much. What about the investigation? What do they think about it on Capitol Hill? Republicans being impressed, how will they weigh in?
[Harlow:] Plus, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly jumps into the debate overnight over removing confederate memorials, and uses the words, quote, "good faith" on both sides, saying, a lack of compromise led to the civil war, the controversy about that. Also, right now, 70 percent of Puerto Rico is still without power after Hurricane Maria. Minutes from now, FEMA Chief Brock Long on the hot seat over the federal response.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] And the concentration of all those emotions get worse, we need people that we can count on to tell the truth. And I hope that that happens for this country. That's all for us tonight. Thanks for watching. CNN with Don Lemon, "CNN TONIGHT" starts right now.
[Don Lemon, Cnn:] Thank you, sir. A lot to get to, so I'm going to move it along. I'll see you tomorrow. All right. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. Here's our breaking news. Early results coming in right now in the U.S. Senate runoff in Mississippi. Republican Senator Cindy Hyde- Smith, well, she has the lead over the Democrat there, who is Mike Espy. But there are still a lot of votes to be counted. You might be wondering why all eyes are on this Mississippi race tonight a full three weeks after election day. Well, the answer three words. The blue wave. The blue wave that swept Democrats into power in the House, and it stands right now as it stands right now, Democrats have picked up 39 seats in the House of Representatives. That is the biggest gain in the House seats in the House seats by Democrats since Watergate. But even that fact doesn't really capture what happened in these midterms. The Cook Political Report has been keeping a tally of the votes cast for either party in House races across the country. And according to their latest count, Democratic house candidates got over nine million more votes than Republican candidates. That is the largest margin in the history of midterm elections. Democrats lead Republicans by 8.1 percentage points. That's a bigger lead than Republicans had in wave elections in 1994 and in 2010. And beyond the House, Democrats picked up seven governorships, even winning in Kansas, a state the president carried by almost 21 points and unseating Republican Scott Walker in Wisconsin. They picked up 332 state legislative seats across this country, and that could still grow. Since his press conference on November 7th, the president has insisted without evidence that he and the Republicans had a good election night. Make no mistake, there was a blue wave in America. Plenty to discuss now. Mr. John king is here. John, good evening to you. Give us the latest.
[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] Big blue wave in America, but perhaps not in Mississippi tonight in the final contest of the 2018 midterms. Let's just look, Don. We're at 55 percent. The incumbent Republican, she was an appointed senator, but she's the incumbent now. Cindy Hyde- Smith with 55 percent. You see it here. Mike Espy, the Democrat, former congressman, former Clinton Bill Clinton cabinet member, just shy of 45 percent. So, 51, almost 52,000 vote margins for Cindy Hyde-Smith as you look at the map, and it's filling in. Here's one safe bet. This will get at least a little bit closer. Why? This is Mike Espy's old congressional district out here in the western part of the state. You see all the blue. This is the most Democratic part of the state, a heavy African- American population. The problem for Mike Espy is he needs to not only run up margins here, it will show you, they're pretty good, right, at 72 percent in this county, with 84 percent in. Sixty-seven percent here with half of the vote in. He needs to not only run up those margins, he needs to turn out. He needs African-Americans to come out in overwhelming numbers. One other thing, if you look at the Espy campaign, they're saying we'll get closer here because Hinds County, we're only at 47 percent of the vote, so half, a little more than half still to be counted. And you see the big margin. This is Jackson, just around Jackson that Mike Espy is running up there. So, if you're in the Espy headquarters, you're saying, OK, that's not great. It's going to get a little bit closer. The question is can you get it close enough? Is the Democratic turnout mostly in the western part of the state going to be enough and that's a big challenge? Because you start looking. Number one, let's look in the Jackson suburbs. This is a pretty respectable showing in Madison County. For Mike Espy 46 percent of the vote we're at 44 percent. Down here closer to Jackson, you have affluent suburbs we saw in the Alabama win last year for the Democrats in the south. We saw throughout this blue wave year in House races. The president struggles with Republican voters, especially moderate women, in the suburbs. So that's a respectable showing. Is it enough to get Mike Espy over the finish line? That's how we'll count them up as we get closer. You move over here and see a much bigger win in the eastern Jackson suburbs. It's more conservative territory, Cindy Hyde-Smith doing what she needs to do there. One more quick point about Mississippi, Don. Now we can do whatever you want here. I just want to look. This is one of the places the president visited, Cindy Hyde-Smith running up pretty good numbers here. Why do we say that? let's do a little comparison. This is three weeks ago. We're here tonight because there were four candidates three weeks ago. So, 48 percent, 20 percent, 68 percent, right? The Republican vote in this area three weeks ago. Let's come back. Remember, 68 percent. She's getting just shy of that now. So, did the president help? Well, a lot of those Chris McDaniel voters not fans of Cindy Hyde-Smith. So at least the president will be able to make the argument he got those tea party voters who might not love her to realize you got to come vote today. Again, we're going to be counting for a little while. We're up to 59 percent now though. Fifty-nine percent as the map fills in this very red state. For Mike Espy to pull off a miracle when these counties come in, not only the margins, the turnout has to be huge. Possible? Yes. Bet on it? I wouldn't.
[Lemon:] Yes. So, you showed us where Espy needs to run up the total if he stands a chance. But I got to ask you, we're looking at usually a ruby red state. To have these sorts of numbers, what does it say about what's going on, John?
[King:] Look, this is not just the president. She's not a great candidate. As you've talked about for the last couple of weeks, she said some pretty horrible things, at least from a national perspective. We're going to see tonight how the verdict goes on some of these racially charged comments in Mississippi. She has a state that's Republican Party has become more tea party. She's more establishment. So, it's not just President Trump. Not just President Trump. But if you have a 10-point race, let's assume it gets a little bit closer. Republicans will celebrate that. That means they will have 53 seats in the United States Senate next year. Easier for the president to get a new attorney general. Easier for the president to get other nominees confirmed. However, in Mississippi, she's on the ballot again in two years if she wins tonight. This is to fill the remaining term for Senator Cochran. If you look at this you are going to be thinking, yes, the Democrats might not have a great candidate. This is not an over joyous night if this is the margin that holds up in the state of Mississippi. A win is a win, don't mistake that. A win is a win. But it's another sign even in Mississippi, you just talked about the big blue wave. The Republican Party has problems just about everywhere.
[Lemon:] Let me ask you this, then. You said the Republicans, they have problems just about everywhere. Let's talk about overall because not a lot has gone well for Republicans in terms of the House since election day. So, catch us up on where we stand right now.
[King:] Sure. Let me come out of here, and let me close this out. I got to fix this for you. This is our House map. This is the big House map if you look at it right now. These are the called races. There's one left out in California where the Democrat has actually pulled ahead. We're not ready to call that tonight. The Democrat has pulled ahead in recent days in another Republican district. Right now, 234 to 200. Four hundred thirty-five seats so there's one left. That's 42 pickups minus three. A net gain at the moment of 39, 39 for the Democrats. That's a blue wave. That is a blue wave, and it could get to 40. So, what do we do when we look at this? Number one, the Democrats are winning everywhere, not just wiping out the Republicans in New England but picking up a seat in Oklahoma, but picking up seats out a seat here in Kansas. That's one way to look at it. Let me show you something else, Don as we go through this. Republicans, the reason Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, then George Bush, the Republican Party of those days was anchored in the suburbs, including suburban women who cared about low taxes, schools, crime. Let me show you something about what happened in this election. Let's bring this out and take a look. Number one, let's look at the big 2016 to 2018 flips. These are the Republican held seats or the Democrat held seats if it's red. These are seats that flipped from one party to another. Now let me bring that back out and show you this. Let's just collate in now the top suburban districts. Of the 39 the Democrats have tonight, maybe 40 when that California race is done, the pickup, right? Look at this, Democratic pickups in suburban, more than half, more than half of what the Democrats are getting are these suburban districts and they go coast to coast. Coast to coast the Democrats have taken away the suburbs, which are fast growing in the United States, which are where most competitive statewide elections are won. And just one quick point, to stretch out California, you don't need to be little bit smart here. But Orange is literally the new blue, as in Orange County, which used to be Ronald Reagan rock red Republican. The California Republican Party, we talked about the National Republican Party. This Republican Party in this state has been in trouble for a long time. It is just on life support after this cycle.
[Lemon:] Orange County traditionally very conservative. Thank you thank you, John. I appreciate it. We'll get back. We're going to keep following. Listen, it's not over yet. It is not over, as we say, till it's over. So, let's bring in Harry Enten, Mark Preston, Nia-Malika Henderson. Listen, the numbers are what they are right now. But again, until it's called, it's not over yet. Mark, give us your impressions, your thoughts on how things are looking in Mississippi.
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, a couple things. One, we shouldn't be surprised by what we're seeing as the outcome right now. We know Mississippi is a rock-solid red Republican state. Having said that, though, there are major red flags being put up. Now John just discussed those and talked about how Democrats are winning across the country. Let me just put this in perspective when we talk about changing demographics and how things can change in the country. If you look in the south right now and you look in Georgia, you look in Texas, you look in Florida, you saw three states where Democrats almost won major seats, whether it be a Senate seat or a governorship. What did all those candidates have in common? They were absolute long shots to even be in contention for those seats, and they were all minorities. You add Mike Espy to that list as well. You now have four candidates. Let assume Espy does lose, who were very, very close. Why is this a problem for Republicans? It all comes down to math, right? You need 270 electoral votes, Don, to become president of the United States. Let's just say in a decade these demographics change a little bit, and we see that Georgia, Texas, and Florida flip and they become Democratic states. All you have to do is add in California, which we know is very liberal, New York, which we know is very liberal, and you are only 103 electoral vote as way from being the president of the United States. That's with only a handful of states.
[Lemon:] Very interesting. Let's continue to talk about Mississippi. I want to bring Harry in. Does Espy have a path to victory right now?
[Harry Enten, Cnn Politics Senior Writer And Analyst:] I don't see it. I mean, obviously, I don't project races for this network. But I don't see it based upon everything that I'm seeing. And that shouldn't be a huge surprise, right? The polling average heading into this runoff had Hyde-Smith leading by mid-single digits. Based upon the votes left out, we should see Espy close the gap which is above 10 points now. So, we'll head right towards that polling average. But more than that look at the results that occurred earlier this month. And then you try and predict them based upon the past presidential vote whether or not the incumbent is running. That would have predicted Hyde-Smith would win by seven percentage points and that's looking like what we'll probably end up at this point.
[Lemon:] Listen, you are the forecaster, the political forecaster but, I mean, just to me as a person who sits here and, you know, sort of as a moderator of the political debates, to see this these sorts of numbers in Mississippi, as I said to John, I mean, it's surprising to me.
[Enten:] I think it is somewhat surprising insofar as this is a state where a Democratic Senate candidate hasn't won since 1982. A Democratic gubernatorial candidate has not received a majority of the votes since 1987. And you have to go all the way back to the '50s for a Democratic presidential candidate to receive a majority of the vote. So, the fact that Espy at least was somewhat closer, closer than you might have expected given the first rounding of voting when the Democrats only added up to 42 percent of the vote does indicate to me that some of Hyde-Smith's comments might have hurt her but not to the extent whereby it was enough for Espy to close.
[Lemon:] Let's dig in a little more about that. Because, Nia, listen, if she does win, a win is a win. Cindy Hyde-Smith, her comments about attending a public hanging, the president asking whether Espy fit in in Mississippi. Do you think these dog whistles had an impact?
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] Marginally. Probably. I think the major way they had an impact was it drew the national spotlight to this campaign in Mississippi that probably wasn't going to get much national attention. It also allowed Mike Espy to make a closing argument about why people should vote for him, which is to say that essentially Cindy Hyde-Smith wouldn't be good for Mississippi's reputation. Obviously, it's a deep south state and has struggled to embrace sort of this new south reputation. So, I think that in some ways was a good thing for his candidacy. But I think in the end, we're going to see a state do what a state like Mississippi would do, which is to say we're going to see a very racially polarized electorate, likely 80 percent of white voters in Mississippi are going to pull the lever for Cindy Hyde-Smith, and over 80 percent of black voters will vote for Mike Espy. That's just how Mississippi is. Everything in that race in terms of politics, everything in that state in terms of politics has often been about race, right? I mean, white people fled the Democratic Party and became Republicans over the issue of race. So, if you're a Mississippian, you're sort of used to this language around race and dog whistling and signaling around race. But in the end, it will l be the same outcome here. But certainly, some warning signs, I think, for Republicans in this state, and certainly, I think probably some regrets that they did put forth Cindy Hyde-Smith, who is a weak candidate and likely ended up in this position because Mississippi is a state that has never had a woman before Cindy Hyde-Smith represent them in Congress, either in the Senate or in the House of Representatives. So, if she wins tonight, she's going to make some history tonight.
[Lemon:] Mark, a win by Smith would mean that we're looking at a 53-47 Republican majority in the Senate, and the president went down there, campaigned hard for her as he did for many red-state senators. Is this Senate his red wall?
[Preston:] Well, it certainly I mean, he's going to need the Senate. He's going to need Mitch McConnell to have as much breathing room as possible to try to get some things done. But, look, nothing is going to get done unless House Democrats and Senate Republicans can actually come together on some issues. It doesn't appear that they can. But you can never say never. So, operationally, this win is more important for someone like Mitch McConnell because he needed that extra Republican senator. Now, we all know that President Trump is going to be tweeting and talking about how he delivered this race to Cindy Hyde-Smith. What's interesting about her is that she entirely embraced Trump. I mean, she might as well have been like Trump woman, right? I mean, that was her whole campaign. So-
[Lemon:] Wasn't her bus something like the MAGA bus or something-
[Preston:] Right. Right.
[Lemon:] that she drove around in?
[Preston:] She went hard. What he'll do is he'll look at that and say, look, she embraced me. She won. Mia Love didn't embrace me. She lost. Doesn't make sense. It doesn't make it true. But that's the reality of what he's going to say.
[Lemon:] All right. Thank you. I want you all to stick around and I want everybody to stick with us for the latest results on the Senate runoff in Mississippi. As it says, as we've been saying, the votes are the vote counting is underway, and all of this is happening as the president is doubling down on his assault on the truth tonight. Wait until you hear what he is saying now about his own administration's climate change report.

[Unknown:] I believe in second chances. He has the highest motivation to ensure that his legacy is not defined by a picture in his yearbook.
[Uknown:] And there it is. The dynasty continues.
[Rob Gronkowski, Partiots Football Player:] The hard work we put in this year was just paid off this year.
[Unknown:] It was unreal. I mean, it was like a home game. This is New Day with Alisyn Camerota and Tom Berman.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right, good morning and welcome to your new day. Alisyn is off, Poppy Harlow is with me, regretting it already.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] And Berman cannot stop smiling. Let me tell you.
[Berman:] It's hard. All right, six and counting. Oh, you're going to hate me even more for saying that. The New England Patriots won their sixth Super Bowl, a 13-3 victory over the Los Angeles Rams. It was the lowest scoring Super Bowl ever and it felt like it. Patriots receiver, Julian Edelman, he was the game MVP. We're going to have much more, much more on this big historic game in just a moment. But first, the State of Union address, it's tomorrow. A new CNN poll just released shows where the president stands with the American people. President Trump's approval rating is now at 40 percent. It's up slightly from last month, but still not good and Americans are not confident the president can avoid another shutdown. Only 34 percent believe President Trump and Congress will be able to reach a funding deal by next Friday's deadline. And, when it comes to the president declaring a national emergency to build a wall, two out of three Americans say he should not do it.
[Harlow:] Also this morning, in battled Virginia Governor, Ralph Northam, will meet with his Cabinet in about two hours as calls for him to resign grow louder and louder over that racist yearbook photo. Well, last night, he held an urgent meeting with several senior staff members of color and a source tells CNN no one in that meeting urged him to stay and fight.
[Berman:] All right, joining me now is the former Republican Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie. He's a long-time friend of the presidents and an author of a new book, "Let Me Finish: Trump, the Kushners, Bannon, New Jersey and the power of In-Your-Face Politics." Governor, thank you so much for being with us. You brought a copy of your book. I left my ear marked copy down in my office, but it's terrific to see you and congratulations on your Super Bowl.
[Chris Christie, Former Governor Of New Jersey:] Thanks for having me guys, appreciate it.
[Berman:] So, I want to start with Ralph Northam, the Governor of Virginia. You faced your own scandals and issues when you were governor, vastly different.
[Christie:] Yes.
[Berman:] But, what does it feel like to be in this type of moment where everyone is looking at you?
[Christie:] Well, I think it's hard, no matter what. You're human and nobody likes to be going through stuff like this. Now, the difference here is that he has no sense, it seems to me, of what the truth is. I mean, we've heard two or three different versions of the truth so far from him. That maybe it was him, now maybe it wasn't him and I think that the biggest challenge in a situation like this is, if you don't know what the truth is you've got to go find it out and then you've got to present it to people immediately if you want to try def credibility with people you represent. And I think the biggest problem for the governor right now, beside the incident itself, is his reaction to the incident, which is to be all over the place and I don't I quite frankly don't think he's going to be able to survive this for two reasons. One, because of his own conduct and two, because the Democratic Party, I don't think as a whole, can deal with going into a presidential year having to answer this question over and over and over again.
[Berman:] I want to get to that second point, but just go back to the first one, the issue here is for people who haven't attention to this Friday, is there is a racist photo on his medical school yearbook page. At first he apologized for it, then the day later he said it wasn't him in it. Does it matter, at this point, if it's him in it?
[Christie:] Well, it does matter if it's him in it, but I think because of his varying answers, you're right, it almost doesn't matter. Here's the think people can't believe. People can't believe it's on his yearbook page and he doesn't know whether it's him or not. Now, if he had said right from the beginning, it's not me, I used the picture, it was awful judgment and I'm sorry, or it is me and here's why I did it. Either one of those could be answers that he could try to deal with potentially. Here's the problem though, you can't say you don't know you put the picture on your yearbook page, how do you not know.
[Berman:] It's possible he's saying there were a lot of mix-ups with photos in the yearbook, but still, the question of how do you not know if that's you in a picture no matter how many years later. It's hard to believe that.
[Christie:] Well, just how about this though for a second? If it were me...
[Berman:] Yes.
[Christie:] ... and all of a sudden there's a mix-up and that photo shows up on my yearbook page, I'd be screaming from the mountaintops, hold on, that's disgusting, I'm not going to do that. That does that's not me, so.
[Berman:] You brought up the Democrats, the Democrats not being able to handle this or wanting this as they head into 2020. Is there a different standard though, in the Democratic Party, when it deals with members of it's party that have scandals, issues, of race or sexism or harassment? Al Franken was forced out of the Senate, yet Donald Trump, with the "Access Hollywood" tape stayed in the campaign and he's now President of the United States. Steve King is still in Congress. Do Democrats have a zero tolerance policy and Republicans have a somewhat not zero tolerance policy?
[Christie:] I don't think that's it. I think it's more the circumstances of each one of those cases. I think if you spoke to Senator Franken today, he would say to you, he wishes he hadn't resigned. That he acted precipitously. And I think he would react differently than the way he did before. I think the difference here is that the Democrats have been very, very aggressively, rhetorically, against the president on issues of race going all the way back to Charlottesville. I think that was appropriate. I spoke out at the time of Charlottesville and said that I thought that the president's remarks were not acceptable. But when you do that, people in your business are going to be looking for hypocrisy and so they're worried about and appropriately so, and so I think Democrats, now, having down what they have done and I don't think they regret what they've done, but now they're going to have to apply the same standard to the Governor of Virginia and I think that's I don't think he can survive this.
[Berman:] New polling out today from CNN and in advance to the State of the Union address tomorrow night, the president's approval rating is at 40 percent, but there's some other numbers here that jump out as well. Forty-three percent of the people in this poll say it's the worst run government ever, like in their lifetime, 43 percent say the worst run government ever, 47 percent strongly disapprove the president. Those are very high, strong, don't like numbers.
[Christie:] Sure, and here's the thing, let's divide let's split them up. On the 47 that don't approve, strongly disapprove of his presidency, that's not surprising to me. The fact is, this has been a very divided country. It was divided during the election and the run up to the election and nothing that's happened since then, in the last two years, has brought the country any closer together.
[Berman:] Nothing that's happened, nothing that he's done, is that fair to say?
[Christie:] Well, I think he's the president, so nothing that he's done or quite frankly nothing that the Congress has done on either side of the aisle, Republican or Democrat. Now, on the other issue though, I think on the worst run, that's what we address in the book. The fact is that, it could have been different for the president and it could have been better, but people around him, Steven Bannon, Rick Dearborn, Jared Kushner, throughout a transition plan that 140 people worked on for six months, put me out of it, 140 people worked on for six months and they decided to run a transition from the back of an envelop for 71 days. This was an awful disservice to the president and an awful disservice to the country and it's indicated by the way it's been run and the president has been trying to recover from that ever since then.
[Berman:] Your write about it extensively in your book, but that's all in the past tense, let's talk about the present tense. Because Maggie Haberman and others or all reporters are saying that Jared Kushner is acting as a defacto Chief of Staff, that his power has never been greater inside this White House. You're very critical of him in the book. Do you think that's a dangerous situation for the president?
[Christie:] Listen, I think that the president, it's always difficult and that's why it very rarely happen when you family in official positions. Families have always been informal advisors to presidents and really since Bobby Kennedy, we haven't had this situation where a family member has had such an important position as both Jared and Ivanka hold in the White House. The problem is, if they do something wrong it's hard to fire people that you've got to have Thanksgiving dinner with, right? And on the other hand too, people inside the White House, also, are going to be deferring to them because they know they know that they get the last word. They're the one in the residence, they're the ones going to Mar-A-Lago on the weekends or to Bedminster, New Jersey, and so these are difficult things that I think the president has to has looked at this. He's got to understand how that's affecting the ability to get good advice from other people.
[Berman:] If he is the one running things right now, is he doing a good job? If he was running things during the shutdown, is Kushner doing a good job?
[Christie:] Well listen, the shutdown was a failure and there's not other way to put it. When the government is shutdown that's a failure and that's why I don't think I saw the number about whether the government will be shutdown again. I just don't believe the Republicans or the Democrats can afford to shutdown the government again, and this time the Democrats are going to own more of it than they did the last time. The president said he wanted to own it the last time. Once that happened it gives the Democrats a free pass to do whatever they wanted to. Now, the Democrats, if this gets closed again, both sides are going to take a hit on this. So, I think there's going to be one of two alternatives, either they're going to come to a deal by Friday, or if they don't they're going to have a funding deal that's going to continue to move forward, of some length of time, and the president is probably going to go for a national emergency to build the wall.
[Berman:] Do you think suggesting the shutdown is still on the table? You said, the shutdown was a terrible idea and you blamed him for it...
[Christie:] Right.
[Berman:] ... or for saying that he was going to own it before hand. Do you think telling Margaret Brennan over the weekend that, yes, I still might shutdown again is a good strategy?
[Christie:] Well, I think you have to do that to keep that on the table as part of your negotiations, but I think everybody realistically knows in the back of their mind that it's not going to happen. And I don't that Republicans in the Senate would permit it to happen, even if the president wanted to. The president would then have to defy Republicans in the Senate and Democrats in the House. I just don't think he's going to do that, because I don't think it's practical and I don't think it will get him what he wants ultimately. Now, the national emergency thing, you know, is a real jump ball in terms of the legal strategy and whether or not a court will endorse his ability to do that. But, the fact of the matter is, the Democrats, I think, are playing this one, in the second phase, wrong if they don't give the president something. I worked with the Democratic legislature for eight years, what I learned was, in a tough negotiation, everyone's got to win. If everybody doesn't win something, then it damages the relationship going forward and you're never getting anything done.
[Berman:] The Conference Committee is meeting. We don't know what they're going to come up with right now.
[Christie:] Yes.
[Berman:] Maybe they will come up with something. Axios has a heck of a report that they put this weekend, where someone leaked the president's schedules for months and months and months. There are several aspects of this that they're worth diving into, but one thing is, the sheer amount of executive time, 297 hours of executive time compared to 77 hours of meetings, 51 hours of travel, this is from November 7 to February 1, 2019. Two hundred and ninety seven hours of executive time, is that too much?
[Christie:] It depends on what he's doing in executive time, okay? So, if he's watching you guys.
[Berman:] Which he is. You know he's doing that a lot.
[Christie:] Well, I know he's doing some of that. If he's watching you guys exclusively, that's too much time and I would tell him to turn off the TV and not no offence, but not watch you guys that much. I think he's also spending a lot of time on the phone consulting with people during that time. I know that I speak to him often during that executive time, period. He's talking to lots of different people, gathering opinions and ideas, and he's most comfortable doing that without exposing on his calendar exactly who he's speaking to. That's certainly his right to do it. So, it depend on what he's doing in that executive time and I think if he's making it productive for him, to be able make decisions, we're not asking presidents to punch a time clock.
[Berman:] No.
[Christie:] They're on duty all the time, no matter what. And I think it depends on what the president's using the time for.
[Berman:] Yes or no, is he working hard enough and putting in the hours that he needs to, to understand the issues?
[Christie:] Oh yes, yes. Listen, there's no one who, I think, who knows him is ever going to accurse President Trump of now working hard enough. He's a hard worker.
[Berman:] All right, Governor Chris Christie is going to stick around to talk a little bit more. Some of the questions I have, are what does it say to you that someone leaked these schedules? Hold onto that answer. And also, I have some new questions for you about the timeline of the revelations about the president's relationship with Russia and I want to go back to some of those moments in the presidential campaign. So, stick around. More of Chris Christie in just a moment.
[Harlow:] Yes, fascinating interview so far, but this is the only thing we would interrupt if for, of course, and that is a big win for the Patriots, and of course J.B., who can't stop smiling this morning. The Patriots winning their, record, sixth Super Bowl. Coy Wire live in Atlanta with more. Kind of a snoozer for a lot of folks, but not this guy.
[Coy Wire, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] I like what you said before, the snoozer bowl, a lot of people saying that. And Poppy, I played against Tom Brady and the Patriots twice a year, every year for six years of my NFL career. So, despite Brady not throwing a single touchdown pass and they still find a way win, not a surprise. Now the game did not start off well for the Patriots or with Tom Brady. On his very first pass attempt it would be an interception, a tipped pass and that would kind of set the tone for the game. Great defense, not a lot of scoring. It was just three to three in the fourth quarter for the first time in Super Bowl century and here's the play of the game. Tom Brady sees Gronk in man-to-man coverage, I'll take it he says, gave the Pats a spark. That set up Sony Michel, who lost the college national championship on this very same field just a year ago, scoring the only touchdown in the Super Bowl, putting the Pats up 10 to 3. Just about four minutes to go though, young Jared Goff has a chance to tie it up. Great pass to Brandin Cooks, but look at the defense, Cook can't haul it in. One more chance for young Goff to prove he can beat Tom Brady too and bring his team back. But no, Stephon Gilmore with the interception, he's no Tom Brady, 13 to 3 is your final. Julian Edelman is your MVP. Tom Brady wins his sixth Super Bowl. That's a record. I caught up with big Gronk afterwards and asked him about crunch time and about his possible retirement.
[Gronkowski:] Unreal man. This is surreal.
[Wire:] Your third time.
[Gronkowski:] Third time. This is crazy man, crazy. This is the hard work we put in this year, was this paid off for sure.
[Wire:] All right, John, I did ask him about it. He said, just think about a week or two. I know you're hoping Gronk comes back, because he's a heck of a player for them and the heartbeat and soul of that team. Congrats to you, John Berman, on yet another victory for your team.
[Berman:] I just Rob Gronkowski to be happy, which is, about 130 percent of the time.
[Wire:] He always is happy.
[Berman:] So, whatever he does he's going to be happy. Coy Wire, great to have you down in Atlanta. Thanks so much. We're going to much more with former New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie next.

[Berman:] During one 14-hour stretch in Chicago on Sunday, 44 people were shot. Forty-four people shot, five killed. CNN's Ryan Young live in Chicago with this deadly, dangerous weekend Ryan.
[Ryan Young, Cnn National Correspondent:] John, just a tough story. Of course, the city in mourning after this so we're kind of struck by the headline in the paper. It says less than seven hours after midnight Saturday, 44 people were shot, just like you were talking about the numbers here. But when you think about the carnage and you think about the young people who were in involved in this, you had a 13-year-old, you had a 14-year-old, an 11-year old all shot during this, this is very upsetting, of course, to a lot of people across the city. You've had over 5,000 illegal guns picked up off the streets of Chicago this year. The crime rate is down but then you have a weekend like this where it was so hot they had multiple shootings. At one point one of the things that stood out to me was the scene outside one of the hospitals here. One of the largest hospitals here in the city had more than 50 people standing outside, all waiting to find out what happened to their loved ones in a mass shooting. There were several parties over the weekend and it seems like, according to police, that gang members targeted some of these parties and shot them up. Multiple people getting shot and taken to the hospital to try to survive. We believe the numbers will actually go higher. There will be a news conference this afternoon where we'll learn more information. But when you think about what police have done over this last year, the crime rate has fallen tremendously because of some of the actions they have been taking. But you can see this weekend how things can spike. I can also tell you the fact that this summer they took 30,000 kids to work for a summer youth job program. They wanted to make sure kids were off the street. But you see on a weekend like this that gun violence knows no bounds, especially on the south and west side. This is a city where we've seen people take to the streets protesting the violence. It seems like so many answers are not coming in terms of what should happen next. We heard the mayor even talk about there needs to be a cultural change, but also a chance to get those illegal guns off the street Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Oh my gosh, Ryan, the numbers there are staggering. Of course, there has to be an answer there.
[Young:] Heartbreaking.
[Camerota:] Thank you very much. So an investigation is underway into the deadly crash of a small plane in Southern California. Officials say this twin-engine Cessna had declared an emergency before it dropped onto a parking lot in Santa Ana killing all five people on board. This happened just about a mile away from the John Wayne Airport. No one on the ground was injured.
[Berman:] Police are looking for a gunman who they say opened fire inside a community-run radio station in Madison, Wisconsin. Officials say a disc jockey suffered what is described as non-life-threatening injuries after several shots were fired inside the studio. Police can't say how the assailant entered the building early Sunday but there are signs of there are no signs of forced entry. The motive for the shooting is still unclear. Early indications suggest it does not appear to be random so there is no risk, they say, to the public.
[Camerota:] Singer Demi Lovato is speaking out for the first time since her apparent overdose. Last month on Instagram she wrote, "Addiction is not something that disappears or fades with time. It is something I must continue to overcome and have not yet done." Lovato says she now needs time to heal and focus on her sobriety. She ended the post with a vow to keep fighting. Well look, so many people I mean, including young people are following what happened with Demi Lovato because she has been outspoken about her addiction and when she overdosed or what appears to be an overdose that was so upsetting to everybody. But I think she makes a great point. Addiction doesn't go away.
[Berman:] Yes.
[Camerota:] You just learn how to manage it maybe from day to day.
[Berman:] I think what everyone should want here is that Demi Lovato gets the space to work through her own issues here and to get better. But also, for her to be as transparent and open as she can be because there are so many young people who I think would benefit
[Camerota:] Absolutely.
[Berman:] from knowing about this.
[Camerota:] No, it's really helpful to bring out this what is this stigma out into the public. It's really helpful.
[Berman:] All right. Atlanta police releasing body cam video of an intense fiery rescue. Officers racing against time to save a passenger from a burning car after hitting a utility pole Sunday morning. Look at that. The engine already engulfed in flames was already engulfed in flames when they arrived. One officer tried to pry the door open and grabbed the fire extinguisher to douse the flames while a second officer pulled the passenger out through the driver's side. A total of three people were taken to the hospital. One of the officers did suffer minor scrapes and bruises but otherwise, they were OK. Thank goodness for that.
[Camerota:] Oh my gosh, they're so brave. They're so brave going up there
[Berman:] It was remarkable.
[Camerota:] and going to that car.
[Berman:] Just go, go, go. All right. The fallout from an alleged plot to assassinate the Venezuelan president this remarkable scene caught on video with allegedly an explosive-laden drone involved here. We'll give you the latest, next.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm pleased to report that the Tanger is healthy and back on the ice this season where he belongs. It's going to be a great season for you. Yet many of the players really might agree that the biggest MVPs was your incredible loyal fans. The Pen's faithful packed the arenas for every single game, cheering Pittsburgh's boys of winter all the way. Great, great fans. Great state. Great place. In fact, every one of the Penguins home games for the past straight years has been to very much to Ron Burkle's happiness sold out. Right, Ron? Sold out. So, while you are dominating the ice, the heart of the organization and its commitment to Pittsburgh shines just as brightly off the ice. The Pittsburgh Penguins foundation supports a number of great causes serving young people. Over a million dollars in grants were awarded to local charities last season. The annual food drive distributes thousands and thousands of pounds of food, and tens of thousands of dollars to local community food banks. Since 2010 the Pittsburgh Penguins foundation has also worked with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center sports medicine to combat concussions in young athletes. Just last week, the Pens pledged two donations of $25,000 each toward relief efforts in Puerto Rico in a support of the victims and the first responders of the terrible attack in Las Vegas. They have worked so hard. The police, the first responders, for everything. Whether it was in Texas, or in Florida or Louisiana or Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands, or that horrible, horrible situation caused by a very demented, sick person in Las Vegas. The police, every one of them, first responders, they have been incredible. They have been absolutely incredible. So, we should give them a hand. OK. Just as much as your five Stanley Cup wins, your generosity has shown the true character of this incredible organization. You are true, true champions and incredible patriots. Now with hockey season again under way, I know you are ready to make yet another run at the cup. The NHL has not seen a three-peat in a generation, but I know you are ready for the challenge. I'm going to be watching so closely. Because you think you'll be back next year? I think so, right. I have a feeling. I've been watching them. I go to those Ranger games, and you do a lot of bad damage to our Ranger games, don't you? Boy, oh, boy you do damage, but that's the way you want to do it. It's called winning, right, Sidney? It's called winning. I know the Capitals will be looking for pay back tomorrow night. So, we will let you get back to practice. I just again want to congratulate this incredible franchise on its so many victories. You embody the values of dedication, discipline and hard work. To every young American watching today, we encourage you to always strive to be your best, to do your best, and to give your all. We wish all the best of luck this season. You are going to have a great season. Coach is telling me your team is going to be better than ever. So, let's go Pens. Thank you all. God bless you and God bless the United States of America. Fantastic. Thank you very much. Congratulations.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] It's always fun for any president to get a championship team on over to the White House. This is Pittsburgh Penguins, the championship your Canadian, help me out, Stanley Cup, thank you. Thank you Rachel Sklar, forgive me, I'm from the South where we got a hockey team later in life. Forgive me. Stanley Cup, Pittsburgh Penguins. So, congratulates to them. The president didn't at all wade into anything with regard to football standing at the national anthem. We did though during that press briefing here Sarah Sanders stand by the latest statement from the Roger Goodell, the Commissioner at the NFL, saying we want our players to stand for the flag. There you have it the President with the Penguins. We'll want to continue our conversation that we had before this event there in the East Room. More on our breaking news on Harvey Weinstein. Both Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie among the high- profile names now speaking about their own personal encounters with Hollywood mogul, Harvey Weinstein. These new developments ahead. Also, the political part of this story today, Hillary Clinton who accepted thousands of dollars in political donations from Harvey Weinstein, she is now breaking her silence with a statement. We'll have that for you coming up next.

[Baldwin:] This next story serves as an important testament to something we've said over and over and over this year. Facts matter. A State Department employee has just filed a defamation suit against Info Wars, the fringe website that has a reputation for peddling conspiracy theories. The suit alleges Info Wars and other far-right figures falsely suggested that Brennan Gilmore played a role in the Charlottesville terror attack as some sort of inside job. Why? Because Gilmore was in Charlottesville and obtained this video of the attack that killed 32-year-old Heather Heyer. With me to talk more about this is Oliver Darcy, CNN senior media reporter, and Sara Azari, a criminal defense attorney. So, Oliver, is the suit about redeeming his reputation?
[Oliver Darcy, Cnn Senior Media Reporter:] The State Department employee has certainly been very affected by this, these conspiracy theories. He told me he has lost friends over this and has received a slew of death threats, including a white envelope in the mail that had a mysterious powder, which turned out to be nothing. But you can imagine, he said it was a terrifying moment. But there's a larger thing he's trying to do here. He's trying to hold these media outlets accountable for their actions. He said the primary motivation was that he was trying to I'll read the statement: "The primary motivation was accountability and trying to confront what I consider to be an incredibly dangerous trend in our civil discourse, our democracy. And that is the widespread saturation these sites have and their unwillingness to go by traditional journalistic practices." He has a "Washington Post" op-ed today calling Alex Jones, the founder of Info Wars, a menace to society. And I don't see him letting up anytime soon.
[Baldwin:] Aren't defamation lawsuits tough to prove or what do you think of this?
[Sara Azari, Criminal Defense Attorney:] He has to prove that the statements made, that he was part of this deep-state conspiracy, were false and they were published. He won't have a problem with the publishing aspect of this. But he could have been Joe Shmoo, the bystander here, which is what he kind of was. He recorded this incident. It's in response to the fake news put out by the right that this was somehow in self-defense. His video I call videos the best evidence shows this was not self-defense. The was a Dodge vehicle that is ramming into a crowd of peaceful protesters. The fake news starts with the slew of right-wing defendants in this case. He's responding by tweeting out this video and really putting out the best evidence, which is the video of what really happened. You know, I agree with you that the lawsuit is about the bigger picture, that the right doesn't get to call everything they don't like fake news.
[Baldwin:] There was another lawsuit that we wanted to follow up on. The family of Seth Rich is suing FOX News for broadcasting false conspiracy theories about the death of their son. You've covered so much of this.
[Darcy:] Right. This is another lawsuit against FOX about the Seth Rich story. The family is suing, filed a lawsuit in federal court, saying they had a lot of emotional distress over FOX's story in May 2017, that FOX published the story that was peddling the conspiracy theory about their son's unsolved murder. We debunked it here at CNN within hours. But FOX, it took them seven days to retract that story. And now it seems it might actually cost them. The family says they went through emotional trauma. And the father told them, at one point, the story was actually almost as bad as their son's death. It just felt like that. FOX is being sued. And the interesting thing about this is that FOX, at the time they retracted the story, they said they're going to launch this investigation into what happened. It's been some time now, several, several months, FOX has never announced that action. And we don't know what happened, other than our own reporting. Oliver, thank you. Sara, do me a favor and stick around. I have to ask you about this story that I tried ready about twice today. As the owner of a small dog, couldn't quite get through it. We'll get to that in just a second. First, do you see all these pictures on your screen? This is happening across the country. These walkouts by the thousands. Students from coast to coast are demanding change with our nation's gun laws. And the story I was just talking about. The United Airlines CEO in big trouble after a dog, this dog, dies in an overhead bin during a flight. The family says they were forced to put their pet up there. How the airline is responding. Does the family have a case? We'll be right back.

[Robyn Kriel, Cnn Correspondent:] Hell, I'm Robyn Kriel. This is CNN News now. Anti-G20 protests rage in Hamburg, Germany for a second straight evening. And tonight, you're looking at live pictures where there's 11
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight, my interview with Qatar's foreign minister. This week, the deadline caused demands by Saudi Arabia and its allies, but the minister tells me that live is aggressive and insulting.
[Mohammed Bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Qatar Foreign Minister:] We are not going to comply with anything against the international law. We are not going to have something which just signaling out Qatar.
[Amanpour:] Also ahead, the former U.N. Climate Chief Christiana Figueres tells me why she thinks Donald Trump maybe cutting off his nose to spite his face. Good evening everyone and welcome to the program. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. President Donald Trump has been attending the G20 summit and his second international trip in six weeks. The last one included a visit to Saudi Arabia and told with almost all the regional leaders. Since then, a huge divide has emerged amongst U.S. allies. Qatar is being diplomatically isolated by four of its neighbors and they now threaten the stability of the Persian Gulf region. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt say they'll continue to hold Qatar on an economic blacklist saying that Doha gave "a negative response to their 13 point ultimatum." The quartets of Arab nations accused Qatar of funding terrorism and destabilizing the region.
[Unidentified Male:] It was disappointing, but the response from Qatar was totally is void of any substance and it was a denial of taking any steps or measures that would respond to the region and its requests of the four countries.
[Amanpour:] Yet in new report by the U.K.'s respected conservative think tank, the Henry Jackson Society says Saudi Arabia is at the forefront of funding extremism here in Britain. I spoke to the Qatari Foreign Minister here in London for the latest on where this standoff will lead. Foreign minister, welcome to the program.
[Al Thani:] Thank you very much.
[Amanpour:] What is Qatar's response to these demands?
[Al Thani:] Mainly, if you are looking at the demands, there are accusations that Qatar is supporting terrorism. There are shutting free speech, shutting the media outlet, expelling people, oppositions, violating the international law by withdrawing citizenship from some of the people and return them back home. So there are a lot of demands which are against the international law.
[Amanpour:] And are you saying you're not going to comply?
[Al Thani:] We are not going to comply with anything against the international law. We are not going to have something which just signaling out Qatar. And if any situation will be provided, it should be provided for the entire.
[Amanpour:] Is there any of the demands that you see has any room for compromise, for negotiation, for you accepting the demand, shutting Al Jazeera.
[Al Thani:] Shutting Al Jazeera, this is something out of the question.
[Amanpour:] Throwing out the Turks Turkish base.
[Al Thani:] You can ask me the demands one by one. But let me tell you that any issue of touching the sovereignty of the country, we are not going to discuss.
[Amanpour:] You have called this the siege, a clear aggression and an insult. Is that what you feel about what's happened?
[Al Thani:] It is an aggression. It is an act of aggression and insult for any independent country, for any sovereign country. When you are imposing a blockade, a political blockade, economic blockade and the social blockade on an independent country, it is an act of aggression. They accused Qatar that Qatar has a special relation with Iran, as an example. And they never imposed any of these measures against Iran from the other hand. So it is an act of aggression against the country for different reasons, not because of Iran.
[Amanpour:] You were accused by the UAE and others of funding extremism abroad including here in the U.K. So a very direct question, can you categorically state that no Qatari money comes here to fund hate-preachers or any kind of terrorist organizations?
[Al Thani:] Well, just let me I just want to about the funds of Qatar, which is going outside Qatar to fund
[Amanpour:] See, the problem is that that's a yes or no answer. Either Qatari funds are going to terrorist organizations or they're not.
[Al Thani:] They are not going to terrorist organizations. And if there is any Qatari who is involved in financing any terrorist organization, he will be held accountable for the wrongdoing he has done. And there are a few individual cases who are already in a trial and some of them are convicted already.
[Amanpour:] And you think they're going to any hate preachers here? You know, we have a lot of problems in Britain, as you have seen.
[Al Thani:] Our if there is any charity, which operates under Qatar government system, they have to comply with the government system of the beneficiary country when they are operating there. So if there is any violation, it should be reported and the Qatar will take an action against them. We are against any hate preacher, whether it's in Qatar or outside Qatar. We believe that the world is suffering from terrorism, and all of us, we are we have to work together collectively in eradicating this.
[Amanpour:] How do you square the following circle? When I spoke to your Amir at the U.N. a few years ago, he was saying that we don't support terrorist organizations. But we and some of our allies and some of our neighbors may have different definitions of what different things are.
[Al Thani:] I know that in America and in some countries, they look at some movements as terrorist movements. But there are differences. There are differences that some countries and some people that any group which comes from Islamic background are terrorists and we don't accept that.
[Amanpour:] Is that still your position?
[Al Thani:] It is our position, as long as the terrorist is not defined as terrorist organization within the United Nation's Security Council or there is no proof that this organization is involved in violence. If there are political organizations with Islamic background, we have no problem. Or we have not designate them designating them as terrorist organizations. But we have nothing to do to support them as political organizations, as long as they are operating outside Qatar.
[Amanpour:] So what about Hamas, which has been designated a terrorist organization by Israel, by the United States and, you know, leaders like Khaled Mashal are in Qatar.
[Al Thani:] Hamas representation and Qatar is a political office. It's not any military presentation there in Qatar. The political leadership of Hamas now, they are insiders. They are not there are some in Qatar, yes, but the ones who are on Qatar, they are involved in the national constellation which is Qatar working and facilitating. And it is also endorsed by the international community and also in coordination with the United States. Qatar's support doesn't go to Hamas. Their support goes to the people
[Amanpour:] And the Muslim Brotherhood, obviously they are not designated to terrorist group by all countries. But some Egypt thinks it's a terrorist organization.
[Al Thani:] Egypt, they are designating them as terrorist organization. They have to treat them they are treating them in Egypt as terrorist organization. But for me and Qatar, they are not designated as terrorist organization. And Qatar doesn't sponsor the Muslim Brotherhood or it doesn't have a presence of the Muslim brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood are a political movement which operates in Bahrain, which is one of the blockading country, and they are designating them as part of their demands. Now, a terrorist organization, why they are operating in the political in the parliament there in Bahrain, which shows you the double standard in this.
[Amanpour:] And al-Nusra, remember the very famous case when Qatar fortunately was able to get an American, a journalist out of captivity, and you dealt with al-Nusra to get them out.
[Al Thani:] Dealing with al-Nusra, engaging as I told you, engaging with any organization doesn't mean endorsing their ideas. And for us as Qatar, we have facilitators to facilitate this. We don't have direct interaction with them.
[Amanpour:] Do you think President Trump and the administration are contributing to this crisis, or can they play a mediating role?
[Al Thani:] Well, U.S. and Qatar relationship has been very strong, and they are playing a strong role in this. So the U.S. government is highly involved in this conflict. And there are also several steps being taken by them, which forced the blockading countries to submit their demands. So there is a role for the U.S. in mediating in this.
[Amanpour:] I wonder what you think of President Trump who tweeted, "During my recent trip to the Middle East, I stated there can no longer be funding of radical ideology." Leaders pointed to Qatar, look, did Trump's visit encourage this move by the Saudis?
[Al Thani:] First off, President Trump's tweet here he is being told by leaders, leaders who imposed the blockade against Qatar. He didn't refer to the agencies of the United States, which we have everyone has followed the statements of the Department of Defense, or the State Department and the appreciation of their relationship of Qatar and Qatar contribution to countering terrorism. So the differences of the U.S. government agencies and the institution which has a long lasting relationship with the state of Qatar, they know very well the activity of Qatar and the way how cooperative Qatar is with the United States.
[Amanpour:] So you must have thought it was sort of a knife to the heart when at first Secretary Tillerson appeared to want to play a mediating role, and very shortly thereafter, President Trump doubled down against Qatar.
[Al Thani:] The president, when he tweeted, when he referred to
[Amanpour:] Within in the rose garden.
[Al Thani:] A foreign leader, or he has his speech he is delivering his speech, and he's referring to a foreign leader, not to his agencies. We take what's coming out from the agencies and whom the agencies we are dealing with. President Trump has talked to
[Amanpour:] And just finally, I mean, what do you think is the real reason for all of this?
[Al Thani:] Well, we believe that Qatar's independence and its policy may be it's a sort of driving force for this. Qatar policy, first of all, had been always independent, different view, yes, but it doesn't it never affected the collective security of the Gulf countries. And it's never been meant to be affecting the collective security of the Gulf countries and we don't want to compromise any of the Gulf countries' security, because we have a sequence of Qatar. So Qatar has been more progressive in different fronts than the other countries. Maybe this is one of the motives. And I believe mainly that small countries punching over its weight as you have mentioned is something annoying for big countries. And this is not a reflection but what Qatar is doing is not punching over its weight. Qatar is an active player in the international forum, using the international mechanism clearly and visibly with full transparency in front of everyone. And we are trying to bring people together. We are trying to make peace in the world, not to create wars in the world. We are trying to solve the problems by diplomacy and providing a platform. And this is a unique role big countries cannot play. Small countries can do.
[Amanpour:] Foreign minister, thank you very much for joining me.
[Al Thani:] Thank you very much.
[Amanpour:] And when we come back, President Trump has already beneath with climate protesters in Warsaw. Next, I talk to the woman who led the Paris climate deal. Christiana Figueres on only three years that we have left to hope dangerous levels of climate change.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back. Sticking with our politics lead and new reaction to the newly revised health care plan unveiled by Senate Republicans until just a few hours ago. GOP leaders have kept this draft closely guarded, only releasing a few headlines. Now on paper, the actual provisions seem to address some of the major demands made by various senators, the question, of course, is, will the changes be real today convince at least 50 Senate Republicans? That's the minimum number they need to support the final bill. CNN's Ryan Nobles joins me live from the Hill. And, Ryan, the Vice President Pence says President Trump's going to be working hard to get the votes needed. A lot of undecided Republicans. Specifically on the substance, how is this legislation different from the previous health bill that the Republicans couldn't get enough votes to pass?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Jake, really substantively, it's not dramatically different, but there are a few key changes that Republicans are mulling over right now, deciding whether or not it's enough for them to support this bill. And let's break down a couple of them. One of the big changes is, there's now going to be an option for folks to buy and purchase cheaper insurance plans that will also offer fewer benefits, these catastrophic plans that are currently not available under the law. They also want to allow people to use their HSA payments or their allowance pretax to pay for premiums. That's something you're not allowed to do now. There is $45 billion that have been allotted to combat the opioid crisis. That's something a couple of key senators are very keen on getting into this bill. But this is one of the most important aspects of this bill, there aren't any dramatic changes to Medicaid from the previous bill, and that's one of the reasons that a lot of moderate senators have been concerned, big and deep cuts to Medicaid down the road that they're unhappy with. But moderates are happy with this provision. There will be no repeal of the Obamacare taxes on the wealthy. That's something that they have fought for. You know, there is one key senator who has been somewhat of a purity person when it comes to this. He wants to be a full repeal, and that's Ted Cruz. He sounded a little bit different today after they emerged from a meeting on this bill. Take a listen to what they had to say.
[Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas:] The bill today reflects the input from senators across the spectrum. It's not the ideal bill I'd like it pass. I suspect there may not be a single senator for whom it's the ideal bill they'd like to pass. But it does represent a bill that reflects the concerns expressed across the conference. I think that's how we actually come together and honor our promise to repeal Obamacare.
[Nobles:] Not necessarily a ringing endorsement, Jake, and that could be the problem for Mitch McConnell as they try and bring all these senators together to get those 50 votes necessary to get this bill passed.
[Tapper:] All right. Ryan Nobles on Capitol Hill for us thank you so much. President Trump says most people would have taken the meeting his son had with that Russian lawyer promising dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russian government. If that's true, and it's no big deal, why are we just learning about it now? Stick around.

[Baldwin:] Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin blurring the lines between pleasure and business. Again, the Treasury Department says while planning his European honeymoon over this past summer, Mnuchin asked the White House if he and his wife could use a government jet. Mnuchin said he wanted the jet so that he could have secure lines of communication while he was abroad. He later withdrew that request. And now these investigators are telling CNN that they will be reviewing all of Mnuchin's government-related travel requests, because this isn't the first time he and his wife's travel have, shall we say, raised some eyebrows. Let's talk this over with CNN contributor Larry Noble. He is general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center. And also with me, CNN White House reporter Kate Bennett. So, good to see both of you. And, Larry, just again, to be clear, Mnuchin never actually followed through with getting this jet. Nevertheless, the request was apparently made. How brazen would this sort of a request have been vs. his excuse that he wanted a secure coms line?
[Larry Noble, Cnn Contributor:] It's pretty brazen. They're only supposed to use the military jets when it's absolutely necessary, and the fact that the answer came back that we have other ways to have secure communications shows that, you know, this wasn't a serious a really serious effort to protect the government interests. What this was, was an effort to use a private government jet, an Air Force jet, to go on his honeymoon. You know, one of the ironies of this is that his wife got into an Instagram battle with somebody else and made a comment saying, I bet you think that the government paid for our honeymoon or travel, laugh out loud, laugh out loud. Now it's apparent that she said that because she already knew the government had rejected their request for that travel. It's a pretty brazen attempt. And it fits into other things they have done, such as the question why they went to Kentucky during the eclipse.
[Baldwin:] Right. Right. Right.
[Noble:] It seems to be looking at the government resources as something they can use for their own benefit.
[Baldwin:] On some of that, Kate Bennett, you have new reporting on some of this Mnuchin stuff. What are you learning?
[Kate Bennett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, I think, you know, the point here is, what we don't know is Louise Linton. We don't know her very well. We don't know Mnuchin very well. But we do know that she likes luxury things. She enjoys she did a story for "Town & Country" right before her wedding detailing the diamonds she planned to wear before the ceremony. This is a woman who felt comfortable tagging the thousands and thousands of dollars that she was wearing in designer clothes. She's an actress. She runs a production company. The couple has recently moved to a large home in Washington that she's apparently integrating herself within the social scene here. You know, this optics wise is not great timing. Her husband is now part of the government. He's working on tax reform, of all things. So there's sort of this brazen contradiction between what has happened now twice in terms of making headlines and what his real day job is.
[Baldwin:] But, so, to Kate's point, Larry, you know, when you look at the full picture, and you alluded to the Fort KnoxEclipseKentucky trip, right, in the government jet, and this request for this European honeymoon and a government jet, and the whole wife tagging fancy, fancy designers and it just begs the question, is the man tone-deaf?
[Noble:] At the very least, he's tone-deaf. I think what you're seeing here is a very different view of the world than most Americans have or are capable of having. It's a view of the world that you take what you can get, that these services are there for me and I will use them, you know, regardless of what the actual rules are, and regardless of who's paying for them. I have to say that the tone for this administration is set at the very top. There seems to be just this idea that it's not a question of what we should do, it's not a question of what norms are, it's not even a question of what the law is. It's a question of what we can get away with. And so, you know, it's the whole thing of, well, I can ask, I can try, if I don't get caught, I get away with it. I think it's the whole tone of the administration that it's tone-deaf to how average Americans live and it's tone-deaf to what the ethics rules are and what they're about. And I think we're going to see this continue to happen unless they have a real change of heart about what their role in government is.
[Baldwin:] Well, as we have been reporting, there is now an internal investigation over this honeymoon jet request. We will stay on it. Larry Noble, thank you. Kate Bennett, nice to see you. Coming up next, we do have breaking news now involving the president talking to reporters on board Air Force One as he's making his way back to Washington, made news on a variety of topics, including what we were just discussing. Stand by for that next.

[Soares:] It's been described as more precise that a bullet and costs only a dollar a shot.
[Vause:] The U.S. Navy's active laser weapon is a silent killer. CNN's Jim Sciutto was granted exclusive access to a live-fire test.
[Jim Sciutti, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] In the sometimes-hostile waters of the Persian Gulf, loom the U.S. Navy's first, in fact, the world's first active laser weapon. The LAWS, an acronym for Laser Weapon System, is not science fiction, not experimental. It is deployed on board the "USS Ponce" amphibious transport ship, to be fired at targets today and every day by Captain Christopher Wells and his crew. CNN was granted exclusive access to a live-fire test of the laser.
[Capt. Christopher Wells, U.s. Navy Commander, Uss Ponce:] It's more precise than a bullet. It's not a weapon system like some other weapons throughout the military where it's only good against air contacts or it's only good against surface targets, where it's only good against ground-based targets. In this case, it's a very emotional weapon. It can be used against a variety of targets.
[Sciutto:] LAWS begins with an advantage no other weapon ever invented comes even close to matching. It moves, by definition, at the speed of light. For comparison, that is 50,000 times the speed of an incoming ICBM. LT. CARL
[Hughes, Laws Weapons System Officer:] Destroying massive amounts of protons at an incoming object. We do not worry about winds or rains or anything else.
[Sciutto:] CNN witnessed that speed and power firsthand. First, the "Ponce" crew launches a target, an incoming drone aircraft, the weapon in increasing use by Iran, North Korea, China, Russia and other adversaries. Immediately, the weapons team zeros in on its target.
[Hughes:] We don't have to lead a target. We're doing that engagement at the speed of light, so it really is a point-and-shoot. We see it, we focus on it, and we can negate that target.
[Sciutto:] Then, in an instant, the drone's wing lights up, heated to a temperature of thousands of degrees, lethally damaging the aircraft and sending it hurtling down to the sea. All this from a silent and invisible killer.
[Hughes:] It operates an invisible part of the electromagnetic spectrum. You don't see the beam. It does not make any sound. It is completely silent. And it's incredibly effective at what it does.
[Sciutto:] It is remarkably precise, minimizing collateral damage. And all the $40 million system needs to operate is a supply of electricity and a crew of three. No multimillion-dollar missile. No ammunition at all. Cost per use?
[Hughes:] It is about a dollar a shot.
[Sciutto:] Today, the laser is intended primarily to disable or destroy aircraft and small boats.
[Wells:] It's designed with the intent of being able to counter airborne and service-based threats. And it's been able to prove itself over the last three years as being incredibly effective at that.
[Sciutto:] However, the Navy is already developing more powerful second-generation systems, which would bring more significant targets into its crosshairs missiles. Those visions remain classified. However, commander and crew are already very much aware of the potential capabilities.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Could it shoot down a missile?
[Wells:] Well, I don't know. Maybe.
[Sciutto:] The U.S. is certainly not the only country working with laser weapons. Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and others, doing the same. And to be clear, not just with the intention of striking targets down here on earth, ships and aircraft, possibility of missiles, but also targets even as far away as in space. Jim Sciutto, CNN, Washington.
[Soares:] Now, they've overcome war and U.S. bureaucracy, and now they're hoping to take home the big prize. The Afghanistan girls robotics team is in the U.S. capitol competing in an international robotics competition. It's an event designed to encourage young people to pursue careers in math and science. The team of six were rejected for U.S. visas twice before U.S. President Donald Trump intervened at the last minute.
[Vause:] An activist is cheering on the girls, tweeted out her support, saying, "So proud of #girlsinstem." The team will play three more matches on Tuesday. And we wish them well.
[Soares:] Very much so. Coming up, it's receiving Oscar buzz even before it had been released.
[Vause:] We'll speak to a film critic about the new World War II epic. It's called "Dunkirk." It's epic.

[Harlow:] Welcome back. We are waiting for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, you see his back there, and Christopher Wray, the FBI director, to begin their testimony on Capitol Hill in front of the House Judiciary Committee. This is a hearing that got under way, focused on the oversight of the FBI and DOJ's actions surrounding the 2016 election. You heard from the chairman and the ranking member of the committee, and then they had to take a break for a vote. Then they will be back and we will hear the opening statements from the deputy AG and the FBI director. As we wait, let's talk about what is ahead because this is a very consequential hearing and an important day on the Hill. Joining me now, Josh Campbell, CNN law enforcement analyst and former FBI supervisory special agent, Shimon Prokupecz, our crime and justice reporter is also here, and Amber Phillips, reporter political reporter for "The Washington Post" is here. Shimon, just walk us through how consequential today is. I mean, we heard certainly some of it laid out by Goodlatte and by Nadler. But what is today trying to get at?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] So certainly you're going to hear a lot about the 2016, probably the IG report, but I think what I'm going to be looking forward to and sort of hearing is how the two Rod Rosenstein and obviously Christopher Wray defend their agencies respectively. You know, as you know, Rod Rosenstein has come under fire, Chris Wray, though not directly under fire, his agency certainly has been under fire, so I think we're going to see a lot of that. This is an opportunity for these two men to defend their work, to defend what they have been doing. They don't often speak publicly. But anytime they do, and they get an opportunity to defend themselves, certainly they do it. I think it's going to be interesting to see if questions about the Mueller investigation come up, confidential informants, so-called spies in the campaign, if all of that comes up and how they handle those situations because, you know that is going to come up. So I'm going to be interested to see how they respond to that. Certainly we know a lot already about the IG report, Christopher Wray already testified about some of that. It was during that testimony where he defended the FBI. He also defended the Mueller investigation, saying that it is not a witch-hunt, I'm sure that question will come up again. So those are the things, as much as
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] You know, we're going to be focused on the past, but it's also the president and what's going on currently that is going to be an issue.
[Harlow:] And Laura Jarrett is also with us, our Justice Department reporter. I think we have there she is. Laura, good morning to you.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Hi. How are you?
[Harlow:] Laura, let's talk about how Peter Strzok's testimony, 11-hour marathon testimony behind closed doors yesterday plays into today because one of the headlines out of that closed door session from both Republicans and Democratic lawmakers who were in there is that Strzok told them this is the FBI agent that sent those anti-Trump text messages, he told them that the special counsel Bob Mueller did not grill him, really, about the text messages when he found out about them. Now Mueller did let him go and released him from the Russia probe he was working on. But Democrats play that one way and Republicans play it another way. And then you look at the two gentlemen, you know, the deputy attorney general who is going to be on the Hill and also Christopher Wray, what do you expect them to be pressed on when it comes to that agent, Peter Strzok?
[Jarrett:] It will be interesting to see how exactly Rosenstein and Wray thread the needle on Peter Strzok. Obviously consequential because of his text messages, but he is still technically employed by the FBI. He was escorted out earlier this month after that lengthy inspector general report. But he is technically still on the job and so they have to be careful about what exactly they can say while he's undergoing these disciplinary proceedings. Obviously lawmakers want to hear that there will be consequences for Peter Strzok, especially House Republicans have been pressing that over and over again. And, of course, the backdrop to all of this is the fact that Strzok was on Mueller's team briefly.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Jarrett:] And so the Republicans, at least some of them, they say this is fruit of the poisonous tree. Because he was on Mueller's team from the very beginning, the entire investigation is then somehow tainted. But Democrats say that's preposterous. He was only one of many members on the team and he certainly wasn't able to affect any of the key decisions. At least from what they have seen thus far.
[Harlow:] Josh, to you, as a former FBI supervisory special agent, what are you looking for, especially from Christopher Wray, the president's pick, to head the FBI, but now the intelligence agency's once again under attack by the president this morning.
[Josh Campbell, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] That's right. I mean, oftentimes these hearings can be anodyne, sometimes, you know, downright boring, some of the subject matter expertise the subjects that are talked about. This is not going to be one of those hearings. I think we can prepare ourselves for fireworks and the reason is because the House GOP is not going to be satisfied with what they're going to hear as we break down official by official. So with Rod Rosenstein, obviously the House GOP they've been asking for these very sensitive details of sources and methods and up until now, you know, the deputy attorney general has been holding the line and saying no, we're not going to throw open our files for you to, you know, come rifle through. We'll provide you with information, you know, as part of your oversight duties but we're not going to go on sources and methods. We are going to see fireworks. With respect to Christopher Wray, and Laura just alluded to, they want to know who is being held accountable inside the FBI. They want insight into those ongoing disciplinary proceedings. Chris Wray isn't going to go there. It will be interesting to see kind of what his posture is. I just actually talked with Director Wray on Monday when he was out here in Los Angeles. And his posture appears to be, is he's going to move forward and we have to remember that he wasn't there in 2016, so he wasn't
[Harlow:] Right.
[Campbell:] You know, responsible for what was going on. But I think his goal was to let the FBI's work speak for itself and they continue to reiterate that, although there may be a subset of people, a very small group, that, you know, made bad decisions, we're talking about Strzok and, you know, Page and McCabe, the FBI is a larger organization than that.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Campbell:] So I think we're going to constantly hear that reaffirming that, look, this is an organization of 37,000 people, those who made mistakes will be held to account but they shouldn't, you know, represent the rest of the agency.
[Harlow:] Well, in fact Wray has been a staunch defender of the agency and the agents as a whole in the wake of the president continuing to attack them. Amber, what do you make of the divide that we actually see, even a divide among some of the most conservative members of the Republican Party on what to do about Rod Rosenstein? I think it's telling that you have Meadows saying if Rosenstein and the DOJ don't turn over these documents having to do with the early days of the Russia probe in 2016, by July 6th, we would be open to pushing for, you know, towards impeachment proceedings. But then you have other pretty conservative members like Chris Stewart of Utah, like Bob Goodlatte, the chair of this committee, saying, hold on a minute, hold on a minute, not sure that's necessary. Let's see if we can get the answers we need from the documents the DOJ has already turned over. What do you make of that?
[Amber Phillips, Political Reporter, Washington Post:] Yes, I think Republicans need to figure out where they land on Rod Rosenstein's future. And you're right to zero in on his future, Poppy. That's because President Trump in the past, with any number of investigations or findings or classified memos that the House Republican committees have declassified, has used this to try to discredit in some way, not just Bob Mueller, not just the Justice Department at large, but Rod Rosenstein. And if you look at it, firing Rod Rosenstein from Trump's perspective makes a lot of sense. Constitutionally he can do it, where as it gets really iffy on firing Bob Mueller. And Rod Rosenstein is the person who oversees and approves all of the special counsel's work. And so I have heard from Capitol Hill a lot of red line from Republicans on whether the president fires Mueller, or even Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Rosenstein's boss.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Phillips:] I have not heard a clear red line on Rosenstein. That's what I'm going to be watching for today.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Phillips:] And I think you're absolutely right, Poppy, to zero in on that.
[Harlow:] Thank you, all. Amber Phillips, Shimon Prokupecz, Laura Jarrett, Josh Campbell, stick with me as we wait for this hearing to get under way of Christopher Wray and Rod Rosenstein. But, look, Rosenstein smiling there, glad handing people, just waiting patiently for this to begin. Don't let that deceive you. It's going to be fireworks, folks. Also, Anthony Kennedy on his way out of the high court after 30 years on the bench. Straight ahead, the battle over who will succeed him and his hugely influential key swing vote.

[Whitfield:] Welcome back. Today, a mother is burying her son after he was shot by a sheriff's deputy in Louisiana last week. The death of the 27-year-old man has left the town reeling and several unanswered questions about what started the fatal altercation. The only people who know exactly what happened, the sheriff's deputy and the girlfriend of the now deceased man, who is now charged with attempted first-degree murder of a police officer. CNN's Kaylee Hartung is here with me now. You've spent some time in this very small town earlier in the week. This is a rather complicated story.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] It really is, Fred. And this town of Mamou, Louisiana, it's a one stop light town in a rural area just surrounded by rice fields and gravel roads and the texture of it is complex of the story and of this town. So, as Dejuan Guillory's family buries him today, a lot of questions remain answered. But here is what we know. So, it was the early morning hours of July 6th that Dejuan Guillory and his girlfriend, Dequince Brown, were ridding a four-wheeler. They were going hunting for frogs. Not an usual activity in this part of Louisiana. Well, down one of those gravel roads, three miles from the one spotlight in town. They encountered Deputy Sheriff Holden LaFleur. Now, LaFleur was out on a burglary call for an ATV. He saw this couple on an ATV, so he pulled them over. Well, then a struggling sued and the deputy shot and killed Guillory. Now, what led to that fatal moment, this is where the story widely differ. The officer said that it was Guillory who threw the first punch and then he says Brown jumped on his back and tried to grab his gun as he attempted to subdue Guillory. But Brown's attorney says that authorities are misrepresenting his client's version of events. They say the officer started the fight. Now, Fred, the big key here though, Louisiana State Police as they are investigating this case, they are reviewing dash cam footage from the patrol car, you would like to think that that video if seen could answer a lot of our unanswered questions right now.
[Whitfield:] And now what other details do we know about the deputy and even the victim?
[Hartung:] Really complicated past for both of these men, both in their late 20s. Let's start with deceased Dejuan Guillory. He is known to law enforcement officials in the area most notably from a 2015 incident in which he allegedly stole an ATM with a stolen back hoe and then fired shots at the responding officers. He was initially charged with attempted first-degree murder but pled out to lesser charges. And as for Deputy LaFleur, he was actually supposed to appear in a trial last week for a civil lawsuit. That trial has been suspended indefinitely because of security concerns stemming from his involvement in this incident. He was one of four officers who are in this wrongful death suit stemming from a 2014 arrest gone wrong. So, Fred, this Investigation on going as a lot of layers exists in this complicated situation.
[Whitfield:] All right, thanks so much Kaylee. Appreciate it. All right, still ahead, governors on both sides of the aisle have come out in opposition to the Republican health care bill even after a meeting with Vice President Mike Pence. Congressman and former Florida governor, Charlie Crist, joining me live to discuss the potential impact for millions of Americans. But first, this week's Start Small Think Big, one woman in Colorado couldn't find a restaurant that worked with her diet. So, she opened her own.
[Unidentified Female:] Booming beads is boulder's 100 percent grain- free and gluten-free paleo restaurant that was opened in 2014. We basically cater to people who try to live a very healthy lifestyle. So, I noticed recently as I'm turning older how gluten is really affecting me in how I feel. There is a real need in the community. While the movement is growing, the industry isn't catching up as fast as it should. My ambition is to make it possible for people who are trying to be healthy to have those options. The cashew grain-free waffles are ridiculously good and some of the main reasons I come here. They have no dairy, no processed sugar and no grain, so no flour. So, how do you make that happen? We wound up with raw, ground-up cashews and it took 300 different attempts to get that batter down. It is unbelievably difficult. But once you get it down, it's amazing. We have a lot of customers that just like to come here because they love the flavors.

[Asher:] Hello, everyone. I'm Zain Asher at the New York Stock Exchange. Coming up on the next half hour of QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. Burberry executives survive a shareholder revolt over pay and bonuses. And if you're in Europe and looking for a job, the EU is looking out for your privacy. It says your next boss cannot, cannot just go snooping on your social media account. But first, here are the top news headlines we're following for you at this hour. U.S. President Donald Trump defended his elder son during a news conference in Paris and called Donald Trump Junior a wonderful young man, the president's son sparked fresh controversy after releasing e-mails about his meeting with a Russian attorney. Mr. Trump said most people would have taken that meeting. Now Chinese democracy activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo died from liver cancer, Liu passes away Thursday at the age of 61, still in Chinese custody. He was serving an 11-year prison sentence when he fell ill. China ignored demands that Liu be allowed to seek treatment abroad. The parents of a terminally ill British baby battling to keep him on life support stormed out of a hearing on Thursday. Charlie Gard's parents want to take him to the U.S. for experimental treatment for a rare genetic disorder. The boy's doctors argue he may suffer and not benefit from the treatment. Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter is in hospital. The 92-year-old collapsed while working for a charity home-building organization in Canada. The hospital spokesperson said Carter was dehydrated from working in the hot sun and is OK. U.S. Senate Republicans are pushing forward with efforts to pass a health care bill. The revised version would allow cheaper plans with fewer benefits and two senators tell CNN they are working on an alternative, they say it would keep popular provisions of Obamacare while giving more flexibility to states. On a day when the Dow raced to a new all-time high, it was only fitting that the closing bell should celebrate the next generation of high-speed racers. Somewhere in that excited crowd was the executives of DHL including Ken Allen who is with me now. Joined Enel and Formula E to celebrate the first-ever electric-powered race in New York City this weekend. Ken Allen joins me live now. Interesting, I have so much to talk to you about. It's interesting because in terms of your business strategy here in the U.S. we are hearing a lot as I'm sure you know of protectionist rhetoric coming out of the White House, I'm curious how that affects your strategy right now.
[Ken Allen, Ceo, Dhl Express:] It doesn't affect our strategy at all. Because I don't believe that anybody is really protectionist. Business is global. And with the digitization, the new technologies that link the whole world together, for the first time in history in theory, everybody could be connected. Everybody is a customer everywhere. Business continues to grow. In fact, as a part of the rhetoric, it seems to be stimulating even more growth. Because we see in every part of the world, our businesses really doing well, growing very strongly. And so, I don't think anybody takes any direct notice of some of these things. Quite honestly.
[Asher:] It's interesting that you say that obviously your business depends heavily on cross-border e-commerce. If NAFTA is renegotiated, if there's changes to the trade relationship between the U.S. and China, doesn't that worry you slightly? None at all.
[Allen:] None at all, seriously, a lot of these agreements are about tariffs, a lot of goods and products if the government decides it wants to put on a big tariff, but you still want to buy that internationally, you're still going to go ahead and do it. What we see at the moment is two things, first of all, traditional business-to-business is growing strongly again. If you think back 2008-'9 we had the Lehman crisis, and 2010-12, we had the euro crisis in Europe. And in 2012 to about '15, the end of the China boom. It wasn't the downturn in China. A lot of commodity prices collapsed and there was a lot of restructuring going on in the world. All that is behind us. Business to business is growing now again faster than GDP, international trade. That's giving us a strong basis for growth. A lot companies are re-investing and we definitely have seen that. And then the second one as you said, b-to-c, e- commerce globally. Trunk cross-border is growing 25 percent plus. So that's giving a real fill-up to our business, right? We've seen 30 consecutive quarters of growth.
[Asher:] One of the areas I'm excited to talk to you about is, areas in which you're investing here in the U.S. you're very much focused on technology, on innovation, on drones. A lot of people associate drone delivery with Amazon. You've heavily invested in that area too along with electric cars. For example, you guys are all about efficiency, making it much more efficient for the consumers when it comes to e-commerce.
[Allen:] Absolutely. So, when you think about it now, as I say, anybody, anywhere in the world can be instantly connected. So, if you see something on the internet in Nigeria that you like
[Asher:] I'm from Nigeria, by the way.
[Allen:] Who better to pick it up for you, tell you how much it will cost to fly it over here, clear customs and deliver it to your door. Any single entrepreneur anywhere can use our service to grow their business, we see many small entrepreneurs that started off on the old days, you start a business in America, you if you stay in New York, you go America-wide. Today, from day one you can be totally international. Put your goods and services on the international network. And a company like DHL can help you become a global player almost instantaneously.
[Asher:] Actually, since you brought up Nigeria, I do want to ask you about Africa. One of the issues that Africa has had to deal with for a long time is they import way more than they export, so for you guys, that means you have a lot more planes going into the continent than the other way around. What sort of challenges does that present to you?
[Allen:] On the outbound flights, we bring a lot of commodities and foodstuffs and flowers, we make sure we've got a two-way flow of traffic. But it is a good point. I think Africa overall needs to focus on the small- and medium-sized businesses. The whole digitization revolution, enables people to trade a lot more easily. It is going to pass Africa by unless the government starts giving better access to broadband, invest in small- and medium-sized business enterprises. Everything that the first world countries are doing, we just need to do more of it in Africa. In fact, part of the G20 and the B20 going on in Germany. There's a whole drive to help Africa improve its customs clearance processes, its trading position. So that we put something back in there. We need to see Africa growing. Even to date, it's not hitting, its potential. As you say, people are selling a lot in. But there's not much coming out. Another the big problem with Africa is they don't trade amongst themselves. Most African states are trading with Europe and the United States, there's not many trade between Nigeria and Kenya, for example.
[Asher:] Trade and also flights, the connectivity in general is poor. Well, Ken, we have to leave it there. I'm glad you brought up my home country. That was perfect. Shout-out to Nigerians watching. Thank you. Burberry has suffered a new shareholder revolt over executive pay, three years after an embarrassing defeat in an earlier vote on pay. This time a third of the investors rejected the compensation packages for former CEO and current creative director Christopher Bailey, as well as the CFO, Julie Brown. Royal London Asset Management actually owns a stake in Burberry and actually, led the backlash. Their corporate governance manager Ashley Hamilton Claxton told me why.
[Ashley Hamilton Claxton, Corporate Governance Manager, Royal London Asset Management:] Burberry has got a long history of pay issues, actually. So, this year the issue has been more around the recruitment of the finance director. So, she was recruited from a company called Smith and Nephew and provided a bunch of shares to compensate her for the shares that she had given up. Basically, she was forced to give back those shares this year. Because the award was deemed to be too high. And generally, the governance around at the board level has been confusing and chaotic this year, the pay decisions have been the company has changed their minds about pay. They've changed their minds about the role of the CEO, Mr. Bailey as well, and the role he plays on the board.
[Asher:] So, overruling, it's not the first time that shareholders have revolted about pay particularly at Burberry and shareholders still at times have not ended up getting what they wanted. What do you think the message isn't getting through?
[Claxton:] That's right. So, you know, in 2014, the company had more man 50 percent of shareholders vote against the pay package. Which is very significant, we don't see that very often, really. Again, this year, regarding this pay package, it was more than 30 percent votes against. I think the main concern for us is that the board doesn't seem to be getting the message. And the governance around pay has been poor. There's been a lot of confusing messages coming from the board about the pay packages and the criteria leading to the payouts for these executives and so the issue for us is really who is in charge of those pay decisions and the governance around those decisions.
[Asher:] You said governance, but you mentioned also in addition to the pay packages, the governance structure at Burberry hasn't worked for you. You've got Gobbetti, reporting to the chairman. You've got Christopher Bailey, wo is now the chief creative or creative officer. Who is also reporting to the chairman. Why don't that structure work for you?
[Claxton:] A company needs to be run well, in order for a company to be run well, there needs to be someone clearly in charge. We have the new CEO reporting to the chairman and Mr. Bailey reporting to the chairman and ultimately, we don't really know who is in charge. Making sure that there's good governance in place is really important for the best interests of the shareholders. We manage money on behalf of millions of pension savers and many of us wouldn't know, but our pension money would be invested in Burberry, so it's really important from that perspective, from the management of the company, that we have very clear lines of control.
[Asher:] What do you want to see going forward from Gobbetti the new CEO?
[Claxton:] The new CEO is starting off with a clean slate, I think he will be a good appointment and I think he can just get on with managing the business. That's not our concern. The concern is the role of the chairman and the board as a whole in overseeing the strategy of the business and overseeing Mr. Gobbetti and Mr. Bailey.
[Asher:] Donald Trump says China's president is a friend and a great leader. That's not enough. He's calling on China to get tougher with North Korea on a day when trade figures show they're only getting tighter. That story, next.

[Matt Schlapp, Chairman, American Conservative Union, Former George W. Bush Political Director:] We have a broken process.
[Camerota:] You can come to the United States and seek asylum. That's legal. In fact, there used to be a time
[Schlapp:] No.
[Camerota:] that we opened our arms to people who wanted to come.
[Schlapp:] We still do.
[Camerota:] But, Matt, you keep
[Schlapp:] We still do.
[Camerota:] Hold on one second, Matt. You keep framing them as these sort of opportunists who are trying to take advantage of our system. Do you have any
[Schlapp:] They want to be
[Camerota:] sympathy for the conditions
[Schlapp:] They want to be in America. America yes.
[Camerota:] in their country?
[Schlapp:] Absolutely.
[Camerota:] Do you?
[Schlapp:] Look, I come on, my last name is Schlapp, Alisyn. Where the heck do you think I come from? I mean, all kinds of people throughout generations want to be Americans. It's one of the things I love about my country. And we're the most tolerant country on the face of the earth when it comes to accepting immigrants. We are still that way. What we cannot do is allow people to come here in a way where they get temporary protective status that allows them to stay in the country forever. We have millions of people in this country
[Camerota:] But, Matt, you know that there is a process for asylum seekers. I mean
[Schlapp:] We have millions of people who have come to this country this way. Alisyn, it's the wrong way to come.
[Camerota:] Matt
[Schlapp:] The right way to come is the legal system.
[Camerota:] You're lumping everything into one. You know that there's a process for asylum seekers and you know that's legal.
[Schlapp:] I do.
[Camerota:] And so here we are.
[Schlapp:] And, Alisyn, answer me this question. When you get your temporary status in this country, what are the consequences if you don't go to your hearing and go back to report about your status? What happens to you?
[Camerota:] Matt, you know what? My producers are yelling at me.
[Schlapp:] Did you answer that because I'm not yelling.
[Camerota:] Matt, I know what you're talking about
[Schlapp:] I'm not yelling.
[Camerota:] with this catch and release. That's what I believe you're referring to. And I believe that lots of people think that there is a problem with catch and release and that that's what they're trying to fix.
[Schlapp:] I agree with you.
[Camerota:] But drumming up fear right [audio gap]
[Schlapp:] It's truth.
[Camerota:] thousands of marauding people
[Schlapp:] There are thousands there are 5,000 4,000.
[Camerota:] at the southern border of Mexico. And by the time you know the attrition that happens by the time they get here it won't be. And then they're going to follow a legal process
[Schlapp:] So, Alisyn
[Camerota:] for seeking asylum and a fraction of them will get asylum.
[Schlapp:] Alisyn, you agree. You and I agree. They shouldn't be able to come into our country. It sounds like you and I agree. Let's shake hands on it. I agree. They should follow the law and you're saying
[Camerota:] Matt, everybody agrees that
[Schlapp:] that they're not going to be able to get here.
[Camerota:] people should follow the law. But listen, I like what you're saying.
[Schlapp:] So let's
[Camerota:] You and I will find out the exact number
[Schlapp:] Please, because I know I didn't use the right number
[Camerota:] Fair enough.
[Schlapp:] because I didn't look at it
[Camerota:] Fair enough.
[Schlapp:] before I went on the air.
[Camerota:] Got it.
[Schlapp:] Let's look at it.
[Camerota:] Let's be fact-based.
[Schlapp:] Every month people come into
[Camerota:] Let's be fact-based.
[Schlapp:] this country in this way
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Schlapp:] that allows them to come temporarily. They overstay
[Camerota:] I like your adherence of facts
[Schlapp:] OK.
[Camerota:] and when you come on later this week we will both be armed with the same facts and we'll have this discussion.
[Schlapp:] And I might be wrong because you know what, Alisyn? I'm wrong a lot
[Camerota:] I don't believe that.
[Schlapp:] but it doesn't mean I'm lying. And the president's wrong
[Camerota:] You're never wrong.
[Schlapp:] sometimes. It doesn't mean he's lying. Actually, when it comes this question of immigration he's been more right
[Camerota:] Matt, the president isn't even trying.
[Schlapp:] he's been more right than any politician we've seen recently.
[Camerota:] Matt, the president isn't even trying to use sense. And by the way, we have still not gotten the answer on where all that rioting in California was this weekend, but we'll continue to look at the facts. We look forward to talking to you about it
[Schlapp:] OK.
[Camerota:] later this week. Thanks, Matt.
[Schlapp:] Thanks.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] I just want to see the handshake that was promised there.
[Camerota:] I was wondering how we were going to do that.
[Berman:] All right. Overnight, an explosive debate in a key swing state, plus a big poll number for a rising star in the Democratic Party. That's next.

[Christine Romans, Early Start Show Co-host:] Tough talk from Iran met with a blunt warning by the U.S. President Trump says further threats from Tehran will bring severe consequences and the Secretary of State compares Iran's leadership to the mafia.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't think they did anything wrong. I think they went to the court. They got the Judge's to approve it.
[Dave Briggs, Early Start Show Co-host:] Fellow Republicans refuting the president's claim that newly released documents prove his campaign was spied on. The President now taking to Twitter, undoing a week of support for the Intel community.
[Romans:] And a driver for Uber and Lyft is off the road after live streaming passengers for it turns out. He was not breaking the law. We have reports this morning from London, Jerusalem, Hong Kong, and New Jersey. Welcome back to "Early Start." I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I am Dave Briggs. I didn't know how many people know they could be recorded sitting in the back of Uber. I didn't not know that.
[Romans:] You know in a lot of states it just takes one party to consent to be recorded either, you know, with the film, on the phone, this is one of those places.
[Briggs:] More on that story in a minute. But we start with breaking news. Tensions between the United States and Iran escalating dramatically overnight. It all started early Sunday when Iranian President Rouhani cautioned President Trump about pursuing hostile policies. Rouhani said quote, America should know that peace with Iran is the mother of all peace. And war with Iran is the mother of all wars. Last night, he via tweet.
[Romans:] Yes. President Trump warning Rouhani in all caps, never ever threaten the United States again or you will suffer consequences a likes of which few throughout history have ever suffered before. We are no longer a country that will stand for your demented word of violence and death, be cautious. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is live for us from London monitoring all of this morning, Nick.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Correspondent:] Remarkable again to wake up on a Monday morning and find block capitals potentially trying to inflame another conflict around the world. Some say perhaps this is a convenient distraction for U.S. President that has a lot of its play, but the Russia investigation and the some degree of controversial summit in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin. But here we have a whole new part of that foreign policy now potentially seeing significant more attention. A bit of context here, first of all, the idea likely of a sudden overnight shooting war between the United States and Iran is a little farfetched at this point. But it is a region with a lot of tension right now. And the U.S. ally Israel is regularly hitting this Iranian ally with the Syrian regime with air strikes and to its north Israel has these Lebanese, Hezbollah that got a lot of Iranian funding. But those two places where you could see flash points. Back to the original exchange of words. This is essentially building after the decision of the U.S. to pull out of the nuclear agreement with Iran. That is now going to lead to increased bids to tighten their economy's sanctions particularly in oil, the Iranians have made hints they might try and impede passage through the gulf of oil shipment globally. Of course, also we just heard from Mike Pompeo, the U.S. Secretary of State, in California, a little in a matter of hours before Donald Trump's tweet in which he referred to the moderates inside of Iran's government as in fact being extremist in disguise. Here is a little more what he had to say.
[Mike Pompeo, Secretary Of State:] The bitter irony of the economic situation in Iran is that the regime uses the same time to line its pockets while its people cry out for jobs and reform and opportunity. The Iranian economy is doing great, but only if you are politically connected member of the elite.
[Paton Walsh:] I won't suggest that much detail. There is a $95 billion slush fund, he claims, that the regime used to publish it interest globally and domestically to being, no doubt, there has been a lot of economic turmoil recently in Iran partially because of the impact of sanctions damaging the local economy. People have been protesting that. We just heard from the foreign ministry spokesperson now, according to Reuters, saying in fact that, you know comments like this will simply unite the Iranian people. There seem to be, I think a path of myth to some degree in U.S. diplomatic circles that the more you pressure Iran, the more likely you are suddenly find come out of the box, a more liberal Iranian administration taking this kind of moderate place. Unlikely the more you get closer to the hardliners, they are starting to do that, I think the belief in Washington is though, pressure, pressure, pressure. Eventually something breaks and that could only serve U.S. interest. But really once again. Another morning, a whole new different part of foreign policy that is potentially turned on its head.
[Romans:] Our Nick Paton Walsh for us this morning in London. Thanks Nick.
[Briggs:] Well, just under six weeks since President Trump declared North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat. The President has been steadily tweeting about how well talks with Pyongyang are going, but U.S. official telling CNN that the President has privately fumed about the slow pace of the denuclearization. For the latest, let's bring in Will Ripley live in Hong Kong this morning. Will?
[Will Ripley, International Correspondent, Cnn:] Hi, Dave, and you know, the pace may get even slower. This is really is a dose of reality for President Trump about how North Korea does business and how they negotiate. We have been saying for a long time the definition of denuclearization may be very different between the White House and Kim Jong-un's house. And we are seeing that play out now. Because while the U.S. wants North Korea to give up all its nuclear weapons. They want full transparency disclosure of nuclear missile facilities, and they want it all done in a matter of months. I spoke with a North Korean overnight who says the North Koreans believe they have already done enough. They said they have not launched the missiles since November, they have not conducted a nuclear tests and they say they destroyed the nuclear test site at [inaudible]. I went there. I saw things blow up, I don't know if the site was already destroyed, because there were no experts there to confirm. But now the North Koreans wanting things from the United States that perhaps the U.S. is not be prepared to give. Like, sanctions relief, like a peace treaty, formally ending the Korea War, they believe it would guarantee the survival and safety of Kim Jong-un's government. And the North Koreans say, if they don't get those things, particularly that peace treaty which they value security above any economic incentives, they say they might walkway from these negotiations. And they are feeling embolden by the fact that even though things are pretty slow, potentially falling apart with the United States, things are going very well right now as North Korea reaffirms its alliances with traditional ally, China and Russia. Dave?
[Briggs:] Will Ripley live for us in Hong Kong. 4:36 p.m. there. Thank you, Will.
[Romans:] All right. President Trump is now ended up where he started a week ago. He is back to questioning whether Russia interfered in the U.S. elections. He spent much of the last week trying to convince everyone he believed the Intel, remember after he stood there alongside Vladimir Putin in Helsinki and questioned the American Intelligence Community and sided with Putin. Now the President is again scoffing at the conclusion of the U.S. Intelligence. The conclusion he just said he accepted. So President Obama knew about Russia before the election, why didn't he do something about it? Why didn't he tell the campaign? Because it is all a big hoax that is why. And he thought crooked Hillary was going to win.
[Briggs:] For the record, trump campaign was told about the potential Russia interference. CNN has reported that the President was personally briefed about it in August of 2016. And even before his tweet last night, GOP leaders were raising concerns.
[Rep. Trey Gowdy, , South Carolina:] The evidence is overwhelming. The President either needs to rely on the people that he has chosen to advise him or those advisers need to reevaluate whether or not they can serve in these administration, but the disconnect cannot continue.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham, , South Carolina:] He has changed his mind four times this week. You did not collude with the Russians. I have not seen any evidence, but Mr. President, they meddled in the elections.
[Briggs:] Senator Lindsey Graham there calling on the President to impose new heavy-handed sanctions on Russia before Vladimir Putin visits Washington, expected in the fall.
[Romans:] Former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page calling an FBI claimed he was a Kremlin agent, a complete joke. Page responding to the released of secret documents used to secure a surveillance warrant. Now, the application shows Federal Investigators believe Page was engage in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of Moscow. Page acknowledging on State of the Union, he wasn't in formal adviser to Russia, but he says the foreign agent accusations are ridiculous.
[Carter Page, Former Trump Campiagn Associate:] No. I have never been an agent of the foreign power in by any stretch of the imagination. You know I may have back in the g20 in St. Petersburg, I might have participated in a few meetings that a lot of people, including people from the Obama administration were sitting in on in Geneva and Paris, et cetera. But I have never been anywhere near what's being described here.
[Briggs:] The President using the document to renew his unfounded claim that the Trump campaign were spied on even some of his allies in Congress are casting doubt. CNN's Ryan Nobles with more.
[Ryan Nobles, Washingon Correspondent, Cnn:] Dave and Christine, good morning. We did not see President Trump at all this weekend. He was at his golf resort in nearby Bedminster, Jew jersey. He didn't make any public appearances, but his Twitter feed was busy, very critical of the newly released FISA warrant application of related to the surveillance of Carter Page, the former member of his foreign policy team. The President saying this was yet another example of how there was a conspiracy against him to launch these investigation into his campaign's ties to Russia. Well, not everyone agrees with him, including some Republicans. Listen to what Marco Rubio had to say on State of the Union.
[Sen. Marco Rubio, , Florida:] I don't think they did anything wrong, I think went to the court and they got the Judges to approve it. They had laid out all the information and there were a lot of reasons unrelated to the dossier for why they wanted to look at Carter Page. And Crater Page was not a key member of the Trump campaign, but in the Trump campaign has said that.
[Nobles:] And despite all the president's complains about the FISA law, it is important to keep in mind there has been numerous opportunities for the Congress to kind of rein in the FISA law. Make it more difficult for the Federal government to conduct surveillance on American citizens and every time the Congress has elected not to do that. Including as late as January of this year where they decided to reauthorize the law and it was President Trump who signed that reauthorization into law. The same law that he is now so very critical of. Dave and Christine.
[Briggs:] Ryan Nobles, thank you. President Trump's lawyers allowing prosecutors to access a secret recording made by Trump lawyer, Michael Cohen. Even the president calls the recording perhaps illegal. The Trump legal team waiving attorneyclient privilege on the recording of Cohen's speaking with Mr. Trump about the payoff to former Playboy playmate Karen McDougal two months before the 2016 election. According to Rudy Guiliani, the president's team believes the tape will show no wrongdoing, because the transaction never happen. But the media company whose CEO has close ties to President Trump did paid for the story and then later killed it.
[Romans:] the president tweeting inconceivable that a lawyer would tape a client, totally unheard of it, perhaps illegal. The good news is that your favorite President did nothing wrong. To be clear, Cohen did nothing illegal by taping the call. In New York is a one-Party consent state. Meaning only one person involved in the conversation has to know it is being recorded.
[Briggs:] Breaking overnight. At least 14 people shot in the Greek town neighborhood of Central Toronto. Police say, one of the victims has died and another, a young girl is in critical condition. Officials say the shooter is dead. Witnesses transported by bus so investigators could interview them. One witness standing near the scene told CTV, that he heard about 20 shots and a sound of a weapon being reloaded repeatedly. We bring in more of the story as it comes in.
[Romans:] All right. The new tax law fueling a record amount of stock buybacks. All of that just by going into the pocket of investors. One of Wall Street most powerful CEO's says that is not a bad thing.
[Jamie Dimon, Ceo, Jp Morgan Chase:] We work hard to benefits our shareholders and that is our huge message to society. It is not like a few rich people.
[Church:] My exclusive interview with JPMorgan Chase CEO, Jamie Dimon next.

[Cyril Vanier, Cnn Anchor:] Hi, everybody, thank you for joining us here. I'm Cyril Vanier in Atlanta at the CNN Newsroom. Now, Spain's Catalonia region is going to hold its controversial independence vote in about an hour. The referendum has divided the country. On the one side, residents of Catalonia want to make their voices heard in a referendum. Voters have been lining up for hours at the entrance to this polling station in Barcelona. On the other side of this argument, the central government has tried to stop the vote. The highest court says it's unconstitutional, and Madrid has sent thousands of police reinforcements to block Catalans from casting their ballots. Now, there've been demonstrations on both sides in the recent days. On Saturday, thousands of people rallied in Barcelona waving the Spanish flag and calling for unity, and Catalonia's separatist government is pressing ahead despite the pressure from Madrid, and this is all leading to a very tense situation across Spain. CNN's Hannah Vaughan Jones reports.
[Hannah Vaughan Jones, Cnn Anchor:] First, it was the students, then came the firemen, and finally, the farmers. Campaigning in Catalonia's independence referendum may have drawn to an end, but the tension on the streets is only building. The Spanish government has said Sunday's vote is illegal, and must not go ahead. Barcelona's port has become a staging ground for Spanish police. Extra forces and police vans shipped in from across the country, all to try to block people from voting. The Spanish government has seized millions of ballots and campaign leaflets, arrested Catalan officials, and closed down political websites. It's a vote long campaigned for by separatists in Catalonia. The region in Northeastern Spain already has limited autonomy from the central government in Madrid. It has its own flag, its own national anthem, and its own language. But still, many Catalans want more. They want full independence for their region, which is Spain's number one tourist destination, famous for Gaudy, the iconic Sagrada Familia, and as the birthplace of Salvador Dali. Catalonia is also home to FC Barcelona. The football club has spoken out in support of the referendum. Donald Trump, on the other hand, speaking earlier this week alongside the Spanish prime minister, said he wants a united Spain.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I really think the people of Catalonia would stay with Spain. I think it would be foolish not to because you're talking about staying with a truly great, beautiful, and very historic country.
[Vaughan Jones:] A historic country which could have its borders redrawn in a matter of days, according to Catalan leaders. They threaten to declare independence from Spain within 48 hours of the vote. Hannah Vaughan Jones, CNN, London.
[Vanier:] I spoke earlier to Ryan Griffiths, a senior lecturer at the University of Sydney, about the independence vote.
[Ryan Griffiths, Senior Lecturer, University Of Sydney:] But the Spanish government would like to would like the movement to basically go away. They don't want to legitimize a referendum on independence, but they also don't want to overreact react in a heavy-handed way that drives more of the Catalan citizens to join the independent spots. So they're kind of caught in a kind of a catch-22. While they know that the other side is going to keep on pushing but they can't but they don't really have a good they they're kind of caught between two bad options.
[Vanier:] All right, so what can possibly happen here? As you were speaking, we saw the police reinforcements being sent into Catalonia, but we also saw the people lining up already as we speak to vote in a few hours. So short of beating those people, or physically removing them, there are some people who are going to vote.
[Griffiths:] That's right, that's right.
[Vanier:] OK.
[Griffiths:] Some number of people are going to get in there, and they'll be able to vote. The police are under, you know, pretty strict orders to keep it peaceful, to not to not overreact. But some number of people are going to get in, and vote. Now, one of the problems they have is that you know, that roughly half of the population would vote no in a legitimate binding referendum, but most of them are going to stay home. So whatever referendum, whatever vote comes out of the you know, the referendum today, it'll almost certainly be predominantly a yes vote. Now, the Catalan independence leaders have promised to declare independence in 48 hours if the you know, if they can show the majority supports.
[Vanier:] Ryan Griffiths there, a senior lecturer at the University of Sydney. OK, so let's update you now on what's going on in Puerto Rico, and the humanitarian crisis there. Their island was brought to its knees 11 days ago by Hurricane Maria. Most of its people are reeling in misery. Even the Mayor of San Juan is living in a shelter sleeping on a cot. However, late Friday, when she begged Washington for more federal help? Well, the President of the United States seemed to take it personally, and he tweeted from his golf resort in New Jersey, "The Mayor of San Juan, who was very complimentary only a few days ago, has now been told by the Democrats that you must be nasty to Trump....Such poor leadership ability by the Mayor of San Juan, and others in Puerto Rico, who are not able to get their workers to help. They.......want everything to be done for them when it should be a community effort. 10,000 Federal workers now on Island doing a fantastic job." Well, here's the latest from U.S. emergency officials. Search and rescue teams have scoured the island from end to end, and rescued 843 people. Eleven highways across Puerto Rico have now been cleared of storm debris, and that should make it easier to move emergency aid into the battered countryside. And 70 percent of the ports and 60 percent of the gas stations are operational, even though curfews force gas stations to close by 9:00 pm. San Juan's mayor brushed off President Trump's criticism of her. Here's what she told our Anderson Cooper.
[Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz, Mayor, San Juan:] The truth is staring us in the face. Just today, I was telling you we had to evacuate yet another hospital because the generator caught on fire. So this is an another hospital that will not be able to work for another week. We transported 14 patients to one of our facilities. The damp in the Eastern part of the island is two towns, for the first time that I know of in my lifetime in Puerto Rico, two towns are being completely evacuated. People are still coming and saying, the Mayor of San Lorenzo, the Mayor of Comerio, the Mayor of Ponce, the Mayor of Loiza, are saying, you know, "Where's the help? We need it. Please, help us."
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] The president also said in a in a tweet early this morning that, you had been nice to him early on, but that Democrats told you you have to be nasty toward him.
[Cruz:] You know, I don't know, maybe he's just not used to women being big enough not to be told what to do. Right, you know? That's but that's not who we are here in San Juan.
[Vanier:] The Mayor of San Juan there. Now, it's important to note that some emergency aid is reaching ordinary Puerto Ricans who are struggling to get by from one day to the next. However, in many cases, contrary to President Trump's accusation, that help is coming from private citizens, not from the government. CNN correspondents are covering all angles of this. Our Leyla Santiago is in a community outside the capital, and she shows you exactly that one famous Puerto Rican stepping up to help his people.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] She may need a walker, and has an extra load, but the walk home is the easy part for Alice Elise Negron. The 62-year old was first in line for help when this package arrived in Toa Baja. ALICE ELISE NEGRON,
[Citizen Of Puerto Rico:] She says she doesn't know what's in the box yet, but she knows that it's a blessing a blessing.
[Santiago:] But it's not from the federal government.
[Daddy Yankee, Puerto Rican Singer-songwriter:] We just have to make sure that people get the food in their hands.
[Santiago:] Rather, a superstar who calls Puerto Rico home, musician Daddy Yankee, and a food bank. Do you feel the government's doing enough?
[Yankee:] No, I don't think so
[Santiago:] No?
[Yankee:] I don't think so. And that's real. You know, there's no time to play politics right now. This is a chaos. We're really struggling right now.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes?
[Santiago:] Struggling is exactly how Edwin De Jesus describes it. EDWIN DE JESUS,
[Citizen Of Puerto Rico:] When Hurricane Maria whipped through town, he said he was able to get one pants, two shirts, and a radio that he's using right now.
[Santiago:] He's also one of the lucky ones to receive a box each with a week's worth of food. The food bank says this load from private donors is enough for 4,000 families. DE JESUS [through translator
[Santiago):] He says, this is good because at least the help is arriving now.
[Santiago:] Beyond this, the only other help residents tell us they've seen here 10 days after Maria struck. NEGRON [through translator
[Santiago):] She says some water has arrived here as aid, but that's it. She hasn't seen anything else. That's why she was first in line to get these boxes.
[Santiago:] For many, these boxes bring home a bit of hope.
[Unidentified Female:] OK.
[Santiago:] Alice Elise doesn't understand English, so I'm going to read to her what this says. It said, "Better days are coming. Be brave, and stay strong." [Translating into Spanish]
[Negron:] Amen. Amen. [Speaking in Spanish]
[Santiago:] Amen. NEGRON [through translator
[Santiago):] And she adds, "And have faith."
[Santiago:] Faith that more help like this will get here soon. Leyla Santiago, Toa Baja, Puerto Rico.
[Vanier:] All right, let's stick with the Puerto Rico story, where we were telling you yesterday and Derek Van Dam is with us from the CNN International weather center. He was telling you yesterday that there was concern over possible rainfall. Derek, what do we know?
[Derek Van Dam, Cnn Weather Anchor:] Well, Cyril, that additional heavy rain that has fallen today and that continues to fall overnight and into the day on Sunday, is putting major stresses on the nearly failed dam in the northwestern sections of Puerto Rico. This is the area where the Guajataca Dam is located. You can see that shading of red. That's a flash flood warning. The entire island's still under flash flood watches, including portions of the British and U.S. Virgin Islands. It's all thanks to additional tropical activity that continues to bombard this region with heavier rain. Additional rainfall on a already saturated environment means the ground really can't soak up that extra water. So flooding is a possibility going forward. We have at least another 15 to 30 millimeters of rainfall in the forecast for the east coast and the mountainous regions across the central portions of Puerto Rico. We have zero river gages at the moment that are indicating flood stage or higher. That's the good news. But we'll see how the additional rainfall impacts those particular rivers, and the additional flooding that is expected. You can see the computer model's indicating some sort of a clearing trend as we head into the day on Monday, so finally, we'll start to see some breaks in the cloud cover overhead. So interesting notes. New to CNN here, just on some of the services that are being restored to the island, the northern sections of the island have seen a 29 percent water restoration. You can see 72 percent in the south, 46 in the east, 19 in the west, and the San Juan metro region has had 55 percent of water restored to that particular area. But certainly, Cyril, a slow road to recovery for all of Puerto Rico going forward. Back to you.
[Vanier:] And Derek Van Dam from the International Weather Center. Thank you very much. We've been monitoring that, and we'll continue to do so. Thanks. Now, the Trump administration is acknowledging for the first time it is in direct contact with North Korea over the nuclear crisis. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says the U.S. has a couple of channels of communication, and is trying to determine if leader Kim Jong Un is willing to negotiate. Tillerson says the immediate goal is to calm tensions down after escalating threats and counter-threats between the two countries. An Air France flight en route to Los Angeles Saturday made an emergency landing in Canada after suffering serious engine damage. Passengers say they heard a boom, and started descending quickly. Well, fortunately the plane landed safely in Canada after the engine blew out. No one was injured, and it's still unclear what caused that engine failure. Thank you very much for watching CNN, everybody. I'm Cyril Vanier. MARKETPLACE AFRICA is next. Stay with us.

[Blitzer:] This just coming in to CNN. The actress, Margot Kidder, has died. She had been a staple on movies and television since breaking into the business as a 20-year-old in 1968. She's best known playing Lois Lane in all four of the Christopher Reeve "Superman" films.
[Margot Kidder, Actress:] Do you have a girlfriend?
[Christopher Reeve, Actor:] No, I don't. But if I did, you would be the first to know about it.
[Kidder:] Um.
[Blitzer:] Her family says she passed away quietly in her home in Montana. Margot kidder was 69 years old. Other news we're following, dozens of Palestinians were killed today during protests in Gaza along the border with Israel. The demonstrations were aimed at the United States' opening a new embassy in Jerusalem, moving the new embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations says today's violence means there's no chance at peace. Let's get perspective from the Palestinians right now. Joining us, Ambassador Husam Zomlot. He's the head of the Palestinian authorities' delegation to the United States. Mr. Ambassador, thank you very much for joining us. Give us immediate reaction, if you can, to what the latest developments are, the impact of the U.S. moving the embassy, and what it means for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process?
[Amb. Husam Zomlot, Director, Plo Delegration To The United States:] Just the U.S. administration has gave up on the peace process and its role as a mediator international towards achieving the internationally endorsed two-state solution. And it also means the U.S. has gave in for the voices of extremism, for the voices we'll see a zero-sum game, the fanatics, politically speaking. It was telling today that the ones who opened the ceremony of moving the U.S. embassy are religious leaders of the Christian Zionists who interpret politics and legality and world map from a very contested, to say the least, religious implications. This is not only encouraging Israel to cross the line. It's very encouraging to Israel to cross the line towards Armageddon and the end-of-time prophecy.
[Blitzer:] Ambassador, are you at all, Mr. Ambassador, in touch with Trump administration officials? They keep saying they're about to release their peace plan, Israeli-Palestinian peace plan, and they still have hope for the two-state solution, Israel alongside a new state of Palestine. Have you had conversations with these American officials?
[Zomlot:] We don't know what they're talking about, really. We don't know. Peace is a very firm vision by the U.S. That vision has been drawn by all previous administrations, with the 1968 borders, establishing a sovereign state with each in the U.S. capital. The U.S. law is very clear. It was presented in 1991 by former administrator, James Baker. It is very clear. The U.S. intervention and vision is about Israel's occupation, implementing U.N. Security Council resolutions and respecting them in Jerusalem, never recognizing Israel's control of annexations. So what the U.S. administration has done is reneging on these promises and violating international law. There is a U.N. Security Council resolution that the U.S. voted for and that presents any state from moving its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. And also the U.S. has stated that Jerusalem is outside the negotiating table. You know it, Wolf, very well. You have been there for many decades. But Jerusalem is the heart of the two states solution
[Blitzer:] Let me just interrupt, Ambassador, because they say they're not necessarily concluding all final status of all parts of Jerusalem. Yes, the U.S. is moving the embassy to west Jerusalem, but they're not completely ruling out the possibility of the Palestinians having control of parts of east Jerusalem and having a U.S. embassy in east Jerusalem for the new Palestinian state. When you hear that from the administration, what do you think?
[Zomlot:] No, I only have it from you now. Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people. It's not even the capital of Israel. As I said earlier, a clear religious interpretation of international relations and legal matters on one hand. On the other hand, there was a reason why all previous American presidents, from President Truman to President Obama, why they decided not to move the embassy. They knew, by doing so, you actually remove the U.S. from the role of the mediator and dictate the terms of reference and dictate the outcome of Jerusalem being an issue. Of course, we would be fine if the U.S. has when there are two embassies after reaching a peace agreement. Before that, it is it will only be seen as urgent on the Palestinians. President Trump himself says removing the Jerusalem from the table, taking it off the table. And then they wanted to remove the administration off the table that services the refugees. And then they are not even criticizing or condemning the illegal settlement expansion, which has been the major obstacle on the part of the two-state solution. And they are not even criticizing or condemning the murder by Israeli forces of the Palestinian peaceful demonstrators. So the bottom line, what peace process this administration is talking about? We believe that peace can be found now in the international community, in a multilateral forum. Peace can only be found based on legality, based on politics, not based on ideology, and some very twisted religious interpretations of reality.
[Blitzer:] Ambassador Zomlot, let's see what this if they do release a plan, the Trump administration, what specifically it spells out. We'll continue our conversations. Ambassador Zomlot, thanks so much for joining us.
[Zomlot:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] We're going to hear from the White House about these deadly protests in Gaza, along the border with Israel in a few minutes. I'm sure there will be plenty of questions on that, plenty of questions on a lot of other issues as well. The White House press briefing set to begin at the top of the hour. We'll have live coverage. We'll be right back.

[Lu Stout:] All right. Coming to you live from Hong Kong, welcome back. This is News Stream. Now, European Union tariffs are more than $3 billion worth of American goods are now in force. And new taxes are being leveled on several goods. This, of course, all in response to the Trump administration's tariffs on Europe. Now CNN's Anna Stewart joins me now live from London with more. And, Anna, first, exactly which products are being targeted, and what impact could this have on the U.S. economy?
[Anna Stewart, Cnn Correspondent:] It's a really wide range of tariffs actually, Kristie, and we did know about these months before, but today is when they're actually going to be implemented, and interestingly enough, they target some real Republican states. For instance, we have here peanut butter. That is one of the things that will be tariff. This is made a lot in Texas. Orange juice, Florida, of course, and things like rice, which are made in states like Arkansas. So, these are the sort of products we're seeing, and as of today, they are getting more expensive in the E.U., and what that really means is that for restaurants, shops, businesses that buy these products, they'll either have to absorb that cost, and damp down their profits, pass on the cost to the consumer. Or choose to buy the products from somewhere else, and of course that is what would be so damaging for the U.S. businesses if their customers drop off, and of course for jobs in the U.S. as well, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] It was the Trump tariffs on aluminum and steel on Europe that kicked this off. Europe is retaliating. Could the U.S. hit back? Could this just go on and on, and be another front in emerging trade war?
[Stewart:] I mean, it really could, and we already know that the Trump administration has been looking into the possibility of tariffs on European cars. We also know that the E.U. has already prepared a list of more tariffs on the U.S. products of over $4 billion, so even more than this list. So yes, this is likely to continue, and it's not just obviously China and the U.S., and now the E.U. and the U.S., it's also Canada, it's Mexico, it's India, all these countries have prepared tariffs, many of them have been implemented. Canada's will be implemented in a couple of weeks on July 1st, so this is just ramping up, really.
[Lu Stout:] A number of flash points in this ongoing trade battle, Anna Stewart reporting live from London, thank you. Now, OPEC ministers in Vienna, they are preparing for a crucial vote on oil production. U.S. President Donald Trump says oil prices are too high, and has urged OPEC to boost supply. Saudi Arabia wants OPEC to increase output by 1 million barrels per day, but Iran does not think that this can, or should be done. CNN's John Defterios joins me now from Vienna outside the headquarters of OPEC. And, John, we've heard that there has been an agreement. Can you clarify?
[John Defterios, Cnn Emerging Markets Editor:] Yes. I can clarify it, Kristie. In fact, we spoke to the Saudi Energy Minister Khalid Al-Falih who at the start of the meeting says the overall agreement would be at 1 million barrels a day. The devil is in the detail, how they carve that up. It looks like they're going to iron out those details. The nominal figure is 1 million barrels a day, but it only goes to producers who actually have the spare capacity, so probably be about 700,000 barrels a day coming on to the market in the third quarter. This is clearly Saudi Arabia, and some of the gulf producers responding to the pressure of U.S. President Donald Trump saying that OPEC was getting greedy when prices rose to $80 a barrel in may. We heard complaints from China and India as well. But this is also a meeting, I think it's very important to suggest, where oil, and geopolitics are clashing, and clashing badly right now. The Iranians are holding out in this closed door meeting, trying to get some very tough language into the final communique against the United States for sanctions against Iran and Venezuela. Now, the de facto ruler and the ally of the United States of the OPEC Organization is Saudi Arabia. It's the biggest producer, and they suggest that this tough language is a nonstarter. Let's listen to the Saudi Minister.
[Khalid Al-falih, Saudi Energy Minister:] I think countries that have political complaints will make those political statements. They've made it outside the meeting over the last couple of days. They will make it inside the meeting. But the communique will not acknowledge anybody's political issues and problems.
[Defterios:] Very clear language coming in from the Saudi Oil Minister. The Iranian Minister told me in an exclusive interview a few days ago that he thought OPEC now joined with sarcasm, the U.S. Department of Energy because of the influence the U.S. is having here on proceedings in Vienna. In fact, last night, at a preliminary meeting right here at the OPEC headquarters, he decided to walk out as a gesture, suggesting he wasn't being heard. I don't think it will impact the overall production agreement. It is what the Saudis were suggesting, but it does tear at the unity of the organization. They worked for 18 months to take oil off the market, to raise prices, and they had a collective agreement. This is the first time in 18 months we see tearing in the unity of OPEC and non-OPEC producers, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Yes. It's been a very tense affair there in Vienna. John Defterios across it all for us. Thank you, John. All right. Neymar and the Samba boys, they are back in action against Costa Rica in the World Cup. Brazilian star Neymar has recovered from injury, and is in fact on the field right now. For more, World Sports' Alex Thomas joins me live from Moscow. Alex, today's first game, Brazil versus Costa Rica, happening right now, always in Neymar. What's the latest?
[Alex Thomas, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Yes, I mean, far too early days to talk about the game itself, nil-nil, currently, Brazil desperate for a win really to get step closer to reaching the knockout stages, the round of 16 after a disappointing draw in their opening game against Switzerland. It's Serbia that are atop the group after winning their opening match against Costa Rica, and it's Serbia that Brazil have to play in the final game, so they don't want to come away with only a point, or even a defeat out of this one, and have to beat Serbia, or risk going out at the group stages, which would be a national disaster for a country like Brazil that loves their football so much. The spiritual home of the game, even though it was invented back in the U.K., because this is the country that has been the most successful in World Cup history, having lifted that famous trophy on five occasions, and looking to bounce back from heartbreak on home soil four years ago when they reached the semifinals, and then were thrashed 7-1 by the eventual champions, Germany. Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, so much on the line for Brazil, and we got to talk about Argentina. Messi, what went wrong, and can Argentina make it right?
[Thomas:] Argentina is still in this World Cup, Kristie, but only just clinging on by their very fingertips. One of those results that had you waking up this morning, and pinching yourself, and checking your smartphone just to make sure it actually happened. Croatia, winning, maybe, you could see that. They've got excellent players that play for some of the biggest clubs in Europe, led by Real Madrid star Luka Modric who scored when they goal, but 3-nil thrashing, really? When you're up against not only Lionel Messi, Barcelona super star, five times world player of the year, and who's won everything in the game with his club Barcelona, but also Sergio Aguero, Gonzalo Higuain, just players of the highest caliber, lots of fire power going forward for Argentina. Perhaps not with the midfield, and defense that are able to support those star attacking players, and the Argentina coach certainly took a lot of the blame on his shoulders, saying it was down to his tactics. He got it wrong, and he apologized to the team, and to the country who are definitely in mourning, although mathematically, they can still get through, and they'll be wondering they'll be relying a lot on what happens in the Nigeria-Iceland game kicking off at 6:00 in the evening in Volgograd later, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] All right, Alex Thomas live in Moscow, thank you, take care. Coming up right here on the program, we've got chaos and mixed messages with thousands of children caught in the political cross fire. We're going to be live in Texas after the break.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] President Trump back to the wall but still in no man's land when it comes to telling the truth about it. John Berman here in for Anderson. A lot happening in the hour ahead. You're looking at the county coliseum in the Texas border city of El Paso. The president will be speaking there shortly and on the street tonight heading to a counter rally nearby, protesters including former Democratic congressman and possible presidential hopeful Beto O'Rourke. That's on the right side of your screen. They are marching to tell the president what they think of his border policy and statements like this which are just plain wrong.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The border city of El Paso, Texas, used to have extremely high rates of violent crime. One of the highest in the entire country and considered one of our nation's most dangerous cities. Now, immediately upon its building with a powerful barrier in place, El Paso is one of the safest cities in our country.
[Berman:] So keeping them honest, that's not true, full stop. El Paso was and is one of America's safer cities before and after the wall. Here are the facts courtesy of the "El Paso Times" and figures they received from the FBI. They show violent crime they're peaking in 1993, and declining by more than a third by 2006. Border fencing was authorized that year and was completed in 2009. And as you can see, while a crime actually went up right around then, about 17 percent, and it's bounced around at a fairly low level ever since. The numbers are consistent with other big cities over that period. Violent crime going down substantially or in many cases dramatically, and the president any president can get those numbers by just picking up a phone a local call, any president at any time of day or night has access to more facts about more things than any of us could possibly imagine. Unless that is he prefers imagining his then doubling down and actually going to the place he lied about to prove a point that's not true, you know, because it's Monday. In a moment, you'll hear from the mayor of El Paso, a Republican by the way. First, live coverage of the events starting with the protest march in CNN's Jeff Zeleny who joins us live. Jeff, give us a sense of what's going on where you are.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] John, there is a sense that the residents of El Paso here as you can see behind me, they're staging to have a march to the arena where the president is going to be. They are saying that they want to tell their story about El Paso. They want to tell their facts and figures about the actual crime right here. As you said the Republican mayor of El Paso, other Republicans we've spoken to all day long say the president simply is not correct here in his facts. So that is something that they are marching. They want to, of course, a correct the record if you will. They were stung last week when the president mentioned this in the State of the Union Address. So they are trying to correct the record. But, John, a lot of attention is focused on one person in the crowd, a tall person in the crowd. That, of course, is Beto O'Rourke, the former Texas congressman. Anticipation hanging over the air here about his future.
[Berman:] And the question is will he announce whether or not he is running for president the former Texas congressman has said he will decide by the end of February. We will hear from Beto O'Rourke shortly. Do you have any sense on what he might discuss tonight.
[Zeleny:] Well, John, we know that he will not announce that he is going to seek the Democratic nomination tonight. I've talked to two friends of his who say he does not want to use the timing or the space here of the president's rally to announce his future plans. But we do know that he wants to talk about his opposition to the border wall. He wants to talk about his you know, differing view of immigration policies so that is what we expect him to say. He wants to also he says tell the story of El Paso which he says is one of the safest cities in America because of immigration, because of legal immigration. So that is something we are going to hear from him. But so, there are black flags here, John, whipping into wind saying Beto for president for 2020. He has not yet made that decision we're told but he's inching ever closer to it. That, of course, would be adding one more name to the crowded field should he do it. But don't look for that announcement, John, but a bit of a tease here.
[Berman:] Yes.
[Zeleny:] A couple weeks before he'll make his plans known, John.
[Berman:] Yes, he won't announce it tonight, but it is clear he is using this night in this event to create the juxtaposition with the president of the United States. It is interesting in and of itself. Jeff Zeleny, great to have you on the ground there in El Paso. Keep us posted as this march develops over the next several minutes. Again, we were expecting the president shortly. Let's check in now at that video with CNN's Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, so why did the president chose El Paso for this rally, given that the facts do not support the arguments that he made about the need for the wall in El Paso?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Yes, John. Despite what officials say and despite what the numbers show, the president believes this is the city that makes the argument for his border wall. One reason he believes that is the state's attorney general, Ken Paxton, who told the president that violent crime here dropped after that fence barrier was built along the border, which you can see when you step just outside of the coliseum and that the president is speaking at tonight. Now, despite the numbers and what officials have said as you said at the beginning the show saying that's not true, the president is expected to continue undeterred, making that argument here to the residence of El Paso tonight.
[Berman:] Hey, Kaitlin, has he spent anytime meeting with people today, any officials to find out what's really going on on the ground?
[Collins:] No, John, the president actually has not even landed yet here in El Paso. He's still up in the air, on his way from Washington, but right now, he doesn't have any briefings on his schedule. Instead, when he gets here, the two things we know he's doing is one, a photo line with supporters. That costs about $15,000 per supporter and he's pretaping an interview with Fox News that's going to air later on in the evening. Now, we should say that the president did visit the border city of McAllen, Texas, back in the middle of January, where he did do border security briefings. He walked along the border with several officials. But, John, this is the president's first time in El Paso tonight, the city that he says that's making the argument for his wall here, yet, he's not scheduled to have any kind of border briefings with any of the local officials who have been disputing what he's been saying about this city.
[Berman:] All right. Kaitlan Collins at the event itself. Thanks to you and thanks to Mick Jagger. On the other side of your screen there is the march, this counterprotest we can put it back up again against the president. People in El Paso, they say they want to give the president's the facts there about what has gone on in that city, again one of the safer cities before a wall was built and after a wall is built. In that crowd, former Democratic Congressman Beto O'Rourke, who we will hear from very shortly. So stay tuned. If anyone should know what life is like in El Paso, it is the mayor there he like the president is a Republican. He has been in office since 2017, and I had a chance to speak to him earlier tonight. Mayor Margo, just this afternoon, the president's campaign released a video featuring residents of El Paso saying that since the barrier was put up in your city, crime has gone down dramatically and that not constructing a wall is immoral. How do you respond to that?
[Mayor Dee Margo , El Paso, Texas:] Well, I haven't seen the clip. I don't know who was saying it. But the statistics show that we were one of the safest cities before the fence went up and we've remained today we're considered I think the safest city in the United States, according to uniform crime statistics reported by or to the FBI for a community that's or a city that's over 500,000. The fence has helped some on crime and the residents in some of the neighborhoods, specifically the Chihuahuita neighborhood, which is which is one of our oldest if not our oldest neighborhood have said that they felt safer as a result of that. But the overall crime statistics with the exception of vehicle thefts and some things like that hasn't had significant change.
[Berman:] No, and the notion that he stated in the State of the Union, El Paso had one of the highest crime rates in the country, one of the most violent cities in the country, you take issue with that?
[Margo:] Well, it's just it's not factually correct, but I think to give deference to the president, he was echoing what our attorney general had said a couple of weeks ago in McAllen and that's where the incorrect information came from. So, no one asked me to correct that one. I've just been correcting the or since the president's State of the Union.
[Berman:] What do you make of your city being used as something of a political tool tonight by the president, as a way to make his case for the border wall?
[Margo:] Well, I prefer not to characterize this as a political tool. I think it's an opportunity to showcase El Paso. My biggest argument has been if you want to understand immigration, if you want to understand the border, if you want to understand how Mexico and in our case El Paso and Texas are intertwined, culturally and economically for almost 400 years, you need to come here. And as a result that he's coming, even though it's a political event, I'm just happy to have them down here. But the problem we have is most of the people in the pundits who are in Washington or middle America or Chicago or elsewhere, I don't know where they are, but are making comments about the border have never been here and don't understand it.
[Berman:] Do you think or expect him to act or accurately depict the realities of El Paso tonight?
[Margo:] It's hard to say. I would hope I'm going to hope I hope that I will be able to visit with him before his rally a little bit and maybe, you know, eliminate or elucidate him for on El Paso. But it's hard to say. It's an awfully quick visit, but it's a start. I mean, we're pleased I would prefer it being a presidential visit for fact-finding and those kind of things as opposed to a political rally. But I'm but we're happy to have the president come down here and see a little bit of El Paso firsthand.
[Berman:] Mayor, you said you want people to come see the border for themselves. What do you want the president to learn about El Paso tonight?
[Margo:] Well, the fact that we are so you know intrinsically tied together that we're one we're really one region. You know, I like to say we're three states, New Mexico, Chihuahua and Texas in two countries, the United States of Mexico, and one region of two and a half million people, and we've been that way for almost four hundred years. People also don't realize that El Paso was original on the South Side of the Rio Grande until 1848. So it's just hard for people to fully understand. We're not a small dusty community. We're a large metropolitan area with over two-and-a- half million people.
[Berman:] Mayor Margo, I appreciate your time. Appreciate the work you do for El Paso. Thanks so much for being with us.
[Margo:] Thank you.
[Berman:] Always a note when a Republican mayor cannot say whether or not the president of the United States will be accurate tonight in his comments. Again, you're looking at live pictures from El Paso. This is not far from where the president will be speaking right now. This is the counter protest, a rally, a march to make a statement by the people in that city, but what would they say the facts are in El Paso, and among the marchers is the former Democratic Congressman Beto O'Rourke considering a run for president. We will hear from him shortly. A lot more head as we get ready to hear from the president and Beto O'Rourke as another shutdown deadline approaches. We'll get a live update on negotiations and take you inside the talks is one of the lawmakers tried to reach a deal. And later, the president may have thought he was only insulting a political rival. In fact his latest remarks about Senator Elizabeth Warren, Native Americans have also reopened an old and especially deep wound in this country. Keeping them honest on that ahead on 360.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for being with me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We're about to enter now hour 14 of the partial U.S. government shutdown. And neither side is ready to blink on the border wall issue. The president, he is having lunch with a group of all Republican lawmakers to discuss border security. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says it is the Democrats who actually need to make a move in order to get the government back open again. Listen.
[Mitch Mcconnell,  Senate Majority Leader:] We pushed the pause button until the president, from whom we will need his signature, and Senate Democrats, from whom we will need votes, reach an agreement. No procedural votes, no test votes, just a meaningful vote on a bipartisan agreement whenever that is reached. And it's my hope that it is reached sooner rather than later.
[Chuck Schumer,  Senate Minority Leader:] President Trump, if you want to open the government, you must abandon the wall, plain and simple. The wall is President Trump's bone to the hard right people. It's no way to spend $5 billion, for a political bone.
[Whitfield:] Let's get right to CNN's congressional correspondent Phil Mattingly on Capitol Hill. You're hearing that this could get worse before it gets better?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, Fred, that's exactly right. At least this current state, there are no clear pathways out of the negotiations that have occurred behind the scenes. What I'm told is that there have been proposals traded back and forth from the White House to Democrats and back, and at this point they are still, what I've been told, billions of dollars apart. And obviously one crucial issue, you heard it from the Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer on the Senate floor, Democrats are not willing to budge in the idea that they will not provide a dime in border wall funding. The president has made clear his threshold right now is $5 billion, willing to come down a little bit, we're told in negotiations that have been ongoing, but there does need to be money for the wall. And if you're reading tea leaves, and pretty much given that most lawmakers aren't here today, that's what a lot of us have been left to go. If you look at the meeting in the White House, the lunch that you mentioned that is going on in the White House right now, and who is attending that lunch. You have essentially hardline conservative and allies of the president, members of the House Freedom Caucus, Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Mike Lee, Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby, who is considered somebody who can be part of a potential deal. But if you look at that list, and I've been talking to both Republicans and Democrats about those attending, nobody views that list as the type of people that are going to help the president move any closer to making a deal. The House Freedom Caucus allies are a very conservative caucus in the House, were the group that was pushing the president to have this fight, to stick to the issue that he campaign on and promise his supporters he would eventually win on, the funding for the wall. And given that that is occurring, given that negotiations really haven't moved that far over the course of the last 12 to 15 hours, you mentioned that it is 14 hours into the shutdown, we shouldn't probably be talking about the hours that this will take. We should be talking about the days, maybe even longer according to aides I'm talking to now. I will note Vice President Mike Pence making his way back to Capitol Hill, he was in here last night with Mick Mulvaney, the incoming chief of staff, and Jared Kushner the president's son-in-law and senior adviser. He has been trying to take an active role in discussions and talks and negotiations, but at this point, even as he arrives on Capitol Hill, nobody believes that anything is happening any time soon. In fact, it might be a long wait at this point, Fred.
[Whitfield:] Phil Mattingly, thank you so much. So President Trump delayed his holiday trip to his Mar-a-Lago resort in south Florida, and says that he is working hard at the White House trying to resolve this shutdown. We just mentioned there was going to be a lunch there. Let's check in with CNN White House reporter Sarah Westwood. So Sarah, what are you hearing about what productive material could come from this lunch?
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Fred, President Trump has really been all over the map when it comes to this funding fight. First, he said about a week ago that he would be proud to be responsible for a shutdown if it meant getting money for his border wall. Then his aides signaled that he would be willing to sign that temporary spending deal that passed the Senate. It would have kept the government open to February 8th. But by Thursday, he had changed his mind, put his foot down again, taking a hardline stance in favor of his $5 billion. And that's how we got to today. There's still not a lot of clarity coming from the White House about just what kind of legislation the president would be willing to sign. That's causing a lot of headaches for negotiators. The president had become increasingly sensitive to criticism from his conservative allies that he was essentially surrendering by taking that temporary spending deal that would have kept the government open, and forfeited his last, best chance to get the wall before Democrats come into power in the House in January. Now, this White House meeting that you and Phil mentioned, it is really just with people who already agree with the president on funding for the border wall. And as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell mentioning, what the president needs to do right now to break the logjam is huddle with people who don't agree with me, with Senate Democrat whose votes he will need to get something passed in the Senate. Remember, he has to have 10 Senate Democrats come across the aisle, at least 10 if he doesn't lose any members, any Democrats, to come across the aisle and vote for what he is willing to sign in terms of border wall funding. The White House not signaling just how far down from that $5 billion he would be willing to come. And so there is a lot of wait and see until the president clarifies his position right now, Fred.
[Whitfield:] Sara Westwood at the White House, keep us posted. Let's talk more about all this. Joining me right now, CNN political analyst Brian Karem, and Washington bureau chief of the "Chicago Sun Times," Lynn Sweet. Good to see both of you. Happy holidays. So, Brian, you first. What's the point of this lunch if it really is preaching to the choir?
[Brian Karem, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, because you like to hear the choir sing back at you on occasion, I suppose. What this situation really boils down to, Fred, is three things. First of all, he was willing to compromise, on Wednesday gave the signal he was going to compromise, then heard from Ann Coulter who is the intellectual equivalent of an empty wasp's nest in the middle of winter. And when she went after him, he capitulated, and Rush Limbaugh hopped. And so the president hardened Pharaoh hardened his heart. So that's where we got to where we are. Then the issue itself, as far as the border wall, it's a very disingenuous issue. So they tell us it will stop illegal immigration. A lot of the illegal immigration is from people who overstay their visas. Then they tell it is going to stop terrorism. I covered that border for five years. There has been very few cases of terrorism. Most terrorists come in the usual route, the terrorists from the Middle East, and where he says. And then finally, he talks about it curbing drug problems. Well, it's not. There is a demand for drugs in this country. And so all three of these issues are just disingenuous. And the real reason why this is an issue for Ann Coulter and for other Republicans is that they believe that the people coming in from south of the border are brought here to vote Democratic. And so they're brown people, it's a racist argument, and it's a political argument. So today, when he sits there in that lunch, he is preaching to the choir, talking to the choir, and they're bolstering each other, and there's nothing being done.
[Whitfield:] So then, Lynn, you heard from the minority leader, Chuck Schumer, who was trying to be both instructive and also admonished the Senate there. And he says, you know what, this administration has barely spent money from last year. So he says this is, and I'm quoting now, ineffective law the majority of people don't even support, meaning this $5 billion for the wall or any amount of money for the wall, because Schumer was saying, look, we have three proposals on the table, two of them are Democratic, one is from Mitch McConnell, and they all are promising $1.3 billion for border security, but no funding for the wall. So is this both sides just simply digging in their heels? And this promises that this is going to be a very long government shutdown, because neither side is going to budge?
[Lynn Sweet, Washington Bureau Chief, "chicago Sun-times":] Well, I've been through these shutdowns before. And these deals materialize somewhere. What is giving them an escape valve is that because this is the Christmas holiday, people all over the place are on holiday, so you won't feel the impact of it in the way you might otherwise have said. But I want to
[Whitfield:] Unless you're a federal worker, one of the 800,000.
[Sweet:] That's true. But you might it just is not the same, this is the most unusual week of the year, where people, a lot of people are off, and might not have trials scheduled, trips to national parks scheduled. But my point being, I don't want to negate in any way the toughness that this is on federal workers, who may be in a tough position. I want to go back to Schumer's speech today, because he had two parts in it. One that was a strong argument, one that was a weaker one. Saying what people rely on, or citing the poll, most people think this or that, is something that is easily debatable. And what is not as debatable is Schumer understands how federal government works, and this is such an important point, let me just plow through this. Most federal projects do not get full federal funding all at one time. The White House has not put out, it's not saying that we need $5 billion year one, you spend 1.2, year three we do whatever. So if you can't even spend the money in the pipeline, it is hard to justify in routine federal projects getting all of the money at once. That's why there is this term called shovel-ready projects and all that, all this to say that Schumer really struck on something, that you can't spend all this money in one year, so why do you need it in one year? And then that goes back to
[Whitfield:] He is getting to the heart of governing. He is being very critical and saying Mr. President, you don't know how to govern.
[Sweet:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] And you're not leading
[Sweet:] That's why I think, Fred, you need to pay attention to this. And then the other thing that Democrats are a little slower coming back to is they don't even have to necessarily debate about the wall, because if Mexico is going to really pay for it, it would have been a nonstarter. And that's where I think you're going to see some of this discussion going, bringing it back to a point sometimes people forget.
[Whitfield:] So then Brian, the flipside to that is you have the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who is placing the blame on Democrats and saying, wait a minute, the pressure is on you, on you two come around and to compromise and to get government running again.
[Karem:] Well, and then Mitch is ignoring the point that Lynn just made, and he knows it all too well. That's Mitch playing to the base, to the president's base, because Mitch knows all too well, Senator McConnell has been there for a long time. He knows how this game is played, and he knows that if you don't spend the money, everything that Lynn just said, I won't repeat, but he knows this. So when he is saying what he is saying, he's being disingenuous in order to sell it. The president came out and owned this, said he would be happy to shut it down, said it was his shutdown.
[Whitfield:] And it's difficult to walk that back.
[Karem:] Well, no, how do you walk that back?
[Whitfield:] He is saying it, and so are other Republicans who are supporting him, who are saying, yes, it is on the Democrats, you own this. But the president said he owns it.
[Karem:] But Fred, he has walked everything back at one point or another, since he's been there. Since day one when they showed his picture and said that the inaugural crowd was the largest ever. They create the facts, and then they want us to report them. It is a long cry from where it was when Reagan, Larry Speakes said, look, don't tell us how to stage the news and we won't tell you how to report the news. This administration stages it and then wants to tell how to report it and then changes it. It's not news. This is the way Trump operates. Merry Christmas.
[Whitfield:] We will leave it there for now. I know, merry Christmas. Brian Karem, Lynn Sweet, good to see you both. Appreciate it.
[Karem:] Good to see you.
[Whitfield:] All right, still ahead, a new resignation over President Trump's surprise withdrawal of the U.S. troops from Syria. The top U.S. envoy in the ISIS fight quitting a day after Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis turned in his resignation. So what do these departures mean?

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] President Trump making a veiled threat to former FBI director James Comey. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. The President tweeting, James Comey better hope that there are no tapes of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press. But here ass a question. Did Trump's firing of Comey this week dampen the investigation into Russia's meddling into the election? Some answers in just a moment. And look at this. It's not a bird or a plane, but Melissa McCarthy, playing Sean Spicer speeding around the streets of Manhattan on the White House briefing room podium. We are going to see why. But I want to begin this hour with developments in the Russian investigation. Joining me now to discuss is Alexander Vershbow, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Julia Loffe, staff writer at "the Atlantic" and Jack Barsky, a former KGB spy who is the author of "Deep Undercover." Good evening to all of you. Ambassador Vershbow, you first. CNN learned today that deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein doesn't see a need at this point for a special prosecutor in the investigation to Russia's meddling in the election. Do you think that's the right decision?
[Amb. Alexander Vershbow, Former U.s. Ambassador To Russia:] No, I don't. I think that the firing of Comey and all the things that have happened in the last few days, just underscore the need for an independent prosecutor, or a 911 style commission, something that would elevate this to something that would have more credibility. Unfortunately, it looks like the Republicans and the Senate aren't prepared to do that. I think that they are in effect becoming accomplices after the fact to the kind of cover-up by the administration.
[Lemon:] You said the administration the must better served by a Russian policy than a Russian scandal. Look at these pictures. Pictures like this with the foreign minister Lavrov, joking about director Comey's firing like this as well. Listen to this.
[Unidentified Female:] Does the Comey firing cast a shadow over your
[Lemon:] I mean, what would a White House Russian policy even be at this point?
[Vershbow:] Well, I think it's not completely impossible to get the focus back on policy and away from these scandals and investigations. But the administration just keeps tying itself up in knots. The handling of Lavrov in the oval office just made it worse. The optics were just terrible coming after the firing of Comey and all this glad- handing and black slapping with ambassador Kislyak and with Lavrov just gave the impression that the President either doesn't believe or doesn't care that the Russians tried to hijack our elections. But I hope that some lessons can be learned after this horrible week. And that we can actually get down to the business of developing a policy towards Russia. The world isn't going to wait, the situation in Syria gets worse and worse. In the Ukraine, there is still an undeclared war going on. And the President, if he gets engage, maybe make a difference working with the French, the Germans and the Ukrainians to get the Russians out of eastern Ukraine. But right now, everything is being swallowed up by these scandals and by the mad tweeting.
[Lemon:] Jack, you say you are distraught over what's happening, why?
[Jack Barsky, Former Kgb Spy:] Well, the lack of class, the lack of understanding what's going on, the lack of, you know, awareness that you are playing in you are playing hardball in the international arena, all of that is really disconcerting, particularly, when we're talking about the head of our government showing a phenomenal level of naivete in this realm. And that it is not just about the Russians, you know. This would apply to everything else in foreign policy. And apparently, he doesn't listen to advisors, assuming that they are actually talking to him.
[Lemon:] How is all this being perceived in Russia, Jack?
[Barsky:] They are running victory laps, absolutely are. I mean, this is what they are after. And they have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations for sure.
[Lemon:] Julia, Deputy A.G. Rosenstein has agreed to brief the whole senate next week on the firing of FBI director James Comey. Do you think we'll get any clarity as to what actually happened?
[Julia Loffe, Staff Writer, The Atlantic:] I don't know. I think this scandal has so many layers. I think we are at the very, very beginning of this. And if you think about you know, I'm not the first one to draw parallels to Watergate. They have been floating in the air all week. It took almost two years from the beginning to the end when Nixon resigned. So I think we are like, you know, the first week in what could be a very long process. What I think is really ironic about Rod Rosenstein is he was an unheard of bureaucrat. People who know him say that he made the DOJ a way his life. He was kind of a faceless functionary in this giant apparatus known to be a very impartial like, you know, his reputation going into this was that he was impartial, he was apolitical, he was just about the DOJ and the rule of law, and the way the public finds out about him is in this very politicized, very toxic scandal and that he is now going to be forever associated with. Even if this doesn't end in impeachment or the removal of the President, it will still go down in American history as a massive, massive scandal and Rod Rosenstein who have played this a pivotal role in it after spending decades in the DOJ trying to be the exact opposite of it.
[Lemon:] On the other hand, the former FBI director James Comey will not testify before the Senate intelligence committee next week. The "New York Times" is reporting tonight that Comey wants to testify, but he is insisting that it be in public. What's your reaction to that?
[Loffe:] We don't know that he will testify, right. He turned down a voluntary like he turned down an invitation. They can still compelled them to testify. And if I were Comey, I would wait until I was compelled. Because if you were to go just for the regular invitation, go and just spill the beans, it also it makes him look petty. It makes him look political. It makes him look partisan. If he were to wait for subpoena which could very likely come, then you know, he is just serving a law. He is doing as he is being made to do. He is not doing this voluntarily. He is not voluntarily sinking to this much lower level.
[Lemon:] Ambassador, who do you think of the reporting tonight of the "New York Times," he wants to do it in public?
[Vershbow:] Well, I think he feels that he has been mistreated this week, so I think he wants the public to hear, and not just the committee to hear his side of the story. But I think the important thing is that who is going to be the next FBI director? Is the investigation going to be allowed to continue without political interference? That I think is the most important thing. But Comey needs to have his say. And explain why he asked for additional resources or additional personnel, where the investigation is going, doing it in public, I think, is better for the public and better for him.
[Lemon:] Jack, what do you think about how the White House feels about this, they may not want him to do it publicly.
[Barsky:] Yes, the whole way this all transpired is. It's bizarre, really. It's totally bizarre, where, you know, one day, it was the assistant district attorney who triggered the firing, and the next day, Trump actually disagrees whole heartedly in public with that. And so, you know, that threat was another one of those tweets about, you know, he better not leak anything. Why would Trump even assume that there is a leak? And you don't know what he is playing, whether he has a game pan or he is just loose. It's very difficult to discern from the outside.
[Lemon:] Jack, we talked about this tweet last night, and said Russia must be laughing up their sleeves watching as the U.S. tears itself apart over Democrat excuse for losing the election. And then today, Sean Spicer was asked about it. Watch this.
[John Roberts, Fox News White House Correspondent:] I would like to quote from another of the President's tweets this morning. He said quote "Russia must be laughing up its sleeve watching the U.S. tearing itself apart over Democratic excuse for losing the elections." What did the President view by that? How do you specifically, is the U.S. tearing itself apart for all of this?
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] I think the President's comments about the Russia and collusion have been very clear, with respect to some of the charges that have been made. He has been very clear that it's one thing that he believes that the notion that there's collusion is a hoax. It's been reaffirmed by several people, including Senator Grassley and others who have spoken to him. And that he wants to make sure that he is focus every day on doing what's best for the American people.
[Lemon:] So Jack, subpoenas have been issued in the investigation. It is a real thing, not a hoax. Does it get to the bottom of what happened at best for the American people?
[Barsky:] Absolutely. And I think our President should just stay out of it, you know. It's like his feelings are hurt all the time. He is acting out like the narcissist that he is. And, you know, this doesn't help anything or anybody. And he is not acting Presidential.
[Lemon:] Ambassador, the President goes overseas next week. How do you think he's going to be received? What is the world thinking about this, looking at us, you know, from across the shores?
[Vershbow:] Well, I think the effects of all the events of this week unfortunately damaged the President's credibility. And it raises questions in the minds of foreign leaders, whether they can take him at his word because his grasp on the truth is so tenuous. But at the same time, he has got important responsibilities on this first trip, visiting Saudi Arabia. He is going to have his first summit with NATO. That's less than two weeks away, yet we haven't heart from the President, what is his vision for the trans-Atlantic relationship, our most important alliance. We are so completely bug down in this investigations and scandals that the important business of our government is not being carried. So hopefully he will kind of refocus in the coming days. Certainly, I don't think he wants a repeat of this week. And we can begin to hear some ideas about how he is going to strengthen our security, how he is going to better fight ISIS, how he is going to reset relationship with Russia without selling out Ukraine. These are the things he should be dealing with rather that tweeting at 6:00 in the morning about Comey and mysterious tapes that may or may not exist.
[Lemon:] I have got about 20 seconds here. Jack, you say that we aren't going to win this and we will lose influence in the world.
[Barsky:] We are not going to win this as long as we are shooting arrows at each other. I think what needs to happen here is cooler heads should prevail and determine who the fall adversary is.
[Lemon:] Thank you all. I appreciate it. When we come back, was Comey's firing the beginning to the end of President Trump's presidency? I'm going to speak with someone who says it could be.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone, from Washington D.C. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. Right now from coast to coast people of all ages are pouring into the streets walking side by side, holding signs, chanting, singing, and demanding stricter gun laws. The leading voices in this movement, the high school survivors of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas massacre in Parkland, Florida. They planned the March for Our Lives, that's what it's being called, to honor the 17 classmates and faculty members killed by an armed former student just last month. The survivors have one very loud, very clear message on gun violence never again. Their frustrations gaining national momentum and driving the conversation on the polarizing gun control debate. Those students are leading the march on Washington right now, but they don't stand alone. Star power is backing them up here in the nation's capital. Ariana Grande, Miley Cyrus, Lin-Manuel Miranda are just a few of the names taking part in the event today. And you're looking at the main stage right on Pennsylvania Avenue, hundreds of marches in fact are scheduled across the country today. CNN has team coverage with reporters spread out across the country. CNN's Dianne Gallagher is with a group of students from Parkland, Florida, right here in the nation's capital. Dianne?
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Fredricka, we're not too far from where you are, about a mile, and that's because this group of Marjory Stoneman Douglas alumni, teachers, students, parents, they're about to be leaving this breakfast they had this morning. And I'm going to see if I get Don to can pan the room. They're waiting. They're going to be marching roughly that mile to the area together as a show of force and solidarity. They want people to know that MSD showed up, they came. They as a family are here supporting what these students are doing, supporting the idea of safer schools. Some of them are proponents of gun control. Others are focused on mental health. We're seeing a bit of diversity of ideas within this room. And most of these, again, MSD people here. So there should be any time now coming up these escalators we can see they are starting to come at this point. They're passing out lots of buttons and pens. There are plenty of signs, Fredricka. And again, this is something that this entire community kind of got involved in. When this happened at the school, it's a close-knit area, Coral Springs, Parkland, Florida. They banded together. We have alumni from the '90s, the 2000s, from just a few years ago. I talked to one alumni who went to UCF and she said that she rode a bus all night. She got in Washington D.C. at 6:00 a.m. just so she could be here and march with those students. As they get up here, we're going to start going with them, Fredricka, walking down to where you are so we can be there as they support their fellow students on stage. Again, it looks like we're about to leave now, so I'm going to send it back to you so we can get out the door.
[Whitfield:] Dianne Gallagher, thank you so much. As so many kids from Parkland, Florida, assemble there before they make their way to this area on Pennsylvania Avenue just in the shadow of the U.S. capitol. CNN's Kaylee Hartung is in Parkland, Florida, where it all began, where the mourning continues for the 17 killed, and the focus is sharpening there. Kaylee?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Fred, the program here just beginning in very enthusiastic fashion. You can hear the chants behind me I'm sure. But you make a good point. As one parent just reminded me, this community is still grieving. But as that parent of a Stoneman Douglas student told me, she's filled with pride to see her daughter turn that grief into passion. This crowd gathering behind me, evidence of the impact that the passion of the Stoneman Douglas students have had on so many. We've seen these pictures of hundreds of Stoneman Douglas students making the trip to D.C. to make their voices heard. But remember, Stoneman Douglas is a high school of about 3,300 kids, so many of them wanted to be here. As one student organizer told me, this was where she felt she need to be today, not in D.C. but here in other home community to make their voice heard. She also said it's absolutely incredible for them to see the support that they have generated, as you see behind me here, but also across the country. Now, here where we are in Pine Trails Park, this park where these kids grew up in this community playing soccer, having sports banquets and award ceremonies here, this park then became the site of the memorial where people came to pay their respects to the 17 victims and shed tears for that loss of life. But now today this park takes on a new meaning for the change that they hope to see. This march will leave Pine Trails Park in about two hours. They will march towards the high school. They're then told to march in silence past the high school and to keep marching as this signal, sign of the determination that they want to keep this conversation moving forward. Fred, this program just about to get under way with a host of speakers. We anticipate it to be a very powerful and moving morning here in the Parkland area.
[Whitfield:] Kaylee Hartung, thank you so much, out of Parkland, Florida. You see the crowds there. There are crowds developing in New York City as well, and that's where we find our Jason Carroll in the thick of it. Jason?
[Jason Carroll, Cnn National Correspondent:] Let me tell you, there are so many people who are already here and the event hasn't even officially started yet. We're here at 61st street. Let me show you what's happening up here. People are standing shoulder to shoulder, going up Central Park West all the way up to 72nd street, keeping them in pens along the way. Already I've spoken to a number of survivors here, people from Sandy Hook, a librarian who sheltered 19 fourth graders in place in a library there. I also spoke to a survivor from Las Vegas who was here as well. And in talking to a number of the people here who are about to take the stage very soon, Fredricka, they've been talking about what they want to see going forward. As you know, the state of New York has some of the toughest gun legislation in the country. That was passed after Sandy Hook. And when I spoke to one of the survivors here today, I asked her, I said what is it specifically that you're going to be looking for like so many people here who are coming out to protest, to stand their ground? She said we're looking for politicians to listen to the people and the people will be speaking today. Back to you.
[Whitfield:] All right, Jason Carroll, thank you so much. Let's talk more about the scope of this march and the mission and what might be accomplished. David Swerdlick is a CNN political commentator and also special editor for the "Washington Post." David, good to see you.
[David Swerdlick, Cnn Political Commentator:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] So it's an extraordinary sight because you've got a lot of young people here from all over the country and you have them with their parents. This is a family event. Their objective is to get the attention of lawmakers here in the shadow of the U.S. capitol. Is this likely to be effective?
[Swerdlick:] I think it's the start of something at least. You know, in the wake of the Parkland shooting, you've seen a march here today that's led yes, many adults are here, but it's led and inspired by students in part because I think a lot of students saw with their own eyes for the first time just how slowly the wheels of government turn when they want a problem addressed, and this is their response to it, Fred. We're getting to that point in the year where Congress is about done doing things and they start turning toward campaigning for reelection in the fall. Will this spur them to kind of come back here, act, take action on some of the things the students are demanding, like maybe reinstating the assault weapons ban, like perhaps raising the federal age limit to 21 for purchasing all firearms. It's unclear, but I think this is how they're going to try and get the attention of their representatives. They're looking at this and saying, hey, we're kids, we think something should be done, why aren't adults getting things done.
[Whitfield:] I talked to a lot of kids and their families who have descended here on Washington D.C., and so many of them have expressed they are so disappointed that there hasn't been great change on a national front. And then on the eve of this march, the White House makes an announcement that the Trump administration will have a new rule or at least taking a step toward banning bump stocks. And that was a plea being made after the Vegas shooting. On the eve of this march that the White House would say it is making a step towards that, is that strictly to appease this audience?
[Swerdlick:] So I think President Trump is feeling his way, trying to figure out how he can look like he's on the right side of this issue without abandoning or getting crossways with one of his core constituencies, which is the NRA. He enthusiastically accepted their endorsement when he ran for president. In recent weeks he's had more than one closed-door meeting with leaders of the NRA, and he can't afford to lose that core constituency. At the same time, President Trump realizes that there's a lot of agitation, a lot of concern in the country for doing something about gun violence in the country, and people are looking at this and saying after Sandy Hook, after Parkland, after Las Vegas, why won't government act? President Trump's not a traditional conservative, so I don't think he's driven by an ideological core on this issue as much as he wants to try and keep his base with him, at the same time appeal to a broader audience.
[Whitfield:] There are one-issue voters out there, and many of them here whom I've spoken with say this gun control, stricter gun laws issue is the one issue for them. How might it impact midterm elections? Are Democrats and Republicans particularly conscientious that the one-issue voter could make a difference in midterm?
[Swerdlick:] You're going to have I think one-issue voters on both sides, Fred. You're going to have folks who have traditionally supported strong gun rights who are going to look at what's happening here and say I'm going to go out there and vote as I've done in the past to try and elect people who don't want to change existing gun laws. On the other hand, you've got a lot of teenagers out here today who might be voting for the first time in their lives this November, turning 18 this year, and saying that, look, if legislators aren't going to do something, I'm going to vote for different legislators who might take action on this. Again, if you go back to what the president's doing, he said yesterday, as you said, that he wants to ban bump stocks, but folks out here today are saying we want you to do more. The Florida the Parkland kids were able to get their legislature in Florida to pass a law that banned bump stocks. It didn't go that much further to doing some of the other things they wanted, so I think they're going to continue to pressure legislators to do more over the course of this year in advance of this election.
[Whitfield:] And quickly, your impressions as you look around, as people are gathering, the official march begins, or the rally begins at noon, but already hundreds of thousands appear to be here.
[Swerdlick:] Yes, a critical mass is gathering. And the fact that it's so chilly out here and people are still out here sort of excited and ready to form up here and show their support for this issue signals that this is a movement that's probably not going anywhere any time soon.
[Whitfield:] Maybe not hundreds of thousands. Maybe tens of thousands.
[Swerdlick:] Yes. It's hard for me to see out here and it is early. It's cold but it's a nice day. I think you're going to see a lot of people out here.
[Whitfield:] They'll leave here near the U.S. Capitol Hill and then they'll march towards the White House later on. David Swerdlick, thank you so much. Some of the music now beginning here. We've met so many families who have made the trip here by plane, train, car. The Bishop family from Parkland, Florida, says it's their mission to advocate legislation in Florida and across the country to ensure both the right to bear arms and the right to feel safe. Daniel and Julia, you were both at Marjory Stoneman Douglas school at the time of the shooting but you were in separate buildings. And mom, Susan, you were at a nearby Walmart shopping for last-minute Valentine's gifts for the entire family. And now more than 30 days later you're here in D.C. for this march for life. So how has all of this changed, impacted the family?
[Susan Bishop, Mother Or Parkland Shooting Survivors:] This incident has blown a grenade size hole inside of our town, and we're all coping with it and trying to come together and use this to come together to make change and to make sure that no community ever has to go through what we've had to go through.
[Whitfield:] Your mom said something really powerful there, which is coping and changing. How do you prioritize those things for you? I mean, you were in your school. You've lost your classmates. You have to both cope and now you're on a mission to change. How are you doing that?
[Julia Bishop, Parkland Shooting Survivors:] Well, I think that we know that our classmates that did lose their lives, they would want us to be activists. We did have the time shortly after to grieve and to be upset, and we still carry that with us every day. I always think about my classmate, Carmen, every single day. But I know that when I'm fighting for her I'm making a difference.
[Daniel Bishop, Parkland Shooting Survivors:] It's stressful. I'm not going to lie. It's been a lot to handle as a student, as a teenager, but I think that coping and change come together, that they're hand in hand.
[Whitfield:] A week after that shooting and Julia, you were on a bus to Tallahassee and you had a message for lawmakers.
[Julia Bishop:] I'm going to be speaking to these legislators. I don't care what political party they come from. There was legislation passed in the state of Florida. We did end up having the age limit raised to 21, and also there's going to be a three-day waiting period.
[Daniel Bishop:] Even though I went to Tallahassee and talked to legislators and tried to get my points across, I don't have a vote. So I think that it's really important for everyone who can vote, 18, 19, 20, 21-year-olds, everyone to go out and just try to influence the people around them.
[Whitfield:] The U.S. capitol building, this is the seat of power. And mom, Susan, when you look at this building knowing what it represents, do you see it differently after the shooting claiming 17 lives?
[Susan Bishop:] I want these lawmakers who are representing us to understand that we have to make the changes that need to be made to keep the people in this country safe.
[Julia Bishop:] I'm honestly worried that this will just blow over as every other mass shooting has. In Vegas, there were almost 60 people killed, and we were sad for a week and we sent our thoughts and prayers, and no one did anything about it.
[Whitfield:] Daniel, what's the goal for this march?
[Daniel Bishop:] I think that we have something real here. This is real. And when we were just another high school, we barely even noticed when the Senate rejects gun control. We barely even noticed. I mean, now when things get passed, when things don't get passed, the whole community knows.
[Whitfield:] The Bishop family in huge company here in the nation's capital and across the country because nationwide gun control rallies and protests are growing by the second. Take a look at live pictures right now in Miami, Florida, where crowds are taking over the streets there. A similar scene unfolding in Philadelphia. We have reporters fanned out across the country as well. Stay with us. We'll take you across the country.

[Burnett:] Tonight, President Trump calling the special counsel probe unconstitutional, tweeting: the appointment of the special counsel is totally unconstitutional, in all caps with an exclamation point. Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done nothing wrong! OUTFRONT tonight, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, member of the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees. Congressman, unconstitutional?
[Rep. Eric Swalwell , California:] Yes, the way that he is acting is absolutely unconstitutional. He is not, despite what he thinks, above the law. Good evening, Erin. And, you know, he and his White House may not be able to say he's not above the law, but we in Congress should say it. Paul Ryan should say it. Kevin McCarthy should say it. Mitch McConnell should say it. And when they don't say it, they leave this president unsupervised. And when he's unsupervised, he pushes the boundaries and threatens the rule of law and our Constitution.
[Burnett:] Well, here's what Kevin McCarthy is actually saying. He's not all saying what you're saying. He's saying that, in fact, that there was no collusion, right, coming to a conclusion, I'm sorry, that of course the special counsel has not yet come to. Here's what he told our Dana Bash yesterday.
[Rep. Kevin Mccarthy , House Majority Leader:] What I'm concerned most about like most Americans, was there any collusion, there was no collusion, this has gone on for more than a year. It's been investigated in so many different manners.
[Burnett:] This is the man who, you know, if the Republicans stay in control, could be the speaker of the House.
[Swalwell:] That's right, Erin. You know, with Paul Ryan, we've seen shrinking leadership and just absolute silence. With Kevin McCarthy, we would see a parrot for the president. And he can't say there's no collusion. He and the Republicans on the Intelligence Committee have refused to look for collusion. In fact, they've done everything but take out the shovels and bury the evidence. They won't even allow the transcripts out from the investigation we were able to do. But they didn't use the subpoena power. They took every witness at their word. People who are not worthy of being taken at their word and never followed up to challenge anything they said. Hopefully, the Senate can able can do this in a bipartisan way, but if not, and we win Congress, come November, we have to tell the American people what the Russians did and what we're willing to do to make sure it doesn't happen again.
[Burnett:] You say that McCarthy would be a parrot for the president. Senator John Cornyn today over in the Senate side was asked about whether the White House is lying about the president's response to the Don Jr. meeting at Trump Tower with the Russian. Of course, obviously they had said he didn't dictate the letter. Now, of course, it turns out that he did. And as we know it was misleading and inaccurate. Cornyn says, quote, I don't know whether it is that they don't go to the trouble to learn what the facts are before they start issuing statements, but it ended up being a nothingburger, so I think it's clearly beside the point. Is it beside the point
[Swalwell:] It goes to the consciousness
[Burnett:] I mean, you know, the meeting ended up not delivering what Don Jr. thought it would, so is it beside the point?
[Swalwell:] No. It's a large part of the point, Erin, because in investigations, oftentimes, you can learn a lot about a subject's conduct for the underlying crime, not by what they did and what you know about the crime, but how they acted once an investigation was launched. And whether it was the firing of James Comey, or what we see now with the dictating of the June 9th meeting, that's called consciousness of guilt. And that may, I think, reflect on that he knew this meeting took place. And going back, Erin, to what I talked about earlier, we have the ability on the House Intelligence Committee to find out whether or not Donald Trump Jr. was in contact with his father about that meeting taking place. Because we have phone records that we were not willing to subpoena and follow up to see whether there were calls made to the candidate himself. We should have looked into that.
[Burnett:] Right. We know a call was made to a blocked number, you know, very almost immediately after news of this meeting came. But, of course, yes, they would be able to determine if that blocked number was the president's, who has a blocked number. But we don't know that, because they wouldn't subpoena
[Swalwell:] But if you don't look, you can just say no collusion I guess.
[Burnett:] So, the president tweeted he has a, quote, absolute right to pardon himself. You heard Sarah Sanders there saying, I don't know why anyone's asking whether he has the right because he hasn't done anything wrong. And, of course, Ted Cruz I don't know if you heard this tonight, but the constitutional expert Ted Cruz was asked about it, and he had 18 seconds of dead silence before he said, he didn't know, he hadn't looked into it. What do you what do you what do you say? Is the suggestion of the president pardoning himself grounds for impeachment or not?
[Swalwell:] You don't have to be a constitutional scholar to know that you can't pardon yourself. You can't be your own judge. That, in fact, was the opinion of the Department of Justice, the president's Department of Justice, back in 1974 as they considered that issue with Richard Nixon. They said no person in America can be their own judge. So that still applies today. That opinion is uncontroverted. It's disappointing that Ted Cruz can't affirmatively say that to the American people. That's what's so frustrating is we're not helpless as this president tries to roll over the rule of law. We designed, our founders designed a Constitution that puts a check on the president and we just see capitulations up and down the Republican leadership. And I don't think the American people are going to stand for that come November.
[Burnett:] Congressman Swalwell, just a few moments ago, Bill Clinton came out to try to deal with the brouhaha, the hubbub as he called it that has arisen from him saying, defiantly, that he's never apologized personally to Monica Lewinsky. He again came out tonight and said, oh, well, I did it publicly and that's good enough. Your diplomatic colleague Senator Kirsten Gillibrand said recently that with the way things have changed and the Me Too Movement, that President Bill Clinton should have resigned during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. And he was asked about this and here is how he responded.
[Bill Clinton, Former President:] You have to really ignore what the context was then. But, you know, she's living in a different context and she did it for different reasons. So I but I disagree with her.
[Burnett:] Who do you agree with? Him saying he should have stayed in office, or Senator Gillibrand saying he should have resigned?
[Swalwell:] Yes. Erin, I was 15 years old when that happened. I was raised that when you screw up and you make a mistake, you say sorry and if it's not good enough for the person you are apologizing, you keep saying sorry until they feel comfortable and you are recognizing that you made a mistake. I think the most important we can do for the Me Too Movement though is make sure that every woman in America is protected at her workplace and it's not only people in powerful positions. There's a lot of women who work for powerful people who are not regarded as powerful to the media, but they have to deal with harassment and discrimination every day and we should move quickly in Congress in a bipartisan way to protect those individuals.
[Burnett:] But the bottom line is you're saying he should apologize and she should apologize directly to her. But you're not weighing in on the resignation?
[Swalwell:] Again, I was 15. I don't think going backwards helps this movement, especially going back into the '90s. I think women deserve to be protected and women should be protected in the workplaces today and that's the most important part of this movement.
[Burnett:] Congressman, thank you for your time.
[Swalwell:] You bet.
[Burnett:] And the congressman, of course, joining us in California tonight. We are just hours away from major midterm votes. California front and center, eight states are heading to the polls in hours from now. And in California, what's called the jungle primary could be the biggest test for Democrats yet. It is what might stop them from taking control of the House. Miguel Marquez is OUTFRONT.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn National Correspondent:] California Democrats buoyant, counting on a November blue wave and flipping several congressional seats here from Republican to Democratic. [on camera]: If a Democrat is on the ballot in November, what happens?
[Gil Cisneros , California Candidate For U.s. House Of Representatives:] I think if a Democrat is on the ballot in November a Democrat wins.
[Marquez:] But California has a jungle primary, meaning only the top two vote-getters regardless of party advanced to the general election in November.
[Marian Bodnar, Indivisible Ca39:] The fear is just that the vote gets so split that no Democrat beats Republicans.
[Marquez:] In Orange County and adjacent and astounding 45 candidates are running for just three seats. So many are well-funded, well- organized Democrats raising the prospect the Democratic vote could be split so much that only Republicans within advance to the November ballot. [on camera]: You were running in this district. Why'd you drop out?
[Phil Janowicz , Dropped Out Of Crowded U.s. House Race:] I dropped out because we had too many candidates running at the time.
[Laura Oatman , Dropped Out Of Crowded U.s. House Race:] I withdrew from the race and not only withdrew from the race but decided to get behind the strongest candidate who I believe can win.
[Marquez:] Janowicz and Oatman are two of nine Democrats withdrawing from the three races, hoping to narrow the field and improve the chances of the remaining 15 Democratic candidates.
[Political Ad Announcer:] Democrats and Harley Rouda are moving us forward. And national Democrats, the DCCC weighing in, spending millions in advertising in English and Spanish, a rarely used tactic as they try to ensure a Democrat is on the ballot in every race come November. DCCC is responsible for the content of this advertising.
[Marquez:] So worried, national Democrats are even running attack ads against some Republican candidates in all three districts, trying to dampen Republican turnout by criticizing GOP candidates for voting like Democrats.
[Harley Rouda , California Candidate For U.s. House:] We're going to have a tough primary on June 5th.
[Marquez:] Harley Rouda in California 48 is in a unique category, winning support from both the establishment DCCC and activist groups like Indivisible.
[Rouda:] All the different aspects of the party are getting behind this campaign and hopefully that will propel us to the general.
[Marquez:] Democrats here we'll need more than hope.
[Cisneros:] We can count on your vote on June 5th.
[Marquez:] Gil Cisneros in the 39th is banking on enormous Democratic turnout to make the difference on primary day.
[Cisneros:] We can get those Democrats out to vote and I think it's going to carry over. I think we're going to see good results.
[Marquez:] Maybe. Absentee ballots in the three Orange County districts so far show more Republicans than Democrats voting.
[Burnett:] A crucial day tomorrow and, Miguel, what does this do to Democratic chances in November. You heard, you know, Eric Swalwell, right, they're very optimistic, but maybe not with reason.
[Marquez:] They need every seat that they can get. There's 23 seats that Democrats need to flip in order to flip the House from red to blue. If they are locked out of two or three of these seats in Orange County, that is going to enormously complicate the math for them across the country. It all comes down to voter turnout. That's what they are relying on, and I will tell you that in a primary off year election like we have tomorrow, Democrats rarely get out and vote Erin.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much, Miguel. All eyes on California those eight states tomorrow in crucial primaries. And we'll be right back.

[Allen:] It is a momentous day for Brexit unfolding right now. We're following fast-moving developments in Brussels this hour.
[Howell:] The images we're seeing now, these images of the British prime minister, Theresa May, at the roundtable with other European Union leaders. The E.U. 27 having now officially endorsed the Brexit withdrawal agreement and political declaration on the future E.U.-U.K. relations. That coming from European Council president Donald Tusk in a tweet just a short time ago, barely an hour into the day's summit. E.U. leaders are also committed to taking the necessary steps to ensure an orderly withdrawal. They urge the British Parliament to sign off on the deal as well. Mexico's incoming government denies it reached a deal with the Trump administration regarding migrants seeking asylum in the United States. "The Washington Post" reports that the purported deal would require asylum seekers to stay in Mexico while their cases are processed. It would effectively end what Donald Trump disparagingly calls the U.S. catch and release policy.
[Allen:] Right now, thousands of migrants are in the Mexican city of Tijuana, waiting to file claims. The city's mayor has requested humanitarian aid to deal with the influx of people. On the other side of the border, U.S. law enforcement officers are currently patrolling the area and conducting security exercises.
[Howell:] In the meantime, the U.S. president has repeated his threat to close the country's southern border. Our Sarah Westwood has more now on his reaction.
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Correspondent:] After weeks of ratcheting up the pressure on Mexican leaders to do more to help the U.S. with
[Westwood:] its illegal immigration problem at the southern border, the president is hinting that he may have struck a deal with Mexico that could force asylum seekers to wait on the Mexico side of the U.S.-Mexico border until their claims are processed by U.S. courts. The president tweeting on Saturday, "Migrants at the southern border will not be allowed into the United States until their claims are individually approved in court. We will only allow those who come into our country legally. Other than that, our very strong policy is catch and detain. No releasing into the U.S." Then he goes on to say, "All will stay in Mexico. If for any reason it becomes necessary, we will close our southern border. There is no way that the United States will, after decades of abuse, put up with this costly and dangerous situation." The president has threatened to close the southern border before, although it's unclear how exactly he would do that. And the president has already attempted to make changes to asylum policy through executive action. Just a few weeks ago the president attempted a proposed rule change that would have required migrants to present themselves at legal points of entry in order to request asylum. They would no longer be allowed to request asylum if they were caught trying to cross the border illegally. But, of course, a court blocked that executive action from moving forward. That's something that the president has fixated on as he's spent the week here in Florida for the holiday. This deal would represent a major overhaul to the asylum system as currently, anytime a migrant sets foot on U.S. soil, they are eligible to request asylum. And often they are released from detention while awaiting a court decision on their case. That can take months. The president has referred to that practice as catch and release. It's what he's described as a loophole that he wants to change and he wants to pursue a policy that either forces those asylum seekers to cross into Mexico or continue to be held by immigration authorities until their cases are processed Sarah Westwood, CNN, West Palm Beach, Florida.
[Howell:] Let's talk more about this now with former U.S. deputy Homeland Security adviser, Amy Pope. Amy served in the National Security Council during the Obama administration and she's a senior fellow at The Atlantic Council. Good to have you live in our London bureau. Let's start with the last point raised in that report we just heard. The U.S. president wanting migrants to either seek asylum at official ports of entry or to prepare to be detained if they try to enter the country by any other means. How does this square with a ruling by a federal judge recently, temporarily blocking the government from denying asylum to those crossing the border between points of entry?
[Amy Pope, The Atlantic Council:] Look, there are real questions about whether this puts the United States in conflict with its obligations under existing treaties that it signed on to, as well as the real principles that stand behind the foundation of United States, that it is a place where people who are fleeing violence and persecution can find refuge. Let's put this into context. The people who are coning from Honduras are fleeing some of the most violent cities in the world. The murder rates are high. There are very few opportunities for the police to engage. They face real danger. We shouldn't assume that women and children are walking from their home countries to the United States because they have something better to do. This is real danger that they're fleeing. And the United States has an obligation to evaluate their claims.
[Howell:] Want to get to this other story, the incoming Mexican government denying this report by "The Washington Post" that it reached a deal with the Trump administration on asylum. Keeping in mind this new administration doesn't take control of Mexico until December 1st. So do you take this denial at face value or could this be a way of kicking of can until they officially take over government?
[Pope:] I think this reflects the fact that immigration in Mexico is also a political issue. We learned, when I was in the Obama administration, that working with Mexico, partnering with Mexico was the most effective solution to managing migration along the southern border. That means one needs to treat Mexico as a partner. It's not effective to put any sort of agreement or partially formed agreements out into the public eye. It needs to be coordinated and it needs to be done in recognition that Mexico is a player here. You can't denigrate Mexico or its government at the same time that you want them to work with you.
[Howell:] The incoming interior secretary spoke on this. She said that Mexico doesn't have plans to become a third safe country for migrants, essentially that Mexico won't be a waiting room. Clearly, this is a response to the pressure that government is under from both migrants and the U.S. government.
[Pope:] There is room for Mexico to play more of a role here. There's no question. One of the key issues that we faced when I was in the last administration was working with Mexico to increase its own capacity to evaluate people who were seeking asylum or refuge in Mexico. But the truth is, their capacity to do that is still fairly limited. So any solution needs to be done in conjunction with the United States. Putting increased political and actual pressure on Mexican resources will backfire on the president and is not a long-term or sustainable solution here. It will further politicize the issue and really exacerbate the problems that both countries are facing.
[Howell:] This goes back to what we talked about. Federal courts made a decision here. But the president did tweet recently that migrants would need to stay in Mexico until their asylum claims are processed and would need to close the border, he says, if necessary. All that though seems in line with this alleged deal reached between these two nations.
[Pope:] The question of closing the border is a very loaded one. When the United States relies heavily on the transportation that's going back and forth across that border, trade, people, business, the impact on the United States would be extremely detrimental. And taking any kind of action like that would be disproportionate to the effect anyone seeking asylum. And we're talking about a couple of thousand people who are desperate, poor and fleeing circumstances that one can't imagine sitting in the United States. So taking an action that would further harm the U.S. and Mexican interests doesn't make a lot of sense here and it is not the way I would advise a president to take the threat.
[Howell:] Amy Pope, we appreciate your time. Thank you.
[Pope:] Thank you.
[Allen:] The U.K. is now one step closer to leaving the European Union. The controversial Brexit deal was formally accepted in the past hour by the European Union. We'll take you live to Brussels for the latest.

[Cabrera:] Breaking news into CNN. Reports right now out of London that a vehicle has collided with pedestrians and there are several casualties. The Metropolitan Police tweeting just moments ago, "We are dealing with an incident in Seven Sisters Road. Further details to follow." Again we are told there are a number of casualties, that could mean injuries or deaths. We don't know for sure. We know at least one person had been arrested according to police. Police and ambulances are on the scene right now. Now here's a sense of where this is happening. Seven Sisters Road is near Finsbury Park. This is north of central London and officers say they were called to the scene very shortly after midnight local time. It is now just after 1:00 a.m. there. I want to bring in Juliette Kayyem who's joining us now on the phone. And actually, you know, I'm just being told we need to go to Phil Black in London. Juliette, stand by with us. Phil, what can you tell us? What are you learning?
[Phil Black, Cnn International Correspondent:] What we know so far is really very limited. It comes from a statement that we received from the police, where they talk about dealing with an incident. They say it is a vehicle that's been involved with colliding with pedestrians, and they are dealing with casualties at the scene. A person has been arrested and at the moment their investigation is continuing. It is as limited as that. That's all the police have made public at this stage. But, of course, any sort of incident involving that involves that sort of description is, of course, of great concern in this city given recent events here.
[Cabrera:] Phil, do you know what this area would be like on a typical Sunday night? Can you describe this zone?
[Black:] Well, Seven Sisters Road is a major it's a significant road in London. It depends upon where this incident has taken place on the road itself. But this is not central London, as I believe you pointed out. This is north of the center of the city itself. It is possible that there could be people on the streets, and as I said, it depends upon where along this road this incident has actually taken place. But it is not a the sort of place that would necessarily be particularly populated at that time on a Sunday night.
[Cabrera:] Obviously right now tensions are really high in London. We don't know what this incident is exactly just yet. Police only confirming that there are multiple casualties and a vehicle hit pedestrians. But certainly people are on edge, right?
[Black:] Yes, indeed. And this is a city that is certainly very much on edge. It is it has already experienced two significant terror incidents this year, one of them quite recently in central London. On top of that, this is a city dealing with the grief and the shock of the tower fire that took place here last week and the dozens of fatalities that were caused in that incident. Of course, not a terror incident but it is something that has certainly added to, no doubt, the sense of shock and the emotional strain I think it is fair to say that people in this city have been experiencing. Now this particular incident we simply don't know at this stage how serious it is, where it falls into the spectrum of concern, if you like, of the sort of events that people in this city have been so worried about recently. But it is something that the police have notified the public about and say they are dealing with it. And as I say, it is simply the nature of that description, vehicle into pedestrian, that's what was experienced at London Bridge and Central London so recently, as well experienced at Westminster Bridge near the House of Parliament back in March. Both of those incidents involved and caused the deaths of a number of people. So there is perhaps concern of a pattern developing here. Vehicle into pedestrian attacks something that has been encouraged by terror groups abroad. These attacks have taken place in other European countries and cities, and because we've seen a number of them here so recently, of course, obviously concern. We have to stress at this stage the police have not said that that's what this is. They simply scribbled it as an incident. They have said that there are casualties, they have said that there is someone in custody and they are still working to get to the bottom of precisely what happened here.
[Cabrera:] And we are going to continue to monitor their Twitter feed. They do tweet quite a bit when we've seen these incidents unfold, sadly as you mentioned, multiple times now in the past few months. I want to bring in Juliette Kayyem who's joining us via Skype. And again, Juliette, all we know right now is this incident happening a little after midnight local time there in London, and in the northern part of the city, at least north of central London, that there was a vehicle that hit pedestrians, multiple casualties, and at least one person under arrest. We do not know whether this could be terror-related or an isolated incident, but a lot of people's minds go there because of the history, the recent history in London.
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] And you would actually want at least the British police's minds to go there in terms of an investigation. That's why you have seen such a quick reaction on Twitter and them trying to at least calm the public because everyone's mind is going in that direction. So what do we do now? Because we don't actually know what it is. The good news or at least how I look at this is that it's late on a Sunday in London. We're not in downtown London. For a terrorist to have great impact one would assume that they would pick a more popular night and a more dense area. The arrest does not mean anything one way or the other. It could be someone who was drunk. Remember, we saw this just very recently in Times Square. Everyone was very nervous and about half an hour later realized it was someone with a drug and alcohol addiction. So we wait it out, but nonetheless what I think is important to do is to notify, as we're doing as well as what I think the Metro Police are doing, that this is a time of heightened alert. People should be aware and listen to the police and their first responders about what to do until we actually know what it is. Before ISIS, there were unfortunately people who got into car accidents with pedestrians, and so we just we wait at this stage. I know it's one of the hardest things, being an analyst on CNN to do, but there seems to be nothing that we can say more now than everyone is on high alert for all the reasons that the reporter said, and they ought to be given the kind of attacks that terrorists like right now.
[Cabrera:] And we are reading some tweets now from London. "Ambulance saying we have sent a number of resources to an incident on Seven Sisters Road. More information will follow when we have it." And so we're getting trickles of information, but to your point we don't know what this is.
[Kayyem:] Right. And there's no there's no prize for being first in this. You know, I know there's a lot of people who want it to be a certain thing, and we obviously don't want it to be anything. I mean, in other words these are tragedies regardless of a motivation and people are obviously hurt or suffering right now, but one of the reasons why you know, I just tweeted out, everyone, follow Metro Police, is because as you know a lot of the firsthand or statements and a lot of the eyewitness statements can be off. People think they see something or they heard someone say that they saw something and that we just wait until at least the Metro Police give us a sense of what it is they're dealing with. And if it tends to be more sort of, let's say, a less nefarious motivation, nonetheless still a horror but a less nefarious motivation, then all of us can sort of stand down. If this is a third attack in I guess it would be about six weeks now, then London has a major issue to deal with. It's not like it didn't know it already, but the vehicle are just clearly going to be utilized until we can figure out a better way to minimize their impact. But for now I'm very comfortable as an analyst saying we just need to wait it out, is the responsible thing to do.
[Cabrera:] And let me bring in Kimberly Dozier, our global affairs analyst. And Juliette, just stand by as we work to get more information on what exactly is happening here. But, Kimberly Dozier, obviously you and I were here just two weeks ago talking about the incident on London Bridge and we were in this very similar situation where we were waiting for more information. What we do know right now according to London's Metropolitan Police, there was an incident at Seven Sisters Road. Reports quoting, "Reports of a vehicle in collision with pedestrian." They say officers are on scene and other emergency services are there. There are a number of casualties being worked on at the scene and there's been one person arrested. Inquiries continue. More information will be released when confirmed, they write. Kimberly Dozier, this is also a time where Ramadan continues, and we know some terror groups have called on attacks during this time. So there is this heightened sense that people are on edge and there are some nefarious things that some have intended to do.
[Kimberly Dozier, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] This is true, but to add to what Juliette was saying, the Seven Sisters Road, known locally as the A503 is a very busy multi-lane thoroughfare that goes through a pedestrian through a residential neighborhood. But along the main thoroughfare you've got small rows of shops. There is a possibility that this was something like a drunk driving accident that just went terribly wrong. So we do have to put the note of caution out there. Busy road, complicated intersections where different roads come together in that particular part of town. But if it does turn out to be some sort of an intentional attack, the scary thing for me is that this is not a landmark, this is not a place that a tourist would go. This is the kind of place that an ordinary Londoner lives, commutes from, and a place that you would think people would probably let their guard down. Now Sunday night at midnight, I can't think where you might have a big crowd. Pubs close pretty early on a Sunday night. So there's a lot of questions out there for me. I looked at the security services' Web site for MI5, that's domestic security sort of an equivalent to our FBI and DHS put together, and MI5 still has its alert level at the second highest alert, which is severe, not at critical. So that means that says to me that police didn't know of any particular event or plot that they were on the watch for, they were just still on the watch for another thing that they hadn't expected like the London attack. Of course, you know the London police and the overall security services have taken a lot of grief for not having kept watch on at least one of the suspects in that attack because he had been on a watch list before, he had been a vocal jihadi follower, an ISIS follower. But let's reel it back. In this case all we know at this point is a number of pedestrians have been hit in a location that's not where you would expect a terrorist group to hit. So a lot of questions, and I will be watching what British media says because they very carefully in cooperation with the authorities tend not to use the word "terrorism" until security officials start using that word publicly.
[Cabrera:] And again, there is no indication at this time that this is any kind of terrorist attack, but that's the fear of course. We're hoping to get more details as we wait it out and continue to watch the Twitter feed, continue to work sources from our London bureau to find out more information about exactly what police are dealing with. What we do know that happened according to London's Metropolitan Police is that there was some kind of a collision involving a vehicle and pedestrians near Finsbury Park on Seven Sisters Road. And as we just heard from Kimberly Dozier and our Phil Black earlier, this is not a typical big tourist attraction, although it is a busy road in a high traffic area. We don't know exactly who was involved, however police have confirmed they have made at least one arrest. I want to go back to Phil Black who's joining us from the London area. And Phil, what more are you learning?
[Black:] At this stage we are still waiting for further police confirmation about just what this could possibly be because as we've been discussing in a sense that initial description is something that will be concerning to the city given the recent events here that we've been talking about, the recent terror attacks that are involved people using vehicles to strike, to run down and kill people deliberately in central London, initially outside Westminster, the House of Parliament, more recently near London Bridge, Borough Market and that region. That simple description we heard from the police that this involved a vehicle colliding with pedestrians, as I said, because of the very high level of alert and concern the people in the city are experiencing, it is a concerning description, but at this stage we simply don't know whether this was, in fact, a deliberate act or something more benign, a sort of traffic accident that does occasionally happen in a big city on busy roads. So we are just waiting for further confirmation from police, as I say. The facts they have confirmed at this stage are just very real limited, that this was some sort of incident, as they're saying, involving a vehicle and pedestrians. They're dealing with multiple casualties, they have one person arrest. At the moment the police have no and other authorities have yet to confirm or give any sort of indication just what they believe actually happened here, what the motive may have been, whether this was in fact an accident or otherwise.
[Cabrera:] I mean, the fact that they have somebody in custody, hopefully that means that we'll get more answers more quickly as opposed to, you know, having no having this void of information, although we know authorities will be very careful to put the information out until they're able to confirm that information. They don't want to get anything wrong. They've got to get this right as they're disseminating the information. Again, we've seen these tweets. This is from the London ambulance right now. We have sent a number of resources to an incident in Seven Sisters Road. More information will follow when we have it. That tweet now from about 23 minutes ago or so or beyond that. We know this incident we're learning from the Metropolitan Police happened a little after midnight local time. It is now a little after 1:30 there in London. Police are on the scene and they say emergency crews are also there working on casualties at the scene, and one person is under arrest. Inquiries continue. They write, "More information will be released as it is confirmed." Juliette Kayyem is still with us. Again, we are looking at the map there, Juliette. This is not a typical tourist area. It is not London Bridge, it is not Westminster Bridge. Based on the location of this, do you have a better sense of what we're dealing with?
[Kayyem:] Oh, no. I am so wary of conjecturing because a network like ours being wrong has significance. So here is what I will say. That the Metro Police are being quite responsible in getting information out. The road is now closed. London Ambulance Services are now being deployed there. From the looks of it and the sounds of it, this is not an insignificant event. This is not a fender bender. This is not some drunk guy, you know, sort of maybe going up on a border. It sounds like there's a lot of emergency personnel going there, so that makes me think that this is, you know, not not your typical kind of accident. Where I am wary of sort of conjecturing at this stage is because of the desire of terrorist organizations to have a very big media impact look, we don't even have cameras there yet, I don't believe, and that a Sunday night on sort of a highway or not a highway but sort of a larger thoroughfare does not constitute the kind of attacks that we've gotten used to. Now it is not to say that they're not going to now try the suburban or the less urban attack, but we have gotten used to the hotels, the bridges, everything like that. So this makes me cautious about saying I know what it is. London Bridge, you know, to be honest, London Bridge I knew exactly what it was the second it happened. That is exactly what you would anticipate. And if you are following along in terms of social media and stuff, the Metro Police are they have learned, let me just tell you, they are so good at putting out information that's almost always accurate, including just what they're doing. So the road is closed now. So that means that it will be hard for media and others to get close by. But I anticipate, given that they know we are all thinking what we're thinking, just given what has happened in London recently, that they will have a statement, it is 8:30 here now. They're going to have a statement by 9:00 p.m. There's no doubt in my mind because they know that people are very nervous there and their responsibility is to make sure that London that people in London who are basically asleep right now do not wake up to a lot of rumor and conjecture.
[Cabrera:] And I have another tweet that we are just getting. Let's put it up. It says, "Seven Sisters Road is now closed northbound at Hornsey Road and southbound at Roxie due to an emergency services incident. Seek alternative route." So they are closing down the roads. It seems to be that the situation is expanding to some degree. We know one person is in custody. We know that there are multiple casualties. We know ambulances, several emergency responding crews have gone to the scene to work on those casualties. Still waiting to hear on how many people may be injured, whether anybody has been killed in this incident. The only information we have been able to confirm based on what the police have disseminated in information right now is that they were called just after midnight local time to an incident on Seven Sisters Road, to reports of a vehicle in collision with pedestrians. This is north London near Finsbury Park, a residential area but also a very busy road we are learning. The London Ambulance Service has sent a number of resources to this incident right now. Police say officers are on scene with other emergency services and, again, they are continuing to try to determine exactly what went on here. We are hoping to get more details as police and other authorities are able to notify us. Do we still have Phil Black with us, guys? Phil Black, you're on the phone with us. It seems to be a pattern now that it's typical for London police to be careful about putting out information. It's not like we're getting information as they're learning it.
[Black:] No, indeed. And that's standard process with the police here, and they take a fairly conservative line in what they release and what they make public while at the same time understanding that there is a real demand for information, a real interest, a real concern, particularly when it comes to incidents that fit a description that are a little unusual, that could be potentially more concerning for whatever reason, that could fit a terror profile, all these sorts of things. But the police here are generally very cautious. They don't want to cause unnecessary alarm, but they do, of course, want to let people know when major events have occurred. By all accounts this would seem to be a significant event, even if it is just an accident, we're talking about a significant road accident that has resulted in a number of casualties, that has resulted in a significant response from emergency services including ambulances to an area on a busy road. Even if it is on a Sunday night in London, which obviously is not a key time for anyone that's either out driving or out walking the streets, this is still a significant event on a busy London road, and the emergency services have responded accordingly. They're all telling us, the ambulance service, the police, that they will let us know more once they possibly can. I think what we can infer a little from what statements they have released so far is it doesn't seem this is an ongoing incident necessarily. Police say that a vehicle has moved into a crowd. There is no indication yet that there is some sort of rolling operation here just from the basic information that they have supplied us so far, which as we've stated a few times is that there has been an incident involving a vehicle running into pedestrians. There are a number of casualties, they have a person in custody. That's the limit of the information that they have supplied, but nothing in that to indicate that perhaps some sort of problem is ongoing that they are trying to get on top of.
[Cabrera:] We're looking at this Google Earth right now, this Google Earth view, and now we are just getting our first images from the scene. And you can see just how many people have gathered around there. There's the police vehicle in the front, but there is a large, large crowd on the scene. Guys, I'm trying to make out what the words are in some of the image behind there. It is tough to know exactly where this is. Juliette, if you are near your screen when you look at this image, what are your thoughts?
[Kayyem:] I'm afraid I can't see. I'm at home today, so I can't see what you're looking at, but I did want to just reiterate what Phil was saying, that Metropolitan Police and the British prime minister, everyone there wants to close off as soon as possible the suspicion that this is this could be something purposeful, even terrorism. So the more that this goes on without a statement, the more people like me do get a little bit nervous that this is that this could be something purposeful because, you know, basically, you know, because the responsibility of public safety is to inform and also calm the public, they will want to do that as soon as possible. So I've been through this enough times that I know that if we don't hear anything within the next 20 minutes I would begin to think that this is something that they don't quite know what it is. You know, a drunk driver is pretty easy to tell pretty quickly. So the next 20 minutes are going to be very significant. I know when I was in public safety we really tried to have a narrative within an hour if we knew what it was and could be accurate about it, and the failure to have a narrative does tend to say something. So that's what I'm looking at right now, given also what Phil is reporting just, you know, there's a lot of different pieces that are moving around right now. But whatever this is, it's clearly a significant event. This is a major road closure. Cars do not hit pedestrians thankfully, lots of pedestrians very often, and London is on edge. It's not just the terror attacks, of course. It was the tower burning which has had a tremendous destabilizing and political impact in London and England over the last week.
[Cabrera:] OK. Juliette, stand by. Kimberly Dozier, I know you have had a chance to look at this image. What strikes me is just how many people are on scene.
[Dozier:] Yes, and I can also see what looks like a couple of the men in the crowd are wearing Muslim head dress. Now Finsbury Park is a very vibrant, mixed community with a big Muslim community that has in the past suffered from some discrimination. There was an arson attack on a mosque in that area and there are some unconfirmed reports that this happened as people were leaving a mosque, but this is the type of stuff that's floating around Twitter and we have not confirmed it. I am just looking at the circumstantial evidence that some of the people in the crowd look like the community that I've heard lives in Finsbury Park. So we're looking at the possibility of rather than tourists being the target the local residents there. If this was some sort of an intentional attack, then the person attacking must know that that community is a mixed, ethnically diverse community with a strong Muslim presence. So I'm sure that might be adding to the police's layers of facts that they've got to go through before sharing anything with the public. But what has happened many times in different parts of the world like Iraq, like Afghanistan during Ramadan, people who are perceived as working with the government, working with the West, become targets. So I'm making a huge leap here, but let's just have some caution about who might be the target if this was an attack. That is what jumps out at me from that particular photograph.
[Cabrera:] And the first tweet from Metropolitan Police came about 50 minutes ago when they said, "We are dealing with an incident in Seven Sisters Road. Further details to follow." So we know they were responding within the last hour. They are now telling us this happened just after midnight local time, an incident on Seven Sisters Road, and they were responding to reports of a vehicle in collision with pedestrians. Peter Bergen is now joining us on the phone. Peter Bergen, what's your take on what you are seeing in this image of the people and the police vehicle there on the scene?
[Peter Bergen, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, as Kim Dozier was saying, I mean this part of London is, you know, an area where has a heavy Muslim population. The Finsbury Park mosque which is not far from where this incident happened is a rather notorious mosque where quite a number of Islamist militants used to gather. We don't know what this incident is. You know, it is strange, as Juliette Kayyem was saying earlier, you know, if you were trying to get massive media attention on a Sunday night in you know, in this area past midnight, it is kind of a strange selection of target if, indeed, this is terrorism. On the other hand, you know, places like Westminster Bridge or London Bridge, after these events and other kind of iconic targets in London are closely guarded. We just had for instance I believe in the last 48 hours a man with a knife was arrested outside the Houses of Parliament in London, precisely because there's a concern that somebody with a weapon might do something in an iconic location. So this is certainly not an iconic location. This is sort of a I would say a working middle class area of London, very, you know, average kind of area, north London. Nothing particular that would sort of leap out at you about this as a place where you would conduct some kind of operation. But as Juliette was saying, you know, with every passing minute, you know, and if indeed somebody was a drunk driver this is information that we would presumably know pretty quickly. We are in the month of Ramadan. We still don't know the question exactly of the motivation here, if indeed it is a terrorist attack, but we just had within, you know, the last 12 hours an attack in Mali by jihadist militants on a hotel. You know, every day, Ana, in the past Ramadan season unfortunately we've seen, you know, minor or major attacks in countries around the world. And while, you know, it's not clear what is happening in London tonight, this is a time of particular concern to law enforcement authorities. ISIS has repeatedly called for attacks in Ramadan not only in 2017 but in years previous and unfortunately militants around the world have responded to that, including, by the way, in the United States where an attack during the Ramadan season was conducted by Omar Mateen in Orlando, Florida, that I'm sure a lot of viewers unfortunately will remember.
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Bergen:] In which 49 people were killed. So, you know, that's the kind of context that we're looking at right now.
[Cabrera:] Stand by with me, Peter. I want to bring in Cynthia Vanzella. She is one of the people who took these picture that we're looking at on our screen right now, the one in particular that seems to be close. Cynthia, talk to me about what you have witnessed.
[Cynthia Vanzella, Witnessed London Incident:] Hi, hello, Ana. I was in bed really and I just heard a lot of people shouting. So I went by the window to see what was going on, and I saw loads, loads of people gathering in this corner right in front of my window, across the road from my apartment. And they're very nervous, shouting very loud, trying desperately to make some signs to a police car that was a little bit further down, just passing the road. There was a little bit of traffic at the time, and in a matter of like seconds the police car arrived and many other police cars arrived just after that. I didn't see exactly what happened. I just saw from this moment when everybody was already screaming and shouting and very, very nervous.
[Cabrera:] Do you know where all these people came from? Were people just hanging out in the street? Was there an event going on?
[Vanzella:] No, what happens in here is that this community in north London is a very mixed community. It has people from many, many different countries, different cultures, and we all live perfectly fine. I never saw anything nowhere close to this happen at all. We have a church in one road, an evangelic church in another corner and a mosque across the road as well and everybody just lives fine. We never had any problem at all in here. But what happens is that usually someone is Muslim, when they finish their prayers in the mosque, they just gather in this little corner to talk for a bit, and I'm guessing I'm not sure, but I'm guessing now because it is Ramadan there was maybe more of them for a little into a little bit later maybe because it's so hot in London today as well. So I'm guessing that maybe they were the victims because they were desperate. I saw so many of them crying, screaming, trying to get police and ambulance around. So I'm guessing that if someone were run over, people in the corner, maybe they were there.
[Cabrera:] So the people that you saw crying and trying to get police attention, they appeared to be Muslim because they were wearing Muslim garb or how could you tell?
[Vanzella:] Yes. Yes. They were all wearing the white Muslim I don't know the name of that, but yes.
[Cabrera:] OK. So
[Vanzella:] That was just like, just kind of people in there but mostly them. And because I'm so used to seeing them there every day, I just assume that maybe there's some Muslims between the victims I saw on the floor.
[Cabrera:] We are hearing from police based on what they've put out, the information that we have that there are multiple casualties or a number of casualties is actually are the words that they used. From your vantage point could you see how many people may have been injured?
[Vanzella:] I saw a lot of people injured. They were helping on the pavement and they were trying to help them to get away of the scene. I saw at least two on the floor. Then I couldn't the police then covering part of my view from the window. I saw at least two of them on the floor. One of them I think maybe was really bad hurt because I saw a police officer doing cardiac massage trying to resuscitate them. So I'm guessing that at least one of them was really, really bad hurt. I'm not sure about the other. But they were working, they were working on them on the floor for quite some time. And so now they just left in an ambulance to a hospital.
[Cabrera:] So there's an ambulance that has now come and gone? Are there still people laying on the ground?
[Vanzella:] The road is still closed. There's many, many police officers around and police cars around. Most of the people have dispersed now. I can see the police are going to some houses around. I can see them trying to talk to witnesses. There's one small ambulance car. I think all these ambulances already left with all the victims. So it's more quiet now but there's a lot of police around. And the helicopter is still around as well.
[Cabrera:] Were you able to see the person they arrested?
[Vanzella:] I didn't. What I saw, someone saw on the Internet after. I saw when the first police car arrived, these people were pushing someone towards the police. They got made but I didn't see any fight at all. They're just there with their nerves and pushing these people, this person towards police. And they put them inside the police car and I couldn't see their face from my window. But then it was weird because after that I saw someone posted a video, many people filming and I could see the face. It looked like a man that was being arrested. The person said that their guy had run over people in that corner.
[Cabrera:] Who was it who said their guy had run over people on the corner?
[Vanzella:] With a car, I guess, I don't know what kind of car.
[Cabrera:] OK. So you didn't see the vehicle that was involved in this?
[Vanzella:] No, because there was a lot of people in front of it. And there's always some cars parked on the corner, so maybe one of those cars. I don't know which one. I have I can see half of the road like here. Just hop it so you can further out. But they took this man, the people pushing toward the police, it's like, take him, take him and they put him in a police car and took him away. But I didn't see them arrest anyone else after.
[Cabrera:] OK. So you did see they put somebody in a police car. It was a male. Did you see what he was wearing or anything else that would provide some kind of a description for that person?
[Vanzella:] Not really. I could see just below the head because that was in the very first moment when there's a lot of people and the first police car arrived so everybody was very nervous. There was a lot of people together. I would say easily 200 people, probably more in the tiny little part of the small access road. There's a lot of people. Probably more. And I saw on the video after they considered chase a little bit more but I'm not sure I can really describe him.
[Cabrera:] When you said there's about 200 people, that is a lot of people. Were those folks already outside do you believe or that
[Vanzella:] No.
[Cabrera:] Just eventually came to the scene?
[Vanzella:] Yes, they definitely run to the scene because there's a little access road in the corner with Seven Sisters Road, which is a very, very busy road in north London. And it's just one block away from the entrance of the tube stations, the main station. So it is normal. And that's why it took me awhile to go to the window as well because I'm used to
[Cabrera:] What's happening right now?
[Vanzella:] Right now, the situation is calm. I can't see any victims on the floor anymore. The ambulance took them all to hospital. Even injured people, I think they're all gone now. There's still a lot of police cars like 15 police cars actually probably more that I cannot see yet. The road is still closed. But the situation is much more calm.
[Cabrera:] OK. Cynthia Vanzella, thank you so much for spending some time with us and for sharing with us what you have seen tonight and giving us a sense of what's happening in that area. We have some more video I want to show our viewers right now. This is new video that we just got from the scene. It appears there are a lot of officials standing by, blocking off an area, a lot of flashes lights, you can see. It looks like the road is mostly clear and you can see in that video kind of panning around giving us a look at a little bit more of that zone. Juliette Kayyem, I know you're still with us. If you were listening to Cynthia Vanzella, who was describing what she witnessed, what does what she told us tell you?
[Kayyem:] Well, two things. One is and remember once again eyewitness reports we're always cautious about, but she was just there. That this clearly took place near a mosque and that a lot of the victims were coming out of the mosque. We are confirming that yet, but I do, you know, just in terms of her eyewitness account, one of the first that we have heard from that makes this significant and still terrorism, obviously, if it's a targeted attack. I think the other thing is I'm looking at the clock at 8:53 p.m. our time. And the first tweet went out over an hour ago about the incident. This is when I start to based on my experience this is when I start to get nervous. First hour, I wait for facts to come in. I always wait for facts to come in, but the absence of a statement by the Metropolitan Police or the mayor, we haven't heard from him yet, the absence of a statement standing everyone down essentially saying there's been a tragedy, but it's not the tragedy you're thinking about, that is significant at this stage. An b hour is a long time to figure out whether it's a drunk driver. They do have someone in custody. If they worry that it's something more, they are going to wait. So time the length of time is now suggesting that they don't have a story yet of what this is. We would prefer it being something tragic, but accidental, of course, a drunk driver or something like that.
[Cabrera:] Right.
[Kayyem:] And so as I look at the clock, this is where based on my experience I now begin to worry in addition to the eyewitness reports that London once again may be suffering something quite intentional.
[Cabrera:] Now what we're learning about this area according to Cynthia is that this is a mixed community, as she said. Multiple religions, a lot of people, it's a busy area. A couple of churches in different corners, a mosque also nearby. She did mention that there were people who were dressed in their Muslim attire outside when she started hearing these people shouting and trying to get the police attention. So she was called to heroine doe to look out of what was happening very quickly after this incident took place. She tells us she saw people pushing an individual toward police as those police officers arrived on scene and that that person, a man she believes, was put in the police car. The fact that they were able to push that person toward police, does that give you any clues, Juliette?
[Kayyem:] Yes, I mean, I think one of the benefits of hearing something like that is this is not an ongoing incident. Right? So that if there were multiple people or multiple events, we would certainly know that by now. It doesn't mean that this isn't scary and emanated from an animus or a political belief.

[Romans:] All 680 public schools in West Virginia closed for a fourth day by an ongoing teachers' strike. The walkout affecting more than 227,000 students. Teachers hit picket lines last week demanding higher wages and better benefits. West Virginia Ranks 48 in the nation for teacher average teacher pay. Governor Jim Justice signed legislation last week raising teacher pay but teachers say it just does not address other concerns like rising health care costs.
[Briggs:] A terrifying ordeal for passengers and crew members on a Southwest Airlines flight. Now, the plane had just taken off from Salt Lake City when passengers heard a loud explosion.
[Romans:] Oh, my.
[Briggs:] An engine on fire.
[Unidentified Female:] We've got shooting flames out the side of the engine and it's crazy. I kind of just got really, really, really scared and I started crying, and I just started praying and holding my sister's hand.
[Briggs:] Wow.
[Romans:] Oh.
[Briggs:] Passengers say the pilot remained calm as he completed an emergency landing. Another jet was brought in and passengers were flown to
[Lax. Romans:] All right. The search is on for a killer who shot a North Carolina man as he was broadcasting on Facebook live. A warning some of you may find this video we're about to show disturbing. Fifty-five-year-old Prentis Robinson was killed in Wingate, about 25 miles southeast of Charlotte. The video shows him being approached by a man asking him "you on live" before shots are fired. CNN affiliate WSOC says Douglas Colson has been identified as a suspect. The incident, once again, raising questions about violent content on Facebook live.
[Briggs:] All right. More than 200 rivers near flood stage this morning from Texas to the Great Lakes and more rain headed to hard-hit areas. Here's meteorologist Pedram Javaheri.
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Dave and Christine, good morning to you both. Yes, you know, this is going to be a very serious situation for a lot of people. As we know, upwards of 200-plus river gauges that are reporting flooding as of this hour. The vast majority are in the minor flood stage levels but you notice a good number in the moderate and then certainly, about a dozen or so in the major flood stage, really stretching from the Gulf Coast all the way towards the Great Lakes. And that's precisely where we have a frontal boundary draped across this region. Could see additional change of showers. Unfortunately, the bullseye for the heaviest rainfall across parts of east Texas on into, say, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, and parts of southern Tennessee. Really, the areas that have been hardest hit in the past week so some of these regions could see another round of, say, three, four, maybe five inches of rainfall. And again, several million people underneath flood watches and flood warnings this morning as a result of what's happening. And look at the uniform nature of this incredible temperature trend. Up to 60 in Chicago. Lower 60s also down around portions of Arkansas. Middle 60s into the southern U.S. and about 60 around the northeast as well. So this is a trend we think will last a couple of more days and then finally, a little cooler as we push to the weekend.
[Romans:] All right, thank you. Let's get a check on "CNN Money" this morning. Right now, U.S. futures are down a little bit but global stocks had a great performance set by the tone on Wall Street yesterday. A big rally for U.S. stocks yesterday, up nearly 400 points for the Dow. For now, investors stopped worrying about rising interest rates, but the tiniest rate news moves stocks here and we may get more today. New Fed chief Jerome Powell will testify before Congress. Apple stock jumped two percent, nearly an all-time high. Warren Buffett said his company bought more Apple shares than any other this year. And, you know, big tech moves markets. Three tech stocks have fueled nearly half of the S&P 500's rise this year Amazon, Microsoft, and Netflix if you're keeping score. About three-quarters of those big losses in the Dow that we had last this month have been erased. So, the market's been clawing back. New home sales hit a 5-month low in January, falling for the second month in a row. New homes are just a small slice of the entire housing market. Existing homes is bigger. Those sales also dropped in January, the sharpest annual drop in three years. Homebuyers face some problems here. Low supply, rising prices that is sidelining many first-time homebuyers and experts worry two factors will slow things down this year in housing rising mortgage rates they're near a 4-year high right now and the new tax bill. It caps the mortgage interest deduction. All right, "BLACK PANTHER," have you seen it? It is raking in the big bucks at the box office $700 million worldwide. Just incredible. Disney is giving a cut of that back to children. Disney will donate $1 million of the profit to the Boys and Girls Clubs of America. The money will support its STEM programs for kids and teens. That is science, technology, engineering, and math. Disney's CEO Bob Iger says it's just thrilling to see how inspired young audiences were by the technology in the film. If there's something Disney knows, it's technology.
[Briggs:] Just incredible $700 million. For context, "GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY" made $773 million
[Romans:] yes.
[Briggs:] in five months.
[Romans:] Wow, amazing. All right, thanks for joining us. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. "NEW DAY" starts right now. We'll see you tomorrow.
[Trump:] I really believe I'd run into it even if I didn't have a weapon.
[Unidentified Female:] It's ridiculous.
[Sanders:] He was just stating he would have stepped in and hopefully, been able to help.
[Unidentified Male:] The proposal to raise to 21 is just common sense. I don't think he should be backing away from this issue.
[Trump:] By the way, bump stocks I don't care if Congress does it not. I'm writing it out myself, OK?
[Gov. John Kasich , Ohio:] In this case, he deserves credit for this and I hope he'll keep it up.
[Trump:] I got to watch some deputy sheriffs. They weren't exactly Medal of Honor winners.
[Romans:] The school resource officer insisting he did nothing wrong as CNN learns new details about the gunman's troubled past.
[Unidentified Female:] I remember thinking he's going to kill someone and I can do nothing about it.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Tuesday, February 27th, 6:00 here in New York. So here's our "Starting Line."

[Blitzer:] White House briefing moments from now. Live coverage coming up. Looking at live pictures. Let's bring back Mark Preston and Karoun Demirjian. Karoun, it looks like it's all a done deal. The government is going to reopen. There are a few technical snags, right?
[Karoun Demirjian, Cnn Poltical Analyst:] That's why you don't have it declared a done deal yet. They have to go through the hoops of making the second Senate vote happen and kicking it to the House and hoping that nothing
[Blitzer:] The first Senate vote, which passed overwhelmingly, was procedural. Now they have to vote on the bill.
[Demijian:] Right. Exactly. It's not a challenge to get through the procedural vote this will pass through the Senate and kicks to the House. There is a question of who votes for it in the House. The idea it will probably be done. You have 81 votes on the Senate side. The odds of it not passing in the House are slim. The question is, what's next. This won't go without vitriol exchange on the floor about everything they have not yet resolved and everything that's unsatisfactory from the fact that it's a three-week bill.
[Blitzer:] Mark, we'll hear from Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, in a moment. We'll have live coverage. It is another to hear from the president of the United States.
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Which we haven't heard from. Again, we haven't heard his voice in the first or last few days. It will be an interesting position now for President Trump, what role he'll play to try to get the DACA deal done. He has sent mixed messages that are 180 degrees different one day from the next. What influence will he have on House Republicans to get the DACA deal done. Listening to some Republicans talking about the deal who were talking about hoping to get a deal, they seem nervous that DACA won't be done and that it will take a big push on behalf of the White House. We'll see if the White House is there.
[Blitzer:] The president will have to take charge if this is to be a done deal. Not just in the Senate but the House.
[Demirjian:] The politics many the House are the problematic one for getting DACA done. The Republicans haven't been as willing as the Republicans in the Senate. They have been saying over the last several days hanging together has worked well for them the last few fights, including this one. They have to break rank because there are too many conservative Republicans that will never vote for this and work with Democrats and probably rely on a majority of Democrats to get something DACA-related through. That takes Paul Ryan saying, I will break up this coalition that's working well for the GOP. To make that decision without the president's support is a troublesome thing.
[Blitzer:] He says he's the great dealmaker. It will be a challenge to put this deal together and make it work. Guys, thank you very much. That's it for me. I will be back at 5:00 p.m. eastern in "THE SITUATION ROOM." Meantime, right here on CNN, the news continues right now.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] All smiles for the camera. But behind closed doors, Mike Pompeo's blunt message to the Saudi crown prince his future as king is at stake. Pompeo briefs the president this morning as Jamal Khashoggi's final column goes to print.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] The former president of USA Gymnastics arrested after charges he tried to conceal in the Larry Nassar investigation.
[Romans:] Does anyone want to win the lottery? No Powerball Jackpot winner, $1.3 billion in lottery money now up for grabs.
[Briggs:] Never good when an umpire is trending on Twitter. Major controversies. The Red Sox steal one from Houston Astros. Is it or is it not fan interference? Let us know what you think @earlystart. It will be debated throughout the day and perhaps into the off-season. Good morning. Welcome to EARLY START. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] And I'm Christine Romans. Nice to see you this morning.
[Briggs:] Good to see you.
[Romans:] It is Thursday, October 18th. It is 4:00 a.m. in the East. President Trump meeting this morning with Mike Pompeo, his secretary of state. He will get a briefing on the diplomatic swing through the Saudi and Turkish capitals. A trip focused on the disappearance and presumed murder of U.S.-based Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. CNN has learned that beneath the surface of Pompeo's upbeat photo-op with the Saudi crown prince, all smiles there, but behind closed doors is a blunt no-nonsense meeting. A source tells us Pompeo warned Prince Mohammed bin Salman known as MBS his future as king depends on his handling of this apparent killing. The source says Pompeo told the prince he must own the situation and that every fact is going to get out.
[Briggs:] The "New York Times" and "Washington Post" both reporting this morning on mounting evidence that connects Crown Prince Mohammed or MBS to the killing, including his ties to several members of the team that flew from Riyadh to Istanbul just as Khashoggi disappeared. The "Post" also reports the White House and the Saudi royal family are searching for an explanation for Khashoggi's death that does not implicate Prince Mohammed. The president says he's waiting for answers, but also seemed to cast doubt on intel that could implicate the Saudis.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm not giving cover at all. With that being said, Saudi Arabia has been a very important ally of ours in the Middle East. I want to find out what happened, where is the fault, and we will probably know that by the end of the week.
[Unidentified Reporter:] You asked for this audio and video intelligence that the Turks supposedly have.
[Trump:] We have asked for it if it exists. We have asked for it, yes.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Yes, but you haven't gotten it.
[Trump:] We've asked for it if it exists.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Are you surprised that they haven't turned it over?
[Trump:] No. I'm not sure yet that it exists. It probably does, possibly does.
[Briggs:] Possibly. Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker says the administration has, quote, "clamped down on intelligence about the case," saying, quote, "I suppose they don't want us to see the intel."
[Romans:] Now to the view from Saudi Arabia. What's the reaction in Riyadh? What might the kingdom do next? Let's bring in senior international correspondent Sam Kiley live in Riyadh for us. And Sam, you know, you've got this unusual situation of, you know, the crown prince is investigating whether the crown prince is implicated in this apparent murder here. What's the view from there?
[Sam Kiley, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, that is exactly what is going on, but behind the scenes, they are also trying to come up with a narrative which somehow squares with the near waterfall now of leaks coming out of Turkey which do, as you say, implicate a number of very senior officials. Not just those very close to the crown prince, but people from outside, from the establishment, from the medical establishment for example in this country who would have been very hard to get to participate in an operation of this kind without an order from a very senior figure. Nonetheless, of course, this is a country that is actually run by the crown prince. He is, if you like, the chief executive of Saudi Arabia. And he's not going to authorize any kind of statement that would implicate himself clearly. So they are in something of a bind, particularly as the king, King Salman at 82 is frail and elderly, and as I say, handed over power to MBS, who has, I have to say, over the last 18 months, especially concentrated power in a way that has never been seen in Saudi Arabia before. Eviscerating the royal court and really taking executive control Christine.
[Romans:] Fascinating. All right. Sam Kiley for us in Riyadh. Thank you, sir.
[Briggs:] Jamal Khashoggi's final column published by the "Washington Post." It was submitted by his assistant one day after he went missing. Fittingly it was about the value of a free press. And it called out the Egyptian government's seizure of the entire print run of a newspaper. The column reads in part, "These actions no longer carry the consequence of a backlash from the international community. Instead, these actions may trigger condemnation quickly followed by silence. As a result, Arab governments have been given free rein to continue silencing the media at an increasing rate."
[Romans:] He says a platform is needed for Arab voices. He calls for the creation of an independent international forum, isolated from the influence of nationalist governments.
[Briggs:] Ahead of the midterm elections, it's been a quiet period for the special counsel's Russia investigation. Publicly anyway. But behind the scenes, Robert Mueller's team has been very busy debriefing Paul Manafort. Sources tell CNN the former Trump campaign chairman and his lawyers visited Mueller's Washington office at least nine times in the last four weeks with prosecutors also interviewing other witnesses, gathering a grand jury weekly and working out some kind of secret court action. We're told the White House insiders expect more criminal indictments.
[Romans:] Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein publicly defending the Mueller probe. In a rare interview with the "Wall Street Journal" he calls the inquiry appropriate and independent, and said the public will have confidence that the cases we brought were warranted. One other potential problem for the president, his former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, meeting Wednesday with officials investigating Mr. Trump's family business and charitable organizations.
[Briggs:] New this morning, U.S. marshals arresting the former president of USA Gymnastics on charges he tampered with evidence in the Larry Nassar sexual abuse case. The Walker County, Texas, district attorney says Steve Perry ordered documents related to Nassar removed from the USA Gymnastics training center at the Karolyi Ranch. According to an indictment, the documents were delivered to Perry at U.S. AG headquarters in Indianapolis and have not been seen since. The marshals' fugitive task force arrested Penny on vacation in Tennessee. He is now awaiting extradition back to Texas.
[Romans:] More than $1.3 billion in lottery jackpot money is now up for grabs. There were no winners in Wednesday's $378 million Powerball Jackpot drawings. The winning numbers were 3, 57, 64, 68, 69 with 15 as the Powerball. The estimated jackpot for Saturday's drawing is $430 million. Friday's Megamillions Jackpot has now climbed to $900 million with the lump sum option of $513 million.
[Briggs:] And yes, I'm already envisioning how I would spend it, my friend. That's what I do.
[Romans:] You could buy companies. You could buy companies with that much money.
[Briggs:] Massive companies.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Briggs:] U.S. all right. The GOP tax cuts sent the deficit soaring. Now the president wants his Cabinet secretaries to help make up some serious ground.

[Rosemary Church, Cnn Anchor:] Another top Trump administration official says goodbye. Attorney general Jeff Sessions is out after the president fired him from the job. That news comes as the Democratic Party takes back the House with some stunning firsts as a historic number of women win seats in Congress. And
[Trump:] The sanctions are on.
[Unidentified Male:] You still expect to be
[Trump:] No, no, excuse me. Wait.
[Unidentified Male:] Sorry, sir.
[Trump:] The sanctions are on. The missiles have stopped. The rockets have stopped.
[Church:] President Trump's relationship he says is fine even as the North cancels an upcoming meeting. Hello and welcome to our viewers all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church and this is CNN NEWSROOM. There's a new leader at the U.S. Justice Department. That could mean big changes for the Russia investigation. President Trump fired attorney general Jeff Sessions on Wednesday; replacing him for now is Sessions' chief of staff, Matt Whitaker. According to the Justice Department, Whitaker will be in charge of all matters under the purview of the Department of Justice. That means he will oversee special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Sessions left the Justice Department building late Wednesday, saying goodbye to his former employees and shaking hands with his replacement. Trump has wanted to replace Sessions ever since he recused himself from the Russia probe. Over the past year, the president has repeatedly asked Sessions to regain control of the investigation. Earlier Wednesday, the president played coy when asked about Sessions' future.
[Unidentified Male:] And can you give us clarity, sir, on your thinking currently now, after the midterms, about your attorney general and your deputy attorney general? Do they have long-term job security?
[Trump:] I'd rather answer that at a little bit different time. We're looking at a lot of different things, including cabinet.
[Church:] A Justice Department source told CNN that people close to Sessions are encouraging him to run for his old Senate seat in 2020. More on how he got here from CNN's Laura Jarrett.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Legal Analyst:] At President Trump's request, Jeff Sessions is out as attorney general, submitting his resignation letter to the president. Quote, "I have been honored it serve as attorney general and have worked to implement the law enforcement agenda, based on the rule of law," wrote Sessions. Trump has made no secret of his disdain for his attorney general.
[Trump:] I'm disappointed in the attorney general for numerous reasons. But we have an attorney general. I'm disappointed in the attorney general for many reasons. And you understand that.
[Jarrett:] The long expected departure of one of President Trump's earliest supporters, attorney general Jeff Sessions, coming after months of blistering attacks.
[Trump:] I said on the Department of Justice, I would stay uninvolved. Now I may get involved at some point if it gets worse.
[Jarrett:] At one low point, Trump even going so far as to declare, quote, "I don't have an attorney general." All because Sessions stepped aside from overseeing the Russia investigation, something that overshadowed nearly all his 20 months at the Justice Department.
[Trump:] He took the job and then he said, I'm going to recuse myself. I said, what kind of a man is this?
[Jarrett:] And despite all the tweets and withering critiques from his boss...
[Trump:] I put in an attorney general that never took control of the Justice Department, Jeff Sessions. He never took control of the Justice Department and it's sort of an incredible thing.
[Jarrett:] Sessions rarely pushed back...
[Jeff Sessions , Former U.s. Attorney General:] The president speaks his mind. He says what is on his mind at the time and he has been frustrated about my recusal and other matters. But we have been so pleased and honored to be given the responsibility to execute his agenda at the Department of Justice. Part of that is just this kind of case. And so I am pleased and honored to have that responsibility and I will do so as long as it is appropriate for me to do so.
[Jarrett:] picking his moments carefully and vowing in August that the Justice Department will not be improperly influenced by political considerations. Publicly, he advanced the president's most controversial immigration policies; privately, a source close to Sessions tells CNN he, too, has been frustrated that Mueller's investigation is not yet completed. And the attorney general hopes he will be remembered for never undermining the integrity of the department. With Sessions now gone, his chief of staff, Matt Whitaker, will take over the department in the interim. Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney from Iowa and former CNN contributor, has served as Sessions' right- hand man since September 2017. But with Sessions now gone, the question is, who will replace him? Republican senator Lindsey Graham has reportedly been asked about the job and has repeatedly said he's not interested. Others said to be in the running include former federal prosecutor and current Republican congressman John Ratcliffe, Boeing general counsel Michael Luttig and others potentially in the mix are federal appeals court judge Edith Jones, who sit on the 5th Circuit, and Janice Rogers Brown, who used to sit on the D.C. circuit, though a source close to Brown tells CNN, she is likely not interested Laura Jarrett, CNN, Washington.
[Church:] So let's get more on all of this with CNN legal analyst Paul Callan. Good to have you with us.
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Thank you, Rosemary.
[Church:] So clearly a lot to cover. There always is. But let's start with the firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. And that news came to us before most people had time to digest the results of the midterm elections. What impact might Sessions firing have on the Mueller investigations specifically?
[Callan:] Well, I mean, for starters, of course, that was a classic Trumpian move of changing the subject of losing the congressional elections. And, boy, we're now focused on a really big issue and that is the resignation of Jeff Sessions, attorney general of the United States. A lot of people thought that this was going to happen at some point but we just didn't know when. And certainly, the thought, I think among most lawyers is that this is really an attempt to impede, influence or maybe even terminate the Mueller investigation as it moves closer possibly to Don Jr. and other and the Trump businesses.
[Church:] Right. And of course, Jeff Sessions will be temporarily replaced by acting attorney general Matt Whitaker, a vocal critic of the Mueller probe. He's previously suggested starving the Mueller investigation of funds so it "grinds to almost a halt," his words. And this is what former Attorney General of the United States Sally Yates tweeted Wednesday. "We should not lose sight of why POTUS fired the attorney general because he wants a crony to protect him from the investigation of his own campaign. The rule of law is disappearing before our eyes." Is Sally Yates right there?
[Callan:] Well, I think we won't know until we see what Mr. Whitaker does in his new position. I certainly think the optics of this are terrible for the Trump administration. If you are going to put somebody in charge of the Mueller investigation and by the way, that's exactly what Whitaker will be in his new position. He will be the person really who was in charge of the investigation. You really would think you'd have somebody who is less publicly committed to criticizing Mueller, someone who is little bit more neutral at the very least or even supportive of the investigation. Instead, the president has selected somebody who is an outspoken critic of Mueller. And I think that's going to erode public confidence in Whitaker, regardless of what he does.
[Church:] But Whitaker has to be confirmed, doesn't he, for the job? So how likely is it that that would happen? He's there temporarily for now but he has to be nominated and then confirmed, doesn't he? How likely would it be that that he would the guy in the end?
[Callan:] It's hard to say whether he'll be the guy in the end. And I think whether he's the guy, it depends upon whether the president is happy about how he's dealing with the Mueller investigation. You know, he has said publicly as you began this interview by talking about cutting off Mueller's budget. Now he, as acting attorney general would have the right to do that. That would be one way that he could close down the Mueller investigation. Mueller has to come to him if Mueller is going to issue a subpoena of the president of the United States. And as acting attorney general he could veto that and put a stop to it. So he'll have enormous power in managing the Mueller investigation and he'll be on the one hand, try to keep himself from getting into trouble by the way of, you know, there will be claims against Whitaker that he is trying to obstruct justice if he is trying to close down the Mueller investigation to protect the president. But of course, on the other hand, if he's not aggressive with Mueller, he has no chance of permanently getting the attorney general position because the president will be unhappy with him. So he's signed up for a really tough job.
[Church:] And what happens in the meantime to previous acting attorney general Rod Rosenstein?
[Callan:] Well, that's a great question. Because a sort of the whole reason for his existence in the Justice Department was because Jeff Sessions had a conflict and he had to bring somebody in from the outside who had good credentials to supervise the Mueller investigation. And Rosenstein now really that job is going to Whitaker. So I would not be at all surprised to see Rosenstein resign from the Justice Department as well. But that remains to be seen. Maybe they'll find another role for him. He's a very well-respected deputy attorney general. But on the other hand, it's humiliating to have this responsibility taken away from him in such a public way. So I really would be surprised if Rosenstein stays on.
[Church:] And what will the Democrats do about this now that, of course, they're in control of the House?
[Callan:] Well, you know, Rosemary, they have subpoena power now. And they can hold hearings on this and they can cause the administration a great embarrassment. There are also requirements in the special counsel law that whoever is supervising the Mueller investigation has to report when certain incidents occur to the Congress. And you report to the majority's representative on the judiciary committee. So that would be a report to the Democrats. So they'll have an active role in this and they'll be aware of a lot of things that are going on in the investigation that they were not aware of before, the Democrats, of course.
[Church:] We will be watching the story very closely. I know you shall. And we'll see how long we'll be talking about this before another distraction happens, right? Paul Callan-
[Callan:] Well, that's true, that's true. Thanks so much, Rosemary.
[Church:] Thank you so much, Paul Callan, for being with us. Jeff Sessions' abrupt firing coming just hours after the U.S. midterms spelled an end to one-party rule in Washington. Here's the new balance of power. Democrats needed a net gain of 23 seats to win back control of the House for the first time in eight years. They topped that, gaining 28 seats, giving them 223 in total. Republicans have 199 confirmed seats. On the Senate side, the Republicans have at least 51 seats, assuring them of a majority. Democrats have 46 seats, three other seats are still up in the air now. At a news conference Wednesday, President Trump touted the Republican victories.
[Trump:] I'll be honest, I thought it was I thought it was a very close close to complete victory. We saw the candidates that that I supported achieve tremendous success. Others decided let's stay away. They did poorly. I'm not sure that I should be happy or sad. I feel fine about it.
[Church:] As we've discussed, with Democrats in control of the House, they will have subpoena power as the majority Democrats will not control the chairmanships of House committees so they can limit Trump's legislative plans. We could see the Russia probe ramped up and a possible investigation into the president's tax returns. House Democrats could also vote to impeach the president but it is highly unlikely a Republican controlled Senate would convict him at trial. So let's get into all of this with Scott Lucas. He teaches international politics at the University of Birmingham in England. Thank you very much for being with us.
[Scott Lucas, University Of Birmingham:] Thank you.
[Church:] So how much gridlock can we expect over the next two years with the Democrats in control of the House and the Republicans controlling the Senate? And what could this mean for President Trump's legislative plans, future investigation and the possibility of impeachment?
[Lucas:] Rosemary, gridlock is a place for normal times. And of course, we will see, for example, a battle probably early next year when the Trump administration makes its budget proposal. We know that the administration which has only had one major bill passed in two years. The tax cuts bill will struggle to get any further legislation. But these aren't normal times. I mean, Donald Trump doesn't rule by working through Congress the way that we expect, he rules by executive order. So expect, for example, if we have further anti-immigration moves, executive order, further tariffs, executive order, further environmental protection being pushed away, executive order. But we've already seen that showdown. Because if Trump wants to rule by executive order, he faces the immediate challenge. The immediate challenge of the Democrats controlling the House committees, which could, for example, put pressure on him over his financial affairs. But immediately it raises the Russia investigation because Republicans or leading Republicans have been accused of blocking access to the Mueller team of records that could contribute to the investigation. They have been accused of slowing down this investigation well, going all the way back to early 2017. Now that barrier is gone. And what you saw yesterday was that Donald Trump wasn't worried as much about gridlock as much as he was worried about the fact that the Russia investigation may take over now and that you and I will not be talking about the economy, we will not be talking about foreign policy, but we'll be talking about how close Robert Mueller is getting to the president over the next few weeks and months.
[Church:] Right. And of course, so while the nation was trying to assess the impact of the midterm elections. We got distracted by news of the firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. What impact do you expect this to have on the Mueller inquiry, with Matt Whitaker now the new acting attorney general?
[Lucas:] Well, first of all, Rosemary, I don't think it's a distraction, I actually think it is a logical reaction to what happened. Sessions is going to be fired anyway. That was an undated letter which he had written at the White House command. I think they did move more quickly than we expected. And I think the reason links to two things: because the returns were not what they wanted, especially for the House. I think Trump and his inner circle decided they've got to take the offensive now. I think they're moving in two stages through the replacement for Jeff Sessions. I think the first is that they will try to contain Mueller. And the key thing that I picked up from your interview earlier is subpoena power. We know Mueller wants to subpoena Trump to pull everything together in terms of the evidence he has, but the new acting attorney general can block that and I would expect that to happen. Now the question, is he just a placeholder or are they going to try to put a more heavyweight person in as attorney general? There has been the name of Janice Rogers Brown, an appeals court judge, floated as a replacement this morning. If she is brought in, do they make the ultimate move, which is to fire Mueller and dismiss him? We know if they do, that's it. We're in a constitutional crisis. We know they can't walk that back. So even though, I think, Donald Trump is impulsive, even though I think he is acting erratically, I think the firing of Sessions is just an intermediate step. And we've got to wait probably for the next few months, for weeks and even months before we see if it were ultimate decision of whether Trump stays or whether he goes.
[Church:] All right. We'll watch to see what happens there. And of course, in the meantime, President Trump was lashing out at the media in an explosive news conference after the midterm election results. What was that all about? Anger with the results or simply offering up a new distraction?
[Lucas:] Whenever you're with Trump, start with Trump personally. And despite what you heard him saying, this is a near complete victory, he knows it wasn't. He knows that the loss of the House is big. He knows probably that most of the candidates he campaigned for did not actually win on Tuesday. And so he took it out on CNN's Jim Acosta because Jim Acosta is a target of the president and of leading conservatives. We know that. Was it a distraction? It becomes a distraction if the media lets it become a distraction. Despite the fact that I think this is an attack on press freedom. I think if we get back to talking about Sessions firing today, if we get back to talking about how Trump is going to deal with the new Congress, well, we'll see if we can get Jim Acosta back into the White House. But, meanwhile, look, Donald Trump is on the defensive right now. And we've got to start from that position when we assess everything that's happening in this confusion around Washington.
[Church:] Yes. We will stay on topic for sure. Scott Lucas, many thanks to you for your analysis and perspective. I appreciate it.
[Lucas:] Thank you.
[Church:] A Pakistani Christian woman who had her death sentence overturned is finally free from prison but now Asia Bibi is facing a uncertain future and threats to her life. Plus relief in Cameroon, as 78 kidnapped children are released. But two youngsters are still in danger. The details when we return.

[Harlow:] You're probably used to these images by now, but you shouldn't be. This I mean, this is remarkable, but it's been three weeks since the Kilauea volcano first erupted, the lava spouting out and showing no signs of slowing down. You've got dozens of homes, buildings, cars destroyed. People have evacuated.
[Berman:] Yes, several cracks on the ground has sent lava and toxic gas into the air. It's so bad that officials are handing out new masks today to protect residents from the volcanic ash. Our Scott McLean live on the big island where he's been braving all of this. Scott, what's the latest?
[Scott Mclean, Cnn Correspondent:] John and Poppy, there are no shortage of dangers here on the southern part of the big island of Hawaii. You mentioned the ash cloud for people who are near the summit of Kilauea about 20 miles away from we are. There's also the sulfur dioxide continuing to pour out of those fissures. There's also the laze hazard, that nasty gas that happens when lava hits the ocean. That can also be potentially dangerous. I haven't even mentioned the earthquakes and obviously the lava itself. Well, the latest threat here is this geothermal power plant where lava is encroaching slowly on to the property. Authorities they met with residents here to try to calm some of the concerns that they had. There were dangerous chemicals on that plant but they have been removed now for some time. That plant has been shut now since May 3rd. But now the issue is those geothermal wells. Ten out of 11 of them have had cold water poured down them that seems to neutralize them. They had issues with the 11th. What they did is plugged it or capped it and authorities are confident at this point that it won't be an issue. They're also telling people that the lava that is slowly creeping in there is still more than a mile away. And the fissures, some of them continue to bubble up. Some of them are dying down including the one that injured Darryl Clinton. He is the only person to have been injured so far by Kilauea. He was actually protecting two houses, one of which was only about a hundred yard away from a spewing fissure. We spoke to him in the hospital yesterday and he is in remarkably good spirits after being hit with a lava bomb that burned his leg and burned his porch. He's got a rod in his leg. He will be out for six weeks, but it's just amazing to hear how positive he is despite what's happened to him John and Poppy.
[Harlow:] It is. He's quite a character. I'm glad he's all right after that happened. Scott, thank you very, very much. You can go to CNN.com. There's actually this Web camera, and this is a live feed of the volcano, the Kilauea volcano right now, 247 on CNN.com.
[Berman:] It's mesmerizing. It is mesmerizing but still dangerous.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Berman:] Yet mesmerizing.
[Harlow:] It's very, very frightening.
[Berman:] It's like the Yule log.
[Harlow:] It's like the what?
[Berman:] Yule log, but not as festive.
[Harlow:] Your reaction just moments ago from former FBI director James Comey, reacting to the president's claims that a spy was planted in his campaign. Wait until you see what the fired FBI director has to say.

[Riddell:] The Australian open is the first big sports event of 2018, and tennis fans can't wait for it to start in just 12 days' time. But that may be too soon for some of the world's top stars, many of whom haven't been able to shrug off injuries from last season. Andy Murray has pulled out of Brisbane because of his injured hip and he wrote on Facebook, "Continuing rehab is one option in giving my hip more time to recover. Surgery is also an option, but the chance of successful outcome are not as high as I would like, which has made this my secondary option and my hope has been to avoid that. However, this is something I may have to consider, but let's hope not. The reason he's so hesitant about surgery is because tennis players know that it is very, very difficult to come back successfully from a hip operation. Tennis players get injured all the time, it's a grueling support with a lot of wear and tear on the body that hips for athletes aren't necessarily that easy to fix properly. Take for example,
[Unidentified Male:] A race that is synonymous with passion, excellence, and weathering the extremes. The 2017 edition of the Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race saw a turbulent narrative unfold with its astonishingly quick pace, race records and line on this controversy. But nothing could take away the overall honors from Australian Sailing President Matt Allen and his Ichiban team, who steered the newest boat in the entire fleet to victory on corrected time in just one day and 19 hours.
[Matt Allen, Former President, Australian Sailing:] The Rolex Sydney to Hobart Race is just the most difficult race to win you could ever imagine, and it's every sailor's dream to win this race. It was just an incredible moment for me to come across that finish line, I'm thinking finally after so many years, we've got it in the bag.
[Unidentified Male:] As well as lifting the celebrated Tattersalls Cup, the 52 foot Ichi Ban, also claimed two long-standing course records to become the fastest yacht on 55 feet and the fastest fixed kill yacht in the race's history.

[Unidentified Male:] The president now has three people who have broken with him. He can't lose more than two on any big vote.
[Sen. Bob Corker , Tennessee:] I think the debasement of our nation will be what he'll be remembered most for.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] They were not likely to be re-elected. That shows that the support is more behind this president than it is those two individuals.
[Unidentified Male:] Both of these really started with personal jabs from the president to these members.
[Unidentified Female:] It's a tough situation for the Republican Party. We're seeing buyers' remorse play out publicly.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] We're going to concentrate on what our agenda is and not any of these other distractions that you all may be interested in.
[Flake:] History will look back and say why didn't we stand up? I hope that more of us do.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning. Welcome to your NEW DAY. We begin with something that was certainly unusual. The impact we'll have to see, but this Republican rebuke against a sitting president, we haven't seen anything like it, at least in a very long time. Two retiring GOP senators calling out President Trump, a member of their own party, remember, as dangerous and utterly untruthful. Senator Jeff Flake says he will, quote, "no longer be complicit or silent," issuing a call to arms to fellow Republicans. Senator Bob Corker says the Trump presidency will be remembered for, quote, "debasing the nation."
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] So could these defections and attention inside the GOP threaten the president's agenda? The White House spokesperson defending Mr. Trump's clashes with both men, saying it's probably best they leave. Coming up in just minutes, Senator Jeff Flake will join us live. So let's begin with CNN's Joe Johns is live for us at the White House. Another intense day, Joe.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] That's for sure, Alisyn. And, look, here at the White House they are saying it's all good, even with freewheeling criticism of the president by two prominent Republican senators. They're free to speak their minds, because they're not running for re-election. But that free will could affect the Senate arithmetic and the president's agenda.
[Flake:] It is time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end.
[Johns:] Outgoing Senator Jeff Flake fiercely denouncing President Trump's policies and behavior as dangerous to democracy and calling on his fellow Republicans to do the same.
[Flake:] When the next generation asks us, "Why didn't you do something? Why didn't you speak up?" what are we going to say?
[Johns:] Flake railing against the politics of the era of Trump, the undermining of democratic ideals, the personal insults, and what he called the flagrant disregard for truth and decency.
[Flake:] Reckless, outrageous and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as "telling it like it is" when it is actually just reckless, outrageous and dignify and undignified. We were not made great as a country by indulging in or even exalting our worst impulses; turning against ourselves; glorifying in the things that divide us; and calling fake things true and true things fake.
[Johns:] Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praising Flake but punting when asked by reporters how the party would respond.
[Unidentified Female:] At what point do you have an obligation as a leader of this party to weigh in on these very serious criticisms of the president?
[Mcconnell:] What I have an obligation to do is to try to achieve the greatest cohesion I can among 52 Republicans to try to achieve for the American people the agenda that we set out to achieve.
[Johns:] Flake's sweeping indictment coming hours after Republican Senator Bob Corker also blasted Mr. Trump.
[Corker:] The president has great difficulty with the truth. I don't know why he lowers himself to such a low, low standard and debases our country in the way that he does, but he does.
[Johns:] The retiring Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman expressing concern that the United States' position in the world is suffering under President Trump.
[Corker:] World leaders are very aware that much of what he says is untrue. He purposely is breaking down relationships we have around the world that have been useful to our nation.
[Johns:] Their feud reaching a boiling point, with the president responding to Corker's attacks in a series of tweets, again calling him "little." The White House brushing off the criticism as petty while welcoming the decision of the senators to retire.
[Sanders:] I think they were not likely to be re-elected. And I think that shows that the support is more behind this president than it is those two individuals.
[Johns:] A source familiar with the president's thinking says he is in high spirits after Flake's announcement. An ally of Mr. Trump's former chief strategist also celebrating, saying, "Steve Bannon added another scalp to his collection as another establishment domino falls." Senators Flake and Corker won't be going anywhere anytime soon. They'll be in the United States Senate until January of 2019. The president, for his part today, headed to Dallas for a fund-raiser Chris and Alisyn.
[Cuomo:] All right, Joe, thank you very much. All right. Let's discuss with CNN political analyst David Gregory; and reporter and editor at large for CNN Politics, Chris Cillizza. Let's play a little bit more of this sound so we can do a good discussion on, really, the full complement of things that were said. We have Flake and Corker.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Do you think that President Trump is setting a bad example for the nation's children?
[Flake:] Yes. Some of the statements that are made about people and seeming to ascribe the worst motives to people, as well. That's something we tell our kids not to do.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Do you think he's a role model to children in the United States?
[Corker:] No.
[Raju:] You don't?
[Corker:] No. Absolutely not. We have young people who for the first time are, you know, watching a president stating, you know, absolute nontruths, nonstop. Personalizing things in the way he does. And it's it's very sad for our nation.
[Cuomo:] All right. So there they are. David Gregory, it's interesting. You know, the little bit of this is a matter of perception. Are they defecting? I would say, no, they're doing the opposite. They're actually redoubling their commitment to what they say their party is about and stepping away from the president on that basis, not a defection at all. How do you see it?
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, they're but they're going to be gone. I mean, they're doing the thing that I think resistors of the president want them to do, which is to stand up and say, "This is not right. This is not right for America. This is not how a president ought to behave. And this is not right for the Republican Party." So they will get kudos for that. The other side of it is that those voices, brave voices you know, Jeff Flake is someone, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, you can say, "This is a guy who should be senator." He's very smart. He's very dedicated. He's a terrific public servant. Well, he's now going to go. Now, he probably wouldn't have won anyway. He recognized he was going to be primaried many, many months ago; and things had accelerated to the point where he isn't able to win. So the immediate impact of this is to say, well, if you're a Republican president, you have these defections. You can blame him as being, you know, part of the establishment that needs to be drained. But you're losing votes for your priorities. In this case tax reform. That has obvious pain to the president here and now. And maybe history will judge this as a moment of unraveling for the Trump presidency. But the immediate effect is for Trump and his allies to stand up and say, "Yes, these guys are part of the problem." It's amazing to hear the White House spokesperson call these things that they're saying, Corker and Flake, petty. This from a president who often doesn't tell the truth, who personally insults people and is certainly a bad influence on America's children. But that's the state of affairs in the Trump presidency. People know it. Voters know it. It's the reality that we're living through.
[Camerota:] So, Chris, these guys are retiring but not for 14 months.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Correspondent And Editor At Large:] Right.
[Camerota:] So why now? Why did they feel they needed to make these statements now?
[Cillizza:] Well, you know, I think when you think about your next election, particularly given the cost of these elections, you have to sort of make these decisions about now. You simply can't wait and wait and wait and wait. It makes it difficult for the party to hold your seat, particularly in Arizona, and it makes it difficult for you to win. So I think some of it is they're having these heart-to-hearts with themselves at a time when you have to make a go or no go decision. I do think David's point is important as it relates to Jeff Flake. This is in some ways, he will be touted as a truth teller to the Trump presidency by those who oppose Trump. It will be seen in many ways, though, within the Republican Party, particularly the Trump base of the Republican Party, as two things: a victory for the Steve BannonDonald Trump wing of the Republican Party; and also a cautionary tale for sort of the governing wing of the Republican Party. Remember, the reason that Jeff Flake's poll numbers are where they are and that's not in a good place is not because he's too moderate. He's one of the ten most conservative senators in the Senate. It's because he wrote a book that was deeply critical of Donald Trump and was unafraid to go out and talk about it.
[Camerota:] So wait a second. So his poll numbers plummeted after that. He was going to win re-election, you're saying, until the book?
[Cuomo:] Well, we don't know that.
[Camerota:] I just want to ask what Chris says about that.
[Cillizza:] Yes. No. Look, I think he had some issues before anyway. This exacerbated those issues tenfold. If he had said nothing about Donald Trump other than, you know, "He does his things and I do mine," he would have had a decent to better than decent chance of winning a primary.
[Cuomo:] Any poll you look at says that you have at least I mean, Chris and I, we were talking about this yesterday at least two out of three of people-
[Cillizza:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] who identify as Republican are for Trump.
[Cillizza:] That's right.
[Cuomo:] So you go out, you're technically going out on a limb.
[Camerota:] Of course. I know he went out on a limb with the book. I just didn't know what his political standing was-
[Cuomo:] any criticism. It's-
[Cillizza:] Alisyn, I would say he had this was not a lock-
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Cillizza:] before he wrote about Donald Trump, but he was in a much better place within the Republican Party than he was afterward. After that book came out and David made this point it was going to be a very uphill climb to win the nomination.
[Cuomo:] It also depends on what happens next. That's the big factor. You know, I was watching "The Walking Dead" last night with my son. And like at one point, these two guys, "I've had enough," and they run out nobody follows them.
[Camerota:] And you saw it as a metaphor.
[Cuomo:] Yes. And so they come out. Jeff Flake gives a speech yesterday and you hear [APPLAUDS] because they are countenancing what the president says and does. He came out about Bob Corker, and the definition of a lie, if you want to use it, is you know it's wrong and you say it anyway with an intention to deceive. Them saying, David Gregory, that "Corker is why we have the Iran deal" is not just demonstrably false; it's a lie. And these guys hear them say it, hear it repeated, and do nothing. And McConnell says, "Well, I'm here to enforce an agenda." The senator with Wolf says, "Well, it's your job to call lies. I'm here to" come on. But, again, why are they doing it? Two out of three Republicans like Trump.
[Cillizza:] That's right.
[Cuomo:] All weighed in with all the stuff that goes along with it. So what happens next here? You could argue nothing.
[Gregory:] Well, again, it's also what are your priorities? Mitch McConnell is gritting his teeth through the Trump years and saying, "OK, I've got to work with this guy, because I want to keep control of the Senate as a Republican, and we have an opportunity, despite how erratic he is, to actually get tax reform done." Now we'll see what happens. The reality, too, is that this is basically the "never Trump" movement of the campaign happening while he's governing. Trump surmounted that obstacle during the campaign. The "never Trumpers: didn't succeed. So now, even as he's governing, he's facing some of that. If he can't get anything passed, if the Republicans lose the Senate and the House, then we have a new reality, because then you start asking questions about whether Trump in re-election can actually keep the party together. Right now, there's enough Republican leaders who say, "Yes, we can," and these others are going to be marginalized.
[Camerota:] OK. David Gregory, Chris Cillizza, thank you very much for the analysis. So how does Senator Jeff Flake feel this morning? He joins us live here on NEW DAY in just minutes.
[Cuomo:] All right. We're following breaking news, as well. Senate Republicans reversing another Obama-era policy late last night. The Senate is making it easier for banks to avoid any type of litigation. Right now, you have consumer protections that allow for arbitration clauses to be upset and that you can sue. No more. CNN chief business correspondent Christine Romans joins us now with more. I thought we were supposed to be about the little guy in this administration.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] How do you reconcile that with this?
[Romans:] It's a really good question, because the president wants to loosen Wall Street regulations, Chris, and this is his biggest win yet; and it's a blow to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Gone now is a CFPB rule banning forced arbitration clauses. That's in the fine print of contracts for banks, for credit cards and other financial companies. They force customers to resolve any disputes outside a courtroom, blocking them from banding together in class- action lawsuits. The Republicans call the rule an overstep by the CFPB head Richard Cordray, who was, by the way, appointed by President Obama. And they claim the class action lawsuits, they just benefit trial lawyers. They don't help consumers. Consumer advocates fiercely disagree. They say that arbitration favors companies. All the leverage is with the big financial companies. Here's an example I'll give you. Wells Fargo, victims have had trouble suing because of arbitration clauses. This new rule that was just killed was only issued in July. The CFPB, the government watchdog here, found that customers struggled to open arbitration cases against their banks. The power is with the big financial firms, not with the little guy Alisyn.
[Camerota:] So interesting, Christine. Thank you very much for all of that. So a past president and three Republican senators publicly denouncing President Trump in just the last week. So what does the future look like for this divided party? We debate that, next.

[Baldwin:] One firefighter says he doesn't know when he will see his family again. He says some nights they sleep sitting up right as the flames spread right outside their truck. And now a section of those flames has become the biggest ever in the history of California. This is happening in northern California, on top of the 15 other wild fires burning right now. So, let me just show you this map. This so-called Mendocino Complex fire is the largest. It's two fires combined into one, nearly 300,000 acres scorched, and it has doubled in size in just a couple of days. On the front line, 14,000 firefighters. Day after day, night after night these men and women have been tirelessly battling these dangerous fires. And someone who knows exactly what they are going through and what's at stake is former firefighter Brendan McDonough. Back in the 2013 during the Yarnell Hill fire in Phoenix, he lost all 19 of his friends and fellow firefighters. They were like his family. And so, he is the sole survivor of the Granite Mountain Hot Shot Crew. And he is good enough to join me right now. Brendan, thank you so much for being with us. And thank you so much just for your service and your sacrifice. You know, in the state of Arizona. Can you just first help our viewers understand the magnitude of being on the ground and fighting a fire like this?
[Brendan Mcdonough, Former Yarnell Firemen:] I think the best way we can describe it is the news has done a great job of giving insight of what these fires are looking like. But to understand what the men and women are actually carrying, what their weighing. You know, that's a 45-pound pack, that's chain saws, tools, and they're working, you know, 16 plus hour shifts weeks at a time, like you had said. And so, the work is grueling. And the time frame and the pace that they're carrying it's at a high rate and they're just asked to do a lot. And they're continuing to show up and continuing to do the job that they're called to do. I just really commend them for everything they're doing right now. Lot of these men have been doing since March. They started fighting fires in March. And so, here we are in August and there's kind of no end to the sight of the season so far.
[Baldwin:] What is it like when you're going out to fight such a massive fire and you don't know when you'll see your family again?
[Mcdonough:] It's tough. It's tough. You know, it's definitely a motivating factor to put in the work and put in the effort. For me personally when I was out on the line, I would think of the families that were impacted by this and I would remember why we're out here. There's a bigger purpose than just myself. Every moment that you do get to talk to your family, you do get to talk to your children you really cherish and take the time to be able to do that. I remember there were nights where I had opportunities to read my daughter a book, I'd carry children's books with me, so I could read to her. I know a lot of moms and dads that are out there right now are really going through kind of the ringer this gauntlet of doing this since March. And kind of going back and forth and being pushed to the limit. Just having every opportunity that they can, they take to spend with their family when they do go home and do have a minute to talk. It's pretty tough. But we keep on our minds, you know, the bigger purpose and that's helping our communities. It needs to be done. And so, I really commend those that are out there right now making that sacrifice.
[Baldwin:] It's incredible thinking of you or anyone carrying children's books to the line, you know, just to have on the phone and read them to your kids back home. What so far, we know that these fires have claimed two firefighters and I know that's a loss you know deeply. How do you mourn the loss of a family member yet keep going back to this dangerous work?
[Mcdonough:] So, we've actually lost a handful of firefighters recently. We lost a captain on a hot shot crew. We lost two dozer bosses and a firefighter from Redding department as well. And it's really difficult. It's a tough time. You know, the bonds that are created out there, bonded over a period of hard work and grueling work and it takes a team. You know, it takes a family to accomplish what they're accomplishing. So, to be able to stay motivated and to be able to have that compassion and to be able to kind of put things aside and know that there's a bigger purpose to this is kind of what they're going through right now. And it's not easy. But a lot of these men and women to go back out on the line of losing someone, so they have things in place to where they get to go home for a few days and kind of just take some time off. But they're right back at it. It's not I wish I had the best answer, but I know they're doing the best job with it.
[Baldwin:] No, I know they are and we're thinking about them, these men and the women. Brendan, thank you for everything you've done as well. Brendan McDonough, a pleasure. Thank you.
[Mcdonough:] Thank you. Appreciate it.
[Baldwin:] You got it. Back to our breaking news, Rick Gates being cross-examined right now in the Paul Manafort fraud trial. We know President Trump is watching this very, very closely, so we'll talk about what his take away might be coming up.

[Berman:] All right, time now for the "Five Things to Know for Your New Day." Number one, the fate of more than 2,300 children taken away from parents at the border, it remains unclear after President Trump reversed his policy by executive order. The order does not address exactly when and how these families will be reunited.
[Hill:] CNN has learned President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are planning to meet this summer. It's expected to happen in mid-July around Mr. Trump's trip to the U.K. and the NATO summit. One official says Vienna has been discussed as a likely location.
[Berman:] Protests in Pennsylvania after an unarmed teenager was gunned down by police. Seventeen-year-old Antwon Rose was shot several times in east Pittsburgh after police say he ran from a car allegedly connected to a shooting.
[Hill:] The wife of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is facing fraud charges. The indictment alleges Sarah Netanyahu misused nearly $100,000 to pay for hundreds of meals from gourmet restaurants in violations of rules at the prime minister's restaurants.
[Berman:] New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern gives birth to a baby girl, becoming the second elected leader in history to have a child while in office. The baby shares a birthday with the first leader, former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.
[Hill:] For more on the "Five Things to Know," just head to cnn.comnewday with the latest.
[Berman:] All right, we're going to continue CNN's series "Champions for Change." Bill Weir takes us inside an organization trying to find homes for the homeless.
[Hill:] Looking forward to that. First, though, how you can treat yourself to ice cream even if you can't have milk. Here's today's "Food as Fuel."
[Lisa Drayer, Cnn Health Contributor:] If you love ice cream but can't have dairy, good news, you have plenty of options these days. Frozen desserts made from soy, almonds, cashew and coconut milk have gone mainstream and can taste as delicious as the real thing. If you're watching your weight or concerned about heart health, you can find option that's fit within your daily calorie and fat budgets. For instance, this soy milk dessert has only 120 calories and zero grams of saturated fat per serving. But not all non-dairy treats are created equal and they may not be any healthier than the traditional version. Take coconut milk based desserts. Generally speaking, they're higher in saturated fat, which raises bad cholesterol. So pay attention to labels. Look for those with less than 200 calories, 16 grams of sugar and 3 grams of saturated fat per serving. And keep an eye on portion sizes. They're typically only a half cup, or about the size of a light bulb.

[Becky Anderson, Cnn:] Right now, terror in London and an earth-shaking bridge catastrophe in Italy. Two breaking stories for you. We're connecting you to both this hour with incredible CNN access and footage. Welcome to our special edition of CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson. And we begin here in the British capitol outside Parliament just behind me here. No one was killed or critically injured. But there are a lot of questions this hour after a man smashed a car into a barrier. Keep your eye on the car here. Swerving and veering off as pedestrians jump out of the way. Now the driver is being held on suspicion of terrorism. But who he is and what was he hoping to gain? Well we'll get you live to the scene in just a moment. First, though, unimaginable horror during a deadly bridge collapse in Genoa, in Italy.
[Unidentified Male:] Oh dear, oh dear.
[Anderson:] You can sense the panic and disbelief of onlookers in this footage. It was recorded as the tragedy was unfolding. Sending rubble plunging down on to vehicles below. A major rescue operation is now under way. But just in the last few minutes, officials now say at least 25 people are dead. Police say a violent storm brought this bridge down. CNN's Nic Robertson is on the scene now. He was only a few minutes away from crossing the bridge himself when it came down. And that, Nic, means that we are in place to connect our viewers to this event like nobody else. Just describe what you understand to have happened and what is going on around you.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] Well, Becky, in the last few minutes I've seen rescue workers with what appear to be search- and-rescue dogs walking away from the scene, as well as sort of pace of activity here
[Anderson:] Nic, nothing short of catastrophic. I'm going to stick with you, viewers, apologies for the quality of this line. We're going to stick with Nic though, because this is important. Nic, there will be so many questions now being asked about simply why this happened. You've talked about the inclement weather conditions. What else do we know at this point?
[Robertson:] Well, this is a bridge that is a vital link for tourists in this
[Anderson:] All right. It does sound as if we have lost Nic, but you'll get the sense, viewers, fantastic analysis by Nic, who was literally on that road heading for that bridge, just moments before it collapsed. As I say many, many questions now being asked. What we do know is that 25 have lost their lives and as Nic now describes it, it certainly looks to him like this is now a recovery effort for bodies rather than them still possibly looking for survivors. Well let's get you back to that suspected terror attack here just behind me in London and the search for answers. It's just after 4:00 in the afternoon now. At 7:37, the scene here quite different. The Prime Minister huddling with her security chiefs this hour after a car slammed into a barrier outside Parliament at just after half past 7:00 this morning. Nobody was seriously injured. The driver is being held on suspicion of terrorism. CNN's Erin McLaughlin is on the scene where she's been following all of this literally as it unfolded. And aside from knowing that there is one man in his mid-20s being held on suspicion of terrorist activities, what more do we know at this point?
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Becky, we're getting a better understanding of how this suspected attack unfolded in the earlier hours of this morning. It was around 7:37 a.m. when a man believed to be in his late 20s driving a silver Fiesta Ford through this area crashed into a security barrier. Surveillance footage shows him careening around Parliamentary Square and now that they've lifted sort of the outer security coordinate had surrounded this area, we're starting to get a better picture of what exactly happened. Let me show you, we believe that based on the surveillance footage he drove down this road just over that way is Parliament Square. The surveillance footage shows him sort of careening to the right of the Square. Before then taking a sharp turn to the left. As you can see behind me, that is where it's believed he crashed into the barrier after hitting two pedestrians who were not serious injured. But you can see there, that they've set up security screens blocking our view of what exactly is going on. But we understand that that is an active crime scene, a forensic teams are there. We've seen drones, surveilling the area as well. So, we are getting a better sense of how it happened. But what we don't know is why. Authorities have yet to formally identify the suspect in question. And they say that they're working to determine the motive. Take a listen to what the assistant police commissioner had to say about that earlier today.
[Assistant Police Commissioner:] Given that this appears to be a deliberate act, the method and this being an iconic site, we are treating it as a terrorist incident and the investigation is being led by officers from the counterterrorism command.
[Mclaughlin:] So, they're treating this as a terrorist incident. Because the way the apparent attack happened. The way he was driving appeared to be deliberate. The method of the suspected attack as well as the fact that this is an iconic area of London. All of that leading them to believe that this could be terrorism related. But again, no definitive motive as of yet Becky.
[Anderson:] Sadiq Khan, the mayor tweeting earlier on this afternoon and speaking to CNN. Saying that London will not be cowed by this sort of attack. We do know that these streets pretty much, aside from this one, which is right outside the Houses of Parliament here. These streets are open again. London is moving again. The transport system is moving. People are able to get home. It's the commuter time, of course, or certainly moving towards it. And London, very much on the move now. But authorities here will be alarmed that once again, Erin, in this part of town, in front of what is such an iconic building that this sort of event was allowed to happen. Correct?
[Mclaughlin:] Absolutely, Becky. And there are echoes here of what happened some 17 months ago. March 2017 when a man driving a van plowed into a crowd of people just around the corner from here in Westminster Bridge. Injuring 50, killing five before proceeding down this very road and stabbing and killing a security officer right outside of Westminster. So, authorities here are familiar with this kind of apparent attack. And that's perhaps why they reacted so swiftly this morning. They arrested the individual. Again, a man who has not been formally identified by authorities at gun-point and are taking him for questioning. But authorities are saying he's not cooperating. At that point Becky.
[Anderson:] Erin McLaughlin there just down the road from where we are here. You're looking at images there of cyclists who were caught up in that fray. I must repeat once again, a couple of people taken to hospital, one treated at the scene. No critical or life-threatening injuries. Thankfully in what is being described as a terror attack earlier on this morning here in London. Still to come tonight, the U.S. is now sanctioning allies as well as adversaries. We're in three countries bearing the brunt. That is up next.

[Burnett:] Breaking news. Polls just closing in Georgia, several high-stakes runoffs tonight with big implications for the midterms. Trump, himself, weighing in on the governor's race in Georgia today, tweeting, "Today is the day to vote for Brian Kemp, will be great for Georgia, full endorsement." The Republican winner facing Democrat Stacy Abrams, who would be America's black female governor if she won. Tonight's polls closing as a top election forecaster is shifting, 17 House races away from sure Republican wins. That would be a sea change. Larry Sabato's crystal ball at the University of Virginia Center for Politics is moving eight House races to toss-up. These were all eight of them lean Republican, now in pure toss-up. Is there a blue wave coming? I'm using that word, because that's what a Republican is calling it today. I want to go now to Kyle Kondik, Managing Editor at Sabato's Crystal Ball. He's the one who wrote this piece today on the shift, April Ryan, American Urban Radio Networks' White House Correspondent and our Senior Political Analyst, Mark Preston. Kyle, you did the research here. We're talking about 17 races shifting, eight of them specifically going from lean Republican to toss-up. What's causing the shift?
[Kyle Kondik, Managing Editor, Sabato's Crystal Ball:] Well, I think it's big picture factors and also individual factors in these districts. So, you know, for much of this cycle, we've seen that, you know, the President's approval ratings have been kind of in the low 40s. The House generic ballot, a national poll that asks the voters whether they're going to ask for a Democrat or a Republican in their respective house district. It's been around a lead of about, democratic lead of about six to eight points, which is about in the range where you would think that the Democrats would have a decent chance to win the House. We just got the second quarter fund-raising reports from the FEC for April through June. Dozens of House Republicans got out-raised by their Democratic challengers. Some of those races are among the ones that we moved today. And also, history just suggests that, you know, when a party takes control of the White House, as the Republicans did in 2016, there's often a price to be paid more that. And 36 of the 39 midterms since the civil war, the president's party has lost ground in the House. So you put all of that stuff together, and you could start to see how the Democrats could net the 23 seats they need to win control of the US House.
[Burnett:] All right. So there, you know, there's lot of Democrats who are really thrilled to hear you say that. April, I want to mention those. Some Democrats I've spoken to, they say, look, you know, the number Kyle puts out there, 23, and they go, gosh, we might only get five. They're terrified that they just don't have the excitement and the enthusiasm to deliver on what Kyle is saying could be possible. Do you think Democrats can actually pull this off?
[April Ryan, White House Correspondent, American Urban Radio Networks:] Let me say this, Erin. Politics is personal. And for this political season, it is about how personal is the politics for you, and if you go to the polls. This is just a moment, a straw holes moment of the time. We've still got a little ways to go. And if the elections were to happen today, there's a lot of discontent. And people are revved up to go. But what happens in November for some of those elections in November? You know, and I think about how the GOP, it's in favor for the GOP, when you have white people who white GOP members who like to go to the midterms. They are known to go to the midterm elections. Also, there are issues of the economy. It's doing well. Also, you have gerrymandering.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[A. Ryan:] So you've some things that are in favor of the Republicans, but then you have Democrats who are very upset about this climate. The NAACP is talking about vote now because of the atmosphere of hate. You've got people who are on the immigration issue who are very upset. Again, going back to the issue, the politics is personal. And how personal is it for you? It determines if you go to the polls and vote.
[Burnett:] So and that's the crucial question, mark. Now, you know, Kyle is going through some of the numbers he's been running, right, for the House. On the Senate side, a senior democratic senator told me recently that he thinks Democrats can take the Senate. He thinks it's going to be 51. Possible?
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Look, anything is possible in this political environment. I think that is rather ambitious, given where these races are playing out. Ten of these races are playing out in states that Donald Trump won by double digits. Let's just take three of those away, such as Michigan and a couple of others. And you're looking at incumbents that are in very, very difficult races right now.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Preston:] Democratic incumbents, meaning Bill Nelson down in Florida, Joe Manchin in West Virginia, Heidi Heitkamp out in North Dakota, Joe Donnelly in Indiana. The reason why we say is
[Burnett:] By the way, he has all of those as wins. Of course.
[Preston:] He has all of those as wins. And they're all different states, mind you. So Trump country isn't just in the middle of the country, right, Erin?
[Burnett:] That's right.
[Preston:] It is pockets around and that is going to be difficult for Senate Democrats.
[Burnett:] So, Kyle, this whole issue of the blue wave, right? That I was referring to Republican Representative Kevin Yoder. He's from Kansas. He told David Drucker of the Washington Examiner about his campaign saying, quote, "My assumption is, we could be heading towards a 500-year flood, a Democratic wave." Now, those are some big those are some big words. What do you say, Kyle? Realistic?
[Kondik:] Well, look, you know, Yoder is an interesting case because he's one of the 25 Republicans that represent a district that Hillary Clinton won in the last presidential election. You know, in 2010, we had the Republicans pick up 63 seats, but part of the reason for that was that the Democrats were defending almost 50 seats that John McCain had won in the previous presidential election. So I mentioned that there were just 25 of those so-called crossover seats. And so, the Republicans aren't as exposed in 2018 as the Democrats were in 2010. However, you know, if things break right for the Democrats, I think you could see them pick up significantly more than the 23 seats they need, you know, 30, 40, maybe even 45 seats, something like that. And I think that would probably classify from Yoder's perspective, as sort of a huge wave.
[Burnett:] It sure would. And I just have to say, you know, when I'm hearing the Democrat strategist who was telling me, what if we only get five seats from the 23. And you're saying possibly 45. I mean, it's amazing how uncertain the situation is. And as we have this poll closing tonight, Mark, in Georgia, right? There is this whole side story that's become much more of a front story than the candidates want. One Georgia Republican making waves that state representative Jason spencer, who actually went on an episode of Sacha Baron Cohen's new series. In which Cohen post an Israeli terrorism expert convinced Spencer that saying the N-word would help for terrorist. This actually happened, this is actually real. Let me play it for you.
[Sacha Baron Cohen, British Actor:] In America, there is one forbidden word. It is the N-word. Now, I am going to be the terrorist. You have three seconds to attract attention. Go.
[Jason Spencer, Georgia Lawmaker:] [Inaudible].
[Cohen:] Are you crazy? The N-word is nuni, not this word. This word is disgusting.
[Burnett:] And then Spencer pulled his pants down after being told it would scare terrorists.
[Cohen:] We say in the Mossad I mean, not in the Mossad, if you want to win, you show some skin.
[Spencer:] OK.
[Cohen:] OK, show it to me. Now, try to touch me.
[Spencer:] I'll touch you. I'll touch you with my buttocks. I'll touch you. Drop the gun or I'll touch you. USA.
[Burnett:] OK, yes. I see the look on your face, Mark. I can see the look in your face.
[Preston:] USA, how about that?
[Burnett:] The two gubernatorial candidates here, Kemp and Kagel, in this runoff today, have condemned everything about this, right? But yet they were forced to talk about it.
[Preston:] Yes, they were. I mean, look, this is very embarrassing. This is a terrible thing right now for the Republican Party, because you have one individual who is a Republican, who is now saying and doing things that cast terrible aspirations upon the Republican Party as a whole, OK? So that in itself I should point out that that state rep is not somebody who was necessarily well liked in Georgia amongst his colleagues, somebody who had lost a primary and is going to be out of office in five months anyway. So good chance we won't see him around. But I will say this, though. Talk about this Georgia race, you know, we'll get a Republican nominee tonight, wow! Because you have two candidates right now on the Republican side that are running so far to the right. I mean, they've talked about Kemp has talked about driving around the state of Georgia in his pickup truck and picking up illegal immigrants and taking them back to Mexico. So you have that. And then as you pointed out at the top, Stacy Abrams, who is this progressive firebrand that could be the first African-American governor ever elected. It's amazing.
[Burnett:] It's amazing. And the choice is stark, just to be clear, when you talk about Kemp driving around in his pick up truck, picking up illegal immigrants we should say, again, Trump came out today with a full-throated endorsement of Kemp. April, pretty incredible though that you have a video like that. That became that the Republicans candidates, where we're going to get the results here momentarily, had to talk about.
[Ryan:] Yes. You know, this is Sacha Baron Cohen just played on the climate right now. And for some business, what they want. This is the political incorrectness that we're seeing from the head. And, you know, this candidate felt it was OK. But, you know, it comes out of state of Georgia, where you have a potential African woman to be the new governor of that state, turning this to Stacey Abrams, turning it purple. We're not in a moment in 2018 where we should be doing that kind of thing. We're going backwards instead of forwards.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you all so very much. I appreciate it. And next, the alleged Russian spy, Maria Butina's cryptic message to Russia after Trump win. What did she mean? Four lawyers is my guest. Plus, our special OUTFRONT series Bill Weir tonight on the ground in Alaska, at the town at the heart of one of Trump's most controversial moves.
[Bill Weir, Cnn:] There are three top conversations most days, polar bears, the weather and Donald Trump. Are you a fan of President Trump?

[Vanier:] The United States top general is now in South Korea to address the looming missile threat from North Korea. Joint Chief Chairman, Joseph Dunford, will meet with South Korea President, Moon Jae-in, to discuss the situation. Also interesting, the U.S. defense secretary and secretary of state wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal about the North Korea tensions. Part of it reads, "We're replacing the failed policy of "strategic patience," which expedited the North Korean threat with a new policy of strategic accountability. The object of our peaceful pressure campaign is the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." They go on to warn that, "Any attack will be defeated, and any use of nuclear weapons will be met with an effective and overwhelming response." CNN's Paula Hancocks joins me now live from Seoul. Let's talk about both of those things, Paula, and let's start with the op-ed. It was just a few days ago that the U.S. president uttered some really unprecedented and war-like remarks, you know, about the military being locked and load, about the fire and the fury. And now a few days later, his top security officials are actually saying, well, we're prioritizing diplomacy.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] Yes. It's interesting, Cyril. I think certainly from here; this is being read as somewhat of a pullback or a confirmation that actually diplomacy comes first. All this talk about military options, all the fairly bellicose rhetoric we heard from the U.S. President, Donald Trump, about the military options being locked and loaded. That has appeared to be tempered somewhat with this op-ed that we saw from the two top diplomats because they are focusing on the fact that they want diplomatic and economic reforms to work. They want these issue to actually get them to the point of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Now, of course, whether or not North Korea is willing to give up its nukes, we know full-well that they have no intention of doing so, at least that's what they've said publicly. But what we're hearing from the U.S. side now is at least that, that they want to focus more on sanctions, they want to focus on the troops sorry, the alliances around the region, and to make sure that the region knows that the U.S. is on the same page as Japan and South Korea, and in some ways as China that diplomacy comes first. But of course, they also specify that the military option is there, Cyril.
[Vanier:] Yes. As if underlying that, the top U.S. general just landed in Seoul. What is going to be discussing with the South Koreans?
[Hancocks:] That's right. Yes, General Joseph Dunford is here in Seoul. He's just met with the South Korea defense minister. He's also going to meet with his Korean counterpart. Later today, he'll meet with the South Korean President Moon Jae-in, and we expect some kind of a readout press conference after that. What we're hearing from the Defense Ministry, certainly in the press briefing this morning was that they wanted to make sure that they discuss the topic of deterring and effectively responding against the North Korean's nuclear and military threat very general terms. They will be talking about North Korea. They will certainly, from the South Korean's side, be hoping to hear from General Dunford that the alliance is strong that the South Koreans will have a say in what happens if there is any kind of response to North Korea. Certainly, that's been the concern in the past that put the U.S. unilaterally at, and with this kind of meetings, it does
[Vanier:] Paula Hancocks, reporting live from Seoul, South Korea. Thank you very much. And the war of words between the U.S. and North Korea reached a fever-pitch as we were saying this past week. But at the Korean DMZ, the Demilitarized Zone, an international group of musicians are trying to send a different message. Alexandra Field has more on their mission for peace.
[Alexandra Field, Cnn International Correspondent:] If the sound carries beyond these walls
[Patrick Sanguineti, Harvard-radcliffe Orchestra:] You look around over these mountains after this, it is really a beautiful place.
[Field:] It will take you to a beautiful place, and estranged place.
[Sanguineti:] Before coming here, like, this seemed like a really scary place. I mean, with the barbed wire, like the tank traps.
[Field:] A dark place.
[Sanguineti:] They tell you not to hop the fence, you know, don't do anything stupid. You know, the reality is that it is there is like a lot of anxiety heads up here.
[Field:] Mostly though, there is the pain they've known almost forever now.
[Unidentified Female:] My heart is boom, boom, boom, boom. Why we can't go there? Part of my heart; it's something very painful.
[Field:] The idea seemed like a stretch. A senior choir, a South Korean youth orchestra, a group of Harvard students in concert, during the time of rapidly rising tension right on the edge of North Korea.
[Sanguineti:] This is really scary for a lot of people not just us. Our own family was contacting us, making sure that we're OK with what's actually going to happen.
[Field:] As the war of words between the U.S. and North Korea gets ever wilder, for a moment, they're drowning the North. Why are you singing at the DMZ?
[Unidentified Male:] We wish for you know, to send our wishes to the North. Our wishes for reunification. That is my dream and my choir's dream as well.
[Field:] They can't go any further than this. This is one of the most heavily fortified border areas in the world. The Demilitarized Zone cuts the Korean Peninsula in half. It's 160 miles long; it's two and a half miles wide. And that's been enough to keep families permanently ripped apart. Bae Yung-Ja feels close to her husband's family in the North when she's here. She never met them, and she's already lost him.
[Unidentified Female:] Before I die, I want to hear something useful from his family.
[Field:] When the choir and the orchestra walked outside, she's looking in the right direction.
[Unidentified Female:] Music is the one way. Why can't we be together?
[Field:] For Grant Riew, who came from Harvard to be here, it's already that.
[Grant Riew, Harvard-radcliffe Orchestra:] Music is, actually, a universal language. And so, you can come to Korea. I don't speak any Korean, but I am Korean and I can sit down with all these people and be able to make music together. And you know, it's really something that everyone can personally relate to. There are some like 80-year- old people in the choir, and there's like 10-year-old children that we're playing with.
[Sanguineti:] When we started playing these folk songs, this traditional music, I had heard
[Field:] The finale is this song composed in the North when the Korea's were still one. If the sound could carry, these musicians hope it would travel back there. Alexandra Field, CNN, at the DMZ.
[Vanier:] Marking 70 years of independence and a high-priced pay for it the anniversary of India's partition after the break, stay with us.

[Tapper:] We're back with our politics lead. And the third resignation announcement from a member of Congress in just three days, following accusations of sexual misconduct again. Minutes ago, Republican Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona said he's moving up his resignation date to today. This follows his abrupt announcement last night that he would leave Congress at the end of January after learning about an ethics investigation into allegations that he had sexually harassed two former female staffers. Some background here, Franks tried to explain that he and his wife have struggled with fertility problems. They used a surrogate to give birth to their first two children, twins. They wanted more children. And, well, here's how Congressman Franks explained it. Quote: Due to my familiarity and experience with the process of surrogacy, I clearly became insensitive as to how much the discussion, as to how the discussion of such an intensely personal topic might affect others, unquote. My panel's here with me. So, it's not entirely clear how this was framed to staffers, but I think it's fair to say from the statement of the Office of Speaker Paul Ryan, he wasn't buying the explanation necessarily. And even if he believed the explanation, he thought it was highly inappropriate for a member of Congress to harangue two female staffers into bearing his children to the point that they felt uncomfortable and intimidated.
[Carpenter:] The whole thing is gross, right? Like this is gross. We have to remember that the version
[Tapper:] Not surrogacy, we should say, not surrogacy, but trying to force a staffer. Right.
[Carpenter:] So, the version of events that Trent Franks released last night, the statement, was probably the best version possible. This was coming out in his words from his office. It's going to be worse. He left immediately now. Speaker Ryan agreed. So, we have to believe this is what like I don't get. I knew the problem of sexual harassment was bad in Washington on the Hill. I honestly didn't think it was this bad.
[Tapper:] Oh, this is just the tip of the iceberg, though.
[Carpenter:] I worked in great offices that had great culture. This is unimaginable to me. I mean, truly. This is gross. Creepy. Weird.
[Tapper:] OK. A week ago I was saying how come the me-too movement as spared Congress? How come Congress has this shell and they have not been nobody's resigned, et cetera. Now, here we are, three members of Congress, Conyers, Franken and Franks, it's obviously hit Congress. But don't you think there is probably a lot more to come?
[Berg:] Oh, absolutely. No doubt about it, Jake, that this is, as you said, the tip of the iceberg. That said, I agree with Amanda. I would have expected maybe more boiler plate sexual harassment or assault. I know that sounds a little more cynical, but, I mean, as women, we've all experienced
[Carpetnter:] The groping, yes.
[Berg:] something, sure, or heard about something. But this level that we are seeing from some people like the Harvey Weinsteins of the world or now, Trent Franks, it's just outrageous. And I think, you know, it makes sense in this case that the speaker did what he did and told him to resign immediately. I think we are seeing the start of a zero tolerance era.
[Tapper:] Robby, let me ask you a different question. I want to bring it back to Roy Moore for a second, because that's obviously the pressing Senate race going on. A quote from September from Moore is getting some renewed attention today. He was asked by an African- American member of the audience when was the last time that he thought America was great? And Moore responded, quote, I think it was great at the time families were united, even though we had slavery, they cared for one another. Our families were strong. Our country had a direction. So, sometimes lost in all of this stuff about his alleged actions with young teenage girls is the fact that he says things like this.
[Mook:] That are racist, yes. It's depressing. I just the idea that you can say things like this today and not only not pay a political cost but it's almost celebrated by Steve Bannon and other people. You know, I think about John McCain in 2008 on the campaign trail when someone called Obama a Muslim. I mean, you know, you could argue that's less offensive than some of these other things that are going on and McCain stopped, corrected them and said that was wrong. George W. Bush after 911 consistently said that America was not at war with the Muslim religion, we were at war with violent extremists. I just I don't it's so irresponsible for people in power to incite other people to violence and to hatred like this. And I think I'm like a lot of people, I feel so helpless. It feels like anything we say here on this set makes no difference. We say the right thing and people just continue to do the wrong thing, and I, you know, I'm optimistic we're going to get through this. There are a lot of factors putting this into play. But it's got to stop at some point. It's not OK. It's not.
[Tapper:] I'll buy you a drink after the show. Everyone, stick around. We have a lot more to talk about. New details about just how many documents have been collected in the investigation of Russia's election meddling, election interference. It's a staggering number. We'll tell you about it, next.

[Vause:] 78 children kidnapped from a boarding school in Cameroon have been released. A military spokesman claims the hostage takers are Anglophone separatist fighters calling for independence from Cameroon's French-speaking majority government.
[Gemon Damianus, Mother Of Kidnapped Child:] War is
[Simeya Priscaline, Aunt Of Kidnapped Child:] You can imagine the stress that we've gone through for these past two days. It has been horrible. We have spent sleepless nights. We thanks the Almighty God. That's the way safe and sound.
[Vause:] Two children are still being held hostage with their principal and a teacher. A school official says the children's parents are high-ranking members of the government. A Christian woman in Pakistan is now free from jail a week after her death sentence is overturned. But her safety is still far from certain. Intelligence sources say Asia Bibi has been moved to an undisclosed location. She spent eight years on death row after being convicted of blasphemy. She won her appeal last week but has been kept in prison because she was facing threats from hard line Islamists angered by her acquittal. CNN's Sophia Saifi joins us now, live from Islamabad. So Safire what exactly do we know about, you know, her future, where she is, how they intend to deal with the, you know, the issue simply of her safety?
[Sophia Saifi, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John there is a bit of confusion here on the ground in local media concerning, you know, where Asia Bibi is. I mean we have to take into consideration that there are lots of extreme right-wing groups out for her death, you know, to kill her basically. Because of that reason late last night, we found out that the jail cell where she'd been kept for the past eight years on death row which had then become into a safe house because there had been so many protests that the country and state could not really confirm that they could keep her safe. That safe house she has now left that safe house. She's been moved to an undisclosed location and the confusion arises as whether she's still in the country or not. Now the question is, is that the TLP which is the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan, a right-wing Islamist group which shut down the country for three long days after Asia's acquittal have said that, you know, they're going to be sending in a petition to the Supreme Court preventing Asia from leaving the country, putting her on that exit control list which is Pakistan's no-fly list. Legally Asia is not on that list. But there is a petition in the works to put her on that list. There are also the consequences of the government flying her out of the country. There have been lots of western countries who kind of clamored for, you know, wanting to help her to get out, wanting to provide her asylum. But because of the many security issues around the blasphemy laws in Pakistan, considering that, you know, if anyone talks against blasphemy laws even their liable to be killed. There is a lot of sensitivity around not just Asia Bibi. Her lawyer fled to the Netherlands last week leaving her in the lurch for his own safety. He took his family with him. And you know, there is a lot of confusion. The foreign office is claiming that she is very much in the country. You know, there's been a lot of different reports coming in. But the Pakistani government is still saying that she's still very much in Pakistan but in an undisclosed location John.
[Melissa Bell, Cnn Correspondent:] Louise de Bettignies was just a young French girl from an upper class family until the outbreak of World War I a war that would make her a hero.
[Henri Claud De Bettignies, Great Nephew Of Louise De Bettignies:] There was a sense that this war was a disaster for everyone and she needed to try to contribute and to use her personality and her experience in different countries and the language and so forth and to service against the Germans.
[Bell:] At just 34, Louise posing as a peddler and using the name Alice Dubois began working for the British, spying on German positions and troop movements in northern France and passing crucial knowledge on the Allies, sometimes in the form of messages hidden inside toys and chocolate bars. Louise de Bettignies became known as the Joan of Arc of the North. And it is in the northern French city of Lille that she is best remembered with streets signs, plaques, schools and memorials like this one. It was after Lille fell that Louise began running her network of spies. [on camera]: Passing the message on to the British. One of her very last communications just before her capture by Germans warned of a massive offensive that was being planned at Verdun. [voice over]: The French military refused to believe it and just 16 months after taking Lille, the Germans kicked off one of the bloodiest battles of World War
[I. De Bettignies:] The kept my city to
[Bell:] But Louise was caught, according to her biographers, swallowing her final message before being locked away. Louise died in a German prison just before the end of the war although she was never forgotten.
[De Bettignies:] The family is
[Bell:] An armistice now being remembered 100 years on along with the sacrifices made by people like Louise de Bettignies for the allied cause and in the name of peace. Melissa Bell, CNN Paris.
[Vause:] And we're back right after this.

[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] Half past the hour on this early Saturday morning. I'm Christi Paul.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you.
[Paul:] So, the GOP health care bill to repeal and replace Obamacare passed the House, now has to pass the Senate. And that's a task some say is already dead on arrival. Senate Republicans poised to make changes to the House's provisions have created the group you see here. This group that is starting to craft the Senate's version of the plan. Notice not a female in sight there.
[Blackwell:] Yes. This group's lack of diversity is catching heat from the left. Democrats are using that and the fallout behind the bill as a strategy to win back the House or to make some advantages in 2018. Virginia's gubernatorial candidate Tom Perriello put out this attack ad. Watch.
[Tom Perriello , Virginia Gubernatorial Candidate:] Republican leaders are trying to do this to affordable health care. I'm Tom Perriello, and in Congress, I voted for Obamacare because it was wrong that a million Virginians weren't covered while insurance companies held all the power. We'll make sure this never happens in Virginia.
[Blackwell:] The bill's fate is uncertain at this point, but the question remains will the Democrats' message resonate with voters and change the GOP's future? Let's continue the conversation, bringing back CNN Politics reporter Eugene Scott and political reporter for "The Washington Post" political blog, "The Fix", Amber Phillips. As we admire Mr. Perriello's ability to get that in one take because you have one ambulance, let's talk about the message here, Eugene. Democrats believe that this will be in part the ticket to taking some advantages at least in 2018 in Congress.
[Eugene Scott, Cnn Politics Reporter:] They do. I was reading the Cook Political Report, and 20 Republican lawmakers are currently in districts that they believe now could go to the Democrats in 2018. Democrats are on a high because of this vote and really believe that things look well in their favor in addition to the fact that Obamacare is now enjoying high favorability ratings. However, one thing that they would be wise to pay attention to is that people on both sides of the aisle have said that there are quite a few issues with the Affordable Care Act, and they could use this opportunity perhaps not to just coast on these approval ratings and the Republican lawmakers' vote, but actually to pay attention to some of these criticisms and try to make the bill better.
[Blackwell:] Let's turn now to the Senate. Amber, let me pull up a tweeted out statement from Senator Lamar Alexander who is going to be heading up this 13-member working group. We've shown the photographs here, but let's look at the tweet. He says, "The Senate will finish work on our bill, but" not and "but will take the time to get it right." Seems like a backhand at the House.
[Amber Phillips, Political Reporter, Washington Post's Political Blog, "the Fix":] Yes. The Senate wants absolutely nothing to do with this House bill. They think it is absolutely toxic. Listen, Paul Ryan and you can understand why when you look at the political dynamics with the House. To get this House bill through, Paul Ryan needed to shift it to the right. He needed this group of 30 or 40 conservative members of the House Freedom Caucus, who want government like completely out of people's health care, to get on board. Managed to do that. The Senate is an entirely different beast. You have more moderate Republicans who are in states that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare. Those states would be on the hook financially, hundreds of thousands. In some of the bigger states, millions of people could lose their health care. These senators cannot face voting for that kind of legislation whereas in a House district, it's much smaller. You have people who might cheer on, you know, this kind of conservative hands off my health care legislation. The Senate does not want to touch the House legislation, and clearly they're not going to.
[Blackwell:] I mean, there is no gerrymandered state, right? So these districts can be kind of fitted to suit someone with some of the more conservative rhetoric that we've seen from some House members. Eugene, back to you. And we've shown the 13-member working group tweet out from Democratic Senator Patty Murray where she says and points out there are no women on this panel. "It matters to have women at the table, and it matters when they aren't." I mean to have no women as part of this group, especially after that what could become iconic photo from the Rose Garden this week with members of the House celebrating passage of that bill would appear to be dozens of white men exclusively behind the president, the decision not to put a woman on this panel, this working group.
[Scott:] Indeed. This is also another move after, if you recall, some of the earliest discussions about this bill actually in the White House also featured a photo that had no women on the table during a specific meeting about how this bill could affect women. I think what we will have to see Senate Republicans try to do is make the case that they are listening to the voices of women and how they will be impacted by this legislation if it gets passed, and that they truly are concerned about making health care more affordable not just for people who look like them, but people who have different needs, different pre-existing conditions than themselves that are unique to women.
[Blackwell:] And hen you consider, Amber, that two of the voices or two of the votes they're likely going to need are from two of the more moderate members of the caucus, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, two more moderate female senators who could have filled one of these seats that were occupied by two of the more moderate men. You've got Gartner of Colorado. You've got Portman of Ohio, Toomey of Pennsylvania. That could have been an easy fix important voices in this conversation.
[Phillips:] Yes, exactly. This comes across as tone deaf from Senate Republicans. I don't think they were trying to exclude women or anything, but there is an optics problem here, right? And then a politics problem as you get to exactly with the fact that the Senate can only lose two votes. This is assuming all Democrats oppose this bill, which is a very safe assumption. The Senate can only lose two votes to have some kind of legislation, whatever they come up with, pass. And right here you are excluding two moderates, two very important, powerful moderates who carry a lot of weight in the Senate from even crafting the legislation. And the fact that they happen to be women also gets to this optics problem Republicans have right now.
[Blackwell:] Eugene, we saw that the House bill went through without the CBO score being completed. We know that will come out over the next ten days to two weeks. Are we expecting that this Senate bill will go through regular rules, that there will be public hearings, that there will be some of these voices that were not included in the House legislation, some of the outside third-party advocacy groups will be consulted with?
[Scott:] Well, when they say they plan to take more time with the bill, that is the implication, I believe, to be true. But time will tell. It will certainly do Republican lawmakers a service to listen to some of the voices that believe they were not believe went unheard during the first steps when the House voted on the bill.
[Blackwell:] All right. Eugene Scott, Amber Phillips, thank you both.
[Phillips:] Thank you.
[Scott:] Thank you.
[Paul:] Well, new doubts this morning about the Trump administration's vetting process after the latest pick for army secretary suddenly withdraws his name.
[Blackwell:] Plus, North Korea accuses the U.S. of planning a detailed attack to assassinate its leader. Those accusations and the U.S. response are ahead.

[Alison Kosik, Cnn Anchor:] Did President Trump dictate the initial response to his son's meeting with a Russian lawyer? A major new report this morning that could spell further trouble for the commander-in-chief.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] And it didn't take long for the new chief of staff to make his mark. Anthony Scaramucci is out as communications chief. John Kelly putting a quick end to a whirlwind 11 days and a whirlwind 24 hours it was at the White House. Welcome back to EARLY START. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Kosik:] Good morning. I'm Alison Kosik, sitting in for Christine Romans. It's 30 minutes past the hour. And we begin with new reporting that suggests President Trump himself personally dictated the initial misleading statement about Don Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer during the campaign. According to the "Washington Post," the president insisted on a change in strategy after advisers planned to issue a truthful statement to get ahead of the original story before it broke in "The New York Times." "The Post" citing people with knowledge of the deliberations says the president dictated a statement saying his son and the Russian lawyer discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children. The statement was worked out on Air Force One on the flight home from the G20 summit in Germany.
[Briggs:] The adoption claims were later shown to be misleading. Trump Jr. even acknowledged he took the meeting because he was promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton from the Russian government. President Trump's lawyer already on the record denying the president had anything to do with crafting this statement.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Well, he didn't have anything to do with the statement that Don Jr. put out, that was being worked on with his team?
[Jay Sekulow, President Trump's Lawyer:] That's no. The statement that Don Jr. put out you talking about yesterday's, Chris?
[Cuomo:] The one over the weekend that the president's team was helping with.
[Sekulow:] That was written no, that was written by Donald Trump Jr. and I'm sure in consultation with his lawyer.
[Cuomo:] Because "The New York Times" is reporting that the president OK'd the statement.
[Sekulow:] Well, they're incorrect.
[Cuomo:] "The New York Times" is wrong?
[Sekulow:] Yes, I know. Is that shocking that sometimes they make a mistake?
[Kosik:] The extent of the president's personal intervention adding to a series of actions Trump has taken that advisers fear could place him and some members of his inner circle in legal jeopardy. There's concern that his direct involvement leaves him vulnerable to allegations of a cover-up. We should also note CNN was the first to report concern that White House aides involved in the Trump Jr. response may have exposed themselves to special counsel scrutiny.
[Briggs:] The president's son-in-law and top adviser Jared Kushner offering up a new defense to knock down claims that members of the Trump election team colluded with Russia. On Monday, Kushner spoke privately to a group of congressional interns and told them collusion could not have occurred because staffers were barely talking to each other. Quote, they thought we collided, Kushner told the interns, but we couldn't even collude with our own local offices.
[Romans:] OK. We know what Kushner told the interns because a source provided a copy of his written notes to the publication "Foreign Policy." Kushner also downplayed his failure to report more than 100 instances of travel and contacts with foreign officials on his security clearance forms which he had to update twice to include meetings with Russian officials. Kushner claims he didn't track the meetings because he didn't expect to get into politics.
[Briggs:] The days of tolerating B.S. in this White House are over, end quote. That from a source close to the Trump White House. If you don't believe it, just ask Anthony Scaramucci. His tenure as communications director ending before it really began, technically his start day was August 15th. Scaramucci lasting exactly 11 days. A White House statement saying: Mr. Scaramucci felt it was best to give chief of staff John Kelly a clean slate and ability to build his own time.
[Romans:] Sources say Kelly delivered the news in a face-to-face meeting with Scaramucci after being sworn in. They say the retired marine general thought Scaramucci lacked discipline and severely damaged his credibility after a profanity-laced tirade in "The New Yorker". And President Trump apparently agreed.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Look, the president certainly felt that Anthony's comments were inappropriate for a person in that position. I don't think that it's complicated to understand that the president felt the comments were inappropriate. I can't really explain it any further. I'm not sure what's hard.
[Briggs:] Sarah Huckabee Sanders also telling reporters that all White House staff will now report to Kelly. The president had no official comment on Scaramucci's departure but tweeted last night: A great day at the White House. Earlier, Mr. Trump had also tweeted: no chaos at the White House. Nothing to be seen here, Alison.
[Kosik:] If that was a great day, I would hate to see what a not-so- great day looks like.
[Briggs:] Well, it's funny, the word great, right? If you're making America great again, what do we mean by that if that was a great day yesterday?
[Kosik:] All right. New chief of staff John Kelly was so upset with how President Trump handled the firing of FBI Director James Comey in May that he called Comey afterward and told him he was considering resigning. That's according to two sources familiar with a conversation between the two men. They tell CNN it is not clear how serious Kelly was about stepping down from his post as secretary of homeland security. He's described as angry and hurt by the way Comey was treated.
[Briggs:] The former FBI director learned he was fired from TV news reporters as he was addressing staffers at the agency's L.A. office. Comey took a call from Kelly while he was traveling back to Washington and told him not to step down. Comey has declined to comment. The White House and Department of Homeland Security have also not responded to CNN's request for a comment.
[Kosik:] Obamacare's outlook in 2018 just got a little brighter in Ohio at least. Insurers agreed to sell policies in 19 of the 20 counties that had zero options next year. That's according to the state's department of insurance. And regulators are working to bring coverage to the last county. This cuts the number of so-called bare counties in half, ones who lack insurers on the Obamacare exchange. Eighteen counties in Nevada and Indiana are still at risk of having zero Obamacare providers next year. But the deadline is coming soon. Carriers have until late September to commit to participating in 2018. Roughly 11,000 Ohio residents were at risk after Anthem and Paramount Health Care exited the exchanges earlier this year. The insurers blamed huge losses and uncertainty of the future of Obamacare, including the continuation of federal subsidies that helped pay for low-income Americans. However, the president is currently threatening to end those payments as he pushes for the repeal of Obamacare.
[Briggs:] Yes. The key word there that you said is uncertainty. And that's what's facing the entire health care system in the United States until we see some leadership on this issue.
[Kosik:] Yes.
[Briggs:] Ahead, friends of Anthony Scaramucci aren't the only ones sad to see him leave the White House.
[Stephen Colbert, Comedian:] I guess it's time to say goodbye, Anthony Scaramucci. We hardly knew-chi.
[Briggs:] As you might imagine, a field day for the late-night hosts. Much more next.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you, Kate. And welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us. The former number two at the FBI says the president's conduct was under scrutiny in the Russia investigation long before the James Comey firing. And Andrew McCabe says congressional leaders were looped in and that they did not object. Plus, Trump confidant Roger Stone is getting hauled back to court. A federal judge now angry after Stone published her picture on social media, along with a targeting crosshairs. And, feel the Bern, take two. Bernie Sanders launches a second bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. His impact on the party's agenda is enormous, yet might he also be somehow out of step with what Democrats are looking for in 2020?
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Presidential Candidate:] Together you and I and our 2016 campaign began the political revolution. Now it is time to complete that revolution and implement the vision that we fought for.
[King:] And we begin there with Bernie Sanders and the big question raised by today's official 2020 launch, does the Democratic Party want him or just his ideas? The Vermont independent is promising this time will be different. An even bigger grassroots campaign, he says, than last time when he lost the nomination to Hillary Clinton but not before shocking the party establishment without his fundraisers and his level of support. Sanders, on CBS "This Morning," looking to prove he is up to the challenge of beating President Trump.
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Presidential Candidate:] It is absolutely imperative that Donald Trump be defeated because I think it is unacceptable and un-American, to be frank with you, that we have a president who is a pathological liar, and it gives me no pleasure to say that, but it's true. We have a president who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a xenophobe.
[King:] One giant change from the 2016 is the competition. Senator Sanders joins a crowd of historically diverse Democratic field. He's the sixth senator to announce his candidacy or to form an exploratory committee. CNN's Jeff Zeleny joins us live now in Manchester, New Hampshire. Bernie Sanders made a big mark by winning his first win against Hillary Clinton there in 2016. What about this time around, Jeff?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] John, there's no question the announcement of Bernie Sanders is the buzz in the very chilly air here in New Hampshire today. And one number stands out, he beat Hillary Clinton in the primary in 2016 by 22 percent. That was the place that launched him. This is the place that launched him. But talking with New Hampshire Democrats, talking to others, it's unclear if he is welcome in the Democratic Party this time. As you said, his ideas certainly are. There is no doubt that Bernie Sanders has had a tremendous effect on the direction of the Democratic Party. For better or for worse. We don't know the answer to that question. But there is a sense of that support here. And 13 million votes across the country. Now that is much likely to be divided among several candidates. He's now running against others who share his ideas. So the question here for Bernie Sanders, can he develop a second act? Can he win over some of the people he didn't last time? That would be older voters, African-American voters, some female voters. His crowds, if you'll remember, John, were remarkably young, promising free college for all, promising other things. So that is something that he must do. But, John, I'm also struck by something the DNC did last summer. They passed a rule which was not seen as much of a big deal at the time last summer, but they said that anyone running for president has to declare themselves as a Democrat. It was aimed at Bernie Sanders. Vermont, of course, does not have party registration. So he is running as a Democratic presidential candidate, but he will not be, I do not believe based on my conversations this morning, nearly as welcomed as he was four years ago largely because there is so many other options. John.
[King:] Jeff Zeleny on a windy day in New Hampshire. Jeff, appreciate the time and the live reporting from there. With me in studio it's a little warmer, less windy in here to share their reporting and their insights, CNN's Kaitlan Collins, Julie Hirschfeld Davis with "The New York Times," Tarini Parti with "BuzzFeed" and Elana Schor from "The Associated Press." And that is the question. There's no doubt some Democrats don't like it, but Bernie has moved the party. His ideas have moved the party. His energy has moved the party. His success on the Internet has taught people a lot of lessons about how to raise money. But did he prove something and now they say thank you and move on, or does Bernie you could argue the crowded field thing two ways. Number one, he's got a base of support, a crowded field that helps you to have your own solid base. Others, you could say, wait, this is there are more women running, there are African-Americans running, thank you very much, see you. Which is it?
[Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Congressional Correspondent, "the New York Times":] Well, I don't think we know. I mean I think that's going to be one of the big questions that Sanders will have to answer and that the other Democrats in the field will have to answer. There is no question that his ideas have sort of been adopted by a lot of the people who are already running, and there are things that four years ago you wouldn't have expected or two years ago you wouldn't have expected to hear Democrats running on. But the Trump effect has been such, it's not just Bernie Sanders, but the Trump effect has been such, I think, that, you know, things that Democrats would have shied away from making the centerpiece of their campaigns, things like Medicare for all, things like free college tuition. We hear Elizabeth Warren starting to talk about this child care plan. Things that are real big spending plans that Democrats might have shied away from before. They're running against they're going to be running against a candidate on the Republican side in President Trump, who has not been shy about proposing some incredibly big ideas, even some ideas that entail a lot of federal spending. And so I think Democrats feel like they really need to answer in kind and be just as bold and be just as dramatic. And I think that is sort of pushing them towards some of the ideas that Bernie Sanders espoused in the last cycle. But they may be some of these other candidates may be more able to push those forward given the demographics certainly have changed as well.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] I also think it will be interesting to see what the other candidates do, the way they talk about the president. Because you see Bernie Sanders saying the president is a racist, saying he's xenophobic, saying all of these thing about the president outright, listing what he believes the president is. So it will be interesting to see if those other candidates try to match his rhetoric and talk about the president as bluntly as he does, or if they try to moderate their language a little bit. We've already seen a Trump reaction from this because the Trump campaign has only put out two statements on two candidates who are running for office, even though there have been several Democrats who have declared that they're going to run. Elizabeth Warren and then today they put out a statement on Bernie Sanders going ahead and following the president's strategy to frame the 2020 election around socialism, saying that America is not going to be a socialist country. And they were more than happy when Bernie Sanders entered the race to put out a statement going ahead and laying out those stakes.
[Elana Schor, National Political Reporter, Associated Press:] But to that point, you know, there are other candidates who see Bernie's entry into the race as a good thing for them. Cory Booker sees a really sharp contrast. Booker's message is one of unity. He deliberately did not call the president a racist. So he can draw a pretty bright line between his style, which may appeal to more independent, swing-leaning voters, and Sanders' style. Even Elizabeth Warren is probably saying, oh, Bernie Sanders gives me a great opportunity to draw a contrast. I believe in capitalism. He's a socialist. I'm not.
[King:] And with that the part to me is interesting how this plays out in a crowded field. Who wants the lanes? If you're Amy Klobuchar, you say, I'm more centrist. Great, the more liberals the better. You take the centrist spot. If you're Mike Bloomberg, you're still thinking about it, you say, sorry, Amy Klobuchar, I'm coming in to try to take the centrist spot. Sanders gets the difference. He knows this time he's going to have at least a half a dozen women running after 2018, which was viewed as the year of the woman. He gets you have two black candidates running for the Democratic nomination, the African-American vote in the Democratic primaries is critical. Listen to this on Vermont Public Radio today. He understands the field. Still trying to make his mark.
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Presidential Candidate:] We have got to look at candidates, you know, not by the color of their skin, not by not by their sexual orientation or their gender, and not by their age. I mean I think we have got to try to move us toward a non-discriminatory society which looks at people based on their abilities, based on what they stand for.
[King:] It's an interesting way of saying, don't count me out because I'm an older, straight white male running for the Democratic nomination.
[Davis:] Right. And the only you know, the only one right now, you know. It's just the field has changed so much and I think he does understand that he's going to have to answer that question, but it is another point of contrast for the other candidates without having to say a word just by their very presence, you know, you know that Cory Booker and Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren look different and sound different from Bernie Sanders. And that's going to be a challenge that he's going to have is to sort of explain to voters why, you know, this is the right person for 2020. Schor: But in addition to that, black voters also had a real issue with Bernie Sanders in 2016, in part because they perceived him as really obsessed with economic inequality, but not to attuned to racial inequality. And these comments are going to stoke some debate.
[King:] Right, and he he alleges he's gotten the lesson. And we have seen him down working South Carolina. We'll see this as how it plays out. Do you learn the lessons of the last time? One great advantage he has is he's been around the track. He's been bruised as a presidential candidate. You get all candidates get knocked down. You learn the lessons. You learn what you did right and learn what you did wrong. One thing he did right last time, and this will be a test to see whether he's kept a level of support. Look at the fundraising here. This is through June, the end of June in 2016. Bernie Sanders got out of the race in June. It takes a while to count the money. Yes, Hillary Clinton outraised him $275 million for her, but did anybody think at the beginning of the last campaign that running against the Clinton juggernaut, Bernie Sanders could raise $235 million? I mean he shocked the party. Now, you can make the case it was one-on-one. You know, running you're it's just one-on-one. Democrats are always looking for a fight. Or you can make the case, this guy proved a lot of people wrong.
[Tarini Parti, White House Reporter, "buzzfeed News":] He did. And, I mean, small dollar fundraising, it was really Bernie Sanders in 2016 that showed the Democratic Party and Republicans that this is something that they can work on. You know, for years presidential candidates have been courting big donors. They haven't really even thought about the small dollar fundraising basis much. And now Bernie Sanders is sort of showing the way on this front. And we also actually for a candidate who campaigned on campaign finance as one of his core messages, he actually did have an outside group that he created when he, you know, when he quit the when he didn't get the nomination that has also been fundraising and really putting out his message in the years in between. So he's had this sort of campaign in waiting thanks to his small dollar fundraising that's been there, you know, for the last two years.
[King:] We won't know this for almost a year, but do the changes impact Bernie Sanders? We know there's a more crowded field. We know there's a more diverse field. We also know that Iowa is changing the rules of the caucuses. Hillary Clinton won in Iowa, but it's a liberal state. You would think it would be a place where Bernie get in charge but they're going to change the rules of the caucuses to allow a broader participation. Then there was, as Jeff Zeleny noted, the Democratic National Committee, you know, essentially passing a new policy saying you have to be a Democrat. If there are a lot of Democrats, I suspect, in a debate, and Kirsten Gillibrand said this offhand a couple weeks ago, going to turn to Bernie and say, great, but you're an independent. If you know, help the Democrats. Become a Democrat. Does that matter?
[Collins:] Well, that would be a big question. I think actually that could mirror part of what we saw in 2016 with Donald Trump, that when they asked everyone at one of the debates, if you don't win the nomination, do you say that you won't run as an independent? And Donald Trump didn't raise his hand. So the question will be, is Bernie Sanders fitting into that mold in this race and, you know, how does that how does that work out with all of these other candidates? And is he still able to hold onto that anti-establishment group of voters that he was able to illicit so much support from?
[Parti:] I think, on the flipside, it also means that every other candidate gets asked, are you a socialist?
[King:] Right.
[Parti:] Are you a Democratic socialist, which is what we saw with Kamala Harris just yesterday getting asked that in New Hampshire. And then they are forced to respond, especially since the president is sort of trying to frame the entire Democratic Party broadly as socialists.
[King:] I would say this is the beginning. A lot of people are saying, you know, he had his shot. His time is past. Let's not repeat the mistake of the last campaign. To borrow a phrase, do not missunderestimate him. We will see where we go. Up next, beware of what you post on Instagram these days, especially if your name's Roger Stone.

[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] the way the city has it operating like many cities, they were able to alert the hospitals that these that this large number of casualties was going to come to the hospital and because of that they were prepared and they were able to save as many lives as they could Brooke?
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] Amazing. Stephanie, thank you so much. I'm glad you reiterated the point. They need blood. Please donate blood if you're in the area, specifically, if you have O-negative blood. That is really the prized possession at the moment in Las Vegas. Let's go back to Joseph Ostunio, who is standing by live. We were cut off by the White House briefing. Thank you so much for your patience.
[Joseph Ostunio, Witness:] Glad to be here.
[Baldwin:] So you were telling me about your friend. She'd been shot in the shoulder. The doctor couldn't get the bullet out so presumably for the rest of her life she will have this piece of evidence in her body of this horrific, horrific moment. When did she where were you and when did she realize she had been hit?
[Ostunio:] We were near the stage when the shooting broke out. We thought it was fireworks and then shortly after Jason Aldean went on stage we fled, and as we were fleeing she kept complaining about a pain that she had and she was heavy breathing. I thought she was hyperventilating, but I checked her body regardless and I could not find a wound on her and we kept moving and we're lucky we got out.
[Baldwin:] How did you get out? I understand at some points there were ten-foot high walls. It was hard for a lot of people.
[Ostunio:] We hopped the ten-foot wall to get out.
[Baldwin:] You hopped a ten-foot wall to get out with your friend with a gunshot wound.
[Ostunio:] I don't I she must have been going off pure adrenaline. I'm amazed that she got over the wall, but there were people helping us and we couldn't have made it out without the help that we got.
[Baldwin:] Can you just talk to me about it was law enforcement, you know, and ultimately first responders and it was concert goers, grabbing people and throwing them in pickup trucks and grabbing garbage trucks and tell me about the actions of heroism that you saw.
[Ostunio:] There were acts of heroism everywhere, and somebody actually was driving us to the emergency room, but we couldn't get out of the strip because it was barricaded. Luckily there was an ambulance that pulled over to the side any I got out of the car and they took my friend.
[Baldwin:] Help me understand, we were talking about 22,000 people. This is the end of this huge country music festival. I mean, was it all kind of different ages and were there a fair amount of children? It was a family-friendly event, and yes, there were children there. Your friend went to the hospital and at what point did this sink in and you realized it wasn't fireworks and it was a mad man hanging out of a hotel window?
[Ostunio:] I mean, I don't think we knew where the shots were coming we knew they weren't inside the venue, and it was pretty obvious because it sounded like fireworks in the distance. It took us a while to realize they were actually gunshots. It wasn't until Jason Aldean went on stage that panic ensued and it was like a war zone. People were just dropping to the ground and running.
[Baldwin:] And then just lastly, if you can hear me. I know that you're near the airport. Was there a security perimeter for concert goers? Did you have to have bags checked?
[Ostunio:] There were bag checks, there were pat-downs and metal detectors on them if they needed them, but I was patted down when I walked into the venue that day.
[Baldwin:] It's, like, all of you all did the right things and it was this man, Joseph Ostunio, I'm so sorry. And I hope your friend is going to be OK. Thank you so much for the time. I appreciate it.
[Ostunio:] You're very welcome.
[Baldwin:] We just heard from the White House moments ago there. We will be hearing or seeing the president and the first lady leading a moment of silence from the South Lawn in the wake of the murders in Las Vegas. We will take that live 10 minutes from now. Also ahead, my next guest is a mother who was at that country music festival with her 14-year-old daughter. They had won tickets through their local radio station. Where were they? What did they see? How did they feel? That's coming up. And we will start to piece together how this shooting unfolded and what eventually led police to this suspect, to the shooter on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Hotel. A smoke alarm playing a key role here. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You are watching CNN's special live coverage.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] President Trump takes his assault on law enforcement institutions to a new level, fueling unproven claims about a spy inside his campaign. Tonight, fired FBI chief James Comey says Mr. Trump is peddling lies that will do lasting damage to the country. Ready for sentencing. New indications tonight that the special counsel is done pumping former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos for information. We're going to tell you what we're learning about that. And lava threat. We're live at the Hawaii volcano, as a burning toxic nightmare shows no sign of ending. Stay right here for up-to-the-minute images of this erupting disaster. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking tonight, Jared Kushner's lawyer confirming to me just a little while ago that this client was interviewed a second time by the special counsel's team. Abbe Lowell acknowledging that Robert Mueller asked the president's senior adviser and son-in-law about the firing of James Comey and about the Trump campaign's contacts with Russia. Lowell also confirms that Kushner has finally been granted a permanent security clearance 489 days into the Trump administration. I will get reaction from Republican Senator Jeff Flake. He's a member of the Judiciary Committee. And our correspondents and analysts are all standing by. First to CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger and CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz. Gloria and Shimon, I want to listen to what Abbe Lowell told me in the last hour. So, your client Jared Kushner, he sat down with the special counsel for a second time last month. The interview lasted, what, about seven hours. What was the focus.
[Abbe Lowell, Attorney For Jared Kushner:] So the focus of Jared's cooperation has really been dictated by what the special counsel wants. Back in the fall, they were interested in understanding some of the issues about General Flynn. And he answered all their questions then. And in April, we basically followed their lead and the topics were what were the appropriate topics. You know that they're being thorough in looking at the campaign. And by campaign, the issue that they're investigating is whether there was something called collusion, whatever that means to people. They're looking to see whether there was some undue influence put on by outside countries, particularly Russia. And they have been looking at some of the post-inauguration issues, primarily the firing of James Comey. And, of course, Jared has had roles in the campaign. He was the point of contact for foreign officials for that and also in the transition. And he was around the circumstances that were ultimately led to the firing of Comey. So you can assume that they know their topics, and they would have exhausted all of them.
[Blitzer:] All right, so, Gloria, what's your reaction?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, my reaction is that they are being very specific with Jared Kushner, because he was at the nexus of all of the things they're investigating. So, I thought Abbe was pretty candid about what they were asking Jared about, particularly regarding his his meetings with Russians, I would assume. Don't forget he was the point person who we were told wanted to establish a back channel to Russia. He was involved in the campaign and had meetings, and also, of course, dealt with Cambridge Analytica, which has been something that has that has come up time and time again, and also, of course, the question of obstruction and the firing of James Comey, because we know the Jared Kushner was in New Jersey that weekend when the president made his fateful decision to fire the FBI director. Those close to Jared say he just supported it, but had nothing to do with the decision. People who are not close to Jared portray him as driving the decision to fire Comey. So, I'm sure that the special counsel wanted to wait awhile, until he could ask Jared, get a lot of other people's stories about what occurred, and then ask Jared Kushner himself to answer these questions.
[Blitzer:] Shimon, I asked Abbe Lowell if Kushner is a witness, a subject or a target of this investigation. Listen to his response. Has Jared Kushner been told if he's a witness, a subject, a target of the investigation?
[Lowell:] The answer to that is those are words that you guys in the media report, and they make no sense to people who are practicing lawyers, because...
[Blitzer:] These are legal terms, as you know.
[Lowell:] They are not. They exist in the United States attorney's manual for primarily the purpose of telling people when they're supposed to be given their rights before they go into a grand jury or get a subpoena. I have done this for a bunch. And I will tell you that today's witnesses is tomorrow's indicted person. So, I don't ask that question. What I do ask is whether somebody is the focus of the investigation or whether somebody should be expecting more questions. Those are questions that I ask. But these are just the titles that are handy for the media to use. And so I didn't ask. But I would tell you that, in my experience, the kinds of questions they asked, the kinds of statements he made, the kinds of information he has reflects that they understand that he's a witness to the events.
[Blitzer:] Well, that was the question, if he's a witness, a subject, or target.
[Lowell:] Wolf, I simply don't use those terms. I never have.
[Blitzer:] He just said he was a witness. Shimon, what do you make of that?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Correspondent:] It's pretty insignificant. First of all, I think we should not lose sight of the fact that having Jared Kushner's attorney come out like this and speak out, it's rare that we ever see him do this. In fact, I think this may be like the only second time that I have actually seen him on television. And I think they felt that they were at a point where they feel pretty comfortable that whatever Robert Mueller has been looking into as it relates to Jared Kushner, that perhaps is somewhat over now. Of course, as Abbe there says, anything can change. The other thing that I think it's important note here is clearly he thinks that Jared Kushner was a witness here. I don't think he would have allowed the special counsel, the FBI agents and those prosecutors to sit there and grill Jared Kushner for some nine hours if he thought that he was a target of the investigation. That would just pretty much be malpractice on Abbe Lowell's part. So, it's clear that he thinks that he's a witness here. And, Wolf, we should remember that what the Russians here were doing, what they were running, what other countries here were trying to do was influence Jared Kushner, was to try and influence the campaign and eventually the president. There was as we have reported, there was outreach by many different countries to Jared Kushner, specifically with the Russians and different people that were had ties to Vladimir Putin to Russia that were meeting with Jared Kushner. I mean, he says it there himself, Abbe Lowell, that when he talks about undue influence by other by other countries. And those are the kind of questions, it seems, that were posed to Jared Kushner, because that is central to one of the main issues that Robert Mueller is still looking at.
[Blitzer:] Yes, Gloria, Abbe Lowell also confirmed that Jared Kushner finally received his permanent security clearance. What would this is something that had been delayed clearly for a long time.
[Borger:] Right. I mean, as we all recall, he had interim clearance longer than anyone at that level that we know about had ever had. But then, in the wake of the Rob Porter scandal, when they sort of redid all the security procedures at the White House, Jared Kushner lost his clearance, along interim clearance, along with a lot of other people. And what Abbe Lowell was saying was after going through the regular procedure, keeping his place in line, not jumping to the head of the line, that Jared was finally granted his security clearance. They have always maintained that the reason he didn't get it in the first place was because of his complicated business, et cetera. But we also know that there is a lot of controversy over the filing of Jared's FS-86 forms, which he had to amend multiple times, because the contacts with the Russians that in fact the special counsel was apparently asking him about in April were not listed on his security clearance forms. And his lawyers have said that initially that was an oversight. But it was really a complication for him, which they had to straighten out. And it looks now as if they have.
[Blitzer:] So, Shimon, in November, he was questioned for two hours, mostly about the firing of Michael Flynn, the national security adviser, in April, seven hours. Now he gets his permanent security clearances. Walk us through the process. The FBI and the intelligence community make recommendations. But, in the end, it's up to the White House to decide specifically, I assume the president can make that decision.
[Prokupecz:] Well, certainly. And the president wanted him to have security clearance. I think this was the big issue all along. And then folks like John Kelly, obviously, they instituted some new policies at the White House. But, in the end, really, Wolf, if the intelligence community, if the FBI was really holding this back and thought that there were still some issues where Jared Kushner shouldn't have security clearance, it's highly likely that he would not have a security clearance. But, ultimately, yes, the president would be the one to decide. And if the president says, we need to figure out a way how to get Jared Kushner security clearance, then that would happen. But, clearly, if you listen to what Abbe Lowell says here, that they went through the proper channels and the right process to get him the security clearance.
[Blitzer:] All right, guys, I want both of you to stand by. Senator Jeff Flake is about to join us as well. Senator, we're going to get to you in a moment. But we're learning more right now but the president's son-in-law, senior adviser. The president is pouring fuel on the conspiracy theory at the same time, that the FBI quote "spied" on his presidential campaign. Just days after he hereby demanded a full-scale investigation, the president appears to have delivered a verdict himself, tweeting about the unsubstantiated claim as though as though it were fact. Let's go to our senior White House correspondent, Pamela Brown. Pamela, the president escalating this new line of attack against the Russia investigation.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Yes, that's right, Wolf. Yes, that's right, Wolf. In fact, today, he's calling it a big political scandal, not backing down from his claim that there was a politically motivated spy implanted in his campaign, despite the fact that the president has yet to cite any concrete evidence to back that up.
[Brown:] Tonight, President Trump going farther than ever in attacking America's law enforcement institutions, accusing former President Obama's Justice Department of spying on his presidential campaign.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I hope it's not so, because, if it is, there's never been anything like it in the history of our country. I hope I mean, if you look at Clapper, he sort of admitted that they had spies in the campaign yesterday, inadvertently. But I hope it's not true, but it looks like it is.
[Brown:] Trump referring to comments from former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. But what Clapper actually said wasn't that Trump's campaign was spied on, but that the FBI was in fact watching Russia.
[Question:] Was the FBI spying on Trump's campaign?
[James Clapper, Cnn National Security Analyst:] No, they were not. They were spying on a term I don't particularly like but on what the Russians were doing, trying to understand, were the Russians infiltrating, trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage and influence, which is what they do.
[Question:] So, why doesn't he like that?
[Brown:] The president seizing on the mischaracterization nonetheless tweeting, with certainty: "Look how things have turned around on the criminal deep state. They go after phony collusion with Russia, a made-up scam, and end up getting caught in a major spy scandal, the likes of which this country may never have seen before." That after ordering the DOJ to open classified files to congressional review.
[Trump:] They're going to all be in the room tomorrow. We're going to see what happens. What I want is, I want total transparency.
[Brown:] FBI Director Christopher Wray, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and Department of Justice official Ed O'Callaghan will brief just two lawmakers, Republican Congressmen Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy, leaving Democrats with no seat at the table and no way of knowing what information will be shared.
[Sen. Mark Warner , Virginia:] My hope would be that any such move needs to be both bipartisan. And my hope and prayer is that the FBI or the Department of Justice would not in any way be forced to reveal confidential information. That would go against 75 years of practice.
[Brown:] Former FBI Director James Comey blasting the president for the order, tweeting: "The FBI's use of confidential human sources, the actual term, is tightly regulated and essential to protecting the country," adding, "Attacks on the FBI and lying about its work will do lasting damage to our country." Trump's response?
[Trump:] We're not undercutting. We're cleaning everything up. This was a terrible situation. What we're doing is, we're cleaning everything up. It's so important. What I'm doing is a service to this country. And I did a great service to this country by firing James Comey.
[Brown:] The whole episode has further soured an already complicated relationship between Trump and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. But both greeted each other warmly today at an immigration roundtable in New York, where Trump doubled down on calling MS-13 gang members animals.
[Trump:] I called them animals the other day. And I was met with rebuke. They said they are people. They are not people. These are animals.
[Brown:] This as Trump's attorneys try to narrow the scope of a potential interview between the president and special counsel Robert Mueller. Multiple sources familiar with the matter tells CNN Trump's legal team wants any interview with Mueller to only focus on matters occurring before Trump became president, which would effectively eliminate questions related to obstruction of justice.
[Blitzer:] Pamela Brown with that report. Thank you, Pamela, very much. Joining us now, Republican Senator Jeff Flake. He is a key member of the Judiciary and Foreign Relations Committees. Senator, thanks so much for joining us. There's lots to discuss. But let me get your quick reaction to these new details we just heard from Jared Kushner's lawyer. What do you think when the president what did you think, first of all, to what Abbe Lowell, Kushner's lawyer, told us?
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] I don't have any window into that. I just know that Mueller is a professional. He's doing things methodically, as he should. And I trust him. But I don't have any window into the Kushner issue there.
[Blitzer:] What do you think when the president uses the phrase criminal deep state?
[Flake:] Well, I think that that is completely unfair, and it's not good to sully our institutions like that without proof. And having a briefing that includes only Republicans is no way to have transparency. If you're going to have transparency, then involve both parties. So I hope that the president reconsiders. If there's a meeting or briefing just with Republicans in there, it will do nothing to shed any light, if light needs to be shed on this topic. But I have seen no evidence that there is spying on the Trump campaign. It's just simply the FBI following leads on, was Russia involved or fought? And I think it was appropriate, from what I have seen. But, boy, if there's a briefing, it ought to involve both parties.
[Blitzer:] Yes, a lot of people, including several of your Republican colleagues, agree. You just delivered a pretty scathing speech at Harvard Law School's class day. You said, among other things and I will put it up on the screen "Our presidency has been debased by a figure who has a seemingly bottomless appetite for destruction and division and only a passing familiarity with how the Constitution works. The Congress is utterly supine in the face of the moral vandalism that flows from the White House daily. Simply put, we may have hit bottom." All right, tell us our viewers what made you say that.
[Flake:] Well, I think that our presidency has been reduced. When we have the president calling for the jailing of defeated political opponents calling his opponents losers and clowns, then the presidency has been debased or reduced. That's what it means. And for Congress, we need to stand up and reclaim our constitutional prerogative, whether it's passing immigration reform or authorization for use of force. We shouldn't continually say, we will pass what the president wants. We should pass what we think we should do and ask the president to sign it. He can either sign it or veto it. But we have given far too much. And I think that it's time for the Congress to stand up.
[Blitzer:] The president is also making some very serious accusations that President Obama, former CIA Director John Brennan, among others, were abusing their power to go directly after him. Do Republicans have a responsibility to challenge the president when he makes these kind of accusations?
[Flake:] Yes, we do. And Republicans have a responsibility when the president says, I'm just going to brief Republicans, to say, no, that's not how it goes, particularly when you're talking about defense, intelligence, national security, those kind of issues. You know, we work in a bipartisan basis. That's the only way to do it, particularly in the Senate. And so we have a responsibility as Republicans to say, that's not how we do it, Mr. President. That's not how you should do it either.
[Blitzer:] If the president does convince his supporters, though, his base, that the entire Justice Department, the FBI, the intelligence community, they were all out to get him and that seems to be the narrative that he's trying to get sunk in what happens when we finally see Robert Mueller's findings?
[Flake:] Well, that's what I mentioned in my speech, is seemingly bottomless appetite for division, to play off members of Congress against each other, the parties against each other, and to divide. And so I hope that, when Bob Mueller continues his investigation, which I hope he does, and produces his report, that it's something that brings us together. And I don't know what's he's going to come up with, but I have confidence in him. And I think we ought to all have confidence in our system.
[Blitzer:] Senator Flake, thanks so much for joining us.
[Flake:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Just ahead, we will have more on the breaking news, what we're learning from Jared Kushner's lawyer about his client's second interview with the special counsel, and what that could mean as the investigation goes forward. And we're also tracking the exploding volcano danger in Hawaii. CNN is live on the Big Island as the lava gushes and overflows.

[Scuitto:] We're learning more now about a deadly shooting in Afghanistan inside the Kandahar Palace, several senior officials including Americans there, the gunfire erupting just moments after a meeting between the U.S. commander of all forces in Afghanistan and a top Afghan police chief. Thankfully, the U.S. commander uninjured. However, we're learning that the police chief was killed, two American service members also injured in the shooting. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh joins us now with the details. Do we know the circumstances of this attack now, Nick?
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It is a startling breach of security, frankly. Inside the Kandahar Palace where the governor holds key, very secure, very heavily fortified meetings where the top U.S. commander Scott Miller was clearly involved in a substantial gathering with major local Afghan officials. Now, the police chief who died, General Abdul Raziq, he is young. He's pretty notorious, accused of frankly unethical conduct to some degree, but a massive power broker in that vitally important southern Kandahar region. It's unclear exactly how this incident played out. It appears to be Afghan on Afghan. That's parlance for one Afghan soldier or official turning his gun upon other Afghans. The Taliban have claimed responsibility. They often do. We don't quite know who carried out the attack just yet. But they say that General Miller was also the target as well as the other General Raziq. But it's a startling situation frankly. Now 17 years into the war, to have a meeting like this violated. It's a massive security breach. I have to say though, when it comes to these attacks by Afghans on Afghans, there is very little that can be done. The Taliban have been shown themselves able to infiltrate it seems here the most secure parts of the Afghan security bubble. The Key issue here though, General Miller appears to have been out of the way when this attack occurred or at least injured by it. There were two citizens from the United States who were injured, unclear exactly what their role are. We're days away though from vital Afghan parliamentary elections, record violence, record numbers of Afghan soldiers and civilians being killed and near record American bombs being dropped on the country. The war is reaching its peak. And an instance like this just shows you exactly where it's going. Poppy?
[Harlow:] And exactly the risk, Nick, that Americans are putting themselves in continually there, 17 years in.
[Sciutto:] Every day.
[Harlow:] Every day.
[Sciutto:] Absolutely every day.
[Harlow:] Nick, important reporting. Thank you so much. Also this, new satellite photos obtained exclusively by CNN show Russia ramping up its military presence along the Baltic Sea. The U.S. military says it is preparing just in case any NATO ally needs protection. Our Fred Pleitgen has more from onboard a U.S. war ship just off the Atlantic coast.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] The USS Iwo Jima off the coast of Iceland, in the hangar deck, marines gearing up for an air assault. Retaliation if there's an attack on a U.S. ally. Corporal Derek Hussinger is part of the invasion force.
[Col. Derek Hussinger, U.s. Marine Corps:] When we get our guns situated, put the tripod down, set the gun up, and you know, stable platform.
[Pleitgen:] The exercise also a deterrent, as the north Atlantic region becomes more contested. With this exercise, the U.S. and its allies are practicing their response in case a friendly nation gets attacked. On the adversary in this exercise is fictitious, but it comes as a time when growing tensions with the U.S. and Russia. As the Marines raced to the Icelandic Coast, new evidence that Russia is beefing up its capabilities right in the heart of Europe. CNN has exclusively obtained satellite images from the Israeli firm image sat international, seemingly showing massive construction work at Russia's bases in Kaliningrad upgrading a nuclear storage facility there, adding new bigger ammunition bunkers and upgrading the military air field. Is Vladimir Putin building up his military in Kaliningrad. Russia's defense ministry didn't respond to CNN's request for information, but the commander of U.S. Naval Forces in Europe and Africa tells me there's a pattern of Russia upgrading its capabilities in the region.
[Admiral James G. Foggo, Commander Of U.s. Naval Forces Europe-africa:] They're putting a lot in their modern weapon systems, anti-cruise ship missiles, radars, the S-300 and S-400 in there.
[Pleitgen:] Sending a message of strength to Moscow, the U.S. and its NATO allies are gearing up for an even bigger exercise in Norway.
[Foggo:] If they want to challenge us, we will challenge them. We're not going to be intimidated by those systems that are out there.
[Pleitgen:] And that challenge is now playing out in the north Atlantic region, with an increasingly assertive Russia and the U.S. showing it won't back down. Fred Pleitgen, CNN, aboard the USS Iwo Jima in the Atlantic Ocean.
[Sciutto:] Alarming developments along the coast there. Michael Cohen's transformation from ally to adversary of the president, what exactly does he know?

[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Host, Amanpour:] Tonight, after decades of war, in an exclusive interview, the Afghan president Ashraf Ghani tells me why he's making an unprecedented peace offer to the Taliban. Also ahead, decades of war between Israel and the Palestinians. I talk to the former speaker of the Israeli Knesset Avraham Burg at a time when peace seems farther away than ever. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the program. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. At war for almost 40 years since the 1979 Soviet invasion and with the United States fighting the last 16 years, hundreds of thousands of civilians dead, has the time for peace in Afghanistan finally arrived? President Ashraf Ghani tells me that it has. He is reaching out to the Taliban with the best offer they've had yet legitimization, talks without preconditions, everything on the table. But the Taliban is far from grasping the hand of reconciliation. It doesn't even recognize Ghani's government. It says it will only speak with the United States. But President Ghani tells me that it is time now for them to separate that posturing from reality. President Ghani, welcome to the program from Kabul.
[Ashraf Ghani, Afghan President:] It's a pleasure to be with you.
[Amanpour:] Well, this is an amazing time. What you have just done, your outreach for peace, your outreach to the Taliban is described by those who know as the best ever offer to the Taliban by an Afghan president. You have put everything on the table. Why are you doing it and why now?
[Ghani:] The why of it is because our society is a consensus now. Our women, all ethnic groups, all political parties have converged on the need to seek peace. Equally, we have an international consensus that is supporting us. Plus, a very important event has happened in the Muslim world. The scholars, Islamic scholars, the ulema, are beginning to speak clearly on condemning bombings, the type of violence that is not rooted in our Islamic culture and civilization. So, we need to move forward and the other side is the opportunities.
[Amanpour:] You talk about consensus. And, yes, of course, the Afghan people and the region and your international partners want peace. But they are very divided on whether you should be offering everything, including re-examining the constitution, to a group that seems to have the upper hand on the ground right now, controlling a lot and active in the majority of the land. And also, for women, especially, who have historically been not considered equal by the Taliban. And you, of course, once called them terrorists.
[Ghani:] Terror is an activity. The Irish, the Good Friday Accord, was it reached with a group that were nice people or a group that were engaged in destabilizing? So, the important issue is now those want to separate themselves from international terrorist organizations and terrorist activities would need to be separated through this process. Secondly, our women have emerged to speak for themselves, to take great public positions. We have ten deputy ministers, five women ambassadors, three ministers. They're increasingly active. They are going to be engaged in every part of the peace process. Thirdly, I would question with respect your assertion that they're militarily dominant. For the first time since the departure of the international troops, we are steadily moving. We have a four-year plan. We're offering this not out of some desperation, but out of courage and conviction that the violence that is inflicted on our people the type of violence that they're resorting to is an indication of weakness, not strength.
[Amanpour:] OK.
[Ghani:] To kill innocent civilians is not an act of courage.
[Amanpour:] I know you say that. And, of course, it is not an act of courage to kill innocent civilians. However, the facts on the ground, according to a US military report, just recently said that your government only controls 18 percent of the country's districts. That means the Taliban does have the upper hand right now. And furthermore, this group, which calls itself
[Ghani:] I would strongly disagree with that. I would strongly disagree with that. I've just had a briefing from again the US General Nicholson will disagree with that. This is not the fact.
[Amanpour:] So, what is the fact then? How much do you control?
[Ghani:] They, in effect, in terms of the number of district, at most if you even if you go at a liberal classification, it's 9 to 12 districts out of close to 400. They've not been able to take a single city, a provincial capital or consolidate the key goals to overthrow the government or to create two separate geographies has not happened.
[Amanpour:] Well, let me again come back because the UN said that, last year alone, Afghan civilians suffered 10,000 casualties, dead and wounded. And your capital has come under awful suicide bombing in the last several weeks. A hundred people killed by a weaponized ambulance. Taliban reaching the most secure hotel in the capital, the Intercontinental. But, more importantly, I want to ask you to respond to their response. This is what they have said. And I say that they call themselves the Islamic Emirate. So, "the Kabul process and other such efforts seek surrender from the Islamic Emirate at a time when the Islamic Emirate is without a doubt a force that has defeated an international arrogant power like America with all its allies and tools at disposal. So, do you believe such a proposal is logical?" That's their view of your offer. And the encouragement by Americans to talk to you they don't even want to talk to you, the government.
[Ghani:] Well, certainly. But let's separate posturing from the realities. Every group that is dedicated to violence is going to exaggerate its own importance in its posturing. The question is directed to the people of Afghanistan. When a group is so desperate to kill innocent civilians and take responsibility for it, that's not an act of strength. That is not an act of a group that thinks they're winning or defeating.
[Amanpour:] So, this is what the former US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told me yesterday. And, of course, let's not forget he was President Obama's defense secretary. This is what the American point of view seems to be now.
[Chuck Hagel, Former Defense Secretary:] There is no other way out of this. There is no military solution here. And at some point, the United States is going to say enough is enough. We've never been in a war this long. And I think Ghani understands that. And I think this approach is the only legitimate, wise, responsible course of action to take.
[Amanpour:] So, he, obviously, fully backs what you're doing. And I wondered what backing you're getting from the Trump administration. They have not wanted to talk to the Taliban, even though the Taliban has reached directly to them.
[Ghani:] The secretary is right. We have to show an end to war. We have had full support and backing from the Trump administration and it's actually the new South Asia strategy of the Trump administration that has created the enabling environment to move to both have the strength to move forward with security reforms and consolidation of security, but also to put the ultimate political solution clearly
[Amanpour:] And what about the all-important country, your neighbor, Pakistan, which you have called in the past the center of the Taliban, which the Trump administration has just censored and removed a hefty, many, many hundreds of millions of dollars of security aid for their activities in this regard. Without their support, it's not going to work, is it?
[Ghani:] We have offered a comprehensive discussion with Pakistan. And yesterday, I announced that Afghanistan is willing to arrive at an agreement on a plan to repatriate the 2.2 million of our fellow citizens that they've been living as refugees in Pakistan, so that there'd no excuse left. Pakistan is at a moment of choice. Its past course of action has resulted in a situation where it is placed in isolation. Its interests, its state interests, its national interests and its regional interests require it to be connecting in the hope that Pakistan would opt for the right approach.
[Amanpour:] And can I ask you a question that others have asked you in the past, including you've had questions from CNN about this. Since the autumn, you have been classifying the key details around your military. The numbers of military and police, particularly those who have been killed in this ongoing battle. Why are you doing that? That doesn't show confidence, does it? I mean, a winning side doesn't need to classify the body count.
[Ghani:] We have not classified the body count. This is totally false. And it's available. And should you want interviews, I would ask the Ministry of Defense Interior and the National Directorate of Security to the share all the figures with you.
[Amanpour:] I have been interviewing Mr. President for the last 18 years in all your different government positions and now as president. You've been trying to work this problem for that long. Is this a last-ditch effort for you? What happens if it doesn't work? What happens to you? What happens to your people and to your country?
[Ghani:] Well, first of all, no effort for peace is last-ditch. We will succeed. Our past, against all odds, is to be able to do impossible things. When the Soviet Union invaded us in 1979, was there anyone in the world that believed that we would succeed, friend or foe? We succeeded, but subsequently we're unable to benefit from our gains. When I became president, the overwhelming opinion was that we would collapse within six months to nine months. We are moving forward. Let us please understand that the absolute majority of the Afghan men and women are under 30. There is a generational change in government, in society, in the economy, and particularly in culture. And the younger generation of Afghanistan both own the problems and own the solutions. I was in the City of Herat for four days inaugurating the TAPI project and its related projects. The sense of creativity stuns me, humbles me and we hope that they would take a chance that is offered earnestly and for the good of our people. It's the command of God Almighty, the Allah, to seek peace. War is not the way. But my firm belief is that our nation will succeed, as we've succeeded against all odds in the past.
[Amanpour:] Against all odds indeed. President Ashraf Ghani, thanks so much for joining me from Kabul tonight.
[Ghani:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] And the former Afghan President Hamid Karzai has also just weighed in. He strongly supports President Ghani's reconciliation efforts and he's urging the Taliban to "work with fellow Afghans for an end to our suffering." Turning now to another intractable regional conflict, the one between Israel and the Palestinians and the one inside Israel. In nine years under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and with Israel's political left in disarray, Netanyahu has a freehand when it comes to making policy. But one prominent Israeli voice refuses to give in to what he calls the groupthink paralyzing Israel's government. My guest Avraham Burg. He was a rising political star, speaker of the Israeli Knesset. Even acting as president for a short time in the summer of 2000. But, now, he's out on the fringe, labeled by many a gadfly, pointing an accusing finger at Israel for its failure to bring peace and equal rights to this vital part of the Middle East. Burg's new book, "In Days to Come: A New Hope for Israel" is his account of his personal journey from Zionist true believer to modern-day Jeremiah. Avraham Burg, welcome to the program.
[Avraham Burg, Former Speaker Of The Israeli Knesset:] Thank you very much.
[Amanpour:] So, is that all right? Is that all where you stand right now? You are a true believer. Your father was there at the creation. He helped create the state of Israel. And now, you have turned against this with a vengeance.
[Burg:] No.
[Amanpour:] Yes!
[Burg:] I don't have this kind of emotions when it I'm not angry. I have a lot of hopes. I see the problems. I'm upset with the political situation. I wait for some kind of Afghani inspiration in our region, somebody to come with vocabulary and syntax of peace to a region which is in a chronic conflict. Yet, at the same time, I didn't give up. I believe that the opportunities are there and I believe it is possible.
[Amanpour:] But you've written this book and you are angry. You're quite angry at your father for all sorts of things. And you do, in fact, in your words talk about a period of sanity in Israel that you say expired in 1967. That's decades ago.
[Burg:] I was born before the watershed; '67 was actually a turning point. Up until '67, the first 19 years of Israel were years in which Israel slowly but surely moved from a young enterprise into something very promising. Then came '67 and introduced into our life new dimensions of scatological thinking, of messianic politics, of occupying other people despite their will, the Palestinian people. Yes, a certain part, my father as much as so many of my friends and colleagues were and are part of the system. And, yes, I come and I try to offer an alternative, which says a better Israel is an Israel which relinquishes all of this kind of emotionless, scatological, doomsday scenarios. Do I do it with anger? You're a reader. You know better than I do, but I feel seem quite calm when I come to it. I have a good argument. I don't have to be mad.
[Amanpour:] OK. You have a good argument. But, again, as I said because people are saying, you're sort of a gadfly now, particularly with the sort of the left relinquishing the stage, its voice. Very, very heavily silenced. The right-wing, Benjamin Netanyahu bringing ultra-orthodox right into the cabinet, is in the ascendancy and it's marching along quite ahead with very little opposition. They say if there was a snap poll today, Netanyahu would win again.
[Burg:] Right. However, the weakening of the almost, I would say, breaking down of the left camp in Israel has two dimensions. The external one is it's part of the weakening process of so many liberal democracies around the world. I mean, tell me what's going on here with the Labour. Tell me what's going on in America with the Democratic Party. Tell me what's going on in Germany with the SPD. It's the same phenomenon about liberal democracies of the 21st century and we are part of it. The second has to do with our own private intimate scenery. In Israel, to be a leftie means you're for or against settlement with the Palestinians, but this is not a comprehensive philosophy. Being a liberal, progressive, social democrat means separation between church and state, equality for all the citizens, fairness of the game, fair distribution of public resources. And we, the camp the peace camp and the social democratic potential camp in Israel forgot about all of it. And, therefore, in my writing and in my political arguments, I try to say, yes, it is about us and the Palestinians because the occupation is so malignant. Yet, at the same time, we have to build so many new institutions and approaches for a better Israel.
[Amanpour:] You call Israel the only half democracy in the Middle East.
[Burg:] Israel prides itself we have an issue with standards. We like to set the bar so high and then we are so upset when the world comes and says, hey, you don't meet the standards you've set by yourself. And I say, yes, we have high standards because the nature, the history, the high call of being a Jew for so many years deprived of political sovereignty. Yet, at the same time, we give ourselves labels that we have to justify, the most moral army in the world, only democracy in the Middle East. And I say it's a beautiful democracy, but it has issues. We're dominant on other people, the Palestinian one, millions of people between the Jordan and the Mediterranean and depriving them from any possible political rights, this is not a full democracy. And I say, within Israel, given the issues of church and state, of orthodox hegemony, is not fully democratic and, therefore, we still have challenges and a lot of work to do.
[Amanpour:] What would your solution be to the principal existential threat, as said, for instance, in the gatekeepers documentary all to a man and, of course, they were all men the former security heads and intelligence heads and military chiefs all say that that situation is Israel's existential threat. So, how would you solve the ongoing conflict?
[Burg:] First, by admitting that whatever used to be the classical external existential threat is not there anymore for a long while. I mean, Syria, as much as whatever happens there is devastating, is not an existential threat. With Egypt, we have peace. Jordan is OK. And even the Iranian issue is not as dramatic as our prime minister would like us to fear of. Yet, when you look inside, you must realize that the fragmentation of the Israeli society and the collapse of its previous value system is something very, very problematic. And my offer, in my writing and in my political position, challenging my own camp first, before trying to challenge the right wing, is to say as follows. Between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, every individual should have the rights for the same rights. Let's begin with this. This actually is cause for us, the Jews, the privileged element to relinquish some of our absolute, total privileges.
[Amanpour:] Are you talking about a one state then?
[Burg:] Not necessarily. But let's begin first with the individual rights. You live in Ramallah, you have to vote for a parliament, be it the Palestinian parliament or a joint parliament. That's a different decision. But, first, let's put it on the table that it's not kosher, it's not OK for any Western democracy like the Israeli one, and this is where we belong and should belong, to deprive the rights of so many millions. So, it's about rights. It's about the concept of what is right and what is wrong vis-a- vis rights. The second element goes to the understanding that this space should be assured space. Would it be assured space that because we are married and we have the same family or just because we have good neighbors and we share the same space, that's an outcome of a political negotiation. One warning I have for my society, this beautiful formula that everybody is in love of two state solution has expiration date. It is not there forever.
[Amanpour:] What do you mean?
[Burg:] When we spoke about it first during the 70s, we were well poisoners, trojan horses, stabbing the back of the nation, not just Avraham Burg, OK? We were not good nicks. And then, in the years, people say yes, it's a good formula. Even Prime Minister Netanyahu rhetorically adopted it, not practically, but rhetorically. But it doesn't move? Will it go on forever? The answer is no.
[Amanpour:] OK. So, let me ask you. How does the Trump administration and the equivocation there on a one state or a two state, the moving of the US embassy, now apparently on a fast track to moving to Jerusalem, Jared Kushner who's meant to deliver the best deal of all and who is already under his own issues in Washington with all these investigations, what is the American momentum to help push Israel towards a two-state solution or any kind of peace?
[Burg:] As much as you called me in your introduction a Jeremiah, which I'm not. I'm trying to prophesize America
[Amanpour:] What's the effect now? What effect is it having?
[Burg:] America is in a way not a real player. It's not a real player. I mean, Trump is it's a strange presidency. It's supporting the right-wing policy in Israel because of right wing conservative policies over there, but it is far from being perceived as a fair honest broker between the sides. And in a way, being so bizarre, the presidency, it brings the burden back to the sides. It's us and the Palestinians. Dialectically speaking, it's very good. And I believe that what we discuss today, it is not two states or no solution. I hope one day there will be two-state solution. I hope my leadership will be generous enough to see that that's Afghani model, the only way to go about it. But if we're not there, the deliberation is about one state with two regimes, one full of privileges and one not so generous to the Palestinians or a better one state with everybody is equal.
[Amanpour:] Let me ask you specifically about the prime minister. Everybody knows that there are all these allegations. There's all these investigations. He calls it a witch-hunt. The first question is, how do you think it's going to end up? Is he going to survive the duration of his prime ministership?
[Burg:] May I circumvent the question, in a sense I want to defeat him at the ballot box.
[Amanpour:] OK.
[Burg:] I do want to defeat him with a police station.
[Amanpour:] All right. Well
[Burg:] So, whatever he has, I wish him the best and I wish everybody that no country deserves a prime minister under investigation or in jail.
[Amanpour:] Then, what effect what has been the Bibi effect? I started to say that he's brought he's turned the country sharp right. He's brought ultra-orthodox into the cabinet like never before. He's put an indelible stamp. In fact, Bret Stephens of "The New York Times" has said, "Bibi has been for Israelis a pretty good prime minister. For all of his flaws, few have done it as well as Bibi, which is why he's endured and he will probably continue to do so."
[Burg:] He is the most omnipotent prime minister maybe we've ever had. He is so powerful, it's unbelievable. I mean, the public support he is the king of Israel. Bibi
[Amanpour:] And we will leave it there and wait to see what happens in your country. Avraham Burg
[Burg:] There will be peace in my country.
[Amanpour:] I hope so. As President Ghani said, against all the odds. Avraham Burg, thank you so much for joining us. And that is it for our program. Remember, you can always listen to our podcast and see us online at Amanpour.com and follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Thanks for watching. And goodbye from London. END END

[Romans:] Russian President Vladimir Putin currently meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the first day of the eastern economic forum. The event is a key opportunity for the Russians who have turned to Asia in an attempt to strengthen ties there and expand their influence. CNN's Matthew Chance live in Moscow with the very latest Matthew.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Thanks for that meeting between Xi Jinping, the Chinese president, and Vladimir Putin, the Russia leader is one of a whole catalog of meetings the two leaders have had, it's a personal friendship, which has been part to spearheading the so-called pivot east that Russia has embarked since its relationship with the West and the United States in particular began to deteriorate back in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and the sanctions that have been imposed against the country by Washington over hacking and other issued as well. As the two leaders meet at the economic forum in Vladivostok, there is something really significant is also taking place also in east of Russia. Joint military exercises between the Russians and Chinese, 300,000 personnel are involved. These are the biggest military exercises Russia has staged since the end of the Cold War, 3,200 of those troops are from China, as well as China's military vehicles, Chinese aircraft is involved as well. Just a few years ago or a decade ago or so, China was perceived by Moscow as an adversary. But the fact that it is being included in these military exercises and close bond with Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin shows it is more of an ally. It's a response in many ways to the pressure that has been put on both Russia and China by the West and by the United States in particular, sanctions on Russia, the trade war against China. It is almost forced these two countries together, forging a new power, which is emerging in the east of the globe in the Asian region, changing geopolitics in the world, very significant indeed, Christine.
[Romans:] Yes, incredibly important shifts to note. Thank you so much for that, Matthew Chance in Moscow.
[Briggs:] All right. The U.S. special representative for North Korea beginning his meetings with South Korea's foreign minister. Steve Biegun says he's looking forward to discussions on how to work with South Korea to move the denuclearization process forward in North Korea. South Korea's President Moon Jae-in said Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un asked him to act as a mediator. Moon saying he will take on the role until the U.S. and North Korea are able to conduct more active dialogue and communication. The White House reiterating President Trump is open to another meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong- un, citing a letter from Kim.
[Sanders:] The president has received the letter from Kim Jong-un. It was a very warm, very positive letter. We won't release the full letter unless the North Korean leader agrees that we should. The primary purpose of the letter was to request and look to schedule another meeting with the president which we are open to and are already in the process of coordinating that.
[Briggs:] The White House is planning to one sign it considers hopeful, that parade in North Korea this week focused more on economic growth and less on the country's nuclear arsenal. CNN's Will Ripley says that doesn't mean the country has gotten rid of any nuclear weapons. Coming up on the program, Hurricane Florence now a category four, barreling towards the East Coast and could get worse, millions in its path. We are live in the weather center with an update.

[Gorani:] A woman's hijab tore from her head by a stranger on the tube, a man stabbed in the neck for speaking Polish in public, just two examples of hate crimes in this country, the UK, and they have surged by a record 29% in the past year. New figures show that the Brexit referendum of 2016 and then a string of terrorist attacks earlier this year were followed by spikes in racially aggravated crime. The UK Home Office says that, although some of the rise is down to increased reporting, it also marks a significant increase in hate crime. Does it have to do with some of the messaging that came out during, for instance, the Brexit referendum campaigns? Some people say it could have a relationship to that, the feelings that immigrants may be causing problems for this country. My next guest says, in the era of Trump, America is at risk of hate crime becoming the new normal. She says the president's own behavior fosters an environment where intolerance could be considered more socially acceptable. Maria Konnikova is a contributing writer for "The New Yorker" and she joins me live from New York. You wrote a piece called the new normal. What is the new normal in the era of Donald Trump in the United States?
[Maria Konnikova, Contributing Writer, "the New Yorker":] Well, Donald Trump is the voice of the free world, for better, or some might say, for worse. And so, when he says something or acts in a certain way, it becomes it's kind of a message from above that this is the way that we should be acting or that we can be acting, that this is the way that we can express our frustration. And so, what he says ends up becoming somehow, through a trickle-down effect, the new norm of social behavior. It's hate speech normal. Well, some would now say, sure, the president does it, why can't I?
[Gorani:] First in Charlottesville as an example, where you had these neo- Nazis, these white supremacists, marching with tiki torches. After that, the president famously said that among them there were some very fine people. Here's a hypothetical. If the President of the United States Donald Trump had come out and said these men and women are un-American, their message is un-American and shocking, and I condemn wholeheartedly, let's assume he had said that instead of what he did say at the time. What difference could that have made?
[Konnikova:] That would have made a huge difference because people look to sources above them, as psychologists have known for decades, for cues on what is and isn't OK to say and how one can act and how one can't act. So, if the president condemns hate crime and says this isn't OK, suddenly if I have these impulses, if I want to say anything like this, I'm going to tone it down, I'm going to say, OK, at least I can't express this in public. If the president calls me or someone like me a fine person, what am I going to do, I'm going to say, this is amazing, I don't even have to tone it down anymore, I can ramp it up, I can say it in public, and I'm going to be sanctioned by the most powerful office in the country.
[Gorani:] But what's interesting is, in your piece, you're not saying people are necessarily inherently, to their core, experienced bigots or homophobes or Islamophobes? You even give an example you give an example at the beginning of your piece of someone who didn't who drew neo-Nazi graffiti and he didn't even get the shape of the swastika right. Why is that significant?
[Konnikova:] So, you have people who are just frustrated, who are displaced, who don't like the fact that they don't have power and that there are elites who do have power, and they are looking for a way to vent that frustration, to express it. And so, they look from above. This isn't an inbred hatred. This isn't something that's kind of deeply rooted prejudice on their end. It's a way of expressing just general social anxiety and discomfort. And so, you look for cues from above because those are your sources of authority. That's where social norms are set, from above, from the places of authority. So, when the president uses anti-Semitic rhetoric, all of a sudden, it's OK for you to do it, so you try it on for size.
[Gorani:] You give the example of Rwanda, obviously, where many years and many thousands of miles away from anything happening in the United States, but it found it interesting that, for generations, and you give this example, Hutus and Tutsis lived side-by-side and when there was this directive from above to massacre basically your next-door neighbor that that happened very easily. And what made me obviously, we're all it made me wonder, are we all really that pliable that all it takes after generations of living in peace with a neighbor we cover the Middle East a lot, we see it a lot in certainly community that that's all that is required, is just a directive from above?
[Konnikova:] You know what, it's a very scary thought. And the woman who did this research, Betsy Pollock, just won a MacArthur Genius grant because it's incredibly it's incredibly timely right now. And the answers is, for the most part, yes because sometimes Hutus were married to Tutsis. These weren't even neighbors. This was your family. When everyone around you, when your entire community is acting a certain way, maybe at first you resist, but unless there's someone who's helping you, unless there's kind of a way to foster that resistance, it becomes very easy to find yourself kind of in that same root. So, a lot of the Hutus and Tutsis said we felt like cattle. So, this was a direct quote that that's actually somehow, we turned into cows and we were being herded in one direction. And you see it happening, but it's really hard to resist because we really care about being liked and we really care about being members of our community. And there have been studies after studies that have shown that, when everyone is against you, you will often give the answer that you know is wrong just because everyone else is doing it. And, over time, especially when it's social norms, you stop seeing what's right and what's wrong. Instead, you are just saying this is how everyone is acting. And it seems totally crazy. It seems like this can never happen to us. But then you look at studies like Stanley Milgram's, obedience studies that were done after World War II, when people would give electric shocks to someone who they thought was suffering from a heart condition which seems totally inhuman
[Gorani:] And they did it.
[Konnikova:] But there was a voice of authority, someone in a jacket, in a lab coat who said, no, this is fine, keep going, and they kept going.
[Gorani:] All right. Well, there is a lot more to talk about on this topic. Maria Konnikova, thanks very much for joining us from New York. We appreciate your time. Very interesting piece in "The New Yorker." Coming up, a former "Fox News" host accused of sexual misconduct says it has been horrible for him and his family. Bill O'Reilly lashes out after revelations of a $32 million settlement with a former colleague.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. We begin with breaking news right now. Bracing for impact on what's being called a nuclear Hurricane Irma. Closing in on Florida after devastating parts of the Caribbean. The state's governor now telling folks there, get out now because he won't be able to save them when the storm strikes. We'll speak to the governor shortly. Plus, new concerns about the state running out of gas, evacuating hospitals and the elderly in the safety of nuclear power plants. We'll take you there live. And just a short time from now, President Trump holding a news conference over at the White House. You're looking at live pictures. He's expected to talk about the hurricane, but also he'll deal with the arrangement that he worked out with the Democrats that has left his own party shell shocked and furious.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Let's get to the breaking news. Hurricane Irma, already one of the most powerful Atlantic storms in history and it's heading for Florida. Moments ago, the president expressed confidence in the state's preparations.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're very concerned. We are working very hard. We have tremendous groups of talented people there. We think we're as well prepared as you can possibly be.
[Blitzer:] Right now, Hurricane Irma is ripping through the northern Caribbean hitting island after island and leaving at least six people dead. Most of those deaths are in St. Martin. Here, you can see some of the damage. Homes and businesses flattened by the immense power of Hurricane Irma. It is decimating, by the way, the island of Bermuda. The prime minister there is now saying it is now barely habitable. In Puerto Rico, more than 1 million people are without power and 10s of thousands have no running water. Right now, in Florida, it's bracing for a direct hit from the storm of size of Texas. Our meteorologist Chad Myers is tracking all of this all for us. So, Chad, where is Hurricane Irma right now and will it make a direct hit on the United States?
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] It is north of the Dominican Republic and yes. I know you're not used to getting a direct answer from all of the politicians you talk to. But my answer is, yes, it absolutely hits the U.S. Does it hit Florida, Georgia, or the Carolinas first? That's where we don't yet know. The storm is 175 miles per hour. It's moving to the northwest. We already have hurricane warnings for the Turks and Caicos and now hurricane watches for the Keys, all the way up to about Fort Pierce, and almost down to on the other side of about Cape Coral. Now, I know those aren't exact points, but you get the idea. You can see the pink. You say, why? Why would we do a hurricane watch? It's a timing thing, 48 hours, 72 hours, 36 hours? All about when the watches and warnings are posted. So, warnings absolutely will be posted tomorrow as that thing moves our way. A large storm not losing any power whatsoever with a direct impact in the center of the cone right near Miami, Florida. The worst possible case scenario moving over Ocean Reef and Key Largo all the way almost to Tavernier. There are people in the Keys that are refusing to evacuate. I can't imagine that. This bubble of water, this surge may be 18 feet high, Wolf. The Keys are, like, eight to 10 feet high. I know there's one spot in Key Largo about 16 feet high. That's it. The water will completely over-wash the Keys if it's a direct hit. And then, you get very, very close, such a populated area, from Key Biscayne, right through Miami proper, all the way up into, oh, gosh, I don't even know if you want to call a Fort Piece or do you want to call it Jupiter? It still could be on land right there. A little bit offshore and then back on land. Now, obviously, if there's a cone, it can go one way or the other. If it comes back out here, people in Florida go, whew, yes, we got missed. The problem is it's still 160 miles per hour right here because it never hit any land. And where's it going? Into the Carolinas, Georgia, somewhere up there. It's going to turn left eventually. So, yes, someone gets hit. Is it here, here, here or possibly there? I'm not sure exactly where the worst-case scenario is. There's 10s of billions of dollars of damage no matter where it hits. You have to take precautions, no matter where you are. Here's the European model. Where does it go? Right through and north of Key Largo, right into Key Biscayne. There's a wild bird sanctuary right there. A national park right there. Up through Fort Lauderdale, West Palm and finally offshore, doing damage with 140 mile-per-hour winds here. That's an EF-3 or almost four tornado, on the ground for hours, that's 40 miles wide. I mean, think of the damage that would do in Oklahoma. Think of what it would do in downtowns like all those from Fort Lauderdale all the way north but including Miami as well. There is the American model slightly better. Tens of billions of dollars less damage and also with the potential for a less loss of life. But, Wolf, I don't understand. When you tell people to mandatorily evacuate, that that doesn't mean anything to them.
[Blitzer:] I don't understand that either. But here's the question. Why the difference between the European model, which projects a direct hit on Miami and Fort Lauderdale, going up to Palm Beach County, as opposed to the U.S. Model. And which one has a better track record?
[Myers:] It's hard to answer that question. The European model is a four-dimensional the model. It means it moves its data points ahead in time four dimensionally. So, it's time, space. It's up-down, east-west, north-south, vertical and time. The U.S. model only does the three. They take all the same time. The model runs at 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. That's it, period. They don't take they don't care about anything else. So, it's a little bit of a difference how they put it in there. But I'm going to tell you. If you talk about 40 miles, 72 hours away, I mean, those models are exact. The problem is, you know, we have a major city in the way. And if that was let's say let's say we're talking about anywhere in the continental U.S. in Texas. And you have 40 miles one way or the other with 72 hours' notice. If it wasn't Houston, wasn't Corpus Christi, that's a win. And that's where we were with Harvey. The models have really won. We finally have this down to a good science. And 40 miles, I know it makes a huge difference to Miami and Fort Lauderdale and the like. But in the grand scheme of things, 72 hours out. They're almost exactly the same.
[Blitzer:] Yes, if people are told to evacuate, they've got to evacuate. They've got to listen to the authorities. Chad, stand by. We're going to get back to you. As this hurricane is racing towards Florida, officials are bracing for the worst. Mandatory evacuations for the Florida Keys, the low-lying parts of Miami, Dade County as well as Broward County. That's where Fort Lauderdale is. But there are also deep concerns about gas shortages, price gouging, water supplies. CNN's Rosa Flores is joining us now from Miami Beach. Rosa, so what's happening there where you are?
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, Wolf, there is a lot of worry. There is a lot of stress. As residents patch up their homes with pieces of plywood, grab their kids, jump in the car and then hope for the best as they head north. You talked about price gouging. You talk about gas shortages. That is a huge worry as folks start to see the interstates bumper to bumper heading out of this southern part of Florida. Now, when it comes to evacuations, as you mentioned, Miami-Dade is under a mandatory evacuation for a few areas. Zone A which is along the coast. Multiple areas, including this island that you might see here to my right which is on the south side. And then, there's also the barrier islands where I'm standing right now in Miami beach. All of these areas including areas where people live in mobile homes. Those under a mandatory evacuation. Our friends to the south, in Monroe County, according to the governor, more than 31,000 people already evacuated headed north. Our friends to the north in Broward County. Anyone living in a low- lying area. Anyone living in a mobile home. Anyone living east of U.S.-1 which includes Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Pompano Beach, Deerfield Beach, all of those folks are encouraged and are under mandatory evacuation to leave north. And that is the only way out of the peninsula, Wolf. As you know, you can't go east. You can't go west. You have to go north. Now, when it comes to price gouging, the state attorney, here in Miami-Dade County, has activated a hotline for people to report price gouging, because, of course, in these dire times, there's always people who are going to try to take advantage of others. And the message from Florida is, don't do it because you're going to get caught and get punished Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, Rosa, stand by. Rosa Flores in Miami Beach for us, under evacuation orders at least big chunks of it. The Florida Governor Rick Scott says getting enough fuel into a state is one of his top priorities right now. He's joining us live. Governor, I know you're very busy. Thanks very much for joining us, updating viewers. So, first of all, this issue of fuel, which is sensitive. People are ling up in long lines to get gas for their cars. What are you able to do about that?
[Gov. Rick Scott , Florida:] Well, last night, I had a call with the retailers of gas stations to say, what can I do? This morning, I did the major oil companies. And then, I've done the carriers that take the fuel from basically the our ports to their saying, what can I do? So, now, what we're doing is providing escorts to the carriers, so they can get in and out fast. They can get to the stations. They get back to get more gas from the ports as fast as we can. We're working to make sure that as many vessels can get into our ports as possible, so we have as much fuel as possible. We are we are getting some waivers of some federal regulations. I
[Blitzer:] We certainly do. And at what point, Governor, do you make those interstates all one way heading north, for example? We see the traffic is enormous heading north. Not much traffic heading south. At what point do you make that decision to move, to move all of those lanes into the same direction?
[Scott:] So, what we do first, Wolf, is we're tracking this everywhere, highway patrol, the Department of Transportation. We have cameras around the state. We have law enforcement pushing. The first thing we do is we add the shoulder. And so but we're we've got to keep everybody safe. It depends on how fast the traffic is going because we've got to keep everybody safe first. We will do everything we can to make sure people are able to evacuate. I tell people, if you don't if there's any reason you're in an evacuation zone and you don't you don't you don't have the gas. You can't get out. We have a state-wide hot line and we can we will get you out. I told that with the Keys that already had their mandatory evacuation. I told that to every place around the state. We will get you out. But you cannot wait. You cannot wait to get out.
[Blitzer:] Yes.
[Scott:] I'm all Wolf, I'm also looking for more volunteers. I need a total of 17,000 volunteers. I have I have a little less than 10,000 people signed up, that have volunteered for our shelters for food distribution. I need more volunteer. You can go to VolunteerFlorida.org and volunteer. But, right now, by goal is to keep everybody safe.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Well, that's critically important. Chad Myers, our Meteorologist, Governor, has a question for you. Chad, go ahead.
[Myers:] Governor, hello. We met in Pensacola last year with the flood there.
[Scott:] Yes.
[Myers:] We both witnessed how much water can damage a neighborhood. Well, this isn't a neighborhood. This is a city. What if Miami gets a 15-food storm surge? Fort Lauderdale, all the way up into Broward County? What does the city look like with 15 feet of water in it?
[Scott:] Oh. Here's what people are not thinking about. This is bigger in size, much bigger than Andrew. Andrew was, you know, a horrible storm. It's it packs more wind. But the real difference is the risk of storm surge. The storm surge can come in. It can come in a long way and it can cover your house. So, you have got to listen. You know, the National Hurricane Center has some storm surge models now. We're using those models county by county. That's part of how we're deciding the evacuation route, our evacuation areas. So, you've got to listen. If they tell you that your area should be evacuated, one thing they're thinking about is how big will the storm surge be? The other thing I'm trying to get people to understand is, it looks it looks great right now and everybody is believes the path is going to be up the east coast. The cone's not just on the east coast. The cone's partially on the west coast. So, all the southern part of the state has to continue to watch out for this thing. If there's a little wobble to the west, it impacts the west part of the our state. So, we're focused on this. But this storm surge is my biggest concern right now besides the fuel. That people don't understand the risk of this storm surge.
[Myers:] Wolf.
[Blitzer:] You know, Governor, there's two nuclear power plants, as you know, in your state right now, potentially in very, very serious danger. What are you doing to make sure they are not in danger?
[Scott:] I've been talking to Solar Power Light which owns these. They will they will both be shut down. They'll it's about a 30- hour process. They'll start to shut down as soon as the category one winds start. We're working to make sure we have evacuation routes open for people to get out and get back to them. But they will be completely shut down before the storm hits. And then they and they will not reopen until afterwards. So the they are they are in and both in a place where their power that they need to restart and to make sure it's safe is high. So I've been talking to Florida Power and Light and they are very comfortable right now that even with the winds, even with the storm surge, both of these plants will be safe.
[Blitzer:] One final question I know you've got to run governor, before I let you go. Which model do you suspect is more accurate, the European model, which shows a direct hit on Miami and the millions of people of Miami-Dade County and Broward County and Palm Beach County, or the American model, which has this hurricane hitting slightly off the coast, the eastern coast of Florida?
[Scott:] Well, as you you know, look, I'm an optimist. I hope I hope it continues I hope it goes far east and doesn't get any closer than Matthew did last year. But I here's what I tell everybody. I love my state. I love every citizen here, every visitor. I want everybody to be safe. So don't take a chance. Don't be an optimist with this. Be prepared. Maybe we'll get lucky and it will go further east, but it could it could just as well go west.
[Blitzer:] We're going to be in very close touch with you, Governor Rick Scott of Florida. Good luck to you. Good luck to all the wonderful people down in your beautiful state of Florida. We're hoping, hoping, for the best. But as you are reminding everyone, everyone has to prepare for the worst. And if you want to volunteer to help out the governor, you listened you heard what he had to say. Governor Rick Scott, we'll stay in very close touch with you. Chad, we're about to get more tape any moment now from the president of the United States. He's over at the White House meeting with the emir of Kuwait, but also speaking about Hurricane Irma. The picture that the governor just presented is very bleak.
[Myers:] It is. And I think it's very important. He said, don't be an optimist. I mean, we have seen so many times and I admit, you know, hey, it's going to hit, it's going to hit and then it turns right or it turns left. Ah, it's not going to hit this time. This isn't, Wolf
[Blitzer:] All right, hold on, Chad, for a moment. The president's speaking now. Let's listen in.
[Trump:] The emir of Kuwait is a most special person
[Blitzer:] I think we've got some technical problems over there. We're going to cue that tape. That was just shot moments ago. The president meeting with the emir of Kuwait. They're about to have a joint news conference as well. We'll have live coverage. I think we've fixed the audio. Nope. Looks like they're still trying to cue up the audio. This is a pool tape that comes in from from the reporters over at the White House. The camera crews. They're going to get that ready. We'll have excellent we'll play that as soon as we get it cued up appropriately. So stand by for that. Let's wait for a moment. Chad, you and I were talking about this worst-case scenario, this Hurricane Irma hitting about 3 million people potentially right in Miami-Dade County and then millions more up further north in Broward and Palm Beach Counties. That's the worst- case scenario. That is clearly what they're bracing for.
[Myers:] Sure. No question, Wolf. If the storm runs up through Key Largo, up Card Sound Road, into Homestead and into Miami, that's the worst possible scenario. Onshore flow making significant flooding that the governor was talking about. I think the surge is 15 feet. He thinks it's closer to 10. I guess he's being the optimist compared to me being the pessimist or somewhere in between. I want you away from that water. You need to be away from the water. Northern central Keys, middle Keys, you've got to get out of there. There's just there's no reason to stay there. If the water goes over your island and then finally back to the north. I just talked to a guy on Twitter, Ryan Mowi. He's a doctor. And he said that, look, he looked at the models and he looked at the population and 16 million people will have wind over 75 miles per hour. That means 8 million people won't have power? I mean, that's got to be close.
[Blitzer:] Yes, it's an awful, awful situation. Stand by. We've got a lot more coming up. The brand new forecast from the European model coming in very soon. We'll update you on that. Its track record lately has been excellent. We'll also speaking live with the mayor of Miami Beach about the urgent evacuations underway there, and why he's calling this a, quote, "nuclear hurricane." And President Trump getting ready to hold a joint news conference moments from now. He's expected to discuss the storm. Also the fury from his own Republican Party after he stunned everyone by cutting a deal with the Democratic leadership. This is CNN's special live coverage.

[Hala Gorani, Cnn International Anchor:] Hello, everyone. We are live from Paris on this Monday. I'm Hala Gorani. Tonight, the president's long time personal attorney in court. We will have the very latest from New York. Michael Cohen, there he is entering the court house facing a judge today. Also, Comey tells all. The former FBI director says Donald Trump is not morally fit to be president. And British and French parliaments are debating Syria today, but the debate is coming after the air strikes. We'll have the latest on that. Right now, Donald Trump's longtime lawyer and friend, Michael Cohen, finds himself in a Manhattan courtroom. A federal judge is trying to decide on what to do with the materials that the FBI seized from Cohen's home, office and a hotel room in a raid last week. The president's lawyers are fighting to keep the Cohen files out of investigators hands to allow the president to determine which documents can permanently be withheld because of attorneyclient privilege. Adding to the tension, the arrival today of porn star, Stormy Daniels at the court. There she is wearing pink ensemble. She says Cohen paid her $130,000 to keep quiet about an affair she had with Donald Trump in 2006. Let's bring in CNN legal analyst to look into all of this. Now, one of the urgent that just flashed on my phone, Joey Jackson, is that Michael Cohen disclosed in court that the client who requested to remain unnamed was Sean Hannity who is a Fox News presenter and provocateur and I guessclient privilege here.
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] You know, and that may very well be a viable argument. Good to see you as always. It depends on what the client list looks like. Remember what happened on Friday. They are making that argument, which is a very good argument, that we should not be ordered to turn over information. Well, they have the information already, but that the information they have should not be used if it's privileged. That's true. Attorneys have a privilege where you sitdown and in the event that you establish an attorney-client relationship, because you want, lawyers do, want clients to be candid, to be truthful, to give all information, that's protected. No one ever gets to hear that and so, I understand, and I get the argument. The further argument, Hala, is that [inaudible] we don't rely upon them and how could we rely upon them, they're full of prosecutors. And while they may not be directly related to the investigation, how will you trust them, maybe a special master should be appointed as a defense of arguments to evaluate this information or maybe you judge should look at it in camera. But I get and understand why Sean Hannity or any other client who doesn't to have his stature or notoriety would not want to be outed on a client list. So, they will make the argument before the judge. The judge will determine whether, A, attorneyclient privilege attaches, B, whether there were any exceptions here to that attorney-client privilege and, C, if so, whether this government gets to use this information or whether they don't. That's the essence of this hearing.
[Gorani:] So, the judge needs to decide whether or not this material seize can be fully used in the investigation into Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen is under criminal investigation. So, the judge is making that decision based on what exactly?
[Jackson:] Well, what happens that's absolutely right. The judge is determining whether the information that the government seized when they had a warrant that was lawfully obtained, right. It was signed off on. But now that you have the warrant and you go and you exercise as hotel and his home and his office and his lock boxes, whether if that's privileged, it should not come in or should not, you know, should have come in or should be excluded. And so, when you are under criminal investigation and the government wants to use information against you, it should not be information that otherwise they should not have. Remember this, although the criminal investigation at this point we know is federal in nature, right, and that's significant. And I mentioned it because the president has something called a pardon power, which he can wave a wand and absolve you of all sin. Still I believe Michael Cohen could have a problem because a lot of what he is charged with, Hala, could be charged as state crimes by the Manhattan attorney's office or by the state attorney general.
[Gorani:] That the president cannot pardon. The president cannot pardon someone who is convicted on state charges. What about Stormy? What was she doing?
[Jackson:] I think that's more or less a side show. That's symbolic in nature. Remember how we got to this point, how we got to this point is the fact that there was this agreement. Stormy Daniels, of course, someone who is alleged to have been involved with the president sexually. There's this hush agreement wherein she can't share anything regarding her relationship with the president. She's paid $130,000 in order to be quiet. Then the president says, I don't know who she is, didn't have an affair with her. Don't know what you are talking about. So, she's just there because this, of course, started as a result of her. Michael Avenatti, her attorney being very aggressive is there to demonstrate to the president, I mean business and we want to be heard. And so, she just there, she won't be asked questions. She's not a part of this hearing. I think it's symbolic to let the president know that we're on your case.
[Gorani:] How does it change things that we now have the name of other Michael Cohen clients such as Fox News' Sean Hannity.
[Jackson:] Well, we don't know how it changes things yet and simply because Sean Hannity was on the list, it doesn't necessarily mean that he qualifies as a client. Now, let me be clear. You can be a client to a lawyer, but maybe it is that, you know, it's not a privileged communication. They are trying to establish privileged communications, right? Those are the things that should be exempted from view. If you have a business dealing with someone that's outside of attorneyclient privilege, that's not protected. If you are acting on someone's capacity, but it's not really as a lawyer relationship, it's simply as an associate, that's not protected. Soattorney relationship? Number three, what's the nature of the communication between you and that client for which they should be privileged? And if any exemptions to the privilege apply, we know that there are a number of exemptions. One being crime fraud in the event that you engage in any criminality or have a discussion about criminality, Hala, with a client, guess what, that doesn't receive the protection of privilege and the government can freely use that at will.
[Gorani:] But lastly, what about communication between Michael Cohen and his longtime client, the president of the United States, Donald Trump? What about all of that material that may have been seized by the FBI?
[Jackson:] Yes, I mean, that's obviously, that's very significant. The FBI is going to be evaluating what if any communication was there. But remember, that in and of itself is not necessarily privileged, right? If he was having conversations with the president, was it in the context of an attorneyclient relationship? And remember what the end game is here, Hala. Regardless of what communications he had with Trump and what were they and what was it about and were they legal, were they illegal, what were they doing, remember the end game. If you squeeze Cohen and find out things he was involved in of the illegal variety say if the FBI has nothing in their seizure here that relates to any crime as it relates to the president, there may be other things Cohen knows. The end game is to charge him and then offer him some type of immunity so that he can talk regarding the president and what he knows. Again, generally speaking, he would say, I'm not talking to you. I have nothing to say because I'm going to get a presidential pardon Goes back to what we said before, though, if there are state crimes involved, Manhattan District attorney's office or the state attorney general, now he has real exposure. I'm interested to know what deals if any would be cut with the Manhattan DA's Office or the state attorney general, my former office. The reality is if they want him to talk, they will come up with ways and offers to give him to talk. When you have a family, when you are facing jeopardy, believe me, could you be loyal all you want, but when you look at years in jail if there's criminality, people more people talk than don't talk. I tell that to you as a defense attorney and former prosecutor. That's the reality.
[Gorani:] Well, you have experience in that you have experience in that domain. Joey Jackson, thanks very much. Obviously, a reminder of how absolutely unusual this is here with the FBI conducting a raid in the office and home of an attorney of the president of the United States, no less. While, the president and his legal advisers have one eye on that courtroom in New York, the are watching the former director of the FBI with the other. James Comey was interviewed on national at television on Sunday, delivering a blistering rebuke of President Trump. He's on a book tour. He is speaking to journalists. His first appearance was this weekend. Here is CNN's Kaitlan Collins with a wrap-up.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] I don't think he is medically unfit to be president. He is morally unfit.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Fired FBI Director James Comey unleashing a scathing criticism of President Trump's character. Blasting him unfit for office and a stain on those around him.
[Comey:] A person who sees morally equivalence in Charlottesville, who talks about and treats women like they are pieces of meat, who lies constantly about matters big and small, and insists the American people believe it. That person is not fit to be president of the United States on moral grounds.
[Collins:] In his first interview since the president fired him last May, Comey reveals he thinks the president might be vulnerable to Russian blackmail.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you think the Russians have something on Donald Trump?
[Comey:] It strikes me as unlikely. I would say with high confidence with any other president I dealt with, but I can't. It's possible.
[Collins:] Comey reflecting on the February meeting when he says President Trump asked him to drop the investigation his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn.
[Unidentified Male:] Why didn't you say I can't discuss this? You are doing something improper.
[Comey:] Maybe, although, he didn't know he was doing something improper. Why did he kick out the attorney general and the vice president of the United States and the leaders of the intelligence community, and why am I alone if he doesn't know the nature of the request?
[Collins:] Trump denies he made the request, but Comey believes it bears weight in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
[Unidentified Male:] Was President Trump obstructing justice?
[Comey:] Possibly. It's certainly some evidence of obstruction of Justice.
[Unidentified Male:] What will it mean if President Trump tries to fire Robert Mueller?
[Comey:] It would, I hope, set off alarm bells, that this is his most serious attack yet on the rule of law.
[Collins:] But when asked whether Mr. Trump should be impeached?
[Comey:] I hope not because I think impeaching and removing Donald Trump from office would let the American people off the hook. People in this country need to stand up and go to the voting booth and vote their values. Impeachment in a way would short circuit that.
[Collins:] Comey comparing the behavior the president's behavior to that of a mob boss saying he repeatedly demanded loyalty, most notably at a one-on- one dinner.
[Comey:] He said I expect loyalty. I need loyalty. I just stared at him and this narrative with myself inside saying don't you move. Don't you dare move. Don't even blink.
[Unidentified Male:] Why not say no?
[Comey:] I think because I was caught totally by surprise.
[Collins:] Trump denies he ever said that. Comey says President Trump dominated the conversation talking about himself whole time.
[Comey:] Constant series of assertions about the inauguration crowd. His crowd was bigger than that of Barack Obama's first inauguration. That is not true. That is not a perspective, view. That is just a lie.
[Unidentified Male:] So, you are listening, are you thinking President Trump is a liar?
[Comey:] Yes.
[Collins:] Comey recalling his infamous handshake from Trump in the White House shortly after the inauguration. He says even his family knew how uncomfortable he was.
[Comey:] I know that is my "Oh, no" face.
[Unidentified Male:] But that's not exactly [inaudible].
[Comey:] I don't want to say that on television.
[Collins:] Comey revealing how he felt when he discovered he had been fired.
[Comey:] I don't remember being angry. I thought it was crazy to fire me. I'm leading the investigation of Russian influence and particularly whether anyone in the Trump orbit coordinated and conspired with the Russians. That makes no sense at all.
[Collins:] Comey also reflecting on his controversial decision to inform Congress that he was reopening the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation just days before the election.
[Unidentified Male:] What was it like to be James Comey in the last ten days of that campaign after you sent the letter?
[Comey:] It sucked. I walked around vaguely sick to my stomach and feeling beaten down. I felt I was totally alone and everybody hated me. There wasn't a way out because it really was the right thing to do.
[Collins:] But the fired FBI director adamantly defending his handling of the Clinton probe.
[Unidentified Male:] If you knew that letter would have elected Donald Trump, you would have still sent it?
[Comey:] I would. Down that path lies the death of the FBI as an independent force to the American life. If I ever start considering whose political fortunes affected by a decision, we're done.
[Gorani:] And that was a wrap-up of the James Comey interview which aired live on American television on Sunday evening. For the White House reaction to James Comey's interview, let's bring in CNN's Jeremy Diamond. We've heard quite a bit from the White House following this Jeremy.
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's right we have. We even heard from the president before the interview actually aired with the president taking to Twitter to issue a sort of pre-buttal to James Comey's assertions. His book has been reported on now for several days. And last night, we heard from James Comey with some of, you know, rehashing some of these allegations that he has made against the president, including his claim that he believes that there was obstruction of justice or at least evidence possible evidence of obstruction of justice when the president asked James Comey to let go of the Michael Flynn investigation. We saw the president this morning again taking to Twitter to continue to criticize James Comey. That was it we saw that one tweet from the president this morning. Most of the folks who are close to the president, close to this White House believe that there could still be more to come from President Trump on James Comey. We know, of course, that he has repeatedly been angered by the FBI director's public assertions of the two of them and clearly the president may have more to say on this front. For now, though, most of the response has been handled by outside surrogates also White House Advisor Kellyanne Conway calling James Comey a spin artist. And the Republican National Committee has already launched a website calling James Comey a liar.
[Gorani:] Just quick one on the Michael Cohen court appearance. How much is the president paying attention to that? This is his personal attorney. He's is in a situation he needs lawyers. His home and office were raided by the FBI. Is the president concerned at all?
[Diamond:] Well, we know that the president has been extremely angered by this FBI raid on Michael Cohen's personal office, hotel room, the president suggesting that it was an attack on our country just last week with some pretty fiery language. But we also know that his lawyers are concerned about this probe, which was referred by the special counsel, but is being handled by U.S. attorneys in New York. So clearly, there could be some damaging information uncovered here. What's important to note is not every communication between the president and his personal attorney, Michael Cohen, would necessarily fall under that attorneyclient privilege. It would only be certain communications when it's about legal advice, when it's about advising him on specific matters. But there could be other communications, other documents that would be caught up in this, which have been a cause for concern for the president and his team of attorneys.
[Gorani:] All right. A lot of this to worry about, be concerned about and pay attention to at the White House in the last few days. Jeremy Diamond, thanks very much, reporting live from Washington, D.C. Still to come tonight, the British prime minister is defending her decision to strike Syria. Anger here, in France, too, over why President Macron authorized action without consulting lawmakers. We'll have that story coming up next.

[King:] Topping our political radar today, let the gambling on games begin, says the Supreme Court with a 6-3 vote, it just struck down a law that kept nearly all states from allowing sports betting, meaning New Jersey and others can now cash in on a lucrative revenue stream. The major sports leagues didn't want this, fearing their integrity could be damage. No word yet from Peter Rose. New female lawmakers getting fed up with the Senate's failure to reform the system for handling sexual harassment allegations on Capitol Hill. New York Senator Kristen Gillenbrand pointing out on Twitter, it's been 93 days since the House passed the bill addressing the issue, still no action in the Senate. Fellow Democratic Senator Patty Murray retweeting that post and adding, "We're tired of waiting." And the big bet today by a retail lobbying group hoping to convince the president the sweeping trade tariffs a bad idea. The wager? But the president likes John Hughes' movies end and he saw this ad while getting his daily dose for "Fox & Friends".
[Unidentified Male:] Tariffs raise acts on high working Americans. It's not complicated. Tariffs are B-A-D economics, bad economics. Bad.
[King:] Always good to see Ben Stein. The Let me come back to the more serious issue first, which is why are at almost 100 days the House passed bill. Remember when MeToo move was on the front pages. Congress said, you know what, on this one we're finally going to come. They're out of the 15th century, or the 16th century of the 21st century system to handle these things. Why? What's the excuse?
[Kim:] There's some that's a great question for people to answer definitively but there's been some concern in the Senate about provisions in the House bill that would've basically made the lawmakers financially responsible for any paying out any claims. Right now you can use taxpayer funds to do that. The legislation will make them personally liable. But I think the problem and we try the Congress tried to put that sexual harassment legislation into this big catch all omnibus sweeping budget measure back in March. It did not get included and infuriating these female senators that we just saw earlier. And there aren't a lot of must- pass train leaving the station at this point here on the Capitol Hill in the midterm year so it just makes it much more difficult
[King:] How about making this one a must-pass on its loan so it can't be hidden, so we can look at. And if there are legitimate questions about that, I get it. It's a complicated issue. There's a don't they have enough staff and lawyers to figure this out?
[Kucinich:] Well, you know, I had a very similar conversation with the GOP leadership aide around that time when there was at first a lot of rage about this not being included and there was a plan to get this done. But it doesn't answer you question on why this why haven't hasn't this gone through a community process? Why hasn't there been any momentum on this? And I think that's something they need to answer.
[King:] And this base Supreme Court decision, I'm going to get Cleveland
[Kucinich:] I'm never going to bet against LeBron James, ever.
[King:] Ever.
[Zeleny:] I mean this is a big in terms of the
[King:] 6 to 3
[Zeleny:] decision 6 to 3 and, you know, an unusual alignment of justices, which we don't also always see. But Sheldon Allison, we're talking about him before. This is certainly is going to be a blow for the Nevada gaming industry. It's going to be interesting to see how many states follow through with this.
[King:] And a lot of states looking any time they can to let

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Calls for resignation and impeachment. Virginia's lieutenant governor faces another allegation of sexual abuse, adding to the state's growing political crisis. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos sues the "National Enquirer" for blackmail and flags links between the tabloid's publisher, President Trump and the Saudi kingdom, we'll explore that. Also this hour the CNN Freedom Project. We take a look at a fashion- forward approach to helping victims of human trafficking. Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Natalie Allen and this is CNN NEWSROOM.
[Allen:] Our top story, the government of the state of Virginia is spiraling into chaos. Three top officials are mired in scandal and the Democratic Party wants action to stop the train wreck. The most serious allegations are against this man, lieutenant governor Justin Fairfax. Two women now accuse him of sexual assault. He denies any wrongdoing. Meantime, governor Ralph Northam, on the right there, vows to keep his job after racist pictures of him showed up in a 1984 yearbook. And attorney general Mark Herring admits to wearing blackface in 1980 and is also fighting for his political life. CNN's Ryan Nobles is in Richmond, Virginia, with a closer look at the second woman accusing Justin Fairfax of rape.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] It seems in many ways the situation in Richmond, Virginia, is getting more complicated by the day. Already the governor and the attorney general under a cloud of scandal because of accusations of racist photos and appearing in blackface in the past. Now the lieutenant governor who was already under fire from a sexual assault allegation is now facing accusations from a second accuser. That woman, Meredith Watson, says that Justin Fairfax raped her when they were both college students at Duke University back in 2000. Watson even goes on to say that she believes that Fairfax targeted her because she was a previous rape victim. Watson's attorney supplying the media with emails that they say show that Watson has told people for many years about Fairfax raping her when they were in college. in fact, one of those emails came as Fairfax was beginning his political career. A group of Duke alumni asked for donations from fellow alumni. Watson responded to that email chain by saying, quote, "Justin raped me in college. And I don't want to hear anything about him. Please, please, please remove me from any future emails about him, please. Thank you." Now Fairfax is vehemently denying this claim by Watson. He says that this is absolutely not true. And he also says that he plans not to resign. Even though Fairfax says he doesn't want to resign, the calls for him to do so are coming from all corners of Virginia's government. A number of the state's congressional delegations saying it's time for him to go. The former governor, Terry McAuliffe, also saying he should go. And to take it a step further, a Democratic delegate from Arlington, Virginia, Patrick Culp, says that he will file articles of impeachment against the lieutenant governor on Monday if he does not resign beforehand. Of course, all of this comes as the state is still reeling from the controversies involving the governor, who, in his medical school yearbook, there was a racist photo that appeared under his name, and the attorney general who admitted that he appeared in blackface while in college as well. The only update on those two stories is that the governor doesn't appear to be going anywhere. He told members of his cabinet in a meeting on Friday that he plans to serve out the balance of his term Ryan Nobles, CNN, Richmond, Virginia.
[Allen:] As Ryan just mentioned, calls for Justin Fairfax's resignation are pouring in from around the country. Virginia's house and Senate issued a joint statement, asking him to step down. It says this, "Due to the serious nature of these allegations, we believe lieutenant governor Fairfax can no longer fulfill his duties to the commonwealth. "He needs to address this as a private citizen. The time has come for him to step down." And the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus writes this, "In light of the most recent sexual assault allegations against lieutenant governor Justin Fairfax, the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus believes it is best for lieutenant governor Fairfax to step down from his position." And take a look at this list of some of the many U.S. senators who have called on Fairfax to resign. All of them here are running either for president or exploring a run. We now turn to Capitol Hill and heated exchanges on Friday between the Trump administration's acting attorney general and House Democrats. During his testimony before the Judiciary Committee, Matt Whitaker said he has not interfered with the Russia probe. But Democrats say Whitaker failed to answer key questions about his oversight of the investigation. For more, here's Jessica Schneider in Washington.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] This hearing highlighted the partisan divisions on Capitol Hill. Republicans calling it unwarranted while Democrats dug in. Now after hours and hours of questioning, the committee chair, Jerrold Nadler, says he is still not satisfied and even not sure he believes all of Whitaker's testimony after several back and forth testy exchanges.
[Schneider:] Acting attorney general Matt Whitaker making his first appearance before the House Judiciary Committee
[Unidentified Male:] This hearing is pointless.
[Rep. Doug Collins , Ranking Member, Judiciary Committee:] If this is the way we are going to go, then we'll have plenty of stunts. We're going to have plenty of theatrics. Bring your popcorn. I'm thinking about maybe we just set up a popcorn machine in the back because that's what this has become.
[Schneider:] and igniting a political firestorm.
[Rep. Jerrold Nadler , New York:] It's our understanding that at least one briefing occurred in December, before your decision not to recuse yourself on December 19, on Christmas Day. Is that correct?
[Matthew Whitaker, Acting U.s. Attorney General:] What's the basis for that question, sir?
[Nadler:] Yes or no.
[Whitaker:] Mr. Chairman, I again, what is the basis for your question? You're saying that it is your understanding.
[Nadler:] I mean, I'm asking the questions. I only have five minutes. So please answer yes or no.
[Whitaker:] No, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to you are asking me a question. It is your understanding. Can you tell me where you get the basis...
[Nadler:] No, I'm not going to tell you that. I don't have time to get into that.
[Schneider:] Whitaker at one point trying to cut the chairman off.
[Whitaker:] I see that your five minutes is up. And so... I'm we we we I am I'm here voluntarily. I we have agreed to five-minute rounds. And...
[Unidentified Male:] I think that's a fine place to end the five-minute rule.
[Nadler:] The committee will end will come to a and I will point out that we didn't enforce the five-minute rule on Attorney acting Attorney General Whitaker.
[Schneider:] Whitaker denied any conversations with the president or other White House officials about the special counsel's investigation, which Whitaker oversees, either before or after he took over the top spot at
[Doj. Whitaker:] At no time has the White House asked, nor have I provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel's investigation or any other investigation. I'm sorry.
[Nadler:] It's a yes-or-no question. Have you communicated anything you learned in that briefing about the investigation to President Trump, yes or no?
[Whitaker:] Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier today in my opening remarks, I do not intend today to talk about my private conversations with the president of the United States. But to answer your question, I have not talked to the president of the United States about the special counsel's investigation.
[Schneider:] Whitaker has come under fire for denouncing the Mueller investigation as a commentator before he joined the Justice Department, which Republicans quickly pointed out was not the reason for the hearing.
[Rep. Debbie Lesko , Arizona:] It's nothing but character assassination, harassment of our witness.
[Schneider:] Whitaker, who said he has been fully briefed on the Mueller investigation, declined to specifically condemn the label witch-hunt used by the president to describe the Russia probe.
[Whitaker:] I have not interfered with the special counsel's investigation.
[Rep. Steve Cohen , Tennessee:] Are you overseeing a witch-hunt? You would stop a witch-hunt, wouldn't you?
[Whitaker:] Congressman, it would be inappropriate for me to talk about an ongoing investigation.
[Schneider:] And Whitaker giving no specific indication how much longer it will last.
[Whitaker:] We haven't received the report. Bob Mueller is going to finish his investigation when he wants to finish his investigation.
[Schneider:] This isn't the end of the investigation. The chairman has a list of questions he wants answers to, including when he was briefed on the special counsel investigation and whether or not he had conversations with the president after the briefings. Nadler says he doesn't find Whitaker's insistence that he didn't have conversations with the president completely credible. Of course the chairman, Jerry Nadler, is once again threatening a subpoena, if it's necessary, to get those answers Jessica Schneider, CNN, Washington.
[Allen:] The U.S. president has ignored a legal deadline to tell Congress whether the Saudi crown prince ordered the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Under what is called the Magnitsky Act, he had 120 days to determine if the Saudi crown prince was responsible and whether to impose sanctions. The White House says the president doesn't have to act on committee requests. But lawmakers such as Democrat Bob Menendez says he does and they're pushing for action. Menendez says, "The Trump administration showed that it is willing to ignore U.S. law in its continued effort to stonewall accountability for the murder of Khashoggi." Mr. Trump has not agreed with the CIA conclusion that the Saudi crown prince ordered Khashoggi's killing. Khashoggi, of course, worked for "The Washington Post," owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. An intriguing part of Bezos' explosive blog post alleging the "National Enquirer" tried to blackmail and extort him are questions about ties between the tabloid, Saudi Arabia and the White House. That comes as federal prosecutor look into whether the magazine violated its immunity deal. For the latest, here's Alex Marquardt.
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Correspondent:] The "National Enquirer's" parent company hitting back today at stinging allegations and revelations by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, saying in a statement, it believes fervently that it acted lawfully, that it was in good faith negotiations to resolve all matters with Bezos. American Media Inc. or AMI also promising to launch an internal investigation into Bezos' long list of claims against them, including what he called extortion and blackmail when AMI threatened to leak risque photos of him. Sources telling CNN federal prosecutors are also looking into his accusations. In his blog post, Bezos alleges that AMI had a cozy relationship, not just with the Trump White House but with Saudi Arabia. Also alleged in published reports last year. AMI put out a 97-page glossy magazine heralding the kingdom's new crown prince and his vision ahead of his trip to the U.S. The Saudi embassy in Washington claimed they had no involvement or knowledge of the AMI publication with Prince Mohammed bin Salman on the cover, a man the CIA has concluded ordered the violent murder of Jamal Khashoggi of "The Washington Post," which Bezos owns. The Saudis have called the finding false. But the Associated Press reported that according to sources, embassy officials got an electronic copy of the pro-kingdom magazine about three weeks before it came out. Today a top Saudi official says he has no idea of any relationship with AMI, adding, "It's like a soap opera," and told CNN that as far as he knows, the Saudis did not press AMI to publish negative stories about Bezos. The biggest of which was the expose on Bezos' extramarital affair, which people around him believe was a political hit job, alleged payback for his newspaper's dogged reporting of President Trump and of the Saudi crown prince's role in the Khashoggi murder. Trump and Pecker have a well-documented history. The tabloid paying a so-called catch and kill fee to Karen McDougal once before the 2016 election for her story about her alleged affair with Trump, which he denies. Pecker then flipped, cooperating with Robert Mueller's team in exchange for immunity to detail those payments made by Trump's lawyer. That turn didn't dampen the president's rejoicing amid the "Enquirer's" splashy story about Bezos' infidelity, calling the Amazon CEO "Jeff Bozo" on Twitter and saying this about Bezos looming divorce from his wife of 25 years.
[Trump:] I wish him luck. It is going to be a beauty.
[Marquez:] No doubt this is a complex web of allegations and personal history but what Bezos, without proof, is saying here is clear: that AMI had reasons to protect and to promote the Saudis. At his newspaper, "The Washington Post," and their relentless covering of the Khashoggi murder angered AMI's friends, driving home the point that this expose of his affair and the attempted blackmail were politically motivated Alex Marquardt, CNN, Washington.
[Allen:] Steven Erlanger is chief diplomatic correspondent in Europe for "The New York Times." He joins us from Brussels. We always appreciate you being with us. And yes, Steven, where do we start with this one? Jeff Bezos, richest man, versus the "National Enquirer" and then throw in Saudi Arabia. And what do you got?
[Steven Erlanger, "the New York Times":] And Trump. It's an amazing set of inquiries. The most interesting thing is the way Bezos was deeply embarrassed about this affair has turned himself into a hero of free speech, fighting back against a really revolting newspaper, the "National Enquirer," which we know had deals with Michael Cohen to protect Donald Trump during the campaign from stories that he, himself, had affairs. And it is very funny for Trump to talk about Bezos' upcoming divorce as "a beauty," given the experience which Trump has had fences with divorces himself. So it's very complicated. Bezos is rich enough and powerful enough to be able to say, OK, I'll do what you want but I'm not going to just lie back and be intimidated. And I think that's very powerful and very important.
[Allen:] Yes, I'm curious, you know, Bezos in his blog post actually printed the letters from the "National Enquirer." Perhaps they're not used to someone playing hardball with them like that.
[Erlanger:] I think that's true, also as he said, if someone like me, he's probably the wealthiest person on Earth, is willing to be intimidated, then what hope does anyone else have? And I think that his ownership of "The Washington Post" is really a factor in all of this, he used a strange word for it, a "complexifier" for him. But he has done a great deal to save "The Washington Post" and make it a much better paper again. And obviously "The Post" goes after Trump and Trump goes after Bezos. That's not to say that Trump was behind all this. But the mystery is how, did the "National Enquirer" get these private emails and photos? And that meant that Bezos was trying to find when AMI, the company that owns the "Enquirer," threatened to publish more if he didn't stop.
[Allen:] We'll continue to follow that one. But I want to ask you about Congress wanting to hear from President Trump on the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. But there hasn't been a response about whether it was ordered by the crown prince. Why is the White House staying mum?
[Erlanger:] Well, I think this is also, in keep with political views, violating the law, because Congress has mandated a response. Here I think they have some sympathy with the realists in the White House, who understand that Saudi Arabia is an important ally of the United States, that the crown prince is not going anywhere, as some people hoped he would, that he'd be pushed aside. That's not happening. And so it's very a very electric moment. I think the White House and Trump know very well what happened. But it's not for the relationship to go public about it and some of the same people have to say who decry the national interest quality of the Trump White House are also decrying violence on Khashoggi when, in fact, there are, I think, compelling national interest reasons for Trump to keep his mouth shut on this one.
[Allen:] I want to pivot now to the acrimony we saw, the testimony in Washington. The acting attorney general, going before Congress; contentious might be the word of the day. Someone called him snarky. It's always tough to say the word snarky. The question, was he credible, forthcoming at all in responding to Democrats?
[Erlanger:] Well, it was always going to be hostile and, you know, I think Whitaker, people who suspect he's not the person they want in the job as even
[Allen:] All right, we always appreciate your insights. Thank you for giving us your time, Steven Erlanger, thanks, Steven.
[Erlanger:] Thanks, Natalie.
[Allen:] U.S. aid for Venezuela is still stuck in Colombia. It's not going anywhere. So many people are in need. Look at that. The opposition leader wants to bring that in. The president says there is no need. We'll have the latest on the ongoing standoff there. Also, Seattle bracing for another round of snow, look what they've already gotten. Derek joins with us that coming up here.

[Cabrera:] President Trump's attorney, Rudy Giuliani, holding a press event right now after a controversial week that included him contradicting the President on the payment to Stormy Daniels. Let's listen in.
[Giuliani:] So, go ahead. What would you like to ask? Again, as I said, I will repeat it one more time. Not answering questions about that now. We will talk about that tomorrow and later on in the week.
[Unidentified Female:] Why are people so afraid of the words are regime change and assume that it must mean war boots on the ground?
[Giuliani:] Well, it almost always doesn't. I mean, I guess this regime is so violent and the biggest supporter of terrorism in the world that they assume that it will be violent. I'm hoping it wouldn't be. More like what happened in Poland, more like what happened in Russia. I mean, Russia was one of the biggest armies in the world and it wasn't violent.
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Mayor, have you talked
[Giuliani:] Yes, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] As you very clearly demonstrated when you held the paper up what you thought the President would do with the nuclear agreement was spit on it and get rid of it. Has he told you personally?
[Giuliani:] No. I mean, it's a different thing when he is President of the United States. And I don't mix my role as attorney for him with my foreign policy views. He knows my views from the time of the campaign. I know his views. It's different, it's a year and a half of history, but he has surrounded by really terrific foreign policy advisers. And I would think John Bolton's view of this is no different today than it was a year ago, which is that this agreement is one of the worst ever reached in American history. Unfortunately, the Iranian regime has gotten the benefits of it already. And I think Prime Minister Netanyahu did a pretty good job of showing us how it was violated. The MEK could do that same job as effectively as the prime minister. So, I don't
[Unidentified Male:] On a scale of one to ten
[Giuliani:] But I can't predict. It wouldn't be fair now. I mean, if I were, just in private life completely, I would give you my prediction. You know, what my desire is but I can't give you a prediction because I, you know, I represent the President. And I can't and I certainly can't speak for him. You know, Bolton maybe or Pompeo can speak for him but I can't.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. Mayor
[Unidentified Male:] What about North Korea? What do you anticipate happening in North Korea?
[Giuliani:] No. I think I'm praying like everyone, including nobody's done more to get people released from North Korea than the gentleman who was here before, Bill Richardson, for whom I have enormous respect, even though we are in different parties. I think he would I think the less said about it right now the better and the more we pray, the better. But we could have three people released. That would be historic in and of itself. And then we could have we could have, maybe, just maybe, a nonnuclear North Korea. Wow. That would be unbelievable. I guess you can't go that far with it yet. I mean, he first has to decide what he wants to do with the agreement. Seems to me there are three choices, right, one that I don't like, continue it. Second one, renegotiate it. Number three, throw it out, get the sanctions back, and then see if they don't come to their on their knees again like they did last time. President Obama obviously, I will not answer that question. But you can
[Unidentified Male:] Why not?
[Giuliani:] Because this is not the time for it. The concentration here is on the freedom of the Iranian people. Can you have some simple respect and remain concentrated on that? There is plenty of time to answer the other questions.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you support a regime change?
[Giuliani:] I have been in support of regime change for I don't think how long. I mean, ten years. I continue to be. I think it's the only way to peace in the Middle East. It's more important than an Israel-Palestinian deal. Iran used to be an ally of not only the United States but of Israel. That could happen again. I mean, you're seeing Egypt becoming an ally of Saudi Arabia and Israel, Saudi Arabia, Emirates, Qatar, this could really spread.
[Unidentified Female:] When John Bolton was named national security adviser, using his connections to MEK and really painting him and the group in just
[Giuliani:] Look, I went through it with John at that time. I wrote letters for him. I didn't testify because they didn't want know testify but I wrote letters for him, and MEK has been one of the more maligned organizations, but it's come into its own now. It was listed as a terrorist group by one of the biggest mistakes of the Clinton administration in order to placate Iran and I have to teach you, you can't placate them. They are murders, they are killers, they are thieves and they are corrupt and they kill members of MEK. And the silly people in our state department said, the MEK is not really a threat. Then why is the Iranian regime killing them if they are not a threat? You don't kill people that are not threats just for the fun of it.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you think the President might go out and tweet in favor of what's going on in Iran.
[Giuliani:] He did. He did.
[Unidentified Female:] What kind of effect is that having on the morale within Iran? Is that what we should be watching?
[Giuliani:] I think it's great. I think the President I think maybe more attention paid to that and not some of the other things you want to talk about. I think the same scenario could happen in Iran that has happened in North Korea, because this President is so much more effective than our prior President, who was feckless. I mean, the prior President drew a line in the sand, Assad killed his own people, and he did nothing. This President drew a line in the sand and he bombed Assad. Assad has stopped. So we got to hope that works. It's not going to work all the time. It's not going to work immediately but long-term, it's the much better approach. Thank you.
[Unidentified Female:] The status of the three American hostages?
[Giuliani:] I don't know the status of them. You might know it better than I do. They looked pretty good yesterday. I haven't paid attention to it today and I'm praying it will get done.
[Unidentified Female:] Change from Thursday comments on Thursday?
[Giuliani:] Nothing's changed. They are working on it. And I'm not privy to I'm not privy to what they're doing. I'm reading the newspapers like you are. Thank you.
[Unidentified Male:] What's the current status of the Mueller investigation?
[Cabrera:] Of course that was Rudy Giuliani taking a few questions from reporters following his speech to the Iran freedom convention in D.C., saying he wanted to keep the conversation about Iran in that question and answer session. Let's bring in CNN political commentator and former special assistant to President George W. Bush, Scott Jennings. First of all, Scott, nobody wanted to really talk about Iran in that Q&A because Rudy Giuliani is representing the President as his outside counsel in the Russia probe. Why is he talking about foreign policy instead of taking questions on that?
[Scott Jennings, Former Special Assistant To President George W. Bush:] Yes, great question. I mean, it seems like Rudy has taken on a larger role than just external counsel for an outside matter. It seems like right now, he is one of the closest people to the President when it comes to all things both legal and policy. He is not shy about commenting on it. So, I think what will be interesting to see is whether he continues to play this role from outside the White House. I mean, the things he was saying today and the things he was talking about, these are normally the purview of your national security adviser, your state department, those kinds of people who are inside the government. Certainly, the President can take counsel from anyone he likes, it's just unusual to see someone outside speaking so freely about it when they're not actually part of the national security apparatus.
[Cabrera:] Even in his comments today at this convention, he talked about the North Korean detainees and said he, again, believed they were going to be released in the next few days. So he seems or implies to know something about that as well. But let me ask you about the broader picture and his media blitz this week, how he contradicted the President's previous comments about the stormy Daniels payment. Here's how conservative media reacted to that.
[Unidentified Female:] I love Rudy, but they better have an explanation for that. That's a problem. Look, I'm I was a criminal defense lawyer. This is what I did. I was always looking for inconsistencies in statements like any lawyer would. The left is going to seize on that. It's all about credibility and impeaching someone's credibility throughout the process. So, if you are not being if you're not being truthful about this, then are you being truthful about the Russia you can see where this is going to go.
[Cabrera:] Scott, if FOX is conflicted on how to react, should the President be worried about the conservative base's reaction?
[Jennings:] Well, I don't think the base is going to leave the President over, you know, a couple of days of fumbles by Rudy Giuliani. I mean, clearly, he got out over his skis, the President had to reel him in. I think what the base wants to see for the President is a competent legal strategy in an external apparatus to handle certain questions moving forward. That competent legal strategy, I think, is going to be set by Emmett Flood, who's a real lawyer who knows how to handle real investigations. It strikes me that Rudy Giuliani is really taking on a PR role. The real legal role here, the where the President's really in danger is on the legal side and that's why they went out and got a great lawyer in Emmett Flood who knows what he is doing. So my suspicion is, once Emmett gets to the office, there's going to be a lot more tight scripting of when Rudy Giuliani goes out and discusses the implications of certain legal machinations in this case.
[Cabrera:] But you just said that Emmett Flood is a real lawyer. You don't think Rudy Giuliani is a real lawyer?
[Jennings:] Well, I don't think Mr. Giuliani's been practicing for quite some time. Of course he is a real lawyer. I mean, he is alive and he is a real person. But you know, Emmett Flood is a real, practicing attorney who has real high-level experience handling investigations in the executive branch. He represented us when I was special assistant to President Bush in the second term. On a lot of serious matters, on investigation issues. So, Emmett Flood is exactly the kind of lawyer you need in this situation and it strikes me that he won't be playing the public role that Rudy is playing. So if you want to know who's going to be running the legal strategy, it's Emmett. Who is running the PR strategy? That's Rudy.
[Cabrera:] And yet, Rudy Giuliani, we understand, did meet with Robert Mueller earlier this week, trying to lay out the parameters that there were to be an interview with the President and the President yesterday said he would be happy to sit down with Mueller. Do you think that's going to happen?
[Jennings:] I don't know. I would be surprised at this point if the President sat down with Mueller for an interview, despite what he has said. Perhaps they are trying to find middle ground here where perhaps the President could answer questions in a time-limited fashion or answer questions in writing. I mean, the safest thing to do would be to answer questions and have them submitted in writing. That way you have really tight control over exactly how you answer them. But given open-ended several long hours interview to this special counsel under the circumstances and under the posture that has been brought forth this week, I think it's highly unlikely that the President will ultimately sit down and do that. I know he has maintained his innocence and he has maintained that there has been no collusion. So they may take a little PR hit on him not sitting down, but it's probably not worth the risk if they can get a deal to do it in writing.
[Cabrera:] There is also the possibility if he doesn't do so voluntarily, Mueller could subpoena Trump and that could make this investigation go on much longer. Is that what Republicans want?
[Jennings:] Well, I think Republicans want this investigation to ultimately come to an end. And they want the investigation to come to an end and tell us what we really all want to know. Nobody really wants to know about Stormy Daniels. What people want to know about is whether Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin and the Russians interfered in our election, how did they do it? And how do we stop it in the future? That's what this whole thing started as, a collusion investigation and how do we stop the Russians from interfering in our democracy. But we are in some ways way far a-flung from that right now. So I think what Republicans want is this to eventually come to an end because it's been going on for a long time, and to tell us what's most vital, not about the President's sexual history, but about the future of the country as it relates to the Russians.
[Cabrera:] Scott Jennings, thank you so much for joining us.
[Jennings:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] Quick break. We'll be right back.

[Baldwin:] We still have a little deja vu over the Florida recount. Stop me if you've heard this one. "She was using a private e-mail account." no, not Hillary Clinton. This time it was Ivanka Trump. The President's daughter has committed this violation that her own father was fixated with as he ran against Clinton to become President. Remember those chance? "Lock her up"?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] She should never have been allowed to run for the presidency based on what she does with e-mail. She doesn't even remember whether or not she was instructed on how to use e-mails. She deleted the e-mails. She has to go to jail.
[Baldwin:] Yes, there are key differences between Clinton and Ivanka Trump's e-mail use, but as for Ivanka Trump's defense? I didn't know. Does that sound familiar? Only this time President Trump hasn't said one word. His daughter's e-mail use came to light after this ethics watchdog group called American Oversight sued for public records. Now the first daughter's e-mails will be part of this probe led by house Democrats into whether she violated the law when conducting government business. Let's go to our White House reporter Jeremy Diamond. What is the White House saying about this?
[Jeremy Diamond, White House Reporter:] The White House is simply looking at the facts here. The facts are that Ivanka Trump used a private e-mail address to conduct government business for at least several months at the beginning of her tenure as a senior White House official. These records on it and by the watch dog group show Ivanka Trump several e-mails sent to senior officials, including the secretary of commerce, the secretary of education, Betsy DeVos. All of this show there could be a violation here. This is of course all drying cries of hypocrisy from both the President's critics but even some his supporters who remember the President's chants on the campaign trail of "lock her up," some of which you just played. Of course, this issue of Clinton's e-mails was a central line of attack from the President. Now it seems Ivanka Trump, at least through her attorney's spokesperson is using some of the similar defenses that Hillary Clinton used back during the 2016 campaign. Some of which include, this was mostly logistical e-mails, family scheduling and that they were ultimately forwarded to government accounts. But there are some key differences here as you did point out, Brooke. And her attorney spokesman, Peter Mirijanian, is pointing some of those out in a statement saying, "To address misinformation being peddled about Ms. Trump's personal e-mail, she did not create a private server in her house or office. There was never classified information transmitted. The account was never transferred or how's that Trump organization. No e-mails were ever deleted and the e-mails have been retained in the official account in conformity with record preservation laws and rules." But the President of course was not just focused on those details, he was using her use of personal e-mail, Hillary Clinton's, as a broader line of attack, but for now the President not commenting on certainly not calling his daughter, crooked Ivanka.
[Baldwin:] No, he is not. We will listen to see if he says anything as he is on his way to Florida next hour, Jeremy Diamond, thank you very much, from the White House. Happening at this very moment. Wall Street's 2018 gains have been wiped out amid a selloff. What has investors spooked? What does this signal about the state of the U.S. economy?

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight, Rudy Giuliani, the president's TV lawyer, is signaling what might be a new tactic when it comes to whether the Trump campaign received advanced warning directly from WikiLeaks of e-mails damaging to the Democrats back in 2016. In a telephone interview today with the Hill, Giuliani says that President Trump had no contact with WikiLeaks, but he claims even if someone inside or associated with the campaign got material directly or indirectly, as long as they weren't involved in hacking, Giuliani says there's no problem.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump Attorney:] I don't know if other people contacted with WikiLeaks, but it's hard to understand what the crime would be if they did.
[Berman:] Here to help me sort this out, CNN's chief legal Jeffrey Toobin. So, Jeffrey, Giuliani left open the possibility that other people besides the president may have been in contact with WikiLeaks but says he's not sure what the crime would be, even if they were.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Well, you know, I think we're really in the end game of preparing for the Mueller report. And I think what Giuliani is doing is he's preparing to make arguments based on the facts that Mueller finds. One of them, it appears, may be that contrary to what they have said earlier, there were contacts between people affiliated with the Trump campaign, perhaps Roger Stone and WikiLeaks, and the question will be, is there anything improper or illegal about that? Giuliani is asserting no. It may be somewhat more complicated than that.
[Berman:] Right. You know, there's an interesting legal question here, which has to do with what is WikiLeaks, correct?
[Toobin:] Right. Absolutely. If you know, someone tells, you know, the Trump campaign that CNN is going to report x, y, and z, and then they get that advanced knowledge, there's certainly nothing improper about receiving that information. WikiLeaks is or is not a journalistic organization. When Pompeo was director of the CIA, he made very clear his view that it was not a journalist organization. It was an arm essentially of the Russian government, which creates a different set of legal questions. In any case, it's also true that the relationship between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks may have gone beyond simply receiving information from WikiLeaks. There may have been coordination, there may have been collusion to use the famous word. And those facts are actually more important than any sort of advanced spin on the legalities.
[Berman:] And there certainly might be a legal issue, might be a legal issue but there will definitely be political ramifications if that contact took place.
[Toobin:] Especially since the president himself and the Trump campaign and all of its surrogates have been saying for literally years now there were no contacts between WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign.
[Berman:] Which again, to go back to your first answer is why it's so interesting that Rudy Giuliani perhaps in the weeks before a Mueller report comes out is opening the door to the possibility that maybe in fact there were those contacts. I want to get your take since we're talking about Rudy Giuliani on two sort of contradicting statements he gave about whether or not the president would answer more questions from the special counsel. He said this in an interview with the Hill. Listen.
[Giuliani:] We're not answering any more questions from these people. Their outrageous activity we did enough.
[Berman:] So that's what he said out loud. We have the audio there. He spoke to the Daily Beast and said, and I'll give you dramatic reading, "Negotiations haven't formally ended yet. They haven't ended because it's not just my opinion that matters. There are other lawyers involved and the president of the United States, of course. My opinion is, I don't trust them." So we hear him out loud saying, there's no way he's going to answer more questions. And then we read that statement saying, you know, we're still talking about it.
[Toobin:] Yes. I believe the former more than the latter. I don't believe that the president is going to make any more statements. I think he wants to give the impression as he has from the very beginning that Donald Trump feels he has nothing to hide. He wants to answer all the questions. But the lawyers are saying this thing needs to come to an end. The short version is he ain't talking to them. In print, you know, in writing, orally not at all.
[Berman:] I suspect you're right and I think what we're also seeing here is Rudy Giuliani asking more acting more as a flak than a lawyer. He's just filling air time with the Hill, giving interviews and print interviews. And if he contradicts himself, who cares?
[Toobin:] That's been the job since day one. I mean he has been a public relations advocate for the president. Sometimes more effectively than others. Mostly it seems for providing talking points to Fox News so that they can continue offering the defense of the day. But, you know, on the legalities, the former mayor has been had some problems along the way.
[Berman:] All right, Jeffrey Toobin, stick around, if you will because we want to get your insight on another controversy bubbling for the White House. And this goes back to the very start of the administration, the inauguration. It brought galas and glamour and a record shattering price tag. Did donors expect more than just a good time? According to reports, federal investigators are on the money trail looking into that question. Details, next.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] They're going to have to answer for how they feel about what President Trump says. And this was her first sampling of how she'll do that tonight. Thank you for watching. "CNN TONIGHT" with Don Lemon starts right now. How do you think she did? You're a funny guy.
[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I've got nothing but the utmost respect for Nikki Haley. I think she is a fantastically professional all the time and I loved it when she said I don't get confused. Remember? I think-
[Cuomo:] Sure, I remember that.
[Lemon:] I like her chutzpah. But it's the Al Smith dinner, and we have to have a sense of humor. You talked about some serious stuff. OK. You can debate whether or not she did it while she was in office or not. That is fine to do that. That's legitimate. But when you're doing those things you've got to be funny.
[Cuomo:] Sure.
[Lemon:] And I thought she was funny.
[Cuomo:] What was her best joke you that heard there?
[Lemon:] I don't even remember what she said there. I thought she I thought it was funny-
[Cuomo:] Mine was-
[Lemon:] I thought it was Elizabeth Warren. I thought that was pretty funny.
[Cuomo:] yes. That was the best one.
[Lemon:] And if you're going to talk about it. You saw what the former congressman, what was his name, Chaffetz, on Twitter when he tweeted the terrible thing, he was at Disney World or Disneyland with his kids and there was a picture of a Native American or at least a carving, a sculpture, a statue and he was standing there saying look, I'm at Disneyland or Disney World, I forget which one, with Elizabeth Warren. It wasn't funny. But in that setting, I thought the joke was appropriate and funny. And listen, we've got to stop being so P.C. or we're going to kill comedy. You've got to understand you got to, listen, you don't want to insult people just because you you don't want to be racist or sexist or you've got to know some boundaries. But we can't kill comedy. And comedy is not about being politically correct.
[Cuomo:] It's often about the opposite.
[Lemon:] Right.
[Cuomo:] I mean, imagine what George Carlin would be saying today about things, may he rest in peace. Look, with P.C. I think what matters more than what you say is what you do.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] That's always been the big contradiction is that people say all the same things and I'll call you African-American but I don't work for equality and for your right and social justice. Then what the hell, it doesn't matter what I call you. Her test is going to be though, Don.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] You remember the one time she said I don't get confused or whatever it was-
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] because it was the only time. And even at the Al Smith dinner tonight she didn't make any jokes about Trump.
[Lemon:] No.
[Cuomo:] And that's something she's going to have to answer for at some point.
[Lemon:] Well, I think now what we're going to see, I think she was very smart and very strategic about how she navigated the Trump administration because she is, I think the only one so far who's come out unscathed and I think she may come out looking better than when she went in.
[Cuomo:] Her numbers are very good.
[Lemon:] She definitely built her resume, built up her resume. Now she has experience-
[Cuomo:] Yes. Big credential.
[Lemon:] Big huge credential. And I think she got out probably in the right time. She got out before the midterm elections because if Republicans do badly then she won't have to deal with that. Plus, she gets the headline. If she had if she had resigned after the midterm elections or, you know, shortly after that, the headline would still be the midterm elections and not Nikki Haley. So, I think she got out in time. But anyway, I have nothing but respect for her. I thought she was funny. And you know what? People may think this is sexist. I thought she looked great. I don't know if we still have a video of her. But I actually thought she looked really pretty.
[Cuomo:] I think it's still OK to say that.
[Lemon:] I know. I worry sometimes. Can you say that in this era? Like I say people at work and I say can I say hey, nice dress, you look beautiful. Because you never know, I'm just asking.
[Cuomo:] You never say that to me.
[Lemon:] Well, because your dresses are never nice and you never look beautiful.
[Cuomo:] Fair point.
[Lemon:] But seriously, I think she looks fantastic. She sounded fantastic. And I think that was a good look for her, meaning overall, everything.
[Cuomo:] I think she checks a lot of boxes.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] I really do. And I think in a great irony at a time where she's working for an administration where the motto is, make America great again, I don't care what anybody says, I think it's inherently reductive and I think inherently a dog whistle to a time when things were not great.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] She stands apart. She represents diversity, women empowerment. She represented a strength. She represented an evenness.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] And she went at it pretty much straightaway, not overtly partisan.
[Lemon:] She's going to the lion's den. A lot of people won't do that. She'll actually come on, what's consider the line, she'll actually come on CNN, come on another network-
[Cuomo:] And in fact, if she were a Democrat she'd probably be at or near the top of the list for them right now.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] Funny how the fates work.
[Lemon:] I never even thought about that. So, did you you saw the president's reality, right?
[Cuomo:] I did.
[Lemon:] Did you see what he said about Gianforte?
[Cuomo:] No. What did he say?
[Lemon:] He was saying he pretty much, I'm paraphrasing here, he called him out as something good that was the guy that body slammed the reporter.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Lemon:] Saying I was overseas on a trip and I heard that you body- slammed someone, you don't want to mess with this guy. We're going to play it in this hour. You'll see.
[Cuomo:] He's all about strength. Unless he's dealing with somebody who's strong.
[Lemon:] You dressed like me again.
[Cuomo:] No, I didn't.
[Lemon:] Yes, you did.
[Cuomo:] This suit is blue, plays great.
[Lemon:] I've got a new friend for you. I'll introduce him to you and the audience tomorrow. And we'll figure out a name for him. I'm giving it away a little bit.
[Cuomo:] Are you?
[Lemon:] Well, yes.
[Cuomo:] Well, no, you're not giving it away because people will be surprised to hear you have a friend other than me. I love you, buddy. People are going to love your new friend.
[Lemon:] Yes. OK. We'll see. We'll talk tomorrow. We'll figure it out.
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Lemon:] Thank you. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. You know, with everything that's going on in the White House, top aides in a screaming match over immigration, the administration trying to dodge world outrage over Jamal Khashoggi, it's no surprise that President Trump got out of Washington and headed to his happy place tonight, which is the campaign trail. You know this president loves a campaign rally in a place where it's still 2016, where he's surrounded by adoring MAGA hat-wearing fans. Where he's winning so much they're getting tired of winning.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] America is winning. Because we are finally putting America first again. It's America first.
[Lemon:] But back here in the real world, things are a little different. A lot different. Can you believe it was just last week that President Trump did his victory lap after getting Justice Brett Kavanaugh confirmed? That was just last week. Since then the outrage over the disappearance and likely murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi has exploded. Leaving the White House desperately trying to avoid blaming the Saudis. But that didn't stop the president from making what may be the most inappropriate joke ever. Joking about, I just mentioned this, Montana Congressman Greg Gianforte, who assaulted a reporter during his campaign last May.
[Trump:] Any guy that can do a body slam, he's my candidate. He's my guy. I shouldn't say this, but there's nothing to be embarrassed about. So, I was in Rome with a lot of the leaders from other countries talking about all sorts of things. And I heard about it. And we endorsed Greg very early. But I had heard that he body- slammed a reporter.
[Lemon:] So, you heard the president. He's joking about an assault on a reporter. In the face of world outrage about what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. But there's more. The deficit, at $779 billion now, the highest it's been since 2012. And the president's signature campaign promise, stopping immigration along our southern border, falling apart. Border crossings are actually up. A record 16,685 family members arrested in September. Up 80 percent from July, 80 percent. That as a migrant caravan fueling instability in Honduras makes its way north. Sources telling CNN that's why the screaming match blew up today between John Kelly and John Bolton. They also say Trump is incensed about the rising levels of migrants.
[Trump:] Remember, it's going to be an election of the caravan. You know what I'm talking about. As you know, I'm willing to send the military to defend our southern border if necessary. All because of the illegal immigration onslaught brought by the Democrats because they refuse to acknowledge or to change the laws.
[Lemon:] So, you heard that. The president falsely claiming that Democrats are to blame for illegal immigration. And threatening today to deploy the military to shut down the border. Even though the Posse Comitatus Act forbids, forbids using the military for suburban duties on military bases. The president is tougher on immigrants than he is on Saudi Arabia. With the Saudis he's leading from behind. Actually, leading from behind would be a step up. It's no kind of leadership at all to give the Saudis a few more days to investigate what happened to Jamal Khashoggi.
[Mike Pompeo, United States Secretary Of State:] I told President Trump this morning that we ought to give them a few more days to complete that so that we too have a complete understanding of the facts surrounding that.
[Lemon:] And what kind of immigration is run by the very people you suspect of being involved in the crime?
[Trump:] We're waiting for some investigations and waiting for the results, and we'll have them very soon.
[Lemon:] So, sources are telling CNN that Jared Kushner, advising the president to go slowly, has also reminded him that the U.S. partners with less than savory regimes around the world, not just the Saudis. That kind of what aboutism is not leadership. But this president wants you to see him as a leader, a leader who can carry the entire GOP on his coattails.
[Trump:] I'm not on the ticket, but Congress is on the ticket. And I try and tell my people, that's the same thing as me. In a sense. That's the same thing. Think of it as the same thing as me.
[Lemon:] Yet, he also says this.
[Trump:] So let's say we have a really bad time in three weeks. If they don't go out and vote, they have themselves to blame.
[Lemon:] Heads I win, tails you lose. If the GOP goes down to defeat in the midterms, this president won't take the blame. He never does. He has no problem doing a 180, calling Christine Blasey Ford credible, then mocking her in of course a campaign rally. Admitting and apologizing for joking about sexual assault on that Access Hollywood tape, then telling his confidants he doesn't think that it was his voice, insisting there were very fine people on both sides of the deadly riot in Charlottesville and then one day after saying racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs. There's one thing that matters to this president, and that is winning. Heads I win, tails you lose. Jim Acosta is with the president tonight in Montana. He joins us now. Jim, good evening to you. The president at his favorite place at a campaign rally, and he's going all in on immigration. What's the latest?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, that's right. I mean, it was pretty typical Donald Trump when it comes to pulling out the red meat for this crowd in Montana. But Don, there were times during his speech when [Inaudible] and that was essentially on this issue of the caravan of migrants coming up from Central America. [Inaudible]. The president at one point painting those migrants as criminals even though many of them, as you know, Don, are trying to escape crime in their home countries. Here's more of what the president had to say.
[Lemon:] So, Jim Jim, I have to ask you about that comment the president made about Congressman Greg Gianforte's body slamming skills. I mean, that was really in remarkably poor taste with the apparent murder of the journalist in the Middle East.
[Acosta:] That's right, Don. I mean, obviously right now the whole world is demanding answers from the Saudi government to explain exactly what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. It sounds like he was brutally murdered in the most gruesome possible fashion. And here you have the president at one point during his speech he was praising Greg Gianforte, the Montana congressman who body-slammed Ben Jacobs with the Guardian newspaper. Gianforte actually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in that case. And you have the president of the United States even in this investigation while he's claiming the administration is claiming that they're going to get serious with the Saudis about all of this, joking that Greg Gianforte is his kind of guy, saying anybody who can body slam somebody is my kind of guy. And Don, he not only did this once. He came back to this joke, this bit later on in the rally when he was handicapping the 2020 field going through the various Democrats he might be up against and he recalled when Joe Biden said he would like to take Donald Trump behind a school building or something like that and have a fistfight. The president at one point saying that he would take down Biden faster than Greg would, referring to Greg Gianforte. So not just once but twice tonight the president is making jokes about assaulting reporters while the whole world is demanding answers about the murder of a journalist who died in the most gruesome and vicious way possible. And Don, also we should point out, the president time and again was going after Democrats accusing them of being part of a mob, of being part of an angry mob. I have to tell you, Don, when the president made that joke about Greg Gianforte assaulting Ben Jacobs, I looked over to the crowd. There was one gentleman, a Trump supporter in the crowd, who was doing pro wrestling moves, doing body slam type gestures in the crowd. So, the crowd was obviously eating this stuff up, and people wonder whether or not there's a cause and effect, whether or not the president's rhetoric, you know, plants seeds of violence in his own supporters, in his own crowds. I think it was pretty evident there that the crowd was loving every minute of this when the president was talking about assaulting, joking about assaulting reporters at this rally tonight, Don.
[Lemon:] An embarrassing performance tonight by the president with those jokes and people cheering him on. Sad. Thank you, Jim Acosta. I appreciate it. The president campaigning tonight after his top aides got into a screaming match over immigration. CNN's Kaitlan Collins has the details for us next.

[George H. W. Bush, Former U.s. President:] Read my lips, no new taxes.
[Bush:] I, George Herbert Walker Bush, do solemnly swear
[Unidentified Male:] That I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States.
[Bush:] That I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States. Kuwait is liberated. Iraq's army is defeated. Our military objectives are met. Just because you run against someone does not mean you have to be enemies. Politics doesn't have to be mean and ugly. I love you, precious, with all my heart, and to know that you love me means my life. How often I have thought about the immeasurable joy that will be ours someday. Just because you're an old guy, you don't have to sit around drooling in the corner. No regrets about one single thing in my life that I can think of.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is CNN special coverage of the passing of George H. W. Bush. I am Wolf Blitzer reporting from Buenos Aires. Prayers and words of comfort being offered to the former president's family right now. President Bush worked tirelessly for the American people, as a U.S. Navy pilot, then as a congressman, a diplomat, and as head of the CIA. But he is also remembered as a great family man, survived by five children, more than a dozen grandchildren, and many great grandchildren. He was 94-years-old. His death comes months after his wife Barbara Bush passed. She passed away this past April at the age of 92. They were married for 73 years. Dana, this is a story that all of us are going to remember for a long time, these days as we reflect on this great American leader.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Anchor:] No question, Wolf. It is really remarkable to be here in Houston in the late president's hometown, a place that he loved. He was certainly a member of the community here. But you got to know him, Wolf, covering him as a master on the world stage. Here in Houston right now joining me is someone who edited the president's book on that period "The China Diary, George H. W. Bush, The Making of a Global President." Jeffrey Engel is also the author of "When the World Seemed New, George H. W. Bush and the End of the Cold War," and he's a founding director of SMU's Center for Presidential History. Thank you for joining me this morning. I want to start with something that struck me in the book I talked about that you wrote about how President Bush handled the end of the cold war. And it is hard, I think, for people to wrap their minds around what he had in front of him, just in one term, even the beginning of his one term. You talk about the Berlin Wall falling, democracy taking root behind the iron curtain, Germany uniting, which had been divided since World War II, the Soviet Union surrendering. And it goes on and on and on. And you note that what he had to deal with, the complexities of it, was only paralleled by what FDR had to deal with during his four terms.
[Jeffrey Engel, Historian, Southern Methodist University:] I was going to say, during a lot longer period in office. It really was an astounding period. We've never seen such tectonic change in the international system over a short period. In fact most of the things you just mentioned really happened in the first half of his first term. So we think about Donald Trump's first term, he is about halfway through. That was the period when we saw the Berlin Wall come down, communism begin to falter, and also Saddam Hussein invade Kuwait. It really was remarkable how many things happened and how much he had to juggle at one time.
[Bash:] And now, looking back, watching what happened as he became president, he was vice president as the cold war was really ending, but when the transformation happened, it was on his watch as president. And it was not a sure thing that it was going to end up that way. It was because he was president that it happened that way.
[Engel:] This is really key. We have to remember it has been a long time now. But we have to remember this is really one of the most dangerous periods in the 20th century because we have a global super power, the Soviet Union, which effectively is collapsing. And throughout history, we've never seen a super power collapse without an ensuing great power war. But we've never actually run that experiment globally with nuclear weapons in the mix, 20,000 nuclear weapons on the Soviet side. So what Bush was confronting was something that really could have at any moment, probably should have, if you ran experiments enough times, probably should have exploded into the kinds of ethnic violence or the kinds of civil war that we saw, say, in Yugoslavia. That could have happened throughout the Soviet Union. And Bush's really skill in handling of that was to keep calm in order to keep global leaders while this tectonic change was going on, keep them all focused on not making it worse. Let's keep talking. Let's keep the crisis down, let's keep the emotions down. And that all happened behind the scenes.
[Bash:] Yes, and that is really remarkable because he really was the right man at the right time, because it was his DNA to keep calm, to not be, as we've heard so many times this morning, braggadocious. And that really helped as a guiding light and a guide post for how he handled that remarkable time in history.
[Engel:] I like to say that basically he practiced Hippocratic diplomacy, that is to say the first thing you do is make sure you're not making things worse, which is really something that other presidents might want to take note of. One great example of the way he was able to personalize foreign policy and really get to know foreign leaders really occurred at the fall of the Berlin Wall. This was a moment in 1989 that frankly shouldn't have happened. It was a mistake. No one expected it. Bush and General Scowcroft, his national security adviser, didn't expect it basically in their entire lives. Suddenly it happened. And while Bush had to go in front of cameras, in front of the American people to give a statement to explain what was going on, he simultaneously knew people around the world, including in the Soviet Union were watching. So he had to make sure that nothing he said would perhaps provoke violence, even though he knew, he would keep on getting notes passed to him that said Margaret Thatcher, prime minister of Britain, called. Germany's Helmut Kohl called. Mikhail Gorbachev called. And everyone had the same question of the president of the United States, which is do you know what's going on. And he was able to keep things calm and keep things from spinning out of control during that incredibly chaotic moment.
[Bash:] You mentioned all those iconic figures calling him real time as this potential crisis was happening that turned out to be not really a crisis. You learned so much about how he used those relationships to help kind of take this through this period of time in history, particularly with Gorbachev. I am really struck by the bond that the two of them struck.
[Engel:] It is really remarkable. And I think the way that Bush managed to strike those relationships with Gorbachev in particular but with other global leaders was because he understood that American power was undisputed but America's relations had to be a two-way street, which is to say he used to call foreign leaders around the world and basically just say what's going on in your country, what do you think of the world, and then listen. In fact, we have transcripts of all of his phone calls now from the Oval Office to foreign leaders. And some of the transcripts are actually quite funny. It would be basically George Bush saying hello, someone else talking for three pages, and Bush saying great, it was great to talk to you. What that says to me as a historian, as a foreign policy analyst, is that Bush was able to listen. And when he needed a favor, when he needed people to listen to him, they were more likely to really hear him out because they knew he had taken time to listen to them.
[Bash:] It is so basic. It is the basic humanity he understood implicitly with everything in his life from the small to the big to the important stuff. Stay with us on that whole notion of humanity. I want to talk about memorial services being planned for President Bush both here in Houston and in Washington. And I want to bring in CNN special correspondent Jamie Gangel to talk about that. What can you tell us, Jamie, about the ceremonies planned in the coming days?
[Jamie Gangel, Cnn Special Correspondent:] So the services have not been publicly announced yet. But we can tell you two things. We have confirmed that the Bush family reached out to President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump, and they are invited to the National Cathedral service. And now the White House confirmed that the Trumps will be attending that service. And this should not come as a surprise to anyone who knew former president Bush, because even though we now publicly know that he voted for Hillary Clinton and he had some choice words for Donald Trump, this is about former President Bush respecting the office of the presidency. It would never occur to him not to invite the sitting president of the United States. The other thing we can tell you is that among the eulogists at the National Cathedral will be, no surprise, his son, former president George W. Bush. I think that I can predict pretty accurately that that will be an emotional speech. The Bush men are known for crying. And I am going to guess he's going to struggle to get through it without crying, Dana.
[Bash:] I would tend to agree with you there. You learned about the final moments that the late president spent on this earth and who was around him, obviously his family, but one person that was really striking to me, again not surprising, is his secretary of state but also longtime friend James Baker. So touching and moving that he was there.
[Gangel:] So there are a lot of people who consider themselves George Bush's best friend, and they were, but James Baker was his best friend. You may remember not too long ago there was a picture of them, I think November 1st, early voting, the two men. If you go on Instagram, you'll see it. They went on voted together. They were so close. And the Bakers spent a tremendous amount of time with former President Bush the last couple of weeks and months especially. And they were there along with many of the family members who live in the Houston area, his son Neil Bush, Neil's wife Maria, some of the children, grandson, Pierce Bush were all around. And then the family members who couldn't be in town, who had already I think said their goodbyes over the last couple of weeks, were calling in all day to talk to him.
[Bash:] Jamie, thank you for that reporting. And you have some incredible exclusive interviews with really everybody, everybody in his family, and people who knew him so well. We're going to be getting to that throughout the day. And Wolf, as I toss it back to you, it is so fitting I think that you are there in Buenos Aires, that the G20 is meeting at this time, a global alliance, the kind that George H. W. Bush called absolutely critical, critical for the kind of world that he saw throughout decades and decades in his public service as important to keep the peace.
[Blitzer:] Absolutely, right. He would have welcomed the opportunity to sit down with all of these world leaders who have gathered here in Buenos Aires for this G20 summit. Dana, I had a chance earlier today to sit down with the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo. We spoke obviously about the passing of President Bush. We also spoke about other sensitive issues on the national security front, including what happened to the Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, what's going on with President Putin in Russia. That interview is coming up. We'll have it for our viewers. We'll take a quick break. We'll be right back.
[George H. W. Bush, Former U.s. President:] I did my job as president. I just didn't expose my inner feelings. And I think people liked me, I think people were disappointed, I think people wanted change. I think when I said the economy has recovered, look at this guy, he is out of touch. I've got a whole rationale of reasons why I did not get reelected, but maybe if I had been a little more emotional, or more revealing of the person, why, maybe it would have helped. But it never occurred to me then. I mean,
[I -- Unidentified Male:] No regrets then?
[Bush:] No regrets about anything. No regrets about one single thing in my life that I can think of. Maybe I made mistakes, but they don't measure up to regrets now.

[King:] President Trump having a little fun poking at his critics on the road this week. Yesterday he was in Nevada. Earlier in the week he was in Minnesota. In Nevada he was campaigning for Dean Heller, the most vulnerable Republican senator incumbent on this midterm elections' midterm map. Let's go through it again. President first out of Minnesota that's unique because it's a blue state. He didn't win it. Nevada also a state the President just barely lost in 2016 competing for Dean Heller. He'll be South Carolina this week, also going to Wisconsin this week. Let's take a look at one of the interesting factors in this campaign. The President's controversial first midterm election among all Americans his approval rating in our polling just under 40 percent. Some other polls are well above 40 percent still historically low. Nationally the President has a problem. Midterm elections you tend to lose. But look at Republicans 81 percent approve, 15 percent disapprove. Among Republicans the President is still the gold standard. He helps gin out turn out. That is why the Nevada trip is so interesting. Again you go back and look in time, just barely but Hillary Clinton carried Nevada. Here is the plus for Dean Heller. He wants the President to gin up all these conservatives in the central part of the state. Here is the risk. Will the President being out there especially in the middle of this immigration fight instead gin up more Democrats Latino voters, other union voters, Democrats to turn out. That is the big risk. But if you're Dean Heller you are not going to run from your president. Democrats did that in 2010 and 2014 in the Obama years and they lost big time. So Dean Heller embraces the President and hopes, hopes attacks like this help.
[Trump:] A vote for Jackie is a vote for Nancy Pelosi. It's a vote for Schumer and it's a vote for all of the problems that they bring. And I don't think you want that. You have an outstanding man in Dean Heller. And I know and I have been on both sides of him. And I want to tell you, he's a tough cookie. He's a tough cookie and we want him on our side.
[King:] We talked a bit about this. But as the President travels more it is interesting to look at the state by state calculations. No brainer he is going to be in South Carolina tomorrow. The Republican Governor Henry McMaster forced into a runoff. No brainer. Here in South Carolina you want the President on your side. The Nevada one is a lot more complicated because the state is actually a very contested state. Before we have the conversation that is the President yesterday, he talked about you can't be weak on immigration. Dean Heller's opponent also had a friend in town, Elizabeth Warren, who says on immigration the President is dead wrong.
[Senator Elizabeth Warren , Massachusetts:] President Trump and his Republican leadership have decided to inflict as much pain as they can on people coming to the United States. I want you just to look at the list. His administration has ripped children from the arms of their mamas. He has signed off on locking up small children in wire cages. He shrugged off the problem with reuniting thousands of children who have been taken away from their mothers and fathers.
[King:] If you want a test of this issue in a highly competitive almost evenly-balanced state, there you have it.
[Talev:] Oh yes. Nevada, Colorado, California, Pennsylvania maybe a couple of states in the Midwest doesn't take that many pick ups for Democrats to take over control of the House. Now, President Trump may be playing to keep the Senate. He may have already made the calculation that holding the Senate is more important than anything else for his own fortune but this is now what's going to play out in these swing districts and in states that are tossup states or that lean left.
[Raju:] And you know, Trump has told Republican leaders he is willing to go everywhere. And the question is do they want him everywhere? They know that one thing that he does effectively is he drives up the negatives of a Democratic opponent. He's very good at that. But he also riles up the Democratic base. So it is going to be an interesting calculation come the fall as we get into the heat of the general election where middle of the road voters, people who maybe put off by some of the Trump rhetoric and policies and whether or not the President will be effective in a state like Arizona where there is another big senate race or Florida where he's got a big ally on the ballot in Rick Scott. But of course, Florida being the swing state that it is will Trump be effective there? So this is going to be a difficult interesting calculation for how the Republicans decide to use him come the fall.
[Martin:] And speaking of calculations, Trump did two campaign events this week on the road. And the tell was who was there and who wasn't there. So on Wednesday he is in Duluth, Minnesota a house district where he actually won convincingly that Obama had won four years earlier to the iron range. The House candidate the GOP has was there with Trump. The event was basically for him because this is one of the few House seats that the GOP thinks they can actually flip. Who wasn't there? Tim Pawlenty former two-term governor of the state, former candidate for president himself, wants to run for governor again this year; stays away from the event. Why this is a blue state, maybe a tad purple but basically a blue state. And Pawlenty knows in a general election Trump is a toxic political figure with voters in the Twin Cities. Flash over to Nevada yesterday, there is Las Vegas Dean Heller with President Trump; his calculation very different than Pawlenty. Also a purplish blue state his calculation though is look, I've got problems with my base politically. I've got to have my base unified. Trump can help me do that. And if I stiff him then I'm going to have a problem with my base politically. So I'm going to embrace Trump and sit here next to him. In doing so he is getting at his opponent but he is ensuring that his base is with him and it comes out.
[King:] And again that's the lesson of 2010 and 2014. The Democrats who pushed away Obama still got pummeled.
[Martin:] Exactly right.
[King:] They still got pummeled.
[Martin:] That's right.
[King:] May as well stick with the boss. Does this matter? This is George Will writing in the "Washington Post" on Friday essentially taking after Republican congressman now standing up to President Trump on this

[Church:] Welcome back to CNN NEWSROOM. U.S. President Donald Trump is in Brussels for a variety of meetings, but the headliner is a NATO summit just hours from now. As a candidate, Mr. Trump called the alliance obsolete, eventually walking that back as president. Before the summit, he will also sit down with the new French president and in about half an hour, Mr. Trump will meet with European Council leaders. Now, Phil Black joins us live from Brussels for a preview. So Phil, what are the expectations? What does President Trump want to see come out of this NATO summit, and what about NATO leaders? What do they want?
[Phil Black, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Rosemary, there have been two key concerns often expressed by President Trump in the lead-up to this, criticisms really. His belief that many NATO members are not paying their way, they're not spending enough on defense, and that the organization as a whole, the alliance as a whole is not doing enough to fight terrorism. So those will be the two key issues discussed over the dinner that leaders will be holding tonight, and they'll be trying to thrash out some sort of measures that could in some way satisfy President Trump's concerns. The alliance is responding to those concerns. And what they hope in response is that President Trump will really move a long way from his criticism of the organization as being elite. He has backtracked on that slightly. But what they want is President Trump to adopt a far more traditional American policy towards the alliance, one that backs it completely, unequivocally, and in particular one that speaks very strongly about the idea of collective defense, which is what the alliance is based upon, that is an attack on one is an attack on all. Because they believe that is absolutely crucial to the alliance, having the ability to deter people from attacking any member state.
[Church:] So, Phil, as we mentioned during the election campaign, Mr. Trump called NATO obsolete. He backpedaled on that as we mentioned. He's criticized other member nations for not paying their way. So as a result of that, just how awkward or even confrontational could this summit be as a result of those comments?
[Black:] Well, it all comes down to Mr. Trump really in the end. The summit is being designed in such a way that there's no doubt to impress and to appease his concerns. In the lead-up to the actual meeting over dinner tonight, there will be there will be some ceremony. First the opening of the new, very impressive NATO headquarters. There will be a commemoration for a number of memorials including a 911 memorial that will actually include a part of the World Trade Center. What it does is also mark the one and only time that NATO, as an alliance11 attacks. And then of course over dinner they will have those substantive conversations about just what the alliance can do in order to step in line with Mr. Trump's concerns. If that satisfies the American president, then all will go well. It depends upon to what degree Mr. Trump is willing to continue to push those concerns, perhaps even harangue the other member states. If he is satisfied and walks away, then it will be seen to be a success. The idea today is for this to be a demonstration of solidarity and unity because NATO believes that's ultimately where its strength comes from.
[Church:] All right. And I know you, Phil Black, you'll be watching very closely to see the outcome there. Joining us with a live report from Brussels, where it is 9.45 in the morning. Many thanks. Well, there has been intense scrutiny of Donald Trump on his first foreign trip as U.S. President, but his normally publicity-shy wife is also getting a lot of attention, and Melania Trump seems to be holding her own.
[Kate Bennett, Cnn Correspondent:] Without actually saying anything publicly, the first lady has been a hit with international audiences, even joking with the pope, who earlier today during a visit to the Vatican teased Melania about feeding her husband too many Slovenian sweets.
[Pope Francis:] What do you give him to eat?
[Melania Trump, First Lady Of The United States:] Pizza.
[Bennett:] She also ventured solo in Rome to a children's hospital where she made a friendly greeting to the children in Italian. Hugging the kids, making drawings, even posing for a few selfies, the first lady connected with one young boy, whom she learned hours later was notified that doctors had located a donor for the heart transplant he needs. Melania tweeting the news. The trip has been the most the world has seen of the first lady in consecutive days since her husband took office, and Melania has made sure she's looking her best. The White House telling CNN her strategy was to pack a separate bag for each stop on the trip, taking every event on this five-city, nine- day journey as a separate focus. Every outfit from the demure black jumpsuit she arrived wearing in Saudi Arabia to her white ensembles in Israel, where white is considered by some to be a holy color, a symbol of peace and purity, to the black lace dress by Italian designers Dolce & Gabbana that she wore to greet the pope. Everything was planned down to her Manolo Blahnik high heels. She and Ivanka Trump wearing the required black formal wear long sleeves and head veil for their audience with the pontiff. Part of the protocol she likely studied when she met with State Department officials in preparation for this trip. But it hasn't all been perfect. There was that hand swat her round the world, the moment on the tarmac in Tel Aviv, when the president crowding her out on the red carpet, reached back for Melania's hand and she didn't take it. That clip going viral, even noticed by President Obama's former White House photographer, Pete Souza, who was quick to troll the moment, posting his own image of Barack and Michelle on his Instagram page clearly holding hands.
[Church:] CNN White House reporter Kate Bennett with that report. Next on CNN NEWSROOM, black arm bands and a moment of silence. Then this happened. How Manchester United is helping fans heal their wounded city.

[Bolduan:] All this week we've been sharing the extraordinary stories of people who are making a very big difference. It's called "CHAMPIONS FOR CHANGE". Joining me now is my former TV partner, John Berman, a man I admire beyond measure, even though I dumped him.
[John Berman, Cnn Correspondent:] Everything you said there's true. You admire me and you dump me, and I wrote that. All three things
[Berman:] All three things are true.
[Bolduan:] It's all true. It's all true.
[Berman:] Let's talk about "CHAMPIONS FOR CHANGE," shall we?
[Bolduan:] Let's talk about it. It's actually important.
[Berman:] This year, I spent time at a charity in Boston, a place called the West End House in Boston, a place my family has been connected to for about 100 years. This is such a wonderful place. Its job is to help immigrant underserved communities. They helped those kids move forward throughout the important part of their lives. Watch.
[Carolina Schott, West End House Participant:] My name is Carolina Schott, and I'm 16 years old. I attend Bossner Academy. Today, I'm performing Mendelssohn.
[Shaw:] I go to school from 8:00 to 4:00. Then I take the train to the Boys and Girls Club. Hi, guys. When I started going to West End House, I was 10 years old. I remember taking my first singing lessons. I went from being super shy to singing in front of 300 people. Be a little bit louder. Be confident. Ready?
[Berman:] Kids like Carolina has been coming here since it was founded in 1906 in the West End, a section of Boston that doesn't even exist anymore. [on camera]: In some ways, the West End House is the story of Boston. It's been a place where the immigrants of Boston could come and get help over the decades. One hundred years ago, that was my family. My grandmother had five brothers. They were Jewish kids, grandchildren and children of immigrants, and they were among the underserved. And they came here to get off the streets. My great-uncle Alan, you can see him when he was a young teenager playing basketball. How has the makeup of the kids who use this changed?
[Andrew Musto, Board President, West End House:] Now we're supporting people from all over the world. It's a new need but in reality it's the same need.
[Berman:] The West End House offers 1600 kids and teens a home away from home. A place to learn new skills, succeed in school and create lasting friendships.
[Musto:] We have four pillars to our program, leadership and life skills, education and high school preparedness, performing and visual arts, and fitness and nutrition.
[Berman:] The kids we were playing Foursquare with, or the kids who run to get meals or play in the music room or doing the art, they all feel connected to this place. They all feel it is a part of them and they are a part of it. And that's a wonderful thing.
[Schott:] My parents are from the Dominican Republic. At home, I speak a mixture of English and Spanish.
[Olivo::] I want Carolina and Kathy, both my daughters, to have a better life here in the United States. Their language makes it very difficult.
[Schott:] I am a Latino woman. You definitely can face many challenges, but I've been lucky enough to not face so many where I feel less than.
[Musto:] I think the organization is breaking stereotypes of what an after-school program is. What we endeavor to do is have our young people shatter our stereotype of what it means to be an urban young person from a first-generation family.
[Berman:] It's a cause close to my family's heart. My sister is on the board. And this year, she convinced me to help raise money by running. [on camera]: I started training in December for the Boston Marathon, and I trained for four or five months. I hurt my knee about five weeks before the marathon, but I wasn't going to not do it. I figured, what could possibly go wrong? Which was before I saw the weather report. I was soaked before I started the race. I didn't really train in the driving, pouring rain with 20-mile-an-hour wind gusts in your face. This was the hardest thing I've ever done in my entire life. [voice-over]: But worth it to support the work of volunteers like Carl Schiff. [on camera]: How far was your drive? How long did it take to get here?
[Carl Schiff, Volunteer, West End House:] About 90 minutes. My wife and I support this.
[Berman:] Why is it so important to you to do the 90-minute drive here?
[Schiff:] I think I'd have to tell you a story and you'll understand. The story is about a kid who is poor, no money. The kid has had to trade off school for working. He had one thing going for him. And that was the West End House. A shining light. A place where he was treated with respect. I'm talking about Eddie Schiff, my dad. And maybe that's why I'm here, is to fulfill his destiny.
[Berman:] Your father needed this place?
[Schiff:] Big time.
[Schott:] How are you, Carl?
[Berman:] Tell me about Carolina. You help her in math?
[Schiff:] Math but all sorts of subjects. She would have essays. My favorite was the one about stereotyping.
[Berman:] Why?
[Schiff:] Because she taught me a lot.
[Berman:] You're supposed to be tutoring her. It sounds like she was teaching you.
[Schiff:] Isn't that what life is all about?
[Berman:] How has your relationship sort of changed since you met him?
[Schott:] At the beginning, I was kind of scared of him. As the relationship got bigger, we kind of trusted each other more.
[Berman:] People say you guys make an odd couple.
[Schott:] No! I think we're different, but we're not different.
[Berman:] We should all be lucky enough to have someone like Carl. You get the sense that she's going to lean on him forever. Look at those faces.
[Bolduan:] So good. So good. You know what, even before obviously, you didn't plan this but this is what we're talking about right now. This is a story of immigration.
[Berman:] Look, it's really the story of the West End House. My great- uncles were there when Carl's father was there. It's a place where young Jewish and Italian ruffians from this neighborhood in Boston, which doesn't exist anymore, got them off the street and got them doing productive things. That was 100 years ago. Now the faces are literally different.
[Bolduan:] Yes.
[Berman:] If you look at the faces on the wall, it goes white Jewish kid, white Jewish kid, then it changes and changes and changes, and now it's kids like Carolina, West Indian kids. The kids and faces are different, but their mission is exactly the same. Exactly the same.
[Bolduan:] And as needed as ever.
[Berman:] More needed than ever.
[Bolduan:] You played some Foursquare. How did you do?
[Berman:] They play for keeps. The kids there play for keeps. When I was going to jump in, the advisers said, you need to be careful. They know my knee is a little sore from the marathon. You need to be careful. I got to the third square, the third square, which is way further than anyone thought I could do, but then they got me out.
[Bolduan:] I don't remember the rules of Foursquare. We can talk about that.
[Berman:] Foursquare is good.
[Bolduan:] Yes.
[Berman:] As good as anybody in my age level. I really think that's a virtue.
[Bolduan:] You are an old man.
[Berman:] Yes, it's all true.
[Bolduan:] But it's great to see you.
[Berman:] It's great to be back. Thanks for letting me back after all this time.
[Bolduan:] Thank you so much. John, I love you. You can see more inspiration stories just like John's during the "CHAMPIONS FOR CHANGE" one-hour special tomorrow, at 8:00 p.m. Coming up for us, uncertainty and chaos not only along the border but also in Washington after the president says Republicans are wasting their time on immigration. How does this affect the Republican Party's chances come November? Stay with us.

[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] Marking 100 years since the end of the First World War. World leaders planning to come together in the coming hours. CNN is live in Paris, covering all events around Armistice Day. Plus this
[Olivia Allen, Toddler:] Those fires. Those fires.
[Joe Allen, Olivia's Father:] Guess what? We're not going to catch on fire, OK?
[Howell:] A father talking to his toddler. Can you imagine that? Driving through flames to get to safety. Wildfires in California continue to burn out of control, destroying homes, cars and entire neighborhoods. Also ahead this hour, controversy over election ballots, races too close to call to declare a winner. Both counts to go into a recount in Florida. Live from CNN World Headquarters in Atlanta, welcome to our viewers around the world. I'm George Howell. The CNN NEWSROOM starts right now. Around the world, good day to you. It was supposed to be the war to end all wars. And 100 years ago today, that war came to an end. In the next two hours, world leaders are set to come together in Paris, France, marking the centennial anniversary of the end of World War I. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, will speak at a ceremony. The U.S. president, Donald Trump, also there, keeping in mind the relationship between the U.S. and French presidents has been off to a rather rough start. There was a tweet by the U.S. president, criticizing Mr. Macron just moments after arriving in Paris. That didn't help. And there seemed to be a chill in the air when the two leaders sat down for face-to- face meetings. My colleague, Fareed Zakaria, spoke exclusively with the French president.
[Fareed Zakaria, Cnn:] Let me ask you about your relationship with Donald Trump. He says, now that he's made up with you after the tweet, he says you have lots in common. And I'm wondering what that is because he calls himself a nationalist. He draws on these populist forces. And you describe yourself often as one of the great opponents of these forces of nationalism and populism. What do you think you have in common?
[Emmanuel Macron, President Of France:] Probably the fact that both of us are outsiders, of the classical politician, I would say. He arrived from the business side. He was not a favorite. And it was an unexpected candidate. And I was pretty much in the same situation in France. Probably because we are very much aligned in the fight against terrorism. And we work very closely together following this line. We know where we disagree and we are very straightforward in that; on climate, on trade, on many other items. But we work very well together because we have very regular and direct discussions.
[Howell:] Again, live images just outside the Elysee Palace. You see guards there, world leaders arriving there in the French capital. From there, they will head to a ceremony at the Arc de Triomphe. CNN is live in Paris, France, around Armistice Day. Our international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson, standing by live, along with senior international correspondent Jim Bittermann in Paris. Nic, first to you. We've seen the U.S. president side by side with his French host, Emmanuel Macron. Mr. Trump also spending time with the president of Turkey. We're hearing more of what came out of these meetings, some conversation about the death of slain journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Tell us more about what you're learning.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] If we look at this tweet that you started talking about, President Trump's tweet on arrival, it seems strategically timed and its intent can only be taken to sort of cause disruption because President Macron's comments made to a French radio station that so upset President Trump, calling it insulting. President Macron talking about the need for a European army or a better coordination between European nations for their own defense. President Trump's tweet timed just after he arrived. Of course, this subject that President Macron was talking about is something that's been discussed by President Macron, by others in Europe, for many, many months. You can go back several years, looking at the need, the discussion, the need to rationalize, for example, the manufacture of defense equipment in Europe. The United States has one manufacturer of a tank; Europe has many.
[Robertson:] The idea is that Europe can do a better job of maintaining and having a better integrated defense capability. And that goes to President Trump's point about needing NATO nations to up their contributions, their defense spending, relative to GDP. And this seemed to be how President Macron and President Trump pulled the conversation back onto that subject. President Trump, at the end of the conversation, saying that, yes, he understood what President Macron was talking about ask, they have the same aim, to make Europe's contribution towards NATO better, stronger. This is something that President Trump has been very clear in demanding. But the very nature of that tweet, coming at a time just after he arrived and when any number of advisers to President Trump could have explained this to him. And what President Macron's words were not new. So we saw in that meeting as well President Macron reaching out and touching President Trump's knee. And that really seemed to be the French president really trying to sort of, if you will, calm the U.S. president down. We've heard from officials within the White House, saying that President Trump has arrived here in a sour and testy mood. And the video we have of that meeting with President Macron does seem to indicate President Trump, who is looking not particularly happy. So if he got off to a bad start, it seemed part of President Trump's intent; although why not clear. Yes, he did have dinner last night, sitting next to the Turkish president, President Erdogan. Protocol, of course, at these big state dinners, would have been determined by the French. Interesting that President Erdogan sat next to President Trump, because, of course, out of the conversation between President Macron and President Trump yesterday, came very interesting insights into the United States' thinking, that we hadn't really heard before about the murder of "The Washington Post" journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, that the American side is very afraid of disrupting the relationships with Saudi Arabia, walking on eggshells, it was described. They're very keen to know the precise chain of command of those 15 people that came from Saudi Arabia to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul moments before Jamal Khashoggi was murdered, that they were there during that period. That's very interesting that we hear from the United States, that they still haven't figured out if there is a trail of command that goes all the way back to the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman. That is a very key issue for the United States still, we understand, from this meeting. We hadn't known those details. And interestingly, too, in the context of Saudi Arabia, the United States had said yesterday that it was stopping its air-to-air refueling of the Saudi coalition air force for its war in Yemen at the request of Saudi officials. In that meeting with President Macron yesterday, President Macron's officials took away from that meeting that the United States had done this with the intention of pressuring Saudi Arabia to end that war in Yemen. So a lot coming out. So placing President Trump next to President Erdogan at that dinner would have given the Turkish president a chance to speak directly to the American president about the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
[Howell:] It does seem that, with the context of history in the background, a very somber, sobering moment that we're all remembering. Today's geopolitics certainly front and center being discussed and a lot to talk about; Nic Robertson, thank you. Let's shift to Jim Bittermann in Paris as well. Jim, if you could tell us about the day ahead, the services planned in commemoration of Armistice Day?
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Sr. Intl. Correspondent:] Well, they've already started in some ways here, George. If it sounds quiet behind me, it's because the police have closed off the Champs-Elysees, which leads to the Arc de Triomphe, where all this will take place. Seventy world leaders will gather around the tomb of the Unknown Soldier, where for the last 80 or so years they've rekindled the flame every night at 6:30 in the evening and they'll do that again today, of course. At exactly the 11th hour on this, the 11th day of the 11th month, 100 years on, all over France, church bells will ring just as they did, kind of an echo of what took place 100 years ago, when the armistice was finally signed and announced throughout the country and the guns fell silent. It was the war to end all wars but it was a war that was unbelievable and tragic in its consequences: 40 million military and civilian casualties in France; 1.4 million soldiers lost their lives alone. So this ceremony will be to commemorate that but also to celebrate the end of the war and the armistice
[Bittermann:] that was signed. There will be readings, for example, from four different high school students in four different languages five, I'm sorry, five different high school students, five different languages, letters from soldiers who were at the front when the war came to an end and their reaction to peace finally coming to the battlefield. So that will be one of the moving moments. There's also going to be a performance by Yo-Yo Ma, the celebrated Chinese American cellist, playing a very respectful and solemn "Sarabande" by Johann Sebastian Bach. There will be a performance by the European Union Youth Orchestra. Just a number of events that the French have been planning for over a year now.
[Howell:] Our senior international correspondent, Jim Bittermann, live for us in Paris, along with our international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson. Gentlemen, thank you both for the reporting. We will stay in touch with you as we continue to cover events there for Armistice Day. As world leaders come together in Paris, there is a remarkable story to share of a French woman who faced a great deal of danger in order to support her country during the First World War. CNN's Melissa Bell has the story of a young hero who fought for peace more than a century ago.
[Melissa Bell, Cnn Correspondent:] Louise de Bettignies was just a young French girl from an upper class family until the outbreak of World War I a war that would make her a hero.
[Henri Claud De Bettignies, Great Nephew Of Louise De Bettignies:] There was a sense that this war was a disaster for everyone and she needed to try to contribute and to use her personality and her experience in different countries and the language and so forth and to service against the Germans.
[Bell:] At just 34, Louise posing as a peddler and using the name Alice Dubois began working for the British, spying on German positions and troop movements in northern France and passing crucial knowledge on the Allies, sometimes in the form of messages hidden inside toys and chocolate bars. Louise de Bettignies became known as the Joan of Arc of the North. And it is in the northern French city of Lille that she is best remembered with streets signs, plaques, schools and memorials like this one. It was after Lille fell that Louise began running her network of spies. [on camera]: Passing the message on to the British. One of her very last communications just before her capture by Germans warned of a massive offensive that was being planned at Verdun. [voice over]: The French military refused to believe it and just 16 months after taking Lille, the Germans kicked off one of the bloodiest battles of World War
[I. De Bettignies:] The ability to cope with danger and the willingness to risk her life because she knew that she would be caught. There were times she got into very sticky situations and managed to escape.
[Bell:] But Louise was caught, according to her biographers, swallowing her final message before being locked away. Louise died in a German prison just before the end of the war, although she was never forgotten. The Supreme Allied Commander visited her memorial several years later to remember the heroism that had made such a difference. And more recently veterans marking the centennial of the end of the Great War did the same.
[De Bettignies:] The family is proud and would like their children to remember that if you are committed to an idea or committed to a direction and you follow it, you can achieve great things. And it is thanks to people like her that maybe would things did happen at the end and we had this armistice.
[Bell:] An armistice now being remembered 100 years on along with the sacrifices made by people like Louise de Bettignies for the allied cause and in the name of peace Melissa Bell, CNN, Paris.
[Howell:] For more, my colleague, Cyril Vanier, is here with perspective. Cyril, all eyes are on your hometown. Tell us more about what this means for Paris, to have all these world leaders come together for this momentous occasion.
[Cyril Vanier, Cnn Anchor:] This is really important for France, for French people and for the French leadership. If you consider that not one but two French presidents made the commemoration of World War I, the centenary, one of their political priorities, you start to understand how important it is. This started more than four years ago, commemorating the 100-year anniversary of World War I. Under the past French president, Francois Hollande, now it continues under Emmanuel Macron. There's an understanding for the French leadership and the French people in general that this is one of the two or three single biggest events of the past 100 years that have shaped the way France is today and the way Europe
[Vanier:] is today. And that's why people do buy into these commemorations and take them seriously. There's another aspect to this for Emmanuel Macron personally. He is going to be the master of ceremony that involves almost 100 world leaders. And there is nothing that French presidents like more than being the center of global attention and get an opportunity to show that they are a global voice. And Emmanuel Macron is no exception to that rule.
[Howell:] We know he will be speaking shortly at a ceremony with other world leaders around him. There is a sense of somber remembrance, also celebration around this event. Help viewers understand how they're striking that balance.
[Vanier:] I think the mood look, the mood is going to be solemn. When you go through the French education system, as I did, if you remember only one thing from your history class, it is World Wars I and II. There is the understanding those are the two biggest things that shape the country as it is today. There's another aspect to why people take this seriously. You cannot extricate the history of World Wars I and II from France, because you see monuments, reminders of it in your daily life everywhere. It's in Paris, with statues, with plaques, with commemorations. It's also in the provinces and the villages, in front of schools, in front of churches, in front of town halls. You can't forget this. And there's a lesson that French people have remembered that is drilled into them at school and part of the national political consensus, which is that unbridled nationalism and the competition of national interests leads to death and destruction. Europe is a continent that has been structured by rivalries and wars. And it is only when millions of people were killed that the lesson was learned that Europe had to come together to find a lasting peace.
[Howell:] It is interesting to point that out. As an American traveling through your city, you see it on the streets. You see the monuments, the statues. You get a sense, the world came together.
[Vanier:] They leave the bullet holes and the shell holes on buildings on purpose as a reminder.
[Howell:] And certainly globalism very important with what we're watching here. Cyril Vanier, thank you so much.
[Vanier:] George, thanks.
[Howell:] Absolutely. Still ahead here on CNN NEWSROOM, world leaders coming together in Paris, marking a momentous occasion. CNN is live in Paris ahead. Plus devastation, destruction, massive fires burning out of control in California. And the flames don't seem to be stopping anytime soon. Stay with us.

[Blitzer:] Right now, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is deciding whether to fire the former FBI deputy director, Andrew McCabe, just days before he is scheduled to retire and receive full federal benefits. CNN has learned the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility has been a recommendation McCabe be fired, but the ultimate decision to fire him is up to Sessions himself. We're joined now by former senior counsel to the deputy attorney general under President Obama, Eric Columbus, and former counsel to the assistant attorney general for national security, Carrie Cordero. Guys, thanks very much. Eric, let me ask you, he worked at the FBI for 22 years. He's scheduled to retire on Sunday. Between now and then, Sessions could potentially fire him, and he would lose his pension.
[Eric Columbus, Former Senior Counsel To Deputy Attorney General:] Yes. There are two questions here. One is whether McCabe did something wrong and, two, whether he should be fired for it. The first one, we don't really know the answer. We're just reading press reports that suggest that he was not forthcoming and misled the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility and possibly also the inspector general's office regarding contacts he had with the press for a 2016 news story. Now, assuming that he was at fault in that, the question is, is proper to terminate him for that and to do it days before he is set to retire. And we would need to know more facts about this, because did the FBI follow their normal process. Did it go is this something that's been brewing for months or is it just a sudden rush to judgment to try to fire him because Donald Trump clearly hates the guy?
[Blitzer:] He's tweeted against him. White House officials have as well. Let's talk a little about Robert Mueller's investigation, the decision, Carrie, to go forward and subpoena the Trump Organization for business documents, something the president earlier, some are suggesting, would be a red line, don't cross it. The decision to subpoena for those documents as opposed to simply asking for the documents is significant.
[Carrie Cordero, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, it is, and yet because it's the president's company. Right? I mean, that's why it's so significant because this is the Trump Organization and his private business, and this is his whole family's business. But a subpoena, generally, in a complex criminal investigation is a standard investigative technique. So given the scope of this investigation, it's not surprising a subpoena would be issued. The difference between a subpoena and a voluntary request, meaning there is a requirement that the Trump Organization, when they receive this subpoena, they have to preserve everything, and so, that way, the special counsel's office doesn't have to negotiate what will be produced. They know what they want produced will be.
[Blitzer:] I raised the question, Eric, because, earlier, there was voluntary handing over of documents from the Trump Organization to Robert Mueller and his team, and they did cooperate, the promised to cooperate. And now, all of a sudden, the decide to issue, presumably, grand jury subpoena.
[Columbus:] There may also be the possibility that the Trump Organization is doing this to protect themselves if there are documents that they are contractually obligated to keep confidential once a valid subpoena or search warrant is issued.
[Blitzer:] The whole notion, Eric, let me get your thoughts on this, whether or not Robert Mueller and his team already have Donald Trump's IRS tax returns over the years, or whether the subpoena is designed to get those tax returns.
[Columbus:] I do think that they have his tax returns to the extent that they want them. I don't think his personal tax returns would be in the possession of the Trump Organization anyway.
[Blitzer:] But they could simply go ahead and ask the IRS returns for those tax returns and the IRS would have to comply?
[Cordero:] They would have to work with the IRS to be able to obtain those. There's actually, you know, have to be a process in working with the IRS. And they very well may be doing that. Probably, given the heart of the investigation, which part of it in terms of whether or not there was any cooperation, has to do with what would have been the motivation for Donald Trump and his campaign to cooperate. Any financial information for the organization and whether there are major debts and foreign debt would play into that and be relevant.
[Blitzer:] It's a sensitive matter, given the president's refusal over all this time to release publicly those tax returns, even though other presidential candidates and presidents have always done so. All right, guys, thanks very much for coming in. Under attack. The U.S. government accuses Russia of targeting the U.S. power grid, putting America's nuclear and electric systems in peril. Congressman Eric Swalwell, of the House Intelligence Committee, he's standing by to join me live. And we're also on stand-by for the White House press briefing. Looking at live pictures coming in. Sarah Sanders getting ready to answer reporters' questions. Stay with us for live coverage.

[Cooper:] A white nationalist march yet again this past weekend in Charlottesville, Virginia. Once again chanted, you will not replace us. Last time it was Jews will not replace us. Once again a tiki torch rally. This gathering smaller than the one in August which results of course of the death of 32-year-old Heather Heyer was killed when a man plowed his vehicle into a crowd protesting a white supremacist. At discussing as both rallies where there is something else that caught our eye when it posted this past Friday. It's the claimed that the August protest the one that killed Miss Heyer was some sort of a left wing plot. Now who we might ask would something too offensive in discussing is that some shock jock radio personality maybe, no an elective representative who's serving right now in the U.S. Congress. Here is two term Arizona Congressman Paul Gosar. Now he's here's exactly what the congressman said to Vice News correspondent Elle Reeve.
[Rep. Paul Gosar,  Arizona:] Let's look at the person that actually started the rally. Its come to our attention that this is the person from occupy Wall Street, there was an Obama sympathizers. So, wait a minute be careful on where you start taking these people to. And look at the background. George Soros is one of those people that actually helps you know, back these individuals. Who is he? I think he's from Hungary. I think he was Jewish and I think he turned in he's own people to the Nazis. They're careful of where we go with those.
[Elle Reeve, Vice News Tonight Correspondent:] Do you think George Soros funded the Neo-Nazis who march in Charlottesville?
[Gosar:] Well it'll be interesting to find out.
[Cooper:] Again, that was Republican Arizona Congressman Paul Gosar. This man, keeping them honest, does he have proof, no, nothing. In other words it's a false flag. He's spreading an insulting and discussing conspiracy theory one that's been swiftly debunked by many. We asked Congressman Gosar to come on the program tonight, his office declined. We told him it's open invitation, we got no reply. These conspiracy theories were first spread by radio talk show host Alex Jones, the rally in August was organized by Jason Kesler who said he voted for President Obama and attended one occupier then. But he also says he became disenchanted with the Obama administration. And addition to organizing that hateful Charlottesville rally has according to Vice News, spend time on YouTube rally against what he called white genocide. He's certainly a turner. As for billionaire investor George Soros who does back liberal causes, a spokeswoman for his foundation issue the statement to Vice News, a recent part, "George Soros survived the Nazi occupation of Hungary and he has spent his life supporting efforts to ensure that such terrifying authoritarianism never takes root again. He was 14 years old when the war ended. He did not collaborate with the Nazis. He did not help round up people. He did not confiscate anybody's property." Joining me now is Elle Reeve, she is the Vice News reporter who did that interview with Congressman Gosar and who was also at the original rally in Charlottesville who did such amazing reporting there. Does it make any I mean when this Congressman says that to you. I mean you were at the original rally, does it make any sense to you what he's saying?
[Reeve:] Oh no of course not. Some of the people involved in that rally have track records going back five or 10 years. The
[Cooper:] The idea also that the way the congressman is saying is like, oh we're learning this or, you know, we're finding this out, as if it's sort of the full weight of his office or the U.S. Congress when in fact it seems like he's just getting stuff from Alex Jones.
[Reeve:] That seems to be where the news is coming from. Alex Jones claim to have sources all throughout the government. But George Soros did not fund these people what he's saying g is not true.
[Cooper:] The just to be clear, the point of your interview with him it wasn't even about Charlottesville right?
[Reeve:] No.
[Cooper:] So he just brought this up?
[Reeve:] Right, yes. We were interviewing him about a constituent who's suing him for blocking her on Facebook. It's an interesting First Amendment case, and so we ask him, why block these people. He tried to draw a line between the attention of assassination of Steve Scalise and hateful or profane comments on Facebook. And he kept bringing up Antifa. So finally I was like Antifa's on the news because of a white supremacist rally, and that's when he launched into this.
[Cooper:] And I mean have you seen any of this Republican colleague speaking out against his comments?
[Reeve:] No, I have not.
[Cooper:] So you had there's to your knowledge no one has been saying this is absurd, this is offensive.
[Reeve:] Nothing that I've seen. Another Congressman Dana Rohrabacher has accused the protesters there being civil war reenactivists who were tricked by someone. That's all I've seen.
[Cooper:] Elle Reeve, it's great to have you on again, thank you very much.
[Reeve:] Thanks.
[Cooper:] Yes. When we come back a dust off between First Lady Melania Trump and the president's first wife Ivana, even for this White House, this is a bizarre turn of events.

[Baldwin:] A surprise moment bringing the audience to its feet at the Tony awards. I'm not talking about Robert De Niro. I want to focus on the drama students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Singing the signature song from "Rent." So special. Earlier that night, their drama teacher was given the 2018 Excellence in Theater Education Award. She helped protect 65 people in a closet during the February 14th shooting that left 17 people dead. Two of the other moments from the Tonys is getting buzz. Actor Robert De Niro goes off script and hits President Trump with a few choice words. I want you to watch the reaction from the audience.
[De Niro:] It's no longer
[Baldwin:] What De Niro said was this, "I want to say one thing, F Trump." And then he said, "It's no longer down with Trump, it's just F Trump." Jim Geraghty is the senior political correspondent with the "National Review." Jim, we've seen what De Niro has said in the last year-plus about Trump. That's not the surprise. What surprised me is the lengthy standing ovation from the audience members at the Tony awards. Doesn't that just fuel Trump, fuel the Trump supporters, help them?
[Jim Geraghty, Senior Political Correspondent, National Review:] Yes. I hope it was worth it for everyone in that theater, I'm sure it was authentic. I'm sure that's how they feel. The question I suppose you could say, well, he's preaching to the choir, and sometimes the choir needs some preaching, too. Do you think there's a single Trump voter in America who looks at that says, I think I made the wrong choice?
[Baldwin:] No, no.
[Geraghty:] No, I think if anything this makes them angry, and plays into Trump's favorite narrative, that the elites look down on you, the elites look at you with contempt. We're at an event celebrating. The moment with the Parkland students was amazing.
[Baldwin:] So beautiful.
[Geraghty:] It's celebrating great performances. It's celebrity people who are great communicators who can make us feel things we never thought we'd ever feel. There's a lot of arguments to be made against the president and the Trump administration. De Niro didn't do any of that. He dropped the F Bomb, and I don't think it persuaded anybody who wasn't already persuaded. The only way it could have been worse is if he said isn't it terrible the way he's corseting our culture?
[Baldwin:] Corseting our culture, Jim Geraghty. Speaking of being politically correct or not, did you see the whole Twitter uproar over Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey? He goes, he's eating at Chick-Fil-A, and a bunch of people from the left jump all over this, because the CEO of Chick-Fil-A has publicly been against gay marriage. Are you surprised at everyone hooting and hollering over this?
[Geraghty:] Yes. Happy Pride Month, everybody. Twitter drives everybody nuts. It's not healthy for people. This is where I'm supposed to say, follow me, but the reactions I get, not a good idea. I could live happily in a world in which Twitter was trying to make everyone be polite. Don't'be rude, don't use bad words or stuff like that. Or we could live happily in a world where Twitter is the Wild, Wild West, everyone says what they want. Life is tough, you'll hear nasty things. Where a helmet. Be ready for it. What I don't like, and I think a lot of people see it, that sometimes Twitter enforces the rules, sometimes it doesn't. It's very kind of ad hoc, arbitrary basis. And you have this nagging feeling, a sense of like, wait a second, you enforce the rules

[Lemon:] So we have breaking news. A source says Rob Porter was interviewed by the FBI in the fall and they brought up what the ex-wives had alleged. Porter then told White House Counsel Don McGahn about it. Also in the fall, the chief of staff John Kelly was made aware of some of what the FBI had learned when Kelly inquired about status of some security clearances. Now, again, Porter denied the allegations. I want to bring in now CNN political commentator Scott Jennings and Symone Sanders. Listen, no matter how you slice it, this is a very troubling story. Good evening to both of you. Scott I'm starting with you. I have to ask you about this new reporting by CN's Pamela Brown about Rob Porter interview with the FBI and what John Kelly and John McGahn were told. Should Porter have been fired then and there?
[Scott Jennings, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, certainly if the FBI thought that the allegations were credible enough to bring forward, and if Porter then misled as some are saying chief of staff Kelly and the White House counsel McGahn about what was said in the interview, absolutely. That is one thing you will hear if you talk to people in the White House tonight, because they feel like Porter really did mislead them. I'd like to know what Porter told the FBI, I like to know if he misled them as well. These time line has been laid out and the reporting tonight is extremely troubling. And the White House I think still has work to do to try to clean up precisely who knew what and when. Again if you talk to people in the White House there is a lot of frustration. They feel some of this has been scrambled about when John Kelly knew things and when he did not. But at the end of the day you cannot deny this is a major P.R. debacle in the White House. I'm glad Rob Porter is ultimately gone. But this has been a torturous story. Nobody with this kind of stuff in their background should be in a position of trust.
[Lemon:] You mention a time line but the White House won't give the time line, because they're afraid it makes them look bad.
[Jennings:] There are things going on in this time line that we don't know. What I would advise the White House to do is sometimes letting people, the American people, the press look under the hood of the security clearance process is a good thing. And if there are things that aren't getting out that they feel like would help clarify this situation that would be good. Look, the bad actor here is Rob Porter. He clearly did something he shouldn't done. It was a terrible thing. So what the White House has some explaining to do on is how does the security clearance process work? How did it work with Porter? And why wasn't it acted upon?
[Lemon:] John Kelly is not a bad actor, after a year you can't get a permanent security clearance?
[Symone Sanders, Cnn Political Commentator:] I think Scott is being generous. He is being extremely generous. Too generous. The fact of the matter is Rob Porter is a bad actor. And John Kelly. And anyone else who excused and covered up this behavior. This is not rocket science. It's not just Rob Porter for that matter that is been operating with a temporary security clearance at the White House. Because there is some reason they cannot get a real security clearance. Jared Kushner as well. And 13 other individuals who don't have security clearances handling sensitive information for this country in the White House. This is a problem. I don't buy it not more a minute that the White House didn't know. It should be inexcusable at any level for something like I don't care if you are a Rhode scholar if you are beating on your wife or anyone else, you don't deserve to serve the American people.
[Lemon:] Let me say this. They say they were misled by Porter. Well they had the information. The FBI said there were orders of protection. An order of protection. There is the evidence. There were two different wives that there were allegations against. I mean, if you have the evidence laid out in front of you, then how can you be misled by Rob Porter? There is the evidence. The facts. And then how someone spins them. Scott?
[Jennings:] Yes, I think there is some dispute if you talk to White House people about exactly what they knew from the FBI. Now what I think is frankly a more troubling.
[Lemon:] Is it because they don't trust the FBI even if
[Jennings:] Porter had been involved with separately from the FBI called the White House and said these things happened to me which further complicates the overall time line. One thing to remember about the security clearance process. It's not instantaneous process. It does take time for people who even had relatively uncomplicated backgrounds. It is not totally unusual. This one took a long time and clearly there were issues at play that they should have looked into it.
[Sanders:] Son, I think the fact of the matter here is this. To be clear Porter is no longer at the White House not because the White House felt it was egregious of what he was accused of they need to excuse him. But because of media pressure, he excuse himself and even afterwards the chief of staff sent out a statement basically saying we stand with him.
[Lemon:] But Symone, January of last year, the White House reportedly told FBI, I mean the ex-wives told the
[Fbi. Sanders:] Exactly which is why this is problematic. What this says to me, this is a larger issue. We have had a national reckoning with the #metoo movement. But the fact of the matter is that men in power are still protecting toxic men who are having access to power.
[Lemon:] Is this an old boy's club Symone?
[Sanders:] It's an old boy's club. I think we have to unpack it, we have to speak very frankly and intentionally about that. I just do not understand I think there are many folks across the country, especially women, asking themselves today how could Rob Porter be allowed to continue to operate in that magnitude at the White House and folks continue to support him?
[Lemon:] I got to switch gears here so let's move on now. I want to talk about the former White House aide. Omarosa.
[Sanders:] It is black history month we got to talk about Omarosa? All right. I'm just saying. It is black history month.
[Lemon:] Guys.
[Sanders:] We didn't go to the mat to get Negro history week and eventually turning into a black history month to talk about Omarosa and her apology tour and salvaging her reputation on a reality TV show. Not during black history month, Don.
[Lemon:] Ok.
[Sanders:] These are the facts. Scott, you going to back me up.
[Lemon:] All right. Sorry the guys in the studio are not helping let me get the story.
[Scott Jennings, Cnn Political Commentator:] That was terrific. That was a terrific decision. I'm frankly amazed with someone is allowed to use a position of public trust to further enrich themselves. I think it devalues the office.
[Lemon:] She is not the only all right listen as much as I'm laughing at Omarosa she is not only one using the public office to enrich themselves personally. There are lots of people in this administration, including the President.
[Sanders:] Every other white man that is been fired from the White House.
[Lemon:] Wow! Let's get the story in. Omarosa is now on the celebrity show celebrity big brother I think on CBS, she has been giving insight into the time at the Trump administration. Watch this.
[Unidentified Female:] I was haunted by tweets every day. Like what is he going to tweet? Does anybody say to him, what are you doing? And I tried to be that person. And then all of the people around him attacked me. Should we be worried? Don't say that. Because we are worried, but I need you to say now it's going to be ok. No it's not.
[Lemon:] Okay. So.
[Sanders:] I don't think it's going to be ok either.
[Lemon:] But
[Jennings:] Wait, whoa, whoa? Why is he whispering? She is on national television. Who does she think is not going to hear her? I bet if you tried to produce a memos of all the things she accomplished at the White House you couldn't fill up a piece of paper double spaced.
[Lemon:] Hold on Symone, OK you just made my point.
[Sanders:] Ok.
[Lemon:] In defense of Omarosa which I can't believe I'm defending Omarosa. There are lots of people at the White House.
[Sanders:] It is black history month.
[Lemon:] Symone, I got to get through this. Stop it, girl. If you look at the White House there are lots of people who didn't get anything accomplished in the White House and who are not getting anything accomplished now. Look at the chaos that is going on. Omarosa is not alone. I think maybe other people in the house are sleeping. Maybe give her and what's his name some credit for that. Go ahead.
[Sanders:] Look, I don't give any passes to anyone who came from the White House who participated that the kerfuffle that is the Donald Trump in my opinion presidency and the eroding of the institutions who leads the White House and going on the tours suggesting they are hurt.
[Lemon:] But Symone other people showing up on this this network on making money off this White House and getting rich why should shouldn't Omarosa be any different.
[Sanders:] They are all in my eyes bad apples. I'm putting Omarosa in it.
[Jennings:] Hold on hold on. You can't apply that to you cannot apply that title to there are people working in the White House and this administration and there are people working in the Obama administration and the Bush administration and the Clinton people go to the jobs by and large do so because they believe in public service. You can't apply that title to everybody that works there.
[Sanders:] You worked in the White House. It's not just because I don't like the President. I think the president is eroding institutions and the stance abroad. The damage is done to American democracy that is being unraveled. So in my opinion anyone that is working in the White House that is complicit that doesn't beat in back every single day, I think those individuals are complicit I'm calling them bad apples.
[Lemon:] I want to White House response? Can I do the White House response? I want to do the White House response. Let's play it real quick.
[Unidentified Male:] Omarosa was fired three times on the apprentice. And this is the fourth time we let her go. She had limited contact with the President while here. She has no contact now.
[Lemon:] So here is what I got out of that. We let her go, meaning the White House is the apprentice. It's a reality show. He said that. His words, Scott.
[Jennings:] Yeah, I thought Raj's note today and comment was good. It was stinging. But the clearly she shouldn't have been hired in the first place. I mean, this person's entire life has been made by Donald Trump both before and I guess after the White House.
[Sanders:] Hold on Don.
[Jennings:] I think she used this job as a spring board to the next reality TV thing. To use a job like this where you could do some good really to enrich only you're only self and I think despicable.
[Sanders:] She is not the only one.
[Lemon:] She is not the only one only black one.
[Sanders:] Omarosa is no different than the President of the United States in this matter. I think that statement goes to show that this White House if you didn't think it before they had zero loyalty. Omarosa had been with the President from the beginning. She went to support the Donald Trump candidacy, because her friend called her and told her he was running for president. What would you do if your friend called you? I don't know what kind of folks need enemies with friends like these. Omarosa is no different than other folks on the apology tours which I do not support.
[Lemon:] I got to go. This is a fascinating conversation. I needed a good laugh. Thank you Symone. Thank you, Scott.
[Jennings:] Thank you, Don.
[Lemon:] Omarosa. Come on now. Really. When we come back her father was one of Vladimir Putin's bosses. Now this reality star turned politician is challenging for the presidency. Sound familiar?

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Zimbabweans are anxiously waiting to see if a military takeover will bring political change. President Robert Mugabe who's ruled Zimbabwe with an iron fist for almost four decades is now said to be safe under house arrest.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] Military leaders denied they staged a coupe. Despite that, it sure looks like they have. Tanks and troops stationed around key government buildings and a number of officials have reportedly been arrested. It's unclear what political role, if any, the 93-year-old president will have in a new government and was believed that military had done this to try and prevent the president's wife, Grace, from taking over from her husband.
[Sesay:] CNN's Eleni Giokos joins us now from Johannesburg. Eleni, good to speak to you once again. I guess the basic question here is what happens next?
[Eleni Giokos, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, exactly. What is going to happen next? We've got the military on the ground. Huge presence taking over the whole place this morning. We've had almost propaganda-style information coming through about peace and stability and they are going to be embarking on a peace and stability summit over the weekend. You have the airport still in operation under the control of the military with a lot more vetting that is coming through. You've got SADC, regional body that is going to intervene. President Jacob Zuma sending an envoy, but importantly the African Union chair Alpha Conde, he is also the Guinean president, who is very pro- democracy. And in fact, I spoke to him over the years. He's always said that presidents that have overstayed, they welcome to start rethinking their position. The African Union and SADC, January, have dragged their feet when it comes to the Zimbabweans situation over the years despite hyperinflation and food shortages. Very little change had been pushed forward by these regional bodies that perhaps these have a lot of clout. Now what next, we know that the Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa was fired by President Robert Mugabe last week and this is one of the reasons that the military says that it's going to intervene. But, remember, that anyone that is in
[Sesay:] Yes. And, Eleni, as you talked about the future and the shape that could take in terms of allowing Zimbabweans to have a voice possibly in whatever happens next, the question also has to be asked whether Robert Mugabe will be held to account for his nearly four decades in power that brought immense hardship, death, violence, brutality to millions of people.
[Giokos:] We're talking about a 93-year-old man that is in the past say that he is not interested in anything that the international criminal court have to say or any kind of international intervention or force that the international community had on Zimbabwe. I think it's going to be up to the courts, the global courts, to decide whether they are going to take Robert Mugabe to task. It would be interesting to see if the regional bodies are going to do something similar. We've seen in the past that African presidents or, you know, people who stayed in power for longer than expected always say they welcome or even had spoke violence have perhaps gotten away with thing, specifically on the continent. So there's a lot of things that could play out. First, is Robert Mugabe going to sit down and take this on and allow transitional government to form its SADC and the African Union going to allow that to happen? It's, of course, going one of the repercussions going to be for Robert Mugabe and where he is going to go next. I mean, what is his next step. I mean, that's I guess one of the biggest questions right now.
[Sesay:] Yes, indeed. Many, many questions. Eleni Giokos, really appreciate the reporting. Thank you so much.
[Vause:] To Washington now. And fresh off his trip to Asia, President Donald Trump says America is back and he has restored U.S. standing in the world and he's claiming progress on North Korea fighting terrorism and trade.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I also had a very candid conversation with President Xi about the need to reduce our staggering trade deficit with China and for our trading relationship to be conducted on a truly fair and equitable basis. We can no longer tolerate unfair trading practices that steal American jobs, wealth and intellectual property. The days of the United States being taken advantage of are over.
[Vause:] Joining us now, CNN correspondents Andrew Stevens in Beijing. Paula Hancocks is in Seoul, South Korea. Here is Los Angeles, Democratic strategist Caroline Heldman and conservative commentator Alex Datig. I hope I got that right. Thank you for being with us. OK. So Caroline, this was a 35-minute long speech by the president. It was build as a major announcement, but it's seem more like it's a travel diary and mostly we say I was blight and dine and had a really good time.
[Caroline Heldman, Democratic Strategist:] And, apparently, he didn't have enough to drink because he was very thirsty. This is what we remember about the speech. I thought he was teasing a major trade deal. His whole point him going on this trip was really two-fold. One was to establish a clear trade policy in the region which he's failed to do as much as he says that he has. There's nothing concrete. And the other was to share an idea of stabilization and get everybody together to coalesce against what's happening in North Korea. That didn't happen either. He got into a petty Twitter squabble with Kim Jong-un, and then he flip-flopped on Russia after meeting with Putin. So this was not a successful trip. And his speech today really exemplifies the fact that nothing happened on this trip.
[Vause:] Alex, how do you answer that criticism? Also, the fact that, you know, what he did outline in his speech many say it's kind of overblown. It's exactly right.
[Alexandra Datig, Editor-in-chief, Front Page Index:] I like to begin by saying here's to you. You know, I think he accomplished a lot by bringing those UCLA basketball players home for starters and it would have been nice to say thank you.
[Vause:] I think one did.
[Datig:] OK. Oh, if they did then I didn't hear it. But needless to say I thought that was a good accomplishment. And I thought, you know, I thought it was no good deed goes unpunished with this president. Nobody wants to give him any credit. He freed these students and, you know, I mean, they got to admit to UCLA, what are they doing steeling stuff.
[Vause:] He didn't go over to Asia to free the three students.
[Datig:] I understand and he could have negotiated something else had they not done that.
[Heldman:] Why he didn't get a trade deal, Alex. Because he was negotiating on behalf of the basketball players.
[Datig:] He wasn't looking for a trade deal. He was looking to have good relations. He was looking to have good relations with China to help with Korea. He have an issue with Iran, because we do have this nuclear agreement that is being undone right now or in the works and so forth. So I think it was a diplomatic tour very much for him. I think it was successful. And I don't think we should have expected a lot more than just for him to have good relations so that we can have higher expectations.
[Vause:] Well, one of the big goals of the trip was to build pressure on North Korea especially to try and get China to do a lot more about North Korea and missile program. This is the assessment the president had. Listen to this.
[Trump:] During our visit, presidency pledged to faithfully implement United Nations Security Council resolutions on North Korea and to use his great economic influence over the regime to achieve our common goal of a denuclearized Korean Peninsula. President Xi recognizes that a nuclear North Korea is a grave threat to China.
[Vause:] To Andrew Steven's in Beijing, did China actually agreed to making denuclearization a goal here? Is it in the past a priority as it has always been to maintain peace on the Korean Peninsula never going that far.
[Andrew Stevens, Cnn Asia Pacific Editor:] China has always been looking for a denuclearize Korean Peninsula, John. That is true. And the president is right in saying that it does wield an awful lot of economic influence over North Korea. What China would also say and has been saying repeatedly is that it is abiding by all the UN sanctions, below those latest sanctions imposed after the September 3 hydrogen bomb test. They included capping oil exports to North Korea and also looking at banning exports of textiles and also cutting back visas for North Koreans working overseas. So China says it's faithfully implementing all those. It could go a lot further if it wanted to. That would take it beyond the remnant of the U.N. sanctions and its showing no indications they are prepared to do that. I would say, though, and this is being seen as not a coincidence. A special envoy from Beijing is traveling to Pyongyang tomorrow to meet with senior members of North Korea's communist party. We don't know whether he'll actually be meeting with Kim Jong-un himself. The Chinese are saying this is a protocol visit to tell the North Koreans what happened to this recent 19th national Congress held in Beijing. But a lot of the conversation here is the fact that the envoy will be bearing a message to Kim Jong-un from Xi Jinping. And relations here are not warm at all. We don't know what the message of that what the content of that message will be. But certainly it's quite safe to assume that denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula would be very, very high on those talks. What happens from there we don't know, John. But the president is right in saying that China has this massive economic influence. 90 percent of North Korean international trade goes through China, but there's no indication from President Xi or anyone else that it's going to do anything other than stand by the U.N. resolutions on dealing with North Korea.
[Vause:] Andrew, thank you from Beijing. We'll head over to Seoul and we'll talk about the issue of North Korea, because Paula, good to see you. Donald Trump talked about the progress he made in dealing with North Korea. Listen to this.
[Trump:] We have ended the fail strategy of strategic patience and as a result we have already seen important progress including tough new sanctions from the U.N. Council. We have a Security Council that has been with us and just about with us from the beginning.
[Vause:] So, Paula, what's the views from there. Is progress being made on ending Pyongyang's nuclear missile program?
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, what we did see was the U.S. president was in the region with Japan and South Korea coming out with unilateral sanctions against North Korea potentially in order to carry favor with the U.S. presidency. I mean, we saw those two countries pulled all the stops in order to try and impress Donald Trump or something that set not too much of a stretch to say that. So we did have unilateral sanctions, but beyond that there was nothing concrete. Interestingly, we haven't seen any missile launches from North Korea for about two months now. That is uncharacteristically quiet when you consider 2016, much of 2017 has been intense testing the likes of which we haven't seen in North Korean history. But that can't be put down to the last couple of weeks at this U.S. president's trip in Asia. And certainly from North Korea's point of view when it comes to the rhetoric. They are angered by the U.S. president, by what he has said, by the Twitter spat that he has got into once again. One thing I wanted to read you a commentary from the North Korean newspaper on Wednesday said, quote, "Trump who is no more than an old slave of money dared point an accusing finger at the sun. He should know that he's just a hideous criminal, sentenced to death by the Korean people." Now, that is because they are angered that he is making personal attacks against Kim Jong-Un, the North Korean leader and also a fairly unusual threat on his life against the U.S. President himself. So in that respect, he's not making much headway.
[Vause:] I guess on North Korea we'll give him an incomplete and maybe work on his people skills. Paula Hancocks thank you, in Seoul. And before you Andrew Stevens there in Beijing. Thanks to you both. Back to Alex here because the problem for the President is that the story dominating the news right now is the story that Donald Trump does not want to talk about. Listen to this.
[Trump:] Thank you. Thank you all.
[Unidentified Female:] Should Roy Moore resign, Mr. President? Should he resign?
[Vause:] OK. So this is Roy Moore, you know, the Senate candidate from Alabama accused by a growing number of women, two more have come out according to the "Washington Post" the last couple of hours accusing him of inappropriate sexual behavior. Donald Trump won Alabama by 28 points. If he wanted to resolve this, he could do it quickly and he could do it easily. Yes?
[Datig:] You know, yes. But I'm not sure if the President is even an issue here. We have 3.1 million registered voters in the state of Alabama; 1.3 million of which voted for Donald Trump; 700,000 voted for Hillary. So, in last election in the primary they had 17.6 percent voter turnout which means 580,000 Republican votes and 109,000 Democratic for Jones. Now Moore won that over Luther Strange. So, I mean, if you have Republican turnout it may not matter what the women do or what they don't do because it's a numbers game. And while if these allegations are true, I find that all very sad and very horrible. I just think it's very it is politically motivated. I do not I do not like seeing sexual harassment claims made at the eleventh hour against a candidate. But at the same time, children are off limits, you know? And if you're talking about us having to decide whether or not to give someone the benefit of the doubt so they can run for the United States Senate, the answer's no. And that's just my position. It's been my position for a while and I came out on Facebook about it and I got called out. But now, you see what happens. And I just, you know, I do not like sexual harassment being used in politics at all because the victims don't really get redress. They may get monetary relief but redress is impossible when they make this public.
[Vause:] Let's get Caroline in this
[Heldman:] So they should have stayed quiet? I mean I think it's morally reprehensible that we are having a conversation about whether or not Roy Moore is fit or the timing of all of this. It is really clear, we are talking allegations of pedophilia, of sexual assault. At this point, yes, the President could step in. Terrible timing for the GOP but at the end of the day this is Steve Bannon's fault. This man was not vetted. He should have been vetted and this should have all been resolved. He never should have been the candidate.
[Vause:] Alex, one of the problems the President has is that if he gets up on a stage somewhere and says he believes that, you know, now seven women who accused Roy Moore of sexual misconduct. Does he then have to explain at the same time why he does not believe the 16 women who accused him of sexual misconduct during last year's campaign?
[Datig:] I love that question John.
[Vause:] I'm sure.
[Datig:] And the reason I love that question is because I'm a human trafficking survivor. I'm a sexual assault survivor. I'm a child molestation survivor. I'm a teenage rape survivor. And as a rape survivor and a sexual assault survivor, I can tell you today if I sued every person that sexually harassed me I'd be an unemployable millionaire.
[Heldman:] What about the 16 for Trump, though?
[Datig:] But it doesn't matter. It's very damaging for a sexual harassment victim to come out and speak about this publicly because of the re-traumatization.
[Vause:] But doesn't that
[Datig:] It should belong in the therapist's office.
[Vause:] doesn't that lend credibility to those claims?
[Datig:] I understand you know, I understand the sticking point and all that but this is not something that is healthy for a sexual assault survivor. It's not healthy.
[Heldman:] Wait no, no. They get to decide that. As a sexual assault survivor
[Datig:] I understand I understand why the sexual assault survivor gets to decide. I understand.
[Heldman:] They get to decide when they come forward.
[Datig:] I understand but you know what as an advocate for child
[Heldman:] You're speaking with one, as well. You're speaking with a sexual violence advocate so set that aside. Donald Trump
[Datig:] with the toughest laws in the country against child sex trafficking and Roy Moore is a child sex trafficker.
[Heldman:] And yet you're still and you're still
[Datig:] When you take a minor
[Vause:] But should he be in the Senate?
[Datig:] He should not.
[Vause:] OK. Good.
[Datig:] He should not. Absolutely not. We agree.
[Vause:] We agree. OK. Well, it looks like he's going nowhere because he tweeted this out a short time ago. "Dear Mitch McConnell," the Republican Senate leader "bring it on." He obviously blames the Republican Party establishment for this what he calls a witch hunt and he's not leaving. So this goes on. Alex and Caroline good to see you both. Thank you.
[Heldman:] Thank you.
[Datig:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] So it's not going to end anytime soon. Next on CNN NEWSROOM, President Trump has asked China to exert more pressure on North Korea. Now Beijing sending a top diplomat to Pyongyang. The high stakes behind that high level visit. We will explain.
[Unidentified Male:] I really truly believe that we would have had a horrific bloodbath in that school if that school hadn't taken the option when they did.
[Vause:] And staff on an elementary school praised for saving lives during a deadly shooting spree in California. We'll explain when we come back.
[Sesay:] Well, on the hills of U.S. President Donald Trump's visit to Asia during which North Korea was frequently discussed, China is now sending a special envoy to Pyongyang.
[Vause:] He's a senior diplomat and is expected to arrive on Friday amid speculation he has a message for the North Korean leader from China's President Xi Jinping. CNN's Brian Todd has our report.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] North Korea's brash young dictator could soon get some arm-twisting from his most important ally. China, he says, it's sending a special envoy to North Korea. It comes in the wake of what experts say has been near hostility between Kim Jong-un and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
[Jonathan Pollack, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution:] North Korean officials saying we don't we don't trust China; we didn't expect to play any kind of a major role here. In one context, Xi Jinping was accused of betraying North Korea.
[Todd:] Experts say the Chinese president himself detest Kim Jong-un for his reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons.
[Pollack:] He really, really dislikes young Kim. He feels that Kim is doing nothing but creating bigger risks for China, bigger dangers for the region and that Kim isn't listening to anyone.
[Todd:] Did the Trump team coordinate the Chinese envoy's visit to Pyongyang to build on the president's trip to Asia, the White House and State Department aren't commenting. Experts say in Pyongyang, the Chinese diplomat may press the Trump administration's message, may try to get Kim to at least pause his weapons buildup, but they say the Chinese will never exert all their might on Kim to give up his nukes and they'll never squeeze him out of power. A collapse of Kim's regime, analysts say is China's biggest fear.
[Andrew Shearer, Former Australian National Security Adviser:] China would obviously be concerned about refugee uploads. It would be concerned about loose nukes as it were, where what happens to those nuclear weapons that the Kim regime has developed, but even more fundamentally it would be concerned about the potential for reunification of the Korean Peninsula on democratic terms.
[Todd:] At the same time, Kim welcomes the Chinese diplomat. He's hurling more insults at President Trump. His regime calling the president an old lunatic, a mean trickster. Still, resentful of Trump's personal salvos about Kim's ambitions.
[Trump:] A dictator's twisted fantasies of violent conquest and nuclear blackmail.
[Trodd:] And a front to the dignity of the supreme leader that experts say can't go unanswered.
[Pollack:] The North Koreans clearly take great offense at things that attack Kim Jong-un personally, so at the end of day the North Koreans feel that they have to protect the sort of eternal wisdom of the Kim family and of the regime and the dynasty that they have built. So those kinds of words bite.
[Todd:] And there is another potential piece of fallout here. Rex Tillerson and other U.S. officials and even President Trump have implied recently that they could someday sit down and negotiate with Kim Jong-un's regime. Experts say all these personal insults back and forth are starting to erode the possibility of that. Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
[Vause:] A psychiatric patient in Hawaii managed to not only escape but he made it all the way to California before he was caught after a tip off from a taxi driver. Randall Saito escaped from a nurse facility where he'd been since 1981 after he was acquitted of murder by reason of insanity.
[Sesay:] He fled the grounds, called a cab from a park, caught two flights and got another taxi before he was finally arrested and stopped in California three days later. Hawaii's governor is blaming his escape on a major breakdown in security procedures.
[Unidentified Male:] I am deeply concerned that such a dangerous person was able to escape from the Hawaii State Hospital and remain undetected for such a long period of time. Authorities and the public should have been notified much, much sooner.
[Sesay:] Well, a number of employees are suspended without pay pending an investigation.
[Vause:] Well, a quick decision to order a school lockdown appears to have prevented a much bigger tragedy during a shooting spree in California, which left four people dead. The gunman, Kevin Neal, was on bail charged with firing shots at two neighbors and stabbing one of them earlier this year. Neal's sister told CNN, her brother has struggled with mental illness for decades. More details now from Sara Sidner.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] The shooter's deadly rampage may have started in the confines of his own home.
[Unidentified Male:] We were looking for his wife. We located her dead body concealed under the floor of the residence.
[Sidner:] She had been shot multiple times authority said. It didn't stop there. Investigators say the gunman went on a 25- minute shooting spree killing a neighbor with a restraining order against him, then turning his rage on complete strangers including those inside this elementary school. One child was hit by gunfire. Mother Sara Gonzalez says she saw the gunman.
[Sara Gonzalez, Witness:] It kind of swerved in front of me, stopped me, and he shot at me three times.
[Sidner:] Her heart sank. She had just dropped off her 10-year-old daughter at the elementary school the shooter was heading towards.
[Gonzalez:] I went to my daughter's school. Started honking, letting people know what was going on and try to go get my daughter out of the school when he shot towards me again and I had to leave to call 911.
[Unidentified Girl:] I heard like three times and then like it stopped and then it's like there was one big one that was before we went in to hide.
[Unidentified Male:] The whole school was sprayed with gunfire.
[Sidner:] As terrifying as it was, the superintendent and assistant sheriffs says a massacre was avoided by the quick thinking of school staff and the shooter training small children across America are now drilled on.
[Paul Johnston, Tehama County Assistant Sheriff:] I really truly believe that we would have had a horrific bloodbath in that school if that school hadn't taken the action when they did.
[Sidner:] Jesse Sanders says he lives near the school and was grazed by a bullet after trying to distract the shooter from the children. The school secretary heard the shots and initiated lockdown mode. The superintendent says 8 to 10 seconds made all the difference between survival and yet another school massacre.
[Supt. Richard Fitzpatrick, Corning Union Elementary School District:] Between that time the shooter then took his weapon and ran a top speed around the corner into the main quads of the school. The reason that I'm standing here today and I'm able to speak to you without breaking down and crying is because of the heroic efforts of our school staff. Love and kindness and selflessness paired with the ability to professionally do what they did defeated evil.
[Sidner:] Sarah Sidner, CNN, Corning, California.
[Sesay:] I mean, so lucky the way that one played out.
[Vause:] What's surprising is that people just getting used to school shooting.
[Sesay:] Yes, exactly.
[Vause:] It's now an automatic response.
[Sesay:] And we're going to take a quick break. The political future in Zimbabwe is uncertain. The military is now in control. The president is under house arrest and the world is waiting for what happens next as the new government is open. We are waiting to see details and analysis next.
[Vause:] And refusing to back down. Alabama's embattled Senate candidate Roy Moore goes after to his accusers.
[John Vause, Cnn International Anchor:] We're in the homestretch now. Welcome back. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.
[Isha Sesay, Cnn International Correspondent:] And I'm Isha Sesay. The headlines this hour, President Donald Trump says his trip to Asia has restored U.S. standing the world and made it clear America is back. He is claiming progress on trade, fighting terrorism and uniting the world against the nuclear threats from North Korea.
[Vause:] Alabama's embattled Senate candidate Roy Moore is showing no signs of dropping out of the race despite growing calls for him to step down. The Washington Post now reporting two more women have come forward accusing him of inappropriate sexual behavior decades ago. A total of seven women have now accused Moore of sexual misconduct. Moore's attorney though is challenging the credibility of at least one accuser suggesting a signature believed to Moore's in a yearbook might be fake.
[Sesay:] Flash flood has killed 30 people around Athens, Greece. Others are trapped in their homes without power or running water. A state of emergency has been declared in the West Attica region. Parts of the national highway system had been destroyed and many other roads are shut down as well.
[Vause:] Zimbabwe is waiting to see if a military takeover will bring political change. President Robert Mugabe is believed to be under house arrest after ruling with an iron fist for almost four decades. The 93-year old is now facing uncertain future. Analysts believe the military is trying to prevent his wife, Grace, from taking over from her husband.
[Sesay:] Well, Piers Pigou is a senior consultant on Southern Africa for the international crisis group. He joins us now from Johannesburg. Piers, it's good to have you with us. So, you said this moment in Zimbabwe for many a big sigh of relief but for others, it's a moment of apprehension. In your view, what exactly does this moment mean for the nation?
[Piers Pigou, Senior Consultant For Southern Africa, Crisis Group:] Well, it is a pivotal moment when one is coming to the end of you said in the intro, almost four decades of rule by Robert Mugabe. So, in many respects, while this may not lead to significant material change in the lives of Zimbabweans in the short or median term, this has enormous symbolism in terms of the life of history of independence in Zimbabwe. Seeing the end of the man who's dominated the political scene since its inception.
[Sesay:] You say might not lead to material change in the short or medium term for the people in Zimbabwe who have been crying out for change, I mean, would that be a case of dashed hopes and what might that lead to?
[Pigou:] Well, dashed hopes on this, it's too early to say much depends on what kind of program of action they reconfigured government puts on the table. There's an enormous need for a reengagement with the international community and with international creditors to deal with the dataries problem to deal with related reforms that can lay the basis for some kind of broad base sustainable recovery for Zimbabwe. Its economy is in a seriously negative shape at the moment and is on a down with trajectory with real concerns about the return to hyperinflation. So, there needs to be some kind of stabilization process immediately which can at least lay the foundations for that recovery. How that translates into the material benefits of ordinary Zimbabweans of course has yet to be seen. But one thing that could help of course is to rest the rising food and commodity prices which we've seen particularly in the last six to eight weeks which has really sharp intentions I think for a lot of people in terms of their living conditions.
[Sesay:] Yes. And the expectations is or the wide reporting is that effectively the ousted vice president would return to Zimbabwe and effectively in the wings and ultimately take the reins of power once Mugabe has been swept from the stage. He is a man to implement the necessary changes that you say a needed in Zimbabwe? Does he have the vision to stabilize the economy and do what's necessary to reengage with the west?
[Pigou:] Well, Emmerson Mnangagwa has been presented by a number of people as the face of reform within insanity over the last couple of years. There has however been little evidence that he's been able to drive such an agenda and we get to really see the kind of vision that is necessary for the kind of recovery that I've been talking about. Mr. Mnangagwa has a reputation which will be difficult to overcome. But for many, he seems the most stable pair of hand in this in this current situation from within
[Sesay:] Yes, indeed. You know, we're all looking at statements coming from the African Union, which has been a lot of circumspect, you know, calling for restraint, looking at statements coming from South Africa. President Zuma currently the head of SADC, the SADC countries there in the region. He's been a little bit clearer and more forceful, saying that this is a coup and, you know, dispatching an envoy. How great a test is it for these bodies in terms of the way they handle this moment in Zimbabwe? How great a test is it of not just the efficacy but their commitment to Democracy?
[Pigou:] Well, I think it's a huge challenge because, of course, this does represent on face value of coup d'etat. But most entities including the African Union, the SADC to a certain extent, and certainly from the west and from China and so forth, have avoided using the coup terminology. And of course, within Zimbabwe the military and those supporting this action have been at times to point out that this is not a military takeover. It is perhaps what crisis group are calling a curve of peculiar kind because it seems to me that the very people that the very person that they want to sweep from power, Mr. Mugabe, they require his endorsement for this process. So, I think part of the delay that we're seeing is the choreography, the legal and constitutional fig leaf that needs to be put on top of this is still being negotiated because it's extremely difficult for the African Union in particular and for SADC to endorse this kind of behavior by the military in Zimbabwe.
[Sesay:] Yes. Piers, final question before I let you go. You know, we talk a lot about the need to end impunity, we talk a lot about the need to hold people accountable for crimes, not just committed in Africa of course but, you know, around the world where wrongdoing occurs. How important is it in the course of ousting President Robert Mugabe that he is held to account for, you know, the allegations and claims and what we have seen over of course, four decades of rein in Zimbabwe that is led to untold suffering of his people. How important is it that that step is taken and the message that sends to the rest of the continent?
[Pigou:] Well, I think at this stage, stability seems to be the priority. How people review what Robert Mugabe has been involved in and indeed his chief lieutenant whether it's from the within the ranks of those who support vice president former Vice President Mnangagwa, all indeed those that support the elements that have now been pushed to one side and we understand they're under arrest, remains to be seen. Certainly, Zimbabwe's own constitution promises a retrospective into past violations. We get to see a new significant movement on that run. So the whole issue is still very much on the table but the question will be at what time would it be appropriate for them to really engage in such activities.
[Sesay:] And a lot to sort through. Peirs Pigou, we really appreciate the insight. Thank you so much for the great conversation.
[Pigou:] My pleasure. Thank you.
[Vause:] The lawyer for one of the women accusing Roy Moore of sexual assault is calling for a Senate hearing. She wants the judge and her client to testify under oath. A lot of the response from the Moore camp in just a moment.
[Sesay:] Hello, everyone. Republican U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore remains defiant and stepping up his defense amid sexual misconduct allegations and caused him to quit the race. The Washington Post says two more women have come forward claiming more made unwanted advances toward him when they were teenagers and he was in his 30s. Five other women have made similar accusations, he's denying all the claims.
[Vause:] Moore's attorney has questioned the credibility of one accuser, Beverly Young Nelson who says Moore sexually assaulted her when she was 16. Nelson says Moore signed her yearbook around that time but Moore's attorney has suggested that could be a forgery and he wants it analyzed. At the same time, Moore's lawyer is vouching for his client's character.
[Philip Jauregui, Roy Moore's Attorney:] I've traveled with Judge Moore all over the state, different states across the nation. I've been with him in probably over a hundred different meetings and been around probably in excess of 10,000 different ladies in Judge Moore's presence and not once, not one time have I ever seen him act even remotely inappropriate against any woman, toward any woman. Not when they were walking away, not when he and I were in private afterwards, that's the man that I know and that I've known for the last 24 years.
[Sesay:] Well, late Wednesday, the Moore campaign released statements from 12 women in an effort to defend Moore's character.
[Vause:] Joining us now, Attorney Gloria Allred who is representing Alabama woman, Beverly Young Nelson who claims Roy Moore sexually assaulted her when she was, what? 16-year old, teenager, I think, Gloria?
[Gloria Allred, American Women's Rights Attorney:] Yes.
[Vause:] OK. I just want to pick up on what we heard from Moore's attorney. The agent say, I've been with this guy, I've never seen him do anything inappropriate. Case closed.
[Allred:] Well, I mean, I can never be sure but looking at his attorney, it does not appear to be that he is a woman. And although sometimes appearance, they are deceiving. Having said that, so, there is no person who is an alleged victim so far who claims that he is a man who was sexually assaulted as a teen by Roy Moore.
[Vause:] OK. Roy Moore's attorney also seems to be saying that someone forged Roy Moore's signature in Beverly Young Nelson's yearbook. Listen to this.
[Jauregui:] Judge Moore says he can't ever remember ever signing his name with D.A. after it but he had seen it before. You know where he had seen it? When he was on the bench, his assistant whose initials are D.A., Deborah Adams would stamp his signature on documents and then put D.A. That's exactly how the signature appears on the divorce decree that Judge Moore signed dismissing the divorce action with Ms. Nelson.
[Vause:] OK. And Moore has also written this on the letter defending himself. He goes on to say, the 7th in Christmas, 1977, in a note with different script on the 7th and the date, 122277, also he evoke, I believe, he says, tampering has occurred. Is any of that significant?
[Allred:] Well, here's what significant. We have asked the Senate Select Committee on Ethics and the United States Senate Committee on the judiciary, John, to hold hearing as soon as possible but no later than two weeks from now, within two weeks. In which time our client, Beverly Young Nelson can go there and testify under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help her god. And she will then answer any and all questions be agreeable to be cross- examined by the Senators and we would like the Senate those one or both of those committees to subpoena Roy Moore and have him testify under oath and also be cross-examined by the Senators. And at that time too, we are agreeable to submit that your book, the signature in the yearbook, that you just discussed. And that would be to an independent signature handwriting examiner who could compared that signature to exemplars of Roy Moore's signature at or about the time that he allegedly signed this yearbook. So, we're certainly open to that, it's not a problem. The real question is: A, are the Senators going to hold such a hearing? It's time for them to answer that question. They could do it, it's a political forum. A former United States Senator told me today, absolutely, they could do that because it's political. They can do whatever they want to do. And the second thing is, let's hear from Roy Moore, will he be willing to testify under oath.
[Vause:] Yes, they kind of docked that question earlier today. And that would be the closest thing you could get right now to a court of law.
[Allred:] Exactly. Because any legal proceedings would take too long, and wouldn't happen before the election which is in the matter of only a few weeks. We'd like his hearing to be held in public so that the public can decide. After all, I mean, does Roy Moore have something to hide? If not, let them come forward and say, yes, I'll testify at that hearing. Let's get it on.
[Vause:] OK. One last I want to put one last thing to you, because there are two more women have come forward talking about, you know, unwanted or untoward advances from Roy Moore. This is the Washington Post. One woman in particular, Gena Richardson, she had turned 18, was about to turn 18. She met Roy Moore at that ball which he apparently been banned from at some point. He approached her, he asked for her phone number, he apparently called her while she was at school, and agreed to go on a date, and then The Post reports this, "They met that night at a movie theater in the mall after she got off work, a date that ended with Moore driving her to her car in a dark parking lot behind Sears and giving her what she called an unwanted forceful kiss that left her scarred." That sounds very similar to the account from Beverly Young Nelson and what happened to her. It's not as dramatic, but, you know, it plays out on a very similar way.
[Allred:] Right. Not as serious but in terms because Beverly Young Nelson alleged that he had her alone in a car that she thought he was driving her home, and then she alleges unwanted sexual assault or conduct.
[Vause:] Yes. She
[Allred:] Yes. And she alleges that he took her head and tried to force it down to his crotch and
[Vause:] And driving into the dotted parking lot.
[Allred:] And tried, you know, touched her breast and so forth. Having said that
[Vause:] Just the
[M.o. Allred:] anything that is unwanted by a woman, any touching of her body, which she has the right to decide who may choose to touch who may touch her body and who may not, is I think, something that has to be taken seriously.
[Vause:] Gloria, we'll leave it there. Thank you.
[Allred:] Thank you.
[Vause:] Good to see you.
[Allred:] Thanks, John.
[Vause:] Well, Republican leaders are continuing to demand Roy Moore drop out of that race. Lawmakers, though, are looking for ways to stop his election in the first place. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator John Cornyn who both say they support Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions as a write-in candidate. This is his old seat which he gave up to join the Trump administration. Tom Foreman explains how that would work and how it could be a win for the President.
[Tom Foreman, Cnn Correspondent:] Jeff Sessions could reclaim his title as a Senator from Alabama again in two ways. He could run as a write- in candidate against Roy Moore and Democrat Doug Jones counting on his popularity as a 20-year senator from that state to knock them both out in the December 12th vote or if he waits and Moore wins, two-thirds of the Senate could declare Moore unfit for that job and Sessions could be appointed senator by Alabama Governor Kay Ivey, also a Republican. Either way, it could be a great big win for Donald Trump, and here's why. Remember, the President made it very clear he wanted Sessions as Attorney General to oversee the Russia investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller. Why? Because an engaged, politically friendly Attorney General could warn the White House about any serious issues, steer the investigation and potentially smother any final report, making the whole matter a lot less threatening to the President. But Sessions recused himself, leaving the supervision of the investigation to his Deputy, Rod Rosenstein. If Sessions leaves, Rosenstein could be promoted to the top job. He has no known reason to recuse himself and he's already said he does not want the Russia probe to go too far afield in a fishing expedition into all of the President's affairs. And that could raise questions about Mueller's position and the future of the investigation. But the Republican Party could also benefit if Sessions became a senator again. Right now, they hold 52 seats out of the 100 in the Senate. And their slim majority will get slimmer if they lose even one of those to the Democrats in the special election. So, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was the first big player to start floating Sessions name as a possible solution to the Roy Moore problem, someone with two decades of experience and knows exactly how the Senate works who could maintain the status quo. The only thing we really don't have any answer about yet though is how does Jeff Sessions feel about all of this? And after all the abuse he's taken from President Trump, is he interested in his old job?
[Sesay:] Our Tom Foreman there. Is he interested?
[Vause:] No.
[Sesay:] No?
[Vause:] I think he's pretty clear he does not want to go back to Alabama. He likes it in Washington, he's likes to
[Sesay:] We'll see. Things move so quickly. We're going to take a break.
[Vause:] For me, not right now.
[Sesay:] No, you're moving incredibly slowly. This is the scene in much of Puerto Rico right now, darkness, and the Island's struggle to regain power is as far from over. We'll go to San Juan for more after the break. Well, it's been nearly two months since Puerto Rico was decimated by Hurricane Maria and the island just can't seem to get a break. At one point on Wednesday, it looked as if really well
[Vause:] Our Leyla Santiago has more on Puerto Rico's struggle just to get electricity.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] Shortly after the Governor of Puerto Rico tweeted in celebration that Puerto Rico had reach its goal of 50 percent power regeneration, the power went out in the capital here in San Juan, that include hospitals and business and homes, left in the dark yet again. Even though they managed to get back on the power grid within the last few weeks. So, that adds to the frustration of people that are still living without power nearly two months after Hurricane Maria. According to the power authority, it was some sort of a failure in a transmission line that had had issues last week as well. But the frustration among people, many people is the numbers. Puerto Rico is saying they were at 50 percent power generation, but that is generation, not the number of clients, so not the number of homes, number of buildings, business that actually have power. The government says those numbers, they do not have to report at this hour. And this comes as the island is trying to recover after the Category 4 storm destroyed the island. The good news is in terms of water, the government is reporting they are at about 90 percent of the island getting clear water at this hour, but still so many are left without homes. Nearly 2,000 people are still living in a shelter nearly two months after Hurricane Maria destroyed the island. Leyla Santiago, CNN San Juan, Puerto Rico.
[Sesay:] Leyla Santiago there. Well, singer and actress Jennifer Lopez helped raise $35 million for Puerto Rico in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria.
[Vause:] And Becky Anderson spoke to her about those efforts and asked her what message she wanted the island to hear.
[Jennifer Lopez, Singer Actress:] To Puerto Rico, I mean, the message is, you know, that we haven't forgotten about you, and we were able to raise up a lot of money. But now, it's about distributing that money, how it gets distributed, where Puerto Rico need it the most and kind of like now the work really began after we raised it. People on the ground in Puerto Rico right now telling us what they need, where the money is needed most, what exactly they need, whether it's, you know, generators or diesel fuel or water or logistics put in place to get this stuff where it needs to because that's really been the problem because the island is so devastated and different roads and places some people can't get here and there. I mean, there's so much stuff. And those kids in hospitals who need the generator I mean, it just it goes on and on and on, and we're just here and we're trying to help as much as we can, and you know, hope to take a trip down there soon and really see for myself what's going on.
[Becky Anderson, Cnn International Anchor:] Because if you hear people saying, you know what, crisis over, you will say?
[Lopez:] No. Oh, my God, no. It's not over. It I mean, it's going to take so long to rebuild and it's going to take so much more money, $30, $35 million that we raised. The past couple of years with so much division and sad events going on and devastating events and tragic events happening. For people to come together and show unity and show that they care, you really go, there's so many good people in the world.
[Anderson:] Were you disappoint how long it took for the U.S. government to get on and help?
[Lopez:] Listen and I can only control myself, so I would say that everybody who's frustrated in any way, do something, do something yourself. Because you can't ever really depend on anyone else in this world, right? You have to you have to take things into your own hands sometimes, so the way I combat any frustrations I may have with anything or anybody, it's to take it into my own hands and do something about it.
[Vause:] Watch the entire interview with CNN's Becky Anderson and Jennifer Lopez later on Thursday. "
[Connect The World" 3:] 00 p.m. in London. That is 7:00 p.m. in Dubai.
[Sesay:] You have been watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. That does it for us, I'm Isha Sesay.
[Vause:] I'm John Vause. Follow us on Twitter @cnnnewsroomla. There, you can find highlights and clips from the show. The news continues with Max Foster, our very own oil painting after the break.
[Sesay:] If you have $450 million.
[Vause:] Not even close.

[Blackwell:] The Chinese Navy has just taken a historic step with the trial of its first home-grown aircraft carrier.
[Paul:] Yes. The maiden sea voyage is a milestone for the Chinese communist party which wants to build a- quote "a world class Navy." Now military experts tell CNN while it will certainly boost China's naval presence in Asia its technology still lags far behind from that of the U.S. Here's an example for you. It uses conventional rather than nuclear propulsions. One of the big things we're watching here the U.S. is going to officially open its embassy in Jerusalem tomorrow. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, it is a quote "truly historic happening."
[Blackwell:] President Trump will not attend the grand opening but Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, you see here, they just arrived moments ago. We're joined by special envoy to the Middle East. Now Pastor Robert Jeffress he told "FOX News" the he will also be there and will make the opening prayer. If that is true is he the right man for the job? I want you to listen to some of his, let's call them controversial statements.
[Dr. Robert Jeffress, First Baptist Church Of Dallas:] Here is the deep dark dirty secret of Islam. It is a region that promotes pedophilia, sex with children. Mormonism is not Christianity. It is always been considered a cult by the mainstream of Christianity.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Hindus and Buddhist, Islam, cult?
[Jeffress:] Yes, absolutely. Mohammed was nothing but a blood thirsty warlord who beheaded 600 Jews who would not follow him in the battle.
[Unidentified Male:] That is not true.
[Jeffress:] Israeli is wrong. It is a heresy from the pit of hell. Mormonism is wrong. It is a heresy from the pit of hell.
[Paul:] We want to talk about this with pastor of the Friendship Baptist Church in Baltimore, Maryland, Pastor Alvin Gwynn. Pastor, thank you so much for being with us. After hearing some of what we just heard there do you think that he is the right person to give this opening tomorrow?
[Alvin Gwynn, Pastor, Leadenhall Baptist Church:] No, indeed. It's shocking and amazing that we would be hearing from quote "a Baptist minister" who espouses anti semanticism throughout his conversation and to think that he is going to the most holiest place in the world along with the president is the most immoral leader of this nation and they are going to defile a holy place with their presence is astounding to me.
[Blackwell:] Pastor, I also want you to listen to this is mega Pastor John Hagee, founder and national chairman of Christians United for Israel. He will deliver the benediction at the opening ceremony tomorrow, now. For people at home who recognize the name, in 2008 then Republican candidate for president John McCain had to reject his endorsement for these comments made in 1990 suggesting that Hitler and the holocaust were part of God's plan. Listen to Pastor Hagee here.
[Gwynn:] OK.
[John Charles Hagee, Found And Senior Pastor Of Cornerstone Church San Antonio, Texas:] God says in Jeremiah 16 "Behold, I will bring them the Jewish people again unto their land that I gave unto their fathers. Behold, I will send for many fishers, and after will I send for many hunters. And they the hunters shall hunt for them" that would be the Jews.
[Blackwell:] Now we want to read that he said, "To assert that in any way I condone the Holocaust or that monster Adolf Hitler is the biggest and ugliest of lies. I have always condemned the horrors of the Holocaust in the strongest of terms." But is what he's saying here is that the Holocaust is was part of God's plan for this man to go to Jerusalem, of all places in the world. Your reaction?
[Gwynn:] You know, I've heard Pastor John Hagee down through the years along with Jerry Falwell and many others who espoused that fundamental belief fundamental disbelief, rather, that the Jews God brought the holocaust to punish the Jews. That's not true. Nazi Germany brought the holocaust to punish the Jews. The second of all that the Jews are the founders really of our Christian faith because we Judeo-Christian, the first Christian church was made up of 3,000 Jews on a day of Pentecost so why is it that they feel they are so separate from the Jews when they are really Judeo- Christians?
[Blackwell:] Well, Pastor, let me ask you this, John McCain had to reject Hagee's endorsement, had to repudiate the comments. We all remember what President Obama said about Jeremiah Wright and his comments. Why does there appear to be most response, no consequence for President Trump?
[Gwynn:] Right. You know, it has amazed me because, number one, President Trump has some moral issues of his own. And the thing that the fundamentalist, Southern Baptist Convention, which is one strict fundamentalist now are adopting and embracing individual with moral deficiencies is amazing to me. They were once very strict construction is when it came to religious doctrine and now they have become apostatized, very lukewarm in their doctrine of teaching. They seem to espouse the fact that the end justify the means no matter how evil a person might be after the results seem to be OK then we can accept that individual.
[Paul:] All right. Reverend Alvin Gwynn, we appreciate your time this morning. Thank you for being with us.
[Gwynn:] You're welcome.
[Blackwell:] A survivor of sexual abuse is on a mission to protect children across the country. Next, how her story is helping change laws in more than two dozen states. You'll want to see this.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon. It is 11:00 p.m. here on the East Coast. We're live with big breaking news, huge. Rudy Giuliani dropping an absolute bombshell tonight saying that President Trump paid his fixer, Michael Cohen, back for that $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. I want you to listen, this is what he said tonight on Fox News.
[Sean Hannity, Fox News:] My question is, are you concerned in the process of this? We did discover that a foreign national, Christopher Steele, was paid through Fusion GPS, used Russian sources that not only weren't verified, but were debunked are you concerned that that was paid for to manipulate the American people in the lead-up to an election?
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Attorney:] Isn't that closer to the mandate on Michael Cohen?
[Hannity:] Why isn't that happening? Where is Mueller on that, sir?
[Giuliani:] Having something to do with paying some Stormy Daniels woman $130,000? I mean, which is going to turn out to be perfectly legal. That money was not campaign money. Sorry, I'm giving you a fact now that you don't know. It's not campaign money. No campaign finance violation.
[Hannity:] So they funneled it through a law farm?
[Giuliani:] They funneled through a law firm and the president repaid it.
[Hannity:] Oh. I didn't know. He did.
[Giuliani:] Yes.
[Hannity:] There's no campaign finance law?
[Giuliani:] Zero.
[Hannity:] So the president
[Giuliani:] Just like every Sean
[Hannity:] So this decision was made by
[Giuliani:] Everybody was nervous about this from the very beginning. I wasn't. I knew how much money Donald Trump put into that campaign. I said $130,000? He can do a couple of checks for $130,000. When I heard Cohen's retainer was $35,000 when he was doing no work for the president. I said that's how he's repaying, with a little profit and a little margin for paying taxes for Michael.
[Hannity:] But do you know the president didn't know about this? I believe that's what Michael had said.
[Giuliani:] He didn't know about the specifics of it as far as I know, but he did know about the general arrangement that Michael would take care of things like this. I take care of things like this for my clients. I don't burden them with everything single thing that comes along.
[Lemon:] So let's bring in now CNN Senior Political Analyst, Mark Preston, Senior Political Correspondent, Sara Murray and CNN Correspondent, Sara Sidner. Also with us this evening is Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' attorney. Good evening, everyone. Sara, you have been following the Stormy Daniels saga from the very beginning and now tonight a bombshell from Rudy Giuliani that Trump repaid Michael Cohen $130,000 in hush money for that Stormy Daniels hush money payment. Giuliani says that this did not violate any campaign finance laws. Is he right, Sara Snider?
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] The answer is no according to common cause and they have a couple of reasons why. They said that it exposes Donald Trump to possible criminal prosecution with the DOJ because they have filed a complaint with the Department of Justice. Why? Because if he paid Michael Cohen back the money, it means that the president did know about it and potentially willfully ignored the law. And you know that ignorance of the law does not mean that you get forgiven for breaking the law. So that is one thing that common cause says. The second thing they say is that Michael Cohen can't be let off the hook just because he was paid back because there is a contribution limit for individuals. Michael Cohen said, look, I paid this on my own. I went and got a home equity minus credits to pay the $130,000 to Stormy Daniels in this hush deal. Well, he can't go and do that and try to influence the election. If that's what he was doing then he could have violated not only FEC rules, but if you think about it, the in-kind contribution is set up to $2,700. $130,000 is far beyond that. So common cause says both people now, because of what Rudy Giuliani has said on television and has doubled down on, both of them are in very deep water here potentially with the FEC and also with the Department of Justice.
[Lemon:] So Sara, before I get to the other Sara Sidner, before I get to the other folks. What does Michael Cohen and President Trump said about the payment in the past?
[Sidner:] Look, the president we've heard, he was on Air Force One. He has said, look, I didn't know anything about this deal, you'll have to talk to my lawyer, Michael Cohen. What has Michael Cohen said? Well, let's put it up for you. He sent a statement out when this FEC filing was put in place, a complaint was put in place and there it is. He said, in a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford, that is Stormy Daniels' legal name. Neither this is the important neither the Trump organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me. So, now we're hearing from Rudy Giuliani that he was reimbursed over several months through a law firm. The question is when did that happen? I think that's really important. When did that happen, but ultimately common cause says all of it is a legal problem.
[Lemon:] OK. I wanted to get to the news. Did you guys have to standby when everybody standby because Michael is here and you're about to jump out of your seat. What do you think of this when you heard this? You are listening to Rudy Giuliani just moments ago when we played that sound bite and what was going through your mind?
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] It's an absolute disgrace, Don, and I'm disgusted by it. In every American, regardless of their political persuasion, I don't care if you're on the left, I don't care if you're on the far right, I don't care where you line up, you should be disgusted by what has happened in connection with the lies that you have been told over the last three months about this payment. You should be disgusted by the fact that the president of the United States stood on Air Force One on video and audio and stated lies to you relating to this $130,000 payment. And there's no way to dress this up. You can try to put lipstick on the pig morning, noon and night and it's still going to be a pig, Don. This is disgusting what we're hearing. And I want to make a couple of points, OK. You put the statement up on the screen. Weeks ago, months ago when we first started talking about this statement, when we filed our case and I honed in on the word facilitate, and I used to talk about what an interesting word that was as opposed to just having him state that he repaid it. I found that to be a very suspicious word. I also found it suspicious that the statement did not state that Mr. Trump individually had not reimbursed the $130,000. Now we find out that in fact my suspicions about that statement were spot on because they wordsmith the statement in order to deceive the American people. So, that's number one. Number two, Rudy Giuliani, based on what I've just seen stated that there were bogus law firm bills, fraudulent law firm bills.
[Lemon:] Are you talking about the part which is he paid him back? He said when I heard Cohen's retainer for $35,000 what he was doing no work for the president I said, that's how he's repaying. That's how he's repaying it, with a little profit and a little margin for paying taxes.
[Avenatti:] Well, guess what? That's fraud. That's illegal. And if you have parties that know about that, namely the party that is sending out the invoice plus the party that's paying it, that's a felony. You can't do that. So basically what Rudy Giuliani among other things and this is an important point. He's stating that Michael Cohen sent out bogus invoices for $35,000 for legal work with the understanding no work would be done and that the president we paid the $35,000 invoice knowing that no work was done, and that's how they basically laundered the reimbursement of this $130,000, plus a little bit of profit, plus additional money for taxes. This is a serious, serious matter. And to all the people out there that I've heard from and there hasn't been a lot, but there's been a number of them they said that this was a bogus lawsuit, that it was a publicity stunt
[Lemon:] Well, they asked why we are covering the story.
[Avenatti:] Right. Why is
[Cnn -- Lemon:] Why do you have Michael Avenatti
[Avenatti:] Right. Why am I on CNN so much, and why are you giving him so much airtime? Well guess what, this is why. We've been talking about the fact that this was about the cover up and it was about the lies and it was about the deception. And guess what's? It's all come home to roost tonight.
[Lemon:] So, listen, and I mean this, any of the president's representatives are welcome to come on now. The president if he wants to call in. Michael Cohen, if Michael Cohen wants to call in. If Rudy Giuliani, call in, come in or whatever, to respond to this. I think this is huge story and it certainly changes the trajectory of the story. So, let's keep it with the president now and then I'll go to Michael Cohen. What do you think this means legally, if anything, for the president?
[Avenatti:] Well, I think that this shows that the president has significant potential criminal liability for felonies associated with campaign finance violations, as well as potential money laundering violations, as well as potential fraud violations relating to these law firm invoices that we've now heard about. I mean, this opens the Pandora's Box if you will into serious, serious issues for Donald Trump. I said it weeks ago. I'm going to say it again, Mr. Trump will not serve out his term. No way, no how. He will be forced to ultimately resign. This is a bombshell.
[Lemon:] Okay, let's get to Michael Cohen. As you know, I've interviewed Michael Cohen and he has said as much in interviews, that he's fiercely loyal to the president, that he has done nothing illegal, that the president should be happy that he has someone, anyone would be happy to have someone like him looking out for their business, that he did this out of love or his, I don't know, loyalty to the president. What do you say to that?
[Avenatti:] Well, I think it has been laid bare tonight that a lot of that is complete nonsense, Don. He clearly has lied to you and others in the press. He's lied to the American people. He had David Schwartz come on CNN repeatedly and lie on his behalf and claim that there was no reimbursement. I mean, don't lose track of that. Let's not lose track of this. This is very serious matter. And let me just tell you this, Michael Cohen I'm sure, as he sat at home tonight and learned of Rudy Giuliani's comments, he probably is most shocked because he is the one that right now is in the crosshairs. He is the one that had the FBI show up at his office, his hotel room and his home and come out to raids. He is in the worst place right now than he has ever been in connection with this criminal investigation. And the reason is, a big reason is because the statements of Rudy Giuliani made to Sean Hannity.
[Lemon:] So, does this so this shows you I asked what are the legal ramifications for Michael Cohen? Does this definitely show that he's done something illegal here?
[Avenatti:] I think all indications are that that's true. I mean that there are significant campaign finance violations, there's significant potential bank fraud violations relating to his opening of the bank accounts for this payment. We don't know how the money was reimbursed. And by the way, now is a really good time for me to bring this up, OK. Now is an excellent time. The administration should immediately order the release of that suspicious activity report or SAR that was filed by First Republic Bank in connection with their investigation of this matter, period. Now is the time. The American people should demand the release of that SAR, that suspicious activity report. And I will submit that the reason why our request was not complied with, and the reason why the American people have been kept in the dark as to that suspicious activity report, Don, is because I believe that it contains a narrative of a lot of this conduct, and this in furtherance of the cover-up and the lies and the deceit.
[Lemon:] All right. So let's tell them what the SAR is. Suspicious Activity Report, what exactly
[Avenatti:] Suspicious Activity Report is when a bank questions a transaction as potentially being criminal or suspicious in nature. They conduct an investigation. They create if they conclude that illegal activity may have occurred, they compile what's called a suspicious activity report. It is submitted to a group called FinCEN, which is part of the Treasury Department for further investigation. We demanded weeks ago that the SAR be released to the American people. It hasn't been. Now is the time the American people should see it.
[Lemon:] What do you think is in there? Why do you want it released? What do you think is in there?
[Avenatti:] Because I think that the SAR lays out a narrative and significant evidence of Michael Cohen's criminal conduct in connection with this $130,000 payment and may in fact also include information relating to how that $130,000 was reimbursed. That's why the American people should see it, Congress should investigate it, immediately demand it be turned over. And if there's nothing to hide in it, then let's publish it to the American people, period.
[Lemon:] OK, so let me refresh you on this because you said that I think you said it first here that you thought the president wouldn't serve out his term. I think it was on this program that you also said on this program when you raised the, you know, the suspect, right, the $131,000.
[Avenatti:] I also said months ago that it would ultimately be shown that the president reimbursed $130,000 among other things.
[Lemon:] So that's a big assessment or a big claim for you to say that the president of the United States would not serve out his term, that he would resign. How do you say that?
[Avenatti:] Every statement that I have made, every prediction in this case thus far, Don Lemon, has come true. I have been right and I don't say that to be egotistical. I have been right all along. And I don't see how the president is going to be able to serve out his term in light of the information that is going to come to light in connection with the FBI raids, in connection with Michael Cohen flipping on the president, and in connection now with these admissions tonight. I just don't see it.
[Lemon:] Stand by, Michael. I may have some more questions for you. I want to bring in now Sara Murray. And Sara, I want to get your reaction to, you know, we've been listening, and Mark Preston as well. You're there in Washington. Where do you think this story goes now with you've heard from Rudy Giuliani and now you're hearing from Michael Avenatti.
[Sara Murray, Cnn Political Correspondent:] Well, look, I think that there is going to be a lot to grapple with, and it's not just what Rudy Giuliani said in the context of dealing with this payment and dealing with Michael Cohen. I mean, if you're watching the rest of this interview that he did, he is essentially trying to make the case that the president deserves to be believed. He's setting up these standards that he thinks need to exist when it comes to whether President Trump is going to sit for an interview with Special Counsel Robert Mueller and essentially saying we're only going to go in there if they promise us that, you know, they're not just going to believe what the former FBI director has to say. That they're going to listen to the president and treat him just as credibly as they would a former FBI director. And then, Rudy Giuliani went out to make his own the president look like a liar. He essentially said that the president reimbursed Michael Cohen and was aware of this agreement after we saw President Trump publicly say he knew nothing about it. So, there are ripple effects here to the president's credibility beyond just the question of what exactly happened with this $130,000 payment. And it's at a critical moment. When they're in these discussions why whether Trump is going to sit down for an interview with the special counsel.
[Lemon:] So Mark, you know, we've been covering this for, you know, we covered the campaign from the very first day when he went down the escalators at Trump Tower, when the news broke of the "Access Hollywood" tape and when the news came out earlier this year about the payoff to Stormy Daniels, and here we are now. Do you think this will make a difference as a turning point?
[Preston:] Well, a couple of things that I think we have to put things in perspective here, Don. First of all, no disrespect to Michael Avenatti there, but the idea of him talking about him not being able to fulfill his four-year term and efforts we're seeing within Congress right now to "impeach Donald Trump," is probably working against the Democratic party's efforts to try to take back the House and the United States Senate. People don't want to hear that talk, and also at this point, I don't think that he has risen to the level of being impeached. So talk like that is not going to work for Liberals and Democrats who want to see Trump to go. But to your point, is it going to matter? Right now, it matters because it's now in the sphere. It's all out there right now. Rudy Giuliani was amazingly interesting tonight on Fox News. It wasn't just this that he talked about, Don. There were a lot of other things too that are certainly going to raise some red flags. You know, the first thing that comes to light is when Rudy Giuliani said, listen, I should have taken the job. Had I taken the job basically we would not be in this position. Jeff Sessions would have not recused himself and Jeff Sessions would not have had Rod Rosenstein taking over
[Lemon:] He said that Sessions and Rosenstein should shut this down right away. Hs did say that.
[Preston:] Right away.
[Lemon:] Hold on. Let's play it. Let's play it, mark. Here it is.
[Giuliani:] I think Comey is a bigger liar than McCabe. I think McCabe was a situational liar. He's a much bigger liar. So if this were an equal system of justice, they'd all be prosecuted.
[Hannity:] Let me ask you because this was
[Giuliani:] My biggest regret, I'm sorry, Jeff, to say this
[Hannity:] You were offered the job.
[Giuliani:] Yes, it's my biggest regret in not having taken that job. I wanted to be secretary
[Hannityl:] My biggest regret, and I like Jeff Sessions, but he never should have recused himself.
[Giuliani:] Well, he never should have appointed Rosenstein.
[Lemon:] Mark, quick response to that.
[Preston:] Well, you know, a couple of things here. It looked like there were two great supporters there of President Trump lamenting the fact that they're in this position. Of course, Sean Hannity was supposed to be a journalist and actually interviewing, but what it does say to me is that and if you heard Rudy's tone throughout the whole interview, is that we are going through a whole another sphere right now. This is going to get very, very combative. They're changing their legal team up right now and we're going to see Rudy Giuliani and others right now pushing this whole narrative that we have seen to discredit this investigation just to give more criticism
[Lemon:] And the Justice Department. Mark, thank you. Michael, you want to respond? I'll give you the last word here.
[Avenatti:] Lying on videotape to the American people on Air Force One should never be acceptable in our America, period.
[Lemon:] Thank you all. I appreciate it. When we come back, much more on our breaking news tonight. Rudy Giuliani's stunning statement that President Trump repaid Michael Cohen $130,000 for the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. [COMMERCIAL BREAK] So here's our breaking news tonight, Rudy Giuliani's bombshell statement that President Trump repaid Michael Cohen $130,000 for the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. So let's bring in now John Flannery, a former special counsel to the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, Caroline Polisi is a federal and white collar criminal defense attorney and CNN Legal Analyst, Michael Zeldin who was Robert Mueller's former special assistant at the Justice Department. I've got a lot of questions for you guys in a short period of time here. So, I said this, Caroline, is this a jedi mind trick because how can someone I'm being serious.
[Caroline Polisi, Federal And White Collar Criminall Defense Attorney:] I have to believe, Don, that there is a bigger strategy here because otherwise there is just literally is no explanation for what Giuliani just did. Talk about Rudy to the rescue, I mean, this is a terrible thing that he did. I have to think he's getting out in front of some bad facts that he knows, potentially. It's a strategy on part of criminal defense attorney to sort of get all the bad facts out up front. Maybe that's what he was doing here. That's the only thing I can think of.
[Lemon:] What do you think of that, Michael?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I think that probably is not the case here. I think that this guy was just freelancing. Remember the first thing he said when he was brought onto the team was I'm going to put this Mueller investigation together in a few weeks time and it would be done.
[Lemon:] So he's giving it more fuel now.
[Zeldin:] Now he comes on that's right. And now he comes on and he says one of two things. Either Michael Cohen made a contribution that was excessive and violated the law or the president made a loan was received a loan that should have been reported and wasn't reported and that the repayment of that loan was funneled in $35,000 increments in the way I think calculated to avoid reporting the loan on the campaign finance forms. And so potentially Giuliani walked his client and potentially Michael Cohen in a difficult legal position. What you don't want to do if you're Rudy Giuliani is back Michael Cohen into a corner where he thinks that the president really is not on his side, and that if Michael Cohen has something bad to say about the president, he will now think long and hard about making a deal with the prosecutors. So, all in all I think it was not a good night for Trump, Cohen and especially Rudy Giuliani.
[Lemon:] So, go ahead, John. I want to get your reaction, but I got a question.
[John Flannery, Former Assistant U.s. Attorney:] Well,, you know, I think Rudy tonight should be arrested for impersonating a criminal defense lawyer. It's the most amazing performance. I can't imagine what Cohen's lawyer was doing, but I think he probably brought that client closer to cooperating if there haven't already been discussions. And he's restructured the entire case now into there was a pay off, there was a statement made to a bank. We don't know what the false statement was. And it question is what did Mr. Trump know and when about that application for the loan. And then restructuring something in which Rudy said that there was a little extra paid for income so, did they make representations to IRS that these payments were income to the firm, and they gave additional money to cover the taxes for it? And Rudy sounded at one point like he knew about it as it was happening. And I'd have to hear what he said again several times, but it sounded like that.
[Lemon:] Let me ask you this. So the president has said he did very that it was his attorney, he was only client. And then he said according to Rudy Giuliani that it was a retainer. You saw the $35,000. Do you think that maybe the president is giving Rudy Giuliani this narrative to go out and say that it was a retainer to sort of stem some sort of legal tide that is coming?
[Flannery:] I think that most lawyers would spend more time to find out what the government knew before they went around offering a defense to one offense and leaving themselves open to several others. I can't even imagine why you do it. But I think I've said to you before that as a prosecutor, I always thought in white collar cases, you don't always catch the geniuses. But it's unusual to have an attorney with at least these prior experience come on the air and say anything like he did and open himself up to among other things an apparent waiver of any privilege, which is being contested in that criminal case pending in the southern district of New York. It's a debacle of enormous proportions. And if Trump comes out and says I never authorized him to say that, where are they then? It's just amazing.
[Lemon:] OK. So Michael, you said that, you know, you thought that he was freelancing. He was just talking to Sean Hannity, you've made that point. Here's what I want to ask you, Caroline. So, it seems like and this is according to a lawyer I know. He says it seems like Rudy Giuliani is trying to somehow shift or relocate or reallocate Cohen's retainer in hindsight, and that is very convenient. But retainers don't suggest any service has to be completed by Cohen. It may simply suggest availability. But he thinks that this attorney thinks that he's conveniently trying to reallocate that the retainer, you know, this was a retainer and not hush money that he was paying.
[Polisi:] Yes, but this goes to Michael Avenatti's point that he made earlier, that this could be sort of an elaborate structuring deal, and structuring is itself is a federal crime, if that's telling. He said the idea being, you know, and I think Giuliani said that the money was funneled through a law firm. Well, funneling sounds a lot like money laundering. So when you combine structuring with the funneling, there is a lot of moving parts here that are sort of right for prosecution.
[Lemon:] You got to go quick for me Michael. I've got a break to get in here. If you were John Dowd and Ty Cobb were out, and then Emmet Flood who is coming in, what would you be thinking right now?
[Zeldin:] Oh, my god might be the first thought that comes to my mind. I think of Marty and Jane Raskin, two terrific lawyers who now are on the scene and have to sort of control these cats. I think Emmet Flood is a terrific lawyer and will be helpful here. And so I think they've got their work cut out for them not only in controlling the messaging out of the president's mouth but apparently the messaging out of Rudy Giuliani, one of your team members now. I don't know what they can possibly do to control both of those people at this point in time.
[Lemon:] Thank you all. I appreciate it. When we come back, much on our breaking news tonight. Plus, this we have this. Three Americans who have been detained in North Korea for months could be released at any moment. We're going to go live to the region. That's next.

[Sciutto:] New tonight, the other person who was allegedly in the room when Brett Kavanaugh allegedly again assaulted Christine Blasey Ford is speaking out now. In a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mark Judge and his attorney write following, "Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford's letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in a manner Dr. Ford describes." However, judge's past is now coming under intense scrutiny. Jessica Snyder is OUTFRONT.
[Jessica Snyder, Cnn Correspondent:] Testimony from Brett Kavanaugh's high school classmate Mark Judge in demand by Democrats.
[Sen. Chris Coons,  Delaware:] I think it's important that we hear from witnesses, not the least of which is Mark Judge.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer,  Minority Leader:] How could we not want to get the truth and not have Mr. Judge come to the hearing and ask questions?
[Snyder:] Professor Christine Blasey Ford says Mark Judge was in the room at a house party when she alleges a 17-year-old Brett Kavanaugh, pinned her down, tried to take off her clothes and put his hands over her mouth to prevent her from screaming. Ford said Judge now an author and film maker witnessed everything. Through his lawyer, Judge sent a statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Tuesday, saying, "I have no memory of this alleged incident and never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford described." Kavanaugh has also forcefully denied the incident. Judge's own memoir in addition depicts the heavy drinking and hard partying. At Georgetown prep student at that time, Kavanaugh was there in the early 1980s but he does not recount any incidents such as what Ford alleges. In "Wasted: Tales of a GenX Drunk", Judge writes how the all boys' high school was swimming in alcohol and he was shocked they got away with it.
[Debra Katz, Lawyer For Christine Blasey Ford:] One needs to look at the writings of Mark Judge who was the other person present to know he wrote about how drunk he and other members of Georgetown Prep were repeatedly, routinely. This was part of their culture. Judge even seems to allude to Brett Kavanaugh in this passage from the memoir. "Do you know Bart O'Kavanaugh?" one character asked another, "Yeah, he passed out on his way back from a party." Both Kavanaugh and Judge were varsity athletes at the prestigious all boys catholic high school outside Washington, D.C. Captions and quotes inside their class yearbook allude to parties and women, 100 kegs or bust written on Kavanaugh's year book page. On another page, "Do these guys beat their wives?" And this one, prep parties raise question of legality. Judge's personal page reads, "Certain women should be struck regularly like gongs." Judge has even waded into conservative politics, writing several articles for the "Daily Caller". He has written about former President Obama saying, "he seems to be a women and feminist one at that." And Judge took on the topic of feminism in a 2013 book review, writing, the bogus war on women is really nothing but liberal women acting out against bad fathers. The anger of the feminists has grown more acute, nothing short of a matriarchal utopia will suffice. It's easier than admitting what really ails you.
[Schneider:] And Mark Judge telling the Senate Judiciary Committee tonight he will not be testifying or speaking out publicly because he has no memory of the alleged incident. Jim, in addition, we talked to a friend of Kavanaugh and Judge who said Kavanaugh did drink beer in high school but was never out of control. Judge, in the meantime, was apparently a loud mouth apparently and a lot wilder. But, Jim, the same person said they had no knowledge of the party that Ford alleges that she was sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh Jim.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn:] Jessica Schneider, thanks very much. OUTFRONT now, Wendy Murphy, she's a former federal prosecutor, and Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor. Wendy, if I could begin with you, mark judge said he does not want to speak publicly about the sexual assault allegation. But from the perspective of this hearing that's coming, can it be a credible hearing if you don't hear from the other witness that we know of at this point?
[Wendy Murphy, Former Federal Prosecutor:] You know, if he were not an eyewitness, Jim, I would say, let's not go there. It's just too tangential, even if the guy has a lot of bad marks on his record and a terrible history of insulting and disrespecting women. But he was not only an eyewitness, he was a participant. Let's remember that. Yes, the judge, Kavanaugh, is the primary target and the man whose career is on the line but Mark Judge was accused of participating to some extent. Remember, there was slamming of the door, the music was raised up so that her screams couldn't be heard and he jumped on top of both of them, which allowed thankfully allowed her to escape. But he was not just an eyewitness, that's why I think it's critical and has to be there. He should answer questions about not only what he claims he doesn't recall seeing but about his own behavior during that very incident. Of course, the Republicans are going to put him on a long plane trip someplace because if he does testify, it will highlight the most important aspect of the story, which is that we're talking about a grotesque example of violence against women that is pervasive in our society, that really does raise important questions about the qualifications of a judge, even at a lower level, much less the United States Supreme Court. It matters that the man accused here could sit in a position of prominence that would affect not just women's lives but all of our values and the integrity of the values in this country. It's fair, Mark Judge should be there, and he won't be there because he knows his testimony would destroy the judge's chances.
[Sciutto:] Renato, there will be and this assumes that Ford goes forward, there would be only two witnesses as currently planned in this hearing. If the intention here is to properly explore and investigate this allegation and judge the credibility of both of these witnesses, does the committee need to hear from others?
[Renato Mariotti, Former Federal Prosecutor:] I think there's no question, Jim. Whenever you're dealing with what I'll call a one-on- one, a situation like this where there's only two people who were present and have a recollection, although obviously the point that was just made a moment ago is an excellent one, I do agree that Mr. Judge should be subpoenaed and his testimony is vital because obviously Dr. Ford has indicated he was part of the incident, and that is her recollection. But clearly you need to have other witnesses who either corroborate or undercut the testimony. There's a lot of witnesses that could be called here. For example, the therapist, assuming that Dr. Ford was willing to waive the privilege there. Her husband and others who could support the testimony and corroborate her testimony. And then there would be other witnesses, presumably who could support Judge Kavanaugh as well.
[Sciutto:] Wendy, certainly a lot riding on the line here. We're hearing tonight, that "New York Times" reporting, that Ford is receiving death threats, that she's had to move out of her home, hire private security. You have represented clients, I imagine, in situations like this, but barely certainly not with this public attention to it. Is that a common thing?
[Murphy:] I wish I could say it's rare. I actually think intimidation tactics run the gamut from you know, here's a promise I'll never do it again or here's some cash, or I'll kill you if you testify. I'm not surprised. But I do think we have to put it in context. If she were not credible, she would not be getting death threats. People are trying to silence her. People always try to silence women to keep them from telling their stories. That's one of the reasons the #MeToo movement is so powerful. Women are done being silent. So I hope she does come forward. I don't think anyone will kill her, and I think she will be heroic when she testifies.
[Sciutto:] Renato, the president made clear today he does not want the FBI to investigate this allegation, just a reminder, the president has asked the FBI to investigate a whole host of things, have a listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The Democrats have had massive collusion, massive obstruction, and they should be investigated. Why isn't the FBI looking at the DNC server?
[Sciutto:] Also on Twitter at times, saying in part that the FBI and all others should be looking into the leaking of classified information, must find leaker now. So a lot of cases there, those are just a few. Hypocrisy by the president to say the FBI has no business, no interest to look into this?
[Mariotti:] No question. I mean, Trump views the FBI has his own force that should be used to investigate his political opponents and his enemies and then I think recently suggested that the attorney general should have quashed the investigations of his political allies. So there's no question here. If you really want to have a nonpartisan professional investigation, you'd have the FBI do it. They're professionals, not a bunch of senators who will use this to score political points and potentially embarrass Dr. Ford. It would be better if the FBI was doing it but it doesn't look like that's going to happen.
[Sciutto:] Wendy, Renato, thanks very much. OUTFRONT next tonight, evangelicals are part of the president's rock solid case. Has the Kavanaugh crisis shaken their faith in them? I'll ask a prominent Christian voice who had doubts about Trump from the start. And the Kavanaugh chaos now front and center in Florida's red hot Senate race.
[Gov. Rick Scott , Florida:] Dr. Ford needs to come and give an opportunity to testify.

[Whitfield:] All right, President Trump's personal lawyer is launching some very personal attacks at a potential adversary in the 2020 presidential election. In an interview with the Huffington Post, Rudy Giuliani called Former Vice President Joe Biden a moron and mentally deficient idiot. Last night, Giuliani attempted to clarify those comments to CNN's Chris Cuomo.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Attorney:] I didn't mean that. I mean, he's dumb. I think Joe's last in his law school class. Joe
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] He wasn't last but he was low.
[Giuliani:] Actually, he was second to last and the guy died and he ended up last.
[Cuomo:] We had it as a different number, but he didn't do well. I'll give you that.
[Giuliani:] And he had a plagiarism problem at law school. He had a plagiarism problem at as a senator which I think indicates something even about character. Constantly making faux pas.
[Cuomo:] But why talk about Joe Biden?
[Giuliani:] Well because, obviously, I'm asked, would he be a formidable candidate? I said, no. He'd be somebody that I think the President would like to run against. He never did well as a national candidate. President did fabulously as a first-time national candidate.
[Whitfield:] Arizona Senator John McCain's daughter is coming to Biden's defense. Saying on Twitter, "I am disgusted by Giuliani's abhorrent and idiotic comments about Joe Biden. Joe Biden is one of the great political leaders of all time. One of the truly decent men left in politics and someone my family has looked to for strength during the most difficult time in our lives." Joining me right now to talk about this, CNN Political Commentator and GOP Consultant John Thomas and CNN Political Commentator and Democratic Strategist Dave Jacobson. All right, good to see you both.
[Unidentified Male:] Good to be here.
[Whitfield:] And finally, in the flesh, love it.
[Unidentified Male:] Appreciate it.
[Whitfield:] OK. So John, you first, what are your thoughts about Giuliani's comments? Why do this?
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, first of all, I would love Joe Biden to run. Many of the points that Giuliani made, primarily Joe Biden can't take the moral high ground in a Trump versus Biden argument. He has trouble with the truth. He got caught for He got caught for plagiarism both in law school not, you know, plagiarizing a sentence but five pages of plagiarism for getting the site.
[Whitfield:] But trouble with the truth doesn't seem to be standing in the way
[Thomas:] No. But the point is he can't lob the standard attacks on the left at Donald Trump. He's having some questions about his only two issues. He's a gaffe machine. I think Donald Trump's going to nickname him sloppy Joe.
[Whitfield:] Oh, boy. So Dave, do you think Republicans or even more Democrats need to be coming to the defense of Joe Biden or at least comment about what Giuliani had to say?
[Dave Jacobson, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, two things. One, sloppy has already been taken, there's sloppy Steve. Donald trump has already dubbed his former senior adviser. But, look, I think what this truly underscores is the fact that the Trump campaign machine is scared. They're desperate. They're scared. Joe Biden would be formidable as would a number of other competitive Democrats who were looking at a 2020 contest. The fact of the matter is, this is gutter politics. The Trump folks are not talking about jobs. They're not talking about health care. They're not talking about how they're going to fix our broken immigration system. What they're talking about is ripping apart children and families and that's not a winning message for 2020.
[Whitfield:] So what is going to be the winning message, John?
[Thomas:] I mean, I think we run on the record that Republicans under the Trump administration have achieved. Our jobs numbers is largely what they're going to largely run on. And look, I think honestly a BidenTrump stack up would be fantastic. Biden is known to be a gaffe machine. And I think I think Democrats are under the mistaken perception that Biden is tested. When you run for V.P., it's a completely different position than when you run for president. They say running for president is like the MRI of the soul. I just don't believe that Biden is up to the task. So I encourage him to run, along with the 20 other Democrats
[Jacobson:] But last time I checked, Joe Biden was under the microscope for eight years when he was vice president to President Obama. And so the fact to the matter is he has been in the
[Thomas:] He was not under the microscope. There was a love affair with the President and they were not looking at Joe Biden. And he's had his own awkward me too moments where he's kissing people for too long, awkwardly hugging them.
[Jacobson:] I haven't seen a me too movement.
[Thomas:] I think it's going to be very difficult for Biden. He is not going to have easy path here.
[Jacobson:] Look, he screams authenticity, right? But the fact to the matter is that when you bring up the issue of lies or perhaps having difficulty with the truth, it was Donald Trump that was reported on by The Washington Post who has lied over 3,000 times.
[Whitfield:] So both parties do seem to have a problem or there are problem areas as it pertains to the Republicans. You've got, you know, Senator Corker who just recently said, you know, there is like a cult-like following within the Republican Party of Donald Trump. Take a listen.
[Sen. Bob Corker , Tennessee:] We're in a strange place. I mean, it's almost, you know, I'm going to it's becoming a cultish thing, isn't it? It's not a good place for any party to end up with a cult- like situation as it relates to a president that happens to be purportedly of the same party.
[Whitfield:] So, John, you largely talking about the silence, you know, among the party, among party members and even as it pertains to not completely telling the truth. Not correcting the President.
[Thomas:] You know, Senator Corker can call it cult like. It's called great approval ratings. That's what it is. It's called better approval ratings for Republican president than almost any of his predecessors. And Senator Corker can't understand why many of the GOP base are not aligned with him on issues like immigration and putting America first. And they like Trump's style. They like that he picks, but Senator Corker doesn't understand that.
[Whitfield:] And then as it pertains to Democrats, the problem sometimes is not being focused, you know, on what the message is. Looking less of just opposite anti-Trump. So what are the Democrats going to do particularly as we, you know, inch towards these midterms?
[Jacobson:] Well, a couple things. I think you're right that there is not like a broad Democratic platform. We haven't seen that. I don't know that we necessarily need it. I think everything has to be laser focused by district. That's what we saw with Conor Lamb's election. And a district that Donald Trump won by 20 points. There wasn't a national message that he was running the Cotels up. He was running a micro-targeted campaign focused on local issues. So I think it's important that Democrats focus on that. That being said, John, I think the American people are looking for a check on Donald Trump. That's why the generic ballot is starting to take back up. Nuclear politics has a sort of 7.3 percent advantage. And Fox News just a couple weeks ago put out a poll having Democrats with a nine-point advantage for the generic ballot. So, it looks increasingly like the wind is at the back of Democrats. And when we come to the November elections, we have a good shot at taking back the House.
[Whitfield:] And as part of that silence, I mean, you know, seeing what happened to Mark Sanford. Some are saying because he was outspoken against the President that cost him.
[Thomas:] Yes. Certainly
[Whitfield:] But Jeff Flake isn't, you know, trying to run.
[Thomas:] Well, largely because he knows what would have happened to him. He would have lost. That's right. A lot of these members are look, every politician, Democrat or Republican, is really concerned about one thing at the end of the day and that's the re-election. And these members understand if they buck the President and buck the President's agenda, voters are going to hold them accountable and they will primaried.
[Whitfield:] Dave, do you believe that is what happened with Mark Sanford? Or was it or could it have been the me too movement, you know, and the fuel behind it and people then thinking about, you know, his past transgressions and that payback has come now as a result?
[Jacobson:] I think this is the year of the woman, right? And ever since the Harvey Weinstein scandal has broken, I think people are looking at elections and giving it a new perspective, right? But I think Mark Sanford lost potentially because of that, but also he is in a deep red district. And that is a Trump district that the President won overwhelmingly. I don't think that's necessarily the challenge for Republicans going to 2018. I think the challenges, if you look at the California 7, seven House districts where Hillary Clinton won but Republican currently has the district, right? Those are the swing districts that are going to determine whether or not Democrats take back the House, right? And that's why you're seeing that a lot of those House members trying to negotiate with Democrats on issues like immigration.
[Whitfield:] Right. And the case of Mark Sanford, he wasn't necessarily accused of anything that is in the category of me too, but I really speak of the empowerment of women at this time of me too. I think these transgressions of, you know
[Thomas:] And Sanford, in fairness to his opponent. Sanford ran a terrible campaign, so it was a combination of things.
[Whitfield:] All right, we'll leave it right there. John and Dave, good to see you. We'll see you again tomorrow and later on this afternoon right here in the House.
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] Good to see you. All right. Coming up, in a week that saw President Trump praising Kim Jong-un, we look at the harsh reality behind those happy pictures of North Koreans cheering their leader.

[Paul:] So we have some new details this morning about a letter an American missionary wrote just before he was killed on an island near India. John Chau gave the letter to fisherman before he left their boat for the island.
[Savidge:] And it shows that he knew the tribes, people living in isolation there, were dangerous. Chau wrote, "You guys might think I am crazy in all this, but I think it is worth it to declare Jesus to these people. Please do not be angry at them or at God if I get killed." CNN's Polo Sandoval has more details.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] This is one of the oldest and most isolated tribes in the world. Authorities say they're responsible for last week's killing of American missionary John Allen Chau. This archived footage from Survival International provides some of the few existing images of the tribe known as the Sentinelese. They live in complete isolation on the tiny island of North Sentinel. According to Indian officials, Chau illegally paid fisherman to take him to the isolated island hoping to convert the tribe to Christianity. Authorities believe he first canoed to shore on November 16th, deliberately disregarding an established perimeter around the island. According to journal entries left with the fisherman and shared with the "Washington Post," the 26-years-old wrote, "I hollered my name is John. I love you. And Jesus loves you." He was then reportedly shot at by a member of the tribe with an arrow, piercing his bible. The next day, Chau made a second attempt, but never returned. The fisherman he hired later reported seeing the young man's body buried on the beach by tribe members. Chau's last entry in his journal reads "You guys might think I'm crazy in all this, but I think it is worthwhile to declare Jesus to these people. God, I don't want to die." In 2006, the same tribe killed two poachers who had been illegally fishing near their island. Survival Interview, a group advocating for tribal people, believe the natives decision to be remain isolated should be respected.
[Sophie Grig, Survival International Senior Researcher:] They've made it very clear they don't want contact. Somebody comes, they have no idea what he is coming for and why. I think it is far more self- defense than it is murder.
[Sandoval:] On social media, Chau's family wrote their son loved God, life, helping those in need, and had nothing but love for the Sentinelese people, and forgive those reportedly responsible for his death, the wrote. All they can do is wait to do is find out when or if their son's body will be recovered. Polo Sandoval, CNN, New York.
[Savidge:] Earlier we spoke to Mary Ho, the international executive leader of the missionary organization John Chau worked for, and we got her perspective on the trip.
[Mary Ho, International Executive Leader, All Nations:] He has been preparing his whole life for this. We knew he was very well prepared. There were several people who would have been happy to go with him, but this is typical of John. I think he did not want to endanger other people's lives. And so finally he went alone. And that was his decision. But there were others who were willing to go with him.
[Paul:] Breaking news out of Paris right now. Protesters clashing with police on the Champs-Elysees. Tear gas, water cannons all being used to try to suppress the demonstrators who are angry about rising fuel prices. We have the latest from Paris, next.
[Savidge:] And then a devastating government assessment warns unchecked climate change will cost thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in the U.S. What will the president do about it?

[Keilar:] A meeting of minds over a year in the making has finally happened. Pope Francis and President Trump putting a war of words behind them inside of the Vatican. The two met today in a private 30-minute session, and reports are that the mood was kind of tense in the beginning, but when it was over, here's what happened.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Thank you very much. I won't forget what you said. Good luck.
[Keilar:] That's pretty good, right? The relationship has not always been this cordial. Pretty contentious, in fact. Remember some comments during the election like this.
[Pope Francis:] A person who thinks about building walls wherever they may be and not building bridges is not a Christian.
[Trump:] If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which, as everyone knows, is ISIS'ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been president. For a religious leader to question a person's faith is disgraceful.
[Keilar:] What a difference an election makes. Joining me is Tara Palmeri, CNN political analyst and White House correspondent for "Politico." And also joining us on the phone, John Allen, CNN senior Vatican analyst ad editor of "The Boston Globe's" "The Crux" and also the author of "The Francis Miracle." Thanks to both of you for being here. There are reports that the pontiff left quite an impression on the president, and that the topics of terrorism, the Paris Accord, the environment came up. John, when the president clearly said to the pontiff that what he had said made a big impact on him, what do you think that could have been?
[John Allen, Cnn Senior Vatican Analyst:] Well, I think actually from President Trump's point of view, this meeting probably went about as well as he could have envisioned. Frankly, if he had scribbled out the outcome on a cocktail napkin with a pen, which would be in character for this president, I don't think you could have envisioned a better outcome. First of all, the chemistry between the two men, particularly towards the end of the meeting, was obviously quite warm. Secondly, if you look at the statements that the Vatican put out afterwards, there was a deliberate effort to play down issues of contention and to play up the issues where Pope Francis and President Trump might be able to find common ground. The statement led with the joint commitment of the defense of human life, which is, of course, Vatican speak for the fight against abortion, religious freedom and freedom of conscience. There was recently an executive order put out on religion freedom. Despite the obvious differences between Francis and Trump, their differences on immigration, climate change, poverty relief, war and peace, and so on, that in this meeting, they wanted the climate to be upbeat and the focus on where they could agree.
[Keilar:] Tara, I want to ask you a question about protocol because it's so important on these visits. And to that point, the issues of veils is something that many observers were wondering about, is Melania, the first lady, going to wear a veil in Saudi Arabia. She did not. Some have said her outfit evoked, even though she didn't wear a veil. But she did at the Vatican, and so did Ivanka Trump. What did you think about the choices on protocol there?
[Tara Palmeri, Cnn Political Anayst:] I think the difference is that the pope requested that they wear a veil. This is standard for anyone who is visiting the pope. And whereas in Saudi Arabia, they didn't actually make that request that they wear veils. It's not illegal for foreign women to veils. So I think the difference is the request and symbolism of it and its respect for the pope and it doesn't have a broader implication.
[Keilar:] Tell us, John, about the gifts that they gave to each other. This is significant and a lot of thought behind them.
[Allen:] Yes. If should be said, every time a head of state comes to the Vatican, he or she presents gifts to the pope and the pope does likewise. This is hardly something that is unique to the president of the United States. But President Trump presented Pope Francis with a collection of the writings of Martin Luther King Jr, which is a carefully thought-out move, because, if you remember when Pope Francis spoke to Congress last September, he lifted up four great Americans that he admired in a particular way, and one of them was Martin Luther King. So Trump has been well briefed about the likes of Pope Francis. Pope Francis gave the president a mini statue, a bronze medallion, coined by a Roman artist that was the depiction of an olive tree, which was described as a symbol of peace, saying that he wanted the president to be an agent of peace, he wanted him to be someone who would work for peace. And it's quite likely that, at the end of the meeting, when we overheard President Trump on the way out saying to Pope Francis that I will not forget what you said to me, that may well be part of what he had in mind.
[Keilar:] Tara, I want to ask you about something. As we look at this opportunity, this photo opportunity, there's someone missing, and a lot of people are talking about how Sean Spicer, the very visible representative of the White House, who is an extremely devout Catholic, was not included. And we actually have some reporting by CNN that he felt left out by this, which you cannot blame him for. What happened?
[Palmeri:] I think what you're seeing is the disenchantment that President Trump has expressed to his aides with Sean Spicer. My sources have told me that he suggested that he feels that some of the newcomers that came on with the RNC, Reince Priebus, they are not as loyal to him as Keith Schiller, who had a chance to go and visit the pope. He's a bodyguard. He's been around since the beginning of the campaign. And Dan Slaven, who has worked for the president for 18 years. White House officials are saying that you may not see Sean Spicer again at the podium after this trip, so it would make sense that the president would start limiting his appearances. And these people are very close to Trump. They are literally family. He really values loyalty and blood. And there is something to it. As a reporter, when I make a phone call to the press office and it's about Reince Priebus, I get a quicker response than I do when it's about the president. There's a sort of loyalty towards him because he was the one who brought them into the White House and Trump wants to know that the loyalty is to him, first and foremost.
[Keilar:] Very good point. Tara Palmeri, in Brussels; and John Allen, thank you to both of you.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news. I'm Brianna Keilar. We're beginning this hour with our breaking news. The brother of the Manchester concert bomber has just been arrested, accused of planning a separate terror attack in the Libyan capitol of Tripoli. Back in the U.K., five people are now in custody in connection with the bombing as police there now say

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour: President Trump tweets a Christmas greeting and then toots his own horn. Plus one of the most reclusive corners of the world appears to be losing some of its luster. Why North Korean tourism is taking a hit. And life after the hurricane: the Christmas holiday raising spirits in post-Maria Puerto Rico. Hello and welcome to our viewers from around the world, I'm Isha Sesay. NEWSROOM L.A. starts right now.
[Sesay:] Donald Trump is marking his first Christmas as U.S. President with tweets from his Mar-a-lago resort in Florida on Monday evening. He wrote, "I hope everyone is having a great Christmas. Then tomorrow it's back to work in order to make America great again, which is happening faster than anyone anticipated." Earlier in the day, he posted this holiday message.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] Melania and I are delighted to wish America and the entire world a very merry Christmas.
[Melania Trump, Wife Of President-elect Donald Trump:] At this time of year, we see the best of America and the soul of the American people.
[Sesay:] Those weren't the only tweets Mr. Trump sent over the holiday weekend. In between his official duties and some Christmas celebrations, the president found time to praise himself and criticize a few favorite targets. Here's our own Sara Murray.
[Sara Murray, Cnn Correspondent:] It was a relatively quiet Christmas day for President Trump, he and the first lady spent it ensconced at Mar-a-lago. That's the president's Florida resort. But Trump fit in plenty of Christmas activities on Christmas Eve. That's when he sent a video message to U.S. troops who were deployed abroad. He and the first lady also made phone calls to children who were tracking Santa. And then after that they attended a Christmas eve service at the church that they were married at. Of course this would not be the president without a Twitter tirade. We certainly saw that over the weekend, heading into this Christmas holiday. That's when he took aim at the FBI, he took aim at the media and aired one of his deepest grievances of 2017, the notion that he is just not getting enough credit for all of his achievements, particularly on the economy Sara Murray, CNN, West Palm Beach, Florida.
[Sesay:] Mr. Trump will soon wrap his first year as commander in chief. Our own Dana Bash takes a look back at some of the major moments in 2017.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Let's be honest. The first year of the Trump presidency feels more like a decade because of the relentless stream of news. Here's a look at some of the key moments of President Trump's first year in office.
[Bash:] For candidate Trump, large campaign crowds were the norm. But at his inauguration, this was a sore subject. The new president grew angry watching reports his inaugural crowd size was smaller than President Obama's. One of his first presidential acts was to order his press secretary to do this
[Sean Spicer, Former White House Press Secretary:] This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period.
[Bash:] That's thing the president himself amplified while standing in front of a CIA memorial to fallen heroes.
[Donald Trump:] We had a massive field of people. You saw that. I looked out. The field was it looked like a million, a million and a half people.
[Bash:] But the numbers didn't lie. And the episode set an early Trump administration tone. Government regulation: it sure doesn't sound exciting, so it's no surprise the Trump administration effort on this was not splashy 2017 news.
[Donald Trump:] One, two, three.
[Bash:] But the president withdrew hundreds of regulations. A dull term with a real-world impact from the safety of the products you use to the air you breathe.
[Donald Trump:] We have reduced unnecessary regulations to a point that this country hasn't seen in years.
[Bash:] It was a promise kept to Republicans, who argue excess regulation hurts business and economic growth.
[Unidentified Male:] Raise your right hand.
[Bash:] The most lasting Trump 2017 accomplishment is arguably the nomination and confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
[Judge Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court Nominee:] I will do all my powers permit to be a faithful servant to the Constitution and laws of this great nation.
[Bash:] The seat was open for a year since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia and Senate Republicans refused to consider President Obama's pick, Judge Merrick Garland.
[Donald Trump:] You will go down as one of the truly great justices in the history of the United States Supreme Court.
[Unidentified Male:] Justices can disagree without being disagreeable.
[Bash:] Getting Gorsuch was noteworthy not just for the Trump legacy but the process.
[Donald Trump:] It is an extraordinary resume.
[Bash:] From announcement to confirmation, this success was the most conventional Trump undertaking of the year. After months of back and forth between Donald Trump and North Korea's dictator, words like "rocket man" and "fire and fury," the president took his insults to the world stage. His first speech at the United Nations
[Donald Trump:] If it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.
[Bash:] The rhetorical crossfire continued on Twitter and through regime statements.
[Donald Trump:] Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself.
[Bash:] By year's end, the escalation reached new heights. North Korea tested its most powerful missile yet, with the capacity to reach the U.S. mainland. No discussion about Donald Trump's first year in the White House would be complete without talking about his favorite little birdie. He sent more than 2,000 tweets in 2017 alone, from the mystery of covfefe to a series of really consequential posts, like unprecedented attacks on his own party's leadership and some head-scratching retweets. This anti-Muslim video sent by a Brit convicted of hate crimes caused a diplomatic rift with the British prime minister. Plus his claim that President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower. Yet the one that may come back to haunt him the most, taunting fired FBI director James Comey. "Better hope there are no tapes of our conversations." The hands-down biggest 2017 Trump defeat, failure to repeal and replace ObamaCare. John McCain's dramatic no-vote sealed its fate but Republicans were split how to fulfill their ObamaCare repeal promise, one that helped them win control of government. That loss made President Trump and Hill Republicans quest for tax reform a political life or death mission: must-pass legislation.
[Unidentified Male:] Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as amended is passed.
[Bash:] And it worked.
[Donald Trump:] People are going to be very, very happy. They're going to get tremendous, tremendous tax cuts.
[Bash:] Whether most Americans, especially working class Trump voters, will see that as a win, to be determined. And finally, the most important Trump moment of 2017: firing FBI director James Comey. Sacking Comey while he was investigating potential 2016 Trump-Russia collusion caused a political earthquake with aftershocks still rattling the president.
[Donald Trump:] Let's see what happens.
[Bash:] Not the least of which, Comey's revelation that he kept detailed memos documenting meetings with the president, which Comey asked a friend to leak to the press.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.
[Bash:] That's exactly what happened. And special prosecutor Robert Mueller's Russia investigation was a cloud over the first year of the Trump presidency, which so far produced indictments of two former campaign officials and the guilty plea of foreign national security adviser Michael Flynn for lying to the
[Fbi. Bash:] What a year. What will 2018bring? Buckle up.
[Sesay:] Oh, we are buckled. Jessica Levinson is professor of law and governance at Loyola Law School and joins us now. Jessica, great to have you with us on this day. So I guess here's my question, are you in agreement with our own Dana Bash in that the firing of James Comey is the most consequential action taken by President Trump in his first year in office?
[Jessica Levinson, Loyola Law School:] Well, I'm not actually I think that the most consequential action may have been the appointment of Neil Gorsuch and not just Neil Gorsuch but also all the other lower judges that President Trump has appointed. And so I think that when we're thinking about we saw that story where he repealed a number of regulations and he wasn't able to repeal ObamaCare. But one of the things that he's been doing that's been so underreported is that he's reshaping one of the three branches of our government. He's reshaping the judicial branch and people aren't really talking about it. But if we look at all of the things that he's done that we talk about, the travel ban and the ban on transgender, people serving in the military, all of these things have ended up in federal court. And in all of these cases, it's been judges who have thwarted what President Trump wanted to do. And so I think the most consequential thing is the reshaping of one of our three branches of government.
[Sesay:] And wondering whether that would be your choice because we have seen not only this reshaping of the lower courts and appointment of Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, but we've also seen a president willing to take on one of the bedrocks of this country, the independence, impartiality of the judiciary. Where do you see that going in 2018? Do you see more of that, given the number of challenges being leveled at his administration in court?
[Levinson:] Well, I do. And I think this is one of the most disheartening aspects of what I'm seeing, which is that he's undermining the bedrocks, the integrity of our government. So we saw this when it was candidate Trump, where he was talking about "so- called judges." And we see this with President Trump, where he's saying, well, this decision that if it's a decision that goes against him, he says this is just a liberal activist judge. And we have three coequal branches of government. And we see the same behavior when it comes to the FBI investigation. And it is very important that the American public and the world really has faith in this FBI investigation, in the appointment of a special counsel, in former FBI director Robert Mueller looking into these issues of whether or not the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government. And so for him to be taking so many of the bedrocks of our system of government and trying to basically just lie about them and undermine them and harm their integrity is something that makes me deeply concerned. And I think we will continue to see it throughout 2018.
[Sesay:] And as you talk about the president and his reactions to the special counsel investigation, when he was in Mar-a-lago he's been posting all these tweets and he's continued to lambast the FBI. He put out two tweets over the weekend, slamming deputy director Andrew McCabe. We want to put them on screen. The first one seizing on the fact that McCabe's wife who is a Democrat ran for office and this is what he said. He said, "How can FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leaking James Comey of the phony Hillary Clinton investigation, including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails, be given 700,000 for wife's campaign by Clinton puppets during investigation?" He did not stop there. There was another message that he posted, which appears to be responding to news reports, that McCabe is considering retirement. And this is what that president said there. "FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits 90 days to go?!!!" Let me ask you this. Some are speculating that the president is trying to erode confidence in the Russia investigation. Do you think he is succeeding? We're seeing a number of individuals on the Right, lawmakers and other networks, right-wing networks, certainly parroting a line that this investigation is tilted against the president. What about the broader populace? Will they go along with this line of operation, if you will?
[Levinson:] Well, I'm very worried that that they will. And I think the thing that is worrisome is that all of these tweets are like one- sentence headlines, that if they're true, tell you a very small picture, a very small part of the overall story. And so this issue, let's take specifically the issue with deputy director Andrew McCabe and the idea that his wife was paid by Hillary Clinton associates. So we need to look at what actually happened which is before FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe ever got close to the Hillary investigation, before there was an investigation he could be involved with, his wife was running for state senate. And she obtained funds from a PAC that was run by Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe, who previously had worked for the Clinton administration. So the full story takes a few sentences to explain. And it doesn't sound as damaging or doesn't sound as scary. But that's the truth behind it. And What I worry about with all these tweets, is that he really is sowing the seeds of doubt and that all it takes for the populace is to say, well, you know, I heard this one thing or somebody posted this on Facebook or I heard it, I saw a quick headline or I heard part of a radio story. And all of a sudden this incredibly important investigation that is looking into whether or not there should be criminal charges brought against members of the Trump campaign and members of the Trump administration., all of a sudden, we say, well, can we really trust those people? Are they biased? And it's again, it's the same thing that we see happen with the judiciary. At that point, we no longer have faith in our institutions. So I think it's very important for the American public and the public at large to really look at what's happening and, unfortunately, we now have a president where we can't just accept what he's saying as truthful or factual.
[Sesay:] Democratic congressman Adam Schiff of California, who's the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, he essentially tweeted the same thing. And I want us to put that up on screen. He said, "FBI would set a dangerous precedent if it forced out dedicated career public servants in capitulation to Trump and White House pressure. President has already removed one top FBI leader, Comey, over Russia. McCabe would be another." That's what he goes on to say. So obviously, echoing in what you're saying, saying that this would be a very, very bad move
[Levinson:] I think this is part of, if you say it three times then maybe it will be true. I don't see anything to indicate that we're close to the end of the FBI investigation and particularly with respect to President Trump. Instead what I'm seeing is that this is a big and complicated investigation and it's proceeding exactly as we would expect. So you're starting from the outside of the investigation; you're going after the smaller players or the peripheral players or you're going after the people who are closer on the outside but to unrelated crimes, like for instance we saw Paul Manafort, who was indicted for making false sometimes. Not directly related to a Russian conspiracy but enough to get him to cooperate with the investigation. And so if you look at who has been indicted thus far, what they've been indicted for, if you look at the probable inquiry into what documents were looked at, I don't think there's anything to indicate that we're close to even it's entirely probable to me that we're not even close to the middle at this point. So I understand that President Trump has a political purpose in telling his lawyer that he should say we're close to the end, because then when we're not, it feels like, why is this dragging on so long? But the truth is we're not.
[Sesay:] Well, the longer it goes on, the more tweets we shall see. Jessica Levinson, we appreciate it. Thank you so much. Merry Christmas.
[Levinson:] Thank you. You, too.
[Sesay:] Puerto Rico is still reeling from the devastation caused by Hurricane Maria. Thousands on the island remain without power and some still have no water after the storm hit in September. One senator is still trying to make the most of the holiday season and make sure kids who lost everything in the storm are not forgotten. Leyla Santiago has this story.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] Even for Santa
[Manny Rivera, "santa":] Merry Christmas!
[Santiago:] This Christmas just hasn't been the same this year.
[Rivera:] The devastation in Puerto Rico was at another level.
[Santiago:] For many, the magic of Christmas has been overshadowed by the daily struggles of life after Hurricane Maria.
[Rivera:] A kid yesterday asked me to bring back his house the way it was before Maria.
[Santiago:] As he's done for the past five years, this Santa is gathering his elves to make sure the children of Puerto Rico know Santa is still watching.
[Rivera:] I'm going on my sleigh, my personal sleigh and even though Maria banged it up a bit.
[Santiago:] This year Maria has forced some of the same kids he visited last year to move in with relatives in homes powered only by generators.
[Rivera:] This part over here was hit pretty bad also when Maria
[Santiago:] Other children are in homes without water. And Santa can relate.
[Rivera:] I don't I don't have power. Still don't have water. And still got to fix the roof to the house.
[Santiago:] Maria destroyed his home, too. But when Santa visits these children, they forget, even if just for a moment, about the challenges of the last few months, the concerns for the future. She says this year because the children lost everything, they were concerned, not just about life, but also about Santa coming. But that's what makes this so special, that he did come this year. For this moment, six-year-old Alejandro forgets he doesn't get to spend Christmas in his own home. He says this is what he put on his list for Santa to bring him. And he's just grateful he got it this year. And 7-year-old Jamelle forgets he even doubted Santa finding him this year. Enough proof for at least a few families on the island to believe Santa is real Leyla Santiago, CNN, Puerto Rico.
[Sesay:] Quick break now. Russia is urging the U.S. to smooth things over with North Korea. Why Moscow's top diplomat thinks the U.S. should reach out first. That's coming up.

[John King, Cnn Chief National Correspondent:] And New Jersey right here, we'll know in the next half hour or so are Democrat getting closer to the magic number? We'll know soon.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Yes. We have got some projections right now. All right, CNN projects that Bob Casey, the incumbent Democratic Senator in Pennsylvania will be reelected for another six years. Senator Lee in Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar reelected for another six years, Amy Klobuchar wins in Minnesota. In New York State, Kirsten Gillibrand, she got reelected, she is the incumbent Democrats. Senator Lee in New Mexico, Martin Heinrich, he will be reelected in New Mexico for another six years. Too early to call in some states right now. In Texas still too early to call between Beto O'Rourke and Ted Cruz. In Arizona, too early to call between Kyrsten Sinema and Martha McSally. Similarly in North Dakota, Heidi Heitkamp the incumbent Democrat facing Kevin Cramer, too early to call in North Dakota. No projections right now and we put it up on the screen for you. No projections as we mentioned in Arizona, Michigan, the special of Minnesota Senate Election, Nebraska, North Dakota, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Let's look at the balance of power, where things stand in the Senate right now. Take a look, 35 Democrats will be in the Senate, 42 Republicans. 23 Senate seats remain outstanding right now. Democrats must pick up two Republican seats and not lose any of their own in order to get the majority of 51 they need. Dana, you're eyeing contests very closely right now because they are tight.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Extremely tight. A lot of very exciting frankly races that we're looking at across the battle ground states in the U.S. Senate starting, of course, with Texas. We keep watching this, and it is getting tighter, but Beto O'Rourke, the Democrat, is still ahead by a little less than 4,000 votes right now. Florida, it is so tight. The Republican challenger Rick Scott is still ahead beating right now the Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson very, very close, less than 60,000 votes between them. Indiana. This could be a heart break for the Democrats because the Republican challenger Mike Braun is ahead and has been all night long, about two-thirds of the vote in. Joe Donnelly is down significantly there. West Virginia, a very different story. Same in that they're both states where they're Trump country. Joe Manchin, the Democrat has been ahead all night there in West Virginia. Also want to check in on Missouri, another state where Trump won by double digits. The Republican is ahead there. Josh Hawley by a little more than 14,000 votes and 2% of the vote in, so it's early there. I want to straight to Nia, her project of the governor race.
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] That's right, Dana. We can make two projections at this point. We'll start in New York. CNN projects that the winner of that race is Andrew Cuomo, the incumbent of course going for his third term defeating Marc Malinaro in New York. And we'll move onto another race in Texas, closely watched race. CNN projects that the winner of that race is Gregg Abbott. Again, he's the incumbent going for a second term defeating Lupe Valdez in Texas. And let's go now to some other races we've been looking at and can't yet make any projections at this point. Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, no projections at this point. It's just too early. And we'll go now to these other races we've been watching all night long. Florida, Ron DeSantis in this governor's race hanging onto a pretty good lead at this point, 89,000 votes at this point. Over Andrew Gillum who is trying to become the first African American governor in Florida, 96% reporting. A lot of votes there separating those two. Let's go to Kansas. This was a race Laura Kelly at this point over Kris Kobach. Kris Kobach, of course somebody who Trump endorsed in the primary. He's behind at this point by about 55,000 votes at this point, 34 % report right now. In Ohio, another race we're watching closely in the Midwest. Ohio. Mike Dewine over Richard Cordray. And this has flipped back and forth all night long at this point, and 80,000 votes at this point Mike Dewine over Richard Cordray the Democrat in this race, in Ohio, 45% reporting. Let's go back down south to Georgia. Brian Kemp, 258,000 vote lead at this point, 61 %, and you have Stacey Abrams here, a historic going through history here in Georgia, 32 % reporting right now. And we're going to hand you over to Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Wee have got a projection in the House of Representatives, two holds for the Republicans in Kentucky, the sixth district, the winner incumbent Representative Andy Barr. He's the Republican. We have been watching this race very closely. He was challenged by Amy McGrath. Andy Barr reelected in the Lexington, Kentucky area, Andy Barr, the incumbent Republican get reelected. In Florida, Ross Spano, the winner, the Republican may beats Kristen Carlson. This is along the I-4 corridor. Ross Spano gets elected in Florida. So right now in the House of Representatives Democrats must pick up 21 Republican seats. It stays the same as a result of this. 21 Republican seats and not lose any of their own. Jake, let's talk about this. 21 seats they still have to pick up, the Democrats.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] It is entirely possible that the Democrats will regain control of the House today. But I have to say, when you look at what's going on here tonight, this is not a blue wave. This is not a wave that is knocking out all sorts of Republican incumbents. We saw, you just called the Kentucky sixth district. Now, there are every all sorts of ways Democrats can regain the House without Amy McGrath having defeated incumbent Congressman Andy Barr, but the fact is she did not. And if she had, that would have really been an indication of a big, powerful blue wave. The fact that she did not, and it is a district that he won two years ago, Congressman Barr by more than 20 points but this was a target. Democrat did hope to win Kentucky sixth. And you look at the competitive races going on in Florida where Republicans right now have the edge. You look at what's going on in the Indiana Senate race right now. It does look as though Republicans have been able to build something of a wall in certain parts of the country, especially in these states that President Trump won. That said, Democrats still have a decent chance of winning back the House. They still have a number of seats that are very competitive where Democrats are in the lead, and that could still happen.
[Blitzer:] Yes, they had high hopes for some of those districts where the Republicans managed to pull out a win.
[Tapper:] Yes, the Republicans did pull well, look you have to Democrats have done a good job in recruiting House candidates but Republicans have not sat back and let this happen. They've been fighting for it. And as we see by what's going on in Florida right now, what's going on in Georgia right now, what's going on in Indiana right now, Republicans have managed to get their voters to the polls as well.
[Blitzer:] Let's go over to John and take a closer look at some of these contests. The Florida Senate race right now is close. John, it's very close but Rick Scott is still ahead.
[King:] Rick Scott is still ahead, and you're starting to look at this, 96% of the vote. Now, we went around the state earlier. I'll show you again just to do this, just to show, a smaller Republican rural counties are mostly in. You'll find a couple maybe in the 90s. I just tapped four there and they're 100 %, so most of the Republican vote is in. Now the question is if you're down 58, can you find them somewhere. And so I was just checking over here again just to look, 91% still in Hillsborough County. This is closer, still closer but if it's the rest comes in Bill Nelson pick up some votes here. This one is at a 100. So there are no votes here. So as always, Democrat in the close race in Florida, what you need is the rest of the vote here. We're up to 87% now. The question is as this kicks up, is Bill Nelson picking up 5,000 votes or is he picking up what he needs which is 20,000 votes, 30,000 votes, higher. There's still enough there in Miami Dade and then a little bit more opportunity here. Not as big but beside just look at state population. Miami Dade 13 plus percent, Broward County, a little over 9, 9 and a half percent, so here and here mathematically possible yes, but you're nail biting time right now in the Nelson campaign as you're trying to find out what precincts are out. What was our turnout? Let's try to do the map because Palm Beach, the other third, the most reliable Democratic county in state is 100% in. So you're looking at this in the Senate race, let's just check in the close Governor's race. Remember that 58 changed for Rick Scott in his lead there. Ron DeSantis since the Republicans took the lead has had a bigger lead. And that's a significant jump from Rick Scott in the Senate race in the race for governor. Again, it's the same math. If you look up here, those votes are in, Republicans winning as they have to do out here. 90%, so a little bit more here, a little bit more here for Republicans to come in, in the Panhandle in the Pensacola area. Most of the others are in. And you're looking down again. It's the same calculation. Let's just check on Tallahassee, Andrew Gillum is the mayor there, 94%. He's winning big. Not as populated. See the vote totals aren't, but an opportunity as you get very close near the end here for Andrew Gillum to pick up some here but just as we were talking about in the Senate race, the big opportunity. I just want to check on Duval. It's pretty much in. It's pretty evenly split too. So a few votes maybe for Andrew Gillum to narrow a bit here but the big basket if it's going to happen it's going to come down here again and the margins in the race are similar, so 60 to 40 in the governor's race, 60 to 40 around them in the Senate race. So we're going to watch. We have to wait for Miami Dade and we have to wait for Broward. I've said that sentence before.
[Blitzer:] Hold on a moment. Dana, you got a projection in the Senate.
[Bash:] That's right, Wolf. A major projection, West Virginia's CNN can project that the incumbent Democrat Joe Manchin will go on for another term. This was one of those very key battle ground Senate seats and mostly because the President won there by such large margins. So set's look now at what it means for the balance of power in the U.S. Senate. Right now 36 Democrats, 42 Republicans. We still have 22 Senate seats that remain out, and, of course if you look at that number on the upper right of your screen, 51 that's the number of seats that Democrats could need to have at the end of the night. The end of whenever we're counting in order to gain control of the U.S. Senate. Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Thanks very much, Dana. Let's take a closer look. Joe Manchin in West Virginia he gets reelected. The President gone there maybe times to try to defeat him. He didn't exactly work out for the President.
[King:] This is one of the races the President made personal. He's been to West Virginia for rallies I believe maybe late in his campaign he pass it but it had been more than any other state. He always says Joe Manchin says he's with me but never votes with me. I went down there to try to help Patrick Morrisey in this race but Joe Manchin is the ultimate survivor. He was the Democratic governor of the state. We go back to the day Michael Dukakis carried the state. It used to be one of the blue states in America. It is become one of the Ruby red states in America where President Trump is off the charts. President Trump won this state two years ago by 42 points. Joe Manchin, that's a close race. Closer than Manchin would like it, but to win in that environment in that state is a big deal.
[Blitzer:] That's a big win for Joe Manchin. Let's go to Texas right now. It looks like Ted Cruz, the incumbent Republican has pulled ahead.
[King:] There you go. And so as you watch this, we talked about earlier they're small, but there are 200 of them, meaning the smaller rural counties in the state of Texas. And that's what's starting to fill in here to make it closer. By no mean, we're not over. Texas is a big state, it's a diverse state. They only have 55% of the vote. But Beto O'Rourke takes an early lead. Ted Cruz comes back as these Republican counties start to come in. There's not a lot of votes there. But like I said, there are 254 counties in Texas, 200 plus of them are red like this. And that's what's going to happen as they come in. So the question is, you know, assume these are all mostly going to be Republican votes. If you're Beto O'Rourke, you don't like that. Ted Cruz has passed you. So you're looking at the map. You're still giants. Giants pocket of Democratic votes here. Harris County, Houston, and the sprawling Houston suburbs, again one of the most diverse areas in America, one of the fastest growing areas in America, one of the increasingly Democratic areas in America in what used to be a red state. 16 plus percent of the statewide population, and we got nothing. We got nothing. So if you're Beto O'Rourke, you're thinking OK, Ted Cruz pulled ahead. We're still in the game. This is where Beto O'Rourke is from over here and it will pass off. This is where his House seat is. We have no votes here yet as well. So if you're in the Democratic head quarters, you'd rather be ahead than behind. But you still see opportunities especially here and here and if you're Ted Cruz, again you see all these smaller counties and you know those are coming my way. The question for Ted Cruz is going to be the margins.
[Blitzer:] It is a rural district I believe staying back and forth.
[King:] Stay along and what happened? I just said this is home. This was gray a minute ago. We had no votes. So the first votes to come from El Paso, 7, 25. This is Beto country. One of the questions here for Beto O'Rourke, this is his congressional district right here. As you move out, this is a Republican congressional district. Just next to it. One of the things Texas Democrats were telling me in recent weeks is don't be surprised if Beto makes this closer than you, people in Washington, think because of a point of pride down here. Again, they never have candidates in statewide elections. So this is Will Hurd's congressional district. If we switch to the House, can Beto O'Rourke keep this blue? The republican voters down here, this is part of the Hurd district there. O'Rourke is running very strong. Again, the vote totals were low here as we watch them come in. So we'll see if the rest holds up but if look at the map, Beto O'Rourke pulled ahead. Texas looking like Florida tonight, isn't it? Back and forth. Back and forth. And we haven't said that in a long time. And that's something to be said in this environment that this is there was not a lack of money in this race. Beto O'Rourke became a national fund raising sensation for the Democratic Party. So much so within the last weeks of the campaign there are a lot of Democrats saying, hey kid, you can't win. Send some of this money to other states. Beto O'Rourke said, oh I think I can win, thank you. And I'm going to keep my money. So we'll watch this play out. 11,762. If look at the map, a long way to go again, most of these smaller counties they're not much of the state population. But they're going to come in for Ted Cruz and when you at them all up, it matters. It matters. We don't have that many close statewide races in Texas. It will go through this that often, Ted Cruz certainly did not have a close race the last time. The governor's race maybe closer than Republicans thought, but they're going to win that race tonight. So as you watch this fill in, here's the challenge, down along the border. Not only do the Democrats win but by how much. Is the immigration debate is this a place where the immigration debate helps Republicans here but brings out voters who normally wouldn't vote here? That's a question we'll be asking tonight. And again, if you look at the map right now, this is a giant unknown, incredibly significant to any statewide election in Texas, 16 plus percent of the statewide population. We have zero, which means if you're Beto O'Rourke, you're ahead and you think if you're Beto O'Rourke, you think you're going to do well there. So that's drop in.
[Blitzer:] A real battle in the Senate in Texas. Let's go over to Jake. The House of Representatives, let's show our viewers what's happen right now. We put some numbers up on the screen and you can see it right now, 33 Democrats are leading in Republican districts that are races that are too early to call. Democrats must pick up 21 Republican seats. Five Republicans by the way are leading in Democratic districts that are too early to call, 21 still the magic number for the Democrats to reach 218. But you take a look at this and you see what's going on. Cautionary note for the Democrats, five Republicans are leading in Democratic districts.
[Tapper:] Right. But in the same way that when John brings out Texas and shows what Beto O'Rourke has done in Texas, and it may be that ultimately that effort falls short, but what Beto O'Rourke will have done to help some of the Democrats running for the House in Texas may be quite significant in terms of getting out voters who were excited to vote for him and ultimately helping to defeat a couple if not more Republican congressman while ultimately not able to win himself. And that in some ways is a picture of what is going on this evening, because Republicans are winning some big races right now. And there's some we haven't called yet, but it looks as though the Republicans will be victorious in that state. And yet Democrats in individual congressional districts might be doing enough so that they are able to win the 21 seats that they have yet to turn over from Republican to Democrat. And you see there are 31 Democrats leading in Republican places as of right now. If they win 21 of those, not including the sixth Republican leading in Democratic districts then ultimately they will win control of the House. And we still have a whole section of the country that has not even closed their polls yet in the west coast.
[Blitzer:] Dana has a got a significant projection in the Senate.
[Bash:] We sure do, Wolf. The State of Tennessee, CNN can project that Marsha Blackburn, the Republican candidate will keep this open Republican seat in GOP hands. Not only that, Marsha Blackburn will be the first female senator to represent the state of Tennessee. This is a big win for Republicans. And a big, big loss for Democrats who knew that Tennessee was a chance for them or the only chances for them if they could win to take back the Senate, so let's look at the big picture, the balance of power. Democrats right now have 36 seats. Republicans have 43 seats. 21 seats remain to be called before the end of the evening or maybe early tomorrow morning. Wolf and Jake.
[Blitzer:] Yes. They had high hopes in Tennessee, the Democrats not didn't necessarily happen.
[Tapper:] No, they didn't and so one of the things to look at here is first the big picture. What does this mean in terms of control of the Senate now that CNN has projected that Joe Manchin, the Democrat will keep his seat in West Virginia. I mean, from the U.S. Senate seat representing West Virginia, and Marsh Blackburn will keep that, which is former senator soon to be former senator Bob Corker, Republican seat will keep that seat in Republican hands. So let's look at the picture. Here is the U.S. Senate. 36 Democrats, 43 Republicans with 21 seats outstanding. Of those we only think the 10 are competitive. So then let's look at them. All right, so we've put West Virginia in the Democratic column and we've put Tennessee in the Republican column. So what does that mean in terms of balance of power? Well, let's just, for the sake of argument, give Texas to the Republicans. We haven't called it yet. So I'm not saying that's going to happen. Let's ultimately give Mississippi to Republicans too. Then what happens? You know, let's say that Heidi Heitkamp has a bad night. North, that's it. That's all they need to do, because the map really favors the Republicans. So with the Republicans grabbing Tennessee or keeping Tennessee in Republican hands, even with Joe Manchin having a good night, ultimately let's say let's do it again. Let's give Indiana, we haven't called this yet. But let's give Indiana to the Republicans and have Senator Ted Cruz win. Then what happens? I don't know what if Mississippi, which we all oh there you go, see, the map favors the Republicans and so ultimately Tennessee, that's a big victory for the Republicans. Because then all they need to do is win two more, and then they have the control.
[Blitzer:] Yeah, looking good for the Republicans in the Senate. The House, Democrats still have very, very strong chance of taking the majority. Anderson, over to you.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Wolf, thanks very much. Our reporters and analysts have been watching, along with everybody else, also checking to sources. I just want to quickly run through some first impressions. David Chalian?
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Well, what Jake was talking about there, Tennessee was the Senate race I was watching all night to sort of figure when does the Senate go off the board here? That was critical. Because if indeed as expected down the road Heidi Heitkamp loses her North Dakota seat, Tennessee was a critical part of what the Democrats needed to put in play to have a real shot at the majority barring the Beto O'Rourke miracle in Texas. So I do think that was hugely significant, because the battle for control of the Senate, I think is going to become the second tier story now. It's not in play, which is what we thought coming in as much. The House side, Anderson, Democrats are doing what they need to do, but I don't think we're seeing some massive blue wave crashing ashore yet. I don't see signs of that, but they are on track to do what they need.
[Cooper:] Do you see a blue wave?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] No, not at all. And I think what you're seeing here even if Democrats take control of the House is falling short of expectations on a lot of key races. Some places where they thought they could send a message to President Trump. They're not going to be able to do that in the way they would have liked to do it. And for President Trump you're seeing the payoff for his investment in some of the races.
[Cooper:] Sorry. I just going to show Texas tied right now, tied Beto O'Rourke has 79 votes more than Ted Cruz at this point.
[Phillip:] Take a picture of that.
[Chalian:] 79 votes.
[Phillip:] That could be a moral victory for Democrats if they pull that out. But there are still along way to go there but I think for President Trump he's looking at Florida, a place where he spent a lot of time. Donald Trump Junior went into that Kentucky sixth seat where Andy Barr just pulled it out. I think the Republicans are feeling pretty good about their investment of time.
[Cooper:] David Axelrod?
[David Axelrod, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] I think it's early on the House side to draw too many conclusions. I think there are a lot of races even race in the east in Virginia that are very much up for grabs right now. So I think the House picture is unclear. I think some of the early Senate results are disappointing for Democrats. Although, I don't think there was a realist expectation that Democrats were going to take the Senate. Now it looks like Republicans could expand their majority in the Senate.
[Cooper:] Even some of the gubernatorial ran, Florida, when you look, you know, Rick Scott right now is in the lead in Senate with 55,000 votes and Gillum has been I mean that's it's been
[Axelrod:] Florida is a disappointment.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Florida is yeah, because it's so tight.
[Axelrod:] Yes.
[Borger:] And because they thought the top of the ticket would help down ticket. Look, there was a dream tonight for Democrats which was that early on they'd be able to say OK, we won a couple in Virginia. We won in Kentucky and this is going to show that this wave is starting and you can't stop it. Now, they can still win n the House. I think it's probably more likely they will win the House than not, but they can't have there's no tsunami. There's no tsunami coming. I mean winning the House by one vote by one member is enough for them. But there's a lot of disappointment I'm hearing from people. I'm also hearing talk about recounts in Florida. Can you believe it? And the lawyers going to Florida, so, you know, this has to really play out, but the excitement, I think is the cliche is the balloon is popping.
[Cooper:] Among Democrats.
[Borger:] Yes.
[Axelrod:] Lots of excitement.
[Cooper:] Yeah. Van?
[Van Jones, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, first of all there are still people standing in line in Georgia. There are still people standing in line in Florida. This is not over. People need to stay out there and continue the fight. This is heart breaking, though. It's heart breaking. The hope has been that the anti-bodies could kick in. That this sort of infestation of hatred and division would drive response from the American people really in both parties and say no more and no more. That does not seem to be happening tonight. It's not a blue wave, but it's a blue war. We have to continue the fight forward. But I think that sense of helplessness, that has really fuelled a lot of this outrage and outpouring from Democrats may still be there tomorrow even if we have the House.
[Cooper:] Governor?
[Jennifer Granholm, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] Yes, I definitely think the outrage will still be there. The disappointment will be there certainly on the Senate side. I'm not giving up on the governors yet, even the governor of Florida.
[Jones:] Stay in line.
[Granholm:] I know, right? Georgia has not had Atlanta come in yet. But in Michigan and in some of these other races in Ohio, I think there's still great hope out. Obviously Pennsylvania, that Midwestern cluster of states, Wisconsin, we'll see what happens. I'm still my nails are still like clutching to hope that we can win at least on the governor's side and certainly
[Cooper:] More polls closing obviously in 36 minutes. Senator?
[Rick Santorum, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] You can't have a wave election when both sides are energized. And ultimately both sides are. This was a huge turnout. All around the country people are saying we've never seen a midterm election like this, and it wasn't just Democrats. And ultimately both sides this was a huge turnout election. I mean, everywhere I talk to all the around the country, we're seeing we've never seen a midterm election like this and it was just Democrats. You lose when one size energized and the other isn't. Both sides, you have to give Donald Trump credit for energizing. The other thing that's really remarkable is that Republicans where everybody I talked to said we were outspent two, three to one. The Democrats had all the money and all the media, and they still couldn't win it. Even with the divisive figure of the President on top of the ticket. That is a message of solace to a lot of conservatives who were worried about this being a disaster.
[Cooper:] And for all that talk about the future of the Democratic Party and what the messages and how far left that should be or separate?
[Santorum:] The message was anti-Trump. The message just never got across.
[Jones:] I don't agree with that.
[Santorum:] I think that was the motivating factor. The message of
[Cooper:] David Urban?
[David Urban, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, so the question, did the caravan ads work? The answer clearly is yes tonight we just see, right? Whether you like him or not.
[Cooper:] Wait. Let him finish.
[Urban:] They worked. To just echo what Van had said earlier, Donald Trump, this is the best shot of politics, you hit the guy, he absorbs it, he gets stronger. Or Rick, whoever said it. But you hit him, he absorbs it and gets stronger and he is going to come out tomorrow. This is going to be a big win for the President.
[Cooper:] Van you said you disagreed.
[Jones:] Well, I don't agree. I mean, listen, yes, there's a lot of anti-Trump at the top of the conversation. But on the ground you had and still have domestic workers who are out there knocking on doors in Georgia. They weren't fighting about Trump. They were fighting about their ability to see a doctor. And on the ground you had a million doors knocked on in Florida. Those people were talking about health care and real issues with people they're going to fight for their lives.
[Santorum:] I agree, but what people here on all the networks is Trump negative, negative, negative Trump. And what you said about, you know, the antibodies coming out against race and bigotry, a lot of people just bristle that because they support Trump but they're racist and they're not bigots and they don't like to be called that.
[Cooper:] I got to get to John King because I want to follow this race in Texas right now. Beto O'Rourke with 107 votes now ahead.
[King:] Unpredictability, Anderson. There's one thing we saw in 2016, that's something we're seeing in 208. We still have a ways to go. But we're now at 70%, that was 70% in the state of Texas. And the Democrats, Beto O'Rourke is leading the Senate race. That will surprise a lot of people. One of the things that's happened recently since the last time we had the conversation is we got the first votes in from Harris County, which is Houston. And the sprawling Houston suburbs, one of the fastest growing areas in the country, not just in the state of Texas, 16 point plus of the state-wide population, Beto O'Rourke running it up strongly, 57 to 42 and only 16% of the vote in, so if you're a Republican you're saying OK, this is Texas. So go back to its DNA. Maybe it will. Maybe it will but only 16% of the vote reporting in one of the fastest growing counties in the state, and in the country and guess what, Beto O'Rourke running it up. So you pull out the map and look and say what are they doing in Ted Cruz head quarters? What are they thinking about? Where are the votes? A lot of them, a lot of them. The small counties, a lot of Republican votes, don't discount them. In a close race every vote counts, even if you're winning 1400 to 274 that's 33% of the vote. If you look at Harris County and say, oh come on that doesn't count. Well, it does count when there are 200 plus of them. And there are. Small rural counties in Texas, so you count them all, that's why they cast them. And there are opportunities for Ted Cruz here. But this is an interesting map. Something we haven't looked at in a long time, a competitive state-wide race in the state of Texas. So you come in. I just want to check and see if the numbers changed. No. Harris County, Houston and the suburbs, which is above down below here, starting to get smaller here, but look, this is what I mean. This part of the state is growing, 2.5%. More competitive as you move away, right? Urban areas, big Democrat. Close in suburbs, big Democrat. Start moving away, that's the challenge. Can the Democrats keep winning as you move away from the urban areas? Beto O'Rourke doing what he needs to there. The other big part of the state, Dallas County, again, smaller than Harris County, now 9.4% of state population, 63 to 33 we're talking about the Senate race. There's also a congressional district right here, the Republicans think they're going to lose tonight in part because of the Beto O'Rourke effect, whether Beto O'Rourke wins or losing. Pull it back out, you come down here. Austin, Travis County, Democrats have to win big here. It's not as big, if you look, 4.2% of the statewide population. Beto O'Rourke doing what he needs to do, and saying he told people, you watch, I'm going to turn out more votes than you think I can. We'll see if he gets there in the end but so far he's doing what he said. Then you move down here again San Antonio, another Democratic area running it up. Pretty good vote totals there. And you come in and you could try to go back in time and look. You know, how does this match up historically? Well, Ted Cruz didn't have a race last time. He didn't really have a race last time. You see all this right up here. But just remember, just look at the map and see all of the red. Now you come here. There's more blue. There's more blue. And now there's still some gray. We got votes to come in. But there's more blue. This is Beto's home. El Paso, only 3% of the state population but in a close race, it's nice to run it up 75-25 somewhere. And we'll going to watch. I talked about all the unfilled in gray up here in small rural Texas. We expect to come in red by significant margins. The question is what's happening in what called Beto O'Rourke country? Next to El Paso, we still don't have any votes here. It's very tiny here, very tiny here. But you do have as you start moving down along the boarder, as David Urban talking about the caravan ads. No question, the focus on immigration anyway by the President did help in some places as this Texas race is very close tonight in this border areas, Latino areas here, here. You could also see the reverse of that in the State of Texas as we watch this one play out. Remarkably close, 50.6 percent, 48.7. 51 to 49, a hundred thousand votes lead in a competitive race in the state of Texas. Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Very, very close. We've got some numbers to show the big picture of the House of Representatives right now. Some encouragement for the Democrats, 31 Democrats right now are leading in Republican districts in races that are too early to call. The Democrats must pick up 21 Republican seats. One cautionary note, 5 Republicans are leading in Democratic districts right now in races that are too early to call. But 31, they're leading in 31, John. Where are they leading in those 31 districts? Because for the Democrats, they smell victory in the House of Representatives.
[King:] Part of it, I'll get to it in a minute. We don't know what this will hold up, but part of it is here in the State to Texas where the Democrats are leading in six districts. Six districts right now held by Republicans. That would be beyond the Democrat's dreams. Will they get six? Who knows? But they want to pick up at least two in Texas. That tells you the Democrats in the State of Texas are on par for their math. Let's come over to what we have more results. One of the things we cannot compare tonight and cannot emphasize enough tonight for Democrats trying to get to that magic number was total of 23, now 21. The new lines in the State of Pennsylvania, court ordered said Republicans went too far drawing the lines. Newer, more competitive, better lines for the Democrats. Democrats right now are on path to pick up seats significant number of seats as you try to get now to 21 over all goal of 23. Pennsylvania is an opportunity for the Democrats right now. We still need to count the votes. It's early in some of these districts but it looks good. Virginia has been back and forth all night. This is been a fascinating state. The Democrats have already picked up this district, the 10th. That was the first one. The first of the pickups in the evening and this is what the Democrats needed to do, significant though just to remember 55-45, 10 points in a previously Republican district, Democrats winning in the suburbs. So now you come down. This race has gone back and forth all night long. Abigail Spanberger, I looked at this two minutes ago. She was losing. More results have come in, it's at 92% now, 380 votes.
[Blitzer:] Wow.
[King:] 380 votes, welcome to the 2018 midterm elections. Now, if you're the Democrats, you know, this is a race, again, Richmond Suburbs just like the northern Virginia suburbs. The President's a problem for Republican candidates here. This is Tea Party and Trump country. Dave Brat won before Donald Trump was on the national scene, knocked off a Republican incumbent. Tea Party votes here in the rural areas. Tough competitive district, Democrats back in the lead. Watch that. Another one, Democrats wanted at least one. They were hoping for two, maybe three in Virginia. Let's keep an eye over here on the coast. Scott Taylor, 91%. The Republican incumbent, Scott Taylor losing, an incredibly close race but 4,000 votes with 91% right now, so watch as that comes in. The Democrats had a plan. We'll get to New York and New Jersey. Those polls close later. Picked up a lot in New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, they needed at least one. They were hoping for two or three in Virginia. You're looking at the map now. They got one. The question is can they keep going? And then you pull back out and look at it. Come down to Florida, we've done the business down here. This was a flip. This one we already called, I'm sorry, this one we're already caught here, this one we're watching as we come through. We're up to 93%, the Democratic candidate running ahead of the Republican incumbent here. This would be a big target for the Democrats to get that one. Pick up opportunity in Florida. So they have won. They're looking at a second. Now I just want to come back to this Texas races and look well, let me actually come up here for a minute because this is another one here. I want to come back to Johnny broken record, the suburbs. This is Kansas. But this is Kansas City. The Kansas City suburbs, Democrats think can we get Republican incumbent Kevin Yoder again? We got a way to go in this race but the Democrat pulls out to an early lead. See that, we come over this district here. We'll see how this one plays out. Paul Davis, one of the many Democrats who say under no circumstances will I vote for Nancy Pelosi, it won't happen. It doesn't matter, it won't happen. Well, we'll see if he get the chance, 32% of the vote coming in, Paul Davis winning over the Republican, Steve Watkins. Again that's early in the count there. But if you're looking at the map, the Democrats did leave some seats on the table over this way. It looks like the Midwest is actually being nicer to the Democrats than some other parts of the country. They had opportunities but again, we'll going to come down here. This to me, this is Will Hurd'district. Ortiz Jones, the Democratic candidate 858 votes again. So again, these are leading. They're not called. They're leading. But this is a race, Hillary Clinton carried this district. Will Hurd has been running scared from the beginning, running a smart campaign. The question is, number one, this is a place where the President's immigration focus hurt? There were places it helped without a doubt but is this a place where the President immigration focus hurt? Number one, and number two is Will Hurd going to get caught up in the Beto O'Rourke effect, Beto O'Rourke from El Paso? Democrats turning out in this part of the state. We'll watch that play out. I just want to come up over here to Houston to see if we have this district here. This was another one we had no results a short time ago. Harris County, surrounding areas just started to come in. This was a major Democratic target in Texas, another suburban Republican. Democrat ahead by 840 votes, 77% of the vote in, that's a trouble sign for a Republican incumbent. We'll keep counting but that's a trouble sign there. Houston suburbs, let's move up a little bit. Come over here, Dallas suburbs, Pete Sessions, Republican incumbent, Chamber of Commerce, other groups winning there, a lot of money trying to helping Pete Sessions out, 14,000 votes ahead in a congressional race here. Again, you're beating the drum but suburban America Democrats are not to the finish line yet. But as they try to get closer and closer to the magic number, they began the night at 23. Suburban America right now is their base.
[Blitzer:] Dana has two more projections in the U.S. Senate. Dana.
[Bash:] Two big projections in the U.S. Senate starting with Indiana. This is big because this is a Republican pickup. CNN is projecting that Mike Braun is going to be the next senator from Indiana beating the incumbent Democrat Joe Donnelly. And in Wisconsin the Democrat is going to go on for another term. CNN is projecting that Tammy Baldwin has won her race in Wisconsin, so two big projections, especially in Indiana. Let's look at what this means for the balance of power right now in the U.S. Senate, 37 Democrats, 44 Republicans as you saw, the one pickup so far, 19 seats remaining for the evening, 51 at the top of the screen. That's very hard to for Democrats to do right now. And that is the number that they would need to take control of the U.S. Senate. Wolf and Jake.
[Blitzer:] You know, the Democrats have a very, very limited route right now to take the majority in the U.S. Senate with the defeat of Joe Donnelly, the incumbent Democrat in Indiana.
[Tapper:] Limited is a nice way to put it. It's generous way to put it. It looks increasingly like not only will Democrats not win back the Senate but that they'll actually lose seats in the Senate this evening. We're right now we haven't called Florida yet but Nelson, the incumbent Democrat is trailing in the vote there to Governor Rick Scott, who is running for that Senate seat. And then we just called Indiana. Now, we should point out Indiana is a state that President Trump won. He won it handily by almost 18 or 19 percentage points. But, still, that's a big loss for the Democrats. Let's look at the board here in terms of what the Democrats need. 19 seats remain in terms of what there is. We think nine of them are competitive that have not been called. We put Manchin in West Virginia held on to a seat. We put that in the Democratic column. Tennessee, that seat staying in the Republican column, the governor former governor Phil Bredesen did not beat the Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. She will be the Tennessee's first woman senator and that seat stays Republican. We have now called a Democratic seat flipping to Republican Indiana. So what else did Republicans need to do in order to keep control of the Senate? Well, let's give them Mississippi. Because it's Mississippi, for God's sake, and then right now, with the vote coming in, I mean, we could give them Texas, we can give them Nevada. Let's give Texas to the Democrats just for giggles and let's see what happens. What else do the Republicans need to do? Well, I don't know. There's one, two, three, four, five Democrat seats, two Republican seats. Let's say that Heidi Heitkamp has a bad night. North Dakota. There it is. Republicans win the control of the Senate because of course in a 5050 Senate Mike Pence breaks the tie. But I think it's actually going to be worse than that for Republicans. I think it's entirely possible they're going to pick up seats. This is always going to be a tough map.
[Blitzer:] Yes.
[Tapper:] But it's going in the wrong direction at the beginning it was Democrats need to switch two seats. Now they need to switch three. Democrats need to start going in the other direction instead of losing incumbent Democrats to Republicans.
[Blitzer:] Not in the right direction in the Senate. But in the House it's a very different story right now. Take a look at this as you can see 21 there are 32 Democrats leading in Republican districts right now in races that are too early to call. Democrats must pick up 21 Republican seats. Republicans are leading in Democratic districts in five Democratic districts. Let's go over let's talk a little bit about that, Jake
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] as we take a look at the numbers right now.
[Tapper:] So 32 Democrats are leading in Republican districts right now, 5 Republicans are leading in Democratic districts. So let's just do some simple math here and just assume all of those go the way that they're going right now, which is not going to happen. But just for argument's sake, that means the Democrats would win 27 seats. We haven't even by the way, gotten to the west coast of the United States.
[Blitzer:] Right.
[Tapper:] So
[Blitzer:] There are several potential Democrats.
[Tapper:] Absolutely but that's 27 when all they need right now is 21 because we've already called two Republican seats that have flipped from Republican to Democratic control in northern Virginia and then in southern Florida. So I mean, that's one of the things going on right now. It still seems even though Democrats aren't having a good night on the state wide contest Senate contests, it does still seems that they're on track to win back the House.
[Blitzer:] We have two significant projections right now. And Democrats pick up two seats, two important seats in Pennsylvania. The Mary Gay Scanlon, she picks up the district in the Philadelphia suburbs. She defeats Pearl Kim, she's an attorney in Pennsylvania. This is an important pickup for the Democrats in Pennsylvania, the fifth district. And Conor Lamb, we all remember him from the special election in western Pennsylvania in the suburbs of Pittsburgh. Conor Lamb gets re-elected in that district. He beats Keith Rothfus, the Democrats now that number has gone down. Democrats must pick up 19 Republican seats. Not lose any of their own. The number has gone down, Jake from 23 to 19. So they're moving slowly but surely. That's what it looks like in the House of Representatives.
[Tapper:] That's right. And these were seats that we did expect the Democrats would win. But still, they're on track to do that. Nancy Pelosi
[Blitzer:] Hold on one second. Let me just point out to our viewer, right now Democrats are leading in 31 Republican districts in races that are too close to call. Democrats once again, they have to pick up 19 of those Republican seats. Six Republicans are leading in Democratic districts in races that are too early to call. So Democrats are moving in the right direction from their perspective, but it's not a done deal yet.
[Tapper:] On a House to House level. But when it comes to the big statewide federal contest, the Senate seats things are not working in their direction. Actually, this is pretty much what we thought was going to happen. That Republicans had a great map when it came to the Senate and Democrats had the advantage when it came to the House. And it's pretty much working out that way. Democrats did hope for a big blue wave. That is not happening. Will Democrats win back the House? It is entirely possible, if not probable according to models right now, but the big blue wave is not there. Key House seats that Democrats thought wow, it would be great if we can win this seat, Kentucky 6, etcetera that didn't happen.
[Blitzer:] So the battle for the House is still unfolding. Once again, Democrats leading in 31 Republican-held districts, more than the 19 pickups they need to reclaim the majority. Note, Republicans are ahead in six Democratic held districts. Polls close in four more states soon. That could push the Democrats closer to taking back the House. Stay with us. All right. Let's go to Dana. She's got a projection.
[Bash:] A projection in the Garden State, Wolf. CNN can project that Democratic Senator Bob Mendez will go on for another term in the State of New Jersey. It was unclear for a while because he had a lot of money going in for his Republican opponent, but he is going to go on for another term. So what does this mean for the balance of power? 38 Democrats right now, 44 Republicans. Remember, one pickup on the GOP side. 18 Senate seats remain to be called. I want to go to Nia for a projection.
[Henderson:] That's right, Dana. We can make some projections in the governor's races. In Illinois CNN projects that the winner of that race is J.B. Pritzker defeating Bruce Rauner in that race, this is a pickup for Democrats, a very, very expensive race, Democrats out ahead in that race. In Oklahoma, CNN projects that the winner of that race is Kevin Stitt, the Republican defeating Drew Edmondson in that governor's race. Another projection CNN can make in Alabama. Kay Ivey CNN projects the incumbent of defeating of Walt Maddox in this race going for her first full term in Alabama. In South Carolina another CNN projection, Henry McMaster CNN projects the winner in that race defeating James Smith. And now let's check in on these races that we've been looking at in Wisconsin. Tony Evers in Wisconsin ahead of Scott Walker at this point, the incumbent in the race, Tony Evers ahead by about 10,000 votes, 23% reporting. We'll keep an eye on this really important contest in the Midwest. We're going to go to Wolf Blitzer with a Key Race Alert or projection in the House.
[Blitzer:] Now we got a Key Race Alert. Let's take a look at where things stand in the House of Representatives right now. Impressive numbers for the Democrats, 33 Democrats are leading in Republican districts in races that are still too early to call. Remember Democrats must pick up now 19 Republican seats. 19 Republican seats, they started the night with 23. But one cautionary note as I like to say, 7 Republicans are leading in Democratic districts right now. Seven Republicans are leading in Democratic districts right now. All right, let's go to John King. John, the 33 Democrats that are leading in Republican districts they need what, 21. It's an impressive number for the Democrats, very doable that they can get the majority.
[King:] They need 19 more. They need 19 more and there are your targets of opportunity. And again, we still have a ways to go to the west coast. One quick note, you made this key point, seven Republicans leading in districts now held by Republicans. We don't know, those seven Republican is going to win but one of the things we're seeing tonight is the remaking of the American political map. In that, down here in the Dallas suburbs, in the Houston suburbs in Texas, Democrats are leading in congressional races. Republicans leading in rural Minnesota. White, rural areas that used to be the backbone of the Democratic Labor Party in Minnesota, we're not saying these Republicans are going to win, but they're leading. This is Donald Trump's Republican Party. It's a different Republican Party. This was happening before Donald Trump, this is accelerating under him. We'll see how this happens. But now the Democrats, 19 more they need. As we start to get results from New York and New Jersey this is where you see more targets of opportunity. Three Democrats leading right now in Republican held seats in the state of New York, leading early votes coming in. Here's one of them here, Elise Stefanik, the Republican incumbent, 52 to 48. But again, low vote count, very early to strap in. But this is one of the Democrat's targets right here, up here and this one, Wolf, close to home. Close from Buffalo, can Chris Collins, at 1 point, he got to get off the ballot he is under indictment for insider trading and charges elect. At one point they were trying to get him off the ballot. He decided to stay on the ballot. Again, very early votes, the Democrat 220 votes again there. That would be a huge pickup because it's such a Republican district. This was not on any democratic target list when the year begun. It's Collins legal travel. They put it on the target there. Let's move down here. Again, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, a huge target of opportunity because the lines have been redrawn in the state here, five Democrats currently leading, one Republican, so if the Democrats can get a net four or more out of Pennsylvania when you're trying to get to 23, 19 is your target now. We've been talking throughout the night. Are you picking up the seats you need to pick up? Are you leaving any targets on the table? This is a Republican retirement. Two dozen Republican retirements is out there in the country gave the Democrats hope. Look how close these races are though. Again, you know, the Democrat is leading here, southern New Jersey. This is one of the districts on Frank LoBiondo's district on the Democratic list here but, again, 929 votes. Let's stay with it a while. I just want to come back up here for you. This was a race. And we're only 37%. Maybe it will change. But this was a race that was personal to national Democrats in the sense that Tom MacArthur, the Republican incumbent was the moderate who stepped forward. He was the key architect of the compromise to repeal and replace Obamacare. In the House of Representatives, Democrats wanted to get Tom MacArthur. They thought Andy Kim was the right candidate. Only 37% so we don't know what's out but if you look at that right now, that was a target race for the Democrats that they might leave on the table. As we watch that play out. But the big picture is, again, we're still out here. The Democrats have the opportunities to pick them up. One of the things I've been watching is Illinois in the sense that there's one potential Democratic pickup here, Randy Hultgren, the Republican incumbent. Lauren Underwood running ahead right now in a congressional race with 62% in, but that's an OK lead. We've been watching some other races in this area as well that have gone back and forth. Peter Roskam, member of the House Republican leadership, he was losing earlier. He's inching ahead right now. We'll keep watching this race. This was another race on the Democratic target list in the state of Illinois where we just projected the governor's race. One of the things that the Democrat think will help them in the Midwest is they think they're running strong in these governors races. If you go back to 1994 on the Republican revolution, they needed 40 to pick up the House. They got 52 in part because their gubernatorial candidates in the Midwest were running so strong. As we move west, number one, the Democrats are still leading in two districts in Kansas. This was the target race they did think they could get. We're at 23%. Kansas City, Missouri here, we got a city, Kansas here, Suburban area. Trouble even in Kansas for Donald Trump's Republican Party, we'll see if the Democrat can hold up here. We move out here, 49-41. Again, if this holds up, if the Democrats retake the House and this is one of the races they win, Paul Davis has said under no circumstances will I vote for Nancy Pelosi.
[Blitzer:] I'm curious, in what states are the Democrats getting the most potential pickups right now?
[King:] Right now you see Pennsylvania by far. Pennsylvania by far is their biggest pickup opportunity right now. Then as you watch it, you've got two on the board in New York right now, very early in both of those New York districts. But two in New York, four or five in the State of Pennsylvania, you start coming down. If you look at Virginia, they've already picked up one in Virginia. The Democrats are in play, 97% now, 1766 votes. This was a big target. Democrats wanted this one. Number one, some Republicans privately wanted Dave Brat to lose, to tell you the truth right there. Wolf, back to you for another projection.
[Blitzer:] We've got a couple of projections right now. 6th district in Colorado, CNN now projects that Jason Crow will defeat Republican Congressman Mike Coffman. Jason Crow, a former U.S. Army Ranger, this is a pickup for the Democrats in the State of Colorado. In Michigan, Michigan 11, House District 11, Haley Stevens, the Democrat, she will defeat Lena Epstein. She used to work in the Obama administration on the auto bailout. In Michigan, Haley Stevens will become the Democratic representative from Michigan. So right now that number has gone down from 19 to 17. Democrats must pick up 17 Republican seats right now in order to get the magic number, not lose any of their own. 17 is the magic number for the Democrats right now. Let's go over to John. So it's gone down from 19 to 17. The Democrats are smiling right now as the number continues to decline.
[King:] They are smiling especially because again, you just called that race in Colorado. That was a target of opportunity, a key pickup for the Democrats to prove their point, again, in the Denver suburbs, that they could pick up these previously Republican seats in suburban areas where the President of the United States, this wasn't about Mike Coffman, the President of the United States is toxic out there, plus the changing demographics of the district. But that one's off the board now, right? That was here a minute ago. Democrats see more opportunities in the states that haven't closed yet, including a number in the big state of California. But so you're looking now the Democrats need 17 more, and they're leading in 31. Tells you the math is pretty good, eight Republicans leading right now in Democratic districts. If those Republicans win, it affects the Democratic math, so you're going to stay with us through the next couple hours as we go through this. It's interesting to see where are the Republicans leading? I just want to pop this one here again. These are obviously early results from here. This is a district drawn from Emanuel Cleaver, the former mayor of Kansas City. Now, he's losing right now. But that's a very low vote total again. That would be stunner. Now there is a Senate race out there. Sometimes the dynamics of a race change. But that would be a stunner. So you're looking at these races, are these really pickup opportunities for the Republicans. I would be skeptical there. The Democrats in Kansas, here's one, 53-42% there, so a ways to go, 56% there. The Democrats have been holding the lead, not a huge lead, but the Democrats been holding that lead for a while. The Democrats think about the math. If the Democrats were to leave some seats on the table in the east but pick up one or two in Kansas, a pickup seat, you start looking here, an Oklahoma seat, we'll see if that holds up. Mark, a little bit suspect but if you look right now, Steve Russell, the Republican incumbent, we're at 66% in. It's a close race. That's a close race, 1,700 there. We'll watch. And then you come down here. Again, down to Texas, this is where four Democrats leading at this moment. Leading doesn't mean win, but leading at this moment in Republican-held seats and number one, Will Hurd. Hillary Clinton carried this district. Look how close that is, 256 votes, only 10% reporting. Let's hold on and see how this one plays out. Will Hurd was confident in the end, maybe more nervous a few months ago, confident at the end but again we'll see and again we'll get to the Senate race in a moment. Is there a Beto effect down here because Beto O'Rourke is from here. Let's come back up to the Dallas suburbs, 8% of the vote in. Republicans, the night texts, messages all night long, thinking their long time incumbent Pete Sessions once ran the House Congressional Campaign Committee, they think he may go down. But that's only 8%. We'll see how this one plays out. Again, another suburban district, reliably Republican district, it looks like it could flip blue tonight. That would be key for the Democrats. Another district down here. This was not on our list but we'll take a look here and see if it turns out. Only 2% so you're going to see some races on this map where you have 1%, 2%, 3%, 4% 5% even 10% or 20% in, in their precincts from one area of the district. Now, the rest comes in, it goes but that's worth watching. And again, down here, this is also key in the Senate race. This has stayed this way. Lizzie Fletcher, Democratic challenger beating veteran Republican incumbent right now John Culberson, 53% rounded up to 47%. This would be a big pickup for the Democrat and another suburban district in a once red state, reliably red suburban district. And so, again, you see it, Democrats winning in the suburbs, Republicans leading up here in more rural, blue-collar Minnesota, a remaking of the American political map, we'll see if these hold on. Let's take a look at these. Minnesota's 8th congressional district up here, this is an opportunity for the Democrats and Republicans fighting this one out, an open seat. The Democratic congressman who held that seat ran for other office, the Democratic incumbent, Collin Peterson next door, only 6% of the vote in, 730 votes. But let's watch it. Republicans certainly more competitive out there in Minnesota, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] We've got two more major projections in the House of Representatives. Right now more good news for the Democrats right now. In New Jersey, the Democratic candidate, Mikie Sherrill is the winner. She defeats Jay Webber, she is a former U.S. Navy helicopter pilot. Mikie Sherrill gets the win. It's a pickup for the Democrats in New Jersey. Similarly in Florida, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell defeats the Republican incumbent Carlos Curbelo in that district. She really went after Carlos Curbelo on Obamacare and other issues. CNN now projects House 26 in Florida, she is the winner. Right now Democrats must pick up 15 Republican seats. That number is consistently going down, John. So those are two major pickups for the Democrats in this race for the House majority.
[King:] And so you're going through to look for others. And I'm just looking at 9:00 poll closing in New York. So you're trying to look up there. There's Dan Donovan, Republican incumbent. Max Rose, the Democratic challenger. Again, 86% of the vote in, 52-48 we're not quite there. But here's another one in New York State. Let's pull back out and look at New York. Come back over here. Move up here to the New York area is up here. John Faso, Republican incumbent. Just 1%, but that's a target for the Democrats. We'll see. Another one here, Claudia Tenney, the Republican incumbent losing with 3% in. Again, that's early. We mentioned the calls district earlier. The big picture, Wolf, if you pull this all out, is the Democrats well within striking distance of taking back the House, more than enough targets of opportunity. The question now as we go through more states about the close, can they close the deal here and as we move west?
[Blitzer:] All right, polls are about to close as we know in four more states right now as Democrats get closer and closer to their goal of trying to retake the House of Representatives. These are very, very close races right now. Democrats have been consistently moving ahead in their race to become the majority in the House of Representatives. They need 218 in the House of Representatives to become the majority, and that would be such a significant development right now. About right now, the Democrats are moving closer and closer and closer. We're watching all of this unfold. The Senate, there's a different story right now, but we're going to update you right now because Democrats are closer to retaking the House. We've got a projection right now in the U.S. Senate. Mitt Romney, he will be the next United States senator from the state of Utah-

[Lemon:] We heard two of Harvey Weinstein's accusers tell their stories tonight. Here to discuss all of this. CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter, also CNN legal analyst Areva Martin, CNN political commentators Alice Stewart and Angela Rye. So let's begin this very difficult conversation that we unfortunately have to have right now. I just spoke to two of Weinstein's accusers, Angela, their stories are eerily similar to what we are hearing in that audio released today by the New Yorker of Weinstein trying to convince a model name Amber Gutierrez to come to his room, his hotel room in Manhattan. A day after he allegedly forcibly groped her. The disturbing conversation caught on tape during a sting operation by the NYPD. It was March of 2015. Listen to this.
[Unidentified Male:] I am telling you right now, get in here.
[Unidentified Female:] What do we have to de here?
[Unidentified Male:] Nothing. I'm going to take a shower. You sit there and have a drink. Water?
[Unidentified Female:] I don't drink.
[Unidentified Male:] Then have a glass of water.
[Unidentified Female:] Can I stay on the bar?
[Unidentified Male:] No. you must come here now.
[Unidentified Female:] No. I don't want to.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm not doing anything with you, I promise. Now you're embarrassing me.
[Unidentified Female:] I know, I don't want to. I am sorry, I cannot. No, yesterday was kind of aggressive for me. I need to know a person to be touched.
[Unidentified Male:] I won't do a thing. Please.
[Unidentified Female:] I don't want to be touched.
[Unidentified Male:] Don't embarrass me in the hotel. I am here all the time. Sit with me.
[Unidentified Female:] I know but I don't want to.
[Unidentified Male:] Please sit down. One minute. I ask you please.
[Unidentified Female:] No. I cant.
[Unidentified Male:] Go to the bathroom. Listen to me.
[Unidentified Female:] I want to go downstairs.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm not going to do anything. You'll never see me again after this. If you embarrass me in this hotel where I am staying at
[Unidentified Female:] I am not embarrassing you.
[Unidentified Male:] Just walk.
[Unidentified Female:] I don't feel comfortable.
[Unidentified Male:] Honey, don't have a fight with me in the hallway. Please.
[Unidentified Female:] It's not nothing, it's
[Unidentified Male:] I am not going to do anything, I swear on my children. Please come in. On everything, I am a famous guy.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm feeling very uncomfortable right now.
[Unidentified Male:] Please come in now and one minute. If you want to leave when the guy comes with my jacket you can go.
[Unidentified Female:] Why yesterday you touch my breast?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh please. I am sorry, just come on in.
[Unidentified Female:] Why yesterday you touch my breast?
[Unidentified Male:] You're used to that?
[Unidentified Female:] You're used to that?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, come in. If you do this now you will [inaudible]. Now go. Never call me again. OK, I am sorry, nice to have I promise you won't do anything.
[Unidentified Female:] I know but yesterday was too much for me.
[Unidentified Male:] I will never do another thing to you. Five minutes. Don't ruin your friendship with me for five minutes.
[Unidentified Female:] I know, but it is kind like it's too much for me, I can't.
[Unidentified Male:] Please you are making a big scene here, please.
[Unidentified Female:] No, but I want to leave.
[Unidentified Male:] OK. Bye. Thank you.
[Lemon:] So when I heard that this morning, my jaw dropped. What's your reaction to that audio, Angela?
[Angela Rye, Cnn Political Commentator:] It's just disturbing. I've never been a victim of sexual assault on any type of sexual harassment but I can't imagine for the women in my life who are friends of mine and family members who've experienced this. I just cannot even imagine. I think the biggest frustration in me hearing all of this banter about Harvey Weinstein over the last few days is the ability for people to make this political in some way. Like at some point, your humanity should Trump, no pun intended, but how convenient, what you feel, what you see. It shouldn't this shouldn't be about political contributions or anything else. It should be about humanity and ensuring that these women are made whole. There are so many folks now who are coming forward and you just have to wonder how much of this is culture, not just in Hollywood, but with people, men and women, in positions of power and how they use their influence to just step all over the most vulnerable. And in this instance, it's people with less power than them.
[Lemon:] Well the perpetrators are more often than not men, but the victims are more often than not, women. It does happen to men. Terry Cruz, very famous actor in Hollywood said it happened to him at a party. To this particular case, do you think Harvey Weinstein should have been charged based on that tape?
[Areva Martin, Cnn Legal Contributor:] Absolutely. And not do I think that, Don, many of the police officers who were involved in this have spoken out and some have been anonymous in their statements, but we've heard statements where there was confusion about why he wasn't charged after that basic confession was tape recorded by this very brave woman. I want to say what I started to say to you during the break, which is to me this is next level predator. This isn't like Bill Cosby. Bill Crosby was acting on his own. He was not the representative of a major corporation. What we learned today is that there's 16 employees, former and current employees from the Weinstein company who witnessed or were somehow involved with the unlawful acts of sexual harassment and sexual assault involving Harvey Weinstein. We haven't seen that level of predator someone being a predator at that level involving a company. And I think we've got to take note of that because it's very different than when you have an individual acting in their sole capacity.
[Lemon:] He was very powerful. He is accused of raping women. I mean, and drugging them, that is pretty damn bad.
[Martin:] But he didn't have a board of Directors sitting there who overlooked his conduct. He doesn't have employees. We didn't see employees come forward in the Bill Cosby case to say I witness the conduct. Now we're seeing
[Lemon:] He did work for NBC which is a major network.
[Martin:] Well, he wasn't the face of that organization in the way Harvey Weinstein it is. That company had an obligation to create a safe workplace, obligation to create a mechanism for complaints for women, it had an obligation to investigate complaints and to take action to remove him from this company. Not three decades later, but at the time that these allegations were made and we now learned that allegations were made, and we now learned that allegations were made, but they were overlooked, they were dismissed, and as we often see in these cases, the machine is turn against the women, I'm a lawyer, we go after these women. The P.R. machine, they make it very difficult for them to move forward with their complaints.
[Lemon:] I felt compelled that I have to give the statement here because you're talking about the Manhattan D.A.'s office. They released a statement saying if we could have prosecuted Harvey Weinstein for the conduct that occurred in 2015, we would have. While the recording is horrifying to listen to, what emerged from the audio was insufficient to prove a crime under New York law which requires prosecutors to establish criminal intent. That will be debated about, but also, the board of Harvey Weinstein's company, the company that he was formerly the head of released a statement as well, Brian, saying these allegations are antithetical to human decency, these come as an utter surprise to the board, and a suggestion that the board had knowledge of this conduct is false. How could they not have known?
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] I'm perplexed, by this statement. The official comment tonight from the board of Directors, they know they're under tremendous scrutiny, but even though there is this sort of denial of knowledge, there's a mountain of evidence that a lot of people looked the other way, Don, that is being generous. They looked the other way. Harvey Weinstein had a reputation for being a creep, for being volatile guy that was prone to anger, who might treat young women in inappropriate ways. Even if he didn't know about assault or god forbid rape allegations, there is at least a sense that he was treating women, young women inappropriately. The idea that his brother Bob or other board members had no idea about that, look, they're saying in the statement that they didn't have any knowledge of that. But I think even folks inside the company don't believe that denial.
[Lemon:] Alice, you know, Angela said it, she can't believe that people are politicizing, but it is a big political issue. He is a huge Democratic donor. He knew Hillary Clinton, he knew the Obamas, their daughter, the intern at his company, what do you think of this?
[Alice Stewart, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, I think I'm glad that finally after five days that Hillary Clinton and former President Obama did come out today and say they were disgusted and shocked and appalled by this, but for a Party leaders who are who have, you know, made their name on being the party of women and supporting women and equality for women, it should have been a natural gut reaction when they first heard about this five days ago, not one after five days of public pressure. Angela is exactly right. This is not about politics. This is about a pervert whose predatory behavior was damaging to women. The sweet Katherine woman you spoke with, she felt illegitimate after her time with him. The other victim you had
[Lemon:] Louisette.
[Stewart:] Certainly, they feel disgusted with themselves. Due to his behavior. And for this board to say that they had no knowledge of this this, defies any kind of reality. If you read the New Yorker piece, the end of that piece, there are people that worked with this company who say they knew about this for years, they felt guilty for not saying, and if nothing else, they want to create an environment for all these victims to come forward, have justice be done and open up this huge vast array of innocent victims who have been victimized by this pervert.
[Lemon:] Areva, future criminal liability for Harvey Weinstein?
[Martin:] Very possible. We know that the New Yorker piece talks about rape allegations. Apparently three women who have come forward to say they were raped, not just sexual harassment. There are two legal things happening here. We have civil liability potentially for sexual harassment in a workplace. And that could include the board, even though it denies having any knowledge of this, that is a little suspect at this point. But they could also be on the hook for civil damages and then there are criminal penalties. We see Bill Cosby was charged in the case with Andrea Constance. The statute of limitations has not run, as far as we know with respect to all of these women. The woman that is on the tape, that happened in 2015. That was just two years ago. So I would not be surprised if we don't see a barrage of civil lawsuits and there may be criminal charges filed.
[Lemon:] That is all we have time for. Thank you. When we come back, NFL owners looking into making rules into players kneeling during the national anthem. And today Cowboy's Jerry Jones said he will bench any of his players who disrespect the flag. We're going to speak to a man who knows Jerry Jones very well, next.

[Savidge:] A manhunt is under way in New Orleans this morning after two suspects opened fire, killing three people and wounding several others three miles from the French Quarter.
[Paul:] Police say the suspects approached the victims from behind. They started shooting. The other victims were taken to several hospitals in the area. We know one is currently in critical condition. As we continue to get more information, we'll certainly bring it to you. I want to let you know too that civil rights icon and Georgia Congressman John Lewis is in the hospital. He is expected to be released today, though.
[Savidge:] CNN's local affiliate WSB-TV is reporting that Lewis became ill on a flight to Atlanta and his spokeswoman says Lewis is under routine observation. The 78-year-old Lewis was or has represented Georgia since 1986. And in 2011, he was presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
[Paul:] Well, there is supposed to be development experts with technical expertise, but, instead, according to "The Washington Post," the report there is that the Trump White House is giving jobs to political allies and loyalists instead. This is happening at the Millennial Channel Corporation, that small federal agency in charge of promoting economic growth in poor countries. Walter Shaub, CNN contributor and former director of the Office of Government Ethics is with us now. So, Walter, when we look at the background of someone who is typically hired, how do you compare that to what we are seeing in terms of the people who are now in those positions?
[Walter Shaub, Cnn Contributor:] Yes, well, this is quite an incredibly story. And just when you think that you've seen the layers of the swamp in this administration, it just gets deeper. This agency has an $800 million budget, so it may be small, but it's, you know, using a lot of tax dollars. In 2003, George W. Bush had emphasized that as that agency was set up, it was going to be more technical and accountable than a lot of other foreign relations and foreign aid type positions agencies. So, they have always filled those positions with highly technical experts. Well, now, they are filling them with college graduates and the grandson of one of the members of the Presidential Personnel Office. They've got an acting leader who sort of politicized things by telling his career staff that they should be reading Breitbart and who put all kinds of campaign paraphernalia up in his office until they told him that was a no-no in the federal government. So, it's a very significant departure from what's gone before in this agency.
[Paul:] So, it is you would characterize it as unprecedented?
[Shaub:] Yes, I think so. I mean, there maybe random individual examples, or something went awry in the past. But this is an agency that we dealt with when I was at the Office of Government Ethics and it's always highly technical and focuses on development in foreign countries that are in dire need. The this is part of a trend. The Office of Presidential Personnel has always been headed by somebody who is very senior and very experienced and respected in Washington and any administration, Republican or Democratic, they have put a 28-year-old in charge of this agency and there was an article in "The Washington Post" recently about how he has been using that office to throw drinking parties and people sit around there, the youngest staff members in the White House vaping, smoking electronic cigarettes. And it's apparently become the social hub of the White House. And he is now using this office to fill jobs for people like this he filled the Millennium Challenge Corporation with an individual who is a friend of his who he had worked with at a prior federal contractor job that he had filled. He went on a vacation with one of his senior officials and a bunch of other people and when he came back, a few months later, he filled the job with her grandson who had just graduated from college about a year before. That individual who also works in the Presidential Personnel Office has become something of a one-woman employment agency for her family and counting her, there are five members of her family working for the Trump administration and, after all, if our president is going to engage in nepotism, why wouldn't his personnel office follow suit?
[Paul:] All right. Walter Shaub, we appreciate your insight on this. Thank you so much. I do want to make a note here that the White House and MCC did decline comment when contacted by "The Washington Post."
[Savidge:] Russian President Vladimir Putin showing off Russia's new warships in its annual navy day parade. We'll tell you what this display of military might could mean for the U.S., ahead.

[Blitzer:] Right now, U.S. troops will remain in Syria, but President Trump isn't very happy about that. Sources tell CNN that the president got irritated with his top military brass and national security team after they laid out the risks of an immediate withdrawal of some 2,000 U.S. troops from Syria. Joining us now, CNN military and diplomatic analyst, retired Rear Admiral John Kirby, and from Damascus in Syria, CNN senior international correspondent Fred Pleitgen. Fred, earlier this week, President Trump announced it was time to bring home those U.S. troops from Syria. He said very soon. At the same time, officials say the U.S. would remained until the defeat of ISIS was complete. How are those mixed messages being received in Damascus?
[Fred Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It's really interesting to see, because if you speak with folks within the Syrian army, they are not even factoring the U.S. in the future of Syria. I talked to some very senior soldiers and they were telling me they want to win back all of Syria, they want to get back all of their territory. They didn't seem as though they were concerned about the U.S. being there for an extended period of time. So it looks as though the Syrian government, which is of course backed by the Russians and the Iranians, it looks to them like Syria wants to pull out sooner than later, anyway, and that is something, Wolf, we said in the past couple days and it really strengthens the hands of the Russians and the Iranian in this part of Syria and other parts of Syria as well Wolf?
[Blitzer:] Good point. John, what are the risks of pulling out those 2,000 U.S. troops? Because 2,000 doesn't seem, isn't 100,000 or 50,000. What is the risk of pulling them out quickly?
[Rear Adm. John Kirby, Cnn Military & Diplomatic Analyst:] Hopefully, we've averted this outcome of this latest decision. But if we pull them out before we could stabilize areas that ISIS has been kicked out of, you run the risk of ISIS reconstituting. You run the risk of the counter-ISIS coalition, which the U.S. leads and includes 75 other partners, potentially falling apart, which won't be good for the entire region. And, as Fred pointed out, you give more oxygen to Russia and Iran, and frankly, Turkey, who would like nothing better than the United States to lead so they can begin to pursue a Syria that is in their interests and not necessarily the interests of the international community.
[Blitzer:] Listen to Lieutenant General Frank McKenzie, the director of the Joint Staff over at the Pentagon. This is what he just said. Listen to this.
[Lt. Gen. Frank Mckenzie, Director, Pentagon Joint Staff:] A lot of great work has been done in Syria, very close to reaching an in-state against the caliphate. We think as we go forward one of the things we haven't been given is a timeline. That's actually very effective. And that might have been a problem we saw before in Afghanistan where we acted against the timeline that was known to the enemy. The president has actually been very good at not giving us a specific timeline. That's a tool we can use to our effect as we move forward. I would tell you, looking in the long term, obviously entities in the region, nations in the region have to have as much
[Blitzer:] He's making the case why the military thinks giving the enemy, the adversaries advance warning about a timeline would be bad.
[Kirby:] It would be, and that was something the military bristled at with Iraq and Afghanistan under President Obama, was we were telegraphing too much of our timeline. That said, Wolf, and I agree with the general that it's good there hasn't been a specific timeline laid out yet. But the president has already telegraphed his intent. By doing that, he's given oxygen to partners on the ground, Syrian Democratic Forces in particular, who know they can't rely on the U.S. long term. They don't know exactly how long, but they know for not long. So they'll begin to start casting about for other allies and partners that they can rely on going forward. And most assuredly, not all the allies and partners on the ground they find will be sharing our interests in the future of a stable Syria.
[Blitzer:] Very quickly, Fred, what are you hearing over there? You're on the ground, you're in Syria. You're there in Damascus, which is under control of the Bashar al Assad regime, which is backed by the Iranians, backed by the Russians, backed by Hezbollah. What are you hearing from the U.S. allies, whether the Syrians opposed to the regime or the Kurds?
[Pleitgen:] Yes, especially the Kurds I wouldn't say they are losing faith in the U.S. but they are getting there. For them, it's a difficult situation. Keep in mind, the Kurds hold a large part of Syria. There are only 2,000 U.S. forces there, but as long as the U.S. forces are there, it deters other nations from trying to infringe on their territory, and that's something obviously they think they'll lose if and when the United States pulls out. Then you have to put yourself in the shoes of these folks who have been fighting alongside the U.S., what options do they have? Certainly some of the moderate rebels that were on the ground here, they strive to cut a deal with the Kurds. But the Kurds are left with the option to try and deal with the Russians. We know there's already some talks going on, so it certainly makes it difficult for them and you can see them losing faith in the United States Wolf?
[Blitzer:] Those Kurds have certainly lost a lot of faith. Fred Pleitgen, in Damascus, John Kirby, in Washington, thank you. Coming up, the U.K. has pinpointed the source of a nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy and his daughter, and it all leads back to Russia.

[Cabrera:] Meghan Markle had a big moment today, the new duchess of Sussex looking relaxed as she made her first royal balcony appearance in Buckingham palace. CNN's Nina Dos Santos was there in London.
[Nina Dos Santos, Cnn Correspondent:] Meghan Markle took part in her first major royal engagement just three weeks after tying the knot with her new husband, Prince Harry. This ceremony was the trooping of the colors. Since 1748, the UK monarchs can have the chance of having two birthday celebrations, one unofficial and one official. Well, the Queen turned 92 back in April, but this was the official ceremony to mark her birthday. The so-called trooping of the color is actual an opportunity for the sovereign to inspect her troops. More than a thousand soldiers took part in this event, 200 expert cavalrymen and about 400 soldiers as part of the marching band as well. One of the highlights of the day was when the royal family gathered upon the balcony of Buckingham palace to wave to the crowd but also to inspect the fly-by of Lancaster bombers, helicopters, fighter jets, and also those famous RAF red arrows, as they flew by with the characteristic trails of red, white, and blue smoke. Just as there was one new member of the royal family present at these celebrations in the form of the new duchess of Sussex, there was also somebody else who was notably absent. The Queen traveled back and forth on her own because the duke of Edinburgh who will turned 97 on Sunday has retired from royal duties. Nina Dos Santos, CNN, outside Buckingham palace in London.
[Cabrera:] Coming up, President Trump says his relationship with some of America's allies is at a ten. He calls reports of fights with allies, fake news. But how do they see it? That's ahead.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm John Berman. The message just in from the President. Oh, no, I meant it. It counts. Moments ago in a statement on Twitter, he wrote, "The fake mainstream media is working so hard trying to get me not to use social media. They hate that I can get the honest and unfiltered message out."
[Harlow:] This seems to contradict his own staff. What he calls honest and unfiltered, they call not policy. Listen.
[Sebastian Gorka, Deputy Assistant To President Donald Trump:] It's not policy.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Of course, it is.
[Gorka:] It's social media, Chris. It's social media. You know the difference, right?
[Cuomo:] It's not social media. It's his words, his thoughts.
[Gorka:] It's not policy. It is not an executive order. It's social media. Please understand the difference.
[Harlow:] OK. And it's a moment that everyone will be watching. Fired FBI Director James Comey in the hot seat just 48 hours from now for a grilling on Capitol Hill. The Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee says Comey's testimony will be unrestrained and that he will talk openly about his confrontations with President Trump to allegedly back off the investigation into fired national security adviser Michael Flynn. So let's go straight to the White House. Our Senior Washington Correspondent Joe Johns is there. And, Joe, we've learned he is expected to be open about his conversations with President Trump but fairly limited in what he can say about the Russian investigation. Is that right?
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] Yes, that's absolutely right, or so it seems because there are a lot of other things floating around, including the Special Counsel investigation. But I think probably the most important thing to say in the headline over the last 24 hours here from the White House on this is that the President, according to the White House communications office, will not seek to assert executive privilege. We put in some caveats because the President has 48 hours or so to tweet and speak publicly and possibly change his mind, as he has before. Sarah Huckabee Sanders did issue a statement saying the President wants to facilitate a swift airing of the matters that the Senate Intelligence Committee is interested in hearing about. Now, the fact of the matter is, legal experts have said it was always a long shot for the President to assert executive privilege because, number one, James Comey is no longer an employee of the government, meaning the President has limited control over what he does. And number two, the President has talked so much about the Russia investigation and related matters that he may have actually waived the privilege to keep it secret. And if you want to hear the kinds of things the President has said about the Russia investigation, just listen to his sons, Eric and Donald Trump Jr., on another network this morning.
[Eric Trump, Son Of President Donald Trump:] It's the greatest hoax of all time. I was there throughout the campaign. We have no dealings in Russia. We have no projects in Russia. We have nothing to do with Russia.
[Donald Trump, Jr., Son Of President Donald Trump:] I mean, to me, it's without a question, you know, reads and smells like a witch hunt.
[Johns:] So the significance of the President's decision on executive privilege is that if any constraints are placed on James Comey and his testimony later this week, apparently, it won't be the White House. Back to you.
[Berman:] All right. Joe Johns at the White House. Thanks so much. Other major news this morning on leaks. A federal contractor with top security clearance is now facing up to 10 years prison.
[Harlow:] The 25-year-old is accused of mailing classified intel on Russian's hacking to an online news outlet. Our justice reporter, Laura Jared, is live in Washington with more on the contractor and what was in the document that she leaked. What are we learning?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Well, Poppy, the document at the center of this case is a classified report from the National Security Agency detailing how a Russian military intelligence unit tried to hack into voting systems here in the U.S. just days before last year's presidential election. Sources telling us that the classified report that Reality Leigh Winner, this federal contractor, allegedly leaked is the same one described in an article published by "The Intercept" yesterday. And while there is no evidence that any votes were affected by this hack, this document does provide new details into some of the mechanics of how the Russians specifically tried to target voting software suppliers and trick local election officials into clicking on phony e-mails. Now, prosecutors they were able to catch Winner relatively quickly in this case because a news outlet sent a copy of the document over to the government for authentication before publishing the story. And so investigators were able to forensically trace it back to Winner. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein praised this operation, saying, "People who are trusted with classified information and pledged to protect it must be held accountable when they violate that obligation." John, Poppy.
[Berman:] All right. Laura Jarrett for us in Washington. Laura, thanks so much for that. Joining us now to talk about everything that's happening in Washington right now, and will happen in the next 48 hours. David Swerdlick, CNN political commentator, assistant editor for "The Washington Post"; Paul Callan, CNN legal analyst, and Caitlin Huey-Burns, national political reporter for "RealClearPolitics." Caitlin, if we can, let's put up this tweet from the President, or maybe I'll call it a statement that he wrote down and happened to put out on Twitter. He writes, 'The fake mainstream media is working so hard trying to get me not to use social media. They hate that I can get the honest and unfiltered message out." Now, I think he's right that someone hates this, but I don't think it is the media. I think it's own his staff and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
[Caitlin Huey-burns, National Political Reporter, Realclearpolitics:] Exactly because time and time again, he undermines his own staff by putting out these tweets. And they are unfiltered and they do reach the people that they want to reach, but you also have to take those statements. They are coming from the President. That is important, no matter what his staff says about never mind the tweets. The reason that they are saying that is because they don't want that to interfere with some of the legal arguments, of course, they're trying to make with the travel ban. That is kind of the context of this kind of thing. But they are coming from the President, they have to be treated as statements from the President.
[Harlow:] I mean, you even had George Conway, the husband of Kellyanne Conway, someone who is up to be Solicitor General, say, "These tweets may make some people feel better, but they certainly won't help the OSG get five votes in the Supreme Court, which is actually what matters. Sad." There is an interesting op-ed in "The Washington Journal" this morning that John pointed out. Paul Callan, to you. And here is one key line of it, "If this pattern continues, Mr. Trump may find himself running an administration with no one but his family and the Breitbart staff. People of talent and integrity won't work for a boss who undermines them in public without thinking about the consequences. This is a Murdoch on paper. This has generally been pretty supportive of the President with the exception of a few rare instances. How big is that?
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I think it's a good observation by "The Wall Street Journal" because and particularly when you are dealing with lawyers. Lawyers are always willing to take on a new client in the hopes that the client will listen to the legal advice given, but if the client consistently undermines the lawyer. The lawyer gets in front of a judge and makes a statement on the record, and then the client says that's not true, the lawyer's integrity is shot and the ability to argue the case effectively is shot, and I think you would see resignations occurring. And that's going to happen continually as long as the President undermines his own advisers.
[Harlow:] I mean, he's already doing that on Twitter.
[Callan:] Yes, he is.
[Harlow:] He's saying what you are saying, what you are arguing is not true. David
[Callan:] Yes. And someday, they're going to be standing in front of the Supreme Court
[Harlow:] Making that.
[Callan:] answering for those tweets.
[Berman:] And by the way, it's not a distraction we're talking about lawyer-client here because one of the things that's happening is the President has been very critical of Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General, on Twitter as well. "The New York Times" has a whole article about that, that they have a tension that exists between the White House and the Justice Department. David Swerdlick, if we can shift gears to what's happening in Washington in just two days. Forty-eight hours plus one from now, James Comey testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee. You know, our Gloria Borger reported that had James Comey seen obstruction of justice, people familiar with his thinking said he would have said something at the time, which, in some ways, to me, seems to be trying to lower expectations here. Is there a notion that Democrats may not be happy at the end of this with everything they get from James Comey?
[David Swerdlick, Assistant Editor, The Washington Post:] John, so I think Democrats are not going to get the sort of decisive blow to the President that they might want or maybe have hoped for over recent months. The idea that one single thing in this whole collection of smoke that's surrounding the White House is going to take President Trump down at an early stage in his presidency, right, we're still only a few months in, I think is sort of a pipe dream for Democrats. But even if Comey comes outs and just testifies in front of cameras directly what we think we already know we think we already know that the President at least sort of encouraged him or nudged him to put the brakes on the Russia investigation I still think that's pretty big news because, right now, we're hearing it from secondary sources, but we'd be hearing that from someone who was in the room with the President. Even if it doesn't rise to the legal level of obstruction of justice, John, it rises to a political problem for the President. No question.
[Berman:] He's not deep throat.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Berman:] I mean, James Comey won't be deep throat, he'll be a named source
[Harlow:] No. So, Paul, you wrote an opinion piece that's getting a lot of attention on this about how boxed in you think actually James Comey is going to be in what he can say and can't say based on how he testified back in March, just on March 20th. How boxed in will he be by that because our sources say he'll be open about the conversation with the President but not on the Russia investigation? But if the President is under any sort of investigation for obstruction of justice, which we do not know at this point in time, will he be more limited even in what he can say about those conversations?
[Callan:] You know, people forget that Comey is not only the top copper or was the top cop as head of the FBI but he is also a lawyer. So
[Berman:] A good one.
[Callan:] A very good lawyer, very respected lawyer, but he's bound by the code of professional responsibility that binds lawyers and prosecutors. So I went over the transcripts of his last two congressional appearances, and he will not talk about pending investigations. Well, the Russian investigation is pending. Virtually everything the Democrats want to grill him about are pending investigations. He will not make statements about pending cases that would violate the code of professional responsibility. And with respect to his conversations with the President, well, the President has now said, at least through spokespeople, that they're releasing him from executive privilege. Now, that being the case, I think the one thing we may see here that we didn't see before is the give and take between the President and Mr. Comey directly. And that's going to be big news, but I think that's the only big news that's going to come out of this.
[Berman:] But, again, that is big news because that gets to the whole idea of possible obstruction of justice, even if not in a legal sense, in a political sense.
[Callan:] But here's the thing, and why I called it him being boxed in. When the President says, you know, or implies, go easy on Flynn, can you let this go, what does Comey do? Comey doesn't go and consult with the Justice Department and say, something really strange happened in the Oval Office, how should I proceed? He walks away from it. He seemingly just makes a note about it and continues with his investigation. So the claim is going to be if he thought something criminal had occurred, an ethical investigator would have done something more than make a note about it.
[Harlow:] Caitlin, how much do you think it hurts the President here, or does it at all, that he laid out so much leading up to this, whether on Twitter, whether on the interview with Lester holt, whether in his note about why he fired Comey, saying, "I greatly appreciate you informing me on three separate occasions that I am not under investigation"? Obviously, outside factors shouldn't color Comey's testimony, but we are all human.
[Huey-burns:] Exactly. And they provide kind of the frame through which both Democrats and Republicans are looking at this. You do have some Democrats who are saying, you know, we are going to ask, why did you bring this up now? Why didn't you flag it earlier? Remember, Democrats kind of have a complicated relationship with James Comey. But it is bipartisan in the fact that both Democrats and Republicans want to get Comey's side of the story. What's also really telling is how the administration is kind of prebutting this. Remember, Kellyanne Comey, yesterday, was saying, remember that Comey had to correct testimony the last time he appeared before Congress. Also remember that everybody in Washington kind of detested, in her words she said, this person. So it's kind of interesting. That gives us an idea of how the administration is trying to kind of prebut these arguments, kind of expecting that even if there is not some bombshell revelation, that the details provided are going to be really important here.
[Berman:] And that's a great point. David Swerdlick, just to circle back to you for a quick last word here, your point that even the details of those conversations will be significant, it is very rare that you have someone under oath who has the potential to directly contradict the President of the United States about those conversations.
[Swerdlick:] Yes.
[Berman:] You know, President Trump, in a memo that's out there, says, on three separate occasions, you told me I'm not under investigation. I expect that James Comey will give some kind of answer to that, that either will directly contradict it or will confirm it in the answer to that question. It's huge either way.
[Swerdlick:] I think you're right, John, that Comey will have some kind of answer like that. I think Caitlin makes a great point that the White House is setting up these prebuttals. They're preparing for whatever is to come on Thursday. And I think they have figured out that Comey is not going to deliver that decisive blow to the President. On the other hand, I wouldn't expect, if I were in the White House, Comey to flinch, right? We've seen several witnesses now come before Congress or come before T.V. cameras. I'm thinking of Ambassador Susan Rice when she went on with Andrea Mitchell. I'm thinking of former Attorney General Sally Yates when she went before Congress. Whether or not Republicans or whether or not the public believes what they said, they didn't flinch. They said we didn't leak. They said we did our job to the best of our ability. I expect Director Comey to testify in a very similar, direct sort of manner
[Berman:] Right.
[Swerdlick:] just straight ahead saying, I was in the room with the President and this is what he said.
[Harlow:] Guys, thank you very much. David Swerdlick, Paul Callan, Caitlin Huey-Burns, we'll know in 48 hours. Still to come, breaking news on the London terror attack investigation. What we know about the third attacker, we're just learning that this morning.
[Berman:] Right. The London Mayor still engaged in a battle with the President of the United States. The Mayor's message, cancel your trip to the United Kingdom. And help wanted, a lot of it, as the White House battles controversy. The problem is, there are hundreds of open positions in the administration.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. We begin with breaking news in our money lead.
[Tapper:] You hear the bell there, stocks roaring back today, closing more than 740 points higher, after a surprisingly strong jobs report. CNN's Alison Kosik is live for us at the stock exchange. And, Alison, is there signs are there signs this might continue?
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Correspondent:] You can expect volatility to really become the norm. Wall Street needed some good news today and today it got a trifecta. China taking steps to stimulate its economy. The December jobs report that blew away expectations. Just on those headlines, we saw the market rally. But then Fed Chief Jay Powell having a panel discussion with a couple of his predecessors said the magic words. The central bank will be patient with raising interest rates. Bam, stocks rocketed higher and you see them closing now, the Dow up 743 points. You know, the Fed has been one of those issues that's rattled the markets. The market has been concerned that the Fed has been raising rates too quickly. A couple of interesting moments in this panel discussion. One of them, Powell was asked if there has been any direct communication between the White House and him. We all know President Trump had been looking around to see if he had the authority to fire Powell. Powell said there has been no communication. He also said if Trump asks him to resign, Powell said he won't Jake.
[Tapper:] Alison Kosik at Wall Street for us, thank you so much. Now to the politics leads. And the headline, no deal. President Trump told congressional leaders the federal government shutdown currently about to enter its third week could potentially last quote "months or even years." The president met with congressional leaders for the second time today and they appear just as dug in as ever before. Democrats say open the government now, Mr. President. The president insisting, not unless you give me $5 billion for my border wall. Determined to have the last word, President Trump gave a lengthy, somewhat rambling press conference in the Rose Garden this afternoon, where he asserted he may not need Congress at all to get funding for his border wall, saying he's considering doing it by declaring a national emergency.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We could call a national emergency because of the security of our country, absolutely. No, we can do it. I haven't done it. I may do it. I may do it. But we could call a national emergency and build it very quickly.
[Tapper:] House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described the meeting at the White House as contentious and said the only progress made was that they have eliminated some possible ways to solve the standoff. Meanwhile, more than 800,000 federal employees continue to be either furloughed without pay or they're being forced to work without pay. CNN's Abby Phillip leads off our coverage from the White House.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn Political Analyst:] Leading to little progress and threats that the now two-week-old government shutdown could last much longer.
[Question:] You said in the meeting, this is him quoting you, I just want to check, that the shutdown could go on for months or even a year or longer. Did you say that?
[Trump:] I did. I did.
[Question:] Is that your assessment of where we are?
[Trump:] Absolutely, I said that. I don't think it will. But I am prepared. I'm very proud of doing what I'm doing.
[Phillip:] President Trump challenging Democrats.
[Trump:] We need border security.
[Phillip:] Agree to a deal on border security, or he might take extreme measures.
[Question:] Have you considered using emergency powers to grant yourself authorities to build this wall without congressional approval? And, second...
[Trump:] Yes, I have.
[Question:] You have?
[Trump:] Yes, I have. And I can do it if I want.
[Question:] So you don't need congressional approval to build the wall?
[Trump:] No, we can use a absolutely. We can call a national emergency because of the security of our country, absolutely. No, we can do it. I haven't done it. I may do it. I may do it. But we can call a national emergency.
[Phillip:] And Democrats insisting the government needs to be open before they will even consider a compromise.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] It's very hard to see how progress will be made unless they open up the government.
[Phillip:] While not giving ground, the president says it could come down to this weekend.
[Trump:] We're going to be meeting. I have designated a group, and we're going to be meeting over the weekend, that group, to determine what we're going to do about the border.
[Phillip:] Adding
[Trump:] We had a very, very productive meeting. And I think we have come a long way.
[Phillip:] Democrats also hinting hope is not gone.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , Speaker Of The House:] We made some progress.
[Phillip:] Well, there will be meetings this weekend, the president said, led by Vice President Mike Pence and several other White House officials. But it does seem that both sides are still exactly where they stood two weeks ago now. And that could be why President Trump seemed to have very little to say to the 800,000 federal workers who are staring down the possibility of no pay for the foreseeable future Jake.
[Tapper:] All right. Abby Phillip at the White House for us, thanks so much. And today the president said he might declare a national emergency in order to get wall funding. Let's talk about this and the other issues related to the shutdown with my panel. Is that the right way to do it, an emergency, declaring a national emergency?
[Mary Katharine Ham, Cnn Political Commentator:] I don't think that exercising like extreme measures of executive power is a great idea, just in general. And, you know, I think he made an argument that, look, if Obama could do this on DACA, even though he said he couldn't, then I should be able to do this. And I would say, no, that is not the right path, because if you really can't do it, you really shouldn't do it. Look, I know there are powers in the presidency. I get it. Continue trying to make a deal. He made this promise to his voters. I know that they're in a stalemate. If they want this to end, Democrats are probably going to have to give him a little something that feels like a win that, he can call a win. And then it will end.
[Tapper:] Do you agree? I will come to you after this.
[Angela Rye, Cnn Political Commentator:] The biggest challenge, and I do want to get to this national emergency issue, declaring a national emergency. But my fundamental problem with this is, this is not going to be a win, period. The president's campaign promise was to build a wall and to have who pay for it?
[Tapper:] Mexico.
[Rye:] Exactly. And so at some point, you have to acknowledge that you getting 50 percent of what you promised that a lot of voters who voted for you for this particular issue, this is not a win, period. You're making those same voters pay for this. I know some of them have started a GoFundMe or whatever to help support that. And, you know, more power to them. But at some point, he's got to acknowledge this was not the campaign promise. And there's revisionist history, surprise, surprise, from his administration on what that campaign promise was. On the national emergencies piece, I promise this is my last point. The national emergencies piece, there have been limitations placed and codified for this very reason that were signed into law by Gerald Ford. So if there are limitations on what a national emergency even is, like let's just start there. And just stop, full stop.
[Tapper:] Let me ask you this, because President Trump is already trying to do the spin that this deal, the new trade deal that has yet to be ratified by Congress, but if it goes through, that that will ultimately be Mexico paying for the wall. To the base, does it matter?
[Kristen Soltis Anderson, Republican Strategist:] I don't think that it matters a lot. I think, look, the spoiler alert here is, this is how this ends. Something gets passed at some point. Pelosi and Schumer come out, give a press conference that say we have reopened the government and we haven't given him his wall. And then President Trump signs it and says, they gave me my wall. And it doesn't matter what's in the actual bill. Democrats will say they didn't give him wall money. Trump will say he did get wall money. That's how this ends. The question is, how fast do we get to that point? And we will get to that point when one side or the other feels some sort of political pain. And right now, neither side is feeling political pain. There's pain being felt by the federal workers who aren't getting paid. There's pain being felt by people who need federal assistance in some way, but aren't getting it, because of the shutdown. But political pain, federal workers are not a pressure point for this president.
[Tapper:] And, Kirsten, let me bring you in on that, because the president had another opportunity today to express compassion and sympathy for those workers, some of whom live paycheck to paycheck.
[Kirsten Powers, Cnn Commentator:] Yes.
[Tapper:] Here is some of what he said.
[Trump:] I really believe that these people many of the people that we're talking about, many of the people you're discussing, I really believe that they agree with what we're doing. Many of those people, maybe even most of those people, that really have not been and will not be getting their money in at this moment, those people, in many cases, are the biggest fan of what we're doing.
[Tapper:] There's absolutely no evidence to back that up.
[Rye:] None.
[Tapper:] And, in fact, it contradicts what the president said a day or two ago, when he seemed to suggest that most of the people who are federal workers are Democrats.
[Powers:] Yes. Well, I actually lived through a couple shutdowns in the Clinton administration, and pretty much everybody that I knew, every person, whether they were a political appointee or whether they were a career person, was living paycheck to paycheck. People who own homes were terrified that the bank was going to go to pull the money and the money wasn't going to be there. That's the way most government workers are living. They aren't living large, I think the way a lot of people think they are. And so he also said today something about the landlords should go easy on them. Well, you know, first of all, that carries no weight, just for starters. Second of all, landlords also have bills and mortgages to pay, right? So there's the money comes in and it goes out. So it's not that's not it has impact on everybody. And so I think, you're right. The pain is being felt predominantly by the people who can't pay their bills. And I guess, you know, I do sort of worry that the Democrats will end up giving in on it, because they're the ones who are going to be more moved by this, frankly, because I don't think that the president is really going to be moved at all by the fact these people are suffering.
[Ham:] Also, is he a landlord who would accept that?
[Powers:] No.
[Ham:] As a man who deals in real estate? Look, I think the issue is that, yes, federal workers and this part of the argument is not a pressure point on him. And it won't become one. Democrats, I think you're right, are more likely to be the ones who feel that pressure. But he took the pressure off of them, quite conveniently, by saying, I will take the rap for this. So, that's why I think it might last longer than it otherwise has in the past.
[Rye:] He shifted his tone on that, though, and now he's putting it at the feet of Nancy Pelosi, even before she was speaker became speaker yesterday. I think the other interesting thing to me is we're talking about Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer. There's another person involved. That would be Mitch McConnell, who also has just as much responsibility, as the majority leader of the Senate.
[Tapper:] Now, what Mitch McConnell has said is that this is really a negotiation between the Democratic leaders, because it needs to pass the House, and obviously they need 10 Democrats or whatever it is. Now it's actually more than 10 Democrats. ... in order to get through the Senate. Not that he is sidelined, but that the negotiation needs to go to those people. What's the way out of it? You suggested a way, but not in terms of the specifics of the bill. What do you think should be in the bill that both sides can claim victory?
[Soltis Anderson:] Money for border security that President Trump can spend on surveillance, on a fence, which maybe you could define as a steel see-through wall. I mean, I think that's the way this ends is with the Democrats giving some kind of money for border security, because while the wall is unpopular, border security is not.
[Ham:] That's right.
[Soltis Anderson:] And there are a lot of people who are just elected in the House who come from districts that Donald Trump won by two, three, four points, who don't want to be seen as soft on border security or they're going to be vulnerable next time around. So I think something that includes less than $5 billion, but some amount of money for border security that Nancy Pelosi can say, this isn't a wall and Trump can say, this is a wall, I think that's the only way out of this.
[Powers:] Isn't that offer already on the table, though? Aren't they offering like a million-and-a-half a billion-and-a-half?
[Tapper:] A billion $1.3 billion.
[Powers:] Yes.
[Tapper:] That's obviously not enough.
[Powers:] Right. So you're saying they would have more money than that? Because they have said, we support border security, we will give you this money, but we're not going to give you the money for the wall and that's where the $5 billion comes in.
[Tapper:] And, ultimately, the big solution, obviously, we know, because Jeff Flake, he used to say, all these Democrats in 2013 voted for something like $40 billion in border security. Not a border wall, but border security. But it came with this giant immigration reform comprehensive package.
[Rye:] It was a comprehensive immigration package that folks have forgotten all about it, and it is necessary. Somehow, the entire immigration argument has been reduced to a physical wall that we have once tried with physical and electronic surveillance and fencing through SBInet, which was the Secure Border Initiative. And it did not work. Like, I don't know why we're not having that conversation either. It's very important. I'm going to continue to repeat it, because I hope somebody will hear it.
[Tapper:] And remember also there's a question about what will constitute the wall you're talking about. And Kaitlan Collins from CNN asked the president about that today, whether it's going to be concrete, whether it's going to be steel slats or whatever he said. Take a listen.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] You ran your campaign promising supporters that Mexico was going to pay for the wall...
[Trump:] Here we go again.
[Collins:] ... and that the wall was going to be made of concrete. You just said earlier that the wall could be made of steel.
[Trump:] I said I was going to build a wall. I never said, I'm going to build a concrete. I said I'm going to build a wall. Just so you don't because I know you're not into the construction business. You don't understand something. We now have a great steel business that's rebuilt in the United States. Steel is stronger than concrete.
[Tapper:] All right. But, again...
[Rye:] First of all, first of all, I wish that Kaitlan would have come back and said, actually, I come from a family of, like, anything. I just can't even believe he told her what she does and does not know. I'm going to hold...
[Tapper:] This is a president who has declared himself an expert on drones, on all sorts of things in the last week. But construction, actually, he might legitimately lay a claim to.
[Rye:] No, that's fair. But Kaitlan he doesn't know her background.
[Tapper:] But the other issue, does it matter? Does it matter if it's concrete or steel slats or...
[Ham:] No, I think in the end...
[Powers:] Paper.
[Tapper:] A paper fence?
[Ham:] The money for border security has to include, I think, in order for them to come to a deal, has to include something that is physical, that he can claim as a wall. I think that you could point to parts of things they have passed in the past that could be that some Democrats have backed. Now, to your point, Angela, I think you're right that comprehensive immigration reform should be the goal.
[Rye:] Right.
[Ham:] An issue is because things like that have passed in the past and then sort of been gutted and physical barriers never come to fruition, people feel betrayed on that point. And that is where trust falls apart for a lot of people on the right or even center right. And they need a down payment on that. And that's what part of this would be.
[Tapper:] Everyone, stick around. Just in, mass sick calls at airports across the country because of this government shutdown. How the standoff could now put your safety at risk. That's next.

[Cabrera:] Welcome back. The hot and cold relationship between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un seems to be heating up.
[Trump:] And you know the interesting? When I did it and I was really being tough and so was he, we were going back and forth. And then we fell in love, OK? No, really. He wrote me beautiful letters. And they are great letters. We fell in love.
[Cabrera:] This romantic rhetoric, this new bromance may be one-sided. The North Korean foreign minister says more trust needs to be built between the two countries before denuclearization can begin, saying the reason behind the recent deadlock is because the U.S. relies on coercive methods which are lethal to trust building. And that brings us to your weekend Presidential brief, a segment we bring you every Sunday night highlighting some of the most pressing national security information the President will need when he capes tomorrow. And joining us now is CNN national security analyst and former National Security Council adviser, Sam Vinograd. She spent two years in the Obama administration helping prep for the President's daily brief. So Sam, what kind of impact does Trump's statement of love actually have on policy going forward?
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well Ana, to quote Tina Turner, "what's love got to do with it?" This relationship should not be driven by emotion. It should be driven by policy objectives. And if President Trump is crazy in love with Kim Jong-un, this is an abusive relationship. Kim is still attacking us in cyberspace. And according to John Bolton, he is still trying to interfere in our elections. And the fact of the matter is, the President's statements actually hurt us with Kim. The President looks so infatuated with Kim Jong-un that Kim probably thinks that he has the upper hand. At the same time, this also hurts the President with other dictators and would-be Kims. Because it looks like the President's love in
[Cabrera:] You mentioned a little bit of election interference. Here we are about six weeks out before the midterms. How are we looking?
[Vinograd:] We are looking securely insecure. In national security when you do a threat assessment, you often look at in adversaries intent and capabilities. We have four adversaries, Iran, North Korea, China and Russia that have the most advanced cybersecurity abilities in the world. And John Bolton have said that they have the intent to attack us. They are trying to do so right now. We have gross physical and social insecurities. Our infrastructure, state voting systems, contain decades-old laws. And the CEO of twitter testified under oath, he can't confirm that social media won't be manipulated again. And President Trump introduced a new wrinkle on a global stage who said China is trying to interfere in our election. But he only cited their very over propaganda and use of terrorist to target
[Cabrera:] And there is so much else going on. We have been so focused on the Kavanaugh confirmation and the hearings this week, have to do these accusations. What kind of impact do you think that's having beyond the U.S.?
[Vinograd:] The world is literally listening to what's happening with the Kavanaugh confirmation. And this ensuing dialogue on sexual assault that it's unleashed, that includes sexual assault victims, victimizers and the general public. And the United States used to be the gold standard on promoting the rights of victims and the rule of law. I worked overseas with so many colleagues from U.S. government agencies that were engaged in combatting gender based violence promoting judicial integrate, promoting thorough investigations. And take a step back and let's ask what last week signaled. It signaled a woman is being criticized for sharing her story too late and in the wrong way. It's signaling that certain elected officials are placing their desire to get a judge confirmed before midterms over figuring out whether he committed a crime or that he is a character that is appropriate for a Supreme Court justice. And so, if we were the gold standard, do we really want other countries to be emulating our latest example? I think unfortunately the answer is a resounding, no.
[Cabrera:] Sam Vinograd, lots for us to think about. Thank you.
[Vinograd:] Thanks, Ana.
[Cabrera:] Now, the death toll continues to climb after an earthquake and tsunami decimated parts of Indonesia, reducing entire towns to piles of rubble. We will bring you the latest next.

[Vause:] To all the viewers joining us, you're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.
[Sesay:] And I'm Isha Sesay. The headlines this hour. Donald Trump will announce his decision on the future of the Iran nuclear deal in the coming hours. He's widely expected to pull the U.S. out of the agreement despite urging from Britain, France and Germany. Iran says it will not renegotiate the deal.
[Vause:] "The Wall Street Journal" is reporting that President Trump's legal team is hoping he will decide by May 17 of testifying in special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe. One of his attorneys, Rudy Giuliani says the President has felt, what does he have to lose by sitting down with Mueller? But Donald Trump has also promised to weigh his legal team's advice.
[Sesay:] Well, the Nigerian army says it's rescued more than 1,000 people held captive by Boko Haram in Borno State. Most are women and children and also some young men who were forced to fight for the terror group. The rescued hostages are receiving treatment at a military facility.
[Vause:] Well, there were dignitaries, a former German chancellor and a Hollywood action there all looking as Vladimir Putin began his fourth term as Russian president.
[Sesay:] In his inauguration speech, he laid out a plan for more restoration for his new term. Matthew Chance has all the details.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, we witnessed an extravagant bit of political theater here in Russia with the inauguration ceremony of Vladimir Putin. He was pictured working in his office, then strolling on his own to the long corridors in the Kremlin before getting into a especially constructed presidential limousine which has been dubbed locally the Putin mobile to take him on a short drive to the Grand Kremlin Palace and St. Andrews Hall where there're these exorbitant rooms which are lavishly decorated were filled with 3,000 especially-invited guests including ministers in the Russian government and some foreign dignitaries as well including Gerhard Schroder, the former German chancellor and Steven Seagal, who is a Hollywood movie star and a close personal friend of Vladimir Putin. In a short address following his inauguration, Putin said that he would service Russia for the rest of his life, much to the alarm here, I expect of critics out there that want to see him gone. But he also said that his emphasis as head of state will be to make Russia prosperous again and glorious. And the tone of his speech was very much in this fourth term in office. Vladimir Putin wants to emphasize economic recovery as is main platform. Now whether or not that will happen or not remains very much to be seen; obviously Russia has massive economic obstacles. But as I mentioned there are lots of political protests there have been over the course of the past 48 hours or so as well, over the weekend before the inauguration ceremony. The people turning out in towns and cities across Russia to voice their opposition to Vladimir Putin who won a landslide election back in March. He now starts another six-year term as Russian president. He's already served four terms. And in fact he's ruled this country as either president or prime minister for the past 18 years and there's very little sign at this point that that is going to change. Matthew Chance, CNN Moscow.
[Sesay:] Wow.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Sesay:] That's a long time.
[Vause:] It is.
[Sesay:] Now, another teenage girl in India had been raped and set on fire. The 17-year-old is now in a hospital with burns to 70 percent of her body and the suspect has been arrested.
[Vause:] This all happened in the same region where another teen was burned to death after being gang-raped. We have details now from Anna Coren.
[Anna Coren, Cnn Correspondent:] The haunting screams of family members begging for justice following the alleged gang-rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl. The attack which happened last week in Jharkhand, eastern India is the latest in a series of violent sexual crimes across the country. "There was a wedding at my brother's place", said the victim's uncle. "She went to fetch water and that's when the attacker grabbed and took her in a car. Then he raped her." When the family complained to the local village council, the accused men were fined $750 dollars and order to do 100 sit-ups. Enraged by the punishment, police said the men
[Deepa Narayan, Author And Social Scientist:] The rape is a rape. And these rapes, including gang-rapes of young girls is increasing. It's not decreasing.
[Coren:] India has been reeling from a string of highly publicized attacks that have sparked protests. Earlier this year, an eight-year-old girl in the northern Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir was abducted, drugged and held captive in a temple where she was repeatedly raped by several men before being strangled to death. Despite the national outcry over this brutal attack, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was accused of being extremely slow to respond. His days of silence widely criticized until finally addressing the crime. "I want to assure the country that no culprit will be spared", he said. "Complete justice will be done. Those daughters who have become the victim of such crime will get justice for sure." But justice is sadly elusive for the surviving victims and families. Authorities claim more than 100 cases of rape are reported each day. That's roughly one every 15 minutes. There was a 12 percent rise in the number of reported cases from 2015 to 2016 but there are more than 15,000 rape cases awaiting trial.
[Narayan:] It's a huge social, cultural problem in India. And the other factors that the conviction rate was 3 percent.
[Coren:] India's deep-rooted problem with rape came to international attention in 2012 when a 23-year-old physiotherapy student in New Delhi was brutally gang-raped on a minibus. She died a few weeks later. The anger and protests that followed forced the government to change the laws and increase penalties for sexual violence. And just last month, the Indian cabinet approved the death penalty for rapists of girls under 12. But critics say those laws are yet to be enforced and attitudes still haven't changed.
[Narayan:] unless the way women are viewed changes culturally, we're not going to see any stoppage of violence against women.
[Coren:] Anna Coren, CNN Hong Kong.
[Sesay:] Honestly distressing.
[Vause:] Yes. It is an issue which just keeps coming back and obviously there needs to be something done.
[Sesay:] And they have laws but the question is not more laws, it's enforcement.
[Vause:] Yes. And education.
[Sesay:] And education.
[Vause:] Still to come on NEWSROOM L.A. rivers of lava on Hawaii's Big Island showing no signs of slowing down. We'll have an update on the volcano in just a moment.
[Sesay:] Well, the Kilauea Volcano in here we are.
[Vause:] Here we are.
[Sesay:] Here we are.
[Vause:] There it is behind us.
[Sesay:] They can't
[Vause:] That's incredible. Look at it.
[Sesay:] That volcano that one. That one is in Hawaii.
[Vause:] You're in big trouble.
[Sesay:] It shows no signs of quieting down. It's been spewing lava and toxic gas since Thursday. There are now at least 12 fissures which have been opened up. Thirty- five structures have been destroyed including more than two dozen homes. Stephanie Elam has the latest now from Hawaii's Big Island.
[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] Rivers of smoldering lava threatening Hawaii's Big Island. The red-hot magma spewing up to fissures that have emerged since the eruption of the Kilauea Volcano has ravaged roads and destroyed dozens of structures. Watch this time lapse show the all-consuming flow of the lava as it slowly creeps across a road, engulfing a parked car leading a smoky black trail in its wake; more lava spilling through neighborhoods, turning lush, green island vegetation to walls of blackened rocks. At least 1,700 people in Leilani Estates and Lanipuna Gardens have had to evacuate. Tell me what it was like when you first saw lava coming out right by your house.
[Unidentified Male:] It was, it went really orange, the highest splatter I saw first was about 60 feet tall which is pretty big.
[Elam:] After that, potentially deadly volcanic gases. The eruptions have released high levels of sulfur dioxide into the air. And then there are the Big Island earthquakes more than 1,300 in the last week alone. From a helicopter, we can see where all of this began and the destruction is massive. To the south, the Puluoo vent of Kilauea collapsed.
[Sean Regahr, Helicopter Pilot:] craters up there, it almost collapsed into one big hole.
[Elam:] Some residents in Leilani Estates have been allowed to return temporarily to check on their homes. But the threat and the uncertainty remain.
[Debbie Agbayani, Resident:] Just watching everybody come out of there with all their things. It's so bad. It's just so bad.
[Elam:] And it's worth point out that the people that lived in these communities are mainly working class folks that have taken their life savings and put them into this land to have a slice of paradise not far from the beach. But with lava insurance being so expensive many of these people don't have it and so if their homes are lost to the lava, they will have likely lost everything. Stephanie Elam, CNN near Leilani Estates, Hawaii.
[Vause:] Let's go to Pedram Javaheri. He's there at the CNN International Weather Center for more. So Pedram they don't really know how much longer this will continue or how bad it's going to get.
[Pedram Javaheri, Ams Meteorologist:] Yes. It's impossible but you know one way to look at and kind of guesstimate where we think this will end up, you're looking at historical sort of eruptions across this particular region. We know that typically several weeks to several months is a pretty good bet of how long such events last across this region. So you would expect earthquakes to continue. We're seeing on the order of 100 per day, upwards of a thousand have occurred in the last week or so. Additional fissures up to the 12 that we've seen, potentially more possible as we see additional quakes, and of course, poisonous gas is being released at the moment across this region as well. Here is the widespread coverage of the quake activity over the past week or so indicated in yellow the past 24 hours. You see that indicated in the orange coloration as well. So the activity is certainly not quieting down. And frankly this is what we have the Hawaiian Islands come from, right. We have volcanic activity, tectonic activity put this together go to the northwestern corner of the island, of the 132 islands that make up the archipelago. Kauai is your oldest island at 5.1 million years old and you can scoot on over towards the southeast, towards the Big Island. In fact, it's the youngest island the oldest spots of the Big Island come in at 700,000 years old. And in fact, in the eruption that occurred across this region back in 2012, we added an additional 200 hectares of land to the island so these sort of eruptions cause the island, of course, to grow and this what we're watching essentially, geology before our eyes. But the temperatures associated with this incredible, in fact, it is that eighth fissure right there that has been really problematic. That produced a tremendous amount of lava that's caused widespread damage. You've seen the remarkable footage associated with this as well. And just based on the coloration of the lava, we can actually see and guesstimate the temperatures associated with it. The white and yellow colors are indicative of some 1,200 degrees Celsius temperatures. And of course you get down a little cooler down towards the red coloration which is about 800 degrees Celsius. But see how it hardens and solidifies? That actually does a wonderful job to insulate the lava and that really makes it another dangerous element because these lava tubes can allow the lava to farther travel downstream. We've had previous eruptions where lava has been tracked some 10 kilometers away up to the coastal community right on the coast. And the tubes themselves have been able to maintain their temperatures. So even on the coast 10 kilometers away, John and Isha, the lava temperatures are 1,200 degrees Celsius and that of course, placed additional major, major disruptions and damages even far away from where the eruption occurred.
[Vause:] Yes. We're hearing from officials there in Hawaii saying this is not a tourist attraction.
[Sesay:] No.
[Vause:] Stay away.
[Sesay:] Yes, this is dangerous.
[Javaheri:] Yes. Not at all yes.
[Sesay:] Pedram thank you.
[Vause:] Thanks
[P.j. Javaheri:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] All right. Quick break here. Up next, "This is America", the multilayered new single and musipedia by Childish Gambino is being called a work of genius. We're going to try to analyze its many, many messages.

[Howell:] Welcome back to CNN Newsroom. I'm George Howell. In Guatemala, there is frustration over a tragedy that some say could have been prevented, 109 people are dead, some 200 missing, this after the Fuego volcanic eruption. Critics accused the disaster management agency there of not responding quickly enough to eruption warnings. CNN's Patric Oppman reports from the disaster.
[Patrick Oppman, Cnn Correspondent:] It's hard to believe that this used to be a neighborhood where people lived. There were houses here. This was the main street. And now, it is just tons and tons of volcanic ash that will need to be cleared before to be livable, before anybody could come back. We have a mask on in case the wind changes direction. But the smell makes you somewhat dizzy. It is really just overpowering odor. And you see as they are watering it down, the steam rises. All these days after the volcanic eruption, that rock is still that volcanic ash still boiling hot. It is not safe to go there. And this [inaudible] was out spraying it down. It will probably cause them to [inaudible] malfunction. He is trying to cool down that volcanic ash. It gives you an idea of how dangerous this is. That's why they're telling residents not to return because [inaudible] coming off the street. It could still take someone's life. And you look down over here and this was someone's house again completely buried by volcanic ash. We don't know if the people who live in this neighborhood that is now one color, the gray color of ash, got out in time. But you can see what a hell escape it has become and you could see how difficult it will ever be for anyone to ever return to this neighborhood in Guatemala. The smoke is coming out there. You can feel the heat emanating. I'm going to step back because it really is quite hot and we're going to leave. We've been told that we should only stay in this area for a short time. It is an incredible sight to see and it makes you wonder if anybody could ever live here again. Patrick Oppman, CNN near the Fuego volcano.
[Howell:] Patrick giving us that up close and personal look at what's happening there in Guatemala. Now, we've just learned at least 600 homes have been destroyed since May, this by the ongoing volcanic eruption in Hawaii. And on Thursday, officials reported that Kilauea's eruption has created enough lava to bury the entire island of Manhattan, almost 2 meters deep. Fissure number eight remains the only active fissure at this point producing fountains of lavas spouting into 70 meters high at times and that fissure also feeding a lava channel that is still at Kapoho Bay destroying homes. The United Nations is taking unprecedented action against human traffickers. This, after a CNN Freedom Project investigation exposed the slave trade in Libya. The U.N. is sanctioning six men that says led criminal network trafficking large numbers of migrants through Libya to Europe. Nima Elbagir has this report.
[Nima Elbagir, Cnn International Correspondent:] It's been more than a year in the making. In an unprecedented move, the United Nations Security Council, acting on a Dutch-led initiative, is sanctioning six individuals, four Libyans and two Eritreans for they say includes profiting from human trafficking, sex slavery, slavery, murder, all to do with the trade in people, the movement of people through Libya up from Africa into Europe. Some of these names are unfamiliar to even those of us who follow Libya closely, but what they do isn't. And specifically, one man is a commander, Abd Al Rahman Al-Milad, in the European Union funded and European Union trade coast guard. He is a commander in the Libyan coast guard in Zawiyah, body that has been really part of the bigger picture in terms of stopping the migrant flow to the shores of Europe. Well, for now, the message that has been sent is that even that is not enough to guarantee impunity. The Dutch foreign minister was gracious enough to credit CNN and saying that our reporting created the momentum that allowed these sanctions to pass.
[Stef Blok, Netherlands Foreign Minister:] I'm very glad the Netherlands was able to initiate this important initiative to effectively punish human traffickers active in Libya. It was CNN that draw the attention to this terrible well, you may actually call it a slave trade that has been going on in Libya for far too long. And as the Netherlands is currently member of the U.N. Security Council, we proposed to them to impose sanction on six of the worse perpetrators and that will mean that this crime won't be left unpunished.
[Elbagir:] So, what now, the sanctions, of course, go immediately into effect? And while there are many critics who would say that because this has taken some time with regard to diplomatic rambling over these sanctions in the U.N. Security Council, has there been enough time to allow those on list to hide away some of those assets but those we're speaking to say that it's not possible to hide bricks and mortars. And yet, unbelievably, trading in people buys you bricks and mortars. Some of it, we understand in the European Union, but this isn't just about sanctioning about those individuals. This is about sending a bigger message to those behind these individuals. These are the kingpins. But most investigators working on this tell us that they know that this is a crime not just of opportunity but also a crime of so attractive that there are so many waiting and willing to fill the shoes of those running these networks. This sends a message to them. The time to make money off the misery of those desperate to come to Europe and fulfill their dreams is running out. Nima Elbagir, CNN London.
[Howell:] The time is running out. Nina, thank you with that reporting. The dangerous journey that migrants form the horn of Africa are escaping war and poverty through searching for better lives in oil-rich Saudi Arabia. And to get there, they must pass through war torn Yemen, a land of dust and desolation. CNN obtained exclusive footage of this very dangerous journey. Our senior international correspondent, Ben Wedeman, has this report.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn International Correspondent:] At dusk, they're still on the move, small groups of young men from Somalia and Ethiopia.
[Unidentified Male:] Where are you going now? I'm going to Saudi. Why? I'm going to work. Which kind of work? Any work.
[Wedeman:] This exclusive video shot by freelance cameraman, Gabriel Hyen, for CNN documents the plight of desperate people fleeing war, unrest, and poverty in their native lands to a country already wrapped by violence. According to the International Organization for Migration, every month as many as 7,000 people from the horn of Africa make these careless crossings over the Red Sea to Yemen. Nearly 50 died this week when their boat capsized. More than a dozen are still missing. Despite the dangers of the crossing and their initial destination, the country at war since early 2015, and now threatened by famine and disease, they continue to come. For more money says African-Ethiopian. We don't have any money. We'll take any job. We don't have money for food and water. Our country has nothing. Says 14-year-old, Evan, I came to Yemen looking for work. There's war and sloth. The final destination of many, or so they hope, is oil-rich Saudi Arabia to the north, the land of milk and honey. For those who can't make it that far, stranded in Yemen, the land of dust and [inaudible]. The camp where I live has no electricity, nothing, no water, no food, no government says Umpha Tum. We suffer. I come here to beg and then I go back and sleep in a cardboard box. To get here, they paid hundreds of dollars, for them, an astronomical sum. They're brought to Yemen by men like these, fishermen in times like these. Now, [inaudible]. Trafficking, he says, actually a test humans, human trafficking. He asked that we not show his face. They show how they load people onto their boat. It's designed to hold perhaps 30. But sometimes, vessels like these are crowded with as many as 50. The logic of this business is simple, in a day to make months' wages, he says. Once on shore, the migrants walk for days and days. As night falls, some stopped to pray. The road ahead is long. Ben Wedeman, CNN Beirut.
[Howell:] Ben Wedeman tracking that very dangerous journey. We'll talk more news right after the break.

[Paul:] It is still an absolute mess in the Carolinas. And that green band that you see there on the radar is only going to make it worse here in the next few hours. So glad to have you with us. I am Christi Paul. Victor Blackwell is there in Myrtle Beach right now. You have got some new information for us?
[Blackwell:] I do. I do. We have been talking about rain that has come down on North Carolina and will be coming down over the next several days. Well, we've just learned that North Carolina has broken its all-time record for rainfall during a tropical system. It was held back in 1999 during hurricane Floyd at 24.06 inches. Well now hurricane and tropical storm Florence have broken that record and they may surpass it even more because this storm is not moving, Christi. It is moving at virtually two miles per hour. When I hear two miles per hour, I think about that old Fresh Prince song, "Two Miles an Hour, So Everybody Sees You." We see hurricane and tropical storm Florence. It is staying here for quite a while and it cannot move out quickly enough.
[Paul:] All right, Victor, thank you so much. We're going to be going to Victor again in just a couple of minutes here. But Florence, remember, slammed ashore in North Carolina as a category one hurricane just a little more than 26 hours ago. It has since been downgraded, as you heard him say, tropical storm. But this is still dangerous. I want you to look at the fury that it brought with it as it hit.
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn National Correspondent:] The wind is whipping stronger than it has in the last 24 hours.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] The eye did make landfall at Wrightsville Beach about six miles from where I am with a wind speed of about 90 miles per hour.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] This isn't just water that's coming this way. The ocean and the wind are forcing sand up into the air.
[Unidentified Male:] If you look all the way down among all those people, you might be able to make it out. That is the ocean. It is not supposed to be there right now.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] Power is out all over the city. That tree over there to my left, to your right, looks like it is about to be uprooted. And we're getting a lot of strong gusts of wind.
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] We are in River Bend, experiencing an extraordinary amount of flooding here. And a lot of people have said that they weren't expecting it to flood like this here.
[Paul:] I want to give you another update on something we have been going back and forth here about some different information that was coming in. At one point we had said there were seven deaths we had been told attributed to the storm. It is five deaths attributed to this storm now. Two of those deaths apparently are being categorized as a murder-suicide. So again, there had been seven deaths, but five of them are attributed to this storm in terms of a 77-year-old man who was found dead at his home. He had gone out to check on his hunting dogs. The wind knocked him down. There was a mother and infant who died when a tree fell on their home. And another man in the north county who was electrocuted when he was attempting to connect extension cords outside his house. So Victor, we just wanted to make clear some of the new information we had coming in about the death numbers that have been fluctuating a bit.
[Blackwell:] Yes, those details coming from law enforcement. They have corrected the numbers they released to us. Now again, five deaths attributed to the storm. Let's go now to David Cotton. He's the county manager there in Onslow County in North Carolina. David, good morning to you. First, I understand that there have been rescues across Onslow County. Are there still people waiting to be rescued from their homes? And give us an idea of the conditions there.
[David Cotton, Country Manager, Onslow County, North Carolina:] Sure. Good morning. There are approximately 40 folks in the queue waiting to be rescued. For the most part they are not in imminent danger, but flood waters are rising quickly, and we are working with the Coast Guard and Marine Corps to deploy helicopters and swift water teams. We have had a swift water team that just arrived from Indiana that has already gone into service, and we are actively rescuing those folks as we speak.
[Blackwell:] These 40 people or so, I know that's an estimate, are they in one specific locale or are they spread across Onslow County?
[Cotton:] Sure. For the most part we have isolated there, 10 people needing rescue from one location. And beyond that it is the individual homes with two people or one person. The overall conditions are really deteriorating as we speak. As you mentioned, the storm is not moving, so we are moving beyond flooding like we have never seen. Places that are not identified as being in flood plain are being flooded. Homes that would have never been expected to have ever seen any water damage are up into the first floor, over the roof of vehicles. So it's going to be a long process of cleanup. But right now we're still focused on the rescue.
[Blackwell:] Those 10 that you said in one location, which city are they in, or are they in unincorporated Onslow?
[Cotton:] They are near Jacksonville. It's right on the unincorporated border between Jacksonville and just being in the county itself.
[Blackwell:] OK. Was there a mandatory or even a voluntary evacuation order for your county? And how many people do you believe decided to leave?
[Cotton:] There was. We started with a voluntary evacuation when we declared a state of emergency on Monday. Tuesday based on conditions and when we anticipated the storm arriving, it was actually a category four on Tuesday and coming straight for the new river which is right in the center of our county. I then issued a mandatory evacuation. We did a mass transportation of those that did not have vehicles to get out in partnership with Onslow County school system to Raleigh. That was just over 1,100 individuals that caravanned to Raleigh. And beyond that, we were estimating those that heeded the warning in the neighborhood of 30 to 40,000, maybe more than that. But we're a county of 200,000.
[Blackwell:] All right, sir, thanks so much for spending a couple minutes with us. I know that you have a lot of work to do and there are still those people who are waiting to be rescued. The best to you and the people there in Onslow County. You said you have rescue teams from Indiana coming in, and hopefully they'll be able to assist shortly. Again, thank you for your time. I'll let you get back to work. Christi, again, this story has not moved on, the storm has not moved on solely to South Carolina. As we heard from the county manager there. There's still a lot of work to do in North Carolina. Back to you.
[Paul:] Yes, and a lot of people who still need to be rescued. Victor Blackwell, Victor, thank you so very much. Another former Trump aide is flipping. This time we're talking about Paul Manafort, the same person President Trump called a brave man last month for refusing to break. What does this mean? We're going to discuss it.

[Rep. Bob Goodlatte, , Chairman, House Judiciary Committee:] The clerk will call the roll
[Goodlatte:] The clerk of the Judiciary Committee will call the roll of members who have not yet been recorded.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Issa.
[Rep. Darrell Issa, , California:] Yes.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Issa votes yes. Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Buck.
[Rep. Ken Buck, , Colorado:] Aye.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Ms. Roby. Mr. Rothfus.
[Rep. Keith Rothfus, , Pennsylvania:] Aye.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Rothfus votes aye. Miss Bass. Mr. Jeffries.
[Goodlatte:] I've been asked by the minority and the majority counsel to advise members their votes will only be counted once if they're on both committees. And the clerk of the Oversight and Government Reform
[Issa:] Mr. Chairman, point of order. On what basis would that rule be, since we each committee is voting separately on that?
[Goodlatte:] Procedurally, we have agreed to one unified vote. The clerk of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee will call the roll of those members who have not voted.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Amash. Ms. Foxx. Mr. Hurd. Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Clay. Mr. Gomez.
[Unidentified Congressman:] Yes, sir, he just responded to her. Mr. Chairman?
[Goodlatte:] The gentleman from Missouri.
[Unidentified Congressman:] No.
[Goodlatte:] The gentleman from Missouri votes no.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Clay votes no.
[Goodlatte:] The clerk will report. The clerk will suspend. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
[Hurd:] Yes.
[Goodlatte:] Mr. Hurd, of Texas, votes aye.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Hurd votes aye.
[Goodlatte:] The gentlewoman from North Carolina.
[Foxx:] Yes.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mrs. Foxx votes yes.
[Goodlatte:] The clerk will report.
[Unidentified Clerk:] Mr. Chairman, 38 members voted aye, 31 members voted no.
[Goodlatte:] And the motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the chair is upheld. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Cummings, for his questions.
[Rep. Elijah Cummings, , Maryland:] Mr. Strzok, first of all, let me say this. To the members of the FBI who may be watching this, I want them to be clear that we have the utmost respect for the organization. And you and I thank them for doing what they do every day. And protecting rights and protecting our people and protecting our way of life. And as I listen to you in answering Chairman Gowdy's questions, particularly at the end, you gave a very impassioned statement. But can you understand why there are members that question whether the thoughts that you may have that you put in an e-mail, a text, might interfere with the investigation? I mean, can you understand at least the questioning of that?
[Peter Strzok, Fbi Agent:] Yes, sir, I do.
[Cummings:] And I want to and I know you are familiar with oaths, because I'm sure you've taken them 50 million times. But I remind you that you're under oath. And I'm just going to ask you this. How do you square that? In other words, I understand the piece about there are so many layers that the FBI wouldn't even allow to happen, even if they you wanted to. Wanted them to. But how do you take that, compartmentalize I guess that's the best word I can think of and then when you walk into the room be neutral or independent or live up to your oath. Do you understand my question?
[Strzok:] I do, sir.
[Cummings:] All right. Can you answer that? Because I think that would be very helpful to me. And hopefully, your answering that question will be helpful to my colleagues. In fairness to all of us. Go ahead.
[Strzok:] Yes, sir. Thank you. And I certainly do, sir, appreciate and understand that question and that concern and why people would look at those texts and want to know why and how they should believe that personal beliefs played any role in my official acts. What I can tell you, sir, is that, first, I, like every FBI agent, like every person in this room, like everybody watching, has a political opinion. And each and every one of those people in the FBI, whatever their political beliefs, walks in the door and they leave those behind. The FBI has a culture. It is in our culture, it is in our training, it is in our policy, and everything we do is dedicated to the pursuit of the facts where they lay and applying the law to those facts. There's no room for personal belief. It is something that is an anathema to us. It is something that doesn't occur. And were it to occur, it would be noted and stopped. And in addition to that culture, we have policies, we have procedures, we have laws. We have guidelines that are designed to provide outside checks and balances, to provide for outside review, to provide for any number of ways that the individual actions of any agent, any analyst, any support personnel, are not acting in any way other than official policies and procedures. So when I tell you, again, as I did, personally, what I believe and what I did, I understand why people may or may not have doubts or believe that. But then I would turn to and say look at the entirety of the rest of the organization, of the men and women who make it up, of all the things that are in place to ensure that our job in the FBI is to competently and independently pursue the facts, wherever they are. And I cannot stress to you enough, that is exactly what is done day in, day out, and that is exactly what has guided my behavior for over 26 years.
[Cummings:] All right. Thank you very much. Let me ask you this. In previous testimony to Congress, President Trump's FBI director, Christopher Wray, explained the critical importance of protecting confidential human sources. And this is what he said, Agent Strzok. And I quote, "The day we can't protect human sources is a day the American people start becoming less safe," end of quote. Do you agree with that?
[Strzok:] I do.
[Cummings:] The problem is, we now have the transcript of your 11-hour closed-door interview with our committees. And it shows that Republican members asked you repeatedly about confidential human sources involved in the Russia investigation. Is that correct?
[Strzok:] My recollection is yes, sir.
[Cummings:] Do you remember how many questions they asked you about that?
[Strzok:] I do not, sir.
[Cummings:] Let me read one of their questions from the transcript. One Republican member asked you this question, and I quote, "In the month of July, was there any information from confidential human sources given to you as it relates to the Russia investigation," end of quote. Do you recall being asked that question?
[Strzok:] I do.
[Cummings:] That question was specifically about information from confidential human sources in the Russia investigation. Obviously, you cannot answer the question. And that is because Department of Justice has a long-standing policy against revealing information from confidential human sources during an ongoing criminal investigation. Is that right?
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Goodlatte:] Will the gentleman yield?
[Cummings:] I will yield at the end. I want to finish. And that is what Director Wray was talking about when he testified that revealing those sources or their information will make America less safe, is that right?
[Strzok:] I don't know why Director Wray said that, but I agree with the statement.
[Cummings:] In your experience, how dangerous could it be to reveal the identity of a confidential human source?
[Strzok:] Extraordinarily dangerous.
[Rep. Mark Meadows, , North Carolina:] Will the gentleman yield to his friend?
[Strzok:] Of course.
[Meadows:] I thank the gentleman. I want to be clear. Since the gentleman from Maryland, who is my friend, is going along a line of argument that would suggest a question asked by me. I want to make it perfectly clear, I asked if you talked with confidential human sources. I never asked for a name, nor would I ever ask for a name of a confidential human source. I appreciate it. I yield back.
[Cummings:] I don't think I said that. But anyway, thank you, gentleman. Disclosing the identity of a confidential human source could create a risk to that person or our national security, is that correct?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Cummings:] What effect could revealing a confidential human source have on the FBI's ability to recruit or retain human sources in the future?
[Strzok:] I think it could and is having an extraordinary impact, in that people who come to the FBI with information are putting themselves at risk. Anywhere risk in their job, risk of their life, and they trust and put their literally sometimes lives in the hands of the FBI. So when they observe if their identity is put at risk, clearly, that's a personal risk to that individual source. But every other potential source out there, every other person in Washington, D.C., or Beijing or Moscow, wondering about approaching the FBI to give them information is going to look to how well or how poorly the FBI protects their information and protects their identity as they weigh whether or not to take that extraordinary risk to work with the FBI and work with the United States of America.
[Cummiongs:] Mr. Strzok, the inspector general report criticized your political text messages and raised concern that your political views may have impacted your decision in the summer and fall of 2016 to prioritize the TrumpRussia investigation over the reopening of the Clinton e-mail investigation. I understand from your transcribed interview with the committee that you dispute that finding.
[Strzok:] I do.
[Cummings:] You told us during your interview that you immediately assigned agents to follow up on the Weiner laptop. And we know that you were a key player in the FBI's actions, such as sending a letter about the reopening of the Clinton investigation shortly before the election that clearly hurt Secretary Clinton's candidacy and benefited Candidate Trump. But more importantly, you described during your interview that you believed Russia's attempts to interfere with our election pose a grave threat to our national security. You stated, and I quote, "I cannot think of a more grave allegation of the counterintelligence division, or let alone the nation, than that a hostile foreign power was seeking to clandestinely influence our presidential election." Do you remember saying that?
[Strzok:] I do.
[Cumming:] Why is the interference by a hostile foreign power in our presidential election such a monumental threat to our nation?
[Strzok:] Well, I think when you look at the when you look at the threat that represents, when you look at the threats facing the United States and what it means to protect the United States, the prospect of voting is the key core of who we are as a democracy. And there's no more important vote that we exercise than the vote for the president of the United States. So when I look at the span of threats that I was responsible for that the counterintelligence division was responsible for and the FBI, the prospect of a hostile foreign power interfering and influencing the election for the president of the United States of America, I can think of few more severe or consequential threats facing our nation than that one.
[Cummings:] Just two more questions. What could be the potential impact of a hostile foreign power successfully interfering with our presidential election?
[Strzok:] Well, I think it's multifold. I think there's certainly from a broad perspective, it draws into question the effectiveness and the credibility of our electoral system. It places into question the motivations and the actions of those people either who are elected or who were brought in as staff to staff that campaign and eventually administration. I think it draws into question whether or not the actions of the elected party and group of governing folks are acting ultimately in the interest of the United States or whether or not there's the potential that those interests have been compromised in favor of that foreign power.
[Cummings:] And finally, how is that threat made worse if the presidential campaign colluded or worked with hostile foreign power?
[Strzok:] I think that would be the worst realization of that potential threat. I think you would indicate the FBI some of that is a hypothetical. I think the FBI would approach that from the perspective that if there were people within the campaign who were colluding or working with the government of Russia, that there's very little that would be of more importance to the FBI or actually the expectation of the American people that we get to the bottom of it. The American people, I think, expect that. Frankly, any presidential candidate who might have that going on in their campaign I think would want to know about that and have the FBI get to the bottom of it. But any actual inclusion and cooperation would be amongst the gravest threats to our democracy.
[Cummings:] Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[Goodlatte:] The chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes himself. Mr. Strzok, I want to follow up on a couple of the questions Chairman Gowdy asked. Your texts and e-mails make it appear you had come to a conclusion on the Clinton case long before you had interviewed many witnesses, including Clinton herself. You also appear to have been opining for the impeachment of President Trump at the very beginnings of the Russia case. Does the FBI normally make such decisions on whether to recommend prosecution or exoneration so far ahead of all the facts coming to light?
[Strzok:] Typically, sir, DOJ makes prosecution decisions in cases.
[Goodlatte:] Do they normally make such decisions whether to recommend prosecution far ahead of the facts coming to light?
[Strzok:] Sir, I don't think any in my experience, the final decision is never made until the conclusion of the case. I think it is fair to say that in the conduct of investigations, particularly very large investigations with a lot of folks working on it, my experience is there comes a time if you're worth your salt in the conduct of that investigation, an agent, the attorneys assigned to that, will have a very good idea well before the case is concluded that there may or may not be demonstrable crimes. That there may
[Goodlatte:] Let me ask you this, then. How many other cases on which you have worked do you recall opining on the disposition of the case months ahead of interviewing multiple witnesses?
[Strzok:] I remember quite a few cases where I or agents would discuss the prospects of the outcome of the case with prosecutors as the case was going on, from the beginning of the case, talking about what crimes may or may not be relevant as the case proceeded to identify which elements may or may not be strong or demonstrable, as well as towards the end when we were trying to shore up evidence that may or may not be there. But
[Goodlatte:] And let me ask you this about that. In regard to those cases, was it normal behavior on your part to chat with colleagues in the manner you did on the Russia case about how much you despise the very person you're investigating, or complimenting the person you're investigating in the Clinton case? Is that typical?
[Strzok:] Sir, I would draw a distinction between commenting on case- related matters versus discussion of personal belief. I think those are very different matters than saying this person as a witness was not credible. Or this person as a target or subject did or didn't do something. That is a very different matter
[Goodlatte:] So you could completely separate out what your personal opinion is from what you discussed with others in investigations?
[Strzok:] I am telling you, sir, I separated out my personal belief from
[Goodlatte:] But you did not do that with regard to Attorney Page, who was also involved in these investigations, correct?
[Strzok:] Sir, I disagree with that. I separated out my personal beliefs from any I separated out my personal believes from any action I took officially as an FBI agent every day.
[Goodlatte:] Do you recognize how your vitriol against President Trump makes it appear you could never approach the case in a fair-minded manner?
[Strzok:] Sir, of course, I appreciate that. I understand
[Goodlatte:] Let's discuss a text that hits home for me. On August 26, 2016, you texted Ms. Page, quote, "Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could smell the Trump support." And smell is in capital letters, all capital letters. What does "Trump support" smell like, Mr. Strzok?
[Strzok:] Sir, that's an expression of speech. I clearly wasn't smelling one thing or the other. What I was commenting on is living in northern Virginia
[Goodlatte:] What does
[Strzok:] What I meant by that, living in northern Virginia, having traveled 100, 150 miles within the same state, I was struck by the extraordinary difference in the expression of political opinion and belief amongst the community there from where I live.
[Goodlatte:] You described that as smell in capital letters.
[Strzok:] Sir, that was a choice, a quick choice of words
[Goodlatte:] All right. So earlier OK. So earlier, you had texted Ms. Page that another part of Virginia, Loudoun County, which is, I think, in northern Virginia, is quote, "still ignorant hillbillies," unquote. Is that what you meant?
[Strzok:] No, sir, not at all.
[Goodlatte:] You do consider Trump supporters to be ignorant hillbillies?
[Strzok:] Not at all, sir.
[Goodlatte:] What did you mean by that?
[Strzok:] Sir, the first thing I'd tell you is that, as a Fairfax County resident, there's a healthy sort of competition between Fairfax and Loudoun. Second thing I would tell you is that in no way did I or do I believe any resident of Loudoun County or southern Virginia or anywhere else in the nation is are any of those things. That was a flippant
[Goodlatte:] So do you understand the implications of this text when my constituents in Virginia read it?
[Strzok:] I do, sir. I would ask you to tell them that that was a in some cases, certainly unfortunate use of words, that in no way do I believe that those things are what
[Goodlatte:] Now you and Ms. Page used personal phones and accounts to communicate. Have you turned over those communications to the inspector general?
[Strzok:] No sir.
[Goodlatte:] If not, why not?
[Strzok:] Sir, they asked and, working with my attorney, the inspector general and I arranged an agreement where I would go through my personal accounts and identify any material that was relevant to FBI business and turn it over. Those reviewed, there was none. My understanding is the inspector general was satisfied with that action.
[Goodlatte:] We know from text that you and Ms. Page would transition to I-message and G-mail. Who determined that messages were only personal in nature and not business related, especially since you've just testified at length that a number of communications you have made on government communication devices were personal in nature?
[Strzok:] Sir, the broad, broad context of what I used personal e-mail and phones for was personal communication. For those things that were work related, almost universally, that material was translated into FBI systems. Certainly, if there was anything that was of record or would constitute needing to be there, it was provided, but I made that decision.
[Goodlatte:] So, let me ask you this. When did Attorney General Lynch know that charges would not be brought against former Secretary of State Clinton?
[Strzok:] I can't answer that question, sir. That's something you'd have to ask her.
[Goodlatte:] Do you know whether it was prior to Lynch's announcement that she would defer to career prosecutors and Director Comey on whether to prosecute
[Strzok:] Sir, I don't know.
[Goodlatte:] Clinton? Why would Lisa Page text that Lynch's decision was a, quote, "Real profile in courage since she knows no charges will be brought," end quote.
[Strzok:] Sir, that's a question you'll have to ask her.
[Goodlatte:] So how did you take that statement when she texted it to you?
[Strzok:] The way I took that, sir, is that we had, for many months, working with a team, a team of career attorneys in the Department of Justice, a team of attorneys from the eastern district of Virginia, a team of agents from FBI, have been working intensively on this case. We had gone through mountains of evidence, tons of interviews. And we were looking at the various statutes that might apply to any sort of criminal conduct. And I think we were, as we surveyed that, as the attorneys looked at it, saw a number of very fatal areas where elements of the crime were lacking, our ability to demonstrate facts to prove those elements of a crime. So I think we had begun to arrive at a sense that it was going to be difficult, if not impossible, to identify any statute where we could satisfy those elements of the crime. My assumption certainly is that from the Department of Justice's perspective those attorneys were briefing their supervisors who were briefing their supervisor, who were ultimately briefing the deputy attorney general and the attorney general, and that she would have that same sense that it was a difficult, if not impossible, proposition to conclude that there were viable charges to be brought against Secretary Clinton.
[Goodlatte:] Mr. Strzok, did you ever believe these texts would become public?
[Strzok:] I did not.
[Goodlatte:] Given that, you felt free to express your true feelings, didn't you?
[Strzok:] I suppose, yes. That's a difficult question to answer.
[Goodlatte:] Mr. Strzok, former Director Comey played judge, jury and exonerator in the Hillary Clinton investigation. In your experience at the FBI, have you ever seen the FBI director make the decision on whether to prosecute for the Department of Justice?
[Strzok:] Mr. Chairman, I would not agree with that characterization of Director Comey. And in answer to your question I have not seen it before.
[Goodlatte:] All right. Was that appropriate, what he did? To hold a news conference and publicly announce the decision that was supposed to have been made by the Department of Justice?
[Strzok:] Sir, that was his decision. I
[Goodlatte:] Was it appropriate, in your opinion?
[Strzok:] Sir, I don't think it's for me to say whether or not
[Goodlatte:] I think it is for you to say. I asked you the question. What's your opinion?
[Strzok:] Sir, I understand the variety of factors that went in well, I understand some of the factors that went into Director Comey's decision to make the announcement. I can tell you that that decision was not made lightly at all. I can tell you my experience in that decision
[Goodlatte:] But you're not aware of any precedent for that?
[Strzok:] I am not.
[Goodlatte:] Mr. Strzok, in a footnote, 197, of the inspector general's report, it's noted that, quote, "Supervision of the Russian investigation was briefly transitioned from Strzok to another Counterintelligence Division DAD in early 2017." Why were you transitioned from the Russia investigation in early 2017?
[Strzok:] Sir, let me see if I can answer that question without getting into operational detail. The investigation was brought. What Russia was doing against our country encompassed a variety of things. There were actions in the cyber arena, there were actions by their agents and intelligence service, there were actions by subjects of investigation that are currently ongoing. The prospect of how the FBI would investigate that was a multi-tiered effort. So some of those efforts that traditionally fell into line that with other DAD and their stand and scope of responsibility were moved to their supervision.
[Goodlatte:] So, the footnote goes on to state that, quote, "However, A.D. Priestap told us that FBI leadership decided to keep Strzok involved in the Russia investigation and he was, therefore, reassigned back to it." Do you know who in, quote, "FBI leadership," end quote, decided to keep you involved in the Russian investigation?
[Strzok:] I do not.
[Goodlatte:] Could it have been Deputy Director McCabe?
[Strzok:] Sir, possibly. I do not know.
[Goodlatte:] And when were you assigned back to the Russia investigation and when you were reassigned back to the Russia investigation, were you still in a supervisory role?
[Strzok:] Sir, I would answer that question again. I don't I don't entirely my recollection does not comport with the statement from A.D. Priestap. There were elements of the investigation that stayed under subordinate leaders, section chiefs and unit chiefs, on down the line. There were elements of it that were transferred to a different DAD and remained with that DAD. So my recollection is a bit different from A.D. Priestap's.
[Goodlatte:] Mr. Strzok, did you ever consider recusing yourself since you had such personal disdain for the person you were investigating?
[Strzok:] I did not.
[Goodlatte:] Yet, others did require that ultimately.
[Strzok:] Sir, I would not characterize those decisions as subject to the same set of considerations.
[Goodlatte:] You don't think that it was the bias expressed in your text messages that caused Mr. Mueller to remove you from the investigation?
[Strzok:] I do not think that the there were that bias was expressed in those text messages. I cannot speak to why Director Mueller chose to remove me from the investigation, but I can tell you that those text messages are not indicative of bias.
[Goodlatte:] Mr. Mueller never told you why you were being removed?
[Strzok:] My recollection of the discussion was he mentioned the existence of the text messages, and that based on that, he needed to ask me to return to the
[Fbi. Goodlatte:] Lots of people have text messages, Mr. Strzok.
[Strzok:] Yes, sir. And, again, my impression, not stated by him, but my impression was that based on the appearance of those messages and, in part, of a desire by him to avoid even the appearance of any potential bias, that he asked me to return. But that's a question for him.

[Unidentified Female:] Amazing work that they're doing.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Everyday people coming together for one another. That's who we are as well.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] God, that's so wonderful. All right. Thank you. Thanks for showing us the Biden stuff. Great stuff. And obviously we'll be replaying it throughout the day if you missed it. Time for "CNN NEWSROOM" with John Berman.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. John Berman here. Things the president wants this morning? A conversation with Robert Mueller, a shutdown and a parade, not necessarily in that order. Things that key White House advisers and senior Republicans don't seem to want this morning? A conversation with Robert Mueller, a shutdown and a parade, not necessarily in that order. Yes, on a morning Republicans and Democrats say they are very close to what would be a major spending deal to keep the government running and fund the military for two years, an eternity in Washington terms, the president is still talking about a government shutdown. On a morning when the president's lawyers and friends say that he should not sit down with investigators from the special counsel's office because he might get caught lying, the president is saying he can handle the truth. Also, the president wants a parade, a big one with tanks and troops because in a nutshell he likes parades and wants one. Much more on that coming up. But first, words we don't speak very often because it's a thing that doesn't happen very often. We're getting whispers this morning turning into shouts that we could be minutes away from a big, substantive bipartisan deal on Capitol Hill. So let's get right to the breaking details. Suzanne Malveaux on Capitol Hill with the very latest. Suzanne, what are you hearing?
[Suzanne Malveaux, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, John, I just spoke with Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat, saying do not let the president taunt you, do not fall into his trap. There is a possibility of immigration on the one hand and also this big budget deal that's in the works on the Senate side, a bipartisan deal that could avoid some of the short-term spending deals, if you will, the spits and stops in funding the government. Here is what they are looking at, the potential here. It would fund the government for six weeks up to March 23rd while they sort out some of these other things, things that Democrats and Republicans want. Significantly increasing defense as well as domestic spending for two years in the tune of $300 billion-plus, includes a disaster relief package for those areas ravaged by the hurricanes. Also raises the debt limit past the midterm election so it's not a political football and funds community health centers for another two years. Senator Durbin saying, look to his colleagues on the House side, House Democrats, who desperately wanted to tie this to an immigration bill, saying that that was really their leverage saying don't fall into that trap. That will come in addition after they can figure out how to fund the government. Now House Democrats just starting their own three-day retreat. They have moved it from the eastern shore of Maryland here to the U.S. capitol to grapple with these very serious issues, also to talk amongst themselves on whether or not they feel this is the kind of thing on the House side that they, too, can support, the Democrats on the Senate side are pushing as well John.
[Berman:] All right. Suzanne Malveaux on Capitol Hill. Some of the big numbers there, two years, two years of funding for the military and domestic programs and raising the debt ceiling past the midterm elections. Again, a very big deal. So what are the president and his chief of staff doing to help in these talks? Well, nothing. The opposite, in fact. Let's get to Abby Phillip at the White House with that Abby.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, John. It seems very much that the president and his chief of staff are kind of throwing a wrench into a burgeoning bipartisan agreement on the budget and on immigration. We heard from the president yesterday that after coming out of a government shutdown in which they thought the Democrats had been outmaneuvered, the president is now the one talking about a government shutdown. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] If we don't change it, let's have a shutdown. We'll do a shutdown and it's worth it for our country. I'd love to see a shutdown if we don't get this stuff taken care of.
[Phillip:] Well, that is exactly the opposite of what Republicans want to do with the budget deal right now. And it's also the opposite of what the White House is saying officially. Sarah Huckabee Sanders had to pretty much walk those comments back. The Republicans want a clean budget deal that does not tie immigration into it. President Trump is clearly not on the same page. And at the same time you have White House chief of staff John Kelly making some controversial comments yesterday about the Dreamers' issue. Listen to what he had to say about why more Dreamers didn't agree to sign up for the Obama-era program.
[John Kelly, White House Chief Of Staff:] The difference between 690 and 1.8 million would be the people that some would say were too afraid to sign up, others would say were too lazy to get off their asses but they didn't sign up.
[Phillip:] Now a lot of Republicans and Democrats found those comments to be unhelpful in negotiations that are already fairly difficult and also kind of strikes against something that we've been hearing from this White House for quite some time, that they believe that the Dreamers ought to be taken care of, that they as President Trump has said repeatedly should not worry, it sounds like John Kelly very much is on a different wave length when it comes to that. And he then doubled down on the comments later. We also heard yesterday that Steny Hoyer, a Democrat, in a private meeting with John Kelly actually confronted him over it. But Kelly is not backing down on that one John.
[Berman:] All right. Abby Phillip for us at the White House. Keep us posted what you hear from there. In the meantime, joining me, CNN political commentator and Spectrum News anchor Errol Louis, RealClearPolitics reporter Caitlin Huey- Burns, and from "The Fix" blog at "The Washington Post," Amber Phillips. Caitlin, I want to start with you. I know it's odd to be so surprised when people in Washington are doing their job, but the Senate seems to be on the verge of doing something which is almost, you know, unheard of, which is a bipartisan deal. Two years of funding. This is significant.
[Caitlin Huey-burns, National Political Reporter, Realclearpolitics:] It is an eternity in Washington, especially since we've been operating on this kind of month-to-month funding of the government. Yes, this is kind of the basic task of government, but it also comes when lawmakers are facing a really tough political reality which his that they're in a midterm election year. Nobody on either side wants to have to deal with these continuous fights over funding the government and all of the things that go along with it. So if they're able to get this deal done, I think it is significant and can allow them then to move on to things like immigration where they can kind of be focused more on that.
[Berman:] You know, Errol Louis, it's so interesting because as this is happening, again we could be minutes away from some kind an announcement. We're waiting on that. You know, the president and the chief of staff the president is still talking about a shutdown. The chief of staff saying things that are frankly offensive about Dreamers, calling them lazy and things, they should get off their asses. It strikes me that these discussions are going on behind closed doors. The White House, the president and the chief of staff, they are not in the room where it happens, as they like to say in "Hamilton."
[Errol Louis, Cnn Political Commentator:] Yes.
[Huey-burns:] Yes.
[Berman:] The grownups are doing things.
[Louis:] Yes, well, that's right. And it could be that they have figured out on both sides of the aisle in Congress how to get things done. And that includes not being distracted, not being swayed, not going to meetings at the White House where a preexisting deal was going to get blown up or some other kind of crazy comment is going to throw the news cycle off and stop you from getting the momentum and the consensus that you need to get some of these things done. And so yes, they're doing what makes sense for them. It's amazing how elections can help sort of sharpen one's focus. They've got the fall elections, just as Caitlin suggests. They've got two-year deals that appear to be coming out of Congress that we elect two years at a time. Imagine that. It seems to be lining up. And again the most important thing is not to go and have some kind of obscene, scornful, dismissive or irrelevant garbage coming out of the White House that throws the whole thing off. That is a big part of Trumpism. And it seems like they're learning how to get along without Trumpism.
[Berman:] You know, this was more like Kellyism in this case, Chief of Staff John Kelly, the general, Amber, who said he called Dreamers who hadn't signed up for DACA, a distinction there, he said that they, you know, didn't get off their asses and they were lazy there. You know, we are always asked this question, is this part of some negotiating tactic? Is the White House putting out a marker or is this just John Kelly telling us what he really thinks?
[Amber Phillips, Political Reporter, Washington Post:] I I do not know. I'm very perplexed why the White House chief of staff would say that on the eve of a very delicate spending negotiations knowing full well there are a number of Democrats, especially in the House, who are still really frustrated that this spending deal would not protect Dreamers. It was excuse me, what's remarkable to me, John, is that for the second time in two months we have top White House officials essentially denigrating or insulting or offending large groups of immigrants. And of course, the first White House official I'm referring to is the president himself, using profanity to talk about immigrants from Haiti and African nations and elsewhere. You know, my read on this, this is almost like they either want their way or the highway or don't want a deal at all, and are kind of torpedoing it with these very public comments.
[Berman:] It is interesting to see and it's interesting to see how House Democrats will react to it. Right now everyone is just saying, OK, they said that, let's keep on dealing. Amber, while I have you, let me ask you about this other news that was reported by CNN overnight. Sara Murray saying that despite what the president's lawyers and his friends all say which is don't go talk to the special counsel because we think you're going to get caught lying. Sara Murray's reporting is the president is going around saying, you know what, I can handle this, I can work this system, I got this. What do you make of it?
[Phillips:] I think this is the president either trying to bolster his public image and then possibly he could blame it on his lawyers if he decides not to talk. I think the president is in a really tough situation. It's kind of lose-lose, whether he sits down with the special prosecutor. On one hand, if he listens to his lawyers, he risks a massive legal battle. If Mueller wants to try to take him to court to get him to talk to him. He risks bolstering public opinion that he's not working with the Mueller investigation, that he has something to hide. A recent "Washington Post"-ABC poll said 50 percent of Americans don't think he's working with the investigation, 49 percent think he obstructed justice with regard to this investigation. But the bigger danger for Trump could be sitting down and actually talking. And that is, as everyone has talked about, his inconsistency with the truth. Mueller has I'm sorry, Mueller has pieced together, you know, like events, minute-by-minute, hour-by- hour. And Trump is here and he says thousands of misleading and false comments for the past year.
[Berman:] Yes, my read on it is it seems that the president may have just been watching TV during executive time the last day and he got sick of hearing that his friends and lawyers honestly, you know, didn't think that he could do this without getting caught lying.
[Phillips:] Right.
[Berman:] And wanted to say, no, look, you know you know, I can handle this. I can handle this. Errol, do you like parades?
[Louis:] Yes, I do. I like to watch them on television. I don't like being caught in traffic. We have more than 365 parades a year here in New York City. And if you tried to go to every one you would have a full-time job. But I know where you're going with this. And
[Berman:] The president wants a big military parade in Washington, D.C. because he liked the parade in France. And even before that, he wanted a big military parade for the inauguration. The guy likes parades.
[Louis:] He likes parades. If he can find private sponsors, maybe like sort of a military contractor's air show, those are very common around the world, let them pay for it. To have the taxpayers pay for a parade that nobody asked for except for the president, seems like a dubious use of money at a time when we've got to make every penny count.
[Berman:] You know, it is interesting, Caitlin, because if you look at the history here, again, the president, this is something he wanted for the inauguration. People said nah, this is not the kind of thing we usually do in the inauguration. And he went to France, stood next to his new friend, Emmanuel Macron.
[Huey-burns:] Yes.
[Berman:] Watched the Bastille Day Parade and liked it. He said we should do this in the United States. Apparently he keeps on asking the military leaders for this and whether they agree with him or they're just sick of fighting it, now they are studying this, and this might happen. The president said it's a celebration of the United States and the military role around the world. There was a parade in 1991 after the Gulf War. But it's not a type of thing that we usually see in the United States.
[Huey-burns:] Right. Exactly. And it's one thing to celebrate the military. It's another thing to have this come at a time when you know, we're still involved in a lot of serious things going on across the world. North Korea being kind of chief among them at this point. To your point about the spending, I mean, the president just asked for an increase in spending on the military side in this budget that Congress is trying to work out. That is not I don't think a lot of people would want to spend that money on the parade. But I think this also kind of will come down to how you feel about this president. I think a lot of his supporters would look at this and say, yes, why not, why aren't we celebrating the military. This is something that we all should be celebrating. And then you'll have other people kind of saying that, look, this is a show of military state, this is going into difficult territory here and, of course, the spending issue.
[Berman:] It was interesting, Jim Jordan, Republican from Ohio, a fierce supporter of the president, was on with Chris Cuomo earlier. You know, he was saying it's up to the president. But he wasn't jumping up and down and buying cotton candy for the parade. So it will be interesting to see what they all think about it. Caitlin, Amber, Errol, thank you all very much for being with us. The White House says the president was joking when he said that Democrats committed treason during the State of the Union. That old treason punch line. The former Vice President Joe Biden not laughing.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] They say it was tongue-in-cheek. Democrats can't take a joke.
[Joe Biden, Former Vice President:] Let me tell you, he's a joke.
[Berman:] More from that fascinating interview later. First, though, investors bracing for what could be yet another wild ride on Wall Street. Cristina Alesci at the New York Stock Exchange Cristina.
[Cristina Alesci, Cnn Money Correspondent:] Investors a bit more calm today after that wild thousand-point swing. I was right here on the floor watching the market rally. Over 500 points just before the close, John. It was amazing. Now the question is clearly will be last? Investors saw a buying opportunity yesterday. It doesn't necessarily mean it will carry through today. We'll have to watch and see, and I'll be back with the Opening Bell in just a few.

[Bobby Chacon, Retired Fbi Special Agent:] ... go into if someone is not an adult by the state law and there is probably a framework of things that they have to follow. And they are probably working with the state attorney already on making sure that they go down that checklist and do everything by the book, you know, in dealing with a minor if he is in fact a minor. They are probably following all those protocols to make sure that nothing gets, you know, done that can hurt their case later on.
[Ashleigh Banfield, Host, Hln:] I`m glad I didn`t lose you because that`s critical information. Bobby Chacon, thank you for that. We are now at the top of the 6 o`clock hour and this time to reset exactly what we know, but if you are joining us at the top of this hour, that picture on your screen is critical. Because this news is breaking and it is breaking fast. For the last three hours we`ve been following this tragic school shooting in Parkland, Florida in Broward County. We don`t know how many dead. We know for sure two at this point, but 20 or so injured or casualties we were told. Nobody separated dead from injured when they gave the 20 person casualty so we`re waiting to find out what this toll is. But in that cruiser going down that freeway is the suspect in this shooting. Arrested without incident. A former student at the school, not a current student. There is the arrest picture on the left before this person was transported to the hospital and then transported again as you are seeing live on your screen presumably to a police station for booking. Arresting officers could only tell the surrounding press when questions were shouted how old is he. Approximately 18. That`s what we know at this time. Arrested without incident and uninjured potentially taken to the hospital just to check off all boxes and now being transported to a process that will likely last for years. If not decades, if not for life. The suspected shooter was in the maroon shirt being arrested being transported. We do not know if that shooter`s parents are with him have been notified. We don`t know what the situation is with those parents. We covered numerous school shootings where parents have also been victimized. So we are waiting to hear about any other potential crime scenes and any other potential crimes. But rest assured the investigation is vast. The crime scene right now at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School is massive. It`s being processed as the alleged shooter is being transported. And I think you can see what appears to be potentially even slightly a motorcade at this point. There several police vehicles I believe that are with that cruiser on the left hand side of your screen in Parkland, Florida. Right now all I can tell you is that there is a massive clearing operation underway at Marjory Stoneman Douglas. They are trying to figure out if there are any more kids or teachers cowering in closets, under desk in any kind of cranny they can find for safety because that`s what happened when the fire drill went and the emergency lockdown went into effect. I think I`m being told that we`re just about to learn the identity of the shooter. Nikolas Cruz. I`m being told the name is Nikolas Cruz. Can we just ask if I can get clarification as to whether or not Nikolas Cruz is indeed 18 years old or if we know that information yet? Do we know if we do not know. All we know is the arresting officers and what they describe as the age of the suspect. And they said somewhere around 18. That Nikolas Cruz is the person in that cruiser. Presumably, en route to, well, any number of things. A booking, a processing, a first appearance and then what will be many appearances after that. As far as who Nikolas Cruz is, we know very little. I am getting confirmation he is 18 years old. That is a huge, huge metric in this story. Because that`s an adult. An adult is treated in an extraordinary way. In Florida, it is a death penalty crime. So that changes everything the fact that Nikolas Cruz is 18. The suspect in this case that changes everything. If there are multiple fatalities, that changes everything. So we are going watch to see as Nikolas Cruz is unloaded from that cruiser when they get to their destination. I want to bring in Bradford Cohen. Bradford is a defense attorney. He has spoken with us many times on CNN and HLN. We lost Bradford, but the reason I was going to bring him in and I want to establish contact again if we can reestablish because Bradford`s nephew knew this alleged shooter. So if we can reestablish contact with Bradford, maybe we can get some insight as we watch the transportation. And I`m just getting some very distressing information that we are now hearing the number is at least 16 dead. At least 16 fatalities in this high school shooting in Broward County. Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, a school that has somewhere around 3100 students. At least 16 fatalities reported. How many are students and how many are teachers, I don`t know that yet. And sadly that`s not going to be the final story. Because we were given a hard, at least. Earlier we were told there were 20 casualties, but no delineation between dead and injured. Now I can tell you, 16 dead. And you can bet your bottom dollar with 16 casualties, dead, would raise this to a death penalty case in the State of Florida. The reason I say that is you are watching the beginning of a process whereby we don`t often have a shooter who is alive in these high school shootings. Oftentimes if you look at the Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris model, they take themselves out before they can be arrested and questioned and then maybe we can get insight as to why this happened. Maybe. But this is the cruiser where I`m assuming that Nikolas Cruz will be escorted out of at any moment. This is a live picture from our affiliate, WPLG. You can see one of the officers is gloving up. There are a lot of reasons for that. There are ballistic tests that will likely be performed, they don`t want to disturb any kind of forensics on this person. We may even see his hands gloved up at some point or bagged. That`s oftentimes if you want to find out if there`s gunshot residue. He is not wearing the burgundy clothes. It appears he might even be in a forensic suit, a protective suit of some kind or at least maybe that`s a hospital gown. I think it might be the hospital gown. That`s Nikolas Cruz, 18 years old being escorted into the process of now what will be an extraordinary case against him. Sixteen people dead and that qualifies as a mass murder. That qualifies as one of the most serious crimes you can perpetrate in this this country. And this also qualifies as the deadliest mass shooting in Broward County and you are watching it. Seconds ago, fresh from the hospital, Nikolas Cruz, 18 years old, being escorted by deputies into law enforcement agency where he will be processed. It`s pretty remarkable to see how quickly that happened. Always in a time span of about three hours, 16 people at least, at least lost their lives. And an arrest was made off campus of an 18-year-old young man without incident, without confrontation. A transportation to a local hospital was made of that suspect. And the transportation yet again to this scene you are seeing right now of Nikolas Cruz in Broward County getting the slow march as we call it. And there will be plenty of slow marches for that suspect in the foreseeable future and they will not be pleasant. This person will not be bonded out, not with 16 dead, not death penalty on the table. This person probably will never see the inside of his home again if convicted. That`s for sure. And that person that you are seeing in the hospital gown may see a may see a death penalty ward, death row as his home for two decades because that`s on average how long it takes if it ends up as a death penalty case for that process to play out. But that will be likely the last time he sees any kind of pavement that the free man walks. Just an unbelievable scene how quickly that was processed. In the meantime, I want to remind you that there are a number of people who are being treated in those area hospitals. At least two that we heard of earlier at Broward Health Medical Center, and Broward north, another facility that received some of the victims. Others just ran for their lives and others got out of that school and ran to wherever they could. Many of them jumping those fences going to a nearby Wal-Mart and a mall to escape the gunfire. We had two to six shots at least that they heard before SWAT, FBI, ATF, and local law enforcement descended upon their school. Dozens and dozens of vehicles and sirens and officers and kids being marched out single file being told to put your hands up, put your hands forward and drop your backpacks. You might not think that`s as traumatic as obviously what some saw inside that school, but make no mistake. These are kids who just lived through something that the rest of us will never live through, thank God. And they are just kids. And many of their parents haven`t even been reunited with them yet. So that end, parents were sent to a local Marriott Hotel as the staging area. Many of the kids were then rescued from the school if they hadn`t already run from the school. Many who were cowering in closets for upwards of 30 minutes and some reports say two hours. They were then transported to that Marriott and hopefully at this early stage of this tragedy, they are being reunited. But you know, I hate to say it. It`s hard to say it, but there will be 16, you know, the families of 26 will not, they will not be reunited. And they may not know that yet. You know, this happens just all too often and it never gets easier. It just doesn`t get easier. These are some of the images coming in to us obviously of traumatized kids and relieved parents to say the very least. To get a hand on the shoulder of your boy after all of this, it`s just I think every parent can imagine. Wow. This is just sort of this raw moment because we are still living the middle of this incident. It`s still happening. And I think a lot of these people, you know, they got their news and they are getting the hell out of there and they`re going to where they feel safe and they`re going to their normal. And God bless them because they get their normal back. Whatever their new normal is. They get at least a new normal. Just imagine these hugs. So I`m going to bring in Mike Galanos. Mike, you know, I thought that we sort had been through the worst of this. You know, with Newtown. And you just think about these parents who are waiting to find out if they are going to be among that 16 and you see these others who know they aren`t. And even God, I`ve been doing this for 30 years and it`s just like a wave to think of what they are going through. You know? The ones who are reunite and the ones who aren`t yet.
[Mike Galanos, Anchor, Hln:] You can feel the emotion just seeing that. A dad putting his hand on his son`s shoulder. A mom hugging a daughter. And I couldn`t even imagine the emotions and those are the emotions that you mentioned, Ashleigh, that become the new normal. They have their child back and they can hug and they can go to that place where they feel safe and they can begin the recovery. And there is one of those hugs. You hold them so tight and so close. But yet, there are going to be at least 16 families without where there will not be a unification. Instead it`s tragedy and grief and horror and a new normal that you never thought you had to live through. And you become a member of a fraternity you never want to become a member of. There is the dad and his son who is trying to cope with what he went through. You know, I`m sure it knocked us all back when we hear the number. At least 16 dead. Parkland, Florida where tragedy breaks out at a high school of over 3,000. At least 16 dead. We heard the number at least 14 injured have been taken to a hospital. And these numbers they could change and become more tragic as the day ends and we continue to follow this story. We do know the shooter is in custody. The suspect`s name is 18-year-old Nikolas Cruz. And we know the sheriff has been keeping us updated. Scott Israel as we see that suspect there, saying that the student was not a current student. Or the shooter was not a current student, but has attended the school in the past. And we heard official say that this person had been to the had been a student in the past there and this person taken into custody and I`m quoting, "after committing a horrific homicidal detestable act." Nikolas Cruz taken into custody without incident. There was no confrontation. As this was going down, I was following the local media and it sounds like law enforcement did a great job. They were getting witness accounts. They knew the name, they knew what he was wearing and they were on top of this within the hour. They had him in custody, 1.4 miles away. They knew where he lived. So they were definitely on top of this. And the school superintendent of Broward County is Robert Runcie. He made mention very earlier on that mental health issues need to be looked at in this situation. So those are all situations and all the different aspects of this case. One thing that is chilling as well, and Ashleigh, you had mentioned it, the number of school shootings this year, my producer Sammy did some research. The number now in the year 2018 and we are barely into February. It`s 18.
[Banfield:] It is, isn`t it?
[Galanos:] Eighteen.
[Banfield:] I don`t know. I thought it was 18. I wasn`t sure. I thought it wasn`t possible. I actually wow. Silly me. Six weeks. I didn`t think it was possible. But it`s 18. You know, Mike, I`m just going dovetail on that statistic because Bobby just handed me this statistic on this one now. Officially makes this the ninth deadliest mass shooting in United States history and we are just at least 16 at this time. If you need a reminder, number one is Las Vegas which we just came back from a few months ago. Number two is the Pulse nightclub. Number three is Virginia tech. Number four is Sandy Hook. Number five is Sutherland Springs. Number six is Collin, Texas back in 1991. Number seven is San Ysidro at a local McDonald`s back in `64. And number eight, if you can believe is Austin, Texas. The University of Texas tower that way back in 66. So now we are at number nine. By the way, we are only we`re only at a partial number we think at this point. Because we`ve been told at least 16 dead. And now you can see in the banner on your screen that an AR-15 style firearm was used in this shooting. And this has been the subject of so much angst for so many people. We are already hearing people on Capitol Hill weighing in on this. When will the deadly gun violence and when will we do something about gun control. Others are saying the only way to do something about a shooter is to have more guns. And still we find ourselves in this situation. The only country in the world that does. The only country in the world that finds itself with 18 school shootings. Eighteen school shootings and it`s only February 14th. I want to bring in Bradford Cohen. Bradford, I spoke about you earlier and I think we lost your signal. We`ve done interviews before. You are a defense attorney, you`ve appeared on our programs on HLN and CNN. And now it turns you it turns out you have a direct connection to this tragedy. Your nephew your nephew knew the shooter. What can you tell me?
[Bradford Cohen, Defense Attorney:] So without giving names of who the alleged shooter is, my nephew is now in private school. We actually removed him from the high school a couple of years ago. He attended junior high with the alleged shooter. And he told me that everybody pretty much knew this alleged shooter had issues not only with other students, but with the school and had some pretty serious outbursts with the school. And I think effectually he left the junior high school and I think that`s possibly when he went to this alternative school.
[Banfield:] So, Bradford, I can tell you right now...
[Cohen:] Yes.
[Banfield:] ... the police are releasing the name. It`s 18-year-old Nikolas Cruz.
[Cohen:] It is.
[Banfield:] They are showing pictures of the arrest. He was transported to a hospital and still in hospital gown, was then escorted by several very burley officers. Slowly and methodically in for processing at the law enforcement agency. So you are saying that your nephew attended school with Nikolas Cruz and that your nephew found Nikolas to be troubled back then?
[Cohen:] Yes. He described several incidences that were pretty troubling. I mean, where there were several outbursts, violent outbursts where, you know, it would cause anybody to have concern. And then my nephew said that he either left the school or never return or was thrown out of school. He`s not sure, quite sure what happened, but he knows he never came back. And I think that`s possibly when he went to a different school and then ultimately, an alternative high school before returning to Stoneman Douglas. So, you know, to me, and I said this often, I said it on your show in fact, you know, gun control to me is a Band-Aid over the mental health issue. And I think you are going to see some overtures of mental issues with this case. It`s a tragedy. It should never happen. None of these shootings should ever happen. And I think that gun control is one aspect of what the discussion should be. But it should also revolve around mental health issues. Which everybody kind of ignores when it comes to when it comes to gun control. They only want to talk about gun control. AR-15s and what we should do about it. But they`re not talking about these individuals that mentally show signs before anything happens. And this is just a guess from my end, but I think when you look at this young man`s Facebook, Instagram, Twitter accounts, my guess is that someone ignored the signs that were probably pretty evident that this individual is troubled.
[Banfield:] So, Bradford, I want to ask you a little bit more about these violent outbursts that your nephew says Nikolas Cruz displayed. And by the way, can you just give me a timeline. Is this a year or two?
[Cohen:] No.
[Banfield:] How long ago was this?
[Cohen:] This is so this would be in it would have been in eighth grade I think in junior high school when my when my nephew still attending Stoneman with this individual. And he can tell you, he told me in one of his classes, there was an outburst against the teacher and then the individual ended up kicking out a glass window and running off campus. And that`s just one incident. So we...
[Banfield:] And this was in, Bradford. Sorry. This was in eighth great that your nephew witnessed Nikolas Cruz kicking out a glass window after an outburst against a teacher?
[Cohen:] Correct.
[Banfield:] And how long ago it`s hard to tell when someone is 18 how long ago they were in middle school. I mean, some kids are, you know, two years older than they should be or younger. But how many years ago was this?
[Cohen:] So, my nephew is 17, he`s turning 18. So I would guess it was at least, I would say six years ago? I would imagine six or seven years ago. I mean, you know, I don`t know how old eighth graders are now, but I would imagine it would be at least six or seven years ago. He would explain I think...
[Banfield:] Were there any other incidents that you were there any other incidents he described?
[Cohen:] He described some incidences in P.E. class of outbursts and you know, just he told me that this individual had everybody kind of knew that he was and I don`t even like to use the term crazy. Obviously I`m using what a kid would say. But that he had serious issues. You know, in terms of the way he behaved in school and the way that he behave towards teachers. I don`t think this is something that just sprung up overnight. And like I said, I think that a lot of people ignore the mental health aspect of this. And that, you know, when someone needs help or someone is looking for help and then coupled with if there is photographs or things on Facebook or Twitter or Instagram that cause alarms, those are individuals that need to speak up. And I don`t think anyone really speaks up.
[Banfield:] Is there...
[Cohen:] I`m going to put money on that there is going to be something on his Instagram, Facebook or Twitter account that would have displayed issues that he was having.
[Banfield:] And you know, without question there is a lot of vetting that goes on before that can go up on television. And so certainly we have [Inaudible] of people who are combing through the social media aspects of this person`s history. And then, trying to vet whether it`s really that person. I mean, that`s one of the difficulties that we have.
[Cohen:] Of course.
[Banfield:] Bradford, I don`t want to you go just yet. And I understand your feelings about the commitment to mental health and the gun control debate, et cetera. But we`re still in the we`re still in the breaking news and I`m still trying to get my head around what, who that person is and what kind of like that person has led up in these 18 years. And so right now you are my only connection and your nephew is my only connection to try and get some insight into this.
[Cohen:] Yes.
[Banfield:] There is the incidence in the P.E. class. Can you give more detail about that?
[Cohen:] He didn`t go into great detail. He said that there was it was an issue with a teacher. And that it was a it escalated past a verbal argument, but he didn`t give great detail about it. My nephew is not the great communicator. So, you know, when we are discussing things, of course, it happened at least six or seven years ago. But when we`re discussing things he gave an overview of the individual than he did of every specific incident. And the overview was pretty much everyone that was, you know, anywhere near this individual knew that he was a troubled kid. And it was a kind of the norm to stay away from them.
[Banfield:] Can I ask if anyone...
[Cohen:] So nobody really got very close to him.
[Banfield:] Well, then that`s sort of where I`m going. Once this Nikolas Cruz who we are seeing again in the hospital gown being led into the police station presumably for booking on multiple first-degree murder changes, that`s my guess since we have 16 people dead and he is the alleged shooter according to authorities. Once he left that middle school, did anyone have any other contact or was he sort of a, you know, a lost connection to them? Did they have any other information on him after he left? And actually, Bradford, hold that thought. The sheriff is giving a live update. I want to hear what he had to say. Just a moment.
[Scott Israel, Sheriff, Broward County:] It`s horrible. It`s catastrophic. There are sad to say that 17 people lost their lives, 12 people within the building, two people just outside the building, one person out on Pine Island Road and two people lost their lives in the hospital. There are people that are still undergoing surgery. We just pray for the city and pray for this school, the parents, the folks that lost their lives. It`s a horrific, horrific day. As I said before, my triplets attend and graduated from Stoneman Douglas High School. It`s just horrible. Absolutely horrible. We will we continually ask you in the media to continually put out the message, if you see something, say something. If anybody has any indicator that someone is going through a behavioral change or on the social media, that there are disturbing photos, or perhaps bombs or firearms or just, you know, videos or pictures that are just not right that there is something, please make sure law enforcement knows about it. We`re already you can follow us on Twitter. We will put out numbers where people can possibly call and what have you, so.
[Unidentified Male:] Sheriff, [Inaudible] are all of the victims, all of the wounded and fatalities students or a mixture of students and teachers and can you give anything on...
[Israel:] We don`t know. [Off-mic] Can you go back there. There was it`s very distracting.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you go back to whether these are students or teachers or mixture of both.
[Israel:] It`s a mixture. I don`t know if there are any teachers, but there would be, you know, there are certainly students and there are certainly adults. [Off-mic]
[Unidentified Female:] Were there any signs that you know of?
[Israel:] I believe there will be once our investigators have that`s a great question. Our investigators are certainly began dissecting social media and looking at the web site and Nikolas, I think it spell his name as N-i-k-o-l-a-s Cruz was the killer, he is in custody and we`ve already begin began to dissect his web sites and the things that social media that he was on and some of the things that come to mind are very, very disturbing.
[Unidentified Female:] What can you tell us about him? And we understand he may be a former student.
[Israel:] He`s 19 years old. He was born in 1998 in September. He was a former student of Douglas High School. He got expelled for disciplinary reasons. I don`t know the specifics. I think he might have surfaced at Taravella High School. We`re still trying to confirm that. And this morning when he woke up whether he was a student or not, I don`t know.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you speak to weapons he had and whether or not we heard there is fire alarm was pulled off. Was that in this investigation for shooting that took place?
[Israel:] I don`t know anything about the firearm at this point. He had countless magazines. Multiple magazines and at this point we believe he had one AR-15 rifle. I don`t know if he had a second rifle or not.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you speak to the fire alarm that was pulled?
[Israel:] I know nothing about it.
[Unidentified Male:] Did he say anything when he was apprehended and he was taken to Broward Health North. What are his injuries then how did you get him?
[Israel:] Yes. I think he`s left Broward General North. I don`t think his injuries were anything significant. I believe they arrived at the public safety building. The investigation will continue. I will keep Broward County informed. Anything that we uncover, anything that`s important to report to the media, you know, we will I know it`s going to be a long night for all of us, but on behalf of my family, BSC family just continue please to pray for these victims and these families. We`ll give you a briefing the next time...
[Unidentified Male:] Do you have a quick timeline from when the first shots were fired in the first...
[Israel:] No.
[Unidentified Female:] Can you go over the number of fatalities and the victims again?
[Israel:] Yes. We have 17 confirmed victims. Twelve victims were within the building. Two victims were outside, just outside the building. One victim is on the street at the corner of Pine Island. And two folks are people who lost their lives at the hospital.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you think this kid woke up this morning hell bent on causing massive destruction at the school?
[Israel:] I have no idea.
[Unidentified Female:] Sheriff, do you think the shootings started inside or outside? Any idea?
[Israel:] It started outside and went inside. Thank you. Seventeen fatalities.
[Unidentified Female:] How many injuries?
[Israel:] At one point, I reported that there were 14 folks that went to the hospital. Two succumbed to their wounds. I don`t know if more people were wounded or we are just finding out that more went to the hospital. Perhaps they were not transported by us. Perhaps by their own families or friends transported them. But we will keep you updated.
[Unidentified Male:] Have the families been notified?
[Ashleigh Banfield, Primetime Justice Show Host, Hln:] So the sheriff then leaves this most recent update with a couple of critical pieces of information.
[Banfield:] That is that the shooting began outside the school. Victims were everywhere. Twelve of them found in the building. Two of them found outside the building. One of them found on a street corner. Two died in the hospital having been transported from this massacre. Nineteen years old Nikolas Cruz. Nineteen years and critical to the investigation, the social media and as the sheriff said, his websites which the sheriff determined to be disturbing. He was expelled for disciplinary reasons which coincides with what our last guest just told us about his nephew. And what Bradford Cohen`s nephew experienced as a school colleague of Nikolas Cruz about six years ago in middle school, that there were violent outbursts in middle school. In one incident, an escalation with a teacher that led to violence and breaking of glass. Another incident with P.E. teacher that got more than just verbally violent. And as Bradford Cohen put it, an attorney who works with us oftentimes here and now, finds himself intersecting with a crime firsthand because his nephew knew this alleged shooter. Everyone knew. That`s what Bradford Cohen`s nephew says about Nikolas Cruz. Everyone knew that this person had issues. And now we know where this person is headed. He was taken from a hospital as the sheriff said. Didn`t think there were serious injuries. But certainly left the Broward Health North Facility where he was taken and may I just add, that is the second facility that was reported to have received victims in this shooting. So God knows, if Nikolas Cruz was taken to the same hospital where many of his alleged victims were also taken and God forbid, the two who died in the hospital may have died at that hospital, we don`t know that yet, but he is now at the public safety public. The visuals you are seeing now is Nikolas Cruz in a hospital gown being led into the public safety building in Parkland, Florida. I want to bring in Joseph Scott Morgan. He is a certified death investigator, also professor of forensics at Jacksonville State. Joseph, the process that now needs to be for lack of a better word, collected, in order to prosecute that 19-year-old adult, it`s massive. And the forensics scene at that one crime scene alone and I don`t know how many others there may be. Walk me through the school, what it looks like, what some of those investigators are doing, the yellow cones that they putting down where where they find casings from that AR-15 and the multiple rounds that the sheriff just announced were found. Just help me understand the massive forensics project they have ahead of them.
[Joseph Scott Morgan, Certified Death Investigator:] Sure, Ashleigh. I can characterize this in one word and that`s chaos. And it`s reminiscent of the Jonesboro, Arkansas shooting back in 1998, which is almost 20 years ago next month as a matter of fact. If we remember then, one of those boys that did that shooting up there pulled the fire alarm. And what happens with that as you create a chaotic situation within the school, they are overstimulating the children as they are moving. And all of a sudden, someone just starts firing. If this is the case that that fire alarm was initiated, it sounds like it may have been, these children are very vulnerable in this environment as are the staff. You will have potentially people that were trampled, that have sustained injuries relative to that. There will be a tremendous amount of blood evidence that will be found on all of the surfaces where the shootings took place. And the idea is we had to straighten out the dynamics of what exactly happened. Remember, we had a prosecutable case here with an assailant who is still alive. You mentioned well earlier that unlike other cases, this individual is not deceased. Florida will move ahead with the prosecution in this particular case, I`m sure. And so it is mountain of evidence. And then we have people that were removed from the scene. And they have both evidence that is at the scene. Their blood evidence always the people that will survive. And there is evidence that is contained on their clothing at the hospital, also any kind of this is hard to say, but any kind of projectiles that are still within their bodies that is removed at surgery. Those automatically become evidence as well. So it is a huge mountain that Broward will have to climb here. I know that they are up to the task. Their crime scene people are fantastic, particularly aided with the ATF as well as the FBI in processing this. We are talking about a cavernous structure here, multi-buildings. Obviously, we got people that were outside of the building that were injured as well. It was mentioned just a moment ago that we had one person that was deceased on the street, two outside of one of the buildings, as well as the 12 within the buildings. And of course those victims that had passed on at the hospital and currently being triaged and evaluated and undergoing surgical treatment, I`m sure.
[Banfield:] And I am just sorry to say from the empirical experience that I have in covering these things, with 17 people dead now, we had that as an at least when it was 16, but now 17.
[Morgan:] Right.
[Banfield:] It is very possible there could be other fatalities elsewhere.
[Morgan:] Yes.
[Banfield:] We have seen shooters who have killed parents or siblings or friends prior to or even after wreaking havoc inside those facilities. We don`t even know at this point what the story is of Nikolas Cruz`s parents, whether they are safe, whether they are in that public safety building alongside him. I just wish I were the fly on the wall who could hear that Miranda being issued and see if it`s being honored or if it`s being broken. Because at 19 years old, you don`t get a whole lot of mulligans, especially if Miranda was done perfectly. Anything you say can and will be held against you. And this I am going to say flat out will be a death penalty case. You just can`t mow down 17 people with an AR-15 in the United States and not face the maximum penalty. Because that`s why we have the death penalty. We have the death penalty for suspects like this young man in this hospital gown being led into the public safety building in Broward County becaue 17 people at least are dead. Seventeen families and all the friends of those 17 people will never see those people again. This is how it shook out. This is where the casualties were found. And you know what?
[Morgan:] Yes.
[Banfield:] The sheriff just said that the surgeries are continuing. There is still an emergency going on right now in at least two hospitals. Quickly, Joe, before I leave you, will there be more than two hospitals given the magnitude of the casualties?
[Morgan:] Yes, I would think so. This is a mass casualty event. As all counties have over the past few decades, you prep for this sort of thing with mass casualty events such as plane crashes and this sort of thing. So you will have police will have to be on their toes in the collection of evidence. Let`s also not forget that the medical examiner and again I hate to say this, will be very, very busy tomorrow. That`s another piece we have to consider going forward. You were talking about this case in terms of the aggravating circumstances. Remember what the sheriff said. This individual showed up with he was very specific. He said multiple magazines. That to me states that he came there to kill and fire and maim as many people as he possibly could.
[Banfield:] And that will be an aggravator in any case. Let`s just say this case may never go into a courtroom at all. This could be a case that pleads. This could go any number of ways, but if it pleads, I don`t know. I`m not sure if I were a prosecutor in the state of Florida that I would be so willing to plead out a death penalty case when there are so many witnesses, so many dead, and just so much incredible mayhem. Joe, I am going to ask you to stand by for a moment, if you will. I just want to let people know that the FBI it`s a sign of the times when we have a hash tag, "Stoneman Shooting." The hash tag "Stoneman Shooting." That`s where a lot of people are getting and giving information about hash tag. The FBI has also established the old-fashioned tip line for anybody who might have information, who might have anything and no information is too small about the shooter, the alleged shooter, Nikolas Cruz, or the shooting itself. Again, there may be 3,000 somewhat students at that school, but this is critical in terms of being able to get some answers and put together an iron-clad case. The FBI, the lead investigator now on this case is going to need as many eyes as it can get. And you can`t say it loud enough or often enough, no detail is too small. If you ever see the programs like "Forensic Files," they sometimes turn on the tiniest pieces of evidence and information. So, this is critical. If you knew anything or know anything about this person or this person`s travels or this person`s throughout the day and throughout the week, social media, anything at all. That`s the tip line. 1-800-call-FBI. I want to go to Mike Galanos, if I can. Mike, I know you have been monitoring a lot of this as the information comes in pretty quickly with the updates and the locations of the dead. Do you know anything about those who are still in surgery or whether this number on our screen is going to go up?
[Mike Galanos, Anchor, Hln:] Nothing definite, Ashleigh, we will say that. The number 17 is still just unbelievable to soak that in. We know that it was 14 and then we know two lost their lives on the the hospital. It`s 12. It could be more. You make a great point when you hear of 12 killed in the school, two outside, one on the street, and two lost their lives in the hospital. There could be others elsewhere. So, we are monitoring all of that. It was a very enlightening and sobering press conference from Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel starting with the fact that this is catastrophic. Let`s listen.
[Israel:] Seventeen people lost their lives. Twelve people within the building, two people just outside the building, one person out on Pine Island Road, and two people lost their lives in the hospital. There people that are still undergoing surgery. Just pray for this city, pray for this school. The parents, the folks that lost their lives. It`s a horrific, horrific day. As I said before, my triplets attended and graduated from Stoneman Douglas High School. It`s just horrible. Absolutely horrible. We will continually ask you and the media to continually put out the message. If you see something, say something. If anybody has any indicator that someone is going through a behavioral change on the social media, that there are disturbing photos, perhaps bombs or firearms or just videos or pictures that are just not right, please make sure law enforcement knows about it. We are already you can follow us on Twitter. We are going to put out numbers where people can possibly call and what have you. We don`t know. I keep hearing that. Can you go back? It`s very distracting.
[Unidentified Male:] Are they students or teachers or a mixture of both?
[Israel:] It`s a mixture. I don`t know if they are teachers, but certainly students and certainly adults. I believe there will be once our investigators, that`s a great question. The investigators certainly began dissecting social media and looking at the website and Nikolas Cruz was the killer. He is in custody. And we have already began to dissect his websites and things that social media that he was on and some of the things have come to mind are very, very disturbing.
[Unidentified Female:] Tell us about him. What can you tell us about him? Is he a former student?
[Israel:] He`s 19 years old. He was born in 1998 in September. He was a former student of Douglas High School. He got expelled for disciplinary reasons. I don`t know the specifics. I think he might have surfaced at Terra Bella High School. We are still trying to confirm that. This morning when he woke, whether he was a student or not, I don`t know. I don`t know anything about the fire alarm at this point. He had countless magazines, multiple magazines. And at this point, we believe he had one AR-15 rifle. I don`t know if he had a second one.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you speak about the fire alarm that was pulled?
[Israel:] I know nothing about it.
[Unidentified Male:] Could you say anything, when he was apprehended and he was taken to Broward Health North, what are his injuries
[Israel:] I think he has left Broward General North. I don`t think his injuries were anything significant. I believe he arrived at the public safety building. The investigation will continue. I will keep Broward County informed on anything that we uncover and anything that is important.
[Banfield:] That is the sheriff in this case giving the update. Sheriff Scott Israel, also personally connected, his triplets went to that school and graduated from that school where Nikolas Cruz is now alleged to have killed 17 people. Waiting to find out if the number climbs. Waiting to find out how many in that number were the adults, how many were the students. The sheriff just simply does not know at this time. Tyjanai Thomas is a student at the school. She she saw her teacher shot while trying to protect students. Tyjanai, can you hear me?
[Tyjanai Thomas, Student At Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School:] Yes, I can hear you.
[Banfield:] Can you tell me a little bit about what you went through today, what you saw?
[Thomas:] We heard the fire alarm go off and our teacher told us like normal procedure to get our things together and walk down to our zone. So, we all started walking and me and my friend Brianna have paused for a second because we`ve seen someone coming down the hallway. And he stopped in front of our door because the door was open and he was trying to get more students, but our teacher started to like interfere and protect the students so he shot him.
[Banfield:] So, the shooter came to the door of the classroom you were in and shot the teacher in your classroom right in front of you?
[Thomas:] I wasn`t in the classroom with him. I was about to go down the stairs, but I was standing like halfway so I can still see out into the hallway. And that`s when I seen him approaching my teacher and we heard it go off and he fell down.
[Banfield:] Do you know if your teacher was able to get away or to move after the shooting?
[Thomas:] Later on I heard that he died. He didn`t make it.
[Banfield:] What did you witness?
[Thomas:] I witnessed him being shot.
[Banfield:] Did you see him fall after he was shot?
[Thomas:] Yes. After that, we took off running.
[Banfield:] Did you see him shoot at any other students or teachers?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] And where did he go after shooting your teacher?
[Thomas:] I believe he went back the other way where he was coming from.
[Banfield:] And at that point and please don`t name your teacher if I can ask you please until we get next of kin, we don`t want to identify anyone and cause any more stress or mental trauma to a community that is already been through hell today. Tyjanai, when your teacher was shot, what happened to the rest of the kids who were all around your teacher, who your teacher was trying to protect? What happened to them?
[Thomas:] They ran out. He went the other way. We don`t know why or for what reason. They all took off running. It was so much smoke around, people were bumping into each other trying to get out of there.
[Banfield:] There was smoke as in from his gun or do you think he set off some kind of smoke device? Did it seem like that?
[Thomas:] Right now we are not even sure. It looked like someone set off fireworks in there. There was so much smoke.
[Banfield:] It looked like fireworks from the amount of smoke. What did it smell like? Did it smell like the fireworks smell?
[Thomas:] No. That`s how we knew it was like real and we were in danger.
[Banfield:] So when you say smoke, was it so smokey you could barely see or did it look like it was I`m trying to figure out if the shooter might have actually tried to set off some smoke bombs to make it more catastrophic and difficult for people trying to get to safety.
[Thomas:] I`m pretty sure that`s what had to happen with the amount of smoke that was there, couldn`t have came from just the gun.
[Banfield:] It did not seem like the amount of smoke that you witnessed seemed to have been able to come from a gun.
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Tyjanai, can you stay with me? I have a lot of questions for you about what the shooter looked like, but I want to go to the doctors who are updating us.
[Unidentified Male:] We received eight patients and one suspect. The suspect was treated and released in police custody. Of our eight patients, we had two mortalities. Three in critical condition and three are stable. What condition was the suspect in? I cannot disclose that.
[Unidentified Female:] Can you repeat again, 17 patients at Broward or more? I don`t believe that`s correct.
[Unidentified Male:] No, no. System-wide in Broward Health, there was a total of 17 patients. Nine here, seven at Broward General and one at Coral Springs. Can you talk about what type of injuries? How serious are these? Of the eight patients that we had not including the suspect, two mortalities, three critical condition, three stable. What are you seeing? What kind of wounds? Out of respect for the family members and our respect for our patients, we are not going to disclose that information.
[Unidentified Female:] Are they all gunshot victims?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, they are all gunshot victims.
[Unidentified Female:] Sometimes we see people that are trampled on their way out or sustained other sorts of injuries so that`s why we wanted to clarify. Of the eight victims here, they are all gunshot wounds, correct?
[Unidentified Male:] That`s correct. Can you elaborate on the ages of the patients brought here? Again, we can`t talk about the age or any information related to the patients out of respect to the families. Can you talk about I know you guys were in lockdown, but can you describe for us if this is a mass casualty incident? What was it like inside as these patients were coming in after the shooting? Sure. We work very closely with our pre-hospital personnel. Fire rescue on scene and in conjunction with Broward Sheriff`s Office. Pre-hospital communicates information to us. We routinely run drills at our institution to be ready for instances like this. So we have a process in place that gets initiated so there is calm collected care that our patients receive. Can you tell us anything about the fatalities, their ages, and do you believe they are students and possibly people working at the school? We prefer not to comment on our patients in respect for our patients.
[Unidentified Female:] Can you talk about this personally? I mean, seeing this sort of thing, knowing that they are I mean, just as human beings outside of being doctors, treating these people who have come in here after experiencing if not the worst event of their lives, having the responsibility of treating these people and ensuring the best outcome, I mean, how does that affect you all as human beings?
[Unidentified Male:] We do this every day. So what we saw today, we have the trauma center. That is what we do every day. Fortunately for everybody, we are located very close to this high school where this shooting happened. So it is fortunate for everybody they brought these patients to our hospital and we were able to do a great job to deliver care. The suspect was brought here. I know you can`t say much. But from people at home, they might be surprised that the suspect was being brought here. How do you guys take the Hippocratic oath and do your job knowing that this guy potentially did what he`s accused of doing? Every patient gets treated as a patient. We take care of them medically. That`s what we do.
[Unidentified Female:] Was there any particular reason why he was brought to this facility versus one of the other facilities?
[Unidentified Male:] Because of the location. They have to go to the nearest facility. We are the nearest. Is this the biggest mass casualty you can remember? At our hospital, yes. Are you expecting more victims? We cannot comment. Can you tell us if it was a large caliber or small caliber? I don`t know.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you know the update on conditions for the other hospitals?
[Unidentified Male:] Not right now. No.
[Unidentified Female:] Are any of them still in surgery or did the surgery go on after?
[Unidentified Male:] We still have three patients in the operating rooms. They are in stable condition.
[Unidentified Female:] Did all of them undergo some type of surgery?
[Unidentified Male:] No. Can you describe what their demeanor was like and if it was obvious, can you describe it for us? I mean, I prefer not to comment on specific patient`s demeanor. But as a human being, you can imagine that they would be in shock or be emotional about the whole situation.
[Unidentified Female:] That`s it, guys. We have to go.
[Unidentified Male:] Pardon me? We work closely with our pre-hospital personnel to set that up.
[Unidentified Female:] One more question.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you walk through what`s next for these patients specifically, the three in critical and three in stable, in terms of services? I understand Chaplains are now here? They are going to have successful surgeries and probably go home.
[Unidentified Female:] Thank you.
[Unidentified Male:] Thanks very much.
[Banfield:] So these doctors are giving sort of Three in critical condition, and three who have been stabilize. That`s hard to tell given the other numbers that he gave out. 17 total treated. And at least we know at this time 17 total treated and I hope that means that we`re not going to see this number climb much more and God forbid it climbs at all, but at least not much more than that. But we do have three in critical condition still. Can`t discuss the suspect because yes, that suspect did arrive at their hospital and was treated. Obviously alongside some of the victims and then transported. And as we know now, it didn`t appear to the sheriff that those injuries and the suspect were significant. Doctors however can`t discuss that. Lots of reasons out of the respect of families, but also HIIPA laws. There is a lot of reasons why doctors can`t get into the details that those reporters were hoping for. Just before we went to the doctors news conference, I was speaking with a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Tyjanai Thomas, are you still with me? Can you still hear me?
[Thomas:] Yes, I can hear you.
[Banfield:] Tyjanai, before we went to the doctors, you were telling me about the smoke in the hall, that you saw the shooter come to the doorway of the classroom where your teacher was protecting students. You saw the shooter shoot your teacher and I will remind you, please don`t say his name at this time. I know you heard later that your teacher didn`t survive, but we are still waiting for official confirmation of those who lost their lives. Can you describe what the shooter looked like, what the shooter was carrying, and if you saw the shooter`s face?
[Thomas:] OK. Considering the amount of smoke, it was really hard to make out the facial features, but you could tell he was a relatively average height. Maybe a little taller than that. He was like hiding something behind his back. That`s how we knew right away something was wrong. It was really hard to make out who he was.
[Banfield:] Could you see a gun?
[Thomas:] Yes. You could see the handle of it like from behind his back where he was holding it. You could see it.
[Banfield:] And did it look like one of those rifles that is referred to as an AR-15, but it`s looks like one of those military-style assault rifles?
[Thomas:] It looked like a heavy-duty gun. I`m not really sure how to describe it.
[Banfield:] Could you tell what the shooter was wearing?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] Could you tell, Tyjanai, if the shooter had on any of that that kind of
[Thomas:] I believe so. Like the figure looked like a little bulky and like we were believing that that`s what it was like a bulletproof vest or something.
[Banfield:] It appeared to you he was wearing a bulletproof vest, Tyjanai?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Did you see him carrying anything other than what looked like the gun behind his back? Did he carry any other kind of nothing else that you saw?
[Thomas:] Not that I could tell.
[Banfield:] Could you see his face at all?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] And did he say anything? Could you hear him saying anything?
[Thomas:] Not at all.
[Banfield:] Was he running? Was he walking slowly? What was his demeanor? How did he appear to you? The way he appeared was like a very strong, dominant person. Like he had a plan. He knew what he was doing and he just trying to get there. But something got in his way and he got rid of it. So it seemed to you the shooter that you witnessed who shot your teacher was methodical and calm throughout this?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Didn`t look nervous or afraid or erratic?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] And when he turned away after shooting your teacher and walked in the other direction, did he walk with purpose or was he running?
[Thomas:] He was running. He ran the other way. How long after that did you get out of there? Right after I heard it, we ran. Everyone that was in the hallway, they just ran down the stairs.
[Banfield:] And Tyjanai, were you on what`s been described as the tenth I think it`s the tenth floor or the building I`m looking for the name of the building and the floor where you were.
[Thomas:] The 1200 building, the freshman building.
[Banfield:] The freshman building and the third floor?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] How many shots do you remember hearing?
[Thomas:] If I`m not mistaken, I believe it was three.
[Banfield:] You heard three shots. Were those the three shots he fired at your teacher?
[Thomas:] No. Those were three shots I heard from like downstairs.
[Banfield:] So you heard the shots downstairs and then you saw the shooter come upstairs?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] How many times did he fire at your teacher?
[Thomas:] If I`m not mistaken I believe there was one or two.
[Banfield:] It was one or two?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Were the other students screaming or were they frozen?
[Thomas:] They were like in panic mode, but like they didn`t really know what to do on that situation. Everyone was just so shocked. We just kind of stood there for a second trying to get together in our minds what was actually happening. Were there any other adults with you at that time or were you pretty much left alone as a group of kids once the teacher was shot? Yes. We were pretty much left alone until all the other teachers like it was weird. We didn`t see any other teachers out in the hallway, no other classes. So we were kind of confused as to what to do.
[Banfield:] And this was again, you call at this time freshman building, right?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] And it was the third floor in the freshman building called the 1200 building where we had heard earlier there were about 10 classrooms. Do you have any idea how many kids have been up and down that hallway? How many kids would have been in those classrooms at the time this was happening?
[Thomas:] No, I`m not really sure.
[Banfield:] Tyjanai, had you ever seen this shooter`s face before? Did he look familiar?
[Thomas:] No. Like he I couldn`t really tell anything.
[Banfield:] And no one else around you knew who he was?
[Thomas:] No, not until later. We heard the last name and someone was like he sounds really familiar like he knew them.
[Banfield:] The name Nikolas Cruz sounded familiar to someone you know?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] And did they say anything about Nikolas Cruz at the time?
[Thomas:] No. They just said that they just knew his name, like the last name sounded familiar to them.
[Banfield:] Tyjanai, when you ran from the hallway after your teacher was shot, did you come across anything else? Did you see anything else, any kind of other victims, any kind of carnage, anything and broken glass? Did you see anything else on your way out of that school?
[Thomas:] On the very first floor of the building, that`s where it was another big amount of smoke and we seen like something that appeared to be a body on the floor closer to the other end of the hallway.
[Banfield:] That`s on the first floor?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] So there was smoke on the third floor in the hallway where your teacher you witnessed being shot. There was smoke on the first floor hallway where you said you saw another body of a student or an adult or a teacher?
[Thomas:] We are not really sure what it looked like.
[Banfield:] Was that victim in the hallway or in a classroom?
[Thomas:] In the hallway.
[Banfield:] Could you see anything else in the hallway?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] Could you see go ahead.
[Thomas:] But at the end of the hallway, we as soon as we got downstairs, we seen something there come threw out of the corners that appeared to be another figure. So we all ran outside.
[Banfield:] You saw another figure at the other end of the hallway coming into the school?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Did it appear to be the same person you saw who was the shooter or did it appear to be, say, a police officer perhaps?
[Thomas:] I`m not really sure who it was. But I don`t think it was the shooter. I don`t think he could have gotten down that fast. I`m not sure.
[Banfield:] Were you able to see into any of the classrooms on the third floor or on the first floor?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] Did you see anything on the second floor as you were descending down the staircase?
[Thomas:] No, we all just ran right past it.
[Banfield:] So there is no way to tell if there was smoke or anybody shot on the second floor as far as you witnessed, Tyjanai?
[Thomas:] No.
[Banfield:] When you got outside, did you finally find a teacher or find an adult or someone to give you direction to get to you safety?
[Thomas:] That`s what we were looking for until we heard more gunshots so we started to run the opposite way and then we heard it from that way and ran back and finally seen security. They were telling us to just get off school grounds. So we jumped the fence and headed into the complex that is right next to the school.
[Banfield:] So Tyjanai, if I`m not mistaken, I`m trying to get a start to finish, you know, accounting of your experience. But you said you heard a number of shots when you were up on that third floor and saw your teacher shot. And then you heard additional shots when you were on the first floor or outside. Can you just clear it up for me how many shots and where you heard the shots.
[Thomas:] When I first heard the shots I was on the first floor and then when we got outside we kept hearing them, you know. It was just like someone repeatedly at least shooting the gun.
[Banfield:] How many times do you estimate?
[Thomas:] Maybe three or four times.
[Banfield:] And that was on the first floor.
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] But just one shot on the third? I`m just trying to get a clear indication. When your teacher was shot and you witnessed that on the third floor, that was one or two shot, correct?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] And then on the first floor, three or four additional shots, is that correct?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] And when you got to safety, how did that happen? Who found you outside the first floor and where were you taken and what was that like? What were you asked to do when you were rushing from that school?
[Thomas:] No one found us. We looked down the hallway, a longer hallway, seeing one of our security guards pointing towards the gates and telling us to get out and go somewhere and hide.
[Banfield:] I`m just going ask one last question and it`s probably a repeat. But you will have to forgive me, Tyjanai. It`s important. When you saw the shooter, as smoky as it was, you could see the gun behind his back and it did look like he was wearing one of those police-style armored vests, tactical vests, is that correct?
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Banfield:] Was he wearing anything on his head?
[Thomas:] I`m not sure.
[Banfield:] But you are very sure he appeared to be wearing one of the bulletproof vests?
[Thomas:] Yes, that`s what it appeared to be.
[Banfield:] Tyjanai, thank you so much for helping us with this information. It is invaluable and it is so difficult for grown ups to process this stuff. And so for you to go through this, you know, are you with your parents now?
[Thomas:] No, I`m not, but I can be.
[Banfield:] I want you to be. If you can be. It would be great if you can be with your parents, sweetheart. Thank you so much, Tyjanai. I just wish you the best, sweetie. As you go through getting past this and the things that you have seen.
[Thomas:] Thank you.
[Banfield:] Tyjanai Thomas. Wow. A freshman. That`s what a freshman`s day was today. Tyjanai saw her teacher shot. Tyjanai heard her teacher was killed. We don`t have confirmation on that yet. HLN anchor Mike Galanos is with me now. Mike, that`s the first indication and witness account that I have heard describing smoke in the hallways both the third floor hallway and the first floor hallways in the 1200 building, the freshman building. And it`s the first count that I have heard of a shooter wearing a tactical vest.
[Mike Galanos, Hln Anchor:] And I`m still taking in the strength of this young lady.
[Banfield:] I know.
[Galanos:] A freshman in high school who could recount to you the detail with such clarity and strength. So and I`m with you, praying that she can heal through this. It may take time, but to hunker down with her family. Ashleigh, let`s get supposed details as we take in that riveting interview. The numbers, again, they are just so heartbreaking. Seventeen dead. And we just heard the number taken to hospital total was 17. It sounds like and this is a rudimentary number, 14 injured, sounds like still fighting for their lives. At one hospital, we know three in critical condition. Another number that is equally astonishing and saddening, this is the 18th school shooting this year and we are just six weeks into 2018. So family and victims are number one, but we do know the name of the alleged shooter, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz. Had trouble that we know, at least dates back, at least anecdotal stories tell us into eighth grade five years ago, violent outburst, expelled from his high school because of disciplinary reasons. So we are taking all that in. The sheriff talked about this social media footprint. Websites that were very disturbing. What did he use to carry out the horror, this hellish attack on students and teachers. An AR-15 with multiple magazines. We know that. And as we get back to family, you know, our hearts go out to the families that are at a Marriott in Coral Springs. Parents told, if you are looking for your child, go there. What are those? We hope reunions like. But for some it will not be a reunion. It will be a moment of unthinkable horror and grief as they enter into a fraternity they never wanted to be a part of. Ashleigh, back to you.
[Banfield:] Yes. And you know, I just got handed a note that after this many years, you think that you would be
[Galanos:] I mean, Ashleigh, when you stop and think, 18 already this year? We are on an average of what let`s say, we are six weeks in three a week. Three per week school shootings? I mean, thank goodness for teachers who are heroes who can stand up. And we hope that that teacher survived. It doesn`t sound like it. That would stand up and be a deterrent and save who knows how many lives. Just by allowing students like Tyjanai to escape and get out of there. And then for her, as you mentioned, a 14 or 15-year-old to witness this and have that in her mind`s eye for the rest of her life. Again, this is just something.
[Banfield:] You know, I interviewed someone and I`m looking at the clock. 7:16 now eastern time. I don`t even know when it was. It might have been an hour and a half ago. Here is her name, Melissa
[Brynn Gingras, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. And Ashleigh, at this point, you can imagine that sort of the adrenaline has worn off for these students. Maybe teachers and administrators in that school and now it`s all sort of settling in. Before I get to the students I were able to escape. I do want to mentioned that the Broward County sheriff`s department did just tweet about a hotline that anyone can call, a crisis hotline to get any help. And a little bit earlier in your newscast, Mike actually jogged my memory. When I was covering Orlando, the Pulse nightclub shooting, I remember meeting a group of folks that unfortunately has Mike used the word fraternity. They became a part of the fraternity as some of these mass shootings, not just school shooting, a mass shooting that happened all around the country. Parents have banded together who witnessed tragedy, have felt tragedy and losing loved ones through the shootings. And ever since they sort of lost a loved one, they sort of moved around the country trying to support as new tragedies happen. So you can imagine the same group I talked to at the Pulse nightclub shooting will now be heading here to Florida to help families who are grieving. Because again, We know the number of people that were kill. We don`t know their names yet. We don`t know how many are students. We don`t know how many are teachers. We don`t know how many are administrators at this point. But yes, Tyjanai really gave you a good idea of what she witnessed. But we talked to other student who is witnessed incredible things. One student said, you know, this was a time of reflection, sitting in there, being in lockdown upwards of two hours waiting for the SWAT team to come by. I`m sure having anxiety and stress and wondering what was going happen next. And here are some more accounts on what students said they were going through during that time.
[Gingras:] And these are all the different accounts we have from students as this continues to unfold. Just like that student there, rushing out of the building and some escaping to that Marriott where they were hoping to be reunited with their family. Some going to a nearby Walmart that was adjacent to the school. And again, other students are being in lockdown situations for several hours waiting for that SWAT team to clear them. So just incredible stories again, Ashleigh, as we continue to see this story just sort of happen in front of our eyes, waiting until we get more news about who is injured and who was killed during this. And that`s all going to sort of bring this to a close in some ways as far as the adrenaline. Just people now processing.
[Banfield:] You know what, Brynn? I don`t know about you, Brynn, but I am struck. It`s just sort happening as I am doing this coverage. But I`m struck by the composure of these kids freshman, you know, 14, 15-year-old kids. The way they are able to report the accounts to us. And it makes me wonder if it`s a sign of the times. Because it is maybe it`s just not so foreign to them that this stuff happens. Yes, it`s a shock when it happens to you, but maybe not so foreign. School shootings to them now are part of their lexicon. Part of their culture as they grow. And yes, it happened to them, but it`s not so unfamiliar. And that`s a really distressing reference. I mean, it`s really distressing thing to note. We see these pictures a lot, you know. Brynn, I have to fit in a break, but sorry about that. I have to fit in a break. But I just I want to dove tail off of what Brynn said. And that is that there are people who are in the business of consoling. They are brought in to help those who are emotionally afflicted by this and they are busy, busy people. More and more, they are busy, busy people. They go from the Pulse nightclub. They come to this school. The 18 other schools that have been hit just this year alone in six weeks. And with this being the fourth worst school shooting in U.S. history, let me put it into perspective. Seventeen people were killed in this school shooting. And if Columbine really stands out to you, that was 13, a sign of the times.

[Vause:] The body of former U.S. president George H.W. Bush is lying in state in the U.S. Capitol in Washington. The Bush family accompanied the 41st president's casket on board the presidential plane, on a flight from Houston, Texas, on Monday. His son, the 43rd president, George W. Bush, will deliver a eulogy at a memorial service at the National Cathedral on Wednesday. President Donald Trump and former Presidents Obama, Clinton and Carter will also attend. The funeral will take place Thursday in Houston and the former president's body will be interred alongside his wife, Barbara, at his presidential library in College Station, Texas, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan was among those paying tribute at the Capitol on Monday.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , House Speaker:] Throughout his life of service, President Bush personified grace. His character, his character was second to none. He reached the heights of power with uncommon humility. He made monumental contributions to freedom with a fundamental decency that resonates across generations. No one better harmonized the joy of life and the duty of life.
[Vause:] The White House has confirmed Donald Trump will attend Wednesday's state funeral. He will be seated front row, alongside former presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. Former president George W. Bush will deliver a eulogy for his father. Given Trump's criticism of past presidents, that seating plan alone is likely to highlight his isolation. And then there will be the service itself. The tributes and memorials for George H.W. Bush have struck a starkly similar tone as those for Senator John McCain, who died three months ago. An outpouring of bipartisan praise, both men described as honorable, gracious, decent. Trump and McCain had publicly feuded for years. He wasn't invited to the senator's funeral, which became an extended comparison between a selfless war hero, dedicated to public service, and a man who avoided the Vietnam draft with four deferments of college and a fifth for bone spurs. Well, there is similar bad blood between the Bush family and Donald Trump, the 41st president made clear he wanted the current U.S. president at his funeral. Placing the office of the presidency above any personal ill will. And while the service will try to steer clear of the anti-Trump turn on McCain's funeral, they will still be talk of sacrifice in service, of selflessness, a greater good. Intended or not, that praise alone is likely to sound like a criticism of Donald Trump. For more now, presidential historian, Mike Purdy, is with us from Seattle. Mike, thanks for taking the time to be with us.
[Mike Purdy, Founder, Presidentialhistory.com:] Thank you.
[Vause:] This is President Donald Trump who likes praise, he likes being praised. I wonder if on Wednesday, after speaker to speak and remembers George W. Bush and his life of service at such glowing terms. Is it just possible that, maybe for a moment, the 45th president will stop and ask himself, "What will they say about me? What will my legacy be?"
[Purdy:] Well, I think we can hope that. Although personally, I would be pessimistic about it. I mean, I think President Trump at some point needs to begin to reflect on the fact of what life will be like when he does not control his Twitter narrative. And when history will be the judge of his deeds and he won't have control over it. He likes being the center of attention obviously. And so, that is going to be that's his challenge as president to rise to the occasion. He, of course, has a very difficult history with the presidents that he will be with. He called Barack Obama the worst president in the history of our country. Bill Clinton was the worst abuser of women in the history of our country. He criticized George H.W. Bush in his thousand points of light and said, "What does that mean anyway?" So, he's got a big history with these presidents and they have a history with him, as well, in terms of saying things about him. Obama said he was unfit to be President.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Purdy:] Clinton said he didn't know much.
[Vause:] You know,
[George H.w. Bush, 41st President Of The United States:] We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations. A new world order, a world for the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations.
[Vause:] You know, President Bush saw this world of shared responsibilities. Smaller states no longer at the mercy of stronger nations. I just wonder if over the weekend, do we see Donald Trump's vision of a new world order at the G20? You know, with that high-five handshake between you know, leaders of Russia and Saudi Arabia, two men with no regard for international norms or standards of international law. They act with impunity and they had the support of the current U.S. president.
[Purdy:] That's right. I think Donald Trump has totally blown up the presidency in terms of our relationships with other countries. Expected norms, collaboration, pulling out of trade agreements, pulling out of the purse a climate agreement. And I think President Trump's actions are because he always wants to be at the center of attention. And I think that's what is going to make this weekend this week a difficult one for the president because it won't be about him. And I wonder if we'll see some tweets coming out afterwards in anger. We'll have to see how that plays out.
[Vause:] Yes, this will be look, knowing this president as we know him now, this will obviously not be an easy time on Wednesday. But, especially if you listen to what's already being said you know, making this comparison between Donald Trump and George H.W. Bush. And President Reagan's daughter, Patti Davis, she made that comparison during an interview on CNN just a few hours ago. Listen to part of it, here it is.
[Patti Davis, Daughter Of Ronald Reagan:] The president is supposed to revere democracy and all of the institutions that hold it up. The president is supposed to work with our allies with diplomacy and respect. And at
[Davis:] the same time, stand up to autocrats who murder people. The president is supposed to understand and adhere to the Constitution. The president is supposed to be a grown-up. You know, 9-year olds are should be able to look up to the President of the United States, not feel that he's one of them.
[Vause:] You know, I've just wanted Trump's bombastic divisive style and style of politics has that sort of embellished or you know improved, if you like, the legacies of past presidents? Because there's almost this longing for those days, whether or not they were real or imagined.
[Purdy:] You know, I think it has to some extent. I think we compare a president's who pass away to the current president. And we've got some pretty big extremes. I mean, George H.W. Bush is going to be remembered, I think for his basic sense of decency. For the fact that he was a civil man, he was a consensus builder, a collaborator, he knew how to compromise, if you look at you know, what he did in terms of developing the coalition for the Gulf War. So, Bush knew how to do that and Trump doesn't appear to have those skills. And so, yes, we compare them and we look at them quite differently.
[Vause:] Yes. They quite differently, too, if you look at the relationship between reporters and the presidency, "The New York Times" opinion writer, Maureen Dowd, had an anecdote from her time as a White House reporter, covering you know, the George H.W. Bush administration. There's this friendship, which, you know, I guess that not a lot of people knew about. It was she talked about how it developed over the years. Here's part of her column. "'Put it this way,'he wrote me once, 'I reserve the right to whine, to not read, to use profanity. But if you ever get really hurt or if you ever get really down and need a shoulder to cry on, or just need a friend, give me a call. I'll be there for you. I'll not let you down. "'Now, go on out and knock my knickers off. When you do, I might just cancel my subscription.'" You know, that's a very long way, but it's far away as you could possibly get from, you know, the enemy of the people.
[Purdy:] Right.
[Vause:] Has the coverage of the White House changed so much in those years? Or is it just that this president, the current occupant of the White House, is he just really thin-skinned compared to others?
[Purdy:] Well, I think, he is very thin-skinned. I think some of his actions and past actions, perhaps, have caused the press to be critical. And I think, rightly so, all presidents have challenges with the media because the media is there to hold government to account. And to the extent that a president is more out in left-field shall we say, then the media is going to be there. You can go back and look at Watergate and President Nixon. And they did a good job in terms of uncovering what was going on. But I think what that quote you read, you know, indicates is George H.W. Bush knew and understood and valued relationships. That was the key and he knew how to praise people. He was probably better as president behind the scenes. He wasn't a very good upfront sometimes. He struggled with what he called the vision thing. And he was more comfortable, I think, behind the scenes. But he was very effective at it because he knew how to build relationships.
[Vause:] Yes and of course, this is a moment for the nation to remember and obviously to take time to consider where it is you know, where and where it is being and where it is going. And these are all very difficult issues. But Mikey, thank you so much being with us. We appreciate it.
[Purdy:] Certainly, my pleasure. Thanks.
[Vause:] Donald Trump lashing out at his former attorney, Michael Cohen, who is cooperating with the Russia investigation. The president says he wants Cohen to be sent to prison for a full sentence, no special treatment. Sara Murray has more details.
[Sara Murray, Cnn National Political Correspondent:] With the Russia probe barreling closer to President Trump, he's taken to Twitter to rail against the investigation and his former attorney. After Michael Cohen's attorneys asked in a weekend filing that Cohen receive no prison time, Trump lashed out, tweeting, "You mean he can do all of the terrible, unrelated to Trump things having do with fraud, big loans, taxis, et cetera and not serve a long prison term? "He makes up stories to get a great and already reduced deal for himself. He lied for this outcome and should, in my opinion, serve a full and complete sentence." The recent Cohen filings reflect not only on his actions but also on Trump's. Filings show how Cohen kept then candidate Trump in the loop about the potential Trump Tower Moscow project as late as June 2016. He and Trump also discussed possible travel to Russia in the
[Murray:] summer of 2016, a trip that would have taken place after Trump accepted the GOP nomination in Cleveland.
[Trump:] I humbly and gratefully accept
[Murray:] Now Trump is changing his story on the Moscow project.
[Trump:] I have no deals in Russia. I have no deals that could happen in Russia. Everybody knew about it. It was written about in newspapers. It was a well-known project.
[Murray:] But, in fact, the deal wasn't made public until 2017. And Trump's shifting stories are raising alarm with Democratic lawmakers.
[Rep. Jerry Nadler:] One question has always been why was the president so obsequious to Putin from the beginning of the campaign up to the present day and it may be that it's because the Kremlin has leverage over the president.
[Murray:] Cohen said in a filing that when he was preparing to testify before lawmakers he was in "close and relative contact" with the president's lawyers and White House staff. Cohen would later admit his congressional testimony was a lie. For all Trump's fury with Cohen, he's clearly pleased with long-time political adviser, Roger Stone.
[Roger Stone, Long-time Trump Ally:] There is no circumstance under which I would testify against the president because I would have to bear false witness against him. I would have to make things up.
[Murray:] Trump hailing Stone's comments on Twitter today. "Nice to know that some people still have guts."
[Vause:] And that was political correspondent Sara Murray. And some legal experts say the message from the president to Roger Stone amounts to witness tampering. However, they add, proving that in court is difficult. The president of the United States may be in denial but the U.N. is not. The urgent call for action coming out of COP24, the climate change conference in Poland. That's just ahead. Also the White House maybe not be taking climate change seriously but one Texas city. Coming up, extreme measures in El Paso.

[Berman:] Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen heads to the border with Mexico today after the death of a second migrant child in Border Patrol custody this month. This morning, we're hearing from the mother of the Guatemalan boy who died on Christmas Eve. CNN's Dan Simon is live in El Paso, Texas, where Secretary Nielsen makes her first stop today. Dan.
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, hi, John. Secretary Nielsen's stated reason for coming to the border is to see firsthand the medical screenings that are taking place inside the border control stations. Obviously she is facing this fresh new crisis with two children who have died in less than a month and she wants to see the enhanced screenings that are taking place. She will be in El Paso today and in Yuma, Arizona, tomorrow. In the meantime, we are gaining better insight on why the eight-year-old and the father came this country, why they wanted to leave Guatemala and come to the United States. Well, we're told that the father wanted to find better work and that the son, they said they wanted to give him a better education. But they're also saying that the reason why they brought the son is because they were under the impression that when you bring a child that you have a better chance of gaining entry into the United States, that they were encouraged by their neighbors to bring a child. One of the things that the mother told Reuters is, quote, lots of them have gone with children and managed to cross, even if they're held for a month or two. But they always manage to get across easily. And critics of U.S. immigration policy will say this is exhibit a with what is wrong with the system, that it's a system that incentivizes bringing children across. And this is the latest tragic example of that. Erica, we'll send it back to you.
[Hill:] All right, Dan, we'll take it. Thank you. A massive storm is being blamed for two deaths and flooding in the south and it could now bring blizzard conditions to millions this weekend. CNN meteorologist Jennifer Gray joins us now with your forecast. Jennifer, good morning.
[Jennifer Gray, Ams Meteorologist:] Good morning, Erica. We have a lot to talk about. We have this storm system that's stretching from the northeast all the way down to the south, bringing monster storms to places like New Orleans this morning. Also raining in D.C., New York, Atlanta, Boston getting a mix of rain and even a little bit of snow. But all of this rain over the last 24 hours across the south with this slow-moving system, we saw ten inches plus across southern portions of Mississippi. So we have flash flood watches, flash flood warnings in effect right now. And you can see that area 50 million people under a flood threat. It stretches all the way up to New York City. So the rain accumulation through Saturday morning, we're going to see that bullseye right around the panhandle, stretching all the way up to the northeast. So it is going to be slow-moving at the airports now for big cities like Atlanta, New York, D.C., Boston, all will see delays for today, even seeing delays as far back as Chicago, Cincinnati. Places like Minneapolis finally starting to clear out after snow the last two to three days. But, looking ahead, as we look into New Year's Eve, things don't look much better. That first round will clear out by the weekend, but we have a second round that's going to come through just in time for New Year's Eve, unfortunately. So we are going to bring rain into the new year. So if everyone's heading to the city for the ball drop, you could get wet. But at least temperatures will be warmer than last year. John.
[Berman:] Yes, you're going to get rained on and you can't go to the bathroom for nine hours if you're in Times Square. So, you know, it sounds like a great night. Jennifer Gray, thank you very much for being with us. Appreciate it.
[Gray:] All right.
[Berman:] So as 2018 comes to an end, the eyes of the political world, they're on 2020. Which Democrats will step up to run against Donald Trump? We'll discuss, next.

[Baldwin:] We're back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Special counsel Robert Mueller is offering the president a compromise in the Russia investigation. Mueller suggesting that he would cut the number of obstruction-related questions for the president. But the catch here, he wants the president to answer those questions in person. The president's lawyers had offered written answers to obstruction questions. The Trump legal team wanted the sit-down interview limited to things that had happened before he took office mainly related to the collusion piece of Mueller's probe. This is happening just one day after the president said his attorney general should end the Russia investigation. So back with me, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. And so, Mr. Attorney General, I mean, the president's tweet from yesterday, right, so the White House says, whoa, whoa, that was an opinion, that wasn't an order to the A.G., that Trump wrote the word should and not must. Do you think it crossed the line?
[Gonzales:] I'm not sure that it did, given the past statements by the present. I mean, everyone knows that's the president's opinion and that he would like to he would to see this ended. And everyone knows the president has ways to end this investigation if he wanted to. One of the things I worry about, quite honestly, by the constant whining is it makes the president look weak, the fact that he keeps saying this investigation should be over, Rod Rosenstein should end it, that Attorney General Sessions should do something. The president is head of the executive branch, and these individuals all work within the executive branch, as does the special counsel. And to continue to complain about it, to me, it just makes the president look weak. And I think it's very, very unfortunate. I think it's I think, as a general matter, it's unfortunate for the president be speaking about his attorney general in this way, to be speaking about ending an investigation. I think he needs to allow the investigation to move forward. And as soon and if he does that, and Bob Mueller will end investigation, and it'll be it'll be over, and we will all know exactly what happened in connection with the 2016 presidential election.
[Baldwin:] OK. So the president complaining and whining, and we know he wants this thing to end. But you were once the A.G. I mean, put yourself in Jeff Sessions' shoes. You read the president's tweets. What do you do? Do you ignore the president?
[Gonzales:] This not the first time the president has made this kind of complaint against the attorney general either directly or indirectly. I'm assuming, the first time it happened, Jeff Sessions had a private conversation with the president. They reached some kind of understanding. And now Jeff Sessions, I he's probably immune to it. As far as he's concerned, he's carrying out the president's agenda. And I think most critics of the and supporters of President Trump believe this is probably one of the most effective Cabinet members in carrying out President Trump's agenda. And so long as he's doing that, I think Jeff Sessions is quite comfortable serving as the attorney general and taking these barbs.
[Baldwin:] We have had some reporting this week that the president is worried that the Democrats could actually take back the House, depending on which way the midterms go. And we also know that, in the end, the president's fate will be determined not by Robert Mueller, but by members of Congress. So, with that in mind, here is the president's attorney Rudy Giuliani.
[Rudy Giuliani , Former Mayor Of New York:] I have to say this. And I say this in my role not as a lawyer, but as a concerned citizen and Republican. But this election is going to be about impeachment or no impeachment.
[Baldwin:] But it just he's right. I mean, is he correct that anything Mueller finds will ultimately be up to Congress, sort of jurors in Congress?
[Gonzales:] Well, I think there is a very serious question as to whether or not a president could even be prosecuted. I mean, that's certainly the position of the Department of Justice, as far as that I understand. And there are limits in terms of even what how far you can go in getting testimony from the president, which is why you see Robert Mueller negotiating to try to get some kind of interview with the president, even if it's even if it's limited.. So, at the end of the day, I think what you're likely to say here is Robert Mueller coming up with findings, and even though he can't may not be able to prosecute the president and believes the president engaged in wrongdoing, those findings will be provided to Congress. And then it'll be up to Congress to decide whether or not these crimes reach the level of impeachment.
[Baldwin:] Giuliani also said that Trump would be walking into a perjury trap. Speaking of this potential interview with Mueller, he would be walking into a perjury trap if he agrees to do this interview in person. And I'm curious just what would that suggest to you, hearing that? Would that suggests that his client would have something to hide or that he's doing his job and has his client's back?
[Gonzales:] Well, it could mean that the president has something to hide. It could also mean the president is undisciplined and says things off the cuff.
[Baldwin:] You think?
[Gonzales:] And oftentimes without thinking much thinking much about it. And so he's worried about that, because, obviously, Bob Mueller and his team have interviewed a lot of people in connection with Russia meddling. And so President Trump may say something off the cuff. But, again, there is a serious question as to whether or not the president could even be indicted for perjury, but not but he could, of course, be subject to impeachment if, in fact, Robert Mueller finds possible perjury and refers his findings to the Congress.
[Baldwin:] Last question. Despite what we're hearing from Trump's attorneys, he says essentially bring it on, he wants to do this interview with the Mueller team. What do you think that is? Is that hubris? Is that naivete? Is that a smokescreen?
[Gonzales:] I don't know Donald Trump.
[Baldwin:] OK.
[Gonzales:] It's possible for me to answer that question. He is so different from the president that I served. I just it's I'm not in a position to answer that question. Who knows.
[Baldwin:] Who knows is right. Alberto Gonzales, former U.S. attorney general, thank you so much. Pleasure to have you on.
[Gonzales:] Thanks for having me.
[Baldwin:] Coming up next: Paul Manafort's landscaper on the stand today, testifying about nearly half-a-million dollars in payments he got from an offshore bank account, details on those sorts of revelations from this federal courthouse today. Also ahead, President Trump compares Manafort to Al Capone. We will talk to a writer who argues that there are quite a few similarities between the former mob boss and Trump himself.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] just a moment here in Las Vegas, authority is expected to brief reporters and the public on the progress they have made, the latest on the investigation since thousands of shots rained down behind me. As we wait for the press conference to begin. I want to quickly go to CNN's Kyung Lah, because what we know so far, so what more do we know now about the run-up to this?
[Kyung Lah, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] We know he was very methodical. We about the planning, according to the sheriff, he planned for this for a very, very long time.
[Cooper:] Collecting weapons?
[Lah:] Collecting weapons, especially if you look at the weapons history. But perhaps, most startling in what we learned in the last news conference from the sheriff were these cameras, cameras that were inside hotel room, cameras that were in the hallway. The sheriff explaining that the reason he had these cameras out here is because he wanted to see when law enforcement would be approaching, about the outcome and that was very clear, Anderson.
[Cooper:] And I mean, it seems like he I mean, I don't know if it was the cameras that gave him the warning that law enforcement was approaching. Because there was he did fire at law enforcement when they initially came.
[Lah:] And you're absolutely, right. What they did discover is that they did have that exchange. He was alive on that first contact. It wasn't until that second contact after that exchange of fire so that's when they discovered that he took of his life.
[Cooper:] If it's
[Lah:] It's a little unclear as far as the tick-tac. We know that was approximately 72 minutes from when the actual shooting begin on the crowd to when they were able to reach the room. So that timing is still a little bit murky.
[Cooper:] Right. Still so much that we don't know about obviously motivations and things like that.
[Lah:] Absolutely. And I think that's perhaps most frustrating. And you know from having covered unfortunately so many of these, we simply have don't have a clear motivation as of yet. And that's why these constant news conferences that's the question that keeps coming up over and over again from reporters, what was the motivation. So they try to focus on the guns. What we now know, 49 guns accumulated from three different sites. And we went to one gun shop in Utah. He went to Arizona, California, Nevada, we went to Utah and spoke to a gun shop owner and here's what the gun shop owner told us.
[Chris Michel, Owner, Dixie Gunworx:] Every regulation federal regulation that is in place, he passed. He passed right through them with no problems. He passed all of our background checks here in the store. He passed every red flag that could have popped up. But it's still there. It's still something that I'm still going what else could I have done better, what could I have done? There's nothing.
[Cooper:] He has a sense of guilt obviously.
[Lah:] Even though he sold him a shotgun. That's what I found remarkable. He sold him a shotgun, the weapons that were found that we've seen so far, the high-powered rifles. So I found that quite extraordinary. And he says what we have to understand is that we cannot vilify gun shop owners. Guns are legal in the United States through some checks. There has to be a conversation about it. He says that gun shop owners should try to see those red flags, that he missed something that's why
[Cooper:] And that's the thing, I mean, there are no criminal record that we know of with this guy. Do we know much about the girlfriend?
[Lah:] That's what you know, we all want to know about this girlfriend. She's in the Philippines. We understand she's cooperating. She's a person of interest. We heard that clearly from the sheriff. She lived with him not just in his
[Cooper:] I'm told the press conference is about to begin. Let's listen in.
[Undersheriff Kevin Mcmahill, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police:] I'm going to provide you the final briefing for today. And as promised in our last briefing, we now have the LVMPD.com site up and running. It's a page list of resources available to our victims, our family representatives of victims involved in the route 91 Harvest Festival shooting. Information on the site includes instructions on how to report information if you are a witness, important phone numbers on how to provide photo and video evidence as soon as we have information on how to retrieve lost property. As the sheriff told you previously, we'll post that on the page as well. After this incident, one of the most striking visuals in addition to the absolute carnage was the sheer amount of personal items left behind as people fled from the terror. One of the biggest items left were vehicles of the concert goers. So for those people that are waiting to get that property returned to them, I have an update. There's a dirt lot on the corner of Giles Street, G-I-L-E-S between Ali Baba and Mandalay road. There's approximately 150 vehicles over there that citizens have not yet been able to be recover. Those cars can now be picked up by the registered owner by meeting officers at the corner of Reno and Koval. We'll have officers permanently assigned there post to that corner to escort you to your vehicle. So again, we ask the owners of those that had patiently waited to get them back to meet our officers at the corner of Reno and Koval. Bring your identifications so we can match you back to your vehicle. The sheriff in the previous press conference was asked a number of questions by you. And I understand in the insatiable appetite of the media that you want some answers. I'm going to try to answer a couple of those questions that you asked. But I'm also going to just make it very clear to you that I need some patience from you. This investigation is a long time from being concluded. We recently went down to the Mandalay Bay. I can tell you that we're days away from completion of the processing of that room. We're getting very close to the completion of the processing of the site. We have a significant amount of time left there as well. However, the southbound portion of Las Vegas Boulevard is now completely open. We are also working diligently as we speak. I believe we just opened up two of the northbound lanes. And the completion of the northbound lanes should occur sometime this evening. So bearing in mind that the investigation is dynamic, ongoing, continuing, and I don't have a lot of answers for you yet. And clearly understanding that nobody wants answers to why more than the police and the victims' families. But we have a responsibility to get it right, and so that's why it's going to take time, and that's why we're going to take that time. However, there's some, I guess, at best interesting reporting about how long the shooting lasted and how long it took us to get into the room. First question is how long did the actual shooting last? I'm prepared to give you information on that. And the first call came into our dispatch center at 10:08 p.m. about shots being fired. The suspect, I can tell you that we know now that he fired off and on for somewhere between nine and 11 minutes. We know that the suspect fired over a dozen or so volleys, and we know that the firing by the suspect ceased at 10:19. So I want you to think about that. The minute the first minute the police are aware of shots being fired at 10:08, and it stops at 10:19. That's a remarkable response by this police department. Also, another question that came up, how long was it before our SWAT team entered the suspect's room? Somebody said you heard that it was 72 minutes and if why so long. As I just mentioned to you, as the sheriff mentioned previously in the briefing, we had patrol officers actually working another event at the Mandalay Bay who heard the shooting and they took it upon themselves to form up into a team, enter the stairwell, begin ascending the floors, and also evacuating hotel guests. The SWAT team had to arrive first at the Mandalay Bay before they could take any action. As I mentioned earlier, there was a very heroic security guard who was shot during the search for that suspect. That security guard went up to the room, he was advancing towards the room when the suspect fired through the door at the security guard and struck him. He was able to provide additional information to the police on exactly which room we were looking at. However, at that time, it's important to note that the shooting had stopped. We're considering it a barricade at that point because there's no longer inactive shooter. We're not hearing any further shots. The floors had already been evacuated of the guests. The suspect was now isolated and contained within a room. At the point that the SWAT team made their decision based on when it was appropriate to enter, I want to make it clear, again, to you that while there was that slight delay, the suspect was no longer firing into the crowd. There was a question about the validity of the crime scene photos that somebody had leaked. I can confirm those are in fact photos from inside of the room. They are in fact photos of our suspect, and as the sheriff mentioned previously we have all opened up an internal investigation to determine the source of the leaks of those photos to the public. You asked what we found in the sheriff or in the suspect's room and the sheriff spoke a little bit about cameras being located. To clarify, there were two cameras located in the hallway so that the suspect could watch as law enforcement or security approached his room. And there was another camera placed inside the hotel room door peephole so that he could see down the hallway. At this point, you had a number of questions about the weapons and the SAC from the ATF to my right, Jill Synder will answer or provide a statement to you, but not take any questions.
[Jill Snyder, Atf:] Good evening. I'm Special Agent in charge, Jill Snyder of ATF San Francisco Field Division. Special Agents from the San Francisco Field Divisions Las Vegas Field Office responded to the shooting that occurred on Sunday. Additional agents from other locations within the San Francisco Field Division as well as agents from ATFs Los Angeles, Dallas, Phoenix, and Boston Field Divisions have been working on this investigation. We know that you have many questions regarding the firearms in this case. There's also been a lot of unofficial information being recorded reported regarding the guns. We'd like to clear up any conflicting information regarding the number of firearms and the current status of the trace information. Please understand that this investigation is ongoing and I won't be taking questions at this time because we're still working through all of our investigative findings, but I'll give you the facts that we have as of this time. Currently, 47 firearms have been are recovered. These firearms were recovered from three different locations. Those locations consisted of the hotel room, as well as Verde and Mesquite, Nevada. They were purchased in Nevada, Utah, California, and Texas. The gunman purchased rifles, shotguns, and pistols. At this time, none of the guns recovered appear to be home made. There were 12 bump fire stocks identified on the firearms in the hotel room. The ATF Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division provides determinations on devices such as bump fire stocks and their legality. The classification of these devices depends on where they mechanically alter the function of the firearm to fire fully automatic. Bump fire stocks while simulating automatic fire do not actually alter the firearm to fire automatically, making them legal under current federal law. It is still being determined which firearms were used in the shooting. All of the firearms have been traced. We are still awaiting results from some of the firearms that were located at the Mesquite residences. As the investigations proceeds, ATF will continue to conduct interviews and provide our resources and full support to the sheriff and all our local law enforcement partners. Thank you.
[Mcmahill:] Thank you. As this investigation continues on, we continue to hear stories of heroics by police officers, first responders and average citizens alike. I commend all of their actions as they showed immense courage in the face of extreme danger. I want to mention one of those brave people was Las Vegas Metropolitan police officer Charleston Hartfield. Officer Hartfield was at the route 91 concert that night along with his wife when shots rang out. Even though Officer Hartfield was at the concert as a civilian, he immediately took action to save lives. In that moment he was acting as a police officer. He ultimately gave his life protecting others. Officer Hartfield was an 11-year member of the LVMPD and leaves behind a wife and two children. We're grateful for his sacrifice. There will be a vigil to remember of Officer Hartfield this Thursday, October 5th at the Police Memorial Park at 6:00 p.m. As you all know that park is located at 3250 Metro Academy way and it's being hosted by our police protective association. As this community has become accustomed, we do provide information and regards to our critical incidents. We release body-worn camera footage to you. There's a significant amount of body-worn camera footage that we're going through. However, I'm going to play a clip on our new very large monitor for you of a compilation of a number of those body-worn cameras. You'll see that the officers were dealing with some uncooperative citizens at times, but at all times they were trying to locate the source of the gunfire as well as evacuate those citizens that were in the line of fire. I think the video will speak for itself. So if you'd like to, I'll try to narrate just a little bit for you as we go through. But Carlos if you could play that for me, please. That wall faces Mandalay Bay and they are hunkered down behind that wall after an initial bullet of shots. [Off-mic] At this point they're still trying to figure out where the rounds are coming from. [ They're talking off of official helping down to a patrol vehicle on Las Vegas Boulevard. One of our officers gets shot. [ This video is of security. You notice the officers were wearing those yellow reflective vests. That's what you're actually seeing. [ Very difficult to tell from that video, but they officer is actually standing over another woman. [ When you see have a vest on. [ So before I take some questions, I understand that the Coroner is here now. Oh I'm sorry, I was looking right back to John. This is John Fudenberg, Clark County Coroner.
[John Fudenberg, Clark County Coroner:] Thank you, Undersheriff. Again, I'd like to just start by saying that my condolences go out to all those that are involved in this incident, specifically the family and friends who have lost loved ones in this incident. I would like to provide you some information some updated information on what's happening at the Family Assistance Center at the convention center. We have work fully operational all evening, all through the night. And tomorrow at noon, we'll make a determination whether or not we're going to be open 24 hours going forward. But at minimum, we will be open from present time to 5:00 p.m. tomorrow. So we're still fully operational to answer any questions the families may have, any friends of the families. And I would also like to clarify we are not releasing property at the Family Assistance Center. That is as the sheriff mentioned earlier, that is going to be released. There's they're developing a plan currently to release that property in the future, and I'm certain that will put out during one of these press conferences. I'd like to also discuss some of the numbers that we've been dealing with over here. I had that question earlier by multiple media outlets. I it's estimated we've served well over 1000 family members and friends there at the Family Assistance Center. We're providing all sorts of services to include bereavement services, and our staff at the Clark County Coroners office has been meeting with every family that comes in there. And I'd like to again, thank them. They are an amazing group of people and they've been doing an amazing job in serving these families. I think everybody except for the families would consider this a huge success at the Family Assistance Center and rightfully. So I think the reason the families may not is because if they are waiting one minute longer for us to provide the information that's too long. So they have been very patient, I appreciate that. And I just want to send a message to them that we are doing everything we can to communicate with them and get them the information that they need. If they want to come down to the Family Assistance Center, we're there to receive them and communicate with them. If they're not able to attend the Family Assistance Center, I'd like to provide you with a phone number that has been previous published and that is within the State of Nevada, 211, outside of the state of Nevada that's 1866-535-5654. We have call takers standing by to take missing persons reports. I believe that's tailored off quite a bit. Today, we have received over 3,000 missing person's reports. And I'd like to clarify what that means so people don't misreport the intent of that number or the intent of me giving you that number. That by no means that we have 3,000 people missing. We believe that all 59 of the deceased are identified. Tentatively we're working on positively identifying the rest of them and we believe that will happen by the end of this evening. We estimate in between 9:00 and 10:00 p.m. So, that's very normal for us to receive an excessive amount of missing person's reports following an incident like that. So, again that be no means we have outstanding missing persons. We have very detailed manifest and we believe that everybody involved in the incident from the decent standpoint is accounted for and we're waiting to communicate that with the families. So, I'm available to answer questions you have. I have limited time to answer questions so I'll take a few. Yes, go ahead. [Off-mic]
[Fudenberg:] Excuse me?
[Unidentified Female:] Everybody who died and
[Fudenberg:] Yes. The majority of them did. I'm not at liberty to tell you whether or not all of them did died as a result of gunshot wounds simply because I don't know at this point.
[Unidentified Male:] How long we could a list for names of those?
[Fudenberg:] I'm working with the Metropolitan Police Department to develop that list, and we'll make that public. I would imagine that's not going to happen until the earliest tomorrow morning.
[Unidentified Female:] The three victims of the shooting
[Fudenberg:] We have as I spoke to earlier, we have tentatively identified them, but we're working on some confirmation issues, and I'm confident they will all be identified. We believe we know who every single one of them is. It's just a matter of confirming that. We don't have the liberty to make mistakes. So, we've got to get this right, as the Undersheriff mentioned earlier we've got to get this right. So we need your patience and we're going to work through the night to get that right and I'm hopeful that we'll have all those confirmed by tomorrow morning and the families notified. Yes, sir?
[Unidentified Male:] Sir, you said the majority died of gunshot wounds [Off-mic]
[Fudenberg:] I don't believe so, but, again, I can't confirm that right now.
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Coroners have you completed an autopsy from Mr.
[Fudenberg:] I'm not going to speak to examining date of the details of the examinations at this point.
[Unidentified Male:] Have you completed it?
[Fudenberg:] Excuse me?
[Unidentified Male:] Have you completed it?
[Fudenberg:] Again, I'm not going to speak to any of the details of the examinations at this point, primarily out of respect for the families. And I hope you understand that. Yes, did you have a question? [Off-mic] Well, that's quite a lengthy process, but in a nut shell, the families of the decedents will make arrangements with the local area mortuaries and they are the folks that provide details and provide the transportation back to their home states. Yes, one last question if you would.
[Unidentified Male:] percentage of how many victims from local and how many are
[Fudenberg:] I don't have that estimation but we're putting that together and we should have that by the time our list is finalized and confirmed. [Off-mic] It does not. Excuse me, could you I'm not sure I understood that and I want to give you accurate information [ No, no. We have 58 dead plus the shooter for a total of 59.
[Unidentified Male:] And when you release the list, are you going to post it online at the same time you
[Fudenberg:] This is the last question. I don't know.
[Unidentified Male:] OK.
[Fudenberg:] But that will be announced through one of these press conferences probably later today or most likely tomorrow at some point. And that's all the questions I'm going to take. Thank you very much for your time. [Off-mic] I can clarify the 59. We have confirmed 59 dead in our office. Yes, 58 plus the shooter for a total of 59. And that is confirmed. OK, thank you very much Undersheriff.
[Mcmahill:] You're welcome. Thank you.
[Ken:] Mr. Undersheriff back into [Off-mic]
[Mcmahill:] I didn't call on you first, Ken, but go ahead.
[Ken:] Is there another death somewhere else? We were told previously 59 plus one.
[Mcmahill:] Yes. But remember we also told at you that the numbers of dead and wounded will continue to fluctuate, so the answer the corner provided you is the most recent relevant number we have.
[Unidentified Male:] Undersheriff, is there any indication that he was planning something else a couple weeks beforehand in your investigation are you seeing that?
[Mcmahill:] No. I'm not prepared to speak about that, but that is part of our investigation.
[Unidentified Male:] Undersheriff, with the knowledge that Philippines, possibility he is been
[Mcmahill:] We haven't absolutely ruled anything out in this investigation. What I can just the listen, I'm not trying to coy, right? But I can confirm to you we have not ruled anything out.
[Unidentified Male:] I mentioned
[Mcmahill:] But I also confirmed that we have not ruled that in. So we have a lot more questions than we have answers today. [Off-mic] I understand that, we're well aware of that. I'm sorry go ahead sir.
[Unidentified Male:] Can we get an update on any of the electronics that have bring with
[Mcmahill:] I'll get back to you when we have it. It's not a simple process, it takes at the same time and we have guys working diligently on that for us. Let me finish before you ask, all right? Thank you. Go ahead.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you have information whether the shooter trained himself to fire these weapons? Did he visit gun ranges? How did he train himself to fire this?
[Mcmahill:] Right, so the question is do we have any information that the suspect had trained himself in firearms? I'm aware that online reporting as well. We have not been able to confirm any of that information yet.
[Unidentified Male:] Is there a theory on why the gunman stopped shooting? Did he see officers outside? Or is there's a timeframe?
[Mcmahill:] The investigation will obviously reveal that. I believe personally because the security guards approached to the room, obviously took his attention away and he fired at the security guard. And then the immediate police response that followed on.
[Unidentified Male:] Undersheriff, tell me bout what you're hoping to learn from this family when investigators speak with her. How will that investigation how will that interview help advance in the investigation?
[Mcmahill:] Great question, I can't reveal that because we don't know yet. We have a lot of questions, I can tell you that.
[Unidentified Female:] on the timeline, the SWAT team entered around what time? And what point of the shooter back in
[Mcmahill:] Yes. The question is can I give you the exact time that SWAT entered. I was hoping to provide that to you today. I'll provide that or the Sheriff will provide that in the next briefing.
[Unidentified Female:] But there would some
[Mcmahill:] There is a delay because he was not firing anymore. We treated the situation as a barricade at that point. [Off-mic] I don't know what the time was. I'm working on trying to verify that information about when SWAT actually made entry, via both radio communication and body-worn camera communication.
[Unidentified Female:] who came to the door with the security guard with the SWAT team?
[Mcmahill:] The SWAT team is not a normal SWAT team. It was made up of both SWAT officers, patrol officers, and a K-9 unit.
[Unidentified Female:] Undersheriff, on the same information that panic may have check into the
[Mcmahill:] I can't confirm that information now, but we've heard that same allegation.
[Unidentified Male:] Undersheriff
[Mcmahill:] The question is, is Ms. Danley coming back to the country, and we're aware of some information, but not prepared to release that at this point in the investigation.
[Unidentified Male:] Is she in custody?
[Mcmahill:] I take two more, back here.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you at least confirm the reports that he wired $100,000 to an account in her name, in Marilou Danley's name?
[Mcmahill:] Right. The question is, can we confirm that $100,000 was wired to the Philippines? The answer is no. We have financial subpoenas that the FBI has put out, remains an active part of our investigation. We certainly want to know the answer on that question.
[Unidentified Female:] Can you confirm what time the security officer was shot that approached the door?
[Mcmahill:] You know, it's just moments prior to our initial officers responding up there, so we'll add that to the questions that we can answer again tomorrow. And with that I'm going to say this to you. I apologize. I forgot to introduce the Special Agent in charge of the Las Vegas Field Office, Aaron Rouse. And it's just been such great partners with us through out this investigation. And as you know, we've been joined at the hip from the very beginning as well. I'd like you to just make sure you pay attention to our elected officials from across this great state and here locally, Congressman Kihuen, and I'm sorry General
[Cooper:] You heard the latest there from authorities including you just saw police body cam video, a gun fire erupting from above. You get a sense of the confusion as officers were trying to figure out exactly where the shots were coming from, from the Mandalay. Behind me, you heard about the bump fire slide stocks identified weapons in the hotel room according ATF. Joining us now is retired FBI Supervisor Special Agent James Gagliano, also Former Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, Juliette Kayyem is with us as well. To me, one of the most interesting things is sort of the timeline breakdown, that the shoots this guy was shooting for about nine to 11 minutes they say, which sort of the answer to the question about why they waited for SWAT team to come in order to breach the room because it was no longer that he was not an active shooter. He wasn't actually firing. It was then it was a barricade situation?
[James Gagliano, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Right, Anderson. What we know about active shooter situations usually, usually, interdict by the first time by the police between three to 10 minutes.
[Cooper:] Right. The FBI e has done a study of like every active shooter situation since Columbine and they find most the deaths occur within those first minutes.
[Gagliano:] And that was the big After Action Review lessons learned from Columbine because at that point if you didn't have a homogenous SWAT unit, a team that worked together, police were left to inner folks that time where we've learned post-Columbine is you can't do that.
[Cooper:] Right. The Columbine, they basically made a perimeter waited for SWAT and even then they waited and some of the people like the teacher, the centers bled out after lying on the floor after four hours.
[Gagliano:] The lessons learned from this and I have to give kudos and credit to the Las Vegas Police Department and their Sheriff's Department. As a former FBI SWAT team leader, and a member of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team, what happened with the initial assault, the first guys that got up there within the 11 minutes, that probably took the attention of the shooter away from the two windows in his barricaded situation, and that slowed him down. Now, it goes from a hasty assault which was what they were doing to a deliberate assault as soon as he stops shooting because the only reason you would make a dynamic entry is this, first thing, stop more killing. Second thing, if it's a hostage situation. We didn't believe there were hostages inside. The shooting had start, now you take a step back put together delivered plan, you bring in folks that have explosive breaching capabilities. Now, I'll tell you we're in the hotel, those doors are steal doors with steal frames. Those are difficult to enter without explosive
[Copper:] And what we don't know at this point is, and thank goodness the shooter did stop, but why the shooter chose to stop? You know, there was the initial confrontation. He shots through the door at the hotel security guard.
[Gagliano:] Right.
[Cooper:] We just learned the police were there, the first responders are there, but then I mean theoretically we don't know why he didn't continue firing outside that window.
[Gagliano:] What we know so far, OK, we know that he had weapons that run by bipods and they were positioned in two doors and he created the perfect death funnel down there. But we also know that you mentioned before the bump sticks that were used, these are after market products. And unfortunately they are not illegal right now because they do not permanently modify the weapon. It's not like you're spieling down the sheer, or doing something to make it fire fully automatic. You jam the stick in and it keeps it open, the bolt open so it continues to cycle
[Cooper:] It is a work around to make a fully automatic?
[Gagliano:] It is a work around, absolutely. So, in that situation, maybe there is a weapon malfunction, maybe because of the crazy sustained rate of fire. Remember an M4, the automatic weapons like that they can fire 750 to 900 rounds per minute. That heats the barrel up, possibly a jam. And then also, he probably wanted to go back and forth because these people were panicking not knowing where the shoots were coming from. He move to one side, he funneled people back this way, move to the other side funneled back this way, keep them in the kill zone.
[Copper:] Juliette, it's fascinating though that this person and we don't know what level of training he may have had, it didn't seemed to have a military record as far as I've heard. But had the presence of mind to have camera set up in the corridor, two cameras according to authorities to see law enforcement coming and also a camera in the peephole, which I guess allowed him to fire at the security guard through door.
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] That's exactly right. And, you know, since we don't know a motive yet, maybe to memorialize what he viewed as a sort of the moment of heroism. However, he and his mind view this, that he wanted to memorialize this act for himself or for the future. I have no doubt that we will eventually see some of those videos. We've already seen some of them. And just, you know, sort of I want to just say about that press conference, my two big takeaways, just from the last hour Anderson when we were together. One is they are back tracking a little bit on the girlfriend. Remember, earlier today they said she was on route. The sheriff would not confirm that now. You know, I have my focus on her and I don't know where she is or and the $100,000 that they would not confirm, whether a $100,000 had been spend to her. So, we don't have official verification that she's in fact on route or that she got this $100,000. The second thing is, of course, I want to get my numbers right, 47 firearms, 12 bump stock devices. Bump stock devices, you heard the woman from the ATF, and I forget her name, I apologize. She was sort of twisting and turning trying to define what the pump stock device does and doesn't do. She says they don't mechanically alter the gun, therefore they're not illegal. Even an ATF person finds it hard to explain how these are use in any way, expect for to alter the experience and therefore the impact of a semiautomatic to an automatic. And so, while we're talking about the, you know, the motive, we also need to really talk about these bump stock devices, the 12 of them. How were they obtained? Why were they obtained? And why are they lawful on the market? No one can not even the ATF woman could gave speaking at this press conference gave anything but I'd have to say sort of a contorted explanation for why they're legal. And I guess, the definition is they don't mechanically alter the gun. That just that's not passed in any straight phase test at the stage, especially after a massacre.
[Cooper:] And Juliette, also I mean to what we were talking about a moment ago, the idea that, you know, the initial team that is up there helped it change from an active shooter situation, he stopped firing out into the crowd, directed fire at the first responders. But then, according to authorities now, did not continue firing outside, which is why they were waiting for the SWAT team to arrive to actually breach it in the most in the safest most professional way possible.
[Kayyem:] That's exactly right because remember, there's communication probably ongoing at this time. While they're having him in a right position, in other words, he's not shooting at the stage. They don't know whether there's IED or something else set up that when they open the door the whole place explode. They have no idea. So their situation awareness is simply we have now stopped the killing. But remember, this is dynamic because down below as we saw in the video, the police are moving everyone out of what we've been calling this fish bowl. So, as much you know, even if they only got five minutes, 20 minutes, 25 minutes, they are moving people out of the line of fire. So there's two things going on, both holding him in the hotel room and moving future victims or potential future victims out of the way. So, it sounds all right to me just based on our experiences of other mass shootings at this stage.
[Cooper:] Yes. The Undersheriff a moment ago talked about how this killer built himself a kind of armed bunker or gunner's nest in that room. James Gagliano mentioned this as well. I do want to bring Tom Foreman who is then looking in this in our virtual studio, Tom?
[Tom Foreman, Cnn Correspondent:] Anderson, we knew that he had this commanding view of the strip and the concert area over here from this 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay. What is emerging though is very picture of a man who built sort of a fortress up here, and a trap for any police who tried to come and get him out of this suite of room. Look, pretty big space up here. When we talk about the hallway, the funnel of death, one of the people shared awhile ago, that's what we're talking about right here. One hallway approaching this area. That's where he had two cameras outside, one hidden on a room service cart in this hallway, the other one aiming out of a peephole in the door, right there to look right down the hallway. And that's the only way police officers could have approached this room. And inside the room, what did he have? He had n arsenal spread out through all this place. He had more 20 guns, we now know that 12 of them were set up with these bump stocks so he could fire like automatic weapons. Some of them had these bipods on them which allow them to be steady better for shooting over a longer distance. Remember, you're shooting 400, 500 yards, that's quite a distance out there. Some of them had powerful scopes on them. You can see where he sort of set up a little receptacle here out of the furniture to put them inside there and he had a tremendous amount of ammunition. In this shot, if you look right along there, you can see some of the magazines stacked right there. And this is one of the windows he was shooting out of here. So he used this hammer to smash out some windows. Look, we're going to the front door right here and you can look where he did this. If we change our shot and move in, you can see if you're in that front door and turn right, right next to the pillar that's where he smashed out one of the windows. And then he smashed out another one a little bit further down. And from these positions, Anderson, that's where he had this absolutely commanding view of everyone down below. And as we were told now, he spent nine to 11 minutes raining bullets down upon these people. Anderson?
[Cooper:] It's just sickening. Tom, thanks very much for that, Juliette Kayyem as well and James Gagliano. Coming up, a couple married for 32 years. They were enjoying traveling during retirement until this trip his wife, his high school sweet heart died in his arms. We're going to talk to him next.

[Michael Smerconish, Cnn Contributor:] And that is that the president was very concerned at the time that they were resolving the two litigation items that were outstanding, the so-called hush payments, because of the election. The fundamental issue here is, were those two payments made in an attempt to keep silent those women's comments in the face of the election? And, of course, prosecutors and Michael Cohen, AMI, David Pecker, they all say yes. It requires getting into the president's brain in order to bring a successful prosecution. And one key to doing that is whatever Michael Cohen can relate that he was told by Donald Trump at the time that they resolved those matters, because you know what the president will say. If asked, the president will say, it had nothing to do with the campaign, I was acting to protect my marriage, I was acting to protect my young son, I was acting to protect my brand, in the event this campaign didn't end well.
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] Right. But, of course, Michael Cohen in that issue was part of the Southern District of New York's filings, and one of the years he got three years in prison as a sentence was because they say he hadn't fully cooperated with them. And that's something the president continues to go after, his credibility, in saying he's not truthful. Why do you think Cohen, who is now claiming to be a changed man, has been holding back, according to Southern District of New York? What has he been waiting for?
[Smerconish:] Well, Ana, there a couple of different reasons. One is if he had a full cooperation agreement, it would have put the onus on him, a burden on him to explain in detail any and every time that he violated the law and his full knowledge of others with whom he was dealing who had done likewise. And maybe he just didn't want to open himself up to that extent. A more favorable outcome or answer for Michael Cohen would be one that said, this has wreaked havoc on him professionally and personally, and, frankly, he wants to get it over. And the quickest way to get it over is to take his lumps and frankly get to jail on March 6, rather than see this thing continue on with his outcome hanging in the balance.
[Cabrera:] As we just laid up at the top of the show, six Trump business entities are now under investigation, the walls clearly closing in on the president. Michael, what do you think is going on right now in the White House?
[Smerconish:] I think probably most concerned, because it's immediate and we know a great deal about it, is that what you're describing coming out of the Southern District of New York. This may end up posing more crises for the White House then does whatever Mueller might conclude. We just don't know what Mueller has. But we do know a great deal because of the Cohen plea about this claim that could be made against the president for his role in violating federal election law. Now, of course, you know, Ana, that the precedent is that you don't indict a sitting president. So maybe he's protected in that regard. And one of the questions that I have is, what ultimately happens at the end of the road with the Southern District investigation? Does it get folded into the Mueller probe? Is it presented in some way that Congress if they wanted to could act on it? That's unclear.
[Cabrera:] We don't really know what's happening behind the scenes in the White House, but we do get a sense of what may be happening, the conversation on Capitol Hill, particularly among Republicans, many of whom shrugged off the campaign finance violation allegations that you say are perhaps the most threatening right now against this president. Among those Republicans initially brushing this off was Orrin Hatch, who said this to CNN's Manu Raju.
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] I don't care. All I can say is, he's doing a good job as president. I don't think he was involved in crimes. But even then, you can make anything a crime under the current laws. If you want to, you can blow way out of proportion. You can do a lot of things.
[Cabrera:] Well, now that senator says he has regrets for making those comments, calling them quote "irresponsible" and adding that while he doesn't feel President Trump broke the law, no one is above the law. What do you think inspired this about-face?
[Smerconish:] So let's assume that in the end Mueller doesn't have collusion, Mueller doesn't have obstruction of justice, Mueller issues a report that is condemning of the president for some of his behavior, but does not color out a case for a criminal indictment, and we're left only with that which we know from the Southern District of New York. Is this enough to begin an impeachment process? I could see Democratically controlled House of Representatives voting for impeachment. But now, to answer your question, ultimately, then, it gets to the Republican-controlled United States Senate. And I'm sure there's a mentality amongst some in the Senate that, in the end, the underlying conduct here was sex. And we learned our lesson 20 years ago, perhaps, that if that's the underlying conduct, it's not enough to meet the standard for a conviction in the United States Senate. I'm not buying into that necessarily. I'm just trying to explain that mind-set.
[Cabrera:] All right, Michael Smerconish, we will see. Thank you very much for your time.
[Smerconish:] Thank you, Ana.
[Cabrera:] And don't forget Michael's show, "SMERCONISH," is tomorrow morning at 9:00 Eastern here on CNN. We have more breaking news now on a high-stakes meeting that was just announced involving President Trump, a possible government shutdown. It is set to happen sometime this afternoon. Let's get right to Phil Mattingly live on Capitol Hill. What can you tell us about this upcoming meeting?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Ana, this is all about government funding, and whether or not a week from today the government will be set to shut down. Now, you remember President Trump in that now infamous Oval Office meeting with the Democratic leaders earlier this week said he would be willing to take the blame for any government shutdown. Republicans both in the Senate and the House not so keen on that. However, things have been almost frozen, I'm told, over the course of the last week or so, as Republicans on Capitol Hill have waited for some signal from the president in terms of what he wants to do next. He may be at least presented with options to make that decision shortly. He's supposed to meet with his head of legislative affairs, also supposed to meet with OMB Director Mick Mulvaney on these issues. And one of the items is going to be presented to him, I'm told, is something that Republicans on Capitol Hill have started to coalesce behind, and that is punting the funding fight for at least another two weeks. This would mean he would not get $5 billion in his wall money, he would not get any wall money specifically. He would get a continuation of the $1.3 billion in border security that is already set. Essentially, what this would do is freeze the current spending levels for another two weeks and punt the fight into January. What happens in January? Well, Ana, you know, well, that's when Nancy Pelosi, the speaker-designate, will likely take the gavel and House Democrats will take the majority over there. The calculation from Republicans on Capitol Hill is, since they don't expect Democrats to move at all right now, better to have the holidays and set that fight up for when Democrats take the majority in the House, maybe set Democrats in the majority in the House up for some blame or at least a battle with one on one with the president. That's where they are. I will note extreme caution, in the sense that the president has not made any decisions yet, I'm told. This meeting will be really the first time these types of options are put in front of him for any type of decision. So we don't know where he's going to go. He's certainly been steadfast that he wants to have the fight now, and that the $5 billion for the wall is crucial for him moving forward. Will he stick to that? Well, people have been waiting for an answer. We may get one soon, Ana.
[Cabrera:] And, Phil, do we know who's going to be in this meeting?
[Mattingly:] So we do know that the head of legislative affairs, Shahira Knight, will be there. We also know that OMB Director Mick Mulvaney is supposed to meet with the president as well. And these are really kind of the crucial players, not just in laying out the options, but also conveying what they're hearing from Capitol Hill. And, again, in talking to Republican lawmakers, both publicly and privately over the course of the last couple days, the enthusiasm to have a bare-knuckle brawl that we have seen so often in these spending fights has really just dissipated in the course of the last couple days, not just because the president kind of took the P.R. message away in saying the shutdown would be his fault, but also because of the holidays and because the recognition that, as it currently stands, Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, and Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, have made clear they're not moving on this issue of the wall. They don't want a drawn-out shutdown. Might as well punt it to the next year, then try again. We will see if the president is willing to agree to that, Ana.
[Cabrera:] All right, Phil Mattingly, we know the president also has holiday plans, so nobody wants to be stuck in Washington. We appreciate you. Thank you. I want to get to our breaking news that just dropped. Robert Mueller just filed another memo, this one involving Michael Flynn, and this submission may have a big impact on Flynn's punishment when he is sentenced next week, the special counsel issuing a response to the sentencing memo of Flynn's attorneys. Now, remember, we already know both sides agree on one major point. The man who was President Trump's national security adviser for 23 days should not get any jail time for lying to federal investigators. And that's because of Flynn's early and his ongoing quote "substantial assistance" that from Mueller's own filing, which foreshadows quote "some of that benefit may not be fully realized at this time because the investigations in which he has provided assistance are ongoing." I want to bring in our panel now, Evan Perez, Shimon Prokupecz, and Jennifer Rodgers, to discuss this. I mean, this came out as we were just talking on air to Phil Mattingly. Evan, what are you learning?
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, one of the things, Ana, we were talking last hour is the Flynn legal team. One of the things they mentioned in their memo was that the circumstances under which he was interviewed, the FBI came to interview Michael Flynn, and they never told him that lying to the FBI is a crime. They didn't sort of give him the warnings that you often hear in these interviews. And so they mentioned that in their filing. So the special counsel responds to this now, and it says: "The circumstances of the defendant's interview, which are further described below, are not mitigating." In other words, it makes no difference. They're saying that they're sticking obviously to the idea that Michael Flynn does not deserve any prison time for that he has given substantial help to this investigation. But they're saying that the things that the legal team has raised, the questions over whether or not he was warned, whether or not the FBI sort of put him at ease and didn't tell him exactly what this was about before they came over, none of that matters. They say that Michael Flynn obviously is a national security adviser for the president. He is a former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. He's a longtime military decorated military veteran. He should know that lying to the FBI is a crime. So none of that should matter. And, look, I think what the special counsel is trying to do is get ahead of any issues that the judge might raise as a result of this. They're making sure that the judge gets the clear picture here that what Michael Flynn did is was lying, is plain and straight lying.
[Cabrera:] Yes.
[Perez:] It doesn't matter what the circumstances under which those lies occurred.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Correspondent:] So, in these in what was just filed, his actual interview, what's called a 302 that the now fired FBI agent Peter Strzok filled out after he interviewed Michael Flynn. But we also now learn that Peter Strzok was interviewed by FBI agents separately about his interaction with Michael Flynn, and what how he describes Michael Flynn's demeanor at the time of the interview is quite interesting. What he says is, throughout the interview, Flynn had a very sure demeanor and did not give any indicators of deception. He did not parses words or hesitate in any of his answers. He only hedged once, which they documented, the FBI agents, Peter Strzok documented in his 302. And then Strzok said that he and this other FBI agent who interviewed Flynn had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying. Flynn struck Strzok, the FBI agent, as bright, but not profoundly sophisticated. So that's interesting. It's giving you some color of what it was like in that interview. What's interesting about this is that Flynn's attorneys are arguing that it was the FBI agents who went in there under false pretenses. They were acting like they were friends with him, we are allies, we're just trying to get information, and, in essence, tricked him into lying. And that has been their argument, which is why they have wanted this information released. Keep in mind also, it is very rare that we get to see these kind of...
[Perez:] Never see these.
[Prokupecz:] You almost never see these. We're getting an inside view now of the interview of what it was like at the White House when the FBI agents went there to talk to Michael Flynn. There's more here obviously that we're going through. Talks about when they received a phone call from Michael Flynn, how all that went down. This is fascinating stuff because we just never get a chance to look inside the room of an interview. And that's what we're getting here. And just the perception of the FBI agents at the time, we heard all this. No one thought at the time that Flynn was lying, perhaps after the fact.
[Perez:] Right.
[Cabrera:] But they had other information to know he was lying. Jennifer, when you look at these doctors, and to Evan's point that Evan and Shimon's point that we are getting these details about the interview itself. Are you surprised that they included those specific documents in this sentencing memo?
[Jennifer Rodgers, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I would have been had this all not come up in Michael Flynn's sentencing memo. And I think Mueller's team is right to push back on this, this narrative that Flynn's team is trying to put out there for public consumption and for the judge's consumption that he somehow was treated unfairly, that it wasn't OK for them to not tell him, by the way, it's a crime, pursuant to 18-USC-1001, to lie to us. I think it's very, very smart of them to do this, because I think people need to know that you don't have to tell the head of the national security adviser that it's a crime. There's no question that he knew that. He also knew what the interview was about. It's very clear that they told him, not once, but more than once, what exactly they needed to talk to him about. It had been in the press. He knew exactly what he was going to be talking to the agents about and what they were concerned about, which were his contacts with the Russians. So there's no trickery here. There's there's nothing like that. And so I think the fact that they have released these documents is good to set the record straight.
[Perez:] I think they had to do it at this point, Ana, because this was becoming a thing, especially in the right-wing media. But, look, I mean, we reported this back in early 2017 after Flynn had been interviewed. We reported at the time on CNN that the agents who interviewed him didn't think that he was lying. They certainly did not he did not come across as intentionally lying. It didn't look like something that they could prosecute. It wasn't until later on that they took a second look and decided that this was something that he could be prosecuted for. We still don't know the full circumstances of that, by the way. I mean, I think that is still yet to be to be revealed by the special counsel. But something happened in between this first interview in early 2017, and then the time that Robert Mueller is appointed, that they decided that there is enough here to prosecute Mike Flynn. It's what he pleaded guilty to.
[Cabrera:] Well, that's what I think is really important to... I got to squeeze in a quick break, Shimon, so hold your thought. I want to get that. We're going to continue our special coverage. But, on that last point, let me just kind of put a little button on this segment for a second. And that is the fact of the matter is, Flynn pleaded guilty to lying. So the question about whether he was lying at that interview or not isn't a question. He has admitted to it and said that that was a fair indictment, essentially, in which he pleaded guilty to. So, we're going to come back. We're going to continue to go through these memos and we will bring you new information that we're learning about it when we come back.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn:] And welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jim Sciutto, in for Jake today. We begin with the politics lead and another legal team shakeup, signaling perhaps a more aggressive approach to the Mueller investigation. White House lawyer Ty Cobb is out, with a source telling CNN that the president's lead lawyer had been clashing with Mr. Trump for weeks over his combative stance towards the special counsel. And Emmet Flood, the man who represented Bill Clinton during his impeachment process, he is expected to join the president's team. A source familiar with the president's thinking telling CNN, playing nice hasn't gotten them anywhere, and calling Rudy Giuliani, another recent Trump hire, a professional assassin who is more likely to play hardball with Mueller. This all comes as President Trump's legal team is bracing for the possibility of a presidential subpoena, this after Mueller raised that possibility in at least one meeting with the president's lawyers. This is according to sources. We have all angles of this story covered from the White House to the legal implications. Let's begin, though, with CNN's Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, the White House claimed here that Cobb had been planning to leave for some time, he was planning his retirement, but, in fact, sources telling CNN that this was something of a dispute with the president about his approach to the investigation.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Yes, Jim, we're learning there may be more than meets the eye to Ty Cobb's departure here. The White House says he did a terrific job and that he's retiring at the end of the month. But there is no denying that the one lawyer handling the Russian investigation from inside the White House is leaving while we're still in the middle of it.
[Collins:] President Trump's top lawyer, Ty Cobb, is out, replaced by Washington veteran Emmet Flood, a sign his approach to the special counsel's investigation could be changing. Rudy Giuliani, another recent addition to the Trump legal team, telling "The Washington Post": "Jay Sekulow felt that he needed someone that was more aggressive. That is not a criticism of Ty, but it's about how we are going to do this." Cobb joined Trump's legal team last summer and took the lead in dealing with Robert Mueller. The White House said today that he's retiring. But a source close to Cobb said he recently grew uncomfortable with the president's Mueller tweets, saying he didn't want to be part of a mudslinging campaign and that Flood, who is replacing Cobb, represented then Bill Clinton during his impeachment process in the late 1990s. He also worked in George W. Bush's administration and personally for Dick Cheney. All this as CNN has learned that the president's legal team is now preparing for a showdown with the special counsel, bracing for a possible legal fight after it was revealed that Mueller raised the possibility of a presidential subpoena. Trump was once eager to sit down with Mueller face-to-face.
[Question:] Are you going to talk to Mueller?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm looking forward to it, actually.
[Collins:] But now Giuliani tells "The Post" any interview would have to be two to three hours maximum, with a narrow set of questions. In the meanwhile, the president seething on Twitter today, writing: "There was no collusion, it is a hoax, and there is no obstruction of justice. That is a setup and trap," once again uttering the new White House catch phrase witch-hunt. Trump also attacking Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, tweeting: "A rigged system. They don't want to turn over documents to Congress. What are they afraid of? Why so much redacting? Why such unequal justice? At some point, I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the presidency and get involved." The president escalating a long-running feud between the Justice Department and conservative lawmakers who say Rosenstein is refusing to hand over a number of controversial documents. Now, Jim, the Department of Justice declined to comment on the president's tweets today, but we should note that the deputy attorney general did say yesterday that the Department of Justice would not be extorted. Of course, this is clearly an angry president, as his legal team is in limbo. And sources have said to CNN that the ouster of Cobb and the rise of Rudy Giuliani could signal a more adversarial approach to the special counsel's investigation. That was something that Cobb repeatedly told the president was going to quickly wrap up, but now, Jim, we're seeing Ty Cobb's time in the White House come to an end before the special counsel's investigation.
[Sciutto:] Perhaps long before. Kaitlan Collins, thanks very much. Let's go right to Jeffrey Toobin. Jeffrey, on this issue here, Ty Cobb had encouraged this more cooperative approach to the investigation. You heard there Rudy Giuliani, one of the lawyers on their team, a professional assassin. Does it signal to you that they're going to change tack?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Senior Legal Analyst:] Absolutely. The there is a scene in "Godfather II" where they talk about, it is time to go to the mattresses, like, this is the time to go to the mattresses. They are done cooperating. Ty Cobb was very successful in avoiding any problems in terms of turning over documents, in terms of scheduling interviews for White House personnel. All of that is done. I mean, all that is turned over. And the issue that remains is the president's interview, which it looks like there is going to be no cooperation on. And they're going to, it looks like, fight it out in court.
[Sciutto:] Laura Coates, Rudy Giuliani told "The Washington Post" this afternoon that Trump, if he were to do an interview, at least holding it out there as still a possibility, it would have to limited to two or three hours maximum. Do the president's lawyers have the ability to limit the question time that Mueller might have with the president?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Only in a world where pigs fly, because, actually, it is Mueller who will dictate and the prosecutor in this case who would say, the length and time. They could be able to say and limit it, the way Clinton did. I think it was like four hours to be able to you. But about having to have the audacity to say we will dictate all of the terms, us, and we're going to cooperate with, and he has the ultimate grand jury subpoena power in his back pocket, it is a fantasy to think that they could dictate every single term. But, again, it is part of the Rudy to the rescue strategy that has been played since he actually joined the administration.
[Toobin:] But it is not crazy to think that there would be a time limit.
[Coates:] As I said, with Clinton, it was four hours.
[Toobin:] That's right. And two or three hours is too short. But it is not that different from four, which is what Clinton agreed to. But if you just look at the whole demeanor of how the White House is handling this, the odds that they could actually reach any sort of agreement on time, on subject matter seem increasingly remote.
[Sciutto:] And it fits with the way Trump has dealt with litigation throughout his business career. Right? It is fight, fight, fight. On question of an interview, Laura Coates, we know that Robert Mueller raised the possibility at least of a subpoena with Trump's lawyers if the White House, if the president were to refuse. Is a subpoena to the president, is it bulletproof or is this a question? Is this still an open legal question as to whether that is enforceable?
[Coates:] Well, the subpoena power that Mueller has is absolute. He can subpoena the president of the United States. There is precedent for it, even in the Clinton years, when Ken Starr first gave him one and he withdrew it, and he volunteered to actually cooperate at that point, which, by the way, was a much different case, which four hours may have made more sense, as opposed to 49 different topics you have here. But it is not that it is not bulletproof or it's bulletproof or not. The question really is whether or not the president has the right to thumb his nose at it and if he can go to a court to have it enforced. There is no precedent for anyone asking a court of law to hold the president of the United States in contempt for failing to abide by the terms of a subpoena. And that is the real question here.
[Sciutto:] When if you look at the cases of Nixon or of Clinton, two presidents who did not love the idea of being interviewed in investigations, but did end up going, didn't the court decide that a subpoena was enforceable...
[Toobin:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] ... the president?
[Toobin:] In the Paula Jones case, they went the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court said, the president has no right to refuse a subpoena in a civil case. The courts are always much more sympathetic to prosecutors than they are to civil lawyers. So, if a president can't refuse a civil subpoena, it certainly seems unlikely that he could get even conservative votes on the Supreme Court for the idea that he could simply defy a grand jury subpoena. Now, the circumstances of that interview, the length, the subject matter, certainly the courts would say that Mueller has to negotiate. You can't just say...
[Sciutto:] The president is a busy man. He has got other duties.
[Toobin:] ... for two, three days.
[Sciutto:] Gotcha.
[Toobin:] But some sort of appearance before the grand jury, he can't avoid it.
[Sciutto:] Well, Laura, the other headline change here is that Trump is bringing in Emmet Flood to replace Ty Cobb, Emmet Flood, experience with Clinton's impeachment proceedings. Is that a signal perhaps about what the White House could be preparing for here?
[Coates:] I think it is, because, remember, there's two different points here. You either have the impeachment process through Congress or you have a potential criminal probe with Robert Mueller. So if they are preparing and being very prudent overall, they're going to prepare on both fronts, the idea that there may be criminal exposure for somebody on their team or the president himself, or also may refer, because, remember, Mueller is going to write a report at the end of this. It will go to Rosenstein. It will decide whether or not they want to refer it to Congress if, in fact, there is a high crime misdemeanor threshold they've already met. So maybe they are already looking ahead to that very point in time. So, I think that is part of it. Also, the Fifth Amendment aspect of this, if the president of the United States were to comply with the subpoena and do so "voluntarily" quote, unquote and then plead the Fifth, well, you have got a different range here about impeachment and what could mean to an impeachment proceeding. So, they are preparing on all fronts. It's prudent to do so, but they are in a lot of trouble at this point in time.
[Sciutto:] Jeffrey Toobin, I'm sure you noticed some of the president's tweets this morning about the power...
[Toobin:] I do. I always notice the president's tweets.
[Sciutto:] ... he might have over his Justice Department. Let me quote them back, because, in one of those tweets, he quotes Joe diGenova. He's a former U.S. attorney that almost, our understanding is, joined Trump's legal team. And he said the following, that the questions, referring to the Mueller questions that had been first reported by "The New York Times," "are an intrusion to the president's Article 2 powers under the Constitution to fire any executive branch employee. What the president was thinking is an outrageous as to the president's unfettered power to fire anyone." On that issue, what is your view? Does Article 2 give the president the right to fire everybody? And does that therefore close this question, which is, did the president do something improper by firing James Comey?
[Toobin:] Absolutely not. I think that argument is legally, factually and morally wrong. If a president of the United States is given a suitcase of cash in return for firing the FBI director, does anyone think that is legal because he's the president and on this Article 2 powers? It is the same question in this investigation. Of course he has the right to fire James Comey, but he doesn't have the right to fire him with a corrupt motive.
[Sciutto:] Right. And the corrupt motive here would be?
[Toobin:] Would be to save his own skin.
[Sciutto:] To save his own skin.
[Toobin:] And that is the question at the heart of this investigation, and the idea that his decision to fire anyone is completely unreviewable is wrong, in my view.
[Sciutto:] And the other thing that he tweeted about, he said this, kind of an ominous warning, as it were, a threat. "At some point, I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the presidency." As you saw those words, Laura Coates, was that a veiled threat about his ability to fire other officials involved in this investigation?
[Coates:] Well, not so veiled and also ironic. You mean to tell me right now he's not yet involved with the Justice Department? That is a shocker to me. He's been involved. That is one of the critiques of this presidency. What it is, is an attempt, I think, that goes in line with what is happening with the Freedom Caucus about Rosenstein and the impeachment there to essentially say, listen, everybody is fair game for the president to show that you are serving at his pleasure. It was not a veiled threat, but it was not one that really has actual legal teeth behind it. But he will continue to do so on Twitter because it makes news.
[Sciutto:] Jeffrey Toobin, some of his lawyers, including many who have now walked out of the door, have counseled the president not to fire Robert Mueller, not the fire the deputy A.G., Rod Rosenstein. In these words here, particularly as he has more of a pit bull kind of legal team around him now, do you think that possibility is alive again?
[Toobin:] Oh, it is no question that it has increased. Remember, Emmet Flood is from Williams & Connolly. Williams & Connolly is a famously aggressive law firm. They represented Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton in the investigation.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Toobin:] People older than you will remember that Brendan Sullivan represented Oliver North in the Iran-Contra investigation. And he said famously, I'm not a potted plant. I'm going to interrupt. Emmet Flood comes out of the world. It is more aggressive place. Whether they will fire Mueller, fire Rosenstein, I don't know, but certainly the chance has increased with his arrival.
[Sciutto:] Jeffrey Toobin, Laura Coates, thanks very much for breaking it down. Does the shakeup of President Trump's legal team mean that he is taking his gloves off? Former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, he's going to be here with me. And that is next.

[Bolduan:] President Trump firing off about North Korea again this morning. Writing on Twitter the following: "Our country has been unsuccessfully dealing with North Korea for 25 years, giving billions of dollars and getting nothing. Policy didn't work." This comes after more cryptic tweets over the weekend where the president said that only one thing will work with Pyongyang. So far, we don't know exactly what that is.
[Unidentified Reporter:] What's the one thing that will work with North Korea?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] You'll figure that out pretty soon.
[Bolduan:] The latest version of, "You will see, believe me." Let's bring in CNN's Will Ripley. He's spent quite a lot of time reporting on the ground in North Korea. He's joining me now from Tokyo. It's great to see you, Will. This all this was all weekend and continued into this morning. Oh, yes, and it was last weekend as well that the president was firing off about North Korea. How are North Koreans receiving this vague, but consistent threat from the president?
[Will Ripley, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] You know, I've been having conversation with the North Koreans, because, remember, they're also hearing from the State Department and the defense secretary that this is a diplomatic push, that the United States is talking with North Korea, that there are channels open. And yet, North Koreans are telling me channels haven't been activated and they see no point to have discussions right now with the Trump administration because you have this bellicose rhetoric coming from the top from the president. Then the secretary of state saying, actually, we want to negotiate. What are they supposed to think? They are saying to me that sitting at the diplomatic table wouldn't result in anything, a deal they could rely on because, even if a deal were negotiated, they're not convinced President Trump would follow through on it. So you have North Koreans frustrated with the mixed messaging, confused, trying to get answers. Certainly, leaders around the region are very nervous that this could lead to an accidental war that would be far more catastrophic to people in this region than elsewhere. And then you have this reshuffle of the North Korean elite. You have Kim Jong-Un promoting his younger sister and foreign minister to these major roles in the top decision-making body. The foreign minister is the one who threatened to detonate a nuclear bomb over the Pacific and also called President Trump president evil. So if you think he's surrounding himself with advisors who are sympathetic to the United States, think again. It's hardliners surrounding Kim Jong-Un right now Kate?
[Bolduan:] A lot of messages being sent and, just, nuclear war at stake. Will, great to see you. Thank you so much. Coming up for us, the president the president's growing war of words with a powerful Senator from his own party. How does this back and forth help the president's agenda? Someone, please explain. That's coming up.

[Whitfield:] President Trump is making a big push for his newly unveiled tracks reform plan, saying, it's centered around, quote "a giant, beautiful, round, massive tax cut that will help American companies grow."
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] For decades, the policy of Washington, D.C., on the subject of manufacturing was a policy best summarized in one word: surrender. They surrendered. Under my administration, the era of economic surrender is over.
[Whitfield:] The president insists the GOP tax plan will also help average everyday Americans. How does it aim to do that? CNN's chief business correspondent, Christine Romans, explains.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] This is the opening argument in tax reform. The president unveiling what he and Republicans would like to do in terms of your taxes. And it looks like what they have on paper here is real tax reform. Real tax reform different from just tax cuts. In real tax reform, you simplify the tax code. That's what they want to do here, make it much easier to follow your taxes on maybe a form the size of a postcard. Close loopholes. Lower tax rates, and boost growth and hiring. That's the point. Let's talk about what's in here. Cutting the tax brackets. The middle-class tax income, 25 percent. Top income would be taxed at 35 percent. And the low end of the spectrum, 12 percent. Taking seven tax brackets and shrinking it down to three. This one's higher than the lowest tax bracket now. Today, the lowest tax bracket is 10 percent. This is 12 percent. What the White House says is that by doubling the standard deduction for families, the first $24,000 of income for a married couple is tax free, that would help people, millions of families would pay no taxes whatsoever. Let's talk about what this eliminates. Most itemized deductions. If you live in a state, like California, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, these are states where you pay big state taxes. Today, you could write those off your federal return. This would eliminate that. That's why you're already seeing pushback from Republican Congress members of those states. It gets rid of the alternative minimum tax and estate tax. These are two points the critics said benefits the rich and companies more than anyone else. Here's what individuals keep in this plan. The mortgage interest deduction, very popular. Charitable giving deduction. And some higher education. And retirement plans, 401K, for example, 529 plans, those are still tax advantaged. Here's the corporate tax rate. Today, it's 35 percent. Proposed, 20 percent. You look at the small business rate, this would help small business and entrepreneurs. So this is the business part of the tax reform plan that's on the table. Again, an opening argument, this is the part of the plan that Wall Street really likes. They think this will boost profits and boost growth.
[Whitfield:] Thank you very much, Christine Romans. So how will that plan play out on Capitol Hill and on Main Street? Here to discuss, CNN political analyst, Margaret Talev, in Bedminster, New Jersey, traveling with the president. And in Washington, CNN political analyst, Rebecca Berg. Good to see both of you. Let's begin with the huge cut on corporate taxes. Republicans and the White House saying it will bring jobs and business back to the United States. Democratic leaders say it's the same old failed trickle-down economics formula and gift to the Americans. Margaret, what is the White House strategy to try to counter those arguments?
[Margaret Talev, Cnn Political Analyst:] The White House strategy is to talk about this on two fronts. Number one is the idea of job creation. You saw him do that with the manufacturers yesterday. The other is emphasizing that this goes hand in hand with relief for middle-class Americans. And the president already feels like he's made a really big concession. He had wanted to hold out for a reduction of the corporate tax down to 15 percent. Internal divisions inside the White House saying that's just not possible. There's no way that it could pass. It wouldn't work, wouldn't 0- he sort of agreed that he can live with 20 percent. But look, there's going to be a tremendous amount of debate. And when you pile on some of those considerations about Republican representation in blue states, where the reduction, the elimination of some of those itemized deductions is playing out, you see that, again, this is not really that much easier than health care in terms of a legislative push.
[Whitfield:] And so, Rebecca, that potential clash between Republicans that Christine was talking about, you know, involving the the scrapping, you know, of particular measures. How much more complicated might this be for the White House? He has really no political clout, thus far. He's counted on members of the Hill for crafting his legislation without a lot of involvement. That's been the criticism. Will he be approaching that differently this time?
[Rebecca Berg, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, as we like to say, the devil is always in the details with a major piece of reform like tax reform. So this could get very messy. But actually, in the first week or so, with this rollout, this has been surprisingly easy, positive for Republicans and for the administration rolling this out. And the big difference that we're seeing so far between the health care fight on Capitol Hill and this tax reform proposal that they're putting forth is that Republicans so far are actually coming together and all sides of the Republican spectrum are supporting this bill so far. The Freedom Caucus has said in principle that they plan to support this on the House side. You've had a range of conservative to moderate Republican groups coming out and saying they plan to support this. So assuming that Republican lawmakers are able to pass this through what we call the reconciliation process, so you would only need a simple majority, they could pass this with Republicans alone, if Republicans stick with together on, this they could get this done. And the political pressure, Fred, is really there for them to do that because they weren't able to get health care done. Republicans and the president really feel like they need to get something big done before the end of the year here.
[Whitfield:] Yes. And so, Margaret, what is different? Why is there a much greater consensus thus far?
[Talev:] Part of it is the absence of that resolution on health care and the feeling that, really, they can't have the only major accomplishment of Republicans before the end of the year being holding out the possibility of relief for undocumented immigrants. So there is a real push to move ahead on this issue. But watch the calendar for a clue as to whether the process is becoming bogged down or not. We're talking about officials inside the administration, talking about timelines of as early as late October, early November for House votes, and sometime the end of November for Senate votes, a goal to get this done by year's end. If you start to see some of the timetables slip, it means the process has become complicated.
[Whitfield:] And then, Rebecca, the president's handling of Puerto Rico right now, how might it his handling impact this push for tax reform or any other big-ticket legislative item that he still wants to get under his belt?
[Berg:] Well, certainly, if it is taking a share of his attention as we have seen that it is, he's traveling to Puerto Rico this week. As we can see from the president's tweets this morning, this is consuming a large share of his thinking at this time. So it really just crowds out some of the other things like tax reform that he could be thinking about, strategizing, and also speaking with Congress about, as well. If you look at the congressional side of the ledger, you could have Congress needing to address Puerto Rico as well, sending them relief money as they did with Texas and Florida. And so that adds to the legislative schedule, as well. Obviously when you have more on your plate, things just become more complicated. But I think the administration and Congress are hoping that they can walk and chew gum at the same time on this.
[Whitfield:] Rebecca Berg, Margaret Talev, thank you very much to both of you. Appreciate it.
[Berg:] Thank you.
[Talev:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] All right. We'll be right back.

[Whitfield:] All right. We're following a developing story out of France where people say four female American tourists were attacked with acid. It happened earlier today at a train station in Marseille. Police say, two of the victims were taken to the hospital, they say the attacker was a mentally unstable woman. She was arrested and later hospitalized, there is no evidence that the attack was terror group-related. London police have arrested a 21-year-old man, the second arrest in connection with Friday's train explosion. Police have also searched a house in a suburb west of London. An 18-year-old man police arrested Saturday remains in custody. The terror threat level has now been downgraded to severe, meaning a new attack is still considered highly likely. Thirty people were injured when a bomb a partially detonated in a train during rush hour Friday morning. British Prime Minister Theresa May is headed to the United Nations this week and says the terror threat will be at the top of her agenda.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] One of the issues we really need to be addressing and I'll be raising this when I'm at the United Nations is, the question of the use of the internet by terrorists for terrorist planning, but also this use for using it for the spread of the extremism of hatred, of propaganda that can insight and can inspire terrorism.
[Whitfield:] CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is following the story for us from London. So how much do we know about the latest arrest?
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Minimal about this 21-year-old arrested in Hounslow, that's out of the west of London. That occur just 10 minutes before midnight just in the past day, just now. Now that resulted in house being searched also in the
[Whitfield:] And the prime minister had said that Donald Trump's sentiments about the Friday attack was not helpful. She said such speculation was not helpful. How is that relationship being measured between she and the president of the United States?
[Walsh:] All right. Theresa May is always has been I think keen to show that she can be chummy with Donald Trump. Oddly enough they hail from sort of similar parts of political spectrum of elements of Theresa May's party here, but [inaudible] nationalistic and protectionist as we see in the United States as well. But even Theresa May's own home secretary, her leading law enforcement official here Amber Rudd today said when questioned about whether or not Donald Trump's suggestion that the police had the attackers, persons been in their sights while it occurred. She said that was quote, pure speculation, and said that she wouldn't be the first person, I'm paraphrasing here, the first person to encouraged Donald Trump not to be tweeting on his phone. So, a definitely a fought relationship here the issue of whether Donald Trump will come visit London while in this constantly been on the discussion here because the board
[Whitfield:] All right, Nick Paton Walsh in London, thanks so much. All right, a mystery in Cuba after a series of suspected sonic attacks leave U.S. diplomats and their family suffering now. The U.S. is considering shutting down the Havana Embassy. We'll bring you the latest, next.

[Erin Burnett, Outfront:] Good evening, I'm Erin Burnett. Welcome to a special edition of "OutFront" live from Washington, D.C. Tonight, the breaking news, the bombshell testimony. The keyword this evening, "lie." The fired FBI director pulling no punches, accusing the President of the United States Donald Trump of lying, questioning the credibility of Trump repeatedly in nearly three hours of dramatic testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] Saying that the organization was in disarray, that it was poorly led, that the workforce had lost confidence in its leader. Those were lies, plain and simple. I was honestly concerned he might lie about the nature of our meeting.
[Sen. Angus King , Intelligence Committee:] The President said, "I had dinner with him. He wanted to have dinner because he wanted to stay on. Is this an accurate statement?"
[Comey:] No, sir.
[Angus:] But, in that same interview, the President said, "In one case, I called him, and in one case, he called me." Is that an accurate statement?
[Comey:] No.
[Angus:] Did you ever call the president?
[Comey:] No.
[Angus:] And, in his press conference on May 18th, the President was asked whether he had urged you to shut down the investigation into Michael Flynn. The President responded, quote, "No, no. Next question." Is that an accurate statement?
[Comey:] I don't believe it is.
[Burnett:] It couldn't be more clear. And another explosive revelation and there were many of them today, Comey admitting that he engineered the leak of his memos about a meeting with the President. And he did it in order to force the naming of a special prosecutor. He brought this up himself.
[Comey:] I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn't do it myself, for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. And so I asked a close friend of mine to do it.
[Burnett:] And, of course, it seems to have worked. Now, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has those memos. And the big question at this hour is whether Comey today made a case that Donald Trump, the President of the United States, obstructed justice, which could be an impeachable offense. We begin our breaking coverage with Dana Bash. And Dana, it was a stunning day on Capitol Hill.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] You can say that again, Erin. Look, James Comey said he has absolutely no doubt that the President fired him as FBI director in order to try to change the way that the Russia investigation was being conducted. And the irony is that the President got what he wanted. It did change but certainly not in the way the President intended or hoped.
[Richard Burr , Intelligence Committee Chairman:] Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth
[Bash:] The former FBI director under oath and unvarnished called the President who fired him a liar.
[Comey:] The administration then chose to defame me and, more importantly, the FBI by saying that the organization was in disarray, that it was poorly led, that the workforce had lost confidence in its leader. Those were lies, plain and simple.
[Bash:] Using the "L" word more than once.
[Comey:] I was honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meeting, and so I thought it really porch to document.
[Bash:] With flare for the dramatic he is known for, James Comey described that faithful February 14th moment in the Oval Office when President Trump kicked everyone out but Comey, and asked him to lay off the investigation of his former national security advisor, Michael Flynn.
[Comey:] My impression with was something big is about to happen. I need to remember every single word that is spoken.
[Bash:] And though Comey testified that the President did not explicitly order him to lay off Flynn, that's exactly how he took it.
[Comey:] I took it as a direction. This is the president of the United States, with me alone, saying, I hope this. I took it as, this is what he wants me to do. I didn't obey that, but that's the way I took it.
[Bash:] He came under scrutiny from lawmakers for not pushing back on the President in the moment.
[Sen. Dianne Feinstein , Intelligence Committee:] Why didn't you stop and say, "Mr. President, this is wrong. I cannot discuss this with you?"
[Comey:] It's a great question. Maybe if I were stronger, I would have.
[Bash:] After he fired Comey last month, the President tweeted that Comey better hope that there are no tapes of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press.
[Comey:] And look, I've seen the tweet about tapes. Lordy, I hope there are tapes.
[Bash:] Stunningly, Comey revealed that Trump's tweets prompted him to strategically deliver content of real-time memos he wrote about his conversations with Trump to the press.
[Comey:] I woke up in the middle of the night Monday night because it didn't dawn on me originally there might be corroboration for our conversation. There might be a tape. And my judgment was I needed to get that out into the public square. And so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn't do it myself for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. And so I asked a close friend of my mine to do it.
[Bash:] That Comey, now a private citizen, deliberately used the press to force the appointment of a special counsel is a stark illustration of how seasoned he is in the ways of Washington. What was not standard Washington behavior, argued Comey, was that President asking an FBI director for what he took as a loyalty pledge.
[Comey:] Again, I could be wrong, but my common sense told me what's going on here is that he's looking to get something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job.
[Bash:] Throughout his nearly three-hour testimony, Comey revealed several nuggets about the FBI criminal probe now in the hands of special counsel Robert Mueller like this about Flynn.
[Burr:] Do you sense that the President was trying to obstruct justice or just seek for a way for Mike Flynn to save face, given he had already been fired?
[Comey:] General Flynn, at that point in time, was in legal jeopardy. There was an open FBI criminal investigation of his statements in connection with the Russian contacts and the contacts themselves.
[Bash:] And he hinted at information not yet known to the public about Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
[Comey:] Our judgment, as I recall, was that he was very close to and inevitably going to recuse himself for a variety of reasons. We also were aware of facts that I can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic.
[Bash:] And though Comey testified that as FBI director, he did in fact tell the President he was not being investigated, Comey revealed that he handed over his memos about his conversations with Trump to the special counsel, which could mean now the President is being investigated for obstruction of justice. Comey also dropped the political bomb about the Clinton e-mail investigation last year which Democrats accused him of mishandling big time. He said that Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch said to him that he should not call it an investigation but rather a matter, which he said confused and concerned him. Erin?
[Burnett:] All right, Dana, thank you very much. And Jim Acosta is "out front" at the White House. And Jim, you know, you hear everything that Jim Comey said today and yet, the President of the United States, the White House are claiming as a victory tonight.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] That's right. We heard from Marc Kasowitz, the President's outside legal counsel earlier today. He talked to reporters, really just gave a statement. Didn't answer any questions. But he tried to have it both ways at one point saying that the Comey testimony today vindicated the President in that it revealed that the President was not under investigation as part of a Russia probe, but at the same time Kasowitz was pushing back on any notion that the President demanded that Comey make a loyalty pledge. Still, the White House legal team feels as though they struck gold with Comey's admission that he orchestrated the release of that information about his memos, so it would get out to the press and prompt a special counsel investigation. Here's more of what Marc Kasowitz had to say about that.
[Marc Kasowitz, Private Attorney For President Trump:] Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he leaked to friends of his purported memos of those privileged communications, one of which he testified was classified. Mr. Comey also testified that immediately after he was terminated, he authorized his friends to leak the contents of those memos to the press in order to, in Mr. Comey's words, quote, prompt the appointment of a special counsel, close quote.
[Acosta:] Now, despite that confidence hearing from the President's legal team, the Comey testimony did spark some uncomfortable questions over here at the White House, the Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders took questions from reporters earlier today. She was asked about Comey repeatedly saying that the President had lied. She was asked point blank whether the President is a liar and she said, "No, he is not. It's never a good at the White House when you're being asked that question." And she was also asked, once again, whether the President has some kind of recording system, Erin, that allows him to record his biddings. The White House once again said they cannot answer the question. So it remains an open question over here at the White House if there's a recording system, where are the tapes. Erin?
[Burnett:] It's a crucial question and they're going to have to answer it. All right, Jim Acosta, thank you very much. And "OutFront" now my panel who will be with us for the entire hour. Mark Preston, our senior political analyst, Nia-Malika Henderson, senior political reporter, Chris Cillizza, reporter, editor-at-large, Jeffrey Toobin, senior legal analyst, John Dean, who served as President Nixon's White House counsel during Watergate, Matthew Rosenberg, national security correspondent for the New York Times and Dana Bash is with us, of course, as well. Mark, we learned a lot of new things today.
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] We did. And we also learned that there are a lot more unanswered questions and that this investigation is going to continue. But what we did learn and what we knew is that Comey is a bit of an operator. He understands the politics of Washington. He knew he's not a politician. He did a very controlled leak to try to help control the narrative from his side of the story, which I don't personally, I don't think I could blame him but, you know, there are some questions about that. We also know that at the time and this could have changed since he left as FBI director that President Trump was never a target himself in the investigation. Although Comey is very careful in how he explains that to say, at this time, and he's not a target for the you know, a counterintelligence investigation. I do think that Marc Kasowitz is declaring victory a little bit too early but as his lawyer you would expect him to do so.
[Burnett:] What was the key headline for you Nia?
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] Yes, I think this White House sees it as a battle between Trump and Comey, right, in this statement. The final lines are essentially Trump feels vindicated and that he's gotten this cloud behind him and he can focus on his agenda. I think the problem with that construct is that this White House, Trump particularly, has a bit of a credibility problem, right? I mean, his relationship with the truth is an interesting one. And he's not always accurate in terms of his depiction of events. I think that's a bit problematic. But it does fit into sort of the insider-outsider narrative that Trump has like to construct. It existed in the campaign and it still exists as he's president.
[Burnett:] He used the word "lie."
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter And Editor-at-large:] Yes.
[Burnett:] He used it multiple times.
[Cillizza:] Yes.
[Burnett:] I also just want to comment on his appearance. He looked tired. He looked haggard. This is clearly taken a toll on him. Did you, Chris, find him believable? And American public would said well he says, somebody's lying, did you find him believable?
[Cillizza:] Yes. He did look tired. But I feel like I'm often tired and haggard and I have nowhere near the amount of stress that Jim Comey has probably endured for the last months certainly about
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] six months. I did find him believable. And I think what you have to do is put it in the context of it's not in a vacuum. It's a he said-he said at this point. Obviously the special counsel, Bob Mueller, will eventually, I think, give us more clarity. But at the moment, if Donald Trump says this, Jim Comey says that. So, do I think he is more credible on this given his background in, you know, in this department, given sort of his track record than Donald Trump who we know for a fact Nia mentioned is look, that guy has, whether you like him or hate him or feel indifferent toward him, the guy has said a number of things both during the campaign and as president that are just not true. So, I think when you compare him to Donald Trump, yes, I think he came across as believable today and more believable than Donald Trump. Again, one other thing, Erin, he was under oath, right?
[Burnet:] Yes, right. Now
[Cillizza:] This is not just somebody popping off on cable television, right? I mean, this is a serious thing with penalties if you are found to be lying.
[Burnett:] So, when he came out today, you know, when you read this prepared statement
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Senior Legal Analyst:] Right.
[Burnett:] By the way, I thought it was interesting at the topics. I'm not going to waste anybody's time but I have some comments I'd like to make. And he talked about how he felt in those meetings, how pressure he felt. You were clear yesterday you thought that that memo was obstruction of justice. From what you heard today, did you change your view?
[Toobin:] Not at all. In fact, I thought the description of the key event, February 14th in the Oval Office, that discrimination was so extraordinary and so dramatic and so real I mean, imagine the scene. He walks into the Oval Office and everybody starts leaving. All these people the attorney general, his boss fades away. The vice president of the United States fades away. Reince Priebus tries to come in the door, Trump the steers him away. Jared Kushner not allowed in. These two guys next to each other. And what is so important that Trump needs to tell him, "Leave my claim alone." Let him be. Let Flynn you know, leave him alone." Which is, as far as I am concern, evidence of obstruction of justice. And then what happens? He doesn't leave him alone. He doesn't end the investigation, and he gets fired for his trouble.
[Burnett:] So, John, on this issue, there was an exchange with Republican Senator Jim Risch, right, on the issue of what happened in that meeting and whether the President ordered Jim Comey to stop the investigation or whether he asked him to do so and whether that is a distinction with or without a different. Here's the exchange.
[Sen. Jim Risch , Intelligence Committee:] He did not direct you to let it go?
[Comey:] Not in his words, no.
[Risch:] He did not order you to let it go?
[Comey:] Again, those words are not an order, no.
[Risch:] He said "I hope." Now, like me, you probably did hundreds of cases, maybe thousands of cases charging people with criminal offenses. And, of course, you have knowledge of the thousands of cases out there that where people have been charged. Do you know of any case where a person has been charged for obstruction of justice or, for that matter, any other criminal offense, where this they said, or thought, they hoped for an outcome?
[Comey:] I don't know well enough to answer. And the reason I keep saying his words is I took it as a direction.
[Risch:] Right.
[Comey:] This is the President of the United States, with me alone, saying, "I hope" this, I took it as, this is what he wants me to do. I didn't obey that, but that's the way I took it.
[Risch:] You may have taken it as a direction but that's not what he said.
[Comey:] Correct. I that's why
[Risch:] He said, "I hope."
[Comey:] Those are exact words, correct.
[Burnett:] Is that a distinction that matters?
[John Dean, Former Nixon White House Counsel:] I think it is a distinction that does not matter. When you're sitting in the Oval Office and the President makes a suggestion or has a hope, you as a staffer take it as a direction. I'm sure that's what Mr. Comey did and I think that's what most people sitting in the Oval Office would react to.
[Burnett:] So you are still as you were last evening saying obstruction of justice tonight?
[Dean:] I don't think there's any doubt. I don't think the debate moved far forward but certainly didn't retreat at all today but he went under oath and that made it a different status.
[Burnett:] Right. It wasn't from leaks. It was
[Dean:] No.
[Burnett:] from his own mouth. Now Matthew, Comey offered without everything look, he's a lawyer. He understands the game. We have all made that point clear. So he offered something without being asked. Now, if some of us did that it might be accidental but not in the case of Jim Comey. And what he offered was not only that he leaked the memos but his motive for doing so. And his motive wasn't just set the record straight. It was because he wanted to force the naming of a special prosecutor. Let me just play the exchange with Senator Collins.
[Comey:] The President tweeted on Friday, after I got fired, that I better hope there's not tapes. I woke up in the middle of the night on Monday night because it didn't dawn on me originally that there might be corroboration for our conversation. There might be a tape. And my judgment was, I needed to get that out into the public square. And so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn't do it myself for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. And so I asked a friend of mine to do it.
[Collins:] And was that Mr. Wittes?
[Comey:] No, no.
[Collins:] Who was that?
[Comey:] A good friend of mine who's a professor at Columbia Law School.
[Burnett:] And I want to get into that in the moment Matthew, but first, the bombshell her of his motive. That he did it for that he name a special prosecutor. Now, of course but now, it's like why is that? Because he felt there was something for the prosecutor to see or what?
[Matthew Rosenberg, National Security Correspondent, The New York Times:] Well I think, hey we have that Comey is an operator. And Donald Trump isn't wrong. He's a better to show but he knows that a matter Jim Comey's image. And I think Comey also speaks to something that every journalist in this town knows about the sources they've been dealing with. Is that there are people in the entire government establishment who see things that are going wrong and the self-corrected mechanisms aren't working. We are that last resort. That's what the press is for. That's what leaks are for, to try and change kind of public opinion or change policy. He said look this isn't going well in his estimation. I leak this. We get a special prosecutor we need. I need to move the ball that way so he leaked it.
[Burnett:] So Dana, their bottom line. Is this then a good day for Jim Comey?
[Bash:] I mean, it depends on what his actual goal was. If his goal was to leave some pretty remarkable breadcrumbs for the public and for the Senate about things that are going on in the investigation that we should know about, confirming that Michael Flynn is under criminal investigation. And that part of the reason is because he might not have told the truth to investigators. And, you know, dropping a not-so-subtle bomb on Jeff Sessions by saying, well, you know, maybe he shouldn't have been involved because, you know, he was supposed to recuse himself. And, you know, I don't want to talk about it anymore than that, wink, wink. You know, payback is a, you know what? Because he was clearly upset that Jeff Sessions his boss didn't protect him from the President.
[Burnett:] Right.
[Bash:] And there are other
[Burnett:] He implored him. I think he said the written testimony implored him to not have them ever be left alone.
[Bash:] And given the fact that he is an operator and given the fact that he understands the sort of way to politically maneuver this town. He also wanted to show the President, oh, yes, you're going to fire me? Guess what? I know how to work it, too. And the way I work it is I saw your tweet about tapes and I made sure that the public understood that I have notes, too.
[Preston:] You know, Eric, you know, I think what's important to know about Jim Comey today is that oftentimes when we see witnesses appear before Congress, it's very politicized, right? You know, you really see a political angle being pushed forth. Jim Comey came across as somebody who clearly is an operator and knows Washington but he came across to me as kind of sterile, like septic in some ways of being somebody who was trying to do good. Now whether the way that he went about it was the right way or not, that's rather to be judged. Whether it was legal or not
[Toobin:] The advantage he had is he speaks English. He doesn't speak government talk. You know, when Dianne Feinstein asked him why didn't you go to go, you know, fight back. He said, I don't know. That's a good question. Like that's how human beings speak.
[Bash:] And if
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] Right.
[Toobin:] And the other thing was, which I found remarkable, is that the Republicans did not attack him.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, they were good.
[Toobin:] You know, it took Marc Kasowitz, Trump's lawyer. He was the only one who alleged that Comey was lying. All the Republican
[Henderson:] Yes.
[Toobin:] legislators were quite
[Cillizza:] And I think that's super important.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] As the Mark's point typically what you see in these hearings which are not as high profile as this. The Democrats it seems like they're in two different hearings.
[Unidentified Male:] Right.
[Cillizza:] The Democrats ask certain questions, the Republicans ask different questions and it feels though it's two ships passing in the night. You saw over and over again, country that their talking points are in Sea Point out, by the way, that suggested, you know, trying to go after Comey's reputation.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] Even the people who were sorts of tough on Comey, they all started with, as I've said before, I appreciate your service.
[Burnett:] Right.
[Cillizza:] So there's it certainly different than the average congressional hearing that we have.
[Burnett:] So that left it to Marc Kasowitz to say, Matthew, that Jim Comey was lying, OK. And it comes down to, actually, reports in the New York Times. So let me just lay it out. On the issue of leaking the memos, right? You heard Comey said I walk up in the middle of the night, I saw the President's tweet and then I decided to leak the memo. So and of course the tweet, the original tweet was, "James Comey better hope there are no tapes of conversations before he starts leaking to the press." So that's what Marc Kasowitz, the president's lawyer on all things Risch says is a lie. He says that that's not when the memo was leaked. And here's what they came out and say.
[Kasowitz:] Although Mr. Comey testified that he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from those memos the day before the referenced tweet.
[Burnett:] OK. So we can lay this out very simply, Matthew. Kasowitz says there was a story in the New York Times detailing the dinner and Trump's demands for loyalty on May 11th. The tweet was May 12th. The first story in the New York Times that talked about the loyalty pledge in detail was on May 16th and that is the first time a memo was cited. Can you tell us as a representative here for the New York Times, was the memo the source for the story before the tweet or not?
[Rosenberg:] I can't get into the source. And I'm not we did have a story on May 11th which was did not mentioned memos and was not an incredible detail that Trump did asked him for loyalty. That was not information that was only in the possession of James Comey. We know that today. He talked with a number of people about it. You know, Kasowitz in his entire statement said he want to
[Preston:] He also and he threw Dan Coats and Admiral Rogers yesterday.
[Rosenberg:] Yes, he did.
[Preton:] But the hearing that was held yesterday with the DNI director and the NSA director about how they actually answered questions about what they knew about supposedly trying to persuade the FBI to end the investigation. Kasowitz today misinterpreted how that hearing
[Henderson:] I mean, we're getting a glimpse of what their strategy is going to be. There's a lawyer involved now. Sean Spicer and folks at the White House aren't going to be peppered with these questions as much as they have been in the past. But in some ways this was a little sloppy, right? I mean, this was full of typos, their statement. They kept the lane in terms of the time. There were going to come out and respond to this. So, you know, I think they've got some work to do. It's better than Donald Trump tweeting.
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Henderson:] But it sort of what not is kind of
[Burnett:] Right. Which, of course, he didn't do.
[Henderson:] Yes.
[Burnett:] The type of that but to your point, you know, saying that he's a liar and then saying look he told the truth on this is obviously a bitch way.
[Dean:] He did not understand the executive communications either be called they call it permissive.
[Burnett:] Next here from our nation's capital, the moment President Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Jim Comey. So what happened next? And the breaking news, what Comey just revealed privately, and that classified session to senators about the embattled attorney general. Big developments on Jeff Sessions tonight. Plus, why is everyone talking about John McCain's line of questioning?

[Vause:] Welcome back. Robert Mueller's Russia investigation is moving beyond the 2016 presidential campaign to Donald Trump's business dealings in Russia before he ran for the White House.
[Sesay:] Sources tell CNN some witnesses are being questioned about the timing of Donald Trump's decision to run, why his plans for Trump Tower in Moscow fell through, and whether the Russians had compromising information about Mr. Trump. Investigators are also following the money trail for the 2013 Miss Universe pageant which was held in Moscow and ran by the Trump Organization.
[Vause:] We are joined now by CNN political commentator and Democratic strategist Dave Jacobson and Republican consultant John Thomas. OK, let's start with line of questioning here which is centering about 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. This is from our reporting. In particular, Mueller is looking at meetings Trump had with Russian business people or government officials leading the source to believe the investigators were probing the possibility of compromising material on Trump. Investigators were interested with logistics surrounding Trump's hotel room in Moscow. Who was there? Who would have access to it? Who is in charge of security? Who was moving around with him during the trip? So, John, Donald Trump and his lawyer made it very clear, anything beyond anything before he was a presidential candidate, before 2015, 2016, is beyond the scope of Mueller's investigation. But when you listen to these questions and how that might relate to what happened later on in the campaign, why are those questions
[John Thomas, Republican Consultant, Cnn Political Commentator:] This sounds very much like the DNC in Clinton's Russian dossier, right? Whether he was what he was he doing in his hotel room, were there prostitutes there, was it compromised, right? That is essentially what an element of dossier was getting into. It is not surprising that the special investigations have mission creep. I think that's exactly what Trump was afraid of. I don't think there is anything to do to stop Mueller sort of firing him but I am concerned that this creep into Trump's business dealings before the election are going to push his button to such an extent that he will want to fire Mueller.
[Vause:] Dave?
[Dave Jacobson, Democratic Strategist, Cnn Political Commentator:] I mean let's not forget it's Rod Rosenstein that is overseeing this investigation. He is a Republican appointed by Republican Donald Trump. And so he is overseeing every element of this investigation. And so clearly there is got to be some tie to the 2016 election. Otherwise, he will shut this thing down, right? And so
[Thomas:] Well, not necessarily. He has gone after Paul Manafort for things he did, you know, years and years and years ago. So it is not necessarily. He is just going down that route to see if there is a there there.
[Vause:] But John, let's just remind you that Mueller was appointed by Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, a Republican, and
[Jacobson:] Mueller is a Republican.
[Vause:] Exactly. But this you know, Mueller was given this to investigate any methods that arose or may arise directly from the investigation. It is very broad but that is what Rosenstein told Mueller to do. And that what appears that he is doing right now.
[Thomas:] You think it is challenging because Trump wants to say look, they are looking for Russian collusion. They found nothing at least that we know of to date. The investigation has been going on and on and on and there has been nothing. At some point, you have to draw a line. I think Trump's worry, if you back to 2013, are they going to go back to 2000? Are they going back to
[Vause:] Nothing wrong.
[Thomas:] Well, because you might get nailed for process crime. That has nothing to do with Russia collusion. Ask Rick Gates. Ask Paul Manafort.
[Vause:] But still crimes.
[Thomas:] Right, but it has nothing to do with Russia collusion. I think that is Trump's point, if you are trying to get to the bottom of Russia collusion, this is not the way to do it.
[Jacobson:] We don't know that necessarily. But if you look at the big picture here, we have seen a tremendous swing in public opinion. USA Today and Suffolk University had a brand-new poll that shows that 58 percent of the American people trust Bob Muller, 57 percent don't trust Donald Trump on this issue. And I think that is really, really stunning because it is a dramatic shift from what we have seen recently. And I think most of that is emblematic of the fact that independent voters are now seem to trust Bob Mueller perhaps more than they were previously.
[Vause:] OK, The Washington Post is reporting that officials from at least four countries, China, Israel, Mexico, and the UAE privately discussed ways to manipulate White House adviser and presidential son- in-law Jared Kushner, taking advantage not just his lack of experience when it comes to foreign policy, but also his own personal financial problems, in particular
[Jacobson:] Precisely. And that's probably why or at least could potentially be one element of why Jared Kushner hasn't been able to pass throughout the entire course of his time in the White House a standard FBI background check, right? That at the end of the day is a massive clearing issue. And that is why he was recently demoted. That's why he got that security clearance take down. And I think it is going to have a massive impact in terms of his ability to do the scope of work that he he has been working on whether it is the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks or dealing with and being a liaison to Mexico. I mean, this is going to have a massive body blow in the terms of the portfolio and the data they work that he does in the west wing.
[Vause:] Kushner was also described as the secretary for everything, broker for the Middle East peace, adviser on relationships with Mexico, Canada and China, overseeing the Office of American Innovation,
[Thomas:] I don't think he can. It is a conflict of interest. They say that General Kelly made that call unilaterally, but I guarantee you, he would not have made that call even if he had authority to make that call without consulting the president.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Thomas:] So this is something that the president who sticks very closely by family was willing to go along with because the conflict of interest was so glaring. I have never been a fan of having nepotism in the White House. It just didn't seem to make a lot of sense to me.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Thomas:] But the fact that there has been focus on this, I think it is a healthy thing. I think Kelly has made the right call. And now that he has been demoted, he can't do his job.
[Vause:] Right. Well, as far as his future is concerned, here is White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] He is a valued member of the team and he will continue to do the important work that he has been doing since he started in the administration.
[Thomas:] The interns are important.
[Vause:] Dave, is that one week or two weeks before Jared and Ivanka
[Jacobson:] Well,
[Vause:] OK, let us finish up with secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Ben Carson. First, there was the whistle blower who told CNN that she was pressured to exceed the legal $5,000 limit to redecorate Carson's office.
[Helen Foster, Former Hud Official:] One-on-one meeting with my boss who was the acting secretary at the time. And he told me again that $5,000 wasn't enough and specifically $5,000 is not enough to buy a decent chair.
[Vause:] She said it wouldn't buy chair but $31,000 apparently buys a very nice dining table and it comes under the heading of office supplies, so it doesn't go into the redecoration. According to The New York Times, Carson didn't know the table had been purchased but does not believe the cost was too steep and does not intend to return it, said Raffi Williams, a HUD spokesman. In general, the secretary does want to be fiscally prudent as possible with the taxpayers's money, he added. John, this comes as programs at public housing to help the poor, the homeless, are said to be cut by the White House budget. So, for Ben Carson, a man who wants pose in a painting with the son of God, what would Jesus do
[Thomas:] You know, lawmakers get nailed for this kind of stuff all the time, lavish expenditures on their office. I think it is a bipartisan problem. I am glad he was exposed. And I think it is pretty simple. He either cuts a check himself or he steps down. I really think it is that simple. Elected officials or appointed officials should not be living lavishly on the taxpayers' dimes. It is just that simple.
[Vause:] Good point to end it. John and Dave, thanks so much.
[Jacobson:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Quick break here. After week of confusion, the Nigerian government is sharing new information on more than 100 missing girls. What to do to find them and bring them home, just ahead.

[Cuomo:] The president says he didn't know about Michael Cohen's payments to women until later on. But remember, we've already played you a tape that shows this cannot be true. Listen.
[Interviewer:] Did you know about the payments?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Later on I knew. Later on.
[Cohen:] I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend David, you know, so that I'm going to do that right away. I've actually come up and I've spoken
[Trump:] Give it to me and
[Cohen:] And I've spoken to Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up
[Cuomo:] There they listen. Here we test. That was before Michael Cohen made the payment. The president is in the room. He's speaking. He's listening. He's directing. The president told you, don't believe what you're reading or seeing. Is that because what you're seeing and hearing prove that he's lying? Let's ask our great debaters to take it on, Jennifer Granholm and Steve Cortes. Steve, let's see if we can go 2 for 2 on the candor meter. His former attorney says you've got to focus on collusion, but in terms of whether or not he's lying about these payments, yes, he's lying and the public has a right to be upset about that. Will you own that reality as well?
[Steve Cortes, Former Head, Trump Hispanic Advisory Council:] Well, listen, we have to be very careful about the facts here. And Chris, when you keep playing that tape, you're misrepresenting the facts because that tape is talking about the payments to Karen McDougal which were made by American media and assuming that David is David Pecker in that tape, the fact of the matter is neither Trump nor Cohen ever paid them. So, you're conflating two stories. The Stormy Daniels payment is totally different from the Karen McDougal payment. So Trump can truthfully say that he didn't know about that
[Cuomo:] No, no, no.
[Cortes:] because there was no payment.
[Cuomo:] No, I give you that they are different payments. I never said anything else, by the way. I've always represented that was about Karen McDougal and David Pecker. However and also, you're assuming that David Pecker doesn't say the same thing that Michael Cohen does. You'd better check your facts. However, the point remains the same, Steve. I'll bounce it over to you, Jennifer Granholm. He says he didn't know
[Cortes:] Wait, it doesn't mean the same though. Trump did not pay David Pecker. He didn't pay American media. He didn't pay Karen McDougal.
[Cuomo:] It's about what he knew about what was being done on his behalf. That's why Michael Cohen had to plead guilty to two counts. One for
[Cortes:] They were discussing paying for something and they never paid for it. Facts are important here, Chris. They discussed paying. They never did in that case.
[Cuomo:] No. You are making a distinction that makes no difference in the analysis.
[Cortes:] It makes all the difference in the world. I can talk about buying a house. If I don't buy it I didn't buy it.
[Cuomo:] Did you know that we were considering you buying a house and how to do it? Did you know or not? That's
[Cortes:] That's not material. The point is
[Cuomo:] It's absolutely material.
[Cortes:] He's not lying because he didn't do it.
[Cuomo:] That's not the standard of whether or not he's lying about knowing about what was going on. Jennifer Granholm, what's your case?
[Jennifer Granholm, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] Yes. I mean, really, Steve, bless your heart for trying to get Trump out of this soup, but he knew that he was paying off women. That's the bottom line. And it's a good thing that we've got evidence other than Michael Cohen's testimony. There's the tape. And who knows what other evidence that the Mueller investigation has that's documentary evidence or testimonial evidence from other people. What is Allen Weisselberg saying? We don't have any idea what's behind the scenes. But as to this notion that Trump did not know, that it is totally belied by the tape.
[Cuomo:] And the idea of even if he knew doesn't matter he's not a crime. And I paid all the money that was put out by Michael Cohen so nobody contributed anything for me. There's still the recording requirement in the statute, Steve.
[Granholm:] Right.
[Cuomo:] So there would still be a legal aspect
[Cortes:] Hold on, Chris. That's not true. That's not true. If and you have to again, we have to be careful here. Election law is clear. If an expenditure would have been made, irrespective of the campaign, that's the phrase that's used in election law, if it would have been made anyway then it is not deemed
[Cuomo:] But Michael Cohen said he made it to help the campaign.
[Cortes:] Michael Cohen Michael Cohen the felon and dishonest rat said that.
[Granholm:] Come on.
[Cortes:] And we're going to take his word as gospel truth
[Cuomo:] The president sure disagrees with you about what Michael Cohen is. He said he was a good man, an honorable man.
[Cortes:] He's suddenly George Washington who can't tell a lie. Look, Michael Cohen was facing decades in prison because he committed really serious crimes that had nothing to do, totally unrelated to Mr. Trump, then Mr. Trump, now President Trump. Because of that, the prosecutors were able to squeeze him and put him in the corner as they often do and get him to admit
[Cuomo:] Because of what he did they were able to squeeze him.
[Cortes:] And get to admit to a non-crime because it's not a crime. There are many
[Cuomo:] You spend money on your campaign and you don't record it, it's a crime. Now, I'm not saying that they're going after the president for it. I don't think they can. Not just in substance but in style. I don't think they can do it with him in office. And I think that's why they didn't even use his name in the information. But it does go to lying. I give it to Jay Goldberg for being honest about that, that the president's not telling the truth. Now we have the question before I let you guys go of the implications. I get having this argument, Jennifer Granholm. I don't understand using it as leverage on the Kavanaugh nomination.
[Granholm:] Really?
[Cuomo:] During the Clinton situation, you had Stephen Breyer come up and he went right through in the process. It wasn't used as a bargaining chip. Why use it as one now?
[Granholm:] Yes, but this because this particular nominee has an unusually expansive view of executive power. He was selected by Donald Trump because Donald Trump picks people who are going to help him. They went through his entire record, and they know that this particular nominee believes that presidents should be above the law, immune from prosecution, immune from subpoenas. He even went so far as to say that the unanimous Supreme Court decision that called for the release of the Watergate tapes shouldn't have come down that way. So, this particular nominee was selected by Donald Trump because Donald Trump knew the Mueller investigation was coming. This nominee does not like independent counsels. So, you've got to look at all of it in that context, that he was picked out by Trump for the purpose of protecting himself because he knew that a Mueller potential case was going to come to the Supreme Court.
[Cuomo:] Steve Cortes, I'm short on time but in the interest of fairness give me a button.
[Cortes:] There's a lot of conjecture from Jennifer. Look, if you want to stop a Supreme Court nominee, control the presidency and the Senate.
[Granholm:] Look at his record.
[Cortes:] The Democrats have the Democrats have done neither. So, to me, that's the way if you want to stop a nominee. Not by making up wild accusations only from Michael Cohen that are totally uncorroborated
[Granholm:] No, well, just look no, no, no. You've got to look at his written his written record. I'm not talking about wild accusations
[Cuomo:] We've got to look at all of it. Jennifer's right about that.
[Granholm:] His words.
[Cuomo:] We've got to hold on. We've got to leave it there. But we will look at everything. They're going to have the hearings. We're going to be testing it here. And I'm going to be using you two to help the audience understand the issues better. Steve, Jennifer, thank you.
[Granholm:] Thanks. You bet.
[Cuomo:] All right. Troubles for President Trump extend beyond campaign finance violations. Why? Because Cohen's lawyer says his client has information he can share with people like the New York attorney general, who may be looking at the Trump Foundation, like the Mueller probe. Maybe information on what the president may have known about the fruits of Russian hacking. OK? We're going to see what a former top spy thinks about the potential here. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden, next.

[Victor Blackwell, Cnn:] live in Washington where despite last minute, negotiations and huddles and votes, the government is shut down for the first time in more than four years. The art of the deal, president could not reach that deal with democrats and a few republicans. Just a few hours ago, they marked the one year anniversary of his presidency by rejecting a budget bill.
[Christi Paul, Cnn:] The president is reacting on Twitter this morning as well saying democrats, "Could have easily made a deal but decided to play shutdown politics instead.
[Blackwell:] CNN's Ryan Nobles is live on Capitol Hill. Ryan, we've learned that some lawmakers are expected back on the Hill in just a couple of hours. RYAN NOBLES, CNN Washington
[Correspondent:] Yes, that's right Victor and Christi. The House will return here to Capitol Hill to begin negotiations. In fact, they will gavel into session at around 9:00a.m. this morning. Then at around 10:00, House House republicans and democrats will go their separate ways and begin to have conversations behind closed doors about what to do next. Then, the big moment comes at noon, that's when the Senate gavels back in. The ball's really right now in the Senate's court. They're the ones that have to take the next move because the House has already passed to short-term spending plan. The question is, can the Senate gather the 60 votes necessary to do that themselves? At this point, that doesn't seem possible. In fact, listen to what was talked about last night on the Senate floor right before the shutdown went into effect.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Senate Majority Leader:] Perhaps across the aisle some of our democratic colleagues are feeling proud of themselves but what has their filibuster accomplished? What has it accomplished? The answer is simple, their very own government shutdown.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Senate Minority Leader:] President Trump if you are listening, I am urging you, please take yes for an answer. The way things went today, the way you turned from a bipartisan deal, it's almost as if you were rooting for a shutdown.
[Nobles:] And you could tell just from the back and forth there between Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer that this is really more about a blame game. There doesn't appear to be a real effort right now to begin the hardcore negotiating that is necessary to come up with some sort of a grand bargain. In fact, what is likely to happen today is a conversation about another continuing resolution that will be a bit of a short-term fix to this problem instead of a month long continuing resolution, one that would end around February 8th. This is a deal being floated by Senator Lindsey Graham. And in fact, Lindsey Graham was among a group of senators who voted no yesterday and it was both republicans and democrats who flip side. There was a group of four republicans who said that they were not going to support this continuing resolution and then a group of five democrats all from Trump friendly states who said that they could support this continuing resolution. So you can see, this is a problem for both republicans and democrats and there's a lot of talking that needs to be done today that there's any hope of this government shutdown ending anytime soon. Christi and Victor
[Paul:] All right. Ryan Nobles, appreciate it so much sir, thank you.
[Blackwell:] President Trump tweeting this morning about the shutdown, four tweets within the past hour blaming democrats for the political panic on Capitol Hill.
[Paul:] CNN's White House Correspondent, Abby Phillip with us now live from the White House. And we should point out, the White House came out initially with some pretty strong language. The president doing the same again this morning.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right Christi. The president waking up in this building right behind me with a government shutdown on the one year anniversary of his inauguration when he thought he would be in Florida at his Mar-a-Lago resort celebrating and instead he sent out this tweet this morning noting his inauguration anniversary today calling it a nice present from the democrats he said. "This is the one year anniversary of my presidency, democrats wanted to give me a nice present." But he then also went on to talk about the fact that he thinks that this shutdown proves the need for more republicans in Congress. He wrote, "For those asking, the republicans only have 51 votes in the Senate and they need 60 that's why we need to win more republicans in 2018 election. We can be even tougher on crime and border and even better to our military and veterans." Now, White House Press Secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders last night channeled a little bit of President Trump's anger and frustration about this situation with some Trumpian language. She put out this statement calling this, "The Schumer Shutdown." She wrote, "Tonight, they put politics above our national security, military families, vulnerable children, and our country's ability to serve all Americans. We will not negotiate the status of unlawful immigrants while democrats hold our lawful citizens hostage over their reckless demand. This is the behavior of obstructionist losers, not legislators." Obstructionist losers, the kind of name calling we would typically see on President Trump's Twitter feed. Now, after these talks between Senate democrats Senate Democratic Leader, Chuck Schumer and President Trump failed to produce any kind of deal yesterday, it is not clear whether we are going to restart any negotiations today. The White House is putting their foot down, they do not want to talk about immigration. They only want to fund the government. Christi and Victor
[Blackwell:] All right. Abby Phillip, of course at the White House. Abby, thank you so much.
[Paul:] So let's bring in Stephen Moore, CNN Senior Economics Analyst and a former Trump Economic Advisor. Matt Viser, CNN Political Analyst and Deputy Washington Bureau Chief for the "Boston Globe." Patti Solis Doyle, CNN Political Commentator and Hillary Clinton's former Presidential Campaign Manager. And Andre Bauer, CNN Political Commentator and former Lieutenant Governor of South Carolina. Got it all out. Welcome everybody, glad to have you here. Want to listen real quickly to President Trump, then citizen Trump back in 2013 when the government shutdown and who he said then was to blame.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And the president in all fairness, he's the leader, he's the one that has to get everybody to get in a room and get it done. They're not going to be talking about Baner and Reed and all, they're going to be talking about President Obama and what a disaster the administration was. So he does have a lot of pressure to get this problem solved. He's got a big problem.
[Paul:] Andre, does President Trump have a big problem? Does this sit on his shoulders?
[Andre Bauer, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well it does in some ways. I mean, he's missing the opportunity he bought not to be talking about so many accomplishments in the last year. I walked by when we broadcast last year this very day and thought about how exciting it was to see him take over and he's had a lot of victories. But the fact that we're not talking about those victories really hurts him. I don't know what he could have done any different, he sat down with Schumer yesterday, they tried to work out a deal, didn't sound like Schumer want a deal. It may very well be a smart move on the democrats to not have people talking about the accomplishments of Trump Administration the first year but instead talking about a government shutdown technically would be a good move.
[Paul:] So you're saying you think that the democrats did this to avoid the subject of the positivity but it could come out of the president's first year?
[Bauer:] But so much is done in Washington, it's not about the people, it's about politics. It's not why I believe that the president said we need more republicans, I think we need term limits. I think we need all of them to know this as a part time job, not for a long, long time and part of the big problem is as everybody is posturing about getting reelected more than anything else and it's disappointing. I saw it when I served in elected office in both Houses and then in the executive branch and people so often make all their decisions based on what's best for me in the next election and that's what's best for the people I represent and I think you saw that happen yesterday.
[Blackwell:] The latest CNN poll number show that as compared to funding the government, DACA comes in priority at 34 percent of the respondents but funding the government is 56 percent. Do these numbers work for the democrats in drawing these line on protections for DACA recipients?
[Patti Solis Doyle, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, I think first of all, I think DACA is very important. We have 700,000 dreamers who basically don't know what their future holds for them. They are living in great angst. But the republicans had every chance to fund the government. They control the House, they control the Senate, they control the presidency. And this is their fundamental job of Congress is to fund the government and they haven't been able to do it. We've been working on CR after CR after CR. For the democrats I think, it is about DACA but it's also about disaster relief, it's also about C.H.I.P., it's also about military, it's also about funding the government. And the republicans haven't been able to get any of that done on a permanent level, on a two-year budget deal.
[Paul:] So matt, I want to ask you because a lot of people are waking up and they're going, "Look, both parties new this was coming. They knew what the deadline was. Why is it that they cannot come to some sort of an agreement?" When you're talking about government employee, some of who makes $500 a week, they live paycheck to paycheck, why when you know that this is on a horizon, you cannot come to some sort of agreement?
[Matt Viser, Cnn Political Analyst:] Its striking and kind of ridiculous frankly. I mean, everybody knew the issue set, everybody knew where the sticking points were for weeks leading up to this. The republicans knew that DACA was a big deal for democrats and they knew that they had to win over some democrats on this. It wasn't a secret that they could not do this alone and democrats says that they're one point of leverage really in a minority is to use the budget frankly, to have that. And President Trump had that big meeting a week ago to sort of set the stage for negotiations around DACA and around immigrations. So Congress doesn't operate well without a deadline, so they sort of put all of those sticky discussions until really the 11th hour or almost literally, you know what I mean? There was very little activity throughout the day aside from Schumer going to the White House. There seem to be no urgency on the part of either party because they I think they both felt like they had a winning hand heading into last night. And now is the question over do does either party have a winning hand?
[Blackwell:] And Stephen, looking forward, we know that Senator Graham was excited about this potential for a three week continuing resolution. Although they couldn't get the votes for 30 days. I mean, it why would he be optimistic that he could peel off a few more of at least those red state democrats to support three weeks when they wouldn't support 30 days? I mean, is that fool's errand?
[Stephen Moore, Cnn Senior Economics Analyst:] Well look, I would I thought that cooler heads would prevail last night and they would get some kind of deal to keep the government I mean, this is silly. This is just stupid. Why are we shutting down the government and disrupting people's lives? Although, the good news for people out there, this will have about zero impact on people's lives because it's a weekend and it's only nonessential services of government that are affected. But this does come down to the immigration issue. Look, it's not fair to say, "Well republicans could control everything, they could keep the government open." The democrat just to be real clear about this, the democrat's filibuster of the budget yesterday in the Senate which required 60 votes. You're right, republicans have 50 votes, they don't have 60. And so unless they could get 10 democrats to come over, the government was going to get shutdown. It's interesting on the politics of this that the three democrats and the Senate who voted with Trump and the republicans were the three e that are in the most vulnerable seats in Indiana and West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota. So I think the democrats understand the politics might not be on the side on this. One last point, you said, could should we open the government for three days, three weeks, four weeks, six weeks? We're still going to ultimately come down to this issue about what to do about this immigration issue.
[Blackwell:] The immigration issue.
[Moore:] And there is a big divide. Republicans are essentially saying, "Until you help build the wall and until you participate in border security, DACA isn't going to happen." And democrats I think are vulnerable on the charge that they are very weak on border security.
[Blackwell:] But Senator Schumer said yesterday that he put the wall on the table in that meeting with the president, we'll talk about that. We got to take a quick break but everybody stay with us. Much more to discuss. Hundreds of thousands of workers, billions of dollars, this government shutdown will be felt far and wide.
[Paul:] How will it affect you, we'll talk about it.

[Allen:] Welcome back. The NBA All-Star Game ended a few hours ago with a win for the team led by Lebron James. But the athlete also made headlines this weekend for sparring with a "Fox News" host. Laura Ingram slammed James and fellow NBA Star Kevin Durant on Thursday after they appeared in a video criticizing President Trump. She in a mocking tone called James remarks barely intelligible and took jabs at his education.
[Laura Ingram, Fox News:] This is what happens when you attempt to leave high school a year early to join the NBA. And it's always unwise to seek political advice from someone who gets paid $100 million a year to bounce a ball. Oh, and Lebron and Kevin, you're great players but no one voted for you. Millions elected Trump to be their coach, so keep the political commentary to yourself or as someone once said, "Shut up and dribble."
[Allen:] James fired back at Ingram telling her to check her facts. He also said this.
[Lebron James, Cleveland Cavaliers Forward:] We will definitely not shut up and dribble. I would definitely not do that. I mean too much too society, I mean too much to the youth, I mean too much to so many kids that feel like they don't have a way out and they need someone to help lead them out of the situation they're in.
[Allen:] The "Fox News" host invited Lebron James on her program. On Friday, she also released a statement standing by her comment and dismissing claims that her remarks were racist. Let's talk more about this with Dave Zirin, he is the sports editor at the "The Nation Magazine." Dave, thanks for coming on.
[Dave Zirin, Sports Editor, Nation Magazine:] Sure thing. Because this is turning into a big story, what were your thoughts after hearing Laura Ingram on "Fox?"
[Zirin:] Well my first thought is that it was a very old script. I mean, to hear, "Shut up and dribble" it reminded me when people used to say to Muhammad Ali, "Shut up and box." It reminded me of when people used to say Jackie Robinson, "Shut up and bunt." I mean, these are the things that have long been said to black athletes to make sure that they don't use their hyper exalted platform to actually say something about politics and just as they say stick to sports.
[Allen:] So you think this is something that is specific toward African-American athletes and not other athletes?
[Zirin:] Historically that's what its been and if you look at for example Donald Trump's tweets since he's been president, he's gone after black athletes with a particular vengeance and ignored people in the sports world who are white, who have criticized his presidency. I think the same is true with Laura Ingram, she proudly carries water for Donald Trump. They like to play these racial games, it's not so much a dog whistle as is an air raid siren but I think this time truly Lauran Ingram and the people around her bid off far more than they could chew. I don't think they expected for one second not only for Lebron to respond the way he did but for the sports world to rise up in unison to say, "No, we defend the right to be more than an athlete."
[Allen:] How could they not know there were big backlash? Lebron James, 40.7 million followers, Kevin Durant, 17.4 million. These are mega stars, that many people care what these athletes are doing and likely what they're saying.
[Zirin:] It's interesting that you said their Twitter numbers because Michelle Roberts, the head of the NBA Players Association, she referenced them as well and said, "Well now, 57 million new people have been introduced to who Laura Ingram is and they're getting a very negative impression of that." I just think they did not expect the athletes to pushback. I think they realized that these athletes over the last five years or so have really been in a kind of training for this kind of political activism. I mean, it started with the tragic killing of Trayvon Martin when Lebron James got the Miami Heat to all wear hoodies and that picture went viral. And since then, it's been regular political discourse and dialogue for almost six years and I don't think "Fox News" has any conception whatsoever that these athletes are ready for this kind of political fight.
[Allen:] Right. You talk about the pushback from the athletes. Let's talk about the role of athletes. James posted this message, "I am more than an athlete." And he also says this is bigger than him playing basketball. Let's listen.
[James:] You know, if it's for the greater good, then I don't mind being a symbol. I don't sit up here trying to get a reward for it. I don't think Muhammad Ali sat up there trying to get a reward. I don't think Jim Brown or Bill Russell or Jackie Robertson and the list goes on and on. They sit up there trying to get rewarded for it, it's just because this is who we are and we know it's bigger than us, it's not about us. I'm going to do what I have to do to continue to play this game that I love to play but this is bigger than me playing the game of basketball.
[Allen:] He made his feelings very clear on that, didn't he?
[Zirin:] He certainly did. And he wasn't alone. I mean, Dwayne Wade, Kevin Durant, even Adam Silver, the Commissioner of the NBA, he did what is known as the State of the NBA Union where he does a big press conference during All-Star Weekend which is what we're in right now. And Adam Silver started his comments unprompted with a defense of Lebron James and any players right to be political. I mean, that's a remarkable level of institutional support in the NBA that for example in the NFL players simply do not have and I think it's one of the things that's attracting people to the NBA because whether you agree or disagree with the politics of the players, you see them as three- dimensional people and that three dimensionality is exactly what "Fox News" was pushing back against. And I think they really did learn a lesson that to quote "The Wire," "If you come for the king, you best not miss."
[Allen:] Lebron James encountered direct racism recently. Last summer, his home was vandalized with graffiti and after that he said this, "No matter how much money you have, no matter how famous you are, no matter how many people admire you, being black in America is tough. We've got a long way to go for us as society and for us African- Americans until we feel equal in America." And this story involving "Fox" certainly illustrates the fact that he's been targeted unfairly more than once, many times and then he's been quite eloquent talking about to the issues he faces. All of this while he does his day job, play basketball quite remarkably.
[Zirin:] Right. No, it's a remarkable story. And I reminds of Seattle Seahawks, Michael Bennett who was asked why he supports the Black Lives Matter Movement and he said, "Well I'm going to play in the NFL for another couple of years, I'm going to be black the rest of my life." And there is this rhetoric certainly from Donald Trump, the word he uses is ungrateful to describe protesting black athletes and that word ungrateful, it assumes this idea that somehow racism is no longer an issue in your life or the life of your family just because you're a star athlete. And I think what Lebron James's recent experience has shown and that what he's trying to be a voice for is that this is everybody's responsibility to do something about whether you're directly affected by it or not. "Fox News" is a very different perspective on the question of racism in U.S. society and that perspective is, "Just shut up and dribble."
[Allen:] Dave Zirin, sports editor at "The Nation Magazine," we appreciate you coming on. Thanks for your thoughts.
[Zirin:] Thank you.
[Allen:] News out of the Olympics, it is not about medals, the Russian Olympic Delegation says one of his athletes has failed a drug test. CNN's Amanda Davies joins me now with more from Pyeongchang, South Korea, what we're learning about this, Amanda.
[Amanda Davies, Cnn World Sports Correspondent:] Yes, thanks Natalie. Just three golds being decided today and not until later in the day, so it's a real day where it's sports news dominating the headlines instead of the sport not what the IOC would have wanted. And while there's interest in the current climate when you hear of a failed drug test, if that failed drug test involves an athlete from Russia, then as you can imagine and that is magnified at least ten folds and the spokesperson from the Olympic athletes from Russia team confirm to CNN that the Russian delegation was told on Sunday that one of their athletes has failed a test and are waiting for the results of the B sample which should be confirmed later today. But neither the OAR or the International Olympic Committee have confirmed the identity or sports of the athlete as things stand. In terms of the bigger picture though, it's going to be very, very interesting to see what impact this might have on whether or not Russia will be able to march under their own team name and flag at the closing ceremony on Sunday. You might remember that one of the clauses in the agreement that allowed the band Russian team to compete here in Pyeongchang under the neutral flag was that the option is there for them to reinstated for the final proceedings if they stick to the rules. And the IOC Spokesperson, Mark Adams wouldn't really be drawn on that matter when he was pressed in a daily news conference, he simply said it's too premature to say with the official decision set to be made on Saturday. Let's have a listen to what he have to say.
[Mark Adams, Ioc President's Spokesperson:] On the one hand it's extremely disappointing when prohibited substances may have been used. But on the other hand, it shows the effectiveness of the anti-doping system at the games which protects the rights of all the clean athletes. If this case is confirmed, if this case is confirmed, it will be considered by the OAR implementation group chaired by IOC Executive Board Member Nicole Hoevertsz which will report to the IOCEB at the end of the Olympic Games.
[Davies:] If the results of the B sample that we're waiting for Natalie to discover whether or not this case will be confirmed and you suspect at that point, a lot more detail will come and the decision in terms of the bigger picture will need to be made.
[Allen:] All of the lead up concerning Russian athletes and drugs and it seems surreal, we're talking about this yet again. Amanda Davies for us, thank you so much for that report Amanda. You knew him for his movies such as "Alien" and "Gladiator" but the BAFTA honored Director Ridley Scott for much more, we'll have that next. Plus, look at this year's winners at the BAFTA in London, coming right up.

[Cuomo:] President Trump gloating on Twitter this morning after Congress voted to end the government shutdown, the first we've ever had with one party in control of both houses of Congress and the White House. CNN anchor Jake Tapper received an e-mail Trump's campaign sent to supporters with the headline "Democrats caved." Joining us now is Democrat Congressman Henry Cuellar of Texas. He voted yes on the spending deal. Does that mean you caved, congressman?
[Rep. Henry Cuellar , Texas:] No. I've been a big believer since the Republicans shut down the government in 2013. And, by the way, President Obama did not gloat. He took it as a professional and said, let's get back to work. And that's what we ought to do. I've always believed that you don't shut down the government over any issue. The Republicans were wrong over trying to shut it down shut it down for health care in 2013 and I think, you know, this time it's the dreamers, which I'm very passionate about. What's going to be the next hot issue next year. So it's going to be one of those things that I've always said, terrorists don't shut down the federal government but Congress has a way of shutting down our government every time.
[Cuomo:] Well, if you care about the dreamers, what did the Democrats get in exchange for your votes yesterday that makes the dreamers better off?
[Cuellar:] Well, first of all, I voted yes on Friday. So I've been voting consistently to
[Cuomo:] Right, right, right. But you're in the House. We get it. But yesterday was about the Senate. So go with from there.
[Cuellar:] Well, let me let me finish. Let me finish.
[Cuomo:] Go ahead.
[Cuellar:] So I voted yes on Friday. I voted again because I don't think we ought to shut down the government for any reason. Now, my suggestion has always been since back in September, and I told this to Kevin McCarthy, was, what we ought to do, if we're going to do a CR, do a CR which I don't like CRs you take a vote before. You don't leave it open the way the Senate did it. You don't do that because there's no concrete agreement. And you've got to have both the Republican leaders and the Senate leaders agreeing to that, otherwise you're going to leave it open. That's not the way to negotiate. It's it was a path moving forward, but it's not the way I would have negotiated this one.
[Cuomo:] That's what Pelosi seemed to be doing saying yesterday. You think she would have made the same deal?
[Cuellar:] Well, I think she would have done it. In fact, I was the one that suggested that what we ought to do is do it that way. I was at a leadership meeting and I've been saying this for a while, you get the CR and you take the vote before. In fact, I told Kevin McCarthy this last week, and I told him back last year the same thing is, look, if you want to put the Goodlatte bill, put the Goodlatte bill, and then let's put a bipartisan bill, let's say the
[Cuomo:] So, what do you think's going to happen now? Do you think you're going to get an up-and-down vote on something for the dreamers? Do you think a pathway to citizenship is even possible?
[Cuellar:] Well, again, in our bill, there is a pathway. And, again, all I want is I don't want the Republicans to be afraid of the will of the House. Put Goodlatte's bill, put our bill there, let's see what happens, and let the will of the House. But apparently they're afraid that their bill is not going to pass, our bill is going to pass with Republicans, and that's what they're afraid. So they're they're prohibiting. It's the same thing that Boehner did some years ago on immigration reform. He said he supported it. He won't put it for a vote. With all due respect to Speaker Ryan, he says he supports DACA, but he won't put it to a vote. Put it to the vote. If it fails, it fails. Which I don't think it's going to fail. It will pass and they're afraid to put it to a vote.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Cuellar:] That's the bottom line.
[Cuomo:] But you don't have any leverage. See, that takes us back to the Senate situation. You're in the minority. The only leverage you had were these votes that the Republicans need in the Senate, even if they get all their people on board, because of the filibuster rule. So now that you showed as Democrats I know that you're in the House, but you're all in the same party, that's why I made the point I made earlier, what is your leverage to get the GOP to do anything that they don't want to do with the dreamers when the president, who was your bestial ally for a minute, just put out an ad basically saying they're all terrorists.
[Cuellar:] Yes. Well, you know, the bottom line is, you're right, I mean, the president will say one thing. He will change. We know that he just changes. So let's go back to Congress where we can work this out. Our leverage is still this. We've still got to pass the appropriation bill. The Dream Act is one issue. But we've still got to get the top line numbers. We've still got to get, how are we going to divide the money between defense and non-defense, equal, equal. We still need that appropriations because otherwise we're going to continue to stay with a CR, and we have to get those numbers. The numbers in the appropriations is what the top line numbers are that are important and that's the leverage.
[Cuomo:] Look, I mean, I hear that from a lot of people in the House. Maybe that's why, in the end, it was the Democratic conclusion to separate the two issues, DACA and the appropriations. Nancy Pelosi said the same thing, the minority leader, yesterday, that the budget concerns loom even larger than the DACA problem. Henry Cuellar, thank you very much.
[Cuellar:] Thank you.
[Cuomo:] I appreciate your perspective this morning.
[Cuellar:] Thank you so much.
[Cuomo:] Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, now to this story. More than 100 girls and young women have testified in court at the sentencing hearing for disgraced former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar. Nassar admitted to sexually abusing young girls in his care. We're going to hear from two survivors in a moment. But first, let's get to CNN's Jean Casarez. She's live in Lansing, Michigan. What's the latest there, Jean?
[Jean Casarez, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, Alisyn, more and more young women keep coming forward into that court to tell their stories. And the reason so many can speak in court is not only because the victims, who this actual prosecution are allowed, parents are allowed, it's all because of the plea agreement and the plea agreement also says other act witnesses, those young women filing reports saying they, too, were sexually assaulted by Larry Nassar.
[Emma Ann Miller, Victim Of Larry Nassar:] I have never wanted to hate someone in my life, but my hate towards you is uncontrollable. Larry Nassar, I hate you.
[Casarez:] A fifth day of emotional testimony filled with anger.
[Taylor Livingston, Victim Of Larry Nassar:] What you have done is despicable. What you have done, you can never erase. But I find more peace in knowing that one day you are going to die. And when you do, your pain will not subside.
[Casarez:] And tears.
[Krista Wakeman, Victim Of Larry Nassar:] I feel my own sense of guilt because I was 16 years old and I should have stopped this monster from hurting other girls.
[Casarez:] Dozens of survivors confronting disgraced former gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar about the sexual abuse they suffered as children.
[Kamerin Moore, Victim Of Larry Nassar:] You molested a little girl who had just lost her father. Was I not suffering enough?
[Casarez:] But outrage was not just directed at Nassar. Many blaming the institutions that employed the doctor for not doing more to stop the abuse that went on for decades despite complaints.
[Clasina Syrovy, Victim Of Larry Nassar:] They certainly didn't stand up for us. They stood up for you. They stood behind you. They safeguarded you when people spoke out.
[Casarez:] An attorney for the victims calling on Congress to investigate the US Olympic Committee, USA Gymnastics, and Michigan State University, where Nassar was employed since 1997. Pressure now mounting on Michigan's president, Lou Anna Simon, to resign. Simon denies any wrongdoing saying she supports the survivors, but 15-year-old Emma Ann Miller says her family is still being billed by MSU for appointments when she was abused.
[Miller:] This is a burden at 15 I shouldn't have to bear. But believe me, MSU, bear I will.
[Casarez:] The university has said she will not have to pay those bills. On Monday, the chairman and two other top board members at USA Gymnastics stepping down. The Gymnastics Federation's president saying she hopes new leadership will help implement change.
[Amanda Smith, Victim Of Larry Nassar:] Whether we were abused one time or 100 times, it's never OK. I will not stop speaking until I am heard, until we are heard.
[Camerota:] OK. Joining us now are two athletes who plan to make statements about their experience with Dr. Larry Nassar. Kaylee Lorincz is a gymnast at Adrian College, and Sterling Riethman is a former intercollegiate diver. Ladies, thank you so much for being here. Sterling, let me start with you. I understand that you plan to make your victim impact statement tomorrow to the court. What do you plan to say directly to Larry Nassar?
[Sterling Riethman, Former Intercollegiate Diver:] Yes, that's correct. So I'll be speaking tomorrow. And, you know, the whole purpose of this is really to explain our story, to tell our truth, reclaim our voice and just make sure that the court and Larry and all of his enablers understand that we're not standing for this. We're putting an end to sexual assault, we're putting an end to the culture of abuse.
[Camerota:] Kaylee, as I understand your story, you were first sexually abused by Larry Nassar on your 13th birthday. What do you plan to say to him and to the court?
[Kaylee Lorincz, Adrian College Gymnast:] You know, I would like the court and Larry and everybody to know how his actions have affected me since the time I was 13 and how this has affected my future. And going through this process of testifying in court and, you know, being questioned by his defense attorneys, I want everyone to know just how difficult it really can be.
[Camerota:] And, Kaylee, can you just tell me more about that? How did it affect your future?
[Lorincz:] I have a very hard time trusting anybody. And even myself at some times. You know, whether I know what's right and what's wrong. And I I do believe that I do know that but sometimes I do question myself. You know, I can't even go to the doctor by myself anymore because I'm afraid that another doctor will betray me just like Larry did because he made us think he was our friend and got us to trust him from the very beginning.
[Camerota:] Sterling, this is such a great point. This was a man that you trusted your future to, you trusted your health to. He was considered a miracle worker by I know you and so many athletes because he could fix your bad back or your bad knees or your bad feet. How you do think it was possible that he was able to perpetrate this against so many girls? I mean the count is now up to at least 144.
[Riethman:] He was a master manipulator. He was he groomed us. He groomed us to think that he was that saint, to think that he was that miracle worker. And we had no reason to question it. You know, he would give us gifts. And he would he would talk to us like he was our best friend. And he made he allowed us to trust him to make sure that we could get back to training, that we could get back to the sport that we loved. And we were brainwashed. We were manipulated and brainwashed. And it's grooming on a whole new level.
[Camerota:] Kaylee, the chairman of USA Gymnastics and two other high- level board members resigned on Monday. Do you think they knew what was happening?
[Lorincz:] You know, I think that there are certain people who knew. I don't think that there's any way that nobody knew what was going on.
[Camerota:] Who do you think did know?
[Lorincz:] And you know, it's hard to pinpoint exactly who I think knew for sure. But I think that there's no way that this just went completely unknowing. There's just no way that that can be possible.
[Camerota:] Sterling, what do you think? Who do you think knew? And did you try to, over the years, tell anyone?
[Riethman:] You know, I did not tell anyone. I, quite honestly, I did not know that this was sexual assault until that "Indy Star" report broke back in September of 2016. And but when you look at the facts and you look at the history and you hear the stories from these women and so many people that did tell someone, you know that there were multiple people at Michigan State who knew that this was happening. We have reason to believe that there were 14 people at Michigan State who knew that he was sexually abusing women and did nothing about it. And, you know, we knew that there were gymnasts that reported to USAG and they took weeks and months to investigate and they never communicated that. And they never protected their athletes and the young women that were involved in the sport. So it really is it's a shame to see that so many people were putting their institution and their brand and their reputation ahead of our lives.
[Camerota:] Well, obviously, they are forced to listen to your voices now. Best of luck tomorrow when you give these victim impact statements, and we'll be following your future. Kaylee, Sterling, thank you both very much for being here.
[Riethman:] Thank you.
[Lorincz:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] Thanks to our international viewers for watching. For you, CNN "NEWSROOM" is next. For our U.S. viewers, NEW DAY continues right now.

[Berman:] All right, happening now on Capitol Hill, the director of National Intelligence is testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee. According to multiple officials, he is one of two top intelligence officials that the president, President Trump, asked them to publically deny that there was any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government during the 2016 election.
[Harlow:] All right, joining us now as we wait to hear from Director Coats, who's going to be asked about this, no question.
[Berman:] Yes.
[Harlow:] After what we're told is pretty short opening remarks, so stay with us for that. With us now is CNN's senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, also a staff writer for "The New Yorker," and our Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr. Jeffrey to you. A former senior intelligence official puts it this way to "The Washington Post." "The problem wasn't so much asking them to issue statements, it was asking them to issue false statements in an ongoing investigation." These are two of his handpicked guys. He goes to them and says basically, even though the White House isn't commenting, our reporting is, help me out here. This isn't the case. You know it. Go out in public and say it. Anything illegal about that?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Senior Legal Analyst:] Potentially. I mean it's potentially part of an obstruction of justice process that you could argue that the president was engaged in. This is what Robert Mueller will be investigating. When you
[Harlow:] So they would point to intent?
[Toobin:] Well, it's also just asking people to say something false for your legal benefit. I mean that is part of obstruction of justice, potentially. I mean, you know, you have to get what the facts were
[Harlow:] Right.
[Toobin:] What people actually said, not, you know, newspaper reports about it. But when you combine these comments with firing Director Comey, with his statement the president's statements to the Russians about why he fired Director Comey, it all adds up
[Harlow:] Pattern.
[Toobin:] To a possible pattern of obstruction of justice, certainly something worth investigating.
[Berman:] Let me ask you this, can it still be obstruction of justice if the president is right, that there's absolutely no evidence
[Harlow:] That's a good point because it's an ongoing yes.
[Berman:] Of collusion between his campaign? If there was nothing there, and he knows it, is it obstruction of justice to say, you know, say something out loud?
[Toobin:] It can be. It can be. You don't have to succeed in obstructing justice to commit obstructing justice. I mean just the all the federal statutes, Title 18, Section 1503 says to attempt to obstruct justice is a crime as well as actually obstructing justice.
[Berman:] Even an investigation that might ultimately exonerate you?
[Toobin:] Absolutely. Absolutely. I mean it makes sense when you think about it. I mean if you lie in the course of an FBI investigation, but the underlying crime that the FBI is investigating, you're either innocent of or never charged with, you could still be prosecuted for it. And that happens actually with some frequency.
[Harlow:] Barbara Starr, there's an important twist to this all, and that is the fact that outside of DNI Coats, the other person that he asked is NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, and he is an active duty military officer. Does that take this to another level?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] I think many people think that is exactly what's happening. If you're in the United States military, you do not engage in politics. That's just really a fundamental tenant. The U.S. military is here. It's legitimacy derives from the fact it's here for the defense of the country, not to engage in the political agenda of elected officials. So if this, in fact, happened precisely as is being laid out now, it begins to really question whether the president fully understands the basic underlying tenant of the United States military that they don't engage in politics. Admiral Rogers, by all accounts, declined the request. That's exactly what you would expect a serving U.S. military officer to do. But was this framed as an order? Did he have to deny the president an order? Was it a casual request? All these things remaining to be sorted out. But, again, this really goes, I think, both for Admiral Rogers, the U.S. military and even the intelligence community. These organizations really do derive their legitimacy from the fact that the public can believe they are there for the public good to carry out the defense of the country. When we have heard about politicization of intelligence over the years, and of the U.S. military, generally that leads to nothing but trouble. So this is a very concerning development. I talked to a number of officials this morning. The reaction I'm getting so far is really a big sigh and slumped shoulders. Sort of, what's next. John and Poppy.
[Harlow:] Wow.
[Berman:] All right, Barbara Starr, Jeffrey Toobin, thank you so much for being with us. Appreciate it. We do have some breaking news. Former James Bond, Sir Roger Moore, has passed away. That's according to statements from his family posted to his official Twitter feed. He died after a battle with cancer. He was James Bond for much of the '70s and early '80s, "Moonraker," "For Your Eyes Only," "The Man with the Golden Gun," A View to a Kill." All the way into the '80s as well. Roger Moore was 89.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Lines of communication are back open this morning between North and South Korea. It comes hours after President Trump's 280 character message to Kim Jong-un. Mine's bigger than yours.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] He really said that. The president's tweet at North Korea part of a wild and wide ranging social media tirade. He took aim at Iran, the Palestinians, Democrats and his own deep state Justice Department.
[Briggs:] And the Senate returns to Washington today, top level meetings on tap. Can the White House get its 2018 agenda off the ground? EARLY START coverage from Seoul, London and Jerusalem begins right now. Good morning, everyone, and thanks for getting an EARLY START with us. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] I'm Christine Romans. It is Wednesday, January 3rd. Are all of your New Year's resolutions still intact?
[Briggs:] I promised to tweet less. I'm failing at that.
[Romans:] And sleep more.
[Briggs:] I'm failing at that, 0-2. And you?
[Romans:] We'll try again tomorrow. No. It's 5:00 a.m. in the East, and 6:30 p.m. in Pyongyang. Let's start there. Breaking overnight: diplomatic contact has resumed between North and South Korea. Just hours ago, North Korea called South Korea through a revived communication line. Discussions resumed after a green light from Kim Jong-un. It's widely viewed as a way to drive a wedge between Seoul and the U.S., and it came hours after President Trump capping off a day of wild tweets appeared to taunt Kim Jong-un and North Korea.
[Briggs:] North Korean leader Kim Jong-un just stated that the nuclear button on his desk at all times. Will someone from his depleted and food-starved regime, please inform him that I too have a nuclear button but it is much bigger and more powerful than his and my button works? That tweet drew sharp criticism including from former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on CNN.
[James Clapper, Former Director Of National Intelligence:] It would almost be amusing if it weren't for the gravity of the subject. When we're casually back and forth by whatever means, kind of a dueling banjo, who has the greater the bigger male appendage, it's also almost a manhood thing when there are potentially millions of lives at stake, an untold death and destruction here. And to me, it's very disturbing.
[Romans:] Lawmakers also weighed in like Democratic Senator Ed Markey who tweeted: imagine being a service member or a family of a service member stationed in Korea and reading this. This borders on presidential malpractice.
[Briggs:] This comes days after Kim Jong-un's peace overture to South Korea, which has now led to discussions. For the latest, let's go live to CNN's Paula Hancocks live for us in Seoul. Good morning, Paula.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] Hello, Dave. Well, North and South Korea have made communication and a connection once again, just a matter of hours ago. It was the communication hot line at the DMZ. We've just had a readout of what was said. The names have been taken out for security reasons and it is very short. North Korea phoned South Korea at 1:30 a.m. Eastern Time. A South Korean official said this is X and the North Korean official said this is X. And then they checked the technicalities, to check that the communication line was still working. That's it. At this point, as far as the officials that speak to us are concerned, there was no more. They have been waiting for a second phone call from North Korea. It's now 7:00 p.m. in the evening. They could potentially have to wait until tomorrow to find out if North Korea is going to say yes to their suggestion. They have suggested that next Tuesday, January 9th, they should meet at the DMZ for high level talks to talk about the fact that Kim Jong- un wants to send a delegation to the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics. Now, as for that tweet from the U.S. president, we're not going to get an official response from that from South Korea. Certainly not from the President Moon who has welcomed the New Year's Day suggestions of peace between North and South Korea, but we could get something from North Korea. We have seen in the past that Kim Jong-un has responded almost directly to the U.S. president when he is being rebutting any threats or anything against him. So, we'll have to see if he says anything this time Dave.
[Briggs:] Indeed, we will. The world awaits a month ahead of the Olympics meanwhile. Paula Hancocks, thanks. President Trump also weighing in again on the deadly anti-government protests in Iran, tweeting the people of Iran are finally acting against the brutal and corrupt Iranian regime. All of the money that president Obama so foolishly gave them went into terrorism and into their pockets. The people have little food, big inflation and no human rights. The U.S. is watching. Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. echoing her boss's sentiments.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United States:] We must not be silent. The people of Iran are crying out for freedom. All freedom- loving people must stand with their cause.
[Romans:] The White House will not go as far as saying it wants regime change. For now, Ambassador Haley says the U.S. is seeking an emergency Security Council meeting in New York and a human rights meeting in Iran to deal with this Iran crisis. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is monitoring developments for us this morning. He is in London. Nick, how is Iran responding to these comments by President Trump and Ambassador Haley?
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, frankly being dismissive of external judgment of what's happening inside of Iran. You have to bear in mind too that given the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's comments yesterday that in fact it was the enemies of Iran that were fomenting these protests, the level of support we've heard from the U.S. and even direct comments from U.S. State Department officials that they are in contact on social media trying to encourage protests plays into that broader narrative, that these are not groundswell, grassroots protests from angry young people across economic changes but instead something fomented by foreign powers. We're now into the seventh day of protests. The death toll as far as we know not rising from 21 overnight. Unclear, very sporadic information coming out, but what is clear is that news agencies saying now is pro-government protesters coming on to the streets. We're still seeing, though, protests in some of the previous cities where they grew over the past week or so. It does appear that they're not on the same scale or widespread as they were before, but still, there are a lot of economic problems in Iran. Let you see some of the price rises people have experienced over some of the past months, fomenting some of this unrest. These economic issues don't go away suddenly overnight and as the result possibly of austerity measures, a more complex budget being put in by moderate governments of President Hassan Rouhani, reelected only in August indeed. And so, the broader question here is, do we see these protests slowly run out of steam in the days ahead, or does the outside attention now, does the rhetoric from the White House encourage them or does it give license to hardliners in Iran to suggest this is fomented by an outside and therefore can be repressed more forcefully? These questions to be answered in the days ahead. One indications Iranian authorities might be feeling a little calmer, they're talking about lifting social media restriction perhaps on Friday, in areas where the unrest has ended. Still, though, this has been very unpredictable, very foolish to call it over or ebbing at this stage. Back to you.
[Romans:] Yes, seven days in here. All right. Nick Paton Walsh in London watching this for us thanks, Nick.
[Briggs:] All right. Joining us this morning, Erin Delmore. She's a senior political correspondent of Bustle.com. Good to have you back.
[Romans:] Nice to see you.
[Erin Delmore, Senior Political Correspondent, Bustle.com:] Good morning. Great to see you both as well.
[Briggs:] So, this nuclear button trending on Twitter, the president of the United States saying mine is bigger than yours to Kim Jong-un widespread criticism needless to say of this tweet. But not so widespread that it reached the Republican Party. Will we hear the return of Bob Corker, of Jeff Flake, perhaps Mitt Romney as he prepares to throw his name into the Senate race in Utah?
[Delmore:] Yes, you're heading this idea that Bob Corker talked about over the summer, that the White House is behaving like a daycare center, that somebody needs to reign in the president's actions. It's been widespread criticism among Republicans and then this tweet, you can see why. It's an inflammatory statement that is meant to get under Kim Jong-un's skin. It also shows you, you have deeply troubling the president finds this and how it's consuming his attention. There's a lot to get done back home. We have only a couple of weeks until the Olympics, but this is something that has just captured the president's attention and is really bothering him.
[Romans:] And Pakistan, the Palestinians, Iran, North Korea, the president on air safety, taking credit for air safety. The president really starting the year with this Twitter storm, yet when you talk to Republicans and people advising the president on how to capitalize on the tax cut win, they want to be talking about a domestic agenda here and how to take the tax cut win and broaden that out on a legislative agenda. We have no indication yet on how they're going to do that.
[Delmore:] No, and that's part of what they're going to discuss in a meeting today to figure out what the Republican agenda, how it dove tails with the Democratic agenda. Do they focus on infrastructure? Do they hit welfare reform and entitlement reform like Paul Ryan wants to? Do they go into DACA? Are they going to revisit health care? After all, President Trump promised to repair and replace. Where's the replacement? There's a lot to be said about what the Trump agenda is domestically and what the Trump doctrine is globally. A lot of people are watching him to say where exactly do you stand?
[Briggs:] He referenced the meeting that's Mick Mulvaney, the budget director, the legislative affairs director from the White House, Marc Short, and leaders from both congressional, so Pelosi, Schumer, Ryan, McConnell, where will they start? Because will DACA, will CHIP, children's health insurance, be handled by this January 19th deadline to fund the government?
[Delmore:] I've had sources tell me the fact that CHIP is something that's being negotiated in this partisan fashion is in their words insane. That's what they say about the tenor in Washington and how tough it's become to get anything at all through. Now, everybody has a different place where they want to start. The most pressing deadline is January 19th. That's when they finally have to come to terms with how much money they'll use and how they will fund the government. Before that, they need to figure out spending caps. But there's so much tied in there. Of course, March 5th is when President Trump has set the deadline for figuring out what to do with these 700,000 Dreamers across the U.S., children's funding for health care is going to begin to run out very soon, certainly by March there's no more money to put that program through. They're also working on a sticking point about surveillance law. Do they authorize this post 911 program?
[Briggs:] That's right.
[Delmore:] Sure, sure, you have the defense hawks on one side and then people who say it's government overreach, and that they can't reauthorize it. All of these things are sticking points because this spending bill is a must pass item. So, you're going to see a lot contain in that
[Romans:] I think that DACA is going to be real I mean, the president said the Dreamers are going to fall in love with the Republican Party. How? I mean, I don't what are the tools they have here? I mean, he wants a wall, a physical actual 2,200-mile wall in exchange for a deal on Dreamers. I don't see the Democrats moving on that.
[Delmore:] The wall is a nonstarter. Democrats have been unequivocal about that. The wall is a nonstarter. But if they want to have a conversation on border security, on border security funding, that's something where Schumer and Pelosi can come to the table. Now, Mitch McConnell has said that he'll bring immigration to a standalone vote in January. If both sides can come to an agreement, they keep talking about that wall, they probably won't get there.
[Briggs:] That's if the president can find something to satisfy his base that comes up short of a wall. How they thread that needle we do not know. But let's talk Utah real quick. Orrin Hatch is out after 40 years, he will retire. Mitt Romney changing his Twitter location from Massachusetts to Utah yesterday. Any doubt he'll run? And do we expect him to return to being this Trump critic?
[Delmore:] Yes, Romney has been a pretty consistent figure through most of his time in politics and he's had no problem coming out as somebody that would hit the president hard. You can remember, this was a huge issue in the beginning of the campaign and as Trump gained steam as the presumptive nominee. Now, my sources tell me that they expect Mitt Romney to get into the race, that it's a natural fit and he is somebody who still has a lot of appeal within the Republican Party. The Republicans are facing a challenge here heading into 2018. They need to decide whether they're going to put President Trump out front and center, whether they want to rile up the base or whether they need to figure out how to reclaim that middle ground. Somebody like Mitt Romney lives in the middle and could be really appealing to voters.
[Briggs:] And will Steve Bannon have a primary challenge waiting for Mitt if he gets in that race? That could be interesting.
[Romans:] All right. Erin Delmore, come back in about half hour. Lots to talk about this morning.
[Delmore:] Will do.
[Romans:] President Trump's Twitter tirade yesterday also focused stateside, again targeting his own Justice Department. The president going after former Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin as well as former FBI Director James Comey, saying that, quote, deep state Justice Department must finally act on them and others suggesting a conspiracy theory against him. Here's White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders.
[Reporter:] Does he believe the entire Justice Department and its more than 100,000 employees are part of this deep state?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Obviously, he doesn't believe the entire Justice Department is part of that.
[Briggs:] The tweet comes days after the State Department released thousands of Abedin's e-mails. They show Abedin forwarded confidential information to her personal Yahoo account that included passwords to government systems though that e-mail was not marked as classified as the president claimed.
[Romans:] Right. Today marks the deadline set by House Intel Chairman Devin Nunes for the Justice Department to turn over documents related to the infamous dossier on candidate Trump. Nunes has threatened to hold top officials in contempt of Congress. The deadline coming as the House Russia probe reaches a critical partisan crossroads.
[Briggs:] Republicans on the House panel eager to wrap up the investigation, claiming scant evidence of collusion has been found. Democrats insisting several key areas have not been fully investigated, including the extent of Russian efforts to get dirt on Hillary Clinton to members of the Trump campaign.
[Romans:] Meantime, the cofounders of Fusion GPS, that's the firm that paid for the dossier on candidate Trump with new op-ed in "The New York Times". They pushed back on Republican criticism of the dossier saying it was not what prompted the Russia investigation. According to cofounders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch, the dossier corroborated reports the FBI received from other sources including one inside the Trump camp.
[Briggs:] All right. Ahead, if cold were not enough, snow making its way up the East Coast. That's right, Romans. Snow, six inches or so. How much is in store. Why the temps are actually going down for this frigid weekend, ahead.

[Anderson:] And just after half past 7:00 in the UAE. I'm Becky Anderson. This is our special coverage of the war in Syria. We have heard so many horrific numbers about the dead and wounded, the civilians forced to flee their homes. And children who've grown up knowing nothing but war. And yet as this conflict enters its eighth year, the world is still essentially a bystander. With Russia's help, the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, may eventually be able to win this brutal civil war that began as a peaceful uprising. But what kind of nation would be left for him to rule. CNN's Nic Robertson reports.
[Robertson:] President Bashar al-Assad has all the traits of an old school dictator. He is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Syrians, but it's not how he sees himself.
[Bashar Al-assad, Syrian President:] My enemy is terrorism. The instability in Syria. This is our enemy. It's not about people. It's not about persons. The whole it's not about me staying or leaving. It's about the country being safe or not.
[Robertson:] To his loyal followers, Assad is a bulwark against a threat of radical Islamist terror. Before the war, many in the West thought he was a bulwark against instability sweeping the region. He trained and practiced as an eye doctor in London. Was thought to be more sophisticated than his brutal father, Hafez, whom he replaced 18 years ago. But it was a sham. When faced with peaceful protest, he called in the tanks. Assad had never expected to lead Syria. His tougher older brother, Bassel, who had been groomed to be president died in a car crash in 1994. Once the civil war got under way, Assad's family, in particular his younger brother, Maher, a feared military commander, stiffened his resolve for a long, bloody fight. Iran and their Lebanese proxies added their punch, backing Assad's forces with weapons and troops. Then, Russia, detecting a lack of Western will, flew to Assad's rescue with massive air power, turning a tide of battlefield losses to strategic gains. While hospitals were crushed, and civilians starved and pulverized under their brutal bombing, areas under Assad's control escaped the worst ravages of the war. Compare the center of the capital, Damascus, Assad's official home, with Eastern Ghouta less than ten miles away. In his rare appearances, Assad, occasionally accompanied by his wife, appears unruffled by the mayhem they are spawning and in even rarer interviews, he sounds as callous as he is blind to the facts under his knows. This, in 2011.
[Assad:] The only thing that you could be afraid of as president to lose the support of your people. That's the only thing that you can be afraid of.
[Robertson:] And this, six years, hundreds of thousands of deaths later.
[Assad:] The suffering of the Syrian people, the humanitarian interaction between me and every city and my family who died, who only died. This is the only thing that could deprive me from sleep from time to time. But not the Western statements and not the threat of the support of the terrorists.
[Robertson:] Despite unanimous U.N. Agreement to transition Assad out of power, peace talks in Geneva are failing to unseat him because he is winning the war. His big backers, Iran and Russia, have too much to lose to let him go. Assad may bridle at the moniker dictator, but no other world leader now in power has so much of his countrymen's blood on his hands.
[Anderson:] A conflict that has raged today for seven long years, Nic joining us now live with more. He is currently in London. And Nic, what is next for Bashar al-Assad and what's next for Syria?
[Robertson:] In the immediate term it looks like more of the same. Certainly, it doesn't seem that he's about to leave power. The sort of transition if you could call it that or the adoption or add-ons of something different in the way to run Syria as the Russians would see it, would be some of the very weak opposition figures. Obviously, that's something that the United States, Great Britain, their allies and partners believe is not a tangible lasting solution, in Syria. Because it would just if you don't have a more balanced leadership of the country that's agreed by all parties on all sides in this war, if you don't have that, then the peace won't last, and it will all break down and the fighting will continue. So, in the near term, more war, Assad continues to hold onto power. It's not even clear, even if Russia was to suggest to him it's time to move on, that he would do that. The expectation is he would call on Iran to weigh in even stronger in his favor. But there really isn't a hint of it. At the moment, you get the sense that Russia wants to move the U.N. Peace talks in Geneva on to their own territory. Manage them in the way that they'd like to manage them. We're not expecting any change in any of this until after President Putin's reelection. That's coming up this weekend. And beyond that, now, I think with the changing international scene towards Russia at the moment, Russia is going to be less willing and less open to the West views on what should happen in Syria. We know that the United States is beginning to make stronger statements about the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Absent real moves towards peace. And there aren't any. It's more war, more of the same.
[Anderson:] Well, that's a depressing picture, Nic Robertson is painting but sadly it seems a very true one. Nic Robertson is in London for you today. Now this war is so massive that well, you need to go up, way up to catch it. Into space. We've got some satellite photos to show you now. This Homs before the war. Bright colors from trees and cars, large buildings, busy streets, it looks like anywhere. A living city and then fast forward to well, right now. Streets turned into gun ranges, houses into hideouts, Homs in gray scale covered in the shattered dust of its own destruction, and it's not just in Syria. Here, an empty patch of desert in Jordan where we just were with Jomana, now the site of a sprawling refugee camp, population some 80,000. We can find many more images like that and incredible insight tracking Syria's descent into what seems like "HELL ON EARTH" on CNN.com. That is CNN.com. Coming up, the chemical weapon Novichok is making headlines after the U.K. says it was used to poison an ex-Russian spy and his daughter. We'll hear from the American reporter who broke the story of the deadly nerve agent's existence. That's next.

[Lemon:] You heard the president tonight dodging a question about whether he might fire Robert Mueller or Rod Rosenstein by saying they're still here. But there's no better sign of just how serious all this could be than this. Reports of a leaked internal police e-mail in Pittsburgh ordering major crimes detectives to bring riot gear with them to work beginning tomorrow in case of protests if the president fires Mueller. But there are bills in both the House and Senate tonight that would protect Mueller. And my next guest is backing one of those bills. Joining me now is Congressman Leonard Lance, one of a group of House Republicans backing one of those bills. Good evening. Thank you so much.
[Rep. Leonard Lance , New Jersey:] Thank you very having me.
[Lemon:] The president was asked just a short while ago about fire Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein. He said they're still here. Does that give you any confidence he won't act to fire either man or try to shut down the Russia investigation?
[Lance:] I certainly hope he will not do that, and that's why I'm involved in the legislation, but let me say that it is in the president's best interest not to do that and he's being advised that way by Corey Lewandowski and others and I think he should take that fine advice. And so far the Mueller investigation continues and I am a supporter of the Mueller investigation.
[Lemon:] OK. Before we get to the bill, let me ask you this question, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein oversees the Mueller investigation, oversees Mueller, would firing him effectively accomplish the same goal?
[Lance:] I don't think so because the Mueller investigation would continue and if someone were to be nominated to be deputy attorney general, that position requires Senate confirmation, Don.
[Lemon:] Yes. OK. So let's talk about a bill. Because there are actually bipartisan bills in both the House and the Senate that would protect Mueller prohibiting the president from firing him without good cause and giving him a right to appeal. Including one by Republican Charlie Dent just this past Friday. You endorsed that bill along with a handful of Republican lawmakers. Why now?
[Lance:] Because it's important that the Mueller investigation continue and Congressman Dent, as you know, is retiring next month and I hope to be the Republican lead when my good friend, Charlie Dent, retires from the Congress.
[Lemon:] So he's retiring next month. What will happen to the bill you signed on to support then?
[Lance:] Congressman Welch, a Democrat, is the principal Democrat who is sponsoring the bill. I hope to become the principal Republican. And of course, this is identical with the bipartisan bill in the Senate of the United States. Senator Tillis, Senator Booker, Senator Alexander, I believe, perhaps Senator Graham, I think it's Senator Graham, and Senator Coons and we have to move forward in a bipartisan capacity in this matter in my judgment.
[Lemon:] OK. So the bill will continue to go on even without Charlie Dent?
[Lance:] Absolutely.
[Lemon:] House and Senate leaders have opposed any such bill. I want you to listen now to both Senate Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan said just yesterday. Watch this.
[Mitch Mcconnell, Senate Majority Leader:] I don't think he should fire Mueller and I don't think he's going to. So this is a piece of legislation is not necessary in my judgment.
[Neil Cavuto, Fox News:] Obviously none of your colleagues fear it enough to say it should be in there as an-
[Mcconnell:] Yes. But I'm the one who decides what he takes to the floor. That's my responsibility as the majority leader and we'll not be having this on the floor of the Senate.
[Cavuto:] Would you be shocked if he did fire him?
[Mcconnell:] Yes, I don't think he should and I don't think he will.
[Paul Ryan , House Speaker:] We do not believe that he should be fired, and we do not believe that he will be fired.
[Lemon:] So they think they feel differently than you.
[Lance:] I would hope that as Senator Grassley brings this bill out of his committee that the majority leader might reconsider his point of view and that's why it's bipartisan in nature, Don, and that is why I support it.
[Lemon:] OK. Listen, there's a lot of talk about a blue wave coming. New Jersey is a solid blue state and you won your district by 11 points in 2016, yet your seat is judged to be a tossup by both CNN and Cook Political Report. Are you worried you're going to lose your seat, congressman?
[Lance:] I am not. I won by 38,000 votes last time. Secretary Clinton carried the district by 3,800 votes. We had a governor's race in New Jersey a couple of months ago. And the Republican candidate for governor who lost the state by the same percentage as Donald Trump a year before won our district by 15,000 votes and state Senate republican candidates by 21,000 votes. Don, I have a very sophisticated district. And I'm going be judged base upon what I have supported including this piece of legislation.
[Lemon:] Are you hearing about the Russia investigation from your constituents and if so, what are they telling you?
[Lance:] I am. I hold town hall meetings regularly and my constituents want to get to the bottom of how the Russians were involved in tampering with our elective process and that is unconscionable and we want to make sure it does not happen again. We need to make sure that the sanctity of the voting booth is preserved in this country. There should be no voting fraud in this country and certainly there should be no tampering by a foreign power, particularly the Russians.
[Lemon:] Let me ask you, is the president the president a liability for you or other moderate Republicans come the midterms?
[Lance:] I support the administration when I can, but I have opposed both the health care bill and the tax bill and I want the Russian investigation to continue and I will be judged based upon my views. I have been a Republican throughout my entire adult life. I'm a proud republican. And those in my district will judge me based upon my views.
[Lemon:] Congressman Lance, thank you.
[Lance:] Thank you, Don.
[Lemon:] And when we come back, President Trump remembering former First Lady Barbara Bush tonight. But after all his criticism of her family, will he pay his respects at her funeral?

[Fareed Zakaria, Cnn:] The GLOBAL PUBLIC SQUARE. Welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world, I'm Fareed Zakaria. We'll start today's show with the French election. Will populism win or will the center hold? Also, Trump's quest for Middle East peace. Will it work? All that and much more with a terrific panel. Also, from a major bust to a sustained but slow boom. The U.S. economy, former Fed chair Ben Bernanke gives me his take on where things stand and what the Trump effect really will be. Then, Donald Trump wants to make America great again. But Neil deGrasse Tyson is on a quest to make America smart again.
[Neil Degrasse Tyson, Astrophysicist:] Innovation in science and technology in this century are the engines of tomorrow's economy.
[Zakaria:] America's favorite scientist will reveal just the secrets of the universe to all of you. But first here's my take. There has been much focus on Donald Trump's erratic foreign policy. The outlandish positions, the many flip- flops, the outright mistakes. But far more damaging in the long run might be what some have termed the Trump effect. The impact of Donald Trump on the domestic politics of other countries. That effect appears to be powerful, negative, and enduring. It could undermine decades of American foreign policy successes. Look at Mexico. For generations this was a country defined by fiery anti-Americanism. Founded by a radical revolutionary movement, fuelled by anger against American imperialism and highhandedness, Mexico would rarely cooperate with Washington. Since the 1990s, that landscape has been almost reversed. Thanks to intelligent leadership in Mexico City and consistent bipartisan engagement by Washington, the U.S. and Mexico have become friendly neighbors, active trading partners and allies in national security. Mexico buys more U.S. goods than does China. And is, in fact, the second largest destination for U.S. exports after Canada. Sales to Mexico are up 455 percent since the passage of NAFTA. The country cooperates with the U.S. on border security, helping to interdict drug shipments and deporting tens of thousands of Central American migrants who aim to enter the U.S. illegally through Mexico. All of this could change easily. Over the last year as candidate Trump and now President Trump has attacked and demeaned Mexico and its people, the political landscape there has shifted. President Enrique Pena Nieto's already declining approval ratings have plummeted after he was seen as too conciliatory to Trump. It is now quite possible, in fact likely, that the next president of Mexico will be an anti-American socialist populist, similar to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was polling around 10 percent at the start of 2015. He is now over 30 percent. The frontrunner among the presidential candidates for next year's election. A victory for Lopez Obrador would be a disaster for Mexico but also for the United States. It would likely take Mexico back to its days of corrupt socialism and dysfunctional economics, all sustained by populism and nationalism. Now consider South Korea. Trump's demand that Seoul pay for the THAAD missile defense system threatening to overturn the existing agreement with Washington has fuelled the forces in South Korea that opposed that system in the first place, along with any aggressive military measures taken against North Korea. Trump has casually delivered a number of slights to one of America's closest allies. Accepting wholesale China's claim that Korea once belonged to it, and threatening to tear up the U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement. South Korea is facing a snap election for its presidency. And the candidate who is benefiting most from Trump's antics is the left-wing Moon Jae-in. Anti-American has returned to South Korea in force, though not quite as strongly as in Mexico where Donald Trump's favorability has been recorded at 3 percent. In foreign policy great statesmen always keep in mind one crucial reality. Every country has its own domestic politics. Crude rhetoric, outlandish demands, poorly thought through policies, cheap shots, all place foreign leaders in a box. They cannot be perceived as surrendering to America. And certainly not to an America led by someone who is determined to show that for America to win others must lose. That's one big difference among many between doing a real estate deal and managing foreign policy. For more go to CNN.comfareed and read my "Washington Post" column this week and let's get started.
[Barack Obama, Former President Of The United States:] I'm not planning to get involved in many elections now that I don't have to run for office again but the French election is very important to the future of France, and the values that we care so much about.
[Zakaria:] A rested looking Barack Obama there in a video released Thursday. This weekend, of course, the French go to the polls for the final round of voting in their presidential election. Obama went on the video to endorse centrist candidate Emmanuel Macron. Macron's only opponent, Marine Le Pen, is a member of the populist right-wing National Front Party. She has had photo-ops with Putin, demonizes Islam, and wants France to leave the European Union. There's lots of other news to talk about, as well, but let us start with the French election. Joining us in Paris is Natalie Nougayrede, the former managing editor of France's "Le Monde." She's now a columnist and a foreign affairs commentator for "The Guardian." Here in New York, Bret Stephens, joins us. He has a new job as op-ed columnist at the "New York Times." Congratulations, Bret. And Richard Haass is the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, and the author of a terrific and timely new book, "A World in Disarray." Natalie, tell me what does it say that you have Marine Le Pen's party, the National Front, which is polling in the 30s, it might actually end up even in the high 30s, this is a party with roots in fascism, with roots in anti-Semitism. Isn't that even if she doesn't win how disturbed should we be?
[Natalie Nougayrede, Foreign Affairs Commentator, The Guardian:] Yes, it is very worrying. But the fact that she's reached this very level of politics she's managed to establish her party as an important player in today's France, and she's managed to spread its ideas way beyond the initial core circles that were, you know, at its base. She's basically turned it into a fairly mainstream party and she's tried to detoxify her party by moving it away from overtly or extremist racist statements towards statements that talk about globalization, the negative impact of globalization. The talk about the defense of lower and middle classes. And even the talk about the sense of secularism as she sees it in France. And that's a message that, of course, the way she reads it, targets Muslim minorities.
[Zakaria:] Richard Haass, when you listen to this, do you think that if Macron wins it is a it is the end of the kind of populist wave? Or is it a check on it? Because there's going to be elections in Germany and it does seem as though Emmanuel Macron will win or even a more pro-European social democrat will win?
[Richard Haass, President, Council On Foreign Relations:] It's not the end of the populist wave. It might mean it's cresting for now. What it really does is give governments in places like France and Germany an opportunity to get it right. And by get it right I mean such things as modernize the European Union. Maybe rebalance the relationship between Brussels and national capitals. It might not it might mean not having a one-size-fits-all European Union. But something with a little bit of tailoring. And then they've obviously got to get their domestic economy going, and particularly France. So it's an opportunity. It's almost a breathing space. But if after several years President Macron cannot deliver, and the French economy is drifting and millions of people are unemployed and you have continuing violence then I don't think we've seen the end of populism or nationalism in France. It's just that, it's a respite but I really hope that the French take advantage of it.
[Bret Stephens, Op-ed Columnist, New York Times:] But I think we should also point out that assuming Macron wins, and my fingers are all my fingers are crossed there, that's also a revolution. France is going to elect or should elect an investment banker. This is
[Zakaria:] He worked for the Rothschilds.
[Stephens:] Worked for the Rothschilds and who's speaking about the need to cut corporate tax rates, to reform the social pension system, to cut the size of government, something like 57 percent of French GDP last I checked goes to is government spending by far the most in the OECD. And so the fact that France is actually prepared to go for this kind of if not facts right then blare right treatment of the economy, shows some real maturity on the part of the French.
[Zakaria:] Natalie, let me ask you what this says about the very strange but very warm relationship between Le Pen and Putin. Because that how did that play? Do the French like the idea that pally with Vladimir Putin?
[Nougayrede:] I don't think so. Putin is not a popular figure in France. His regime does not have a positive image at all in France. I think what Le Pen was trying to play on was the kind of image of a strongman try to benefit herself from that image of a strong leader. And to show that she did have some kind of international dimension to her. Not that many foreign leaders wanted to appear publicly with her during this campaign. She went to one African country and she went to Moscow. But remember, when she went to Trump Tower she did not get a meeting with Donald Trump during that campaign.
[Zakaria:] When we come back, much to talk about, Trump's foreign policy, but also, the dust-up Bret Stephens caused with his first column for the "Times" on climate change.

[Erica Hill, Cnn Anchor:] Serena Williams says she is proud of her behavior during that U.S. Open upset last night. The historic win for Japan's Naomi Osaka overshadowed, in large part, by the confrontations between Serena Williams and the umpire who penalized her a point and an entire game after she called him a thief at one point. Williams in tears pleading with officials, insisting men do and say far worse on the court without punishment.
[Serena Williams, Table Tennis Player, United States Open Tennis Championships:] It's not right. That is not right. This is not fair.
[Unidentified Male:] OK. For calling you a thief.
[Williams:] That's not right. He thinks I'm a cheater.
[Hill:] In the end, the final score of that match six-two, six-four, Osaka. Serena, though, venting more of her frustration. She didn't say much at the trophy presentation, saying she wanted it to be about Naomi Osaka, a 20-year-old, her first Grand Slam title. But during the post-match press conference, Serena she did talk a little more.
[Williams:] I'm here fighting for women's rights and for women's equality and for all kinds of stuff. And for me to say thief and for him to take a game, it made me feel like it was a sexist remark. I mean, like, how he never took a game from man because they said, thief. For me, it blows my mind.
[Hill:] Joining us now, ESPN tennis analyst Rennae Stubbs who is also a U.S. Open and Wimbledon champion, a four-time Olympian. It's so great to have you here. Listen, you've won the Open. You it's not your only Grand Slam title, as we mentioned. Do you agree with Serena? Is there a double standard on the court?
[Rennae Stubbs, Espn Commentator:] Listen, this, obviously, is being talked about a lot over the last 24 hours, particularly with us at ESPN, with our crew. I think that the bottom line is the umpire overstepped his boundary at the start of this match when he gave the warning for the coaching. We all know that there's coaching going on from the sidelines. What Patrick Mouratoglou did with the innocuous movement with the hands is so something that should have really been let go of. And I think that was the problem from the beginning. I think he should have said to Serena, I saw Patrick. It would have given Serena an opportunity to say what she did once the warning was given, which was he never coaches me. I don't look at him. I'm not somebody who cheats. And I think once Serena felt that she was being unfairly treated at that moment by getting a warning for something she doesn't do she's not known to be a cheater and certainly not
[Hill:] Right. And that's what she was trying to explain to him.
[Stubbs:] And she was
[Hill:] Hey, I just want you to know we don't do this.
[Stubbs:] Yes, she was so upset. And I think the one thing I want to know from Serena is, did she think that he was going to take that warning away once she sort of made the argument to him on the changeover? So then when she broke the racket for the second warning and then she didn't even realize that she had a point penalty. You know, as a player, once you get that second warning, there's a point penalty. She walked down the other end and actually walked to the first court. You should have walked to the second court knowing that you've had a second warning. So I wonder if she even realized that he didn't take the warning away. As a player, you know.
[Hill:] Yes.
[Stubbs:] Once a warning is given, it's on the books. Then she should have known. So she was very careful, I believe, in the third instance when was going at him at the chair
[Hill:] Yes.
[Stubbs:] to not swear, to not say anything that would've given her another warning because then she knows possibly it's a game or the match. So she was very, very understanding of that rule. And I think what she said, in my opinion, was a little innocuous. I mean, that was something that a lot of other players, particularly men, have sworn at him
[Hill:] Right.
[Stubbs:] have said things to him in the past and have not got a warning. This is not about taking the game. This is about giving a warning.
[Hill:] Right.
[Stubbs:] The cumulative effect of that was the game.
[Hill:] Is the game.
[Stubbs:] And that's why the crowd was so upset as well.
[Hill:] You know, a number of men I mean, I spoke with James Blake earlier. He was one of them. He said, look, I've done far worse things. I mean, there are plenty of examples we can all point to, but a lot of men have come out, you know, even on social media, and said she's absolutely right. You know, I have done worse. It's interesting as we talk the umpire. Sally Jenkins wrote this morning in "The Washington Post." I'm going to just quote a little bit here, but she was talking specifically about Carlos Ramos in his role saying, he took what began as a minor infraction to your point and turned it into one of the nastiest and most emotional controversies in the history of tennis all because he couldn't take a woman speaking sharply to him. She goes on to say, all good umpires in every sport understand the heart of their job is to help temper the moment and to be quiet stewards of the event rather than to let their own temper play a role; going on to say, he made himself the chief player in the women's final. Would you agree with that assessment?
[Stubbs:] One hundred percent. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind what Sally wrote was perfect because in that instance and I've talked to a bunch of umpires that have done very big matches in the last 24 hours. And one of the things that you have to understand as an umpire, the moment. You have to understand the player. You have to understand the time that it's happening. And I think the first warning for the umpire for giving the coaching was the worst decision that he has made in a long time. I've had him as an umpire. I've actually sworn on the court in an instance where he didn't give me a warning. So we've all had our instances with him where it's a little ambiguous. And that's the problem with the umpires, is that there's too much ambiguity. And that's where you heard Patrick Mouratoglou say Rafa's coach coaches all the time.
[Hill:] Right.
[Stubbs:] And Sasha was coaching from the other end. And that's the problem. And I think for Serena, who is somebody who is not known to not get a lot coaching from the side of the court she doesn't even use on-call coaching when it's available to her. She's the last person that would probably. So that's where it got really heated for her in the end.
[Hill:] Really quickly, we're tight on time.
[Stubbs:] Yes.
[Hill:] But what about Naomi Osaka?
[Stubbs:] I know.
[Hill:] I mean, it is getting she's playing her idol.
[Stubbs:] Yes.
[Hill:] She's
[Stubbs:] Yes. It was
[Hill:] I mean, the emotion from her
[Stubbs:] It was terrible. It was so terrible to see what happened on that dais when she was about to receive. She played unbelievable last night. She deserved that win. The last point was an incredible serve. She didn't get overruled by the situation. I've got to tell you, it was one of the most amazing matches that I've seen a young player play, to play her idol. But that moment, unfortunately, was overshadowed by what happened last night. And I know Serena putting her arm around her on the trophy celebration there was a pretty amazing moment. And for me, as a player, and all of us as viewers, it was hard to watch. And I hope she can enjoy this moment today.
[Hill:] Yes, I hope so, too.
[Stubbs:] Yes.
[Hill:] We really appreciate you coming in.
[Stubbs:] You're welcome.
[Hill:] It's a pleasure to meet you.
[Stubbs:] Yes.
[Hill:] Thank you.
[Stubbs:] Thanks.
[Hill:] President Trump will answer questions in a defamation suit brought by a former "Apprentice" contestant but he won't be doing it face-to-face with his accuser or her attorney. So what could that mean for Stormy Daniels and other accusers?

[Athena Jones, Cnn Correspondent:] Ear infection made the 16- hour flight with no food or water. He was examined in Japan and is flying back to Kansas with an escort.
[Kara Swindle, Dog Mistakenly Flown To Japan On United:] He was probably so scared and freaked out and probably hurting too because he doesn't have his medicine. I'm hoping and praying that he will still be alive.
[Jones:] United apologizing in a statement saying that an error occurred during connections in Denver for two pets sent to the wrong destinations. The mix-up coming one day after this French bulldog died on board a different United flight after flying more than three hours from Houston to New York in an overhead bin.
[Sophia Ceballos, Dog Died On United Flight:] And the flight attends came. She said put you have to put him up there because it's going to block the path. And we're like, it's a dog, it's a dog. And she's like, it doesn't matter, you still have to put it up there. She took him out and opened the thing and then she got the dog and he was dead.
[Jones:] United taking full responsibility. acknowledging that the passenger did tell the flight attendant that the dog was in the carrier. but explaining that the attendant did not hear or understand her and did not knowingly place the dog in the overhead bin.
[Ceballos:] He was a really special dog. And it's just sad how the way he has to just leave.
[Jones:] Lawmakers are demanding answers.
[Sen. John Kennedy , Louisiana:] What happened to this pet was disgraceful. And I can't imagine how the pet's owner feels. But we need to get to the bottom of it.
[Jones:] Republican Senator John Kennedy introducing legislation today to ban animals from being put in overhead bins. The Department of Transportation says 18 animals died on board United Airlines flights last year, more than any other airlines. These latest incidents coming nearly one year after United Airlines faced intense backlash after this video surfaced of a passenger being dragged off a flight for refusing to get off the plane due to overbooking. And who can forget that story? Now, United has announced that start in April it will issue brightly colored tags to passengers traveling with pets to put on their pet's carriers so they can be easily identified by the crew.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] OK, that sounds like a start. That maybe a that might work.
[Jones:] They also listen to the passengers who are telling them the dog's in the carrier. And the dog that's barking.
[Camerota:] Exactly.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] She did not knowingly put the dog that's just legal language to cover themselves for what is sure to be a lawsuit. But also interesting aspect to this. John Kennedy, we have him on the show there, Republican senator out of Louisiana, Congress is moving on this right away. What happened with this dog? We've got to figure it out. Bills are being introduced. School shootings, not so much. But this dog and why? Because they believe that you act out of consequence, not conscious, and they know voters will reward and punish if they don't on this. They don't feel the same way about the other issue. There it is in action.
[Camerota:] Enough said.
[Cuomo:] Thank you. The nor'easter, the U.S. is locked in winter's grip with spring now just five days away. Fake spring. CNN meteorologist Chad Myers joins us with more. Fake spring, Chad. Fake spring.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] That is a new hashtag. I will probably use that today. It's spring in St. Louis where it's 49, but not in Jacksonville right now where it's 32, 17 degrees colder. This weather is brought to you by Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, packed with goodness. Is spring on the way? No, not yet. Not for the northeast. Not for Atlanta. Temperatures will be in the 70s the next couple of days. So, yes, down here. But the spring weather could also bring some severe weather with it too. That would be on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. I know you've heard about this nor'easter that could potentially hit the northeast on Tuesday. Well, the American model says, not so fast, it's a rainstorm. But the European model says, yes, sirree there's going to be snow. We will see the battle between the models in the next couple of days, who believes what. Temperatures are still going to be cool in the northeast and nice and mild in the south. Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Chad, thank you very much. So thousands of students walked out of school across the country to fight gun violence. Two students who participated tell us what they accomplished, next.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] Good evening from Las Vegas. We are learning much more tonight, much of it obviously deeply disturbing about the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history. We're learning about the gunman's arsenal, about how long he'd been buying weapons, about the cameras he set up inside and outside the gunner's nest he created in that VIP suite on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel behind me. Now, an earlier briefing, Las Vegas sheriff said there was much more they now knew, that they'd likely be making public over the next 24 hours. Now, it's possible we may hear some of that tonight. As we always do, we'll be bringing you obviously that press conference and also, more importantly, the stories of all those whose lives were lost. First, we go to CNN's Alex Marquardt, for what we've been learning throughout the day. Cameras were set up inside and outside the room.
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] Yes, that was some of the information we got from the sheriff earlier. He said there had been extensive preplanning and that was part of that. Those cameras set up inside and outside that hotel room up there on the 32nd floor. He said that they believe that they were for transmission and not for broadcast. Meaning that if he was inside, he could monitor anybody who might be coming to take him into custody. And it appeared they may have worked because we know that as the police and security teams moved into that room, they took on fire from the shooter. In fact one of the security guards took a bullet to the leg. Now, we know all of the cameras had been handed over to the FBI. Obviously, if there's any sort of recording capability, that could be extremely important in this investigation.
[Cooper:] Is it known yet the kind of time it took? We know the first responders with the hotel security figured out where the room was, as you said one of them took a bullet. They basically cordoned off the area. They got the people evacuated from other rooms. Do we know yet how long it took SWAT to come and actually breach the door?
[Marquardt:] Yes, an hour twenty, all told. And this is what we've been trying to figure out over the past few days. We know that on Sunday night, at 10:08 p.m., the first shots rang out. And almost immediately, there were calls put in to the authorities who very quickly realized where the shots were coming from, from up there. But they initially assumed it was on the 50th or 60th floor. So, the security teams starting going floor to floor. We heard from the sheriff today that those bullets only rained down for nine minutes. Then we know about that gunfire inside, and then after that gunfire, the security team and police, they were treated waited for SWAT, it wasn't until 11:20 p.m. So, an hour and 12 minutes later that they put explosives around the door, breached it, went in and that's when they found the shooter who had apparently committed suicide.
[Cooper:] I mean, not that any motive would make any sense, but do we know more about motives?
[Marquardt:] In short, no. That's one of the reasons that the authorities have been hesitant to call this domestic terror, because they don't know the motivation yet. The sheriff was asked again today about motive, he said that they don't have one. They will obviously be combing through all of the evidence they can fine here, at the home in Mesquite, at another home in Reno. We do know that he's been collecting weapons for some 20 years. At last count, there were some 49 weapons. But some of the best evidence could come from his girlfriend who as we speak, coming back to the country.
[Cooper:] Right. What do we know about her?
[Marquardt:] Well, initially, right after the attack, she was named as a person of interest, and then the authorities said that she wasn't. Tonight, we learned from the sheriff that she still is a person of interest. However, she was not in the country at the time of the attack. She was in the Philippines, which also raises other questions because we know that the shooter sent at one point $100,000 to the Philippines. We just don't know when and to whom. So, she's on her by the way back to the U.S. as we speak. They will be questioning her almost immediately. The sheriff said that he expects information here shortly, that information obviously be very valuable in terms of determining that motive.
[Cooper:] Is it known at this point when the survivors who lost loved ones, when they will be able to bring your loved ones home?
[Marquardt:] No, I mean, the authorities here are still going through the identification process. We know from the sheriff's department they are almost completely there.
[Cooper:] Nearly everybody's been identified?
[Marquardt:] Everybody's been identified. So, presumably, as soon as they have been identified and the evidence that has been gathered is necessary. Hopefully the families will be able to take their loved ones home and laid to rest.
[Cooper:] So, unbelievable. Alex, appreciate the reporting. Again, we're expecting a press conference at 9:00 p.m. Eastern tonight. We're, of course, going to bring that to you live with all the latest information. We spent some of the day today with a woman named Heather Milton. She's an orthopedic surgeon from a small town called Big Sandy, Tennessee. She and her husband Sonny, who's a registered nurse, were here because they loved going to concerts. That was their thing. Heather says that when the first firing started, Sonny grabbed her and pulled her to safety. He saved her life and he lost his own life doing it. As you know, we don't name the killers on this broadcast. We don't show you their picture. We don't believe history should remember the name of those who took the lives of others. We don't believe that history should remember the name of the Columbine killers. I always think it's strange that everybody can name the names of the Columbine killers, but how of the names of the victims from Columbine can you remember? Like Dave Sanders, who spent four hours on the ground bleeding to death, or from Aurora, probably remember the name of the Aurora shooter, but how many remember the name of Jessica Ghawi who was an inspiring sports writer who died there. Sandy Hook, probably remember the name of the killer of Sandy Hook, but how many people remember the name of Grace McDonald who died there? How many remember the name of Noah Posner and all the others? We hope that history does not remember the name of this killer. We hope that history remembers the names of all those who lost their lives. I talked to Heather about her beloved Sonny earlier today. What do you want people to know about sonny?
[Heather Melton, Wife Of Shooting Victim Sonny Melton:] I think I kind of answered this question a little bit. But, he was such a kind hearted, loving, caring person and people felt that as soon as they met him. There's not a person's life that he didn't touch that wouldn't say those things. He was the most selfless person that I've ever met and even until his last breath, he proved that.
[Cooper:] His mom said that he has an infectious smile.
[Melton:] Yes. Everybody remembers his smile. And all of the pictures that are coming out I think everybody can see that. His name was Sonny but he literally was sunshine when he walked in the room and he smiled.
[Cooper:] Is that what you first noticed about him?
[Melton:] Absolutely.
[Cooper:] It was?
[Melton:] Yes.
[Cooper:] How'd you meet?
[Melton:] Well, we met in a bar. And he just came up with that huge smile. He said the minute he saw me that I stole his heart. And it wasn't necessarily the relationship that was supposed to be. It wasn't textbook.
[Cooper:] How so?
[Melton:] Well, I'm a lot older than he is and I had been going through a divorce and I had three children and he was young and never been married. So, a lot of people thought that that shouldn't happen, but I don't think there's anybody who's ever been around us as a couple who didn't feel how much we loved each other. And he he saved me before,
[Cooper:] That you had that love in your life?
[Melton:] Yes, I think it's so rare honestly. But there was never a minute that I doubted his love for me.
[Cooper:] Especially Sunday night.
[Melton:] Yes.
[Cooper:] He saved your life?
[Melton:] He did. And he would do it over and over again.
[Cooper:] Do you want to talk about that night at all?
[Melton:] Yes, I mean, it's horrifically vivid. It's not an image that probably will ever be out of my mind. But we were having such a good time, and probably
[Cooper:] Going to concerts was is your thing.
[Melton:] Yes, we loved going to concerts, we did it every single month. We went to at least one concert.
[Cooper:] You're wearing his favorite concert shirt.
[Melton:] Eric Church was his guy. And we came to Vegas to see Eric Church, and actually, we have tickets to go tomorrow night to see him in Nashville. And we were having a great time and it was Sunday night, the last night. And he had just met Big & Rich.
[Cooper:] You went backstage?
[Melton:] We went backstage and it was such a highlight of our day. And we went out and they performed and they sang "God Bless America". And everybody was singing at the top of their lungs and had their phones lit up. It was just so moving and just really true. Like, we talked about what a great atmosphere we were in. There was all aged people. There were kids there. There were elderly. There were vets. You know, all races. It was just like people there to have a good time. People were respectful of each other. It was kindness which we feel like is lacking so much in our world today. And, we had talked about even leaving early that night because it was just exhausting long day. We both said, well we're having so much fun, like we'll just stay. And we were in the center of the stage, relatively close to the front. And I heard the fire some shots go off and I looked at him, and I thought I said to him, I think that was a gun. He said, no, I think it was probably fireworks. I mean, everybody thought that, it was so loud. And people were shoulder to shoulder, we were just packed in there. And then we heard more, and then I saw Jason Aldean run off the stage and everybody just started running. And there was just a barrage of shots fired and rounds and rounds and it seemed like an eternity.
[Cooper:] Did you know what it was at that point?
[Melton:] At that point, we sort of know, but you couldn't tell where it was coming from. Was it somebody on the crowd or if it was happening on the street, not even where we were? Then I started feeling the ricochets of the bullets on the ground.
[Cooper:] You actually felt that?
[Melton:] Yes. I said to Sonny, let's get down. He said, no, we can't get down we'll get tramped. And he grabbed me from behind and we started running in a duck position.
[Cooper:] He was running behind you, holding you?
[Melton:] Yes. And I felt him get shot in the back. We fell to the ground, and I just remember seeing people all around me on the ground. And I was trying to talk to him and he wasn't responding, and I started doing CPR on him. And people were yelling at me to get down, and I kept feeling the shots all around me. And I was just screaming for somebody to help me. And then, finally, the shots stopped and he started bleeding from his mouth. I knew he was probably gone but I still wanted to help. And so, luckily some amazing people, I don't even know who they are, came and helped me carry him off the field, and it was quite a distance. When we got there
[Cooper:] They helped you pick him up?
[Melton:] Yes. He threw him one man threw him over his shoulder and we ran to a field. We got to a truck with the bed open and they put him in the back of the bed with two other victims. I jumped in and the truck took off down the road. And those two men who did CPR on Sonny and another man all the way to the hospital.
[Cooper:] Driving in the back of the truck?
[Melton:] Just blaring down the road with the horns honking and cops were going in the other direction towards the scene. I just wanted somebody to help us.
[Cooper:] You were hoping someone would give you an escort or something to the hospital
[Melton:] Something, yes. I mean, I don't know if it would have made any difference, but you always have that hope that if he got integrated or got blood you know, he would have been OK. By the time we got to the hospital, they started coating him but they didn't very for long.
[Cooper:] You're a surgeon. You're used to being in the hospital scene.
[Melton:] Yes. It's hard not to want to be in there trying to help them.
[Cooper:] Is that where they told you he had passed? How do you how do you deal with this? I've talked to people in the past who say sometimes it's minute by minute, second by second?
[Melton:] I mean, I think that's where you have to start, second by second. You know, I cannot imagine my life without him. I'm not really sure how you do that, because it's not something you learn in life. Like, you don't just learn to start tying your shoes and, you know, or riding a bike, you're never prepared for something like this. I have an amazing supportive family and so does Sonny and I think that will be my crutch. But we all loved him, so this is hard for everybody, you know, and we just have to be there for each other.
[Cooper:] You worked together also?
[Melton:] Yes.
[Cooper:] He worked in the operating room with you.
[Melton:] Yes, he had in the last few months being my surgical assistant. We wanted to be together as much as possible, you know? Some people go to work to get away from their significant others.
[Cooper:] I know a lot of couples who don't like to work together.
[Melton:] Yes, and I know that feeling, but I we wanted to be together. I mean, there was hardly I know we are newlyweds but we had been together for about five years. But I don't remember a time when we were walking where we weren't holding hands. We feel asleep holding hands. It was you know, my mom talked about one time where he just walked by and he just had to touch my shoulder. We just wanted to be together.
[Cooper:] Did you have a chance to say good-bye to him?
[Melton:] I mean, I don't know, I hope he heard me in his last breaths. I went into the trauma room and he had already passed and I kissed him and hugged him, but I was pretty quickly escorted out of there because there were more traumas coming in.
[Cooper:] You were saying before when we first met, that you're not thinking about the person who did this, you don't really care about.
[Melton:] I don't even know his name. I don't want to know his name. I don't care what his motive was because in my mind, there's no justifiable motive, reason, belief that could account for what he did and it won't change the fact that he killed my husband and a lot of other innocent people. I don't ever want to hear his name. I don't want to see his face. And that's a big reason why I'm talking to you, because I want to be here doing this, but I cannot let a monster like that overshadow the people that he took. And I want everybody to know what amazing person was taken from this planet senselessly. He brought joy to so many people. He brought love to a small community. Our community is reeling with pain over this.
[Cooper:] Is the place you live now is the town you grew up?
[Melton:] Yes.
[Cooper:] Pretty small town?
[Melton:] Yes. Just over 500 people. We love it there.
[Cooper:] Everybody must have known him at one time.
[Melton:] Yes. And his family, they've been there for generations. Yes, they love him.
[Cooper:] Why do you think he wanted to be a nurse?
[Melton:] He just had the most nurturing spirit. I have received dozens of messages from people who cared for and their families, that he made them feel so comforted and so he just made them feel like he cared about them and I think that was just his nature. And it could be a nursing or it could be in going to mow somebody's lawn. He just had a way of caring for people and just an amazing bedside manner. He would have made an amazing doctor but he just like to care for people. It is the field that I was in also and so it was what we talked about and I think that kind of gave him a little bit of interest in doing that.
[Cooper:] Almost sounds like had he been able to get you to safety, seems like he's the kind of guy that would have gone back to help other people.
[Melton:] Yes, we actually talked about that, when we said if he was one of the people who had survived and gotten me out, he would have been running those people running back in. I have no doubt in my mind. He sacrificed his life for me. I think he'd do it for other people he didn't even know. I just feel that he is he always puts people above himself for other people.
[Cooper:] It's also a situation like this, to see people reaching out to, you know the guy who put him over the shoulder and ran, the guy who drove the truck.
[Melton:] Yes.
[Cooper:] It gives you hope.
[Melton:] Right. And I was yes, I mean there was one good people, there was one bad person there that night. And I don't know the names of those people, but I was in that emergency room by myself, I'm not from here, I had only come here with him. But the people there embraced me and those two men who were giving him CPR stayed by my side the entire night. And, they said that Sonny will always be part of their life. But in the chaos of everything that was going on, you know, I don't remember their names. I barely what was happening around me. But I'm grateful for people like that. And there were a lot of people there like that, that night saving other people and putting their own safety, you know, beyond, behind what they were doing for other people.
[Cooper:] Yes. Heather, I wish you continued strength and peace in the days ahead. Thank you.
[Melton:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] Sonny Melton was just 29 years old. He will be remembered as will all the others who lost their lives. We'll be right back. We're going to have a press conference starting at 9:00 from authorities with all the latest. We'll have that. We'll have President Trump's visit to San Juan today and all the other news here from Las Vegas.

[Cupp:] Third time is a charm? Former vice President Joe Biden is seriously considering a 2020 run, all signs point to yes. According to the "Associated Press," Biden's advisers have floated the idea of teaming up with a younger running mate like Beto O'Rourke. And Biden will reportedly meet with his family over the next several weeks to discuss running. He has been making the rounds on the speaking circuit as well, even telling the Montana crowd this month that he is the most qualified person in the country to be President. Now, he could be in a good position too. According to a new CNN poll, Biden is currently the favorite among Democratic voters by a wide margin as a 2020 Presidential candidate. Thirty percent say they would support his nomination. Vermont senator Bernie Sanders came at second at 14. Beto O'Rourke may gains at nine. President Trump has already weighed in on what he thinks of that match-up.
[Trump:] I dream about Biden. That's a dream. Look, Joe Biden ran three times. He never got more than one percent. And President Obama took him out of the garbage heap and everyone was shocked that he did. I would love to have it be Biden.
[Cupp:] Well, I want to turn now to a man who knows Joe Biden very well. His former 2012 campaign deputy chief of staff, Scott Mulhauser. So is he running?
[Scott Mullhauser, Former Deputy Chief Of Staff, Vp Biden 2012 Campaign:] First, thanks for having me,
[S.e. Cupp:] Break some news.
[Mullhauser:] So I think one of the best things about the vice President is that he is pretty similar in private and public. And what he says he is going to take time with the family and think about it.
[Cupp:] He really is.
[Mullhauser:] But that said, I think you look at the recent piece in "the Atlantic" last week where voters were not only encouraging and asking him to run, they were demanding it.
[Cupp:] Yes.
[Mullhauser:] And it was folks from California and across the Rust Belt. And it was Democrats and Republicans. So I think you have to hear that and you have to think about it and say, it's hard not to at least contemplate it.
[Cupp:] Yes. So what about this Biden-Beto ticket? I mean, it sounds good, catchy. Its literative spans generation.
[Mullhauser:] Exactly.
[Cupp:] But two white guys? I mean, if you are a Democrat and you are looking at that and you look back at what happened in 2018, you are saying are you kidding me? Come on, guys.
[Mullhauser:] I think one of the lessons that comes out of the midterms is that voters clearly want authenticity which the vice president and the congressman have in space. And I think they both get along well. I think we learn is that the candidate like Beto and like Stacey Abrams and like Andrew Gillum, even when you lose a close race, there is resonates. And so, that is how I think they get along well. Do I think it is might too early for VP speculation? And you know, without anyone in the race yet and without the nominee, it sure is.
[Cupp:] OK. Well, whoever runs against the President will have to be prepared for Trump's blistering attacks. In fact, my colleague, Van Jones, just asked Kristin Gillibrand about that earlier interview that's going to run following us. So stick around and watch that. Here's what Gillibrand said about that.
[Van Jones, Cnn Host, Van Jones Show:] You fought right back. Is that kind of nastiness though a deterrent for you to get in this race?
[Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand , New York:] No. I'm not afraid of him. And I'm not afraid his nasty language and his name calling.
[Cupp:] You know, Biden famously said he would like to take Trump behind the gym and beat the hell out of him. I think he would be up for the task, but is that what the country wants to see, two 70- something guys swinging fists around? Yes.
[Mullhauser:] Look. I think what voters want right now, particularly Democrats, is a contrast to what they are seeing in Washington. And I think that authenticity we talk about, and there is a resonance to what he is talking about, the sort of the populous message he is carrying.
[Cupp:] Yes.
[Mullhauser:] I mean, you think about what Democratic voters want. And I'm not sure they know. And so, what we are going to see is this long drawn out protracted miserable but sort of fun -.
[Cupp:] Fun?
[Mullhauser:] Sort of fun battle right over the next several months that are part of the year. And I think he is going to be a part of that. Whether it's a candidate or someone who sort of, you know, stands on behalf of others and jumps in the fray either way.
[Cupp:] So what about Me Too? A lot has changed since Anita Hill. The Clintons have not been able to navigate me too very well. Do you think Biden is prepared for this, you know, new world?
[Mullhauser:] He is a vice president. If you look from the work in his Senate career on through his time as vice president, and now his found his foundation, he was the author of the violence against women act and he takes these issues seriously. They are one of the pillars on his foundation work too.
[Cupp:] OK.
[Mullhauser:] And I think he is a guy who has been pretty darn progressive his whole life and he stood up for his values and for these moments. And I think we will see where it goes but I think he is ready to be a part of this conversation and make sure those issues stay front and center.
[Cupp:] Quickly, can he win a primary? I mean, that would be my concern. Because as you say, he has got sort of a populous message and that party is moving very far left, can he prove his progressive bona fides when he is up against someone like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders?
[Mullhauser:] I think there's a Sanders wing of the party that will be further left that anyone.
[Cupp:] Yes.
[Mullhauser:] And I think that but, you know, is that where the bulk of the party is? We will see. I think when you look at his record, while there's populism, there is sticking up for middle class voters. There is also pretty forward leaning pieces from
[Lgbtq. Cupp:] Gay marriage, for sure. Right.
[Mullhauser:] He was out there earlier and I remember that was certainly controversial. I was there at the time and it was tough.
[Cupp:] It was welcomed for a lot of us who have defended gay rights. It was a nice moment.
[Mullhauser:] Yes. It was pretty special but he is taking on those fights. He has not been afraid to do it again.
[Cupp:] Scott Mullhauser, great insight. We will have to have you back because I have a feeling he might actually do it. Thanks.
[Mullhauser:] Thanks.
[Cupp:] OK. Next, a judge rules that Obamacare is unconstitutional but could this actually make life harder for Republicans in Congress?

[Romans:] All right. Happy Monday. Earnings, trade, a fed meeting, the January jobs report, it's going to be a really busy week on Wall Street. High level trade talks between China's Vice Premiere and U.S. officials happen mid-week in Washington. Both sides want to reach an agreement to diffuse the trade war before a March 2nd deadline. Investors will be paying attention to earnings from four of the most valuable tech companies in the world, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, all set to report earnings this week. And even though the government is reopening, some key economic reports could still be delayed. A report on fourth quarter GDP is scheduled for Wednesday. We still will get that job report on Friday. They kind of suspect of 168,000 new jobs, 3.9 percent unemployment and 3.2 percent wage growth. Investors also eyeing the Federal Reserve. The Central Bank expected to leave interest rates unchanged, on Wednesday, but Fed Chief Jerome Powell hold a press conference after that decision, the topic of future rate hikes bound to come up.
[Briggs:] A measles outbreak has led to a state of emergency in Washington State, officials there are confirmed 35 cases, 30 of them involving people who have not been vaccinated for the disease. More than two-thirds of the cases involve children under 11. The state military department organizing assistance to the Department of Health and local offices. The problem has spread to Oregon as well. Officials say people infected with measles have recently visited the Portland airport, hospitals, schools, store, restaurants and a Portland Trail Blazers home game.
[Romans:] All right, if you or someone you know takes the blood pressure medication, listen up, the FDA warning the product recalls are causing a shortage of a common class of blood pressure drugs called ARBs. Officials say medicines containing valsartan are already in short supply. Two similar drugs may face shortages soon. The drugs are recalled after it was found they were they contain an impurity that presents a cancer risk. The FDA had to devise a special test after it learns some ingredients imported from one Chinese company were tainted. Well, wow, that's terrifying. All right. A big night for "Black Panther," at the Screen Actor Guild awards, winners in a lifetime achievement award, they've got the audience emotional, next.

[Church:] A very warm welcome back to CNN Newsroom, I am Rosemary Church. Update to our main stories that we had been following this hour. U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says he wants it. Any preconditions for talks with North Korea, the White House says President Trump views on the matter have not changed, implying he does not support Tillerson take on the negotiations. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump is tweeting backlash after a tweet that slam Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gellibrand, she has said he should resign, because of allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct. Mr. Trump called her a lightweight, who would do anything for campaign contributions. Gellibrand responding saying she would not be silenced by what she called a sexist [inaudible]. A stunning upset in Alabama's hotly contested Senate race Democrat Doug Jones narrowly defeated Republican Roy Moore in Tuesday's closely watched election. Moore so far has refused to concede, but Alabama's Republican Party says the election is over and Jones is the winner. Doug Jones stunning offset victory makes him the first Democrat to win a Senate seat in Alabama in a generation.
[Doug Jones,  Alabama Senate Candidate:] This entire raised has been about dignity and respect.
[Church:] Alex Marquardt has more now from Jones headquarters in Birmingham.
[Alexander Marquardt, Senior National Correspondent, Cnn:] Well the party here at the Doug Jones headquarters is winding down, it was a ruckus one following this victory, you can see here there is still a couple stragglers basking in the glow of Doug Jones win. I spoke with the campaign chairman for the Jones campaign. He said he had a glass of wine in hand. They too, are celebrating tonight. Now, as you know what happens in these situations is the victor, gives a victory speech with we heard from Doug Jones and the loser get a concession speech which is often followed by phone call to Victor congratulating him or her. Now those last few things did not happen. There has been no contact between the Moore and the Jones campaigns. The campaign chairman for the Jones campaign Perkins told me that he is disappointed that the proper thing to do what it had been for Moore to call and congratulate Doug Jones. He said that it is a clear win and he hopes that they wake up in the morning and concede this race. Now what we expect to happen in the coming weeks as the Secretary of State for Alabama will certify these votes for the end of December and in all likelihood Doug Jones will be sworn into the Senate in early January. Back to you.
[Church:] Thanks you Alex. Joining us now is Leslie Vinjamuri, Associate professor in international relations at the University of London. Thanks so much for being with us.
[Leslie Vinjamuri, Associate Professor In International Relations At The University Of London:] Thank you.
[Church:] So big a blow is this to President Trump and why do you think Democrat Doug Jones won despite Alabama being such a deeply Republican state, was it the sexual allegations against Roy Moore wasn't nothing else?
[Vinjamuri:] Well I do think it is a very big blow to President Donald Trump because remember he hesitated initially and then he decided to really come in very strongly endorsing Roy Moore and so that endorsement has been rejected by the majority of voters in the states. I was clearly blowing it below. Also for his ability to govern going forward, because he is now losing a very critical state in the Senate, but as for what drove that election. I think one of the very big stories here is voter turnout, it would be expected a much lower turnout across the board. I think the numbers anticipated were somewhere around 825,000 look like well over 1 million people turned out which is greater than exceeded and especially the African-American vote turnout was much higher. People were very worried that voter suppression would dampen that turnouts and there was the this considerable money put into making it possible to mobilizing that most of voter turnout seems to be up but undoubtedly the sexual allegations casts a very dark cloud over Roy Moore's candidacy is not a very popular figure at all in any case in the states, a deeply Republican state. So it's a very significant and I think for many people actually surprising result but Roy Moore was not a popular candidate and the sexual allegations against him in the broader context of course of the me to movement has certainly color that campaign.
[Church:] And what will Doug Jones's win mean for the balance of power in the Senate given, now 49 Democrats, 51 Republicans and that is very significant.
[Vinjamuri:] That is very significant. It looks like he is not likely to come in until the new year. So there will be a very big push right which I think right now by the Senate Republicans to get that tax reform through, because it's not clear that John has come out against that proposal. More recently, so it's not clear where he would end on that, but nonetheless it alters the balance very considerably. This is a President Trump had a very difficult time getting anything through the Congress is now going to face a much more significant uphill battle. And of course it raises a lot of questions about what will happen in the midterm elections having that one extra seat makes it more possible, more plausible, perhaps, that the Democrats could conceivably take the Senate. I after the midterm elections is a very significant election and definitely changes the politics in Washington.
[Church:] Roy Moore lost to this race, although he says it's not over yet and he's a refusing to concede, but given Mr. Trump endorsed him, what message a voter sending to the president, do you think? And could Moore proved to be an albatross around the president neck going forward.
[Vinjamuri:] Yes, I think it certainly sends the message that the voters in Alabama are not willing to support a candidate who's got the sorts of allegations that the Senate Republicans didn't come out strongly endorsing the RNC went back and forth on this and clearly many people wrote it. I think there what right now or singer over 18,000 people who wrote in a candidate so those were voters that Roy Moore would otherwise have expected to have on his side, so that he just simply couldn't carry the state in the and as you as he said the state of the Republicans have carried since the early 1990s, and in the Senate so it is a very strong message.
[Church:] And I do want to shift the conversation now to a scathing editorial in the USA Today newspaper that calls President Trump unfit for office in response to a tweet the president send out Tuesday. The editorial said this, I do want to wait it out. A president who would all but cool Senator Gellibrand or is not fit to clean the toilets in the Barack Obama presidential library or to shine the shoes of George W Bush. It goes on to say Obama and Bush both failed in many ways they broke promises and told untruths about the basic decency of each man was never in doubt, Donald Trump the man on the other hand, is uniquely awful, his sickening behavior is corrosive to the enterprise of a shared governance based on common values and consent of the government. How significant is that a new statement that rarely wide scathing editorials about anyone would use such strong language against the leader of the free world? And could this possibly signal some sort of tipping point where the countries says enough is enough when it comes to certain behavior we are saying from the President of the United States.
[Vinjamuri:] It is extraordinary. Remember that the newspaper that's very widely read and it hits the large number of middle Americans and is clearly a very strong statement by Sen. Gellibrand has really taken the lead in calling out the behavior in the number of individuals and of course against President Trump and his response. I think was interpreted by many people to be really very odd below any standard that would be expected of a President of the United States of America and so the tightest thing of the tight has absolutely turns and the good it does the title have when it comes to what some public opinion of the United States is willing to accept on his questions of inappropriate behavior. So this is not a statement that we would've anticipated our takeover that we should take lightly. It's a very significant statement.
[Church:] Leslie Vinjamuri, thank you so much for joining us with your perspective and analysis, always a pleasure to talk with you.
[Vinjamuri:] Thank you.
[Church:] All right. The new U.S. policy on Israel has created global approval protest have been happening around the world up to President Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. The decision was criticized by many countries and Muslim leaders are grappling with what to do next. A number of them are gathering in Istanbul Turkey right now for emergency summit of the organization of Islamic cooperation. CNN's Arwa Damon is in Istanbul. She joins us now with the very latest. So whereas these Muslim leaders gather there in Istanbul for this emergency summit, what are some of the options that they will be discussing when it comes to finding a response to Mr. Trump's announcement on Jerusalem?
[Arwa Damon, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well it is really going to depend on how much muscle they actually want to put behind any sort of declaration that they do. You may we have heard repeatedly from leaders in the region, including Turkey leader President Erdogan that this decision by the United States to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is null and void. It is illegal, and it will not be accepted. We heard earlier from Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu who put out a statement effectively saying that in that case other nations should recognize East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. What we have today is representation from some 48 country, 16 heads of state in the summit that has just begun to Turkish President still speaking once again calling Israel a terrorist state and I was saying vowing that this will not be recognized, but in terms of options and so as to ensure that this does not just end up being another declaration of condemnation within what many Palestinian leaders refer to as a library of condemnation is going to be up to the various nations gather here to try to come up with some sort of consensus as to how much force they actually want to use. How much pressure do they want to use. Will they call for those who do have ties with Israel to sever their ties, will they try to make some sort of public declaration that is accepted by the majority of those who are present, perhaps beyond that yet. East Jerusalem will then be the recognized capital of Palestine. Will they once again as we have seen in the past call for a boycott of Israeli product? There are actually a fair amount of pressure point that various different nations can use especially Israel's neighbors such as Egypt and Jordan, who do have peace accord with Israel. There are these various different pressure point and again it remains to be seen how much muscle are the nations going to put behind their declarations and what will that can lead to? Rosemary.
[Church:] And overall what are the expectations, because this is the problem is not of the options are limited, although the backdrop here is that no other country has followed suit. They come out and said that they not moving the embassies Jerusalem, they're not recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. There is strength in that presumably, but overall, what can be achieved at the summit?
[Damon:] There is a lot of strength in that Rosemary. There's also strength, Palestinians will tell you and the fact that we had seen feasible demonstrations in countries like Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan where the Palestinian people feel that at the very least, governments aren't willing to put muscle behind their rhetoric the population perhaps will be able to put in turn pressure on their various different respective government. The bar is actually quite low, because the vast majority of the time. Not every single time on the backend of these types of summit. We only do end this thing declarations on paper, but you also have something that is fairly extraordinary. Given how turbulent the region is and that is the various different players you have now gathered at this one summit, countries that are normally at odds over various other issue that actually come together over this one.
[Church:] All right. Many thanks to Arwa Damon joining us there from Istanbul, Turkey. Where it is nearly 11:45 in the morning. We will take a short break here, but still come as president is moving forward with the Paris Climate Accord even though the U.S. decided to pull out of it. We will look at what was achieved at the one planet summit. We are back just in a moment.

[Kosinski:] The White House slamming Russia's decision to expel 60 American diplomats. The announcement coming from the Kremlin just days after the U.S. booted 60 Russian diplomats to protest the poisoning of a former double-agent and his daughter in the U.K. Press secretary Sarah Sanders calls the expulsions a further deterioration in the United States-Russia relationship, already at a low, and the Trump administration will quote "deal with it." So let's go live to Moscow now and bring in CNN's Phil Black. So Phil, sometimes the Russians retaliate for these things. In the past, they haven't. How concerned are Russian officials now that the U.S. is just going to retaliate for this retaliation?
[Phil Black, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, Russia is saying Michelle that the ball is in your court to the United States because they have chosen to match those expulsions as you detailed there, match the closure of the consulate in this case, Saint Petersburg. They believe that's the reasonable response but they say that they will take more action against the United States if the U.S. acts against Russia's interests any further. And the U.S., of course, has said well, we reserve the right to take further actions as well. So it remains to be seen if this draws a line under this current round of tit for tat diplomatic expulsions of whether there is still more action to be seen. But it reinforces what we've come to realize is that this is a historic low in relations between Russia and the United States. Interestingly here, for all the anger directed at the United States over these expulsions there is very little criticism of President Trump himself. There is still a belief here that President Trump would improve relations with Russia if he were allowed to, but Russian officials believe that he is held back restricted by an anti- Russian political class in the United States Michelle.
[Kosinski:] Yes, this has been a difficult back-and-forth. Thanks, Phil.
[Briggs:] Now let's get a check on "CNN Money" at 5:49 eastern time. Wall Street closed today for Good Friday. The Dow jumped one percent yesterday thanks to a rebound in tech stocks but still lost two percent for the first three months of the year. That ended a 9- quarter winning streak, the longest in 20 years. Right now, global stocks are higher. AT&T's antitrust trial continues and one of the Justice Department's own witnesses may have done damage to its case. The DOJ suing to block AT&T's purchase of Time Warner, the parent of CNN. It claims the merger could hurt rival companies. How? By withholding networks like CNN and HBO during negotiations. But a Comcast exec undercut that argument saying he has no reason to believe the deal would impact future negotiations with Time Warner. Walmart may buy health insurer Humana. That's according to "The Wall Street Journal." Now, it's the latest in a recent series of huge health care mergers. Last year, the Justice Department blocked two major tie-ups between insurance companies. It cited antitrust concerns. So now, insurers are seeking different dance partners if you will. For example, CVS pharmacy will buy Aetna. Walmart is already made forays into health care with its pharmacy business but acquiring Humana will give it far greater clout. iPhone users can now turn off a controversial feature that slows down older phones. Apple just updated its mobile operating system and it includes a laundry list of new features and fixes, like the ability to disable a feature that slowed down older phones. Apple previously admitted to slowing older models to save the battery, outraging their customers. Apple also added some very timely privacy features allowing customers to see all the data Apple collects and what the company uses it for, my friend.
[Kosinski:] Great.
[Briggs:] I am an iPhone user but you stick to your thumb-typing Blackberry.
[Kosinski:] Yes, yes.
[Briggs:] I like it.
[Kosinski:] I've had no problems with such things. Laura Ingraham went after a Parkland survivor. Now his social media campaign has advertisers fleeing Ingraham's show on Fox. We'll tell you what Ingraham is saying now.

[Camerota:] A plan to sell nuclear power to the Saudis is under investigation by House Democrats. The proposal was backed by former National Security adviser Michael Flynn, and a new report says Trump administration officials kept pushing for it through early 2017 despite warnings that the technology could be used to develop weapons. Kara Scannell is live for us from Washington with all of the latest developments. What is the latest, Kara?
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Reporter:] That's right, Alisyn. So, this new report from the House Oversight Committee shows that despite multiple warnings, White House officials continued to push forward with this plan that would potentially give nuclear power and build nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia. Now, according to the report that was that the House Democrats had filed, they found that "Multiple whistleblowers came forward to warn about efforts inside the White House to rush the transfer of highly-sensitive U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. They've warned about political appointees ignoring directives from top ethics advisers at the White House who have repeatedly and unsuccessfully ordered senior Trump administration officials to halt their efforts." So, Alisyn, this report finds in the first three months of the administration that the staff of the National Security Council were warning that the plans to produce this power plant could violate the law in two ways. One, it could violate the conflicts of interest because the plan was being pushed by a private company that had ties to Michael Flynn, the then-National Security adviser. He had worked as an adviser to them before he joined the administration, pushing this same plan. And they were also worried it could violate the Atomic Energy Act, which really limits the transfer of nuclear technology outside the U.S. to a foreign country without the approval of Congress. So the staffers were really concerned that this was bypassing the normal protocols in order to get this plan through. They raised this internally to ethics and legal officials. The top lawyer on the National Security Council told them to stop working on this plan. The White House officials, including Michael Flynn and some of his allies, continued to push for it. They were trying to get a proposal in the hands of President Trump before he had key meetings with Saudi leaders. And this continued despite these multiple warnings, they were continuing to do this. Now, Cummings' committee the House Oversight Committee is saying that they're going to investigate this. They want to know whether the U.S. was acting in the best interest of U.S. national security or to line the pockets of those close to the administration, John.
[Berman:] Part of the new oversight you will see from the Democratic- controlled House. Kara Scannell, thank you very much for that report appreciate it. An alarming trend among young women. More of them are having heart attacks. Why? We're going to speak to Dr. Sanjay Gupta about it, next.

[Rep. Steve Russell , Oklahoma:] The powers of government are drawn from the people's consent. The executive branch draws its law enforcement powers not only from that consent, but most importantly from the trust to wield such power without prejudice and with integrity. Mr. Chairman, we heard a lot about ethics, patriotism and service today. We are all accountable for our actions. I am mindful of the words of Christ in Luke, "You shall know a tree by its fruit, from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." And I yield back my time to you, Mr. Chairman.
[Unidentified Male:] Thanks gentleman. And the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Biggs, is recognized for five minutes.
[Rep. Andy Biggs , Arizona:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Strzok, you've worked as a criminal investigator for at least 20 years, is that correct?
[Peter Strzok, Fbi Agent Who Sent Anti-trump Texts:] National security investigator, primarily C.I. work. Within the bureau, we differentiate criminal which is
[Biggs:] But you're you did you're familiar with criminal investigations, right?
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Biggs:] And you understand that as you're aggregating evidence, you're looking for a couple areas. Number one, you're looking to see if there's an act. The act is raise of a crime, right?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Biggs:] You're also looking for couple of mental state of a crime, right?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Biggs:] You have to demonstrate the couple mental state if you going to bring a case forward, right, intentional, knowingly, reckless, et cetera, right?
[Strzok:] Almost always, yes.
[Biggs:] Yes, unless there's something strict liability, right. And you would agree that short of some statement against interest, most of the time the culpable mental state are either intentional or knowingly, that's usually done through circumstantial evidence, correct?
[Strzok:] I hesitate to generalize. I would
[Biggs:] Trust me, it is. It is. Because short of someone making a statement against interest, you've got to prove that the intended not only the every element of the offense, right, or knowingly did that offense. That has to be proved. And often times by circumstantial evidence, which by the way, there's a jury instruction typically that goes forward that says there's no qualitative difference between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence. You would agree with that statement, right?
[Strzok:] Sir, I'm not an attorney. I wouldn't
[Biggs:] Well, you've been in court many times, right? You sure sound like an attorney sometimes, right?
[Strzok:] Very educated recitations of legal terms that I don't have the education to
[Biggs:] OK. Well, trust me on that. There's a jury instruction that says
[Strzok:] If you are representing to me that's accurate, I will accept that.
[Biggs:] Right. And then this morning, you said and this has been a theme and I don't know how many times you said it, but I wrote down the one quote you gave to Chairman Goodlatte. You said, quote, my text messages are not indicative of bias, quoteunquote. Do you still hold to that position?
[Strzok:] I do.
[Biggs:] OK. Now, as we go forward here, when the FBI is trying to put together circumstantial evidence of a culpable mental state, they're looking at things such as text messages. They're looking at things such as communications between people for whatever reason, right? You would agree with that?
[Strzok:] I would, yes.
[Biggs:] And so, that indicates someone's mental state, that you are going to take before a jury, where you're going to say, beyond a reasonable doubt we can demonstrate either intentional or knowing by this serious, this cumulation of circumstantial evidence, right?
[Strzok:] Rephrase the question, please, sir. I'm not
[Biggs:] OK. This is not hard. So when you're trying to prove culpable mental state, most of it's coming from circumstantial evidence, very real unless you got a confession, right?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Biggs:] And so you're taking a cumulation of various pieces of evidence and you're saying, look, this adds up to intentional or knowingly, right?
[Strzok:] Agreed.
[Biggs:] So, one of the things that's been made evident here is that your statements and your communications with Ms. Page, it wasn't a one-off. It wasn't two, it wasn't three. This is a whole series. It's a whole series that goes on not for a day or a week. This goes on for a long period of time. Is that not true?
[Strzok:] It is true.
[Biggs:] Yes. And so when people begin to say, was there bias on the part of Peter Strzok, they're not saying oh, gee, just on August 8. They're going through a whole cumulation and aggregation of various statements that you made. And that Ms. Page made, as well. So that leads us to the I.G.'s statement. So when the Inspector General comes in, and I said him the question, I said, look, you've said regarding Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page, you didn't find documentary testimony, evidence that they had improper considerations, including political bias directly affecting. I said, that's directly affecting, because they you said they weren't the sole decision makers. I said did they indirectly affect it? You said, yes. Why? Because he said you were the lead investigator. The lead investigator of the Hillary Clinton. You were the liaison, if you will. You were the flow of information from the investigative team that you've said there's lots of I can actually sketched kind of a Venn diagram, how this works, organization chart as works, as you were describing it earlier today. You were the gate keeper of information. Lisa Page was providing counsel to Andrew McCabe. On the Russian investigation, you were the head guy. You're the head guy. Now we have a cumulation of biased information that indicates some kind of mental state of bias. And at the other end of this, you're the head guy on these. That's what the Inspector General said. Under oath, in testimony, not too many weeks ago.
[Strzok:] Sir, Mr. Chairman, if I may respond.
[Biggs:] There's no question before you.
[Strzok:] I want to correct some inaccurate things you said.
[Biggs:] I didn't say anything inaccurate. There's
[Unidentified Female:] The witness needs to be able answer the question.
[Unidentified Male:] And you're out of order.
[Strzok:] Mr. Chairman, when aspersions are cast on the witness
[Biggs:] There's no aspersions cast.
[Strzok:] There were, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] Everyone will suspend, and the time of the gentleman has expired. And the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Grothman, for five minutes.
[Biggs:] Sir, may I respond to the gentleman who just spoke?
[Unidentified Male:] No, you may not. The gentleman from Wisconsin has the time. Mr. Chairman, you have said throughout this hearing that at the conclusion of the questioning, the witness would be permitted to respond. That will now change? But there's no question directed to him. That's not true, Mr. Chairman. It is true. Well, he has a response. He'd like to give to the committee. You said throughout the day that was the procedure. Now, you're claiming it The gentleman is completely out of order. No, Mr. Chairman, you're out of order. No. The time belongs to the gentleman from Wisconsin, and he may proceed.
[Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee , Texas:] Mr. Chairman, you indicated, you must remember that
[Lee:] I beg of you to allow the gentleman at the end of this long hearing to be able to explain conflicts in representation that have been made by various persons on the panel.
[Unidentified Male:] The gentleman from Wisconsin may proceed.
[Rep. Glenn Grothman , Wisconsin:] Well, it seems to me that on advice of counsel, a lot of the things we want to find out here today we're not going to find out. But I'd like to focus a little bit on the milieu in which you operate in the FBI. When I look at this area around Washington, D.C., I look in we had a candidate run for President to ran on the promise to drain the swamp. When I look at the election result in the areas in which you and other people work for the government around here live, I see almost monolithic mind-set that can be illustrated in the election results in the area, things that given the country as a whole is almost half for the candidate that wanted to drain the swamp and half for the candidate who didn't. You look at the District of Columbia, 4% for Donald Trump. Prince George County, 8%, Arlington, Virginia, 17%, Alexandria, 18%. I mean, things that in Wisconsin, 72 counties, and normally, we're about a 50-50 state. There's not one county in which you have that everybody voting together. So I want to dig into a little bit about the milieu in which you hang around with. Now, at the time where Mr. McCabe, who I believe was Ms. Page's boss, at the time his wife ran for Congress, or was maybe as a state elected position, you referred to people who lived in the county just beyond Washington, D.C. A little bit more normal, still a Democratic county. You referred to them as this county, Loudoun County as being gentrified, but it's still largely ignorant hillbillies. I don't mean to embarrass you in that because it doesn't surprise me that people in this swamp would refer to people, once you get a couple of hours away from Washington, as ignorant hillbillies. It wouldn't surprise me if someone was it invert me got ahold of e-mails and people were saying that at the newsroom in MSNBC. It wouldn't surprise me if they were saying it in the Department of Interior, the Department of Education. It disappoints me a little bit that they were saying it in the FBI. But I'm going to ask you, in the areas which people you congregate in your business, you obviously talked about politics. How many people did you run into say in the Washington office here who are overtly supporting President Trump?
[Strzok:] When you say in the office, sir, a couple of things, and you may not have been here this morning. I certainly I do not view the people of Loudoun County as ignorant hillbillies. I live in adjacent county and much like in Wisconsin, you might look folks in Minnesota where the
[Grothman:] I'm a people like you.
[Strzok:] I regret that statement. And
[I -- Grothman:] I know you regret.
[Strzok:] But When you say the office, sir, I don't understand what you mean by around the office.
[Grothman:] People you work with on a daily basis.
[Strzok:] I don't tend to know who they support, sir.
[Grothman:] Well, it's apparent in the e-mails that you exchanged with Ms. Page. But not only with regard to her opinions, but obviously that McCabe's were very political in nature, you must have some general opinions of the politics that it'd be work around. You were not shy about sharing your political opinions.
[Strzok:] Right. My sense is that the FBI, including me, is a very conservative typically organization. They believe in law and order. They believe in a strong national defense.
[Grothman:] I'm going to say
[Strzok:] I'm sorry, sir?
[Grothman:] In the areas which I've worked in the past prior to getting involved in politics, I can almost always tell you where I have an opinion, where people come down on these issues. You are not shy about talking about politics. I want to know in the social circles that you hang around with, including at work, maybe you get at home, do you ever run into people who would have voted for President Trump, people you know?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Grothman:] Would you guess in the FBI like I said, we rattled off the percentage of people voting for President Trump in the surrounding counties, looks like overall, maybe less than one in six, just amazing. Could you comment again on your comment largely ignorant hillbillies? And there a lot of people think like you in this swamp, OK. It's not unusually. Probably a lot of lobbyists probably feel that way. Congressional staffers. Could you comment in general on the political viewpoint of the people who work in the Washington office with you?
[Strzok:] The general perspective as I just said, sir, the most FBI agents in my experience tend to be strongly conservative
[Grothman:] Kind of outside
[Strzok:] In Washington, D.C. Strongly conservative, strongly law and order, strongly national defense, up until the current date, very strongly Republican. I don't know I couldn't tell you what people did or didn't vote for this election because we don't attempt to talk about that.
[Unidentified Male:] We have some other time. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Gomez, for five minutes.
[Rep. Jimmy Gomez , California:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Strzok, you've been on the hot seat for a number of hours. I just wanted to give you an first, thank you for being here and thank you for trying to answer the questions to the best of your ability. But I wanted to give you at least 45 seconds to respond to any of the comments that have been made that you feel like you haven't been given the opportunity to respond to.
[Strzok:] Sir, I appreciate that. And one thing I two things. One, with regard to the I.G. and what they found, to be clear, the I.G. report found no active bias by me or anybody in the FBI, period. And he said in his testimony, my understanding is the same. Two, the I.G. found, and stated in the report that I was the most aggressive people in pursuing the Hillary Clinton investigation, going after Secretary Clinton. So those facts are indisputable. They're written down. And there's no two ways to try and spin out of those. And I don't want to take your time, and so I'll try to some 15 seconds. The insurance policy text that has come up before, that text represented a debate on information that we had received from an extraordinarily sensitive source and method and that typically when something is that sensitive, if you take action on it, you put it at risk. And so there's a tension there. Maybe we should you are just roll slow, take a typically three-year or four-year county intelligence investigation. Because the more aggressive you are, the more you put it at risk. And some people said that. Some people said, hey, look, every poll is saying candidate Trump is likely not to win. Every Republican was saying that. Some people said as a result of that, let's not risk this source. Let's go slow. What I had advocated for. What I'm saying is, look, we're the FBI. We need to do our job. We need to go investigate. While it isn't likely according to all the pollsters and everybody that candidate Trump is elected, we need to make sure we are protecting America. We need to responsibly and aggressively investigate these accusations because you know what? If candidate Trump is elected, there might be people we need to be investigating that might be nominated for important national security positions. Everybody in America would want to know that. Candidate Trump would want to know that. So much like that you probably won't die before your 40
[Gomez:] No, thank you
[Strzok:] That's the meaning, sir.
[Gomez:] No, thank you so much. I got sworn in July 11, 2017. So I am one of the most fresh new members of Congress. It was about a year ago yesterday. And I was excited to be on the Oversight Committee, because I believe that Congress has a responsibility to be a check on the executive branch. But that's when it's being honest in its purpose, right? I don't believe our committees, led by the majority, has been honest in its purpose. Because if they had been, it would be treating requests by the minority with as much importance as they're owned. So I have a question, it's a rhetorical question. Why is it that the House Oversight Committee and the House Judiciary Committee have refused to issue a single subpoena to compelled documents or witnesses from the Trump administration on any topic other than this one? It's because they don't believe and they don't care to discover the truth. They are using this process to throw more red meat to their base in order to turn it out for the midterms and to protect a president that has no moral authority to lead this country. So it is kind of embarrassing. I've been watching this farce and this circus for the last five hours, and I wonder to myself, you know, what are people thinking that there's grown men and women shouting over each other, insulting one another. Yes, they try to dress it up by saying the gentleman from North Carolina, the gentle lady from California, but it's all a farce. And the American people know it. You know, we've asked for subpoenas for a variety of issues. Commerce Department and the Census Bureau withholding documents on citizenship questions. Department of Justice withholding documents on request to add a citizenship question. Department of Justice withholding documents on politicized hiring allegations for immigration judges. Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice withholding documents on gag orders against whistleblowers. White House withholding information on chartered flights. The list goes on, there's about 12 of them but they have never issued a subpoena except on this. And the American people should ask why, why, why? And the reason is, because they're not interested in finding the truth, or making sure that we hold this administration accountable. It's all for tossing red meat to their base. And you know what? We should never talk ill about anybody, you know, in any particular part of our country. But this President has lowered that standard. He questions immigrants, he questions the allegiance of judges, the FBI, and that in my opinion is insulting. And I think we need to grow up, and show that the American people that we're here to act as responsible branch of government. And I yield back.
[Unidentified Male:] The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Rutherford, for five minutes.
[Rep. John Rutherford , Florida:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Strzok, when I hear you talk about your passion for America, I believe you. I can see that passion. When you talk about your love for the FBI, I see it. I believe it. When you talk about your faith in the American electorate, I believe that. Now, what concerns me is you said that you didn't trust the elections, the quote you you didn't trust the elections after Russia put their finger on the scale. Remember saying that earlier?
[Strzok:] That, I don't believe that's exactly what I said, sir. I think I said something slightly different, but I recall that exchange.
[Rutherford:] Well But that was your that was the meaning, right?
[Strzok:] I don't think that was the meaning, sir. The meaning was I was very concerned that Russia was attempting to do that. I have prayed
[Rutherford:] You specifically said Russia had put their fingers on the scale.
[Strzok:] I don't recall what I said specifically.
[Rutherford:] You can find it later, but I wrote it down.
[Strzok:] OK,
[Rutherford:] And what I want to ask you is, do you think that justifies then you, Mr. McCabe, and Lisa Page, to correct that wrong that you perceived was done by the FBI?
[Strzok:] That never happened and that would not happen.
[Rutherford:] Let me ask you, the I.G.'s report that I have right here, you said political bias did not impact your professional actions. You said that earlier in this meeting, as well. Let me give you a little background. In a text message sent on August 15th, and this has been discussed earlier, you wrote to Lisa Page, I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy's office that there is no way he gets elected. But I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40.
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Rutherford:] You certainly remember that. You heard it a lot. Was there anyone else in that meeting?
[Strzok:] I'm sure there was. I don't remember who.
[Rutherford:] So you don't remember who all was
[Strzok:] There were an inordinate number of meetings for the government. We had meetings. I don't remember for this particular meeting who was there. I could look at my notes
[Rutherford:] At least two of those people that were in that meeting with you are no longer working for the FBI, are they?
[Strzok:] I don't know that Mr. McCabe was there.
[Rutherford:] Do you know that Mr. McCabe was in the office?
[Strzok:] He was in the office. My recollection of that meeting is that we had had a briefing to the director. Sometimes after briefings like that, the director will stay behind with his very senior staff like the general counsel and the deputy. And if we have other matters to discuss that don't merit the importance of the director's time, we'll go down to the deputy's office and wait for him to return. So, he may have been there, he may not have been there. I don't recall.
[Rutherford:] But Mr. McCabe is no longer working at the FBI, is that correct?
[Strzok:] That is correct.
[Rutherford:] How about Lisa Page?
[Strzok:] She is not.
[Rutherford:] Anybody else who was in that meeting that you recall that no longer works with the FBI?
[Strzok:] Possibly Mr. Baker. But I don't know if he's in the meeting or not.
[Rutherford:] OK. Let me ask
[Strzok:] That's it. Possibly I don't think Mr. Baker went on another.
[Rutherford:] OK. Let me ask, did you present the original FISA application?
[Strzok:] No. Sir, when I assume you're talking about the FISA application on Carter page that have been limited to build it and answer your question.
[Rutherford:] Right.
[Strzok:] I did not.
[Rutherford:] Were you in the courtroom?
[Strzok:] No.
[Rutherford:] OK. And do you and there were three renewals, correct?
[Strzok:] Sir, I'm not certain I can discuss that without divulging classified information and I don't know that I've been given clearance by the FBI to discuss that.
[Rutherford:] OK. Well Mr. Rosenstein was here and admitted that he signed the third renewal.
[Strzok:] I certainly defer to his statement, sir.
[Rutherford:] But he signed that third renewal, but amazingly to me, Mr. Strzok, apparently because of the information that was in that renewal, he would not admit that he actually read the document. Do you know of any falsehood, any half truths, any misinformation that was in that third renewal that would preclude him from being able to say he red it, assigned it and approved it?
[Strzok:] I have no information about the deputy attorney and what he did or didn't do or why he did or did not do anything.
[Rutherford:] OK. You've said that political bias didn't affect your work, but the FBI and DOJ were both admonished for misconduct in the prosecution of Senator Ted Stevens, right?
[Strzok:] Sir, I was not involved in that investigation. I don't know.
[Rutherford:] OK, Well, the former director
[Unidentified Male:] The time of the gentleman has expired. The witness can answer the question.
[Rutherford:] OK. You know that they're undergoing training right now for political bias at the FBI, is that correct?
[Strzok:] I understand that that was a recommendation in the I.G. report.
[Unidentified Male:] The time has expired. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Palmer for five minutes.
[Rep. Gary Palmer , Alabama:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Strzok, despite your assertions that the I.G. report did not in any way indicate bias, I would disagree with that. But also on page 424 of the Inspector General's report, he said that we therefore refer this information to the FBI for its handling and consideration of whether the messages sent by the five employees, of whom you're one, place it above, violates the FBI's office code of conduct. Are you under review by the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility?
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Palmer:] Thank you. In January of 2014, the Inspector General for the intelligence community, Mr. Charles McCullough, sent out a letter and indicated that he had received two sworn declarations from one intelligence community element. These declarations cover several dozens e-mails containing classified information determined by the intelligence community element to be at the confidential secret and top secret special access program levels which was were you aware of this letter?
[Strzok:] What was the date of the letter?
[Palmer:] In January 14th, 2016.
[Strzok:] I don't recall it now, but I may have known it at the time. Correspondence like that to read. We had a team of anywhere from 20 to 60 people, so
[Palmer:] Well this is I understand that you can't know everything, and I get it. And I also want you to understand, and I'm not going to be necessarily in attack mode, because I want to get some answers.
[Strzok:] Absolutely.
[Palmer:] And this is a very, very serious problem that's raised by this letter, whether it's confidential, secret, top secret. But certainly a special access program. You're former military, correct?
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Palmer:] You can understand then the danger that this could pose for our men and women in harm's way.
[Strzok:] Yes, sir.
[Palmer:] OK. This was January. And then and again, on March 4th, you sent a text saying that Hillary should win 100 million to nothing. In May 4th, that's when you said, you know, the pressure really starts to finish with your evaluation. At what point in there was the memo changed from gross negligence to extremely careless. It was in May.
[Strzok:] Sir, I'm not going to be able to give you a
[Palmer:] I'm not asking for a date.
[Strzok:] I can't give you a break on of what occurred before
[Palmer:] And I understand you've been here a long time and so have we, but it was in May.
[Strzok:] OK.
[Palmer:] And what it appears here and it's in the context of the need to finish midyear investigation is that Donald Trump had just won the primary. It was obvious that he was going to be the Republican nominee. And I believe you when you say you're a patriot. I believe that you care deeply about the country and I can see how you and some of your colleagues concluded that it's in the best interest to change it from gross negligence to extremely careless because you just couldn't comprehend a President Trump or, in your mind, the danger that that might
[Strzok:] That's how it happens, sir.
[Palmer:] Well, something happened to change this from gross negligence to extremely careless because it's extremely careless. It's not prosecutable.
[Strzok:] I can tell you why it happened if you'd like me to answer, but I don't want to take your time if you don't.
[Palmer:] I know what the Inspector General said he thought happened. He said it was changed because it wasn't prosecutable, because it's not in the code. The espionage act doesn't have anything in the criteria for extremely careless. So I think, again, you know, I kind of give you some credit for your patriotism and your desire to do what's best to the country. I mean, our history is replete with people who've made decisions that they thought were the right decisions at the time but they got outside the lines and the text messages and the fact that clearly there's a bias. And I get it. We all have biases. It's what we do with them. It's how we act on them, how we're able to compartmentalize these things that determine the course of things, really the course of history. And the few seconds here, I want to tell you that I appreciate the fact that you sought forgiveness from your family. I appreciate the fact that you realized that you have severely damaged the reputation of the FBI. And we're not here about the FBI, we're about here about you and what you did. I literally sat here, and I mean this sincerely, and prayed for you and your family. Because that I can't imagine what your family is feeling, going through this. And I'm not going to question your integrity, but I will say this to you, and I hope this is constructive, I hope you take it as constructive. As I watched your body language, as I watched your facial expressions, it's almost as though you've enjoyed this. This is a competition for you. In many respects, even now. And I don't think you're I'm not going to say your problem is a lack of integrity, I think it's a problem with hubris. And I think you need to take that into account in regard to how you handle this going forward, because it makes it more difficult for us to give you the benefit of the doubt.
[Unidentified Male:] The time of the gentleman has expired.
[Palmer:] Mr. Chairman OK.
[Strzok:] Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman
[Unidentified Male:] The gentleman may briefly respond.
[Strzok:] No, sir. I appreciate your prayers. Sir, I can tell you when you look at what happened in the investigation, everything was done by the book. And you can assure yourself and your constituents and everybody you're talking to, when you look at both investigations, notwithstanding, what decisions have made, high level to say something, not to say something. When you look at the investigation, what does men and women did, everything was done right and by the book. And I share your concerned about the nature of the classified information. We found a bunch, T.S., special access program, confidential and secret. All that was found, all that was detained and direct to Comey's statements, so I appreciate it.
[Palmer:] In regard to that, I want you to understand nobody here
[Unidentified Male:] Gentleman's time has expired.
[Lee:] Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry
[Unidentified Male:] Gentleman's time has expired.
[Lee:] relating to the rules of this hearing, parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman.
[Unidentified Male:] He almost stated parliamentary inquiry.
[Lee:] The witness has attempted to answer the gentleman's question
[Unidentified Male:] And he was allowed to.
[Lee:] Mr. Chairman, just a moment, please? On a question that's been asked over and over again about the gross mismanagement and negligence issue. And the witness was not allowed at that time to give the clarification. I think the
[Unidentified Male:] The gentlewoman has not stated a parliamentary inquiry.
[Lee:] which was not written by the gentleman as I understand.
[Unidentified Male:] The gentlewoman from Georgia, Ms. Handel, is recognized for five minutes.
[Rep. Karen Handel , Georgia:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Agent Strzok, for being here. I have found your testimony today frankly to be quite remarkable in its disingenuousness. And you have shown a disturbing degree of denialism about your actions and the impact of those actions. I think we would all agree that everyone does have personal viewpoints. That is very true. But, Agent Strzok, there is a very big difference between someone expressing his or her political views generally, and someone leading an FBI investigation, making highly negative and explosive comments about the actual target of that investigation. Would you agree? That's a yes or no.
[Peter Strzok, Fbi Agent:] Rephrase the question. I don't understand the
[Handel:] You have an awesome talent for filibustering. You might want to think about running for the Senate. I'll just say again, you were the lead investigator, one of the lead investigators, and you made highly negative and explosive comments about the actual target of an investigation. That is distinctly different from an individual expressing his or her political views. You are in a position that you need to be at a higher, much higher level of standard and you failed to reach that. Your assertion that your statements do not constitute bias is well, absurd. The facts are this the FBI inspector general testified before this very body that you did, indeed, exhibit bias. And further in his report, he detailed numerous examples of investigative steps that were not, quote, by the book, as you just testified. What I also find stunning is someone in your role with the responsibilities that you have engaged in such grossly unprofessionally, unacceptable, and unethical behavior. And now, truly ironic, did I hear you say you're in a senior position for the HR division for the FBI?
[Strzok:] Yes, ma'am, currently
[Handel:] That's very iconic. So, let me ask you this, you were in a supervisory role at the FBI. Suppose you found out that one of your direct report was sending the kind of text messages that you were sending about the target of an investigation that they were working on, what action would you take?
[Strzok:] Ma'am, if they were sending personal opinion about a political matter, that's their business. I think given my experience to date, I would caution them against doing that on a government device. That is entirely separate and distinct from an individual that was under that was not a political candidate, that was not that did not have the protection attached to it.
[Handel:] Suppose that you found out a direct report was having an extramarital affair with a colleague or with someone outside of the bureau. What action would you take?
[Strzok:] Ma'am, it depends. If it was in if it was against the FBI's regulation in terms of it was somebody in their chain of command, above or below them, which is inappropriate, or not allowed by regulations, I would tell them and report that. If it was otherwise permitted in our regulations, I would probably talk to them and say, hey, look, this is I'm aware of this and you need to be aware and just take into consideration what you're doing and the appearance of it.
[Handel:] So obviously, you understand the gravity of the transgressions, engaging in the kind of behavior that you've been engaging in, especially with the extramarital affair. It opens up an agent to exploitation and even blackmail. Given the fact that you hold a high left security clearance, did you ever discuss your relationship with Ms. Page with HR or anyone around your security clearance?
[Strzok:] They were well aware of it well, they
[Handel:] When did they become aware of it?
[Strzok:] When it was kind of made very public by the media after some leaks late last year. But, ma'am, I can tell you, the fact that your premise though that it makes it susceptible in blackmail, I never, never could have been blackmailed or coerced by the nature of that relationship. That is not the nature of my patriotism and the nature of what I believe in this country
[Handel:] When you're undergoing security clearance, you were asked a question about that. There's a reason that security clearance is asked those kinds of questions. Did you ever advise Mr. Mueller of your relationship with Ms. Page?
[Strzok:] I did not.
[Handel:] Why?
[Strzok:] It didn't strike me as relevant.
[Handel:] You have a lot to learn about human resources. I mean, wow. It is absolutely relevant. There should have been conversations I find it interesting that there was no discussion that the two of you shouldn't both be together on that same investigation. Mr. Strzok, no reasonable person could not be concerned about your actions in this investigation. No reasonable person could not be concerned about this situation involving yourself. So, thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[Unidentified Male:] The chair recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. DeSaulnier, for five minutes.
[Rep. Mark James Desaulnier , California:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for your testimony and your service. It's been a long day. And I admire your resume. I came from a similar background. I went to a Catholic high school and Catholic college. I remember going to Holy Cross and having people say, the graduates from Harvard and Yale make the laws, but the graduates from Holy Cross and Fordham enforce the laws. And we always took great pride in that because I think you as well. And having had friends who had served in the bureau, who took great pride in that education reinforced your ethical beliefs, in a difficult world where we all make mistakes and that's part of our humanity. So, I admired your work. I must say I'm discouraged today to have listened to much of this hearing, on many levels. I'm discouraged because I consider many of the people on the other side of the aisle as friends, good friends. I must say this reminds me of what it must have been like to sit through the McCarthy hearings, waiting for that moment, at long last, that you have no shame. But maybe that's to come. Having said that, I am troubled by the fact that someone in your background did what you did. But you and I both believe in redemption, so I think you have acted in that way today. I want to ask you just a comment and a question specifically for one case. So, there's been a consistent conspiracy theory about Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation and one of your former colleagues, John Giacalone, the executive director for the FBI's national security branch. He left the FBI because he was upset that there was a bias in the Clinton case, so the conspiracy theorists say and going, quote, sideways, or, quote, nowhere by design. So he responds in testimony in front of our committee on June 21st, and said that these allegations were completely false, quoteunquote, nonsense. Quote, he said totally inaccurate. This is all nonsense. Almost the whole thing is nonsense. I'd have to read it again to say that. But from what I recall, I didn't leave because I was disgruntled, I left because I was broke. He continues11. And I think it was a bad day for a lot of people and for this country. So, there's no way I left because I was sideways or because I was disgruntled. It was purely the right time for me 25 years in right opportunity. I never spoke to anybody, as to internet article, I don't know who they used it, the source of this thing. He further said in explaining the Clinton case, from the outset, he said, quote, I fully recognized right at the gate that it was a political bombshell that we, meaning the FBI, were an apolitical organization. So I had the referral, we were going to open up the case and wait to put together a team and we were going to conduct a thorough, down the middle investigation, which is what we did, end quote. And starting again in quotes, he said about Director Comey, he's a straight ahead guy. And you know if the evidence existed, he would have pushed it for prosecution. And then about you he said, quote, there was no indication that he exhibited any bias while he was conducting the investigation, while he was working for me. He went 110 miles an hour and we were always looking for new ways to uncover information and evidence. So, I had no indication that he even had would politically lean the way I guess some of these text messages show that he did lean. At no point in time during my management of this case did he exhibit anything that would provide any slight indication of some of those things that were, you know, posted and put out to the media, end quotes. Do you have any comments on your former colleague's comments, about what he said you go through?
[Strzok:] I deeply appreciate them. Mr. Giacalone is an extraordinary agent with a heart of gold. And I appreciate them.
[Desaulnier:] So just in closing, just curious, I really want to reiterate, you are a nonpartisan in your comments and criticisms, which I think is fair. My dad used to be a state superior court judge in Massachusetts. And I remember one of my siblings once active in politics put a bumper sticker on his car and he went ballistic. There was no question he was a committed Republican, but he was concerned about the perception. So, sitting here today, after all these hours, is there any one thing that you can encapsulate what the bureau could learn from this experience to make sure no one would sit where you're sitting again?
[Strzok:] Sir, there is. I deeply my belief is these texts should never be public, and whether reasonable or not, they were made public. And I deeply regret some of the appearance that they created, and all the way that manifest itself out, personally with regard to the bureau. So, at the end of the day, we're judged on our actions. Certainly, you know what I do with regard to my personal matters is my own business, but I would also say I take some comfort that when I look at my actions in the workplace, that they are the proper, that they are correct, that they were done for the right reasons and done in the right way. And so, whenever I get ups and downs in this experience, I look at that record of work, and it gives considerable comfort that it was done right and well. So
[Desaulnier:] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
[Unidentified Male:] The chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Rothfus, for five minutes.
[Rep. Keith Rothfus , Pennsylvania:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Strzok, you were the lead investigator in the Clinton e-mail investigation. Were there ever any searches for e-mails with the clintonemail.com route on the data government warehouse that would have held data collected through 702 or other FISA authorities?
[Strzok:] Sir, I would have to think about that. Rephrase the question, were there any searches of
[Rothfus:] The I.G. report talks about servers that were searched and devices that were searched. Were there never searches done on the data warehouse system that would contain data collected pursuant to FISA or 702?
[Strzok:] So, when you say data warehouse system, you're referring to any FBI data system that would house FISA or 702 data?
[Rothfus:] Correct.
[Strzok:] Yes, sir, I believe there were.
[Rothfus:] There were. Do you know if anything was found on those?
[Strzok:] No, I don't.
[Rothfus:] It's not reference in the I.G. report whether that was searched. On page 96 of the I.G. report, it said that investigators learned late in their review that the FBI considered seeking access to certain highly classified materials that may have included information relevant to the mid-year investigation, but ultimately did not do so. Furthermore, unnamed FBI attorney one went so far as to say that review of those materials was necessary to complete midyear, and even started to draft a memo about it. And per the I.G., you thought revealing those e-mails would have been a logical, investigative step. Who stopped it?
[Strzok:] I don't know. It was levels above me. My understanding was it was outside the bureau that was stopped.
[Rothfus:] Did you object to that?
[Strzok:] I disagreed. I wanted to search it. We're getting very close to classified information. So, I want to be very careful in
[Rothfus:] Did you send an e-mail or a memo to that effect that you said we need to search this?
[Strzok:] Sir, I don't recall the nature of what that discussion was. I remember talking about doing it and wanting to do it.
[Rothfus:] As a counterintel officer, did you know if any other non-DOJ government officials have reviewed the classified materials in question in this case?
[Strzok:] I don't know.
[Rothfus:] Did any non-DOJ personnel communicate with anyone at the FBI or DOJ or to midyear personnel about this classified material?
[Strzok:] Sir, I can't I can't answer that question without providing or
[Rothfus:] Do you know if anybody on the midyear team, FBI or DOJ, ever briefed anyone at the White House about such classified material as a potential related to the midyear?
[Strzok:] I don't know. I'm not aware of it. But I don't know.
[Rothfus:] Who had the most influence on midyear investigator's beliefs that this classified material was ultimately not necessary and were not have a material like that?
[Strzok:] Sir, those are two different questions. There's an investigative question, which I the leader of the team, which included the senior investigators, had a desire to do something. And then there's a decision at a much higher level and a different organizational spot that was well above
[Rothfus:] This was all happening in May of 2016. Was there a rush to wrap this up?
[Strzok:] This was not all happening in May of '16.
[Rothfus:] Well, according to the I.G. report, this was all coming out in May of 2016.
[Strzok:] Sir, there may have been aspects of the discussion in May of '16, but my recollection is that this was broader than that.
[Rothfus:] On page 96 of the I.G. report, it said investigators learned late in their review that the FBI considered seeking access to certainly highly classified materials.
[Strzok:] I think that's when the I.G. learned about it, sir, if I'm not mistaken in that reading. Sir, I don't remember specifically when this came up in the context of midyear. I could not tell you when I first became aware
[Rothfus:] You were the lead investigator, right?
[Strzok:] I was.
[Rothfus:] OK. During midyear exams, did investigators find any e- mails between Secretary Clinton and President Obama, including e-mails that would have used aliases?
[Strzok:] Including emails
[Rothfus:] emails that would have used aliases?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Rothfus:] Did any of those emails contain classified information?
[Strzok:] With President Obama?
[Rothfus:] Between Mrs. Clinton and President Obama.
[Strzok:] I don't believe so, but I would have to verify that with the case counselor.
[Rothfus:] Do you know if any of those emails were ever intercepted by a foreign actor?
[Strzok:] I don't know.
[Rothfus:] On page
[Strzok:] When you say any emails, sir, you're talking about emails between Secretary Clinton and President Obama? Or the emails contained classified?
[Rothfus:] No, between Secretary Clinton and President Obama.
[Strzok:] I don't know.
[Rothfus:] On page 149 of the I.G. report, it noted they found evidence that you advocated for more aggressive tactics in the Clinton investigation like grand juries, subpoenas and search warrants. Ultimately, the midyear team decided to go with the kid glove approach, using consent agreements. I can think of some high profile examples where federal agents did not use agreement. Relating to midyear, who specifically had the authority to decide not to use compulsory process to obtain evidence in this investigation?
[Strzok:] Sir, I'm certain the I.G. did not use the phrase kid gloves. The decision ultimately about whether or not to issue process rest with the prosecutors. So
[Rothfus:] Did anyone outside of the midyear team suggest to the team not to use an aggressive approach?
[Strzok:] There was a constant debate which is normal and healthy between the agents and the attorneys about how aggressive to be. My recollection is that
[Rothfus:] Anybody outside the midyear team. You're talking
[Unidentified Male:] The time of the gentleman has expired. The witness may answer the question.
[Rothfus:] No. Not to my recollection, there's nobody outside the midyear team that was exerting any pressure one way or the other.
[Unidentified Male:] The chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Comer, for five minutes.
[Rep. James Comer , Kentucky:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Strzok, Hillary Clinton has said publicly that FBI Director James Comey cost her the election. Do you share Hillary Clinton's opinion?
[Strzok:] Sir, I don't know. I've read a lot of pollsters and a lot of speculation, but I don't know.
[Comer:] It's an important question, because you think about Hillary Clinton making a statement like this about the FBI and the FBI director, as well as statements that President Trump has made about the FBI, and those are the two leaders of each party in the last presidential election. So, I think it does matter. Out of curiosity, are there any recordings of the interviews of the Clinton email investigation?
[Strzok:] No, sir. I don't believe we recorded any interviews.
[Comer:] So, none of the interviews were recorded?
[Strzok:] To the best of my recollection, sir, I'm not I would need to review the case file, but I don't believe anywhere.
[Comer:] Is that normal for an investigation of that size?
[Strzok:] Yes.
[Comer:] Mr. Strzok, did you consult with James Comey before he made the decision to go public, days before the presidential election, with the fact that the FBI was going to reopen the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails once it was determined that Anthony Weiner had access to the emails and potentially had access to classified information. Did you consult with James Comey before he made that decision?
[Strzok:] I was present at meetings where that decision was discussed.
[Comer:] Do you think that was the right decision?
[Strzok:] Sir, that's always a difficult question. I think for all of us, it was kind of a 50-49 proposition. I came out of that decision comfortable we're doing so.
[Comer:] Did Ms. Page consult with James Comey before he made the decision to go public?
[Strzok:] I you'd have to ask her, sir. I don't know that she did.
[Comer:] We hope to get to ask her some questions. Do you think that James Comey leaked out the let me back up, in a text message from you to Ms. Page, you mentioned insurance policy. That's been referenced many times today. What exactly did you mean by having an insurance policy in case, I would assume, President Trump won the election or was looking like he was going to win the election?
[Strzok:] Sir, I appreciate that question because it has taken very much I understand ambiguous and that people have taken out of context. The insurance policy was merely an analogy to you do something when something isn't likely to happen. You're probably not going to die before you're 40, but you have insurance policy any way. What we had before was an allegation that something significant, that members of the Trump campaign may have been working in cooperation with the Russians and some people were saying, hey, look, this sensitive source of information that's so sensitive, so vulnerable, we shouldn't put it in danger, because sometimes we go out and do aggressive investigation. If it's a drug snitch, or intelligence source, you can cause significant harm. And a lot of people look and said, hey, well, look, all the pollsters, everybody in the world saying it's not likely President Trump is going to be elected. So, don't worry about it. We can let this lie. I had a different view. I said, you know what, it doesn't matter whether or not he is going to be elected, we need to do our job. We're the FBI. We need to aggressively go out there and pursue the allegations because
[Comer:] Let me ask you this.
[Strzok:] But I want to finish
[Comer:] You've answered the question. Do you think that James Comey leaked out about the re-opening of the Hillary e-mail investigation because he needed a, quote, insurance policy to cover his back for predetermining that Hillary Clinton was innocent in the e-mail investigation before it ever even began?
[Strzok:] I don't think Director Comey leaked anything with regard to that I'm aware of, with regard to the Clinton investigation. I certainly do not think he, I, or anybody else viewed any investigation or any step in the sense of what you're saying we need to do something to prevent any particular action at all.
[Comer:] With respect to the clear bias of Donald Trump in your text messages and your clear prejudice against the Trump voters and, by the way, I'm one of those smelly hillbillies from Appalachia, that you reference in your text, you were in a supervisory role at the FBI. What would you do if you found a text from a subordinate of yours that exhibited the same type of bias that you had towards a group of people that were key witnesses or key whatever to the investigation? How would you handle that scenario?
[Strzok:] Sir, if I found a text from a subordinate expressing a political opinion, one, I don't think I'd see it, and, two, I'd think it was entirely appropriate. If your question is the text was about a target of an investigation, talking about the target, that's an entirely different matter and I'd bring that subordinate in and counsel him. But those are apples and oranges. They are not at all the same.
[Comer:] Well, I conclude my statement, Mr. Chairman. I believe that this is a bad day for the FBI. I believe that we have an overwhelming majority of quality FBI agents and intelligence agents all across the United States and all across the world. But it's unfortunate that when reading the inspector general's report and sitting here listening to your testimony, watching the reaction from some of your colleagues behind you with rolling their eyes and frowning faces, and, you know, it's just very discouraging as a member of Congress that we've tried this hard to get information. The American people want to know. This Russia investigation has been going on for a long time. Many believe that it is a witch hunt. It needs to wrap up. But from what we've heard today, there are a lot of problems with your credibility as the lead agent in the entire Russia investigation. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[Unidentified Male:] Does the gentlewoman from Texas, before we close, we will now be closing, does the gentle woman from Texas desire to make any closing remarks?
[Jackson:] Mr. Chairman, thank you for your indulgence. This has been a long day. First, let me thank the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the agents that I worked with on my years of service on the Judiciary and Homeland Security, the aftermath of 911, which I had the lack of distinguished, if you will, distinguished position to be in the United States Congress11, and certainly in the aftermath of the investigation. Let me thank the FBI, Mr. Strzok, for their service. Let me quickly say this, and then conclude my remarks. I want it to be clear that General Flynn, in his offense, asked the Russian ambassador to refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia. Following, a whistle-blower then said that he referred this to Mr. Flynn, that the sanctions would be quote ripped up to allow money to start flowing to one of Flynn's business projects. Did you have anything to do with any comments by General Flynn?
[Unidentified Male:] This is not for asking questions, Ms. Jackson.
[Jackson:] I will leave that on the record, Mr. Chairman. I thought it would be good to clarify it because I've asked others. But let me finish my remarks. In the concluding comments, Mr. Strzok, again, I believe this hearing, in its long period of time, showed no bias in the decisions regarding the final report on Hillary Clinton's e-mails. She was vindicated. Nothing changes the Russian interference in our elections of 2016. Unfortunately, no questions were asked by the Republicans about the Russian interference. The GOP, in many instances, would not let you, Mr. Strzok, answer the questions. Finally, the hearing did not give the American people, I think, the important answers that they needed, and that is how will we secure our elections in 2018? That unfortunately plays into Putin's hands. It also did not respond or did not answer, what do you do when White House officials have not gotten their own security clearance? And finally, let me be very clear, when our country is attacked, I want to make sure the FBI and not the KGB shows up. We need to do a better job of answering the concerns of children snatched away from their parents, the violation of voting rights, the need end gun violence and many other issues. But today, you stood the test of time, at least you've admitted fault, and certainly admitted that you would have wanted to do things in a better way, as I've gleaned from your testimony. But it cannot take away your service in the United States military, your service to the FBI and your willingness to offer, if you will, your deference and your concern about the continuation of the FBI in its service to this nation. Mr. Chairman, I hope the judiciary committee and oversight chairman, I believe, is not present, but in any event, that we will take up the issues that the American people desire, and that we will solve problems, which are important to the democracy, security and the values of this nation. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
[Rep. Bob Goodlatte , Virginia:] I thank the gentle woman. Many members on the other side of the aisle have attempted to denigrate this investigation, and in particular this hearing today. One going so far as to calling it stupid. This investigation and hearing aren't just about reviewing the 2016 election, however, however important that is, this is a much bigger matter. Our investigation and this hearing goes to a larger global and existential issue of equality under the law. So, for my Democratic colleagues to call this review stupid denigrates the importance of our founding principles and the core of a system of justice. I venture to guess that most Americans don't view equality under the law and fair and unbiased investigations as stupid. Mr. Strzok, this has been a lengthy hearing, so thank you for your time today. It has been extraordinarily frustrating, though, in trying to get answers to many important questions. I understand that you have refused to answer many questions on advice of the FBI. You've also said that you cannot answer questions on advice of counsel because they could disrupt the ongoing Mueller investigation. So, we are presented with a situation where you have not answered questions from congress under the cover of the FBI and special counsel Mueller. Neither the FBI nor the special counsel is mentioned in the Constitution, Congress is, and we have a constitutional right to have answers to the many questions that have been posed to you. While you have consistently referred to the FBI as the ultimate arbiter who is preventing you from answering questions today, the FBI director reports to the deputy attorney general. The FBI is a component of the Department of Justice. So, at the end of the day, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, who has oversight over the Federal Bureau of Investigation and of the Mueller investigation is where the buck stops. We now consider the department on the line, in addition to the FBI, for failing to permit you to answer questions that don't even go to the substance of any investigation, but have focused on your involvement in the process of those investigations. This is unacceptable. Congress has been blocked today from conducting its constitutional oversight duty and more importantly, the American people have not received answers on why our chief law enforcement agencies and agents and lawyers operating within them permitted improper bias to permeate through three of the most important investigations in our nation's history. The Constitution's construct of congressional oversight over the executive branch has been severely undermined today. We will resist attempts to prevent us from getting to the facts. This is not over and you as well as future witnesses are on notice that fulsome answers are expected promptly. With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] That was House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte wrapping up quite a day, to say the least. For the last 10 hours, almost without interruption, all eyes and no shortage of heat have been focused on that hearing room and one individual. He's FBI agent Peter Strzok, pulled from the Russia investigation, as you know, last August over messages and emails he exchanged with then-FBI agent Lisa Page.

[Cooper:] Tonight, an American is being held by Russia in an arrest surrounded by mystery. 48-year-old Paul Whelan of Michigan faces espionage charges, but Russia isn't explaining why. He's a corporate security executive for an auto parts supplier and a former marine reservist. His family says he was there for a wedding when he was detained five days ago. U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman went to see Whelan today at a Moscow jail, something that one U.S. official described to CNN as an unusual move so soon. The arrest happens to come about two weeks after the guilty plea in this country of Maria Butina, the alleged Russian spy. Former national security officials wonder if it's Kremlin retaliation. I spoke earlier with Paul Whelan's twin brother, David. David, what did Ambassador Huntsman tell your family today?
[David Whelan, Brother Of Detained American Paul Whelan:] He spoke with my brother, Paul's second brother, and explained that the embassy staff had an opportunity to see Paul, and that Paul seemed to be healthy under the circumstances, healthy and good condition. And the embassy staffs were able to take some requests from Paul, some list of things that he needed, and just to do a general checkup and share with us information about now how we could proceed to the next steps of helping him.
[Cooper:] Are you clear right now as to what exactly the U.S. government State Department is doing or can do to try to free your brother?
[Whelan:] I think we have a general sense of what they're able to do. Certainly we realize that they're not there to provide him with legal representation, so that's a step that we're going to be getting started for him to help to identify lawyers and so that he can select one and start to deal with the legal issues that he faces in Moscow. But it also allows us to do things like provide him with money or other things so that he can have resources in the jail.
[Cooper:] To the notion that is being put forward by Russia that Paul was on a "spy mission" when he was arrested, I'm wondering what your response to that is. I mean, to your knowledge, is your brother has he ever been a spy?
[Whelan:] No, I don't believe Paul is a spy. I don't believe that there are charges that would support him being a spy.
[Cooper:] He spent a lot of time in Russia, I understand, over the years, vacations. Do you know what it was about Russia that he liked, that he enjoyed?
[Whelan:] Well, I don't think it was solely Russia. Paul has traveled a lot for personal reasons and for business. And I think Russia was one of the many locations that he went to. He has friends that he's gathered over the years on social media, some of them are Russian and so he's visited them while he's been in Russia.
[Cooper:] When was the last time you spoke to Paul and how did you actually find out he'd been detained?
[Whelan:] It's probably been a month or so. I think it was before American Thanksgiving. And I've heard from my family that they were concerned that he was missing because he hadn't checked in from a wedding that he was attending in Moscow. They were expecting that they might see pictures or that he might text them to find out about some activities that the family was experiencing in Michigan. There was a vet appointment for his favorite dog, and so that was really the first time we had a sense he was missing. That was confirmed on the Sunday that he had a missing person report filed by his friend in Moscow, an American who is also a former marine. And then it was Monday morning when I did some internet sleuthing to find out more that we actually learned that he'd been detained.
[Cooper:] And that's how you found out, you found out on the about it through the internet?
[Whelan:] Right, yes. We didn't have any idea and so as anybody would, you would be concerned that something had happened to your family member who had disappeared and was out of contact. So, I got up and started to do searches to see if there was news about an American who had been killed or been in a car accident or something else had happened, been mugged in Moscow, and those searches led me to news wires that were reporting that the Russian ministry's press release that Paul Whelan had been detained as an alleged spy.
[Cooper:] I mean I can't imagine how frightening this is and, you know, distressing this is obviously for you, for your family. You know, we are seeing in overseas in Russia. If you could speak to your brother, is there anything you would want to say to him?
[Whelan:] I would just tell him to be patient, to be strong, as I know he can be in these sorts of situations, and to know that we are doing everything we can, both to help him in Russia with the situation that he has right there, and also to look to the U.S. government's resources to see if we can get him to come back home.
[Cooper:] David, we wish you the best and we'll continue to follow this. Thank you.
[Whelan:] Thank you very much.
[Cooper:] Well, ahead tonight, more on the breaking news and the President saying he'd look "foolish" if he signed onto the Democrats' plan to end the shutdown. There are all kinds of consequences on the lingering government shutdown on top of federal workers without pay conditions are deteriorating, some in the national parks. These are so bad that Joshua Tree campgrounds can't stay open. We'll have the latest from there next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] The year is 2018, not "1984," but the sentiment is eerily similar to George Orwell's dystopian novel. The president of the United States saying it's not just the media lying to you but now your own eyes are deceiving you as well.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Just remember, what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening. Just stick with us. Don't believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news.
[Blitzer:] That was yesterday at an event for veterans. Let's bring in CNN's politics reporter, Chris Cillizza. Chris, the president there having, what some are describing, an Orwellian moment.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter & Cnn Editor-at-large:] Yes. Look, Wolf, this is a book that probably everyone read at some point in your high school or collegiate life. I want to read you a quote from the book that will ring eerily reminiscent. "The party told you to reject the evidence of their eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." I'll add there, Wolf, take it out of the fictional realm, I'll add that, in many authoritarian countries around the world, led by what we would call authoritarian dictators, there's a lot of state-run, state- controlled media. No free and independent press. Basically, you can only believe what the top person tells you to believe. The thing that worried me the most is not that Donald Trump said it. It's the cheering that you heard in that clip in response to it. I think that is just people cheering because they don't like the media, which is their right, but I wonder what their lives would be like without a free and independent media.
[Blitzer:] While the president is telling people not to believe what they see or read, they are not being completely honest over at the White House or forthright about what we all saw in Helsinki last week at the summit with Putin, are they?
[Cillizza:] That's right. Let's play a little sound first. This is from the summit last Monday in Helsinki, Finland. Donald TrumpVladimir Putin being asked questions. Let's play that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election, and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
[Vladimir Putin, Russian President:] Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.Russia relationship back to normal.
[Cillizza:] OK. Now let's go what you heard is this, Wolf, over here close to me. "President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to do that?" Here's what still is on the official White House Web site as the White House transcript. "Did you direct any of your officials to do that?" That doesn't make a lot of sense because you're missing this whole first part, which says, "Did you want Donald Trump to win," to which Putin responds, "Yes, I did, yes, I did." Now the White House has said CNN has reached out. The White House said there's nothing malicious in this. What it is, is, as Putin was having it translated to him in real time in Russian, the question obviously asked in English, a part of it was missed by the official White House stenographers. Those are not appointees. Those are lifetime people. These are not partisans who are keeping track of what's being said. The thing to note is they haven't corrected the record. Everyone agrees this version is what happened. If you listen to that clip we played, this is the version. This is the version on the White House Web site. It's a simple change. You literally cut and paste this and put it here. Don't know why they haven't done it. They should do it. They correct transcripts all the time for less major omissions or something wasn't said properly. Given what President Trump has said over "would" versus "wouldn't" as related to Russia, given what he said when he said, no, but wasn't talking about no as it relates to Russian targeting, you'd think they would want to change this to accurately reflect the record. Back to you Wolf?
[Blitzer:] It's unclear why they still haven't fixed it. They've known about this mistake for a week at least. Thank you, Chris, very much. As Michael Cohen officially turns on President Trump by releasing a secret audiotape, there's a comment in the tape that suggests there's more being held secret. We'll discuss. And a short time from now, lawmakers will grill Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the president's summit with Vladimir Putin. One of those Senators standing by live to join us as we learn what Pompeo is expected to reveal.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Brianna Keilar, live from CNN's Washington headquarters. And we begin with the breaking news bombshell in the Russia investigation. President Trump's former right hand man pleads guilty to lying to Congress about discussions involving a potentially lucrative business deal. Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen was mobbed by reporters as he left the federal courthouse in New York today. During a hearing, Cohen admitted making false statements about plans for Trump Tower Moscow, a proposed project. Now, according to court documents, Cohen told Congress, quote, the Moscow project ended in January 2016 and was not discussed extensively with others in the company. That being the Trump Organization. Well, he now admits that, quote, the Moscow project was discussed multiple times within the company and did not end in January 2016. In fact, he says, discussions continued as late as June 2016. According to his plea deal, quote, Cohen made the false statements to give the impression, the false impression, that the Moscow project ended before the Iowa caucus and the very first primary. Well, here's why that's important. It means that while then candidate Trump was running for president, and as people were voting, he was discussing a possible deal with Russia. As he left for the G-20 Summit today, the president defended those discussions and he blasted Cohen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He is a weak person and what he is trying to do is get a reduced sentence. So he's lying about a project that everybody knew about. I mean we were very open with it. We were thinking about building a building. I guess we had it in a form. It was an option. I don't know what you'd call it. We decided I decided ultimately not to do it. There would have been nothing wrong if I did do it. If I did do it, there would have been nothing wrong. That was my business. I was running my business while I was campaigning. There was a good chance that I wouldn't have won, in which case I would have gotten back into the business. And why should I lose lots of opportunities.
[Keilar:] Well, the president says the project was widely known, but actually the proposed deal only came to light long after it was canceled and after he took office. The other major development is that Cohen has reached a cooperation agreement with Robert Mueller's office. That agreement extends beyond Trump Tower Moscow. It could include other areas under scrutiny. And this is a deal that hinges on Cohen continuing to, quote, respond and provide truthful information. CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz is outside of the federal courthouse in New York. Shimon, how significant is all of this and what more have we learned today?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Well, it's hugely significant. You have to think about it, look at it this way, you have now someone who was extremely close to the president, was the president's personal attorney during some significant investigations, during some significant matters, for the second time, coming into a courtroom and saying basically that he was trying to protect the president, Donald Trump, from any kind of legal exposure, from any kind of criminal investigation. You had him come in here into a New York courthouse where he said that he was trying to protect the president in the Stormy Daniels matter. You now have him coming in here and saying that he's trying to protect the president in this investigation of possible Russian collusion, possible Russian ties. So, no doubt about it, that this is going to be hugely significant. Michael Cohen admitting that he lied to congressional investigators when he was asked about the Moscow deal and continued to do so all in an effort to protect the president of the United States. He said he was trying to minimize the links between the Moscow project and Trump and that is why he lied to members of Congress.
[Keilar:] And, Shimon, what did Michael Cohen's lawyers say about his continues cooperation with the special counsel?
[Prokupecz:] Right. So when Michael Cohen left court, he said nothing. He walked straight. You know, obviously, all of the reporters here, we circled him, we tried to get Michael Cohen to say something. He would not say anything. But significant what his lawyer chose to say was that Michael Cohen is cooperating and going to continue to cooperate. And it's very clear that there is still a very much long-term, ongoing investigation between the special counsel and also which a lot of people have assumed there is a lot of concern out of what the Southern District of New York, that is the U.S. attorney's office here in New York, knows and what exactly are they investigating that could potentially cause major problems for Donald Trump, his family, for the organization. Those investigations seem to be continuing here.
[Keilar:] All right, Shimon, thank you for giving us the latest there. The other huge headline today, we now know that Michael Cohen has a plea deal with the special counsel, Robert Mueller. And this is hugely significant because Cohen is the same man who once said he'd take a bullet for President Trump. For more now I want to bring in senior White House correspondent Pamela Brown, and CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger. They have been doing excellent reporting on this. And, Gloria, we knowing that Michael Cohen has spent 70 hours with the special counsel, you know, maybe it's not surprising that they didn't just discuss Trump Tower Moscow. But, truly, we now know this is the tip of the iceberg.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Absolutely the tip of the iceberg. Michael Cohen was in a lot of trouble and, of his own volition, reached out to the special counsel and said I have some things I need to tell you. And over those 70 hours, they clearly discussed a lot of topics. And these are all topics that could be potentially damaging to the president, particularly since the timing of this is interesting, which is that the president has already filled out his interrogatories that he got from Bob Mueller's office. You have to assume that some of these other topics were included in the questions. And, you know, Pam has done some reporting on what the other topics might be.
[Keilar:] Yes, what what are they? And we may not know all of them, right, but there's also possibilities. But what do we know?
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Yes. Well, there are several areas where we know Robert Mueller is interested in as it pertains to Donald Trump and where Michael Cohen could be helpful. Some of the questions that went to the president included whether he had advanced knowledge of the Don Junior meeting with Russians at Trump Tower. Our reporting is he said, no, he didn't. Also, WikiLeaks, whether he had advanced knowledge or knew of anyone on the campaign with advanced knowledge that WikiLeaks would dump John Podesta's e-mails. And again, according to our reporting, he said no. But Michael Cohen could very well be shedding light on some of these other areas that we know Robert Mueller has been interested in. Also whether there's been any discussions between the president and Michael Cohen about pardoning him, whether the president tried to have undue influence. We know there was, at one point, a legal defense agreement between the two sides, Cohen's side and Trump's side. That broke down, obviously. But I'm sure that Michael Cohen once sorry, Robert Mueller is interested in an array of topics beyond just Trump Tower Moscow. And it's no coincidence that this happened after the president and his team turned in the responses to the questions from Mueller.
[Keilar:] So that his written answers could not be influenced by this new information, right?
[Brown:] Right.
[Borger:] Right.
[Brown:] They're locked in now. They are locked in. And they essentially went in blind with the answers on this because they had no idea what Cohen was talking about to investigators.
[Keilar:] Wow.
[Borger:] Right. I was going to say, there's been a split. I mean, and, you know, at one point the president invited Michael Cohen to Mar-a- Lago after the Stormy Daniels' case and, you know, he's my good friend, he's my personal lawyer. And suddenly, today, we hear, he's weak and he's a liar, et cetera, et cetera. So it's Shakespearian because somebody who said he would take a bullet for Donald Trump
[Brown:] Yes.
[Borger:] Is now pointing the gun at him, honestly. And so I think there's a this has got to unravel to a great degree because we don't know what was in those 70 hours that he spent answering questions.
[Brown:] Well, exactly. But what what stuck out to me was on the plea agreement papers, they said that Robert Mueller's team said it would reveal the exact scope and nature of the agreement. So there is more to come.
[Keilar:] Yes.
[Brown:] And no doubt this is not a good day for the president and his lawyers.
[Borger:] Right.
[Keilar:] We are going and we'll find that out. All right, I'm going to have you guys stand by for me. Michael Cohen's surprise appearance in court today left many lawmakers with more questions than answers.
[Rep. Adam Schiff , Ranking Member, Intelligence Committee:] Well, if Mr. Cohen misled the Congress about the president's business dealings in Russia deep into the campaign, it also means that the president misled the country about his business dealings.
[Sen. Mark Warner , Vice Chairman, Intelligence Committee:] You've got all these close associates of the president, one after another pleading guilty, often pleading guilty about their ties to Russia and Russians. And what are they covering up for?
[Keilar:] Well, they are careful to use the words "misleading" and "covering up," but not the word "lying." I want to introduce our other guests here. We have former Federal Election Commission general counsel Larry Noble. We have former federal prosecutor Laura Coates joining us, along with Gloria and Pamela as well. Laura, when you hear what Shimon was reporting, when you hear about the cooperation now extending beyond Trump Tower Moscow, what is standing out to you?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] The chain reaction that took place after the president of the United States handed in his answers. You had Paul Manafort now established as a liar.
[Keilar:] Can I can I just ask you, your so he's handed these are he is stuck to these. These are under oath.
[Coates:] Yes. They might as well have been written in the pavement, you know, we pavement. He has written them down. They will solidify. They will form the foundation for what he says going forward. They will now compare what he says in writing under oath to what goes down now. And they use that. They waited, of course, and probably strategically so. Now they know that Paul Manafort was a liar. Now they know and they can say that Michael Cohen somehow was misleading the Congress and now he's ready to plea. They have set this up particularly perfectly on this issue. What stands out to me, of course, is the notion of the timing of it. The timing of all of these things. The big question in the Russia collusion investigation has always been, why would Russia feel that their was a campaign receptive to this overture to try to influence or intimidate or try to somehow change the outcome of the 2016 election? Why do you think they had a safe haven in the president's campaign? Well, now you're seeing financial ties. And when you follow that money trail, you can answer the question of, perhaps there is somebody who is beholden to Russian influence and you have Michael Cohen saying, it didn't just take place when he was the candidate, it took place when he was the president of the United States, answering questions of, what happened in Helsinki? Why is the president not been or been reluctant to actually condemned the Russians, condemn things like WikiLeaks, et cetera. Well, maybe you know because he, in fact, had some self-gain.
[Keilar:] A conflict of interest, which is the big question here, Larry.
[Larry Noble, Former General Counsel, Federal Election Commission:] Right. It is clearly a conflict of interest. I mean we've known for a while that he's had these connections with Russia. And it continues. And it gets deeper and deeper. And when he says that he can continue doing business when he's running for office, that's technically true, but most candidates don't because it's very tricky because people can use your business as a way to influence you while you're running and it can become an illegal campaign contribution. So, now, he didn't accept anything as far as we know at this point. But the fact that Russia was willing to talk to him about the Trump Towers and was willing to do at least make noises about doing business with him and he was trying to do business with them is really disturbing. He was really trying to keep these connections going.
[Keilar:] And this really brings, Pamela, the timeline of when we know, according to Michael Cohen, that he was still engaging with President Trump on a business deal in Moscow. It brings it very close to the timing of the president becoming the nominee, but also being privy to information about Russian meddling in the election, right?
[Brown:] It's all around sort of that same timeframe when the DNC e- mails were coming out and so forth. And what's critical here, and what you read in the court documents is, Michael Cohen says that he's claimed that it wrapped up in January 2016 because he wanted to make it clear it was before the Iowa caucuses. Well now we found out it was going on after the Iowa caucuses, once Trump was a presumptive Republican presidential nominee. And so I think also it's just really interesting to see the statement from the president's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and the president himself, coming out and trying to act like they've been open and transparent about this, which is simply not the case. We didn't find out about this
[Borger:] And he's president.
[Keilar:] Sure. He said that we were we were very open. What is he talking about, Gloria?
[Brown:] Which is just
[Borger:] No, they were not. No, they were not open. I mean I did the story on this Trump Tower Moscow letter of intent in September of 2017 and I was told that it was shut down because they didn't want to mix you know, they knew the president was running and it wasn't going anywhere anyway and so this was before the Iowa caucuses, they wanted to shut it down. In the meantime in the meantime, the president was out there on the campaign trail and we know it's not a crime to lie to journalists, but the president was there out on the campaign trail saying I have I know of no business dealings with Russia. I've never had any business dealings. I'm not you know, maybe I sold somebody a house in Palm Beach, but that's it. That's the extent of it, when he very well knew that they were in negotiations to get I and I would say to tell you this was a sweetheart deal they were they were being proposed for this Trump Tower Moscow. It was a branding deal. They just put their name on it. There was a spa that was going to be named after Ivanka Trump. They would make a lot of money up front on it. Put and putting nothing in. And they wanted it. They wanted it. But they said they shut it down when, as we now know from Michael Cohen today, they did not.
[Coates:] You know, the luxury of being able to back petal and correct is over for the president of the United States. As you say, it's one thing to lie to the media, and perhaps the American people. Once it's in writing, now I am using you as your own foil. And I'm glad you mentioned things about the sweetheart deal or other members of the family because, remember, Michael Cohen was not that critical in the campaign, but he has been critical, I'm sure he'll be called a coffee boy at this point, but critical, of course, in the family business, which involves other people aside from Donald Trump. Which involves issues of confidence that you know well about for other members of the family, financial disclosures, ethical conundrums, et cetera. So this has expanded far beyond perhaps just the investigation of the campaign and now the entire Trump enterprise.
[Keilar:] What is the bigger concern to you, Larry? Is it the knowing that you had a candidate who was engaged in business with a foe of the United States, questioning whether he is someone who, once he's president, can therefore put forth in an unbiased nature U.S.Russia policy, or is the concern the cover-up? Is the concern that people have been lying about it? Is the concern, why are they lying about it? What don't we know? What what is it to you?
[Noble:] Well, it's both of those and one other thing. It's the fact that he doesn't seem to understand or care that there's a difference between being president of the United States and being the chief of the Trump Organization. And even his statement now, that he could have run his business while he was running the campaign, shows a real lack of understanding about what being president is. He stood up there in January, after he after he went into that big press conference when he had those fake files in front of him and he said he was going to divest himself, or at least put them put the all the interests in with his children. He didn't really do that. He still gets reports and all that stuff. So what really bothers me about this, though it's very consistent, is that he sees his business interests coming before everything else. He is willing to do whatever is necessary for his business interests. His statement that, well, I may not have run I may not have won and therefore I could keep my business going, well, you could stop your business for six months while you're running, or for a year while you're running so you don't get those conflict because
[Keilar:] Or wall yourself off.
[Noble:] Right, or wall yourself off.
[Keilar:] Right.
[Noble:] And he never did that. And then so what it leads to is this feeling that he has a real conflict of interest. He is more concerned about his business than he is about what else is going on in the government, about his role with the people, and what else is going on now. What does he feel he owes the Russians now? I think we can guess by things we're seeing, but so it's really disturbing, this whole idea that he doesn't get his role as president, he doesn't get his role as candidate, he doesn't get what it means to have a conflict of interest.
[Keilar:] Let's listen to the president and to Michael Cohen, because they repeatedly denied that there were any deals with Russia. Let's listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I have no dealings with Russia. I have no deals in Russia. I have no deals that could happen in Russia because we've stayed away. And I have no loans with Russia.
[Michael Cohen:] There's no relationship. The last time that there was any activity between the Trump Organization actually it really wasn't even the Trump Organization, it was the Miss Universe Pageant was held in Moscow
[Unidentified Male:] When was that?
[Cohen:] Six years ago.
[Keilar:] All right, that is stunning, Gloria, when you read what Michael Cohen is saying now about the timing of even discussing a nominee Trump visiting Russia after the convention in connection with Trump Tower Moscow.
[Borger:] Right. So this is all going on while I and others were being told, through this letter of intent and our own reporting, that it was shut down because, a, they didn't have the connections, b, they didn't have the land. They didn't have the financing. And why would Michael Cohen continue with a deal that clearly wasn't going to go anywhere. Plus the fact that you're heading into the Iowa caucuses and now they were completely focused on the on the campaign. You know, taking a step back for a minute, you had I think we all would understand that the Trump people never figured they were going to win. So they were continuing to operate the business as if they were going to go back to it in a minute. And they didn't get back to it in a minute because they never ended it. And so they did continue and the president was publicly lying about that. And Michael Cohen was saying, you know, this was ended. I had no real connections to Putin. I had to write an e-mail to Putin's spokesman blind. He said he never received a response on that, right, Pam?
[Brown:] But he did, according to the court documents.
[Borger:] But he did. He did receive a response. So now as we're unwinding
[Keilar:] Multiple responses.
[Brown:] And now now
[Borger:] Multiple, yes. It's it we're unwinding it, we're realizing that we were we were told whoppers.
[Brown:] Right.
[Keilar:] I'm going to have all of you stand by just for a moment here. The former director of the CIA, Leon Panetta, is going to join me live to respond to this news. Plus, it's only been a few weeks since the president fired his attorney general. So what did Acting AG Matt Whitaker know about these developments beforehand? And the president abruptly cancelling his meeting with Vladimir Putin at the G-20 Summit in Buenos Aries. He is not citing the Cohen news. Stand by. This is CNN's special coverage.

[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles.
[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour, Xi Jinping's power move. The Chinese president unveils his new leadership team with no clear successor in sight.
[Vause:] Hostility has had broken out in the long-brewing civil war with the Republican Party. Two Republican Senators have unloaded on their president, and say they've had enough of Donald Trump.
[Sesay:] And later, few things are tougher than rocket science, but Brexit may actually be one of them.
[Vause:] I don't think so. Hello, thank you for joining us. I'm John Vause.
[Sesay:] And I'm Isha Sesay. This is NEWSROOM L.A. Well, Chinese President Xi Jinping's hold on power is now solidified. He revealed the line-up for the Communist Party's proliferous standing committee just a short time ago. Five new members replaced the retired members of this all-powerful group.
[Vause:] Also, the men will help run the country for the next five years. The line-up did not include a clear successor to President Xi Jinping suggesting he may try to hold on to power beyond 2022.
[Unidentified Male:] Over the past five years, we have set out a broad agenda. Some tasks have been completed while others need more work. This party congress has set new goals and new tasks. We must make coordinated efforts to see them through.
[Vause:] Matt Rivers is in Beijing. He joins us now with more on this; he's in Tiananmen Square. So, Matt, on Tuesday, the party enshrined "Xi Jinping Though" into the party's Constitution. On Wednesday, he became a leader for life, what does he do on Thursday? I guess, the question is: what comes next?
[Matt Rivers, Cnn International Correspondent:] Yes. You know, whatever he wants, really, because you can look at what is happening today here in Beijing as kind of the final step, and President Xi's quest to amass more political power than any other Chinese leader since that guy, over my right shoulder, the guy with his picture on the wall, Chairman Mao Zedong, the Founder of Communist China. We saw the members, the new members of the standing committee walkout in their traditional
[Vause:] You know, what was interest when Xi Jinping spoke after announcing the new standing committee of the politburo, he spoke about this rejuvenation of China will become a reality talking about all China's citizen's sharing equally and the prosperity. Because this has been, really, a hallmark of the last five years ending corruption, you know, essentially trying to move the economy forward. Not necessarily reform it, but get it to a point where, I guess, you know, it works more efficiently and more Marxist political system. I mean, what's his vision in terms of economic reforms and to get to that point of sharing prosperity?
[Rivers:] Well, I think you heard it in the beginning of the Party Congress when he gave that mammoth three-and-a-half-hour speech in which he kept coming back to this same theme of the total, absolute party control over all aspects of society. And so, while a lot of people are holding out hope that there might be some sort of market liberalization that we might the government actually take its foot off of the economy a little bit. If you listen to Xi Jinping's words, it seems like he is an absolute true believer in the fact that China does best when the Communist Party is at his strongest, and when he is at the helm of the Communist Party. And so, when it comes to lifting people out of prosperity, when it comes to being the new center of the world, when it comes to being a model for new era of socialism around the world, Xi Jinping is talking about that in the realm of the Communist Party running all of those things. He firmly believes that and now that he has the power to kind of do whatever he wants in this government, or at least execute his vision, I think that's what you're going to see moving forward.
[Vause:] Yes, there are many people who've been thrown in jail, a lot of dissidents who've been locked up. And of course, to the crackdown on the Internet is the flipside of all of that. But, Matt, we'll talk about that next hour. Matt Rivers, live in Beijing, thank you.
[Sesay:] All right. Let's turn to U.S. politics now. And since the start of his presidency nine months ago, and indeed well, before Donald Trump has engaged in blistering attacks often on Twitter. Now, now he's on the receiving end. Two Republican Senators delivered stunning rebukes, Tuesday; the same day the president was on Capitol Hill to push tax reform.
[Vause:] Senator Jeff Flake and Bob Corker accused Mr. Trump of debasing and dividing the country. We get more now from CNN's Jeff Zeleny.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] President Trump on Capitol Hill today, trying to sell his tax plan and revive the agenda of a fractured Republican Party. But only an hour after leaving with the wave and a smile, Republican Senator Jeff Flake delivered a stinging rebuke of the president.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] When a leader correctly identifies real hurt and insecurity in our country, and instead of addressing it, goes to look for someone blame. There is perhaps nothing more devastating to a pluralistic society.
[Zeleny:] Flake's announcement: he would not seek reelection in his blunt concession that he's no longer comfortable with Trump Republican Party.
[Flake:] There is an undeniable potency to a populist appeal by mischaracterizing or misunderstanding our problem, and giving to the impulse to scapegoat and belittle the impulse to scapegoat and belittle, threatens to turn us into a fearful, backward-looking people.
[Zeleny:] Came on the same day, the Republican picked a new fight with Senator Bob Corker, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee it was an extraordinary moment for a party in power. White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders called Flake's decision to leave the Senate, good news, and blasted his speech as inappropriate.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I noticed that a lot of the language I didn't think was befitting at the Senate floor.
[Zeleny:] She also defended the president's fight with Corker.
[Sanders:] He's a fighter, we've said it many times before that person of this country didn't elect somebody to be weak. They elected somebody to be strong.
[Zeleny:] After Corker said in a round of morning television interviews, the president should leave details of the tax plan to Congress. Mr. Trump launched a searing attack on Twitter. The president said: "Corker, who couldn't get elected dog catcher in Tennessee is now fighting tax cuts." Seven minutes later, the president added: "Corker dropped out of the race in Tennessee when I refused to endorse him, and now he's only negative on anything Trump. Look at his record." The senator fired off this rebuttal: "Same untruths from an utterly untruthful president. #alertthedaycarestaff." The extraordinary exchange between a Republican president and of the party's senior statesman
[Sen. Bob Corker , Tenessee:] No, it's not accurate. You know, nothing that he said in his tweets today were truthful nor accurate, and he knows it. People around him know it. I would hope the staff over there would figure out why he's so controlling.
[Zeleny:] When asked by CNN's Manu Raju if the president is a liar, Corker had this today.
[Corker:] The president has great difficulty with the truth on many issues.
[Zeleny:] Asked whether he would support him again, Corker did not hesitate.
[Corker:] No way, no way. I think that he's
[Zeleny:] Taken together, the decision by Flake who also has called repeatedly with Mr. Trump underscored the challenges facing the GOP, and potential complications to the president's agenda.
[Flake:] We must argue our positions fervently and never be afraid to compromise. We must assume the best of our fellow man and always look for the good. Until that day comes, we must be unafraid to stand up and speak out as if our country depends on it because it does.
[Zeleny:] The move stunned Republics, and overshadowed discussion of a tax plan the party still hopes will be the one major legislate accomplishment of the year. House Speaker Paul Ryan was among GOP leaders trying to extinguish the unusual and to much unseemly civil wars.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , Speaker Of The House Of Representatives:] So, all of this stuff you see on a daily basis on Twitter this, Twitter that, forget about it. Let's focus on helping people.
[Zeleny:] As Republicans watch this widening civil war inside their party, the question is: what effect will it have on legislating? Will they still be able to get the tax cut plan through with or without help from some of these Republicans who are now disenfranchised from the president? Once again, the White House message overshadowed by all of this fighting. Jeff Zeleny, CNN, The White House.
[Vause:] Joining us now CNN Political Commentator and Democratic Strategist, Dave Jacobson; John Thomas, a Republican Consultant, also a CNN Political Commentator; and Michael Genovese, a Political Analyst and President of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University. Nice to have you all with us. The White House Press Secretary, Sarah Sanders, she offered this tired old explanation about why the president was feuding with two senior Republican lawmakers. Here's what she said.
[Sanders:] Look, you've got an individual and the president, he's a fighter, we've said it many times, before. The people of this country didn't elect somebody to be weak. They elected somebody to be strong. And when he gets hit, he's going to hit back. And I think Senator Corker knows that, and he, you know, maybe trying to get a headline or two on his way out the door.
[Vause:] But, John, the presidents hitting back at Myeshia Johnson, the widow of a U.S. soldier who was killed in Niger. He's hitting back at her close friend, Democratic Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, he's hitting back at Senator John McCain. Last week, two former presidents spoke out against this type of presidency. Donald Trump is taunting the nuclear-armed leader of North Korea by, you know, insulting Kim Jong-un by, you know, using names. This is exhausting for the country, and it just never seems to end.
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator And Republican Consultant:] I mean, it is. It's terrible when members of Congress use dead soldiers for political gain to pick fights for with the president. That's what all of these people have in common, John, are they pick fights with the president. Now, sometimes the president does an issue
[Vause:] I'm talking about the bigger picture.
[Thomas:] Oh, yes! Oh, it's terribly exhausting. There's no doubt about it. I wish look, as a good conservative, I wish we didn't have as many spats, I wish we just focused on the legislative agenda. Well, like Sanders said, it's not who Trump is.
[Dave Jacobson, Cnn Political Commentator And Democratic Strategist:] I just think like the lack of civility and the discourse is not sustainable. It just isn't. People are angry, they're frustrated, they want their government to solve problems and get stuff done. They want to see pragmatic leadership, and they're not seeing that. And the president is thinking he feels them.
[Sesay:] And Dave, to that point, is Democrats exhausted? Is that why it feels as if they're quieter and not really bringing the fight in terms of you know, in terms of and we're talking about the comity and the lack of civility. It just feels as if Democrats are like, Nah, let them do it, let them fight amongst themselves, we're not going to challenge or stand up for what is right?
[Jacobson:] Well, I wouldn't make the argument the Democrats are sitting back. I mean, I think they're digging their heels, and in the sense of
[Sesay:] It seems quiet.
[Jacobson:] Well, I think they're doubling down on 2018. And they focus on fund-raising and looking at seats that they can flip. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is looking at 80 seats across the country the Democrats are targeting. We only need to pick up 24 seats to flip the house.
[Thomas:] And the harder part they're having is the RNC and the Republican Party's dramatically our-racing the Democratic Party largely. I mean, the Democrats
[Jacobson:] Nationally, but not the Democratic Congressional Committee.
[Thomas:] They've had their fair share of challenges.
[Vause:] And you know, when your enemy is shooting itself in the foot, you can have their way.
[Thomas:] And that's also true. They're gambling that Republicans will solve this problem for them.
[Jacobson:] It's not going to make headlines if Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer go out there and obscure President Trump. It's going to make headlines when John McCain does it or Jeff Flake does it.
[Vause:] OK. After announcing he was retiring from the Senate, Jeff Flake spoke to Jake Tapper to explain his decision not to stand for reelection.
[Flake:] But right now, the vast majority of those who vote in Republican primaries seem to be OK with the president's policies and behavior. I do agree with the president sometimes. I disagree with him other times. That's what I've done with Republican and Democratic for residents. But now, it seems that you know, if you deviate at all from, you know, the president's positions or if you fail to condone his behavior, then you're out of step with the party or at least a segment of the party that votes in the Republican primaries.
[Vause:] So, Michael, does that sum up the problems right now for the Republican Party there? Because there's almost rabid core group of voters who essentially don't reflect the wider GOP?
[Michael Genovese, Political Analyst And President Of The Global Policy Institute At Loyola Marymount University:] You know, I think Senator Flakes in a tough position. He probably would have lost the election had he run. But I think, you know, the Republican Party is torn; it's torn between the old party of Lincoln, the party of Reagan. It's now becoming or in jeopardy of becoming the party of Trump, and I think a lot of very traditional Republicans find that to be morally obnoxious. After all, that was a marriage of convenience, to begin with. And that marriage of convenience is now looking inconvenient. The president said Senator Corker has a distant relationship with the truth. I think, you know when the political autopsy is done 20 years from now, where are the pieces going to fall? Who's going to be at the front end of history and who is going to be criticized?
[Sesay:] But, John, that's the whole point. Doesn't it seem as if Republicans are worried about 20 years from now? I mean, they're not worried about
[Vause:] 20 months from now.
[Sesay:] Yes, exactly. I mean, because I think I mean, that's what Jeff Flakes that's his calculation, the one they look back. He doesn't want to have been on this side, although Republicans don't seem to have those issues.
[Thomas:] Well, time will tell. But I think in politics the ways how we look at it is it's a sport of winning. He needs to win in order to get your legislation through. If you're not in power, you can't even have a crack at it. Now, Republics haven't been super successful in driving legislation. But certainly, if we lose in the midterms, we're toast. If you look at Senator Flake's approval rating in his own state is 17 percent. I mean, people talk about Trump's approval rating as being terrible in the high 30s, low 40s; he's at 17 percent. I think a lot this honestly I'm not saying that Senator Flake was being untruthful in his remarks, but he's upset. The guy lost his power because he went up against the president and lost.
[Vause:] He's also partly upset by what the president has been doing, right?
[Jacobson:] I mean, certainly, because it's his style of the way he would do it.
[Vause:] OK. This Flake and Corker retiring, at least the way it opens a special breed of candidate ones like Steve Moore Roy Moore, I should say. The hard-right candidate who is backed by Steve Bannon.
[Sesay:] Steve Bannon. Merging the two.
[Vause:] Exactly, Steve Moore-Bannon. You know, this is the guy who, you know. There he is with his little pistol ping, ping, ping, ping. He was a judge. He described a Supreme Court ruling, which affirmed marriage equality; he said it's worse of a decision by the Supreme Court often described as the worst decision by the Supreme Court to legalize slavery. This is what he said.
[Sen. Roy Moore , Alabama:] In 1957, the United States Supreme Court did rule that black people were property. Of course, that contradicted the constitution and it took a civil war to overturn it. But this ruling in the
[Vause:] John, is this the direction you want your party going?
[Thomas:] That's not the direction the party is going. I mean, that clip was from November
[Vause:] But he's under the Senate.
[Thomas:] But hold on, he didn't run on that. That clip was on Pastor Radio from 2016. If you look at the
[Vause:] But his views are well enough.
[Thomas:] True. But if you look at the campaign advertising, what that whole election in Alabama was about, it's about who was the establishment and who wasn't. That was the conversation, and that's the broader conversation we're seeing internally across the Republican Party.
[Vause:] So, you think
[Thomas:] Well, no, but I'm saying not every candidate I mean, he happens to be incredibly socially conservative. But a lot of the other candidates that are running, they're not social conservatives, that's not the commonality. It's the anti-establishment crusaders like Bannon that's what they have in common. Versus the Tea Party wave, that was singularly focused on smaller government. If you didn't believe that guy you were you want to a contender.
[Sesay:] Jeff Flake is basing near the point, it's not enough to be conservative these days, you have to be angry. He said that's basically that's the defining factor of those coming to the forefront now.
[Jacobson:] That's the manifestation of what the Bannon movement did today. And look, I think more came off as a barbarian with those kinds of comments. And I think Alabama is a special case because of this a state where Donald Trump won by 20 points. But if you look at the 2018 map in states like Arizona and states like Nevada where Democrats are angling to flips those seats red to blue, like you can't have a candidate run in a more moderate sort of purpled state like that and expect to just walk into Congress, right? Like Roy Moore and the 20-plus state that Donald Trump dominated in is a special case. I don't think like if you look at the broader electorate as we gear up for 2018. But, like, you can have these sort of fringe, Steve Bannon- backed candidate propelled to victory campaigning on a mandate like that.
[Vause:] I keep remembering what he says, "I'm not a witch."
[Thomas:] And that's the way Republicans run is as of nominating somebody who may not be a witch.
[Vause:] Exactly.
[Thomas:] Yes.
[Vause:] I haven't checked my Twitter feed the late last 30 seconds but Donald Trump, I think, has yet to respond directly to Jeff Flake, but has lashed out repeatedly at Bob Corker. Among the many insult, tweets are this one: "The entire world was laughing and taking advantage of us. People like little Bob Corker have set the U.S. way back. Now, we move forward." Michael, this seems to be Trump's way of sort of framing this as a battle with the establishment not just with the Republican establishment but the establishment from both parties.
[Genovese:] And you wonder how long a shelf life, smallness, and anger has. You can't be the basis of governing philosophy. And so, you wonder when will, when will when might the American public tire of this? When will they say we want something better, we want something to be optimistic about, something to believe in. And the failure to Democratic Party has been that it has not offered an alternative. It has been sitting back, waiting for Trump to implode, waiting for the Republicans to crack up. That's not a governing strategy either. So, the Democrats need to offer something positive, hopeful, something about tomorrow. They have not done so, and so the Democrats are at fault in this as well.
[Sesay:] Dave, which goes back to what I was saying to you about the Democrats' response to all of this. I mean, what's your response to what Michael just said that they haven't done enough?
[Jacobson:] I think Michael's precisely right. I mean, Democrats, from a national perspective, haven't done enough in terms of coming up in articulating a broad social and economic justice message nationally. We've got the better deal. I don't think that's resonating with the electorates; it's not where we need to go. But you are seeing really comprehensive big and bold plans with leaders like Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren, who are putting forward, you know, single-payer healthcare Medicare for all which is extraordinary You know what, the polling there actually is in the majority. And if you look at a state like California, I think we've been a beacon for the Democratic Party, and at least for, like, the national resistance against the White House. And I think national Democrat was looking to states like California to help shake that narrative. But you're right, it does need to come from leaders in Washington and it hasn't yet.
[Vause:] But, John, that message can't get out because Donald Trump dominates every minute of every news cycle.
[Thomas:] Well, and the game you're right. It's hard to get any other oxygen. You know you follow where the story is. But also, the Democrats, especially looking at 2020, they're all jockeying for who can be the most anti-Trump. I mean, that's the dynamic we see; they're not talking about who could have the best policies. It's who can foil to President Trump.
[Jacobson:] Well, Donald Trump's vulnerable. I mean, look at his polling numbers.
[Thomas:] No, what I'm saying is the Democratic base wants to crusader against Trump.
[Jacobson:] Absolutely.
[Thomas:] They don't want the economic plan against Donald Trump.
[Jacobson:] Well, I think it's a combination of both.
[Vause:] OK.
[Sesay:] We'll do this again tomorrow.
[Vause:] You know what, there will be
[Sesay:] There will be more.
[Vause:] Tomorrow, there will be more. Michael, John, and Dave thank you so much.
[Sesay:] Thank you, gentlemen, thank you.
[Vause:] OK. After the break, we'll have much more on our top story where China's new leadership team stays up President Xi's power and his plans for the future.
[Sesay:] Plus, officials fear the Russians did in the U.S. and now in the U.K. as well. British lawmakers want to know whether Russia used Facebook to influence the Brexit referendum.

[Harlow:] All right, moments ago, FBI Agent Peter Strzok arriving on Capitol Hill for this closed door hearing in front of the House Judiciary Committee about those anti-Trump text messages that were a significant part of the inspector general's report on whether there was bias in the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation. We'll report that out as soon as we get more. Of course, it's a closed door hearing. Meantime, a factory in Texas that makes steel pipes for the oil and gas industry says the new Trump tariffs are killing its plans to expands and hire more workers. And to drive that message home, workers and their children are flooding the White House with postcards asking for a waiver from the measure that was meant to give them a leg up. Like many U.S. factories, this company, Borusan Mannesmann, imports raw materials and estimates the tariffs on imported steel will cost it $25 million a year minimum. I'm joined by the company's CEO, Joel Johnson. Thank you for being with me this morning.
[Joel Johnson, Ceo, Borusan Mannesmann:] Good morning, Poppy.
[Harlow:] Your company imports raw material from Turkey. These tariffs are going to hurt a lot. $25 million a year is what you predict they will cost the company. What would that mean in terms of job loss?
[Johnson:] Well, we also buy the bulk of our steel from the domestic producers, such as Nucor, SDI, Big River, ArcelorMittal. What we do import is semi-finished pipe from our Turkish parent. And we finish those in Baytown, Texas, for the oil and gas industry.
[Harlow:] So would you have to lay off workers if these if you don't get a waiver? Because you're asking the Trump administration for a waiver to exempt you guys from this tariff. If you don't get that, are you going to have to lay people off?
[Johnson:] Well, it would definitely impact our production balances. It just makes it difficult for us to understand what might happen. You know, a couple of years ago, when the oil and gas industry was in crisis, we were down to 100 people and we were still making pipe in Baytown. Now, as the oil and gas has recovered and our products are in demand, we're touching 300. We don't want to go back to the 100 head count level. It's just it's it's it would really impact the Baytown community, which already has a 10 percent unemployment rate. So what we want to do is, we want to we want to grow.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Johnson:] And what we've offered President Trump is a deal where we, for a short-term exemption, for two years, we'll use that time to build a factory in Baytown and employee another 170 people and then stop imports. So we're kind of we're flipping it to say, just give us a short-term exemption.
[Harlow:] So well, so your message to President Trump, who insists that these tariffs are good for America and good for American jobs, seems to me to be, no, they're not good for Americans here in Baytown, Texas, and we need relief.
[Johnson:] Well, we're not asking for a forever relief, we're just asking for a short-term bridge.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Johnson:] And give us enough time to build another factory.
[Harlow:] So you
[Johnson:] So I see this as I agree that his that, you know, he's trying to increase the local context and increase jobs and investment, and that's basically what we're offering. We're saying, just give us a little bit of time and we'll push the button and build in Baytown.
[Harlow:] You have some postcards with you.
[Johnson:] Yes.
[Harlow:] And this is notable because a creative strategy you guys have to reach the White House and to get the ear of the president, your workers have written 4,500 postcards to the White House, imploring the president to do this. Their kids have written some. Read us a little bit of what they've written.
[Johnson:] That's right. Our employees are our biggest asset. Everybody got involved. We stopped the factory. One of the kids, the winner of the kids' contest, they drew a picture of the current Borusan with a pipe factory and then a new Borusan with many more. And it says, dear Mr. President, the company that my dad works for needs your help. They want to build a big company. By making it big, they can bring people that which more people and more positions and makes a big new company. Thank you. You know, it's things like this that, you know, these are real decision that impact families. They're being talked around at the dinner table. We just need to get ten minutes of time with President Trump or Secretary Ross and explain our deal. It's a win-win. It's a win-win for America. We're part of the energy the national security process of becoming energy independent. All we need is a bit of time and we'll build another factory.
[Harlow:] If you're comfortable telling me, did you vote for President Trump? And would you say a majority of the workers at the factory were supportive of the president in this election?
[Johnson:] I'll answer it this way. Two years ago, when I three years ago when I started with Borusan Mannesmann, we went down to 100 employees. Now we're at 300. In the midterms, I'm going to be Republican backing. We got great support from Congressman Babin on this specific issue. And, you know, I think with Trump's emphasis on the economy, if it was today, I would vote for him.
[Harlow:] But if this doesn't change, if your company doesn't get a waiver, will you have to move the company? Is there a chance that you will not be able to continue production in Baytown, Texas?
[Johnson:] Our parent is committed to the U.S. market. We'll still be here. We'll have to fight our way. Unfortunately, you know, we won't be able to grow then.
[Harlow:] Understood.
[Johnson:] And, you know, Baytown has got 10 percent unemployment and we want to grow.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Johnson:] Our you know, our goal is to grow. So that would be a real shame if we didn't get it. But I think we're our deal is unique enough that the president could could put his attention on our little company and allow us to grow.
[Harlow:] Well, we'll see if he's watching now. Joel Johnson, thanks for your time this morning.
[Johnson:] Thank you very much.
[Harlow:] All right, right now, one of the president's top aides is in Russia, in Moscow, meeting with Vladimir Putin. So what does that mean ahead of this high profile summit between Putin and the president?

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Right now, here in downtown Miami, we've seen gusts up to 60 miles an hour. They are expecting sustained winds well above that when this storm hits about 20-plus hours from now. So, this is nothing and already the shore is being overwhelmed by storm surge. They're expecting six to 10 feet, even though track has shifted of this storm. The urgency for those in in area has not. Let's go the Chad Myers in the weather center. And it's something that we're battling here with the perception of even Floridians, which is if the storm has moved, they must be safe now.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Right. And it depends on where you are. Some people are safer and some people are certainly more in danger. Just depends on your location in Florida and if you evacuated to the west coast because the storm was supposed to be here when we talked about it three days ago. Now that's not happening. The storm is going to be over Key West and into southwestern Florida. You know, and it still could. People have been asking, can this thing still miss Florida or miss you know what, Hurricane Irma doesn't know if there's a European model or a GFS model or an NAM model. It doesn't care. It's not running on any model or any timetable. So certainly, it still could miss. It's been moving to the west all week long. Two to 4 feet up and down the east coast, this is the real dreadful area, 10 to 15 feet here anywhere from Cape Coral through Naples right on down to Keys. That is the storm surge. If you don't understand what storm surge means it means a flood. You're going to get a 15-foot flood right over your house if you're in that little zone. If you're 30 feet above sea level you're in great shape. Don't even worry about it. Stay in your bunker. Don't move. If all of a sudden you realize, wait a minute, I'm six feet above sea level, that's not going the work, then all of a sudden you need to start to move Anderson.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] Chad Myers, Chad, thanks very much. Chad, if you could, talk about for the folks who are here in Fort Myers, you're talking about 10 to 15-foot storm surge south of here in Naples. Is that going to reach Fort Myers?
[Myers:] It certainly could because we talked about this model or this computer not agreeing with what Irma is thinking it's doing. Irma has been shifting left. We were waiting for this turn and we've been waiting for a long time. When does the turn occur? Well, the turn could have occurred east of Miami and everybody would have been missed even the Bahamas really would have just had a miss. That didn't happen. Waiting, waiting, waiting, and then all of a sudden, yes, you're into Fort Myers. So, there's no question that at the 5:00 advisory if this thing doesn't start turning, the hurricane center could slide that higher surge on up to Fort Myers for sure. And it's not out-the question that this thing gets into Tampa. That's why I need everybody on the west side of the state to watch this. You're still in the cone, Tampa, and you've never been out of the cone. Fort Myers never been out of the cone. Cape Coral, never been out of the cone. So, you know, this is still a great forecast, 120 hours ago, we were still forecasting this hurricane center was, and they're still right on the money.
[Cooper:] Yes. In fact, Chad, the last thing I heard you say in the previous hit was for Tampa to expect 5 foot to 8 foot of storm surge and that's been upgraded.
[Myers:] That's right. We were talking about zone one, Pinellas, and Hillsboro, I need you to keep listening to your local officials there because we may have to raise the zone from A to B around parts of Tampa if it looks like the surge may get into Tampa Bay. Right now, it's 5 to 10. You know what, Anderson, this just a bad flashback. You and me standing in Tampa waiting for Charley, a Category 4, very strong storm and it turned right into Punta Gorda and we had to go chasing it to the south. That was 13 years or so ago. The same thing can happen today. I have a wind gust possible in Punta Gorda, Florida, tomorrow, of 150 miles per hour. The storm is still expected to grow as it gets into the warm water. This is serious and it's the real deal.
[Cooper:] Yes. And people in Fort Myers know this is the real deal. Chad was talking about possible expansion of evacuation zones in Tampa. That has now happened here in Fort Myers. The mayor's office, now they've expanded the evacuation zone to Zone B as well, which is in the downtown west and south down river, and that is obviously of great concern. There are a lot of people frankly who came from Miami, I just was talking to somebody who evacuated from Miami is now in Tampa and is now suddenly faced with the decision what shall do I do, stay in Tampa, try to go back to Miami? We just drove here to Fort Myers. I can tell you the highways are pretty much empty, certainly heading west on I-75, the highway was empty. There was a gas station open, you could buy up to $25 of gas. There were police there. It was very orderly. There weren't long lines. There is some light traffic heading back to Miami. I can only assume some people decided to try to get back there, but the situation in Fort Myers, it's always been serious, but as people are tracking this Governor Rick Scott is speaking. Let's listen in.
[Governor Rick Scott Florida:] Hurricane Irma is battering the South Florida and the Florida Keys with dangerous winds and continues to remain a catastrophic and life-threatening major Category 3 storm with winds of 125 miles per hour. This is a deadly major storm and our state has never seen anything like it. Millions of Floridians will see major hurricane impacts with deadly, deadly, deadly storm surge and life-threatening winds. There's a serious threat of significant storm surge flooding there is a serious threat of significant storm surge flooding along the entire west coast of Florida, and this has increased to 15 feet of impact above ground level, 15 feet of impact above ground level. Think about that, 15 feet is devastating and will cover your house. In the Tampa Bay area, the surge is forecasted to be 5 feet to 8 feet. Think about that. The typical first story is 7 feet to 10 feet, 5 feet to 8 feet. This is a life-threatening situation. Remember, the storm surge comes in comes after the wind. Do not think the storm is over when the wind slows down. Local officials will let you know when it's safe. The storm surge will rush in and it could kill you. Here in Orange County, you're under a hurricane warning and will see dangerous and life-threatening wind and torrential rainfall of more than a foot. The rainfall has already started in this area and the wind will begin tonight. We could also see tornadoes. Please take action to keep your family safe and shelter in place or find shelter now. There is a mandatory evacuation order for mobile homes in Orange County. If you have been ordered to evacuate anywhere in the state, you need to leave right now. Not tonight. Not in an hour. Now. You are running out of time to make decision. Evacuations are in place across the state more than 6.3 million Floridians have been ordered to evacuate. You need to listen to local evacuation orders. I'm a dad and I'm a grandfather. I love my family more than anything and I cannot imagine life without them. Do not put your life or your family's life at risk. Right now is the right time to do the right thing for your family. School buses are aiding in evacuations. Please take advantage of this service. If you need to leave and are unable to do so for any reason at all, call 1-800-342-3557 and we will do everything possible to get you out. Protecting life is our absolute top priority. There will be no resource. There will be no expense that will be spared to protect lives. I urge everyone to check on your neighbors, families, and friends. If you know someone who is not evacuating and should, please contact them and make sure they have a plan to get to safety. But you can't wait to get out. You can't wait until storm's here. You have to do it now. Possessions can be replaced. Your house can be replaced. You and your family cannot be replaced. Shelters. We have been working with counties across the state to ensure there are enough shelters. Currently there are more than 320 shelters open across every county in the path of the storm and more opening today. More than 54,000 Floridians have already taken shelter and there's still room for more. If you have a building and emergency officials ask you to open a shelter, please comply. You will save somebody's life. This is so important to families seeking safety. Everyone in Florida needs to find a safe place to go. Traffic. Evacuation routes are moving and we have stopped the shoulder driving on I-75 from Wildwood to the Georgia line because traffic is moving. If there's a need to reopen this, FDOT and Highway Safety will do so immediately. Evacuations are not meant to be convenient. They are meant to keep you safe. Check realtime traffic information and evacuation routes at fl511.com. Fuel. We are still aggressively working to keep gas stations opened and filled. This won't last much longer in South Florida because it will be unsafe to be on the roads. While all the fuel ports in Florida are now closed for safety as Irma impacts our state, following the storm, state troopers will resume escorting fuel supply trucks directly to gas stations across the state. Highway Florida motor fuel import tax for five days to help bring more fuel to our state for storm response and recovery. This will make our more efforts to bring more fuel from neighboring states after the storm. We know fuel is important. We're doing everything we can to get more fuel in the state. Florida's prepared. Every single Florida Guardsman that can be deployed has already been deployed to prepare and respond to this storm across the state. We have so many members of our law enforcement that are putting their lives at risk to help Floridians get to a safe place and they will not stop until it is no longer safe. We cannot thank our Guardsmen, our law enforcement, any of our first responders enough because they're putting themselves at risk to take care of everybody else. Utility providers. They're actively prepositioning resources throughout the state and in neighboring states. We all know the importance of getting power back on. We will work aggressively with our utilities to make sure it gets back on as quickly as we can. I want to be clear. We are under a state of emergency. Employees who perform vital services including health care staff, we need you to be there to help your community. Right now, Florida needs 1,000 volunteer nurses to help at our special needs shelters. If you're a nurse and you can volunteer, please e-mail at helpfl@flhelp.gov. You can still e-mail to prior e-mail address we were using, bprchdpreparedness@flhelp.gov. Again, we need nurses for our special needs shelters. We've already received thousands of supplies. This is great news, but we're still acting to try to get these individuals to our shelters. We're also going to need continue to need volunteers before and after the storm. So many people across the country and across the world have called to offer their prayers and support. I want to thank the governors of the other states that provided every resource we've asked for. I know the entire country is behind us. I've been talking to the White House pretty much every day, been talking to FEMA all the time, talked to Brock Long this morning, FEMA administrator. I've talked to almost every cabinet member and they are doing everything they can to provide whatever resource they can. We have our country's best first responders ready to help us and Florida will get through this. If you're in an evacuation zone, you've got go. You've got to get out now, get to a safe place. This is a catastrophic storm our state has never seen. Remember, we can rebuild your house, you can get possessions again, but we can't rebuild your life or your family. Florida is tough, Florida is resilient, Florida is unbreakable. Let's stay together and help each other. You can follow my Twitter account @flgovscott for lifesaving messaging and updates in English and Spanish. Florida is an amazing melting pot of loving people and I'm so proud to be governor of this incredible state. [Speaking Spanish]
[Cooper:] You're listening to Florida's Governor Rick Scott giving just another urgent warning to people to be taking this storm seriously. He was talking about that storm surge basically swamping people's homes. Here in Fort Myers, if you've been listening to Chad Myers over the last hour or so, they have upgraded the level of storm surge that they expect a little south of here up to Naples, possibly even as far as Fort Myers to 10 to 15 feet. That is extraordinary. Right now, for Tampa, it is 5 feet to 8 feet. This area in Centennial Park where you can see the water right here, probably about 8 feet over the water, so there will be water all throughout this area. And as we go back as we join Chris Cuomo who is in Miami Beach as well, Chris, it does bear repeating that the mayor here has expanded the evacuation zone to Zone B, which is downtown south and west down river. And for anybody who has not evacuated at this point, but needs help in order to get to a shelter, the mayor is saying call 211. That is the number they of set up. Call 211 and they are going to try to help get people to these shelters. Chris, I just drove by the Germane Arena on I-75, there were long, long lines, and I know we'll talk to our Drew Griffin shortly outside there, there were long lines, hundreds of people waiting to get in. We'll be checking in soon, Chris, to see if those lines are moving. A very severe situation here as it continues to be for you and everybody in Miami.
[Cuomo:] Yes. Look, we're getting a band of just a taste of what is to come. I'm no fan of standing in the rain, but it's important to demonstrate something. If you haven't evacuated, if you need to get out, look how much more difficult it would be now. We're getting gusts of about 65 miles an hour and now pretty I'd say medium level band of rain. Dave, if you pan to the left a little when you get a chance, Dave, look at the difference in the water that this wind picking up and the rain coming in has made. The storm surge now is easily overwhelming all of the docks in this area and it's just a marginal uptick in wind, the addition of rain, and you know what, if you needed to hit the road now, you would be in a bad way because driving in this is not easy. Your visibility is shot and this is nothing compared to a hurricane. Anderson, you and I have been in plenty of them. This is mild, but it changes the dynamic and that's why we just heard the governor in such, you know, serious tones telling people you need to move when the window opens. And if you're in an area right now like downtown Miami, when this rain stops and this band moves, if you need to get out, if the government has told you to, take the chance, because once this happens, movement is hard, Anderson. It's hard.
[Cooper:] Yes. It's very deceptive when you're here, I mean, look right now, Fort Myers, you know, there's a gust of wind, but there's no storm. It's very deceptive. You know, I've just put on sunscreen because the sun is out behind clouds. And the difference between when one of those bands comes, it changes on a dime. When we were driving here, one of those bands swept over the highway, we were driving on, the rain was just torrential. We had to slow down to a crawl on the highway and that was just a quick band. This thing is going to be going for many, many hours, some 24 hours from now, we will be in the thick of this as will all the residents here, frankly, all throughout Florida. Some people may feel toward the east that it's not going to be as bad and for some people it won't be, but this storm is so big it is going to impact everybody in one way or another. We have a lot more ahead. We'll take a quick break. We'll talk to our Drew Griffin at the Germane Arena to give you a sense, last time we checked in him about an hour ago, or about 10:00, it was supposed to be opening. There were probably hundreds if not more than a thousand people waiting to get in. We'll see what the scene is there next.

[Stevens:] Saudi Intelligence officer was reportedly shocked and called the audio recording of Jamal Khashoggi's killing a "true disaster". A pro-government Turkish newspaper quotes the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is saying that when the officer heard the recording, he thought the kill team was on heroin. This follows a New York Times report that the recordings container remark that the U.S. officials believe links the journalists killing to the Saudi Crown Prince, himself. Jomana Karadsheh has details.
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn Correspondent:] The New York Times in this report says it has spoken to three people who are familiar with the audio recording that Turkey says it has with the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. And they say on this audio can be heard a phone call that was made by one of the 15 Saudi's a member of that hit team that carried out the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. He is identified as Maher Abdulaziz Mutreb. He is a member of the inner circle of the crown prince. He's a former diplomat at the Embassy in London. He's a security official and an intelligence officer. In his first speaking to superior telling him "Tell your boss." Something along the lines of the deed is done. Now, he doesn't specifically mention the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. But, according to U.S. intelligence officials, they believe the term your boss is in reference to the crown prince. Several U.S. officials in recent weeks have told CNN that they believe an operation like this that would have involved members of the inner circle of Mohammad bin Salman could not have happened without the knowledge of the de facto leader of Saudi Arabia. But Saudi Arabia for its part has repeatedly denied that he had any knowledge of this operation. They have blamed it on rogue elements. And some members of the intelligence community believes that this is you know, this latest revelation is as close as they get to a smoking gun. But it's not necessarily irrefutable evidence, the direct link to the crown prince. On Tuesday, the National Security Advisor John Bolton, reportedly told journalists in Singapore on the sidelines of the summit there that he did not personally hear the recording. But those who did, it is their assessment that it does not implicate the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman. Nonetheless, these leaks as they continue they are definitely putting more and more pressure not just on the Saudis, but also on the U.S. administration to push their Saudi allies to answer some other questions that many have, and especially that Turkey has put forward. Especially, the key question of who ordered the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. Jomana Karadsheh, CNN, Istanbul.
[Stevens:] A top Kremlin opponent says that he's been blocked from leaving Russia. Alexei Navalny is one of the most prominent critics of the Russian President Vladimir Putin. A CNN's Brian Todd reports, his high profile might be the reason he's still alive.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] He's been roughed up at protests, arrested, detained scores of times by Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin. Now, Alexei Navalny, Putin's most powerful and famous arch-rival, says he's been barred from exiting Russia and has had his passport confiscated. The opposition leader posted a picture of himself on Instagram awaiting screening at border control. He was trying to get to a human rights court hearing in France. Analysts say, despite all the harassment and threats leveled at him over the years, there's a key reason Alexei Navalny is still alive. Unlike some of Putin's other notable critics.
[Ben Judah, Contributing Writer, Politico:] In a previous instances where he has been persecuted or detained by Russian officials, there's been such a blowback in Russian public opinion and protests that Putin has been apprehensive and nervous about going through with it.
[Todd:] Now, another well-known Putin critic has leveled a stinging broadside at the Russian president. Asked by Vanity Fair magazine if he'd compared Putin to Joseph Stalin, American born financier Bill Browder, said, "I see him as a modern-day Pablo Escobar. Putin has no ideology whatsoever. Putin is pedestrian. All he wants is money and to hurt his enemies." Escobar, the late kingpin of Colombia's Medellin drug cartel was notorious for his thirst for blood. Once blamed for blowing up a passenger plane to strike at his enemies. Browder believes Putin wants to strike at him and spoke about it when we interviewed him in Washington. What are the security threats you have received?
[Bill Browder, Co-founder, Hermitage Capital Management:] They've the Russian government has made numerous death threats against me. They want to kill me, they'd like to kidnap me, they'd like to me have me arrested and sent back to Russia.
[Todd:] Putin even brought up Browder by name at the Helsinki summit with President Trump. Saying, he might make Russians available for questioning in the Mueller investigation if Russian officials could interrogate Browder. Trump didn't push back. Putin has a seething hatred for Browder. Because Browder spearheaded the passage of the Magnitsky Act. An American law which sanctions powerful Russians close to Putin and prevents them from getting to the money they've stashed outside Russia.
[Browder:] I have found his Achilles heel. I've created a mechanism, a legal mechanism to seize that money, and he feels personally aggrieved, and he has a vendetta against me.
[Todd:] Even with his critics embolden, one analyst believes the only person who can toss Vladimir Putin from power is Vladimir Putin.
[Judah:] I don't think that Putin is vulnerable to an overthrow from the streets. And I don't think that Putin is for the moment vulnerable to some sort of coup d'etat. I think that Putin's greatest vulnerability is actually himself and his own physical health, which is one of the reasons he's so obsessed of sports and exercise.
[Todd:] We asked Russian officials for a response to Browder's comparison of Putin to Pablo Escobar. An official here at the Russian embassy referred us to a previous statement calling Browder a businessman with a stained reputation and referring to Putin accusing Browder of stealing 1-12 billion dollars from Russia when Browder was a financier there. An accusation which Bill Browder vehemently denies. Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
[Stevens:] The art world is preparing for a record-breaking auction. David Hockney's Portrait of an Artist is going on the block in New York. How much is it expected to fetch? We'll take a look in just a moment.

[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Anchor:] With this Tweet has President Trump gotten himself into legal jeopardy? Tonight we debate obstruction of justice. And it is the Russia probe heard around the world, why Moscow poses an existential threat to The United States. And we'll hear from Investigative Journalist Luke Harding also of the best selling collusions, thus later in the program Hamilton comes to London, my exclusive interview with its creator and the cult hero Lin Manuel Miranda. Welcome to the program, I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. We begin tonight with the most powerful man in the most powerful country in the world. Has President Trump admitted to committing a crime, or tried to obstruct justice in the Michael Flynn case. It is a question an anxious world is asking after this tweet from the President's account this weekend. Quote I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the F.B.I. He's plead guilty to those lies it is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful there was nothing to hide. And what are we all to make of this assertion by the President's lawyer John Dowd, speaking with Mike Allen of Axios this morning. The President can not obstruct justice because he is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer. And has every right to express his view of any case. But is this actually right? Joining me now Richard Ben Veniste who was a special prosecutor in the Watergate case, along with Chief Legal Analyst of CNN and writer for The New Yorker Jeffrey Toobin. His new article is called Michael Flynn's Guilty Plea Sends Donald Trump's Lawyers Scrambling. Welcome gentlemen to you both. So, let me ask you Jeff that saying he had to fire Flynn because he knew that Flynn had lied, that's new we didn't know that the President knew that Michael Flynn had lied to the F.B.I.?
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Well I think it's important to draw a distinction here Christiane. We did know that he was fired the story was because he had lied to the Vice President. What the tweet was providing new information was that he had that the President says in the tweet that he knew he'd lied to the F.B.I. That's a crime, it's not a crime to lie to the Vice President, but it is a crime to lie to the F.B.I. When you just appose that knowledge with a couple of weeks later the President saying to James Comey the F.B.I. Director whom he later fired saying to Comey go easy on go easy on Mike Flynn. Don't he's a good guy, don't don't pursue him. If he says that to Comey knowing that Flynn has committed a crime that really is potentially direct evidence of obstruction of justice saying don't investigate someone that you know has committed a crime.
[Amanpour:] So let me drill down on the obstruction of justice issue that has captured Washington and frankly the world today, for you Richard Ben [inaudible] Special Prosecutor with Watergate. So has you know the law that John Dowd tells Axios that the President cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice. And I guess I want to ask you is that true or not given the facts that the Watergate articles of impeachment against Nixon in part say that he had prevented, obstructed, and impeded the Administration of Justice and likewise the articles of impeachment against President Clinton wrote the President obstructed justice in an effort to delay, impede, cover up, and conceal. So, can a President obstruct justice?
[Richard Ben Veniste, Special Prosecutor Watergate Case:] This is eerily reminiscent of the President Nixon when he famously said it's not illegal if the President does it. Well that's just not so, and indeed President Nixon was identified by the Grand Jury in Watergate as an unindicted co conspirator meaning that he criminally associated himself with an ongoing obstruction of justice conspiracy. So, it is not so that the President cannot violate the law. He certainly can and he did in Watergate. It's clear that the Watergate cover up conspiracy involved obstruction of justice. It involved making promises of clemency to individuals in return for their silence; therefore, the imperative piece of it, in order to criminalize the conduct, is a knowing quid pro quo, as it were, in return for something that the President wants.
[Amanpour:] Yes.
[Ben Veniste:] He's asking for silence or he's asking for the FBI Director to go easy on an individual.
[Amanpour:] So, let me ask you, Ben-Veniste.
[Ben-veniste:] Of course, there's much more. The firing of Comey, the FBI Director, who is conducting the investigation, is in direct parallel to Nixon firing Archibald Cox, who is [a] special prosecutor investigating Nixon.
[Amanpour:] So obliviously, this all leads to the question, where is this case going, Jeffery Toobin? Why would the President's lawyer have written this stuff and given this interview?
[Jeffery Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Well, I think [John Dowd], has [tease] technical legal term, made a big mess and he's trying to dig himself out of it. I I I can't answer why he did it. I think he regrets it. John Dowd is seventy-six-years old, he isn't, exactly, familiar with Twitter and other modern technology. And, I think he'll be staying away from it, henceforth. However, I do think, I I I, there's one respect where I think John Dowd is not entirely wrong, which is, it is a very much open question. About whether a sitting president of the United States can be indicted for abstruction of justice or anything else.
[Amanpour:] Well.
[Toobin:] The the our, our system is set up so that the President is in a discrete legal condition. Different from other people and he has to serve his term. And it may not be possible for him to be indicted.
[Amanpour:] Well.
[Toobin:] [In case] the Supreme Court has never resolved. However, the President can be impeached. There is no doubt about that and I think [Rick] is exactly right to point out, that Bill Clinton was about, I'm sorry, Richard Nixon was about to be impeached for obstruction of justice. Bill Clinton was impeached for a form of obstruction of justice. So, the idea that the President is somehow insolated from obstruction of justice, at least as far as the House of Representatives is concerned, is clearly wrong.
[Amanpour:] Well, I wish we had more time Gentlemen. Thank you, both very much, indeed. Just very quickly to you, Richard Ben-Veniste, and I mean like really quickly. Is this, at this point, a political matter? Does it matter who controls Congress, in terms of President Trump's future?
[Ben-veniste:] It is a political matter in terms of impeachment. In terms of the Special Council's investigation, Mr. Muller's investigation, that is a political. It has nothing to do with politics and he will make a decision based on facts, alone, given his reputation.
[Amanpour:] Alright. Richard Ben-Veniste, Jeffrey Toobin, thank you, so much for joining us on that breaking news tonight. And who better to talk about today's development than [James Clapper]. As Director of National Intelligence under President Obama, he was [Finn's] boss when he was hired and then fired as Director of Defense Intelligence Agency. And he briefed the incoming president, Donald Trump, on Russia hacking the election. I began by asking [Clapper], the significance of [Flynn's] guilty plea.
[James Clapper, Former United States Director Of National Intelligence:] Well, I think that this is a hugely important development. Obviously, Mike Flynn is not a coffee boy. If anyone has insight into what the Trump campaign was doing and what was going on during the transition, and at least the first 24 days of the administration, is Mike Flynn. And having read the terms of his plea bargain, I think there's every incentive for Mike to fully cooperate with the Special Council. So, I think there's obviously much more to come with this. I just don't think he'd be off doing these things, like so kind of rogue, all by himself. So others, clearly, had to have been involved.
[Amanpour:] You were General Flynn's Mike Flynn's boss and I spoke to Mike Flynn back during the Republican Convention in 2016 in Cleveland. And he had this to say to me about why he chose to assist Donald Trump.
[Mike Flynn:] I just saw him as a really high quality leader. He approaches problems vastly differently. And, I think that his, I think intelligent and decision making skills and abilities are really much different.
[Amanpour:] Well let me ask you.
[Flynn:] I like those. I appreciate those.
[Amanpour:] What do you make of Mike Flynn's assessment of Donald Trump and perhaps 20-20 hindsight might color that assessment?
[Clapper:] Well I guess I had a little trouble relating to that. I don't see the President in quite the same light as Mike did. I think Mike changed a lot after he left active duty in the army. He became somewhat of an angry man and, of course, he was engaging with any number of Republican candidates and was interested in anyone that would listen to him, I think, he would latch onto. And as it turned out he latched onto the candidate who, at the time unlikely though it may have been, who ended up winning.
[Amanpour:] What do you make of President Trump, in terms if you were over here looking at America from the allied or even adversary point of view? People started to question the stability of the leader of the free world. So when you put that in the context of what the National Security Advisor, H.R. McMastser, this weekend said, the potential for war with North Korea is at the highest it's ever been. How does that make you feel about the stability and consistency of policy coming out of the White House?
[Clapper:] Well, I think it's first of all overseas I know for a fact it's a concern. In my travels since I left the government and you're right, people do hang on his every word and every Tweet and it cause for concern in many circles, particularly among our closest allies. I know others have questioned, as I have, his temperance, I guess the word I'd use, in with regard to many world problems and of course particularly given the sensitivity of the tensions right now between North Korea and the United States. And this is a subject that requires temperance moderation, thought, as I observed when I was there in November 14, they the paranoia and seize mentality in Pyongyang is palpable. And so, if there are to be any negotiations, and clearly the North Korean's aren't in the mood for that right now, they want to be in a position of strength where they're not being dictated to about what the terms of such a negotiation would be.
[Amanpour:] About Russia, people over here and maybe over there with you, are still trying to figure out why it is that President Trump has never mustered a negative or any kind of comment towards Vladamir Putin, despite the evidence of Vladamir Putin's policy towards the
[U.s. Clapper:] Well to me this is the overriding issue connected the foreign policy issue connected with this administration and I do not understand the singular indifference to the threat posed by Russia, both in terms of undermining our system as evidenced by their interference in our election, not to mention the profound military threat that they pose to the United States. Unlike North Korea, Russia does represent an existential threat to this country and I do not understand President Trump being a supplicant, more less, to Putin give Putin's very strong anemic towards the United States, what it stands for and it's values and it's system. And to me, that overarches all other issues. Collusion is important, but not as important as this.
[Amanpour:] And we're going to dig deeper into that. James Clapper, thank you so much for joining us from Washington.
[Clapper:] Thanks for having me.
[Amanpour:] And on that issue of collusion, we turn now to the man who wrote the book on it, British journalist Luke Harding, who is Moscow Bureau Chief for "The Guardian" newspaper and dove into Trumps ties to Russia, pulling it all together in a new book currently at the top of The New York Times best seller list. It is called "Collusion." Secret meetings, dirty money and how Russia helped Donald Trump win. Luke Harding is with me now. Welcome. It seems a good day to talk about all of this and you just heard what the former Director of National Intelligence said, that the relationship that Trump still has with Putin is one of great mystery to a lot of people including him.
[Luke Harding, British Journalist:] Yes, that right. We've had a year of chaos but the only constant theme is Donald Trump being very nice to Vladamir Putin and I think I can safely predict that Trump will never criticize Putin. We have to ask ourselves, why is that? And I think the most simple answer is the most convincing answer, that Putin and the Kremlin have stuff which gives the leverage over Donald Trump.
[Amanpour:] OK, what stuff? Can we just start first with how Donald Trump even entered that sphere? You write about how he first went to Moscow, when he first married Ivana Trump who was obviously Czech, part of the whole Soviet Block at that point.
[Harding::] Yes I mean I think to understand the extraordinary events of last year, you have to go back to the Cold War to the Soviet Union to Donald Trump's marriage to a woman from Communist Czechoslovakia and also to a trip he made in the summer of 1987 with Ivana to Moscow. He was invited by the Soviet government who paid for his expenses. We have to ask ourselves why would they do that and if you read the KGB memos from that period, they're very keen to recruit Americans and they're looking for particular kinds of Americans who are vain, narcissistic, perhaps corruptible and so on. And of course Trump ticks practically every single box.
[Amanpour:] When you say recruit Americans; you're not saying they recruited him as an agent or anything?
[Harding:] No we can't say that. But what we can say is that there was a determined effort to kind of woo him, to cultivate him, spearheaded by [Yuri Dubinin] who was the Soviet Ambassador who raced up to Trump Tower.
[Amanpour:] To Washington.
[Harding:] Yes knocked on the door, said Mr. Trump lovely to meet you, come to Moscow, we will take care of everything and sort of dangled the prospect of building a tower in Moscow, which never happened but of course 30 years later we now know there were secret negotiations, emails going on between Trump's team and his lawyer, Michael Cohen sending emails to Dmitry Peskov who's Putin's press guy saying help us.
[Amanpour:] Help us?
[Harding:] Help us with this [task]. Meanwhile on the campaign trail, Donald Trump is saying wouldn't it be nice if we can get along with Russia with this kind of schmoozey theme that we've seen all the way through.
[Amanpour:] So as you see the developments today and everybody now asking the question was there obstruction of justice? It is news that Donald Trump tweeted that he fired General Flynn because he lied to the FBI. We knew that he fired him because he lied to the vice president but it's news that he lied to the FBI or at least that Trump knew that.
[Harding:] Yes, that's right and I think Trump is trouble. Four of his associates have now been indicted, Flynn most recently last week and I was reading Trump's lawyer saying that he crafted the Tweet and I read and I thought this is Donald Trump's voice, the exclamation mark that's the Trump exclamation mark and I'm very skeptical about that. And of course the worry for Trump now is what Flynn going to say to Mueller about secret dealings inside The White House, inside the campaign team and the dealings with Moscow.
[Amanpour:] And we heard both our legal experts at the beginning of the program saying there will be more and even James Clapper said, there will be more, there's more stuff to come out. As you've really dug into this and you have gone back all the way to the late 80's with the first trip, where do you think this is headed now?
[Harding:] I would say no place good for Donald Trump, I mean I think the broad thesis of Christopher Steele, remember he's the former British intelligence guy who wrote the famous dossier published in January is true. Not all of it true, but Steele says according to his friends about 70 percent of it is true. Essentially there was a transactional relationship between Moscow and Donald Trump with the Russians supplying Trump with helpful intelligence in his battle with Hillary Clinton. And of course hacking those emails which were dumped out last year to damage Clinton very successfully and this I think is what Trump is afraid of, that more of this will come out.
[Amanpour:] So you know Steele, Chris Steele, and his reputation has been impugned obviously by certain quarters. What do you know about him? Why would he do this, what is his motive?
[Harding:] I think he is kind of professional, he's credible, he spent three years in the Soviet Union as a kind of junior spy for the Brits; 22 years in British intelligence, he essentially sent out this query to his secret sources about the relationship between Trump and Russia and he said he got a series of hair raising replies which essentially said that the two camps are enmeshed and meanwhile we have British intelligence and other European spy agencies telling Washington, telling the CIA, guys there are meetings going on here secret meetings and I think broadly he's credible and I think Mueller thinks he's credible too.
[Amanpour:] Fascinating. Luke Harding, author of Collusion, thank you so much indeed for joining us. And now for something a little bit different as we [lean] back in time to imagine a world of history through Hip-hop. Hamilton has been the hottest ticket on Broadway since its debut in 2015 and now fans on this side of the pond will be able see the show about losing colonies; not one of Britain's finest hours. In an exclusive interview creator and star Lin-Manuel Miranda joined me here in the studio to talk about Hamilton's first trip abroad. Also about his pride of calling Puerto Rico home and after Hurricane Maria why he's raffling off tickets to Hamilton's London premier to fight climate change. Lin Manuel Miranda, welcome to the program.
[Lin Manuel Miranda, Actor:] Thank you, thanks for having me.
[Amanpour:] So, I mean first of all we are surrounded by all these big, big, big images of your life. What does mean to you to have done that and now to bringing it here to England?
[Miranda:] It's really thrilling, you know this is the first international company to show, I feel like they have a real pride of ownership in the show in representing us to London and the wider world. You know, their American accents are better than ours which is infuriating as someone who spent eight months of the year trying to vaguely east end accent for Mary Poppins.
[Amanpour:] So of course Hamilton is all about immigrants, immigration as well right? I mean it's celebrating that arrival to the United States.
[Miranda:] Yeah, I have to say people ask me you know is it going to play well in London, they don't know our history, I didn't know much of this history going in, what I knew about Hamilton, when I picked up Ron Sharon, amazing biography I knew he was the guy on the $10 bill. I knew he had died in a dual and I knew his son has died in a dual a few years prior. And then there was something about the fact that he was sort of our proto immigrant story. I mean really, came here on a scholarship to get his education and ended up shaping the world. That to me reminded me of my father and reminded me of so many immigrants I knew growing up in my part of New York in Northern Manhattan, you know. I've never known my parents to have less than three jobs, you know, it's that thing of no the deal is we just have to work three times as hard and that to me, Hamilton is the embodiment of that story which I think is the best of us; the best American story that is increasingly hard to see but is true.
[Amanpour:] Do you ever imagine that this tsunami of tweets and the repetition of this certain message against immigrants does have a corrosive effect? I mean maybe some thought; well it's just him tweeting it won't make a material difference.
[Miranda:] Yeah, well listen, I think words matter and they matter in ways big and small. I can tell you one of the most devastating ones that I've been dealing with for the past two months, you know when hurricanes hit Texas and Florida, our president will be there, anything you need we'll be there, he was there, National Guard was there instantly. Puerto Rico gets hit with a hurricane and he tweets a message of good luck to the governor the day it makes landfall and doesn't tweet about Puerto Rico for a week.
[Amanpour:] And this is what you said in response.
[Miranda:] What I said that in response to was when he began attacking the people of Puerto Rico themselves saying our people are doing great but they want everything done for themselves, you know the sort of dog whistle redirect, and then attacking the mayor of San Juan. I just, to me natural disasters are so easy. It's like well they're no ones fault, your job is to unite us, your job is to get the help to the people that need it. This is not a partisan issues, and I've never seen a president attack people who are already the victim of a natural disaster and so those are the only words I had left for that.
[Amanpour:] And before we get to you actually going there and helping out, you're using Hamilton and this period up to the launch to actually auction or raffle off some tickets right? To let some people come and the donations, the contributions will go to the Puerto Rico climate charity, is that right?
[Miranda:] My new full time job is raising money for Puerto Rico, for relief, we are still in the humanitarian crisis, half the island is still without power, that is something that is very easy to fall off the face of; off the front of the news but it's still happening.
[Amanpour:] Still houses without power.
[Miranda:] Yeah, still houses without power.
[Amanpour:] And they're American citizens, we do have to keep saying that.
[Miranda:] Yeah, 3.5 million American citizens. You know, but the other thing that we're doing that's related to that is my wife and I started this Prizio Campaign, basically we raffle off two tickets three nights in London, hang out, see opening night of Hamilton, come with us to the after party and the benefits, the raffle tickets all go to the NRDC and Ten-Ten which are both climate change organizations that are London based.
[Amanpour:] Fantastic. You developed, you wrote, you've done everything for Hamilton and you're no longer in the lead role and you haven't been for a while. How does that feel?
[Miranda:] Great.
[Amanpour:] No.
[Miranda:] It does. I mean you know listen, I do have a pang every time I see one of our companies, you know when you see an incredible bur, when you see an incandescent Eliza and you get that oh man I wish I could play opposite that, and you know I get that pang because I'm an actor as well as a writer, at the same time I really get the joy of watching these people grow into their roles and take ownership of it.
[Amanpour:] And, are you taking it anywhere else around the world? Do you have plans?
[Miranda:] Well, yes. We have some plans. So, we have we have this company that's opening in London. We have another company that's opening very soon in Seattle. And then, I'm coming out of retirement January 2019 and we'll open a new company in Puerto Rico.
[Amanpour:] Really?
[Miranda:] In January 2019. This has been in the works for a long time. It's been in the works for six months before the hurricane but we announced it recently because we want to plant a flag and say we've got to be ready, we've got to rebuild our island and time is of the essence. And, two, to raise as much money on the island as we can.
[Amanpour:] That's wonderful.
[Miranda:] So, that's the goal.
[Amanpour:] Do you feel political? I know you're a cultural phenomenon but do you feel political? Might you go into politics?
[Miranda:] No. That's a big red line I've drawn for myself. I think the big political takeaway from Hamilton is the limit of our representative democracy is we can elect who we put there but we can't control what they do once they're there. That's really what room where it happens which is every politician's favorite song is about. It's we ask our leaders to save the day but we don't get a say in what they trade away. That's those are the lyrics that I think really best articulate by healthy cynicism about politics.
[Amanpour:] Lin-Manuel Miranda, thank you so much.
[Miranda:] Thank you.
[Amanpour:] And, just a reminder that his raffle for climate change offering two tickets to Hamilton's London premier After-Party the works ends Tuesday. And, that is it for our program tonight. Remember you can always listen to our podcasts, see us online at amanpour.com and follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Thanks for watching and goodbye from London. END

[Cuomo:] All right, let's get more now on the breaking news. But really this is more than that. This is something that we've almost never seen anything like this. Yes, you had all the politics surrounding the torture memo, and you'd have to go back to remember what that was where the CIA was on one side, the politicians on the other, but not like this. We have President Trump and a slice of his party throwing their own people at the Department of Justice under the bus, President Trump and the FBI director that he appointed as a cleansing agent, Christopher Wray. They are now in a showdown over the expected release of a Republican intelligence memo alleging FBI abuses of surveillance laws against the Trump campaign. Tonight the FBI is expressing, "grave concerns about making the memo public." Why? They say it is inaccurate because it doesn't have a complete basis, and they're worried about sources and methods. However, the White House Chief of Staff, John Kelly, says he predicts a quick release, adding, "The whole world will see it." What is this about? Is this going to be good for the democracy or just good for political expediency? Let's take on this question with somebody who has a very strong opinion and a voice in the matter. Republican Congressman Steve King, member of the House Judiciary Committee. Before we get after it, what's right is right. Thank God you are OK. You and the other Congress members who were on that train, horrible what happened to the driver of the truck. Horrible that any of it happened. But thank God you're all right. It's good to have you, Congressman.
[Rep. Steve King , Judiciary Committee:] Well, thank you, Chris, and I do want to say that there's a family that's saying good-bye to a loved one tonight and other families sitting around hospital beds, and that tragedy took place. If it was going to take place, the people that were on that train, I counted at least nine doctors that answered the call and two nurses that answered the call and a priest that gave last rites. The circumstances, if it was going to be a horrible tragedy, the American people would have been proud of how their members of Congress and that team launched into action and did the right thing. And so we all got together and did a ceremony and a prayer session tonight and prayed for the families. We're grateful that it wasn't worse than it was, and our prayers are with the families who are grieving tonight.
[Cuomo:] Well, look, it is good to hear that people stepped up, and it is horrible that they had to at all. And we'll keep track of what happened to the people on that truck, and we'll tell their story. Congressman, thank you for relaying that information.
[King:] Thank you.
[Cuomo:] All right, let's now get to the matter at hand. Make the case to me, Congressman. Why is releasing this memo the right thing to do when you have your own people, Republicans at the top of the FBI, Trump's choices at the DOJ, Rosenstein and Stephen Boyd, saying don't do this?
[King:] Well, I think in the first place, when the Department of Justice put out that message that said don't release the memo, I don't believe any of them had read the memo at that point. And I'm not sure anybody in DOJ has at this point, but I am of course we do know that Christopher Wray, the director of the FBI, went over to read the memo last Sunday. And the next action that seemed to take place at opening of business was that Andrew McCabe was then gone from employment as number two in the FBI. So that should tell us something. And
[Cuomo:] It could tell us nothing, Congressman, because the reporting is well, we'll talk about your ability to do oversight because when you guys are this divided and I read the transcript to that vote to release this that does not sound like a group of men and women who can work together, but we'll get to that. Christopher Wray, with McCabe, the reporting is that maybe something in his inspector general report triggered a concern that Wray had with McCabe. Maybe, maybe not. Nothing about this memo. Wray now had to step forward and put out a statement from the FBI saying, grave concerns. So what makes it worthwhile?
[King:] Well, I wish he was more specific about grave concerns.
[Cuomo:] What else do you need to hear?
[King:] But I don't believe we can point to an a potential IG report coming out and say that's the reason that Christopher Wray made the move to, I'll say, remove Andy McCabe. That had to be and I've read the memo, and I have that advantage, of course. But here's what the memo if the memo is incomplete according to the assertions of the DOJ, have they read it, haven't they? I don't know. But there's no such thing as a complete memo. You can always assert that about any memo. I believe it is solid. It's factual. But also, being objective, the information that is used to build the memo is not in the memo of course. And I have not had access to that, but I do know Devin Nunes, and I know a good number of the members, every member on the select committee on Intel. I trust them that they would not put their names on the line and have anything but the most solid information that is feeding the memo. And I read the memo carefully.
[Cuomo:] I got you.
[King:] I believe it is objective, but one more thing, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Go ahead, Steve.
[King:] I do not believe that there's anything in there that jeopardizes our national security or sources or methods.
[Cuomo:] All right. Well, look, good because I would hope you wouldn't want to release it otherwise if you actually knew that. However, a few questions.
[King:] All right.
[Cuomo:] One, you haven't seen the fact basis for the conclusions. That has to give you some pause.
[King:] That's right.
[Cuomo:] You're reading conclusions. You don't know where they come from. You say you trust Devin Nunes. Member of Trump transition team Devin Nunes, running around at the White House getting intelligence, playing games, not telling the rest of the committee, getting investigated for ethics violations because of that, Devin Nunes. Devin Nunes didn't read the fact basis for the conclusions in his own memo either. Devin Nunes, who like you and everybody else who says this is the right move, hasn't seen the FISA application that you're criticizing. So where does your confidence come from?
[King:] How does he get the FISA application? I want the American people to see
[Cuomo:] But how do you judge it when you haven't seen it?
[King:] We are going to have to pull all of this out, and that's one of the things the memo does.
[Cuomo:] But you're already concluding it was wrong, Steve.
[King:] chase the rabbit trails down. I know what's wrong.
[Cuomo:] But how do you know it's wrong if you didn't see the application.
[King:] memo, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Please, go ahead.
[King:] Chris, the data will come out. The data will come out. I want it to come out. I want it all to come out. I don't know that we ever get to the bottom of this unless we do. And if we're going to have a Congress that does oversight, we can't accept the FBI or the DOJ or any other branch of government from closing the gate in front of us and saying, sorry, you can't look at this because it's classified. Then what I saw and what I believe happened could go on in perpetuity, and we become a banana republic. This is earth-shaking, and it does go deeper than Watergate and that memo
[Cuomo:] Deeper than Watergate? How is it deeper than Watergate?
[King:] Deeper than Watergate. How is it deeper? Because the FBI and the DOJ, by the information that I have observed and the testimony that I have I'm going to say the testimony that I have analyzed from listening to and questioning multiple members of the FBI and the DOJ, tells me that the FBI and DOJ have been weaponized. If they've been weaponized for political reasons much in the same way as the IRS, I believe it was weaponized for political reasons, America cannot tolerate that. And if it was used to influence an election and to undermine a transition and to undermine an inaugurated president, that should chill and shock you as well, Chris.
[Cuomo:] It could. The problem is that you're all in on that conclusion, but you don't know that it's true. You haven't even looked at the judicial proceeding that you're saying was dirty.
[King:] conclusion. I said if.
[Cuomo:] But you said that is what you read in the memo is more troubling than Watergate. That is conclusory.
[King:] Here's what it's not a conclusion. But I said what I read is more troubling, but we have to bring the evidence and prove it. I want evidence out front. I want it examined.
[Cuomo:] But why would you release these conclusions in this memo? Honestly, Congressman, we talk a lot about things.
[King:] If we do not
[Cuomo:] Yes.
[King:] If we do not, we're allowing the FBI, then, or the DOJ to decide they're going to police their own house. We can't let that happen.
[Cuomo:] Well, first of all
[King:] I think a lot of Jeff Sessions. I think he's a tremendous attorney general. But I'm worried about some other people in those ranks, and I think you'll see those names in a day or two.
[Cuomo:] Look, I get that. I get that you believe there are bad apples, but just listen to the totality of what you're saying. Of course there's oversight over the Department of Justice. That's how our democracy works. But, you know, fact, for the record, the inspector general that's doing their independent review of the practices during the campaign brought out the texts that Devin Nunes and the rest of you seized upon as if they were your discovery. And then the missing text that you all seized upon as if it was relevant was then cleared up within the FBI, and they found the text. So the secret society that you all seized upon that wound up becoming bogus
[King:] I didn't.
[Cuomo:] This is a pattern of jumping for a conclusion because it is a beautiful distraction from the investigation
[King:] Not so, Chris.
[Cuomo:] you don't like. And now, but listen to what you're saying to us. You're saying
[King:] There are dots that need to be connected along the way
[Cuomo:] I know. But you are saying
[King:] and history will look at this and say if we fail to connect the dots, we were naive and foolish. That's the other side of this coin. We've got an obligation to use our good judgment and common sense. There have been what is the numbers, seven different people that have been removed from the FBI and the DOJ. Seven of them over the last James Comey and on down the line.
[Cuomo:] Why would Christopher Wray
[King:] Andrew McCabe. He's probably not the last one for this week.
[Cuomo:] Why would Christopher Wray look, the fact that you get rid of people and chase them out of office is not necessarily a vote of confidence on any kind of justification.
[King:] But they left on their own or the decisions were made by their superiors.
[Cuomo:] Did they? How do we know how they left? Do you know why Andrew McCabe left?
[King:] I have a pretty good idea about most of every one of them yes.
[Cuomo:] You have an idea.
[King:] Yes. I don't think Andy McCabe woke up on Monday morning and said, hey, I think I'm going to take some advice from Chris Wray and leave my job.
[Cuomo:] I don't either. I don't either.
[King:] I think he was told you're gone
[Cuomo:] Right.
[King:] because of what was read in the memo
[Cuomo:] I don't think it was look, I know you read the memo, but here's the thing. You're going to release this memo. The Intelligence Community doesn't want to, and I got to tell you the justification for why that's OK coming from your side is is suspicious. And then you're saying, but I haven't seen the FISA application. I need to see the facts. Why wouldn't you do it the common sense way? I want to know what happened in the FISA application. You can find that out tomorrow. The DOJ guys said they will come to you
[King:] You think so?
[Cuomo:] They said they would come to you and explain how they did it and answer any questions that you have.
[King:] Then they have capitulated to duress, but that doesn't necessarily mean if they explain it to us it's going to be how it was. We've gone through this for a year or a year and a half trying to get information out of the FBI or the DOJ. And they have not been forthcoming. I do think Christopher Wray is an honorable individual, and I think he has got an opportunity to put the FBI back on the rail
[Cuomo:] And he says he has grave everyone cans and this is the wrong thing to do.
[King:] Judiciary Committee. And Rod Rosenstein
[Cuomo:] Yes.
[King:] was not forthcoming either. What I saw in his eyes when he was asked if the FBI paid for the dossier told me something entirely different than the answer that he gave under oath. But time will tell on that, Chris, on who's telling the truth on this and who survives.
[Cuomo:] You know,
[King:] But it took a long time to drill down through Watergate, and there's a lot to be drilled through here that's far more complex.
[Cuomo:] Watergate was a felony that you had an obvious cover-up and material movements by the president of the United States to stop the administration of justice and it resulted in his impeachment. If that scenario fits anything that's going on, it would be only a possible, possible, potential outcome of the Russia investigation, and it really seems like you guys are trying to mirror the stakes with your own. But we do have to wait for what comes out
[King:] Let me point out. Let me point out something.
[Cuomo:] But once you release this memo, you know the genie is out of the bottle. And even if it winds up being untrue, people will still believe it.
[King:] I've said goes deeper than Watergate, but the reason it isn't bigger right now is because it hasn't identified a president. But I remember President Obama saying in April of 2016, when he said in an interview with Chris Wallace that there is no corruption, there is no fraud, there is no political bias. He said, that's guaranteed full- stop, how many times do I have to say it? We should go back and look at those words. We'll see how they ring in the ears of President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the activities within the FBI and the DOJ as we get to the truth. I want the American people to see it all.
[Cuomo:] Well, it should start with the facts and then go to the conclusions. But Congressman, you went out of your way to be here tonight. This is an important matter. You had a rough day. Thank God you're OK. And I appreciate you making the case to the American people.
[King:] Let's see how well my words stand up over time, Chris. Thank you. Appreciate talking with you.
[Cuomo:] We always do, and you will be invited back when we learn more.
[King:] I'll be willing to do that for sure. Thank you, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Thank you, Congressman. All right, more breaking news tonight in the Russia investigation, Maggie Haberman from "The New York Times", she's going to call in right now. She has a headline you need to hear, next.

[Cabrera:] Iowa Congressman Steve King coming out swinging today at a town hall, addressing head on allegations that he is racist. He slammed a recent "New York Times" article where he was quoted as saying, "White nationalists, white supremacists, Western Civilization, how did that language become so offensive." He was even removed from his committee assignments after that. CNN's Sara Sidner joins us now from outside the town hall venue. Sara, what did Congressman King have to say?
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] When he came on stage after everyone stood and clapped, when he walked in the room, he said that he wanted to address the elephant in the room, so to speak, and that was the article and the accusations that he has been using racist rhetoric. That is not the first time we have heard racist rhetoric from Steve King. He didn't deny he said those words. He denied, said they were taken out of context. I'll let you hear in his own words what he told the crowd here. We're in the northwest corner of the state in a very small town of about 930 people. About 80 people showed up, not everyone was in support of him, but the vast majority of people were. Those who weren't, some of them, Democrats in the room. But this is how he addressed what the article said and what he says he thought of it.
[King:] It is stunning and astonishing to me that four words in a "New York Times" quote can outweigh 20-some years of public service, 20- some years of giving you my word every day. And not one soul has stood up and said that I ever lied to you or misrepresented anything or given it to you in any spin that's anything other than what I believe to be the objective truth. And I even think about Brett Kavanaugh, when he went through that inquisition, he at least had accusers. I don't have accusers. Not one soul that stood up and said Steve King has ever stood up and said Steve King has acted in a racist fashion. Never discriminated against anybody. There's plenty of evidence out there to the contrary.
[Sidner:] But he does actually have accusers. There are some of his constituents, some of them who were inside the town hall area that did believe he was a racist, judging from not just what was in the "New York Times," but some of the other comments he's made along the way. And his retweeting, for example, of white nationalist rhetoric and Neo-Nazi rhetoric in the past. So you certainly did have some folks. Although there were several Democrats, two or three Democrats, that were in the room, they are his constituents, they live in the district, who were concerned he was not going to be able to fully do his job in Congress with what has happened, him being stripped of those congressional committees.
[Cabrera:] So how did he respond when they asked him about that specifically, about him being stripped of the House committee assignments?
[Sidner:] He talked about the fact that he says, look, I'm going to start working with the executive branch. He's going to start working with the president more, trying to get things done alongside the president. He said that this would allow him also to be in Congress for every single congressional vote, that he can speak now for every time that he feels the need to speak on the floor of the Congress. So he said that's how he was going to work around being stripped of those committees. You can hear that he's quite upset about the fact that he is no longer on those committees, if you will, Fred [sic].
[Cabrera:] He's been sidelined. Sara Sidner, thank you. Coming up, the White House tries to distance itself from Roger Stone. The problem is, President Trump and Stone have a history that goes back decades.
[Stone:] I am one of his oldest friends. I am a fervent supporter of the president.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn:] Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We just five days away now from another potential government shutdown if lawmakers cannot reach a deal to fund the U.S. government. And optimism that bipartisan negotiations revealed acceptable to both sides has given away too, now concern. Sources tell CNN partisan talks have reached a standstill and concern is growing that a deal won't be reached by the Friday deadline. White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney making it clear this morning that another painful shutdown could be looming.
[Chuck Todd, Msnbc Host, Meet The Press Daily:] So is it fair to say that whatever Congress hands him he will sign, he just may not be enthusiastic about it?
[Mick Mulvaney, Acting Chief Of Staff:] No, I don't think so.
[Todd:] You are not ready to go there. You cannot definitively we cannot definitively rule out a government shutdown by the end of this week?
[Mulvaney:] You absolutely cannot.
[Whitfield:] And despite the ticking clock, some lawmakers are holding out hope that a deal can come together.
[Rep. Liz Cheney , Wyoming:] I certainly hope we're not headed for another shutdown. I think the President has been clear and the Republicans in the House have certainly been clear that we absolutely got to secure the border. I'm hopeful that this committee will be able to come up with a proposal that we all can support, that the President can sign.
[Rep. Jon Tester , Bipartisan Conference Committee:] We are not in a point where we can announce a deal. Negotiations are still going on. There are good people on this committee. So I have confidence that hopefully, we will get something done pretty soon.
[Whitfield:] And as we wait to see how negotiations play out on Capitol Hill, another Democrat is jumping into the race for U.S. President. Soon Senator Amy Klobuchar will take to the stage in a very snowy subfreezing rally in Minneapolis to make her big announcement. It is just 14 degrees there now with a few flurries in the air. She will join the crowded group of Democrats hoping to beat President Trump in next year's election. We will bring her comments to you live as it happens. So let's get started with CNN's White House correspondent Boris Sanchez. So the President is getting ready to make a trip to the border tomorrow, but is that what's top of the line, the border, or is it the potential for another government shutdown?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Both will certainly be part of the President's rally tomorrow in El Paso, Texas, Fred. Here we are yet, again, counting down the days to another potential government shutdown over the President's long promised border wall. Republicans and Democrats, we are hearing from sources are at yet another impasse, this time over a disagreement about the number of beds that Democrats are trying to limit that Republicans want in ICE detention centers. Republicans have balked at the figures that Democrats have offered up. Democrats, meantime, have argued that they have made concessions on other issues that Republicans wants such as funding for the President's border barrier. The acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney was asked about what he thought the most likely outcome was. Here was his answer on a Sunday morning talk show.
[Todd:] Whatever he sure of, is he going to find the money somewhere else? Is that what we should we expect?
[Mulvaney:] I think that is fair. That is probably the most likely outcome. Again, you cannot take the shutdown off the table and you cannot take $5.7 billion off the table, but if you end up someplace in the middle, yes, then what you probably see as the President say, yes OK, and then I will go find the money somewhere else.
[Todd:] You have been looking for the money and the budget.
[Mulvaney:] I haven't.
[Todd:] There is this national emergency. Are the two the same thing or different? Do you find money without declaring a national emergency or do you need to declare the national emergency to use sums of money?
[Mulvaney:] The answer to the question is both. There is certain sums of money that are available to the President, to any President. And there is pots of money where presidents, all presidents have access to without a national emergency. And there are ones that he will not have access to without that declaration.
[Sanchez:] Meantime, Fred, President Trump has been busy on twitter, blasting Democrats suggesting that they are being held back by their congressional leadership, and that they have had a bad week because of his positive reviews for the state if the union address and because of the ongoing controversies surrounding the leadership in the state of in the commonwealth of Virginia, I should say. We have heard from sources as far as how Democrats want to move forward on this, that they would potentially present a bill in the House of Representatives that would fund the department of homeland security through September and other government agencies. No telling whether Republicans would actually take that up in the Senate, though, Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right. Boris Sanchez, thank you so much from the white House. Keep us posted. All right. Let's talk more about this. Joining me right now, congressional reporter for the "Washington Post" Karoun Demirjian and national political reporter for the "Washington Examiner'Salena Zito. Good to see you both. All right. So Karoun, you first. What happened to all that optimism leading into the weekend?
[Karoun Demirjian, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, leading into the weekend you really had people heading into the most intense part of the negotiations. And it seemed through the weekend like they might be hovering towards getting towards a deal that hovered around that $2 billion figure for the border. But it's interesting that the border wall itself is not really what is the main sticking point here and that it's this additional issue of the detention centers and their capacity that is really making these on the ground. I think it is timing, really, you know. There is a big difference between the Friday before the really crunch weekend and negotiations and they will coming out of it, knowing what the Senate schedule is and the procedural jujitsu that has to happen to get any bill across the floor, how little time there actually is. So I don't think anybody is saying, OK, strap and guaranteed government shutdown now, but it's more of a possibility than it was last week. And I know, I think everybody remembers the very recent history of how dramatic and difficult that last shutdown was. It didn't go well for anybody, especially not the President. So that's why you are not hearing people speak of it in tones that are embracing the idea, but it's back on the table as a possibility.
[Whitfield:] So Salena, detention centers, it's also down to wall funding, you know. The President has threatened this national emergency time and time again, but you heard Mick Mulvaney who says it's really not that simple. There is some money that is available nearly immediately and then some money that he would have to seek approval as a result of this declaration of national emergency. So, is there any way in which to detect where the priorities are for the President?
[Salena Zito, National Political Reporter, Washington Examiner:] Well, you know, I think he wants a win, but I also think both the President and the Senate in the House also do not want to go through this shutdown again. I don't think anybody benefited from it very well. Supporters might say, you know, the President might have loved it or supporters for the Democrats might have loved it, you know, for saying, you know, we are fighting. They are fighting for the things that we believe in. But at the end of the day it helped no one and it just sort of kept that idea that Washington doesn't work prominent in the minds of voters.
[Whitfield:] Right. Still at issue was funding for the wall. The President has said, you know, he wants that $5.7 billion, but is he indicating that he has, you know, that he is willing to budge on that?
[Zito:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] Yes? How?
[Zito:] Absolutely. I think so. So when you saw Mick Mulvaney, who is the acting chief of staff, as well as North Carolina Congressman Mark Meadows, who is the chairman of the freedom caucus, very conservative wing of the Republican Party, both have said today on the Sunday shows, you know, he is going to get his money one way or the other. I feel like that "or the other" was that wiggle room. That I don't know if we know what that is. But it tells us that the potential for a shutdown doesn't happen. And that there's other ways that the President is exploring to get what he wants.
[Whitfield:] So Karoun, you know, Democrats have said, and particularly Nancy Pelosi has said, you know, there is no there is no money for, you know, the wall. She, you know, joked that maybe she just give $1, you know, in the past several reports suggesting that latest negotiations center around this $2 billion figure for border barriers. The President has in the past said he doesn't want to budge. Is this the occasion in which perhaps he might?
[Demirjian:] Well, like Salena was referencing, he can budge if he thinks he has other money elsewhere, and that's what Mick Mulvaney seems to be saying, more than a hint really, this morning, almost saying that's what he was going to do. That in that situation, it behooves the President to take the deal as long he can take the deal and meet in some phase. $2 billion is more than the $1.6 billion that people are discussing several weeks ago. It is less than what he wanted but it would be something that Senate Republicans could agree to. And that really seems like it is going to be the main sticking point. Can the people in Congress, the Republicans and the Democrats actually decide to agree to something? They would never agree, Senate Republicans would never agree to a zero dollars for the wall figure. But if they can agree to something that seems reasonable in between the numbers that were out there in the table for, OK, you can get through a Congress. The question before was always, will the President sign it? Now it seems the answer that question is, yes, OK, as long as it's relatively reasonable, he will sign it. But that doesn't mean he is not going to make this emergency declaration or find other money. And then it becomes a new stage of this potential crisis. And I know this is prognosticating past where we are, but if we look at that point, then the question is, OK, where is he taking that money? Because he can maintain support within the Republican Party if he takes it from places that Republicans don't consider sackrasacing. As long as he starts as soon as he starts looking rather as certain military construction projects or certain forms of disaster relief, he is going to get pushback within his own party. So if we get through this week, with not the $5.7 billion figure for the wall, but without a government shutdown, that's the next thing that is coming that is going to really cause a lot of internal tension as well as interparty tensions as we see it every stage of the game.
[Whitfield:] Right. And then, Salena, adding to the hypotheticals is what if? I mean, he and his advisers have to be thinking about so what if another government shutdown? I mean, the polling after that showed that majority of Americans felt that the President was to blame, not the Democrats for that shutdown. The President doesn't like, you know, approval ratings in that kind of class, you know, taking a dip. So what is the answer to the "what if" that he and his advisers are thinking about? If there is another government shutdown, you know, at what cost? Why would that be a win for him?
[Zito:] I don't think personally it would be a win for him. Here is what I'm looking for. I'm looking to see what he says at the border wall or at the border tomorrow with the rally that he is holding. I suspect that more of what we are talking about right now that we don't have the answer to, he may reveal there. And he may reveal that he is willing to compromise, he may reveal that he isn't willing to compromise.
[Whitfield:] There was no sharing of a willingness at the state of the union. That could have been an opportunity. Why would all the eggs be in one basket at the border? He would announce those kinds of details.
[Zito:] It's a rally and he loves rallies.
[Whitfield:] But a rally audience wouldn't want to hear that. Would they, compromise from him?
[Zito:] No. I think actually, you might be underestimating the American people a little bit. They are willing to compromise. People are very, you know, if you look at the polling data on the DACA kids and border funding, people are much more willing to have a compromise on the situation, because basically people have to compromise every day in their life. Every time you pull out from a parking lot, you are compromising if you can get in and get out. And so, I think people are, I think, we over estimate or maybe underestimating people's willingness to compromise on issues. So I think tomorrow actually is going to be really telling I think it is tomorrow, right.
[Whitfield:] Yes.
[Zito:] The rally is tomorrow yes. I think that we will have more information after that moment.
[Whitfield:] All right. Karoun, do you want to punctuate that?
[Demirjian:] Well, I was just going to say, if we are coming out of the weekend with some sort of a deal, tomorrow would have been the point, of course, we would have seen how the President is going to spin it for his own base, which has been extremely critical of any sort deal- making or budgeting from the line. Now, if he's going to be able to take that conciliatory position, he is going to have to do some pretty depth maneuvering to be able to sell what is not a done deal but his own willingness to compromise from a position point that is still has negotiating position potentially from the party. It is more difficult for the President at this point. And as we know at rallies, he tends to feed off the crowd. So if the crowd is cheering for the tougher lines, we may see him laughs to a more stringent position again bout border security that lines up more with money for the wall and potentially there is still that open question of where there will be a reach of his declarations? Will he see something else that then complicates this negotiation process even more since it's now not where they hoped it would be?
[Whitfield:] Right. All right, Karoun Demirjian, Salena Zito, thanks to both. Appreciate it.
[Demirjian:] Thank you.
[Zito:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] All right. Still ahead, defiance and denial. Virginia's top two leaders both facing scandals, refusing to resign. This as we are getting a clear picture of how Virginia voters feel about their embattled leaders. And we are also standing by to hear from Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar. Yes, look at those snow flurries and it is 12 degrees. She is expected to announce that she is getting to the 2020 race for the White House. And her crowd is there to support her. They are braving the conditions there and they even have been passing hot chocolate and hot apple cider to keep warm. We will bring you the comments as it happens.

[Berman:] Two Democratic senators are calling on colleagues to block any bills that are not related to reopening the government. The Democratic-led House has already passed bills that would end the shutdown but not fund the president's border wall. The Senate has not taken up any of those measures. Joining us now is Democratic Congressman Tom Malinowski, a new member from New Jersey. Thanks so much for being with us. Congratulations on your first week in office.
[Rep. Tom Malinowski , New Jersey:] Thank you.
[Berman:] So, the president now says that he is willing to have this barrier be made of steel, not concrete. How much do the building materials matter to you?
[Malinowski:] It's not about building materials. It's not even really about border security. As you know, we provided billions of dollars in border security to this administration that they haven't spent. This is about what happens when the president doesn't get his way. The president, obviously, is entitled to fight for his wall or for any other policies that he may want, but if he cannot persuade the United States Congress, which he hasn't
[Berman:] Yes.
[Malinowski:] If he can't persuade the American people, which he hasn't, is he entitled to shut down the government? To take the entire United States government hostage. I believe he's not and that's why I think it's really important that we not acquiesce to this.
[Berman:] In the past, Democrats have voted for fencing barriers as part of larger deals. The president wants 234 miles of new barrier. Do you think that any new barrier, whether it be fencing or walling or slats or anything that any new barrier is merited?
[Malinowski:] I think that's a debate that we can have when we consider the appropriations bill for DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, in February. It's not a debate that we should have with the entire United States government held hostage, with TSA employees not going to work, with millions of Americans facing the loss of nutritional assistance, with Coast Guard employees not getting paid.
[Berman:] Once the government does open could you support some new barrier?
[Malinowski:] Once the government is open I would support looking at a broader compromise on immigration. And it's not just going to be a debate about a barrier. It's going to be a debate about comprehensive immigration reform, about child separation, about the Muslim ban, which is still in place. About all of these policies that the president has put into place that I and many Democrats think are un-American and frankly, unlawful.
[Berman:] You are a member of this freshman class in Congress and some of your classmates have received a lot of attention. I'm not going to ask you to respond to Rep. Rashida Tlaib. What I do want to ask and Cortez was on "60 MINUTES" freshman member of Congress just four days into it and getting the "60 MINUTES" treatment. What I am going to ask you is why do you think they are getting so much attention? What's captivating people so much about the fact that Rashida Tlaib said impeach the mother-blanker?
[Malinowski:] Well I our freshman class is getting attention because we're the largest, most diverse freshman class in well, in generations. And I think some of us are have a lot to say that's of interest to the American people. But I think look, it's very important that we maintain a distinction between what's trivial and what's important in America right now. What's important is that we had a presidential campaign in 2016 that was inviting the help of a foreign power while the presidential candidate was doing real estate deals in that country. Whether the [audio gap] uses a bad word, that's trivial. The government shutdown is important. What we're going to do to reopen the government is important. The debate about border security is important and about health care. And I think that's where the attention of the media should be.
[Berman:] You brought up the Russia investigation. I just want to point out one of the things we did learn last week is that the grand jury who has been sitting in the case of the Russia investigation has been extended up to six months, so this thing is not going away anytime soon. You spent a good deal of your career in foreign policy. And I want to ask you about recent developments in Syria where the national security adviser John Bolton seemed to reverse course or walk back the president's demand to withdraw all U.S. troops from Syria. Initially, the president wanted to do it now or in 30 days. That was extended to four months. But this new policy appears to be somewhat indefinite. Listen to the national security adviser.
[John Bolton, National Security Adviser:] We're going to be discussing the president's decision to withdraw, but to do so from northeast Syria in a way that makes sure that ISIS is not able to revive itself and become a threat again. And to make sure that the defense of Israel and our other friends in the region is absolutely assured.
[Berman:] John Bolton listed conditions. He has conditions for the U.S. withdrawal. The president, when he made the announcement, did not have conditions. Do you, Congressman, know what the U.S. policy is this morning?
[Malinowski:] No, nobody does. Under normal circumstances, I would say that's great. The national security adviser speaks for the president and he's reassured us that this will be a more responsible policy. But we all know this is not a normal circumstance. That the president, tomorrow, could completely contradict what John Bolton said. Look, every single person, years ago, who we thought might constrain [audio gap] his impulses is on. The only constraint the only check right now on a completely irresponsible foreign policy comes from the United States Congress. And I look forward over the next two years to being part of an part of an effort in the Congress to provide that track.
[Berman:] Congressman Tom Malinowski, welcome to NEW DAY. Please come back. And again, congratulations on your first week in office.
[Malinowski:] Thank you so much.
[Berman:] Alisyn
[Camerota:] TSA workers are among the 800,000 federal workers furloughed or not getting paid, and CNN has learned some are calling out sick. So, what travelers are seeing now at some of the busiest airports.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The horrible situation they had with Florence two weeks ago. But they're incredible people and they know how to do it. They've done it before and they'll do it again, but they know how to do it. So we've had great reports in everything, the only the big problem with this hurricane was the tremendous power. Unfortunately it was very fast, it went through Florida very, very quickly. It didn't linger didn't come back as we had in Texas where it actually came back a second time and then a third time. It went out, filled up, came back. This one went very quickly but its tremendous destruction in the areas where it as the path that it it shows is incredible. That kind of destruction we've not seen destruction like that in a long time. But it's the rebuilding I could actually say the rebuilding process and the survivor looking process, we don't have too much of that. The area most affected was hopefully 100 percent evacuated, but there's always somebody that stays, and in this case they would have been in big trouble. But so far, the reports, as you know, are very good. So I want to thank you for that and I don't know if you have any questions on the hurricane, does anybody have any questions? John?
[Unidentified Male:] Do you have do you have enough time to focus on hurricane [inaudible] today at the White House
[Trump:] Yes, I do, I have a very busy day today. We're doing as you know, we're going having to do with copyright music, we're doing right now the Save Our Seas Act of 2018, which is a very important thing. But I and yesterday I had a tremendous rally in Pennsylvania, and we had thousands of people lined up and I just couldn't you couldn't tell those people and they were there for a day and a half before. And I couldn't tell people that have been standing in line for a day and a half wanting to get into the arena that I'm not going. I went there, we had great control over what we were doing both in Air Force One at the White House and in Florida. And I think you're seeing we're getting tremendous marks for the job that we did, and I wasn't going to disappoint thousands and thousands of people who have been standing on line for in some cases a day and a half. I wasn't going to do that. But I think I think we've I think we've really, really done a good job. This is a particularly busy day because we're signing a number of bills, very different kinds of bills, so you'll be seeing me a little while later I think with a couple of the senators standing behind me right now. And you'll be seeing me and us in a little while. And we're having lunch with Jim Brown, one of the great football players of all time and a great guy, and Kanye West, he's coming they're coming in for lunch. And after that we're doing some additional interesting things. But we have a busy day, but I always have a busy day and the economy is doing really well and the jobs are looking we think jobs are going to be better than ever. We think records are broken already but we're going to continue to break the records. So let's talk about the Save Our Seas Act if we could, and again thank you all for being here. I want to thank also the members of Congress that are with us. That's Senator Dan Sullivan who's been absolutely terrific, worked with along with Sheldon Whitehouse and these two have been spearheading something that's very important and we want to thank you both. Sheldon, thank you, Dan
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Trump:] We appreciate it, really do. I know you worked very hard on that.
[Unidentified Male:] Worked well together [inaudible].
[Trump:] And Mr. Sullivan, thank you very much for being here, we appreciate it very much. We have Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross who worked along with the senators and acting NOAA Administrator Admiral Time Gallaudet. You're here and thank you for being here, Tim. Thank you very much. Great job you're doing. Every year over 8 million tons of garbage is dumped into our beautiful oceans by many countries of the world. Now that includes China, that includes Japan, that includes many, many countries. This waste, trash and debris harms not only marine life, but also fisherman, coastal economies along America's vast [inaudible]. The bad news is it floats toward us. I've seen pictures recently and you've some some of you have seen them where this vast, tremendous, unthinkable amount of garbage is floating right into our coast. In particular, along the West Coast, and we're charged with removing it, which is a very unfair situation. It comes from other countries very far away, takes six months and a year to float over, but it gets here and it's a very unfair situation. It's also unbelievably bad for the oceans. Every year, over 8 million tons of garbage is dumped into our beautiful oceans, and when you think of that number, I mean, to think 8 millions and I would say it's probably, senators, I think it's probably more than that based on what I've seen and based on the kind of work that I've seen being done. This dumping has happened for years and even for decades. Previous administrations did absolutely nothing to take on the foreign countries responsible. We've already notified most of them and we've notified them very strongly. The Save Our Seas Act will help address this problem by extending the marine debris program for five additional years. We also are strengthening that up to improve waste management overseas and clean up our nation's water. We will boost the federal government's response to oceans waste by authorizing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to declare severe marine debris events, which happen all the time. It's incredible, it's incredible. When you look at it, people don't realize it, but all the time we're being inundated by debris from other countries. This legislation will release funds to states for clean up and for response efforts, and we will be responding and very strongly. The legislation also encourages the executive branch to engage with those nations responsible for dumping garbage into our oceans. My administration is doing exactly that. For example, the new United States Mexico Canada Agreement is the first U.S. trade agreement ever to include commitments by the parties to cooperate
[John King, Anchor, Cnn:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS, I'm John King. You're listening to the president of the United States there in the Oval Office, discussing a number of issues, signing some legislation today, talking about the economy, talking principally so far also about what he believes is a very good federal and state response to the devastation of Hurricane Michael. This is tape coming in from the White House, later on the president takes questions on other issues. We'll take you back in there when he discusses for example the current stand off with Saudi Arabia and other issues though. But for a moment with me in studio to share their reporting and their insights, Eliana Johnson with Politico, Michael Shear with the New York Times, Bloomberg's Sahil Kapur, and CNN Military and Diplomatic Analyst, the retired Rear Admiral John Kirby. Now let's start with the hurricane and president saying obviously the Carolinas are still getting soaked two weeks after Florence. The current death toll is two, that's tragic, but if you look at the pictures from what we've seen from Hurricane Michael, in some ways it's also a miracle when you look at pictures like this. And that number's likely to go up some in the hours and days ahead as they try to account for missing people. But the president saying we're on top of this, there was a bit of a controversy last night. The president decided to go to Erie, Pennsylvania for a political rally. And he said hey, you know, my I knew my team was doing a good job, those people have been waiting, off we go.
[Michael Shear, White House Correspondent, The New York Times:] I mean look, I think in some ways the president has learned the lesson of these disasters, which is to say that he you need to set expectations, you need to describe the fact that the government is acting and is acting quickly. All presidents, once they go through a couple of these natural disasters, they sort of realize what you have to do on the front end. I think the real question that all presidents also deal with, and it's not clear to me that this one has, is that there's follow through afterwards. After you see the pictures of that kind of devastation, you know, what do you do? And obviously with Puerto Rico, he confronted the problem of, you know, not having done enough, not having, you know, followed through on the rebuilding and on and on helping the people that have been so devastated get back to get back to their houses and their lives. And that I think is the real test, not do you hold a couple of sort of photo ops and express your your, you know, desire to [inaudible].
[King:] To that to that point, if you all hang in for a minute, sorry for the patience, let's bring in Jeff Byard. He's FEMA's associate administrator for response and recovery. He's at FEMA headquarters right now. Jeff, thanks for taking the time on what is obviously a very busy day. You heard the president there I hope at the top of the program talking about how and these are heroes, electrical companies from all around the country send people in after this. Now they have to get [inaudible]. Take us where are we right now? When you look at your list of challenges that priority one today is what?
[Jeffrey Byard, Associate Administrator, Fema:] Priority one today is continuing our search and rescue efforts. The state of Florida's doing an outstanding job. We hope to have our initial search done which is a very wide area within the next 72 hours or so. But we're actually earlier reports we're beating that timeline and I can't commend the work that Florida's doing, their National Guard, their first responders, we're supporting their efforts all along the coast. Very important to also know that the president did approve the declaration, the governor's declaration for individual assistance, specifically I'm going to read them so I don't miss them. Bay Franklin, Gulf, Taylor and Wakulla counties in Florida. We encourage those survivors to go to disasterassistance.gov and begin that process. And John, we also understand that there's power out, so we will have additional FEMA teams in tomorrow to start peppering those counties so that we can get the needed assistance to those survivors. But our primary efforts are going to be on search and rescue for the next couple of days. We also are looking at the Health and Medical Lifeline. We know we have some hospitals down in Bay County that we've got disaster medical assistance teams throughout Florida agency and health and human services that's assisting the efforts there in Florida. So, the next few days definitely focused on search and rescue, meeting the immediate needs of the survivors. And then also as we're planning of a very long-term recovery efforts in Florida, Georgia and other states, in concurrence with that, getting the power back on as rapidly as we possibly can.
[King:] When you talk about the search and rescue efforts, it may too soon and I'm sorry is this a premature question, but do you have any idea is there a number of people who were unaccounted for? Or is it just too early for that.
[Byard:] I think it's too earl for that, John. As the day goes on, as the days go on, we'll have a clear picture obviously. We want to get to those survivors and unfortunately, you look at the devastation and the strength of the storm and some of the evacuation rates, they were not realized. Those fatalities may very well be realized. But what a job search and rescue does. At all levels, it's a tough job and right now we want to get to as many survivors as we possibly can.
[King:] Amen to those who are both the volunteers and the first responders at the state and national level. When you look at these pictures, especially when you look at these pictures from that areal view of Mexico Beach, you see the houses devastated. Do you have any problems in terms of infrastructure? Any roads cut off, any other vital pathways in to try to do search and rescue, to try to get emergency supplies, anything like that?
[Byard:] We have definitely our infrastructure; our road network is very heavily impacted. Most of the major arteries are open and the system that we have in place that Florida's put in place is we actually have teams that can cut their way in and then there're multiple muli-tools, kind of like a Swiss Army knife. They have an element of law enforcement, element of search and rescue, the power cruisers coming in behind them. So, it's really a multi disciplined effort when we get in there. We also have airframes, air assets that obviously are flying over our coast guards, doing a wonderful job. The Florida National Guard's also doing a great job. So, it's a team effort. And we want to get there by any means necessary.
[King:] Jeff, again, probably unfair on this first day but I think you just set a benchmark for us. Any what's the route number at the moment for people who are out of power? And your best guess for how long some of them are going to be waiting.
[Byard:] Right now, our numbers are in between 300,000 and 400,000 in Florida alone, very similar numbers in Georgia. Those numbers also in Alabama, they're not quite as extensive obviously. So, we've got just under a million, a million or so without power. A lot of those areas will come on pretty rapidly. But as you get down in to the coastal areas as we have massive amounts of debris, it's going to take us some time. We have a plan in place, the state of Florida, the state of Georgia and Alabama. We've got commodities on hand. We will be dispersing the emergency food and water. But that's just a small token, that's one of the definite lessons learned as we move through hurricanes. A majority and a large of amount of food is provided by our private nonprofits, our [inaudible], our [inaudible] communities which are already in the area. And so we support the Red Cross, we support that with both food and we have no limited factors as it comes to the amount of food. We want to make sure that we have good distribution plans in place and we're working that as we speak.
[King:] Jeff Byard, appreciate your time on this busy day at FEMA. Please keep if there's anything we can do to help spread the word, let us know and we'll keep in touch over the next several days and weeks as we go through the recovery effort again. Jeff Byard-
[Byard:] Yes.
[King:] We appreciate your time today. Thank you very much. Up next-
[Byard:] Thanks.
[King:] For us, our missing journalist and how his disappearance could rip a part a vital U.S. alliance.

[Baldwin:] We just saw President Bush 41's casket roll by through that Plexiglas. Look at all these people looking on and paying their respects. Ed Lavandera is there somewhere in these crowds. Ed, I hear it's not a pretty day in Texas. It's been raining, but the fact that so many people are showing up to show their respect for a man who gave so much to this country, tell me more.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Brooke. Thousands of people have lined up along the streets here, along these train tracks. One of the things that has really kind of stuck out to me is the number of military veterans, young and old, Vietnam veterans, also perhaps even a little older than that. Also veterans of the more recent war. So very much struck by that kind of feeling and the number of veterans who have shown up here. Of course, President George H.W. Bush, a vaulted member, naval officer and heroic World War II participant. I was really kind of struck by that. Many people here, just as the train just passed by already starting to clear out from the grounds here. You look and see the number of people who turned out in this small town, a population of just over a thousand. One of the law enforcement officials told us they had more than 3,000 people here in town this afternoon. You get really a sense of just this one brief stop along this journey to George H.W. Bush's final resting place just a couple of hours away from where we are here this afternoon Brooke?
[Baldwin:] Let me stay with you for a minute, Ed, as we stay on these pictures and you see this beautiful brightly colored train traversing Texas from, as you pointed out, Houston to Texas A&M and College Station, Texas. The world watched the funeral in the National Cathedral and all the presidents

[Church:] The death toll from last week's earthquake near Mexico City has risen to 319 people. And hope for finding more survivors beneath that rubble is starting to fade now. Several aftershocks have rattled Mexico in the past few day, including a 5.7 magnitude tremor early Sunday.
[Howell:] It's a deadly earthquake. Also Sunday, the body of an adult woman was recovered from a collapsed school in Mexico City. 19 children and seven adults were killed at that school alone. Now to the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico. Most areas there still don't have rung water, still don't have power at this point. This after the Hurricane Maria tore through that region of this U.S. commonwealth last week.
[Church:] Not only that, many residents having a hard time reaching their loved ones because most of the cell phone towers aren't working. We get the latest now from CNN's Leyla Santiago.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] From above, the images tell the story of Maria's destruction. But on the ground, the faces tell the story of its desperation, as many on this island of 3.5 million people struggle to reach their loved ones.
[Jose Flores, Puerto Rico Resident:] This is the only place where we can get signal.
[Santiago:] On this highway overpass, dozens pull over, hoping that this spot is the one to reunite family, if only by voice. Jose Flores drove for hours to get here, to get to cell service, to get to tell his daughter in Florida one thing.
[Flores:] So I'll let my family know that we're fine.
[Santiago:] For others, borrowed satellite phones are their last hope. [on camera]: People are trying anything they can to reach out. This note, handwritten, was passed along to our photographer in hopes that it would reach a loved one. It says, among other things, "Tony OK. Tony at Frank's house. And love you all."
[Unidentified Female:] Thank you, thank you, thank you.
[Santiago:] Later that day, we were able to get a call out to his girlfriend in New York.
[Unidentified Female:] So it was just such a relief. Neither I nor his family has slept all week just worrying about him.
[Santiago:] An FCC report found 96 percent of cell towers in Puerto Rico are not working. The government here says it's trying to figure out which towers need generators and fuel to start working again. A small sign of hope on this island with so much to rebuild. For many year, the first chance to talk is the first step to recovery. Leyla Santiago, CNN, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
[Church:] Well, Maria is a grim memory for people in the Caribbean. But the storm isn't completely over. Our Meteorologist Derek Van Dam joins us with the latest. Derek, you're just back from the region, from Puerto Rico.
[Howell:] A lot of destruction there.
[Derek Van Dam, Ams Meteorologist:] Yes, we saw it firsthand. It really is an ongoing humanitarian crisis. No water, no electricity. And no food for many. So you can imagine as the days and months go on, stresses will get worse for the people down there, unfortunately. All right. Let's talk about the details. Because things have changed. Unfortunately, it appears as if this storm is going through a weakening stage, still churning across the Atlantic. This is a category 1. It was a category 2 about 12 hours ago. So some weakening taking place. This is all thanks to the colder waters that were kind of mixed up in the Atlantic Ocean from Hurricane Jose, believe it or not. This is interesting, because now the outer edges of Hurricane Maria will actually scrape the east coast of the United States. Right along the Cape Hatteras, specifically the Outer Banks of North Carolina. That's where we have our shading of yellow. Kill devils hill into Cape Hatteras and the nags head region. Even though the storm is going to stay well east of a landfall from the United States, the outer rain bands expand at least 200 to 300 kilometers away from the center of the storm. That's where we find some of the tropical storm-force winds. So you can see as we time this thing out by midday on Wednesday, that some of that dark shading of red and purple indicating winds in excess of 70 to 80 miles per hour that is tropical storm-force. Will reach, again, the coastline of North Carolina. So we're going to keep a very close eye on any shift to the west, obviously, will mean that more winds will move inland. Well, the other threats here would be large waves along the shoreline, creating dangerous rip currents. In fact, some of the open ocean swells measuring six to nine meters that will equate to at least seven to 10-foot waves along the beach line. A rip current threat stretching from Florida to Cape Cod. Most of the rainfall will stay offshore. The chances of this bringing flooding rain to the east coast of the United States very slim. But, of course, the ongoing threat still looms across western Puerto Rico, where they have flash flood warnings. We've been talking about the dam that overflowed its bank, the Quajataca Dam in northwestern Puerto Rico. Any additional rainfall will put more stresses on that dam which is a concern for hundreds of thousands of people who live close to it.
[Church:] It is a real worry.
[Van Dam:] It is.
[Howell:] Derek, thank you. And welcome back.
[Van Dam:] Thank you very much.
[Howell:] Still ahead on NEWSROOM this hour, the president's latest adversary is football, the National Football League and players who protest during the national anthem.
[Church:] How fans are reacting. We'll have that for you when we come back. Stay with us.

[Blackwell:] A source tells CNN the FBI now has recordings of President Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen. Apparently, he taped his conversations with the lawyer for two women who say they had affairs with the president.
[Paul:] The recordings could become a key piece of evidence obviously in the criminal investigation of Cohen, the man who once said he would take a bullet for President Trump. Cohen has admitted no wrongdoing, but according to a warrant he is being investigated for bank fraud, wire fraud, and campaign finance issues. Cohen has been ordered to attend court on Monday, by the way. All righty. So, joining us now, Kaitlan Collins, CNN White House reporter. Kaitlan, what are you hearing this morning about all of this?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, so, when these FBI agents raided Michael Cohen's office, hotel room, and house on Monday, something that really angered President Trump, we are told that they did seize recordings between Michael Cohen and Keith Davidson. Keith Davidson is an attorney who represented both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, two women who said they had affairs with President Trump. He is no longer their lawyer, we should note. It is important to note that they recorded conversations between Cohen and Keith Davidson, something Cohen is known as a standard practice essentially for him. So, it would be interesting, these prosecutors are clearly looking to see what it was Michael Cohen knew about these payments, what exactly his role was in all of this. They have obviously been looking at not only his role in the payment to Stormy Daniels, but also what role he played in trying to suppress the information about Karen McDougal, that former "Playboy" playmate who says she did have an affair with President Trump. Now, this is all interesting because it could prove very valuable to these investigators as they are looking at the role that he played. This is all going on as the White House is still maintaining that Michael Cohen does still represent President Trump. They just spoke yesterday. The president actually called Michael Cohen as my colleague Gloria Borger reported and then the deputy press secretary, Raj Shah, said on CNN last night that he does, in fact, still represent the president. Michael Cohen is someone who is very close to President Trump, a close confidante of his for the last decade or so. He represented the Trump Organization for some time and also has been spotted at the White House. So, someone who is very close to the president and recordings if they have any of between him and President Trump that would also prove very interesting. Certainly, something that will be troublesome for Michael Cohen if the investigators here get anything out of these recordings between him and Keith Davidson, that attorney.
[Paul:] All righty. Thank you very much for the wrap-up there, Kaitlan Collins. I know it gets diluted and crazy with all of the names intact. We appreciate you walking us through it. Thank you.
[Blackwell:] All right. Joining us now, Errol Louis, CNN political commentator and anchor for Spectrum News. Errol, good morning to you. Let's talk about these recordings between Michael Cohen and Keith Davidson. As Kaitlan said there, this is the man who I guess some would say coincidentally both represented Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. The expectation is that these will be valuable to the investigation. How do you see where do you see the value?
[Errol Louis, Cnn Political Commentator:] Some of the value lies in whether or not the recordings were even legal, depending on the state we're talking about, you're not supposed to record these kinds of recordings. That's sort of a slide issue in some ways. But for the prosecutors, though, I think it can help establish whether or not the facts or the timeline that they've sort of created by other means can be corroborated with hard evidence. So, when Michael Cohen is talking with this particular attorney or anybody else about what he's doing and why he's doing it and on whose behalf he's doing it, he's providing sort of a timeline, giving you breadcrumbs. He's letting you know potentially what the president knew or didn't know, what he may be acting on behalf of the president with or without the president's knowledge, what he was trying to do and when he was trying to do it and why. It's a treasure trove of information. But again, it could be in the nature of confirming what the Mueller team already knows.
[Blackwell:] The "New York Times" is reporting that the president's advisers are viewing the investigation into Cohen as more threatening, more imminent to the president than even Mueller's Russia probe. Considering all that we've learned in the emergency hearing yesterday for protection order to stop the FBI from getting into those files that they seized on Monday, you think they're right?
[Louis:] Absolutely. They do not know, Michael Cohen and his lawyers, do not know exactly what was seized. It was done on a no-knock warrant. They went into his safe-deposit box of his bank. They took his phone, his computers. It is an amazing amount of information that they have. And it's hard to say I would be surprised if Michael Cohen himself and his attorneys could say with any certainty what it is that's on all of the multiple devices, the sources of information. Remember, they went to his home as well as two different offices, and again, the safe-deposit box, it's impossible to sort of really create a kind of defense when the other side is holding all the cards. In this case, the U.S. attorney is holding all of the cards. They know what they were looking for. They know what they have and Michael Cohen is one reason you saw him on the sidewalk is if they take your computers and phones and they've tossed your office, what are you left to do?
[Blackwell:] There is nothing left to work with. Let's talk about the story of the morning, Syria. Congressman Thomas Massey who's opposed U.S. military presence in Syria for some time has tweeted this since the strikes last night. "I haven't read France's or Britain's Constitution, but I've read ours, and nowhere in it is presidential authority to strike Syria." Several Democrats have called the attacks I should change that, the strikes illegal absent the authorization of use military force specifically for Syria. Now you've got a Republican who is coming out and keeping up the campaign of calling them unauthorized, at least maybe illegal. Do you expect that there will be some traction here for Congress to finally authorize?
[Louis:] Yes. Not only members of Congress, but there are a lot of forces on the right including the extreme right for whom Trump's anti- interventionist rhetoric during the 2016 campaign was a big campaign promise that they were relying on. They are going to sort of invoke not just the Constitution but his own statements on the campaign trail, his own tweets in the years leading up to the campaign that he was not going to be the kind of president who would bring Americans into what is often described as a quagmire in the Middle East. He's doing just the opposite of what was promised, and there are both legal and political reasons that people are going to take issue with it, including members of the president's own base, absolutely.
[Blackwell:] All right. Errol Louis, thanks so much.
[Louis:] Thank you.
[Paul:] British Prime Minister Theresa May is talking about this overnight strike on Syria, emphasizing it's not aimed at regime change, so to speak, but at deterring the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Live reports for you coming up from London and from Paris. Stay close.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] Moments ago, the Senate majority leader said that that should happen.
[Question:] Does it bother you that, almost a week ago now, someone on the president's staff insulted one of your senior colleagues, John McCain, with this morbid joke, and then no one from the White House has apologized for it, even today, as part of [Off-mike]
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] Well, the person who said that should apologize, and should apologize publicly.
[Keilar:] Well, the president has been more focused on how this comment went public, tweeting quote "Leakers are traitors and cowards." I want to turn to CNN's Manu Raju on Capitol Hill and CNN's Jeff Zeleny at the White House. Jeff, we've heard from some senators. What's the White House saying about this meeting?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] Well, Brianna, the White House is saying about the meeting that it was the president's chance to have an opportunity and an audience with these senators. And he came in with a full plate of things to talk about. And I am told that he spent most of the time essentially filibustering, to use a term of the Senate there. He was talking a lot about the 2018 agenda, about that potential historic summit with Kim Jong-un next month in Singapore, and also talking about the 2018 midterm elections and other parts of the agenda. He was not coming in, of course, to talk about John McCain. He didn't mention him at all. And he wasn't asked about it. So the White House is seeing this as a sign that this is still something that Republican senators seem to find it a lot easier to ask questions and criticize the president and the White House from afar. But up close, that certainly did not happen. And within the last few seconds, Brianna, we saw Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy coming over here to the White House, I'm told, to have a meeting on immigration. So, clearly, the agenda is at issue, but no one in the room pressed the president on it. And I think the White House would suggest that that is a sign that the president is still firmly in control of his Republican Party.
[Keilar:] Manu, what are your sources telling you about this lunch and how this all went down?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Well, Jeff's exactly right. It went on for about an hour. The president spoke most of the time. He talked a lot about his accomplishments. He promised to campaign, in the words of one senator quote "everywhere" and all of the key states. And there were actually only two questions that senators asked. And it didn't have to do with this remark about John McCain and it also didn't have to do with that Trump tweet from over the weekend about the Chinese electronics maker ZTE, saving Chinese jobs, something that has actually sparked significant concern, even from a top Senate Republican, John Cornyn, who told me yesterday he did plan to raise this with the president today. It is unclear if he just wasn't able to have time to talk about this because the president spoke for so long. And it was only two questions were ultimately asked. Now, ahead of the meeting, there were still some significant concerns from senators about those remarks that White House aide Kelly Sadler made about John McCain. Take a listen.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] I don't understand it, why you just don't apologize and move on. That would be easier do. It wasn't the president making the statement, but I'm sure, if he asked her to apologize, she would. So I don't know why he hasn't.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] The best way for this to be put to rest and it should have happened immediately would have been for the White House to issue a public apology to the entire McCain family.
[Raju:] Do you think Trump should, too, the president himself?
[Collins:] I think it would be helpful if the president made clear that those kinds of comments are not acceptable, rather than criticizing the leaker.
[Raju:] Now, again, that did not come up at the lunch today, but what did come up at the lunch was Gina Haspel, the president's nominee to be the CIA director. He hoped that she would get confirmed soon. And all indications are that she will get confirmed soon. Brianna, we are learning that two new Democratic senators have announced their support for Gina Haspel, one, Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, saying that he would support Gina Haspel, as well as Heidi Heitkamp, the North Dakota senator, red state senator up for reelection in a state that Trump won big. That brings the number up to four Democratic senators who have announce their plans to support this nomination, more than enough that they will need to ultimately get Gina Haspel confirmed. She will be voted out of committee tomorrow, probably on the floor by the end of the week, potentially. So at least the president will get a victory on the CIA director nominee, after she's faced a lot of concern and criticism over her views of torture and the interrogation program, something that she has tried to clean up and walk back in private meetings over the last several days here, Brianna.
[Keilar:] Manu Raju on the Hill, Jeff Zeleny at the White House, thank you so much to both of you. Now, if the White House were to issue a public apology to the McCain family, as so many Republicans senators are demanding, this would be a rare moment in the Trump administration. And with me now to explain why is Zach Wolf. He's our CNN politics digital editor. Zach, there have been so many calls. We're hearing them, maybe not in this meeting between Republicans and the president, but certainly publicly you hear this from senators. They want the president to say that he's sorry. They want the White House to issue a public apology, but this isn't really the M.O. for President Trump.
[Zach Wolf, Cnn Politics Digital Director:] No. And you could say his political mantra since he's been in politics is don't apologize for anything almost ever. I mean, he started his campaign referring to Mexicans as rapists, kind of writ large the entire country. No apology there. He's tangled with John McCain. Remember, he essentially made fun of John McCain for being a POW back in 2015. Didn't apologize for that. He, in a closed-door meeting with staffers, made fun of Carly Fiorina's face, and that leaked out. Jake Tapper CNN's Jake Tapper asked him about that during a debate, and he essentially had the opportunity to apologize to Carly Fiorina. Instead, he just said, you have a beautiful face, but didn't kind of say, I'm sorry, which he could. He retweeted that Megyn Kelly was a bimbo. He said a lot of other things about her too. She actually personally asked him about that, read the tweet back to him. And he said, excuse me, but did not offer an apology. There are others. There's Ted Cruz, accusing the guy's father essentially of being involved in the Kennedy assassination. There were a lot of calls that he should apologize in that case. He never did. Cruz did, however, go on to endorse him in the campaign. And then, more recently, as president, he used some unfortunate language to refer to countries in Africa, saying he didn't want immigrants from those countries coming to the U.S. because he didn't like those countries and also Haiti. He met with African leaders. It didn't seem like there was an apology there either. So, I wouldn't hold your breath this time.
[Keilar:] Now, it's stunning, though. When he does apologize, it's very it's very infrequent. It's in his own way, but he's done it on a couple occasions.
[Wolf:] That's right. I think the first one that you have to pay attention to was when he retweeted some anti-Muslim videos from a fringe political party. Piers Morgan, the former CNN personality, actually basically dared him to apologize during an interview in Davos, Switzerland, earlier this year. Take a listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] If you're telling me that's a horrible few people, horrible racist people...
[Piers Morgan, Tv Personality:] Yes.
[Trump:] ... I would certainly apologize, if you would like me to do that. I know nothing about them.
[Morgan:] And you would disavow yourself of people like that?
[Trump:] I don't want to be involved with people. But are you telling me about these people, because I know nothing about these people.
[Morgan:] Yes.
[Wolf:] There you go. He said, I will apologize if you want me to. It didn't really sound very sincere. I think the most popular most apologetic moment of his presidency and the clearest apology he's ever had was with the "Access Hollywood" tape, when he used unfortunate language about women and what he wanted to do with them. He was essentially forced to come out and give an apology. He taped a response. And then he talked about it again at a presidential debate. Take a listen to that.
[Trump:] This was locker room talk. I'm not proud of it. I apologize to my family. I apologize to the American people. Certainly, I'm not proud of it. But this is locker room talk.
[Wolf:] So, locker room talk. I'm kind of sorry, but really it's locker room talk. In the taped apology that he gave, he actually used that to pivot and then attack Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. And then he brought Bill Clinton accusers to that debate he was just at.
[Keilar:] All right, Zach Wolf, thank you so much for that little trot down memory lane. We appreciate it. We do have some news just in to CNN. I want to go ahead and get to M.J. Lee with some new details. M.J., catch us up here. This is about a Qatari businessman who said that he was there at meetings at Trump Tower back in December of 2016, right after the president was elected.
[M.j. Lee, Cnn National Politics Correspondent:] That's right, Brianna. What we have now is the first official acknowledgement from a Qatari investor. His name is Ahmed Al-Rumaihi. We are familiar with this name now because Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' lawyer, tweeted about him just several days ago. And what he said in the tweet, I will get into a little bit later, but let me just first read the statement that we now have from Mr. Al- Rumaihi from a spokesperson acknowledging that he was in fact at Trump Tower on December 12 of 2016. Here is that statement: "Mr. Al-Rumaihi was at Trump Tower on December 12, 2016. He was there in his then role as head of Qatar Investments, an internal division of QIA, to accompany the Qatari delegation that was meeting with Trump transition official on that date." Now, the statement also says he did not participate in any meeting with Michael Flynn, and his involvement in the meeting on that date was limited. So, the statement, even though it acknowledges for the first time again that Al-Rumaihi he in fact at Trump Tower in December of 2016, and for the stated purpose of meeting with Trump transition officials, of course, still a lot of questions about what kind of meetings these were, what kind of discussions took place on that day. But one more thing that is really significant, Brianna, I am told by a person familiar with these meetings between the Qatari delegation and Trump transition officials on that day that there were several meetings that took place on this day and that Michael Cohen briefly popped into one of those meetings. So, we now have sort of a sense, at least from this one person, that Michael Cohen popped his head into one of these meetings. But they were clear that this was not a situation, according to their knowledge, where Michael Cohen was deeply or heavily involved in the substance of these meetings. Now, the reason, of course, that we are talking about the statement from this Qatari investor is because of tweets that Michael Avenatti sent out recently. Just to remind everyone, he tweeted some photos from Trump the Trump Tower lobby there they are and he pointed to the fact that Michael Cohen was in that photo, and so was Al-Rumaihi and Michael Flynn. And then he raised this question. Why was Ahmed Al-Rumaihi meeting with Michael Cohen and Michael Flynn in December 2016? And why did Mr. Al-Rumaihi later brag about bribing administration officials, according to a sworn declaration filed in court? Now, the back story behind that is also quite complicated. Al-Rumaihi is currently in a legal battle with a man named Jeff Kwatinetz. And in a court declaration, Kwatinetz said that this was a Qatari investor who was constantly showing interest in getting some kind of access to Steve Bannon, and that at one point he made a joke about how Qataris were successful in bribing Michael Flynn. Again, this was a joke, he perceived at the time. So, a lot of questions right now on what exactly happened, but at least now we're getting a little bit of clarity directly from Al-Rumaihi on the fact that he was there at Trump Tower in December of 2016 and the stated purpose was in fact to meet with Trump transition officials. I would quickly note, as you remember, Brianna, that at this point in time after the election, Trump Tower was where all of the action was. A lot of these kinds of high-profile meetings were happening post the election, a lot of important figures, high-profile people coming in and out of the Trump Tower lobby in order to have these kinds of meetings. So, not necessarily unusual that a meeting like this would have happened there, but again we don't know the details of what actually went on at these meetings on that day Brianna.
[Keilar:] All right, M.J. Lee, thank you for breaking that all down for us. I want to bring in David Catanese. He is a senior politics writer for "U.S. News & World Report." What there is a lot to dissect here, because this isn't simple, right? But when you hear that, that this Qatari businessman is admitting, yes, he was there for these meetings, what's the significance of that to you?
[David Catanese, "u.s. News & World Report":] Well, I think the first question as a follow-up is, what was be asking for, right? That's the question. You have got a transition where you got a new administration is coming. You have got lot of people coming in those doors, as we saw every day. What exactly did this Qatari businessman want? Did he want something from the president in his official capacity? Did you want something on the business side? Because we know Trump had business deals all over the world. And I think the next question in this story is, was there any follow- up and did the administration deliver anything to this Qatari businessman? I have a feeling that Robert Mueller probably knows the answers to those questions, or is at least probing those questions. We just don't know those answers right now.
[Keilar:] All right, David Catanese, stand by with me. You are going to join us, along with a wonderful political panel, as we tackle all of today's political topics, including John McCain and why he did not come up in a meeting between President Trump and Senate Republicans, despite Republican saying they wanted to bring it up.

[Watt:] American president Donald Trump is taking a hard-line stance against a new migrant caravan heading towards the U.S. from Honduras. Mr. Trump warns that the U.S. will cut off aid to the Central American country if the Honduran government fails to stop the thousands trekking north. Ironically, a cut in aid would add to the misery that is forcing people to flee the violence plagued country where corruption is rampant and two-thirds of the population lives in poverty. The caravan has made it as far as Guatemala and CNN's Leyla Santiago has the latest on this grueling trek.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] They've been traveling by foot for days, among them, mothers carrying young children, many being pushed in wheelchairs. This group of about 3,000 Honduran migrants is headed to the United States in search of a better life, leaving poverty and violence in their home country. They made the long trek through Honduras to the Guatemala border, then on to the city of Esquipulas. The group clashed with Guatemalan police, who blocked one of the border crossings. It's a long journey but they say they do not have much of a choice.
[Unidentified Male:] There is much corruption here in Honduras. We want to work. There is none. We want land to plant bananas, plantains, beans. There isn't any, brother. We need to migrate to another country, brother. In the hospitals, there is no security. There is nothing. Our patients die, brother.
[Santiago:] President Donald Trump threatened the Honduran government. If the caravan continues on, he says, tweeting, the United States has strongly informed the president of Honduras that if the large caravan of people heading to the United States is not stopped and brought back to Honduras, no more money or aid will be given to Honduras, effective immediately. The Department of Homeland Security expanded on Trump's tweet, calling the caravan a, quote, "result of well advertised and well known catch and release loopholes." Andrea Aleman, who is making the journey with her four children, believes she should be allowed into the
[U.s. Andrea Aleman , Honduran Migrant:] Heading to the United States, we're going to arrive with Donald Trump. He has to receive us, just as we received the Americans over here. They will have to accept us over there.
[Santiago:] One of the group's organizers said that the plan is to walk across Guatemala and reach Tapachula in Southern Mexico. There they hope to apply for humanitarian visas or get asylum. According to the U.S. State Department, Honduras has had one of the highest murder rate in the world since 2010. The World Bank reports that over 66 percent of the population lives in poverty Leyla Santiago, CNN.
[Watt:] As we just noticed noted I am sorry the migrants have made it as far as Guatemala and authorities there detained one of the caravan's coordinators, Bartolo Fuentes early Tuesday. Two other people were detained with Fuentes. It is believed all three will be returned to Honduras in the coming hours. The reason for their detention, though, remains unclear. Meanwhile, CNN's Matt Rivers has been visiting an area between Myanmar and Bangladesh, known as no man's land. That is where 5,000 Rohingya Muslims are stuck in limbo, too afraid to return home. You'll recall more than 700,000 Rohingya have crossed to neighboring Bangladesh in the past year, fleeing a military operation in Myanmar that the U.N.'s top human rights official likens to ethnic cleansing. There are allegations of rape, torture and murder. Most of the refugees are women and children. In June, Myanmar signed an agreement with the U.N., saying it would create safe conditions for the refugees to return to their homes. But the process is yet to begin in earnest.
[Matt Rivers, Cnn Correspondent:] If they do come back, officials admit they will not be resettled on their original land and the Rohingya say they fear they will end up in camps indefinitely. Plus, the security forces who would be in charge of the repatriation are some of the same people the U.N. says carried out the genocide.
[Rivers:] So back in no man's land, no surprise, the Rohingya will stay in put. The conditions inside that camp were obviously horrific. There's no access to education, no health care, no electricity, food is scarce, and yet still, they'd rather be on that side of the fence than this one, because they're too afraid to come back.
[Nick Watt, Cnn International Anchor:] Tune in Wednesday to see the first of Matt Rivers' reports from his series inside Myanmar, witness to the Rohingya crisis. Matt will provide us all with rare access and insight into this on-going humanitarian crisis. That's 1:00 p.m. in London and 8:00 p.m. in Hong Kong. And still to come, it's now OK to get high. The Great White North will look at the new rules in Canada, which is just legalized recreational marijuana.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back. One month ago, Congressman Dan Kildee of Michigan was in South Korea at the same time that the North Korean regime was testing another missile. He was there speaking to U.S. military and South Korean officials. He is here with me now. Thank you for joining me, congressman. Look, you were on the peninsula during one of these tests. You have a unique perspective. You're home now with your constituents. Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, his comments this morning were Americans should sleep well at night. Are your constituents sleeping well given what has transpired in the last 24 hours?
[Rep. Dan Kildee , Michigan:] Well, I think they are, but there's obviously growing concern, and that concern is fueled when the president of the United States deliberately uses language that escalates sort of the war of words and I think, unfortunately, matches the tone and tenor of North Korean officials. I mean this is the United States of America. We ought not engage in this sort of belligerent talk. And when I talk to my constituents, I mean they know that the U.S. will do what it needs to do to protect its citizens. But there are some concerns about the president and whether his choice of words is really thoughtful and helpful.
[Harlow:] OK. So I hear that. And, look, there have been others, Republicans, John McCain among them, who have been critical of the language. Given that, there have been preceding presidents, Democrats and Republicans, whose language has been much more tempered, much more measured. And the counter argument to yours is that that has not worked. That has not deterred this regime.
[Kildee:] Well, the point though is, is that that doesn't mean that belligerent language is a step in the right direction. A step in the right direction I think perhaps would be to really put pressure, for example, on China. I mean is the president willing to be tough in his private conversations with Chinese officials and get them to take the steps necessary to actually reel in North Korea, to actually provide greater security.
[Harlow:] All right, well, they got China on board with the U.N. sanctions over the weekend. Those unanimous sanctions.
[Kildee:] That was a that was a
[Harlow:] And we have sanctioned one big Chinese bank. So what else do you think would actually be effective in moving Xi Jinping's hand?
[Kildee:] I think the president needs to make it clear that China needs to be willing to end trade with North Korea. I mean
[Harlow:] Completely?
[Kildee:] Well, this is the this is the one piece of leverage that we have that does not escalate the potential for military action. It's very clear that China, in some ways, wants to be able to have it both ways. They vote with us at the Security Council. We can't say that's a bad thing. That's a step in the right direction.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Kildee:] And they are willing to help sanction, you know, in a limited sense.
[Harlow:] But the thing is
[Kildee:] But unless they're willing unless they're actually willing to take a bold step and say, we're going to cut off trade with North Korea, that's essential for North Korea to be able to do anything, both militarily and economically.
[Harlow:] Well, sure. I mean it harms North Korea certainly economically. North Korea's economy is not exactly flourishing right now, as you know. I mean this is a regime, this is an economy that is already on the brink. But you are convinced that cutting them off economically from the rather robust trade agreement they still do have with China would be sufficient, would actually turn the tide?
[Kildee:] It would make a difference because those who are right around Kim, those sort of wealthier members of the of North Korean society, that very small percentage of the population in Pyongyang, they would feel it. And that's what we need to do. We need to put a squeeze on those who can those few people who can have any effect on Kim Jong-un.
[Harlow:] Quickly before you go, we have 30 seconds left. But your fellow Democratic congressmen, Ted Lieu, and Senator Ed Markey have proposed this legislation that would would bar the president without congressional approval, any president, and they, as Congressman Lieu told me yesterday, proposed this also before, once before Trump was president, to get congressional approval for first use of a nuclear weapon. Would you support that?
[Kildee:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Because this is a this is a power that any U.S. president has had since 1946.
[Kildee:] It is power that a U.S. president has, but Congress has its authority as well. And and this is a case where we know that the threat is existent. We know that the president is suggesting potential use of military force. This is not a moment when the president in the heat of an exigency would make a decision. This is a conversation that needs to take place. The authority of Congress should be asserted. And particularly in the case of this president where he seems to be somewhat erratic when it comes to what he suggests is American foreign policy.
[Harlow:] Congressman Dan Kildee of Michigan, thank you for being here.
[Kildee:] Thank you.
[Harlow:] Blame Bannon? "The Wall Street Journal" editorial board this morning says, yes, slamming the president's chief strategist and his backers for creating what it calls, quote, White House dysfunction, and fueling the feud with National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] You're not off the hook, you're not, you're not. Good decoration but All right, "Early Start" continues right now.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Anchor:] Day eight of the Rob Porter story, and the White House still can't get its timeline straight. White House Chief of Staff John Kelly under increased scrutiny as sources tell CNN, the President is looking for possible replacement.
[Unidentified Male:] Frankly, the United States is under attack.
[Briggs:] A stern warning from top U.S. intelligence officials, Russia is already meddling in the midterm election. What they said about the President's willingness to fight back.
[Kosik:] Redemption for Shaun White in South Korea, winning gold in the Men's Halfpipe. A live report with all the Olympic headlines that you may have missed overnight. Good morning, and welcome to "Early Start." I'm Alison Kosik. Happy Valentine's Day.
[Briggs:] Happy Galentine's Day too, for you single ladies. I'm Dave Briggs, it is Wednesday, February 14th, it's also Ash Wednesday 5:00 a.m. in the east. We start with day eight of a story that could be a 24-hour mess.'Conversations over who could replace embattled White House Chief of Staff John Jelly heating up this morning. CNN reporting that President Trump called associates in recent days discussing possible replacements for Kelly in the wake of the Rob Porter spousal abuse scandal. Multiple sources tell us the President has made no decision to push Kelly out, but they say names being floated if he does include Chief Economic Advisor Global Gary Cohn. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and Budget Director Mic Mulvaney. Mulvaney's has already denied he's under consideration and Press Scretary Sarah Sanders said yesterday, "The President has confidence in Kelly."
[Kosik:] So this all coming out of White House struggles to control the follow up that we've been seeing over allegations that Porter, the former White House Staff Secretary, physically abused his two ex- wives. Porter denies the accusations. Chief of Staff Kelly defending his handling of the situation, telling the Wall Street Journal, "Is this all done right?" The scrutiny only intensifying on Tuesday, after the director of the FBI up ended the White House timeline of events.
[Briggs:] A quick recap now on Monday. The White House said top officials learned the "extent of the allegations" last Tuesday and that Porter's background check was still ongoing. But then Yesterday, FBI Chief Chris Wray told the Senate Intel Committee, "The bureau notified the White House of these allegations months ago.
[Christopher Wray, Fbi Director:] The FBI submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in March. And then, a completed background investigation in late July. Soon thereafter, we received requests for follow up inquiry and we did the follow up and provided that information in November, and then we administratively closed the file in January.
[Kosik:] Okay. This all comes as we learned Porter was actually in line for a promotion at the same time that these abuse allegations were coming out.
[Briggs:] President Trump's longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, says he paid $130,000.00 out of his own pocket to porn star Stormy Daniels who once claimed she had an affair with Mr. Trump. It is the first time Cohen has acknowledged making the payment since it was first reported last month by the "Wall Street Journal." Sources say, Cohen paid Stephanie Clifford, better known as Stormy Daniels, out of concern; the accusation could damage the President. In a statement, Cohen says, "The payment to Mrs. Clifford was lawful and not a campaign contribution or a campaign expenditure by anyone. Just because something isn't true doesn't mean that it can't cause you harm or damage. I will always protect Mr. Trump."
[Kosik:] Cohen says, he was not reimbursed by the Trump campaign or the Trump organization. He has previously said the President denies any affair with Daniels. She has dodged questions about an affair in recent weeks but has not publicly denied it.
[Briggs:] All right joining us now, CNN Politics Digital Director Zach Wolf live in D.C. this morning. Don't worry Zach, we're not going to into the Stormy Daniels. Is that even the lead story, of course because this is the Trump Administration, of course it is day eight of this Rob Porter mess. This is really a text book example of how not to do crisis management. How will the White House get this behind them?
[Zachary Wolfe, Managing Editor, Cnn Politics:] I don't know. I mean, it's almost like they just have to wait it out. They might have to, you know, kind of shake the trees and get some new people in there. It's not exactly clear. This is like a total system failure playing out in front of us. You have the issue who staffs the White House and the President, you have the issue of how they deal with the existing government in the FBI, how they're dealing with the press, how they're trying to cover things up. It's like all of these things that have, you know, been difficult for this White House to deal with during this administration coming to a head in this one issue, that you can't really see how they fix it.
[Kosik:] You know, you mentioned that maybe the White House will have to get new blood in there. But, you know, who are they going to get? The "Wall Street Journal" had an op-ed today saying about John Kelly and whether or not John Kelly should be leaving, saying asked on Monday if the White House should have handled Mr. Porter's situation any differently, Chief of Staff John Kelly said, "No, it was all done right." In this op-ed, we've got we've got the "Wall Street Journal" saying that the White House is having problems finding good people to fill these positions. Almost like Kelly's better than what they may find after Kelly.
[Wolf:] Yeah. This is not a job that requires senate confirmation. It's only a job you have to get somebody to agree to do. I'm not sure would you want to be the White House Chief of Staff right now? It would you would feel like the walls were coming down in on you, and you'd be starting day one. CNN also reported that Tom Barrack his close friend, he had talked to him about taking the job, but Barrack said, "No, I'm more valuable to the business community." Things like this, it seems like it would be a tough job to take. Plus, if you have somebody like Kelly who goes in, a respected cabinet secretary, you know, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, he's going to leave the White House with with his standing sort of imperiled.
[Briggs:] Imagine if Gary Cohn, global Gary Cohn, becomes the chief of staff for the once-populist President. And Cohn, by the way, a registered Democrat, would be a fascinating dynamic. But let's be honest, the most important thing that came out yesterday in that Senate Intel briefing was the fact that there was a stern warning to the President, to this country that Russia never went away and is meddling here as the director of National Intelligence warning about 2018.
[Unidentified Male:] There should be no doubt that Russia perceived that its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 U.S. midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations.
[Briggs:] How consequential is that sound bite, Zach?
[Wolf:] I think it's a big deal. I think a lot of people need to pay attention to it. It shouldn't seem very new because they've said this kind of thing before repeatedly on Capitol Hill. It appears that the only person who doesn't believe it at this point is President Trump, according to CNN's reporting. He has doubts that Russia tried to meddle. But then if you think about it, you know, if Russia meddled, then maybe the special investigation into into collusion might have something to it. It's like in his best interest if Russia didn't meddle but everybody has said that Russia has meddled at this point. Who would be in a position to know?
[Kosik:] Yes, the question is, are we going to see the White House take action after this clear warning was spelled out?
[Briggs:] Any action at all? Senator Mark Warner says, "We still do not have a plan." Zach Wolf, thanks so much, we'll check back with you in about 30 minutes. Meanwhile, President Trump calls the immigration debate now underway and the senate the last chance for dreamers. But negotiations off to a rocky start with democrats and republicans in a standoff over how debate should proceed. Majority leader Mitch McConnell trying to open the session with a vote on legislation to punish sanctuary cities, but Minority Leader Chuck Schumer objecting to the measure because it has nothing to do with the Dreamer Act.
[Unidentified Male:] There is no reason not to come together and get a solution this week. This has been going on endlessly. They shut down the government over this. I want to see what they want to do. Finding 60 votes for something that meets the needs of both sides and can deal with the dreamers and border security is not easy. We all know that immigration is fraught with peril, but this is the closest we've come, and everybody has to make a really final effort.
[Briggs:] With the floor debate faltering, a bipartisan group of senators claims to be making progress, behind the scenes on an immigration plan that could get the 60 votes needed to pass.
[Kosik:] A second federal judge temporarily blocking the Trump Administration from ending DACA, that's the program protecting young immigrants brought here illegally as children. The New York based judge ruling dreamers and states who filed suit likely to succeed in their claim. President Trump's decision to end DACA was arbitrary. Last month a federal judge in California came to the same conclusion. DACA was originally set to end on March 5th.
[Briggs:] I'm not optimistic anything gets done.
[Kosik:] I'm with you.
[Briggs:] Even if they find something to get 60 votes, it appears the far right, the house freedom caucus, is going to hold up anything in the house.
[Kosik:] Yes. There's little common ground.
[Briggs:] It doesn't look good for dreamers. Meanwhile, Shaun White looking good, making Halfpipe good at the winter games. The 100 U.S. Winter Games gold medal, Coy Wire, has more in the Bleacher Report next. What a night for snowboard superstar Shaun White soaring to historic gold medal at the winter games.
[Kosik:] Coy Wire with more from Pyeongchang in this Morning's "Bleacher Report." Good morning, Coy.
[Coy Wire, American Television Anchor And Correspondent:] Good morning Alison and Dave. The first American male to win gold medals at three Olympic winter games -That's Shaun White. When he won his first Olympic gold in 2006, for perspective, fellow snowboarders gold medalist Chloe Kim and Red Gerard were just five years old, at 31, Shaun captured not just gold but redemption after failing to medal in Sochi. Needing to do something outstanding in his final run, he was sitting second place. He did a trick that he attempted just four months ago in New Zealand and that left him with a gash and over 60 stitches in his face when he crushed his run. He scored nearly a perfect 100 and he also help secure the United States a historic 100th gold medal in the history of the winter games. Once his score was announced, white burst into tears and he was sobbing as he hugged his mom, dad, and family who were there. He talked about it just over an hour ago.
[Shaun White, American Snowboarder:] At the bottom, all those emotions hit me. I won, everything we'd been through, every you know dream I've had, trying to sleep last night, you know. And I'm like living that dream right now. So it's amazing.
[Wire:] All right, despite the pressure on the only two North Korean athletes that qualified to be here outright, the nation's pair of figure skaters skated out to the loudest applause of any competitors performing. They performed an instrumental version of the Beatles' song "A day in the life." They went on put on the career-best performance, they finished 11th out of 22. They are ahead of the U.S. in the standings and the finals will be later tonight here on the East Coast.'All right, let's get to Early Start on the medal count. Norway is out in front with 11. And we now have a three-way tie for second. Germany, Netherlands, and Canada all have ten, USA still frozen there in fifth with seven. Quick NBA update. If a little change goes a long way, who knows how far a lot of change can take you in the wake of their mid season roster overhaul, Lebron James and his new teammates knocked off the thunder on our sister channel TNT last night, 120-112. King James led with 37 points. Cleveland now riding a four-game win streak. Its longest since December. Alex and Dave coming up in Early Start friends, we're going to tell you about one Olympian who is a plumber, works for his dad, and with his brother. But now he's an Olympian, it's an incredible story. We're going to share it here on "Early Start."
[Kosik:] I want that story. Okay.
[Briggs:] You've got my attention. That's a great tease from Coy Wire live in Pyeongchang. It wasn't all positive news for Shaun White. There's a me too aspect to this moment, because just moments after clinching that gold, Shaun White was asked about sexual harassment allegations launched by Lena Zawaideh. She's a drummer in her band, Bad Things.
[White:] You know, honestly, I'm here to talk about the Olympics, not, you know, gossips. So but I don't think so. I am who I am. And I'm proud of who I am. And my friends, you know, love me and vouch for me. And I think that's that stands on its own, so.
[Briggs:] It's a complicated picture, folks. Back in august, 2016, Zawaideh filed an amended complaint, to a civil suit alleging White had sexually harassed her for, for part, White admitted to sending her sexually explicit and graphic images. Last February, the pair reached an undisclosed settlement. He is really the godfather of the sport. He is a legend, greatest of all time
[Kosik:] But he's not above certain things.
[Briggs:] Again, it's a complicated story. There's more to it.
[Kosik:] All right, terrifying moments in the air over the Pacific Ocean when the cover tore off a plane's engine. How passengers reacted once they were safely on the ground.
[Briggs:] About 5:22 Eastern Time, a hiker who fell over 700 feet off the south side of mt. Hood has died. Seven other climbers from two groups were stranded on Hog's Back Cliff have been rescued strong winds and sunny conditions are causing rocks and ice to fall, making this popular spot extremely hazardous.
[Kosik:] A high-ranking Chicago police officer shot and killed in downtown Chicago. Officials say Commander Paul Bauer, a 31 year veteran, was gunned down while pursuing a suspect who had fled from other officers. The 53-year-old had been in the area attending active shooter training when he heard an alert and responded to the scene.
[Briggs:] There was an honor procession Tuesday night for the slain police commander. Bauer leaves behind a wife and a daughter. Police recovered a gun from the unidentified suspect who is now in custody.
[Kosik:] Our hearts go out to his family. All right passengers called it "The scariest flight of their lives," after part of the cover tore off the right engine. Look at that. This was on a United Flight from San Francisco to Honolulu. Passengers say they heard a big metallic bang, then the plane began to shake. Get this for more than 40 minutes in the air, listen.
[Unidentified Female:] The captain kept trying to tell everybody it's going to be you know, he was just I don't know how they it, thank god for that crew. That's all I got to say because they were calm and they helped it was just it was just horrible.
[Kosik:] That must have been the longest flight ever. Our United spokesman said the plane made an emergency landing in Hawaii. The passengers got off at the gate just as they normally would.
[Briggs:] This morning, Flynn the bichon frise is America's new top dog winning best in show at the 142nd Westminster Kennel Club dog show in New York.
[Kosik:] I just want to run up and cuddle that dog.
[Briggs:] So cute, right.
[Kosik:] This champ turns 6 years old next month. And according to his handler, plans to retire after his Westminster win. But not before taking the traditional victory lap that includes lunch at Sardi's, a visit to One World Trade, and of course lots of press and bragging rights to last a lifetime.
[Briggs:] Going out on top. Congrats to Flynn. Okay, the White House struggling to get its story straight in this Rob Porter scandal with talk of a cover-up hanging in the air. The latest next.

[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] It's 3:00 a.m. on the U.S. east coast. We're following the latest on Hurricane Nate. The third hurricane to hit the U.S. mainland in just six weeks and people are feeling the effects this hour. I'm George Howell.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Natalie Allen. We'll be with you for quite a while. Hurricane Nate made its second landfall of the night a short time ago near Biloxi, Mississippi. The Category 1 storm is drenching the region with heavy rains and damaging winds.
[Howell:] It's knocked out power to thousands of people in three different states, in Mississippi, in Alabama, and in Florida. One big problem, one big concern here is the storm surge. Officials are warning residents don't take any chances. Hurricane Nate is being blamed for at least 28 deaths before it was a hurricane. This in Central America. Hundreds of people were rescued from flood waters and mudslides there.
[Allen:] That was an impressive storm surge we were seeing a moment ago in Biloxi. Let's get the latest on the storm status. Meteorologist Ivan Cabrera tracking it for us. What have you got, Ivan?
[Ivan Cabrera, Ams Meteorologist:] We're looking at a storm that is now inland here, Natalie. George, good to see you. It will continue to weaken as far as the strength, as far as the core winds, right? So, I don't think we're at 85 miles an hour. We're getting a new update from the National Hurricane Center and those winds will like to come down. It's still officially a hurricane of course, as you mentioned making its second landfall in the United States, made the first landfall in Nicaragua. By the way, this was the first hurricane to hit and make landfall. First in Louisiana since 2012 with Isaac and then the secondary landfall near Biloxi in Mississippi. The strong west winds will be located around those rain bands. Wind gusts in excess of 50 miles an hour. I think we're certainly going to lose the wind gusts that we have seen between 70 and 90-mile- an-hour winds. Right now, we are looking at 30-mile-an-hour gusts in Biloxi that went from 75 to 5 with the eye going right on top of Biloxi and now we're on the back side of it here. We'll continue with 30-mile-an-hour winds. These are the kinds of winds that will continue through tonight and through the early part of tomorrow. And the wind field will continue to diminish and then we're just going to be talking about some big rains. Case in point, as far as the winds, 75-mile-an-hour winds in Mississippi. This is the highest wind gusts by the way that I've seen so far, this evening and so far from the storm in general as it made landfall, 89-mile-an-hour winds, 96 would be a Category 2. Of course, that was not sustained. That was a gust, but certainly more than enough to cause power outages and significant damage. There you see the storm surge warnings that are continuing in effect. This is from Southeast Louisiana although I think the worst of it here done for you and then further to the east from Biloxi heading into Mobile Bay. We'll continue to see some gusty winds and also a bit of storm surge. But by the next couple of hours I think that threat will continue to diminish as well. This is what you expect with a landfalling hurricane. Things will transition into a broader wind field. A lot of us will see more wind but less wind as far as the intensity. As it moved on shore it brought in the Gulf of Mexico, anywhere from 5.9 feet in Pascagoula, that was on the eastern flank of the storm, and then interestingly enough you don't need the water to come up from the gulf, right? We have lakes here. And specifically, Lake Borne with a northerly wind on the west side of the storm, that was enough to provide us with 4.6 feet of storm surge there at Shell Beach, St. Bernard Parish. As we see the storm pulling away the threat as well a little further to the east. This is going to be a tornado watch. It has now by the way been expanded by the national weather service. So that means the conditions will continue to be favorable. You see these bands here. Any of those bands embedded within them could be thunderstorms that could put down a brief tornado and we have seen that so far this evening. Numerous warnings in fact have been out for tornadoes. We'll continue to watch that threat developing as well through the overnight hours guys.
[Howell:] Ivan, that northeastern quadrant of the storm, the dirty side of the storm, right? That's what's pushing in right now and causing those tornado concerns.
[Cabrera:] That's where all the action is. The storm surge, the heaviest rain, the heaviest wind, and also where we're going to have the tornadic threat as well. You're right.
[Howell:] Ivan, thank you.
[Allen:] We're covering this storm from all along the gulf coast. Of course, we'll be watching as it moves inland as well and perhaps spawning a tornado. CNN's Ed Lavandera is in Mobile, Alabama. Martin Savidge is in Biloxi, Mississippi. Just due west. Martin, let's go to you first. What are conditions like there now? What have you been experiencing?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, you can definitely tell, Natalie, we're on the back side of this storm. The wind now hitting us from exactly the opposite direction than it was, say, about two hours ago. Much dryer on the back side at least as far as we can sense so far. Not getting the torrential kind of rain. You're getting some rain but not just the deluge that we had. And the good news is that the water that had been significant on top of U.S. Highway 90 here, that has all receded. In fact, I won't say it's completely gone but much of it is gone. It's down dramatically so, another good indicator. Probably one is the change of direction of wind. Also, two we're past high tide. So that is good news. The power has remained fairly consistent. There's been some periods where we had temporary blackouts, but otherwise seems to be holding OK. Right now, the biggest problem is the wind. But it's nowhere near as significant as what they did have. There is flooding in other areas as well because with this wind it gets pushed around and it's been driven in the various bays and that so really it won't be until daylight, you can get a full sense of how much flooding. But again, should not be catastrophic flooding. It should be just sort of the typical kind of flooding of wind-driven water. Daylight will tell us a lot more, but it seems that Nate's done OK here. They've made it through fairly well Natalie.
[Allen:] That's good news.
[Howell:] And Martin, it's George joining in here. Just to ask you, do you get a sense that people there throughout that region, that they did heed these warnings as they came in before the storm made impact?
[Savidge:] Well, you know, it was a little bit difficult because I think a lot of this is very much a tourist town. They had a lot of things planned this weekend. The casinos are always very busy. And they were waiting until they really got the last kind of update before they decided that they had to close down. It was a decision that was made by Harrison County here where they finally said we need to shut down those major waterfront hotels. Because if 90 did get covered as it did, they wouldn't be able to get the heavy first responder equipment in. It was probably a wise call. Even though this storm is hopefully going to push through quickly and maybe by midday tomorrow things will look a lot better. In fact, the sun is expected to be out George.
[Howell:] Marty, it's good to see, though, the conditions are improving where you are. Martin Savidge, thank you so much for your report. Let's now switch over to Ed Lavandera. Ed live for us in Mobile, Alabama. Ed, looking at the radar here, it looks like one of the stronger bands is about to push in or has pushed in there. What are you experiencing on the ground?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. We've been kind of keeping tabs on that as well, George. This is one of the stronger bands that we have seen throughout the evening and it is whipping the rain through here. You can hear it howling by at this point. I just saw off to our west over here a flash of blue light which I suspect is probably a transformer blowing out. There are some 17,000 people in the state of Alabama who have already lost power is the latest numbers we have been told. That looks like it will be a concern here as the worst of this storm and as the storm has passed through Biloxi, starts getting closer into the Mobile area and the Alabama state line. And that is what we're starting to experience here. We're on the edge of Mobile Bay. Just behind me is the water and it's moving very quickly from south to north and has been doing that for the last several hours. That kind of speaks to that storm surge we've been talking so much about. You can get a sense of how the storm even as minimal of a hurricane as Hurricane Nate, these storms' ability to push water from south to north. That pushes everything back inland. That's what creates that flash flooding. In fact, here along the harbor there's a step down here and some of the water's starting to come over the edge of the ridge here along the harbor where we're standing. Nothing major to worry about there by any means. And soon as the storm goes down that water will quickly recede, but it does give you a sense of it here slowly the water has been coming up. We're about high tide, which also influences the storm surges and the potential for flooding situation as the water comes up you add the storm surge on top of that. And in these bayous and tributaries and all around that water continues to rise. That's why emergency management officials have really been cautioning people to really pay attention to their specific areas and watch for where that water might come from George and Natalie.
[Allen:] All right. Ed Lavandera for us there in Mobile, Alabama. Ed, thank you for bringing us the latest. We want to talk now with Vincent Creel. He's the public affairs manager for Biloxi, Mississippi where we just saw our Martin Savidge. Mr. Creel, thanks so much for talking with us. We know this is a busy night. But what kind of reports have you been getting? What have you been hearing about what's going on in Biloxi?
[Vincent Creel, Public Affairs Manager, Biloxi, Mississippi:] We're starting to see the water recede, and we still have some wind gusts on the back end of the storm. And we're going to have a lot of cleanup to do on our front beach, and it's to be seen how much damage was done to the sand beach here in Biloxi and Harrison County, which we're proud to say is the world's longest manmade sand beach at 26 miles. But it looks like the beach took a pounding from the surge and we have not had any major reports of any major damage to homes. I'm unaware of any house flooding in the city. I do know we had some scattered power outages. One thing we're thankful for is, you know, the last several weeks we've been watching what happened to the small town in Rockport, Texas. You heard about all the flooding in Houston and what happened in Miami. So, we were well aware that this could have been a much more serious storm. There was talk of it being a Category 2 with an 11-foot tidal surge when it came ashore. It did not happily, it did not live up to that billing. From what we are understanding, it pretty much disintegrated, parts of it, whenever it made landfall. But nonetheless, it was much more than a nuisance for us. It's a storm that's going to require a lot of cleanup here in Biloxi. We're not aware of any injuries that are related to the storm. We're thankful for that. That's pretty much the story here in Biloxi. It's going to be a lot of cleanup tomorrow and we're going to be looking to get back in business just as soon as we can.
[Allen:] I can tell that you've got some relief there in your voice and there's reason for it, isn't it?
[Creel:] We sure do. We sure do because it was a lot of worried people. Our mayor was worried going into this, looking at the reports that he saw. But we're proud to say that all of our police officers were able to pretty much stay on the streets throughout the duration of the storm. There was one rescue that I'm aware of at a low-lying area on the northern side of the Biloxi peninsula called Pop Ferry where they had to rescue a family of four as I understand it, a man and a woman and a 14-year-old and a 4-year-old. They sent a swift water team out, was able to rescue them from a van that had started taking on water. That's the only incident I'm aware of. And from what we understand our friends in Mobile are having a tough time of it right now, and certainly, our thought and prayers would be with them as it begins to recede. The water begins to recede here in Biloxi.
[Allen:] And I want to ask you, too, Mr. Creel, what about flooding there? Earlier, we saw a casino being inundated.
[Creel:] There's been a lot of talk about that, and I was talking to one of the affiliates in New Orleans about it. What we did whenever we rebuilt after Hurricane Katrina was we made sure to build back in a manner that would diminish the risks from future storms. So, the casino resorts in pretty much all of the waterfront development in Biloxi on the Biloxi peninsula, it's elevated. It's anywhere from 10 to 12 to 15 feet above the ground, which puts it significantly above the tide line. Sea level's what I'm trying to say. So, what you saw there was there is a marina right next to that casino, Point Cadet Marina. What you're looking at is a bank of elevators that are at the bottom of the parking garage. We're happy to say that we're unaware of any of the casino resorts that actually had water on their gaming floor because they're all well elevated to where we learned a huge lesson from Katrina and we owe it to the rest of the country to make sure we build back in a more resilient fashion.
[Allen:] Right. That's the key.
[Creel:] There's been a lot of talk about that water.
[Allen:] Well, thanks for explaining it to us. It was just that lower- level
[Creel:] Like a bank of elevators at the bottom of a parking garage on the ground floor. But thank you all for the interest in Biloxi. We certainly appreciate all the thoughts across the country.
[Allen:] Absolutely. We know what Biloxi went through with Katrina so many years ago. We're so glad to see that this one has been a mild one. Vincent Creel, thanks so much for helping us out with that information. We thank you.
[Creel:] Thank you.
[Howell:] Pick up on that as well, Natalie. A little relief in his voice there. But certainly, the storm still making an impact and we'll continue to follow its trajectory. Still ahead here on NEWSROOM, reporters ask President Trump to clarify his mysterious tweets about North Korea.
[Allen:] His strange response leaves everyone guessing. We'll tell you what he said in a moment.

[Harlow:] One day in a morning after a very ugly and very public meeting. The president this morning is taking aim at Democrats once again over the spending showdown less than 24 hours from when President Trump had the meeting, said he'd gladly take the blame for the shutdown.
[Sciutto:] Yes, thirsty is an understatement for how that meeting
[Harlow:] Oh, yes
[Sciutto:] Went yesterday. But for all the back and forth, and let's admit it, theatrics on both sides, sources on Capitol Hill say that the government shutdown is not necessarily a lock, and that the Oval Office spectacle may be a good thing to help both sides reset to work on a deal. That's putting a rosy story
[Harlow:] All right
[Sciutto:] Let's discuss now with Ron Brownstein; Cnn senior political analyst and Matt Lewis; Cnn political commentator. Matt, I want to begin with you, because the "Wall Street Journal", of course, conservative editorial page, they seem to say that the Democrats got the better of this meeting by the president taking ownership of a potential shutdown. I'm going to quote here, "whether Mr. Trump was merely following his script or erupted at Mr. Schumer's goading, the president abruptly took political ownership of shutting down the government next week over funding for his border wall." Do you agree?
[Matt Lewis, Senior Columnist, Daily Beast & Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, look, I think that they're operating under a normal traditional paradigm which Donald Trump is playing a completely different game. So yes, what they're saying is basically, I think, conventional wisdom. You know, you should never say you want a shutdown because shutdowns are bad. And if you get blamed for a shutdown, there will be consequences. You will lose in the court of public opinion.
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Lewis:] And there you may lose election. I think my argument, which is a contrarian argument, is that all of those things matter to normal politicians, but they don't matter to Donald Trump. I think if you watch the theatrics yesterday, it was Chuck Schumer who looked very uncomfortable. I think Donald Trump came across as actually dominant. I mean, he's the president, so that makes sense. It's he's playing a home game
[Sciutto:] All right
[Lewis:] There, his turf. I think that
[Sciutto:] I thought Pelosi did a pretty good job pushing back against it
[Lewis:] She was OK, she's tougher
[Harlow:] I think it was Mike Pence who said so much
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Lewis:] The last thing I'll say and then I'll shut up is, what does Donald Trump have to lose, right? And he just lost the House, there's not going to be another election for two years. He looks authentic. He looks like he wants transparency by bringing in the cameras, and he's tough. He's always been a base player. He wants his base wants this wall, and guess what? If impeachment becomes a reality, if it starts to get serious, he will need his base, that's what this is about.
[Harlow:] So, Ron
[Ron Brownstein, Senior Editor, The Atlantic & Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Hello
[Harlow:] Let me just jump in here
[Brownstein:] Yes
[Harlow:] I want you to respond
[Brownstein:] Yes
[Harlow:] But you've been tweeting about these numbers, and I want to bring them
[Brownstein:] Yes
[Harlow:] To our viewers as well
[Brownstein:] Exactly
[Harlow:] Because the president
[Brownstein:] Right
[Harlow:] Said, let me quote more of him yesterday after this meeting. "If we close down the country, by the way, I will take it because we're closing it down for border security. I think that wins every single time, no, it doesn't, not among the American people." Look at the new Marist poll, "Npr", "Pbs" poll out this morning, 50 percent of Americans think the wall is not a priority at all, 19 percent think it's not an immediate priority, Ron, that's almost 70 percent of Americans
[Brownstein:] Right
[Harlow:] Who don't see it the president's way. So this is a
[Brownstein:] Right
[Harlow:] Big gamble, no?
[Brownstein:] Absolutely, look, the message of this last election is very clear. That it isn't only the base of the Republican Party that votes. I mean, Republicans lost the House popular vote by almost 10 million votes by a bigger margin than Democrats did in '94 or 2010. And the fact is, not only are government shutdowns unpopular, the president is proposing to shut down the government over an idea that is deeply unpopular, 60 percent of the public has consistently invariably opposed the idea of building a wall every time it has been polled in his presidency. And that includes preponderant majorities of all the groups that just gave Democrats control of the House. Three-quarters of millennials oppose building the wall, two-thirds of independents opposing building the wall, 60 percent of college-educated whites oppose building the wall. So again, I think this is an indication as Matt I think correctly says, that the president is invariably focused on his base. But the base are not the only people who vote, as we were just ready to point
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Brownstein:] And reminded. And I also note that in 2020, you have Republican senators, unlike this and unlike the 2018 environment in places like Maine and Colorado that are trending Democratic and where this kind of base first politics I believe is kind of a, you know, a sentence for ending their careers.
[Sciutto:] You know, Matt, you have seen some Republican commentators who say that in the data forget their opinions, but in the data from the midterms, that the wall issue, the immigration issue did not do as well for Republicans as the president and other Republicans imagined. Now, I wonder if you share a similar concern.
[Lewis:] Well, look, first of all, I would say, we're two years out. I think this is probably part of Donald Trump's calculus. Here, Republicans shut down the government and got blamed, I think rightly blamed for it in 2014 in September. They ended up doing pretty good two years later. So there's a lot of time between now and whenever
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Lewis:] The Republican senators are going to be up for re-election. I also think I don't want to say I don't believe the polls, but I think that they don't fully capture the immigration issue and the intensity. I saw polls for the last five years even on the Republican side. You would look at external polls or you know, talk to people who voted in a Republican primaries, they would never rank immigration as a top issue. You know, they really said they don't care that much about immigration. They're actually they're OK with a pathway to citizenship, and yet Donald Trump, every single time I think exploited that issue
[Sciutto:] You know, but I'm not talking purely about the poll
[Lewis:] Thank you
[Sciutto:] I'm talking about how people voted in the midterms on this
[Harlow:] Yes
[Brownstein:] Yes
[Sciutto:] Not an express to an issue
[Lewis:] And
[Sciutto:] Which is the more operational data, right?
[Brownstein:] And the wall you know, look, the wall has become some you know, it's become say much more than an immigration. It really has become a symbol of whether or not you accept a changing or welcome or fear a changing America. And the idea that this is not an intensity issue on the other side, on the Democratic side, I think it may have been true once, no longer true. I think it is an absolute symbol for the Democratic coalition of resisting
[Lewis:] What if he gives them
[Daca -- Brownstein:] The kind of
[Lewis:] What if he gives them DACA though, what if they turn
[Brownstein:] Well, you know
[Lewis:] Down DACA?
[Harlow:] We're waiting and waiting always down there
[Brownstein:] Yes, well, don't forget, last year that don't forget that last year that
[Harlow:] Guys
[Brownstein:] Deal was on offer when the White House also demanded massive cuts in legal immigration. And I don't think there is a wall deal with the Democratic House majority. I just
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Brownstein:] Think it is too overwhelmingly opposed by the groups that created that majority.
[Lewis:] I agree, and that's why I think Trump actually could end up winning this one, because if he offers DACA, and says look, all I want is some funding for border security for a fence
[Sciutto:] Right
[Lewis:] A fence, but I'll give you DACA. Is Nancy Pelosi going to be in a position to say yes to that? So I don't think it's
[Brownstein:] Well, look
[Sciutto:] That's a fair, that would be a lot tougher thing
[Brownstein:] Last year, that deal was on offer
[Sciutto:] That also, but that would be a lot tougher thing clearly for the Democrats to turn down. But hasn't been a lot of talk
[Brownstein:] Right
[Sciutto:] About that, we'll see, who knows? The president is a deal maker, Ron Brownstein, Matt Lewis, thanks very much.
[Lewis:] Thanks
[Sciutto:] President Trump's former attorney and fixer could face a lengthy term in prison. We're on top of that story.
[Harlow:] Right, that's in less than two hours. We're also just minutes away from the opening bell on Wall Street. Futures pointing slightly higher this morning. Investors pointing to a renewed optimism about U.S.-China trade negotiations. But there are a lot of other major issues between the U.S. and China that could severely complicate that. We'll get into all of it ahead.

[Camerota:] A "New York Times" report gives fascinating insights into President Trump's TV viewing habits. The paper says the president watches at least four hours of television a day and drinks 12 cans of Diet Coke a day. Here to discuss all of this is CNN contributor and Donald Trump biographer, Michael D'Antonio. Michael, great to have you. And just I know you're standing by. We have breaking news, so I may have to cut away from you. But while we get our sources in place and while we get more information
[Michael D'antonio, Cnn Contributor:] Sure.
[Camerota:] You and I will chat. So you, of course, are a Trumpologist. You wrote a biography about him. Did you know about his voracious viewing habits?
[D'antonio:] Oh, sure. I think people who have been around the president for any real period of time know that he is a television addict. He's probably watching us right now because as "The Times" reported, he tunes to CNN when there's breaking news. CNN is the strongest network in hard news and so, as much as he might berate the network at other moments, he tunes in when he needs the facts.
[Camerota:] Here's a tidbit from Maggie Haberman's reporting, along with some of her colleagues. People close to the president estimate that Mr. Trump spends at least four hours a day, and sometimes as much as twice that, in front of a television, sometimes with the volume muted, marinating in the no-holds-barred wars of cable news and eager to fire back. Here's another interesting thing, Michael, that I know that you can speak to, it's just how much President Trump still enjoys being hearing his name on TV. Though, of course, he's now the most, you know, famous, talked-about person in the world, their reporting says, to an extent that would stun outsiders, Mr. Trump, the most talked about human on the planet, is still delighted when he sees his name in the headlines and he is on a perpetual quest to see it there. One former top adviser said Mr. Trump grew uncomfortable after two or three days of peace and could not handle watching the news without seeing himself on it. Your thoughts?
[D'antonio:] Well, that strikes me as consistent with who he's always been. The president, as a boy, 14, 15 years old, saw his name in the paper because he got a hit that won a baseball game. And I think that started this cascade of headlines that featured the name trump and made him really happy. And, you know, I've written about the fact that he is a man of his time. And a lot of us, I think, seek to have ourselves writ large, whether it's on FaceBook or Twitter or, in the president's case, on the news. And it gives us a sense that we're alive and that we matter. And it's remarkable that he could be president and still crave this, but it is consistent with who he's always been.
[Camerota:] The article also gives interesting tidbits about the other kinds of consumption of the president, including his eating habits. This is about his Diet Coke habit. Let me read it to you. Watching cable he shares thoughts with anyone in the room, even the household staff he summons via a button for lunch or for one of the dozen Diet Cokes he consumes each day. If you add this, Michael, to what his former Corey Lewandowski, I mean, his campaign manager, has a new book out about some of these very things. Corey's book is called "Let Trump Be Trump." Here's what he writes in that. On Trump force one, there were four major food groups, McDonald's, Kentucky Fried Chicken, pizza, and Diet Coke. What are your thoughts? I mean, listen, when I when I read this, I think, this is not, OK, what doctors would recommend. This is not the healthiest diet. However, obviously, President Trump seems to have boundless energy. So what does your reporting suggest?
[D'antonio:] Well, some of that energy is obviously caffeine. And, you know, we see him go up and down during the course of a day and during the course of a week. And it may sometimes depend on the supply of Diet Coke. The other the thing that would concern me more is this consistent consumption of fats and sugars and all sorts of stuff that's bad for you. We can get to 65 or 70, the president's now, I guess, 71, and look healthy on the outside, and he does have a lot of energy, but any physician will tell you that that's a recipe for problems. And we need a president who's healthy, who's not going to have an episode that puts him in the hospital. I would look forward to the physical that he's going to have in January for the country to be reassured or for the president maybe to be put on a different path, as President Clinton got on a different path. And you look at him now and he's quite slim and healthy.
[Camerota:] After heart surgery. I mean, let's remember how far down that path President Clinton went.
[D'antonio:] Yes.
[Camerota:] But, you're right, he is getting his first official medical, which will be publicly disclosed and will, of course, be fascinating to everyone because he's our president and you want to know what kind of health he's in. What did you think, Michael, about that episode recently where he slurred his speech? Did you know that to be true of him in the past?
[D'antonio:] No. I hadn't seen that before. And I don't think the public record has much in it that would suggest a speech problem or, you know, a mental processing problem. But there have been observations made by neurologists and psychiatrists about the decline of his vocabulary over the years. When you analyze how he spoke and his public performances in the '80s and '90s
[Camerota:] Has it declined?
[D'antonio:] He did have a much broader vocabulary.
[Camerota:] I want to ask you about that.
[D'antonio:] Yes. Yes. I mean he he spoke in
[Camerota:] So when you interviewed him, you noticed a difference?
[D'antonio:] Well, I did notice a difference between the Trump I saw in 2014 and 2015 and the man who was publicly with us in the '80s and '90s. He is a little slower. And he falls back on these habitual phrases, things like, "nobody would believe" or, "it's the greatest you ever saw." And those are ways for him to catch his breath and let his mind grasp the next thought that he's going for. In the past, he was much quicker and could go right to the point he wanted to make. So I've seen it. I think this is something that he should have checked out. You know, all of us lose words as we get older and we speak with more deliberation. There's nothing inherently wrong in that. But I think we need to be reassured that he's OK.
[Camerota:] OK, Michael D'Antonio, always great to get your perspective on all of this stuff. Thank you very much for being here. Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right, we are following breaking news. Information keeps coming in about what happened in New York's Port Authority during rush hour this morning. We are told one person is in custody. There was an explosive device. We have the latest, next.

[Cabrera:] This morning, a frantic search is underway for three missing children in California after their family's SUV plunged off a cliff. Authorities have recovered the bodies of Jennifer and Sarah Hart and three of their six children. But here's the big mystery, where are the other three children. At this point it's still unclear if they were even in the SUV. And now the family's neighbors are speaking out about some of their suspicions. CNN's correspondent, Miguel Marques, is in Los Angeles with more details on this investigation. Miguel, where is this investigation right now? Any leads in the search for these three missing?
[Miguel Marquez, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, they believe that they were in the car and they were probably swept out to sea. The other three children that were killed were not buckled in. They believe the other three probably were not either. The cliff is so steep that it went nearly into the Pacific Ocean. And the water, the waves were lapping up into the car and could have pulled other debris out. It is a mystery as to how this happened. One of those missing is 15- year-old Devonte Hart. He came to national attention in 2014 for a hug during a Black Lives Matter protest in Portland, Oregon. He was seen crying by police officers. The police officer approached him. Then he photo, he hugged the police officer and they had a long conversation. That photo went viral. And the so the rest is history. Now he and two of his sisters are still missing. Just how this happened, though, is very much a mystery. The police and law enforcement says that there were no skid marks, no sign of braking. It's not clear how that SUV went over that very steep embankment along the Pacific Coast Highway, this, you know, rough but absolutely gorgeous part of California.
[Cabrera:] And tell us more about this Hart family. Neighbors say they had their suspicions?
[Marquez:] Well, neighbors say that they had that the children, Devonte and others, had come over looking for food at different points and had burst into the house saying that their mother was beating them. It is not clear how much of that is true. We do know that there was a referral to child protective services in Washington state on Friday. When officials from CPS went over to the house to check on the children, they didn't find anybody there. Then they checked Monday and Tuesday. Didn't find anyone then as well. So it is all part of this mystery as to why this family was so far away from home, over 500 miles away from home, when this terrible accident happened. Ana.
[Cabrera:] All right, Miguel Marquez, we know you'll stay on top of it. Thank you. Hope Hicks has left the White House and the president is apparently being told by allies he doesn't need to replace her. What this could mean for messaging out of the West Wing.

[Berman:] All right, the breaking news, President Trump just now criticizing law enforcement leaders, claiming that they are politicizing really the classified Republican memo. This is what the president wrote. The top leadership and investigators of the FBI and Justice Department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of Democrats and against Republicans, something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago. Rank and file are great people. Now, this comes as sources tell CNN that President Trump thinks the memo could discredit Robert Mueller's Russia investigation and that is a primary reason he wants it released. Here to discuss, CNN national security analyst, former director of national intelligence, James Clapper. Director, thanks so much for being with us. First, your reaction to this statement from the president moments ago saying that investigators and leaders of the FBI and Justice Department have politicized the investigative process.
[James Clapper, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, it strikes me as the pot calling the kettle black. I think this is almost amusing if it weren't such a serious subject. I think the Department of Justice, and particularly the FBI, have done the right thing by trying to defend themselves. And I was particularly struck by the FBI's statement, which cited errors of omission of fact rather than jeopardize the sources and methods. And I found that quite significant.
[Berman:] Why?
[Clapper:] I mean it transparency is a great thing, but let's let's be factual and objective about it. And this clearly is a pretty blatant political act. And I hope that the FBI particularly takes the opportunity to rebut the memo that those things those and include those omissions of fact to the extent that they can.
[Berman:] There's an implication in the president's statement this morning that it's the leadership that is politically biased, not the rank and file. Is there any merit to that distinction, especially you're dealing with the Russia investigation, the Clinton e-mail investigation, from the beginning. Was it the leadership doing this investigation? Was it the leadership driving for these FISA warrants, or was it the people, the rank and file, on these cases?
[Clapper:] Well, I believe it's probably the rank and file. Certainly the leadership is aware, particularly if there's a FISA request authorization request. And, by the way, you know, this implicates a lot of other considerations here. The court itself that grants and, in this case, what I understand as the the instant issue was the extension of a FISA authorization, which would indicate that the original FISA order was producing something and information of value. And so the court this is not a casual thing. And there has to be layers of approval. There has to be corroborating evidence. And the court, more importantly, has to has to approve it. As well, I think Mike Hayden alluded to this yesterday, this also implicates others in the intelligence community who have a lot at stake here with the whole FISA process. Not to mention besmirching, regardless of what the tweet says, besmirching the rank and file superb people of the FBI. And I think it calls to question our standing and our ability to keep secrets in the rest of the world, which could impact sharing.
[Berman:] Now, leave aside, for a second, the fact that this is a Republican memo and the Democratic version of the analysis of the underlying data is not being allowed to come out at the same time. But is there a proper role for congressional oversight over the intelligence agencies if there was something wrong with the way that investigators went about getting this FISA warrant? Shouldn't Congress step in and say, hey, this smells funny?
[Clapper:] Well, absolutely. And that's the whole purpose of why the two intelligence oversight committees were established in the first place. You know, unlike other constituencies in the government, the Department of Agriculture or the Department of Commerce, what the intelligence community does is secret. So I almost felt that the oversight committees had an additional burden because they have to represent the people because we can't expose what the intelligence community does every day because of the concern about sources and methods, trade craft, protection of people undercover, et cetera. But absolutely they should conduct oversight. But there is a process for this that is discreet and confidential. And exposing this as a political act I think is particularly egregious.
[Berman:] Let me ask you this. Christopher Wray, the FBI director, there are people within the White House telling CNN they are concerned that he might quit over this. There are other people suggesting he's been sending signals he won't. But put yourself in his shoes. If the White House goes ahead and releases this memo over your objection and now your public, frankly, objections to this, should he stay in his job?
[Clapper:] Well, that's entirely up to him. That's a very personal decision. But I will tell you, John, having been in a situation like that, you know, a similar position, senior position, that there were times when I considered resigning to make a point. And what you have to weigh is what would be the impact on the institution if you did that. Are you doing more harm, causing more turmoil if you take an action like that to make a point? No one you know, that's a very personal decision and only Chris Wray can make it. And I don't think anyone else can speculate, I certainly can't, about what he will do.
[Berman:] Again, just one more question on the president's statement this morning. The top leadership and investigators in the FBI and Justice Department politicized this investigation. You were director of national intelligence when this all began. Were there any politics involved when you were there?
[Clapper:] Well, I don't think so. People will argue that until the cows come home. But I know in the preparation of our intelligence community assessment, we tried to keep the politics out of it and just report on what on the and we did so with pretty high confidence in the findings of the intelligence community assessment. Obviously, when we went to The Hill to brief it, there were varying reactions to what we said in the intelligence community assessment. And some Republicans did look for political motives. But we tried to keep very hard to keep that out of it. I didn't see it. Certainly not among the analysts that actually did the work. And
[Berman:] Let me ask you one question on some other news today. We learned that Mike Pompeo, the CIA director, did met with Russian intelligence chiefs in the United States last week, despite the fact that at least one of them were listed under Russian sanctions. Now, our understanding from Jim Sciutto is, is that they went through the proper processes to OK this meeting and certainly former U.S. intelligence chiefs have met with Russian leaders before. What do you make of this meeting?
[Clapper:] Well, sort of a mixed message here. First, it is a good thing to try to communicate a dialogue with the Russians. Although I've, in my experience, found that to be very unsatisfactory and pretty much a one-way street because the Russians are, at best, transactional. I do hope that Director Pompeo, when he did meet with them, didn't give them a pass as far as the Russian interference in our election is concerned because it was those very services that he was meeting with, or the leaders of which, which were at the pointy end of the stick, if you will, in orchestrating the interference in our election. So, yes, the Russians are bad, but we need the dialogue with them. And if we can find ways to work with them, fine. I just I never did. But you've got to talk to them. But I just hope that they didn't get a pass when he met with them.
[Berman:] All right, James Clapper, always great to have you, sir. Thank you so much.
[Clapper:] Thanks, John.
[Berman:] All right, thanks for our international viewers for watching. For you, CNN "TALK" is next. For our U.S. viewers, NEW DAY continues right now.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Camerota:] All right, we do have some breaking news because there are developments coming out this morning fast and furious about this memo. John Berman joins me. Great to have you here this morning. So, here's the breaking news. President Trump is again accusing the nation's law top law enforcement leaders of being biased. This is a new tweet. He claims they are the ones politicizing this investigative process, rather than the partisan politicians in Congress who are doing so.

[Baldwin:] Boston's most notorious mobster, James "Whitey" Bulger, has been killed in prison. But one of the big questions today, who did it, why did they do it, and how did they manage to pull it off in a maximum-security prison? Bulger was found unresponsive yesterday in the West Virginia Federal Penitentiary where he had just been transferred just 24 hours prior. The facility is a maximum- security prison. Now, we're learning just days before Bulger's killing, a bipartisan group of lawmakers voiced deep concerns to Attorney General Jeff Sessions about the safety and the staffing of that very prison. So with me now Michael Kendall, a former federal prosecutor. He once represented the family of one of Bulger's murder victims. Mike, good to see you, sir. We don't have a lot of details, but what we do know is he was killed in this maximum-security prison. I'm curious, do you think it was a hit job?
[Michael Kendall, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Well, most people who are familiar with federal prisons will tell you that the lowest form of life in a prison is an informer. Bulger was the most notorious informant or rat in the country. He obviously would be a person that would have a bull's eye on his back in any prison, particularly one as violent as this one.
[Baldwin:] So how would that hit come down? Would it come from someone outside the prison and just carried out from within the walls?
[Kendall:] I think it would be ubiquitous. Numerous people in the prison would want to go after someone like him. They may have a Boston connection, a La Costa Nostra connection, or it's someone wanting to make their name. But they'd all have the same motivation. And being an informer, he would have no friends in prison.
[Baldwin:] We mentioned he had just been transferred 24 hours before. How rare is this?
[Kendall:] Well, prison murders happen. They are somewhat rare. I think we've read and all seen with respect to this particular facility, it's quite violent, it has understaffing problems, and so it would be a particularly bad place to put such a notorious informer into the general population. You really got to think, what were people thinking?
[Baldwin:] I want to ask you what the victims' families are thinking. You represented one of the families. Have you talked to them? How are they reacting to the news?
[Kendall:] I haven't spoken to anybody in the last couple of days, but in general, from comments we've seen in the press from other victims' families, there's this sense of some sort of ironic just desserts but obviously too late. He's somebody who eluded law enforcement for 16 years on the run, somebody who had a life of crime until the age of 65. Nobody should applaud a murder in prison, but obviously this is not a person anybody has sympathy for given his sociopathic record.
[Baldwin:] Not at all. Michael Kendall, thank you.
[Kendall:] Thank you, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] You got it. Coming up next, imagine family members now sifting through debris as heartbreaking evidence starts to surface after this newly built passenger jet crashes into the ocean. They are going through backpacks and wallets and shoes. What radar is now revealing about the unusual final moments of that flight.

[Rosemary Church, Cnn Anchor:] A rare olive branch from North Korea, Kim Jong-un reopens a hotline with South Korea amid taunts from the U.S. President on Twitter. But North Korea wasn't President Trumps only target, now the U.S. is threatening to also cut funding to the Palestinian authority. And later, it's one story determined not to become last year's news. We have more on a new initiative taking on sexual harassment in Hollywood and beyond. Hello and welcome to your viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church and this is CNN Newsroom. And we begin with a major diplomatic breakthrough between North and South Korea. For the first time in almost two years a special direct hotline connecting the two countries just reopened and North Korea called the South. North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, gave an order to open the phone line because he wants to talk about sending his athletes to the Olympic Games next month, but even as Pyongyang and Seoul make these moves toward talks, Mr. Kim and the U.S. President remain combative. During his New Year's address, Mr. Kim said, the U.S. was within range of his weapons and the nuclear button is always on his desk. President Donald Trump responded with a taunt saying this, I too have nuclear button, but it is a much bigger and more powerful one than his and my button works. The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. says Washington has a firm condition for diplomacy.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The U.n:] North Korea can talk with anyone they want, but the U.S. is not going to recognize it or acknowledge it until they agree to ban the nuclear weapons that they have.
[Church:] Well joining us now is CNN Military Analyst, Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona, in California and Paula Hancocks in Seoul. Greetings to you both. Paula, let's start with you, what is the latest on these upcoming talks between North and South Korea and what has been the reaction to President Trump bragging on Twitter that his nuclear button is bigger than Kim Jong-uns?
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn Correspondent:] Well to your first question, Rosemary, just a half an hour ago that communication hotline was reopened at Panmunjom, the Truce Village in the demilitarized zone. It hasn't been answered since February 2016 according to South Korean officials, but South Korea has been phoning 9 a.m., 4 p.m., every single day since that point to see if North Korea would answer. But today, North Korea actually made the first phone call, 3:30 p.m. local time here in Seoul. They made sure the communications were correct and then they started their discussions. Now we don't have any information at this point as to what they were talking about, whether or not they agreeing to that suggestion from South Korea that January 9th, next Tuesday, should be the time that they actually start those high level talks at the DMZ. South Koreans saying they have to be soon, they have to be high level because there's only a month to go before the winter Olympics. But, we've heard some very positive sounds from both sides. The North Koreans though the television on a North Korean official saying that Kim Jong-un did welcome the response from the South Korean president. South Korean's President, Moon Jae-in, is saying he welcomes the idea of talks and he also went on to say that he thought that it could go onto nuclear talks as well. But at this point North Korea just wants to talk about the Olympics.
[Church:] And of course the reaction to those words from President Trump?
[Hancocks:] There has been no official reaction. You can imagine the scratching of the heads and the conversations and corridors of power in North and South Korea as that tweet came out. I think there's been those kinds of questions and discussions all around the world, but there has no official response from either side and quite often we don't see a response from South Korea. They're an ally of the United States, they don't want to be saying anything that's seen as criticizing the U.S. President, but I can't image that they thought that tweet was helpful.
[Church:] Indeed. Paula Hancocks, bringing us up to date on the situation there from Seoul in South Korea just after 4 p.m. Many thanks to you. So, let's bring in Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona now for some analysis and Colonel, when you read that tweet from the U.S. President about his nuclear button being bigger than Kim Jong-un's, what did you think and what impact could that sort of language have on the outcome of rising tensions between the United States and North Korea?
[Rick Francona, Cnn Military Analyst:] Well I think a lot of this was to be expected. First you had Kim Jong-un making his statement. He included he started off his statement with his threats toward the United States, then he went on to make this conciliatory gesture towards the South. I think this was very well played by the North Koreans and I think this might be trying to drive a wedge, a small wedge, between the United States and South Korea. If you look at what happened, he tried to provoke the U.S. President and guess what, it worked. And so you see Trump respond with this knee jerk reaction. Now preferably he wouldn't have said it, but I think we may be reading too much into this. I don't think we're going to war over this and I don't think it's really going to upset what's happening. The North Koreans and the South Koreans look like they're on a path towards some talks. This is a good thing. The participation in the Olympics could be a good think. So, I'm not going to put too much into this bluster, because we see this bluster every year from the North Koreans, we just don't see a response from the United States like this every year.
[Church:] Yes, let's talk about the opening of that hotline, because the U.S. is, of course, dismissing upcoming talks between North and South Korea initiated by Kim Jong-un which is highly unusual, calling them nothing more than a band aid and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, says the U.S. won't take any talk seriously if they don't ban all nuclear weapons in North Korea. Now, if and when these talks do take place, it's more than likely that they're just going to be talking about North Korea being included in the Winter Olympic Games, but from what you've been saying it sounds like you see it as a positive move that talks are starting at all, but there's an effort here, presumably, for North Korea to freeze out the United States. Do you see that as a strategy on the part of the north?
[Francona:] I do and I think that's what the North Korean's would prefer. They want to have bilateral talks with South Korea and they want South Korea to recognize that they're a nuclear power. They know that United States is not going to sit down at the table with them as long as they insist that they're going to be a nuclear armed nation and I don't see that changing. I see the United States position and North Korean position diametrically oppose. I see neither side willing to give on that. So the only way we're going to have talks is if we start with North Korea and South Korea and given the stakes here, any talking is good.
[Church:] Yes, and I did want to ask you or more less going back to the tweet that we read out from President Trump, what would you see as the endgame of challenging the power of Kim Jong-un? Is it Mr. Trump using a language that Kim Jong-un understands and some people have suggested that that actually is helpful or could be helpful, or could it push tensions into dangerous territory here?
[Francona:] Well he's running risk when he does this. I mean I understand what he's doing. He's saying, yes you don't even know that you have a capability that works. They have not tested it. I think the latest intelligence assessment that I've been able to glean was that they do not have a reentry vehicle yet. So, they really don't have a capability that he's threatening to use. And I think the President wanted to put him in place and saying, yes you're still the little kid on the block and we're the big gorillas. So, let's just knock this off. I don't know I think he runs a big risk doing that because antagonizing a guy with his finger on a nuclear weapon isn't really a good idea.
[Chuch:] Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona, thank you for joining us and thank you for your analysis, we always appreciate it. And you can add the Palestinians to the list of people President Trump is blasting on Twitter early in 2018. He is threatening to withhold future payments to the tweeting this, we pay the Palestinians hundreds of millions of dollars a year and get no appreciation or respect. With the Palestinians no longer willing to talk peace, why should we make any of these massive future payments to them? Here is Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.
[Haley:] The Palestinians now have to show their will that they want to come to the table. As of now they're not coming to the table but they ask for aide. We're not giving the aide, we're going to make sure that they come to the table and we want to move forward with the peace process.
[Chuch:] We turn to Iran where demonstrators are planning to march Wednesday in support of the countries regime.
[Church:] And these are some of the anti-government protestors clashing with riot police Tuesday, was the sixth straight day of protest against Iran's leaders. The protestors are fed up with Iran's stagnant economy, high unemployment, especially among young people and perceived corruption. But Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, is blaming outside enemies for the unrest. Well the U.S. calls that allegation nonsense. Mohammad Marandi is a professor at the University of Tehran and joins us now live from the Iranian capital. Thank you so much for being with us.
[Mohammad Marandi, Professor At University Of Tehran:] Thanks for having me.
[Church:] Now, the protests were apparently quieted Tuesday and we're expecting see pro-government demonstrations on Wednesday, what does that signal to you? An end to the anti-government protests or a pause in those demonstrations do you think?
[Marandi:] Well, I think we have to make a distinction between protests and riots. What we've had over the last few months in Tehran and in other cities, have been peaceful protests. For example, we have regular protests in front of parliament over different issues, but more recently since a couple of financial institutions have collapsed and a lot of people have lost their money, there have been protests where people have been demanding that the government resolve the problem for them and return their help them get their money back. But what happened was that rioters began to hijack the protests and these rioters have been guided from abroad. The people who are using social media apps to very openly instigate violence; they've been teaching people how to make Molotov cocktails and other bombs, and they've been telling them to attack police stations; these are people who are based in Europe and the United States, it's very clear who they are. One such group is the Mujahidin the terrorist organization, which in the 1980's assassinated many people in my city in Tehran.
[Church:] Sir, I wonder if I could just interrupt you. What evidence do you have of that outside influence?
[Marandi:] Well the very fact that the majority Nadil terrorist organization is involved in this and they are they have offices their central is in Paris. In the 1980's, as I was saying, they assassinated hundreds of people in Iran and they blew up many bombs in cities throughout the country. Very near my home, a family of four Armenians was killed because of one of their bomb attacks. And they then went to Iraq fought with Saddam Hussein against Iran, basically betraying their own country and they have offices across Europe and North America, in Berlin and Paris. And if we had such a group in Iran that was carrying out attacks in Europe, I think that the reaction would have been very different from those countries. So -
[Church:] And where are you getting that information from?
[Marandi:] They are openly making statements on-line for people to carry out attacks on police stations. And as I said groups using social media apps in Persian. These are very well known groups that people are members of; I monitor, I a member of these groups because I want to see what they are saying. So it's no secret.
[Church:] Now Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Tuesday blamed Iran's enemies for stirring up unrest in the country you referred to it there, but some might say that President Trump's Tweet on January 1st was doing just that when he said this was a time for change in Iran. Are protesters being emboldened by U.S. support for anti-government protests in any where or are they motivated? The protesters you talk about, not the rioters, of course, are they motivated entirely by domestic factors? When they talk about economic issues that are a concern certainly to younger people trying to get work?
[Marandi:] That's a very good point actually. Those who are protesting, no they're not motivated by Trump. Actually people like Trump and the rioters both cause them to stop protesting because they don't want to be associated with either Trump or the rioters. So Trump has, as usual, he does no service to anyone. People in Iran have no respect for Trump because in the United States, he supports direct or indirect racist groups. In Charlottesville he played a very negative role; when African-Americans
[Church:] We appear to have lost our signal there, Mohammad Marandi joining us from Tehran, many thanks to you. The U.S. wants the U.N. Security Council to hold an emergency session on Iran. Let's get more now from CNN's Fred Pleitgen in Berlin. He has reported from Iran numerous times and Fred the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley has called on the international community to speak out on the Iran protests. She says the U.S. will seek emergency U.N. talks on the situation. What are European leaders saying about the situation in Iran and how far might they go?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well I think they're going a lot less far than the U.S. administration is at this point. You have Nikki Haley obviously speaking out; you have President Trump speaking out and supporting in support of the protesters in various Tweets that he's launched over the past 24 to 36 hours. European leaders, they don't necessarily take a different view, but they are very different in the way that they convey those views. You have Frederica Mogherini who's obviously the foreign policy chief of the European Union and she's a big, big backer of the nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers so she's been calling on all sides to tone things down but she's also calling on the rights to free assembly to be respected in Iran and that's really something that we're seeing from various European leaders. Leah Rhiman in Germany, you have Zeck Margobriall, the foreign minister who also called on all sides to show restraint, but also said that freedom of assembly and freedom of speech must be respected. And then there was a phone call between the French President Macron and the President of Iran Hassan Rouhani, where Rouhani called on Macron to stop some of the groups that Professor Marandi was just talking about from operating in France. It's unclear whether or not that's something that's going to happen, at the same time Mr. Macron also called on the Iranians to respect free speech and free assembly and also said that they were going to postpone a visit by the defense minister of France, which was supposed to take place next week to Iran. So certainly this is having a bit of an effect, but at the same time the European leaders really have a different style of rhetoric than the Americans at this point Rosemary.
[Church:] All right many thanks to our Fred Pleitgen joining us there live from Berlin where it is 8:15 in the morning; we appreciate your live report. Let's take a very short break here, but still to come, President Trump tries his thumbs at Twitter diplomacy his latest swipes at Iran, Pakistan and North Korea, plus he saved a few jabs for his favorite target of late, the Department of Justice, we'll have more on that when we return.

[Vause:] Terrifying moments there as an escalated malfunction suddenly accelerating, brightest which has gone unclear. Some on the neighboring escalator reached across trying to save them. With others who just left to tumble down to the bottom. All of this happened at a metro station in Rome on Tuesday. At least 20 people were once seriously. Mostly, was caught up in this accident were Russian football fans on the way a match. Officials are investigating this but so far, no word on what went wrong. The U.S. National Security Advisor went to Moscow, ready to give Vladimir Putin an earful about Russian election meddling and pulling out for nuclear arms deal. But the Russian president shot back. So, how is it that a second summit between President Putin, rather, and President Trump is now actually in the works? CNN's Fred Pleitgen has details.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] A tense meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and National Security Advisor John Bolton, Putin immediately taking a swipe at the
[U.s. Vladimir Putin, President Of Russia:] The emblem of the U.S. depicts an eagle. In one claw, it holds 13 arrows. And in the other, an olive branch. A symbol of the peace-loving policy of the states together with 13 all this. Question, it looks as if your Eagle has eaten all the olives, and has only arrows left.
[Unidentified Female:] And what is left is only the arrows.
[John Bolton, United States National Security Advisor:] But I didn't bring any more olives.
[Pleitgen:] Despite the thick air, the two sides decided on a new meeting between President Trump and the Russian leader on November 11th in Paris. The Russians still fuming after the Trump administration's decision to pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. CNN caught up with a national security advisor as he was laying a wreath for murdered opposition leader Boris Nemtsov between high- stakes meetings with top Russian leaders. Are the Russians been quite understanding for your reasoning and you explain it to them?
[Bolton:] Well, I think their preferences, they've stated is that we not withdraw. But I think, we've given them reasons why we're going to do it, and I think they understand that reasons quite clearly. Some of which I think they fully appreciate from their own strategic perspective. I think the president could not have been clearer, not just on Saturday, but yesterday is for what his decision.
[Pleitgen:] After a Russian woman was recently indicted for allegedly trying to meddle in the upcoming midterm elections, Bolton, said he warned Putin not to interfere.
[Bolton:] It's a lesson I think, don't mess with American elections.
[Pleitgen:] But the National Security Advisor didn't specify what the consequences would be if Russia was found to be meddling in America's democracy again. Saying only, the U.S. was keeping an eye on the situation. Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Moscow.
[Vause:] Vladimir Putin is not the only Russian being warned about meddling in the U.S. midterm elections. The U.S. is also putting hackers themselves on notice for the new cyber operation aimed at trying to end their efforts. Details from CNN's Brian Todd.
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] A shot across the bow to Russian hackers trying to meddle in America's midterm elections. An administration official tells CNN, the U.S. military's Cyber Command has begun targeting those Russian operatives. Apparently overwhelming them with electronic messages and fake e-mails to try to make their meddling more difficult.
[Jason Healy, Former White House Cyber Official:] It is very interesting to see this now being part of this U.S. cyber strategy. to go to these Russian operators, and saying don't influence the elections. We know who you are, we are tracking you, there are going to be consequences.
[Todd:] Word of the operation comes as President Trump's national security advisor is in Moscow, delivering the same message to the Russians in person.
[Bolton:] Don't mess with American elections.
[Todd:] Just what are Russian trolls doing to try to disrupt the midterm vote? Experts say they often create false personas, pretending to be Americans. Then they either try to recruit real Americans to stage protests or other events. Sometimes even paying for the equipment, like this rally against Hillary Clinton, or they send divisive messages online.
[Laura Rosenberger, Director, Alliance For Securing Democracy:] So, whether that's around you know, a mass shooting, or whether that's around you know, questions about NFL protests, we see them seizing on these moments and often just amplifying existing material, but to make Americans think that we're more divided than we actually may be by, again, artificially manipulating that information space. They've purchased ads in the past.
[Todd:] On Friday, a U.S. criminal indictment said a Russian conspiracy of online trolls tried to stoke discord in the U.S. with posts like these, "Obama is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Illegal immigration is a taxpayer burden." U.S. officials say, a crony of Vladimir Putin's contributed $35 million to the operation. The woman charged with coordinating the campaign went on Russian T.V. to ridicule the charges.
[Elena Khusyaynova, Accused Of Meddling In 2018 Midterms:] I was shocked to hear that me, just a simple Russian accountant, elected a U.S. president, instead of Americans.
[Todd:] This new campaign against Russian trolls isn't the first time the U.S. has gone on the digital offensive against enemies.
[Healy:] The U.S. has certainly been involved with some pretty severe disruptive attacks on adversaries, and this the Stuxnet attack on Iranian uranium enrichment is certainly a great example of that.
[Todd:] Some analysts believe that's what the U.S. should be doing to the Russian trolls to directly target their capabilities, rather than just sending them warning messages.
[Rosenberger:] Offensive cyber operations are an option. Essentially, you know, frying the servers.
[Todd:] The New York Times reports that the American effort to target those Russian cyber meddlers is somewhat measured limited in scope. Analysts say the Americans have to be a little bit careful not to trigger an escalation. And prompt the Russians or other adversaries in cyberspace to try to hack into the American power grid and other key infrastructure. Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
[Vause:] The son of journalist, Jamal Khashoggi has been summoned to the Saudi Royal Palace, what Riyadh says was a condolence call. But critics say, it was a force photo-op with the man who ordered his father's execution. More on that in a moment. And later this hour
[Unidentified Male:] We are an honorable people, we are workers. Would it call a group of kid's terrorists?
[Vause:] Still of the thousands making their way towards the US-Mexico border, responding to President Trump's accusations that they could be criminals or maybe even terrorist.

[Audrey Gossett Louis, District Attorney, Wilson County, Texas:] Everyone can help. Help by praying for these families and their loved ones. And everyone can do that. The other thing is you can help these families financially. And so we are working and in the process of setting up two bank accounts. The Sutherland Springs Community Association has a bank account through Commerce Bank in Stockdale that will be accepting monetary donations on behalf of the families. In addition to that, Wells Fargo will have an account as well set up for the victims of Sutherland Springs. So that will be available for anyone to help. What we do not need at this point are canned goods and nonperishable items for the families. If you want a way to help, it's through prayer and it's through financial donations. So, we appreciate you guys sharing that information. And we are very grateful for this country and the just tremendous outpouring of support that these families are starting to receive, and we want to make sure that everybody knows how they can help. Thank you all very much.
[Freeman Martin, Texas Department Of Public Safety:] Also with us today, we have two Texas Rangers majors, Cory Lane and Brian Braskinski, the commanders for the investigation. So we will try to answer any of your questions you have at this time.
[Unidentified Reporter:] What did video show and assist in the investigation?
[Martin:] Of course, the video will assist in the investigation. And, you know, it was a horrific event. And at this time, we're not prepared to talk about the video.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Director Martin, could you explain what happened after the shooting happened? Could you back up a little bit and give us a description. Reports a gas station walked up behind where you guys are sanding?
[Martin:] We know he was seen at the Valero. He was, obviously, suspicious to others. Based on the way he was dressed in all black. At that time, I'm not sure if he had the mask on or not. But he was wearing a black mask that had a white face, skull face, to it. Then he drove across the church and exited the vehicle and started the shooting.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Was he wearing body armor?
[Martin:] He was wearing a ballistic vest with a plate on the front. There was no plate on the back.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Beyond going domestic situation, you were talking about
[Martin:] At this time I cannot. We know that he expressed anger towards his mother-in-law, who attends this church.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Do we know if she reported its to authorities?
[Martin:] We don't.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Do we know if it had anything to do with the estranged wife?
[Martin:] We can't answer that.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Would the suspect continue to engage people inside the church and had it not been for the good Samaritan who stepped in.
[Martin:] We can only speculate but, you know
[Unidentified Reporter:] Would you call this domestic terror?
[Martin:] Probably a better question for
[Unidentified Reporter:] When did he buy the weapons? Let him answer. What's your name? Would you call this domestic terror?
[Chris Combs, Special Agent In Charge, Fbi:] At this time, we do not have a terrorism investigation open. The rangers are the lead. They have the investigation and we're supporting them.
[Unidentified Reporter:] What's your name?
[Combs:] Chris Combs, with the
[Fbi. Unidentified Reporter:] Where were the weapons bought? The main weapons
[Combs:] So what we know is he bought four weapons in total, two of them were bought in Colorado, two of them were bought here in Texas.
[Unidentified Reporter:] When were they purchased?
[Combs:] Each one was purchased per year in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017.
[Unidentified Reporter:] When in 2017? The events
[Combs:] The question is could you describe what happened in the church. He walked down the aisle shooting and then walked back down shooting is that correct from?
[Joe Tackitt, Sherriff, Wilson County Sherriff's Department:] Without getting into too much detail the subject it was a there was some length of time that the subject spent inside that church in the shooting event. He moved around freely inside the church. I'm not going to get into exact dynamics in the church.
[Unidentified Male:] Last question.
[Unidentified Reporter:] The pastor
[Martin:] Yes. The pastor I can only imagine what he's going through.
[Unidentified Reporter:] How many of the victims were minor?
[Martin:] We don't have all of the information. There are several that are children. Their exact ages yesterday we released information that the ages ranged from 5 to 73. Those were the ones being treated at the hospital. Inside the church, the deceased, actually range from 18 months to 77 years of age.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Really quick on that
[Tackitt:] We will tweet follow us on Twitter please, and we will tweet something as well. We plan on having a press briefing around 7:00 this afternoon.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Where did the video come from. There's three Academy Stores in San Antonio. Do you know which ones the weapons were purchased?
[Tackitt:] We're in the going to release that information. Thank you all for coming. We will brief
[Martin:] My name is Freeman Martin. F-R-E-E-M-A-N, Martin, M-A-R-T-I- N. With that, you all, we would like to close in prayer.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] All right. We have been we have been listening to right there is an update from Texas officials in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on this horrific shooting. Not sure if we have the audio. We'll continue. Some a lot of information coming out, none of it uplifting in any way, shape, or form. The ages of those who were killed in the church now they say was ranging from 18 months old to 77 years old. Ten people remain in critical condition in hospital. And one of the first things they said right off the bat so this number could rise. We did earlier a lot more about maybe what was leading up to this shooting and how it played out. Steve Moore is back with me. Art Roderick is back with me. Jonathan Wackrow here as well. Always takes your breath away when you hear an 18-month-old was part of it, Jonathan. What stands out to you? A lot they told us a lot in this press conference, including that the gunman, the shooter likely may have, is the way they said it, died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound and he called his father on when he was being pursued to say he was shot and might not make it. That seems
[Jonathan Wackrow, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Yes. There's a lot of unanswered questions that are coming out. But let's go to, again, what I said earlier. This individual showed up to this church with multiple weapons, body armor, tactical gear. He had a motive. What was it? Looking at possible answer the in-laws. His estranged wife. Again, in the infancy of the investigation this will start to come out and build a better, clearer profile of who this individual was.
[Bolduan:] Steve, what stands out to you in what we heard from Texas officials?
[Steve Moore, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] That it's, first of all, I was kind of devastated by the 18-month-old, too. I think that what you're going to realize here, what we're going to realize this is pretty orthodox as far as mass shooters are concerned. They have a target. They go in and they do not stop shooting until the first time somebody confronts them, and then usually they'll either flee or kill themselves. So we're finding this finding out it's fairly orthodox, as tragic as that sounds. I'm also, from the videos there, I'm seeing an be an external security camera at the church that might show an area in front of the church where he stood. I'd really like to see if that camera was going on. I'm more enlightened about how the attack went down that he went in and had a lot of time in it. The early accounts he was actually outside the building firing in, make no sense with the 223 because it's not really going to do much once you fire through walls.
[Bolduan:] And also not only with went in, Art, but had the ballistic vest on, wearing all black and put on a mask that had a white skull on the front of it. What's your takeaway right now.
[Art Roderick, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] The black mask thing is new information. I hadn't heard that before. That shows the level of what this guy was trying to carry out. I think when it's said and done having been involved in a lot of complex investigations, and I don't mean to downplay this, but it's probably going to come down to more or less a domestic scenario.
[Bolduan:] Art
[Roderick:] I found it interesting that there was four weapons
[Bolduan:] Hold on one second. I want to go back to Sutherland. We have parents, some family members speaking right now.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Mrs. Pomeroy.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm telling everybody you lean into what you don't understand, you lean into the Lord. I would submit this to everyone, my family is here, and you guys there, but every life brings to you lean on the Lord rather than your own understanding. I don't understand. I know my God does. That's where I'll leave that. Thank you for coming.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Again, follow us on we will e-mail you.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[Unidentified Reporter:] On Twitter as well. [11:39:55:]
[Bolduan:] We believe that somehow we'll get more information. These folks just came up to the camera and were sharing their thoughts. We believe they were somehow family members of some of the at least one of the deceased we were just, obviously, speaking about. Art, I cut you off. Finish your thought, please.
[Roderick:] Kate, I was mentioning that it's interesting that we had the ATF agent come up and talk about a purchase of weapons.
[Bolduan:] Yes.
[Roderick:] Over 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, that's four weapons. Only mentioned three. I'm sure the other one was back at his residence. But this is an individual that also used multiple states, as we heard during the Vegas shooting, where the individual purchased his firearms in four different states. This individual went and purchased them in Colorado and in Texas.
[Bolduan:] Also there seems to be still, even in ATF and the other officials there, still seems to be confusion, Jonathan, that they're working out. They said with all of this, in general a dishonorable discharge should not have been able to possess or purchase a firearm but still a lot of documentation and they have a lot of questions it seems themselves.
[Wackrow:] Absolutely. Again, we're in the infancy of the investigation. They're trying to backtrack all these weapons. We only know about these weapons that he purchased, you know, reportedly legally. We don't know if he had any other types of weapons at his house, a weapons cache, if this was a part of a larger, you know, attack. And he, obviously, was at the church and then fled. Why? That's a big question. This he wasn't making a final stand.
[Bolduan:] Right. Right.
[Wackrow:] He had body armor. He was prepared for some sort of fight with multiple weapons. Again, this will come down to, you know, ascertaining what was his true motive.
[Bolduan:] And with what what do you were they alluding to maybe what they thought was the contributing factor to why he fled, Steve, in our Texas hero, this good Samaritan that came out of his house, he lives next door. I think I heard he came out without his shoes on. John Berman speaking with someone, ran out with his gun and didn't even grab his shoes to help.
[Moore:] I think whether or not the subject or whether or not Kelley had any intention of a secondary target, we're probably not going to know. As we learned from active shooter situations around the United States, when they're confronted, they usually stop shooting. One thing I would like to put a different word in the vernacular. These guns were purchased fraudulently, not legally. He was not legally allowed to own these guns and he committed fraud to get them. So just I don't want to put too fine a point on it. They weren't legally purchased. They were fraudulently purchased.
[Bolduan:] Adding to the conversation. Art, can you give me your thought on one detail that seems strange. He goes into the church, clearly with a plan. Obviously. Just look no further than the outfit he chose when he went in with weapons. He leaves, he's shot, he in the car when he's being pursued, he calls his father to say he was shot and doesn't think he's going to survive. What does that mean?
[Roderick:] Yes. I mean, we've seen this in the past, unfortunately, where maybe not necessarily a phone call as the individual is dying, but generally there's a note, something left behind, an e-mail message, something on social media. This does not surprise me. I think at that particular point in time, he knew he wasn't going to make it. He was being pursued by an individual who had just shot him. He dropped his rifle, the one weapon that could have matched the good guy's weapon. I think he realized I'm going out going to say good-bye to my father.
[Bolduan:] That's one father that will faces some questions.
[Roderick:] Yes.
[Bolduan:] Face an interview now. Steve, Art, Jonathan, thank you so very much. We learned a lot from this. We learned a lot from the press conference. And we have much more on the breaking news ahead.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Deal on protecting dreamers that marks a shift from a key campaign promise. So are democrats on the verge of cutting a second deal with the president? Joining us now is Democratic Congressman Henry Cuellar of Texas. Good morning, congressman.
[Rep. Henry Cuellar , Texas:] Thank you. Good morning.
[Camerota:] So you believe that this outreach that you've seen to Democrats is actually a new strategy coming from the White House. What gives you the impression that it's a thought-out strategy rather than just today making a deal with Democrats makes sense, tomorrow making a deal with conservatives makes sense?
[Cuellar:] Well, you know, because their other strategy, trying to run over Democrats, has failed. And the president and Republicans have gotten nothing done for the country. So I specifically asked that question to the White House legislative director. And I said, hey, you ought to try this. He said, we're going to try this. And I also told the president, listen, every major piece of legislation that has passed the last few years, at the end, not the first messaging bill but the final version of the major bill, including the Harvey bill, is the majority, the majority of the votes are contributed by the Democrats. And we're the minority in Congress. So I told that to the president. He said he understood that. He said, we'll give this a try. If not, we'll go the other way.
[Camerota:] So if this is the dawn of a new era, what happens when conservatives rise up and the president sees all sorts of negative headlines from Breitbart, Ann Coulter tweets, et cetera, saying, you know, you're breaking your promise to us?
[Cuellar:] Well, I think that's the president's problem that he's got to deal with a base that that he created from those that rhetoric that he used during the campaign. Bottom line is this. Bottom line is that the president has seen that, you know, his promise of when he said we're going to win, win, win, win, you're going to get tired of winning, we know that hasn't happened. So this gives us an opportunity to work in a bipartisan way. But I do say this, no looking at the president, studying the president, he makes everything temporary. So we might just be temporarily allies and then he will shift over. So, you know, I go into this with clear eyes, understand this is a temporary type of environment with him. But while we have this environment, we are going to try to protect the dreamers. We're going to go ahead and have a tax reform that really helps the middle class. And as long as we have a say so, it will be bipartisan.
[Camerota:] And, congressman, what about the wall? We've heard the president, in just even the past 48 hours, say lots of different things as to whether or not the wall is still a must, nonnegotiable. Let me just play for you what he said yesterday about his strong feelings about it.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We are looking for extreme border security and surveillance you know, surveillance, everything else. We also have to get the wall. It doesn't have to be here, but they can't obstruct the wall, whether it's in a budget or something else when we're ready. Ultimately, we have to have the wall. If we don't have the wall, we're doing nothing. They cannot obstruct the wall. The wall, to me, is vital. If I don't get the wall, then we will become the obstructionists.
[Camerota:] What does all that mean to you? The wall is vital. They can't obstruct the wall.
[Cuellar:] I'm just amazed that here we are in the 21st century and the president and the other Republicans are still using a 14th century solution called the wall. The wall will cost 21 mile for every mile, 21 over $21 million. $21 million. All I need is a $100 fence I mean a $100 ladder and that can be taken care of. So we've just got to be smart on how we secure the border. I don't just come to the border and spend five minutes and go back and say that I know the border. I live here on the border. I raised my family here. I breath the air here. I drink the water. I understand the border. So I want to see a way that we can sensibly secure the border using technology, cameras sensors, the right mixture of personnel and, at the same time, making sure that we work with our neighbors to the south because we have a shared responsibility to secure our border.
[Camerota:] OK. So, in terms of the border security deal that the president appears to be hatching with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, as well as protecting the dreamers, when will this happen? I mean Nancy Pelosi put out a statement that seemed to suggest that it's going to happen in the next couple of weeks.
[Cuellar:] What the president it was interesting because I was watching and listening to every word the president was telling us. The first he said, hey, it's been six days, you know, since we've talked you know, since I made my order and nothing has happened. He said, I don't want to wait six months. I want to get this done as soon as possible. It's interesting that after we spoke to the president and our leaders spoke to the president that the that the Republicans have set this informal committee of Republicans, House members, to talk about DACA. I know those members on those. Those are good people that can actually work something with us. So at least there's some movement within the House. And I told the president this, Mr. President, if we put DACA or the dreamers bill on the floor right now, it has the votes. It will pass. And I said, we've got to put that bill on the floor. And he looked at me and he said, Henry, we will have a vote on this. You will see a bill on the floor. So, again, he doesn't speak for Paul Ryan, but at least there's some momentum moving into that direction. All we need is a vote on the floor and we'll get it done.
[Camerota:] OK, Congressman Henry Cuellar, thank you very much for talking to us on NEW DAY this morning.
[Cuellar:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] Chris.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] All right, not all news has to be heavy. The Cleveland Indians have a new mantra, refuse to lose. They have a record-breaking win streak. And, guess what, it's alive and well. We have details in the "Bleacher Report."
[Camerota:] But first, Tony Melendez is a successful guitar player who uses his toes to strum the chords. Born without arms, he's proven that talent has no bounds. Dr. Sanjay Gupta has his story in this edition of "Turning Points."
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] Tony Melendez's mother was given a medication for morning sickness while she was pregnant which may have affected his development.
[Tony Melendez:] I came into this world missing the two arms and a left foot was clubbed. In my eyes it was normal. So it's not like, oh, I lost them. It was, I never had them. So I was able to, with my toes, reach out and do things that people just said, how's he doing that? I wanted to be a priest when I was younger.
[Gupta:] At the time, a person was generally required to have a thumb and an index finger to become a priest in order to give communion.
[Melendez:] So I had to find something else. At 16 someone showed me how to turn the guitar different. That opened the door to be able to do the toe picking. I was able to sing for John Paul II in 1987. That moment led to a lot of things. I've recorded now six different albums. If I could go back and have two arms, it would say the only reason I would do that would to just be able to wrap my arms around my wife and hold her.
[Gupta:] Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN reporting.

[Whitfield:] Breaking news in Florida, the counting is over. That means the recounting begins. It is official. The races for Florida governor and the Senate seat are going to a statewide recount. The margin of each race was less than a half a percent, which triggers this machine recount. Now, in the Florida's governor's race, Republican Ron DeSantis is still ahead of Democrat Andrew Gillum by 0.4 percent. The Senate race is even closer. Republican Governor Rick Scott leads incumbent Democrat, Bill Nelson, by just 0.15, that's barely anything, of a percent. Now, President Trump is weighing in on this recount. He is not mincing any words. He just tweeted an unsubstantiated accusation: "Trying to steal two big elections in Florida. We are watching closely," he writes. CNN's Ryan Nobles is in Tallahassee, a town no stranger to any recount. Ryan, when did this ball get started?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, honestly, Ana, it could happen at any minute. The way that recounts work in Florida is they are administered individually by each county. So depending on how the supervisors of elections want to handle their recount, as long as they can get it done by next Thursday, they can start whenever they would like. S there's the possibility that the recount could start in some places as early as today. But we think most of them will start first thing tomorrow morning. We're already starting to hear the candidates react to the news, that the races are so close, that they are going to require a recount. Many harkening back to the dramatic 2000 presidential election where Florida was at the center of all of the attention because of a dramatic recount. We heard a few minutes ago I just left a press conference with Andrew Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee, and also was the Democratic nominee for governor. You will remember, on election night, he actually conceded the race for governor while he's talking a little bit differently about that concession today. Listen to what Gillum had to say.
[Andrew Gillum, , Florida Gubernatorial Candidate:] I am replacing my words of concession with an uncompromised and unapologetic call that we count every single vote. We count every vote. And I say this recognizing that my fate in this may or may not change. What I do know is that every single Floridian who took time to go out, to cast their vote, to participate in this process, deserve the comfort that knowing in a Democratic society, and in this process, every vote will be counted.
[Nobles:] And so you heard Gillum there saying he is replacing his concession, essentially withdrawing it. But he also makes it clear that he doesn't necessarily think that the outcome of this race is going to change. And privately, many of his aides feel the same way. They do believe that that margin of victory is perhaps too much for them to overcome, even in a recount. That's not the same tune they're singing in the Senate race, Ana. The margins are much closer there. That's where Democrats are focused. They do believe that there are enough votes for Bill Nelson to overtake Rick Scott, who is, of course, the current governor. But, Ana, we've got a long way to go before we know how this thing turns out.
[Whitfield:] And at last check, at least, the numbers were still over 12,000 difference in terms of how many voters had voted for Scott versus Nelson in that very close Senate race. We know you have been watching every single move and following this for us. Thank you, Ryan Nobles, in Florida. President Trump, meantime, attacks the media, and that, of course, is nothing new, nor are they any less reprehensible. But this week's attacks against three different journalists crossed a line. It became personal and, frankly, insulting. So why does a man who demands respect above all continue to stoop to this level? We will discuss next.

[Holmes:] Welcome back to the program. We have just, of course, been discussing race in America. Well, South Africa has a history of racial struggle, but the company also carries another very heavy burden, an HIV epidemic, bigger than anywhere else in the world. Around 7 million people there are living with the virus. Oscar-winning actress Charlize Theron, who's from South Africa, has set up a charity aimed at bringing that number down. She joined me from Johannesburg to talk about her work. Charlize Theron, thanks so much for your time. Great to have you on the program. Let's start with why South Africa, your home country, is a country so heavily burdened by the AIDS epidemic in this day and age.
[Theron:] Well, South Africa has been the hardest hit by this epidemic and still is. And it's just really unfortunate because HIV is 100 percent preventable. And being South African, I just couldn't see myself not doing something. I think once I left South Africa and came back and started really, as a young adult, paying attention to statistics and seeing the kind of unnecessary suffering that was happening here, there was I had to do something about it. And so, it was really just a question of how can I be the most effective in helping to stop this epidemic.
[Holmes:] What sort of damage is being done to African society? I know you've spoken before of so many children who lost parents and it was something that you grew up with and were very well aware of, growing up in South Africa, right?
[Theron:] Yes. I don't think there is a child of my generation that didn't grow up in hushed silences and their parents or adults always whispering about this monster that nobody really knew anything about and people were dying at a degree that was really frightening. And I think it definitely marked me as a child. Also, just kind of the misconceptions about what AIDS was at that time. And seeing a photo of Princess Di visiting a hospital with HIV-positive patients really moved me. We have come a long way. It's been we have the largest treatment program in the world right now, but we still have 53 percent of our HIV infected people not HIV-infected people not on treatment. So, we still have a long way to go. And I think for me and where my focus really stands with CTAOP is in really focusing on the adolescence of this country, the young people of this country who will be the future of this country, and not treating them to kind of curb AIDS, but to invest in them and invest in their youth and their health to be the future leaders, not just of South Africa, but of this world. I'm trying to get people not positive, so they don't need treatment.
[Holmes:] Right.
[Theron:] That's my hope and my dream.
[Holmes:] Where is the shortfall? Where is the government responsibility? Why are there places in countries like South Africa where that isn't available? Why on earth is it not available?
[Theron:] Look, the country South Africa as a country and as a government has really stepped up to the play. And it took a long time for them to get there, but they really are a country that is taking this very seriously. But when you look at our economic structure and where we are with our economy, we're not a country that can be solely responsible for the burden of what this cost is. We need a bit of a bigger push here. There is a huge misconception. I think a lot of Americans think 25 percent of the budget is sent to South Africa or to AIDS aid. And that is not true. It's less than 1 percent and now it will be less than that since President Trump's administration made these cuts to that part. And so, I think as an international world, we have to look at how do we stop something that's a virus that could come back in several years or maybe tomorrow and cause a lot more damage than what it did in the last 30 years by getting 76 million people infected and having 35 million people die. That's something that might be a South African problem right now, but could very much be an international problem. So, why not solve it here, which is to end this.
[Holmes:] Well thought. And I was going to ask you about President Trump and the cutbacks to overseas health projects and the impact of that. And you did address that. It just brought me to another thought, though, at the International AIDS Conference last year, you said we value some lives more than others. That's still the case in your view?
[Theron:] Well, when you look at the amount of people that are infected and how the AIDS epidemic has ravaged sub-Saharan Africa over the last decade versus what's been happening in the Western world, how can you deny that?
[Holmes:] Right.
[Theron:] I think that some lives are valued more than others and I think that goes beyond the AIDS epidemic. I'm seeing it right now in America. So, I think that we have to look at that as a global front. We have to be brave enough to kind of look at that as part of the problem that's been keeping the AIDS epidemic alive for so long.
[Holmes:] When you say you're seeing that in the US now, you mean with the current environment, what we've seen in Charlottesville and those issues sort of having a broader context. THERONL Yes. I see racism alive and well and that scares me and saddens me. Thank you so much, Charlize Theron.
[Theron:] Thank you so much for having me.
[Holmes:] And from a South African star to an icon, a quote by Nelson Mandela is the talk of Twitter, after this tweet by former President Barack Obama featuring the words of Mandela became the most liked tweet of all time. When we come back, imagining America at its peak, the hope and joie de vivre of new Americans who became citizens at the top of Freedom Tower. We will be right back with that.

[Sciutto:] The Republican candidate for Florida's governor under fire once again. Just days after Congressman Ron DeSantis was accused of using a racist term, the "Washington Post" reports that DeSantis spoke at multiple racially charged events, this dating back to 2013. At these conferences, you'd hear hundreds of people, many of the speakers right-wing speakers, but also some of them known racists, bigots, Milo Yiannopoulos, Sebastian Gorka, who's had anti-Muslim positions. CNN's senior Washington correspondent, Joe Johns, joins me now. So first of all, at these events, you have a variety of viewpoints, many from the right, certainly not all racists and not all bigoted, but those kinds of voices seem to be a regular feature at these events.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] Right. And I think it's important for a variety of reasons. Number one, because, right now and you have to underscore this he's running against an African-American candidate, Andrew Gillum, who's the Tallahassee mayor, and he makes a comment, for example, on television, saying, we don't want to "monkey up the state." And the question, of course, was whether that was a racist comment or not. He said it wasn't intended to be racist. But now you overlay that with this disclosure in the "Washington Post" that he's appeared four times before this group, organized by a conservative who has brought in these types of viewpoints, repeatedly. Then it starts to paint a bit of a more of a picture. And also important, I think, because the African-American community, already galvanized by the possibility of first African-American governor for the state of Florida, and now has these questions about the Republican candidate.
[Sciutto:] And the point about DeSantis and some of this came up when he used the racially charged term is that, here's an experienced politician, sitting Congressman, I believe he's a military vet.
[Johns:] Right.
[Sciutto:] Smart guy, right? But he's been if he's been going to these events, going back to 2013, none of this should be a surprise to him, right? You wouldn't go to the event and not know the kind of stuff that is being said.
[Johns:] Right. And the question becomes whether this is all a wink and a nod to bring out those voters who support right-wing notions. Of course, he's also considered a very big Donald Trump supporter.
[Sciutto:] So he's resigned his seat. He's also not running again for his congressional seat. But we're early September.
[Johns:] Right.
[Sciutto:] So until that election, there's been several weeks here, where no one's sitting in that seat.
[Johns:] Precisely. And Florida is trying to figure out what to do. They are planning a conference call this afternoon to determine whether or not there ought to be a special election to have somebody in that seat, the sixth district, through the end of December, into the beginning of January, when the new Congress is sworn in. Because the question is whether there's enough time, particularly, to get military ballots out, which have to go out 45 days before the election, and what are they going to do? Because somebody's got to be in that seat, presumably, if they can, until January.
[Sciutto:] But there are already candidates in place, Democratic and Republican, to fill that seat in the regular general election.
[Johns:] Right. The primary was the 28th of August. There's a Republican, there's a Democrat, and DeSantis was presumed to be not running.
[Sciutto:] Right. Joe Johns, thanks very much for clearing up for us. That is it for me today, Jim Sciutto, sitting in for Wolf. NEWSROOM with Brooke Baldwin starts right now.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Hi, there. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you so much for being with me. We are minutes away from the first White House briefing in nearly three weeks. It comes as President Trump claims the White House is a smooth-running machine, despite the fact that his own vice president has offered to take a lie detector test. It's to prove he did not write that withering "New York Times" opinion piece, slamming the president, and as administration officials try to figure out which one of their own is not telling the truth. The president is calling Bob Woodward a liar. The acclaimed journalist, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist of Watergate fame, debuts his Trump tell-all, "Fear" the name of his book tomorrow. And the president is discrediting Woodward's account of an administration in an unprecedented crisis. Trump tweeted, the Woodward book is a, quote, "scam," and a "joke" that should not be taken with a grain of salt. And here is what he says about Woodward. Trump cites Savannah Guthrie, the host of the "Today" show, who interviewed Woodward this morning. Quote, "It is mostly anonymous sources in here. Why should anyone trust you? General Mattis, General Kelly said it's not true." Trump then writes, quote, "Bob Woodward is a liar who is like a Dem operative prior to the midterms. He was caught cold even by NBC."

[Cooper:] A judge has ordered Michael Cohen to be in court for a hearing on Monday as lawyers for him, the president, try to stop federal prosecutors from using some of the records they seized in that raid on his home, the office, and hotel room. Yesterday, it came to life that Cohen has under criminal investigation for months. We don't know yet what specifically Cohen is under investigation for. We do know that he has been the president's fixer for years. Gloria Borger tonight has more.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] In the soap opera in which a porn star accepts a payoff to keep quiet about her affair with Donald Trump, there's got to be a guy who gets it done.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney Of Stormy Daniels:] Where is Michael Cohen? Where's Mr. Cohen? Where is this guy? Where is this guy?
[Borger:] Michael Cohen is where he's been since 2007, standing behind Donald Trump, or closer in his back pocket.
[Sam Nunberg, Trump Campaign Aide:] Michael was I'd always like to say the Ray Donovan of the office.
[Ray Donovan, Fictional Character:] I'm going to take care of it.
[Nunberg:] He took care of what had to be taken care of. I don't know what has to be taken care of, but all I know is that Michael was taking care of it.
[David Schwartz Attorney Of Michael Cohen:] He's the guy that you could call 3:00 in the morning when you have a problem.
[Borger:] Do you know stories of Donald Trump calling him 3:00 in the morning?
[Schwartz:] Donald Trump has called him at all hours of the night. Every dinner I've been at with Michael, the boss has called.
[Borger:] But Cohen did not call the boss, he says, when he decided to pay Stormy Daniels $130,000 out of his own pocket. 11 days before the election.
[Avenatti:] I think it's ludicrous.
[Borger:] So you believe 100 percent Donald Trump knew?
[Avenatti:] One hundred percent.
[Michael D'antonio, Trump Biographer:] There's not a meeting that takes place, there's not an expenditure that is authorized, that he doesn't know about it.
[Borger:] Cohen wouldn't go on the record for this piece. But his friends claims it's all part of his job in Trump world, giving the boss deniability and protection.
[Schwartz:] If you know the relationship between the two people, he took care of a lot of things for Mr. Trump without Mr. Trump knowing about it. That's part of the overall structure, is that Michael had great latitude to take care of matters.
[Borger:] In Michael Cohen, Trump hired his consigliore, a version of his long-time mentor, the lawyer Roy Cohn, a controversial pit bull and aggressive defender of all things Trump, no questions asked. After D'Antonio finished his book on Trump, he got the Cohen treatment in what turned out to be an empty threat.
[D'antonio:] Then he got mad. It was, "You just buy yourself an effing lawsuit, buddy. I'll see you in court."
[Borger:] In 2011, Michael Cohen described his job this way.
[Michael Cohen, Attorney Of President Donald Trump:] My job is I protect Mr. Trump. That's what it is. If there's an issue that relates to Mr. Trump that is of concern to him, it's of course concern to me. And I will use my legal skills within which to protect Mr. Trump to the best of my ability.
[Borger:] Cohen, a sometimes Democrat, first came to Trump's attention after buying apartments in Trump developments. Then went to the mat for Trump against one of his condo boards and won.
[Schwartz:] Trump loved him for it. That was the beginning of it. And then after that, they became close. It was much more than an attorneyclient relationship. It was something much deeper, almost father and son kind of thing. Always hot and cold. Donald Trump could be yelling at him one second and saying he's the greatest person in the world the next second. Donald Trump knew that Michael always had his back.
[Borger:] For Trump, it wasn't about pedigree. Cohen, who is 51, got his degree from Western Michigan's Cooley law school and had some initial success in the less than genteel world of New York taxicab medallions.
[Nunberg:] If you look where Michael came from in his legal career, before he started working for Trump board, it wasn't like he came from a white shoe law firm. He came from a hardnosed New York trial firm. Trump has an eye for talent. And this was somebody that, I mean, he used to call him his bulldog, his tough guy.
[Borger:] At the Trump organization he's done a bit of everything. Running a mixed martial arts company, securing real estate branding deals, and even taking care of transportation.
[Nunberg:] The famous Trump plane, there was an engine issue that he actually took care of and got a really good deal on.
[Schwartz:] Watching him is it's like a reality show. He's got three phones. He's got the hardline. He's got two lines. He's texting. He's on the computer.
[D'antonio:] You can almost say this is Donald Trump's mini-me. For a guy who started really in the middle class, on Long Island, to now be quite wealthy himself, known internationally, and yes, he's in a bit of a jam with the Russia scandal.
[Borger:] In the eye not only of Stormy, but now under criminal investigation in New York. And also of interest to the Special Counsel Bob Mueller and Congress.
[Cohen:] I look forward to giving all the information that they're looking for.
[Borger:] During the campaign, when Trump said he had no contact with Russia, Cohen was privately trying to cut a deal for a Trump Tower Moscow. It never happened, but Mueller has asked about it.
[Nunberg:] The sad reality is that Michael pursuing that Trump Tower deal in December is just another factor that goes into this whole Russian narrative.
[Borger:] Cohen's name was also in the infamous dossier which alleges he traveled to Prague to meet with Russians. He's completely denied it and is suing BuzzFeed which published it.
[Schwartz:] It's immeasurable, the damage that has been caused to him, to his family.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I will faithfully execute.
[Borger:] When Trump became president, he did not bring his brash wingman to Washington. Do you think he wanted to be in the White House, be White House counsel?
[D'antonio:] There must have been a part of him that was dreaming of a great job at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But he's also the guy who not only knows where all the bodies are buried, he buried a lot of them himself. And that ironically disqualified him.
[Cohen:] They say I'm Mr. Trump's pit bull, that I am his right-hand man. I mean, I've been called many different things around here.
[Borger:] Now he may be called to testify. With the Stormy Daniels case in federal court.
[Schwartz:] I know Michael Cohen for over 21 years. And I know that he will not rest. He will not sleep. He doesn't sleep anyway, right? Until he recovers every single penny from Stormy that's due the
[Llc. Avenatti:] I've seen a lot of attorneys use intimidation tactics. The problem is, is if that is your speed, and if you are a one-trick pony, and you use that in every case, when all of a sudden you run up against somebody that doubles down and that isn't intimidated, well then you're lost.
[Borger:] Cohen flew to Mar-a-Lago to dine with the president the night before Stormy Daniels appeared on "60 MINUTES." Because if you're Michael Cohen, you're the ultimate loyalist.
[Cohen:] The words the media should be using to describe Mr. Trump are generous, compassionate.
[Borger:] And you still believe Donald Trump will be loyal.
[Cohen:] Kind, humble, honest.
[Borger:] To you. Gloria Borger, CNN, Washington.
[Cooper:] What kind of legal trouble could Michael Cohen actually be in? What are the implications for the president? And what happens next? We'll talk about all of that when we come back.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] We asked CNN's Leyla Santiago who joins us live from San Juan to tell us about the facts on the ground about the relief effort Leyla.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Jake, the fact is hospitals have had to evacuate because generators are failing. The fact is that people are leaving this island because of conditions. So, as the president takes to Twitter to self-congratulate a job well done, Jake, the fact is, many have yet to receive help from FEMA.
[Santiago:] The destruction, a constant reminder, Maria's eye was here just 24 hours. Three weeks later, Puerto Rico is unrecognizable. But for us, this is familiar. We were here in Quebradillas just four days after Hurricane Maria struck. When we arrived, a woman, a complete stranger embraced me in a way I will never forget. Desperate, she explained no one else had been to her town since the storm. No one else had come to see if that mountaintop community had even survived. Her name is Brenda. We wanted to find her again to find out how she's doing. [on camera]: That's her right there. [voice-over]: She recognizes us immediately. The mayor she tells us brought a box of emergency food. The neighbors all shared it. There's nothing left now. [on camera]: The president has said that he's doing an A-plus job in recovery efforts, how would you grade.
[Resident Of Quebradilla, Puerto Rico:] No. No, no way.
[Santiago:] What grade would you give him?
[Resident Of Quebradilla, Puerto Rico:] I'll give it a D. We have not seen anything.
[Santiago:] It's hard for them to give the U.S. government a good grade when they still don't have power or water. More than 80 percent of Puerto Rico, no electricity. Maria left these mountains scarred, mudslides are closing off entire communities across the island. [on camera]: So this is as far as we can get in this part of Anasco. There's a whole community back there. You can see that there's water that's taken over the road, there's mud. Trees down, making it difficult to reach this community. So, we're going to have to go by foot in order to get to them. [voice-over]: Along the way, we meet David. He's a veteran, an orange farmer from the neighboring town who just wants to help. He hiked in with a full crate of water and ice. [on camera]: So, right now, you're having to walk through all of this, why?
[David Iturrino, Resident Of Anasco, Puerto Rico:] For the people.
[Santiago:] The people. That's what makes it so hard for him. At 70 years old, he's one of the few reaching the people in this community that he loves. A half hour hike through an area once slush now stripped of leaves and color, we learn one helicopter landed here since the storm. The bottled water is running out, along with the food for Hosian five months old, completely unaware of the reality surrounding him. [on camera]: She's worried about the milk and water for him. She only has two gallons left. [voice-over]: Mom tells me, it's only enough for another week and a half. She needs more. She needs more power. She needs another helicopter to land here soon. A third of the island doesn't have clean water. As we move to another part of the island, we spot help. [on camera]: What are you guys doing down there?
[Unidentified Male:] We're headed up this road right here.
[Santiago:] Are you bringing supplies?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, we're bringing some stuff to them.
[Santiago:] In Utuado, the interior, the director of emergency management tells us they've been able to reach everyone here, his challenge, communication. [on camera]: This is what they've been given out here. OK. It's got a number, it's got a Website. But in an area where there's no cell service and there's no Internet, that's a problem. [voice-over]: He insists help is flowing. But it's not what we found when we talked to Sylvianne up the road. Her home battered by Maria, the floors still wet. No power here either. [on camera]: I notice she doesn't have a roof, but I also notice that flag she's flying. [voice-over]: The reason, she says She says that's their salvation. Among the devastation, the desperation, she says she flies this flag with pride, waiting for help to arrive. And, Jake, when you talk to people like we did out in the remote areas, when you talk to first responders, when you talk to FEMA off camera, they will tell you, this isn't a matter of weeks or months, this is a matter of years in recovery efforts to get Puerto Rico back to some sense of normalcy.
[Tapper:] A powerful piece from Leyla Santiago, thank you so much, Leyla. Appreciate it. It turns out all those trips President Trump takes to his club at Mar- a-Lago are not only expensive, the president might also be profiting from them. We'll explain next in our conflict of interest watch. Stay with us.

[Camerota:] In a new interview, President Trump questioned why the U.S. would defend a NATO ally?
[Tucker Carlson, Fox News:] Why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack? Why is that needed?
[Trump:] I understand what you're saying. I've asked the same question. You know, Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people.
[Carlson:] Yes, I'm not against Montenegro. Or Albania.
[Trump:] By the way, they're very strong people. They have very aggressive people. They may get aggressive, and congratulations, you're in World War III. Now, I understand that, but that's the way it was set up. Don't forget: I just got here a little more than a year and a half ago, but I took over the conversation three or four days ago, and I said, "You have to pay."
[Camerota:] We're back now with CNN political analysts David Gregory and Margaret Talev and John Avlon. David Gregory, it's impossible to know how the president feels about NATO. He's all over the map. He's said so many schizophrenic things in just the past half a week. So I guess Article V doesn't count or he wants to change that?
[Gregory:] Well, what's interesting is that what the president appears not to realize, because I don't think he's taken a lot of time to actually think about this, the only time that Article V was invoked was to defend the United States, and that was after 911. So to the notion that the United States set this up to, you know, be the world's policeman, to go, you know, defending Montenegro, I mean, is just so silly. I's actually a misnomer. It was only invoked to help the United States. And that's when countries like Germany actually sent forces to Afghanistan. So the whole thing is absurd. And what you're seeing is, yes, the president, again, in his mind, in his infatuation with strongman politics, particularly Vladimir Putin who has never liked NATO's growing role. Never liked when President Bush got out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty. You know, now has an ally in President Trump, who says yes, kind of shares this world view. He doesn't seem to value the western alliance. Doesn't seem to value Europe, calls the European Union a foe. It's just not the case. And most Republicans don't believe that. And Mitch McConnell saying yesterday it's important, you know, saying to the world, despite what the president of the United States says, it's important for our western allies to know that here in the Senate, we actually believe in the world as it was before Donald Trump and the importance of the alliance that was established after World War II. And so there's a lot of cleaning up to do beyond the theater of yesterday and changing his statement.
[Berman:] Look, I'm not disagreeing with you, because I don't do that.
[Camerota:] Of course. We know better.
[Berman:] But when you say it's impossible to understand where the president stands on NATO, I think we can know exactly where he stands, because he has told us repeatedly, he does not believe in the foundational aspects of NATO. What he said about Montenegro there is not, like, some toss-away there. It is the central component to the NATO alliance. The president just told Tucker Carlson that he doesn't see a need to defend Montenegro. He doesn't see the need to defend a NATO ally. And Margaret, you know, I think if you track back the last week and understand how the president behaved and discussed NATO while he was there with other NATO leaders here, perhaps that's not surprising.
[Talev:] I mean, I do want to say, Montenegro is like smaller than Washington, D.C.'s population, the newest member of NATO. And also contributed, committed to troops to support the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. So if you're a very small country, and you look at what Russia did with Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea, and then you hear the president of the United States say this, you're terrified. So that happened. Also, you know, we heard the president last week. I asked him during the news conference in NATO, did he think that he could, if he were so inclined could he get the U.S. out of NATO without a congressional vote, and he said, yes, he thought he could, but that it wasn't necessary. So he's made his views on NATO pretty clear, and then walked those back, and then seems to be going back to the original
[Avlon:] He's always going to he's always going to default back to his original instincts. The teleprompter Trump is not the real Trump. That's the State Department or the Pentagon, trying to get him in line. But what's really troubling about his statements about Montenegro in that particular interview is that he is again reciting Vladimir Putin's talking points. The specter that has been raised, as Margaret said, is all of these small countries, from the Baltic states to Montenegro, do you really want to go to war with them for them? Because that does cut to the heart of Article V. And the question of Crimea suggests, if one of those states were pushed back on by Russia, as they have long desired to do, claiming ethnic overlap and religious and historical connections, that could be a test of NATO without the president of the United States willing to back the central purpose of the organization. That's the real danger.
[Gregory:] Right. And the central purpose being, too, as a check on Russia
[Avlon:] Russia.
[Gregory:] on the Soviet Union. On the menace of the Soviet Union, which we are seeing in this surge of authoritarianism and ethnic nationalism that's projected by Vladimir Putin. But the political potency is still the same. President Bush tries President Bush makes an argument that the Europeans can't get this free lunch. That America has got to start looking after itself. And even that and he's not the first president who thinks that there should be more of their defense spending dedicated toward NATO. And he has brought that issue to the fore, but he also creates false crises that he then claims to solve, while the underlying issue is the same, which is what is the commitment? That's the question the Europeans are asking, or maybe they started to just kind of wait for the time, when we're post-Trump to try to restore, you know, a world order. What happens in between is the critical question.
[Camerota:] Margaret, we need to get to this next bit of nice, and that is that the Russian defense ministry put out an announcement that they are, I guess, excited about the new agreements, new military agreements between the U.S. and Russia.
[Talev:] I bet you want to know what those agreements are.
[Avlon:] Surprise.
[Camerota:] I am curious. And you were in Helsinki, and I'm just curious. Did President Trump mention any new agreements that happened in that tete-a-tete, one-on-one that he had with Vladimir Putin?
[Talev:] We have not heard from President Trump or his team yet on what the Russians are talking about. We have a couple of potential clues from that news conference. And was the on the idea of election stuff, the idea of joint commission to look at, you know, whatever happened, and and or there could be some sort of discussion whether it's related to arms stuff, or whether it's related to military. There could be some discussion of information sharing, potentially, or some path toward an extension of arms control. But we just don't know. And given the complete reversal, and now semi undoing of the original reversal of the first position. There are a lot of questions about what actually happened in that one-on-one meeting with President Trump and President Putin. I do think it's safe to say, after yesterday's rush to the White House from Secretary Pompeo and some other top folks, and then the president's remarks in the afternoon, that there will be been a lot of resistance inside the administration, as well as in Congress, to forging any kind of a PAC with Russia at this point. But we still don't know what conversations actually were had between the president and Putin to prompt the Russians to put out this very provocative tease of a statement.
[Berman:] Good thing there's a record, a solid record
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Berman:] of that meeting.
[Gergen:] But I do think this is the importance of congressional oversight. Everybody's saying, well, what is it that Congress can do? This is where Congress must force some understanding of two things. What happened, what potential agreement there is. What is the policy right now? What is the relationship with Russia? Where are we working together? Where are we working at cross purposes, and why is there such a schism between the president's national security team and him? But that's what plays itself out over and over again, and that's what's so dangerous.
[Berman:] All right, guys. Thanks so much for being with us. We're going to be talking about this all morning, no doubt about that. We're going to take one brief break for some really wonderful news. The survivors of that cave, those soccer kids who were trapped in there for so long, look at this picture.
[Camerota:] Look at how much better they look.
[Berman:] They're going home from the hospital. We'll have a update this just happened next.

[Tapper:] Thanks for watching.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news. In the line of fire. President Trump slams the initial response to the Florida high school massacre, saying he would have rushed in, even without a weapon, to protect students from the shooter. And the president tells governors not to worry about the NRA, saying and I'm quoting him now "They're on our side." Investigation red line. CNN learns the GOP leaders of committees involved in the Russia probes are drawing a red line when it comes to Trump family finances while Democrats say, follow the money. Dueling story lines. The House Intelligence Committee meets for the first time since the release of the memo by its Democratic members, responding to Republican claims of FBI abuses. Now President Trump and the panel's top Democrat are in a war of words over that memo. And school deputy responds. The armed resource office who failed to confront the gunman during the Florida high school massacre speaks out for the first time through his lawyer, calling the criticism of his actions unfounded. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news, President Trump is sticking with his idea of keeping schools safe by putting guns in the hands of some teachers. And he criticizes deputies who failed to confront the Florida high school shooter. The president says he would have run in to do so without a gun in his hand. And the president is in a war of words with House Intelligence Committee Democrats over their memo defending the FBI against Republican attacks. The committee is meeting tonight. I'll speak with Congressman Joaquin Castro of the Intelligence Committee. And our correspondents and specialists, they are standing by with full coverage. Let's begin with President Trump suggesting he'd be the first responder in chief in a school shooting situation. Let's go live to our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, the president is still pushing the idea, I take it, of more guns in schools.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] He certainly is, Wolf. And President Trump made the strange claim today that he would have tried to rescue the students at the Parkland school shooting. The White House attempted to clean up those comments today, but there was not much clarity on exactly what kind of gun control measures the president would support beyond banning bump stocks, which weren't even used at Parkland.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] Thank you very much.
[Acosta:] President Trump insists he would have saved the day. If he had been on the scene of the Parkland school shooting, the president says he would have stormed the building.
[Trump:] I really believe I'd have run in there, even if I didn't have a weapon, and I think most of the people in this room would have done that, too.
[Acosta:] Unlike the deputies, the president says, who choked.
[Trump:] They weren't exactly Medal of Honor winners. All right? The way they performed was frankly disgusting.
[Acosta:] When the president said earlier today that he would have run into the school, was he suggesting that he could have saved the day?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I think he was just stating that, as a leader, he would have stepped in and, hopefully, been able to help.
[Acosta:] Is he trained in using a handgun or a firearm of some sort?
[Sanders:] I don't think that was the point he was making.
[Acosta:] In a candid exchange with the nation's governors at the White House, the president claimed he met with leaders from the National Rifle Association over the weekend. It was no surprise when the president defended the gun lobby's intentions.
[Trump:] Don't worry about the NRA. They're on our side. You guys, half of you are so afraid of the NRA. There's nothing to be afraid of. And you know what? If they're not with you, we have to fight them every once in a while. That's OK.
[Acosta:] The president also continued to push his goal of ending the days of gun-free zones at schools in order to put more firearms in the hands, he says, of skilled shooters.
[Trump:] I don't want teachers to have guns. I want highly trained people that have a natural talent. Like hitting a baseball or hitting a golf ball or putting. How come some people always make the four- footer and some people under pressure can't even take their club back?
[Acosta:] One of the Democratic governors in the room, Jay Inslee, from Washington state took issue with that plan, then offered the president some advice.
[Gov. Jay Inslee , Washington:] I've listened to the first-grade teachers who don't want to be pistol packing first-grade teachers. So I'd just suggest we need a little less tweeting here, a little more listening, and let's just take that off the table and move forward.
[Acosta:] Mr. Trump did vow to ban so-called bump stocks, the attachments that allow semiautomatic rifles to fire like machine guns. That was the weapon of choice in the Las Vegas massacre last October, though not the Parkland school shooting.
[Trump:] Bump stocks, we're writing that out. I'm writing that out myself. I don't care if Congress does it or not. I'm writing it out myself. OK?
[Acosta:] The president need only look at the polls to see the growing support for new gun control laws, now at 70 percent. A huge jump from the days after the mass shooting in Las Vegas. And the students who have been demanding action on gun control now have the first lady's seal of approval.
[Melania Trump, First Lady:] I have been heartened to see children across this country using their voices to speak out and try to create change. They're our future. And they deserve a voice.
[Acosta:] Still, the White House appears to be staying on message. Even daughter Ivanka Trump sounded supportive of the idea of arming teachers in an interview with
[Nbc. Ivanka Trump, Daughter Of Donald Trump:] I think that having a teacher who is armed, who cares deeply about her students, or his students, and who is capable and qualified to bear arms, is not a bad idea. But it's an idea that needs to be discussed.
[Acosta:] And the White House was asked whether the president is backing away from his support for raising the age for people, buying assault rifles to 21 nationwide. The president tweeted his support for that last week, but in fact, today, press secretary Sarah Sanders was asked about this a couple of times at a briefing today, Wolf. She would only say the president supports that concept. It's not exactly the same thing, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, I looked at the tweet. Raise the age to 21. That's what he said then. But since then there seems to be a little backing away in the face of NRA opposition to that. We'll have more on that. That's coming up. Jim Acosta, thanks very much. The House Intelligence Committee is meeting tonight for the first time since the weekend release of the memo by its Democratic members, responding to Republican claims of FBI abuses. Let's bring in our chief national security correspondent, Jim Sciutto. Jim, the president has sharply attacked that memo, which attempts to smack down Republican claims of wrongdoing one by one.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Right. And though this was buried, seemingly intentionally, by the White House on a Saturday afternoon by the White House and Republicans, it does take aim at the two central claims of what was known as the Nunes memo or the GOP Republican memo. The first one being the aspersion the FBI opened its counter- intelligence investigation into Trump-Russia ties based principally on the so-called Steele dossier. That's the opposition research document on Trump and Russia that was funded by Democratic groups, including the Democratic National Committee. Now, the memo, in countering that allegation, notes that, in fact, that probe, that counterintelligence probe, started in July 2016. That's seven weeks before the FBI team investigating Russia first received that dossier. The memo states and I'm quoting here the FBI's concern about and knowledge of Page's activities this is Carter Page, a campaign adviser to the Trump campaign long predates the FBI's receipt of Steele's information. Now on a second key charge of the GOP memo or the Nunes memo is the GOP claim that the FBI hid that political origin of the dossier. But the Democratic memo says that, in fact, in its first FISA warrant request this is a warrant to observe, to surveil an American the DOJ, in fact, mentioned Steele's political ties and motivations. So going after those two central claims there, of course, you know, each side has its political motivations here. But on the facts, it's a fairly credible rebuttal of those central GOP claims.
[Blitzer:] And beyond that, Jim, there's also some new information about this overall investigation contained in this ten-page memo.
[Sciutto:] That's right. And this this caught the attention of myself and my colleagues as we were reading through this memo when it came out on Saturday afternoon. And this entry caught our eyes. By September 2016, the FBI had opened what are called sub-inquiries into a number of Trump campaign associates. This beyond Carter Page that we knew about, indicating that Page was not the only person that the FBI was looking at. Now, because this was a redacted document, a great amount of this information is classified. Both the number of those associate that were under these inquiries and the names of those people under these inquiries, they were redacted from the documents. We don't know how many. We don't know who they are, but we know that there are a number of them in addition to Carter Page.
[Blitzer:] Very interesting. People are trying to find that, figure out who those people might be. Thanks very much for that. Jim Sciutto reporting. Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Joaquin Castro of Texas. He's a member of the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman, thanks for joining us.
[Rep. Joaquin Castro , Texas:] Thank you for having me, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] So your committee chairman, Devin Nunes, says that this Democratic memo, in it the Democrats are advocating that it's OK for the FBI and the Department of Justice to use political dirt. How do you respond to that?
[Castro:] Well, the first thing is that the Democratic memo was written to really correct the record. Remember, Devin Nunes and the Republicans put out a memo that was wrought with inaccuracies and really a bunch of falsehoods. So we came one a version that corrected the record. And it demonstrated that the FISA process was followed. In fact, that the FISA court was made aware that this was part of opposition research against President Trump. And I'll also point out that the way that this firm, Fusion GPS, got involved in the first place, is because they were hired by a very conservative outlet, "The Free Beacon." That's why they were looking into President Trump, then-candidate Trump, in the first place. So it wasn't just a bunch of Democrats. There were also conservatives involved, as well.
[Blitzer:] But should that FISA application, with hindsight, knowing what you know right now, Congressman, have specifically named the Clinton campaign and the DNC as the financier of the dossier?
[Castro:] Well, as I understand it, all the processes were followed with the FISA court. All the information they are required to know was made available to them. And so, you know, as long as those those processes were followed, then I don't see a problem. And they knew that part of this had to do with political opposition research.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Political opposition. But it's one thing to just say it was political opposition. It's another thing on say the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign were funding it. Right?
[Castro:] Well, but as I said, Wolf, remember: Fusion GPS was first involved because of Democrats but the conservative "Free Beacon" publication.
[Blitzer:] Yes. But when they actually hired Christopher Steele, that was only after Hillary Clinton and the DNC took over. Right?
[Castro:] No. You're right about that. That's right.
[Blitzer:] All right. So they could have been a little bit more specific. Was would releasing this memo and I've gone through it now several times, all ten pages. Would releasing this memo, unredacted and there are a lot of redactions in these ten pages unredacted have compromised sources and methods?
[Castro:] Yes, we said all along that we would work with the FBI and the intelligence agencies to make sure that we didn't divulge any classified information, any sources and methods. And that's exactly what we did. We did our very best to make sure that there was no classified information that was that came out in this memo.
[Blitzer:] But are you OK with the redactions that the FBI and the intelligence community, maybe the White House, made, citing sources and methods? You don't want to compromise how the U.S. gathers intelligence?
[Castro:] Look, I mean, ideally of course, you wish that every word would get out. But this was an agreed-upon compromise, and so, you know, we will take it.
[Blitzer:] The Democratic memo also says that by mid-September 2016 and I'm quoting now the FBI had already opened sub inquiries into, and then they redact individuals, the names. Individuals linked to the Trump campaign. More redaction. And former campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page. That redaction is very long. How many Trump campaign associates were under investigation, and are those redacted names all publicly known?
[Castro:] That as you could imagine, I can't discuss. But I said months back, to you, in fact, Wolf, that I believe, based on everything that I've seen, that there would be several people that I think would be subject to legal liability. I still believe that's the case, and I still think that there are more people that haven't been named, who may be in legal jeopardy.
[Blitzer:] Can you give us an approximate number?
[Castro:] I can't. You know, we're going to wait to see when it all comes out.
[Blitzer:] And in the memo, can you just tell us, is it two or three or four or five? I saw how long the the redaction was, and it's hard to tell specifically how many names were mentioned.
[Castro:] Sure. And I don't have the memo in front of me, but you know, it I believe that there's more people to come.
[Blitzer:] What are these memo feuds doing to protect American elections, looking ahead to the mid-term elections in November, the 2020 presidential elections? What does this do? The release, first of the Republican memo and now the Democratic memo?
[Castro:] I think that it was important for us as Democrats to correct the record, but this entire episode has been a real side show to the main point of this committee's work, which is figuring out who messed with our 2016 elections, why they did it, how they did it, and also as important, whether any part of it was an inside job. Which Americans, if any, cooperated with the Russians who interfered with our elections. That's the main purpose of the work we're doing, and we have to make sure that we get back to focusing on that.
[Blitzer:] Let's get to the issue of the Florida school massacre. President Trump said today that, every once in a while, you have to fight the National Rifle Association. What do you think he'll fight them on when it comes to specific gun-control legislation?
[Castro:] Well, I hope that he'll do what he has talked about. Ban bump stocks, raise the age of purchase to 21, and do other things that the Congress should do. I think that we should either ban assault weapons or at least ban high-capacity magazines so that somebody can't fire off 20 rounds and put ten bullets in somebody before they had a chance to even react.
[Blitzer:] Any...
[Castro:] There's a lot of work to be done.
[Blitzer:] Any chance the House and the Senate will pass that?
[Castro:] Well, sure. I think there's more momentum right now. And you see even among the public that you've got 70 percent in support of more gun reform. And really, Wolf, if the president and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan were committed to do something more than talk, they could absolutely get something done. They could pass a bill on the House floor and the Senate floor tomorrow, or this week, if they wanted to. And I hope that the president puts as much effort into pushing for sensible gun reform as he did for giving tax breaks to the wealthiest corporations in this country. This Congress can get it done if there's the will of the president and the will of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell and this body to do it.
[Blitzer:] Congressman Joaquin Castro, thanks for joining us.
[Castro:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Up next, the Russia probe's congressional Republicans are steering clear of the Trump family finances while Democrats say, follow the money. And as Florida authorities investigate the response to the high school mass shooting, the deputy criticized for criticized for failing to confront the gunman is now speaking out.

[Lemon:] Today, a jury recommended a life sentence for the white nationalist convicted of killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer. Nearly 40 others were seriously injured after James Fields Jr. plowed his car into a crowd of counter-protesters at a Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia last year. Field's actions and the images of white nationalists marching with torches stunned and shocked the nation. Now, racial rhetoric and hate crimes are becoming all too common. CNN's Sara Sidner has this update on the state of hate in this country.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn International Correspondent:] It is as if Pandora's box has been opened and hate is spilling out. In Aventura, Florida, police say Nadim Siddiqui was caught on camera smashing a bottle of wine at the Kosher Kingdom store, and this wasn't his only offense.
[Laurence Einhorn, Store Owner:] This caused a lot of problem and people get scared. We're so happy that they finally got him.
[Sidner:] Police say Siddiqui is charged with a hate crime because has shown a pattern of targeting Jewish people, knocking down a menorah in another building, and making hateful comments when confronted.
[Unidentified Male:] He made comments of six million dead wasn't enough.
[Sidner:] What used to be held silently in the minds of some Americans is now being verbalized publicly, and statistics show being carried out with violent acts more frequently in the last couple of years.
[Unidentified Male:] No, your honor.
[Sidner:] Just in the past couple of weeks, the incidents are piling up. Perhaps the most violent, in Snohomish County, Washington. Seven men and one woman arrested. Police say they viciously attacked a black disk jockey while yelling racial slurs as he was simply trying to entertain folks at a bar. The sheriff said an Asian employee was also attacked when he tried to help the deejay. Police say it turns out the suspects are bald members of a violent Neo-Nazi group. Police say two of the suspects have criminal records.
[Unidentified Male:] Jews will not replace us.
[Sidner:] The Southern Poverty Law Center says one of the suspects took part in the 2017 white nationalist Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. That rally turned violent. Ending in murder and mayhem after James Alex Fields rammed his car into a group of people protesting hate. A jury convicted Fields just last week and today decided his sentence on 10 criminal charges against him including the murder of 32-year-old paralegal Heather Heyer. Heyer's mother sat through the entire trial.
[Susan Bro, Mother Of Heather Heyer:] Justice has him where he needs to be and my daughter is still not here and the other survivors still have their wounds to deal with.
[Sidner:] But the darkness of hate continues to sweep across the country. The plots in two separate cases in Ohio are chilling, federal investigators say. One month after the deadliest anti-semitic attack in America carried out in Pittsburgh, they say Damon Joseph planned a similar attack on a synagogue in Toledo.
[Justin Herdman, Attorney:] Mr. Joseph pursued a detailed and calculated plan to strike synagogues in the Toledo area.
[Sidner:] Investigators say a woman was behind a plot to blow up a pipeline. Elizabeth LeCron used social media to heap praise on the Columbine killers and racist murderer Dylann Roof. Even on college campuses, racist tirades are gaining more and more attention. This happened at Columbia University.
[Unidentified Male'unidentified Female:] We build modern civilizations. White people are the best thing that ever happened to the world.
[Sidner:] A student who in a statement says he's not a racist and does not hate anyone, but he goes off on a group of students because of his distaste for the overuse of the term white privilege and similar divisive rhetoric as a means of dismissing views of others. And yet
[Unidentified Male:] We're white men. We did everything.
[Lemon:] Sara Sidner joins me now. Sara, hello to you. There's been a major spike in hate crimes over the past two years, even on college campuses. Why are we seeing it more with young people?
[Sidner:] You know, it's a good question. One of the things that's happened on college campuses when you talk to the groups that study have been studying this for many decades is that there is serious recruitment going on on college campuses and through social media. There have been flyers that have been put up and actually just today at the State University of New York Purchase campus, a student has been charged with a hate crime for putting up Nazi posters, posters that have swastikas on them and putting up at a time when Jews are celebrating Hanukkah. That happened just today but there have been plenty of other flyering incidents across the country and certainly on social media. Some of these groups are trying to entice those who they think may start feeling threatened, if you will, by students of color. So it's interesting to note that there is a lot of recruitment going on. We should also mention another hate crime that has happened. The fifth attack on a Jehovah's Witness kingdom hall in Washington state. That particular attack was an arson, that police say has happened several times. There have been five different attacks on Jehovah's Witness kingdom halls and police are saying yes, these are hate crimes. They have not so far found a suspect, but in one of those attacks, a suspect shot up one of those halls 30 times. The violence is increasing if you look at the numbers from the FBI and anyone who looks at those numbers can easily say, look, these numbers are not the actual numbers of what's happening out there. There happen to be many more. Sometimes people don't report them and sometimes police departments don't report hate crimes to the FBI, which is how the FBI gets its numbers, Don.
[Lemon:] It's sad.
[Sidner:] It is.
[Lemon:] Sara, we appreciate your reporting. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. The search is on for a new chief of staff, but John Kelly is leaving a few things unresolved. Congresswoman Frederica Wilson joins me next on the lie he told about her, the threats she's gotten since, and why he never apologized.

[Tapper:] Welcome back. The Dow and the S&P 500 both closing this hour at record highs following today's release of another strong jobs report. Employers added 228,000 jobs in November and the unemployment rate remained at a 17-year low, 4.1 percent. The report echoing other signs of strength, including the best quarter of economic growth since 2014. Let's talk about this with the panel. Robbie, some key industries have been hiring in November, manufacturing added 31,000 jobs, construction, 24,000. Isn't this what President Trump promised?
[Robby Mook, Former Campaign Manager, Hillary For America:] Look, this is great news, but there are two things we should keep in mind. One, this is because of the work under President Obama's administration. It's not like a new president comes in and suddenly companies suddenly
[Tapper:] We're I mean, it's December already.
[Mook:] Yes, but these things these economic forces take a lot longer. But the second and the more important to me is we are passing a tax bill that gives away billions of dollars to the wealthiest people in this country to "stimulate the economy" when it's looking like the job market is basically getting as tight as it possibly can, but that income gap is widening. So we're solving a problem that doesn't exist and we're making a problem that does exist a lot worse and that is income inequality.
[Tapper:] I mean, is it is it is that a fair criticism in this sense? What is the impetus for this tax bill if the economy is so strong and it does look pretty strong, if you want to give to the credit to President or President Obama, it does look pretty strong, at least on the surface.
[Amanda Carpenter, Former Communications Director For Ted Cruz:] And you can never be too rich or too skinny, right? Isn't that what people say? But listen, I think that Trump does gets a lot of credit even though he didn't do anything because there's such confidence in the Democrats leaving the White House and stopping the threat of more regulations coming down the pike. Trump didn't have to do anything and he gets that benefit. But here's what makes Republicans sick is that the economy is doing great. Trump was supposed to be the jobs candidate. Somehow he didn't have to do anything and he's the jobs President. They don't get any credit for it and he's still at historic approval lows. So what happens if the economy does go down? It could get really ugly.
[Tapper:] So and why is that? Because this usually you know, as James Carville said, it's the economy, stupid. Usually if people if the voters feel like the economy is doing well, that's reflected in their approval rating for the President. That is not the case here. The economy is definitely improving and President Trump's approval ratings are at historic lows, they're in the 30s. Why the disconnect?
[Rebecca Berg, Cnn Political Reporter:] Well, a big part of it is what the President himself is talking about and drawing attention to, Jake. Any other President given this set of circumstances, a booming economy, you know, pretty positive economic news, that's exactly what that President would want to talk about. They would want to talk about the tax reform legislation that is going through Congress and could be a major policy victory for Republicans. Instead, Donald Trump, if you take a, you know, casual glance at his Twitter, would see he is talking about none of those things. He is talking about things that make voters nervous, that upset voters. Voters we are seeing now, there was some doubt about this during the election, but there are actually still many Americans who believe a President act presidential. And on the campaign trail, I talked to even Trump supporters who said they thought as president he would become more presidential, would tamper his language. Obviously, he hasn't done that. And so you see people now disappointed in what he has how he has acted as President.
[Tapper:] So, I should point out because you brought up the tax bill. Republican Senator Susan Collins who voted for the tax bill last week, she now said she's considering removing her support of it because she told a CNN affiliate she could change her vote if her proposed amendments don't make it to the final version. So it's not out of the woods yet but you still think it's probably going to pass?
[Mook:] I don't know. I think the devil is in the details. It's a lot easier to pass something, get it to committee and then decide than decide on the final version. I honestly hope it doesn't. This is really bad. This is exactly what happened when George W. Bush came into office. Strong economy, big tax breaks for the wealthiest people for corporations and the economy, you know, the bubble blew up, burst and the economy crashed. This crash I fear could be worse because there are so many people who aren't doing better. And those are exactly the people who voted Trump in. So this is not a good recipe for re-election for Trump.
[Tapper:] All right, we're going to take a quick break. I think we're going to show you some pictures of President Trump. There it is, getting ready to take off for Pensacola. There he is at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland. He's heading to Florida to rally for the candidate across the border in Alabama. We'll take this quick break. We'll be right back.

[Church:] We welcome our viewers joining us here in the United States and all around the world. This is CNN newsroom, I'm Rosemary Church. Want to update you on our breaking news that we're following this hour. Police in Melbourne, Australia, say a driver deliberately plowed into a crowd of pedestrians in the heart of the city. Two people have been arrested, including the driver. Police say 14 people were injured, including a child in serious condition in hospital. Police have not yet determined the motive. We turn to Ivan Watson who joins us live from Hong Kong. So Ivan we know from the police this was a deliberate act, but we don't know a lot more about this.
[Ivan Watson, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] That is right. The police have made clear that the motivation at this time behind this is unknown. That is something certainly that we'll be following very closely. But let's keep in mind, this took place at around 4:45 p.m. Melbourne time. That is less than three hours ago. So the authorities are very much in the preliminary stages of establishing what they say is going to be a crime scene for some time there in Melbourne. The incident took place near Flinders street station that is an iconic building, in the heart of the city. One of the busiest shopping districts, also an area people transit through, and coming into rush hour time, right before the Christmas holiday. The description of a white Suzuki vehicle ramming into pedestrians there, as we've heard some 14 people being taken to hospital there, including a child of preschool age as well. When it comes to also the investigation, the police have said that they immediately arrested two people on the scene, including the driver. They have not been identified yet. We do not know yet about charges potentially that could be placed against these two people. When it comes to the question of motivations here, we do have to take into consideration, a violent incident that took place almost a year ago, January of last year, just blocks away from where this took place, a ramming incident involving a vehicle that killed six people. In that case, the authorities ruled out terrorism, said that terrorism was not involved in that deadly incident which lead to city officials starting to put kind of planters, basically obstacles that could help protect this busy pedestrian area from vehicle-type attacks. Another piece of context, in December of 2016, almost exactly a year ago, Australian police did foil what they say was a terror plot inspired by ISIS, aimed at using improvised explosive devices around that same very area, running up to the Christmas holiday. So those are two important one deadly incidents, not terror related, another that could have become one that was foiled in that same vicinity almost year ago today. Rosemary.
[Church:] It has to be said, Australian authorities do have a good reputation and a good record for foiling attempts like this, or once they happen, certainly following up on them. Just want to make the point, as you said, this took place at 4:45 p.m. in Melbourne, it's now 7:36 p.m. So, of course, this is continuing and we heard from authorities there that this is a crime scene and will continue to be a crime scene for many hours to come. People are to stay clear of the area, although the Flinders street station is still operating. So what we need to focus on here now, Ivan, is that this has happened in various cities around the world, where there's a situation where vehicles are near pedestrian areas. And it may come to a point where various countries need to determine whether that is very wise.
[Watson:] Yes, and that is a question that of course will come up for down the road. I mean again, for now, because this is so immediate, not only is the treatment of the victims here of utmost priority, but also the gathering of information here. So the Australian police have put out a call for images, for example, for video that people could have been filming at the time of the incident. They've also put out a call for eyewitnesses to come forward to deliver statements, because they're trying to suck up as much information now as possible to try to figure out what and why this could have happened. But when you ask a question about these ramming incidents, that is also a major concern. Again, we don't know the Australian police say they don't know what the motivations are behind this incident, but there's certainly been a deadly and disturbing pattern of terror- related attacks around the world, involving vehicles plowing into pedestrians. That seems to be a tactic that has not only been publicly called for by both Al Qaeda and by ISIS, but it is something that has been implemented with deadly results in a number of incidents this year. You recall December 19th of 2016, there was an incident that took place in Berlin in a Christmas market there, where at least 12 people were killed. Since then, there have been more than a half dozen similar incidents taking place several times in London, in Stockholm, in Barcelona and in southern Spain, in Canada, and most recently, October 31st of this year, eight people killed when a man went down a bicycle path on the west side of Manhattan and rammed into people there. So this is something that is increasingly becoming a concern in major metropolitan areas. Rosemary?
[Church:] It most certainly is. Ivan Watson joining us there from Hong Kong, bringing us up to date on the situation in Melbourne Australia and giving some context there, some history of similar accidents that have occurred in the past. Many thanks to you Ivan. And Jim Stupos owns a donut shop in the area of Flinders Street station nearby and witnessed what happened. He joins us now on the phone. So, Jim, talk to us about what you saw exactly in the lead up to this accident and then in the aftermath.
[Jim Stupos, Owner, Walkers Donut Shop:] Hi, Rosemary. I was probably 20 yards away from it, across the road. I saw this white Suzuki SUV speeding at about a hundred kilometers, about 60 miles per hour, and the intersection was completely full. Probably the busiest intersection in Melbourne here. And the car just literally plowed into them. All you could hear was people hitting the car, bouncing off and screaming. The only thing that slowed down the vehicle was the amount of people that it hit. It was awful.
[Church:] That is a horrendous thing for you to witness. And then once the vehicle did come to standstill there, were you able to see the driver and the other person in the vehicle?
[Stupos:] No, I wasn't. I only saw the footage that was on the internet. I saw the police responded within a minute almost. A minute, two tops and they had the vehicle surrounded. I didn't see them pulled out of the car, but I heard that is what happened. I was more concerned with the people lying on the road. The vehicle didn't seem to speed up, but it didn't seem to slow down. Terrorism is everybody's first thought, but thought maybe somebody had fallen asleep at the wheel, but it wasn't.
[Church:] It's extraordinary what you said. You said police were there within a minute. Where were is that usual there would be a lot of police around that particular area?
[Stupos:] Yes. There's a station across the road. Because the intersection is so busy, there's always police around. But I was amazed at how quickly they were here. Police cars were turning up within minutes.
[Church:] The police do have a pretty good record in Melbourne, Australia, don't they, for responding very quickly to situations like this? Do you remember back in January this year, just a few roads streets away from Flinders street station, there was a similar incident, but there were six fatalities? Do you remember that incident?
[Stupos:] Yes, absolutely. I was here on that day as well. I didn't witness the incident, but, yes, the city was in virtual lockdown again. It was a lot of traffic. I remember, because I was driving to the store and the city was gridlock, basically.
[Church:] And of course no link has been made by Australian authorities at this point between what happened just a few hours ago there in Melbourne and what happened back in January. But just talk to us about the situation. I'm assuming you're still there nearby. What are you seeing right now?
[Stupos:] Right now it's a fairly subdued scene. The vehicles are still there. There's debris all over the place. Police and SWAT Team are walking around with big machine guns. There's detectives. And there's major collision investigation. So there's police, in terms of the chaos before, it's just calmed down. The car is still there where it stopped.
[Church:] And of course for the benefit of our viewers joining us here in the United States and all around the world, it is now 7:43 in the evening there in Melbourne, Australia, as the police continue to try to piece together what exactly happened here. They have been able to establish this was a deliberate act, but they do not know at this point what the motivation was. So, Jim, talk to us about the people you saw being taken to the hospital. Because we understand now 14 people were hit by this vehicle.
[Stupos:] Yes, I thought it would be more, to be honest. I was surprised it was only 14. A little child apparently, I heard through other people speaking in the internet, but there was a lot of people being put into ambulance. A lot of people with backpacks on, you know, look like business people as well. Sort of a cross-section of the community, basically.
[Church:] Jim Stupos, thanks so much for going us and sharing your story with us, what you were able to witness at this accident where the police there in Melbourne, Australia, have said it was a deliberate act. They don't know at this point what the motivation was, but two people including the driver have been arrested. We will, of course continue to follow this story and bring you the details as they come in to us. We'll take a very short break here, but still to come, a big day ahead at the United Nations where the U.S. has a warning for countries that don't support its recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital. We're back in just a moment.

[Cabrera:] Some parents of students of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School are filing a federal civil rights lawsuit today which alleges several Brower County officials, quote, "failed to stop the shooter during that attack" almost 5 months ago. This as the same community, students and survivors has been working to turn their pain and experiences into a grass roots movement. They're calling it the "road to change" where they stop in cities across America to talk about gun safety, to help register people to vote. A few days ago, in Dallas students recorded an intense conversation with what they called counter protesters, called Open Carry Texas. They were challenged on things like mental health, arming teachers. And what happens next is remarkable.
[Unidentified Male:] Would it be accurate to characterize it what you are saying is guns are part of the problem, but it goes a whole lot deeper than guns. This is a nuanced issue. I think the easy access in some of these areas to firearms does escalate violence, especially in Chicago. Those 150 hours of training mean nothing. Because we don't rise to the occasion, you fall to your most basic level of training. Exactly. No amount of training can train you out of that instinct. That's my opposition to putting more guns in schools, which I'm sure you guys can understand, you know. I don't necessarily agree with it. I can see where you're coming from, I respect your opinion. That's fine. That's why I asked them from the get go what the agenda was as far as Democratic policies, they said they're not anti- gun. They're for common sense. That's why we have been debating. They're not trying to take guns away, that's what I hear anyways. You hear a lot of things from inside. This is what America is about. Come on.
[Cabrera:] Our revenge has ended. With me now, Matt Deitsch is a former student, one of those at the center of that conversation. Matt, you're in that video. We see it end with a handshake. Tell me what the man in red, the red hat, said to you.
[Matt Deitsch, Former Parkland Student:] The man in the red hat at the end of the conversation told me this was the most American thing he ever experienced, for us to come together, have a conversation about how to save lives. With counter protesters, there tend to be very few of them. They spout the same talking points as the NRA, same misguided truths. They attempt to sell us more guns. We tell them why that is not the way we actually ensure public safety.
[Cabrera:] Did you feel they were open to listening to you?
[Deitsch:] At first, they weren't because they spouted hateful things at our people coming to attend our events. We decided to try to engage them, talk about why they had so much hate. These groups are full of people who are racist, white supremacists, misogynistic. Come from a place of heavy ignorance. A lot of it is misinformation, misguided. Through education,
[Cabrera:] Did you have any eye-opening moments or as you've been traveling and talking to different groups, are you learning more about the other side of the gun debate and their point of view?
[Deitsch:] Here's the thing about the other side of the gun debate. A lot of the talking points are incredibly misguided, and we have to live in reality. We have to live in the country and what is happening right now. And what is happening right now is people are dying. 96 people die every day from gun violence. A lot of those are suicides and red flag laws, universal background checks can help save those lives, too. We tell you exactly how to come together and help save lives and so when we have the conversations, telling us arming teachers is the right way to solve the problem, that's giving up. That's saying there's no way to keep a bad person from coming into the schools and kill children. We say, no, this is not normal. We can stop this from happening if we talk about the policy that is will work.
[Cabrera:] Matt, thank you very much for your time.
[Deitsch:] Thank you so much for having me.
[Cabrera:] Coming up sorry, Matt. We didn't mean to cut you off. How a comedian duped Sarah Palin into an interview and how she is responding to it.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor:] Top of the hour. It's Wednesday, shutdown day 33.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Yes. Wow. I can't believe we're saying that. Good morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow.
[Sciutto:] I'm Jim Sciutto.
[Harlow:] Want to let you know who we are. The state of the shutdown, the state of congressional efforts to end the shutdown, the State of the Union, we expect to hear about all three minutes from now when Democratic leaders from the House and Republican House leaders step before cameras, separately of course, on the Hill.
[Sciutto:] Separately again. To be clear, real negotiations among people that actually make a deal, they don't exist so far as we know, but it is hoped that they could resume that after two votes tomorrow in the Senate on competing bill that each stand almost zero chance of passing. That's Congress in the year 2019.
[Harlow:] I know. Yes.
[Sciutto:] What is certain is that 800,000 federal employees will see another payday come and go this week without pay. And the commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard is understandably appalled.
[Adm. Karl Schultz, U.s. Coast Guard Commandant:] You as members of the Armed Forces should not be expected to shoulder this burden. I find it unacceptable that Coast Guard men and women have to rely on food pantries and donations to get through day-to-day life as service members.
[Sciutto:] Get through day-to-day life. CNN's Phil Mattingly is on the Hill. Day 33, Phil. So, Phil, you hear this idea, that by putting this Republican proposal forward and it not passing, that that messages the president that the deal he wants does not have the votes. Does that move the ball forward?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] I think it's a combination. Right? Not only does that or that proposal from the president not have the votes, or at least that's the expectation from aides in both parties going into the vote tomorrow. But a Democratic proposal, a House-passed proposal by House Democrats will also get a vote on the floor. And it is expected to fall short as well. At least as we currently understand. And the idea, it seems trite, and it's not very complicated. It's the idea of showing these were the two issues, these were the two bottom lines that both parties have had. Now you have shown that they do not have the votes to advance on the floor. Now lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, in both chambers, can actually sit down and have real negotiations. Because remember, above all of this is the very divergent bottom lines. Democrats made clear, they will not have negotiations on border security until the government is reopened. The president has made clear he will not sign anything reopening the government until he gets funding for his border wall and border security negotiations actually take place. Somehow that bridge needs to be that divide needs to be bridged. And I think the hope, at least among the optimistic individuals on Capitol Hill, is once you show these bills fail, these two proposals from both sides fail, that those negotiations can happen. I think the difficult part right now, at least according to people I'm talking to that are involved in the talks or lack thereof up to this point, is there's no plan B right now. There's no clear pathway out. There's no proposal that can thread the needle and there's no sense right now that at the top levels people are willing to come off their stated positions. There is, however, a lot of grumbling in the rank-and-file, there's a lot of frustration in the rank-and-file, and there's a lot of kind of desire to get a green light to try and make a deal. They just need the folks at the top to give them that. And at this point, at least before these votes tomorrow, that doesn't exist yet guys.
[Harlow:] OK. Wish you had better news. Phil, thank you. As for the White House, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders has not held a press briefing since the shutdown began.
[Sciutto:] She is this morning confirming that the president is pressing forward with preparations for his State of the Union speech. Not clear what form that's going to take. Boris Sanchez is at the White House with more. So, Boris, what are the options here beyond doing it as per tradition from Capitol Hill?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hey there, Jim and Poppy. Yes, the White House is looking at several options. Ultimately what we're watching here is a slow motion game of chicken that will ultimately be decided next Tuesday when the president is scheduled to give his State of the Union address. So far the White House has said that they are moving forward with the plan as is and that they haven't heard from Nancy Pelosi directly on this. Remember that her letter didn't formally disinvite the president from giving his State of the Union on Capitol Hill but rather simply asked him to delay it. She has yet to actually take that step. But the White House says that if she does, they will be ready. Listen to this from Press Secretary Sarah Sanders speaking on FOX News this morning.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] We always like to have a plan B, but the president should be able to address the American people whether he does that from the halls of Congress or whether he does that in another location. The president will talk to the American people on January 29th.
[Steve Doocy, Host, "fox & Friends":] One way or the other.
[Sanders:] As he does nearly every single day. And we're going to continue moving forward with the State of the Union and we'll see what happens.
[Sanchez:] Now specifically outlining those options, Jim and Poppy, there are a couple that the president could move toward. One of them, as you heard Sarah Sanders there suggesting that the president could still speak at the Capitol Hill only not in the House of Representatives but rather in the Senate's chamber. We've also heard from several sources indicating that aides here at the White House are exploring the possibility that President Trump could use any number of rooms here to deliver that address. Also we're hearing that the president could speak at a rally. We know how much he loves to be around his supports. So that is certainly a plausible option. We've also heard from lawmakers in North Carolina or Michigan inviting President Trump to give his speech in their states. It does not appear the president is going to move that direction. He formally turned down the invitation to speak in Michigan. And the last option, of course, for the president to speak at the source of all the dysfunction behind the shutdown, at the southern border where the president has long railed and called for a border wall with Mexico Jim and Poppy.
[Sciutto:] Boris Sanchez at the White House, thanks very much. Joining us now the former director of Legislative Affairs for the Trump administration, and that is Marc Short. Marc, as always, thanks for taking the time with us.
[Marc Short, Cnn Political Commentator:] Thanks, Jim. Thanks for having me on.
[Sciutto:] So, Marc, let's for a moment declare a talking points-free zone if that's possible.
[Harlow:] Amen.
[Sciutto:] And paint for me a compromise that would get through both Houses of Congress to reopen the government and make the president happy.
[Short:] Jim, I know there's some conversation this morning about extending green cards to those who are DACA recipients. I think that's a positive development step. Certainly something that I would encourage the administration to support
[Sciutto:] It's a non-starter with Democrats, though. You know that. They've already said it's a non-starter. So what would work?
[Short:] Why would providing a green card that is not just a three-year extension a non-starter for Democrats?
[Harlow:] Well, it's actually a non-starter for the Republican congressman we just had on.
[Sciutto:] And the you split up like we had Clay Higgins on, Republican as you know.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] He said I'm not going to support amnesty. And you've heard that from the Laura Ingrahams and the Anne Coulters of the world, too.
[Short:] Yes, I don't I accept that there's going to be some on the right that oppose it. I don't think that means it's a non-starter, Jim. But right now, I mean, I think the reality is what we face is you're going to see the votes this week that I think put people on record which is, as Phil was explaining to your audience, I think is a positive development to step forward. But ultimately I think that we're still more likely to head toward a declaration from the president to just get this over with because I think that it's gone on too long. I think people are suffering too much. And it's apparent that Congress is not going to find a resolution so I do
[Harlow:] A national emergency declaration? Is that what you're saying?
[Short:] I think that that's probably a more likely pathway forward. Yes.
[Harlow:] So we just had Kevin Hassett on, the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, who rightly points out he's not you know, he's not in the cabinet. This isn't a political role. It's a numbers role. And he just told us unequivocally that yes, if this shutdown continues fully through the first quarter the U.S. economy could see zero growth in Q1. Now he hedged it a little bit, says usually Q1 growth is a little bit less but, I mean, the White House hears a headline like that, that's got to be concerning, right? Because the president has consistently polled higher on the economy than anything else. Promised 3 percent to 4 percent growth quarter by quarter. If you get a quarter zero, what are you thinking?
[Short:] Yes. Well, Poppy, a couple of things. One, I don't see how this could extend throughout the entire first quarter. I think too many people are hurting, too much pressure is going to be applied here to actually get this resolved. So I don't think that's a scenario that can unfold. Certainly shutdowns don't help anybody. It's not good for either side to be in this position. And I think if you look at what the economy has done in the last couple of quarters, there were 4 percent, there were 3 percent growth, I think it's I'm not going to argue with Kevin, he's a better economist than I'll ever be, but I don't see a scenario where you go through a shutdown the entire first quarter.
[Sciutto:] Let me ask you this. So you say national emergency declaration is the way out. And I know there are some Republicans who privately say, yes, it will get us out of this, and there might even be some Democrats. Right? But Republicans are not fans of unchecked executive power. They certainly weren't happy with the president using executive orders during President Obama, I should say, during his administration. What kind of precedent does that set going forward that if a president can't get what he wants through Congress just declares a national emergency and he can define what the emergency is? Because, as you know, the numbers don't support an emergency today anymore than there was last year when Republicans controlled Congress or 10 years ago and the numbers were far higher at the border.
[Short:] Well, fair point, Jim. I think it is a bad precedent. I think it's a fair criticism that Republicans complained about the executive orders of the Obama administration and I think it's been too frequently relied upon in this administration. So I think that's a very fair criticism. Having said that, I do think there's justification to say there's a crisis. And I don't think you have to go back, you know, to just this year. In fact, it was President Obama who used that terminology humanitarian crisis in a Rose Garden speech in 2014. So both sides at different times have acknowledged that it's a crisis. So I do think there's a precedent for it but I'm not suggesting either this is the right way normally to go when Congress can't solve it but I do think it is something that's significant and in this case merits it.
[Sciutto:] Crisis is different from an actual national emergency. I mean, a national emergency it's a legal definition empowered by Congress, you know, declared after 911 for instance. I mean different from a crisis.
[Harlow:] It's a good point.
[Short:] That's fair, Jim, but I think that this is a I think that there's plenty of evidence to suggest that this is an emergency that's been going on for quite some time. Both sides have acknowledged it in different times in the past. And I'm not going to I'm not sitting here and tell you it is a good thing to be declaring this. I agree with you. It's something that should be fixed legislatively and not by the executive branch. But at some point too many people have been hurting when this gets extended as long as it has.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] You know, I'm old enough, old enough to remember when the president walked away from a deal that it was believed that he would take for $25 billion for the wall, Marc. Remember that? I mean I think you were
[Short:] I do.
[Harlow:] And permanent protection for Dreamers. And now it seems like both Democrats and Republicans are going to get way less than what they wanted back then.
[Short:] That's fair, Poppy. But let's just be clear on what exactly that offer was because there was $25 billion and I think Democrats in the past have said that they're supporting the wall going back to 2006 Secure Fence Act. So it is confusing to how we're in this place now. But that offer as well, what it was was it wasn't just the DACA population. The Democrats put on the table it extended to those who were parents of the DACA population and those who could have applied but didn't apply and maybe should have applied. And so all of a sudden that number was ballooning much beyond the DACA population. I think that's where that fell apart.
[Sciutto:] Let me ask you this before you go. You, the president's other supporters, the president himself have portrayed themselves as defending U.S. national security with this stand here. As the shutdown continues, we're getting hard evidence, the FBI saying they have to stop investigations, you have Coast Guard sailors going to sea without pay. You have air traffic controller who's got to work double jobs. I don't know, I don't want my air traffic controller driving Uber, you know, before a 12-hour shift. Right?
[Short:] Right.
[Sciutto:] I mean, there was hard evidence of real damage today to national security as a result of this shutdown. Is that a trade that you support? A tradeoff in effect that you support.
[Short:] No,
[I -- Sciutto:] Demanding the wall funding as there's real damage elsewhere?
[Short:] No, Jim. I think a shutdown is not a resolution that anybody should support, honestly. I think it's I think that what the White House initially that OMB put forth, $1.6 billion that the Senate had approved. But I think that the president is right to say there is a crisis at the border and there is national security concerns. And I do think that there's hypocrisy, you know, on this on both sides. Democrat have said before they support wall funding and yet, you know, they don't now, and basically we're arguing over one-tenth of 1 percent
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Short:] of the federal budget.
[Harlow:] We have to go. People are forgetting, Nancy Pelosi voted against the Secure Fence Act.
[Short:] That's correct. And Senator Schumer voted for it.
[Harlow:] She's one on the House side yes, I hear that. I hear that.
[Short:] As Hillary Clinton.
[Harlow:] Let me leave it there. Marc, you'll be back. Thank you.
[Short:] Thanks, Poppy.
[Sciutto:] Still to come this hour, we are watching Capitol Hill. We're after more shutdown negotiations. You're going to hear from both Republicans and Democrats. We're going to take you there live.
[Harlow:] Also today Paul Manafort's legal team faces a new deadline. How they're responding to allegations that he lied to the special counsel's office and the FBI. And the 16-year-old student at the center of that viral video that sparked major controversy, now speaking out. What he says the original video of the incident got wrong.

[Max Foster, Host, Cnn:] London terrorist identified after brutal attacks in the heart of the city. A neighbor saying they warned police about one of them. Sadiq Khan hits back at Donald Trump after the U.S. President slam the mayor's response to the attack.
[Rosemary Church, Host, Cnn:] ... leaks and fleeing Mosul. Civilians rushed to leave the city before the final assault on ISIS. I'm Rosemary Church at CNN headquarters in Atlanta.
[Foster:] And I'm Max Foster at Abingdon Green here in London. Hello and welcome to the special edition of CNN Newsroom. British authorities are facing new questions about possible security gap as we learn more about the London attackers. Officials name two of the three men. On the left is Khuram Shazad, a British citizen born in Pakistan, on the right Rachid Redouane, who claimed to be Moroccan and Libyan. Police say they were searching an east London addressing in connection with the attack. No one has been detained. The 12 people who are arrested during earlier raids have been released without charge. Joining us now is CNN's Samuel Burke out Scotland Yard; Isa Soares is at 10 Downing Street. Samuel, first to you, what do we know about what the police knew about the suspects before the attack?
[Samuel Burke, Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, Max, so many times in this investigation you hear people say we had no idea, he was a nice guy. But that really doesn't seem to be the case about Khuram Shazad. But police are saying that he was known to both the police and to MI5, though they say that there was no intelligence to suggest that there was any type of planning that they knew about in this attack that happened this week. But we're hearing from members of the community, both from within the Muslim community here in London and the non-Muslim community. One neighbor telling CNN that she had actually been suspicious of Mr. Butt and that she had flag him up to the authorities after she said she saw him teaching kids to pray in her neighborhood. But then you have other information from other members of the Muslim community. One man Muhammad Shafiq [Ph] say that at one point he was verbally assaulted by Mr. Butt, that he called him a word in Arabic which would be the equivalent of calling somebody a traitor or a stooge for the government and that he reported him to the police. And that the police came but he said he's actually not surprised that these men was one of the people who carried out the attack. On top of that, Max, you see footage from Channel 4 a local news station here in the U.K. which actually did a documentary which included Mr. Butt saying the documentary was the Jihadist the next door. And you see him in the Regent's Park, one of the best known park here in London unrolling a black flag which may looks similar to the ISIS flag for some people but wasn't the actual ISIS flag. So, the question really comes now here is what were the police doing with the information that they had? Do the police here in the U.K. and the intelligence forces have the resources that they need to investigate these people, and what are they doing with the resources that they have? An important question that Theresa May is facing on the campaign trail already.
[Foster:] Any words really about the resourcing issue from a technical point of view, do they failed that they got enough resources?
[Burke:] Well, we actually heard from one of the police commissioner. Commissioner Dick saying that she didn't feel that the police had enough resources that needed to be an increase. Under Home Secretary Theresa May when she was home secretary there are actually 20,000 officers cut. Now a lot of this is being politicized here in the U.K. because we're about to have an election. But again, hearing from the commissioner saying that they do need more resources to actually fair and clear, and somebody who seems to be fairly apolitical in their word. That's a very clear message saying that they do need more.
[Foster:] OK. Samuel at Scotland Yard, thank you. Let's go to Isa now who's looking in that political perspective. The election is on Thursday, so we haven't long to go and this is going to define it. What sort of criticism is the government coming in for?
[Isa Soares, International Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, I can tell you there are already from other party they are making political hay of this of this recent attack. Of course, following on from the Manchester attack, Max where 20 people died. There was an outpouring of grief, there was an outpouring of anger. That has actually escalated somewhat following from the London attack given what we're hearing from Samuel Burke, hearing what we're getting from authorities that perhaps this man was known to police, not just normal police but also MI5. And they were investigating investigating him. And people had actually warned police about him. So, many people of course, especially those undecided voters who were asking themselves which way they will go ahead of the election on Thursday. And Max, I was listening to a really interesting discussion on a London radio station where people were basically calling in saying they had changed their minds regarding the way in which they will vote following on from this attack, given the fact that Theresa May was Home Secretary was Home Secretary and she may cut of as many as 20,000 in police cuts. So, people really changed, some people changing their minds as to which way they will vote. That will be front and center as the campaign has resumed in the last 24 hours. We heard from Jeremy Corby, the leader of the opposition calling on Theresa May to resign but she had pitched herself as strong and stable and we heard from her just day after attacks in which she came out with a full throng of approach on how to target these terrorist groups saying that enough is enough.
[Foster:] Genuine questions are being asked by independent parties as well, about whether or not the security apparatus in the country is fit for purpose anymore because of this new type of threat we're facing, the intensity of the threat. Tell us a bit more about that because that's a genuine concern away from politics.
[Soares:] Yes. And this is this is interesting. And nothing many people will be discussing this in the next few days because, you know, the way these attacks we have seen these attacks now they are so hard to prevent and they are so hard to predict. You know, this just guys getting on vans and just mowing down people. So, what they basically and what we're seeing is that, you know, we've got a 5,000 or so open counterterrorism investigation into these people. But we've also got something like 20,000 of them how people, former people of interest. So there is this question over do we have enough people, is the British police is there enough people surveillance on these people, which is a question of course we were raising when we were covering the Paris attacks very similar. But also, Max, what we heard from neighbors as CNN reporting, the people were reported reporting these people, but perhaps the calls one being made to the right department. So, is something falling for the cracks. This is something that of course many people are asking, many people are questioning and whether having more police will that change anything or is this the problem of the structure within the police force. These are all questions they're not just Londoners but indeed that many Brits will be asking as they head to the polls, a critical election of course given what we've seen in the last two weeks. Of course, not something that Theresa May never expected of course when she called this election on March, Max. She had, she was expecting to have a majority, had a huge lead and that gap has narrowed quite dramatically in the last week or so, Max.
[Foster:] Yes, one poll we can't take any of the polls face value, but one of them this morning putting the lead at less than, well, about 1 percent which is extraordinary considering how far ahead Theresa May is parting was...
[Soares:] Yes.
[Foster:] ...at the beginning of all of this. Joining me now is David Lea, he's a senior Europe analyst for Control Risks. Where from here, don't we, that these people were on the radar before they carry out the attacks but does you know, this guy could not have been more on a radar it seems. There was even a program that him being a Jihadi and there was an investigation. We don't know what happened about that investigation in the end. But what are your thoughts about how this compared with other similar circumstances?
[David Lea, Senior Europe Analyst, Control Risks:] I think at times it's easy to be what's up to the event. But there are serious questions about this as the surveillance of this particular individual and obviously a lot more is going to come out of that in the next days, isn't it. It does seem as if it's going to be something that the police and the security forces have to defend once we [Inaudible] throughout the election so far.
[Foster:] What we often hear is that it takes so much resource to monitor someone.
[Lea:] Yes.
[Foster:] But from what we understand it didn't get to that point and it doesn't seem to be a resourcing issue, it's just a case of they had looked into it and they decided not to continue so that's not a resource issue, is it?
[Lea:] It depends. It could be a resource issue given that they looked into is that enough to continue because there are other higher priorities and they didn't have the resources to get...
[Foster:] They don't have the time to spend on it.
[Lea:] ... to the priority there, so that's entirely possible at all.
[Foster:] What about the security apparatus in the country, one of the main newspaper here saying it's not just fit for purpose. The whole thing needs to be re-thought and that's actually a serious consideration here in Westminster as well, isn't it?
[Lea:] Yes, absolutely. The security apparatus has evolved constantly after the terrorist attack in fact, going roughly to seven slaughtered and 25 are yet luckily be crafted then.
[Foster:] Yes.
[Lea:] A lot more community and intelligence can tell [Inaudible] and that's not really very successful, you know, until now.
[Foster:] Where is the problem with the relevance? Why is it not working as well now?
[Lea:] I think after a number of, after a matter of times certainly.
[Foster:] Yes.
[Lea:] Sooner or later some folks are going to get through. But the community work very well here in the regions [Ph] we've heard both of Manchester and the ones that people from mosques and friends within the community are informed.
[Foster:] And one of the concerns there is local level policing, basically police walking around the streets having relationship with local communities that's been one of the biggest areas of cops, right? So that when we talk about intelligence we're not necessarily talking about MI5 and MI6.
[Lea:] No.
[Foster:] We're talking about bodies on the beat.
[Lea:] No, not exactly that's the kind of thing. I'm going in the constant of people in those communities and then you can then make decisions for yourselves. And that the calls to local and community policing are going to be a factor in what remains the election campaign on that basis.
[Foster:] We heard for these latest suspects there were calls have been made to the anti-terror hotline which is meant to be a way that you could report problems but those messages didn't seem to get through but presumably they've got huge amount of calls coming into that line.
[Lea:] Again, it's going to be a priority issue that you know, is this guy [Inaudible].
[Foster:] So when it comes to trying and being partial that we got an election coming up, we got Theresa may saying one of the issues is, you know, partly talking to what you're talking about a cultural issue. Then you got the opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn saying it's a resource issue there's been too many cuts in the police and security services. What are your thoughts on that if it's if anyone is right or wrong?
[Lea:] It's going to be a fascinating issue because obviously the conservatives should initially portray themselves as party of little older [Ph] and coming into this campaign would have been extra image and comfortably [Inaudible] winning debates on that, and particularly portray Labour Party weaken that area. Now Labour Party has got something, you know, with which to attack Theresa May because she has been [Inaudible].
[Foster:] Because this day left the campaigning so it's going to be the defining issue for many of them, isn't it?
[Lea:] Absolutely.
[Foster:] David, thank you very much indeed. More on the terror attack here in London shortly. But I'll hand back now to Rosemary for more news from around the world. Rosemary?
[Church:] Thanks so much, Max. We'll talk to you in just a bit. A federal contractor is under arrest accused of leaking top secret information about Russia's efforts to hack the U.S. presidential election. Twenty-five-year-old Reality Winner, you see her here admits she intentionally leaked the classified document. She faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted. Her mother says Winner wasn't especially political and that she never praise past leakers like Edward Snowden. CNN's chief U.S. correspondent Jim Sciutto joins me now to talk more about this. So Jim, what more are you learning about these leaks NSA memo containing information on Russian attempts to hack voting software just days before the 2016 presidential election.
[Jim Sciutto, Chief National Security Correspondent, Cnn:] That's right. So it's a classified NSA document prepared dated just in May of this year is some of the latest intelligence about these attempts. During the election we knew that there been some probing attacks of voter registration systems in Arizona, in Illinois, in Florida we've done some reporting on some probing attacks were on a contractor in Florida that handled some of those voting systems. It remain then and it remains today the judgment of the U.S. intelligence community that Russia did not successfully get into vote tallying, did not affect with cyber-attacks any of the counting of the votes. But this NSA report shows that they are still looking into what those probing attacks did where they went, possibly some, you know, assessment of what the intention was, et cetera, has not changed the overall assessment that there was no messing with the vote tallies. But they are still gathering intelligence assessment can change, that assessment has not change. But Rosemary, they're still gathering intelligence that shows that the Russians were at least looking to see how far they can go instead some of these systems.
[Church:] So what actually motivated this young contractor to leak this information to an online media outlet, do we know what was she hoping to achieve with it?
[Sciutto:] It's not 100 percent clear yet. We've done some reporting where apparently where she had heard a podcast where some journalist including Glenn Greenwald who is tied to the intercept talked about their doubts about Russian interference in the U.S. election. There been some reports about that so we looked at some of her communications tried to time that to when that podcast aired. It looks that there's possibly a connection there that gets to a possible motivation, we don't know that. But what we do know is how she was caught. And that involved some detective work some interesting sort of old school detective work on the part of U.S. intelligence agencies. And how this happened is she apparently download this document, printed it out, took a picture of it, share that picture, apparently anonymously with the intercept. The reporter there then show that to another contact of the reporter, another contractor say, hey, is this document real. That person went to some of their colleagues to report that this document was out there. They looked at the document saw that there had a crease in the corner on the image which was an indication that it had been printed out. It looked like there was a fold there that when you take a picture sometimes that fold shows is a crease. So they looked at the people who had printed out this document. It was a small handful of people and then from there were able to find their way to this leaker, this 25-year-old contractor. So, some old school police work there that led to the original leaker of the information.
[Church:] Extraordinary. So what damage has potentially been done with this leak and what will likely happen to the young woman behind it?
[Sciutto:] Well, on the second question first, leaking of classified information carries potentially heavy legal price possibly up to 10 years in prison rarely do people serve the maximum sentences. We do know we don't know if she'll be convicted. We do know that she's appeared in court already. CNN spoke to her mother today that she has a court appointed lawyer. Her mother is hoping that she will be released on bond. But facing a difficult legal future it seems as to what damage it did, you know, it's interesting here as they called illegal but the information is already out there, right? So there's classified NSA report is out there adding to the picture of Russian interference in the election, but it shows again the vulnerabilities in the system, right? Because remember, it was also a contractor named Edward Snowden who led to an enormously leak of information about domestic surveillance and other surveillance programs. There been a lot of effort made by U.S. intelligence used to plug leaks like that going forward but when you look at what happened here it's clearly not all those holes have been plugged.
[Church:] Yes, certainly, that is the case. Jim Sciutto, many thanks...
[Sciutto:] Thank you.
[Church:] ... for filling in all of the holes there and we understand a little bit more about this now. Many thanks.
[Sciutto:] Thank you.
[Church:] Well, there's new evidence of Russian hacking in the U.S. election could come up Thursday when former FBI Director James Comey appears before the Senate intelligence committee. CNN's Tom Foreman has a preview.
[Tom Foreman, Correspondent, Cnn:] For Congress it's the hottest question in town. Did President Trump tried to pressure FBI Director James Comey to drop the Russia probe and was it obstruction of justice.
[Joe Manchin,  United States Senator:] We want to find out what Comey was thinking at that time if he thought it was, has risen to that level of obstruction. And if it had why hadn't something been done, why didn't act on it he was still FBI director.
[Foreman:] As FBI Director Comey met or spoke with President Trump at least three different times. The president just talked about some of it.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] If it's possible would you let me know am I under investigation? He said, "you are not under investigation."
[Foreman:] But sources say Comey in his own notes after one such meeting in February said the president also inquired about the probe into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. "I hope you can see your way to letting this go, to letting Flynn go." Trump allegedly said, "he's a good guy."
[Mark Warner,  United States Senator:] I want to know what kind of pressure appropriate, inappropriate, how many conversations he had with the president about this topic. Did some of this conversations takes place even before the president was sworn in?
[Foreman:] The president rejects the whole idea.
[Unidentified Male:] Did you at any time urged former FBI Director James Comey in any way, shape or form to close or to back down the investigation into Michael Flynn, and also as you look back...
[Trump:] No, no. Next question.
[Foreman:] Complicating the matter, Trump's firing of Comey and this cryptic tweet when news of Comey's notes appeared. "James Comey better hope that there are no tapes of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press." The White House has not said of any tapes exist.
[Sean Spicer, United States White House Press Secretary:] The president has nothing further to add on that.
[Foreman:] Comey has previously made it clear he would take seriously any political meddling in the FBI.
[James Comey, Former United States Fbi Director:] I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason. That would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.
[Church:] Still to come, the worse diplomatic crises in years hits Gulf Arab states. Why multiple nations are severing ties with Qatar. That is next. And then later, London's mayor in the spotlight after Saturday's terror attack. His choice of words for Donald Trump. We're back in a moment.

[Ward:] Venezuela is a country on the brink of collapse, torn apart by violent protests as opposition leaders face off with President Nicolas Maduro and his supporters. The government is cracking down on dissent and intimidating journalists, even taking CNN's sister network, CNN en Espanol, off the air. Well, CNN's Nick Paton Walsh went into the country under cover. Much of the filming was done covertly to avoid the risk of being arrested. Watch this.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Venezuela's dark lurch into poverty and chaos is on display as you drive into the capital. This food truck breaking down for mere seconds before it was looted. Basic food is scarce. No shortage of bleach but long lines for bread. This crisis all created by the mad policies of a government that now wants to hide the collapse, cracking down on and intimidating journalists. We had to go under cover and much of our filming was done covertly to avoid arrest. With some poor nearing starvation, the people demand change in violent clashes. Tens of lives lost as desperation meet tear gas and police birdshot. You've heard of the Molotov cocktail? Well, that would be too simple for a once suave, gas rich state. So this is the Puputov, a sewage bomb.
[Unidentified Male:] Mixed with gas and ammonia, prepared directly for the police that throw tear gas bombs at us worth $60 each. My country doesn't food and we can't even protest peacefully.
[Paton Walsh:] This is the daily standoff. The crowd sometimes attacked by pro-government folks on motorcycles who open fire discriminately. Gunfire takes at least one this day, that of 27- year-old Miguel Castillo. But it doesn't stop the daily battle to eat. Virginia has been doing this for 18 months to feed her five kids. She can't find work since she had this little one, but here sometimes what she calls meat.
[Virginia, Venezuelan:] Sometimes I find stuffed bread, rice, meat, beans, pasta. Some people are conscientious and put it in clean bags, leaving it out.
[Paton Walsh:] So how has oil-rich Venezuela got so bad? In most countries, it's the market that sets the price of, let's say, for example, rice. But here in Venezuela, the government decides how much you should pay for most goods stuff but also what many people's wages actually are. And since the oil price has crashed globally, they have not been able to keep one up with the other. They're basically flat out of money. And now, for rice like this, you need to find three times as many as many notes as these, and that's about a month's minimum wage. Wherever you look, repression and hunger haunts this once proud city. Jesus is a juggler, a magician for kids' parties, beaten heavily, he says, in the day before's protests, now begging for food him when we find him.
[Jesus, Venezuelan:] I spent two days on the street and two days at home. And when I go home, it's because I have food. Before, I get calls to do magic at birthday parties, but now, no. Now, with the country the way it is, magic doesn't help.
[Paton Walsh:] They mourn the dead. The anger, quiet, indignant, not belligerent. South America is looking to see if Venezuela can fix its self-made crisis without major bloodshed. But they are falling so far, so fast, and the ground is getting nearer.
[Ward:] Nick Paton Walsh joins us now live from New York. Nick, let me start out by asking you, what is the Venezuelan government saying about this?
[Paton Walsh:] Well, despite their bid to practically keep a lid on what's happening inside that country, it's hard to work there as a journalist, even if you're actually based there with official accreditation. They say that much of the depiction of their country is from a hostile foreign media with their agenda, that we exaggerate some of the problems. And they also point out that they are facing an opposition that often has its fingers in business there that are involved in sort of manipulating or complicating the economic problems facing Venezuela. And then also, too, they're servicing their foreign debt with a lot of the state funds that remain. And, of course, since the oil price has crashed, those state funds are significantly reduced, Clarissa.
[Ward:] And give us a sense of what daily life is like there.
[Paton Walsh:] It is a very, very strange place to be. I mean, this crisis is ostensibly entirely man-made. It's about the command economy in which the people running it have sort of lost command and control. It is strange to go with a bundle of dollars to try and pay for things, realize you can't pay in dollars. You have to pay in local currency. If you pay using your credit card, well, the exchange rate you get is oddly about four or five times the black market rate. So you try and change dollars into local currency, that then has rarely ever worked because there isn't actually enough physical currency around to be able to convert a hundred bucks, for example. So you end up asking a local if they wouldn't mind paying using their banking card, which they can do because they get better rate of you with your dollars. It's a very, very strange place to simply try, as you saw there, just buy a bag of rice. And that's for us with resources available. You know, we spoke to one family who, basically, the man works all week long, the husband of the couple, with a number of children, for enough money to buy 13 coconuts, roughly, on the black market exchange rate. Life is basically on limbo for most people there. And that's the reason you see the anger on the street because, frankly, that situation has been created by the governments, in want of a better word, mismanagement Clarissa.
[Ward:] Such an important story and so under reported. Nick Paton Walsh, thank you so much. And don't miss it tomorrow. Nick Paton Walsh gives us a rare glimpse into a Venezuelan hospital where the economic crisis is taking its toll on the most vulnerable.
[Paton Walsh:] Danielle is 14 and elsewhere, would probably have kept her leg. But in Venezuela, vital medicine for chemotherapy is short and so were the odds the bone tumor in her leg wouldn't spread. Just a little cold water, the doctor says. Does it make you feel angry as a doctor, that a procedure like this is necessary
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Paton Walsh:] where you could prevent it if you had the right medicine?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes. That is very sad for us.
[Ward:] Danielle's case is not an isolated one. More from Nick Paton Walsh in Venezuela tomorrow on CNN.

[Don Lemon, Cnn Anchor:] Midnight here on the East Coast. I'm Don Lemon. You are watching CNN TONIGHT. This is our continuing coverage of Hurricane Florence live here on CNN. I've moved down to the beach because this thing is starting to get closer, starting to make landfall and I just want to bring you closer to the action. We still have a little bit of time before that happens. We can see that the wind has started to pick up. I'm behind the building here. As we're walking out between the buildings, we got more gusts. The outer bands are starting to come through. No rain here in Myrtle Beach where I am. But you can see my colleagues who've been out there and there's some waves lapping at the shores here. One person who's been in rain all night and that is my colleague, Anderson Cooper. Anderson, I can't see you. I could see you from my location before but what's going on now?
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] The story of rain continues. Earlier we were talking in the last hour, we were talking about how Dianne Gallagher had seen some transformers exploding, lighting up the sky. I just saw that here in Wilmington for the first time. I almost thought it was a lightning strike at first but I believe it was some sort of a transformer because it had that kind of bluish glow to it. A number of the buildings, the lights went out for about a second or so, then they seemed to pop back on. So it seems like there's still electricity, still streetlights here. Our lights are still on at a hotel nearby and the buildings nearby. But, again, that's just a sign of perhaps things to come as it gets later and later and this rain continues and the wind continues to pick up. But it's really you know, it's a story of water, of rain, of storm surge that we've been covering for the last really, you know, 18 hours or so. And that's going to be the story for the next 24 to 36 hours, Don. But there's a long way to go. You know, it's miserable out but thankfully people are not out on the streets. It seems most people are inside or already asleep or watching television as long as the electricity lasts and hopefully they'll stay there until this thing is gone.
[Lemon:] If you still have electricity and you're watching this storm, you're one of the lucky ones, Anderson, because over 150,000 people, we're told, without power now and about 12,000 people in shelters I misspoke earlier. It's 126 shelters in North Carolina. I believe you said where you are in Wilmington, there are five shelters where people are sheltering in place there. And those are the lucky folks who could actually get into those shelters. This is nothing to play around with.
[Cooper:] Yes, it's really not. You're right; five shelters to expand the capacity. After last night they started to fill up so they're expanding capacity on that. But at this point people are either in the shelters or at their homes and they should stay where they are at this point, according to all the officials we have talked to. They do not want people obviously out on the streets, driving around. There's still not a water, at least in the areas I'm in on the ground. But we're watching very closely the river, which we're not expecting to crest until Tuesday. So there's a long couple of days still to come. It's going to be miserable for a number of days for people and, you know, they've got to buckle down and stay where they are and try to get through this as best they can.
[Lemon:] Listen, I was speaking, Anderson, to Ed Rappaport at the National Hurricane Center a short time ago. And he basically reiterated and confirmed everything we were saying, everybody reads a lot into those numbers, what category it is. Of course that's important. It tells you the wind speed or what have you. But he says there's a 5-mile difference between the 1 and 2 and once it was downgraded to a 1, even if it's downgraded right now, I think right now 90 mile an hour winds are the strongest winds we've been getting in some places. I think 100 in Davis County somewhere, that's still nothing to mess around.
[Cooper:] Yes. You're breaking up so I couldn't hear just the end part of what you said. But, yes, those winds are nothing to scoff at when you're standing outside, particularly given the size of this storm and the amount of time that those winds are going to be hitting the coast and hitting even inland areas. Look, we've both been in storms that have higher, sustained winds. Going back to 2004, 2005, we saw storms that were higher category. I think the untold story and the thing I'm frankly am not sure about and the thing we're going to have to wait and see is just the story of the water and what happens in terms of the storm surge and this pounding rain that continues hour after hour after hour.
[Lemon:] Yes, and if you get 30 inches of rain in that short amount of time, then that is problematic. Anderson, thank you very much. I want you to stand by. We'll get back to Anderson in just moments. He is riding the storm out there, watching it for you so that you don't have to be out in it. Also in Wilmington, North Carolina, I want to get to my colleague, Martin Savidge. He joins us now. Martin, what are you experiencing now?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Don, we're on the outskirts of Wilmington, very close to what's called Wrights Field Beach. And where you are in relation to this storm can give you a very different experience. Here, it's a combination of both the battering winds the winds are quite strong at times. You can hear them howling in the wires above you, you can hear the trees being torn apart above you as well. And at the same time, it's the wind driven rain. There are times you can look behind you at the streetlights and it's like a fog, it's almost like a wall of water you're staring into. So that is the combination of wind driven water and also the rain is falling in tremendous amounts here. So even though this storm has been downgraded, it's not a major hurricane anymore, it is going to be a major problem and potentially a major disaster, especially the interface when you have an urban environment. You're going to have water that begins to pool, rivers going to be flooding. We've already seen that in Dianne's reporting. But this is going to be something that will expand beyond the coastal neighborhoods here, which is why the Coast Guard is standing by, both with helicopters for air rescue. But then on top of that, they know they have to get into urban streets. For that, they have to use different vehicles, high-water rescue vehicles by the National Guard but also small, flat bottom boats like we saw being used in New Orleans. It's a combination of what you need in the open areas as well as what you need even in city parking lots like this. The next day, the next hours, maybe even the next few days are going to be the stories that's revealed, as Anderson just said. But right now we're still dealing with high winds, dangerous winds, power outages, power lines that can come down, trees that can topple over. It is not a time for people to let down their guard and certainly not a time for anyone to go out and say, hey, let's see what's going on right now Don.
[Lemon:] Absolutely. Well said from Martin Savidge in Wilmington. Martin, thank you very much. Just getting an update from the top of the hour coming from the National Weather Service. They're saying they are getting life threatening wind gusts in Eastern North Carolina right now already. So this is just the beginning. The storm is still stirring. It hasn't made landfall yet but already life threatening wind gusts, Eastern North Carolina. I want to get to my colleague, Brian Todd. Brian Todd is at Hampstead, North Carolina. We've been watching Brian Todd. We've seen him with some flooding, with some trees and some branches down and also traveling along the roads there in Hampstead. Brian, what are you seeing now?
[Brian Todd, Cnn Correspondent:] We've seen a worsening of conditions along these roads. And we're going to show you another reason why the downgrading of this storm to a category 1 should not make people underestimate this. The winds, as I've heard you and Martin talk about just a second ago, are still extremely strong, especially where we are in the northern band of this storm. You can see the front tree ahead of us could be on the verge of snapping and collapsing. We're going to cruise past it and show you the debris on the road. A lot of these roads are very bad off now and they're getting worse by the minute. The wind and rain are really whipping around here. These rural areas, especially near the Intercoastal Waterway, are vulnerable. We're going to take you to the edge of this road. This is Watts Landing Road. It goes right up to the Intercoastal Waterway. We're going to be
[Todd:] at the edge of it in a second, where the road is washed out. And we have to point out the road is washed out, it was washed out before the storm hit. But the fact it's washed out means that this could make it even more vulnerable, this area, this street and the homes on it could be much more vulnerable to the storm surge. We know it's nothing, we know it's going to get worse. We're right about at the time when high tide is going to hit. We're at the edge of this road right now. I'm going to get out of the vehicle and go to the edge of the road. We talked about people on the barrier islands and on the Outer Banks, who could be trapped on the Outer Banks, on those islands because they're only acceptable by boats because the roads to them can get washed out. Well, this is a washed out road. And it illustrates that, even that people on the mainland can get trapped. Over here, you don't see them but there are houses just a few feet away from me. And look at the storm surge here with the marshland area is overwhelming this area. It's about to push the water all the way up here. I'm really just a few feet from several homes and we're getting a really bad gust right now and kind of the wind and rain is hitting us from side to side. That's another thing about a hurricane; you just never know what direction the wind is going to come from. But, Don, there are houses to my right just a few feet away in serious danger now from this storm surge, which I've seen rise up a couple of feet just in the last couple of hours here.
[Lemon:] Thank you very much for that, Brian Todd. We appreciate your reporting. Brian Todd is in Hampstead. I just have a little bit more information for you. When we're talking about the intensity of this storm and you heard Martin Savidge saying, depending on where you are in the Carolinas, you get a different perspective of this storm. This now from NOAA; they're telling us there's almost 10 foot storm surges, 10 foot flood stages in New Bern. That's where Delia Gallagher [sic] was just a short time Dianne Gallagher, excuse me Dianne Gallagher was a short time ago. And she's standing by there. But again, they're seeing some flooding there. Almost 10 feet; 9.6 is the exact count they told us. But that's nearly 10 feet there. And they're also saying 70 mile an hour sustained winds right now in that area. So the winds are starting to pick up. Let's check in with my colleague now, Ed Lavandera, Jacksonville, North Carolina. Take us to the scene now, Ed. What are you seeing?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Don, it's the eeriness of these storms, when they start making landfall in the darkness of night. You hear the eeriness of the wind howling through the areas we're in. It's hard to really make out exactly what's happening around you. That's what lends itself to these rather tumultuous and nerve-wracking storms as they come ashore here in the darkness of the night. We've been speaking with emergency officials here in the Jacksonville, North Carolina, area. They say there are reports of homes starting to take on water near rivers here in this area. These are rivers that obviously make their way and flow their way into the Atlantic Ocean. With all that storm surge pushing in, that water really has nowhere else to go. It's really hard to assess just how significant the damage is at this point because first responders aren't really able to get out in full force and assess the situation. We are told here in the Jacksonville area, though, Don, there are no rescues taking place. That is bit of good news considering, here on the top side, the north side of this hurricane, where we have been throughout the day, we've really seen some of the strongest and heaviest rains lashing out against the coastline here for much of the day. It taken quite a while. I'm surprised at how long in the areas that we've been that the power has seemed to hold on. And just as I was just thinking that, the power transformer about 50 yards away from us started exploding. I've never seen that in storms in all my years of covering hurricanes. It was like a fireworks display right next to you. So in that instant all the power went out here in Jacksonville. So that is what we're dealing with here tonight, Don.
[Lemon:] All right, thank you. Ed Lavandera, stay safe and we'll get back to you. Listen, I want to bring you now to the conditions on the ground here where we are in Myrtle Beach. This is John Rhodes, former mayor, right? Steve Taylor, you're a resident.
[Steve Taylor, Myrtle Beach Resident:] Yes, sir.
[Lemon:] I'll get to you in a moment. I understand why you're here, Mayor. You're the former mayor.
[John Rhodes, Former Mayor, Myrtle Beach:] For 12 years.
[Lemon:] For 12 years. So tell me, what's going through your mind right now?
[Rhodes:] Well, it's a waiting game right now. We know she's coming in, we just don't know what time. It lasts two days this very five different directions and so but it's pretty well set we're going to get some effects from it. Hopefully it'll be down to a low category 1 where we'll maybe get winds up around 70 to 80 miles an hour. But the big problem is going to be the rain. When Matthew was here two years ago, it dropped a little over 15 inches of rain in the area. And that's around an area which is a lot of low country where the mall was flooded. This is going to be historical with 20-25 inches of rain sitting in that area. So we're going to have a lot of problems with ingress and egress from veins coming in like 501 and places like this to get back into the beach.
[Lemon:] You've gone through this before. You've seen it and you know how unpredictable this can be. Generally you know where it's going, you know, the wind speed. You know what happens. It can move fast, do a lot of damage with winds or it can go slow and bring a lot of water. This appears to be a water event and you've gone through that.
[Rhodes:] It is. And something's that's difficult, it's going to be moving at 4 mph. We've never had a storm come through Myrtle Beach moving at 4 mph. We're looking at anywhere from 36 to 48 hours of constant wind and rain. And we just have to be prepared for it. And that's one thing about our city is our guys have been through this before, our guys and girls that had on in the streets, they're ready, they're prepared and they'll take care of this beach.
[Lemon:] I got some comfort from him. Did it help you? You must be very comfortable, Steve, because you're staying.
[Taylor:] Anytime I'm with John, I'm comfortable.
[Rhodes:] Steve also happens to be the chairman of the beach committee, which looks after this beach.
[Lemon:] And that's one of the reasons you're here. But why are you riding it out?
[Taylor:] I've lived here my whole life and I've never left for a storm. And, you know, you've got to decide what's best for your family and whether you're prepared. And I believe the vast majority of people that stay around these storms, at least locally here in Myrtle Beach, are prepared. They've been through these storms before. You've got your generator, your batteries, your food. If you've got elderly, those are the people that need to consider moving and get out of town. But in my case I've got businesses here and I want to stay close to home.
[Lemon:] I've been speaking to people and they say, listen, I know there are physical issues and that means physically safe with your body and your person. But there's also fiscal issues. We have businesses here. This is our livelihood. We don't want, you know, people looting. We want to keep an eye on that because that's really how, that's what sustains us.
[Taylor:] Right, that's one issue. The other is, in Myrtle Beach, we're a tourist economy and this has been a week now that we'll be without any business down here. So business owners
[Lemon:] What does that do to you?
[Taylor:] Well, it hurts my pocket like everybody and my employees, too. They can't work. So it's important for the beach and our community to get back up and running and get the message out that we're open and get cleaned up and get back in business really quick.
[Lemon:] I was trying to tell people earlier, when I was here on the beach, this season, when you're in the Northeast, when you're up where we were in the New York area, it's usually Memorial to Labor. Yours is extended because of the weather, because it's so warm here and you can continue to make money and a livelihood really Florida a month or so, maybe even more past what is a traditional season.
[Rhodes:] gone through Thanksgiving.
[Lemon:] You have?
[Rhodes:] The shorter months have really increased in the last five or six years.
[Lemon:] And you need that.
[Rhodes:] And we were able to get the funds to promote Myrtle Beach and advertise. A lot of people think that we're just a small beach. But Myrtle Beach is the third largest resort in America,
[Lemon:] This guy is really still the mayor. He's still the mayor. Give us some words of wisdom and comfort. I would prefer to not be here but this is my job. I would prefer you to not be here but, listen, I'm not going to shame you. If you want to ride it out, that's your business. You're a grown man. Give us some words of comfort as we leave here.
[Taylor:] Again, I think that most reasonable people know how, that have been down here and lived through these storms, know to stay inside. They're not out this isn't like we're at the end of the pier, having a party and throwing caution to wind. Everyone is prepared; you stay inside and wait until the storm has passed and then you try to take care of business. But this has been a long three days already and we've still got three more days. So we're ready for it to move on. So we're ready.
[Rhodes:] Like I said, we're going to get the beach back into shape as quickly as possible and welcome our tourists back to Myrtle Beach this fall. We're still going to have a great fall. But it'll take us two or three days to get the beach shaped back up. And hopefully we don't lose any more structures like the piers and all, which does take us more time to get rid of the debris on the beach. But right now I'm looking pretty positive. Once the rain goes, then I'd say we'll finish up. Well, right now, it's like it's probably going to be around Sunday before we get out of this.
[Lemon:] You're good. Fingers crossed. Thank you, Steve. Thank you, mayor. You guys stay safe. Thank you so much. We hope your business gets back open really soon, because we understand, every day I will. And I love seafood. I'm from Louisiana, so I'm going to take you up on that. I appreciate it. Listen, there are life threatening storm surges already occurring. We just got the update from the National Weather Center, so from NOAA, so you guys stick around. Again, this is just beginning. You heard them. They've been dealing with it for three days. They expect to deal with it for three more days. They're experts, they're pros. They've been here forever. They mayor, obviously he's been the mayor, so they have some skin in the game here. But if you don't have to be here, the window is almost closed but you need to get out. We're going to continue our coverage here in the Carolinas. I'm Don Lemon. I'm in Myrtle Beach. Our special covering continues right after the break.

[Rene Marsh, Cnn Anchor:] And good morning. I'm Rene Marsh in Washington, D.C. We are following some developing breaking news. We can tell you at this hour, the Time Warner Building in New York City has been evacuated. Jim and Poppy Harlow, who you saw anchoring, they had to evacuate the studio. We're going to bring in CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz. Shimon, tell us, what do you know about what's happening in New York City at this hour?
[Prokupecz:] Right. So as we were coming on the air just a short time ago with Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto, who were anchoring from our set in New York, the fire alarms started going off. Our viewers perhaps could see that. Our building in New York has been evacuated because the NYPD is now investigating a suspicious package, something that was sent to the building at 10 Columbus Circle, which is in New York, and it is our basically our offices in New York, the building that houses our offices in New York. I'm told by a law enforcement official that the bomb squad is responding to the office to check on this suspicious device. We don't know if the package was actually addressed to CNN or to someone else in the building, but as a precaution, the building there, the NYPD along with the bomb squad, have said that the building should be evacuated. And they're going to respond and investigate the package. Obviously growing concern given all the news that we're reporting here this morning about explosive devices being sent to the former president, President Obama, to Hillary Clinton. We also just moments ago reported that a fourth explosive device was sent to the White House and intercepted in a mail room. And now authorities, obviously as I've been saying this morning, are increasingly concerned that there could be more packages, more explosive devices that were sent elsewhere, perhaps around the country, in other cities. So taking no precautions obviously taking over-precautions here, I should say, in that they're now evacuating buildings. If they see something suspicious, authorities in New York certainly are on heightened alert because some of these devices were sent to areas in New York. The NYPD there has stepped up security around locations out of concern. So obviously now we're waiting to learn exactly what was in this package at the Time Warner Center where our offices have been evacuated.
[Marsh:] OK. Shimon, stick with us. We're going to go live now on the phone to Jim Sciutto, who was anchoring but is now outside of the Time Warner Building. Jim, if you can hear me, I guess the first thing I want to hear from you is what is happening now and what are you seeing at this moment?
[Sciutto:] OK. We're standing outside our headquarters here. There's a New York Poppy Harlow is here with me. There's a New York Police Department Bomb Squad Unit here. Also members of the Strategic Response Group. The New York Police Department has a very fast-acting, quick-response group to respond exactly to incidents like this one, including incidences that are suspected of involving terrorism. So we have actually I'm accounting four or five different police units here now at the New York police officers here with the responsibility of removing Poppy and myself, all of our CNN colleagues, there are, well, a couple hundred of us now, out on the street here. Obviously serious enough to evacuate the building, take us off the air from New York. And listen, as it happens, Poppy and I were reporting on the air about the series of other explosive devices received at the residences of Clinton and Obama, at the White House now, and with the new suspicions that those devices were linked. Of course, the question now, whether this one is linked to those. But certainly the timing is, at the very least, suspicious here. And again, just as we're standing here on the street, the police being very cautious, as you would expect them to be. They want us to get as far away from the building as possible because if it is indeed an explosive device sent here, they want to reduce the risk to all of us here. And they don't know if there's something else that might be connected to it.
[Marsh:] Right. So, Jim
[Sciutto:] We are seeing a robust response from the New York Police Department here.
[Marsh:] Jim, we don't have images right now of outside of the building, so if you can set the scene for me, do you get a sense from where you're standing where or the general vicinity of where this device may be in relation to the Time Warner Building?
[Sciutto:] Well, let's see, the police have not told us exactly where the device is, I don't believe. If it's been mailed in CNN, like other organizations in this day and age, they have a screening process for suspicious packages so we don't know. And I can't see from here. In fact, I've taken a picture which I'm going to tweet out now, we don't see an obvious device that's been singled out or cordoned off on the street here. I'm just trying to get a better look. I will tell you, there are a dozen police vehicles now. And again those officers part of the Strategic Response Unit.
[Marsh:] I'm going to interrupt you
[Sciutto:] It's not clear if the device entered that building. That it's not clear if the device was able to get inside the building.
[Marsh:] OK. Stay with us, Jim. We're going to go back to Shimon Prokupecz, who's live in the newsroom here in D.C. And you have more information. Shimon, what can you tell us now?
[Prokupecz:] Yes. Rene, I'm being told by a law enforcement official that, in fact, this suspicious package was found in the mail room, so obviously probably sent through the mail, at 10 Columbus Circle, which houses our offices in New York. I'm told that when they looked at this package, and obviously I have to tell you security all across the country this morning, at offices across the country, has been increased, and folks, you know, looking for these kinds of perhaps suspicious packages. Something in that package concerned them. I don't want to get too specific about it, but there are things in this package, items in this package that were discovered at our offices in New York that concerned security, perhaps the staff in the mail room, that they decided to call the police given the news of this morning, given what's going on with these other explosive devices. The police have moved in, and they're obviously taking every precaution. But I'm told by officials that there are things in this package. They don't yet know if it's explosive material. But certainly there are things in this package that make it look very suspicious and has them concerned. And that's why we're seeing our offices in New York evacuated. I'm also told that the area around Manhattan, around our building, just about a block south, 57th Street, is being shut down.
[Marsh:] OK.
[Prokupecz:] So really what we see in these kinds of situations, the police and the fire department responding, closing down the area, evacuating buildings.
[Marsh:] OK.
[Prokupecz:] So serious concern here from the police in New York.
[Marsh:] All right. Shimon, stick with us. We also have Tom Fuentes, who's joining us here. Tom, I want to bring you into the conversation because right now we're talking about over a span of 24 hours, we have five suspicious devices that have been intercepted. You're looking at this all unfold. What do you make of all of this?
[Fuentes:] Well, Rene, from my perspective, it looks to me like some type of domestic terrorism. Somebody is trying to cause chaos and it may not necessarily be one side against the Democratic Party or another side against the Republican. The fact that we have now the White House receiving a package, obviously with a Republican administration, and now CNN or the area of CNN, the complex of buildings at Time Warner in Columbus Circle in New York, receiving a suspicious package.
[Marsh:] And we're actually look at we're actually looking at a photo that Jim Sciutto just tweeted us from outside of the building there. So sorry to interrupt, but that is a photo of the large police presence there responding outside of CNN. But go ahead. To you, you said this looks like a case of terrorism.
[Fuentes:] Yes, domestic terrorism, someone trying to get you know, cause chaos basically in our process. And now you have buildings being shut down, two former presidents' residences receiving packages or mail directed toward those residences. Fortunately, most of the large public buildings, particularly federal buildings in Washington, use off sites to have their mail screened long before they actually get to the White House or the Capitol or Department of Justice, State Department, FBI headquarters, the Pentagon. They're not received at the building first and then screened.
[Marsh:] Right.
[Fuentes:] So the offers some degree of protection, and the same thing with both former presidents, Clinton and Obama. Secret Service screens their mail so that they're somewhat protected from that. So that's why you have this screening process. And now because of an abundance of caution, they're going to make sure that any possible building receiving anything suspicious is going to be closed down and a major investigation and search launched at those buildings.
[Marsh:] Well, Tom, walk me through this right now because, I mean, clearly this is all unfolding as we speak. What is happening now from the law enforcement perspective? Detail it for me as far as what steps are currently being taken now.
[Fuentes:] Well, the first step is the examination of the devices. How are they put together? Do they look like they were made by the same person or small group of persons? How were they packaged? How were they going to be detonated? And then where were they mailed or delivered from? These were placed in the mail to come to the Columbus Circle mail screening or the White House mail screening or the Clinton and Obama residential screening process. Where were they mailed from? Does that indicate again a small group of persons or a single person? Then the actual devices will be forensically examined in detail for hairs
[Marsh:] All right, Tom
[Fuentes:] fibers, fingerprints, anything like that that can link someone later.
[Marsh:] OK.
[Fuentes:] To the
[Marsh:] OK, Tom. Just pause for me one second because we do want to get back outside of the CNN center. We're following this breaking news. The Time Warner Building has been evacuated and we're joined right now by the anchors who were they were anchoring at this hour but had to evacuate, Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto. What are you guys seeing now at this point?
[Harlow:] So, Rene, I want to tell you that we are outside safely. All of our CNN colleagues that we know of are outside right now. Everyone is safe, as we can see. We do have some reporting. Jim was just able to confirm, I believe, Jim
[Sciutto:] The Strategic Response Group, they are the team that responds to situations like this, they're very quick. They get there within minutes or seconds,
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] Caught apparently at screening of the building. But as you see
[Harlow:] Right. And to catch our viewers up, about just a few 10 minutes ago we heard the fire alarm go off while we were anchoring the show, reporting on these explosive devices, suspicious packages delivered to the former presidents' home of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, George Soros and the White House. And minutes later we were told suspicious package at CNN, evacuate immediately. The lights shut off. We walked down six flights of stairs. We're out here. They're now moving us, Jim and I and everyone here from CNN, all the way down the block towards 9th Avenue, very far away.
[Marsh:] And what's the sense, guys? I mean
[Sciutto:] out of the building. And remember, just as we were on the air before this happened
[Harlow:] You can hear the
[Sciutto:] the concern from the FBI was these various packages are linked. Of course the
[Harlow:] Of course, those were in upstate New York, in Washington, now this is in Midtown Manhattan. The police here saying quick, quick, quick, move, move, move. They want us not even across the street, Rene, from CNN. They want us across the avenue, as far away from the building. And by the way, it is not just CNN.
[Sciutto:] Just to set you the scene, the response here and again, one of our colleagues is walking backwards here.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] They're taking this very seriously.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] And there's another fire truck arriving as well. They're taking it very seriously.
[Harlow:] Yes. You have the best of the best here, you know, for precaution, should this be a danger. But again, this is a huge huge response. There are ambulances, police vehicles, fire trucks. They have actually completely brought us now to West 58th Street. This is one of the main thoroughfares in the middle of New York City that is now completely shut down to pedestrians. Yes. Right. Rene, are you still with us? Can you hear us?
[Marsh:] Yes, we are still here.
[Harlow:] OK.
[Marsh:] Thank you, guys, for kind of laying the land here. I just want to reset before we turn things over to Wolf Blitzer. Again, you guys are there outside of the Time Warner Building. To be very clear, authorities found this suspicious item inside of the Time Warner Building. According to Shimon Prokupecz, it was inside of the mail room.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're marshalling the full resources of the federal government to help our fellow Americans in Florida.
[Unidentified Male:] There's devastation. Let's hope everybody survived. It's horrible what we saw. It will stretch the resources quickly. We're still in a rescue mode here and had the flood, and it's just been devastating. We will recover. We will rebuild. It's not a story of tragedy. It's a story of resilience.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Chris Cuomo. We are in the Florida Keys. This is Big Pine Key. But it will be known now as ground zero. We are just a few miles from where Hurricane Irma made landfall, where that eye did the most punishment in this part of America, 120-mile-an- hour sustained winds. That's what happened here. We've picked a scene for you this morning of the good news. This is the good news. Tremendous property damage. But the people who stay here are alive in that home. Their home is still standing. Being someone who made it through and still having a home, those are rare commodities down here. And we will show you. Because now we know the truth of the situation. The current standing of Irma is no longer a hurricane. She's not being tracked as that anymore. The death count, five people have lost their lives in the United States because of this storm. At most recent count. Again, we are still in the discovery phase. Thirty-six lost their lives throughout the Caribbean. In terms of power outage, that is the big blow from this storm in our country. Seven million customers throughout the southeast. Now, remember, customer is a household. It's not people. OK? So there's many more people who lost power. Seven million customers. In Florida alone, 6.2 million customers. That means that about two-thirds of that state is in the dark this morning. All right? So the good news, some of the Upper Keys are going to reopen. There are a lot of people who live here who did evacuate, and they want to get home. They want to see what's going on, especially when they start seeing the images that we're going to bring you this morning. And they can start to get back in Key Largo, in Tavernier, in Islamorada. Only to be able to get back. But only a resident. Only a local business owner. And there are going to be people checking. We saw that, as we came back. We have Bill Weir is in Key Largo. He'll show us the reality there on the ground. The Pentagon says they may have to do...
[Camerota:] OK. So listen, obviously, Chris is in Big Pine Key. OK? That is the farthest point that we can tell that a reporter has made it. You can see how remote where he is, is. He made it with the first responders. Hold on a second. So we're trying to get Chris's signal back. But as he has told us all morning, the communications there he is so remote and he's not even using there's no cell service. He's using, I think, an old-style satellite phone. So we will get back to him as soon as we possibly can. Because of the extent of the damage in the Keys is so bad that the Defense Department said they believe 10,000 people rode out the storm there and may need to be evacuated. So, obviously, it's impossible to really know if that number is accurate, 10,000 people. But if so, they don't have water. They don't have electricity. Their houses may be, obviously, destroyed. So we are going to be watching right now for a FEMA hearing. That's where we will get all of the latest details on numbers. I mean, the amount of people who are, today, along the east coast without power, it's more than 6 million households. So, FEMA will be telling us all of the latest in terms of what the human toll has been, as well, as far as they've been able to make it out. So Bill Weir is also in the Keys. He is in Key Largo. And Bill Weir joins us now to tell us what he his seeing this morning around him Bill.
[Bill Weir, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Alisyn. Yes, we're about to set sail here on a sort of figurative and literal journey into the heart of darkness. We're going to try to leapfrog Chris and go even farther south to Cudjoe Key, where the most devastating winds hit with Hurricane Irma. Let me show you around our home for the next couple of days. This is a 50-foot fishing boat. These are these are common down here. This is sport fishing heaven. And our captain, Captain Bam-Bam is going to take care of us. We've got a dingy where we'll be able to go ashore and investigate exactly how these communities fared. We're going to head through this channel. We're on the bay side. We'll be heading down past Marathon. Captain Bam-Bam told me he took the he took the dingy out yesterday and did a little a little reconnaissance to see how the water is and says you're not going to believe what's floating out here. Of course, we see what's on the land devastation. But if you can imagine, these are tiny little islands so, so much houses and boats are blown off of the Keys into Florida bay, are stuck in the mangroves. We'll be bringing that to you throughout the day as we journey south. So the good news for the people in the Upper Keys today is that Monroe County says they are going to open up Key Largo, and Tavernier and Islamorada. If you have a yellow resident sticker, let locals back in and business owners, to get their shops opened. So some sense of normalcy can come back. Still no problem. Still no running water. It is primal living down here, where a bucket of ice will bring tears of joy if someone offers it to you. But the spirit of the people here, some who haven't eaten, people who are sleeping, you know, no air conditioning. The mosquitos are back after the storm, as you can see one go by. They're living literally moment to moment. And then there's so much concern about, as you mentioned, Alisyn, all the unknowns. How many people are down south? Now, you did mention a lack of water and electricity down there. The good news in Key West, at least in theory we haven't gotten confirmation that they're working. They do have a desalination plan. They do have a power generator down there that can handle about 60 percent of capacity on Key West, which is where most of the people in the Keys live, maybe 30,000 population down there. So hopefully, those things are keeping those folks they're keeping those folks alive down there until the USS Lincoln. The aircraft carrier can go down. You know, who what Navy man doesn't want to do a stint in Key West, right? So the affection for this place, when they're in trouble, they send an aircraft carrier.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Weir:] I've been hearing from so many people, Alisyn, around the country. It seems like, you know, the Keys is, like, one of those places, sort of like New Orleans in Katrina, where people have a soft spot in their heart. They've either vacationed here. They've got relatives who retired down here, and everybody is desperate to say, "Hey, could you check on my relatives in Plantation Key? Could you" Facebook pages of missing people, and they don't know if they perished or if they're like the rest of us, they just can't get a cell signal. You saw that with Chris. We're relying on these BGANS, you know, to bounce off the satellites, which can be difficult, especially while we're moving on a boat. But we're on our way. And fingers crossed that what we mostly see is physical devastation and then the human survival is like what Chris found, where people are there, but they just need help.
[Camerota:] Yes. We pray that is what first responders and you, on your recon mission, find. But Bill, explain to us, how what's the process of the Upper Keys opening? So now people are going to be allowed to come back. And what's this going to look like? I mean, is this is this just going to be a deluge of people? And and what happens when they get to their home and realize that they're uninhabitable?
[Weir:] It's baby steps. You know, the people who have stayed here yesterday, I was walking around. I actually went to check on our friend, Ana Ana Navarro's home. She's got a place on Key Largo. And so we had to park the car and walk through her neighborhood because there are so many downed power lines and trees. And I met about a half a dozen people saying, you OK? Are you all right? They wanted to show pictures of the storm and say, "Hey, do you know where I can get a do you know where I can get a hacksaw? You know? Do you have any kerosene?" And so once, you know, the business owners come down, and they can start opening up, those people can get resupplied. And it's just little by little. You clear a road today and hopefully, you know, the Florida power company can come down and move the downed lines. And so, yes, it will it will be crazy. It will be like, you know, opening the doors of a concert or something. You know, there have been cars that have been frustrated, sitting there, waiting for the go ahead. But, finally, at least the Upper Keys are open. I mean, when you think about it. I've been coming down here on vacation for 20 years. The idea that the Florida Keys is closed, you know, just is it's hard to fathom. But at least the Upper Keys, hopefully, will be open today.
[Camerota:] Right, right. That's what I was imaging, Bill, frankly, that sort of stampede at the opening doors of a concert. That is what I was imagining. We'll see, because they're now open. We'll see what happens in these next hours. Bill, thank you. We'll check back with you, obviously. Joining us now is a man named William Rose. He packed up his truck and his boat, and he evacuated from Key West. But his mom, his stepdad, his grandmother and his aunt did not leave. And he now cannot get ahold of them. For all intents and purposes, they are missing. William, thank you so much for joining us. Can you just tell us, what was happening with the storm on Thursday, when you decided to pack up and leave and why your relatives didn't?
[William Rose, Hurricane Victim:] Hi, good morning. Yes, Thursday morning I woke up about 6:30 in the morning to finish packing up my boat and all the other totes that I had put in my boat. I had 10, 12 cases of water. I had gone to the local Winn-Dixie, and Winn-Dixie had stocked up on, I think they said, over 25,000 cases of water. They had water stacked all the way to the back. And my girlfriend is used to work there. So she was very familiar with the locals. And they anyway, like a long story short, they had plenty of water. And it had flown off the shelves faster than I had ever seen before. It was also late, and so we had a lot of people in town. The roads were crowded. You had to wait 15, 20 minutes to even turn left or right on U.S. 1. As you guys know, your reporters should know, it's a two-lane road. There's not very much room. And especially with now all the debris in the way, it's going to make it very difficult for moving around, maneuvers and the people who trapped and the people who are...
[Camerota:] And William, sorry to interrupt you. But I do want to get to that. Because in terms of the people trapped, I just want to find out how we can help you find your family. The last time correct me if I'm wrong that you spoke to your mom, was midnight on Sunday. That morning, you had gotten, I think, a text from her saying something to the effect of, "This is terrible. I'll never do this again. I'm so glad you got out." So...
[Rose:] Yes.
[Camerota:] Then what happened?
[Rose:] Well, when I got that message, that the whole situation finally hit my heart that this could be a storm of a lifetime. And they were the home that they're in is safe. It's a two-story home. It's about 12 12, 13 feet to the bottom of the floor from the ground level. And then the canal water level is two foot below that. So in my head, I know the water had to come up 15 feet to get in the house. I was not certain whether the water was going to go into the house, but the worry was in my mind. I knew if they stayed together, there was a bathroom in the center of the house where they could all huddle together if the roof were to get ripped off. I personally had given my stepfather materials that he need to bolt his roof down before the storm came, which I had given him on Wednesday.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Rose:] So my stepfather had prepared his house. And he felt confident that his house was strong enough to withstand the storm of a lifetime.
[Camerota:] And so, William, I mean, the best-case scenario that, of course, you're hoping for is that they stayed in the bathroom. They weathered the storm. And you just can't get ahold of them., because there's the cell service is down.
[Rose:] Correct.
[Camerota:] But you have no idea?
[Rose:] I have no idea. But I'm staying trying to stay positive, trying to keep a positive attitude. Trying to keep high spirits. As long as I keep a positive attitude and keep looking up, every day will be a good day. And just trying to stay positive. Not put the thought in my mind that this could potentially be worse than it is. I'm just trying to stay positive that it's just the satellite towers that are out and that there's no communication.
[Camerota:] When you last talked to your mom, what was that conversation like?
[Rose:] The conversation was about the house. I wanted to know, because on the offseason when I'm not lobster fishing, it's also Bill's home. I wanted to know the condition of the home at the current state. The winds were gusting upwards of 90 miles an hour. She said the doors were shaking, the windows were shaking. I asked her if the walls were breathing, if the walls moved four to six inches on the gusts. She said the walls were staying solid and had not moved. I asked her if pictures were falling off the walls, if the house was shaking that bad. She said no, that was a negative. She said the roof wasn't flapping. So I knew that was good. Really needed to stay together, stay strong and kind of stay awake during the storm. So if anything were to happen that they could be awake and alert and handle the situation correctly.
[Camerota:] Yes, that's good advice. And how about your friends? I mean, I know that you have a whole bunch, obviously, of friends in the Keys also. Have you been able to get in touch with anyone?
[Rose:] No. We use we all downloaded this app called Zelo. I'm sure some of you out there are familiar with it. Some of you may not be. It uses very little communications, satellite reception to communicate. We lost touch I lost touch with one of my very, very good friends, Kristen Tregara and a good friend of mine, Tanner Trivett. They are both with their families in separate rooms. Kristen Tregara is on the Gulf side of the road. My buddy, Tristan or Trivett, sorry, is on the ocean side of the road. Last time I talked with both of them, they were OK, safe. They had plenty of water, plenty of supplies. Their shelter that they were in, which is their home, was doing fine. Everything was OK.
[Camerota:] So, William, I'm sorry to interrupt. But what's your plan? I know that if you don't hear from your family and your friends in the next little while, what are you going to do?
[Rose:] Well, my boat is ready. I have over 30 gallons of gas and five-gallon gas cans in the back of my truck, as you've seen in the pictures; and my boat has 25 gallons of gas in the gas tank. So I have plenty of fuel to make it to Cudjoe Key, Florida, and Key West and make it back to Miami. And if I need to, I'll make that trip in tomorrow.
[Camerota:] OK. William Rose, thank you for taking the time. Obviously, our thoughts are with you. We're praying that you do connect with your family and friends somehow in the very near future. Please keep us posted as to their whereabouts and safety. OK?
[Rose:] I will. Thank you very much.
[Camerota:] OK. We'll speak again. Meanwhile, the remnants of Irma are inundating several states in the southeast. Downtown Charleston, South Carolina, where Irma's heavy rain and storm surge showed up, that of course, caused widespread flooding. So CNN's Nick Valencia is live in Charleston. What is the situation there, Nick?
[Nick Valencia, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey there, good morning, Alisyn. Large parts of the low country are under water this morning. And before you say, OK, this happens in Charleston every time during a heavy rain event, it does but this time it's a little bit different because of debris like this. This is the kind of debris that is just sort of strewn everywhere, all across this downtown, historic area. The local newspaper saying the last time flooding was this bad and this widespread in this part of Charleston was during Hurricane Hugo, which was almost 30 years ago. The paper may have forgotten that thousand-year flood back in 2015 that was very widespread here throughout the entire state. But we did speak to some county officials here in Charleston to tell us. About 100 people spent the night in be split between two shelters. And the good sign this morning, though, you may see some of these guys in the yellow vests. They're cleaning and pumping out this water just in the hour or so that we've been here. This water has almost all together receded Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Nick. Thanks so much for walking us around there. We can see the debris and see all the challenges there. So more search-and-rescue teams are heading to the Florida Keys in just a few hours. One group consists of medical disaster teams, and they, of course, will provide medical treatment. So CNN's Elizabeth Cohen is with them. She's live in Orlando for us with more. What's the plan, Elizabeth?
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Correspondent:] Alisyn, the plan is that dozens of medical assistance personnel are going to be flying from here in Orlando to Key West. They're called DMAC teams, Disaster Medical Assistance Teams. Behind me, you can see the team from Hawaii has already gathered, and more folks are due to come in. They're going to go to Key West, and they're going to assess the situation. And then they do searches and they provide medical assistance. Teams of doctors, nurses, pharmacists, all sorts of medical assistance teams. Now, Alisyn, they'll be coming in on C-7 military planes. These are gigantic planes that can carry not just people but lots of equipment. The vehicles that you see behind me over there, or hopefully, you can see behind me. Those vehicles can get on the plane. Boats can get on this plane. It can carry huge amounts of vehicles, equipment and people to go help the folks down in the Keys Alisyn.
[Camerota:] That is so great, Elizabeth. That's what they need. I mean, exactly that kind of equipment and all sorts of manpower. So thank you for being there and, obviously, we'll track your progress, as well. We are, as we've said, awaiting a FEMA briefing. This will be the first time this morning that we are getting actual information and real numbers of who they think are still trapped in the Keys, of what the plan is to get them water and needed supplies and life-saving details. So the severe flooding in Jacksonville is also forcing rescue crews to spring into action there. We're going speak to the mayor of Jacksonville with an update next.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Camerota:] Here is the FEMA update we've been waiting for.
[Elaine Duke, Acting Secretary Of Homeland Security:] ... Customs and Border Protection and Department of Defense have deployed significant assets to the area to assist in search and rescue. We're very pleased that the weather is allowing this effort on search-and-rescue. We are constrained by geography. And our bases of operation are more limited than our response to Hurricane Harvey. Yet we are working to get as many aircraft in the air as possible. I urge everyone impacted by the storm to continue to pay attention to your state and local officials. They will let you know when it's safe to return home. Be patient. The federal government effort is working closely with our state and local partners in our response and recovery efforts. I would like to thank President Trump and Vice President Pence for their attention to this storm and their concern for the communities that are affected. The White House and the entire cabinet have been very supportive of the first responders and the survivors of Hurricane Irma. A storm of this magnitude needs a team effort. And we've seen tremendous response from our federal partners. Nearly 22,000 federal personnel are ready on the front lines, and more continue to deploy. We face a long and challenging road ahead, but the Department of Homeland Security, our federal, state, tribal and local partners, will continue to stand with the people affected by the storm. Whether you are in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands, we are here for you, and we are here for the long haul. While we are ramping up operations in Florida, for those of you in Texas and Louisiana, affected by Harvey, we are still with you. I actually spoke to Governor Abbott yesterday and will continue to support the state rebuilding efforts. I would now like to introduce Chris Krebs, the assistant secretary for infrastructure protection at DHS, who is currently running our national protection programs directorate. He'll talk to you about power, water and communications in Florida. Thank you.
[Chris Krebs, Assistant Secretary, Infrastructure Protection At Dhs:] Good morning. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Very briefly on the ground in Florida, we are looking at a little over five to six million customers without power. That translates to about 15 million people without power. Department of Homeland Security is working very closely with the Department of Energy and the local utilities to get the crews back in there, do damage assessments, clean up debris and hang new lines. I do ask that everyone have patience. This is going to take some time to restore. And in some circumstances, it will be a situation about rebuilding. Hurricane-force winds can significantly damage infrastructure. Those crews are still down there right now, getting a sense of what is going on, on the ground. Now, with power out, power pretty much drives everything. Lights are out. There may be impacts on local water and wastewater treatment facilities. Most of those facilities should have generator and fuel supplies for a number of days. However, it is a priority. Once it's safe to re-enter, it is a priority to get those electricity crews back in on the ground. Communications is also an issue, particularly down in the Virgin Islands. But in Florida, there is some cell service disruption and maybe some wire line disruption, as well. Again, same thing applies. As soon as it's safe to re-enter, those crews are going to be back in there. They should be doing damage assessments late yesterday and into today. Last thing I would add is that hurricanes Harvey and Irma are linked. With Harvey we had a significant amount of the nation's refining capacity offline, as well as distribution through some of the pipelines through the southeast. As a result, there may be some fuel supply shortages throughout the southeast. That's why last week the secretary issued the a Jones Act waiver to allow easier distribution of fuel throughout some of those ports throughout. So, I do ask everyone to have patience. We're getting on this quickly, and we'll be here to answer questions. Thank you.
[Brock Long, Fema Administrator:] All right. Good morning, everyone. So it's very clear to all of us that the president's goal is to take care of people. And, you know, this is a unique event compared to what Harvey was. Harvey's damage areas were combined in confined, excuse me, to about 50 counties within Texas and a few in Louisiana. This one is complex because of the multiple states involved. We also have the Seminole tribe that comes directly to FEMA for support and then also our partners in the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as Puerto Rico. So during a complex event like this, it's very important to double down on communications. And what we're doing is to make sure that we have clear lines of communication, not only with our governors but the state divisions of emergency management, as well, including our tribal partners in the Seminole tribe. So we will continue to do that. As the secretary and Chris Krebs have both said, this is going to be a frustrating event. It's going to take some time to allow people back into their homes, particularly in the in the Florida Keys. If you look what happened in Florida, obviously, Monroe County took the brunt of the hit. And a majority of the homes there have been impacted in some ways with several of them destroyed and many more with major damage. But, you know, so we're having to go down and make sure that it's a safe place for people to return so that we don't have loss of life after Irma passes through. So, the bottom line is, is that later today, I will be headed to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, meeting with both governors to make sure that we're on the correct pathway to recovery there. Obviously, power restoration is one of the biggest goals, along with you know, power restoration is the largest goal right now in Puerto Rico. You know, there were over a million people without power. We've made a lot of progress. And that's down to around 300,000. That will continue to improve. For the U.S. Virgin Islands, we're directly working with Governor Matt to understand his issues, as well. Obviously, we want to make sure that safety and security is upheld, and we're continuing to work with him to roll in military police through our National Guard partners to those islands to ensure safety and security. We're also pushing a lot of commodities forward. We've established air bridges through our partners with the DOD and the Navy with the ships that are offshore there. And we continue to understand the life sustainment missions to support to support our partners in the Virgin Islands. Moving to the continental United States, the president, as you all know, moved very quickly to put forward presidential disaster declaration. It's very important, specifically in Florida right now. The county is under individual assistance declarations. There's quite a few. So I want to read those off. Broward County, Palm Beach, Clay, Duvall, Flagler, Putnam, St. John's, Charlotte, Collier, Hillsboro, Lee, Manatee, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Pinellas, Sarasota. These counties right now, if you're a citizen in those counties, you can go to DisasterAssistance.gov to begin registering for assistance if you've received damages and are having hardship. And in some cases, you know, the first line of defense is file your insurance when you're allowed to get back home. File your insurance. Not only your personal insurance but also through the NFIP program, the National Flood Insurance Program if you're a policy holder. You know, once you return home, please, you know, call your private insurer to activate that policy if you've had damage. We can begin to process begin the process to have money flow and to help you in that regard. The other thing here is, is that, you know, we're also watching the continuing situation in Jacksonville overnight. Jacksonville and the areas around the St. Johns River were heavily impacted. We're still conducting life safety missions in and around that area because of the flooding. We were very aware of it last night and continuing to support our state and local partners there. Again, this issue is passing through. There's large large-scale power outages and almost a million people in Georgia without power today, as well. But we have been working with our partners at the Department of Energy to pre-stage power crews not only in Florida but all over the southeastern United States. But let me reiterate: you know, it takes a long time for this infrastructure to come back up. It may take multiple days if not weeks in some areas as we've been saying before the storm hit. So with that, you know, one final graphic that we have up here is our force lay-down to show how dynamic this response is and as the secretary reiterated it's all about communication, clearly identifying how to support our state and local partners. And that's exactly what's taking place today as we start to turn the corner and provide a road to recovery. So, with that, we'll open it up to any questions.

[Stout:] Welcome back. And let's turn now to those crucial climate talks that are taking place in Poland. Many scientists agree if the temperature rises more than 1.5 Celsius then it could produce disastrous environmental results. Delegates from nearly 200 countries at the COP 24 summit are trying to negotiate a plan to limit global warming and move the Paris agreement forward. But reports say disputes over finances and other issues have been a major sticking point. Nick Paton Walsh is at the summit. He joins us now. And Nick, the COP 24 summit is at a critical moment. What's in store today?
[Walsh:] Yes. I'm on paper it was supposed to finish today. We were supposed to be seeing that sort of critical climax of negotiations here. What's at stake is what's known as the rule book really. You have the sort of volition of the Paris agreements of 2015, where countries said they wanted to reduce emissions. Now you have to work out how you are going to measure that, who is going to be accountable, to what standard, what level of transparency, who is going to pay for what. The important points are lot of rushing around. They are now of hotels we saw yesterday by delegations as they rush to see a draft text, it seems very drafted at this stage and a number of paradoxes too. We've seen the United States here come to dispute some of the science, along with Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, and also promote fossil fuels. Many bizarre paradoxes here. The biggest of which being the summit itself is being held in the heart of coal country, in coal country itself, Poland. There's a glimmer of hope of climate change on the planet. It's not down here. A thousand meters mining underground. Women seen as bad luck and everyone greets each other with God bless you. It's why it's startling this far below the earth to see how divorced this world is from the global challenge above COP 24. This coal helps make steel even for cleaner technologies so nobody feels change is coming soon. "Global warming is overrated," he says. "It's based on political motives to lower the coal use. Poland has the mother lode of coal." It does indeed. Black gold is at the core of life and prestige here. Mining hasn't lost any of its sparkle. In this tiny block of flats coal is haul, in the damp they keep themselves warm. The real constant in this former miner's life. But it's also what they wear and how they wash and even in where they worship. This is once a mining community but now the men in overalls are here to fix gas supplies and former teachers, no change can't be stopped. "We care about the environment," she says, "but it's regrettable our families won't have jobs. The coal stoves are going away," another adds. I even use gas now. "We were teaching children three children how to separate [Inaudible] and what to do with it." A paradox too then for a summit about how the world will measure emission reductions. Technicalities that are both easy to dismiss but also vital to insure a drop to save our planet. A lot of this is about presentation about convincing people of the trillions of dollars they've got to spend to prevent catastrophe. But there is something also utterly vital missing. And that's a message of international consensus. The summit thrown by a refusal to work on a key scientific report last weekend led by Russia. You have space here but few people. And the United States who were listed as here on the floor map but aren't. People keep coming to you asking where is American. OK. They're joined by Kuwait who shares a space around this engine with Saudi Arabia who mark their office like this. No one inside. This is the Saudi room, yes?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Walsh:] But a joke isn't funny anymore, not with 12 years to avoid global disaster. The U.S. instead, found itself chanted down by protesters at it promoted fossil fuel use. It's a different world here, to Barack Obama's former climate change envoy Todd Stern. There's been a certain amount of tracking the vegs [Ph] at a more political level as well. And having the U.S. not engaged in that instrumental way and not engage in that senior political way from the president, you know, down to you know, really to my level. That's that makes it more difficult here. Worse thing you can do is look at IPCC report say, my God, look where are we? And put your, you know, put a pillow over your head and say I can't think about this and let's just go see walls. But even if there is success here it is outside these walls, in daily lives globally that the great change has come. There is something startling, Kristie, really about how undisputable what has to be done here, is there is no doubt about the science the world is going to see catastrophic change in 12 years say scientists unless it acts finitely and quickly to reduce emissions. But still, the conversations continue here today. But the degree of urgency and the clock ticking, not only on the summit but the world. Kristie?
[Stout:] There is no doubt about the science. But as you point out, so many bizarre paradoxes at this climate change summit taking place in the heart of coal country. High tension there as well as you brought up the images in your report at the protests. Just how fraught are these talks?
[Walsh:] Well, it's obviously an incredibly difficult task to get 1 to 200 nation states to agree simultaneously to a complicated technical document the outlines how they would transparently explain how they are fundamentally changing the nature of daily life in each of their countries. That's what is required to meet this emission goals by 2030. We saw a text circulated last night. It was certainly a draft text. It appeared in certain areas to have different options, potentially for the direction they may choose. And then subsequently most of delegations were called back. Essentially, they'll have to feel like they have some say in what the actual outcome is. We may see more of the [Inaudible] text later on today and then you have the broader question of exactly how quickly can they get everyone do agree to it. And then once that is done if that is an easier task, then perhaps some fear it may be here do they act on it, do we actually see a real change or people are looking for wiggle room. Kristie?
[Stout:] Some of us will reach that critical stage. Nick Paton Walsh reporting live. Thank you. Now a young Guatemalan girl died while in the custody of U.S. border protection. The 7-year-old and her father were detained last week in New Mexico for illegally crossing into the U.S. She was in custody for eight hours when it was found she had an extremely high fever and was flown to a hospital. The Washington Post reports that she had no food or water for days. But border patrol says that is typically provided to migrants in custody and agents took every possible step to save the child's life. Texas Congressman Joaquin Castro and other politician say that they are devastated by the report and they were asking for an investigation into the circumstances that led to her death earlier. Earlier, my colleague George Howell spoke with Peter Simonson, he's the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico. Take a listen.
[Peter Simonson, Executive Director, Aclu New Mexico:] This is yet another tragedy in this administration's war on poor immigrant families. And like the tragedies that we've seen before. This one also falls a child. It's an unspeakable tragedy to try and imagine what that young girl must have suffered through before she ultimately perished. It just bears the imagination. You know, we're going to do everything we can as an organization to get to the bottom of it, call upon authorities to conduct a full and transparent investigation. But you know, we're facing huge challenges these days, and the realm of immigration and this is just one symptom of it.
[George Howell, Cnn:] The ACLU is quoted in that report again by the Post that reportedly blaming lack of accountability and a culture of cruelty within CBP's culture for the girl's death. And they're demanding more transparency given that. Again, it took a week for this to come to light. Do you see the need for serios reforms here?
[Simonson:] We have long needed reforms of the border patrol and CBP generally. This is an agency that is the largest armed force in U.S. territory, short of only the military. It operates with virtual impunity. It does not count with the same kinds of accountability mechanism that you see in many of our municipal police these days. It refused to use and implement to use the body worn cameras. Its use of force policies and policies for systematically investigating use of force incidents are deficient. It doesn't have any sort of a civilian oversight apparatus. So, for a very long time we've known that this is an agency that suffered from a lack of accountability. Under this administration's reign it's only gotten that much worse.
[Howell:] A lot of questions here for sure. Customs and Border Protection is expressing condolence to the family of this seven-year-old girl, saying that agents took every possible step to save her life. CBP says it routinely provides food and water, but clearly, in this case something fell short, something didn't happen while she was in their custody for several hours.
[Simonson:] Yes. And you know, there's a lot that we don't know right now. And so, I'm a little hesitant to sort of leap to conclusions. But I do have to say that, you know, we've heard any number of reports about the sort-term custody facilities that border patrol uses. Concrete cells that are cold, that people are denied food and water for long periods of time and denied medical care. There are very harsh conditions oftentimes. And to hold a child in those conditions it just makes no sense.
[Stout:] A heartbreaking development. That was Peter Simonson, the executive director of the ACLU of New Mexico. Now a woman that few had ever heard of months ago has made a big flash news in U.S. courtroom on Thursday centered on Russian espionage. The apparently gun-loving 30-year-old Russian admitted to crimes that may have an impact long after her guilty plea. Sara Murray has the details.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Russian national Maria Butina admitting she conspired to act as an illegal foreign agent as she pleaded guilty in D.C. federal court today.
[A.j. Kramer, Federal Public Defender, Columbia:] She was satisfied with her lawyers and made the decision voluntarily.
[Murray:] Wearing a green prison jumpsuit and a tattered undershirt beneath it. Butina spoke clearly with a Russian accent as she entered her plea. Butina admitted she acted at the direction of a Russian official who CNN has identified as former Russian banker Aleksandr Torshin while attending American university and failed to notify the U.S. government. As she cooperates with investigators Butina is providing information about how her boyfriend Republican operative Paul Erickson aided her activities in the U.S. and telling investigators about her contacts with Russians. The plea agreement reveals Erickson's involvement in Butina's ploy was more extensive than previously known. Butina kicked off her plan around March of 2015. Working closely with Erickson on a plot called the diplomacy project. According to her plea, Butina's plot to build relationships with politically influential Americans and advance Russian interests included attending National Rifle Association meetings and organizing a Russian delegation to attend the 2017 national prayer breakfast in D.C. According to the plea, she proposed getting hundred and $125,000 from a Russian billionaire to attend conferences and arrange other meetings. At one 2015 political event she asked Donald Trump about his views on Russia.
[Maria Butina, Russian Spy:] If you would be elected as the president what will be your foreign politics, especially in relationships with my country.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I believe I would get along very nicely with Putin, OK?
[Murray:] That same year she invited an NRA delegation to Moscow to build closer ties. Afterward she sent Torshin a message saying "we should let them express their gratitude now. We will put pressure on them quietly later." Butina also attended the NRA's 2015 annual meeting. Meeting Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Soon after, he announced his bid for president with Butina in the audience. At the 2016 NRA meeting, Butina and Erickson tried to lay the groundwork for a meeting between Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Their efforts fell short. Erickson's role in aiding Butina has been a focus of the investigation, but so far, he is not been charged with any crimes. Now the Russian government had previously claimed that Butina was being tortured while she was in custody. So, there is a vibrant back and forth about the state of her mental health in court today. At one point, her lawyer said she is doing well mentally and even though she's in solitary confinement she is allowed out for a couple of hours in the night and also now allowed visits with a Russian orthodox minister. Back to you, guys.
[Stout:] Sara Murray there. Now Donald Trump says he didn't direct former attorney Michael Cohen to break the law but the president may have been more involved that he's living on. Ahead, details on a secret meeting that may have violated campaign laws.

[Vause:] Well Marvel's Black Panther is opening in wide release, it's begin I think and could break all the box office records.
[Sesay:] Here, just look at the film and why its star say it is so much more than just a movie.
[Unidentified Female:] Nearly 52 years after he first appeared on the cover of this Marvel comic, Black Panther is making a fierce return. Black Panther is projected to earn an estimated $165 million or more for the U.S. opening weekend alone according to Hollywood's major tracking services. But it's greatest impact may not be at the box office.
[Chadwick Boseman, Actor:] If anybody believes that Africa didn't have empire, didn't have architecture, didn't have art, didn't have science, you see it in this movie.
[Unidentified Female:] Critics are calling this film "A cultural milestone" and "Radically different" not only because it has a predominantly black cast, but because it's breaking ground off the big screen as well. Hundreds of Go Fund Me Campaign from across the world have raised more than $400,000 to help kids see the movie this month. And to say they're excited is an understatement. The cast is equally excited about the film's scope and significant.
[Michael B. Jordan, Actor:] It's an honor, it's humbling, and very surreal that this is like kind of a major introduction, almost a reintroduction of like black fantasy sci-fi, mythology, this like I said generation growing up. I can't wait for Halloween and see these little like everybody dressing up as the Dora Milaji and Black Panther and Killmongers and stuff like that. I think it's going to be it's super important and impactful for their for our culture moving forward, I think it's extremely important. So, yes, it means a lot that we're inspiring the youth.
[Lupita Nyong'o, Actor:] I've never been a doll before and then now there's dolls coming out, Nakia dolls and Okoye dolls and it's such a thrill because first of all I remember when I was younger my mother couldn't even find black dolls for us. And so the fact that there are going to be plenty because of the kind of reach that Marvel has and that is going to be our faces, I mean it's a humbling and actually a little bit exciting and terrifying at the same time. But how lovely to live at a time when kids can have that.
[Winston Duke, Actor:] I'm so excited, profoundly excited that they're going to get to like ingest, consume this kind of content before the world puts their own politics on them and their bodies, and their experience, and what they could be. They're going to get to see this and see people who look like them, to have agency and story, that's exciting.
[Daniel Kaluuya, Actor:] And in fact they're not going to see especially they're going to see
[Duke:] Yes, let's keep going.
[Sesay:] What a moment.
[Vause:] It looks fun.
[Sesay:] More NEWSROOM LA in a moment, stay with us.

[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] Calling it quits but why now? The high-profile U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations suddenly announces her resignation taking many at the White House by surprise everybody. Hello everybody, I'm John Vause in Atlanta.
[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm George Howell in Destin, Florida where we wait waiting for this category three hurricane that has the potential surely to get to a category four in the Gulf of Mexico. Hurricane Michael is moving this way right now just over 300 kilometers from Panama City, Florida. That's where the eye of the storm is tracking right now. Panama City, right in the bullseye. Everything to the west of it certainly in the storm zone into the east of it on that northeastern quadrant of this storm, that's typically where you find the rougher side, the dirty side as they call it of the storm where tornadic activity is possible. The stronger bands and the storm just continuing to bring in more water and just dumping it. That part of this state is really bracing for a really long, long several hours. This storm right now moving a faster than we've seen with other storms, more of a classic hurricane right now moving about a 19 kilometers per hour. It will move and quickly hit hard and then move right out to the Atlantic. To talk more about the storm's track and what's expected let's bring in our meteorologist Pedram Javaheri. Pedram, in the CNN International Weather Center. And Pedram, tell us first of all I was talking about that the eastern part, just east of Panama City. What are the expectations for storm surge, for the winds that are coming in?
[Pedram Javaheri, Cnn Meteorologist:] Yes, George. You know, the eastern side as you said certainly going to be the rougher side of the storm system. And when you take a look at how this is going to play out here over the next couple of days, of course, we're watching this as a strengthened rather quickly over the past couple of hours and will continue to strengthen as it moves over towards the north and east here. And already see some of those outer bands, George. So we already seeing some of those thunderstorms begin to push it at least towards areas not far from Apalachicola. You'll begin to feel that as you approach Destin here, as the storm approaches Destin over the next couple of hours. And that's where we see some of the strongest really gust begin to move in as early as 2:00 to 3:00 a.m. and then of course really pick up an intensity into the afternoon hours. And the latest guidance actually has strengthened this form up now to a Category Four potentially as it approaches land sometime between noon to around say 2:00 to 3:00 p.m. Wednesday afternoon local time. So this would be the first Category Four to impact this region of the Florida Panhandle since 1950, since records began. So certainly worth noting here a significant historic storm as it approaches land. And then at that point they'll kind of really skirt off to the north and east and rather quickly move offshore very much a different story when we saw with Florence which was a slow-moving system but hung out for several days and kind of sat there producing tremendous rainfall. The storm system will do that but we'll do it much quicker duration here and of course, hurricane warnings have already been prompted across this region. As you take a look, the storm surge threat becomes the primary concern and they look at a coastal area like as is across this region of the Panhandle kind of a concave coastal region where the water essentially gets the funnel in here. We have a considerable threat here for storm surge as much as two and a half to almost four meters high in the area that it makes landfall not far east there of Panama City. Also with the amount of wind in the forecast here as a Category Four approaches land, we know the widespread concern here for places such as Tallahassee well-known for about 50 percent of the tree canopy there covering the city, well known for all of these trees that often do come down with powerful winds, with tropical systems and none have been as strong as this one going back to 1950. So the concern here is significant power outages, east of Panama City working their way into portions of Georgia and of course on it to the Carolinas where the storm system ends up sometime on Thursday. And that's the last thing we want to see, George, where water levels have finally been dropping and then they can go right back up again the next couple of days.
[Howell:] All right. All of that very important, Pedram, thank you so much. Pedram really explaining the metrics around this particular storm. Let's talk now about the people, who this will impact, how many people, and really what it means here to the southeastern part of the United States. So we understand right now some 28 million people in this part of the U.S. under some form of a watch or warning. And again, this part of the country really hasn't seen many of these major storms. Pedram pointed this out, 1950. Since 1954 major storms have come through. So really they've dodged a lot of bullets. This one seems to be moving in and again targeting Panama City at this point. Let's talk more about this now with Jeff Petrowski. Jeff is a storm chaser just in Panama rather in Mexico Beach that is just north of Panama City. And Jeff, tell us your expectations about what's coming in. I think we're having some trouble there with Jeff's audio. Jeff, I don't know if you can hear me but we'll keep in touch with you. Again, Jeff Piotrowski, a storm chaser. He is in Mexico Beach, just north of Mexico Beach which is east near Panama City Panama City that we continue to follow that part of the state. So here's the thing. many people have been told to evacuate. The question is have they. Some people have decided to ride this out. And here's the thing, this is a Category Three storm. It has the potential to get up to a Category Four. Right now, again, some 300 kilometers offshore from where we are. And as we understand the Gulf water is very warm. So as the storm continues to track in and as our meteorologists just pointed out, the storm has the ability within full to get up to a Category Four storm. We also saw the last storm Florence that came through the East Coast, people had a lot of time to prepare for that. That storm track toward the East Coast over several days. People made the precautions of decisions to either leave or stay. This one happened much quicker John and now we understand you know, people many people who've decided to stay here. They're just going to have to brace and get through it.
[Vause:] I guess the question there, George, is you look around at your location there, you know, people have had you know, a fairly limited chance to prepare for the you know, for Michael as it arrives. What exactly have they been doing you know, in the last 24 hours?
[Howell:] Right. You see the typical things, John. People boarding up, people deciding do you stay or you go. People also deciding you know, what can be done to protect their property. That those are really the big decisions that are made during a time like this. But again, it comes down to that critical decision, did you stay or did you go. And for people who left, they will be wondering if is their property safe, what's left over. For people who are here, they're going to have to wait and see how powerful the storm is.
[Vause:] It just raises the question what can you prepare for when you have a Category Four hurricane potentially bearing down which could bring 13-foot storm surges with it. You know, what exactly can you do to make your property and your life safe under those circumstances? It's a big question.
[Howell:] John, you know, the simple answer to that not much, but you know people are certainly doing what they can because this storm seems to be one that will be historic for this part of the country.
[Vause:] George, thank you. Please stay with us. We know we had some communications problem. And so they begin as the weather gets worse. There'll be a lot more of that to come. We'll be back with you in a moment. Thank you, George. Well, for almost two years, Nikki Haley has been a high flyer within the Trump administration winning praise for her role as Ambassador to the U.N. surviving public disagreements with the president, the likes of which could have sucked the careers of others in his cabinet which is why so many were taken by surprise on Tuesday when Haley announced her resignation. The President though was
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, Dina is certainly a person I would consider and she is under consideration. We have actually many names. And you know, Nikki has been great. Nikki is going to be working along with us and helping us with the choice plus he's going to help us with 2020. And Nikki is a great friend of mine. We've become real friends over the last year. She's done a fantastic job and so she'll be involved.
[Vause:] Joining me now David Rohde, a CNN Global Affairs Analyst and Executive Editor, New Yorker Web site. David, thank you for taking the time. You know, despite what the President has been saying, we know, who does not want the job and that would be White House Adviser and Trump favorite for pretty much everything Ivanka. The first daughter tweeted out a fairly emphatic statement saying that she's just is not interested in being Haley's replacement. And so with that in mind a few hours ago it came an opinion piece put out by the Editorial Board of the New York Times, it was full of praise for Nikki Haley and they write it one day she may eventually find herself having to defend facilitating some of President Trump's worst policies and instincts but she will also be able to point to a more constructive role she played. Indeed a replacement in her mold may be the best to hope for from Mr. Trump. So is there another Nikki Haley out there and is this role within an administration really that important? So it only goes to the early comers or those who are on their way out, the elder statesman if you like.
[David Rohde, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] I think the role can be important and I think Nikki Haley showed that she disagrees with the President on a variety of fronts. She actually you know, opposed Trump when he was running for president. Is there another figure who will speak that openly, it's you know it's not clear. Dina Powell who works in the National Security Council, her name has come up. I don't know if she has the sort of political sway and a Republican Party that Nikki Haley had. And the reality is you know, this President totally dominates this Republican Party. His sort of favorite now in terms of foreign policy is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo so the short answer is I don't think there is another person who can sort of question Trump and challenge him the way Nikki Haley did.
[Vause:] Yes. There are also a lot of questions out there about the timing of this announcement. Why now? Notably Haley, you know, floated the old cliche need to spend more time with family excuses. This what she said.
[Nikki Haley, United States Ambassador To United Nations:] There's no personal reasons. I think that it's just very important for government officials to understand when it's time to step aside. And I have given everything I've got these last eight years and I do think that sometimes it's good to rotate in other people who can put that same energy and power into it.
[Vause:] You know, that need to take a break, this sort of crop rotation system for senior government officials, it's often what a president will say when he's firing someone is it?
[Rohde:] Yes, I don't I don't think she's forced out but I think there's something happening here. Officials in the White House were surprised by this announcement. They didn't expect it would come. It distracted from the president you know, swearing in Brett Kavanaugh as the new Supreme Court justice last night, and so that I think there's a lot of speculation about why she's done this. You know, Nikki Haley has spoken out about women who are saying they're victims of sexual assault being listened to. She has disagree with the president so I think there's more to this and that will come out in the days ahead. I don't think you know, this is a sudden announcement that surprised people across the White House, that's no accident. There's something more to this story.
[Vause:] I'm just wondering. Could it simply be that she's now planning on cashing in on her government experience? She wants this high paying job in the private sector because the home state newspaper The Post and Courier has reported this. The federal ethics reports show Haley a debt from $525,000 to about $1.1 million in 2017. The last year available for this numbers, $25,000 to $65,000 on two credit cards, listed a mortgage on the line of credit for 250,000 to 500,000. This report goes on to detail finds with troubles for her parents. They sold a strip mall to Haley's husband for $5.00
[Rohde:] I think that you know, she could have headed for the exits after the Midterm elections. You know, even if the Democrats there well in the election said that won't be a surprise. So I don't and you know, there are these financial difficulties you mentioned, again, I would have expected her to get through November. We're weeks away from this vote. There will be a lot of turnover I think in the administration after the midterms no matter what. So again, there's some other reason she's leaving. It's not clear yet but I think it will emerge. And one thing just you know, it's a it's a symbol. She's one of the few female members of the cabinet that really is a sort of powerful figure and so her departure you know, it creates even more of a cabinet of older white men. And you know, you talked about a replacement, you know, that'll be a big question will he try to find another woman and he does lack women in his cabinet.
[Vause:] Yes, there's not a lot diversity within the administration right now. And we saw sure should not that Haley's resignation was not the only surprising statement that she made, on Tuesday there was also this.
[Haley:] Jared is such a heavy genius that no one understands. I mean to redo the NAFTA deal the way he did, what I've done working with him on the Middle East peace plan, it is so unbelievably well done.
[Vause:] She went on to say how Jared Kushner has been hiding this this genius that he has. But you know, to be fair, there's also gushing praise for so many others within Donald Trump's administration. Is it that kind of a glimpse of how you know, Nikki Haley has handled Donald Trump?
[Rohde:] I think so but look, I want to be respectful to Donald Trump. Again, these statements and her sort of you know, praise for Donald Trump and his son-in-law you know show the total power of Donald Trump over this Republican Party. She is a politician Nikki Haley. She will be running for office in the future. Donald Trump can turn on any candidate in any race in this country, in a Republican candidate and back their opponent and that Republican politicians career is over. So I think she was exaggerating about Kushner. She was praising the president. That is a way to handle Donald Trump. But the point here is you know Nikki Haley is savvy and this is absolutely 100 percent Donald Trump's Republican Party. He controls it and Nikki Haley showed that today.
[Vause:] Yes. Absolutely. He owns them 100 percent. David, thank you so much. Good to see you.
[Rohde:] Thank you.
[Vause:] Well, there is significant new reporting about the disappearance of a prominent Saudi journalist. Coming up, what U.S. intelligence may have known by our communication intercepts about plans being made by the Saudis. Also to come, first, her husband went missing. Now, she fears for her own safety. CNN's exclusive interview with the wife of the former Interpol chief who is now detained in China.

[Richard Quest, Cnn:] In the space of one year, markets have soared to records, trade deals have been torn to pieces and the economic world has been turned on its head. I'm Richard Quest. This I the "World of Trumponomics." Good evening. When Donald Trump became America's 45th President, so began a business experiment perhaps unlike any other. The man who made his name in real estate promised to bring a billionaire's touch to governing. Over the course of the next hour, you and I will hear from some of the executives and the politicians who have watched the world change before their eyes. Because from taxes to trade, there was a sense that things would never be the same again.
[Quest:] President Trump has brought the mentality of the corner office to the oval office. A series of executive orders to short circuit lengthy legislative processes, long winded interagency negotiations. Negotiations carried out in public on NAFTA, TPP and the border wall. And board room meetings to schmooze top leaders. Think of the way he is running the U.S. as America Inc. This time, or today it was executives from Harley- Davidson, as well as union leaders who made it to the Oval Office. And put it into context, it follows meetings with automakers, drug executives and tech bosses. And tomorrow he'll be having more meetings, this time with his strategy group on the economy, which is predominantly business leaders. Never have we seen or at least in recent times have we seen a new U.S. president paying court and running things like a businessman or woman. Trump is running America Inc. His position is the fixer in chief. And his ambitions don't stop at the water's edge.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The world is in trouble, but we're going to straighten it out. OK? That's what I do. I fix things. We are going to straighten it out. Believe me, when you hear about the tough phone calls I'm having, don't worry about it.
[Quest:] You just don't hear politicians and new presidents speaking like that. From trade to manufacturing to foreign relations, the theme remains the same. Donald Trump and Donald Trump alone can take charge and fix America's ills. It's the core decree of the chief executive.
[Trump:] Well you need somebody. Because politicians are all talk, no action. We need a leader that wrote the "Art of the Deal." Our leaders have to get tougher. This is too tough to do it alone, but you know what, I think I'm going to be forced to. Because I used to be part of the club, I'm the only one that can fix it. I alone can fix it. I want to do things that haven't been done. I will never ever let you down. America will start winning again. Winning like never before.
[Quest:] Strip away the hyperbole and you realize when you look at the last two weeks, he's doing exactly what he said. Carlos Gutierrez says that the government must adapt to this PresidentCEO business mentality. Now, he should know Mr. Gutierrez that is he served in government and business. He was the commerce secretary and he was the chief executive of the cereal company Kellogg. I put it to him that Mr. Trump has come into the White House like a CEO in a hurry to get things done.
[Carlos Gutierrez, Former Us Commerce Secretary:] If you look at the way he has placed people in positions, he has come in with the same strategic themes that he had during the campaign. And he's gone out to find people who can execute his strategy. You know, and you look across his cabinet, he has done a pretty good job of that. The point here is that he does set the strategy, but he will get involved in tactical areas. He will get involved in the tactics, in the negotiating tactics. And that is where the COO needs to keep things on the rail.
[Quest:] From what you've seen so far, I mean I think of people like Lee Iacocca who lead, follow or get out of the way. From what you've seen so far, is he acting more like a president or more like a chief executive?
[Gutierrez:] Well, you know, I tend to believe that there are a lot of similarities between the two. But I would say President Trump is leaning toward a CEO. He is behaving like a CEO. He has issues that he is interested in. He is not as concerned with process and not as concerned with procedural matters. But getting his message out and getting results. So, yes, I would say that right now he is leaning toward CEO. Whether he will adjust his style to the executive branch and the processes, the inter- agency processes that already exist, that is to be seen. But in the meantime, I think the solution needs to be that his organization needs to be adapted to his style.
[Quest:] But here is the real problem with what I've just heard you say. If you have people like we believe Steve Bannon, the chief strategist, who believed the system is so broken that it can only be rebuilt after it's been blown up, or at least been destroyed and then rebuilt from the bottom. What do you do then?
[Gutierrez:] It appears that what's happening here is that there are two groups that perhaps are being developed. There is the institutional traditional group, which is Preibus. And then there is Bannon. Who as you say, you know, he's coming to shake things up. There are different roles. The chief of staff is the chief operating officer. He operates the day to day. And Bannon is the chief strategist. So, where's policy going? Where are we going in the long term? You know, what direction are we headed? And that is where the coordination needs to exist. My concern here, and I think the thing to watch, is are we going to see factions. And will there be a Reince Priebus faction, and will there be a Steve Bannon faction.
[Quest:] In this case, we have a chief exec President who seems to foster the factional form of government believing it brings out the best in all. Is he right?
[Gutierrez:] I think that if the President wants these factions, the President can have these factions. But from the standpoint of his people, if there is one thing that his people owe him is to be on his team. So, the idea of playing politics below the president, I think they can create problems beyond just what, you know, what the President would like to see or the fact that he likes debate. So, if there's going to be debate, let the President drive the debate. But I think his people owe to him to be team players and to be on one team. And to, you know, look after the eater good and not their own territory and not their own image. And that's going to be the issue to watch. Because the President surrounded himself with some very large egos.
[Quest:] The President has not always relied on Congress to push through his agenda. Within days of taking office, he signed executive orders that rolled back years of regulation. He approved giant pipelines. And he cut environmental red tape, often controversially. With a few strokes of the presidential pen, he turned years of policy on its head. And for his allies in Congress like Senator Jim Inhofe, it was a breath of fresh air.
[Sen. Jim Inhofe , Oklahoma:] Look, Richard, this President has had a war on for fossil fuels since long before he was even in the White House. And when I go back to Oklahoma and people ask questions. You know, right now, we are 89 percent dependent upon fossil fuels and nuclear to our ability to provide the power to run this country. Now what happens if he is successful and takes that away? And that's just logic and I know you and I don't agree. And a lot of people on the other side are very upset with this President winning. Because we've seen the last for a while anyway of the Obama types of programs.
[Quest:] Now, Senator, one area though which is not strictly speaking in your environmental area, but is coming up again and again and again, and it is that question of returning American jobs and manufacturing to the United States. Time and again, we are told that it will create more jobs. But the alternative argument of course is that those jobs at higher paying jobs will create higher cost of goods for American consumers. Now, whether it is cars or shoes, if you are bringing it back from Mexico to the U.S., which is a higher cost production base, those costs will be passed on surely.
[Inhofe:] Well, you know, I the higher paying job argument, you might have a point there. But we're talking about gross jobs. We're talking about unemployment. We're talking about increasing the economic activity of this country. And that is what's going to bring us out of what I would refer to as the Obama recession. And we're now in a position to actually, get that done. You talk about how does it affect the environment. The Chinese, for example, right now they are putting out new coal fire plant every ten days. Now they're not interested at all in any kind of an agreement whether it's Paris or anyplace else. But what's going to happen now when we are not able to provide the jobs here and they go to some place like China, that doesn't have any restrictions, it's going to increase not decrease the environmental problems.
[Quest:] By the summer, the historic nature of this presidency was now abundantly clear. Trade deals such as the TPP had been scrapped and regulations just been torn up. Relationships with allies and enemies have been redefined. Richard Haass had called it "adhocracy." A leadership style favored by Franklin D. Roosevelt. One where decisions are made on the fly and done so at a dizzying pace. Haass is the president of Council on Foreign Relations, and was even mentioned as a possible Secretary of State of State early on in the Trump administration. For him, "adhocracy" is a dangerous game to play.
[Richard Haass, President, Council On Foreign Relations:] What I think they are doing is essentially doing a policy of some intimidation, some coercion. There's focusing on trade deficits and imbalances. And they're hoping that they can get Mexico or China to do things, to essentially compromise on certain positions unless they pay some kind of trade retaliation with the United States.
[Quest:] Stay with me on this issue of adhocracy. Are we seeing a perfect example of which you write so elegantly, with this ad hoc meeting with President Putin with a single translator from the other side, which to neophyte in politics would say, well you know, what is wrong with that, I'm getting to know the man. But you say the political world is defined by relationships rather than transactions. And Donald Trump is comfortable with an approach to running his presidency on what worked for him in the private sector. That sort of chat worked for him.
[Haass:] Well, it won't work for him in foreign policy because governing is about relationships. And also governing is about tradeoffs. So, if he is going to be speaking to a Russian leader, he's got to think about the full menu of U.S.Russia relations and also U.S.Russian relations don't take place in a vacuum. It is against the backdrop of North Korea, of Syria, of Europe, U.S. relations with allies. So, I'm not terribly comfortable with the President of the United States sitting down with Mr. Putin without an American official present. Without an interpreter, without a notetaker and without talking points. I just don't think that kind of improvisation is the way to conduct foreign policy.
[Quest:] So, the difficult question to try to finish with to you, sir, is we might just have to get used to it if that is the way he wishes to do it. He is the President of the United States.
[Haass:] Absolutely. And he decides what is the style of decision making and governing in hl administration. But also look at what happened with health care. There are clear limits to this kind of adhocracy, improvisation, call it what you will. And it is not working for him. So yes, he can stick with it for four years. There is no one who's going to force any decision-making system on it, but at some point, the results or lack of results are going to speak for themselves.
[Quest:] Some business leaders were skeptical about Donald Trump's strategy, others downright hostile. As we continue Trumponomics, you'll hear from the billionaire who's trying to have the president impeached.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right. FBI director Christopher Wray taking questions right now in the House Judiciary Committee. Remember the president just said the FBI is in tatters. Let's listen.
[Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte, R-va:] put out as a justification for closing the investigation of the former secretary of state.
[Christopher A. Wray, Director, Fbi:] As I said, Mr. Chairman, I believe the standard is gross negligence. I leave it to others to conclude whether "extremely careless" and "gross negligence" are the same thing. But I will say that the particulars of the investigation and the decisions that were made and whether or not it was handled appropriately is, as I think it should be, the subject of an outside, independent investigation by the inspector general, and I look forward to his findings, as I'm sure the committee does, as well.
[Goodlatte:] In July of 2016, the State Department revealed that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton exchanged on her unsecured private server nearly two dozen top secret e-mails with three State Department officials. The classification Top Secret means, in part, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to national security. Can you explain to the American people how the FBI could not be investigating actions taken by individuals like those named in 2016 Jacob Sullivan, Cheryl Mills, William Burns that threatened grave damage to the national security?
[Wray:] Well, as I said, Mr. Chairman, the handling of the investigation and whether or not in particular whether or not decisions made in that investigation were the product of any improper considerations is precisely what the outside, independent inspector general is investigating. And, when we get his findings, I will look and see what appropriate action we can take at the FBI in response to that.
[Goodlatte:] Can anyone on this committee set up a private server now and conduct classified business on it, since not a single person has been prosecuted or held accountable for the Clinton e-mail investigation?
[Wray:] No.
[Goodlatte:] Thank you. Director Wray, what are you doing to ensure that the top ranks of the Federal Bureau of Investigation are cleared of individuals who are tainted by bias or those who have exhibited indiscretion by failing to demonstrate the integrity Americans expect from their top law enforcement officials?
[Wray:] Well, the first thing I'm doing is respecting the outside, independent investigations that are underway. My preference is to be one of these people who is not a "act first and ask questions later" kind of guy, but an "ask questions first and then act" kind of guy. And so I think these matters are being looked at, as they should be, by somebody outside the FBI. And, when those findings come to me, I will take appropriate action, if necessary. In the meantime, I am emphasizing in every audience I can inside the bureau that our decisions need to be made based on nothing other than the facts and the law and our rules and our processes and our core values, and not based on any political considerations by any side of the aisle.
[Goodlatte:] Thank you. Does the FBI obtain a warrant before accessing and reading Americans' e-mail?
[Wray:] It depends on the situation, but yes.
[Goodlatte:] So can you explain why you obtain a criminal search warrant before reading an e-mail of someone under investigation for a crime?
[Wray:] I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?
[Goodlatte:] Can you explain why you obtain a criminal search warrant before reading an e-mail of someone under investigation for a crime?
[Wray:] Well, in the situations where a search warrant is required, and, of course, under the Fourth Amendment, there are plenty of situations where a search warrant is not required there are all sorts of aspects to the Fourth Amendment. But, in those situations where we seek a warrant, it's because the Fourth Amendment requires it.
[Goodlatte:] Section 702, as you and I both noted, is up for renewal within a few weeks. It is a critical national security tool that must be reauthorized. You and I agree on that, as well. But it is just that a national security tool, not a criminal tool. Is it reasonable, when accessing content that shows evidence of a routine crime and is located in the FBI's 702 database, that agents should obtain some process, as is required in criminal cases?
[Wray:] Mr. Chairman, I've appreciated our discussions on Section 702. My own view is that Section 702, as currently drafted, which is the view shared by the courts that have looked at the question, is fully constitutional and lawful. And I would say to you that our handling of querying of the information in the 702 database is querying of information that is already lawfully and constitutionally in the FBI's possession and is most useful at the earliest stages, when information is coming in in fragments and the bureau is trying to make assessments of what do we have, is this a real threat, where is this going. And I would implore the committee and the Congress not to begin rebuilding the wall that existed before 911.
[Goodlatte:] Well, thank you. My time's expired, but I will add that we share that concern, as well, and that's why we have drawn a clear distinction between national security and solving domestic crimes. And, when it comes to the query, we allow that to move forward. But, when you then find that there's something related to the investigation of a domestic crime, then you should go ahead and get a search warrant. And we've protected the FBI's ability to access that database for the purpose of a query, but then, if you're going to take it further and actually read the contents of the e-mails if they're national security, go right ahead, because you may be stopping a terrorist attack. But if you're solving a domestic crime, whatever it might be, then I think you need to respect the civil liberties of American citizens and get a warrant. I now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Nadler, for his questions.
[Nadler:] Thank you. Let me say prior to my statement that I totally agree with the chairman and his observations on 702 and on the distinctions we made in our bill between national security and counterintelligence operations, on the one hand, and investigations of domestic crimes, on the other, where we where you should get a warrant, where you'd normally need a warrant. Director Wray, I'd like to ask you for your help putting the events of the last few days into context. To set the stage, over the summer, in an interview with The New York Times, President Trump stated, quote, "When Nixon came along, out of courtesy, the FBI started reporting to the Department of Justice, but the FBI person really reports directly to the president of the United States," close quote. Director Wray, you have one direct report to the executive branch. To whom do you directly report?
[Wray:] I directly report to the deputy attorney general, who then reports to the attorney general.
[Nadler:] Thank you. Has President Trump ever asked you to sidestep the chain of command and report directly to him?
[Wray:] No.
[Nadler:] Also, over the summer, former Director Comey testified that, during a private dinner, President Trump told him, quote, "I need loyalty. I expect loyalty." Has President Trump ever asked you for loyalty?
[Wray:] I have never been asked by the president to take any kind of loyalty oath. My loyalty is to the Constitution, to the laws of this country and to the you know, the good men and people of America.
[Nadler:] Thank you. Last week, former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to one felony count of lying to the FBI about conversations he had with the Russian ambassador. I would like to put President Trump's initial Twitter reaction up on the screen. I won't read it, but I will simply say he claims here to have known that General Flynn committed a crime at the time General Flynn was fired. There's come controversy as to whether the president actually wrote this Tweet. The White House later claimed that it came from the president's private attorney. But I'm not sure that it matters who wrote it, given the Department of Justice's litigating position that these tweets are, quote, "official statements of the president of The United States," close quote. A few clarifying questions, Mr. Director. In your experience at the Department of Justice, have you ever prosecuted a case involving a charge of obstruction of justice?
[Wray:] Yes.
[Nadler:] And Sections 1503, 1505 and 1512 of Title 18 make it a crime if someone corruptly, quote, "obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding," close quote. What does it mean to corruptly obstruct, influence or impede an official proceeding?
[Wray:] Well, Congressman, that would require me to get into kind of a legal discussion... ... and it's been a while since I've looked at the case law on this subject. I do know have somebody who's been both a line prosecutor and a senior Justice Department official and a defense attorney that sometimes the language of that statute can be trickier than folks...
[Nadler:] OK, fair enough fair enough. And I'm glad you're respecting the fact I only have five minutes. Does obstruction of justice require specific intent? In other words, does a prosecutor have to establish that a defendant had knowledge of the official proceeding and intended to obstruct it?
[Wray:] Sitting here right now, Congressman, I don't remember the specifics of exactly what the intent requirement is.
[Nadler:] OK. So you can't say if it matters that a suspect well, does it matter that a suspect has knowledge of a crime when he attempts to wave off criminal investigators? In other words, if a suspect has knowledge of a crime and he attempts to wave off criminal investigators, does that constitute obstruction of justice?
[Wray:] Well, certainly, the defendant's knowledge and state of mind and intent is a critical element of the offense.
[Nadler:] OK. Later that day, the president tweeted this claim this claim that we'll put up there. And, in effect, he accuses former Director Comey of giving false testimony. Mr. Comey testified that President Trump urged him to be lenient with Michael Flynn, producing a note in which he quoted the president saying, "I hope you can't I hope you can let this go." In multiple appearances before Congress, Attorney General Sessions appears to have corroborated both the fact of the meeting and the gist of the conversation between the president and Director Comey. Director Wray, do you have any reason to doubt the testimony of Director Comey or Attorney General Sessions on this point?
[Wray:] Congressman, the questions you're asking go directly to what Special Counsel Mueller is investigating. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to be weighing in on that in this setting.
[Nadler:] You don't think you can say whether you have reason to doubt the veracity of a statement because that might be under investigation?
[Wray:] Congressman, you're the question you're asking me and I appreciate the reasons for the question, but the questions you're asking me are would be asking me to weigh in on witnesses in the course of an investigation that's ongoing...
[Nadler:] OK.
[Wray:] ... and I don't think that's appropriate for me to do.
[Nadler:] I fair enough. As at your confirmation hearing, you testified that you would, quote, "consider any attempt" I'm sorry, "any effort to tamper with Director Mueller's investigation unacceptable and inappropriate, and any such effort would need to be dealt with very sternly and appropriately, indeed." Since your confirmation, has the president ever contacted you about the special counsel's investigation? Has the Attorney General or anybody else at the White House?
[Wray:] No.
[Nadler:] OK. My final question is, the president's tirade ended with one final tweet, where he says your reputation is in tatters. After years of well, Director Wray and it's up there we have heard other veterans of the FBI and the Department of Justice push back against this attack on the reputation of the FBI. With the time I have we haven't heard from you. With the time I have left, will you respond to this tweet by the president? Is the FBI's reputation in tatters?
[Wray:] Mr. Chairman, may I have time to answer this question? Because it's something that matters to me a great deal.
[Goodlatte:] Yes, go ahead, please.
[Wray:] Congressman, there is no shortage of opinions out there. What I can tell you is that the FBI that I see is tens of thousands of agents and analysts and staff, working their tails off to keep Americans safe from the next terrorist attack; gang violence; child predators; spies from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. The FBI that I see is tens of thousands of brave men and women who are working as hard as they can to keep people that they will never know safe from harm. And the FBI that I see is reflected in folks like the new class of agents that I swore in at Quantico two days ago: hard- charging, high-integrity people; people like the hostage rescue team and SWAT teams that we send out into all sorts of danger with almost no notice. The FBI that I see is people decent people committed to the highest principles of integrity and professionalism and respect. The FBI that I see is respected and appreciated by our partners in federal, state and local law enforcement; in the intelligence community; by our foreign counterparts, both law enforcement and national security, in something like 200 countries around the globe. That's the FBI that I see. Now, do we make mistakes? You bet we make mistakes, just like everybody who's human makes mistakes. And, when we make mistakes, there are independent processes, like that of the outside, independent inspector general, that will drive and dive deep into the facts surrounding those mistakes. And, when that independent fact-finding is complete, we will hold our folks accountable, if that's appropriate.
[Nadler:] It's very fine. Thank you very much. I yield back.
[Goodlatte:] The chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Chabot, for five minutes.
[Chabot:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Wray, you've mentioned that the I.G., the inspector general, is investigating matters related, for example, to the Clinton e-mail server scandal, et cetera. But isn't it a fact that the I.G. does not have prosecutorial powers?
[Wray:] Well, under certain circumstances, the inspector general works with prosecutors to bring criminal cases.
[Chabot:] Well, what about in this case?
[Wray:] Well, this is a matter that's under review, at the moment, looking into the facts surrounding all those decisions.
[Chabot:] So the bottom line is the I.G. is looking into the matter, investigating it, but has no prosecutorial powers per se at this time?
[Wray:] The inspector general does not himself have prosecutorial power, yes.
[Chabot:] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The president of the United States, as the chairman mentioned, recently expressed the opinion that the FBI's reputation was, quote, "in tatters," unquote. Now, someone who's sat on this committee, the judiciary committee that has oversight of the Justice Department and the FBI, for over 20 years now, such a statement is, at least at first, shocking. But, when you look at a few facts, it's understandable why the president might make such a statement. A former head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, is put in charge of an important investigation, and who does he pick to be on his team? Well, you'd want people who are experienced and smart and, most importantly, unbiased, because, whatever you do, the result is going to be second- guessed. One side or the other is going to be dissatisfied and critical. So, above all things, they've got to at least appear to be fair and unbiased. So who does Mueller pick? He picked 16 attorneys nine of the 16, more than half, have given money to the Obama campaign or the Clinton campaign or both, and nobody has given a cent to Donald Trump or his campaign. Does that show a lack of bias? Does that show fairness? I think the American people can decide that for themselves. And, perhaps even more shocking, we recently learned that one of those supposedly unbiased investigators on the Mueller team was a guy named Peter Strzok. Turns out Strzok was sending out anti-Trump, pro- Clinton messages, so he ultimately got canned from the investigation. The question is, how did this guy get on your supposedly unbiased team in the first place, when you consider that this is the same guy that had a key position investigating the Hillary Clinton e-mail server scandal, and apparently had a hand in altering the FBI's conclusion that Clinton was grossly negligent, down to "extremely careless," so she could escape prosecution and thus stay in the race against Donald Trump. And now we learn that the number two guy on Mueller's team, Andrew Weissmann, is just as biased as Strzok. He made an anti-Trump communication to the since-fired Sally Yates, and the depths of this anti-Trump bias on the Mueller team just goes on and on. It's absolutely shocking. Director Wray, I know all this took place before you took the helm at the FBI, but none other than the president of the United States has said that an organization that most Americans, including myself, hold in the highest esteem, the FBI, is in tatters. What can you do what will you do to restore confidence in the premier law enforcement agency in the world?
[Wray:] Congressman, I appreciate the question and the reason for the question. It goes to the heart of whether or not the bureau is following its processes and the rules and the guidelines, and adhering to the independence and objectivity and professionalism that we all come to expect and respect from the FBI. And I think the best way that I can validate the trust of the American people in the FBI is to ensure that we bring that same level of professionalism and integrity and objectivity and adherence to process in everything we do. As I said at the beginning, I think it is important that we not jump first and ask questions later. So the second thing that I think can be done is, when there are fair questions to be asked about things like whether or not some of the decisions made in the 2016 investigation were handled appropriately or were subject or based on any kind of improper considerations, rather than have the FBI investigate itself, having an outside inspector general do the investigation and report to all of us on the findings, I think, is the one of the best things I can do. And then, based on that information, I won't hesitate to take appropriate action based on what it is he finds.
[Chabot:] Thank you. And I'm almost out of time, but let me ask you, would you as FBI director, for example, ever permit associates of someone under investigation who themselves could also be under investigation to sit in an interview with the accused?
[Wray:] Well, I will say this: Having been, as I said to Congressman Nadler, both a line prosecutor a Justice Department official, but then also a defense attorney, that that's not my experience as the normal practice. I'm also, however, reluctant to ever answer questions, as you can appreciate, with a hypothetical about whether I would ever do something, because every investigation is subject to its own unique circumstances.
[Chabot:] I certainly understand it, because that's exactly what happened in the so-called investigation of Hillary Clinton. And I yield back my time.
[Goodlatte:] The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Lofgren, for five minutes.
[Lofgren:] Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Director, for being here today. And thanks to you for your leadership of this agency, and to the men and women who work so hard to protect our country and to serve the United States. It's we all appreciate it, even though we might have a few questions. My question my first question has to do with cybersecurity. You know, the there's a rapidly growing threat of cyber attacks at all levels, federal, state and local, business, personal level. And I was really concerned to learn in November of a report highlighting the FBI's failure to notify multiple government officials that they were the target of a Russian hacking campaign. Now, at least according to this report, 500 people were targeted in the past year, including officials as high-profile as the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the former head of the Air Force intelligence. Many of these people still had security clearances or worked for the government. So I'd like to know the FBI was, as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong of these efforts for at least a year, but, I am advised, informed only two of the targets. Can you explain why these individuals had to learn from the Associated Press that they were targets of an aggressive Russian hacking effort? And do we know if any classified information was stolen? Were any members of Congress or congressional staff a target? And what mechanisms or additional resources need to be put in place so that targeted officials know they're at risk when there's a foreign operation such as this?
[Wray:] Well, Congresswoman, I think I'm not comfortable trying to discuss this specific victim engagements in a particular investigation, at least in this setting. But I think what I can tell you, which might be helpful, in response is that we have very well- established criteria and policies and procedures for questions of victim notification in cyber matters. And the questions and I probably can't repeat them to you verbatim, but I can give you the gist of them the questions go to things like, number one, can we identify the victim, which in a lot of cases is harder than you might think; number two, is the information that we have at that point in the investigation actionable for the victim is there something they can do with it, you know, can it could sharing the information actually protect somebody, prevent a loss, et cetera? We also look at whether or not sharing the information at the time that we you know, in question would potentially compromise or jeopardize an existing investigation or reveal sources and methods, which is often the case in these kinds of investigations.
[Lofgren:] But yeah.
[Wray:] And the last point I guess I would make is that, when you have a large number of people, it's much easier for us to provide victim notification when we have official or government or corporate accounts, where we can contact the chief information security officer and then they can communicate to all the people who are on that server. When you talk about Gmail accounts and things like that, it gets a lot harder, because a lot of people's Gmail addresses don't have, you know, Wray C-W-R-A-Y, or, you know, Lofgren, or...
[Lofgren:] Right. But, for example and I assume, if what you're describing is the current practice, when the Democratic National Committee was hacked by the Russians, the FBI contacted an intern. They never contacted the chairman of the DNC. She found out, you know, months later. So, hopefully, those types of procedures have been revised. Do you know that?
[Wray:] I think the procedures themselves remain the same, and the procedures themselves, I think, are pretty sound. The question of but if you think about what they are, they are questions that the investigators have to ask in each victim notification context.
[Lofgren:] Well, let me go when we had the Attorney General here recently, we asked there's an ongoing effort to hack into the election system. We know that from various reports. And the Attorney General said he really, nothing was going on that he hadn't been able to pay I'm paraphrasing he would say it's really important; we haven't spent enough time on it. I'm getting the sense that that's true across the government. In fact, we've got systems that were hacked within half an hour at DEF CON by state voting systems. What is the FBI doing, relative to preserving the integrity of the voting structure itself for the next election?
[Wray:] Mr. Chairman, may I see my time may I answer that one?
[Goodlatte:] Yes.
[Wray:] Thank you. Well, I think the FBI is actually very focused on this subject. It's one of the things that I've tried to insist on, upon arriving. We have a foreign influence task force that we stood up that brings together both our counterintelligence division, our cyber division and our criminal division, as well as some other parts of the bureau. We are in coordination, through that task force, with DHS, which of course has responsibility for a lot of the election infrastructure, along with states. We are in contact with our foreign partners, because, as you know, efforts to interfere with elections are occurring in other countries, as well, and so, by doing that with our close relationships with our foreign counterparts, we learn more about tradecraft methods and things like that. So we're acutely focused on looking out for signs of interference in the 2018 or 2020 election cycle.
[Lofgren:] If I may, Mr. Chair, I know my time is up, but I hope that there is an effort by the bureau to communicate with state election officers, who oftentimes have been kept in the dark. And I yield back.
[Goodlatte:] The chair recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Issa, for five minutes.
[Issa:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Wray, a couple of questions, one is one that I'm sure you're aware of, and I'm just going to ask it as a "Do you agree?" And it's not hypothetical, but it's nonspecific. Do you agree that persons should not have their assets forfeited without due process and a provable link to criminal activity?
[Wray:] Well, Congressman, it's been a while since I looked at the law on asset forfeiture. So I want to be careful...
[Issa:] Well, this is a this is a constitutional, not a statutory question.
[Wray:] Well, I believe that, in the context of asset forfeiture, we should respect the constitution.
[Issa:] OK. So it's fair to say that, if somebody has $10,000 in their van, they have it taken from them and they have to sue to get it back, even though they're never charged with a crime, that would be wrong under due process in the Constitution?
[Wray:] Well, again, I'm not trying to make this difficult, but I you know, to me, asset forfeiture questions raise all kinds of complicated case law questions about due process, et cetera. What I do believe due process and adherence to the Constitution are incredibly important in the asset forfeiture context, as in elsewhere.
[Issa:] Thank you, Director. Now, switching to the matter of Peter Strzok and I had a long time working with your folks on the personnel side, over at Oversight, where where we oversee a lot of those things. And I just want to make the record straight, now that you're, in addition to being the chief from a law enforcement standpoint, you're also sort of the ultimate head of H.R. for those tens of thousands of people who are working so hard for us: Is an FBI agent allowed to have a political opinion?
[Wray:] Yes.
[Issa:] Is an FBI agent allowed to communicate that political opinion to their wife or even their mistress?
[Wray:] Yes.
[Issa:] So nothing in a text simply communicating a political opinion would be cause for firing or any other action under the ordinary rules of the FBI or any federal person, correct?
[Wray:] I think each question would have to be based on its own circumstances. Certainly, I can imagine situations, as you're describing, where it wouldn't be, and I can imagine situations where it might be.
[Issa:] So that brings us to a situation, now, in which an individual is key to the question of whether or not there should be a full de novo review of the FBI's actions as to Hillary Clinton and the decision not to prosecute her, since he was he was actively involved in that. So my question to you is, since it's clear that whatever Peter Strzok did was sufficient to have him relieved something that, in the ordinary course of simply communicating a political opinion, would not cause that, and would be inappropriate to relieve somebody simply for having a political opinion will you make available to this committee, upon the chairman's obvious request, the ability to see any or all of those 10,000 texts sufficient to understand why this individual was dismissed and how it might be relevant to the question of the objectivity of Director Comey's investigation and conclusions?

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] on the one-year mark of the Mueller probe. He writes, "We have had the most successful first 17 month Administration in U.S. history." That's the latest. This as the president is also grasping on a "New York Times" report that delves into the early days of the FBI investigation and the Russia probe. And he claims his campaign was spied on. That's not what the report says. The president, though, insists it is bigger than Watergate.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Also this morning, the president's lawyer Rudy Giuliani claiming that the Mueller team says they will not indict the president because they cannot indict the president. Our Jessica Schneider joins us now with much more on that. Jessica?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, John and Poppy. Rudy Giuliani's basing that conclusion, not only on what he says Mueller's team has told the Trump legal team, but also really on guidance that was issued by the Justice Department in the Nixon administration and also renewed during the Clinton administration. And that guidance really says a sitting president cannot be indicted but really the fact is that doesn't end the inquiry since the Supreme Court has never weighed in on this issue, but nevertheless, Rudy Giuliani getting his message out, directly perhaps to the special counsel. And of course this being the one-year anniversary of when the special counsel was named. Over the past 365 days, there have been quite a few developments, twists and turns and also a number of charges. In fact, 75 criminal charges in all have resulted in this year-long probe that's against 22 people and companies, that has so far amounted to five guilty pleas, one person sentenced and interestingly, the guilty pleas include former White House national security adviser Michael Flynn as well as deputy campaign manager Rick Gates. Both of whom are cooperating with the special counsel. So on that one-year anniversary, though, Giuliani is still speaking out and he's saying not only can the president not be indicted, but he can't be subpoenaed either. Take a listen.
[Rudy Giuliani, Lawyer For President Trump:] We're going to see what kind of legal remedies are available to us, including if they subpoena us, challenge the subpoena. The same reason they can't indict him, they can't issue a subpoena to him.
[Schneider:] All right. So, to take you through some of the logic there from Rudy Giuliani, so the special counsel, he says, could only force a subpoena to investigate a crime of great significance. But Rudy Giuliani's reasoning, the president can't be indicted then there is no crime of great significance to even pursue. So, a bit of a roundabout legal analysis there, but nevertheless, providing pushback against any consideration by Mueller's team of issuing a subpoena to the president. And, of course, while President Trump is calling this a witch-hunt, Giuliani says that he will use this one year anniversary in some way. John and poppy, he wants to push the special counsel to disclose how much money is being spent and also perhaps mark this one- year anniversary by actively beginning any negotiation of any possible presidential interview. Guys?
[Berman:] Jessica Schneider for us in Washington. It is notable, this is clearly the message that Rudy Giuliani wants to send, and these friendly interviews on Fox News, the president sending his own message on Twitter, at the same time the president will not hold a news conference today with NATO which had been expected. Why? Because perhaps he doesn't want to face actual real questions about the Russia investigation.
[Harlow:] And two days and no White House briefing too.
[Berman:] Two days and I think we may hear the White House briefing today. That may come up but the president himself clearly not wanting to face the tough questions on this. And one other point, the Mueller team doesn't have a public response because the Mueller team does not leak. We're now one year into the investigation and our Sara Murray joins us now with an inside look at that investigation one year in. Sara?
[Sara Murray, Cnn Political Correspondent:] Well, yes. The Mueller investigation carries on and I think there were a lot of people who were involved in this probe. Lawyers, witnesses, that kind of thing who thought and it would wrap up by this summer. And now, they're beginning to think that that is a lot less likely that this could go on. We know that Mueller continues to call in witnesses. He continues to bring people in to speak before the grand jury. And as you point out, all of this is going on this critical mission with relative silence from Mueller's team. This is not a guy who is out there holding press conferences to talk about his work. Instead, he arrives pretty nondescriptly to the office every day by 7:30 a.m. in the morning. And he and the rest of his workers sort of toil away in what have been described as a pretty nondescript government building and a pretty drab one on the inside. You know, witnesses are brought in. They're in conference rooms with mismatched chairs and office furniture that kind of looks like it came from an office supply store. They're offered water, but, you know, there is no real refreshments there. And if you're an employee who works there, the situation is not a whole lot better. They pop out during the middle of the day and go to the food trucks, there's a lunch room there that we were told smells vaguely of hot pockets. And this is where bureaucrats are working day in and day out to try to move this Russia investigation forward, the one that obviously bothers the president so much so that he constantly declares it a witch-hunt.
[Harlow:] The message again from him this morning. Sara Murray, thank you. Let's talk about all of this. With us, CNN legal analyst, Carrie Cordero and CNN contributor Garrett Graff, he's written a fascinating new piece "The Making of Robert Mueller" in the current issue of "Wired" nice to have you both here. And Garrett, congrats on your piece, it is fascinating talking about the time and the impact Vietnam had on him during the war. One of the things we heard from his new personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, Garrett, is that, look, you know, the you can't indict the president, but you can write a report about him as if this is, you know, a fifth grade essay or report if you will. For someone who has delved into the past and what has been formative for Bob Mueller, if Mueller thinks that the president crossed the line, what do you think that report would look like?
[Garrett Graff, Cnn Contributor:] Well, you know, we have some good historical examples including Ken Starr's original report that sort of kicked off the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, that this is not necessarily that new information. We have known about these DOJ guidance from the Nixon administration and the Clinton administration before and we have sort of every reason to believe from Bob Mueller's background and his, you know, almost 50-year career in the Justice Department that he wouldn't disobey or go against the standing DOJ guidance, that it is sort of the outcome for presidential level information was always going to be a report that gets turned over to the deputy attorney general that then in turn is supposed to be turned over to Congress.
[Berman:] And, Garrett, though, the point these reports can be tough. And these reports can lead to things like say, impeachment, which is a pretty big deal.
[Graff:] Absolutely. Yes, and
[Berman:] Go ahead.
[Graff:] Yes, and they can be incredibly detailed and that's probably a key way that the president hopes to move information out into the public sphere.
[Berman:] So, Carrie, the point that Rudy Giuliani is making one of the points he's making, arguments, and it is a legal jump here. Is it well, if you agree the president can't be indicted, and, you know, there is a debate about that, but even if you stipulate that he can't be indicted, well, then you can't subpoena him either. He's not subject to any subpoena. Any legal rationale for that?
[Carrie Cordero, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well so, John and Poppy, it is important to keep in mind that these are arguments and these are arguments that the president's counsel is making. None of this with respect to whether or not the president can be indicted, whether or not the president can be compelled to appear before the grand jury, none of that is settled Supreme Court precedent. These are based on historical memos, interpreting, going back to the federalist papers and constitutional roles of the president and what he can be compelled to do. And so, as we think about the Justice Department precedent that exists, and these legal memos that the office of legal counsel memos or memos that were written by prior independent counsel, it is important to keep in mind that those are historical and those are were not written with this particular factual scenario in mind. So my question is whether or not this special counsel, in this environment, given the potential criminal charges that might exist, has conducted their own independent legal analysis.
[Harlow:] Garrett, Rudy Giuliani back on Fox News this morning suggesting that Mueller's team and Mueller himself would not want to get in a fight with Giuliani and the president's legal team over a subpoena. Given all of the research you did, and the reporting you did for your new story on Mueller and "Wired." Do you think he would be at all worried about a fight with Rudy Giuliani?
[Graff:] Not at all. This is as you said, I dove into Bob Mueller's very formative experience in Vietnam. And when you go back and when you look at that time and you talk to people who knew him then, and knew him now, he really sees sort of everything that he's conducted in life paling in comparison to the stress that he faced leading men in combat in Vietnam. And sort of he used to joke darkly as FBI director even after 911 amid the terrible crucible of that time inside the Justice Department. Hey, I'm still getting more sleep than I ever did in Vietnam. And I think Bob Mueller probably is sleeping very soundly even today.
[Berman:] Well, again, to that point here. How do you think he's reacting to what he's seeing from Rudy Giuliani going on and doing his muscle flexing interviews saying I'm way tougher than the lawyers were here before? You know, I'm telling Robert Mueller who is boss. What do you think Mueller thinks of all that?
[Cordero:] I think he probably
[Harlow:] Garrett, let us get your take on the you know, the president's read of "The New York Times" big story this morning on the early days of the FBI investigation, the Russia probe, because his read is that, oh, this is the FBI spying on the Trump campaign, and that's bigger than Watergate. It is actually not what the report says at all. It talks about how meticulous the FBI was early on, a government informant meeting with people like Carter Page and Papadopoulos who were on the Trump team in the early days and how careful the FBI was, Garrett, to keep a lid on all of this and to get none of this out before the election. What do you make of the president's read?
[Graff:] Yes, that's actually the thing most striking to me about that "New York Times" article is just how carefully the FBI avoided any leak or damaging information about this Trump investigation before the election. Sort of the fear that it would impact the campaign in any way it was very real, very present among the FBI investigators. And they went really out of their way to keep this a close hold until after the election. And that is sort of goes against this presidential narrative over the last year that the FBI has been out to get him, this is somehow a bashed in, pro-Clinton propaganda that was sort of bending every rule in sight to personally attack him. What we actually see increasingly is that the FBI did just the opposite.
[Berman:] Carrie Cordero, Garrett Graff, thank you so much for being with us, appreciate it.
[Cordero:] Thank you.
[Berman:] All right. Stepping forward, an anonymous source now reveals why Michael Cohen's bank records were leaked. We'll tell you the reason why just ahead.
[Harlow:] Plus, reality check, this morning U.S. officials say that is how the president is viewing Kim Jong-un's threat to pull out of the historic summit. And a red alert in Hawaii, noxious gas, steam, ash and lava, spewing still from the Kilauea volcano. We're live on the big island.

[Michael Bender, White House Reporter, "the Wall Street Journal":] Affecting his decisions on approach to China, too.
[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Well, calling it calling it as it is, not just as you see it, but calling it as it is, is important. Congrats to the secretaries there. Wolf Blitzer starts right now.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. President Trump calling the appointment of the special counsel unconstitutional and insisting he has the absolute right to pardon himself. What prompted those tweets today? And just how far do his presidential powers go? Former President Bill Clinton getting heated in a new interview when asked about the Monica Lewinsky scandal. He says he doesn't owe her a personal apology. You'll hear why. And some of America's closest allies fighting back today, slamming the president's tariffs on steel and aluminum. Canada calling them just plain insulting. So what could the long-lasting affects be? All that coming up. But first, power play. The Trump legal team claims he has the sweeping authority over all federal investigations as President Trump attacks the Russia probe on constitutional grounds. He tweeted this, this morning. Quote, the appointment of the special counsel is totally unconstitutional. Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done nothing wrong, closed quote. The tweet follows an assertion by the president and his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, that the president has the power to pardon himself.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Lawyer:] I mean that's another really interesting constitutional argument, can the president pardon himself? I think the political ramifications of that would be tough. Pardoning other people is one thing. Pardoning yourself is another.
[Blitzer:] The president was less circumspect. He tweeted, quote, as has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to pardon myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? Let's go to our chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta. Jim, those comments are part of a larger strategy clearly by the president's legal team to assert almost unlimited executive powers. Tell us a little bit more about that.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. And we've been hearing this from the president's legal team for months. They view that the president has almost sweeping, unchecked powers when it comes to running the executive branch of government. They feel as though the president, because he is the head of the executive branch, can fire whoever he wants. And in some cases, it sounds like from the rational laid out by Rudy Giuliani and the president, that to some extent they feel that the president is above the law. The president tweeting this morning that he believes he can pardon himself. Of course, Wolf, we should point out the history in all this. When Richard Nixon was in hot water back in the 1970s, the Justice Department, right before he stepped down from office, said that the president could not pardon himself because that would essentially put the president above the law. But you saw President Trump, though, this morning going on another one of these tweet storms saying that the special counsel investigation is unconstitutional, that they're cooperating as much as they possibly can and so on. That seems to be one of the talking points coming out of the White House this morning, that they've been cooperative throughout this entire investigation. Of course, Wolf, you have to ask the question, how is it cooperative for the president and the executive branch, how is it how can they say that sort of thing? How can they lay out that kind of argument when, at the same time, as we as we both know, Wolf, the president has been going after Robert Mueller, the special counsel's office, the Justice Department, Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, there have been talks of threats of firing the deputy attorney general, questions almost on a daily basis as to the future of the attorney general, Jeff Sessions. You know, how is that cooperative? I think that's another question that needs to be asked. But no question, Wolf, this is a legal and political strategy when you talk to sources familiar with conversations that go on inside the president's legal team. They have definitely shifted from a posture of cooperation with the special counsel's office to attack, attack, attack and this appears to be another one of those instances over the last 24 hours whether it be the comments from Rudy Giuliani or from the president himself. They seem to be following that approach and sticking to it. Just about every hour a tweet comes out, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, and Chris Cuomo is going to be hosting Rudy Giuliani, questioning him, 9:00 p.m. Eastern later tonight on the premiere of his new show. We'll be anxious to see that. Jim Acosta at the White House, I know you have a press briefing coming up with Sarah Sanders. We'll have live coverage of that as well. In the meantime, let's get some perspective on the presidential power play. We have CNN political analyst Molly Ball with us, CNN political commentator David Urban, CNN legal analyst Laura Coates, and our chief political analyst, Gloria Borger. The president says, Gloria, he has the absolute right to pardon himself. What do you make of that?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] First of all, I think he needs to read a 1974 memo from the Office of Legal Counsel which states very clearly that no one may be a judge in his own case and says that a president can't pardon himself for that very reason. Now, there have been legal scholars who disagree with that. Solicitor General Robert Bork back in the day disagreed with that. But then let's take a step back further and try and figure out why this is all going on right now. Rudy Giuliani is out there saying the president can do anything he wants. This legal memo was leaked over the weekend, a 20 page memo, detailing why the special counsel basically can't touch the president in any way, shape or form. So it makes you wonder whether they're sending this outside signal to the special counsel that people are with us here, so you better be careful because you don't have public support and you better not try and subpoena the president. And I'm told, my sources tell me, that they believe he doesn't want to Mueller wants to avoid a subpoena of the president, but we don't know for sure. So what they are doing and I believe directed largely by the president and the mouthpiece is Rudy Giuliani, what they are trying to do is send these signals to Mueller that if you try and do this stuff, if you try and subpoena us, we're ready. And, you know, Mueller has read the memos. We're not quite sure if he responded to this memo. But now they're saying, well, now the American public has it and they know our arguments and so it's there you know, in politics we talk about pre-buttals. This is the delivery of that and making their discussions with Mueller almost public.
[Blitzer:] Yes, I mean, whoever leaked that 20-page memo to Mueller from the legal staff, the then lawyer John Dowd, for the president clearly was trying to send a message to the president's supporters, here are some talking points, here are some arguments for you.
[Borger:] Absolutely.
[Blitzer:] Laura, I want you to listen to what Rudy Giuliani said on ABC yesterday because something jumped out at me, even though we suspected this, he has officially confirmed the president is now a subject of this Mueller investigation. Listen to this.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Lawyer:] You've got everything you need. What do you need us for? In fact, most prosecutors don't have the subject or target or whatever you want to call the president, although he's only a subject right now. And I think will remain that.
[Blitzer:] So he says the president's a subject, only a subject right now. We checked with the Justice Department. A witness is clearly somebody who has some information that could be useful. A target is someone who's a target probably of a criminal investigation. But a subject, according to the Justice Department, is a person whose conduct is within the scope of a grand jury's investigation. So we have reported he was probably a subject, but now he is officially saying the president of the United States is a subject of this investigation.
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] And you have to wonder to how much of this Rudy Giuliani is aware of or perhaps getting into semantics based argument in his own head. You have to wonder about that. But in all honesty, of course he is a subject of the investigation. It is his campaign that they are looking into about counterintelligence with Russia and possibly collusion. This should surprise no one as an epiphany. What is surprising as the epiphany that only the Trump administration or Trump legal team has come to is this notion of being above the law. And I really had this idea that the trump legal team is running around a house trying to close every single window for Mueller, but Mueller already has a key. It's called a grand jury subpoena. He can go into the house. He can try to execute information. He can understand what's happening here and he can get the information there. And I agree with you, Gloria, the notion of the 1974 OLC opinion. And the reason it's so important to focus on that, Wolf, is because, remember, it has been the Trump strategy and Trump's legal team's statement that we have to rely on the fact that a sitting president, based on those OLC opinions, cannot be indicted in office. And you cannot, on the one hand, say it's important, and on the other hand ignore the one that says you're not above the law and you cannot pardon yourself in an impeachment. We've already seen this version of King George III again through Nixon. It wasn't successful the first time. It should be again.
[Blitzer:] In that 20-page letter that "The New York Times" published, David, the letter assets, quote, the this is from the president's lawyers, the president cannot illegally obstruct any aspect of the investigation into Russia's election meddling because the Constitution empowers him to, if he wished, terminate the inquiry or even exercise his power to pardon. You're a former Trump campaign strategist. What do you think of this strategy now of going public with all these arguments?
[David Urban, Cnn Political Commentator:] Yes, so, look, I think it's it is a legal argument and there's a there's a political argument, right? The legal argument they make, I think, is probably on more solid ground than the political argument. I think the president does have pretty unfettered and not unquestioned but pretty unfettered ability to pardon with the exception of impeachment. And what the president could do here, Laura and I talked about this briefly before, the president could, you know, they could invoke the 25th Amendment, the president could step down for a day, the vice president could be the president.
[Coates:] Sure.
[Urban:] He could president he could pardon the president. And then the next day the president could come back to work. So there are you know, the ability to pardon I think is you know, we're we're how many angels can dance on the head of a pin at this point? The question I think of whether this we have to kind of step back and take a look, does any of this rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors, right? Is any of this going to be an impeachable offense because because
[Blitzer:] That's what the U.S. House of Representatives will have to decide, if it comes down to that.
[Urban:] Because that's where this is going to end up. Yes, make no mistake, this is not going to end up in the southern district of New York, or the northern district of Virginia. This is going to end up on the lap of the folks in the House of Representatives. At the end of this, Director Mueller is going to complete his report. He's going to hand it to the attorney general, who then is going to hand it to Rod Rosenstein and they're going to publish it, I'm guessing, at some at some point because they're not going to be able to keep that it will leak within five minutes if they don't publish it. And then it's up to the House of Representatives. So this is all really all these arguments are really political arguments. They're not they're somewhat legal, but they're really being made for political for political purposes.
[Blitzer:] There was another element in that 20 page letter that "The New York Times" reported on, Molly, that the president actually, according to the president's lawyers, dictated that statement to "The New York Times" about that very controversial Trump Tower meeting that his son, son-in-law, campaign chairman had with Russians back in 2016. I want you to listen, though, to what some of the president's lawyers and aides said contradicting this notion that the president dictated the statement.
[Jay Sekulow, President Trump's Lawyer:] That was written by Donald Trump Jr. And and I'm sure with in consultation with his lawyer. So that wasn't written by the president. The president didn't sign off on on anything. The president was not involved in the drafting of the statement and did not issue the statement. It came from Donald Trump Jr.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] He certainly didn't dictate but, you know, he like I said, he weighed in, offered suggestion, like any father would do.
[Blitzer:] And if you read those statements, I went back and took a look at the statement that the president dictated, which his aides have denied he did it, but among other things it said in the statement that it was not a campaign issue at the time. There's the statement right there. It was a short introductory meeting. I asked Jared and Paul to stop by. We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government. But it was not a campaign issue at the time. It was a campaign issue at the time because the Russians promised, quote, dirt on Hillary Clinton. That's why the president's son and son-in-law and campaign chairman went to that meeting.
[Molly Ball, Cnn Political Analyst:] Right, although that is also something that they initially denied because we have had these evolving and contradictory and ever shifting rationales that have been offered. This is a remarkable admission in that memo. But it is not the first time that we have heard admissions following denials, following, you know, arguments that, well, it doesn't matter any way, even if this was done that, you know, that it's OK. So these but I as David was saying, all of these shifting rationales add up not to any kind of sustained or consistent legal case, but to trying this case in the court of public opinion because the Mueller team isn't doing that. The Mueller team is completely silent. When they speak, it is through actions. It's through the legal filings, often surprising ones, that we don't know are coming or that bring people into the investigation, make charges that the president's legal team didn't know was coming, much less the public. And so you have this very lopsided process where one side is dealing strictly in the legal realm and the other side is dealing almost entirely in the political realm because, as David said, they know that their defense is not going to be whether or not a judge or a court believes their legal argument, it's going to be whether the Republicans in the Senate and the House of Representatives decide that because of public opinion they must back up the president.
[Blitzer:] And we do know, Gloria, that the Mueller team is investigating that statement that was put out.
[Borger:] Sure.
[Blitzer:] Because it potentially could be some sort of obstruction argument.
[Borger:] Well, and we also know that Senator Chris Coons is saying that Don Jr. lied before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I have what he said here and he kind of was wiggling around this. But but, you know, my question is, why is the president's attorney and Rudy Giuliani talking about impeachment so much? I can't really understand that. Why is he so sure that this is, in fact, political and not legal? Does he know that?
[Coates:] I think that he is misconstruing every argument. He believes this is, as you're talking about, only a political issue. But it's only political if you abide by the principle that a sitting president cannot be indicted of a crime. Well, if he's impeached, he's no longer sitting, then it could end up right there in a SDNY or in Virginia or other cases. So it's very short sighted to think about impeachment because the end result could very well be a criminal prosecution.
[Blitzer:] All right.
[Urban:] This is well, I we
[Blitzer:] Very quickly.
[Urban:] We were all here for the Clinton for the Clinton impeachment. It's not it's not a pretty sight. It's not this is not going to happen. I predict this is going to wrap up. We'll see I'm just saying, they're not going to have an impeachment. It's big political.
[Blitzer:] We'll see what happens. Guys, thank you very, very much. There's more news we're following, the U.S. Supreme Court has now ruled on a case that pitted religious liberty against gay rights. The justices deciding in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The baker claimed doing so would violate his religious beliefs. CNN's Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue is joining us right now. Ariane, this ruling came down in favor of the baker, but it isn't necessarily the broad ruling many were expecting. What exactly did the court say?
[Ariane De Vogue, Cnn Supreme Court Reporter:] Well, Wolf, as you said, this has always been this collision between religious freedom claims and LGBT rights. And here the court did rule narrowly in favor of the baker. Remember the baker refused to make that cake. The couple sued. A lower court ruled in favor of the couple. And today Kennedy reversed 7-2. And this is what he did. He said that the state violated the baker's religious freedom by showing hostility to his religion. And Justice Kennedy pointed to one specific hearing held by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission where he said where one commissioner said, look, Phillip's beliefs amounted to discrimination. And Justice Kennedy said that those comments showed that the commission wasn't applying this with the religious neutrality that it need to. So it is a win for Philips and it's a win for religious liberty, but it's not necessarily that big, religious liberty case some people focused on. Kennedy was straddling two sides of his jurisprudence. Remember, he's the guy who wrote the Obergefell decision, cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide. But, today, he gave a nod to religious freedom, religious concerns. He said the commissioners' hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment's guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion. So there you have it. He gives this victory. It's a narrow victory, but it's for the baker.
[Blitzer:] Ariane de Vogue, good explanation. Thank you very much. Other news, diplomats are working around the clock right now preparing for that meeting between President Trump and the North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un. Ahead, why some say the Singapore summit may be more of a meet and greet. Also ahead, former President Bill Clinton on the defensive right now. He says he doesn't owe Monica Lewinsky a personal apology.

[Paul:] Aren't you glad it's the weekend. Take a nice deep breath. Here we go. I am Christi Paul.
[Blackwell:] I am Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you. In about 90 minutes from now, Donald Trump, president of the United States will deliver his first commencement speech as president to Liberty University.
[Paul:] He may be bringing with him some of the remnants this week, the cloud of the FBI's investigation into Russia's meddling into the 2016 election. The sudden controversial decision to fire FBI Director James Comey. So all of that is lingering, but there's a live picture on the left side of the screen of those graduates as they're getting ready. And on the right side, Joint Base Andrews as the president gets ready to depart for Lynchburg, Virginia. Now as the president prepares for that speech, we should point out some of those who are waiting to hear from him say they're conflicted over their support of the president. Here's CNN correspondent, Polo Sandoval.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] The White family tackles everything at the dinner table from their projects to the politics behind the controversial firing of the FBI Director James Comey.
[Larry White, Trump Voter:] Those who are which is probably the majority here, those who were pro-Trump, voted for Trump. I think something like this isn't going to shake them one bit.
[Sandoval:] Larry White and his wife, Kathy, are raising their family in Lynchburg, in the center of Virginia, but leaning right, more than 50 percent of the city voted for Donald Trump.
[White:] We all basically have the same world view, a Christian world view but when it gets into politics, there's certainly going to be some variation.
[Sandoval:] The Whites are highly conservative, but they are also conflicted when it comes to their views on President Trump.
[Unidentified Female:] I didn't actually vote for him.
[Sandoval:] The 23-year-old Anna White is one of a few in her family who did not cast a vote for president last November. Recent Trump tweets reassure have only reassured Anna of her decision. For Trump voting family members, however, still stand by their choice.
[Abigail White, Trump Voter:] I don't think there's one time where I'm like oh, OK, shouldn't have voted for him, he was not the hero I thought he was. He wasn't a hero to begin with.
[Sandoval:] You didn't vote for him because of thinking he was a hero.
[Kathy White, Trump Voter:] Yes. I would add I have trust issues with the former president and the president before that. So the idea of trusting this president or not trusting is not new.
[Sandoval:] This is the kind of dialogue you'll find at the Whites' dinner table.
[Unidentified Female:] Intense. We all get in tense and passionate. Don't get angry but we get very passionate when we're talking.
[Abigail White:] And there's a lot of us so it's hard to actually talk.
[Sandoval:] This weekend, it is Trump's turn to talk in Lynchburg, a place that welcomed him as a candidate and now as president. This part of Virginia is home to some of Trump's steadfast support says the city's Republican Party Vice Chair Tim Griffin.
[Tim Griffin, Vice Chair, Lynchburg Republican Party:] Jerry Fall Sr. was part of the Reagan revolution and the moral majority. That's why it is important for people to come to Lynchburg, meet voters, meet people and see what's it all about, Liberty is all about.
[Sandoval:] Over 100 days into Trump's presidency, Griffin and fellow Republicans seem unfazed by the cloud of controversy swirling over the White House.
[Kathy White:] I want to support the role that he plays, the job that he's doing. I want him to be a good representation of America. America. I love this country.
[Sandoval:] The Whites' faith in President Trump is being tested but their faith in the office is unshakeable. A feeling shared by many in this brass buckle of the Bible belt. Polo Sandoval, CNN, Lynchburg, Virginia.
[Blackwell:] Democratic attorneys general from 20 states and municipalities blasted the president's firing of James Comey and called on the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein to appoint an independent special counsel to continue the Russia investigation. Washington's attorney general who has joined the push says that they perceived no response to their call so far. OK, so there is this response that I just talked about that the Deputy AG, Rod Rosenstein, says he sees no need for an independent special investigation or probe right now at least not yet. What do you make of that?
[Karl Racine, District Of Columbia, Attorney General:] Well, I respectfully disagree as do my colleagues at the Democratic Attorney Generals' Association. It's clear that we're talking about a serious investigation. We're talking about the potential of meddling in a Democratic presidential election with the Russians. What we need is a thorough investigation that doesn't have anything to do with politics or partisanship. The only way we can do this is to do what Janet Reno did many times during President Clinton's tenure. And that is go outside of the Department of Justice, hire a special counsel, a special counsel who has not been hired by the president and cannot be fired by the president. It's only that type of special counsel who can restore the public confidence in the justice system.
[Blackwell:] So you say you want this investigation to happen without partisanship. What do you make of the relative silence from Republicans both in Washington and attorney generals like yourself across the country?
[Racine:] Well, the Democrats have spoken. There's no doubt about that and my colleague, Moore Helick from Massachusetts led the charge and got 19 of us to join in a letter. I think, the silence on the part of most republicans both on the hill and certainly from my colleagues in the state A.G. world speaks of a level of partisanship, the kind of partisanship that will not get down to the facts and will not reach a full some conclusion. That's why, again, Janet Reno, during President Clinton's tenure, appointed eight independent and special counsel in order to ensure that the public could be confident in the result of an investigation. And one more point, Victor, Jeff Sessions, when he was United States senator, he called for an independent counsel on several occasions and he's making he made the same argument that I'm making today. Namely, that an independent counsel is necessary when the president is being investigated. Why? Because you need to have a lawyer who is not subject to being replaced by the president of the United States.
[Victor Blackwell, Cnn Anchor:] Let me get your reaction to something. This is from Senator Dick Durbin, he said this on Friday and let's put it up on the screen, this is actually a statement from his office, "To preserve his reputation as a credible prosecutor, Deputy A.G. Rod Rosenstein must appoint an independent special prosecutor to pursue possible criminal charges or he must resign." Do you go that far and we know that Senator Dianne Feinstein agrees now that he cannot do the job if he does not appoint an independent special prosecutor?
[Racine:] You know, I frankly associate myself with Senator Durbin's remarks. I think, he's exactly right and if you think about it, just a few days ago, the White House would have all of us believe that the reason why former Director Comey was fired was because of an investigation that the Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein made. We now know that that wasn't the case. We now know that President Trump was going to fire in his words Comey no matter what and that the cause of it was the Russian investigation. Frankly, the deputy attorney general has a well-earned reputation for honesty and integrity, I think, that in order for him to retain that reputation, he must hire special counsel.
[Blackwell:] One more element here, the president scratched the plan to visit the FBI according to sources that was scheduled to happen on Friday possibly because of ill feelings surrounding Comey's firing. You remember the law enforcement community, how can the president mend this relationship with members of the FBI?
[Racine:] Well, it's clear that the only way to mend any kind of relationship in law enforcement is to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Stop obfuscating, stop lying and otherwise allow the FBI to conduct a full investigation under the jurisdiction of an independent counsel.
[Blackwell:] Washington, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine. Thanks so much for being with us this morning.
[Racine:] Thank you, Victor.
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] A

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn:] All right. Good morning, everyone. And a happy new year to you. If you are just waking up, happy 2019. I hope last night was festive. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. Jim Sciutto has the well-deserve holiday off. And we do begin with important breaking news this morning. We are learning right now a lot more about the American detained in Russia, accused of being a spy. Paul Whelan was arrested in Moscow on Friday. Let's go to my colleague Marty Savidge. He has more on this man. The story, look, we are learning more details. This is someone who had frequently traveled to Russia and whose family says he was there for a wedding. The Russian government says something else.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Right. They do indeed. The family had been very anxious because they say the last time they heard from Paul Whelan was around the 28th of December. He lives here in Novi, Michigan here, in a suburb of Detroit. And he was a frequent traveler to go to Russia. He is a former marine, retired marine, I should say. And he works in corporate security for auto parts manufacturing. So he has gone to Russia several times for personal reason as well for work. He was in Russia. He arrived on the 22nd to attend a wedding of a fellow marine. That wedding was supposed to happen as they say on the 28th. He didn't show up. And that's when everyone became worried because it was so unlike him. When he travels, he usually stays in close contact with his family, especially his parents. And then they get the notification that he has been detained. They find that the reason for him being held by the Russians is absolutely preposterous. They are hoping that American officials will have a chance to actually talk to him. They have been gravely concern because they thought perhaps he might have suffered some kind of tragedy. It is still extremely serious for them but at least they know his whereabouts right now, Poppy.
[Harlow:] OK, Martin Savidge there in Novi, Michigan where he is from. Again, this is a man that was born in Canada. The state department refers to him as an American citizen. And again his family wants answers. Before we get to his brother who will speak to us in just a moment in his first interview, let me go to Moscow. My colleague Matthew Chance is there. So Matthew, walk us through what the Russian federation is saying at this point.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, Poppy, they are not saying a great deal that has to be said. They just made this very sort of stiff announcement by the FSB, which is the main cantor espionage agency here in Russia. They are saying they had arrested a U.S. citizen on the 28th of December in the Russian capital, Moscow. And they said he was caught spying, but no other detail was given about what exactly he was said to have been doing when he was detained. The Russian foreign ministry also said they formally notified U.S. authorities of the detention which was confirmed by the state department as well. But in terms of detail, very, very sparse information coming out about what this individual may have been concerned with. It does come just a couple of weeks after Maria Butina who is a pro- gun lobbyist held in United States pleading guilty to conspiracy there and faces six months in prison after U.S. prosecutors say that she tried to infiltrate U.S. for conservative groups
[Harlow:] OK. Matthew Chance, I know you are asking for more answers. Please let us know if you get them. Thank you very much for that reporting live from Moscow in this morning. On the phone with me now is David Whelan. He is the twin brother of Paul. Paul Whelan again is the American detained on Friday in Russia on espionage charges. You see him there. The Russian government says he is a spy. Let me bring in his brother, David his twin brother, David. This is your first interview, I should note. Thank you for taking the time on this New Year's morning to speak with us.
[David Whelan, Brother Of American Detained In Russia:] Thank you, Poppy. I appreciate the time.
[Harlow:] Of course. What can you tell us first just about your brother as we look at his picture here? What do you want everyone to know?
[Whelan:] Well, it's funny because I think sometimes we don't think about how we would describe our family members until we are in a situation like this. Paul is a very kind and generous person. I think he's well known for that. He is burglarious among friends, although maybe not comfortable in larger groups. He is loyal to a fault with his family and friends. He is just a very nice person.
[Harlow:] Obviously there are a lot of answers that you want. So let's take through this slowly. Walk us through what you know at this point, what you have been told by the government, by the state department, perhaps anyone at the White House about your brother being taken into custody in Russia on these espionage charges. What have they said to you?
[Whelan:] We don't know very much. The government has been helpful. My family members have been in contact with people at the state department and at the embassy in Moscow. And we have heard that they have received an announcement from the Russian government that Paul had been detained. But they have not yet been able to have constant access with Paul. And I believe there is a 72 hour window, so we are sort of waiting for that to pass.
[Harlow:] There is.
[Whelan:] I'm sorry. Go ahead.
[Harlow:] No, there is a 72-hour window so let's talk about that. You guys have been told, as I understand it, that there is a 72 hour window before the U.S. embassy and representatives can meet with Paul and check on his well-being, et cetera. That 72-hour window would have, one presumes, started on Friday. I know you guys have an anxiously awaiting that to pass. It seems like that window would be closed at this point.
[Whelan:] Yes. So I'm not sure how the timing on that has tolled.
[Harlow:] OK. So have you reached out to the White House andor have you heard from the White House or the President?
[Whelan:] No, not from the White House or the President. But we have reached out to congressional representatives for Michigan, which is where Paul and my family are based. And we look forward to when we finally have access to Paul, hearing about his condition and helping him to get a lawyer to take on these criminal charges and continue to try and work with the American government to have him released.
[Harlow:] Tell me about what your brother does. We understand he was in security. He did security contract work and travelled to Russia a number of times.
[Whelan:] Yes. Paul and I are chalk and cheese. And so I can describe it but I am a librarian describing corporate security and so I may not get it right.
[Harlow:] Sure.
[Whelan:] My understanding is that he was he was responsible for looking at the physical security of sites for his employer to make sure that things couldn't be stolen or broken into, to remove the opportunities for people to have access to things he shouldn't have access to.
[Harlow:] OK.
[Whelan:] But it wasn't cyber security. It wasn't body guard type of security. It was much more about the physical plant.
[Harlow:] Who did he work for?
[Whelan:] His current employer is Baird and Warner.
[Harlow:] OK. When is the last time, David, that you did hear from him because you say that it is unusual that you wouldn't hear from him on the 28th, you know, Friday, the day he was supposed to attend the wedding. So when is the last time you did speak with him?
[Whelan:] I don't speak to him very often. We often communicate over email and things. But he communicates much more regularly with my parents. So they were surprised not to see any photos from him. He had been particularly worried that they were on a winter staycation and some mischief might happen to them while he was out of the country. They are older and it is snowy in Michigan. And of course we have a family pet and he is concerned about the dog. So there are a number of things that he would have normally have been checking in to see how that that's appointment is done or
[Harlow:] Is there anything that concerns you about his travels to Russia? Did you have any concerns ahead of this trip or any of his trips to Russia that he could be detained, that he could be arrested?
[Whelan:] Not more than any other tourist traveling to many countries in the world. Paul is a former marine. He is former law enforcement. He does corporate security and he travels extensively. So I think as far as people who are aware of the risks of travel and being prepared to, you know, avoid whatever risks are possible, I think Paul is probably as best situated as anybody could be, even in a country like Russia.
[Harlow:] There is no world in which you suspect that your brother in any way worked as a spy for the U.S. government. Is that correct?
[Whelan:] That's correct.
[Harlow:] Can you tell us a bit about his military service?
[Whelan:] I only know what he told me. I know for sure he was in Iraq in the early 2000s and he did multiple tours in Iraq. Names like Al- Assad airbase, Anbar province, that's the sort of things that I heard about. And He wasn't terribly forthcoming with his military service, but I was aware of where he was.
[Harlow:] He was born in Canada, correct, but is a U.S. citizen?
[Whelan:] Yes.
[Harlow:] OK. What would you like to see from the representatives in Congress in Michigan that you and your family have spoken with from the state department and from the White House at this point and going forward this week?
[Whelan:] I think there's really just one goal, which is to get Paul back home from Russia. And I'm not sure if it's at a level where leaders of both countries have to work out a deal or whether it's congressional action that can leverage him loose, but that is our goal, that is our one goal, is to get Paul back home.
[Harlow:] We know that the President has had an increasingly, I wouldn't say open dialogue with Vladimir Putin, but as you know he has met with the Russian President in Helsinki and consistently says better relations with Russia are desired. Are you hopeful that President Trump can do something, say something to bring your brother home soon?
[Whelan:] Yes. I would be supportive of anybody who can help to get Paul to come home.
[Harlow:] David Whelan, I'm so sorry you are facing this. Thank you for taking the time in speaking to us. Reach out any time with more information that you might have.
[Whelan:] Thanks very much, Poppy.
[Harlow:] Of course. All right. We will stay on that. Again, the first interview that the brother of the detained American in Russia has done. We will bring you more information as we have it. Ahead for us, day 11 and counting of the shutdown. The President says he has no choice continuing the government shutdown as House Democrats come up with a plan of their own that they will vote on this week. We will give you the latest. And a new twist to the administration's plan to withdraw troops from Syria, more time. "The New York Times" this morning is reporting the President has given the Pentagon four months to pull out 2,000 members of our military there. We will have the latest on that. Plus, U.S. markets say good-bye to the wild trends and volatility of 2018 or do they? What do they expect? Ahead.

[Briggs:] One day after the U.S., Mexico and Canada were chosen as combined hosts for the 2026 World Cup, the 2018 tournament kicks off today. Host Russia plays Saudi Arabia in the opening match 11:00 a.m. Eastern and over the next 64 matches will be played in 12 venues. Let's bring in CNN's Alex Thomas who is excited for the events to get underway. He is live in Moscow for us. Just about noon there. Good morning, Alex.
[Alex Thomas, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Dave, and I landed in Russia on Saturday barred the old sign. It was hard to tell a World Cup was happening here. Give it a few days later and the atmosphere is completely turned around. You can probably hear some of the vuvuzela trumpets being blasted by some of the international fans that have landed here. We expect a million to come to the country to enjoy this feat, the football, over the next four and a half weeks. As you say, it all kicks off later on Thursday with the host nation Russia up against Saudi Arabia. By ranking the two worst teams in the competition. So not exactly a mouth watering one for the footballing or soccer aficionado. Of course the United States haven't qualified along with other notable teams like Italy and the Netherlands. Still plenty of star names, though, and forget all the politics involving Russia, once the sports takes over in my experience, this is my fourth World Cup on the ground, the action takes over and that's all that everyone is going to focus on. But we got an opening ceremony involving international pop star Robbie Williams and a local Russian opera singer, too, before the action gets underway. The atmosphere is building up very nicely indeed here in Russia Dave.
[Briggs:] You're on the spot, Alex. Who wins?
[Thomas:] If you have to pick someone, Argentina and their superstar Lionel Messi.
[Briggs:] I like it. OK. I'm going to go with Spain. Alex Thomas, live for us from Moscow. Thank you.
[Romans:] All right. A giant Martian dust storm threatening NASA's Opportunity rover on Mars. Over just a few days it's become considerably darker. That's June 7th on the left, June 10th on the right. Opportunity operates on solar energy so with the light blocked, the rover has put itself to sleep. It hasn't been heard from since Sunday. The storm itself is huge covering an area the size of North America and Russia combined. But Opportunity is pretty hardy. It was designed for a 90-day mission, but it has lasted, Dave, 15 years.
[Briggs:] OK. An update on the raccoon that climbed the 25-story Minnesota skyscraper and set social media on fire. Officials say NPR raccoon, as was the hashtag, was captured in a trap on the roof of the high rise baited with some delicious soft cat food. Who wouldn't resist that? Right? She's taken to a private residential property in the Twin City suburbs for release. She ran off into the woods. UBS really should have jumped all over that.
[Romans:] Yes, I love that.
[Briggs:] Claimed it as UBS raccoon.
[Romans:] I love that story. All right. Let's get a check on "CNN Money" this morning. Global stocks falling overnight. Wall Street closed lower after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates and hinted that faster hikes are on the way. Fed Chair Jerome Powell now plans to hold news conferences after every Fed meeting. Right now it's every other meeting. Investors think this means the Fed may raise rates more frequently in 2019. And higher borrowing costs could eat into corporate profits, Also a concern trade. The Trump administration may hit China with $50 billion in tariffs as early as today, adding another affront to America's trade war. A federal judge approved AT&T's purchase of Time Warner, parent of CNN. So Comcast is officially crashing Disney's bid for FOX. In December FOX agreed to sell Disney it's entertainment companies for $52 billion. But it's been long rumored Comcast would try to break up that deal. Now Comcast is formally offering a higher all cash bid of $65 billion. Setting the stakes for a high stakes bidding war over FOX which is great for its stock price. FOX shares jumped nearly 8 percent yesterday to a record high. Apple making it harder for law enforcement to break into iPhones.

[King:] President Trump, today, griping that Republicans were outplayed in negotiating the new spending bill, which Congress will vote on today. Sources telling CNN, the president, who, as we all know, fashions himself as a big dealmaker, is wondering why he wasn't consulted more. The bill, here you go, a good that's not even all of it. I left a few pages on the desk. Six 1,169 pages long. It requires everyone, Democrats, Republicans and the White House to hold their nose a little bit. It falls, for example, way short of the president's demand for $5.7 billion in new border wall funding. There's no extension of the Violence Against Women Act or back pay for federal contractors, both of those Democratic priorities. The Senate, then the House, are expected to vote on the deal later today. Republicans know the president is mad because he's getting so little of what he demanded when he shut down the government back in December. So, as they discuss this compromise, they're trying to spin it as progress.
[Sen. Shelley Moore Capito , Member Of Conference Committee On Border Security Funding:] A government shutdown's never going to help. It hurts people. Maybe So maybe burned once here badly, I believe it led us to, I think, a very good compromise that, again, gives the president the ability to move forward with the plan that the professionals have told us that they want and need at the border.
[King:] CNN's Phil Mattingly live on Capitol Hill doing the math today. And that's interesting how the senator put it, Phil, with the plan that professionals tell us they want and need at the border. What the professionals say is different from what the president says.

[Sciutto:] Welcome back. And we are back now with our political panel, continuing the conversation. Teeing off with Scott Pruitt, the embattled EPA administrator, you might have heard a scandal or two related to him. But we've got a couple of new ones. Former aide says that he directed her to help his wife land a $200,000 job, or a six-figure job, and then he kept a secret calendar to keep some meetings under wraps, including a meeting with Cardinal Pell, who's accused of sexual abuse, a coal CEO. Might be interesting to know if the EPA administrator is meeting with the coal CEO. Why does the president stick with Scott Pruitt?
[Powers:] I'd love to know. I mean, the only, the thing we can go through all of these various scandals, all the way back to, remember the trip to Morocco, which costs $100,000 for four days with eight staffers. It makes no sense why he needs to do that. You know, all through all the other scandals and only thing to think of is this is the swampiest swamp creature that you have ever seen, right? This is exactly what Donald Trump said he was going to get rid of. And it's just an endless maybe, Amanda, you can help us understand this. It's really astonishing, like, does he have something on Donald Trump?
[Sciutto:] Or just doing what Donald Trump wants? Environmental
[Powers:] He can find another person to do that.
[Carpenter:] Scott Pruitt is a walking, talking ethics violation. But if you talk to Republicans who are sticking by him, they just say, he's getting the job done, which is crazy to me. It's like there's no one else you can pick? You can pick a random staffer from Jim Inhofe's office and you get the same result.
[Powers:] Right.
[Carpenter:] So, I would bet the Democrats take the House he resigns.
[Sciutto:] Right.
[Carpenter:] Because guess what happens then? Hearings, hearings, hearings.
[Sciutto:] Does the president dig in sometimes on staffers like this just for the sake of digging?
[Cillizza:] So, I think that's one theory and that he sees in Pruitt a kindred spirit of some sort.
[Carpenter:] A fighter.
[Cillizza:] He believes Pruitt to be sort of being bashed unfairly. I also as an avid "Simpsons" watcher, just stick with me. I think there's a Montgomery Burns element to this. Montgomery Burns, the old tycoon, goes to the doctor. And the doctors comes he has a physical. The doctor says, you're surprisingly healthy, Mr. Burns. He'd say, oh, that's great. And he says, well, can I go? He says, what it is is you have every disease known to man but they're all blocking one another from getting out, so you're weirdly healthy. I don't know if there's so much on Scott Pruitt that now at this point, it's all sort of gets balled up into believe that you could be I believe this. People including Trump don't believe that you could do this many things that are at best ethically questionable.
[Sciutto:] Symone? Symone?
[Sanders:] He has actually done them.
[Cillizza:] Yes.
[Sanders:] Documented, on the record. And we still don't have even, so much as a hearing from the Republicans in Congress who are, in fact, in control
[Sciutto:] Yes, oversight committee, please?
[Sanders:] Yes, where's the oversight? So, I also think for folks that are upset about the abuses and the insider things that are happening in Washington, they need to hold these Republicans accountable in 2018 at the midterms because they have yet to do anything and The last thing to know, like, the young person that he made put the hotel on the card, fire me, OK? As a former young staffer, I don't play those games.
[Cillizza:] The idea that the means justify the ends is a dangerous road to go down. Well, he's doing the job, so therefore however you get from point A to point B is meaningless.
[Sciutto:] Well, I mean, it's not the first time that's happened in Washington.
[Cillizza:] Donald Trump operates like that. If the end is what he wants, it doesn't matter how he got to the end. And I would argue it does matter, particularly if you're the head of a political party.
[Sciutto:] Standards matter, norms matter. Those rules are in place for a reason. Thanks very much, my panel. Trapped a mile deep into a cave, why a group of children, some who have never swam at all may need to learn how to scuba dive just to survive. Plus, President Trump issues a new threat to our most critical military allies. Pay up or else.

[Robyn Kriel, Cnn:] At this hour, American lawmakers wanting to make sure Donald Trump can't go easy on Russia. The American president is bringing a new face at the White House, but will it do anything for his image? We are all over that. Plus...
[Unidentified Male:] I found eight people dead at the back of that trailer.
[Kriel:] Eight dead and thirty injured, packed at the back of a trailer, parked in a Wal-Mart parking lot. We have details still ahead. Then...
[Unidentified Male:] This the first time that the two of us have ever spoken about Harry's mother.
[Kriel:] We all know them as princes, but they were they are two boys who lost their mother, Harry and William on their lost of Princess Diana just ahead. Hello and a warm welcome to Connect The World. I am Robyn Kriel in Atlanta sitting in for Becky Anderson on this Sunday. The new White House communications director says that he is ready to deliver what he calls President Trump very compelling message to the American people. Anthony Scaramucci, a financier with no political experience has officially joined the Trump team. Sean Spicer, the former press secretary is out. CNN's Jake Tapper spoke to Scaramucci about his new job.
[Anthony Scaramucci, White House Communications Director:] There is obviously a communications problem because there are a lot of things that we have done as it relates to executive orders, bills that have been signed, economic progress. I don't want to cite all the economic data, but the economy is super strong. Business optimism is way up. And over the next six months, we are going to have phenomenal achievements with the president. I still think we are going to have healthcare situation done. One of my closest friends is the secretary of treasury. I'm very confident on tax reform. If the president gets those two pillars done, which I predict he will over the next six months, you and I hopefully will sit down around Christmas time and will be having a different conversation about the presidency, the communication coming out of the White House, and our achievements. And so, these things, they could go up and down, Jake, as you know. The president is an experienced business person. He is a very effective politician. And I just think we need to deliver the message a little bit differently than we have been doing in the past. And my prediction is that this stuff is going to start to come to fruition quite quickly.
[Kriel:] Also, on the White House agenda, dealing with a bill that congressional leaders have agreed to vote on that aims to further impose sanctions on Russia, to punish it for meddling in the election. The bill could land on the president's desk as soon as August. And Jake asked Scaramucci if Mr. Trump will sign it.
[Scaramucci:] We got to ask President Trump that. You know, it is my second or third day on the job, but my guess is that he is going to make that decision shortly. But you know, there are a lot of questions out there, Jake. And in this is another thing that I don't like about the process. This man, our president, he has phenomenal instincts, a lot of the stuff that people are said in the mainstream media that was supposedly true, turned out that it was not true. I think it was three or four weeks ago, there were 17 intelligence agencies that were saying something. Then we realized that there are only four intelligence agencies. And I'm not saying four intelligence agencies is insignificant, I am just saying there is a lot of disinformation out there, you know. Somebody said to me yesterday, I won't tell you who, that if the Russians actually hack the situation and spilled out those of those e-mails, you would have never seen it. You would have never had any evidence of them. They are super confident in their deception skills and hacking. My point is all of the information isn't on the table yet... Let me finish, let me finish.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Correspondent:] Anthony, you are making assertions here. I don't know who this anonymous person who said that if the Russians have actually done it, we wouldn't be able to detect it...
[Scaramucci:] He called me from Air Force One and he basically said to me, hey you know, this is maybe, they did it, maybe they didn't do it.
[Tapper:] Hold on a second, this is exactly the issue here. We have experts, the U.S. intelligence agencies, unanimous, vote Obama appointees and prompt appointees, the director of national intelligence, the head of the national security agency, the head of the FBI, I mean, all of these intelligence experts saying Russia hacked the election. They try to interfere in the election. No votes were changed, but there was this disinformation and misinformation campaign. President Trump is contradicting it and you're siding with President Trump.
[Scaramucci:] Well, I didn't say that I was siding with President Trump, he hasn't made the decision yet to sign that bill one way or the other. And so, when he makes that decision, I will 100 percent side with him because I am his communications director, and I'm his advocate on a show like this.
[Kriel:] To get more now, joining us from Charlottesville, Virginia, is Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, and from Moscow, our Clare Sebastian who is covering Russia's reaction to all of this. Thank you both so much for your time. Let's start with this. Sean Spicer's replacement as White House press secretary, as Sarah Huckabee Sanders, she says President Trump will support the new Russian sanctions bill. Let's take a listen.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] We support where the legislation is now, we will continue working with the House and Senate to put those tough sanctions in place on Russia.
[Kriel:] Larry, I would like to ask this of you. Huckabee Sanders says that the president will sign this, which she says no decision yet, mixed messages already in the communications department?
[Larry Sabato, Director, Center For Politics, University Of Virginia:] Yes, there is nothing new about that with the White House. And of course, in the end, President Trump will make his own decision, probably on the day up. So who knows what he will do. But if he does not sign it, assuming the bill actually makes it to his desk if he does not sign it, he will suffer a considerable political penalty. It will once again emphasize the very peculiar relationship that this president of the United States has with our chief international foe, Russia.
[Kriel:] Well, let us go now to Russia. Clare, what is the reaction to this news of the sanctions, and of course, that President Trump, according to Huckabee-Sanders is going to sign this bill?
[Clare Sebastian, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Robyn, we're off the ground yesterday how they viewed this new agreement in Congress, or that new bill on Russia's sanctions. And we go to very economical response, just two words, quite negatively from Kremlin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov. But those words perhaps deliberately understated, Robyn, because Russia has never meant its words on sanctions before in the past, and in the past few years when sanctions have been introduced from the U.S. and the European Union. They call them everything from politically motivated to a violation of international law, have repeatedly that they served no other purpose other than worsen relations. And they deserve the right to retaliate. This is really happening, this new bill, at a situation, where there is already kind of heightened mood over sanctions because there is a parallel dispute going there. Russia is fighting to get the return of its diplomatic compounds in the U.S. that was seized in December in the round of sanctions imposed by the Obama administration over election meddling. Those talks are ongoing. But Russia has said that packages of measures in retaliation for that is in the works, and it would be ready to retaliate if the new bill and sanctions comes in. So quite negatively, it is understated, but I think that you can read into that, that Russia is really in no mood to take this lying down.
[Kriel:] Let's part sanctions for a moment. And, Larry, I want to return to you and back to the exchange between Jake Tapper and Scaramucci. First of all, what do you think is Scaramucci's performance thus far in your view as very new to the job, particularly in comparison to Sean Spicer, who is no longer holding that position? And what do you think is in his language, for example, using the words intelligence agencies and insignificant in a single sentence? Give us your thoughts on this thus far.
[Sabato:] I'm tempted to say meet the new boss same as the old boss, except that Scaramucci is much more polished. He is more than eloquent than Shawn Spicer ever was. He is better at delivering the Trump message, but his main message so far at least in that Jake Tapper interview was he was extraordinary. People should watch that. His main message so far is that President Trump is the greatest thing since sliced bread and cream cheese, and he loves the president of the United States. It is ironic because he was a major critic of President Trump. And just last night, purged his tweets, many, many tweets critical of President Trump, and also taking liberal positions on gun control, Hillary Clinton, and lots of other things. So this is fascinating. He shares a lot of characteristics with President Trump that is he is very bold and aggressive, but you have to look behind every word and check every word.
[Kriel:] What about that sentence that he used? He said intelligence agency and in the same sentence, he used the way insignificant. I realized he was talking about foreign intelligence agencies and perhaps specific incident. But what is the danger of using words like this together for someone as powerful as his job?
[Sabato:] Well, he is mistaken about that, but that is another subject. Before, he was talking about the four big ones in the United States. The point though is that Scaramucci is making the same mistake that President Trump made during the campaign and the transition, and early in his presidency. He is dicing the American intelligence agencies. The president depends on the information they are able to produce especially when they all agree about something. When the intelligence agencies are opposed to you and your president or you're in a presidential administration, you have got a giant problem. You need them just as much as they need you.
[Kriel:] Dicing the American intelligence agencies. We do appreciate both of your time. Clare Sebastian live for us in Moscow, Larry Sabato for us in Virginia. Thank you both.
[Sabato:] Thank you.
[Kriel:] We have tracked down one of the key figures associated with that now infamous Trump Tower meeting where Donald Trump's eldest son-in-law and the campaign chairman met with a Russian lawyer. That meeting was set up on behalf of Emin Agalarov on the left here, according to e-mails released by Donald Trump, Jr. And our Matthew Chance just caught up with them in Riga Latvia. Thank you so much for your time, Matthew. What did you find out?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] We are in Riga Latvia, which is a short distance from the capital Riga. And it is where there is a festival that is underway involving mainly stars from the former Soviet Union and Emin Agalarov, who of course originally a big name in the music industry here in this regional of the former Soviet Union. And of course, he has come to the floor, as you were mentioning, because he was a key figure in apparently setting up a meeting between Donald Trump, Jr., Donald Trump's son that is, and a Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya. She said she was there to discuss the options. But there has always been a suspicion bolstered by the fact that e-mails said this, that this was a pass, a way that the Russian authorities may have been sort of reaching our to see whether the Trump campaign, as it was, in June of last year, were you know kind of prepared to possibly work with the Russians to discredit that political position at that time with Hillary Clinton. And officially, he is not giving any comments on this. We have spoken to his lawyer extensively in the United States and they said he is not going to comment either. And so, we decided to approach him on the street literally here to try and get a response from Emin. Take a listen.
[Chance:] Did you arrange that meeting Donald Trump, Jr., and the Russian lawyer?
[Emin Agalarov, Singer:] Come join me for the show tonight.
[Chance:] Yeah. We will do that. Any comments?
[Agalarov:] Excellent, excellent.
[Chance:] The American wants to know whether the Trump administration...
[Agalarov:] Can I have a drink first? See me after the show. Thank you very much. Guys, thank you very much.
[Chance:] I'm just going to go now.
[Agalarov:] Thanks. Enjoy.
[Chance:] Thank you. Did your family...
[Agalarov:] Talk to my lawyer.
[Chance:] Always taunting. You said you wouldn't comment.
[Agalarov:] So I wouldn't comment.
[Chance:] All right. He said he wouldn't comment, the lawyer. And of course, as you saw there, Emin Agalarov, his father, Aras Agalarov, the former business partner of Donald Trump, Sr., the president of the United States. They staged the Ms. Universe competition together in the Russian capital of Moscow. He wouldn't comment on any of these reports either.
[Kriel:] Well, an amazing exchange there, Matthew. It appears that perhaps partying over politics is what Agalarov is interested there. But what does the Kremlin said thus far about the allegation of collusion?
[Chance:] Well, yeah, as you saw there, Emin Agalarov is kind of laughing off the suggestion that he was involved in any way with collusion with the Trump campaign team. The Russians themselves who of course is alleged who were behind this. And I'm not laughing at all. They didn't think it was funny. They dismissed first of all out of hand, saying it was ludicrous that there is any kind of collusion between the Kremlin or the Russian authorities and Trump campaign, as it was then. They called it like they would like to call it political schizophrenia. They say that basically it is a madness affecting the political environment in the United States, what the Russian issue has of course become so toxic. And it is very frustrating for the Russians because they thought that Donald Trump was going to be the president who would turn around the relationship between Moscow and Washington. Remember, when he was campaigning he promised to make things better, wouldn't it be great, he said if we can go on with Moscow. But, of course, because of the blissful situation, he has been completely unable to do that. If anything, the relationship is worse now than it was before President Trump. And in the Kremlin and in the upper echelons of power in Russia, they are immensely frustrated.
[Kriel:] Matthew, thank you so much, live for us there. British princes, William and Harry, say that they regret the last phone call that they have with their mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. In a new documentary for ITV and HBO, the duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry reveal that they were in a rush to end the conversation, so they could go and play. Their mother died in a car crash, August 31, 1997. Diana: Our Mother, Air, Life, And Legacy celebrates her life and work 20 years after her tragic death. Here is a look at some of their happier memory.
[Prince Harry, Wales Kcvo:] My mother was everybody says to me, you know, said she was fun, give us an example. All I can hear is her laugh in my head. And that sort of crazy laugh is just pure happiness shown on her face. One of the things she said to me was you can be as naughty as you want, just don't get caught. She was one of the naughtiest parents. She would come and watch us play football and smuggle sweets into our socks. And then, when she is walking back from a football match and having lots of funny packets of starburst and just the whole shirt was bulging with sweets. And I see her looking around and at the top box, all in, lock it up.
[Prince William, Duke Of Cambridge:] There are a couple of memories I have. She organized when I came home from school to have Cindy Crawford, Christy Tellington, and Naomi Campbell. I was probably 12 or 13-year-old boy. I was red. I fumbled. I was completely sort of lost track.
[Kriel:] Nina dos Santos is in London with more. Nina, I have to admit, as a mother, I did tear up watching that amazing exchange. I have never seen the British princes speak so candidly. Is this a sign of things to come that they are losing that upper left.
[Nina Dos Santos, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Robyn, they have been clear that these conversations are really a part of this documentary that will be airing on ITV tomorrow evening, but the main public will of course BBC will also air its own documentary with some very candid comments of the princes later. As obviously, the whole of the country marks the 20th anniversary since her passing in August 19, 1997. You could just hear there them talking very fondly about their late mother, saying that she was a joker, that she was fun, she encouraged them to be naughty as long as they didn't get caught. She sometimes like embarrassing them a little bit, in a pleasant way, as you could hear there with a series of supermodels that Prince William had posted on his bedroom wall, but also dressing them up in fun little outfits, she had a real sense of humor. What was also obvious in this documentary is some footage that we haven't seen before of the princess, their mother. You saw in the opening shot there of Prince William holding a picture of Diana, holding him as a two-year-old on her head. And he says, at one point, in this documentary, Harry, you were in the picture, too, because she was expecting already Prince Harry at that point. So there are some shots of life behind the walls in Kensington Palace that we have not seen before. It is very heartwarming, but there is also very poignant message that I think has grabbed everybody's eyes and ears this weekend, which is they really regret having cut short their last conversation with their mother because they wanted to go and play. And Prince Harry says in this documentary, I just wish I had spoken more to her. I don't remember what my last words were, but I just remember they were just too short.
[Kriel:] Nina dos Santos, of course, most little boys don't want to be on the phone talking to their parents at that age. I know that Harry has spoken, Nina, about being traumatized and feeling a tremendous amount of guilt, which is what he has referred to there, traumatized by having to walk behind Diana's casket when she was buried. And he is trying to send a message, isn't he, of opening up really and talking about his psychological issues?
[Dos Santos:] That's right. And about two months ago, he opened up to a mental health charity. In fact, both he and Prince William, as well as the Duchess of Cambridge, Prince William's wife, Catherine Middleton, she is also part of this initiative where they tried to bring together a charity to make people more aware of mental health issues, and basically to say it is OK to say that you have mental health issues, even one of the biggest heirs to the thrown, Prince Harry has said that he admits he had counseling for a while, about 10 years, not all that long ago, to cope with the aftermath of his mother's passing, even though it had happened so many years before he buckled it all up. And in fact, it was Prince William, who urged his younger brother to seek help. So this is all part, yes, it is a slightly more open younger generation of royals who are very keen to make sure that they can embrace causes that people can relate to, that they themselves can relate to. So painfully there with the passing of their mother 20 years ago, that obviously is still fresh in their minds, fresh in the collective memories, this country prepares to remember the late Diana, Princess of Wales. But also, when you look at a documentary like this, it is also hot warming to hear from Prince William who talks about what kind of grandmother Princess Diana would have been. He says some very, very heartwarming things such as she would have been a great-grandmother. She would have loved the children, but on the other hand, she was naughty, she would have been a nightmare of a grandmother. She does come along, bath time, there would be water and bubbles everywhere and she would have left us to clear up the mess. But she always had being somebody who is fun and somebody you would remember. And that is what all of this about, this particular documentary. And the next one that will be airing soon on BBC, it is about remembering their mother and sharing their collective memories of their, but the rest of the country, and of course, the rest of the world. Robyn.
[Kriel:] Yes, she is the kind of grandmother who feeds her grandchildren sweets right before bed. Thank you so much, Nina dos Santos. And again, Diana: Our Mother, Her Life and Legacy, celebrates Princess Diana. That is a documentary coming up. There is a whole lot more ahead of this hour. Up next, a grim discovery in a Wal-Mart parking lot, what police are calling a deadly case of human trafficking. Plus, violence between Israelis and Palestinians, world leaders weigh in. We have a live report from Jerusalem.

[Briggs: 4:] 46 Eastern Time. The White House about to make its next move in the ongoing diplomatic skirmish with Russia. Sources say the Trump administration could announce sanctions as soon as today against several people with close ties to Vladimir Putin in connection with their alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election. CNN's Matthew Chance live for us in Moscow with the latest. Matthew, good morning to you. That's what everyone has been calling for is you got to go after the money. Is that where we're headed?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It certainly looks like that's the direction that these sanctions are pointing to. These are widely expected. They've been planned, these sanctions. They're aimed at individuals who are close to Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. It's also emerged that the Mueller investigation has been questioning a number of Russian businessman or Russian oligarchs in connection with the allegations that they illegally funded the Trump election campaign, the Trump inauguration. So that may be one of the factors that leads the U.S. administration to include people on the list. But the main reason, I think, is people who are close to Vladimir Putin. This is a way of punishing Russia for its alleged meddling in that 2016 presidential election. Of course there have been people sanctioned previously. This would add to that number. And it all comes, Dave, as the relationship between Russia and the West and Russia and the United States in particular is undergoing particular strains. Just yesterday, 60 American diplomats were put on buses and flown out of Russia in the latest tit-for-tat expulsions between the two countries, this time over the nerve agent poisoning of Yulia and Sergei Skripal on the streets of Salisbury. And these latest sanctions, when they come down, are not likely to make that relationship any better at all Dave.
[Briggs:] No. Indeed that is the case, Matthew Chance, big story coming today. Thank you.
[Marsh:] Well, the first busload of Central American migrants traveling northward toward the U.S. border is now in Puebla, Mexico. CNN's Leyla Santiago spoke with migrant families in the annual caravan. Their next stop, Mexico City.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] Dave and Rene, the organizers of this caravan have admitted that they are overwhelmed. And so we are actually getting conflicting reports on what exactly is happening with this caravan. Some organizers saying that things are on hold, they're going to delay their next move. And others saying the march is on. We will continue to make our way north. So what are we seeing? We are in Puebla, where one bus arrived transporting people from Oaxaca further south to Puebla where we are right now. These were women, children, families that started with this caravan. Some now having permission from the Mexican government to be here without fear of deportation, having that special permit that allows them to be here. But many of them still saying they plan to go to the United States. Others saying they are afraid of the rhetoric coming out of the White House and they will stay in Mexico over going to the United States. Now the president of the United States, President Trump, has said that the numbers are dwindling. That this is a caravan that is breaking up. And while this group is seeing the numbers diminish and they are breaking up into smaller groups, that is actually something that is quite normal. Remember, this is a caravan that has been organized for years. They have been doing this for more than five years. And every year, they start with a big number. This year about 1200. And then the groups get smaller and smaller as they make their way to the north. And organizers say that a group of about 200, they believe, will make it to the U.S.-Mexico border to seek asylum. I asked some of the people here today what will happen if they encounter National Guard troops given that President Trump says that is the new plan to provide more security on the border. And many of the people here said if they have to wait, they'll wait. If they have to find another way, they'll find another way, but they will make it to the United States of America Dave, Rene.
[Marsh:] Thanks, Leyla. And Virgin Galactic successfully launched its rocket-powered Spaceship 2 on a supersonic flight. It's the company's first rocket-powered flight since a crash in 2014 destroyed an earlier model and killed all of its pilot. The Spaceship 2 took off shortly after 8:00 a.m. from the Mojave air and space port in California. It flew to an altitude of roughly 46,500 feet before separating from its mother ship and firing off its own rocket. The test puts Richard Branson's aerospace company another step closer to its goal of space tourism.
[Briggs:] That is awesome video. Some more stunning video to show you now. A towering crane being used to build the new police headquarters in St. Petersburg, Florida, collapses sending workers literally running for their lives. Security video capturing a massive crane about 10-stories high, falling over Thursday morning, just barely missing some of those workers on the ground. Thankfully no one was injured. Officials say the falling crane created no hazardous conditions and minimal damage at the construction site, if you can believe that. That's extraordinary.
[Marsh:] Yes. Amazing video there. So coming up, Facebook's apology tour. It's not over yet. As the company's data privacy scandal grows, so do the mea culpas. We'll get a check on all that in "CNN Money" next.
[Briggs:] Plus the MMA fighter, Conor McGregor charged by New York police after this epic rampage caught on camera. That's next.

[Briggs:] The Chicago Cubs avoid elimination but not without a little bit of controversy.
[Romans:] Coy Wire has more in this morning's "Bleacher Report". Hey, Coy.
[Coy Wire, Cnn Sports Corresponden:] Christine, wearing her Cubby blue.
[Briggs:] Is it or is it Dodger blue?
[Romans:] Oh.
[Wire:] I like that.
[Briggs:] Dodger blue is very similar, just saying.
[Wire:] Come on, let the Cubs fans have their moment of fun. Good morning to you. The defending World Series champ not going quietly into that good night. They are fighting scratching clawing and swinging for the fences. Cubs Javier Baez was in a post-season slump for the ages, 0-20, but the 24-year-old from Puerto Rico broke out of the slump just in time to save the Cub season. Baez blasts not one but two home runs at Wrigley. But then, in the eighth inning, closer struck out Curtis Granderson, so everyone thought. Shockingly, the umpire ruled that Granderson actually fouled off the pitch, and that gave him and the Dodgers another shot. Well, Cubs manager Joe Maddon not happy about that. He would get tossed with some not words safe for TV, but thankfully for the Cubs, Granderson would strike out on the next pitch. Cubs would go on to win 3-2. After of the game the umpire admitted he blew the call. And, Joe Maddon, what would you have done if Granderson would have got a hit?
[Joe Maddon, Cubs Manager:] That can't happen. The process was horrible. To have that change in next picture out, you know, I might come running out of the clubhouse in my jockstrap. I mean, that was like really that bad.
[Wire:] Kind of wishing Granderson would have had a hit. All right. Game 5, tonight at 8:00 Eastern on sister channel TBS, Christine's Cubbies are alive. After being down two games to none against the Astros, the Yankees are just one win away from the World Series. Up 3-2 now. Masahiro Tanaka took his game to a whole new level, eight strike outs and seven scoreless, as he owns Yankee, seven wins in the last eight starts. How about Gary Sanchez for the Yankees? Coming up big at the plate, hits a home run to help New York stay unbeaten at home this season, winning 5-zip. They can wrap it up in Houston tomorrow night. Yesterday, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said the league would like to get the number of players protesting during the anthem to zero but is going to stand behind the players and help them make change in their communities.
[Roger Goodell, Nfl Commissioner:] I understand where our fans feel about this issue, and we feel the same way about the importance of the flag, about the importance of patriotism I believe our players feel if a way. They will state to you and they have stated to everyone publicly. They are not doing this in any way to be disrespectful to the flag. But they also understand how it's being interpreted. That's why we're trying to deal with those underlying issues.
[Wire:] New York Giants owner John Mara agreed with Goodell, saying that he asked his players to stand by said quote at the end of the day this is America. We do have something called the First Amendment, unquote. Let's get you to the NBA.
[Gordon Hayward, Celtics Star:] What's up everybody? Just want to say thank you to everyone who has the thoughts and prayers. I'm going to be all right.
[Wire:] That's Celtics star Gordon Hayward addressing the Boston faithful from his hospital bed, right before going to surgery to repair that gruesome injury he suffered on Tuesday. Fans lined to sign a huge card urging the all star to come back stronger than ever. Good stuff there, guys.
[Romans:] That is great.
[Briggs:] That is good. You know what else is great. You mentioned Javier Baez from Puerto Rico. Good catch there. He's raising money to help everyone in Puerto Rico, selling some T-shirts, El Mago, the magician.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Briggs:] So, thanks for their help in Puerto Rico. Hundred percent of the proceeds go to them. Thank you.
[Wire:] You're welcome.
[Romans:] Nice to see you. All right. Just about half past the hour, the defense secretary said to be dismayed about lack of information about that deadly ambush on Americans in Niger. Now anger growing about what the president did or did not say to a Gold Star widow.

[Jimmy Kimmel, Host, Jimmy Kimmel Live:] A little over a week ago on Friday, April 21, my wife, Molly, gave birth to a boy. His name is William. We call him Billy. It was an easy delivery. Six pushes and he was out. He appeared to be a healthy baby until three hours he was born and we were out of the delivery room and moved to the recovery room. Our whole family was there and introduced him to his 2 12- year-old sister. She was cute with him. We were happy. My wife was in bed relaxing and when a very attentive nurse at Cedar Sinai Hospital checked him out and heard a murmur in his heart but also noticed he was a bit purple well, which is not common. She asked me to come with her and my wife and I assumed it would be nothing. Our daughter had a heart murmur too and we didn't notice he wasn't the color that he was supposed to be. So now more doctors and nurses and equipment come in and it's terrifying thing. My wife is back in the recovery room. She has no idea what's going on. They did an echo cardiogram and found that Billy was born with a heart disease, something called tetralogy of fallot with pulmonary atresia. He has a hole in the wall between the left and right sides of his heart and they brought my wife in and they wheeled her in and the doctor told her what was going on and what our options were. We decided to take him to children's hospital where there's a world renowned cardiac surgeon. He's a genius. We put the baby in an ambulance to children's Hospital Los Angeles and on Monday morning, the doctor opened his chest and fixed one of the two defects of his heart. He went in there with a scalpel and did magic that I can't even begin to explain. He opened the valve and the operation was a success. It was the longs guest three hours of my life. We were brought up to believe that we live in the greatest country in the world. But until a few years ago, millions of Americans had no access to health insurance at all. If you were born with congenital heart disease like my son was, there is a good chance you'd never be able to get health insurance because you had a pre-existing condition. If you were born with a pre-existing condition and if your parents did not have life insurance, you may not live long enough to even get denied because of a pre-existing condition. If your baby is going to die and it doesn't have to, it shouldn't matter how much money you make. I think that's something whether you're a Republican or a Democrat or something else, we all agree on that, right? I mean, we do whatever your party is, whatever you believe or support, we need to make sure that the people who are supposed to represent us and people meeting about this right now in Washington understand that very clearly. Let's stop with the nonsense. This isn't football. There are no teams. We are the team. It's the United States. Don't let their partisan squabbles divide us on something that every decent person wants. We need to take care of each other. I saw a lot of families there and no parent should ever have to decide if they can afford to save their child's life. It just shouldn't happen. Not here.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Anchor:] All right. I'm going to bring in Brad Carson and Beverly Halberg. Thank you both for being here. First up, your reaction, Brad, to what we just heard from that very emotional plea from Jimmy Kimmel.
[Brad Carson, Former Under Secretary Of Defense:] I think he speaks for tens of millions of Americans who find themselves with health conditions and find it difficult to access insurance, perhaps not even possible to get insurance and I think it's a fundamental debate rather than all of the intricacies of health insurance. Do people have the right to have health insurance or not? And should it be based on your income level or not? That's why Republicans are finding it so hard to repeal Obamacare.
[Brown:] Rebecca, you don't necessarily agree with the point that he made about pre-existing conditions, is that right?
[Beverly Halberg, Conservative Strategist:] When I watched that, I teared up the first time I saw it.
[Brown:] It's hard not to.
[Halberg:] I'm an aunt of a little boy who had open heart surgery because of a heart defect. When I heard this story, I teared up. I think it's great that he was that transparent and open. I would agree with him that we as Americans, whether Republican or Democrat, any child going through this should get the care that he or she needs. What I disagree about is that the answer to these problems is Obamacare. So, when it comes to pre-existing conditions, Republicans are talking about having a health care that does have pre-existing conditions as an element of that. But the issue is, one of the reasons why health care is so unaffordable to begin with is because of so many of these policies of Obamacare. My premiums have tripled since Obamacare. We need to get to the heart of the issue which is cost and quality of care.
[Brown:] Let me ask you this, Brad. We heard the President say that the GOP bill will guarantee coverage for those with pre-existing conditions but the reality is, states can opt out. I mean, this is sort of the big sticking point between conservatives and moderate conservatives.
[Carson:] The freedom caucus and perhaps the people on the far right of the house GOP conference don't believe in covering pre-existing conditions. The waiver will no doubt be exercised by 30 or more states effectively ending the requirement that pre-existing conditions be ignored in the issue wants o issuance of insurance.
[Brown:] Beverly, our reporting is that Republicans are one "no" vote away from this crashing and burning again. What do you think is going to happen? Do you think they are going to get it?
[Halberg:] I would hope that the Republicans make sure that they have all of the votes. It's a PR disaster the first time and will be this time. One of the reasons they are working so hard, because let's not forget that President Trump said he was going to move on to tax reform, the reason they are pushing this forward is because this is what Americans want. This is one of the reasons why many of them got re-elected, that people are struggling under the weight of rising health care costs and they are saying that you have to do something about it. And so, I think you're going to see Republicans continue to battle this out. I would be surprised if they put anything on the house floor for a vote that they weren't sure they had all of the votes on. It would be disastrous if that happened.
[Carson:] Paul Ryan won't bring it to the floor unless he knows he has the votes.
[Brown:] Beverly, Brad, thank you. Appreciate it. In South Carolina, a police officer pled guilty for killing an unarmed man after shooting him in the back. Details on the deal he's getting and how long he could spend in prison.

[Harlow:] Welcome back. So the world's largest pilots union is calling on President Trump to end the shutdown. They say it's affecting the safety of air travel in the
[U.s. Sciutto:] That leak comes as hundreds of TSA screeners call out sick at several major airports. One federal official calls it the blue flu, because of the blue TSA uniforms they wear. Joining us now from Reagan National Airport, CNN government regulation correspondent Rene Marsh. So, Rene, you were the first to break this story on Friday. I'm curious about the numbers here. How many folks are calling in sick and does the TSA have the ability to plug those holes in effect so everybody's getting screened who needs to be screened?
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Government Regulation Correspondent:] Right. So, Jim, we spoke with two senior TSA officials as well as three TSA union reps and they tell us that they're talking about when you look at major airports, at least four major airports, hundreds of TSA officers have called out sick since this government shutdown began. And they're concerned, they're telling me, is that this just means that air travel could be less secure because, they say, obviously they're doing less with more as these call-ins or call-outs begin to stack up. And that is the concern, that they will continue to stack up as this shutdown drags on. As we know, there is no indication of any end in sight. Now, we did speak to TSA. They told us in a statement that these call- ins started happening around the holiday and that they have increased. But what TSA is saying at this point is that the call the sick calls aren't that significant to the point where it's impacting safety, security or wait times at airports. But with all of the TSA officers I'm speaking to, they're saying just wait. This week they say will be critical because, as you know, Friday will be the first day that they miss their paychecks. And many of these officers are saying they're calling out for very practical reasons. They need cash. So they are trying to get to these cash-paying jobs outside of government while the government is shutdown. Take a listen to this TSA officer's personal situation.
[Brian Turner, Tsa Officer Working Without Pay:] I live about a half hour from work. And it's going to come to a point where you say, do I put gas in my car or do I feed my family? You feel hopeless. And you feel helpless. You know, I'm not in Washington. I don't have the influence that these people of power have. And we we rely on them. We elect them to these positions to get a job done.
[Marsh:] And as you mentioned, it's not just the officers but the largest pilots union also calling for this shutdown to end because of concerns over security. Let's see if lawmakers on Capitol Hill and the president will listen to these folks. Back to you guys.
[Sciutto:] And, listen, the state a fact, we know that terror groups are still targeting U.S. commercial aviation.
[Harlow:] True.
[Sciutto:] It's a real concern.
[Harlow:] It is.
[Sciutto:] Rene Marsh, thanks very much. It is not just federal workers being impacted by this shutdown.
[Harlow:] Right. Farmers who already have been taking a hit because of the trade war with China are now taking another hit because of the government shutdown. Our Vanessa Yurkevich joins us live this morning from Polo, Illinois. This is really, Vanessa, a one-two punch for these farmers.
[Vanessa Yurkevich, Cnn Politics Correspondent:] Definitely, Jim and Poppy. This shutdown is really not coming at a good time. After a really tough 2018 for farmers and ranchers, the shutdown is very much unwanted at this point. So let's talk about what that trade war means for the farmers here. We're on Brian Duncan's farm here in northwest Illinois. And his biggest buyer of soybeans is China. And they aren't buying any. And his biggest buyer of pork is Mexico. And they're not buying that much anymore. So when you add the shutdown to this, Brian really relies on government subsidies to help make up that revenue difference that he's not getting from Mexico and China. So he's waiting to file his application because he was waiting for his corn harvest to finish and his application is sitting on his desk in his office. So he's not able to get that money and he's not able to get that check. But let's just put it into perspective of where we are. We're in a very conservative area. A lot of Trump supporters and a lot of Trump voters. So I asked Brian whether or not this shutdown and these tariffs are playing at all into how he might be voting and how others might be voting, even come 2020. Take a listen to what he had to say.
[Brian Duncan, Vice President, Illinois Farm Bureau:] I do think the president is in danger of losing a significant part of his base if the economic woes continue out here. If there is no resolve to these trade disputes. My fear is that what we'll be watching in 2020 is, are we bleeding for territory we already had? We're shedding significant economic blood out here.
[Yurkevich:] We spoke to a couple of other farmers in the area at a local diner and we asked them whether or not they are still supporting the president amongst all of this chaos with the shutdown and the trade war and they said that they are. But when I asked them about 2020, Jim and Poppy, they said that they would have to wait and see. I think they're going to be looking at their bank accounts, they're going to be looking at how their businesses are doing, Jim and Poppy.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Yurkevich:] But as we know, 2020 is a couple of years away, so they'll have a little bit of time to think about it before they go ahead and cast their ballot.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] Yes. It was quite a statement there, are we losing territory we already had.
[Harlow:] Right?
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Yes, that's fascinating. Vanessa, great reporting, thank you so much. So, it could be an unprecedented move by President Trump to declare a national emergency and use military funds to pay for the wall. If he does it, does he have the law on his side?

[Cooper:] Hours after President Trump called off the summit with North Korea's dictator, a response tonight. And North Korean official says they're still willing to sit face-to-face at in any time, in any way. Earlier today the President said this.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I believe that this is a tremendous setback for North Korea and, indeed, a setback for the world. I've spoken to General Mattis and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our military, which is by far the most powerful anywhere in the world and has been greatly enhanced recently, as you all know, is ready if necessary.
[Cooper:] JOINING me is Kimberly Dozier, Jamie Metzl, Robby Mook, Molly Ball and Rich Lowry. Kim, I mean does it surprise you that the summit has been called off, I mean given that it was called on with very little preparation?
[Kimberly Dozier, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Not really, especially because we didn't see much preparation going ahead of this summit. Look, summits start with leap also of faith, but usually there have been behind-the-scenes negotiation and a senior administration official told us this afternoon they hoped to have some of those negotiations in the run-up to the summit but they got stood up. You also had a situation where the national security team was saying different things to different audiences, but the North Koreans were listening. And the adversary gets a vote. So when they're hearing Mike Pence talk about the Libyan option for them, they had to respond.
[Cooper:] Jamie, I mean do you think there's a chance the North Koreans didn't want the summit to take place? I mean for them for Kim Jong-un, isn't it a win?
[Jamie Metzl, Former National Security Staff, Clinton Administration:] This is such a massive win for Kim Jong-un. This whole summit idea was really a sham from the starter. Another way of saying it, the North Koreans won from the beginning. Once the President of the United States agreed to meet with the leader of North Korea, which is something that any past President could have done in an instant because the North Koreans were begging for that kind of legitimacy. So we gave them a lot of what they want in the beginning, and now the situation is that we are walking away from the deal. The reason that we're walking away is that we aren't signing on to the gradual process that North Korea, South Korea and China all support. So now North Korea is much stronger because they have legitimacy that they have wanted. They put a wedge between the United States and South Korea, and there's going to be no way for sanctions to snap back with China and South Korea not on board. So they are North Korea is stronger and, unfortunately, the United States is weaker.
[Cooper:] Rich, do you agree that North Korea won just by the President agreeing to do this, which is something obviously past regimes in North Korea
[Lowry:] I think he never should have agreed to the meeting in the first place, but I don't think it is the worst case. I think the worst case would have been the summit going forward, which I think was very likely to serve North Korea's interest rather than ours. My fear is we have not heard the end of this summit. There are obviously a couple of escape hatches in the President's letter. He underlined them in public remarks, saying it still might happen. What we've heard from the North Koreans so far is quite conciliatory. So it may be that we are still involved in a negotiation over the negotiation over a summit that will still eventually happen.
[Molly Ball, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes, I mean one of the criticisms of Trump from the beginning of the process was that he was too eager, he wanted this too much. And he got so much positive reaction to this domestically. The American people really liked it. Experts, a lot of them were praising him for doing this bold, unexpected move. There was the sense that he wanted it so much he would giveaway the store. So I do think he deserves some credit for being willing to at least for the moment walk away from it, and I think that may be the North Koreans thought they could keep asking for more and more from an American President who seemed so politically invested in the process. And I think they may have been surprised that he was willing to walk away.
[Cooper:] It is I mean, Robby, do you see this as kind of just a sign of, you know, the President liking a big event, he likes the praise, he likes the headline, but, you know, as Kimberly was saying most sum minutes are done from the bottom up with weeks and months and if year, not years of boring meetings laying the ground work between functionaries?
[Mook:] Well, I think this proves the President's style, which we all know. He's winging it. There is no plan. He is taking it day by day. In fairness, I will say sort of like Molly was just saying, Democratic and Republican administrations have not been able to solve this problem. That usually means it is very hard, and Donald Trump took a gamble here, right, and I think he is still living in this gamble. And it looked like at one point it might pay off. Now who knows? But I think probably what is going to happen is the odds are not good of the gamble paying off. If it does, big reward, right? I actually think in terms of a reelection, in terms of his political standing, this would be a big trophy for him. You know, to say, look, I solved the major or I took a step forward on major foreign policy problem, but I think the likely outcome is it won't work because it has never worked before. And I don't you know, he was probably trying to look strong by pulling back first, but I think the reality was this was probably headed in a bad direction. That's why he did it.
[Cooper:] It is surprised me though that the South Koreans were not informed about this, you know, even a couple of minutes in advance of this. I mean apparently the statement was released and then, you know, Paula Hancocks was saying the South Koreans were given a heads up. A heads up is actually when you are given a heads up before something happens?
[Metzl:] No, no, this whole thing is just preposterous. That is why we, the United States, have put so much on the line for nothing with no strategy. And now the U.S.South Korea alliance is really in danger because President Moon put his credibility on the line. He came to the United States to speak with President Trump, to assure him that there could be a process, and the process was these gradual negotiations with North Korea. And for the United States, if we pushed for North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons up front, North Korea was never going to sign on. But if we agreed to a gradual process, that's the same deal that past Presidents have agreed to, which Trump is so critical of.
[Lowry:] And critical of for good reason. It failed and it materially advanced North Korea's interests. So that's why the administration was right to be so insistent that it has to be rapid, immediate, signs of seriousness right from the beginning. And it was bad for Trump to wobble on that a little bit earlier this week, but one of the reasons maybe if the North Koreans don't want this meeting is they realized that there's no way they can actually meet that goal because they're not serious about denuclearization. And they probably never will be.
[Mook:] But that's where I wonder for them how much are they psychoanalyzing Trump and trying to figure out do we actually have an opportunity to leave him at the altar in a really dramatic way? Do we have an opportunity to maybe set the Americans back so that they're going to you know, if there's a future administration, they will be more tenuous about doing anything? I'm not a North Korea expert, but I at this point I would be thinking about that. I would be thinking how I can play this guy because he seems to react.
[Cooper:] Kimberly?
[Dozier:] Just a little bit of history. The Trump administration is not the first one to make a mistake in terms of parts of different parts of the security apparatus making a misstep and throwing it all out the window. Remember, in the Bush administration in 2005 the North Koreans had agreed to denuclearize as part of the six-party talks, but then the very next day the Treasury Department slammed sanctions on Banco Delta Asia in Macao and it was a little too effective. It turned of the top in terms of money going to the North Korea elite. They walked away from the six-party talks until those sanctions were released.
[Cooper:] Interesting. Thanks, everybody. I appreciate it. One quick piece of unrelated breaking news, CNN has just learned that disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein will turn himself into authorities here in New York City tomorrow. According to a source familiar with the investigation he will be charged with raping one woman and forcing another to perform oral sex on him. We'll have details on that coming up. We're also just getting new details on this. Also, coming up, we'll get reaction to the new NFL policy on the national anthem. President Trump saying today, if player who don't stand for the anthem, "maybe they shouldn't be in the country," we'll talk with Seattle Seahawks star player Doug Baldwin who is taking issue with the President's remarks.

[Tom Sater, Ams Meteorologist:] hurricane making landfall in the U.S., this is the longest drought in history and we're making up for lost time. But, Brooke, believe it or not, Nate is the ninth consecutive named storm to make it to hurricane strength. You've got to be kidding me.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] Crazy.
[Sater:] Yes. And that has only happened once before in 1893 but they didn't even have satellites back then so how did they know they were all hurricanes? Definitely since the satellite era, this is a record. But if we have hurricane force winds in Mississippi and Alabama, it's only the second time in history that all of the Gulf Coastal states this year have had hurricane force winds. We've already had some hurricane gusts there, of course, in parts of Louisiana, Plaquemines Parish, Venice is the name of the town there, and now we're definitely going to have some hurricane winds as we have landfall in about an hour, maybe an hour and a half. Doesn't look impressive. Right? The system has been moving so fast, hurricanes do not like to move this fast because they cannot generate any intensity. They like to move slow over the warm water. So that actually has been a good thing. And notice how we're losing the colors here, dry air has been trying to infiltrate the system and it's been doing that almost all day long, but there are still some color on this infrared satellite imagery which tells us hey, it still has a little bit of strength. But here's why New Orleans was saved, these are the computer models, we talk about the U.S. model, the GFS in red. The European model in blue which have been handling these hurricanes beautifully, but again both of them, the last couple of days were right over New Orleans, the center of the storm moved off to the east sparing them. Now the only threat that they have is really a north wind on Lake Pontchartrain. But the system picks up in speed and that's good and bad because we're going to find several states dealing with some pretty strong winds and that's going to mean more than significant flight delays in the days ahead. Notice the tornado watch. We have seen several warnings, the sirens have been going off. We've had waterspouts making its way on shore. But again we're looking at a possibility of a landfall in about an hour, hour and a half right around Biloxi. In fact, most likely that will be the case. It's been hard to find an eye on satellite imagery, radar has even been tough. But the last couple of hours you kind of get a good indication of what we're looking at here. So again our landfall not too far in the distant future and then with that tornado warnings. You start to see them here in purple. So just to the west of Pensacola, into Mobile Bay, most likely the sirens are going off. But this is the area of surge. All of the wind threat really is from the core east ward and that's where we're going to have the surge. These are high tide times and they are not going to go well with this timing here because notice in Biloxi 12:22 a.m., that's not going to be good news when landfall moves in because it's going to be significantly higher. Mobile, almost 1:00 in the morning. Pensacola 12:19. So it'd be nicer if the storm would move in first and then you have high tide but things don't always work out. The good news is we have lost some of the watches in the western part of Louisiana, the warning in red and a tropical storm watch has been canceled in downtown Atlanta. When Irma moved through, over a million and a half people lost power in the state of Georgia alone. There still will be some power outages. Here's an area of what we're watching. The brighter colors here the better chance of getting some tropical storm force winds and it extends upward north of Birmingham. By this time tomorrow, Brooke, Nate is going to be in Kentucky so it's really picking up in speed. So as we look at the track, this is what something everyone should know here. You take the speed of the core of the winds, all right, sustained winds, and then you couple that with its forward movement. So there could still be some snapped branches, some downed power lines, debris flowing around in all the neighborhoods along this track and to the east. And then by the time this moves up into the northeast we're going to have significant flight delays I think that are going to be hanging around parts of all day Monday and maybe into Monday night. So the good news is it's not a category two, it's breaking down, the core energy is the problem, it's a small area concern but really it's going to be about the storm surge threat and we'll dig into that deeper I think in the next 30 minutes, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] All right. So it's the next hour, hour and a half.
[Sater:] Yes.
[Baldwin:] And we're talking landfall in those various locations and the storm surge that you will hone in on in just a little bit. Tom, thank you so much for now. I'm going to come back to you. But let's go to Biloxi now to Martin Savidge. He is in Biloxi, Mississippi, near where that second landfall that Tom was just talking about, you know, will be happening very, very soon. And so, Martin, let's just begin with conditions where you are right now. How's it looking?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Brooke. Well, the city just tweeted out that they anticipate the worst conditions are going to start up right about now. So just as Tom has said, they are seeing the natives knocking on the door here. Their real concern, they don't think the winds are going to get above hurricane strength. They're not sure. Certainly some of the gusts might, but for the most part they think they're going to be OK when it comes to wind. They're really worried about the water because the water begins just where those lights end. Highway 90 is right in between them. They do believe that with that high tide coming and with the storm surge here which they're thinking seven to 11 feet, it likely will cover that roadway. There is a curfew that's in effect primarily because of that reason, runs from 7:00 p.m. all the way until 9:00 in the morning. And for the most part it looks like people are adhering to it. About the only traffic you see out here are the emergency first responders, police still checking on the roadways here to make sure they're clear. Fire trucks have gone by, even some ambulances but it appears that they're on patrol, no one's out on any sort of emergency run. They did put in a mandatory evacuation for Harrison County Beach and anything south of the sea wall that pretty much just affects the direct waterfront but that 12 casinos and hotels here in Biloxi also had to pretty much close down because they didn't want crowds of people gambling and having a good time when you've got Nate coming ashore. So it was out of a still real strong real strong sense of concern, Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Savidge:] But right now they're feeling like they're doing OK.
[Baldwin:] Good, good, good. Yes. Out of abundance of caution as we have seen these last couple of hurricanes. Martin, thank you so much. And as you mentioned that curfew in place there for Biloxi until 9:00 a.m. We'll check back with you. Meantime, in Alabama, nearly 7,000 people are already without power at this moment. Ed Lavandera is in Mobile for me. I hear and see that rain coming down. Is it getting worse for where you are at?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] This is by far, Brooke, the strongest rain band we've seen throughout the night here in the city of Mobile. We're just on the northern edge of the bay. And as you see behind me, everything going on your screen from right to left is south to north, and we have seen the bay water here really getting pushed up where that kind of speaks to that storm surge concern. And as the high tide approaches here about 1:00 in the morning Central Time, that storm surge obviously is of great concern. And you can definitely see even though this is a small and not terribly powerful storm by hurricane standards, but it is bringing a great deal of pressure, that water pressure moving, getting pushed north. So we'll continue to monitor that. That's why those concerns and those warnings have gone out, especially to those low-lying areas. People who live near creeks, tributaries, bayous, that that could be a concern. But, you know, the winds haven't been terribly strong throughout the night either, but this is definitely one of the strongest rain bands that we've seen and it's been going on for probably the last 10 minutes or so. Sometimes they'll die off and then pick back up again. But this is really the most we've seen. You know, if this is the way it remains for the next couple of hours, that in many ways will be really good news for this part of Alabama, there's been a great deal I don't know whether to characterize it as complacency or just a very relaxed attitude about the storm. But you know, we haven't seen many people throughout the day that were flocking to board up their homes or businesses and windows and that sort of thing. Many people expecting that kind of doing the bare minimum would be able to would be enough to withstand the worst of the storm, and perhaps, you know, they're going to be right at the end of the day. But the real concern is as this storm makes landfall here through the overnight hours is really that urge to tell people to stay inside, back down, really no reason to be out and about on the streets. And those severe storm warnings, tornado warning that have popped up throughout the night here in southern Alabama is also a concern not just on the coastal areas close to where we are, but also further inland as the storm moves inland. And of course all of this taking place in the middle of the night, that adds an extra layer of concern as, you know, the visibility is obviously dark and incredibly hard to make out exactly if a tornado were to dip down out of the sky, very hard to see. That adds another layer of concern and makes those situations, you know, much more dangerous and concerning. Especially for first responders here. So you can see how just here in the last 10 seconds or so how the rain has come down a little bit. But we expect these bands to intensify here over the next couple of hours Brooke.
[Baldwin:] Ed Lavandera, you have really been in it. Of course this hurricane season, go get dry. We'll talk to you in just a little bit there in Mobile. Thank you very much. Let's bounce back to Biloxi. I've got Mike Theiss back with us. He's a storm chaser. And, you know, Mike, we're still about an hour ahead of time for those storm surges. I can see them over your shoulder, though, is it picking up where you are?
[Mike Theiss, Storm Chaser:] Oh, yes. Oh, yes. If you saw that last wave that just came in, the surge is starting to come up pretty fast here in Biloxi. This parking lot is fully engulfed now and you see the next wave that comes in, it's a little higher than the waves before. So it's starting to make its presence felt for sure. I don't know how much higher it's going to get, maybe a couple feet here, but it's definitely coming up right now in Biloxi.
[Baldwin:] How intense is the wind?
[Theiss:] I'd say it's maybe across the storm force right now. I don't think this is the strongest of it yet. Maybe 50 miles per hour gusts, but I think the big story here is going to be the storm surge for sure.
[Baldwin:] How high are you guessing?
[Theiss:] Maybe six to seven feet here in Biloxi area, maybe a little bit lower.
[Baldwin:] Let me ask you
[Theiss:] It's hard to say. Yes.
[Baldwin:] No, it's hard to say for sure that's what we were just looking at some of the models earlier, they were saying that if not a little bit higher. Do you this your job, right? You chase storms. I was talking to our meteorologist Tom Sater about what happened this year, I mean, between Harvey and Irma, Maria, now, you know, Nate to a lesser extent. What's going on?
[Theiss:] That's the same question I have. This has been a crazy year, it kind of reminds me of 2004 and 2005 where once the hurricanes got going they just didn't stop, they kept coming one after the other. So the ingredients are definitely in place for hurricanes this season and we were there to cover all of them to share with everybody. Unfortunately it was a sad story in the islands and the Florida Keys and those areas, but we will bounce back and get over it. I've got some rain on my lens. There we go. Yes, it's up to my ankles now and I'm going to go ahead and retreat back in the parking garage where it's a little safer.
[Baldwin:] OK. Please do. Mike, we'll check in. Thank you so much in Biloxi. We've got you covered tonight with special Hurricane Nate coverage but we're also covering some other stories including out in Las Vegas, cryptic numbers deciphered. Investigators figured out what a notepad, some numbers etched on it. It was left inside that Las Vegas shooter hotel room. What it actually means? Can it help determine the motive in this mass murder? You're watching CNN.

[Berman:] All right. Happening now, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley is on Capitol Hill. She's testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. You're looking at live pictures right now. This is going on as the Trump administration is warning Syria against a new chemical attack.
[Harlow:] In the Mediterranean, U.S. military ships and aircraft are watching to see if the Assad regime will carry out another chemical attack. Of course, the last chemical attack in April sparked a U.S. missile strike on a Syrian air base. Our Barbara Starr joins us now from the Pentagon. And Barbara, it was yesterday on this show that you broke the news about the activity that the administration had been seeing at that air base concerning them about another possible chemical weapons attack. Has anything escalated from there?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Well, in fact, according to defense officials, it looks like it may be ratcheting down a little bit now. To be clear, U.S. planes and ships do remain on station and ready to present options to President Trump if the Syrians do move ahead. But a short time ago, Defense Secretary Mattis told reporters traveling with him and let me insert here, no television journalists were invited on that trip. So, we are quoting "Reuters" here. Secretary Mattis telling them that it looks like the Syrians, in fact, backed off. Separately, defense officials here, telling me that does appear to be true. It looks right now like perhaps the Syrians are not moving ahead, perhaps like President Trump's warning worked. And last night, national security aide, Sebastian Gorka, talked about his view about this warning. Have a listen.
[Sebastian Gorka, Deputy Assistant To The President:] The president was sending a very clear message, under this administration of Donald J. Trump, red lines mean red lines. What would you do in his position if the most powerful nation in the world demonstrated to you that we can see what you are doing? Wouldn't you think again about actually executing on that decision? I know I would. I wouldn't test Donald J. Trump.
[Starr:] However, remember that President Trump was not a fan of red lines on Syria and any notion of a red line presents every president with a problem because if they don't act on it, then they are seen as backing off. So, still the fundamental national security question on the table is if the Syrians were to move ahead and you saw them begin to take off with chemical weapons on board, what would you do about it? John, Poppy?
[Harlow:] Barbara Starr at the Pentagon, thank you for the reporting. For more now, let's get to CNN military analyst, retired Major General James Spider Marks. He joins us from Washington. Let's talk about the calculus that Bashar al-Assad may be making right now. Why would he even consider using more chemical weapons given the response of the Trump administration in April? MAJOR GENERAL JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS
[Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, you know, Poppy, first of all, thank you for having me on. I would say that the regime change in Syria is not on the table for the United States in terms of a policy option. So, Assad is no dummy. He understands that. Were we to move forward and try to remove Assad, we would be in complete contravention. We would have the potential of a real challenge with Russia because Russia backs Assad. So, the big picture is, Assad understands his flexibility. He could launch chemical weapons, certainly as Barbara indicated, we have sufficient intelligence collection and this is a real intelligence activity right now, a campaign of technical and human intelligence means that would give us some good warning as to when he was going to do that. I don't think we would interrupt that activity, but we'd certainly be able to confirm it. But Assad can move with a certain degree of impunity because of the backing of Russia. Clearly, Putin, I don't think is any big fan of Assad and routinely take some output woodshed and says, cut this out. However, there's no known replacement for Assad. And until the United States and Russia can have that discussion about what the next step could be with a regime change in Syria. It's not going to happen. And Assad, Assad has the flexibility to do essentially what he wants.
[Berman:] Well, how much more currency though, does the United States have after what it did in April? After the limited missile strike against that Syrian base in April, are these threats from the White House more believable and in any way more threatening?
[Marks:] No, I don't think so. Sadly, John, what happened back in April? It was a very proportional response. And I think it was done very, very precisely, very deliberately and it was done, as I said, at a very proportional level simply to send the message, don't do that again. The United States needs to be out of the business of establishing red lines. Because you hold yourself accountable to what the result is. You must act. You want to preserve your flexibility. So, don't establish red lines. Just say, look, it's unacceptable. But again, what we could do to punish Assad is not going to push him we have to have a very delicate approach. We can't push him to the point where he will collapse. Because again, we've got Russia that we have to deal with. The discussion in Syria right now is all about our relationship with Russia. That has to be established and we have an opportunity here to agree upon something. And what does the Syrian regime look like after Assad?
[Berman:] General Ambassador Nikki Haley is on Capitol Hill being asked about this right now. Let's listen to what she says.
[Marks:] Sure.
[Rep. Ed Royce , Chairman, Foreign Affairs:] regime take any steps in response to that warning.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador, United Nations:] Well, I can tell you that due to the president's actions, we did not see an incident. What we did see before was all of the same activity that we had seen prior for the April 4th chemical weapons attack. And so, I think that by the president calling out Assad, I think by us continuing to remind Iran and Russia that while they choose to back Assad that this was something we were not going to put up with. So I would like to think that the president saved many innocent men, women and children.
[Royce:] Let me ask you a question on the U.N. Security Council resolutions that were passed with respect to North Korea. We're a few years away from North Korea having an ICBM capability that can reach the
[U.s. - Berman:] Joined again by retired Major General James Spider Marks. Spider, you heard Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to United Nations, saying that the president saved lives, with the statement from the White House the other day. Threatening Bashar al-Assad saying, don't do this chemical attack, we see your vessels and ships moving right now in that direction, don't do it. She says the president saved lives. Do you think that's true?
[Marks:] I don't think you can casually link what's been said and activities on the ground. I think what has worked to the advantage of the population in Syria, if there is an advantage let's speak very honestly here is that the actions by the United States a couple of months ago in fact degraded Syria's capabilities, albeit minimally, but it degraded their capabilities. They had to respond to that. So, I think the only thing that Assad would respond to is any type of immediate pressure that came from Moscow that said, cut this out or I'm going to shoot you in the face. We'll try to find a replacement. Putin is not that impetuous. We can see intellectually and we can act emotionally and we should not. What we should do is look very agnostically at this and realize there are limits to our powers in the Mideast. And we have some type of discussion with Russia that allows us to agree so we can move forward and get Assad off the table.
[Berman:] All right, retired Major General James Spider Marks, always a pleasure to have you with us. Spider, thank you so much.
[Marks:] Thanks, John. Thanks, Poppy.
[Berman:] All right. We are watching some action on Capitol Hill this morning, the fight to get to 50 votes for the Senate Republicans, perhaps some movement to bring Republicans together to work out some kind of deal. We will discuss with our panel next.

[Whitfield:] Now for a look at this week's "CNN Hero," for than two decades Jennifer Maddox worked for Chicago's police department. Frustrated by continued violence and limited opportunities for young people, she started Future Ties, a nonprofit after-school and summer program focused on providing a free, safe space for kids to find a positive purpose.
[Jennifer Maddox, Cnn Hero:] We are in a state of emergency here in the city of Chicago. The shooting, the killing, 5, 6, 7 year-olds, they're losing people that they love and care about. I'm a law enforcement officer but I'm also a mother and a member of this community. We can't arrest our way out of this. Once, I saw that there was another side to policing. I thought that I could do more.
[Whitfield:] Well, to learn more about Jennifer, visit CNNheroes.com. And while you're there, nominate someone you believe should be a 2017 CNN hero. All right, Manchester police say they have made two more arrests linked to last week's terror bombing at a pop concert where 22 people died, a total of 13 people are now in custody. Britain's home secretary is raising concerns that some of those involved in planning the attack could still be at large. And authorities are racing to uncover the full extent of the terror network. We are also seeing newly released images of the Manchester bomber. They were taken the night of the attack on closed circuit cameras. I want to bring in CNN's Atika Shubert from Manchester. So how great of a concern is there about another potential attack?
[Atika Schubert, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] It's a big concern, but having said that, a terror threat level has been reduced in part because police are now fairly confident that they've rounded up most of the network, or at least the first level of it. But of course, there are still the potential for others in the network to be out there. At least that's what Britain's home secretary said earlier today. I think what it really comes down to is the fact that the city realizes it has to move on despite that fear. And in fact, today people came out for the Manchester run, a half-marathon, and there were balloons, people were running, despite heavy security. Nobody here was saying that they were afraid. They really wanted to come out and show their solidarity. So I think the city wants to certainly show that it will stand up to terrorists by continuing with the normal way of life.
[Whitfield:] We're also hearing the police may have found the site where the bomb was actually assembled. What more do we know?
[Schubert:] Well, yes. This is one of the sites that we actually visited in the last few days. It's a short term rental in the city center, just about a mile and a half away from the arena. And it now looks like so it's the last place that Salman Abedi, attacker was at before he detonated those explosives. Now, what the police are looking at is whether that apartment was in fact the staging ground where he assembled that bomb. We still don't know exact details but that's what police say. They released those CCTV photos in part to get the public's help and retracing his steps over the last few days to know exactly where he was and who he was meeting with.
[Whitfield:] All right, Atika Shubert, thank you so much at the site which becomes a memorial now paying homage to 22 killed and many injured. Thank you so much. All right, thanks so much for being with me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. Much more in the "Newsroom" straight ahead with Ana Cabrera.
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Newsroom Show:] You're in the "CNN newsroom." Hello on this Sunday. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Great to have you with us. A fresh plot of uncertainty hangs over the White House tonight. President Trump is back in the West Wing returning from his first trip overseas less than 24 hours ago. He now confronts a growing controversy focused on Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner.

[Paul:] This morning there are some tough questions about our nation's airport security after an employee at Seattle Tacoma International Airport stole a passenger plane and he crashed it. This happened over night.
[Blackwell:] OK, so this is still early in the investigation but this is what we know from authorities. He's a 29-year-old ground service agent who they say stole the plane around 8:00 p.m. Pacific time. He flew the plane about 40 minutes before crashing into the small island in the Puget Sound. The Pearce County Sheriff Department says the man was suicidal. An audio between the man and traffic controllers, we're learning that they tried to help him safely land for nearly an hour before he crashed.
[Paul:] So I want to bring in...
[Unidentified Male:] Oh man, those guys will rough me up if I try landing there. I think I may mess it up there, too. I wouldn't want to do that. Oh, they got anti aircraft. No, they don't have any of that stuff. We are trying to find a place for you to land safely.
[Blackwell:] Let's bring in now Peter Goldstein an aviation analyst and former manager director of NTSB. Good morning to you. And listen to that sound, the man sounds excited or thrilled by this in discussion of antiaircraft. I wonder when you hear that ground service agent got behind, got into the cockpit and took off in this plane. Is this a single breach do you think or did this man have to jump through a series of loopholes to pull this off?
[Peter Goldstein, Avaiation Analyst And Former Director Of Ntsb:] No he cleared the background check which he apparently hadn't and worked for the company, this is a clearly one-off event. The person was going through some sort of mental health crisis that he got access to the plane is unfortunate, but these aircrafts are serviced over night and they are maintained during the evening hours so they can fly during the day. This is just a tragic one off event.
[Paul:] We know the NTSB and the FAA and FBI have been notified, they're all going to be working on this. What is the first thing they'll look at?
[Goldstein:] Well this will be an FBI led investigation, my guess is. The NTSB, my old agency, defers to FBI in any criminal type of investigation. I think the first thing you would do as anyone would do is review your procedures both your ground procedures to see that security is in place and if there were any gaps in it and you would also frankly review your employee assistance programs to make sure that employees who are having difficulties have access to this. But you know Alaska is one of the airlines that consistently ranks high in customer satisfaction, high in employees satisfaction, and they're known as a really cutting-edge carrier. So this really is a one-off event. But I think everyone is going to take a hard look at it.
[Blackwell:] I also want to share, our producer told us during the break that you and I wonder, we should disclose this, have done some consulting work for Alaska Airlines, just so everyone's cards are on the table here.
[Goldstein:] I have and I admire the airline greatly but everyone will take a look at procedures and at whether every step was followed and whether there were any gaps and those will be closed. I can't think of an event like this happening before in my lifetime.
[Blackwell:] Yes, you know I wonder and I got Mary Schiavo's perspective on this and I want yours as well. After a plane crashes, train crashes as well, we've talked about some of the protections, some of the protocols that could be implemented that would protect these in the future and there has been some hesitancy, some resistance from the industries to implement those. To what degree do you think that we'll see intensified or increased mental health screenings or checks for employees of these airlines? We know that'll come at great expense.
[Goldstein:] Well there is expense on doing that and certainly the [inaudible] who had the German wing tragedy some years ago has completely revamped their mental health screening and their whole mental health environment for pilots. It is a challenge, I think if this incident is reviewed, there will be new procedures in place.
[Paul:] All righty. We do want to point out, you mentioned Alaska Airlines, as we understand that this person was employed by Horizon Air, as well just to be clear. Thank you so much Peter Goldstein, we appreciate you being here and appreciate your perspective as always.
[Blackwell:] Thank you.
[Goldstein:] Thank you.
[Blackwell:] The trial of Paul Manafort will enter its third week on Monday. Prosecutors are expected to wrap up the case soon. On Friday, they focused on the former Trump campaign chairman's lavish spending on hundreds of thousands of dollars on baseball tickets; $226,000 for luxury box seats at Yankee Stadium in New York City allegedly paid for from an unregistered foreign account. Now, the jury was expected to hear that a part of the case right when court started Friday but instead, there was this 5-hour delay that pushed everything back until the middle of the afternoon. CNN National Correspondent Athena Jones is telling us what to look forward as this case moves forward.
[Athena Jones, Cnn National Correspondent:] Prosecutors expect to laying out the government's case against Paul Manafort early next week. This after a week of damaging revelations, many of them coming from Rick Gates, the government's star witness in the trial. Manafort's long time partner pleaded guilty to conspiracy and to lying to investigators and is cooperating with the government as it tries to convict his former boss on 18 counts of bank and tax fraud. While the trial is not about the president or his campaign, Trump's shadow looms over the proceedings. This is the first of two trials his former campaign chairman faces in Virginia and Washington, D.C.; the Virginia case presenting the first big test for Special Counsel Robert Mueller who is investigating the Russian meddling of the 2016 election. Manafort spent about six months on the Trump campaign.
[Paul Manafort:] He's just won the primary process with a record number of votes.
[Jones:] Before leaving amid questions about his lobbying work for the pro Russian government in Ukraine and the payments he received which prosecutors say totaled more than $60 million. The government alleges Manafort hid millions, lied about his income, and failed to pay taxes while spending big on items like expensive suits and ostrich jacket, real estate, and New York Yankees season tickets. While serving as Manafort's right hand man for a decade, Gates whose three days on the witness stand began Monday testified that he and Manafort had 15 foreign accounts that they did not report to the government even though they knew it was illegal. Manafort instructed him not to submit the required forms. Gates testified that Manafort recommended a banker who loan him money for position of the Trump Administration and he admitted he cheated on his wife and had embezzled several hundred thousand dollars from Manafort by submitting false expense reports. Revelations Manafort's defense team hopes to use to undermine Gates' credibility. The government has also presented emails, photos, and financial records to prove their case and employees from the FBI and IRS testified about the money Manafort earned from his political work in Ukraine and his failure to report some of it on his tax returns. The president has played down his relationship with Manafort in recent months.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] You know Paul Manafort worked for me for a very short period of time.
[Jones:] But he's watching the trial closely, taking to twitter early on to express sympathy for Manafort, comparing his treatment to prohibition-era gangster Al Capone and calling on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to end the Mueller probe immediately; a call the White House described not as an order but as an opinion. Athena Jones, CNN, New York.
[Paul:] Thank you to Athena there. So African-American activist Theo Wilson went undercover as a white supremacist because he wanted to better understand the hatred of where all this was coming from. What did he learn, what is he saying about it now? He's with us next.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Odd man out. President Trump stuns the world, pulling out of the G7's official agreement and issuing a warning to allies.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're like the piggy bank that everybody is robbing. And that ends.
[Tapper:] Is there an actual strategy here?
[Justin Trudeau, Canadian Prime Minister:] We also will not be pushed around.
[Tapper:] President Trump's chief economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, responds next. Plus: one-time shot. The president touches down in Singapore for a summit many thought we'd never see and says it won't take him long to figure out a devious dictator.
[Trump:] I think, within the first minute, I will know, my touch, my feel. That's what I do.
[Tapper:] If the president wings it, is there is a prayer for peace? Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein will be here in moments. And blaming Obama. As President Trump puts in a good word for Vladimir Putin with U.S. allies, he says, thanks, Obama, for letting Russia run over Crimea. So, who is giving Russia the pass now? Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is solo. And I'm not talking about the new "Star Wars" movie. President Trump is in Singapore for what could be the biggest meeting of his entire presidency. North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un is also on the ground meeting with Singapore's prime minister. But, right now, it is the news President Trump made on the way to his meeting in Singapore that is rattling world order. As President Trump is preparing to improve U.S. relations with that brutal dictator, he seems to be throwing out two days of diplomacy with U.S. allies, slamming Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as quote "very dishonest and weak" and announcing that the U.S. will not sign a joint statement agreed to by all nations at the summit. Let's go straight to Singapore and CNN's Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, what is the latest?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Jake, this is real. It is actually happening. It's something that a lot of doubters and experts didn't think it would actually come to this, but President Trump and Kim Jong-un are finally on the same soil, Kim Jong-un landing earlier today, President Trump landing just a few minutes ago. And now everyone will be watching to see what comes out of this potentially historic summit when the two leaders do sit down Tuesday morning here to talk and see what comes out of that. What is the president looking for? He has said denuclearization in the past, but, lately, he's been saying it will only take one minute for him to see what it is, if Kim Jong-un is serious about committing to denuclearization. That is something that is still largely up for discussion, that it's not clear what the North Koreans are willing to commit to. That is going on the heels of this G7 summit that the president really upended as soon as he got on Air Force One with a single tweet, tweeting about the prime minister in the way that he did. Certainly a lot of diplomatic moves here, Jake, to keep an eye on.
[Tapper:] All right, Kaitlan Collins in Singapore, thanks so much. Now, here with me is the top White House economic adviser, Larry Kudlow. He was with the president at the G7 summit. He was doing a lot of the negotiating on that communique. Larry, thanks so much for joining us.
[Larry Kudlow, Director, National Economic Council:] Thank you, Jake.
[Tapper:] We really appreciate it, as always. But let's start with this unprecedented decision from the president to not endorse the communique that you had been negotiating. Was this the plan all along, or was this completely a reaction to Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister?
[Kudlow:] Completely a reaction. I appreciate you putting that out there. Look, we went there. All the punditry was saying, A, President Trump might not even go to G7, B, we will never sign a communique because, C, we're not going to work with other people. Well, we did in good faith. I personally negotiated with Prime Minister Trudeau, who, by the way, I basically liked working with, but not until this sophomoric play. I mean, we went through it. We agreed. We compromised on the communique. We joined the communique in good faith.
[Tapper:] But what did he say that was so offensive? President Trump accused him of lying.
[Kudlow:] Well, he holds a press conference, and he said the U.S. is insulting. He said that Canada has to stand up for itself. He says that we are the problem with tariffs. Well, the infactual, the non-factual part of this was, they have enormous tariffs. I mean, they have tariffs on certain dairy and food products of 290, 295 percent. He was polarizing. I mean, here's the thing. I mean, he really kind of stabbed us in the back. He really, actually you know what? He did a great disservice to the whole G7. He betrayed...
[Tapper:] Trudeau did?
[Kudlow:] Yes, he did, because they were united in the G7. They came together. And I was there extensively. I was involved in these late-night negotiations. President Trump was charming, good faith. I I was in the bilateral meeting with Trudeau and President Trump. And they were getting along famously. President Trump actually and this is music to my ears, Jake. He went through those two days of conference talking about the need for a new free trade system, no tariffs.
[Tapper:] Right.
[Kudlow:] No tariff barriers.
[Tapper:] No subsidies.
[Kudlow:] No subsidies. He is a trade reformer, as I have argued again and again. And he put that out. And so they had this bilateral meeting. We were very close to making a deal with Canada on NAFTA, bilaterally perhaps. And then we leave, and Trudeau pulls this sophomoric political stunt for domestic consumption. It pains me...
[Tapper:] But President Trump does that all the time, though, doesn't he?
[Kudlow:] No, he doesn't.
[Tapper:] He doesn't say things for domestic consumption?
[Kudlow:] No, the point is, if you are going through a treaty process, a communique, and you have good faith...
[Tapper:] Right.
[Kudlow:] And and those leaders were together. I mean, I was right smack in the middle of it on Friday night and Saturday morning. You don't walk away and start firing bullets. Now, look...
[Tapper:] I can't believe that an adviser to President Trump... ... is saying that, because President Trump does that all the time. He does things for for domestic consumption.
[Kudlow:] Jake, not in not after you pull a treaty or a deal together.
[Tapper:] But let's look at the language of the communique.
[Kudlow:] That's the point I'm trying to make here.
[Tapper:] Let's look at the language yes, let's look at the language of the communique that you helped negotiate, that President Trump walked away from. Here is the part that is on trade, which is the part that, obviously, I think President Trump is most interested in.
[Kudlow:] Yes. Yes.
[Tapper:] "We acknowledge that free, fair and mutually beneficial trade and investment, while creating reciprocal benefits, are key engines for growth and job creation. We strive to reduce tariff barriers, non-tariff barriers and subsidies. We call for the start of negotiations this year to develop stronger international rules on market-distorting industrial subsidies and trade-distorting actions by state-owned enterprises." That is what President Trump believes in.
[Kudlow:] Yes.
[Tapper:] Why walk away from it just because of something Justin Trudeau said for domestic consumption?
[Kudlow:] No, not something. Look, you yes, for domestic political consumption. But it was a global statement. The whole world listened to what he said. Look, you're reporting it here in Washington, as you must.
[Tapper:] Sure.
[Kudlow:] I get that. You just don't behave that way, OK? It is a betrayal, OK? He is essentially double-crossing not just double crossing President Trump, but the other members of the G7, who were working together and pulling together this communique. You know, you never get everything you want. There are compromises along the way. President Trump played that process in good faith. So, I ask you, he gets up in the airplane and leaves. And then Trudeau starts blasting him in a domestic news conference? I'm sorry. It is a betrayal. That is a double-cross. It pains me because I like Trudeau. I was working with him. We were together putting words on paper. I'm changing "the"s to "a"s when it comes to reforming the international system. They all agreed. This is so important. They all agreed that the WTO...
[Tapper:] So why walk away from the agreement? That's what I don't understand.
[Kudlow:] Well, then ask Mr. Trudeau that. That's the question.
[Tapper:] But he didn't walk away from the agreement. He...
[Kudlow:] Don't blame Trump. It was Trudeau who started blasting Trump after he left, after the deals had been made. And one last point on this.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Kudlow:] POTUS is going to Korea no, Singapore, to negotiate with the North Koreans. This is an historic event.
[Tapper:] Absolutely.
[Kudlow:] Good things, wonderful things could come out of this.
[Tapper:] We all hope so, absolutely.
[Kudlow:] All right. Thank you. Now, POTUS is not going to let a Canadian prime minister push him around, push him, POTUS, President Trump...
[Tapper:] But that's what...
[Kudlow:] ... around on the eve of this. He is not going to permit any show of weakness on the on the trip to negotiate with North Korea, nor should he.
[Tapper:] So, this was about North Korea?
[Kudlow:] Of course it was, in large part, absolutely.
[Tapper:] So, because Trudeau said that as Trump was going to Singapore...
[Kudlow:] Well, you know, one thing leads to another, Jake.
[Tapper:] Oh, I see. OK.
[Kudlow:] They are all related. We had done our work in in Quebec, north of Quebec. We did our work. We worked with the Western alliance, pleased to do so. We get on the plane, and then this guy Trudeau starts blasting us.
[Tapper:] So what is key here?
[Kudlow:] Kim must not see American weakness.
[Tapper:] Yes. I see. I see.
[Kudlow:] It's that short. And, you know, Jake you have covered the beat for so long how many times has President Trump said, if you hit me, I'm going to hit you back, OK?
[Tapper:] Right.
[Kudlow:] And this is a case where Trudeau it was like, I don't know, pouring collateral damage on this whole Korean trip. That was a part of Trudeau's mistake. He Trudeau made an error. He should take it back. He should pull back on his statements and wish President Trump well in the Korea negotiations.
[Tapper:] So, what...
[Kudlow:] These other members did.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Kudlow:] Angela Merkel did. Macron did. I was right there. Theresa May did.
[Tapper:] OK. So, there's a...
[Kudlow:] And, all of a sudden, he went rogue.
[Tapper:] I'm seeing what you're saying here.
[Kudlow:] He went rogue.
[Tapper:] That this had to do with North Korea.
[Kudlow:] In large part.
[Tapper:] A lot of people are not interpreting it the way you're interpreting it. Senator John McCain issued a statement, saying: "To our allies, bipartisan majorities of Americans remain pro-free trade, pro- globalization and supportive of alliances based on 70 years of shared values. Americans stand with you, even if our president doesn't." That's a remarkable statement from a Republican senator...
[Kudlow:] OK.
[Tapper:] ... about a Republican president.
[Kudlow:] Look, two two things. One, John friend John McCain and I are old friends, and I wish him well. He is not well. I wish him well. Just want to make that point. Number two, President Trump is essentially doing what John McCain wanted him to do with respect to free trade. President Trump made it clear time and again in those two days outside of Quebec that he wants to reinstitute a process of free trade, no tariffs...
[Tapper:] No subsidies.
[Kudlow:] ... no tariff barriers, no quotas and subsidies. He was absolutely consistent during this entire trip. And, to some extent, this was a new emphasis, although I have known for years I wrote a piece in "The Washington Post" the other day I have known that Trump is a free-trader, OK? I knew that. This is the first time, as I recall, he put it out there explicitly. And what does he get from Pierre [sic] Trudeau? Slam, slap in the face. And I'm sorry. Look, nobody in this game is perfect. Nobody in this game is entirely clean. I get that. But that doesn't mean you can't negotiate in good faith, OK?
[Tapper:] Well, I see. And you're also saying that what is really important here is that America, in your view, can't show weakness as President Trump...
[Kudlow:] Well, that's...
[Tapper:] ... flies to Singapore to negotiate with Kim Jong-un.
[Kudlow:] Well, first of all, you know, why throw a monkey wrench into the meeting of the Western allies? That is point number one. I think Trudeau and, second of all, yes, you're quite right, sir. I mean, President he can't put Trump in a position of being weak going into the North Korean talks with Kim. He can't do that.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Kudlow:] And, by the way, President Trump is not weak. He will be very strong, as he always is. So those are my points. This was an ill-advised statement by Mr. Trudeau.
[Tapper:] Let me ask you I want to ask you another question.
[Kudlow:] He ought to really...
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Kudlow:] He ought to come out and apologize in the name of the Western allies, OK? He ought to come out today and wish President Trump well in the negotiations...
[Tapper:] In Singapore.
[Kudlow:] ... instead of taking potshots at...
[Tapper:] I want to ask you. Another thing that raised a lot of eyebrows had to do with President Trump, on his way to the G7, saying how he wished Russia was at the table. There are a lot of people who didn't understand why he would do it, why he would do it that way. Usually, you would have a private conversation with G7 allies before you talk about new members. At the same time that all this was going on, Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, was speaking in France, where he said this about Russia's cyber-attacks. I'm sorry. It is a graphic. "These Russian actions are purposeful and premeditated. And they represent an all-out assault by Vladimir Putin on the rule of law, Western ideals and democratic norms. The Russians are actively seeking to divide our alliance, and we must not allow that to happen." What would you say to critics who say that President Trump and there are critics out there who are saying this in the United States and Europeans that President Trump is actually doing what Vladimir Putin would want him to do, trying to bring him into the G7 or G8 without any concessions, and really causing a lot of tensions with the allies in the G7?
[Kudlow:] Well, first of all, I think Dan Coats is right. Russia is very difficult, very divisive. They are a threat in so many ways. So that is right. But President Trump is saying, look, perhaps we should go back to dealing with them. Remember, it used to be the G8.
[Tapper:] But shouldn't you get a concession?
[Kudlow:] Perhaps so. I mean, he wasn't he wasn't negotiating with himself or anybody else. It was the G8. Russia is a player on the world stage. And he was suggesting that perhaps they ought to the G7 should to... ... again.
[Tapper:] But you know this, because I used to watch you when you were an anchor during this period. Russia is no longer a member of the G8 because they invaded Crimea.
[Kudlow:] That is fair enough. I fair enough. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't talk to them. That doesn't mean we shouldn't deal with them. Again, Russia was doing some very bad things years ago, when they were part of the G8.
[Tapper:] Right.
[Kudlow:] So, look, you can argue that both sides. President Trump is just throwing it out there for consideration. There is nothing wrong with that. Dan Coats is right, on the other hand. Russia has a record that is an arm long when it comes to violating sanctions, damaging people, invading the Crimea, trying to threaten the rest of Eastern Europe. So, sure, but the two are not mutually exclusive.
[Tapper:] And yet have been more critical just now the show of Vladimir Putin than President Trump has. President Trump pointed at President Obama when asked about Crimea. He said Obama quote "allowed Russia to take Crimea in 2014." I mean, whether or not you think President Obama was aggressive enough against Russia, it wasn't Obama who let them do it. Putin did it.
[Kudlow:] That is true. I think we could have had a much stronger response with President Obama. But I don't want to go there. I'm not an expert in this field. I just don't see anything wrong with the American president suggesting that the G7 go back and have another discussion with Russia. It was the G8. So be it. That does not absolve I'm sorry that does not absolve Prime Minister Trudeau's essentially busting up the G7 and its communique. Do you know let me this is funny. Look, we've known each other a while. I'm getting text messages from very good reporters Thursday and Friday before the
[G7:] Is it true that President Trump is not going and Vice President Pence is going to go, all right? And I'm saying, no.
[Tapper:] No, not true at all.
[Kudlow:] There is an overunder whether President Trump is going to show up. OK? I said no. He showed up. He worked with them. We had long night sessions. He was a participant. Not only did we play. We were in the communique, team players, really, really, team players here, the U.S., to help the Western alliance. And then Trudeau throws him under the bus with some very harsh language. Jake, it was a betrayal. It was a diplomatic betrayal. That is not good. And you know what? We were close to negotiating a trade deal with Mr. Trudeau.
[Tapper:] So, what is next?
[Kudlow:] I was in the bilateral meeting.
[Tapper:] What is next with U.S. relations with Canada? What is next with the relationship with the G7? Is it frayed to the point that it can't be repaired?
[Kudlow:] Well, what is next is historic negotiations with North Korea.
[Tapper:] In Singapore with North Korea, absolutely.
[Kudlow:] That is the absolute end-allbe-all. With regard to the G7, frayed relations? I don't know. I watched Angela Merkel and President Trump talking to each other. The same with Macron of France. The same with May of Britain. I was right right there. And they are talking with each other. Is there an occasional barb? Of course there is.
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Kudlow:] These are major politicians. But, on the whole, that alliance was strengthened. That G7 alliance was strengthened, as President Trump involved himself and devoted himself to the process. That is a good thing. They should have said to him, Godspeed. You are negotiating with this crazy nuclear tyrant in North Korea. And we are behind you. That is what President what Prime Minister Trudeau should have said.
[Tapper:] The only point I will make about is that I have talked to a lot of Canadian and European diplomats in the last year. And I think they would be surprised that the Trump White House would be offended at barbs being made by Justin Trudeau, given all the ones that President Trump has made about Canada and Europe for the year- and-a-half of his presidency.
[Kudlow:] After you sign an agreement like that?
[Tapper:] No, not immediately after. Yes, so the timing is important.
[Kudlow:] Really? Really? And, by the way, the other thing is I don't want to lose this point the American economy is really growing rapidly. We are the fastest growing G7 economy right now. We have cut taxes. We have pushed back regulations. Here is the president being the frankly, the strongest trade reformer in the past two decades, which, if we could overcome these unfair trading barriers, would help our economy and the economy of the rest of the world. We talked to Trudeau, as I said, in the bilateral. We were coming together beautifully, OK? And then he goes out there and pulls this amateur political stunt. Jake, look, it is not personal. Trudeau is a smart guy, as I said. I was working with him. I call him Prime Minister. He calls me Larry. I'm taking notes. I'm going back to POTUS to see if he will accept this stuff.
[Tapper:] Is there going to be payback?
[Kudlow:] It worked it worked beautifully.
[Tapper:] Payback to Trudeau? Is there is the U.S. going to do anything?
[Kudlow:] I don't know anything about that. What I'm saying is that President Trump had every right, every right to push back publicly on this Trudeau amateurish scheme that really broke that really broke up all the good will from that meeting in Quebec.
[Tapper:] Well, let me just say this. I'm sure most Americans, if not all Americans, watching right now are hoping for the best in Singapore. So, please convey that for us. To you, Larry Kudlow, always a pleasure having you on.
[Kudlow:] Thank you. Thank you.
[Tapper:] Thank you so much. The man who wrote "The Art of the Deal" is now facing what might be his greatest test. Will President Trump's special feel and touch be enough to negotiate a deal with Kim Jong-un? Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California is here to respond in moments.

[Mike Pence, U.s. Vice President:] Who is fighting every day to make American great again. Since the first day of this administration, President Donald Trump has been working tirelessly to keep the promises that he made to the American people. President Trump has been reforming health care, enforcing our laws and ending illegal immigration, rebuilding our military and this President has been rolling back excessive regulations and unfair trade practices that were stifling American jobs. Thanks to President Trump's leadership, American businesses are growing again, investing in American again and they're creating jobs in this country instead of shipping jobs overseas. Thanks to President Donald Trump, American is back. And just last week, we all witnessed the bold leadership of an American President on the world stage putting American first. From the middle east to Europe as leader of the free world, President Trump reaffirmed historical alliances, forged new relationships and called on the wider world to confront the threat of terrorism in renewed ways. And by the action that the President will announce today, the American people and the wider world will see once again our President is choosing to put American jobs and American consumers first. Our President is choosing to put American energy and American industry first and by this action today, President Donald Trump is choosing to put the forgotten men and women of American first. So, with gratitude for his leadership and admiration for his unwavering commitment to the American people, it's my high honor and distinct privilege to introduce to you the President of the United States of American, President Donald Trump.
[Donald Trump, U.s. President:] Thank you very much. Thank you. I would like to begin by addressing the terrorist attack in Manila. We're closely monitoring the situation and I will continue to give updates if anything happens during this period of time but it is really very sad as to what is going on throughout the world with terror. Our thoughts and our prayers are with all of those affected. Before we discuss the Paris accord, I'd like to begin with an update on our tremendous, absolutely tremendous economic progress since election day on November 8th. The economy has started to come back and very, very rapidly. We've added $3.3 trillion in stock market value to our economy and more than a million private sector jobs. I've just returned from a trip overseas where we concluded nearly $350 billion of military and economic development for the United States creating hundreds of thousands of jobs. It was a very, very successful trip, believe me. Thank you. Thank you. In my meetings at the G-7, we have taken historic steps to demand fair and reciprocal trade that gives Americans a level playing field against other nations. We're also working very hard for peace in the middle east and perhaps even peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Our attacks on terrorism are greatly stepped up and you see that, you see it all over. From the previous administration including getting many other countries to make major contributions to the fight against terror. Big, big contributions are being made by countries that weren't doing so much in the form of contribution. One by one, we are keeping the promises I made to the American people during my campaign for President. Whether it's cutting job-killing regulations, appointing and confirming a tremendous supreme court justice, putting in place tough new ethics rules, achieving a record reduction in illegal immigration on our southern border or bringing jobs, plants and factories back into the United States at numbers which no one, until this point, thought even possible. And believe me, we've just begun. The fruits of our labor will be seen very shortly, even more so. On these issues and so many more we're following through on our commitments and I don't want anything to get in our way. I am fighting every day for the great people of this country. Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect American and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord, thank you. Thank you. But begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers. So, we're getting out but we'll start to negotiate and we will see if we can make a deal that's fair. And if we can, that's great. And if we can't, that's fine. As President, I can put no other consideration before the well-being of the American citizens. The Paris climate accord is an example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States. And the exclusive benefit of other countries. Leaving American workers, who I love, and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shut factories and vastly diminished economic production. Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the nonbinding Paris accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund, which is costing the United States a vast fortune. Compliance with the terms of the Paris accord and the owner's energy restrictions it's put on the United States could cost American as much as 2.3 million lost jobs by 2025, according to the national economic research associates. This includes 440,000 fewer manufacturing jobs, not what we need. Believe me, this is not what we need. Including automobile jobs and the further countless communities rely on. They rely for so much and we would be giving them so little. According to the same study, by 2040, compliance with the commitments put into place by the previous administration would cut the following sectors. Paper down 12 percent. Cement down 23 percent. Iron and steel down 38 percent. Coal and I happen to love the coal miners down 86 percent. Natural gas, down 31 percent. The cost of the economy at this time would be close to $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million industrial jobs while households would have $7,000 less income and, in many cases, much worse than that. Not only does this deal subject our citizens to harsh economic restrictions, it fails to live up to our environmental ideals as someone who cares deeply about the environment, which I do. I cannot, in good conscience, support a deal that punishes the United States, which is what it does. The world's leader in environmental protection while imposing no meaningful obligations on the world's leading polluters. For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years. 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries. There are many other examples, but the cot tomorrow line is that the Paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States. Further, while the current agreement effectively blocks the clean coal of American, which it does, and the minds are starting to open up, we have a big opening if two weeks. Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, so many places. A big opening of a brand-new mine that's unheard of for many reasons that hasn't happened. They asked me if I'd go. I'm going to try. China will be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants. So, we can't build the plants but they can. According to this agreement. India will be allowed to double its coal production by 20. Think of it. India can double their coal production. We're supposed to get rid of ours. Even Europe is allowed to continue a production of coal plants. In short, it doesn't eliminate coal jobs, just transfers those jobs out of American and the United States and ships them to foreign countries. This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States. The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris agreement. They went wild. They were so happy. For the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of American, which we all love, at a very, very big economic disadvantage. A cynic would say the obvious reason for economic competitors and their wish to see us remain in the agreement is so that we continue to suffer the self-inflicted major economic wound. We would find it very hard to compete with other countries from other parts of the world. We are among the most abundant energy reserves in the planet, sufficient to lift millions of American's poorest workers out of poverty. Yet, under this agreement, we are effectively putting these reserves under lock and key taking away the great wealth of our nation, it's great wealth. It's phenomenal wealth. Not so long ago we had no idea of such wealth. And leaving millions and millions of families trapped in poverty and joblessness. The agreement is a massive redistribution of United States' wealth to other countries. At 1 percent growth, renewable sources of energy can meet some of our domestic demand, but at 3 or 4 percent growth, which I expect, we need all forms of available American energy or our country will be a grave risk of brownouts or blackouts, our businesses will come to a halt, in many cases, and the American family will suffer the consequences in the form of lost jobs and a very diminished quality of life. Even if the Paris agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it would only produce a.02 of 1 degree. Think of that. This much Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100. A tiny, tiny amount. In fact, it would wipe out the gains from American and this is an incredible statistic, would totally wipe out the gains from American's expected reductions in the year 2030. After we have had to spend billions and billions of dollars, lost jobs, closed factories and suffered much higher energy costs for our businesses and our homes. As "The Wall Street Journal" wrote this morning, "The reality is that withdrawing is in American's economic interest and won't matter much to the climate." The United States, under the Trump administration, will continue to be the cleanest and most environmentally friendly country on earth. We'll be the cleanest. We're going to have the cleanest air, the cleanest water, we will be environmentally friendly but we're not going to put our businesses out of work and we're not going to lose our jobs. We're going to grow. We're going to grow rapidly. And I think you just read, it just came out minutes ago, the small business report, small businesses as of now are booming, hiring people, one of the best reports they've seen in many years. I'm willing to immediately work with Democratic leaders to either negotiate our way back into Paris under the terms that are fair to the United States and its workers or to negotiate a new deal that protects our country and its taxpayers. So, if the obstructionists want to get together with me, let's make them non-obstructionists. They will all sit down and get back into the deal and make it good and we won't be closing up our factories and we won't be losing our jobs and we'll sit down with the Democrats and all of the people that represent either the Paris accord or something that we could do that's much better than the Paris accord and I think the people of our country will be thrilled and I think the people of the world will be thrilled. But until we do that, we're out of the agreement. I will work to ensure that American remains the world's leader on environmental issues. But under a framework that is fair and with the burdens and responsibilities that are equally shared among the many nations all around the world. No responsible leader can put the workers and the people of their country at this debilitating and tremendous disadvantage. The fact that the Paris deal hamstrings the United States while empowering some of the world's top polluting countries should dispel any doubt as to the real reason why foreign lobbyists wish to keep our magnificent country tied up and bound down by this agreement. It's to give their country an economic edge over the United States. That's not going to happen while I'm President. I'm sorry, my job as President is to do everything within my power to give American a level playing field and to create the economic regulatory and tax structures that make American the most prosperous and with the highest standards and to create the economic regulatory and tax structures that make American the most prosperous and with the highest standard of living and the highest standard of environmental protection. Our tax bill is moving along in Congress, and I believe it's doing very well. I think a lot of people will be very pleasantly surprised. The Republicans are working very, very hard. We love to have support from the Democrats, but we may have to go it alone. But it's going very well. The Paris agreement handy caps the United States economy in order to win prays from the foreign capitals and global actives that have long sought to gain wealth at our country's expense. They don't put American first. I do. And I always will. The same nations discussing to stay in the agreement are the countries that have collectively cost American trillions of dollars through tough trade practices and in many cases lax contributions to our critical miller alliance. You see what's happening. It's pretty obvious to those who want to keep an open mind. At what point does American get demeaned? At what point do they start laughing at us as a country? We want fair treatment for its citizens, and we want fair treatment for our taxpayers. We don't want other leaders and other countries laughing at us anymore. And they won't be. They won't be. I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris. I promised I would exit or renegotiate any deal which fails to serve American's interests. Many trade deals will soon be under renegotiation. Very rarely do we have a deal that works for this country. But they'll soon be under renegotiation. The process has begun from day one. But now we're down to business. Beyond the severe energy restrictions inflicted by the Paris accord, it includes yet another scheme to redistribute wealth out of the United States through the so-called Green Climate Fund nice name which calls for developed countries to send $100 billion to dwelling countries, all on top of American's existing and massive foreign aid payments. So, we're going to be paying billions and billions and billions of dollars. And we're already way ahead of anybody else. Many of the other countries haven't spent anything. And many of them will never pay one dime. The green fund would likely obligate the United States to commit potentially tens of billions of dollars, of which the United States has already handed over $1.0 billion. Nobody else is even close. Most of them haven't paid anything. Including funds raided out of American's budget for the war against terrorism. That's where they came. Believe me. They didn't come from me. They came just before I came into office. Not good. And not good the way they took the money. In 2015 the united nations departing top climate officials reportedly described the $100 per year as peanuts, and stated that the $100 billion is the tail that wags the dog. In 2015 the Green Climate Funds executive director reportedly stated that estimated funding need to increase to $450 billion per year after 2020. And nobody even knows where the money is going to. Nobody has been able to say where is it going to. Of course, the world's top polluters have no affirmative obligations on the green fund, which we terminate. American is $20 trillion in debt. Cash strapped cities cannot hire enough police officers or fix vital infrastructure. Millions of our citizens are out of work. And yet the Paris accord says billions of dollars that ought to be invested right here in American will be sent to the very countries that have in fact are taking jobs away from us. So, think of that. There are serious legal and constitutional issues as well. Foreign leaders in Europe, Asia and across the world should not have more to say with respect to the U.S. economy than our own citizens and their elected represent he was. Thus, our withdrawal from the agreement represents a reassertion of American's sovereignty. Our constitution is unique among all nations of the world. And it is my highest obligation and greatest honor to protect it. And I will. Staying in the agreement could also pose serious problems for the United States as we begin unlocking American's energy reserves. It would have once been unthinkable an international agreement could prevent the United States from conducting its own domestic economic affairs. But this is the new reality we face if we do not leave the agreement or if we do not negotiate a far better deal. The risks grow as historically these agreements only tend to become more and more ambitious over time. In other words, the Paris framework is just a starting point, as bad as it is, not an end point. And exiting the agreement protects the United States from future intrusions on the United States' sovereignty. And massive future legal liability. Believe me. We have massive legal liability if we stay in. As President, I have one obligation. And that obligation is to the American people. The Paris according would undermine our economy, ham string our workers, weaken our sovereignty, impose unacceptable legal risk, and put us as a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the world. It is time to exit the Paris accord. And time to pursue a new deal that protects the environment, our companies, our citizens and our country. It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan And Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania along with many other great locations in our country before Paris, France. It is time to make American great again. Thank you Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Very important.

[Vause:] Well, the US and Japan are now looking to ramp up the pressure on North Korea after its latest missile launch. By our count, this is number 21 this year alone. This time, the fight path of the missile was directly over Japan's northernmost island Hokkaido, home to more than 5 million people. Warning sirens were heard on the island urging people to take shelter.
[Sesay:] Well, the missile was in the air around 14 minutes. It flew 2,700 kilometers and broke into pieces over the Pacific. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe calls it the most grave threat ever.
[Vause:] For more, CNN's Andrew Stevens is live in Tokyo and Paula Hancocks also live this hour in Seoul, South Korea. Andrew first to you, Tokyo has warned of a firm response. What would that look like? And given the conversation in the last hour or so between the Japanese Prime Minister and the U.S. President, it seems that this will be coordinated at least between Tokyo and Washington. Paula, first to you, there is a lot of concern coming from Tokyo. At the same time, there has been an extraordinary response from South Korea.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] That's right, John. This is a stronger response than we've seen from previous missiles certainly. We heard from the defense ministry official that the air force here in South Korea carried out a bombing drill very shortly after this missile launch, saying this was in response to the missile launch. We have four F-15 fighter jets dropping eight 1 ton bombs on to a shooting range about 150 kilometers from the DNC, the NorthSouth Korean border. And what we heard in the press release as well was that they said this was to show the capability of being able to destroy the enemy's leadership. So, a very specific threat there to North Korea, to the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, pointing out that they are able to retaliate in a very quick situation, saying that they could retaliate like that in an emergency situation. So, certainly, we are seeing some kind of response from South Korea from a political point of view. President Moon had actually called for a strong response. We know the foreign minister here has spoken to the US foreign minister Rex Tillerson actually saying that it was disappointing that North Korea chose to carry out this missile launch even though the offer of talks was on the table. John?
[Vause:] OK. Paula from Seoul. And to Tokyo, Andrew, the missile flight over Japan seems to be almost a nightmare for defense planners there in Tokyo.
[Andrew Stevens, Cnn International Correspondent:] Yes, absolutely, John. Previously, the North Koreans had launched missiles in Japan's direction, but they had always used a very high trajectory, which meant that the missiles flashed down in the Sea of Japan between North Korea and Japan. Now, clearly, there has been a missile which has traversed across Japanese airspace. We have seen it before, but the North Koreans in the past mostly have given some sort of indication they were going to do this. There was no indication today, and that is why Shinzo Abe is so upset about this. Remember, these are most likely multiple-stage rockets, which separate during flight, a piece of that rocket could still fall on the Japanese mainland even if the missile is a success. Shinzo Abe making his point very, very clearly in a press conference. Just listen to what he had to say about it.
[Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister Of Japan:] The missile which passed over our nation represents the greatest and gravest threat to our nation ever. It also is an egregious threat to the peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region.
[Stevens:] Abe has been very busy today, not only meeting his emergency cabinet members and discussing what to do, but also talking to Donald Trump, a 40-minute telephone conversation apparently. Mr. Trump saying that the US stood behind Japan 100 percent and would, of course, come to Japan's defense if needed. And both sides pushing for more action, tougher action against North Korea, starting with an emergency meeting which they've called for of the UN Security Council. John.
[Vause:] OK, Andrew. Thank you. Andrew Stevens live in Tokyo. Also, Paula Hancocks live in Seoul with the very latest. Thank You.
[Sesay:] Well, President Donald Trump plans to survey the damage in Texas Tuesday. It's the biggest natural disaster since he took office.
[Vause:] He acknowledged recovery will be a long and difficult road, but thinks the country will come back in his words, "bigger, better and stronger than before."
[Donald J. Trump, President Of The United States:] Tragic times such as these bring out the best in America's character strength, charity and resilience are those characters. We see neighbor helping neighbor, friend helping friend, and stranger helping strangers.
[Sesay:] Well, joining us now Democratic strategist Dave Jacobson and Republican consultant John Thomas. Both are CNN political commentators. Gentlemen, welcome. First off, I want you to take a listen to the president discussing the situation in Texas during the press conference with the Finnish president earlier on Monday. Take a listen.
[Trump:] It's the biggest ever. They're saying it's the biggest. It's historic. It's like really like Texas, if you think about it. But it is a historic amount of water.
[Sesay:] Dave, the president summing up the situation in Texas as only President Trump can. He's also been tweeting his way through this crisis using lots of exclamation marks. Your assessment of how he's responded so far.
[Dave Jacobson, Cnn Political Commentator:] There's no doubt that President Trump has like come out and tweeted about the hurricane and promised financial aid and FEMA aid and that his administration was going to respond. But I thought what was extraordinary was the fact the time that, pardon me a president is supposed to bring the country together and is supposed to be a beacon of strength for the country, a time of tremendous devastation, he's fanning the flames of polarization across this country. He spent the weekend pardoning a known racist, a convicted felon, Sheriff Joe from Arizona, and then he endorsed a book deal from a Milwaukee sheriff who, of course, is a controversial figure who labeled Black Lives Matter as a hate group, basically equating them to neo-Nazis. And then, at the same time, he doubled down on the wall. So, he's furthering splitting the country rather than bringing the country together.
[Sesay:] John, go ahead.
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator:] As much as my friend Dave wants to turn this disaster response into a partisan issue, the president actually deserves kudos. And he's received it across the aisle for doing a good job, empowering FEMA to do what they need to do to get things done. Everything seems to be according to plan. And for once the exclamation points, the braggadocious nature of everything being the biggest, is applicable in this scenario.
[Sesay:] What about the point of mixing politics with a natural disaster in pardoning Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the timing of all of these things emerging. The Arpaio stuff, officially instructing the military to ban transgender, all of that happened on Friday as Harvey was taking center stage.
[Thomas:] The president the government doesn't stop just because there's a natural
[Sesay:] The government is calculating. You know that. All governments are. Do you think that timing was such to dump it and so people would miss it, that news?
[Thomas:] It's funny. On Friday, I heard both stories. I heard Democrats speaking out both sides of the mouth. One was this is a strategic cue to pander to the base. Well, if you're going to pander to the base, you do it loudly, so they hear it. Others said he's trying to bury the news, so that no one knows he's pardoning a racist. I can't speak to the president's intent. All I know is he took action.
[Sesay:] All right. So, let's listen to what the president said because the president explained his actions. Let's roll the clip.
[Trump:] In the middle of a hurricane, even though it was a Friday evening, I assume the ratings would be far higher than they would be normally. The hurricane was just starting.
[Sesay:] So, it's about the ratings. Dave?
[Jacobson:] There you go. He's bragging again, right? The reality is Donald Trump never misses an opportunity to exploit his self- indulgence when it comes to being an egomaniac. And the reality is like he wants to be in the headlines and clearly Hurricane Harvey was taking away from that. But I think here is the other issue. Like, he has to govern and he has to get a bill through to actually fund the relief. And this weekend he was tweeting to Senator Claire McCaskill from Missouri, bragging about his electoral victory over the weekend at a time when he should be talking about the hurricane. He's going to need her vote to pass a relief funds bill
[Sesay:] John, the president is going to go to Texas on Tuesday. The question is, can he stick to the script. Can he keep it about Texas? Or does it become about the president?
[Thomas:] I think, at this point, they're one and the same. I think the president is focused on the federal government giving the proper response to the governor of Texas, who said that he's been thrilled with the reaction and the relationship that the president has had towards Texas at this point. Time will tell. But so far, I give the president I think most people a pretty darn good rating in terms of handling this disaster.
[Sesay:] Apart from Dave. Dave, what are your expectations for the president's trip on Tuesday?
[Jacobson:] I think the question is like, is he going to act presidential? Will he be cool, calm and collected and measured? And from what we've seen throughout the last seven months of this presidency, I doubt that's going to be the case.
[Thomas:] I think the difference is Dave wants he's concerned about temperament. I am concerned about actions and results.
[Sesay:] Ooh.
[Jacobson:] We shall see.
[Sesay:] Gentlemen, thank you.
[Jacobson:] Thanks.
[Vause:] Well, Houston city officials are trying to reassure undocumented immigrants. There's no risk of deportation if they need to be rescued or seek shelter or other help. The mayor says, everyone who needs help will be helped regardless of immigration status. A storm hit days before a new Texas law takes effect, cracking down on so-called sanctuary cities. That law which requires police and other officials to enforce federal immigration statutes is currently being challenged in court. The city tweeted this message out about an hour so ago. We will not ask for immigration status or papers from anyone at any shelter. This rumor is false, assuming that the rumor that they would ask, is in fact false. It's a little confusing that tweet.
[Sesay:] Yes, it is. When we come back, a lot more from the Texas flood zone. This was a scene just before nightfall in Houston. In a moment, we'll hear from a pastor helping the stranded as those flood waters rise.

[Briggs:] Welcome back. Everybody, thanks for joining us on a Sunday afternoon. I'm Dave Briggs in for Fredricka Whitfield. The tide has not turned in southern California. We are in day six in the furious Santa Ana winds are keeping the areas' largest wildfire alive, the Thomas fire now, the state's 13th most destructive. It's torched an area over twice the size of Atlanta. Overnight, the blaze jumped in the nearby Santa Barbara County. Evacuations there are underway. And for hundreds of homeowners and businesses, the devastation is simply unspeakable. California Governor, Jerry Brown, calls this, quote, the new normal.
[Gov. Jerry Brown , California:] From history going back a long, long way, there have been very long droughts in California. We are getting some of those returning very bad. And we're going to get them returning more often and then with climate change, some scientists are saying southern California is literally burning up. And burning up as maybe a metaphor or a description and not just with the fire right here, but what we can expect over the next years and decades.
[Briggs:] Ominous words there. CNN's Senior Correspondent, Kyung Lah is in Santa Barbara County on the fire line. Kyung, what are you seeing there?
[Kyung Lah, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] Well, Dave, it's expected to be a very tough day. We were actually in the hills with the firefighters and they tell you that it's exhausting and they are looking at another rough day specially when you go into the fire line. This is one flank of the fire. You can just see it's burning right there in those hills. And we were amid that area. This is a fire that is in so many ways absolutely unrelenting. It is 173,000 acres, 15,000 structures are threatened, 754 have been destroyed so far. But those figures, Dave, we believe are outdated because while we were up in those hills with firefighters, we saw a house burn right before our eyes. So, what firefighters are hoping is that the weather is going to improve, but the forecast is absolutely the reverse. The dry conditions are continuing. The winds expected to pick up in those hills. It is very, very windy. They are hitting it very hard from the air. You can hear helicopters. I can actually see one over there trying to pick up some water. They are trying to hit it as hard as they can from the air to try to put down these flames. The big concern right now, Dave, is that the fire is going to continue to march northwest. If it heads northwest, an area called Montecito, California which is bit more populated, populated with celebrity homes, larger estates that could also come under evacuation order and come under the threat. They're hoping to try to slow this merciless fire down. Dave?
[Briggs:] Terrifying new norm in the words of the governor there. Kyung Lah, thanks so much. Kyung talked about those gusty Santa Ana winds. Let's get to our CNN Meteorologist, Ivan Cabrera, for the latest on the red flag warnings. Ivan, what are we seeing? Are these winds going to pick up?
[Ivan Cabrera, Cnn Meteorologist:] They are going to continue to pick up. In fact, I think by later this afternoon we could be looking at the potential for hurricane force winds once again, upwards of 20 million people under a critical fire threat here across multiple counties in the southern California with the Santa Ana winds that continue. And we've seen Kyung Lah there, not much wind where she is, but boy, you get up to those hills and the winds pick up dramatically. In fact, the high wind warnings continue now for Ventura and then to Los Angeles counties, 35 to 45 mile per hour winds. That's bad enough. You get down towards San Diego County, 60 to 75 mile an hour wind gust as we heads for later on today. Seventy four is hurricane, right? So, once again, we could have that potential with very high fire risk. Then you see the red flag warnings that continue here because of those winds that have been relentless coming in from the north and east pushing down toward the southwest. These are the critical things we look at, right? Temperature, that's hasn't been an issue. There has not been a problem. The wind has basically calling the shots here over the last and several days, 40 to 55 mile an hour winds. In general, the humidity, my goodness, I mean, it just can't get any lower. Single digit humidity values, that will continue and, of course, there is no rain inside. That has of course, it's what leads to this problem here. No rain. The conditions not been just prying for high fire danger here. Here's is the area of high pressure. Those are the offshore winds that compress and kind of lower the humidity as well as when they come down to slopes that can really get going 60-70 miles an hour. Better conditions as we hit through Monday. And I really think Monday will be the transition day. So then by Tuesday, we're going to see this area with improved winds, right? So now we've gone from critical. This is for tomorrow, elevated still going to be a problem. And I still think we have 40 to 50 mile an hour winds but that area of high pressure will begin to move to the north and they'll begin to weaken here. Look at this, 242 square miles. We mentioned Atlanta twice. The square footage there where we're looking at those square miles, we're looking at basically the size of Chicago as well. So this is going to continue to be a problem. But I think by the time we get into Tuesday, firefighters, this is a one ingredient. If you ask them that is going to be a big help will be the winds coming down and I think that will happen by Tuesday will be down between 20 and 30 miles per hour. That's still high, but it's a much improved condition from hurricane force winds which we have in the last few days.
[Briggs:] Any good news, they will take it there in southern California. Ivan Cabrera, thanks so much. Happening right now in New Jersey, Democrat Senator Cory Booker campaigning with Democrat Doug Jones in Alabama which is a couple a days away from crucial Senate race. An African-American turn out will be critical for Doug Jones. Complete team coverage of that race, ahead.

[Quest:] Extraordinary story of appetizing. Aeromexico is telling Americans, we'll give you a discount if can prove you have Mexican heritage. Take a DNA test, and the more Mexican blood you have, the bigger the discount. The ad was filmed in Texas and it followed President Trump's call for a border wall.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you like Tequila? Yes. Do you like burritos? Yes. Do you like Mexico? No. And when your company name is Aeromexico, well, so how do we increase USA flights to Mexico if a big part of Americans just don't like Mexico. According to the Department of Homeland Security, Mexican immigration goes as far as the 1800s, settling in on the south. Meaning that a big percentage of Mexican ascendance in the USA doesn't even know it yet.
[Quest:] Now, the ad then goes on to prove as the various people then learn that they've got percentage of Mexican blood within them. I want to bring in Bruce Turkel; he's the CEO and founder of Turkel Brands, a management firm. He joins me from Miami. Always good to see you, Bruce. You've seen the advert
[Bruce Turkel, Chief Executive Officer, Turkel Brands:] Good evening, Richard
[Quest:] It's moving infomercial, it goes on for some two and a half minutes, and it's a good story-tell. But does it work for you?
[Turkel:] Well, it goes on for two and a half minutes because, obviously, the whole point of this is they want it to go viral. They want it to sell they want you to sell it and send it to other people. Does it work for me? You know, what's interesting on a lot of levels. As an American, I find it fascinating. As a traveler, I had to watch. As someone who has partisan, political views as we all do, I also found it fascinating. But as someone in the industry, I'm not so sure. I did a lot of work for Avio, TECO, for Taco, for Long Chili and their number one market is VFR, that's called visiting friends and relatives. Indigenous residents of a country going home. So if you get a percentage off for Mexican heritage, does that mean if you're Mexican, you fly for free? I don't understand how that works.
[Quest:] As in terms of just being down right controversial, it sort of pokes fun at what some would say as being ignorant Americans in the south who discover that they are part Mexican. Does is that is that nice?
[Turkel:] It's not nice to poke fun at anybody, but I think you said the right words upfront, Richard. In terms of being down right controversial, we have proved that in today's environment, both politically and also advertising business, there's no margin in the middle. You have to both excite people and take the risk of let's face it, ticking people off in order to get a response. So no, it's not nice, but it's telling and it makes you watch. You want to hear what these people do. You either side with them or against them, but you can't turn it off.
[Quest:] It's reality TV in an advert, look, remember yesterday on this program, we had the new Gillette commercial which is all about getting men not to be so boarish. Let's all listen to that one quickly for a second.
[Damon Jones, Vice President Of Global Communications, Procter & Gamble:] Nine out of ten consumers tell us that, you know, they want brands to be active on social and environmental issues, and they will have a more positive view. We know that half of those consumers influence, you know, the purchase decisions or influence by their shared beliefs from a brand. So we believe it's an opportunity for us and we believe that when we do it, we can again have a positive impact on society and reflect well on our brands.
[Quest:] That was head of commerce for P&G there, defending it. You've seen that commercial too.
[Turkel:] Yes, of course
[Quest:] It's taken a lot of flack, does it work for you?
[Turkel:] Yes, I think that one makes a lot of sense for a couple of reasons. One of which is obvious, one of which is not so obvious. Think about when you shave, Richard, what is a more intimate time than when you're looking at yourself in the mirror and trying to make yourself feel better and look better. So having a conversation with yourself about how you may have misbehaved, how may be you didn't do the right thing back in your past, that's a very intimate moment, and I think that ties in exactly with who Gillette is, be the best a man can be. But there's something they're not telling you. In women's
[Quest:] Right
[Turkel:] Wear I'm sorry, in men's wear, 80 percent of men's wear is purchased by women. They buy it for the men in their lives. How many Gillette customers get their razor blades because their girlfriends, wives, mothers, somebody else buys their blades? My wife happens to buy mine for me. That ad speaks to women.
[Quest:] All right
[Turkel:] I have a feeling that what Gillette is not saying is a big part of their purchasers of men's blades are women.
[Quest:] Haven't thought about, brilliant, good to see you, Bruce, have a lovely weekend.
[Turkel:] Thank you, Richard, and you
[Quest:] We will take a profitable moment after the break, it will be a short one, but we'll still have it.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks to our international viewers for watching. For you "CNN TALK" is next. For U.S. viewers, NEW DAY continues right now.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] You mean right now.
[Berman:] I mean literally right now, this second. Good morning. Welcome to your NEW DAY if you're just joining us in the last second and a half. The Justice Department inspector general's report is out, the president and his allies already using it as ammunition against the special counsel's Russia investigation, even though the I.G. report was not about the special counsel's Russia investigation. The president wrote about it for the first time just moments ago. His lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, sending out an even stronger message. He says that Robert Mueller should suspend his investigation today so that FBI officials and the report can be investigated. Again, there is nothing in the report on the special counsel probe. But the report also found that former FBI director James Comey was not motivated by political bias in his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
[Camerota:] Or at least that there was no evidence of that.
[Berman:] No evidence that Comey was. But Peter Strzok, one of the agents
[Camerota:] Certainly seemed biased against him.
[Berman:] Exactly.
[Camerota:] All right. Meanwhile, the House Republican leaders are unveiling an immigration bill that adds new restrictions to legal immigration and asylum seekers and new protections for young, undocumented immigrants known as DREAMers. It would also stop the Trump administration policy of separating parents and children at the border that we're seeing play out right now. In the meantime, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is using the Bible to defend that practice of separating parents from children. According to the "Washington Post," he used the very same passage from the Bible that has been used to justify slavery. We begin our coverage with CNN's Abby Phillip. She is live at the White House. What's happening there, Abby
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Alisyn. It's 2016 all over again here in Washington. With this inspector general report into the FBI's handling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation, sparking both sides claiming some victory here. And President Trump this morning is tweeting now about the I.G. report. He tweeted earlier this morning about Peter Strzok but in the last few moments said this: "The I.G. report is a total disaster for Comey, his minions and, sadly, the FBI. James Comey, the former FBI director, will now officially go down as the worst leader, by far, in the history of the FBI. I did a great service to the people in firing him. Good instincts. Christopher Wray will bring it back proudly." Christopher Wray being the current FBI director. What we're also seeing in the fallout from this I.G. report some previews of what the messages might be about the special counsel's findings once he finally concludes the Russia investigation.
[Rudy Giuliani, Attorney For Donald Trump:] Tomorrow, Mueller should be suspended, and honest people should be brought in. Strzok should be in jail by the end of next week.
[Phillip:] President Trump's legal team seizing on the inspector general's report in an attempt to undermine both the special counsel probe and the credibility of former FBI director James Comey.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] It reaffirmed the president's suspicions about Comey's conduct and the political bias among some of the members of the
[Fbi. Phillip:] The report offers a bruising rebuke of Comey, saying he was insubordinate in his handling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation, and repeatedly departed from normal Justice Department protocol, including with this press conference announcing the end of the probe.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly-classified information.
[Phillip:] Comey did not tell then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch before making this announcement. The inspector general also criticizing Comey for ignoring the objections of top Justice Department officials and sending this letter announcing the reopening of the investigation just days before the election.
[John Podesta, Former Clinton Campaign Chairman:] Jim Comey violated practice and procedure. He applied a double standard with respect to the investigation of Hillary Clinton versus the investigation of Russian interference in the election, and its connection to the Trump campaign.
[Phillip:] Comey, defending his actions, writing, "My team believed the damage of concealing the reopening of our investigation would have been catastrophic to the institution." Nevertheless, the inspector general did not challenge the conclusion that Clinton should not have been prosecuted, and they found no evidence that the conclusions by the prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations. Ironically, the inspector general report did find that Comey himself used a personal e-mail account to conduct official government business. Clinton responding with this stinging tweet quipping, "But my e-mails."
[Robby Mook, Former Clinton Campaign Manager:] Director Comey felt entitled to go in front of the country, unauthorized, and lecture Secretary Clinton about her use when it turns out he was doing the same thing.
[Phillip:] The report is particularly critical of two FBI officials, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who exchanged a number of texts, criticizing Mr. Trump, including this from August 2016. Page texts, "Trump's never going to become president, right? Right?" Strzok replies, "No. No, he's not. We'll stop it." The inspector general says that, while the text implies a willingness to take official action to impact Trump's electoral prospects, he found no evidence that bias impacted the Russia investigation. The I.G. adding, "The conduct by these employees casts a cloud over the entire FBI investigation and goes to the heart of the FBI's reputation for neutral fact finding and political independence." FBI Director Christopher Wray vowing to hold employees accountable but defending the bureau.
[Wray:] Nothing in this report impugns the integrity of our work force as a whole or the FBI as an institution.
[Phillip:] And President Trump has no public events on his schedule again today, for the third day in a row since he returned from Singapore and that Kim Jong-un meeting. But we have already seen him rolling out some of his responses to this I.G. report. We'll be on the lookout for more of that this morning John.
[Berman:] All right. Abby Phillip at the White House. Just one of the major developments today. Also, a new immigration bill by House Republicans adds new restrictions in legal immigration and new restrictions on asylum. It would also extend new protections for young, undocumented immigrants and change the new Trump administration policy of separating parents and children at the border. The measure calls for $25 billion in border security funding that include a wall. It would end the diversity visa lottery and make cuts to family-based visas. And as we said, also provide a path to citizenship for DACA recipients. While this is going on, the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, is quoting scripture, using the Bible to defend the administration's policy of separating parents and children. Ed Lavandera is live in McAllen, Texas, with the latest on this. Ed, tell us what you've seen.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, John. Well, the Trump administration announcing that it is planning to open a new temporary shelter in far West Texas to house more of these undocumented immigrant children that are coming in and being separated from their families. All of this taking place over the course of the last month or so after the administration rolled out what it's called its zero-tolerance policy of charging everyone who crosses the border illegally with that federal misdemeanor crime of illegal entry. This is a temporary shelter that has been described to us as it will have soft sides, full heating and air-conditioning, as well. It will be crucial, because those summertime temperatures out in West Texas can easily reach over 100 degrees at times. So all of that continuing as the administration has been there are protests across the country because of the zero-tolerance policy, which is leading to the separation of more families here. But the administration incredibly continues to stand by what it's doing. The attorney general, Jeff Sessions, as you mentioned off the top, invoking biblical passage for doing what they're doing. And Sarah Sanders at the White House yesterday on the defensive, but not backing down from the administration, calling this the right move.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] The separation of illegal alien families is the product of the same legal loopholes that Democrats refuse to close. And these laws are the same that have been on the books for over a decade, and the president is simply enforcing them.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] your policy to take children away from their parents? Can you imagine the horror that these children must be going through?
[Sanders:] It is to follow and enforce the law.
[Lavandera:] And John and Alisyn, one of the confusing things that we've been reporting here in South Texas over the last few weeks is just the perhaps the arbitrary and inconsistent nature with which the zero-tolerance policy is being applied. In the federal courthouse, where we've seen hundreds of undocumented immigrants being prosecuted for the federal on the federal charge, just across the street there was a shelter where we've interviewed more than a dozen undocumented immigrants who tell us that they were never separated from their children, never taken into federal court. And trying to understand what the difference is in these different cases has been very difficult. So at times, it appears arbitrary and inconsistent, to be honest.
[Berman:] Again, Ed, it's great that we have you down there, taking a look at this firsthand to get the facts. Ed Lavandera, down in McAllen, Texas, thanks so much. A lot going on. We have immigration issue, the I.G. report. Joining us, CNN political analyst John Avlon and CNN Politics reporter and editor at large, Chris Cillizza. Guys, let me just read you quickly what the president is saying this morning, because he's weighing in for the first time. For the first time in the I.G. report. He said, "The I.G. report is a total disaster for Comey, his minions and, sadly, the FBI. Comey will now officially go down as the worst leader, by far, in the history of the FBI. I did a great service to the people in firing him. Good instincts. Christopher Wray will proudly bring it back." That's what the president says. Rudy Giuliani, his lawyer, says that because of this report, he's got a Mueller's got to quit, basically, right now.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes.
[Camerota:] I'm sure he'll get right on that.
[Berman:] Well, look, you know, what's going to happen today?
[Avlon:] I think we've got a couple reality checks here. This report was very much hyped up by Trump and his folks, because the original bar was would there be prosecution for Hillary Clinton? Would there be more even more condemnatory of James Comey legal repercussions? This and was there bias seeding it all? The report falls short of those partisan goals. It is condemning of Comey, I think appropriately, for not following proper procedures. It highlights, really, indefensible, you know, texts from Strzok and to his the woman he's having an affair with, his fellow agent, Page. But it doesn't hit those bars. The idea that Rudy is saying this compels the immediate shutdown of the Mueller probe and its folks should be in jail by the end of the week. There's Rudy knows in this heart of hearts, this isn't related to that entirely. That is not on what charge would you put Strzok in prison by the end of the week? That is is pure public opinion language that has nothing to do with the reality of the report and really diminishes the rule of law. It's beneath him.
[Camerota:] There there are so many headlines from this report. I mean, James Comey was insubordinate. That he broke with protocol. But I can't get past that he used his private e-mail account.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Correspondent And Editor At Large:] I know. As we were saying, it now feels to me like, basically, every government official does not use their government e-mail and uses their private account. I do think Comey and John touched on this. Comey does not come across very well here. He is it strikes me and the I.G. report doesn't say this but it strikes me that he is someone who's looking out for sort of how Jim Comey is going to come out of this thing. The fact that he would go and lecture Hillary Clinton about her use of a private e-mail server while having using his own private e-mail, not a server but his own private e-mail. The fact that on October 5, he recommends not coming out with the Russia the fact of the Russian investigation for fear of it being an October surprise.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] But 23 days later he comes out and says, "Oh, by the way, remember that thing in July I talked about. Well, now we are going to look into these e-mails on Anthony Weiner's computer."
[Camerota:] And didn't they find that he didn't have to do that? Not only was it inconsistent
[Cillizza:] Right.
[Camerota:] that there was no protocol that he had to.
[Cillizza:] Right. The problem was, I remember that day. He said, "I'm saying this. We won't be able to we almost certainly will not be able to figure out what's in these before the election." And then on the Saturday or the Sunday before the election he said, "Actually, nothing's in there."
[Avlon:] "Never mind."
[Cillizza:] But by then, the damage was done.
[Avlon:] The damage was done. And also, significantly, the tail is wagging the dog. He's responding to concerns that, in the future, if that news gets out, it will be seen as a conspiracy.
[Camerota:] There's one thing about bias.
[Cillizza:] And hurt him. He's seen
[Berman:] And bias, of course, is in fact, a four-letter word here. But it's also the most complicated thing that comes out of this 500- page report. On the one hand, it finds no evidence of bias at all was involved in the conclusions in the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation. And that's huge.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Berman:] That's crucial. However, it specifically says that they can't be sure that bias did not play a role in how Peter Strzok
[Avlon:] Correct.
[Berman:] handled Anthony Weiner's computer in the month before.
[Cillizza:] And the timing of why he remember, they had the computer in September. And it wasn't until the end of October that Comey came out and said, "We've got these e-mails." The report is very clear. It says, "The one thing we cannot determine" now people well read that as, well, must be bias. No, cannot be determine there was bias, is why did he it take that long on the Weiner thing and the not the Russia thing? Was that prioritized? Was that de-prioritized? Wit's we're never going to know the answer to that. But remember: the Russia investigation, which would have been hugely damaging
[Avlon:] Right.
[Cillizza:] if it had leaked for Donald Trump, didn't leak.
[Berman:] I understand. And also, you can make an easy case that the delay hurt Clinton way more than it helped her.
[Cillizza:] No question.
[Avlon:] The absurdity of all this question is that the way the FBI handled all of this helped Donald Trump get elected and hurt Hillary Clinton. So I mean, let's not forget that screamingly obvious fact behind it all.
[Cillizza:] And to John's point there, it is important to remember the things that Comey is scolded for, the July 5, coming out with that and saying, "Well, there are no charges that we're going to press." And then the October 28 coming out and saying, "Well, actually, we're reopening." Those things and, oh, not coordinating enough with Loretta Lynch. None of you can argue whether they helped Donald Trump. But none of them certainly hurt Donald Trump in any meaningful way. And I would argue you can make a very convincing case they hurt her.
[Berman:] Well, look, Peter Strzok will still be investigated for his role, I think, in the Mueller investigation.
[Camerota:] And there are damning texts.
[Berman:] That's a whole other thing.
[Camerota:] We're sure of that. But let's talk about what's happening at the border. OK? So as you know, there are something like I mean, in the past, I don't know, I've seen different numbers. Somewhere between 500 and 650 kids who have been separated from their parents in the past few weeks. So Senator A.G. Jeff Sessions had a new explanation, a new justification for why this is OK.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Camerota:] Let me play this for you.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Sessions:] I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes. Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent, fair application of law is, in itself, a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak. It protects the lawful.
[Camerota:] Go, John.
[Avlon:] A couple problems with this. One, James Madison's going to come back from the grave and smack Jeff Sessions upside the head about the separation of church and state. Second problem is quoting Romans 13. That biblical package, first of all, basic reality check. The heart of the Bible is not submission to worldly authority. That one in fact, it's the opposite of much of what the Bible says. That passage gets invoked particularly in the run-up to the Civil War to defend slavery. And by loyalists during the American Revolution. So let's not get spun around that that's somehow fidelity to the Bible. That is a biblical excuse for an administration policy that is undercutting the essence of family values.
[Cillizza:] And the word here "discretion" matters. This is a policy. Sarah Sanders kept saying this. There is a law that, if you enter the country illegally with a child, the adult will be prosecuted and the child will be placed in care. But it's
[Camerota:] There's also a law that we provide protection to asylum seekers. There is a law that you provide protection to them, not that you rip their children away from them.
[Cillizza:] Totally agree. But they would argue the argument would be these are not all asylum seekers, No. 1. Right?
[Camerota:] Sure. But they are doing it to the asylum seekers, as well.
[Cillizza:] And what they are doing is, when you say there's a zero tolerance policy, you are making a choice.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] It used to be and that Sarah Sanders is, I think, trying to say, "We're just enforcing the law. Our hands are tied." That's not accurate. You can use discretion. Even obviously, I think asylum seekers you put in a different category.
[Camerota:] They're not.
[Cillizza:] You should. You need to use discretion. And I think we're seeing we are seeing the result of what a zero-tolerance policy, which probably sounds good on the campaign trail, what it means in actual real life. And I don't think any of us should be comfortable with it, no matter what our view on broader immigration policy.
[Avlon:] This is a choice, and as the pope pointed out in a tweet that seemed to be addressed, there is also a biblical package that says love the foreigners among you. So this is a decision.
[Berman:] This is a Trump administration policy. They decided to do this.
[Avlon:] Right, right.
[Berman:] And they just need to own it, and then you can have the debate about whether it's
[Camerota:] Right. But the fact that they're not owning it, maybe it's just a tactic to bring people to the table. Maybe it's just a tactic to hasten the immigration debate, because that does seem to be happening.
[Berman:] It's a it's a tactic being played out on babies. So they need to own that.
[Camerota:] Absolutely. Using babies as a tool.
[Cillizza:] That's a problem. If it is a tactic and I never know if it is or they're just doing it. But if it is a tactic, OK. But the problem always with this stuff and this is the case any time you take any sort of extreme position and say zero-tolerance. The problem is the real world is impacted by these policies.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] It's just not something you say on the campaign trail, because you know certain people within your base like it.
[Camerota:] Gentlemen, thank you very much. Chris Cillizza, John Avlon, great to talk to you. OK. So the Trump and Clinton campaigns are united on one point.
[Berman:] It brought them together.
[Camerota:] This is a beautiful moment of unity. That former FBI director James Comey did them wrong, both of them. But did he affect the outcome of the 2016 election? And who got hurt? We will hear from both sides, next.

[Kellyanne Conway, Counselor To President Trump:] I was just in Tennessee last Thursday again on the opioid crisis. This is the scourge of our times. This is no state has been spared. No demographic group untouched. You want to come along sometime and report on it? You want to go listen to the people?
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] We have a documentary coming out this fall about the opioid crisis
[Cuomo:] Manchester, New Hampshire, where the president was, the firefighters there still hoping for help that was promised during the campaign.
[Conway:] So you know what? So you know what? The opioid you want to talk about Russia. I want to talk about the opioid crisis. We talk about it on this show. I have a documentary coming out this fall. I want you to talk about the women's empowerment initiatives that Ivanka Trump is leading. I want you to talk about ISIS in retreat. I want you to talk about the 10 bilateral meetings that the president had on this foreign trip and the three pull-asides. I mean there's so much because what about the speech in Poland that tells them you are survivors. We share your spirit, your love of freedom, your love of personal responsibility, your love of this is just such a beautiful speech where the President of the United States appealed to people in Poland. We will stand with you. And then went to the G20. Here, for a couple of hours, practically a couple of days. He will go back to Paris. There's so many things to cover. Please connect America with the information they need. You're in a great position to tell veterans they've got help. They've got new hotlines. They have new ways to access care. You can tell people about the jobs that are being created, the fact that we
[Cuomo:] We do.
[Conway:] define every type of work.
[Cuomo:] We do. And I let you make your pitch to the American people. I'm happy you did. The opportunity is always here.
[Conway:] Tell your panel
[Cuomo:] The opportunity is always here. Hold on. Don't worry about the panel.
[Conway:] six versus one anti-Trump panel we're sorry we cut into their time.
[Cuomo:] Tell the American people something else while you're here, that they shouldn't believe all of the White House and the surrogates and your alt-right friends that want to destroy the responsible media. Tell them that they shouldn't listen to that stuff, that the media matters and that they should judge stories on their face and that they shouldn't think that there's some type of agenda out to get the president on the behalf
[Conway:] I know you're trying to go viral here so let me just do this
[Cuomo:] I'm trying to go viral?
[Conway:] watching this in your pajamas or writing about us
[Cuomo:] But I'm just saying that matters, too because you're saying I have a great opportunity.
[Conway:] respect the First Amendment.
[Cuomo:] But you compromise my ability to reach people with information
[Conway:] No, I don't compromise your ability.
[Cuomo:] when you say whatever you don't like is fake. That matters, too, Kellyanne. If you're going to tell the American people what to think about
[Conway:] I never used that word.
[Cuomo:] they should think that, too. Well, but many around you have.
[Conway:] Chris, I believe
[Cuomo:] You don't have to say the word without meaning the word and attacking CNN every time you don't like what they report.
[Conway:] You're doing an infomercial now.
[Cuomo:] I'm doing an infomercial? What were you doing? What were you doing, making your witness? What were you doing?
[Conway:] Oh, excuse me, excuse me. It wasn't an infomercial. It was actually telling people information they should have about jobs and apprenticeships and health care
[Cuomo:] And that's relevant information also. The media matters. We shouldn't disrespect each other. We should give each other the benefit of the doubt. First of all, it's my show. This is what I do. I talk through the television. And if it's not me, then it's Alisyn talking on the television. That's the show. But listen, I think we've spent enough time on this stuff today.
[Conway:] You asked me about the media. First Amendment, we, of course, believe and respect the First Amendment. We believe the press has a great role in this country. You've got to treat this guy more fairly. You've got to treat him more openly and honestly. The snarky looks, the furrowed brows, the rolling of the eyes from so many people on your panels and you know it. You've made a business decision to be anti-Trump. OK, the country
[Cuomo:] And you guys have also made a decision. You've made a decision to be antagonistic toward the media, to lump us all together, to rally your followers to think that we're bad people.
[Conway:] That's not true.
[Cuomo:] And attack us online and talk about our families and come and try and jump us and try to embarrass us. Look, it comes out from the White House all the time. I'm saying it all matters. That's all. It all matters. Everyone can do better. That's all.
[Conway:] You don't want to have said you don't want to have said that we rally people to attack. OK, you don't want to have said that. I don't want this to be about me. I know you like to say the word "I" a lot. I'm a 247 Secret Service protectee, not because it's fun or not because they flipped a coin.
[Cuomo:] And you know how I feel about that. And you know how I feel about that as your friend. And you know how I feel about that as your friend.
[Conway:] privately
[Cuomo:] You know publicly also. I do nothing but show respect to you and I give you lots of time on the show. Yes, I do think that everybody can do better. I agree. I agree.
[Conway:] But, look, this with a free press comes a fair press and a fully responsible press. And the rush to judgment, the fact that you go with one source on things and then have to retract it
[Cuomo:] That is not how we do things, by the way. First of all, whatever CNN has done wrong, it has owned
[Conway:] I know.
[Cuomo:] in a way that is a symbol for accountability to this country, by the way. It would be nice if everybody who is wrong handled it the way CNN did. I was very proud of what this organization did. I know a lot of other news organizations and a lot of political people wouldn't have done it.
[Conway:] Think about what happened. It's the rush to judgment, it's the rush to be negative. Think about why it happened. That's all you need to do.
[Cuomo:] All I know is how it was owned and how it was handled, how it was owned and how it was handled is a model for accountability. Everybody should handle
[Conway:] Be more fair. Why aren't your panels more balanced? Why are there sometimes no
[Cuomo:] I think are plenty balanced. On this show they're mostly journalists. All right, we got "Washington Examiner." We got everybody from all over the place.
[Conway:] Let me repeat my question then.
[Cuomo:] Yes.
[Conway:] They have to be more balanced. You need somebody who's reflecting the
[Cuomo:] If you want flattery there's another channel that can give you that. We try and keep it straight, we go with both sides and we test power. Kellyanne, I got to go. We have got to get to a health care we have to get to a health care debate. You are welcome whenever you want.
[Conway:] Health care reform is coming.
[Cuomo:] Thank you for making time.
[Conway:] Take care.
[Cuomo:] You were awfully quiet.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] I went to work out. I don't often have time to have work out, but I just did now.
[Cuomo:] But, listen, you know what, hopefully a good conversation for you guys to hear. It was actually not that unlike conversations that we have off camera.
[Camerota:] It was fascinating. It was fascinating. I mean Kellyanne states her case quite plainly the way she sees it and, you know, obviously, you tackled it as best as anybody ever could and so I think we just see
[Cuomo:] But the points are all real. And they are echoed out there. But, look, I think the the headline, you know and this won't be the headline, but it should, is, there's no question that this has to be a dynamic of people trying to do it better because I don't think this is sustainable. I don't think that this
[Camerota:] The overheated vitriol?
[Cuomo:] This hostility
[Camerota:] Ys.
[Cuomo:] And not so much look, Kellyanne and I have known each other literally a very a very long time.
[Camerota:] No, that wasn't overheated.
[Cuomo:] But this idea that the media, if they're doing things that are critical of the president is bad, that's bad. That is dangerous and it's not helpful to the president. And I think that you've got to be fair to the president. The president has to be fair to you. Both of them may sometimes fall short, but it's got to change.
[Camerota:] Yes. Let's discuss it with our balanced panel. We have CNN's senior political analyst Ron Brownstein, as balanced as they come, CNN political analyst David Drucker and associate editor and columnist for Real Clear Politics, A.B. Stoddard. David, I don't know where to begin.
[David Drucker, Cnn Political Analyst:] Me neither.
[Camerota:] What what did you hear that you'd like to talk about?
[Drucker:] All of it, but let's hone in on a couple of, I think, important things here. I don't even know if they all go together. But but I think that, as a matter of U.S. foreign policy, Kellyanne Conway did comment on how this White House views Russia and its ability to work with Vladimir Putin. And its it's confusing because the president's national security team, General Mattis, General McMaster, Nikki Haley, the ambassador to the United Nations, seemed to recognize Vladimir Putin for what he is, a U.S. adversary that you cannot trust. And a lot of the actions that the administration has been taking that they don't talk about have recognized Putin for what he is and work to counter his influence in Europe and the Middle East. But the president and his leadership here, his rhetoric is so important. And we saw that reflected in how Kellyanne Conway talked about the president's meeting with Vladimir Putin does not seem to recognize that Vladimir Putin is an adversary that cannot be trusted. And it appears, possibly, that the president is about to try his own Russian reset. And and I mention that because she brought up that ridiculous Staples button that Hillary Clinton used when she was secretary of state to try and symbolize the reset.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Drucker:] And, if so, it means that the president doesn't recognize the lessons that Barack Obama, a Democrat, and George W. Bush, a Republican, should have learned from dealing with Putin. That, I think, is one key thing to come out of the interview. The carping about the media and the need to be fair, look, I will just say this, everybody has opinions about the media. I know a lot of Americans aren't always happy with what we do. The whole point of having a free media is really the freedom to be unfair. And if you don't like it, you go to another source and there are many sources. The point isn't to be the point is to be accurate and the point is to be fair, but the point is also for the judgment on that to not come from one central place, particularly the people in power that we're reporting on.
[Cuomo:] Right. All right, look, I mean you have to give Kellyanne the benefit of making a good point with that Russian reset. It didn't work and
[Camerota:] But aren't they doing a Russian reset right now, just without a big red button?
[Cuomo:] Right, but I think her point is in general that, look, it didn't work before.
[Camerota:] Right, but they're trying it now.
[Cuomo:] It's it's yes, it's good if you're going to try and work with somebody. I don't think anybody would disagree with that. It was that choosing cyber security was an odd thing given the inimical nature that Russia has with the United States on that issue.
[Camerota:] Yes, but I think I I get I hear you, but I guess my point about being confused by what Kellyanne said is that they're trying a Russian reset. Every administration wants a Russian reset and then decides that maybe it won't work.
[Cuomo:] There's nothing wrong with a reset. It's that the last one didn't work and she was suggesting this one is working better. That remains to be seen.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] But the big story of the morning, A.B., we also heard about. Kellyanne was arguing that because the meeting amounted to nothing again, amounted to nothing in the to the reckoning of Donald Jr., and his credibility is an issue, therefore the meeting doesn't matter. But that's not true, I would submit, because it is about the solicitation by this attorney with connections. It is about his acceptance of that solicitation on the basis of potential negative information about Hillary Clinton. That's why it's relevant to the investigation, not what fruit came out of the meeting. Your take?
[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor & Columnist, Real Clear Politics:] Right. And you argued that pretty well, that it was the it was the intent of an operative for the Kremlin to get a meeting and to try to interfere by promising some damaging information about Hillary Clinton and, you know, Donald Jr. accepted that pretext for the meeting, as he says, and accepted the meeting. And actually Kellyanne did not have a good argument or defense of that. She just tried to say, like, Chief of Staff Reince Priebus did it. It was a nothing-burger. That since nothing came out of the meeting, it's meaningless. And as you said, the entire point is that the Russians could have made associates of the Trump family or campaign unwitting participants in some sort of collusion that the Russians had planned and were attempting. And so because she couldn't make a good defense of Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting, she did what I understand, and she does so well because I, too, have known Kellyanne a long time and she is as articulate and unflappable as they come. And she and she has the frustration that many people who have worked for presidents before President Trump have had, which is they don't think their good news get out and so they believe that the free press is not being fair because they only cover the corners that the administrations are cutting, the untruths that presidents are telling, the things they're trying to cover up and, you know, potential scandals. And so that was true of Obama. He felt that the press was out to get him. He went after the press very hard. And so, you know, it's not something new that she's sitting here on NEW DAY trying to use it as a platform to talk about the positive things he's done because that's a frustration that they that they hold. But she also just could not make an explanation for your argument, which is why Robert Mueller and the investigators are looking are going to look into this. It's because it is evidence of how aggressive the Russians were at trying to penetrate the Trump campaign.
[Camerota:] OK, Ron, free choice, whatever you would like to discuss from our entire morning.
[Ron Brownstein, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, you know, it certainly that was that conversation kind of blurred the line at points between interview and therapy session about the relationship between the media and the Trump administration and Chris still hasn't had a glass of water. It's pretty impressive. Look, every administration, as A.B. says, wants to work the refs. And we heard a lot of that from Kellyanne in the in the first half hour. But there's another piece of that, which I think is actually even more revealing, where, yes, she wanted to work the refs and she said we're not the media is not covering the good news the administration is producing. But mostly what she was doing was bashing the media in a way meant to rally the president's base and his core supporters, basically arguing that he's under siege from all of these hostile forces in the media. And that, to me, is indicative of a much larger truth about this presidency. If you if you look at everything they are doing, both in style and substance, the agenda on health care, the agenda on taxes, even the way they are doing infrastructure, this is not designed to be a presidency that is a 50- plus one presidency. There is no vision here about expanding the base that he came in with. There is really nothing here about kind of growing who supports them. It is about rallying and mobilizing and stoking what was 46 percent of the electorate last November and in polling is probably somewhere now closer to 40 percent. It's a very kind of targeted and consistent approach, you know, that reflects in everything from the way they talk about the media to the decisions to try to do health care and taxes without even having perfunctory talks with Democrats on The Hill. And I think the way you heard Kellyanne talk about the media in the first half hour here is indicative of a presidency that is more about mobilization than persuasion and is really giving up on the idea of speaking to a broader country I think in almost everything they do.
[Cuomo:] Also, you know, Kellyanne kept trying to use the "in a courtroom" context. I don't know why she would use that. It's not a good metaphor for the administration. She should want to keep this as far away from any courtroom scenario as possible. But I only have one piece of proof, nobody would give Kellyanne Conway the amount of time that we just did. We didn't have to. She didn't hijack the show. We had plenty of other things that we are prepared and produced to do on this show. We gave her the time because we care about the conversation. And I know a lot of people on the left don't want Kellyanne Conway to have that kind of time. They say, no, no, don't give voice to it. That's what we do. You're not here to curry favor. You're not here to curry rancor from the White House. We had the discussion. That's the proof. She got the time to make the case. That's what CNN does.
[Camerota:] A.B., Ron, David, thank you very much for the perspective and being with us this morning.
[Drucker:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] So, let's talk about health care. Congress is back to work today. But senators, of course, are bitterly divided over the health care overhaul. Even Republicans cannot agree. So, what's next?

[Allen:] Well, the last time North Korea's top negotiator was in Washington, he hand-delivered a letter from North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to President Trump. Less than two weeks after that, the two met in Singapore. Now, Kim Yong-chol is back in Washington, and he may have another letter for President Trump. But it comes as the U.S. rolls out a new missile defense strategy and the Pentagon says North Korea remains a threat to the United States. For more about this, here's Paula Hancocks in Seoul.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] North Korea's top negotiator Kim Yong-chol is in Washington, D.C. right now. He was seen leaving Dallas International Airport with the U.S. Special Representative to North Korea, Steve Biegun. Now, Kim Yong-chol will have meetings on Friday. He's expected to meet U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Potentially, the U.S. President Donald Trump, as well. We don't know for sure. But he did last time, last year when he came. He met with Mr. Trump. And he came with the a rather oversized envelope carrying a message, a letter from the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. This time, as well, he will be delivering a message from the North Korean leader. The intention of this clearly from the North Korean side to try and break this stalemate in the denuclearization talks. And try and push towards that second summit between Kim Jong- un and President Trump. Now the date and location still being speculated on Hanoi, Vietnam appears to be the front-runner at this point. Bangkok has not been ruled out. And so, certainly, we could be hearing an announcement on that very soon. But the timing of Kim Yong-chol's visit is also interesting because it comes just hours after Trump rolled out a missile defense strategy. And this missile defense review at the Pentagon explicitly states that North Korea is an extraordinary threat to the United States. Now, this is consistent with what U.S. military and intelligence assessments have been stating all along. It is not, however, consistent with what the U.S. president has been saying all along. He has explicitly said that North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat. He said this back in June after that summit with Kim Jong-un in Singapore. He touched down in the U.S. and he tweeted that just landed a long trip but everybody can now feel much safer than the day I took office. There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea. Now, potentially this could be about timing. It could be about strategy with North Korea, we simply don't know. We also heard from the U.S. Vice President Mike Pence on Wednesday, and he said that the U.S. is still waiting on concrete steps from North Korea to denuclearize. Paula Hancocks, CNN, Seoul.
[Allen:] As France readies itself for the 10th consecutive week of yellow vest protests, President Emmanuel Macron is rolling out a new strategy, talking and listening. And he's calling it, the Great Debate. Our Jim Bittermann has more from France.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] For a few hours, the pleasant little Normandy Count of Bourgtheroulde was the political flashpoint of France. It was here that French President Macron in an attempt to defuse months of sometimes violent street protests chose to launch what he's calling the Great Debate. An extraordinary nationwide exercise in direct democracy that will continue from now until March 15th. To kick it off, the president met with 600 mayors who spent two hours telling him about the grievances and complaints of their fellow citizens. Centuries before the launch of the great debate, town halls have maintained a grievance box where citizens can write down their complaints. Since the yellow vest movement began, thousands of gripes have been collected. Chief among them seems to be the decline in purchasing power. But they range from the inequality of the tax system to the speed limits on rural roads. In Bourgtheroulde, about a hundred of the town's 3,800 people have taken time to complain. The mayor says local citizens are most concerned about taxes and mobility. The lack of public transportation for example on the expense of maintaining a car. He's not sure how much residents will take part in the great debate. But he'll organize meetings anyway. At a local florist shop, the owner who has lost time and money because of the yellow vest protest thinks that great debate will help ease the crisis.
[Cedric Deshayes, Florist, Bourgtheroulde:] You have to take matters in hand. Dialogue with people, get close to them and try to find a way to unblock things because if it goes on like this, then we're heading for chaos.
[Bitterman:] But a few miles away at a traffic circle that has been occupied since the beginning of the yellow vest movement, factory worker, Olvier Bruneau, says he's not participating in any debates. Macron, he says has shown contempt for the movement.
[Olvier Bruneau, Protester, Yellow Vest:] He does exactly what he intends to do without taking into account the complaints he already has, and without even looking at them.
[Bittermann:] That kind of resentment is more visible here in rural France where the feeling is that people are second-class citizens. Professor and author Denis Lacorre, says Macron's emphasis on modernizing France has left many here feeling like they've been left behind.
[Denis Lacorre, Professor And Author:] So it created a resentment. A kind of president who favored wealth, the rich, the American ways of doing things, particularly from Silicon Valley and forgot the lower-middle-class.
[Bittermann:] The president's grand experiment and direct democracy is meant to address that sense of exclusion, but much depends on what conclusions are drawn at the end of it. President Macron, says every kind of question can be raised during the Great Debate. But there remains a great deal of skepticism about the process. Skepticism about whether or not it's just a delaying tactic by the government to weigh out the protests. Or, whether the government will really respond to the kind of issues that are raised. Jim Bittermann, CNN, Bourgtheroulde, France.
[Allen:] And still ahead here on CNN NEWSROOM.
[Clarissa Ward, Cnn Chief International Correspondent:] These roads are still dangerous. Especially, early in the morning because there are ISIS sleeper cells in the area. They come out overnight and they plant roadside bombs.
[Allen:] U.S. allies say they will keep pushing ISIS out of Syria one town at a time. CNN's Clarissa Ward takes you to the frontlines.

[Cabrera:] The calm before the storm, that was the ominous cryptic warning from President Trump last night speaking off the cuff at a photo op with the nation's highest ranking military officials and their spouses. Listen closely to what he says.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] You guys know what this represents? [Inaudible] Maybe it's the calm before the storm.
[Unidentified Male:] What's the storm?
[President Trump:] Could be the calm before the storm.
[Unidentified Female:] What storm, Mr. President?
[President Trump:] You'll find out.
[Cabrera:] You'll find out. I want to bring in CNN White House reporter, Kaitlan Collins, and CNN global affairs correspondent, Elise Labott. So, Kaitlan, did the White House offer anything to clarify what the president meant by those remarks?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] No, they haven't. They haven't responded to multiple requests for comment about what the president meant when he made that ominous remark last night, but I should note that this is an event that reporters were not supposed to attend. The White House had issued a lid which means that the president is not scheduled to make any more public remarks and then shortly thereafter they called the reporters back into the room and that's when the president unprompted made these remarks about the calm before the storm. He was asked in the moment what storm was he referring to and he did not provide any more context, only said that you'll find out. But the White House did provide a read out of his meeting with these senior military leaders and it said they discussed things like North Korea, Afghanistan, Iran, some actual storms as hurricanes that have hit the United States in recent weeks, but no mention of any impending storms that could happen. There's a high possibility here that the president was just speaking off the cuff. We'll see is a favorite phrase of his that he uses very often. So, whether or not he was foreshadowing or just speaking off the cuff again is really anyone's guess at this point Ana.
[Cabrera:] We know this president likes to create drama, that is his wheelhouse over the years. Elise, you and Kaitlan, both have some new reporting just out on the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson now widely seen by both officials inside the White House and within the diplomatic community as being on the way out?
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Ana, I mean, look this week with revelations of things he might have said about President Trump, possibly calling him a moron, just the idea that the secretary of state is not in, you know, supporting his president, I think has really chafed President Trump. You know, he kind of knew about this when it before these stories started by NBC News that others have, you know, corroborated, ran, but the whole idea that it would become public and that Secretary Tillerson would be seen as being defiant of his president in that way, I think President Trump has been fuming. He was certainly furious when this all came out, and now officials are, you know, talking about whether Secretary Tillerson could stay in his job, whether President Trump would want to keep him in his job. I think there's a real recognition in the White House that they can't have this continued turnover of staff. You've seen a chief of staff, national security adviser, several communications advisers and cabinet member leave. So, I think the question is, whether President Trump can, you know, continue to work with this secretary of state. You have threats from North Korea and Iran. You have a big trip by President Trump to Asia coming up. But then on Secretary Tillerson's side, I think it remains to be seen how long he can stand this type of humiliation and this public airing. You heard him earlier this week say I'm not from Washington, I really don't understand this idea that people are trying to take people down. The question is, can he stay with dignity? Does he feel he has a duty to this country and will he stay in this job as long as he can? I think these are the questions that the administration and Secretary Tillerson himself are going through.
[Cabrera:] And the rest of the country curious to see what happens with the end of all of this. Elise Labott and Kaitlan Collins, thank you both. For more perspective, let's bring in National Security Analyst John Kirby, a retired rear admiral and former Pentagon and State Department spokesperson. So, first, Admiral, I would like to get your reaction to this new reporting from Elise and Kaitlan that Tillerson is widely seen as on his way out? REAR ADMIRAL JOHN KIRBY
[Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] Yes. Very, very interesting. And if it's true boy, you can see that ball must have rolled really fast this week in light of the moron comments because before that, while it was widely known that Tillerson had had some frustrations working with the White House, it was largely over policy resourcing issues. And that they were working it out at the staff level and sort of the typical grumbling, but now it seems like things might have been moving fast here after the comments that he allegedly made to military leaders at the Pentagon about the president's intelligence. This is not a president who suffers fools very well. It's not a president who likes to suffer criticism, particularly from those on his team. So, one can see where this might have caused more tension than probably we appreciated earlier on.
[Cabrera:] Yes. The comment being that the president is a moron is the reporting that NBC News broke earlier this week. But we haven't seen the president attack Tillerson, which is interesting because he hasn't held back in terms of his fury projecting that on other officials like AG Jeff Sessions. But if this is how many in the diplomatic community view Tillerson he's on his way out, how does that impact his work on so many of these crucial international issues like North Korea, like the Iran deal, and others?
[Kirby:] It's certainly not going to help his credibility on the world stage to be seen as having, you know, caused perhaps irreparable rift with the president of the United States. That said, Ana, the president has undermined him in tweets before. I mean, just recently with the, you know, hey, that's OK, Rex, don't negotiate with North Korea. We'll take care of it another way.
[Cabrera:] Calling it a waste of time.
[Kirby:] Yes. Well, I think the president may have thought he was trying to help Tillerson in terms of pressurize the atmosphere for talks with North Korea with a message it likely sends to Pyongyang is, Tillerson's not really the man, he's not really the one we need to be negotiating with. So, I don't think the president has done much to help him. I also think quite frankly, Ana, that Mr. Tillerson hasn't done a lot to help himself inside the State Department. I mean, there are still plenty of dozens of positions that are left unfilled and he hasn't done a really good job in terms of communicating inside the lifelines with our ambassadors, with our diplomats, the career foreign service officers about what his vision and goal

[Vince Cellini, Cnn Sports Anchor:] Greetings from Augusta, Georgia, home of the most anticipated Masters in years. This tournament, an American institution, played on one of the most exclusive golf courses in the world. And today you'll get a peek behind the scenes at Augusta National Golf Club, and of the people who make it all so iconic.
[Cellini:] The dramatic road to Augusta national golf club. Tiger Woods back in action for the most highly anticipated Masters ever.
[Tiger Woods, Golfer:] Six months ago I didn't know if I would be playing golf, forget playing at the tour level. I didn't know if I would ever play again. Now I know I am on the weekend.
[Phil Mickelson, Golfer:] I know that I've appreciated the challenge of playing and competing against him and I also appreciate the level of greatness that he has achieved.
[Vince Cellini, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Excitement of the resurgence of the 40-somethings. Tiger and Phil, once bitter rivals, now finding common ground.
[Unidentified Male:] I never thought I would see the day, Tiger and Phil playing a practice round at Augusta.
[Cellini:] Taking on golf's hottest young players.
[Unidentified Male:] They both have done so much for the younger generation, their influence on the game and our wanting to be like them when we grew up.
[Cellini:] In this cathedral of golf the world's greatest players are always tested.
[Unidentified Male:] We have to be on top of the game for this Sunday charge to put on the jacket.
[Cellini:] At a place where time stands still, and legends are still revered.
[Jack Nicklaus, Six-time Masters Champion:] I drove down Magnolia Lane in 1959 and I was absolutely in awe. And Tuesday I went down Magnolia Lane, I was in awe again.
[Vince Cellini, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] This is "All Access at Augusta," a CNN Bleacher Report special.
[Cellini:] Hi, everyone, I'm Vince Cellini here in Augusta on what is known as moving day, and it's a damp moving day as the rains have moved in on day three of this Masters. We have a great show for you, terrific voices, including the World Golf Hall of Fame member Hale Irwin, he of the three U.S. Open victories and a top five finisher at the Masters, Shane O'Donoghue, host of CNN International's "Living Golf," and CNN sports contributor "USA Today's" Christine Brennan who will join us from just outside the press building at Augusta National overlooking the far end of the driving range. So where do we stand right now at the 82nd playing of the Masters? Let's take a look atop the leaderboard. And there is an Augusta University product who has never posted a score in the 60s in four previous Masters, but Patrick Reed did so Thursday and Friday. He is at nine under in front of a host of major champions and pre-tournament favorites. Marc Leishman is two back, like Reed, seeking his first major. A gentleman not seen on that board is one Tiger Woods. And Hale, he tantalized us in five previous PGA tour events, but Tiger is four over right now. What are you seeing?
[Hale Irwin, Three-time U.s. Open Winner:] Well, I think we're seeing a resurgent Tiger Woods. He is never out of the mix, Vince. I don't think Tiger Woods is ever out of our minds. He's never out of the mix. What he has had to the endure over the last several years with all the surgeries, all the physical problems I think might be taking a little bit of a toll on the man who is now 42 years old. But bear in mind that he has more experience around here than maybe Phil Mickelson might, but the two of them have struggled a bit over these last couple of days playing against this army of young people.
[Cellini:] No question about that. Christine, the phenomenon of Tiger is strong, but so, too, is the challenge of Augusta. Tell us about that.
[Christine Brennan, Cnn Sports Contributor:] Well, he had a tough time in those first two days. But I'll tell you this. Tiger, Vince, is more human. If anything, he is more likable. The crowds have come back. I was out there both days watching him, and it is like the '90s or the early part of the 21st century in the sense fans are willing him to do things that he probably yet can't do on this course. But with Tiger back, the game of golf is thriving and the TV ratings go up. And I think we saw that, and I certainly saw that as well. If he is playing well, frankly making the cut and being out there at all, he'll probably have a bigger gallery out there than anyone else over the weekend.
[Cellini:] I was out there, those galleries are strong. They're 10, 12, even more deep. Shane, but do you think that in some ways did we overplayed his return?
[Shane O'donoghue, Cnn Living Golf:] Well, I think Tiger-mania is understandable because he is the most transformative player of the modern generation. What he has achieved is just incredible, and to see him back is so exciting. And you want to see him playing on the grander stages. You don't want him to finish in a wheelchair, because it was looking likely that he was going to have to sail off into the sunset and never play again, because he feared that he would never play again. So this has been a minor miracle to see him back. And so it is understandable that everyone was excited.
[Cellini:] Hale, you mentioned Phil Mickelson. It's been disappointing for Phil trying to become the oldest Masters winner ever, 79 on Friday, that tied his Masters high in a single round. But then again, there were expectations for Phil as well, but golf is a funny game as you know.
[Irwin:] It will bite you. And I think with Phil, we saw yesterday just too many wayward shots. When you are going off into the pines to retrieve a golf ball and you are missing the greens, I don't care how good of a pitcher he is of the ball, there are just too many difficult, really difficult shots. So I know that Phil is very disappointed, but that is Augusta national. You just have to have a good plan, which I am sure that he had, but he just didn't execute it very well.
[Cellini:] All right, let's get to some of the young guns here, and if there is a way, Shane, to make the Masters even bigger, Rory McIlroy is doing that. He is four under, and he is tee four going into the third next round. You've known him for a long time, since he was a kid, so tell me about where you see his game right now.
[O'donoghue:] I think it is perfectly poised and I think it is wonderful that he has been under the radar because of the Tiger mania and then Jordan doing some spectacular scoring on the opening day, he took over the mania to cope with the lack of Tiger's sparkle. And so people have not really focused on Rory as much. And to be honest, he is the one who is on the verge of history this particular tournament and this weekend, because the career grand slam is on the line, and he is perfectly poised.
[Cellini:] He could become the first European player to capture a grand slam, sixth overall in golf, and Rory is in good form. And now Jordan Spieth, the 2015 Masters champion, and Hale, he had a tough start on Friday. He started six, six, were his first two numbers he wrote down. But he hung in there, he was grinding, and now he is part of the mix. What do you see?
[Irwin:] I think Jordan, of all of the players, and I like the point you made about Rory, he is kind of there, but I think Jordan a little bit, too. He is very capable, obviously he's very capable, but sometimes when you the round he did on Thursday and you start out poorly like he did on Friday, it is sort of a slap in the face to get back into the game. And he did. He fought back, and now he is very, very much in the race.
[Cellini:] Christine, you covered Spieth in Masters and U.S. Open win, so you know he is poised to play well in majors. He knows how the take those gut punches, doesn't he?
[Brennan:] He sure does. He is 24 going on 40, maybe 50. He is so mature, and the fact that he had those five consecutive birdies on the back nine in the first round, who else but Jordan Spieth would show up and all of a sudden explode like that. And really the maturity of such a young man is extraordinary that you see that kind of poise and be able to sink his way around the golf course, at this golf course at that young age. And I wouldn't count him out by any means.
[Cellini:] Well, they are all chasing Patrick Reed who is looking for his first major championship. And guys, we have talked a little bit about him as well. He is a pit bull. He played very well, he can get hot. He's a guy that is going to be tough to chase over the weekend. But there are always unlikelies at major championships, and I don't have to tell you this, Hale, because you were one of the guys who was sort of a wild card maybe in your last U.S. Open, the third and final one. And here it is, the putt, the celebration, Medinah in 1990. And it is a matter of hanging in there, isn't it? You never know.
[Irwin:] You never know. And I think what you have to keep in mind is a goal. You have to have something in front of you try and achieve. The brass ring shouldn't be too easy to grasp. It has to be a little out of reach to make you work for it. And that day that was what I was trying to do at the final hole is to keep that brass ring in front of me but not so far out that I couldn't get to it. And that's what these young people have to do today when they are chasing the leaders, is keep it in front of them.
[Cellini:] One of those unlikelies might be Tony Finau. He is really the comeback story of this event. You know the story, back on Wednesday, the par-three, he makes a hole in one, celebrates, backpedals. And Shane, he dislocates his left ankle and pops it back in. Yet he is two under through two days here. What toughness.
[O'donoghue:] The storylines that are thrown up at the Masters are incredible, and he is certainly one of them because this is a minor miracle that he is in the position he is in, but really that he is actually contending in this Masters. And I think it's down to his desire to play in the Masters. It is obviously a long-hailed dream, he is making his debut. And as long as he got the all-clear after the MRI on Thursday morning, he was ready to go. And I think he played with adrenaline. And it's obviously getting him through this point, because he has to be in pain, Vince.
[Cellini:] Christine, this is an amazing performance, wouldn't you say? Have you seen anything like it?
[Brennan:] Well, I am laughing and smiling because aren't we all? We have all done something dumb. Most of us are lucky that it is not captured on social media and goes around the world and becomes viral, but Tony Finau, people would not have known his name, would not know how to pronounce his name, wouldn't know who he was. Grandmothers probably had no idea and all of a sudden they are cheering for this guy because they watched him pop his ankle back in and jump up around. And I think it is a great story. I agree with Shane on this one and Hale, these moments. That is why we cover sports, that's why we are here, that's why we watch it. And Finau is really that guy, and social media phenom turned obviously, by the way, a great golfer.
[Cellini:] Right. He said it was more the pain of embarrassment maybe than even the ankle coming out of place. Sergio Garcia, your defending champion among those who had missed the cut joining Danny Willett as back-to-back defending champs missing the cut. And Sergio doomed by that opening 81 including a 13 on the par five 15th hole. And he also posted the higher score in Masters history for a defending champion. Augusta is a timeless place where winners are celebrated for a lifetime, and you will see it exemplified as I sit down with Jack Nicklaus and Gary Player.
[Gary Player, Three-time Masters Champion:] I always said if there is a golf course in heaven, I want to be the head pro there of this golf course.

[Blackwell:] Well, matching the resources with the needs remains a major area of concern in Puerto Rico. The number of people killed there now up to 48, 86 percent of the island still has no power. Hospitals are running low on medicine and supplies. But there are urgent attempts to help. The federal government has sent ten disaster teams of doctors and nurses and paramedics to the island. Four mobile hospitals have been set up in a hospital parking lot. And the medical treatment ship, the Comfort, is there on the scene. The HHS assistant secretary for preparedness and response said Puerto Rico is receiving comparable relief as the disasters in Florida and Texas.
[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] Meanwhile, there is a doctor assisting with disaster relief in Puerto Rico who has quit her team after seeing medical workers treat themselves to, as she quotes it, a spa day. Apparently, a nurse on the team arranged for two nail techs, one hairstylist and a massage therapist to come and provide discounted spa services in those triage tents that were set up. Each person that participated did pay out of pocket from their own money but they were paid for a full day's work on a taxpayers' dime as they were supposed to be assist be patients. Well, this doctor wrote a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services and said the situation is a gross misuse of taxpayer funds and an abuse of privileged positions that she finds abhorrent. HHS did respond, saying this: HHS personnel to date have provided medical care for more than 3,000 patients in Puerto Rico, including more than 500 patients in that facility. After learning of this incident, based on information gathered so far, HHS has removed the person responsible and that individual will be sent home. An inquiry, internal inquiry is ongoing. One example of poor judgment should not overshadow the life-saving work being performed by the more than 500 HHS personnel on the island. So let's talk to that doctor who quit. Dr. Mona Khanna. I want to be very clear here about this. DMAT, which she is a part of, Disaster Medical Assistance Team, is overseen by HHS. This is not FEMA, which have been heavily criticized for a lack of preparedness. But just to be very clear, this is not FEMA. But, Dr. Khanna, thank you so much for being with us. I know that you have traveled the world doing this. You were in Haiti after the earthquake there. You were one of the first Western doctors on the ground in Indonesia after the tsunami. You have seen a lot. Take us to this day when you saw this. Help us understand what happened and what struck you as wrong.
[Dr. Mona Khanna, Medical Doctor, Humanitarian And Disaster Volunteer:] Certainly, Christi. Well, I was treating patients as I always do. I was the only team physician left in the two tents that were seeing patients. I went to another tent just adjacent to get some food and Styrofoam containers that the hospital was providing for my patients since we would keep patients in the tent for hours at a time. I went to get some food and I walked in and I was surprised to see a manicurist sitting at a table painting the nails of one of my key members, and I didn't know what was happening.
[Paul:] And we are seeing pictures here. You say there was you discovered manicurists and pedicurists and massagers. We are seeing of people in flip-flops.
[Khanna:] Right.
[Paul:] Was this an area that should have been sterile or at least sanitary if you were treating people?
[Khanna:] Well, when I came back to my own treating tent which is where the pictures were taken of the person in flip-flops, I asked around. I said, what's going on over there? And I was told that this person who was wearing the flip-flops had made the arrangements for these service providers to come in, in taxpayer-funded medical tents, on taxpayer-funded time, to provide these services to our team members. And the reason she was wearing flip-flops is that she, herself, had just had a pedicure and she was air drying her nails.
[Paul:] So, did that cause alarm to you?
[Khanna:] It did cause alarm to me. Now, mind you, this isn't an operating theater, so it's not a sterile environment per se, but we do have strict-mandated dress code and as you can see, next to her feet in flip flops, there's a woman wearing black boots. That is part of our dress code. And we do it for protection. What if one of one of the patients' gurney fell over on our toes? What if we run over by the wheels of a gurney? This is for our protection, so we do have a strict dress code.
[Paul:] OK. Listen, I'm going to pull an Elwoods moment here on you. Manis and pedis, this much I know, they require clean water. We have been watching these stories for weeks of people who can't get drinking water, who are drinking contaminated water. Do you know what water was used for these services?
[Khanna:] I did not since I didn't procure the services myself and I didn't stick around long enough. I was so enraged. I didn't stick around long enough to observe the techniques of these manicurists and pedicurists. My suspicion if they were worried about using water that was available to bathe in and wash hands, they may have used bottled water but I can't confirm that.
[Paul:] OK. I want to get back to the HHS statement. They said that they removed the person responsible. That they sent them home. That there's an internal inquiry going on, and that they urge one example of poor judgment shouldn't overshadow the life-saving work being performed. What is your reaction to their response? Is that enough for you?
[Khanna:] Look, I'm tired of people making excuses. I'm tired of excuses about Weinstein and I'm tired of excuses about people who hold positions of stewardship and power in this country being given passes, free passes. Look, these are people in their 40s, 50s, and 60s. We have been empowered to, by the federal government, to have stewardship of taxpayer funds. We have a mission. We have to be mentally prepared when we go out. We have to be physically prepared when we go out. There is absolutely no excuse. What it a lapse in judgment? No. It was premeditated, pre- calculated, pre-thought out, and I might say, done in combination with the commander of the team. So, sent home? That's an impotent response.
[Paul:] All right. Dr. Mona Khanna, so sorry, we've run out of time. Thank you so much for sharing the pictures, sharing your story and your experience with us. We certainly appreciate it.
[Khanna:] Christi, it breaks my heart for having quit a team I was with 20 years. It just broke my heart.
[Paul:] Does this mean you're quitting altogether or you just quit this Puerto Rico project?
[Khanna:] My original intention was to quit this particular team that made these calls about allowing these services and perhaps transfer to another team. Now, having come out and done the things I've done and said the things I've said and made these pictures available, I doubt it will be possible for me to go back to the system. However, no fear. There are plenty there are thousands of nongovernmental organizations with which I could volunteer my free time to provide services to people who have been through disasters.
[Paul:] And thank you for your service for that, certainly. And thank you, again, for reaching out. Dr. Mona Khanna, we appreciate it.
[Khanna:] Thank you, Christie.
[Blackwell:] Harvey Weinstein, the disgraced Hollywood producer, has been kicked out of the Academy of Motion Pictures, Arts and Sciences. The prestigious group, you know, is behind the Oscars. The decision comes after more than a dozen people have accused Weinstein of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and even rape. The academy's board of governors released a statement after the vote, saying, and this is just part of it: We do so not simply to separate ourselves from someone who doest no merit the respect of his colleagues, but also to send message that the era of willful ignorance and shameful complicity in sexually predator behavior and workplace harassment in our industry is over. Let's talk about it, CNN senior media correspondent and host of "RELIABLE SOURCES", Brian Stelter, is here. And this was not even just over the line of a majority. This was, as they say, exceeding, far exceeding a majority of this vote to expel Harvey Weinstein.
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] That's right, an unprecedented decision by the board. They had rules for this, but they never actually had a vote like this until yesterday. I think it's notable, Victor, that statement talking about the era of willful complicity is over, it is confirming there was an era of willful complicity. This is Hollywood doing some soul-searching and admitting to some nightmares in its past. You know, I talked to Jodi Kantor of "The New York Times, one of the reporters who dug into Weinstein's behavior. This was an investigation that took many months and they were proud it was finally published ten days ago. Here's part of what Kantor told me about the reaction to these accusers' stories.
[Jodi Kantor, Correspondent, The New York Times:] One thing I was also really happy about was seeing how much respect there was for the women's stories and the women who chose to come forward. I think any woman coming forward in that situation, you know, if you're unknown, you have set of fears, right? Like I'm this anonymous person who's going to be dragged into the media spotlight. If you're very well- known, you have a different set of fears, which is, who get him, I'm going to be tabloid fodder for days. And it seems to me the world has treated the women who have come forward very respectfully and I'm glad for that.
[Stelter:] We'll have more of my interview with Kantor on "RELIABLE SOURCES" at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time today. But she's on very important there, I think. The idea that in the past, there have been cases of sexual harassment and assault allegations where the women, the accusers have been shamed. In this case, it's Harvey Weinstein being shamed. And here is an example of that from "SNL" last night. "Weekend Update" had a lot to say about Weinstein.
[Unidentified Male:] Apple has announced it will add hundreds of new emojis to its iOS system, including a person at a spa, a vomiting face, and a shushing finger, finally giving emoji fans the ability to describe what it was like to work for Harvey Weinstein. Weinstein has been accused of multiple counts of sexual assault is reportedly going to Europe for sex rehab. Somehow, I don't think that is going to help anybody. He doesn't need sex rehab. He needs a specialized facility where there are no women, no contact with the outside world, metal bars, and it's a prison. You know, this is a tough spot for a comedian because it's so hard to make jokes about sexual assault. But it's so easy to make jokes about a guy that looks like this!
[Stelter:] There you go. "SNL," the late night shows were criticized for not saying more about the Weinstein allegations this time last week. And now, it seems "SNL" is trying to make up for lost time and lots of comments about this ongoing scandal.
[Blackwell:] All right. Brian Stelter, thanks so much.
[Stelter:] Thanks.
[Blackwell:] And be sure to watch Stelter's show, "RELIABLE SOURCES." I just called him Stelter. This morning at 11:00 a.m. Eastern, right here on
[Cnn. Paul:] Brian Stelter.
[Blackwell:] Stelter, Brian.
[Paul:] We got it. This week's "Staying Well" takes a look why adults who play more, stay healthier.
[Dr. Bowen White, National Institute Of Play:] When we were born, we came into the world and we now how to play. Play is what kids don't have to be taught. Creating something that is so engaging and so interesting, losing track of time, that is the adult version of it.
[Unidentified Female:] We all remember playing kick ball from P.E. when we were in grade school. It brings you back to a little bit of your childhood. I'm a mortgage banker and each day has its own deadlines and timelines that can cause for a stressful day or week, and kick ball is a good way to relief that.
[White:] Work places where people have fun working together, they do better work. What you get from the culture is work is important, more is better, so we don't honor the fun factor. Play is great stress management tool. Your blood pressure goes down. You release dopamine. It allows us to connect better with other people. Family systems where people have fun together, they play together, they are healthier family systems.
[Unidentified Female:] Being outside, playing with your friends, you kind of forget everything else. You're not thinking about, whatever personal things might be going on in your life.
[Unidentified Male:] I get excited I'm going to see my friends. There is just something about that cohesion that I don't think you can create it anywhere else. Good game. Good game. Good game.

[Asher:] Welcome back, everybody. Africa's largest democracy will vote for its next president on Saturday. The frontrunners in the race to lead Nigeria have similar backgrounds but actually very different views. The incumbent Muhammadu Buhari is a member of the APC or All Progressives Congress Party. His challenger Atiku Abubakar is a member of the PDP; the People's Democratic Party. He's a former vice president of the country and a multi- millionaire entrepreneur. More than 70 candidates are running for president. The vote comes at an important time for Nigeria which suffers - continues to suffer from so much economic hardship. Wherever you are in the world, I want you to get out your phones right now and go to cnn.com-slash-join, tonight, we're asking you the question, what should Nigeria's top priority be? What should the next president of Nigeria really be focusing on? Should it be, "A", the economy, "B", security, "C", corruption or "D", poverty. So, the economy, security, corruption or poverty. What should the next leader, whoever it is between the two main candidates be focusing on? Just go to cnn.com-slash-join and vote now after I do my next interview, you end up seeing the results on your screen. Adebola Williams is a friend of mine and also the CEO of Red Africa, he's also the author of the book, "How to Win Elections in Africa". Adebola, my friend, good to see you.
[Adebola Williams, Chief Executive Officer, Red Africa:] Hello, Zain, good to see you.
[Asher:] OK, so, here's the thing. You worked on Buhari's first campaign and a lot of people credited you with helping in some way, shape or form get Buhari elected. How would you assess his first term? How has it gone for him so far?
[Williams:] It's been an interesting four years. But there is a consensus it would be that a lot more could have been done. I think that he's tried to do a lot of big ticket projects which might take a bit of time to see the full impact. The trains, the massive investments and agriculture amongst other things. But maybe on the side of the quick wings on the low-hanging fruits, there might be a bit more that could have been done. In terms of directly engaging the masses, especially the poor, I think he's done quite a number of initiatives, which is getting money into the hands of the poor. But what might be missing with that is the oiling of the private sector who also by itself automatically generate work and generate income
[Asher:] So
[Williams:] To the masses as well
[Asher:] So Adebola, let me ask you this, let me ask you this, because Atiku has been very focused on the private sector. My question to you is, if an incumbent loses, like what happened with President Goodluck Jonathan, if an incumbent loses in Nigeria, what message does that end up sending to the Nigerian government?
[Williams:] I mean, I think if an incumbent loses again, you know, you would finally say to the Nigerian people that their vote counts, that their power you know, is indeed in their votes. We did it in 2015, repeating the same exercise in 2019 establishes that indeed, when the people rise, government must pay attention. And so, what that means is that whoever takes over, be the new guys, the Moghalus, the Fela Durotoyes, you know, or whoever takes over, you know, must pay attention to the voice of the people because indeed, perhaps, the voice of the people would be the voice of God.
[Asher:] So, when you have a country like Nigeria that is so divided, you know, I mean, you and I have talked about the divisions between the various tribes and the various factions in Nigeria, how does the president, whether it's Buhari or Atiku. How does the president go about uniting the country, because that is for me personally as a Nigerian, that is a very important issue.
[Williams:] Very tough question, this Zain. This is a long-standing conversation. I've always said that beyond the surface, there is a lot of angst, a lot of pain from different regions in the country, and whoever takes over from here on or if it's a continuation, that person must be ready to deal with the differences, you know, of the different parts of the country. Restructuring is an issue that must come to the fore, you know, in the next four years. People want to spend their resources, people want to use their allocation by themselves, people want to know what exactly they bring to the table and be engaged based on what they bring to the table. I think that the Kagame model is something to also consider, Facing on our past problems like the Biafra issue that continue to rear its ugly head from every now and then, facing onto deaths in the north, you know, the fact that the people in Lagos or the west might be slightly disconnected from the deaths in the north. How do we together mourn these losses? How do we together look back on our problems and say, we will be united together, build a better nation. So a leader who will be bold enough to confront all of these differences and bring us together like Kagame has done with the genocide. And I would think that probably, you know, maybe the younger guys have been bold enough, you know, and to do this, the
[Asher:] All right
[Williams:] The Felas, Moghalus, the Obis, you know, have been bold enough to take on such a challenge.
[Asher:] All right, Adebola, good to see you my friend, I hope we can hang out next time I'm in Lagos.
[Williams:] I look forward to seeing you again.
[Asher:] Thank you so much. Adebola actually threw me a party threw me a birthday party the last time I was in Lagos, so he's definitely good people. OK, so according to those of you who voted at cnn.com-slash-join, most of you actually say that corruption and the economy, corruption and the economy should be the president's top priorities. Obviously, that election happening in Nigeria tomorrow, Saturday, February 16th. Coming up, few would describe bitcoin as a stable investment, but for desperate Venezuelans struggling with the plunging currency, the cryptocurrency has actually become a haven from hyperinflation, that's next.

[Curnow:] You are watching CONNECT THE WORLD, I'm Robyn Curnow, this is CNN. Thanks so much for joining us. Our top story right now, one hour into the trading day in New York and we're certainly seeing some significant losses, including for the Nasdaq, of course, tech-heavy, and that is down over 2 percent. This is all contagion from a shock profit warning issued by Apple. Alison Kosik is at the New York Stock Exchange. As we have been speaking in the last 20 or so, 30 minutes, there has been more moving and again, all coming from that rare profit warning coming from Apple.
[Kosik:] Yes, that is really the bulk of why you're seeing the market sell off. But we saw the Dow accelerate those losses when a manufacturing report came out showing that manufacturing here in the U.S., it expanded in December, but it came in short of expectations. That's worrisome to investors, because of course, the big worry about Apple is that the impact of the slowdown in China's economy impacted Apple's revenue for the last quarter last year. Well, now we're seeing a bit of a slowdown in manufacturing here, although we're seeing an expansion. But when you see the manufacturing come in short of expectations, that can really rattle the markets. So that's why we saw the Dow tick even lower. Now down more than 500 points Robyn.
[Curnow:] Ok, and this Apple warning, I mean this is a giant red flag. Is this a sense that Apple is breaking cover? Are we going to be seeing other key companies making these sorts of statements?
[Kosik:] I think you're going to see other companies definitely make these statements like this. I mean even if you look at the last earnings season, more than a third of the S&P 500 companies, CEOs, on their earnings calls, mentioned how tariffs are concerning to them or how they're impacting their companies. So let's fast forward to a few months later. So we're getting another earnings season coming up in just a few weeks and the expectation is these CEOs are going to be talking more about the tariffs, more about the uncertainties surrounding the U.S.China trade war. And some of the companies up to bat that could be impacted the most are GM, Starbucks, Volkswagen, they do a huge chunk of business in China. So if Apple is being impacted by China's economic slowdown, that means these companies could be impacted as well Robyn.
[Curnow:] And the big question is with all of those companies that have exposure in China, how deep and wide is that exposure, and what kind of impact will there be? Because of course China is the world's biggest market.
[Kosik:] Right. So yes, China is the second biggest economy in the world, and if these companies have that kind of exposure, it's going to hurt their revenue, and you're going so see that sort of ripple effect happen. Not just with the companies with the most exposure, but those with even just a little exposure. I mean, what you're essentially seeing happen in U.S. stocks right now is a readjustment in prices based on how investors see how it is going to be let's say just in six months from now. How this tariff and trade situation could affect companies moving forward. So, companies that are a valued very highly, well that value is going to be readjusted lower, because the expectation is costs are going to increase for these companies, if this trade war lingers on.
[Curnow:] OK, Alison Kosik, keeping an eye on those numbers and certainly moving over there at the New York Stock Exchange. Thanks so much for the update.
[Kosik:] Sure.
[Curnow:] OK, so in just over an hour, the U.S. will make history, with its most diverse Congress ever. A record number of Latinos, African-Americans, and LGBT members have been elected. There is also a record number of female lawmakers. That puts the number now at 25 women in the Senate, and 102 in the House of Representatives. And that includes Nancy Pelosi who is expected to be named Speaker of the House, probably also in the next hour or two. It would be her second stint in that role and she's the only female speaker ever. Pelosi's daughter actually spoke to CNN earlier about her mom and this is what she had to say.
[Alexandra Pelosi, Daughter Of House Democrat Nancy Pelosi:] She'll cut your head off and you won't even know you're bleeding. That's all you need to know about her. No one ever won betting against Nancy Pelosi.
[Curnow:] Dana Bash recently spoke with Nancy Pelosi about the barriers she broke to be such a driving force on Capitol Hill. Here we go.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] This is your hood.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , Speaker Of The House:] Yes.
[Bash:] To really know Nancy Pelosi, you go where it all started, Little Italy, in Baltimore, where she was born to Congressman Tommy D'Alesandro and Annunciata D'Alesandro. When she was six, her father became Baltimore's first Catholic mayor.
[Pelosi:] He leapfrogged over the Irish. That was a big deal. But it took a political organizing to do that.
[Bash:] Much has been made of Pelosi's father's influence on her. Less known is her mother's. [on camera]: Your mom actually patented a device, the first device to apply steam to the face.
[Pelosi:] Yes.
[Bash:] Basically an at home facial.
[Pelosi:] That's right.
[Bash:] That's incredible.
[Pelosi:] That was incredible.
[Bash:] Pelosi says her father and the times held her mother back in many ways but Annunciata D'Alesandro was a quiet force in politics.
[Pelosi:] My mother was very much a part of the organizing. My father was the orator, the public servant.
[Bash:] And your mother got stuff done.
[Pelosi:] Well, my brother called it her moccasin brigade, all of these women who would be part of getting the message out, being at events. There are two things that I bring with me from my family in this regard. One is to know how to count. That's very important. Count your votes to win the election. Count your votes to win a vote on the floor. But the other is, listen to the constituents.
[Bash:] The D'Alesandro home was at the center of this Italian community. A vivid childhood memory helping new immigrants who knew where her father, the mayor and his family lived and would regularly knock on their door asking for help.
[Pelosi:] Since I was a little girl, I knew how to tell somebody how to get a bed in city hospital. How to try and get housing in the projects because that's right here next to us. And because I heard my mother say it so many times.
[Bash:] After college, she wanted to go to law school. Instead, like many in her generation, she got married, and started a family.
[Pelosi:] When I got married, and I had a baby and another one, five and six years, people are always were saying, oh, she knew when she was a little girl, she wanted to run for office. I never thought of that at all, ever, until I did.
[Bash:] The Pelosi's moved back to husband Paul's hometown, San Francisco. She became more and more active in the Democratic Party. But it wasn't until her youngest daughter was a senior in high school that she ran for an open House seat.
[Pelosi:] I went to her and said, you're going to be a senior, mommy has a chance to run for Congress, I don't know even know if I'll when.
[Bash:] She said get a life.
[Pelosi:] She said get a life. And I did.
[Bash:] When she first ran for House leadership 18 years ago, her male Democratic colleagues didn't get it.
[Pelosi:] When people said oh, there are a lot of the women are supporting Nancy, to run. And they said well why? Do the women have a list of things they want us to do? Why don't they just make a list and give us the list? This is the Democratic Party in the year 2000.
[Bash:] She attributes her boundless energy to Italian genes it's certainly not a balanced diet. Dark chocolate and ice cream. Vaccaro's has been her favorite since she was a little girl.
[Pelosi:] The chocolate. Not chocolate chip, but chocolate. I like my chocolate unadulterated.
[Bash:] How do you think that you wield your power as a woman differently than a man does?
[Pelosi:] Other people tell me if you're at a meeting or something, they'd say, do you understand how different that meeting would have been if a man were conducting it?
[Bash:] Do they explain how?
[Pelosi:] Well you listen, you build consensus.
[Bash:] That's exactly what she did to get what she hopes will be enough votes for speaker again. Make compromises with Democratic doubters looking for someone new, not her.
[Pelosi:] None of us is indispensable. But some of us are just better at our jobs than others and I have a following in the country apart from anybody who has run for president.
[Bash:] For most women, frankly, you know, myself included, it is hard to say those words I am uniquely qualified. I deserve this. I earned this, I can do this better than anyone else. But you can say that.
[Pelosi:] You know why I do it? Dana, I do it because I want women to see that you do not get pushed around. That you don't run away from the fight.
[Curnow:] That was a great conversation wasn't it? Thanks to Dana Bash for that. I'm Robyn Curnow, live from Atlanta. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. Coming up, we are going to talk about alleged Saudi human rights abuses. They're in the spotlight. The details on that in just a moment.

[Pamela Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you very much. And thank you for joining me today. "INSIDE POLITICS" with John King starts right now and I'll see you back here tomorrow.
[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you, Pam. And welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us. The president's lawyer confirms the president was lying to you again. This time it's about Russia business dealings deep into the 2016 campaign. Plus, a new report details the scope of Russian election meddling. Details of a social media pushed to discourage African-American turnout and evidence the Kremlin backed support for Trump carried over through the transition and the inauguration. And new polling shows Iowa Republicans like President Trump but are open to challengers in 2020. The president's Republican critics here in Washington, well, they are, too.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] I see nothing wrong with challengers. That is part of our democratic system.
[Unidentified Female:] Is there a world in which you think a Democratic president would be better for the country than a reelected President Trump?
[Sen. Bob Corker , Tennessee:] I don't know. I don't want to speak to that yet. Let's see what happens a year from now.
[King:] Back to that in a bit. But, today, the president's top lawyer again muddling the president's defense and saying it's not a crime if the commander in chief routinely lie to the American people. Again, more on that in a moment. But, first, startling news insight into the depth and the damage of the 2016 Russia disinformation campaign. The new evidence, a pair of reports submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee. The studies were done by cyber security firms and social media trackers, partnering with top light universities. The reports analyzed Twitter, FaceBook, Instagram and YouTube on how Russian intelligence manipulated those platforms. The big takeaways, according to the reports, the Russian propaganda effort, aimed to boost then candidate Trump, both in the primary and in the general election, also that Russian operators, the same ones now under indictment by the special counsel, sought to suppress the Democratic vote with an emphasis on African-Americans. And the reports say the U.S. intelligence community got it right when it concluded Moscow actively worked to help get Donald Trump elected. CNN's Alex Marquardt is here in Washington analyzing this report. Alex, what are the big takeaways?
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, what's really stunning here is the scale and detail of the efforts by the Internet Research Agency, which, of course, is that Russian troll farm linked to the Russian government that has been indicted by Robert Mueller's office. They go into great detail about what the IRA tried to do, not just during the 2016 campaign, but beyond. But during the 2016 campaign, they make it clear that the efforts were meant to benefit Donald Trump's candidacy meant to undermine Hillary Clinton's candidacy. One thing that they did, for example, was to try to boost Clinton's opponent, Jill Stein of the Green Party. Back, John, back to the scale of this. Take a look at these numbers. These are posts that the IRA made that were part of the data that were handed over by these social media giants. Ten million tweets. 116,000 Instagram posts. 61,000 FaceBook posts and 1,000 videos. And then, on top of that, there were some 44 Twitter accounts that posed as U.S.- related news organizations that had collected around 600,000 followers. Now, the report is very critical about these social media giants. They say that they handed over the bare minimum in terms of data, that what they have analyzed so far is only what the companies felt they had to give to the intel committee as an absolute minimum. They also say that, as a result, there are likely out there far more Russian accounts that the social media companies have not yet identified. And then, John, one of the important points is that another person that they were trying to boost, besides Donald Trump, was WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, which, of course, we know has been connected to those Russian military hackers that were, again, indicted by Mueller. So it's a very detailed report. It's a very disturbing report, not just about the last presidential campaign, but also as we gear up for the next presidential campaign. John.
[King:] That's a great point at the end. Alex Marquardt, appreciate that. The more we learn, the more stunning it is. Alex, thanks very much. Now, the report clarifies one central question of the Russia special counsel probe, but leaves the big one untouched. That one being whether there was any cooperation, collusion is what the president calls it, between the Trump campaign and the Russian effort. The Russian conspiracy probe, of course, just one of the 17 investigations into the president, his presidency, his inauguration, his transition team, his campaign, his charity, and his business. The legal pressure is starting to trigger some fresh Twitter rage from the president and more what I'll call head-scratching explanations from his top lawyer. Rudy Giuliani's spin? Sure, some things the president has denied for years actually happened, but none of it, he says, was illegal. In other words, the president's lawyer says the president sometimes is lying, but he's not a lawbreaker.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Rump's Attorney:] He's changed his story four or five times.
[George Stephanopoulos, Abc News:] So has the president.
[Giuliani:] The president's not under oath. And the president has tried to do the best he can to remember what happened back at a time when he was the busiest man in the world. And I can't I was with him most of that time. I can't remember a lot of the stuff that goes on there.
[King:] With me this day to share their reporting and their insights, CNN's Dana Bash, Dan Balz with "The Washington Post," Toluse Olorunnipa with "Bloomberg" and Catherine Lucey with "The Associated Press. I know you talked to Rudy Giuliani after his Sunday show circuit. I'm sorry, I get the politics. He has to clean up because the president had to change his story about the payments to Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. The president has changed his story about how long was he talking with the Russians about the possibility of a Trump Tower. But the president's lawyer, a guy he's paying money, I think, goes on television every time he goes on television he says, yes, the president's not telling the truth, so what.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] He's not telling the truth and he hasn't told the truth. And, look, I think that he sees it as his job to take those harpoons, to be the person to go out there and say, you know, I'll do it. I'll get the headlines. He's it's not the first time he has done it. Some of those headlines have not been helpful to the president. In this case, I think that this is just a fact-based answer. The president has changed his story multiple times on this. Now, what he didn't say, which I'm kind of surprised about, which I think may be more understandable to the people out there who are watching, who are supporters of his, is that he did this and he changed his story and he didn't tell the truth because he was trying to protect his wife. That's what I've heard privately. He did not say this publicly. That's on that issue. Now, the whole Trump Tower Moscow thing has nothing to do with his personal life. That is 100 percent to do with his businesses. And that, too, is an area where the president did not tell the truth to the American people. And what Giuliani is basically saying is, I'm his lawyer and I'm telling you, he didn't do anything illegal, never mind what he did in terms of leadership.
[King:] And part of the reason he has to clean this up when he's asked now, part of the reason he has to clean it up when he's asked now is because the president did submit answers to the special counsel to written questions, which included, how long were you talking about this Trump Tower Moscow? It's important because the initial story, Michael Cohen said it was this way, he's now changed his story, Donald Trump said it was this way, now he is apparently changing his story, that they stopped January 2016. He's a serious candidate for president, can't do this anymore, stop. Now we learn it went on at least through June, according to Michael Cohen. Listen to Rudy Giuliani. He says, actually, it could have been even longer.
[George Stephanopoulos, Abc News:] Did Donald Trump know that Michael Cohen was pursuing the Trump Tower in Moscow into the summer of 2016?
[Rudy Giuliani, President Rump's Attorney:] According to the answer that he gave, it would have covered all the way up to November of 2016. He said he had conversation with him about it.
[King:] What? So it could have gone is that a CYA?
[Bash:] Yes.
[King:] You just say it was all of it could have been all of 2016?
[Toluse Olorunnipa, White House Reporter, "bloomberg":] Right, it's surprising that the president's own lawyer seems to be somewhat confused about some of these very fundamental and very basic questions about how long the president was talking to the Kremlin or Russian officials about trying to build the Trump Tower in Moscow. If it was happening at the height of the campaign, all the way until November, it means that even after it became public knowledge that the Russians were meddling in the election, President Trump had some sort of a back channel where he was trying to negotiate a real estate deal with them and not telling the American people that that may have been why he was being so cozying up to Vladimir Putin and talking about how, you know, he wanted to have a great relationship with the Russians, how sanctions needed to be removed. If they the president's own personal financial dealings with the Russians were what was leading to this close relationship with Putin during the campaign, that would have definitely changed much of the tenor of the campaign. And it's one thing that we still don't know is whether or not President Trump was talking with the Russians.
[Bash:] Can I say quickly, I talked to Giuliani about this after that appearance and what he said to your point about the fact that now they have they're on the record with the special counsel, he said the answer that the president gave was general enough that it covered him admitting to talking about Trump Tower up through Election Day.
[Dan Balz, Chief Correspondent, "the Washington Post":] Also, if you're in Rudy Giuliani's shoes, or anybody who works for the president, you know that he does lie. He doesn't tell the truth. And, in a sense, you have to protect yourself against that. And so, you know, you broaden, you create a window or parameters in which almost anything could have happened and the story changes and you're still safe on that.
[King:] Right. And so one of the stunning things about the last week to 10 days, as we get to the end of 2018, many people thought we'd be wrapping things up by now. Instead, what are we learning, the Trump inauguration is under investigation, the Trump Organization is under investigation. Mueller keeps going about Russia, the question of collusion, maybe obstruction of justice. Just about everything the president touches seems to be under investigation at the moment. You wrote Sunday about a president who is very isolated. This is Andrew McCarthy, a conservative former U.S. attorney, often a defender of the president, saying on Twitter, remember, the president over the weekend tweeting about break-ins at Michael Cohen's office. No, it was a legally obtained search warrant, calling Michael Cohen a rat for turning on him. This is Andrew McCarthy. Sir, in mobster lingo, a rat is a witness who tells prosecutors real incriminating information. Perhaps a different word? Searches of lawyer's offices common enough that DOJ has a procedure for them. Here it yielded evidence of crimes you said he should be jailed for. You should stop. Friends of the president essentially saying, you know, the pressure we understand the pressure, sir, but what you're saying is only getting you in more trouble.
[Catherine Lucey, White House Reporter, "associated Press":] It's highly unlikely he's going to stop based on his tweeting from the last two years. But, yes, he's not just all these aspects of his presidency, but his life are under investigation. These pressures keep mounting and we're about to head into a year in which Democrats are taking over the House and there will be investigations and other efforts there as well. So he is he really is entering a new phase of his presidency and it's a perilous one.
[King:] And Mueller still wants to talk to the president. We know he got the written answers. You could hear Rudy Giuliani trying to explain them there. Mueller's lawyers will look at them. They probably look at them a little differently than Rudy Giuliani does. But the idea, the question, will the president sit down still with Robert Mueller came up yesterday on Fox News.
[Chris Wallace, Fox Host, "fox News Sunday":] Is he
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Attorney:] Didn't pay the proper fee.
[Wallace:] Is the special counsel does he want to interview the president?
[Giuliani:] Yes, good luck. Good luck. After what they did to Flynn, the way they trapped him into perjury, and no sentence for him, 14 days for Papadopoulos, I did better on traffic violations than they did with Papadopoulos.
[Wallace:] So when you say good luck, you're saying no way, no interview?
[Giuliani:] They are a joke. They're a joke. Over my dead body. But, you know, I could be dead.
[Lucey:] That is such a Trump White House answer. Everyone has to put a qualifier on everything. You can't say anything definitively.
[King:] But the but the tone and tenor and let me sneak this in. This is the question this is a question now about Rudy Giuliani and I know you have some information on this says, you know, the special counsel now is going back decades.
[Wallace:] Bob Mueller.
[Giuliani:] This is a witch hunt. They are going back now they're going back to 1982, 1983. They're going through business records.
[King:] That's a political argument more than a legal argument to tell the Trump base, this guy's out of control. This is a rogue prosecutor. Stay with the president. Is there any evidence they're going back to the 1980s?
[Bash:] He told me that he got that from "The New York Times," that they're looking into it. It's he knows that they are when I say they, I mean the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, not the Mueller investigation, are looking into Trump records, but that specific date, he said he saw in a "New York Times" report.
[King:] And just to note, for all the talk of the witch hunt, the U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York is Rudy Giuliani's former law partner, appointed by President Donald J. Trump. That's your witch hunt. A reminder, Michael Flynn gets sentenced by a judge tomorrow for lying to federal investigators. But, today, a new glimpse into some of the fruits of Flynn's cooperation with the Russia special counsel. Federal prosecutors charging two of Flynn's former business partners with conspiracy and acting as agents of the Turkish government. Mueller spun that case off of federal prosecutors in northern Virginia earlier this year. Again, the Flynn sentencing tomorrow. We'll be right back.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] People around the world are sharing their memories of famed chef, Anthony Bourdain, a gifted storyteller and writer, who died at the age of 61 after taking his own life. He traveled the world for us in his CNN series "PARTS UNKNOWN," bridging cultural divides through food. I had the opportunity to talk with him about his experiences back in 2010.
[Anthony Bourdain, Former Cnn Host, "parts Unknown":] I sort of overnight had an overnight success with an over-testosteroned, obnoxious memoir about a not-very-distinguished career in the restaurant business. One day, I was standing next to a deep fryer, and the next, I had this gig where I'm traveling around the world making television any way I want, anywhere I want, living the dream.
[Whitfield:] So that was before "PARTS UNKNOWN" and he became part of the CNN family. At the time, he was promoting his book, "Medium Raw," and was also on the Travel Channel. But since he's been in the family, we have all felt like we have lost a very deep, close friend. CNN correspondent, Alex Marquardt, looks at how, in both life and death, Bourdain continues to bring us all closer together.
[Boudain:] For me, one of life's great joys is cheese.
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Correspondent:] For Anthony Bourdain, the recipe for understanding people, understanding cultures around the world, and creating a hit TV show couldn't be more straight forward.
[Bourdain:] We ask very simple questions, what makes you happy, what do you eat, what do you like to cook? And everywhere in the world we go and ask these very simple questions. We tend to get some really astonishing answers.
[Marquardt:] Bourdain was found dead Friday morning by a friend in a hotel room in France where he was filming for his award-winning CNN show, "PARTS UNKNOWN." The cause of his death was suicide. Bourdain started working in kitchens at a young age and would become a celebrity chef and author as he made his way into television. The Smithsonian called him the "original rock star of the culinary world," the "Elvis of bad-boy chefs." It was his way with words, "his irreverence, curiosity, ease and warmth" that fueled his massive following. Bourdain didn't shy away from talking about past demons. Heavy drug use that included an addiction to heroin as well as cocaine use. So bad, he said, he should have die in the his 20s but instead lived what he called a charmed life.
[Bourdain:] Massachusetts is quite small-town America.
[Marquardt:] He addressed his past head-on while highlighting the opioid epidemic in Massachusetts in an episode of his show.
[Bourdain:] But I thought I'd start the show by returning to Provincetown, all the way out on the tip of Cape Cod, which is where, at age 17, I started washing dishes and started working in the restaurant business as a summer job and began my sort of trajectory in the restaurant business and into drugs. Somebody who wakes up in the morning and their first order of business is, get heroin, I know what that's like.
[Marquardt:] Bourdain came to CNN in 2013, bringing his show to a global audience. Throughout his TV career, he won award after award.
[Bourdain:] First order of business, dinner.
[Marquardt:] It was the food that lured people in. But viewers knew it was about so much more.
[Bourdain:] Incredible.
[Marquardt:] Quickly finding themselves immersed in an experience that focused on people, exotic places. and faiths from around the world. He insisted he wasn't a journalist. But over the years, forged a unique style of storytelling that was unmatched.
[Whitfield:] Alex, thank you so much. Bourdain's passing comes just days after the suicide of famed fashion designer, Kate Spade. And now a new troubling CDC report reveals suicide rates are on the rise in almost every state. From 1999 to 2016, 25 states had increases of more than 30 percent. And in more than half of those deaths, the person did not have a diagnosed medical condition. Joining us now, CNN senior medical correspondent, Elizabeth Cohen. Elizabeth, what are the factors that seem to be contributing to this spike?
[Dr. Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Senior Medical Correspondent:] Fredricka, the spike, I think, was really shocking to so many people. And really we don't know exactly why it went up so much. However, there are a couple of theories. One of them is when you look at 1999 to 2016, that encompasses the economic downturn of 2008 and that certainly was so hard on so many people. It also encompasses, and we were just talking about this with Anthony Bourdain, the opioid epidemic. So that's when it really was on the rise. And so that might have something to do with it, too. But in general, we're not entirely clear on what all the factors might be.
[Whitfield:] Elizabeth, you know, what are the signs to look for. You know, if someone is concerned about someone very close to them or perhaps someone personally watching this, is, you know, a feeling, a very troubled. What are the signs? That should people do?
[Cohen:] Right. It's so important, Fredricka, to know the signs and to not be afraid to talk about it with that person. For example, increasing isolation, increasing feeling of despair, sleep patterns change, and a change in social media behavior. If you can look on their social media pages and see, wow, they used to be very connected and now they're not or any other abrupt change could be a sign that something's going on. Mental health experts will say, don't be afraid to say to that person, if you're really concerned, are you thinking about suicide? I think people are afraid they will put the idea in their head, which is not the case. If they're thinking about it, they're thinking about it. Also, always when we're talking about this, Fred, I want to note that sometimes you don't see those signs. Sometimes people do things very unexpectedly. Even mental health experts, psychiatrists and psychologists, will miss these signs in their own patients and they will go on to take their own lives. So people, survivors should not feel guilty if they were not expecting a suicide.
[Whitfield:] Elizabeth Cohen, thank you so much.
[Cohen:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] Really important information. Here's the number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It is 1-800-273-8255. That's 1-800-273-TALK. People are there 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And later, CNN will pay tribute to Anthony Bourdain with a special night of episodes of "PARTS UNKNOWN." It begins tonight, 8:00 p.m. Eastern, only on CNN.

[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Kate Bolduan. We begin with breaking news right now, the FBI conducting a surprise raid at the home of President Trump's former campaign chairman. It's part of the special counsel's investigation of Russian meddling in the election. The raid we are told came one day after Paul Manafort met with the Senate Intelligence Committee. Let's get all of the details on this. Let's go live now to CNN's Jessica Schneider. Also with me here is CNN legal analyst, Paul Callan. Jessica, first to you. What exactly do we know right now about this?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Kate, Paul Manafort's spokesman in fact confirming that raid saying that Manafort has, quote, "consistently cooperated with law enforcement and other serious inquiries." But it does raise the question why this raid if he has in fact been cooperating. Now there are several ongoing investigations both on the congressional side and of course, by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The time line of this raid is notable since we know that it happened at the end of July. "The Washington Post" reporting on July 26th. One day after Paul Manafort met with the Senate Intelligence Committee behind closed doors. And in fact, the same day that Paul Manafort was initially scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. That hearing was postponed after Chairman Chuck Grassley agreed not to issue a subpoena in exchange for Manafort agreeing to hand over documents. You know, but we do know the special counsel investigation, it is going full steam ahead. In recent weeks, it's been of particular significance of Manafort's presence inside that July 2016 meeting at Trump Tower that was arranged by Donald Trump Jr. involved that Russian lawyer. And it initially came, of course, with the promise that it would reveal damaging information about Hillary Clinton. So, Kate, we know that federal agents raided Manafort's Alexandria, Virginia home. Interestingly, a source is now telling our Evan Perez that this is somewhat of an unusual move in a case like this where the investigation has been ongoing already for several months and in a case where Paul Manafort has, in fact, been handing over documents already presumably to the special counsel. We do know to those congressional committees. So, yes, that raid happening at the end of July Kate.
[Bolduan:] Yes, a surprise break to Paul Manafort and a surprise move when you think that everyone thought that Paul Manafort was cooperating. Jessica, thank you so much. Paul, on the most basic level, how do you get the FBI knocking at your door pre-dawn with a search warrant?
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, you know, it's an indication of a complete lack of trust and a heavy suspicion with respect to the person who is being raided. There are three ways to get information that prosecutors use. One is voluntary cooperation. Your attorney says, OK, you want the documents, we'll produce them. He had a lawyer who was allegedly voluntarily cooperating. The second way is a subpoena is issued. Lawyers love subpoenas because they can go into court and contest the subpoena. Say it's overly broad, they don't have the right to this. The third way, predawn rate by the FBI into your house. Now that's done when system one and two has failed and the FBI feels that they have been deceived. And they're not being they're not getting the information that they want through the more conventional method. This is a suspicion of criminality. It may be by Manafort, maybe by somebody else, and a fear by the FBI that there was information that would be destroyed unless produced forcibly by a raid.
[Bolduan:] We, of course, at this moment, don't know what they were looking for. We don't know what they took with them in the raid. But generally speaking, is this a good thing for Paul Manafort?
[Callan:] It's a bad thing for Paul Manafort. It puts him dead center of the Mueller investigation and really, it's not surprising given his connections to Russia, Ukraine, and his simple role in the early stages of the Trump campaign.
[Bolduan:] Fascinating. A lot more to learn on this one, Paul. Thanks for laying it out. I really appreciate it. Great to see you, Jessica. Thank you so much. Also, following this, tough talking, tough tweeting, a day after President Trump warned of fire and fury if North Korea continues to threaten the United States. He sends out a statement again on Twitter about the state of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Here is the tweet, "My first order as president was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal. It is now far stronger and more powerful than ever. Hopefully, we will never have to use this power, but there will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world." But still, both here in the U.S. and abroad, folks are reeling from the president's choice of words towards Pyongyang. But today, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says his boss is just speaking a language Kim Jong-un can understand.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] I think Americans should sleep well at night. I have no concerns about this particular rhetoric over the last few days. I think the president again as commander-in-chief, he felt it necessary to issue a very strong statement directly to North Korea. But I think what the president was just reaffirming is the United States has the capability to fully defend itself from any attack and defend our allies and we will do so. So, the American people should sleep well at night.
[Bolduan:] With me now, chief national security correspondent, Jim Sciutto, for much more on this. So, Jim, where exactly do things stand right now? You have the president's tweets, the president's statement, and then what we heard from Rex Tillerson this morning.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Well, Rex Tillerson is either walking back the president's comments or that this is part of a good cop bad cop, the secretary of state speaking in somewhat more reasonable terms or less bombastic terms and the president making a statement as the secretary of state said there in terms that Kim Jong-Un would understand. But the thing is, you have walked back from other spheres as well. South Korea, for instance, the U.S. ally in the region, making a point of saying today through their spokesperson in the Foreign Ministry that listen, there is not a crisis. There's not an impending calamity on the peninsula here. So that message perhaps to temper the president's message there because, of course, we saw the reaction. Not just from media or from Republican and Democratic lawmakers, John McCain included, but also from the North Koreans as well. Because you had what appeared to be a threat from North Korea following the president's statement saying that it will bring nuclear war to the continental U.S., et cetera. So, from a rhetorical standpoint, certainly an escalation following the president's remarks.
[Bolduan:] Can I also ask you, Jim, about the president's tweet about the nuclear arsenal? What exactly do we know about any changes that have been made since he took office in efforts to modernize the nuclear arsenal?
[Sciutto:] Well, the president's claim in his tweet that his first order was to modernize and that the arsenal is now modernized in the six months since he has been in office is frankly misleading, for one, the president did order a review, but that review is still under way. In fact, President Obama last year ordered a modernization at the cost of which had been estimated up to a trillion dollars, some of which money that hasn't been allocated yet. Second of all, that's something that's going to take many years. So, to claim that he ordered it himself and that it's complete and the U.S. nuclear forces are suddenly more modern than they have even been is it's frankly misleading. It's a long process. It started before the Trump administration and it's certainly not complete. It is significant, though, because this is talking about a lot of money here. It's talking about modernization. But it's also part of a debate, Kate, because a lot of these are treaty obligations, right? You have treaty obligations that hold down capabilities of your nuclear forces. You can't just snap your fingers and make this happen. It's a very long and difficult process.
[Bolduan:] You can't sum it up in 140 characters. That's for sure.
[Sciutto:] No. No.
[Bolduan:] Great to see you, Jim. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. So, is the U.S. military preparing any kind of response to this crisis in the face of the tweets and the statements and the potential walk backs? Let's find out. CNN Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, is looking into all of this for us. So, Barbara, is the Pentagon saying anything about the president's remarks quite yet? Any changes planned?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Not quite yet, Kate. We can always wind up hearing from the secretary of defense later in the day. He is traveling today. He could wind up making a statement. We don't know. Right now, we are told there is no plan for additional forces to go to the region. That also could change at some point. As far as it stands right now, aircraft and ships and troops remaining on their standard schedules. Two things to note, however, the U.S. does keep those bomber aircraft in Guam. That's why Kim Jong-un got so upset and made that threat against Guam. They flew earlier this week in a show of force, unarmed, of course. They could fly again to demonstrate U.S. military capability in the region. There is a long-scheduled exercise later this month in South Korea with South Korean forces. That is likely to bring a significant number of additional U.S. troops to the area for that exercise. Everyone will be watching to see how the North Koreans react to that. Expect to see a lot of rhetoric, but everybody insisting a long- standing routine scheduled exercise.
[Bolduan:] A routine exercise at a time when the tensions could not be higher. Great to see you, Barbara. Thanks so much. We will keep close to Barbara. See if we hear anything from the Pentagon. How are they reacting today to this? Coming up next, we will talk about the president's red line. The red line he drew and has North Korea crossed it and how Kim Jong-un is likely to react now. Plus, a blast from the past, a "Meet The Press" interview from the '90s. Citizen Trump talking about the North Korean threat then and what he would do about it. It has a lot of folks talking today. And more drama inside the west wing, this time a conservative editorial board targeting Steve Bannon. Hear why.

[Whitfield:] All right. Kentucky's governor declaring this Sunday an official day of prayer for Marshall County in honor of the victims of this week's deadly school shooting. Two students were killed and 16 others injured after a shooter opened fire at Marshall County High School. Visitations and funerals will be held for the two victims this weekend. CNN's Kaylee Hartung is live for us in Kentucky Kayleigh?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Fred, emotions are still incredibly raw in this small and close-knit community. But yesterday, there was an effort to return to a sense of normalcy. Just three days after the students and the faculty of Marshall County Hight School experienced unimaginable horror on their campus and after investigators had processed the crime scene and returned it to the county, the school's doors reopened. An assembly was held yesterday morning. And one student told me she estimated only about a quarter of the student body was there as administrators tried to emphasize to the students the many resources available to them as they are dealing with this incredibly difficult time with grief counselors on hand. Students were then told that they could return to the commons area, and the site of Tuesday's horrific scene. Many students had dropped or left behind their belongings as they had fled for their lives that day. They were then able to reclaim them. One student told me that, as she walked into the familiar commons area, she was struck at how clean it was, and said she had never seen it so clean in a way that made her feel so unsettled. Today, many students will be back on the campus again for the visitation for both Preston Cope and Bailey Holt. Students, though, telling me they feel mixed emotions about returning to campus for that event, and also Preston's funeral tomorrow, because the event is in the gymnasium, a place they associate with so many carefree and joyful moments of high school, like basketball games and pep rallies. But of course, they want to honor the lives lost. It's hard to process the idea of doing it in that gym. Now, you mentioned, Fred, that the Governor Matt Bevin declared Sunday as a day of prayer for Marshall County. He held an event yesterday with state officials to reaffirm his support and that of many others for this community.
[Matt Bevin, , Kentucky Governor:] The Marshall County, though reeling from the atrocity, has come together to comfort one another, relying on the love for each other, their school, their community, and their faith. All of Kentucky stands with the residents of Marshall County.
[Hartung:] Both the Holt and Cope families have voiced their appreciation for the support that they have felt far and wide. This afternoon, before visitation, for their 15-year-old son and daughter, respectively, we will hear from members of the Holt and Cope families Fred?
[Whitfield:] Kaylee Hartung, thank you so much. We have so much more straight ahead in NEWSROOM. Stay with us.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] I'm Don Lemon. 11:00 p.m. here on the East Coast. Live with all the new developments tonight. President Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen changing his legal team. Sources telling CNN that he has been meeting with lawyers who might potentially represent him and that he wants attorneys with experience in the Southern District of New York. What does that all mean? Cohen's been the subject of a criminal investigation since the FBI raided his home and office that was back in April. He has not been charged with a crime, but sources say he will not be shocked if he is indicted. What does this mean for President Trump? Also tonight a top Republican on Capitol Hill criticizing his GOP colleagues for not standing up to President Trump accusing Republicans of being in a cult-like situation when it comes to the President. We're going to talk about all of that straight ahead. A lot to get to in the next hour. I'm going to begin, though, with Michael Cohen and changing his legal team. I want to talk about this now with Michael Avenatti, attorney for porn star Stormy Daniels who is suing Cohen. Good evening, sir. What does this mean that he is changing his legal team that he split with his council?
[Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniel's Attorney:] Well, Don, I don't think this is positive development for Michael Cohen or the President for a variety of reasons. I mean, these are attorneys that have had involvement with him for weeks on end. He is paid them likely millions of dollars. I mean, I estimate that his burn rate is probably about $500,000 a week.
[Lemon:] I read that. Where'd you get that? Half that is a lot of money.
[Avenatti:] No. It's a tremendous amount of money. But that is what you see in these white collar criminal cases, Don, with these many documents at issue. And you know, in the last hearing that we had, Michael Cohen's attorney's, they stated they had 15 over 15 lawyers working full time, and based on my experience with New York and Los Angeles rates, I mean if you do the math it works out to probably about $500,000 a week. And look, this is what happens in these cases. You have defendants that start out and they're very defiant and they state they're going to take bullets for their co-conspirators and all of a sudden the burn rates sets in and they start burning this kind of money and then reality sets in. And the fact the matter is, I'm not at all surprised by this. I think this source, whoever it is that stated it's about having somebody with experience with the Southern District of New York, I don't think it has anything to do with that whatsoever. I think, it's all about money.
[Lemon:] All right, hold that thought, because you were talking about the attorneys. I've had legal experts come on and I would get the statements from Michael Cohen's attorneys and whatever his P.R. people, and I would read the statement and the defense to our legal experts who are not Democrat or Republican and they would say to me that is wrong. He is getting bad legal advice. Do you think he is getting bad legal advice? Do you think people were stringing him along, because they wanted the money? Or I don't know, $500,000 a week that a ridiculous amount.
[Avenatti:] I agree 100 percent and I think it is a ridiculous amount of money and the fact of the matter is, Don, look, there were two option. Option one was having the team review the documents. And options two was having Michael Cohen's private lawyers review the documents. Now, the private lawyers advocated for them to review the documents.
[Lemon:] That means they are charging him?
[Avenatti:] Of course. There is a profit motive. There's a disincentive for them to advocate on behalf of having the taint team do it. Let me just let me tell you something, Don. The end result is going to be basically be the same with the exception of Michael Cohen is going to be 2, $2.5 million lighter in the pocket. And so now reality has set in and this is a very bad situation for Michael Cohen and it is a very bad situation for Donald Trump.
[Lemon:] How much did you say lighter in the pocket?
[Avenatti:] Well, I mean, I estimate it is $2 -2.5 million that Michael Cohen has burned. And look, here's the important thing, of all the people on the face of it planet that Donald Trump should have brought inside the tent, embrace, given love should have been
[Lemon:] Michael Cohen.
[Avenatti:] Absolutely, because well, not not only because he was so loyal but just from a Machiavellian perspective, if you want to reduce it to that. This is guy that knows where all the bodies are buried. This is the guy that represented the President for 10 or 12 years. If you are going to pick anybody to be loyal to, it is this guy. The problem is that you have a President that values loyalty when it comes to him, but he is not willing to give any loyalty in exchange. And we have seen that in a whole host of context. But here's the problem, nothing lasts forever. And this is going to come back and it is going to bite him in a very big way and I predicted that for two and a half months.
[Lemon:] You've been very adamant that you think that he faces some serious charges. Do you think this is a sign that charges are imminent when it comes to Michael Cohen?
[Avenatti:] There's no question in my mind that charges are imminent. I don't know that he is going to be arrested tomorrow or even next week. I think some of those reports maybe are overblown. There's no question in my mind, Don, as I said, two and half months ago, that Michael Cohen is going to be indicted and he is going to attempt to flip on the President. But here's the problem, Don, with each passing day for Michael Cohen his options get more and more limited. If in fact Bob Mueller concludes that a sitting President cannot be indicted, Michael Cohen may have played his hand too long. Not to mix metaphors but he may be left with no chair when the music stops. And when I mean by that is, if Bob Mueller concludes that a sitting President cannot be indicted, and I actually believe that he will conclude that based on what I know of Bob Mueller and what I know of his conservative leanings and his belief related to various legal scholars. If Bob Mueller concludes that, Michael Cohen is not going to have anybody to roll-up on. He is not going to have anybody to lean on. He is going to have zero leverage and he is going to be out on an island. And I predict if that happens I think ultimately he is convicted, or he pleas, I think this President is going to hang him out to dry. I don't think the President is going to give him a pardon and I think Michael Cohen is going to be sitting there potentially in a prison cell wondering what he did with his life.
[Lemon:] The president is a self-profess billionaire, maybe he is going to help him pay the legal fees.
[Avenatti:] You know, why hasn't he already? I mean, this is one of the cheapest guys on the face of the planet.
[Lemon:] So, we talked about does him wanting I said to hold that thought when it comes to having a legal team that has experience with dealing with the Southern District of New York. Because it is been said that his team has more experience in dealing with the law in Washington or political, that sort of thing. So you said that you're not buying that. Why?
[Avenatti:] No. I'm not buying that, because it doesn't matter at the end of the day whether you're litigating cases in D.C. or New York or Los Angeles. When you're at the federal level and you're at a level of this magnitude, whether you have experience with a particular office or not, in my view does not carry a ton of weight. If you look at the lawyers that are prosecuting this case in the Southern District of New York, lawyers that are very, very capable but many of which, I mean, they haven't been in that office that long. We're not talking about 20-year prosecutors. So I'm not buying that. I think it's a bunch of nonsense. I think at the end of the day this comes down to money. Michael Cohen has probably run out of money or he doesn't have the money to front, and now these lawyers having taken 2 million or $2.5 million off him have abandoned him. And you know, this is what a lot of these big firms do. I mean, they talk a good game, but when it really comes down to it, they're nowhere to be found.
[Lemon:] You sound like, I mean you feel sorry you sound like you feel sorry for Michael Cohen, he is being abandoned by his legal team. Like the President saying, oh, he did Hillary Clinton wrong, Comey so that is why I have to fire him.
[Avenatti:] Well, look, I mean, I have to tell you. This is a very serious matter for Michael Cohen, OK. He is going to face some very serious charges. I know he has a family, I know he has a wife, I know he has kids, I understand he is a good father. I don't wish any will, you know, will against him, Don. You know, I have to tell you I'm very concerned about his safety, I am very concern about his mental state. I'm just going to state that here tonight. I don't know where this is going to end. I hope he is able to handle it because this is tremendous amount of pressure, but look.
[Lemon:] It is tough on him, I do know that, because the number of times that I've spoken to him, it is toughed on him, he is worried. He is concerned about his family, especially his son.
[Avenatti:] Look, this is I don't think people can comprehend how much pressure this is. And look, in that respect I feel for the guy. I mean for the reasons I've just stated. But, look, he is been isolated and abandoned by someone that he was loyal to, Mr. Trump, who's shown no inclination to take care of him or have his back. You know, his attorneys have put their own profit motives ahead of his interest, there's no question about that in my view now. I mean, this guy has been placed on an island. And people that are twisting in the wind are dangerous.
[Lemon:] OK. Quick. Two things quickly if you can get to, because allegedly Trump's allies are concerned that he is going to flip. Should they be concerned?
[Avenatti:] They should have been concerned two and a half months ago when I predicted it.
[Lemon:] So, where do you get and also do you think any of this how does this relate to Stormy Daniels? Do you think anything that comes out of the recordings or any of the things that were taken in the raids because I think you're waiting Friday is the deadline, right? To determine if that is the things that were taken in the raid, if they were attorney-client privilege. Anything that comes out do you think it's going to be related to your client?
[Avenatti:] Oh, I think a number of pieces of evidence are going to be related to my client. And Don, look, our case has gotten better every week. It is getting better every other day and you know, hopefully Rudy Giuliani will go on Fox and Friends in the morning and it will get even better.
[Lemon:] Michael Avenatti, thank you appreciate your time.
[Avenatti:] Great to see you.
[Lemon:] When we come back Republicans attack President Obama throughout his two terms in office saying he was vain and inexperienced. I wonder what those same Republicans would say about President Trump. We are going to discuss that right after this.

[Church:] Welcome back, everyone. A UNESCO World Heritage site that is all about good karma, the ancient town of Luang Prabang in northern Laos delights travelers from all over the world. But its core is devoted to the soul's journey. CNN's Amara Walker takes a look in our special series, "Destination: Laos".
[Amara Walker, Cnn Correspondent:] Gone in Luang Prabang the former capital of Laos. And the song of insects is interrupted by the ringing of the bell as the sky begins to lighten. A sea of saffron appears in the distance. This is tak bat a centuries' old Buddhist ritual of alms giving. Locals line up along the road to offer gifts of sticky rice to the passing monks while tourist snap photos on the other side documenting the living tradition.
[Unidentified Male:] For the alms giving, we do every day; every day even in the rainy season or the dry season. So seven days a week. This is the way how we believe, how we practice Buddhism.
[Walker:] As one of the most significant and ancient centers of Laotian Buddhism, the peninsula of Luang Prabang lies at the juncture of two rivers, the mighty Mekong and its tributary, the Nam Khan. In 1995, UNESCO listed the city as a world heritage site citing Luang Prabang's well-preserved architecture and culture nestled in verdant splendor.
[Unidentified Male:] In Luang Prabang itself, it has more than 32, 33 temples you know. And some temples very special like this one. Buddhism
[Walker:] At 6:00 p.m. some 12 hours after the alms-giving, the strike of another bell signals the evening's chanting.
[Unidentified Male:] It is necessary to do our chanting because it is our duty. It makes us feel peaceful and it's a way to show our appreciation to the lay people who support us.
[Walker:] As the drone of Buddhist mantra filled the evening in Luang Prabang, another day in the temple draws to a close. Tomorrow these same monks will wake up before the sun to collect alms, to nurture and perhaps defend an ancestral culture.
[Church:] Well, tributes are pouring in from all around the world for legendary French singer Charles Aznavour. The Eiffel Tower was bathed in light in honor of Aznavour who died at his home near Marseilles at the age of 94. Fans also left flowers and candles at his star in the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Aznavour was sometimes described as France's Frank Sinatra. He was famous for his haunting love songs, selling more than 100 million records in a career that spanned eight decades. Thank you so much for your company. I'm Rosemary Church. I'll be back with another hour of news coming up next. You're watching CNN. Stick around.

[Sanchez:] This week, President Trump will come face to face with the man who tried to meddle with the U.S. election, President Vladimir Putin. Officials confirmed the two will meet on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Germany. When they do it, it could be a public relations mine field. The investigation into Russian election meddling and possible collusion with the Trump campaign is looming large, and of course tensions in Syria are heating up. With me to discuss, CNN global affairs correspondent Elise Labott. Elise, what is the White House hoping to get out of this meeting?
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well Boris, they haven't really said much about the meeting. Obviously this will be the first meeting between the two leaders especially since President Trump has taken office. But his national security adviser, H.R. McMaster has said there is no agenda. It will kind of just be based on what the president wants to talk to at the time. You can bet that President Putin will want to come out of this meeting with a real sense that the relationship is back on track. I think both leaders want to do that. President Trump has certainly said he wants better relations with Russia. And so I think that's what they're both coming out looking for good optics of the meeting, there's not a lot of preparation it seems going into the White House as President Trump takes a meeting, but Vladimir Putin is undoubtedly preparing for this very carefully, and so I think he goes into this meeting with a little bit of the upper hand.
[Sanchez:] Yes, the president met with the Russian foreign minister and the Russian ambassador in the Oval Office earlier this year, they looked like they were pretty chummy. They were getting along. There were reports that potentially some secret information, sensitive information was revealed to them. Is Trump expected to be tough in his meeting with Putin, confront him perhaps about election meddling or are we going to see maybe a hug or something a bit chummier?
[Labott:] Well the White House hasn't said whether he's going to talk about any potential about that issue in the meeting. I would suspect that he won't because he wants to put that relationship with President Putin back on track. They have a lot of other important issues to discuss, Syria, Ukraine, North Korea, nuclear issues so, I mean, I think everyone would like him to bring up the election meddling, kind of a warning to President Putin not to think about doing anything like that again. But I think the body language in this meeting is going to be so interesting because as you said, President Trump is kind of a hugger, is kind of a real chummy guy. President Putin is not like that and I think President Trump wants to show that the who men are getting along, and I think President Putin wants to show that President Trump respects him. So I think the body language in that handshake, if it's their photo op or whatever, is going to be the most interesting thing.
[Sanchez:] Yes, President Trump certainly known for his enthusiastic handshakes. Elise, we have to leave it there. Elise Labott reporting from Washington. Thank you. Coming up, we bring you the story of a special needs child who could be one of those most affected by the Republican health care bill. But first, the original Chinatown in America is deep in the heart of San Francisco. On the next "United Shades Of America," W. Kamau Bell walks the streets to see how and why people are choosing to honor their original Chinese heritage in the face of racist stereotypes. That's tonight at 10:00.
[W. Kamau Bell:] San Francisco is the first Chinatown and it seems like the identity of the city.
[Unidentified Female:] Exactly. But years ago is a country like it's another country. People began to have these fears of Chinese- Americans.
[Bell:] Chinese people in Chinatown had to stay in Chinatown.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Bell:] That's a history people really don't talk about. People like to promote San Francisco as an all accepting and welcoming place, but that's not always true. How important was it to you to grow up owning your Chinese-American identity?
[Unidentified Female:] Oh my go, you have opened such a can worms.
[Bell:] Is it important that Chinese-Americans retain this culture? I've seen the hyper sexualization of the Asian female.
[Unidentified Female:] It's something we've had to deal with all of our lives.
[Unidentified Male:] With Asian male masculinity, it's perceived inferiority at a genetic level.

[King:] It's a high-profile spotlight tonight for Georgia's Stacey Abrams delivering the official Democratic response to the President's State of the Union Address. Abrams should probably remember narrowly lost in last year's governor's race and many Democrats hope she'll run for Senate in 2020. She promise in November not to stand on the sidelines too long but she isn't ready to be specific.
[Stacey Abrams , Former Ga Governor Candidate:] I intend to go back into politics, but I'm going to take the time necessary to make sure no matter who runs that they can believe that their votes will count and that their campaigns will count. And so my private citizen future is what looms ahead of me, but I will certainly reenter politics, I just haven't decided how.
[King:] Well, tonight she will be the first black woman to give the Democratic response as the party counters President Trump with a message of diversity. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is gives the party's official response in Spanish and Senator Bernie Sanders who's an independent but likely Democratic presidential contender is again giving his own response. We'll comeback to the Sander's question in a minute but for Stacey Abrams, this is a golden opportunity for any politician every year, but it also sometimes comes with a little quicksand.
[Ball:] Yes and historically it's almost been more of a jinx than an opportunity and you have to think if you're offered this time slot. On the one hand, how can you say no? On the other hand, what is it going to do to your future if all that anybody remembers about you is, you know, that moment with the water bottle or whatever it happens to be. But, you know, Stacey Abrams, I spent a little bit of time with her for a profile that I wrote last year. She is the rising star in the party despite having lost that election. She's a very charismatic politician and I think the Democrats particularly after 2016 have realized that they need messengers who just have personal charisma. Who just have the ability to make people respond to them that it's not about a policy checklist. It's not about a resume like it was with Hillary Clinton, just people who make people feel good and I think that's a lot of what the fixation on Beto is driven by as well. It's not about where is he on XYZ, it's about when people are around him, he makes them feel good and the party is dying for that right now.
[Talev:] Well Molly raises a good point also both with Beto and with Stacey. Abrams you've got two candidates who are famous for losing. But famous for losing close enough that they could be a winner next time. So there some sort of symbolism that the Democratic Party is trying to convey in not that subtle a way, which is if you don't succeed the first time you come at it with a second crack which I think is going to be part of kind of the 2020 theme, whoever that nominee ends up being. So that's part of it. Part of it is the changing phase the Democratic Party, they very clearly want to send a message about women and people of color and if it is a female person of color, you know, so be it. The symbolism is not nuanced at all. It's totally hits you over the head.
[King:] Yes and nobody hear the humor here, you mentioned the quicksand for people in the past I call the quicksand. You said that, Joe Kennedy for the Democrats Congressman Joe Kennedy and a long list of advice on Twitter including misplace your Chapstick and go back and look it up in the internet. Marco Rubio, yes had say to Stacey Abrams, hydration, it's a very good idea. Trust me on this, Marco Rubio and of course the great water about a moment. Help with the Sanders. He has done this for some time. He's an independent, he's not a Democrat. He likes to do this every year. But because of this, the moment of the Democratic Party the year of the woman, the diversity in 2018. Is it smart to do it again, or do you step back and give the if you're going to say hey, I'm a Democrat when you run, if you run?
[Ball:] It's a question of whether or not you run for president. Does the country need you personally, Bernie Sanders, or can somebody else deliver that message?
[King:] OK, it's fascinating that. Thanks for joining us INSIDE POLITICS. Stay with CNN all day long including Brianna Keilar, she starts after a quick break. Have a great afternoon.

[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Anchor:] And Louis C.K. back on stage for the first time since admitting to years of inappropriate sexual conduct. Good morning. And welcome to EARLY START. I'm Laura Jarrett.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, Laura. Good morning to all of you. I'm Dave Briggs. Tuesday, August 28th, it's 5:00 a.m. in the East. We have a live report from Hong Kong straight ahead. Also Ivan Watson joins us from Vietnam. We start, though, with the latest on Senator McCain. It took two days and mounting pressure from all sides, but President Trump has finally offered praise to honor the late Senator John McCain. First, in a written statement saying in part, "Despite our differences on policy and politics, I respect Senator John McCain's service to our country." The president later echoed the sentiment at a White House event, a move one leading veterans group called symbolic but important.
[Jarrett:] A source familiar with the internal talks says Mr. Trump was pushed by senior staffers including John Kelly, Bill Shine, and Sarah Sanders to deliver a more robust statement on John McCain. The "New York Times" reports the president even refused earlier requests from Vice President Pence to do so.
[Briggs:] According to the "Wall Street Journal" White House prodded the president for two days to put out a kind word about McCain, but Trump reportedly told advisers he thought the TV coverage of McCain's death was over the top. More from CNN's Abby Phillip at the White House.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Dave and Laura, a day of controversy ended with President Trump making an abrupt about-face, finally issuing a statement addressing John McCain's service to the nation Monday night at an evangelical event here at the White House. Listen.
[Trump:] Also our hearts and prayers are going to the family of Senator John McCain. There will be a lot of activity over the next number of days and we very much appreciate everything that Senator McCain has done for our country.
[Phillip:] President Trump's comments were the first that he made all day on Monday after ignoring questions from reporters on five separate occasions when they asked him to comment on McCain's death.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Mr. President, any thoughts on John McCain? Do you have anything to say about John McCain, sir? Do you believe John McCain is a hero, sir?
[Unidentified Female:] Guys, let's go. Keep moving.
[Trump:] Thank you.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Nothing at all about John McCain?
[Unidentified Female:] Let's go.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you, guys.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Why won't you say something about John McCain?
[Unidentified Female:] Press, let's go. Make your way out. Let's go. Press, let's go. We're finished, let's go.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Mr. President, any comment on John McCain, sir?
[Phillip:] Now the president had faced a lot of pushback from Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill, from veterans groups, and according to our sources, even from within the White House. Finally on Monday afternoon, he issued a statement addressing McCain's service to the nation after this weekend only issuing condolences to McCain's family. That statement also authorized the flags here at the White House to be lowered to half-staff. The White House had initially resisted lowering the flags, which would have been a longstanding tradition that many presidents have followed, lowering the flags until McCain was laid to rest. And now President Trump is saying that's exactly what will happen. Now we asked Sarah Huckabee Sanders about what caused the change of course here at the White House. She would only say that it was the president's decision to issue a second statement which lowered the flags and addressed McCain's service and that that statement spoke for itself Dave and Laura.
[Jarrett:] Abby Phillip, thank you. Senator McCain had one final message for his fellow Republicans. In a pointed letter read by his longtime aide Rick Davis, McCain encouraged Americans to unite around ideals that connect them rather than focus on divisions.
[Rick Davis, Former Mccain Campaign Manager:] "We weaken our greatness when we confuse our patriotism with tribal rivalries that have sown resentment and hatred and violence in all the corners of the globe. We weaken it when we hide behind walls, rather than tear them down. When we doubt the power of our ideals rather than trust them to be the great force for change they've always been. "Do not despair of our present difficulties. We believe always in the promise and greatness of America. Because nothing is inevitable here. Americans never quit. We never surrender. We never hide from history. We make history."
[Jarrett:] McCain said that he lived a rewarding life and would not trade a single day, not even the ones of extraordinary hardship.
[Briggs:] No doubt the hardest of those hardships was the five and a half years he was held captive at the infamous Hanoi Hilton in Vietnam. John McCain's time as a prisoner of war shaped the remainder of his life and his legacy. Ivan Watson inside the Hanoi Hilton this morning Ivan.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave and Laura. The Hoa Lo prison, better known perhaps as the Hanoi Hilton, is now a museum with displays such as the flight suits that U.S. pilots wore when they carried out combat missions over Vietnam. And John McCain spent a big chunk of his five and a half years as a prisoner of war within these walls. And he figures prominently in the museum exhibits here. For example, there are photos along walls here of when he was actually a prisoner such as this moment here when he was badly hurt after he was taken prisoner in 1967 when he's splashed down. But I think that the exhibits here also kind of display the remarkable transformation in relations from that long conflict. I'm going to zip around here to 2000 when he was a visitor here to the same very museum talking about that time but also talking about peace between the U.S. and Vietnam. He became a prominent voice advocating for improved relations. And he's being honored here by top officials where there's a monument by the lake where he splashed down when he was shot down in '67. There are flowers and tokens of tribute to him. The U.S. embassy here in Hanoi is holding a rare honor for him. A book of condolences open to the public. When he was ambassador in Washington, the deputy prime minister of the country saying he is a symbol of a generation of lawmakers and veterans who have worked to heal the wounds between these countries Dave and Laura.
[Jarrett:] Gosh, so incredible just to see inside the museum there. Well, John McCain's Senate colleagues returning to Washington without him for the first time since 1987. McCain's desk was draped in a black cloth and on the desk sat a vase of white roses later re-tweeted by his wife Cindy. Georgia Republican Johnny Isakson pulled no punches with his remarks on the Senate floor.
[Sen. Johnny Isakson , Georgia:] Anybody who in any way tarnishes the reputation of John McCain deserves a whipping. I would say to the president or the anybody in the world, it's time to pause and say this was a great man. He gave everything for us.
[Briggs:] Republican senators are mixed on Chuck Schumer's proposal to rename the Russell office building after McCain. Senators Orrin Hatch and Tim Scott say yes, but several say it's too soon to decide. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell sidestepped the question altogether. The Russell office building had been named after longtime Georgia senator Richard Russell. He was a Democrat, but also a segregationist who opposed the Civil Rights Act.
[Jarrett:] In the wake of John McCain's passing, Arizona voters go to the polls in primary elections today. Republicans will choose between three candidates. Congresswoman Martha McSally, Kelli Ward and former sheriff Joe Arpaio, running for the Senate seat being vacated by Jeff Flake. On Monday Ward apologized for suggesting an announcement by McCain's family that he was ending his cancer treatment was designed to hurt her campaign.
[Dr. Kelli Ward , Arizona Senate Candidate:] I do understand how many could have misconstrued my comments as insensitive, and for this, I apologize. But again the intention of my comments were in no way directed at Senator McCain or his family.
[Briggs:] The frontrunner for the Democratic Senate nomination is current Arizona Congressman Kirsten Sinema. Florida also has a primary today. The Republican race for governor between Congressman Ron DeSantis and state agricultural commissioner Adam Putnam has been hotly contested. DeSantis asked for and received President Trump's endorsement. Primary day will also cement one of the year's most competitive Senate races and one of its most expensive. Governor Rick Scott all but guaranteed to face Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson in November.
[Jarrett:] Breaking news. A letter from a top North Korean official is apparently what led the president to cancel Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's latest trip to North Korea. Our colleague Josh Rogin first reported in the "Washington Post" that Pompeo received the letter from Kim Yong-Chol, a top aide to Kim Jong-un. CNN has confirmed the letter sent to Pompeo warned the denuclearization process was again at stake and may fall apart. CNN's Will Ripley live for us in Hong Kong. Will, what's the latest?
[Will Ripley, Cnn International Correspondent:] Hi, Laura. Essentially this is the biggest warning sign yet that this new diplomatic relationship between the United States and North Korea could really be in trouble here. I want to read you a portion of what a source told me overnight saying from the North Korean view that the U.S. is still not ready to meet North Korean expectations in terms of taking a step forward to sign a peace treaty. A peace treaty to formally end the Korean War which has been in a technical ceasefire since 1953, appears to be the major sticking point here. The North Koreans think the peace treaty should happen up front, denuclearization later. The U.S., though, feels that a peace treaty is a major concession that shouldn't happen until after Kim Jong-un has agreed to give up a large portion of its nuclear arsenal. But the North Koreans and this is why the U.S. have gone U.S. and North Korea have gone back and forth on this and really have been in gridlock since early July. The North Koreans say they're not going to give up those nukes until they have security guarantees that Kim is going to stay in power. And that is where we are right now. This letter also indicating that if diplomatic talks, if this process falls apart, North Korea could go back to its nuclear and missile activities. The kind of activities that the U.S. had responded to with increasingly escalating tensions that many felt pushed this region to the brink of a military conflict. An all-out war potentially between Pyongyang and Washington. We're not there yet. There is still time to save this diplomatic process. But the next steps forward are going to be critical. And that is why perhaps President Trump called off Pompeo's trip to Pyongyang that was supposed to happen this week feeling it might do more harm than good Laura.
[Jarrett:] Critical indeed. Will, thank you.
[Briggs:] Major development there. All right. The "Wall Street Journal" editorial board calls the trade deal between the U.S. and Mexico notably worse than NAFTA in many ways. What's in it? What's not? And what does Canada have to say?

[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] that it will be achieved. You are the reason change is coming to the U.N. It is now my honor to introduce someone who is no stranger to change, Donald Trump has a businessman's eye for seeing potential and he sees great potential not just in this reform movement, but in the United Nations itself. He shares your commitment to creating a more effective advocate for peace, security, and human rights. We are deeply grateful he has taken the time to be with us today. Ladies and gentlemen, President Donald J. Trump.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, thank you very much.
[Haley:] I came to the United Nations about the same time as the Secretary General. He and I share a mission to find value in the U.N. We share the goal of a better United Nations. Not a cheaper U.N. or a more expensive U.N., not a smaller one, or a bigger one, a better United Nations, an organization with the trusts and the capability to deliver on its mandate to promote peace, security, and human rights. Over the past eight months, he has been a partner and become a friend. His leadership brings us together today. Ladies and gentlemen, Secretary General Antonio Guterres.
[Antonio Guterres, U.n. Secretary General:] Mr. President, thank you very much for your engagement and support. I also thank Ambassador Haley for her leadership, her partnership and her commitment. And I am very grateful to all the leaders here today. Someone recently asked what keeps me up at night. My answer was simple, bureaucracy, fragmented structures, byzantine procedures and endless red tape. Someone out to undermine the U.N. could not have come up with a better way to do it than by imposing some of the rules
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] We are listening to the Secretary General of the United States, Secretary General Guterres speaking there. We'll monitor these remarks. But let's bring back in our panel, Jeff Zeleny, Jim Sciutto, Nia- Malika Henderson and Admiral Kirby. It's very interesting if you listen to the tone and the language that the president used to describe what he believes are failings of the United States. Admiral, to you first, it could not have been more measured, his criticism of the U.N. which is so vastly different from not a friend of democracy, not a friend of freedom, saying that it causes problems. Not today. REAR ADMIRAL JOHN KIRBY
[Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] No. No, did you see, if you watched Secretary General watching the president deliver those remarks, he was fairly beaming I think and happy to hear the more measured tone by Trump and you can hear in just a few minutes that we heard of the Secretary General. He was echoing, in fact, with more detail what the president did, the problems at the U.N. of bureaucracy and red tape. And all of those are valid concerns. I mean, I think, we've all known that the United Nations can be a much more efficient organization for many, many years. So I think everybody welcomes this reform effort. This is one thing you would I think that everybody can get behind, including President Trump that the U.N. needs to be a little bit more efficient and more effective.
[Harlow:] Jim Sciutto, what are your thoughts? Let me just read some of the quotes from the president here. The U.N. has not reached its full potential because of bureaucracy and mismanagement. We've seen the results, he talked about a rising budget, but not as much getting done, but he said that is all changing because of the Secretary General.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Listen, it's not a new point, particularly from a Republican president, to take shots at the U.N., for efficiency, for a waste of money and actually it's interesting because Donald Trump and his Secretary of State, you can argue, have taken shots at their own State Department.
[Harlow:] 100 percent.
[Sciutto:] Many senior positions not filled, morale inside the State Department building at Foggy Bottom is really low and it's been low before, particularly low now. So there have been substantive moves by this administration to downgrade, you know, the role of diplomatic institutions. But on the flip side, there's been a great need for the U.N., particularly with regards to the response to North Korea. The Trump administration needs and needed the U.N. to get through these penalties, economic sanctions, not as strong as they wanted but needed them.
[Harlow:] He didn't bring them up. That was interesting.
[Sciutto:] He didn't. I have to think tomorrow in his more formal because this is about efficiency as opposed to about the real mission, national security priorities, et cetera. But Trump being Trump, of course, he also in his comments has to make a reference to a Trump Tower across the street from the U.N. as a as an example of the success of the
[U.n. - Harlow:] Let me read that.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Let me read that. I'm glad you brought that up. OK. He talked about success and things changing and getting better at the U.N. OK. Then he said, I actually saw great potential right across the street. Of course, right across the street is Trump World Tower on United Nations plaza, a huge building here in New York. He said it turned out to be a very successful project due to its proximity to the United Nations. Nia-Malika Henderson, there's actually a bit of a backstory to this also?
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] I mean, I think sort of the context for this is in many ways I mean this is sort of Trump's approach to everything. This is essentially he says this not only about the U.N., right? That it's in need of reform.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Henderson:] He sees great potential in the U.N. And he can sort of bring that magic touch to the U.N. in the same way he's saying the same thing, I think about the American government, right? It is an institution that is embroiled in red tape and here he is. He can bring sort of a magic touch of being a businessman in the same way that he did with Trump Tower to course right across the street from the U.N. So I think it is classic Trump there that he is patting himself on the back about his success as a businessman. I'm sure that was not in the script there, but in some ways
[Harlow:] All right. Nia, hold that thought. My apologies for interrupting. Let's listen to Nikki Haley.
[Haley:] speak with one voice and the future of this institution is worth the extra mile. Our goal is to convince the delegations that have not yet signed the declaration to join the effort for a more efficient, accountable and transparent U.N. The United States believes we can make history by coming together as a true global community for reform. In the coming weeks and months, we will be considering the Secretary General's broader vision. This is an opportunity for all of us to seize this moment and ensure that United Nations remains relevant. We must challenge traditional mindsets, inertia and resistance to change. We will do this together. I hope we can count on your help. Thank you, again, and let's make it a new day at the United Nations.
[Harlow:] Showing once again how deliberate her choice of wording is there. Make it a new day at the United Nations. She reiterated exactly what she told our Dana Bash here yesterday. Nia-Malika, you were in the middle of speaking as we went to Nikki Haley.
[Henderson:] Yes. I mean, we were talking about sort of a Trump's off- the-cuff remarks about the Trump Tower that's across the street. In some ways Nikki Haley sort of set him up for that talking about him as a businessman. And in many ways, those are going to be I think whatever his asides are in some ways will be much of the focus as the actual text, right? Him strain from the text will be as much as important as whatever is written before him. And always interesting to see the president on script there, he isn't, you know, as emotive when he is reading as he is when he is off-the-cuff. So I think we're going to see in many ways a very constrained Trump in measured Trump over these next couple of days.
[Harlow:] He's greeting world leaders now, shaking hands. Talk about the day ahead, he has, Jeff Zeleny as we look. I'm not sure if you can see these images of the president just departing the room here, rather, brief remarks from him and Nikki Haley as well. But he has a big day ahead -of that big speech he has tomorrow.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] He does, indeed, Poppy. And we can see these images here as the president is really greeting these world leaders. And that's important to point out as the president did at the very beginning there, that this is happening in his hometown. He loves to show off the Oval Office, of course, as we've seen but he also wants to show off New York City. And of course, by mentioning Trump World Tower there, mentioning that he's a real estate executive. But the most important meetings as Jim Sciutto mentioning earlier are, indeed, these individual one-on-one meetings that he will be having and today, the two of the leading meetings he'll be meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well as the French President Emmanuel Macron. He will be doing those meetings off site here nearby. And those are really the moments and the and the minutes that we watch for new relationships building, what the about the will say, about the Iran nuclear agreement, et cetera. But again, just watching and I think it's important to put in context here. The president inside the United Nations building, even though he lives blocks away from here, he has a property across the United Nations Plaza here. We believe, Poppy, this is the first time that Mr. Trump certainly as president but overall has been in this building. He's been unusually critical of the United Nations and he has even been as so specific in his criticism as talking about the emerald green sort of backdrop that will be behind him tomorrow when he addresses the general assembly. He said that look if he's becomes president he would do a remodeling job. He equipped that last year. Of course no remodeling of the emerald in the works but he is talking about reforming the U.N. So I think this is so interesting again, seeing this, you know, real estate mogul now on the world stage here as president. A building he's been very critical of. Do not look for him to be as critical or sharp about the U.N. today. His words will be much more measured as we just saw a few moments ago, Poppy.
[Harlow:] Clearly just displayed. Something tells me that money is needed for other things other than new marble behind the podium there. Jim Sciutto in all seriousness though that these world leaders and the delegations that he was shaking hands with, these are people who when they saw the Trump budget outlined, you know, six months ago, were terrified about what America First means for global diplomacy that saves lives.
[Sciutto:] Absolutely.
[Harlow:] They were very concerned and so they want to hear what this president will say.
[Sciutto:] Well, they do. And listen, you'll have the words and then you have the actions, right?
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] And you saw in those comments there the measured Trump, the scripted Trump and tomorrow I think you can expect that as well, although the message will be strong tomorrow about America First. There's going to be no backing off that by this administration or by this president. But then you have the actions. And to be clear, while in the budget, for instance, you have a deep lessening of America's prioritization of U.N. priorities. In other places, the U.N. Security Council is back, front and center in the major national security crisis of the time which is North Korea. And everyone involved recognizes that they need that body. Now you have had Haley and McMaster say that well, the U.N. has done all it can on this and we're going to go to the you know, we may very well go to military options, but the fact is Trump needs the U.N. here. And it's those substantive moves that I think are going to be more telling to the world leaders present there today. At the end of the day Donald Trump's president of the United States. The United States, you know, for all the discomfort you've heard publicly from them and even more so in private from many European and international diplomats, the fact is he's the American president. They've got to go shake his hand. They need him not just on North Korea but any long range of issues that they're facing right now.
[Harlow:] Not shaking his hand will be two big players on the Security Council with veto power, though Russia's leader and China's leader not attending which would have been critical meetings as well for this president. Thank you very much, Jim Sciutto, Jeff Zeleny, Nia-Malika Henderson, Rear Admiral John Kirby. We appreciate it. The president is expected to as you've just heard push this America First agenda throughout his big debut at the United Nations. Interestingly Jeff Zeleny said the first time he's been in the building. Not just as president but the first time he's been in there. What Republicans are saying about the meeting today and their hopes for his big speech tomorrow? Then, how Facebook could become key or perhaps already is key in the Russia investigation. And President Trump may not have won an Emmy last night, but he loomed large in the room.
[Stephen Colbert, Host, "2017 Primetime Emmy Awards":] We know that the biggest TV star of the last year is Donald Trump. Yes. No. You may not like it. He's the biggest star, you know, and Alec Baldwin, obviously, you know.

[Bolduan:] This afternoon, New York's Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo was set to meet with President Trump at the White House, and it's all about taxes. The big issue is the state and local tax reduction, lovingly known as SALT. The 2017 tax bill put a cap on those deductions and Cuomo says it has left New York with a massive hole in its budget now. Let's get more on this now. CNN Business correspondent, Alison Kosik, is here. Alison, Democrats, blue states say they're unfairly targeted here. Republicans say it's not their fault that taxes are high. Who is right? What is likely to be hammered out at the White House?
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Business Correspondent:] You nailed both sides perfectly. What are they able to get done? You know how complicated the tax code can be. It's questionable whether they can get anything done. This all stems from the GOP tax bill that President Trump spearheaded. It basically limits the amount of state and local tax you can deduct from your tax bill. And that's hurting taxpayers in states that have higher taxes. It was one of the more controversial parts of tax reform that was passed in 2017. So this capped how much you could deduct from state and local taxes to just $10,000. Before, the deduction was actually unlimited. I'm laying it out for the SALT change there. The GOP has justified this by saying this would stop the federal government from subsidizing higher-state taxes and raise revenues to pay for tax cuts that were given to mostly businesses. But lawmakers who are in the high-tax states are complaining this cap disproportionately hurts their residents in New York and New Jersey and California. Here's an example for you. Taxpayers in New York will pay roughly an estimated $14 billion more dollars in federal taxes this year, and that drives big earners to places like Miami to try to escape the SALT tax. Losing residents, that means is state revenue goes away as well. So New York Governor Cuomo plans to meet with President Trump today to discuss removing the cap, which disproportionately hits those blue states, and it's a criticism that Cuomo and other Democratic lawmakers have had that levied against the tax bill.
[Andrew Cuomo, , New York Governor:] What it does is it has created two different tax structures in this country. And it has created a preferential tax structure in Republican states.
[Kosik:] Last week, President Trump did tell reporters he's open to revisiting the topic. However, I think the genie is already out of the bottle. Senate Finance Committee Chair Chuck Grassley said the panel would not revisit the deduction cap later this year. Kate, once you start to try to roll back things, especially when it involves taxes, I say good luck.
[Bolduan:] There's compromise in the air in Washington today, so
[Kosik:] Glass half full
[Bolduan:] Sure. I'm not even going to pretend. Great to see you. Thank you so much.
[Kosik:] Thank you.
[Bolduan:] We'll be right back.

[Camerota:] Comedian Jon Stewart accuses the White House of screwing over 911 first responders. Stewart and a bipartisan group of New York lawmakers attacking this proposal they believe threatens treatments for the thousands who got sick during recovery efforts at Ground Zero. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux is live on Capitol Hill with more. So what's this about, Suzanne.
[Suzanne Malveaux, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Alisyn, this really is a case about if it is not broken, don't fix it. That is the message from Jon Stewart who has been fighting for this program for 15 years, as well as Republican and Democratic lawmakers. There's a real fear and anxiety here that this bureaucratic budgetary move is actually going to impact the ability for these 911 first responders to get health care.
[Jon Stewart, Comedian:] If you want to stand up and say, we love our first responders in this country, we love our veterans in this country, stop screwing them.
[Malveaux:] Comedian Jon Stewart slamming White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney for the proposed restructuring of an agency that provides health care to 911 first responders.
[Stewart:] It is a special kind of incompetence that takes a program that was fought for, for 15 years by firefighters, police officers, first responders, veterans and survivors that has finally come to fruition and is finally working well. It's a special kind of incompetence to want to turn that upside down.
[Malveaux:] The World Trade Center Health Program provides treatment for more than 80,000 individuals suffering from illnesses related to the recovery efforts at Ground Zero.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , Minority Leader:] The bill is passed.
[Malveaux:] Congress passed the bill in 2010 and reauthorized it in 2015 for 75 years, a fight championed by Stewart and the bill's bipartisan co-sponsors. The Trump administration's budget proposal would separate that program from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, something advocates fear will make it harder for survivors to receive treatment.
[Rep. Jerry Nadler , New York:] The expertise of the men and women of NIOSH have saved lives, brought comfort to grieving families and eased the suffering of these injured heroes. Why on earth would we change it now?
[Malveaux:] The White House denying that the restructuring will impact the program's funding or services, telling Politico, there will be zero change in the benefits our heroes currently receive and wholly deserve. The proposal simply attempts to align long-term needs of a reimbursement program. But Stewart calling on the president to intervene and blasting Mulvaney for bypassing Congress.
[Stewart:] They'll have to rewrite "School House Rock" as to how a bill becomes a law and one guy screws everything up. That will be known forever as "pulling a Mulvaney."
[Malveaux:] Now, Mulvaney's office continues to insist it is not going to impact the funding, this reorganization. And at this point, Chris, it really is just a proposal, it is just a plan, as this public relations battle is full on full-court press. We'll have to see how this all unfolds, Chris.
[Cuomo:] All right, thank you very much, Suzanne. And, look, and people have feelings about Jon Stewart, whether, you know, you're on the left and the right, you'll see him differently. Tomorrow we have P.J. Rycoff, who is the head of the IADA, one of the largest veteran organizations. He's going to come on the show and he's going to tell you what the reality is of the promise to support the troops, OK? Now, what could be a major breakthrough, North Korea agreeing to halt nuclear and missile tests, but they do have a condition. What is it? How realistic is all of this? Next.

[Romans:] The Arlington Texas Police Department standing by one of its officers who shot an alleged shoplifter after the suspect pointed a pellet gun at him. Police say they responded to a call of someone stealing sunglasses at a mall on Sunday. Officers spotted the suspect, a chase ensued. Police say the suspect pulled an imitation firearm from his waistband and pointed it at one of the officers who then fired hitting the suspect.
[Briggs:] The unidentified 20-year-old was taken to the hospital for treatment. Investigators recovered the bb gun. Arlington Police Chief Will Johnson tweeting a photo showing the suspect pointing the gun directly at the officer. Johnson writes, "It is nearly impossible to determine the authenticity of a real versus fake gun."
[Romans:] A Virginia mom faces five years in prison on a felony charge for putting a recorder in her 9-year-old daughter's backpack after the child complained about being bullied. Sara Sims telling CNN affiliate, WAVY, her daughter was being picked on at Ocean View Elementary School in Norfolk. Sims said she called the school, e- mailed the school repeatedly but her messages, she says were ignored.
[Briggs:] She took matters into your own hands putting a digital recorder in the fourth grader's backpack to catch the alleged bullying. When the recorder was discovered, Sims says her daughter was kicked out of class and a month later, Sims was arrested.
[Unidentified Female:] If I'm not getting an answer from you, then what am I left to do? I don't even think surprise is the right word. I was mortified. I was terrified. Next thing I know, I'm a felon. Felony charges and a misdemeanor when I'm trying to look out for my kid. What do you do?
[Romans:] What do you do? The Norfolk School District says electronic devices are prohibited in elementary schools, but would not comment on the charges filed against Sara Sims. Charges that Sims' attorney believes will not hold up in court and no word on what the district is doing about the bullying against her daughter.
[Briggs:] All right. The new head football coach of Tennessee is unclear at this point. Why did the school pull the plug on former Rutgers and Tampa Bay Bucks Coach Greg Schiano. Coy Wire with this confusing story this morning in the "Bleacher Report" next.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] The wall should be called the wall, after all, and the House speaker will be begging for it. Those are the latest proclamations from the President as the clock continues to tick down to another potential shutdown or perhaps a state of emergency declaration if the President doesn't get the wall that he wants. And judging by what Speaker Pelosi said today, it doesn't seem like he will.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , California:] There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation.
[Cooper:] Well, that's pretty clear. The Speaker later went on to suggest that it she'd be open to more enhanced fencing, but the wall seems to be as much of a non-starter as ever.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And by the way, if you go to Tijuana and you take down that wall, you will have so many people coming into our country that Nancy Pelosi will be begging for a wall. She'll be begging for a wall. She will say, "Mr. President, please, please give us a wall." It will be very interesting. Some people have suggested let me take the wall along California. Let's move it to Arizona. Let's move it to Texas. And you know, it would be a very interesting statement.
[Cooper:] Now he is not only moving the goalpost, he is maybe moving the whole wall. The President was asked if he would accept the other kinds of physical barriers that the speaker suggested she'd be open to.
[Trump:] No, because if there is no wall, it doesn't work. She is just playing games.
[Cooper:] Right, doesn't work politically if there is no wall. Keeping them honest, and we've said this before, there is a debate to be had about immigration policy, there's no doubt about that. But when it comes to accusations of playing games, the President doesn't exactly come from a non-hypocritical place, to put it nicely. Just today, he was back to his word games about whether to call the wall the wall. He typed into the Twitter machine, "Let's just call them walls from now on and stop playing political games. A wall is a wall." Well, not only did the President invent this game, he wrote all the rules, he broke them, he changed them, he rewrote them and then he changed them again. A wall is a wall, he says, but he didn't always seem to think so.
[Trump:] We're going to build a wall and it's going to be impenetrable. It will be a real wall. It's not a fence, it's a wall. You just misreported it. There could be some fencing. You go back to 2006, they all approved essentially a wall, a very powerful fence, which is pretty much the same thing. A wall or a slat fence, or whatever you want to call it. A wall, a fence, whatever they'd like to call it, I'll call it whatever they want, but it's all the same thing. You could call it a steel fence, this wall or fence or anything the Democrats need to call it. They can name it whatever. They can name it peaches. I don't care what they name it.
[Cooper:] They can name it peaches. Call it whatever you want. But, now, a wall is a wall, all caps, exclamation point. Keeping them honest, the President and his supporters seem to be the only ones who are hung up on what to call this thing that doesn't even exist. When Kellyanne Conway was asked about a poll showing that vast majority of Americans didn't think a wall was worth the shutdown, she seemed to think it was very important to use the proper words, whatever those are.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Kellyanne, there's a new poll out showing that 71 percent of American
[Kellyanne Conway, Donald Trump Aide:] Do you have the poll? Do you have a poll question?
[Phillip:] So, it's on
[Cbs. Conway:] Yes, right, but I just want to see the question.
[Phillip:] The question was, is the wall worth the government shutdown?
[Conway:] And so why would that be the question?
[Phillip:] I'm wondering what is the President
[Conway:] No, I'm asking you why are you still saying the wall when the President has said I'm asking why you in the polling questions respect there is still saying wall when the President said you can call it whatever you want. Call it steel, slat, barriers, whatever.
[Phillip:] He calls it a wall himself, Kellyanne.
[Cooper:] So, OK. So there she is saying, "Why are you calling it a wall?" He is calling it a wall. He campaigned on it. It's always been a wall. The only thing that is demonstrably changed is the other part of his promise about who is going to pay for it.
[Trump:] Who's going to pay for the wall?
[Unidentified Speakers:] Mexico.
[Trump:] Who's going to pay for the wall?
[Unidentified Speakers:] Mexico.
[Trump:] Who?
[Unidentified Speakers:] Mexico.
[Cooper:] The conversation has moved from whether Mexico is going to pay for it, which it never was, to whether a wall is actually a wall, and the only person responsible for that is the President. As for where this leaves us and the federal workers who may be facing another shutdown in just over two weeks, it is not looking great.
[Trump:] On February 15th, the committee will come back. And if they don't have a wall, I don't even want to waste my time reading what they have, because it's a waste of time.
[Cooper:] A waste of time, says the President. Joining me now is Congressman Henry Cuellar, Democrat from Texas, a member of the group of lawmakers trying the hash out a deal. Congressman, thanks for being with us. So the President saying today
[Rep. Henry Cuellar , Texas:] Thank you so much.
[Cooper:] the bipartisan panel is no closer to a deal now than when it started. As a member of that panel, is he right?
[Cuellar:] Look, without due respect to the President, we're just focusing on what we can do as appropriators Senate, House, Democrats, Republicans, and I feel optimistic that if there is no outside interference by the White House, we can work this out. I feel very confident that we can work it out.
[Cooper:] So, is there any discussion about a wall or whatever you call it, you know, increased fencing, supplemental fencing, additional fencing in some areas that are strategic points that may need it?
[Cuellar:] Well, right now where we're focusing is trying to answer two questions. When you look at the question, how do we stop drugs from coming in, keep in mind that most drugs according to DEA, Homeland, will come through ports of entry. So in our ports, what we need to do is make sure, make sure that we have the right number of K-9s, CBP officers, those are the men and women in blue, and have the latest X-ray technology, the sea portals and things that you can have an 18-wheelers go by and still provide the X-ray to see what's in there. So we got to be smart on how we secure the border. And also, keep in mind that just think it was today, the largest amount of fentanyl that has been captured in the U.S. history was done at a port of entry. And if you listen to the latest drug case in New York, what are the bad guys saying? They use ports of entry. They will go ahead and use submarines or speed boats in the water. So we have to be smart on how we address drugs. And keep in mind, one last point, if you want to stop people, keep in mind that in the year 2000, border patrol stopped 1.6 million individuals, apprehended. Last year it was about 303,000 individuals, a smaller amount. And the larger amount, 67 percent of the people are not supposed to be here are visa overstays. And by the way, most of those visa overstays are Canadians.
[Cooper:] Right. In the past, though, Democrats have supported some fencing, some fortified fencing. And there is, you know, there are many areas where there is there are steel slats. There are various kinds of fencing. Would you be supportive of any kind of agreement that increases the length of fencing in some areas if border protection says that would help us in this particular region? Not talking about a wall from sea to shining sea, but just increased fencing of an extra 100 miles, 200 miles of fencing, is that something that you would support?
[Cuellar:] Well, you know, again, first thing I want to do is make sure that we have the technology, the right number of personnel. Border patrol is losing more men and women than they're actually hiring in border patrol. We've got to make sure that we provide security underground because of tunnels, tunnels. Keep in mind that there has been what, 290 tunnels that they discovered going in the under the walls or fences, should I say, for a long time. And then of course sea, because of the coast guard has to play a role. And then air. We need air stats. We need drones. We need helicopters and airplanes.
[Cooper:] But even just to get a deal, as a compromise, would you consider additional fencing?
[Cuellar:] Well, again, we got to look at what we have right now. Right now we have 654 miles of fencing. 300 of those miles are vehicle barriers. And if you're familiar with the vehicle barriers, they're basically to stop cars. They don't stop people. You can crawl under them or just jump over. So we have to look at what's out there. Now, keep in mind that in the year 2000 2008, Senator Cornyn and myself and a Democratic county judge, we came up with a compromise for what we called a levied wall, which is basically there is flooding down there by the river in the South Texas area. We got a dirt mound and we put a cement barrier on it and it became a flood control and at the same time border security. So we can get creative. What we don't want is Washington to get a red crayon and tell us what we need to put any sort of barriers if we even get to that part.
[Cooper:] All right, Congressman Henry Cuellar, appreciate your time. Thank you. Joining us now, "USA Today" columnist Kirsten Powers and former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo. Kirsten, I mean, is the President right to a certain degree here? Are Democrats playing political games with the word "wall"?
[Kirsten Powers, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, I mean, he's also changed his different definitions of what a wall is and what a fence is. And I think Nancy Pelosi said today, like he can call it whatever he wants, you know. You know, they are interested in trying to beef up security, particularly at ports of entry because that is where, you know, most of the most of the problems occur, frankly, and it's the way most people come into the country. Can they give money for a little more fencing? Sure, but that's not really what this was all held up over, right? This was held up over his insistence on having a wall. Not having a fence, on having a wall there never would have been a shutdown if he just wanted a little fencing.
[Cooper:] Michael, for the President to say as he did today that this isn't about votes, it isn't about elections. I mean, that's not true. Obviously, this was a central part of his campaign. It's fulfilling a campaign promise ahead of 2020, is it not?
[Michael Caputo, Former Trump Campaign Aide:] Well, I think it's one of his key campaign promises, just like improving the economy, driving down the unemployment rate, you know, freeing up business by deregulating, so many eliminating so many of the regulations laid on business by the Obama administration. It was a key campaign promise, of course, and I think because it was so central to his victorious campaign, I think the Democrats have decided it's a line that they're not going to cross. And it's going to become an election issue for sure in 2020. If the wall is being built or it's built by then, it will be a victory for the President. If it isn't, then it will be a point of contention between him and the Democratic nominee. But the fact of the matter is the President can build this wall with or without Nancy Pelosi's approval through a state of emergency or even other ways. And I think he is intent on doing that.
[Cooper:] Kirsten, I mean, wouldn't it I mean, it seems like obviously that there's going to be some sort of a compromise between Democrats and Republicans, whether the President goes along with it. It seems like one obvious compromise is some sort of increased fencing in some key strategic areas and whether it's called a wall or, you know, steel slat fencing, or whatever they want to call it. Isn't that sort of the obvious compromise, that the Democrats can say it's not a wall, and the President can say, you know, it's a wall.
[Powers:] Yes. I mean, I have said before that I think they have to give him an out. They have to give you know, when you are negotiating with somebody, that you have to try to get to yes. And I know that makes a lot of people angry, because that's not really how he negotiates for the most part. But if it's something that is first of all not insanely expensive the way the wall is, and the reason that the Democrats oppose it is because it's just not a good idea, and it's not necessary. And we've gone through many times all the different reasons that this is not what the United States needs if we want to deal with the problems at the border. So, I think that was just a non-starter. But are there other things that they can agree on? Yes. And I think that they like I said, they want increased security at the border, they have agreed to that. And so that is giving him something. They're just not giving him the wall because they don't think it's a good idea, and he said Mexico is going to pay for it. So it's just is more of this crazy making that somehow it's the Democrats' fault that he doesn't have funding for the wall that he said he was going to get the funding from Mexico for.
[Cooper:] Michael, what about that?
[Caputo:] Well, I think I mean, I agree, Kirsten is right in a lot of ways. But at the same time, you know, today the Democrats laid out their plan for border security. And in that plan, they froze the number of border patrol officers. If they're going to go ahead and beef up security at the ports of entry, they're going to need a lot more border patrol officers. And the idea that the vast majority of border patrol officers support a wall, I think that's driving what the President wants to do. But also, by the way, the majority of border patrol officers support increasing the number of border patrol officers. Democrats really got to get a handle on what border security really means to them.
[Cooper:] Michael Caputo, Kirsten Powers, thank you. Up next, we're going to speak with Senator Jeff Merkley who said that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen lied in congressional testimony about family separation of illegal immigrants. The senator is asking the FBI to investigate. I'll talk to him about that.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks for being with me today. I'm Poppy Harlow, in New York. I'll see you back here tomorrow morning. Let me pass it over to my colleague, Kate Bolduan.
[Erica Hill, Cnn Anchor:] Hello. I'm Erica Hill, in for Kate Bolduan. We begin this hour with Hurricane Florence, a massive storm that has just strengthened. Now a category 3, which makes this a major hurricane, one that appears to be barreling toward the Carolinas. It could be the strongest hurricane to hit that area in more than 20 years. Just moments ago, we learned more about it. We also learned a mandatory evacuation about to get under way on North Carolina's Hatteras Island. Right now, the National Hurricane Center is releasing its latest updates. CNN's Chad Myers is tracking all of this for us from the Weather Center. Chad, the question obviously a lot of folks want to know is when could Florence hit the U.S.?
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Probably the first effect would be some time noon on Thursday. Maybe a little earlier. Outer bands kind of coming in with lashing 75-mile-per-hour winds. But the problem is not really that we're 115 right now. It's the problem of what's going on from here. The water is getting warmer, Erica. It's now 85 degrees under the storm. And it's forecast to be 145. And right behind here, it's a 150-mile-per-hour storm. Even if it loses some strength on the way into land, it's going to have this massive bubble of water called a storm surge. The same type of surge that we see in every landfalling major hurricane, like Katrina, like Hugo, like all of the big storms that push water onshore. It could be 15 or 20 feet high as it comes onshore. Then the storm is going to stop. And it's going to rain a little bit like Harvey. Hopefully, not a lot like Harvey but it's forecast to come onshore, stop, and put down somewhere in the ballpark of 20 to 30 inches of rain somewhere in between West Virginia, Virginia, and down into the Carolinas, which is very topographic, not flat like Houston. This is going to run off, be flash flooding, major, major problems with this storm. It's time to prepare. This looks like a true buzz saw right now. And this means right now this is going through rapid intensification. If you're doing anything, anywhere along the coastal areas and you don't belong there, don't live there, just leave now so you don't clog the roads for the locals that are trying to leave as the week progresses. This will be an evacuation-type storm where people will need to get away from that water, especially if it's going to go that deep that quickly, Erica. This is going to be a big one we haven't seen in this area in decades.
[Hill:] All right, Chad Myers with the latest for us. Thank you.
[Myers:] Thanks.
[Hill:] While Hurricane Florence is still days away from landfall, as Chad pointed out, those warnings, those preparations already under way. CNN's Kaylee Hartung is live in Wilmington, North Carolina. You have been speaking with folks not just on the beach yesterday. Today you're at some of the stores. Are people really starting to heed the warnings and get prepared?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correpondent:] They are, Erica. We're seeing shelves clear, from Savannah, Georgia, up the Carolina coast, into Virginia. This Home Improvement store behind me selling out of the generators that they restocked this morning. Getting more on the floor as soon as they can. Water, bread, and milk, those types of hurricane necessities, emptying out in grocery stores across the area. But people here recognize this storm, as Chad mentioned, isn't just a threat to the coast. You also have to be concerned with areas inland. We talked to one Lowe's home improvement store an hour and a half inland from where we are here in Wilmington, North Carolina, a store in Lumberton, North Carolina, that sold more than 200 generators in the past day. So many people here preparing for a storm that this area really hasn't seen in about 20 years. You mentioned those evacuations. Hatteras Island now under mandatory evacuation starting at noon today. Hatteras Island in the area familiar called the Outer Banks, that entire county of Dare County will be under mandatory evacuation starting 7:00 a.m. tomorrow. People here are taking this serious, so are officials. We're aware of the states of emergency that were declared before even the weekend. People asking, why were those declarations made so early? For this reason. So allocations could be made, resources and assets put in place well before the storm hits.
[Hill:] Kaylee Hartung with the latest for us. Kaylee, thank you. At the Trump White House, the list of suspects shrinking. The roll call of denials growing. In the latest twist here, a sitting vice president goes to extraordinary lengths to say he will prove his loyalty to the commander-in-chief. Add Mike Pence to the lengthy list of Trump officials to deny writing that scathing op-ed for the "New York Times." But Pence going a step further. He says he never discussed removing President Trump as unfit for office and is even offering now to take a polygraph.
[Chris Wallace, Fox News Anchor:] Should all top officials take a lie detector test, and would you agree to take one?
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] I would agree to take it in a heartbeat and would submit to any review of the administration.
[Unidentified Correspondent:] One of the claims made in the op-ed is that there had been discussion of invoking the 25th Amendment, to even remove the president from office. Have you ever been part of a conversation about that?
[Pence:] No, never. And why would we be?
[Hill:] All this as the embattled White House is bracing for tomorrow's release of Bob Woodward's book and its damning account of a president dangerously impulsive and uninformed. The president not wasting any time, firing back this morning, quote, "The Woodward book is a joke," he tweeted. "Just another assault against me and a barrage of assaults using now disproven, unnamed and anonymous sources. Many have already come forward to say the quotes by them, like the book, are fiction. Dems can't stand losing. I'll write the real book." CNN's Abby Phillip is at the White House. Abby, let's begin with this "New York Times" op-ed. A source telling CNN White House aides have actually whittled down the list of suspects. What more do we know about their efforts to determine who the author is?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, White House aides are being pushed to identify this person by the president himself, who has talked publicly and privately about his anger at this person. He's raised some national security concerns that he might find himself in meetings with a person who would write an op-ed like this. But what we haven't gotten a sense of is who they think this might be, where they might have come from within the administration. What is their profile? We haven't heard anything about that. And meanwhile, there are, as you just mentioned, a slew of officials talking about the fact that they weren't behind it and denouncing the unnamed administration official who did write the op-ed. Listen to Kellyanne Conway yesterday on "State of the Union."
[Kellyanne Conway, Senior Advisor To President Trump:] If this person really thinks that he or she is being patriotic and not pathetic, which is the way I view it, they should come forward. I think the motivation was to sow discord and create chaos.
[Phillip:] Kellyanne also this morning spoke to reporters briefly and we asked her, how is the search going? She says she doesn't know anything about it because she's not involved in it. Meanwhile, we are wondering now, what is President Trump going to do when it comes to his claim that he might ask Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, to investigate this person. Kellyanne also said yesterday that she didn't know of any laws that this person might have broken, but she left the question open. We'll see today whether or not the president moves forward with that and whether that has actually been conveyed to anyone else in this government.
[Hill:] All right, Abby, appreciate it. Thank you. Let's continue the discussion. Joining me now, Josh Dawsey, CNN political analyst and "Washington Post" White House reporter, and CNN senior political analyst, Mark Preston. Good to have both of you with us. All of this is unfolding with the "New York Times" op-ed and the parlor game still going there as we're waiting for Bob Woodward's book to drop tomorrow. He was on the "Today" show this morning, and Savannah Guthrie asked him point blank, you have John Kelly and Jim Mattis coming out and saying the things you said I said in the book, I didn't say. They're refuting his claims. She said, are they lies? His answer, they're not telling the truth and he felt they had to make political statements to protect their jobs. Josh, who do we believe?
[Josh Dawsey, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, there was certainly a lot of pressure on senior officials last week to go back and push back on Bob Woodward's book and the early accounts that came out. Mr. Woodward said he interviewed more than 100 people for this book. Yesterday, he talked about his meticulous reporting history as a journalist in Washington. But you also have senior officials who are saying their comments were misattributed. The book, I think what's important to say is a mosaic of what it paints, a portrait of his presidency that in some ways is aligned with what we have been reporting here at "The Post" or books, at the "New York Times," "Wall Street Journal," other places have reported. And lot of the anecdotes in the book are things I had heard separately and I think my colleagues have heard, too, and we know to be true. I don't know every detail in the book, but I know a lot of the reporting aligns with what I've heard inside the White House. # Which tells us all a lot. Bob Woodward was also asked, if in working on the book, he feels he may have spoken to the author of the op-ed. Take a listen to that exchange.
[Savannah Guthrie, Fox News:] I want to ask you if you have any suspects, but I wonder when you read that op-ed
[Bob Woodward, Jounralist & Author:] I don't have any suspects.
[Guthrie:] Did you think this might be someone I also have talked to?
[Woodward:] No, I didn't, because the people I talked to I insisted be very specific about the incidents.
[Hill:] Mark, does that answer in any way narrow the list of possible authors?
[Mark Preston, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] No, I mean, look, a good question by Savannah Guthrie as we're trying to figure out who the person is. And I should note, we will find out who the person is. There are no more Mark Felts, no more Deep Throats in this culture we live in, in this information age where everything moves so quickly. But, again, it was Bob Woodward who protected the identity of Mark Felt for all those years as his source for Watergate. No surprise he wouldn't even address the question so much when asked right then. But I want to go to something I trust as well. The overarching narrative about chaos in the White House is something that we have been reporting on since day one. So we shouldn't be surprised that conversations that have come up in this book, controversial subjects that have come up, the 25th Amendment have come up. We shouldn't be surprised at all that these conversations have happened in the White House.
[Hill:] And you know, just to pick up on that point, what's fascinating here is this White House media blitz that they put out, certainly over the weekend, to try to keep the focus on the letter while sort of complaining a little bit about the focus on the letter, it hasn't really focused on the content of the letter. Take a listen to some of what Kellyanne Conway had to say just yesterday.
[Conway:] I think the motivation was to sow discord and create chaos.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Host, State Of The Union:] You think the person broke the law?
[Conway:] I don't know. I have no idea.
[Hill:] We don't know if anything illegal happened here, but the president wants an investigation, but we don't know why. Clearly, this was about sowing discord and chaos in the White House because I guess there wasn't any before that. Again, Josh, what's not addressed here is the content of this letter.
[Dawsey:] That's correct. And one of the challenges the White House has had in sussing out who wrote the letter is there are a number of officials who privately agree with the contents of the letter. We did reporting last week where they were trying to figure out early on who it could be, and everyone had five, 10 guesses which tells you a lot of people share the insights put in the letter. I was on Air Force One with the president on Friday. He came to the back of the plane and was talking about the letter and saying how shameful it was and how he wants Jeff Sessions to investigate. But we haven't, from a lot of officials, heard as much about the contents of the letter and the claims it makes of the president, that he's incompetent and amoral, and more about how atrocious it was for the person to pen such a letter, which is an interesting divide.
[Hill:] You know, Mark, something I wanted to bring up that you touched on talking about Bob Woodward and Deep Throat. One of the other things that was interesting, he was asked this morning, by Savannah, have you ever put out a book with information that you know to be true and then the person who is quoted in the beak says, oh, I never said that. He said, oh, yes, that does kind of happen. And that eventually he said, you know, and I'm paraphrasing here, eventually, the truth comes out. As you were saying, Mark, eventually we'll know who wrote this op-ed. You know, none of us has a crystal ball, but what's fascinating is that eventually, that timeframe of that is much different in 2018 and how quickly that can come to light.
[Preston:] Erica, I'm surprised we haven't found out yet.
[Hill:] Yes.
[Preston:] I'm surprised the name hasn't come out yet. What I do think is interesting and I do think our viewers should really hone in on this, when you have somebody come out, such as General Mattis or anybody, and say look, I did not write the op-ed or I never said those things, take into context that he's a secretary of defense for a president right now that a lot of people have questions about his stewardship of the country. Could you imagine if Jim Mattis came out and said, you know what, I did say that? We would be in absolute turmoil. So when Bob Woodward says that's a political statement, they have jobs. It's more than they need a paycheck. There's much more to it than that. There's the country at stake. So I do think that's what Woodward is getting to.
[Dawsey:] And the op-ed denials are interesting to me because you have folks if you wrote an anonymous op-ed like this and would you then immediately say, oh, actually, I did do it, when asked by the press? If you were willing to write such an op-ed and place it, it's hard to imagine now I received a press question so I'm going to fess up to it.
[Hill:] I don't need to be anonymous anymore. Sure, it was me.
[Dawsey:] Right, it was me. So it's hard to know, you know how if any of the denials are disingenuous because you're not going to just say, oh, yes, I did it, thank you very much.
[Hill:] Oh, and at some point, perhaps we'll look back on this and laugh at the fact it took us now six days to figure this out. Mark Preston, Josh Dawsey, always appreciate it. Thank you.
[Preston:] Thanks.
[Dawsey:] Thank you.
[Hill:] Coming up, an awkward mistake from the U.S. government. Prosecutor say they were wrong to accuse a Russian national of offering sex for political access. Is her case, though, really the one the president is thinking about? Plus, President Trump says the economy is so good, but one of his latest tweets about it is flat-out wrong. The facts ahead.

[Berman:] All right, after falling behind to the Chicago Bulls, the Boston Celtics succeeds, and now won three in a row and are just a win away from advancing to the conference semifinals. I'm very excited.
[Harlow:] Clearly. Andy Scholes has more in this morning's "Bleacher Report." Good morning.
[Andy Scholes, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Good morning, guys. You know what a difference a week makes, John. You and Celtics fans everywhere, I'm sure, in a panic after the team lost two straight to the eighth-seeded Bulls, but all is well now after the third straight win for Boston. All-star guard Isaiah Thomas arriving to the arena with his son. And check him out. He looked like he was ready to play. I'm sure he was proud of dad after this one. The 5'9" Thomas coming up big with some huge buckets down the stretch to lead the Celtics to a 108-97 win last night. All right, tonight, the first round of the NFL draft. This year it's taking place in Philly, right on the iconic Rocky Balboa steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art. The Cleveland Browns have the first overall pick. Draft's going to start at 8:00 Eastern. Each team gets 10 minutes to make their pick in round one. Michigan's football team, meanwhile, is currently in Italy on a week- long trip that includes holding a practice by the team visiting the Vatican yesterday, taking in Pope Francis' weekly address. And afterwards, Coach Harbaugh met the Pope and gave him a Wolverines helmet and a brand new pair of custom Michigan Jordan shoes. Harbaugh saying, quote, "This has been the experience of my lifetime." And guys, I wanted to ask you, do you think Pope Francis ever wears those Jordans?
[Harlow:] Definitely. And our friend just gave our baby, Sienna, little baby blue air Jordans. There you go.
[Berman:] So she's just like the Pope.
[Scholes:] Just like the Pope now.
[Harlow:] She's just like the Pope.
[Berman:] All right. Andy Scholes, great to have you with us. Thanks so much, Andy. We really appreciate it.
[Scholes:] Sure.
[Berman:] All right. There is breaking news this morning. There is a new investigation that has been launched into the former National Security adviser, Michael Flynn, and his ties to Russia.
[Harlow:] And all of this is happening as the White House pushes ahead to the 100-day milestone. Stay with us. Much more ahead.

[Whitfield:] A notorious gangster is on the run again, this time after a spectacular prison break, his second time. He escaped from a prison near Paris this morning with the help of multiple armed men who hijacked a helicopter to pick him up. They forced the pilot to fly to an area just northwest of Paris, and police say the men let the pilot go unharmed and then took off in a car. Faid was serving a 25-year sentence for masterminding a failed robbery, and he was serving an additional ten years for a previous escape in 2013 where he used explosives to blast through prison doors. A French journalist is outside the prison following this story for us now. So Caroline, what can you us about this investigation?
[Caroline Dieudonne, Reporter For French Tv Network:] Well, the investigation has just started, but what we know so far is that there were three people involved in the escape. The French justice minister confirmed it an hour ago. Two heavily armed men who used tools to get inside the prison to go through the doors to the visiting room where
[Whitfield:] And Caroline, are people at all fearful of his escape?
[Dieudonne:] Well, the people inside the prison told us that they were frightened after what happened because it's not the first time that he's escaped. The first time he escaped was in 2013, five years ago, in the north of France. It was also a spectacular prison break that took less than half an hour. And he had taken several guards hostage. He used explosives to get out, using the guards as human shields. And he was on the run for several weeks. He was captured by the police. Right now
[Whitfield:] Caroline Dieudonne, thank you so much for your report. Appreciate it. And we have so much more straight ahead in the newsroom. It all starts right now. All right. Hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us. I'm Fredricka Whitfield in Washington, D.C. Up first, the U.S. Supreme Court showdown. In just an hour, President Trump will head back to the White House from his golf club in New Jersey, where he spent part of the weekend interviewing possible Supreme Court candidates. Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement just a few days ago, but President Trump has already jumped into action, saying he will announce his new pick one week from tomorrow. This decision has the power to transform the U.S. Supreme Court for generations, and the looming nomination battle is already igniting a fire storm on Capitol Hill. Republican senator Susan Collins will be a key vote for the President. She met with Trump to discuss the vacancy, and she still has some concerns, she says.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Chief Washington Correspondent:] Are you comfortable with everyone on that list?
[Sen. Susan Collins, Maine:] No, I am not. Now, some of the people on the list I have not vetted at all at this point. One of them I voted against years ago. And I would have to do a great deal at more work.
[Whitfield:] All right. Let's check in with CNN White House correspondent Boris Sanchez.

[King:] Democrats offering a new tact. You might call it a new power play on this, day 26 of the partial government shutdown. Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying the president should cancel or at least delay his upcoming State of the Union address on January 29th. She says the president should do that unless unless the shutdown is resolved this week. Now, it's still an open question, or is it? Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, just moments ago here on CNN, being a little more straightforward, saying the State of the Union is off. The Democrats' argument? They say the event requires too much security from officers who, at the moment, are not being paid because of the shutdown. Speaker Pelosi offers this alternative.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , House Speaker:] This is a housekeeping matter in the Congress of the United States so that we can honor the responsibility of the invitation we extended to the president. You can make it from the Oval Office.
[King:] CNN's Lauren Fox live on Capitol Hill. Lauren, what's behind Pelosi's move here?
[Lauren Fox, Cnn Congressional Reporter:] Well, if you read that letter from Nancy Pelosi, the language is pretty cordial, but it is ultimately up to her whether the president gets to come before a joint session of Congress and deliver that State of the Union Address. I want to read just a little bit of that letter from her. She said, sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest we work together to determine another suitable date after government has reopened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union Address in writing to Congress on January 29th. Now, it's important to remember that this is a high-security event. And that is the rationale that Nancy Pelosi uses in her letter. She's trying to say to the president, look, you've got members of cabinet you have members of the cabinet here, you have members of the Supreme Court and you also have the entire Congress and the vice president sitting in one room. That is a high-security event. She says unless that government shutdown end and furloughed workers are getting paid, it's not worth having the public address, that the optics here could look tough for the president of the United States and Congress as they both have failed to come to the agreement on how to end this government shutdown, John.
[King:] Another wrinkle. Day 26. Still no signs of any tangible progress, though, for people who are missing paychecks. Coast Guard today missing its first paycheck. Thank you, Lauren Fox, live on Capitol Hill. With me in studio to share their reporting and their insights, CNN's Dana Bash, Michael Bender with "The Wall Street Journal," Carl Hulse of "The New York Times" and CNN's MJ Lee. So, security, Secret Service, other security officers not getting checks. That's Pelosi's rationale. Is it her reason?
[Carl Hulse, Chief Washington Correspondent, "the New York Times":] I don't I don't think so. I mean you could you could have had this event. I a couple of things that I thought of immediately this morning. I was up there yesterday talking to members saying, this is going to be a strange State of the Union if the government is shut down, and I think Nancy Pelosi, one, is showing she is reminding Trump, she's got power right now. This is up to her. And he can come if she decides that he can come. Two, I don't think the Democrats wanted to sit there and be lectured by the president, who gets to give a pretty uninterrupted address there, interrupted, of course, only by applause and boos. But I don't think that they wanted that during the shutdown. It would have been it would have been really a tricky situation under any circumstance.
[King:] Would have been a tricky situation for the president as well
[Hulse:] Yes.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Yes.
[King:] To stand before the American people at a time, today, today, that's 13 days from now. The speech is scheduled 13 days from now. It would have been a tough challenge for the president if Speaker Pelosi has planted her flag. She's not moving in these negotiations so far. Would have also been tough for the president to stand there, you're right, he has this big, high podium from which to lecture the Democrats, but he also has to talk to the country about, why are we still doing this?
[Bash:] Yes, exactly. I think I'm probably in the minority at this table because coming out of the break I said, I think that she did him a favor. Certainly she has her own very real political reasons. And, of course, you hit the nail on the head on that. But, yes, the president might think going in that he's got the upper hand physically and also because he's the one giving the speech, but he has to say something other than wag his finger and say, give me my wall. He has to say something that makes it more understandable and a little bit comprehensible why he is not cutting the deal that he promised on the campaign trail he could cut because of all his years in business. And it's not happening. It's a complete stalemate.
[King:] And out in America people are saying, what about me, the 800,000 plus who are missing their check. Coast Guard for the first time missing a check today. And then the domino effect in their communities with restaurants and other services and other businesses and federal contractors. They're saying, why are you having a Pelosi-Trump conversation. But we're having a Pelosi-Trump conversation because the only way to fix that for them is for one of these two or both to move.
[Mj Lee, Cnn National Political Correspondent:] Right. And even by day 26, it was not clear that there was going to be anything to push President Trump over the edge to make some kind of concession over something to click in his head that this has been going on for much too long for his political good. But I do think the point about the economy is an important one, and that's going to be the dynamic for us to watch as we get these stories pouring in from across the country about real families who are not getting paychecks and are struggling because of the missing paychecks, whether that ends up making an impression on Trump in a way that nothing else has so far, particularly given that the economy and the economic growth has been the rare, one bright spot that has been consistent for the president. And, remember, something that he is planning on running on for his re- election, if he feels like that is going to be severely damaged, then I do think we can see a scenario where he starts to change his tune.
[King:] The question is, how does he change his tune? Does he say, I'll take no wall money? That was the original plan that, at the last minute, he backed away from. Or does he then try to cut a traditional Washington deal where I'll take half or I'll take a third or whatever. We don't know that. But we do know right now is everybody's waiting on this economic impact, looking at the polling. So far about a half dozen Senate Republicans have started to get squeamish about this. That's not enough. It would take probably twice that to get the majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to move. Until then, the Republicans, even though the polling shows Americans a majority of Americans blame the president, Mitch McConnell, on the floor today, trying to say, look at the speaker.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] One dollar. One dollar. That's the amount that the new speaker of the House recently said she'd be willing to invest in physical barriers at our southern border. For federal workers who are now stretching every dollar until Democrats lose interest in dead-end political games, the speaker's one-dollar punchline is not very entertaining.
[King:] This is what we have. This is we're going to have the posturing and the finger-pointing, and it's necessary. Both sides feel the need to make their case politically. But do we know the answer? Is the president prepared to back down and take less than the nearly $6 billion he has demanded? Do we know the answer? Is Speaker Pelosi willing to go to her liberal caucus and say, we have to give him half of that or what's the number to get a deal? We don't know, right?
[Michael Bender, White House Reporter, "the Wall Street Journal":] No, we don't know and I can tell you neither does the White House right now either. They're frustrated with the inside politics questions here on Nancy's Nancy Pelosi announcement this morning. We reported at "The Wall Street Journal" last week the White House was talking about who to use the State of the Union in order to as a cajole against lawmakers if the shutdown still continued. All those plans are going to be wiped out if they cancel the cancel that meeting. And the bigger question that you brought up as well, federal workers are missing paychecks. That's a big deal. And there is and there are cracks inside the White House right now on that point. There's a there's a faction inside the White House that is saying, this is no longer a messaging war, Mr. President. These people losing their paychecks is a real issue that we need to find a way out of. You showed the clip of Mitch McConnell here. There's a lot of people in the White House that are hoping Mitch McConnell bails them out yet again.
[King:] He but he's hesitant to bail them out yet again because he, with the vice president in the room, and other White House officials back and forth on Capitol Hill, passed a piece of legislation that the president then backed away from at the last minute. So I there there will be no deal without Mitch McConnell in the end. The question is, when does he decide to raise his cautious hand?
[Bash:] My impression in talking to people around him is that he saw it as his job to negotiate out of a shutdown when he was minority leader and there was a Democrat in the White House, but in this situation and it is not just that there's a Republican in the White House, but it's this Republican who is, shall we say, an unreliable negotiating partner for him. He got very burned at the end of December, like you talked about. Don't I don't expect to see him jumping to save the day any time soon.
[King:] Right. And so the president
[Bash:] Because he can't without the president.
[King:] Right. And the president has some members of the Problem Solving Caucus down at the White House now. Some of them are Democrats. It's good that people are meeting. I think people should meet. Eventually they're going to have to cut a deal, but there's no reason, right? No reason
[Hulse:] The problem with this is, it's not a typical Washington negotiation.
[King:] Right.
[Hulse:] Usually you split the difference. But you can't split wall or no wall.
[King:] Right.
[Hulse:] So how do you get to that resolution? As far as Senate McConnell talking to Senate Republicans yesterday, the polling is, yes, as you said, the president's getting the blame, not them. So right now they're kind of comfortable where they are. Let the president and Nancy Pelosi fight this out. I don't see Mitch McConnell rushing in here at all.
[King:] Right. And there's also the two Americans polling in the sense that Republicans don't want the president to cave.
[Hulse:] Right.
[King:] They want the wall. Democrats don't want the speaker to budge at all. They don't they want the president to get a big zero. So we have that's one of the splits in the
[Barack Obama, Former U.s. President:] Even in the midst of the enormous challenges we face today, I have great faith and hope about the future because I believe in you, and that's why I wanted to tell you first that I'll be filing papers today to create a presidential exploratory committee.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. You are watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles. I'm Isha Sesay.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] I'm John Vause. Thanks for staying with us. We'll check the headlines now.
[Vause:] Investigators are still trying to piece together why Stephen Paddock opened fire on a crowd of Las Vegas concert. Police found 50 pounds of explosives and 1600 rounds of ammunition in his parked car. His girlfriend says that she had no idea he was planning a bomb attack.
[Sesay:] President Trump traveled to Las Vegas Wednesday to meet with some of the shooting survivors and first responders.
[Vause:] And back in Washington, he tweeted his appreciation. "On behalf of a grateful nation, thank you to all the first responders, who saved countless lives in Las Vegas on Sunday night." Here's Jim Acosta with more on the president's visit.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] In a city in desperate need of comfort, the president and first lady toured the hospital where survivors of the mass shooting in Las Vegas are clinging to life and searching for answers.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And we ask God to ease their suffering and to speed their healing. We pray for the recovery of the injured and those injured officers who so bravely threw themselves into danger when duty called.
[Acosta:] The president praised the medical staff that treated the wounded
[Trump:] The doctors, the nurses, all of the people at the hospital have done a job that's indescribable.
[Acosta:] and offered his own diagnosis of the killer.
[Trump:] I can tell you, it's a very sick man. He was a very demented person.
[Acosta:] One topic the presidents not taking on his visit, gun control.
[Trump:] We're not going to talk about that today. We won't talk about it.
[Acosta:] The White House is steering clear of the issue, sending out these talking points to its surrogates. "Let's gather the facts before we make sweeping policy arguments for curtailing the Second Amendment," the talking points read. "Let's be clear, new laws won't stop a mad man committed to harming innocent people." And the talking points asked, "Did he have radical ties," despite the fact that investigators say they believe the gunman acted alone. The president doesn't always wait for the facts to come in. During the campaign, then-Candidate Trump called for temporary ban on Muslims coming into the
[U.s. -- Unidentified News Correspondent:] Graphic shootout here.
[Acosta:] after mass shootings in San Bernardino, California, and Orlando. Advocates for more gun control say the time to confront the issue is now.
[Sen. John Lewis, , Georgia:] How my more must die? 100? 1,000? 10,000? A million? What is your blood price? How many more must die?
[Unidentified Female:] Now is the time to come together, be responsible. Democrats, Republicans, everyone. We must never stop fighting. Fight, fight, fight.
[Acosta:] The president's trip to Las Vegas was much more controlled than his visit to Puerto Rico where Mr. Trump tossed rolls of paper towels to storm victims and joked the hurricane damage there would be costly.
[Trump:] I hate to tell you, Puerto Rico, but you've thrown our budget a little bit out of whack.
[Acosta:] On this day, the president appeared to strike the right tone, meeting with the first responders who rushed into the line of fire.
[Trump:] But you showed the world, and the world is watching, and you showed what professionalism is all about.
[Vause:] Well, joining us now, Democratic strategist, Matthew Littman, and CNN political commentator and Trump supporter, John Phillips. Good to see you both.
[Sesay:] Welcome.
[Vause:] At a CNN town hall, with House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, one of the questions she received came from Bob Patterson. His wife was shot and killed in Las Vegas on Sunday night. This is the question.
[Bob Patterson, Wife Killed In Las Vegas:] There was Sandy Hook, Florida, San Bernardino. How many more lives have to be taken before something is done? Congressman Congresswoman Pelosi, as a leader on Capitol Hill, what are you going to do to stop this?
[Vause:] So, John, I'm going to put that question to you because, essentially, this is an issue for Republicans. What do you say to the man who lost his wife? What are Republicans prepared to do now?
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, I wish you would have shown her answer, which was background checks. And background checks would not have worked in this particular case. This guy had no criminal rap sheet at all. In addition, Hillary Clinton put a tweet out that said that we need to ban silencers, or go after silencers. The guy
[Thomas:] did not he a silencer on his gun. The fact of the matter is, is that I have not seen any prescription so far or suggestion so far that would have prevented this attack from happening.
[Vause:] That wasn't the question. What are Republicans prepared to do? Republican are responsible as well.
[Thomas:] But it was in the context specifically of this attack
[Vause:] No. He mentioned Sandy Hook. He mentioned San Bernardino. He mentioned Orlando a well. It's a question about the gun to this issue, this event rather. What are Republicans prepared to do? Because you keep saying, what's the answer? I don't know.
[Thomas:] You tell me what the answer would be
[Vause:] No. Republicans control the
[Thomas:] I'm telling you, I don't know
[Vause:] the Senate and the White House.
[Thomas:] legislatively what could have been done.
[Matthew Littman, Democratic Strategist:] I'll tell you something that could have been done. Why should a person be able to buy 50 guns? I mean
[Vause:] 33 in one year
[Littman:] Why is a person buying all those arounds of ammunition? There has to be a way to prevent people from doing this. It perfectly legal for somebody to do that right now.
[Sesay:] So, Matt, how hard are Democrats willing to fight for this, bearing in mind mid-terms are around the corner?
[Littman:] I think the Democrats are going to fight hard for it. The majority of the country wants some type of reasonable gun control legislation. Even fighting hard for the Democrats who aren't in the majority. And even though the majority of the country wants some type of gun control legislation, it's probably not going to happen, any real legislation, for a long time, at least not until Democrats are in power. In this country, the majority does not rule. The House of Representatives is controlled by Republicans. It's mostly controlled by southern Republicans. They do not want gun control. And as long as they're in power, there's not going to be effective gun control in this country.
[Thomas:] When you're talking about gun deaths, you're talking specifically, if you look at the numbers, about three different kinds of deaths. You're talking about number one, suicides.
[Vause:] Which is the main.
[Thomas:] Number two, you're talking about gang violence. And number three, you're talking about domestic violence. If you want to go after those gun deaths, if you want to reduce those deaths, those unnecessary deaths, then the prescription is something other than gun control.
[Littman:] That is not true. In every country Listen, every country, they have issues of domestic violence. They have issues of gangs. That's not unique to the United States. The thing that's unique to the United States is that everybody can get a gun, as many guns
[Thomas:] But the point is the violence going to happen regardless. If you want to kill yourself, whether you do it with guns or whether you do it-
[Littman:] That's not true. The United States has these killings, 500 people. Sandy Hook, first-grade kids. These are unique to the United States. They keep happening over and over again. They're not going to stop happening as long as these guns are
[Vause:] If it's a mental health issue, John, then why did the Republicans quietly roll back an Obama-era guideline from the Social Security Administration to advise anybody who's a recipient, who has mentally challenged issues or mental health issues that they immediately go on a background check? Back on February 28th.
[Thomas:] Look, if I were in charge, I'd bring back the nut house and I'd institutionalize a lot of these people. This guy has a pilot's license. OK? This guy had to pass a very strenuous mental health test.
[Sesay:] I guess we have a lot to discuss. But I'll say this again, which I brought up with John Thomas yesterday, why is the issue of gun control, common sense gun control in this country seen as a zero-sum game? Nobody's saying that people can't keep their guns. People are saying they want control. But why do Republicans frame it as we want to take away all your guns? That's not what people are calling for.
[Thomas:] To me, it's an issue of enforcement. The state of California right now, the state legislature just passed laws that would allow people convicted of gun crimes to be let out of prison early. That, to me, is completely insane. Once you have someone who's broken the law with a gun and has proven that they cannot enjoy that responsibility and keep the rest of us safe, then why are we so lax to throw them out of prison? I don't understand that. I mean, I think if you have limited laws and you enforce them, but you enforce them severely and strictly, then you're going someplace.
[Littman:] Can I answer this question, though?
[Vause:] We're going to move on.
[Littman:] The NRA has control over the Republicans in Congress, but they also have a fanatical following. And those people vote on gun issues. Specifically, I'm a Democrat. I vote on a bunch of issues. I'm not a one-issue voter. But on that gun issue, they have a very specific following. Those people are fanatical, and that's why those Republicans are afraid to go against them.
[Vause:] OK. A few hours after leaving Las Vegas, the president tweeted a video montage of his time with survivors and first responders. Here's a look. OK, Matt, big thumbs up in the wake of the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
[Littman:] And they did that to music.
[Vause:] Lee Greenwood, "God Bless the
[Usa." Littman:] I mean, Donald is just a weird guy. I don't know what to say. That is so strange to put that out today after all of that. I can guarantee he wasn't putting that out after his reception in Puerto Rico.
[Sesay:] John, why does this president seem to have trouble with escaping from moments where he's called to show empathy unscathed? Why is it always why is it always some kind of hangover, leftover from these moments? I mean, you'd think consoler-in-chief is a big part of his job.
[Thomas:] I don't think he has any trouble at all. Those people were thrilled to see him in Las Vegas.
[Littman:] You don't think Donald Trump has a problem consoling people?
[Thomas:] Not at all. And I think he puts these videos out because he communicates directly with the American people. Because whenever the news media talks about it, they're snarky.
[Vause:] Well, it was all about him, if you look at the video. But anyway. The secretary of state held a news conference on Wednesday, and it's not every day you hear a question like this.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] I'm not going to deal with petty stuff like that. I mean, this is what I don't understand about Washington. Again, I'm not from this place. But the places I come from, we don't deal with that kind of petty nonsense.
[Vause:] The bigger picture here, apparently, reports Tillerson's deeply unhappy. He had to meet with the vice president who convinced him to stay on and not resign. And somewhere along the line, Tillerson called Trump a moron. Matt, if Tillerson was fired or quit, would anyone actually know this? How much longer is it before he goes? Because, clearly, he can't stay.
[Littman:] There are a couple of things here. First of all, how many people in the Trump administration has offered a letter of resignation to Trump? I feel like every cabinet member has come in at some point and said, I'll resign, and Trump says, no, no, no, please don't resign. The reason why Tillerson wasn't fired today or didn't quite today was because Tom Price just left. So they can't just have everybody leave every single week. But there's been an incredible amount of turnover in this administration, number one. Number two, he didn't just call him a moron. He called him an F-ing moron. We are not allowed to say F-ing, on the show.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Littman:] And number three, Tillerson's doing a pretty bad job. He's not even filling all of the roles. Donald Trump, he goes to North Korea, Donald Trump tells him not to waste his time by tweet. He's been basically castrated in this job.
[Sesay:] John, you have to admit, did you ever think you'd live to see the day where they're holding a press conference to push back against reports he called the president a moron?
[Thomas:] I think it was taken out of context. Trump said, you think I have enough hairspray?
[Vause:] You came prepared. Brutal op-ed in the "Washington Post" a few days ago. It was entitled "Donald Trump's dog." Here's part of it: "When Rex speaks, Rex thinks he speaks for the USA. See Donald. Donald owns Rex. Rex is Donald's dog. Donald is loud. Donald is big. Donald is bigger than Rex. Donald is mean to Rex. When Rex speaks Donald tweets. Donald tweets like bird. Tweet Donald, tweet. Donald's tweets hurt Rex. Donald says, bad Rex, do not speak Rex. Rex, you do not speak for the USA." It just goes on and on and on. Fascinating read. John, for a guy who, two years ago, was ranked the 20th most powerful person by "Forbes" in the world, all of this stuff has got to be incredibly difficult for him to deal with.
[Thomas:] Yes. I hear that Dana Millbank is a comedy legend in France.
[Littman:] You know who else doesn't like Trump's cabinet? Trump. A lot of these people are leaving. The turnover in this administration is by far greater than in the Obama administration. There'no comparison.
[Thomas:] How about Clinton in the early years?
[Littman:] Yes, even Clinton in the early years did not have the same type of turnover Trump had. Not nearly to this extent. By the way, when we talk about Tillerson saying Trump is the moron, do you have quotes from Bob Corker, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who said basically, if it wasn't for Tillerson
[Sesay:] Mattis. Yes. And Kelly.
[Littman:] There would be complete chaos. This is the Republican leader of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
[Sesay:] A good day for you, then.
[Thomas:] A good day?
[Sesay:] I mean, if Corker says something like that I'm being it's not a good day, is my point, to have people in your own party coming out
[Thomas:] Corker's on his way out. Who cares?
[Littman:] The reason why Corker feels free to say what he wants
[Vause:] What are the implications around the world when the secretary of state of the United States of America believes that the president of the United States of America is a moron?
[Thomas:] He's denying that.
[Vause:] He didn't deny it. He did not directly deny it.
[Littman:] Watch it again. He definitely didn't deny it. I don't think Tillerson listen, I work in Washington a lot, and I talk to people in the administration. I talk to people who work with Donald Trump. And I'll tell you that's not a unique point of view.
[Vause:] Right. John and Matthew
[Sesay:] John Thomas is stumped tonight.
[Vause:] good to see you both.
[Sesay:] All right. Quick break here. It may have fallen from the top spot in the headlines but the investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. election is still going strong. There are new details we need to tell but next on NEWSROOM L.A.

[Smerconish:] Two top Republican senators asking the Justice Department to pursue possible criminal prosecution of the author of the disputed Trump Russia dossier, Christopher Steele, for allegedly making false statements to investigators. Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley, Senator Lindsey Graham accusing Steele of what they described as potentially false statements about the distribution of claims from the dossier. Joining me now, Gabriel Debenedetti, the national political reporter for "Politico," McKay Coppins, a staff writer at "The Atlantic," Joe Watkins, a former White House aide under President George H. W. Bush. He's got a brand new book, it's titled "The New PC, Practical Consideration." I'll get to the dossier story in a moment. But Joe Watkins, let me put on the screen a tweet that I set out at the end of the week. I had just been on Brooke Baldwin's program and I said this, "If you were the White House and you wanted to sell more of this book, you'd threaten legal action against its release and keep trashing it." Joe Watkins, the best possible thing for your new book would be a cease and desist letter from the White House. What do you make of the whole strategy, the way they handled Michael Wolff?
[Joe Watkins, Former Gop Candidate For Lieutenant Governor In Pennsylvania:] Well, it just underscores what Wolff is saying about the disorganization of this White House. First of all, allowing him in to the White House, giving him that kind of access without having strict rules, without knowing who he what he was going to write and giving him free access to everybody just shows the dysfunction of this current White House. No White House that I know of, certainly the president for whom I worked at the White House nor the president for whom my daughter worked at the White House, would allow that kind of unrestricted access to any author. So, this is I wish that I had written a book that was so inflammatory that the White House would have the White House lawyer try to do a cease and desist on me. I'm not so lucky to have that, at least not yet anyway. But at the end of the day, it points to the dysfunction in the White House. They should have just left it alone and let it be. Now they've made it the main story.
[Smerconish:] Gabriel, what was your one takeaway among many, I'm sure, about the Wolff book thus far?
[Gabriel Debenedetti, National Political Reporter, "politico":] Well, as you say, there are many, many takeaways, and I think the next few weeks will have even more takeaways from this book as the president continues to react to it. But the big one is what we saw this morning the president tweeting about. For the longest time people in Washington behind the scenes have been talking about this question of his mental fitness, Democrats in particular have been talking about this but don't want to talk about it in public. But this book says that members of the White House are constantly concerned about this, and it's a frequent topic of conversation among them. By tweeting about it this morning, of course, by calling himself the very stable genius, the president ensures that this is a topic of conversation in Washington and in New York. But the big takeaway is that this is now something we have to talk about and people in Washington have been talking about behind the scenes for a very long time. McKay, I thought I was particularly witty on Twitter this week. I'm going to hit you with one more of my tweets. Put it up on the screen and I want you to react to this. I said the following, if we can quickly find it. Where is it? We don't have it. Come on, guys. Here's what I said. "The only thing that's more problematic for this president than a salacious book about him is a salacious book that's not about him." For all the reports of him fuming behind the scenes, do you buy into that, or do you think he thrives on this kind of chaos?
[Mckay Coppins, Staff Writer, "the Atlantics":] I don't think those two things are mutually exclusive. I think he absolutely is probably upset with Michael Wolff. He clearly thought Wolff was an ally. He had reason to believe that, by the way, given the things that Wolff had written proceeding this book. But I had an experience with Trump like this back in 2014 when he brought me to Mar-a-Lago and I wrote a long profile of him he didn't like. He thought because he had invited me into his home that I would write a puff piece, and when I didn't, he was offended. But at the same time he clearly then and now basked in the kind of fallout from it. He loves that we're talking about right now on CNN. He loves that the media is covering this wall-to-wall. This is, arguably, the thing Trump likes most about the presidency, is all this attention. And so I think for that reason he probably is enjoying it, while still being upset with some of the things that are in the book.
[Smerconish:] Joe Watkins, I'm looking at a headline in "The Times" today, "GOP senators pursuing author of file on Trump." What's really going on in this dossier story?
[Watkins:] Well, it provides a little bit of cover, I think, to President Trump. It throws him a bone so to speak, because it's meant to divert some of the attention of the Russia investigation by attacking Steele. By the way, they don't attack the voracity of what he said in the dossier. They just attack the fact he may have lied to the FBI and the FBI needs to be just as much on top of this as they would for anybody else that lies to them.
[Smerconish:] Gabriel, Elizabeth Warren in 2020, you say that she's going through all of those steps one would normally take to be ready to run. Tell me about it quickly.
[Debenedetti:] Well, we don't yet know if she's actually going to run, but it's pretty clear that she's spent the last year doing a lot of things that if she wanted to be in prime position to run for 2020 she would get there. One of the big things is raising campaign money. She's currently sitting on more campaign cash than almost any other sitting senator at this point in a campaign cycle, and that's raised a lot of eyebrows. But also she's also been doing other things like sitting down with other Democrats who have been skeptical of her in the past, hiring up a bigger than usual campaign staff, basically doing things that are raising eyebrows across Washington, because when she was considering running for president or when people wanted her to run in 2016, before she decided against doing that, she hadn't done any of this.
[Smerconish:] And Gabriel, those cheers that you hear are probably from the West Wing. I mean, isn't this the scenario they'd most want apart from Hillary coming back in 2020 and running against Trump?
[Debenedetti:] Well, there are two sides to this. Certainly, the White House wants you to think THAT they'd be very happy about this. The reality is Elizabeth Warren does occupy some of the president's time when he thinks about the Democrats, he often talks about her, refers to her derisively as Pocahontas. On the other hand, plenty of Democrats think that she would be able to beat him pretty easily. If you look at head to head numbers, she is of course ahead at this point. But let's take a step back again and say it's very, very early. We don't know what a primary would look like, we don't know if she's going to run. But the reality is, yes, the president would love to take someone like Elizabeth Warren on because he's shown that he wants to do it in the past. There's no reason to believe he wouldn't want to do it in the future.
[Smerconish:] McKay, you just wrote about Mitt Romney. The last time that I thought about Romney and Trump in the same breath is when they were having dinner. I think it was at the 21 Club just before Trump was sworn in. At that time somebody was courting somebody. What went wrong here, and is Romney really going to run for the hatch seat?
[Coppins:] Yes, Mitt Romney had obviously been an outspoken critic of Trump during the campaign, and then there was this moment that looked like Romney might actually end up in the Trump administration back in January or December, I think. You know he was being talked about as a potential secretary of state. And at the time I'm told Romney didn't want to disown any of his criticisms of Trump but felt like it was possible that some really, you know, irresponsible and unqualified people would end up in the administration and Romney felt like it was worth exploring, you know, taking one of those slots. Since then he's continued to be critical of Trump, and I report that Romney has very seriously laid the groundwork for a potential Senate bid with Hatch's retirement. Most people in Utah are expecting Mitt Romney to run, so the question now is what kind of senator Mitt Romney will be. If he does run, he will almost certainly win. He's very popular in Utah. The question is, what kind of senator will he be? Will he want to hold Trump accountable, or will he use his influence to try to pass major Republican legislation, in which case he would probably be trying to mend fences with the White House. Time will tell.
[Smerconish:] Right. And Joe Watkins, finish us up on that. Is it the severe conservative? That's what mitt Romney described himself as in 2012, or is it the progressive who governed a blue state in Massachusetts? By the way, can I just say this? Can you imagine if ultimately the fate of the affordable care act in a 5149 scenario comes down to the senator who truly was the godfather of it in Massachusetts? Joe Watkins.
[Watkins:] That's right. Of course, politics is like theater, and Mitt Romney is a very smart guy. He will be who he has to be, and what he had to be or who he had to be in Massachusetts may be different from who he is able to be in Utah, a state that's heavily Mormon, that has values that he understands deeply. So, yes, Mitt Romney is in great position here. This seat is his for the asking, by the way. If he wants the seat, he's the next senator from Utah. And, indeed, he may be the one to put the finishing touches on a health care vote if he gets the chance in the Senate to do that.
[Smerconish:] Gentlemen, I appreciate all of your work. Joe, the White House just called to ask people not to buy your book. I hope that helps you. Thank you all very much.
[Watkins:] It's a bestseller now, it will be a bestseller.
[Smerconish:] Right. On Amazon, boom. Let's see what you're saying on my Smerconish Twitter and Facebook pages. What do we have, Katherine? "Smerconish, could absolutely care less about Wolff book. I'll laugh at those who take it seriously." You know Josh, thus far, and by the way, Michael Wolff is scheduled to be here a week from today with me. I'm paying close attention, I see that some dates are wrong, some names are wrong, a lot of little stuff is wrong. But what I've noticed is this, Bannon didn't disavow the treasonous comment, right, because that's the big substantive issue in the book, and the president clearly thinks that Bannon said that, or the president would not have gone after Bannon the way that he did. So, you know, you've got to acknowledge that where it matters thus far, it seems like people are agreeing that he got it right. One more, do we have time? Yes? "Smerconish, why the fascination with his base? There's another two-thirds or so of America that's going to decide his fate come November. His base can't save him from that." I don't know, Bobby, I'm fascinating by, and frankly you're pointing out the fact I wanted to get into that issue and I neglected to ask my guests about it. I'm just fascinated by the fact that the base seems to be holding firm. And the idea that a, you know, liberal writer publishes a tell-all book about the administration, I don't think it's going to resonate with folks in the red states, but I want to know. Next, is a pot war looming between the feds and pot-loving states? Going to ask the governor of Colorado. And then is the Bitcoin craze digital gold or a Ponzi scheme that's going to crash and burn? Two major players in the industry are coming up.

[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] Hello and welcome to a special edition of AT THIS HOUR ahead of President Trump's historic summit with North Korea's Kim Jong-un. I'm Kate Bolduan in New York. Lucky to have with me for the entire hour Anderson Cooper who is in Singapore. Anderson, less than ten hours to go before this big face to face.
[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] That's right. There's a lot of anticipation certainly, it is 11:00 here at night. We're just hours from a handshake that could make history. The ice from nearly 70 years [inaudible] could be broken when President Trump and Kim Jong-un meet here. The first summit ever between a sitting U.S. president and a North Korean leader. It is certainly unchartered territory, high stakes, global implications. Kim Jong-un is not exactly getting to bed early before his big day on the world stage. He's been going for a bit of a walk about on the town in Singapore with his entourage, taking in the sites by the bay. Even posing for a selfie with the foreign minister of Singapore. That's the selfie that was taken. I'm not sure how many selfies Kim Jong-un has ever actually been in, but that's certainly one of them. CNN's Paula Hancocks and Kaitlan Collins are here as well covering all of this. Paula, let's start with you, what do we know about this tour that Kim took tonight? Was that I know they had been preparing for it, for several hours.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] That's right, Anderson. Certainly, there has to be some kind of security preparation, roads were closed off, that was the key clue that they were going to be heading out into this city. They had a significant convoy. There was security there. A lot of security, motorbikes as well. And, first of all, they went to an area which is very popular here, Marine Bay Sands. And Kim Jong-un went to the top of that, we understand, to take in the views of Singapore. It was a mini tour of the tourist hot spots you go to in this city state, which when you think about it, is quite surreal. This is a North Korean dictator that is being shown around Singapore, by the foreign minister. And certainly, what we could see from our vantage point here, he went to his second spot, was that there was some people that were sort of crowding around, trying to take photos, waving at Kim Jong-un as well. And he looked very pleased and seemed to be enjoying himself as he was walking around. This is really quite significant pictures that we are looking at. This is really the first time we have seen the North Korean leader in this kind of environment. Yes, he does this with North Korea, but it is highly choreographed, and everyone will be smiling at waving him. He's here now, the furthest he's traveled to Singapore since he took power in North Korea and he's having a walk about in the evening, just before that historic summit with the U.S. President Donald Trump. New, we can speculate on what this means, does this mean he's feeling confident enough, he doesn't have to prepare, so he's going on this mini tour. The fact is he looks at ease. He looks as though he is enjoying himself. It is really quite significant as this is the first time that he's done something like this. You would assume a young leader like this would be a little ill at ease. Not quite comfortable with the cameras not necessarily friendly cameras, not just the North Korean cameras, following his every move. But he appears to be quite at ease with what he's doing Anderson.
[Cooper:] Kaitlan, what has President Trump done throughout the day?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Anderson, earlier today the president did meet with the prime minister of Singapore, something we saw as all of that unfolded. This afternoon, it is 11:00 here now in Singapore, this afternoon the White House issued a lid, meaning we weren't likely to see President Trump again today. And we haven't seen him since. He's been at his hotel in Singapore. He and Kim Jong-un staying at two different hotels, but actually not that far apart, Singapore is actually quite small. But we have not heard from him since then. We did hear from his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who came to brief reporters earlier today. Essentially to give an overview of what the United States is expecting tomorrow, what they expect to hear from north Korea, but offering no firm commitments from the North Koreans, just hours ahead of that sit-down with president Trump. But Pompeo did say that they do expect, and they do still want complete denuclearization from the North Koreans.
[Mike Pompeo, U.s. Secretary Of State:] The ultimate objective we seek from diplomacy with North Korea has not changed. The complete and verifiable and irreversible denuclearization of the Korea Peninsula is the only outcome that the United States will accept. Sanctions will remain until North Korea completely and verifiably eliminates its weapons of mass destruction programs. If diplomacy does not move in the right direction and we are hopeful it will continue to do so, those measures will increase.
[Collins:] So, Pompeo there saying that they have high hopes for that sit-down between President Trump and Kim Jong-un, that is going to be a sit-down that is one on one at the beginning, Anderson, so likely a readout from President Trump, he's going to take questions from reporters after that meeting happens. And then we'll find out exactly, according to President Trump, what happened during that meeting.
[Cooper:] All right, Kaitlan Collins, Paula Hancocks, thank you very much. Joining me now, CNN national security analyst and "New York Times" correspondent, David Sanger, and Elise Hu, the Asia correspondent for NPR. To see Kim Jong-un walking around like this, I don't know if he's trying to project confidence, I'm not sure if he is confident moving into this, but he really has already achieved a lot from this summit, even before it has begun.
[David Sanger, Cnn Political And National Security Analyst:] Well, Anderson, just think about where we are in the past couple of months, versus where we were a year or two ago. A year or two ago, the only American we could find that would even talk to Kim Jong-un was Dennis Rodman, OK. He had not met any foreign leaders, he hadn't gone to China, so forth. Now he's met Xi Jinping twice. He's met the president of South Korea twice including an emergency meeting after President Trump briefly canceled this session. He's going to meet the president of the United States. And he's walking around like a tourist in the middle of Singapore, you know in the evening, taking it in. You expected him to sort of go find a bar and, you know, find a Singapore sling some place, right? He seemed pretty relaxed. So, this is a different image that he's now projecting from hermit to I'm on stage like the rest of the folks, and if you're looking for legitimacy, he gets it the moment he meets the president. That's why our objectives are really so different because the meeting itself gives him a good deal of what he wants.
[Cooper:] Well, Elise, that's one of the reasons former presidents did not actually have one on one meetings with Kim Jong-un, that there were, you know, multi six-party talks they didn't want to give the leader of North Korea the legitimacy unless something was brought to the table first.
[Elise Hu, Asia Correspondent, Npr:] That's true. And we have to keep in mind that the Trump administration is saying that they will get something radically different than what previous administrations have gotten. We will see whether that's going to actually bear out in the next 24 hours or so and in the days and weeks ahead. However, we have to keep in mind that nothing is divorced from the context that it is in, right? We are under a now progressive Korean president, Moon Jae-in, who has really tried to create the conditions that have led to this moment. And in a lot of ways has played matchmaker and middle man between the North Koreans and the United States in a way that the previous South Korean administration Park Geun-hye, a conservative government was not interested in. And I'm sure David will remember just two years ago the South Korean administration was on a campaign to try and get north Korea's diplomatic allies all over the world to end their ties, what a dramatic shift. Now we're in a place where the U.S. is talking about possibly normalizing diplomatic relations.
[Cooper:] Yes, I mean, it is really South Korea which has gotten the U.S. to this point.
[Sanger:] That's absolutely right, and although you have to give credit to President Trump. I mean, he decided, rightly, I think, that we had tried negotiating with the North Koreans on holding out the possibility they might meet in America, Bill Clinton was thinking of going at the end of his term. And that failed and failed again and failed another time.
[Cooper:] Just about everything that the U.S. administrations have tried has failed.
[Sanger:] That's right. Everything has failed. And the president was right to say everything has failed, right to say other presidents kicked this down the road, and I think he's right to give this a shot. That does not mean it is going to work. And, you know, that's a very different thing. And you got a lot of people, including a lot of the president's supporters, sort of, you know, spiking the ball at this point. We don't know whether Kim Jong-un just wants to get the president at this point into a process that is going to take so long, but while it is going on, he can't turn around and credibly threaten to bomb them. And a lot of the sanctions pressure has lifted already from Russia and China.
[Cooper:] Yes, I mean, this could, you know there's a lot of expectation obviously about tomorrow. But it is very unlikely there will be some sort of joint communique about what was resolved tomorrow, but actual verifiable changes if they ever come won't be for a very, very long time.
[Hu:] Right. If there is a process that begins, a lot of experts believe that will take 10 to 15 years. Kind of start from the halt part to then a roll back and then elimination of their nuclear program. But from the South Korean perspective, the fact that these two guys are meeting at all is an important start. And engagement and diplomacy is the opposite of what we were seeing in the fall, which was U.S military members having to prepare go bags and South Korea being very concerned that actual military options were being considered and might take place. So, the fact that this is happening is significant in and of itself, the debate about denuclearization is something we see a lot out of Washington. I can say from this part of the world, there is a lot of cautious optimism that just talking is going to begin a process.
[Cooper:] There have been meetings running up to this. Probably already working on the communique that will come out of this. Are you surprised at the length of time that is scheduled for President Trump and Kim Jong-un to meet one on one with their translators, without other people around?
[Sanger:] Well, on the one hand, the fact that they're meeting one on one for that long and what we're hearing is upwards of two hours does sound like a long period of time, but clearly President Trump wants to feels as if he can get to know Kim Jong-un, set up a line of communication with him, that's the first big step. It is the relationship building that he learned in business. That doesn't necessarily mean that when the crisis comes they're really going to be able to get on and talk to each other. Again, worth the try, no American president has tried that before. And that's what gives this a little bit of the, you know, Nixon's first encounter with Mao or Kennedy and Khrushchev. It is a nuclear power. It is a nuclear power that is made pretty clear if it can't reach the united states now, it is going to be able to pretty soon. So, it has a little bit of a tinge of those cold war days to it. Whether or not that communique is substantive enough for us to say that a real breakthrough has been made, I have my doubts. I think one area they will make a lot of progress on is they'll be some declaration they're moving to a peace treaty and away from the armistice that was signed in 1953 that left the Korean war and the sort of suspended state. But that doesn't take you all that much closer to what Secretary Pompeo is talking about, complete verifiable, irreversible denuclearization.
[Cooper:] If you're North Korea, why give up your nuclear weapons? I mean, it is there is economic things that you would like, there is legitimacy on the world stage, but without a doubt, we wouldn't be here if North Korea was not at the point where they have nuclear weapons.
[Hu:] Well, North Korea has said it is committed to complete denuclearization, but it is not saying it is giving up its nuclear weapons right away. Not by a long shot. And it does want a security guarantee and end to the hostile policy, what they consider a hostile policy by the United States. That security guarantee part is fascinating in that, you know, Secretary Pompeo in his remarks to the press today said the U.S. was prepared to offer something different and unique on this security guarantee part, what that means, what the specifics of that are is unclear. But that could really kind of change the way this policy is laid out.
[Cooper:] Elise Hu, David Sanger, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Much more on breaking news from Singapore ahead. First, back to Kate Bolduan in New York Kate.
[Bolduan:] Thanks so much, Anderson. We'll get back to you shortly with everything that is going on there, clearly almost everything. Coming up for us, as President Trump attempts to make peace with a dictator, he shows no signs of backing down on his attacks against U.S. allies like Canada, the message, there is a special place in hell for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. What is going on here? Details ahead.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] Good evening. Thanks for joining us. We begin tonight with political and policy confusion and the children suffering as a result of it. Yesterday, President Trump signed that executive order to solve a problem that he himself created. Some 2,300 kids taken from their parents in the border now scattered to all corners of this country. He promised it would end family separation. Then we were told it would not apply to the kids already in custody. The ones who had been separated and later that it would and today on Capitol Hill, more confusion from DHS secretary. Asked about how families will actually be reunited, she said there was plan in place.
[Kirstjen Nielsen, Homeland Security Secretary:] We have a plan to do that. As you know, we do it on the back end. So, a combination of DHS, DOJ, HHS reuniting as quickly as we can.
[Cooper:] Well, keep them honest, though, her answer seemed to refer to current procedures, which required parents to call government hotlines to locate their kids. She also appeared to be referring to the thousands of unaccompanied minors in custody, not the recently separated 2,300 kids. Now, as for them, we've got no clear plan nor apparently has the Department of Health and Human Services. A spokesperson telling CNN they are, quote, awaiting for their guidance on the implementation of the executive order. So, mixed signals on the implementation and mixed signals as well on the meaning of the order itself, even from the man who signed it. Here is how the president described it yesterday.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It's about keeping families together while at the same time being sure that we have a very powerful, very strong border and border security will be equal, if not greater than previously. So, we're going to have strong, very strong borders, but we're going to keep families together.
[Cooper:] It's about keeping families together. He said yesterday, unless, of course, it isn't.
[Trump:] I signed a very good executive order yesterday but that's only limited. No matter how you cut it. It leads to separation ultimately.
[Cooper:] So, it leads to separation ultimately. Just as a point of fact, the president appears to be referring to the court settlement requiring children accompanied by parents to be released from custody within 20 days. It's not entirely clear that he was, though. If he was, he seems to be ignoring the fact as a former acting ICE director told us last night that this does not have to lead to family separation. Yet the president now calls it inevitable, this thing he started three months ago and yesterday claimed he was ending. And if you're head is not spinning already, listen to Attorney General Jeff Sessions today on the practice followed by his thoughts on it just last month.
[Jeff Sessions, Attorney General:] It hasn't been good and the American people don't like the idea that we're separating families. We never really intended to do that. If your smuggling a child, then we're going to prosecute you. And that child will be separated from you probably as required by law.
[Cooper:] So, today he said we never intended to separate families. Previously, he indicated they did intend to do just that. And if that isn't confusing enough, there was this the first lady leaving to visit migrant children down in Texas, making a compassionate visit wearing jacket with these words on the back. I really don't care. Do you? Now, she did not wear it in Texas, but had it on when she landed back in Washington. And she kept it on at the White House as calls poured in to the White House about why the first lady might be wearing a coat with the rather large, seemingly insensitive sign on the back. Her press secretary said and I quote, it's just a jacket. There was no hidden message. OK. But then a couple hours later, late today, the president contradicted his wife spokesperson tweeting that oh no, there actually was a message intended in the sign. "I really don't care, do you?" written on the back of Melania's jacket refers to the fake news media. Melania has learned how dishonest they are and she truly no longer cares. Really? That was the message? OK, but remember, this was the trip to unveil this? That message? Was this really the best trip to unveil that message? I mean, who exactly came up with that idea? Because the first lady of the United States was making a trip to the border in the midst of a crisis in which kids had been ripped from their parents arms, a trip designed to show compassion and caring and she's wearing a giant sign that says I really don't care, do you? Then the White House says there's no message to it. It was just the coat she happened to grab off the rack, and now, the president's claiming it was actually a meta statement about the media. I was going to say you can't make this stuff up, but you know what, every day, it seems like the White House sure does try. It's worth remembering that at all the center of this noise, all this confusion, all the politics and posturing, the confusion and outright dishonesty are 2,300 kids 2,300 kids are now scattered across the border region and the entire country having endured the kind of trauma we first heard on that recording which had such an impact for so many people audio of a child at a detention center crying out for her parents. Today, we found the mother also incarcerated. You'll hear from her in a moment. But first, some of that audio of her child obtained by "ProPublica".
[Border Patrol Agent:] Where are you from?
[Unidentified Child:] El Salvador.
[Border Patrol Agent:] And you?
[Unidentifeid Child:] Guatemala.
[Border Patrol Agent:] Don't cry.
[Unidentified Child:] I want to go with my aunt
[Border Patrol Agent:] You're going to get there. Look, she will explain it and help you.
[Unidentified Child:] At least can I go with my aunt? I want here to come I want my aunt to come so she can take me to her house.
[Cooper:] Well, joining us now is Rosa Flores from the facility where the mother of one of those children is being held. So, you spoke to a Cindy Madrid for about 45 minutes today I understand. How was she doing?
[Rosa Flores, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, she's described she's in despair, she's depressed, she's paralyzed with pain because she says that she misses her daughter. Here's what she told me.
[Cindy Madrid:] Please help me reunite with my daughter soon. I'm desperate. I want to see her. I love her and that I miss her so much. And that I hope to see her very soon, God willing. We've always been very close, her and I. We've shared everything, together. She's very fun. She's very charismatic. She likes pets. She likes having fun. She is very intelligent. She is very loving.
[Flores:] And, Anderson, Cindy also says that her daughter has never been apart from her mother. They've never separated since birth. This is very tough for this woman.
[Cooper:] Rosa, at the facility Melania Trump toured today, the manager there said that the children in his facility are able to talk to their parents by phone for 10 minutes twice a week. Is that across the board at all these facilities? Have Cindy been able to talk to her daughter?
[Flores:] You know, that was one of the astounding things about this conversation with this woman because despite what the administration has said and the Cindy was describing how they were watching television when President Trump signed that executive order and all of these women in his facility started cheering and crying and thinking that things were going to change, that they're going to be able to talk to their children. But that was not the case. Take a listen.
[Madrid:] I have not once talked to her. I've been talking to the social worker, but she only took my information because she said my daughter was in an activity. She told me to call at 5:00 p.m.; but my call was not answered. To date, they haven't answered me. Not one time. Imagine, all these days without knowing anything about my daughter, without talking to her, without seeing her. Without any information about anything. It's maddening because at the every moment I ask myself, how is she? Has she eaten? Are they taking care of her? Do they shower her? It's maddening not knowing anything about her, you know?
[Flores:] Now, Cindy shared that phone number that immigration gave her with us. So, during our interview we tried that number twice and here's what we heard on the other end of the line. Take a listen.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi, it's
[Flores:] And, Anderson, this woman said that she's not the only one. Most of the women that she knows in this massive facility are just like her. They have not been able to communicate with their children.
[Cooper:] Rosa, I understand that Cindy Madrid said she had a message for the first lady. What did she say?
[Flores:] You know, I was actually doing the interview with her when the news broke about Melania Trump landing in the Rio Grande Valley, visiting a separate detention center. So, I asked her about the first lady's visit and here's what she said.
[Madrid:] I would hope that she would help me. I think she understands what it's like to be a mom. Perhaps she has never been separated from her children; but she understands that one would give everything for one's children.
[Flores:] And, Anderson, I was also able to talk to Cindy's sister, so this little girl's aunt and she says that she actually was able to talk to the little girl and the six-year-old she said that is very worried about her mother, asking her aunt if her mother had eaten, if she was still in detention, if her mother had had her detention hearings. And then processed this with me this little girl, her wish about leaving detention is she hopes to take a shower at her aunt's house, according to her aunt. And she says that she wants to buy and eat as much cereal as she can Anderson.
[Cooper:] Rosa Flores, I appreciate the report. Thank you. As we said, children taken from their parents are now spending their nights not just apart from them but sometimes several thousand miles apart, approximately here in New York state. Today, New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo visited one such facility in the New York City area. He joins us now from Albany. So, Governor, the facility that you tour, what were you able to see and what were you actually able to find out about the kids there?
[Gov. Andrew Cuomo , New York:] Well, Anderson, the first, it's a hodgepodge to use a word. I think what happened is when they started the zero tolerance policy April 7th, that triggered once they decided to arrest the parents, that triggered the problem of whether you put the children because the current law says you can't detain the children. And HHS then has been in this scramble ever since sending children all over the country as we well know. We have a very large force, the care system in the state of New York, so we wound up with many of the children. Basically today, the young people we spoke to, they're basically traumatized. They're in limbo. They showed up at the border with their parent. They were all excited. They were going to America. Salvadoran running from MS-14, Guatemalan running from a dangerous condition, they get to the border and they are separated from their parent immediately. They're shipped to a state they've never heard of. They can't speak the language. Your point about contacting the parents is very different, it depends where the parent is and what detention center. We have one young person who's been there for several months only spoke to a parent once. But they're traumatized. Many of them have psychological issues. They have anxiety. They have depression. Many of them are on psychotropic drugs and under the care of a psychiatrist. And they don't know what's next. They don't know what's going on. Are they seeking asylum? Are they going to be sent back? And much of this started in AprilMay, as soon as the zero-tolerance policy went into effect. And, look, this is either gross government incompetence, unparalleled, or it is the most disgusting political display we've ever seen, right? It's one or the other.
[Cooper:] What's
[Cuomo:] This was either a debacle.
[Cooper:] What's
[Cuomo:] In any event
[Cooper:] Go ahead.
[Cuomo:] you have 2,300 children. I'm sorry. In any event, for me, you have 2,300, 2,500. Who even knows what the number is? I tried to get HHS, Health and Human Services, to tell us how many children were in the state today so I can provide help. They won't even tell me. I don't know that they even know. But in any event, you have 2,500, 2,700 young people being used as political pawns, traumatized and this is a trauma that can last them a lifetime.
[Cooper:] What
[Cuomo:] It really is that kind of traumatic situation.
[Cooper:] What I don't understand is, you know, when General Kelly was head of Homeland Security, he was publicly raising this idea of separating families, you know, when he was running it. They you would think if they were talking about it back then, at the very least, they would have had a lot of time to kind of figure out the where kids would go, to figure it out, and it wouldn't be, to use your words, such a hodgepodge. I mean, did the workers at the facility you were at, that they seemed have guidance as to what was actually going to happen next? Or how these kids would be reunited or what the next step was?
[Cuomo:] No, they had no idea. But, Anderson, it's what you said. April 7th, they put in the zero tolerance policy. We're arresting everyone. We're tough. We're strong, strong borders. The law says you can't detain children. That triggers the children having to be sent somewhere else. The president does the executive order yesterday. The headline is president reverses himself. He didn't reverse himself. The executive order is a sham. A reversal is a 180. This was a 360, this was a political pirouette. He wound up just where he started. The executive order says the attorney general must go renegotiate the Flores decision, which is the decision that guides the fact that you can't detain juveniles. The attorney general hasn't even started that, and good luck. The Obama administration tried to renegotiate Flores and they couldn't. Today, they say, we're going to set up camps for 20,000 family detention you can't do that either under the Flores decision. So, none of it makes sense. None of it follows the law. And I think what this is really about is making a robust political statement. We're strong on the border. We have an infestation, and that the children are the pawns in this national debacle.
[Cooper:] And it's not going away anytime soon. Governor Cuomo, appreciate your time tonight. Thank you. More now on the trauma the governor just spoke of because there really is no overestimating how wrenching it is for these kids. We all remember the fear as young kids of being separated, even momentarily from a parent. Joining us now is Dr. Colleen Kraft, the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Dr. Kraft, I mean, the governor was talking about the trauma these kids are going through in detention centers. There's also the trauma, I imagine in the many unknowns of when and how they'll actually be able to be reunited with their parents. It's one thing to be separated. It's another thing to not really know what the future holds.
[Dr. Colleen Kraft, President, American Academy Of Pediatrics:] Absolutely. And so, the kids who can tell you that they're traumatized are telling you this and acting out and we're seeing anxiety and depression and all kinds of other problems. The kids that I've seen were the really little ones who some of them are pre-verbal and all they know is that that one foundational relationship in their life has been taken away from them. And they either externalize their behaviors. They become aggressive, crying, screaming, or they internalize them and they become withdrawn.
[Cooper:] It's also, I mean, Doctor, talk about the first two to three years of life and a child's development has pretty much the most important, you know, immediate span of time. If you have kids who are pre-verbal, you have little children of that age being separated from their parents there's no telling what that does to a kid for the rest of their life, just in terms of their own development.
[Kraft:] Absolutely. So, the brain develops most rapidly between birth and three years of age and that's when we want positive experiences and positive relationships to build that brain architecture correctly. And what's happening with these kids is that the trauma is causing something we refer to as toxic stress where their fight-or-flight hormones are staying high in their system and that actually keeps them on red alert all the time and disrupts their brain development, disrupts their ability to speak to gross motorfine motor movements to develop relationships from here on out.
[Cooper:] The fact that the president's executive order is allowing for these families to be reunited, but that they may be held together possibly indefinitely or even if they don't pass if they don't alter this, the Flores settlement, within 20 days, they could be separated again.
[Kraft:] So, after the president's executive order, the question we have is now what? So, when are these families going to be reunited? When are these children going to be reunited with that foundational relationship, that parent who loves them? And where are they going to be kept? Are we going to have them in a place where they'll be retraumatized again? You know, where is the action now that this executive order has been has been declared?
[Cooper:] You visited one of these detention centers. Can just described a little bit about what you saw, what you heard? I mean, are caregivers there able to touch them, to console them?
[Kraft:] So, what I saw was in one of the tender care shelters, and it was a very homey environment. There were appropriate books and toys and blankets and things there for the children to keep them clean and fed. But when you walked into the toddler room which should be a den of activity and noise and a rambunctiousness, you had several very quiet little toddlers who were just looking at you frightened. And one little girl who was just sobbing in the middle of the floor and couldn't be consoled, the workers who are in the room were trying to help this little girl out they were giving her a book and a toy, but they couldn't distract her and they weren't allowed to hold her or touch her. So, this child was really in a great deal of pain and the rest of us felt so helpless because we knew she needed her mother and we couldn't give that to her. And I mean, I guess you know the reason they're not allowed to touch a toddler or an infant is for, you know, the preventing kind of abuse, at the same time, the idea of a child not being getting any kind of affection is I mean, it just it's kind of stunning. It's sad and I don't know what or where or why this policy exists. But I saw this in action happening on the day that I visited.
[Cooper:] Dr. Colleen Kraft, I appreciate your time. Thank you. Just ahead, the message that wasn't a message until it was. New reporting on how the White House is handling the outcry over the first lady's sign on the back of her jacket today. Also later, breaking news, something you'll only see here. Exclusive new evidence at the confusion and chaos surrounding the president's executive order.

[Paul:] All right. I want to show you some live pictures out of Paris right now as we continue to follow the developments there.
[Savidge:] Demonstrators are take thing to the streets over rising fuel costs. Police have been using teargas and water cannons against some of the 8,000 protestors. They have gathered in the French capital to express frustration with President Macron after tax hikes on diesel and gas. Macron is also pushing incentives to purchase electric vehicles. And many of the protesters take issue with the encouragement to move towards environmentally friendly policies, primarily because of the cost. Government officials blame Far-Right extremists for inflaming the tensions here. This is all occurring on the Champs-Elysees, you see the Arc de Triomphe in the background there. So one of the most famous streets in all the world and certainly one known to many Americans.
[Paul:] And just to clarify what you're looking at there, I know a lot of times we see something like this and we see people in yellow vest, and we think that those are authorities, they're police officers. They are not. The people in the yellow vests are the protesters. It's called the yellow vest protest, because there in Paris, everyone has a yellow vest in their car. And it seems like this may have taken the scope of it may have taken authorities by surprise. You see there is something burning. It looks like it may have been a vehicle at one point. But as Martin said, tear gas has been used, water cannons have been used to try to get everybody under some sort of control, and that just doesn't seem to be happening today. So, we'll keep you posted on what's happening there. Let's talk about the gun debate. Gun debate here in America, two big groups now seeming to go head to head, the NRA versus the nation's doctors. Earlier this month, a medical journal suggested new ways for doctors to reduce gun violence, such as asking patients if they have guns in their homes, counseling them about gun safety. Well, the NRA, not so happy about that. They went to Twitter and said basically someone needs to tell these doctors to stay in their lane. So doctors decided to share some photos, showing the damage that gun shots can do. Please let me forewarn you here, I do not want you to be taken off- guard, these are graphic photos and they're hard to look at. But this is from Dr. Kathrine Holte, here we go. She tweeted this photo saying, I am a trauma surgeon, this is what it looks like. #StayInMyLane #ThisisMyLane. And there were thousands of others doing the same thing. That picture isn't actually loading properly, but it is a bloody scene of them in an emergency room treating a gunshot victim. Dr. Joseph Sakran, who is a survivor of gun violence himself is with us now, as well as Dr. Brendan Campbell who is also a member of the NRA. I appreciate both of you for being here, thank you. I wanted to ask you Dr. Campbell, first and foremost, you own guns. You must in some way be feel like you are caught in the middle here. What is your perspective as a gun owner?
[Dr. Brendan Campbell, Pediatric Surgeon:] Well, first and foremost, I'm not a member of National Rifle Association, but I am a gun owner. I'm a hunter, I've owned guns for a long time. But it's not really about being caught in the middle, it's about finding ways to find common ground, gun owners, non-gun owners alike and to use a public health approach to try and make some meaningful progress on this issue. I think the one downside to this, this is my lane, this is not my lane argument is we are all in this together, and if we polarize the debate, we're not going to make progress on it. So, it's very important that we work collaboratively together on this to make some meaningful progress.
[Paul:] So, Dr. Sakran, I know that you're somebody who sees this violence all the time, you've experienced it yourself. You were hit with a bullet, I believe when you were 17. What would you like to say to the NRA?
[Dr. Joseph Sakran, Emergency General Surgery Director, Johns Hopkins:] Well good morning. I think that type of rhetoric that we heard, to me, is just a clear demonstration of the lack of understanding of how complex a health problem this is. And to think that health professionals are not part of the solution is unacceptable and I think this kind of goes along with the false narrative that is an attempt to polarize this debate. Like you heard from Dr. Campbell, I think it's very clear, when I've talked to hundreds if not thousands of gun owners, we have a lot more in common than divides us on this issue. I want to real quickly just give another heads-up to our audience here. We do have that picture for you, and I just think it's appropriate to show it now, because Dr. Sakran, you were talking about how you are on the frontlines of this because you are the ones treating people for gunshot wounds and emergency rooms. Is there a space do you think Dr. Campbell, is there a space for gun right advocates and the medical community to craft solutions together, or is it too inflamed?
[Campbell:] Well, there's absolutely an opportunity. I mean we have a common purpose here, right, it's to reduce firearm injury and to make firearm ownership as safe as possible. And I think the American College of Surgeons Firearms Strategy Team, which I'm a part of, just published 13 recommendations for how we can make the United States safer. And we're not the first ones to do this, but we're the first group of gun-owning physicians to support these types of recommendations. There are things as simple as universal background checks and providing federal funding for research on this issue. We have to start treating this problem the same way we're treating our patients. We identify what the best treatments are for it doesn't matter whether it's a tumor or whether it's trauma, what are the best solutions and we need to implement them. Dr. Sakran, was there ever a moment, when Dr. Campbell talks about some of these recommendations, and again some of them are counseling patients on gun safety, asking parents if they have guns in the home. Is there ever a moment where you look and think I am a doctor, I did not think these were the conversations I was going to have to have as part of my career?
[Sakran:] Well, I think the fact is that, this is a public health crisis that we're facing. We just saw the CDC and FDA put out a warning to Americans that we should throw away all our lettuce, and that was because 32 individuals were infected with E. coli and 13 were hospitalized. When you look at that same time period, 240 children were shot and 78 died. So we must have the same type of proportional response that mirrors the burden of disease that we're facing. And I think us working together with other individuals is the only way we're going to come up with common-sense solutions to reduce firearm injury and death in this country.
[Paul:] Dr. Campbell, your final thoughts here.
[Campbell:] Well I think Dr. Sakran is right on target. This is an issue that we've known about for a long time and it hasn't gotten the same amount of attention in terms of federally funded research and discussion by that it deserves. And I think, if we're going to make meaningful progress on this issue, gun owners and non-gun owners, we're going to have to find ways to collaborate and work together.
[Paul:] All right, Dr. Joseph Sakran and Dr. Brendan Campbell, thank you both so much for making time for us today.
[Sakran:] Thanks for having us.
[Campbell:] Thanks for having us this morning.
[Paul:] Absolutely.
[Savidge:] An American missionary's last letter detailed his desire to evangelize the people who ended up killing him. We'll tell you what else we've learned, next.

[Cooper:] As we discussed before the break, former Trump campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, was before the House Intelligence Committee today. Panel member Eric Swalwell mentioned this. The Committee's Ranking Democrat Adam Schiff is not happy. Congressman Schiff, as Lewandowski refused to talk about some topics and doesn't get to pick and choose which questions to answer. Back now with the panel, it does seem like just about everybody had goes before this committee does get to pick and choose what questions they want to answer.
[Borger:] Right. Because, you know, the Democrats don't control the committee. It's fallen apart. They don't even know who the Ranking Republican is on the committee anymore who the chairman is. Is it Nunes or Conway? And they're just daring them. Lewandowski, in talking with the Special Counsel, would not be able to claim any kind of privilege.
[Cooper:] But none of these people
[Borger:] Lewandowski doesn't have any privilege. I mean, he was dismissed during the campaign. He's not serving in the White House. It's not like it was with Hope Hicks where they were literally on the phone or was it Bannon, they were on the phone to the White House trying to figure out what he could and he couldn't say. So this is Corey Lewandowski just, you know, thumbing his nose at these guys and saying, I don't have to answer your questions. There is no hell to pay for it.
[Fallon:] But even when White House officials, sitting White House officials have tried to dodge answering questions, they haven't formally invoked any kind of privilege. They've just sort of informally said, no, we're not going to answer that. You heard Jeff Sessions go before Congress and say, I'm not going to answer that because I want to hold open the possibility that the President may want to invoke executive privilege which is another inventive privilege that doesn't exist legally. You can do one of two things in these scenarios. You can either invoke privilege and have a legitimate claim and that can be tested or you can plead the fifth. In Corey Lewandowski's case if, he doesn't want to have the conversations he may have had where he that may implicate the President about that June Trump Tower meeting. And so we were during the break, we're talking. This only lasts for as long as Republicans control the gavel and can take no for an answer. But I guarantee Adam Schiff is not going to make this a voluntary interview. He's going to subpoena things and subpoena people. And he will hold people in contempt if he takes that gavel back.
[Psaki:] And Eric Swalwell just alluded to that during that interview. He just said, like, this is somebody we could bring back essentially.
[Cooper:] But what does this mean? I mean, regardless of, you know, where you stand on the rest of the story and whether do you think this committee needs to be doing what it's doing, just for the future, I mean, is this just a are we just going to see more this is a line that's been crossed and we're going to see more and more and more of this kind of stuff or is this just a one off?
[Jennings:] You know, I have my thoughts about the way the Democrats have conducted themselves on this committee. But I think, generally speaking, the House Intelligence Committee has been more amateurish than the Senate Intelligence Committee. I think what I'll want to see on the intelligence committee is, look, a lot of these policy committees, they get partisan. We have debates over bills. These intelligence committees are doing important things.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Jennings:] Should be above partisan politics. The Senate Intelligence Committee is handled itself extremely professionally. I think most people would agree the House Committee has evolved a bit. We've got to get these intelligence committees back to where they are which is basically above the partisan, you know, atmosphere that has gripped this House Committee and frankly has them. You know, I think most Americans are looking at both sides going. I don't know if I trust any of these people.
[Borger:] They're not going to get the answers. Mueller's going to get the answers. I mean, it isn't going to come from the Congress. It isn't going to come from the politicians. It's going to come from the Special Counsel. And as the story unfolds, I think that's where we're really going to really learn it. Because he does subpoena people. And he can indict people. And he has cut deals with people.
[Cooper:] We should I know there's obviously politics. But Marc should Republicans subpoena people who are not answering questions?
[Lotter:] I think it's important to remember though that what we heard Congressman Schiff talk about is that Corey didn't answer questions about the drafting of the statement following about the June Trump meeting. Well, he wasn't in the administration, talking about discussions about firing of James Comey. He wasn't in the administration. Or possible discussions which have always been denied about potentially firing Bob Mueller. He's not in the administration. So, did he not answer questions about things he wasn't in the administration to know about? And, I mean, at the end of the day, it seems to me that Democrats are grabbing at more straws than stable hands.
[Psaki:] Look, ultimately, I think what the staff needs to remember is President Nixon didn't go to jail and about a dozen of his staff did. So, this makes lie with these committees but it's not going fly with Mueller and it's not going to even fly with all the committees. And that's why they're going to come back.
[Fallon:] And you're seeing it this week. I mean, we had a former Trump adviser have a meltdown on television the other day claiming he was going to defy Bob Mueller and by all accounts he is submitting because all it takes is one conversation with a serious lawyer to tell you that if you don't comply, you're going to jail. And it could be for a long time.
[Jennings:] Yes. I think this is a side show ultimately. I mean, look, you know, people could show up and answer questions, not answer questions, we can talk about Mueller is the key to all of this.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Jennings:] You know, the partisan nature of this committee means Republicans are going to do what they do today. If Democrats win the House, they'll do what they do next year. But the only thing we ought to really care about here is getting this Mueller investigation conclude which is gone for a very long time and appears to be, you know, moving forward at a rapid pace. This is a side show compared to that. And if I'm the White House tonight, I'm looking at this going, you know, this is not in my I'm worried about Mueller, not this.
[Borger:] You know, I think Congress' responsibility to at least to shine the light on the stories. And they did it in Iran-Contra when you had people publicly testify even though there was a special separate prosecution going on. And these committees have not really done that. I mean, there was Comey testifying, but we didn't see a lot of public testimony.
[Cooper:] Yes. We're going to take a break. Thanks everybody, appreciate it. Coming up, a new CNN Original Series uncovered rare details about America's most famous political family. I'm not talking about the Trumps. Preview of American dynasty, the Kennedys, after a quick break.

[Vanier:] Welcome back, everyone. I'm Cyril Vanier.
[Allen:] I'm Natalie Allen. Let's update you on our top stories this hour. Philippine officials say two ISIS-linked militants have been killed in the southern city of Marawi following a long standoff with government troops. Officials say one of the militants was a top ISIS leader in Southeast Asia and was wanted by the FBI. The other led a local militant group. They spearheaded a deadly siege in Marawi which had sparked fears ISIS would gain a foothold in the region.
[Vanier:] Ten days of joint U.S.-South Korean naval exercises just gone underway. South Korea's naval commander said the drills are to counter North Korea's provocations. The U.S. and Pyongyang had exchanged escalating rhetoric over the North's nuclear program. Pyongyang renewed its threat to launch missiles near the U.S. territory of Guam.
[Allen:] U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson say the U.S. is trying to stay in Iran nuclear deal, though it needs serious revision. This comes after President Donald Trump threatens to pull the U.S. out of the agreement on Friday, he says Iran is violating the terms and betraying the
[U.s. Vanier:] And the Catalan president is refusing to clarify whether he indeed declared Catalonia independent from Spain. Instead of that, Carles Puigdemont is asking Madrid for two months of talks. The central government had threatened to suspend the region's economy if his answer was not clear enough. Now some residents in northern California is returning home to piles of metal and rock after dozens of wildfires that scorched their neighborhoods the past few days. At least 40 people have been killed in the fire since Sunday.
[Allen:] Nearly 88,000 hectares or 217,000 acres have burned throughout California. The crews are starting to get the fires under control. CNN's Dan Simon has the latest from Kenwood, California.
[Dan Simon, Correspondent, Cnn:] For the first time in a week firefighters are now striking optimistic tone about these fires that's because the winds have died down, and with that the containment numbers have gone up. That's other stores and trouble spots. Take a look behind me, that's the Oakmont fire you can see the smoke billowing. There are some flame there on the mountain but firefighters not too concerned because the fires are not burning towards any populated communities. We have seen though, some airplanes making some drops just to make sure things don't get out of control. Saturday night it was a difficult night for the community of Sonoma which is south of here. We did see some structures burned. There were some evacuations, but Sunday a whole different story because the winds have died down. The area no longer under a red flag warning. And with that, we've seen a number of fires including the Tubbs fire which was the most destructive fire in the community of Santa Rosa. The containment number 60 percent or more so firefighters now think they're beginning to turn a corner. Dan Simon, CNN, Kenwood, California.
[Allen:] Finally, we take it. Pedram Javaheri following the latest too, for us as well. That's some good news from Dan Simon, Pedram.
[Pedram Javaheri, Meteorologist, Cnn:] Yes, absolutely for a long time coming. You know, we had winds up to tropical storm force about 10 days ago where it all initiated if you look 20 large active fires across this region. And of course, the concern now is how it is improving, how quickly it is improving. And we've seen about 8 to 15 percent improvements as far as containment is concerned of the past 24 hours. And you see the Tubbs fire still only 60 percent contained but still seen dramatic improvements just in the past 24 hours alone. Winds have generally calm down a little bit, say two to five miles an hour, some areas of the 10 miles per hour down from the 35 to 40 miles per hour we have just a few days ago. And then the temperature is within onshore component. Look at this San Francisco of course from 85 down to 65. Los Angeles from the middle 90's down to the lower 80s, so the firefighters certainly going to be appreciative of the improving conditions across that area of the Western U.S. Now into Western Europe, we go where something very interesting, very unusual taking place right now. Post-tropical storm Ophelia working this way ashore. And notice the winds are actually 140 kilometers per hour, which is 85 miles per hour. That is equivalent to a category one hurricane. But the reason it's not called hurricane is that it's moving over cooler waters, it is a cold core systems versus tropical systems are one core. But really it doesn't change the fact that the winds are just as strong as a category one hurricane. And of course, the impact is going to be significant around the western area of Ireland here over the next several hours. It will move ashore with winds equivalent to a category one hurricane first time since 30 years ago today the great storm of 1987 impacted this region. It left behind 22 lives lost and also brought down 15 million trees across North Western Europe. We know the impact it could be significant, in particular for Ireland. The education department saying the storm is unprecedented as a result for Ireland they've actually close all schools across the board across the island today work your way into portions of the U.K. there. A low impact is expected but still could see power outages widespread. In fact, Heathrow reporting about 20 flights that been halted so far. Dublin much the same about 20 flights have been canceled going into Monday. There is the center of the storm going to the afternoon and evening hours, notice a lot of these winds pushing into the channels could be upwards of 100 kilometers per hour and then it works its way towards northern areas of the U.K. there. So, a big story for folks across an area that's do get hit with very hard and significant storms but of course having one that has tropical origins is something you don't see every day, guys.
[Allen:] Yes, unusual like many of the storms we're seeing.
[Javaheri:] Yes, very true.
[Allen:] Pedram, thank you. Yes, Pedram said it's racing toward Ireland and the United Kingdom bringing hurricane force winds, heavy rain, and possibly a dangerous storm surge. Let's go to our Phil Black because he is live in Ireland. You are starting to feel the effect there, Phil.
[Phil Black, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, indeed. And Natalie, it's really extraordinary. The conditions here are changing so quickly, so rapidly, it's been very windy, blustery, and wet throughout the morning as the sun has risen here. But there are moments of relative calm and there are moments where the wind really picks up. Overhead at the moment was a huge patch of blue sky, it is changing very, very quickly. But over the hour from two hours that's when the authorities here tell us that this particular corner of Southwest Island is really going to start to feel the strongest winds coming from Ophelia. And as you heard there, this is no longer hurricane but the strength of the winds is still very much like one. And so that's why the authorities here are so concerned. They are initially just worried about the south, the southwest coast where we are, that's why they put in place what they called a red warning, the strongest possible weather warning. That warning now applies to the entire republican of Ireland because they are concern that the gust of wind could be so unpredictable and so dangerous in every county of this country. So the advised to everyone here is to stay indoors all day to sit this one out. They've been advised to do all the preparation stuff before today. And what the authorities here now hope is that the storm will pass, the damage will be minimal. And hopefully no one will be hurt. But they are worried about the wind, they're worried about the rain. They're expecting flooding, and of course big seas and a storm surge as well as this storm begins to move its way up to the West coast of Ireland. Back to you.
[Allen:] Tropical storm hitting Ireland that is so bizarre. Phil Black covering it for us. Stay safe, Phil. We'll talk to you again. Thanks. We turn now to Puerto Rico. Thousands of people struggling from basic necessity still nearly a month after Hurricane Maria devastated the island. Eighty five percent of the island still has no power.
[Vanier:] And more than 30 percent of people don't have clean drinking water. In fact, the situation is so bad that someone drinking from contaminated wells. CNN's Ed Lavandera has more on this.
[Ed Lavandera, Correspondent, Cnn:] Nearly a month after hurricane Maria struck Puerto Rico, there are still some serious questions about just where some Puerto Ricans are getting their water from. Now one area, in particular is of intense concern here. It's an area around a town called Dorado, just west of the capital of San Juan. There is an area there that has been labeled as a Superfund site. For those of you not familiar with what that term means, it's created by the Environmental and Protection Agency and it basically describes an area that is highly contaminated with toxic materials in the ground. There are a number of water wells on Superfund site and there are reports and we've seen it ourselves of people getting water from those wells. Now one of the wells that have been use has been efficiently cleared by government officials here in Puerto Rico, and they have actually dish passing that water out to people who have standing in the long lines to come and get that water. They say that the water has passed all of its testing. Some of the other wells is not exactly clear. A team from the Environmental Protection Agency went around this weekend testing some of those wells and it could most of the week to get the results back. And it is believed that in this water that there could be high levels of toxic materials from industrial waste that is in those waters that could be a cause serious health problems for people. EPA officials say it would require long-term exposure to that water. But we were with one of those EPA officials this is what he had to say about the testing that they're doing.
[Gary Lipton, Epa Incident Commander, Puerto Rico Operations:] There is the urgency it's a concern. And it's a concern both in public health and perception, but we understand that people are hurting right now. We understand there's a lot of thirsty people out there and they're accessing whatever water we can whatever water they can and we're trying to ascertain if it is pose any hazards or not.
[Lavandera:] Some independent experts that we have spoken with here over the last few days are getting them to examine the EPA documents about this of Superfund sites. It is disturbing that water wells are being used for drinking water. Some water have been exposed to that drinking water and have used it for drinking water. And what is more fascinating that many people as we've gone around to some of these wells many of the people who live in this area had no idea that this area had been designated as a Superfund site and they had no idea they were tapping into possibly contaminated water. So, the work on determining exactly what is coming out of those water wells will continue to be done this week.
[Vanier:] An anti-immigrant politician is set to become Austria's next chancellor who may form a far right coalition government. We'll have a live report from Vienna after the break.

[Cabrera:] President Trump's effort to fill his top staff positions has hit another snag. This time it's his nominee for Army secretary Mark Green who has withdrawn his name over controversial comments he's made and the outrage they sparked. This is strike two now for the president when it comes to this position. The Army secretary position. And it's raising questions about who is doing the vetting for potential nominees. CNN's Jessica Schneider has details Jessica.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] Ana, the Trump administration has repeatedly been criticized for its vetting process. Well, now the latest nominee for Army secretary has been forced out once again raising the question, is the Trump team getting this vetting process right?
[Schneider:] Mark Green is a victim of his own words.
[Mark Green, Former Army Secretary Nominee:] If you polled psychiatrists they're going to tell you that transgender is a disease.
[Schneider:] Green has also made critical comments about Muslims and is a self-identified creationist who once delivered a lecture arguing against the Theory of Evolution. Now the West Point grad who was President Trump's second choice for Army secretary is taking his name out of consideration. The first pick withdrew setting financial entanglement. Green is just the latest problematic pick for President Trump drawing doubts about the administration's vetting process. Questions are also now being raised about 28-year-old Steven Munoz. He was hired for a top job in the Office of Protocol at the State Department on January 25th. But police records first obtained by ProPublica then obtained by CNN show multiple people accused Munoz of sexual assault while he was a student at the Citadel Military College. The alleged victims came forward to college officials and police between 2010 and 2012. Munoz was never charged with a crime. But an investigation by the Citadel revealed that based upon a preponderance of the evidence the college concluded that certain assaults likely occurred. Munoz's lawyer maintains, "The allegations were unfounded. It was a total overreaction by the Citadel to even investigate and ultimately no charges or lawsuits were brought against him." The State Department is standing by Munoz and it's vetting procedure. A simple search would have revealed the allegations. The White House and State Department did not comment on whether they considered or knew about the allegations. Perhaps the most serious case of questionable vetting, the appointment and subsequent resignation of former National Security adviser Michael Flynn. The retired general accepted $45,000 in speaking fees from Russian state TV in 2015 despite being warned by the Pentagon not to accept money from foreign governments and Flynn initially failed to register as a foreign agent for work he did for a Turkish owned company. President Trump deflected responsibility pinning Flynn's approval on former President Obama.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He was approved by the Obama administration at the highest level. And when they say we didn't vet, well, Obama I guess didn't vet because he was approved at the highest level of security by the Obama administration.
[Schneider:] And President Trump is right. The Obama administration granted Michael Flynn a security clearance, but Flynn resigned from that post in 2014. A year before he was paid for that speech in Russia. It's something that a second background check, if done by the Trump team, may have picked up Ana.
[Cabrera:] All right, Jessica Schneider, thank you. A third search will now be needed to fill out President Trump's Army secretary, one of hundreds of positions still unfilled. Let's talk this over with CNN political commentator and former Reagan political director Jeffrey Lord, and CNN contributor, former Philadelphia mayor, Michael Nutter. Jeffrey, it's a Washington to blame previous administrations for problem, but doesn't President Trump have to take responsibility at some point?
[Lord:] Well, look, we're talking a couple of things here. First, sure, he has to take responsibility. Every president, the buck stops on their desk. That's absolutely correct. My point here is that this happens in administrations. I can think of three right off the top of my head from the Obama administration. Tom Daschle is HHS secretary, Charles Friedman, a Saudi ambassador, and head of the National intelligence Council, and Bill Richardson as Commerce secretary. All of them had to withdraw their nominee their nominations for varying reasons, conflict of interest, et cetera. So and there are others going well back in the past so this happens.
[Cabrera:] Yes, it happens but
[Lord:] It just the Donald Trump term here.
[Cabrera:] But Donald Trump also comes in with a unique set of circumstances, right. He's the mogul whose shot to stardom as a mentor to his "Apprentice," he knows nothing about hiring?
[Lord:] Well, what you've got here is this is the government here. This is the government, and the media and all of that sort of thing. So there is a problem here. I'm sure he's going to correct it. I have no doubt about it. But in context, to be very, very fair here, this kind of things have been happening for a long time and they happened in the Obama administration.
[Cabrera:] Right. Right.
[Lord:] And he served two terms.
[Cabrera:] Yes. But, you know, Daschle, as you mentioned earlier, he was due in February. It's May. But anyway, Mayor Nutter, is the problem the vetting or is it unfair expectations?
[Michael Nutter, Cnn Contributor:] Yes.
[Cabrera:] I mean, Donald Trump is a different kind of president. Doesn't it make sense he would have a different kind of staff, could you argue?
[Nutter:] No, and, Jeffrey, you need to cut it out. You know this is bad.
[Lord:] You're right.
[Nutter:] You just ran right past the fact that the president has to take responsibility for this. Forget about I love, maybe you didn't, President Obama in his eight years. But last I check he's out of office. There is a vetting that must take place before you even think about nominating someone before you speak their name in public. You have already gone through a double vet. President Trump likes to talk about extreme vetting. This was for the National Security adviser. So cut it out. There's nothing to do with President Barack Obama. There is a thing, Jeffrey, that was created I know you were in the Reagan administration but since then there's this new thing out called the Internet. You can find out all kinds of information if you go on to your little device or computers. And when you fill out your clearance form, like I've had to in the past, the things that Mr. Flynn is being accused of, or that he did, you actually have to put on the form. So this is all the Trump administration and it's really indicative of the arrogance and ignorance with which they've approached putting their team together in the first place.
[Cabrera:] Jeffrey, I'd like to ask you about your experience working in the White House. At some point surely as these open jobs caused problems for staff, don't they? You look at the State Department and a third of ambassadorships have not been filled. Undersecretary and assistant secretary positions are still open. We're talking about hundreds of positions overall in the administration. Doesn't this have an impact?
[Lord:] There are a couple of things that are at play here. One I think is unique to Donald Trump. I think he genuinely believes that some of these positions are not necessary and why fill them. So that's number one. It's probably unique to him. But there is a second thing that went on in the Reagan administration that's going on in the Trump administration and I'm sure it went on in the Obama administration as well, and I can give you an example. A friend was nominated to be secretary of Transportation. He was cleared. He wanted to appoint a specific person as his communications director. That specific person had problems with the Reagans. And therefore that nomination wasn't going to be approved until certain things were taken care of. They went through this all through the Reagan administration with candidates who had worked in the Bush campaign, for example, even though George H.W. Bush was vice president where one candidate was vetoed for a job in the Reagan-Meese Justice Department.
[Cabrera:] Right. Right. There are a lot of examples where that happens.
[Lord:] They want people who are loyal to the candidate and loyal to the president. And that takes time.
[Cabrera:] But but what's the impact on it does take time. But what's the impact of having all of these positions still left open? And even if there are maybe there is some trimming of the fat to be done to your point if we were just to accept that, at some point, though, there's an impact to things getting done, is there not?
[Lord:] Well, sure, if you just extend it forever and a day but that's not going to happen here. I mean, these positions are going to get filled and will go on. I mean, things are rolling along as they are. He just got his health care bill out of the House. So, you know, life moves on.
[Cabrera:] All right. Mayor Nutter, I know you are the Philadelphia mayor, of course. One of the country's biggest
[Nutter:] Going nowhere in the Senate.
[Cabrera:] But I'd love to get your input from your shoes and the positions you've held. How did you handle criticism of your hiring decisions?
[Nutter:] Sure. Well, first and foremost, Ana, the answer to your original question just now to Jeff is, yes, it has an impact on departments and maybe the president should not have had a massacre of the ambassador corps requiring everyone to resign at the same time, again, not understanding that it actually takes time to vet your own folks and get them confirmed. Second, you know, much of this process actually quietly, you know, every candidate should at least consider that they might possibly win. So you start thinking on a separate track that you're actually going to start identifying folks that you would want to have in these critical positions and then you accelerate it after the elections. So they've been slow from the start. And then they were even slower, kind of getting up and running. It's May. And you've got a ton of positions unfilled. It does have an impact on the departments and agencies. People want to do their work. They want to know who they report to. What's the direction? What's our focus? What's our mission? And some of these agencies are being run by folks who are a couple of rungs down from the secretary's office or the ambassadorship and so you can't just say it is not running like a fine-tuned machine as the president likes to say. The wheels are starting to come off of this a little bit.
[Cabrera:] All right. We'll leave it there.
[Lord:] Ana
[Cabrera:] You've got the first, we'll give Mayor Michael Nutter the last. We've got to leave it there. Thank you both, gentlemen. Coming up, the president takes a victory lap on health care. But is he ready for a bigger fight ahead in the Senate? A preview of what's to come next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Happening now, cashing in on credit. President Trump reverses course deciding to sign the GOP tax bill in front of the news media today instead of in January as originally planned. The President boasting of his accomplishments and complaining he gets no credit. Does he have any regrets from his first year in office? The inner circle, the Russia investigation focuses on one of the President's longest serving aides. The woman who has been his gatekeeper over at Trump Tower in New York for more than 30 years, she answers questions from the House Intelligence Committee with the Deputy FBI Director now corroborating James Comey's accounts of his conversations with the President. Is the Russia probe about to enter a new phase? Also, breaking news, anthrax missiles. As the U.N. votes on new sanctions against North Korea, South Korea reports the Kim Jong-un regime has more than a dozen biological agents, including anthrax that could be made weapon-ready within a matter of days. Is Kim Jong-un contemplating a horrifying attack? And Christmas allowed. A new app from a pro-Trump group thanks the President for things like taxes, the economy, supporting Israel and, quote, letting us say Merry Christmas again. Is that among his most significant accomplishments? I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM. President Trump's Christmas holiday is underway. He's now over at his resort at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, leaving Washington after signing the GOP tax bill in a hastily-arranged ceremony. White House sources tell CNN the President actually wanted to hold a year-end news conference like so many of his predecessors but was persuaded not to do so by top aides. Instead, the President used the signing ceremony to tout his achievements and to complain that he doesn't get enough credit for them. And we're also following beaking news. The House Intelligence Committee Russia investigators are interviewing one of the President's longest-serving aides, Rhona Graff. For more than three decades, she's been his gatekeeper in New York where the interview was held over the objection of Democrats on the committee. And the United Nations Security Council has voted unanimously to impose harsh new sanctions on North Korea in response to its ballistic missile tests. President Trump praised the move in a tweet just moments ago and added, quote, the world wants peace, not death. And now there is new concern about the Kim Jong-un regime's ability to use those missiles to deliver biological weapons, including anthrax and smallpox. We're covering all of that much more this hour with out guess including Congressman Ted Lieu of the Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committees. And our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. Let's begin with the news on President Trump. Our senior White House Correspondent, Jeff Zeleny is joining us from the White House right now. Jeff, we now know he wanted to hold a year-end news conference but his aides talked him out of it. What are you hearing?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior Whitehouse Correspondent:] Wolf, that is what we are told tonight by administration officials. The President wanted to do what many Presidents do and hold year-end news conference. But some aides worried the Russia investigation and other matters could overshadow the conversation. So instead, the President invited a few reporters into the Oval Office as his aides stood by and watched as he signed the tax bill into law.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] So this is the bill right here. And we're very proud of it.
[Zeleny:] President Trump signing the tax bill into law today, his final Oval Office act throughout the year. Injecting a burst of reality show drama into the moment, the President hastily summoning reporters after White House aides said he would sign the bill privately. But from his seat at the resolute desk, the President making a rare acknowledgment of a favorite pastime, watching television.
[Trump:] We're going to wait until January 7th or 8th and do a big formal ceremony, but every one of the networks was saying will he keep his promise, will he sign it for Christmas before Christmas? And so I immediately called, I said let's get it ready.
[Zeleny:] The President hoping to end 2017 on a high note, presiding over the first major overhaul of the U.S. tax system in three decades. He downplayed concerns of the laws unpopularity with many Americans or that it could be a weight on Republicans in the midterm elections.
[Trump:] I think it's selling itself. It's becoming very popular. But I think it will really you'll see something on February 1st when they open up the paycheck. That's when you're going to start to see it.
[Zeleny:] Even as he blasted Democrats for standing in unison against the bill, the President said he believes his rivals will come aboard next year to support a major infrastructure plan.
[Trump:] The Democrats very much regret it. They wanted to be a part of it. It just doesn't work out. I really do believe we're going to have a lot of bipartisan work done and maybe we start with infrastructure. Because I really believe infrastructure can be bipartisan.
[Zeleny:] It's an open question whether bipartisanship is wishful thinking or a New Year's resolution. As he reflected on his first year in office, the President complained about not getting credit for his accomplishments.
[Trump:] Harry Truman had more legislative approvals than any other President and a record long-held. And we beat him on legislative approvals of which I get no credit.
[Zeleny:] We asked the President if things would have gone smoother if he started with infrastructure rather than trying to repeal Obamacare?
[Trump:] I could have started with infrastructure. I actually wanted to save the easy one for the one down the road. So, we'll be having that done pretty quickly.
[Zeleny:] When asked whether he had any regrets from the start of his presidency, Mr. Trump shook his head no. Yet Politico reported a memo from the President's handpick RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel suggests the GOP is in danger of losing its majority in Congress next year. As Republicans brace to defend seats in the House and Senate
[Unidentified Male:] Roy Moore
[Zeleny:] The role of the President's former Chief Strategist Steve Bannon remains a critical question. At a year-end news conference on Capitol Hill today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made clear he blames Bannon for losing a Republican seat in Alabama.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] Well, let me just say this. The political genius on display throwing away a seat in the reddest state in America is hard to ignore.
[Zeleny:] At the White House, there was no traditional year-end news conference, like most presidents have done.
[Barack Obama, Fmr. President Of The United States:] All I want for Christmas is to take your questions.
[Ronald Reagan, Fmr. President Of The United States:] With the holiday season upon us, I'm delighted to see Americans giving each other the best Christmas present possible, a strong economy.
[Zeleny:] In fact, President Trump has not held a formal solo news conference since February. He was initially planning one to tout his accomplishments, CNN has learned, but some advisers argued against it to avoid being besiege with questions about the Russia investigation.
[Trump:] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
[Zeleny:] That tension was clear in the Oval Office today as aides tried again and again to escort reporters out, even as the President seemed eager to talk. A few hours later, Mr. Trump arriving in Sunsplash, Florida with a bounce in his step, greeting supporters as he started a 10-day Christmas break.
[Obama:] Merry Christmas.
[Zeleny:] Even though President Obama and other presidents have long celebrated Christmas, Mr. Trump has taken credit for shining a new spotlight on the holiday, with one of his super pacs launching this ad.
[Unidentified Female:] Thank you, President Trump, for letting us say, Merry Christmas again.
[Zeleny:] So that ad playing from one of the Trump super pacs, thanking the President allowing people to say Merry Christmas. Well, of course, Wolf, that has always been allowed. But it was one of the biggest applause lines at Trump campaign rallies throughout last year and, indeed, this year as well when he travels across the country. He has seized upon that to talk about Christmas. But, Wolf, he is at Mar-a-Lago now for a 10-day holiday vacation. He calls it a working vacation, of course, keeping an eye on North Korea and other threats. But as of now, he is flying a bit high from the tax bill he signed into law. Of course we'll be talking about that all next year as it's a central figure in the midterm election campaign. Wolf?
[Blitzer:] Certainly will be. Jeff Zeleny at the White House, thanks very much. There's breaking news in the Russia investigation. The House Intelligence Committee interviewing President Trump's assistant and gatekeeper for more than three decades, Rhona Graff. Our Senior Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju is here. He's working this story for us. Manu, a lot of Democrats objected to this interview. The fact to it was taking place for example in New York.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, that's right, because this investigation could be coming to an end and that's what Democrats in the House particularly are concerned about. They see these interviews being stacked in the way that is meant to expedite the investigation. What you're hearing from members of Democrats who are concerned about the fact that this is happening on a Friday before Christmas, where most members will not be attending and it's happening in New York. They're saying, well, why couldn't we wait until January when we're back in session? Republicans say, look, we want to get through all the witnesses as quickly as possible. And she is an important witness. Why? Because she is a longtime personal assistant to the President. She worked in the Trump Organization for roughly three decades. And she presumably knows about any contacts that may have occurred, including that meeting that occurred in June 2016 with Donald Trump Jr. and those Trump associates in Trump Tower. Because, Wolf, in that e-mail exchange between Rob Goldstone, the British publicist and Donald Trump Jr. setting up the meeting. Goldstone references Rhona Graff and says, I can contact Rhona Graff instead if you want me to take this directly to your father Donald Trump. It's uncertain whether or not he went that route. But undoubtedly, she will be asked this question at his interview today by the committee.
[Blitzer:] The staff members are talking to her, not the lawmakers?
[Raju:] There's some members may attend. We have get we have work that some members have attended this, but not the full committee for certain. Most of them are out of town.
[Blitzer:] There are also new developments involving Paul Manafort's Deputy Rick Gates who is facing charges in the Russia probe.
[Raju:] Yes, that's right. Apparently, a federal judge is concerned that perhaps he may have violated his gag order. This because of a lobbyist a controversial lobbyist by the name of Jack Burkman played a video of him talking to donors essentially talking about thanking them for their help in their case. The question of that the judge is wondering is that whether or not this violated the gag order. And also side note that this lobbyist is a rather controversial person, someone who promoted this conspiracy theory about the death of that DNC staffer Seth Rich. So some questions there as well, but one question is whether or not he did anything that the court would not approve of which is to violate this gag order.
[Blitzer:] Let's see what happens on that front as well. Manu, thank you very much. Let's get some more on all of these. The Democratic Congressman Ted Lieu of California is joining us. He is a member of both the Judiciary and the Foreign Affairs Committees. Congressman, thanks for joining us.
[Rep. Ted Lieu,  Judiciary Committee:] Thank you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] So President Trump's longtime Secretary Rhona Graff has been interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee. She was his gatekeeper, as you know. Some called her his rolodex. How useful could her testimony be to investigators?
[Lieu:] Well, let me first say happy holidays to you and to your viewers. In regards to your question, I'm pleased that the House Intelligence Committee is continuing to do interviews. I think it would be tragic if speaker Ryan shutdown the committee. And I think they're going to look pretty silly because I can guarantee you, the Senate Committees and Special Counsel Mueller's going to keep on going and they're going to keep revealing additional evidence, additional facts. So I really hope that the House Committee on intelligence does not shutdown.
[Blitzer:] Yes, there's a lot of concern, including Adam Schiff, your California colleague, who is the Ranking Democrat on that committee, because nothing so far is scheduled for next year. They're wrapping things up right now. Let's see what happens on that front. Does your committee, Congressman, the Judiciary Committee, want to interview Rhona Graff as well?
[Lieu:] I would be happy to interview her. I do know that we did have a confidential interview of Andrew McCabe yesterday with the FBI. And I would be happy if he came back in an open public hearing, because I think America would like to know what he said.
[Blitzer:] Because CNN has learned that Andrew McCabe, the Deputy Director of the FBI, is one of the people who were briefed contemporaneously by the fired FBI Director James Comey after his conversations with President Trump. You're on that Judiciary Committee and as you correctly point out, McCabe appeared there this week. He appeared before other committees behind closed doors as well. Do you believe McCabe could corroborate Comey's account?
[Lieu:] So I don't want to comment on what he said because it was a confidential testimony hearing, but I would be happy if Republicans called him back to an open hearing. I think America would like to know what he said.
[Blitzer:] How do you see all of the attacks on McCabe? Because there's some concern that there's a push to get rid of him by some Republicans.
[Lieu:] As a former prosecutor, I have to say it's disgraceful, the attacks by the Republicans on law enforcement, on FBI agents, on prosecutors. So publicly they've attacked him because his wife engaged in political contributions. So let me just say, the FBI director Christopher Wray gave over $39,000 exclusively to Republicans and I trust Director Wray to do the right thing, to act impartially, because it's offensive and demeaning to say that if you're an FBI agent you somehow can't do your job just because you exercised your First Amendment right, to make political contributions. It's even a farther stretch to that say your spouse engaged in certain conduct regarding political contributions and somehow that affects your bias.
[Blitzer:] His wife was running for state office in Virginia and received a lot of contributions from the Virginia Governor Democrat Terry McAuliffe pac in Virginia. That's the accusation against the Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. But does he also have to answer for some of those anti-Trump text messages that were sent by two FBI agents and both of those agents, their responsibilities have changed as a result. They've been dropped from the Mueller probe.
[Lieu:] So he did not send those text messages. And when Robert Mueller found out about those text messages, he removed the FBI agent that sent those messages. And keep in mind, Robert Mueller is a Republican appointed previously by Republican President. And Special Counsel Mueller did absolutely the right thing by removing that agent. And we need to let the Special Counsel investigation continue forward. And when you see all of these attacks to smear Mueller's team, my question is, what are people afraid of?
[Blitzer:] Well, what do you think they're afraid of?
[Lieu:] So, when Special Counsel Mueller was appointed, Republicans praised him. Republicans like Newt Gingrich and others. Now they're attacking him. The only thing that's changed is two guilty pleas plus two additional indictments. So they're afraid, I think, of facts and evidence that Mueller is uncovering and that is not a good justification to try to smear his team.
[Blitzer:] Are there outstanding questions, Congressman, about the handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation, or are those questions a distraction from the current Russia probe?
[Lieu:] I believe it's a distraction. And last time I checked, Hillary Clinton is not President. Donald Trump is President. Our intelligence communities and agencies assessed that Russia attacked America last year in the cyber world. They did an influence campaign to undermine the democracy and help Donald Trump get elected.
[Blitzer:] How much was the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation a focus of the interview with the Deputy Director of the FBI, McCabe?
[Lieu:] Again, I don't want to comment on his testimony, but I'm just going to say, again, I think if he testified openly and publicly that Americans would be interested to know what he said.
[Blitzer:] Well, explain that, if you can elaborate a little bit.
[Lieu:] Yes, absolutely. He would give you immense confidence in the FBI. And, by the way, I want to thank the FBI today for thwarting a terrorist attack on Pier 39 in California. The FBI is one of our nation's preeminent law enforcement agencies and it is a dear service for Republicans and allies of the President to attack the credibility of 37,000 people of the
[Fbi. Blitzer:] Yes. We're going to have a lot more on that breaking story later here in THE SITUATION ROOM as well. Congressman, stand by. There are more developments unfolding right now. We'll take a quick break. We'll resume the interview right after this.

[Sciutto:] If you ever heard Donald Trump tell his own life story, and I'd say there's a pretty good chance of that, this might sound familiar.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] My father gave me a small loan of a million dollars, I came into Manhattan and I had to pay him back, and I had to pay him back with interest. I started with a million-dollar loan, I built a $10 billion company. My father gave me a very small loan in 1975, and I built it into a company that's worth many billions of dollars. I built that into a massive empire, and I paid my father back, that loan.
[Sciutto:] Well, long before he ever run for president, Donald Trump, the brand was based on that story, the story of self-made billions. But a stunning new "New York Times" investigation disputes that.
[Harlow:] For 18 months in a locked room at the "New York Times", three journalists poured over tens of thousands of documents, going back decades, learning that the future president and his siblings received more than a billion dollars from their parents. In the process, helping, according to the "Times" to hide much of that family fortune from the IRS. Just moments ago, the president responded to the "Times" story on Twitter, calling it "old, boring and an often told hit piece." Notably, he did not say it was inaccurate. Our Cristina Alesci has been pouring through all this, she joins us now. I mean, just looking at what the "Times" has here on the front page, they have checked I mean, it's amazing, right? And we don't know how they got all of this, how they got these tax returns, but they did. What is the big takeaway?
[Cristina Alesci, Cnn Correspondent:] It completely destroys Trump's narrative that he is a self-made billionaire, and in details in pain- staking ways, how his father, Fred, transferred his vast fortune to his children by either illegally evading taxes or legally avoiding them. But here is some of the numbers specifically
[Harlow:] Yes
[Alesci:] Before we get into the nitty-gritty of how it all works that the "Times" unearthed. At three years old, Trump was earning $200,000 a year already. At age eight, he was a millionaire. At 17, he was part owner of a 52-unit apartment building, and after graduating college, Trump was receiving a million dollars a year from his father sorry, just a million dollars from his father. At in his 40s and 50s, he was getting $5 million annually. Look, it seems like Trump gave his children based on the "New York Times" reporting, an equal share of his dad's fortune. But Trump, according to the "New York Times" disproportionally benefitted because his father was there when Trump ran into issues with his various risky investments. In other words, Trump had a very big safety net
[Harlow:] Yes
[Alesci:] He goes out there
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Alesci:] And says I did all of these deals, they were risky, I took you know, I took these risks and they were based on my gut instincts, and yes, perhaps, but he also did so with a very vast
[Harlow:] Yes
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Alesci:] Safety net
[Sciutto:] I mean, just one year of income as a teenager there belies that my father only gave only gave me a million-dollar loan
[Alesci:] Right, and those are all in today's dollars
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Alesci:] By the way.
[Sciutto:] Question for you, anything illegal uncovered in this or this was legal tax evasion?
[Alesci:] Well, the "New York Times" goes as far as to detail what may have been a fraudulent scheme
[Sciutto:] Right, the use of that word is defraud.
[Alesci:] Exactly, but at this point, we've probably passed the Statute of Limitations for a lot of these crimes, although the New York Department of taxation says that it's going to vigorously pursue all of the appropriate avenues for investigation. Look, the most interesting part of this development here is that, this backs Trump into a corner. If he really feels this story is untrue and wants to sue the "New York Times", he is at risk for revealing his tax returns. If he doesn't sue and takes that counter-puncture or position, then he is essentially admitting that the "Times" story is correct.
[Harlow:] By the way, the strongest counter-punch to this would be, do what every other presidential candidate and president
[Alesci:] Yes
[Harlow:] Has done
[Sciutto:] Right
[Harlow:] In modern history, and that is release your tax returns.
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] Politically, what's your read?
[Alesci:] Politically, this definitely adds fuel to the fire that the Democrats are building if they take control of either chamber to call for Trump to release his tax returns. And they will say the American people need to know whether or not President Trump is using the same tax avoidance or illegal tax maneuvers that his father used. And that's where the rubble will meet the road.
[Sciutto:] Legislation being considered to require
[Harlow:] Yes
[Alesci:] Definitely
[Sciutto:] The release of those tax returns. Cristina Alesci
[Alesci:] Thank you
[Sciutto:] Very much, let's bring back in Laura Coates who certainly knows the legal aspect here. So you just heard that the Statute of Limitations passed, I believe it's three years for tax, although, it can be extended under certain circumstances. But there is a civil, potential civil risk to the president. Is that right?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analysts:] It is right, the idea that limitations period has run for criminal cases, it can be sent to six years. But it's really important to note that it really is from the last instance of the tax evasion. Not just the actual calendar year, and so there is a conceivable theory that could run, that says that if there is evidence in the most recent tax returns or that due in that limitations period, if there is still evidence of tax evasion or an ongoing quest to try to dupe the government and perhaps it could actually toll in that fashion. However, you're largely right, the idea of limitations being run, the criminal contacts is there. On the civil side of things, though, there is no Statute of Limitations, period. The government can always get their money, it often runs up to 75 percent of the amount of income that you tried to hide from the government. And so, there is a way to do just that. But again, the larger issue here is the overall scheme of things. What is what are the activities that have been undertaken to try to evade and circumvent the tax laws? Not just exploiting legal loopholes, but trying to do it in a criminal way. That's the big question here.
[Harlow:] Where do you think this goes? What's your gut as a former prosecutor? Does this is this just a bad look or does it actually result in anything?
[Coates:] Well, one, I think that Mueller's team probably already has this information. I also think the state of New York and they're looking at the Trump Foundation and their own tax issues as probably part of this overall controversy. What someone like Michael Cohen might know about the legal or tax strategy happening may come into play. But ultimately, this is but the third instance now where the President of United States hand may be forced to actually show his income taxes, we already know that just having an audit does not say you cannot provide the information
[Sciutto:] Right
[Harlow:] But you have the emolument cases out of Washington D.C. and out of this area that says that the president has been benefitting financially from the use of his hotel, et cetera. And that's also asking for his tax returns and how he's quantifying that payment. So you have yet another instance, this could actually be the straw that breaks the camel's back that says I will not release it. Emoluments are very obscure part of the competition, plus this, may say we will get full information and disclosure.
[Scuitto:] You know, and listen, this is happening as the president has repeatedly advocated for tax legislation, tax cuts
[Harlow:] Right
[Sciutto:] That he has a personal interest in
[Harlow:] And also ending the estate tax
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] A promise
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Harlow:] He made on the trail. Laura, thanks, so interesting
[Coates:] Thank you
[Harlow:] We appreciate your expertise. One of the reporters who broke that story is going to join us next hour. Ahead for us now, we'll call the action the president not up for re-election for another two years. His message to the supporters for the midterms vote like I am.
[Sciutto:] We are moments away as well from the opening bell on Wall Street. Dow set to rise this morning to reach a new record high. Something the president has already tweeted about this morning. Investors will be keeping their eye on the jobs report due out at the end of the week.

[Anna Coren, Cnn:] Hello. I'm Anna Coren in Hong Kong. You are watching "News Stream." These are your world headlines. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is apologizing to users for "major breach of trust," allowing outside consultants to harvest the personal data of millions of users without their consent. He says Facebook is working to make sure user data is better protected and he even said he was willing to testify before U.S. Congress on the scandal. Russia's ambassador to Britain is holding a news conference at the embassy in London. This follows the expulsion of Russian diplomats in the wake of the nerve agent poisoning that led the former spy and his daughter in hospital. Alexander Yakovenko says Moscow has not received any information from British officials on the investigation. He also says the U.K. had stores of Novichok believed to be the nerve agent used before the attack. Police in Austin, Texas say the suspect in a series of bombings left a confession on his cellphone which he recorded before he killed himself. Federal agents say 23-year-old Anthony Conditt also had parts of bombs in his home. Investigators say so far none of the evidence points to a motive. Despite a possible trade war, Donald Trump is expected to announce new U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports. That's on top of the steel and aluminum tariffs already going into effect Friday. The European Union is hoping Mr. Trump will announce a last minute exemption for them later Thursday as E.U. leaders meet in Brussels. A group of six South Korean officials is on a visit to Pyongyang, North Korea. It comes ahead of a visit by a music group that is expected to perform there next week. Let's go straight to Alexandra Field in Seoul. Alex, what can you tell us?
[Alexandra Field, Cnn International Correspondent:] Hey, Anna. Look, this is another step forward leading to what will be a symbolic event. It may pale somewhat in comparison to the even more significant developments. We talked about the possibility of this inter-Korean summit next month and then the possibility of a sit down between the North Korean leader and the U.S. president following that. But look, this is a symbolic step forward. We literally got a team that is now on the ground in Pyongyang ready to lay the groundwork for a cultural exchange that will mean about 160 South Korean delegates traveling to North Korea. Among them, you've got a big rock band, you've got some legendary South Korean singers, even one of the country's most popular K-Pop girl band. This will be an important moment. This cultural exchanges have happened before but nothing like this has happened for more than 10 years. That was the last time that South Korea sent a group of performers to North Korea. You will remember of course that just a few weeks ago, North Korea did send its own performers to South Korea, part of the Olympic festivity, part of the falling of the tensions on the peninsula finally, and this is another step in the service of falling those tensions. This whole thing has really come together extremely rapidly following that Olympics sort of interlude that we saw there. There was the trip of South Korean envoys to Pyongyang. That was the time when they met directly with Kim Jong-un. And that's when they hatched these pretty grand plans. One for cultural exchange but also that's when they laid the plans for this inter-Korean summit that will take place next month and it was shortly after that trip that we heard from South Korean official who traveled to Washington, D.C. that the groundwork had been laid for this historic potentially summit between President Donald Trump and the North Korean leader. So, the cultural exchange is really just the first step forward in a series of steps as we watch the relationships here potentially change. But it's something that is promising certainly and it's something that people will be watching closely. It happens just next week and we will certainly be bringing it to you.
[Coren:] We can only hope that those relations can keep improving. Alexandra Field, joining us from Seoul, good to see you. Many thanks for that. This week, our special coverage takes us to India, exploring its diverse cultures and traditions. In this edition of "Destination India," we travel to Chandigarh, the capital city shared by two states, Punjab and Haryana. We gained exclusive access to the Capitol Complex which in 2016 was awarded World Heritage status by UNESCO.
[Sumit Kaur, Former Chief Architect, Chandigarh Administration:] Chandigarh
[Coren:] Still ahead on "News Stream," we will meet a young man who is trying to change the world by turning organic waste into renewable clean fuel. Tomorrow's hero is next.

[Cooper:] As we said at the top, the government is just days from a shutdown. The standoff is over immigration and the controversy, not to mention the dishonesty, is what the president said about certain countries vulgar, racist, confirmed by people who heard it. And now, what the administration is at best blowing smoke about. CNN's Jim Acosta had tough questions today for the president and his press secretary. He joins us now. So, you were in the White House today. You asked the president about his comments last week, about immigration. What happened?
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] Right. Well, I was less concerned about these comments that the president made last week in which he described countries in Africa as a shithole mainly because we have been through that over and over again. The White House is really denying it and hanging that on Senators Perdue and Cotton, who say they didn't hear that, they don't recall it. And I was more interested today in following up and asking about this remark the president made that he would prefer to see people come into the United States from countries like Norway, which is obviously predominantly white. And so, here's what happened when I tried to ask the president that in the Oval Office earlier today.
[Acosta:] Mr. President, did you say you want more people to come in from Norway? Did you say that you wanted more people to come in from Norway? Is that true, Mr. President?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I want them to come in from everywhere. Everywhere. Thank you very much, everybody.
[Acosta:] Just Caucasian or white countries, sir, or do you want people from other parts of the world, where there are people of color?
[Unidentified Female:] Jim, thank you.
[Acosta:] And, Anderson, I don't know if you saw that at the end there, but the president of the United States in the Oval Office, in the White House, ordered me out, essentially ordered the press out. Typically that is not something the president does. The wranglers as you hear will say, thank you, please go. Eventually, we will go. But to have the president point at you and say you're out I think goes beyond what the president really should be doing in the Oval Office in my view in terms of dealing with the press. The other thing that I think caught my eye as the day went on is just a few moments later, we were escorted into the Roosevelt Room, where he gave some remarks with the president of Kazahkstan and at the end of those remarks we tried to ask more questions about these remarks the president made last week. On that occasion, Anderson, it was it was pretty startling because two press aides for the president basically stood right up in front of me, right in front of my face and started shouting so loudly that I couldn't ask my question of the president. They essentially blocked his view of me and blocked anything that I could be saying, trying to shout me down. And so, it was just another episode here at the White House that reminds you that at times here, it just doesn't feel like you are covering the president of the United States. You feel like you are covering the president of just some other country that is less democratic than this one.
[Cooper:] Jim, Sarah Sanders was pressed today about whether the president made those racist remarks. Her answer was complicated. She didn't deny it. Instead, she said that she chooses to rely on those who have denied it, shifting explanation of what happened there. I mean, are these people just lying? It seems like what Cotton and others came out this weekend sort of quibbling about what was said. I mean, it's the difference between the word house and hole.
[Acosta:] Exactly. As if there's a difference. I would remind people there's plenty of indoor plumbing in Africa. But getting back to what Sarah Sanders was saying in the briefing room, she was saying she would side with people who were in the room. Well, Senator Dick Durbin was in the room. He said he heard that remark. Senator Lindsey Graham was also in the room. He's not denied the remark was made. And as a matter of fact, he told Senator Tim Scott that's exactly what happened. And so, the White House is choosing to rely on the word of Senators Cotton and Perdue, not from Graham and Durbin, bipartisan senators who were invited over to the White House to try to craft some way out of this immigration impasse. They just haven't been able to do that at this point. But, Anderson, it just goes to show you when we try to ask for straight answers over here, it is just extremely difficult. They can filibuster. They can move on to the next question, they can go around us. At one point, Sarah Sanders described the president's remarks as strong language and not always politically correct. To go after countries, to talk about countries in that fashion, that's not going against political correctness. That is really just being discriminatory towards people coming in from those countries.
[Cooper:] Yes. Jim Acosta, appreciate that. Thanks. Earlier today, "THE LEAD's" Jake Tapper spoke with Democratic Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois. He was in the room, as you just heard from Jim Acosta, with the president. Remember, Senator Durbin says he heard the president utter racist remarks. He also told Jake that walking into the Oval Office seemed to him like walking into a setup.
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Illinois:] We call him two days later, Senator Graham and I, and say we have done it, we met your criteria, we have a bipartisan bill, we are ready to go, then to be called into the president's office to explain it to him and find that we have been sandbagged. General Kelly, Steve Miller as I understand it invited five other members of Congress who were not in favor of immigration reform or in a very harsh sense, and they were there to refute any assertions we made that this was a good policy. So, you asked me where we are today, I will tell you where we are. We are finding that more Republicans are willing to step up now, distancing themselves from those outrageous comments by the president, and really I hope join us in a bipartisan effort to solve this problem.
[Cooper:] So given that the question is how open is the president to compromise, remember how agreeable he was the last time he met with lawmakers, saying he would go with whatever the lawmakers in the room came up with because he respects them. Remember also in the same meeting how some of his fellow Republicans staged a kind of in the moment intervention. As the president seem to backing the position of the Democrats on DACA, in conference of the immigration reform, Republicans intervening immediately to bring the president back to a harder line. So is that what happened this time, a White House intervention? Joining us now two David, to have been on the room when deal were made, David Gergen and David Axlerod. David Axelrod, I mean you hear Senator Durbin, is that anyway for a president or Republican or Democrat to operate and negotiation on something as fraud with tension as DACA?
[Axelrod:] No, I mean look, David Gergen and I have been both in the room as you mentioned. But generally with presidents who have some sense of what they want to do. Last week, literally one week ago the president was in a room with cameras talking about a bill of love, that's what he called this immigration bill that he hoped to sign. And urged for a bipartisan bill, but they're clearly is a group within the White House that doesn't want to see that done and they staged an intervention before Senator Graham and Senator Durbin got over there. What it really speaks to is, that this president doesn't really have a lot of grounding in any of this. And, you know, I've said before, you know, the hat during the campaign said make America Great Again. The hat now should say rent this space. Because he just doesn't seem to have firm moorings. And that is that is concerning. What he said in that room, and I've know Senator Durbin for 40 years. So I have great faith in his veracity. But what he said in that room was deeply disturbing. But this is another piece of the story that's also disturbing which he doesn't seem to know exactly what he wants or where he stands. And therefore, he's being buffeted between various factions.
[Cooper:] You know I mean David Gergen, we saw that I mean just clearly on camera in that DACA meeting when he agreed with Senator Feinstein, saying, oh yes, you know, that's what we'll go with, just DACA first and then, you know, other stuff after, we're comprehensive immigration reform using a phrase that I'm not even sure he understood how that's commonly used. And then, you had, you know, McCarthy Senator McCarthy jumped in and said well actually, you know, Mr. President I think mean is this. Congressman McCarthy
[David Gergen, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Yes. This is all very peculiar, it is question that lead to my experience going back sometime. Anderson, listen, typically, you will have in any White House factions. And usually there's a moderate versus a more hard line or more extreme group in the White House and they pit off against each other and they try to present, you know, they try to bring in different people representing their views to influence the president. What was unique about this in my experience was that the president himself said I'd like to talk to these two guys. He seemed to be in and, you know, Durbin had a conversation with him, president called Durbin around 10:00 in the morning and Durbin called, you know, Lindsey Graham and said I have had the best conversation I've ever with the president and a long, long time, I am really optimistic we're going to get this done. He wants just come down to the White House right away. And it was the White House staff, not a faction within the White House, but the White House staff which then apparently invited then five hard line conservative opponents of this plan that was emerging to as David said to sandbag it. Or as we heard from Durbin to sandbag it. And in effect to what the White House staff did was sabotage prospects before getting this bill done. And persuade the president by the sort of in effect manipulating him by rounding up all these hard liners. So that is extremely unusual. I just not I'm not aware of that, I think it does support David Axelrod's valid point on many issues like this. The president is not anchored and he an be buffered by the various forces in politics.
[Cooper:] Right, which what the DACA has always been as sort of influence by whoever the last person in the room is. David Axle rod if you were advising the president, would you say to him, let's sir maybe if you, you know, offer even with a whiff of apology or a regret about your words in the Oval Office meeting, that might help this get this DACA deal back on track or is that just anti ethical to who the president is, that it wouldn't be worth suggestion suggesting.
[Axelrod:] Look, I think first of all, they need to decide what it is that they want to accomplish. This bill that was presented to them really was a compromise. There were things in there that Democrats wouldn't like, there were things in there that Republicans wouldn't like. That's the nature of compromise. And so he has to decide how much he is willing to match his words that he wants an agreement, you know, with his actions andor how much is going to get jerked back by this group in the White House and his, you know, activist base which really believes that giving these any sort of status to these DACA young people as amnesty. Which is, you know, betrayal on their part. He but I must say this, Anderson, I do believe that they are going to get something done and the reason I believe it is because it would be a political calamity for the Republican Party at the end of the day not to do something. I watched this really moving video of this gentleman being shipped out yesterday after 30 years here.
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Axelrod:] And back to Mexico and it just tore you apart. They don't want that multiplied by a million on television going into 2018.
[Cooper:] Yes, we saw him being separated from his family at the airport saying goodbye to them. David, David, thank you very much. Coming up just ahead, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders again, says her boss is not a racist. This time using "The Apprentice" defense. We'll explain what that means. We'll also explain and talk with author Cornel West about that and a whole lot more.

[Hannah Vaughan Jones, Cnn:] Hello and welcome. I'm Hannah Vaughan Jones, in for Hala Gorani all week. And we are following two major breaking stories for you this hour. Just minutes ago, President Trump outlined his new America first strategy on national security. We will get you the very latest on that. But first, we head over to the U.S. West Coast, where we bring you breaking news out of the U.S. state of Washington. A passenger train is currently dangling over a major highway after derailing on Monday morning, spilling onto the cars below. Authorities say multiple people inside the train were killed. At least 77 people have been taken to hospitals locally. Here is the train conductor's emergency call just after the crash.
[Unidentified Male:] Amtrak 501, emergency, emergency, emergency. We are on the ground. We are on the bridge On the freeway. We need EMS. It looks like they're already starting to show up. Amtrak 501 answering, Hey guys, what happened? We were coming around the corner to take the bridge over I-5 there, right north into Nisqually and we went on the ground. OK. Are you is everybody OK? I'm still figuring that out. We got cars everywhere and down onto the highway. OK. As soon as I know exactly where all my train is, I will let you know.
[Jones:] Terrifying audio there. It all happened about 80 kilometers south of Seattle near a small city called Dupont during the morning rush hour. U.S. President Donald Trump spoke about it in just the last hour.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] Let me begin by expressing our deepest sympathies and most heartfelt prayers for the victims of the train derailment in Washington State. We are closely monitoring the situation and coordinating with local authorities. It is all the more reason why we must start immediately fixing the infrastructure of the United States.
[Jones:] President Trump there. The U.S. Transportation Safety Board is sending a team of 20 people to investigate the crash. We just heard from one official with the NTSB. Take a listen.
[Unidentified Female:] The NTSB is launching a go team to Dupont, Washington, to investigate the derailment of Amtrak train number 501, which occurred this morning. Before I continue, we would like to all express our deepest condolences to the family and friends and all of those affected by this tragic accident. The NTSB team will be led by Ted Turpin, who will serve as investigator in charge. He is accompanied by NTSB staff with expertise in the following areas: operations, mechanical, track, signals, human performance and survival factors. Also accompanying the team are members of the NTSB's Office of Transportation Disaster Assistance or TDA and the Office of Media Relations. This accident meets the criteria of the Rail Passenger Disaster Family Assistance Act. Our TDA specialists are already working closely with officials at the scene locally as well as with Amtrak to assist them in their efforts to support all of those who have been affected by this accident. Several of our investigators on the West Coast will be arriving on scene this afternoon. The rest of our go team expects to arrive at the scene late tonight.
[Jones:] So investigators are on their way. Authorities so far saying that all of the deaths in this crash were contained to the train itself. Paul Vercammen is following the story from our Los Angeles bureau for us. Paul, I know that the details are still very sketchy right now but talk us through what we know about the casualties, the types of injuries they may have and the number of people on this train in the first place. That might give us some idea as to who was hurt.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Hannah. Well, this was the inaugural run of the 501 Cascades line going from Seattle to Portland. From what we understand, I've heard two numbers here, between 70 and 78 people on board. That might explain what you were talking about earlier when they said 77 were rushed to local medical centers. I have been in touch with some of those medical centers. They say the injuries are
[Vercammen:] a range of things; a lot of fractures. You can understand this because, as you know, there are no seat belts on this train. Also the U.S. Army has jumped in to help start treating people. Madigan Army Center, which has taken in trauma victims from overseas wars, is not too far north to this. And they are treating at least 20 of the patients. They say about half and half; 10 are serious or so and stable and another batch are stable and fair. As for the fatalities, an extremely difficult number for the authorities to nail down right now. They have said multiple. Does that mean multiple, as in three to 10? Not sure yet. One thing though that's clear, this is fascinating. Despite these horrendous pictures, Hannah, they say there have not been any fatalities on the freeway there. That's Interstate 5. They say no one was killed when the train went off the track and hit cars below it. They say the fatalities were all on the train itself. So perhaps a slight bit of silver lining there. And maybe that will keep that number of fatalities in line and lower than originally forecast Hannah.
[Jones:] If that is the case, that would be truly miraculous. Paul, thanks so much. I know you will update as soon as you get any more details about casualties and fatalities in this horrific crash. Paul, thank you. CNN transportation analyst Mary Schiavo is a former inspector general of the U.S. Transportation Department and joins me now. Mary, we have seen horrific images, aerial shots as well of this derailment, audio from inside the train carriage itself. From those initial images and sounds, what's your assessment of what happened here?
[Mary Schiavo, Cnn Transportation Analyst:] Well, because of the position of the cars on the ground and there is an engine on the ground, too so there was obviously an engine at both the front and rear of this train, that engine, a very heavy piece of equipment, has been spun around, is perpendicular to the track and the number of cars off the rail, strewn about like leaves in the wind. Speed played a factor here. There had been a lot of criticism of the starting of this train, of this line. Local officials said they did not think the track could take a high speed train. And it's really not a high speed train. It's not like a Shinkansen or a Japanese bullet train. But for the U.S. trains, it was faster. And that's what they wanted, was faster service. But there was a lot of criticism that there were too many sharp curves or dramatic curves, as the one the train was attempting to negotiate when it came off the track, that they didn't think was sufficient for a high-speed train. Amtrak said they tested it. That is true, they did test. But how they tested, if they tested with a fully train component like here, several cars, front and end engines, that's not known.
[Jones:] You say it wasn't a high-speed train by that margin of error. But how fast are we talking here?
[Schiavo:] Seventy-nine miles an hour is what the track was rated for. But this curve, at this particular point, to me, 79 miles is very is a lot of speed for that kind of a curve. And also, it's not just the it's not just the curve. It's the component of the cars, where the weight is distributed. You know, physics is a funny thing. You change one little distribution of the weight and, on a curve, the centrifugal forces go completely out of balance. So I think that the NTSB, as soon as they get the black boxes, will have a good idea whether or not the train actually faced any obstructions on the track or if the rails were out of line or if this is a case where the pre-inaugural run of this train, while they may have tested it, they didn't test it sufficiently enough. And this was just too great of speed for a curve like this.
[Jones:] That's what's going to be so interesting, the fact that this was the inaugural run and there were potentially warnings about it in advance. Mary, we appreciate your analysis. Thanks so much, Mary Schiavo there. Let's bring in CNN's Rene Marsh now. Rene is in Washington, D.C., for us on the other coast. Rene, the NTSB are on their way there. It's some hours on a flight just to get to Washington State. What will they look for first off when they get there?
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. So it's going to be a team of 20 NTSB members, which is a relatively large team. They consider this a major incident. They will be looking for a number of things. Once they get on the ground, they're going to first want to collect any perishable evidence. Then they will want to do interviews with passengers, especially interviews with the crew that was on board. That will be paramount. They will want to get the train's recorders because that will hold some detailed information, everything from the speed of the train, when the brakes were applied, all of that critical information for them to piece this all together. They will also have a team inspecting the tracks
[Marsh:] as well as the signals to make sure that those things were working. So once they get there, they will all fan out. Of course, not to be forgotten, there will be a human performance team. That team will really be zeroed in on the crew. They will be asking the crew a wide variety of questions, everything from how much sleep they got the night before, what time they showed up to work, any medications they may be on, just a wide range of questions to get a feel as to whether there was any human element here, any human error, that may have contributed to this.
[Jones:] Rene, thanks so much. Rene Marsh live for us there in Washington, D.C. Thanks for staying across the story. We will turn to the other breaking news story we have for you this hour, a busy hour ahead indeed, saying weakness is the surest path to conflict. Donald Trump is unveiling a new national security strategy that he says will bring about peace through strength. The U.S. president just wrapped up a speech in Washington, his new strategy is based on his America first doctrine. Mr. Trump says it recognizes that there's a new era of competition on the world stage. He says the United States will seek cooperation with rivals but warns it will stand up for itself, quote, "like never before."
[Trump:] We face rogue regimes that threaten the United States and our allies. We face terrorist organizations, transnational criminal networks and others who spread violence and evil around the globe. We also face rival powers, Russia and China, that seek to challenge American influence, values and wealth. We will attempt to build a great partnership with those and other countries. But in a manner that always protects our national interest.
[Jones:] President Trump there. Let's bring in our reporters, live on the story for you tonight. Matt Rivers is in Beijing and Nic Robertson is in Moscow. Matt, to you first. I didn't hear him specifically call out China in his speech. It's there in the doctrine, the fact that he now, having spent the best part of a year trying to make friends with China, he very much sees them as a competitor. How is that going to go down then in Beijing?
[Matt Rivers, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, probably not that well. Certainly not well privately. Publically, we will have to wait until the sun rises here in Beijing to get a formal reaction publically. You're right; he didn't really call out China that much in that speech he gave. The speech is really an executive summary of this document. The document itself, quite frankly, calls out China in a major way, in a way that goes far beyond what we saw in the last time a national security strategy document was released. That was in 2015 during the Obama administration. In this document, they talk about China and Russia, for that matter, contesting the U.S. geopolitical advantages and trying to change the international order in their favor. They go down a litany of issues when it comes to China. They have issue with China expanding their military, including challenging commercial trade routes in the South China Sea. They talk about how China is trying to expand their political influence by investing money in infrastructure projects around the world, including in Africa. They reaffirmed their support for Taiwan, well, the United States under the Trump administration reaffirms the U.S. support for Taiwan. And they also, talking about trade, they go into detail about intellectual property theft, allegedly committed by the Chinese government over the years. This is really a strong document from the Trump administration when it comes specifically to China, calling out the Chinese government in a way that the Obama administration didn't do really back in 2015.
[Jones:] Nic Robertson is in Moscow for us. Nic, over the past couple of days, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have shared a couple of phone calls, very friendly phone calls. And interestingly, in President Trump's speech, just in the last hour, he didn't call out what is perhaps arguably at least the biggest threat to U.S. national security right now and that is Russia undermining American democracy.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] This has been a characteristic of his administration and the relationship, the poor relationship that he's having with his intelligence services, who have one view and most of the key officials around him have one view about Russia's role in this hacking and meddling in the U.S. elections last year. Yet President Trump doesn't seem to respond to that. We saw a reflection of that today, when he talked about the role that he sees Russia and China playing in the world in the future. He then almost in the same breath went ahead and said, yes, but we can have great partnerships where it's in our national interest and then started talking about the phone call that he had with President Putin this weekend, where President
[Robertson:] Putin had thanked him and thanked the CIA for providing timely information that led to the arrest of a group of terrorists under the direction of ISIS who were going to launch an attack in St. Petersburg at the weekend. Now President Trump said this information may have saved thousands of lives. We know this is a narrative where President Trump and President Putin agree. They both say that this combining of working together in their own national interests, in the joint national interests, to thwart global terrorism is a good thing. And this is exactly what President Trump was saying here. So rather than take strong shots at Russia and some of the other areas of concern, the cyber issues were kind of laid off way somewhere else in the speech, not aimed specifically at Russia and, really, again, reaching out with a warm handshake in that speech with President Putin.
[Jones:] Fascinating stuff. My thanks to both of you gentlemen. Nic Robertson in Moscow and Matt Rivers in Beijing. Thank you. We will continue talking about this story, about Mr. Trump's tough words on China and Russia and Pakistan and many others as well. I'm joined now by Jamie Metzl. a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. He is a former executive vice president of The Asia Society and also served on the U.S. National Security Council during Bill Clinton's presidency. Jamie, thank so much for joining us here on CNN this evening. So throughout that speech from President Trump, it was very much America first and America strong. Peace through strength delivered by military might. How does that sit?
[Jamie Metzl, Atlantic Council:] Well, it's great for America to be strong. And American strength has been an underpinning of global peace, security and stability for the past 70-plus years. But if it's just America first and just America strong and it's not connected to what has been, for many, many decades, America's vision of a broader sense of peace, security and stability that brings everybody in, where America supports international law, international institutions, where American soft power sets norms for other countries to emulate, then American power is really not that meaningful. We will become another force in a global balance of power. And we know from the 19th and early 20th centuries, where the balance of power structure and where this overreliance on national sovereignty leads. Unfortunately, that destination is destruction or has been destruction and war. So I hope that definitely it's great for America to be strong. But America needs to play a role of envisioning a better world for everyone.
[Jones:] Jamie, just stand by for a second because the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, has also just weighed now in on President Trump's speech and his national security strategy. He has issued a statement. I just want to read part of it to you now. He says, quote, "Whether the threats are rogue nations seeking nuclear weapons, terrorists plotting to attack our homeland or malicious cyber actors seeking to damage and destabilize our critical systems and infrastructure, we must remain vigilant against those who would do harm to our people and our way of life. "President Trump's new national security brings to bear all elements of American power, to protect our people, generate new economic opportunities and advance our interests and our democratic principles." The overriding theme there, Jamie, from what Rex Tillerson has said and also from what the president said as well is that the focus of this administration is not so much on cooperation with other nations. It's on competition with other nations.
[Metzl:] We live in a very competitive, dangerous world. And we always have. The question is, what is the right role for the United States in that world? If we are just another country competing in and insert name of your country first balance of power, dog-eat-dog world, we can do that. As a matter of fact, the United States can do that very effectively. But the issue is, what happens to the world? The reason we have the world as we have, the reason that we have these multi these international institutions and concepts of international law, the reasons why the United States has this strong alliance system, why we have partner organizations like NATO, why we support the U.N., isn't that we are altruists. It's that we learned the lessons of the first two World Wars and recognized that it's only by pooling sovereignty and addressing the problem, the scourge of nationalism, that we can build a better world for everyone. And the United States obviously can't be played by other countries. And certainly that world isn't perfect. But by stepping away from America's international obligation, by using this overheated rhetoric around national sovereignty, without articulating the way the world can work for everyone, I think it's a very dangerous step that the United States is taking. But having said that, there are some very good points in the national security strategy. It's absolutely true the United States needs to be tougher on China, needs to be tougher on Russia, needs to do a better job of supporting its interests. But if that's taken outside of context, the proper context, that can be very dangerous, not just for the United States but for everyone.
[Jones:] OK. We talked a lot about the content of the strategy of the speech as well. I'm wondering now, your reaction to the tone and the delivery, as someone who has no doubt been an observer of national security strategy announcements over the years. What did you make of Mr. Trump's performance?
[Metzl:] Well, Donald Trump is a very flawed deliverer of any kind of message on U.S. national security. And when he is delivering a speech about strategy, when, who knows what the origin of all of these tweets have been that have been very destabilizing around the world by many accounts I certainly believe that it makes it there's a fundamental mismatch between often some of the words and I don't believe that Donald Trump wrote all or any of the national security strategy or, frankly, all or any of the speech that he just gave. So there's the words. And there's the behavior. So if we believe what Trump has articulated, that the United States needs to be stronger by being tougher on China and Russia, well, contrast that to the actual behavior of sucking up to Putin, of undermining the investigation of Russia's interference in the U.S. democratic process or all of the things that he said about Xi Jinping and not advancing America's interests, not advancing America's trade interests, not promoting international law or human rights. If he believes, as he says, as is said in the national security strategy, that the United States has to strengthen our diplomacy and support international institutions, then that fundamentally conflicts with what we've seen in all of the actions or many of the actions of this administration to date and the gutting of the State Department and U.S. diplomacy. If he believes, as he has stated, that America is leading, then we need to see evidence of that leadership and returning to the best values of the United States, which, unfortunately, are under threat, both internationally and at home.
[Jones:] All right. Well, we will wait to see if there's any more substance in the 70-page I believe documents of this national security strategy. Jamie Metzl, thanks so much for joining us here on CNN this evening. We appreciate it.
[Metzl:] My pleasure. Still to come, on HALA GORANI TONIGHT, after 11 hours in the dark, the power is back on at the world's busiest airport. But the nightmare is not over for thousands of people, still trying to get on flights during what is, of course, the busy holiday season.

[John Vause, Cnn International Anchor:] Welcome back, everybody, you're watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause, with the headlines this hour. Facebook has shut down dozens of pages and accounts which could be linked to Russia, may have hundreds of thousands of followers. The social media giant says they identified a new and coordinated effort to interfere in U.S. politics and mislead American voters ahead of November's congressional elections.
[Vause:] Well, Neil Diamond surprised firefighters in Colorado, performing one of his all-time classics, Sweet Caroline. He lives in the area where fire has burned over 48 square kilometers. The music legend recently retired from touring after being diagnosed with Parkinson's disease. And on Tuesday, actor Alan Alda, revealed he's been living with Parkinson's for more than three years. The 82-year-old went public because he noticed his hand was twitching and worried that a sad and depressing gloomy story was only a matter of time. And he says that's not what he wanted.
[Alan Alda, Actor:] To be immobilized by fear and think the worst thing has happened to you hasn't happened to you. You still have things you can do.
[Anthony Mason, Anchor, Cbs News:] Yes.
[Alda:] I'm taking boxing lessons.
[Mason:] Three days a week, I read.
[Alda:] Three times a week. I do singles tennis, a couple of times a week. I march to Souza music because marching to march music is good for Parkinson's.
[Vause:] Well, joining us now with more of what we know about Parkinson's is Dr. Michele Tagliati, and you're going to say that for me one more time, he's the director of the Movement Disorders Program at the Department of Neurology at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Sorry, one more time?
[Dr. Michele Tagliati, Director Of The Movement Disorders Program, Cedars-sinai Medical Center:] Michele Tagliati.
[Vause:] Tagliati. Thank you. I knew I was going to get that wrong, so I apologize. OK, Alan Alda, he talked a lot about staying active, during that interview on CBS. On Twitter, he had this advice. I decided to let people know I have Parkinson's to encourage others to take action. I was diagnosed 3-12 years ago, but my life is full. I act, I give talks, I do my podcast, which I love. If you get a diagnosis, keep moving! The recent research would suggest that's pretty good advice.
[Tagliati:] Absolutely. That's a fantastic announcement that Alan Alda made for all patients with Parkinson's disease, celebrity that comes out, swinging with this positive, you know, message, which is actually true. This is what we tell our patients when they come to the clinic.
[Vause:] Because by staying active, actually delay the onset of the worst symptoms.
[Tagliati:] Correct. Exercise is the only remedy that we know, as of today that can slow down the progression of the disease.
[Vause:] Alda said he actually had no symptoms when he went in to be tested, but he did have an episode of acting out a dream, which is why he was actually concerned in the first place. Listen to what he said on CBS.
[Alda:] I asked for a scan because I thought I might have it. I read an article by Jane Brody in the New York Times that indicated that if you have if you act out your dreams, there's a good chance you might that might be a very early symptom that where nothing else shows. And by acting out your dreams, I mean, I was having a dream that someone was attacking me and I threw a sack of potatoes at them. What I was really doing was throwing a pillow at my wife. I didn't have any symptoms. The doctor said why do you want a scan? You don't have any symptoms. And I said, I want to know if there's anything I can do, I want to do it before things start to show up.
[Vause:] Explain the link here. How is someone acting out their dream, linked as being a symptom of possibly having Parkinson's?
[Tagliati:] So, that's correct. And we are starting to recognize that there are certain symptoms like acting our dreams or losing your sense of smell, sometimes, constipation, that can anticipate, that can procure the typical symptoms of Parkinson's disease, the shaking, the stiffness. And the reason is that we're starting to recognize the disease seems to progress through the brain. And part of the brain where the dream, sort of, controlled and formed, is very close to the part of the brain that controls the movements. And so there is, sort of, a step before, is where the dreams start to become unusual.
[Vause:] Well, it's fascinating how all of this is connected, how it all works together. Right now, there's no cure for Parkinson's, but, you know, there has been some progress and research. We have this clinical trial underway in Japan at Kyoto University. Essentially, I may have this tell me if I've got this right, they plan on injecting stem cells into the brain to increase dopamine levels, because dopamine is a neurotransmitter. A lack of dopamine can impact motor skills, can cause all that shaking, that kind of stuff. We looked at that research and what they're doing. What's your opinion? How promising is that or not?
[Tagliati:] So, I mean, I'm a researcher, so every research is promising and stem cells, of course, evoke a lot of hope, you know, in many people. The stem cells promise to, sort of, regenerate this dying parts of the brain. And so, we look at that at research with a lot of respect. We tend to use stem cells to study the disease. You can reproduce personalized parts of the brain and really study subject by subject. You know, Alan Alda said that today, everyone has a different, slightly different type of Parkinson's disease. So, it becomes essential to be able to study your Parkinson's disease, his Parkinson's disease, her Parkinson's disease. And stem cells can do that.
[Vause:] What's interesting, though, you know, we hear a lot about Parkinson's when there's a celebrity, when there's Alan Alda, when there's Neil Diamond, when there's Michael J. Fox. It seems the disease is a lot more common than many people might realize when it's about 10 million people around the world. One study expects the number of sufferers in the U.S. to double, what, by 2030? Well over, a million people. That is a lot of consequences, obviously, for the health care system. But also, what's driving those numbers? What's driving this increase?
[Tagliati:] In one word, aging.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Tagliati:] The population is aging. We are eating better, we exercise, and we are arriving, as a population, older and older, ages in reasonable good shape. And that brings with them the risk of developing Parkinson's disease or Alzheimer's disease. So, it's as far as we understand, this is purely a consequence of the general aging of the population.
[Vause:] Very quickly, we got 30 seconds left.
[Tagliati:] Yes.
[Vause:] For anyone who wants to know the best, sort of, lifestyle, the best thing they could do, is there anything you can do to try and help avoid this disease later in life?
[Tagliati:] Well, definitely, exercising. Obesity seems to be associated. We're finding some parallel between diabetes and Parkinson's disease, so, eat well, sleep well and exercise.
[Vause:] It's the old advice. It's the old advice for the good advice. Dr. Michele Tagliati?
[Tagliati:] Yes.
[Vause:] Thank you so much.
[Tagliati:] My pleasure.
[Vause:] Appreciate it.
[Tagliati:] Thank you for having me.
[Vause:] We'll take a quick break here. And then, it's Trump versus Lincoln, and the President claims he's got better poll numbers.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] President Trump wants Congress to know he isn't done with trying to repeal and replace Obamacare, tweeting out a taunt to Republicans just this morning. Let me quote from the president's tweet, "If Obamacare is hurting people, and it is, why shouldn't it hurt the insurance companies? And why should Congress not be paying what public pays?" Some Republicans in the U.S. Senate say they want to see a more open process, if the White House is going to try again.
[Sen. Susan Collins, , Maine:] Congress doesn't do comprehensive well. We need to go back to committee, to the Health Committee and the Finance Committee, identify the problems, carefully evaluate possible solutions through hearings, and then produce a series of bills to correct these problems.
[Sen. Jeff Flake, , Arizona:] There are only so many things can you do, just as one party. We're arriving there a little quicker than we thought. I'm glad to see that now we're talking about sitting down with our colleagues, going back to committee, going back to what we call regular order, and letting the committees and the experts deal with it, and bringing the public in more than we have before.
[Blitzer:] I want to bring in our senior Washington correspondent, Brianna Keilar, on Capitol Hill. Brianna, who's laying the groundwork for a new bill, or a set of bills? The next step?
[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] You're hearing some from Senators Collins, Senator Flake, on the Republican side. We've heard from the Democratic leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, a desire, perhaps to doing in some a bipartisan way. There some House Republicans and Democrats looking at this. The outstanding question, Wolf, is after a stunning defeat for Republicans in the Senate Friday, where does Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, stand on this? Where does President Trump stand on this desire to work across the aisle? We're hoping to find out more when, and get a better sense where Mitch McConnell is on that today when the Senate comes in to session this afternoon. And also really the the lengths to which President Trump would be willing to go to push this. We're also going to get a better idea tomorrow when we hear Senators getting together, discussing during their lunch, really a postmortem of what happened on Friday. But you see that tweet coming from President Trump where he said, why shouldn't the health insurance companies hurt? There is something before the Trump administration this week that could be very huge. That is a decision about whether to essentially subsidize insurance companies as part of Obamacare. Part really, a key part of the whole program is payments made by the government to insurers. You can imagine if those bills were not paid. That will really upset the applecart here. And this is something Republicans in both chambers actually going through this process of attempting to repeal and replace, they wanted those payments made. To not pay them would destabilize the situation. So that is going to be a big question mark they were hoping to have answered, what is the president going to decide on that Wolf?
[Blitzer:] Brianna Keilar, lots of questions on Capitol Hill. Brianna reporting for us. Thank you. My next guest says with repeal and replace voted down for now, he has a different idea about how to help health care. Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger you see him live right now he will join us. We'll discuss that, Russia's retaliation against the United States and more, right after a quick break.

[Harlow:] All right, this morning, time is running out for a mother who's blocked from seeing her dying two-year-old son in a California hospital. Why? Because of the White House, the Trump administration's travel ban. Here's a look at her son, two-year-old Abdullah Hassan, on life-support there. He is suffering from a genetic brain condition. Doctors say he may not have much longer to live.
[Sciutto:] So the issue is that Hassan's mother is a Yemeni national living in Egypt. She is not allowed to come to the U.S. because of the White House's travel ban. These things have real effects. Now the family is working with the State Department to get her an expedited humanitarian visa, at least for her. CNN correspondent Dan Simon is at the hospital in Oakland, California, with more details. Is there any evidence, Dan, that she had a security background that required her specifically to be banned from entering the U.S.?
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] Not that we know of, Jim and Poppy. I can tell you, though, that things now appear to be moving in a positive direction for this family after CNN and other media began reporting out this story. I can tell you that as of last night the family had been in touch with the State Department so she could be granted this humanitarian visa so she could fly to the United States, come to this hospital in Oakland, California, and essentially say good-bye to her son. You know, the father, he is a U.S. citizen. He lives in Stockton, California. But the mother, she is from Yemen. So she was blocked from coming to the United States because of the Trump administration's travel ban. I want you to listen now to what the father told "NEW DAY" just a short time ago when asked what message he may have for President Trump. Take a look.
[Ali Hassan, Father Of Two-year-old Boy On Life Support:] All families, they're supposed to be together. Right now, my son's situation, he's facing death. And I'm going through losing my son. It's really hard for me and for my mother and for my family and my wife, too, just really hard.
[Simon:] Well, this boy, Abdullah Hassan, he's two years old. He has a rare brain condition. He's on life-support at the children's hospital in Oakland. And the hospital, they put out a statement last night saying that they empathize with this family, they're supportive of their desire, of course, to be together in the boy's final days. And they say right now they're just doing everything they can to keep him comfortable. I can tell you that right now the wife, she is in Cairo, Egypt, essentially waiting for the State Department to grant this visa, which could come, again, as early as today. And if it does, she plans to hop on the earliest flight available. Jim and Poppy.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] Dan Simon, thanks.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] You see this often, I mean one story will get attention and the administration will respond, take care of that one story. Does it change the broader policy?
[Harlow:] Yes, it doesn't.
[Sciutto:] You have to imagine there are others effected. That's the test.
[Harlow:] I hope that mom gets over here. All right, the White House just announced plans to overturn some school policies that were put in place under President Obama to make sure that minority students are disciplined fairly. The details, next.

[Vause:] Well Monday was the fifth day of emotional testimony from victims at Larry Nassar's sentencing hearing. In the past week, nearly 100 young women and girls shared stories of sexual abuse which they suffered at the hands of the former USA gymnastics doctor. Nassar has pleaded guilty to seven counts of criminal sexual conduct, he has also admitted to sexually assaulting and abusing young girls under the guy that's providing medical treatment. As part of his plea deal, all of the victims who reported assaults to the Michigan State Police were allowed to give impact statements to the court.
[Taylor Livingston, Nassar Accuser:] What you have done is despicable. What you have done, you have done you can never erase. I have found a little bit of peace knowing that the rest of your life all you will be doing is rotting but I find more peace in knowing that one day you're going to die and when you do, your pain will not subside.
[Emma Ann Miller, Nassar Accuser:] I have never wanted hate for my life but my hate towards you is uncontrollable. Larry Nassar, I hate you.
[Vause:] Former Gymnast, Rachel Denhollander was the first woman to publicly accuse Larry Nassar. She testified last Friday that remained in the courtroom as other women has spoken out. And she sat down and spoke to my colleague Isha Issay about her experience.
[Rachel Denhollander, Nassar Accuser:] There are so many dynamics to what had been taking place in that courtroom. I mean, in one sense it is incredibly empowering to see so many women reclaiming their voice. But the reality is that there is an incredible amount of damage that led that Larry has done and the most sobering thing for me is I have sat through testimony after testimony is seeing how many victims came after that first report of sexual assault, the first two reports of sexual assault in 1997. Had those first two reports of sexual assaults in 1997 made to MSU head coach, Kathie Klages been handled properly, the vast majority of the women that you're hearing from would not be in that courtroom today.
[Isha Sesay, Cnn International Anchor:] Yes. So many dynamics, as you said so much emotion. How has this journey been for you?
[Denhollander:] It is an incredibly painful process. Stopping a pedophile, stopping a predator requires losing an extreme amount of privacy. It includes having to relive the abuse over and over and over again. It includes it becoming part of your identity in a way you never wanted it to be. So it has been a very painful process but it has been worth it. And with every survivor that stands up and reclaims her voice, it's a constant reminder that it's been worthed it.
[Sesay:] You have said, you know, in the part you said, "We were we were silenced, we were mocked, and our abuser was told time and time again, I'm on your side." The culture that allowed this predator to keep abusing has yet to end. As you look out what has been put in place as a result of your bravery and the bravery of other women, where are we in terms of achieving that goal of ending that culture, that culture of silence and making sure that young women and girls feel brave enough to step forward if something wrong is happening.
[Denhollander:] You know, for both organizations, USAG and MSU, I don't think we've seen anything more than posturing to be perfectly honest. I am grateful to see the steps to close the Karolyi Ranch. But outside of that, every single person, outside of having a new president at USAG, every single person who is responsible for this culture is still on the board at USAG, is still employed at MSU and both organizations have very clearly sent a message that they find that behavior and that conduct acceptable, that there will be no consequences for that behavior and for that conduct. And as far as USAG's new guidelines and new reports, this is all I can say about that, if you have to pay a private investigator to come in and tell you to report the sexual assault of a child, you have no business being on the board of an athlete and child-focused organization.
[Sesay:] Yes. Larry Nassar has been in court throughout these days of survivors sharing the impact of his wild actions and on Thursday we learned that he sent a six-page single-spaced letters to the judge in which he accused the judge of turning the sentencing hearing into a "media circus" to put himself in the spotlight. He also wrote this, "I'm very concerned about my ability to be able to face witnesses this next four days mentally." When you heard that Rachel, what went through your mind? I mean, is this a man who feels remorse, any remorse for what he has done?
[Denhollander:] No. No. Larry does not feel any remorse for what he has done. To be honest, at this point, I pity Larry, I really do. And I don't think that letter was anything more than an example of how far he has fallen. I truly found it laughable because
[Sesay:] Yes, I think your sentiment is shared by the County Court Judge, Rosemarie Aquilina who read from the letter in courtroom Thursday and she also said this which I think was very poignant. She says, "Spending four or five days listening to them is significantly minor considering the hours of pleasure you had at their expense ruining their lives." I mean, the judge's compassion throughout the sentencing hearing procedures has been clear and touching and I think, again, back to what you're talking about in terms of officials, MSU, Michigan State University, and USA Olympics
[Denhollander:] I mean, it is almost impossible for multiple reasons. One is because you are powerless, you're not the one in authority. The other dynamic, so many dynamics, is either putting words to it makes it real. So, when you have been through an experience that is incredibly traumatic and degrading and humiliating and confusing. Especially, when it is someone like Larry who you trusted, the ability to put words to what happened is almost never present because the shame is so great. And the confusion is so great. And you know, studies have borne out repeatedly that the trauma of sexual assault is the greatest trauma from a criminal standpoint that is inflicted upon a victim who lives. But the other thing that studies have consistently shown is that the impact of sexual assaults is really directly proportional also to the societal response the victims received when they speak up. And so, when you have children who have been sexually assaulted and they raised their voice and they are silenced and they are disbelieved, that just exponentially increases the damaged that they have already experienced at the hands of their predator. And that needs to be taken very, very seriously.
[Sesay:] As you have been through this painful journey and that's how you described it at the beginning and you have heard from these other survivors. Has there been any, you know I don't I will say closure, because again, you know, some would say that's a made-up word but has there been any catharsis have you been able to move forward in your healing? Because you've spoken plainly but how this has impacted you in many ways, big and small.
[Denhollander:] You know, I really was able to reach an incredibly good place of healing before coming forward, which is which is what allowed me to be able to do what I did, to be able to hold on to the truth no matter what Larry was saying, no matter what the people around me were saying, no matter what society was saying. Because it was pretty ugly for the first little bit there. Until the child porn was found on Larry's computer, it was very ugly. And so, I am grateful that I was able to do that. I do find that the process, in general, what has been incredibly painful has also then very rewarding. Particularly, again, to see so many women and even children, still, able to reclaim their voice. That's an incredibly beautiful thing to see amidst all of the damage.
[Sesay:] I want to give you the last words to share any messages you may have to any other children or adults who are out there who have been the victim or who are suffering through abuse, who wonder how you found the courage to step out into the light to share your story. What would you say to them?
[Denhollander:] I would tell them that it is not their fault and that there is hope. That they can call what happened to them evil without minimization, without mitigation. And because they can identify it is evil, they can also be certain good exists. Good and evil exists in opposites. And when you can call something evil, you can also find the good. And where there is good, there is always hope.
[Sesay:] And we can call you brave, Rachael. And we thank you for speaking to us and for sharing your story and setting the wheels in motion to bring this terror to an end. Rachael Denhollander, thank you.
[Denhollander:] Thank you.
[Vause:] And since that conversation that Rachael had with Isha, top executives from USA Gymnastics have stepped down. The organization announced Monday its Chairman, Vice-chairman, and Treasurer have resigned. President and CEO Kerry Perry issued this statement, "We support their decisions to resign at this time. We believe these will this step, rather, will allow us to more effectively move forward in implementing change within our Organization." Michigan State University is also speaking out. Larry Nassar worked there from 1997 to 2016. Here's their statement: "Words cannot express the sorrow we feel for Nassar's victims; the thoughts and prayers of the entire MSU community are with these women as we listen to their heart-breaking testimony. But as we have said previously, any suggestion that the university covered up Nassar's horrific conduct is simply false. Nassar preyed on his victims, changing their lives in terrible ways." A short break. More news after this.

[Victor Blackwell, Cnn:] Good morning, I'm Victor Blackwell.
[Christi Paul, Cnn:] And I'm Christi Paul. So glad to have you here. We have breaking news to tell you about that happened overnight. A regional airline employee steals an empty plane and takes off and then starts doing aerial maneuvers.
[Blackwell:] This happened just after 8:00 Seattle time. Within minutes, military jets were right behind him. He flew the plane for about an hour and then crashed into a wooded area 40 miles from the airport.
[Paul:] We're learning more about the man who apparently stole that plane, by the way. The Pierce County sheriff's office says it was not a terrorist incident. We want to make this very clear. This is not a terrorist incident.
[Blackwell:] That is important to point out. They did not identify this man but they said he is a 29-year-old man who they say was suicidal. Here's a closer look at what happened.
[Unidentified Female:] There is a ground stop. No one is departing right now. They're working out an issue close to our air space.
[Blackwell:] [voice over] With those words to airline pilots all traffic was stopped at Washington State Seattle Tacoma airport known as Sea-Tac after what's being called an unauthorized takeoff of a Q- 400 turbo prop plane from Horizon Air owned by the Alaska Air Group. The company COO said in a video statement that the aircraft was taken by a single Horizon Air employee and no passengers were onboard. The Pearce County sheriff said the man was a 29-year-old ground service agent. What happened next was a bizarre display in the skies above South Puget Sound. The agent was in touch with air traffic controllers and, apparently, performed stunts in the 76-seater plane. They tried to talk him down to a safe landing.
[Unidentified Male:] Congratulations, you did that. Now, let's try to land that airplane safely and not hurt anybody on the ground. All right. I don't know man, I don't know. I don't want to. I was kind of hoping that would be it, you know.
[Blackwell:] Air National Guard jets were scrambled and Washington's Governor Jay Inslee tweeted that fighter pilots flew alongside the aircraft and were ready to do whatever was needed to protect citizens, but, in the end, the man flying the stolen plane crashed. Pictures from CNN affiliate KOMO showed flaming debris on nearby Ketron Island, the site of the crash.
[Unidentified Female:] The plane literally at that moment was flying right over our deck and right behind it were F-15s. We'd never seen a plane that low over our deck before and shortly thereafter we saw a giant plume of black smoke out in the distance.
[Paul:] We have more audio from inside the cockpit of that plane, as well, where that man, who we understand was a ground service agent, talked about what he was trying to do.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm going to try to do a barrel roll and if that goes good, I'm going to nose down and call it a night.
[Blackwell:] Joining us on the phone now is John Waldron. John, thank you for being with us. It's a late night for you there on the West Coast, early morning for us here on the East Coast. We'll keep it short. You looked up and saw those fighter jets escorting the stolen plane. At any point up to that point, did you realize or recognize that something was wrong or was the presence of those jets the first sign for you?
[John Waldron, Witness To Stolen Plane Flight:] Well, we have two large military bases within about ten miles from where this all happened so, it's not uncommon to see, you know, fighter aircraft up in the air. But to see them in the manner they were flying and at that location where they were at was a little bit bizarre. So, I started to tape the aircraft and then out of nowhere the guy that was flying this Q-400 just pulled the stick back and put this thing into a complete loop and I honestly thought he was going to stall and hit the water. But, you know, I mean, it was just very shocking to see so I just kept taping and I was completely unaware of what had actually happened at the airport. I had no idea the plane had been hijacked or what was going on. It appeared the two fighter jets were escorting him; they were alongside him and then they would trail behind him. You know, I don't know what they were trying to do at that time, obviously, because, like I said, I was unclear about what actually was going on and then he headed down towards where he eventually crashed at. He actually pulled the nose back up, again, and I thought he was going to stall, again and he made his way down toward [inaudible]. I looked again and he was in a nose dive and he went into the ground, straight in the ground. I saw a brief flash of flame and a big plume of smoke and the sound of the explosion. I just had a bad feeling that it wasn't an exercise or anything. I just knew he had crashed at that point.
[Paul:] You said earlier that everyone was literally frozen in place. What conversations were you having? What were you thinking? What were you all standing there, in that moment?
[Waldron:] I think we were all just completely in awe first of all, over the type of flying this individual is doing because it just my first thought is either he doesn't have any flight experience in this aircraft and he's unfamiliar with the controls or perhaps he is a stunt pilot and he's showing off or something. But it's very uncommon to see two military aircraft like that trailing behind. So, we're all kind of sitting there with our jaws on the ground. You know, like, what just happened? I think maybe a military exercise but over that area would have been very uncommon because that's not, that's a civilian island with little beach cabins on it. It's populated very sparsely but it's just, it's very bizarre to that area. No air shows were scheduled or anything that I was aware of. So, to see this type of flying was just, it was way off what is normal.
[Blackwell:] All right, John Waldron, this amazing video that you shot really helps us understand what happened in those minutes over South Puget Sound. John Waldron, thanks for staying up late for us.
[Waldron:] Oh, you're welcome, sir. Thank you, it's a pleasure.
[Paul:] Thank you, John.
[Blackwell:] All right joining us now to talk more about this, Mary Schiavo, CNN transportation analyst, former Inspector General for the Department of Transportation and Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona CNN military analyst. Good morning to both of you and I'll start here, before we get into the psychology of this ground service agent and all the particulars, the big headline question is, how in post-911 America does a ground service agent get access to a plane and have the possibility of doing something like this? Let me start with you, Mary.
[Mary Schiavo, Cnn Transportation Analyst:] Well, this was a question that Congress asked just last year. The House Homeland Security Committee put out a report and they were calling on the TSA to do enhanced background checks, beef up the screening at airport workers; there are 900,000 airport workers at 450 U.S. passenger service airports and they, in some cases, don't receive the same screening passengers do. Just last year, Congress passed a bill to enhance the screening and the access controls for these employees. It didn't pass the Senate. I think that will be the question that goes to Congress and reviving Congress again next week. It's a big question.
[Paul:] So, Rick, with that said, what vulnerabilities did this highlight, do you think? Not just, is it the airport, the airline? I mean, who are they really going to be looking more closely at here?
[Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, every airport is different so, they're going to have to come up with specific guidelines for each airport, and the problem is, once somebody does this, he puts a lot of people at risk. One guy gets in one airplane and he takes off in a crowded metropolitan area and look what happens. Not only does it tie up the air traffic system, but no one knew what his intentions were. He could have easily turned north and gone through downtown Seattle. He could have caused countless deaths on the ground. This is a real vulnerability that they have to address. It's not, they say this is one guy, one plane, but the potential damage he could cause needs to be addressed.
[Blackwell:] Let's go to some of the particulars about this situation now. Earlier the sheriff there in Pearce County referred to him as a mechanic, that's the job title that we were learning in the early moments after the breaking news. We now know that he was a ground service agent. First to you, Mary, most people know what a mechanic is. Ground service agent, what would that description have consisted of and would he typically have access to the cockpit to pull something like this off?
[Schiavo:] No, to have access to the cockpit and taxi an aircraft, ordinarily you're a mechanic and you to have to specific authority. You have to have taxi authority. You actually have to be trained in the aircraft and have taxi authority. You have to know the airport traffic patterns because lots of collisions happen right on the ground in the taxiways. I have worked air crashes where planes have crashed into each other while they're being taxied around. A couple years ago a mechanic taxied one off accidentally off a taxiway in Florida. So, it's very important. So, that's who is allowed to taxi an aircraft at the airports to and from maintenance and the ground service workers usually not an AMP mechanic which also means doesn't have a licensing and background check that an AMP mechanic would have.
[Paul:] So, Rick, when we talk about the military jets from Portland that followed this plane and we need to point out again these military jets as is being reported had nothing to do with this crash in terms of the consequences of what we're seeing, but you brought up a very good point about intention. Help us understand what those military jets, how they may have been communicating and what may they have been hearing about as they try to follow this guy not having any idea of what his intentions are.
[Francona:] Yes, you know, they were scrambled out of Portland; it's about 100 miles away. They were going supersonic so they could close that distance in about nine minutes. So, they were on the scene almost immediately and they took up positions behind and above this aircraft and then they made visual contact with the aircraft but they were trying to establish voice contact, which I don't think they ever did. Of course, they're getting information not only from Seattle air traffic control and also from the Western Air Defense Sector which just happens to be located at that Air Force base in Seattle. They were getting a lot of information. You have to realize what these young pilots are facing because they don't know what this guy's intentions are. Is he going to fly this into a city and fly it into a school or residential area? So, they go up there and they don't know what they're going to find. They're the first responders. They have to go up and assess the situation. Fortunately, there was only one death and that was the person who stole the aircraft. It could have gotten much worse if he was headed towards downtown Seattle, they would have had to increase their activity level and at the end, we were not going to let that aircraft go into downtown Seattle.
[Blackwell:] And of course that begs the question, at what point what was the protocol to make the decision to shoot down a plane. Colonel Francona, Mary Schiavo stay with us. We'll have more questions including that one in just a few moments. But, first, one year since white nationalists and counter protesters faced off on the streets of Charlottesville. Now they plan to do it again, this time in the nation's capital. Why they have not learned anything about race and hatred on this one year anniversary.
[Paul:] Also a bank employee says his boss wanted a job in the White House and willing to approve a massive loan to Paul Manafort in order to get it. The latest as week two of the Paul Manafort trial wraps up.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] All right. It's 11:00 on the East Coast. I'm Fredricka Whitfield in New York. Welcome this Saturday. New developments in the Stormy Daniels saga President Trump's lawyer now facing questions after taking out a home equity loan to keep the porn star quiet about an alleged affair. Daniels also claiming the controversy may actually be helping her career. Plus, Florida's Republican governor coming under fire from the NRA a lawsuit now in play as the state of Florida passes new gun control legislation. And President Trump responds after a deadly shooting at a California Veterans Affairs clinic. What we now know about the gunman and his victims. Let's begin with the latest on the case causing more trouble for the White House. We now know President Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, used his official Trump Organization e-mail address and signature; and Cohen says he took out a equity line of credit in the amount of $130,000 to make the payment to keep Stormy Daniels quiet about an alleged affair between herself and Mr. Trump. Daniels' attorney made his case to CNN's Anderson Cooper last night.
[Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' Attorney:] This took a long time the negotiation, the drafting, the communication, the routing of the payment. We're talking about hours and hours and hours. And what Mr. Cohen and the administration now expects the American public to believe is that he went off half-cocked on his own without any guidance or communication whatsoever with his client, none. He just decided that he was going to do this. He was going to draft the document. He was going to negotiate it. And he was going to draft the document with places for his client to sign.
[Whitfield:] All right. This comes as President Trump prepares to hit the campaign trail today. He'll be stumping for Pennsylvania Republican who is in danger of losing in a district the President carried by 20 points. CNN White House correspondent Abby Phillip is at the White House for us now. So Abby it appears this controversy is not going away.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right Fred. This controversy continues to engulf this White House and it does seem that the more revelations we get about what's going on in this case the more questions we have about what exactly the President knew about what his attorney seemed to have been doing on his behalf. With the revelation that Michael Cohen used his Trump Organization e- mail to send correspondents to Stormy Daniels' attorney in the days preceding the election, Sarah Sanders is facing new questions about whether or not the President and his personal lawyer are were talking then and are still talking now about this ongoing litigation. Listen to what Sarah said yesterday about that.
[Phillip:] You said from the podium you acknowledge that the President, to follow up on April's question, knows about the arbitration involving Stormy Daniels. Does he remember speaking with his lawyer about that? Does he remember meeting Daniels?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I've addressed this extensively. I don't have anything else to add. Sorry I did tell Troy I'll take one last question.
[Phillip:] The White House is now trying to shut down questions about Stormy Daniels after Sarah Sanders this week really opened a Pandora's Box by acknowledging that the President had been had won an arbitration case against Stormy Daniels in the last several weeks. That case being brought by his lawyer Michael Cohen. She now won't say at all whether or not the President has spoken to Cohen about this case. Now you just mentioned the President is heading out this afternoon to Pennsylvania where he's going to be campaigning for a Republican candidate who seems to desperately need his help at this point. But obviously the President is in a politically-perilous situation. He not only has this controversy with Stormy Daniels brewing but he is also facing some backlash from world leaders and from his own party over his decision to impose tariffs on aluminum and steel. So there's a lot going on right now for this president. And it's unclear how it's going to affect this very near future of this Pennsylvania race but also races down the road in the mid terms in 2018 Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right. Abby Phillip, thanks so much at the White House. All right. Let's bring in our political panel now. Julian Zelizer, a CNN political analyst and a professor and historian at Princeton University and Amy Parnes, a CNN political analyst and a senior political correspondent for "The Hill". All right. Good to see both of you.
[Julian Zelizer, Cnn Political Analyst:] Good morning.
[Amy Parnes, Cnn Political Analyst:] Good to see you.
[Whitfield:] All right. So Julian central to this is not just the alleged affair. But in terms of payments, that's really what makes this so paramount and essential, these payments that came just ahead of the 2016 election. Where did they come from? And now to hear that Trump's attorney Michael Cohen not only used his Trump, you know, Org e-mail but that he took out a home equity line of credit for $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels. So doesn't this make it that much harder for the President to continue to dismiss this as important or relevant?
[Zelizer:] It does. I think at some level the President doesn't care about the focus of the story, meaning the relationship. He's had so many stories at this point. One more doesn't matter. What does matter is was there a campaign finance violation? And the information we get today or in the last few days leads us closer to that. And second, I'm sure the President and his advisors are worried about this going to court because if you have the President deposed and if you have statements, we remember what happened to Bill Clinton, it can lead to bigger scandals.
[Whitfield:] Is it almost certain that there will be a deposition of the President?
[Zelizer:] No, it's not certain at this point. This can be resolved before this ever reaches court and that's often what happens. So I'm not sure we're going to get there. But those are the two parts of the story that I think are buried within the front page scandal.
[Whitfield:] And so Amy, you know, the plot is thickening here. And now you've got the a.k.a., the alias of the President that is now, you know, of public interest now, this David Dennison, and the attorney putting his own home on the line and that he wouldn't be reimbursed. I mean who believes that?
[Parnes:] No. And that's the thing. I mean when you talk to people who know about these things, a lawyer wouldn't do that kind of thing for a client. So it's very suspect, I think. And I think that's why it's raising a lot of eyebrows; the timing, of course. I mean this is one of those circumstances I think where the cover-up is almost worse than the crime. It's not really about the affair anymore. It's more about, you know, what the lead-up it to in the days before the election and that's what's happening right now. And it does the plot is thickening every day.
[Whitfield:] Yes. The White House is going to continue to be peppered with these questions, which is exactly what happened on Friday. And this is how Sarah Sanders handled it all.
[Sanders:] The President has denied the allegations against him. And again this case has already been won in arbitration. Anything beyond that I would refer you to outside counsel.
[Unidentified Male:] You said that there is arbitration, that's already been won, by whom and when?
[Sanders:] By the President's personal attorneys and for details on that, I would refer you to them.
[Unidentified Male:] But you're aware of them. So what more can you share with us?
[Sanders:] I can share that arbitration was won in the President's favor and I would refer you to the President's outside counsel on any details beyond that.
[Whitfield:] And Julian, this kind of confusion only worsens things about what kind of, you know, legal road this case is taking the White House.
[Zelizer:] Yes. I mean part of this points to the ongoing chaos within the White House and a level of dysfunction which is now the normal for the administration. But you'll hear different things from different members of the administration. Politically you can survive that. But legally, the question is does that kind of confusion open them up to problems like more information from his attorney? I would say though he probably is happier talking about this than the tariff controversy or the gun control. And so there is part of me always thinking which of the various controversies would the President rather be centered on?
[Whitfield:] And then Amy, you know, Stormy Daniels' attorney is really trying to put the Trump camp in a corner saying you all can actually get to the bottom of the President, the Treasury Secretary can get to the bottom of this money and this transaction of Michael Cohen. This is, in fact, what the attorney told Anderson Cooper last night.
[Avenatti:] We know that the President and his appointee, the Treasury Secretary, control Finson. They could very easily release this SAR. And, in fact, if Mr. Cohen does not have an objection to it, if he doesn't believe anything was untoward about this, if his story is to be believed, then release the SAR. It's a fairly brief document but it's going to be very illuminating as to the details relating to this transaction. And if there is nothing to hide, release the SAR and let the American people see what happened here. And if there's nothing there then there's nothing there.
[Whitfield:] All right. Amy, I know a lot of people are saying what in the world is a SAR, you know? This is the Suspicious Activity Report
[Parnes:] Right.
[Whitfield:] and this is the bank. A financial institution notifying a division within the Treasury Department that there is this money and we don't know what is behind it and perhaps we can look into it.
[Parnes:] Right.
[Whitfield:] So the attorney is challenging that the President can actually reveal that the Treasury Secretary can find out what this is all about and put it all to rest perhaps
[Parnes:] Right.
[Whitfield:] or open a new Pandora's Box. Which it is?
[Parnes:] No. And so they're not going to do that obviously.
[Whitfield:] Not going to do it.
[Parnes:] Because why would they.
[Whitfield:] Would this be interesting to the Mueller team?
[Parnes:] I would think so. And you'd have to think that someone over there is looking into this right now because it does sort of break these election laws. And so I think, you know, it's very interesting and I think something has to be brewing over there at the same time. And that has to be scaring White House officials right now. They don't want this in the headlines. It derails their message every single day. You know, this week Trump had to sort of get out in front of it and talk about Korea and that sort of pushed it off for a while. But this keeps looming kind of like the Russia story line and that's problematic for the White House.
[Zelizer:] It also points to a looseness in the campaign and to how they view the laws and to how they see the rules and regulations. In this case, campaign finance. But that does lead in to some of the other questions that have emerged in the Russia investigation about the demeanor and the approach of this then-candidate.
[Whitfield:] It's a potential pattern that the Mueller team would find interesting of just this hiding information, hiding transactions, trying to convince the public or, you know, the general consensus that it's something other than something else.
[Zelizer:] Exactly. And the problem of compromising information has been something that has surfaced and been part of the investigation as well. And here you seem to have a case where that's tangible. So these are connected. And I think they can effect how Mueller thinks about his own case.
[Whitfield:] All right. All fascinating and curious. Thank you so much.
[Parnes:] Yes, thank you.
[Whitfield:] talking to both of you.
[Zelizer:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] We appreciate it Julian and Amy. All right. Stormy Daniels meantime, well, she is staying rather busy. CNN's Nick Valencia talked to her exclusively last night in Florida where she was making an appearance. And Nick is joining us right now from Fort Lauderdale. So what did she say?
[Nick Valencia, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Fredricka this was her first live performance since filing the lawsuit earlier this week in California superior court and Los Angeles superior courtroom over that nondisclosure agreement which she says is null and void because Donald Trump, the President of the United States, the man she's accused of allegedly having an affair with did not sign that agreement. Now, we were told that we shouldn't expect to get an interview with Stormy Daniels. But all that changed after her performance when her team agreed to an audio interview only so long as we didn't talk about the litigation pending or the President of the United States. She did, however, talk to me about how this whole ordeal has impacted her career.
[Valencia:] So what has this done for your career?
[Stormy Daniels, Adult Film Star:] It's sort of been a double-edged sword where a lot of people are very interested in booking me for dancing and stuff like that. So I'm getting more dance bookings. I usually only dance once a month and now I'm dancing three or four times a month. So that's been really great. But because of that, it's sort of overshadowing a lot of the adult films that I'm supposed to be promoting and a lot of the mainstream projects that I was actively working on have been indefinitely put on hold.
[Valencia:] You've gotten a lot of attention, some negative attention. How you are handling everything?
[Daniels:] I've been in the adult business for 17 years. So to make it that long in that business, you have to have a really tough skin. And so it's most of it rolls off my shoulders because it's an opinion like oh, you think I'm a whore or you think I'm ugly or I'm old or I'm fat or my boobs are too big or too small or whatever. I've heard there is nothing along those lines that someone can say to me that I haven't heard. And so when someone says hey you're a whore I'm like that is successful whore to you.
[Valencia:] But this is a little different though. I mean has some of it been hurtful at all? What's your reaction then to it?
[Daniels:] The stuff that bothers me is the flat out lies. Like people randomly making up stuff.
[Valencia:] Like what?
[Daniels:] Like that I'm broke. I've actually I'm actually one of the most successful adult movie directors in the business. I have a contract that's been in place for several years. And actually just renegotiated and got a new contract that was already the terms were already set before this stuff happened. And I have a huge I got a raise. So I'm doing just fine.
[Valencia:] What do you think about like the circus that is happening? I mean, you know, this was kind of out in 2011. But now it's like a renewed attention on you and, you know, somebody else that we'll not name.
[Daniels:] I think it's pretty clear that with the new developments comes new interest.
[Valencia:] Any go ahead.
[Hadas Gold, Cnn Digital Reporter:] What do you want people to know about you and about what is going on that you feel has been overshadowed?
[Daniels:] Like I just said that I'm doing what I've always done. I'm writing, directing, performing, dancing like none of that changed. People are under the huge misconception that I just started stripping. And I've actually been doing this for 18 years.
[Gold:] Like you take advantage of the situation.
[Daniels:] Right. And that's not true. I was already booked. Now yes, I'm more in demand. And like I said in "The Rolling Stone" interview, if somebody came up to you and said hey, you know that job you've been doing forever. How about next week I pay you quadruple. Show me one person who's going to say no.
[Valencia:] So it's helped you?
[Daniels:] It helped me in the short and immediate time because obviously more people are coming, the more people in the club, so that's more tips. But I have you know, yet to see how it's going to play out long term.
[Valencia:] When you look back at this stage of your life, this period of your life, what do you think you're going to think about? I mean what you are going to think about what you're going through right now?
[Daniels:] Holy
[Valencia:] Anything I haven't asked that you that is important to know? Anything you'd like to talk about while we have the chance?
[Gold:] Any more news this week or are you just going to let
[Valencia:] Yes, what else should we expect?
[Daniels:] I'm not sure what's coming this week, honestly.
[Valencia:] Ok.
[Daniels:] I mean you guys work at CNN, you know.
[Gold:] We try to know. That's our job.
[Valencia:] Any comments to the President? And we should mention the other voice you hear there on that tape is the voice of CNN digital reporter Hadas Gold, who was part of that CNN team. We were here inside last night watching Stormy Daniels perform in front of about 200 people. She has two more performances scheduled later tonight Fredricka.
[Whitfield:] All right. Nick Valencia thank you so much for that. We'll talk more about it. All right. Coming up, the White House insists President Trump will meet with Kim Jong-un. But provides little details about where and when that might happen. Given the rocky history between the two leaders, what can we expect from what this historic meeting could unfold?

[Anderson:] Right, it's just after half past 7:00 here with our programming hub in the Middle East in Abu Dhabi. I'm Becky Anderson. British Prime Minister, Theresa May says the Brexit vote gave her a mandate to change the country, despite her party's humiliating showing in the June 8th General Election. Well, the prime minister gave her first major policy speech since the vote a short time ago and she says now is not the time for her government to play it safe. The British Foreign Secretary spoke to the House of Commons on the heels of her speech. Boris Johnson lashed out at the EU over Brexit demands. Have a listen.
[Boris Johnson, British Foreign Secretary:] The sums that I have seen that they propose to demand for this country seem to me to be extortionist and I think to go whistle is an entirely appropriate expression.
[Anderson:] Phil Black joining me now "live" from Downing Street. Some strong words there from Boris Johnson and you might, if you will expound on those EU demands that he's talking about, and just how does Theresa May see the Brexit negotiations going now?
[Phil Black, Cnn Correspondent:] So, what Boris Johnson, first of all, Becky what he's talking about there is the divorce settlement. It's the first key pillar of the EU negotiations. Britain and EU have to agree on just how much money Britain owes for its existing commitments under its membership to the European Union. There's a lot of wild guesses out there, but they all seem to be 10s of billions, that's just a question of how many 10s of billions. You heard Boris Johnson there say that what they're asking is extortion. While, it is the early stages of the negotiations, so you would expect the positions of both sides to be at the extreme and then hopefully overtime those will close. What Theresa May was talking about today is that Brexit is more than just pulling Britain out of the EU. She sees this as an opportunity to change the country profoundly, to ask the question what sort of country does Britain wants to be. Now, this is interesting because what she's trying to do clearly is re-establish her authority after the embarrassment of the election result where she didn't have to go well. She lost that majority in parliament, has suffered such a loss of influence with the British people, within her own party as well. She's now trying to re-establish her authority by reclaiming the language she first used a year ago when she stood here in Downing Street and spoke to the British people for the first time when she talked about injustice and fairness and building a country that works for everyone, not just the privileged few. These ideas, when she first expressed them initially made her quite a popular leader. Over time, well, she's suffered that loss of a clear mandate clearly through the election result. She's rebuilt the party into a minority government. And, so if you take a listen now, this is what she said when she talked about the defining characteristics of the government that she wants to lead.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] A clear understanding that the EU referendum result was not just a vote to leave European Union but a deeper and more profound call for change across our country, a belief that at the heart of that change, must lie a commitment to greater fairness in our country as we tackle the injustices and vested interests that threaten to hold us back and make Britain a country that works for everyone, not just a privileged few.
[Black:] So, she's trying to sound like a leader. She is talking about making big, difficult, long-term decisions, bold actions. She's talking about a vision once again. These are all things that a diminished leader generally finds very difficult to achieve. Now, of course, just saying them doesn't mean that it will happen but it is a statement of her intention to move on and to try and guide the country in a way that many people thought she simply wasn't capable of doing following that election result, Becky.
[Anderson:] Phil Black outside the prime minister's residence there at Number 10 Downing Street following in the end the Brexit debate became quite nasty with lots of really hurtful and harmful words being frame on them. And that is just a small part of what is this ecosystem hatred that thrives on the internet. I want to bring you a striking example of that now. The founder of a Neo Nazi website is facing a lawsuit for encouraging an army an army of internet trolls against a Jewish woman. Sara Sidner has our report and that, I'm going to warn you, some of the language in this report is explicit and it is disturbing.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn International Correspondent:] They call themselves trolls. What do you call them?
[Tanya Gersh, Jewish Woman:] Terrorists.
[Sidner:] In the digital era it only takes a few key strokes for hate to suddenly consume your life.
[Unidentified Male:] You worthless piece of [beep].
[Sidner:] This is what is often waiting for Tanya Gersch everyday when she goes online or picks up the phone.
[Unidentified Male:] I hope you die, you worthless {beep}. Stupid, ugly [beep] was Tanya Gersh.
[Gersh:] I had a lot of phone calls with gunshots. That sound kind of still makes me sick.
[Sidner:] The Gersch's including their 12-year-old son had received thousands of messages like this for months.
[Gersh:] You're a [beep] of a mother, should watch herself. Why don't you crawl into this oven little boy. There's a free Xbox inside. They photoshopped and list imagery of me with Nazi symbols on my forehead or on my arm and terrible inventory of me and my son on the Gates to Auschwitz Concentration Camp.
[Sidner:] Do you think it scared them?
[Gersh:] Yes.
[Sidner:] It's the last thing you'd expect in the quaint resort town of White Fish, Montana.
[Gersh:] I just pray that we'll be safe.
[Sidner:] Gersch says it all started when she came into contact with fellow resident, Sherry Spencer, who happens to be the mother of White Nationalist, Richard Spencer.
[Unidentified Male:] Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory.
[Sidner:] He shot to fame celebrating President Trump's win with Nazi symbolism. His mom, Sherry Spencer, owns a commercial building in town. Gersch, a realtor, says she was trying to help Spencer sell the building to calm tensions within the town over her son's beliefs. But, according to a lawsuit, filed by an anti-hate group, Spencer published a blog post accusing Gersch of threatening her with protest until she complied and sold her building. We called Spencer, who said she didn't want to talk to us.
[Bill Dial, Police Chief, Whitefish, Montana:] People say, "Who do you believe? I said, you know, it's I don't know.
[Sidner:] But the police chief says no complaint was filed by Spencer and no charges were brought by any other agency. But after the blog post, the lawsuit says, Andrew England, the founder of one of the most popular Neo Nazi website, The Daily Stormer, picked up the torch and unleashed what he called his troll army on the Gersch's, publishing their contact information on his site.
[Unidentified Male:] [Beep], Jew.
[Sidner:] The southern poverty law center is suing Andrew England on Gersch's behalf accusing him of intentionally inflicting emotional distress, invasion of privacy and intimidation.
[John Morrison, Southern Poverty Law Center:] The purpose is to cause them fear and emotional harm. And that's illegal. It's not protected by the First Amendment.
[Sidner:] We reached out to Andrew England who told us he now lives in, of all places, Lagos, Nigeria where he says his rights to say what he wants aren't limited. He did not return comment about the Gersh's case. But, we managed to catch up with one of the writers on "The Daily Stormer" website at a rally in Houston.
[Robert Ray Azzmador, Daily Stormer Write:] Andrew England specifically called on the readers of "Daily Stormer" to contact Ms. Gersch and tell them what they think about it. And that's exactly what they did. There's no evidence that anyone from who was influenced by "Daily Stormer" made any death threats or anything. I've watched...
[Sidner:] Well, they made some threats.
[Azzmador:] Like what? We're going to throw you in a gas chamber? That's a real credible threat.
[Sidner:] The anti-defamation league says England has launched his army of hate many times before. England initially responded to the Gersch lawsuit with this image.
[Gersh:] He's on a horse with a big spear into me.
[Sidner:] Asking for donations to fight the lawsuit. He has raised more than $150,000 so far. Gersch is also receiving support in the form of batches of letters and emails.
[Gersh:] I don't think I could have survived the whole thing without this.
[Sidner:] While it was the hatred spewed by strangers that has terrified her family, it is also the kindness of strangers that is saving them from utter despair. Sara Sidner, CNN White Fish, Montana.
[Anderson:] Well, "The Daily Stormer", Andrew England told his troll army to stop contacting Gersch after the lawsuit was filed. For the most part, they have. Well, updating you on one of our top stories, breaking story this hour, Donald Trump, Jr. has released a statement and an email chain giving new information about Trump, Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer during last year's presidential campaign. The "New York Times" first reported on the email it says, "The meeting was part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump and that the lawyer has information that would incriminate Hillary Clinton and be very useful to Donald Trump". We're going to get more on this for you, taking a very short break, back after this.

[Lu Stout:] All right, coming to you live from Hong Kong on a Monday night Welcome back, this is "News Stream." Now, U.S President Donald Trump once called NAFTA, in his words, the worse deal maybe ever signed. And today you can say he delivered on the campaign pledge to revise it after Canada reached a last-minute deal with the U.S. On twitter, President Trump called the new pact, which will be known as the US-Mexico-Canada agreement, wonderful and historic adding that it will be great for all three countries. Let's go now to New York. That's where we are going top find CNN correspondent Paula Newton as well as CNN's chief business correspondent Christine Romans. A big thank you to you both and Christine, we'll start with you Donald Trump, we know he has long criticized NAFTA. Is this new trade agreement that much different from the original? What's in it?
[Christine Romans, Cnn Business Correspondent:] Well, you know, they're ditching the name. It's not going to be NAFTA. It is US-Mexico-Canada agreement USMCA. Peter Navarro, one of the president's top trade architects saying, you know, consider NAFTA dead. This is the new architecture. The Americans and the Canadians saying this is going to strengthen the middle class and create good well-paying jobs for the nearly half a billion who call North America home. What's in it? Well, they gave way on that access. More access now to Canada's dairy market. This was really important politically for President Trump a big win for President Trump. He had been in upstate New York. He had been in Wisconsin. He had heard the complaints of American farmers and he really, really pressed Canada on this. It does preserve a way to settle dispute. That is something that is important to the Canadians, but it is still scaled-back. Now here is something interesting, the higher wages and labor standards for autoworkers, cars imported from the three North American countries must have 75 percent North-American content rather for duty free trade and two- fifths of every car to be duty-free have to have wages at $16 an hour or higher. So that was something that was a really important thing for the Americans. They're really trying to, you know, make things better for American factory workers. That was really a goal here for the American team.
[Lu Stout:] Got it. And Paula, there was this time where it was kind of touch and go for Canada. You know, it looked like Canada would be excluded from any final deal, but they are in it. So, how is Canda viewing this? Are they getting what they want?
[Paula Newton, Cnn Correspondent:] They definitely did get a lot of what they wanted. One thing that they didn't get though and despite everything that Christine just mentioned in terms of you're going to have a lot of politicians today saying this is a win-win situation. Canada did not get the tariffs on steel and aluminum lifted. That is 25 percent on steel, 10 percent on aluminum. It's causing the Canadian economy, and I don't say other economies around the world, a lot of money right now, Donald Trump and his administration hung close to that largely for political reasons. The Canadian say they are still waiting for those to be lifted, but Christine, what this does Kristie, what this does is shed really a light on what the negotiating strategy will be going forward. Whether it's Japan or whether it's Europe or whether it's China, which will the tough negotiation ahead, Kristie, which we all know these are the kind of issues, political issues that no matter how much the negotiations went down to the wire the Trump administration just wouldn't budge.
[Lu Stout:] Yes. And let's get Christine's thoughts on that. Christine, how should other nations seeking a trade deal with the U.S. view this? Should they be more optimistic, more hopeful that, yes, they too can struck a deal with Donald Trump?
[Romans:] I think that they have seen how Donald Trump negotiates. Like you're right, he did not budge at all, Paula. And you know, there was criticism of this president last week because he was taking such a tough line on America's allies at the same time he is being so Canada while he is being so gentlemanly to North Korea, right. And I think the Chinese negotiators, what they see in this deal right here is a president who did not back down. They see a Chinese manufacturing sector that is starting it's growth is slowing there, right, under a bit of pressure. And this is a president who really, really wants to make another campaign promise in terms of China, keeping a campaign promise in terms of China. Also in this deal, there's this interesting thing. I don't know if you notice it Paula, but in sort of the what we're learning and what's emerging about this deal, something about currency manipulation. Countries could not be able to, you know, artificially weaken their currency to help their exports. That's part of that problem, between the United States, Canada and Mexico. There are a lot of people who were thinking that some of that language and some of those ideas might be a precursor for other trade ght be a precursor for other trade deals going forward.
[Lu Stout:] Paula go ahead.
[Newton:] I'm sorry Kristie, no, and Christine is right. Christine Romans is right in terms of the architecture of this deal. When you look at the architecture of this deal in terms of currency manipulation or even key here, Kristie, is the intellectual property piece. They are definitely looking at it as a template to go forward.
[Lu Stout:] All right, Paula Newton, Christine Romans, a big thank you for you both. Thank a lot. Take care. We're going to have much on the deal along with how the market is going to react at the opening bell. That's coming up on "First Move with Julie Chatterley" that starts in about 40 minutes from now. And news that Elon Musk will step down as the chairman of Tesla, that seems to be giving a big boost to the stock. I mean, Tesla shares has soared as much as 18 percent in pre-marketing trading after Elon Musk agreed over the weekend to pay a $20,000,000 fine to [inaudible] a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Regulators, they claim that he misled investors by claiming he has secured funding to take the company private. Musk did not admit or deny wrongdoing with the settlement. He will remain as CEO. Now, the FBI investigation into Donald Supreme Court nominee seems to be raising more questions and answers at this point. President Trump has said the FBI will have free rein in their probe of Brett Cavanaugh. But Democrats, they are concerned with White House maybe trying to limit the scope of the investigation. Kavanaugh has denied allegations of sexual misconduct dating back to his time in high school and college. His drinking habits back then have also come under scrutiny and that one of his former Yale classmates says that Kavanaugh has not told the truth about that. Abby Phillip is at the White House. She joins us now and Abby, the questions out there, concerns are growing about the scope of the investigation and exactly who's calling the shots here.
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White Hous Correspondent:] Exactly right, Kristie. This investigation was supposed to add some more clarity to this national debate about the MeToo Movement that has been sparked by Brett Kavanaugh's nomination, but instead what we're talking about is whether or not the White House is playing a role along with Senate Democrats in trying to limit the scope of this investigation.
[Phillip:] The FBI investigation into Judge Brett Cavanaugh under scrutiny with sources telling CNN that the White House is controlling the scope of the probe despite President Trump insisting otherwise.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They have free rein. They're going to do whatever they have to do, whatever it is they do.
[Phillip:] Two sources tell CNN that the administration's lead advocate for Kavanaugh, White House counsel Don McGahn is working with Senate Republicans to make the review as narrow as possible.
[Kellyanne Conway, Counselor To The President:] It will be limited in scope. It's meant to last one week. It's not meant to be a fishing expedition.
[Phillip:] The top Democrat on the judiciary committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, requesting a copy of the White House's directive laying out the parameters of the investigation in a letter to McGahn and FBI Director Christopher Ray last night.
[Sen. Mazie Hirono , Hawaii:] To limit the FBI as to the scope and who they were going to question. That really I wanted to use the word farce but that's not the kind of investigation that all of us are expecting the FBI to conduct.
[Phillip:] President Trump pushing back, charging that nothing will ever be enough for Democrats.
[Sara Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] The White House counsel has allowed the Senate to dictate what these terms look like and what the scope of the investigation is
[Sen. Amy Klobuchar , Minnesota:] You can't interview this person, you can't look at this time period. You can only look at these people from one side of the street from when they were growing up. I mean, come on.
[Phillip:] A source tell CNN that Cavanaugh's drinking history, a key point of contention at last week's hearing is not part of the probe.
[Brett Kavanaugh, U.s. Supreme Court Nominee:] If you're asking about blackout, I don't know, have you?
[Phillip:] On of Kavanaugh's Yale classmates accusing Kavanaugh of being a frequent and heavy drinker in a statement Sunday, feeding and downplaying the degree in frequency of his drinking, Brett has not told the truth.
[Unidentified Male:] If Judge Kavanaugh is shown to have lied to the committee, the nomination is over.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] Yes, I would think so.
[Phillip:] CNN has learned the FBI has spoken to Deborah Ramirez Sunday, who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a party while they were students at Yale, a claim Kavanaugh has denied. There is no indication that the FBI intends to speak with the third accuser, Julie Swetnick, who has also accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell releasing a statement on Sunday, attacking Swetnick's credibility.
[Kaanaugh:] The Swetnick thing is a joke. That is a farce.
[Phillip:] Two sources tell CNN that Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford were not on the initial witness list given by Senate Republicans to the White House, but that agents were expected to interview several people who Ford says were present at the party where she says she was assaulted. And the question about the scope of this investigation is really one that could be answered pretty quickly either by the White House or by the FBI. It's pretty telling that despite all of this back-and-forth over the weekend there hasn't been anything concrete that's come out of either place about how and to what extent they are investigating this. I should also note that last night, former FBI director James Comey wrote an op-ed indicating that he believes the FBI can play a constructive role in this process. He indicated that he believed that if there were any lies that were told either in the confirmation hearing, the FBI can clear this up because of the power that speaking to interviewers has people tend to not lie to the FBI and investigators tend to get the truth, so that's Comey's perspective on all of this, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] And meanwhile, President Trump, he says he has no plan B, he has no back up plan. In the event that Kavanaugh's nomination fails, why is that?
[Phillip:] So that's right, I mean the president here projecting some confidence in this process and indicating that he's not looking elsewhere just in case this failed. And I would also add that the White House agreed to do this seemingly in part because they believe that nothing could emerge that would tank his nomination, but the president told reporters that this is it's Kavanaugh or bust. But what we had heard from reporters from sources last week, is that there were people in the White House and around the White House who have been suggesting that maybe they should start preparing some of the other individuals who had been on President Trump's shortlist just in case Kavanaugh doesn't make it through. I think there is still a possibility here, just given how narrow these margins are in the Senate, that this could go either way. So I think the president projecting confidence shouldn't be taken as a fait accompli for this particular nomination, Kristie.
[Lu Stout:] Got it. Abby Phillip, reporting live from the White House. Thank you. Now, the U.K due to leave the European Union in just six months time, but the debate on how to do it, that is raging on. British Prime Minister Theresa May is facing increasing pressure from members of her own conservative party over her plans for Brexit. The issue is set to dominate her party's annual conference in Birmingham, England, which is now in day two. CNN's Bianca Nabilo is [inaudible] the story from there. She joins us live, and Bianca, at this conference, Theresa May really needs to reassert her authority. We know that political rivals are circling around her. Tell us about what's at stake for the British prime minister.
[Bianca Nabilo, Cnn Correspondent:] Kristie, I mean, politically everything is at stake with the prime minister this week. She has almost become and her leadership synonymous with her Brexit proposal even though obviously the policy and the person are distinct what she stands for in these Brexit negotiations is having a huge impact on her credibility as leader. Now, it's been said for some time that she won't be leader too long after Britain actually exits the E.U next month from the 29th, but everything is still uncertain at the moment and what's happened today is we've seen her in a call, really rally around her. We've had a speech from her chancellor, Phillip Hammond, and also the Brexit secretary, Dominic Raab, who had some very strong words for the E.U. Let's take a listen.
[Dominic Raab, U.k. Brexit Secretary:] If the EU wants a deal they need to get serious and they need to do it now. Some people say that no deal is unthinkable. Wrong. What is unthinkable is that this document or any other British document could be bullied by the threat of some kind of economic embargo into signing a one-sided deal against our country's interests.
[Nabilo:] Fighting talk there from the Brexit secretary who certainly does have a black belt in karate but he and the chancellor have rallied around the prime minister today, just digging their heels in and making sure that the party know and bear in mind, this party is not will check in no particular popular plan within this party. So they are really trying to call on some more support in these crucial stages and convince the members because they are actually aren't other options on the table. People might talk about a comprehensive free trade deal that is more ambitious, but they argue that is simply not possible as far as the E.U is concerned.
[Lu Stout:] OK, so, all eyes on Theresa May and also on, yes, Boris Johnson who resigned as foreign secretary in protest of May's chequer's plan earlier this year. What Brexit plan is he calling for and how much party support does it have?
[Nabilo:] That's an interesting question because when I was at the this conference last year, there was a lot more drama and excitement around Boris as a figure in the party and he commanded more approval than he currently does. So that remains to be seen. He's going to hold a big rally tomorrow so it will be interesting to see how the membership responds to that. Now he, in his proponent of what he calls a super Canada deal. This is an idea that Canada style over the E.U., so a free trade agreement rather than something closer to the Norway option which keeps the U.K. far more closely aligned with the European Union in the future. Now, that has a lot of support among the membership of the conservative party, but that is exactly why the messaging from the prime minister, the Brexit secretary and the chancellor today have been strong and they've all been arguing that whatever Boris is suggesting is simply not feasible in these negotiations. However, he did dominate the first day of conference yesterday with making a huge splash across all of the headlines. He has called the prime minister chequers proposal to rage in his [inaudible] attacks on the proposal. The former Brexit secretary, David Davis and some other members of the conservative party who are highly ranked and listened to those membership have come out though and be more critical of Boris than they have in years past. So, watch the space. It seems like his star maybe fading somewhat.
[Lu Sout:] Interesting. Bianca Nabilo, reporting live from Birmingham, thank you. We'll talk again soon. You're watching "News Stream." And still ahead, scenes of devastation just there in Indonesia as the death toll rises following that massive earthquake and tsunami. We go live to the region, next.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent/anchor:] Yes, they've been sitting on those numbers for some time. Barbara Starr, thanks very much. Our coverage on CNN continues right now.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news. "Maybe he did." President Trump stands by the Saudi crown prince, insisting the CIA has not definitely concluded that he personally directed the murder of a U.S.-based journalist. The president says maybe he did, and maybe he didn't, making it clear, there will be no punishment for Saudi Arabia. Returning his responses. The president finishes answering questions from the special counsel, Robert Mueller, about possible collusion, and his lawyers have now submitted the written responses. So what's Robert Mueller's next move? E-mail excuses. The president concedes that his daughter and senior adviser, Ivanka Trump, used private e-mail for government business. Is that any different than what Hillary Clinton did? And Putin's Interpol pick. A close ally and top aide of Vladimir Putin is in line for the top job at the global police organization Interpol. Why are Putin's critics very worried? I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news. President Trump sides with Saudi Arabia, shrugging off an intelligence assessment that the Saudi crown prince personally ordered the murder of a U.S.-based journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, saying, "Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't." The president lets the crown prince off the hook and signaling that the United States will not punish Saudi Arabia, while stressing that the kingdom has pledged to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the U.S. I'll speak with Congressman Adam Smith. He's the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. And our correspondents and specialists are standing by with full coverage. Let's begin with our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, the president is now making it abundantly clear that he's backing the Saudis.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] That's right. First, some breaking news, and that is the president's legal team has sent out a statement, saying that they have submitted the president's written responses in the Russia investigation to the special counsel's office. But as you said, Wolf, there is arguably a bigger story today. And that is that President Trump is sending a strong signal today that he stands with Saudi Arabia, despite the kingdom's apparent role in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The president seems to be dismissing a CIA assessment that the Saudi crown prince ordered Khashoggi's murder. And when I asked the president whether he is allowing the Saudis to get away with murder earlier this afternoon, he said his decision is based on his policy of "America first."
[Acosta:] Just moments before a ceremonial pardoning of the Thanksgiving turkey at the White House
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I will be issuing both Peas and Carrots a presidential pardon.
[Acosta:] President Trump delivered a chilling message on the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. In a statement that begins with "America first," the president seemed to dismiss a CIA assessment that found Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, ordered Khashoggi's killing, saying, "It could very well be that the crown prince had knowledge of this tragic event. Maybe he did and maybe he didn't." Leaving for Thanksgiving, the president defended his decision to side with the Saudis. [on camera]: Are you letting the Saudis get away with murder?
[Trump:] No.
[Acosta:] Murdering a journalist?
[Trump:] No, no. This is about America first. They're paying us $400 billion-plus to purchase and invest in our country. That's probably the biggest amount ever paid to the United States.
[Acosta:] Don't you believe the CIA?
[Trump:] They didn't make a determination. And it's just like I said. I think it was maybe he did, maybe he didn't. They did not make that assessment. The CIA has looked at it; they've studied it a lot. They have nothing definitive.
[Acosta:] In a statement, the president also appeared to buy into a Saudi smear of Khashoggi, adding, "Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an enemy of the state, and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood." Khashoggi's family has blasted those claims as ridiculous. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo backed up the president's statement.
[Mike Pompeo, U.s. Secretary Of State:] This is a long, historic commitment, and one that is absolutely vital to America's national security. It's a mean, nasty world out there.
[Acosta:] But not all Republicans are on board.
[Rep. Francis Rooney , Foreign Affairs Committee:] I'm concerned about our standing in the world and what it says about the United States.
[Acosta:] The president's willingness to believe Saudi denials is consistent with his posture toward other undemocratic countries like Russia and its meddling in the 2016 election.
[Trump:] Maybe it was. I mean, it could be Russia but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?
[Acosta:] The president's explosive statement comes less than a day after his own daughter, Ivanka Trump, came under scrutiny for her use of private e-mails to do government business.
[Marc Short, Cnn Political Commentator:] It's hypocritical, and certainly, it looks bad. And I'm sure that the media will have a field day with it today.
[Unidentified Male:] Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!
[Trump:] Tell you what. For what she's done, they should lock her up.
[Acosta:] Hypocritical, because it's a reminder that her father savaged Hillary Clinton for her private e-mail use.
[Trump:] If I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. Because there has never been so many lies, so much deception.
[Acosta:] A source close to Ivanka brushed off the story in a statement saying, "This is a 14-month-old story. There was nothing there then, and there is nothing there now." The president insists his daughter did nothing wrong.
[Trump:] They weren't deleted like Hillary Clinton, who deleted 33 she wasn't hiring she wasn't doing anything to hide her e-mails. There was no deletion; there was no nothing. What it is, is a false story.
[Acosta:] Now as for Ivanka Trump's e-mail use, a source close to the White House and the Trump family says the president's daughter obviously knows better, as she watched the 2016 campaign like the rest of us. As this source put it, Ivanka, quote, "deserves to get hit over the issue." And as for Khashoggi, the president keeps defending the decision that he made with claims that the Saudis are spending a fortune on U.S. weapons, but only a fraction, Wolf, of those financial gains have actually materialized at this point. The president said today, he's not willing to destroy the U.S. economy over Khashoggi, but, Wolf, a lot of lawmakers in his own party would argue that he can do plenty of about Khashoggi without wrecking the economy. We should also point out on the economy, the president did weigh in on the stock market dropping some 500 more than 500 points today. The president made it clear to reporters he is not overly concerned about this downturn in the stock market, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right. Jim Acosta, our chief White House correspondent, reporting tonight from the White House North Lawn. Thank you very much. Now to two stories that breaking right now. The president's lawyers say the president has now turned over his written answers to questions from the special counsel, Robert Mueller. And moments ago, "The New York Times" is reporting that President Trump wanted to order the U.S. Justice Department to prosecute Hillary Clinton and former FBI director, James Comey. Let's bring in CNN's Laura Jarrett. She's over at the Justice Department. CNN's Kara Scannell is here with me. And Laura, let me just read the first couple sentences of this "New York Times" article, which is explosive. The headline, "Trump Wanted to Order Justice Department to Prosecute Comey and Clinton." "President Trump told the White House counsel in the spring of this year that he wanted to order the Justice Department to prosecute two of his political adversaries, his 2016 challenger, Hillary Clinton and the former FBI director, James Comey, according to two people familiar with the conversation." The article continues. "The lawyer" that would be the White House lawyer, Don McGahn "rebuffed the president, saying he had no authority to order a prosecution. Mr. McGahn said that, while he could request an investigation, that, too, could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, Mr. McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for Mr. Trump, warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment." Laura, this is an explosive article we're getting. And clearly, they didn't go ahead, and the Justice Department didn't begin to prosecute Hillary Clinton or James Comey. But this is pretty explosive right here.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] It's remarkable reporting, Wolf. And it's interesting that McGahn obviously saw the writing on the wall, saw how this could turn bad and fast, even resulting in possible impeachment. And so he had the lawyers in the White House counsel's office, according to this reporting, draft up a memo, trying to outline for the president all of the different down sides of this. According to the reporting from Maggie Haberman and Michael Schmidt, it's not clear that the president actually read that memo, but clearly, McGahn tried to warn him of this. And it's also not clear whether, in fact, this ever was conveyed to the Justice Department through other channels. We know that John Huber, a prosecutor out in Utah, has been looking at Hillary Clinton for some time. We know the inspector general over here at the Justice Department has also been looking at James Comey. And so we don't know whether he went around McGahn and found some other way to get this dirty work done. But it's, again, one of the most striking examples of how the president has tried to encroach, slowly but surely, on these traditional norms between the Justice Department and the White House. And I should also point out, Wolf, of course we know that Don McGahn has spent quite a bit of time with the special counsel's office through their investigation into obstruction of justice. And so you can imagine, this has come up. You can imagine that memo has been turned over. And just finally, Wolf, the other tidbit in here is his disappointment, apparently, with the FBI director, Christopher Wray. The reporting here is that he feels like Wray has been weak, because he has declined to go after his political rivals, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right. Stand by. You mentioned Maggie Haberman. She's joining us on the phone right now. She's one of our CNN political contributors, the coauthor of this explosive new article in "The New York Times." So step back and give us the big picture, Maggie, on your excellent reporting. What have we learned?
[Maggie Haberman, Cnn Political Analyst:] Thanks for having me and thank you for reading the reporting. Look, what we have learned is that the president engaged privately in, frankly, what he has talked about publicly on and off for quite some time, but that he tried to use the levers of power to do so, which was prosecute his political enemies. He made clear to the White House Counsel's Office that he wanted the Justice Department to go after James Comey, the FBI director who he fired, and Hillary Clinton, his rival in the 2016 campaign, who he claimed just a week after the election, you know, he didn't want to do any more damage to. But he has changed his tune, and he himself has found himself under investigation. He made clear at the White House counsel's office he wanted this done. And Don McGahn, then the White House counsel, made clear there were a range of negative outcomes that could face him if he went ahead with that, including but not necessarily limited to, impeachment. It is extraordinary to have a president who so openly talks about using the levers of power this way. I think not since Nixon have we heard of something like this. And the degree to which Don McGahn documented what was taking place is in the form of a memo explaining to the president what was going on and what could and couldn't be done. But it clearly laid out, I think, in case, you know, the president went further and went around Don McGahn, that he had tried to stop this.
[Blitzer:] You say that the president wanted to prosecute James Comey and Hillary Clinton. But for what charges? What specific charges did he want the Justice Department to go after two of these rivals?
[Haberman:] It's never entirely been clear. I think in the case of Comey, it was for leaking. I think in the case of Comey, it was possibly how certain pieces of information were handled. In the case of Hillary Clinton, it was related to Uranium One, more specifically donations to the Clinton family foundation by those associated with the company, Uranium One, which was a Russian
[Blitzer:] The other really explosive note in your article, and once again, really terrific reporting, is that the president is now deeply disappointed in the FBI director, Christopher Wray, whom he nominated, whom he appointed to be the FBI director.
[Haberman:] He has complained about Chris Wray on and off for quite some time, almost since he was nominated. First he wasn't moving fast enough to rid the FBI top ranks of, you know, Trump detractors. Then it was related to Hillary Clinton and Comey. You know, he has had all sorts of complaints about officials at the Justice Department. Chris Wray had very a very narrow honeymoon, frankly, before he started incurring Trump's frustration. But, yes, one of his frustrations is that he didn't think things were being done to go after his rivals.
[Blitzer:] So where does it stand now, that relationship between the president and the FBI director?
[Haberman:] Look, as far as we know, you know, it remains unchanged. I don't think that it is anything like the level of toxicity with what we saw with Jeff Sessions. But remember, that was a very specific thing related to Jeff Sessions' recusal from the Russia probe, which literally everybody recognized had to happen, except the president. This is this is a different issue. There's nothing that is ever going to top that. But look, people come in and out of Donald Trump's favor all of the time. But you come in and out of favor, because you're not using the Justice Department as a way to settle personal political scores.
[Blitzer:] We remember at least some of us that Richard Nixon, then president tried to use his presidential power to influence law enforcement, the Justice Department, to go after individuals, political rivals. But this is pretty extraordinary, if this president, President Trump, were to try to do something similar, right?
[Haberman:] Yes. I mean, this is this is as far as we know, nothing happened beyond this discussion. But, you know, there's a statement in our story from a lawyer for Don McGahn saying that, to his knowledge, the president never ordered anyone to do this. I think that is a very specifically worded statement to make clear that "We don't know whether the president tried to go around the White House counsel and tell anyone else to do anything." You know, our reporting does not show that he did. But I don't think people are willing to rule it out.
[Blitzer:] And it's unclear whether McGahn's suggestion to the president, that if he were to order such an investigation, such a prosecution by the Justice Department, that could lead potentially to impeachment. It's unclear whether that did have a negative effect on the president, forcing him to step back, right?
[Haberman:] Oh, I think it did. I think it did. I think repeatedly, anything that has come toward the third rail of impeachment appears to get through the president as a problem. You know, again, whether he tried to do something on his own, he thought he could put in place, I don't know. But I do think that, at least for a time and possibly permanently, it got him to back off.
[Blitzer:] In your article, Maggie, you say a White House spokesman declined to comment. A spokeswoman for the FBI declined to comment on the president's criticism of Director Wray. But there is a statement here from the lawyer for Don McGahn, who was the White House counsel. Let me read it: "Mr. McGahn will not comment on his legal advice to the president. Like any client, that the president is entitled to confidentiality. Mr. McGahn would point out, though, the president never, to his knowledge, ordered that anyone prosecute Hillary Clinton or James Comey." That's the statement. That's a very carefully written statement from Don McGahn. I wonder if you'd like to elaborate on it.
[Haberman:] Well, I think it I think it speaks for itself. But again, as I said before, I think that the words "to my knowledge," I think, speak to nobody wanting to say as an absolute certainty that the president didn't try to find other avenues to influence the Justice Department. BLITZER; We also know that Don McGahn, as the White House counsel, spent hours, I think some 20 hours, talking to the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and his team. Is there any indication that this specific issue came up, that the president wanted to have the Justice Department prosecute Hillary Clinton and James Comey? That I don't know the answer to. I do know he spent more than 30 hours with them, and we also know that Mueller has called a number of witnesses back if this did not get asked about. I imagine McGahn could be called back in the future and asked about it.
[Blitzer:] Do we know if McGahn actually wrote that memo he said he was going to write to the president explaining the negative consequences of potentially launching this kind of Justice Department prosecution?
[Haberman:] A memo was written about the parameters of his office by White House counsel officials. I'm not sure about how detailed it was about the possible ramifications of it.
[Blitzer:] And do you know if Mueller has that memo?
[Haberman:] I do not know the answer to that. But I think if he doesn't have it already, he will after this story.
[Blitzer:] Yes, I'm sure he will. This is once again, explosive information. And just to be precise, want to be precise. There's no indication that any such prosecution no such investigation was ever launched.
[Haberman:] Correct. Correct. We have our reporting did not show that anything like that happened. Again, I want to refer back to Don McGahn's very carefully worded statement. To his knowledge, nothing was done. To our knowledge, nothing was done either.
[Blitzer:] And the relationship that Don McGahn had with the president when he left the White House was what?
[Haberman:] Not positive. I mean, I think that the it was neutral, I would say, at best. You know, the president remains very angry at Don McGahn for essentially blames him for the Mueller probe. That he thinks was his fault, that Sessions recused, and it was his fault that, you know, after they fired Comey that they ended up with Mueller. He likes a lot of other things that Don McGahn did, including efforts to toward deregulation. And I think there were other areas where he thought McGahn was really helpful, such as nominating Supreme Court justices. Judge Kavanaugh was a close friend of McGahn's. McGahn helped shepherd that through. I don't think they're going to break apart. But it has been a very, very, very rocky relationship over a long period of time. McGahn was a tremendous target of the president's.
[Blitzer:] And we know what has happened over the past couple of weeks. There's a new acting attorney general, Matthew Whitaker. Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, was fired. How does that potentially fit into this narrative?
[Haberman:] Well, I think that look, I don't want to speculate about what could happen in terms of whether the president would go after somebody. I think it's a little unlikely that he would do that now with the Democratic Congress taking over with its own subpoena power. I think that the belief among a lot of Trump loyalists is that Matt Whitaker is going to be potentially more helpful to the president is related to the special counsel's investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials and any improprieties related to that.
[Blitzer:] I asked the question, as you know, Maggie, because in the past as a private citizen, Matthew Whitaker, the now acting attorney general of the United States, had made a case that Hillary Clinton could be prosecuted.
[Haberman:] He did. I think, again, I think it would be really hard for them to go ahead with that right now. But, yes, he most certainly did make that case when he was a private citizen. And when you know, around the time the president was tossing this kind of thing around. Remember, the president said in a radio interview a year ago that he was not being allowed to do some of the things he wanted to do. This appeared to be one of them.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Well, you did excellent, excellent reporting, Maggie. Thank you for the good work, as usual.
[Haberman:] Thank you, sir.
[Blitzer:] All right. You know, let me bring back Laura Jarrett, our Justice Department lawyer. She's over at the Justice Department right now. Any more in the article, there was no comment from the Justice Department, no comment from the FBI. Anything coming in?
[Jarrett:] No reaction yet, Wolf. But I have to say, I mean, some of the details in this are quite remarkable, including just, again, to underscore this piece on Director Wray. It appears his only gripe with the FBI director is the fact that he hasn't been aggressive enough in going after Clinton for this Uranium One deal that we've heard so much about. Again, that is the issue that John Huber, a federal prosecutor, the top prosecutor out in Utah, has been looking into for some time. And we all kind of wondered kind of how all of that would hash out eventually. Even at the time, some suggested that the fact that Jeff Sessions had appointed him in the first place might have been viewed as political, given that there hadn't been any real allegation of impropriety, other than on fringe sites and by the president himself. So we're going to have to do more reporting, obviously, on all of this, including what role, if any, Matt Whitaker, the new acting attorney general, had in any of this and whether he was privy to any of these discussions, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, that's a very, very serious potential that we lead to investigate. Let me just read a couple more sentences from this article. Kara Scannell is with us. I want, Kara, you to weigh in on this. "Ultimately, the lawyers warned Mr. Trump could be voted out of office if voters believed he had abused his power," abused presidential power. And then the article says this. "For decades, White House aides have routinely sought to shield presidents from decisions related to criminal cases or even from talking about them publicly. Presidential meddling could undermine the legitimacy of prosecutions by attaching political overtones to investigations in which career law enforcement officials follow the evidence and the law." So potentially, this is explosive. If, in fact, the president would have ordered the Justice Department to launch this kind of prosecution, that could be seen as an abuse of presidential power.
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. I mean, and it's sort of the red line, the third rail, this political interference in DOJ investigations. And so if there is evidence that the president did insert himself in this, that that's a big problem. The Department of Justice is supposed to be independent. It's not supposed to be an arm of the president to investigate his enemies or foes. So that is a that is a real key issue here that more reporting assets get to the bottom of. Is that, you know, was there any interference? Did this message ever make it to DOJ and did they act on it?
[Blitzer:] I want to bring in our chief legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, who's now gone through this article. Jeffrey, give us your thoughts, because as I've been saying, it's all very potentially explosive.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] I'm sorry, Wolf. You're breaking up. I didn't I didn't get that. I apologize.
[I -- Blitzer:] Can you hear me?
[Toobin:] You better go to someone else. I can't hear you.
[Blitzer:] ok. We'll fix your earpiece over there. We'll get back to you. Let me bring in Laura. It's also explosive if the president would have gone forward with this order to launch of prosecution of Hillary Clinton and James Comey.
[Jarrett:] That's right. And you know, it's interesting. In the article, he appears to be saying to McGahn, "Don't I have the authority to do this?" He's fixated at least on the idea that, in theory, as the head of the executive branch, of course, he can make this type of order. But the question is should he, and is that a good idea? Is that the kind of thing that we want and the kind of norms that we want to be establishing between the White House and the Justice Department? And, of course, you know, it still has shades of what we've seen from him, as Maggie said. His public behavior, calling on Twitter all the time for Jeff Sessions to investigate Comey and Clinton repeatedly. And even then bemoaning the fact that the Justice Department has actually gone after Republicans. We remember that tweet right before the midterms when the president lambasted the fact that the Justice Department had opened investigations into Duncan Hunter and Chris Collins, because they're Republicans. And so there's the idea that the Justice Department is just a puppet for his whims, instead of actually trying to carry through on legitimate, well-founded investigations, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, this is very, very significant. Kara, as we've been pointing out, there is a new acting attorney general of the United States right now who as a private citizen made abundantly clear he thought Hillary Clinton should be prosecuted.
[Scannell:] That's right. I mean, he has been, Matt Whitaker has been very outspoken of his views of the Clintons, you know, perhaps even going further publicly than what Trump is even saying here. I mean, he's been looking for an investigation. So this could be something that would be welcome to him. But it would still cross that line of interference that, you know, is the whole integrity of the Justice Department and of line prosecutors is that you don't cross. You don't do these political-motivated investigations. That's something that, at least a lot of the line assistants and the career professionals view as sacred to them.
[Blitzer:] The the charge that James Comey leaked classified information, what's that based on?
[Scannell:] I mean, I think what they're focusing on here is that he was leaking information related to the investigation of Clinton, and some of the foundation investigation had come out. Remember, they were two sort of competing investigations. And that, you know, was that something that was coming out to help balance, perhaps, the other investigation that was out there? But this is, you know this remains to be seen what exactly he is focusing on in you know, with that specific allegation of a leak by Comey.
[Blitzer:] Kara, the other breaking news you're working on is that the White House, the president's lawyers, personal lawyers, Jay Sekulow and Rudy Giuliani, have now both confirmed that the written responses to Mueller's written questions have now been sent from the White House to Mueller's office.
[Scannell:] That's right. So both attorneys are saying that the written answers that Trump himself said that he wrote have been submitted to the special counsel's office. We have a statement from Rudy Giuliani, one of the attorneys, in which he says, "It has been our position from the outset that much of what has been asked raised serious constitutional issues and was beyond the scope of legitimate inquiry. This remains our position today. The president has nonetheless provided unprecedented cooperation. The special counsel has been provided with more than 30 witnesses, 1.4 million pages of material, and now the president's written responses to questions. It is time to bring this inquiry to a conclusion." So the president has responded, but these questions are focused on collusion and whether anyone from the Trump campaign had any interactions with Russia. It does not cover the potential topics of obstruction of justice or what happened during the transition. So it remains to be seen if this is going to satisfy the special counsel's inquiry. I mean, this was part of a negotiated deal, but there's still a lot remains to be seen here, whether this is the final note in this investigation as it relates to the president.
[Blitzer:] I want to bring in Congressman Adam Smith of Washington state. He's the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, likely to become the next chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman, you've been hearing all the breaking news. Let me first get your reaction to this bombshell report in "The New York Times" that President Trump actually attempted to order the Justice Department to prosecute Hillary Clinton and the fired FBI director, James Comey. What's your reaction?
[Rep. Adam Smith , Washington:] Well, it's not even remotely surprising. I mean, President Trump has made these types of charges before. I mean, he gosh, he admitted on NBC News he fired, you know, Director Comey because of the Russia investigation. He has been quoted as asking for loyalty out of people from the Justice Department. As your guest pointed out, traditionally, presidents separate themselves from the Justice Department and let the Justice Department do their jobs. But over and over and over again, over the course of the last two years, President Trump has made it clear that he views it as his Justice Department and will use it in any way he can to protect himself and punish his enemies. So there's nothing terribly surprising about this, unfortunately. It's fits with the pattern of the way he's talked about the FBI and the Justice Department during his time as president.
[Blitzer:] Yes, and expressing his disappointment in the FBI director, Christopher Wray, this he isn't tough enough. I want you to elaborate, Congressman. What does it tell you about the president's views on the Justice Department, the FBI, and his own presidential powers?
[Smith:] Again, it tells us what we've already known. How many times has he tweeted over the course of the last two years as he's complained about the Mueller investigation, you know, "How come they're not investigating Hillary Clinton? How come they're not investigating the Democrats?" So, you know, he's been very public about his desire to have them investigate his political enemies. You know, if you just think about it logically, it's hard to imagine that in private he wasn't trying to do that. I mean, remember James Comey's accounting of, you know, his meeting with the president, where the president kept asking him for loyalty, kept wanting, basically, to get an assurance from James Comey that he would look after Donald Trump, as opposed to the law. So it is deeply disturbing Don't get me wrong that a president views the Justice Department and the rule of law in this way. But it is a consistent pattern with President Trump, as he's tried to undermine the investigation. And keep in mind, I mean, the Russia investigation, when it first started, as an investigation into what the Russians were up to. They didn't necessarily have to be connected to Trump or his campaign. But Trump was trying to stop it from the very start. So yes, this is deeply troubling. We are a nation of laws, not of people. President Trump does not understand that. He sees the entire government apparatus as his, basically. He got elected to president, so now it should do his bidding. And it's disturbing. And I'm only, you know, happy that we've had people at the FBI, at the Justice Department, who are willing been willing to stand up to the president and not let him do that, to maintain the integrity of the rule of law in this country.
[Blitzer:] Well, what do you think of the acting attorney general, Matt Whitaker, right now?
[Smith:] Well, I don't think there's cause for optimism in terms of how he's going to approach this, given his track record and his connections to President Trump. And the very obvious reason why he picked Trump sorry, why Trump picked him for the position. We'll have to wait and see what happens. But the No. 1, most important thing is to protect Mueller's investigation. And as you mentioned during your reporting, and I thought it was a very good point I forget, sorry, which person it was who said this that whenever Trump is told that his actions may lead to impeachment, he pulls back. So and he's been told that about any effort to fire Mueller. But you can definitely see the appointment of Whitaker as a step towards getting to the point where he could do that. So, you know, the media everybody has to really stand up for the rule of law here and protect the Mueller investigation: maintain its independence and allow it to do its job. Because if President Trump could get away with it, he would end it tomorrow. I have no doubt about that. We have to make sure that he thinks the price of doing that is too high. That the price would be his presidency and the price would be impeachment. Whitaker is a step towards Trump trying to move in that direction, but it is not a step that gets him there. So we need to stand up and make sure that it doesn't.
[Blitzer:] You're expected to become the next chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Let me get your thoughts on the murder of the Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi. The president seems to be arguing now, in this lengthy statement that he released earlier today, that Saudi Arabia is way too important an ally of the United States to hold it accountable for the murder of this journalist. Is that just the price of doing business with the Saudis?
[Smith:] This is incredibly disturbing, as well. I mean, it's hard to say what's more disturbing: the president wanting to use the Justice Department to go after his political enemies or for him to basically he just said it. He said, "Maybe he did it, maybe he didn't." And the way he said that was, basically, at the end of the day, President Trump doesn't care, which means the United States doesn't care. And this is part, again, of a pattern of dictatorship and autocratic approach to government. We have seen the media targeted in many countries throughout the world, with new constitutions placing restrictions on free speech and the freedom of the media. And I think the most disturbing thing about this is that the Saudis thought they could get away with it. You know, ten years ago, if they had been thinking about this, that the international price that would have been paid, the way the U.S. would have reacted, they never would have considered doing it. But it appears that the Saudis knew President Trump fairly well. And they figured that they could get away with doing this. And if if it's open season on your political critics, and the United States does nothing about it, that is just appalling. It creates a situation where we creep towards a complete shutdown of freedom, of political freedom, the ability to express yourself. And the president is just wrong, like crazy wrong to say our relationship with Saudi Arabia is somehow our economy hinges on it. It does not. The weapons sales he keeps pointing to are but a mere pittance of our committee. So it's really just a cover of the fact that the president really doesn't mind if autocratic dictators take out members of the media. So, again, this is not the direction that U.S. values and U.S. policy should be going. And it is deeply, deeply disturbing.
[Blitzer:] Congressman Adam Smith, thanks so much for joining us.
[Smith:] Thanks, Wolf. I appreciate the chance.
[Blitzer:] All right. There's lots of breaking news we're following. We're going to take a quick break. We'll resume our special coverage right after this.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn:] The top of the hour. 7:00 here in New York. 4:00 in the afternoon out in the west. I'm Ana Cabrera. You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. Thank you so much for being with us. One hundred percent proper. Those words from President Trump today describing his handling of the Russian election meddling investigation, 100 percent proper. The President is hosting Republican leaders at Camp David right now. This is a weekend dedicated to mapping out the New Year's legislative agenda. But a reporter asked the President about reports he tried to prevent attorney general Jeff Sessions from recusing himself from the Russia investigation.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Everything that I have done is 100 percent proper. That's what I do is I do things proper. And you know, I guess the collusion now is dead because everyone found that after a year of study, there has been absolutely no collusion. There has been no collusion between us and the Russians. Now, there has been collusion between Hillary Clinton, the DNC and the Russians, unfortunately, you people don't cover that very much. But the only collusion is between Hillary and the Russians and the DNC and the Russians and one of those things.
[Cabrera:] That was the public President Trump today. Earlier in private and on twitter, he lashed out again at that new book that paints the oval office in a not so flattering light. And reports suggest he is not mentally stable. While in one tweet, the President refers to himself as a quote "very stable genius." CNN's Boris Sanchez joins us from the White House. Boris, the President's reaction to this book seems to be overshadowing the politics plan for this weekend at Camp David.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Ana. The President making news on several fronts today, not only backing his attorney general Jeff Sessions, whom several congressional Republicans in the freedom caucus called to be fired this week, but also praising direct talks between North and South Korea, sending a message to Democrats on immigration saying there would be no solution to the legal status of Dreamers, the issue of DACA, without funding a border wall, also talking about the Russian investigation. All of that, though, being overshadowed by his defense of his mental state. He clearly has taken the comments from Michael Wolff personally in his book "Fire and Fury." And not just that but also some of the comments that Wolff has made during television interviews saying that the President has quote "lost it and going as far as to say that 100 percent of the people around the President question his fitness for office. In turn the President calling Michael Wolff a fraud. Saying that what he is doing is disgraceful and going as far as to question or rather refute that Michael Wolff had any access to the President saying that he was never in the oval office. Questions about the President's mental state have long been swirling, though. It was a few months ago Steve Bannon reportedly said there was a 30 percent chance that people around the President might bring upon the 25th amendment and force him out of office because of his mental state. And just last month, you had some dozen lawmakers in both chambers of Congress being briefed by a psychiatrist from Yale University about the President's metal fitness. Despite those previous questions, we have never really seen the President be as aggressive as he was today at Camp David defending his mental state. And at the same time while trying to outline and then move forward with his 2018 agenda Ana.
[Cabrera:] And a part of that little press Q&A the President re- affirmed his support for attorney general Jeff Sessions. But Sessions is not at Camp David this weekend. What does the White House have to say about that?
[Sanchez:] That's right. They say it has been part of a long-held plan. The absence certainly curious as I know that before. Because this week you had several congressional Republicans calling for Jeff Sessions to step down. Despite that the White House says that this week was all about the legislative agenda. And that it had long been a part of a plan for the lawmakers and cabinet members that there now to be there not a part of the executive branch department of justice agenda for this weekend. So it would be natural that Jeff Sessions, this is attorney general, will not be there, Ana.
[Cabrera:] OK, Boris Sanchez at the White House. Thank you. President Trump's comment on Jeff Sessions following the "New York Times" report, suggesting he ordered White House counsel Don McGahn to try to prevent Sessions from recusing himself from the Russian investigation. Now CNN has learned that three White House officials, in fact, were a part of that effort. CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz is joining us now. What does this mean for special counsel Robert Mueller's probe, Shimon?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Producer:] Right. So keep in mind, Ana, that this revelation, these sort of new facts are not necessarily new to the special counsel. Some of the people who we have reported were involved in trying to put some pressure on the attorney general in not recusing himself from the Russia probe, have all been interviewed by special counsel, by Bob Mueller's team. So some of this information is probably already before the special counsel. And it could go into a sort of building a bigger pattern, a fact, a pattern here into obstruction. You know, Bob Mueller's team, the obstruction is still a big part of the investigation. We know that several people who have been interviewed by the special counsel have been asked questions about who played what role in the firing of the former FBI director. This Air Force One statement regarding the Trump tower meeting with Don Jr. and a Russian lawyer, where the President had direct involvement in the statement and the crafting of the response when that story surfaced. So all of this goes to the obstruction case, because in the end, you know, every time the FBI, we now know, when the FBI had asked questions of people associated with the campaign about their connections to Russian, some of them lied to the FBI. George Papadopoulos, a former foreign policy adviser was arrested by the FBI, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his conversations with Russians. So all of this just continues to build out perhaps a pattern of continuing to hide information from investigators, continuing to hide contacts with Russians. And we know that the obstruction case is still going on and is still a big part of this special counsel probe.
[Cabrera:] There are a lot of Republicans now calling for Jeff Sessions to step down because of his recusal from the Russian investigation, which led to this special counsel appointment. What is the mood like right now inside the justice department regarding session a future there?
[Prokupecz:] I think it's fair to say that there is probably constant confusion between some of the people who worked there as to what the future holds for the attorney general. There are today the President said he had the attorney, he supported the attorney general, you know, tomorrow that could change the day after that could change. You know, there is constant inconsistency in where the President stands. I think the other issue here is the relationship with the FBI in the department of justice. And, you know, the President's attacks on the FBI. The revelation from the "New York Times" that the department of justice has denied that, you know, someone in the department of justice was trying to, was ordered to try to find dirt went to the hill to try to find dirt on the FBI, the former FBI director. So all of this just sort of keeps happening. There are new facts that come out. The department of justice has denied that they were looking for dirt on Comey. But, you know, all of this is very interesting because it does go to the continued kind of morale within these agencies that they feel beat up, you know. We are still talking about them. And they really want to move forward. But the career folks and the people who work at these agencies will keep doing their job in trying to keep us safe, keep prosecutions open investigations. That is going to continue. But you know, you do have to expect that it does hurt the people who work there, morale and how they feel about their leaders, about the people that are heading these agencies that they'are working at.
[Cabrera:] Shimon Prokupecz in Washington. Thank you. I want to discuss President Trump's actions today, defending his mental stable, lashing out at the author of a tell-all book and turning the spotlight back on the Russia probe during that press that was supposed to be the focus of the legislative agenda moving forward. Joining us now to talk more about it is Douglas Brinkley, CNN Presidential historian, Samantha Vinograd, former member of President Obama's national Security Council and Page Pate, defense attorney and constitutional law professor. Douglas, President Trump's tweets, the ones saying she a very stable genius, where does this fit into a big pick historically. Have previous Presidents weighed in the base over their mental fitness?
[Douglas Brinkley, Presidential Historian:] No. I mean, there often been Presidents have had to defend their health. I mean, when Woodrow Wilson had a stroke, people wondering what kind of condition he was in. Dwight Eisenhower had a heart attack in 1955. And you have to come out and show that you are vigorous. This is about the psychological health of the President. Some people raised that about Lyndon Johnson in 1968 when he decided not to run for re-election. And, of course, Richard Nixon in his last months. I mean, Nixon I edited Nixon's tapes and you can hear him screaming at Henry Kissinger and others to do crazy irrational things and they would say yes sir, yes boss, and not listen to him. But the fact that he came out the way he did, Donald Trump, and reminding me of Nixon saying I'm not a crook. Donald Trump basically said today I'm not a moron. And I think it was silly of him to have taken the bait of the Wolff book this fulsomely.
[Cabrera:] Douglas, in all of the bluster about Wolff's book, one thing is missing, not one mention of vice President Mike Pence emerged in any quote or published exit so far. What do you make of his notable absence in this tell-all book?
[Brinkley:] That Pence stays very quiet. Tries to avoid the media spotlight. You don't see him saying a lot of things that would anger Donald Trump. I mean, he is the nation's plan b if Donald Trump has to resign or and Democrats get control of Congress in the Senate and they move to impeach him. So Pence has shown that he stays under the radar often. And it speaks well of him not to have spoken of Wolff. I still don't know how Wolff got that kind of access into an administration, but alas he did. And his book is beyond being a bestseller. It's in the history books, a lot like a Woodward and Bernstein, in the sense of it's a permanent part of this year and what's going on right now in the book.
[Cabrera:] Samantha, Trump blames Bannon for these revelations that came out in the book. But is Bannon to blame for the kind of access he had to the White House and these other aids are also quoted on the book?
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] I think it was bad staffing. I worked for two Presidents. And it's staffing 101 that before a reporter or writer enters a White House, has any meetings, has any discussions, two sides, who is he or she going to talk to? Is it going to be on or off the record? Those are the kind of details that you work out in advance sow don't get into the scenario that we are seeing right now. But I think that the reaction to the book has a lot of national security impacts that we are not talking as much about perhaps. Let's do a little bit of role playing here. If you are Kim Jong-un or you are Vladimir Putin and you are watching the President of the United States react this strongly to a book. This is not the first bad thing that's ever been said about the President.
[Cabrera:] And it won't be the last.
[Vinograd:] Most definitely. How many books have been written about Presidents in the past? How many bad news stories? The Presidential thing to do typically is to shrug it off. But again, if you are a foreign leader, if you are an enemy of the United States, you just learned the very valuable lesson. You have learned that the surest way to throw the President off track and to distract him is to insult his image. We have seen Kim Jong-un do this in the past. He has done it over twitter. He has made fun of Donald Trump. Now we see Michael Wolff writing a book and poking at the President and his stability. And instead of the President spending time working on infrastructure, which is sensibly why he is at Camp David or really digging deep on the myriad of national security issues we have in front of us. He is tweeting about a book that's messaging to our enemies all over the world that you just distract him by insulting him.
[Cabrera:] And he is tweeting about just how smart he is and how mentally stable he is. Page, here is what the President said about Robert Mueller's Russia investigation.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, if Robert Mueller asks to you come and speak with his committee personally, are you committed still to doing that?
[Trump:] Yes. Just so you understand, just so you understand, there has been no collusion. There has been no crime. And in theory, everybody tells me, I'm not under investigation. Maybe Hillary is, I don't know. But I'm not. But there has been no collusion. There has been no crime. But we have been very open. We could have done it two ways. We could have been very closed and it would have taken years. But you know, sort of like when have you done nothing wrong, let's be open and get it over with. Because honestly it's very, very bad for our country.
[Cabrera:] Page, you are a defense lawyer. Does the President's argument that his administration has been opened to Mueller's investigation, hold up?
[Page Pate, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, somewhat Ana. They have been producing documents, the White House has, that were documents that were requested by the special counsel's office. But as far as interviews, making themselves available to discuss with investigators' specific allegations, that really hasn't happened yet. But there is going to come a time as the special counsel gets close to finishing their investigation, when they are going to want to talk to key people in the White House. And I'm interested to see whether Trump and other folks in the White House will try to rely on things like executive privilege, attorneyclient privilege to try to block those interviews. So as of now, they have been somewhat cooperative. But the real test is as we get closer to the end of the investigation.
[Cabrera:] He was asked if he would be willing to talk with Robert Mueller. And he appeared initially to say yes, but he quickly deflected. Is there any chance you can pick he isn't asked to come before the special counsel?
[Page:] You know, it's unusual. This entire investigation is unusual. But normally, in a federal criminal investigation like this even when it's done by an independent or special counsel, they will gather all of the other evidence first. They will charge other individuals, which they have done in this case, get cooperating witnesses, which they have done in this case. And then at the very end when they think they have satisfactory information of either a criminal act or that there is no crime been committed here, then they want to interview the guy at the top. Because then, they know a lot more than perhaps the President does about this investigation. So no longer is it just about collusion, conspiracy or obstruction, but it is about making that false statement. So anyone who is representing the President will certainly want to keep him away from any sort of sworn testimony in front of this particular special counsel.
[Cabrera:] Douglas, the President also saying today he stands by attorney general Jeff Sessions. We also know secretary of state Tillerson is defending Trump's mental fitness in his interview with our Elise Labott and he is saying he is not planning to go anywhere. Are these signs of this administration is stabilizing is perhaps stabilizing from earlier days of chaos?
[Brinkley:] Well, I thought Rex Tillerson did an amazing job in the interview, right, when just what Samantha was talking about, people in the world worried about Donald Trump's stability on the news of the book went global. And there was Tillerson kind of reassuring people that American foreign policy had a steady hand in the state department. So, yes, I think Tillerson now looks like he is probably going to stay on at least for this year. Jeff Sessions would be a disaster if he quit for Donald Trump or if he got fired. So I think you are starting to see some of those key players stabilize a little bit. Although, there is no love lost between Sessions and Trump and Tillerson needs to get more of our ambassadors in place and start jump starting the state department, not just, you know, trying to get to know his boss as he did if 2017.
[Cabrera:] Sam, real quick. Your take on the impact of Jeff Sessions were to resign at this point.
[Vinograd:] I think that it would be just another blow to the functioning of our legal system. Now, leaving aside whether he has done anything improper or now. What we do know from all this different threads is that it looks like the President is trying to interfere with the separation of powers. And that the independent judiciary is a core part of our democracy. We know that Russia is trying to undermine that democracy. So every single time we see the President or a thread about the administration, trying to interfere in the investigation or gather dirt on Comey, all that's doing is making the Russian's job easier so the best case scenario is that the department of justice continues to function without interference from the White House and the special counsel continues to do its work.
[Cabrera:] Thank you all so much Samantha Vinograd, Page Pate, Douglas Brinkley. I really appreciate it. Still ahead here in the NEWSROOM, as headlines swirl about this new book about President Trump and the White House, the Republican agenda waits. How "Fire and Fury" is overshadowing everything from DACA to infrastructure. Congressman Dan Kildee give us this take next. Plus, secretary of state Rex Tillerson telling CNN in a TV exclusive what he thinks of the President's competence as commander-in-chief. And later, the riffle effects of the bomb cyclone leaving passengers stranded for hours at one of the country's busiest airports. You are live in the CNN Newsroom. Don't go away.

[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Brianna, the next step on this is for the top Democratic representative on the committee, Adam Schiff, to meet with the FBI to hear about its concerns about the memo. Schiff is promising to listen to the FBI, and then redact whatever the FBI suggests to protect those sources and methods. It was Friday when the president decided not to declassify the Democrats' memo. In a letter that was sent, he said it's significant concerns for national security and law enforcement if it was released. But the president, he did also leave the door wide open. The White House counsel in that letter said the president may be inclined to declassify the memo if the committee works with the Justice Department and the FBI to address some of the concerns in the memo. But despite all that, Democrats are crying foul over that promise, saying that the FBI had expressed grave concerns before the release of the Republican memo, but of course, the White House released it, anyway.
[Rep. Jim Himes, , Connecticut:] We're being careful here. You know, we don't want to establish we're uncomfortable with the establishment of a precedent where, for political reasons, and this is what happened with the Nunes memo, for political reasons classified information gets out there. Remember, the White House overrode the objections of the FBI the first time around. We're going to say, hey, we don't want to be political, we want the rebuttal out there. But we do want to listen to the FBI, something the president did not afford the FBI when the Nunes memo was released.
[Schneider:] There is still a chance the committee and the full House could vote to override the White House, declassify the memo, anyway, but sources say that route is unlikely, and Democrats are unlike to push for a vote until Adam Schiff meets with the FBI, maybe issues some redactions. But we're still waiting to hear when Adam Schiff meets with the FBI Brianna?
[Keilar:] Jessica Schneider, thank you so much for that report. So where do we go from here now? Joining me to discuss, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Michael Zeldin. Michael, just explain to us how this process of redacting would work. Does the FBI highlight specific passages, is it a give and take? What is it?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] The FBI starts by saying, these are the passages about which we have concerns. That creates a discussion. Then they try to reach compromise. It may be the FBI is being overly cautious and could pull back a little from its caution, but that's the nature of it. And then hopefully they reach agreement. They determine this is a memo that now doesn't interfere with the national security interests or law enforcement interests, and then it can go to the president and the president can determine whether it's now suitable for release.
[Keilar:] The Republican memo, which is already out and was not redacted, alleges surveillance abuses by the FBI. This memo, the Democratic memo, Democrats say paints the whole picture, but what you would expect is that it actually gives a little cover to the FBI, which is feeling, I think, pretty stung by that Republican memo. So because of that, how much does the FBI's desire to stick up for itself play into how they're looking at redactions here?
[Zeldin:] Hopefully, it doesn't play a large role. Hopefully, what the FBI is doing is its job and playing it straight and saying, we're looking at the content of the memo and we're determining that this content is good, this content jeopardizes law enforcement and national security interests, and therefore, it's not good, and that it's not sort of self-grandizing or self-protecting. There is a natural instinct to do that. But hopefully, they're playing it straight so when it goes back to the president, they have a clean memo that he has no choice, if you will, if he wants to be transparent, but to release.
[Keilar:] Republicans have alleged some FISA abuses, manipulation of the FISA court. After this memo is released, do you think there will be reforms to the FISA process?
[Zeldin:] The irony is, of course, just before the Nunes memo was released, a month or so, they had hearings on FISA. They reauthorized Section 702, which was the most controversial part of FISA, warrantless acquisition of information. There were a lot of proposals at that time to modify FIS, to give more protection to FISA, and the same people who came forth with this memorandum were against those reforms. So there's a bit of sort of irony, if you will, if they're now asking for FISA reforms when
[Keilar:] It's almost like it's political, Michael Zeldin.
[Zeldin:] I don't like to say those words.
[Keilar:] Thank you so much. Appreciate the insight.
[Zeldin:] Thank you.
[Keilar:] Coming up, as we mentioned, President Trump will unveil a huge infrastructure plan any moment now. Stay with us.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] About Russia's ongoing interference in U.S. politics.
[Question:] Senator, did you speak about election interference as well? Did that come up?
[Sen. Rand Paul , Kentucky:] We had general discussions of a lot of issues. And, basically, we have decided that, right now, what we're trying to do is have dialogue. And I don't think we solve issues, other than see, our biggest issue right now is no dialogue. Is isn't the issues at hand.
[Sciutto:] Paul's apparent lack of urgency stands in sharp contrast to the nation's senior-most national security officials. Just last week, they delivered the stark warning that Russian interference remains pervasive today.
[Dan Coats, U.s. Director Of National Intelligence:] It goes beyond the elections. It goes to Russia's intent to undermine our democratic values.
[Sciutto:] Now, Putin's press secretary says that this letter was delivered through what he called diplomatic channels. They say, the Kremlin, that they have not yet reviewed it. And we should note that the meeting between Trump or, rather, between Putin and Paul has not happened Jake.
[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] All right, Jim Sciutto, thanks so much. We will talk about with our experts now. Mary Katharine, there's just this schizophrenic foreign policy when it comes to Russia. I don't really understand. On one hand, you have Coats and Wray and all the national security officials saying the Russians are they attack us in 2016, cyber, they're doing it again right now. And then you have President Trump and Rand Paul, who seem to be on a different page.
[Mary Katharine Ham, Cnn Political Commentator:] Right. Yes, you constantly have this huge divergence between what the president specifically is saying publicly and the policies that they're putting in place, many of which are tough and good. But that's a problem because what the president says matters. Now, Rand Paul has always been more on the interventionist, leaning toward isolationist side when it comes to foreign policy than many people in the Senate. This isn't like a huge shift for him, but I hate the way this is being framed by many Trump supporters and by more libertarian parts of the party, where it says it's either war or diplomacy, all-out or diplomacy. We can do diplomacy with a more clear-eyed vision of exactly what Putin is and exactly what Russia is trying to do. Moral clarity and diplomacy can go together.
[Symone Sanders, Cnn Political Commentator:] What is Rand Paul meeting with people going to do about Claire McCaskill, who's still getting hacked by the Russians in Missouri? I just don't understand this insatiable need of some people in Congress to run over there and meet with President Putin. It just makes no sense to me, when we are currently under threat. We are less than 100 days from the midterm elections. And cyber-security-wise, there are many people that are in fact not safe. So I just think that folks need to be taking this a lot more seriously. And I hope that Rand Paul gets a reaming when he gets back to Congress from some of his colleagues that are asking what the hell he's doing.
[Bill Kristol, Editor, "the Weekly Standard":] Symone, that's very much welcome, welcome to a hawkish foreign policy.
[Kristol:] Why is Trump writing a letter for Rand Paul? I mean, Rand Paul is...
[Jason Kander , Former Missouri Secretary Of State:] You open it up, it says made guy.
[Kristol:] Yes. I mean, seriously, he has an ambassador to Moscow, Jon Huntsman, if he wishes to transmit messages to Vladimir Putin. He can pick up the phone and talk to him, I suppose. He's got a national security visor. Paul has been against. Didn't the sanctions in the past... It was like 98-2. He's one of the two. He is against the policy of the huge majority of Congress on Putin, which Trump has reluctantly acceded to in some respects. So giving Paul the letter really undercuts the notion that there is a tough Russia policy, I think.
[Kander:] Sometimes, it's helpful to step back and look at this from high up. And what I'm reminded of is, you talk about, like, a schizophrenia foreign policy. Right? We're supposed to be one big family, like it's supposed to stop at the water's edge. And it just reminds me of like, when I was a kid, and my younger brother was smaller than me, we would get in fights. And I would beat him up a little bit. But if you came from down the street and tried to beat up my little brother, I was going to kick your butt. That's how it's always worked in this country for the most part. Republicans and Democrats, we have arguments inside the house. But if you come and try and attack the house, or come after one of us, we band together and kick your butt. This is not how it's supposed to go. And, apparently, the way you get in the good graces of President Trump is you say, hey, I would love to go meet with your buddy Putin.
[Tapper:] Now, you pointed out that this is not new, this kind of foreign policy for Rand Paul. He's been a skeptic of the more hawkish foreign policy towards Russia. But what is interesting is he's been very critical when they were running against each other of Donald Trump, specifically on how Donald Trump would handle Vladimir Putin. In fact, during that second Republican debate that I moderated in Simi Valley at the Reagan Library, take a listen to what Rand Paul had to say about Donald Trump.
[Paul:] Do we want someone with that kind of character, that kind of careless language to be negotiating with Putin?
[Tapper:] Apparently so.
[Ham:] That is a good question, Senator Paul. And I also take issue with Paul said the problem is there is no dialogue. The president just sat down with Putin very recently, as we all remember, and the dialogue may be some of the problem, and his careless speaking within said dialogue is part of the problem. So I agree with old Senator Paul, I guess.
[Tapper:] I guess the other question, Bill, is if the Russians are still attacking the United States Facebook just last week, I think, took down some ads that were supposedly by the Russians trying to foment discord in the United States. You had Dan Coats, all these intelligence people talking about how the Russians are still attacking us. Why is there's this constant need to go and talk to people who are attacking the citizens of the United States?
[Kristol:] No, it's pathetic. They are also attacking Russian dissidents in England, Great Britain, an ally of ours, and killing actually one woman, British woman, right, inadvertently, I guess, as a result of their but they have an attack, chemical weapons, on British soil. Look, if a bipartisan delegations. This is sort of Jason's a bipartisan delegation went over there, senior senators, senator congressmen, said to talk tough to Putin and say, we have a bipartisan consensus in this country that you will pay a big price for continuing to do this and also for other things you're doing in Ukraine or elsewhere and in Britain, that would be one thing. There's a case for Congress weighing in, in support of a tough U.S. foreign policy. There's not much case for one senator going over and trying to undercut American foreign policy.
[Tapper:] And, Mary Katharine, Rand Paul spoke last month about the importance of diplomacy with Russia and it kind of gets to the false choice that you say he makes. Take a listen.
[Paul:] Nobody is saying or excusing Russia's meddling in our elections. Absolutely, we should protect the integrity of our elections. But simply bringing the hatred of the president to the Senate floor in order to say we're done with diplomacy, the hatred for the president is so intense that partisans would rather risk war then give diplomacy a chance.
[Tapper:] Is that you? Are you a partisan that would rather risk war because you hate Donald Trump so much?
[Kander:] I'm pretty sure that diplomacy has been the reason for a really long time that we didn't go directly to war with Russia or the Soviet Union. So I really don't get the idea that for the longest time we have been having this debate, should we go to war with Russia or should we have diplomacy? I think that's not true. It's really more he's saying like someone is trying to burglarize his House and he's like, we should just talk to them. I mean, it doesn't make any sense.
[Tapper:] Is it appeasement, do you think?
[Ham:] Well, at Symone points out, there's also urgency here, because we are close to an election, and that's what they're trying to mess with. So having it present at the top of your mind and dealing with it strictly is important.
[Tapper:] Everyone, stick around. We got a lot more to talk about. The president may be touting a GOP sweep in the latest primaries. Not so fast. The red alerts show the results about Republicans and Democrats about November. Stay with us.

[Cooper:] Another change tonight what seems like a never ending shake up in the White House. National security advisor, H.R. McMaster is out. John Bolton is in. Shortly after this was announced, Bolton acknowledged that he has written countless opinion pieces, given countless speeches and interviews. But he told Fox News that his past comments are behind him. Here just a few of those past comments.
[John Bolton, New National Security Advisor:] There is no united nations. The Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If you lost 10 stories today, it wouldn't make a bit of difference. But our biggest national security crisis is Barack Obama. And we have to know facts here. And it's not at all clear to me just viewing this from the outside that this hacking into the DNC and the RNC computers was not a false flag operation. I think the only diplomatic option left is to end the regime in North Korea by effectively having the south take it over.
[Cooper:] Again, Bolton says those comments are behind him. What matters is what the President says and the advice he gives him. Back now with the panel. How big a change is this for the White House?
[Bash:] Well, it is a big change. Look, John Bolton is somebody who, I'm told, had very good meetings with the President. They after those meetings, kind of clicked personally, which as we know from the way the President has been operating lately is become more and more important to him.
[Cooper:] Right, which all the reporting was he didn't really do that with H.R. McMaster.
[Bash:] He didn't at all. He didn't like his style in every way but particularly I was told his briefing style. And with John Bolton it was different. Having said that, they could not have more different world views when it comes to the big things which are which is, let's just say Iraq.
[Cooper:] Bolton was a big supporter of
[Bash:] And still is. He still to this day, does not say it was a mistake. He said, you know, basically that they would have done it again and the President campaigned aggressively on the idea that he thought it was a terrible idea. And he's much more of a hawk. He's much more of an internationalist. Having said that, he is not working for somebody who doesn't share those views and there's no question. Well, it's hard to believe that they didn't have those conversations about their differences and how that would work if he were talking about national security
[Cooper:] Scott, you work for Bush 43 as did Bolton in the recess appointment, I'm wondering what you made of this.
[Jennings:] Well, I'm a John Bolton fan. I'm comfortable in more hawkish win in the Republican Party. I think and I've said many times on the step changes. I think the President deserves to have a staff that he get along with and that he trusts and that he can have actual exchanges with in the Oval Office that it might lead to the best possible outcomes. I heard Ambassador Bolton say tonight that it's his job to lay out multiple option and help the President make the best decision. They have different world views, but he was very clear about understanding his role as a staffer and not someone who is out there actually setting the policy. So if the President's more comfortable with this, I think that's good. It is interesting though the President's posture on North Korea right now is far different than what Ambassador Bolton posture has been as recently as February when he was advocating, you know, the possibility we might go ahead and attack them. So he's going to have to adjust his world view on North Korea as we head towards these meetings I think in May.
[Gergen:] Scott is absolutely right. The President deserves to have the people around him, and he has the right to have the people around him that he wants. But to suggest this is not going to make a difference when they come right down and have a counsel and a meeting of the NFC with the President, I think these appointments had to stay and that the NFC have both moved the center of gravity towards a much harder line position on both North Korea and on Iran. I'll be really surprised now. It looked like the President was tilting toward getting out of the Iranian agreement. I think the chances are just gone up a lot, this going to get out of the Iranian agreement. And they're going to go in with lower expectations on the North Korea talk. Yes, we can put his John Bolton is a very smart man, and he's had a lot of interesting statements. He can put a statement by but his not going to put his believes behind. He's not going to be a neutral arbiter. He's got views that he will advance, he's done that all as like that's what he does, you know? And so he's going to be trying to advance his policies. And I think, it's really significant now that the President, a series of big personnel everything has moved towards a harder line, a more combative line whether it's trade or North Korea or Iran. You can go down just get down in the whole series and even his personal lawyers are more combative
[Cooper:] But, I mean, there had been controversial people in this position. I mean, Henry Kissinger, you know, had very strong views
[Gergen:] Absolutely. He had a huge impact on policy. You know, it's the rare national security advisor. Brent Scowcroft is one of them, who saw himself as a, you know, you collect all the views, present them fairly to the President, he don't push your own agenda. John Bolton doesn't come from that. That's just not this person who he is.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Powers:] But the also hasn't really even a serious foreign policy player for a long time. I mean, the last job that he had, I think, was in the Bush administration and he was Under Secretary of State. He is really this is the President, you know, sort of again looking to this conservative infotainment, you know, people that he thinks are policy people. And, you know, I just think that there's just that problem. And then also he does savor extreme things. I mean he wrote the forward to Pamela Geller's book. I mean she is a top of the line islamophobe. I mean there's no question.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Powers:] So, I mean, I think he takes really extreme positions on things. I think he said a nuclear striking on North Korea. This is not somebody who's on the margin. I mean, he's a hard liner. And so, I think it says something that this is the kind of person the President wants to have around him in this position.
[Granholm:] And to me, I mean, everything that he has written, this aggressive interventionist is totally opposite of what the President campaigned on. And so I give it 10 months.
[Schultz:] I agree he's a hard liner. I agree he's a hard liner. He's hawkish. But I also heard on night tonight on the news channels folks talking about how the President keeps pointing yes man and people were going to yes. I don't I submit, Pompeo is not a yes man. Pompeo has his own strong thoughts. And everyone here, around this table agrees
[Cooper:] he does seem to be a very much in line, Pompeo.
[Schultz:] Philosophically they can be in line and they can get along. But that doesn't mean that they're not going to disagree in a civil way in the Oval Office. I think he's put in good people in place that he trusts.
[Cooper:] It is interesting the television aspect which you raised on this. I mean, you know, one goes back to where he talks about the generals, you know, that he learned from watching on television, and which was sort of an offhanded remark and some made fun of at the time, but I wondering how much that is actually playing into this. I mean, is his familiarity with John Bolton
[Powers:] I think hugely
[Cooper:] in watching him on television.
[Powers:] I don't think there's any question. You see a lot of other staffers there ending up there because they're on T.V. You know, whether it's Mercedes Schlapp or whether it's, you know, Larry Kudlow, you know, now getting a position there. So, I think that he, you know [Off-mic] Yes. And I mean, you know, Sam Stein from the "Huffington Post" made a joke, something like, you know, the Chyron operator at Fox & Friends has more power than anybody in the White House. Foreign policy, I mean, and that's, you know, we know he looks to Fox & Friends, you know, every morning just sort of get his ideas. So, I think him seeing John Bolton who's on Fox all the time has definitely played a huge role in this.
[Schultz:] That just because you're good at messaging and a good messenger doesn't make it a bad policy. And I think the President is right. He's going into a 2018 year with midterm elections coming up and he's looking to folks who can carry that message.
[Cooper:] Right and that's what Maggie Haberman was saying in the last hour too, which is that he feels that there's not enough people talks saying what he wants on television, pushing his agenda.
[Jennings:] Yes, regardless of what advice he's getting from this people. He views the world through [inaudible] we can't communicate it publicly whenever going to get better. And so he clearly didn't like the way McMaster was communicating in the Oval Office. He wasn't a T.V. presence. He likes the way Kudlow talks. He likes the way Bolton talks. They can make an argument, engage in a debate. So I agree with you. They can be good on policy and they can be good arbiters of policy, but if the White House never finds a way to communicate all the good things they're doing, it will be hard for him to ever to get up closure to 50 percent, which where we want them to go.
[Granholm:] So he makes his legal team in the same kind of way, I mean he's pushing out people who are more moderate or at least seem to be willing to work with Mueller and bringing in hard liners, not to change the subject and a bit it's the similar, you're going to have a bunch of bulldogs and there are a whole bunch of them. And while he wants people who are going to be aggressive and muscular, they also have ideas that may not be consistent with one another. So, it's going to be interesting to get the internal dynamic
[Cooper:] We're going to take a quick break. Thanks, everybody. We'll be right back. More news ahead.

[Fareed Zakaria, Cnn:] Happy New Year, and welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world. I'm Fareed Zakaria coming to you live from New York. Today on the show an in-depth look at what 2019 may bring with it, for America and the world. A nuclear treaty with North Korea? A big beautiful wall on the southern border? A new Middle East crisis? I will ask Ian Bremmer, Rana Faroohar and David Miliband about that and much more. Then this week China landed a rover on the dark side of the moon. And weak Chinese sales made Apple miss its target. What can we expect from the other super power in 2019? I will talk to the man Trump calls the leading authority on China.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He was saying that China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very, very large brain.
[Zakaria:] Also, 2019 will surely bring some momentous decisions. How should House Democrats approach their investigations of the Trump presidency? How should Trump deal with China? How should countries deal with the climate crisis? How should anyone approach any decision? Well, Steven Johnson has written the book about just that. But first, here's my take. It is nearly the mid-point of Donald Trump's four-year mandate, a good time to take stock of what has been the most unusual presidency in modern times. In fact, one would probably have to go back to Andrew Jackson to find anyone who has occupied the White House with as much tumult, drama and disruption. Watching his first two years in office what is striking about Donald Trump is that much more any president I have watched or read about, he is a gambler. Unconstrained by precedent, history, norms, or official advice, Trump simply acts on his impulses and his ideas. Sometimes this can be refreshing. He's forced Washington to take a closer look at assumptions about China. He asks what exactly is being accomplished by America's military interventions in the Middle East. He's focused attention on the problems of the working class in an age of globalization and technological revolutions. But the problem is that Trump's same style, impulsive, erratic, disruptive, means he has no thoughtful policies of his own. His management style is so imperious and narcissistic that he struggles to retain talented officials. He has no background in policy nor any inclination to learn anything about it. So he simply wings it. The result is that he has many balls up in the air and no clear plan as to how to catch them. He took us to the brink of war with North Korea hoping to get Pyongyang to cave. When it didn't, he simply declared victory and moved on. He has begun a trade war with China with no clear sense of the deal he actually wants. He insults key allies for no reason in service of no strategy. And now he has shut down the government with rhetoric that leaves him little room for a face-saving compromise. So far the effects have mostly been bewilderment and a sense of unease as people try to understand where all this is leading and whether things will settle down. Well, let me tell you, they won't. Trump thrives in an atmosphere of chaos where all the attention is focused on him and nothing is ever normal or settled. As the pressure increases from the House Democrats, Robert Mueller, China, expect more impulsive, emotional decision making, not less. The greatest risk, of course, is that one of these days in one of these arenas one of those balls drops. We have experienced Donald Trump in normal times. What will it be like for America and the world to watch Donald Trump when some great international crisis hits, as it so often does? Buckle your seatbelts for 2019. And let's get started. Let's bring in my terrific guests to get their thoughts on 2019 and what the year ahead will bring. David Miliband is the president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee. He was the Foreign secretary of the United Kingdom from 2007 to 2010. Rana Faroohar is CNN's global economics analysts and a global business columnist for the "Financial Times." Ian Bremmer is the founder and president of the Eurasia Group, a political risk consulting firm that operates around the world. Rana, let me ask you, when you look at 2019 it does seem economically we are entering a more troubled period.
[Rana Faroohar, Cnn Global Economic Analyst:] Yes.
[Zakaria:] The two great engines of growth in over the last decades have been the United States and China.
[Faroohar:] Yes.
[Zakaria:] Both economies seem to be slowing and central banks around the world which have been providing cheap money so that people could get low-interest mortgages and loans seem to be turning off the tap.
[Faroohar:] I think you're right. I think that we are at a real inflection point. And if you just look historically, recovery cycles tend to go in eight to 11-year periods. We're 10 years into a recovery cycle. So if you just take it on historical data we are due for a slowdown probably this year or next year. And I think that that probably is going to be the case. How quickly it comes and how sharp it is depends on a couple of things. One, how the U.S.-China trade conflict goes. China is definitely slowing down. It was even before there was conflict with the U.S. But it's really feeling short-term pain. I think longer term pain is going to be felt by the U.S. but already you're seeing companies like Apple downgrading their results. You're going to see more companies saying look, China is slowing, our business is not as good there. That's going to hit the U.S. economy. The other question of course is interest rates. We saw the Fed hike rates, and we see Donald Trump trying to politicize the Fed which frankly is an unforced error, you know. If there's been any institution globally that's done a lot to stabilize economies in the last 10 years it's been the central bankers of the world. But they are at a difficult balancing point. Regardless of what else is happening in politics, there is a big debate right now about how much inflation we can really expect to see. The numbers are good in the U.S. We have a slowdown in China and Europe. That could affect the global picture. At the same time you have technology spreading throughout lots of different industries that may be slowing inflation. So should they hike? Should they not? That's the big question for 2019.
[Zakaria:] Quickly, you mentioned to me that when you talk to American chief financial officers.
[Faroohar:] Yes.
[Zakaria:] Most of them expect a recession this year.
[Faroohar:] Yes. More than half of CFOs at U.S. big companies expect a recession. About 80 percent of economists think we're going to see a slowdown this year or next year.
[Zakaria:] David Miliband, looking at the world geopolitically, what do you see?
[David Miliband, President And Ceo Of The International Rescue Committee:] Well, I think that in 2018 we saw what it means for the global ship of state to have no anchor. And the great danger for 2019 is that we have an age of impunity. In 2018 we saw the murder of Khashoggi, but also the immiseration of the people in Yemen. We saw hospitals run by the International Rescue Committee in Syria again bombed by Russian as well Assad forces. And the idea that we're living in a world where the not just the institutions but the norms and values of the post-war period are no longer upheld is a very dangerous prospect. When you add it to the economic picture that Rana has produced what you see is economics and politics pulling in opposite directions and in potentially very dangerous directions.
[Zakaria:] David, how much of that was inevitable with the rise of China, with the resurgence of Russia? In other words, these norms were Western norms, they were American norms. Is this inevitably the world we are entering?
[Miliband:] No, I don't think so. A man who has I can't remember talked about the post-American world. Who was that? A man, a famous book of
[Faroohar:] A brilliant man.
[Miliband:] A brilliant man. Ten years ago. But the post-American world doesn't need to be the Wild West. Because talk about China, the first country you mentioned. They have had enormous benefit from the global multilateral system but they are also investors in the global multilateral system. And I would argue that we are seeing in global politics the old adage that nature abhors a vacuum. And when you create a vacuum all sorts of actors can move in and it's easier for maligned actors to move in than for benign actors. And the great danger, let's be honest, the pivot to Asia that President Obama announced 10 years ago, it was based on a reality of shifting economic power. The great danger is that the Chinese leadership calculate that far from investigating in the global multilateral system they are better off either building their own or just opting out of it. And that is the political challenge. The Russians is obviously a different case. They are exploiting weakness and there is no sanction. And when there is no sanction that's how you end up with the bombing of hospitals or the killing of journalists. An age of impunity is one in which global rules are not enforced.
[Zakaria:] Ian Bremmer, for the last two years, what we have watched is a rising populist tide almost everywhere. But there are many people who think, well, you know, this is also going to run its course, these guys have no answers. What do you see when you look around the globe at populism?
[Ian Bremmer, Founder And President, Eurasia Group:] Well, there are two thing aren't running their course. One, as David just said, there were eyes of China with a different set of norms and values and new architecture that competes with the U.S. And second, that the developed economy, that the democracies actually don't have the leaders, those leaders don't have the legitimacy. The institutions themselves are eroding. That's what the populism is all about. And for those that had hoped that people like Macron in France represented a shift in tide in populist support. His approval ratings are 23 percent right now. You know, I mean, let's face it. That's not where Trump is today. Merkel, Angela Merkel isn't going anywhere any time soon but she's had to abdicate the chairmanship of her party. And so she's already essentially a much weaker leader in 2019 than she was in 2018. If you look around the world, even Canada, where Doug Ford is the premier today, I mean, it's a softer form of populism in the United States but that's the-second most powerful position in the country. Trudeau himself is weaker. It's only Japan that's the exception. And they are an exemption because they haven't had the immigration. It's very homogenous. Their population is shrinking. So per capita even though the economy is not growing they're feeling a little better. And the military is constitutionally not allowed to actually participate in wars around the world. Add to that the lowest adult social media participation rate in all of these countries and suddenly you say this isn't a model that we could even try to adapt to in the United States. Well, 2019 is going to see a lot more populism unfortunately for those that hope that the center is going to hold than 2018 experienced.
[Zakaria:] And David, when they look around the world at the United States, I mean you've had to do this when you were Foreign minister of Britain. What do they you know, if you were advising a foreign government on how to deal with Donald Trump, what would you say?
[Miliband:] Well, you'd say three things, obviously. One, this is an unpredictable super power. We've never had experience with an unpredictable super power. It's precisely been predictability that has given it power in the past. Secondly, transactions matter far more than values. It's absolutely evident that the administration has no preference for dealing with liberal democratic nations over autocratic nations. Thirdly, and I think what's interesting is that in the end President Trump wants the deal. And he often advertises that he wants the deal more than anything else. We'll see this tested in the shutdown which obviously in some way a domestic question. But if you think about the Chinese trade, quote-unquote, war, you think about the North Korea example, in the end he doesn't want to go over the edge. And I think people are figuring that out.
[Zakaria:] All right. When we come back President Trump said this morning as he departed for Camp David that if anybody else but him were president we would be at war with North Korea. Not quite sure why. But so will Trump get a deal with Kim in 2019. I'll ask the panel. And of course I will ask David Miliband about Brexit when we come back.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] As far as the two gentlemen you told me about, they've been saying I'm going to rid of them for the last three months, four months, five months, and they're still here. So we want to get the investigation over with, done with, put it behind us, and we have to get back to business.
[Camerota:] OK, that was President Trump addressing whether he plans to fire special counsel Robert Mueller or deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein. And, he also repeated one of his favorite lines that there is no collusion despite the fact that the investigation has reached no conclusion yet. Joining us now is CNN counterterrorism analyst Phil Mudd and CNN law enforcement analyst Josh Campbell. Great to see both of you. So, Mudd, how do you hear the president's mindset there and his response? Does that mean that Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller are safe?
[Philip Mudd, Cnn Counterterrorism Analyst, Former Counterterrorism Official, Cia:] Heck, no. I would look at Rosenstein before I'd look at Mueller. I mean, if you look at the law I think the president would have a challenge firing Mueller. I think, though, people are forgetting one key element of this and that is the investigation will live on regardless of what the president does about Rosenstein and Mueller. First of all, if he ever did that, the president
[Camerota:] But just explain that to us one more time Phil because we hear so many people with different opinions about that, which is if he puts in one if the president puts in one of his guys who's like- minded with him who says you know what, I think we're done with this, how does the investigation live on?
[Mudd:] Well, there's a couple of elements here. First, if he puts in one of his guys that person has to be confirmed. Do you think the Congress is going to confirm somebody who doesn't affirm that they'll let the investigation continue? I'd like to see that confirmation process. There are a couple of other boring pieces here so let me bore you for just a moment. Number one, in the digital age, this entire file will live forever in the FBI so even if you eliminate one person the files will survive for the next team. Secondly, the team below Mueller is not going to be terminated. I know some of the senior lawyers on this that team. Those guys are brilliant. So I think Mueller is critical partly because of the his character the esteem he brings to the job. But both the documentation and the team behind him, and then the congressional support to continue the investigation if the president ever does anything I think this investigation will go on even if it gets ugly, and I expect it will get uglier.
[Camerota:] Try as you might you cannot be boring, Phil Mudd. Josh, do you agree with that assessment?
[Josh Campbell, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst, Former Special Assistant To James Comey, Fbi:] I do. I agree with my good friend Phil. And I'll tell you from a practical standpoint if you look inside the FBI I mean, the focus of an investigation counterintelligence investigation is to identify a threat and to mitigate. So just because you have political actors that are trying to shut down investigations that doesn't mean that the threat goes away. So within the FBI and Phil knows this from his time there there's a process for actually closing an investigation. You have to go in and affirmatively state that there's either no longer evidence or you no longer see a threat. There is no box to check that says closed because of political pressure.
[Camerota:] OK, very good context for us to know. Next topic, James Comey. As you know, he's on this media blitz. So he went on "THE VIEW" and he got some very tough questions from all sides. So let's listen to the questions that they posed and some of his answers.
[Meghan Mccain, Co-host, Abc "the View":] Your second in command, McCabe, was fired for lying multiple times within the FBI. You defended his character on Twitter. That's OK lying is OK internally?
[Joy Behar, Co-host, Abc "the View":] You said that you reopened the investigation into Hillary's private e-mail server 11 days before the election because quote-unquote, "I was operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was going to beat Donald Trump." Now, should the FBI have taken it upon himself on yourself to guess who was going to win? I mean, that seems out of your purview.
[Sara Haines, Co-host, Abc "the View":] One thing I wanted to know when I read the book. You referenced Trump's possible self-tanning, the size of his hands, his hair. Was it worth it when we've seen that all already, at the expense of possibly some credibility?
[James Comey, Former Director, Fbi:] I think you're right. If I had it to do over again I wouldn't put that paragraph in.
[Camerota:] OK, this wasn't "60 MINUTES." This was " THE VIEW," Phil Mudd, and I wonder if James Comey is now regretting more than just that paragraph. I mean, since he's been under fire for the choices that he made and his judgment.
[Mudd:] Well, as he should be. I mean, you can't go on these T.V. shows and expect that somebody who reads a paragraph where you characterize the size of the president's hands isn't going to say hey look, you're trying to portray yourself as the high road guy and you put this stuff in your book. You didn't expect that people would pick up on that and now you're saying it shouldn't have been in there? That said, I think we're skipping over one key issue. There's been confusion in the past few days about the style of what Comey wrote should he have put in some of the stuff, should he have taken the low road in a few cases, and the substance. How many people on those shows are questioning whether or not he told the truth when he characterized whether the president asked for a sort of loyalty oath? I don't think anybody's questioned that. So the key here is is it an accurate portrayal is this book an accurate portrayal of his interaction with the president? Meanwhile, the conversations have been about why the heck are you talking about the size of the president's hands when you're trying to claim that you're a high road guy? I didn't get that either.
[Camerota:] Well, sort of, Phil. Hold on
[Mudd:] I'm ready for my role on the view, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Hold on one second. I mean, sort of that yes, there is some interest in why he included some of those more petty, I guess, details.
[Mudd:] Yes.
[Camerota:] But you heard the women there. I mean, the women there were asking, I think, interesting, relevant questions. Meghan McCain was asking an important question about why he would defend Andrew McCabe who it was then revealed lied. So here's the answer to this, Josh. Let me play for you what James Comey oh, I actually have to read it, hold on. So, Meghan McCain said you defended Andrew McCabe on Twitter. That's OK? Is lying OK internally? Here was his response. I'm going to read it to you because we don't have it ready. "No, it's not. In fact, the McCabe situation illustrates what an organization that's committed to the truth looks like. We investigated. I ordered that investigation. We investigated, hold people accountable. Good people lie." What do you think of that, Josh?
[Campbell:] Well, it's true. I mean, if you think of all of the people that you know that you've come across in your life, that you've worked with, maybe they're your friends there is no one out there who has never lied. But that doesn't mean that they also can't be good people. In the case of Andrew McCabe, I think what this shows is that there's a process in place to hold accountable those who stray. And in this case, according to the inspector general, it looks like that he lied and that severe action was taken, as it should have been. But if you step back and look this is a process working. This is saying we don't care how great you are, how nice you are. If you lie, if you break the law, if you violate these policies you will be held to account. And I think that that's what Comey's saying.
[Camerota:] OK, we really appreciate getting both of your perspectives. You guys know this situation, the FBI and James Comey, well. Philip Mudd, Josh Campbell, thank you. And we should let everybody know that today, Jake Tapper will ask James Comey the questions that others have not asked. This will be live on "THE LEAD" at 4:00 p.m. eastern right here on
[Cnn. Cuomo:] An historic day in Cuba. After nearly 60 years, the Castro dynasty is over. Over, though, must stay in quotes. Who's taking over and what does it mean for the Cuban people really being free, next.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Jimmy never takes an opportunity not to show their face.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Jim, great reporting. Thank you very much. We're following a lot of news. Let's get to it.
[Cuomo:] We went to college together.
[Camerota:] I know that.
[Unidentified Male:] Now our closest allies will not know whether the president is speaking from facts. We're looking for solutions for paths forward.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Why did they ban together to screw the United States on trade?
[Unidentified Male:] These documents suggest that the Trump Organization has been intimately involved in the effort to keep Stormy Daniels quiet.
[Unidentified Female:] We're talking about a president engaged in behavior that is, a, immoral, b, that's possibly illegal.
[Unidentified Male:] Is any Trump voter surprised that he wasn't Mother Teresa?
[Unidentified Female:] I instantly burst into tears just wondering where my dog was.
[Unidentified Male:] This has happened on more than one occasion on United flights.
[Unidentified Female:] It was a really special dog. It's just sad the way he has to just leave.
[Unidentified Male:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Cuomo:] Good morning. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Thursday, March 15th, the ides of March, by the way. Beware, keep your distance. It is now 8:00 in the morning. We begin with a stunning admission from the president of the United States. "The Washington Post" reporting that President Trump told donors at a closed-door fundraiser that was recorded that he made up information about trade in a meeting with Canada's prime minister. The president also apparently threatened to pull U.S. troops out of South Korea over trade. So we're going to talk to one of the reporters who heard the audio recording of the president coming up.
[Camerota:] Meanwhile, staffers inside the Trump White House wondering which shoe will fall next. One administration official tells CNN the president wants to fire every cabinet member that he considers dead weight. And CNN has new reporting that the person most at risk is getting the axe next could be Attorney General Jeff Sessions, but that would, of course, create a host of new headaches. So let's begin with CNN's Abby Phillip live at the White House. What are you hearing, Abby?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Alisyn. President Trump may want to fire the dead weight in his cabinet, but the issue could very well be that it is very difficult to replace some of these people. There is a large group of cabinet officials who President Trump is upset with at the moment. Perhaps at the top of the list, as you just mentioned, is Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, who has been criticized by President Trump repeatedly on social media. He's also talking about firing H.R. McMaster, who is also another person who has been add odds with the president on a number of policy issues. And there are others, Ben Carson at the housing agency, also Betsy DeVos who had that really tough interview over the weekend and has failed to answer some basic questions about her agency. So the list is very long. But on Sessions, sources tell us that there are serious conversations happening right now about replacing him with someone else in the administration, the EPA administrator Scott Pruitt. Pruitt is a former Oklahoma attorney general, so he has that in his resume. But the problem becomes if he is named as acting attorney general, that's a position that eventually the president would need to name him to on a permanent basis. And once he does that, he can no longer be the acting A.G. Pruitt has not been without controversy. Democrats have been concerned about how he's run the EPA. But of course, all these conversations are happening in the White House, and it seems at the moment that almost no one knows exactly what President Trump is going to do and when he's going to do it, Alisyn and Chris.
[Cuomo:] Abby, thank you very much. Let's bring in A.B. Stoddard, editor at Real Clear Politics, Brian Karem. So A.B., this is an interesting issue. You could actually get into the weeds very quickly, and I promise I won't, about what it is to slide over from one cabinet member into another cabinet position, acting versus permanent. But the idea that it would be easy and they could just simply avoid a re-vetting of Pruitt if he were to take out Sessions may not be so simple in the minds of the senators who would make the decision. Here is Senator Angus King who would sit on the committee that would do the vetting. Is it your understanding that the White House can slide somebody from one cabinet position into another without going through any recertification by the Senate?
[Sen. Angus King,  Maine:] No. I've never heard that theory. Oh, no. If Mike Pompeo is going to move from CIA to be secretary of state, there clearly has to be a full confirmation process, hearings in the Senate and a Senate vote on confirmation. Those are two very different jobs.
[Cuomo:] So let's say it's the example of Pruitt who was A.G. in Oklahoma and would have some bona fides there, but I'm sure people would have questions for him. Do you think their plan is to try to do an end run around the process, A.B.?
[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor, Real Clear Politics:] Well, obviously I think President Trump would be happy with an end run, but that doesn't mean that the Senate will. We know the Senate Republicans, many of them have been privately telling the White House for months that they don't want to approve of another attorney general, that it is politically perilous for the president to get rid of Jeff Sessions, that unlike the other cabinet secretaries, including Scott Pruitt, he has not abused first class or private travel, he has not ordered pricey dining room sets on the taxpayer dime, and he has actually worked harder than anyone to implement the president's make America great agenda. So there's a lot of bad feelings about the idea of him getting rid of Sessions to begin with. Scott Pruitt just like Senator Angus King was describing about Mike Pompeo moving from CIA director to secretary of state would have to come in and talk about his role as, and his performance as attorney general in Oklahoma. He would have to talk about what he's done as secretary at the EPA and the fact that he's run into some ethical trouble with the rules. And he would have to talk about his responsibilities in that new job. So it obviously brings up the whole scope of the conversation about the Russia investigation, Bob Mueller, would he fire him, how would he oversee it and all of that. So it would be very contentious and very controversial, and it is not easily done. So as much as President Trump would like to watch cable news and decide who the next person is for new jobs, it's not as simple as it sounds.
[Camerota:] Sometimes it is. Listen, he does have a lot of people he's chosen are from cable news that he's gotten familiar with over the years. We see that happening with Larry Kudlow. But I'm fascinated by this, Brian, in terms of this game of musical chairs. Here is the list of resolving door, as our reporting shows all of the people who may or may not be on the chopping block. It goes from David Shulkin, Jeff Sessions, as we're talking about, H.R. McMaster who fills in for him? Betsy DeVos, John Kelly, Ryan Zinke, Ben Carson says Sarah Sanders, but I think we can take that off the list. But in any event, are people just interchangeable in that way?
[Brian Karem, Cnn Political Analyst:] First of all, we have to understand what the White House is right now. It's a dysfunctional daycare center. There's no other way to look at it. And at the bottom you've got people who are barely professional who really shouldn't be where they are. In the middle you've got the middle management, the nannies who have to manage up and down and are trying to implement a message from the president, but that message changes on a daily basis. And the top management, you've got people that are competing with the president who loves conflict, who loves to pit people against each other and thinks he's getting a handle on his job now. This looks like a guy who is feeling his oats. But at the same time he's really a good that would rather be on the back nine kicking his titleist out of the rough than actually dealing with some of the important issues that are facing the country. So he views it as a reality show, so he can kick people in and out any way he wants. The simple fact of the matter is government doesn't run that way, and he's loathe to reach the learning curve where he understands the job, although he thinks by his actions that he does. That's the White House.
[Cuomo:] A.B., what do you make of the criticism that his style is disruptive as a way of messing with these people who are so stuck in their bureaucratic ways and that there is progress, there is method to his madness, he is getting things done because of how he is? Does anyone buy into that?
[Karem:] No. We've seen method, we've seen madness, but we've seldom see the two meet. The method is madness, and the simple fact of the matter is, if there is a message it's often lost by the simple fact of the way he conducts business. And while he may want to shake things up I've been coming and going since Reagan, OK. I've seen people who like to shake things up. But this is flying by the seat of the pants. There seems to be no real message other than the message of the moment. And that's the difference. And the people who are professional, and there are some like McMaster, like I told you before, Chris, I think he's a great guy. I think Mattis some of these people actually are good people, sound professional people, are having difficulty dealing with it. And then of course on the back end there are people afraid if they leave this administration they'll never find work again.
[Camerota:] A.B., your thoughts?
[Stoddard:] I think that I've heard the conversation this morning, and we have it often, about whether or not Trump's base will support all this chaos and whether they'll leave him. They don't care about Stormy Daniels, and that's fine. But this is governance, and governance is a process. And so while he creates all this disruption and he enjoys it Brian is right and it's his style and it was in the New York real estate business, it actually destabilizing the U.S. government at a time when the economy is fine at home doing quite well. He has a great story to tell there. He got a tax bill through Congress and he's presided over massive deregulation that the business community loves and Wall Street adores. But overseas we're in a perilous situation. And so while the world watches the way he dumps his secretary of state, the world watches people working close to the president, handling classified and sensitive and secret information without security clearances, and then being whisked off the property without their jacket on, the world watches all this dysfunction, him bragging about lying to the prime minister of Canada, one of our greatest allies, and thinking it's funny, threatening to pull troops out of South Korea at a very, very grave time and consequential time, this undermines us long term, not only now but later. And that's what's so scary is that it's not just a style. It really has consequences.
[Karem:] Right, and the real consequence, the bottom line in the piece that you saw that Jim put on that you were talking about earlier, is the Russian question. Russia is running rampant right now and freely and unchecked. And last Friday in that briefing room I asked Sarah Huckabee Sanders. I said, listen, in the last three weeks this president has said he's going to increase our involvement in nuclear arms, he's going to back away from the leadership role this country has taken in nuclear disarmament. The following week I think it was OMB Director Mulvaney said we're going to spend $50 billion upgrading and enhancing our nuclear arsenal. A week later Putin comes out and says he has a first-strike weapon that can render our defenses useless. Those are the serious issues this president must deal with. And when I asked that question, I was told by the White House that their problem, quite frankly, isn't that. It's false narratives and fake news. These people do not understand the issues facing this country. Brian Karem and A.B. Stoddard, thank you very much for your analysis.
[Cuomo:] Let's get back to the bombshell report in the "Washington Post," an audio recording captured the president about lying when it comes to the trade balance with Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau. Joining us is CNN political analyst Josh Dawsey. He co- wrote the piece in the Washington and heard the Trump recording. Sorry to get you out of bed, brother, but this mattered this morning because already Trump loyalists are pushing back, saying he didn't say it, it's fake, he didn't mean it that way, it's been misrepresented. You heard it. How did it go?
[Josh Dawsey, Cnn Political Analyst:] We have the audio. It was a 30- minute comments to the fundraiser where the president rifts like he normally does on a whole smorgasbord of topic. He talked about trade, he talked about South Korea, potentially pulling out troops if he doesn't get what he wants on trade with Seoul. And the president was there ostensibly for a fundraiser for Josh Hawley who is running for senate in Missouri but it turned into one of his free-wheeling campaign-style rallies where he just went through a number of topics, from Justin Trudeau where he said essentially I made up the facts at this meeting, I said I don't really know, but I'm going to guess we have a trade deficit even though the United States trade representative says there's a surplus, to his comments on the allies. He says our allies are not looking out for us. They're looking out for themselves. Essentially, Chris, his comments distilled to this he thinks so many other countries and the world are, frankly, screwing the United States over. He went through, Japan, China, Canada, Mexico, all of these places where he wants to renegotiate deals and wants to obviously put more tariffs on. His comments were pretty striking even to the donors in the room.
[Cuomo:] That's fine. He can call out trade imbalances. He's just got to find a way to fix them and he can't abuse the truth in the process at least when he's being recorded. Let me ask you thing, any thought over at the "Washington Post" to put out the recording and put all these discrepancies to rest?
[Dawsey:] We'll put a transcript out likely later today, Chris. We have the recording. We've quoted him extensively. This isn't anonymous sourcing.
[Cuomo:] I hear you. But you know how it goes, if people don't see the proof for themselves, there's always going to be a little bit of a space for a disconnect.
[Dawsey:] Chris, there's always sensitivities to our sourcing and how we do our recording and what we can do and what we can't. But I think we quoted the president extensively, and obviously we stand by our reporting.
[Cuomo:] And was there anything in how it sounded that would give an excuse to the president of, I was just joking, I was making a joke, this didn't really happen and everybody in the room knew it?
[Dawsey:] The president does sometimes joke, Chris. But this is the way he tells stories. You watched his rallies over and over again, and sometimes his folks around him will say don't take him literally. He likes to be he likes to embellish the truth occasionally. He likes to go out and take some liberties. He's even said that in a deposition before. And the crowd was laughing. But the president's words are his words and our job is to try to find out exactly what he's saying to donors behind closed doors and write about it.

[Michael Cohen, Former Personal Lawyer For Donald Trump:] I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info.
[Rudy Giuliani, Attorney For Donald Trump:] I've dealt with much worse case than this.
[Unidentified Male:] He's got truth on his side now, and he has to tell the truth. He's going to flip. There's no question. He's now made it clear. Nothing on this tape suggests to me that there's an illegal act.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] It is certainly circumstantial evidence that Donald Trump knew about each of these payments.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, July 25, 6 a.m. here in New York. And we do begin with breaking news for you. We have a major CNN exclusive. CNN has obtained a secret audio recording between then-candidate Donald Trump and his attorney, Michael Cohen, two months before the 2016 election. This audio appears to confirm that Donald Trump knew of the effort to pay off and silence former "Playboy" model Karen McDougal and her story of their alleged affair. The Trump campaign had repeatedly denied that. Former communications head Hope Hicks had said in a statement, there was, quote, "no knowledge of any of this."
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] In fact, she said, "We have no knowledge of any of this," and given that the campaign included the now-president, and you can hear his voice on the tape talking about it, that seems to be a lie. And it was a lie that was told just before the election. The recording also raises questions about whether the president was trying to cover his tracks with cash payments. Now this part is unclear on the tape, and you should listen to this for yourself. But what is clear is that it is definitively that it is not, I should say not definitively exculpatory, which was the claim from the president's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani. That is now spin. It informs our knowledge of what he was trying to do. What's more, you can hear Donald Trump on the tape talking about delaying the release of possibly incriminating information. What does that tell us about his mindset and intentions before election day? Finally, the mere fact of this release seems to tell us there is no turning back for Michael Cohen. This looks like a full split, which opens up more than a can of works. It's like a bucket of worms, or a trough, or a truckload of worms. We have this all covered for you this morning. Let's begin with CNN's M.J. Lee. You need to hear this tape
[M.j. M.j. Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. That conversation with Donald Trump that Michael Cohen secretly recorded is officially no longer a secret. Thanks to this audio that CNN exclusively obtained last night, we can now all listen to that exchange between Trump and Cohen shortly before the 2016 election. Now, you're going to hear them talk about a couple of things, but watch out for this at the end. You hear the two men discussing a payment to a woman who said she had an affair with Donald Trump. Here's that recording. Let's play it.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] You know what's happening, OK? Oh. Oh. Maybe because of this it would be better if you didn't go. You know, maybe because of this, for that one, you know, I think what we do is get rid of this. Because it's so false with this thing. Such bullshit. I think I think this goes away quickly. I think what I think it's probably better than the Charleston thing. Just this time. Yes, it's a waste of time. I think right now it's better, you know? OK, honey, you take care of yourself. Thanks, babe. Yes, I'm proud of you. So long. What's up with you?
[Cohen:] Great poll, by the way. CNN, great poll. Big time.
[Trump:] Making progress. And your guy's a good guy.
[Cohen:] Pastor Scott?
[Trump:] Pastor Scott. What's happening?
[Cohen:] He's
[Trump:] Can you use him anymore?
[Cohen:] Oh, yes. A hundred no, you're talking about Mark Burns. We've told him what to say.
[Trump:] Bob Burns, can we use him anymore?
[Cohen:] No. No.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. Lovecraft. I'm sorry. Mr. Lovecraft just called. He said when you had a chance, he had an idea for you.
[Trump:] OK, great.
[Cohen:] So we got served from the "New York Times," I told you this we were
[Trump:] To what?
[Cohen:] to unseal the divorce papers with Ivana. We're fighting it. Kasowitz is going to
[Trump:] Never be able to get that done. Never, never.
[Cohen:] Kasowitz doesn't think they'll ever be able to. They don't have a legitimate purpose.
[Trump:] Get me a Coke, please!
[Cohen:] They don't have a legitimate purpose, so
[Trump:] And you have a woman that doesn't want this.
[Cohen:] Correct.
[Trump:] Who you've been handling.
[Cohen:] Yes. And
[Trump:] And it's been going on for a while?
[Cohen:] For about two or three weeks now.
[Trump:] All you have to do is delay it for a few weeks.
[Cohen:] Even after that, it's not going to ever be opened. There's no there's no purpose for it. Told you about Charleston. I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend David so that I'm going to do that right away. I've actually come up, and I've spoken to
[Trump:] Give it to me and get me a
[Cohen:] Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up. With
[Trump:] So what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?
[Cohen:] funding yes. And it's all the stuff.
[Trump:] Yes, I was thinking about that.
[Cohen:] All the stuff. Because here, you never know where that company you never know where he's going to be
[Trump:] Maybe he gets hit by a truck.
[Cohen:] Correct. So I'm all over that. And I spoke to Allen about it, when it comes time for the financing, which will be
[Trump:] Wait a sec, what financing?
[Cohen:] Well, I'll have to pay him something. No, no, no. I got it. No, no. Hey, Don, how are you.
[Lee:] Now, obviously, the quality of that recording is far from perfect, and there is now a dispute about the very last piece of what we just heard. You may have been able to make out Donald Trump saying the words "pay with cash." Then you hear Michael Cohen responding, "No, no, no, no." Now the president's legal team have put out its own transcript of this recording. And according to Rudy Giuliani, in that muddled portion of the recording, Trump is actually saying, "Don't pay with cash," and then goes on to say the word "check." So this cash versus check debate, whether Trump was saying the payment should be made in cash or with a check, is going to be one of the sticking points for the Trump and Cohen legal teams. Now, having said that, we all should not lose sight of the big picture. This recording provided to CNN appears to show the president and his personal attorney discussing a payment to a woman in order to keep her quiet about her alleged affair with Donald Trump, and even more importantly, the audio appears to show that Donald Trump had contemporaneous knowledge about this hush payment despite his denials in the past John and Alisyn.
[Berman:] And despite the capaign denials, the explicit denials, before the election, and the explicit denials while from the White House after the election, as well. M.J., thank you.
[Camerota:] Thanks, M.J. OK. So let's bring in CNN senior political analyst John Avlon; CNN political analyst David Gregory; and CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Laura Coates. Laura, I want to start with you. Because in terms of, obviously, it's stunning to hear these negotiations. It's amazing to hear what Michael Cohen, how he spoke to Donald Trump, what he was willing to do for Donald Trump, how he's walking Donald Trump through all of this. Legally, what do you hear?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] One reason it's so stunning, Alisyn, is that you're hearing attorney-client communications, and you never really hear that, because you have a privilege attached to it. And so on the one hand, you see that there is an effort by, perhaps, Rudy Giuliani where they decided not to assert that privilege here, to say, "We'd like the people in the court of public opinion to decide whether or not this makes Michael Cohen look good or makes Donald Trump look bad. And they're banking on the latter." No. 2, what I really hear here is the idea of what M.J. talked about. That contemporaneous knowledge. That up till now, we haven't know whether or not the president of the United States, while he was then- candidate Donald Trump, really truly knew about the allegations or about the AMI company trying to compress the story of Karen McDougal, and whether or not it would have some impact on the election. You hear him allude to "We've got to delay the Ivana Trump disclosures" till after. And he kind of has an ellipse on the end of that, followed by communication about whether or not they have to suppress all the stories, or all the things that David Picker, the head of AMI may have in his pocket. And so what you're seeing here is somebody with knowledge, which goes against exactly what he told us all along. But it doesn't really move the needle that far, because there's not a specific mention of the election.
[Berman:] No, although if AMI, which of course, is the company that owns "The Enquirer," if they were doing this to help Donald Trump, that would be a campaign expenditure, and that opens up serious legal questions here. And the contemporaneous knowledge of the president is crucial in that sense. So when you hear the president ask "So what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?" That tells you, his head is in this game, in this game before the election, after "The Enquirer" was already in this. And also, David Gregory, I'll point out that Michael Cohen says, "All the stuff." "All he stuff," opening up the door to this responsibility that there's more than just this Karen McDougal thing.
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, and that's what I think is important, John. I think that what what they are doing, what Michael Cohen is doing through Lanny Davis is really going to war with the president and his team, suggesting, "Hey, this is what I got, and maybe there's a lot more" that he could talk about. That would be embarrassing enough for the president to maybe give him a pardon, which may be really what's at play here. Or maybe there is more that Cohen knows that may be relevant to what the special prosecutor, Bob Mueller, is looking into. Right now, there's a separation between that case, that investigation, and what they're doing in the Southern District of New York related to campaign finance violations, potentially. He could also be facing, Michael Cohen could, bank fraud charges, as well, for some of these payments. So the political distraction is the president lying, if that's what's going on here, despite their denials about these payments right before the election? What could be worse about knowledge of the campaign finance violations. And what more does Michael Cohen have? That's what's that'the question that's here. The other piece of this, just the insight that the tape provides, is the kind of world around Donald Trump and the campaign which you have to assume is true in the White House, as well. I mean, here is this, frankly, sycophantic sounding lawyer, talking about, "Oh, I've got this covered." And he's talking so fast. "And I'm all over this, and by the way great poll, and you're looking great. And everything is fantastic." I mean, there's just an intensity of that exchange that I think is revealing.
[Camerota:] I agree. It is the world around him that is, I think this is a fascinating window into. And about that world, John Avlon. You know, people are willing to lie for Donald Trump.
[John Avlon, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Sure.
[Camerota:] We see. And look, it's no surprise that a candidate who is caught having an affair, or the information about an affair could come out would want to suppress that. OK? I think we've seen that movie before. OK? But the idea that people around him I mean, Hope Hicks on November 4 to "The Wall Street Journal." Hope Hicks here, I'll read it. "Trump campaign spokeswoman said of the agreement with Ms. McDougal, "We have no knowledge of any of this." There, maybe she didn't, OK? "She said that Ms. McDougal's claim of an affair with Mr. Trump was," quote, "totally untrue."
[Avlon:] Right.
[Camerota:] How could she know that?
[Berman:] Can I say something. Maybe she didn't know, but when she says "We have no knowledge of this," that implies "we, the entire campaign." That includes the candidate.
[Camerota:] OK.
[Berman:] That is a lie.
[Camerota:] Well
[Berman:] Whether she knows it's a lie, it is a campaign lie.
[Camerota:] I don't want to dissect that, whether or not she was lying. But the part where she says "totally untrue" is unknowable for her.
[Berman:] I'm going lie.
[Camerota:] You're going lie. My point is this, that they're willing if you spent years with Donald Trump, OK, there is no way that you could ever say that the idea that he had an affair was totally untrue. Every single person in New York City who ever read "The New York Post" knew it was not totally untrue that he would have an affair.
[Avlon:] Yes. There should be a presumption that he had an affair. But I think a couple things. First of all, it is the press secretary's job to know whether something is true when they speak to the press. Second of all, we've seen a pattern that lying is a measure of loyalty in this campaign and in this administration. And I think what's so explosive about the tape isn't just the fact that his consigliere has turned on the president of the United States. And they say there are over tapes. But it is part of this larger recognition that the Trump team's best defense at this point is "Don't believe your eyes and ears." The president said it yesterday at a VFW rally. And now they're confronting this tape where people have to decide whether they're going to believe their ears or believe the president and his lawyer. Because that spin that he's actually saying, "No, don't pay cash" is pretty desperate.
[Berman:] "What you are reading, what you are seeing is not what's happening"
[Avlon:] Right.
[Berman:] is what the president said. We just heard with our own ears what transpired between the two, and to me it is a huge window into what Rudy Giuliani was doing when he released the notion of this tape last Friday. We were all talking, Laura, last Friday. "Why is why is Giuliani coming out with this? Why is he telling us all about this?" It's because he wanted to put his spin on it early. He used the word "exculpatory." I don't know whether or not the president said "cash or check," or "cash or no check." You can't tell. It may not be incriminating, but it is not not exculpatory. It just doesn't say what Rudy Giuliani definitively says it says.
[Coates:] You know, when you try to launch a pre-emptive strike, the only reason you would do so is if you fear the person actually has something to wage against you in the form of a war. And what they were anticipating by doing that preemptive strike last week is saying, "Listen, I'm going to take some of the air out of the sails of Michael Cohen if this if this comes out," which it likely would have come out. He was trying to get ahead of it. But he's kind of getting ahead of it for a legal reason, I think, as well. Because I think you have to realize that you have the crime fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege. And although we have heard from Donald Trump only a sliver of his work, legal work was ever done by Michael Cohen, there is still the notion of, well, the attorney-client privilege is only as good until you actually commit a crime or you and your lawyer are conspiring in furtherance of a crime. If that's the case, then it had to be litigated. They were trying to get ahead of the public narrative, as well as even having to litigate the issue of the crime-fraud exception, which by the way, Nixon never even had to, as well, because he was trying to get ahead of that, as well. Just ask John Dean about that notion. And so, I think, on two different notions here, he had this idea, and he was trying to make sure that whatever came out, they had their thumb on that particular scale.
[Berman:] Johnny, you brought you want to go into the Nixon thing? You've got some tape.
[Avlon:] I do. Look, I mean, Yes, the reason the Nixon thing is relevant is one of the smoking gun tapes was John Dean talking with Nixon, and Nixon specifically says, "I know where we can get $1 million cash. It won't be easy, but we can do it." And and that again, I think the specter of a presidential candidate, now president of the United States, talking about a cash pay-off is significant; it's historically resonant; and it's just as ugly as it sounds.
[Berman:] "So what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?"
[Avlon:] Right.
[Berman:] Question mark.
[Avlon:] Yes.
[Berman:] It's not a million dollars. It's not Nixonian. It's not a million dollars. It's 150, a discount rate. "Art of the Deal."
[Avlon:] A discount rate because, you know, for frequent service. But what I think is significant is that, you know, in this context when you're paying cash, it's always done to hide it. And the idea I mean, listen to the tape. Cohen is definitely saying, "No, no, no, no, no." So, you know, we can't directly parse the exact context, but it's hard to imagine he's said, "No, no, no, no, no, we shouldn't pay with a check."
[Berman:] Look, I don't the thing is, is you listen to it, and you don't know. What I do know is that the questions that would have been raised, had we heard this tape out of nowhere, we would have all been asking, "Oh, my gosh. Did the president just say, "Pay cash'?" And that's why Giuliani came out beforehand and said, "He's definitively not saying, 'Cash"."
[Avlon:] Keep in mind, it's also specifically, from the context of Cohen saying, "I'm setting up a shell company to make the payoff."
[Camerota:] Exactly.
[Avlon:] You don't do that if you're paying cash.
[Camerota:] Now David Gregory, very quickly, yes.
[Gregory:] I would just say, you know, the larger picture here is a president who, frankly, is known for this kind of behavior, you know, that he's trying to cover up. And we've seen politicians do this before. But he was sufficiently worried during the campaign when other tapes came out, the "Access Hollywood" tape, that all of this could hurt him. And he is in a position now where he's got to wonder whether even his most stalwart supporters look at this and say, "You know, there's some line being crossed, where this leads." We haven't seen it yet. He's been able to to bloody up the narrative around the Mueller investigation enough to obtain that support. But you look at something like this and the unpredictability of it, in case Cohen has more, that certainly is hitting home with the Trump team thinking there's a political piece of this that we just may not want to endure.
[Berman:] Obviously, we have much more to discuss here. The timing. I'm interested in the campaign finance aspect of it. We will ask all these questions when our special coverage continues. The breaking news, CNN has exclusively obtained a secret audio recording between then-candidate Donald Trump and his attorney, Michael Cohen. This took place two months, two months before the presidential election. And they're heard discussing this proposed deal to buy the rights to former "Playboy" model Karen McDougal's story, who claims she had an affair with then-Donald Trump. That affair allegedly happened about a decade ago. We're back with David Gregory, Laura Coates and John Avlon. On the legal matter, again, Laura, when the president says, "So what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?" he's putting a value on this information. He is also noting he uses this really fascinating quote about David Pecker, who runs AMI, which owns "The Enquirer." You know, what happens if he get hits by maybe he gets hit by a truck. In other words, David Pecker is the carrier of all this knowledge. If he gets hit by a truck, where does that knowledge go? We lose control of it, Does this not indicate that AMI did something of value for the Trump campaign, which then raises campaign finance questions?
[Coates:] I think it does suggest that, most certainly, John. And because think about it he's saying, essentially, "Look, we have somebody. We have an in. This is our boy in AMI. He is privy to information that would be damaging," or you know that there is a tendency on the Trump behalf to try to suppress information that would be damaging, particularly two months before the presidential campaign of 2016. And so the suggestion, we have to take care of all of that, the whole breadth or scope of it, in case we were to lose that valuable asset. Now that could be they recognize David Pecker as an asset, means that he's able to make a contribution to their world in some way, shape or form. Now, I know Pecker has gone back and forth and said vehemently that "I am not that person. That's not my role." But it does when you hear it with their own ears, it does suggest that there is some connection, some expectation of a contribution, even if it's in kind. And that number 150 means that they're willing to pay for that asset, as well.
[Camerota:] Hey, David, maybe we should listen again. Because this is the moment where it sounds like Michael Cohen is describing how he's going to set up the LLC. And he talks about talking to somebody, Allen Weisselberg, who was a Trump Organization lawyer, we think?
[Berman:] I think a lawyer, accountant for
[Camerota:] Or accountant type. And so so let's listen to this shorter version where Michael Cohen is explaining how he's taking care of all this.
[Cohen:] I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend David. You know, so that I'm going to do that right away. I've actually come up, and I've spoken to I've spoken to Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up, with
[Trump:] So what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?
[Cohen:] the funding, and it's all the stuff. All the stuff. Because here, you never know where that company, you never know where he's going to be.
[Trump:] Maybe he gets hit by a truck.
[Cohen:] Correct. So I'm all over that. And I spoke to Allen about it, when it comes time for the financing. Which will be
[Trump:] Wait a sec. What financing?
[Cohen:] We'll have to pay him something. No, no, no, no, no. I've got no, no. Hey, Don. How are you?
[Camerota:] David Gregory, what do you hear?
[Gregory:] A couple things. First of all, this obviously sheds light on more than this situation, right? Because the whole Stormy Daniels case related to setting up a company that would make the payment to her, right? Which the president has denied, his team has denied. So all of the other stuff, right? If something happens to David Pecker, there's you know, where does the knowledge go? If there's other pay-outs, other affairs and so forth that have to be dealt with, we deal with this through this company. It sounds clear to me the president's talking about cash. I heard some when I first heard this, I heard something else, which was remember this whole business of Michael Cohen paying for this personally. Like no, no, no, we're not you're not going to pay, I'm going to take care of it. Which may not be accurate, but it's just something I heard in all of that. So you lay all of that out there. The other thing that I think we can't lose sight of is that the president and his team said he didn't have any knowledge of these payments. This tape would indicate that he did.
[Avlon:] Yes, obviously. Right? I mean
[Gregory:] We can't lose sight of how important that is. When a president is under investigation, says declaratively there was no collusion. And when he's saying publicly that you cannot believe what you hear or see, when he himself has just been contradicted by something that you can't hear or see. And this is the president of the United States and how he's not being truthful with the American people. So that we just can't lose sight of all of that as we're dissecting it.
[Avlon:] No, and the danger, of course, is that it gets baked in the cake. You clearly have a president, among other things, who is lying as a matter of course. He seems very comfortable suggesting cash payouts for silence.
[Camerota:] Well, sort of, except he goes, "Wait a second. What financing?" as though that's surprising to him.
[Avlon:] That would be he's more used to cash payouts. He doesn't think you need to get financed.
[Camerota:] Oh, he doesn't want to do a finance plan.
[Avlon:] And it almost goes without saying that the initial version put forward by Michael Cohen, that these were payments made without Mr. Trump's knowledge, without organization input, solely out of the goodness of his heart to clean up a problem.
[Gregory:] Right.
[Avlon:] That was always the self-evident B.S. that it now appears to conclusively be. So all those things are important. But what I think is so important is also the day that this comes out, knowing that there are tapes, the president goes to a VFW hall and says, "Don't believe what you see or what you read." And that is the larger context of this. Whether it's a conscious brushback pitch or not. And it's close to a verbatim quote from Orwell in "1984."
[Camerota:] Oh, gosh.
[Avlon:] Which says, you know, the party's No. 1 rule is not to believe what you see or what you hear.
[Gregory:] Well, the amazing part of this, too, John, is that all you have to do is follow the president himself and what he says when a camera is present. And all of these contradictions, yesterday he's talking about, you know, "We're not going to apologize anymore," after last week apologizing, saying that the United States was also responsible for the bad relationship with Russia. All you have to do is listen and watch the president, and you'll see lies. You'll see contradictions. That's all you need to look at. You don't even have to to bring the media into it.
[Camerota:] Well, he doesn't even want you to believe his words. He doesn't want you to believe that he said his words. "Why would I can't see why Russia would behind it." All of that stuff is what he's trying to have you you un-hear and unsee.
[Berman:] Let me just read this specific quote that John was talking about right there, because it is really unnerving. "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential demand." Reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.
[Camerota:] George Orwell, "1984."
[Berman:] And I will also bring people back to 24 hours ago, when Maggie Haberman was here. We were asking whether or not the Iran tweet, we were asking about whether this revoking security clearances was meant to distract from Russia. She says, "No, I think a big part of this, in what my sources are telling me," Maggie said, "is that it's about Michael Cohen."
[Camerota:] Right.
[Berman:] The president is unnerved about Michael Cohen. And I think now we see why. This is something that, you know, he is problematic, to say the least, for the president, Laura.
[Coates:] Well, you know, the president is well aware that he needs to play Johnny Appleseed in this scenario. He's got to plant the seeds of doubt. Because it's going to be a credibility game of "he said" against "he said." And when you have that, Michael Cohen is the one who says, "I have truth on my side. I've got the upper hand." And what Donald Trump is trying to do through his legal team is essentially tell the American people, look, the Karen McDougal scenario may be a foregone conclusion. We all heard the Anderson Cooper interview. But the Stormy Daniels issue still stays out there. The idea of Essential Consultants and that payout. Let's not conflate the two and think he's saying the same thing. But what he is doing is trying to prepare everyone and say, "I have now planted a seed of doubt." This is this is the seedy character. It's not me. And I'm attempting to exculpate myself in some way." But make no mistake about it. He is trying to have that bright, shiny object blind you to what you're hearing and what you're seeing. And the American people will decide whether credibility is the issue and whether it should be.
[Berman:] Listen to the president when he stands next to Vladimir Putin Listen to this tape for yourself. Pay attention. Be be the judge in this, that would be my advice.
[Gregory:] Yes.
[Camerota:] All right.
[Gregory:] One one thing about Michael Cohen, though, I mean, this is pretty seedy on his part.
[Berman:] Oh, yes.
[Gregory:] As a lawyer, to record his client. And I think, you know, the president will have a constituency saying, "Who is this guy, and why would he do that?" People will look up and go, "Yes, it seems really odd."
[Camerota:] That is a good question. Why was he just randomly recording conversations with his client? All right. We have so much more
[Berman:] I'm totally never hiring him as my lawyer. At all.
[Camerota:] Wow.
[Berman:] Can we say one more thing about the lie thing? Because I just want to because this is do not know whether Hope Hicks knew what the truth was at the time.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Berman:] But when Hope Hicks says, "We have no knowledge of any of this."
[Camerota:] Yes?
[Berman:] That is a lie. The campaign
[Camerota:] Maybe she meant the press
[Berman:] No. No.
[Camerota:] Maybe she meant the press office.
[Berman:] No, doesn't matter.
[Camerota:] You and I could you and I could debate this forever.
[Berman:] "We" includes the candidate is the campaign.
[Camerota:] Maybe.
[Berman:] He knew.
[Camerota:] I'm not
[Berman:] He knew.
[Camerota:] I'm not as upset about that part as when she says the claim of the affair is, quote, "totally untrue."
[Berman:] You know what?
[Camerota:] That part, I think, is unforgivable.
[Berman:] You can keep the paper.
[Camerota:] No.
[Berman:] I want you to keep the paper.
[Camerota:] I have my own. Listen, we have to get to other stories. Believe it or not, there's a lot of news happening. There have been dozens of people killed in wildfires in Greece. We'll show you what's happening there. In fact, we'll take you there live.

[Vanier:] The Iraqi forces say they are going to declare victory against ISIS in Mosul within days. They are now engaged in a fierce battle with holdouts in the old city. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh has seen some of the most intense fighting first-hand and he has this update from Irbil, Northern Iraq.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Sr. Intl. Correspondent:] It is clear, according to our sources on the ground, that in the overnight period, Iraqi forces have managed to secure the al-Nuri mosque, that great symbolic place for ISIS, where Abu Baker al-Baghdadi gave his one singular public appearance, announcing the beginning of the caliphate. They appear to have moved past it and further deep into the old city of Mosul, hundreds of meters now potentially between them on the river that marks the end of ISIS territory. But that's no comfort to thousands of civilians still caught in that area that ISIS control. We saw some of them emerging ourselves yesterday, talking of an absence of anything apart from war to being shelled constantly, some injured hobbling simply out of the rubble. Before the question, though, it is simply a matter of trying days, says the U.S.-backed coalition and the Iraqi government until Mosul falls entirely. The broader question is how does Iraq deal with the lingering insurgency that ISIS will become in the months and years ahead. They're already seeing parts of it reaching into Baghdad and elsewhere. There are certain towns like Hawija that ISIS still have a substantial presence in. This isn't really over. Politically, the message may be out that they've defeated ISIS. But politically, too, they have to enter into room to reconciliation here. Remember the got of Baghdad is predominantly Shia; they've had a lot of Shia forces fighting against areas which are predominantly Sunni. Remember the Sunni-Shia split in Iraq, the Sunnis were in control on the Sudan. Now the Shia are dominating control. The question is how do you get that Sunni part of the population, the extremists, of whom felt more affinity frankly with ISIS than anybody else here. How do you get them to come together and for Iraq to heal? Well, the pace in which declarations of victory have been made suggest maybe reconciliation isn't on the top of people's agenda We'll have to see in the months ahead because, without a broader healing here, we may see something like ISIS rear its head again.
[Vanier:] Our Nick Paton Walsh there reporting. And I spoke to retired U.S. Army Lt. General Mark Hertling earlier. He reminds us that retaking the city is not the end of the story.
[Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, Cnn Military Analyst: Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, the next phase of the operation is going to actually more difficult
[Hertling:] Cyril, and that's when the Iraqi government decides to reinforce with assistance, aid in rebuilding. When my organization along with the Iraqis fought there in 2008, it was against Al Qaeda. They had damaged a great deal of the city. But it was nothing like what ISIS has done in the last two years. They have destroyed the city and the fighting there with the artillery and the coalition bombing has destroyed it even more. So the Iraqi government from Baghdad, a Shia government has to support the rebuilding of this city while providing humanitarian aid for the close to 1 million people who live in the city. That's going to take a lot of money. The last time they attempted to do this, corruption splintered away some of that money. It didn't get to the places it needed to go, the rebuilding did not take place. And it generated some ill feelings even more dire, ill feelings toward the Iraqi government. So Mr. al-Abadi really has to make this happen in order to bring the citizens of Mosul back under the patronage of the Iraqi government from Baghdad. That's going to be tough.
[Vanier:] So rebuilding the city of Mosul is going to key. But what about security because ISIS, even if it's defeated in its stronghold of Mosul, it won't be totally gone from Iraq?
[Hertling:] It won't and there's a couple of places that I would name: Shirqat, Hawija, Al-Qa'im, areas in Kirkuk province, which is to the southeast of Mosul and even as far south as Diyala province, which is just north of Baghdad, still has pockets of ISIS fighters. So the security forces in those areas have to continue to fight; at the same time, one of the biggest problems that we experience and I think the Iraqi security forces are going to continue to experience, the borders with Turkey and Iran and Syria are very close to the city of Mosul. If those borders aren't controlled and they've always had difficulties doing that, then you're still going to have challenges with additional new fighters coming in and ISIS will try and rebirth themselves. That's a fact. They may do it in Iraq; they may do it in other places but there's certainly going to be continued fighting in the northern Nineveh plains of the Iraqi government.
[Vanier:] And while Mosul is by far the largest city where ISIS holds territory in Iraq, militants still occupy some smaller areas and attacking the capital, Baghdad. As the political crisis deepens in Venezuela, the death toll increases. On Friday new clashes between demonstrators and police killed two more civilians, bringing the death toll up to 83. And with a struggling economy many Venezuelans are also running out of basic resources. Our Rafael Romo takes a closer look.
[Rafael Romo, Cnn Sr. Latin Affairs Editor:] People that we've talked to on the street in Caracas, the capital, say that, in Venezuela, you don't thrive but barely survive. For many people, a typical day in Venezuela involves standing in line for several hours outside a supermarket or a bakery to be able to buy anything they can. In many instances, they leave empty-handed after several hours of waiting. There is also a big cash problem in Venezuela. The government promised last December that it would make available higher denomination bills and people have just started to see them at ATMs but only in the capital. Why is there such a shortage of cash? Well, the main problem is inflation. The International Monetary Fund forecasts inflation will rise to nearly 1,700 percent this year. And, finally, the international community is concerned about an inquiry targeting Venezuelan attorney general Luisa Ortega Diaz. Why is she being targeted? Well, she broke ranks with President Nicolas Maduro and accuses the government of violating the rights of protestors and ignoring the constitution. The U.N. issued a statement Friday calling a pretrial hearing "deeply worrying" Rafael Romo, CNN.
[Vanier:] A city in southwestern Iran may have just tied the hottest temperature ever recorded on the planet. Now Canada enjoying something of a moment on the world stage. Its prime minister, Justin Trudeau, is a social media darling. It has been applauded for its openness toward refugees and now it is celebrating a major milestone. Security preparations are underway on Parliament Hill in Ottawa to mark Canada Day. It's the country's anniversary and this year it's extra special. Canada turns 150 years old. Some royal visitors have already kicked off the festivities. Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall started their national tour in the country's far north. Two more things for you before we wrap up this show. One of the world's top football players is now off the market. Barcelona star Lionel Messi married his long-time girlfriend, Antonella Roccuzzo. The couple have known each other since they were little and they have two children together. The ceremony at a hotel and casino complex in Argentina was, as you would expect, a star-studded event. Many football celebrities in attendance and it made a big splash in Argentina's press, one newspaper calling it "the wedding of the century." And also this, some bad news, if you're a huge of Adele, the singer is hinting that she may never tour again. She says it's all due to medical reasons. The star wrote a letter to all of her supporters, calling herself really more of a homebody, adding that touring just doesn't suit her very well. She also cancelled the final two performances of her current show. Don't be too afraid; Adele has taken breaks before, most recently making a comeback with the huge hit, "Hello." So all is not lost. Thank you for watching CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Cyril Vanier and I will be back with the headlines in just a moment. Stay with us.

[Cabrera:] New developments in the crash of a plane stolen from the Seattle Tacoma International Airport. The NTSB says it has now recovered the flight data recover from the site where this plane went down Friday night. 29-year-old Richard Russell performed mid-air stunts before he crashed on a remote island outside Seattle about an hour after takeoff. Now officials believe Russell was the only person killed. Family members say they are stunned and heartbroken by what has happened. Kyung Lah is in
[Kyung Lah, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] Well, the very latest information that we're getting, Ana, is from the NTSB. Their investigators have recovered as you said the flight data recorder. That has been wrapped up. It will be sent to Washington, D.C. tomorrow. They intend to begin analysis sometime this week, to try to fill in the blanks about what exactly happened in the plane. What they have not been able to recover is the cockpit voice recorder. And here's why. The plane went through a heavily wooded area in one of these remote islands that's right behind me, and it hit a lot of trees. And so when it crashed into the ground the NTSB says it basically smashed into smithereens. There is almost nothing left that looks like a plane except for one wing section. So they are not incredibly optimistic about finding the cockpit voice recorder. But a lot of this, Ana, it did play out so publicly. People did get to see this plane. We heard those extraordinary exchanges between Russell and ATC here in Seattle. So many of those movements at the very end throughout this extraordinary scene that played out here, that is already known, a lot of questions, though, about how to prevent this from happening again Ana.
[Cabrera:] And Kyung, you wonder what if there were any red flags. What is Russell's family saying as we're starting to hear some reaction from them?
[Lah:] And that's another key part of the investigation. Is was there something that people missed? Was there a sign that someone could have seen? We spoke to co-workers who said they didn't see anything. His family came forward with a statement saying that they simply did not see any outward signs of mental illness with the young man who they called Vivo, a man who was so loved, he was happily married, they say. They simply didn't see it. Here is what they say.
[Mike Matthews, Friend Of Family:] May seem difficult for those watching at home to believe but Vivo was a warm, compassionate man. As the voice recordings show Vivo's intent was not to harm anyone. He was right in saying that there are so many people who have loved him.
[Lah:] The family saying that they are going to take a hard look at themselves, Ana, just as the airline industry is also going to re- evaluate everything it's done Ana.
[Cabrera:] Kyung Lah, thank you. Imagine if your son or daughter were forced to practice until they passed out or in one case until they lost their life. A new bombshell report detailing allegations of a toxic culture at the University of Maryland as the school's head football coach gets benched.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] with John Berman, always seen and heard.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Did Chris Cuomo just say, sometimes it's better to say less?
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Yes. In that position.
[Camerota:] Yes, he did.
[Cuomo:] Not in mine.
[Berman:] OK.
[Camerota:] The irony that screams.
[Cuomo:] And in your position right now, it may be better to say less.
[Camerota:] Wow.
[Berman:] Yes. I better stop right now, I have to say, in that sense. We have a lot of news, so I'm going to get to it and say goodbye to you, guys. So long, bye. All right. At this moment, voters are heading to the polls in what could be the most important special election in decades. The most expensive House race ever. The most pivotal political moment yet to face this White House. It could be all of those things. Then again, it could just be Tuesday. It's sometimes hard to know with special elections. What we do know about the race in suburban Atlanta is that it is being seen as a referendum on the Trump presidency in a district that has been in Republican hands for a long, long time. So important the President weighed in, not once, but twice this morning. Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican Karen Handel, they are neck and neck. We've heard from both of them within the last hour. CNN's Jason Carroll joins us now live from Marietta. Inside the most watched congressional district on Earth this morning, Jason.
[Jason Carroll, Cnn National Correspondent:] Wow, that's quite the lead-in, I mean. But you're not off the truth there. I mean, you look at how many votes were cast early in this election 140,000, John. Those are the types of numbers that you normally see during a presidential campaign. This is the most expensive race of its kind in U.S. history. $50 million spent between both candidates, if you also add in super PAC spending and PAC spending as well. When you look at the lay of the land in terms of what's happened here, I mean, the sixth congressional district has been reliably Republican for decades. But during the 2016 campaign, Trump barely eked out a win here. Democrats saw an opportunity. That's where you had the man by the name of Jon Ossoff entering the race early on, very much making it about President Trump, making it very critical of President Trump. You've got Karen Handel on the other side who says Jon Ossoff doesn't have the political experience. He's basically just a liberal doing what he's been doing. Now, what you have is both candidates, John, basically saying the race is about each other and not about the President.
[Karen Handel, Republican Congressional Candidate For Georgia:] The people of the sixth district want this to be about the sixth district. They are not interested in Hollywood and California coming in and buying this seat. And they are very concerned about an individual who does not even live in this district. He is a liberal and just the same along the lines of Nancy Pelosi. He's going to be her vote in the House. What the people of the sixth want is a vote for them.
[Jon Ossoff, Democratic Congressional Candidate For Georgia:] The contrast in this district is between a career politician, my opponent Karen Handel, who is notorious for cutting off funding for life saving breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood, or a fresh voice who wants to work across to get things done and grow our local economy, work to make health care more accessible and affordable for women and folks with pre-existing conditions.
[Carroll:] So let's look at the implications here. If Ossoff wins, that's really going to be a symbolic victory for Democrats going forward, hopefully giving them the momentum they think that they need going into midterm elections. If Handel wins here, again, symbolic victory for Republicans because what it does is it shows that what the President has been doing is working, gives GOP lawmakers in Washington a mandate to move forward on his agenda. The problem is, for both sides, John, the race is just too close to call. John?
[Berman:] I got to tell you, Jason, both those candidates look simply exhausted, probably almost as tired all as the voters in that district where you are this morning. Jason Carroll, in Marietta, thanks so much.
[Carroll:] They are tired, yes, no doubt.
[Berman:] All right. It's a big day for secrecy on Capitol Hill. In a few hours, Vice President Mike Pence will meet behind closed doors with Senate Republican leaders to talk about their health care bill that practically no one has seen and for which there are virtually no details. But whatever is in it, it is promising enough to leaders that they want the Senate to vote on it as soon as next week. Incidentally, what does the Vice President think about secrecy? Listen to this. "It's simply wrong for legislation that will affect 100 percent of the American people to be negotiated behind closed doors." He wrote that. Of course, he wrote it back in 2010. I guess times have changed. Democrats, who have almost no power over these developments, held something of a vent-a-thon overnight. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux live on Capitol Hill with the very latest. Suzanne?
[Suzanne Malveaux, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good morning, John. Well, Democrats are really seizing on the Vice President's comments there. And they are also, while many of us were sleeping late last night, they were on the Senate floor. It was a kind of a talk-a-thon, if you will, waging their own protest to at least call attention to the super-secret process that is going on behind closed doors to craft this legislation by Senate Republicans. They have asked for a number of things, all of them rejected. One of the things that we had heard about was whether or not they would make the text public and available. There is no text to this bill so far. Public hearings. That has also been rejected, an all-Senate meeting. So Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell saying that none of those things are on the table. Now, earlier this morning, I spoke with Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat, and asked him, what can Democrats possibly do? Why did they wage this protest? And are they going to slow or try to slow the government down? Here's his response.
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Illinois:] It takes three Republican senators. If three Republican senators say this is the wrong way to change the health care system in America, we can stop this and move toward a more constructive process. One that's more bipartisan, one that's more open, more public, so that the American people know what's going to happen.
[Malveaux:] John, some Republicans are pushing back, saying that the Democratic process, as you had mentioned back in 2010, was not completely open. And I did put that to Senator Durbin. And he said, well, at least we had some public hearings following that bill, at least the writing of that legislation, and 25 days of debate. If you look at the calendar on Republican's side, they certainly will not be offering that. It will be more in the tune of hours and not days for that to be public. But what we will see today is Vice President Mike Pence, who, in that course, could be a tiebreaker in all of this. He will be meeting behind the scenes with Republican lawmakers to talk about what they have so far. A temperature check, if you will, in terms of some of the details John.
[Berman:] Yes. They may not get 25 hours of debate, let alone 25 days, but it might be the best way to get it passed in the Republican Senate. Suzanne Malveaux, on Capitol Hill, thanks so much. Joining me now, Jason Miller, CNN political commentator, former communications director for the Trump transition team; David Swerdlick, a CNN political, assistant editor at "The Washington Post"; and Jeff Weaver, former campaign manager for Bernie Sanders. Gentlemen, let's play a game of what if with the Georgia Sixth special election. Jeff Weaver, firs to you, in 20 seconds or less, if Jon Ossoff, the Democrat, wins, what if he wins? What does it mean?
[Jeff Weaver, Former Campaign Manager For Bernie Sanders:] Well, what it means is that the American public are sick and tired of this Trump agenda, of an attempt to take away health care from 23 million people. And as we've seen over the course of three special elections, Democrats are far outperforming how they did in the presidential election year. And I think Jon Ossoff's going to put it over the top today.
[Berman:] All right, Jeff. Then, what if he loses?
[Weaver:] Well, look, this has been a very close race. The previous incumbent, Price, I think won this seat by 23 points. It's a staunchly Republican seat. The fact that Ossoff has gone toe-to-toe with his Republican opponent, I think, is a testament to the strength of the Democratic message at this particular moment.
[Berman:] Jason Miller, you get to play now. What if Karen Handel wins? What does that mean?
[Jason Miller, Former Communications Director For The Trump Transition Team:] I think what this will show is that voters in Georgia, and largely around the country, as this race is becoming nationalized, do not want to see another vote for Nancy Pelosi being sent up to Congress. And I think there's a bigger counter culture backlash that we're seeing going on right now that's really galvanizing and firing up the Republican base, where voters are upset with a Kathy Griffin treatment toward President Trump. We see the terrible witch hunt that's going on against President Trump in Washington right now. We even see the fake art in the park that has dominated some of the headlines over this past week. I think Republican voters are really fired up about this. They're going to show up in big numbers today. And one other really critical point that's going on here I think Jeff is really someone who can speak to this as well is it's important to point out that the Democratic base really has been demotivated and in shambles ever since the DNC and Secretary Clinton and others
[Weaver:] We'll see.
[Miller:] stole this election, that primary election, from Bernie Sanders last year. The Democrats have not been able to get their footing back ever since then.
[Berman:] You went over your 20-second allotment there.
[Miller:] Sorry.
[Berman:] But I will still ask you, in 20 seconds or less, Jason, what if, then, the Republican Karen Handel loses?
[Miller:] Well, I don't think she's going to lose today. I think she's going to win bigly. I know everyone is saying it's really close going into today, in Election Day, but, look, I think Karen Handel probably wins by upwards of four or five points. I think she wins it running away, and I just don't see her losing at all, even though it's a tight district.
[Berman:] All right. Jason Miller, noted. Not playing the expectations game here. You're supposed to say it would be an amazing upset if she wins, that's the way politics normally is in Washington. But we appreciate your honesty there. David Swerdlick, to you, obviously, this is a race that people are trying to nationalize here. People all around the country are looking at this as some kind of referendum. When we wake up tomorrow, will it tell us something, going forward?
[David Swerdlick, Assistant Editor, The Washington Post:] Well, if Ossoff wins and the Democrats finally get a win, I think it will just mean that a fever broke. Republicans won the special in Montana. Republicans won the special in Kansas. Those were Republican districts that they were supposed to win. This is a Republican district that's closer, so if Democrats can pick it off, even if it's a close race, I think that suggests that they have something to build on. But I think it will be getting ahead of ourselves to say that they can, all of a sudden, start dreaming about taking back Congress or taking back the House. If Handel wins, I think it just suggests that a Republican won a Republican district, even though she was facing a well-financed Democratic challenger. And Democrats really have to go back to the drawing board and realize that part of their message is an anti-Trump message, John, but part of their message has to be a prospective message heading into 2018 about what they want to offer voters that they'll do, rather than what the administration won't do.
[Berman:] I say this as an assistant
[Miller:] Amen. Amen.
[Berman:] I say this as an assistant little league coach here. Democrats are running out of participation trophies. I mean, sooner or later
[Swerdlick:] Yes, exactly.
[Berman:] Sooner or later, Jeff Weaver, you know, you've got to win somewhere, right, so do you believe the Democratic base? Jason Miller suggested the Democratic base isn't energized. Is that for real?
[Weaver:] Well, nothing could be further from the truth. I think you've seen it in the streets of this country, with the Women's March and other marches across this country. The base is very energized. And, look, I would say this, this is the first of the three special elections where you've had financial parity between the candidates. In the case of Montana, Quist received very little outside money where he was pounded with $5 million's worth of Koch Brother and other money on negative ads. Thompson in Kansas got no outside help. So this is the first time we've seen a Democratic candidate in one of these special elections get the kind of financial support they need to go toe-to-toe with the Republicans. And surprise, surprise, they're going toe-to-toe. Ossoff's going toe-to-toe with Handel in Georgia. If these other candidates have had the same kind of resources, not taking anything away from Ossoff, I think you would have seen similar results in those places.
[Berman:] All right, Jason Miller, let's
[Miller:] Sorry, I think that
[Berman:] Let's turn, Jason, if we can, to health care, to all the details we know inside the Senate health care bill. I was silent there because we don't know any of the details of the Senate health care bill because it's being negotiated behind closed doors. And, Jason, I know you were listening as we were reading the Mike Pence tweet from 2010 when he said it's simply wrong for legislation that will affect 100 percent of the people to be negotiated behind closed doors. Will you grant that it's at least a little bit ironic, Jason, that this is happening in complete secrecy?
[Miller:] John, of course, the Republicans are going to go and put together what they want to move forward for the legislation and then, of course, they'll be some floor debate over this. The exact time parameters, we don't yet know, but the Republicans have every right to go and negotiate their own plan, what they want to put forward, and then get that out there for people to go on and debate. But I think the fact that the Democrats are seizing on the process aspect of this and not the fact that ObamaCare's failing and the fact that Democrats don't have their own legislation or a real bill that will go and help people and turn around this cliff that we're heading to with ObamaCare, I think, is really telling the lack of direction and the rudderless aspect of the Democratic Party now.
[Berman:] But you're talking about the same process.
[Miller:] Yes.
[Berman:] Democrats are talking about the same process that Republicans talked about back in 2010. No one likes it when the other side negotiates behind closed doors, David Swerdlick. And to Jason Miller's point, yes, there will be floor debate. Maybe a few hours, you know, 10 to 20 hours. Two days, if we're following the time frame that we're getting a sense of right now from Republican leadership. It does seem as if they are trying to get this through very, very quickly before these senators have to go home for the July 4th recess, David.
[Swerdlick:] They're trying to get it through done quickly and without a lot of rancor on either the House or the Senate side. Look, Jason is my man, 100 grand. But, Jason, you know that this is exactly the argument that Republicans made in 2009 and 2010 about the Democrat's process. It was partly a substance argument and partly this idea that Democrats were, you know, cooking this up in secret. Look, Republicans have not been consistent on this issue, and that's actually been a problem for them as they try to get their own version of this bill passed. If Democrats had done something like Medicare for All back in '09, Republicans would probably be doing something right now that looked very similar to the RomneyCareObamaCare plan that used to be a Republican plan.
[Miller:] Well
[Swerdlick:] Now that they have to replace that plan, they're looking for alternatives. And they can't agree between House Republicans who want it a little more conservative, House senators that want it a little more in the middle.
[Berman:] Jeff Weaver, quick last word, though. Democrats, they vented last night, but can they do really much more than vent at this point?
[Weaver:] Well, the process is difficult with this Senate reconciliation procedure that's being used to pass this bill. But I do think, look, on this topic, John, the American people at the polls are all consistent. I mean, a huge majority of the American people are opposed to what the Republicans are doing. And that's why they're trying to do it in secret and sneak out of Washington before they go home for July 4th. They know if this thing is hanging out there, the substance of this thing is hanging out there, when they go home, there's going to be a lot of angry constituents at their town meetings.
[Berman:] We will see. Jason Miller, David Swerdlick, Jeff Weaver, thank you all so much. You're all 100 grand in my book, or at least 99, on a Tuesday. New information about beleaguered former national security adviser Michael Flynn, potentially controversial trips and meetings that Democrats say he did not disclose. Plus, a U.S. citizen dies after being in captivity in North Korea. John McCain calls it murder. This morning, how will the President respond? And forget mixed messaging. How about no messaging? The White House schedule clear of press briefings today.

[Gorani:] Frustration over the condition of the European Union is spilling over for some of its leaders. Jean Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, slammed the entire European Parliament for its low at a session reviewing the Maltese presidency of the EU now. Now listen to some of the unusually strong words that Juncker used.
[Jean Claude Juncker, European Commission President:] Mr. President, Mr. Prime Minister, the European Parliament is ridiculous, very ridiculous. I would like to welcome those that have actually taken the trouble to turn up this morning. But the fact there are about 30 members of parliament in this debate only really illustrates the fact that parliament is not seriously missed. I'm putting that to you today that if Mr. [inaudible] or Mrs. Merkel or Mr. Macron perhaps have been here, it would have been a full house. Mr. President, could you please have a more respectful attitude. You may criticize the parliament, yes, but the commission does not control the parliament. It's the parliament that should be controlling the commission. There are only few members in the plenary to control the commission, you are ridiculous. I wanted to pay tribute to the Maltese
[Antonio Tajani, European Parliament President:] Mr. President, I would ask you please to change your language. We are not ridiculous, please, please.
[Juncker:] I will never again I will never, I will never again attend a meeting of these kinds. The commission is under the control of the Parliament, but the Parliament has to respect even the persons [inaudible] smaller component is what the parliament is not doing.
[Rear Admiral John Kirby , Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] I don't know how this one was made. Typically, it's usually done at lower- level staff level between both countries sort of working out what the format's going to be like, what the protocol, the size of the room and how many backbenchers you have, people at the table. So it's usually done at the lower level. I'm sure it was done bilaterally. I think it's a good thing. I think this works to the President's favor because it means more people in the room. It means a more structured agenda. It means a chance to really try to make this content heavy, rather than just sort of an informal pull-aside where, you know, there's no structure to it. And it may lend itself to optics that don't convey the seriousness of the first meeting between these two men.
[Gorani:] But because there is so much of a focus on Russia's role in trying to interfere in the U.S. election, on some of the staffers during the Trump campaign, what communications they might have had also with Russian officials, this couldn't have been just a low-level decision, right? In this particular case, would you expect it to have gone all the way up to the President himself to make that decision?
[Kirby:] Oh, well, clearly look, clearly, ultimately, the two principals have got to agree that it's going to be a bi-lat. What I'm saying is the logistics of making that decision
[Gorani:] Right.
[Kirby:] are done at the lower level. But, clearly, both men had to have agreed to it. I don't suspect that this was something that there was a lot of handwringing over at the White House, nor should there have been. I mean, this is the way normally, when two presidents meet, this is the way it's done. And these two particular guys, with as many issues as there are between us, this makes a lot of sense, from my perspective.
[Gorani:] So you have two very strong personalities. Obviously, we get a lot of insight into Donald Trump's thinking on his Twitter account, not as much President Putin. He doesn't tweet. But how important now is this personal relationship? What should we be looking out for?
[Kirby:] Well, look, I don't think either side expects there's going to be a lot of specifics that come out of this meeting, a lot of tangible results, some sort of deal struck. I really don't think anybody is looking at that. It's the first meeting between them, and there's such contentiousness in the relationship
[Gorani:] No, but you're going to look at body language, at the handshake, at, you know, what they end up
[Kirby:] Yes, sure. Look
[Gorani:] telling reporters after, that type of thing.
[Kirby:] Yes. Exactly.
[Gorani:] Yes.
[Kirby:] Look, I think the handshake stuff is awful fun for theater. I don't put a lot of stock in that. What you should look is at the backend, what they each say about the meeting. If there's no common, you know, bi-lat read out, what do they say and what are the gaps between what each side is saying about what was discussed? And what agreements are going to go, going forward? Here's what I think. I think they'll say it was constructive.
[Gorani:] Yes.
[Kirby:] They'll say it was positive. They'll say, you know, we were able to talk about mutual concerns and the poor state of the bilateral relationship and how we're going to make it better. And our two teams are going to meet again in the future to try to work out some of these issues. I think that's pretty much what the read out is going to be. I don't think there's going to be or that there are high expectations for actual tangible outcomes.
[Gorani:] Well, I've interviewed diplomats for many, many years, and I know when I hear words like candid, frank, constructive, friendly, we'll meet again
[Kirby:] Yes. Yes.
[Gorani:] that's usually diplo speak for, well, we talked honestly about certain things, and maybe we're keeping other topics for later.
[Kirby:] Yes.
[Gorani:] But the one topic everybody wants to hear about, in terms of whether or not the President brings it up with President Putin, is this Russian interference. And an official is telling CNN that is not likely to top the agenda at all if it makes it into the conversation. Do you find that surprising?
[Kirby:] I don't find it surprising, Hala. I do find it disappointing. I think in a weird sort of ironic way, the issue is going to come up because we can expect Putin's going to complain about the fact that President Obama kicked his diplomats out of the country and out of those two compounds in Maryland. That is sort of a backdoor way of talking about the election season and the meddling. But here's what I do believe. I hope that President Trump and his team are reconsidering this approach. Because, look, even if he doesn't want to admit to the election meddling issue in 2016 and he doesn't want to look back, he needs to look forward. Russia will do this again. You are seeing it there in Europe. They are continuing to do this sort of cyber hacking, and it will continue. And we've got a midterm election in 2018 in this country, another presidential election two years later. He needs to lay down a marker for Putin that this is not going to be tolerated and that we take this seriously.
[Gorani:] Now, you say handshakes are good theater, but President Macron of France said that white-knuckle handshake he had with Donald Trump was no accident.
[Kirby:] Oh, yes.
[Gorani:] That it was more than theater, that he wanted to send an actual diplomatic message.
[Kirby:] Yes.
[Gorani:] You know, that we won't be sort of pushed around, something like that.
[Kirby:] Yes.
[Gorani:] There's the video of it, by the way. It was in Brussels in May.
[Kirby:] Yes.
[Gorani:] So this is going to be important to look at too as well, how they interact with each other, these two men.
[Kirby:] Yes. Look, they're both very
[Gorani:] The body language.
[Kirby:] They're both very proud of their masculinity.
[Gorani:] Yes.
[Kirby:] And, yes, I think we're going to see very robust, you know, physicality between them. I just think sometimes we make too much of the whole handshake thing. That's my personal opinion. But, yes, look, everybody's going to be looking for that. This is the other good thing about having a formal bi-lat because usually, as you know, Hala, they'll be proceeded with a camera spray. They'll be media in the room.
[Gorani:] Yes.
[Kirby:] There may even be a chance for media to ask a question or two. That's all good for the transparency and the message sending, you know, part of a meeting like this.
[Gorani:] Well, we'll see how that all unfolds. John Kirby, as always
[Kirby:] We will be.
[Gorani:] great having you on. Thank you.
[Kirby:] Thanks, my pleasure.
[Gorani:] Now, imagine trying to plan a foreign trip for a U.S. president. Imagine now having to plan that trip for Donald Trump. Obviously, this isn't just buying a plane ticket on Expedia and booking an Uber at the airport. We are talking dozens and dozens of vehicles and hundreds of staff, all flown in on transport and passenger planes. On top of which, the Secret Service has been working for weeks on securing the President's travels. Now, President Trump starts his trip in Poland and Croatia. Then it's on to Hamburg for the G20 and his meeting with President Putin. Now, my next guest planned such travels for former U.S. President Barack Obama. Johanna Maska joins me now from Los Angeles. So, Johanna, thanks for being with us. First, if you were planning a Donald Trump trip, what would be top of your list of concerns, of things you need to address?
[Johanna Maska, Former Director Of Press Advance For President Barack Obama:] Well, you started with a little bit of a bio. I worked for President Obama. I travelled with him for eight years to 40 countries, and I will say I was very lucky because I had a predictable principal. I think I'd be most worried at any of the last minute changes because, obviously, you know, a concern for you when you're on your own territory is you're not always in control. When you're on foreign soil, you're definitely not in control.
[Gorani:] So how do you, you know, maximize control when you're abroad?
[Maska:] You know, what we would do is we would go six weeks in advance, and we would lay out, you know, what we wanted out of the trip. We were pretty transparent with folks. We would actually bring the press to most of our meetings because, you know, when you're moving the center of the White House to a different location, you're actually moving, you know, the ability for him to communicate. You're moving military operations. You're moving the security forces that you already talked about. You're basically moving the Oval Office to wherever he is. So you need to make sure that everyone has the ability, should anything go wrong, domestic or international, that you can respond to it in that moment. So what they have to look at is, you know, wherever he's going, making sure that he has that Oval Office operation with him at all times.
[Gorani:] So it's interesting what you're saying that you go six weeks ahead of time. Obviously, I don't find it surprising. I would expect that. But then there are these reports regarding Donald Trump that between the G20, the end of G20 in July 14th, which is Bastille Day, when he is the guest of honor at the Bastille Day Parade of Emmanuel Macron, that he might pop over to the U.K. These are reports floating around. Therefore, would that require more preparation, or is that doable on short notice?
[Maska:] So Air Force One doesn't just pop. I mean, that's the thing is, you know, you have to plan this because it's diplomatic, you know, protocol that you have to do. When you arrive in any country, they normally want to greet you. There's political implications if he just pops over to a country. There's also, you know, all of the diplomatic implications. Because if he's going to another country, the embassy, the State Department, the military, all of these different components should be ready. And on that, we did do off the record trips, but our off the record trips were to Afghanistan or to Iraq or, you know, somewhere where there was a significant reason that we were going there. Most of our trips, if there was a couple days shuffle, the press would at least have an idea of what we were thinking about doing.
[Gorani:] Right. So if by now, there hasn't been a formal announcement for the U.K., chances are this isn't something that's happening. You couldn't just wing it, obviously.
[Maska:] I can't imagine it. The only thing I ever remember us like kind of winging was Stonehenge at the last moment. We ended up adding that on a trip where we were already in country. So winging it and going to another country, that's very unlikely.
[Gorani:] It's a big ask. What's the most unusual thing that a government has offered to do for President Obama on a foreign trip?
[Maska:] Well, I was doing an interview with R.A. Shapiro and I remembered that the Italians had started building us a basketball court, which we did not ask for and subsequently said, no, I don't think but, you know, if every
[Gorani:] How far along were they in the building of the basketball court, if anything?
[Maska:] They had one one hoop was already done.
[Gorani:] Oh, wow. OK.
[Maska:] So that was not going anywhere. But, you know, every country wants to be a great host. And so, you know, I can never imagine a country not trying to host, to cater to whoever the president is. I'm trying to remember some more other circumstances, but, you know, multileader summits, they can't do that much for one leader and not for another.
[Gorani:] Yes.
[Maska:] It will be interesting.
[Gorani:] It will be interesting to watch the G20 unfold, and we'll see. Maybe we'll have that unannounced trip to the U.K. during that downtime. We'll see.
[Maska:] Right.
[Gorani:] Johanna Maska, thanks so much for joining us from L.A. President Trump is also facing resistance back home from dozens of U.S. states. This time, it's not just the so-called blue states leading the charge. And this is why this is an interesting story as well because Republican-dominated states are pushing back as well against the new Trump commission looking at the supposed problem of voter fraud, which most studies say doesn't exist in the first place. Now, Dianne Gallagher breaks down this complicated story for us.
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn National Correspondent:] Tonight, growing backlash from states feeling the federal government overreach into voter information. Now, at least 40 states pushing back at requests from President Trump's commission to handover election data, expressing reservations, citing legal barriers, or outright refusing to turn over some or all of the information.
[Alison Lundergan Grimes , Kentucky Secretary Of State:] This is simple a government overreach. It's making government bigger, something Donald Trump told us he would not do by creating a, hashtag, fake commission.
[Gallagher:] Bipartisan opposition with red states refusing too. In a statement issued before even receiving the request, Mississippi Secretary of State told the commission to, quote, go jump in the Gulf of Mexico and Mississippi is a great state to launch from.
[Kris Kobach , Kansas Secretary Of State:] This is a commission that is just gathering data, and we'll follow the facts where they lead them.
[Gallagher:] Kris Kobach, the vice chair of Trump's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is asking for information, if publicly available under state laws, including a voter's full name, address, date of birth, political affiliation, voting, military, criminal records, along with at least part of their Social Security Number. Now, some states are more critical than others, with at least 10, including California Secretary of State, questioning the ethics of the panel.
[Alex Padilla , California Secretary Of State:] We know nothing about how they intend to operate in a way that's transparent and accountable to the public. But it's a commission that was based that was formed on the President's fixation of massive voter fraud which, study after study, shows is simply not true.
[Gallagher:] Kobach told CNN's Anderson Cooper that's not the point of the commission.
[Kobach:] First of all, the commission's purpose is not to prove or disprove what the President speculated about back in January. The purpose of the commission is to find facts and put them on the table.
[Gallagher:] President Trump attacked the opposing states on Twitter, asking, what are they trying to hide? Since the start
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They woke up from the dead and they went and voted.
[Gallagher:] Trump has claimed fraud in U.S. elections.
[Trump:] Believe me, there's a lot going on. Do you ever hear these people, they say there's nothing going on. People that have died 10 years ago and still voting. Illegal immigrants are voting.
[Gallagher:] Citing zero evidence, he tweeted in November, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally, but the administration has yet to provide any proof. And every credible study CNN has found has determined large-scale voter fraud is extremely rare to nonexistent.
[Gorani:] Dianne Gallagher reporting. Well, Dianne mentioned that at least 40 states are pushing back against this commission. Well, CNN can now report that 44 out of the 50 states are refusing at least some part of this. So the number has increased to 44 out of all 50 U.S. states. Still ahead, we'll go back to the U.S. but for celebration this time, not controversy. It's Independence Day, July 4th. We'll take you to iconic Coney Island for a fun July 4th traditional, quote, sport, unquote.

[T Apper:] Welcome back. Do not assume that Rod Rosenstein is going to be kicked to the curb. That's the line coming from the White House as the deputy attorney general is set to meet face-to-face with President Trump on Thursday, with the fate of the Russia investigation possibly also on the line. CNN's Laura Jarrett is at the Justice Department. And, Laura, there are reports there was a Rosenstein exit letter already drafted?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Jake, that's right. Officials over here at the Justice Department were all geared up, ready to go, believing that his departure was imminent. But, of course, it never happened. And then he returned to the Justice Department yesterday afternoon, carried on with his day as if nothing happened. But, of course, his longer-term status here as the number two in command still very much in limbo.
[Jarrett:] The future of Russia probe leader Rod Rosenstein may still be in peril, with lawmakers now pressing for the Justice Department's number two to testify on Capitol Hill. The president in New York today trying to redirect attention to the work at the
[U.n. Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm meeting with Rod Rosenstein on Thursday. Today I'm doing other things.
[Jarrett:] White House officials caution Rosenstein may not be out of the job, as White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders added to the ambiguity.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Obviously, the president has been disappointed by a number of actions that have taken place at the Department of Justice. And he wants some answers to some of the questions that he has. Some of them have to do with Rod Rosenstein, some of them have nothing to do with him.
[Jarrett:] The Justice Department prepared a statement Monday, ahead of what they thought was Rosenstein's last day, according to sources. The statement, obtained by "Axios", read in part, quote, Rod Rosenstein has served Department of Justice with skill for 28 years. His contributions are many and significant. We all appreciate his service and sincerely wish him well. Officials were also ready to name Matt Whitaker, Attorney General Jeff Sessions' current chief of staff, as Rosenstein's replacement. Whitaker, a former CNN legal contributor, urged Rosenstein last year to order special counsel Robert Mueller to limit the scope of his investigation. But if Rosenstein leaves, Whitaker won't oversee the Russia probe. That will fall to Solicitor General Noel Francisco. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Republicans are calling for the deputy A.G. to be subpoenaed over the story that started it all. Reports that Rosenstein discussed secretly taping the president and invoking the 25th Amendment to remove him from office. One source in the room dismissed to CNN as sarcasm, but Republican Congressman Mark Meadows isn't laughing, tweeting, you can't have the number two official at the Department of Justice making comments about wiring the president and not address it. Rod Rosenstein must come before Congress this week, under oath, and tell the truth about his alleged statements. And Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz says the story could be career- ending.
[Rep. Matt Gaetz , Florida:] I don't think it's appropriate to joke about taking an action against the institution of the presidency while you're overseeing an investigation.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Host, "cuomo Prime Time":] Fireable?
[Gaetz:] Probably.
[Jarrett:] Others on Capitol Hill, however, raising very different concerns. Republican senator of Maine, Susan Collins, who I should mention is a key swing vote for the president on his embattled nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, saying to reporters just a short time ago, Jake, that forcing Rosenstein out would be, quote, a huge red line and very problematic Jake.
[Tapper:] All right. Laura Jarrett, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Let's discuss with our experts Phil Mudd, former FBI official, is here with me. I want to play the sound again from Sarah Sanders, talking about Rod Rosenstein and the Justice Department, because it's really stark. I know we've all gotten accustomed to this. But this is the White House press secretary talking about her own Justice Department.
[Sanders:] The president has been disappointed by a number of actions that have taken place at the Department of Justice. Some of them have to do with Rod Rosenstein. Some of them have nothing to do with him. But it is Department of Justice. And it should work to actually fix and hold up law and order, not complicate or undermine law and order.
[Tapper:] Again, that is the White House press secretary, saying that the Justice Department under her own president undermines law and order.
[Phil Mudd, Cnn Counterterrorism Analyst:] Well, if you ask the American citizens if they have a gang problem, if they have a drug problem, if you go back to Enron, if they have a white collar crime problem, who the heck are you going to call? I think 98 percent of the American population would say not only would I call the FBI, but I would trust them. Guys, I went over there. I wore like different colored socks some days and the FBI guys would be like, what's wrong with you? These guys are arrow-straight. My point is, the president of the United States in this 1 percent probably less than 1 percent of the FBI resources. That is the investigations that Rod Rosenstein has been involved in, the Russia investigation, has persuaded the American people that 99 percent of the world, you trust them. And in this one area, where people, including judges, have said these cases are not only predicated, but have led to guilty pleas, this you shouldn't trust him. I don't get it. I trusted the FBI. I saw them for four and a half years and I think most Americans still would, unless it's Russia.
[Tapper:] So it seems as though the most likely bet is that Rod Rosenstein has a judge, at least through the mid terms. There's a lot of pushback going on.
[Bolden:] At least politically.
[Tapper:] Yes. Well, the reporting is that Chief of Staff Kelly and others want him to have they don't want this issue before the midterms.
[Bolden:] Well politic I'm sorry, good right ahead.
[Tapper:] As a political issue. But do you think that that means that Mueller and Rosenstein should think about the fact that their days might be numbered?
[Bolden:] I think Rosenstein needs to think about what's next. But I think the GOP in the House, Senate and White House need to think about what's next. Because if you take Rosenstein out, you're taking out someone that has many respects been the glue between the chaos, between Mueller, between the public and the House and the Senate, because he's got a lot of credibility. Secondly, there will always be that concern that he was removed because of the president's dislike of him or of the Russia investigation. That's the constitutional crisis that the House and Senate don't want to get into. But who takes over for him? And what do they do? They'll feel the same pressure that Rosenstein feels. That's not going to change. And even if they are big Trump backers, even Trump and whoever the next one will be will feel that, remember, this is a Republican-led investigation endorsed by all the Republican powers. It's got to see an end, because we're talking about our democracy, our voting rights, our systems. Not just about whether Trump colluded with Russia. That's a part of it, but it's really super-important to the American people.
[Tapper:] And yet you have these House Republicans who have been really pushing against Rosenstein for a long time. We saw them in the in the piece just there, Laura Jarrett's piece. You have Matt Gaetz, Mark Meadows, they have not liked Rosenstein. They have been talking about impeaching Rosenstein.
[Powers:] Right. Well, I think
[Tapper:] Before this "New York Times" story.
[Powers:] I think the question has always been not if he's going to get fired, but when he's going to get fired. It's been pretty clear that they've that that's what a lot of people who support Trump and I think Donald Trump probably wants this reporting about the 25th Amendment and allegedly wanting to wiretap him, which, of course, Rosenstein has denied, gives Donald Trump the excuse. And so, I guess he could argue, you know, I didn't do it before the election, because that would have been bad. And then after the election, he decides he's really upset about it. But they're having this meeting on Thursday. So, it feels like this would be the opportunity for him to do it in a way where most people would say, yes, most presidents would be pretty mad about that if that happened.
[Tapper:] Certainly. But I can't imagine I mean, Mark Meadows and the Freedom Caucus, they really love President Trump. And I can't imagine a hearing like that would actually happen without President Trump's tacit approval. One demanding that Rosenstein answer under oath what he did or did not do as reported in the "New York Times."
[Holmes:] I mean, I don't know. I think House Republicans have run a number through the Intel Committee, through the Reform Committee, a number of different hearings that, you know, if I were running communications in the White House, would probably not be my first choice of things to do. But their frustration is real. And I think the president's frustration is real, because the reality is, the moment he decided to fire Comey, he was boxed in on Rosenstein and Sessions, period. And the cavalcade the sort of dominoes that fell afterwards put him in a place where just optically, it's impossible. No matter how much he feels like they're not doing their job or they're not responsive to his administration's agenda, all of that kind of doesn't matter, because of the optical box that he's now in, vis-a-vis the Russia investigation.
[Tapper:] Yes. Everyone, stick around. Coming up next, Cruz confronted. The tense moments for the Texas senator and his wife at a D.C. restaurant. What these activists wanted him to hear as President Trump sends his own message to voters ahead of the midterm. Stay with us.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news: border stall. As President Trump heads to Texas to promote his wall, are talks to avoid another government shutdown making progress or going nowhere? We're following late negotiations this hour and the status of a new Democratic proposal that Mr. Trump is attacking tonight. Postponing again. Michael Cohen is putting off another chance to appear before Congress, coming up with a new reason to delay. After multiple hearings have been nixed, will the former Trump fixer ever testify? The odd couple. We're digging into Roger Stone's indictment and his relationship with another key figure in the Russia investigation. Why does their unlikely alliance matter to Mr. Trump and to Robert Mueller? And inside Iran. CNN is live in Tehran, as Iranians mark 40 years since the Islamic Revolution with defiance of the U.S. president and chants of "Death to America." Does it feel like 1979 all over again? We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] We're following breaking news on the threat of another government shutdown just four days from now. This hour, President Trump is on his way to El Paso, Texas, to rally support for his wall and to try to blame Democrats for a new holdup in talks on border security. As negotiators are expected to resume talks up on Capitol Hill this hour, the partisan divide over immigration remains deep. It will be on full display tonight as Democrats protest the president in Texas with a counter-rally called Stop the Wall, Stop the Lies. I will get reaction from Senator Bob Menendez, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, and our correspondents and analysts are also standing by. First, let's go to our Chief White House Correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, we heard from the president just before he left the White House for Texas.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. President Trump is starting to dig in his heels all over again as the deadline approaches for another government shutdown. The president is on his way to El Paso, Texas, at this hour, to pitch his border wall one more time. But there's one other sticking point in the shutdown talks that also goes to the heart of the immigration debate. The president, by the way, is not vowing to own the shutdown this time around. When asked a short while ago whether there will be a shutdown, he said that's up to the Democrats. But this time around, the president wants more than just a wall. He wants beds.
[Acosta:] With just four days and counting until the government runs out of money again, President Trump is looking to escape any blame this time around and pointing the finger at Democrats.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Now, we need a wall. We can call it anything. We'll call it barriers. We'll call it whatever they want. But now, it turns out not only don't they want to give us money for the wall, they don't want to give us the space to detain murderers, criminals, drug dealers.
[Acosta:] Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney warns a shutdown could happen again.
[Mick Mulvaney, Acting White House Chief Of Staff:] You cannot take a shutdown off the table. And you cannot take $5.7 billion off the table. But if you end up someplace in the middle, yes, then what you probably see is the president say, yes, OK, then I will go find the money someplace else.
[Acosta:] But now there's a new wrinkle. Not only is the president demanding more money for his wall as part of a deal to avert a shutdown. Democrats want something, too, a cap on the number of detention beds used by ICE to keep undocumented immigrants in custody.
[Trump:] Democrats want them to go into our country. That's why they don't want to give us what we call the beds. It's much more complicated than beds.
[Rep. Deb Haaland , New Mexico:] I was just at the border this past weekend. And the whole situation with those facilities is that they weren't meant to detain families. Whole entire families now are being detained at the border facilities, and it's an untenable situation.
[Acosta:] The president is off to El Paso, Texas, to whip up support for his wall, but he will have company as potential Democratic contender in 20 Beto O'Rourke is planning a rival event just down the street from Mr. Trump.
[Rep. Beto O'rourke , Texas:] Not too far from the coliseum where we're going to present a powerful, positive message for the country about who we are on the U.S.-Mexico border.
[Acosta:] The president has been taking jabs at potential rivals in 2020, mocking Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar's snowy announcement over the weekend, tweeting: "She was talking proudly of fighting global warming while standing in a virtual blizzard of snow, ice and freezing temperatures. Bad timing. By the end of her speech, she looked like a snowman, woman." Klobuchar said the president doesn't know the difference between weather and climate issues.
[Sen. Amy Klobuchar , Presidential Candidate:] I would like to see when he called me a snowwoman, I would like to see how his hair would fare in a blizzard.
[Acosta:] The president is also trolling Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and her past claims about her heritage, tweeting: "Will she run as our first native American presidential candidate? See you on the campaign Trail, Liz." Mr. Trump capitalized the word trail, which appeared to be in reference to the death of Native Americans on the Trail of Tears. The president's son Don Jr. was loving it, calling it "savage." Warren didn't wait long to fire back.
[Sen. Elizabeth Warren , Presidential Candidate:] Here's what bothers me. By the time we get to 2020, Donald Trump may not even be president.
[Warren:] In fact, he may not even be a free person.
[Acosta:] The president is also defending how much time he spends on the job after leaks of his schedule to Axios showing he's spending hours in the residence on executive time, as he tweeted: "No president ever worked harder than me, cleaning up the mess I inherited." With the government closing in on another shutdown, Mr. Trump is asking Democrats to lighten up, tweeting: "Loosen up and have some fun." A top official with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency known as ICE, held a conference call with reporters earlier this afternoon and blasted any notion there should be a cap on the number of detention beds for immigrants coming into their custody. But Democrats worry the White House has moved way beyond law enforcement concerns and is simply trying to use ICE to round up law- abiding people who pose no threat to their communities. And hammering this point earlier today was the California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom. He is pulling hundreds of the state's National Guard troops from the border, accusing the president of the trying to manufacture a crisis. Wolf, there are four days and counting until this government shutdown. But it's starting to feel like here they go again Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes, let's hope they can resolve this. Jim Acosta, thank you very much. Let's get some more now on the shutdown negotiations that are under way behind closed doors up on Capitol Hill right now. Our Senior Congressional Correspondent, Manu Raju, is joining us. Manu, top negotiators, what, they are planning to work through the evening. What are you hearing?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Yes, actually, a more optimistic note, Wolf, than yesterday, when negotiators were concerned that negotiations had essentially stalled. I talked to the top Senate Republican who's working to try to cut a deal, Richard Shelby, just moments ago. And he told me that negotiations have reopened and he feels more positive than he did yesterday, simply because they are talking. Of course, they broke down on Friday night after Senate Republicans rejected that Democratic offer to limit the number of detention beds of individuals held in ICE custody on American soil. Now, this after that, the Republicans rejected that. There were really no talks up until this afternoon when the top four negotiators met for about 90 minutes behind closed doors, and, afterwards, not just the Republicans, but Democrats sounded potentially more hopeful about getting a deal, including Patrick Leahy, who's the top Democrat appropriator. He said that he's hopeful that they can try to finish tonight and, of course, time is of the essence. If they do cut a deal, they got to move it still through both chambers of Congress, get enough votes, of course, get the presidential signature, so a lot of hoops they need to jump through. But at least, according to both sides, they're talking about seeing if they can get a deal. We will see if they're able to do that tonight. We expect more talks to happen this hour, Wolf. We will see if any more developments happen, but, at the moment, a little bit more optimism than yesterday, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] That's good to hear that, but if there's not a deal reached by Friday, Manu, is there a backup plan to avoid a government shutdown and prevent 800,000 federal workers and their families from suffering, as we all remember what happened during the 35 days of the first shutdown?
[Raju:] It's unclear at this point. I asked that question directly to Richard Shelby if there will be a short-term stopgap measure to keep the government open. He said, "I don't think so, I hope not," meaning they hope to get a deal and not resort to that last-minute effort. But it remains to be seen. All this has to be negotiated, of course, big question about whether the president tries to declare a national emergency and try to fund his border wall. That would open up a whole range of political and legal questions going forward, but that remains an option as well. Still, a lot needs to be negotiated to avoid that shutdown. Still very possible there's another government shutdown, but negotiators now fervently trying to avoid that, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Let's hope they can avoid it. Manu, thank you very much, Manu Raju up on Capitol Hill. Joining us now, Senator Bob Menendez. He's the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator, thanks so much for joining us.
[Sen. Robert Menendez , New Jersey:] Good to be with you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] So, as you know, the president, he is continuing to call for a wall. Even if negotiators can reach a deal and they're working, obviously, very hard to come up with some sort of compromise do you believe the president will accept it?
[Menendez:] Well, it will be either he will accept a bipartisan compromise, the second one that has come about we had one in December or it will be at his doorstep to if he rejects it, we will be in the midst of another government shutdown simply because he is recalcitrant here. So, I mean, you know, I hope we all don't forget that the president's insistence here is about billions of dollars toward what is an even bigger figure, $20 billion, $25 billion, ultimately, to build a wall that he wants to build, and ultimately something that he said Mexico would pay. And Mexico's made it very clear they never will. So it is the president's insistence. If he cannot accept a bipartisan compromise, which I believe can, in fact, ultimately take place, then he will be responsible for doing damage to the American economy, to the American people, and to all of those federal workers and federal contractors.
[Blitzer:] There's a sensitive issue involving beds. Going into the negotiations, as you know, Democrats wanted about 35,000 ICE detention beds. Then on Friday, they proposed a cap of less than half that number. Why did Democrats take a stand on that issue when talks seemed to be going so well?
[Menendez:] Well, Wolf, in a negotiation is exactly that, a negotiation. All we have heard is what the administration wants. The problem here is that ICE is out of control. They are already 8,000 beds daily over their existing budget. They want the Congress to bail them out for violating the budget that already exists. So the bottom line is that we cannot go on a path in which ICE and the Border and Customs Department is already bigger than all of the other federal law enforcement entities together, FBI, Secret Service, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm. And that's because the president has decided to criminalize everybody who is an undocumented immigrant, even when he uses them at his luxurious country clubs and properties to make profit.
[Blitzer:] The deputy director of ICE says a cap on beds, in his words, would be quote "extremely damaging to the public safety of this country." How do you respond?
[Menendez:] The reason that they are already 8,000 over their budgeted amount, so they're violating the budget, is because of the president's zero tolerance policy that has turned everyone, regardless of their record, into a criminal. For example, if you cross the border undocumented, he has now made you a criminal. He is creating that problem by turning people away who legitimately seek asylum. If a person has a driving while under the influence violation, he is now making that, saying that that's a criminal. What we have seen in the past under, for example, President Obama, that violent criminals, yes, we want to see those persons not only arrested and detained, we want to see them deported. But at the end of the day, because he tears children away from their mothers and puts them all in detention facilities, he has an over- demand as a result of his policy. So it's his policy that's driving this. No one who is a real criminal at the end of the day, anyone is going to advocate for them to be let go. No, they need to be detained, they need to be arrested and they need to be deported. But that's different than what we're talking about and what's driving this demand for beds. It's his demand to take everybody. Look, I had a grandfather from New Jersey who's been here over 20 years. Works hard. Never had a criminal record. They wanted to deport him. They wanted to detain him. That's not the essence of brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers who otherwise have been law-abiding in every other respect. He wants to incarcerate them as well as he seeks to deport them. It's far different than criminal aliens.
[Blitzer:] But if the government does wind up shutting down once again, will Democrats share the blame if they insist on this issue of a limit on beds?
[Menendez:] Wolf, a negotiation is exactly that. It's not a limit on bed. It's that ICE cannot have an unlimited budget. It's beyond the question of beds. It's a question of, can ICE continue to over-expend and expect the Congress to bail it out because of a policy that the president is directing that doesn't go to the essence of our national security? So at the end of the day, there was a bipartisan agreement, unanimously passed in the Senate on December 18 of last year. The president rejected it. There hopefully will be a bipartisan agreement. The president cannot accept a bipartisan agreement, then it is fully on his lap and in his responsibility. And so I hope he accepts a bipartisan agreement that I think can come forward and that ultimately will be fair and balanced at the end of the day.
[Blitzer:] They're working really hard on it right now. Let's hope the bicameral, bipartisan negotiators can come up with a deal. Senator, I want to turn to the Russia investigation right now. The House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Adam Schiff, says he's concerned that the special counsel, Robert Mueller, might not be pursuing the question of money laundering as far as the president is concerned hard enough. Why are we just now hearing this criticism of Mueller? What do you suspect is going on?
[Menendez:] Well, I think there's a concern. You know, Deutsche Bank, which is the financial entity involved here, when everybody else was not willing to lend to the Trump Organization, lent them hundreds of millions of dollars. In 2017, Deutsche Bank was fined by both the United States and the United Kingdom for significant violations of Russian money laundering. So you have to wonder whether or not the fact that Trump, President Trump, said, if you go into that, you're crossing a red line, that somehow the special counsel was prohibited in some way from pursuing that. It needs to be understood whether Deutsche Bank, that was doing Russian money laundering and seems to be one of the few financial institutions in the United States that wanted to give Trump money, was doing so for reasons outside of its financial determinations. So we need to know whether the president is being responsive to his interests and whatever interests overshadow him, or whether he's being responsive to the interests of the American people, particularly in foreign policy.
[Blitzer:] Schiff says the House Intelligence Committee will investigate that. Let me get your thoughts on the Trump administration's failure to meet Friday's deadline to provide Congress and the American public, for that matter, a full report on the death of "The Washington Post" columnist Jamal Khashoggi and what role the Saudi crown prince may have played in his murder. You're now preparing new legislation, I understand, with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham in response to that failure to meet that deadline. What will that bill look like?
[Menendez:] Well, first of all, Wolf, the president didn't have a choice here. The law is clear. I helped write that law. And, in fact, the then Republican chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Corker, and myself, as the ranking Democrat, invoked the provision of the law to demand for the president to make a determination. It's not discretionary for the president to decide whether he wants to make that determination. So he's violating the law, number one. And we're looking at ways in which to force that determination to be made, pursuant to the law. The legislation that we have co-sponsored, and there are several Republicans with us, Lindsey Graham is the lead on it, but there are several Republicans with us as well, the Saudi Arabia Accountability and Yemen Act would do a series of things. It would deny a series of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, it would impose sanctions on those who are in the midst of the Yemen conflict, both those who are supporting the Houthis and those denying humanitarian aid. And specifically as it relates to Khashoggi, it would insist on direct sanctions on those individuals who are ultimately found to be responsible for Khashoggi's murder. And from everything that I have seen, it is very clear to me that the crown prince was intimately engaged in that murder. So, at the end of the day, the president may seek to avoid that responsibility. The Congress will put his feet to the fire. I'm glad that we have broad bipartisan support in this legislation and I look forward to putting a vote on the floor of the Senate, because we cannot just simply allow the indiscriminate killing of a journalist to ultimately go by without consequences at the end of the day.
[Blitzer:] Senator Menendez, thanks so much for joining us.
[Menendez:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Just ahead, former Trump fixer and lawyer Michael Cohen is postponing another date with Congress to testify. So what's his excuse this time? And will Democrats do a better job investigating the president's personal finances than Robert Mueller? We're taking a closer look at the House Intelligence Committee chairman's concerns about the special counsel's probe.

[Text:] serious civil war has been raging for seven years. Here are the defining moments of CNN's coverage.
[Unidentified Female Reporter:] 2011. They're chanting peaceful, peaceful around this massive Syrian flag. You will notice that some people have scarves on their face or other things. They're telling us that it is because they want to hide their identity. They're afraid that Syrian security forces if they see their image will come and detain them.
[Unidentified Male Reporter:] 2012. On the road to Zabadani, it feels like we're entering a war. We cross to the anti-government side, follow Arab League monitors through twisting streets into the town center. After more than an hour, as the monitors inch their vehicles through the crowds, more and more press forward. They don't want the monitors from the Arab League to go, telling them soldiers will use their tanks to fire on the town as soon as they leave. 2013. A plowed over lot in the Damascus suburb of Zamalka, this is actually a mass grave with the bodies of many of those killed in last week's alleged chemical weapons attack. There's very little space left as one resident shows us and that space might soon be occupied with many unidentified bodies in the local field hospital. A lot of them children. Residents say the alleged chemical attack happened in the middle of the night, killing many in their sleep while others struggled to escape like 6-year-old Abdul. After the chemicals hit, they woke us up and told us to put masks on, he says. I told my dad I can't breathe. My father then fainted, and I fainted right after that.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] 2014. From the ground level inside the city, you can see what months of fighting has done, absolute devastation. It's almost impossible to imagine this city sustaining life at any time in the near future. But still the fighting persists. The shelling almost constant, so much of it caused by crude homemade devices like this. It is the graveyard that tells you about the near future and the more distant one. A trench dug for the dead they expect next to those they have already buried. Headstones from rubble. Again, a morbid playground.
[Unidentified Female Reporter:] 2016. There was just an air strike here in the town of Ariha, so we're now driving very quickly. It's not clear yet what was hit, but we are hearing that there are still planes in the sky. [voice-over]: Arriving on the scene, our team found chaos and carnage. The strikes on Ariha that day killed 11 people, among them a woman and two children. Rescue workers wasted no time in clearing away the rubble. And this ugly war, massacres have become routine. 2018. Yasa's tiny chest heaves with each breath. He was born during a week that even by Syria's ungodly standards was especially punishing. The hospital he was at was bombed. The footage from that night is a glimpse into the magnitude of the horror, the fear. Hanan watches her baby fight in one of the last remaining facilities where he even stands a chance. But what kind of a world are these babies fighting to live in?
[Anderson:] We get you to that raging war now, that of battlefield Syria, the carnage there still so raw. Right now, we are getting in these shocking live pictures. This, an exodus happening right now in an area right outside the capital pummeled for weeks. We'll explain more in a second. But if such pictures seem ordinary, then words seem to fall flat to describe what is going on. So why don't I give you a single number. A single number with two grim meanings. On today, exactly, Syria's war has erupted on for seven long years. Seven years of merciless fighting and through each of them, we 've worked out every seven minutes, a man, a woman, a child killed. That's as far as we know. The number could be higher. As ever, we are connecting the world for you on Syria. Ben Wedeman following every day of that war. He's in Beirut for you tonight. Jomana Karadsheh in Jordan. Why the hundreds of thousands of Syrians have fled there across the long border, the countries they share. So, let's start with you, Jomana. This war has gone on for so long that it's almost hard to remember how it all began. Remind us.
[Jomana Karadsheh, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, as you recall, Becky, the first couple of months of 2011 were just incredible. It seemed like that myth of the Arab strongman, the Arab regimes was being shattered by ordinary people. And so, you had that domino effect across the region. But when it comes to Syria, what is remarkable is what is actually considered to have been the spark of that uprising.
[Karadsheh:] It might be hard to believe this is how it all started. Peaceful protests demanding freedom and dignity. Even harder to believe why it all started. It was an active teenage defiance. 514-year-old boys did the unthinkable. They spray painted anti-regime graffiti on their school's walls.
[Mouawiya Syasneh, Arrested For Graffiti:] My friends and I used to stand on the corner of our school and the police officer would prevent us from moving freely. We saw the demonstrations in Tunisia and Egypt where they were writing freedom and down with the are regime. So, we wrote on the walls too.
[Karadsheh:] Mouawiya Syasneh was one of the 15 boys rounded by the security forces in the city of Daraa. Their families protested, demanding their release.
[Syasneh:] They took me at 4:00 a.m. during the dawn prayers. I was asleep. They woke me up, handcuffed me. They told my parents they will bring me back. It was a terrifying feeling. They took us to the police station where they tortured and beat us. They also break my friend's fingers.
[Karadsheh:] As protests spread across the country, they were met with bullets. Violence escalated, and the country slowly descended into the seemingly endless civil war. The streets of Daraa old city, where it all began, now stands scarred. Years of battles have left this destroyed southern city split between the regime and opposition fighters. Daraa seems an abandoned city. Half its population is believed to have fled the war. Syasneh is now another boy of Syria's lost generation. Going to university, a distant dream for this rebel fighter who lost his father to the violence. If he could turn back time, he says he would spray paint that graffiti again.
[Syasneh:] I don't regret what I did because we were only calling for freedom. It is the regime that turned it into a war, destroyed the nation, and killed the people.
[Karadsheh:] How it all started, a chapter for the history books. Now, it's hard to imagine how it all ends. And you know, Becky, for the past few months, Daraa has been relatively quiet. That's after that de-escalation agreement was reached between Jordan, Russia and the United States last summer. But over the past couple of days, we've received reports of airstrikes on Daraa. A very ominous sign people there are telling us for Daraa they feel that it might be next on the regime's list of territory, that shrinking territory that's under rebel control that the regime is reclaiming.
[Anderson:] Jomana is in Jordan for you tonight. Ben's in Beirut. And the Syrian government wants the world to see this video, Ben, of its softer kinder side, if you will. Its own state TV showing its own troops helping let people out of Eastern Ghouta. Here, one even carries a baby out to safety. But it's troops like those from the Syrian regime, supported by the Russians, who have been smashing the place to pieces for weeks now. That's why you're looking at what is an exodus feeling your screen. Some 10,000-people running for their lives within just hours. And so, the war, Ben, it seems, is far from over.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn International Correspondent:] No, this war, I think, one phase of it is slowly coming to an end, and that is the phase of the regime with the help of Russia, Iran, and others is to crush the opposition. But then we are moving quickly into another phase where you have on the ground in Syria, Turkish forces, American forces, Russian forces, Iranian forces in addition to Kurds who are independent from the government, supported by the United States, and the Syrian regime. And slowly we are seeing that the lines separating those foreign forces in Syria are becoming ever thinner. You had, for instance, earlier this year, that Israeli F-16 that was shot down by the Syrian forces. And so, as the opposition and ISIS are being crushed, you still have massive foreign forces in Syria who are very close to a hair trigger when it comes to conflict between them. It was described I heard it described this morning as a mini world war within Syria itself. It could be very much a part of that next phase. So yes, we're finishing one phase but the next one could be even more dangerous Becky.
[Anderson:] Appreciate it Ben, thank you. We have mapped out the war then into three arenas. Arena one where we just were the regime attacking rebels, the same true up near Idlib in the east arena two. That's where the war on ISIS has been playing out. Back towards the north, arena three, a fairly new extremely intense front in what is this multifaceted conflict. Well, in retrospect, it seems improbable, even inconceivable that soft spoken ophthalmologist who once practiced in London would go on to unleash one of the worst wars this century. We will profile the Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad. Up next.

[Smerconish:] In the coming weeks, that was one of just many aspects of Sen. Al Franken's resignation speech that struck me as unusual. If you listen carefully, he kept his foot ever so slightly wedged in the door. In fact, if instead, Sen. Franken had been making a speech, and announcing that he was staying and fighting instead of stepping down, he would've had to have changed maybe one sentence in the speech? There was no admission, there was no contrition. And who announces that they're resigning in the coming weeks? If you've done something so egregious that you're resigning your job, ya head for the door immediately. In fact, that's what Trent Franks did yesterday, and that's not what Al Franken is doing. He was trying to thread the needle of refusing to admit charges of his accusers, while not antagonizing them further. Franken's hand was forced by female Democratic colleagues, led by New York's Kirsten Gillibrand, who perhaps had their eyes on Tuesday's special Senate election in Alabama, and wanted to establish the moral high ground by ridding Washington of both Rep. John Conyers and Sen. Franken before Alabama voters cast their judgment on Roy Moore. Franken walked the plank. But maybe he had his fingers and toes crossed. He never admitted wrongdoing. He said he'd been anticipating an opportunity to defend himself before the Senate Ethics Committee.
[Sen. Al Franken , Minn./al Franken, Former Minn. Senator:] Some of the allegations against me are simply not true; others, I remember very differently. I said at the outset, that the Ethics Committee was the right venue for these allegations to be heard and investigated and evaluated on their merits that I was prepared to cooperate fully, and that I was confident in the outcome.
[Smerconish:] Don't misunderstand I am not saying that Franken is staying. If he leaves in a week or a month, it won't diminish my observation. I am saying that, when he spoke on Thursday, he sought to leave open the possibility that after Tuesday's vote, there might be some rethinking among his colleagues, perhaps with Moore getting elected, where Franken would then, say, hey, here's a guy against whom credible evidence exists that he assaulted a 14-year old, and he's about to be seated in the U.S. Senate, but I have to pack my bags? That doesn't seem right, he'll think. Joining me now, someone who was on CNN's "NEW DAY" with me yesterday morning, and called my analysis crazy Minnesota Public Radio Host, Kerri Miller. OK, Kerri, I've invited you to explain crazy. Why do you think he said in a couple of weeks?
[Miller:] You know, Michael, when I hear you explain all this, I think you're trying to have it all ways. I mean, you're saying, "Don't get me wrong; I don't think he's staying, but I'm not convinced he's leaving." And I'm also say going to say here that somebody better tell Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton what's going on here if Franken has his fingers and toes crossed, because Gov. Dayton is spending the weekend thinking about who's going to replace Sen. Franken. So I think it's a done deal. I'm not sure why you're going around saying
[Smerconish:] Yes.
[Miller:] that you think it's not a done deal. But everybody here in Minnesota, at least the political leaders, are proceeding as if it is a done deal. So I think if Sen. Franken
[Smerconish:] Well, did you
[Miller:] would change his mind on Wednesday morning, it'd be it'd be a complete shock, and I don't think anybody
[Smerconish:] I don't think
[Miller:] is expecting that.
[Smerconish:] no. I don't think he changes his mind. I don't think he changes his mind. I think he's tried to leave the foot in the door so that, if there's a look. He's leaving with a gun to his head, which was set by female Democratic colleagues in the Senate. I don't think he's leaving of his own volition. This is a guy who in that statement, acknowledged no wrongdoing. And to the extent that your governor
[Miller:] I disagree.
[Smerconish:] is quickly going to make an appointment known I'll just finish this thought it's because your governor wants to slam that door shut, because your governor is not on board with Sen. Franken. You get the floor.
[Miller:] No, no, no. Governor no. Gov. Dayton is proceeding because he is taking Sen. Franken at his word, as most people are you being the exception. Gov. Dayton doesn't want to leave Minnesota unrepresented in the United States Senate. He's also aware that whoever he's going to appoint needs a few weeks to, you know, get to Washington, and get prepared. Everybody in the political class here in Minnesota I think is acting like Sen. Franken meant what he said, and as I said to you yesterday on "NEW DAY," I take Sen. Franken at his word. I hear what you're saying. His reluctance is obvious. It's clear that he does not want to be leaving, and that he feels, in some ways, maneuvered into leaving. But he's
[Smerconish:] Right.
[Miller:] a grown man, and he got on the floor of the U.S. Senate, and he made this decision, and he expressed that decision. And I just simply think it's kind of absurd to think that on Wednesday
[Smerconish:] OK, so
[Miller:] he's going to say, you know what? I've thought
[Smerconish:] I didn't say that
[Miller:] about this, Roy Moore won
[Smerconish:] I didn't say that.
[Miller:] and now, I'm not going to do it.
[Smerconish:] I did not say that.
[Miller:] Well, it sounds like that's what you're saying.
[Smerconish:] That's not my theory. No, not at all. I couldn't be more crystal clear.
[Miller:] Well, what is your theory?
[Smerconish:] I think you're the only one hearing it that way.
[Miller:] Well what? No.
[Smerconish:] So let me ask you
[Miller:] No, I don't think so.
[Smerconish:] my original question
[Miller:] I'm confused about your theory.
[Smerconish:] one more time. My question
[Miller:] OK. OK?
[Smerconish:] is, this is a guy
[Miller:] Let's hear it.
[Smerconish:] who wants to keep his job. So let me ask you the very first question I asked, which is this. Why did
[Miller:] Yes.
[Smerconish:] he say, I'll leave in a couple of weeks, if it's not his angle to leave his foot in the door? Why a couple of weeks?
[Miller:] You are correct that Congressman Franks resigned and left. I think Sen. Franken is going to wrap up his business in Washington by the end of the year, and I think that that's the timeline that he's given Gov. Mark Dayton to name somebody, and have that person get prepared to step in. That that's what I don't think there's anything underlying the, "I'll do this in a couple weeks" other than, it's a timeline that allows a replacement to get settled, and Sen. Franken to pack things up and leave Washington. I don't hear anything
[Smerconish:] Yesterday, a guy in the House of Representatives
[Miller:] you know, unusual or nefarious in that.
[Smerconish:] said he's resigning, and he did it the conventional way. He I'm not saying nefarious. There was no acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and a couple of weeks. And in combination with Tuesday's election, and the way in which he was forced to walk the plank, mine is only analysis that he'd like to stay, and he's hoping that there will be requests made that he can do so. Hey, thank you so much for being here. I appreciate your
[Miller:] But it
[Smerconish:] point of view, even if I disagree with it.
[Miller:] it
[Smerconish:] Thank you.
[Miller:] -
[I -- Smerconish:] Let's see what you are saying
[Miller:] disagree with you, thanks.
[Smerconish:] about this via Facebook and Twitter. What have you got? From Facebook: "Michael, you are absolutely correct" really, I'm not crazy? "and I think it is genius of Franken to do it this way. It is the only thing that makes sense. Really, why should Franken leave if Moore gets seated?" Nathalie, I think that's what's going through his mind. There's no other explanation. If you're the guy yesterday, Franks, who's leaving the House of Representative what did he do? I'm out of here, and, boom, he's, you know, gone like the wind. That's not what Sen. Franken did. I'm not endorsing it, I'm not criticizing it; I'm analyzing it. He'd like to stay, and he feels like he's been forced out the door "maneuvered," to quote my guest. Up ahead, what harm comes when the FBI's reputation is subject to the political divide? The president on the attack against the Bureau after the demotion of the agent who led the investigation into Hillary Clinton's private e-mail server, and had been the FBI's lead investigator in the Mueller probe.
[Trump:] This is a rigged this is a rigged system. This is a sick system from the inside.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news. Chaos ensues. President Trump's executive order on migrant family separations is causing confusion as the administration struggles to explain what happens now. And the president's latest remarks are only adding to the uncertainty. Full message jacket. First lady Melania Trump pays a surprise visit to a Texas facility housing detained migrant children, but her unusual fashion choice steals the show. What do the cryptic words on her jacket mean? And who are they aimed at? Detention nightmare. Disturbing allegations against facilities housing detained migrant children, including abuse and forcing them to take mood-changing drugs. We're learning new details. And Putin on a summit. President Trump says he's considering meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin next month. Where will they meet, and what tone will President Trump take with his Russian counterpart? I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] We're following breaking news. The Trump administration now asking a judge for permission to hold detained migrant children past the current 20-day limit in the wake of President Trump's order aimed at ending family separation. But the president's reversal on its controversial policy has only sparked more confusion, and it remains unclear whether any of the 2,300 children taken from their parents in recent weeks will be reunited with them any time soon. We'll talk about it with the president of the National Border Patrol Council, Brandon Judd. And our specialists and analysts are all standing by. First, let's go straight to our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. Jim, the chaos around this crisis continues despite the president's executive order.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] It sure does, Wolf. The White House is struggling tonight to explain what is happening to the children who were separated from their parents at the border. Today, the president said his executive order ending the practice may only be, quote, "limited." And the first lady, who was trying to show her compassion with a visit to the border earlier today, stepped on her own message with a jacket that has to be seen to be believed.
[Acosta:] It was a tale of two Trumps. While the first lady attempted to show sympathy, visiting the children taken from their migrant parents at the border, the president was creating more confusion, telling his cabinet that his executive order aimed at ending the family separations is limited.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I signed a very good executive order yesterday, but that's only limited. No matter how you cut it, it leads to separation, ultimately.
[Acosta:] The president also tried to downplay the conditions inside the facilities, where the children are being held against their will.
[Trump:] We have a situation where some of these places, they're really running them well. It's the nicest that people have seen.
[Acosta:] Mr. Trump was playing politics, accusing Democrats of seeking to turn the detention spaces into resorts.
[Trump:] They want us to take care of bed space and resources and personnel and take everybody and, you know, like, let's run the most luxurious hotel in the world for everybody. But they don't want to give us the money.
[Acosta:] The president also falsely accused Democrats of sparking the crisis his administration started.
[Trump:] They've created, and they've let it happen, a massive child smuggling industry.
[Acosta:] Despite the searing images of suffering children seen around the world, the president sounded detached and bitter.
[Trump:] They walk through a Mexico like it's walking through Central Park.
[Acosta:] Democrats pushed back on the notion they're to blame.
[Rep. Mazie Hirono , Hawaii:] You know what my strong reaction to that is? It's a lie. So for the president to constantly say that we are against immigration reform that makes sense, that is humane, it's a lie, and in fact, he is the one who is creating chaos at every turn.
[Melania Trump, First Lady:] Thank you so much. I heard you have 58 children here?
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[M. Trump:] Fifty-five. Oh, oh.
[Acosta:] Down at the border, the first lady toured one facility for the separated children that looked more like an elementary school and less like the jail shown in some photos from the region. Mrs. Trump wanted to know how the children are coping.
[M. Trump:] When the children come here, what kind of stage, you know, physical and mental stage they come here?
[Unidentified Female:] When they get here, they're very distraught.
[Acosta:] And she asked how she could lend a hand.
[M. Trump:] And I also like to ask you how I can help. To these children to reunite with their families as quickly as possible.
[Acosta:] But it was the message on the back that created a stir: "I really don't care. Do U?" was the question scrawled across the jacket she wore as she left for Texas. The first lady's office said in a statement there was no hidden message. Now, as for that jacket, a White House official tells CNN in just the last several minutes that that jacket worn by the first lady was not a message aimed at her husband, the president. Of course, we have been reporting earlier today, Wolf, that there was potentially some disagreement between the first lady and the president about going down there. That she was planning to go down there without, really, his approval, and that he finally gave that approval to the first lady for this trip. Now, as for the Trump administration, we have yet to hear any kind of answers in terms of any sort of basic questions in terms of how these children are going to be reunited with their parents in the coming days. Asked about these pending reunifications, the homeland security secretary told reporters there is a plan for that. But she didn't she didn't say what it was. And multiple officials are telling us, Wolf, today agencies are still awaiting guidance. And of course, so are the kids.
[Blitzer:] Yes. They're clearly scrambling, those officials. All right. Jim Acosta at the White House, thank you. Let's get some more from our chief political correspondent, Dana Bash. Dana, how did this trip by the first lady come about?
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Well, she apparently decided on her own a couple of days ago, before the president signed the executive order yesterday, that she wanted to go down. She wanted to see firsthand what was happening on the border. She'd already tweeted several days ago and made it very clear that she was concerned about this. And we actually heard from the president that she had privately said to him on several occasions, "We have to find a way to fix this." And look, it is significant in that after, you know, what? More than a week plus of these images blaring out to the world, this is the first time somebody in the Trump inner circle has gone down to see firsthand what exactly is happening at the border as a result of the president and his administration's policies. So that's what she did. She certainly, as Jim said, toured a facility that is pretty well-run. It is a place run by the Department of HHS, Health and Human Services, where they have mostly children who come across the board unaccompanied, about five or six who are actually taken away from their parents because of the separation policy. But it certainly is and was significant that the first lady wanted to go down there and show the compassionate side, especially the juxtaposition between that and the very, very harsh language we heard about the same time from her husband.
[Blitzer:] Yes, that difference was stark. Kate Bennett, our White House reporter, traveled with the first lady to Texas today. She's joining us on the phone right now. So Kate, update us on the latest information you're getting and also, there's a lot of interest, clearly, in the jacket she was wearing and what it said.
[Kate Bennett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. We literally just touched down here back in Washington with the first lady. Certainly, a lot of the focus has been on this jacket and why she was wearing it. We observed her getting on the plane earlier this morning. We could not read the writing on it because of where we were positioned under the wing of the plane. It was too far away. But, you know, as the story broke, as we were flying back, it certainly is extremely curious. She was not wearing the jacket when she exited the plane in Texas. Nor did she wear it to the facility to visit the children or back up on the plane. So I'm not sure quite what the reasoning was behind that. Certainly, she is not one who has worn messaging before so blatantly on her clothes, which is a questionable incident. Her spokeswoman is saying this is not something to focus on. Focus on her good work. This is not about a jacket. However, clearly, it's captured the attention of people on this trip.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Certainly, she's clearly that didn't happen by accident. She was deliberately trying to say something. The question is what was she saying? The words on the back of that jacket: "I really don't care. Do U?" question mark. So everybody agrees she did it for a reason. We don't know what the reason was.
[Bennett:] Yes. I mean, listen, I follow the first lady pretty closely. I follow a lot of her fashion choices. I've been the one who's often said she doesn't do anything by accident. She's not a first lady who has coincidences, and most of her fashion choices do send a message. You know, when we were abroad, her outfits reflected the country that was hosting her. She wore that white pantsuit to the State of the Union. You know, certainly, these are thoughtful things she does. It is to me very unclear who or what that messaging was for.
[Blitzer:] It wasn't some sort of designer jacket. This was a pretty cheap jacket, if you will. You're going to tell us about that. But let me read the statement from the first lady's press secretary, who said this. And I'll read it to our viewers: "It's a jacket. There was no hidden message." This is not the first time, though, she seems to have acted independently, but talk a little bit about the exact jacket.
[Bennett:] So the jacket is by Zara, which is a Spanish-based company. Certainly, it's very there are Zaras in shopping malls and all over the world, literally all over the world. It's known for sort of doing trendy clothes that are knockoffs of designer at lower prices. This particular jacket on Zara's web site is listed for $39. Certainly, not in the price range of what the first lady typically wears, which are often designer clothes, you know, as Michelle Obama did, you know. This is the first lady who is sartorially knowledgeable. She used to be a fashion model. Certainly, the jacket of a $39 Zara jacket is, again, a sort of curious blip in this day. Again, as 13 or so members of the press boarded her plane today, we were unaware of what the jacket said from the back. We did notice that she changed, of course, which she often does on the plane and was wearing something different when she landed.
[Blitzer:] I'm glad you traveled with her, Kate. So Dana, what was the messaging here on this critically important day?
[Bash:] Well, it was obviously confused messaging, and this is going to sound maybe like this doesn't pan out in our linear thing, but I'm going to say, but it was confused messaging on purpose. This was a jacket that, as Kate said, and as she's reported so many times, that, obviously, the first lady wore on purpose. Was it aimed at somebody in her family? Was it aimed at somebody else? We don't know. But I was just texting back and forth with somebody who's in Trump world, who thought that maybe it was a message to the people who cover her, to the media saying, you know, "I know that you focus on what I wear and I'm going to wear this in order for you to sort of speculate about it," and maybe try to make the media look like they are, you know, sort of trying to dumb down what she did. But the fact that that is something that we have to discuss, the fact that this is something that we're that people are trying to sort of crack the code of the jacket, really does beg the question about why she wanted to do this when the message that she was trying to send and is trying to send is so important about having compassion for these as an immigrant herself, having passion for these these families and particularly these children who are at the border.
[Blitzer:] Yes, that jacket clearly taking away from the much more important issue at hand, what's happening with these families, what's happening with the kids. I want to get back to that. Dana and Kate, guys, thank you very much. Let's have some more on the breaking news right now. The president of the National Border Patrol Council, Brandon Judd, is joining us. Brandon, thank you very much for joining us. And thank you to the 15,000 men and women of the Border Patrol who do important work protecting the country. Lots of questions right now about the president's executive order that's now being implemented. Have you been given written guidance on how to carry out this executive order and what it will mean for families?
[Brandon Judd, President, National Border Patrol Council:] Not yet, but what I can tell you is that I had a meeting that was scheduled with Commissioner McAleenan. That meeting has now been pushed back and most likely will be postponed. This commissioner is very conscientious. He made his rank under the Obama administration. And now he was appointed as the commissioner under the Trump administration. A very moderate individual, and he is going to get it done. I expect that we're going to have the instructions here very shortly.
[Blitzer:] But before orders like this are given to have zero-tolerance policy that order was given in April. And now to reverse that policy yesterday. Don't you think the men and women of the Border Patrol need to know how this impacts their day-to-day jobs?
[Judd:] We operate on the fly all the time. We're going to be able to adjust very, very quickly. We're going to be able to understand, once that executive order was signed, exactly what we need to do, because we've been doing this for a long time and because we've been dealing with crises like this for years upon end. We're going to be able to adjust on the fly.
[Blitzer:] And I have the executive order that the president signed yesterday. What did it change from yesterday to today for the Border Patrol?
[Judd:] What it means is whenever we take these children into custody now, we're going to have to separate children from parents initially, especially if they don't have documentation to prove that these are their children, because one of the things that we have to look at is we have to look at are these children being exploited? Are they being brought in for sex trafficking? So initially, we're going to have to separate them, but we're going to bring them back immediately, and we're going to make sure that we can we hold them in the in the same facilities without separating over a long-term period of time.
[Blitzer:] Of course. I can understand if the elder person, the older person is not the parent and they're just smuggling some kid into the United States. But what if they're the real parents and the children are taken away by your fellow Border Patrol agents? That seems so cruel.
[Judd:] You know, that's something that we're never going to look at and say this is something that we were happy doing. But in reality, if you look at what we were actually doing, when we took people into custody, we would keep them together until they had to go see a magistrate. Once they went and saw a magistrate judge, whatever that sentence the magistrate judge gave is what that judge gave. And if that judge separated them, then they would they were supposed to be reunited shortly thereafter. But in the vast majority of cases, a judge would give them time served. They'll be they'll be separated from their children for about seven to 12 hours and then reunited almost immediately.
[Blitzer:] But that's changed. There's 2,300 kids right now who have been separated for days and days and days.
[Judd:] There are, and there are certain extreme cases in those 2,300. For instance, a week ago I said earlier today, I said four days, but about a week ago, there was one person that we arrested that had a conviction for rape in the United States. He had a 7-year-old daughter with him. We separated those two, and we're not going to reunite those two until the court system plays out. Now, that is an extreme case and of those 2,300, there are less extreme cases. But in a lot of those cases, there are very extreme cases. We have to dig deep into this, and we have to look deep.
[Blitzer:] I know the president values your opinion. You served on his transition team. Were you consulted at all with the initial decision to do this zero-tolerance and the subsequent executive order that reversed that decision?
[Judd:] No. I wasn't I wasn't consulted on the zero-tolerance policy. But yes, I did absolutely present concerns to the agency on what was happening under the zero-tolerance policy and how we could make it better or how we could loosen it up. I did have a role in that, yes.
[Blitzer:] You did have a role in that. The president keeps saying, and he said it again today, these people trying to cross into the United States are all criminals, drug smugglers, gang members. You and the men and women of the Border Patrol deal with them on a daily basis. Is that accurate?
[Judd:] Well, I go back to, again, about a week ago, we just had an agent that was shot. A couple months before that, we had an agent that tried to take individuals into custody. One individual got his gun, put his gun to that agent's head.
[Blitzer:] Those are extreme cases.
[Judd:] Those are extreme cases.
[Blitzer:] Most people trying to come to the United States are escaping gang violence.
[Judd:] I will agree with that.
[Blitzer:] And they're trying to trying to have a better life.
[Judd:] I will
[Blitzer:] Seeking political asylum.
[Judd:] The vast majority of the individuals that we encounter are very polite, very respectful individuals. It's about 20 percent that we deal with that have criminal records. The problem that we have, though, is we don't know what their criminal records in their own countries, and so we have to be very careful.
[Blitzer:] That's only a small percentage. But that's not necessarily the message we hear from the president, either in his speech last night in Duluth or today in his cabinet meeting. He makes it sound like almost all of these people trying to come into the United States are killers or rapists or drug dealers.
[Judd:] Now, if he's if he's purposely trying to do that, then that's not true. The fact of the matter is, is we do deal with an awful lot of people that do have criminal records in the United States. Some of them very bad criminal records. Wanted for murder. Warrants for rape. For child pornography. For all kinds of things. But yes. The truth is that the vast majority of the people we deal with are very polite, respectful individuals. We just don't know who when we're going to be dealing with those people or when when a situation's going to turn bad very fast.
[Blitzer:] In the executive order the president signed yesterday, as you know, one of the provisions was to get a court order to allow the government to hold these children for more than 20 days, and in fact, the government filed a suit today to try to do that. What do you think about that? About holding, detaining these kids for more than 20 days?
[Judd:] That's not going to fly, because the court decisions are very, very clear that we're not going to be able to hold the children for more than 20 days. What I will tell you is, is I am very concerned about the magnets that draw people to the United States. We arrest people, and they flat-out tell us that "We gave ourselves up, because we know you're going to release us." And the problem with that is, is what we see is the smugglers force them to cross the border between the ports of entry, because they know it's going to tie up my resources. And when my hands are tied up, and I pull agents out of the field to process these people, the drug smugglers or the traffickers of any illegal contraband create holes in the border and they run their higher-profit contraband through the holes that they create. If these individuals would present themselves at ports of entry, which is a legal process, then it frees up the Border Patrol to deal with the criminality and the cartels and the smugglers.
[Blitzer:] If the courts reject the administration's request to be able to hold these kids for more than 20 days, what's going to happen to them and what's going to happen to their parents?
[Judd:] What we're going to have to do is we're going to have to release them under what is called the catch and release program.
[Blitzer:] The president flatly said today he doesn't he will never allow catch and release which was has been, at least until now, the U.S. government's policy.
[Judd:] It's impossible. It's impossible to not separate the family unless the catch and release unless the catch and release policy takes effect again. We can't hold the children for more than 20 days. Therefore, we can't hold the parents for more than 20 days. It takes it takes about six to nine months for a deportation proceeding to see from the beginning to the end. We just can't hold people that long.
[Blitzer:] I'm surprised the president hasn't call you into the Oval Office yet, because you've got years and years of experience. If he does call you in, tell our viewers right now what you would tell him, how you would solve this problem.
[Judd:] Well, I'm going to look back in April of 2017, and what's most disappointing to me is, in April of 2017, we hit the low- water mark. We only had 11,000 apprehensions. The vast majority of those were single males. We had very few children. We had very few family units. Had we have implemented the zero-tolerance policy at that time, we had the chance to keep the numbers low. Look, whether you're on the right, whether you're on the left, people want secure borders. You can't have secure borders if we're going to allow the criminal cartels to dictate to us how we how we effectuate our operations. We have to be able to dictate to them, and that's what's happened for too long.
[Blitzer:] But from your perspective, and you have a lot of experience, catch and release is going to continue, at least for the foreseeable future?
[Judd:] There's no way it can stop.
[Blitzer:] Brandon, thank you very much, and thank your colleagues in the Border Patrol for all of their really important work they're doing.
[Judd:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Appreciate it very much. Brandon Judd is the president of the National Border Patrol Council. Up next, a CNN investigation uncovers allegations of children being drugged and abused at facilities housing detained migrants. Plus, a possible July meeting between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. We're learning new information tonight. Stay with us.

[Hill:] Disturbing new video emerging that shows staffers pushing and dragging migrant children at a facility in Arizona. The video coming to light as the likely chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee vows to hold hearings on the deaths of two Guatemalan children. Those children, of course, died while in U.S. custody earlier this month. CNN's Dianne Gallagher is live in Arizona with more for us. Dianne, good morning.
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Erica. And yes, we're going to show this video. I want to warn you what happened here in the Hacienda del Sol, which is now closed down, may be upsetting, what you're going to see on this video, to some of you out there, because it shows what appear to be workers abusing children. They are dragging the children. They are pushing them, angrily confronting them. These videos, which were obtained by "The Arizona Republic" through an open records request, were blurred and edited by the state Department of Health here in Arizona. But it appears that around the same time these were published, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office announced that it was going to turn the case over, this investigation, which apparently happened back in September, over to the county attorney's office, to determine whether or not criminal charges need to be placed here, if whether or not they need to bring criminal charges. Now, initially, when we had reported this back in October, they'd said they didn't think it rose to the occasion. But through the investigation, they found additional evidence, and now they want the attorney to weigh in. Now, this is a Southwest Key facility. It is now shut down. We reached out to Southwest Key. They referred us to a statement that they sent us back in October, when we originally reported on this, where they basically said that they were they were looking forward to working with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of Refugee and Resettlement. They welcomed investigations, and that they are engaging in child welfare consulting programs to make sure that everything was on the up and up. But a source close to the way that things were handled after the situation tells CNN that at least two staffers were fired after this, and that they after this was shut down, they continued to work on what's happening here in Arizona. Of course, Alisyn, this comes as there is continued discussions about what happened to those two migrant children who died as they came across the border, in U.S. custody. And of course, as Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina, who is likely going to be the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says that he would like to have hearings on that as soon as he can possibly do that when the new year comes.
[Camerota:] Yes, sounds like they will get right on that. Dianne, thank you very much for all of that reporting. Joining us now is outgoing Republican Congressman Carlos Curbelo of Florida. Good morning, Congressman.
[Rep. Carlos Curbelo , Florida:] Alisyn, good morning. It's good to be with you.
[Camerota:] Happy new year to you. When you see that video of those kids, those those children in custody there, being physically mistreated, as well as we know that these two children who have died in custody, clearly the system is not working. That's not a news flash. We all know that the system for asylum seekers is not working. President Trump had a theory on what's broken. He tweeted, "Any deaths of children or others at the border are strictly the fault of the Democrats and their pathetic immigration policies that allow people to make the long trek, thinking they can enter our country illegally. They can't. If we had a wall, they wouldn't even try." What do you think about the president casting blame in that way?
[Curbelo:] Well, that's a true shame, Alisyn. And one can only hope and I truly believe that these are isolated incidents. I visited some of these facilities in South Florida and happy to say that the children there were being treated with great care. However, this does need to be looked into. And rather than dehumanizing these children and trying to assign blame summarily, whether it's to Democrats, or Democrats trying to blame the administration, we do need to find out what's going on. And more broadly, we do need to reform our asylum policies in this country. We put an immigration bill on the floor just a few months ago that provided a solution for about two million DACA recipients; increased border security; and also reformed our asylum laws, because although we must be a compassionate and caring nation, I also understand that the United States cannot be the orphanage for all of the poor children in the world.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Curbelo:] So we need to find that healthy balance. And we do need to do our best to treat the children who are in our custody as best as possible.
[Camerota:] But I mean, as a Republican, from where you sit, though there's a Republican in the White House and, as we know, Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, do the Democrats deserve some blame for how broken this is?
[Curbelo:] Well, I think everybody deserves blame to the extent that we haven't reached an agreement, Alisyn. Our government is designed for dialogue and compromise. And that's why we put together a bill that had wins for Republicans; for Democrats; for those that want more border security; for those who are sympathetic to the DACA population, who want to see them have a permanent future in our country. That's what we need. And right now, I mean, you see what's happening. It's sad. The government is shut down in this country, and it seems like our political leadership, nobody cares. It doesn't make a difference to anyone. During previous shutdowns you had people over at the Obama White House around the clock, trying to reach an agreement, at least having conversations. Now, we're not even talking. And that's just a shame. And it shows how far our politics have fallen in this country.
[Camerota:] Well, look the president is very dug in on his demand for $5 billion for a wall. And I'm just wondering. As a member of Congress, as a Republican, can you define the president's wall? Do you know this morning exactly what that looks like? How long it is? How high it is? What it's made of?
[Curbelo:] Well, I think that's part of the problem, that no one knows exactly what it is he would agree to. Now, I do know that the solution is somewhere in the middle. I think most Americans do want to see more border security. Most Americans do understand there's a lot of human trafficking and drug trafficking at the southwest border. I think we would all like to see that diminished. And then, I think most Americans also want to see us reform our immigration system in a compassionate way. And of course, you had Senator Graham on your air yesterday articulating this. There must be a compromise, and that compromise does include, or should include the DACA population. In our bill, we had 2 million young immigrants who were brought to this country as children, who grew up here, who are working here, haven't broken any laws. They're paying taxes.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Curbelo:] Let's give them a path to a permanent future in this country. Pair that with border security. It's a very neat, elegant, symmetrical compromise. That's where the answer is. If Congress is going to succeed, the next Congress, 116th Congress, in breaking this stalemate, it's going to be by compromising, not by digging in. And obviously, leadership starts at the top, and the president has to be the first one

[Richard Quest, Host, Quest Means Business:] The Dow showing very good gains, off the best of the day. It's given back maybe 50-odd points or so, but still a robust healthy session across all the major indices and that's the sort of gavel you need to bring trading to a close on Thursday. It's August 16th. Tonight, bouncing back, the Dow's just had its best day in many months. Larry Kudlow says China is looking terrible as new trade talks are put into the diary. And football is coming here. I'll speak to the company taking Spanish football stateside, and by that, I mean football, none of that American stuff. I'm Richard Quest live in the world's financial capital, New York City, where, of course, I mean business on a good day for the Dow. Good evening. Tonight, Wall Street comes surging back. China says trade talks are back on again, and the delegation is heading soon to Washington. These are the reasons why you're going to see such a strong performance at the Dow Jones Industrials, indeed, and the S&P 500. The Dow has been driven higher by those stocks which benefit particularly from the China deal or the China potential talks and Walmart results, so, Boeing is 100 points. Walmart is 60 points. Goldman Sachs is 30 points, Caterpillar 30 and Apple 25. It puts perspective into how the Dow has made such good gains in one day. Larry Kudlow is the Director of the White House Economic Council and promising this rally still has room to grow.
[Larry Kudlow, Director, White House Economic Council:] Our economy, our investors, our workforce are crushing it right now. We are crushing it. And people say this is not sustainable, it's a one quarter glitch, just nonsense. An absolute nonsense. Any business economist worth his or her salt will look at these trends and tell you we're going for a while. The single biggest story this year is an economic boom that is durable and lasting and that most people thought was impossible.
[Quest:] Durable, lasting, and most people thought was impossible. Paul La Monica, guru is with me. He's right. I mean, there is an economic boom taking place in the United States, and, well, politically, one could disagree on whether people thought it was possible, but the economics are there.
[Paul La Monica, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, this is a very solid economy right now, Richard, and I think that Larry Kudlow is correct to assert that it could be sustainable. One of the things that a lot of people forget sometimes when they talk about how the economy is, you know, the economic boom is getting old, is that it wasn't that big of a boom to begin with for a lot of people. It was such a shallow rebound that it felt sort of as if the US was stagnating for a while. So, now we're picking up some steam. I think the hope is that if you resolve some of these trade issues, and that's why the market rallied today, that could give the economy and hence, the market a further lift.
[Quest:] That's an interesting point that you've just have been talking about, the early days of the post great recession recovery. Were down less than 1%, 1.5%, whatever. Are you saying that really this bull market, which is one of the longest in history, this bull market really we should look at it as being from a later date in the sense of those first times where they don't really count.
[La Monica:] Yes, I don't know if you would go so far as to say as they don't count. I just think that people who only look at the age of the bull market and decide that, well, the economy now must go into a recession soon or that the market has to fall from these levels, I think that is a bit of a fallacious argument. You could have the rebound go on longer, as long as earnings growth is there and so far, it's been there. Remember, the first quarter was supposed to be the best, as good as it gets for a while, what was it? High water mark going to Caterpillar and the second quarter has turned out to be pretty much just as good, if not better.
[Quest:] So the earnings season gave a certain oomph to this. Walmart, which we'll talk more about in just a moment. Walmart has given further reason for us to accept it was a good earnings season, things are as good as they're likely to get.
[La Monica:] Yes, I think the Walmart numbers, which I know you're going to talk about in more detail were very solid, it shows the health of the US consumer. Don't discount Cisco. Cisco was also in the Dow, it's a lower priced stock, so it doesn't have as much weight, but Cisco's results and outlook really gave the tech sector a boost today and I think that was much needed.
[Quest:] Netflix was down and Facebook was down.
[La Monica:] Netflix and Facebook were down, but I think we're at a stage now where as long as the mature tech companies Cisco, Apple, Microsoft if they can keep doing well, you throw Google on or Alphabet in there, that's not the worst thing in the world if Netflix and others aren't doing as well.
[Quest:] Good to see you.
[La Monica:] Thank you.
[Quest:] China says trade talks with the United States are back on and it comes as the country's stocks certainly could do with a boost. The Shanghai composite is on a four-day losing streak and is fast approaching what one would describe as a bear market. Now, you remember, a bear market is where well, a correction is up to 10%. Bear market, you're heading towards 20% down. So these are the falls and the serious fall on Wednesday, and a year to date fall of 18.2%. China's powerhouse tech giants are feeling the pressure and we're seeing that in the numbers. Tencent was down again following a disappointing earnings; jd.com, earnings also were short. Larry Kudlow, who you heard a moment ago, the head of the Economic Council, the Chief Economic Adviser, I should say, Larry Kudlow says the Chinese economy right now looks terrible.
[Kudlow:] Their economy is just heading south. Retail sales, business investment is collapsing in China according to the numbers. Industrial production has fallen, and now is plateauing at a low level. People are selling their currency. There may be some manipulation but mostly, I think, investors are moving out of China because they don't like the economy and they're coming to the USA because they like our economy. I'm not a China expert, although I'm boning up as fast as I can. I would just say right now their economy looks terrible.
[Quest:] Larry Kudlow brings great credibility to the whole process when he gives answers like that. David Dollar is in Washington. David serves as the US Treasury Emissary to China and is now senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Do you agree with Larry Kudlow that the Chinese economy is in his words looking terrible?
[David Dollar, Us Treasury Emissary To China:] Chinese economy is decelerating, there's no question about that, but I would not say that it's terrible. It's still growing pretty well. It's going to do 6.5% or more for the year, so I think it's an exaggeration to say that the economy is cratering, but clearly, the Chinese economy has decelerated while the US economy is accelerating. So the two are moving in different directions. That's certainly affecting their respective stock markets.
[Quest:] And the reason for that deceleration can often be described as bad debts, overhanging of debts in the market, under Chinese government policy, but also the trade tariffs will eventually also play into that reason.
[Dollar:] Yes, I would put most of the emphasis on the government policy, you know, China has been growing very much based on credit growth for a long time and starting last fall, they really began to rein that in. And so you saw their stock market starting to fall after January and that was a result of their deleveraging campaign and now the trade war is piling on, on top of that, so definitely the trade war is not helping. The market is down 24% from a high in the middle of January, so in that sense, it really is in a bear market now.
[Quest:] But there is a feeling that there's an orderliness to it. But if the goal is to take the steam out of a Chinese economy to allow the currency to find a more natural level, then there's a certain success in the way it's been implemented.
[Dollar:] Yes, I was just in Beijing meeting with officials and academics. They're pretty relaxed. Some of this slowdown is exactly what they wanted. There has been overinvestment in China. The only way to correct that is for investment growth to slow down, so I think they're mostly on target, maybe a little bit the July data, a little bit too low in terms of investment, so then they fine tune. They come back with a little bit more credit with fiscal stimulus, so I think they had the tools to hit their target.
[Quest:] And from your recent visit, were you able to glean their stomach for a full-fledged trade war with the United States?
[Dollar:] Yes, I think they're preparing for a long-time conflict, so it's good news that their Vice Minister of Commerce is coming to talk. That's a pretty low level, so that's just keeping the lines of communication open. I think the Chinese expect that this will last throughout 2018 and they have to find other types of stimulus to keep their economy going. They're not really counting on quick resolution of the trade conflict.
[Quest:] Good to see you, sir. Thank you. Please come back again and give us the perspective. We appreciate it. So breaking news I need to bring to your attention. The Vatican has responded to this week's detailed report on the historic abuse of children committed by hundreds of Roman Catholic priests in the United States state of Pennsylvania. Barbie Nadeau is on the line from Rome. What's interesting about this, we've been waiting for the Vatican's response. We've had various diocese from across the United States, and now the Vatican's given its word.
[Barbie Nadeau, Correspondent, Cnn:] What's interesting about this is the language that they've chosen. They're using the word, "carnal." Now, that's something we haven't heard from the Vatican when it comes to clerical sex abuse. We hear them talking about sins and omissions and forgiveness and prayers, but this is really the first time in a statement by the Vatican we've heard them acknowledge these accusations as criminal, and I think that that is exactly what the victims have been asking for, that validation that these are crimes. These aren't sins, these are actual crimes punishable by courts of law and prison term and officers are saying it happened in secular society. And I think the victims will be pleased that this is a step in the right direction, but there's probably still a long way to go before they feel justice, Richard.
[Quest:] Why do you think the Vatican has taken that extra step of calling of describing them as crimes? Why are they moving forward in that fashion?
[Nadeau:] Well, I think because it's been a public relations nightmare for the Pope, this Pennsylvania grand jury has really called attention to seven decades of rampant violence against children in one state alone in the United States, and I'm going to guess that that pressure actually came from the United States church, who have admitted their own culpability and their weaknesses in this area and having the Vatican endorse them in trying to make valid changes and in trying to keep people in the pews, keep people in church. Right now, you've got a situation where you think, as [inaudible] a thousand children were abused for seven decades, that can't be secret, people knew about this, and the catholic church in the United States takes this sort of thing very seriously, and I think it's probably pressured, the Holy See here in Rome to make a statement that counts. I don't think [inaudible] the main spokesperson from the Vatican is American. I think that probably weighted into it quite a bit when we're seeing language emerge from the state and it's coming from the spokesperson who certainly knows what language would work.
[Quest:] Barbie Nadeau who is in Rome, thank you. Aretha Franklin won her first Grammy for this. She would go on to win 17 more. The head of the Recording Academy joins me to remember the legendry artist. With a powerful voice and a no nonsense attitude, Aretha Franklin belted out one unforgettable hit after another. Fans around the world are mourning the Queen of Soul. She died on Thursday morning at her home in Detroit, surrounded by friends and family. The first woman inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Franklin won 18 Grammys in her long career, including best R&B vocals for her ode to her home city's defining industry. Ahe also championed the motor city in another way. She actually sang the ads for Chevrolet cars, and so, let's look at her contribution not only as a leading singer, but her contribution as a leading woman a female singer in the world. Neil Portnow is the President of the Recording Academy, which runs the Grammys. Good to talk to you, sir. The achievement of Aretha Franklin, how would you sum it up?
[Neil Portnow, President, Recording Academy:] It's pretty hard to put into words, you know? As a musician, I first heard Aretha as a young person, and just learning to listen to and appreciate all kinds of music and when I remember hearing Aretha, I was thinking, "Who is that?" And how does anybody possibly evoke that kind of emotion and soul and feeling in three minutes on a record and then I explored further, obviously, so many of us had. She's a one of a kind, you know, we've heard the words national treasure. She's really an international treasure. She's treasured the world over, and hard to imagine seeing the likes of a talent like that come again.
[Quest:] And in an industry where, as you know, there have been there have been questions over the ability of women to make it to the top, to become that sort of global star, she didn't just do that. She defined the book on that. I mean, doing I mean, she wrote the book, defined it, and then put it in the library. But was she seen as a trailblazer for women in that sense?
[Portnow:] Well, no question. I mean, Aretha would probably tell you whatever she did, she did. She didn't rely on others. She relied on herself. She's not only great as an artist, but she was great as an entrepreneur and a promoter of her own work and was certainly going to move forward because she had her own vision, and she had the tenacity.
[Quest:] Right.
[Portnow:] And she certainly had the talent.
[Quest:] And that of course, is crucial. It's the tenacity, the talent, and the ability to fight on through. As she won Grammy after Grammy and you saw her picking up more and more of them, she remained, as I understand it, extremely approachable, extremely humble, extremely normal in that sense.
[Portnow:] Yes, absolutely. I mean, I had the pleasure of working with her in the 1980s when I was running the west coast of Arista Records for the legendry Clive Davis and I'm sure many of you will be speaking to Clive about her career, and she couldn't be more gracious, down to earth, warm, kind, but also, you know, I'll bring back tenacious because she's somebody that knew what she wanted for herself at every minute, and she depended on and trusted her instincts and her vision, and she also made great choices in who she would work with, whether producers and picking great songs and working with... ... great entrepreneurs and record label people.
[Quest:] Yes.
[Portnow:] So she had it all.
[Quest:] Neil, thank you for taking time and coming to talk to us and putting it in perspective. Thank you. We appreciate it. As we continue, Walmart is reasserting its dominance in US retail, even as other chains crumble because of online competition. Now, the numbers that came out today saw the shares go up more than 9% after the company said its US sales grew at the fastest pace in a decade. Investors were pleased that the online sales in the grocery business is growing strongly. Clare Sebastian is here to take me down the aisles.
[Clare Sebastian, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, well, if there's one thing you take away from this earnings report, Richard, it's that it's not just e- commerce, it's not just the physical stores, it's the combination of the two that Walmart is doing really well and that's what's got investors so excited today.
[Quest:] Let me just jump in, though. What have they done differently? I mean, in a quarter or in the half of a year, are we just seeing the results of the policies put in place or have they changed anything recently?
[Sebastian:] They've just been investing more and more, Richard. Their grocery has been a big thing in the last few months. They've been investing in click and collect and delivery and all of that kind of stuff. That's very expensive, but this is essential because they're not just competing with Amazon now, they're competing they're trying to meet the demands of a new generation. Take a look.
[Ryan, Youtuber:] We're so excited to see and ride a real toy.
[Sebastian:] This is how Walmart now sells toys.
[Unidentified Male:] Three, two, one, go!
[Sebastian:] Six years old, Ryan has racked up billions of views reviewing toys on his YouTube channel.
[Ryan:] Look at the boxes with my face on it.
[Sebastian:] Now, he has his own line at the world's biggest retailer. Retailers are waking up to a younger and younger generation of influencers.
[Emma Chamberlain, Influencer:] It's a cute shirt, trust me, just this angle is bad for it.
[Sebastian:] Seventeen-year-old Emma Chamberlain recently partnered with Dote, a mobile shopping app designed to appeal to Gen Z. Her line, High Key sold out in three hours.
[Oliver Chen, Analyst, Cowen:] Influencers and others online can offer you a really authentic kind of connection or experience or knowledge about a product where a consumer can really see him or herself in that blogger or influencer.
[Mckenzie Sullivan, Gen Z:] Give it to someone you know, like someone you watch videos of and you're like trust their opinion. They wouldn't, like, advertise a product that's bad.
[Sebastian:] At the eighth largest mall in America, Palisade Center, north of New York City, we meet Gen Z siblings McKenzie, Sydney, and Tyler Sullivan. Who do you guys follow on You Tube for example?
[Tyler Sullivan, Gen Z:] On YouTube, I like David Dobrik.
[David Dobrik, Youtuber:] May I ask for a little help for my friends at we've got a new car, baby!
[Sebastian:] That means they're exposed to brand sponsoring influencers.
[Dobrik:] If you press a button, it turns into a disco ball and it flies.
[Sebastian:] While other influencers like Shane Dawson with 16 million YouTube followers even have their own merchandise. Dawson sells his on Amazon.
[T. Sullivan:] When he advertises something, it's not because he's, like, getting a sponsor. So that he really like wants to advertise it.
[Chen:] New generations of shoppers are open to new brands and not necessarily wedded to trusting the old and former brands. We're really seeing the transformation in terms of the customer having more power.
[Sebastian:] And let's say, Gen Z doesn't differentiate between online and physical stores. They're more interested in value.
[M. Sullivan:] You could go into the store, try something on, you fall in love with it, go online, get it for like 20% off.
[Sebastian:] You guys will do that?
[T. Sullivan:] A little.
[Sebastian:] And they want personalization.
[T. Sullivan: L:] ike the shoes I'm wearing right now, I went on the Vans website and I, like, picked out the color here and I picked out what the fabric was going to be.
[Sebastian:] It's kind of this connected generation are shifting the power to set trends away from the retailers.
[Ryan:] My favorite is...
[Sebastian:] The old guards are scrambling to catch up. A little glimpse, Richard, there into how the younger generation do it, but the point about this is, it's very expensive, even for Walmart to do all of this and innovation. Walmart are losing money in e-commerce. They expect that to continue for the rest of the year. But the thing about Walmart compared to, for example, JCPenney, which I know you're going to talk about is that they can afford to do this, and that's why they're in this leading position.
[Quest:] Good to see you. Thank you, Clare Sebastian. Now, so far, this year's shares in US retailers have either skyrocketed or gone sky diving. Now, take a look. JCPenney is down 42% year to date. Sears, even worse, 59%. But Macy's and Kohl's are each up around 40%. Nordstrom's earnings are out. Their shares are up 14% after hours. They're looking to invest in the digital side of their business. We'll talk more about the digital side and the winners and the losers. Keep in mind now, Kohl's is up 38% and Macy's up 41%. JCPenney and Sears down heavily. Barbara Kahn is the professor at Wharton and author of "The Shopping Revolution." When I look at those two share price differentials... [16:25:12] ... it looks as if JCPenney and Sears just do not get it, and probably, maybe, never will.
[Barbara Kahn Is The Professor, Wharton School:] I couldn't agree more. I think the difference is, one, that Walmart and to some degree Kohl's and Nordstrom and Macy's, they have a strategy, and JCPenney, right now, it's CEO-less. It lost its CEO, and really doesn't have a strategy. What's the reason to go shop at JCPenney? And I think JCPenney in particular compared to Walmart suffers from the fact that their locations tend to be in malls, and mall traffic is down. They don't have the right mix of merchandise, they don't have a reason to go into the store, and people aren't going to the malls.
[Quest:] Okay, but is the is the bricks and mortar, we know it's not dead, but people still like going into a shop and trying it on. So it's the ability, surely, for a Macy's to balance physical presence with online presence. I'm old-fashioned enough. I still like to go and try an item of clothing on, but if I'm buying a pair of undershirts or underwear, well, I can buy that online.
[Kahn:] Exactly, and like your previous guest said, it's really an omni channel strategy and that is another reason why Walmart has done so well. Walmart spend a lot of money investing in their website, investing into making it frictionless, online-offline, making it really easy to shop, and if you compare Walmart, say, to Amazon, and Amazon, you're paying an Amazon prime membership, but Walmart, you're not paying that membership price. You've got really low, low prices in their store. They've always been a low-price retailer, and when they get their website and their online equation right, that's a winning that's something winning for the customer and you see it in their top line and bottom line.
[Quest:] But they haven't they don't have the cache. They haven't managed to get the cool factor. Whatever you want to call it, I'm sure you have a professorial word that would put it into true perspective. But the reality is, Walmart, look, I'll admit, and I suspect you are, too, I am a prime member, Amazon Prime. They're getting and their hundred andwhatever it is dollars a year from me, and possibly from you as well. Now, that's an achievement.
[Kahn:] Yes, but Walmart is aware of that. When they bought jet.com, that's a separate platform still, they're operating under a different platform. They have a partnership now with Lord & Taylor. They have bought a lot of very sexy digitally native vertical brands, like DeNovo and Millicent, so they're upping their wow factor as well. They're aware of that.
[Quest:] When was the last time you went into a shop and bought something? An item? Clothing?
[Kahn:] I have to tell you, I go in stores all the time. I'm a brick and mortar person.
[Quest:] Excellent. Good to see you. Thank you very much indeed. We'll talk more about this in the future.
[Kahn:] Sure, thank you.
[Quest:] You need to keep up to date on the business headlines. We have it for you and it's just a 90-second Daily Briefing Podcast, updated twice a day, before the start of trade and after the closing bell. Just ask "CNN Money flash briefing" to Alexa or the Google device. As we continue, the threats are still coming from Washington to Ankara. We'll hear from the Turk's chief executive who says Turkey can withstand the Trump administration's onslaught.

[Jim Acosta, Cnn:] Happening now: terrorist assault. Hundreds of people killed in a coordinated attack on a mosque. Bomb blasts sent worshipers fleeing, only for them to be slaughtered by waiting gunmen. Who is behind this horrifying massacre? Cooperating witness. Lawyers for former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn stop sharing information about the Russia investigation with President Trump's legal team. Does it mean Flynn is now cooperating with the special prosecutor and trying to cut a deal? Heightened alert. Frayed nerves in London, but no sign of terror after reports of gunshots in a crowded shopping district. But European and U.S. intelligence fear ISIS or al Qaeda may be plotting to attack over the holidays. Why are terrorists more desperate than ever to strike? And course projection. President Trump tweets about his game with two of the biggest names of golf, promising to play a quick round that stretched for four hours. After repeatedly slamming President Obama's golf outings, why has President Trump now visited his own golf courses 80 times since taking office? We want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and around the world. Wolf Blitzer is off. I'm Jim Acosta. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM room.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Acosta:] We're following breaking news. President Trump just off the phone with Egypt's president expressing condolences and condemning a terror attack on a mosque that left at least 235 people dead. The attackers first detonated bombs that sent worshipers fleeing right into the sights of gunmen outside, who later moved into the mosque to slaughter even more victims. We're also following growing alarm within the U.S. intelligence community over possible terror attacks over the holidays by both ISIS and al Qaeda, with ISIS believed to be especially eager to strike after major losses on the ground in Iraq and Syria. The heightened concern was evident in London today. Police went into full terror mode after reports of gunshots at a popular shopping area, but no suspects or evidence were found. There's speculation tonight that fired National Security Adviser Michael Flynn may be cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller in the Russia investigation and possibly trying to cut a plea deal. That is being fueled by word that Flynn's lawyers have stopped sharing information about the probe with President Trump's legal team. We're covering all of that and more this hour with our guests, including Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee of the Homeland Security and Judiciary Committees. Our correspondents and specialists, they are also standing by. But let's begin with the terror attack on an Egyptian mosque that's left at least 235 people dead. CNN's Ian Lee is working that story for us. Ian, this is believed to be the deadliest attack in that country's history.
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Jim. Tonight, Egyptian security forces and the military are combing the desert looking for the culprits behind this deadly attack. Not only did these militants wait for people to flee the mosque before starting to shoot and then going inside and executing people, but they also ambushed ambulances who were trying to get to those people who were injured. And it took security forces to secure the entire area before the ambulances could go in and ferry the people to hospitals in the area and in Cairo. Over 100 people were injured in the attack. While no one has claimed responsibility, Jim, this bears all the hallmarks of ISIS. ISIS has been operating in the northern part of Sinai and they have carried out mass attacks like this in the past in Egypt. And in the aftermath of such attacks, We hear from the president, President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, and he always comes out strong, and this time he came out strong, too, saying he will use brutal force in hunting down the people involved in this. We heard President Trump spoke with President Sisi, offering his condolences and support. The Egyptians though are also concerned about what they're seeing in Iraq and Syria. As ISIS loses territory there, Egyptian officials are concerned that militants could be coming to Egypt and other territories where ISIS has a foothold. Again, ISIS did not claim responsibility for this, but all the signs point to the terrorist organization Jim.
[Acosta:] And intelligence agencies around the world have to be on guard this time of year. Ian Lee, thank you very much. And we're learning new details about President Trump's phone call to Egypt's president following that attack. CNN senior White House correspondent Jeff Zeleny is in Florida with the president. Jeff, he condemned the attack and said the U.S. will continue to stand with Egypt in the face of terrorism, but he also had other comments on what happened in Egypt, right?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] He did, indeed, Jim. He condemned the attack. And he did have a brief telephone call this afternoon with the Egypt president, as well as a call earlier this morning with the Syria president or excuse me with the Turkish president about Syria. This brings to three the number of world leaders the president has talked to here during this week, which has been a working vacation, as we saw today later on the golf course.
[Zeleny:] President Trump hitting the links today with two of the biggest names in golf, Tiger Woods and Dustin Johnson. The White House rarely confirms when the president is golfing, but he made the announcement himself on Twitter, saying he would be "heading over to Trump National Golf Club, Jupiter, to play golf quickly." He departed after more than four hours at the course. His visit marking the 80th day he's spent at one of his golf properties since taking office and his 100th day at a Trump-branded property. Many Americans and more than a few presidents play golf. It's only notable because of what Mr. Trump repeatedly said before winning the presidency.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] If I win, I may never see my I may never see these pieces again because I'm going to be working for you. I'm not going to have time to go play golf, believe me.
[Zeleny:] The president also talking by phone today with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan about the conflict in Syria. The Turkish foreign minister said Mr. Trump pledged to stop arming a Kurdish militia, the YPG, that the government considers a terrorist organization. The president also condemning the attack today in Egypt killing more than 230 people and wounding more than 100 others in the deadliest terror strike on Egyptian soil. He called the president of Egypt to discuss the attack, which he also seized upon to push his immigration agenda, tweeting: "We have to get tougher and smarter than ever before and we will. Need the wall, need the ban. God bless the people of Egypt." The president is also turning his attention to the tax plan up for a vote next week in the Senate. He offered a preview during a Thanksgiving Day call from Mar-a-Lago with American service members around the world.
[Trump:] Now we're working on tax cuts. Big, fat, beautiful tax cuts. And hopefully we will get that and then you're going to really see things happen.
[Zeleny:] The president is set to meet with congressional leaders at the White House and attend a weekly lunch of Senate Republicans on Tuesday. The Senate Republicans still don't have the votes to pass the sweeping tax overhaul amid the concerns of the bill's effects on the deficit.
[Narrator:] Congress is talking about tax cuts that will add trillions to our national debt and hurt our economy.
[Zeleny:] Senator Ron Johnson has announced his opposition, with Senator Susan Collins, Bob Corker, Jeff Flake, Lisa Murkowski all voicing concerns. Senator Rand Paul will likely support the plan with Senator John McCain as a wild card. As America marked Black Friday, the president's campaign joined in an the annual day-after-Thanksgiving shopping rush with Trump merchandise marked down 30 percent. Now, the dinner hour at Mar-a-Lago, where the president is, he has just sent out a very interesting tweet, Jim, just a short time ago, an audacious tweet, if you will. Let's take a look at this. We have to read through this together. He said: "TIME" magazine called to say that I was probably going to be named manperson of the year, like last year, but I would have to agree to an interview and a major photo shoot. I said probably no good and took a pass. Thanks anyway." Jim, this is sort of coming out of the blue here, but we do know "TIME" magazine often names their person of the year in the month of December coming up here. We're not sure which is more unlikely, that "TIME" would name him man of the year for the second year in a row he is correct that he earned it last year or if he would to decline it if they were to name him. We have checked with "TIME" magazine. They have not yet gotten back to us. But, Jim, this is also something to point out. There is still a fake copy of "TIME" magazine from 2009, I believe, hanging in some of his golf clubs. It turned out that was not real. "The Washington Post" reported that last year, if you recall. So the president, as we know, has been long a fan of magazine covers, so interesting that would have turned it down, if indeed that is even the case.
[Acosta:] Jeff, it may be the first time a sitting president has actually campaigned or lobbied to be on the cover of "TIME" magazine as well. Jeff Zeleny, traveling with the president in Florida, thank you very much. Lawyers for the president's fired National Security Adviser Michael Flynn have told Mr. Trump's legal team they're no longer going to share the information about the special counsel's Russia investigation. And that could be a sign that Flynn is cooperating with Robert Mueller's team, in hopes of a plea deal. CNN crime and justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz, is here right now with the latest. Shimon, one of the president's lawyers is warning against making too much of this development. Obviously, it could mean lots of different things, but certainly a pretty interesting development in this investigation.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Correspondent:] Yes, it absolutely is. And based on the conversations we have had with sources, it appears that there are at least ongoing conversations between Flynn's camp and Bob Mueller's team. Now, this can mean several things. They could be negotiating a plea deal or perhaps more significantly there could be a plan in place where Flynn will plead guilty and cooperate with the investigation. Now, in terms of what his cooperation will bring, that's unclear. But as a result, he would want to distance himself from the president's team, so that he doesn't jeopardize any of the plea deal or any potentially a cooperation agreement that could come of this. And another perhaps significant explanation for this is that Flynn himself could be fighting these charges and, therefore, does not want to also inject himself into the president's team, again, trying to keep his distance from them. And so the president's lawyer yesterday issued a statement. Let me read that to you here. He basically said: "No one should draw the conclusion that this means anything about General Flynn cooperating against the president." No matter which way you look at this, Jim, as you said, this is a significant development, a significant shift in the defense strategy for Michael Flynn.
[Acosta:] And Jay Sekulow says don't draw any conclusions, but there may well be conclusions.
[Prokupecz:] Yes.
[Acosta:] Shimon, thank you very much. We appreciate it. Let's get more on all of this with Democratic Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas. She's a member of the Homeland Security and Judiciary Committees. Congresswoman, thanks for joining us tonight. We appreciate it. Does it look like Michael Flynn is cooperating with the special counsel, based on these developments?
[Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee , Texas:] Well, first of all, Jim, happy Thanksgiving to you and all the American people.
[Acosta:] You as well.
[Jackson Lee:] I can frankly say to you as a lawyer and one who has served on committees that have investigated a number of issues, particularly the assassination of Dr. King and President Kennedy when it was reopened some years later, that this is bad news for the president's lawyers and the president and those surrounding him in the White House. It's particularly bad news as he is on the golf coast golf playing golf for the 80th time. And the reason is, there's several elements to this. And let me share with you those elements. When the agreement was in place, and the legal teams were sharing information, the president's team could be comforted about what they were seeing. They would have a sense of comfort where Flynn and his counselors were going. The information would give them a sense that this is not headed in their direction or that this is reasonable that he's giving this information, that this is nothing new and it isn't anything that would impact them negatively. Now, when the agreement has been disbanded, there's complete silence. That means the lawyers are not talking. They have to protect their client, in this instance, General Flynn. There's a potential conflict of interests, and they don't know what General Flynn is doing, either cooperating for a plea bargain or cooperating and providing information about the engagement of President Trump, his campaign officials in collusion or collaboration with Russia to undermine the 2016 election. So, I think it's bad news. And, yes, you can speculate that there's nothing there, but I can assure you that his lawyers are worried or they should be worried, because now they do not have a pipeline into the legal strategy of General Flynn's lawyers or General Flynn.
[Acosta:] And do you believe, based on what you have seen so far, is there enough evidence to indict Michael Flynn, do you think?
[Jackson Lee:] Well, there's basic facts that he has violated some aspects of the law, the foreign agent registration, even though sometimes you can register after the fact, the potential issue with Turkey, taking, allegedly, dollars to lobby on their behalf or to help deport an individual who has legal status here in the United States. Those are elements that certainly could jeopardize General Flynn independently of anyone else. But, certainly, as an insider, as someone who was hired and present as a national security adviser, he obviously had intimate conversations, not only with campaign officials, but he was in the White House. And so he would have knowledge of facts of that general that special counsel Mueller would be very interested in, and being a top- notch prosecutor, former FBI director, he can truly put the pieces together. He has a top-notch team. I would be worried if I was the president of the United States and also his inner circle, but, in particular, General Flynn is concerned about his son. And, therefore, there may be a lot of leeway, a lot of room, a lot of desire to get this thing behind him, both for himself and his son.
[Acosta:] And let's turn to the attack in Egypt, where at least 235 people are dead after a terror attack on a mosque. President Trump reacted on Twitter this afternoon. I will read it to you and have you react to it, Congresswoman. It says: "Will be calling the president of Egypt in a short while to discuss the tragic terrorist attack with so much loss of life. We have to get tougher and smarter than ever before. And we will. Need the wall. Need the ban. God bless the people of Egypt." Can't argue with the last sentence there. But you sit on the Homeland Security Committee. what does the wall on the border with Mexico have to do with any of this?
[Jackson Lee:] Well, first of all, I'm disappointed that the president of the United States could not behave like a commander in chief and a president that would offer the president of Egypt and the people of Egypt, which I would to want right now, my deepest sympathy and prayers for them and a recognition of the fight in the territory in which they're here, and to stand alongside of them in the fight against terrorism and ISIS. Here is a president that cannot singularly offer a statement that really represents the American people all over the nation, singularly focus on the Egyptian people. This was a dastardly, vicious act. Not only did they bomb the mosque, where people are worshiping, but they shot people fleeing for their lives and shot the ambulances. I'm horrified by this sickness with ISIS. But what should have been said is, we recognize that, as ISIS begins to lose its position of power in Syria and Iraq, that they are headed toward Africa. That is what happened in Niger. And it's happening around Nigeria and Chad. And to be able to say that we will stand with you and the Egyptian people to fight against the dastardly acts of ISIS, and ISIL, and that terrorism has no place in the world, that's the kind of statement that should have been made. It is absurd and really embarrassing. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, we know this all the time. We're in classified meetings about this. But it is embarrassing not to acknowledge the pain of a particular nation and to associate the ban here which has been ruled unconstitutional by the courts, but also the wall. Let me say, as a Homeland Security member of the committee, I want a safe and secure nation in the northern and southern border, but there are many ways that we must look at it, new technology, training of our Border Patrol agents, enhancing those numbers. But to mix that with the devastating, desperate acts that happened and the loss of life in Egypt, I just think is apples and oranges and certainly unfair and certainly inappropriate. My sympathy again to the Egyptian people.
[Acosta:] And we all share that sympathy, Congresswoman. Thank you very much for that. We're going to take a quick break. When we come back, want to talk to you about those growing sexual assault allegations up in Capitol Hill, other topics. We will be right back in just a few moments. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

[Blitzer:] We're following breaking news. Moments from now, the disgraced comedian, Bill Cosby, will learn his sentence. He was found guilty in April of three counts of aggravated indecent assault for drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand back in 2004. CNN's Athena Jones is live. Athena, what's happening in the court right now?
[Athena Jones, Cnn National Correspondent:] Hi, Wolf. We are waiting to hear from Judge Steven O'Neill. He is set to announce his decision on what kind of sentence Bill Cosby is going to have to carry out. We know Cosby's lawyers asked that he be sentenced to house arrest. They cited his age. He is 81 years old and legally blind. He has difficulty getting around and he is not self-sufficient. And they've argued he is not a danger to anyone other than maybe himself. They say incarceration would impose an undue burden on him. The prosecution is asking for five to 10 years. That is a maximum sentence. You'll remember the three charges have been combined because they stem from the same event. The maximum is 10 years. Prosecutors have asked for five to 10 years. They also want Cosby to pay a $25,000 fine and other costs, the cost of prosecution, court costs and sheriffs cost. So that is what we're waiting to hear now. Earlier this morning, that same judge, Judge O'Neill, ruled that Cosby will be classified as a sexually violent predator. He will be required to register for life. He will have a lifetime mandatory counseling to deal with that issue and also a notification of the community that a sexual predator lives in the area. That is independent from the sentence. We are still waiting to hear what his fate will be, coming any minute now. Remember, Wolf, this is the first verdict of a celebrity being accused of sexual assault in the "Me Too" era. This is a very big deal. It was a case that was a long time in the making. You will remember the first trial ended in a mistrial. At the second trial, Andrea Constand, his accuser, was willing to come and do a second trial, but they had five other women able to testify and buttress what she was saying in her testimony about being drugged and incapacitated and being sexually assaulted. That is what led to the conviction in April. We are waiting now to see how long Bill Cosby may spend behind bars.
[Blitzer:] Momentarily, we will find out whether he goes to jail at age 81 or not. Stand by, Athena. I want to bring in our legal analyst, Areva Martin, who is joining us from Los Angeles. Areva, you spent a lot of time watching this case unfold. He is either not going to jail or go to jail for five or 10 years. Now that the judge ruled him a sexually violent predator for the rest of his life, what signal does that send?
[Areva Martin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Wolf, I think, based on what we have seen from the judge and the cases he's ruled on that are similar to Bill Cosby's, we should expect Bill Cosby to spend some time in jail. What's remarkable about that case, Wolf, is Bill Cosby has never expressed any remorse. He had an opportunity today during the sentencing hearing to take the stand and to ask for mercy, to talk about the things he has done in the community and things he has done in his life, and to ask the judge to give him leniency. He did not do that. He missed that opportunity and passed on that opportunity to do so. And although, legally, the judge can't take that into consideration, that says a lot about Bill Cosby and whether he accepted the harm that he has done to Andrea Constand. We will be looking to see how the judge plays this out in terms of sentencing Bill Cosby, but it's incredible that we have not seen him express any remorse.
[Blitzer:] If he is sentenced, I assume he is immediately taken from the courthouse to prison, is that right?
[Areva Martin:] That's what the prosecutors are asking for. An appeal has already been filed by his team. We should expect them to continue to argue to allow him to stay out on bail pending that appeal. Wolf, I also want to note, not only did Cosby not take the stand in his own defense and ask for mercy, but there were no witnesses put on by the defense to try to paint a picture of him other than as the sexually violent predator that he has been deemed by the court.
[Blitzer:] Areva and Athena, I want both of you to stand by. Bill Cosby sentence, any moment now. Let's take a quick break. We'll be right back.

[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] And if anything happens to Guam, there's going to be big, big trouble in North Korea.
[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn Anchor:] Donald Trump warning Kim Jong-un once more Friday evening. But that's not all. President Trump also talked tough about the crisis in Venezuela, saying a U.S. military intervention was not ruled out. Hello, everyone, thank you for joining us. I'm Kristie Lu Stout in Hong Kong. And CNN NEWSROOM strategies right now.
[Stout:] A stern new warning from U.S. president Donald Trump aims squarely at North Korea's threat to fire missiles near the Pacific island of Guam, where the U.S. has a large military presence.
[Trump:] If anything happens to Guam, there's going to be big, big trouble in North Korea.
[Question:] Have you ordered any change in our military readiness?
[Trump:] I don't want to say. That, I just I don't talk about that. You know that.
[Stout:] The U.S. president fired off the verbal salvo after meeting with his national security team while on vacation in New Jersey. But Mr. Trump was cagey when asked by reporters if the U.S. was prepared to go to war against Pyongyang.
[Trump:] We think that lots of good things could happen and we could also have a bad solution. But we think lots of good things can happen.
[Question:] What would be a bad solution, sir?
[Trump:] I think you know the answer to that.
[Question:] When you say bad solution, are you talking about war? Is the U.S. going to go to war?
[Trump:] I think you know the answer to that.
[Stout:] Mr. Trump also opened up another possible area of U.S. intervention when he took a jab at the president of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro. Take a listen.
[Trump:] I'm not going to rule out a military option. We have many options for Venezuela. This is our neighbor. This is, you know, we're all over the world and we have troops all over the world in places that are very, very far away. Venezuela is not very far away and the people are suffering and they're dying. We have many options for Venezuela, including a possible military option if necessary.
[Stout:] All right, a lot to get to. Let's get the latest now from CNN's Jim Acosta.
[Trump:] Well, you know, my critics are only saying that because it's me. If somebody else uttered the exact same words that I uttered, they'd say, "What a great statement, what a wonderful statement."
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] No second thoughts from the president just hours after a new chest thumping message to North Korea.
[Trump:] If he utters one threat, in the form of an overt threat which, by the way, he has been uttering for years and his family has been uttering for years or if he does anything with respect to Guam, or anyplace else that's an American territory or an American ally, he will truly regret it and he will regret it fast.
[Acosta:] The latest tough talk following a morning tweet, "Military solutions are now fully in place," the president says, "locked and loaded should North Korea react unwisely. Hopefully Kim Jong-un will find another path." The threat of military action comes less than one day after Defense Secretary James Mattis was starting to tone down the administrations rhetoric, emphasizing diplomacy.
[Gen. James Mattis, U.s. Secretary Of Defense:] You can see the American effort is diplomatically led. It has diplomatic traction. It is gaining diplomatic results. And I want to stay right there. Right now. The tragedy of war is well enough known. It doesn't need another characterization beyond the fact that it would be catastrophic.
[Acosta:] Still, the president insists his team is on the same page.
[Trump:] There are no mixed messages. There are no mixed messages.
[Acosta:] Asked about the president's claim that military options are now locked and loaded an administration official all but said, don't worry, there are military plans for just about any crisis we may face in the world. These plans are updated on a continuous basis as needed and provide options for the president. This isn't anything new. The president may be shrugging off questions about his talk of fire and fury this week...
[Trump:] And frankly, the people that were questioning that statement, was it too tough, maybe it wasn't tough enough.
[Acosta:] But the increasingly apocalyptic rhetoric runs somewhat owner to his repeated claims that he won't telegraph his next moves.
[Trump:] I don't want to telegraph what I'm doing or what I'm thinking. I'm not like other administrations where they say we're going to do this in four weeks and that doesn't work that way. We'll see what happens.
[Acosta:] Democrats insist the White House message is a mess. Aides to the president are also clarifying his comments on Russia's decision to expel American diplomats.
[Trump:] I want to thank him because we're trying to cut down on payroll. And as far as I'm concerned, I'm very thankful that he let go of a large number of people because now we have a smaller payroll.
[Acosta:] Asked about that, the White House said in a statement, "The president was being sarcastic. We take seriously Moscow's unwarranted actions against our personnel and diplomatic "properties. And we are exploring our response options."
[Stout:] And that was CNN's Jim Acosta reporting there. Let's go to U.S. Lt. Col. Rick Francona, CNN military analyst. Col. Francona, thank you so much for joining us here on the program. Wow, this rhetoric, from fire and fury to locked and loaded, to big, big trouble. What do you make of this tone from Trump? And could it, just could it be part of an actual strategy?
[Lt. Col. Rick Francona , Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, I hope it's part of an actual strategy. If you read the Secretary Mattis's words, his written statement, it was very strong as well, a little more a diplomatically worded. And then you contrast that with what the secretary of state Tillerson has said. They're all wanting to go the same way. Basically saying we hope the diplomatic track works but we're prepared or military option if it doesn't. I think most people realize that's what he's trying to say but he doesn't always say it artfully, just to be polite. But I think it's having an effect. We're seeing the North Koreans react in ways they haven't in the past. Now we are always going to get the bluster and the bellicose rhetoric from Kim Jong-un and his senior officials. But what we saw the other day with this detailed plan of an attack on Guam was something we haven't seen before and I think that the of the bellicose rhetoric from the United States has forced them to try and come up with something concrete. So it's a little more I think finite now. One thing about this plan that they laid out for Guam was it was an option to be presented to the commander in chief. It really wasn't an actual threat to say we're going to do this. He said we're going to plan to do this if we need to.
[Stout:] Got it. And a key difference there, there is a difference between a threat to actually carry out something versus just to have a plan to respond to the rising rhetoric. And it's interesting what you're saying here. You think that the rhetoric from Donald Trump whether it's intended or not or part of a greater strategy is actually working, is forcing North Korea's hand. But is there a danger here? Could it reach a certain pitch that we could edge closer to an actual real-world confrontation?
[Francona:] Well, yes, I think that's a problem because you wars of words have bad consequences if they turn into real wars. So I think both countries are walking a fine line. The problem here, Kristie, is that we are we both countries have taken opposing positions and this won't be solved unless one country is willing to change its positions or live with the status quo. I suspect that we're probably going to end up on some diplomatic track where we end up with the status quo and agree to talk some more because no one, no one wants to edge any closer to the brink than we already are. Neither country wants to fight a war and, of course, the North Koreans know they can't win a war and we don't want to fight one.
[Stout:] Of course, it we don't want all that conflict here. But when you say that diplomacy could be an option there, how could that play out, especially given reports that there is this back channel between U.S. and North Korea?
[Francona:] Yes, and I think that's important and there's always been a back channel with North Korea and I think Secretary Tillerson is the right guy to do this. And if we can make some sort of back channel arrangement, where we can both back off and find some position that both countries can live with. I don't know what that is. That's for the diplomats to figure out. But there's got to be some middle ground where we can we can all live without getting any closer to an armed conflict, even if it's not a nuclear conflict. An armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula will be catastrophic as Secretary Mattis has said.
[Stout:] And there is another option that's out there, an option from Russia and China. They are calling for this double freezing plan, a freeze on North Korean weapons tests, along with the freeze on large- scale U.S. and South Korean military drills. What you make of that? And would the U.S. agree to that?
[Francona:] Yes, this has been a longtime demand of the North Koreans for any kind of concessions on their part. They say we have got to stop these this annual series of exercises that we conduct with South Korea. I don't see the United States backing down on that because we we've just said that's not negotiable, so I don't think that that's something we're willing to concede just yet. But you know, who knows. Something has to give to back down from this situation which we're in right now.
[Stout:] And while we have you, a final question on Venezuela. Donald Trump says that he's not going to rule out a military option. What do you think of that as a response to the legitimate growing crisis there in Venezuela?
[Francona:] Yes, you know, I was really surprised when he said that and I think a lot of people were taken aback when that came out. I know that the U.S. military has plans for all sorts of operations, including Venezuela. But most of these would center around the evacuation of the American embassy, nonessential personnel, American citizens and, if need be, to provide some sort of humanitarian relief if requested by the Venezuela government. But I don't see any chance of a U.S. military intervention. That is just not in the cards. I think he might have picked a few different words there.
[Stout:] Got it. Col. Francona, we'll leave it at that. Thank you so much for lending your insight here on CNN. Take care. Now president Donald Trump blames previous U.S. administrations for not dealing forcefully enough with North Korea. But he claimed to his allies in the region are taking comfort in the fact that he is now in charge.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] U.S. B-1 bombers taking off from Andersen Air Force Base on the island of Guam, part of daily operations at this strategic U.S. launch pad in the Western Pacific. Forty percent of Guam's economy depends on military spending. So installations like Andersen Air Force Base are small cities, home to thousands of service personnel and their family members. There are around 5,300 military personnel stationed at Andersen and at Guam's naval base. U.S. officers here emphasize Guam is more than just a military posting.
[Chris Occhiuzzo, Deputy Operations Group Commander, Andersen Air Force Base:] The majority of the people here, we live here. So I live here. My wife lives here. My two daughters live here. My son lives here. We go to Tumon Bay, my son go they go to school here, we go to Jeff's Pirates Cove, so we obviously have a vested interest in here. And we feel safe here right now. And that's what this continuous bomber presence does. It assures our allies and deters our adversaries.
[Watson:] It is Guam's military installations and its geographic proximity to the Korean Peninsula that have made it the target of verbal threats from the North Korean regime. Guam's homeland security advisor says it would only take 14 minutes for a missile to reach Guam from North Korea, provided the weapon penetrates multiple layers of missile defense. Local authorities also published this emergency fact sheet, advising civilians what to do in the event of an attack from a missile armed with a nuclear warhead. And yet the governor insists the threat level to Guam has not been raised.
[Eddie Calvo, Governor Of Guam:] When the drumbeats of war are being beaten so loudly, it's important to really be clear about the facts and with the facts represented to the people and also urge everyone to be vigilant but also not to panic.
[Watson:] More than 160,000 American civilians call this island home. While there's no sign of panic here, there is concern.
[Ashley Flores, Guam Resident:] It's natural to be scared. We're human. Ashley Flores says she's instructed her 6- and 8-year-old children what to do in the event of a missile attack.
[Flores:] They're in school, to follow the teachers' rules. It's scary if Mommy and Daddy's not there. But as long as you have instructions and you listen, try your best to follow it.
[Watson:] Difficult lessons to teach anyone living in this tropical paradise Ivan Watson, CNN, Guam.
[Stout:] And that was Ivan Watson reporting from Guam. Now let's bring out that sound bite that we have available for you now. This is President Trump talking about allies in the region.
[Trump:] Well, I think as far as reassurance, they probably feel as reassured as they can feel. Certainly they feel more reassured with me than they do with other presidents from the past because nobody's really don't the job that they're supposed to be doing. And that's why we're at this horrible situation right now. And it is a very bad situation. It's a very dangerous situation and it will not continue, that I can tell you. So I think South Korea's very happy and you don't mention Japan but I think Japan is very happy with the job we're doing. I think they're very impressed with the job we're doing and let's see how it turns out.
[Stout:] Donald Trump there calling the tension with North Korea a very dangerous situation and claiming that allies in the region, including Japan, very happy with how the Trump administration is handling things. Journalist Kaori Enjoji joins us now live from Tokyo with the view there. And, Kaori, would officials in Tokyo agree with that assessment from Trump?
[Kaori Enjoji, Journalist:] Well, Kristie, officials here in Japan have been extremely quiet over the last few days. Yes, it has been a long weekend with a public holiday on Friday but very measured response from Japanese officials. Regarding the latest rhetoric between North Korea and the U.S. president Donald Trump, on the surface, the strengths here in Tokyo it is just another summer afternoon, a summer weekend afternoon. But I think citizens too are growing increasingly worried, especially as they saw
[Enjoji:] throughout the warning the PAC-3 missiles, the latest line of defense that Japan has, move toward the central area of Tokyo, toward the area where the North Koreans said the missiles would fly over en route to Guam. So I think in general the public here is fairly calm. But they are not accustomed to seeing this kind of heavy artillery moved. You have now PAC-3s positioned in this area and as they say, this is a last line of defense. These are not designed to strike down missiles at a long distance. They only have a range of, say, 10 to 20 kilometers and there have been also the public has seen the destroyers out in the seas off of Japan, off the Korean Peninsula, that are designed to intercept these missiles. So on average, I think people here are nervous but fairly calms, but growing increasingly aware that the situation may be much more tense than it appears on the surface. But in general, I think there is a sense of resignation, too, on the streets. After all, Japan has a pacifist constitution. It can only self-defend in times like these. And I think they are aware that they are under the umbrella of the U.S.-Japan security alliance. And as you pointed out, the government officials have reiterated that line, reiterating that that this is the bedrock of their security alliance and that they agree with the U.S. president that all options are on the table. So I think for the average Japanese to see this kind of heavy artillery move in the middle of the night, from areas throughout Japan toward that area in particular, areas like Hiroshima, areas like Kochi, Ehime, Shimane, to move some of these PAC-3 missiles and to actually see that is a little bit unnerving, even for the Japanese who are used to these provocative moves by North Korea.
[Stout:] Unnerving, but as you put it, a sense of resignation as these massive missile interceptors are deployed across the country. Kaori Enjoji reporting live from the streets of Tokyo, thank you. And join me on "NEWS STREAM" next week, when I'll be in Seoul for a look at how the region is coping with the growing tensions between the U.S. and North Korea. Up next, more on what President Donald Trump is saying about Venezuela, he says he won't rule out the possibility of U.S. military intervention in that country. And now Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro is responding.

[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn Anchor:] " A fitting end, Moon Jae-in and Kim Jong-un wrap up a three-day summit by visiting one of the most important sites on the Korean Peninsula. The partisan lines deepen. U.S. Republicans set a deadline for the accuser of Supreme Court nominee of Brett Kavanaugh to decide if she will testify. And Maria one year on. CNN looks at the day in day out struggle of people in Puerto Rico still face in the aftermath of that deadly hurricane. South Korean President Moon Jae-in is offering some encouraging words following that three-day summit with his North Korean counterpart. Speaking at a press conference in Seoul earlier in the day, Mr. Moon said that Kim Jong-un gave specific details regarding the denuclearization of North Korea and said he wants to focus on economic development. Mr. Moon said he hopes for further diplomacy.
[Moon Jae-in, President Of South Korea:] Chairman Kim, in order to expedite the process of denuclearization, will pursue the visit of Secretary of State Pompeo, and he has expressed his desire to meet with President Trump to hold a second U.S.North Korea summit.
[Lu Stotu:] Joining me now is CNN's Will Ripley. And Will, you know, the latest inter-Korean summit in Pyongyang in North Korea, it literally reached a peak today at this Mount Paektu. What is the significance of that site and what is the significance of this moment for North and South Korea?
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, I mean, there really couldn't be a more apt place to end a three-day summit that many called a breakthrough than the most important summit for the Korean people, North and South. Mount Paektu is near the border with China and it is revered by all Koreans as a place of deep spiritual significance. I have spoken with so many South Koreans who haves said they would love to go visit there but they have not been able to for a number of years. It is illegal currently for them to travel there. Perhaps that may be changing as a result of what unfolded on the Korean Peninsula.
[Ripley:] When South Koreans sing their national anthem, they sing about Mount Paektu. It's the very first line, until the mountain crumbles, the song goes, God will protect their country. But Mount Paektu isn't in their country, it's in North Korea. A place illegal to visit for most South Koreans who can only hope to see it from the Chinese border. That may be about to change. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in, standing together at a place deeply symbolic to both North and South Korea, countries technically at war since before either leader was born. The symbolic value of ending three days of peace meetings here cannot be understated. This active volcano is Korea's spiritual home. If the North and South were still fighting over any place, it would likely be this place.
[Unidentified Male:] Mount Paektu is the soul of Korea's revolution, the spirit of our people and our pride. We are members of the great country of Paektu.
[Ripley:] I learned what Mount Paektu means to Koreans when I traveled there last year. All around me were pilgrims. Kim Jong-un's people are told the water is holy. Its caldera is Heaven Lake, the centerpiece of a spectacular summit, a symbol of the nation's spirit and strength. In April, Moon Jae-in took one small step over the military demarcation line, hand in hand with Kim Jong-un. Now, Moon found himself standing in a place that would have been impossible to visit just months ago, adding a new moment to the mythology of Mount Paektu.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, and that meeting could pave the way to more talks, but you've got to say, wow. Just the mood, the tone struck as a result of the three-day summit, a world apart from the tensions of last year. Will Ripley reporting live for us. As always, thank you. Turning now to Washington, and Republicans, they have set a Friday deadline for Brett Kavanaugh's accuser to decide if she will testify against the Supreme Court nominee. So far, the Senate Judiciary Committee has received no communication from Christine Blasey Ford or her attorney about that deadline. The Democrats say the committee is rushing the entire process. CNN's Abby Phillip joins me now from the White House. An Abby, the Democrats, we know they want to put a delay on this. You know, the Republicans, they're trying to push this hearing through. Where do we stand right now?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right, Kristie. Chairman Chuck Grassley is refusing to budge on his timeline and he is upping the pressure on Ford saying that she has until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow to make up her mind about whether or not she's willing to testify. He is also saying that Democrats are not helping with the investigation into the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh.
[Phillip:] Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley setting an ultimatum for Judge Brett Kavanaugh's accuser, Professor Christine Blasey Ford, telling Democrats that Ford and her lawyer have until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow to let the committee know whether she will testify at a hearing Monday about her sexual assault allegations, claims Kavanaugh denies.
[Sen. Chuck Grassley, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee:] I'm not worried about anything other than just focusing for the next few days on encouraging her to come.
[Phillip:] Grassley rejecting ford's call for an FBI investigation, but giving her the option of a public or private hearing and offering to send his staff to California to speak with her directly. Ford's attorneys' responding in a statement to the media, writing, "The Committee's stated plan to move forward with a hearing that has only two witnesses is not a fair or good faith investigation. The rush to a hearing is unnecessary, and contrary to the Committee discovering the truth." Ford's lawyers also reiterating that ford needs time to deal with ongoing threats.
[Lisa Banks, Attorney For Christine Blasey Ford:] She has been dealing with hate mail, harassment, death threats. So she's been spending her time trying to figure out how to put her life back together, how to protect herself and her family.
[Phillip:] Sources tell CNN that if Professor Ford chooses not to testify, the hearing will likely be scrapped. And a confirmation vote could occur next week. President Trump growing more vocal in his defense of Kavanaugh.
[Donald Trump, Presdint Of The United States:] He is such an outstanding man. Very hard for me to imagine that anything happened.
[Phillip:] But also encouraging Ford to testify.
[Trump:] If she shows up, that would be wonderful. If she doesn't show up, that would be unfortunate.
[Phillip:] Ford's resistance prompting skepticism from some Republicans who had initially called for a hearing.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] I don't think she can reject having made all of these serious allegations, I don't think that she can reject all those options. I think it's not fair to Judge Kavanaugh for her not to come forward and testify. Both of them need to testify under oath.
[Phillip:] Democrats accusing Republicans of trying to rush Kavanaugh's confirmation before the midterm elections.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader:] Leader McConnell delayed the filling of Justice Scalia's seat for 10 months and now they're saying we can't take an additional few weeks to get to the truth at a very serious allegation. What hypocrisy.
[Phillip:] And throwing their support behind Ford's request for an investigation.
[Sen. Doug Jones , Alabama:] Dr. Ford is being reasonable. I think she needs to have the respect of the committee to let this play out.
[Unidentified Female:] She's being bullied by this committee. It's outrageous.
[Phillip:] And there has been a lot of talk in recent days about whether the FBI should investigate these claims. People have cited the fact that the FBI did investigate Anita Hill's accusations against Clarence Thomas back in 1991. But Republicans are saying that this is a different circumstance. That FBI investigation happened before Anita Hill's name was made public and that investigation was carried out in a confidential manner. They say now that these allegations are public the Senate should take the lead.
[Lu Stout:] And Abby, I just want to get your thoughts on those, you know, interesting comments from Donald Trump earlier about the Kavanaugh accuser. Donald trump saying, you know, if she shows up and makes a credible showing and we'll have to make a decision, you know. Abby, I want to get your thoughts on that. Is President Trump hedging here on Kavanaugh's future?
[Phillip:] Well, I don't necessarily think we should read this as the president hedging, but more that he's leading into what the White House believes is their advantage in this case. They think that if they can put the two individuals side by side in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, they can make this into a he saidshe said case that will make it easier for Republicans to vote in Kavanaugh's favor. Now, the president has been reiterating he wants to hear Kavanaugh's accuser testify. He wants to see if she is credible, but I think it's because the White House believes that at the end of the day it's not going to change many people's minds and it's not going to make a definitive case either for or against her allegations. The White House and the president want to move this forward as quickly as possible and they actually think that this is the best way to do it.
[Lu Stotu:] Got it. Abby Phillip, reporting live from the White House. Thank you. French President Emmanuel Macron has called on European leaders to stay united ahead of crunch Brexit talks. E.U. leaders, they are in Salzburg, Austria where the British Prime Minister Theresa May is trying to raise support for her withdrawal proposals. There are several big obstacles thrown in the way of a divorce agreement, how to manage the border between Ireland and the U.K. That is proving to be one of the toughest to overcome. Now, let's break down this issue for you. A key part of the Good Friday Agreement was an open border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. It's also the only land bordered between the United Kingdom and the European Union. Both sides have agreed to avoid a hard border, which would breach the Good Friday Agreement and could become a target for militants. But, there has been no agreement on what should take its place. Now, leaders have just 190 days to come up with a solution. CNN's Hadas Gold joins us live from Salzburg with more. And Hadas, let's talk about the border issue. Now, we know that's a major sticking point in these talks. How can European leaders cross this hurdle?
[Hadas Gold, Cnn Business Correspondent:] Kristie, that's exactly right. That is the major sticking point and one that's been really the top theme of the last 24 hours since the leaders arrived here in Salzburg yesterday. Last night at dinner, Theresa May, the prime minister of the U.K. tried to make the case to her fellow leaders saying that her plan, the checkers plan, was the only way forward because she says it's the only plan that avoids the hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. But it's very clear that on the other side, there is also a feeling that there needs to be more work done. The European Council President Donald Tusk said yesterday that the U.K.'s plan for the Irish border needs to be reworked. Just this morning though, Irish officials were saying that they are willing to look at new ways to sort of work this out. A lot of this goes down to the details of what exactly that border will look like and who will do the border checks? How would it all work out? But we haven't really heard any specifics coming out of this summit so far and it's very clear that there is still a huge difference. I mean, just a few minutes ago, Donald Tusk, the European Council president posted on Instagram a picture of Theresa May and himself going for some cake and the comments said something along the lines would you like some cake but no cherries. That's going along with the phrase of that Theresa May has been accused of cherry picking what she wants out of this deal. But right now the leaders have just wrapped up a meeting, all the leaders except for Theresa May. And in a few minutes we should be hearing from Donald Tusk and some of the other European leaders on what came out of that meeting, if anything, but to be clear, this is an informal summit. We're not going to get any official declaration. That probably won't come until October when the next formal summit takes place.
[Lu Stout:] Got it. An informal summit, a lot of discussions underway. Is anyone just floating the idea in talking about, you know, the U.K. holding a second Brexit referendum? Is this something a number of E.U. leaders would actually like to see?
[Gold:] We heard from two prime ministers today, for example, Malta saying that they would like and they would hope for a second referendum. But Theresa May last night speaking to reporters outside of that dinner, she shut that down. She said that they are under her watch. There would never be a second referendum. She said that it would cast doubt into the political process of the U.K. and it would take them back to square one in this entire process. And she urged the leaders, labor leaders in the U.K. and the other politicians who are pushing for this to let it go. She said it's not helpful. So it seems unlikely that as long as Theresa May is in power that there will be another referendum. It seems sort of wishful thinking. A lot of the leaders here are just pushing forward on Brexit as it stands, but the hard thing is that we just don't know, we don't have a deal yet.
[Lu Stout:] Yes. Hadas Gold, reporting live from Salzburg, Austria. Thank you. Now in Malaysia, former prime minister, Najib Razak, has been hit with 25 more corruption and money laundering charges. Officials say more than $600 million linked to the country's 1MDB state fund were transferred into Najib's personal accounts. Najib pleaded not guilty to each of the offenses in court earlier. The former prime minister was arrested again on Wednesday in connection with the 1MDB scandal, allegations that Najib and others looted the fund that was a major contributor to his election loss in May. Turning to another embattled former head of state. The former Pakistani prime minister, Nawaz Sharif is a free man for now. A high court in the country ordered Sharif's release from prison, suspending a 10-year prison sentence for corruption that had been handed down in July. His supporters celebrated by showering his car with flower petals. Mr. Sharif's daughter and son-in-law were also released. They were each ordered to pay $5,000 bail. The three were arrested on corruption charges related to some properties the family bought overseas. You're watching "News Stream." Still ahead, millions left in the dark for months. A death toll that dwarfed initial estimates and some communities still cutoff from desperately needed services. How Puerto Rico has struggled to rebuild in the year since hurricane Maria.

[Unidentified Male:] We have very little evidence that shows collusion. What's at stake here is the following question. Did the president himself come under Russian influence? There's a lot of stuff that smells very bad.
[David Shulkin, Former Secretary Of Veterans Affairs:] Three hundred and seventy-five thousand employees, a budget of close to $200 billion. It is going to be a challenge for anybody.
[Unidentified Male:] He does have the president's confidence, and he had the confidence of President Obama. We don't know much about him, and that's part of the concern.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] We've made a lot of progress with the veterans, but I want to get them a choice.
[Unidentified Female:] There's just this toxic culture in the West Wing.
[Unidentified Male:] Aides urging the president not to appoint a new communications director. Those ideas are really dumb.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. Chris is off. John Berman joins me. Great to have you. Happy Friday.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Great to be here. Thanks.
[Camerota:] So up first, CNN has learned why Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants help from the former Trump deputy chairman, Rick Gates. Court filings suggest that Mueller is going after bigger fish as he investigates contacts between President Trump's campaign and Russia.
[Berman:] In the meantime, President Trump's pick for V.A. secretary drawing criticism and concern over his thin management record. "The Washington Post" reports that Dr. Ronny Jackson, the doctor himself, was taken aback when he got the news and expressed hesitance about taking a job that oversees 360,000 federal employees and a $186 billion budget. And a federal judge in California denying a motion from the attorney for Stormy Daniels to depose President Trump and his lawyer, Michael Cohen. Daniels's attorney here live to discuss his next move. Let's begin our coverage, though, with CNN's Shimon Prokupecz, live in Washington with the top story. Information and insight into what the special counsel is after right now, Shimon.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, that's right. And this relates, obviously, to the Rick Gates development. And we're told that Mueller's team has primarily been using Rick Gates for information about the central mission of the investigation, which has been Russian interference or, as we've all referred to it as the so- called collusion into the 2016 campaign. Now, the interesting thing here, very early on, before Gates agreed to cooperate with special counsel, we're told that Mueller's team told him that they needed him that they didn't need him for Paul Manafort and instead wanted to hear about what he knew about contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians. And we may have a hint just how Mueller has been using Gates's information. That came from a recent court filing that shows Gates was communicating with a Russian intelligence official who was also a close associate of Manafort. And the court papers said that Gates knew of this connection while he worked for the Trump campaign.
[Berman:] Shimon, any sense of what Rick Gates could know about all of this or what information he might have had access to?
[Prokupecz:] Well, he had a lot of access. Right? He had a seat at the table. He had ties with members of Trump's inner circle. Obviously, he was the deputy to Paul Manafort. He was also a long- time business associate of his. And then he also has connections to Tom Barrack, who's a fundraiser and close friend of Trump's. He was involved in some of the funding for the inauguration. So he was in Rick Gates was in on some of the fund-raising decisions. He also, we're told, developed sort of reputation for keeping tabs on what others were doing inside in the campaign, including that Trump Tower meeting where a Russian lawyer promised dirt. Remember, that happened over the summer during the campaign, where this Russian lawyer promised dirt on Hillary Clinton Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Shimon, thank you very much for all of your reporting. So skepticism appears to be growing over President Trump's pick to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs. This as the president made headlines in this unscripted rally in Ohio. CNN's Abby Phillip is live in West Palm Beach, Florida, with more. So what happened, Abby?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Alisyn. President Trump is waking up here at his resort here in Mar-a-Lago after a somewhat quiet week, if you count getting rid of one of your cabinet secretaries. But it's the person that he's picked to choose [SIC] his new V.A. secretary who's coming under some new scrutiny as his inner circle increasingly shrinks.
[Phillip:] Mounting skepticism on Capitol Hill about the qualifications of President Trump's nominee to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs, White House doctor Navy Admiral Ronny Jackson.
[Rep. Mike Coffman , Veterans Affairs Committee:] This is an organization that's over half the size of the United States Army. And unless he's going to be tough, nothing is going to change.
[Phillip:] Jackson has worked at the White House for three successive administrations, but he has no management experience and, if confirmed, would take control of the second largest department in the federal government.
[David Shulkin, Former Secretary Of Veterans Affairs:] Three hundred and seventy-five thousand employees. A budget of close to $200 billion next year and a very complex organization. And so it is going to be a challenge for anybody to take.
[Phillip:] Former CIA chief John Brennan calling Jackson's selection a "terribly misguided nomination that will hurt both a good man and our veterans." "The Washington Post" reports that Jackson himself was taken aback by his nomination and hesitated to take on such a big job. But the president continued to push for his selection. Sources say Mr. Trump has been pleased with Jackson since he praised his health in January.
[Rear Admiral Ronny L. Jackson, Nominee For Secretary Of Veterans Affairs:] I told the president that if he had a healthier diet over the next 20 years, he might live to be 200 years old.
[Phillip:] Jackson has not commented publicly about his position on the privatization of veterans' care, a step his predecessor, David Shulkin, opposed.
[Shulkin:] There were some political appointees within my administration that didn't see it that way and really wanted us to take a much harder stance towards privatization. I wasn't willing to do that.
[Phillip:] President Trump, hinting at his support for privatization at a rally Thursday.
[Trump:] We've made a lot of progress with the veterans, but I want to get them choice.
[Phillip:] Mr. Trump also defending his decision to oust Shulkin.
[Trump:] I've made some changes, because I wasn't happy with the speed with which our veterans were taken care of. I wasn't happy with it.
[Phillip:] After largely staying out of public sight for days, President Trump going off script at the rally meant to tout his infrastructure plan. Mr. Trump threatening to upend his first major trade deal with South Korea.
[Trump:] I may hold it up until after a deal is made with North Korea.
[Phillip:] And surprising the Pentagon with this announcement about the U.S. presence in Syria.
[Trump:] We'll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon.
[Phillip:] Before leaving for Ohio, President Trump bid farewell to outgoing communications director Hope Hicks Thursday. So far nobody is in line to take her place. CNN has learned that the president is being told by some advisers he doesn't need a communications director or a chief of staff if General Kelly departs.
[Steve Bannon, Former White House Chief Strategist:] If General Kelly at any time does decide to leave or the president decides it's time for him to move on, I don't believe there will be another chief of staff.
[Phillip:] Well, we are learning new developments about another of President Trump's cabinet secretaries. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is under some scrutiny for his use of a 247 security detail, according to a letter by Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse that CNN has obtained. Pruitt has used the security detail not only for his time here in Washington but also at home in Tulsa, for a trip to Disneyland and also a trip to the Rose Bowl. So more troubles here for the president's cabinet secretaries, Alisyn and John.
[Camerota:] OK, Abby. We'll get into all of that. So let's bring in CNN political analysts John Avlon and Brian Karem. OK, so John, it's hard for people, I think, to follow every thread of the Russia investigation. OK? But what's happened now with this court filing and Rick Gates does feel like it's a big deal to delve into. So explain it to people.
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] It's a confirmation that the Mueller investigation is looking at collusion and direct contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence services. That's the simplest way to say it. It's not just Russians being you know, surrounding and lobbying the campaign. It's not just questions of whether they tried to influence the election, which they did via the IRA in St. Petersburg. It's a close member of the Trump campaign, deputy to the former chairman, Paul Manafort, who is both in business and in contact with a member of the GRU, Russian intelligence services.
[Berman:] It also looks like the Mueller investigation tries to send signals, subtle signals. Not-so-subtle, right? When they indicted 13 Russians and three Russian entities.
[Brian Karem, Cnn Political Analyst:] That's not so subtle.
[Berman:] That's saying the Russians meddled.
[Karem:] Pretty direct.
[Berman:] Let's not argue about whether the Russians meddled. In this obscure court filing they're trying to say, "No, no, no. We're looking at campaign contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia." And it's also a reminder "We've got Rick Gates."
[Karem:] Right.
[Avlon:] "Rick Gates is cooperating with us. We've got Michael Flynn. He's cooperating."
[Karem:] And a few others that you probably haven't mentioned. Well, I think we're looking at it from the outside in. And we're ascribing motive to the action that we can't be aware of. Because I have to tell you, having covered the DOJ, you know, for years and knowing the people that know him, this is a it's been described as a black box. And that and the other metaphor is, you know, peeling back of an onion. I think he progresses methodically. And what we see and ascribe as motives to kind of, like, give us I don't think he cares. I think he's doing his job. He's going to go about doing his job. He's going to do it in the best way he knows how. And I think we find that they're not going to be coming forward with too much information except through court documents. And then he's going to which is really, you know, a very professional way of doing things. Very contrary to Washington, D.C., where if you say hi, it turns out three blocks later that you gave the Gettysburg Address. So I think it speaks to the professionalism of this investigation and the thoroughness of it. I don't like the word "collusion," though, I mean, since it's not a you can't be charged for collusion. I think what they're probably looking at is obstruction of justice. And while collusion could be used to impeach. But if they're going to indict him on anything, it's not going to be collusion. It's going to be something else.
[Camerota:] All right. Let's talk about what's going on in the White House
[Karem:] Oh, boy.
[Camerota:] and in the administration as a whole. So yesterday, the president said good-bye publicly to Hope Hicks. It was her last day. Hope Hicks has been with him since before he was president. I mean, this was a trusted adviser, and aide, and confidante. I'm no body language expert, but this was an awkward that part actually wasn't awkward. The they're very close. That part is actually nice. This one. And good-bye, farewell. Best of luck to you.
[Avlon:] Get out of you.
[Berman:] It was like a mini Emmanuel Macron handshake right there.
[Karem:] Coming up next
[Camerota:] Clearly, he has affection for her and it appears vice versa. So where that leaves us is that he may not replace her. He thinks he may not need a director.
[Avlon:] This is apparently, the president is getting advice from people that he doesn't need a communications director; he might not need a chief of staff. Whoever is giving him that advice are actually not his friends. If ever a president needed a chief of staff and a communications director, it is this one, if he was willing to listen to them. And therein lies the rub.
[Karem:] Well, maybe that's why they're their friends.
[Avlon:] Yes, but I mean, this you know, we're at the end of March. Let's just look at the body count over this month in the president's inner circle. Communications director, gone. Secretary of state, gone. Chief economic adviser, gone. National security adviser, gone. V.A. secretary, gone. That is massive upheaval.
[Karem:] And wait until hour. Someone else might leave.
[Avlon:] There's still time.
[Berman:] Look, Rob Porter, the staff secretary even before that. These are people who are key were key to the smooth operation of the White House.
[Karem:] And that's, you know, the chaos. He loves he had said he loves to operate in chaos. And I can tell you there's nothing out of covering a lot of administrations. I've never seen it's almost scary how mean-spirited and chaotic the White House is and can be. So to operate without you know, the idea of operating without a chief of staff, to me, is anathema to running a government. And how do you run without a communications director? He likes to fly by the seat of his pants, make his own decisions. That's the way he's done business. Everyone who's ever done business with him will tell you that. They say, "He means well." I get it. But this is the U.S. government. It's not a start-up operation. It's been going on since the 1700s. So maybe you might want to kind of follow rote.
[Berman:] A billion served and counting.
[Karem:] We're not even a McDonald's.
[Berman:] John brought up a great point here, which is that these are friends who are not friends if they're giving him this advice. But you can't dismiss these people as powerless quacks, Brian. Because we know the president listens to these people. In some ways they might be more powerful than the people in the West Wing.
[Karem:] Well, and some of them may have spent time in the West Wing and may no longer be in the West Wing. That may be some of the people that he's listening to. And he finds it more convenient to listen to people who aren't with him on a daily basis. You know, familiarity breeds contempt. So maybe he becomes contemptible when he has to see him on a daily basis. And they of him, because they have to put up with him. So perhaps when they're outside, he listens to them. And you're right. It's a good point that you made, John, is that I don't the scary part about it is when you have people outside of the White House giving you giving you advice and you take it. And you don't listen to the people that are there on a daily basis, that's that's a recipe for disaster.
[Camerota:] But I mean, what's the upshot to the American public if he doesn't have a director of communications? Does it matter?
[Karem:] Yes. Yes.
[Avlon:] It does at the end of the day. Look, we know the president is not a big fan of studying American history. But just for a second, you know, both Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter tried stretches without a chief of staff. It was a disaster. There's a reason that role exists.
[Camerota:] I understand chief of staff. That traffic cop I understand. But director of communications? He says whatever he wants on Twitter.
[Karem:] Yes, that's the problem.
[Avlon:] Maybe the administration can have some message discipline that will counteract his shoot-from-the-hip style.
[Karem:] Yes. The problem without a director of communications, look, we'll go through one news cycle. You know, it used to be like I remember walking in with Reagan. They would spend all day long craft you'd go in early in the morning. Larry Speakes would say, this, this and this. Then, say, bring in somebody else who would explain the facts. And then the briefing would come later. And you would spend all day long crafting one message. In fact, sometimes all week long crafting one message.
[Camerota:] How quaint.
[Karem:] And this guy will ruin it all with a tweet. But what you hope is like, we had this plan and then he tweets out something else. But what you hoped you have, and maybe what Hope Hicks was providing, was enough of a break to keep it sane. And you do need that you do need that traffic cop in the White House. Otherwise, bedlam and chaos is going to overwhelm us all, if it hasn't already.
[Berman:] Very quickly, John Avlon, Dr. Ronny Jackson, will he become the V.A. secretary?
[Avlon:] Look, I think Republicans control the Senate. They're going to be inclined to vote for whoever the president's nominee is. But that that hearing is going to be interesting, because he's going to get tough questions about what is his experience, what are his policies, details about the presidential physical, perhaps. So look for, actually, a revealing hearing. But he's look, he is a charming guy. The question is does his and a good doctor by all accounts. Does his experience match up even in the same ballpark of the responsibilities of running the V.A.?
[Karem:] And the situation there is the administration, as I said yesterday, the administration has been screaming that it wants its people. "Give us our people. We can't do our job. We want our team in place." So inasmuch as like I said yesterday, if he doesn't come in and drool or make a big mistake, he'll probably be seated, because the Republicans at the very least, unless of course, there's an overwhelming number of them that don't, want to give him his chance and give him his team. And there's nothing actually wrong with that. I mean, you want the president comes in to do the job. You want him to have the team that he wants.
[Berman:] The team has to be able to play the position.
[Karem:] Well, that's right.
[Berman:] You can't have a pitcher you can't have a pitcher play shortstop.
[Karem:] Well, that's up to the coach. That's up to the coach.
[Avlon:] It's not good for the ball club or the fans.
[Karem:] You and I agree with that. I'm not disagreeing. Then we get rid of the coach.
[Avlon:] And play ball, people.
[Camerota:] I'm stopping the sports metaphors right here, because I don't understand them. John Avlon, Brian Karem, thank you very much. So a legal setback for Stormy Daniels's team. A judge denies her request from her attorney to depose President Trump and his longtime personal attorney. Michael Avenatti joins us next.

[Berman:] All right. Happening now, students and teachers who survived the Florida school massacre exactly two weeks ago today, they are now inside their school. Classes are under way. CNN's Dianne Gallagher is there. Dianne, it has to be a very emotional morning there.
[Dianne Gallagher, Cnn National Correspondent:] John, that's an understatement. The parents of children who were killed were walking to school this morning, hugging students. The police officers from dozens of neighboring departments were here. As the principal said, it was going to be the highest security they had ever seen. Undoubtedly, that is exactly what happened. They were escorting the kids in. John, I've been texting with some of the kids who were inside the school now, some of the kids I rode up on the bus with last week to Tallahassee. They said that they started the day off with a 17-second moment of silence. One second for each life lost two weeks ago today in that freshmen building and around the campus during that massacre. They've kind of described it, John, as weird. That's a word I'm getting the most from these texts. It's strange being back. It's emotional. It's tough for them. When we talked to the kids right before they went in, they told us they were apprehensive about going back to school.
[Samantha Grady, Injured Student Returning To School:] I'm hesitant to walk into the building, but I know I have to, to start I have to face it head on. At least that's my approach.
[Candy Novell, Student Returning To School:] I'm nervous. I feel the same as her. I'm really scared to go in.
[Stephanie Horowitz, Student Returning To School:] I'm still in shock from everything that has happened. Going back in to school, I just I'm just worried that it's going to happen again.
[Samantha Fuentes, Injured Student Not Returning To Stoneman Douglas:] I want to be a part of Stoneman Douglas, and I want to live out the rest of my high school career normally, but there's no such thing as normal anymore.
[Gallagher:] That's it, John. What is normal for these kids anymore? They don't really know. The teachers have told me they don't know what normal is anymore, john. The idea today is not curriculum. It's compassion. The principal they're going to all eight of their periods, going to these 20-minute periods. Today, they started school off in the same classes as they did when the shooting happened two weeks ago John.
[Berman:] Every student is different. Some of the students that I've spoken with, they need to get back to class. Others are just not ready yet. I think the school will be sensitive to everyone's needs. Appreciate you being there, Dianne, thanks so much. New this morning, the CEO of Dick's Sporting Goods, one of the country's largest sporting goods retailer says the company will stop selling assault-style rifles like the one used in the Parkland shooting. CNN's Alison Kosik joins me now with the details on this. What have we learned?
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Business Correspondent:] You know, this is a prime example of how the kids' voices and its corporate America that you're going to see change happen before I think you see anything happen with Congress. So, this morning, we're hearing from Dick's saying that no longer will you be able to buy assault-style rifles at its stores. It's taking those weapons off the shelves. Just to be clear, it's the Dick's Sporting Goods stores that actually took the weapons off the shelves years ago after Sandy Hook. It's the field and stream stores that continue to sell these kinds of weapons, you will no longer be able to buy them there. Also, Dick's announced that you will no longer be able to buy high-capacity magazines and at Dick's stores all around, you have to be 21 or older to buy any gun. Why is this happening? CEO Ed Stack spoke to Chris Cuomo this morning on "NEW DAY." Let's listen.
[Edward Stack, Chairman And Ceo, Dick's Sporting Goods:] When you look at those kids and their parents and the grief that everyone is going through, we don't want to be a part of this story any longer. We actually sold the shooter a shotgun in November of last year. We looked at that and found out that we did this we had a pit in our stomach and said we need to we don't want to be a part of this story. We need a responsibility to these kids and we decided we are not going to sell these any longer.
[Kosik:] It's pretty stunning that Dick's sold a weapon to the shooter at the high school, at Stoneman Douglas High School back in November. This wasn't the gun that he used. It wasn't the type of gun that he used. It was kind of a wake-up call for Dick's to say, listen, we don't want to become part of this story. Let's go ahead and take these off and let's begin being part of the national conversation about how to start to control this.
[Berman:] Dick's saying they're hearing the kids, they're doing this for the kids. Alison Kosik, thanks so much. Appreciate you being here. Later today, the president will meet with Republican, Democratic lawmakers to talk about the way forward on gun control and school safety. According to the White House, the president still supports raising the age limit to 21 for the purchase of certain firearms. A source close to the White House tells CNN that the president seemed to back off that idea to consider other things that would have a more dramatic effect. Former Trump campaign chair, Paul Manafort, in court at this moment answering the criminal charges from the special counsel. He is inside. What is emerging from this hearing? We're on top of all the breaking news. Stay with us.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] And we're back with some breaking news in the "POLITICS LEAD" today. Sources telling CNN that several members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the House of Representatives are in talks to try to get embattled Democratic Congressman John Conyers of Michigan to step down, to retire from Congress, in light of more sexual misconduct allegations against him. This comes as a second former employee has now come forward. His former Deputy Chief of Staff who says that Conyers made three sexual advances towards her during the time she worked for him. Let's get right to CNN's Sara Ganim. And Sara, you spoke with this former employee. What did she tell you?
[Sara Ganim, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. Deanna Maher actually worked for him in the 1990s and says that his office had a culture of sexually inappropriate behavior and that the congressman himself set that tone. She described three incidents of sexual harassment to us. The first one in 1997 when she says she was told to stay in a suite in Washington and John Conyers walk into her bedroom and took off his clothes.
[Deanna Maher, Former Deputy Chief Of Staff To John Conyers:] And I was really tired so I got into bed and all of a sudden John Conyers walked into my bedroom. Another time I was instructed to drive him to the airport and he was driving erratically, erratically he was a terrible driver, erratically. Thank God he was- he was erratic, OK, because his hand was feeling me all over my what do you call it, my abdomen.
[Ganim:] In a third incident in 1999, Maher says that Conyers put his hand up her dress during a town hall meeting in his home district and then whispered to her that, "she had great looking legs." Maher is the fourth woman to come forward with sexual misconduct claims against Conyers. He's denied any wrongdoing, although he admits he settled one case in 2015. Jake.
[Tapper:] And Sara, members the Congressional Black Caucus that Conyers helped formed year also ago, they're now in talks trying to get him to resign with some dignity I suppose?
[Ganim:] That's right. My colleagues on The Hill are essentially looking for a way for him to get out of this with some ease, without trampling on his 50-plus-year-long legacy in the House. This is something that leading Democrats have been struggling with over the past few days. Earlier in the week, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi got into a bit of hot water after calling Conyers an icon and refusing to criticize him after these allegations. She later met with one of these alleged victims and said that she believed the woman's accusations and finds the behavior to be unacceptable. But clearly, as these allegations have trickled out, people behind the scenes are saying that's it's time for some of this to result in some bigger consequences. Jake.
[Tapper:] All Right, Sara Ganim, thanks so much. Joining me now is Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Speier of California. She's one of the co-sponsors of the Me Too Congress Act Legislation that would seek to change how Congress deals with this issues of sexual harassment. Congresswoman, thanks for joining us.
[Rep. Jackie Speier , California:] Thank you, Jake.
[Tapper:] You've said that Congressman Conyers should step down if the allegations are accurate, that the Ethics Committee needs to determine whether or not they are accurate. This now the fourth women, when you hear this woman speaking out about her experiences with Conyers, do you still have that position or do you believe her?
[Speier:] I believe her. I believe the women. I think there's a pattern here. It's pretty clear. And I think that there needs to be action taken in a swift manner. Now it has been referred to the Ethics Committee. If they are if we're going to pursue that, then it needs to happen rather quickly. I think it's not going to take a lot of time to interview these women. It's not going to take a lot of time to determine whether or not the actual payment from the member's allowance was made because of sexual harassment. And if so, I think it's a very clear case.
[Tapper:] We just reported that some members of the Congressional Black Caucus are in talks to try to get him to resign. Do you support their plan?
[Speier:] Well, I think the Congressional Black Caucus is a very persuasive group of people, and I think that I think they're making a good decision if that's the manner in which they're approaching this. It's a tragedy on a number of levels because Mr. Conyers has a very storied history in terms of the civil rights movement. But this conduct is unbecoming a Member of Congress and there is no staff member in this building that should ever have to deal with that kind of conduct.
[Tapper:] I want to play a bit of what Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi had to say about Congressman Conyers over the weekend.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , Minority Leader:] John Conyers is an icon in our country. He's done a great deal to protect women.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you believe John Conyers' accusers.
[Pelosi:] I don't know who they are. Do you? They have not really come forward. That's for the Ethics Committee to review, but I believe he understands what is at stake here and he will do the right thing.
[Tapper:] Now Pelosi since said that his behavior is unacceptable. I guess I'm a little struck by this whole John Conyers as an icon thing that I'm hearing from Pelosi and the CBC and, again, with respect, from you as well, I mean, Harvey Weinstein was a film icon, Charlie Rose and Mark Halperin were journalistic icons. Bill Cosby was a comedy icon. I can go on and on. Why is Congress acting like they are somehow special if their members get caught doing unacceptable things for women? I mean, who cares if they're iconic if they were actually sexually harassing and assaulting women?
[Speier:] Well, first of all, Jake, you're absolutely right. They're totally unrelated and it doesn't matter if you're an icon in business or film or media, and if you conduct yourself in that manner then you are no longer privy to those roles that you held. So you can, on the one hand, say someone is a good journalist, but the fact that they have conducted themselves in a fashion that was sexually harassing, you know, taints it. There is no question about it.
[Tapper:] I want to turn to Senator Al Franken. He told Minnesota Public Radio that he couldn't be sure more accusers would not come forward. What do you think of that?
[Speier:] You know, I guess I'm a little tired of the dance because that would suggest to me that he, in fact, knows that he has done those kinds of things and done it more frequently than has come forward. So in the end, you know, we're here representing the people of our districts, but we're also here representing this institution. And if you bring disgrace on this institution then I think it's time for you to go.
[Tapper:] Earlier this month, you mentioned you knew two current members of Congress who had harassed women, one from each party, but none of the people that have come forward you are or been accused publicly, it's neither of them.
[Speier:] That's correct.
[Tapper:] Is there any way you can tell us who those people are?
[Speier:] So, Jake, I am really here to talk about protecting these victims. If these victims want to come forward then I would support them in doing so. But you know, when you're a victim and I've talked to many of them, they sat in my office. They are tortured by the experience that they have had. And some of them want to able to close that chapter and move on with their lives. They should have the right to do that. So if they want to come forward, certainly they have every right to do so, but if it's going to somehow impact their settlement or if they feel they're going to turn into mincemeat and be trashed by, you know, talking heads then I can understand why they wouldn't.
[Tapper:] All right, Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Speier of California, thank you so much.
[Speier:] Thank you.
[Tapper:] That's it for THE LEAD, I'm Jake Tapper, I'm going to see you again at 9:00 p.m. Eastern for the CNN debate on taxes. Wolf Blitzer is next in "THE SITUATION ROOM." Stay with us.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Charles Manson is dead. The cult leader who orchestrated gruesome murders that shocked the world is gone.
[Unidentified Female:] He needs to look into our eyes and see the pain that he's caused.
[Unidentified Male:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Cuomo:] If you knew what we were laughing about, you would laugh, too. Good morning, and welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Monday, November 20th, 8:00 in the east. And up first, President Trump slamming the father of one of the three UCLA basketball players arrested for shoplifting in China. The president asked for appreciation, you'll remember. He did supposedly help get these students out of China. The athletes then thanked him publicly. But LaVar Ball, who is a piece of work in his own right, the outspoken father of one of the UCLA players, LiAngelo Ball, he's casting doubt on the role of the president. The president heard this, and he did what he does most often, responded in kind. "Now that the three basketball players are out of China and saved from years in jail, LaVar Ball, the father of LiAngelo, is unaccepting of what I did for his son and that shoplifting is no big deal. I should have left them in China!"
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] The president went on. "Shoplifting is a very big deal in China, as it should be, five to 10 years in jail. But not to father LaVar. Should have gotten his son out during my next trip to China instead. China told them why they were released. Very ungrateful." The president also ripped into Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona. In an open mic moment, Senator Flake referred to the Republican Party as toast if President Trump and Roy Moore were allowed to define it. The president then fired back. "Senator Jeff Flakey, who is unelectable in the great state of Arizona was caught purposely on mic saying bad things about your favorite president. He'll be a no on tax cuts because his political career anyway is toast."
[Cuomo:] Are you a toast person or an English muffin or a bagel person?
[Camerota:] I like toast, whole grain.
[Cuomo:] Toast gets a bad name. Let's bring in CNN contributor and Donald Trump biography Michael D'Antonio and associate editor at "Real Clear Politics" A.B. Stoddard. So how do you see it, A.B.? On the one hand, this is what he does. No target too small, No indignity goes suffered. So is this just more of the same or have we seen a new and lower bar for the president actually saying that he should have left American citizens to rot in a Chinese jail?
[A.b. Stoddard, Associate Editor, Real Clear Politics:] I don't think anyone is surprised that he said that. I think his supporters, as we always talk about, you know, will never disapprove. And I do think that let's start with the fact that these guys with incredible opportunity before them really this is a shameful act. They did not deny that they shoplifted sunglasses in China. And it's embarrassing to the country. It's wrong. And they were right to thank the president. He we were here on Friday and talked about was back on a positive note with his tweets, talking about the pitfalls on the road of life, and, you know, to take great care of themselves. And Mr. Ball was rude. But that's you know, that's an aside. President Trump always takes the bait. He always wants more credit. He wants to be thanked. He believes, you know, that people are ungrateful and it's a disgrace, and he always says this kind of thing. But I do think the intensity and the reason he was doing it last night was because there was an ABC News piece out about the fact that Mueller is now the special counsel, is now looking for communications, documents from Department of Justice about the recusal in the Russia probe about the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, as well as the firing of Comey, which indicates he's homing in, of course, on the obstruction of justice. So I do think sometimes the timing has to do with Russia, even though it is sort of typical Trump to blow back on these things and stoke the culture wars.
[Camerota:] So Michael, what do you think? Because just to remind our viewers, you, of course, are the Donald Trump biographer. You have studied him for decades. So that's the question. Is this just his usual reflex, or is it all a strategic distraction because of the Russia investigation and other things boiling in the political sphere?
[Michael D'antonio, Cnn Contributor:] Well, Alisyn I think it can be both. I think that he does have this reflex. But we also know that Mr. Ball has this method, as well. So probably the only two people in the country who are really happy about this are President Trump and Mr. Ball. They this is a game. They're both playing the game. It is it serves them both. For the president, it does distract the media and the country from his troubles with the Special Counsel Mueller. And for Mr. Ball, this is part of his effort to monetize fame. You know, this is a game that actually Donald Trump almost invented, monetizing fame. You seek the attention, you as he says, any attention is better than no attention. And, you know, so now we have a guy that Chris called a piece of work who is jabbing at the White House troll, and the rest of the country gets to watch. And the only people who are doing the shameful thing here are the president and the basketball player's father. When I look at a guy in his 70s engaging in this kind of behavior, and then I see some college students who shoplifted some sunglasses, I actually see a disparity. And I see the president acting un-presidential. You know, those kids did the wrong thing, foolish. They had adults intervene on their behalf. Mr. Ball should have been grateful. But, you know, there's no money in being grateful, and there's no political gain for the president in being gracious.
[Cuomo:] So this is a win-win on one side. The president bringing up MarShawn Lynch, NFL player, on not standing for the anthem at a game in Mexico City. That plays to a culture divide that the president believes works to his benefit. This, the same thing ungrateful kids, they should have thanked me. That works. But then, A.B., we have the Jeff Flake tweet, OK? And that's not about some faux sense of morality and Americana. It's about the expediency of how to explain what happens with the tax bill. Let's put up that tweet. He has some fun with Flake, "Flakey," attacks him for his lack of political future, which is fair. "He'll be a no on tax cuts, because his political career anyway is toast," now, an unintended truth, probably, there, by the president. That's right, when you don't have to worry about getting elected any more, you just vote your conscience, which is what everybody thinks you were put there to do in the first place. But this is different. This isn't just playing on a culture divide. This is about manipulating how people see the battle over the tax plan, right?
[Stoddard:] Right. Look, no matter who votes against the bill on the Senate floor, President Trump, no matter what policy grounds they will be arguing their no vote, President Trump will go after them likely because that's what he's done this whole year. Right now, without Senator Flake having any reservations, there are five senators, Murkowski, McCain, Senator Johnson, and then of course Senators Collins and Corker, who have different reasons why they have concerns with the bill ranging from deficit problems. There are some fiscal hawks remaining in the Republican Party in Congress, though not many left. And then, of course, issues on the more moderate side about what stripping out the individual mandate will do to health care premiums and how that increase in premiums could actually out wipe out any benefits they get from a tax cut. And so you're already looking at five senators that could bring the bill down, because they only they can only lose two. But Senator Flake, he has senator I mean, the president has a personal beef, obviously, with Senator Flake who has been extremely critical of the president, very out in the open about it, wrote a book about it, and subsequently could not get reelected in a primary in Arizona because of it. But it was funny the way he described it like he was purposefully caught on an open mic. And we know that Senator Flake has said everything he said on that mic in public already. So it was it was it wasn't meant to be an interview in public comments, but it's not inconsistent at all with what Senator Flake has said. And again, it's something he has an axe to grind with Flake, and he's going to stay after him and try to make it sound if he opposes it on deficit grounds like he's doing it because it's a personal political spat.
[Camerota:] Michael, one last tweet that I want to get your response to. This is from Congressman Adam Schiff. And he was talking about the president tweeting about having about wishing that he had left these basketball players, these American citizens and kids, in, you know, this Chinese prison to rot. Adam Schiff writes, "The president would have left American students in a foreign jail because their families didn't lavish sufficient praise on him. How can someone in such a big office be so small?" And I'm wondering as well as you know Donald Trump and have studied him, does he get affected by those comments, or can he compartmentalize and dismiss them as that's a Democrat, who cares? What when somebody says that he's acting small, or Jeff Flake comments about him in an open mic, then what happens with President Trump?
[D'antonio:] Well, he sees a dramatic opportunity. This is another enemy for him to go up against. It's actually something that serves him very well. The president is not put off by this. I think for people to think that he stews over a poke at him from Adam Schiff is incorrect. If it were someone in his own party, a senator who might vote against a tax bill, then I think he might get his back up. But this is something he will dismiss, or he'll call Schiff some crazy name. The world will be entertained, and some people will be aghast and think, well, what is going on in Washington. But we're now accustomed to this. This is the routine. So it's useful for him dramatically and keeps our minds off the serious business. You know, this is a problem, though, I think for his legislative agenda. The reason that "Flakey" and Corker and everybody else is lining up against him is they actually oppose his policies, and he's not doing anything to court them.
[Cuomo:] "Flakey." See, it sticks. One thing is for sure. We'll know if the president doesn't like something that is said about him because he will respond. That's what he does. Mr. D'Antonio, Miss Stoddard, thank you very much, as always. So LaVar Ball made a good play here. If what you want is attention, bring so many of you now have heard his name. You're going to be Googling him. So what was in this for him? Was this really about his son? Did he just make a good choice in terms of baiting the president and winning? Let's get his take. He's going to join us tonight on CNN Tonight. I'm filling in for Don Lemon. So at 10:00 p.m. eastern you'll hear from LaVar Ball why he decided to go at the most powerful man in the world.
[Camerota:] And we will recap for you tomorrow morning, as well. Can't wait.
[Cuomo:] Indeed. Why sleep, when I can be here with you?
[Camerota:] Great point.
[Cuomo:] Meanwhile, we do have breaking news for you. Charles Manson has died. The cult leader masterminded the gruesome murders of seven people in Los Angeles during the summer of 1969. CNN's Stephanie Elam is live in Los Angeles with these breaking details. Stephanie?
[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Alisyn. Those gruesome murders that were carried out, murdering seven people that left the nation horrified, well, the man behind it has now died of natural causes.
[Vincent Bugliosi, Manson Trial Prosecutor:] Manson may be the most famous, notorious mass murderer ever.
[Elam:] The summer of '69 was marred by gruesome murders that shook the nation. Five people killed at the home of Hollywood star, Sharon Tate, and another couple murdered the following night. Manson was the mastermind behind the brutal killings, the leader of the clan that carried out the unthinkable. He was convicted of conspiracy and murder in 1971 and infamously went down in history.
[Charles Manson:] I do a lot of things on the world that you guys don't see.
[Elam:] Manson was born in Cincinnati in 1934 to a single teenage mother.
[Manson:] She got out of my life early. I spent the best part of my life in boy schools, prisons, and reform schools because I had nobody.
[Elam:] After marrying twice and spending half his life in prison, 32- year-old Manson made his way to Berkeley in 1967. He established himself as a guru in the summer of love, and was quickly sharing a home with 18 women.
[Jeff Guinn, Author, "manson, The Life And Times Of Charles Manson":] You get these kids, these children, coming into Haight-Ashbury, and here is Charlie Manson saying how much he loves them and he wants to take care of them. He took full advantage.
[Elam:] Manson's passion for music translated into an obsession with the Beatles' 1968 song, "Helter-Skelter."
[Bugliosi:] To Manson it meant that the Beatles wanted them to have a worldwide revolution, blacks against whites.
[Elam:] Aiming to launch the fabricated war, Manson directed his disillusioned clan to kill. On August 9th, 1969, four followers invaded the Hollywood Hills home of actress Sharon Tate where they massacred five people. The 26-year-old starlet was eight and a half months pregnant. The next night the clan brutally murdered Los Angeles couple Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. At both homes they left behind shocking murder scenes.
[Bugliosi:] When those words "Helter-Skelter" were found printed in blood at the murder scene that was tantamount to Manson's fingerprints being found at the murder scene.
[Elam:] After evidence in the cases mounted and a high-profile trial, Manson and four followers were convicted of nine murders and sentenced to death in 1971, which was downgraded to life in prison when California banned the death penalty. And it turned out to be nine life term sentences that Manson was serving out here in California. And as far as trying to get out of jail, he did try to do that. He tried to get parole and it was denied 12 times, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Stephanie, thank you very much. Appreciate the reporting on this. All right, so I don't know if you saw it this morning, but don't worry. We got you covered. What do you do with 25 years of sports history and amazing memories in the Georgia Dome? You blow them up. Wait for it. Wait for it. This was all planned. Don't worry about that. This was about making room for more development.
[Camerota:] That's good. Someone didn't just accidentally cause that. That would have been really a problem.
[Cuomo:] Lord knows the things we have going on in the world, but this was planned. The Georgia Dome hosted Super Bowls, the Olympics, the NCAAs. It was huge. It's been replaced by the Mercedes-Benz Stadium up next door. The new stadium is home to the NFL's Atlanta Falcons and Major League soccer's, Atlanta United. But the George Dome and all those memories up in a puff of smoke.
[Camerota:] I like the sentimentality that you're going for here. I really do.
[Cuomo:] You make fun of me more and more.
[Camerota:] I too am nostalgic. I don't like getting rid of 25 years of memories, but who doesn't like a good implosion in the morning.
[Cuomo:] You seem to be in conflict.
[Camerota:] I am in conflict. That is true. Meanwhile, Jared Kushner's attorney disputing claims that his client has not been up front about Russia contacts. He accuses senators of playing gotcha games, next.

[Brian Stelter, Cnn:] Hey, I'm Brian Stelter. It's time for RELIABLE SOURCES, our weekly look at the story behind the story, of how the media really works, how the news gets made and how all of us can make it better. This hour, a blockbuster story from "The New York Times", lots of reactions to these headlines about Rod Rosenstein. We'll get into the sourcing and the motives and all of it. Plus, Sean Hannity, the president's favorite interviewer, but at this point, I think really more co-host? And later, the death of the White House daily briefing. Yes, there really isn't a daily briefing anymore. What's the press corps doing to get it back? But, first, reading now from the front page of the "New York Times." The facts are still in dispute about a bitter he saidshe said case. A Supreme Court confirmation drama unfolding but lawmakers are being accused of a lack of sensitivity and some prominent politicians are saying, hey, what's the rush? We need a little more time to follow up on the accusations and allegations. All of this playing out in Washington, a city where men have always made the rules and the Senate remains an overwhelmingly male club. This case is sending what one expert called an electric current of anger through women and a greater conviction that women must be represented in high places in greater numbers. All of that from "The New York Times" from the fall of 1991, days before another climactic Senate confirmation hearing. The title of the story, by the way, was my Maureen Dowd. The title that day says the Senate and sexism. It was all about concerns that the mostly male club was mishandling Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas. Now, 27 years later, some of the same men in the same club are in charge of a sequel of sorts. Dowd, now writing for the opinion pages, says in this morning's "New York Times" that it's unnerving to think how far women have come to find ourselves dragged back to the same place. It may be tempting to think that a lot has changed since this day, since Anita Hill sat down to testify and certainly some things have. But America seems even more divided along gender and partisan lines and nowadays, the media environment is even more complicated, even more of a mess. Viewers are hearing about the same set of allegations but reacting to them in very different ways and keep in mind as we head into what could be a very consequential week for the United States, Judge Brett Kavanaugh was supposed to be on his way to confirmation right now. But "The Washington Post" interview with Christine Blasey Ford may have changed all that. She went into detail in a story published one week ago today about the night she says Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. But much of the account is in dispute and for a week now, there has been story after story, rampant speculation about what is going to happen next, about whether she will testify and in what way and in what form. At the moment, there is a tentative agreement for a Thursday hearing. Let's talk about the media's role in this, what it was back then in 1991 and what it is today with an all-star panel here to help break this down is Jill Abramson, former executive editor and managing editor of the "New York Times", also the co-author of "The Strange Justice", this is the book about the Clarence Thomas, Anita Hill hearings that had so much vital information afterwards. Also here with me, Charles Blow, a columnist for "The New York Times" and a CNN commentator who wrote, "Fire Shut Up in my Bones", a memoir which chronicles the abuse he suffered as a child. And here with me as well, Rachel Sklar, the writer and founder of TheLi.st, a network for professional women. Great to have you all here. I'd like to start by going back in time, back to the Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas hearing. Jill, your book afterwards reveal what really was going on behind the scenes. Do you look at this and see a sequel? Do down see parallels today?
[Jill Abramson, Co-author, "strange Justice: The Selling Of Clarence Thomas":] I see tremendous parallels. I was in the hearing room back in 1991. In fact, sitting directly across from Maureen Dowd, who was covering the hearings for "The New York Times" and this has so many eerie parallels, down to the fact that even though now we think we're having a hearing Thursday, that's no time to really get to the bottom of the facts in this case. To report "Strange Justice", the book that Jane Mayer and I co-wrote which had, you know, a large amount of new evidence showing that Anita Hill absolutely told the truth when she testified and that Clarence Thomas' categorical denial amounted to perjury. But to put that case together meticulously and find all the people who knew exactly what happened back then was difficult and took time and
[Stelter:] Years, right, Jill? Years?
[Abramson:] Took us almost three years.
[Stelter:] Right, right.
[Abramson:] So, you know? And just the parallels where Anita Hill's story leaked out to the press.
[Stelter:] Right, right.
[Abramson:] She had signed a sworn avid but wanted to keep her identity confidential in the beginning, the same thing for Dr. Blasey Ford. So, you know, how their stories leaked out in the media similar what is completely different is there is no Fox back then and no social media back then, both of which have served to, you know, intensify people's emotions about this and incited some of the regrettable reaction to Dr. Blasey Ford so far.
[Stelter:] And Hill wrote a piece, an op-ed this week, describing what Ford makes. We can put part on screen. She says the difficulty she points out the difficulty of testifying on national television about sexual assault. You know, I just want to think about what that had to have been like for Hill and what it could be like for Ford. Hill also points out in this piece, Ford may have encouraging letters, support from friends but she cannot match the organized support that Judge Kavanaugh has. So, Anita Hill inject you know, her voice being really important at this moment even though decades have passed. It's interesting to see that.
[Abramson:] It's fascinating. And Anita Hill continued to speak out over the years on behalf of younger women and, you know, I think it's true that Judge Kavanaugh has tremendous organized support but what I've been struck by is the anger of women who I've heard from and like are all over social media right now that this has touched a nerve. Every woman in America has a similar experience from their teenage years, that they haven't thought about. It was traumatic. They've tried to bury it and this is just like lit a match for them.
[Stelter:] And with that in mind, the difference between
[Abramson:] If they feel unheard at the end of these hearings, I think there are going to be big political consequences just like there were after 1991 when the Senate rushed to confirm Clarence Thomas after the Anita Hill hearings. There was anger among women and then in '92, the election of six new women senators and the so-called Year of the Woman.
[Stelter:] The difference this time is the midterms are just or that election is just a few weeks away. In 1991, a year later, we had the '92 election. Now, we're what, 51 days away from the midterms.
[Abramson:] Right, everything happens in warped speed.
[Stelter:] And I think it does make this feel even more intense, even more consequential. Rachel, isn't this sort of a strange way what we're experiencing right now in this debate about gender and about power and about how to handle allegations of assault feels like the end of two years of discussion that started with President Trump and the allegations against him during the campaign.
[Rachel Sklar, Writer And Founder, Theli.st:] There is no question that he's certainly a lightning rod in all of this. The why I didn't report hashtag flared up directly in response to Donald Trump grope- plaining if I may what Christine Blasey Ford truly would have done had she really experienced this. She would have filed a report or her loving parents would have. And many people piped up and, myself included, saying that, guess what? This happens and you don't tell your parents and you don't file a report because of a variety of reasons which again and again women have to take to social media and layout their personal stories in the hopes that maybe, just maybe the tide will turn and they will be believed.
[Stelter:] This is the hashtag why I didn't report, which erupted on Friday after we can put the president's tweet on screen where he really started to cast doubt in a big way on Ford's claims.
[Sklar:] But that's what he does, deny, deny, deny. And this happened with the hashtag not okay after the "Access Hollywood" tape came out that we al know what he said. Am I allowed to say it?
[Stelter:] You're on cable.
[Sklar:] OK. All right. He said that he talked about grabbing women by the pussy, and when you're a star, they let you do it. I mean and then women came forward with credible allegations against him of sexual assault.
[Stelter:] And I appreciate you saying, am I allowed to say this. By bringing up the words, the specific words seems like you're trying to remind people
[Sklar:] It's not my word.
[Stelter:] because I think there is a numbness or it is possible to sort of for some people to forget what we learned during the campaign.
[Sklar:] Look, anybody whose been grabbed there, sorry to use that language, it's not my language but if that's happened to you, you don't forget it.
[Stelter:] Right, not going to forget. Interestingly, the why I didn't report hashtag that takes off on Friday, in the wake of the president's tweet. Rain is the advocacy group that tries to help people who have suffered sexual assault. They have a national hotline number, 1800-656-4673. A spokeswoman for Rain just said to me, we've had a 42 percent uptick in calls since Friday, 42 percent uptick in calls to that hotline. So, it's clear there, Charles, that there could be that people are paying attention. There is an awareness of the conversation and the ability for folks to share on social media their own accounts can make a difference. It might be helping some folks to choose to call the hot line and seek help.
[Charles Blow, Columnist, The New York Times:] The underreporting of childhood sexual abuse, particular child sexual abuse, I want to make sure that I keep going back to the fact that this is a child. She was 15 years old. And when children are abused, they have a different sense of agency than even adults. Even there is underreporting even for adults, but for children in particularly, it's an acute problem because they don't know you know, you're trapped. You go to the school you go to. You can't make your parents get up and move. Maybe they don't have the option to move you to a different school. Maybe this is a person who's in your family, maybe this is a family acquaintance, all those things are happening and that child is forced to make a decision about, do I disrupt the school? Do I disrupt the family relationships? Do I disrupt what my parents believe is a happy kind of existence for me? And those are big questions for a child to have to comprehend. At 15 years old, she's coming out of fresh man year. We've all seen these guys, whether you call them hound dogs. There were all kinds of names for them, the guys that want to reset their reputation by preying on the freshman who come into school, right? That is a real thing that occurs all the time. There are a lot of different ways in which older children prey on younger children. I try to remind people all the time about the statistics around childhood sexual abuse. The number one age that has the most aggressive is not an adult. It's a 14-year-old boy. We have to stop thinking about this type of abuse as to catch a predator. You know, that television show where some grown 40-year-old man shows up with beer and condoms. That's not really the way it happens. It's very often an older child preying on a younger child, and that is what is happening here, and I really think that the media makes a mistake when they allow people to come on air and say, well, these were just two drunk teenagers as if there is not a huge developmental difference between a freshman and senior. I mean, I have three kids. It's like different human beings. They have a freshman and then almost an adult.
[Stelter:] But we are going to hear that line, we're going to hear that boys will be boys. I'm cringing thinking we'll hear that a lot in the next four days.
[Sklar:] Why are we sending these messaging? It's not like these 15- year-old girls, 17-year-old boys aren't watching TV, aren't well, actually maybe they're not watching TV, but they're certainly getting it through some form on their phone. I mean, why are we sending them these messages? There should be a category no. Like enough is enough. This is terrible. And it is shocking to me. No. It is still shocking not surprising, but shocking that the leadership in this nation, the leadership on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and some of whom were on the committee
[Abramson:] Charles Grassley.
[Sklar:] Grassley and Hatch, their first reaction still is to minimize, you know, the survivor's story and their testimony and to center the person who's being accused, I mean, the concern being for Brett Kavanaugh, oh, my goodness, how is this affecting him? Is this going to, quoteunquote, ruin his life? How is not getting a Supreme Court appointment a life ruiner? This is I mean, this is the point of a confirmation hearing is to assess fitness for this lifetime appointment and presumably anybody who's going to be casting a vote is going to be doing so with an open mind.
[Abramson:] I think that we have to stop and think just for a minute as we contemplate what is going to happen on Thursday, just the courage that it takes in this media environment for Dr. Ford to walk into that hearing room, sit down and tell her story because
[Stelter:] Yes, play that out for me.
[Abramson:] sitting there back in '91, you know, it's almost too painful for me now to watch the beginning of the '91 hearings on TV. It's been replaying all week because I know what's in store for Anita Hill while watching that. And yes, I think the senators and especially the all male senators on the Republican side may have learned some lessons. But still, someone who is unschooled in the ways of Washington who hasn't led a public life until now, it is just unutterably, difficult, painful, et cetera.
[Stelter:] Yes, consider how there is only a couple photos of her that we've seen in the past week.
[Abramson:] Right.
[Stelter:] A week full of coverage, we've barely seen a photo of her. This is not a public person with lots of Instagrams we can all look at.
[Abramson:] That's true, and so far, and I want to give a shout-out to "The Washington Post" who she came forward to with her identity to first last Sunday and I thought they did a very sensitive and thorough job in the first story about her.
[Stelter:] Yes, and they have been able to follow up with her since. So far, "The Post" is the only outlet that she seems to be talking with.
[Abramson:] It's interesting, she called them first. She called their tip line first and one assumes that in all of the ensuing months, they contacted her but they respected her desire to remain confidential.
[Sklar:] This is reporting. This is good reporting and investigations that take time. Jill said that, you know, like a meticulous investigation takes three years. There is no effort to even have a slap-dash investigation.
[Stelter:] Charles, final word about how the press needs to treat the next few days?
[Blow:] Like Jill said, it's a different media environment. There was no Fox. There was no MSNBC. There was no Internet. No internet like we have now to speak of, and so, that's a very different thing. I think I would like to raise one point. There are a lot of ways in which this is similar. There are some big ways in which it is very different. We remember that Clarence Thomas emerged from those hearings incredibly popular. I mean, like 62 percent wanted to confirm him after Anita Hill gave her testimony and part of that was because of the spectacle of this black men and all these white guys. And if you recall 1991, this was a few months after the Rodney King beating, which was probably kind of Black Lives Matter citizen video showing on national television. And so in the wake of this guy on the ground being beaten by all these white officers comes this hearing in which this black man sits is being questioned by this panel of white guys, and that, whatever black people might have thought about it, the image of that was a circle the wagon kind of moment that did not give kind of full airing to Anita's very credible account, but because of the racially charged climate, it changed the dynamic of how the hearings played out in America.
[Stelter:] And this time, with the midterms right around the corner, this is primarily about gender and about what was already the year of the women coming to vote and running her office super charged on even higher level now. To our panel, thank you so much for being here. Quick break and then a look at some of the smears, the overflow of misinformation that's been coming out about Ford. This is something that we've been seeing for a week now and these lies have to be taken head on. We'll get into that in just a moment.

[Newton:] Investigators from Britain's data watchdog agency have entered the offices of Cambridge Analytica earlier Friday, a high court judge issued a search warrant for the company. Cnn senior investigative correspondent Drew Griffin joins us now from London. Drew, good to have you there right now. You know, there's a lot of confusion because sometime earlier in the week, Facebook said they were going to try and do this audit and then the government basically said hold up, we want to have a look inside first.
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Senior Investigative Correspondent:] Yes, Facebook actually had investigators at the headquarters of Cambridge Analytica, which is the company in question. But those investigators hired by Facebook were told to stand down until the information commissioner's office could enact their search warrant. They're executing that search warrant as we speak, Paula, and trying to determine at the heart of this is this Facebook data and the misuse or alleged misuse of it. Whether that may have been illegally acquired and used for Cambridge Analytica in its many different pursuits and political operations. So that investigation continues both here in the U.K. and several investigations continue in the United States involving this one firm.
[Newton:] You know, Drew, there's still a lot of people saying that, look, what Facebook did was a breach of trust, but was it illegal? The laws are going to be different on one side of the pond as there are on the other. It seems that here, the U.K. really wants to see as if their laws were broken, and yet this is several years now, none of this was done when Facebook first learned of this breach.
[Griffin:] It's absolutely right because nobody knew if you believe Facebook story that the information was being used in this way that violated company rules. Facebook opened up its data files to a researcher and according to Facebook or Facebook story, is that researcher did not use it for research but set up his own company and began selling the personal information, the personal data on upwards of 50 million Facebook users to companies particularly Cambridge Analytica was then developed as psychological mapping, which was able to target voters in the United States. But not only in the United States, perhaps here in the U.K., in Africa, in South and Central America, pretty much all over the world. And what's been described to me, Paula, is kind of a targeted psychological operations being used in the political field.
[Newton:] And again, a bit startling to think that yes, that might have happened, yes, in some countries including the United States, it might not even have been illegal. Now, I know, Drew, this is difficult to parse, but I know if somebody anybody can do it, you can. There also alarmingly could be some connections to all of these all of these Russia investigations that they're going through going through. I mean, there are Russians involved here and Russian institutions. What's interesting, Paula, is that these two groups, Cambridge Analytica and its political works and what the Russians were doing according to U.S. special prosecutor Robert Muller seem to be the same tactic. Fake news to be infiltrated among social networks to try to divide and sow unrest among a populace. There is no direct connection yet between the two companies countries, entities, but certainly many people are looking for that. These kind of psychological operations are very much prevalent in warfare. These are weapons of war and what Cambridge Analytica is accused of doing now is taking this mind operation, the psychological weapon of war and applying it to regular, democratic elections which startles many people and it's very interesting, that it is also in line with the kinds of activities that we now believe took place in Russia. Yes, this is still going to take a lot more investigations, our Drew Griffin there following this investigations from London now, appreciate your update, Drew. Now, soaking a battle of the tech billionaire, as Elon Musk has deleted the Tesla and Space X Facebook pages, its part of a growing corporate backlash against Facebook and CEO Mark Zuckerberg after the data scandal that's consuming the social network. Never short on snuck, Musk sent a tweet asking what's Facebook? When folks tweeted back and asked him to take his pages down, they were gone within minutes. Other companies are also hitting Facebook where it hurts. Mozilla, the maker of Firefox says it's going to stop advertising on Facebook until it quote, "takes stronger action and how it shares customer data." And Sonos, the smart speaker company is pulling ads from all of big tech, that's Facebook, Instagram, Google and Twitter. The company says it will go dark for one week, starting Monday. And Joy Howard is the Chief Marketing Officer at Sonos and she joins me here now in studio, thank you so much. Can you explain the thinking behind these actions and more importantly, what you hope to gain from this?
[Joy Howard, Chief Marketing Officer, Sonos:] Yes, well, we believe that this Cambridge Analytica scandal raises important questions about whether big tech is doing enough to balance its own interests with its biggest responsibility which is safeguarding your privacy. It's also an important moment for brands like us to reflect on the role that we play in all of this. And for us, it's an important moment to elevate the voices of activists, academics and consumer rights groups, civil society groups who are working to defend consumer rights.
[Newton:] Now you're taking the money that you place on those ads and giving it to charity as well for a week. I think some people might say, look, Joy, it's a good marketing stunt, but at the end of the day it's a stunt because they might even look to you as a speaker company and say, hey, how do we know what that speaker is even doing in our household at this point in time? Is it a reflection in general for all of tech?
[Joy:] It's a reflection for all of tech for sure, and safeguarding your privacy is a critical importance to anyone who depends on the internet for their business. Facebook, Google, they're important partners to us and they're only as valuable to us and to you and to everyone as our trust in them is. So, we feel like you know, this is something that matters a lot to us, we've been working with our NGO partner Access for some time now, and elevating their voices and elevating the voices of activists felt like the right thing to do right now.
[Newton:] And is this a point of inclusion in the company to say that we are going to take a critical view at our options as well.
[Howard:] Absolutely, it's a moment to press pause for everyone to stop and reflect on what it means to work together and how we can partner to create a better social platform for each other.
[Newton:] What will determine whether or not it will last longer than a week?
[Howard:] I'd have to you know, we heard from Facebook right away today -
[Newton:] Oh, you did?
[Howard:] Of course we did
[Newton:] And what did they say?
[Howard:] They said they take it very seriously just like we do. And so I think you know, ultimately, the question is do companies like ours have a choice other than Facebook and Google? So more than 70 percent of the ad dollars and some of the markets are working as far higher than that or spent on these platforms. It's basically a duopoly, and so for companies like us who really now have no choice right now to read to our customers entering these platforms.
[Newton:] When they spoke to you, did they say, please don't do this or don't extend it or just what did they say?
[Howard:] I mean, they value our partnership and we value our partnership with them. And again the only reason we're working with partners is to make each other better. So I think what they're saying is, we it's critically important to us, to Google and Facebook and also the Sonos, that people trust the interactions that they're having on our platforms are safe and secured.
[Newton:] Do you think this is something more than a few weeks I heard some people complaining that, look, this is only going to last a few weeks and then we're all going to forget about it. Or is it a real reflection point for your kind of industry but also of course places like Google, Facebook and Twitter?
[Howard:] Well, we're absolutely in this for the long haul, we've been committed, you know, always to privacy for our consumers and we've worked increasingly over the last years, so with NGOs who care about defending your digital rights because we think it's important that they'd be protected.
[Newton:] What things have you guys done to audit your own behavior though? Because there are some concerns where you even speak
[Howard:] Yes, well, we take every step that we can, and safeguarding your privacy is of critical importance to us. We've also recently entered the smart speaker space as you referenced before. And so one of the features of our product that really matters to us is that we've hard-wired the microphones on our speakers. So if you want to turn the microphone off, you can clearly press the button that can't be hard just it's hardwired to the microphone and you can simply turn it off. That's an example of the step that we're taking to make sure that you feel like you can trust us and that you know that when you want to turn the microphones off in your house, you can do it.
[Newton:] But to be clear, you are examining other steps as well.
[Howard:] Absolutely, we're going to continue to look at everything that we can do to safeguard your privacy.
[Newton:] And from your point of view, what have we learned in the last week about
[Howard:] I mean, I think the most important thing that we've learned is that people will interact on these platforms with each other and with our brand only if they trust them. And so once big tech loses our trust, its value to us as human beings and to us as business partners is very limited. And that if we've learned anything, it stopped.
[Newton:] OK, but we'll see how things change going forward, thanks so much for being here
[Howard:] Yes, thank you for having me, thanks a lot
[Newton:] Really appreciate it. Now buying a pint of your favorite wine sounds rather vulgar these days, but after Britain leaves the EU, you'll be able to do just that. We'll pass the buck on that story in just a minute.

[Allen:] Pope Francis is about to begin a historic trip to the United Arab Emirates, the first time a Roman Catholic pope has ever visited the Arabian Peninsula.
[Howell:] It is historic. The Vatican wants more freedom for the region's Christians and this will be a chance to discuss that with Muslim leaders. Our Becky Anderson has more now from Abu Dhabi.
[Becky Anderson, Cnn Host:] A message to the faithful ahead of his historic trip to the Arabian Peninsula, the birthplace of Islam and home of some of its holiest sites attracting millions of pilgrims each year. The Gulf also has a Christian past.
[Peter Hellyer, Uae Historian And Writer:] We have evidence of Christianity in Eastern Arabia, including the UAE and Oman, certainly well into the 9th and 9th centuries
[A.d. Anderson:] Abu Dhabi itself is home to the ruins of an ancient monastery built around 600 A.D., fragments of which can be found at the Louvre Abu Dhabi.
[Hellyer:] It was founded by a denomination called The Church of the East, which is one of the eastern churches, that still survives. So the visit by the pope actually has a local resonance in that there is a tradition here of Christianity that is still related today to the Catholic Church.
[Anderson:] Hellyer says history suggests that local followers of that church converted to Islam but it didn't mark the end of the Christian presence on the Arabian Peninsula. While Islam is the official religion of the Gulf States and leaving Islam is illegal, in the UAE alone, it is believed there are over 1 million Christians, the majority of whom are Catholic migrant workers.
[Hellyer:] You can't be a trading nation on the shores of a great maritime trade route without learning to develop some kind of tolerance and understanding and acceptance.
[Anderson:] A champion of interfaith dialogue, Pope Francis will meet with the grand imam of the Egypt's al-Azhar mosque in Abu Dhabi during his trip, a cleric regarded as the highest authority in Sunni Islam.
[Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, Professor Of Political Science:] UAE is already a role model of sorts. It's the trendsetter for the whole region. Whatever the UAE does, others follow.
[Anderson:] The UAE is using this visit to shine a spotlight on its carefully cultivated image of tolerance on a world stage while maintaining a more muscular foreign policy. UAE's version of tolerance stands in contrast to neighboring Saudi Arabia, where churches are illegal and non-Muslims can't worship in public.
[Abdulla:] And tolerance these days are in short supply, not only in this very troubled region but all over the world. It's in short supply in Europe, in America, wherever you go. So the UAE wants to be a leading global force for tolerance. And I think that is the kind of legacy that we are hoping that the pope's visit will leave us.
[Anderson:] Becky Anderson, CNN, Abu Dhabi.
[Allen:] The day's top stories are just ahead. Thanks for watching this hour. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] I'm George Howell. More news right after the break.

[Anderson:] Welcome back. You're watching CNN's the world with me, Becky Anderson. It's 19 minutes past 7:00, in the UAE we're broadcasting from our Middle East hub for you. In Britain authorities are still looking at various scenarios for the poisoning of a couple in Amesbury, in the southwest. It isn't clear whether the chemical Novichok made them critically ill came from the same batch that poisoned ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in a nearby town in March. Russia has been widely blamed for that Skripal attack and still denies it. Today the Kremlin called on the U.K. to, quote, "stop playing games with poisonous chemicals." So what exactly is Novichok and how long can it stay deadly? Hamish de Bretton-Gordon was commander of the British Chemical and Biological Counterterrorism Forces, joins us now today via Skype. What do you make of this news, sir?
[Hamish De Bretton-gordon, Securebio Limited:] First of all, the Novichok that is involved, this is a very, very toxic nerve agent, was used in a potential attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal four months ago. It would appear that a residue or debris from that attack has reappeared in Salisbury in the last three or four days and the two people who are seriously in hospital have come into contact with it. It is a very difficult-to-detect nerve age and it's very persistent. And that is the challenge facing the police and the emergency services in Salisbury and Amesbury at the moment.
[Anderson:] There are no connections, as of yet, as far as we understand, between the Skripals and this couple. So what would be the most plausible working assumption at this point?
[Bretton-gordon:] I think you're right there. This couple do not seem to be a couple who would be assassinated by the Russians or any other state. And it does appear to be very bad luck, in the wrong place at the wrong time. I think the best assumption is that the assailants or assailant who attacked Colonel Skripal, when they fled the scene, fled the area, discarded some, probably a syringe or a container that held the Novichok or precursors required to mix the Novichok and probably hoped that they would chuck them in the Avon River that runs alongside the Queen Elizabeth Gardens and it would be out to sea before anybody knew about it. Now that didn't happen and that container, I think, appears to have reappeared and, in some form or other, the couple have been in contact with it. And that has poisoned them quite severely.
[Anderson:] Let's just remind our viewers of a little more about Novichok. It is even more sophisticated and dangerous than sarin, as I understand it. The Soviet Union developing it in a secret program during the Cold War. And it has no color, as you rightly pointed out, odor or taste, which makes it easy to transport. Developed by the Russians to overmatch the U.K., U.S. and NATO military capabilities to defend against it. And as we've seen, it's a very potent weapon and perhaps, as you have pointed out, the Russians feel they have a slight advantage with this. I mean, that's certainly what you have said in the past. Just fill us in a little bit more.
[Bretton-gordon:] Well, I think if we look at chemical weapons strategically, I think because red lines have been missed, particular with a major attack in Syria in 2013, people have thought that chemical weapons are now normalized and fair game. Now the Russians have not only during the Soviet Union period but, recently, we understand, have been developing these Novichoks, which overmatch NATO's defensive capabilities. We know that NATO vastly overmatches the Russians conventionally. But for these asymmetric weapons, we don't. So I think it's not just it's a huge concern that the Russians feel happy to use these chemical weapons on the soil of a NATO country. But if there is an East-West standoff and the Cold War develops any further, this is something that they have an advantage over us.
[Anderson:] Hamish, the chief medical officer here in the U.K. has said that the threat to the population of Salisbury is low. Authorities have said there isn't a wider public health issue here. But clearly, understandably, people are in the area, very concerned. Should they be?
[Bretton-gordon:] No, I don't think they should be. I do agree with the chief medical officer, the threat, the wider threat is low. I think that probably less than a quarter of an eggcup of Novichok was used in the Skripal attack. And I think, from what was recovered on the door handle and probably what was recovered the other day from the Queen Elizabeth Gardens, that is pretty much all of it. However, there might still be, you know, molecules left around. The challenge is it's very difficult to detect. And that is the problem that the authorities are having. And I think also, the messaging has not been great from the British government. Our experience in Syria with the civilians that we advise there about chemical attack, we tell them every bit of information we can and they act accordingly. In this case, the government has told people what to do but not necessarily why they're doing it. And I think that's created uncertainty. But I live very close to Salisbury and I have absolutely no concerns about going anywhere at the moment. I think the threat is over. The investigation must go forward and, hopefully, these two people will be will be cured in Salisbury of this desperately dangerous toxic substance.
[Anderson:] Sounds like they were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. But we'll learn more as the days go on, I assume. Hamish de Bretton- Gordon, thank you for insight tonight.
[Bretton-gordon:] Thank you.
[Anderson:] Well, just ahead, is Trump causing more chaos in an already volatile oil market? That's up next.

[Lemon:] Live pictures now from the senate floor and Senators are now speaking and they're getting ready to vote. It should happen about top of the hour. We expect a vote on the skinny repeal bill. The debate underway now, vote expected soon. There's Mike Enzi speaking. It's a last-stitch effort to roll back Obamacare.
[Stephen Moore, Senior Economic Analyst, Cnn:] Well it is very misleading Don, because really what this bill essentially does, the skinny bill gets rid of the requirement that people buy in Obamacare policy. The CBO say 16 million people are going to lose their insurance that is not actually what is happening here. Its 16 million people who don't want the insurance and basically saying if is if you don't force theme buy it, they won't buy it, how does it help someone to buy something that they don't want.
[Neera Tanden, President Of The Progressive Center For American Progress And A Former Adviser To Hillary Clinton:] Actually that is inaccurate. What actually happens when you fill the individual mandate is that you write the costs rise. There are people young and healthy who get insurance only when they get sick, because they will used the insurance as a costs rise as I have, for Steven every Republican has said they want to lower premiums and CBO just reported that it will increase premiums by 20 percent and that is one of the reasons why people lose coverage, because they'll be priced out of the market. I know insurance I know how it's really complicate and it's a little weird to do this, have a bill out and vote on it two hours later but I do think we should have facts and CBO did have that.
[Moore:] It doesn't make any sense to say people are being hurt but when you forced to buy something they don't want, by the way that they can't afford. That is the whole point of the affordable care act. People can't afford the insurance, so they are paying the penalty rather than having the insurance because it is so expensive.
[Tanden:] if they are paying the penalty then people don't lose coverage, right? You were raising the costs, premiums will go up and don't listen to me about the skinny bill, listen on the words of Lindsey Graham. He called it a disaster just a few hours ago. Republican after Republican today has said this bill is a disaster, it is terrible, they don't let the premiums increases, they don't like any element on his bill and yet they are going to vote for it. That is what people hate about politics and that is what happening in this process. And people lose coverage and raise prices.
[Moore:] Look you are right. But this is not the solution, the skinny bill. The solution is to give people wide range of choices to do something like the Cruz amendment, were basically people want Obamacare they can have it, but to give people an offer where they can buy insurance plan. For young people Don, they don't have to buy Obamacare one thing, they don't have to buy Obamacare package, and they could buy insurance that cost half as much. Why are we forcing young people to buy insurance that actually -?
[Lemon:] I want to ask you. So you're saying this isn't the bill they wanted to pass. What if he doesn't do it? What if he doesn't do it? We're screwed. Sorry, what gives him confidence that this bill is not going to become the law just because Paul Ryan said it is not going to become a law?
[Moore:] Well I think these Senators are going to need some kind of insurance and Republican can't break their word to the Senators, I just it would be you know I mean but here is the point.
[Tanden:] they have broken their word all throughout the process. I am sorry.
[Lemon:] This are politician saying, give you my word. Come on.
[Moore:] Look, I mean this is the deal the senate has made with the house. The senate will pass some bill hopefully we will see in an hour whether they pass this, if they do, they go to a conference and start writing a new law that will be some kind of compromise. This is all basically what to get 50 votes in the United States senate.
[Lemon:] it wasn't enough for him.
[Moore:] McCain?
[Lemon:] Yes, McCain said it wasn't Paul Ryan statement of promises, not enough for him he said.
[Moore:] if it is not enough for him then we got a big problem. I don't see how you passed us without John McCain's vote. Then you are back in square one.
[Lemon:] This is the vice President Mike Pence he arrive at the senate a short time ago. Greeted by protesters, we'll listen. Again, he is been breaking a tie but they needed a 5050 tie to move on earlier in the week, the Vice President cast the vote to do that. I just wanted to point that out since you said there was a big problem I don't have, John McCain and one other person doesn't vote for it. It is over.
[Tanden:] Look, john McCain said that he was concerned about premiums in Arizona. We know premiums will go up. She did not come to congress to her people [inaudible] coverage for 15 million people and premiums will rise by 20 percent in her state. Senator, after senator after senator under the Republican side has said raising premiums is what they are opposed to. They want to vote for a bill that lowers premiums. They will go on record each and every one of them. The question is are these people going to vote for the American people or the needs of Mike Pence and Donald Trump, so far each and every one of them are putting their partisan politics first.
[Moore:] Here is what Republican had completely lost about this. What you describe is what's happening with Obamacare. The premiums have doubles. The reason we are having this whole debate about repealing Obamacare is because the premiums had doubled people can't afford the coverage and you got the situation where 40 you know 33 percent of counties either have zero or one insurance company, next year that is going to be 40 percent. It's getting worse and worse it is like the titanic.
[Tanden:] You know what, this actually American people that is why the affordable care act is now twice to three times as popular as these proposals, that is why you can't get it happening.
[Moore:] Why did Hillary Clinton lose the election then?
[Lemon:] They'll be able to figure this out during conference if they have not been able to come to an agreement thus far.
[Tanden:] Seven months, seven years.
[Moore:] First of all, if Obamacare was so popular, you know I mean look the election in November was essentially a [inaudible]. That is a good question, Don. I can't defend the Republicans' behavior here. They should have this fixed within the first two weeks when they came in the office. They should have voted to repeal Obamacare which is what every single Republican voted for, who ran for congress and was elected. Someday they would vote to repeal Obamacare and basically they don't get this done, they've lied to the American people and the voters.
[Lemon:] I need to stop you guys, I am sorry, standby, I want to get to Ryan Nobles on Capitol Hill, our reporter there, Ryan, has a new information. What can you tell us?
[Ryan Nobles, Washingon Correspondent, Cnn:] Yeah, so as you saw there the vice President Mike Pence has arrived here on Capitol Hill. All that tells us Don is that the voters is going to be close. The Republicans definitely have the 50 votes they need. It shows us they're concerned that there might be a situation where there could be a tie and you played the video of when he arrived and we have to stay we haven't pointed this out much tonight. There has been a very active group of protesters since about 6:00 tonight. And you can hear them. They were yelling a combination of plain all old shame, they also yelled on shame on you and they also yelled kill the bill and there is no doubt that he heard that as he was walking into the Capitol today. But tonight I should say in preparations to cast potentially what would be the tie breaking vote to pass this bill.
[Lemon:] I want the viewer to listen to this, I will come back to you, and can we listen to what is happening outside the Capitol now.
[Sen Al Franken,  Minnesota:] And basically people with preexisting conditions.
[Lemon:] This is Senator Al Franken speaking to protesters outside the capitol by the way, let's listen.
[Franken:] Four lifetime pats. Americans are watching this.
[Lemon:] Anyway that is Al Franken speaking to protesters outside. Ryan I cut you off and yes you are exactly right, we do have the videos as well of the Vice President we played just moments ago. Vice President arriving on Capitol Hill to shops of shame, shame, and shame and again as we said the Vice President has been breaking the tie votes.
[Nobles:] I guess the point I was going to make is we have a group of Senators that don't know how they're going to vote. Or are they listening to the debate. Or watching what's playing out on television or on c-span and making up their minds still. This could be the scenario that we're dealing with and as we've said many times tonight very few of the Republican Senators believe this particular bill should become law and they have all these reservations, because effectively if they vote this bill through tonight, they lose control over it. It goes back to the house. The house speaker has promised it will go to the conference committee where they can hash out their differences, but there are no guarantees. Yes, you're going to vote for this bill but you give up a lot of the power in this process and that is why there are some Democrats on the floor tonight that were employing upon Republican colleagues, let's go back to regular order, let's try this process from the beginning, let's try and come up with a bipartisan solution. It's been the entire summer. It has never change are the immovable position that many of this senators have on this key issues and when you talked about Medicaid, Medicaid not even address on this particular bill. That is not even addressing this bill. There's been no indication going to these conference committee is necessarily solve other problems. So if you're a Republican senator seating on office right now or the senate floor. The question now is it worth it for you to cast this vote which will be controversial regardless, is it worth it for you to cast the vote in affirmative and move this process forward or is there any thought process in the back of your mind that might be worth it to take a step back and regroup.
[Lemon:] And we shall see. Thank you Ryan, we'll get a back to you Ryan. I want to bring in now Senator Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrats. Senator good to see you again, hope you're doing well, thank you for coming on. You guys are about to vote on this on the senate, do you think the Republican have the votes to pass this version of Obamacare repeal this so called skinny repeal?
[Sen. Tammy Duckworth,  Illinois:] I think they do have the votes for it and it's appalling that they do. When you have somebody like Lindsey Graham who said that this bill was a disaster, fraud and terrible policy, his words and then he is going to vote for it.
[Lemon:] You think this is their putting Party over country?
[Duckworth:] They're definitely putting party over country on this one. If you think this is fraud and a terrible bill, and this is a disaster, why would you vote for it?
[Lemon:] I wasn't to get your reaction, because we just got the new CBO score on this repeal. The skinny bill repeal, 60 million more uninsured by 2026, premiums going up by 20 percent.
[Duckworth:] That 20 percent increase is on top of any increases that are going to be happening anyway. It reduces coverage for Americans and increases the cost. That is not what they promised to do. They promise that we would fix any problems that are in the Healthcare system right now and what they have done is made it worse.
[Lemon:] What do you think of the GOP health care strategy essentially saying I asked the two guests on before you what would make you think they could figure it out in conference?
[Duckworth:] This is understand, Don that they could go into conference for five minutes and then the house can actually pull up this bill and vote on it and would become law. It is a cover to hide the true intent from the American people. There's nothing that says we have to hash anything out if they go to conference they could adjourn the same day and vote on this bill.
[Lemon:] As our reporter just said once they vote on the bill, they lose control of it.
[Duckworth:] They absolutely, yes, we lose control of it. There's nothing to say Paul Ryan won't call this bill up for a vote.
[Lemon:] That was my question to the other guests as well. Why should GOP Senators trust that Paul Ryan won't allow this to become law?
[Duckworth:] I don't trust Paul. And that they are looking for something else to vote onto make this happen and juts because he promised and he didn't promise to go into conference on this. He left himself an out. There's nothing to say that they won't know for a day or even just an hour or so and say oops sorry we can't hash -.
[Lemon:] How did he leave himself?
[Duckworth:] In his statement and his spokesperson actually said he is not committing to going to conference and so what we're looking at now is voting on a bill that you have pointed out this CBO and it says put 16 million Americans on the streets without health insurance, increases health care cost by well over 20 percent and then what? Are we just going let Americans die, you know day after day after day I have been watching Americans come in here to say please, I'm fighting for my life, I am fighting for my child's life please don't do this, please kill this bill and I'm going to do I can to do it but I think they're votes in.
[Lemon:] What options, you are saying we have no options. Do you have any options tonight?
[Duckworth:] Well the options we have are to try to delay as much as possible to make it clear what they are doing. To let the American public know what they are doing and then we're going to go home and fight this on the streets, on Main Street, in our town halls, all over this country to make the Republicans explain to the American people why they chose to abandoned American health care.
[Lemon:] Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois thank you so much, so good to see you, my old home state. I appreciate it. I want to bring in Patrick Healy, CNN Political Analyst and New York times Editor, thank you sir. Let's talk about what is in the skinny bill. It would repeal the individual and employer mandate and the tax on medical device makers, but keep the Medicaid expansion and subsidies. What do you think the impact of this if it does become law, because I am part of it at some point when it becomes law?
[Patrick Healy, Cnn Political Analyst:] It's going to hit states with Republican governors now who are saying that is a good bill. The Republican governors of Ohio, Nevada and several other states, it's going to Senator Duckworth said it's almost certainly going to increase premiums by double digits. And it's going to be narrowing choice when you have a President who ran for election who said actually we want to strengthen the market, we want to expand choice, we want to lower premiums. There's nothing in this bill so far that says there are any guarantees those things are going to come to pass. Instead what you have an extraordinary moment. We have Republican Senators who are saying we're going to have to put our trust and to not push this bill to become law. What we've seen, President Trump, if this passes tonight, is going to start applying so much pressure. Right wing radio is going to apply so much pressure. Members of the house, so much pressure on ball Ryan, to get through conference what they the bill they ultimately want, or do a vote on this skinny repeal and send it right to the White House. The idea that somehow this can be held in advance and everything will be worked out many process, we haven't begun to see the pressure tactics that become to bare, to let's send something to the President's desk.
[Lemon:] Stephen Moore is still with me here, I want as Patrick mentioned that the President tweeted tonight, go, Republican Senators, go. Give America great health care. They're passing something that they don't want to become law, they know it's a bad bill, if they are confused about it and even the people reporting on it are confused about it, can you imagine what the people at home are thinking and what they will think once these people go back to their hometowns and have to face constituents?
[Moore:] If you're asking me to defend this process, I can't do it. It's an ugly process. And it's become an ugly moment. What the real issue here is can we continue to live with Obamacare and the rising costs and insurance companies dropping out of the market. What Republicans need to do is they have to stress three things. They have to stress cost reduction, bringing premiums down, more competition. Forcing the insurance companies to compete with each other, and choice, giving every American a choice of the plan they want to buy. Those are things that are denied under Obamacare. If Republicans can pivot this debate back to those three principals, I think they can get the moral high ground back. They've lost that. No question about it.
[Lemon:] Is that possible, Patrick? He can't defend the process.
[Healy:] The idea that you're going to, again, continue the process of reordering one-sixth of the economy based on a bill that was unveiled a couple hours ago and that is being moved through in the dead of night. And the Vice President just showing up, it is hard to defend. You look to Republican governors that they say, yes, we are members of this Party. We're loyal to this Party. But still, this bill is not hitting on numbers of priorities they have that are affecting people who live for real in their states, for real who depend on this kind of health insurance.
[Lemon:] I want to ask you, quickly, if you can give me. I have to get to the break. They're going to vote soon. You know how people whisper. They don't want to say it on camera. I heard Democrats say, maybe this should pass and people will see how bad it is and the Republicans will really own this. And Republicans are saying the same thing. Maybe we should let Obamacare what do you think of that?
[Healy:] These whispers happen all the time. The Democrats need a strategy for the midterms in 2018. They want to win back house seats. They need a strategy for 2020. They don't have a clear standard- bearer going into 2020. Owning the unhinging of a major policy entitlement that a lot of people depend on is a huge deal. At the end of the day, both Democrats and Republicans have said in some of the states, this has helped poor people get health insurance that didn't have it before. It's going a little too far in the cynicism game to say that they're willing to throw those people off, just to pick off 15 house seats, 17 house seats.
[Lemon:] Patrick, Stephen, thank you very much. Again we're waiting the vote on the skinny repeal, the Republican skinny repeal that is their plan. Mike Enzi is still speaking at Wyoming. He doesn't want to yield his time, I'm told. The vote is supposed to happen at the top of the hour. We don't know if it will. But it's supposed to. You heard Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, the Democrat of Illinois, saying she believes they have the votes. Our Ryan Nobles saying, I'm not sure at this point. The vice President just made his way to Capitol Hill through throngs of protesters, people yelling shame, shame, and shame. We'll see what happens. Don't go anywhere. We're back right after this break.

[Briggs:] It truly was an unfortunate night to have to go to bed at 8:00. Truly sad.
[Kosik:] I missed it all.
[Briggs:] A pair of game seven in the Stanley Cup playoffs, none bigger than Penguins captain trip to the finals on the line, Alison.
[Kosik:] Coy Wire, he's got more in this morning's "Bleacher Report". Good morning.
[Briggs:] Hey, buddy.
[Coy Wire, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Great morning to you, Alison and Dave. Arguably the two biggest hockey stars on the planet, the Capitals' Alex Ovechkin, the Penguins' Sidney Crosby. Both came into the league in 2005 but entirely different careers. Ovechkin the Russian has never been to a conference finals. Can you believe that? Versus Mr. Perfect, Sid the Kid, two Olympic golds, two Stanley Cups, including last season's. These guys aren't just talented but they're tough as nails. Remember that vicious crash into the boards Crosby took two days prior? This after already having missed a game in this series due to concussion. Well, Sidney Crosby would play a part in the ice-breaking goal in game seven. Yes, there it is. Brian Russ putting the pens up 1-0. The star of this game, though, guys Pittsburgh's Marc-Andre Fleury. The crafty vet only playing because Matt Murray's injured, turning back the clock, turning away all 29 of the Capitals' shots including one from Ovechkin. Penguins win in the nation's Capital 2-0 with Ovechkin suffering the seventh painful game seven exit of his career. Sidney Crosby four wins away from another shot at a Stanley Cup Series. The Anaheim Ducks breaking their game seven curls with a win over the Edmonton Oilers. Before last night, the ducks having lost five straight in do or die games but that narrative changed last night. The Ducks keeping the league's leading scorer and arguably the future of hockey, the spectacular Connor McDavid, scoreless all night. Ducks win 2-1, now will face Nashville in the western conference finals. As Dave mentioned, a rough night in the nation's capital, sports-wise. Capitals eliminated, Wizards down 3-2 games to the Celtics, game six in that series is tomorrow.
[Kosik:] OK.
[Briggs:] All right, buddy. So, Ovechkin, Lavrov, Kislyak, they can all just leave D.C. Thank you, Coy. Appreciate it.
[Kosik:] And just a side note, ice hockey keeping dentists' pockets lined for ages.
[Briggs:] Always indeed.
[Kosik:] Violent sport. What was the president's mindset leading up to his firing of James Comey? Turns out as the Russia investigation heated up, so did the president's temper. That's next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer and it's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. Terror near Times Square. A man detonating a bomb strapped to his body inside of New York's busiest transportation hubs. New information just in about who the suspect is and why he attacked. Plus, election eve in one of the most controversial Senate races in America. And now, former President Obama telling voters in Alabama to reject Roy Moore. And as several of President Trump's accusers speak out again, one high-profile member of the administration breaking from the White House line about their credibility. Lots going on but let's begin with the breaking news, the explosion near Times Square in New York City. As for a motive, the source said the suspect told investigators that recent Israeli actions in Gaza are the reason he carried out this morning's attack. Mayor Bill De Blasio was blunt in calling it terrorism.
[Bill De Blasio , Mayor, New York:] This was an attempted terrorist attack. Thank God the perpetrator did not achieve his ultimate goals. Thank God our first responders were there so quickly to address the situation and to make sure people were safe.
[Blitzer:] The explosion happened during the morning rush hour at one of the busiest transit hubs in New York, the Port Authority bus terminal. The explosion was caught on surveillance tape. Commuters are seen walking through a hallway when a burst of smoke erupts. Authorities say a man detonated a homemade device that strapped to his body. The suspect was injured, is now in police custody. Three other people suffered minor injuries. Let's go to our National Correspondent Jason Carroll. He's on the scene in New York with the very latest. Jason, what have we learned about the attacker and the possible motive?
[Jason Carroll, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, here's the headline, Wolf. The attacker, identified as 27-year-old Akayed Ullah from Brooklyn, New York. Apparently, he is talking to investigators and so far has yielded some information about the motive behind the attack. Apparently, he had investigators that he was very upset about the Israeli attacks going on in Gaza. That, of course, to the president recognizing Israel as the capital and the unrest there. Apparently, the suspect very upset about that. Came down here to Port Authority with that with that low-tech device. That's how it was described by investigators. That low-tech device attached to himself, detonated below. Again, a 27-year-old suspect from Brooklyn. As best as we can tell, apparently, in 2015 up until 2015, he had a license to drive a car service here in the city. And, apparently, he also told investigators, Wolf, that he made this device at work. That's what he said. So, apparently, the suspect, he was in serious condition. The headline here, is speaking to investigators and is yielding, at least so far, some information about his motive Wolf.
[Blitzer:] That device that was used, police, as you point out, Jason, they say was low tech. What more do we know about it?
[Carroll:] Right. And that's the way investigators are describing it, Wolf, low tech. It was some sort of a pipe bomb that was strapped to his body. He used Velcro. He also used zip ties to detonate the device. The device detonated right below just about from where I'm standing at 42nd and eighth, below ground in a walkway between where I'm standing and a walkway that leads to Times Square. One MTA worker who was downstairs working in her booth when it all happened with the when the device detanated, she basically said she heard a loud noise and immediately started running and left everything behind so she could get away. You could imagine with thousands upon thousands of people who take and use the subway system every day, what it was like under that brief moment of panic as people heard the explosion and to try to get out of harm's way. Obviously, investigators are saying this is something that could have been worse. You heard them describe it as an attempted terrorist attack and possibly the reason for that is because, according to investigators, the device prematurely exploded or partially detonated. So, perhaps, that's why they're calling it an attempted terrorist attack Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jason Carroll in New York on the scene for us. Thank you very much. The New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, says New Yorkers will move forward together, but the city remains a target for terrorists. Governor Cuomo is joining us now live. Governor, thanks so much for joining us.
[Gov. Andrew Cuomo , New York:] Thanks for having me, Wolf. Good to be with you.
[Blitzer:] All right, let's talk a little bit about the investigation. I know you're well briefed. What more, first of all, can you tell us about the suspect, his background, any ties to terror groups, information along those lines?
[Cuomo:] Well, the our information this far and again it's premature, as you've mentioned several times because the investigation is ongoing. But it was a person who was living in New York for several years, driving a car service, a cab. Was disgruntled. Apparently, went to the Internet and downloaded information as to how to make a homemade bomb. Detonated it in an area that could have done extensive damage. The Port Authority is there. It's 42nd Street. It's a main passage between Seventh and Eight Avenue. Fortunately for us, the bomb partially detonated. It was not a sophisticated device. It was a homemade device. He did detonate it but it did not fully have the effect that he was hoping for. The explosive chemical did ignite. It was in a pipe, but the pipe itself did not explode. So, he wound up hurting himself, several others in the vicinity, not serious. More from the noise, a concussion of the explosion. There was no structural damage within the tunnel itself. And the MTA personnel and the Port Authority police were right there. They were on site. And this is, from my point of view this is one of the my worst nightmares, right, is a terrorist attack in a subway system, a place of high density, by a person who is not really part of a sophisticated network. These lone wolfs that we're seeing more and more of. We saw it a couple of months ago in October on the west side of Manhattan where a person drove a truck on the west side and ran over people. It's basically the same M.O. They're not people who come from overseas. They live here. They're disgruntled. They go to the Internet. They find out how to download a device that can hurt and maim. And they implement it themselves on a low-tech basis. But it's very troubling, Wolf. If these were more sophisticated devices, it could have been much more damaging. New York is a target. New York is a place of high density. So, it is one of the ongoing challenges that we face.
[Blitzer:] Do you know if he had any direct links to any terror groups, whether ISIS or any other terror groups or was simply inspired by these various terror groups?
[Cuomo:] Yes, this far the investigation is ongoing. But I would use your word which is inspired. I would say influenced. I don't like the connotation of the word, inspired. But influenced by these groups. Angry for whatever reason, situation of life, the international situation, whatever it is. And it's just all too easy now to go to the Internet and download a quick tutorial on how to help people. One of the questions the Internet companies are going to have to deal, Wolf. That's a sensitive question but a question that I would pose to them is, these Internet service provider companies, they have what they call machine learning tools, right? When you're on the Web, they know where you're going because they then target the advertising to you and to your tastes. What do they do when they know a person is going to a Web site that says, this is how you make a bomb? This is how you hurt people in a terrorist attack. And we all like to feel free and anonymous on the Web. I don't know that we actually are. But it's a question that we're going to have to deal with as a society going forward. Because these last two instances from New York, both of them went on the Web, downloaded information. They must have been looking at a number of these types of Web sites. And that's where they're getting their information. You know, that's where it's spreading from. I'll tell you quickly. I met Shimon Perez, one of the great human beings on the planet that. I met him when I was in my 20s. And we were in Israel and he said, Israel now has these frequency of terrorist attacks because of our proximity. One day, the terrorists will figure out how to cross. And then, America will have the same attacks because the enemy is democracy. The Internet, Wolf, is the bridge across the ocean. And I think that's what we're seeing more and more.
[Blitzer:] And very quickly, Governor, that we've been reporting that he may have been angered by Israel's attacks against Palestinian targets in Gaza. There were earlier reports that he was saying something as the incident was going down involving support for ISIS. So, what, if anything, can you share with our viewers on that?
[Cuomo:] You know, there have been a number of reports on why he was angry, Wolf. I don't put a lot of stock in any of them yet. The investigation's ongoing. But I also don't think it matters. I mean, he was angry. He could have been angry because of the economy, because of his job, because of our political positions. You're going to have angry people. You're going to have angry people in New York. There's no doubt about it. We have to start to look at their access to this kind of information that takes a cabdriver who's angry and allows them to download a tutorial on how to build a bomb. Now, it was a low-tech unsophisticated device. But God forbid it was more so sophisticated. You could do significant damage in a very short period of time. Without a network, without anyone coming into this country. That's going to be the ongoing challenge for New York and for cities and states all across this country.
[Blitzer:] And you're absolutely right, there are lots of Web sites out there, including Al Qaeda and the Arabian Peninsula. They used to have an article, "How to Build a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom." That was very, very, unfortunately, well known. Governor Andrew Cuomo, thanks so much for joining us.
[Cuomo:] Thanks for having me, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Let's get some more perspective now from CNN Counterterrorism Analyst Phil Mudd who's with me here in the studio. So, what are the main things investigators, Phil, are now looking for?
[Philip Mudd, Cnn Counterterrosim Analyst:] You can't, especially in these hours after the event, assume that he acted alone. The first reaction, looking at that this from the outside, and especially given the lack of sophistication of the device, is that he probably did, but probably isn't good enough. So, you're going to talk to him. You're also going to look at interviews with things like friends, family, people who might have lived in the same building complex, look at his social media access. It's going to take a while to figure out whether he acted alone. The second question is whether there is something to learn from this. The governor was just talking about online activity among people who are radicalized. Is there something to learn about how he was radicalized online, for example, if he was, and whether we can prevent that kind of stuff.
[Blitzer:] Does it look like it was very not sophisticated, clearly. Does it look like he deliberately pulled the trigger when he did or it went off accidentally? It could have been a whole lot worse.
[Mudd:] It could have been a whole lot worse. It looks like he tried to detonate a device. The initial comments we've heard from New York, as you were talking about earlier, suggest that he might have talked to investigators and said that one of the triggers was the President Trump's announcement on moving the embassy to Jerusalem. If he did so, we might have a clue about why the device was so unsophisticated. Was he sitting there for months, deciding that he was angry and he wanted to act? Or did he have a trigger last week and said, let me build whatever bomb I can, a really unsophisticated device, and go down into the bus station. That's what we saw today.
[Blitzer:] And so, he's alive, the suspect.
[Mudd:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] He'll be questioned, I assume, at great length.
[Mudd:] He will be but let's be careful here. You hear a lot of comments in these cases about investigators saying, this is what the individual said. I was inspired by ISIS. I was inspired by Al Qaeda. A couple questions there. Number one, is what's the emotional state of the person when they're going into that negotiation? And, number two, what's the backdrop around that statement? Do we see any indication of that in statements to his family? Do we see any indication of that in his online activity? So, there'll be comments about what he says to investigators. But I'd say hold off and let's see what the whole picture is.
[Blitzer:] I assume they're looking at his entire background, his social media presence.
[Mudd:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] 27-year-old of Bangladeshi decent, living in Brooklyn. He used to drive a cab. Apparently, he was doing something else. He built this very unsophisticated bomb where he works. They're going to learn, over the next 24-48 hours, a whole lot more.
[Mudd:] Oh, they already have. Think about the kinds of things you can pick up in the initial hours. You just mentioned he worked for a tax company. Those are interviews going on now. You ought to have an address now. Those are interviews at his apartment, his house going on now. You know who his family is. If you have a name, you might have an indication of what his cell phone number and what his e-mail address is. This information should be flowing in already. So, the data explosion that you get after the initial identification of the suspect is not happening today or tomorrow. It's already happening now in the moment.
[Blitzer:] And they'll be looking, of course, to see how he's lived in the United States.
[Mudd:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] When he came to United States. What his status was. And all of that.
[Mudd:] That's right.
[Blitzer:] I'm sure they're going to be learning a lot more over the
[Mudd:] Right.
[Blitzer:] next hours. Phil Mudd, thanks very, very much. Another major story we're following here today, Alabama's very high stakes' Senate election which takes place tomorrow. Both candidates are making one last final push for votes, pulling out all the stops with major political support. Former President Obama adding his voice to boost Democrat Doug Jones, recording a robo call urging voters to reject Republican Roy Moore. Moore is facing multiple accusations from women who say he sexually assaulted or pursued relationship from them when they were teenagers and he was already in his 30s. Moore has denied all the allegations. He has the full support of President Trump, who also recorded a robo call claiming progress will be stopped cold if people vote for Jones. And the president's former White House chief strategist, Steve Bannon, by the way, he'll be campaigning later this evening in Midland City, Alabama, together with Moore. Let's go to CNN's Kaitlan Collins. She's in nearby Dothan for us. Kaitlan, what more can you tell us about former President Obama now directly getting involved in supporting Doug Jones?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Wolf, we've seen this very aggressive effort on behalf of Democrats to try and counter President Trump's endorsement of Roy Moore in this race because not only did several Democratic lawmakers travel to the state this weekend to campaign on behalf of his opponent, Doug Jones, in the race, we've just received an e-mail from former Vice President Joe Biden sending out a fundraising e-mail, touting Doug Jones's leadership abilities. And then we also know that two Democratic officials have told my colleague, Jeff Zeleny, that former President Barack Obama has recorded a robo call on Doug Jones' behalf. Now, this comes at a time that President Trump has recorded a robo call on Roy Moore's behalf. So we've got these two dueling robo calls going out in the state today, 24 hours before voters go to the polls tomorrow. And in his call, we're told that President Obama says what a fighter Doug Jones is, that he's a fighter for progress and for equality and that he'll be there for voters when they come out to vote, telling them that this is too serious of an election for them to stay at home and not vote. Now, we're also told that the targeted audience for this call is going to be African-American voters. Because if Doug Jones wants to stand a chance in that election tomorrow, that's a demographic where he's really going to need to secure their support because it's quite unusual that a Democrat is even we're talking about this as a reasonable possibility that he will win that he could win this election in a deeply conservative state like Alabama that hasn't sent a Democrat to the Senate in almost 20 years. But this is a very unusual election anyways, Wolf, because on the other side of the aisle we've got Republican Senator Richard Shelby, the senior senator from the state of Alabama, telling Jake Tapper yesterday that he could not vote for his party's nominee in this race.
[Sen. Richard Shelby , Alabama:] Well, I'd rather see the Republican win, but I hope that Republican would be a write-in. I couldn't vote for Roy Moore. I didn't vote for Roy Moore.
[Collins:] Now, the Jones campaign has seized on those comments, also sending them out in a robo call to voter today and in digital ads. And this all comes as Roy Moore has been highlighted that he hasn't done any public events since last Tuesday, which is incredibly unusual in a high stakes election, a very close election, like this one. But you're right, we will see him at a rally tonight with the former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon in Dothan, Alabama. Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Kaitlan Collins on the scene for us in Alabama for us. Thank you so much, Kaitlan. As three of the president's accusers now unite and call for a congressional investigation, a growing list of Democratic senators going further, calling on the president to resign. Plus, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations breaking from the White House line on the accusations against President Trump. You're going to hear what Nikki Haley says about his accusers. And, just in, the president's former campaign chairman appearing in court over his indictment and house arrest. The judge's very stern warning to Paul Manafort. We have new information. Stay with us.

[Cuomo:] All right. So, a fundamental question was raised in a heated exchange on CNN this weekend during President Trump's latest rally. Take a listen.
[Paul Begala, Cnn Political Commentator:] If we're going to wait 1,361 days and he's still going to be the moral midget that you saw on that stand in Harrisburg tonight.
[Paris Dennard, Former Bush White House Director Of Black Outreach:] I did not like probably 98 to 99 percent of the things that President Obama did but I would never call him Obama and I would never call him a moral midget.
[Begala:] You respect the office, not the man. I respect the office. If he enters a room, I stand. If he signs a law, I obey it. He is my president, but he is letting me down and the vast majority of Americans down.
[Cuomo:] The ways to criticize a president the office, the man. Let's discuss. CNN political commentators Ana Navarro and Jeffrey Lord. Ana, respect the man, respect the office how do you balance those two?
[Ana Navarro, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, look, we live in America and we have something called the First Amendment, which gives us free speech. So this is a country where we can actually say what we want about anybody, including the President of the United States. That's a good thing and that's a bad thing. In other countries in a place like Cuba, in a place like Venezuela, in a place like the Philippines, that may get you killed. In the United States, we can. And I do think, though, that we have to have a civil discourse. I think we have to have respect for the office of the presidency, but I think that respect for the office of the presidency must begin, must be reflected by the person sitting in that office at that moment by the President of the United States, himself. And when you have Donald Trump a President Donald Trump who calls Elizabeth Warren "Pocahontas", a person who calls Chuck Todd "sleepy eyes", who throws ad hominem attacks on a constant basis and has done it his entire life, continues to do it as president, then you have to wonder. How can you seek respect, how can you want respect if you're not willing to give respect to your American people? To the people that voted for you, to the people that are part of your country.
[Cuomo:] Jeffrey
[Navarro:] But I think it goes both ways.
[Cuomo:] Jeffrey?
[Jeffrey Lord, Cnn Political Commentator, Former Reagan White House Officials:] Yes. Well, Chris,I have to say, I mean, first of all, the First Amendment is everything here in this country so that's a good thing. Secondly, I have to say there hasn't been a President of the United States in American history, beginning with George Washington, that hasn't been dumped on by their critics. I mean, this is part of life when you're in the White House. I listened to my friend Paul Begala in that clip that you just played and I have to say, with all due respect, there were plenty of Americans in the Clinton days who felt towards President Clinton more or less as Paul Begala was describing President Trump. This comes with the territory and every president's different.Presidents do things Harry Truman said of a critic of his daughter, for heaven's sake, that he going to he hoped not to meet him because if he did he was going to, you know, punch him and hit him where he might need a supporter, and the letter went on at length. And it was a letter, by the way. It wasn't an off the cuff remark. So this kind of thing is, you know, par for the course here in America and it gets more intense than at other times and you just roll with it.
[Cuomo:] But at the end of the day
[Navarro:] Jeffrey, you've got to go get some coffee this morning. You've just given an entire answer and you didn't even mention Ronald Reagan.
[Lord:] Well, of course, I do remember the protests of Ronald Reagan. How about that?
[Cuomo:] You know, look, I take I take the points but I guess the question becomes and look, this is not new. I deal with this every day with people who want you have two camps. One is do not normalize Donald Trump. Do not respect what he does just because he's president. It's about the man and the office. And then this other side, which is well, hold on, you cannot devalue what this office means and once somebody has won it, Ana, you must accord them the respect of that office, and if you don't like what they do, that's fine, but there must be a line.
[Navarro:] Well, good luck with that. Look, I saw some horrible cartoons, some horrible emails comes through when George W. Bush was president. I saw some horrible emails and cartoon comes through when Barack Obama was president, but I've got to go back to my point. The person that has got to establish the precedence of respect, that has got to behave in a presidential manner is the president, himself. That really sets a tone that I think makes a difference in America. When you are doing things, like inviting a mad man oppressor, a corrupt leader of the Philippines to our White House, that is not presidential and people are going to call you names because they are going to be offended, rightly so.
[Cuomo:] Right. So, it's a little bit of the "get what you give," Jeffrey, and is that something that must be factored into this as well? Yes, Donald Trump won the office. He is President of the United States, but the way he has conducted himself and the things that have come out of him, and the actions and the words have generated this criticism. You get what you give.
[Lord:] Well, all I can say is and Chris, the other night I was at the Washington Correspondents' the White HouseCorrespondent's' Dinner and right here in my adopted hometown of Harrisburg was the president, himself, and he gave that speech. And I can only tell you the reports that I got, some of them from that were being texted to me by a local reporter as the event was going on was that the folks who were there were thrilled with him. They love it. They love him to death. They are most unhappy with Washington, D.C. They are most unhappy with the kind of folks that were there with me at the at the Correspondents' Dinner and they wanted to make it known and they love him for doing it. So there is a disconnect here and I think we just have to, you know, work with that.
[Cuomo:] Hey, Jeffrey, does it bother you at all when the president says I want to change some of these First Amendment protections because when I when they say things that are terrible and wrong, you know, we should be able to get after them, like in the U.K.? Forget about the fact that the U.K. is moving some of their statutory principles to be more like us. But the idea of because I don't like it, maybe I'll change the law to get after the media, do you like that idea?
[Lord:] I confess, as a First Amendment freak, that does bother me a bit. I mean, I just think give these things free rein no matter who they are. But I know that he genuinely he's spoken to me about this long before he was running for president and I know he feels very, very strongly about it, so we'll see what happens. But I do think we have to be careful here when we deal with the First Amendment absolutely. And one other thing if I could say, Chris. You know, people at that dinner made which was terrific and I was a guest of CNN made a great deal about the First Amendment, but I didn't hear the words Ann Coulter anywhere at that dinner and here she was under physical threat from giving a speech at Berkeley. I mean, that was a pretty noticeable problem, I thought, and there were others. I didn't hear the names of other conservatives who have been attacked here and threatened, so I think that we've got to work on that.
[Cuomo:] Ana, let me ask you something while I have you. The first Cuban-American elected to Congress is going to retire next year. Tell us about this great lady and what people should know about the legacy of Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
[Navarro:] She's my congresswoman, she is also my friend. She is also a mentor. She was the first Latina elected to Congress. She was the first woman to chair a major committee. She was the chair of Foreign Relations. She's also a sane, compassionate, moderate voice. She was the biggest winner she had the biggest swing district. Hillary Clinton won her district by 20 points and she won that same district by over 20 points. It was the largest difference and margin in the country because she has focused on her community. It's going to be a huge loss in this environment that we have today where there is such polarization and such dysfunction. I've been amazed by the I've been amazed by the feedback in social media to her announcing that she's retiring. You know, I've seen people from the left, from the right, Democrats, Independents, Republicans, LGBTQ, straight people, religious people, immigrants, native-born, young people, older people, Speaker Paul Ryan, even Rosie O'Donnell call her out for somebody that has done the right thing and expressed admiration for her. Ileana, mi amigo, muchas gracias. You're going to be you're a little teeny woman with little teeny feet but you're going to leave very big shoes to fill.
[Lord:] Hey, Chris, you're missing an obvious question here. Is Ana a candidate for Congress?
[Navarro:] Oh, sweetheart, please. I couldn't afford it and they couldn't afford me.
[Cuomo:] All right, thank you both for the discussion. We have a lot of news this morning including what is in and out of this government new spending bill that stopped the shutdown. Let's get after it.
[Trump:] In many cases, you're forced to make deals that are not the deal you'd make.

[Alison Kosik, Cnn Anchor:] the best of humanity out there, and now we are seeing some good corporate do-gooding.
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Anchor:] All right. "EARLY START" continues right now.
[Unidentified Male:] Any threat to the United States or its territories will be met with a massive military response, a response both effective and overwhelming.
[Marquardt:] The secretary of defense right there with a firm warning for North Korea after Pyongyang's latest nuclear test. We've learned the U.S. and South Korea will look to deploy military assets including bombers. We are live in Seoul.
[Kosik:] President Trump will propose ending protections for undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children. Could Congress give DREAMERS another chance?
[Marquardt:] And could billions in recovery funds for Harvey victims be tied to raising the nation's debt ceiling? The treasury secretary says yes. Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Alex Marquardt.
[Kosik:] Good morning. I'm Alison Kosik. It's Monday, September 4th. It's 5:00 a.m. in the east. It's 5:30 p.m. in Pyongyang. And top U.S. defense officials are responding to North Korea's biggest nuclear tests yet with a blunt warning. Defense Secretary James Mattis advising that any threat by Pyongyang against the U.S. or its allies would draw what he called a massive military response. Mattis' warning coming after a meeting with the president, vice president, and top national security advisers. Mattis said this, quote, "Our commitments among the allies are ironclad."
[James Mattis, U.s. Defense Secretary:] 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.
[Marquardt:] This new warning coming after North Korea's claim that it tested a hydrogen bomb on Sunday. A test that was overseen by Leader Kim Jong-un. Pyongyang claimed that the weapon was designed to be carried by an intercontinental ballistic missile, the kind that North Korea has also been testing recently. President Trump was asked about the nuclear test on Sunday as he left a church service.
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. President, will you attack North Korea?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] We'll see.
[Marquardt:] Our coverage begins this morning with CNN's Barbara Starr at the Pentagon.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Alison, Alex, Secretary of Defense James Mattis and General Joe Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, making that extraordinary appearance in front of the White House. Mattis delivering a very carefully worded message, saying that the U.S. does have military options. That any threat from North Korea to the U.S. or its allies would be met with a massive military response. He was very clear the U.S. isn't looking for total annihilation of North Korea, but make no mistake, they are looking to send this very stern, grim message to Kim Jong-un that if he does not give up his nuclear weapons, if he threatens or attacks, the U.S. would take him out. The U.S. strategy at the moment if there is a military strategy is to try and convince Kim Jong-un that he himself and his regime could not survive if they were to attack South Korea, Japan, Guam, or the United States. But on the other hand, it's a message we've heard before. None of it has worked to change Kim's mind and by all accounts, this latest underground nuclear test is a massive step forward. It is a larger test than anything North Korea has done before Alison, Alex.
[Marquardt:] Our thanks to Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Now the U.N. Security Council is set to meet in emergency session this morning in the wake of this latest test. It's just the second meeting in just a week. Past meetings have done little to stop North Korea's provocations. Earlier this morning, South Korea's Army and Air Force conducted a combined live-fire exercise in response to that North Korean nuclear test. Now North Korean state media is blasting South Korea for saying the drill shows that Seoul is hellbent on escalating confrontation. The exercise comes after President Trump called out South Korea on Twitter suggesting that Seoul is appeasing the North Koreans. CNN correspondent, Ian Lee, is live in Seoul, South Korea, with the regional response. Good morning, Ian. So, what kind of response have we seen from Seoul this morning?
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Ales. We saw those military exercises early in the morning and what's important about these is South Korea says that these were directed towards North Korea, saying that these missile tests were targeting their North Korean leadership and nuclear infrastructure in the event of a war. So, a very tough response there. What was used were ballistic missiles as well as advanced air-to-surface missiles fired from an F-15. We're hearing that there could be another test of those advance missiles today. But we're also hearing from intelligence agencies saying that the intelligence groups saying that there could be another ballistic missile test by North Korea sometime soon before that. You know, South Korea, one of their strategies going forward is trying to get the United States, and have a united front with them. That includes asking the United States for advanced weaponry to come to the South Korean Peninsula. They didn't specify what the weaponry would be. But when asked if that could be nuclear weapons, they say that the South is still committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. So, what we are seeing is a tough stance by the South Koreans. One that they want to take the international community so that they can have a united front when isolating North Korea Alex.
[Marquardt:] Some fast-moving developments in a serious potential for escalation. Our thanks to Ian Lee in Seoul.
[Kosik:] OK. Time for an EARLY START on your money. President Trump says the U.S. is considering stopping trade with any nation doing business with North Korea in response to the country's latest nuclear test. This could mean a halt to U.S. trade with China, which has supported economic sanctions on North Korea but remains the key economic partner for the rogue nation. China is the United States' biggest trading partner in goods. Total trade between the U.S. and China topping almost $650 billion last year. That's according to the office of U.S. Trade Representative. Meantime, the "Washington Post" reporting this weekend that President Trump is telling advisers to prepare for withdrawing the U.S. from a free trade agreement that it has with South Korea. According to the paper, Trump is frustrated that the new South Korean President Moon is not willing to accept some U.S. trade demands.
[Marquardt:] And breaking overnight, President Trump is moving to end the program that protects undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children. But the move is far from a done deal with multiple sources saying that the White House is looking at a six-month delay in any action against the so-called DREAMERS so that Congress has time to pass legislation, which would allow them to stay in the country.
[Kosik:] The expected move ending the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals Program called DACA. It comes after weeks of deliberation within the White House. The move may satisfy the president's base, but it could also disrupt the lives of almost 800,000 people working and studying in the U.S. DACA protects qualified applicants from being deported.
[Marquardt:] Now several sources are cautioning that this decision is not final until it is announced. That is expected to be on Tuesday. But already there's been a flood of reactions with immigration advocates calling it cruel while Trump's core supporters are applauding it as the restoration of the rule of law.
[Kosik:] If the president plans to end DACA, but gives Congress a chance to let dreamers say, will lawmakers go along with the president's decision? We get into that next.

[Brian Stelter, Cnn:] Hey, I'm Brian Stelter. It's time for RELIABLE SOURCES. This is our weekly look at the story behind the story, of how the media really works, how the news gets made. This hour, the Mueller investigation is tight as a drum. No leaks while the White House is leaking like a sieve. Why is that? And later, the playmate and the president. Ronan Farrow is here with this latest reporting about "The National Enquirer". But, first, I think "Wired" magazine Editor Nick Thompson summed up this week best. He wrote this. He said: America is where the high schoolers act like leaders and the leaders act like they are in high school. Unfortunately, two stories have merged this weekend. The pain that we all feel after the latest mass shooting and then the confusion we all feel about the Russia probes. These stories have come together. While these grieving students in Parkland, Florida, are asking politicians to protect them and announcing a march on Washington, the president of the United States is making it about himself. President Trump tweeting overnight: It's very sad that the FBI missed all of the many signals sent out by the Florida school shooter. This is not acceptable. He is right about that. But he continued by saying: they they at the FBI are spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. There is no collusion. It's clear the president is feeling the heat of Robert Mueller special counsel and he is lashing out, implying that the FBI might have failed to stop the shooting because it's too obsessed with Russia. Let's be clear, the president is insulting your intelligence. Let's full up FBI.gov. It says right there, the FBI employs 35,000 people. There are a small number of FBI agents working on the Mueller probe, but they have nothing to do with the investigation of tips like the one that was missed before the Parkland shooting. So, where in the world
[Unidentified Male:] At least we know what our federal agents had been doing recently. Why they were too busy to stop school shootings. They've been chasing down bad Facebook trolls. This is the FBI that spends all their time, all their manpower, and all the resources going after a failed Russian conspiracy that never existed and they should be going after bad guys. How many agents have been taken off the duty of investigating terror and domestic terror to follow these political dead ends?
[Stelter:] Aha. So, that's where President Trump got the idea. Yes. This has been a talking point from pro-Trump media ever since Friday that there is a link between the FBI's failure and the ongoing Russia probes. Again, this is nonsensical, but I want you to see what's going on behind the scenes. Geraldo was said that on TV on Saturday morning, and then on Saturday evening, what did Geraldo do? He was at Mar-a-Lago. He had dinner with President Trump. That's according to new reporting from "The Washington Post". Now, when did Trump tweet that nonsensical claim? Eleven p.m. Saturday. You tell me there's a connection there. But the tweets have continued all weekend long. Here are just some of the tweets from the president. You look at what he is doing here. He is undercutting his own national security adviser. He is ranting and raving about the fake media. He has got tweets riddled with misspellings and profanity. I don't know, maybe down in Mar-a-Lago, maybe in person, President Trump is cool, calm and collected, but on Twitter, he sounds deeply troubled. He sounds unhinged. This is why questions about his fitness for office are so urgent. This is the biggest story that I see happening right now. So joining me to talk about this and other issues, David Gergen, CNN senior political analyst. He was an adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton. And Dan Pfeiffer, CNN political commentator and former senior adviser to President Obama. Both of you at one time or another been communications directors for presidents. You have both been inside the White House, so I want to try to assess what we learned from this presidential tweet storm. David Gergen, first to you. Is this unhinged?
[David Gergen, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] It reminds me very much of the last days of President Nixon when he became deeply, deeply insecure, lashed out in all sorts of ways and didn't remain focused on the job at hand. And this I'm afraid has been President Trump's pattern now for some time. I don't know why he is so insecure. It certainly suggests as Mueller closes in more that there is he very much does not want us to know, and he is very afraid that Mueller is going to get there. But I also think, Brian, and Dan can speak to this as well, the way the White House runs and people and staff take their cues from the top, from the president. And if he is deceptive, if he is dishonest with the public, then what you find in the White House is a culture of deceit and deception. And they can't get their story straight, because there hasn't been a history of trying to be straight.
[Stelter:] Is that what you see today?
[Gergen:] That's what I see today, yes. I think that we have an extraordinary situation where that tweet you just showed from Mr. Thompson I thought put it just right. We're under assaults in all sorts of ways as we've seen in this past week and the press has been chronicling and our nation is under obviously now under assault from the Russians on our elections, not just 2016, but as we head into 2018, our children are under assault in their schools. Dreamers are under assault from law enforcement officers. And there is nothing there is no moral leadership from Washington, from the Congress or the White House frankly, and where is the moral leadership coming from? I'm hearing Broward County as we speak just a few blocks away from where a thousand people gathered and the moral leadership came from those young 18-year-olds.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Gergen:] Yes, Emma Gonzalez, wonderful, compelling speech.
[Stelter:] Absolutely. So, Dan, I guess I'm left wondering, why hasn't someone taken away the president's cell phone? Why are these tweets still coming out? Why isn't there a support structure at the White House to save him from himself?
[Dan Pfeiffer, Former Senior Adviser To President Obama:] Well, for two reasons. One, Trump doesn't want it and he won't allow it. Even if you take General Kelly, someone who had a lifetime of experience in the military, he said his job is not to read the president's tweets, he doesn't pay to Twitter.
[Stelter:] Yes, right.
[Pfeiffer:] Which is sort of like a chief of staff saying, I don't care what the president says because this is President Trump's form of communication. And the people who there is a selection of bias and the people who ended up working in this White House. The top tier of best known, best experienced Republican operatives, people who worked for George W. Bush or Mitt Romney or others have chosen not to be in this White House because they don't trust Donald Trump, so the people who are there are people who have come from the Fox News set and are sort of people who are willing to risk career suicide, risk legal jeopardy for the glory, I guess, or infamy of serving Trump. And so, the president's inexperienced and incapable of the job is doing the people he surrounded himself are inexperienced and incapable of the job they've been assigned to do.
[Stelter:] In the press office, one of the deputy press secretaries, Hogan Gidley, has been on a Fox News interview kind of tour recently. This is from one of the interviews where he essentially said it's the media's fault. You all are worse than a hostile foreign government.
[Hogan Gidley, White House Deputy Press Secretary:] There are two groups that have created chaos more than the Russians. And that's the Democrats and the mainstream media.
[Stelter:] No surprise Russia Today ate that up. We can put on screen the tweet from Russia Today. This is the Kremlin-controlled media outlet that was promoting what Gidley said. Dan, your reaction?
[Pfeiffer:] Well, look, this is the incentive structure for Trump's staff. I'm sure Hogan Gidley who is a mid-level staffer there, got a high five from the president for saying that. And whether they are unwitting or witting, they are being tools of the Russian propaganda machine because while I think what they're essentially doing is they have an audience of one in Trump and future career prospects at Fox News, and that is what is driving this. And it is it all goes back to the president because this is what he wants from his staff. These are the kind of staff he wants, and you're doing what he wants them to do.
[Stelter:] To that point, I thought the most interesting quote that I read all week-long was in a Michael Louis piece in "Vanity Fair." Actually, yes, it was in "Vanity Fair," it was an interview with Steve Bannon, and let's put on screen what Bannon said. There's a profanity here we had to excerpt out. But he says: The Democrats don't matter. The real opposition is the media, and the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with you know what. David Gergen, is that what you see happening? That there's all the tweets, you know, all the messages, all the confusing counter- narratives, it's just an attempt to flood the zone like that?
[Gergen:] Absolutely. I think they flood the zone in a way that discredits other institutions that may become critical to him, starting with Bob Mueller.
[Stelter:] Like the FBI or the media, or Mueller? Yes.
[Gergen:] Yes, discrediting Mueller, discrediting what may come out through the Justice Department from Mueller, discrediting the press on what we're reporting on what Mueller does, so that a third of the country will believe it's all overblown or it has been made up or whatever it may be. I think there has been a very clear pattern right from the beginning that has actually in some ways worked because it has kept that base together, but it's eroding the trust in the presidency, the trust in this president around the rest of the country, and it has been extremely damaging, I think for our sense of being a single people, that we have some sense of unity about our country, and the Russians are laughing at us because they are getting away with this. They are fomenting a lot of this, and there is no sense of urgency, especially ahead. We have an election that's just around the corner later this year. What if the Democrats, you know, take the House back? Are they all is that all going to be blamed on fake news? What if they fall short? Are Democrats going to think, you know, it was all that meddling, and they have won a few seats that they wouldn't have otherwise won. This is what split the country apart, and it is a beginning and many other countries it's the beginning of an authoritarian rule, and that's the larger threat hanging over us now.
[Stelter:] That's a pretty frightening picture you just painted. Are you personally afraid of that, David?
[Gergen:] I find it the threat is growing. There is this new book out about how democracies die written by two Harvard professors and it's quite striking, Brian, about the number of countries that were led by democratically elected leaders, but they turned more and more authoritarian. A dozen countries have flipped from democracy to authoritarianism since the end of the Cold War. We're not immune to that. I think we have strong checks and balances. Thank good we have long traditions and norms, but we have to protect those norms in a bipartisan way. We must come together. Those of us who care about the way the country has been run historically, and why it's been successful historically must rally to the kind of standards and the respect for rule of law, the respect for a free press that has made this country great.
[Stelter:] And, Dan, last word to you. You certainly have a point of view on your podcast "Pod Save America" coming from the Obama White House. You're a vocal critic of Trump. But what do you want to see journalists doing in the environment that David just described?
[Pfeiffer:] Well, I think they need to keep doing what they have been doing and aggressively hold Trump and his administration accountable. I actually think the problem here is not a failure of journalism. It is two things. One, this is not just Trump. This is the entire Republican Party has decided they are OK with Trump's behavior, the rampant corruption within the administration and doing essentially nothing about an attack on our democracy. And it's not the mainstream media, as we call it, CNN, "New York Times", ABC, whoever else, are out there doing their job reporting. The problem is, is there is a propaganda infrastructure led by Fox News that is a willing participant in covering up crimes and misleading the American people about a very dangerous situation. I agree with David. Our democracy is under assault and that assault is coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And we think our democracy can survive anything, but these things happen slowly, and then suddenly. I think we are in a very dangerous place, but we need both parties to step up here and do the right thing. And right now, the Republicans have decided not to do that.
[Stelter:] David and Dan, thank you for being here. After the break, we're going to look at the right wing media narrative, what Dan was just referring to. The talking points we're hearing about the new Mueller indictments and how it's all Obama's fault? Stay tuned.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] The U.S. military has not said why the Americans traveled to the busy commercial city of Manbij. This is the largest loss of American life in Syria since the counter- ISIS campaign started in 2014. Three other Americans were also hurt. Our deepest condolences to all of the families. We've got so much more straight ahead in the Newsroom, and it all starts now. Hello again, and thank you so much for being with me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We are now entering week five of the longest U.S. government shutdown in history 800,000 federal workers still without a paycheck as Democrats and Republicans battle it out over the president's demand for a border wall. So in just two hours from now, the president will, once again, take his argument to the American people. Promising a, quote, major announcement concerning the southern border. A source tells CNN the president is expected to propose extending protections for DACA recipients in exchange for the wall, something the president is not willing to back down on the wall.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I hope that Speaker Pelosi can come along and realize what everybody knows, no matter who it is, they know that walls work. And we need walls. And whether it's personal or not it's not personal for me. She's being controlled by the radical left, which is a problem. And she's under total control of the radical left. I think that's a very bad thing for her. I think it's a very bad thing for the Democrats. Everybody knows that walls work.
[Whitfield:] Meanwhile, House Democrats are not willing to budge on the border wall. We saw that in their latest plan. They will propose to which offers no funding for the wall. So where does all of this leave the shutdown and the thousands of federal workers? Let's check in with CNN White House reporter Sarah Westwood. So we'll hear from the president in just a matter of hours. What's expected?
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Fred, we expect President Trump to lay out a broader deal than he's offered so far throughout this process. It would essentially involve the president trading funding for his border wall in exchange for immigration reforms that have been priorities of Democrats for a couple of years now. The deal would involve President Trump holding firm with that demand of $5.7 billion in money to build his wall in exchange for a renewal of temporary protections for Dreamers, those young undocumented immigrants protected under DACA, a program Trump has tried to end. It would also renew temporary protected status for some groups of immigrants and allow those people who remain in the country. Let's take a step back. This is not a new idea. It's one that the president in the past has not supported. In fact, in recent week, President Trump has been saying that he'd prefer to wait for legal challenges to his DACA removal attempts to make their way through the courts before he negotiates on DACA. Nonetheless, though, the White House wanted to project an image of progress after a week of an escalating feud between President Trump and Speaker Pelosi. White House aides worked into the night last night trying to get this proposal ready for this Saturday afternoon announcement. Vice President Mike Pence, Jared Kushner, Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney were all in charge of crafting this proposal that President Trump will announce. Democrats, though, Fred, have said that they are in no mood to make a deal until the government is open. So it's unclear if this is the thing that breaks the logjam.
[Whitfield:] All right, Sarah Westwood at the White House, thank you so much for that. Let's check in now with CNN's Ryan Nobles. So how will this proposal from the president go over with Democrats?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] Fred, the sense we're getting is not very well. Sarah talked about the fact that Mick Mulvaney and the Vice President and Jared Kushner spent a lot of time crafting this proposal. One thing they didn't apparently do was extend that propose am to the Democratic leaders that would play a big role in seeing this through the Congress. In fact, one senior Democratic aide telling me just a few minutes ago, quote, "Democrats were not consulted on this and have rejected similar overtures previously." They call it a "non- serious product of negotiations amongst White House staff attempting to clean up messes the president created in the first place." And "POTUS is holding more people hostage for his wall." And to put some of this in context, Fred, keep in mind that the Democrats did put on the table, back when the Republicans controlled the House, a proposal where they would offer President Trump $25 billion for physical wall funding, but that was in exchange for a permanent path to citizenship for the Dreamers that would solve the DACA problem. Now, at the time President Trump threatened a veto on that proposal and it was ultimately pulled back. Now, there are some saying, well, if the Democrats offered this before, why aren't they agreeing to this deal this time around? Because what we understand is that the president is going to offer the Bridge Act, which is different from the original proposal that would have protected Dreamers permanently. This Bridge Act was designed by Dick Durbin of Illinois, a Democrat, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican, and the goal was to be a bridge, as it's called, to just protect those Dreamers on a temporary basis until a long-term plan could be put into place. So the sense that we're getting from Democrats is they're not going to exchange any money for a physical wall, even if it's only $6 billion, for a permanent structure in exchange for only temporary status for these Dreamers. They're not going to trade permanent for temporary. So that's why the sense right now is that this proposal is dead on arrival before it is even actually introduced to Democrats. And Fred, we should keep in mind, with all of the caveats, we never know exactly what the president is going to propose until the words actually come out of his lips. But it's important to keep in mind that at this point Democrats are completely in the dark and they don't know what the president is going to propose. But what they've heard so far from media report, they are just not impressed, and that's one of the reasons that this shutdown is probably going to continue to go on.
[Whitfield:] Ryan Nobles, thank you so much. Let's talk further about all of this with Molly Ball, a national political correspondent for "TIME," and Seung Min Kim, a White House reporter covering Washington for "The Washington Post." Good to see you both. Oh, boy, here we go. So here, we're a couple of hours away, from the president making his announcement. And the Democrats are now saying, well, he never consulted us, never even shared any of this with us. So, Molly, why wouldn't the White House share something of its plan with the Dems so that when a big announcement is made, at least the White House can kind of control the message from there?
[Molly Ball, National Political Correspondent, "time":] Yes, well, the Democrats' feeling is, as they said in that statement that Ryan just read, this isn't a real negotiation. This is a sort of cosmetic attempt to convince the American people, because I think the president and the Republicans realize that they have been losing the battle for public opinion. They want to put something out there to counter the criticism that they haven't made any counteroffers, that they haven't offered any compromise. But the Democrats feel that a real negotiation takes place behind closed doors. A real negotiation takes place between the parties that actually have the power to hammer something out, not through public announcements where there is no input, there is no ability to horse trade, or whatever is done in a traditional negotiation. This president is not a traditional negotiator. And we still don't know what he is going to say. But, as Ryan was saying, what we are hearing he is going to say would be a nonstarter because the Democrats don't feel that it's acceptable.
[Whitfield:] Right. The Dems saying we've seen this overture before, and if it didn't work then, why, Seung Min, would anyone believe that it would work this time? What is the real strategy here? Is this a plan, an announcement from the White House that really is to galvanize support to get government up and running again? Or is this kind of a public showing of trying to one-up? How do you assess this?
[Seung Min Kim, White House Reporter, "the Washington Post":] I think it is a measure to at least show the public that there might be some forward movement after days, nearly a week-and-a-half of no actual discussion between the president and the two Democratic leaders. But, again, this is a proposal that is going to go nowhere in this Congress for many of the reasons we've discussed earlier. And I want to also point out another reason why this deal is unacceptable to Democrats. It's because Dreamers themselves, the immigrants who would benefit directly from these protections, have said over and over that we do not want to be, quote, bargaining chips for a wall that we do not support. And Democrats have leaned heavily in on that.
[Whitfield:] This underscoring the temporary versus permanent. You have a temporary extension for a permanent structure. Go ahead.
[Kim:] Exactly. And that's precisely why. But I do think that talking with a number of Republican senators and Democratic senators this week on Capitol Hill, Democratic senators still say they are not feeling pressure from their base. They feel like the more that they stand firm with their Democratic leaders against dealing, particularly while the government is closed, with the administration, that the court of public opinion is on their side, and they feel that the Republicans will come closer and closer to them because they are the ones feeling the pressure. And I do want to point out, some recent polling this week that shows the president's personal approval rating has been on a decline. I found the NPRMarist poll pretty interesting in that regard where it does show a decline, not just overall, but also with his key base of support. We're talking about white evangelical voters, suburban men, registered Republicans, and those are really clear signs that the president needs to watch.
[Whitfield:] And we're looking at the president arriving back at Andrews Joint Base after paying respects to four Americans killed in Syria, and a ceremony taking place at Dover Air Force Base. So Molly, as we continue to look at the pictures of the president upon his arrival, and now he's just two hours away from his statement at the White House, you were nodding your head that, yes, Democrats feel like they kind of have the court of public opinion on their side, and they don't really need to work as hard at budging to the president's request. But the president usually is very responsive to polling and to approval ratings, and it has dipped. However, he continues to dig in his heels about the wall being the right thing to do. This is what he had to say this morning before he went to Dover. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We have a lot of people in caravans coming up. If we had a wall, we wouldn't have a problem. But we don't. We have too many open areas. The walls that we fixed and the walls that we built hold beautifully. Everybody knows that walls work. The Border Patrol has done an incredible job, but we need the help and the backup of the wall.
[Whitfield:] So Molly, he continues to say everybody knows walls work, except there are a lot of experts who are saying walls don't do, and are not as effective as the president is professing. So will he change his tune? Or does he have any incentive to change his tune?
[Ball:] Well, I learned long ago never to try to predict what President Trump is going to do. However, I think there's a couple of things. He has sent conflicting signals on this, does it have to be a wall question, right. There have been various times, including in his national address, where he talked much more about border security as a whole. And you have people on Capitol Hill saying, well, this is a game of semantics. It isn't. It's a wall or it's not. But if the president can be convinced to convince his supporters that some kind of border security package is the equivalent of, or is as effective as a wall, then he might get somewhere, but as long as it is wall, period, you're not going to see Democrats come along with it. The other thing I wanted to add to the prior discussion about DACA and the Dreamers is that part of the reason this a temporary protection is a nonstarter with Democrats is that the Dreamers already have temporary protection because the courts have stopped the administration from implementing the end of DACA that they tried to do. So the Dreamers have temporary protection for as long as that decision lasts. What the Democrats want is some kind of permanent legalization, what they want is citizenship for the Dreamers, and that is not something the administration has ever been willing to put on the table. Final thought, there's two ways you can read what the president is doing today. One way is, OK, he's going to start winning this battle now that he has shown that he is the reasonable one, he is making an overture, and it's the other side that has dug in its heel, that's one avenue. But the other way you can read it is he's shown that he is willing to give, and that means that maybe he is willing to give some more and maybe he is willing to cave.
[Whitfield:] So real quick, Seung Min, either he is showing he is willing to give, or perhaps he has even forgotten himself the various sequence of events that have happened, leading up to this, because some of the overtures that he is willing to make today reportedly seem to be overtures that have already been made, whether they were failed, or offered some incentives.
[Kim:] Exactly. There was a broader version of this deal that was offered a year ago in the previous shutdown impasse. But Vice President Pence himself has rejected, when we asked him on Capitol Hill, what about a DACA for wall deal? It was I believe a week ago, though the timeline in my brain can be warped sometimes, but a few days
[Whitfield:] It's happening to all of us.
[Kim:] when the Vice President explicitly rejected that, though he said the president would like to wait until the Supreme Court indicates whether it will weigh in on this DACA case, one way or the other. The president has also contradicted that since. So there is a lot of mixed messaging coming from this administration, and that's why Democrats feel especially confident that they can hold firm on where they are because, as Chuck Schumer has argued, negotiating with the president is like negotiating with Jell-
[O. Whitfield:] Seung Min Kim, Molly Ball, we'll keep it right there for now. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Right now, Women's Marches are happening across the country, but some are facing criticism over comments from organizers. Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz even stepped away from the march in Washington. We'll ask her why, next.

[Isa Soares, Cnn Anchor:] At least two dead and dozens injured after a strong earthquake rattled Turkey and the Greek islands.
[Vause:] A special counsel digging deeper into President Trump's business dealings and now the president's legal team taking a closer look at his authority to grant pardons to his staff, his family, even himself.
[Soares:] And a conflict-free life, O.J. Simpson's shocking statement and why a parole board granted him early freedom.
[Vause:] Hello, everybody. Great to have you with us for our third hour. I'm John Vause.
[Soares:] And I'm Isa Soares. NEWSROOM L.A. begins right now. Now a 6.7 magnitude quake has rattled Turkey and Greece, sparking panic and causing a lot of damage.
[Unidentified Male:] [Speaking foreign language].
[Soares:] These people were celebrating a birthday at a seaside patio in Bodrum, Turkey, when the tremor struck. Several cms of water washed up on the deck and sudden darkness.
[Vause:] No fatalities have been reported in Turkey but across the Aegean Sea, CNN Greece reporting at least two dead on the Greek island of Kos. Merchandise toppled from store shelves and rubble lay in the streets. Dozens of people have also been hurt.
[Soares:] Let's get more on this story. CNN producer Gul Tuysuz has the latest from Istanbul. Gul, both Bodrum as well as Kos, they're very popular with tourists, also with locals, too, in terms of this is high holiday season. What are you hearing from the ground?
[Gul Tuysuz, Cnn Correspondent:] First of all, Isa, we're hearing from the Greek authorities that those two people that had been reported as dead, they've come out and announced their nationalities. It's one Swedish and one Turkish national are the ones who have lost their lives in the 6.7 magnitude earthquake that really shook this very touristy resort, part of the Aegean, both on
[Soares:] And of course, this happened in the very early hours. Thanks very much, Gul. Do keep us posted. Let's get more from meteorologist Karen Maginnis, who's in Atlanta. Karen, give us a sense of just how powerful that quake was and the concerns moving forward in what relates to the aftershocks.
[Karen Maginnis, Ams Meteorologist:] Yes. And those aftershocks, they are very unnerving, Isa, especially since it took place during the early morning hours. People were either out enjoying themselves, because it's a very touristy area, or people were sleeping. So either way, it happens at night and it's an event that you are not expecting. A lot of people were forced out into the streets to sleep there because their buildings, they are afraid or their buildings are compromised. So this is the general area, I will tell you this is very tectonically active. What does that mean? We see a lot of earthquakes across this region. It's one of the most active in the entire world. So here is this coastal community, already we have seen about eight aftershocks between 4.0 and 5.0. Now, if you went
[Maginnis:] from 0.5 magnitude to 0.8 magnitude, that sounds like three clicks away. It is actually 20,000-30,000 times stronger. So this is considered a strong earthquake. And it was measuring 6.7 magnitude. And we are looking at an earthquake that certainly is capable of taking a number of lives but its depth was fairly shallow, just about 10 kilometers deep. Already we have those two fatalities reported here. And around the globe, typically you might expect between 100, maybe 200 earthquakes of this size in a year. There you see some of the damage associated with what looks to be some of the tourist areas, some of the debris that was thrown onto the roads. There was actually about a half-meter tsunami, so it was very small but it ripped some boats from their moors and also produced some water in some of those coastal areas. But we will keep you updated on the situation there Isa.
[Soares:] I appreciate it, Karen Maginnis for us there, thanks, Karen.
[Vause:] Well, Donald Trump's legal team reportedly going on the offensive, looking to discredit the special counsel's investigation of the president's alleged ties to Russia during last year's election campaign. "The Washington Post" and "The New York Times" both reporting that the president's strategy now is to try to find conflicts of interest among Mueller and his investigators. And "The Washington Post," reports that Trump's legal team also taking a close look at his authority to grant pardons, even to himself.
[Soares:] Well, meanwhile, Bloomberg is reporting that Mueller has expanded his probe between Putin's and Trump's business dealings with Russians, going back more than a decade. Bloomberg says FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and other real estate dealings.
[Greg Farrell, Bloomberg Legal Investigative Reporter:] What we have learned is that he is taking a broad view of the investigation and not a narrow view. So the mandate he was given in mid-May is open to interpretation. Anything related to Russia and that might have resulted in interference in the election. He is clearly going back, more than a decade, to any real estate transactions. He is clearly focused on any major transaction that has taken place, like the Miss Universe 2013 pageant in Moscow, et cetera, the flipping of the Florida mansion, in order to get information, yes, he'll have to issue subpoenas.
[Farrell:] He has to issue subpoenas to some banks and more difficult is to issue not subpoenas but requests for information from foreign banks, European banks. That takes time.
[Soares:] How much tension, how much anxiety is there within the White House to relating to this investigation as to how far it may go?
[Vause:] All this comes as the spokesman of communications for President Trump's team has resigned. Joining us now, Democratic strategist Matt Littman and CNN political commentator and consultant, John Thomas. Good to see you both. OK, so we had that extraordinary interview on Wednesday, which the president gave to "The New York Times." In that interview, he essentially drew a line in the sand for Mueller. This is what he said.
[Schmidt:] Mueller is looking at your finances and family's finances unrelated to Russia. Is that a red line?
[Maggie Haberman, "the New York Times":] Would that be a breach of what his actual charge is?
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I would say yes. Yes, I would say yes.
[Vause:] So that was Wednesday. Almost on cue, Thursday comes this report from Bloomberg that Mueller is in fact looking very closely at Trump's financial records. Which, Matt, you know, seems to be well within the rights and the authority of the special counsel.
[Matthew Littman, Democratic Strategist:] Well, in the counsel's charge, it basically says he can investigate anything about Russia and anything he finds out during the course of the investigation
[Littman:] so yes, I mean, he can look into Trump family finances if you look at the people they have hired on the Mueller team, these are people who were white-collar criminal lawyers. And so, I don't think it should be any surprise that they are looking at the Trump family finances at this point. The problem for Trump is, there's a reason why he has not wanted to release his taxes for all this time. And one of the reports is saying that he is really getting nervous about the fact that they're looking into the tax returns. There's a lot here that we don't know about Trump's finances because he has not wanted us to know. We may find out and that's what's making him nervous.
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator:] This is the problem with the special counsel, is they have such broad authority to go anywhere and everywhere, when they were charged to look at the 2016 election. Exactly what does an apartment deal that Trump may have done
[Littman:] That's exactly that is not what he's charged with
[Thomas:] You're right. And so why he is going back?
[Littman:] Because that's not what he's charged with. He is charged with anything the finds out in the course of the investigation, including Russia. So anything that he finds out is fair game. And he's finding some stuff out.
[Soares:] But
[Farrell:] He is clearly focused on any major transaction that, that has taken place, like the Miss Universe 2013 pageant in Moscow, et cetera, the flipping of the Florida mansion, in order to get information, yes, he'll have to issue subpoenas. He has to issue subpoenas to some banks and more difficult is to issue not subpoenas but requests for information from foreign banks, European banks. That takes time.
[Soares:] How much tension, how much anxiety is there within the White House, relating to this investigation, as to how far it may go?
[Littman:] Before they get to you, let me just say that Trump firing Comey is the stupidest political decision of all time because the whole reason all this is happening is because he fired Comey. Go ahead
[Thomas:] and you're right in the sense of the second the special counsel was appointed, Trump lost because this will take twists and turns. Look, Trump, as a business man, has lived a life, I'm sure he has had a lot of bad business deals, a lot of bad business debt, people with axes to grind and now they're all going to have a voice. And I'm sure Trump and his team are going oh, God, this thing is creeping way beyond whether or not Russia hacked the election or I had anything to do with that.
[Littman:] And if you broke the law you broke the law.
[Vause:] Well, in "The New York Times" interview, the president laid the groundwork, it seems, to try and discredit Robert Mueller and the investigation, so he told "The Times." "We were interviewing replacements at the FBI. Did you know Mueller was one of the people that was being interviewed? The next day he is appointed special counsel. I said what the tell is that all about? Talk about conflicts. But he was intervening for the job. There were many other conflicts there I haven't said but I will at some point," indication Mueller's out for some kind of payback because he didn't get the job. And then the past couple of hours we had this report from "The Washington Post" about that Trump's lawyers are actively compiling a list of Mueller's alleged potential conflicts of interest which they say could serve as a way to stymie his work. This is according to a couple of Trump's legal advisers. John, I just wonder how effective can the administration be trying discredit Mueller? He had bipartisan support when he took the job. He's the former FBI director, the second longest-serving FBI director. He saw this country through 911.
[Thomas:] Yes, it's going to be hard to do that if they're looking to discredit the messenger. I'd probably focus on his team members that he's bringing in to show conflicts. I think early on, I can't remember exactly the person, but I think somebody had close ties to Clinton, coming into the team, or it was a Clinton donor. So that's the strategy they will use. I don't think Mueller, good luck with that one.
[Vause:] You know who else gave money to Hillary Clinton?
[Thomas:] Donald Trump, right?
[Littman:] But also, by the way, none of this is about the truth, finding out the truth of what's happened with Trump over the years and with his finances is what we should be looking for. Donald Trump is not Donald Trump believes we have
[Soares:] But it seems within the Republican Party, many are already worried and voicing their concerns about whether President Trump may actually fire Mueller. Take a listen.
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] This is a person that makes statements off the cuff that sometimes come back to haunt him. And that's one of them. I'm presuming he probably wishes he could take that back.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Do you have any concerns about that approach that he's taking with Jeff Sessions, the attorney general?
[Sen. Ben Sasse , Nebraska:] The independence of our judicial officials, Justice Department officials, is highly critical to the functioning of our democracy.
[Raju:] Do you have concerns about the president saying that Bob Mueller should not look in the finances of the Trumps?
[Sen. Richard Burr , Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee:] Well, I haven't seen that specific thing. But Bob Mueller should look at anything that falls within the scope of the special counsel's mandate.
[Soares:] So do you think, Matthew, that he's pretty much set the stage for this?
[Littman:] I absolutely thing that Trump will fire Mueller at some point, I can't see how he's not. Trump does not think that the law applies to him.
[Soares:] How big of a bombshell would it be?
[Littman:] In the House, I don't think it's that big of a bombshell; in the Senate, I do think it's a bombshell. So go ahead.
[Vause:] I was going to say, which kind of explains some of the reporting we are getting now about the president taking a close look at his authority to grant pardons. So, John, just complete this sentence for me: if the administration has done nothing wrong, then why do they need to look at the power to pardon?
[Thomas:] Because, again, well, you have to know all your options. I think, Trump feels, and probably rightfully so, that this thing has become a witch hunt, that they are going to go through whatever layers of the onion they have to, how many decades they have to go back, whatever apartment deal or condo that some Russian bought that maybe he doesn't have a relationship with. They will find some wrongdoing that may have really no connection to this election. So Trump has got to figure out his options. And he needs to shut it down.
[Littman:] It's not a witch hunt if they find legitimate things that Trump did wrong.
[Thomas:] You're right, but what about the 2016 election?
[Littman:] They are looking into the 2016 election. We just came out last week, we just got new news about Donald Trump, Jr.
[Soares:] Will Mueller, do you think, be intimidated by any of this?
[Littman:] Absolutely not. There's no reason for him to be intimidated by this. And I believe that in the Senate, most of the people support Mueller. And if he ends up, if Trump ends up firing him, I think that already they're probably pretty far along in this investigation.
[Vause:] Really quickly, Senator John McCain diagnosed with brain cancer. I think now is a good time to remember what a decent man he was and what leadership he showed during the 2008 election campaign. Look at this.
[Unidentified Female:] I cannot trust Obama. I have read about him and he is not, he is a he is an Arab, he is not
[Sen. John Mccain , Ariz:] No, ma'am; no, ma'am.
[Unidentified Female:] No?
[Mccain:] No, ma'am; no, ma'am. He is a he is a he's a decent family man, citizen, that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues.
[Vause:] Very quickly, John, what happened between then and now?
[Thomas:] Dramatically different people, there's no doubt about that.
[Soares:] Matthew, John, thank you very much.
[Thomas:] Thanks.
[Vause:] Well, we will take a short break; when we come back, The Juice is about to be set loose after nine years in a Nevada jail. The parole board agrees to early release for O.J. Simpson. Details in just a moment.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right, everyone, John Berman here. I want you to listen to these words this morning. I wanted it over with. I wanted out. Please just get this over with. Whatever this is, just get it over. That is from Leigh Corfman who says when she 14 years old, she was sexually molested by Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore. That he touched her over her bra underpants and then he guided her hand to his underpants. I think saying these words out loud is so important because she is saying them out loud on the record. Three other women are telling stories about Moore from when they were teenagers. Roy Moore denies this. This morning, some Republican lawmakers are saying that Moore should drop out of the Alabama Senate race. Others are using conditions in their language. This was White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders overnight.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] The president believes that we cannot allow a mere allegation, in this case one from many years ago, to destroy a person's life. However, the president also believes that if these allegations are true, Judge Moore will do the right thing and step aside.
[Berman:] All right, CNN's Martin Savidge in Moore's hometown of Gadsden. Martin, some breaking news here, you just talked to Roy Moore's brother.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Right, his younger brother Jerry Moore. Spoke to him on the telephone. And he is quite defiant. He is, obviously, in defense of his brother here. And there are a number of things. Let me go through the notes because I literally got off the phone with him. First of all, he says of course he knows, the brother knows, that the allegations against Roy Moore are not true, not true at all. He knows that deeply in his heart. He knows that deeply in his faith. He's very concerned about what the impact is going to be on their 91-year-old mother because hearing all of this. They worry about her and her age and her health. When I asked, what does he believe that the motivation is with these women coming forward and making the accusations they have? Again, Jerry Moore says that it's money and the Democratic Party implying that you know they are doing this because they're being paid in some way and it is for the purpose of derailing or interrupting this campaign. He says it's because his brother has been leading so far in double digits. And he also says he knows that they are not telling the truth and that these women are going to as he put it have to answer to God for these false allegations. And he also portrays that his brother is being persecuted in his own words like Jesus Christ was. And he expects that the voters here and those that know Roy Moore are going to be outraged, outraged by the allegations, he said, no, outraged that anyone would even think that Roy Moore would be capable of doing what he's been accused of by these women, so, very defiant, very outspoken, relying heavily on his faith and defending his brother to the hit. John?
[Berman:] The brother of Roy Moore, the defense there, claiming they are not true, saying that his brother is the victim, which is interesting because you have now these four women on the record including Leigh Corfman who says when she was 14 years old she was sexually molested by Roy Moore. Lay out the charges that are in this stunning "Washington Post" story, Martin.
[Savidge:] Well, the allegations, of course, are that there are a number of teenage girls back when Roy Moore was a 32-year-old assistant district attorney here, who say, that he was trying to initiate relationships with them and in some cases did. But the most crucial one is Leigh Corfman who says at the age of 14, that Roy Moore not only started a relationship with her, but at least on one evening, undressed her and fondled her and she is under age, of course. So that would be a crime if that were true. The statute of limitations would have passed, but none the less when you are talking about a candidate for the U.S. Senate, you talk about any official or any person that is deeply, deeply distressing. But on top of it, it is because of the fact that you have had a number of women that now say that he seemed to have a habit of dating women who were extremely young, high school girls. And he was doing it from a position of authority in the neighborhood. He's the assistant D.A. He's dressed up in a suit. He looks good. He's coming on to young girls. All of this does not sound very good when you're a candidate currently and many people are struggling to either understand if it's true, or understand what comes next.
[Berman:] Yes. Sexual molestation doesn't sound good for any human being, let alone a candidate. Martin Savidge, thank you so much for being with us, again, just getting off the phone with the brother of Roy Moore. Back in Washington, this is a serious issue for Republicans in the Senate. They are all being asked about it. Our Sunlen Serfaty on Capitol Hill with the very latest from there. Sunlen?
[Sunlen Serfaty, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, they certainly are all being asked about it and senators up here on Capitol Hill calling it deeply disturbing and horrifying. And nearly every Republican senator that we spoke to yesterday including from a statement from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, they say that Roy Moore should drop out of the race if the allegations hold up. But, of course, that is the caveat. That is what we're hearing from many Republican senators, that if these allegations are true, he should drop out. Here's more of that message coming from Senate Republicans yesterday.
[Sen. Richard Shelby , Alabama:] It's a devastating, nasty story. If the revelations if that's true, I don't believe there would be any place for him in the U.S. Senate.
[Sen. John Thune , South Dakota:] Allegations, if true, to me, means he needs to step aside.
[Unidentified Senator:] If they're true he should step aside.
[Serfaty:] And Senator Ted Cruz, who is one of the very few senators who actually endorsed Judge Moore in his race, he came out with a statement late last night saying, quote, "These are serious and troubling allegations. If they are true, Judge Moore should immediately withdraw. However, we need to know the truth, and Judge Moore has the right to respond to these accusations." But some stronger words from Senator John McCain, he's one of the very few Republicans up here who said, look, I don't need any more proof from these allegations and "The Washington Post" story. He says that these allegations are disqualifying to Judge Moore and that he should immediately step aside. And certainly John, as this story continues on, that's going to be the questions for a lot of Republicans up here who weren't necessarily completely embracing Roy Moore even before these allegations, the question is, what more proof do you need for these sorts of allegations? What more proof do you need?
[Berman:] Four women speaking on the record, using their names, Sunlen Serfaty on Capitol Hill, stay on this for us. Sunlen we'll come back to you. Joining me now, CNN senior political analyst and senior editor for "The Atlantic," Ron Brownstein, from the "Washington Examiner," CNN political analyst David Drucker and Amber Phillips of "The Washington Post" blog, "The Fix." Amber we kept on hearing. We played that sound montage of all those Republican senators, if true, if true, if true. Well just now we heard from former Republican nominee Mitt Romney who may by the way run for Senate in Utah, that's a totally different story, but Mitt Romney uses completely different language here. He says, "Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections. I believe Leigh Corfman. Her account too serious to ignore. Moore is unfit for office and should step aside." Again, that is from a former Republican nominee for president who says he's seen enough, four women on the record in your newspaper this morning, enough for him to say Roy Moore should not be a good candidate. The implications of that statement?
[Amber Phillips, Political Reporter, "washington Post":] Yes. I think the implications are that Republican Party is clearly very split right now about what to do about this massive story as you point out with serious allegations, four women on the record, decades later, giving names, dates, consistent stories that are all consistent with each other. Sunlen said what more proof do you need. On the other hand, Republicans who are in the Senate right now recognize that the balance of power of the Senate could be at stake in this election if Democrats are able to tilt this election and a couple other in Nevada and Arizona next year and hold on to some other races. Certainly the balance of tax reform which they want to vote on in a couple months could be hanging in the balance with all this. So I think Republicans are split about whether they decide morally that this is not OK and fine, we're just going to let a Democrat have the seat or try to get someone else in, or they say you know what, we really need Republicans right now. We're struggling to get a legislative win, bring Roy Moore in.
[Berman:] It will be interesting if the answer to questions or charges of sexually molesting a 14-year-old, interesting if he answers that question is tax cuts. Ron Brownstein I want to bring you in to this discussion because there is an interesting dilemma here now. You have the president. You gave the vice president. You have all those Republican senators, saying if true, Roy Moore should drop out. You have Roy Moore saying it's not true. You have these on the record allegations. But I don't know that we will get past these on the record allegations or accusations and there may be more but Roy Moore will continue to say they're not true. So how does this position change between now and the December election day?
[Roy Brownstein, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Right. I mean I think the real question for all of these Republicans saying if true, is really twofold. We've been talking about, what is the standard of proof beyond four on the record accusations? I mean certainly there was less specific detailed on the record accusations before Harvey Weinstein was pushed out of the academy, pushed out of his company, at a time when Republicans certainly like to portray Hollywood as, you know, essentially kind of undermining the morals of America. They acted on less specific information than was given here. And I think the other question for that really has to be asked today to Mitch McConnell and all of the other Republican senators is OK, if you do believe and look Ted Cruz is right, everybody should get a chance to respond to allegations against him, but what is the process by which you intend to determine whether this is true? And if you are essentially saying that, you know, nothing, than in effect, if true, becomes OK, fine, let's go ahead with it. So I think there is an obligation I think on those who are saying we should wait to say what exactly are they waiting for and how will they clear up any doubts they have in their own minds.
[Berman:] David Drucker I want to read you the response from one Republican in Alabama. I don't want to suggest this is the response from all Republican office holders down there or all Republican leaders but it is not a unique occurrence either. This is from John Ziegler who is the state auditor who says, "There is nothing to see here. The allegations are that a man in his early 30s dated teenage girls. Even "The Washington Post" report says he never had sexual intercourse with any of the girls and never attempted sexual intercourse." So he's saying you know what, I read "The Washington Post" story. I don't care. You know, how will that play in Alabama?
[David Drucker, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, look, I think the one of the things we have to understand is that Roy Moore has a very loyal and committed base down in Alabama. And I think one of the reasons Republicans on the Hill are in a quandary is number one, there's nothing they can really do to impact what happened in Alabama with the party and part of the reason is that the influence of the establishment of the party doesn't carry weight like it might have 10 or 20 or 30 years ago when a top party official in Washington could have made a call to the state party and said, this guy's got to go and it also would have impacted voters' opinions. They would have seen leaders coming out against the candidate and said to themselves something is wrong here. That in a sense almost works against Republicans in Washington who were concerned about Roy Moore for all of the controversial and incendiary things he said before the revelations. I was on the phone with a voter, John, before we went on the air, somebody I spoke to in September when I was down there covering the Senate race. He voted for Roy Moore over Luther Strange and I said, does this story impact your vote coming up December 12th? He said first of all, I don't believe the story. I don't think it's true. I know the judge. They've been attacking him for years. And this is more of the same. He said, sure, if I actually believed it, it would impact my decision, but I don't. I'm going to one of his campaign rallies on Saturday and I'm going to donate $1,000. And so I think this is what Republicans are trying to deal with in a state that is conservative, but not just conservative, particularly anti- establishment.
[Berman:] You know and then there's this separate argument, Amber, we're hearing from the likes of Steve Bannon, I will not play it right now, because it takes too much time, but Bannon doesn't weigh into whether it's true or not he just says because it comes from your paper "The Washington Post" it should be completely disregarded as liberal propaganda and notes the "Access Hollywood" tapes were first published by "The Washington Post" as well. That too is an interesting argument because there's nothing true or not true about the "Access Hollywood" tapes. Donald Trump said that stuff right there. He's just saying because it comes from "The Washington Post" you shouldn't consider it as an Alabama voter.
[Phillips:] Well, I think that almost bolsters and proves the opposite point that Steve Bannon was saying and bolsters the accusations that these brave women made because listen, "The Washington Post," my colleague David Fahrenthold, published the "Access Hollywood" tape a month before the election. No one else was able to get ahold of it. Here we have publishing accurately the president never denied what was said on that tape, extraordinary proof of what he said. And now here we are again, having a story that is, when it comes to litigating sexual allegations in the press, is as close to proof as you can get. So I think listen, Steve Bannon has had a really bad week when you look at it, he supported Roy Moore. He's now having to defend him with weak arguments from allegations he molested a 14-year-old, couple days earlier he predicted Democrats would be I'm sorry Democrats would be very worried and Republicans would be celebrating in Tuesday's elections. Pretty much the exact opposite happened. So Steve Bannon's credibility has been struggling this week.
[Berman:] Look, it doesn't have to be a Republican or Democratic thing. And Ron Brownstein, I don't think anyone wants tax cuts more than Mitt Romney, for instance. I think he would do pretty well if there were tax cuts and he says he doesn't care, he wants Roy Moore to drop out.
[Brownstein:] Right. I mean, look, this is a test of how tribal our politics has become both from the leadership level and from the voters whether the idea of advancing things that you care about that Roy Moore will be a warrior in the cultural wars is sufficient to look past what, as Amber said, as detailed and specific an allegation as you can get. Look, I think from the point of view of the Senate Republicans there is a self-interest question here beyond the moral question, which is if he wins in December, which I don't think is guaranteed after this. I think that, you know, it's not as though he is 20 points ahead, so it's not inconceivable that he could lose. But if he did win, they will have to deal with the question of how do they deal with him as a sitting senator and how do they simply try to walk past these allegations, have no ethics process, no investigation. Are they seen as, in effect, coddling someone whose behavior went beyond the unpleasant to the criminal in one in the main case here. So there's a lot of self-interest I think on the line for Republicans as well as the moral standard.
[Drucker:] And John if you look at what happened on Tuesday and if you talk to Republican strategists about what they're worried about in 2018 it is suburban women and Roy Moore could be something Democrats could use against them next year and they are concerned.
[Brownstein:] Todd Akin plus.
[Berman:] David Drucker, Ron Brownstein, Amber Phillips, thanks so much for being with us guys. Really appreciate it. There's a new controversy this morning involving General Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser to the president and special counsel reportedly looking into Flynn's role in a meeting about forcibly removing a Muslim cleric from the United States, getting him out of the United States. And at the center of this meeting apparently a $15 million offer. President Trump, Vladimir Putin, the Russian leader, they shook hands right there, but will it be more at this Asian Summit? Will there be a private meeting? If not, why not? We're live in Vietnam.

[Paul:] 26 minutes past the hour. Thank you for being with us on Saturday. I'm Christie Paul.
[Blackwell:] I'm Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you. In the wake of the violence in Charlottesville a week ago today, there are some serious concerns about Boston and what will happen there. That's where our so-called, we shouldn't just we shouldn't say so-called, it is a free speech rally; people come and speak freely, and that's actually the name of it. And there will also be a counter protest, not a far away. CNN Correspondent, Polo Sandoval, joins us now. Polo, what are the preparations there after the country watched what happened in Charlottesville?
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, certainly, a higher level of security, Victor. That's what we heard from officials. As for what we're seeing right now, I think the front page of this morning's Boston Globe best describes it. We're currently seeing the calm before the rally, that's because things are relatively quiet right now. But that is expected to change in a few hours as up to 100 demonstrators, according to organizers, are expected to make their way here to Boston Common for this so-called free speech rally. Organizers have invited "traditionalist, conservatives, Donald Trump supporters, and in their own words, anyone who enjoys the freedom of speech." The concern is that that could be seen as an open invitation for extremist groups, neo-Nazi groups, for example, a White Supremacist. So as a result, local officials here are fairly concerned. In fact, they are recommending that parents not bring their children anywhere near Boston Common, which is a place that's usually bustling with family activity on a Saturday afternoon. Today though, a very different kind of activity that has officials concerned as you're about to hear from Boston Mayor, Marty Walsh.
[Marty Walsh, Mayor Of Boston:] I don't want them here. Let me be clear, I do not want them here. If I could've not had them here without a permit, I actually would not have given them a permit if I didn't have to give them a permit. We don't need that type of rhetoric going on in Boston Common. We've come too far.
[Sandoval:] Guys, there is a counter protest that's also being organized. In fact, that's expected to be a little larger than what we are going to see here at Boston Common. That group, however, is expected to march about two miles to this location, and that's where the concern is for authorities. They're going to make sure that both sides don't necessarily mix here and stay on opposite ends, so as to not create an intense situation. As for what officials are doing to try to keep everybody safe here today, you may be able to make out some of those concrete barriers at the entrance of Boston Common. Those weren't yesterday, those are in place to try to keep any vehicles from making their way into the crowd, obviously something we saw a week ago today. People here, officials here, the city of Boston, hoping to prevent anything like that from happening, Victor. But as we heard from the mayor, they are looking forward to this thing being done with. Of course, this is not what they would like to see on a Saturday afternoon here in the heart of the city.
[Blackwell:] And what time is this scheduled to start, Polo?
[Sandoval:] Things are expected to kick off about noon. This is when the organizers are expected to begin this event. In fact, that's what the permit states. They only have two hours to be able to hold their demonstration and that's when we expect those counter-protesters to arrive here too, Victor, so we'll keep it a very close eye. But at this point, nobody has necessarily shown up, at least, not quite yet but it is early.
[Blackwell:] Well, we do remember, the Charlottesville event was scheduled to start at the noon, but the violence started in the 10:00 hour. So, we will watch that certainly. Polo Sandoval, for us in Boston. Thanks so much.
[Paul:] And we'll show you what we're in Berlin, Germany. Neo-Nazis rallying there

[Baldwin:] With the Democratic field for president expanding quickly, the current front-runner according to the polls appears to be in no hurry formally announce. I'm talking about the former Vice President Joe Biden here. He has led most early polls when Democrats are asked who they would support for president. But today CNN caught up with Biden at the airport and he says, he is in no rush to make a decision on 2020.
[Joe Biden, Former Vice President Of The United States:] I don't think there's any hurry to have that announced I don't have any particular timetable. I don't think there's any hurry, but there's a bigger hurry to decide just personally.
[Baldwin:] The former vice president was asked about the possibility that former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz could run for president as an independent, he downplayed any concerns that Schultz would actually hurt Democrats chances of beating Trump.
[Biden:] I think he's smart as hell and I think it's his decision.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you think it'll hurt Democratic chances of beating Trump?
[Biden:] I think it's premature and so far out, and who knows what it's going to look like a year from now. I mean, you know, one of the things that I think we're doing is and it's us, not the press we're starting awful early. I think we should be concentrating on figuring out how to deal with the damage he's doing right now.
[Baldwin:] So far five Democrats have announced that they are running for president in 2020. Three others have formed exploratory committees and several more are expected to throw their hats in the proverbial ring in the coming weeks or months. Also just in, Senator Chuck Schumer says Stacey Abrams will deliver the Democratic response to President Trump's State of the Union address next Tuesday.
[Unidentified Female:] Have you asked Stacey Abrams to deliver the Democratic response and has she accepted the State of the Union?
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] Well, Speaker Pelosi and I are going to issue an official statement shortly, but yes. Three weeks ago I called Stacey Abrams and asked her to deliver the response to the State of the Union. I was very delighted when she agreed and she is just a great spokesperson. She's an incredible leader. She has led the charge of voting right which is at the root of just about everything else. And she really has if you look at her background, she knows what working people, middle class people go through. So, yes, I'm very excite that had she's agreed to be the respondent to the President and the State of the Union.
[Baldwin:] Stacey Abrams gained national attention during her bid for governor of Georgia. Had she won, she would have been the first African-American woman governor in the nation. So let's go straight to our CNN congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly. And, Phil, what statement, what message are Democrats hoping to achieve or to send by choosing Stacey Abrams?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, Brooke, at least at first, it's further confirmation the State of the Union will actually occur which means we are at least temporarily in a better place than we were for the better part of about 35 days. Brooke, I think what this underscores is something that isn't exactly a secret. That is within the party, Stacey Abrams is considered a rising star. Now yes, she lost her race for governor in Georgia. She was the first female black major party candidate in history in Georgia and she is somebody that national Democrats are very interested in in terms of what her future may be. There's a lot of talk here on Capitol Hill that perhaps she will run for Senate in 2020 there is a seat up for Georgia, so I think I think there's something to see with that. But also, key in on what Senator Schumer said about her work on voting rights. That is a major piece of the Democratic agenda in the House right now. It is a major thing the Democrats just in general are talking about, pushing back against Republican efforts, particularly on voter ID. And Stacey Abrams has been in the forefront of that. Now you know her history quite well. Obviously, serving in the Georgia state House, the very high-profile race in Georgia. Brooke, she won more votes total than any Democratic candidate state wide in the history of Georgia. And that obviously kind of has tongues wagging as Democrats look at potential new battleground states going forward. Now Stacey Abrams did just release tweet about this issue. She tweeted out, quote, at a moment when our nation needs to hear from leaders who can unite for a common purposes, I'm honored to be delivering the Democratic State of the Union response. And, Brooke, it's worth noting, when it comes to State of the Union responses, Stacey Abrams will be at least as far as I'm aware, the first unelected official to give a response to the State of the Union. Steve Bashir, the former Kentucky governor, gave the response in 2017. But before I get attacked on Twitter, that was not actually a State of the Union address, just a joint session of Congress. So obviously, Democrats have very high opinions of Stacey Abrams and again, is going to be very interesting in what she has to say next Tuesday.
[Baldwin:] Yes, happening next week. Phil, thank you very much. Also we are learning the head of the Congressional budget office is standing behind its estimate how much the shutdown actually costs. So on Capitol Hill today he reiterated his findings which found that the 35-day shutdown cost the economy, you ready? $11 billion. That is 3 billion that will never be recovered. Here is what he said about the permanent losses.
[Kenneth Hall, Director, Congressional Budget Office:] We are looking at the effect over in the context of the entire economy, which is really huge. But if you look at the impact on just federal workers it's much higher. If you look at the impact on private contractors it's higher. And some of that effect is going to be permanent for those contractors. We also don't see it entirely recovering. We think that on the whole we'll see some recovery over the next three quarters but we'll still GDP output will still be short about $3 billion. You won't make up for that government output.
[Baldwin:] Despite the CBO report, the White House is disputing the long-term effects of the government shutdown. Here is what the top economic advisor, Larry Kudlow, had to say when he was asked about it.
[Larry Kudlow, Director, National Economic Council:] We frequently disagree with CBO, with all respect, they're doing the best job they can. I get that. No. I don't I won't knowledge any of that right now. You know, in a $20 trillion economy it's awfully hard to make even the best guestimates of those kinds of small fractions of numbers. Now that the government has reopened the switch goes right back on. There is certainly no permanent damage to the economy.
[Baldwin:] Lawmakers have until February 15th to reach an agreement to avoid another shutdown. Next, an alarming bug that is impacting everyone who has Apple's Facetime software. Have you heard about this today? It allows people to eves drop on you without you ever picking up a call. Details on what you can do to prevent it while Apple is hurrying up and fixing it.

[Lemon:] Tonight a federal judge ordering Michael Flynn to stay within 50 miles of Washington and surrender his passport. His sentencing for lying to the FBI postponed for a few months, but not before the judge issued a sting rebuke of President Trump's former national security advisor. I want to discuss now with Harry Litman and Jennifer Rodgers. Good evening. Thank you so much. What an interesting day for the investigation and for the courtroom. We see all these norms being violated and people, you know, shooting down institutions and talking about our law enforcement agencies and the legal system. This is a good day for the rule of law, you think?
[Jennifer Rodgers, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I think it was. You know, you had a judge who has this incredibly important case in front of him, the sentencing of Michael Flynn, and he has a sentencing memo from the defense that is misrepresenting facts and blaming the FBI and has to say, well, listen, if you're going to back off of the situation here and say that you were somehow tricked, then you haven't accepted responsibility. So, the first thing he needs to do is to ensure that the defendant is actually guilty, that he is accepting responsibility, so that's what he does, and he does it in very strong language and also goes after the seriousness of the offense, too. You know, he wants people to know, including Michael Flynn standing there in front of him that lying to the FBI when you're a senior member of the administration, sitting in the White House is a big deal. And so I think it was a good day for the rule of law because, you know, he's not only talking to the defendant as we know, he's really talking to everybody in the country including Trump and followers who are continuing, trying to undermine the judiciary and all of our institutions. So I think it was a good day in that way.
[Lemon:] What do you think?
[Harry Litman, Former U.s. Attorney:] Yes, I agree. Look, it's the crucible of the law that where facts actually control. It's not just any old thing you can say in the political sphere. So they had said these things, they echoed Trump's talking points, and Judge Sullivan was like, you are under oath, let's take it one at a time, that's not true, is it? That's not true, is it? That's not true, is it? It wasn't simply a counterpoint but a counterpoint backed by facts and law, the kind of thing that is lacking so much in the political hullabaloo that we have every day.
[Lemon:] Don't you think that even at the White House and also the trumpets all over the country, their heads were blown up? There were so mad. They love this judge when they thought that he would believe the conspiracy theories, right? And the excuses. And then all of a sudden, they were mad at the judge because the judge said, well, this is what you're telling me is bull and then he scolded them. Let's go through some of it, Harry. First for you. The judge's name is Emmet Sullivan, by the way. Scolded Flynn by saying, I am not hiding my disgust, my disdain for your criminal offense.
[Litman:] Any by the way, shortly after that, he unpacks the T-word, you know, that he possibly commit treason, which he didn't, but nevertheless, we were all of a sudden underscoring, but was in fact a very grave offence because that is the other part of this, not simply that the talking point is on the right or inaccurate but they are trivializing a serious offense. The guy is carrying on a rogue foreign policy
[Lemon:] But this judge has a no-nonsense reputation.
[Litman:] He actually has a reputation for slapping the government around at times, and I think that's why the lawyers for Flynn were led into a blunder of serving up to him the sort of red meat couple pages in the memo talking about the bad things that the government supposedly had done, and he was having none of it.
[Lemon:] OK. So let's talk about the T-word that he mentioned, because he even raised the idea of treason. He said arguably, you sold your country out. He walked that back later and acknowledged that Flynn's unregistered lobbying for Turkey, right, ended before he worked at the White House, but I mean, he went all in.
[Rodgers:] Well, so this is this is interesting. It sounds like he did have the facts wrong a little bit, but the point is, he is not just looking at the offense conduct for what Flynn pleaded guilty to, which is the false statement, which Judge Sullivan said is serious enough as it is. He is also looking at the other conduct that he was charged with and didn't have to plead guilty to which is acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government. And, you know, a judge can take into account offense conduct that the person didn't plead guilty to if he finds it by a preponderance of the evidence. So, it actually is the case that Judge Sullivan can consider that conduct when he sentences Flynn. And to me, the fact that he was talking about that a fair amount today means that he's considering that when he is thinking about whether he should actually go to prison.
[Lemon:] Did Flynn's own lawyers trip him up by putting in that whole thing about the, you know, they didn't tell me what rights and all that? Did they trip him up?
[Litman:] I think so. After the recess, which Flynn grabbed for to take a breath and probably hit the bathroom, they came back, and the lawyers who are, you know, white shoe, very well established lawyers, fell on their swords immediately, said don't blame the defendant, this was our idea. They knew by then it had been a debacle, that they had tried to trot this out and they then walked it back as best they could. That's why they needed a continuance.
[Lemon:] Why would they do that? Saying that OK, well, maybe he was entrapped in some way?
[Rodgers:] Well, you know, listen, I mean, for some reason, they are still towing the party line when it comes to the president and his supporters. I don't know exactly why it is, but I think that Harry is right, you know, in part it's because of Judge Sullivan's reputation, he's tough on the government, so they think oh, maybe the judge will like it if we poke at them a little bit. And Mueller already said he deserves time, maybe he doesn't think Mueller is going to respond strongly. I'm not exactly sure, but it really was a mistake.
[Lemon:] Do you think that maybe the judge took into account the president's tweet? Do you he knew about it this morning saying I wish you well in court? Do you think that played into it?
[Litman:] That's a really interesting question. It does seem to me now we have this political and legal cross currents and as part of what he was doing, reacting to the suggestion out there that normally can't be rebutted, but he's in robes and he can and he wanted to push back not simply on the political side but to the American public and let them know in fact that justice system was just this guy who is being sentenced for serious crimes. My best guess, yes.
[Lemon:] This is important. We saw redactions in the things that were released last night, in the notes that were released last night. A lot of them. The judge would know what is behind in those redactions, right? Wouldn't he know?
[Rodgers:] Yes.
[Lemon:] And he's still very angry?
[Rodgers:] He is. He is. I mean, I think though, you know, he's not angry at what is in the 302, he's angry at the misrepresentations about the 302, right? So, you know. What is interesting to me also is that instead of just kind of giving them a tongue lashing, which I think a lot of people expected, he then goes on to say, you should do more cooperation. Basically, I'm really considering serious prison time for you. You ought to go out and do more to cooperate with the special counsel's office. Come back to me in March and tell me what you've done. And then I'll see what I want to do. So that is also highly unusual.
[Lemon:] Everybody was like, wait, what? What's happening here?
[Litman:] We'll come back another day. That's a great idea, your honor.
[Lemon:] Thank you, Harry. Thank you, Jennifer. I appreciate it. The White House no longer demanding that Congress come up with the $5 billion for the president's border wall, but then who is going to pay for it?

[Zain Asher, Guest Anchor, Quest Means Business:] There we have it. A round of applause marks yet another trading day out of Wall Street. We were actually probably in the red today. The Dow ended down, triple digits or so today. The story had nothing to do with trade. It was all about geopolitical risk. This fear that markets have that perhaps President Trump, the US could be planning a missile attack in Syria in retaliation for the chemical weapons attacks that we saw. Okay, it is Wednesday, 11th of April. Tonight, markets get a jolt as Donald Trump threatens Russia over Syria. And the European Alliance are being warned that airstrikes could indeed be imminent. And Mark Zuckerberg makes few friends on his second day of hearing in Washington. Hello, everyone. I am Zain Asher and this is "Quest Means Business." Hi, welcome, everybody. I am Zain Asher, so tonight investors, airlines and foreign governments are scrambling as President Trump taunts Russia and says that US airstrikes on Syria are coming. He says that they are imminent. As stocks let's take a look here struggled throughout. This session, the Dow ended down 218 points. And by the way, it has been such a volatile week at the stocks. This does appear to be the new normal. The President's tweets and Russia's defiant response echoed in all corners of the market, so it's pretty much just one story today. This is what the markets were focused on and oil prices spiked to a three-year high over fears about supply disruptions. Demand for safe havens also rose. Gold prices hit their highest in two months. In the meantime, the Russia ruble fell to its lowest level against the dollar since 2016. It recovered ever so slightly later on in the day. Art Hogan is chief strategist at B. Riley FBR. He joins us right now from Boston. So, Art, thank you so much for being with us. And here is the thing, this time last year, if I could just compare this year to last year, this time last year, the markets really did sort of seem to shrug off any kind of geopolitical news. This year, it has become so much more sensitive to every single headline, whether it is trade, whether it is North Korea, whether it's the potential strike against Syria. What gives?
[Art Hogan, Managing Director And Chief Market Strategist, B. Riley Fbr, Inc:] It's interesting. I think you stated that perfectly clear, right. So, last year, we saw eight days with the S&P 500 move 1 percent. We have already had 28 of this, this year where we saw 1 percent or more movement in the S&P 500, so, literally, you have four times the volatility and twice of volatility of an average year. And I think that really hinges around three things. I think it's a fear of a mistake whether it's a monetary policy or in trade and now, it's a fear of pickup or an escalation of geopolitical concerns in the Middle East. So, clearly, we have shifted from China and a trade war to Syria and perhaps an actual war where US involvement, it looks like it is going to be increasing in the near term, not decreasing and investors don't like that kind of uncertainty. So, I think that is why we saw the movement in the market today, and you add on top of that the Fed minutes came out, they were slightly more hawkish. Remember, the CPI came out a little bit harder this morning. The Feds sounding a little bit more hawkish on rates. So, when you get that juxtaposition of hawkish Fed and geopolitical problems in Syria, not a good combination for the market.
[Asher:] And not a good combination, but were the markets really focused on those Fed minutes or was it just more about the potential airstrikes in Syria?
[Hogan:] Well, I will tell you, the market tried to post a bit of a rally. It bounced off its lows this morning, but you know, a half an hour after those Fed minutes were released, and really had time to disseminate that, you saw the acceleration into the late afternoon, so I think part of that, I think that the Fed talking about changing their statement from you know, one that is accommodative to one that is neutral makes people think about the fact that they are in line. They are going to continue this. They probably have five more interest hikes over the next two years, probably two more this year. And rising rates trend to slow down the economy. So, I think that's playing a part of this, but clearly, the number one catalyst to the down side today was the Syria and the back and forth over Twitter talking about missile strikes.
[Asher:] And it wasn't just markets that are affected, stock markets rather that were affected. Also, oil prices rising on the back of the geopolitical risk. Syria isn't necessarily a major oil producer, but the fear is that you know, if there is some kind of attack that could actually lead to a major disruption in terms of supply. Just walk us through that.
[Hogan:] Yes, certainly, we haven't seen a bid in the oil market for a fear of disruption of supply and there have certainly been areas that haven't been able to produce up to their quotas. OPEC members like Venezuela hasn't been producing their quota. But, this you know, when something is happening in the Middle East, whether it's an oil producing country or not, that disruption causes that fear of disruption of supply because that's not the right reason for oil prices to begin to go up. There is no economic benefit to that 10 percent increase we have seen over the last week or so in the price of barrel of oil. We would like to see oil rise because the blind demand dynamics have balanced out. That's not necessarily the case of this particular week. Also, look at the yield on the 10-year. It was in the, you know, 2.83 and then as soon as we started thinking about the ramifications of Syria and missile strikes and what that could mean, that's another flight to safety, so you saw money coming in to the for the US 10-year. We also saw it in gold. Gold up almost 20 bucks at the close and you know, clearly, all three of those are harbors of safety, so you've got the pop in oil, you've got a pop in gold. You have got a movement into the US 10- years and you even we actually saw some action in the currency markets in terms of the end. So, you know, a typical flight to safety kind of afternoon as markets sort of accelerated their losses from the two o'clock hour to the close.
[Asher:] All right, Art Hogan live with us there. Thank you so much, appreciate that. All right, US officials tell CNN that President Trump's tweets caught aides and allies off guard. It came as a huge surprise today. The President wrote, I just want to walk you through the tweet that started all of this. He wrote, "Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia because they will be coming. Nice and new and smart and you shouldn't be partners. The gas-killing animal who kills his people and enjoys it." Elise Labott is in Washington for us. So, Elise, gosh, so much dig through there. I thought it's really interesting when I read this tweet that the tweet was more directed towards Russia than towards Bashar al-Assad. I mean, the alleged perpetrator of the chemical weapons attack in the first place. Didn't that strike you as a bit strange?
[Elise Labott, Global Affairs Correspondent, Cnn:] It's interesting, isn't it, Zain, how recently when it comes to Syria, President Trump and you have seen those kind of in the last couple of weeks that President Trump has kind of turned his anger on Russian President Putin for its support of the regime rather than the regime itself, although, look, the State Department, the Pentagon, and others continue to blast the Assad regime for its responsibility. And I mean, we have to be careful to note that investigators are still trying to prove the responsibility of the Assad regime, they say it's consistent with previous attacks and that it does look like this. But you know, you heard the Defense Secretary, Jim Mattis today say that they are still going through the intelligence to try and prove that responsibility.
[Asher:] Correct me if I am wrong, Elise, but isn't it rather difficult for the President to change his mind in terms of launching an attack against Syria in the wake of this tweet. I mean, now that he has announced it to the entire world, surely, he has to go through with it?
[Labott:] Well, he said that he is going to and I think, you know, he has made it pretty clear that he has decided to respond and I think you look at the French definitely want to have some kind of retaliatory response, possibly the Brits and I think they are kind of formulating now what they want to do. I don't think it's a question of it, but the scope and the timing. I think they are deciding you know, whether they want to do something small like they did last year to kind of just send the message or whether they want to do something a little bit more crippling against the Air Force. Of course, if they do that, that then becomes more of an open conflict and particularly with Russia. And I think when to go back to what you were saying about President Trump before, he has kind of made it more of a conflict now with Russia and so when those missiles or whatever they are, are going to start flying into Syrian territory. Is President Trump aiming at Russian targets or is he aiming at Syrian targets? Or is he conflating the two? And I think by that tweet, he kind of conflates a conflict with Syria and a response against Syria with a conflict and response against Russia.
[Asher:] All right, Elise Labott, live for us there. Thank you so much. Okay, so in the wake of the geopolitical risks that our Elise Labott was just talking about, European airlines are being warned about potential air strikes in Syria. The advice that is specifically coming from the European Aviation Safety Agency has directed out flights operating over the Eastern Mediterranean. It is not clear if it was based on any sort of specific military information. We don't know that yet, but the warning relates to part of this area. This area right here around Cyprus close to Syria shown in blue, refers to the possibility of air to ground attacks or cruise missile launches in the next 72 hours in the next three days or so, and possible disruption to navigation equipment. Looking at the region right now, let's take a look here. This is a live view if you will on Flight Radar 24. It's a live view of all the flights that are in the region right now as I speak and take a look. Come closer because it is apparent that planes are avoiding this area right here. That is the area between Cyprus and Syria. Planes are avoiding that area. You see the war is there in clear blue. I want to bring in David Soucie, CNN's aviation analyst. So, do we know whether this warning, David was based on any sort of direct, credible, specific military information or was it just sort of a general warning based on media reports? How do we know?
[David Soucie, Safety Analyst, Cnn:] Well, the fact that they only made it a 72-hour restriction is very telling because that means that they do have some information to say that there is a beginning and an end to whatever is going to happen. Now, if you go back to your previous story about President Trump's tweet, I can't imagine that they would be using a tweet as some reason to do this, but nonetheless, there is something going on there and they are basing all of these movement on the fact that something is going to go on there to what those with missiles in the area.
[Asher:] So, if a missile attack on Syria in retaliation for the chemical weapons attack is indeed launched, will the airlines get even more specific about timing and location, does that rarely happen?
[Soucie:] Unlikely. It very rarely happens. The only thing that get us that [inaudible]. Now, the US has had a restriction since August of 2017 on Syrian airspace all the way from Damascus, up all the way through the entire country. So, that has been in place for a long time for US and domestic carriers. But that is mostly to do with security concerns at the airports. This is something entirely different. And Euro control issuing this says that that entire region is in agreement with that state that it is a high risk to be flying over it.
[Asher:] So, I just showed our audience the map showing just sort of a live view of the region right now and where flights are traveling to and you could sort of see the area that is between Cyprus and Syria just being completely avoided. There it is on our screen, being completely avoided by planes right now as I speak. How much of a disruption is that to airlines? Financially? Just in terms of time. I mean, is it minimal?
[Soucie:] No, it is costing millions and millions of dollars every hour that those airplanes have to go around because now, you are also talking about overloading airports, changing schedules, people are having to wait for hours and hours on the tarmac waiting for a gate to get in and out of the airports, it's a huge amount if you look on the north side of Syria, you will see that all of the planes are lining up almost in a straight line. Those are all lined up ready to land at various airports. So, it's a very big concern and it is costing probably hundreds of millions of dollars every hour just to the fuel burn alone, let alone the inconvenience to the passengers.
[Asher:] Okay, so it is quite a big disruption, so we know that the Air Traffic Control Agency that oversees Europe has issued warnings, but what about other airlines in other parts of the world. What sort of warnings are they getting?
[Soucie:] Well, EASA and Euro Control is really what communicates through and then the International Civil Aviation Organization, they issue these notes and so they go out to every country. Each state or each country is supposed to give that information back to these other reporting agencies if there is something new happening like a military action or something in their country. So, this is something that happened in Ukraine. If you remember MH-17, which was shot down over Ukraine. They were in a very similar situation in which they had put out a restriction and that restriction came out and shared amongst the entire aviation community, yet still an airplane flew over that area and was shot down. So, it's something that is a very good communication network. People know when and when they are not supposed to be in these areas and so they all agreed to it and you could see that is happening. However, if you notice - I was looking at Flight Radar 24 about an hour ago, and there were a couple of aircrafts that were still flying through their with their IDENT off so there were some commercial airplanes that were flying through Syria trying to, I guess, stay off the radar, but they still are showing up there. And this is an IL-76.
[Asher:] Okay...
[Soucie:] That's similar to the plane that was just shot down that just crashed over in the other part of the country, over on the other side of Africa.
[Asher:] All right, David Soucie, live for us there. Thank you so much. We'll leave it there. Thank you. Okay, so yesterday, Mark Zuckerberg emerged, a lot of people are saying virtually unscathed from that Senate grilling. Today, boy oh boy, did they turn up the heat in Washington and we are going to talk about how the Facebook CEO handled it. How did he handle all of that pressure from the House? Coming up after the break. Welcome back. So, yesterday, some people said that Mark Zuckerberg certainly had an easy time in front of Senate lawmakers. Today, the lawmakers came back and they hit hard as Facebook CEO gave evidence in the Cambridge Analytica data scandal. And Mark Zuckerberg basically said that his own personal information has been exposed. Again, he reiterated his apology. He said that Facebook has taken responsibility. They made a big mistake by not taking a broad enough view of their responsibility as a company. Facebook stocks by the way closed up, interesting enough for a second day adding nearly 1 percent. Yesterday, it felt like lawmakers were sparring with the Facebook boss. Today, it came down to brass tactics. Take a listen.
[Frank Pallone, Us Representative, New Jersey, Democrat:] Will you make the commitment to change all the user to changing all the user to full settings to minimize to the greatest extent possible the collection and use of users' data. I don't think that's hard for you to say yes to, unless I am missing something.
[Mark Zuckerberg, Ceo, Facebook:] Congressman, this is a complex issue that I think deserves more than a one-word answer.
[Pallone:] Well, again, that's disappointing to me.
[Anna Eshoo, Us Representative, Democrat:] Do you think you have a moral responsibility to run a platform that protects our democracy? Yes or no?
[Zuckerberg:] Congresswoman, yes.
[Eshoo:] Have users of Facebook who are caught up in the Cambridge Analytica debacle been notified?
[Zuckerberg:] Yes, we are starting to notify people this week. We started Monday, I believe.
[Eshoo:] Will Facebook offer to all of its users a blanket opt-in to share their privacy data with any third-party users?
[Zuckerberg:] Congresswoman, yes, that's how our platform works. You have to opt-in to sign in to any app before you use it.
[Eshoo:] Well, let me just add that it is a mine field in order to do that. Are you aware of other third-party information mishandlings that have not been disclosed?
[Zuckerberg:] Congresswoman, no. Although, we are currently going through the process of investigating every...
[Eshoo:] So, you're not sure.
[Zuckerberg:] ... that had access to a large amount of data.
[Eshoo:] What does that mean?
[Zuckerberg:] It means that we are going to look into every app that had a large amount of access to data in the past before we locked down the platform. I...
[Eshoo:] You're not aware.
[Zuckerberg:] ... imagine because there are tens of thousands of apps, we will find...
[Eshoo:] All right, I only have four minutes. Was your data included in the data sold to the malicious third parties? Your personal data?
[Zuckerberg:] Yes.
[Eshoo:] It was. Are you willing to change your business model in the interest of protecting individual privacy?
[Zuckerberg:] Congresswoman, we have made and are continuing to make changes to reduce the amount of data...
[Eshoo:] No, are you willing to change your business model in the interest of protecting individual privacy?
[Zuckerberg:] Congresswoman, I am not sure what that means.
[Asher:] "Congresswoman, I am not sure what that means." Okay, so even if members of Congress couldn't pin down Zuckerberg on every single topic, we actually got an insight into his thinking, into his thought process when he actually left his notes in the middle of the hearing room yesterday. Uh-oh. So, these take a look here were on show for everybody to see. That was an entire section devoted to Tim Cook's criticism of the company and said, "Important to hold everyone to the same standard." And one bullet point read, "No accountability for MZ?" And it goes on to say, "Accountable to you, to employees, to people who use Facebook." Now, reviewing his performance, Brian Stelter joins us live now in New York, Laurie Segall is in the Capitol for us as well. So, Brian, let me start with you. Despite the obvious sort of time constraints, right, they were they only had four minutes each and that... ... that they couldn't really follow up in a way that they should have been allowed to, did lawmakers do a better job today compared to yesterday of holding Mark Zuckerberg accountable?
[Brian Stelter, Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, we learned a little bit more. The questions were feistier in some cases. We found out for example, Zuckerberg's own personal data was shared through this Cambridge Analytica situation, however, I don't think these lawmakers successfully landed many blows against Facebook's Zuckerberg. His company has to feel good at the end of two days of testimony. They were able to start a lot of questions...
[Asher:] But you found the questions today, it's seemingly a little bit more difficult to answer than yesterday?
[Stelter:] I think that's true for some of them. There was also a lot of focus on issues like alleged conservative bias on Facebook. There is very little evidence to back up those claims, but we did learn more about data practices and about election meddling and Facebook has been given a long to-do list now of questions they promise to follow up on. So, it certainly is a moment for Congress to appear to be holding the company accountable. Count me skeptical though that we are going to see systemic change or new regulation as a result of this.
[Asher:] Okay, so Laurie, Brian is skeptical that we are going to see any sort of systemic change, but do you think there really will be regulation that comes out of this? Changes that we see as a results of the hearings today?
[Laurie Segall, Senior Technology Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, I think that one of the things was that, it was very difficult for lawmakers to understand, A, the platform and B, what kind of regulation would be the right kind of regulation. So, I think there are actually even more question marks than there were before. Facebook has been trying very hard to get in front of the regulation conversation. You know, they have started talking about the Honest Ads Act, talk about election transparency and labeling political ads and the Mark Zuckerberg used a phrase, "we need the right kind of regulation" so we heard quite a bit about that. And also, looking at European regulations, we heard Mark Zuckerberg answer a lot of questions about that. You don't get an idea that there is going to be a clear solution to this problem following today, Zain.
[Asher:] Yes, Brian, I mean, it's an important point that a lot of people have brought up. How do lawmakers draft and craft the right regulation, when they don't even know, I shouldn't say they, but a lot of them don't even know how Facebook works.
[Stelter:] Today, at least some of the House members said they are active users and they sounded like they were. But a lot of these lawmakers were showing their age for over two days of testimony and that's understandable. You know, but constituents, most of their constituents are using Facebook. Facebook is a utility at this point. It's like infrastructure. It's like bridges or banks, and it's not always treated that way. And I think the questions we heard from lawmakers underline some of the embarrassing and awkward questions, was it real anxiety or real tension about the power of these social networks and tech giants in our lives? And that's real. Whether some of these questions were off base, they were, but there is a real tension here. And we might see it play out in the midterms, in the next Presidential election and in elections all around the world. This sense, this gnawing sense that these companies will become too big, too powerful and are abusing their power, abusing the data we give them. It is sometimes hard to pin that down, but some of the lawmakers tried today, and I think that anxiety is going to be with us and these tech companies are going to have to fight it for a while.
[Asher:] So, Laurie, one question that came up over and over again today, and I think a little bit yesterday was this idea that people should be allowed to opt-in to have their data shared, as opposed to it being just the default. I mean, are we at least going to see just in terms of changes, are we at least going to see the terms and conditions of sort of a user agreement between Facebook and a user ordinary user like myself or yourself become a lot more simple and clear to understand?
[Segall:] Well, I think Facebook's company line right now is transparency and you heard Mark Zuckerberg get skewered there. I mean, essentially every single lawmaker was saying, "You have to be more transparent. Your terms of service are terrible." I think Senator Kennedy actually said, "They suck." You know, I think actually, we will see more transparency, but you know, I am not sure we will ever see, you know, an opt-in option. I don't think people even really understand the power of their data and what it does and you know, I think we really should have a larger conversation about privacy because you know, I don't think people quite understand targeted advertising while we are having this conversation and it can be very reactionary. You know, I do think the question you know, what Brian talked about, about are these tech companies too powerful? I think that is emerging and that is going to be one of the most important question that we are all going to be grappling with. You know, it was funny, Mark Zuckerberg said something today. He said, "You know, I feel competition. You know, the average person uses eight apps a day," you know mentioning Facebook and apps, as well as if you take a look at that...
[Asher:] Yes, Facebook owns most of them, yes.
[Segall:] ... three of those Facebook owns three of those apps, and you know, this is an incredibly powerful company and you know, they talk about they always get the question, "Are you a tech company? Are you a media company?" And you know, that's a really important question and while Mark Zuckerberg says, "We are a technology company." He admitted that they are responsible for the content on their platform over the last couple of days, and I think that's a very significant admission because it comes along with a lot of power and responsibility... ... and you know, we saw today on Capitol Hill, lawmakers saying Facebook has a conservative bias, calling out conservative bloggers that have been kicked out the platform. So, you're going to see Facebook falling into these really nuanced questions of hate speech and political speech and that fine line and there is a lot of nuance there. Mark Zuckerberg himself said they are struggling with that and it goes back to the idea of artificial intelligence, which is going to really help fix a lot of this. It's going to help proactively police. Well, that's going to open up a whole new set of problems, so you know, there are a lot of fundamentals that I think came up in these hearings. We might not have gotten as much information about data collection, but I think if you kind of take a step back, there are a lot of ethical issues we can look at when we look at the future of Facebook and just how big and important it has become in all of our lives.
[Stelter:] At the end of this day, we have talked about this data scandal for almost three weeks, and yet, Zuckerberg today has said there has been no meaningful impact on his business. Meaning, people aren't using Facebook less.
[Asher:] See, that I believe.
[Stelter:] ... their accounts.
[Asher:] That doesn't surprise me.
[Stelter:] So, to me, that's one of the headlines.
[Asher:] As Laurie mentioned, you know, the average person uses eight apps a day, Facebook owns three of them. They are in some ways, a monopoly.
[Stelter:] I was watching Laurie's Instragram's from Washington. It looked like a fun scene and I was thinking, wait, this is a Facebook app I am using right now.
[Asher:] Oh, that's hilarious. We're all addicted. We're all addicted.
[Stelter:] They've got us.
[Asher:] Guys, I've got to go. Laurie, thank you so much. Brian, thank you so much.
[Segall:] Thank you.
[Asher:] Guys, I appreciate that. Okay, so elsewhere in Washington, we actually saw a rare case of bipartisan agreement today. Lawmakers came together in an attempt to combat online sex trafficking. In fact, President Trump signed a new law which aims to help victims hold websites accountable if they knowingly if these websites knowingly facilitate sex trafficking. However, the bill certainly does have its critics. Joining me now, Jean Bruggeman who is the Executive Director of Freedom Network USA. Jean joins us live now. So, Jean, here is the thing. Some good news is that there are some websites that facilitate that apparently facilitate sex trafficking that have already been shut down. Obviously, that is certainly a step in the right direction, but how much of a dent does it make in the underlying problem do you think?
[Jean Bruggeman, Executive Director, Freedom Network Usa:] Well, I think it's hard to say. Time will certainly tell. But what is I think what is the challenge is that we haven't identified any sources, any platforms that are solely used for sex trafficking. What we are talking about is platforms that are broadly used for a wide variety of businesses including sex workers who trade sex for a variety of reasons. Some of whom are certainly coerced and forced and need protection and others who are engaging in work through their own choice that are conventional sex workers. And I think that distinction is lost in this legislation unfortunately.
[Asher:] Okay, so then how much of a problem does it make the legislation? I mean, if you have websites that aren't solely used with sex trafficking that like for example, you know, Craigslist, they just shut down their personal ads section, so if you have websites that are used for a variety of reasons, how much more difficult does it make sort of crafting legislation and going after these websites?
[Bruggeman:] Certainly, that's a challenge. You know, going after the abuse and exploitation in any industry and the various trafficking that occurs in all industries and all different forms of labor, we see trafficking victims from teachers to agriculture to mining to domestic work. And so, isolating those who are committing these acts of violence and exploitation is a challenge for law enforcement and is an important task and more tools are needed to assist law enforcement and identifying those traffickers, going after those traffickers, and protecting and providing services and support for those survivors. And it's not easy to do and yet, that is the task before us and we can't take we can't take the easy way. We can't excuse ourselves from doing that hard work of being very specific and going after the traffickers in a very nuanced way.
[Asher:] It's such an important task ahead. All right, Jean Bruggeman, live for us there. Thank you so much. Appreciate that. Okay, so the Speaker of the House prepares to go silent, that the 48 years old, Paul Ryan's departure from politics has some people asking why. Why is he leaving? After the break, I want you to hear what he told CNN just moments ago. That's next.

[Berman:] A new figure emerging in the Russia investigation. And it may be an important figure. The special counsel now getting cooperation from a diplomat with ties to the United Arab Emirates after stopping him at Dulles Airport outside Washington in January. CNN's Shimon Prokupecz in Washington has this story. Lay this out for us, Shimon.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Yes, John. So, you know, this this George Nader is this guy who basically has connections to political circles here. He's been doing some work for the UAE. He's done some other political work sort of as a foreign policy adviser with ties to Washington, D.C. He has an apartment here in Washington, D.C. But he's been this mystery figure that sort of fell off fell off the face of the planet. No one knew that he was even involved in any of this. And then, just in January, he was stopped at Dulles Airport by the FBI, where he was questioned for several hours, handed a search warrant for his electronic devices, and then he was given a grand jury subpoena to appear before this grand jury that's been investigating the Trump campaign and Russian influence. And we've learned that he's been cooperating with the special counsel investigation, providing information to the grand jury on his ties to the UAE and two meetings that investigators have long had questions about that occurred during the Trump transition. Now, one of them occurred in New York City in December 2016 and involved key Trump aides, Steve Bannon, Jared Kushner and Michael Flynn and the crowned prince, who flew in secretly without notifying U.S. officials. And then there was a second meeting that investigators have also been looking at, which occurred in the Seychelles, where Nader again was with the crowned prince, Trump supporter Eric Prince and a Russian with ties to Vladimir Putin. Now, the nature of these meetings have long been a concern to the FBI and intelligence officials. And Nader's cooperation certainly a significant step in this investigation, especially with the fact that he's providing information to the grand jury as Mueller continues to investigate foreign influence on the Trump transition and campaign, John.
[Berman:] Again, this investigation doesn't appear to be getting smaller or it doesn't appear to be getting any closer to finish, at least as we can see right now. Shimon Prokupecz, thanks so much for being with us. I appreciate it. New this morning, a senior White House official tells CNN that sanctions against Russia for cyber meddling could come as early as next week. This after President Trump claimed yesterday that Russian meddling had no impact on the vote in the last election. Joining me now is Republican Congressman Tom Marino of Pennsylvania. Congressman, thanks so much for being with us.
[Rep. Tom Marino , Pennsylvania:] My pleasure.
[Berman:] YOU know, CNN reporting CNN reporting that the White House could ask for these new sanctions as soon as next week. What's the rush? I mean it's been, what, it's been nearly two years now since we first got news that Russia meddled in the election. Should they speed this up?
[Marino:] Well, we certainly need sanctions against Russia, China, North Korea, Iran. And I don't think that we should wait any longer for these. As far as what's being reported, you know, I take it with a pound of salt what's being reported as far as sources. I'm a former prosecutor and there's been a lot of talk about what Mueller is doing, what he's not doing, and sanctions. Listen, Mueller is not letting anyone know what he knows, and that's the way it should be, and we should enforce these sanctions. And with and tougher sanctions as well.
[Berman:] Tougher sanctions on Russia for election meddling, independent of what Robert Mueller is doing, except, I guess, suppose he indicted 13 Russians, you know, for Russian election meddling last year. Just specifically on the Mueller investigation, because it's interesting, you say as a former federal prosecutor it's good we don't know exactly what he's doing. If and you're not going to mind this hypothetical because I'm not asking you to comment on the hypothetical itself. But if he is asking about the United Arab Emirates, if he is asking questions, you know, about maybe Jared Kushner's business meetings, if he's asking questions about the president's business meetings, does that go beyond where you are comfortable with the Russia investigation?
[Marino:] Again, as a former prosecutor, the public does not know, the media does not know the plan that Special Counsel Mueller has going. You turn over one rock and it leads you to a couple of other rocks. So, as I did, I did the same thing in investigations, linking the one issue.
[Berman:] So yes.
[Marino:] And it may be good. It may not be good.
[Berman:] Yes, the only reason I was asking is because there are people, Republicans, who say that if two or three or four more rocks are turned over, that is going too far. They just want to see the one rock. But I'm not going to press more on that because I do want to ask you about what's been going on in the White House. The Gary Cohn departure, the week after Hope Hicks announced she was leaving. You know, there's questions about General Kelly and how he's run the security clearance operation inside the White House. The president said yesterday there's no chaos inside the White House. Is that how you see it?
[Marino:] Look, I trust General Kelly implicitly. He knows what he's doing. He's getting control the way it should be. Everyone should not have access to the president unless they go through the chief of staff. I do not I did not want to see Cohn go. But as my father always told me, there's always some just as good to replace you. Cohn's done a great job on the tax issue. And the president is is a smart businessman. That's why I supported him in the beginning.
[Berman:] So
[Marino:] The one thing that's smart about the president, he leads out with his toughest punch like he did talking about NAFTA, and then now you have people saying, well, let's negotiate this a little bit better instead of eliminating completely, and the president has everyone right where he wants them.
[Berman:] Let me let me go back to Gary Cohn, and then we'll come back to trade and tariffs in a second. What will you miss? Why do you think Gary Cohn will be missed? What does his loss represent to you?
[Marino:] He's just one of the most brilliant economic advisers that I've seen in a long time. It doesn't mean that we will not have another. I'm sure we will have another brilliant adviser. But I think Mr. Cohn will be around for advice if the president wants it. But we will get someone that's
[Berman:] His advice
[Marino:] Cohn's attitude.
[Berman:] His advice was to not issue these tariffs on steel and aluminum. Do you think the president should listen to that advice?
[Marino:] Well, the president is a pretty sharp businessman. And you know something, from the beginning people, first of all, said he wasn't going to be elected, and he was. But look what
[Berman:] I'm asking what you think, though, congressman. I'm asking what you think about this, congressman. Do you think that the president should issue tariffs on steel and aluminum?
[Marino:] I think I think he should issue tariffs on specific countries and for specific issues. Look, we're we've an $800 billion deficit coming up and it's not changing. So what is wrong with trying to resolve this through tariffs on countries like China and Russia that do not care about the deficit that we have. We need to be put on a lower excuse me on a playing field, a level playing field. I have union members coming to me all the time saying, you've got to do something about NAFTA because we're losing our jobs.
[Berman:] Yes. And I hear that, too. You just said specific countries, though, and you noted China and Russia.
[Marino:] Yes.
[Berman:] Well, what about Canada, which is the largest exporter of steel to the United States? What about the EU, which, I think, exports more steel to the United States than China does?
[Marino:] There's where the president and his team need to negotiate a revision of the NAFTA agreement to make sure that we are not at the deficit end of things. He again, he leads out with his hardest punch and now people are talking about saying, let's renegotiate this.
[Berman:] But, again but, again, I'm asking you I'm just I'm just asking, do you think that Canada should be punished on steel and aluminum?
[Marino:] No, I'm not saying they should be punished. I said we should go back to the table and make it a level playing field.
[Berman:] And on when you bring up NAFTA, the clause that the president wants to use to issue these tariffs is Article 232 of a trade legislation, you know, written in the 1960s, which said it's a matter of national security. NAFTA's a separate issue here. You've got to choose one or the other.
[Marino:] I no, I don't think you have to choose. As you said, look how long ago that was written. Look what NAFTA has done to manufacturing in the United States. Look what it's done to our deficit. You know, we can, and the administration does, they should
[Berman:] Trade deficit.
[Marino:] The trade deficit. And we should be able to multitask on these issues.
[Berman:] Congressman Tom Marino of Pennsylvania, always great to have you with us. Thanks so much for the discussion, sir.
[Marino:] My pleasure. You bet.
[Berman:] All right, one week after White House Adviser Jared Kushner had his security clearance downgraded, he is set to meet with the president of Mexico today. What they plan to talk about, next.

[Erin Burnett, Cnn Anchor:] OUTFRONT next, the President's Supreme Court pick. He has made his decision and the nominee is about to be revealed Trump style. Senator Bernie Sanders is OUTFRONT. Plus, Trump reportedly tells Putin that his aides are, quote, "stupid people." Trump said that to Putin about Trump's people. And Michael Cohen vowing to speak the, quote, "real truth", how worry should President Trump be? Let's go OUTFRONT. Good evening. I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, President Trump about to announce his pick for the Supreme Court live on national television in prime time. The person close to the process telling CNN, the President has made his decision and the nominee and the nominee's family are readying for the cameras as we speak there at the White House. This is one of the most significant announcements of President Trump's presidency, one that, frankly, will cement his legacy and define the Supreme Court for more than a generation. That's a monumental moment and the president, of course, has turned it into a reality show. There's the big reveal coming up on live prime time, 9:00 Eastern, and the tease. Trump has been playing this up to get people to watch. Even people who may not care anything about the Supreme Court, they want to watch this whole pomp and circumstance. He's been doing this for ten days.
[Donald Trump, President Of United States:] I'll be announcing it the Monday after July 4th. What is the Monday after July 4th?
[Unidentified Male:] The 9th.
[Trump:] The 9th? I'll be announcing on the 9th. We're going to give you a great one. We're going to announce it on Monday. If you tune in Monday at 9:00, I think you're going to be extremely happy with the selection.
[Burnett:] Even a little tune in announcement. And here's the thing, he hasn't linked, he's played it very close to the vest. Trump said to have made his decision by 3:00 p.m. today. You have to, you know, either have them all there or fly them in. I mean, you know, it's a pretty incredible feat to pull off. We're told the finalists include three men and one woman. The final four include Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Judge Thomas Hardiman, who, of course, was the runner-up to replace Antonin Scalia last year, Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Judge Raymond Kethledge. The big reveal will have the lights, the camera, all of the drama. I mean, do you remember when Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch last year? I mean, this was sort of channeling of Trump's inter apprentice. He walked alone to the mike. He said a few words, then built up to the great reveal.
[Trump:] I would like to ask Judge Gorsuch and his wonderful wife Louise to please step forward. Here they come. Here they come.
[Burnett:] And no one knew until that minute. So tonight, Donald Trump, the man who made a name for himself by saying "you're fired" knows that when it comes to tonight and to leaving his mark on American history, it is not the fired part that counts. But the actual final few words that he used to say in all of his "Apprentice" finales.
[Trump:] Randall, you're hired.
[Burnett:] And Jeff Zeleny is OUTFRONT live at the White House. I don't know if we'll get the screams and the applause that came in "The Apprentice" finales, but that is certainly the mood and the pomp the President is building towards. What are you learning right now, Jeff?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Erin, good evening. If it was only that easy to put someone on the Supreme Court saying you're hired, the President I think would be in much better shape. The reality here is, this is the beginning of a summer-long intense confirmation fight. All ready battles playing out. It's coinciding with a midterm election year, which in some ways helps fire up his base. In other ways it complicates it because the Democrats are fired up as well. But, Erin, the finalists as you were just laying out there. I am told that the President throughout the day today taking phone calls from people essentially soliciting pros and cons from Brett Kavanaugh and Thomas Hardiman. Those are believed to be the two top contenders of those four but no one is making any bets on that. The President, I'm told, still intrigued with the idea of having a woman on the Supreme Court, a conservative woman in his view. The reality is we're going to have to wait. And, Erin, I can tell you, top officials here do not know. They're planning for three possibilities. They've been briefing conservative activists. They are getting their team ready for a confirmation fight for three of them. Of course, in two hours we will know. But, Erin, interestingly tonight in the room there will be a lot of Senate Republicans. Senate Democrats were invited, particularly those red state Democrats whose votes they're looking for. They've all declined. That does not mean they will not vote for the confirmation at the end of the day, but those red state Democrats will not be there tonight. As of now, the White House believes that secret will hold, two more hours to go, Erin.
[Burnett:] All right. Thank you very much. In a White House that leaks like a sieve, the best thing to do is not tell around you who you picked. And then, it can't leak. OUTFRONT now, Independent Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator Sanders, I appreciate your time. But we understand the President made his choice. When you talk about just the logistics of getting someone there and informing them, making it at 3:00 Eastern is pretty darn late for a 9:00 p.m. announcement that's what we understand. Senator, Is there anyone this President could realistically pick that would be acceptable to you?
[Sen. Bernie Sanders , Vermont:] Well, there are many people he could realistically pick, people who respected the rights of workers, people who respected women's rights, people who are concerned about the environment and climate change, people who believed in justice. If President Trump were to nominate somebody who held those beliefs, of course, I could support that person. Do I realistically think that that is going to be the nominee? No, I don't. As you know, Trump has indicated that he is working off a list of 25 right-wing legal people. And that during the campaign he said, pretty publicly, that his nominee would be somebody to overturn Roe versus Wade. If that's one of his nominees, no, I certainly will not support him or her.
[Burnett:] All right. So, on the list of 25 that you're not amenable to, one of the judges that we understand, I don't know if you just heard our Jeff Zeleny, but he's saying it could obviously be anyone on that list of 25. But we believe at this point, he had whittled it down possibly to Judge Thomas Hardiman and Judge Brett Kavanaugh. I want to ask you about Thomas Hardiman. Obviously, he's on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals right now. And part of the reason he's there is because of you, you voted to confirm him as a Circuit court judge. So
[Sanders:] Well, wait a minute. Let's who else voted for him on that one? In fact, everybody voted for him, right?
[Burnett:] Right. Well, Democrats did.
[Sanders:] Yes, that was unanimous.
[Burnett:] My point is, you're saying you're now putting him as a conservative you couldn't support. But obviously a decade ago you didn't feel the same way.
[Sanders:] Well, yes, but there is a difference between voting for somebody in a lower court and voting for somebody in the highest court of the land. There is a fundamental difference. And if he is the nominee
[Burnett:] Which is what? I mean, that principles would matter in either case, right?
[Sanders:] Well, the principle is that the Supreme Court makes the law of the land, and determines what happens in our country in virtually every area. So, yes, there is a fundamental difference. Look, what we are talking about here is in a moment in American history where we have right-wing extremists controlling the House, the Senate and the White House. If we appoint another right-wing extremist to the Supreme Court, I have very serious concerns about justice in this country and what will happen to the men, women and children and the future of our nation. So
[Burnett:] Just to be clear, would Thomas Hardiman be a right-wing extremist now as you define it?
[Sanders:] Yes, if he is on a list of the 25 that were presented to the President, yes, he would be somebody that I would feel impossible to support.
[Burnett:] Your colleague, the Democratic Senator Bob Casey from Pennsylvania, he said he would oppose anybody on the list, which I believe is similar to what you're saying to me now, right?
[Sanders:] Yes, yes.
[Burnett:] OK. The White House Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah responded, and his response was unfortunate though not surprising even before his or her qualifications can be evaluated, Senator Casey is refusing to consider the President's SCOTUS nominee. Doesn't he have a point? I mean, that it would be
[Sanders:] Not really, it depends. I think what Bob said is that, if it were part of that list of 25. And that list of 25 is not just an arbitrary list. These are people who have been assembled by right- wing jurists and they have views on Roe versus Wade, they have views on workers' rights, they have views on the environment which in many cases are well known. So this is not just any old person. I would not say that, you know, any person should be summarily rejected. But if they're a member of that list, they should look. This is
[Burnett:] Do you regret then voting for Thomas Hardiman on that lower court? Because I know you're saying it's different, but the reality is he wouldn't be up for this if he hadn't gotten that.
[Sanders:] Look I voted look, when you vote for lower court judges, sometimes we get blue slips and there's a process that goes by. I think that vote was 95 to nothing, is that correct?
[Burnett:] Yes.
[Sanders:] 95-nothing. And there are a number of votes like that. But let's be clear, voting for a Supreme Court justice is very different than voting for anybody in a lower court. Look, what we're talking about is a right-wing agenda which not only wants to end Roe versus Wade, despite the fact that 70 percent of the American people support the maintenance of Roe versus Wade. Not only wants to overturn decisions regarding gay marriage and gay rights despite strong support from the American people. The right-wing agenda goes so far as to really side time and time again with large corporations who are attacking workers' rights. Even the concept of the minimum wage, which now is a starvation wage of $7.25 an hour. There are people, right-wing people saying, no, no, that's unconstitutional. We're talking about healthcare. We're talking about
[Burnett:] OK.
[Sanders:] issues of women's health in general.
[Burnett:] Senator.
[Sanders:] Yes?
[Burnett:] I want to ask you before we go, but while I have your time about the deadline tomorrow which you know, of course, is the government's deadline to reunite children under 5 who were separated at the border from their parents. Half of the children are going to be reunited by that deadline. And the Trump administration isn't sure about the rest. The federal judge though who set this deadline for reunification said he's, quote, "very encouraged thus far." Again, I've said half of those children will be reunited by the deadline, half will not. Are you encouraged?
[Sanders:] Am I encouraged by a President who ripped children out of the arms of their mother? In a situation in which the authorities did not even know where these kids were, am I encouraged? No, I am outraged by what Trump and his administration have done. Obviously, I would hope and expect that every person in this country, every person in the world believes and expects that these children should be united with their parents. We will see what happens. But I have if you want to know what I've been impressed by, it's the incompetence of the Trump administration, even the simplest things in this area.
[Burnett:] ICE has become a lightning rod in this. The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was followed out of a restaurant this weekend. Protesters were yelling personal insults at him, chanting "abolish ICE" and vote him out. I want to play a clip for you, Senator Sanders.
[Unidentified Male:] Where are the children?
[Unidentified Female:] Vote you out. Vote you out. Vote you out. Vote you out. Vote you out.
[Unidentified Male:] Abolish
[Ice. Unidentified Speaker:] Abolish
[Ice. Unidentified Male:] Abolish ICE.
[Burnett:] Senator, among the protesters were members of a local chapter of the Democrat Socialists of America. Do you think their behavior was acceptable?
[Sanders:] Look, getting back to this very issue of immigration, there are people all over this country that are outraged that little kids have been separated from their parents, which no doubt will cause, I guess, permanent psychological damage when you separate a kid from his or her parents. So people are outraged and I understand that. I happen to believe that if we want to deal with real immigration reform, if we want to deal with real criminal justice reform, if we want to deal with the environment, the area that we should be focussing on energy on is ending Republican control over the House and over the Senate. And I am going to do everything I can and millions of people are going to do everything they can, putting together a grassroots movement which demands that we have a government that represents all of us and not just wealthy campaign contributors. So I think our focus of energy should be on bringing change to the House and the Senate and supporting a progressive agenda.
[Burnett:] Senator Sanders, thank you for your time tonight.
[Sanders:] Thank you.
[Burnett:] Next, breaking news on one of the President's Supreme Court finalists. We now know where that judge is right now and it could tell us something pretty huge about this announcement. Plus, the President's fixer, Michael Cohen, sending a signal to his former boss.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you have any comments on you trying to distance yourself from the President?
[Burnett:] An exclusive new details tonight from one of the divers who risked his life to save some of the young boys trapped in the cave.

[Christi Paul, Co-host, New Day Saturday:] Just about 32 minutes past the hour on a Saturday morning, good to see you, I'm Christi Paul
[Victor Blackwell, Co-host, New Day Saturday:] I'm Victor Blackwell, good to be with you. Dallas police are now seeking a manslaughter warrant for an officer allegedly who allegedly killed her neighbor. The officer shot the 26-year-old man after she entered his apartment, allegedly mistaking it for her own.
[Paul:] Andrea Lucia with Cnn affiliate "Ktvt" going to walk us through what's happened here and where we are now.
[Unidentified Male:] Friends, I know we've come gathered together because pressed upon our hearts is the death of this young man.
[Andrea Lucia, Ktvt Reporter:] At a candlelight vigil, the crowd called for an arrest.
[Unidentified Male:] And we're here to ask that this officer be treated like any other murder suspect. The pop, you know, and it's just like, I mean, it's been ringing in my ear all day.
[Lucia:] Lloyd Harvey and his girlfriend heard the gunshot that killed their next door neighbor, Botham Jean.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm shocked, this is just insane that this would happen to someone so nice and kind.
[Lucia:] Dallas police say the yet to be named officer who fired the shot was coming home from work and still in uniform when she mistook Jean's apartment for her own. Sources say she lived just one floor down.
[Unidentified Male:] Right in front of his house, you have a red floor mat. Like it's a bright red floor mat. How do you think that that's your apartment?
[Renee Hall, Chief Of Police, Dallas Police Department:] Based on what we know right now, that warrant is for manslaughter.
[Lucia:] Dallas Police Chief Renee Hall said due to the circumstances, she personally requested a warrant be obtained for the officer's arrest, and called on the Texas Rangers to conduct their own independent investigation.
[Hall:] We have ceased handling it under our normal officer-involved shooting protocol.
[Lucia:] But with hours ticking away, activists have grown eager to see some sign of justice for Jean.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, he wasn't doing anything wrong, he wasn't trying to do anything wrong, but sit in his home trying to relax, getting ready for the next day of work.
[Paul:] Well, police say the officer's blood is being tested now for drugs and alcohol.
[Blackwell:] We've got new video this morning from the fatal shooting in Cincinnati. Omar Enrique Santa Perez killed three men and injured two others in a building of his city's fountain square. Edited surveillance video shows the shooter in a white dressed shirt walking through the Fifth-Third's center's lobby as he shot off these bullets. Now, this is the body cam from a police officer as it shows outside of them after shooting the glass you see that's breaking. Investigators still are trying to find the motive for the shooting.
[Paul:] Now, stay with us here because we're going to talk about Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren. She wants the senior administration officials to invoke the 25th Amendment if they believe President Trump cannot do his job. More fallout now from that explosive "New York Times" op ed.
[Blackwell:] Plus, more than 400 migrant children taken from their parents are still in custody with the federal government of the federal government. The fight to reunite the families is an ongoing, uphill fight. Our political correspondent Tal Kopan will have the very latest.

[Becky Anderson, Cnn Anchor:] With a year to go before Brexit becomes a reality, these campaigners are trying to change people's minds about the impending divorce. We'll go inside one of their strategy sessions later this hour. Well, hello, and welcome. I'm Becky Anderson. This is CONNECT THE WORLD from our Abu Dhabi studios, just after 7:00 in the evening here. There is new upheaval for Australia's cricket team. Cricket considered a gentleman's game but a cheating scandal involving Australia has exposed an ugly side of the sport. Now, five days in, the head coach says he is stepping down. Darryl Lehmann says he'll leave after tomorrow's test match against South Africa. Lehmann hasn't been named in the scandal, but he said ultimately, he is responsible for the team culture and this is the right time, he said, to step away. Well, meantime, the three players banned over tampering with the ball have arrived back in Australia. Let's kick this off with CNN's Andrew Stevens who has more on what was their emotional return.
[Andrew Stevens, Cnn Asia Pacific Editor:] Australia's champion cricket captain is not used to this sort of homecoming.
[Steve Smith, Former Cricket Australia Captain:] It's devastating and I'm truly sorry.
[Stevens:] Steve Smith, ranked the best batsman in the world, now ban furry year for cheating. On Thursday, he faced the media and a cricket mad nation that prides itself on winning fair.
[Smith:] Cricket is the greatest game in the world. It's been my life, and I hope it can be again. I'm sorry, and I'm absolutely devastated.
[Stevens:] Starring at defeat against South Africa in Cape Town, cameras caught Cameron Bancroft purposely damaging the ball in a way that would make it more difficult for the opposition batsman to hit. Cricket Australia investigators say vice-captain David Warner was the architect of the plan and it was Warner who convinced Bancroft to tamper with the ball. It was on Smith's watch. He and Warner have been hit with one-year bans, up and coming young player Bancroft won't play for nine months.
[Cameron Bancroft, Banned Cricket Player:] Not a second has gone by since last Saturday evening when I haven't wished to turn back time and do the right thing during the lunch break. It is something I will regret for the rest of my life.
[Stevens:] The cheating ploy was unlikely to change the final outcome of the match, but it's deeply affected an Australian public that had put the players on a pedestal.
[Kevin Rudd, Former Australian Prime Minister:] How on earth could Australians have done this? Because we're seen as a fair-minded people who believe in the principles of fair play. And that image has now been violated.
[Stevens:] Major sponsors of cricket in Australia are now dumping a team that once could do wrong. Smith and Warner have lost their million-dollar contracts to play in India's domestic league. Instead, Cricket Australia says the players must return to play and support the game at its grassroots where they hope to earn back the respect of heartbroken cricket fans at home and around the world. Andrew Stevens, CNN.
[Anderson:] I want to do more on this with "WORLD SPORT's" Patrick Snell, who is today in Atlanta. Patrick, can these players regain their reputations as that report was suggesting they'd been asked effectively to do?
[Patrick Snell, Cnn World Sport:] Well, it all starts now, doesn't it Becky, for these three. Though interestingly, we've not heard in term of a press conference from David Warner, but we certainly heard from an emotional Steve Smith there. We've heard from Cameron Bancroft as well. Just a little addendum for you, well, we already knew that Smith and Warner had lost their highly lucrative Indian private league contracts, which Andrew referenced in his piece. We now know that Cameron Bancroft has lost the opportunity to play for English County championship team Somerset. So, he's lost that deal. He will not be their overseas player. So, that's a huge blow to him at 25 years of age, still a player looking to make his mark in the game as a player with terrific talent. Remember Steve Smith is the world's leading batsman with over 6,000 test runs to his name. And over 23 test centuries as well. But boy did we see the emotions there. And a little nugget as well from what we didn't hear, he also spoke about and kind of gave an impassioned plea to kids in Australia. He said, look, when you're weighing up a serious decision in life which you know could go either way, just think of the impact it has on your parents. I thought that was really poignant as well. The rehabilitation process, Becky, starts right now. These players have been encouraged to give back to the game. They can only play at club level in Australia. They're not eligible for international competition. Never mind domestic professional cricket down under in Australia. They're only eligible to play at club level and get involved in the community, rehabilitate themselves and a year from now, in theory at least, they could all be playing again at the we shall see.
[Anderson:] Well, look, a cheating scandal in any sport, Patrick, is a big deal. It's a big story. Cricket is massive. The big competitions like the T20 World Cup can pull in half a billion viewers. What are the consequences for this team, do you think, but also for the game in general?
[Snell:] The spotlight is on this team like never before. We're going to get the fourth test of the current series with the pro-tiers that we South African national cricket team. That one starts in Johannesburg on Friday. But as far as this trio is concerned, you know, they're the ones that have held up their hands and said, look, we are responsible for this. Steve Smith says the buck stops with him. It was only the team's leadership that knows. But broadening this out, I tell you what, the scrutiny on the international game is going to be like never before moving forward. There have been many, many people who have been very quick to condemn. Let's just see what happens moving forward. But I want to bring it back to the Australian head coach. I should now say the former Australian head coach, Darren Lehmann. He had said 24 hours ago he was not resigning. Earlier today, he changed his tune and he came out with this. Let's take a listen.
[Darren Lehmann, Australian Cricket Team Coach:] As I've stated before, I had no prior knowledge of the incident and do not condone what happened at all, but good people can make mistakes. My family and I have had a lot of abuse over the last week and it's taken its toll on them. As many who sit in this road, you know life on the road means a lot of time away from our loved ones and after speaking at length over the last few days. This is the right time to step away.
[Snell:] And Becky, let's just put a need bow on all this. This story has many legs to it. It seemingly developing with each and every passing hour, following every step of the way. A little earlier within the last couple of hours, the CEO of Cricket Australia, James Sutherland, called a hasty press conference, there was much speculation about that. But Sutherland coming out thinking Lehmann for his services and he would not, he Sutherland, would not be resigning. Back to you.
[Anderson:] Fascinating. Patrick, always a pleasure. Thank you. I want to get you to the Korean Peninsula now, viewers, where a remarkable meeting has laid the groundwork for what will be a very rare summit. Senior officials from North and South Korea shook hands today in neutral territory, holding talks in what is known as the demilitarized zone. They set a date for only the third summit ever between their respective countries. North Korean leader Kim Jong-un will meet with the South Korean president on April 27th. The latest in Kim's high series of high-level talks. Let's bring in Ivan Watson he's following developments tonight from Seoul. And we have suggested that this is merely unique. Just how significant is what we are seeing? And what are the consequences? We know that there is dialogue potentially between the U.S. and North Korea. Where are we at with all of this?
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, we've just had a summit between the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, and the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping. We now have a fixed date for a one-day summit between the North Korean leader and the South Korean president. That's April 27th. Again, along the demilitarized zone. And we know that President Trump has indicated that he's looking forward to a possible meeting with Kim Jong-un. And as of now, it looks like it might take place at some point in May. What we're seeing now is in relatively short order, Kim Jong-un going from being an international pariah with international sanctions being piled on to him to now potentially meeting with a head of state month after month, three months in a row, and the leaders of China and the U.S., the two most powerful countries in the world. It's a remarkable reversal, Becky. And on top of that, you have the Japanese now saying that they would like to explore the possibility of a summit between Kim Jong-un and the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. So, a remarkable transformation in where North Korea sits from just a few months ago to today where it looks like heads of state are lining up to get their chance to speak to the young dictator from Pyongyang Becky.
[Anderson:] Ivan Watson in Seoul for you, thank you. Let's get you up to speed on some of the other stories that are on our radar right now. Venezuela's head prosecutor says at least 68 people were killed in a prison fire west of Caracas. Family members demanded answers as they faced off with police in riot gear outside the jail. It is not known what caused the fire or how many of the dead were visitors. Protests have been called across Ireland after two international rugby players accused of rape walked free. 21-year-old woman says Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding assaulted her in Belfast two years ago, which they denied. The verdict has sparked an outcry in Ireland with thousands gathering in support of the victim in several cities. The U.S. city of Atlanta is still struggling to keep the local government running six days after a ransomware cyber-attack shut down the city's computer systems. Now the mayor says hackers are demanding $51,000 but wouldn't say whether the city will pay. Well, the daughter of a former Russian spy poisoned in a nerve agent attack is no longer in critical condition. Salisbury district hospital says Yulia Skripal had responded well to treatment. Now this news comes as Russia accused the U.K. of blocking access to Skripal and her father. Britain believes the pair were victims of an assassination attempt by Moscow. Meanwhile, British police now focusing on Skripal's home in their investigation. For more on all of this, Nima Elbagir, is with us from London. Good news from Salisbury for the Skripal family. We realize the importance of the Skripal house in the investigation. Now, can we, though, just start with what we know about the victims at this point?
[Nima Elbagir, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, let me start with this welcome respite from the family. I want to read you the statement from Salisbury hospital. Doctor Christine Blanshard says that I'm pleased to be able to report an improvement in the condition of Yulia Skripal. She's responded well to treatment but continues to receive expert clinical care 24 hours a day. Yulia's father, Sergei, Becky, remains in a critical but stable condition and that is a far cry from what the Prime Minister Theresa May expected to happen. She had been led to believe that the Skripals may not ever recover from what they sustained. And as you say, this all comes as a clear focal point in this investigation has emerged. Authorities are focusing on the door. Many speculating it's actually the door handle that has become the locus of this investigation. That is where the highest concentration of this nerve agent has been found. And at least there is now a sense that perhaps how this nerve agent was administered can finally be unraveled. And that really will be welcome news for many of the residents in Salisbury who have been genuinely afraid, Becky, that this could be hiding around corners.
[Anderson:] All right. I thought we were just going to have a listen to some sound there. Nima thank you for that. Live from CNN's Middle East program, we have you all tune in to CONNECT THE WORLD. Ahead
[Unidentified Female:] He was always telling us what to do. We want to make our own laws. Well, we are making our own laws.

[Tapper:] In our national lead: entire neighborhoods have been turned in a debris after catastrophic Hurricane Michael leveled parts of the Florida panhandle and has now killed six people. Homes and businesses practically erased from the map in Mexico Beach, Florida. This is the spot federal officials are calling the ground zero of Hurricane Michael's destructive past. And up the coast in Panama City, the Jinx Middle School which recently enrolled students who were displaced last year by Hurricane Maria is now reduced to twisted metal in a stack of bricks. CNN's Erica Hill is live at Panama City Beach, Florida. And, Erica, you've been speaking with residents who are seeing this image for the first time, what are they telling you? How horrific is this for them?
[Erica Hill, Cnn Correspondent:] Jake, a lot of them are speechless. This is definitely a case where the pictures truly do tell the story. They are coming home in some cases to find their neighborhoods gone. One woman who I spoke with lives just to the right of where I am right now, and she said when she tried to come home from the shelter she had to walk because there was no other way to get there. But the real damage, as you pointed out, is ground zero in Mexico Beach.
[Hill:] From the air, a first look at a beach town almost completely wiped out.
[Scott Boutwell, Mexico Beach, Florida Resident:] Our lives are gone here.
[Hill:] Daylight exposing the force of Hurricane Michael. This category 4 storm made landfall near Mexico Beach, packing winds of nearly 150 miles per hour.
[Boutwell:] We had furniture in our house that wasn't even our furniture.
[Hill:] Getting into Mexico Beach, a challenge in itself. Roads clogged with downed power lines, trees and debris.
[Boutwell:] All the stores, all the restaurants, everything, there's nothing left here anymore, you know. All the homes on this side of the road at the beach, they're all gone.
[Hill:] The need extends far beyond Mexico Beach. In Panama City, neighborhoods reduced to rubble.
[Kathleen Labarron, Panama City Beach Resident:] Oh, my God, Panama City, there's nothing there, nothing. I've never seen nothing like it.
[Hill:] This middle school nearly flattened. The gym's roof torn off.
[Britt Smit, Jinks Middle School Principal:] It was heart wrenching. I know what the school means to our our kids and our community and to see that type of devastation on their school and realizing that that devastation in the only is there at their school and also with their homes, because kids live nearby.
[Hill:] In Panama City Beach, a massive boat storage facility at this marina now a twisted cage for the vessels stored inside. The damage resembling the work of a strong tornado, especially when seen from the sky. As the reality of what's left behind sets in, many people here still trying to make sense of what happened.
[Boutwell:] Where do we start now? I mean, what do we do? There's nothing left here.
[Hill:] And that is the case in so many areas. The hard part here, Jake, what's happening now is simply trying to assess the damage, to get into some of those areas that were hardest hit because just getting to a place like Mexico Beach where Brooke Baldwin was able to take a helicopter is nearly impossible because of the roads, 2,500 National Guard troops activated here in Florida and 1,500 in Georgia. It's a start, but this is definitely a long, long road ahead, Jake.
[Tapper:] All right. Erica Hill, thank you so much. I want to show you more from the panhandle. This was a convenience store in Springfield, Florida. That's what you're looking at right now. The storm ripped the roof right off the building. Some shelves there have been ripped to shreds. Obviously, a dangerous scene as people are trying to rummage through what little is left and get flood and supplies. In Mexico Beach, Florida, where Hurricane Michael made landfall, that's rescuers trying to sift through toppled homes. They're obviously looking for any survivors, anyone trapped inside. Let's show you one more, that's a utility pole that sliced right through a waffle house in Calloway, Florida. Joining me now is Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida. And, Senator, I just want to start with your reaction to what you're seeing on the ground. We've seen blocks and blocks of homes leveled, businesses destroyed. What are you hearing from your constituents?
[Sen. Bill Nelson , Florida:] Just exactly what you've been reporting. It's devastation and as you go east of Panama City, that's where the the right side of the hurricane, the most ferocious winds were and Mexico Beach. I imagine when we finally get into the next town which is Port St. Joe, I think you're going to find devastation, particularly Mexico Beach, because there's no barrier island outside of it. So it was getting the full force of the wind and the water. Further east, Port St. Joe is a natural harbor with a cape around it, cape sandblast. It would have had some protection, but no doubt it's going to be like not anything we've seen since Hurricane Andrew in 1992 down south of Miami. It's going to be like that over there in those small little populated areas. They will be flattened completely.
[Tapper:] And what's your number one concern right now, Senator?
[Nelson:] Well, that's why I'm here. I'm here to make sure that the federal government is sending all of the resources that it needs, and it's going to need a lot.
[Tapper:] Governor Scott says that the top focus right now is search and rescue. Have you heard of any areas where people might be trapped, where there is not an effort being made that needs to be made?
[Nelson:] In the woods to the west, all along the shore here, I suspect that there are people who decided to hunker down, and we're going to find people hopefully alive back in those dwellings.
[Tapper:] What's your message to residents who might say, hey, the storm is over, I'm going to get in my car and check on my home, head back into these hard-hit areas like the one you're in right now?
[Nelson:] As a matter of fact, a lot of people are doing that. You should have seen I had to come all the way on the interstate and then south, and there were cars lined up for miles wanting to get back, and that's what they are doing. They want to get back, clean up. You can see the weather is great here. That's simply unusual for a hurricane because it's usually range and still blowing. This hurricane moved so fast it's up north Georgia, South Carolina by now.
[Tapper:] President Trump has declared a major disaster area in Florida. I know you and Senator Rubio asked for this to happen. Are you getting the support you need from the federal government and the White House?
[Nelson:] Yes, and we will get it, and Senator Rubio is on his way to join me, and the two of us are going to be here on the ground. We'll make sure that this area gets exactly what it needs.
[Tapper:] All right. Senator, if you don't get what you need, if there's more you need from Tallahassee or from Washington, D.C., and you're not getting, it let us know here at CNN, and we'll bring attention to it.
[Nelson:] Thanks, Jake.
[Tapper:] All right. Thank you, Senator. How did a Saudi journalist simply vanish? The Trump White House on the case, but will the answer further complicate the president's relationship with a key ally? Stay with us.

[Church:] Welcome back everyone. Well, two African-American men whose arrest at a Philadelphia Starbucks sparked protests over racial bias have now reached a settlement. The city agreed to give them what they asked for, $1 each, but it must also fund a 200,000 grant to establish a program for high school students who want to be entrepreneurs. As for Starbucks, it reached a confidential financial settlement will work with the men on its diversity effort, it also agreed to give them an opportunity to complete their college degrees for free. Well, Cambridge Analytica the data company at the heart of the Facebook scandal is calling it quits. The Trump presidential campaign had been among its clients, but the firms says, business dried up, after Facebook accused it of misusing the personal information of millions of its users. CNN's Brian Stelter reports.
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] The shadowy political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica is shutting down. The company says it can no longer operate, because its customer base has dried up. This comes in the wake of "The New York Times, Guardian and Channel 4," news investigations into the company's use or misuse of data to target voters and other members of the public in incredibly sophisticated ways. You'll recall that Facebook kicked Cambridge Analytica off the platform back in March, when those stories were about to come out. Facebook said the company had essentially misused data from tens of millions of users. Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, then went to Capitol Hill to testify on the matter and vowed to make changes. Meanwhile Cambridge Analytica has essentially defended itself and said it's been innocent of these charges. In a statement on Wednesday the company reaffirmed it always acted ethically with people's data. Here is part of the statement, the company says despite Cambridge Analytica's unwavering confidence, that its employees had acted ethically and lawfully, the siege of media coverage has driven away virtually all of the company's customers and suppliers. As a result it has been determined that it is no longer viable to continue operating the business which left Cambridge Analytica with no realistic alternative to place in the company and to administration. Staffers in New York and London and elsewhere where told to pack up and go home on Wednesday. They apparently will restore receive sovereign, et cetera. The company is also still under investigation. We know that British lawmakers and British investigators are probing the company's practices and so are some lawmakers here in the United States. Now, the company was creating these detailed psychographic profile of voters. It worked for the Trump campaign and other campaigns as well. There's been a lot of debate about just how effective the company's practices are. Now what remains to be seen is whether Cambridge Analytica will reemerge in some new form or some new name. But this practice of targeting voters and trying to get much data as possible and then reaching individuals on a one-to-one basis, it seems likely that is going to continue in various forms and in fact it will get more sophisticated with every passing election. But Cambridge Analytica, the company, the name, that is shutting down. Brian Stelter, CNN, New York.
[Church:] Well, Kanye West is facing a backlash after suggesting this week that Africa-Americans chose to be slaves for 400 years and proclaiming his affection for the U.S. President. Well, now a radio host Charlamagne tha God, has released another interview with the rapper. He told CNN anchor, Hala Gorani, about Kanye's pews on Donald Trump.
[Charlamagne Tha God, Radio:] I think that Kanye is not aware of Trump's policies, I don't think he is aware of Trump's ideologies, I don't think he is aware of how Trump is oppressing and marginalizing a lot of people in this country. I think that he is just intrigued by the fact that Donald Trump reminds him of himself just by being a person that is outspoken and will say whatever they want, when they want to say it. The unorthodox way that Donald Trump has become President, you know, I think that is what Kanye is intrigued by. But, you know, I'm not here to celebrate style when it comes to a President. I want to celebrate substance. And I think Donald Trump lacks a lot of substance. So, you are right. That is the question that all of us are asking. Why is somebody like Kanye West is standing next to somebody a lot of us consider a racist bigot?
[Church:] Charlmagne said he told Kanye he's comments on TMZ were dangerous and harmful. He also said, Kanye should apologize. U2 is kicking off its new world tour in Tulsa Oklahoma in the coming hours. The rock band is bringing fans a unique experience with the help of augmented reality. Fans will get a new perspective of lead singer, Bono, like never before using their smart phones. Laurie Segall got a look at that.
[Laurie Segall, Cnn Senior Technology Correspondent:] Thinking behind using augmented reality to kick off the show?
[The Edge, Lead Guitarist, U2:] Total emersion is our gig. And I guess it just helps, it is use to really make the amplify the sound so that it gets across in a more clear, direct, potent way. So if it doesn't serve the sound we would not consider it.
[Bono, U2, Lead Vocalist:] You'll see that this kind of image we have of consciousness is like this big iceberg and then it starts to melt. And we had to compact that experience, because of battery life. And then we want to do some intimacies. We wanted this very raw, naked version of the singer. I mean, we tend to use my story in U2, because I'm the singer. It could be anybody's story in general.
[Segall:] I don't know what it's like to be you guys on the stage and looking out at a thousand bazillion screams, right, but I am sure that is complicated, because you want people be present for you, but now
[The Edge:] don't worry about the phones, it when they held up a laptops it get a little over the stuff.
[Bono:] You remember it's a very unsound thing to think that people should be interested in your most private thoughts to a bunch of [inaudible] maniacs. And we want people's complete attention, are we really getting cross, you know, if somebody goes to the bathroom during one of ourselves. So I think to try and have fun with this potential for distraction and make the phone part of the actual experience of being on the show that is part of the appeal of using A.R.
[Church:] Fantastic, all right, well, even the future wife of a prince apparently has to pass the test. We will take a look at the questions Megan Markle faces to become a British citizen. Back in just a moment.

[Keilar:] Welcome back. As we return to the investigation of Trump campaign ties to Russia, the big question hovering over the Beltway, will fired FBI Director James Comey testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee as expected after Memorial Day? Washington insiders wonder if special counsel, Robert Mueller, is even going to allow it. If it does go through, though, a friend of James Comey gave an ominous hint about what could lie ahead for the president.
[Benjmain Wittes, Friend Of James Comey:] I have no doubt that he regarded the group of people around the president as dishonorable. This is a guy with a story to tell. I think if I were Donald Trump, that would scare me a lot.
[Keilar:] I want to turn now Eric Lichtblau, the assistant managing editor of CNN's Washington bureau. Wow. He's saying that Comey has things to say that are going to be damaging to President Trump.
[Eric Lichtblau, Assistant Manager, Cnn Washington Bureau:] And that he wants to say them publicly. You know, we're hearing the same thing, that if and when Comey testifies, which is probably the week after next, he certainly wants to do it in public. He doesn't want it to be behind closed doors. He wants the spotlight, which he's been in before and he has some stories to tell.
[Keilar:] Donald Trump said he's a showboat. You know, he's sort of accused him of that.
[Lichtblau:] He's said worse than that.
[Keilar:] He's said worse than that. But it also seems that Comey, certainly, recently, when it comes to some of these issues, he wants to hear them and he wants them out there. Some people have said that's not really, when he was FBI director, that's perhaps not the best way but he's compelled to do.
[Lichtblau:] Sure. You remember last July, the famous press conference over the Hillary Clinton e-mail case, which was unprecedented with the FBI director out there giving a 12-minute recap of an investigation that didn't even bring charges. He got a lot of criticism for that. And 10 years ago, he gave a very famous Senate testimony about his confrontation in a hospital room with George W. Bush's lawyers. So he is he's very comfortable in that spotlight. Trump may call him a showboater but others would say he's just someone that wants the story out there.
[Keilar:] That July moment that you're talking about related to Hillary Clinton, that one was of the things that the deputy A.G. cited, the idea that you would have a press conference to explain that there aren't going to be charges brought.
[Lichtblau:] Right.
[Keilar:] So Bob Mueller, who's now been appointed by the Justice Department to go ahead and look independently at these possible connections between the Trump campaign and Russia, he's going to speak to Comey before this.
[Lichtblau:] Sure.
[Keilar:] That's what we know, right?
[Lichtblau:] Yes. And they are very close. They worked together for years after 911 when Mueller was the head of the FBI and Comey was at the Justice Department. Jim Comey is not going to do anything Bob Mueller
[Keilar:] Mueller says, look, can you just cool it so I can do my investigation? What is the expectation on whether that is going to happen?
[Lichtblau:] I'm sure they will have a conversation. I'm sure that they will talk out what the legal complications could be. It you go back to Iran-Contra 20-plus years ago, 25 years ago, you know, the spectacle of Ollie North and Poindexter testifying before Congress created all kinds of legal problems with the Justice Department and the case was ultimately thrown out because it was seen as tainted in some way. The last thing they want is to have that congressional testimony to hurt any possible criminal case. My guess and it's only a guess is that, at the end of the day, Comey gets the green light to testify but not about the investigation itself, not that he'll say, you know, the Russia investigation is off limits but that he would be able to talk about what the president said to him and be able to quash the investigation.
[Keilar:] Which is the big deal anyway.
[Lichtblau:] Which is the blockbuster and some say it's the smoking gun.
[Keilar:] We will see. Eric Lichtblau, thank you so much for that. Interesting for sure.
[Lichtblau:] Pleasure.
[Keilar:] Next, "The Art of the Deal" visits the Vatican. President Trump meeting Pope Francis face to face after previously calling the pope "disgraceful." Also, Sean Spicer feeling slighted after not being able to meet the pope, which is a huge honor for a devout Catholic. And back to our breaking news. The brother of the Manchester bomber arrested while plotting an attack of his own. We'll have details, next.

[Jeffrey Alan Merkley Us Senator, Oregon, Democrat:] They call it zero tolerance, but a better name for it is zero humanity.
[Cyril Vanier, Host, Newsroom:] Children being taken from their parents at the US border has lawmakers from both parties outraged. Plus...
[John Moore, Getty Photographer:] They asked her to put down her child, and right then, in that moment, the little girl broke into tears.
[Vanier:] The man who captured this image explains what it was like seeing this little girl separated from her mother. And the fourth day of World Cup matches brought us this, the defending champ, Germany kept missing, falling to Mexico. Live from the CNN Center here in Atlanta, I am Cyril Vanier; as always, it's great to have you with us. Anger, frustration and disbelief are growing across the United States over the treatment of undocumented immigrants crossing into the country from Mexico. Families are being torn apart as a result of the Trump administration's policy to prosecute all people caught crossing the border illegally. Some 2,000 undocumented children are being held in temporary shelters like this one without their parents. But the Trump administration is defending the policy saying it is just doing more to enforce legislation that was already on the books. On Sunday, Democratic lawmakers went inside some of the immigration facilities. Our Nick Valencia reports from outside one of them in Brownsville, Texas.
[Nick Valencia, Correspondent, Cnn:] Here in Brownsville, Texas was one of the last stops for Democratic lawmakers as they went on a Father's Day tour of processing centers along the US-Mexico border. They said their intention was to highlight the zero-tolerance immigration policy currently in effect and put into place by President Trump. After touring these facilities they called it zero humanity.
[Merlkley:] And there's zero logic to this policy. The administration is arguing that by inflicting this harm on children and parents, this stress, that they're sending a message, a deterrent message for people not to seek asylum in the United States. It's completely unacceptable under any moral code or any under religious tradition to injure children, inflict trauma on them in order to send some political message to adults somewhere overseas. The President is also arguing in the last few days that this policy gives him political leverage with legislation. Hurting kids to get legislative leverage is unacceptable. It is evil.
[Valencia:] One of the Democratic lawmakers on the tour was Congressman Pete Welsh of Vermont, and I asked him if there's any plan on reuniting the 2,000 children that have been separated from their families over the course of the last six weeks. He says, he hasn't seen details if there is a plan in place. Right now, there's just so much uncertainty. Nick Valencia, CNN, Brownsville, Texas.
[Vanier:] Now, we can't really show you the extent of the pain being felt in American border towns, but we can show you this. A little girl screaming in fear in the dead of night as a crisis envelopes her. It is just one image that speaks to the untold stories of thousands. Getty photographer, John Moore took this photograph and he told our Ana Cabrera what he could about her story.
[Moore:] Well, I was able to speak with the mother very briefly. I had photographed her and her daughter and several other children, other families. The mom told me that they had been traveling for a month and coming from Honduras through Mexico over the course of a whole month is a very difficult journey for these folks, often very dangerous. And so by the time they had reached the US side, they had probably been through a lot already.
[Ana Cabrera, Anchor, Cnn:] What was going through your mind when you took the picture?
[Moore:] Well, they had been body searching people as they were loaded into vans to be taken to a processing center where they were possibly separated parents and children and one of the last people to get on the bus was the mother of this child, and her daughter together. And when they went to body search her against the vehicle, they asked her to put down her child, and right then in that moment, the little girl broke into tears and you know, it's not unusual for toddlers in any circumstance to have separation anxiety, but I think this particular situation with the separation of families leads and gives a new meaning to that phrase.
[Cabrera:] Oh, gosh, that picture it makes us all get tears in our eyes. It's so hard to see her crying and seeming so desperate. When you took that picture, did you know it was something special that it could become a defining image of this moment in history?
[Moore:] Well, I had photographed families trying to seek asylum many times on different visits to the US-Mexico border. What it looked like in many ways was similar to what I have seen before, and I think the families there, they had no idea that they would soon be separated from their children. I could tell they weren't up on the recent news. They'd been traveling in difficult conditions but I knew what was going to happen next, and for me to take these pictures scenes that I had seen before, but with the knowledge that these parents and their children would soon be in separate detention facilities, made it hard for me personally as a journalist, as a human being and especially as a father.
[Vanier:] One US lawmaker trying to drum up public pressure to change the policy is Texas Representative and US Senate candidate Beto O'Rourke. he managed to he marched to a tent city where the US government is holding unaccompanied immigrant children. Speaking to CNN earlier, he said all Americans bear responsibility for this.
[Beto O'rourke, Us Senate Candidate:] Things have to be really bad for you to leave Honduras, travel 2,000 miles if you're lucky, on top of not inside of a train known as the beast or La Bestia your child to literally take you and your child's life into your own hands and hope that you'll make it here. Once you get here to try to request asylum only to find that your child will be taken from you, this is inhumane. I'd like to say it's un-American, but it's happening right now in America and it is on all of us, not just the Trump administration. This is on all of us.
[Vanier:] Let's talk about this with Ellis Henican joining us now. He is a columnist from "Metro" papers and a bestselling author. We have also got political analyst for CNN Andre Bauer, former lieutenant governor of South Carolina. Andre, to you first. Donald Trump keeps saying we heard it, this is not his doing that he inherited this situation from the Democrats, but this is demonstrably false.
[Andre Bauer, Political Analyst, Cnn:] Well, he did inherit this from the Democrats and Barack Obama.
[Vanier:] Not the separation of children from their parents
[Bauer:] Well, you know this plays great for politics, but at the end of the day, we are a nation of laws and we can't accept everyone that wants to come into our country. It has become a great pawn to use children as a vehicle to say, "Oh, well, because of the children..."
[Vanier:] Okay, who is using the children here?
[Bauer:] The people that are coming across the border illegally when they know in fact it is illegal to cross our border.
[Vanier:] Yes or no? Yes or no? Does the President have a choice to separate them from their parents or not?
[Bauer:] The children have the biggest choice to endanger them in the first place to come across in a legal set of boundaries when they know people are armed, when they know there are guards, when they know that there are dangerous areas to cross, there are dangerous people involved. They choose to put their children in harm's risk from the beginning of this. So, let's really find fault where the fault is and that is people, that choose to break the first law when they enter into this country. That is why we have a great country because we have laws that we all live within. There's laws I'd like to not pay my taxes for last year, but there are consequences.
[Vanier:] Andre, Ellis will engage with your argument, I promise, but I wanted just a yes or no answer from you. Is this a stain on the President's record?
[Bauer:] Absolutely not. This is a stain on people that don't want to live within the laws that made our country the greatest in the world.
[Vanier:] Ellis, listen to the President.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The children the children can be taken care of. Quickly, beautifully and immediately. The democrats forced that law upon our nation. I hate it, I hate to see separation of parents and children.
[Vanier:] So, Ellis this comes to the same point. Donald Trump says he hates this, but his administration started doing this.
[Ellis Henican, American Columnist:] So do something about it, change it. With the poke of a Twitter finger or the stroke of a pen, he could change it by the time our segment is over, Cyril. I mean, this is heart breaking, right? I mean, actually just saying the words, yanking children away from their parents, I mean, no decent person can say that and not feel bad. Melania Trump was expressing her concern about it to Kellyanne Conway said that it caused her great distress. No decent American can let this thing continue and not say, "Hey, hold on a second. this is not who we are."
[Vanier:] And can you address Andre's argument that the parents of those kids are putting everybody, the United States and their kids, in this situation by bringing kids illegally across the border?
[Henican:] Well, listen, it would be great if there were no reason for people to flee the violence and the horror of their homelands and seek freedom in America. The world would be better if we didn't have those things going on in the world, but that is a reality. People come, they come for a variety of reasons, most of them highly, highly sympathetic reasons vulnerable people in terrible positions, coming here for the same reasons that our ancestors came here. And, you know what? It's just a reality we are a big wealthy important country and we've got learn to deal with it in a way that yes, provide some border security, but also provide some kind of decency that people live for.
[Vanier:] Andre?
[Bauer:] We're not wealthy. We're $20 trillion in debt, trying to solve the world's problems. We can't be the world's peacekeeper for everybody and everything, and quite frankly, law-abiding citizens in the US, if they put their own children in danger, the Department of Social Services will come in and take those children away from those patients. So, again, they are doing things that put their children at risk from the onset of bringing them over here.
[Vanier:] But Andre, I suppose the I mean, I think everybody can agree that you have to just decide where to draw the line. And everybody, every country has to draw the line somewhere. Those borders are there for a reason and need to be protected. I think everybody can agree on that, but the question the thing that's got people up in arms and by the way, the First Lady among them it seems is that we're talking about kids who are less than four years old for some of them. Does that not give you pause, Andre?
[Bauer:] It does give me pause. I don't think we know all the facts about how long the children are separated. We know it can't be more than 20 days, but we know these are caring people that take these jobs to take care of them.
[Vanier:] So, you're okay with a four-year-old being separated and isolated for 20 days from his or her parents?
[Bauer:] And I will say this, the conditions that they are here in America where they have good meals, they have air conditioning, they have TV is far better than what most people are telling me on the other side and that's the reason they left where they were at. So, the argument doesn't hold water to say well, they're in a terrible condition now. No, in fact, that's not the case. They are being treated much better than most of the conditions I am being told they left.
[Vanier:] Gentlemen, I just want to read the First Lady's statement and we'll leave it at that, but for context, Melania Trump says the statement from her spokesperson says, "Mrs. Trump hates to see children from their families separated from their families and hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration reform. She believes we need to be a country that follows all laws, but also a country that governs with heart." It's difficult, in fact, Ellis, let's get in a quick last one, it is difficult not to see this as a rebuke of her husband's immigration practice.
[Henican:] It is, and clearly, as long as we can talk about this as human beings and Andre, don't get too wrapped up in the polemics of this thing, I understand the hard-core immigration debates, but these really are kids in terrible situations psychologically damaging, wrenching to their families. We are better than this. And I think people across the political spectrum ought to be able to focus on the humanity here and put some of this angry political rhetoric aside at least for a day or two.
[Vanier:] Ellis Henican and Andre Bauer, thank you very much for your time today. As always, much appreciated.
[Bauer:] Thank you, guys.
[Henican:] Thank you.
[Vanier:] Former First Lady Laura Bush wrote a scathing column in "The Washington Post" against this policy. She compares it to the Japanese-American internment camps during World War II. She writes, "This the zero-tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral and it breaks my heart. Our government should not be in the business of warehousing children in converted box stores or making plans to place them in tent cities in the desert outside of El Paso." Let's across the Atlantic. Another immigration story is playing out there. After more than a week at sea, hundreds of migrants are now in Spain where their asylum requests will be considered. The dangerous journey across the Mediterranean was prolonged when they were turned away from ports in Italy and Malta. Lynda Kinkade has these details.
[Lynda Kinkade, Correspondent, Cnn:] Jubilation at the Spanish port of Valencia as 630 migrants saved from the Mediterranean last week dock. The rescue ship, Aquarius was held for two days between Malta and the Italian island of Sicily after Italy's Interior Miister, Matteo Salvini refused to give the refugees safe harbor.
[El Hadji Amadou Gueye Sy, Secretary General, Red Cross:] In moments like this, it is important not to have principal humanitarian action like Spain did in welcoming people in need when others were rejecting them.
[Kinkade:] After Spain agreed to take them, the migrants were divided into three boats, the Aquarius and two Italian coast guard ships. The migrants represent a wide range of people trying to get to Europe.
[Karline Kleijer Is The Emergency Desk Manager For Msf:] And just to emphasize, we have more than 20 nationalities on the ship. We have people from Afghanistan, people from Bangladesh, people from Algeria. It's a wide variety of people. This is not just migrants from Africa. They are actually many people who left conflict and are looking for asylum.
[Kinkade:] Now the migrants will figure out their next steps.
[Maria Jesus Vega, A Spokeswoman For Unhcr:] The Spanish authorities will provide everyone migrants and refugees with the documents that is valid for 45 days. They will also inform them about the possibility of applying for asylum.
[Kinkade:] France has offered to allow some of the migrants to settle there. Italy's Interior Minister remains defiant however saying he hopes Spain takes in tens of thousands more. Lynda Kinkade, CNN.
[Vanier:] We are learning that another Donald Trump associate met with a Russian who promised dirt on Hillary Clinton. Wait till you hear how Roger Stone was reminded of that meeting. Plus, Mexico defeat the reigning World Cup champions. Germany's loss as well as other Sunday surprises. That's all coming up.
[Kate Riley, Host, World Sport:] I'm Kate Riley with your CNN World Sport headlines. A huge setback for reigning world champions, Germany. They were beaten in their very first game at Russia 2018 by Mexico in the tournament's biggest shock so far. Mexico desperate to make a mark on the tournament after years of underachievement, but when PSG [inaudible] Hirving Lozano put them ahead, maybe they started to believe. Germany peppered their opponents so relentlessly, but to no avail, one-nil it ends. Brazil began its World Cup campaign against Switzerland with memories of the humiliating 7-1 semi-final loss four years ago to Germany fairly vivid in many minds. For 20 minutes, the Barcelona forward Philippe Coutinho with a sublime strike called a perfection into the back of the Swiss net. His 11th international goal but Brazil couldn't put the game to bed. They conceded from a corner as Steven Zuber powers the ball home to make it one all there. Brooks Koepka won the 2018 US open, held at Shinnecock Hills, a day to be saved as Koepka who won the tournament last year and now the 28- year-old Floridian has just gone and made it back-to-back titles after a final round of [inaudible]. The seventh man to win consecutive US Opens, Koepka won over par for the tournament, one shot clear of England's Tommy Fleetwood; not one single player under par at this year's Open, and that's a look at World Sports Headlines. I'm Kate Riley.
[Vanier:] At least two people were killed when a strong earthquake hit the Japanese city of Osaka. The 5.3 magnitude quake struck during the Monday morning rush hour. Government officials say two victims died when a wall collapsed on them. One was an adult man, the other a nine-year-old girl on her way to school. At least 40 people were injured. Two Trump advisers admit to a meeting during the 2016 campaign with a Russian who promised dirt Hillary Clinton. Those advisers, long time confidante Roger Stone and former campaign communications official Michael Caputo. The two said that they forget about the meeting. Boris Sanchez explains what jogged their memories.
[Boris Sanchez, Correspondent, Cnn:] Though Michael Caputo and Roger Stone have long denied having any contact with Russian nationals during the campaign, in separate letters they both sent to the House Intelligence Committee over the weekend they acknowledged there was this is May, 2016 meeting between Roger Stone and a Russian national Henry Greenberg. He was apparently promising dirt on Hillary Clinton in exchange for $2 million. Both men claim that they had forgotten all about this meeting until they were reminded by the special counsel. Michael Caputo acknowledging that he was shown text messages exchanged between he and Stone following this meeting. That's what apparently jogged had his memory and then he reminded Roger Stone, and now you have both of them sending off these letters. Notably, Stone says that no information was exchanged between he and Greenberg. He says he turned down the offer and that he never spoke Greenberg again. Further, he says he never contacted anyone on Trump campaign including the candidate himself about this meeting. We should point out that both men are now accusing Greenberg of being an FBI informant, someone that was planted to try to entrap them. I've asked White House officials if the President has been made aware of this admission by Roger Stone and Michael Caputo and further if he agrees with their assessment that Greenberg may have been a plant for the FBI. But we've yet to hear back from the White House.
[Vanier:] Speaking of that probe into Russian election meddling, Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani wants to investigate the investigators. Giuliani tells CNN that the probe began because of notes from fired FBI Director James Comey that were, he says "illegally leaked" And according to Giuliani, that means the entire investigation is tainted.
[Rudy Giuliani, Counsel To President Trump:] If you fail to recognize the crime's unethical behavior of Federal law enforcement officials, you are undermining our system of justice. If you call them out and you do something about it which the Justice Department hasn't done yet, but has to, then you are reaffirming that no one is above the law and that's all we want here. We want the Mueller probe to be investigated the way the Trump administration has been investigated and we'd like to see a report with the conclusions and we'll find out then, is it as bad as some people think or is it what I think or is it nothing?
[Vanier:] Later this week, the Trump administration is expected to announce the formal suspension of joint military drills with South Korea. The drills were a key issue during the President's recent summit with North Korea leader, Kim Jong-un. Mr. Trump tweeted on Sunday, "Holding back the war games during the negotiations was my request because they are very expensive and send a bad light during a good faith negotiation. Also quite provocative. Can't start up immediately if talks break down which I hope will not happen." President Trump also facing criticism for compliments that he paid Kim Jong-un. He now insists he was only kidding when he expressed admiration for the way North Koreans treat Kim. Americans, they have a choice how they view their Commander in Chief. CNN's Brian Todd reports that North Koreans do not when it comes to Kim.
[Brian Todd, Correspondent, Cnn:] President Trump these days is full of admiration for Kim Jong-un, for his strength as a leader and the deference he's shown by his people.
[Trump:] He speaks and his people sit up at attention. I want my people to do the same.
[Todd:] The President later tried to clean up the comment by saying he was joking.
[Trump:] I'm kidding. you don't understand sarcasm.
[Todd:] But North Koreans aren't laughing unless they're told to.
[Greg Scarlatoiu, Executive Director, Committee For Human Rights In North Korea:] Just like the grandfather and the father, Kim Jong-un even more so has ruled through fear, the politics of fear.
[Todd:] That's especially evident in this propaganda video Kim's regime just produced to highlight the Supreme Leader's summit with President Trump in Singapore showing the kinds of displays of affection for Kim that President Trump says he appreciates. The video has the classic signatures of a North Korean production, adoring crowds seeing Kim off at the Pyongyang airport. Dramatic music, and upon his triumphant return, women in colorful robes, top officials, even normally stoic generals practically weeping at the sight of him. But analysts say what you're witnessing isn't spontaneous devotion, it is carefully choreographed fealty. JAMES PEASON,
[Johns Hopkins School Of Advanced International Studies:] You're amassed early in the morning and standing around for hours with these flags and when the moment comes, everyone knows exactly what they do to wave either their flags or their flowers.
[Todd:] In one of the first propaganda films released after he took over from his father, Kim Jong-un is seen departing on a boat. The crowd of soldiers and civilians weep hysterically, then do one better, racing waist-deep into the water to see him off.
[Scarlatoiu:] If one doesn't clap for Kim Jong-un, that person is sure to be in trouble.
[Todd:] Why was your applause so weak? In a 2016 documentary, called "Under the Sun," a Russian filmmaker captured behind-the-scenes footage of a North Korean propaganda film being made. The minders often didn't know the cameras were rolling. At factories, dance classes and elsewhere, minders are shown prodding, scolding film subjects to be more zealous.
[Unidentified Male:] [Through an interpreter]. Still too gloomy. Do it with more joy. You can do it more joyfully.
[Simone Bauman, Film Director:] They would come to the scene and would tell the people what they have to do, where they have to sit, how they have to sit, how they have to smile.
[Todd:] But experts say we shouldn't assume all this emotion is completely fake. Many North Koreans, they say, genuinely believe that their leader has god-like greatness because they've been indoctrinated in it.
[Peason:] The very first things that they're taught in school is to revere the Kim family they're taught about the sacrifices of the Kim family to the state, not just the individual Kim but the entire family going back generations.
[Todd:] A system that, thanks to America's existing democratic system, no president of the United States could ever recreate. While the crime of not showing quite enough joy at a rally can be punishable with reeducation or jail time for the average North Korean citizen, for top officials, that kind of thing can be deadly. A top education official in North Korea was once executed by a firing squad for showing a, quote, "bad attitude" at a gathering of the supreme people's assembly. Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
[Vanier:] Coming up, Switzerland apparently forgot that they were the underdogs against Brazil. We'll have highlights from Sunday's happenings at the World Cup and a look at Monday's games.

[Tapper:] We're back with more in the politics lead. Let's pick back up with our political roundtable. Bill Kristol, let me start with you. We just heard Democratic Senator Mark Warner touch on something we've been talking about during the commercial break, which is Democrats really haven't made much of a stink about the fact that about $800 million, $900 billion in Medicaid funding is going to be pushed to the states from the federal government. In other words, a Medicaid cut, while repealing the ObamaCare taxes will be a tax cut of a trillion dollars or so. A lot of which was is going to go to rich people.
[Bill Kristol, The Weekly Standard Editor At Large:] Yes, obviously ObamaCare taxes were levied mostly on the wealthy. That's how President Obama sold them. The republicans were a little bit mechanical in thinking about this. We have to repeal ObamaCare, that means we have to repeal every tax increase that paid for ObamaCare. Instead of saying which would have been more of
[Tapper:] Do you agree?
[Ruth Marcus, The Washington Post Columnist:] Well, it's a slightly less politically it has the appeal of being bashing on tax cuts for the wealthy, which always plays well. The downside is that you're then concentrating on a lot of money from Medicaid which goes to poor people, which isn't necessarily I mean I think that these Medicaid cuts are very severe and going to be big problems for states. I think Senator Warner is right in saying that we should be hearing from governors about this because, you know, ObamaCare expanded Medicaid greatly, at least allowed states to choose it. But when you're trying to rile up, as democrats, a big proportion of the people arguing that this hurts poor people isn't necessarily congruent with the message that you're trying to get out.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] And I get what you're saying that you know, to say, oh, look, another tax cut for the rich is very politically potent, but the idea of people who are suffering and sometimes suffering the most in their personal lives, it is such a human message to say, you're going to be, you know, basically screwed even more because of these guys. And that's why Nancy Pelosi was so forward leaning in her political speech, 100 percent political speech on the House floor saying, your constituents don't know your name but they're going to when I'm done with you. And they were singing na, na, na, hey goodbye because they feel they that they have political momentum because they feel that this is so dire in a lot of these districts. They might be flat wrong, and they certainly might be flat wrong. At the end of the day, when this goes through the Senate and you have a different spectrum of republicans who are going to have to deal with this in order to get it out of Senate.
[Olivier Knox, Yahoo News Chief Washington Correspondent:] And part of this is a calculation too about who the swing voters going to be in 2018. And they're going to figure out what you see in terms of engagement from middle-class suburban parents isn't necessary the tax cut for the rich. It's the you are taking away healthcare for babies, pregnant moms. And so, that's a more potent argument for some of the people that democrats think are going to be the swing voters in the midterm.
[Tapper:] A lot of politics here though obviously not surprisingly. I know that there were democrats in the House that wanted to introduce the bill a few weeks ago with ObamaCare fixes. Obviously, there's some problems, insurers are pulling out of state exchanges. Here are our fixes, and they were discouraged from doing so. I suppose it is easier if you're in the minority to not have an alternative that people can pick apart. You're just the ones who are standing there with your hands up blameless.
[Kristol:] Remember, the republicans refused they had a sort of quasi-media alternative in 2010 but they didn't actually introduce, which they could have a full-blown tax credit replacement, alternative to the exchanges. And so both parties have done this. It paid off for the republicans in 2010. The bad stories, true bad stories about ObamaCare. We will see what happens this time. I think it is a political very tough vote. I talked to one republican member who said, we may have just have voted -we may be about to vote to elect Nancy Pelosi speaker.
[Tapper:] You could have
[Kristol:] Exactly the same thing that happened in 2010. On the other hand, it's we'll see what the Senate does. I think the most interesting reporting I've just seen, I know you guys reported this on as well on CNN is that the Senate Mitch McConnell convene I think a dozen senators in his office Tuesday to begin working on a Senate bill and I think they exposedly say was, well begin from the House bill? No, let's just write a Senate bill.
[Tapper:] Is that right? Tell us about that.
[Bash:] Well, I should say our Ted Barrett is reporting that there was a group of about 15 republican senators across the republican spectrum.
[Tapper:] From Mike Lee to Susan Collins?
[Bash:] Exactly, the most conservative to most moderate, starting over and getting together and trying to figure out where they need to go to get the republican votes to get this off the Senate floor. That's the way it should be done, by the way. You should start from there. [16:50:065]
[Kristol:] But then it's going to come back to the House and then Paul Ryan will have a tough time making the House swallow the Senate bill.
[Bash:] Before it comes back down, it's got to it's got to go to the Senate.
[Kristol:] Well, true.
[Marcus:] Right. And the Senate republicans with even less a smaller margin are going to face exactly the same problem that Paul Ryan and the House republicans did, which is that that caucus ranges the gamut from Mike Lee
[Unidentified Female:] Exactly.
[Marcus:] and Ted Cruz to Susan Collins. And you can only lose a few of those, even with Vice President Pence to cast a tie-breaking vote. That's a hard that's a hard caucus of cats to herd there.
[Bash:] You know what, at the end of the day, even by the 2018 election it's unclear if we're going to know the core answer, which is, is cost going to go down as republicans promised? Probably the answer will be no, and the question is then will constituents and voters punish republicans.
[Tapper:] Short term though, President Trump, Olivier, seems to have some spring in his step. He does have a victory, it is a smallish victory in the sense that there's still a lot of obstacles before this becomes law and we still don't know what this will mean in terms much voters and his voters.
[Knox:] Right. And I actually want to grab something that Bill said at the very top of the show, which was basically that one anything that the republicans did today was avoid what would have been a catastrophic defeat. Let's flip what actually happened into what might have happened. Take the bill to the floor, either have to pull it or it goes down. Now you have an angry base to whom you've made promise after promise to repeal and replace ObamaCare. You have something that republicans are very concerned about, which is looking like they can't govern, and you have a President whose ability to sway his own party is already under fire, who would have lost another time. So a big part of the victory party here today is kind of we dodged a bullet, you know. This is it's good that we started this process, but, man, just imagine, just imagine had it gone the other way.
[Tapper:] It would have been a catastrophe so
[Marcus:] A little bit of a self-inflicted bullet. I even if this gets through the Senate, which I think is going to be very hard to do, then if something gets through the Senate, how does that something then pass the House given that 217 vote today?
[Tapper:] Oh, you're thinking about tomorrow.
[Marcus:] I don't stop thinking about tomorrow.
[Tapper:] You're thinking about tomorrow, you always are. Dana and Bill, Olivier and Ruth, thank you so much. Health care is of course not the only victory the president is celebrating. He signed an executive order protecting in his view religious freedom. What does this new executive order do? We'll talk about that next.

[Vause:] Welcome back, everybody. You are watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause. We'll check the headlines this hour. Pope Francis is acknowledging the Catholic Church's inaction on sex abuse by clerics. He says with shame and repentance. In a letter written to all Catholics, the pope says the church showed no care for the little ones. Victims groups say the words are not enough and the pope has to take action against the bishops who covered up crimes. Donald Trump says he stayed out of the Russia investigation, but he could be running it if he wanted to. U.S. President told Reuters he is worried that interview with special counsel Robert Mueller would be a perjury trap where they would make him look like a liar, even though he's telling the truth. Venezuelan president, Nicolas Manduro, is rolling out a new devalued currency in what he calls a revolutionary economic overhaul with a touch of magic
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, that's right, John. I mean, these images that you are seeing here, these are the lucky ones. These are the lucky people who have been chosen. And they still had to wait decades in order to see their loved ones. Now, we have heard also from the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in himself, from a separated family. He was part of one of these family reunions in the past, with his mother going to meet his aunt for the first time. He has said that it's a shame on both the North and South Korean governments that there aren't more of these reunions. And for him, it is going to be a top priority, because it's no overstatement to say that time is running out for those 57,000. Lee Keum-seom hugs her son for the first time in almost 70 years. The last time she saw him, he was four. The emotions are raw. Lee is 92 and since being separated from her child in 1950, she never knew for sure if he was still alive. A tragic legacy of the Korean War, that tore countless families apart. Days before making the trip to North Korea, Lee told us she cried for a year when she fled to the site with her baby daughter, after becoming separated from her husband and son in the panic.
[Lee Keum-seom, Separated Mother:] Would it be OK to hug my son? He is over 70 years old now. When I see him, I'll call his name Sung Chol and hug him. And that's what she does, not letting go of his hand as he talks to his sister, he hasn't seen since she was one. At every table in this resort in Mount Kumgang, the scene is the same, a rush of emotion as families greet relatives they barely recognize. Relatives they only recently discovered were still alive. These reunions only happen when North and South Korea are on good terms. This is the first in three years. Even then, only a fraction over 57,000 families in the South who applied, are chosen. And it is bittersweet. A controlled reunion with families meeting for just 11 hours over a three-day period, before returning home knowing that is likely the last time they will see each other. So for now until Wednesday, Lee can catch up with her son she barely knows. Seeing photos of her husband who is no longer alive, hearing about a life she should have been part of. So the majority of people that were part of this first round of reunions were in the 80s and their 90s. More than 20 percent were in their 90s. I spoke to the head of the Red Cross here in South Korea who said that he is talking to his North Korean counter parts and trying to push for more of these reunions and trying to push more people to be involved in each one. Because clearly, with 57,000 still waiting and there's just a handful of people that go to these reunions each time, a lot of people are being disappointed. John?
[Vause:] And a lot of people are getting older each and every day and their time may come without actually having those reunions or that chance. Paula, thank you. It's a great story. Up next here, irony, my name is Melania. While Donald Trump calls people, dogs and thugs on Twitter, his wife is on a crusade against cyber bullying.

[Blitzer:] The White House is now correcting the official transcript of that meeting that the president had yesterday with Democratic and Republican lawmakers dealing with the so-called DREAMers, the DACA legislation. But they say a line, a critically important line that was omitted in the official transcript was not, according to White House officials, they insist, an attempt to scrub what the president actually said. First, let's listen to the exchange, a very sensitive moment during that 55-minute conversation at the White House. Listen to what Dianne Feinstein, the Senator from California, what she said about the DREAMers and legislation and the president's response. Listen to this.
[Sen. Dianne Feinstein, , California:] What about a clean DACA bill now with a commitment that we go in to a comprehensive immigration reform procedure, like we did back on remember when Kennedy was here. It was really a major, major effort, and it was great disappointment that it went nowhere.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I have no problem. I think that's basically what Dick is saying. We're going to come out with DACA and do DACA and then we can start immediately on phase two, which would be comprehensive.
[Feinstein:] Would you be agreeable on that?
[Trump:] Yes, I would like I would like that. Go ahead. I think a lot of people would like to see that. But I think we have to do DACA first.
[Blitzer:] That was the actual video. We saw it exactly here 24 hours ago. It was live. It was on tape. We saw the whole 55-minute exchange. The initial transcript released by White House omitted that critically important line from the president when he was asked by Senator Feinstein, would you be agreeable to that, meaning a clean DACA bill. The president said, yes, I would like I would like to do that. That was omitted. That line, "Yes, I would like to do that," omitted from the official transcript. It was later corrected. They put that line in. But there's a lot of suspicion as to why that most sensitive line during that 55-minute conversation in the official White House transcript was initially deleted. David Gregory is still with us right now. David, you've covered the White House. I've covered the White House. Those White House officials who transcribe these kinds of meetings, they're very, very specific. And when, all of a sudden, that most sensitive line was deleted when the president said, "Yes, I would like I would like to do that," meaning a clean DACA bill. By the way, that was followed by Kevin McCarthy, the House majority leader, who said, Mr. President, you need to be clear though, I think that Senator Feinstein is asking here, what Senator Feinstein is asking, what we're talking about, DACA, then he says, you've got to include security.
[Gregory:] I remember listening to that. He was so unusually broadcasted with the cameras in there. He kind of bellows from across the room, hey, wait a minute, Mr. President, before you do that. Yes, that seems fishy to me, as I'm sure it does you. We know the transcribers who work in the White House who are terrific. This is something the president wouldn't want out there to be consumed and to be scrutinized. And maybe they felt like, well, he didn't really mean that. They corrected it. You shouldn't be messing around with the transcripts. The point is that the president seemed committed to do something until, you know, Republican leaders said, no, no, you're not thinking this through all the way, which, again, suggests some level of lack of preparation.
[Blitzer:] These are official transcripts. Historians study them. When Feinstein said, would you be agreeable to that, meaning a clean DACA bill, and the presidents said, "Yes, I would like I would like to do that." That was deleted. But they fixed it and corrected it.
[Gregory:] Right. The other question is, they talk about doing this in phases, and that first phase is take care of the DREAMers and then get to how do you get to this other stuff, including the wall that the president wants?
[Blitzer:] All right. Thanks very much, David, for that. Republican Senator Rand Paul is standing by. He will join us. We'll discuss this and a whole lot more right after a quick break.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] North Korea, the focus for President Trump as he readies for the longest foreign trip of his presidency. He leaves for Asia this morning, and a show of force overnight raising tensions with Pyongyang.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] The biggest tax overhaul proposal in years is out. What's in? What it means for you? Can Congress pass it? Let alone this year? Good morning. Thanks for getting an EARLY START with us. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] I was last night trying to figure out what it would mean for me and I couldn't get figure it out because these Northeast states, you're going to lose a bunch of
[Briggs:] Yes.
[Romans:] tax deductions, state and local deductions.
[I -- Briggs:] I tried the same thing, but a lot of Americans tried the same thing. And they can't figure it out. We're leaning on you this morning. So, good luck with that.
[Romans:] All right. I'm here, I'm here. We got Greg Valliere, too. I'm Christine Romans. It is Friday, November 3rd. It is 4:00 in East. It's 10:00 p.m. in Hawaii. It is 4:00 p.m. in Tokyo. All right. President Trump taking off this morning on this marathon overseas trip. Air Force One departing at Joint Base Andrews at 9:00 a.m. So, just five hours wheels up, on route to Hawaii, then to Japan on Sunday, followed by South Korea, China, Vietnam and ending in the Philippines on November 12th. Ahead of this trip, the president spoke out on the North Korea threat, touting America's relationship with Japan.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Japan is a warrior nation and I tell China and I tell everyone else that listens, you're going have yourself a big problem with Japan pretty soon if you allow this to continue with North Korea.
[Cuomo:] National security adviser H.R. McMaster says the president is thinking of putting North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, as a quote, threat to the entire world. We also learn that Pyongyang may be ready to carry out new missile and nuclear tests. For the latest, let's bring in CNN's Matt Rivers, live for us this morning from Beijing. Good morning to you, Matt. And ahead of this trip, our bombers doing something the North Koreans may see as provocative?
[Matt Rivers, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, absolutely. And when President Trump comes to this part of the world, he's going to a lot of different places. But the common thing is going to be the North Korea is the top of the agenda at each stop that he's going to make. And there's certainly been a lot of developments over just the last 48 hours here. It was on Thursday that the U.S. military said they flew two B-1 Lancer bombers over the Korean Peninsula. They said it was a planned drill. We have seen that kind of thing before. However, the North Koreans didn't see it that way. They came out through state media, saying that that was a dry run for the U.S. to possibly conduct a nuclear strike against North Korea at some point in the future. A lot of heated rhetoric there. And at the same time, we heard from South Korean intelligence agency on Thursday that North Korea is preparing based on activity that intelligence agency has seen in North Korea, to carry out another missile test and that they are capable of pushing the button on a new nuclear test at any time they so choose. So, lots to deal with there for the president when he comes to this part of the world and tries to figure this ongoing crisis. But it's not just North Korea. There's a lot of other stuff going on. Look at trade, for example. The United States pulled out of the Trans Pacific Partnership under the Trump administration. They've got a lot of work to do there with countries like South Korea building new trade agreements. And then, President Trump has also said he's coming to China about their role in the opioid crisis and their military expansion in the South China Sea. And so, while North Korea definitely going to be the top of each agenda each stop that he goes to, there's certainly a lot of topics for the president to talk about on this long trip that he's about to embark on.
[Briggs:] Boy, no question about that. A crucial trip. Matt Rivers live for us in Beijing, thank you.
[Romans:] All right. One more thing about the president's Asia trip: expect Trump to be Trump. National security adviser McMaster telling reporters the president does not plan to tone down his rhetoric on North Korea even when he's there in the region.
[H.r. Mcmaster, National Security Adviser:] The president will use whatever language he wants to use, obviously. I don't think the president really modulates his language. Have you noticed him do that? I mean, he's been very he's been very clear he's very clear about it. I've been aware of the discussions about, is this inflammatory? What's inflammatory is the North Korea regime and what they're doing to threaten to threaten the world. I think there'd be a great danger
[Briggs:] President Trump's visit wraps up with the controversial meeting with Philippines' president, strongman Rodrigo Duterte. McMaster claims the president is a staunch advocate of human rights, but does not believe, quote, yelling about it in public is effective.
[Romans:] All right. The GOP tax plan is out and debate amongst lawmakers and tax experts is heating up. So, what does it mean for your tax bill? The cornerstone of this plan. Four new tax brackets shrunk down from seven. Couples making up to 90 grand or individuals making up to $45,000 would see their rates cut to 12 percent. Higher income households who pay 25 percent or 35 percent, you can see the numbers there. Top rate stays the same at 39.6 percent for the highest earners. Another big change is the standard deduction. It's nearly double in the new plan, $12,000 for single filers, $24,000 for couples. This will cut the amount of people who itemize and reduce the deductions they could have taken. But the plan also would eliminate the personal deductions where some taxpayers could see little benefit to the larger standard deduction. Other big changes that would affect your money, the child tax credit is being boosted by 600 bucks. It allows for more people to claim the credit. As for housing, the popular mortgage interest deduction will be capped at loans up to $500,000, and homeowners can only deduct 10 grand worth of property tax. The state and local tax deductions known as SALT will disappear, as with the alternative minimum tax and the estate tax by the year 2024. Now comes the horse trading, the lobbying, the fighting, the president goes off to Asia, leaving this to be rushed through, basically.
[Briggs:] Well, you led me to my question. The realtors won't be happy.
[Romans:] They're not.
[Briggs:] But what's the big fight ahead. I can't see it yet.
[Romans:] You know, the realtors aren't happy and some of the small business groups aren't happy either. The small, they say it doesn't go far enough for small business. I think what you're going to see, who is happy, corporate America in general. This is the center piece of this thing. You know, yesterday, you saw Paul Ryan and Republicans really trying to sell this as middle class, for the middle class, for the paycheck to paycheck worker. And they say that $1100 for a family of four making 59 grand, you're going to see $1100, basically a raise. You know, you're going to pay $1100 less in taxes. But this is really about companies, companies having less taxes.
[Briggs:] Sure.
[Romans:] And will that ultimately end up you know, creating jobs? Or just making companies richer?
[Briggs:] The deficit talk is amazing. It is the Democrats now who are deficit hawks, and Paul Ryan ah. Anyway, elsewhere, new signs this morning special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation is reaching the president's inner circle on it, maybe extending beyond Russian meddling in 2016 campaign. CNN has learned investigators have started asking about senior adviser Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law. Sources tell CNN investigators want to know about Kushner's role in the firing of FBI Director James Comey, and the events surrounding that meeting at Trump Tower, the one between Russians and top Trump campaign officials, including Kushner.
[Romans:] What is not clear right now is how Kushner's advice to the president might relate to the Russian investigation, or to possible obstruction of justice in the Comey firing. Our justice correspondent Evan Perez has more from Washington.
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Dave and Christine, sources tell us that Jared Kushner voluntarily turned over documents that he had from the campaign and the transition, and these related to any contacts that he had with Russia. Now, the documents are similar to ones that Kushner gave to congressional investigators. This all comes as investigators have begun asking witnesses about Kushner's role in the firing of FBI Director James Comey. Now, we heard different accounts from sources. Some say Kushner was a driver of the president's decision. Others say that he simply didn't oppose it, and it was something that the president had already made up his mind about. Now, sources close to the White House say that base on what they know, Kushner is not a target of this investigation. White House official says there's no surprise that the Mueller team would be asking questions about Kushner. They also say that Kushner would be among a list of people that investigators would be asking about. A lawyer for Kushner did not comment and the White House declined to comment for the story Dave and Christine.
[Briggs:] All right. Evan, thanks. The Internet red alert has been canceled, folks. Exhale. The president's Twitter account is back up and running this morning after briefly going offline. How is this for a plot twist? It wasn't a glitch. Turns out an unnamed Twitter employee pulled the plug on the account on his or her last day at work. The president's account was restored within 11 minutes but was down long enough to trigger a tsunami of sarcastic jokes and conspiracy theories online, including this tweet, senior editor of the "New Republic" magazine: Wait. Trump's Twitter account has disappeared. Is this how we do coups now? That was one of hundreds of thousands of jokes online.
[Romans:] It wasn't
[Briggs:] It was a peaceful 11 minutes.
[Romans:] I got to say, a peaceful transfer of power for 11 minutes.
[Briggs:] Yes.
[Romans:] President Trump does not seem troubled by a staffing shortage at the State Department.
[Trump:] The one that matters is me. I'm the only one that matters.
[Romans:] We'll try to make sense of that, next.

[King:] Topping our political radar today, divide and conquer. That may be the President's new strategy in the stalled NAFTA negotiations, that according to his Chief Economic Adviser during an interview a short time ago. Listen here, Larry Kudlow saying the President things bilateral has always been better. Hence, the new idea for getting a better deal with our North American trading partners?
[Larry Kudlow, Chief Economic Adviser To President Trump:] He is very seriously contemplating kind of a shift in the NAFTA negotiations. His preference now, and they ask me to convey this, is to actually negotiate with Mexico and Canada separately. The President is not going to leave NAFTA. He's not going to withdraw from NAFTA. He's just going to try a different approach.
[King:] We'll watch that. First Lady Melania Trump scheduled to make a public appearance with the President tomorrow, that to highlight preparations for the coming hurricane season. Last night, we got a glimpse of the First Lady for the first time since she was hospitalized three weeks ago where her spokeswoman described as a benign kidney procedure. You can see the First Lady there, attending a White House event for gold star families. That event was closed to the press. Republican megadonor David Koch stepping down from his role at Koch industries because of health issues. In a letter to employees, his brother Charles Koch writes that David Koch's health, quote, has continued to deteriorate. That letter says, as a result, he is unable to be involved in business and other organizational activities. David Koch is 78 years old. The outgoing Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz is weighing a possible presidential bid on Monday. Starbucks announce Schultz will step down at the end of this month after a 36-year run with the company. Schultz says he's a long way from any many decision, but says he's considering public service as a potential next step. Here's Rachel at CNBC earlier today.
[Howard Schultz, Outgoing Executive Chairman Of Starbucks:] There's a lot of things I can do as a private citizen other than run for the presidency of the United States. And let's just see what happens. I've got lots of things I'm thinking about. I want to think about this through the lens of what it means to be a great American citizen. I don't know what that means at this point. My concern for the country and my concern for our standing in the world, the lack of dignity, the lack of respect, the vitriolic behavior coming from this administration. I think we can do much better.
[King:] Up next, it is exactly one week away and we now know the exact location of President Trump's big meeting with Kim Jong-un.

[Lemon:] And we're back. I want you to take a look at this. This is the latest cover of Time Magazine. There it is. Is this the way President Trump sees himself, dressed as a monarch along with the words king me underneath them? King me? Well, the cover artist says Trump is also making eye contact with Americans. Back with me now, Molly Ball, Chris Cillizza, and Rick Wilson. I love that cover. It's a very interesting cover, Molly. And you cover it with the cover story, and for a guy who didn't know the history of the war of 1812. Does President Trump know enough to understand our entire system was built, so that we didn't put in place a king here in the United States?
[Ball:] You know, I have no idea what he does or doesn't understand, but the implications of what he is doing you know, we were talking in the last segment about this parallel, legal, and political strategy. And so we sort of are trying to lay it out with some original reporting in this piece about how, and why he is waging this war on Robert Mueller, and this investigation. One thing I think is interesting that people might not realize is that it is relatively recent this escalation of the war on the Special Counsel. He wasn't always in full frontal attack mode against the Special Counsel. In fact, he never mentioned Bob Mueller's name on Twitter until March, just a couple of months ago. So this is a real escalation. It mirrors the escalation in his legal strategy. And to your question, what distinguishes what he's doing now from say, the Clinton playbook against Ken Starr, which was also a P.R. strategy to discredit the Special Counsel so that when and if he came up with anything, impeachment would be impossible because of public opinion. What is distinguishing about this war that Trump is waging are these wide-ranging claims of imperial executive power. Very much, almost a liberalization of Richard Nixon's, you know, hair- raising claim that when the President does it, it is not illegal is basically what the President and his lawyers have been arguing in Giuliani, and his public arguments, and in the January memo that was recently leaked saying, you know, the President can pardon him, and all of these things. And this is somewhat worrying to not just, you know, the President's partisan opponents, but fans of the rule of law.
[Lemon:] Yes. So, I'm wondering about, look, themes here, Chris. I mean, between the President's interest in pardons, his claim that he can even pardon himself, his love of parades, military pomp, and circumstance. I mean, do you think imperial power is a theme of the Trump presidency?
[Cillizza:] Well, I think what he knows is, what he comes from, Don, is his way goes. Everyone in the Trump organization works for him. Donald Trump wants to get rid of you, you're gone. That's the experience he has. That's his form of experience is that, and a reality television show that was based on three people being in a board room begging him not to fire them, and him deciding up with of them gets fired.
[Lemon:] Right.
[Cillizza:] So that he has brought those experiences to the government is I don't think terribly surprising. That he has failed to either by choice or by willful ignorance, basically amounts to the same thing, chosen not to understand that the federal government does not work that way that. That, sure, you're sort of the boss of the Justice Department, but there's a long tradition of independence there. They don't they work for you in the broadest sense, but you can't just tell them what to do, and what not to do. He's never seen those lines. I hesitate to say he's never understood them. I don't know if he understands them or not. But he chooses no to regard them. And so it winds up being the same thing. So, yes, I think that I think it's his back ground, and his unwillingness to adopt to the fact that government, and being President is different than being the head of a company.
[Lemon:] Well, here is what they all don't understand. Rick, I want to let you get in here. And even him, he's doesn't going to want to hear this. It's that they all work for us, including him, right? At the end of the day, they all work for us.
[Wilson:] Exactly. This is one of the most fundamental elements of our government and our history. We fought a war to free ourselves of a monarchy. We built it into our constitution that we don't have titles of nobility. The presidency is a part of a tripartite government, where there is a balance of powers between three branches. The executive power was always treated with caution. George Washington, our first president, could have become a king, and didn't want to because he understood the peril of it. Donald Trump is as close to an imperial president as we've had in our lifetimes. And the fever dream of some of the people around him is that now we have a dynasty of Trumps, and they're treating it like a royal family. And Trump loves that because it also plays in, as Chris said, to the reality TV star, fake corporate CEO mogul, all of that stuff. And a lot of his base, and a lot of his fans, they're perfectly content with that. They like that strong man, you know, war lord deal, kind of thing.
[Lemon:] But now, he's, you know, reportedly crowing about attending the G-7 summit, the meeting, because he feels like he would be the odd man out. And maybe in part because, listen, this is he's, you know, at odds with Canada and France. Or because French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted this, he said the American President may not mind being isolated, but neither do we mind signing a sick-country agreement if need be. Because these six countries represent values, they represent an economic market which has the weight of history behind it, and which is now a true international force. Are our allies calling his bluff, Molly?
[Ball:] Well, they're certainly heading in that direction. But look, I think for Trump, and some of the more scholarly, or cerebral theorists behind some of his foreign policy, it is sort of the whole point to isolate America. They believe that that is good for our interests long term. And that all of these, however many country agreements of every sort, that the United States has been enmeshed in, haven't been in support of American interests. So this is going to be a test. Is that actually the case? When you have this has now gone far enough where other countries are starting to take him seriously. They are starting to realize they can't manhandle him, and flatter him into continuing to play America's traditional role. And so if he's going to walk one way, they're going to walk the other. They are, I think to your point, preparing to call his bluff, and then see where the chips fall. I mean, the problem is that these have been at least to the people who forged these agreements, these have been the idea of mutual interest, so within these countries' interests too. And so, are they going are they willing to disadvantage themselves if it comes to that in order to teach the United States a lesson. I think that's what we are going to see.
[Lemon:] I wonder if you guys ever do you guys ever go on peek at his Instagram?
[Wilson:] Yes.
[Lemon:] Because pics I don't know if you could call it sub it's like a sub-tweet, but sub-Instagram.
[Wilson:] Sub-insta.
[Lemon:] What was or sub-insta, what's happening at this White House every single day. And it's kind of amazing. I just want to put this up before we go. He posted in Instagram tonight. This is a photo of President Obama, and other world leaders, and it's captioned back when the G-8 leaders respected each other. You should go check his Instagram. Every single day he does it. And it's really brilliant trolling. Go ahead, Chris, quickly because I've got to go to break.
[Cillizza:] I was just going to say. I think two things are true. Donald Trump is a radical break from anyone who's been president ever before. The 43 people we've held before you say radical break. It is also true that that's what he ran on being, and that's what the people who support him like.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cillizza:] I can't square that circle, but he didn't pretend like he was going to be in a long line of how presidents have done things. He ran on the opposite.
[Lemon:] I've got to run.
[Cillizza:] This is what the opposite looks like.
[Lemon:] I've got to run. Rick, we'll talk more next time.
[Wilson:] Yes, sir.
[Lemon:] Thank you all, appreciate it. When we come back, you heard Kim Kardashian West talk about her role in convincing President Trump to commute Alice Johnson's sentence. David Axelrod has been critical of the President side stepping on pardoning process. And I'm going to get his take on that. That's next.

[Cooper:] There's more breaking news. Tonight, Congressman Trent Franks has moved up his resignation date from January to today. Also, tonight, a
[Sunlen Serfaty, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Well, some of these new details for the allegations, Anderson are quite disturbing. I spoke this evening to a confidante of one of the accusers, a former aide in the congressman's office, who she says has detailed these allegations over the course of a couple years to her. She says the former aide said she was asked by the congressman to be a surrogate in exchange for money. The woman said she was asked to look over a contract to potentially carry a child for him. And it was said if she conceived his child, she would be given $5 million. Now this is according to Andrea Lafferty, she is the president of the Traditional Values Coalition. She was in the room last week when this accuser brought her story to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan's office up here on Capitol Hill. And we know there was a very swift move by the speaker's office to pressure him to resign and to leave. Anderson.
[Cooper:] And why the sudden change of date for the congressman's resignation?
[Serfaty:] Yes, and this is really interesting. Yesterday he said he will resign in January 31st. Today, he says he will resign today, effective immediately. Now, officially the congressman is essentially pinning it on his family. He says that his wife was admitted to the hospital with an ongoing ailment and the best thing for his family to do right now is to be by her side. But, clearly, there was so much pressure on him. Clearly, there was just no appetite for him to stay a day longer up here on Capitol Hill. And we do know from Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, he believes the allegations. He called them yesterday very credible and very serious.
[Cooper:] All right, Sunlen, appreciate that. New information now about Russia's efforts to connect with the President team, "The New York Times" has reporting, the FBI warned President Trump's Communication Director Hope Hicks about Russian operatives who tried to make contact with her during the transition process. CNN's Justice Correspondent Jessica Schneider is here with the latest on that. So what do we know about the FBI warning?
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, we know that senior FBI officials, they cautioned Hope Hicks about several introductory e-mails that she received after the election. They were from Russian government e-mail addresses. So FBI agents met with Hope Hicks twice at the beginning of this year inside the situation room at the White House and they told her that these e-mails were not what they seemed and that they may have been part of a Russian intelligence operation. That's all according to "The New York Times". So, Anderson, this was a very specific warning, and it shows that law enforcement was alarmed, that Russians were still trying to establish contacts with the Trump team even after the election. Reportedly, Hope Hicks disclosed the meetings with the FBI, the White House Counsel Don McGahn. And we also know that Hicks met with the special counsel's team today and yesterday as part of their ongoing Russian probe. Anderson.
[Cooper:] And when it comes to the case against Manafort and Rick Gates, what did you learn?
[Schneider:] So we have learned about a whole slew of information that prosecutors have. They have 400,000 documents in their case against Gates and Manafort. They include things like financial records and e-mails. And prosecutors have even labeled 2000 of the documents as "hot," meaning that they could be particularly relevant. So also what the government has, they have 36 electronic devices they seized from Paul Manafort's home back in July. Investigators have also issued 15 search warrants and probably the most interesting thing, Anderson, in these filings is that the government referenced that Manafort and Gates had actually given deposition testimony in another matter. Prosecutors, though, they're not saying exactly what they mean. The case moving full steam ahead and we'll see both Manafort and Gates back in court on Monday. Anderson.
[Cooper:] All right, Jessica Schneider, thanks very much. Up next, Up next, a live update from Southern California where wildfires have already forced nearly 200,000 people out of their homes, could get worse over the weekend.

[John King, Inside Politics:] Welcome back. The Special Counsel investigation into Russian election meddling now reaching inside social media giant, Facebook. Sources confirming to CNN, Robert Mueller's team has obtained a search warrant compelling Facebook to surrender information about campaign-related ads bought by account that now been linked back to the Russian government. Here's why this could really matter. To get such a sweeping warrant, prosecutors need to demonstrate probable cause of a crime. It's illegal for a foreign national to interfere in the U.S. election and it would be a crime if any U.S. citizen worked colluded with them, for example, to offer political advice like with issues and states. Those ads should target. So this is a, A, it's big deal anyway to have a private company like Facebook, have the Special Counsel come knocking saying, turn over the records. And now you get into this whole question, this collusion question and the idea is the Trump campaign will tell you. Their team dragged about their use of digital space particularly Facebook in the final weeks of the campaign they think is what turned Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Now the question is, if this Russian accounts, Russian bought ads were in the same places, coincidence or not?
[Julie Pace, Chief White House Correspodent, Associated Press:] Well, I mean, it's a huge open question I think at this point, but this is what the Mueller team is after right now. We've been in this space with the Russian investigations where you've had a lot of rumors floating around, a lot of ticky-tack things out there. This is pretty serious. This is a big deal not just for this investigation. It's a big deal for future U.S. elections. And Facebook, the company that has been pretty opaque in their political dealings, pretty opaque in terms of how their ads are purchased, who they deal with there. So the consequences of this, not just for the Mueller investigation but broadly for politics, for big tech and its relationship with Washington are could be hugely consequential.
[Jackie Calmes, Whit House Editor, Los Angeles Times:] That's right. I mean, we're into the mid-term cycle now which is a hugely consequential mid-term. I mean, most of them are, but this one really is and with the control of Congress at stake in the mid-term of the Trump administration. So, it's really you know, you have to wonder what's going on now that is going undetected. They were so successful apparently in the 2016 election.
[King:] It's a great point both for the any campaign regulatory agencies and the social media giants in the idea that what do you have to do to more properly vet
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[King:] when you're taking money from, where is that money coming from. It's hard, you say about its fake account, it's hard, but it's doable. That's one of the challenges. I want to go out for another piece of the story, dramatic story of the New York Times today about two of the President's lawyers sitting outdoors in a Washington D.C. steak house talking about the strategy in dealing with the special counsel investigation we just talked to. Talking about debates within the team about how cooperatively, debates within the team about transparent it could be. Let's listen to the New York Times reporter who was sitting as close as I I'm to you, Jackie, Ken Vogel. The President's lawyers are there. He's, hance, at the next table and he hears this.
[Ken Vogel, Reporter, New York Times:] As I sat there by myself at this table taking notes on my iPhone, they preceded to discuss
[Unidetified Female:] Wow.
[Vogel:] some of the, you know, the most sensitive of the sensitive area in way that was very easily audible to me and allowed for us to get at some of these issues.
[King:] Among the things they are talking is how cooperative to be. And there's a picture of the two attorneys. They're talking about
[Perry Bacon, Senior Political Writer, Fivethirtyeight:] The idea that it's in a restaurant, of course, bad form,
[Karoun Demirjian, Reporter, The Washington Post:] And even what they've exposed also is a question it opens the question of whether other people in the White House will be now brought into Mueller's probe. When you are in a yes, there is a turning point from this, but it's not exactly the same when you are an, you know, employee of the White House and you see. They could now be brought in especially if there is, you know, credible evidence spoken out of the mouths of lawyers themselves, that there may be documents in the state for other things there. You may see some of these other people getting pulled into the probe now which complicates the legal defense for the Trump team and even more.
[Bacon:] And with the White House.
[King:] There's a paragraph of the story about the fear inside the White House trepidation about this, inside the White House, that there are some people think that some of the colleagues might be wearing a wire, were wearing a wire for Bob Mueller. I mean, that again, great going to work every day, right?
[Calmes:] Well, and we saw some of that during the investigations on the second Clinton term.
[King:] Right.
[Calmes:] But not like that. I mean, this is a far more serious. That went to the personnel
[Bacon:] Conduct.
[Calmes:] conduct of the President. This goes to the entire campaign and potential colluding with an adversary.
[King:] And potential, emphasis potential, potential with Special Counsel looking into obstruction by the President
[Calmes:] Right, exactly.
[King:] of the United States, it's not the candidate.
[Demirjian:] But exactly it is potential and if we you know, if McGhan is right that there's nothing there and that's why he should be handing over more documents because it will show the President
[King:] Could be unlocking the safe, it's not locking the safe.
[Demirjian:] Definitely. But again, I mean, if this and this means something that is a self-constructed nightmare that didn't need to be there, then why?
[Calmes:] Why did you say quickly I mean, nothing about what the lawyers reportedly said to each other surprised me really. And Don McGhan, it is his job as a White House counsel, not to represent the President individually, but to represent the office of the President. So he has to be concern about President set. What surprised me about this is that they were saying this. I worked in the New York Times Bureau for nine years. I had many lunches at DOT. There, or any place out, I always looked around the room to see who was there before I talked. And the fact that the two lawyers didn't is astounding.
[King:] Common sense. That's one is interesting to watch. We've seen the President blow off his legal team in the past. We'll see how this story sets with the President today. Up next, it seems the President spend a lot of time on Twitter this weekend. But was it presidential tweets, including the rocket man. Next.

[Baldwin:] Now to a conflict some are saying is partisan, others just contend this is about privacy. More than 40 states, we're counting now 44 and growing, defying this request from the president's commission to study voter fraud, and it's not just Democrats here. It's not just Democratic officials balking at giving over information like voter names, addresses, birthdays, political affiliations, criminal history, last four digits of your Social Security number, but also Republicans. Republican secretaries of state are also refusing to comply, like the one in Louisiana. He is saying and let me just quote him "The president's commission has quickly politicized its work by asking states for an incredible amount of voter data that I have time and time again refused to release." You remember this question of voter fraud? It's coming up because of President Trump. Let me just take you back and remind you.
[Question:] So, you brought in congressional leaders to the White House. You spoke at length about the presidential election with them, telling them that you lost the popular vote because of millions of illegal votes, three to five million illegal votes.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] That was supposed to be a confidential meeting, and you weren't supposed to go out and talk to the press.
[Question:] But three million to five million illegal votes?
[Trump:] Well, we're going to find out, but it could very well be that much.
[Baldwin:] That has been entirely unfounded. Myrna Perez is with me, leads the Voter Rights and Elections Project at Brennan Center for Justice. She is back. Thank you so much for coming in.
[Myrna Perez, Brennan Center For Justice:] Glad to be here. Thank you. Happy Fourth of July.
[Baldwin:] Thank you. You too. Explain to me what the president's commission can actually collect. What's OK? Well, part of the problem is that the whole structure behind the commission is one that is dubious and people are very skeptical of it. It was created basically to justify the president's outlandish claims that massive voter fraud- Where there's no evidence, right.
[Perez:] Right, when there's no evidence. And he staffed it with like a who's-who of vote suppressors. Certainly, a commission, a presidential commission can conduct research, they can conduct hearings. And nobody objects to being nobody objects to that kind of research. What people are concerned about is that the requests that were sent to the states last week were vast. They implicated issues of privacy. They implicated issues of state law.
[Baldwin:] But on the issues of privacy, and I can understand the frustration because the premise is unfounded, according to you and other people I have talked to. That said, Mark Rotter says, well, no, no, we're not asking for anything that's not already out there, when we're talking about this information of voters. If it's public, what's wrong with us asking about it?
[Perez:] This is a great thing to clear up for the public.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Perez:] Every state allows some sort of way of inspecting their voter rolls. But most states have limits on what information you can get, how you can get it, how you can use it, whether or not you can distribute it to other people. And once a state passes this data over this commission that then has to make everything publicly available, they can't enforce their own state laws. So one very concrete example is if you had a law in your state that said you can't use the information for commercial use, once they give it to the commission, what's to stop a company from looking at it and sending promotional material to everyone? It's different.
[Baldwin:] Sure, and therein lies some of the frustration. I remember when the story first came out, I think it was last week, and you had a lot of these Democratic governors or really mostly secretaries of state saying this isn't OK, I'm not giving you my information. I remember Terry McAuliffe of Georgia Democrat, Virginia, last week wrote: "I have no intention of honoring this request. Virginia conducts fair, honest and democratic elections. And there is no evidence of significant voter fraud in Virginia." Flash-forward a couple of days. More and more states pile on. And now you have Republican secretaries of state saying, no, no, no, federal government, don't you meddle in my state processes. So this seems more it less like a partisan issue and more like a states' rights issue.
[Perez:] Well, maybe. I think the commission put the states in a terrible position. One, it caused a bunch of legal problems for them, because, again, they can't enforce their own laws vs. about how you maintain certain privacy aspects of the voter rolls, notwithstanding the fact that, in some ways, they're public.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Perez:] Two, it created a political problem for them.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] A former Trump campaign ad says, "Let them arrest me." He is not going to abide by the subpoena. THE LEAD starts now. Breaking news, Trump campaign aide of past days Sam Nunberg says Robert Mueller called him to the grand jury, but he's not going to go. Instead, he wants to rip up the subpoena on national television. What does Nunes think Mueller will do next? With the White House being described by one ally as pure madness, are we seeing the chaos reflected in the president's policies? One minute, he says trade wars are easy. The next, he says he doesn't think there will be any trade wars. Which is it? A self-proclaimed sex expert claims she will share information linking the Trump campaign and Russia, but only if the U.S. gets her out of a prison in Thailand. Why should anyone believe her? Why is this causing an international ruckus? We went to her to find out.
[Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Tapper:] Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. We're going to be begin with some breaking news in the Russia investigation. Former Trump campaign aide Sam Nunberg says he will not comply with a subpoena from special counsel Robert Mueller to appear before the grand jury, telling "The Washington Post" quote "Let him arrest me." The Trump campaign aide fired Nunes in August 2015 after a series of offensive Facebook posts came to light, but he maintains close ties with Roger Stone, a longtime Trump adviser, and knows President Trump very well. Moments ago, the White House responded to Nunes's claims that Mueller may have something on President Trump.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I definitely think he doesn't know that for sure because he's incorrect. As we have said many times before, there was no collusion with the Trump campaign. Anything further on what his actions are, he hasn't worked at the White House. So I certainly can't speak to him or the lack of knowledge that he clearly has.
[Tapper:] Joining me on the phone right now is Sam Nunberg. Sam, thanks for joining us. So the special counsel is investigating President Trump for any possible ties to Russia that would have resulted in inappropriate, if not illegal behavior. You worked for Mr. Trump. Why are you refusing to cooperate with the subpoena?
[Sam Nunberg, Former Trump Campaign Aide:] Because it is absolutely ridiculous what they requested from me. They requested first of all, they sent me a subpoena where they asked me after November 1 of 2016 did I communicate with Carter Page, Corey Lewandowski? I despise Corey. Why would I communicate with him? Hope Hicks, who was having an affair with Corey? And I would communicate? I should give them every e-mail from November 1 of 2015 to perpetuity with Steve Bannon and Roger Stone? Why? Why do I have to give that to the government?
[Tapper:] Well, because it's a special prosecutor, and he is requesting information.
[Nunberg:] Well, you know, what would you say if it was a Democrat?
[Tapper:] Same thing.
[Nunberg:] Would you agree? Would you agree that I would have to do that if they were investigating a Democrat?
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Nunberg:] You would?
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Nunberg:] OK, fine. Well, you know what? I don't think I should. And I spent hours going over it today. It was really ridiculous. And I just think and I'm not interested in going in there for them to set up a case against Roger Stone, who had no communication with Julian Assange. The idea that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians, you would be giving the Russians you would be looking down on them. He wouldn't be able to keep his mouth shut.
[Tapper:] So, let me ask you. So, they're asking for any communication with Hope Hicks, with Steve Bannon, with Corey Lewandowski, with Carter Page. Is that it? Those four individuals?
[Nunberg:] Oh, Gates and Manafort, who I have never spoken to in my life.
[Tapper:] OK. Rick Gates and Paul Manafort. So, those...
[Nunberg:] I forget the other ones, and I will send it to you. You know what? I may have to release it. Because I am not a fan of Donald Trump. He treated me like crap. OK?
[Tapper:] Right.
[Nunberg:] He treated Roger like crap. We should I should not have been fired. Roger should not have been treated the way he did. And Trump decided that he loved Corey more than us. That's fine. OK. It's old business. But the idea that I was colluding with the Russians, that Roger was colluding with the Russians to help Trump? All we were doing was trying to get Corey fired.
[Tapper:] So is that the reason that you're objecting to turn over these e-mails because...
[Nunberg:] No. I'm objecting to it because I shouldn't have to spend that much time. I shouldn't have to go back down to a grand jury. I spent I'm spending a lot of money on legal fees. A lot of other people are. And, granted, Donald Trump caused this because he's an idiot, because he decided to give an interview to Lester Holt the day after he fired James Comey, and then he decided to have to have the Russians in the Oval Office. You have to explain that one to me, because I will never understand it.
[Tapper:] I'm not going to be able to explain that to you, Sam.
[Nunberg:] No, nobody will. But I don't want to hear I don't want to hear from what's her name today attacking me.
[Tapper:] Sarah Sanders?
[Nunberg:] Yes, Sarah Sanders. If she wants to attack me, I can attack her back.
[Tapper:] Let me ask you. So they're asking I just want to make sure I understand what the subpoena is requesting. The subpoena is requesting all communication you have with a whole bunch of people.
[Nunberg:] Jake, I'm going to send you the subpoena.
[Tapper:] OK.
[Nunberg:] You know what? I'm going to send you I'm going to be the first one in history to flat out say, I'm not going.
[Tapper:] You're not going?
[Nunberg:] I'm not going to the grand jury. I'm not going I'm not going to spend 30 hours going over my e-mails. I'm not doing it. Why do I have to do it?
[Tapper:] You have testified before the grand jury already, right?
[Nunberg:] No! I met with them, very professional.
[Tapper:] You met with them. OK.
[Nunberg:] I met with them. And they were very professional. And, by the way, I was very impressed. But what I'm not doing is following up with it. I think Mueller has enough on Trump. He doesn't need me to start giving him information on Roger Stone and Steve Bannon. Jake, I communicate I communicated with Roger Stone and Steve Bannon 15 times a day. So I have to spend 80 hours going over e- mails?
[Tapper:] Well, I agree that it seems like a lot of time. But it is law enforcement telling you that you have to do it. That's what a subpoena is.
[Nunberg:] OK, fine.
[Tapper:] Are you actually willing to go to jail for this, Sam?
[Nunberg:] I'm not cooperating. Arrest me.
[Tapper:] You're not cooperating. Arrest you.
[Nunberg:] Yes. I'm not cooperating. You're more than happy you want to arrest me, arrest me, because you know what? And I'm not a fan of Donald Trump, Jake.
[Tapper:] I know. You had a big falling out.
[Nunberg:] I'm not a fan of his. You know what? When they start asking for stuff like this, Trump is right. It is a witch-hunt.
[Tapper:] Well, let me ask you a question. When you did meet with the members of the special prosecutor's team, and you said they acted very professionally.
[Nunberg:] They acted professionally. And, by the way, I was very impressed by them.
[Tapper:] You were very impressed. What were they asking you about?
[Nunberg:] They asked about everything in terms of my relationship with Trump, in terms of my they even asked you know, my father worked for Trump in the '80s for Dreyer & Traub. If you read "Art of the Deal," Trump mentions it.
[Tapper:] OK.
[Nunberg:] They asked about it. They asked about stuff like that. You wouldn't believe it. And they know. They know something on him. And, Jake, I don't know what it is.
[Tapper:] They know something on him.
[Nunberg:] And perhaps I'm wrong. But he did something.
[Tapper:] You think that they have him on something. But you don't know if it is related to the Russians or something else.
[Nunberg:] I think it could be I think if they have him on something, they're smart enough to know, if they have him on something, it has to be during the election, because the same way that they went after Bill Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas and they were right to they have to go the minute Trump is a politician, they can go after him. Now, Sarah Huckabee has attacked me again. And I would be more than happy to deal with her face to face. I would be more than happy to go back to court with her. I think she's terrible, by the way. How do you have it's the funniest thing to me Trump that likes her. Trump's approval ratings are in the are dirt. They are like in the 30s. So, I know he likes her because of her father and whatever else. But I would really suggest to Sarah she shouldn't attack me again.
[Tapper:] I'm sure she's getting that message loud and clear. Let me ask you a question. What do you think the odds are well, first of all, about the Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner meeting with individuals that were sold to them as being with the Russian government and having dirt on Hillary Clinton, this happened in the summer of 2016.
[Nunberg:] You know why Trump was so stupid to fire Comey?
[Tapper:] Why?
[Nunberg:] Because Comey can do anything to Trump because he didn't do anything against Hillary. So, Trump fires him. I have heard and you can imagine who I heard it from that Jared was going around for two months saying that Trump should fire him. But he fires him, and then he gives the interview to Lester Holt, and then he has the Russians in the Oval Office. Who in the hell advised him to allow those Russians in the Oval Office?
[Tapper:] It's a mystery. But let me ask you about that Trump Tower meeting. What do you make of it, as somebody who has worked for President Trump?
[Nunberg:] I have defended that meeting. I don't think there's anything wrong with it. And you're going to disagree with me. There's nothing wrong with...
[Tapper:] I don't know what happened at that meeting. Do you think that Donald Trump says that President Trump says he knew nothing about the meeting. Do you think that that's true?
[Nunberg:] No.
[Tapper:] You don't think that's true?
[Nunberg:] No. It doesn't and, Jake, I have watched your news reports. You know it's not true. He talked about it a week before. And I don't know why he did this. All he had to say was, yes, we met with the Russians. The Russians offered us something, and we thought they had something. And that was it. I don't know why he went around trying to hide it. And he shouldn't have.
[Tapper:] I think that that's one of the mysteries of all of this, is that, if there's nothing to hide, why is he doing things like firing James Comey, et cetera, trying to why is he so angry at the attorney general for recusing himself, et cetera?
[Nunberg:] By the way, I just want to say this on your air, and I know you may not like it.
[Tapper:] Sure.
[Nunberg:] No. No, I'm not going to say you may not like this. James Comey deserved to be fired.
[Tapper:] He deserved to be fired?
[Nunberg:] James Comey was a disgrace for what he did letting Hillary Clinton off for that investigation. And he colluded with Obama about it.
[Tapper:] OK. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. I'm not offended by that.
[Nunberg:] No, I know you're not offended. Actually, you know what? I'm wrong and I should apologize. You didn't say anything about that. But I would say, James Comey was pathetic. Now, Robert Mueller is a professional person. Robert Mueller is an honorable man. I'm not going to cooperate, Jake. I'm not going to spend 80 hours going over e-mails. I'm not going to go into a grand jury so that they can set up a case against Roger Stone because they don't like Roger. Roger is my mentor. I support Roger. We were treated very badly by Trump. That's but I'm not going in there.
[Tapper:] So, you so, it sounds like there are two things you're objecting to, and correct me if you're wrong, Sam. One is, you think it would take too much time, and you also just think the request is ridiculous for all these e-mails and texts and whatever between and you Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, et cetera? That's one.
[Nunberg:] You know what, Jake?
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Nunberg:] I'm going to send this to you afterwards, because you asked me for it before, so you can see it.
[Tapper:] OK.
[Nunberg:] They asked me about communications with Carter Page. Do you think I would communicate with Carter Page?
[Tapper:] I'm guessing...
[Nunberg:] Carter Page is a scumbag.
[Tapper:] OK. So the answer is, no, you would not communicate with Carter Page.
[Nunberg:] So, the answer is no. And Carter Page was colluding with the Russians.
[Tapper:] So Carter Page was colluding with the Russians, you think?
[Nunberg:] Yes. I believe Carter Page was colluding with the Russians.
[Tapper:] Well, if that's true, Sam, Carter Page was an adviser to the Trump campaign.
[Nunberg:] He wasn't really an adviser, Jake. Come on. Do you really think he was an adviser? He was a name on a list.
[Tapper:] Well, I know that he...
[Nunberg:] I'm being honest with you. Honestly, let be let's be credible. Let's be honest about this. Trump had to start, Trump had to form, as you will recall, Jake, Trump had to form a foreign policy advisory board. And he didn't know they were happy to get anybody they could get. That guy was introduced to the campaign through Corey Lewandowski.
[Tapper:] So, you OK. So, you think I just want to wrap this up in a second, Sam, but let me just ask you. So, you think Carter Page colluded with the Russians. What do you think about George Papadopoulos, who has also...
[Nunberg:] I don't know anything about George Papadopoulos. The reason I think Carter Page, Jake, colluded with the Russians is because, as you well know, and you have reported this and I watch your show.
[Tapper:] Thank you.
[Nunberg:] About that case in 2014 or so, 2013?
[Tapper:] Yes.
[Nunberg:] That's why I think he did. I think that Carter Page is a weird dude. I don't think he should have been involved in that campaign. If you look at everybody else on that foreign policy board, they were basically brought in through what's his name, through Dr. Ben Carson, Dr. Ben Carson's campaign, because Corey was so lazy, he couldn't organize a campaign he couldn't organize a foreign policy division.
[Tapper:] Right. All right. Sam, always a pleasure talking to you. Thanks so much. Please keep in touch, because, obviously, I'm guessing that there will be repercussions if you tear up that subpoena and refuse to cooperate. And we want to hear your side of it.
[Nunberg:] Do you think should I cooperate with should I spend 80 hours going over my e-mails, Jake?
[Tapper:] If it were me, I would, I mean, if you're just asking my opinion, just because, it sounds like pain, but he is the special counsel and he does have the long arm of the law.
[Nunberg:] Why do I have to produce every e-mail? I talked to Steve Bannon and Roger Stone eight times a day. Do you know what I mean? Why do I have to go over it? Why do I have to produce
[Tapper:] Sometimes life and special prosecutors are not fair, I guess. I would cooperate were it me. But, you know, I'm a different breed of cat. Sam, thanks so much. I appreciate you
[Nunberg:] Jake, I'm definitely the first person to ever do this, right?
[Tapper:] Say that again?
[Nunberg:] I'm definitely the first person to ever do this
[Tapper:] You're the first one I've ever spoken with who has ever done it. So
[Nunberg:] Thank you very much.
[Tapper:] That much is true.
[Nunberg:] By the way, it is an honor to be on your show.
[Tapper:] Thank you. It's nice to have you on my show and it won't be the last time. I appreciate it. Nice talking to you.
[Nunberg:] OK, thank you, Jake.
[Tapper:] Bye-bye. Let's bring in the political panel. I'll start with you, Bill. Your reaction.
[Bill Kristol, The Weekly Standard:] Just one of the more the unusual 15 minutes of sitting on the set with you, I'd say it is always an honor to be on the show with you.
[Tapper:] You don't say that enough to me.
[Kristol:] I don't. You should have Sam up here next time. I don't know, who knows what to make of it. But I would just say this. The two he seems to be have close to and stayed close to are Roger Stone and Steve Bannon. If you listen to him, he talks about he doesn't like a lot of the others, he throws a lot of names around, but those are the two. And especially Stone who was his mentor. And so, either he's just sick of dealing with them and he doesn't want to spend the 80 hours going to his emails and all that, or maybe there's something in there that he doesn't want to share that might be trouble for Stone or Bannon. He's going to have to share it, won't he, because you can't just defy a subpoena because it takes too much time.
[Tapper:] You two stick around. I want to know what you think, but I have to squeeze in a break. That interview went a little long. Stay with us. We have lots more on the breaking news when we come back.

[Mike Pompeo, U.s. Secretary Of State:] They promised accountability.
[Reporter:] Including a member of the royal family?
[Pompeo:] They made no exceptions to who they would hold accountable.
[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] The Saudis promising a full investigation, the secretary of state now meeting with Turkish officials about a missing journalist. The president says this is another case of guilty until proven innocent.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Nothing says leadership like a series of Twitter attacks against women. The president not backing down after calling stormy Daniels, quote, horse face.
[Briggs:] Epic flooding in Texas forces evacuations. A bridge washed away. One body already recovered.
[Romans:] All right. How does $868 million sound to you? That's the next Mega Millions jackpot with no winner in last night's drawing. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. Big news, Christine Romans is actually going to play the lottery, I'm told, for the first time. It's October 17th, 5:00 a.m. in the East. We start in Turkey. The Secretary of State Mike Pompeo there this morning. He just met with Turkey's president and is sitting down with the foreign minister to discuss "The Washington Post" journalist presumed killed at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Yesterday, Secretary Pompeo met with Saudi Arabia's king and crown prince. Overnight, Pompeo told reporters the Saudis promised to figure out what happened to Jamal Khashoggi.
[Pompeo:] They told me they were going to conduct a thorough, complete, and transparent investigation. They made a commitment to hold anyone connected to any wrongdoing that may be found accountable for that, whether they are a senior officer or official. They promised accountability.
[Reporter:] Including a member of the royal family?
[Pompeo:] They made no exceptions to who they would hold accountable.
[Romans:] Three sources tell CNN that a Saudi team sent to interrogate and possibly abduct Khashoggi from his Istanbul was organized by a high-ranking officer in the main Saudi intelligence service. International diplomatic editor Nic Robertson is live this morning. He is outside the Saudi consulate where two weeks and one day ago, Khashoggi disappeared. What's the latest, Nic?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn International Diplomatic Editor:] Well, Christine, according to several sources, this high-ranking intelligence official was the one that put together what Turkish officials are calling the hit team that came to abduct or kill Jamal Khashoggi. What the sources depict is Khashoggi being injected with tranquilizers with the intention of renditioning him. Another source says perhaps it wasn't known by the crown prince, but what is very apparent to Turkish officials is that this doesn't pass the sniff test. And to many international observers, as well, that Mohammed bin Salman is a one-man rule of Saudi Arabia. And his close officials around him, intelligence officials included, would not mount such a complex information without his knowledge. What Turkish officials are seeing is, in essence, obstruction for their investigation. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said it's of the utmost importance that Saudi Arabia has this thorough transparent, speedy investigation, also that they be given time to complete the investigation. What Turkish officials are seeing when investigators went the night before last night into the consulate, they found it had been painted over on the inside, and this was after we'd seen a cleaning team go in a couple of hours life. When they went to the consul general's house close to here, he had fled the country just a couple of hours before. They wanted to search the premises, search his vehicles. They weren't able to do that. We anticipate they'll try again today. So, what Turkish officials are seeing is not compliance and transparency and help with an investigation but, in fact, the complete opposite, obstruction Christine.
[Romans:] The president talking about here we go again, guilty until proven innocent. But, Nic, the Turks are leaking a mountain of evidence in this case. Tell us about the new information we have.
[Robertson:] They have. One o the pieces of new information is that a senior Turkish official told CNN that Jamal Khashoggi was dismembered inside the consulate. Very graphic, very horrible. They release d overnight seven passport photographs and passport details, scans of passports they say were part of the Saudi hit squad coming into turkey in the hours before Jamal Khashoggi disappeared. They tracked these people going into the consulate. And also one of the people identified last week, Abdul-Aziz Mutreb, has been identified by CNN as being the former first secretary of the Saudi embassy in London. And also, while there, the second intelligence liaison. And he's been identified in several photographs. Very, very close to Mohammed bin Salman. Indeed our source says that Mutreb was seconded as part of a new brigade, seconded to provide personal security around him. So, what the Turkish officials here are leaking because they are not getting the cooperation from Saudi Arabia is the information that they want to expose to, if you will, force Saudi Arabia's hand to come clean on this. They essentially are saying the longer they leave it, the Saudis, any narrative, explanation, holds less and less water. Doesn't pass the sniff test Christine.
[Romans:] All right, Nic Robertson. Certainly disturbing, disturbing details there. Thank you.
[Briggs:] To say the least, right? A senior adviser telling CNN Mr. Trump's handling of the crisis with Saudi Arabia, quote, may be the most consequential decision of his presidency. The president once again defending the Saudi regime tweeting, they totally denied any knowledge, then offered this talking point you see here, answers will be forthcoming shortly. Here's what he told Fox Business last night.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It depends whether or not the king or the crown prince knew about it in my opinion, number one, what happened, but whether or not they knew about it. If they knew about it, that would be bad. If they didn't know it, things bad things can happen.
[Romans:] Key Republican leaders are demanding answers from the Saudis, particularly about the role of the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman or MBS.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I've been their biggest defender on the floor of the United States Senate. This guy is a wrecking ball. He had this guy murdered in a consulate in Turkey. There's a difference between a country and an individual. The MBS figure is, to me, toxic. He can never be a world leader on the world stage.
[Sen. Marco Rubio , Florida:] This is going to alter the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia for the foreseeable future. What those specific measures are obviously is going to be up for debate, but they'll be strong and they'll be meaningful. Congress will act.
[Romans:] Attorney General Jeff Sessions is leaving the door open to possible U.S. involvement in the Khashoggi investigation. Meantime, Joint Chiefs Chairman Joseph Dunford says, quote, it's premature to speculate on the effect this will have on the U.S.-Saudi military relationship.
[Briggs:] President Trump joining in a lowdown schoolyard name-calling contest that started during executive time Tuesday morning. First, POTUS unleashed a tirade against Senator Elizabeth Warren, then he turned the Twitter taunts to Stormy Daniels whose defamation suit against the president has just been dismissed. He tweeted now I can go after horse face and her third-rate lawyer. She knows nothing about me, a total con. That "total con" phrase is what triggered the lawsuit. The adult film star tweeted back ladies and gentlemen, may I present your president, in addition to his shortcomings, he has demonstrated his incompetence, look of self- control on twitter again. And perhaps a penchant for bestiality. Game on, tiny. Asked if it was inappropriate to insult a woman's appearance, the president told the "A.P.", quote, you can take it any way you want. According to an official, the president told people he was aggravated by the coverage of the Saudi Arabia crisis. Asked whether Mr. Trump was trying to alter the news cycle, the official said, he's good at doing that.
[Romans:] A fiery Senate debate in Texas last night as Democrat Beto O'Rourke tries to translate his titanic fund-raising, $38 million in the last quarter alone, into votes. O'Rourke and Republican Senator Ted Cruz sparring on key topics, including border security, tariffs, climate change, and regulating social media to combat foreign election interference.
[Briggs:] The wrangling showcased a major shift in tone for O'Rourke. So far he's mostly bypassed opportunities to take direct aim at Cruz.
[Rep. Beto O'rourke , Texas Senate Candidate:] Senator Cruz is not going to be honest with you. He's going to make up positions and votes that I've never held or have ever taken. He's dishonest. That's why the president called him "Lyin'Ted" and it's why the nickname stuck because it's true.
[Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas Senate Candidate:] It's clear Congressman O'Rourke's pollsters have told him to come out on the attack. So, if he wants to insult me and call me a lair, that's fine. But, you know, John Adams famously said, "Facts are stubborn things."
[Briggs:] A new CNN shows Cruz with a solid seven-point lead over O'Rourke, less than three weeks to go. This programming note: our Dana Bash moderates a Texas Senate town hall with O'Rourke tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. Eastern on CNN. We should note, Senator Cruz declined to participate. North Dakota Senator Heidi Heitkamp personally apologizing after an ad for her re-election campaign listed several women as survivors of abuse without their consent. The ad was an open letter slamming Heitkamp's Republican opponent, Congressman Kevin Cramer, for saying tough people do not identify with the #metoo movement. Among of the 120 signers of the letter are several women who have come forward saying they were included without permission or that they were not survivors of sexual or domestic abuse. One group of women say they're looking for a lawyer to take their case because the ad, quote, ruined their lives. Heitkamp says there will be consequences for whoever provided the unauthorized names. No winner in last night's mega millions drawing, bringing Friday's jackpot to a mind-boggling $868 million. If you were to take a lump sum, you would walk away with shy of half a billion bucks. The winning or rather non-winning numbers were 3-45-49-61-69, and the mega ball was 9. Tonight, though, another big drawing, Powerball, an estimated $345 million.
[Romans:] That's a lot of money. You can buy companies with that. All right. The Dow bouncing, the best day since March. So, why is the president still targeting his Fed chief?

[Keilar:] The fate of Michael Flynn still to be determined. A district court judge delaying his sentencing until next year and warning he has not ruled out jail time. One thing that is clear, however, is the White House narrative that Flynn was ambushed by the FBI and tricked into lying has completely been destroyed. Here's what Sarah Sanders is claiming.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] We're arguing that he was certainly ambushed and that the FBI that we know had clear political bias.
[Unidentified Male:] Flynn said that he knew that it was illegal to lie to the FBI and he was ready to accept responsibility. This was all before agreeing to a delay in the sentencing. Given that, are you in a position now or would like to revisit your comments earlier today that the FBI ambushed Flynn?
[Sanders:] No. I we still firmly believe we don't have any reason to want to walk that.
[Keilar:] Well, in open court, Flynn took full responsibility for his lies. He admitted that he knew lying to the FBI was illegal, as you heard there. Earlier today, Republican Senator Joe Kenny Kennedy, pardon me, citing with the facts over the White House.
[Kennedy , Louisiana:] I see no indication that Mr. Flynn was tricked. There weren't any strict questions. I don't think he was coerced. He was given several opportunities to tell truth and he told a boldfaced lie. And that's just a fact.
[Keilar:] Crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz joining us now. And, Shimon, just tell us, where do things stand at this moment for Flynn?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Yes, well, quite simply, Brianna, things are not good for Michael Flynn. The prospect of prison is very, very real for him now. He's in a much different place today certainly than he was going into that sentencing hearing yesterday. And then late yesterday, just in the evening, early evening, the judge then took a drastic measure of trying to limit, trying to keep an eye, even more on Michael Flynn, limiting his travel, saying that he could only travel within 50 miles of Washington, D.C. Told Michael Flynn, you need to surrender your passport. And, keep in mind, all of this is sudden. Michael Flynn has been pretty much a free man, was able to roam around, go wherever he wanted to, travel wherever he wanted to. And for whatever reason, and it is likely because he's now facing prison time, that the judge has decided to yank his passport and limit his travel. This can go on for over a year. Because of his cooperation in another case out of the Eastern District of Virginia, that cooperation can go on for a year to a year and a half. So it won't be until then, until that is over, that we will know what his sentence will be.
[Keilar:] All right, Shimon, thank you so much. Shimon Prokupecz. And joining me now is Ken Starr, former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton. His latest book, "Contempt: A Memoir of the Clinton Investigation," is out now. And, sir, I'm so curious about this book, but I first want to get your perspective on the Russia investigation since you're one of the few people who knows what it's like to serve as special counsel.
[Ken Starr, Former Independent Counsel In Clinton Investigation:] Sure.
[Keilar:] You've we've been covering this, the federal judge delaying Michael Flynn's sentencing at Michael Flynn's request. The judge was clearly peeved by Flynn's filing that indicated he was caught off guard by the FBI, even as he pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and he said in court that he knew that was wrong. Did you see any problem with the way that Flynn would interviewed by the FBI, the way that was conducted?
[Starr:] Yes. I do, and I think Judge Sullivan did as well. So the other side of the story is, it wasn't ambush, but it was irregular. It was a failure by the FBI, which has basically said that we did not follow customary procedures. But I completely agree, there's no excuse for lying to the FBI. And so the Mueller team has not somehow hatched up an ambush. I think it was extremely poor form by James Comey and to Andy McCabe to do what they did. But General Flynn, very experienced, he's responsible for his actions and he's taken responsibility for his actions that he should do. Now, the judge, I think, was peeved at everyone in the
[Keilar:] What were the specifics what were the specifics of the way it was conducted that you take issue with?
[Starr:] Failure to follow protocol, which is to deal with the White House Counsel's Office, to explain what you're doing and to be forthright about what you're doing with the White House Counsel's Office. That way the White House Counsel's Office could have made its own assessment, should we postpone this, have we interviewed General Flynn and so forth. Quite apart from the focus on, should General Flynn have had his lawyer present and so forth. I'm viewing it from a governmental perspective of the relationship with the Justice Department and the FBI to the White House. That protocol was violated. And I think Mr. Comey has specifically said, we took advantage of the fact that it was early on and there was not a great deal of organization. No excuses. But there's also no excuse for lying. And he did. And he's admitted that. General Flynn has. And rightly so, because he lied on multiple occasions. So it's
[Keilar:] But do you see that I'm just curious
[Starr:] Yes.
[Keilar:] Do you see that differently of not looping in White House Counsel different than say like Monica Lewinsky being questioned initially without an attorney present? So you make a distinction because it's a governmental issue?
[Starr:] No. Oh, yes, of course. I mean what we were following, we were vindicated, Brianna, and I describe this in my book, just we were completely vindicated by Chief Judge Norma Holloway Johnson. Lots of media speculation about how did you treat her and so forth? But we were vindicated. We were doing exactly by the book what we were supposed to do in exactly the right way using experience, personnel and so forth. What we know now is that, yes, this is different. This is government to government. And especially when you're going to be interviewing the brand-new national security adviser, you do check in with the White House Counsel's Office. It was very bad form. Not illegal. They could do it. But it was I would call it an abuse of power.
[Keilar:] In your book, and it's important to mention that today marks the 20 years since the Bill Clinton impeachment, and in your book, "Contempt," you talk about the impeachment. You also address how this may not impeachment may not have the end result of the impeachers.
[Starr:] Right.
[Keilar:] So with that in mind, what do you think about what's going on right now with Democrats, will at some point possibly have to weigh this decision about whether to proceed?
[Starr:] Yes. I think there's going to be sentiment. We're already seeing it during the we saw it during the campaign. But I think cooler heads will prevail. But we'll see. It depends on the evidence, of course. But I think part of the lesson that I tried to articulate in the book is impeachment is hell for the country. So hold the president accountable, hold oversight hearings and the like, but be extremely reluctant to go in favor of impeachment. It just puts the country through a terrible ordeal, extraordinarily disruptive and there are other ways to vindicate the truth and the public interest.
[Keilar:] There's there's, I think, at this point in time, there's a reevaluation of the Clinton impeachment and the role of different players. You talk about this in the book a little bit. You talk about Monica Lewinsky. I wonder, what do you think now with the benefit of hindsight about how Monica Lewinsky fared at the time of your investigation, especially as she has been sort of reevaluated in this Ne Too era?
[Starr:] Right. Yes, and I looked at this pretty carefully in the book itself. I saw her as misguidedly, but very shrewdly protecting the president at all costs, including at terrible peril to herself month after month. But happily she eventually decided to do what, which her mother had urged her to do on day one when in which a very competent criminal defense lawyer would likewise have said, tell the truth and work out a deal, just as we're seeing in the Mueller probe, there are deals that are worked out. And the transaction that we were seeking was, we want the truth, Monica. Just tell the truth. Whatever it is, whether it's exculpatory, we think you committed perjury, we think you're encouraging others to commit perjury, just tell the truth and we'll get it all over with.
[Keilar:] She clearly, sir, thought, looking bac, she's moved and is reevaluating whether she thought there was an abuse of power. And I hear what you're saying in your book, you talk about how she was responsible in making herself a tragic figure.
[Starr:] Right.
[Keilar:] Do you I wonder if you worry, when you're talking about that, that you're treading precariously into victim blaming territory?
[Starr:] No, I'm just trying to evaluate a very sad chapter for the entire country. That the entire matter could have been concluded in terms of law enforcement, authorized by Attorney General Janet Reno. And I think there's a real misunderstanding, Brianna, about that. How did this all of this come to be, the Lewinsky phase of the investigation? It was because the president was in the process of committing perjury and engaging in other crimes against the rule of law. We're rightly talking about rule of law in the Trump administration. What the book shows, that the president was embarked, month after month, on effort to obstruct justice and the like. And, in fact, he was found in contempt for his obstruction of justice. I think that is underappreciated. So I think part of the lessons and we're drawing those lessons now is tell the truth, don't obstruct justice because at the end of the road there's going to be accountability. The truth will come out.
[Keilar:] Because he was found in contempt, you make a point in your book, you say that neither Bill, and you say also Hillary Clinton, neither Bill or Hillary Clinton has the character to be the leader to be the leader of the free world. You called Hillary Clinton in your book smug, dismissive, brittle, a liar, vindictive. I wonder, because these are also the adjectives that critics of President Trump's, that they will use, do you think that he is equipped to be to have the character to be the leader of the free world?
[Starr:] He was not my candidate. I had I'm a very loyal member of the Bush team. So he was not my candidate, but he was then nominee and that he won. There are about 80 percent of his policies that I think are terrific. I frequently criticize the president for this. I think
[Keilar:] But on his character? Because you talked about character.
[Starr:] Oh, I think that oh, yes, no,
[I -- Keilar:] Does he have the character to be the leader of the free world?

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, again, everyone. Thank you for joining me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. We start with breaking news. The 2020 race for president is growing bigger by the day. U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren just officially threw her name into the mix last hour.
[Sen. Elizabeth Warren, , Massachusetts:] I stand here today to declare that I am a candidate for president of the United States of America.
[Whitfield:] And she joins a rather crowded field of Democrats hoping to replace President Trump. Right now, Senator Cory Booker is making the rounds in Iowa. He's at a meet and greet in Marshalltown after a busy day and a half of campaigning in the crucial state. These candidates are entering the fray. Take a look as the Democrat Party is dealing with one explosive new report in Virginia politics. The latest surrounding Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax after a second woman came forward, accusing him of sexual assault, something he denies. Many of the 2020 hopefuls are now calling on Fairfax, the lieutenant governor, to resign. Let's start with CNN's M.J. Lee, live for us in Lawrence, Massachusetts, where Elizabeth Warren officially joined the presidential race and pledged her focus. Describe what it was like during her announcement.
[M.j. Lee, Cnn National Political Correspondent:] It is official, Fred. Elizabeth Warren is now a candidate for president of the United States. If you listen to her speech, you heard her say one word over and over again and that word was "fight." This is going to be so fundamental to her candidacy and her campaign, this idea that people need to come together to fight and take on a rigged system. Now, as much as fighting, though, I have to know there was mention of unity and bringing the country together and healing. When she said there's simply no room for bigotry in the White House. Take a listen to what she said.
[Warren:] Whether it's white people against black people, straight people against gay people, middle-class families against new immigrant families, the story is the same. The rich and powerful use fear to divide us. We're done with that. Bigotry has no place in the Oval Office. This is who we are. We come from different backgrounds. Different religions. Different languages. Different experiences. We have different dreams. We are passionate about different issue. And we feel the urgency of this moment in different ways. But today, today, we come together, ready to raise our voices together until this fight is won.
[Lee:] Fred, her speech offered a good blueprint of the policy positions that are most important to her. No surprises there because these are the issues she has talked about so consistently, even over the last month after she announced her exploratory campaign on New Year's Eve. A take from her list: Her anti-corruption bill taking on Wall Street. Her support for Medicare for All. Her support for the Green New Deal as well. Her proposal to tax the rich, which she just unveiled last month. I was trying to count the number of times she said the word "Trump" in her long speech and it was only twice. When she was talking about the fact she believes this is the most corruption administration in living memory. However, even though she was reticent to say the word "Trump" in her speech, make no mistake about it, this is entirely about drawing a contrast between herself and the president of the United States. And this, of course, is going to be what we see in the next couple of months as more Democrats jump into the race, how different candidates can stand out and make the case for being the best candidate that takes on President Trump Fred?
[Whitfield:] All right. M.J. Lee, thank you so much. Meantime, President Trump's re-election campaign is already reacting to Senator Elizabeth Warren's decision to join the 2020 race. They did so preemptively before she took the stage. Let's check in with CNN's White House reporter, Sarah Westwood. Sarah, what caught the TrumpPence campaign's attention on this?
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's right, Fred. President Trump's re-election campaign attacking Senator Warren before she started delivering that speech. They lashed out at her policy platform and, of course, they recycled the text on the controversy surrounding her claims to Native American heritage. Brad Parscale, Trump's campaign manager, said, in part, "The American people will reject her dishonest campaign and Socialist ideas like the Green New Deal. They'll raise taxes, kill jobs and crush America's middle class. Only under President Trump's leadership will America continue to grow safer and more prosperous." This is the first statement from the campaign against a prospective Democratic opponent. President Trump has not been engaging much on his potential challengers. Not been talking about various candidates who have started to wade into the presidential wrap, not Senator Booker, not Kamala Harris. But of course, they are not also mentioning him. This has really been going on without President Trump being a topic of conversation. But Trump has had a particular focus on Senator Warren. He's frequently used derisive nicknames like Pocahontas. He loves to talk about her. So we may continue to see this kind of rhetoric from Trump in the campaign now that she's officially in the race.
[Whitfield:] All right, Sarah Westwood, thank you so much. Another Democratic presidential hopeful is out on the campaign trail. That would be Cory Booker. He's out in Iowa. We'll talk about him in a moment. Right now, I'm joined by Ron Brownstein, senior editor for "The Atlantic." And "The Atlantic's" White House correspondent, Elaina Plott. Good to see both of you. Warren did not hold back against the Trump administration. Listen to a portion of what she said.
[Warren:] We need to change the rules to clean up Washington and end the corruption. We all know the Trump administration is the most corrupt in living memory. But even after Trump is gone, it won't do just to do a better job of running a broken system. We need to take power in Washington away from the wealthy and well connected and put back in the hands of the people where it belongs.
[Whitfield:] Ron, she went on to say Trump is not a he's not the cause of what's broken. He's just the latest symptom. Quoting her now, "kicking dirt on everyone else." Will that message resonate?
[Ron Brownstein, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Elizabeth Warren is the personification of the widespread view in the Democratic Party that Trump uses racism in the service of plutocracy, as the saying goes. He tries to divide Americans along racial and cultural lines to advance an agenda that benefits the affluent. That is, in fact, a widespread belief not only in the Democratic Party but among many political observers. I mean, you could see her strengths and her challenge in this announcement today. Her strength is that she knows why she is running. She wants to run essentially a class-based campaign on restoring the middle class. Running into the rich having too much power. She has an agenda that relates to that rationale. On a debate stage, she is going to look impressive. But she has two, I think, big challenges, Fred, just to put out right at the beginning. One, historically, white liberal Democratic candidates who can't get a reasonable share of African-American voters to vote for them don't win. That is just the absolute history, from Gary Hart to Bernie Sanders. That's the first problem. The second problem is that if Sanders runs, which all signs are he will, as our colleague at "The Atlantic" reported the other day, again, going to be moving closer to her, her lane could be very crowded. You could see assets on why she could be a strong candidate on display today. You can also see what the challenges will be.
[Whitfield:] You could see, she does embody the fighter mentality. She was up there professing about she had very strong messages being a fighter, holding the powerful accountable, and then saying, I'm quoting her now, "Race matters and we need to say so." But Ron thinks that is going to be to her detriment. That may not resonate. How do you see it, Elaina?
[Elaina Plott, Cnn Political Analyst:] I think Ron is right. It's not just something Elizabeth Warren has to worry about vis-a-vis African- Americans, but as we saw in Texas, Fred, with O'Rourke coming quite close to besting Ted Cruz in that Senate race in November, there are a sizable number of white suburban Republicans who are disenchanted with this president and may be very well looking for some reason to vote against him come with November. Elizabeth Warren is not that person. That's why you see so many political observers, including my colleagues at "The Atlantic," waiting with bated breath to see if someone like Biden does get in the race, to see if somebody like Sherrod Brown, who does speak to working class Americans quite effectively, to see if these people do get in the race. Once that happens and you have that progressive ring filled up and you have the more moderate ones start to get clustered, that I when I think this White House has to worry, in effect, that members in the, you know, on the fringes of the base will actually consider defecting come November.
[Whitfield:] While she made some pledges, you know, if elected president, she also made this pledge while on the campaign trail. Listen
[Warren:] We also need to end the unwritten rule of politics that says that anyone who wants to run for office has to start by sucking up to a bunch of rich donors on Wall Street and powerful insiders in Washington. So I'm opting out of that rule. I'm not taking a dime of PAC money in this campaign. I'm not taking a single check from a federal lobbyist.
[Whitfield:] So, Ron, you know, it's become very expensive to run. How will she make the money in order to stay in the race?
[Brownstein:] It is amazing. The biggest change in presidential politics really over the last 15 years if the development of the small-donor base that allows you to raise unprecedented look how much Beto has we talked about Beto O'Rourke raised in Texas from small donors. I think she will be able to raise money from a nationwide network of small donors. By the way, I'm not saying she can't get African-American voters to support her. I'm saying she must do it. It's been something that's tripped up white liberal candidates in the past. They haven't been able to. It's why you saw so much emphasis in her speech on racial inequities across a wide range of subjects, from home ownership to wealth building to criminal justice. That is the challenge for candidates like Elizabeth Warren. It's been the bridge too far for them in the past. It's something she has to figure out a way to get over, to cross that bridge if she's going to really stay in this race, you know, for the long haul.
[Whitfield:] And back to the money, I guess it's not unrealistic, you know, in modern times. Barack Obama, like it was $10 pledges online and, you know, really appealing to young voters. But, Elaina, you know, Elizabeth Warren, how will she I mean, she has the name recognition. She's been on the national stage for a very long time. But how will she be able to be viable by not taking PAC money, not taking lobbyist money?
[Plott:] I really don't think the concern should be too much about how she'll be viable, how she'll have the funds she'll need to run an effective national campaign. It's more about whether this line that I'm not going to draw a single track from a lobbyist or take any donation from a super PACs, does that resonate in 2019? This is, of course, something Barack Obama railed against the insider influence of Washington. Donald Trump did quite effectively as well. I think for a Democratic candidate to use this message most effectively, in trying to rally support from the middle class, has to look at specific policies from the Trump administration, such as tax reform,and really note in specific ways in which it was not helpful to the middle class and was just beneficial to corporations and the most affluent in this country. I think just putting out there that you're not going to take checks from lobbyists is not the kind of message that actually proactively gets people to turn out.
[Whitfield:] All right. Go ahead, Ron, real quick.
[Brownstein:] You can see, Fred, from the speech today, she is likely to stand out in the debates. I mean, she is probably the furthest ahead in the, quote, "ideas primary" on the Democratic side. She has a lot of specifics on a lot of subjects. I think that will help in her fund-raising. Part of the map she's got is Iowa and New Hampshire Bernie Sanders won only one of them will be viable after both, and that's right on a collision course early on in this calendar.
[Whitfield:] All right, we'll leave it there. Ron Brownstein, Elaina Plott, thanks so much to both of you.
[Plott:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] I appreciate it. As I mentioned earlier, Senator Cory Booker, he's also out on the campaign trail. He's making his case to voters in Iowa today. Here's CNN's Rebecca Buck.
[Rebecca Buck, Cnn Political Reporter:] We're here in a bar in Marshalltown, Iowa, where Cory Booker is set to speak to a very crowded room of Democrats here, making his first impression on his first visit to Iowa as a presidential candidate. He had a full slate of events yesterday, traveling the state, from Mason City, Iowa, in the morning, to Iowa City in the evening. He finished up past midnight. He's keeping a busy schedule. It harkens back to his days running for city council in Newark and also for mayor, when he tried to knock on every door, meet as many people as possible. Booker saying no candidate is going to outwork him in the state of Iowa. This is a first-in-the nation caucus state. This is where the primary process begins. Booker's team is thinking, with a strong showing in Iowa, they can get a burst of momentum heading into the later states, New Hampshire, South Carolina and beyond. So this trip, they're laying the groundwork for that. Booker's message, that he has a unique set of experience among the other Senators running. He's the only one who was a former mayor. The only Senator in the entire Senate, he says, who lives in an inner city and can relate to those types of problems. He's also bringing a message here in Iowa of unity and love. Not going after the president. Not even going after Republicans, writ large. He says he's not in this race to beat Republicans. He's in this race to unite the country. Of course, it's too early to know whether that optimistic positive message is what Democrats will be hungry for in this election cycle but he's starting to make his case this weekend here in Iowa. Back to you.
[Whitfield:] All right, Rebecca Buck, thank you so much. Meantime, former Starbucks CEO and potential 2020 candidate, Howard Schultz, will join CNN live from Houston to talk about his possible independent run in the 2020 election. He joins our Poppy Harlow Tuesday night, 10:00 eastern, right here on CNN. Still ahead, Democrats flexing their muscle. An oversight power opening new investigations into President Trump. I'll talk to Congressman Denny Heck of the House Intelligence Committee about what they hope to learn next.

[Berman:] All right, you're looking at live pictures of the attorney general of the united states, Jeff Sessions, right now. He is talking about terror investigations and what he wants to see in general going forward. We'll check in with this in just a moment. Actually, you know what, let's listen in right now to what the attorney general's saying.
[Jeff Sessions, Attorney General:] On the first precinct, its quick response, courageous action, under pressure, prevented the attack from getting worse. He's rightly regarded as a hero today. Not just in New York, but across America. He symbolizes the best in law enforcement. I remember at the Capitol a number of years ago I saw a young officer just racing past me. And there was a shooting outside the Capitol. He didn't know what was out there. Could have been a gang of terrorists with automatic weapons and things. He was going to the fight. That's what our law enforcement officers do. We need to validate them. We need to affirm them. And we need to if somebody in a department does wrong, they need to be punished. But we need to affirm steadfastly the great officers who serve us every day and put their lives on the line for us. This morning, I attended the roll call with officers from the 13th Precinct, some of whom responded to the 911 attacks.
[Berman:] All right, the attorney general right there, Jeff Sessions, talking about the hero police officer, Ryan Nash, who saved uncounted number of lives here in New York City by taking down the assailant, the terrorists, in lower Manhattan two days ago. We are learning new details about this killer. Let's go to New Jersey. CNN's Athena Jones is in Patterson, where the suspect most recently lived. Athena, what are you learning?
[Athena Jones, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, John. Well, we know that the suspect appeared in court last night. He didn't say much in that initial appearance. He did not enter a plea according to a source. But he is talking to authorities. Authorities, investigators, have learned he had been planning Tuesday's attack for a year. According to the criminal complaint in this case, Saipov told investigators that he decided two months ago to use a truck in order to, quote, inflict maximum damage against civilians. Now, yesterday, I, and along with a few other reporters, spoke with a neighbor of Saipov, Carlos Batista, who mentioned having seen a Home Depot truck, similar to the one used in Tuesday's attack, parked in and around this neighborhood over the last couple of weeks or more. Listen to our discussion with Carlos Batista.
[Unidentified Female:] How long have you been seeing him around?
[Carlos Batista, Suspect's Neighbor:] Since I've been here. About a year.
[Unidentified Male:] So for how long you see this truck backing
[Batista:] Oh, the truck's been here for about three weeks, on and off.
[Jones:] And you believe it was at least a similar truck, if not the same truck that was
[Batista:] It has to be the same truck. It has to be the same truck.
[Jones:] And tell us again about when you would see it, where you would you see it.
[Batista:] In front of the house. It would be parked by his, you know, his parking lot. It would just be all over this block. It would just be all over.
[Jones:] So this was Carlos Batista talking yesterday about having seen that truck. And, in fact, he was able to capture a photograph of that truck on October 22nd. That's about ten days before the attack, ten days or so before the attack. We know from the criminal complaint that Saipov rented a truck rented the truck on October 22nd to practice making turns, to practice getting a handle of driving it. Batista said he happened to be taking pictures of a vehicle he wanted to sell and he captured this Home Depot truck in the background. I believe we have those pictures. You can put up on the screen. They are exclusive to CNN. Batista also says that he saw Saipov in that truck before and after that photo was taken, again, on October 22nd. So some interesting details emerging from right here in this neighborhood, from witnesses and neighbors who knew of Saipov and who saw him frequently. John.
[Berman:] All right, Athena Jones, thanks so much. We do want to tell you that all eight of the victims in the deadly truck attack here have been identified. Five of them part of a group of friends visiting from Argentina, Hernan Ferruchi, Alejandro Damian Pagnucco, Ariel Erlij, Hernan Diego Mendoza, Diego Enrique Angelini. Those five men killed. They were part of a reunion here in New York City. So sad. There is also Anne Laure Decadt, a 31-year-old mother from Belgium, who was vacationing with her family. Her husband says she was a fantastic woman and a brilliant mother to their children. Thirty-two-year-old Darren Drake of New Jersey. He served on his local school board. The school's superintendent says Drake was a good man with a huge heart and unwavering commitment. Hearing his father talk about him is heartbreaking. And Nicholas Cleves, a 23-year-old from New York City, recent graduated from college, from Skidmore. Got an engineering job in the city. Our hearts go out to all of them and their families. We'll be right back.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn:] Syria pledges to exterminate the Jihadist group Al-Nusra in Idlib as a final showdown for the province looms. And the U.N. warms a humanitarian crisis maybe in the making.
[George Howell, Cnn:] An uncertain future. Embattled U.S. attorney general Jeff Sessions is hanging on despite some of the harshest criticism yet from his boss.
[Allen:] And yet, another star faces allegations of sexual assault. This time, it is French actor Gerard Depardieu. We are live in Paris with more about that.
[Howell:] And live from CNN world headquarters Atlanta, welcome to our viewers around the world. I'm George Howell.
[Allen:] I'm Natalie Allen, and this is CNN Newsroom.
[Howell:] And we begin this hour with the war in Syria where a final offensive on the city of Idlib it appears to be imminent. Idlib is the country's last major rebel stronghold and Russian and government troops are amassing their forces. Here's what Syria's top diplomat said in Moscow on Thursday. Listen.
[Walid Muallem, Syrian Foreign Minister:] The decision of Syrian authorities is to exterminate Al-Nusra in Idlib and we will go all the way. We say that the priority is to consolidate with any local groups that wish to do so. We will exert all efforts to avoid civilian casualties.
[Allen:] The U.S. isn't buying it. Some three million people live in Idlib province, and there are fears civilians will again be slaughtered. The U.S. says Damascus might even use chemical weapons. Russia says actually it's U.S.-backed groups planning a chemical strike. Let's go now to CNN's Fred Pleitgen. He is covering this for us from Moscow. What is the back-and-forth over chemical weapons, Fred, and why in the world would chemical weapons be used here at the end of this war?
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Yes. I mean why is certainly a question that I don't think any of these big, big players in the Syria conflict, Natalie, have been able to answer or really want to answer. One of the things that the Russians are saying is they believe that there are groups in Idlib province that have already begun, as the Russians say, bringing chemicals into that area. The Russians are saying they believe that these groups want to stage what they call false flag attacks to try and get the Americans or to draw the Americans into this conflict and possibly attack the Assad government. Now, the Russians are saying that to a certain extent is already happening. It's been very interesting to see the messaging coming out of Moscow over the past couple of days, really over the past couple of weeks where they keep saying an attack might be imminent. They have evidence this is going on. They now say that they've already gone to the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons and prevented them with evidence as well. But you're also, of course absolutely right to point out the U.S. in no form buying that at all. They say that while America doesn't have evidence that the Assad government may be plotting chemical attacks, it is something that the U.S. fears could be done. And the U.S. says that there will be a response to this. So really you have the whole conflict about Idlib ratcheting up on two fronts essentially. On the one hand, you obviously have the imminent, possibly imminent attack in itself, which is something that of course the international community and the U.N. is very concerned about. But then you also have this I wouldn't call this a standoff between the U.S. and Russia, but certainly a ratcheting up of the rhetoric and a back and forth in this conflict of words between the U.S. and Russia and of what might be a very, very divisive battle coming up in Syria, Natalie.
[Allen:] Right. And these civilians that could be in harm's way, they just have nowhere to go. Is that it, Fred? They're surrounded?
[Pleitgen:] Yes. I mean, they're pretty much surrounded, and they can't get out to the north through Turkey at this point either. So essentially right now, the fate of these people, if you will, are essentially in the hands of five key players. It's obviously the groups that are on the ground in Idlib province and we have heard that there are still negotiations going on between them, the Turks, possibly the Russians and the Syrian government as well. And the Syrian government itself which has been amassing troops in that area. We heard before from the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem. And then you have the three key players in that area, which is Iran, Turkey, and Russia. Of course, first and foremost, Russia because it does hold many of the cards of what might happen next. And there's a summit set to take place in Iran on September 7th when all of these key powers the presidents of these nations, Putin, Erdogan, and Rouhani are going to get together and essentially try to hammer out some way forward for Idlib. How could an offensive there start before that? Certainly that is very possible. One of the things that the Russians pointed out yesterday is they're going to hold large scale naval and military exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, which means that the Russians will have more military hardware in that area than they do anyway. This morning, the Russians came out with another statement saying that there's going to be 26 warships in the area, and they also say strategic aviation will be there as well, Natalie.
[Allen:] It is such a horror to think about. Fred Pleitgen for us in Moscow. Fred, we thank you.
[Howell:] The United Nations special envoy for Syria says that Syria has the right to want rebels and terrorists out of Idlib, but not at the cost of a humanitarian disaster. Listen.
[Staffan De Mistura, U.s. Special Envoy For Syria:] No one, no one doubts, and I don't see anyone doubting, except themselves, perhaps, that Al-Nusra and Al Qaeda are terrorists and that terrorists identified by the U.N. need to be defeated. There is and it can't be no justification in order to fight rightfully terrorists to not avoid using heavy weapons in densely populated areas.
[Howell:] Let's talk more about this now with CNN military analyst General Mark Hertling. General Hertling, it's a pleasure to have you on the show. Look, this is impending. The Syrian army backed by Russia. The signs are clear of what's to come. Are you concerned about what we could see here? Devastation at the same level or worse than what happened in Aleppo.
[Mark Hertling, Cnn Military Analyst:] You know, I'm going to say worse, George. First of all, thanks for having me on. It is there have been several warnings conducted not only by the Russian foreign minister, Mr. Lavrov, but also by the Russian ambassador to the U.N. about what might happen, how they've been preparing the world for going along with the Assad regime and the Iranians to get rid of what is considered the last problem area, and that's Idlib. But I think we've got to remember too that this is kind of a fascinating trend line because over the last year, year and a half, other immigrants from other cities throughout Syria have been somewhat herded from one city to another in terms of migration, and Idlib is the last place they've gone. So while it is a hotbed of terrorism activity, both Al Qaeda and Al- Nusra and also you could include elements of ISIS in that, an estimated 10,000 or more terrorist fighters, you also have about three million or so citizens of that city and immigrants that have migrated to that city. Knowing the Russian and Syrian way of war, they don't seem to be really precise in their attacking of terrorists. So I think we're going to see continued barrel bombings, bombings of hospitals and schools, indiscriminate use of dumb bombs, and not a whole lot of attention paid to the safeguarding of citizens. I also think unfortunately we may see the use of chemical weapons again.
[Howell:] I want to talk more about chemical weapons in a moment. But first talking about the people, the civilians there in Idlib, the U.N. special envoy for Syria trying to avert what could ultimately lead to widespread massacre of civilians there, hoping to provide the safe passages for people to escape before any offensive on Idlib. The greater question here, we're talking millions of people here. Where would they go? How would they be treated?
[Hertling:] Yes.
[Howell:] And how would safety be ensured?
[Hertling:] Well, that's the key question, isn't it, because as they've evacuated other towns throughout Syria, as the Syrian and Russian armies have gone in, they have made corridors primarily to Idlib, believe it or not. This was the last refuge. And so as you said, the U.N. envoy, de Mistura has said he wants to go there, help create corridors, but the question is where would the migrants now flee to? They've had an unbelievable humanitarian crisis in that city. Thousands of tents put up by the U.N. and other refugee agencies. So you have millions of people who have migrated there already. So it's going to be problematic.
[Howell:] At this point, Turkey seems to be the only nation calling an attack on Idlib a red line, mainly due to what would be an inevitable refugee crisis on its borders. And western powers seem to be on the sidelines unless chemical weapons are used here. What are your thoughts about the west, the United States? Should the U.S. be on standby here, or should the U.S. get involved?
[Hertling:] You know, we've received warnings from the Russian foreign minister and the Russian U.N. ambassador. They have both said, we are going to conduct this operation. Getting involved would be a very poor move on the part of the west, and specifically pointed to the United States. And I think we have to point out too that the Russians have moved somewhere intelligence estimates say between 15 and 25 ships into the Mediterranean Sea. Some of those are cruisers, cruise missile shooters, submarines that could shoot cruise missiles, and anti-air defense measures. So, if chemical weapons are used and the U.S. or western forces are looking to do a retaliatory strike against Syria's forces for the use of those weapons, I think we're going to see some real challenges in terms of the deterrence given by the Russian forces. So that sets a whole other set of parameters on this whole issue, and at the same time you're going to see that humanitarian crisis it's not only going to just affect the region, George, but it's also going to potentially affect Europe with close to a couple million more immigrants fleeing that combat zone.
[Howell:] All right. CNN military analyst General Mark Hertling, thank you so much for your time and perspective today.
[Hertling:] All right. Thank you, George.
[Allen:] We will of course keep a close eye on Syria. Well, President Trump has a warning for his own Justice Department.
[Howell:] At a campaign rally in the state of Indiana, he said that what's happening in the department of the FBI, he said it's a disgrace, and if it doesn't get straightened out, the president said that he would get involved.
[Allen:] In an interview with Bloomberg News earlier in the day, the president called the Russia investigation illegal and blasted his attorney general for not investigating Hillary Clinton.
[Howell:] Our Jim Acosta reports the day started in true Trump fashion with a Twitter tirade. JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR White House
[Correspondent:] President Trump is on a rant. His latest fixation, his outgoing White House counsel Don McGahn. In a morning tweet storm, the president insisted the rigged Russia witch hunt did not come into play even a little bit with respect to my decision on Don McGahn. Mr. Trump's complaints about the coverage of McGahn's departure comes one day after he claimed he wasn't worried about what his long time aide told special counsel Robert Mueller's team in the Russia probe.
[Acosta:] Any concern about what he said to the Mueller team?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Not at all. I knew he was going also, you know. I had to approve it.
[Acosta:] And you're aware of what he said?
[Trump:] No, I don't have to be aware. We have we do everything straight. We do everything by the book, and Don is an excellent guy.
[Acosta:] The president tried to knock down reports about McGahn's exit, tweeting, "I like Don, but he was not responsible for me not firing Bob Mueller or Jeff Sessions. And Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner had nothing to do with the so-called pushing out of Don McGahn.
[Trump:] We're doing record business.
[Acosta:] The president who is suddenly running low on West Wing lawyers during a critical time in the Russia probe is widely expected to tap White House attorney Emmet Flood to replace McGahn. One sign that the president is feeling the pressure, his attacks on the news media. Mr. Trump tweeted, "I just cannot state strongly enough how totally dishonest much of the media is and the other people."
[Trump:] This was an excuse.
[Acosta:] The president is falsely accusing NBC of fudging an interview with Mr. Trump from last year when he admitted that he fired former FBI director James Comey because of the Russia investigation.
[Trump:] In fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.
[Acosta:] The next firing for the president could be Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Not only is Mr. Trump discussing that prospect behind the scenes, his allies are talking up the idea.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I think he wants an attorney general that he has a better working relationship with. I like Jeff Sessions. But I mean, how smart do you have to be to understand this, this is not working?
[Acosta:] Adding to the sense of angst, sources close to the White House tell CNN some of the president's advisers have explained to him that Democrats are champing at the bit to hold hearings and possibly impeachment proceedings should they win control of the House of Representatives in the midterms. Every news story is going to instigate a subpoena. It would be really miserable said one source. A perfect storm said another. But it seems Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be staying at his post at least for now. President Trump told Bloomberg News that Sessions won't be leaving the administration until at least the November midterm elections. Jim Acosta, CNN, the White House.
[Allen:] Much to sort through here. Peter Mathews is again with us. Political analyst and professor of political science at Cyprus College. He's in Long Beach, California. Peter, thank you as always for being with us. So the president continues to be on a tirade of sorts against his own Justice Department. Let's listen to what he just said.
[Trump:] But our Justice Department and our FBI have to start doing their job and doing it right and doing it now. And at some point I wanted to stay out, but at some point if it doesn't straighten out properly, I want them to do their job. I will get involved, and I'll get in there if I have to.
[Allen:] What's he talking about there, Peter, do you think?
[Peter Mathews, Professor Of Political Science, Cyprus College:] He wants them to lay off of the investigations on him, and it's just unconscionable because I've never heard a president talk so condescendingly and such dictatorial fashion to his own Justice Department and the FBI. It's very remarkable, Natalie, and I think he's very paranoid about what's going on with the Mueller investigation and what they're finding out and he wants to stop them one way or the other. He might even fire Jeff Sessions after the election. If he does that, I think it's going to have a lot of repercussions in a negative way because obstruction of justice is what he's facing in many ways. And if any kind of corrupt intent is established, that's a problem for him. I think Mr. McGahn was part of the interview process where he could have revealed information to Mr. Mueller that establishes corrupt intent to obstruct justice on the part of the president.
[Allen:] Yes. And you mentioned Mr. McGahn, his White House counsel, who spent 30 hours with the special counsel. What do you make of the announcement that he will be leaving?
[Mathews:] Isn't that crazy? I mean look at this. One after the other, and it looks more and more like the president is determined to get rid of people who in any way tell the truth about him and his campaign and what might have happened during the White House couple of years that could implicate the president. He wants to wipe them off the picture completely, and I think it's going to backfire on him. Certainly his hard core supporters will love it as they are. You saw at the rally in Indiana today. But the majority of Americans will not put up with this and they're going to hopefully influence Congress in the right way, and I think there's going to be an attempt to elect a Congress that will do the right thing and pursue investigations on this matter.
[Allen:] With Mr. Trump's former fixer cooperating, that's his attorney Michael Cohen, with the head of the National Enquirer, Mr. Trump's top financial official getting immunity here, what might happen next? What will you be watching for as this just continues to march on?
[Mathews:] I'll be waiting primarily till right after the election when I think Mr. Mueller will probably wrap up his inquiry and finally make a report and a judgment and then take it to Congress. And it will be up to Congress to decide whether or not to act on those accusations if they're there and true and valid. And then perhaps put Trump through impeachment and then finally removal. But for that you have to have enough members of Congress who will do the right thing regardless of party. Right now we know the Republican Party and the members in the House and Senate are in lockstep with each other and don't want to in any way do what Congress is supposed to do. So I'm looking for that. It will probably be after the election when we can really see what might break loose.
[Allen:] Yes. And meantime, we have the president going on the attack with that NBC tape that everyone has seen for months and months. Of course he always attacks the media. And his base loves him despite his baseless claims. Do you think that they will stick by this president no matter what he says and does? At some point will people start to break from him?
[Mathews:] I think the vast majority of his base, maybe even 95 percent will stick with him. But his base is fairly narrow. It's only about 35 percent solid support among the electorate. And it's still going to stay with him, I believe, all the way to the end. But there will be enough, 5 percent or 10 percent will peel away perhaps if something really egregious is revealed, like some sort of real not collusion but actual corrupt investigate corrupt action by the president might have had in the campaign with Russian help. If that becomes revealed completely, then he might see a larger chunk of his base pull away. But I think the vast majority will stick with him to the end. But we'll see. We know what happened to Richard Nixon. Many of his people that supported him left him toward the end as well.
[Allen:] All right. Peter Mathews, we always appreciate your analysis. Thank you for joining us.
[Mathews:] My pleasure, Natalie. Thank you.
[Howell:] Allegations of cover-up by of sexual abuse by priests is front and center for the Vatican. Now abuse survivors are demanding the U.S. government investigate.
[Allen:] Also the Catholic Church of Australia says it will not require priests to report child abuse if they learn about it during confessions. Why one top Catholic leader says it will not make children safer. We'll look into that as well, coming up here on CNN Newsroom.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Hello and welcome to CNN NEWSROOM L.A. I'm Isha Sesay.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm John Vause. Our breaking news this hour, North Korea threatening a military strike on the U.S. territory of Guam; in a show of force, Monday, U.S. bombers based on the island, flew over the Peninsula. Pyongyang calls that a provocation, and is also warning Washington: any signs preparing an attack, and the U.S. mainland would be turned into a theater of nuclear war.
[Sesay:] On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump took a break from his working vacation at his golf club in New Jersey to deliver an alarming message to Pyongyang.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. He has been very threatening beyond a normal safety. And as I said, they will be with fire, fury, and frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.
[Sesay:] Well, let's get right to the Korean Peninsula. And CNN's Alexandra Field is live in Seoul, South Korea. Alexandra, good to see you. President Trump's comment is being taken at face value or rather seen as classic Trump bombast. I mean, what's the reaction there?
[Alexandra Field, Cnn International Correspondent:] Look, officially, the focus from the region, from various
[Sesay:] A situation to watch closely. Alexandra Field, there in Seoul, South Korea. Always appreciate it, thank you.
[Vause:] Well, to our panel now. Senior Advisor to the nuclear disarmament group N Square, Paul Carroll; Director of the U.S.-China Institute at the USC, Clayton Dube; Politico Senior Reporter, David Siders; and CNN's Senior Reporter for Media and Politics, Dylan Byers. Thank you all for being with us.
[Sesay:] Hello, everyone.
[Vause:] Paul, to you, list down off with the president said, you know, we don't normally hear a U.S. president talking in these terms. Normally, the strategy is to lower the temperature. So, is this fire and fury threat that we're hearing from Donald Trump, is this everything in more than the regime in Pyongyang could have hoped for? Doesn't this simply confirm what they've been saying about the United States for years?
[Paul Carroll, Senior Advisor, N Square:] Well, it does, unfortunately. It plays into their own narrative, not only on the international stage but domestically. I mean, even though it's a dictatorship, Kim Jong- un and his leadership, does have to satisfy and even mobilize and sort of excite the North Korea population. So, in one sense, Donald Trump's statement plays exactly into that narrative. But in another sense, it does confuse of puzzle our allies. Despite what we're hearing from Seoul, you know, well, that's the American president, that's classic Trump. Nonetheless, it is a line, it's a rhetorical line, and so will we back it up? If we do, that's real trouble. That's a war. If we don't, credibility is diminished. So, if none of these situations that I see this is being a good thing on what the president said. What would be positive now is some type of diplomacy, some type of message to North Koreans that, hey, let's talk about options, let's talk about things that we can do to ratchet thing out?
[Sesay:] All right. Clayton Dube, to you next. You and Paul Carroll make the point that rhetorical lines are being drawn here. If you're sitting in Beijing if you're in the leadership, what are you thinking? I mean, how are reading all of this, bearing in mind the U.S. has long been looking for China to solve the North Korea problem?
[Clayton Dube, Director, U.s.-china Institute At The Usc:] Well, Beijing ordinarily expects for the response from Washington to be measured, clear, precise, and it doesn't expect Washington to match Pyongyang bombast word for word. And so, this is a puzzlement both to potential adversaries and to long-standing allies. The people who are most upset by this are the people of South Korea. They're the ones that are truly on the firing line. And they are the ones that would suffer first if there were to be any kind of conflict, and so the Chinese are trying to take their measure of the United States. And we are proving to be a puzzle rather than operating clearly and in a measured way.
[Vause:] Well, there is a, obviously, confusion out there, there are also a lot of criticism out there of the statement by the president. Senator John McCain, one of the main lawmakers who's weighed in on this. Listen to what he said.
[Sen. John Mccain  Arizona:] The great leaders that I have seen, they don't threaten unless they are ready to act, and I'm not sure that President Trump is ready to act. And so, maybe it'll turn out all right, he's the president, I'm not. But I don't think that some of the great leaders that I've admired would've taken that same path. I just don't think that's the way you attack an issue and challenge like this. It's not terrible in what he said but it's kind of classic Trump, he overstates things, you know. The Presidents and leadership that I admire, that I've had anything to do with would not have said that.
[Vause:] All right. So, Dylan, you know, it's essentially become it's muted criticism about the silly, stinging criticism of Trump.
[Dylan Byers, Cnn Senior Reporter For Media And Politics:] Yes, absolutely. And look, I think the other issue here is: A. you have to actually have a plan to attack if you're going to make statements like that; B. it's a question of understanding what the role of the president is in the world. Historically, if you think about this as a school yard, because right now it feels like Pyongyang and Washington are two kids in a school yard going after each other yes, or kindergarten. You know, historically, the president of the United States has seen himself bulked in an almost supervisor role of the rest of the world understanding that there are multiple facets at play, understanding that China's at play, that Japan is at play, South Korea is at play. Also, understanding that it is your role, as the president of the United States, to tone down the rhetoric; this President Obama did this to a point that he got criticized for it. But right now, it feels like has blinders on and he's just looking straight at Kim Jong- un and trying to match him at his game. And I don't understand the end game that particularly, as Senator McCain said, you actually don't have a plan in place.
[Sesay:] Dave Siders, you know, we have the president inflaming the situation. We have the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, trying to bring the temperature down, opening the door to the possiblity of talks. And you heard Clayton Dube saying, if you're Beijing, this is a puzzle, excuse me, that the U.S. positioned. Why can't this administration get on the same page? Why can't they get a message, and why when it comes to North Korea?
[David Siders, Senior Reporter, Politico:] Well, I think it's not just North Korea. I mean
[Sesay:] Well, yes, don't you think of North Korea right now?
[Siders:] Administration from a get-go. But I think the problems are the same, and this is really a test may be of John Kelly. Did he know about the statement? Was he did he advise the president not to say that, and then was turned down? If he didn't know, why not? I mean, all reporting from colleagues in Washington says that they don't that this vetted through the State Department. So, you wonder who knew about the statement, he didn't say the words twice, right? So, maybe somebody else did. And what level of consultation was there? And if not, I think some people who just following this president on how the message will be very concerned about how he does that.
[Byers:] If I can just say one quick point about message though, CNN had a poll just a few days ago, basically found that 75 percent, three-quarters of American citizens, don't feel like they can trust what's coming out of the White House, which is staggering the lack of credibility there. I think on the world stage, particularly when you start talking about diplomats, about military officials in all of these countries that are involved in what's going on with Pyongyang right now. I think they're similar skepticism. And I think they look at that as traditional Trump being Trump, Kim Jong-un being Kim Jong-un, and they understand that the people are ultimately going to decide what's going here, are the people around them. And I think those are there's a little bit of solace in that if any solace can be found.
[Vause:] Maybe a tiny bit but not
[Carroll:] I think the point made about sort of the adult supervisors in the U.S. administration is a very good one. We have several people in this administration that are military commanders, and the president seems to respect and to those commanders. Those are the ones that, again, I would home deliver clearly the message of the implications about what war would be. What Senator Feinstein said, I think, is also incredibly important. The U.N. Security Council sanctions that we passed, present actually quite a remarkable opportunity; it was swift, it was unanimous. It's all the regional power including Russia and China on the same page in a way we haven't since the second-half of the Bush administration. When we had followed on talks, we had several albeit failed, but several times when all of the six parties of the six party talks were in fact in unison. On paper, we have that today, and so that's the sticks. The sticks are all sort of marching to the same drummer. What we don't have is a well-defined menu of carrots, of incentives, of enticements for the North Koreans to get that to the table. So, the short answer to your questions: if were Kim Jong-un and obviously in Pyongyang, I would think, I don't hear a lot of offering acts. I hear a lot of hammers, but I don't hear a lot of options for me to gracefully, and with face and with confidence, talk to these people and get something out of it.
[Sesay:] And David, back to you. Last week, National Security Advisor, H.R. McMaster, made it clear that the president was not prepared to deal with the threat of North Korea with nuclear weapons. Take a listen to what he said.
[Gen. H.r. Mcmaster, National Security Advisor:] They have nuclear weapons that get through the United States; it's intolerable from the president's perspective. So, of course, we have to provide all options to do that, and that includes a military option.
[Sesay:] Well, David, isn't it the reality, at least, you know, looking to the recent reporting from the Washington Post that we're getting the new reality of North Korea's nuclear program and where it stands? Isn't it just the fact that the U.S. might have to live with that reality?
[Siders:] But they are they're so, I mean, that they have that nuclear capability. I think it's I think most analyst that I talked to today and yesterday, say if not this year, then, or next year. This is just a matter of time, right, so within a couple of years. And I think the risk is not necessarily that we have a premeditated pre-emptive strike from Donald Trump and advisor for making a decision. But there's something escalates is these
[Vause:] McMaster also said in that interview that, you know, North Korea is a global threat which requires a global solution. And we've seen there is zero support for what Donald Trump has been suggesting with his fire and fury comment.
[Dube:] That's correct. The Chinese have said that this kind of language, these kinds of threatcounter-threat don't move us forward in any way. And so, I'd just like to echo what has been said, the U.N. sanctions are significant; China bought into that. And so, that is mobilizing the international community to isolate North Korea even further than it already is. And that is probably the only course that we have available to us that and the sure deterrence.
[Sesay:] Dylan, quickly to you. You made the point that it's politically expedient to talk more at times of, you know, has sagging political fortunes. Given the poll numbers being what they are for President Trump, do you see this kind of rhetoric continuing?
[Byers:] Up to a point. You know, at a certain point, this goes back to a question that John asked earlier about the president putting himself in a box. You can only make so many threats and make so many promises before you have to actually follow through on something. I think what's going on with this you know, the saber rattling for Trump is critically expedient because it takes attention away from some of the negative stories. The saber rattling that's going on with Pyongyang is convenient because it fulfills this narrative that Kim Jong-un is sort of protecting his people against this great, terrible threat that is the United States. Obviously, the remarks from Trump play into that narrative. You know, I think it just points back one thing I see here is, I don't see a reason why Kim Jong-un wants to go to war. He's pilfering his country. He's enjoying the spoils of that. Why does he want to fire and burns down Korea down, which I'm sure he understands America is capable of doing. For Trump, I'm a little more worried. I actually understand why it becomes so politically expedient to go to war, because that does satisfy so many people who start to believe that North Korea is a problem that's, you know, a needle in America's side, and we should do something about it.
[Vause:] Clayton, just a really short with you. Is there a concern, you know, within Beijing that, you know, Donald Trump, you know, he got a big loss in the polls when he launched 59 missiles in Syria. You know, he did that while Xi Jinping was at Mar-a-Lago. It was one of the impressive moment for the president. That maybe, you know, he's this as a way of, you know, boosting his standing at home and around the world.
[Dube:] Leaders have to worry about just that. They have to worry that the impulse to take actions, to be seen as a strong leader, and action-oriented person, that wanting to do that might push him into something like this. But the Chinese are very clear that everybody losses if there's any kind of outbreak of violence on the Korean Peninsula. We have the Korean economy obviously at risk, the Chinese economy at risk, the Japanese economy at risk we are talking World War
[Iii. Vause:] Just very quickly, Clayton, would China back North Korea if there was any kind of confrontation?
[Dube:] Not that they would necessarily back North Korea. The problem has been described. Once you have military action, all sorts of things can happen. And that the Chinese may see this as an encroachment, and they may see some sort of necessary action to stand up to American power.
[Vause:] OK. OK, Clayton, we'll leave it there. But thank you all very much. Clayton, Paul, and David, and Dylan here with us here in the studio thank you all for a very enlightening discussion. Thank you.
[Dube:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Thanks, all. More on our breaking news after the break; why possible North Korea mini nuke could drastically change the nuclear standoff with the U.S.

[Keilar:] We are keeping an eye on the White House Rose Garden. The president expected to make an announcement on the government shutdown at any moment, possibly talking about a deal to end the shutdown. We're watching it carefully and will bring it to you live. But first, Roger Stone, Trump's long-time associate, appearing in court today just hours after he was arrested and indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The former Trump campaign official is charged with witness tampering a former confidant to, I should say, the president is charged with witness tampering, making false statements and obstruction. Stone is just the latest in several of Trump's orbit to be charged in the Russian probe. We have CNN's Chris Cillizza following all of this from the very beginning. I'm sure you can make sense of it in about 90 seconds.
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter & Cnn Editor-at-large:] All right, Brianna, OK, thank you for the challenge. First, let's go to the numbers on this. So with Stone's the criminal counts against Stone being indicted, first let me shout out to Marcia Cohen, who helps keep this Russia file who knows everything. And 199 criminal charges, 37 people now who have been charged, six Trump associates. I'll add just a few other numbers. Seven people have already pled guilty and are cooperating, foru people have been sentenced to prison, one has been convicted, to a prison by their peers, Paul Manafort. Now, in the orbit of Donald Trump, here we go. George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty, cooperating. Michael Flynn pleaded guilty, cooperating. Rick Gates pleaded guilty, cooperating. Paul Manafort pleaded guilty, was cooperating. Roger Stone, first of all, terrific suit, but second of all, indicted. Now, let's go to the next one because all those people, as you notice, Brianna, had something in common that Roger Stone didn't, not cooperating. Here's Trump on Roger Stone no coopeating, "I will never testify against Trump. That's Roger Stone Donald Trump quoting Roger Stone, "Nice to know that some people still have guts." It's important to note, Roger Stone, when he came out after being charged today, came out and said, look, I will never bear false witness, I'm still behind Donald Trump 100 percent. That other chart that has all those other people in that orbit, many of them said, well, I'm not going to cooperate, I'm not going to turn, I'm not going to flip. And one by one, with the exception of Manafort, who flipped and then flipped back, have turned. That obviously is a concern for Donald Trump, should be a concern for him and his inner circle. I say this every time we do a segment like this. There's a lot, a lot, a lot of smoke. Do we have a fire you can point to yet? Not as it relates to Donald Trump. Back to you Brianna?
[Keilar:] You did it, Chris. Thank you very much.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Newsroom Anchor, Cnn:] All right. We're now learning the man charged with writing anti-semitic messages inside a Brooklyn synagogue once worked to fight hate crimes. Twenty six year-old James Polite is facing four hate crime charges, including arson, for allegedly setting a fire at a Jewish study school, just miles from the synagogue. Polite reportedly worked on anti-hate crime initiatives about a decade ago as an intern for former New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. Polite's life, which included years in and out of the foster care system, was profiled in a New York Times piece last year. CNN Correspondent Polo Sandoval is live for us at the Union Temple in Brooklyn this afternoon. So Polo, what else are we learning?
[Polo Sandoval, Correspondent, Cnn:] You know, Fred, the NYPD posted outside of this temple for much of the day here. Now, police saying that they suspect that James Polite was not only responsible for the vandalism that took place here, but also at least six other locations here in the Brooklyn area. Most of them related to the Jewish community. Exactly who this person is, well, you can dig up an article from 2017 in the New York Times, who was essentially a profile on James Polite. It tells a very different or at least paints a very different picture of the 26-year-old man, as you mentioned, somebody who had struggled with not only homelessness but also various issues, had eventually secured an internship with a high-ranking city official in the city of New York. That official that you mentioned there now speaking out, obviously saying that [Inaudible] these allegations but at the same time something like this certainly unacceptable. When you look at that profile piece by the New York Times, you're also able to read that this individual attended Brandeis University, apparently had taken was ordered to take a health leave of absence because he apparently had been smoking marijuana for to relieve some stress. The New York Times writing that during that treatment, during that rehabilitation period, it was discovered that he suffered from bipolar disorder. Again, all of this written by the New York Times, we do understand again, that this individual is still in custody. In fact, he was arrested not far from this location after police were investigating an arson that investigators believe he likely is behind as well. All of these various charges, Fred, they are all being treated as hate crimes tonight.
[Whitfield:] All right. Polo Sandoval, thank you so much. All right, meantime, the city of Pittsburgh is rallying around its Jewish community in the wake of its own hate crime. Today, Steelers Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger honored the victims of last weekend's deadly synagogue shooting by wearing these special cleats with the words stronger than hate. The heated and divisive rhetoric of this election season is a concern for so many voters, including people in the area where that attack in Pittsburgh happened. And that is also where a hotly contested congressional race is playing out. The latest poll from Monmouth University shows Republican Congressman Keith Rothfus trailing Democrat Conor Lamb by 12 points, Congressman Rothfus joining me now from Pittsburgh. Good to see you.
[Rep. Keith Rothfus , Pennsylvania Congressman:] Good afternoon.
[Whitfield:] So just a week ago, the worst anti-semitic attack on American, you know, Jewish people happened in your community. Synagogue members and even the Rabbi said this caustic language preceding that shooting has to end. So how will you help end discourse and promote civility?
[Rothfus:] Yeah. This has been a traumatic week for the city. And Rabbi Myers has really done a tremendous job in showing leadership himself. As he said, I think yesterday on the program about being a victim, about being a pastor, being a witness, he has a compelling testimony. I was able to participate in the show up for Shabbat yesterday with members of the Jewish community. It was an incredible privilege to do so. You know after this heinous attack happened last Saturday, I went home. And like all of us, you know, we're struggling with this in our own individual way. And I talked to the folks who do my ads and I said, look, we need something that's transcendent. We need something that speaks of Lincoln, speaks of the founding, speaks of the God-given dignity and value of every human life. Because that kind of sums up what I talk about all the time, about getting people back in the game and a fair playing field. And they came up with some ideas, and we launched an ad last Tuesday. It's really a message of hope. And I hope a message of healing for people. And so we've gotten a very good response to it.
[Whitfield:] And is that the same ad that, you know, you apparently you do target your you know, competitor Conor Lamb? And there has been a response that they thought it was largely negative, and you're saying it's largely positive?
[Rothfus:] No, no, no, no. You have to take a look at the ad called indivisible. This is not even a political ad. I think it's more of a public service announcement about everything that this country is and everything we want this country to be. And there have been divided times in our history before, 1968 was a very divided time in our country, and so was the 1850s. And Abraham Lincoln talked about the need to go back and look at what's in our Declaration of Independence. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all are created equal and [Inaudible] by your creator with certain [Inaudible] rights. That's the fabric of our country. And that's what we need to be talking about.
[Whitfield:] So then how do you combat the style the style and approach that you've taken by way of your most recent ad and even your language right now, which is promoting civility? How do you combat, you know, words from the President, who you are a supporter of? And when the President uses words like invaders and, you know, talking about, you know, migrants making their way, you know, to the southern border. And then the President has also praised a Montana congressman for, you know, body slamming a reporter.
[Rothfus:] Yeah.
[Whitfield:] You know how do you square the difference? How do you, you know, take the approach of civility, advocacy, of peace and harmony, and at the same time, you know, be an ardent supporter of the President who uses those tactics to persuade or stir his base?
[Rothfus:] Look, anybody who knows me, knows the language I use. And the language I have used throughout my career, both in public life and in private life. You know my opponent's first ad talked about knock him out. Look, I don't use that kind of rhetoric. I know others do. We can take we can have we should be having discussions about what's going on around the world. We should be having a discussion about the caravan in Mexico. We should have a discussion about the need to secure our borders. I am in western Pennsylvania. We have a horrific opioid crisis. We really don't get to talk a lot about the 90 percent of the heroin that is coming into our country courtesy of the evil cartels in Mexico. This is an issue that I have raised a number of times in hearings about what's been happening south of the border, 150,000 dead over the last 10 years. These cartels kill with impunity. The cartels control what's going on at the border and traffic humans and drugs into this country. We have a need to secure that border. Countries have a right to secure their border. That's the kind of conversation we should be having. People can use different types of rhetoric. I know I have always been very deliberate with the language I use, because I am looking for solutions. We had a bill up a couple of months ago that would have provided a good solution, would have provided a legal status for the DACA kids, would have ended family separations at the border, but would have secured the border. Those are the kinds of things that we should be talking about. And then also, talk about, frankly, the best economy we've had in 20 years that's lifting everybody. I talk a lot about the need to get everybody back in the game. People need to talk about the opportunity's own program that Senator Tim Scott put into the tax bill. That's going to provide a lot of opportunity for communities that have been bypassed for decades. So there are a lot of good things that are happening. And it's unfortunate that we see the rhetoric that's repeated in the media, the social media. People get into their own little eco-chambers, and it reinforces what they're hearing from other sources. We need to have more deep and meaningful conversations. And I think Rabbi Myers really has just done a wonderful job.
[Whitfield:] Are you in agreement even the Rabbi said, it begins with leaders. And do you agree with Rabbi saying, you know, cleaning up that rhetoric or at least sending the right message, it really starts from the top?
[Rothfus:] Well, again, I am responsible for the words I use. And I am always willing to engage in conversation. And that's one of the reasons I wanted to put this ad out there, because I want that ad to be a conversation piece. I want people to be focusing on what unites us, not what divides us, and you have just like Lincoln did, look at what's in that declaration. Look at what makes America exceptional. It's we have, again, the best economy going in 20 years, but we also need to be talking about some of those broader aspects that cause us to raise our gaze as it were, and what makes us unique about a country.
[Whitfield:] All right. Congressman Keith Rothfus, we'll leave it there for now. Thank you so much.
[Rothfus:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] And we're back in a moment.

[Baldwin:] Today, we are learning for the first-time what life is like for Bill Cosby inside side a maximum security prison. Cosby is serving at least three years for drugging and sexually assaulting former Temple University women's basketball coach, Andrea Constand. He is entered the general population last month and now Cosby spokesman, Andrew Wyatt, is talking to Philadelphia TV station WCAU about how the aging actor is doing. Wyatt says Cosby quote, looks amazing and mentally strong but there is one person he won't allow to visit.
[Andrew Wyatt, Spokesperson For Bill Cosby:] Mr. Cosby had prepared himself. He prepared all of us probably three or four months before sentencing. He said this guy has a vendetta against me. He will throw the book at me. He said so I'm ready. I'm prepared. I'm ready to go in. Don't worry about me. He said wake me up at 3:30 a.m. they wake him up and he exercises. He is in his cell. He does leg lifts. He pushes up against the bed and does pushups. He showers and he waits for breakfast. He puts it in a little cup, walks over to a sink and runs water over the food and shakes it up and drains it. He eats the food. Right now, I'm the only visitors outside of his attorneys. That is the way he wants it.
[Unidentified Female:] So, Camille Cosby has not visited him?
[Wyatt:] She has not visited.
[Unidentified Female:] When you hear him describe how he's surviving, but you think?
[Wyatt:] He is mentally strong. He is just a strong man. He said despite the circumstances he said this is an amazing experience.
[Unidentified Female:] Did you really use the term amazing experience?
[Wyatt:] Yes. He used the term amazing experience.
[Baldwin:] Wyatt tells CNN that Cosby only speaks to his wife three times a day for three minutes but he has been getting thousands of letters. Strangers are even putting thousands of dollars on Cosby's prison account. The Philadelphia affiliate also quotes Wyatt as saying that Cosby has been assigned cell mates to get around. He is 81 and legally blind. CNN's Jean Casarez extensively covered that trial in his transition to prison. My goodness. Amazing experience.
[Jean Casarez, Cnn Correspondent:] I know. That's what you're left with, amazing experience saying he got down to 195 pounds, that he's not eating bread or desert, really focused on healthfulness in his life. You know, I guess that, you know, he became a super star for American television, right through the per sis tans and attitude and everything else.
[Baldwin:] Sure.
[Casarez:] So, he would take those qualities to make the most of this term. I'm sure what a lot of people want to here is how he feels about the crime he was convicted of.
[Baldwin:] Right.
[Casarez:] You're not hearing that. Let's look at the other side. He was convicted of a felony, three felonies, indecent sexual assault. He was and must be a registered sex offender also determined to be a sexually violent predator. He has to take at least one in prison because of that title he has. There is another side to all of this. It is tarnishing to him.
[Baldwin:] Sure.
[Casarez:] This is very uplifting for what he believes are the people.
[Baldwin:] So, he is in general population. They are reporting that he is getting all of these letters. I can only imagine what people may be writing to him and what they are saying. The fact that people are putting money on his prison account, does that surprise you?
[Casarez:] Yes. You have a commissary account and you can't have thousands of dollars in it. It is to someone who should have a lot of money. Right? And another thing. O.J. Simpson became a mentor. We learned this at his parole hearing that he would lead the prison church service. That he would help and mentor the young men in prison to lead a life that was straight and narrow and not go to other way. He focused on helping others. Now, it has only been almost a year for Bill Cosby. But he always wanted to help the youth, right? But we are hearing solely about him right now.
[Baldwin:] He is doing pushups and
[Casarez:] And no deserts and no bread.
[Baldwin:] He wakes up. These are the details. He wakes up at 3:30 in the morning to exercise in the cell he is mentally strong.
[Casarez:] A sexually violent predator.
[Baldwin:] All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate that update. Just a reminder to everyone tonight the big town hall with Howard Schultz, that is happening in Houston this evening. Make sure to tune in. Questions from voters as he ponders this 2020 run. So again, moderating that from Houston. Tune in tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you for being with me. "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts right now.

[Blitzer:] It's very hard to believe, but the White House isn't ruling out the idea of allowing the Russians to question two Americans, Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador to Russia, and Bill Browder, a Putin critic. The proposal is something Putin brought up during his private two-hour meeting with the president earlier this week in Helsinki. The president later referred to it as, quote, an incredible offer, though not everyone sees it that way. I want to bring in our CNN military and diplomatic analyst, retired Admiral John Kirby. John, tell us a little bit about these two men and why Putin would want to question them.
[Rear Admiral John Kirby , Cnn Military And Diplomatic Analyst:] Thanks, Wolf. You bet. Let's start with Mr. Browder. He is the CEO of a company called Hermitage Capital Management, which at one time was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia. Now, in 2009, one of his lawyers, a man named Sergei Magnitsky mysteriously died in prison, which led Mr. Browder to successfully lobby Congress for the passage of what is now known, The Magnitsky Act, which allows the U.S. government to sanction Russian human rights violators. A year after the passage of that act now in 2013, Putin's government convicted him of tax fraud and sentenced him to absentia to nine years in prison. And he is still considered under investigation. The second individual is our well-known well, former well-known ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, also the author of a new book on Putin's government that's very critical. And while he was in office, he met with opposition members, which angered Putin's government. He now is considered a person of interest in the Browder investigation. Now, Wolf, we have sound from both men reacting to this idea that they could be actually called back to Russia to answer to investigators in Putin's government. Let's give that a listen.
[Bill Browder, Putin Critic Wanted By Kremlin:] Hand me over to Putin is basically to hand me over to my death. And I've been fighting for human rights. I've been fighting for justice for my lawyer, my murdered lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky. And to hand over a human rights campaigner from to a murderer, to his death, would be the most insane thing that this president could do.
[Michael Mcfaul, Former U.s. Ambassador To Russia:] This is yet another tactic to intimidate me, like he has done with other people. And I wish I just hope my own president, my commander in chief, would understand it for what it is and push back, both in public and in private.
[Kirby:] Obviously both men clearly, you can hear from that sound, are not interested in talking to Russian investigators and with good reason.
[Blitzer:] You know, the White House, John, and the State Department, they were both asked about the possibility of allowing these two American citizens to be questioned by the Russians. And listen to this, very, very different answer to that question.
[Heather Nauert, State Department Spokeswoman:] The overall assertions that have come out of the Russian government are absolutely absurd.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] There was some conversation about it, but there wasn't a commitment made on behalf of the United States. And the president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front.
[Blitzer:] And while obviously 180 degrees difference between what Heather Nauert over at the State Department is saying and Sarah Sanders over at the White House is saying. How is it possible that they get such different analysis, and different reactions to this extremely sensitive question?
[Kirby:] Well, Wolf, it's either a huge disconnect between the White House and the State Department, not that that doesn't happen. It does happen on occasion. But it could be also a calculated PR strategy to allow the State Department to push back on this ridiculous notion of sending these two men back to Russia to talk to investigators, and allowing Sarah Sanders not to get crosswise with her boss, President Trump, who clearly wasn't interested in entertaining much pushback to this idea itself. Either way, it speaks to an administration that once again cannot get on the same page to explain what happened in Helsinki.
[Blitzer:] Yes. My own since is Healthier Nauert over at the State Department was speaking for Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state
[Kirby:] Right.
[Blitzer:] Who recognizes this is a disaster if this were ever to happen. That's why she rejected it immediately. John Kirby, thank you very much.
[Kirby:] You bet.
[Blitzer:] Let's get some more on this and other related issues. I want to bring in the Hawaii senator, Mazie Hirono. She's a Democrat. She serves on both the Armed Services and Judiciary Committees. Senator, thanks so much for joining us.
[Sen. Mazie Hirono , Hawaii:] Aloha again.
[Blitzer:] Let me get your quick reaction to what we just heard from John Kirby. Very different responses from the State Department and the White House to this truly shocking proposal to let a former U.S. ambassador, another American citizen actually be questioned by the Russians. What do you think?
[Hirono:] I think it's one of the most ridiculous and dangerous ideas from the president yet in a series of these kinds of horrendous ideas. The thought that we should be turning over our people to Putin for interrogation is, to put it simply, crazy and nuts. This is why a little bit later today I'm going to be on the floor of the Senate to vote on our Chuck Schumer
[Blitzer:] Yes, it says a lot. And it's truly shocking. I assume the White House, at some point, is going to try to clean this up, but we'll see. How do you think the inconsistent messages on Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election is now being received by U.S. allies around the world?
[Hirono:] I think that it should be expected that the fact that our president cannot seem to be consistent. One thing he is consistent on is his really inexplicable affinity toward Putin. But I don't blame our allies at all for questioning our willingness to stand up against Putin and to come to their defense, much less to come to the defense of our own democracy, which the president did not.
[Blitzer:] Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, as you well know, senator, they have no idea what was really discussed between President Putin and President Trump during that two-hour-plus private meeting with only their interpreters present. Now there's some growing calls among Democrats who want President Trump's State Department translator, Maria Gross, to appear before Congress. Do you support that idea?
[Hirono:] I support the idea of finding out what the heck was discussed between Putin and the president. Some people are calling it the appeasement summit. And so it's also very untoward that we actually have to have the translator come and tell us what happened as opposed to the president of our own country telling us what he discussed, what he promised. But if it's going to take the translator to come and tell us because we can't trust the president not to lie to us, then that's what we should do.
[Blitzer:] You think that's at all realistic that they would allow her to go and appear before, let's say, your committee or other committees, even behind closed doors?
[Hirono:] Well, for an administration to say that this is not how we should do things, you know, this is the same administration that is actually contemplating sending our people to be interrogated by Putin. So, you know, in the absence of information that we can rely upon as the truth from our own president, then we have to take some extraordinary kinds of steps. And these are extraordinary times. And we have a president that we can't trust. He obviously promised something to Russia and the American people and we need to know what that was.
[Blitzer:] I want to quickly get your reaction to this tweet, this sentence the president tweeted earlier today because it is really shocking. The summit with Russia, he says, was a great success, except with the real enemy of the people, the fake news media. So he says Russia's not the real enemy of the American people, it's the fake news media which is the real enemy of the American people. When you hear that from the president of the United States, what goes through your mind?
[Hirono:] Totalitarianism. This is what totalitarian and dictators do, they go after the free press. That's what Erdogan does. You jail the media people. Or that's what Putin does in Russia. And I'm sure that if the president thought that he could get away with it, he would probably want to jail what he calls the fake media. So, you know, but for the First Amendment freedom of the press. But this just, once again, reinforces this inexplicable affinity that the president has toward basically totalitarian dictators, but in particular to Putin. And this is why there are so many questions as to really what kind of relationship does the president have with Putin that causes him to be so much for Putin. And, you know, I served on the intelligence committee for two years and countries develop assets that will help them get news, et cetera. In intel language and parlance, it's the president is acting like he is the asset for Russia.
[Blitzer:] Well, what's your suspicion, because some have suggested maybe the Russians have some compromising details, compromising information on the president? What's your suspicion?
[Hirono:] There have been all kinds of information about the president's sexual proclivities I can hardly say the word. But really I think there are some major economic ties. And that is why the Mueller investigation must continue. It must run its course. And they need to do their jobs. That's another issue that I would like to have the Senate bring to the floor the resolution or the bill that was passed unanimously not unanimously, I wish it had been in a bipartisan way that protects the Mueller investigation. That has never come to the floor of the Senate for a vote, although it emerged in a bipartisan way out of the Judiciary Committee.
[Blitzer:] Senator Hirono, thanks so much for joining us.
[Hirono:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Still to come, bipartisan efforts to express support for the intelligence community's findings on Russia, but rejected on the Senate floor just moments ago. We'll tell you what happened.

[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn:] Sources tell CNN we are going to see videos of that shooting that have yet to be released to the public. And we are warned that they are very graphic and disturbing. Also just in from Sacramento, where protests have erupted over the death of an unarmed black man from police, we're just getting the independent autopsy report on Stephon Clark. The report indicates that Clark was shot a total of eight times, six in his back. But most telling, the family's attorney says Clark's wounds do not match what Sacramento police say happened to the 22-year-old.
[Benjamin Crump, Attorney For Family Of Stephon Clark:] It contradicts the narrative that has been put forth by the police based on the autopsy findings. She wants to know...
[Unidentified Male:] Exactly. Where was he facing when the first shot struck him?
[Dr. Bennet Omalu, Clark Family Forensic Pathologist:] He was facing the house with his left to the officers. He was not facing the officers. After he was shot, the first one, he turned around. Now, these are not my opinions. These are the prevailing scientific evidence, as provided by the second autopsy.
[Baldwin:] Clark was laid to rest yesterday. The California state attorney general says the State Department of Justice will conduct its own investigation into the shooting. But let's talk about all of this. I have CNN legal analysts Paul Callan and Joey Jackson with me. And so that's the news, that this pathologist said he didn't die instantaneously, and it was eight shots, six to the back? Your first reactions on that?
[Paul Callan, Cnn Legal Contributor:] It's a shocking shooting. And anybody who has seen the video of it I saw it yesterday, the day before. It's been publicized. It's hard to believe that they would have to shoot this young man five times eight times, I think.
[Baldwin:] Eight times.
[Callan:] Six times in the back.
[Baldwin:] Six in the back.
[Callan:] If that's the case. But we will have to see the whole facts of the case.
[Baldwin:] What does that tell you?
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, there's a general reaction, Brooke. And then there's a specific reaction. The general reaction is, is that it speaks to the divide between law enforcement and the community. It speaks to answering the question of why repeatedly do we have to speak about these shootings year after year, month after month? What is going on? You had a call here of someone vandalizing cars, apparently. That's significant because it informs the narrative of the police in terms of who they're encountering. It wasn't a murderer. It wasn't a rapist. It's someone who is vandalizing cars.
[Jackson:] The other thing obviously problematic is, you are going to give someone a command to raise their hand. Ought you not let them comply before you start shooting? And if tactically you feel that, oh, they're in a police stance or if they're in a shooting stance, maybe should you tell them to get to the ground. You don't provide or render aid. Now we have this report with the multiple shots. Where are they? It's just something is rotten in Denmark here. And so when you see people who are out there who are peacefully protesting and who have strong words, you see the Sacramento Kings, the basketball team, the owner, all they're doing with the community in recognizing and understanding this broad problem, it just it's a source of much frustration.
[Callan:] Just to add also to what Joe is saying in terms of this case, what's very suspicious I was talking about the video, which looked terrible for the police but they turned off the audio.
[Baldwin:] Sure. Hit mute.
[Callan:] Right. And that was at the very point where they would be discussing, my God, what are we going to do now? He doesn't have a gun. He has a cell phone in his hand. Everything looks bad for the police in terms of what we know about this shooting at this point. And of course the community and, I think, in general wants to see that this is handled properly. There's, by the way, a heated district attorney race going on in Sacramento. And that's going to be a big issue, too, because there's been a movement nationwide to get DAs who are more sensitive to the community in these jobs.
[Jackson:] Briefly to that point absolutely. But briefly to that point, I think they announced at a news conference that they would be independent in terms of investigating this. Paul and I have had this discussion many times as to whether a local DA should be divorced from the case. It appears in this case they will be. That's a significant first step, because any findings of an investigation, they have to have inure trust from the community. Otherwise, it's another cover-up, it's another lack of accountability and it's another just shooting where no one will be held accountable. And that's the concern.
[Baldwin:] Gentlemen, thank you for that on Sacramento. Again, there's other video that should be released in the Louisiana Alton Sterling case. We're waiting on that. Meantime, new reporting into CNN. A source says the president's advisers were caught completely off guard when the president made this unexpected announcement about U.S. troops in Syria.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're knocking the hell out of ISIS. We will be coming out of Syria like very soon. Let the other people take care of it now. Very soon. Very soon. We're coming out.
[Trump:] We're going to have 100 percent of the caliphate, as they call it, sometimes referred to as land, taking it all back quickly, quickly. But we're going to be coming out of there real soon.
[Baldwin:] A source tells CNN the president's aides are quote "still trying to figure out what he meant by that" end quote. Confusion well-warranted, because this is a president who has said repeatedly that he will not telegraph military plans publicly.
[Trump:] Well, one of the things I think you have noticed about me is, militarily, I don't like to say where I'm going and what I'm doing. I don't want to telegraph what I'm doing or what I'm thinking. I'm not like other administrations where they say we're going to do this in four weeks. And it doesn't work that way. I don't want to be one of these guys that say, yes, here is what we're going to do. I don't have to do that.
[Baldwin:] All right, to talk this over with me, I have CNN military analyst retired Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona, former U.S. military attache in Syria, and also Brian Karem, who is the executive editor Sentinel Newspapers. So, gentlemen, good to have both of you on. And you know, Colonel, to you first. Isn't this exactly what he said he would never do, telegraph military moves?
[Lt. Col. Rick Francona , Cnn Military Analyst:] Yes. He's telegraphing, but he's not being as specific as we have in the past. That's not the problem. Telling our strategy is now to withdraw is not a good thing. We're on the cusp of a relatively solid victory over ISIS once we figure out what's going on with the Turks. We have major issues with the Turkish military in Northern Syria. Now is not the time to be talking about pulling back when they're advancing. And we also have to get back into the fight against ISIS. Yes, this is very confusing.
[Baldwin:] What about just even in terms of our 2,000 troops over there? What are real-life consequences for them, for the U.S. in terms of pulling out?
[Francona:] If the Turks believe we're not serious about remaining there and re-continuing the fight against ISIS, we're not willing to stand with our Kurdish allies, they will push further and further to the east, which is what they're doing. Erdogan said yesterday he's going all the way to the Iraqi border and he's contemplating going into Iraq, into the Kurdish area of Iraq. If he knows the United States is thinking about withdrawing, is thinking about giving up the fight and let somebody else do it, one, I don't know who the somebody else is. This plays right into Erdogan's hands, and of course, when you play into Erdogan's hands, you're also playing into Putin's hands, because you're giving the Assad regime free play in Syria.
[Baldwin:] Speaking of Putin, I wanted to ask you quickly, too, on Russia. They have now tested this new nuclear ICBM. What do you make of that?
[Francona:] Yes, this is very troubling. If you look at what the Russians have done over, say, the past four or five years, they have introduced numerous classes of very sophisticated weaponry, hypersonic technology, laser technology, air defense weapons, the whole gamut. You look at the GDP of the country, it's somewhere around Australia or Italy. And they're pouring millions and billions of dollars into this high-tech weaponry. What's it for? Their economy is really not doing well enough to support this. And it locks like we're entering into another arms race.
[Baldwin:] Colonel Francona, thank you very much on that. Brian, to you on just the president's Syria remarks yesterday in Ohio. A lot of these senior aides are like, what? They're puzzled over what he meant by that. Do you even know what he meant by that?
[Brian Karem, Cnn Political Analyst:] Nobody knows what he means by that. And it's not the first time we have seen him pull those types of punches. They craft a message all day long and get the rug pulled out from under them five minutes later with a tweet. That's not really news. The telling part, Brooke, was when they talked about explaining what he was doing to Russia and they used the analogy of a boxer, so he could decide with a metaphor what to do with Russia. That tells you the decision-making process. So I have a metaphor. When I was a small child, when I was 16, my first car I bought, I wanted to prove I was on my own. Right? I went to my dad. He wanted me to buy this seemly Oldsmobile. And I said, no, I want to buy this car that I like. So, I bought a '71 yellow Pinto.
[Baldwin:] Nice job, Brian.
[Karem:] Yes, nice job. My father came to me afterwards. He says, I know you want to make your own decision. I know you're proud of the fact that you made your own decision. You paid for your own decision. But let's get rid of the Pinto so you don't blow up. Those were the cars that if you hit them in the rear at five miles an hour, they would blow up. What I would like to say to those who don't understand Trump, we're looking at a '71 yellow Pinto. That's the metaphor you have to look at. It's going to blow up. And there's nothing scarier than looking at this president dealing with Russia, as they're engaged in a new arms race. I asked that question in the press room to Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Isn't it inherently dangerous for the owners of the two largest nuclear stockpiles to be engaged in a new arms race? He came out three weeks ago, this president, and said, we're giving up disarmament. We're not going to lead the world in that anymore. He said we would follow, not lead. And the response I got was, she's worried about false news more than she is and I said this is global thermonuclear war. You don't get to walk away from that. And they don't understand the seriousness of the issues that they're dealing with. And they're dealing with a president who changes his mind, and flies by the seat of his pants every day.
[Baldwin:] I hear you. I hear you on the yellow Pinto analogy. I guess perhaps I just think at least there are some outstanding people who surround him. At end of the day, I realize it's the commander in chief's call.
[Karem:] You hope there's someone there.
[Baldwin:] I understand it's alarming for a lot of senior people when the president says something about withdrawing from Syria.
[Karem:] Who is going to take their place?
[Baldwin:] I know. Brian Karem, good to see you.
[Karem:] Good to see you.
[Baldwin:] Good to see you. Next, CNN learns new details about the Russia investigation that suggests special counsel Robert Mueller is looking very closely at possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Also, a Democratic congresswoman under serious fire today for keeping her chief of staff, this man accused of abuse and threats against this female aide on her staff. How she is now responding. And not guilty on all counts, that is the verdict for the wife of that Pulse nightclub shooter. We will get reaction from a former FBI agent who worked on that very case. Stay with us.

[Carl Azuz, Cnn 10 Anchor:] We`re taking you across Eastern Asia in our first story today on CNN 10. I`m Carl Azuz. It`s great to have you watching. U.S. President Donald Trump is on a 13-day trip to five countries. In order, it includes stops in Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam and the Philippines. The White House says its two main objectives are addressing the nuclear threats from North Korea and discussing international trade. Both topics came up in Japan, where President Trump spent Sunday and Monday. U.S. and Japan are closed allies. They both been threatened by North Korea. And during a news conference, alongside Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the American leader echoed something that U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said about North Korea.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The era of strategic patience is over. Some people said that my rhetoric is very strong, but look what`s happened with very weak rhetoric over the last 25 years.
[Azuz:] North Korean government officials say they`re closely watching President Trump`s Asia visit. He`s scheduled to be in South Korea Tuesday and the Communist North called President Trump a war maniac, and said that if he does anything crazy, North Korea will respond powerfully.
[Subtitle:] Trump in Asia: The big issues at stake.
[Will Ripley, Cnn International Correspondent:] Here in Tokyo, the top priority is the U.S.-Japan alliance. So, you can expect to see Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and U.S. President Donald Trump projecting friendship as they tackle two major issues, trade and North Korea. Over in Pyongyang, officials are still furious over President Trump`s speech at the United Nations, when he threatened to totally destroy their country and insulted their leader, calling him rocket man. They`re also angry about ongoing joint military exercises. The North Koreans tell me the time for talk is over and it`s time to send President Trump a message.
[Matt Rivers, Cnn International Correspondent:] In Manila, President Trump will meet a fan of his in Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. The popular but controversial figure has had nothing but praise for the U.S. leader, and the two will discuss Duterte`s ongoing war against drugs. The big question, will Trump bring up alleged human rights abuses committed by Duterte`s government, of targeting not only drug dealers but drug users as well?
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] The priority for South Korea during Trump`s visit is North Korea. President Moon Jae-in has gone along with the U.S. policy of sanctions and pressure, but ultimately, Moon wants dialogue. More engagement with the North and it`s a desire that in past Trump has called appeasement. And then, there`s trade. Trump has convinced Seoul to renegotiate the trade deal between the two countries, but Seoul doesn`t want many changes.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Internatoinal Diplomatic Editor:] President Trump`s biggest age old challenge in Vietnam will likely be convincing APEC leaders of his views on free trade. He`ll address the Asia Pacific Economic Committee summit, telling him he wants fair trade and balanced trade. Perhaps the most watched event if it does happens is a possible bilateral between President Trump and President Putin of Russia, although if it does take place, it`s slightly to be shrouded by the discussions of Russian meddling in U.S. president elections. The other events still not on the schedule that may happen, a trilateral between President Xi of China, President Putin and President Trump. Likely North Korea on that agenda.
[Rivers:] The biggest issue for China when President Trump arrives here in Beijing will be North Korea. The Trump administration wants China to do more, to force North Korea to stop developing its nuclear weapons. China says it`s doing enough already. That issue will dominate conversations, though expect discussions over things like trade and opioids as well.
[Azuz:] In the U.S. state of Texas, new details are coming to light following a shooting in a small town of Sutherland Springs. Twenty-six people were killed after a gunman opened fire during Sunday`s services at the First Baptist Church. The victims range in age from a year and a half to 77 years old. Twenty others were wounded and several were in critical condition last night. Texas Governor Greg Abbott called the attack the largest mass shooting in Texas` history. It`s not known yet what motivated the killer. He was a 26-year-old man named Devin Patrick Kelley. He was discharged from the U.S. Air Force in 2012 for bad conduct. Investigators say he had domestic problems and had recently shown anger toward his mother-in-law who attends the church. Governor Abbott says Kelley wasn`t supposed to have access to a gun, that he`d applied for a license in Texas but was denied it. Still, police say he bought the rival he allegedly used in the attack from a store last year. And after yesterday`s shooting, Kelley was confronted and shot by a resident of Sutherland Springs.
[Unidentified Male:] I saw the shooter coming out about where the cars are parked, and the other gentleman coming from across the street, both had weapons and drawn, and in a matter of half a second, there was exchange of gunfire. It lasted just a few seconds, and the shooter got to his vehicle and took off and the gentleman with a rifle came across the street and said, he just shot at the church and we got to chase him and I said, let`s go.
[Azuz:] Johnnie Langendorff also said the shooter eventually lost control of his vehicle and crashed into a ditch. He was found dead by police. It wasn`t clear whether Kelley died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound or the original shot by the armed resident. Officials say 4 percent of Sutherland Springs` population was killed in the shooting. One resident describes the community as a small, Christian town where everybody is close to everybody. Ten-second trivia: Which of these automotive features is the oldest? Windshield wipers, automatic transmission, three-point seatbelt, or rearview mirror? The window cleaning device which was patented in 1903 is the oldest. Rearview mirrors weren`t used until years later. Some of today`s windshield wipers are fully automatic. Some of today`s rearview mirrors have screens connected to backup cameras and side view mirrors now feature lights for both turn signals and to indicate if there`s a driver nearby. Auto braking, auto high beam control, autopilot, all examples of who automotive technology has come a long way since Mary Anderson`s invention of the windshield wipers. And as that technology drives forward, so do the sounds it comes with, to make us aware of the cars around us.
[Reporter:] Alarms, they`re the ones that wake you up in the morning, tell you got a message, that your lunch is ready, to close the fridge door, emails, front calls, got calls, Facebook message, turbulence, and alert. And one particular researcher has created this, an alarm to standup from the crowd an alarm to stop ahead on a car collusion.
[Subtitle:] Creating the world`s most annoying sound.
[Reporter:] Her name is?
[Carryl Baldwin, Director Of Human Factors & Applied Cognition Program, George Mason University:] I`m Carryl Baldwin.
[Reporter:] And she`s?
[Baldwin:] I`m the director of the human factors and applied cognition program at George Mason University.
[Reporter:] So, how do you go about creating one of the world`s most annoying sounds?
[Baldwin:] We started out by going out and getting recordings of actual sounds that were in automobiles currently. Then we took those sounds back to the lab.
[Reporter:] Once they collected the sounds, it was time to test on people. They created a system where the listener could
[Baldwin:] Play a sound and then put it in a category
[Reporter:] That the sound was represented. Either a low urgency like a Facebook notification, a medium range urgency like a check engine, and finally, a high level urgency, like an incoming collision warning.
[Baldwin:] And then from there, we set up a series of driving simulator studies and they`re driving along and they`re doing another task just to kind of give them a distraction component and then suddenly, unexpectedly the car that they`re following would break suddenly and we look at their collusion avoidance response, the timing of that.
[Reporter:] They created the perfect forward collision warning alarm. And this was really important because?
[Baldwin:] We found that the sounds being used currently weren`t perfect as being very urgent. You know, a poorly designed sound can be more dangerous than not having a warning at all.
[Reporter:] So, thanks for using the most annoying sound to keep us safe.
[Azuz:] Earning a perfect "10 Out of 10", Max and Quackers. Sounds like a snack, it`s not. Max and Quackers are the names of this dog and duck duo who`d been friends for a long time. After Max`s good friend, another Huskie, passed away, his owners acquired Quackers, who also appeared lonely. So, setting their species aside, these two buddies bonded and had been inseparable ever since. Now, they`re an attraction for any passersby in their home of Strout, Minnesota. So, would you say the duck has gone to the dawgs, or that a dog`s life is for the birds? If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, it could be exquackly the kind of dog or duck that fits the bill for a dog`s best friend. I`m Carl Azuz and we`ll be quack tomorrow. END

[Becky Anderson, Cnn:] Hello and welcome. You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson in Abu Dhabi. It is 7 o'clock in the evening for you and we will be connecting the world for you this hour. Including connecting you to a very molten world in Hawaii. Take a look at these live pictures. Lava just gorging out of the earth. These are live pictures for you, folks. And we will get you to our reporter on the ground just shortly. Absolutely remarkable stuff. Well they are the superstar couple at the moment, royal newlyweds. Prince Harry and Meghan expected at Buckingham Palace this hour to help Harry's dad celebrate his 70th birthday. It will be the first official appearance by the new Duke and Duchess of Sussex as husband-and-wife in honor of Prince Charles. Well, like any other newlyweds this pair wanted to get straight back to work it seems after their emotional fairytale wedding in Windsor on Saturday. They captivated the U.K. and millions of viewers across the world. The Markle sparkle seems to be working its magic again on the weather, at least. Keeping the sun shining on the capital of England. CNN royal correspondent, Max Foster, joining us live from just outside Buckingham Palace in London. Have you seen the dynamic duo yet?
[Max Foster, Cnn Royal Correspondent:] Well, we heard a big scream as a fleet of cars went into the palace. We can assume they're here. And you talk about the Markle sparkle, we're wondering if it's something to do with the weather. Whenever she appears the sun seems to come out. Everything seems to be going her way at the moment. We're going to get the pictures in about half an hour, we think. It's not going to be live. Everyone is talking about what she's going to wear, of course. She's now this fashion icon. Everyone desperate to see how she's going to work it today in the palace. This isn't her day. This is Prince Charles's day. Although, shall be getting all of the attention, of course. This is to celebrate his 70th birthday. All the charities and patronages he's been working with over the years have been invited. Here are a few of the groups, Becky, Meghan's going to be introduced to today. This is her new life. So, she's going to be meeting the Badger Face Welsh Mountain Sheep Society, the Dry Stone Walling Association, and the Gloucestershire Root Fruits and Grain Society and the Goon Show Preservation Society. So, she has to go into these groups and, you know, engage with them, find out what they're doing. How she can help them. It's her first day really as a working royal.
[Anderson:] Drywalling and goon-something or other. She will feel this is terribly British, I should think. This is a garden party in Buckingham Palace, which you rightly point out, is behind you. Whilst we wait on those images from today, Max, I know that we've some images inhouse of these sketches for Meghan's dress. As our resident royal fashion expert now, you are all things tutorial will you tell us more about what you know about the dress?
[Foster:] Becky, you know more about the dress than I do. It's a dress. I think the fashion experts on Saturday she's drop in their viewers. That's what she's done here. But I'm going to go with it because I was being the fashion expert on Saturday. And they said actually it looks very traditional, but she really pushed the boundaries with it. Because you're meant to have your shoulders, as you know, Becky, covered in church and your arms. And what she did was push the barriers of that as far as possible. And actually, it is an example really of how she is trying to be herself whilst fitting into the system. And you know, Saturday she was the star of the show. But ultimately, it's a hierarchical system. The queens at the top, then it's Charles, then it's William, Dennis George, then it's Harry and even Kate is above her. So, she's finding her place and that. And it's going to be that's the adjustment she's got now. She's going to have to keep her place whilst expressing herself. But we saw on Saturday how actually she's been doing so brilliantly so far.
[Anderson:] You are absolutely right. And I wasn't dropping you in it. We did have some pictures, I promise you. You did very well as we looked at those pictures. The beautiful veil, of course, which had the flowers of the Commonwealth countries around it. We've just seen the sketch there. Max, thank you for that.
[Foster:] Thanks for having me.
[Anderson:] If the meeting happens, it happens. That's U.S. President Trump seemingly laissez-faire approach to his plan Summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The fate of which now hangs in the balance. Those inside the Trump circle are increasingly skeptical the plan talks will come to fruition. Well, in less than an hour the president of South Korea will arrive at the White House to make the case for dialogue. Last week amid harsh rhetoric, North Korea threatened to cancel the meeting. But the country does appear to be going ahead with what is being viewed as a good faith measure ahead of the two leaders sit down. Well, a small group of international journalists have been invited to witness what is the dismantling of a nuclear test site. We need to point out no inspectors or nuclear experts are expected to attend this demolition. The North by allowing the media says it is trying to ensure transparency. There are others though that say this could be a way to destroy evidence. CNN's Will Ripley, my colleague, is among those who will witness the leveling of this site in Wonsan in North Korea. Take a look at how remote the location is. There is Pyongyang, the capital. And the site is all the way up in a northeast of the country. Will's taken us along on what is his hours long journey to get there.
[Will Ripley, Cnn Correspondent:] Right now, we are in Beijing about to board our flight into North Korea. We were told that were flying to Wonsan, but our tickets say Pyongyang, the North Korean capital. So, I guess we'll find out on the plane. This will be my 18th trip to North Korea, but I can already tell you it's a lot different from any trip previously. One, because were taking a charter flight in. And two, all of the press interests. We walked in the airport and we were surrounded by media who were not on this trip. As far as who is on the trip I'm counting maybe a dozen and 12 of us on this bus. Maybe there'll be more press inside but it's a small group to go see the what we're told will be the dismantlement of the nuclear test site at Punggye-ri. This is something I never thought I'd see in the "Pyongyang Times." The U.S Secretary of State Mike Pompeo shaking hands with the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. And the article is overwhelmingly positive. So here we are in Wonsan. And this is the newly renovated airport. They have built this up anticipating a surge of tourism. They're building a lot of hotels along the coast. But as far as we can tell, we're the only flight today. We are the only guests here at this North Korean luxury hotel. And this is the city I visited before just under a year ago when they were launching missiles from Wonsan. Now they're building a luxury resort along the beach hoping to attract more tourists. Hoping that this country will open up. But before that happens they need to take steps towards denuclearization. And that's why we've been invited here to witness what were told will be the destruction of the nuclear test site at Punggye-ri. We'll travel 12 hours or so by train. Another four-hour drive and then and hour-long hike to get to a site that no foreign journalists have ever seen before. We are told that we will witness the destruction of the site. Is it all for show? Or are the North Koreans really take substantive steps? That's why we're here on the ground trying to find out. I am will Ripley reporting in Wonsan, North Korea.
[Anderson:] Well that is the view then from North Korea. Our correspondent based in South Korea is CNN's Paula Hancocks. Today though she joins me from the White House after traveling with the South Korean delegation to Washington. There is a lot on the line here for Mr. Trump. Also, though for the South Korean President Moon, maybe even more so. What is his message today for the American president?
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Becky, the message is to make sure that this North KoreanU.S. Summit goes ahead. Given what's happened over the last couple of weeks we've heard both the U.S. side and the North Korean side throw doubts on whether this is even going to happen. So, President Moon Jae-in's main task is to make sure it goes ahead. He has put a lot on the line to get to this point. He had that Summit with Kim Jong-un at the end of last month. And that was to improve relations between North and South Korea. The next step is going to be this Summit on June 12th in Singapore. Whether talks, substantive talks about denuclearization actually get underway. Now we know that President Moon earlier this morning, just in the last hour or so, has met with the U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, also with John Bolton, the national security advisor. And from a readout from the Blue House we heard that he had asked them to cooperate with North Korea, quote, calmly and unwaveringly. So, interesting words there that are being used. This is potentially what he's going to be trying to suggest to the U.S. President as well. To be calm when it comes to dealing with North Korea. We've had these articles from KCNA, the state-run media, and they are particularly bellicose. They're slamming the U.S. and South Korea. But that's nothing new. You can still at the same time have this diplomatic process ongoing at the same time as having these articles Becky.
[Anderson:] There is some uncertainty about what will actually happen and still whether this will happen at all. But the White House communications agency has already minted a commemorative coin for the June meeting. It shows Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un facing-off against each other under the words "peace talks." A little early possibly?
[Hancocks:] Yes, I was asking people here about this and they say this is what happens before there is an international trip or any trip. There is a commemorative coin that is minted. Now this particular one is raising eyebrows because, of course, it refers to Kim Jong-un as supreme leader and not dictator or other words that the U.S. President has coined for him recently. Also talking about peace talks, I mean, these haven't been billed as peace talks. These are being billed as denuclearization talks. So, this isn't something that's approved by the White House. They don't have input into the design. But it's raising a smile or two.
[Anderson:] Paula Hancocks is in Washington for you today. Where the time is 11:11 in the morning. Thank you. My next guest arguing President Moon overstated North Korea's willingness to deal when asking Mr. Trump to come to the negotiating table happen. But thanks to some it will probably still happen. I'm joined by Robert Kelly. He is a professor of political science at Pusan National University. And, sir, you are nothing short of skeptical about the prospects for this meeting. Should it happen at all? Why?
[Robert Kelly, Professor Of Political Science, Pusan National University:] Mostly because I don't think the American side is really prepared for it terribly well. Up to and including most importantly the President himself who has admitted he's not preparing for it and even more so that he doesn't feel he needs to prepare for it. That's pretty astonishing given how difficult and technical the issues are. Right? Missile technology, nuclear weapons, North Korea's, you know, Korea's complex history. And if you look at the way things have sort of swung from all over the place in the last couple of weeks it strongly suggests that the Americans haven't really nail this down. And so, you know, I've argued that we should probably postpone this for a while until the staff work can be done to make this a little bit more formalized.
[Anderson:] You've argued that this is all about the South Koreans effectively flattering Donald Trump with these invitations and sort of trumping up the opportunities that he might actually get. What about from the North Korean side? How well organized are they?
[Kelly:] My sense is the North Koreans probably know this still very well. Right? I mean, the North Koreans have been working on nuclear weapons for 40 years, 50 perhaps. Right? And they wanted a negotiating position with the Americans for a while. They wanted to meet an American president for decades. The North Koreans are almost certainly going to come into this ready to go. I would be very surprised if you see this level sort of disorganization on their end.
[Anderson:] You've tweeted today that you think Trump likely desperately wants the summit for the TV morning shows
[Kelly:] Right.
[Anderson:] and a political win. Monday, U.S. Vice President Mike Pence warning North Korea could end up like Libya if Kim fails to make a nuclear deal. Let's just have a listen to that.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] This will only end like the Libya model ended if Kim Jong-un doesn't make a deal.
[Unidentified Female:] Some people saw that as a threat.
[Pence:] Well, I think it's more of a fact.
[Anderson:] Libya, of course, abandoned nuclear ambitions in the early 2000s, but Muammar Gadhafi was overthrown by Washington backed rebels a few years later. This type of rhetoric, do you think, helpful or hurtful at this stage?
[Kelly:] Oh, it doesn't help at all. Right? I mean, Libya is a terrible model. I don't know why the Trump administration is talking about it this way. Basically, stabbed the Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi in the back by helping the Arab spring revolutionaries overthrow. And, of course, that was the reason he gave up the nuclear weapons program because we were supposed to give him a security guarantee which we dropped. You know, we cheated basically. Right? I mean, telling that to the North Koreans. I mean, North Koreans have told us in negotiations that Libya there's no reason why they're getting a weapon. Right? Because they saw what we did to Qaddafi. And they figured if they gave them up, you know, that we would launch a regime change campaign against them or something like that. And so, will be had to have the weapons. I'm actually rather astonished that that model is being thrown around at all. Because it doesn't reflect well on the American negotiation.
[Anderson:] I have to say when I heard it myself I shared your thoughts. I did think it was quite astonishing. Anyway, not the analogy I would have drawn. Look, U.S. Vice President Mike Pence also warning North Korea's Kim Jong-un not to play Donald Trump if and when they meet next month. This was on one of the breakfast shows. I think it was Fox earlier on this morning. He probably forgotten more about North Korea than most of us will ever know. How do you think that line goes down with Kim Jong-un? Don't play the U.S. president.
[Kelly:] It is not helpful. My sense is that the North Koreans aren't really going to play the president. They're just going to walk in there with a series of demands that Trump isn't going to really understand because he's not doing the preparation. And a lot of it's going to be things that he's not really ready for and he won't want to accept. Right? Which is among other things, that most importantly that North Koreans won't give up all their nuclear weapons. They are not going to go to zero. This is something we all need to sort of get. We need to understand. And the President shouldn't be talking about this and neither should Secretary of State Pompeo. Because they raised enormous expectations and that crashed into the wall of reality this week.
[Anderson:] Sir, I want to have a look again at the aerial photos of the nuclear test site North Korea says it will destroy in the coming days. Our Will Ripley will witness that. A small group of international journalists has been invited to the site. We need to point out, no inspectors or nuclear experts are expected to attend that demolition. But as we look at this site from these aerial images, how significant is this move? And indeed, the site, a critical part of the program going offline or is this a PR stunt?
[Kelly:] Yes, that's actually sort of a big discussion right now. Just how sort of important is this? Right? I mean, there is a sort of argument out there that the site itself is sort of on its last legs. Right? Sort of what they call tired mountain syndrome. And that if the North Koreans do another test that the mountain could actually erupt or break, and you could have Chernobyl incident up there. What's important is to find out if the North Koreans have other major testing sites like this or not. This is why it's important that whatever deal is struck in Singapore, come with verification. You've got to get inspectors back in there. You've got a get cameras back in there. I don't know if that means the IAEA or the European Union or somebody. We've got to get somebody in there, so we have a shape and sense of what the North Korean program is like. We're not going to get the North Koreans to go to zero. That's understood. We all know that. I think it will be a big gain for the president, a big win for him, if he could get the shape of the North Korean program out of them, including this. Right? Is this all they have? Is this real or do they have other sites? And this is just for us for PR consumption.
[Anderson:] Robert Kelly, professor of political science at Pusan National University. It's a pleasure having you one, sir. Thank you for joining us.
[Kelly:] Thank you for having me.
[Anderson:] You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD folks. Thank you, Still to come, tough talk from the America's top diplomat Mike Pompeo. Issues a list of demands to Iran that go far beyond its nuclear program. Saying it better change its behavior or else. Plus.
[Unidentified Male:] Look up and watch them. Keep your eye on them. It is almost like catching a football, but you don't want to catch it.
[Anderson:] Let me tell you these are live pictures. I mean, this is absolutely remarkable. It's the sight of that erupting volcano in Hawaii. We're going to go there to hear about the desperate attempt to save homes.

[Lemon:] Justice Department official, Bruce Ohr, was grilled by Republican lawmakers for eight hours today. The closed door session believed to focus on Ohr's relationship with Christopher Steele, that's the British spy behind the dossier that included salacious and unverified intelligence on Trump and Russia. So let's discuss now with CNN National Security Analysts, Steve Hall and Juliette Kayyem, also CNN Global Affairs Analyst, Susan Glasser. Good evening to all of you, never a dull moment in this news business and in America lately. So thank you all for coming on and talking about this. So Susan, take us through this. What does Bruce Ohr have to do with former FBI Attorney Lisa Page and Fusion GPS Co-Founder Glenn Simpson? And what information led him to testify today?
[Susan Glasser, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Well, it's interesting. First of all, he has become the increasing focus both of the sort of very active group of Trump defenders up on Capitol Hill. President Trump himself has also started getting in on the action. His wife worked for the firm Fusion GPS that commissioned the Steele dossier. He also worked at the FBI and was the liaison with Christopher Steele in relaying his information. This was closed door testimony. We don't know what happened behind the scenes, obviously. What you have is all Republican members of Congress who were present apparently at this hours long interrogation today. There was Democratic staff there but no Democratic members of Congress. You know you basically have sort of this whole parallel inquiry that's been launched on Capitol Hill. That is about the Republican conspiracy theory version of the case, which involves the Steele dossier as being, as I understand, sort of the deep state plot to spy on and to sabotage the Trump campaign, as opposed to the actual investigation by Bob Mueller that involves the actual Russian hacking and the actual interference in the U.S. election.
[Lemon:] Let's take a look at Ohr now and his career. Because Juliette, despite a decades long career of public service, including 10 plus years [Inaudible] organized crime in Russia, Ohr has become a top target of the President. Do you think the President's fixation on Ohr is warranted?
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] I guess the short answer is no, except for he's an expert. I mean what is he an expert in? He is an expert in the Russian mafia and the ties, the financial ties between the Russians and entities in the United States, in which they are either laundering money or trying to get around the sanction to be able to exchange money. This is his expertise. And so to the extent that the Trump White House [Inaudible] across the board challenges the expertise of career civil servants, I do think that Bruce is sort of, you know an obvious target. I will say something that Susan mentioned about his wife. This is the second time of which Donald Trump has specifically targeted the husband of a wife who has had a separate career that the President views as either unbecoming or maybe to, you know, to women's empowerment. Remember McCabe's wife had ran for office. That became the spin up conspiracy theory to which why she was so tied to Democrats and therefore he was not independent. In this case, Bruce Ohr's wife had worked for Fusion GPS. It is consistent, as I said before in this show, with an idea about the wives of or how women should be appendages of these men, as if you couldn't have two separate careers. My husband and I both had separate security clearances. You learn not to talk about them. But I don't think it is a coincidence that of Trump's tweets about Bruce Ohr...
[Lemon:] He would say they both work for Hillary Clinton, though.
[Kayyem:] Yeah. I mean it's just the focus on the wife is I think consistent with a larger theory.
[Lemon:] So you don't think there is credence that the women worked for Hillary Clinton?
[Kayyem:] No. I also think look I mean Bruce Ohr is no, Bruce Ohr documented his contacts with Steele. Like it wasn't like he was hiding them. They are actually you know, whenever you meet with someone in terms of whether it is intelligence gathering, law enforcement gathering, whatever, you have to document them. He documented them. It is why they know they met. It's not like he was hiding it. It was part of his job.
[Lemon:] Well, it is interesting because, you know, as I was saying, it is the same argument that Kellyanne Conway uses when people ask her questions about her husband and when he says something negative or refutes something about the administration. Listen, Steve. You know we know that Ohr and Steele first began working with each other in the mid 2000s, taking on Russian organized crime in the U.S. and the U.K. Tell us more about the type of work that Ohr did combating the Russian mafia.
[Steve Hall, Cnn National Security Analyst:] You know the Russian mafia, the oligarchs, Russian organized crime, the Russian government, it is all pretty much the same thing. It's really not that hard to understand. It is all one big thing. And there has been a considerable amount of time and effort put in largely from the Department of Justice and I think law enforcement to try to figure out what these oligarchs are doing, specifically what they're doing that might violate U.S. law. And of course, none of these oligarchs and it is very interesting by the way that some of the oligarchs that are most closely associated with Bruce Ohr or that he focused mostly on, guys like [Inaudible] are guys that playing prominent roles now or going to play prominent roles apparently in Paul Manafort's upcoming case, and have constant ties back to the Trump organization. So there was a long, hard look by the U.S. government. There continues to be against these oligarchs. And its part of it is law enforcement. Part of it is policy, of course. Sanctions impact these oligarchs quite a bit. So there is a lot of interest in U.S. government as to who these guys are, what they are up to, and what they're doing. I would argue that there is also now an inordinate interest on the part of President Trump in Bruce Ohr, because he is an expert about, you know, precisely this group of people who has really I think been in contact with and perhaps helped this President throughout his career, as you look back, you know, at his business dealings with Russia. So it is a really big tangled kind of knot that the Department of Justice does a really good job of trying to get to the bottom of.
[Lemon:] All right. Thank you all. I appreciate your time. When we come back more on our breaking news tonight, a huge upset in Florida where CNN is projecting Andrew Gillum has won Democratic primary for Governor. Plus, [Inaudible] counted in Arizona's primary are three Trump supporting Republicans are battling for Jeff Flake's Senate seat.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. I'm Brianna Keilar in Washington. This morning, President Trump is spending the weekend at his New Jersey golf club but the big fight, President Trump versus James Comey, goes on. The president is coming back swinging after the former FBI director's mother-of-all testimonies on Capitol Hill. Here's a listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] No collusion, no obstruction. He's a leaker but we want to get back to running our great country.
[Keilar:] Well, now lawmakers are demanding the memos, tapes if there are any, and other records of President Trump's conversations with Comey by June 23rd they want those things, and that's not all. Senator Dianne Feinstein is asking the Judiciary Committee to investigate potential obstruction of justice. CNN Washington correspondent Ryan Nobles is following this story. Ryan, update us.
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Well, Brianna, it's pretty clear that the after the hearing of James Comey on Thursday that we are not in a position to either convict or vindicate President Trump as it relates to the investigation into Russia and this is going to be a long and complicated process that's going to be filled with accusations and innuendo. And we saw that in President Trump's press conference on Friday when he pushed back on many of the things that James Comey said but also embraced some of what he said, saying that it made him look much better in light of everything that's going on. But in particular, Trump said something that was very important. He said that he was willing to testify under oath about those conversations that he had with James Comey. Take a listen to what he said in that press conference yesterday.
[Jonathan Karl, Abc News:] So he said those things under oath. Would you be willing to speak under oath to give your version of events?
[Trump:] 100 percent. And did you say under oath? I hardly know the man. I'm not going to say, I want you to pledge allegiance, who would do that? Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance under oath? I mean, think of it. I hardly know the man. It doesn't make sense. No, I didn't say that and I didn't say the other.
[Karl:] So if Robert Mueller wanted to speak with you about that, you
[Trump:] I would be glad to tell him exactly what I just told you.
[Nobles:] This has been pretty quiet as to how they're handling this investigation, they have not said whether or not they plan to depose the president, and if he will in fact take part in an interview of that nature. But while the Mueller investigation continues, we have investigations on both the House and the Senate side, the House Intelligence Committee, now demanding to know whether or not tapes exist of these conversations between Donald Trump and James Comey. They've sent a letter to White House counsel Don McGahn, saying that if these tapes exist, we want them and they've set a deadline for a response by June 23rd. Brianna, it's less than two weeks away. Maybe we will finally know whether or not these tapes exist.
[Keilar:] He said we'll be disappointed by the answer. We will see, Ryan Nobles. Thank you for that. And joining us, Laura Coates, she's a CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Laura Jarrett, who is our CNN justice reporter, and Ron Brownstein, CNN senior political analyst and senior editor with the "Atlantic." I want to go to you first, Laura Jarrett. I'm fascinated by this addition to Robert Mueller's legal team, Michael Dreeben. A lot of people will have no idea who this is, but this is this is important and it signifies something.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Absolutely. Everyone I spoke with yesterday said look, this shows that Mueller is taking this really seriously. Michael Dreeben is the foremost criminal law expert in the country. He runs the criminal appellate docket. This is a man who's argued over 100 cases before the Supreme Court and he's actually going to stay on at the Justice Department, and kind of toggle back and forth with these two jobs. But this is a really serious addition to the team.
[Keilar:] Yes. He's a top criminal law expert. This is someone who certainly knows about obstruction of justice. Having tried cases on obstruction of justice, does this tell us for sure Laura Coates, that this could head in that direction or just that if it does, Mueller is equipped for that?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] It does both. It tells you it signals to you there is actually an allegation that's out there. We know that from Comey's testimony and we know that they're digging in their heels, and saying listen, obstruction of justice is what one particular facet, maybe an important one. It also happens to form Articles of Impeachment, that may be a coincidence or not, who knows there. But the real issue is they know this is going to the Supreme Court. There will be unprecedented legal issues that they have to navigate. To do that, they have somebody who's not only experienced but is able to navigate the criminality function of the law in this part. You have somebody who's digging in their heels because they know there's going to be a heck of a fight ahead of them and it will be resolved probably sooner than we thought.
[Keilar:] But in this in this case, Ron.
[Ron Brownstein, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Yes.
[Keilar:] And you talked about this, I find this very fascinating,
[Brownstein:] Yes,
[Keilar:] This idea of the he said-he said, completely different things that we're hearing from President Trump and from Jim Comey.
[Brownstein:] Right.
[Keilar:] I want to actually play this where a reporter asks if President Trump thinks that Jim Comey lied. Listen to this.
[Karl:] So he said those things under oath. Would you be willing to speak under oath to give your version of these events?
[Trump:] 100 percent. And did you say under oath? I hardly know the man. I'm not going to say I want you to pledge allegiance. Who would do that? Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance under oath? I mean, think of it. I hardly know the man. It doesn't make sense. No, I didn't say that, and I didn't say the other.
[Karl:] So if Robert Mueller wanted to speak with you about that
[Trump:] I would be glad to tell him exactly what I just told you.
[Karl:] You said you hoped the Flynn investigation you could let
[Trump:] I didn't say that.
[Karl:] He can let go. So he lied about that.
[Trump:] Well, I didn't say that. I mean, I will tell you, I didn't say that. No collusion. No obstruction. He's a leaker. But we want to get back to running our great country.
[Keilar:] OK, Ron Brownstein.
[Brownstein:] Subtle words. No collusion, no obstruction, he's a leaker. This is the whole
[Keilar:] Right? There you go. There's the message.
[Brownstein:] Yes. Yes.
[Keilar:] If this is as it appears right now, Comey's word against President Trump's word, what happens?
[Brownstein:] Well, first, the first important thing is, as Jon Karl pointed out in the question, James Comey has made his comments under oath, which his big difference between what he is saying and what the president has said in a press conference. And I thought it was significant that the president was going out preemptively and saying yes, I will testify. We had the two legal experts here. Ken Starr subpoenaed Bill Clinton to testify before the grand jury in August, 1998 when he was the independent counsel. The White House initially resisted the subpoena, questioned whether it was possible to subpoena a sitting president. Ultimately they agreed to testify. So as far as I know, the issue was never adjudicated about whether you can in fact force the president to testify. It's certainly going to be harder now politically for them for him not to testify, and ultimately whatever the president says now, what really counts is what he says under oath because if you go back again to the 1998 precedent, whatever people thought about the Ken Starr investigation, he accused President Clinton of three counts of perjury from testimony to the grand jury. He didn't indict him. He passed it to the House of Representatives who's ultimately used that those allegations as the basis for the Republican House voting to impeach him in 1998. And you could easily imagine if you know, if Mueller finds wrongdoing that that is the more likely path than testing the question of whether a sitting president can be indicted in a criminal you know, in a criminal manner, rather if he finds evidence of wrongdoing basically putting it on the lap of the House and saying, are you going to deal with it or not, which is not something that many Republicans are looking forward to right now.
[Keilar:] I want to ask you about this because President Trump there accuses Jim Comey of perjury really. And so what would that mean exactly? What would have had to happen I think if President Trump is correct? I mean, he essentially Jim Comey would have had to leave this meeting or any of these interactions, meeting in the Oval Office, phone call, and drafted a memo that he was falsifying.
[Brownstein:] False reference.
[Keilar:] And it's hard to imagine the FBI director doing that, right? Without tapes, it seems as if the recollection of Jim Comey should hold more weight.
[Coates:] Well, you're struggling to find a scenario that would actually make sense because it stretches the imagination, and what the president has done is put himself in a very precarious position. He has said, believe him, when it suits him, when it's the part that corroborates, I told you he told me on three different occasions that we had this conversation, believe him, period, he's a liar. When you do that, you set up a battle between credibility that frankly the president cannot win because for the very reasons you just said. The court of law and the court of public opinion, does give some weight to the idea of having contemporaneous drawings of what you've actually seen and heard. It's a very important thing.
[Jarrett:] So that's why once the president actually sits in a windowless conference room facing off against Robert Mueller
[Keilar:] Under oath.
[Jarrett:] Under oath, he may not be so unequivocal as he is in the Rose Garden. We may hear a lot more of I don't recall, I don't remember. You know, I'm not really sure exactly how that went, because he has to protect himself, right? And so obviously when he's out in front of the cameras it's one thing, but when you are in a room under oath with special counsel, you can't play around with that.
[Keilar:] And in fairness, he should say I don't recall if he doesn't, and especially if this is a conversation months ago or conversations months ago and he doesn't have record of them. It seems like it would be smart for him to say I don't recall, and he really may not be able to verbatim, right?
[Jarrett:] Absolutely. And what is that, the first line that any lawyer tells you?
[Brownstein:] Yes. Right.
[Jarrett:] Just say I don't recall if you are at all unsure. Do not get into that gray zone because it's really dangerous.
[Brownstein:] And also, it's not simply a he said he said, right? Because as you point out there are several other pieces, you know, of what Jim Comey said. You had what he wrote contemporaneously at the time so you basically have the argument that he went left the White House, you know, went into a car, and immediately falsified a record, and you also what he told associates at a contemporaneous basis versus the other side. And, you know, people have argued supporters of the president have argued that if you end up with he said-he said, by definition there can't be any legal jeopardy for the president. I'm not a lawyer, but it's not just a he said-he said, there are other pieces there. And again, going back to the Clinton investigation, there was at least one count of perjury that was essentially a he said -she said, and Ken Starr said she was more credible, therefore I believe the president lied. So the idea that the president would be kind of free and clear to say whatever he wants under oath, you know, relative to what he said in the Rose Garden seems to me a little overly optimistic.
[Coates:] And there are things that attest Comey's credibility besides the memo. Remember, he then discusses with other FBI senior officials what he's actually heard.
[Brownstein:] Yes. Right.
[Coates:] He'd have to falsify that memo, then go back, hold these conversations that we know are credible, and tell them the wrong thing, they have to recall the wrong thing, and then prove him a liar as well. It's too
[Keilar:] But quick final word to you, Laura Jarrett. He is the president. Does that give him any sort of benefit of the doubt here?
[Jarrett:] Well, certainly his lawyers have tried to create that atmosphere. If you think about the travel ban cases, right, they repeatedly say look, this is the president, this is the executive. You need to give him that benefit of the doubt. But the problem is one of credibility. And you can see in the Senate hearing on Thursday James Comey says, look, my mom told me not to do this, but I think my record speaks for itself.
[Brownstein:] Real quickly on the Republicans in the House are overwhelmingly hoping that Mueller in effect takes this off their plate. That he is the one who has to make the decision. I think the suggestion is eventually he will put it right back on their plate, and say, this is something that has to be decided by the political system, not by a court of law.
[Keilar:] Ron Brownstein, Laura Jarrett, Laura Coates, thank you to all of you. So far so how far will investigators go to see if the supposed tapes actually exist? I'm going to discuss that with a former FBI operative next.

[Anthony Scaramucci, White House Communications Director:] I love the president. And I'm very, very loyal to the president. I love these guys. I respect these guys. I love the president. The president's phenomenal with the press. The president himself is always going to be the president. I think he's got some of the best political instincts in the world and perhaps in history. He's done a phenomenal job for the American people.
[Camerota:] All right, the White House has a new communications director. That was Anthony Scaramucci, who seems to have a lot of love for President Trump, though he does not appear to share many of the president's positions. Sean Spicer is now out as press secretary. So what does this mean for getting real information out of the White House? Joining us now, CNN's senior political commentator Jennifer Granholm and former Trump campaign adviser and CNN political commentator Jason Miller. Great to have both of you. Governor, I want to start with you because Anthony Scaramucci is an interesting guy.
[Jennifer Granholm, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] Very.
[Camerota:] And you took note of that on Twitter. You took note of his past positions. Very recent past positions. You tweeted out, Scaramucci deleted tweets showing he's pro-choice, anti-gun, pro- Hillary Clinton, anti-Donald Trump, pro-gay marriage, anti-death penalty and he thinks climate change is real. You sound enthusiastic about this choice for communications director.
[Granholm:] Yes, I mean, he I mean he's pretty much aligned. And I forgot to mention, because we only had 140 characters, that he's anti-wall as well. You know, I mean it's pretty amazing that Donald Trump, who's Mr. Loyalty, right, who is suspicious of anybody who donated to somebody else in the campaign, regardless of the fact that Donald Trump has donated to Hillary Clinton in the past, right, or to Democrats in the past. But the bottom line is that it's really interesting to me that he picked somebody is to be his spokesperson who is completely antithetical in his own personal beliefs to so much of what Donald Trump purports to stand for.
[Camerota:] So, Jason, this was a job that you previously held in terms of communications director for the campaign or the transition. How will this work, that Scaramucci feels so differently than the president he serves?
[Jason Miller, Cnn Political Commentator:] I think Anthony is going to do a fantastic job here. I think one of the important things for folks to remember is that Anthony was an active surrogate on the campaign, as well as the transition. So he's very familiar with the president's positions. He's been a very effective advocate for those positions. And one of the things that the governor knows is that when folks sign on to work for, whether it be a candidate or for someone who's actually in office, they're signing on to their beliefs, their positions and they're going to tow the line and work for the to help advance that agenda.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] I'm sure the governor not everybody who ever worked for the governor during her time in office agreed with every single position, but I think where
[Granholm:] No, everybody did.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] Right. Not not
[Camerota:] Yes, yes, of course. Of course.
[Miller:] Yes, right. Not right, everybody. But here's the important thing.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] Anthony has a proven record of advocating the president's positions.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Miller:] And he really, truly gets this spirit of making America great again, this broader agenda that the president is trying to move on the legislative side.
[Camerota:] Yes, but, hold on, Jason, I understand. But to be so fundamentally at odds with your own positions versus the president that you serve. I mean would you take that job? Would you take a job with someone with whom your positions were antithetical?
[Miller:] Well views might change a little bit over time and also things get said in the course of campaigns maybe when you're on the same side as someone or on a different side. It might be a little bit heated. But the thing that's very clear here is that Anthony is on board with what the president's trying to do. And I think it's also when you go back and look at Anthony's background as someone who's a businessman. He comes from Wall Street. He comes from the world of private capital and trying to get the economy and growth going. That's very much in the same spirit as where President Trump is. And that's why I think part of the reason why I think both of these two get along and agree so much.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Granholm:] I think you know, I mean, ultimately, this is it isn't about Anthony Scaramucci's core, right, because he's he's willing to give that up in order to be the spokesperson, right?
[Camerota:] Is that how you interpret this?
[Granholm:] Yes.
[Camerota:] I mean so like the things that he has tweeted let me just throw up some for people so that they understand. He had all of these tweets that represent what you say, that he is pro-choice, he's pro- gun control. He said things about Hillary Clinton. "If Hillary keeps this up, she might be in play for 2016." He said this in 2012. "I hope she runs. She is incredibly competent." He said about gun control, "I have always been for strong gun control laws." So
[Granholm:] Yes.
[Camerota:] So
[Granholm:] This is quite I mean if it were one evolution, that would be interesting. But he's he's evolved. If it's true that he would have evolved, now adopts the president's position, that is a that would that's head spinning. I'm sure he
[Miller:] No. Look, governor governor
[Granholm:] But, no, no, I'm just saying. But my point is, Jason, is really to sort of agree with you and to say, he is the he's a hired gun now really for the president. It's no different than if you're a lawyer and you have to argue your client's case. And then the the more interesting point to me was the president hasn't seemed to want to have people who had evolved like that. He wants somebody, usually in the past, who was loyal to the core. But here's, I think, what's more importantly, is, can Scaramucci get the president to get on message? I was I was checking out the number of tweets that the president did just in the this month of July on his own defense, the obsession that he has about the Russia stuff and about feeling attacked and about fake news and he did about well, actually, he did another one this morning. So 47 in the month of July tweets related to his worry about China excuse me, about Russia, fake news, all of that, to feeling attacked. His defense. He only did so that's 47 14 tweets about jobs and this is supposed to be the month where he goes to make it in America.
[Camerota:] OK.
[Granholm:] So there's a huge disproportion
[Miller:] All right, Alisyn, I've got to jump in. All right, you've got to let me jump
[Camerota:] Yes, go.
[Miller:] OK. So this this is why the democratic Party is so rudderless right now. Governor, there is not one person in the United States that woke up this morning who gave a rat's you know what about Anthony Scaramucci's or anybody else's tweets from days or months or years ago. No, there is
[Granholm:] No, I'm not talking about no, no, I'm talking about Trump. I'm talking about Donald Trump.
[Camerota:] From Donald Trump.
[Miller:] Nobody well, before you were talking about and then you want to pivot into this what people care about is advancing the agenda and trying to repeal and replace Obamacare.
[Granholm:] That's my point. That's my point.
[Miller:] They care about getting some substantive tax reform done. They want to get
[Camerota:] Yes, and so will of the new communications director be able to do that?
[Miller:] And, absolutely, because Anthony Scaramucci believes in the president's mission and what he's trying to do to move this country forward. That's what people care about. People aren't focused on these on these tweets and these other
[Granholm:] OK. So so when I look at August
[Miller:] And but, again, this is even even today you take a look at what I mean I'm going to throw you a bone here, governor, and talk about the one attempt at a positive message that the Democrats are trying to put out today. It's not even a positive message. They're trying to go on the attack and trying to attack people left and right.
[Granholm:] No, they're speaking about jobs, man. That's what the president should be talking about is jobs. His tweet this morning is talking about the investigation, raiding the
[Miller:] No, and it's no, and that's with no with no you know who actually has
[Granholm:] He's not talking about jobs.
[Miller:] You let you know who actually has a plan? President Trump actually President Trump you look at the job growth records since he's come in.
[Granholm:] No
[Miller:] It's doing fantastic. You look at the stock market. You look at investor confidence,. You look at consumer confidence. Governor, our economy is finally starting to move in the right direction.
[Granholm:] What has he done? What what bill has he passed? Not one. He hasn't passed any
[Miller:] He has he has already started to reduce regulations. He went to Michigan he went to Michigan, your home state, and he's already started
[Camerota:] OK, Jason, answer that answer that as the last word.
[Miller:] He's started to make some fantastic progress to reduce burdensome regulations to were hurting the auto industry. He went and signed that right there in your
[Granholm:] And that's why Ford decided to move their jobs to Mexico, right?
[Miller:] And they have a lot more that they're keeping here and growing here and and we're excited about the jobs that we're seeing in the United States.
[Granholm:] And Carrier Carrier's jobs continue to move. Harley Davidson started to move. I'm just saying
[Camerota:] You guys really
[Miller:] And the president and the president was able to help keep 1,100 jobs right there in Indianapolis.
[Camerota:] I can see that we just wound it up and now you guys are getting started. Governor, Jason Miller, thank you very much.
[Granholm:] You bet.
[Camerota:] It will be fascinating to see how Anthony Scaramucci handles all of this.
[Miller:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] Chris.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] All right, another story for you. Police are piecing together a deadly human trafficking operation. Dozens of people, maybe as many as 100, trapped in the back of a semi-truck. Temperatures topping 100 degrees outside. People lost their lives. Nine at the latest count. What's going on? We have the latest from the scene.

[Blitzer:] Republican Senator Rand Paul makes a diplomatic delivery. Senator Paul revealed today that he delivered a letter to the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, from President Trump while Paul has been visiting Russia this week. He tweeted this, quote, "I was honored to deliver a letter from President Trump to President Vladimir Putin's administration. It emphasized the importance of further engagement in various areas." We just heard from the White House a few moments ago. The press secretary, assistant press secretary, describing it as a letter of introduction requested by the Senator in hopes of meeting with Vladimir Putin. But as far as we know, no meeting has taken place between the Senator and the Russian leader. Let's bring in our chief international correspondent, Clarissa Ward. Clarissa, what more do we know about how all of this came about and how the Kremlin has responded.
[Clarissa Ward, Cnn Chief International Correspondent:] So what we know so far is that the three specific issues that the letter pertained to were counterterrorism, improving counterterrorism between Russia and the U.S., improving legislative dialogue, and also resuming cultural exchanges. These are seemingly, Wolf, very anodyne topics, the exact sort of thing you'd expect to see the president of the U.S. and the president of Russia discussing as they go about trying to repair the very damaged relationship. What makes this, however, very unusual and quite striking is the method of the delivery of the letter. There are diplomatic protocols. There's a chain that one goes through. We have a thing called the State Department. And traditionally, a letter from the U.S. president to the Russian president would go through that typical diplomatic chain or protocol. So very unusual to see President Trump giving this letter to the Senator to hand deliver to Russian lawmakers, who then reportedly passed it on to the Kremlin. We gather, from a Russian news agency, that the Kremlin has the letter but that it has not yet been reviewed by President Putin himself. One can only assume, Wolf, that he will be reading it soon. But again, a very untraditional mechanism for delivering this letter, opening up the possibility, people are saying, of is this some kind of a back channel. Really too early to draw any conclusions about that, Wolf. But given that the topic of the letter, the specific things that are discussed, seem so generic, it seems an unusual way of handing over this letter to the president of Russia.
[Blitzer:] Yes. When it comes to direct dialogue between the U.S. and Russia, Senator Paul and President Trump, they're on the same page. They want to have these kinds of exchanges. They're clearly working together in that area. As you know, Clarissa, there's a leaked document now that sheds more light on that private meeting that President Trump had with President Putin in Helsinki. According to "Politico," the memo shows that Putin lobbied the president on various issues, including arms control and prohibiting weapons in space. So what more are you hearing about all of this?
[Ward:] All of this is coming from a report from "Politico." CNN has not yet been able to independently verify the report. But from what we gather, there's, again, three main topics that President Putin reportedly drilled down on with President Trump during that two-hour meeting. As you have said, many times before, that two- hour meeting, that private meeting has been the source of endless speculation. A lot of mystery surrounding it. A lot of questions of what was discussed. According to this document, which was written in Russian, in Cyrillic, much of it leaves Putin's agenda for this meeting really focused of issues of arms control, with three specific topics, the five-year extension of the New START Treaty. This essentially dealing with limiting nuclear armaments for both sides, both the Russians and the U.S. Commitment to reaffirm the INF treaty. This deals with intermediate ranges, which both sides have accused each other of violating that treaty. And, as you mentioned, also a possible ban on placing weapons in space. Again, what is striking about this, Wolf, is that these are very typical topics to be discussed between the U.S. president, between the Russian president. But we have heard the Russian foreign ministry coming out with a blistering critique of "Politico" saying, "It seems about once a month there's a leak from the American side. What kind of interference in the American elections from Russia can there be if, in the United States, even the content of presidential talks cannot be kept secret." Some harsh words there Wolf?
[Blitzer:] Very interesting, indeed. Clarissa Ward, in London, thanks very much. Other news, any minute now, Republican Congressman Chris Collins will be in a New York federal courtroom just hours after being arrested and charged with insider trading. We'll go there live. Plus, the scene gets testy in the trial of president's former campaign chairman. Why teams went back and forth over the star witness's extramarital affair.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor, Newsroom:] The Dixie School District voting Tuesday night against changing its name for now. This, as some residents in San Rafael, California are calling for 155-year-old district to drop the word Dixie.
[Sciutto:] Why? Some people there criticizing the name saying that it has that it ties back to the Confederacy, and therefore, is a pro-slavery symbol. CNN national correspondent, Sara Sidner, has more.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn National Correspondent:] The fight over whether to change the name of the Dixie School District is sparking vitriolic political discourse mirroring that which is playing out in southern states over whether to remove Confederate statues.
[Unidentified Woman:] Whatever opportunity there was for the dialogue that you talked about at the beginning is long gone. Media circuses hijacked board meetings, and online smear campaigns, and personal threats have intimidated people, have turned neighbor after neighbor against neighbor.
[Unidentified Man:] The name Dixie never meant a thing to me despite growing up south of the Mason-Dixon line.
[Sidner:] But, this is Marin County, California. A bay area county known for being a laid-back liberal bastion of well-to-do, mostly white residents, which is why the pitched emotion filled battling for the name Dixie took some residents by surprise.
[Marnie Glickman, Dixie School Board Trustee:] I was attacked as a bomb thrower, an arsonist, and outside agitator. People hissed at me, and there was immediate negative impact.
[Sidner:] Dixie School Board Trustee, Marnie Glickman, spearheaded the latest call for the removal of the name Dixie.
[Glickman:] People have been saying that this name hurts them. For decades now, and we can make this simple change.
[Sidner:] Mercy Chiu, a mom with two kids in the district, says those who want a name change have been name-calling bullies to people like her who want to keep the name.
[Mercy Chiu, Wearedixie.org Member:] I personally have been through a lot on just joining this campaign, and to be called racist, and a white supremacist, it's been very hard to understand why people wouldn't just accept that other people have different understanding of a certain word.
[Sidner:] Marin County resident, Noah Griffin, says for people of color the district needs to realize the name conjures up pain.
[Noah Griffin, Changethename.net Co-founder:] Here my grandfather was a slave. He was born in 1852. You can't tell any black person that Dixie means anything other than Confederacy, enslavement, terror, and death. It needs to change.
[Sidner:] But there is a wrinkle in the debate. The issue is over history. Two versions of it. One held by those who want the name changed. And the other, by those who don't. Kerry Pierson says he's been demanding a name change for more than 20 years, and Dixie refers to the Confederacy. He references the timeframe when the first Dixie schoolhouse here was built. You were around the first time that this change was asked for.
[Kerry Pierson, Marin County Resident:] Yes. I'll be the first one to ask for it. Yes, publicly. The question you have to ask yourself is, what did Dixie mean in 1863 during the Civil War?
[Sidner:] But residents with the group, We Are Dixie, who don't want a name change say the school district was named after Mary Dixie, a member of the Miwok Tribe. A member of that same tribe has now joined the fight to keep the name intact. How do you respond to their thought that this is painful.
[Marge Grow-eppard, Miwok Tribe Member:] I did not realize my name offended people. I went to school with the guard the last name Custer. I would never, ever ask him, hey that offends me, and what happened to my people, you need to change your name. That's part of our history. We need to learn from it.
[Sidner:] So, after about three hours of a board meeting, and public comment on this particular subject, the board had 13 names before that it could have changed. They decided to stick with the name Dixie for now. But, after all of that, someone put through a petition that basically asked for the school to change its name to a 14th recommended name, which is the Sojourner Truth School District. Of course, Sojourner Truth being the abolitionist and the African-American, who also was a women's rights advocate. That will be voted on in the coming days Jim, Poppy.
[Sciutto:] Sara Sidner, thank you. Debates like this happening across the country. Now, in another story, the crisis in Venezuela from a very different angle. CNN going inside a pediatric hospital were access to key supplies and even food is dwindling.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] shakes up his personal legal team with some new leadership. The president has said just hours earlier, that he planned a more aggressive pushback. Meanwhile, the Post reports that the legal team is also taking a look at where the president's authorities stand on issuing pardons, not only for aides and family members, but maybe also for himself. Well, this morning, the president's lawyer called that reporting nonsense. We are covering all the developments this busy morning. Suzanne Malveaux is on Capitol Hill. Also, Kaitlan Collins is at the White House. And that is where we begin. The White House, they say nonsense, much ado about nothing.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Yes. Good morning, Poppy. We are hearing that Donald Trump is reshuffling his legal team in wake of Bob Mueller's investigation. And Marc Kasowitz, his long-time lawyer is going to see a reduced role. Meanwhile, John Dowd and Jay Sekulow take over handling the Russian investigation from outside the White House. Now, because they are outside the White House working, they will likely not have to reveal their dealings with President Trump because of attorneyclient privilege. Meanwhile, Ty Cobb lawyer is set to take over at the end of the month handling the Russia investigation from inside the White House. Now all of this comes, like you said, as "The Washington Post" and "New York Times" are reporting that Trump staffers and lawyers are looking for ways to investigate Bob Mueller's investigators, including anything they have that's a conflict of interest that they think could discredit this entire investigation. Now, the report says they are scrutinizing their donations to Democrats and looking at Bob Mueller's relationship with James Comey, the FBI director who was fired by Donald Trump earlier this year. Now it's worth noting that John Dowd, the Trump lawyer is pushing back on these stories, saying that they are nonsense. But as you know, in that New York Times interview this week, Donald Trump said that if they started looking into his personal finances, he would consider it crossing a red line.
[Harlow:] Kaitlan at the White House. Thank you very much. Before I let you go, we are hearing and I'm just seeing some reports that the president is meeting with Hedge Fund Giant, big finance guy, Anthony Scaramucci. He's been a close ally of this White House. But there was news percolating that this may be to take over the White House comms job the White House communications lead role. Anything more you can tell us as these two men meet?
[Collins:] Yes. This is a role that's been left open since early June when Mike Dubke resigned and left the White House. Now, Anthony Scaramucci is this hedge fund guy who was turned campaign fund-raiser. And we have heard that he is under consideration for this position. This is a position that Sean Spicer has been handling along with the press secretary role ever since Dubke left. Anthony Scaramucci was seen leaving the White House last night and now we are told he has a meeting with Donald Trump, right now, at 10:00 a.m. at the White House.
[Harlow:] Something tells me that working at the White House pays a little bit less than running hedge fund. I don't know. But we will see. Clearly, it's not just about money. Give us an update when you have it. Today, a new deadline, I should say, hangs over the White House and the Russian investigation. Donald Trump Jr., the president's son, former campaign manager, Paul Manafort haven't said yet whether they will appear before the Judiciary Committee next week and testify as scheduled on Wednesday. Now, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee says if he doesn't have an answer from them today, well, he might subpoena them. All of this as the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner is expected to meet with Senate staffers behind closed doors next week. Susan Malveaux is on Capitol Hill with more. So first of all, any update on whether Trump Jr. and Manafort have said whether they will be there?
[Suzanne Malveaux, Cnn National Correspondent:] We are still awaiting their response. They have until the end of the business day to actually respond but we know the Senate Judiciary Committee is very eager to get a response. A letter has been sent out to both of them. We know that Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on that committee, saying that they did get the clear from Special Counsel Bob Mueller, that this would not impede his own investigation, that they should go before their committee publicly and testify. Senator Chuck Grassley, the chairman of that committee also threatening, as he's been threatening over the last week or so. That he will issue a subpoena if it is not voluntary that they go and testify. This committee, very eager to know what came out of that meeting that happened last June. Those eight individuals, this meeting initiated by the Russian lawyer, as you know, who said they have some sort of damaging information on Hillary Clinton. Also, Poppy, look to Monday. That is when we are going to be seeing Jared Kushner. We might not see him, but we certainly will get some information from this meeting. He is going to be going before the Senate Intelligence Committee. It is being described as an interview. It is not sworn testimony, per se, it will be behind closed doors with staffers to answer some initial questions, and then they will see how it develops. It is expected that he will potentially go before senators at a later date. But they, also, too, want to know what his role was in that meeting and what the larger implications of all of that. At the same time, Poppy, we are still watching the special counsel investigation moving forward as members of Congress seem to be blocked when it comes to their own legislative initiatives and policies, really trying to get that moving sometime next week. Poppy?
[Harlow:] Indeed, Susan Malveaux on the Hill. Thank you very much for that. Let's talk about all of this. Error Louis is here, CNN political commentator, political anchor of "Spectrum News," Michael Shear, CNN political analyst and White House correspondent from "The New York Times," and Brian Kalt, Michigan State University law professor and someone who has a lot to say about all of this and the Constitution. He is the author of "Constitutional Cliffhangers: A Legal Guide for Presidents and Their Enemies." Thank you all for being here. And before we get to that, let's talk about the news that's just breaking, Errol. That Anthony Scaramucci is meeting again today with the president. He was seen in the wings of the White House yesterday evening. Kellyanne Conway went on Fox this morning and described him as someone who's been an incredible asset to the president, his team. And she said, he is one of those killers on TV. Do you think he's going to get the top comms job?
[Errol Louis, Cnn Political Commentator And Political Anchor, "spectrum News":] I think it's entirely possible of course. The question is do they need another killer on television? You know, Kellyanne Conway, no slouch herself, Sean Spicer sort of almost iconic at this point as far as how he represents the administration and its style and then the president of course, who reserved to himself the right to big foot all of them and put out his own tweets, his own statements, his own interviews and sort of run communications himself. And Scaramucci can thrive in that? Yes, sure. But the question is you've got a lot of different sharks. Sometimes they bite each other. Sometimes they are not going in the same direction. If Scaramucci can sort of put some order to the whole thing, the White House will probably benefit politically.
[Harlow:] All right. We'll watch. We'll see their meeting now. Brian, to you, as the legal, the constitutional scholar and legal expert on this panel, "The Washington Post" reporting, that the president and his team have been discussing the pardon possibilities. Can he pardon his aides? Can he pardon his friends? Legal answer, yes. Can he pardon himself? Legal answer up in the air, we don't know. There's not president for this. And you talk about it, that it is fiercely debated, but unresolved legally.
[Brian Kalt, Professor Of Law, Michigan State University:] Right. It's never happened. And until a court weighs in, we don't know. Anyone who says they know, they don't. There are arguments on both sides. But politically, it would be something maybe we can all discuss politically. It will be a very difficult maneuver to pull off politically, but, there are people have this misconception that pardon means you are guilty, that accepting a pardon means you that are admitting you're guilty. It doesn't have to be that way. Pardons can be and have been used to exonerate people. So, if the president wants to say this whole investigation is a witch hunt. It's gone way too far. I have the power to stop it. I am pardoning everyone involved. That would end the investigation and if enough people supported him and we can assume that at least 30 percent of the country could, he might be able to ride that out.
[Harlow:] Right. It wouldn't hurt him politically among his base, at least, that believe that this is much ado about nothing. Michael, to you, you've got not only this, you've got the White House, the president's lawyer this morning coming out, his personal lawyer and saying all of this reporting is just absolute nonsense. It is two publications that are reporting that the strategy in the White House right now is dig up as much dirt on Mueller and his investigative team as possible to undermine the investigation, undermine their credibility. This is not a new tactic. You know, we certainly saw dirt dug up or attempts to do so in the Clinton White House on Ken Starr. What is different this time?
[Michael Shear, Cnn Political Analyst And White House Correspondent, "the New York Times":] Well, look, I think in some ways it's very similar because when presidents are faced with issued that are difficult
[Harlow:] What did she find on the web? What did Siri find on the web?
[Shear:] I have no idea. I thought it was turned off.
[Harlow:] I hope she found my grocery. All right, continue.
[Shear:] Sorry about that. When presidents are faced with these kinds of legal challenges, often they try to discredit the people that are accusing them. And that's sort of a common thing. What's different here is that that effort is not kind of subterranean, but it's right on the surface. The interview that my colleagues had with the president a couple of days ago showed, exposed for the world just exactly how frustrated this president is and how determined he is to push back against Bob Mueller and the investigation in a very open and public way. And so, given the president's own words, the fact that his aides are trying to do exactly what the president said that he wanted to do is not shouldn't be a surprise.
[Harlow:] Interesting note, Brian. Our Jake Tapper spoke with yesterday, alone with four sitting Republican senators. All of them expressing concern about the language that the president used to attack his entire Justice Department in the interview with Michael's colleagues at "The New York Times." One of them said to Jake that leaving the door open to the possibility of firing Special Counsel Bob Mueller is, quote, "chilling" and they went on to say that Congress could figure out how to hire someone on its own and how to sort of circumvent that, if that were the case. The issue is the Independent Counsel statute which would protect the Independent Counsel that lapsed in the '90s. So, what would the powers be then of Congress?
[Kalt:] Well, ultimately, this shows how awkward it is for the executive branch to be pursuing the head of the executive branch. And constitutionally, the way it's supposed to work, when the president is in the cross hairs, so to speak, is for Congress to be impeached in the process and the impeachment process would involve hiring investigators and letting them do their job and seeing what they come up with. And that's the way it's supposed to work. They certainly have that power. And politically, if they want to do that, that's how it would go. But if politically they don't, then nothing will happen.
[Harlow:] Right. But again, this is coming from, you know, sitting Republican senators. So, that is telling. There is another telling thing. And that is the numbers we got in this new CNN poll this morning, Errol Louis. Let's pull them up. Americans asked about their concern about contacts between Russians in the Trump campaign. It actually declined. It's 49 percent of them are concerned now. It was 55 percent in March. Taking to the numbers a little bit more. Only 27 percent of Americans say they are, quote, "very concerned" about contacts between Russians and the Trump campaign. What do these numbers tell us and what do they bolster the White House strategy?
[Louis:] I think the White House would probably regard that it is good news, although it's not. Because we know that Bob Mueller is not looking at the polls. He does not care. We know that the Senate Intelligence Committee for that matter is not necessarily going to be swayed by sort of a moving number like today's poll compared to March numbers on this question. I would go back in time and remind people that most Americans and I'm talking about 60 plus percent did not think Watergate was serious until the hearings actually began.
[Harlow:] And that was a two-year process.
[Louis:] Exactly. They knew there was a break-in. They knew there was a Saturday Night Massacre. They knew that the president didn't want this to go forward. But it was really only in the public forum when people saw hour after hour. You can look at the demeanor of the people. You can look at the questioning that they are placed under. That is the American system, to sort of put people in front of a jury or in this case, a jury of the public and question them closely and find out what they know. That's why these hearings that Grassley is talking about are so important.
[Harlow:] And Michael, just the fact that the Republican chair of the Senate judiciary committee, Chuck Grassley, has been you know, moved to say yesterday to our Manu Raju. Look, if Don Jr. and Paul Manafort don't volunteer by the end of today, to come before our committee on Wednesday, you know, we are going subpoena them.
[Shear:] Yes. That's pretty significant. And you know, I think one of the things that are really hanging over this entire series of episodes is the question of when Republicans how far Republicans are willing to go in protecting the president on one hand or letting the investigation continue on the other. And remember, it was, in Nixon's time, it was when a whole a handful of very senior Republicans went to the president and said it's time to go that he finally resigned. And the question is not nowhere near that resignation or impeachment or anything like that yet. But the question of how far Republicans are willing to go on Capitol Hill to stand in the way of the investigation or to let it proceed. I mean, Senator Grassley's position right now suggests that they recognize that there are serious issues here and at least some of them are willing to let it proceed.
[Harlow:] And of course, Errol Louis, it was the Republican lawmakers question, Howard Baker's question that moved things so much.
[Louis:] What did the president know and when did he know it.
[Harlow:] When did he know it, right? That was it.
[Louis:] A pretty good question.
[Harlow:] It is a pretty good question. Final thought just quickly on where you see the White House this Friday, given all of the shake up in the legal team and these new strategies clearly around the president.
[Louis:] They seem to operate at a chaotic pace, in a chaotic direction. So, you know, it's anybody's guess. Really, the initiative has moved from the White House to the media, increasingly to Congress and to the special prosecutor. They are who's driving the process. For all of the chaos that comes out of the White House, they really are in reactive mode. I don't know that they have the initiative at this point. And if they try to recapture it, they are going to have to do it in a more structured way than we've them somehow.
[Harlow:] Maybe Anthony Scaramucci gets the job. Maybe he changes the messaging
[Louis:] Sure.
[Harlow:] Maybe he gets in front on some of this stuff. We'll see. Errol Louis, thank you very much. Michael as well and Brian, have a good weekend, guys. Multiple errors and a failure to take action, chilling new details this morning about that deadly collision between the USS destroyer and a cargo ship. Also, rubber bullets and stun grenades protesters are clashing in Jerusalem with these new rules trying to keep young males away from the holiest of sites. And Attorney General Jeff Sessions set to speak next hour. Will he address like he did yesterday the continued fallout from the president's attacks on him?

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] It is Monday, April 9th, 8:00 in the east. And we begin with breaking news. Russia's defense ministry claims Israel carried out air strikes on a Syrian air base after a suspected chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus that killed dozens, including children, an attack that Russia has said is a hoax. Wait until you see the photos. Trump warning Syria that Assad, there is going to be a big price to pay for backing him and for attacking civilians again.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] And in a rare more President Trump also called out Vladimir Putin by name for backing Assad. The White House is facing several crises overseas as well as here at home as the president's new national security adviser John Bolton begins his first day on the job. And there are questions about Chief of Staff John Kelly's influence inside the White House and the future of embattled EPA chief Scott Pruitt. So we have it all covered for us, but let's begin with CNN's Fred Pleitgen live in Damascus, Syria, with the breaking news.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Hi, Alisyn. Yes, you're absolutely right. The Russians are saying they believe that Israel was behind those missile strikes on a Syrian air base that happened overnight. They say the Israeli warplanes flew over Lebanese territory and fired eight missiles into Syria, and five of those were intercepted and three that hit that airbase killing several people on the ground. The Israelis for their part of not commented yet. And then you have that alleged chemical weapons attack. We have got to warn our viewers that the images they are about to see are extremely graphic and extremely disturbing, but they are still very, very important. Apparently all of this happened at around 8:20 p.m. on Saturday night when a Syrian military helicopter, the opposition says, hovered over that area and dropped several canisters onto the area. People then got extreme respiratory problems and, the opposition says, dozens of people were killed. And we have those horrible images of children laying on the ground, children not able to breath, doctors in chaos really trying to help them as all of this is going on. The Syrian government for its part says it was not behind any sort of attack. They say, yes, they were prosecuting an offensive in that area at the time, but they said the offensive was going so quickly that they did not need any sort of chemicals to further their advances. They also said this attack happened in the rear echelon areas behind the front lines and certainly would not have helped them militarily in any way. So as you can see, a lot of accusations flying out there. One thing that unfortunately we keep seeing in this conflict and we're seeing again with those images as well is that it is civilians once again who are suffering the most here in Syria, guys.
[Cuomo:] Thank you very much, Fred. And people have to be reminded Syria's regime have denied these attacks in the past and they have wound up being hollow denials. President Trump's new National Security Adviser John Bolton hitting the ground running on his first day, some big questions of his desk. He's leading a meeting with key members of the national security council today. Officials say he is likely drawing up plans for military action in Syria. CNN's Barbara Starr live at the Pentagon with more on how the U.S. is preparing to respond if ordered. Barbara?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Chris, good morning. Those last two words you said, "if ordered," if ordered by the president is the key issue at this hour. But what we do know based on the strikes that happened just a year ago in Syria that the military does not wait to be asked by the president. Options planning, getting options ready for him to look at would already be going on right now. And those options are centered around the key question, what does President Trump want to achieve? Does he want to send a message by striking the chemical weapons targets? Does he want to go further and strike at the heart of Assad's regime? That will dictate the options presented by the president. Those options will look at targets, the chemical weapons, the barrel bombs, tough targets set because those helicopters that deliver them are mobile and can move around. You would have to chase them down and get to all of them. It's not going to end the threat, so you have to be able to look at the targets. You have to decide what weapons you are going to use. U.S. not likely to put pilots into Syria. Expect to see cruise missile attacks once again, and perhaps one of the key questions, enemy forces. You are going to be flying into the face of Russian and Syrian air defenses. Their missiles that could shoot pilots down and shoot missiles down, it will be very tough business. Alisyn, Chris?
[Camerota:] Barbara, thank you for explaining just how complicated all of this is. Let's bring in CNN political analyst John Avlon and CNN national security analyst Gayle Tzemach Lemmon. Gayle has been in Syria twice in the past six months. So Gayle, let me start with you. What do you think the response should be when President Trump says there is a big price to pay? Barbara just laid out how complicated that price would be to extract.
[Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, Cnn National Security Analyst:] It is complicated. Syria is really the conflict that has trampled on all of the international norms for seven years. So I think there are three W's, the what. What is the response? The when, which is what is the timeline? And then the third is the will. How committed is the U.S. going to be to staying the course in Syria and to following up on whatever message the Trump administration decides should be sent? But there is no question that the world is watching, and this is the same moment that President Obama had in 2012 when he talked about a red line.
[Cuomo:] So let's look at the politics of it. President Obama did not believe in exactly what Gayle is saying there, that this is not in the U.S. interest, the money, the time, what it would take to change the situation in Syria, so we're going to stay out of that. Trump feels the same way. He was critical of Obama back then for even considering military action. He does not believe in regime change there. He just suggested that we should get out. So how does this play out politically in terms of will, to the third W?
[John Avlon, Cnn Political Analyst:] There is a total contradiction in Trump's policy, as you point out. President Obama famously did not act on Assad crossing that red line in part because he felt he couldn't get anything through Congress. Trump argued that he shouldn't get involved with Syria and Assad at the time, now criticizing Obama for creating the circumstance. But this all comes a week after Donald Trump called for us to withdraw from Syria and had a big conflict with his military brass.
[Cuomo:] Lindsey Graham says may have emboldened Assad and John McCain says may have emboldened Assad to use chemical weapons.
[Avlon:] May have. But obviously hypocrisy is something that doesn't touch this Teflon Don. What the real issue is you have got John Bolton baptism of fire. Day one, Donald Trump wanting to be tough, calling out Putin, deserves some credit for that in a tweet. But what will that action be? And if it's simply a limited strike
[Cuomo:] Alisyn had sounds from Bolton.
[Camerota:] I still do. We should do it. And Gayle, listen to this, because we do have a window into how John Bolton felt about Syria in 2013 and maybe how he will counsel the president today. So listen to this.
[John Bolton, National Security Adviser:] I would not have referred the matter to Congress. And I think if I were a member of Congress I would vote against an authorization to use force here. I don't think it is in America's interest. I don't think we should in effect take sides in the Syrian conflict.
[Avlon:] That's very much in line with what Trump has been saying, pull out of the region. But that itself creates a vacuum that Putin and Iran and Assad have been allowed to fill, which is the contradiction at the heart of this policy.
[Cuomo:] Gayle, let me ask you something. In that clip from FOX there is a little something on the window in the side that nobody saw. And it said NBC News. This was at the time in 2013. How many people think that President Obama should go to Congress for approval? It was almost 80 percent. They have punted time and time, president to president, giving the ability to declare war in situations basically where there is no direct threat to the U.S. Congress is really supposed to own this and at least be involved in voting on the plan. Do you think that should happen this time?
[Lemmon:] We're going to see because I think it is so important when you look at that Bolton set of comments. That was a half-decade and a half a million lives ago. And I think so much has changed on the ground in Syria since 2013, and you really have seen the rise of this axis of impunity. The Assad regime plus its Russian and Iranian backers who have been all in on the side of the regime. And if you want to look at who is gaining from where we are in this moment in the Syrian conflict, it is certainly not the Syrian people, who have lost time and time again. It is Russia and Iran which have seen the influence on the ground surge and really have reshaped facts on the ground. I remember talking to Obama administration officials back in 2013 when they went to Congress, and Congress wanted no part of these air strikes. They would have had a very difficult time getting it through. But I do think we are in a different moment and it will be up to the Trump administration to really figure out a way forward or whether the impunity which has been the norm in Syria this past seven years really gets to continue.
[Camerota:] When we just had senator Ben Cardin on, he struggled, frankly, to say whether there should be military response right now. He said that he thought Congress should be involved. He thought there should be conversations. Obviously this is complicated. It would be perhaps alarming if somebody had some sort of kneejerk reaction and snap response. But Congress is not being full throated about what to do here.
[Avlon:] We have not had clarity on Syria for years because Congress and the American people are reluctant to get involved in another war in the Middle East. Understandable. At the same time there is moral outrage when chemical weapons are used against civilians as we have seen here. David Cameron, then prime minister of England, went to parliament and couldn't get authorization. That's one of the things that caused Obama to back off. So you've got folks
[Camerota:] Wasn't it also that Assad said that he was going to hand over his chemical weapons? In September, 2013, it was a surprise development after the Senate Foreign Relations Committee had voted to go, then Assad made that move. Turns out he didn't give
[Cuomo:] Who was supposed to oversee it? Russia. That was the joke at the time for people like Gayle who would understand the situation, were like what kind of deal is this? This is a sham. You're going to have the Russian who have an interest in them keeping the chemical weapons, who just called those pictures of all those kids foaming at the mouth a hoax, they're the ones in charge of whether or not they turn over the chemical weapons. That was worse than doing nothing. Anyway, Gayle, thank you very much. John Avlon, appreciate it. This conversation is going to go on.
[Camerota:] It sure is, because how should the U.S. respond to Syria? So we're going to ask a Republican senator on the Armed Services Committee next.

[Lemon:] First Lady Melania Trump making a rare speech today as she unveils her official platform to help children. She's focusing on everything from opioid abuse to cyberbullying.
[Melania Trump, First Lady Of The United States:] It is our responsibility as adults to educate and remind them that when they're using their voices, whether verbally, or online, they must choose their words wisely, and speak with respect, and compassion.
[Lemon:] The President, her husband, is listening to that. Let's discuss now, CNN Presidential Historian, Douglas Brinkley, Sarah Ellison, a staff writer for "The Washington Post," and Lauren Wright. She is the author of "On Behalf of the President: Presidential Spouses and White House Communications Strategy." We can probably use you right now, by the way. Welcome, everybody. Douglas, let's talk about the new poll released by CNN. More than half of Americans, 57 percent, have a favorable view of the First Lady Melania Trump. That is a 10 percent jump from January, while 27 percent hold an unfavorable view of her at the same time. The President's approval rating is only at 41 percent. What's your reaction to those numbers?
[Douglas Brinkley, Cnn Presidential Historian:] First ladies usually are more popular than their husbands for starters. Secondly, there's a feeling of you almost feel bad for Melania, the fact that she's living with the Stormy Daniels crisis all the time, the fact that, you know, her husband does have a bit of a bullying nature to put it mildly, the fact that she's just a bit, trying to raise baron in this sort of crazy media environment, and trying to keep him out of harm's way. But, you know, all first ladies are usually beloved. But when Hillary Clinton was first lady, and she began all about politics, you saw her take a hit with public opinion polls. As long as she's not overly political, and stays on things like opioid addiction, and the strangeness of cyber bullying, she'll stay, I think, high in the public estimation.
[Lemon:] And, Lauren, she also has taken a more high profile role recently with the Macrons with the state dinner.
[Lauren Wright, Author:] Yes.
[Lemon:] Do you think all of these events at least recently will help the President?
[Wright:] They can, and my research shows consistently first ladies are the number one surrogate when it comes to boosting public opinion of presidents, and their policy agendas. I absolutely think so. A big part of this appeal that Doug just talked about is that they're political outsiders. They're family members, so people don't evaluate them in the same way that they do politicians. And that's extremely valuable.
[Lemon:] What do you think, Sarah?
[Sarah Ellison, Staff Writer, "the Washington Post":] Well, I mean, she is the most popular person in that family, and in the west wing, so more than Ivanka, certainly more than Jared, more than her husband. And I think it is because she hasn't tackled anything that's really that controversial.
[Lemon:] Yes. You mentioned, Douglas, that she's dealing with Stormy Daniels and all of that. And then there was a very special guest star, a special appearance, on Saturday Night Live this weekend. Watch this.
[Stormy Daniels, Adult Film Actress:] Hello.
[Unidentified Male:] Stormy? This is Michael Cohen. Are you alone?
[Daniels:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] And what are you wearing?
[Daniels:] Excuse me?
[Unidentified Male:] OK, Michael. I can take it from here. OK. But as your attorney, I highly advise against you to... So what up, girl?
[Daniels:] Hello, Donald.
[Unidentified Male:] Come on, Stormy. Stop making such a big deal about this. Everyone knows it's just an act.
[Daniels:] I work in adult films. We're not really known for our acting.
[Unidentified Male:] Just tell me what do you need for this to all go away?
[Daniels:] A resignation.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, right. Being President is like doing porn, once you do it, it's hard to do anything else. Besides, my poll numbers are finally up, and speaking of polls being up.
[Daniels:] Donald.
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, come on, we'll always have shark week. I solved North and South Korea, why can't I solve us?
[Daniels:] Sorry, Donald. It's too late for that. I know you don't believe in climate change, but a storm's a coming, baby.
[Unidentified Male:] I've never been so scared, and so horny at the same time. Live from New York it's Saturday Night.
[Daniels:] Live from New York it's Saturday Night.
[Lemon:] That's...
[Ellison:] You're not going to come to me.
[Lemon:] Do you think the first lady sees that? That's got to be tough for her, the spouse, anyone that's in do you think she see this stuff?
[Ellison:] It's tough, ad funny to everyone except for her, probably.
[Wright:] On a serious note, we always turn to first ladies when it comes to presidential misconduct. This is funny, but really we're asking questions about Melania Trump when the President is the one misbehaving. And we always do this with political spouses. And I wish we could do a little better with that hold the President accountable, not his wife, for his misbehavior.
[Lemon:] Did you guys, I'm sure you saw "The Washington Post" revealing very revealing piece today about Melania Trump, it's called Inside Melania Trump's complicated White House life: Separate schedule, different priorities. And I just want to read a part of the piece. It says, the Trumps are often apart even during their free time according to several people who know the couple's schedules. At Mar- a-Lago on holidays and weekends, the President golfs and dines with politicians, business executives, and media personalities on the patio, while Melania is often nowhere to be seen. According to several current former aides, the President and First Lady often do not eat together in the White House either. They spend very little to no time together, said one longtime friend of the President. So she's seen as a separate entity from him, very independent, if reporting is true.
[Ellison:] Right.
[Lemon:] Maybe that's why her numbers are higher, that she's just separated herself and said, you know what, I'm going to take on cyberbullying, in your face.
[Ellison:] Well, I mean, she has said for a long time that she gives her husband his space. She they're both very independent from one another. That story started with he's waking up at 5:30 in the morning, and checking out what's on cable news, and she is getting their son, Barron, ready for school. We've known from the beginning that she's very dedicated to Barron, and less concerned with the political life in Washington. I do think that people asked me, do you think she's trolling him with her cyberbullying focus? And I think that is probably not. I think what she's actually doing is she's recognizing that she does recognize that could be something that people say, oh, that's so ironic. It's so absurd that that would be your cause. But I think she's actually dedicated to it, and so she's decided she's going to do it no matter what it is that he does, even though it's absurd to be having that as your cause, and having your husband be the most powerful cyberbullier on the planet.
[Lemon:] And she's I mean, as a mom, she would know, and all moms know about the cyberbullying, at least when your child is of a certain age. And that's certainly something that would be relevant to her. It's just the irony.
[Ellison:] Right. The irony is big.
[Lemon:] Remember, Douglas, in the beginning we were like who's the real first lady? People were saying is it Ivanka, is it Melania? But it seems like Ivanka's role has reduced lately, and Melania's moving up.
[Brinkley:] I think Melania's the one that the American public's infatuated with. I think if she really hones in not only the cyberbullying, but on the opioid crisis in the Midwest, and starts showing up in elementary schools in Ohio, and Michigan, Wisconsin, and talk about public health, and how not to be on drugs, a kind of low- grade Nancy Reagan just say no. But really aiming at younger people, I think her numbers will continue to go up, and she's also a victim, not just a victim of Stormy Daniels, but, you know, over a dozen women charging sexual harassment against the President. Rudy Giuliani inferred over the weekend there may be more women. If I'm Melania Trump, I'm not watching Saturday Night Live. I'm not watching a lot of news program. I'm trying to keep my son away from the humiliation of what's happening right now.
[Lemon:] Douglas, Sarah, thank you. It wasn't so bad.
[Wright:] Thank you.
[Lemon:] Your maiden voyage.
[Wright:] No, I loved it. This is great. Thank you.
[Lemon:] Thank you, Lauren. When we come back, the President said he'll announce tomorrow if he's going to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal. If he does, would he be playing right into Vladimir Putin's hands? I'm going to talk to a former U.S. Ambassador to Russia.

[Vause:] Welcome back everybody. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause with the headlines this hour. Turkey's economic downtown is having a ripple effect on global markets. Stocks in the U.S., Asia and Europe were all down on Monday as the Turkish currency, the Lira continued to tumble. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is blaming so-called economic terrorists on social media. Accusing them of trying to harm Turkey by spreading false reports. Still, no public comment from the U.S. president after last week's Saudi air strike in Yemen which killed 40 school children, instead of three-star general will press Riyadh for a transparent investigation. A mass funeral was held Monday for dozens of the victims that the Saudi's say were killed in a legitimate military operation and denies targeting civilians. And the president of the United States visited a New York military base on Monday, signing into law defense bill named after the ailing Senator John McCain. Trump thanked multiple members of Congress except one, John McCain, as well no other two do not like each other despite both being from the same Republican Party. Senator McCain is suffering from a rare brain cancer.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] And the President of the United States visited a New York military base on Monday signing into law a defense bill named after the ailing Senator John McCain. Trump thanked multiple members of Congress except one John McCain. It is well known the two do not like each other despite both being from the same Republican Party. Senator McCain is suffering from a rare brain cancer. Well, there will also be no thanks from Donald Trump also for his former aide, Omarosa Manigault-Newman. Like many others she's written a book about her experience working in and getting fired from the White House. But unlike many others in the past, Omarosa has some secret recordings of the President and his chief of staff to name a few. Kaitlan Collins has details.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] President Trump addressing soldiers at Fort Drum.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I'm here today to sign our new defense bill into law.
[Collins:] As former White House staffer Omarosa Manigault-Newman escalates her war with the administration revealing she recorded her conversations with the President.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Omarosa what's going on. I just saw in the news that you're thinking about leaving. What happened?
[Omarosa Manigault-newman, Former White House Staffer:] General Kelly General Kelly came to me and said that you guys wanted me to leave.
[Trump:] No. Nobody even told me about it.
[Collins:] Omarosa breaching major security protocols secretly taping her firing by John Kelly in the White House Situation Room. One of the most secure places in Washington with no devices allowed.
[General John Kelly, White House Chief Of Staff:] I think it is important to understand that if we make this a friendly departure, we can look all be you know, you can look at your time here in the White House as a year of service to the nation. And then you can go on without any type of difficulty in the future relative to your reputation.
[Collins:] Trump tweeting today that despite intense pressure to fire Omarosa, he kept her around because "she only said great things about me" adding "Wacky Omarosa skipped work, missed meetings and was a vicious colleague," despite promising this on the campaign trail.
[Trump:] We're going to get the best people in the world.
[Collins:] Asked about Omarosa over the weekend Trump said this.
[Trump:] Low life. She's a low life.
[Collins:] Omarosa had no defined role in the West Wing but raked in nearly $200,000 tax-payer funded dollars and carried the title assistant to the President. She's also claiming the Trump 2020 campaign offered her a $15,000 a month position if she agreed to keep silent. Something she said she refused to do. Trump also admitting for the first time she signed an NDA, writing on Twitter, "Wacky Omarosa already has a fully-signed nondisclosure agreement." When CNN reported that senior staff signed NDAs earlier this year, the White House denied it. But Kellyanne Conway said this yesterday.
[Kellyanne Conway, Counselor To The President:] We have confidentiality agreements in the West Wing absolutely we do. And why wouldn't we
[Collins:] One White House official telling CNN they don't consider Omarosa's recordings to be a national security threat but noting, they're worried she wasn't the only staffer recording conversations. All this, as Omarosa threatened more trouble for the White House.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you have more recordings?
[Newman:] Oh, absolutely.
[Unidentified Male:] Are you planning on releasing them?
[Newman:] I don't know. I'm going to watch to see. They've been threatening legal action. They're trying to figure out how to stop me. I'm expecting that they're going to retaliate and so I'm just going to stand back and wait.
[Collins:] Now Omarosa is denying that she signed the White House version of a nondisclosure agreement so it is unclear which nondisclosure agreement that the President was referring to in his tweet. What we do know that Omarosa has done is create a sense of paranoia here in the West Wing. People who long suspected that she was recording their conversations, and now those conversations seem to be coming to light and Omarosa is only promising that there could more. Kaitlan Collins, CNN the White House.
[Vause:] Well, much of the focus on this story has been about the politics and the fallout for the President. There's potentially a much bigger issue here for the White House and what appears to be a gob-smacking security breach which in any other administration would be a major controversy in and of itself. For more, we're joined now by CNN analyst Juliette Khayyem former assistant secretary in the Department of Homeland Security during the Obama administration. Juliette good to see you.
[Juliette Khayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Good to see you.
[Vause:] Ok. Let's start this out with, you know, by saying we're assuming that all of this happened the way Manigault-Newman said it did. You know ok, so leave it at that. Here's the statement which was issued by the White House press secretary Sarah Sanders. "The very idea a staff member would sneak a recording device into the White House Situation Room shows a blatant disregard for our national security and then to brag about it on national television further proves a lack of character and integrity of this disgruntled former White House employee." It's a rare day but Sanders is actually 100 percent right in what she says but that statement doesn't deal with the other half of it which is how this actually happened in the first place.
[F1:] That's exactly right. I mean look, Omarosa took advantage of the blatant disregard for security procedures that were established by the President himself. I mean we've seen throughout the administration whether it is the use of his unsecure cell phone or the lack of permanent security clearances for some of the top staff or the way he is very loose with the fact he brings, you know, Russians into the Oval Office to discuss, you know, covert operations. The what we call in my world the sort of, you know, security culture begins at the top. And we haven't seen with it this White House. So Omarosa's just basically steps into that vacuum and takes advantage of a White House that has already sort of essentially let its guard down.
[Vause:] And just to back up a little. How much can you tell us about the specific security arrangements in place in the situation which is the White House one, not Wolf Blitzer's?
[F1:] Right.
[Vause:] You know, this was meant to be the most secure part of the West Wing which presumably supposedly makes it one of the most secure places in the world, or at least in theory.
[F1:] Right. That'right. So the Situation Room is what is called a SCIF, it's a secure, compartmentalized room which essentially means that you do not bring anything into the room that has the capacity to be compromised because the room itself is secure. So you just basically don't bring in cell phones, beepers or whatever else. So when you are invited so I was in an agency so when you're invited to the Situation Room, you put your phone into essentially just a cubby. You take a number and you walk into the Situation Room just with paper and pen. That's essentially all you should really have to discuss whatever the security or safety issue is of the day. I will tell you though that that whole process is sort of self- executing. In other works, you know, to work for the President of the United States or for a cabinet secretary, to go through the security clearance process, assumes a level of sort of preservation for classified information for the secrets of your country. So it's not like you get frisked on your way in. I mean there's just an assumption that people will behave with the country's interests in mind. We have not seen that with this White House. And so essentially, you know, she's in the Situation Room. She's bringing in a phone that can be compromised on the way out. We have no idea the security features on this phone. Does it even have dual authentication? Any of those issues and she brings it in, we assume does a tape-recording from there.
[Vause:] Ok. So a lot of people are, you know, obviously questioning Omarosa's credibility. But when you put it in context with everything else that we know about the President and others who are working at the White House and within that security culture that this administration has which doesn't seem to place a high importance on security, that all comes with some pretty obviously consequences.
[F1:] That's right. I mean there's sort of two takeaways from this that I think is sort of bigger than, you know, Omarosa and Trump and them fighting, you know, over Twitter. I think one is that it would be inconceivable that secrets have not been disclosed at this stage. The leaking and the tape recordings and the phones in the wrong places and the briefing that aren't occurring in secure rooms all of it. It would be hard to believe that this White House has not been sort of negligent in how it is retaining our secrets. And then the bad side of that so that's just negligence the bad of that is, of course, the rest of the world is watching. This isn't a fight between a former staffer and the President. Those vulnerabilities are noted by our enemies as well as our allies about what might be compromised, ways that they could take advantage of that. And certainly the drama that surrounds this White House in terms of the personnel each of those people is potentially an access point for foreign entity, for even a even an ally who might want to get more information about Trump or the inner workings of the national security apparatus. And so, you know, it is not just us watching. It is the Chinese and the Russians and even, you know, the British or whoever else. And that's a big vulnerability that's just being played out on television at this stage.
[Vause:] Yes.
[F1:] I know. I know.
[Vause:] Juliette thanks.
[F1:] What can I tell you?
[Vause:] Yes. Good to see you. Thank you.
[F1:] Good to see you. I have to say one thing. When Omarosa and your national security expert are combined, it's a bad day.
[Vause:] It's a weird day. And there's lots of it.
[F1:] It's a weird day. I'll see you soon.
[Vause:] Cheers. Next on NEWSROOM L.A., medically-kidnapped after the world-renowned Mayo Clinic saved her life, an 18-year-old girl says she was then held against her will.

[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] the U.K. will remain unconditionally committed to maintaining Europe's security. And the comprehensive new economic partnership we seek, will underpin our shared commitment to open economies and free societies in the face of those who seek to undermine them. Chief among those today of course is Russia. In a recent speech, President Putin said that while the interests of states do not always coincide, strategic gains cannot be made at the expense of others. When a state fails to observe universal rules of conduct and pursues its interest at any cost it will provoke resistance and disputes will become unpredictable and dangerous. I say to President Putin, I agree, but it is Russia's actions which threaten the international order on which we all depend. I want to be clear about the scale and nature of these actions. Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea was the first time since the second world war that one sovereign nation has forcibly taken territory from another in Europe. Since then Russia has fermented conflict in the Donbass. Repeatedly violated the national air space of several European countries and mounted a sustained campaign of cyber espionage and disruption. This has included meddling in elections and hacking the Danish Ministry of Defense and the Bundestag among many others. It is seeking to weaponize information. Deploying its state run media organizations to plant fake stories and Photoshopped images in an attempt to sew discord in the West and undermine our institutions. So, I have a very simple message for Russia, we know what you are doing, and you will not succeed. Because you underestimate the resilience of our democracies. The enduring attraction of free and open societies and the commitment of western nations to the alliances that bind us. The U.K. will do what is necessary to protect ourselves and work with our allies to do likewise. That is why we are driving reform of NATO, so that the vital alliance is better able to deter and counter hostile Russian activity. It is why we have stepped up our military economic support to Ukraine. It is why we are strengthening our cybersecurity and looking at how we tighten our financial regimes to ensure the prophets of corruption cannot flow from Russia into the U.K. So, we will take the necessary actions to counter Russian activity. But this is not where we want to be and not the relationship with Russia we want. We do not want to return to the cold war or to be in a state of perpetual confrontation. So, whilst we must beware, we also want to engage. Which is why in the coming months the foreign secretary will be visiting Moscow, for there is another way. Many of us here looked at post- Soviet Russia with hope. Because we know that a strong and prosperous Russia which plays by the rules, would be in the interests of the United Kingdom, Europe and the world. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, Russia has the reach and the responsibility to play a vital role in promoting international stability. Russia can and I hope one day will choose this different path. But for as long as Russia does not, we will act together to protect our interests and the international order on which they depend. But the international order on which we depend faces other threats, including the challenge of regions where it is the absence of strong states, that allows instability and conflict to threaten the global order. And nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle East. We see the spillover effects of this instability in the challenge of mass migration and to humanitarian crises in countries like Yemen. And we see it more starkly of all with the threat from Daesh and Islamic terrorism. Britain is at the forefront of international efforts in the fight against this terrorism. From the battlefields in Syria and Iraq, to tackling the ideologues who fuel the hatred of Islamic extremism, and we will defeat it. But the conflicts we see in the Middle East are rooted in a complex mix economics, demographics, history and sectarian tension. In the past we have sought to remake countries or even entire regions at great cost to their people and ultimately to our own willingness to intervene when necessary. Of course, we must never be paralyzed by the myths that armed intervention is due to fail and the U.K. is not and will not be afraid to deploy its hard power where necessary. Indeed, this is happening around the world as I speak, from our world leading covert agencies to over 1,000 troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, to our Royal Air Force operating in the skies over Syria and Iraq and our Royal Navy patrolling the waters of the Gulf. But as we look to the future, it is the strength and stability of our partners that will define the trajectory of the region. So, if we are to achieve enduring stability in the Middle East, let's make an offer which supports both the long-term security and prosperity of our key partners and encourages them to be champions of the global order. As we are doing in countries from Saudi Arabia to Jordan, we will provide support to help and defend and protect their borders and their cities from external aggression, from terrorists to Iranian backed proxies. We will step up our efforts together with our European and American allies to help them not just contain but solve conflicts in the region. From seeking political solutions in Yemen and Libya, to bolstering a united Iraq, and working towards a two state solution in the Middle East peace process. As part of this, why we will stand firm in our support for the Iran nuclear deal, we are also determined to counter destabilizing Iranian actions in the region and their ballistic missile proliferation, working with the United States, France and Germany in particular. And drawing on the full capability of government and private sector, we make a long-term commitment to work with our partners to as they seek to reform their own economies. From Jordan as it deals with the challenges of refugees from Syria and which I will be visiting again later this month. To countries across the Gulf, undertaking social and economic transformation, for these reforms can provide far reaching opportunities for the people of the region and the wider world. As part of these efforts, we have champion steps towards greater rights and openness. Insistent on the direction of travel. Working with our partners in the region and recognizing that each country must find its own path. And this credible and coherent offer of support and partnership is a matter of urgency. As we see from the events of the last few weeks, from Lebanon to the GCC dispute. Our partners see the threats they face as immediate and are straining for the means to tackle them. So, it is in all of our interests to get this right. To bring long-term stability, long-sought stability to the Middle East. Ensure these growing economies can play their full role in the global system and re-enforce a rules-based international order. And at the same time as dealing with threats to the global order from state and regional instability, we must also step up to the challenge of ensuring that free markets and open economies deliver fair and equitable growth for all. As I argued at this banquet last year, free market economies have delivered unprecedented levels of wealth and opportunity. But they are losing popular support because they are leaving far too many people behind. The answer cannot be to turn our backs on the free market economy, which with the right rules and behaviors, is the greatest agent of collective human progress ever created. For it is when countries make the transition from closed restricted, centrally planned economies to open free market policies that we see live expectancy rise and infant mortality fall. Incomes rise and poverty fall, access to education rise, and illiteracy fall. Indeed it is the open free market economies which are the only sustainable means of increasing the living standards of everyone in a country. So, our challenge is to ensure that is exactly what they do. That is why here in Britain, we are building a modern industrial strategy that will help to bring the benefits of our trade to every part of our country. It's why we will act as a voice for free trade at the WTO. And also continue our efforts, including as I set out this year at the G 20, to reform the international trading system. To ensure that trade is not just free, but fair. Fair between countries and fair for the poorest countries. But as we all know, global economic growth is increasingly being driven by emerging economies and power houses in the east. And Africa's population growth means its significant will also only increase in the decades ahead. So, the West cannot right the rules of this century on its own. It is our partnerships with the countries of Asia and Africa in particular that will define the course the world takes. That is why I have asked the new international development secretary to build on the work of her predecessor, by making one of her first priorities a review of how the whole of government, together with the private sector can best support African aspirations for trade and growth. It is why we will use our relationships with the commonwealth and the summit here next year to work with partners in Africa, Asia and beyond, in building consensus and taking practical steps towards a global economy that works for everyone. And it is why I'm also clear that we will continue to increase our investment in Asia. I am committed to maintaining the golden era of our relationship with China. Not just as a vital trading partner, but also as a fellow permanent member of the Security Council whose decisions together with ours will shape the world around us. And I'm committed to deepening our partnerships with countries across Asia. Where I believe that Britain's global offer can have a hugely beneficial impact in ensuring that the region's potential is fully realized. That includes tackling the problems in the region today, such as North Korea. Where we have played a leading role in securing sanctions in response to the regime's outrageous proliferation of nuclear weapons. And it includes continuing to step up our efforts to respond to the desperate plight of Rohingya. Brought home to us again on our TV screen so graphically today with heartbreaking images of young children emaciated and pleading for help. This is a major humanitarian crisis, which looks like ethnic cleansing. And it is something for which the Burmese authorities, and especially the military, must take full responsibility. The U.K. is already the largest donor in response to this crisis and we will continue to play a leading role in bringing the international community together, working through the U.N. And with regional partners to do everything possible to stop this appalling and inhuman destruction of the Rohingya people. And beyond the immediate challenges of today, we must also invest now in longer-term security partnerships in Asia, such as those I have launched with Japan and India over the last year. And which we will look to develop further with countries across the region. Lord Mayor, as we look to the future, one of the biggest aspects of a global Britain will be our soft power and crucially that includes British business. Where open markets thrive, and the rule of law holds sway, British companies prosper. And they take in their DNA a way of doing business that brings not only commercial but wider benefits of good governance, respect for the law, corporate and social responsibility. So, as a global Britain makes its offer to the world, we are also offering the certainty and the competence of the high standards you set. The frame work of rules you follow. The values you live by and the ethos and culture you create. You are the bearers of a certain idea of economic order upon which the last century of growth has been based. As I believe the next will be based. So, you have a vital role to play. To honor the great tradition of your livery companies, by meeting that profound responsibility, not just to do business, but to advance the values, rules and standards on which good business and global security and prosperity depend. To champion the deepest trade links and open markets in Europe and support a new economic partnership with the EU that will be in all of our interests to ensure western strengths. To seek out and secure new markets from the Gulf to East Asia. Driving growth and productivity at home. Embodying British dynamism and expertise abroad. And giving proof to our firmly held faith in open markets and fair competition as the best route to lasting stability, security and prosperity. And I am confident that you can do this. For while our partners around the world want our support as a global power, they want something else too. They want what you bring. They want expertise. They want reliable partners for the long-term. They want the legal services, the accountancy services and the finance in which this great city of London leads the world. Because your engagement and your investments are the ultimate kite mark of confidence, a signal to the world that a country is a credible partner an open for business. So, Lord Mayor, these are challenging times, but I am confident that a global Britain has the ability and indeed the responsibility to rise to the moment, to work together to secure the best possible Brexit deal. A deal that is not just good for Britain and good for the EU, but also strengthens the liberal values we hold dear. And to work together to adapt and defend the rules based order on which our security and prosperity depends. For this is fundamental to our success, to that of our partners, and that of the world. So, let us step up to the task, and let us do so together with a confidence and conviction of a truly global Britain.
[Bianna Gologryga, Cnn:] And you've been listening to the British Prime Minister speaking at the Lord Mayor's banquet. A wide-ranging topics that she covered there. She's taken the opportunity, however, to focus on the threat of Russia. Warning that Moscow is a global threat that is trying to turn information into a weapon. Diana Magnay is in London with more. And as I mentioned, Diana, wide ranging, talking about the Middle East, talking about Brexit, talking about a global Britain. What does that mean? Because she kept going back to that phrase, global Britain.
[Diana Magnay, Cnn Correspondent:] Well she certainly has grand aspirations four what global Britain post Brexit means and that is that it will be upholding the liberal rules based order that it will be a bastion of the values that make Britain and British companies great. And that it will be continuing to make its imprint in preserving peace in the Middle East, or at least in trying to maintain it. That it will be attempting to reassure European and trans-Atlantic allies that its commitment to collective security in the form of NATO, these kinds of things. I mean it did feel to me as though there was an elephant in the room in terms of being more specific about Brexit. If you think about who her audience is, she's talking to the Lord Mayor of London who is the representative of the city of London around the world. And therefore, to an audience who is desperate to hear from her, that for example, she will give them a Brexit deal that they can accommodate, that will be good for business, that they will have a transitional arrangement, and if you think of frankly, the mess that she is in domestically, politically and in terms of Brexit, this does sound very, very highfalutin, to be bombasting Russia. To be talking about Britain's grand role on the world stage Post Brexit, when there's a lot of leg work to be put in to get there -Bianna.
[Gologryga:] When she can't even seem to keep her own cabinet together. Of course, this coincides with meeting that she had today with British business leaders. London of course, voting to remain in the EU. Let me ask you one more question though about something that seemed pointed directly at President Trump. At a time when the president is trying to bring the United States off of the global playing field, at least as a leader in that respect. She said, the role for the U.S. as shaping a global order is as important now as it has ever been. That seem directed at Donald Trump.
[Magnay:] Absolutely, I mean she seemed to have clear messages for important world leaders, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, the both of them. I think that Britain still and Teresa May believes that there is an important trans-Atlantic relationship that Britain and the U.S. have. And she clearly feels that she has a sort of moral duty to enforce upon the U.S. President, you know, his place in these international rules based order which she feels Britain has such an important role in trying to maintain.
[Gologryga:] That's right, Diana. Her message to Vladimir Putin, we quote, we know what you our doing and you will not succeed. You underestimate the West and democracy. Powerful words from the Prime Minister. Diana, thanks so much for joining us. We will have more on Teresa May's political struggles later in the program. For now, will be back with more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in just a moment.

[Anderson:] You're watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Becky Anderson. Welcome back. It is 7:20 in the UAE. That is where we are based. 11:20:00] In Guatemala it is known as the volcano of fire. And this weekend it tragically lived up to its name and unbelievable almost apocalyptic scene there as cars try to outrun a cloud of ash from the Fuego volcano. Rivers of lava swept through villages and fields, 25 people confirmed dead and searches are looking for others who are still missing. Well, the eruption sent people running for their lives with just the clothes on their backs. CNN's Patrick Oppmann following all of this from Havana, Cuba, for us. What do you know at this point?
[Patrick Oppmann, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, three days of mourning have been declared for the entire country of Guatemala. As Guatemalans try to come to grips with this terrible eruption, explosion that took place yesterday. You know, this is a very active volcano, Becky. In February there was an eruption, but it did not cause any injuries or fatalities. And here some of the witnesses described what happened, they really didn't have any time to evacuate, to prepare. They had to run from their houses as these rivers of lava and mud came pouring into their communities. As they said, huge rocks that were on fire came crashing down on their homes. And rescuers have still not been able to get into every town that was hit. So, while the government says there are 25 dead, tens more who have been injured or missing. Expect those numbers to rise because only now are they getting into towns nearest the volcano that were hard hit. The absolute breath of this disaster is really hard to take in. It's expected to eventually impact over a million people. More than 3,000 people had to leave their homes 25 miles away from the volcano. In the Guatemalan city airport was closed down because the ash was considered a danger to aviation. So, this is a disaster that's going to have a major impact. And it may not be over. This volcano could erupt at any time, Becky. People are being told to stay away.
[Anderson:] Patrick Oppmann is in Havana covering the story for us and those images really telling that story. As we are seeing the dangers from the volcano not over. Let's cross to Atlanta and check in with CNN's meteorologist Chad Myers. You know, as we consider these images, what have you been learning about what's happening and what could happen next?
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist:] Well, it was an explosive eruption. Unlike what's happening in Hawaii, Kilauea, where the lava is just flowing out. This is like a champagne cork exploding out of the top of a champagne bottle. Not just oozing, coming over the side. So, we had lava, ash and soot 10,000 meters in the sky when this erupted. It's a strata volcano along the ring of fire. Similar volcanoes go all the way around the Pacific Ocean. In fact, 450 of them at current count. But this was the story, the ash cloud in the sky, people breathing in the ash, getting away from what we call a pyroclastic flow as well, moving at 700 kilometers per hour down this mountain. So, ash going up, pyroclastic flow going down in obviously, lava coming out of it as well. Taking to a visible satellite. This is a satellite. It's visible because this is what the satellite is truly seeing. You can see the darkness in the cloud cover. Now, they're just clouds here, but watch there's a brown mass right there that comes out and into the cloud cover and that's all ash. And they're cleaning up the airport here in Guatemala City because you cannot have ash on the runway. If it gets sucked into a jet engine that jet engine will come to a complete grinding halt. It's pumice, it's lava, it's sand. You don't want sand in your engine. So, something else here. Look at the other lava, the ash fall, here. This is the concern about today. Not so much that there is going to be another eruption, certainly that could happen. What is going to happen is that is going to get rained on now in this ash. It could be a couple meters deep. It's going to get wet and is going to start sliding down hill like a big mudslide. It's called a lahar. It's the most dangerous thing now that these people face, because there could be 150 millimeters of rainfall making mud to go down all of the hills until it eventually washes away Becky.
[Anderson:] Chad, yes, amazing. Remarkable stuff, we're going to stay on the story and keep our viewers up to date. Thank you, sir. A major military shakeup in North Korea. The country's top three military officials have reportedly been replaced just over a week before what is a historic summit between Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump that we are promised. But the show must go on and preparations are still underway for the June 12 meeting in Singapore. The first time a sitting U.S. president will meet with a North Korean leader. Alexandra Field is live in Seoul, in South Korea. And question, when is a summit not a summit? It appears the answer is when it ends up being nothing more than a meet and greet, a photo opportunity effectively. Is that what this is likely to end up being and if so, what should we make of that?
[Alexandra Field Cnn Correspondent:] Right, well, the summit's biggest success just be that the fact that this summit happening. And certainly, President Donald Trump has lowered expectations to the point of calling this a get to know you meeting with the real work potentially coming after that. It certainly moves off the mark of what we heard from the State Department just last week when they were talking about getting some kind of historic gesture from North Korea. Something they had never done before and now you got these words like, I get to know you meeting. But look, Becky, from the North Korean perspective, even if it is a get to know you meeting, it's a win already. You got a North Korean dictator coming face-to-face, as you point out, with an acting U.S. President. This is certainly giving the North Korean leader some legitimacy that he craves. It's also opened up the door to a flurry of diplomatic activity for North Korea. You have these two meetings with the Chinese President already. You had the Russian foreign minister traveling to Pyongyang to meet with Kim Jong-un. Now news that Kim Jong-un will travel to Moscow to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin possibly as soon as September. And news that Kim Jong-un plans to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad who could be the first foreign leader now to travel to Pyongyang. So, in the run-up to this summit, a summit that we don't know what it will accomplish if anything at this point other than this get to know you, North Korea is taking advantage of the timing. They are shoring up its closest relationships. And you got these other leaders in the region who are making sure that their voices are going to be heard as North Korea moves toward any potential negotiations here Becky.
[Anderson:] And not just regional leaders. Talking to reporters Sunday, U.S. Defense Secretary, James Mattis says American troops on the Korean Peninsula are staying put. Stand by.
[James Mattis, U.s. Defense Secretary:] . keeps coming up. Our troops strength on the peninsula I'll say it again, I'm not making news here. And the same thing, they're not going anywhere. It's not even a subject of the discussion. You know, at this stage they are there because of security conditions of ten years ago, five years ago, this era.
[Anderson:] And apologies for the quality of the sound. Important there that we get it on. Alex, how does what matters sit there about U.S. troops feed into the context that this meeting is taking place?
[Field:] Well, look, there are these big questions, because the U.S. has said that the goal of engaging in this kind of talk with North Korea is about working toward the ultimate goal which is, of course, complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization. But there are the huge outstanding questions of how that happens and how you get North Korea to agree to that and what kind of concessions North Korea would demand for that. You have the State Department saying just last week, Secretary Pompeo, himself, saying that they aren't going to talk about the shape or elements of a deal at this point. But it's raised a lot of questions in the region about whether troop levels would be on the table. And if there is some kind of lasting peace on the peninsula, if the U.S. troops levels would need to be maintained out here. Look, you've heard President Trump say it a couple of times and now you have heard secretary Mattis stayed as well, that troop levels are not on the table when it comes to this negotiation. Those are key words for allies like Japan. Allies that are warning the U.S. of an untrustworthy pass from North Korea when it comes to these kinds of conversations and negotiations. Countries like Japan do not want to see North Korea prematurely rewarded for doing nothing more than having a meeting. So, yes, what we can do right now is we can take at face value what the administration is saying. Which is that they're not going to negotiate when it comes to the presence of U.S. troops on the peninsula. But this is a question that will continue to come up because, Becky, you'll remember, even on the campaign trail, this is an issue that President Trump was talking about, candidate Trump at that time. The kind of spending the U.S. does on its defenses abroad. So, while it might not be part of this conversation it could come up again and that's why you have Secretary Mattis addressing the question right now.
[Anderson:] Reporter in Seoul, in South Korea, thank you. We are all watching the small but extremely important Jordan be pulled in 100 different directions, it seems. What's the real story for Jordan at home in the region and around the world? Only CNN can get you those kinds of answers. We speak to the country's Foreign Minister. Up next.

[Cooper:] A dramatic nationally televised speech Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his intelligence service had secured tens of thousands of documents as well as computer disk that prove Iran was in his words appraisingly lying about its nuclear weapons program, even as the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal was being negotiated. To emphasize its point, even further much of the speech was in English aimed at President Trump.
[Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister Of Israel:] This is a terrible deal. It should never have been concluded. And in a few days time, President Trump will decide, will make a decision on what to do with the nuclear deal. I'm sure he will do the right thing. The right thing for the United States, the right thing for Israel and the right thing for the peace of the world.
[Cooper:] Well President Trump has until May 12 to decide whether continue waiving sanctions on Iran that were lifted as part of the overall nuclear bargain. And after Netanyahu speech, President Trump says he is quote, "100% right to criticize the deal". Joining me now retired General Michael Hayden former CI director and former NSA director, who's the author of brand new book, "The Assault on Intelligence: American National Security and in Age of Lies" First of all, in this deal, I mean do you think there are grounds for the President to rip up the deal as he's been threatening to do base on what Netanyahu said.
[Michael Hayden, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Not based on this. This is all baked in. I mean we knew the Iranians were lying about the existence of this weapons program prior to 2003.
[Cooper:] This isn't new information
[Hayden:] No.
[Cooper:] deal
[Hayden:] No.
[Cooper:] what they're doing right now?
[Haydaen:] The outline, the ark, not new. Now he's got new details appears to have been a tremendous coupe on the part of Israeli intelligence getting additional information. But it doesn't change the plot line. They had a weaponization program until 2003. They denied it, they continued to lie about it. I complained during the negotiations, that we should have made them turn their cards face up with what we called PMDs, the previous military dimensions of the program. We didn't force it and so we just let it ride, gave them a whole pass. But we knew they were lying. That was baked into the original deal.
[Cooper:] So you're saying when it's baked into the original deal, meaning the U.S. knew they were lying and, therefore, made the deal so tough, it was it was based on the assumption that they're lying and this is how we verify it.
[Hayden:] It was based on the premise that they had a program. It was based on the premise that the program had made certain advances. It was based on the program based on the reality that they lied about the program. And, therefore, that shaped what we tried to negotiate.
[Cooper:] So in your opinion what Netanyahu just done doesn't change anything about the validity of the deal?
[Hayden:] No. Like I said, it was all baked in. I think we should have made them be more forthcoming but we knew they were lying at the time.
[Cooper:] I wonder what you make of North Korea, the movement with South Korea, the meeting with Kim Jong-un? I mean it's very dramatic to see him crossing over that border.
[Hayden:] Yeah.
[Cooper:] Do you buy what they are selling?
[Hayden:] Who?
[Cooper:] The North Koreans.
[Hayden:] Not yet. This is the fourth time we've gotten to this place.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Hayden:] We've done it with three previous administrations, and we've not had much success. So we'll see where it goes forward from here. Credit to the administration for getting here. That's really important, but we've only begun the hard work now.
[Cooper:] I want to ask you about your new book "The Assault on Intelligence." I mean is what Netanyahu is saying, is that an example of the assault on intelligence?
[Hayden:] Well, more much to the point, the White House after the Netanyahu speech issued a statement that Iran has a robust clandestine nuclear weapons program. Well that flies in the face of a national intelligence estimate that I was involved in, in 2007. And Anderson to the best of my knowledge, that remains the American estimate, is that that one chunk, no, not the centrifuges which was a separate issue, not the ICBMS, a separate issue, but actually constructing a weapon, that that had stopped in 2003 and I'm fond of saying that judgment then was based not on the absence of evidence, but on evidence absence. And I don't know of anything that's changed that, so it's going to be really interesting now what did the intel guys say about the press release that just came out of the White House?
[Cooper:] So, I mean, you're talking about the subtitle of the book is "American National Security in an Age of Lies."
[Hayden:] Yes.
[Cooper:] How does intelligence adapt to this age that we're in?
[Hayden:] It's really hard. So we've seen a pattern from the White House of saying things that intelligence just can't back up, and I'm being kind here. So you try to convince the President in closed sessions with regard to what you believe objective reality is. You know, it's not so much that you're not winning the argument in the process. It's that the decisions seem to be separated from the process. And you saw H.R. McMaster leave the White House a couple weeks ago. I mean, H.R. spent a year trying to connect the processes of government to the decision-making of the White House, and it just doesn't seem to have worked.
[Cooper:] Well that I mean that's a frightening statement that the decision-making is just divorced from the from the actual intelligence.
[Hayden:] So, for example, and this may be a minor issue, but it's current that press release tonight. In my life experience would have had the White House not ever issuing that without running it by the intel guys to make sure they could live with the statement. I don't see that pattern in this administration.
[Cooper:] But it's interesting. I mean we're at a point now where the folks on Capitol Hill almost ignore what the President is saying. It's sort of like, oh, he's just that guy, who's, you know, mumbling that stuff. It doesn't actually necessarily mean that's what the new policy is.
[Hayden:] You know, the American presidency is a powerful office. One of its great powers is the bully pulpit.
[Cooper:] Right.
[Hayden:] One of his great powers is what the President says. Now, you just told me that the American Congress just tunes it out. I don't know that the rest of the world does though, and that makes life hard.
[Cooper:] The you also write that the modern intelligence enterprise, which you obviously goes essential to the U.S. now seems at odds with important elements of American life.
[Hayden:] Yes.
[Cooper:] What do you
[Hayden:] We have collectively. We've talked about the administration, but, you know, the President's reflecting changes in our political culture. Well the Oxford Dictionary word of the year for 2016 was post-truth. Post-truth is defined as decision-making based on feeling and emotion rather than objective data, and I think we see that broadly throughout our society. I mean, you guys comment on it every night. How could people believe that? Political beliefs, political affiliations have now become articles of faith, and it's really hard to unseat a belief with facts if it wasn't based on facts to begin with.
[Cooper:] So what is I mean, how do you get back to I mean, look, obviously, there's been incredible intelligence failures over the years.
[Hayden:] Sure.
[Cooper:] So there's understanding why people be skeptical of American intelligence. Certainly what the President has said has not helped the you know, the confidence in American intelligence or a lot of institutions. What needs to change?
[Hayden:] So that's a point related to an earlier question. I mentioned in the book, you know, obviously everyone has got to follow their own conscience with regard to what does it say or don't say within or outside the administration. But more important than the individual, Anderson, is what you just suggested, preserving the institutions, and I fear what's going on now, particularly with justice and the FBI, but the intel community I think shares in this is the chiseling away at the institutions that service and on which we rely to preserve our liberty and security. That's the collateral damage to this struggle that's now going on.
[Cooper:] And that's not easily revealed.
[Hayden:] Once you begin chiseling away. I mean what will it take, and here's the danger I see. And so, I see folks in my tribe or in justice or FBI pushing back against what is an incredibly norm-busting administration, a norm-busting President, but in the pushing back, we have to be oh so careful that we don't bust our own norms. And so for my folks it might be in leaking. All right. And so we see this deterioration that's coming about because the broader dynamic within society. It scares me, and that's why I wrote the book.
[Cooper:] The book is "The Assault on Intelligence: American National Security in an Age of Lies." Very timely. Michael Hayen, thanks so much.
[Hayden:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] Coming up, breaking news. "The New York Times" is reporting Robert Mueller has at least four dozen questions he wants to ask the President about his ties to Russia and other topics. "The Times" obtained a list of the questions, the latest on that, next.

[King:] Get ready for Hillary Clinton in her own words. Her book on the 2016 campaign doesn't hit store shelves until next week. But CNN was able to obtain a copy of it. Clinton deals in a why she think she lost, who's to blame and the investigation of Russia meddling in the election. Clinton writes, "There's nothing I was looking forward to more than showing Putin that his efforts to influence our election and install a friendly puppet had failed. I know he must be enjoying everything that's happened instead. But he hasn't had the last laugh yet." That's just one excerpt from the book. Let's bring in CNN Senior White House Correspondent, Jeff Zeleny. Jeff, you covered the Clinton campaign. You've read the book. What did you learn?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, John, I think that the biggest take away, she places blame more than she ever has before and she also accepts more blame than she ever has before. And for a political candidate, someone who's gone in the public eye this long, that is big deal to accept a lot of blame and responsibility. Of course, plenty blame to go around in this campaign but she's just quite frankly that she missed the mood and the moment and misjudged the anger in the electorate. Of course, she takes some shots at Bernie Sanders as we've seen already, the President, of course. But she also I think the biggest value of this book, John, she offers a window into something that only she could see. This is one example here of that phone call with Donald Trump. It says this, "It was without a doubt one of the strangest moments of my life. I congratulated Trump and offered to do anything I could to make sure the transition was smooth. It was all perfectly nice and weirdly ordinary, like calling a neighbor to say you can't make it to his barbecue. It was mercifully brief. I was numb. It was all so shocking." And that of course is her description that early morning phone call on the day after the election into those early morning hours, John, when she realized she, of course, would not be the president. So, I think this book it's about 440 pages or so, a lot of this reflective. She talks about her marriage. She says quite frankly she will not run for office again. She hopes she'll be able to vote for the first woman president if this person agrees with her. She also, John, I thought offer interesting window. George W. Bush offered a phone call to her as she was making her concession speech the next day. He waited on the line until she finished shaking hands and that's when they talk. So, she had conversation with a Republican president calling her the morning after. So, it just gives sense of draw in motion on those days back in November, John.
[King:] All right. Most of them, whoever you think a George W. Bush, his manners, he takes this
[Zeleny:] No question.
[King:] Jeff Zeleny appreciate those insights. And Jeff just noted how uncomfortable just Hillary Clinton describes the phone call with now President Trump, then-President-elect Trump in the book. Let's go back to election night and parts of that moment.
[Trump:] I've just received a call from Secretary Clinton. She congratulated us, it's about us on our victory and I congratulated her and her family on a very, very hard fought campaign.
[John Podesta, Former Campaign Chairman To Hillary Clinton:] Everybody should head home. You should get some sleep. We'll have more to say tomorrow.
[King:] John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman there sending the crowd home. Remember, Hillary Clinton did not come out and speak to her supporters that night. She waited until the next day. A reminder of the surreal nature of election night, a reminder that's only Clinton discusses in the book. She also says this, "I can go back over my own shortcomings and the mistakes we made. I can take responsibility for all of them. You can blame the data, blame the message, blame anything you want but I was the candidate. It was my campaign. Those were my decisions." Cross to her for that. There are other things on the book people are going to disagree with but she was the candidate. These were her decisions and at least she straight up there says on me.
[Phillip:] Yes. You know, you played that moment of John Podesta coming out. I think I was there that night. It will live on in for me in my mind as the moment that really illustrated how numb she must have been, to make a decision like that to not show up that night, to not close the door on this campaign in a way and only do the next morning. It is really reflective of how hard it was for them. You know, I think it's interesting that this book is just going to kind of like for a lot of her supporters, an opportunity for them to share on her venting, to share in their collective grief. I'm not sure it will help anyone really move on, but I think she's a human being. I can think she has a right to her thought.
[Henderson:] Yes. And that's what we hadn't really seen from Hillary Clinton like how does she really feel. I mean, her talking about all that phone call and being numbed. And when you imagine, she's going to feel that way for maybe the rest of her life. I mean, there's sense of lost. This is what she had wanted for many years and got it really snatched away. I mentioned in her mind, she sees is that way. So this will be, you know, Hillary Clinton sort of the raw version that we hadn't seen.
[Lizza:] You know, I know from people who have talked to and have been around her in the months since she lost the election that she just spent so much of that time in classic Clinton fashion, studying, processing, trying to figure out what changed in America, what she did wrong and Trump did right to understand her lost. It was very evident if you read the book that that's what the books is about it. She cites a lot of political science and experts and really trying to make process how the rise of Trump happened and how she failed to stop it.
[King:] Is it snarky to raise this question on her book tour? She's going to Michigan and Wisconsin.
[Bender:] Really? Really? Yes. Well, I Really? I'm not sure on the, can she gets out there, but, you know, she was finally, right. She gets out there and see some of Trump country.
[King:] I guess that's a little mean. But it's just a fact, you know, that she'd been in Wisconsin, Michigan maybe during the campaign. We'll leave that for another day. Thanks for joining us on INSIDE POLITICS. We'll see you back here tomorrow. Wolf Blitzer up after a quick break.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] President Trump is going to be awarding the nation's highest military honor to a retired Army medic who risked his life several times in Vietnam and Laos to provide medical care to his wounded comrades while he was wounded himself. Retired Army Gary Mike Rose is being recognized for his courage while serving as a Green Beret medic with the 5th Special Forces Group during combat operations in September of 1970. Rose is credited with saving the lives of 60 wounded soldiers during four days of a brutal combat during a secret mission in Laos. That is why it has taken so long to get to this point. I want to bring in CNN's Jim Acosta to talk about this. He is there at the White House. This is the second Medal of Honor that the president will have awarded, Jim.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] That's right, Brianna. And this is one of those rare moments at the White House that is really absent of politics. It is really just aimed at honoring the heroic actions of our brave service members. And, as you said, as you laid it out beautifully just a few moments ago, retired Army Captain Gary Michael Rose performed an act of bravery that stands the test of time. This happened during a secret mission to Laos during the Vietnam War in September of 1970. It was such a secret mission, Brianna, from what we understand, he didn't talk about this until the '90s. So this mission was really kept under wraps for nearly two decades. And from what we understand, during the ceremony, you are not going to only see the president. As you are looking at these live pictures now, there is the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner but some of Captain Rose's colleagues, his fellow service members who were with him at the time. These are Special Forces soldiers. They will also be there in the room with him as he receives this honor. And, Brianna, I was just looking at a story in "Stars and Stripes" about this a few moment ago. Captain Rose did not want to receive this honor. He did not want to receive this kind of praise and was telling reporters late last week that he kind of wished this never happened. And so this just sort of underlines the bravery and the sacrifice that the men and women of the U.S. armed forces dedicate to this country on a daily basis. And it is remarkable when something like this over at the White House can take place without politics. And we will see that unfold shortly.
[Keilar:] Why did he say that, Jim? I think we understand when you have special operators doing their work, it is quiet work that they do and a lot of times you will never learn about it, because it is classified, as is this case. Why didn't he want to be acknowledged for his contribution?
[Acosta:] I think part of it is because of the secrecy of the mission. But, Brianna, you know from being a White House correspondent and covering these Medal of Honor ceremonies, in many cases, these service members, they come back and they're the ones who survived. And, yes, he saved, you know, many other soldiers on the battlefield that day, but some many don't come back. And what you hear time and again from so many of these veterans who sacrifice so much, but make it back home alive, is that they don't want to receive these types of honors, because they feel as if it takes away somewhat from the sacrifices made by those soldiers who didn't make it home, and so you often hear that. But looking at some of the stories about Captain Rose that have come out in recent days, some of the other people you are going to see in this room here today, people he saved out on the battlefield in Laos so many years ago, they're glad that he's receiving this honor, and hopefully we will see some of that as well.
[Keilar:] Hopefully, we will. All right, Jim Acosta is going to stay at the White House for us keeping an eye on things. And as soon as this begins you can see there this is already under way, people milling about ahead of this ceremony. But when this Medal of Honor ceremony begins, we are going to bring that to you live. You can see top White House officials, including White House Chief of Staff former Four-Star Marine General John Kelly, there in the room as well. The widow of a fallen soldier says she has nothing to say to his commander in chief, President Trump. In an emotional interview with ABC, Myeshia Johnson says the military did not allow her to see her husband, Sergeant La David Johnson's body, before she buried him, and President Trump's condolence call only broke her heart.
[Myeshia Johnson, Widow Of Killed U.s. Soldier:] Tell me that he's in a severe wrap, like, I won't be able to see him. I need to see him, so I would know that that is my husband. I don't know nothing. They won't show me a finger, a hand. I know my husband's body from head to toe, and they won't let me see anything. I don't know what's in that box. It could be empty, for all I know, but I need I need to see my husband. I haven't seen him since he came home. I heard him stumbling on trying to remember my husband's name. And that will hurt me the most, because if my husband is out here fighting for our country, and he risked his life for our country, why can't you remember his name? And that what is made me upset and cry even more, because my husband was an awesome soldier.
[Keilar:] President Trump responded immediately following Myeshia Johnson's interview with this treat. He said: "I had a very respectful conversation with the widow of sergeant La David Johnson and spoke his name from beginning without hesitation." The White House told CNN it has no plans to reach out to Sergeant Johnson's family again. And all of this comes as members of the Senate Armed Services Committee could be briefed on new details in the investigation into this Niger ambush that killed these four service members this Thursday. We do have a lot to discuss. Joining me now, Colonel Steve Warren. He's a CNN military analyst and former spokesman for the anti-ISIS coalition in Iraq. Colonel, what do you make of Ms. Johnson's account of not only the president's call, but the fact that she didn't get to see her husband's body before the burial? And, clearly, that's something weighing on her.
[Steve Warren, Cnn Military Analyst:] This is clearly, Brianna, is something weighing on Mrs. Johnson. And it's tragic and it's heartbreaking, sadly. In combat, sometimes, the damage that's done to our physical form is such that it simply can't be viewed in the public. I understand her desire. I understand her need to see her husband. And I certainly understand that there are going to be, you know, maybe some conspiracy theories out there. But I also have faith in the Army and the military's way they conduct business in Dover, and I know that it is Sergeant Johnson who will be interred in the coming days. And just the entire thing is heartbreaking and tragic.
[Keilar:] You know, Colonel, part of me thought as we have been going through this back and forth for the last few days that maybe Myeshia Johnson would speak and that maybe that would be the final word. That, I think was something that seemed appropriate to many people who have been following this story. And yet that's not what happened. She speaks out on "Good Morning America," and then the president tweets and disagrees with her. What did you make of that?
[Warren:] Well, I will be honest, Brianna. I don't understand why the president chose to tweet about this yet one more time today. I simply don't see the upside in taking a position against a grieving widow like this. I simply I don't see the upside. This is a woman who has had the most unimaginable loss strike her. And she's very vulnerable. She's clearly very young and her heart is broken. And, in my view, she can say whatever she wants to say right now, and what we should do is thank her for her service and for her sacrifice and for the service and sacrifice of her husband. So I simply don't see the upside of taking up any position against Mrs. Johnson. There's just there's no gain in it at all.
[Keilar:] Colonel, the White House is saying that they're not going reach out to the Johnson family again, which I can see that that may not be productive, right, that they have certainly had a major disagreement over how effective it was the last time. But, with that in mind, if it's not the White House, how should the government, the military be reaching out to Myeshia Johnson? And, presumably, I would imagine they are reaching out to try to provide some comfort.
[Warren:] The Army does a fantastic job of providing support to grieving families. In fact, there is a casualty officer who is assigned to Mrs. Johnson and to that family, and he will be there with that family until she no longer needs that casualty officer there. And then he will remain even after that. There is a lot of everything, from the grieving process to the simple and maybe mundane red tape process of benefits and the like. This casualty officer will be with her every step of the way. Our casualty officers are well-trained. They understand the rules, the regulations, and they also understand the human dimension and the human component to this. So I can assure you that the Army is providing terrific, first-class support to Mrs. Johnson, and, in fact, we know she mentioned that the casualty officer was even in the car during that phone call. We have seen some photos of him maybe from the back as he handed her a flag. So we know that the Army is going to provide that much-needed support. From the higher levels and from the highest levels of government, my view, really, if there is a miscommunication, if you miscommunicate to someone and you say words that you intended to make them feel better, but you accidentally made them feel worse, then, in my view, it never hurts to simply pick up the phone and say, hey, I'm sorry. But these are political decisions, I suppose, and these are made at the White House.
[Keilar:] And we are I do want to let our viewers know we are waiting. The president is going to award a Medal of Honor, which is going to be a phenomenal sight. We're going to go take you there to the White House as soon as this begins. He is going to be honoring an Army medic who served during the Vietnam War, retired Army Captain Gary Rose of Huntsville, Alabama. That's what we're keeping our eye on there on the screen to the right there, Colonel. We also heard from Myeshia Johnson. She says she doesn't know what happened in the last 48 hours of her husband's life. We know that senators are going to be briefed on Thursday. What could they learn in that briefing, as so few details are coming out?
[Warren:] The details are still emerging. They may be able to learn it's difficult to know exactly where we are in this investigation. The first thing the investigators, both the military and now the FBI is part of the investigation the first thing these investigators will try to do is piece together a reliable timeline and what happened when, where were people positioned on the battlefield, so they will likely learn more details of the specific tactical situation before, during and after the ambush. They will likely learn who last saw Sergeant Johnson, where, when, what his condition was. And at least we hope they will learn that much. And then they will likely learn what some of the evacuation procedures were. It's difficult to know at this point if they were able to get a full intelligence picture yet. That can take a little bit longer. We will have to go through and review intercepts, review satellite photos, review all the different lines of intelligence to come in before any operation and figure out what the intelligence picture of the battlefield was before the operation started.
[Keilar:] Senator Lindsey Graham has talked about how he didn't realize there were that many U.S. troops in Niger. Let's take a listen.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I can say this to the families. They were there to defend America. They were there to help allies. I didn't know there was 1,000 troops in Niger. John McCain is right to tell the military, because this is an endless war without boundaries, no limitation on time and geography, you have got to tell us more.
[Question:] You heard Senator Graham there. He didn't know we had 1,000 troops in Niger. Did you?
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] No, I did not.
[Keilar:] I mean, my goodness, Colonel, you have top congressional leaders unaware that there were there was this footprint in a country, keeping in mind that Special Forces are in many, many countries around the world. What do you think about that?
[Warren:] Well, the Special Forces are in many countries around the world. And Senator Graham is exactly right when he says they were defending America. I wonder. You know, the commander of the United States Africa Command, General Waldhauser, was on Capitol Hill only a few months testifying about his presence in Africa and about his operations in Africa. I know the previous president, Obama, President Obama notified Congress when these forces were initially sent into Niger. So it's a little bit of a chicken and egg here. I feel like the Congress has an oversight responsibility. Whether or not they asked the right questions during testimony really is something that is up to them. I feel like both the Pentagon and the last two administrations have to get their war powers notifications and over to Congress when it needs to be done. All that said, however, Africa has not been high on anyone's radar. We have been focused, kind of as a society, we have been thinking and talking and worried about the Middle East, about North Korea, so it's easy to understand how maybe they overlooked some of the specifics in Africa.
[Keilar:] Yes, it certainly is. All right, Colonel, thank you so much. And you will see on the side of your screen there, on the right side, any moment, the president is going to award the Medal of Honor to a Green Beret medic who served during the Vietnam War. We are going to take you live to the White House. We will get in a quick break, and we will be back in just a moment.

[Hala Gorani, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Hala Gorani live from CNN London. Thanks for joining us this hour. This is THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. A new chief of staff in the White House with an old headache for the American president. A fresh revelation in the Russia investigation, we'll get to that in a moment. Right now, this is the east room of the White House. We're waiting for Donald Trump, the American president. He's meeting this hour with small business owners to talk about creating jobs in America. We'll monitor any developments from that. But today's top story, the "Washington Post" reporting President Trump personally dictated his son's initial misleading statement about a meeting with a Russian lawyer despite repeated denials from the president's attorney and the White House. We have been in the last hour been updated by the White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She has confirmed that the president in fact had input in the statement.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] The president weighed in as any father would based on the limited information that he had. This is all discussion frankly of no consequence. There was no follow up. It was disclosed to the proper parties, which is how the "New York Times" found out about it to begin with. The Democrats want to continue to use this as a PR stunt and they are doing everything they can to keep this story alive and in the papers every single day.
[Gorani:] That was Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Of course, she's saying the president weighed in. You heard it there, but the president's own lawyers have said he didn't have anything to do with the drafting of that statement that initially suggested that the meeting was simply about a Russian adoption program. When after the fact e-mails from Donald Trump Jr. released by the president's eldest son himself revealed the fact that this was about opposition research on Hillary Clinton. Let's get the latest from Washington. Josh Rogin is a CNN political analyst and columnist for the "Washington Post," and also joining us is CNN's Dan Merica. So, Dan, I want to start with you. And Sarah Huckabee Sanders had very well-prepared facts and figures and statements about all the stories that she was asked about in the briefing room. She comes out today and said and confirms, yes, the president did weigh in on that statement about Don Jr.'s meeting with that lawyer.
[Dan Merica, Cnn Political Producer:] Yes, she weighed in by saying yes, he did. He did weigh in on that statement, which directly contradicted what President Trump's lawyer said after the meeting was first revealed. So, what you now have is the White House saying, yes, in fact, he did weigh in after the president's lawyer said he had no involvement at all. Sarah Huckabee Sanders did take some issue with the word dictation or dictate that the "Washington Post" used saying that the president did not dictate a statement. But what I was what really struck me in all of this is how it gets to the fact that President Donald Trump went against the advice of his aides and advisors and lawyers and actually worked on this statement with his son. It gets to this idea that President Trump thinks he is his best spokesperson. He is his best political adviser and that his gut instincts will get him out of anything. We've seen this throughout the campaign where he has gone against the advice he's getting in from experts because he thinks he can figure it all out. That again happened in this situation it seems on that flight from Hamburg, Germany back to the United States. It could get him in trouble, land him in legal trouble with the special counsel.
[Gorani:] Yes, because Josh Rogin, the initial statement was misleading at best, all right, it suggested that the meeting had nothing to do with the campaign or campaign issues. That this was about a Russian adoption program. Of course, later it was revealed that wasn't the case at all. With Sarah Huckabee Sanders essentially making this admission in the briefing room. What impact will it have on the White House's sort of management of this Russia investigative question that's been hanging over the White House from day one?
[Josh Rogin, Cnn Political Analyst:] It's just a continuation, another in a long line of instances showing that the White House doesn't really have a strategy to deal with the continuing revelations about this investigation. Now this will add to the list of things that all the investigators will have to look into. It represents another attempt by the White House to obfuscate what really happened and how they dealt with it. You know, there is also a total error in what Sarah Huckabee Sanders said. You know, she said that Donald Trump Jr. released the e-mails when in fact he released only after "The New York Times" already had them, was about to publish them. So, their entire narrative which is that there is nothing to see here is contradicted by their actions. You know, when the president of the United States is scrambling on a plane to work out his son's statement. And that shows a level of awareness that this meeting was a problem and their activities to shape the narrative throughout in the meeting show that they have not figured out exactly how they want to deal with it.
[Gorani:] Josh, it's going to lead to inevitably to questions about what President Trump knew about this meeting, right, when it happened shortly after it happened and not simply learning about it as he said many months later when it was reported.
[Rogin:] That's exactly right. Now, you know, in the end, this meeting may not prove to be evidence of any actual collusion. But what it is, is evidence of the Trump team trying to collude with the Russians. And if that in of itself is a subject of the investigation. Also, we know that the investigators are looking into members of the Trump team on allegation of obstruction and if they were trying if this was part of an attempt to obstruct the investigator's ability to get to the bottom of this meeting and that in of itself can become a subject of the investigation. So, whether or not President Trump knew about the meeting then, he's involved in it now, and that's not going to go away.
[Gorani:] All right. And the president, Dan Merica, once again tweeting about fake news. It's a regular occurrence, but this is happening after the publication of this "Washington Post" piece. Now one of the authors of the report had this to say about the White House's dismissal of the content of the reporting on this the drafting of the statement. Listen.
[Tom Hamburger, Reporter, "washington Post":] What you may not know is that we actually sent multiple detailed questions to Mr. Sekulow asking him to respond in some detail. Instead what we got is the rather broad denial. I understand others at the White House and the White House team may already have described our story as fake news. We have multiple sources and are confident in our reporting.
[Gorani:] And the "Washington Post" reporter there, Tom Hamburger, basically referring to the one of the lawyers of the president, Tom Sekulow, who has denied that the president dictated the statement, Dan?
[Merica:] Yes. He said it was total misinformation and the president has said multiple times [inaudible] about CNN or the "Washington Post" that this is total fake news, a total fabrication, the biggest witch-hunt in political history. You know, you got to pin him down at some point and say what is the witch- hunt? Is it the Senate investigations? Is it the House investigations? Is it the special counsel? You really can't get an answer out of the White House on that topic because they don't really have one. They don't have one to describe why the president thinks this is a witch-hunt when Republicans are going along with these investigations as well. And on the point that he sent detailed questions to the lawyers. The statement last night was the typical non-denial, denial. It's not denying the story or the facts in the story, but it's saying that it's misstated or misinformation. He didn't say the story was untrue. He just kind of obfuscated and muddied the waters a bit.
[Gorani:] And Josh, I would ask you about the sanctions bill there that was overwhelmingly passed on Capitol Hill. It's sitting increasing sanctions against North Korea, Iran, and Russia. It's sitting on President Trump's desk. He hasn't signed it. His vice president, Mike Pence, is currently in that part of the world. He was in one of the Baltic states. He's in Georgia today. He's been asked repeatedly about when or if even the president will sign this bill. And we put together a few many answers to that same question over the course of the last few days. Listen.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] And in a further sign of our commitment very soon, President Trump will sign legislation to strengthen and codify the United States sanctions against Russia. The president made it very clear that very soon he will sign the sanctions. In a sign of our commitment, very soon President Trump will sign legislation to strengthen and codify the United States sanctions against Russia.
[Gorani:] All right. When you hear soon that tells you what? I mean, because it's still sitting there and the clock is ticking, Josh.
[Rogin:] That's right. Well, just minutes ago, in his first ever state foreign press conference, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson also commented on the Russia sanctions bill. He said that neither he nor the president was happy about the legislation, but that they've accepted it and that he expects the president to sign it. So that matches in a way what Vice President Pence said in Europe in the sense that we all expect the president to sign it reluctantly and eventually. Now if he doesn't sign it or if he were to veto it, it would still become law. It has overwhelming congressional support. So, these sanctions will go forward and then the president and the secretary of state will have to mitigate the effect of those sanctions on the U.S. relationship with Russia. Nevertheless, the sort of lack of comment by the president on the expulsion of 755 diplomats and staff from Russia and the lack of his any clear position on the U.S.-Russia relationship leaves a lot of incoherence and confusion about what the U.S. is really doing with respect to Russia.
[Gorani:] Josh Rogin at the "Washington Post," thanks very much. Dan Merica in Washington, thanks to both of you. Turning our attention now to Venezuela, the government there moving swiftly to take down its opponents after a controversial election handed the president even more power. Two leading opposition figures are back behind bars. The Supreme Court says it revoked house arrest for Leopoldo Lopez and Antonio Ledezma after intelligence officials told the court the men were trying to flee. The U.S. ambassador to the United States says the jailing of the two men shows President Nicholas Maduro's, quote, "regime has lost all legitimacy." Leyla Santiago joins me now from Caracas with an update on what's happened since Sunday's election. And we saw some dramatic video as well of authorities in Venezuela taking into custody one of the opposition leaders there.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Hala. And now it's a big wait and see, wait and see what is next with the constituent assembly and what is next with the opposition. Now we know that opposition leaders are urging protesters to continue to fight, to not back down from this government. In the meantime, the government of Venezuela is working to establish the legitimacy of this election and the constituent assembly that will be in place very soon. The government has said that it will gather on Thursday and as soon as it gathers, it will have the power to begin rewriting the Constitution and could give President Maduro even more power. Now a lot of people have been very critical of this move saying that this is the road to dictatorship. Several countries have said that they are not seeing this is as a legitimate election. There is mounting pressure across the world, really, and the opposition is hoping that they count on that to continue their fight. In the meantime, you know, we haven't seen the protest that we typically do here today. And so, one has to wonder, you know, are protesters afraid to come out? Are they waiting for another day? We are still waiting to get a better idea of how the opposition will move forward given that two of their big names, two of the leaders were taken in the middle of the night from their homes. One of them in pajamas at that time and making for some very dramatic video that we've seen in social media.
[Gorani:] Right. And we are seeing some of that video on our screen there. Leyla Santiago in Caracas, thanks very much. We'll get back to Leyla soon. Still to come this evening, an extraordinary prediction from a European head of state. He thinks Brexit won't happen despite a referendum result and months of uncertainty. Prime minister of Malta tells me he thinks the U.K. won't leave the E.U. That conversation is up next. And away from the halls of power, a stunning number of people say they'd be happy to lose their jobs or see a family member out of work if it means leaving the E.U. We look at why next.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles.
[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour, retweets are endorsements and the U.S. president just gave his approval to Britain's version of the Ku Klux Klan, sharing their anti-Muslim videos with millions.
[Sesay:] Plus, perhaps the most famous news anchor in America is the latest to face allegations of sexual assault. We have details of what Matt Lauer is accused of doing.
[Vause:] And later, from a courtroom to the crime scene, after his 20- year sentence was upheld. A Bosnian war criminal swallows a deadly dose of poison while proclaiming his innocence.
[Sesay:] Hello, and thank you for joining us. I'm Isha Sesay.
[Vause:] Great to have you with us. I'm John Vause. You're watching NEWSROOM L.A. The U.S. president set off a firestorm on Wednesday and is often the case, it all started on Twitter.
[Sesay:] Donald Trump retweeted three violent and inflammatory anti- Muslim videos. Two of them claimed to show Muslims attack people; one shows a man destroying a statue of the Virgin Mary.
[Vause:] The tweets were originally posted by Jayda Fransen with the far-right group, Britain First.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Whether it's a real video, the threat is real. And that is what the president is talking about, that's what the president is focused on, is dealing with those real threats. And those are real, no matter how you look at it.
[Sesay:] Well, British Prime Minister Theresa May quickly responded. Her office saying in part: "British people overwhelmingly reject the prejudice rhetoric of the far-right, which is the antithesis of the values that this country represents decency, tolerance, and respect."
[Vause:] Donald Trump was not going to let that slide, so he replied with a tweet to the British prime minister: "Don't focus on me, focus on the destructive radical Islamic terrorism that's taking place within the United Kingdom. We're going just fine."
[Sesay:] Well, let's bring in European Affairs Commentator, Dominic Thomas; and Attorney Omar Noureldin, Vice President of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Gentlemen, good to have you with us again. Omar, in your view, why is President Trump retweeting these kinds of anti-Islam videos?
[Omar Noureldin, Attorney And Vice President Of The Muslim Public Affairs Council:] Well, first of all, it's reckless, and it's reckless and indifferent. That's to give the president the benefit of the doubt is reckless indifference. But, really, what the president is doing here is part of the concerted effort to sow division, fear- mongering, and create and break down the social cohesion of this country. And he's done it with Muslims, but Muslims are just one of his targets. He's done it with the LGBTQ community. He's done it with Mexican-Americans. He's done it with African-Americans. And actually, trying to pit communities against each other.
[Sesay:] Because it's good for his political standing? It fires up his base?
[Noureldin:] It fires up his base and it feeds into this narrative that there is an existential threat to whiteness in this country, to Christian values in this country. For example, he released his administration released guidelines that allow for religious exceptions, which is really a license to discriminate against LGBTQ individuals. I mean, the Muslim ban, the Muslim travel ban is another example of this.
[Sesay:] Dominic, Jo Cox, as you all know, the British M.P., who was stabbed to death just before the Brexit vote by a man who yelled Britain First you know, is an example of how, you know, dangerous ideas, you know, aren't just word in isolation; they claim lives. To make the point, though, even if the man yelled "Britain First", it's not known, it's not as if he had a connection to this group behind these videos. I want you to listen to what her husband, Brandon Cox, had to say about the president's actions.
[Brandon Cox, Husband Of Jo Cox:] He was retweeting a felon. You know, somebody that was convicted of religiously aggravated harassments of an organization that is a hate-driven organization on the extreme fringes, the far, far right of British politics. This is like the president retweeting the Ku Klux Klan, you know. This is not a mainstream organization. And for the president of the United States, our greatest ally as a country to be retweeting, to be providing a microphone to those voices.
[Sesay:] I mean, Dominic, it is hard to overstate the significance of what the president did in retweeting these videos, and giving Britain first exactly what they wanted.
[Dominic Thomas, Chair Of The Department Of French And Francophone Studies At Ucla:] Right. It's the oxygen that feeds the rhetoric of these political groups in a country in which freedom of speech regulations are very clear about threats and insults and incitements to racial hatred. And this has been a particularly serious issue since the Brexit referendum, since the London Bridge and Westminster attacks, where attacks hate crimes which are fueled prejudice and have been targeted against ethnic minorities and Muslims in the United Kingdom. And, of course, the authorities and people are trying to deal with this, you know, in a country where there are approximately three million Muslims, who are doctors, and lawyers, and teachers, and healthcare workers, and so on.
[Sesay:] And policemen, and firemen.
[D. Thomas:] Policemen and make immeasurable contributions to this diverse society. And so, this is exactly in the broader context of Brexit and of the European Union the kind of oxygen that far-right political groups certainly should not be benefiting from, and that Donald Trump, given the fact the United Kingdom is one of the most important allies, should be very careful about how he goes about dealing with these questions. And, of course, there are precedents in his attack on the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who is himself a Muslim and an ethnic minority.
[Sesay:] Omar, I mean, just as we made a point that the Muslims in London apart and are woven into fabric of life there, it's the same here in the United States that Muslims serve in the army, and they're policemen, and farmer, and doctors, and all the rest of it. They are part of the American in fact, they are American. I mean, that's, you know, in the case of many, in the case of millions. And yet, groups like Britain First spout this notion that there is this kind of rising threat and crouching threat in Islam about to to kind of wipe out Western civilization. And then, you had Sarah Sanders, the White House Spokesperson, essentially saying, it doesn't matter if the videos are real or not, because the threat is real. So, speak to that, that notion.
[Noureldin:] Well, I want to make a point that also Britain First has analogist organization right here in the United States and that's Act for America. And their founder, Brigitte Gabriel, a few months ago tweeted outside the White House, you know, like a selfie, I'm going to have my moment at the White House. So, not only is the president retweeting these sorts of individuals, they also now have a place in the White House. I mean, the President's Former Adviser, Sebastian Gorka, which was also been linked to far-right nationalist groups and neo-Nazi groups in Europe, was a senior adviser in the White House. So, this isn't just you know, retweeting is one of the most public ways of doing it, but this type of idea is entrenched within this administration.
[Sesay:] Yes.
[Noureldin:] And you know, Huckabee Sanders what I would call it is actually a post-text. A lot of the stuff they've tried to do is give a pretext for discrimination. She now, you know, wasn't allowed that pretext.
[Sesay:] Yes.
[Noureldin:] So, she's trying to get a post-text. And you can't just slap national security on anything and that makes it all OK, right?
[Sesay:] Yes.
[Noureldin:] National security is a real issue. And Americans all Americans, American Muslims care about the security of our country. We care about the security of our cities, of our schools. We want our kids to be able to go to school without being bullied. I think what gets lost here in the national security part is the national who are we as a nation? And I think Donald Trump doesn't get that.
[Sesay:] I mean, Dominic, the politicians across the aisle of every stripe in the U.K. came out and rapidly, swiftly condemned the president's actions in retweeting these videos. I want to put up for you a tweet by David Lambie, British M.P., so we can see what he said. He said, "Trump sharing Britain First, let that sink in. The president of the United States is promoting a fascist, racist, extremist hate group whose leaders are being arrested and convicted. He is no ally or friend of ours." I guess the question is: are there long-term implications for the U.S.-U.K. relationship here?
[D. Thomas:] Yes, there are. And every single time he steps in and makes these kinds of derogatory comments about the United Kingdom or about the United Kingdom's treatment of domestic issues, whether they are concerned with terror, security, respect and so on, and it further impacts this relationship. So, of course, the question of his state visit to the United Kingdom is becoming, you know, an incredible, really, problematic issue. And I think, or even in the case of Theresa May, the initial proximity that she had with this new Atlantic president is becoming a liability for her. And here, what we're seeing really is a complete, sort of crisis American leadership of how to engage with one's partners around the world. And to play the role of the president whose function is to about respect, and values of tolerance, and so on and so forth; not to provide the fuel that exacerbates these tensions and has dramatic impacts on societies that are trying to deal with very complex questions of understanding and so on.
[Sesay:] Yes. It is a significant moment. And Dominic Thomas, and Omar Noureldin thank you so much. We appreciate it.
[Noureldin:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Thank you.
[Vause:] Until now, Britain First was seen as an appalling small fringe group with few followers. Now, the U.S. president has exposed their anti-Muslim message to millions of his followers, and no one can explain how it was that Mr. Trump came to see their videos in the first place. It's just another example of his recent behavior which seems erratic and reckless. After sparking international outrage, the president then went on to deliver a speech promoting tax reform when he made this demonstrably false claim about his achievements in office.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We've already made tremendous progress, far greater than I would've thought. I will tell you this in a non-braggadocios way
[Trump:] there has never been a 10-month president that has accomplished what we have accomplished, that I can tell you. That I can tell you.
[Vause:] This speech was all about the key minor speech is all about promoting tax reform, when Mr. Trump unexpectedly insulted North Korea Leader, Kim Jong-un.
[Trump:] These massive tax cuts will be rocket fuel The little rocket man. Rocket fuel for the American economy. He is a sick puppy.
[Vause:] And this week began with the president attacking a political opponent with the word, which is used to insult Native Americans, and he did it while he was honoring Native American war veterans.
[Trump:] I just want to thank you because you're very, very special people. You were here long before any of us were here. Although we have a representative in Congress who they say was here a long time ago. They call her Pocahontas. But you know what, I like you because you are special.
[Vause:] And there are a number of reports which say President Trump is questioning the authenticity of the "Access Hollywood" tape you know, the one where he made those all comments about grabbing women. Comments which he actually apologized for on the same day the tape came out. And The New York Times, also reporting Mr. Trump is again heading to birther land, asking questions about Barack Obama's birth certificate. And joining us now is CNN Political Commentators, Democratic Strategist, Dave Jacobson; and Republican Consultant, John Thomas. John, what's going on with the president?
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator And Republican Consultant:] Well, the Pocahontas thing, I mean, people say that he was there to use a racial slur but he was actually trying to draw a distinction between people who use race to, you know, exploit for personal gain, and people who are actual heroes
[Dave Jacobson, Cnn Political Commentator And Democratic Strategist:] Come on.
[J. Thomas:] That's exactly what he did.
[Vause:] Look at the whole. I mean, the whole picture. A lot of people are now saying is he unhinged? Is he losing his grip on things? Is he cracking under the pressure of the Mueller investigation? What's happening?
[J. Thomas:] I mean, I don't think there's been a moment whether it was on the campaign trail or during this presidency where we've had tranquility.
[Jacobson:] That's true.
[Vause:] That's right.
[J. Thomas:] You know, I don't really know certainly a lot transpiring. But it's also just an of D.C.s. I don't think the president's unhinged. Look, we're on the verge of passing a major legislative achievement.
[Vause:] His first.
[J. Thomas:] Right. So, if he gets that done, I don't know if he's necessarily unhinged. And the fact that the president does go off- script and maybe definitely has off-script conversations behind closed doors that's not a surprise here. So, I just think it's another day in Trump White House.
[Vause:] Dave, it's pretty clear that no one can control the president at his Twitter account. But can the White House continue to ignore this type of thing when it's impacting foreign policy and foreign relations? And we're not talking relations with Britain. You have to imagine what impact this would be on U.S. allies, in the Middle East like U.S.-Saudi Arabia, for instance you know, a key ally in the Middle East.
[Jacobson:] Right. And like, this goes to the point that John Kelly had made, you know, weeks ago where people were asking about the tweets, and he said I don't believe
[Vause:] Yes. You know, John, the White House is arguing that it doesn't really matter the videos that he retweeted if it's real or fake, you know. The issue is that the president's bringing him tension too, you know, security of the country and that kind of stuff. But, you know, among other issues, is this administration using fake evidence to prove a point?
[J. Thomas:] Beyond crowd size?
[Vause:] Yes.
[Jacobson:] I was going to say.
[J. Thomas:] No, no. I mean, look, it does matter. You shouldn't retweet fake things.
[Vause:] Which you also shouldn't say it doesn't matter if it's fake, either.
[J. Thomas:] No, they're trying to walk back something
[Vause:] But he has got no other
[J. Thomas:] That can't be yes, that's the position they find themselves in, but he shouldn't have retweeted it. But look, by and large, I know Dave probably disagrees, I like his Twitter account by and large, because I actually get a real honest account of what the president's thinking, for better or for worse depending upon your perspective. But these kinds of retweets, I know I've been guilty not of retweeting extreme stuff, but, you know, accidentally thinking it's a real account, it's a parody account. But nonetheless, the president's got to tighten it up.
[Jacobson:] I'm sorry, I don't think I'm crazy to say that, like, there should be some sort of, like, the vetting process for the leader of the free world, the president of the United States. Like before the tweets goes out or before there's a retweet, there needs to be some systemic, like process internally. Unfortunately, we're not going to see that, but I'm sure like other White Houses like Obama administration is doing
[J. Thomas:] So much so
[Jacobson:] I'm sure there were multiple people who
[J. Thomas:] gets watered down I never would read them.
[Vause:] You know, beyond the impact this could have on U.S.-British relations, it will be
[J. Thomas:] And that really is the, to me, the risk of these tweets in things he says off cuff is there are legal ramifications to it? I mean, I don't see an upside there that they undermine their cause legally. And look, there's a lot of people that disagree with the president, especially Democrats, whether they're trying to block him from appointing people in his own administration. So, words do have legal consequence. I think we're going to continue to suffer from those, those, and it's going to undermine his agenda.
[Jacobson:] Well, and I'm not a lawyer, but, like, let's also go back to like the campaign rhetoric, right? He wanted to ban all Muslims from coming in the country. And so, the question is, like: are those going to be incorporated into a legal case?
[Vause:] And could have used those words in restraining orders or putting the travel ban on hold, that kind of stuff. OK. This is the president, as you actually said he on the verge of getting his tax cuts through Congress first big win of the administration. Part of the sales pitch, though, seems to include a great big fat lie.
[Trump:] We're also going to eliminate tax breaks and complex loopholes taken advantage of by the wealthy who are they, I don't know. I think my accountants are going crazy right now. It's all right. Hey, look, I'm president. I don't care. I don't care anymore. I don't care. Some of my wealthy friends, care. Me, I don't care. This is a higher calling. Do we agree?
[Vause:] You know, Dave, if his accounts' going crazy it's because, you know, he's about to get a really big tax cut. And that's big proof.
[Jacobson:] Yeah, of course. I mean, and he should also talk to his Treasury Secretary, Steve Mnuchin, who said just weeks ago that doing away with the estate tax was going to, you know, be a win for the wealthiest Americans out there. But look, if you look largely at this tax bill first of all, it's got 25 percent approval rating according to Quinnipiac's latest poll. That's a lower approval rating than President Trump's. It's amazing, right?
[Vause:] Yes. number one. Number two, like, this gives permanent tax cuts to big Wall Street corporation from 35 percent to 20 percent permanently. It only lowers taxes for
[J. Thomas:] I think that Barack Obama agree that the corporate tax level needed to be
[Jacobson:] Well, and lastly, it actually raises taxes on millions of Americans. Take California, for example our population is 110 of the U.S. population. It raises taxes on people who pay high local and estate taxes.
[J. Thomas:] You're right. But, you know, Trump was being partially truthful there in the sense that he has a home in New York
[Vause:] Right.
[J. Thomas:] and the exemption is limited. And so, he will suffer in that environment.
[Vause:] I want to finish up with this. This is a report from The Washington Post explaining, possibly, the president's behavior: "Trump has internalized the belief that he can largely operate with impunity, people close to him said. His political base cheers him on, fellow Republicans leaders largely stand by him. His staff scrambles to explain away his misbehavior, or even to laugh it off. And the White House disciplinarian Chief of Staff, John Kelly, has said it is not his job to control the president." So, John, no consequences so far, but could there be consequences for all of this come to the midterm elections?
[J. Thomas:] It's possible. I mean, there are warning signs of danger. Virginia was a warning sign.
[Vause:] New Jersey.
[J. Thomas:] The generic ballot that we look at historically is lopsided in favor of Democrats. It's still a ways' out but there are some warning signs. I think the president is going back to what's worked for him in the past. I mean, look, the president was himself, and now he's the president. So, that's what he's relying upon. I tend to think members of Congress will actually be able to have their cake and eat it too. They're going to embrace him when it's useful and distance themselves when it's also useful because Trump is thought to be his own person.
[Vause:] Right.
[J. Thomas:] He's an own you know, a unique breed of politician.
[Vause:] Speaking out there.
[J. Thomas:] Yes. So, I actually think Republicans will be able to parse that. But it certainly is not the traditional playbook.
[Vause:] 30 seconds to finish it off, Dave.
[Jacobson:] I go into John's point: the generic ballots has Democrats leading by double digits. That's significant. The fact that this tax bill may potentially get through it's got 25 percent approval rating. Democrats are going to glue Republicans to it and hammer them over the head with it.
[J. Thomas:] I hope so. I hope so.
[Jacobson:] And then, lastly, if Doug Moore
[Vause:] Roy Moore.
[Jacobson:] pardon me, Roy Moore, pardon me, actually wins the election, that is going to build and enshrine a very toxic brand when it comes to the GOP and Democrats are going to capitalize on.
[Vause:] Healthcare plan, rated 17 percent.
[Jacobson:] Right, even worse.
[Vause:] Dave and John, as always, thank you.
[Jacobson:] Thanks.
[J. Thomas:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Quick break here. Another U.S. personality is fired after allegations of sexual misconduct. This time, it's NBC News morning show veteran, Matt Lauer, and the stories that are emerging about him and much more coming out. More when we return.

[Zakaria:] So here we are 10 years after the collapse of Lehman precipitated the global financial crisis. We haven't had a crisis since, which means, according to some observers, we're overdue for one. The question is, where will it come from? And what is likely to start this new financial fire? I've asked two great minds in financial journalism to come together to look into the future. Andrew Ross Sorkin is an editor and columnist at the New York Times and the author of "Too Big to Fail." A new edition of the book has just been published to mark the 10th anniversary. And Zanny Minton Beddoes is the editor-in-chief of The Economist, which just published its 175th anniversary edition a real blockbuster. Zanny, let me start with you. The recovery is either the longest or the second longest in American history. People say these things don't go on forever. What is the state of the American economy? Are we due for a recession?
[Zanny Minton Beddoes, The Economist:] Well, at some point we will definitely have another recession. But I just want to separate two things, because you started talking about a financial crisis and now you're talking about a recession. And I think it's important to distinguish between those. We will definitely have another recession. And we will at some point definitely have another financial crisis. But we may well, next time, have a recession without a cataclysmic financial crisis. What could cause a recession? They tend, as you say, not to die of old age. Probably, and usually in recent history, it's had something to do with the Federal Reserve. If the Federal Reserve tightens policy too much, then it could tip the economy into recession, particularly as the sugar rush of the Trump tax cuts wears off. On the other hand, if it moves too slowly and inflation starts rising, then it will have to damp down pretty quick and that could push the economy into recession. I don't know what will cause it, but like you, I'm pretty sure I'm very sure that at some point there will be another recession.
[Zakaria:] And the crisis. Andrew, when you look around at the world, what seems to you, kind of, unsustainable? You know, is there something that like, there were people saying at the time...
[Andrew Ross Sorkin, New York Times:] I'm less worried today about a classic run-on-the-bank-style crisis like 2008. What I'm much more worried about is the distrust that was has been created as a function of that crisis, and not just the distrust in the United States government and institutions and elites and the idea of experts, which unto itself is a problem, but the populism and nationalism that it's created not just here but everywhere. And so when you think about a financial crisis when I wrote "Too Big to Fail," we talked about that in the context of banks. Now we talk about it in the context of municipalities, cities, states, countries. And so when you think about our relationships with our allies, the trade fights we're already starting to see, at some point, do the Chinese say, "You know what; we're not so sure we want to buy your debt at these prices anymore?" At some point, do our allies say, "We don't trust you in the way we used to?" And that, to me, is what will if there's going to be another big one, it's much more likely that something like that would precipitate it.
[Zakaria:] And, Zanny, that is exactly the kind of thing that you're talking about in your very robust defense of free trade liberalism. You're worried about a world that is moving toward trade wars and worse?
[Beddoes:] Yeah. We are in our anniversary issue this week, we've written a manifesto for renewing liberalism because we feel that, right now, the credo of liberal democracy, which has done so much to promote prosperity around the world, is really under attack. And it's under attack both domestically, as Andrew says, by the rise of populism and nationalism on both sides of the Atlantic, and also because we see in the form of China a rising economy, the world's biggest economy in the 21st century, which is profoundly illiberal.
[Zakaria:] And, Zanny, is the next crisis, potentially, that you would worry about, you know, a kind of result of that, which would be a conflict between the United States and China? I mean, certainly the conflict between the two largest economies in the world could easily tip the world, let alone the United States, into a recession?
[Beddoes:] Absolutely. That could be cataclysmic. An out-of-control trade war is indeed one of the things that I worry about. I also worry, frankly, about the euro area, which is the one bit of the post- 2008 crisis which hasn't really been fixed. It's massively been papered over. And the third thing I'd leave you with, perhaps, is the incredible rise in dollar borrowing outside the United States, which has been huge, that increase in the last few years. And in a world where we have less trust, less willingness to work together, that really worries me. Remember, 10 years ago, in 2008, after the Lehman failure, the world's biggest economies came together. They created something called the G- 20, which was a new club, and a new club essentially designed to bring the world's biggest economies together to work together to get out of the crisis. Can you imagine that happening now?
[Zakaria:] So where does that leave you, Andrew? Does it make you think that the United States you know, how should it handle the reality of this world? What is you know, if you had a magic wand, or if you had President Trump's ear, either of them, what would you tell them?
[Sorkin:] I would try desperately to re-establish a sense of trust with these other countries, a sense that we are operating in a responsible way, a sense that we want to be a leader, not just of America and America first, but of a world and to some degree a world order. And I think that, if we could get that sense of credibility back, I think that it would help us tremendously. I do want to throw one other crisis that I worry about a lot out. And it's not, again, a classic one. It's the one of cyber. And people don't talk about it enough. But when you think about a true panic, I very much worry about waking up in the morning looking in my bank account and seeing zero. And that's something I think we all have to worry about, given the size and magnitude of these institutions today. People talk about these institutions being too big to fail. That's how they're too big to fail.
[Zakaria:] All right. That is a sobering point to end on. Andrew Ross Sorkin, Zanny Minton Beddoes, pleasure to have both of you on.
[Sorkin:] Thank you, Fareed.
[Zakaria:] Next on "GPS," Pope Francis has been a wildly popular Pope. But now he has a big problem, one that threatens to bring down his papacy. I'll talk to the New York Times' Ross Douthat about that, when we come back.

[Lemon:] Some call him a walking, talking Bruce Springsteen song. Some call him iron stash. He is Randy Bryce and he is running for Congress against Paul Ryan.
[Randy Bryce , Ironworker Running For Congress Against Paul Ryan:] I decided to run for office because not everybody's seated at the table and it's time to make a bigger table. I'm the best person to represent this district because I'm a working person. If somebody falls behind, we are so much stronger if we carry them with us. That's the way I was raised. You look out for each other. I think it's time. Let's trade places. Paul Ryan, you can come work the iron and I'll go to D.C.
[Lemon:] Joining me is Iron Stash himself, Randy Bryce. Welcome to the program.
[Bryce:] Thank you, Don. Great to be here.
[Lemon:] OK. So listen. You are a father. You are an army veteran. You are an iron worker. You are cancer survivor. Why do you want Paul Ryan's job? Why do you want to challenge him?
[Bryce:] Because Paul Ryan's been in about 18 years. I have been working iron for like 20 years. And I just compare what's going on. I can drive around our district and I can point to things that I literally built. I literally built our community with my hands. And I look at what Paul Ryan has brought to the community and I see jobs leaving. We have a plant being taken away, good paying auto making jobs. UAW plant down in
[Lemon:] So my question, are you really serious about this, Randy?
[Bryce:] Absolutely. I'm dead serious. It's been over 600 days since Paul Ryan has been seen in the district. You know, when he has seen there is breaking news alerts. And the people have had enough. We want to be heard, you know. Our concerns, what problems we are facing trying to raise families. It's ridiculous that Paul Ryan hasn't been in the area. We had to borrow representative
[Lemon:] I want to watch part of your campaign ad. And this is particularly pointed today. Here it is.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , House Speaker:] This is repealing and replacing Obamacare. Everybody doesn't get what they want.
[Unidentified Female:] It's a very painful condition. It's like hot knives going through and you can't talk, you can't swallow. It's terrible. I'm going to cry. I'm on 20 drugs and if I don't take one that costs thousands of dollars, I don't know what would happen.
[Lemon:] So Randy, tell us about your mom.
[Bryce:] She is lucky. She is one of the lucky ones. Even having MS that can be debilitating at times, she is one of the lucky ones. Because she has insurance, because she is lucky that my dad had insurance. And my dad, by the way has Alzheimer's. He is an assisted living. And without the independence that the insurance brings, she can take her medications, she can visit him daily. It's horrible. It's a horrible medical condition that she has. But she's a hero to me and I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for her and she's given me the strength. She has raised me to make sure we look after each other. And I can't say enough good things about her. But like I said she's lucky. She's lucky.
[Lemon:] We certainly wish her well. But you know, this everything is politicized, especially the health care bill. What do politicians in Washington what don't they understand?
[Bryce:] Well, for one, I would say Paul Ryan doesn't understand the first thing about what people in the first district need. They don't understand that we are working harder and we are getting less. And I mean this last health care bill that Paul Ryan tried pushing, it didn't even look. When you are looking at it, it didn't even really have the feel of any health. It is not providing. It's not helping anybody. It's a tax break bill that was disguised as something deal that they want to portray as having to do with health.
[Lemon:] What is your next step? Because you announced your candidacy on Sunday and then five days later, here you are. I mean, you have won and lost in state and local races before.
[Bryce:] Right. And I think you are going to see why the losses took place when you see the new districts that there redrawn due to the gerrymandering case. It is about to go on from the Supreme Court.
[Lemon:] I wonder we have -.
[Bryce:] That's given me
[Lemon:] Go on.
[Bryce:] I'm sorry. I was going to say that those races have given me lot of experience. And I think that what I have learned has been shown by the way that our campaign has taken off.
[Lemon:] So, you know, we have you under it says iron stache. I'm wondering if you like Bruce Springsteen because here is what writer
[Bryce:] What American worker doesn't love Bruce Springsteen. The boss rocks.
[Lemon:] Yes. That's a nice Stache. So tell us your secret? What happens?
[Bryce:] It's a I don't want to give away the secret. Maybe come election time as part of the celebration I'll be happy to share the secret. So I would invite everybody to come and watch the election results in November of 2018.
[Lemon:] All right. Thank you for joining us. I appreciate it. And best of luck to your mother. Give her our regards.
[Bryce:] Thanks for having me.
[Lemon:] Thank you.
[Bryce:] Thank you very much, sir.
[Lemon:] When we come back, is the Democratic Party in crisis? Why some are calling for Nancy Pelosi to step down?

[Blackwell:] We're pushing forward on the "BREAKING NEWS" out of Washington this morning. We've learned the FBI opened an inquiry into whether the president of the United States' actions were a threat to national security.
[Paul:] And that counterintelligence probe was prompted by the firing of former FBI director James Comey. Now, The New York Times broke this story last night. The FBI tried to figure out The Times says, if the president of the United States of America was acting on behalf of Russia, and if he was putting U.S.'interests at risk. The president responded to the reporting with a tweet this morning, claiming the FBI opened up an investigation for "no reason." Now this morning, President Trump has reached a bleak milestone. He is presiding now over the longest government shutdown in American history.
[Blackwell:] Day 22 now. For more than three weeks, lawmakers have failed to find a compromise to reopen the government. But it's the 800,000 federal workers from across the country who are paying the price for the inaction in Washington.
[Paul:] Democrats, who control the House, have passed a bill to fund the government, one department at a time. The president insisting funding for a wall at the U.S. -Mexico border, has to be a part of any deal. Without his support, Senate Republicans have refused to call votes on any of the measures. 30 furloughed workers, meanwhile, must have been shocked when they received their full paychecks yesterday. But listen to this, according to The Washington Post, they were paid due to a clerical error and were quickly told not to spend any of the money the people
[Blackwell:] Can you imagine, getting the money you're owed that you're due on payday. And the government says, give it back. A union representing thousands of air traffic controllers is fighting back after being forced to work without being paid. Filing a lawsuit against the federal government. Joining me now, Dan McCabe, representative with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. Dan, welcome back to the show.
[Dan Mccabe, Facility Representative, National Air Traffic Controllers Association:] Thank you.
[Blackwell:] So, let's start here. Your group says that the government unlawfully deprived your members of their earned wages without due process. What's your case?
[Mccabe:] So, we did file yesterday in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. It's really got three prongs to it. A couple of Fair Labor Standards Act violations. One, which is our membership that's working is not working for a minimum wage. The other is that overtime has not been paid promptly, and then, the one you just addressed which is actually a Fifth Amendment violation. Saying they've been deprived all their wages with no due process to go get them.
[Blackwell:] Now, essentially, this is on behalf of your members.
[Mccabe:] Correct.
[Blackwell:] But, I mean, if you're successful, this would affect obviously the all of the people who are working with
[Mccabe:] I mean, it's got big implications out there.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Mccabe:] And this really goes to the ones that are what we call excepted employees or the ones that are forced to go in to do work, and not getting a paycheck for it.
[Blackwell:] Yes, let's talk about we were talking during the break about the moral. Specifically, of those who are going in, doing the job, those essential workers as the government says, but are not being paid.
[Mccabe:] Yes.
[Blackwell:] What's it like?
[Mccabe:] So, we came in last week. We talked about it, everyone was fearful of the unknown. Well, it's real now. It happened yesterday. People open their pay stubs on Thursday, saw zeroes, which is like pouring salt in the wound. Moral is as low as I've seen it in 13 years, and getting worse. So, I'll bring up a little statistic we figured out. Some of 400 people work in the building that I represent.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Mccabe:] Just south of Atlanta. So, we'll say just for the sake of arguing that the average paycheck was $10. Some people got some money in the paycheck for overtime they'd work prior to the Christmas holiday. So, that's $4,000 dollars. You take 400 employees times 10. Our traffic count in one facility of 314 facilities in this agency, the Atlanta air traffic control center worked 8,636 airplanes, Thursday, two days ago. Meanwhile, the 400 people that work seven days a week, 24 hours a day to work those airplanes, $4,000 for two weeks' worth of work.
[Blackwell:] So, by your math, that's 50 cents a plane for two weeks of work for the entire team.
[Mccabe:] Something's wrong with that, it's broken.
[Blackwell:] Let me ask you. There are projects, there is training, there are efforts that were stopped cold because of the government shutdown by your account from the organization 6,000. What does that mean? What do those projects mean to the people who pass through this airspace?
[Mccabe:] So, a lot of these projects, the majority of these projects, you never know about. You've getting on an airplane, sitting on the taxiway, you'd never know. These are things many of them safety related that make an already safe system better, more redundant, safer. A major project that's going on across the country or was going on is something called Datacom. It's something we're working on. The enroot centers are working on. And it's essentially text messaging between controllers and pilots to free up frequency congestion.
[Blackwell:] Yes.
[Mccabe:] That's stopped. We were in the process of in process of implementing it, supposed to go live in March. We will now have to retrain the entire facility on it. Which means more overtime, more people off the operation. More people work in six-day work weeks.
[Blackwell:] The president says that the people who are not being paid support him, and say that what he's doing is the right thing. Now, the White House has not been able to provide any evidence for that. What's your message to the president?
[Mccabe:] In the shutdown? Immediately, it's not worth it. We are tired of being pawns in the shutdown.
[Blackwell:] All right.
[Mccabe:] There is too much at stake.
[Blackwell:] Dan McCabe, thanks so much.
[Mccabe:] Appreciate you having me back.
[Blackwell:] All right. Christi?
[Paul:] Well, Representative Steve King facing backlash from both sides of the aisle for his white nationalist comments. We're going to tell you what GOP's Tim Scott, an African-American Senator from South Carolina have to say about it.

[Berman:] Harvey threatening in Houston still getting hit hard. Today, President Trump praised how people are handling the devastation. He predicted that Congress would act quickly to approve disaster relief funding and commented historic nature of the storm. Look at this.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] It's the biggest ever. They're saying it's the biggest. It's historic. It's like really, like Texas, if you think about it. But it is a historic amount of water in particular. There's never been anything like it. So the people are handling it amazingly well. And the people of Texas, as you know, have really persevered. And when you watch the spirit and the enthusiasm, and helping each other, the teamwork, it's really been something for people to say I think even in Finland they would say it's been pretty incredible what they've been able to do.
[Berman:] All right, joining me now with more, CNN Kaitlan Collins live from the White House. Kaitlan, what else did the President have to say about the ongoing situation in Texas?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, we know that the President and the First Lady are traveling to Texas tomorrow. We heard from Texas governor Greg Abbott today. He said he doesn't expect them to go to the areas that where the hardest hit, John, but he thinks they'll stay in area like, Corpus Christi, or San Antonio, so two of those and they may go back later this week including a possibly trip to Louisiana, depending on what's happening there. But as you noted, during that press conference today, the President did say that he thinks he and Congress will be able to come to an agreement on some relief funding for these flood ravaged areas. But when he asked if all of this going on with Hurricane Harvey makes him reconsider his threat to shut down the government, over funding for his boarder wall, not only did he not say no, he double down on his need for this wall saying that this is a separate issue from this funding and the wall still needed from a security standpoint and that hopefully it won't be necessary to shut down the government over this border wall, John.
[Berman:] And Kaitlan, the President was also asked about his pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, particularly the timing which came right as the Hurricane Harvey, a category-four storm was founding the Texas coast.
[Collins:] Right. Not only did it come during that Friday night, it was also the same time that he directed the Pentagon to begin implementing his ban on transgender service members. And at the same time as the ouster of one of his most controversial aides in the White House, Sebastian Gorka. But today, the President insisted that he was not trying to bear the news of his pardon of the sheriff. Then he was actually trying to highlight it. Listen to what he said.
[Trump:] In the middle of a hurricane, even though it was a Friday evening, I assumed the ratings would be far higher than they would be normally. You know, the hurricane was just started. And I put it out that I had pardoned, as we call as we say Sheriff Joe. Sheriff Joe is a patriot. Sheriff Joe loves our country. Sheriff Joe protected our boarders. And Sheriff Joe was very unfairly treated by the Obama administration, especially right before an election, an election that he would have won. So and he was elected many times. So I stand by my partner Sheriff Joe, and I think the people of Arizona who know him best would agree with me.
[Collins:] We actually know in fact there are a lot of people in Arizona who do not agree with this pardon. One of those people being Senator John McCain, others being members of the President's own party, House Speaker Paul Ryan, also criticized the move. But what's clear from today, John, is that the President does not regret pardoning the sheriff.
[Berman:] No, not at all. All right, Kaitlan Collins for us at the White House tonight. Joining me now, Ana Navarro, Michael Caputo, Jeffrey Toobin. You know, Jeffrey it was notable in the President's defense of the pardon what he did not talk about at all, which was the law, that Sheriff Joe Arpaio was convicted of breaking, contempt of court, nor, you know, what the court had ordered him do, which was to not violate the civil rights of Latino residents of Arizona.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Senior Legal Analyst:] Right. And this was a long, continuing drama in Phoenix. There had been many challenges to Arpaio's rule. And the one that really stuck was that he was accused and found to have conducted immigration round-ups. That included lots of people who were not illegally in the country. A judge told him to stop. Not only did he continue, he brazenly defied the court and said, I'm going to continue any way. That's what led to the contempt of court finding. And that's what he was about to be sentenced for. And that's what ended as a result of the pardon. That legal process.
[Berman:] And again, not discussed at all by the President. As far as I could tell, up until this point. Michael Caputo, what the President did talk about, though, was how many other bad pardons presidents have made in the past. It was almost as if he was saying look, there's a hall of shame out there for presidential pardons, and this one is in a long line of controversial presidential pardons. Is that a good defense?
[Michael Caputo, Former Trump Campaign Aide:] Well, it's not a good defense, but it's a fact. If you're pardoning someone, they are in some criminal jam-up or they've been already in jail. We saw President Obama free FALN terrorist who was responsible for deaths and hundreds of bombings.
[Berman:] You're doing it, too.
[Caputo:] We saw it, you know well, absolutely. Listen, pardons are, by their very nature, controversial. And I think that President Trump, while a lot of people disagree, especially on CNN, about this pardon, you know, he was looking at an 85-year-old man who had never been in trouble in his life who he felt and a lot of people in our camp feel was railroaded by a weaponized Department of Justice. And at 85 years old, you know, convicted of a misdemeanor and what we thought was an unfair trial. He should have been in front of a jury to begin with. They were trying to put him behind bars. And I think the President in a lot of ways had compassion for Joe Arpaio, it's the kind of compassion that a lot of people on the side of the President agree with.
[Berman:] But if it was just about the age and the sentence, he could have commuted the sentence, which is different than a pardon, saying that wiping the slate clean completely, which is what he decided to do. He made that choice. I'm just thinking that clear. Ana, one other thing the President made clear is why he chose the timing, Friday night. You were here with us Friday night when the President released this news that he was pardoning Sheriff Joe Arpaio, while a category 4 storm was making landfall. He basically said today that he was using the ratings boost from hurricane coverage to draw focus to the pardon. I'm not sure the people of the Texas coast would be thrilled that their tragedy was being used in such a way.
[Ana Navarro, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, I think that was one of those off the cuff, stupid, flippant, you know, inappropriate comments that Donald Trump tends to make when he's not on script. One of the things that I found interesting about this press conference, that unlike to be off the rail on hinge press conference post Charlottesville, this time he came with prepared remarks. He obviously had all of those what about examples of presidential pardons by other presidents prepared and was ready to answer that question. I think you're seeing the influence of John Kelly trying to bring some disciplines to this press conference when we saw that kind of a remark. And yes, he showed compassion to his political crony Joe Arpaio. It would have been nice if he could show his compassion to so many immigrants, to the so many Latinos, to so many citizens, Latino citizens, Arizona citizens, a lot of them African-Americans, who were racially profiled, who were abuse, who had to go through civil rights violations at the hands of Joe Arpaio. Those people deserve respect, those people deserve compassion, and that is something that the President of the United States is incapable of doing because all he knows how to do is throw a bone to his base and damn everybody else.
[Berman:] And Jeffrey Toobin, one of the theory that's been kicked around, it's not just throwing a bone to the base, it's throwing a bone to his supporter in some kind of legal trouble, which has led people to wonder whether or not this was a sign to people who are tied up or connected to this Russia investigation saying hey, when push comes to shove, if you are charged or convicted here, I have your back.
[Toobin:] Well, it certainly it's a message that was heard in that way. I can't speak to what was going through Donald Trump's mind. But it is so unusual at this early stage of a presidency to conduct to issue a controversial pardon like this to a political ally. I mean, Bill Clinton's pardon of Mark Rich was appalling, a disgrace. Rich was a fugitive. It was on the last day of his presidency. His pardon of his brother, Roger Clinton, was on the last day of his presidency. George Herbert Walker Bush pardoned a lot of the Iran contra people at the very end of his presidency. To do it at this early stage is a sign that he's being to take some political heat to pardon his friends. I expect that Michael Flynn heard that message loud and clear, and he may benefit from it ultimately.
[Berman:] Any cost, Michael Caputo, to Paul Ryan, John McCain, Jeb Bush, Jeff Flake, and a list of other Republicans that you probably consider establishment Republicans coming out and saying this was a bad idea?
[Caputo:] My response would be yada, yada, yada. These guys are against every single thing that the President does that's even the least bit controversial. I don't think Paul Ryan, John McCain, or anyone else in that crowd would have thought to pardon Sheriff Arpaio or anyone else for that matter, who was headed for personal bankruptcy, who was being prosecuted by a very political Justice Department. They wouldn't have done that, but because they don't have the kind of guts to do those things. They're against Donald Trump all the way down the line. They're going to be against anything he does.
[Berman:] Jeffrey, in a political process
[Toobin:] Let me raise this business about you know, this was a crusade from the Obama Justice Department. This contempt was initiated by the judge in the case. That's who brought this case. The idea that this was some kind of vendetta from the Justice Department, I mean, that's just not true.
[Berman:] Michael?
[Caputo:] Well, if you think that the judge in the Justice Department weren't communicating, you're also a little naive on that report, on that part too. We were talking about the Justice Department that met on the tarmac with Bill Clinton. This Justice Department was going right off the rails in many different ways.
[Toobin:] Do you have any evidence, Michael?
[Caputo:] And for all of us to think, this had nothing to do with us.
[Berman:] Hang on, Michael. Hang on Michael. You're suggesting that a federal judge colluded with the prosecution here. Do you have any evidence of that or are you just
[Caputo:] No, I don't. I'm just saying that the Justice Department was very deeply involved of
[Berman:] You just accused without any evidence a federal judge of some kind of collusion.
[Caputo:] No, that's not what I've done. What I'm saying here is that the judge was an Obama appointee. The Justice Department that brought this down on Arpaio was very listen, this is all about immigration and specifically illegal immigration. It is a partisan, very visceral debate with people really entrenched on both sides. And Sheriff Arpaio became a kind of vision of all of that. And this 85-year-old man who was going to be driven into bankruptcy by these proceedings, the President saw that as something
[Berman:] Hang on, hang on. I'm sorry, Ana, go ahead put the last words.
[Navarro:] I've heard from Trump supporters the entire day about the poor 85-year-old man. Well, the poor 85-year-old man had been terrorizing Latinos and doing racial profiling in Arizona for decades now. This last time he got booted out of office, Latinos and the people of Arizona finally got themselves organized and booted this shameful official out of office.
[Toobin:] And he also ran
[Navarro:] But he has been doing this for a long, long time. And he finally had to pay the piper and Donald Trump saved him at the last minute.
[Berman:] Eighty five years old is also considering, we understand running for office again.
[Toobin:] And he ran for re-election and lost at 84. So, you know, a limited amount of sympathy for the fact that he's 85.
[Caputo:] Thankfully sheriffs like Joe Arpaio who want to enforce America's immigration laws won't be afraid to do so in the future.
[Berman:] All right, Michael Caputo, Ana Navarro, Jeffrey Toobin. One note here the judge was appointed by Bill Clinton not an Obama appointee but a Democratic appointee, at least from a Democratic president. Up next more on the rescue effort in Houston, we'll tell you what happened to these women in assisted living facility. We'll also speak with a volunteer rescuer from a group.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] And welcome back to CNN NEWSROOM. We appreciate you joining us. I'm Natalie Allen. Here are our top stories this hour. Eighty-nine South Koreans are now in North Korea for brief reunions with relatives they have not seen in decades we're talking some 70 years. Can you imagine? Thousands of families were separated by the Korean War in 1950 and many have had little or no contact since. They are adopted. Monday marks an economic milestone for Greece. The country is emerging from three bailouts after a nearly nine-year debt crisis and painful austerity measures. Public debt is still the highest in the Eurozone but the economy has started to grow, unemployment is coming down and tourism is strong. A British woman is safe on dry land after get this spending a long night in the Adriatic Sea. She says she fell off the back of a cruise ship and tread water for close to 10 hours that's some good treading. She was rescued by the Croatian Coast Guard. No word on how she fell off the ship. Venezuela's economic and humanitarian crisis could soon become even more devastating. New economic measures announced by President Nicolas Maduro are set to begin in a few hours. And many Venezuelans rushed to supermarkets over the weekend because they are nervous it could get even harder to find and afford food and other basic necessities. Meantime Venezuelan refugees face more backlash as they try to flee to other Latin American countries. For more about this part of the story, here is CNN's Rafael Romo.
[Rafael Romo, Cnn Correspondent:] The constant stream of refugees out of Venezuela is putting a lot of pressure on neighboring countries. Let's take, for example, the border town of Pacaraima in Brazil where a mob attacked a group of Venezuelan immigrants over the weekend. They also destroyed a camp where the immigrants were staying setting their belongings on fire. This attack prompted a group of about 1,200 Venezuelan refugees to rush back into their own country. Last week, two other countries in the region announced restrictive measures affecting Venezuelan nationals. Ecuadorian officials said Venezuelan migrants will have to show their passport and not just an I.D. before being allowed to enter its territory although we noticed the new rule wasn't being enforced, that immigrants were still crossing into Ecuador. Peru announced Friday, it will do the same. Some immigrants say they were taken by surprise by the new measures as they were traveling in Colombia on their way to Ecuador and Peru.
[Unidentified Female:] We were already on our way here when they started asking us to show our passports because they were no longer going to accept ND and ID card. That's why we're so worried. Many of us may spend the night here waiting for an answer.
[Romo:] Meanwhile, Venezuelans at home are bracing for the effects of new economic measures announced Friday by President Nicolas Maduro that are supposed to go into effect Monday. First of all, the president decreed a 60-fold increase on the minimum wage. Employers don't know if they will have enough money to pay employees although Maduro says the government will provide assistance for 90 days. Also Monday, the government is removing five zeros from the Venezuelan currency dropping its value by more than 90 percent. Many merchants closed their doors over the weekend unable to understand how to change prices to reflect the new currency while shoppers rushed to supermarkets and gas stations that remained open. According to the International Monetary Fund, Venezuela's inflation may hit one million percent by the end of the year. Rafael Romo, CNN Atlanta.
[Allen:] Jennifer McCoy joins me now to talk more about it. She is a distinguished university professor of political science at Georgia State University here in Atlanta. Thanks for being with us Jennifer.
[Jennifer Mccoy, Georgia State University:] Thanks so much.
[Allen:] Let me ask you first, it is hard to fathom the situation in Venezuela getting any worse. And now we learn that Nicolas Maduro is going to print new currency, lop off some zeros because its other currency is just about worthless because he was overprinting to try to fight inflation. How desperate is this plan?
[Mccoy:] Well, a lot of people are confused by the plan. So we're not exactly sure how it is going to work out. But I think that right now, the people in Venezuela are very anxious and trying to you know they've been trying to their money out of banks, what little they have, before it gets devalued even more because after tomorrow, if you had savings in the bank you would be getting out an equivalent of about 4 percent of what you had previously. So it's a huge deal for them.
[Allen:] Right. Here is another example of the confusion. Shop owners don't want to open their doors because they don't know what to charge. They also don't know if people are going to come in because they may not have any money to buy. Plus Maduro is now saying he is increasing minimum wage what is it 60-fold? So how can they even pay their employees? And really again, it is all the citizens that are struggling in this.
[Mccoy:] They really are struggling. And you know, lopping off the zeros helps because before it what they called the wheelbarrow money. You had to bring in so much a wheelbarrow full of money. But it is hard for people to even get cash because the government has not had the funds to buy the paper to print enough of that old worthless currency. So we will see if this improves it. Paying the new minimum salary Maduro says he's going to help small businesses, pay it for the next three months. But what happens after that is another question.
[Allen:] Right. Meantime more Venezuelans are trying to just get out. And now they are being blocked by other countries Brazil, Peru, even Ecuador is requiring passports. So this puts the poor citizens in a terrible quagmire. They're kind of trapped. They're getting trapped.
[Mccoy:] They certainly are. And there are people at the borders in Ecuador and in Peru. The requirement for a passport may not seem like a big deal but the problem is people have not been able to get passports in Venezuela. There've been long lines for them. And the government hasn't again had the money to actually buy the paper for the passports. And so there is a long, long wait for them. So if they can't get into other countries, they are stuck on the borders. People have been traveling, walking, taking buses for days and weeks. And now they are just stuck overnight.
[Allen:] So, is there any reasonable way out of this economic disaster for Nicolas Maduro. The United States has had a hands-off policy. They've encouraged other countries to isolate him. What next for him as far as any move moves he has other than what he's doing now? Anything?
[Mccoy:] Well, you know, people have been waiting for five years since he was elected for him to take some real economic policy changes. He seems to be doing that now. But it's very anxiety-producing. This new currency is going to be based on something completely new what he's calling the petro which is a crypto currency based on the price of oil with oil backing it up. This is the first time this has been done in the world. Other than that, the financial sanctions that the United States and other countries have on him are waiting, the requirement to lift them is that he improve the human rights abuses and the democratic situation and have free and fair elections. So far he's not been going to do that.
[Allen:] That certainly would be a goodwill move that would get the attention of the world. But you are right, that is not happening. We appreciate you joining us so much, Professor Jennifer McCoy of Georgia State thank you.
[Mccoy:] Thank you.
[Allen:] There are signs a ceasefire could be getting underway in Afghanistan. President Ashraf Ghani announced a deal on Sunday to mark the Islamic Eid al-Adha holiday. If the Taliban agrees the truce could last three months. It's still not clear how the militant group will react. They have not formally accepted but say they will release hundreds of prisoners for the holiday. Last week, the Taliban was sending a very different message. Their failed offensive on the city of Ghazni reportedly killed hundreds of people. For a look at the terms of the ceasefire and whether the Taliban will accept, let's go to CNN's Ivan Watson. He joins me now, live from Hong Kong. It's remarkable we're talking about a three-month truce, and that certainly would be welcome for so many people in Afghanistan.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Absolutely. Absolutely. It's a dramatic offer from the Afghan President after what has been the deadliest first six months of the year for civilians in Afghanistan in a decade. So Ashraf Ghani, the president published a series of tweets announcing quote, "We announce a ceasefire that would take effect from tomorrow, Monday, the day of Arafat until the day of the birth of the Prophet Milad un Nabi provided that the Taliban reciprocates." That's important. But also that holiday is roughly November 20th through November 21st. So he is proposing a three-month ceasefire. He goes on to write quote, "We call in the leadership of the Taliban to welcome the wishes of Afghans for a long lasting and real peace and we urge them to get ready for peace talks based on Islamic values and principles." Now this has been embraced by the Secretary General of NATO, by the Pakistani foreign ministry and by the U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who went on in a statement to say quote, "We remain ready to support, facilitate, and participate in direct negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban." That is a statement from the U.S. Secretary of State that came out in the aftermath of the Afghan government ceasefire Natalie. So the question is, how will the Taliban respond to this proposal? Well they put out on Sunday, roughly the same time that Ashraf Ghani put out his proposal their own lengthy statement in conjunction with the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha and it talked about celebrating what the Taliban claimed were big successes on the battlefield against the Afghan government and the U.S. government. It made no mention of a ceasefire proposal which perhaps the Taliban had not heard about it yet. And went on to saying quote, "Since the ongoing war in Afghanistan is the birth child of American occupation, therefore we have and continue to insist on direct talks with America to bring it to an end." So again, we are waiting to hear whether or not the Taliban would be open to this three-month ceasefire proposal. There was a brief ceasefire, Natalie, back in June at the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. The Taliban have also announced that they plan to release hundreds of prisoners on Monday in conjunction with this Muslim holiday. And we'll just keep you up to date if we learn about anything further Natalie.
[Allen:] It sounds hopeful, but just to reiterate again, Mike Pompeo has said that he would like to see dialogue, like to see talks. And now you have the Taliban saying well, they want that too. That sounds encouraging doesn't it?
[Watson:] Yes. The Taliban and there have been reports that U.S. diplomats and the Taliban met in Qatar, in Doha at the end of July for negotiations. The key issue though is the killing, you know. The Afghan capital had a terrible week last week with a number of brutal and deadly attacks. This month you had the Taliban sweep into the city of Ghazni which is quite close to Kabul. This has hurt morale deeply in places like Kabul, both the loss of life and the setbacks that the Afghan government security forces have faced on a number of different fronts around the country. And there are some analysts who would argue that the Taliban is gaining ground and according to U.S. military figures, they control or dispute at least 35 percent of Afghan population centers right now Natalie.
[Allen:] All right. We will wait to see what happens next. Ivan Watson following it for us. Ivan thank you. A top Iranian official says his country might be ready to make a deal with President Trump but there are conditions. CNN's exclusive interview with Iran's foreign minister that's coming next. Plus, a post MeToo Kevin Spacey movie appears in U.S. theaters and the box office sales speak for themselves. We'll tell you what they are.

[Harlow:] All right. We're keeping a very close eye on Hurricane Florence. Meteorologist Chad Myers is with me now. Chad, update us on the forecast. I mean, what we're looking at now in terms of the path and the intensity.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] The path hasn't changed since really 5:00 a.m., Poppy. But a couple of things have. And we will get a brand new update in about 50 minutes, 5-0 minutes, because the 11:00 update will have a new track. Hopefully, it doesn't change very much because if it does change then, obviously, the hurricane center is saying wait, we don't know what's going on. If you keep it in the same focus, the same place, then at least the people that need to get out know that they need to get out and not change your mind. Yes, I'm going, no, I'm not going, because that's just absolutely the worst. Hundred and thirty mile per hour storm, earlier today was 140. It lost its eye wall and it's rebuilding one right now. So we're seeing this eye wall right there from space, and if it gets itself back together and the hurricane hunter is out there flying around it right now, so 129 miles per hour, so 130 seems pretty darn accurate from where we are. And that's what's going to happen as it moves into warmer water, it will get stronger, the eye will come back. We're going to go to 150 miles per hour, maybe even 145. Now even if we make landfall at 4 or even if it's a 3, it doesn't matter. What we have going on here is a bubble of water under the storm now. A lot like Katrina had a bubble. Katrina didn't hit the landfall at 4. And it really, what it was, it was a bubble of water that it built when it was a 5 that it pushed into Bay St. Louis and Gulfport and the like all the way out to the Dauphin Island with that wall of water. Some of those waves now when we talk was 26 feet tall in Katrina. This could be 20. And you know what happened. You could see what happened in that storm. And this is the potential if you're on the right side of where the eye makes landfall. The left side is going to be less. It won't be zero, but it will be less. Somewhere between 2 and 4. Here, they're going 6 to 12 in the north of Wilmington into Morehead City, easily. Up some of these rivers, we could see 18 feet. And if you are less than 18 feet above sea level and your house is, you need to leave. That's why this storm surge watch is going to turn into a warning later on today. Here comes the storm on the European model. Making a run kind of at Wilmington. We'll see. I stopped it right there to give you an idea of what that the American model, the GFS, is thinking, farther to the north, closer to Cape Hatteras. We'll see if that happens. It makes a tremendous difference for rainfall, for one, but for surge. This is going to be a surge with this storm that might be 70 miles wide. OK. So even if you get missed by 60, you still get hit. That's why we have to evacuate so many people. It's so wide right now. And it's getting wider Poppy.
[Harlow:] Wow. 18 feet potential storm surge, 70 miles wide. This thing is no joke. Thank you, Chad. Stay with me. Nick Valencia joins me now from Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. And again, we look at you and we look at the blue skies. At least there's no one on the beach behind you. That is good because the warning there from the mayor is get out.
[Nick Valencia, Cnn National Correspondent:] Yes, they're starting to filter out slowly but surely. When we first showed up this morning there was a lot of people on the beach trying to catch those last rays of sunshine. As we've been here throughout the morning, Poppy, those clouds have gone bigger. The water, as I'm starting to inch away from it, has gotten closer and closer to us. I mentioned, though, that there are still some beachgoers, especially some vacationers here. We're joined by a couple of them right now. Sheri Hamilton, Stephanie Fender. You guys are visiting from outside of Indiana outside of Bloomington. Right? I mean, what do you think of what the mayor is saying, that it's a plea for everyone to get out? Are you leaving?
[Sheri Hamilton, Evacuating Ahead Of Hurricane Florence:] Yes. Absolutely. Yes. We're out today. Yes.
[Stephanie Fender, Evacuating Ahead Of Hurricane Florence:] We here a few minutes.
[Valencia:] You guys had a vacation planned. Drove all the way down here.
[Fender:] All the way down here. Made it an overnight, two-day drive, and we got here. We were about 10 minutes out and I got a phone call saying that, well, if you're still coming, we want you to know you have to evacuate. And I was like, well, we're 10 minutes away. We're on our way. We'll need a place to sleep tonight so.
[Valencia:] That mandatory evacuation you're talking about takes into effect or goes into effect at noon Eastern. What do you think, Sherry, of the people that are deciding not to evacuate?
[Hamilton:] I think it's sad. I mean, you really need to get out. I mean, they're saying this storm is like 150 miles wide. So seriously, you need to take this seriously and move. One of the questions people have is, you know, where are people supposed to go, if this is going to affect so much of coastal Carolinas and Virginia? Where are you going to go?
[Fender:] Possibly the Biltmore. We love
[Hamilton:] Nashville, right?
[Fender:] Yes. Yes. We also love Gatlinburg, so
[Valencia:] So just trying to get further and further inland. Yes. Further west.
[Hamilton:] We're going to head west.
[Valencia:] And just last question, you've been through a hurricane before. You're not trying to see another one, I'm sure.
[Hamilton:] No. Absolutely not. I was a small child, but no. No.
[Valencia:] All right.
[Hamilton:] Don't want to experience that again.
[Valencia:] Well, thank you guys so much for taking the time. Sorry about your vacation. So sorry about that.
[Hamilton:] Thank you.
[Valencia:] Sheri was talking about past hurricanes, and just how devastating they can be. Poppy, they've talked a lot about here about Hurricane Hazel back in 1954. Hurricane Hugo, more recent than that in 1989. Those were especially devastating hurricanes. Hurricane Florence already being compared to both of those Poppy.
[Harlow:] OK. Thank you very much, Nick, for being there, for talking to people. I'm glad they're all on their way out. We appreciate your reporting. Brenda Bethune is with me, she's the mayor of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, and she has been pleading with people all morning to heed these evacuation warnings. She joins me on the phone. Mayor, thank you for joining me. And let's just talk about what you're seeing on the ground there. Are people, you know, following what you're pleading with them to do, and that is to get out?
[Mayor Brenda Bethune, Myrtle Beach:] Good morning. And so far, yes, we are seeing people leaving town. We have a four to six-time increase of traffic heading out of Myrtle Beach, but it needs to be much more than that. We still have a lot of people who are not taking this seriously. And I cannot stress enough the importance of adhering to the governor's orders for mandatory evacuation and our own.
[Harlow:] You know, Brenda, what we often find covering these, and I have covered far too many of these where I have seen people not evacuate, including, you know, Superstorm Sandy here in New York. I saw what happened in my own neighborhood when people didn't leave. One of the reasons why sometimes they don't leave is because they feel like they have nowhere to go, or they don't have the financial resources to afford to go to a hotel or to afford the gasoline. What kind of state-wide federal resources are there for folks struggling that just don't know where to go?
[Bethune:] We have multiple shelters set up across the entire county, across the state. So we have places for people to go. And we just encourage everyone to reach out to friends, to family members, who do live in other areas, and try to find somewhere safe to get to. We are evacuating our animal shelter. We have found safe shelters for our pets. We have a shelter set up for our homeless, which is very critical during a time like this.
[Harlow:] OK.
[Bethune:] And the issue with Myrtle Beach is we have over a million people to get out of town, and we do not have a major interstate. So this is a severe issue that is critical to get people out of town. It will be a very slow process. It requires a lot of patience. But it is critical that people do take the storm seriously.
[Harlow:] OK. Mayor Brenda Bethune, I know you have a lot of work to get to, you and your team, so I'll let you go do that. Thank you for the warning. Again, everyone should heed it. We appreciate it. And good luck over the next few days. Ahead for us, all morning here, we are of course remembering the tragedy of 911, 17 years ago today. The president is set to speak in minutes in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where those heroes brought down Flight 93. We'll take you there next.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] In all of history never before has freedom reigned, the rule of law prevailed, and the people thrived as we have here for nearly 250 years. We must love and defend it. We must guard it with vigilance and spirit, and if necessary, like so many before us, with our very lives. And we declare that our will is renewed, our future is regained, and our dreams are restored. Every American has a role to play in this grand national effort. And today I invite every citizen to take their part in our vital mission. Together our task is to strengthen our families, to build up our community, to serve our citizens, and to celebrate American greatness as a shining example to the world. As long as we are proud and very proud of who we are, how we got here and what we are fighting for to preserve, we will not fail. If we do all of this, if we rediscover our resolve, and commit ourselves to compete and win again, then together we will leave our children and our grandchildren a nation that is stronger, better, freer, prouder and, yes, an America that is greater than ever before. God bless you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Brooke Baldwin, Cnn Anchor:] So President Trump laying out his America First national security strategy. At the top, blasting previous administrations on the immigration and the Iran deal and on trade. Let's just dive right into analysis. First, David Sanger, CNN politics and national security analyst and national security correspondent for "The New York Times." I know you and I have talked about Russia and China on the show. He kept mentioning to trade, trade being central in national security. What were your thoughts?
[David Sanger, Cnn Politics & National Security Analyst:] Brooke, what struck me first of all is this was two-thirds campaign speech and one- third national security strategy speech. The first part of it was all about his election, how the stock market has done, his record has been so far, and I thought that was interesting because it may explain a little bit about how he frames national security which is why he's acting as protector in his mind. On the China and Russia element of this, when you read the strategy, it describes both countries together as revisionist powers. Now I get that for China because China is trying to change the international order and the rules to fit its own agenda, sort of as we did a century ago and then again after world war ii. Russia is a very different kind of beast. It doesn't have the economic power to mandate what the rules are, and it was striking to me how little he had to say about Russia. He mentioned information warfare and cyber as if it was divorced from one particular actor, and he didn't describe, and his strategy doesn't describe a plan to make sure in the last 2016 presidential election
[Baldwin:] Doesn't happen again.
[Sanger:] doesn't happen next year.
[Baldwin:] Yes. On Russia and and, Sam, you were keen to this. On Russia, we know he's talked to Vladimir Putin twice in four days and he mentioned the phone call. Putin thanking him for U.S. intel for helping thwart an attack on St. Petersburg. More on that piece of Russia, and to David's point, and none on the latter.
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Exactly. We have to practice what we preach here. The president just said that we have to confront challenges head-on. The president has had a myriad of opportunities to confront probably the biggest strategic threat to U.S. National security. Russia is trying to undermine our democracy and in two separate phone calls this week the president did not raise Russian election meddling and yes, Russia may be a revisionist power, but Russia is directly attacking our country and he didn't address that. He also, inaccurately spoke about economics as a pillar of national security when he said he's the first person to say that economics matters. I would urge his fact checkers to go back and do a little bit more research because dating back to 1987 and the first national security strategy, economics has been in there. President Obama called economics a foundation a wellspring, excuse me, of our national security. On Russia, on countering extremism, we heard him again talk about external threats and the need to close our boards. Brooke, you and I discussed the fact that the last two terrorist attacks here in the United States have been a result
[Vinograd:] Exactly, of domestic radicalization. So we need to have a fact-based strategy that is not divorced from reality.
[Baldwin:] Rear Admiral John Kirby, senior military and diplomatic analyst, former State Department spokesman, I want to hear from you. And as I'm thinking state, I should also mention there have been reports, the secretary of state was not in attendance at this national security speech. We are told now he was there actually, forgive me. We will talk about this train derailment now. The NTSB there in Washington.
[Unidentified Male:] the accident in Washington State and then we'll take your questions.
[Dr. Bella Dinh-zar, Board Member, National Transportation Safety Board:] Hello. I'm Bella Dinh-Zar, board member of the National Transportation Safety Board. The NTSB is launching a go team to Dupont, Washington, to investigate the derailment of Amtrak train number 501 which occurred this morning. Before I continue we would like to express our deepest condolences to family and friends and all of those affected by this tragic accident. The NTSB team will be led by Ted Terpin, who will serve as investigator in charge. He is accompanied by NTSB staff with expertise in the following areas, operations, mechanical, track, signals, human performance and survival factors. Also accompanying the team are members of the NTSB's Office of Transportation Disaster Assistance, or TDA, and the Office of Media Relations. This accident meets the criteria of the Rail Passenger Family Disaster Assistance Act. Our TDA specialists are working closely with officials at the scene locally as well as with Amtrak to assist them in their efforts to support all of those who have been affected by this accident. Several of our investigators on the west coast will be arriving on scene this afternoon. The rest of our go team expects to arrive at the scene late tonight. For the latest information on media briefings, I encourage you to follow us on Twitter at NTSB newsroom, and our Web site is NTSB.gov. Again, we are just launching our go team and we will have more information after we arrive on scene and start the investigation. We'll be holding a number of media briefings at the scene over the next few days in Washington State. Now I'd be happy to take a few questions. And if you'd like to ask a question please raise your hand and I will recognize you, and then please identify yourself and your media outlet. Thank you. Yes?
[Jeffrey Cook, Correspondent, Abc News:] Jeffrey Cook from ABC News. Do we think this accident could be speed related? Do we know what speed the limit was traveling at or the speed limit in the area?
[Dinh-zarr:] It's a little bit too early to know right now. We are sending investigators on to the scene, so we'll find all of that. We want to give you as accurate information as possible. Yes? So you've probably heard a lot of numbers reported by different outlets and we leave that to the local authorities to report and that varies according to the jurisdiction. Yes, in the back? We actually, at this moment we don't know because we don't have an investigator on scene, but we're headed there as we speak We are looking at that because we want to make sure we get the right information. There's a lot of different information and we don't want to speculate on that. Yes? The question is, is this was this a new route or has there been any information about whether the track was new. And so we are aware of the fact that this was called an inaugural run of this service, but we want to check and make sure what that exactly means and find out more information about that specifically. Yes? The question is, have any of the train personnel been interviewed. And that is what we will be doing as soon as our investigator gets on scene. And our investigator in charge is actually en route right now as we speak. Last question in the back? The question is, what kind of technology, is there a new technology that is being used on this track. And that's why we've launched a full go team with all of the different types of experts. We are gathering information and we will do our best to pass that on to you as soon as we find out exactly what type of technology and what, you know, what type of technology that you're speaking about if it actually is on that route. Thank you.
[Baldwin:] All right. So just a couple of quick questions to the NTSB. You just heard that's the spokeswoman saying that the lead investigator is en route to the scene. But if you are just joining us, and just for the first time seeing these just horrific pictures here out of Pierce County, Washington, Washington State, let me fill you in on what we know. And I have two people standing by to talk to me about how this could have happened. Seventy-seven people have been taken to the hospital. There were 78 passengers on this train, five crew members, people obviously were treated on the scene, as well. Somehow, you heard her mention inaugural route. This was the very first day this high-speed train from Seattle to Portland happened, and as a result is what you're looking at. Somehow this train derailed. There are multiple train cars dangling off of this track. Some have flipped over. And, you know, amazingly, of all of the cars passing below on a very busy rush hour morning, no one was killed, we are told, on the highway in those cars. But you can imagine, it is just awful news for friends and family who are just finding out and also still wondering how their loved ones are. Mary Schiavo is with me. Drew Griffin is with me. Mary Schiavo, I have been watching you all day and looking at these pictures trying to make sense of how many cars were involved, how a train that was clearly all the cars were all connected and now some of them look parallel, dangling, upside down. What are your initial thoughts just looking at the pictures?
[Mary Schiavo, Cnn Aviation & Safety Analyst:] From looking at the pictures, speed is a factor. When you have a situation where, for example, there is a rail out of alignment and it's a low-speed crash, what happens is the train cars come off, they fall over, but they pretty much stay kind of in a line if it's a low-speed event or if there was a slight alignment at a low speed. Here we have several important things. Coming into the curve. They were negotiating a curve. The whole point of a high-speed train and the reason that Amtrak, you know, and any train operator wants to sell it is to go fast.
[Baldwin:] Yes.
[Schiavo:] So they would be keeping their train at the speed limit and hopefully not above, and the initial indications are that the speed limit was 79 miles an hour. That's a pretty sharp curve for 79 miles an hour so it looks to me like it was a high-speed event on a curve and it looks like a rail might have been out of line and you wouldn't have cars perpendicular on the track and spun like leaves in the wind, so speed may be a factor.
[Baldwin:] The question was asked, since it was an inaugural run, was this a new route or new track? I realize this was the first time the high-speed train was going between Seattle and Portland, but the tracks were there before or were they not?
[Schiavo:] Right. But there was some alterations and modifications. There was surprisingly, a fair amount of negative press and government local government official criticism of initiating this train service.
[Baldwin:] Because they were worried.
[Schiavo:] They were worried. In fact, there is a headline that says, now you'll be coming back to me with a deadly crash. That was the beginning of December and that quote was in the newspapers. And they had to modify parts of the trois being and for some of this route had to be run through the inner-city line so they couldn't be running on the same track on the way. There was criticism at the fact of the speed and this is not a bullet train track like in Japan. There were a number of curves, and there were places where trains would have to go to a shoe fly and one would have to let go and let the other pass. There was criticism that this run of track couldn't handle a high- speed train.
[Baldwin:] Mary, stay with me. I want to bring in Drew Griffin, our senior investigative correspondent, who has done extensive reporting of the rail line. Drew, jump in. What can you add?
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Senior Investigative Correspondent:] Brooke, this dates back to 2009. This was part of the American recovery and reinvestment act which pump $8 billion into high-speed rail projects across the country. We did a lot of reporting on this back in the 2013s when we realized much of these high-speed rail projects were for high speed rail and they were for getting trains like these on existing train lines. What you're seeing here is the inaugural run of a new route. It's not new track. It's a new route around port defiance in Tacoma. It's the big hunk that goes around the water of Tacoma if you're familiar with that. It was also a congested train route. So they took $180 million, revamped this existing train route which avoided that water line route and then we're going open it today, get these old trains to move faster on it. Eliminate some of the congestion with some of the cargo traffic, but basically the criticism has been all along with all of these projects is we're just moving old trains faster. These are not high-speed trains. This is not what you see in Japan. This is not even when you see along the Acela line. These are geared to move faster, and the trains are modified, the stations are revamped, and it's basically old technology moving faster. That said, we have no what caused the particular train trash.
[Baldwin:] I get it. People want to go faster, and they wanted to be competitor. Wouldn't they test and know this was a no go?
[Griffin:] Mary Schiavo can speak to that and other experts that we have. I can tell you there was serious pressure to build a point here between Seattle and Portland because when we did this story back in 2013 on this particular route it was a 2:40 trip from Seattle to Portland. The federal government had poured in $400 million to improve the speeds and they cut the time by ten minutes. So there was a lot of pressure to get these trains moving faster to try to prove the fact that they weren't wasting federal dollars.
[Baldwin:] I have done that very trip. Mary, what about the issue of a test run? Would that I have done the test run with an empty train? I imagine weight is a factor. We all remember the physics lessons, how weight and sped it would change their characteristics of physics as they're rounding a curse.
[Schiavo:] Exactly. Throw on top of that the centrifugal forces on a curb. Yes, they did testing. And there were pictures out there, for example, that we are testing the new high-speed rail and we don't yet know how they tested it. Did they test it with one car? With one locomotive? Did they test it with this combination of train cars? This was a fairly long train. Granted, it wasn't full. Did that have anything to do with it? 78 people on a train that could have held far more, but we don't know exactly how the testing was and here based on what we can see in the pictures, both a pusher locomotive in the back and a puller at the front, we don't know the combination of which one was actually doing the work on this particular trip, but we don't know what the testing was. They said it was OK, and the combinations of the lines and the changes they made. They concluded it could accommodate this train. Obviously, not.
[Baldwin:] Obviously, not. Seventy-seven people taken to the hospital out of a total of 78 on this train, five crew members. Drew and Mary, thank you so much for both of your voices and expertise here. As we go to break, let me tell you, as we get more and more piece of information in Washington State, we are hearing from those who survived this horrific crash. Their words, next.

[Gorani:] To Italy now where there is a major political crisis and it could affect Europe. The populist parties who won the election haven't been able to form a government, and this comes after the country's president refused to endorse a Euroskeptic finance minister. Instead he's asked a former IMF official, a bureaucrat, Carlo Cottarelli, to be interim prime minister until fresh elections next year. Confused? Barbie Nadeau explains.
[Barbie Nadeau, Cnn Contributor:] The latest resort for Italy's political crisis is a man they called Mr. Scissors. No, not this one. This one, Carlo Cottarelli, a former director of the International Monetary Fund, who earned his nickname "Mr. Scissors" for his severe cuts in public spending has been given a mandate to form a caretaker government that will guide the country towards a new election. He knows global markets are worried, but he says the economy is growing adding that he would guide a moderate government where in his role in the European Union remains essential. Cottarelli came to power after populist parties that won March elections on euroskeptic campaign promises failed to form a government. Steve Bannon, President Trump's former adviser has been especially interested in the rise of populism in Italy, which is here to support.
[Steve Bannon, Former Adviser To U.s. President Trump:] This populist movement is a global movement is to show the world that every day men and women can take control of their lives, take control of their countries.
[Nadeau:] It is clear that this country is in political chaos staying in the eurozone, which is what E.U. countries that the euro as their currency call themselves is no longer something people take for granted here. I asked Italians in Rome whether they want to stay in or get out of the Eurozone. [Inaudible] as they say here. The Italians are clearly divided when it comes to the Euro.
[Gorani:] Well, what does this mean for Italy, its relationship with the E.U.? Let's get more from Rome now, Barbie Nadeau is there. So, because of all of this and because by the way, some of these populist parties have seen their popularity increase since the election. Should this be worrying to Brussels, to the European Union, that this is happening in the region's third largest economy?
[Nadeau:] I think it is very worrying to the rest of Europe and I think that we saw that sort of pressure on this country's president, Sergio Mattarella, when he vetoed this Euroskeptic minister of the economics really had been against the Euro from the start. And you know, Italy, you have to think about Italy in the context as one of the founding members of the European Union, 1957, the Treaty of Rome, and you have to question what has gone wrong and why Italians today see the Euro more as a necessary evil than something that's actually helping them out.
[Gorani:] Is essentially, does it boil down to austerity because all these countries in the E.U. where austerity has been imposed on them to redress these budget imbalances. It seems like the population blames Europe for that. That we are suffering enough, and we have to cut spending, and this is making unemployment worse.
[Nadeau:] I think that is exactly what brought the populist party into power. They were tired of this austerity, and more than that tired of Brussels telling them how to cut their budgets and you know, the Euroskeptic economic minister, one of his mantras is essentially do not to take the power away from Brussels, to give it back to the Italians to let them decide where they need to tighten the belt, where they need to make cuts. I think that is what we are going to see going forward is the struggle between the populist and the technocrats, those who think that they know better for the country. And when this country goes back to the balance over the next election, I would be surprised if we wouldn't see a similar result or if we wouldn't see those populist parties grow even more Hala.
[Gorani:] Well, certainly in many other parts of the E.U. their popularity is growing. Barbie Nadeau, thanks very much live in Rome. In Ireland, a landslide victory has supporters of abortion rights looking more. Two-thirds of Irish voters chose to repeal the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution, which bans abortions in almost all cases. Now the result represents a palpable change within the traditionally Catholic country and puts British Prime Minister Theresa May under pressure to allow a vote on abortion in Northern Ireland, where terminating a pregnancy is still illegal. As the results rolled in Saturday, abortion rights advocates held up signs saying the North is next. Let's look at what this result could mean for Northern Ireland. Erin McLaughlin joins me here. So, Erin, the question most people might have is Northern Ireland is part of the U.K. Why do they have different abortion laws than England or Wales or Scotland's?
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn Correspondent:] That's a good question, Hala, and that has to do with the way abortion law is determined in the United Kingdom and it's essentially set by the devolved parliaments, which allows Northern Ireland to have more restrictive laws or actually the most restrictive law in all of the United Kingdom. It's also why, in part, it looks increasingly unlikely that abortion laws will change in Northern Ireland any time soon. Even though campaigners are hoping to build on the momentum from the weekend in Ireland. Now, it's also put a lot of pressure on Theresa May given the fact that Northern Ireland does not have an assembly. In fact, it hasn't had an assembly for the past 18 months after a power-sharing agreement collapsed. Many even within Theresa May's own party are looking at the British prime minister to have Westminster step in with some sort of legislation or perhaps a referendum, something that Downing Street says will not happen if the issue of abortion is for the devolved parliaments to decide.
[Gorani:] But so, there is no border between Northern Ireland and Ireland so previously if an Irish or a woman in the Republic of Ireland wanted an abortion, she would go to England, let's say. Now, if someone in Northern Ireland would want an abortion once the law changes in the Republic of Ireland, they just drive south, right?
[Mclaughlin:] Yes, that's right, but campaigners want to still see that change in Northern Ireland. Interesting, though, to note that public opinion in Northern Ireland is deeply divided, conservative Catholic, fundamentalist Protestants, do not want to see the abortion laws in Northern Ireland change. Other people feel differently although they perhaps might not want to see the kind of drastic change that we've seen over the weekend in Ireland, perhaps they want to see the law changed to allow abortion in the case of say, for instance, rape, which again is currently illegal in Northern Ireland. So, public opinion deeply divided, it would be up to the assembly, which of course, does not exist, had it existed it is entirely possible that Democratic Unionist Party would block it.
[Gorani:] Right. And they are supporting Theresa May's government. Thanks very much, Erin McLaughlin with the very latest on that. The times, though, they are certainly changing in terms of abortion laws and the Republic of Ireland will see if that migrates north. Still to come tonight, it seems to defy explanation, the U.S. government has lost track of 1,500 undocumented children across the U.S. border, alone. It arranged their housing, but it says it is not legally responsible for them. And on this Memorial Day in America, we meet a veteran who was there when thousands died. He remembers the Pearl Harbor attack every day and he wants to make sure others do not forget. We'll be right back.

[Nobles:] The Winter Olympic Games are now formally over. The closing ceremony was this morning in South Korea. And an enormous highlight of the games happened on the sidelines, apparent cracks in the ice built between North Korea and the United States. Word today on good authority that the North Koreans are willing to open diplomatic talks with Washington. While we wait to see if that develops, South Korea is still preparing for armed conflict with the North. CNN's Ivan Watson is there.
[Ivan Watson, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Faced with a hostile nuclear-armed neighbor, South Korea's military has announced the creation of a decapitation unit. In the event of a war, the mission of the special task brigade would be to take out the leadership of North Korea. But this is not South Korea's first attempt at creating a team of possible assassins. In 1968, after a bloody North Korean incursion, South Korea created a top-secret hit squad called Unit 684. The assassination squad was sent to this uninhabited island called Silmido for years of training. The initial plan was to recruit death row inmates. But in the end, intelligence officers chose 31 civilians from the streets of South Korean cities.
[Yang Dong-soo, Former Unit 684 Trainer, Republic Of Korea Army:] They were either a shoeshine boy, a newspaper boy, a cinema worker, or a bouncer. They would approach the ones who looked like they might have played some sports and had a strong physique.
[Watson:] In 1970, Yang Dong-soo was a 21-year-old Air Force sergeant sent to Silmido Island to train Unit 684. The conditions on the island were often brutal.
[Yang:] There were accidents. In the middle of sea survival training, one recruit died of fatigue.
[Watson:] In fact, five other recruits were executed for desertion or crimes such as threatening their trainers. For more than three years, unit members weren't allowed to communicate at all with the outside world. Finally, something snapped. On the morning of August 23, 1971, Unit 684 staged a bloody mutiny on this beach. They began killing their trainers one by one. When Yang heard gunfire that morning, he initially thought it was a North Korean attack. But then he says one of his trainees shot him through the neck.
[Yang:] When I woke up, I was bleeding from the neck. Everywhere. Trainers like me were being killed by recruits or running away. It was chaos.
[Watson:] Yang says he dragged himself out onto these rocks and hid and somehow escaped being murdered. After killing 18 of their trainers, Unit 684 wasn't finished. They made it to the mainland and hijacked a bus to the capitol where 20 members died in clashes with Korean security forces. Four survived to be later executed. For decades, the brutal story of Silmido Island was covered up. Until the Korean blockbuster movie "Silmido" hit screens in 2003. Though it led to a public government investigation, this former Unit 684 trainer claims much of the film is fiction. The mutineers were victims who were sacrificed, he tells me, and so were the trainers. To this day, the survivor often preaches about how God saved him on that terrible day when the assassins turned on their commanders.
[Nobles:] That's Ivan Watson reporting. That does it for me. I'll be back tomorrow morning, bright and early, 4:00 a.m. Eastern for "EARLY START." Thank you so much for watching. Jim Sciutto picks things up after this quick break.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] All right, welcome back. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. We continue to cover Hurricane Florence as she battered the Carolina coastline. We do have major breaking news I want to get to out of Washington, D.C. In just minutes, the president's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, is expected to plead guilty to two counts of conspiracy. And doing so in federal court today, he will avoid a second trial that was said to begin on Monday. What we do not know yet, and this is very critical, is whether or not this guilty plea will include a deal to cooperate with Special Counsel Bob Mueller. Will that happen? We may find out in just moments. And what would that mean for Manafort to essentially flip and to cooperate with other strands of the Mueller probe? Let's bring in our chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto. Co-anchor of the show who will be sitting next to me starting Monday, and there will be a lot of news to cover then. This is your beat. This is very significant because he is admitting to committing a host of crimes that he had denied before.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] A significant victory for the special counsel, no question. Second victory against Manafort, of course, because he had a conviction in the Virginia case, just a couple weeks ago. But it's also a significant turnaround for Paul Manafort. I mean he had fought tooth and nail against the special counsel. He spent millions of dollars on lawyers to fight this, and now he's pleading. As you noted, he's pleading to two crimes. Conspiracy, conspiracy to witness tampering.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] He's forfeiting assets. He has not pleading to the other. He faced a total of seven charges. He's pleading to two of those seven but he's admitting to those other charges which included money laundering, illegal foreign lobbying, et cetera. So, in effect, acknowledging responsibility, but just pleading to two of those counts.
[Harlow:] We continually hear from the administration, from the president, as we did after his first conviction, this is nothing to do with me. He's still a good guy. This was a long time ago. Russia is your beat. Talk to me about how this all ties back to Russia.
[Sciutto:] It is true that the bulk of this happened before he started working for the president. It is also true that this is tied to Russia. He was working for pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians, many of them not the greatest people in the world. No question. That said, others did that, too. Paul Manafort was not alone in there, but there are issues. The witness tampering, to be clear, took place afterwards. This didn't take place 10 years ago. It took place in recent months. So that, you cannot claim that all this happened in, you know, in ancient history. There's that. The big question, as you mentioned, is does this mean he's cooperating now? Because that, of course, would be a troublesome development for the president. We don't know the answer to that question. But let's look at clues here. He was charged with seven crimes. He's pleading just two of them. Typically, when a prosecutor accepts a plea like that, they want something in return. Rick Gates, Manafort's former deputy, he was charged with seven crimes, pleaded to two of them. We know he's cooperating. Doesn't mean that Manafort is, but it's an indicator.
[Harlow:] Just on the cooperation point. We should find out in minutes in court here. Rudy Giuliani yesterday told "Politico" there's no fear that Paul Manafort will cooperate against the president. There's nothing to cooperate about. To that, you say?
[Sciutto:] Well, he's the president's lawyer. And he has every incentive to say that. Robert Mueller is also a very serious man, as you know. Would he give a deal like this if he wasn't getting something in return? In terms of cooperation? There are a lot of circumstances where he would not.
[Harlow:] All right. We'll be watching very closely. Jim, thank you. I'll see you back here.
[Sciutto:] See you Monday. We couldn't wait until Monday.
[Harlow:] I can't wait. We'll have a lot of news to cover. I do want to get back to the breaking news. Of course, we're covering Hurricane Florence as she batters at the Carolina coastline. We'll get back to Anderson Cooper down there in just a minute.

[Tapper:] Moment from now, Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh will testify before the Judiciary Committee just after Professor Christine Blasey Ford accused him of sexual assault, saying she remembered it was him with 100 percent certainty. Let's go live to M.J. Lee, who was in the hearing room. M.J., you just spoke to Senator Flake, who is a key, pivotal swing vote on the committee. It's unclear how he's going to vote on Judge Kavanaugh.
[M.j. Lee, Cnn Reporter:] That's right. He walked away from the room pretty quickly. We tried to get some comment from him as we did during the last break. He said he is still listening. That's all he would say. It was notable that one of the questions that myself and another reporter from a different network asked him was, did you find Christine Blasey Ford to be credible? Did you believe what she said? And he would not answer that specific question before walking into a different room. And I just have to say, you know, having sort of taken all of that in over the last four or five hours or so, this was a woman who started her testimony by using the word "terrified." She told the world that she was terrified to be in this room. And I think a lot of the supporters and friends, especially those in the room, were in awe that she managed to say what she needed to say. She was poised, even though she was also very emotional. Just sort of thinking through what this moment is and what it represents, I think for a lot of people that are watching, both women and men, Christine Blasey Ford sort of represented a person's ability to speak about a past, and something that Christine Blasey Ford herself has said, was a dark secret in her life after so many years of not even wanting to share this with family, and certainly not with so many cameras on her and so many people watching her. So I just had that thought about just what this moment represents. And then just in terms of the optics in the room, which you've talked about a lot today, I think there was sort of a missed opportunity for the Republican male Senators, who chose not to question Blasey Ford themselves, but passed on their five minutes to this female counsel, it wasn't only that they were skipping on the opportunity to question Blasey Ford, it was also that they were missing out on an opportunity to say anything about this movement, about this moment in our country, say something to sexual assault survivors, say something about the "Me Too" moment. Because some of the most actually powerful moments in my opinion during this hearing was when Democratic male Senators said what they wanted to say to Blasey Ford, telling her that they believed her, or at least telling her that they know when women and when victims speak out in the way that she is and she did today, that that is really important. Also just thinking about this in a more broader way, I think beyond just the politics, is really important.
[Blitzer:] That's an excellent point, M.J., a very good point, indeed. I want to go to Manu Raju. He's also up on Capitol Hill. Manu, what are you hearing?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] One of the big questions, Wolf, is whether they will move forward with the Friday vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee. I tried to ask the chairman of that committee, Chuck Grassley, whether or not there would be a Friday vote. He would not answer that question or any other question as they try to figure out the next step here. There was discussion earlier on the Senate floor with Senator Bob Corker, who is not on the committee, but a potential swing vote about whether or not there would be this Friday vote. He came out after a private discussion with Senators and he said he still wasn't clear whether or not they were going to move forward. M.J. mentioned Jeff Flake. I had a chance to catch up with him. He would not comment on whether or not they should move forward on Friday. He also didn't say whether they should bring forth Mark Judge, a friend of Brett Kavanaugh. He's been mentioned time and time again. Yesterday, Flake told me, if her testimony relied on Mark Judge, then Mark Judge should, in fact, testify before this committee. That is another key question. But what you're hearing from Republican Senator after Republican Senator, most are not commenting. They're waiting for afterwards. But the major supporters of Brett Kavanaugh are circling behind him, saying there's nothing to corroborate her story and trying to hope that's enough to solidify Republican votes. But as we know, this will come down to the handful of key Senators, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Jeff Flake, in particular. And those three Senators, for now, keeping their powder dry, waiting for Kavanaugh's testimony in a couple of minutes here Wolf and Jake?
[Tapper:] Manu Raju, thank you so much. We're just moments away from Judge Brett Kavanaugh's testimony. Will Rachel Mitchell question him? How will Democrats confront him? Stay with us.

[Richard Quest, Anchor, Quest Means Business:] We are in the last hour of trade on Wall Street. Those of a nervous disposition should turn away. The market which had been as much as 300 points higher after the Fed interest rate decision came out, rates went up. The market rallied for a split second, and then whoosh, this is the lowest part of the day so far. It's not only the Dow. The S&P, the broader market, the NASDAQ, they are both sharply lower. This last hour of trading is the dangerous time, and these are the reasons why. This is what's moving the markets. The Fed stays the course. Rates are going up, but it cuts growth forecast next year and the likely number of interest rates. Jerome Powell says there are signs the economy is softening. Mohamed El-Erian is here and he is going to help us understand. An IPO dear. The second IPO, the biggest IPO in history is a spectacular flop. We're live in the world's financial capital, New York City. Gray day down markets on Wednesday, it's the 19th of December. I'm Richard Quest. I mean business. Breaking news in the last hour. Fed is on course as policymakers raised rates for a fourth and final time this year. They shrugged off a barrage of criticism from President Trump and increased volatility on the stock markets and a slight softening in economic growth forecast, 2.25% to 2.5% is now the Fed funds range. Whilst the Fed still believes some rate rises are needed, policymakers expect only two in 2019, one less from previously forecast. In a statement, the Fed said it is monitoring the global economy. Its exact words were, "We will continue to monitor global economic and financial developments and assess their implications on the economic outlook." That is a change from the last statement. A moment ago, Jerome Powell warned the Fed sees some signs that growth in the U.S. is slowing.
[Jerome Powell, Chairman, U.s. Federal Reserve:] Despite this robust economic backdrop and our expectation for healthy growth, we have seen developments that may signal some softening relative to what we were expecting a few months ago. Many FOMC participants had expected that economic conditions would likely call for about three more rate increases in 2019. We have brought that down a bit and now, I think it is more likely that the economy will grow in a way that will-call for two interest rate increases over the course of next year.
[Quest:] Markets gave up the earlier gains as the Fed decision was published. And what's interesting about this it was up as much as 382 points, and then at 2:30, but immediately after the actual I mean, the market sort of stages a little mini rally-ette and then falls out of bed and went out of the worst so far of the day. The Fed expects economies to scuffle, this has spooked investors, and if you look at commodity prices and copper and gold, they are also down, which is slightly unusual because obviously, an uncertainty, then that is easier for them. Arguably, in times of inflation or higher inflation or slower economies, you might want gold as a hedge, but that doesn't seem to be the play at the moment. I'm guessing there's more behind all of this, which is why we have Mohamed El-Erian here to help us understand. First of all, what the Fed says is it's going to slow down.
[Mohamed El-erian, Chief Economic Adviser, Allianz:] It says it is going to somewhat slow down, but it came across more hawkish than the markets expected. And what you're getting now is a signal for markets, this is a policy mistake. And I think that's important. If you look at the turn around in stocks, if you look at the lower yields, if you look at the flatter yield curve, all that is flashing, be careful Fed. This may be a policy mistake.
[Quest:] So that's the hawkishness to stick to the fourth hike this year.
[El-erian:] Three things. One is they deliver on a hike. That was expected. Two is, they reduced next year's rate hikes not from three to one, but three to two. And three is they still are going to overshoot the equilibrium rate over in 2020. So the market is saying, wait a minute that wasn't a dovish enough hike, we needed a more dovish hike.
[Quest:] So when you say a dovish hike, would that have been don't raise four, but say you'll do one next year or raise four raise the fourth, and say one next year and give us some language? I guess, what I'm trying to say is, the fourth rate hike, was it inevitable because of the political pressure that if they hadn't, they would have been in trouble?
[El-erian:] Yes, it was inevitable. So I don't think the market expected them not to hike, but they expected them to signal a more dovish path from here. That is what they missed doing. Look, you have to understand, Central Banks have gone from being the only game in town where they can do no wrong to a being in a lose-lose situation like they are today. And that is the new realities and it is because we have over relied on them and they simply cannot deliver now what they used to deliver.
[Quest:] What justifies what we're seeing now, where a market has gone from up 300 to down 490 points with every prospect since we're in the last hour of this getting even worse?
[El-erian:] Yes, it's what I call the concern about a policy mistake. That the Fed is going to hit the brakes too hard by hiking too much next year.
[Quest:] But if we accept that there is an element of uncertainty about the strength of growth next year, how does a Fed you're in touch with these people how do they make that sort of mistake?
[El-erian:] They make a mistake because they have to deliver too much. They simply cannot deliver what the market wants them to deliver. I think you have to think about this as a no-win situation. And it comes against a background that we're coming from a year, 2017, where investors had it all. They had high returns, they had low volatility and the correlations were all in their favor. So this is just in my view a resetting to normal, but is a pretty painful one if you're along this market.
[Quest:] It is almost inconceivable that we've gone from growth of 3.5% to 4% to where people are reputable people are talking of a recession next year and it's not easy or obvious to see what's led to this.
[El-erian:] So what's led to this is weaker Europe, weaker China and concern about still banks. That's what led I don't buy the recession next year. Don't buy it.
[Quest:] But it makes no difference whether you're up half of one or down half of one, it'll still going to feel very slow, very sluggish and you may start to see unemployment going up.
[El-erian:] I am willing to take a bet that we'll see unemployment going down next year. That the issue is less the economic outlook and what we, in the marketplace call "technicals." That is people being overextended. The paradigm changing in China and Europe and suddenly everybody wants to get back on-site at the same time.
[Quest:] Now, stay with me. Bear with me, all of this comes amid a backdrop of trade war with China. Alan Greenspan says there are no winners at the end of a trade war. He spoke to Julia Chatterly.
[Alan Greenspan, Former Federal Reserve Chairman:] If you want the most efficient world economy, you have zero tariffs. Trade wars say between parties A and B, out of a necessity hurt both. The winner of a trade war is one who is hurt the least.
[Julia Chatterley, Anchor, Cnn:] Could Trump force then to lower tariffs?
[Greenspan:] Could he do it?
[Chatterley:] Yes.
[Greenspan:] I would say he doesn't understand that well enough to know. You have a situation now which I don't know where it's going.
[Quest:] If Alan Greenspan doesn't know where it's going, then it begs the question does anybody? Julia is with me. Mohamed is still with me, we seem to have entered a new a new era now, a new stage in whatever economics was going on.
[Chatterley:] Yes, I mean, we've been there all year. We've been in a stage where Central Banks globally have been chucking money into the system and supporting the economy and now, they're somehow trying to take it back. We're in uncharted waters and I think this was illustrated really clearly today for Jay Powell. Trade is just one of the risks here.
[Quest:] They've been taking it back for some time. I mean, first of all by stopping buying and then the tapering and we had the taper tantrum and they should have managed this better.
[El-erian:] Oh, I think they've managed it well. The problem is that now, it's not just the Fed that's taking it back. The ECB is doing it in a much more serious manner. So the real question mark is how does the system adapt? As Julia said, to two systemically important Central Banks sucking liquidity out.
[Chatterley:] I do argue though that Jay Powell was never going to win today because if he would have come out and have been as dovish as the market was clearly hoping, and really said, "Look, okay, perhaps, we're even going to pour it here," then the markets would have gone... ... wow, he's really scared now and he's really seeing something dramatic going to happen next year and as you've kind of pointed out, things are slowing, but we're not talking we shouldn't be talking about a recession in 2019.
[Quest:] Well, all right, so do you see recession at all or are we talking because some people are suggesting I mean, this is the difficulty. I can put five of you in a room and I'll end up with eight opinions on whether or not there's going to be a recession or not. And it's towards an ex post facto decision anyway.
[El-erian:] So let me give you a strong opinion.
[Quest:] Go on.
[El-erian:] The U.S. will not go into recession. Europe may well, the U.S. will not.
[Quest:] Okay, so taking that the U.S. will I will take that to the bank.
[El-erian:] Do so.
[Quest:] We will take that to the bank, but Julia, you're hearing as I am from those traders on the floor who are basically saying there is more to wash out here than before it's over.
[Chatterley:] Yes, I mean, there's a real concern here I think and you've illustrated this as well that you have a Federal Reserve here who has got a lot of uncertainty that they're going to keep hiking rates and they are going to hike rates into a slowdown. So policy uncertainty from the Central Bank is one fear. China, what's going to happen with the trade concerns between the United States and China another factor. Europe, you've already mentioned it. I mean, there's so many different risk points. I mean, Jay Powell talked about it. Cross currents. How does that impact his decisions? We don't know at this stage.
[Quest:] So, is this a moment where one would prefer to have firm economic hands on the wheel? And as we know, we have Mario Draghi leaving next year. We've got Jerome Powell who, fair dues all around, I agree with your point but he's still an untried and untested quantity and a maximum streams of pressures. Steven Mnuchin, we'll leave that there. And the rest of the economic team.
[El-erian:] So we're having a lot of transitions. We are having five major transition in the context where some important policymakers are also changing. I think the signal is this is like Julia said, a very uncertain time, markets are going to be very volatile, and you better be able to stomach this volatility because it's not going away.
[Chatterley:] And that's the other thing, I think. We have been going up for a long time. Markets have been going up for a long time. We've forgotten what volatility feels like. We've forgotten all of that.
[Quest:] Oh, we never had no, no.
[Chatterley:] Yes.
[Quest:] No, no. Volatility of this sort of
[Chatterley:] Yes.
[Quest:] No, no. We've not had volatility of this sort of magnitude for a very, very long time.
[Chatterley:] That's what I am saying. That's what I am saying well, fine, the 10 years markets have been effectively going up, so there's going to be an adjustment phase where people are nervous and I think we're in that, too. Q And there we go, we know the nerves are there. Let's go back to that, the 30. You know it is a bad day where the only gainer is Verizon. Because it is the last gasp of rush to quality, or not for quality, but rush to defensive stocks governed by Verizon, the telco. We'll see more from you in just a moment. Julia, great to see you. Thank you. Thank you. Now, second biggest IPO of all time, what a disaster. Softbank officially took its mobile unit public in Tokyo and the shares fell 15%. It makes it one of the largest IPO flops in history. The Chief Executive blames rough market conditions. Softbank has the usual habit of being in the right place at the right time, unfortunately that didn't happen today. One of the earliest investors of Yahoo, which made the company a fortune are back to Verizon. It won exclusive rights to carry the iPhone in Japan, a major win for the chief executive, Masayoshi Son and it was one of the early investors in Alibaba, taking a 32% stake. Will Ripley explains what went wrong.
[Will Ripley, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Softbank obviously didn't want things to go this way on the first day of their eye-popping IPO. This was the world's second biggest share sales after Alibaba back in 2014. But it comes at a really tough time for stocks. You look at the numbers. Japan's Nikkei Index down 6% this month. Down 13% from its early October high. And then there are some other factors at play as well. Softbank had an embarrassing service outage just two weeks ago. It lasted more than four hours. They announced last week they might be pulling Huawei gear from their network. That potentially could be a very costly move. And then you have this controversy over this $90 billion venture fund with Saudi Arabia focusing on emerging technologies. Softbank is under pressure to cut ties with the Saudis after the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. They're saying they're not going to do that, but it's just yet another obstacle that could be spooking some investors in Japan's third largest wireless network. Not to mention the fact that the Japanese government is trying to encourage wireless providers to lower their prices. I can tell you I've lived in Japan, very expensive to have a cellphone there, but that maybe changing because the government is pressuring mobile carriers there. The Softbank CEO, Masayoshi Son, he has been down this road before. He has overseen a vast tech empire that has overcome difficulties to reach really tremendous success and with this IPO, he's raising about $23.5 billion compare that to Facebook. They raised $16 billion...
[Ripley:] ... went they went public back in 2012, and what Masayoshi is doing is he is pumping that cash into companies that are developing really life changing technology. Everything from self-driving vehicles to robots. I remember being in Japan in 2014 and doing a story about pepper, the emotional robot that looked at my face, read my mood supposedly and then tailored its conversation with me based what it thought I was thinking. It's that kind of AI artificial intelligence that Masayoshi Son says he is devoting 97% of this time and brain to in areas like healthcare and agriculture, transportation, satellites, even e-commerce. He really is a strong believer that someday robots will be smarter than people and he believes that the robot population will eventually rival the human population, a slightly terrifying thought for those of us who grew up watching movies like "Terminator," but in Japan, where robots are widely accepted, they are part of the culture and a lot of people are excited about the future that robots could help provide. And that's where all of that money that was invested in Softbank's IPO will be going towards in the coming years. Will Ripley, CNN, Hong Kong.
[Quest:] It is "Quest Means Business." British businesses say they've reached the point of no return and activating their plans for a no-deal Brexit. Later in the program, protesters say democracy is slowly being chipped away as the government passes a law to make people work longer hours. A Hungarian Foreign Minister is with us to go into those details after the break. The E.U. and U.K. are currently heading straight for a no Brexit deal. Now, that's the logical conclusion if you look at the way both sides are stepping up their contingency plans. And the European Union has now announced a raft of temporary measures in case things turns our. So for example, it those flights between the U.K. and E.U. would be allowed for 12 months to ensure basic connectivity. Haulers could drive freight into the E.U. for nine months without having to apply for permits and some financial regulations such as those for derivatives trading will remain unchanged for two years to avoid disruption. Bianca Nobilo is in London. This sounds contingency plans, yes, but they're sort of putting together a package that would be acceptable in the event that they can't do a deal.
[Bianca Nobilo, Correspondent, Cnn:] What we've seen from the E.U. today has been pretty constructive and it does address some of the main concerns like issues about transport, of goods and people, airlines, and what they will be able to do in the event of a no deal and crucially residency rights and that's a really big concern, of course for all the millions of E.U. residents in the U.K. and vice versa. Why they're both doing this and doing it in such a thorough way I think is because both the E.U. and the U.K. are well aware that they need to reassure their own citizens of their preparedness. But in the U.K., they feel people who advocate for a cleaner Brexit and potentially a no deal that the negotiating position of the U.K. is immensely strengthened if they can project that they are fully prepared for this scenario whether or not the British government can convince anyone at this stage remains to be seen.
[Quest:] Right, but if everybody's putting in place humor me with this question, Bianca. If everybody is putting in place no deal contingencies such that it will be bad but not dreadful, doesn't an argument develop, well let's just take a clean Brexit, take the lumps and sort out and we know things will manage on?
[Nobilo:] Well, we heard from business leaders today in the U.K., the five biggest business groups like the CBI and the British Chamber of Commerce underscoring how disastrous a no deal would be, saying they're watching in horror what Parliament is doing and how it seems to be hurtling towards this no deal Brexit. So I understand your point, and yes, there are many MPs that I've spoken to that are concerned that the more a no deal scenario is normalized, it may seem a little less scary, they're concerned that it might seem like a more viable option in some people's eyes. But if we look at the small and medium size businesses, you just simply do not have the reserves to spend this money, preparing for a scenario which may or may not happen and to try and get legal advice and prepare customs forms and things like that, it isn't going to be an appealing prospect to people who aren't convinced.
[Quest:] But, Bianca, she can't get the deal through Parliament. You and I will be sitting outside Parliament on January the week of January 14th, ready to talk about this in detail. She can't get it through Parliament. Nobody really likes Norway or Canada plus. The prospect of a no deal what happens?
[Nobilo:] Well, so no deal is the default option. It's enshrined in law. Yet many members of Parliament keep saying Parliament will not allow no deals to happen. But how can that be because they'd actually need to amend legislation and pass it in order to prevent that outcome. So it does seem to be the default option as it stands and Theresa May is trying it seems two strategies. She's trying to use the stress of a no deal and make it realistic as we've seen in the last few days of these preparations and relying just simply on time. The time is running out, the clock is running down and she's hoping that she will be able to get this through the more the closer that Britain gets to leaving E.U. and the more likely crashing out with a no deal it seems.
[Quest:] We'll talk more about it. Don't go too far. Thank you. Bianca in London. Mohamed El-Erian is back. Is in your view, is it going to be as disastrous as everybody says if there is a no deal Brexit?
[El-erian:] Not over the long-term. I think over the long-term, this actually is what makes most sense because you have Europe that was interested in a marriage with the U.K., an ever deeper union. And you have the U.K. that just wanted to date for a long time, give me the access to your markets, but I don't want this ever deeper union. And I think at some point you have to resolve it. The critical thing is the longer this no war no peace, the longer this war of attrition continues, the more problematic it is for both the U.K. and Europe because no one is focusing on what you need to do today to adapt to a changing world. Everybody is totally consumed by Brexit.
[Quest:] That's on the European side and the British side to some extent. But they're right to be totally consumed by Brexit because if this goes wrong then everybody will be more than consumed by it, they'll be suffering from it.
[El-erian:] But then the wrong negotiating paradigm. You have the U.K. unable to deliver a unified Conservative Party and therefore unable to deliver a Parliament. You have Europe that doesn't want to give concessions that make the U.K. a big precedent. You cannot continue down this road. It doesn't get to a solution.
[Quest:] The European Union has problems across it the range. Italy seems to have finally settled over banks. Shortly we're going to have the Hungarian Foreign Prime Minister on the program who will be talking about their problems. Do you see the Union as being... ... in peril is too strong, but do you see it being in serious trouble with all these various issues?
[El-erian:] So let me give you a simple number. The European Commission expects Europe to grow by 1.9%. I don't think they'll even get to one. And the reason why think of a football analogy. You have a team that's not playing as a team. They can't get their act together on regional issues and your top five players are all problematic. The U.K., France, Germany, Spain and Italy. Would you bet on that team? That team is headed towards a relegation zone. That team is not going to win the division.
[Quest:] Recession in the E.U.?
[El-erian:] I think high risk of recession in the E.U...
[Quest:] And it will certainly feel like that anyway because with slow growth, it will feel just miserable.
[El-erian:] Correct. Correct.
[Quest:] Which brings us lastly to this question of trade. Now, if the U.S. plays this anti-China card to its nth degree, you must be very concerned at that point because the trade is really the last thing that's holding everybody together?
[El-erian:] So the nth degree means two things to me. First, a trade war or the threat of is no longer in the journey, it is the destination, that's problem number one. Second, the nth degree means it's no longer an economic issue. It's a national security issue. So the Chinese will worry about, "Oh, we are being contained," and they are going to start taking steps to counter that and the U.S. will...
[Quest:] How far off are we? How far are we from the nth degree by your definition?
[El-erian:] I don't think we're there yet. I think we're likely to get a short-term compromise and then in a year's time, this issue is reopened.
[Quest:] It's all a bit of a mess. Are you going to be able to get some time off and have a rest over the holiday break?
[El-erian:] I love this mess. This is what makes me energetic. I am no different from you. We love this stuff. It's really interesting. It is so good to go back to a time when markets and the economy are so intriguing. And they are really intriguing right now.
[Quest:] Perhaps, the most intriguing, as we go into a break, perhaps the most intriguing in your thought, the Fed managed to drop the ball today. They should have known better.
[El-erian:] Yes, I agree with what you're saying and that's what the market does...
[Quest:] You said it.
[El-erian:] I said the market fears a policy mistake, but the Fed has been carrying an enormous burden that it should not carry on its own.
[Quest:] You're feeling sorry for them.
[El-erian:] A little bit, yes.
[Quest:] Let's go to the market. We're down 321. Good to see you, thank you.
[El-erian:] Thank you.
[Quest:] Really good to have you. Have a wonderful Christmas.
[El-erian:] You too. Thank you.
[Quest:] The cries of Brexit hard didn't go into the European stock markets. Green across the board. The FTSE gained nearly 1%, the best performer of the day was Milan's FTSE. It was lifted by a breakthrough in the controversial budget deal between Italy and the E.U. Mohamed El-Erian, you're always on the show. I think we give you have a ding at the bell.
[El-erian:] My dream come true. Not a very good one. Can I get a second try?
[Quest:] Go on. Which is more than the Fed did. All right, thank you. When we come back, all I want for Christmas is democracy. Hungarians on the streets claiming their rights are being eroded. Their country's Foreign Minister will answer these in just a moment. This is "Quest Means Business." Good evening to you.

[Blitzer:] All right. We're continue to follow the breaking news. Major developments unfolding in the confirmation process of Judge Kavanaugh. But very quickly, there's another development over the weekend, Max, the president said this about Kim Jong-Un of North Korea.
[Trump:] And you know, what's interesting. When I did it and I was really being tough, and so was he, and we were going back and forth. And then we fell in love, OK?
[Blitzer:] "We fell in love." He fell in love with Kim Jong-Un.
[Boot:] Wow. The love that dare not speak its name. I mean, this is crazy. I recall what Donald Trump himself said about North Korea just in January of this year, in his State of the Union, where he said, no regime has oppressed its own citizens more totally or brutally than the cruel dictatorship in North Korea. And he introduced the parents of Otto Warmbier, the American student, who was killed in North Korea. This is the same regime. It hasn't changed one iota since January. This is the same murderous thug that he was rightly denouncing in February, and now he's in love with I mean, literally in love with. This is crazy. I can't imagine any former American president saying anything remotely like this, and if he had, Republicans would have gone crazy, and rightly so. This is just so I mean, I don't know what to say beyond the fact that it's crazy, deranged, and makes no sense.
[Lizza:] One of the important things that a president needs to do is be realistic and honest about the threats that the United States faces in the world, right? Not to overhype them, not to under hype them. But his entire view of threats is based on his personal relationship with the leader. And it's bizarre, to say the least.
[Blitzer:] To say the least. And, Nia [sic], very quickly, all of a sudden, the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee want 24 additional interviews 24 interviews to be conducted by the FBI this week in connection with the Kavanaugh confirmation.
[Coates:] And a lot of these people on the list are people that came from the testimony of Brett Kavanaugh, through interviews on different media networks, saying that they knew Brett Kavanaugh at that time, that he had belied this impression of himself by talking about this stoic or this altar boy. Leslie Brooks is on the list, of people who talked about. She came on Chris Cuomo's show a couple of days ago, talking about how this was a real injustice in a way, talking about his alcohol record, et cetera. So the list of people are derived from his own statements, proving again, whatever you do or say in a court of law can be used against you.
[Blitzer:] Everyone, stick around. We'll continue to follow the breaking news. Judge Brett Kavanaugh also under fire for what some are calling lies regarding his past drinking habits in high school and college. And yearbook entries. How the president of the United States is responding. That, and a lot more, right after this.

[Vanier:] Brazil's former president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is now officially a fugitive. The 72-year old was supposed to turn himself in on Friday to begin a 12-year prison sentence. But instead of that, he is now holed up at the headquarters of Brazil's metal workers' union and he is surrounded by supporters there. Lula was convicted of corruption and money laundering related to the state-run oil company but he denies any wrongdoing. And one of the world's highest paid actors is in jail. Bollywood superstar Salman Khan is behind bars, waiting to hear if he is going to be granted bail. He was convicted of killing a rare and protected antelope some 20 years ago and he was sentenced to five years in prison. But he's appealing that sentence. Journalist Liz Neisloss is in New Delhi. Liz, Salman Khan is a very popular figure. This is not an ordinary trial by any stretch of the imagination. Tell us more about the whole reaction surrounding this in New Delhi.
[Liz Neisloss, Journalist:] Well, he is, by most tallies, one of the most popular stars in India, by some tallies the highest paid actor in the world. So there is reason for a lot of attention on this particular actor being in jail. But this isn't the first time Salman Khan has spent time in this particular jail. He was tried on two previous cases of poaching. He was acquitted in those cases but that period of time, he did spend a few nights in this jail. Right now the court is in break and we do expect a decision on the bail application by the lawyers just after lunch. After that point, Salman Khan's lawyers will move to a higher court with their appeal Cyril.
[Vanier:] You mentioned there is a lot of money involved, indirectly in this, because he is a very highly paid actor. And Salman Khan, as you explained to me, he is also a brand. How does this impact the Salman Khan brand?
[Neisloss:] Well, Brand Salman, as it's known here, could get dented on the advertising side. He is a big representative of brands, like most actors here in India. It's hard to say, sometimes that does affect product endorsements. But it's not expected to affect the movie side of Salman Khan and that is enormous. He has one movie currently wrapping up. He has three more in the pipeline. By some estimates, if he were imprisoned and those movies couldn't be made, that would more cost more than $75 million and thousands of people their livelihood Cyril.
[Vanier:] Liz Neisloss, thank you, reporting from New Delhi there. We'll see what happens with the trial and with the appeal. Thank you. In Syria now, pro government troops are assaulting the last rebel enclave in Eastern Ghouta. Aid and monitoring groups say dozens were killed on Friday as airstrikes and shelling rained down on Douma. War has left much of Eastern Ghouta in ruins but some residents are nonetheless trying to rebuild. CNN's Fred Pleitgen has more in his report from inside Eastern Ghouta.
[Frederik Pleitgen, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] A drive into the wasteland that used to be the Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta. Years of siege and fighting have laid waste to what was once a thriving business district. Amid the ruins, some are trying to return, praying, like Sahil al- Kalish, that businesses like his tomato sauce factory will come back to life. "God willing," he says, "we will try and rebuild this factory in a fairly short time and then start producing again." Eastern Ghouta, an area with nearly 400,000 inhabitants, was under Islamist rebel control for around six years. After a fierce offensive Syrian government forces managed to take back most of the territory, displacing tens of thousands of civilians.
[Pleitgen:] Much of Eastern Ghouta looks exactly like this, buildings either completely flattened or at least badly damaged. But even in this situation, people are trying to come back and bring back some semblance of life. An almost impossible task, as fighting continues in areas nearby. Yasar al-Hajj says he is lucky his apartment is still somewhat intact. "Life was difficult beyond description," he says, "but we had to adapt to it. For instance, we had inedible barley but we had to eat it anyway." The vast majority of Eastern Ghouta's residents remain displaced in shelters around Syria while those who have been able to come back face a long and tough road, trying to rebuild their district and their lives Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Eastern Ghouta, Syria.
[Vanier:] Still ahead, they're tired, hungry and desperate for a better Life. We'll be hearing from the migrants crossing Mexico in a caravan. Stay with us.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] Hello, everyone. This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon. And this is something a lot of us never thought that we'd hear, the president of the United States publicly denying that he's ever worked for Russia, the president of the United States. That comes as the transcripts of closed-door congressional interviews reveal details of how a half dozen senior FBI officials opened an investigation into whether President Trump was following the directions of Russia in the aftermath of the firing of FBI director James Comey. Trump called FBI officials scoundrels and dirty cops. And there's more. We've learned President Trump actually took away his interpreter's notes after a July 2017 meeting with Vladimir Putin in Hamburg and warned the interpreter not to discuss the meeting with anybody in the administration. That's according to a former State Department official. The president says meetings with foreign leaders are routine and not a big deal. In fact, it is a very big deal when there are more and more questions being raised about why this president seems to be putting Russia's interests ahead of our own. It can be hard to keep track of the developments in the Russia investigation. We know that. It is the cloud that hangs that has hung over the White House since before the president took office. Many of the president's own actions and statements raise even more questions than answers. So tonight, we're devoting the entire hour to trying to get those answers. So let's begin by taking a closer look at President Trump's relationship with Russia's president. Here CNN's Sara Murray.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Don, President Trump wanted to make sure his meetings with Russian President Vladimir were super-secret in 2017. At the same time, the New York Times was asking questions about that now infamous Trump Tower meeting from 2016. Was it all a coincidence? A private dinner-time chat between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G20 summit in 2017 sparking new questions about what exactly the two men discussed. As Trump geared up for meetings with world leaders, the White House received an unwelcome inquiry. The New York Times had learned that Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort met with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower in December 2016. Trump's lawyer had known of the meeting for weeks, but now the Times was doing a story and needed a comment. That afternoon Trump and Putin met for two hours.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It's an honor to be with you. Thank you.
[Murray:] Seeming to hit it off even as Putin denied meddling in the 2016 election.
[Rex Tillerson, Former United States Secretary Of State:] There was a very clear positive chemistry between the two.
[Murray:] Then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had been in the room along with translators. But a former State Department official tells CNN the president confiscated the American interpreter's notes and insisted the staffer keep the details of the conversation secret. The White House insists that's outrageously inaccurate. That evening in Germany, Trump sought out Putin at a dinner for world leaders. The two men spoke for roughly an hour. The meeting, which was eventually confirmed by the White House, wouldn't become public for more than a week.
[Ian Bremmer, President, Eurasia Group:] No one attended that from Trump's side. There was no translator there. There was no adviser there. It was just Trump. For him not to say then afterwards, oh by the way, let me give you a quick debrief on the meeting I had with Putin, that's exceptionally unusual.
[Murray:] Trump's meeting came soon after Justice Department officials had moved to open a probe into Trump for potential obstruction of justice. An investigation that included trying to answer a disturbing question, was Trump making moves designed to benefit Russia or was he merely an innocent party? There's no indication Trump knew at the time that he was under investigation. After Trump's double face to face with Putin in Hamburg, he headed back to the U.S. Aboard Air Force One, Trump and his advisers hashed out a statement to respond to the New York Times. According to the statement, in Donald Trump, Jr.'s name, we primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children in the 2016 meeting with the Russian lawyer. Days later, it came out that the lawyer had actually promised dirt on Hillary Clinton. As the carefully crafted statement fell apart, Trump was still talking up Russian adoptions, insisting that's what he and Putin discussed over dessert.
[Trump:] I actually talked about Russian adoption with him, which is interesting because that was a part of the conversation that Don had in this meeting.
[Murray:] Now, among the people who are questioning this interesting timing was Andrew Weiss. He's a Russia expert at the Carnegie endowment. But it's not just him. Democratic lawmakers are saying, you know, now that we know just how secretive President Trump was trying to be about these meetings with Putin, we really need to find more information about what exactly happened. Back to you.
[Lemon:] Sara Murray, thank you very much. I appreciate that. Let's bring in now Susan Glasser, Renato Mariotti, and Garrett Graff, the author of " The Threat Matrix Inside Robert Mueller's FBI and the War on Global Terror." Good evening. Susan, I'm going to start with you. Number one, you have some good information on this. And number two, it's your birthday, so happy birthday to you. We appreciate you coming on tonight and being with us. You know, you'll get this tonight because I want to talk about the overlap between the president's meeting with Putin at the G20 meeting in 2017 where he confiscated the interpreter's notes and the Times is reporting about Don Jr.'s campaign meeting with the Russians. It's concerning, right?
[Susan Glasser, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] There's no question it's concerning. Again, I keep coming back to first of all it's basically the second anniversary of Trump's inauguration in August. If we had known then what we know now about his dealings with Russia and the Russians extensively, not only before he was president but while he has been president, we would have just been blown away by it. And you pointed out this Hamburg meeting, the G20 meeting, in which the Post has reported he ordered the interpreter's notes confiscated. He then subsequently, of course, had the Helsinki one-on-one summit meeting, which by the way was according to, I think, very reliable reports I've heard personally requested by President Trump. The Russians themselves have said this was not Putin's idea, it was Trump's idea to have the one-on-one meeting. We still don't know what was discussed there. I believe that ultimately the Helsinki meeting, the private meeting, not just the sunny public comments, will come to be a key part of whatever the Mueller investigation finds. But to go back quickly to your question about the original G20 meeting and the dictating of the statement the next day, President Trump echoes Vladimir Putin's talking points. For me, as a Russia watcher, that has been the thing that's been so striking. Talking about adoption of Russian babies is a Russian talking point. It's not about adoption of Russian babies. It's about lifting sanctions on Russia that were imposed on Russia in retaliation for which Russia banned the adoption of babies by Americans. This is a Vladimir Putin talking point that President Trump personally wrote into the statement that was issued on behalf of himself and his son about the Trump Tower meeting. So yes, it's very, very significant.
[Lemon:] Basically, co-opting a Russian talking point. Listen, Garrett, so many questions here. What did President Trump and Vladimir Putin discuss? Why are there all these examples of the president trying to conceal what's going on? What is going on?
[Garrett Graff, Cnn Contributor:] And that's actually one of the really interesting points in this, which is the main reason heads of state get together to talk is to work up policies and compromises and have discussions that then they bring back to government and implement. That you you know, one of the reasons you go into these meetings with staff is sort of there's people to follow up on the work afterwards. You know, part of what is just so strange is that Donald Trump is having these lengthy private meetings and there's no public sign about what is coming out of them. You know, we're not seeing the State Department leap into action immediately afterwards to, you know, follow through on this brave new peace plan that Trump and Putin have cooked up between the two of them. You know, what we're seeing is that these conversations sort of appear to happen in some sort of black hole or parallel universe where there are no fingerprints left publicly on the U.S. government. And that's troubling in and of itself because you sort of have to imagine that they're not sort of getting together and talking about Manchester United's season this year. And in fact, as Susan is talking about, one of the things that's weird is that we're continuing to see the president amplify obscure strange Russian talking points up to just within the last couple of days we've seen the president talking about sort of this incredible revisionist history of the Russian invasion the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to go after terrorists, which is a view not held by any member of the foreign policy historian or establishment press.
[Lemon:] Yes. Renato, I want to know why the big laugh in that. Let me ask you the question. There's reporting the president supposedly took possession of his interpreter's notes following that July 2017 meeting with Putin. Could that action be part of an obstruction case against the president?
[Renato Mariotti, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, he certainly appears to me like he's trying to obstruct the counterintelligence investigation against him. Keep in mind we also learned recently, Don, that the FBI has got a counterintelligence investigation to determine whether or not he's working as a Russian operative or asset. And here, it looks like he's trying to cover up his communications with the Russians. I've got to say, Don, a lot of times I've been on your program and I've come up with all sorts of potentially innocent explanations for conduct by Trump's associates. And I have a lot of trouble explaining any innocent giving any innocent reason for this one. It is really hard to explain why the president of the United States would meet with an adversary and then try to hide the details of that conversation from his own government. I mean, there's really no explanation. And I think you're right that that's something that would be of interest to the FBI both on the counterintelligence side to determine whether or not he's involved with or working with the Russians but also as you point out on the criminal side.
[Lemon:] Let me ask you about the Democrats, Renato, because they're weighing whether to subpoena the president's interpreter, but is it possible that Mueller has already spoken to this person because one question now is where are the notes?
[Mariotti:] I think it is very possible. I, frankly, think that Mueller should be, if he hasn't already. But I will say as a citizen I want my elected representatives to look into this. I called on Twitter for the House to do that. And I was glad to see that Adam Schiff said that he's going to be subpoenaing the interpreter. Because remember, much of what Mueller's investigating may not reach the public. Even if he issues a report, and you know, we heard today the new nominee saying he'll make it public, the details of that meeting could be classified, but it's important for our elected representatives, who are going to evaluate, you know, whether or not, for example, the president should stay in office, for them to have that information and get to the bottom of this for the sake of the country.
[Lemon:] Let me ask you something, Susan. Is President Trump giving Putin exactly what he wants given everything that we have seen and learned?
[Glasser:] Well, it's interesting. You've seen a certain note of exasperation creep into some of the Russian commentary. There was initial jubilation after Trump was elected. Remember, he ran a whole campaign of sucking up to Putin inexplicably. We'll presumably find out a lot more about why that was when the report is issued. But you know, Russians have somewhat soured on him because American policies have not changed drastically. And of course, that's also what you hear from President Trump's defenders here inside the United States when confronted with some of the evidence that we're talking about, the president's continuing public affinity for Putin, his mysterious parroting of Putin's talking points, the strange and obscure reasons for his private undisclosed meetings. What they tend to do, his defenders here in the U.S., is to say, well, basically, never mind, pay no attention to that president behind the curtain and just look at the policy of his administration, never mind the fact that Trump himself is often at odds with that policy. And interestingly, you hear a version of this in Moscow as well essentially saying, well, you know, Trump left to his own devices would be our best friend but he's really constrained by these evil neo con hawk advisers inside his administration and so and by the politics of it here in the United States, which they blame on Democrats. So, in a sense, we still see President Trump acting in concert with the Putin government. And again, you pointed out Trump's latest comments about the FBI, about the investigation. I can't underscore enough how I continue to be amazed and stunned by this. The president of the United States is at war with his own government, with his executive branch, using terms we have never heard from a president. Yes, he denied, under pressure today, that he was acting as an agent of the Russian government. It's a statement that will go down I'm sure with Richard Nixon's I am not a crook, perhaps with Bill Clinton's equivocations about what exactly the nature of sex is and is, is.
[Lemon:] What is, is. Right.
[Glasser:] That's what I thought about this morning.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Glasser:] But it's still let's not lose our sense of shock and dismay that this is how the president is speaking about the rule of law and about the FBI in this country.
[Lemon:] So, Garrett, we know what the what Mueller was tasked with, right? The Russia this investigation and anything that comes up, right any crime that comes up. So, I'm just wondering, he's assembling a timeline. We gave a timeline at the top of our show that showed all these things that are happening, the people surrounded by Trump, people who lied about their contacts with Russians. He's assembling a timeline of all these interactions between Trump and Putin, his campaign and Russia, also the Trump organization. So, then how far back does this go? Does it go back into his business dealings from long ago with Russia to make some sort of tie-in to now? How far back does it go?
[Graff:] It goes back as far as is necessary to tell the narrative, whatever that narrative ends up being. You know, it certainly appears that business deals were part of this. We know that from the Michael Cohen guilty plea, that the Trump Tower Moscow project was under way, that the president while a candidate and while the presumptive nominee for the GOP was out there trying to change the GOP's policies to soften them toward Russia, trying to compliment Vladimir Putin on the campaign trail while trying to do business with Vladimir Putin, while, at least according to what BuzzFeed's reporting is, while trying to give Vladimir Putin a $50 million penthouse in Trump Tower Moscow.
[Lemon:] Right.
[Graff:] So, this is you know, I don't think there's going to end up being a clear line between where the Trump business deal ends and where Trump's collusion with Russia begins because it's Donald Trump himself who has erased whatever line might have existed between the two. Now, that being said, you know, sort of one of the interesting theories that we've seen come out over the last couple days is the idea that sort of the and Benjamin Wittes' law firm has been writing about this
[Lemon:] Right.
[Graff:] that the obstruction could be the collusion, that's sort of the way the president has been trying to stymie the Russia investigation is the thing that he's doing on Russia's behalf.
[Lemon:] Yes. Thank you all. I appreciate your time. And happy birthday to Susan.
[Graff:] Happy birthday, Susan.
[Lemon:] Yes. We'll be right back.

[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.
[Bolduan:] Who could forget that moment from the campaign? July 2016, campaign campaign Trump also that, Candidate Trump during the Democratic convention actually asking Russia for help against his political opponent. A lot of people thinking back to that today with this news coming out, a data analytics company hired by the Trump campaign contacted Wikileaks about getting access to Hillary Clinton's e-mails. CNN crime and justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz, is here with the details. Take us into the details. Lay it out.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Producer:] Kate, this was Cambridge Analytica, a data firm hired by the campaign and what we've learned is that they contacted Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange to see if he had obtained any e-mails related to the Hillary Clinton and whether or not at some point, they would share those e-mails with the data analytics folks. Julian Assange yesterday, after this was revealed first by "The Daily Beast" tweeted out confirming that Cambridge Analytica reached out to them, asked for some information on e-mails but said he had rejected those claims, rejected the overture, did not agree to turn over any of the e-mails to them, and claimed he just did not want to work with them in his tweet.
[Bolduan:] But and also the Trump campaign is, I don't know, seemingly trying to distance themselves from this company at this point, but not so much.
[Prokupecz:] But not so much. They have certainly in a statement said that they relied on the RNC data for their campaign and have distanced themselves, but we went through some of FEC records, election records, and found that the Trump campaign paid Cambridge Analytica a substantial amount of money, some $5.9 million, in November, for some of their work. So, while they may be trying to distance themselves, there are these payments to the group.
[Bolduan:] All right. Let's see where this goes. Great to see you, Shimon. Thank you so much. All right. Joining me now, Bryan Lanza, CNN political commentator and former deputy communications director for Donald Trump campaign, and Paul Begala, CNN political commentator, former Bill Clinton White House adviser, of course. Great to see you both of you. Brian, welcome to the contributor team.
[Bryan Lanza, Cnn Political Commentator:] Thank you.
[Bolduan:] It doesn't mean I can be any nicer to you, I'm just saying. Just ask Paul.
[Lanza:] It is what it is.
[Bolduan:] What do you say to this, Paul?
[Lanza:] Yes. Listen, two things happened yesterday, you had the disclosure of Cambridge Analytica reaching out to Wikileaks and then saying we're not interested, and you also have the disclosure of Fusion GPS that has now been further tied to the Clinton campaign and the DNC and actually Fusion GPS does have some, you know, Kremlin clients. So, if we're looking for collusion, I think the dots got a little bit closer but not with the Trump campaign but specifically with the Clinton campaign.
[Bolduan:] Let's get to OK, I guess, let's just go there. Are
[Lanza:] Please.
[Bolduan:] Are the Paul, are these two things the same? The Fusion GPS and the dossier, and what we're what we are hearing, what we're learning about with Cambridge Analytica?
[Paul Begala, Cnn Political Commentator:] No. It's like saying that firefighters are the same as the arsonists. They both show up at the scene of the crime. Yes, but the Trump campaign now this is one more dot. If you
[Bolduan:] You're saying is one was asking one was looking for help in doing something illegal taking someone's e-mails. The other one was investigating
[Begala:] Opposition research to try to find out was Donald Trump compromised by the Russians. He is acting like he is.
[Bolduan:] How so wrong, Bryan?
[Lanza:] Well here, one was a simple question, like a vendor to the Trump campaign said hey, you know, Wikileaks, is there anything you can share. By the way, that's not a crime as I understand it. So, it's, you know, it's an optics problem for Cambridge Analytica, not necessarily an optics problem for the Trump campaign. But with the Clinton example is they actually hired, and they tried to hide the hiring of Fusion GPS. Now why do they try to hide that
[Bolduan:] Well, wait, couldn't folks say the same, that the Trump campaign is trying to distance themselves from Cambridge Analytica is the same thing, like our hands aren't on this but they are.
[Lanza:] Not at all because I'll tell you what, the meetings never took place. Whereas with the Clinton campaigns, we know that direct payments went into, well went through a third-party vendor to hide the Fusion payment and Fusion itself has some Kremlin clients. I think that's been widely reported. The intelligence community sort of has an eye on this organization. So, I think you're looking at direct tie between the Kremlin
[Bolduan:] A direct tie?
[Lanza:] Direct tie. Direct tie.
[Bolduan:] There you go.
[Lanza:] It's certainly closer than anything Democrats have been saying about the Trump campaign.
[Begala:] Our intelligence agencies, Bryan, as you know, have said that the kremlin, Mr. Putin, was trying to influence the election to favor Mr. Trump. What we don't know we know that. We know that to certainty according to our own national intelligence reports. What we don't know is whether the Trump campaign actively participated in that crime. That is the subject of a special prosecutor. So, you know, you can spin all you want and say this about Hillary, or that, that's not going to work in a grand jury.
[Lanza:] Absolutely it's going to work.
[Begala:] [Inaudible] the rest of these folks are all going to find themselves under oath and my free advice as a lawyer is they best not lie to the grand jury or they will go to prison. We will find out what happened and why the Trump campaign, Mr. Trump Jr. himself, Jared Kushner and the campaign chairman, were meeting on June 9th with people who they said were Russian agents bringing them dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Kremlin itself. Why were they doing that? Why was Donald Trump in that videotape that Kate showed us on July 27th, saying, hey, Russia please hack Hillary. Why now was Cambridge Analytica in touch
[Bolduan:] One thing I think is important I'm cutting you off, Paul. One thing I do think is important is one person is a failed presidential candidate, the other one is the president right now. That is the difference in what we're discussing, and I think that's why there is maybe a difference in significance and important distinction as we have the conversation. But Brian, I want to talk about something else. Also happening right now, allies of Mitch McConnell are now talking taking on Steve Bannon. The Senate leadership fund has plans to fight back against Bannon in the primary battle and war against the establishment he said, that he has promised. I want to play for you Steven Law, the head of the McConnell-linked super PAC. Listen to this.
[Steven Law, President And Ceo, Senate Leadership Fund:] Our concern about Steve Bannon is really just limited to this, that is, that candidates who get wrapped around him will have to answer for his toxic views, things that he said, his associations with the Alt-Right when Democrats make him the star of their attack ads next fall.
[Bolduan:] So, buyer beware kind of a thing. Bryan, both sides of this are actually doing something interesting, which we are saying that other is not serving the best interest of the president as they look as we look towards these primaries, where do you land on this one?
[Lanza:] Well, I mean, I land with Steve Bannon and I find it actually disgusting to see that Republicans are picking up the Nancy Pelosi playbook of trying to demonize Steve Bannon. Why don't we have a debate about the free marketplace of ideas. I mean, that's where the direction this country lies. It doesn't lie on some third-party group attacking Steve Bannon. It lies on what the voters want and what they want at this current time, they want disruption, change, something coming out of Washington that's existed and that's the uphill battle. That Senator McConnell is he's been too much part of Washington and the Bannon's team have finally figured out how to neutralize the money advantage that McConnell had in the past in Alabama proved not to be an advantage. I'm running scared if I'm Mitch McConnell's team. I think the dynamics have changed on them significantly.
[Bolduan:] Paul, you know a thing or two about a super PAC. How do you think this plays out?
[Begala:] Well, I think it's amazing about this it's not about ideas. This is where Bryan is wrong. It's not that they have really different ideas. It's about character. If you look at what Jeff Flake said Senator Flake from Arizona, votes with the president 92 percent of the time. So, it's not actually about a policy change. They all agree that they want to screw the middle class and destroy Medicare but it's about character. That's really different. This could be a lot harder I think to fix. Democrats had a civil war 50 years ago about civil rights and the civil rights Democrats won, the racist Democrats were expelled from the party. That was about ideas and I think the good guys and gals won. This is not really about idea. This is about a president who many Republicans believe is dangerous to our democracy, those are Senator Flake's words not mine.
[Bolduan:] We will see where this goes. All right. Let's see. Bryan, great to see you. Paul, great to see you, kind of. Any moment now, House Speaker Paul Ryan will be answering reporters' questions on Capitol Hill. I think there's I think he might be taking a victory lap, but you don't want to speak too soon. They passed the budget by a slim margin. That's one step in the road to tax reform. It's all smooth sailing from here, right. We're going to bring you his comments live.

[Whitfield:] All right, just days before her death, a Colorado wife and mother texted a friend that her husband was acting distant and cold. Chris Watts was sentenced to life in prison last week for killing his pregnant wife, Shanann, and their two young daughters. He initially reported his family missing, even pleading for their return. And the next day he told police how he brutally killed his family, stuffing them into oil barrels. New documents released by police show Shanann told a friend her husband didn't want their new baby. Rob Lowe of our affiliate KDVR has more.
[Rob Low, Reporter, Kdvr:] Heartbreaking texts from Shanann Watts to a close friend reveal a crumbling marriage and a wife who can't figure out why her husband seems to suddenly want a divorce. Six days before she was murdered, Shanann tells a friend, "Chris told me last night he's scared to death about this third baby and he's happy with just Bella and Celeste and doesn't want another baby." Remember, Shanann was pregnant with a boy but doesn't know it yet when she tells her friend, "I'm supposed to go tomorrow for 4D ultrasounds and gender. Gender reveal next Saturday. I just want to cry. We've never had a problem in our relationship like this. No joke, never. This is total left field." Shannan's friend tries to comfort her texting, "Aww, honey, it will be OK. Give him time. He's adjusting to the idea of the baby. He's scared. He shouldn't be doing this to you, but he's a good guy. He will fix it." "What if he really doesn't love me anymore?" Not possible, honey. He loves you." Shanann responds "Tomorrow is eight years we started dating." The next day, Shanann tells her friend, "He said we are not compatible anymore. He refused to hug me." Shanann's friend texts back, "Go through his phone. Make sure there isn't some other blank I have to kill." When the friend suggests counseling, Shanann texts back, he said he's not sitting on no damn couch, saying what he just said to me to no stranger. Shanann would soon add, "This baby in my belly deserves his full love." Finally, Shanann messages, "The only thing I can think of, even though I don't think he has it in him, is another girl."
[Whitfield:] That was Rob Low of our affiliate KDVR reporting. And a chilling report indeed, I want to bring in psychotherapist Robi Ludwig. She's the co-author of the book, "Till Death Do Us Part, Love, Marriage, and the Mind of the Killer Spouse." So Robi, you've been following this case as everybody really has been from the beginning. What has stood out to you? Even learning now those texts, does it fill in some of the blanks, some of the suspicions you may have had before?
[Robi Ludwig, Psychotherapist:] Yes, and it just really clarified what I always thought, that Shanann really never had Chris in the way that she thought she did, in part because Chris was never capable of that kind of love. And I think at one point when he looked around and he realized he felt trapped, he was no longer feeling successful, when he went into the marriage hoping that he would achieve, which is a sense of success and maybe this idea that Shanann would fix him, would help him to feel normal, it just never played out that way. And at one point his solution was to make his mistake disappear, and we know how it all ended.
[Whitfield:] Wow. So these new details about this case just being released. There's a 2,000-page report. And according to the documents, not only did family members think foul play was involved, they had that instinct right away, but they actually did feel like Chris Watts did it. Neighbors even said they noticed changes in Watts' personality. She texted about it. So as a psychotherapist, what are the warning signs? How do you put all of this now together for people?
[Ludwig:] Well, I think it's very hard, and it's one thing to look in retrospect and say, oh, my gosh, there were signs. But Chris was probably very good at creating a facade, a facade of the loving husband and the loving father. So it may not have been really clear in that at one point Chris felt unsuccessful and dead inside, and had an affair and thought the affair would be a solution for him, a solution to help him live the life that he really felt entitled to. But it's very difficult. You almost have to look at a person's past and find out how they connect in order to find the disturbances, but sometimes it's not clear because the crisis happens in the moment, and that's when the disturbed person acts in a murderous way.
[Whitfield:] And then contrast that, you look at the selfies of her where she looked very blissful and happy even though at the same time she's texting to a friend, I'm quoting now, Chris came back a different man after spending five weeks apart. So that, too, promotes a lot of confusion.
[Ludwig:] I think probably one of the appeals for Chris was probably that Shanann knew how to create this very happy, blissful image, and he wanted to step into that image, and he wanted to feel like a successful, healthy man. If we look at the person who has anti-social personality disorder, they're not really able to connect and feel empathy and to feel love. They can't have that feeling in the way the rest of us can. And I think that there was something about Shanann's presentation that got him to believe perhaps he could be normal and like everybody else. And when it didn't turn out that way, he then blamed Shanann for not fixing him or helping him to feel like the successful man he wanted to be. There were financial issues. There was an additional child. He just could not give Shanann what she wanted from him, and he felt burdened by that. And the way he dealt with it was probably in a way he didn't feel was ideal, but the only way he knew how, which was to kill them.
[Whitfield:] And do you have I guess a little more clarity as to why prosecutors would keep a lot of these details, you know, quiet, these text messages, et cetera, until sentencing?
[Ludwig:] Maybe it was out of respect to the family and to try to keep this case as private as possible. It was a very public case, and maybe just to decrease a circus-like atmosphere that can happen when a case is very public. And then after the sentencing it's a bit safer to reveal this information and to explore it in a way that doesn't impact the case.
[Whitfield:] All right, Robi Ludwig, thank you you so much. It's such a troubling case.
[Ludwig:] Thank you. Yes, very.
[Whitfield:] Still ahead, a massive storm system sweeping through parts of the country could make a travel mess for so many heading home after the Thanksgiving holiday. Where we could see the biggest issues as millions hit the roads and the airways, next.

[John Vause, Host, Cnn:] Welcome back, everybody. It's 12.31 here in Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.
[Isa Soares, Host, Cnn:] And I'm Isa Soares. You are watching CNN Newsroom live from Los Angeles. Now shock for republican lawmakers overnight in Washington where they suffered an enormous defeat in their effort to repeal as well as replace Obamacare. Senator John McCain cast the deciding no vote on the so-called skinny repeal measure, and that means Obamacare remains the law of the land.
[Vause:] U.S. President Donald Trump not happy. He tweeted this out during the early hours. "Three republicans and 48 democrats let the American people down. As I said from the beginning, let Obamacare implode, then deal, and watch."
[Soares:] Meanwhile, and watch meanwhile, back at the White House, a really ugly power struggle has gone public in a rather big way. Incoming communication director Anthony Scaramucci called the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza and viciously attacked Chief of Staff Reince Priebus. He accused Priebus of leaks and then he got really, rather, nasty.
[Vause:] Yes, then he got nasty. I hate to highlight here. This is from the New York article. "Reince is a paranoid schizophrenic, paranoiac," Scaramucci said. He channeled Priebus as he spoke, "Bill Shine is coming in," Bill Shine of Fox News is at the dinner. "Let me leak the effing thing and see if I can something blocked these people the way, something blocked Scaramucci for six months." I have no idea what any of that means.
[Soares:] A lot of expletives.
[Vause:] OK. They can tell you if we see a lot. We have on the republican side, Shawn Steel and John Thomas, and on the democratic side, Matt Lippman and Caroline Heldman. OK. Let's stop and look at the front page from the New York Post for Friday edition, "It's survivor White House." Center stage, reality TV star Donald Trump." Certainly, a lot of in-fighting right now within the West Wing. But I'm wondering, Matt, is it really survivor right now or is it more dynasty?
[Mathew Littman, Democratic Strategist:] Well, Donald Trump obviously likes the drama.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Littman:] But the problem is, that while all this drama is going on, he's not fulfilling the agenda for which he was elected. So, today healthcare reform failed. Tax reform, so far, nothing. Infrastructure, nothing. And that's the problem, is that there's all this drama and in-fighting inside the White House. But also, Scaramucci is probably not the right person for a White House communications job. That's another problem. You know, another person who kisses up to Donald Trump isn't the answer when you're having communications issues. Hiring a professional who knows how to do that job might be the right move. This guy seems to be in love with publicity, even this publicity, which we would consider probably terrible. This to him is fantastic and I think Trump likes it.
[Soares:] Well, this is how Scaramucci pretty much explained what happened. As we can read a tweet from him, he said, "I made a mistake in trusting a reporter. It won't happen again." I mean, he basically calls the reporter. He knows he's on, you know, the record. I mean, a White House communication director...
[Vause:] Did not say off the record.
[Soares:] He didn't say off the record.
[John Thomas, Political Commentator, Cnn:] Well, I'm not sure he has the experience to know that you don't state something that's off the record. It's on the record. And that's part of the problem. To Matt's point, you know...
[Soares:] But important to note, Ryan Lizza actually went back to him after when he called him, they had a conversation, and then the next day he followed up. So you can't say he didn't he wasn't aware of this conversation.
[Littman:] He probably knew the call was being recorded, which it was.
[Vause:] But Shawn, this is the thing, I mean, when are they going to get some experienced people in the White House who actually know how to actually make the White House work?
[Shawn Steel, California Republican National Committeeman:] Scaramucci really had a great debut. And then he had an incredibly strange conversation with a reporter that he really honestly believed that was off the record. He couldn't, because he really, he said things that you wouldn't even say to most people in life. He's embarrassed about it. And it shows one thing. This is such a different White House. It really drives the liberals crazy. The Trump supporters understand that they elected a bull in the China shop and they want all the furniture destroyed. And that's, you know, and you know, they're comfortable with that. Now, what Scaramucci do does in the next couple of days, he's going to he's going to has to be more transparent, he has to be more open, that's what people elected Trump for. Because he's the most unfiltered president of our time.
[Vause:] OK. You said it drives the liberals crazy. It's driving the conservatives crazy as well. This is Mark Levin from his radio show on Thursday.
[Mark Levin, Radio:] Do you think this kind of internecine warfare makes America great again? It makes these guys look stupid, moronic, pathetic! That's not how you serve your president, in my view.
[Vause:] Caroline, Mark Levin master of understatement, I guess. But you know, we should note, though, that apparently this war between Scaramucci and Priebus is actually being egged on by the president.
[Caroline Heldman, Democratic Strategist:] Right. And it's not serving him. Bless your heart, Shawn, but this is not good for the president. It's not just liberals who are upset about this. This president has the lowest approval ratings of any president at any point...
[Stell:] You're relying on the polls again?
[Heldman:] Yes, you know, it's data, numbers, I know facts are scary.
[Stell:] Good luck.
[Thomas:] Well, he's still at 80, 90 percent with his base.
[Heldman:] Nineteen-point-five percent of the population voted for this president. He has a steady stream of seven months of self-inflicted wounds. We can't act like this is normal. We can't act like...
[Steel:] But his base hasn't abandoned him yet, Caroline. That's the issue.
[Heldman:] His base his base has not abandoned him but his base is small and he has not been effective in pushing legislative agenda. And Scaramucci is just the latest in a stream of amateurs in the White House. It reflects poorly on the presidency and it reflects poorly on this particular president.
[Soares:] It has distracted the White House from the policies and legislative agenda then they should be focusing on, Matt.
[Littman:] Well, of course, the legislative agenda is kind dead in the water. The idea that big tax reform would happen, it's not happening.
[Vause:] Yes.
[Littman:] There's a semi-tax reform plan that came out today, not that great.
[Vause:] OK. We're going to take a short break. Stay with us. A lot more coverage out of the White House, the in-fighting and of course the failure to pass healthcare. Stay with us.

[Lemon:] So here is breaking news right now, President Trump getting a briefing Thursday on a highly anticipated report from the Justice Department and inspector general. CNN Justice Reporter, Laura Jarrett joins me now with all the details. OK, so this briefing comes on Wednesday from the Deputy Attorney- General on the IG report on Thursday I should say. So what can you tell us about it? What do you know, Laura?
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Yes, Don, this is sort of eye brow raising. Of course, the President has been hotly anticipating this report, tweeting about it every now and then saying it's been delayed, suggesting that it's been watered down. But I have now learned this evening that the Deputy Attorney-General Rod Rosenstein will brief the President on Thursday before the report is publicly released that day. And I also got a statement, and an interesting one from a spokesperson for the Inspector General's Office who noted that this has been done in the past under the Obama administration. And he goes on to say, no changes are made to the OIG's report on account of these briefings. So, clearly, the office is mindful of what the President has been tweeting, Don.
[Lemon:] So, apparently there is this escalating war, Laura, between Devin Nunes and Rosenstein. Talk to me about that.
[Jarrett:] Yes, this battle gets uglier by the day. And Justice Officials are pushing back on this one saying the fact have been turned upside down. Now this latest feud between Rosenstein and the staff on the House Intel Committee all goes back to a heated meeting in January of this year right on the heels of the House Intel Committee Chairman Devin Nunes who start regularly threatening Rod Rosenstein with contempt of Congress for failing to turn over documents related to the Russian investigation. Well, earlier today, another network reported that at that meeting, Rosenstein essentially threatened House Intel staff in the room with a criminal investigation for their own conduct. But two sources tell me, Don, that that is false. And instead, Rosenstein essentially said if you hold me in contempt, realize I will be able to defend myself.
[Lemon:] Laura Jarrett with the breaking news tonight. Laura, thank you, I appreciate that.
[Jarrett:] Thanks, Don.
[Lemon:] Let's discuss all of this now with Congressman Eric Swalwell. He is a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. First, what's your what's your assessment with this breaking news that Rosenstein is going to brief the President on Thursday?
[Rep. Eric Swalwell , California:] I mean, it's all right. You know, it was a critical point in the election, the President should be briefed on it, I'm not bothered by that at all. But remember, Don, Donald Trump, just days before the election, wanted to throw a parade for Jim Comey for reopening the investigation. And now, it's to suggest that he's offended by the way that he handle it. What I'm more upset about is that the President refuses to be briefed on what the Russians did in 2016 in the election, and what they're willing to do in 2018. He's obsessed with Comey, but he is not obsessed because that's about him. But he's not obsessed about us, and our democracy, and what it takes to protect that.
[Lemon:] I don't think that's going to happen.
[Swalwell:] No.
[Lemon:] So...
[Swalwell:] No.
[Lemon:] So, I mean...
[Swalwell:] So we have to fix that.
[Lemon:] This is not going to happen. So let's talk about our reporting is that Devin Nunes and the Attorney General whose overseeing the Russia investigation is in a fight they're in a fight. I know you can't disclose everything because you know, because of the position that you hold, but what can you tell us about their relationship? What went wrong?
[Swalwell:] Well, Devin Nunes saw his job as not conducting oversight, or protecting the battle box, or protecting the President. That was from day one of our investigation, I saw that behind the scenes, and I saw that in public. And I think Mr. Rosenstein is concerned that you have a member of Congress trying to reach into the FBI evidence locker, and then give that evidence to subjects of the investigation. That's very dangerous for the rule of law, and our country. And at some point, he has to just say no. We don't do that in America, and we're not going to let you do that for this President.
[Lemon:] So, everything you know about the Deputy Attorney-General, would he threaten House staff as he alleges what the DOJ denies?
[Swalwell:] I don't think so, Don. You know, I was a prosecutor, and I think most prosecutors, you know, they go above and beyond to follow the law, and meet the highest standards of the law to prove their case. You know, we were always told when we were trying that, you know, you wear the white hat, and you do the right thing. I just can't see him saying that, but I can see because I have with seen my own eyes, Chairman Nunes obstructing, and preventing Rosenstein from doing what he has to do to allow Mueller to complete his job.
[Lemon:] So, when the evidence that you have seen you have seen with your own eyes? You haven't seen that the Deputy AG would do I with it the Attorney-General would?
[Swalwell:] That would be out of character for...
[Lemon:] OK. So, the Attorney-General Jeff Session in just a short time ago, he said that he said that they have been cooperative with the DOJ, they've turned over information, they have made progress on that front, would you agree with that?
[Swalwell:] That the DOJ has been cooperative with House Intelligence?
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Swalwell:] I think our job is to look, you know, whether Civil Rights are being violated, you know, whether investigations are within their scope, but we don't do that when the investigation is on going.
[Lemon:] Too corporative?
[Swalwell:] Yes, too corporative. Devin Nunes is not interested in even learning, and there's been reports that he doesn't even read what's been turned over. He just wants Rosenstein to say no, so then he can use that as a reason to undermine Rosenstein and Mueller's investigation, huge purpose.
[Lemon:] You have said that from the very beginning, I remember you coming on the show, and even you weren't in the show, you were standing there in Congress saying that you believe that Nunes should have been off the House Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation a long time ago. He seems to keep all of this in the spotlight. Why is he able to do that when the investigation the House investigation is essentially closed as Republicans are concerned?
[Swalwell:] Paul Ryan won't stand up to him. Paul Ryan appointed him. He 2can take him off the committee. He can get us back to that cooperation. I want so many times...
[Lemon:] Why won't he stand up to him?
[Swalwell:] I think he's afraid of Donald Trump. He's afraid of him. The same reason Mark Stanford's afraid of Donald Trump, because Trump wins. When you go against Trump, he wins, and democracy loses. You wouldn't believe the number of times I saw Mr. Schiff in our committee say to the Republicans, why don't we just meet. Go on the sidelines, have an informal meeting, you tell us what's bothering. We will tell you what's bothering us. And not once did they take them up on it.
[Lemon:] So do you remember when the President's attorney was his new attorney? Not exactly knew...
[Swalwell:] Which one?
[Lemon:] Rudy Giuliani. When he said that the President didn't have time to sit down with Robert Mueller because he was preparing too busy preparing for this North Korea summit, right? Watch this.
[Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's Lawyer:] If Mueller said to me tomorrow, bring him in two hours like you want, no questions that you don't want, and we're pretty much ready to clear him. I could not go to the President of the United States, and say, take two days off and get ready for that, and screw the whole thing with North Korea. How can any American do that?
[Lemon:] OK, so there's two thing, number one, summit's over, right, the investigation still going on.
[Swalwell:] Yes.
[Lemon:] And number two, the President admitted as much that he didn't really prepare. Because I've been preparing for this for all my life, I'm going with my gut, and how I feel. So, what gives here?
[Swalwell:] Yes. He didn't prepare. He saw this as a match.com date without any repercussion.
[Lemon:] So what does that what does that mean when Rudy Giuliani said, was he just flat out lying?
[Swalwell:] Sit in the chair now what's you excuse for not sitting in the chair now? When you and to hear all of these complaints from Vice President Pence to the President that it's taking too long by the way, hasn't gone as long as whether [Inaudible] or Watergate. But when you tamper with witnesses, whether you lie, when you obstruct, and when you're not willing to sit in the chair when you've already been given the questions, yes, that's going to take a little while.
[Lemon:] Congressman Swalwell, thank you, sir.
[Swalwell:] Yes, my pleasure.
[Lemon:] I appreciate it. When we come back a federal judge approves AT&T's merger with Time Warner despite the administration's objection to the deal. And that judge is also given President Trump's DOJ a stern warning. We're going to tell you about that next.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. This is CNN's special live coverage of what's expected to be rather explosive testimony from the former acting attorney general of the United States, Sally Yates. It's the first time we're hearing directly from Yates since President Trump fired her for defying his travel ban. Minutes from now she's expected to reveal to a Senate subcommittee what she told the Trump administration about Michael Flynn. And it's coming on the heels of a bombshell from the former Obama from former Obama administration officials. They say the former president personally warned then President-elect Trump against hiring Michael Flynn only two days after he won the presidential election on November 8th. Their meeting was November 10th. The retired three star Army general was forced to resign as national security adviser only 24 days into the job for allegedly lying about his discussions with the Russian ambassador to the United States. The Pentagon is now investigating Flynn for allegedly taking payments from a foreign government without disclosing those payments. Moments ago, the White House responded to news that President Obama had warned President-elect Trump about Flynn.
[Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary:] The president doesn't disclose details of meetings that he has, which, in this case, was an hour-long meeting. But it's true that the president made it President Obama made it known that he wasn't exactly a fan of General Flynn's, which is frankly, shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone given that General Flynn had worked for President Obama, was an outspoken critic of President Obama's shortcomings specifically as it related to his lack of strategy confronting ISIS and other threats around that were facing America. So the question that you have to ask yourself really is, if President Obama was truly concerned about General Flynn, why didn't he suspend General Flynn's security clearance, which they had just reapproved months earlier? Additionally, why did the Obama administration let Flynn go to Russia for a paid speaking engagement and receive a fee. There were steps that they could have taken that if if that was truly a concern more than just a person that didn't had bad blood.
[Question:] That didn't give him any pause at all?
[Spicer:] No. I think again, I think you if you know what we knew at the time, which is that the security clearance that he had, had been reapproved in April of that year, and they took not only did they reapprove it, but then they took no steps to suspend it.
[Question:] Did you not vet him yourselves?
[Spicer:] Well, you don't vet on a security clearance that that's what that's why you get a security clearance. Everyone in the government goes through the same process. So the answer is, that those same that same process worked for General Flynn as it did for me or for anyone else who works here. There's no difference of a security clearance once it's issued.
[Blitzer:] Let's get to our White House correspondent Sara Murray. Sara, tell us what you know about the conversation then President Obama had with then President-elect Trump, only two days after the presidential election.
[Sara Murray, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, sources are telling my colleague, Jim Acosta, that essentially in this meeting, President Obama expressed concern about General Flynn, urged President Trump not to hire him for the job of national security adviser, but clearly he saw Sean Spicer downplaying that warning from their view. They sort of dismissed it as this idea of bad blood between former President Obama and retired General Michael Flynn, basically saying obviously it's clear that the president didn't like this guy. and that's sort of how they say they took the warning, not as a concern that General Flynn might have done anything wrong, but just as sort of this past bad blood between the Obama administration and General Flynn. Now, obviously, as they've come to learn there were many headaches awaiting them when it came to this, but it is interesting to see the Trump administration try to pin the blame about General Flynn's activities and the concerns surrounding him on the Obama administration. And it is worth noting, Wolf, that usually when you are going to put someone in this position, a position of national security adviser, you would do some of your own vetting beyond just the question of whether or not you have a security clearance. Obviously the Trump administration has decided they're going to spin this, try to pin it on Obama. But it's clear there are going to be many, many more questions about Flynn's activities and why President Trump still felt like he was a good fit for this job.
[Blitzer:] Yes, those are excellent questions indeed. All right, Sara, thanks very much. Joining us now, our CNN global affairs analyst, Tony Blinken. Tony also served as the deputy national security adviser to President Obama. He was also deputy secretary of state. Tony, let's start by getting your reaction to this news from former Obama administration officials that the former president himself warned Mr. Trump in person only two days after the November 8th election against hiring Michael Flynn.
[Tony Blinken, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Wolf, I don't have any direct knowledge of that of that warning. It wouldn't it wouldn't surprise me. I think if the president knowing President Obama, knowing that Mr. Flynn had not been a good manager of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and indeed that's why he was let go, and then knowing that he was tapped to be national security adviser wouldn't surprise me that that came up in conversation, but I don't have direct knowledge of that.
[Blitzer:] What about the argument we just heard from Sean Spicer that in April of 2016 the Obama administration renewed his security clearances?
[Blinken:] It's a huge effort at distraction, Wolf. In April 2016, Mr. Flynn was no longer working for the Obama administration. He had been let go in 2014. But what happens with former officials is, they sometimes try to hold on to their security clearances. And when those clearances expire, they get re-upped. And that's done by the agency that the person in question used to work for, in this case the Defense Intelligence Agency. That's totally different than bringing someone in as national security adviser who then has to go through a much more elaborate clearance process and vetting process. That apparently didn't happen with Mr. Flynn under the Trump administration's watch. I sincerely doubt that the White House had an knowledge that Mr. Flynn's security clearance was re-upped in 2016. This was a fairly routine matter that goes back to the agency that he used to work for.
[Blitzer:] And when they re-upped his secretary clearances, the DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, maybe the U.S. Army as well, did they know about his paid speaking engagements in 2015 in Moscow? We all saw the video of him having dinner, it was at this Russian TV dinner with Putin.
[Blinken:] I don't know, Wolf, and it's a very good question. Now, I think there were some public reports about the about those meetings, about those events. Certainly the RT dinner. So, arguably, that's something that that they should have known and they might have looked into when they were re-upping the clearance, but that's not something that went to the White House or went to senior levels of the Obama administration. It's something that was done by the Defense Intelligence Agency and usually it's a pretty routine matter.
[Blitzer:] When you re-up clearances like that, I assume you have to fill out forms. The suggestion out there, the allegation is, he wasn't completely honest about the money he received from Russian TV when he was updating his security clearances. Do you know anything about that?
[Blinken:] Again, no firsthand knowledge, but you're exactly right, Wolf, as a normal process, when you re-up a clearance, you'd have to report on any foreign contacts you've had since the previous clearance, any payments you've received from foreign sources, et cetera. So that's something that Mr. Flynn presumably should have done in re-upping the clearance.
[Blitzer:] The former acting attorney general, Sally Yates, she's about to testify before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee. She's going to tell presumably tell all of us what she told the Trump administration about Michael Flynn after he was national security adviser. In the past the White House has said Yates simply gave them a heads-up about some conflicting statements that Flynn had made to the vice president. What do you expect to hear from Sally Yates today? How far, in other words, do you expect her to go?
[Blinken:] Look, knowing Sally Yates as I do, which is very well, we worked closely together in the last administration, I expect to hear from her the facts. She is the straightest of straight shooters. And, Wolf, remember this, she was initially hired as an assistant U.S. attorney down in Georgia by Bob Barr. You remember Bob Barr, a former Republican congressman, who led the impeachment effort against President Clinton. When she was an assistant U.S. attorney in Georgia, she went after anyone and everyone who violated the law. In fact, she helped take down a Democratic mayor in Atlanta who was convicted of tax evasion. So Sally is, as I said, the straightest of straight shooters. She follows the law. She follows the facts. And if she was concerned about Mr. Flynn and told the White House, I have no doubt that that happened and it's unfortunate they didn't take her seriously. There's a huge gap, as you know, in time between when she reportedly raised these concerns about Mr. Flynn with the White House and when he was actually let go. And then he was only let go after the media started talking about it.
[Blitzer:] And but there are some problems, she has to be careful, in terms of revealing what's called sources and methods, how she found out, for example, about her about Flynn's phone conversations with the Russian ambassador to the United States. She has to be very careful in revealing those kinds of details, right?
[Blinken:] Yes, that's exactly right. And it may be that there are some things that need to happen in a closed session, in a classified session. She can only go so far in a public setting.
[Blitzer:] That's a good point. All right, Tony Blinken, thanks very much.
[Blinken:] Thanks, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Let's bring in our panel to discuss all of this. Our chief political analyst Gloria Borger is with us, our chief political correspondent Dana Bash, our CNN political director David Chalian, and our chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto. This is a very, very sensitive matter that Sally Yates is about to discuss with members of this Judiciary Subcommittee.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Right. She's in a difficult spot because she can't, in public testimony, talk about exactly what was in these highly classified intercepts that she read, that she felt strongly enough to go meet with the White House Counsel about. What she can talk about is question why it took Don McGahn such a long time, the White House Counsel, such a long time to alert the president, what what the president did with this information, what the White House did with this information, why it didn't send up a red flag or two. You know, we've been told in our reporting that she told them quite strongly that Flynn had been compromised, which would mean that he would be subject to blackmail. And, you know, if you're hearing that and you're the White House Counsel, I can't imagine you wouldn't take that directly to the president of the United States and say, we have a we have a real problem here.
[Blitzer:] But what they're trying to suggest, Dana, is that, you know what, she was an Obama administration official. She was subsequently fired by the Trump administration because she didn't think the travel ban was constitutional.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Right.
[Blitzer:] That she could implement it as the acting attorney general. They're going to raise questions about her credibility.
[Bash:] Absolutely. That is I mean the president of the United States unveiled that not so secret strategy in his quite inappropriate tweet this morning going after her. But despite the fact that is going to be some Republican's strategy, it's going to be very hard to really get that to stick. Our colleague, Evan Perez, showed me a story that he wrote back when he was at "The Wall Street Journal" in 2009 about the fact that John Lewis, the civil rights icon, Democratic congressman from Georgia, was trying to block her from being the U.S. attorney from Georgia because she had gone after Democratic members Democratic politicians in Atlanta because of corruption and other issues because and that he thought she was a Republican. So that kind of gives you a sense of, if Republicans think that she's a democrat and Democrats think she's a Republican, kind of like reporters, maybe we're all doing doing our job and maybe she is too.
[Blitzer:] Step back, David. Give us some perspective on what we're about to see during this hearing.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Well, I think what we're about to see is a tale as specific as possible, but probably not all the juicy details, of somebody sounding the alarm to the Trump administration. And, Wolf, I think we have to also step back here. Combine this Sally Yates testimony with what we learned today about President Obama delivering this message of concern about Flynn to President Trump in their first meeting. You had the most inexperienced person in these matters elected to the presidency, surrounding themself with a team of perhaps the least experienced people in dealing with these matters, in terms of the closest advisers, and you have from President Obama to Sally Yates, you have people who have been steeped in this starting to raise red flags and sound alarms. And to Gloria's point, I think what what certainly some senators on this panel are going to look for is, what did you do about those alarms? What what were the steps that you've taken because this was not anything that Donald Trump had encountered in his entire life. Nothing like this. And so he receives this information, so what a very inexperienced person in these matters, what do you do with that information in that moment that you get it?
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] Here's the thing, you she can't go into classified information, but she could tell us the why. Why she delivered that warning. And Gloria and I, we've reported this. The why is that she believed that he was lying when and that she had evidence that Michael Flynn was lying when he said he did not discuss U.S. sanctions on Russia in his conversations with the Russian ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak. That's the message she delivered to Don McGahn. We've been able to report that
[Blitzer:] The White House Counsel.
[Sciutto:] To the White House Counsel on January 26th, 18 days before General Flynn was eventually fired. So without saying sources and methods and without raising a transcript from an intercepted conversation, she can still say, I told the White House that we had evidence he was lying when he said he didn't discuss that. That's a pretty damning
[Blitzer:] You can say evidence, but she can't say that phone conversations were being monitored.
[Sciutto:] Well, she could say phone I mean she could reference that because we know that kind of thing happens, but she can't
[Blitzer:] But she's not going to say
[Sciutto:] But she can't go to the root intelligence. But but, still, you get to the why, as to why that warning was delivered. And that's pretty damning because if the argument is and you heard that from Sean Spicer just a few minutes ago, that, yes, President Obama gave us some some warning about Flynn but, you know what, you never liked Flynn. Of course you wouldn't like Flynn because Flynn was critical of him, you know, as simple as that. OK, so if President Obama didn't give you the basis for his concerns then, which, you know, I would find surprising, but if he didn't, that's fine. Several days later, Sally Yates did. And it took nearly three weeks before he was fired. And, again, remember, he was fired after it went public in a "Washington Post" story.
[Blitzer:] All right, hold your thought. Everybody hold your thought. There's a lot more coming up. We want to get ready for this very, very important hearing. Moments away from now, Sally Yates will testify about what she told the Trump administration about Michael Flynn. This is the first time we're going to be hearing directly from Sally Yates and the president fired her over his travel ban back in January. Stay with us. This is CNN's special live coverage.

[Baldwin:] While we don't know if the special counsel is even considering an interview with Michael Cohen, CNN is reporting that the president's former personal attorney is ready to talk about that meeting with Russians at Trump Tower, claiming that Donald Trump knew about it all along. But the president's current attorney, Rudolph Giuliani, tells CNN that Cohen a pathological liar. Here he is right after the news broke.
[Rudy Giuliani, Personal Attorney To President Trump:] No, no, I expected something like this from Cohen. He's been lying all week. He's been lying for years. The tapes that that we have demonstrate any number of very serious lies by him back a year and a half ago, including his fooling people, hiding tape-recordings, telling them they weren't recorded, lying to their face, breaking faith with them, taping his client, which is a dis-barable offense. I don't see how he has any credibility. This would be if he had a trial. When you have a trial, you would say, which lie do you want to pick? Do you want to pick the first lie, the second lie or maybe some new lie? There's nobody that I know that knows him that hasn't warned me, if his back is against a wall, he'll lie like crazy. Which he's lying also.
[Baldwin:] Cohen has lied to the media before in order to protect the president. In February, he said Trump knew nothing about the payment to Stormy Daniels. We now know otherwise. Just 19 days ago, Giuliani was praising Cohen's loyalty and his integrity when his asked if Cohen would turn on the president.
[Giuliani:] I do not expect that Michael Cohen will lie. I think he will tell the truth as best he can, given his recollection.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] And you confident that truth
[Bash:] nothing that is negative or even worse for President Trump?
[Giuliani:] Yes. I am very confident of that. We all should be or Mueller would not have given it away if it had any hope of producing evidence against the president. I expect that he will cooperate. I don't think he'll be happy with it because he doesn't have any incriminating evidence about the president or himself. The man is an honest, honorable lawyer.
[Baldwin:] Remember, Cohen spent years as Donald Trump's fixer. He once said he would take a bullet for his boss. And when President Trump found out the conversations had been taped, Giuliani said the president felt betrayed.
[Giuliani:] He was angry. President Trump can get angry sometimes. He was disappointed, almost like a father being betrayed by his son. It was very moving.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] But he obviously believed Michael Cohen was a man of good character, who he could depend on, and who would tell him the truthful.
[Giuliani:] Up until a few days ago, yes. I think he did. He had no reason to distrust Michael. He didn't. He didn't select Michael for government. You know Michael was bitter about that. That will be on tapes, without getting into the detail of it. And he is very, very jealous and bitter about the kids, which also comes across on the tapes. So you have a whole scenario here.
[Baldwin:] Those tapes of Cohen's private conversations with the president, Cohen's attorney said there's more to come. Coming up next, a prank of Sacha Baron Cohen paints one Arizona town as racist. We'll play the clip for you. And we'll talk to the mayor to respond.

[Baldwin:] So as we've been talking to people who live and have been describing to us on the air what it felt like, this 7.0 magnitude quake this morning in Anchorage, Alaska, we've really been watching, eavesdropping on this Facebook Live feed of our affiliate, KTVA, in Anchorage, Alaska. Everybody one has been knocked off the air. You can see the damage from the newsroom. But they've still been going over Facebook. Let's dip in and keep watching a bit.
[Unidentified Ktva Reporter:] cell phone back to its owner and get to work. Likely go out into the field and hopefully have a live report tonight. None of us really know what our shows are going to look like, what the structure is going to be, but we are all going to do something and work hard and hope that we can deliver the best product possible under the current circumstances. Again, I thank you for joining us. Hey, is John back there? Yes, can someone take this? I have an assignment.
[Baldwin:] Allison Chinchar, passing off the phone there. It looks like KTVA, different people are heading out on assignment trying to get out and get video of the damage out and about. What's the latest you're getting, Allison?
[Allison Chinchar, Ams Meteorlogist:] Those aftershock numbers keep going up. We're now at 15 aftershocks we've had since the initial 7.0 quake. This is normal. You may not have that many this soon after. Sometimes it can take several hours before you tick up. This is a very decent amount of aftershocks after the initial quake. Some of those have been quite large. In fact, one was over five. And that was the one that was closest to downtown Anchorage. The concern is, after you get a quake that is a 7.0, a lot of buildings, infrastructure becomes structurally compromised. Any subsequent aftershocks can continue to do more damage. That's why we tell me, if anything's wrong with your building, get out. Even it's just the windows are broken or some cracks in the foundation. You don't know about the stuff you can't see. Get out of the building where you can be safer. One other thing, we talked about this, how far people were able to feel this. Getting some reports as far as 400 miles away. But it's not just life shaking. You have a lot of this area in yellow that indicates strong and very strong shaking. Then the orange area, closer to the epicenter, that's where you're talking about severe shaking. That makes a lot of sense when you see some of the video that shows some of the damage that's taken place already. One concern, the U.S. Geological Survey monitors economic impacts. They have given this a yellow pager, indicating they do expect some type of economic impact with the quake. Again, it's a large one. It was relatively shallow. I know it was only 25 miles underground, and that may seem like it's pretty far down, but you have to get over that 40-mile threshold before it's considered a deep quake. This one was not. This was still considered a shallow earthquake. Typically, when we talk about aftershocks, if you have an initial quake of 7.0, it's likely you'll get one that's a magnitude six or higher. At least 10 that could be five or higher. At least 100 that could be, say, magnitude four or larger. So the continuing threat for this particular earthquake is actually going to be those subsequent aftershocks that come through based off of that initial one that was a 7.0. Brooke, one other thing to mention, too, if you have travel plans there, keep in mind a lot of roads are damaged and the airport, the international airport is official on a ground stop as of now.
[Baldwin:] That's right. Listening to the reporter of that TV station saying they all went through the 7.9 magnitude quake back in January. But everyone I've talked to and heard from said this one felt the worst and most violent they have ever felt. We'll come back to you, Allison, next hour. Thank you so much. We are also Allison mentioned the international airport in Anchorage, total ground stop, diverting flights. Also coming in, here's pictures as that quake happened from inside this airport. We're getting control tower audio. We'll play that for you as we see more and more images of widespread infrastructure damage in the Anchorage, Alaska, area. Breaking news after this.

[Bolduan:] A big development in the Russia investigation. CNN is reporting. after months and months of negotiations, President Trump's legal team is preparing answers to written questions providing by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Sources say the questions are focused on, and here's how they describe it, "Matters related to the investigation of possible collusion between Trump associates and Russians seeking to meddle in the 2016 election." Joining me now, CNN legal analyst, Michael Zeldin, former assistant to Robert Mueller at the Justice Department and a former federal prosecutor. Michael, so they're preparing answers to the questions. What exactly does that mean? Are they like sitting down with the president, pencil to paper at this moment?
[Michael Zeldin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] So I think there's a two-step process here. First is, they receive the questions and they, the lawyers, Jane and Marty Raskin, and perhaps Jay Sekulow, are crafting answers based on the documentation that they have already sent to Mueller to make sure that which they sent and the answers to the questions are consistent. Once they have clear answers to the distinct questions, then I think they go to the president, because these are his statements, so he's going to be bound by them. So they'll need to make sure that the president is comfortable with what's being said. Once that's all said and done, they'll send them back to Mueller, and Mueller will review them to determine whether or not there are follow-up questions that need to be asked, new topics that need to be asked, or whether or not he's good with this, and moves on to the next area.
[Bolduan:] I mean, that is actually, I think, an important question. After they send the answers back, what do you think then happens next? I don't know if there's a typical case, but is there a lot of back and forth, or is this the one shot of getting the answers to these questions?
[Zeldin:] We don't know what the terms of the deal that the Raskins and Sekulow struck with Mueller and his team. But in ordinary litigation, you have what they call written interrogatories, these written questions, and there are a first set, a second set, third set. So oftentimes, there's an iterative process in the ordinary course. We just don't know what the deal is. I can't imagine Mueller said, one and done is fine with us. I think he wants to see the answers he gets because he's made a concession to allow the written questions at the outset, instead of requiring or seeking an oral answer to questions.
[Bolduan:] Michael, does this at all indicate where the special counsel is in terms of a timeline of the investigation, nearing the end at all?
[Zeldin:] I think we could probably conclude that going at this point, you know, for the president's questions means he's closer to the end than to the beginning. But he still has a lot of information to take in from the cooperators, Manafort, Gates, Flynn. So he's going to have to measure what he gets from the president and the answers to the written questions against that which he's learned from those witnesses to determine whether he's now able to say, I have a conclusion that I can reach or whether he has to do further investigation. So we don't know, Kate, but, typically, you reserve, toward the end of your special counsel investigation, questions of the president himself.
[Bolduan:] All right. Great to see you, Michael. Thank you.
[Zeldin:] Thank you.
[Bolduan:] Coming up for us, serious allegations being made in one of the most closely watched governor's races in the country right now. Why the Democratic candidate in Georgia wants her opponent to step down from his current job.

[Richard Quest, Host, Quest Means Business:] Hello, I'm Richard Quest, there's a lot more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in a moment. When you will hear from Sir Tim Berners-Lee; the father of the world wide web who wants to make the internet a better place. Amazon is warning potential hosts for its second headquarters. Don't spoil a surprise, as you and I continue tonight, this is Cnn, and on this network, the facts always come first. President Trump says there is great electricity in the air on the eve of the high stakes midterm elections. He's headlining three rallies key rallies in the states today, stumping for Republican candidates. Democrats hope a blue wave will help them regain control of at least one house of Congress. Indonesian diving teams have now identified 27 bodies from the Lion Air flight that crashed last week killing 189 in all. Officials are working with Boeing to warn all carries but the risk of air speed indicator malfunctions on the 727 MAX 8. The Lion Air jet was found to have that malfunction during its last four flights. The sons of the murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi are issuing an emotional appeal for the return of their father's remains so he may be buried. The spoke exclusively to Cnn in their first public remarks since their father's murder last month. Khashoggi's eldest son says he has faith in the Saudi-run investigation into his father's killing. SoftBank says it will not sever financial ties to Saudi Arabia after the killing of the journalist. Chief Executive Masayoshi Son expressed strong regret over Khashoggi's death, and says he won't take any new Saudi money until the truth is known. The U.S. political system, Tuesday is a big day. For investors, it's a week of big events. Political shifts in the U.S. know they will certainly hit the market. The dollar, FANG stocks and emerging markets all likely to face disruption as a result of events. Now, the Fed will reveal its interest rates decision on Thursday. Policymakers have been facing pressure to soften their hawkish views, and all week corporate earnings galore. Some market watchers are concerned profits have peaked. Ben Phillips is watching it all, the Chief Investment Officer at EventShares. Of the events you are watching at the moment, Ben, what are you most concerned? What are you watching particularly carefully?
[Ben Phillips, Chief Investment Officer, Eventshares:] Well, so I think everyone is focused on midterms this week, but we're worried about what's going on after midterms. So regardless of the outcome of midterms, we're looking at Trump's policy towards global trade. We think how he responds to China after midterms after some of this campaigning we've seen really over the past few weeks, that's our biggest concern is that global trade breaks down and supply chains are disrupted because of trade policy.
[Quest:] But I see where you're coming from, but haven't you neatly jumped the hurdle of the midterms? Because the result tomorrow will factor in, you know, becomes a sine qua non of all those other events.
[Phillips:] Well, look, I mean, we're positioning our portfolio adventure as the PLCY portfolio in things that really are going to continue regardless of the outcome. So financial deregulation, it's out of Congress' hands, it's now in the agency, the Fed, the OCC, the CFPB. You look at education deregulation, that's in the department of ED's hands. So if we go down the list and see what's actually occurring, it looks like regardless of the outcome, we're going to have, you know, some policy catalyst that continue. So deregulation, healthcare spending driven by Obamacare, you know, those sorts of things. Defense spending, want to stay elevated, our view. So those are the types of things we're watching and those are the type of things we're positioning our portfolio on.
[Quest:] In the event of a gridlock with the house going to the Democrats, does the situation change? Does it get worse for investors or arguably, it gets a great deal better because if Washington can't do anything, then investors are free and the market is free to make its own direction.
[Phillips:] Yes, I actually think that's right. I think we'll see some more noise potentially, maybe some more hearings and things like that. I haven't heard Democrats mention the impeachment word yet again with a split Congress not even worth really taking that off the ground
[Quest:] Right
[Phillips:] Unless there's some really incriminating new evidence that comes out. But so, yes, I think what happens in a split Congress is less and less is more for the market. There's a whole congressional effect study out there that says when Congress isn't doing anything, markets are happy. So it's just as soon as we remove this uncertainty of midterms, then we have certainty of what the outcome is within a week depending on California races obviously if there's some delay there. But so we'll get some clarity here within the next week and see which direction Congress is going.
[Quest:] Right, quick-fire questions, Ben. Volatility, more of it in the midterm or less?
[Phillips:] More in the midterm because of trade.
[Quest:] Turning to the question of interest rates. Another one in December, and what after that?
[Phillips:] It's going to be, again, the trade can really disrupt the growth thesis of the U.S. So I think if the Fed sees slower growth because of the trade, they might delay their actions and hiking rates further, '19.
[Quest:] Diversification and rotation, we've seen it out of tech into defensive, does that continue, is it overdone? When does the tech come back?
[Phillips:] I think it continues. Tech really has had all this momentum factor built up into it. Now you're seeing people rotate more structurally, longer term out of that momentum factor. So what we're seeing is more and more investors doing that, it's really just started. So if people say, we're at the top of the cycle here, it's going to start - this rotation continues in our view. So I would be wary of tech and the regulation of tech in big data regulation.
[Quest:] Finally, tech and tech. Does tech like Amazon which buys and sells things on Netflix which delivers movies and has subscription basis, and then there's tech like Facebook, obviously Twitter and Snap, we can sort of leave somewhere in the doldrums down at the bottom. But is there a difference, as you say, the rotation out of tech?
[Phillips:] There is, but you know, we think the whole ecosystem is affected. But where we're most cautious is around those social media names, the ones who have been data aggregators in our view, collecting everyone's consumer data and then using it and selling it. They're the ones at biggest risk. But China trade, we think hardware and the semi- conductors and really that whole supply chain is so integrated with China that they're at risk too. So we're broadly avoiding tech other than our 5G telecom exposure in
[Plcy. Quest:] Ben, do me a favor, make me a promise, you'll come back and help us understand more in the future.
[Phillips:] Absolutely, happy any time, thanks Richard.
[Quest:] Excellent, new member of the QUEST MEANS BUSINESS family. Help give us the sort of information that we can all use and understand and put into the wider context. As we continue tonight from London, he created the web in 1989 and now he's trying to keep it on track. We'll hear from the computer scientist Tim Berners-Lee, and I'm talking tech and question of the day. I got off the word tech, it's technology. Get your phones ready for a question on technology where's my phone, it's here somewhere after the break. And get ready to head to cnn.com-slash-join.

[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] in suburban Republican districts that are in danger of losing their seat and we want to try and keep those seats. And not only are women going to come out and vote, but this would a real problem. Government shutdowns are generally not popular when people understand what it means to them. And so they are saying, no, no, no. don't pull that card yet because it will complicate things. Plus, don't forget, they want to get Brett Kavanaugh confirmed for the Supreme Court. How are they going to do that if the Congress is shut down? In a funny way, maybe Chuck Schumer will say, yes, let's shut the government down because that way Kavanaugh wouldn't make it to the start of the Supreme Court session. Who knows?
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] Jim, the president also said there are evil people here in Washington in this interview with Rush Limbaugh. Let me read to you another quote from the president. "You have a lot of bad people in Washington. You knew that a long time ago. Frankly, before I knew it, I had no idea how evil some of them are. But you have some great people, too." So he's doubling down on his evil people here in Washington.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] What a revelation. I mean, it's Washington. You have it in every city. Listen, it fits his narrative. He blames in there's blame he assigns to various folks who criticize him or stand up to him. Some of them, sadly, the media is often one of his favorite targets. But not just the media. Even some in his own party and certainly Democrats. It's a consistent Trump theme, and it's perhaps some consistent Trump hyperbole there.
[Blitzer:] Let's get back to his tweet. A real bombshell this morning, Carrie, when he said, "This is a terrible situation and Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this rigged witch hunt right now before it continues to stain our country any further." He said, "Bob Mueller is totally conflicted and has 17 angry Democrats doing his dirty work. Are a disgrace to the USA." Adam Schiff, the top democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, issued a statement following that. Quote, "The president of the United States just called for his attorney general to put an end to an investigation in which the president, his family, and campaign may be implicated. This is an attempt to obstruct justice hiding in plain sight. America must never accept it." What's your reaction to that statement from Adam Schiff?
[Carrie Cordero, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Adam Schiff is not only on the House Intelligence Committee but he's also a former prosecutor. And as a former prosecutor, as anybody who used to be in the Justice Department, to see a president trying to pressure, for political purposes, the Department of Justice, it's just offensive.
[Blitzer:] All right. With that thought, here's Sarah Sanders.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] It's like the Q. You knew I was coming. Good afternoon. [White House Briefiing From 13:32:38 To 13:56 40]
[Sanders:] It's not weak for the president of the United States to state his opinion. Thanks so much, guys.
[Blitzer:] All right. So there you have it. Sarah Sanders on the most sensitive issue, this tweet from the president this morning that Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this rigged witch hunt right now before it continues to stain our country any further. Gloria Borger, she says this is not an order to Sessions. It's simply an opinion. He wants to see it come to an end. Clearly, he's angry about the entire investigation.
[Borger:] Right. She made a point of saying this is not obstructing. What he's doing is fighting back. And when she was asked, is he blowing off steam, she said this is his opinion, it is not an order. But he's been crystal clear about how he feels. I don't know. Dana mentioned this before. When a president says you should do something, what's the difference between that and you must do something?
[Blitzer:] It's an important issue. She also said, Jim Sciutto, that this entire investigation, the Mueller investigation, is based on a "dirty, discredited dossier."
[Sciutto:] The White House podium has become a platform for repeating false information. We've seen it for a year and a half now. That is an abjectly false statement. It's in the documents. The counterintelligence investigation by the FBI began before the documents existed. It began when Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, bragged to an Australian diplomat about Russians offering the Trump campaign help and having dirt on Hillary Clinton. And that diplomat, who is a close U.S. intelligence ally of the U.S., member of the Five Eyes group of intelligence-sharing nations, felt it was significant enough to volunteer to come to the FBI with this information. That's what kicked off this counter-intelligence investigation. Sarah Sanders knows that. The president knows that. It's in the public record. Yet, she's willing to repeat what is a false statement. And this is something the president repeats all the time as part of a broader and strategic attack on his feud to undermine the investigation. In addition to that, listen to her language. "Witch hunt" has now become not just something that shows up in the president's tweets but is repeated from the White House podium, and a description of a legal investigation endorsed by Republicans and Democrats. It's become a shorthand. Doesn't bother saying the Mueller probe, it is the "witch hunt," which is taken from the president's tweets. They could dismiss the president's tweet as letting off steam, et cetera, but it's become the official moniker for this investigation endorsed by both Republicans and Democrats. So the president's words do matter. They are repeated from the White House podium.
[Blitzer:] Another sensitive issue, this is day two of the Paul Manafort trial, federal trial in Alexandria, Virginia, the former Trump campaign chairman. And the president weighing in on Twitter making all sorts of references to the way Al Capone was treated, Paul Manafort is being treated. She said, Sarah Sanders, "I think Paul Manafort is treated unfairly." It's unusual in the midst of a federal trial for the sitting president of the United States to weigh in.
[Cordero:] It is. It's unusual for the president to compare a mobster to their former campaign chair. In every respect, the president's weighing in on the Manafort trial is odd. The other thing I thought was so interesting about at that press conference is what Sarah Sanders did not bring up, which is that there is an ongoing Russian activity against the election, according to information that Facebook released yesterday, which is an ongoing national security threat to the election system.

[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] A number of people have come out and said that Woodward never even reached out.
[Unidentified Male:] They can't figure out if they're denouncing leaks or lies.
[Unidentified Female:] President Trump is publicly blasting a lot of the quotes in it as fiction and fake news.
[Unidentified Male:] We better wake up. This is not partisan. This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota on John Berman.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Tuesday, September 11th. It is 8:00 in the east. And we do begin with breaking news right now. There is a hurricane watch that stretches from South Carolina to the North CarolinaVirginia border as hurricane Florence barrels towards the U.S. coastline. This is a category four storm. At this hour, it is packing winds of 130 miles per hour, but it is on track to be one of the strongest hurricanes to hit the eastern sea board in decades. Florence could still intensify to a category five storm by the time it makes landfall, which is predicted either Thursday night or Friday morning somewhere along the Carolina coastline. So let's check out this view of hurricane Florence from space. This is the International Space Station. It is very cool to watch how this churns. It is capturing the incredible size while this is hovering over the Atlantic.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] More than one million people are now under mandatory evacuation orders in coastal areas of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. That includes the entire South Carolina coast as of noon today. In North Carolina, parts of six coastal counties in Hatteras Island, you can see it all there on the map, also being evacuated. Just moments ago on NEW DAY, FEMA chief Brock Long called for North Carolina's entire coastline to pay very close attention.
[Brock Long, Fema Administrator:] I believe that people should be evacuating the coast of North Carolina for the category four storm, particularly get out of the areas that are vulnerable to coastal storm surge inundation and get into a facility that can withstand the winds.
[Berman:] You can already see signs that folks are paying attention, boarded up homes, long lines at gas stations. Some of those gas stations already running out of fuel. And look at that. first it was amazing at the hardware store, but here, a lot of Nutella. But besides Nutella
[Camerota:] How can Nutella be left? I would get that first.
[Berman:] That would be the first thing that would go.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Berman:] I want to begin our coverage with CNN meteorologist Chad Myers who has the new advisory and the track. Chad, what are we seeing?
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist:] As we expected, the NOAA Hunter aircraft went through the eye and found 120. That's what we expected because the eyewall is going through a replacement cycle. This may be the smallest that this number gets for a very long time because when that eyewall gets itself back together later today, it's going to go back up to 140 and maybe even to 150. That beautiful picture there from the NOAA News 16 satellite picture, there you go. What an amazing shot. The sun just rising on this storm in the Atlantic right now. Here is the problem. You're looking at 130. You need to be looking at 150. And then 145 because this storm is going to get stronger before it makes landfall. This will have a bubble of storm surge in the 20-foot range, somewhere. I don't know if that's Wilmington yet, because you're still in the cone. I don't even know if that's Cape Hatteras, because you're still in the cone. What I do know is that the cone is getting smaller to the south and not getting as far to the north as we work our way toward landfall. But now what happens is that the storm stalls and has no direction at all. And in fact, this cone gets wider. It could be back offshore. It could be all the way down into Georgia by the time five days comes around. The rub there is not so much that it will be windy is that we're going to get rainfall, 20 inches of rainfall in some spots is completely possible. Here are your watches all the way from Charleston to Kill Devil Hills. As the storm gets closer, the cone gets smaller and hurricane warnings will be issued either later today or into tomorrow.
[Camerota:] Chad, thank you very much for explaining all of that. So evacuations are beginning for residents along the Carolina coast line. For more than one million people the order to leave is now. CNN's Kaylee Hartung is live in Carolina Beach, North Carolina, with more. What's the latest, Kaylee?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Alisyn, actually I just went and put my feet in the water, and you wouldn't believe how warm the water is. The local office for the National Weather Center explained to me the significance of that. They say typically this time of year the water temperatures in the low 80s. At their last measurement it was 88 degrees. Optimal circumstances for a hurricane to do the worst kind of damage. And so life-threatening storm surge, the concern in this area 15 to 20 feet. Where I'm standing that would mean would be underwater. Preparations underway. You mentioned more than a million people expected to evacuate right here on Carolina Beach, one of those barrier islands protecting the city of Wilmington. They want everybody out by 8:00 tomorrow. That's when they expect that tropical storm force winds to be in this area. Local officials saying if you stay here that means you are doing so at your own risk. You'll be on your own. John and Alisyn?
[Berman:] All right, Kaylee Hartung. Kaylee, thank you very much. Joining me is Ken Graham, the director of the National Hurricane Center. Director, thank you for being with us. We just heard from our
[Emanuel:] Chad Myers, but what more can you tell us about the size, the direction and the timing of this storm?
[Ken Graham, Director, National Hurricane Center:] Well, I think one of the big factors is that we're just not talking about impacts inside the cone. We just always got to remind people inside the cone is where we could see the center of this system. And look at what happens inland. It could be anywhere in these areas. But I think one of the big factors we have to look at. We take these forecast points. The closer these lines are together, that means this thing is slowing down. And when we slow down like that over land, that's going to compound our issues with storm surge and also the heavy rain. So water is going to be a huge story in addition to incredible windfall at the landfall. A lot of winds. A lot of trees down and power outages.
[Berman:] Talk to me about the storm surge. How much are we talking, and do you have a sense of where?
[Graham:] We're really looking at it here. We can kind of zoom in. We can zoom in like this, but I think it's really important if I go ahead and show a situation like this where we have a whole storm surge watch. Anywhere in these areas here can see greater than three foot. And this is an important point with the storm surge. When I go to this map, it is not just a coastal issue all the time. You have the barrier islands where you can get these big storm surge values. But here is where it also causes problems. We're really concerned about some of these areas where the water filters in and then where it piles up, where it can't go anywhere, you could get 10 to 12 foot of storm surge. That's just life-threatening. It's very dangerous.
[Berman:] And then they rain. We keep hearing two feet, 20 to 30 inches of rain. How many days? And, again, do you have a sense of where?
[Graham:] We're really looking at that. It is an incredible amount of rainfall, again, very life threatening. And we talk about not just a coastal issue. This is well inland. Look at this graphic, 15 to 20 inches of rain in some of these areas here. But we are looking at potentially isolated areas being up to 30 inches of rain. That is life-threatening in these areas that are going to get this rain fall. So we're looking a big portion of Virginia and North Carolina. And look at this, even going into Maryland and Pennsylvania. But remember where these colors are close together, you can shift this quite a bit depending on the track.
[Berman:] And I will note a lot of the ground there is already saturated because they had more rain than usual already this season. So many of us who watch these hurricane forecasts over the last few years, we've become familiar with the European models and the American model, the spaghetti model, the paths of these storms. Can you give us a sense of what the difference is between the two and why the difference, and what that difference can mean?
[Graham:] It is interesting when you look at the models. People think it is just merely looking at the hurricane. But in reality, you are looking at high pressures and low pressures, sometimes 500 to 1,000 miles away. So little differences in how those are measured and how those are calculated in the models can make a big difference in where they try to steer these systems. It's interesting, because if you look at one or two models, you may see differences. They may flip-flop back and forth. But here at the Hurricane Center we actually use something called ensemble. So in fact we're looking at dozens and dozens of runs of those models. And if you go back in time and really take the consensus of all those models, our forecast really hasn't changed that much even if you go back through the weekend. So what you've got to do is look at all those different models and try to find a consensus, an average, so to speak, and that really hasn't changed that much. And that's why we're pretty confident at least where this direction is so far.
[Berman:] We spoke to one of your hurricane hunters earlier in the show who told us from the air that he sees nothing in the path of this storm to slow it down in terms of the wind speed, in terms of it gathering strength. A different question is, is there anything that could change the forecast that you see? Anything that could push this storm one way or another?
[Graham:] Out ahead of Florence here, this whole area right here is just incredible warm in terms of ocean temperature. But those measurements at the surface. But if you look at the heat content, that warm water goes deeper into the ocean. So, no, the ocean is not going to be a factor. It's going to be basically helping out this storm stay the same, a major hurricane. And in the atmosphere itself we don't see shear, we don't see anything that could prevent this from being a major hurricane. It is so important that we realize some of the wind fluctuating, you will see 140 miles an hour, you'll see 130 miles an hour. It naturally fluctuates like that. So that is not what we really need to concentrate on. No matter what, we're going to have a major hurricane headed for the Carolina coast.
[Berman:] And nothing in its wake. Ken Graham, thank you very much for going over with us some of these models, some of these pictures so we get a sense of just what's about to happen. Thank you, sir.
[Camerota:] We'll keep an eye, obviously, on Florence. But let's also talk about other big news today, and that is politics. President Trump's approval rating is down. In this new CNN poll it has fallen six points in just the last month. It is now at 36 percent. So how is the White House responding to this? There is just 56 days left until the midterms. What effect will this have on the midterms? Joining us now are CNN political analyst David Gregory and CNN political director David Chalian. Great to see you. David Gregory, so it has gone down six points, as we said, in the past month to 36 percent. Among independents, let me put this up for you, the all- important voters, it is also down. It has hit, in fact, an all-time low. It is now at 31 percent, President Trump's approval rating. Just a month ago it was at 47 percent. Your thoughts?
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] I think one of the big issues for President Trump is that he is seen as a chaos agent, even among people who support him, or among people whose support might be a little softer for him because of his personal attributes, his leadership style, the chaos around him, the drama, the coarseness of his leadership style. All of those things I think can tend to undermine him among independent voters. If you look at his core support, you do have to look at the tangibles that he's going to be running on, if this is a referendum on him, strong economy, strong stock market. Even if you look at the job market, wages going up. And for conservatives, what a lot of conservatives care about, look at the federal judiciary. Not just the Supreme Court, judges on the federal judiciary. But then of course Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, who despite criticism, looks to be moving toward nomination. Those are real tangibles. Even the trade business, which is volatile, is still really making good on an area that he promised. Those are strong signs for the president. But again, I think the personal chaotic part that we're seeing in the op- ed and the Woodward book, those things continue to hurt him.
[Berman:] So David Chalian, the CNN poll obviously the one we are most interested in. It's our poll. But what's truly fascinated here is that our poll is in line with just about every other group of numbers we have seen over the last week. Poll after poll has shown the president's approval rating dropping from August to September. So if you are a Republican running for Congress in one of 435 districts across the country, what do you think of these numbers? What do they tell you?
[David Chalian, Cnn Politics Director:] The absolute worst time I'd want to see the president's numbers head in this direction. You've got to step back here for a moment, John, and just remember the story of President Trump's numbers in polling throughout his entire presidency has been a story of stability. No matter what the headlines were, no matter what was going on, he operated in this very narrow band of mid to upper 30s to low to mid-40s. And you didn't see too much fluctuation there. We're still in that, obviously. But your point that there have been five reputable national polls in the last couple weeks all showing a downward trend suggests to me that the president is indeed taking on water right now. And that independent number is huge because they are going to be critical to this midterm at precisely the wrong time with eight weeks to go to the midterms. If you are a Republican candidate, you are in any kind of district that is not ruby red, you are thinking about how to distance yourself from President Trump.
[Camerota:] That was a live shot that we were just watching of President Trump and first lady, Melania, departing for Pennsylvania to obviously remember 911. Today is 911. It is also a Tuesday11 happened 17 years ago. And so they're headed to Shanksville, I believe, to be with some of the victims' families and to remember that moment. So David Gregory, I just want to dive in a little bit more to some very interesting questions that were asked in this poll. I'm thinking of P-18. This is, does the president respect the rule of law? OK. So after everything we have seen with the people around him and how he's treating Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, et cetera, et cetera, 60 percent of the country says the president of the United States does not respect the rule of law. That is stunning. That's stunning. But again, I don't know that people vote on that. I mean, obviously their own purse-strings probably have more impact on their lives than their feeling about that.
[Gregory:] Well, but I think what David said is really interesting. Yes, it is true the president is taking on water. So what is that about? And how do we parse that out? That poll result says to me a couple of things. There are a lot of people who look at the president's attitude toward the Justice Department, toward the rule of law, ordering Jeff Sessions to investigate people, treating the Justice Department like a kind of a collection of do-boys who are supposed to just exact political revenge on his opponents. People are very uncomfortable with that because it is a way of undermining what they consider to be the strength of American America and American institutions. And that's part of the chaos agent piece. That's the part that people have a hard time squaring with their feelings about the economy or how the stock market is doing. And I think a lot of people were willing to compartmentalize and say, yes, the president rails against the press, or he goes too far. He's horrible toward women. But he's going to shake this place up and D.C. will be better for it. I think it's some of that support that is being eroded. At the same time, he has a super energized base working against him, and that is that a lot of progressives in the country think that the world is ending politically and that Trump is responsible for that.
[David Gregory, Cnn Political Analyst:] At the same time, he's got a super energized base working against him, and that is a lot of progressives in the country think that the world is ending politically and that Trump is responsible for that. And so, there is a lot of energy that's moving against him. But, again, I agree with David. You look at these independent numbers. You look at women, suburban voters. You look at college- educated voters who typically vote Republican but who may have also supported Obama. I think these are voters to watch in some of these key districts.
[David Chalian, Cnn Political Director:] Yes, there is one key difference here when people are sitting home saying, yes, but you said this about the polls in 2016. I one key difference here, he's not running against Hillary Clinton right now, who also had lots of problems in her numbers. There was a real comparison in a presidential election that allowed people who didn't like either of them to decide to go with the change agent in Donald Trump. That doesn't exist here for him. So, yes, the economy, 69 percent of Americans thinking it's doing well. It's his highest approval number on any issue, 49 percent approval issue much, much higher than his overall 36 percent. That is the thing that is keeping him a float, as much afloat as he is right now. But what he doesn't have is just a direct comparison against an opponent because the midterm is all about a referendum on him.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, he's not seeing divorce from each other, either that or as you're saying, the economy is actually keeping him as high as he is. The economy is propping him up at 36 percent. And look at the strongly disapprove numbers, and you guys are both touching on that. I think it's 48 percent, incredibly high, strongly disapprove number. That doesn't seem like a winnable group, David Gregory.
[Gregory:] Yes, right. Right. Because, again, that speaks to how much energy there is against him. And what David was saying, he's not running against another candidate who's got other deficiencies. We know, you know, the majority of Trump voters was an anti-Hillary vote. So, now, he's in a different proposition. He's leading the party. It is a referendum on him. And again, there are lots of plus sides that people could vote for him and vote for the Republican Party. That's what they hope. But this chaos agent piece, I mean, I go back to one of the things that I think really hobbled President Bush by the end of his presidency and helped candidate Obama, was the sense that Americans were uncomfortable with the sense of isolation in the world, being so controversial. This is what undermines Trump at a certain point, investigations, specter of impeachment, you know, leadership style, all this trouble from within. There is an amount of drama that starts to erode support.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] All right. David Gregory, David Chalian, thank you both very much.
[Chalian:] Thanks.
[Berman:] All right. So, how can the White House turn this around? And what should Republican members of Congress do as they face tough re-election battles? We're going to speak to a former Republican senator, next.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] You weren't listening.
[Don Lemon, Cnn:] No, I was listening to you, but I just wanted to ask you because I've been off. And just from a distance, the ridiculousness of what is going on in this country. You know, I try to avoid the news. But because of the stories that happened last week, it is hard to avoid. And then people walk up to me and they say, what is going what is happening in our country? I don't know. I'm scared. What's going on? I mean it's I think sometimes we're too close to it, the forest through the trees, that we just don't see how this is crazy.
[Cuomo:] I hear you. I understand that perspective. I cannot own it myself because I am into this 247365. I think of nothing else. When I'm shaving all five whiskers on my chin-
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] I'm thinking about this while I'm shaving.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] I cannot get away from it because I do not want to. That's how I started the radio show today. I need more, D. Lemon.
[Lemon:] Even when you're putting on your toupee, I'm sure you're thinking about that as well.
[Cuomo:] They paid a lot for this.
[Lemon:] Yes. Creams and formula helps too.
[Cuomo:] Thank you for your dog donating the hair by the way.
[Lemon:] You're nut. Hey, good to see you.
[Cuomo:] Pleasure.
[Lemon:] Thank you, sir. This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon. And make no mistake the Russia investigation is on the line right now. It's on the line. So as the president -President Trump's nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, that is on the line as well, him to the Supreme Court. Either or both could decide the course of the Trump presidency. And incredibly they're both coming to a head on the same day, and that's Thursday. And that's throwing the White House and all of Washington into chaos. And all of this chaos, everything we're seeing right now, the Russia investigation, the Supreme Court, it looks like a direct result of what you could call the devil's bargain that conservatives made with a president who is not exactly their natural ally. The deal? Well, we'll support this president no matter what he says or does as long as we get a couple of key victories tax cuts, done. And the Supreme Court. Well, the president's second pick for the highest court in the land, it's not going exactly as smoothly as the Gorsuch confirmation. That is why Judge Brett Kavanaugh is fighting back, doing an interview on Fox News, an interview that just might be aimed at an audience of one. Guess who that is. President Trump.
[Brett Kavanaugh, U.s. Appeals Court Judge:] I'm not going to let false accusations drive us out of this process and, you know, we're looking for a fair process where I can be heard and defend my integrity. I'm not going anywhere.
[Lemon:] That's the kind of fighting spirit the president likes. The Washington Post reporting Trump has been frustrated by the slow pace of the Kavanaugh hearings and has demanded a quick vote. And after being uncharacteristically restrained when Christine Blasey Ford's accusations that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both teenagers, when they first came out, the president is now insisting it's all just politics.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I am with Judge Kavanaugh, and I look forward to a vote. And for people to come out of the woodwork from 36 years ago and 30 years ago and never mentioned it, all of a sudden it happens, in my opinion, it's totally political. It was totally political.
[Lemon:] So a lot of Republicans on the same page. Orrin Hatch is on the same page as the president, Senator Orrin Hatch. That's no surprise with his comments today about Deborah Ramirez who accuses Kavanaugh of inappropriate sexual behavior when they were both at Yale University.
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] Well, it's amazing to me that these allegations come out of nowhere at the last minute and that they weren't brought up earlier in this process. And it's not untypical for our friends on the other side to pull that kind of crap.
[Lemon:] And tonight, some Republicans hinting to CNN they might push through a vote on Kavanaugh this week, even though they don't they won't even hear from Ford until Thursday. They want to push it through this week. So much for a full investigation, right? And Senator Mitch McConnell, the man who said this this is 2016. Watch.
[Mitch Mcconnell,  United States Senator:] One of my proudest moments is when I looked at Barack Obama in the eye, and I said, Mr. President, you will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy.
[Lemon:] Well, now the senator is echoing what sure sounds like a Republican talking point, claiming the accusations against judge Kavanaugh are these are his words "a smear campaign."
[Mcconnell:] But even by the far left's standards, this shameful, shameful smear campaign has hit a new low. A smear campaign, pure and simple. It sounds like a choreographed smear campaign. Democrats wouldn't let a few inconvenient things like a complete lack of evidence or an accuser's request for confidentiality to get between them and a good smear. But the smear campaign didn't stop there. Let's put aside this last-minute, unsubstantiated smear. Let's return to the facts.
[Lemon:] Phrase of the day, kids smear campaign. And with both sides battling tooth and nail over the Supreme Court, the Russia investigation could be hanging by a thread. Rod Rosenstein, the man who is overseeing that investigation, was expecting the ax to fall today when he went to a meeting at the White House. Instead he got an unexpected reprieve after the New York Times bombshell report last week that Rosenstein had suggested secretly recording President Trump and even considering invoking the 25th Amendment to remove him from office. Rosenstein denied it, but you can't blame you can't blame the man for thinking that he was surely on the chopping block with the notoriously thin skin of Donald Trump, President Trump. Instead, the president said this.
[Trump:] I'm meeting with Rod Rosenstein on Thursday when I get back from all of these meetings, and we'll be meeting at the White House, and we'll be determining what's going on. We want to have transparency. We want to have openness, and I look forward to meeting with Rod at that time.
[Lemon:] Doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement, does it, because it's not a ringing endorsement. And it comes after the president said this to Geraldo Rivera.
[Geraldo Rivera, Fox News Correspondent At Large:] Will you fire Rod Rosenstein based on-
[Trump:] I don't want to comment on it. I don't want to comment on it until I get all the facts. I haven't gotten all the facts. But certainly it's being looked at in terms of what took place, if anything took place, and I'll make a determination sometime later. But I don't have the facts.
[Lemon:] And just, I want to refresh your memory now. Remember when a noncommittal Sarah Sanders said this after the FBI raid on former Trump fixer and keeper of secrets Michael Cohen.
[Unidentified Female:] Is the president considering firing or in other ways purposing out Rosenstein?
[Sarah Huckabee-sanders, White House Press Secretary:] I don't have any personal announcements at this front.
[Unidentified Female:] Just one other thing. Paul Ryan today said that he's been given assurances by the White House that the president isn't planning to fire Rosenstein or Mueller. Do you know where he's getting those assurances? Is it coming from the president? Is it coming from others? Where is it coming from?
[Sanders:] Again, I don't have any announcements on that front.
[Lemon:] Well, today she couldn't even muster a no comment and said, instead defaulting to a statement, saying, quote, this is a quote. "At the request of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, he and President Trump had an extended conversation to discuss the recent news stories. Because the president is at the United Nations general assembly and has a full schedule with leaders from around the world, they will meet on Thursday when the president returns to Washington, D.C." Convenient. You got to wonder whether team Trump even wants to fire Rosenstein and potentially open a whole new bunch of obstruction charges, or do they prefer to stick to their strategy of discrediting the investigation? Well, so will the president fire Rod Rosenstein on Thursday? Will the Kavanaugh nomination crash and burn on Thursday? And are Republicans about to pay a price for the bargain they made with President Trump? Let's discuss now. CNN's White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins is here as well as CNN global affairs analyst, Susan Glasser, and Mark McKinnon, a former adviser to George W. Bush and John McCain, who is now executive producer of the circus on Showtime Sunday nights. Good evening to one and all. Good to have you on the program tonight. Susan, I'm going to start with you because you say it is not normal to start a Monday morning wondering if we're having a constitutional crisis and a confirmation crisis. I happen to think we're already in a constitutional crisis. So talk to us about today's incredible developments.
[Susan Glasser, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Well, first of all, Don, I think you're right, you know, that in many ways the crisis every day, people say is this it? Is this the crisis? Well, if Trump does x, if Trump does y, if he fires Rosenstein, this is the constitutional crisis. But arguably it's been going on ever since January of 2017 in the sense that you have a president who is willing to challenge any number of norms. And so it's left us guessing much of the time. But even by those standards today was a pretty crazy day. We can all agree upon that. I think it took two hours and 40 minutes. That's what the Post reported between the initial reports that Rosenstein was preparing to offer his resignation or did offer his resignation to the White House chief of staff. And when Sarah Sanders put out that statement saying, well, OK, let adjust put this on hold until Thursday. Scenes of chaos and uncertainty that to me, are reminder number one. We really have a government by just one person, the president at this point. You know, there is no such thing really as a regular order because even Trump's own advisers are very uncertain as to what the president is actually going to do at any given moment. It makes it very hard for them obviously to run the country when they don't know. So the president is 250 miles away in New York, meeting with world leaders gathered for the annual U.N. general assembly. They must be thinking, look at the United States in this, you know, political chaos, internally divided, inward-looking. The message it sends about America's leadership in the world is something really quite remarkable, I think.
[Lemon:] A sight to behold. Mark, what happens if the president does fire Rosenstein on Thursday? What happens?
[Mark Mckinnon, Executive Producer, The Circus:] Well, the larger perception will be that all hell breaks loose, you know, because there's the broader perception that this is the first domino to fall, and the ultimate dominoes falling means that's the end of the Mueller investigation. Now, there are plenty of people who think that under any circumstance, that that's not going to happen and that people close to Bob Mueller say he will plant acorns everywhere, believe me, and already has. But, you know, I do think I like the Cuomo strategy actually. I think the do nothing strategy would be a brilliant move, totally unexpected, dramatic, which Trump likes. Since right around from the midterms I think Sean Hannity, by the way, was suggesting not that it leads to further collusion evidence, but I think he was thinking more about the midterms, that it just throws chaos and uncertainty into the midterms when really a lot of Republicans would rather focus on the Kavanaugh nomination. It just Republicans have enough trouble right now with the midterms and just throwing that uncertainty into the mix is a gamble I don't think a lot of Republicans would like to take right now. Why not wait until after the midterms?
[Lemon:] This Thursday on the reality TV network, will the president fire I mean that's what it sounds like.
[Mckinnon:] Showdown at the OK corral.
[Lemon:] Tune in on Thursday night at 10 o'clock if you're going to do it. But I mean, Kaitlan, Rosenstein's job has really been in jeopardy before. But today's summoning to the White House, it set Washington on edge. What's going on behind the scenes? Could the Thursday meeting with the president could that be it for Rosenstein, you think?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, that's the question. What happened today didn't resolve that question. It just simply postponed it for a few more days until the president returns from New York. But, Don, I can't understate or overstate the chaos that was in the West Wing or among senior officials this morning after it was reported about Rosenstein offering to resign to John Kelly because it really set off this mad dash to figure out what it was that had happened, what conversations had transpired, and that is why we didn't see the White House respond with any kind of statement for hours. That is why you saw no press secretary coming out and saying, this isn't true. This hasn't happened. It's because they themselves were trying to figure out what happened. Part of that is because John Kelly, the chief of staff, is here in Washington. President Trump hasn't been here since on Thursday because he was traveling last week, then was in New Jersey, and now he's in New York this week. But what we do know is that Rod Rosenstein simply miscalculated just how angry he believed the president was going to be to that New York Times reporting. Whenever they had reached out for comment, he essentially, of course, as you noted their relationship has been pretty bad before to where the president openly talked about firing him. So when this story came out, the natural prediction was that President Trump would be so angry that his deputy attorney general had floated the idea of wearing a wire to meet with him, that he would fire him. So Rod Rosenstein was prepared. He offered his resignation. He said he was willing to quit. John Kelly was under the impression that he had accepted his resignation, and that is what led and jump-started all the chaos that happened today. Now of course, President Trump wasn't actually as angry as people thought. On Friday, he did ask people, should I fire this guy? What should I do? We saw him make that comment at the rally about a lingering stench. But really, Don, over the weekend, President Trump was much more preoccupied with what was happening with Brett Kavanaugh and the drama surrounding his nomination than he was with Rod Rosenstein. And that's not what Rosenstein saw coming, which is what led to so much of that chaos today.
[Lemon:] Yes. Well, he's stood behind Brett Kavanaugh saying, you know, he's a good man.
[Collins:] Yes.
[Lemon:] I can't believe this is happening. This is a smear campaign. This is a worse ting, and I'm paraphrasing here. So you set me up because we're going to talk about that when we come back. I want you all to stay around. When we come back, I want to talk about the other big drama that has the White House and Capitol Hill in turmoil. That's what Kaitlan just mentioned. Judge Brett Kavanaugh trying to save his Supreme Court bid. He tried to make his case on television tonight, but was he really speaking to just one person, the president?

[Newton:] The European Union says it will Britain's plans for a Customs arrangement after Brexit. The U.K. government has suggested temporary Customs Union between itself and the E.U. that continued free trade for about two years after it leaves the union. But Britain wants to be able at the same time to negotiate trade deals with other countries. Walmart CEO, Doug McMillon, says President Trump, quote, missed a critical opportunity to bring our country together by unequivocally rejecting the appalling actions of White supremacists. It's still not clear whether McMillon will stay on Mr. Trump's economic council, but four of his fellow business leaders have walked away because of the President's response to Charlottesville. Now the disaster unfolding in Sierra Leone is expected unfortunately to get worse. Now, the disaster unfolding in Sierra Leone is expected, unfortunately, to get worse. The Red Cross spokesperson says 245 people are confirmed dead now, and he expects that number to rise. Heavy rains triggered a massive mudslide outside Freetown and hundreds of people are still reported missing. President Trump seems to be on a mission to change the subject. We expect him to take the mic very soon. Yesterday, he remained largely focused on the economy. Today, it will be infrastructure improvement. Problem is, the U.S. seems interested in one thing: Charlottesville. White nationalist rallies and ensuing violence have thrown America's simmering racial tension to the forefront. CNN White House Reporter Stephen Collinson is covering this very closely. And, you know, people would say, with good reason, that the spotlight remains on Charlottesville. I mean, you have written and I think, in terms of reading yesterday writing yesterday, that remains the same. This is a man who never wants to say that he is wrong.
[Stephen Collinson, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's correct. What was very interesting about Donald Trump's statement on Charlottesville Monday, though, was it was one of the first times we've seen a tangible political effect to what might be called a misstep by the President. There was this conceit about Donald Trump ever since he was running for election that the normal rules don't apply to him, that apply to other politicians don't apply for him. When he makes a blunder, he appears to get away with it. But I think what we're seeing both in the public reaction to his initial statement on Charlottesville where he didn't call out White supremacists and as you just talked about, the growing number of CEOs for now that have left various White House advisory councils over this is that Donald Trump is paying a tangible political price for one of his own blunders. And that's something new, Paula, which hadn't seen so far during his presidency.
[Newton:] Do you think he believes that, though? I mean, at the end of the day, and we have seen this before, it doesn't affect him. He seems to the Teflon Man and that's how he surprised everyone and won the election.
[Collinson:] I think he doesn't necessarily believe he made a misstep, but it was interesting that he thought he had to come out on Monday amid sort of intense political pressure and to change his position. He appears to have made that judgment at least. The thing with Donald Trump is, though, he can have these set piece events, like the speech on Monday, like this infrastructure event you were talking about, but he doesn't stay on the message his White House aides want him to stay on. As soon as that speech was over yesterday, he started tweeting that the media, hammering him for not saying exactly what they want him to say on race. He's gone off to these CEOs very strongly for leaving his advisory council, saying that they're grandstanding. So a lot of what he does instinctively on Twitter detracts from the more set piece elements of his presidency. So whether he believes it or not, I think it's clear that it's starting to do him some political damage. Whether the political ground is shifting significantly under the feet of his administration, though, I think we're going to have to wait until Congress comes back and to see whether the president still has the authority of the White House to wield as he tries to enact his agenda.
[Newton:] Yes. And thanks for that. Let me remind everyone that fairly shortly, within about a half an hour, we do expect to hear again from the President on that infrastructure announcement. That is live pictures you're looking at now at Trump Tower. Yes, he is only a few blocks from us right here in New York and says that he will have an announcement about that all-important infrastructure program. Stephen, thanks again. And right now, though, we do want to return to one of the key things on President Trump's agenda now, this threat from North Korea. We want to take a closer look at the efforts to resolve the standoff by using diplomacy. Now, former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd joins me now from here in New York where he's the president of the Asia Society. I want to get one thing clear from, though, and understand where you fall on this. Things have quieted down. President Trump, he hasn't taken credit for it yet, but I'm sure that he would say that, look, we were tough, we were strong, and that is why it seems that North Korea is backing down. What do you think?
[Kevin Rudd, Former Prime Minister Of Australia:] Well, anyone who predicts the mind of the North Korean leadership between one day and the next, frankly, I think, has got rocks in their head, because nobody can. This is not an entirely rational international actor. But the two things have changed in the last few days. One's really significant, and that's this very clear statement from the President of South Korea, President Moon, saying that there can and should be no attack by the United States against the North without the prior approval of South Korea. Now, he hasn't said that up until now. This is a big warning shot across the bows of the administration and particularly for the South Koreans to make that public. And then semi-simultaneously, you have Kim Jong-un, the Supreme Leader in North Korea, saying, well, we'll think about the Guam option for little while longer yet. So these are two dynamics. I think, if we read into Kim Jong-un's view, however, to some extent, the analysts would say it's because the language hasn't continued to escalate. It does result in a net de-escalation compared with where we were three or four days ago.
[Newton:] You know, in the interest of, you know, that great cliche, never waste a good crisis, what can happen here? And I know you have been looking at this from many different angles for many years and many different positions. What are the dynamics that can change here to actually get to a resolution?
[Rudd:] Well, once you start to get towards the brink and I read something just a few days ago describing it is sleepwalking to crisis, sleepwalking the war hopefully, it creates a dynamic in capitals which says, for God's sake, we don't want to land ourselves in this mire. How do we, therefore, think about this creatively and afresh? Look, the fundamentals of the North Korean problem remain as they have been for the last decade. But the new diplomatic opportunity, I still believe, lies in this: for United States to be sufficiently persuasive of Beijing to cause the Chinese to conclude that if the Chinese don't help the American solve this problem, then the Americans may well act unilaterally despite what the South Koreans say. Secondly, to then to have a conversation with China about how does a fix on the nuclear problem deal with China's underlying strategic concerns about not agreeing to an American strategy, which creates, ineffectively, a pro- American state on China's borders. And there are elements to that, which are fairly clearly known. If you get agreement and very close diplomacy between Beijing and Washington on that, the magic lies in a joint diplomatic initiative to Beijing. That's where, I think, the work should be going.
[Newton:] Let's take this further down the road. And I don't have to remind you of the grand bargain that Pakistan made, and I think that they are quite happy with the way things turned out in terms of their nuclear arsenal. North Korea is staring us in the face right now. What is it going to take in order to make them back down, and what leverage does China have? Because you obviously pointed out that China does not want a united Korea and does not want a friendly, you know, friendly counterpoint, strategic counterpoint, to the U.S. military presence in Asia there.
[Rudd:] Well, if you look at those questions in sequence, one, the big difference between North Korea and Pakistan is the Pakistanis have never sought to develop an ICBM. The North Koreans have. Pakistan's nuclear program relates to India. This one relates across the Pacific, to the United States and, frankly, to other U.S. allies in the region. It's on a scale beyond the Pakistan problem. But secondly
[Newton:] For their national interests, Pakistan would tell you, it's worked. Why isn't Kim Jong-un saying the same thing to himself
[Rudd:] Yes.
[Newton:] this has worked spectacularly well for him?
[Rudd:] Yes, I was going to go to this question of Kim Jong-un's intrinsic national interests, which is regime survival. That's not a lot of I was about to say, rocket science in that. This regime wants to survive. We would regard it as a brutal authoritarian dictatorship. They, however, believe that, after 70 years or so running the country, that they've got a right to do continue into the long-term future. So if that's the interest and his conclusion is, the only way to guarantee it is to have your own independent nuclear deterrent against Washington, the creative diplomacy lies in what other security guarantees are credible to North Korea, which would provide him with regime stability for the long term? And that's where you get into this discussion about a three-way security guarantee by the Chinese, by the United States, and possibly by the Russians guaranteeing, through international agreement, the future security of North Korea and its regime as part of a broader package, including the denuclearization of the north.
[Newton:] Which many would argue would still mean that Kim Jong-un did, in fact, gained a lot from his grand bargain here. Before I let you go, and very quickly, you have warned the Trump administration not to underestimate Xi Jinping. Why do you say that?
[Rudd:] Well, Xi Jinping is also in election year. Xi Jinping faces a not independent Congress and all the internal party meetings to determine the future shape of the leadership of China over the next five years are basically underway right now, either at Beidaihe on the beach or in Beijing itself. Therefore, there are no ready advantages to be had for Xi Jinping by appearing to be soft on the North Korean question right now. We, therefore, need to be working against Chinese domestic political timetable on the one hand, which reaches its conclusion on October, November. But, secondly, as I said, the key objective here must be, this combined diplomacy between China and the US, where you've got a grand strategic bargain, which deals with those China's long-term strategic interests and America's, as well as those of the South and the North.
[Newton:] Prime Minister Rudd, always a pleasure to speak to you about this and other issues, and we appreciate your time.
[Rudd:] Thank you.
[Newton:] Now, this is THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. Controversial scenes of hate- fueled protests. What do these groups actually want? A conversation about hate in America, next.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour The moment some in Zimbabwe had been waiting 37 years for Robert Mugabe's replacement is set to take power in the coming hours. Plus Donald Trump's former national security advisor cuts ties with the U.S. President's legal team. Why that's supposed to be a huge development in the Russia investigation. Also ahead troubling news for families of a submarine crew missing off the coast of Argentina what this latest clue tells investigators. Hello and thank you for joining us. I'm Isha Sesay. NEWSROOM L.A. starts right now. Well, Zimbabwe will usher in a new era in the coming hours. Emmerson Mnangagwa is set to be sworn in as interim president. He had served as right-hand man to the country's dominant leader of 37 years, Robert Mugabe. Mugabe and his wife Grace have both been granted immunity and a guarantee of safety as part of a deal with the military chiefs who moved to oust him. In the Mugabe dictatorship, dissent was punished with violence. But since his removal, it's been pure jubilation in the streets of the capital. Our Farai Sevenzo visit a part of Harare that is reveling in its new found freedom.
[Farai Sevenzo, Cnn News Correspondent:] This is Highfields, one of Harare's oldest townships. Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo, the founding fathers of the ruling Zanu-PF, have lived here. Now it's a stronghold for Morgan Tsvangirai opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change. And life here is about survival. The jobs are informal mechanics, market women, barbers, and a great deal of unemployed, hustling. It's now a traditionally opposition area Highfields. This is the room where Robert Mugabe's people did Operation Murabatsvina which means clear out the filth. And they razed people's houses on the pretense that they didn't have planning permission. But the aim really was to smash the newly-formed Movement for Democratic Change, the opposition's support base. This is all over here. Maxwell is one of those who had his home destroyed in 2005. The father of three used to be a bank manager. Now he, like so many others, has no job.
[Maxwell, Highfields Resident:] All these years I've been working in the bank for 19 years as manager.
[Sevenzo:] He is desperate for a chance to vote for change, freely and fairly.
[Maxwell:] We must both of them, Mnangagwa, Tsvangirai, the must come together, work together, bring reforms to the election, election must be done.
[Sevenzo:] Unfair because people are so euphoric. But right now incoming president, Emmerson Mnangagwa has the edge. The boys at the barber shop are optimistic. In fact Nasha, George, Mayesa and Archibald can't even believe they're allowed to speak to us. They say Mugabe, if they'll be seen like this, they would have been beaten up for talking to us.
[Unidentified Male:] It's only that people wanted change. He does view that things will change. They wanted change. Here in Zimbabwe right now, it seems to be a bit simpler.
[Sevenzo:] Why?
[Unidentified Male:] To discouraged the mistakes of this old man.
[Sevenzo:] And then everything is better now?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Sevenzo:] These schoolgirls tell us they also believe the future is suddenly brighter with Robert Mugabe's departure. Still, it's in areas like these poor, ignored, and proud where the real test of change will be measured.
[Unidentified Male:] I think it's ok. But in in the meantime people Farai Sevenzo, CNN Highfields, Harare.
[Sesay:] And joining me now from Harare Eddie Cross in an economist and former opposition member of Zimbabwe's parliament. Eddie good to speak to you once again. So soon to be president, Emmerson Mnangagwa will take that oath of office and then address the people of Zimbabwe. In your view, what does he need to say in this moment?
[Eddie Cross, Former Opposition Member Of Zimbabwe's Parliament:] Well, as you've sees from the video clip, the expectations are unreasonably high. He has a massive task ahead of him. The first thing he's got to do is he's got to give us a vision of where he wants to take Zimbabwe because we don't know at this point in time. And then he's got to tell us how he intends to get there. And that's got to involve building a broad consensus. He can't do it on his own. He needs the international community to buy into whatever he is going to do because he needs global support. And that's a tall order for a man who's been at the helm of a dictatorial regime for 37 years.
[Sesay:] It is a tall order indeed. Many obviously question his democratic credentials and whether he can bring about the structural reforms the country needs. I want to ask you something specific about the swearing in ceremony that will take place a couple of hours from now. To the best of your knowledge, will the opposition be attending the gathering?
[Cross:] I received an official invitation. And so I'm sure many of my colleagues have. I was asked that question yesterday and I understand Morgan our president, did not receive an invitation. I think that maybe just administration administrative glitch. I know Emmerson Mnangagwa reasonably well. And I know that's not the kind of thing that he would do deliberately. So let's just wait and see. But I personally have received an invitation.
[Sesay:] Ok. Good to have that confirmation from you. As a member of the opposition though, how concerned are you that in his first address upon returning from a self-imposed exile, Emmerson Mnangagwa, when he spoke to the crowd of supporters there at the Zanu-PF headquarters that he recited those well-known, well-chortled out Zanu-PF slogans. What does that say to you? What does that point to for the future?
[Cross:] We've had some very disturbing indications since the coup last Tuesday. The former minister of finance made a statement where he said quite categorically that the opposition would not be involved in any future government. This was Zanu-PF business and Zanu-PF alone. If they stick to that mantra, then they're in for severe difficulties because they simply cannot get national populist support. I would imagine our support as a party is 75 percent or more. He has to have us on board not just for the fact that he needs popular support for what he's got to do. He's got to make some tough decisions but also because he needs recognition by the international community. And think only my party can really give him that credibility.
[Sesay:] So with that being said, obviously that's something Zanu-PF is aware of, the need to have the MDC come on board to bring a sense of inclusiveness to basically stamp his efforts going forward, if you will; to validate his efforts. What's your next move then? What are the conversations within the opposition?
[Across:] Well, as far as we're concerned, the future is entirely in Emmerson Mnangagwa's hands. If he makes this mistake today and doesn't present an inclusive vision for the future of the country and he doesn't involve all the expertise that's available in Zimbabwe in crafting that vision, if he reappoints this collection of old crooks who have been running this country for the last 37 years I'm afraid he's going to make no progress at all. He faces an immediate economic crisis that he has to resolve immediately. And he cannot resolve our problems without the international community. And the international community had made it very clear that they will not move unless he points a clear pathway, a roadmap back to democratic governance.
[Sesay:] So just so that I'm clear, is the plan to just sit back and wait for outreach from Emmerson Mnangagwa or are your people talking to him, are meetings being held, at least being scheduled? And just trying to be clear whether, the opposition is taking an active role or passive role in what comes next.
[Cross:] Our position has been made very clear. We met as a national executive last Tuesday. And what we resolved was number one, he would have to approach us after he's been sworn in as president. We wouldn't talk to him before he's president. At the moment he's president he has national responsibilities. And we said that if he wants to approach us, if he wants to be involved he has to speak to our president. He hasn't done so. But in a sense, we have a tacit agreement that he wouldn't do so until he was sworn in as president. So the next few days, next couple of days, are going to be very crucial in that respect. The second thing we've done, is we've spelt out very clearly the fundamentals that we would like to see done in the first few months of his administration. So he knows how to do it and he knows what the price is. And we've set it out very clearly. If he doesn't go that route we will continue getting ready for the 2018 elections and he'll have to fight those election against a backdrop of a failed economy and failure to deliver the expectations of the people. And that will be a very rough ride for him throughout.
[Sesay:] Well, the next couple of days are very, very important. We'll be watching very closely. Eddie Cross we appreciate the insight and your sharing the developments in conversations within the opposition. Thank you very much. Eddie Cross there from Harare.
[Cross:] Thank you. Now, a significant development in the probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections. A source familiar with the matter tells CNN, attorneys for fired U.S. national security advisor Michael Flynn has notified the legal team for President Donald Trump they can no longer communicate with him about the special counsel's investigation. That could mean Flynn is cooperating with the prosecutors or negotiating to do so. Let's turn not Michael Genovese. He's a professor of political science and director of the Institute for Leadership Studies at Loyola Marymount University. Michael always good to have you with us. Thank you for being with us on this Thanksgiving.
[Michael Genovese, Political Analyst:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Happy Thanksgiving.
[Genovese:] And to you.
[Sesay:] So this is a pretty significant development, one that that was broken by the "New York Times". Everyone is trying to figure out, it's significant but how significant and what its implications are. I want you to take a listen to Page Pate, one of CNN's legal voices. Take a listen to his analysis of the move.
[Page Pate, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I really think this is a sign that Michael Flynn's team is cooperating with the government. It is common in cases like this, where there are multiple targets for the lawyers to work together in what we call a Joint Defense Agreement. And that means we share information. If we had discussions with the government, we tell each other about it and we get evidence and pass it around. So we know what the other side is doing and we share that information. But if one of the individuals who may be a target or a suspect in the case decides to start working with the government or even just talking to the government about a possible deal, then they have to step outside of that Joint Defense Agreement.
[Sesay:] Michael, I would imagine this is the White House's worst nightmare.
[Genovese:] A lot of sleepless nights in the next few days. But a lot of the significance depends on the story that Flynn has to tell. His attorney said months ago that at the right price Mike Flynn would tell a story that's pretty significant. We don't know exactly what that story is. Is it potentially explosive? Maybe he just knows a few tidbits. But right now Mueller is going through a two-stage process simultaneous information and leverage. Information getting people on record, comparing stories, looking for weaknesses, looking for contradictions. And also leverage trying to leverage what he has to get a better deal. And it looks like that leveraging strategy has paid off. Flynn probably is cooperating and in large part I'm thinking it's because not just Flynn but because of his son as well. And that's the leverage point that Mueller has.
[Sesay:] Yes. I mean to that point, I want to read sort of what the "New York Times" wrote. Let's put it up onscreen. "Mr. Flynn is regarded as loyal to Mr. Trump. But he has in recent weeks expressed serious concerns to friends that prosecutors will bring charges against his son, Michael Flynn Jr. who served as his father's chief of staff and was a part of several financial deals involving the elder Mr. Flynn that Mr. Mueller is scrutinizing." I mean that's the weak spot here, I'd imagine, in terms of for Flynn, knowing that his son may have legal exposure. But you know, you made the point about what does he know. I mean it was one thing for Mueller to get indictments against Paul Manafort and Rick Gates and, of course, get George Papadopoulos to accept that plea deal. It is another thing entirely when it comes to Flynn given his closeness to the President.
[Genovese:] Right. And it's a question of are they getting information on Flynn's dirty dealings with the Russians or with Turkey? Plenty of information on that. Or does it go further? Does it also leapfrog to the White House, or the campaign, to Donald Trump? That's the key question. They know they've got a lot of material on him for his lobbying and his work with Turkey. The question is how much has he got on Trump? How much does he know and he's willing to tell?
[Sesay:] Yes. And again, it just points to Mueller being that methodical, careful character that we knew he was likely to prove to be as we've seen it in the past going after individuals one by one, picking them off.
[Genovese:] Well, you know, sort of the rabbit and tortoise and he's going slowly, painstakingly slowly. I mean people are when is he going to do this. Well, he's going at his own pace and his own pace is working step-by-step. And in a case like this which is very complicated and involves a lot of moving parts that's probably the only way you can go.
[Sesay:] Yes. Well, I want to turn attention to the President's Thanksgiving celebration. The President putting his own twist on things, shall we say, I mean it is of course, that day in the year where it's about giving thanks, expressing appreciation. For President Trump it also seems to be about taking credit this Thanksgiving. He had a teleconference where he spoke to the five branches of the military the U.S. military serving abroad. I want you to take a listen to some of what he had to say.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I told them our country is doing great. And you folks are fighting so hard and working so hard. And it's nice that you're working on something really starting to work. We cut back so much on regulation and all the waste and all the abuse. And the stock market on Friday hit the all-time high, the highest it's ever been, ever.
[Sesay:] Well, the President had a full agenda. In addition to the teleconference he also spoke to the Coast Guard, went to the Coast Guard headquarters with Melania Trump. And that was the clip we played there. So we'll get to the teleconference in a moment. But in that clip that you just heard the President is saying, you know, you folks are fighting so hard and working so hard and it's nice that you're working for something that's really starting to work.
[Genovese:] Well, it started out as a thank you to the troops and it quickly morphed into an advertisement for Donald Trump. He was thanking the troops but then he kept turning it on to himself taking credit and saying well, let's talk about you. What do you think of the great work I've been doing? And so it's lot of credit-taking and a lot of predecessor-bashing. And it became so obvious and embarrassing at a point where he just seemed to be going so overboard, lost track of his message, would come back to it and then go back to congratulating himself again.
[Sesay:] What is that about?
[Genovese:] It's about his fragile ego. It's about his need to be propped up. It's about his need to be made to feel like he's a success. Maybe it stems from his childhood relationship to his father. Maybe it stems from his business dealings. He's very, very fragile. His ego is very fragile and it needs a lot of care and feeding.
[Sesay:] Ok. As I mentioned he had the teleconference with the troops. Let's play that clip I was just referencing there from the conversation.
[Trump:] We're being talked about again as an armed forces. We're really winning. We know how to win but we have to let you win. They weren't letting you win before. They were letting you play even. We're letting you win.
[Sesay:] Well, he did say people would get tired of winning. Would you like to fact check the President? He said they were not letting you win. They were just letting you get even.
[Genovese:] Well, you know, I wish I had a dollar for every time he said win or winning.
[Sesay:] You wouldn't be sitting here with me because you'd be very wealthy.
[Genovese:] But it's amazing to see how he is so conscious of his predecessors and so willing to just on them and attack them both President Bushes but mostly President Obama. And often he does that in a way that is so far-fetched and so absurd it's almost as if he was trying to say, well you know, my predecessor was weak, I'm strong. My predecessor did this but I'm doing this. Thank me, thank me, thank me. Both Presidents Bush and Obama made a very valiant and very serious effort at stopping terrorism and dealing in the Middle East. Most of the strategy that led to success in defeating ISIS started with Trump with Obama and was extended by President Trump. So give him credit give him credit where credit is due but it's not just him and it's not just about him.
[Sesay:] but he does the same with the economy as well. It's the same conversation that he claims all the credit when the boom, if you will, began with President Obama.
[Genovese:] Yes. That's true. There was, I think, a Trump bump after the election because businesses thought well, regulations will go down they have. The taxes will go down maybe they will. That the President is going to be a cheerleader for the economy he is. And so again, give him credit where credit is due. But start with where the credit began, and that the turnaround in the economy started with President Bush who did all the funneling of money into the economy. Then Obama and his efforts to get the economy turned around which was very successful. He's building out what's already been done both in foreign policy and on terrorism and on the economy. He can't recognize that. He thinks it's all about himself.
[Sesay:] He is remaking the presidency in his own image. He's completing the duties of the presidency, the administration with actions taken by him. It's all about him. Do you worry about a loss in impact on the presidency?
[Genovese:] Well, the presidency is one institution in three. It's a three-branch institution. And the President is not the presidency. The President is one person at the head of a branch. And I think what can happen is the American public can lose sight of the fact that the beauty of our system, what makes it great, is that there are checks and balances, that we do have a collegial cooperative government when it works best and sometimes a dysfunctional government when it doesn't work. But it's three branches, not one. It's three legislative, executive and judicial branches, not just a person.
[Sesay:] Michael important civics lesson there. We appreciate it.
[Genovese:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] Thank you. All right. We're going to take a very quick break here. Next on NEWSROOM L.A., there's a major development in the hunt for a missing Argentine submarine the latest on the search, ahead. And just a day after this video of a North Korean's daring dash to freedom another defector tells CNN about his dramatic escape from the North. That story just ahead.

[Paul:] So glad to have you with us here. Twenty-seven minutes past the hour. I'm Christi Paul.
[Blackwell:] I'm Victor Blackwell. Good morning to you.
[Paul:] So listen, this morning we know all 17 victims of that Missouri duck boat crash have been identified. A team from the NTSB says it could take up to a year to release and report on exactly what happened.
[Blackwell:] Last night, the community held a memorial near Table Rock Lake. This is in Branson, Missouri. Of course for the 17 victims. Thursday afternoon, the ship launched in hurricane-like conditions with winds of almost 70 miles per hour. And this morning, a mother who lost nine family members including her three children. She says the decision to try and beat an approaching storm may have cost her relatives their lives.
[Tia Coleman, Missouri Boat Accident Survivor:] There's big, huge waves, choppy. Everybody start getting like, hey, this is a little bit too much. And then it got really choppy and big swells of water started coming into the boat. Then a really huge wave swept over. And when the wave swept over, the last thing I heard my sister-in-law yell was "Grab the baby." My head pushed up to the top of the water and I lost control. I didn't have even I couldn't see anybody. And I know it wasn't, but it felt like I struggled for it felt like I struggled for at least an hour. But it was probably like 10 minutes.
[Blackwell:] So far, survivors have been released from the hospital. Doctors say it's unclear when Coleman will be able to go home.
[Paul:] Police in Houston are looking for the suspect who shot and killed a cardiologist who treated former President George H.W. Bush. He was a patient of his. CNN correspondent Polo Sandoval is live for us from New York. So, Polo, I understand this doctor, he's more than a physician to the former president. He was prominent in the Houston medical community.
[Polo Sandoval, Cnn Correspondent:] Christi, his name was Mark Hausknecht, had been in practice for nearly four decades. Well- respected. A pillar in the medical community in Houston. Now, police in the Texas City are trying to find his killer, and more importantly, a motive.
[Sandoval:] Police in Houston searching an area near the Texas medical center for a murder suspect after cardiologist Mark Hausknecht was gunned down Friday while riding his bicycle to. Police said the doctor was riding north when he passed the shooter also on a bike going the other direction.
[Troy Finner, Executive Assistant Chief, Houston Police:] The suspect was on a bicycle, as well, drove past, rode past the doctor. Turned and fired two shots. The doctor immediately went down.
[Sandoval:] A private ambulance passed by the scene, and EMT stopped to help before the Houston Fire Department arrived.
[Unidentified Male:] I seeing somebody flagging us down. I said it you know, "Something's wrong? And then, I drove up a little further and I see the gentleman sprawled out on the floor with blood all over him. We stopped, rendered aid to the best of our ability.
[Sandoval:] Authorities said, investigators don't know if the shooting was targeted, random, or caused by road rage. A few people may have witnessed the attack and police are looking at surveillance video.
[Finner:] Our homicide investigators are interviewing people. Another good thing about our Medical Center, as you know, there is a lot of cameras. So, we're hoping that we can get some footage of this.
[Sandoval:] Dr. Hausknecht was a well-known cardiologist. One of his patients was former President George H. W. Bush, whose spokesman issued this statement, saying, "Mark was a fantastic cardiologist and a good man." President Bush said in a statement, "I will always be grateful for his exceptional, compassionate care, his family is in our prayers." A Houston Methodist Hospital spokesman, also, releasing a statement, saying, "Not only was he revered by his patients but Mark was highly regarded among his peers and colleagues. He was recently recognized as a super doctor." And so far, police have only described their suspect as a white or Hispanic man in his 30s. At the time of the shooting yesterday morning, he was riding a light-colored mountain bike. But ultimately, though authorities right now are pouring over surveillance video in the area, and also hoping that someone perhaps, saw something after all the shooting did happen during what was considered rush hour there on that hospital complex. Guys?
[Paul:] Yes, that is just bizarre. Polo Sandoval, thank you so.
[Blackwell:] All right, still to come. Michael Cohen, the president's former attorney, and fixer secretly taped the discussion with the president about a payment to a former Playboy model. And the questions now about how far they would go to suppress allegations of an extramarital affair from going public.
[Paul:] Also, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is organizing a meeting of international political and religious. And they're going to talk about religious liberty. We're talking about the agenda here and there are questions raised about how dedicated the Trump administration is to religious freedom?

[Briggs:] The Navy has now officially removed the commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet after the guided missile destroyer, U.S.S. John S. McCain, collided with a commercial tanker Monday off the coast of Singapore. CNN's Matt Rivers live for us in Singapore with the latest details. Good morning to you, Matt.
[Matt Rivers, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. Yes, that's the latest news after this deadly accident that took place early Monday morning. The commander of the 7th Fleet, his name is Vice Admiral Joe Aucoin, was relieved of his command by his boss, the commander of the entire Pacific Fleet, Admiral Scott Swift, with Admiral Swift saying that he no longer had confidence in Aucoin's ability to command his troops. It's really the first domino to fall after what has been a very difficult year for the 7th Fleet. There have been four different incidents involving U.S. Navy warships deployed to this part of the world. Three of those incidents have involved ships from the 7th Fleet, including these last two incidents, both of which are deadly incidents. So they're clearly looking in the Navy at a leadership problem here. But they're also going to look at a broader comprehensive review that's going to be undertaken over the next several days, fleet-wide, across the entire Navy, command by command. They're going to each command in a different way, stand down operationally for one day at a time, to really take a deep dive, a deep look at what's going on here. Are there systemic safety issues that need to be addressed? Clearly there is problems that need to be addressed and the Navy is doing so. But a immediate priority here in Singapore, there remains missing sailors. We know that remains have been found of some of the missing sailors aboard the U.S.S. John McCain, inside damaged portions of the hull. But those search efforts continue today to see if there's any hope of finding any survivors.
[Briggs:] Yes, those 10 families certainly want answers. Matt Rivers live for us; 5:30 pm there in Singapore, thank you, Matt. EARLY START continues right now with the latest from a fiery Phoenix rally.

[Keilar:] "Rock bottom," that's how former Vice President Joe Biden characterizes the latest controversy coming out of the White House. This one isn't from President Trump. It's coming from one of his lower-level aides. It's about Arizona Senator John McCain, who has been away from Capitol Hill battling brain cancer. The controversial remark coming from White House aide, Kelly Sadler. A White House official said that Sadler was reacting to McCain's opposition to Trump's pick for the CIA director when she dismissed his opposition and said, quote, "He's dying anyway." A source said that Sadler apologized to McCain's daughter, Meghan, but that did not keep Meghan McCain from saying this today.
[Meghan Mccain, Daughter Of John Mccain:] Since my dad has been diagnosed, it's almost a year July 19th, I really feel like I understand the meaning of life and it is not how you die, it is how you live. Right?
[Mccain:] And I don't understand what kind of environment you're working in when that would be acceptable and then you can come to work the next day and still have a job. And that's all I have to say about it.
[Whoopi Goldberg, Co-host, The View:] I guess the fish stinks from the head because it's easy to say something like that and not think that, ooh, that is a wrong-headed comment to make out loud. You can think what you want but you don't say this kind of thing out loud.
[Keilar:] Joining me now is HLN host, S.E. Cupp. S.E., you just had an exclusive interview with the House Speaker Paul Ryan and you talked about this. What did he tell you?
[S.e. Cupp, Hln Host, "s.e. Cupp Unfiltered":] I did. I talked to Speaker Ryan today. He's speaking at the Jack Kemp Forum. We talked about a number issues, from poverty to upward mobility to the future of the GOP. I asked him whether he's been tough enough on Trump. That will all air on Monday on HLN. But I did, I asked him about today's news and those comments about John McCain. Here's what he had to say.
[Cupp:] I want to ask you about John McCain. He's meant a lot to you and to me and to many Republicans, and he's taking some unnecessary incoming from surprising corners at the worst possible time. Is there anything you'd like to say to him or to his family or to Republicans?
[Rep. Paul Ryan, , Wisconsin, Speaker Of The House:] Look, John McCain's a hero, no two ways about it. John McCain, I mean, he gave his entire adult life for this country. John McCain fought for us in Vietnam, was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, came home and dedicated his life to public service. His vocation in life was making life better for people and better for the country. There are so many accolades I could heap onto John McCain. But I know John very well. John McCain helped us save our military. He was so passionate about this. We lost 80 servicemembers to death by training and equipment failures. That's part of a problem of a budget we had. John McCain made sure we reinvested in our military, fixed our Veteran Affairs problems. His legacy is so long that John McCain is a hero to us. And John McCain, all of our thoughts and prayers are with John and his family right now at this time.
[Keilar:] And also, S.E., you are it's very interesting to hear that reaction from him. You're also friends with Meghan McCain. With that in mind, when you hear something like this reported out, a comment from a White House aide, you also have a very personal perspective on this. What did you think about the comment?
[Cupp:] You know, it I don't like to rush to Meghan's defense. She likes to joke that she is her dad in a dress. She's a really strong, tough cookie. She doesn't need my help. But it's hard when you hear comments like that about your friend, your friend's family, especially when you know what they've been going through. And it just so gross and disappointing. And of course, you know, it's hard it's hard to be too surprised, right? Kelly's boss, President Trump, has mocked John McCain himself in public. So it's a really troubling times we're living in when that kind of comment is made on the job, on the clock, in front of a large group of people with really no concern about how it would land or whether it would get out and whom it would offend.
[Keilar:] Clearly, someone was offended, right? Because they let it be known that it was said.
[Cupp:] I would hope. That's a very generous view of how that got out. I would hope someone was offended. This is, of course, as you know, a White House that is very internally combustible, lots of leak, lots of people telling on each other. So I'm not sure if this was intended to shame Kelly and bring this to light or some other sort of internal politics going on. Who knows? But I would like to think someone in that room was offended by that comment.
[Keilar:] That's a really good point, S.E. S.E. Cupp, thank you so much.
[Cupp:] Thank you.
[Keilar:] You can see her full interview with House Speaker Paul Ryan on Monday on
[Hln, 5:] 00 p.m. Eastern, over on our sister network. Next, did the secretary of Homeland Security threaten to quit her job after President Trump reportedly berated her over border security? We'll have more on that as we await the White House press briefing.

[John Bolton, National Security Adviser:] position he's in of criticizing President Trump and the is so-called collusion with Russia unless he did use classified information.
[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] CNN NEWSROOM starts now.
[Whitfield:] All right. Hello, again, everyone, and thank you so much for being with me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. All right. Happening this hour President Trump and the first lady are departing his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, on the way back to the White House. The president spent the early part of the day along with his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani managing potential fallout after a "New York Times" report about White House attorney Don McGahn being interviewed in the Mueller investigation. The report detailing the White House counsel has cooperated extensively in the special counsel investigation, providing as much as 30 hours of testimony. Giuliani saying this morning McGahn was encouraged to interview and the White House knows exactly what he said.
[Rudy Giuliani, Attorney For President Trump:] The president encouraged him to testify, is happy that he did.
[Chuck Todd, Host, "meet The Press":] Yes.
[Giuliani:] Is quite secure that there is nothing in the testimony that will hurt the president. And John Dowd told you that when he said he was a strong witness for the president.
[Whitfield:] The president meantime is lashing out, comparing the probe to McCarthyism, tweeting today, "The failing "New York Times" wrote a fake piece today implying that because White House counsel Don McGahn was giving hours of testimony to the special counsel he must be a John Dean type rat. But I allowed him and all others to testify. I didn't have to. I have nothing to hide." CNN's Ryan Nobles is joining me now from Brooklyn Heights, New Jersey, where the president has been for the weekend, but again, on his way now to Washington momentarily. So, Ryan, Rudy Giuliani says he has a pretty good feeling about what Don McGahn would have said, but do they know specifically what he said and what the Q and A was like?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Yes, I mean, that's a big question right now, Fred. We know that Don McGahn spent an extensive amount of time with the special counsel, more than 30 hours over three different occasions. And we also know that Don McGahn is somebody that has been around the president at some of these key moments that would be of interest to the special counsel. And the president and the White House are pretty insistent that that's OK, that they're the ones that gave Don McGahn the right, the ability to go on and have this conversation with the special counsel, and they also were the ones that told him it was OK to waive attorney-client privilege which essentially allowed him to say whatever he knew about these interactions over the past year and half, but what's interesting about all of this is that it's not abundantly clear that the White House knows exactly what Dan McGahn told Robert Mueller. Listen to how Rudy Giuliani was pressed on this, this morning on "Meet the Press."
[Giuliani:] We have a good sense, obviously, of what Mr. McGahn testified to. I can figure it out from
[Todd:] How do you say that good sense? Have you debriefed him?
[Giuliani:] No, no. But Mr. Dowd has a good sense of it. He talked to them at the time.
[Todd:] So you don't know what Mr. McGahn you don't know 100 percent of what he testified to? To Mr. Mueller?
[Giuliani:] I think that through John Dowd, we have a pretty good sense of it. And John Dowd yesterday said I'll use his words rather than mine that McGahn was a strong witness for the president. So I don't need to know much more about that.
[Nobles:] But what the White House has not really responded to was the assertion in "The New York Times" report that when don McGahn learned of the counsel for the president, his private attorney suggesting that he meet with the special counsel that he was concerned that perhaps he was being setup, that this was a way for them to perhaps put him on the hook for any obstruction of justice charge that the special counsel discovered and that's when he got his own personal attorney and was advised by his own personal attorney how to handle the situation, and Don McGahn's personal attorney has been pretty clear this weekend. He didn't go into these interviews with the goal of providing them incriminating information about the president but there's no doubt that he's been a cooperating witness, and William Burke, the attorney for Don McGahn, has said that he was very honest as anyone should be when talking to a federal investigator. So of course, Fred, this gets back to your original question, what exactly did Don McGahn tell the special counsel? It seems the only person that knows that for sure is Robert Mueller Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right. Ryan Nobles, thanks so much. Giuliani also discussed the infamous Trump Tower meeting today saying that meeting was of no consequence and could not possibly result in charges against the president.
[Giuliani:] If someone said, I have information about your opponent, you would take that meeting. If it happens to be
[Todd:] From the Russian government?
[Giuliani:] She didn't represent the Russian government. She's a private citizen. I don't even know if they knew she was a Russian at the time. All they had was her name.
[Todd:] They knew she was Russian. I think they knew she was Russian, but OK.
[Giuliani:] Well, they knew it when they met with her, not when they set up the meeting. You told me you asked me, you know, did they show an intention to do anything with Russians, well, all they knew is that a woman with a Russian name wanted to meet with them. They didn't know she was a representative of the Russian government. And indeed she is not a representative of the Russian government.
[Whitfield:] All right. But of course we know that really isn't true. We have the e-mail exchange with Donald Trump Jr. that proves otherwise. Rob Goldstone wrote to Trump Junior on June 3rd, 2016, saying, "The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father this morning, and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Donald Trump Jr. then responds, "If it's what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer." I want to bring in Jamil Jaffer, former associate White House counsel in the George W. Bush administration, and CNN presidential historian Tim Naftali. Good to see both of you. OK, Jamil, you first. You know, the White House is not refuting that Don McGahn actually gave the testimony. In fact even saying they encouraged it. But the White House is fighting back against any negative inference from it, so what would the White House be so worried about?
[Jamil Jaffer, Former Associate White House Counsel, George W. Bush Administration:] Well, look, I mean, obviously Don McGahn very close to the president, speaks to the president on a regular basis about what's going on, gives advice to the president about what he was doing or the vice president was doing. The president waived attorney-client privilege, he waived executive privilege and told Don McGahn go in and talk. Well, that's a problem because there's a lot of conversation that might be had that were private or provided advice and now that Don McGahn has gone and said everything he knows, because that's what the president told him to do, you know, the president is in a situation where if one of his stories varies from what Don McGahn said, right, if he goes and testifies that's a real problem for the president if he doesn't tell the same story that Don did. Now Don is a smart lawyer but he's going to go tell the truth when he's confronted by prosecutor and there's no privilege at stake because the president waived it.
[Whitfield:] And, Jamil, as you're talking we're looking at live pictures of Marine One there in New Jersey, the president and the first lady leaving New Jersey, eventually on the way back to Washington after having spent the weekend there at the New Jersey golf course, you know, bearing Trump's name. So, Tim, you know, the Rudy Giuliani, the personal attorney for President Trump, says he has a pretty good idea, you know, what Don McGahn would have said. But you saw in that, you know, question and answer on "Meet the Press" it didn't it doesn't sound like Rudy Giuliani has heard first person from Don McGahn what the questions were, what information he would have given, but clearly Don McGahn is also protecting himself by having his own attorney with him. He is a witness in this exchange with the special counsel. How concerning
[Tim Naftali, Cnn Presidential Historian:] Well
[Whitfield:] You know, should the White House be?
[Naftali:] Well, the first thing that the White House should be concerned about be concerned about is that Mr. McGahn is the lawyer for the presidency. He's the lawyer for the office of the presidency. He's not Donald Trump's personal lawyer. So his job is to protect a presidency. And we're assuming he of course he tells the truth, his answers are going to be in support of our country's presidency. It's very possible that he will give information that provides the special prosecutor with better questions to ask about Mr. Trump's behavior. It doesn't mean that Mr. McGahn went into the meeting in order to incriminate Donald Trump. Mr. McGahn wasn't with Donald Trump during the campaign. He doesn't know every associate of Donald Trump.
[Whitfield:] Right. But it's interesting that Giuliani would say, you know, it's his belief that Don McGahn would be a strong witness for the president.
[Naftali:] Fred, Fred, I have to say that during the Watergate period, the White House that would be the Richard Nixon White House made the same claim because what's the alternative? You can't have Giuliani go forward and say, we're worried. Even if they are, they can't say it publicly.
[Whitfield:] Mm-hmm. But I guess worry sounds like that is the sentiment, Jamil, coming from the president when the president tweets, you know, a reference to the Nixon administration attorney John Dean and calling him a rat almost says, you know, maybe a warning to Don McGahn that, you know, you should only say but so much. I mean, what do you interpret from that coming from the president today?
[Jaffer:] Well, you know, Fredricka, it's hard to know what the president is thinking when he puts his tweets out there. I mean, you know, in one on one hand, he is admitting I told Don McGahn to the tell the truth and the whole truth which means that if the president's story varies at all from Don McGahn's, that's a huge problem for the president. On top of that he's also talking about John Dean and Nixon and Watergate, suggesting there might be some parallel here which is not a positive for the president so, you know, as always
[Whitfield:] Right. But why does he do that? Why is he doing that?
[Jaffer:] I mean, it is inexplicable. The president ought to get off the Twitter and get off of Twitter tomorrow, he ought to stop tweeting out, he got to listen to his lawyers, stop talking about the investigation, stop going after Jeff Sessions, stop going after Bob Mueller, focus on his agenda and I mean, he's making it worse for himself. Anybody who's Donald Trump's lawyer right now has got to be thinking, this is a train wreck.
[Whitfield:] So from Marine One now and there is Barron, we haven't seen him in a long time there. The first family there, you know, getting off of Marine One on their way now to Air Force One as they are still in New Jersey ending the weekend there. Any chance we might be able to hear anything? All right, no. But if anything is going to be said, we'll have to rewrack it and try to bring it to you, but you see them at least waving there. So, you know, Tim, the White House, perhaps it's trying to look like it's not worried at all, very calm, cool and collected about all of this, especially by hearing from Rudy Giuliani, you know, earlier today, but then if you're Don McGahn, while you have gotten the green light from the White House to do this interview, and now there is that "New York Times' ," you know, report that says, yes, it was 30 hours, you know, of interviewing over nine months' period, what is that like for Don McGahn to go back to work as the White House counsel? Would he, you know, share the testimony? Would he be mum on it? I mean, what is this going to be like for him?
[Naftali:] I'd leave it to a lawyer to determine whether he should share it, but, look, one thing that is really interesting about this particular story is that when John Dean cooperated with investigators he was looking for immunity and he was on his way out. Presumably Mr. McGahn is not looking for immunity and he's planning to remain the lawyer for the Office of the President. He is a pro. He is a professional. That's his job. His job is to answer questions to defend the presidency. Not necessarily to defend the president. And that's where the challenge is. Because frankly, Mr. Trump, President Trump is not accustomed to having people around him whose job it is to protect the institution rather than the person.
[Whitfield:] Right, and then, Jamil, no wonder why Don McGahn would have his own attorney present.
[Jaffer:] Well, look, Don McGahn, his attorney Bill Burke is a very smart guy, former deputy White House counsel in the Bush administration, he's been through investigations, he knows how to run. He's providing his client the best advice he can and in this case, unlike the president, I bet you Don McGahn is taking Bill Burke's advice.
[Whitfield:] All right. Jamil Jaffer, Tim Naftali, good to see you both. Thanks so much.
[Naftali:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] All right. Coming up there, the men and women who have kept our country safe from terrorists, but the president is threatening to revoke even more security clearances from veteran intelligence officials, this as 60 now former CIA leaders warned the president's threats could weaken U.S. democracy. Stay with us.

[Church:] There is growing pressure on U.S. Representative John Conyers to resign his seat after several women accused him of sexual harassment. The chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus says he had a candid conversation with the democratic congressman but said any decision to resign from office is Conyers' to make. Conyers has admitted reaching a financial settlement with one accuser but denies the harassment allegations. A new accusation surfaced Tuesday from a former staffer in Conyers' Detroit office. The woman worked in the district office from 1997 until 2005. She said the office had a sexually suggestive culture, and she made reports to a House committee on official conduct. She described one incident where she was told to drive Conyers to the airport.
[Deanna Maher, John Conyers Accuser:] He was driving erratically. He was a terrible driver, erratically. Thank God he was erratic, OK, because his hand was feeling me all over my what do you call it? My abdomen, OK? That area while he was driving. And I thought, my God, what am I going to do?
[Church:] Well, meanwhile, Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore will get some help on the campaign trail from former White House strategist Steve Bannon. Several women have accused Moore of pursuing them when they were teenagers and he was in his 30s. One accuses him of sexual abuse when she was 14. Moore denies all the allegations. Alex Marquardt reports on the heated race between Moore and his democratic challenger.
[Alexander Marquardt, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] In what has turned into a grueling high-stakes race, the president has made clear he prefers the prospect of an accused child abuser in the Senate than a democrat like Doug Jones.
[Trump:] I can tell you one thing for sure. We don't need a liberal person in there, a democrat, Jones. I've looked at his record. It's terrible on crime. It's terrible on the border. It's terrible in the military.
[Marquardt:] Trump has emphasized that Moore has denied all of the accusations, but those views are repeated by supporters of Roy Moore like conservative activist Ann Eubank.
[Ann Eubank, Conservative Activist:] Conservatives do not believe in open borders and conservatives believe that a child's life is more important than a woman's choice.
[Marquardt:] Today Jones defended those accusations. How do you respond to the president and to Roy Moore and his supporters who say that you are terrible on crime, terrible on immigration?
[Doug Jones,  Senate Candidate:] Well, I tell people to look at my record and see what I've done, you know, as a former assistant U.S. attorney, a former U.S. attorney, we prosecuted tons of people. Look at my record. Don't just listen to a tweet. Don't listen to somebody make a statement.
[Marquardt:] When it comes to crime, Jones made his name as a U.S. attorney, prosecuting one of the most tragic attacks in Alabama history, the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in 1963 that left four young girls dead, two members of the Ku Klux Klan were convicted. Jones is more conservative than many democrats in Washington, but for Alabama, he's about as left as they come. Under fire from many Alabamians for his views on abortion.
[Jones:] I am a firm believer that a woman should have the freedom to choose what happens to her own body, and I'm going to stand up for that.
[Marquardt:] Moore supporters jumped on Jones for saying he wouldn't back legislation banning abortions after 20 weeks. Later walking it back, saying late-term abortions should only be for medical emergencies. On immigration, he has criticizes the president's plan for a wall on the Mexican border and has supported the so-called DACA program for the children of undocumented immigrants. He calls himself a Second Amendment guy, but has called for more stringent background checks for gun buyers, all positions that Trump and Moore have seized on and which columnist John Archibald says, Jones hasn't done well in communicating to potential voters.
[John Archibald, Columnist, Alabama Media Group:] I don't think he's done a good job of coming out and saying this is what I stand for in a way that people of Alabama as the majority can understand. But clearly I think what he believes and his campaign believes he needs to do is sit back and hope that Roy Moore implodes. I think as we get closer to Election Day, that's probably not going to be enough.
[Marquardt:] Alex Marquardt, CNN, Birmingham, Alabama.
[Church:] New developments in the investigation into a string of killings in Florida. Four people in Tampa were shot to death separately in the past month and a half. The shootings all happened less than a mile from each other. Police now plan to charge a suspect. They arrested a 24-year-old man after he brought a gun to a McDonald's fast food restaurant. The four victims were killed but not robbed while waiting at a bus stop or just walking alone at night. At this point, the motive is not clear. Well, more ahead on North Korea's most alarming missile launch yet. Why U.S. leaders say it puts the two countries on a collision course. Donald Trump is a little closer to something he really wants, a bill he can sign into law. How his tax cut plan made its way to the senate floor. We'll have that and more when we return. Stay with us.

[Erin Burnett, Cnn:] Breaking news, OUTFRONT a rush to fill. Trump just announcing he's meeting with Supreme Court nominees this weekend. Promising an announcement days from now. Plus, Flynn on hold. The special counsel wants a delay in sentencing Michael Flynn. Yet another delay. What is the issue? And the president says journalists should be free from fear while doing their jobs. So, will he stop attacking press? Let's go OUTFRONT. Good evening, I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT this evening, the breaking news. President Trump is free wheeling aboard Air Force One. It was just a 50-minutes from Washington, D.C. to the president sort of weekend getaway in the summer in New Jersey, but in that 50 minutes, he wanted to talk. He wanted to talk to reporters and he made some major headlines. From the Supreme Court to Russia to the fate of John Kelly, his chief of staff. First, the president in true Trump fashion, teasing sort of a bake off for his candidates for the Supreme Court.
[Unidentified Male:] Who you leading?
[Trump:] Well, we have great people. You know, we have 25 very outstanding people. Hey, look, I like them all, but I have got it down to about five.
[Unidentified Female:] Is there a woman on the short list?
[Trump:] Yes, I do have a woman.
[Unidentified Female:] Is that Amy?
[Trump:] I have two women on the short list.
[Unidentified Male:] Two women? Two women on the shortlist? Two women out of the five?
[Trump:] We have three women on the court now. I have two women out of the five.
[Burnett:] All right, so as he tries to build all that you know, all that excitement, the president went on to say this is really important. He will not ask his nominees if they will overturn Roe v. Wade. Now, you might say, well, look at the nominees on the list, we can tell what they think. But that's not always true. And it's a hugely significant statement if true. The president also previewing his upcoming summit with the Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki.
[Unidentified Male:] What do you hope to achieve with President Putin?
[Trump:] We're going to talk about Ukraine, we're going to be talking about Syria. We'll be talking about elections.
[Unidentified Male:] Which elections?
[Trump:] And we don't want anybody tampering with elections.
[Burnett:] That's a big deal. He doesn't want anyone tampering because you'll remember only yesterday, the president tweeted, "Russia continues to say they had nothing to do with meddling in our election." And then, you know, went on to talk about shady James Comey and the disgraced FBI. So, that would be very important. And then, the president didn't stop addressing reports that he wants to replace his chief of staff John Kelly.
[Unidentified Male:] How long you think he'll stick around?
[Trump:] That I don't know.
[Burnett:] A lot to get to this evening. So let's start with Boris Sanchez, he is traveling with President Trump. And Boris, the president spending the weekend at his golf course in Bedminster, where you are standing tonight. One headline after another, he wanted to talk. He wanted to spend his flight chatting. Let's start with the president's possible meetings this weekend with Supreme Court nominees. He says he's got that list of 25 down to as few as five. Two women on that list.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Oh, that's right, Erin. The president taking control of the narrative if you recall, just a few hours ago, we were talking about that embarrassing phone call that he shared with a comedian, a prank phone call aboard Air Force One. In just about 20 minutes, he has shifted the news in a different direction, one where he likes it to go. He talked about potentially hosting one or two possible replacements for Justice Kennedy at his property in Bedminster this weekend saying that he's whittled down that list of 25 possible candidates down to five. Including, as you noted, two women. One topic that's not going to be up for discussion this weekend, Roe versus Wade. The president saying that it would be inappropriate to discuss this possible candidates positions on abortion during their meetings. Here's more from President Trump on that very topic.
[Unidentified Male:] Are you looking for somebody who would overturn Roe v. Wade?
[Trump:] Well, you know, I'd say great group of intellectual talent, but we really you know, they are generally conservative. I'm not going to ask them that question by the way. That's not a question I'll be asking.
[Sanchez:] The president also saying he's not going to be asking these candidates their position on LGBTQ rights. Two quick notes, Erin on the subject of Vladimir Putin, the president suggesting that he may actually bring up the subject of election meddling with the Russian leader during their meeting in Helsinki next month. The big question, Erin is how strongly is President Trump actually going to confront Vladimir Putin. He's faced criticism from some of his staunches allies over what was perceived as a weak response to Putin during previous meetings when Putin has denied meddling in the 2016 election. And lastly on Chief of Staff John Kelly, the president denying reports that he was considering a replacement. We've previously reported that source have indicated that President Trump has reached out to allies polling them on their views of possible replacements for John Kelly for months. So this is something that we know has been on his radar. Again, unclear exactly what the president plans to do there but it is been it has been part of discussions that he has been having, Erin.
[Burnett:] All right, thank you very much, Boris. And I want to go now to New York Times White House reporter, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, New York Times columnist Frank Bruni, and former federal prosecutor Jennifer Rodgers. Frank, the president say he's going to talk about elections with Vladimir Putin. Says he doesn't want anyone tampering with our elections. Yesterday, obviously, he sort of went along the vein that he did one of the last times he met with Putin. So he says he doesn't didn't do it. You know, yesterday was, the Russia says they had nothing to do with meddling in our election. That was it on Russia but, you know, he called Jim Comey shady and the FBI disgraced in the same tweet. So, is he really going to bring this up in the way his national security team and all of his national security advisers and all the chiefs of intelligence, and I could go on and on, want him to?
[Frank Bruni, New York Times Columnist:] Are you saying that our president is inconsistent because I've never noticed that before. There is nothing in the history of this relationship with Putin, there's nothing in the history of President Trump's statements to date, to indicate that we should have confidence that he's going to bring this up in an aggressive way. He has more often than not thrown water on the theory of meddling despite the fact that his own intelligence, you know, experts have said over and over again. There's no doubt here.
[Burnett:] I mean, remember his comment about it could have been some fat guy in the basement literally.
[Bruni:] So occasionally he says something like this just to sort of mix things up and just to get us all to stop asking the question. But this is no signal of a changed course of the president or that he has now taking this seriously
[Burnett:] It's part of this, you know, he sort of slams President Obama. He said the whole issue with Crimea and Putin's decision to annexed Crimea was because of Obama even though of course just a few days ago, he made Putin's point, well, look, they all speak Russian so, you know. Here's what he said on the plane.
[Unidentified Male:] You're meeting with President Putin when you're in Europe. Will you talk to him about Crimea?
[Trump:] I'll talk to him about everything. Don't forget, President Obama gave up Crimea. That was totally given up by President Obama.
[Unidentified Male:] President Putin did that, not President Obama.
[Trump:] No, no. President Obama gave it up.
[Burnett:] I mean, of course, it wasn't President Obama's to give up. So, I mean, just to remind people it wasn't an American territory or anything like that. But, what do you take away from this?
[Jennifer Rodgers, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Yes. I mean, of course, right, President Obama did not give it up. It was Putin who marched in there and caused it to happen. Obama did not just sit back and do nothing. You know, again, we have a president who kind of makes up his own reality in a lot of ways. And so, he's just trying I think to kind of smooth the way for this relationship that he wants with Russia that a lot of people still are not buying.
[Burnett:] Right. I mean, that's the thing. And of course now, Julie, we also have the president saying we've got what, five people. You know, he has lists of 20 to 25. It sort of an Apprentice style situation that's going on in some ways, it feels like Julie, right. So he's now saying, maybe he's going to meet with people, but he's not going to ask them about Roe v. Wade. Do you put too much stock in that, Julie, or do you think, well, he doesn't need to ask them because they're going to have already vetted that completely?
[Julie Hirschfeld Davis, White House Reporter, The New York Times:] Well, I mean, there's no question that the president does want does gravitate to this sort of reality show like process where it's like, who's up who's down and who's he going to pick. He enjoys that. I think that's why he's being so transparent about his timetable here because he wants people to watch the process. But in terms of not asking them about Roe v. Wade, he has said previously that when he put together this list, he had in his mind that he was looking for justices who would I think he said automatically overturn Roe v. Wade. That they would be pro-life people who would come from that sort of bench. So I think he's confidence in his mind already that the people on this list would all be inclined to do that. So he's almost doesn't need to ask them. It is interesting though, you know, this is the sort of thing the president often say, well, I'm not going to have a litmus test, I'm not going ask him about specific precedents that wouldn't be appropriate. And it's interesting to me that he is actually saying that rather than sort of going where he usually goes, which is to make it very clear what he wants to happen and just let people sort of extract points from there.
[Burnett:] Yes, he's doing in a sense. And I've heard a little bit of he's playing the game in a way that he doesn't always play it. What about this issue you know, he makes the point of not one of them but two of them are women. Obviously, there's been a lot of buzz about some of the women on the list. They were obviously, I think what were there on the original 20 to 25. There were six women, so he's now saying two of these women are on his final list. A lot of people keep asking about this woman, Amy Coney Barrett, from the Seventh Circuit. How seriously do you thin he's considering her or any of those individuals.
[Rodgers:] S, you know, I actually don't think he's likely to pick a woman. I know Frank disagrees, and we're talking about this earlier. She's very inexperienced. She's been on the circuit court for like eight months. She was not a judge before that. She
[Burnett:] And you did make a point, right. There's already two women on the court, not dismissively but I mean, he did point out.
[Rodgers:] Yes, three women on the court.
[Burnett:] I'm sorry, yes.
[Bruni:] We'll keep an eye on it. As I said to, I would keep an eye on her. I mean, you're right, she's not that experienced. He has show with many appointments that experience is not his biggest thing. She got and remember, that she got into the back and forth at a Senate confirmation with Senators Durbin and Feinstein and it was all about her religion and she was standing up for her Catholicism, they were saying, can you be a devout Catholic and also interpret the law, you know, in unbiased way. In the course of that, she became a real hero to religious conservatives. And Donald Trump has shown that he likes to make religious conservatives happy.
[Burnett:] I assume this was an abortion conversation
[Bruni:] She's also 46. So in choosing here, they would get someone who might be on the court for three decades or more, four decades.
[Burnett:] Oh, for sure.
[Rodgers:] And they might not know where she stands on a lot of things. That's the other thing though.
[Burnett:] I guess that's true when you only have eight months. OK. Now but what about you know, he says the whole Bedminster thing, can I remind people not the Donald Trump the "Apprentice" host but that is what this has reminisces of. Everybody, remember, Mitt Romney, Chris Christie, Rudy Giuliani, Reince Priebus, remember, they all came to Bedminster and he had the flag out and they did the whole meet and greet and shake. I mean, does that what he's going to do for SCOTUS?
[Bruni:] The way you say, is that what he's going to with SCOTUS, you mean decorum might prevent traditional decorum might prevent Donald Trump.
[Burnett:] I know, I suppose I shouldn't sound surprised.
[Bruni:] as Julie said so eloquently before every moment of this presidency that he can turn into a serial drama and to something like reality T.V. he does. I think it's entirely possible but he'll do exactly that. Don't forget, we were told that two different justices came to Washington before he announced Gorsuch. So there was thing it's the last minute which of these two is it. So he's done this already to a degree.
[Burnett:] Julie, what about John Kelly? I mean, this has been going on for a while. And I think at this point, your reporting, others reporting has been there's no love lost. There's not a lot between these two people anymore. But, what does that mean about John Kelly that he's praising him, but saying, oh, I don't know how long he'll be here. What are you hearing from your reporting, Julie on how long John Kelly will be around?
[Davis:] Well, for a long time, it's been the case that, you know, people have seen John Kelly as eyeing the exits. And there have been these cycles of rumors that have sort of ebbed and flowed and right now, they're flowing. That, you know, the date is approaching when he is going to be leaving whether by his own choice or by President Trump deciding that he's had enough. There's no question that, you know, that he has not seen as long for this world. I did think it was interesting the way that the president dealt with these questions today on the plane. He didn't say oh no, he's staying for a long time. That's totally wrong. He said, you know, he's a good man. We've had a good relationship, it almost sounded like that was in the past. And I wouldn't be surprised if we see some movement on this pretty soon. But again, we've been through this so many times, it's hard to pinpoint a date when he's going to be gone.
[Burnett:] It was somewhat of a eulogy and I think as we've notice as often, he's a good man is not a good thing. Thank you all very much. And next, the breaking news. Bob Mueller asking for another delay in sentencing Michael Flynn. Does that mean because he thinks he'll get more out of him? What does this mean in terms of the information Flynn is still providing? Plus, the president taking a victory lap on his tax cuts. It was a big one. Do the facts add up? We're going check and talk to the president's top economic adviser tonight. And chilling details about the suspected gunman who killed five people at the Capital Gazette newspaper. One man who witnessed what he called the suspect's constant stream of venom in person is my guest.

[Tapper:] Welcome back to THE LEAD. As Congress returns from a week-long recess, during that week, Senate Republicans' health care bill somehow became even less likely to pass. In fact, several Senate Republicans are now declaring the bill dead. So what now? CNN's Ryan Nobles is live for us on Capitol Hill. Ryan, is there any momentum between Republicans in the Senate to throw this bill out and start fresh?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Washington Correspondent:] Jake, not enough for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to change course, at least not at this point. And even as he continues to plow ahead, there is indeed some growing concern about the prospects for this bill.
[Sen. Joni Ernst , Iowa:] Then, we disagree.
[Nobles:] Tonight, after a week of hearing from their constituents
[Unidentified Female:] They absolutely do not care if people are covered or not.
[Nobles:] Senate Republicans are back in Washington, greeted by protests as they tried to revive their health care reform push. But it appears the week outside the beltway is not making the process any easier.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] The one and only issue that came up no matter where I was time and again was health care.
[Nobles:] At least 10 Republican senators remain opposed to the health care bill in its current form, and they are senators from both the conservative and moderate wings of the party. The difference in viewpoints has many left wondering if a grand deal can be brokered.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] In my view, it's probably going to be dead. But I am I've been wrong.
[Nobles:] Despite the differences in opinions, Senate leadership is not giving up yet. Mitch McConnell is hoping his members will find a way to come together.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] We're in a big discussion among ourselves, that is, the Senate Republican conference, about the way forward.
[Nobles:] McConnell continues to offer tweaks to the bill as he brings the conference together. Those changes have not revealed, even to most members. But tweaks alone may not be enough to convince those who are the most firmly opposed. [on camera]: At this point, do you think a complete overhaul is necessary to get to a yes?
[Collins:] I do need a complete overhaul in order to get to yes.
[Nobles:] Meanwhile, the White House is sending Vice President Mike Pence to attempt to rein in wayward senators. He spent time with Missouri's Ray Blunt over the weekend and this morning went on conservative radio to promise a deal will get done.
[Mike Pence, Vice President Of The United States:] This will be a historic step toward reversing the disastrous and collapsing policy of Obamacare. And I promise you, the president and I have not stopped working.
[Nobles:] And while President Trump did tweet about health care, telling senators not to leave Washington without passing a, quote, beautiful new health care bill, a White House official tells CNN the president currently does not have any plan to play a large role in selling health care prior to his trip to Paris on Wednesday. Democrats who don't have the votes to stop the bill are keeping up the pressure. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and his leadership team sent a letter to McConnell asking them to consider fixing Obamacare in its current form.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority:] When using bipartisanship as a threat is your only argument, it's time to move on.
[Nobles:] But it is ultimately Republicans that will need to strike a deal. And even though they have time, optimism is not running high.
[Sen. Bill Cassidy , Louisiana:] Clearly, the draft plan is dead. Is the serious rewrite plan dead? I don't know, I've not seen the serious rewrite plan.
[Nobles:] And the White House director of legislative affairs, Marc Short, telling reporters today that the administration still supports the bill in its current form and that the president remains active in this debate. Jake, he did concede, though, that Democrats are better organized on the issue of health care and that Republicans need to do a better job of getting out their message Jake.
[Tapper:] All right. Ryan Nobles on Capitol Hill for us thanks so much. I'm joined now by my political panel. So, let's go back to that Trump tweet. Some you might call it subtle encouragement. I cannot imagine that Congress would dare to leave Washington without a beautiful new health care bill fully approved and ready to go. What do you think it would mean, Bill, if Republicans left for the August recess without having passed the Senate Republican bill or some health care bill?
[Bill Kristol, Editor At Large, The Weekly Standard:] They might be better off politically in passing a bill that's not so popular that actually then become law and go into effect, then they can say they did their best, very complicated. They'll probably have to do a bipartisan fix for the Democrats of some of the particular problems of the Obamacare exchanges and say, we're going to come back and take a look at it. At this point, I honestly think just politically, it's probably the best thing that could happen for the Republicans.
[Tapper:] To let it die.
[Kristol:] Yes. Start over.
[Tapper:] What do you think, Adrienne?
[Adrienne Elrod, Former Director Of Strategic Communications, Hillary For America:] Look, I think we knew that when Mitch McConnell did not bring this bill to the floor before they went home for July Fourth recess, that this is going to lessen the chances dramatically that this bill would get passed. I mean, I agree with Bill, Democrats are willing to come to table and work with the Republicans to get something done. There are plenty of things that need to be done to improve on Obamacare, but we're not going to repeal the bill. And you saw members like Susan Collins who are even detracting more and more away from this bill. You're seeing the conservative wing of the Republican Party who are less and less inclined to also support it because they don't think it goes far enough. So, again, I'm never going to count Mitch McConnell out.
[Tapper:] Yes, you shouldn't.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Right now. Have a great day.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, I'm Jim Sciutto, in for Wolf Blitzer. It is 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 8:00 p.m. in Moscow. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. Up first today, facing the fallout. The White House in severe damage control mode as President Trump faces a strong backlash from his summit with Vladimir Putin. The president will make remarks on the Putin summit at the top of the next hour. We're going to bring that to you live. The president came under blistering criticism for siding with Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies about Russia's attack on the 2016 election. Critics called his comments disgraceful, shameful, and embarrassing. And that was just from the Republicans. Even the conservative "Wall Street Journal" said the president projected weakness. The editorial board writing, quote, Monday's joint press conference was a personal and national embarrassment. On stage with a dictator whose election meddling has done so much harm to his presidency, Mr. Trump could not even bring himself to say he believed his own intelligence advisers like Dan Coats over the Russian strongman. Let's bring in CNN White House reporter Sarah Westwood. She is at the White House. Sarah, President Trump initially apparently pleased with the news conference, with the summit, even though there was no mention, for instance, of many of Russia's crimes, including the shoot down of Malaysian Airline Flight 17, which I'm mentioning because it was shot down four years ago today, killing all 298 people on board. What is the president tweeting about this morning?
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Reporter:] Well, Jim, President Trump showing no signs of backing down from his performance in Helsinki yesterday despite the fierce bipartisan backlash that has been building over the past 24 hours. Trump defending his summit with Putin this morning tweeting, while I had a great meeting with NATO raising vast amounts of money, I had an even better meeting with Vladimir Putin of Russia. Sadly, it is not being reported that way. The fake news is going crazy. Of course, setting aside the fact that Trump's NATO meeting was also itself controversial, it was the president's comments in a press conference after that summit with Putin that has caused even some of his top supporters to describe his treatment of the U.S. intelligence community as a serious mistake. Now, Republican criticism has ranged from describing this as a missed opportunity for Trump, to calling his comments disgraceful, and even suggesting that the president was potentially manipulated by Russian intelligence. Trump, so far, not offering any clarity to his remarks, but, like you mentioned, we'll be seeing him at the top of the next hour and perhaps he will explain the thinking behind his press conference strategy.
[Sciutto:] Sarah Westwood there at the White House. And if you're tempted to think it's purely partisan, those were Republicans sitting in the House among them who were criticizing the president, raising those hard questions. House Speaker Paul Ryan, the speaker, he spoke out against the president's comments as well. He had a very different characterization of Putin and Russia. Listen to what he said just a short time ago. That was Speaker Ryan there. Manu Raju, our Capitol Hill senior congressional correspondent, he's up there on Capitol Hill. Manu, it was interesting. So Ryan certainly did not pull punches when it came to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, but he did not take a shot at the president himself. Why is that?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, this is the line that Republicans have been trying to draw. They want to be tough on Russia, but they also don't want to get cross wise with the president. And one thing that I tried to ask Paul Ryan about was the finding that was in the House Intelligence Committee's report that disputed what the intelligence community concluded, that Vladimir Putin wanted Donald Trump to become president. Well, Vladimir Putin himself said at that press conference yesterday he did want Trump to become president. I asked Paul Ryan if that was a mistake at all by the House Republicans to assert otherwise. He would not go there. He said that the Republicans found fault with the methodology used by the intelligence community in making that conclusion. Similarly, the other Republicans are weighing a wide range of options to respond. Some say there should be no response. Some say there should be more sanctions. Some believe there should be a symbolic response reaffirming its support for the intelligence community. Nevertheless, there are some Republican, even some Trump allies of Congressman Pete King of New York, who said the president made a mistake.
[Rep. Peter King , New York:] The president is wrong on that. I agree with the president, there's no evidence of collusion. But there's overwhelming evidence of meddling by the Russians. Everyone I've spoken to in the administration, both administrations, accepts that view. I think the president feels if he makes any concession on that, somehow that gives credence to collusion. But there's not. These are two separate issues. He's got to realize that. And also definitely wrong to in any way be suggesting any moral equivalence between the U.S. and Russia. To me it's it's a terrible mistake and he's got to correct it.
[Raju:] And King also stood by that House Intelligence Committee finding. He sits on that committee. He said he absolutely stands by the finding, questioning whether or not Putin wanted Trump to win, despite Putin's own words yesterday. He said he doesn't believe anything Putin has to say. But, Jim, also today, we're hearing from a lot of calls, particularly from Democrats, for these national security officials in the Trump administration to testify publicly and explain exactly what was agreed to behind closed doors. Some Republicans, like Bob Corker of Tennessee, do want to bring in people like Mike Pompeo. So we'll see if that plays out in the coming days here, Jim.
[Sciutto:] Manu Raju on Capitol Hill, thanks very much. Let's get more insight now from our panel. We have Jeff Mason, he's White House correspondent for "Reuters." He was out there with the president. CNN global affairs analyst Kimberly Dozier, senior political reporter Nia-Malika Henderson, and our chief political analyst Gloria Borger. So, Gloria, you have I have sat next to each other here at this table countless times after shocking moments. I think it is very fair to say that this moment was different in that the president has taken shots at a whole host of American institutions before. But to stand next to the man who orchestrated this attack on the election say the same thing and in fact agree with him, that is substantively different. The question is, will the reaction be different?
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Well, it remains to be seen. I mean we've heard the words. We've heard the Democrats call for stronger sanctions, for testimony from the national security officials. I think they want some kind of transcripts or notes from the translator. They would like to see what was there. You do have Marco Rubio and Dick Durbin calling for more sanctions. Democrats saying, we've got to protect Mueller. We've got to do that. We've got to figure out ways to do that. But the Democrats are hamstrung. They don't control the Congress. And Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, while coming out and saying, yes, you know, the Russians are not our friend
[Sciutto:] Through a spokesman.
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] Yes.
[Borger:] He had yes, he hasn't he hasn't come out and said this is what this is what we need to do.
[Sciutto:] Right.
[Borger:] Republicans are mortified and they're embarrassed and they want to find a way to limit the president's running room, but they haven't had the guts to go out there yet and say we are going to do this and we're going to tie the president's hands through legislation. They haven't done it.
[Henderson:] Yes, and it's clear why they haven't done it. It's because the president enjoys 90 percent approval rating among Republicans. That was the last Gallup Poll. He is essentially the most popular Republican president that we've seen in many years. And so it's difficult for Republicans to move against him, to damage him because they need him. They need his voters. And that's not changing.
[Sciutto:] Let me let me ask a question on that, because some of that phenomenon is the echo chambers that both parties, you know, a punitive Democratic president under fire might have a significant support of the Democratic Party. But when you have those voters in an election year hear from unusual sources, criticism, whether it be some sitting Republicans, and, frankly, not that many, but some, but Fox News anchors, and I'm not talking about Sean Hannity, but you did hear from a you know, a Neil Cavuto. You hear from "The Wall Street Journal" editorial board, et cetera. Does that seep into the base in my measurable way?
[Henderson:] We will see, right?
[Borger:] Yes.
[Henderson:] And even a better question is, does that seep into Donald Trump's speech? We'll hear from him later today, because he's an avid viewer of Fox. It must have been quite surprising and mortifying for him to see what some people call state TV, for them to be quite critical of the president, some more critical than others. Sean Hannity, of course, was not critical at all.
[Borger:] Who never apologize for it.
[Henderson:] Who never yes. So we'll see what he says today.
[Sciutto:] Jeff, if I just can, you just returned from Helsinki. You were there. You speak to a lot of folks in the White House on the president's team. Do they feel that this was a particular mistake, that it's something that the president has to correct? And I suppose the next question is, if they do, does that matter? Would the president listen to that kind of criticism?
[Jeff Mason, White House Correspondent, Reuters:] Well, two things. One, we flew I flew back on Air Force One last night because I was in the pool and we did not see really any White House advisers. A couple came back briefly to the press cabin but didn't have much to say. And I think that was a sign that they were already sort of getting into bunker mode and fixing how do we fix this mentality? Then they've scheduled this these remarks this afternoon at 2:00. So we'll see if the president decides to roll back anything that he said or double down or if he'll take the model that he used after Charlottesville, where he sort of tries to roll it back and then gets irritated about that and goes back to where he was in the first place. But in general, I mean, I they you know, they all watch TV. He certainly watches TV. He is stung or will be stung by some of this criticism. And that's going to affect them in the West Wing.
[Sciutto:] Kimberly Dozier, President Obama, he was speaking yesterday in South Africa about actually today, I should say, local time, about the rise of strongman politics. President Obama has been somewhat measured in when he's spoken out publically, critically, against this president. But let's have a listen to his words.
[Barack Obama, Former U.s. President:] Given the strange and uncertain times that we are in, and they are strange, and they are uncertain, with each day's news cycles bringing more head-spinning and disturbing headlines, we now see much of the world threatening to return to an older, a more dangerous, a more brutal way of doing business.
[Sciutto:] Kimberly, is that something you're hearing from foreign diplomats, leaders, et cetera that you've been speaking to?
[Kimberly Dozier, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Very much so. A combination of the stages of grief, you know, anger to denial. Some of them have said to me, now it's all down the Mueller investigation. We don't trust this president. Others are more in the middle of the road. You know, his national security team keeps telling us, trust us. And then still others saying, hey, we woke up this morning, everything was the same in terms of intelligence sharing and national security cooperation. This is going to be another blip that just shows you how Donald Trump personally feels towards Vladimir Putin. His team will take control of this.
[Sciutto:] But the difference on that point, though, is that is that it's not just talk, though, because the president has made substantive decisions, policy changes, while ignoring or overruling the intelligence community, right? For instance, on the Iran nuclear deal, they told him, this is working, it's keeping them under wraps.
[Borger:] Right.
[Sciutto:] Mattis, et cetera. He killed the deal. On North Korea, said the military exercises are necessary, important. He pulled that rug out from under our South Korean allies without even telling them. The thing is, Gloria Border, it's not just talk. You know, regardless of what assurances our allies are getting from the Mattis' of the world, the president is shifting he's driving the ship, the state, in a different direction.
[Borger:] In a totally different direction. For the first time, and after your great question yesterday, which I was to commend you on, for the first time yesterday, Republicans and Democrats started asking the second question, which is, OK, we know the president can't get past his nose on the so-called collusion and the Russia investigation. The second question that was openly asked yesterday was, what does Putin have on Donald Trump? Period. And he and that now is the difference coming coming back from Helsinki.
[Sciutto:] Have Republicans said that? Have Republicans raised that? I've heard that from a lot of Democrats.
[Borger:] Well, you hear it. I mean John McCain almost went there, but he didn't quite. But I do believe that these that question now is being asked privately, and I believe the Democrats Chuck Schumer said it publicly yesterday. And they're going to push that narrative, I think, because it is a question people now want the answer to. I just think something changed.
[Henderson:] Yes, it was the juxtaposition, right, of him being there with Putin and seeming to surrender to Putin essentially and completely co-sign everything that was
[Sciutto:] We that word in "The Wall Street Journal" editorial struck me, because you also heard that from some Fox News commentators. And I only bring that up because we know the president watches Fox News and appears to listen to what they say. Weakness is not a word that this president likes to hear in the same sentence with his own name.
[Dozier:] So I think what we're going to hear from the president this afternoon, as part of his pushback, is something I heard from a former administration official who was in the room for early talks on Russia. A view being put to Trump is that Russia is a power broker who has, despite its size, behaved defectively in a number of situation where we need their cooperation. Russia is cozying up to China. We need to edge China out and make sure it's us and Russia against China. So this is a sort of Nixon in reverse strategy. I don't know, Jeff, if you've heard anything similar.
[Mason:] I haven't heard anything similar to that. But I what I a point I would like to make, and it ties in with what you're saying, it's just it reveals what he said yesterday, reveals again the divide between him and his own advisers.
[Sciutto:] Yes.
[Mason:] In the run-up to this trip you had Ambassador Jon Huntsman, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, the ambassador to NATO, talking about Russia's maligned activities and saying that that's what the focus of both the NATO meeting, as well as the Russia summit, would be. And they were saying even, you know, the advisers were saying the night before, we've had tough meetings with Russia going into this. It's been very difficult. It's going to be tricky tomorrow. He didn't do it.
[Sciutto:] Yes, I mean it's
[Mason:] And this is not and this is not what he did.
[Sciutto:] And it's an important counterpoint because the president will say, as many of his supporters, it's just it's just the left and the media who disagrees with me. When, in fact, it's people he's chosen for these jobs himself and has appointed to them.
[Mason:] Absolutely.
[Sciutto:] Dan Coats but even folks in the White House as well. We're going to have to leave it there, but thanks very much, as always. There are countless Republicans now who told us that they were troubled, even disgusted by the president's remarks in Helsinki. Up next, we'll get the thoughts of a retiring Republican congressman. He is Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania. And in just under an hour, a reminder, the president himself will speak about his meeting with Vladimir Putin. Will he take back anything he said, or will he double down? We're going to, of course, take those comments to you live. Stay with us. We'll be right back after this break.

[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor:] One word best describes Wall Street this week, and that is volatility. And we could see more of it as the opening bell ringing just now on this shortened trading week. Alison Kosik is live at the New York Stock Exchange with more. Alison, looks like a positive opening, just as futures were telling us.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Business Correspondent:] Come on, Jim, get back on the roller coaster with me. Let's do this again. Yes, we are seeing the Dow begin with green arrows. Nasdaq, S&P as well. But you know how things are here at on Wall Street, things could just change on a dime. Case in point, yesterday. You look at the Dow. It was solidly in the negative all day. Then the last 90 minutes of the trading day, it literally erases a 600 point loss and winds up higher by 260 points. It was nausea inducing and it really speaks to the volatility that's happening here on Wall Street. Now, there's not one reason for all of this volatility. Yes, some of this is yearend positioning. You've got investors trying to get as much profit out of what's been going on all year before they close the books on 2018. But there's also the realization that there's this cloud of uncertainty that is weighing on Wall Street. Pick your poison. There is uncertainty about global growth. There is the recent Federal Reserve moves. There's the unresolved trade situation. And then there's the uncertainty happening in Washington, specifically will Fed Chairman Jay Powell be able to keep his job in the new year? So you've got all this uncertainty weighing on Wall Street. It makes it difficult to trade. OK, so where are we are where are we right now? We are two days to go before the end of the year. So two more trading days. Here's the thing, even with all the gains that we've had in the past couple of days, December has still been a really rough month. And if you're checking out your portfolio, still, all the major indices are in the red for the year. We will see how things shape up today, Jim.
[Sciutto:] That's a look at look at the long-term trend lines. That's always a smart thing to do.
[Kosik:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] Alison Kosik, thanks very much. Right now millions of Americans are bracing for a messy, potentially dangerous even day as a deadly storm trudges eastward, blizzard conditions crippling the Midwest. Poor visibility leading to a crash that killed at least one person in Kansas. And in the south, flash flood emergencies as more than 11 inches of rain fell there. One woman killed after a tree fell on her home in Louisiana. Meteorologist Jennifer Gray tracking the latest. Jennifer, what should we expect? I mean it's raining hard here in D.C., but I know a lot of other parts of the country, the snow's coming down hard.
[Jennifer Gray, Ams Meteorologist:] The Midwest, that is winding down a little bit. So I think the focus moving forward will definitely be the rain, Jim, as we go into the rest of the afternoon and into tomorrow. Look at all this heavy rain. It stretches all the way from just east of New Orleans, Mobile, Alabama, all the way up to the northeast, even across portions of Maine getting snow. But some very heavy rain. Cloud to ground lightening. We're seeing gusty winds. And it's going to cause major airport delays all across the eastern seaboard, including the big cities, like New York City, Philadelphia, D.C., could all see delays today. Atlanta as well. And you can see that line of showers and storms. Some of the heaviest coming through in the next couple of hours. Ten or more inches of rain across portions of Mississippi yesterday. We have some video of that. This is what happens when a lot of rain comes down in a very short amount of time. And you can see that flash flooding there. And there's going to continue to be flash flooding in these areas over the next couple of hours. That's why we have flash flood watches and warnings all across portions of the south. And that stretches even up into the northeast, New York included in that, 50 million people in a flood threat. And you can see that most of the rain will be around the Florida panhandle. We will get pockets of say two to four inches, this is through Saturday morning. But one to two inches is really what we're going to see. And it could put Atlanta as the wettest year on record if we meet that before the new year. So these are the airport delays we can expect as far as today is concerned. New York City experiencing about two-hour delays. Atlanta, D.C. experiencing about 45 minutes to an hour. So if you are trying to travel, it is going to be very, very hard. That system moves out. Next system moves into the northeast just in time for New Year's Eve. Unfortunately, it looks like we're going to have a lot of rain across the east to ring in the new year. Jim.
[Sciutto:] Well, good luck. Travel safe for all those folks. Jennifer Gray, thanks very much. Syrian Kurds turning to their former enemy, Syrian Dictator Bashar al Assad, for help now. How President Trump's decision to summarily withdraw U.S. troops is threatening the security of the U.S.-backed allies on the ground.

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us. The secretary of state meets with the Saudi king and the crown prince as Turkey's president says the crime scene at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul has been scrubbed and repainted. Plus, a high-stake Texas showdown. Ted Cruz and Beto O'Rourke debate tonight. Brand new CNN polling releasing this hour shows the Democrat behind despite non-stop national attention and gangbusters fundraising. Debate night in Arizona was last night. That's another race critical to any Democratic hope of retaking the Senate.
[Rep. Martha Mcsally , Arizona Senate Candidate:] While we were in harm's way, she was protesting our troops in a pink tutu.
[Rep. Kyrsten Sinema , Arizona Senate Candidate:] Martha has chosen to run a campaign based on nasty smears and false attacks. And I expect you'll see more of that this evening.
[King:] Back to politics later. But we begin with what one adviser calls perhaps, quote, the most consequential decision of Donald Trump's presidency, how to respond to the apparent death of the Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi. "The Washington Post" columnist was last seen alive two weeks ago two weeks ago entering the Saudi embassy in Turkey. Sources tell CNN the Saudi regime now preparing a report that says he was killed while under, quote, an interrogation that went wrong. The secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, all smiles meeting today in Riyadh with the Saudi king, the crown prince and the foreign minister. Pompeo and the prince, who is the defacto ruler, reaffirming the strong and old alliance between the United States and Saudi Arabia. Pompeo spoke with the president after those meetings. The White House says what happens next depends on just what Pompeo was told, and what the Saudi regime does to explain what happened. But key members of the Republican Senate say they are already planning action.
[Sen. Marco Rubio , Florida:] I can tell you that a separate branch of government that I belong to, the Senate, in the Congress, I believe will act in a bipartisan way. And this is going to alter the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia for the foreseeable future.
[King:] The Republican majority leader, Mitch McConnell, on the other hand, taking a more cautious route.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] Well, I think it's good the president sent the secretary of state out to talk to the king. We need to find out first what happened before deciding what kind of response is appropriate.
[Unidentified Male:] You do think there will be some type of response if these allegations are true?
[Mcconnell:] I can't imagine there won't be. But I think we need to find out what happened.
[King:] CNN's Jeff Zeleny joins us live from the White House. Jeff, take us inside the thinking there as the president heard from Secretary Pompeo, what next?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, John, there's no question that despite what else the president is trying to focus on attention on today, this is a diplomatic crisis that is escalating by the day. And the president, I am told by officials here, is agitated by the news coverage of this. He's agitated by the rush to judgment on this. Now, he is having a phone call. As you said, he had one earlier this morning with his secretary of state, who he dispatched to the region. He was scheduled to have lunch with him earlier today. That was the only thing that was on the week ahead schedule, if you will. So there are no public events on the president's schedule. I'm told he's in the residence of the White House this morning watching television, talking on the phone with his advisers on other matters. But he clearly is agitated about the Saudi Arabian news coverage. You can see in a tweet he sent out this morning saying, I do not have any business interests in Saudi Arabia. I do not have any involvement in that. Well, that is something that is not necessarily 100 percent accurate there. He has talked repeatedly about how Saudi investors have invested in some of his apartments, some of his other matters here. But, clearly, the president unnerved by this and they're not sure where this is going from here. They're waiting for the Saudi government to issue this report, which is already being you know, eyes are rolling across Washington and indeed around the world here. But the president we're not scheduled to hear from him today. Republicans on Capitol Hill and others are talking about this loudly. So we will see what the president does on this. You mentioned the smiles, John. That is one other thing that is being criticized here. The secretary of state smiling as he walked into that meeting. Most people in Washington certainly do not think this is a laughing or smiling matter. John.
[King:] Not in the least. Jeff Zeleny, live at the White House, appreciate the fresh reporting. With me in studio to share their reporting and their insights, Julie Hirschfeld Davis with "The New York Times," CNN's Phil Mattingly, "Bloomberg's" Toluse Olorunnipa, and Lisa Lerer with "The New York Times." The president's upset. What is he upset at? Is it not a basic threshold minimalist expectation that one would expect the president of the United States to express more outrage and to hold out the possibility of a stronger punishment than he has given? He knows a lot more than we do. And what we know is pretty shocking.
[Julie Hirschfeld Davis, White House Correspondent, "the New York Times":] Well, I mean, we've seen this before, that this president does not make it a point to go out and make an affirmative statement about human rights or basic conduct that he expects United States allies and adversaries to carry out. And he didn't do that in this case. And he went solely on the denial that he said was given to him by the king, the denial that was given to Jared Kushner by the crown prince, Mohammad bin Salman, who's being held responsible for whatever it was that did happen here. And I suppose it's possible that having gone out affirmatively and basically, you know, given the benefit of the doubt to the Saudis here, he is feeling burned. That he feels that now they're going to admit that, in fact, something did happen, and this man was killed. And whether it was premeditated or not, that they were responsible for it. And he feels that he has sort of vouched for a regime that is now going to come forward and say it did something wrong. That being said, normally a president would, in a situation like this, withhold judgment. Like you heard Mitch McConnell do there, say, we need to know what happened, but this is of grave concern. People will pay consequences for what's happened here. And having not done that on the front end, I think he feeling that he's, you know, been unfairly criticized. But this is a this is a role that we expect the president to play in this country, no matter what the facts are, that you that you affirmatively lay out what the United States values are, how we expect people to be treated, whether citizens of the United States or not, and then you say, OK, you know, show us the evidence of what happened.
[King:] I don't think it's a bar that any president should not expect to think that, number one, you should stand up for values, including American values. But the president has also has been dismissive of, he's not a citizen. It happened over there, not here. Why should I care? We've seen this before.
[Lisa Lerer, National Political Reporter, "the New York Times":] Yes, I mean, look, I think it's not just, you know, dealing with this on the front end. It's sort of dealing with it in the pregame. This is not the situation is unusual, but the dynamics at play here have been the dynamics with Saudi Arabia for decades. This is a country that's an ally, but it has you know, presidents have always had to walk this fine line between, you know, the relationship, the productive relationship with Saudi Arabia, and the human rights abuses. The country's support for radical, you know, Islamic terrorism, things like that. So this is not a new situation. But clearly at the front end, when they were building this new relationship with the new leader, when they were going to Saudi Arabia for this splashy tour, they did not the president and his team did not lay out the conditions. Like, yes, we want to have a new relationship with you, but there are certain things you can do not. You cannot embarrass us. You cannot put us in these kinds of situations. That diplomatic work was clearly not done at the front end and now he finds himself in this really not only difficult situation but pretty embarrassing situation for him and his, you know, foreign policy team.
[Toluse Olorunnipa, White House Reporter, "bloomberg":] And he's made it somewhat more embarrassing by sort of floating up these new theories about rogue killers.
[Lerer:] Right.
[Olorunnipa:] It almost sounds like he's learning about this information as the rest of the American public is, even though he's the head of the executive branch.
[Lerer:] Right.
[Olorunnipa:] He has all of the intelligence assets at his disposal. And it sounds like he knows nothing, you know, more than a week after this event happened. It sounds like he's learning about this through the newspapers and through the media, just like the rest of us, and that just does not make him seem like the commander in chief in charge of the situation. It sounds like he's just sort of trying to figure out what's happening. And he's been saying for the last week, you know, we're going to get to the bottom of this. We're going to find out what happened. Nobody knows what's happened. And, you know, the American intelligence community is famed as the best in the world. The president has all of that at his disposal. And he could get access to all this investigatory information. It doesn't appear that he has or if he has he's not letting it on. And, instead, he's spreading out these he's sort of out of left wing out of left field ideas about rogue killers or, you know, a mistake that may have happened.
[King:] Which is angering key members of Congress, not as much because what the Saudis are accused of here is beyond reprehensible. Kidnapping, essentially, interrogating, killing and dismembering a journalist. There's a lot of focus on that. He's a human being. Whether he's a good human being or a bad human being, he's a human being. And they're accused of kidnapping, torturing, killing, dismembering and then lying to the world about it. The president has not taken a firm stand. Listen here to Senator Lindsey Graham, who, on most issues of late, is with the president. On most issues of late has defended the president. Listen to what he says here, not just that the president has to do more. Listen to how far Lindsey Graham goes.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] Nothing happens in Saudi Arabia without MBS knowing it.
[Unidentified Female:] So what does the president do, sanction them?
[Graham:] It's up to the president. But what I would do I know what I'm going to do. I'm going to sanction the hell out of Saudi Arabia.
[King:] Sanction the hell out of Saudi Arabia, Phil, but but this is the key part, the MBS figure to me is toxic. He can never be a world leader on the world stage. His father, the king, is 82 and not in great health. The prince runs the show. He's in his early 30s. Lindsey Graham is saying, for this relationship to have a new chapter, after this horrible chapter, MBS has to go.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] Senator Graham, who is a hawk, who has defended what the president what this administration has done in their Middle East policy, which is of which Saudi Arabia has become essentially a fulcrum to what they've been doing over there, and you can tell that he almost feels personally wronged. And you can also tell and this has been something, kind of an undercurrent on Capitol Hill for the last year or so, that people are uncomfortable with the direction that MBS has gone on certain issues with what he did at the hotel with prominent business leaders, with what he's done throughout the country. And the concern that you can't just paper over this if it gets and gets more aggressive. It's now gotten more aggressive. And you see that Lindsey Graham feels like he's been almost personally attacked by what has actually happened and what has taken place because of how often he's defended Saudi Arabia, because of how often he's visited the kingdom. I think there's a couple things here. One, the rubber is going to meet the road in less than 120 days, right? When they're talking about sanctions, what Congress did, or what members of the Foreign Relations Committee did, is they sent a letter triggering a 120-day review on the Global Magnitsky Act, which essentially allows people to freeze individual assets or deny travel to specific individuals going up to the highest levels, including potentially MBS. The president doesn't have to necessarily take that action, but he does have to respond with the findings in those 120 days. That's kind of the baseline for the sanctions you're looking at right now. But there's also the overall relationship with members of Congress. Saudi Arabia, as we all know, has very close relations and extreme money ties to just about every corner of this town, and just about every member of Congress regardless of party. And when you see those things start to fray, when you see people no longer willing to look past things because they're a close ally, that's a significant problem for the country.
[King:] That's a good way to put it. They have they have bought the blinders for years.
[Mattingly:] Yes.
[King:] They have bought the blinders for years. It's time to drop them. And it would help if it started at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We'll keep an eye on that story. Up next for us here, three weeks until Election Day. What we're learning from brand new CNN polling on a huge Senate race in Texas.

[Don Lemon, Cnn:] Trump's tale of the tapes. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. Is anybody out there surprised to hear President Trump doesn't actually have tapes of his chats with James Comey? Anybody? Anybody? Mueller? I don't think so. But was this a much bigger mistake than the President realizes. Plus, the man they're calling a human Bruce Springsteen. Iron stash is running against Paul Ryan. Does he have a shot? And you think Bill Cosby would keep quiet after he dashed a bullet in his indecent assault trial. But just wait until you hear what he wants to do now. So let's get started right to the tale of the tapes. Here to discuss CNN presidential historians, plural. Timothy Naftali and Douglas Brinkley. He is the author of "Rightful Heritage, Franklin D. Roosevelt in the land of America" and CNN senior political analyst, David Gergen and political commentator David Swerdlick. Good evening, gentlemen. Thank you so much for coming on. David Gergen, you first. The President was on FOX News tonight. Let's listen.
[Unidentified Female:] Robert Mueller, do you think he should recuse himself because he is good friends with James Comey. He has hired some attorneys that were part of Hillary Clinton's foundation and given money to President Obama and Hillary Clinton's campaign. Should he recuse himself?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, he is very, very good friends with Comey, which is very bothersome but he is also we are going to have to see. I mean, we are going to have to see in terms look, there has been no obstruction. There has been no collusion. There has been leaking by Comey. But there has been no collusion, no obstruction and virtually everybody agrees to that. So we will have to see. I can say that the people that have been hired all Hillary Clinton supporters.
[Lemon:] So David Gergen, he has declared himself innocent. Should the special counsel be stop now?
[David Gergen, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] No. But I do think you can tell he is ramping up that way to, you know, he is trying to discredit Mueller so that if in fact the Mueller and special counsel finds or has been obstruction or finds there has been collusion, the President's going to declare that fake news. Fake findings. Done by a bunch of Democrats. He is muddying the water in such a way that is either way he wins. If he exonerate him then he wins, if they find him, you know, that he is there are issues that ought to be taken to the Congress regarding to the President, he is going to call it all fake. And you know, a lot of his supporters, based on the past, are going to agree with him.
[Lemon:] David Swerdlick, I have to ask you. What is he laying the groundwork for? Is he hinting at something that maybe Mueller might be out of a job soon?
[David Swerdlick, Cnn Political Commentator:] Yes. He wants to sort of bloody Mueller up and he is doing it in a way that he probably thinks is subtle there. The problem for the President, Don, is that when Mueller was first appointed as special counsel, most prominent Republicans praised him. The problem is also that he was appointed by President Trump's own justice department. And director Mueller, former director Mueller has a stellar reputation having served as 12 years as the FBI director. So the idea that now the President is going to sort of come in here and suggest that, well, hey, he is in the pocket of Democrats, even though as others have pointed out, President Trump himself has on many occasions contributed money to the Democrats over the course of his career. It just it doesn't seem like it's going to wash.
[Lemon:] I want to move on. So quickly, to you guys. Does this bother you him saying that? Is this concerning to you?
[Douglas Brinkley, Presidential Historian:] Very concerning. It means he is going to, you know, gut Mueller in the end. The question is will Republican senators go along with that? Will Corker and Flake and you know, allow him to beat up on Mueller like that.
[Timothy Naftali, Cnn Presidential Historian:] It would be disaster if he fired Mueller or tried to through the justice department.
[Lemon:] Let's turn now to the tapes of the other news of the day. So here is how this all gone down. First, there was this tweet for the President. This was on May 12th and he says here on
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] I very carefully chose the words. Look, I have seen the tweet about tapes. Lord, I hope there are tapes.
[Lemon:] And this today the President tweeting with all of the recently reported electronic surveillance intercepts unmasking or legal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are tapes or recordings of my conversations with James Comey. But I did not make and do not have any such recordings. We have lost, Doug, 40 days, right? And 40 days that have damaged the Trump presidency and cast doubt on his personal credibility as well.
[Brinkley:] It is makes me ill. We have soldiers fighting abroad right now. You have a President jerking the American people around like this on the idea of dangling these tapes that didn't exist in front of us. It's a move of a scoundrel, I think. And the President's behavior has to be and we know Republicans don't like it either. This is not any way to run a country. The world is just got to be scratching their heads and laughing at us.
[Lemon:] Would you describe these last 40 days as self-sabotage?
[Naftali:] Of course. If it hadn't been for his tweet, it is unlikely that James Comey would have leaked his memos. But I want to add one more thing which is the importance of credibility. We are still the only superpower in the world. We have the most powerful nuclear arsenal. And we have a President of the United States who doesn't care if he makes things up. That undermines our ability to send signals to our adversaries and our friends alike. This is real business. This is serious business. And our President, in the way in which he dealt with this tapes matter for 40 days wasn't taking his job seriously, period.
[Lemon:] I want to hear from David Gergen because it has been said, one Republican said the President has been amused by this and all that's been made of it. What do you think?
[Gergen:] Well, I agree with much of what has been said. I have reached the stage of feeling like you know, yes, there has been a lot of self-sabotage. But you know, there have been four special elections in the last 40 days too. And all these assaults on the President. And the Democrats have gone zero for four, which means all this conversation hasn't really moved a lot of the voters who were with him to start with. And I think the question becomes how do we have a conversation on television in which we can listen to each other and I think in some ways persuade the Trump supporters that those of us often critical of the President are not doing it because we want to bring him down. That's not the point. It just he is failing to meet the standards so often that we set for presidents and that's disappointing and concerning and can be dangerous. But I don't know how we get to a place where every night we throw stones at the President and think that's solving the country's problem.
[Brinkley:] We will see what we have to see what the Mueller reports says. I think that's going to be the big moment for our country.
[Lemon:] But don't you think it is incumbent upon the President of the United States to start to the top? Because the President is the one who is he starts by saying, you know, the media is fake. They are terrible people. They are liars. Don't believe anything they say and on and on and on. And then, you know, then he discredits the intelligence agencies and he discredit the former FBI director and anyone who says that this should be investigated. Anyone who says there was actually tampering with the election, that Russia temped with the election. Even though most of the intelligence agencies said they did, he says it is fake news. Shouldn't that start with the President of the United States?
[Naftali:] Yes, but you're expecting him to understand the rules of public administration. This man has never worked for a public organization. He has never been held to that standard. He has never had to be in a transparent situation. He has no desire to learn how to do it. And he has shown us he is not interested of playing by those rules. The question is whether the other people in government in the other branches of government are going to continue to allow break those rules.
[Lemon:] And if he is interested, man, you said by not playing by the rules, I mean, let's be honest, he is interested also interested in not telling the truth because much of what he says about the investigation even beyond, even in creating jobs were just a fact- check is, David Swerdlick, it is simply not the truth. So you know, to David Gergen's point, so you know, instead of television, how do we reach the Trump voter? I don't know. I mean, unless you want to start not telling the truth or giving the reality 068 what's actually happening.
[Swerdlick:] Yes. If you take something that is very specific like these tweets about the supposed tapes, I think it is incumbent upon us as journalists to, you know, call out where the President is either, you know, wasting time, as Douglas said or dithering with the American people, you know. You have a situation where unless there is some strategy that is later revealed about why the President tweeted about these tapes, what you are left with is it's a sense that it is just a little bit of nonsense, right. Nothing about James Comey says that he can either be bluff whether you like him or not, that he can be bluffed or pushed off his stance. So why the President thought that he could do that to director Comey is baffling. If you expand it out the whole open and think about what David Gergen said a moment ago, I agree. The President's approval ratings have never gone lower than 35, never gone higher than 45 since inauguration day which suggest to me that on the one hand he's not losing a lot of support and he is also not gaining a lot of support. And that, you know, we are sort of hardening it to camps in this country and we have got to find a way to have a little bit better dialogue.
[Lemon:] David Gergen, I will give you the last point since we are discussing what you were saying.
[Gergen:] Well, I just want to say is that at the same time I think we have got to hold him accountable when he has big issues before it that are really important to people's lives like this health care bill. I must say that of all the things that have been happening in the last 24 hours, the idea that the United States might actually take money away from poor people, take away their health care and turn it into dollars and give it to the richest people in the country in a country that already has terrible inequality, I just find that stunning. You know, Don, we are at point we don't know whether to talk about the President and all his tweets and all his craziness or to talk about the substance and how it may really effect the very people who voted for him.
[Lemon:] Yes. I get your point and I think a lot of this is a distraction. We have to discuss it. It's the President of the United States. And the tapes are important especially if you look the history of tapes and Watergate. But you are right. This healthcare bill is just as important. And this may be a distraction to get people not to talk about it so that they can sneak it through under the cover of darkness. Thank you. I appreciate that. When we come back the union ironworker who wants Paul Ryan's job.
[Unidentified Male:] I think it is time. Let's trade places. Paul Ryan you can come work the iron and I'll go to D.C.
[Lemon:] He will join me live.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn Anchor:] Democrats accuse the Trump White House of tying the FBI's hands. THE LEAD starts right now. The senators who will decide Brett Kavanaugh's fate dropping signals and weighing in on the FBI report now completed, but breaking minutes ago, one key undecided senator announce announced she's a no. As protesters flood the halls of the Senate office buildings in a major show of force against Kavanaugh, President Trump suddenly taking the side of due process as he issues a new defense of his Supreme Court nominee, and the Senate leader today following the president's lead, saying Brett Kavanaugh is the victim here. Plus, hey, look over here. Vice President Pence taking a strong stance against election interference, but it's not against Russia. Welcome to THE LEAD, everyone. I'm Jake Tapper. We begin with our politics lead. One FBI report, two interpretations. Republican leaders say there is no additional corroboration of the allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and no hint of misconduct. Democrats disagree and are taking issue with the investigation, saying it was not thorough enough and Democrats are calling for the report to be made public. But what really matters here are the key senators who have yet to say publicly how they're going to vote and what they think. Red state Democrat Heidi Heitkamp breaking the news this afternoon that she is a no on Kavanaugh. So, then there were four. Republicans need just two of these four senators to vote yes on Kavanaugh. That will make it 50-50, allowing vice president to break the tie. And of potentially huge consequence, we heard two of these senators have expressing confidence in the FBI report, Senator Susan Collins of Maine saying the investigation appears very thorough. Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona agreeing and adding, "We have seen no additional corroborating information." The final vote on Kavanaugh's nomination could happen as soon as Saturday. CNN's Sunlen Serfaty is on Capitol Hill for us, where there are major protests ongoing. Sunlen, what's going on there?
[Sunlen Serfaty, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Jake, this as a major, loud, very vocal group of protesters here in the Hart Senate Office Building. This is a Senate office building that many key senators have their offices. We can see and you see in the shot behind me many office workers looking out of their windows down to the protests below. They are protesting against Brett Kavanaugh. A lot of them chanting, "Brett Kavanaugh has got to go." They have dying thing "Believe the Survivors." So, certainly, a dramatic moment here with a protest that really in large part colored his whole consideration up here on Capitol Hill. That aside, this story end in the math. And that is where Republicans up here on Capitol Hill feel very confident tonight. Their mood is very upbeat, especially after those comments by Senator Collins, Senator Flake, Republicans very happy with the tone, saying it gives us a key window into their mind-set likely one day before this vote.
[Sen. Tim Kaine , Virginia:] The whole thing is a sham.
[Serfaty:] With tensions on Capitol Hill boiling over as Brett Kavanaugh's fate hangs in the balance.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] Why don't we dump him in the water and see if he floats?
[Serfaty:] Significant new reactions coming from two key senators after viewing that FBI report today. Senator Susan Collins telling CNN, "It appears to be a very thorough investigation, adding, "I have not yet finished going through all the material." Senator Jeff Flake saying the report showed no additional corroborating information. Neither senator revealing yet how they will vote, but their words boosting the confidence among Republicans today.
[Sen. Bob Corker , Tennessee:] There's absolutely zero corroboration, zero corroboration to any of these allegations. I think obviously that makes people feel really good coming out of there.
[Serfaty:] Collins and Flake are two of the four senators who now hold Kavanaugh's future in their hands, after Senator Heidi Heitkamp, a key red state Democrat, told CNN affiliate
[Wday: Sen. Heidi Heitkamp , North Dakota:] I will be voting no on Judge Kavanaugh.
[Serfaty:] Adding to the drama of the moment, a highly choreographed viewing of the tightly guarded FBI report, with senators shuffling in and out of this secure location to view the sole copy of the FBI findings privately, emerging afterwards and taking partisan sides, Republicans saying the report shows no corroboration of the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] When the noise fades, when the uncorroborated mud washes away, what's left is the distinguished nominee who stands before us.
[Serfaty:] And Democrats taking issue with the investigation itself.
[Sen. Cory Booker , New Jersey:] This is wholly unacceptable. It is a truncated, curtailed, a not even halfway effort to interview the relevant people.
[Serfaty:] Saying it was not extensive enough, especially without interviewing Kavanaugh and the first accuser, Professor Christine Blasey Ford.
[Sen. Dianne Feinstein , California:] The most notable part of this report is what's not in it. It looks to be a product of an incomplete investigation that was limited perhaps by the White House. I don't know.
[Serfaty:] Senators have the day on Capitol Hill to finish reading the report, but then it's decision time.
[Sen. John Kennedy , Louisiana:] It's time for women to woman up and men to man up. And let's be senators. And let's start voting.
[Serfaty:] And I want to take me back to live pictures here outside the Senate Hart Office Building, where we see actress Amy Schumer being arrested in the midst of these protests, among many other protesters, certainly speaking to the passion of the moment up here on Capitol Hill. Tomorrow, though, Jake, will be the crucial moment for Brett Kavanaugh. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has scheduled a cloture vote. That means that every senator here will have to say yes or no on Brett Kavanaugh. And if he continues, that means a final confirmation vote on Saturday Jake.
[Tapper:] All right, Sunlen Serfaty at the Hart Senate Office Building. Let's talk about this with our experts. Senator Santorum, an interesting argument this morning from Andrew Napolitano, the judge on FOX News, talking about the investigation. And I want to get your reaction.
[Andrew Napolitano, Fox News:] I was disappointed that they didn't interview Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford and a few more people, because now the people that don't want Judge Kavanaugh, whether they don't want him confirmed because of a perception that he is ideologically against them or because they really believe the allegations against him, now have more ammunition and more doubt to say, why was the FBI held back? Was the FBI used as a political instrument yet again? Why weren't they just allowed to interview whoever they wanted, including the two principals, Judge Kavanaugh on Dr. Ford? Those allegations are going to stick.
[Tapper:] Your response?
[Rick Santorum, Cnn Commentator:] I think the optics would have been better had they interviewed them. I don't know for a fact maybe you do whether they were told they could not. But I think what the FBI did was say that Christine Blasey Ford came forward and said, this is all the information. She was asked, is there anything else that you want to tell us? And she said, no, I have told you everything. So what else could they find out? If she said that she told him everything, there really isn't much more to find, and certainly Judge Kavanaugh, the same thing. I mean, he's been questioned repeatedly. So I think it's very likely the FBI just said there really isn't a reason for us. Let's look to see what kind of corroboration each has for their own story. And that's what you got in this report.
[Tapper:] Kirsten Powers, you have been very critical of the FBI report. You don't think it's legit.
[Kirsten Powers, Cnn Commentator:] No, it's not legit. You don't have a report where people aren't where you have somebody like Debbie Ramirez saying that there are 20 people that she has identified who can corroborate her story, and they don't talk to any of them. When you have people who are reaching out to the FBI and they can't even get through. They're like sending through like the Web site who say that they have information and they're not being responded to. So I think that the whole setup of this situation has been, if you want an FBI investigation, you're smearing a good man. I mean, that literally is what it is. And it's just that's not what's happening. Basically, what Republicans are saying is, either you just accept what he's saying and don't question it, or you're smearing him and trying to ruin his life, vs. saying, there's a credible allegation. I think there's two very credible allegations against this person. Let's do a real FBI investigation. And let's find out what happened both for the women who made the accusations and, frankly, for Judge Kavanaugh, I mean, where you can have a real investigation where people can could clear his name. That would be very important. And now what we're left with is really a sham investigation that makes people feel like this was a setup, that have basically you were told to not investigate people who could corroborate.
[Mona Charen, Ethics And Public Policy Center:] You say there are two credible allegations. I think that's very debatable. First of all, Blasey Ford's allegation itself had problems, in that there's no corroboration.
[Tapper:] There's no firsthand corroboration.
[Powers:] Sexual assaults don't have witnesses.
[Charen:] Let me finish. To contrast it with the case of Judge Moore, when his accusers said he did he did this, here's my yearbook that he signed, here's the person I told at the time who will corroborate that, yes, at the time I told them. It doesn't mean that Blasey Ford is lying.
[Hilary Rosen, Cnn Political Contributor:] Dr. Ford's sent a letter, which they released publicly today, that they offered six people that corroborated this incident well prior to his nomination.
[Rosen:] It does not matter in sexual assault cases.
[Santorum:] They said they don't recall it happening.
[Tapper:] The people that she named at the party said with the exception of Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, that they have no memory or recollection of it happening.
[Santorum:] And her best friend said she never recalled ever meeting Kavanaugh.
[Tapper:] Right. Right.
[Rosen:] One is whether she's telling the truth and the people in her life who she told this story to well before there was ever a nomination. ... any public assault allegations, that is very, very important in sexual assault and sexual harassment cases. Whether you have corroboration, whether you have told someone about this prior to it becoming public. And she's given the name of six people who she told prior to it becoming public. And the FBI chose not to use it. And the reason this matters is because senators are using this talking point, there is no corroborating evidence. But, in fact, there are corroborating witnesses who should be talked to by what the FBI
[Tapper:] I think what they mean is there no I agree that they should be precise. No contemporaneous corroborating evidence. Nothing at the time.
[Rosen:] That's not happening that way.
[Charen:] And well, sometimes it does.
[Powers:] People being told about it at the time is corroborating evidence. I mean, Debbie there are multiple people who have come out and said they remember being told about this. I actually would love to finish a sentence without being interrupted. No, really, this is what's been going on the whole time, which is, if you guys have such a great case, let other people make their case and stop yelling at them and stop talking over them.
[Tapper:] OK. Can we talk about the politics of this for one second? Because right now we have four undecided senators, and Kavanaugh's fate is with them, lies with them. Joe Manchin, the one Democrat on this list from West Virginia, he's up for reelection this year. Susan Collins from Maine. Jeff Flake of Arizona, who is retiring, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. What we're getting signals from Collins and Flake. They're saying this investigation, whatever other people think of it, it seems comprehensive, it seems sufficient. Do you think ultimately this all means Kavanaugh will be confirmed?
[Charen:] I do. I think actually that the FBI investigation was undertaken exactly for those four senators, to satisfy them. And the idea that it actually should have been something that was for the whole country and, by the way, I don't have a side. I'm just evaluating the evidence as I see it, unlike like 99 percent of the country, which seems to have taken sides. But the fact is, those senators now need their fig leaf to be able to say, yes, I saw it, and it wasn't persuasive. And I think that's probably all they're going to need.
[Tapper:] And do you think ultimately he's going to pass? I mean, really, this could come down to I mean, I think it's likely that Flake is going to vote for him. He signaled that. It's going to come down to Murkowski and Collins. What do you think they're going to do?
[Powers:] In my gut is probably that Collins will vote for him. But I don't that's just my gut. I don't really know. I think Lisa Murkowski is going to be in a lot of trouble if she votes for him, just because there's already so much opposition to him separate from this issue.
[Tapper:] In Alaska.
[Rosen:] A Republican lobbyist told me last night that if Susan Collins votes against Kavanaugh, her career is finished. We're putting a lot of pressure on these two women, but in fact it's the entire GOP Senate who is responsible for this. And it's that leadership bullying them that's really the problem.
[Tapper:] And we're going to talk about this in the next coming up. Republicans see it one way, Democrats see it another, but will we ever really know what was in the FBI report? Plus, the fight over Kavanaugh may be energizing Democrats right now, but a big argument being made, it might also help Republicans in the midterms. Stay with us.

[Hill:] All right. Sentencing begins today for Bill Cosby. We do have some video of him arriving at the courthouse a little bit earlier this morning. This is in Norristown, Pennsylvania.
[Sciutto:] He faces up to 30 years in prison. This, after being convicted of drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand in 2004. The judge will also determine today if he will have to register as a sexually violent predator. Athena Jones joins us now. So Athena, five of Cosby's accusers, they testified today. We could also hear from them during the sentencing today?
[Athena Jones, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. We could hear from them again. We could hear from Andrea Constand herself and also these other women who are able to come forward in this second trial to bolster her testimony with substantially similar stories about being drugged, being incapacitated and being assaulted. So we could hear from them today in what's called the victim impact statements. The defense side would get a chance to cross-examine them. So we could hear some more emotional testimony about them talking about being drugged and penetrated. We could also hear from Cosby himself. He did not testify at his trial. But usually, during the sentencing phase, you'll going to have the convict trying to ask for leniency, going for leniency, and that's one thing we expect from his lawyers, as well.
[Harlow:] You know, we have heard some important things from Cosby in his own words that came from deposition that he gave, admitting to some things. How remind our viewers of what he said when he was deposed and then, B, how that could play into the judge's sentencing today.
[Jones:] Well, what's interesting about that deposition, that was a secret deposition that remains secret. It was related to the civil case that Andrea Constand brought
[Hill:] Right.
[Jones:] against him several years back. That settled in about 2006. But that deposition was secret, and then when there was allegations that reemerged in 2014 with with that comedian, Hannibal Buress bringing up Cosby's accusations against him. There's a lot of pressure, a judge decided to release that deposition. That is what laying the groundwork for the prosecutors in that county to bring to file criminal charges against Cosby a month before the statute of limitations expired in the Andrea Constand case. So that is really why we're here now. And that could play a role, certainly. But I would expect these potentially very emotional victim impact statements.
[Sciutto:] We know you're going to keep us up to date. Athena Jones, thanks very much. Coming up, we also have updates, testing under way near a North Carolina power plant where floodwaters are posing an environmental threat now.
[Harlow:] So over the weekend, water from the bloated look at that, the bloated Cape Fear River forced the closure of one of these power plants that led to fear that industrial waste could seep into waterways nearby. Meanwhile, eight rivers across North and South Carolina remained at flood stage with at least one river expected to rise another three feet by tomorrow morning. Let's go to our Kaylee Hartung as she joins us again in Wilmington, North Carolina. I mean, this is what they were talking about, Kaylee, with all these concerns over what would the aftermath of Florence be. What are you seeing?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Jim and Poppy. The threat to the Carolinas continues, and the work of the volunteers of the United Cajun Navy has evolved well beyond the rescue operations that they began more than a week ago. I'm here in the volunteer group's command center. And it has turned into a distribution center, something of a 247 Wal-Mart, if you will, where folks can come in and pick up the essential supplies that they need, everything from dog food, and canned food, and snacks, to fresh produce, diapers and medical supplies. And if people can't come here to pick up what they need, the volunteers here will deliver those same fishing boats they use to rescue folks are now taking these supplies out into the areas that are otherwise cut off, because plenty of those areas still remain. We're talking about visiting individual home, shelters. There was even a delivery to a farm that needed hay and feed for their animals. Yesterday, about 20 boats loaded up with supplies. I hopped in one, a 16-foot bass fishing boat with two military veterans. We travelled about 50 miles up the Cape Fear River. And I was struck not just by how vast this flooding was but also the stench of that water. You mentioned the environmental concerns of the contaminants that could be getting into this water, as it comes to that one power plant just off the Cape Fear River in this Wilmington area, Duke Energy, assures me that the coal ash basins are secure and water testing has come back with positive results. That water not contaminated, to their knowledge. But also hog farming is a big industry here in North Carolina, the waste from those farms entering the water, as well. At one point in this journey up the river, we went more than a mile inland and we were driving a boat down the streets of the small town of Whitestock in North Carolina. And I was able to step very easily from the boat onto the roof of a church to get a better look. And water stretches as far as the eyes can see. When you think about the dangers of this water, though, that stench is more than just displeasing when you're in it, but it's a danger to those who get anywhere near it. The volunteers I worked with yesterday, one of them suffering from a staph infection after working overnight rescues, another with sores on his feet. And yet these volunteers continue to donate their time, their skill and their resources to helping people who need it. We just got a call in to this command center from a shelter in North Carolina, an area we have heard so much about in terms of how it has been cut off from the rest of civilization. They need canned goods, dish washing liquid, batteries, bug spray, pull-ups and toilet paper. Boats being loaded up right now to get those supplies to them.
[Harlow:] OK.
[Sciutto:] Sometimes they forget the aftermath. We're glad we have Kaylee Hartung there. A lot of people still suffering, a lot of people still in danger. On to a different story now in the sports world. He is back, Tiger Woods, finding his winning form to capture his first tournament in more than five years.

[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] 27 tornadoes. The storm also brought heavy rain, damaging wind and destroyed homes, businesses. Ripped the top off a factory. All right. Thanks for being with me. Have a good weekend. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. Kate Bolduan takes over next.
[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Kate Bolduan. For a week that started with a press conference that even Republicans called a disaster, clarification that required two other clarifications, the last thing you would expect is a surprise invitation to the White House for the man at the center of the whole crisis. But that is exactly what you just what you got. Surprise was even the surprise was even to the director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats.
[Unidentified Female:] The White House has announced on Twitter that Vladimir Putin is coming to the White House in the fall.
[Dan Coats, Director, National Intelligence:] Say that again?
[Unidentified Female:] You Vladimir Putin coming to the
[Coats:] Did I hear
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, yes.
[Coats:] OK.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Coats:] That's going to be special.
[Bolduan:] I feel like that's what I say before every show, that's going to be special. I know I normally say, wait, there's more. But today it's, but, wait, there's less. Coats still doesn't know what Trump and Putin actually agreed to or didn't in that one on one meeting Monday in Helsinki.
[Coats:] I don't know what happened in that meeting. I think as time goes by and the president has already mentioned some things that happened in that meeting, I think we will learn more. But that is the president's prerogative.
[Bolduan:] So, who does know what the leaders of the free the leader of the free world and the meddler of the autocratic world said besides the translators? Secretary of State Mike Pompeo seems to have some clues.
[Mike Pompeo, Secretary Of State:] I have had a chance to talk with President Trump about his discussions with President Putin. There was progress made on a handful of fronts, agreements to work more closely on counterterrorism.
[Bolduan:] CNN's Jeremy Diamond is at the White House for us with much more. Jeremy, on this fine Friday, is the White House saying anything more about this Putin visit, time, place, anything?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn White House Reporter:] We don't at this point have any more details on the actual meeting. There is a lot going on in Washington and at the White House as it relates to Dan Coats, the director of National Intelligence comments yesterday. You saw that shocked look on his face when he found out from another journalist that the president was planning a second meeting with Vladimir Putin, even as the controversy surrounding the first meeting has yet to even die down. Let's just remember that this week began with Dan Coats issuing a statement, a forceful statement, defending the intelligence community after President Trump made those comments equating the intelligence community's assessments about 2016 interference from the Russians and Vladimir Putin's denials. The White House and folks at the directorate of National Intelligence had thought that perhaps Coats and the president had turned a corner as the president kind of walked back some of those comments more recently this week. But it seems like that is shifting again. The White House appears to be upset at Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats over his comments yesterday. Folks at the DNI seem to be upset at the White House for Coats being blindsided essentially during that very public interview when he was informed about the meeting between the president and Vladimir Putin that is in the works. You know, Coats is not expected back in Washington until Monday. While he is away, a lot of questions about his future hang in the balance. A lot of intelligence officials beginning to worry that Coats could be fired by the president because of the way that he handled things yesterday. Remember, it wasn't just his shock at this second meeting with Vladimir Putin. He also said that he would not have advised the president to have that one on one meeting with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki in the first place. He also said that he wouldn't have advised the president to invite senior Russian officials into the oval office last year. So, a lot of questions right now about Coats' future and how things will go forward. We do know that the president is leaving later today to Bedminster and sometimes when he walks out to that the helicopter, he does speak to the press. We will keep you posted on all of that.
[Bolduan:] All right. Great to see you, Jeremy. Thank you so much. Joining me right now, CNN political analyst and White House reporter for "The Washington Post," Josh Dawsey, and CNN global affairs analyst, who's advised both Democrat and Republican secretaries of state, Aaron David Miller. So, Josh, bouncing off what Jeremy was saying, it seems White House officials are upset with Dan Coats. DNI is upset with the White House. "Washington Post" is reporting that a senior White House official says that Coats has gone rogue. Is that your sense of things? Is Coats being caught off guard in one case and in another reacting to the president being wrong on the intelligence assessment?
[Josh Dawsey, Cnn Political Analyst:] There's certainly some palpable frustration within the White House of Dan Coats' interview, how candid he was, how he was seemingly critical of the president for meeting with Putin once, for doing it again. He basically showed his cards on stage that he had no idea the president was inviting Vladimir Putin back to the White House this fall. I don't think Dan Coats is the most popular person in the White House today. Though, that said, his frustrations seemed to express the ad hoc nature of this meeting. A lot of White House officials don't know what was said in that meeting, trying to unspool what it means. So, you have a disconnect between the president and his administration. Now that Dan Coats, as a pretty prominent member of the administration, is out showing some of the frustrations, you are seeing some frustrations from the White House.
[Bolduan:] Aaron, the simple fact that the director of National Intelligence doesn't know anything about what happened inside that meeting in Helsinki still days later, are you surprised by that?
[Aaron David Miller, Cnn Global Affairs Analyst:] Not in Trump land I'm not surprised. I'm not entirely persuaded Mike Pompeo received a full briefing. The only person who actually knows on the American side what transpired in that meeting is the interpreter and Mr. Trump. I'm assuming the Russians recorded the conversation. We probably easily could have as well. Whether an actual transcript exists and if it does exist, whether the president would essentially allow it to be prepared and shared, another matter entirely. In Trump land, you have two choices. You can stand up and defend the interests of the republic. Rex Tillerson, despite his imperfections as secretary of state, or you could suck up and survive. I think Dan Coats is trying his best as others have tried to navigate it line. Whether or not he will succeed, anybody's guess.
[Bolduan:] Josh, here is the confusing whiplash element of it to keep with the theme of the week. If we talk about the future of Dan Coats and Jeremy Diamond saying there's conversations about is he going to last, your paper has reported that one of the reasons behind Trump's clarification after Helsinki was concern that Coats would resign over the press conference. What are you hearing about how close it came to that?
[Dawsey:] I think Dan Coats and others in the intelligence community certainly were despondent over the president's comments at the press conference with Vladimir Putin. He came out the next day and said he felt differently. A number of kind of walk back and changes from the White House on Russia. That's why that clarification was made the next day. The president was under tremendous pressure to fix what he said at the podium, even if the president deep down maybe was not so displeased with his comments after all. A lot of the apparatus of the government really was pushing him to make changes. I think that kept Dan Coats around. That said, obviously, Mr. Coats out in Aspen felt the need to unload about what he saw this week and he did that.
[Bolduan:] Aaron, from your Twitter feed today, after Helsinki, you are in a place now where you think Putin has something on President Trump. I want to know why you think that but also then what you then think of Putin coming to the White House in the fall.
[Miller:] I mean, I really don't know, Kate. I'm trying to be as honest and objective and detached about this as possible. Why is an American president consistently kneeling before at best a frenemy of the United States and perhaps an outright adversary? One is the possibility that exist some sort of Trump file either for personal transgressions, financial ones, and that Putin actually has considerable leverage. Second is the reality that Trump has to keep Putin close. Because as the process proceeds in terms of Russian election meddling, the more the Russians are perceived to have meddled, the more the president believes the legitimacy of his election is at stake. And finally, I think it's not just Mr. Putin, it's Erdogan, it's a number of authoritarians. Mr. Trump loves to deal with authoritarians over cranky allies. As far as the summit is concerned, we haven't gotten over the chaos and confusion of the first summit. We don't know what's happened there. Now we're scheduling a second. Only one Russian leader has been to Washington and addressed a joint meeting of Congress and that was Boris Yeltsin in '92. At that time, he was perceived to be a partner rather than an enemy. So, I don't understand it. I think it's a bad decision.
[Bolduan:] I get a sense that Putin will not get an invite to Congress if this trip does come through. I don't know. Maybe that's a possibility. Josh, what are you hearing? How did this invite to Putin kind of come about from the White House? Do you have a sense from the White House that they think another Putin meeting would be a good thing especially if it's held just before the election?
[Dawsey:] I think the president thinks he can charm any foreign leader, he can make a deal. We saw that with Kim Jong-un. He praised Kim Jong-un as he has been critical of some allies. He is doing this with Vladimir Putin. When you talk to his advisers and people in the White House, what they say is a less nefarious explanation. In their mind, he thinks if he can get in a room with someone, he can make terms, he can have peaceful relationships with Russia, friends with Vladimir Putin. A lot of folks in the White House don't think that's possible, but the president thinks it is obviously.
[Bolduan:] So, is it a redo? Is it a do over?
[Dawsey:] I think in the president's mind, he wants to keep meeting with Vladimir Putin. I think he has said that repeatedly. I don't know that's a do over. I think he actually see he thinks can come out of this that are good for the United States. Obviously, time will tell. A lot of Republicans, a lot of his own advisers are very skeptical anything good can come out of a meeting with Vladimir Putin. The president wants to do it and has said that for months and months. He wanted the things we reported is that he has been frustrated that people within his government have tried to stop him from meeting with Vladimir Putin. He was frustrated when we reported in a few months ago that said do not congratulate Vladimir Putin on the phone call and that came out. It's really him versus his own administration when it comes to Vladimir Putin. He takes a far more sunny approach to meeting with the Russian strongman.
[Bolduan:] It's always rainbows and butterflies when it comes to Vladimir Putin from personal experience. Great to see you, Josh, Aaron. I appreciate it. All right. Now to some breaking news that we need to get to that's happening overnight. A tragic story that seems to only be getting more heart breaking. What was supposed to be a leisurely summer night on a Branson, Missouri lake ended with at least 13 people dead when a tourist duck boat capsized in the storm. Right now, divers are back in the water looking for a handful of people who are still missing. Investigators are looking for answers to just why this happened in the first place. CNN's Rene Marsh is following these latest details. She's joining me right now. So, Rene, they've just wrapped up a press conference a short time ago for an update. What's the very latest?
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Aviation And Government Regulation Correspondent:] Well, I can tell you, Kate, at this hour, this is still being considered a recovery effort. But as the governor told CNN this morning, it doesn't look good for survivors. We know that children are among the dead. Fourteen people survived. But again, at this hour, the search continues for even more survivors. To set the scene, take you back to how this all unfolded. It was Thursday evening. The ride the Duck's Tour boat capsized and sank on Table Rock Lake near Branson. It was during the storm. You are looking at video, how choppy the water was there. People captured the moments as that boat was just rocking back and forth in the water. The winds were extremely strong and whipping this boat around. The area we do know was under a severe thunderstorm warning. It was issued shortly after 6:30 p.m. local time, about 30 minutes before the boat capsized. The big question is, were they tracking that weather? Why did they go out there on that boat? The CEO of the boat's company, this Duck Boat Company spoke to CNN earlier today. Take a listen.
[Jim Pattison Jr., President Of Duck Boat Tours' Parent Company:] My understanding was that when the boat went in the water, it was calm. Obviously, we shouldn't be out there in severe weather. People are supposed to be able to go out for an outing and have a good time. This should never end this way. There's not much more you can say.
[Marsh:] All right. So, that's going to be a key part of this investigation. Were they aware of this weather system that was in the area? Did they pay close attention to that before they decided to leave? That is a key question for investigators. It's unclear at this hour if passengers had time to put on life jackets. We know both the Coast Guard and the NTSB are investigating. But Kate, I do want to point out, the NTSB has long warned about the dangers of these specific type of tour boats. It investigated a very similar incident back in 1999 in Arkansas. In their final report, the NTSB said that the canopies on those boats, which this boat has the same sort of canopy is a major I'm quoting "impediment to the survival of the passengers." So, was that another contributing factor in this case as well? Why more people didn't get out alive. That will be all a part of this investigation Kate.
[Bolduan:] That was in 1999.
[Marsh:] Yes, nearly two decades ago.
[Bolduan:] Thank you so much, Rene. We will stay on this as divers are back in the water right now. Appreciate it. Coming up for us, it is what they do every day. That's Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Russia's continued attacks on the United States especially targeting U.S. elections. But is the U.S. prepared? Our next guest says no. Plus, President Trump touches yet another third rail takes on yet another third rail of presidential politics. This time he's sounding off on the Federal Reserve. What he said and what it means, stay with us.

[Tapper:] Welcome back. In a remarkable peek behind the curtain into Washington deal-making, we all just watched President Trump and congressional leaders, Democrats and Republicans, meet to try to hammer out a deal on immigration. Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona was at the table for that meeting. He joins me now. Senator, as always, thanks so much for joining us.
[Sen. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] Hey, thanks for having me.
[Tapper:] Was having that meeting with cameras rolling, what were you expecting?
[Flake:] I didn't expect the cameras to stay that long. Obviously, the more productive part of the meeting was after the cameras left. But, frankly, I went in with pretty low expectations. You don't put 22 people around the table and expect to really negotiate. We're at a point now where we really need to negotiate and where at a point now where we really need to negotiate. But I was surprised that, you know, when the cameras left at the president's flexibility on the matter. And that he actually went in and explained what he meant by a wall and border security, and that's helpful. It really is.
[Tapper:] So, he was actually even more flexible on the issue of what needed to be attached to the DREAMers' bill once the cameras left the room?
[Flake:] Yes, and I don't know if I can define one rather than the other. I can't remember what was what, but certainly after the cameras left Kevin McCarthy and a few others said, all right, let's really set these parameters. What are the four items that need to be there? And we really narrowed it down to that. Now some of these some of the four items could be expanded certainly within them, but just setting those parameters helps a great deal.
[Tapper:] I want to get to the substance of the bill in a second, but
[Flake:] Right.
[Tapper:] But our White House correspondent Jeff Zeleny is reporting that one of the reasons that the White House invited the cameras into the room and let it roll let them roll for so long was to beat back against the narrative in the new book "Fire and Fury" and this idea that the president's mental fitness is deteriorating, he's not up to the job. He did seem rather reasonable and in command in the meeting. I'm just wondering, separate and distinct from the from the negotiations you just attended, have you ever had concerns or heard anyone around the president having concerns about his fitness?
[Flake:] No, no, I'm not going there. I've dealt with him on some issues. I disagree with him certainly on some issues and agree with him on others, but I've not experienced that.
[Tapper:] OK. You say both Republicans and Democrats need to give on something in order to reach a deal on immigration to help the DREAMers. Where do you think President Trump is willing to give?
[Flake:] Well, we got a list, the so-called punch list that I had asked for back with a meeting in early December with General Kelly. We had a series of two meetings with General Kelly and some of us on Capitol Hill. And at that point, we were asking, you know, what constitutes border security and can you give us a list? And we waited and waited and waited. Finally, a few days ago that list came. It was later than we wanted it, but it came, the problem is it was pretty expansive. It was just throwing basically everything in. And the value of the meeting today was shelving some of that or saying, yes, this is important, but it's important as part of comprehensive reform, which we can do in phase two. But right now, we need to protect these DACA kids.
[Tapper:] The president said he wanted comprehensive immigration reform, as you note. That's phase two, this deal with the DREAMers and border security would be phase one. A bigger bill for phase two. Comprehensive immigration reform, as you know perhaps better than most, has become the third rail for many in the Republican Party. Take a listen to the president.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] You want to know the truth, Dick, if we do this properly, DACA, you're not so far away from comprehensive immigration reform. If you want to take it that further step, I'll take the heat. I don't care. I don't care. I'll take all the heat you want to give me. I'll take the heat off both the Democrats and the Republicans. My whole life has been heat.
[Tapper:] Here is how conservative Ann Coulter immediately responded. Nothing Michael Wolff, the author of "Fire and Fury", could say about @RealDonaldTrump has hurt him as much as the DACA love fest right now. I guess my question is, are you worried that once the president actually feels the heat from his base, he might change his mind?
[Flake:] I hope not. And, you know, he is there was a famous meeting with Chuck and Nancy where he expressed a lot of flexibility there and then was pulled back immediately. So, there is that concern. But we're closer to the deadline now. We don't have any time to spare. So, I frankly was pleased to hear what the president said. I would disagree with him a bit in terms of how he said, you know, once we get the DACA piece done, that we're a long ways into comprehensive. Not really. I dealt with comprehensive. We negotiated that over seven months, virtually every night that we were here in D.C., and over the weekends a lot. It was that was tough to negotiate. We're not going to be very far down the comprehensive road when we finish DACA, but it will be a start. And that's a good thing.
[Tapper:] The president also floated the idea of bringing back earmarks, pork barrel projects to help control members of Congress, help cajole them and get them on board. The conservative group Club for Growth said about that idea, quote, bringing back the earmarks is the antithesis of draining the swamp. Earmarks will only benefit the special interest that grow government at the expense of working men and women. What's your take?
[Flake:] I share that view as one who played a bit of a role over the past several years and finally ending the scourge of earmarks. We don't want to bring them back. That is not the price we want to pay for getting a few members to talk to each other. That just that was so corrupting and so awful. We don't want a return to the earmark era. And if anybody needs a reminder of what that was like and what that did to the Republican Party, it chased us out of office in 2006. It chased us out of the majority. We don't need to go there again. We really don't.
[Tapper:] Senator Flake, stay right there. I'm going to ask you after the break, why this recent turn of tide, Republicans who have had strong criticism of the president in the past, such as Corker and Lindsey Graham, now openly phrasing him. Stay with me. I'm going to ask you about that next.
[Flake:] OK.

[Brianna Keilar, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Brianna Keilar, live from CNN's Washington headquarters. We have breaking news. President Trump's former attorney, friend and fixer, Michael Cohen, will spend the next three years in prison. This even after he flipped on the president and cooperated with Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The sentencing happened off camera, but our reporters were inside taking down every word that was said and essentially Cohen and his attorney through his president of the United States under the bus. Cohen saying at one point, quote, recently the president tweeted a statement calling me week, and it was correct, but for a much different reason than he was implying. It was because time and time again I felt it was my duty to cover up his dirty deeds. CNN reporter Kara Scannell is outside of the courthouse. Take us inside of that courtroom, Kara, where you were. How did this play out? And even after cooperating, why did Michael Cohen still get three years?
[Kara Scannell, Cnn Reporter:] Well, Brianna, it was a very emotional day inside the courtroom here. And, you know, one of the issues that the judge said when he was putting laying out this sentence, he told Cohen that, you know, that the crimes that he committed and the seriousness of these offenses, and, you know, the sentence should be amplified because of that. And so he said, you know, it was really important to give him a sentence that reflected the seriousness of these crimes, as well as reflect the importance of obeying the law. So the judge took a fairly stern tone here, despite after hearing from the special counsel's office saying that Cohen had been helpful to them, you know, cooperative, and providing them information that was core to their mission, which is, of course, investigating Russia's interference with the election. But the scene today was really focusing literally on Michael Cohen. And he took the podium to address the court, to ask for leniency. He was very emotional when he spoke about the shame and the pain that he brought to his family. His family members. The courtroom on that side of the courtroom was packed with his father who was there, his mother, his daughter, his son, his wife, several other cousins, family members, in-laws. It was very emotional, especially after he was handed down that sentence. But there are a couple of quotes that, you know, we want to read from what Cohen had said in court today. And one of them was that he said, this may seem hard to believe but today is one of the most meaningful days of my life. I have been living in a personal and mental incarceration ever since the day that I expected the offer to work for a real estate mogul whose business acumen that I deeply admired. And, Brianna, of course he's referring to President Trump. And then he continued on with that and he said, you know, that I take full responsibility for each act that I pled guilty to, the personal ones to me and those involving the president of the United States. Now, Michael Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison. He's paying over $1 million in restitution. He will face he pled guilty, of course, to these nine counts of tax evasion, making a false statement to a bank, campaign finance violation relating to those payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, and lying to Congress about how long he continued to negotiate a potential building of Trump Tower in Moscow as that as the presidential campaign wore on. So the judge today saying, you know, these were serious offenses, sentencing him to three years in prison, over a million dollars in restitution and fines, and Michael Cohen will report to prison on March 6th. Brianna.
[Keilar:] And, Kara, something that his lawyer said that stands out to me was, as he was pleading for leniency for his client, he likened the investigation into Russian meddling in the election to Watergate, trying to argue that the significance of Michael Cohen's cooperation was like cooperating in the Watergate investigation.
[Scannell:] Absolutely. And he was saying, you know, this took so much courage on Michael Cohen's part. He could have just towed the line. He even made a reference, that was a bit of a blind reference, to Paul Manafort, someone who's cooperating but not really cooperating and double dealing, as he put it, you know, as the allegation that Manafort, even after cooperating, was continuing to talk to the administration. So, you know, he really was playing that card and saying this is the most significant time the most significant crime and Cohen's cooperation is very significant at this very important time in history that we have not seen since Watergate, Brianna.
[Keilar:] Kara Scannell, thank you so much for that report. Here with me now, Jack Quinn, he's a former White House counsel under President Clinton, former federal prosecutor Laura Coates, and CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger. Help us understand, Gloria, how significant this is, what happened today.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] This is really significant, particularly if you're the president of the United States and you are watching this play out. What you said earlier, that Michael Cohen ran the president over, he did. And I think what's really important here now is that he said he intends to continue to cooperate. So this is just the beginning of the story. This is not the this is not the end of the story. And one thing that Michael Cohen said in court that struck me was he said he's committed to ensuring that history will not remember me as the villain of this story. The implication being there is someone else.
[Keilar:] That he believes the implication pretty is who he believes the villain is, being the president.
[Borger:] Yes. Yes.
[Keilar:] He also said, Laura, he cooperated because he believed that, I guess if he didn't, or just one of the reasons that he was cooperating was because the president otherwise might get rid of the investigation?
[Laura Coates, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, I think that he, in all respects, as a cooperator, according to the Southern District of New York, is that he was a day late and a dollar short. The timing of this is extremely important, Brianna. Remember, he didn't start cooperating until after he'd been charged with multiple felony offenses in New York.
[Keilar:] So you don't and the point being you don't take that at face value. You say you cooperated to save your own skin.
[Coates:] Well, yes, and that's why you would cooperate, frankly. And there is a little bit of altruism to that, but normally you're cooperating because you're self-interested in some way. Doesn't mean that you're not credible or you're not telling the truth any longer, but you are certainly self-interested. What happened with Michael Cohen that I think the judge was eluding to is the notion that, look, the fact that you've already pled guilty and are later cooperating is not going to somehow be a retroactive act of lenience towards you. You did the right thing now, but at the time you did the wrong thing. And, again, he was not a full cooperator in the sense of, I'll tell you everything, even about uncharged criminal conduct. He was being a confirmer. I will confirm to you that you have it right with respect to what you already know. But if you want to be a cooperator, you have to tell the prosecutors what they have not charged and about other people as well.
[Keilar:] What did you think, Jack, about what today and just what recent filings that we've seen pertaining to Michael Cohen signal to other people who may be targets of the Mueller investigation or are thinking perhaps of cooperating?
[Jack Quinn, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I think that's a critically important point. I mean, and, first of all, Michael Cohen, he didn't get complete leniency. On the other hand, he was facing considerably more time than he got. So he got a break. And he got that break in significant part because special counsel Mueller filed a memo outlining very significant ways in which he can be helpful to the Mueller investigation, including, for example, being able to speak to what Mueller called matters core to the investigation, namely the connection between Russia and the Trump campaign that Cohen has gleaned from his conversations with company executives. That is to say Trump company executives. And we all know who might be in that category. Most of them are named Trump. Anyway, Mueller detailed several other areas where Cohen can provide some unique and critically important investigations and he has more time to get that sentence driven down further.
[Keilar:] I wonder, Laura, the judge agreed to recommend Otisville Prison, which is in upstate New York, the idea being then he's not so far away from his family, right? This would be critical if he were spending looking at spending three years in prison that you would have visitation from people, that it would be more convenient for them to get to you. There are other things that went into this consideration of being lenient to Michael Cohen.
[Coates:] Well, not just the idea that the family can get to him, but he's going to be a continued cooperator.
[Borger:] Yes.
[Coates:] You to
[Borger:] Yes, there you know, there is. And I was told by a source close to Cohen that he's really dug in on cooperating. I mean he said it in court today. He hasn't told his whole story and he wants to tell his whole story. As I was talking about before, he doesn't want to be the villain of this story. He's committed his crimes and he understands that. But there's going to be a lot more talking going on. I think the problem that he had is that he really only decided to fess up after it became clear to him that he wasn't going to get a pardon from Donald Trump. And Pam Brown and I did that story. At first he thought he was going to get pardoned by the president. Then it became clear to him that he wasn't. And then he turned in another turned in another direction. And I think that was noted or implied today. And but now, going forward, I think Cohen is committed, committed, I think we can say, to telling what he knows about what Jack was talking about, which is Trump Org and everything he knows about the businesses.
[Quinn:] He's critical to the link between Trump, the business empire
[Borger:] Yes.
[Quinn:] And Trump the political empire. And drawing those two together is something that Mueller is, if not trying to do, he's incredibly interested in knowing whether these were one enterprise, you know, all together. The other thing, by the way, which Mueller has intimated he can provide valuable information on, he talks in his sentencing memo about Cohen having circulated his false testimony in this calendar year to other people in the White House.
[Keilar:] Which is critical
[Quinn:] Which might mean that there were people involved in a conspiracy with him to provide perjured testimony.
[Keilar:] And no doubt that will be something that he will have an opportunity to tell investigators. If you all could stand by for me, I really appreciate the conversation. We have much more of our special coverage. I'll be speaking live with a Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee on the president's admissions on payments to hush money payments to women he allegedly had affairs with. Now, Theresa May is in a fight for her political life. Her own party holds a vote of no confidence against her, the British prime minister. We are live in London. And protests right now erupting in Michigan as Republicans move to weaken the power of incoming Democrats. We'll be taking you there live.

[King:] Again, A reminder, we're waiting for the president to speak. You see the room is lit up there in Kansas City. That's the Veterans of Foreign Wars annual convention. We'll take you there when it happens. Back to politics now. Now, Georgia's Republican primary for governor is today and it is a Trump feast. The secretary of state Brian Kemp has the official Trump endorsement. The president re-tweeting that endorsement today. Kemp says the president getting involved is like gasoline on a fire.
[Brian Kemp , Georgia Gubernatorial Candidate:] The president and I line up on a lot of things that we believe in, securing our borders. You know, I have plans to track and deport criminal illegals, stop and dismantle gangs like MS-13 that have become a distribution hub to our state for the Mexican drug cartels and other things putting Georgians first. That's been what my whole campaign is about. Somebody up there fighting for those Georgians out there that are still struggling from the Obama recession.
[King:] The lieutenant governor in the state Casey Cagle says he's more like Trump, and he's trying to explain away why his rival got the big endorsement. Quote, the president decided to do this because, Cagle says because Washington insiders who have weaseled their way into his ear convinced them to make a power play. Why? So they'll have a governor who answers to them instead of to Georgians. OK.
[Jonathan Martin, National Political Correspondent, The New York Times:] One of those Washington insiders used to be Atlanta insider. His name is Sonny Perdue, he's the ag secretary. And according to our reporting, he is the one that actually sealed the deal with the president after a cabinet meeting last week in the Oval Office. Now, the larger question of who else helped that cause and sort of pushed the president to endorse Kemp is still a matter of some debate. But look, if you're Cagle, you're in a bad spot, right because the president is so popular with primary voters. You can't, you know, take on him after he, you know, supports the other guy. So you have to find something to say here. And of course, what typically is said is, it wasn't Trump but somebody got to Trump, right? He's being misled. I mean, how many times have we heard this where the
[Martin:] It's like Reagan, right? They're in his ears. The swamp types are sort of like leading him astray on this one. God forbid it's his fault, you know. It got to been a
[King:] But let's go through that very point. First, to the point of the primary endorsement, how much it matters. The Atlanta Journal Constitution asked Republican voters in Georgia, how are you going to vote in this primary? Twenty-five percent say for some
[Kemp:] And two things. If you're going to date one of my daughters
[Unidentified Male:] Respect.
[Kemp:] And?
[Unidentified Male:] A healthy appreciation for the Second Amendment, sir.
[Kemp:] We're going to get along just fine. I got a big truck, just in case I need to round up criminal illegals and take them home myself. Yes, I just said that. I'm Brian Kemp. If you want a politically incorrect conservative, that's me.
[Martin:] It's not Sacha Baron Cohen, this is actually the candidate. That's not the
[King:] Break down the nuance there for us, Dan.
[Balz:] Yes, well, forget nuance. We've long since gone past nuance. The other point about this race is the concern among Republicans about how difficult this race could be in November, as they are deciding who their nominee is going to be. The Republican Governor's Association lashed out at Stacey Abrams, the Democratic nominee with a very tough ad in which they linked her to Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton and say that she's a dangerous radical. So we can see what the argument is going to be going forward. They're going to be nervous about who they get coming out of this primary today.
[Phillip:] You couldn't end up with a more opposite situation. I mean, I think either in some ways if either of the Republican candidates go up against someone like Stacey Abrams, an African-American Democrat, going into some of these suburbs, it could not be a greater contrast. So it will be one of those tests of what are people actually looking for? What are these moderate voters in the suburbs concerned about? Are they concerned about Trump's political correctness or lack thereof? Or are more are foundational issues going to be at play here? Like, you know, sort of like the politics of a southern state.
[King:] As we pay so much attention we're based in Washington as we pay so much attention and we look at the Trump effect. To the point earlier, can the Democrats take the House back. If so, by how much? Will the Senate stay Republican or do the Democrats really
[Martin:] Yes, and Democrats have not won the governorship of Georgia in 20 years. It was '98 was the last time. And before then, they had basically never, never won it or lost I should say. So I think Georgia will get a lot of the attention because of the fact that Stacey Abrams would make history as the first black woman. Because Brian Kemp could be the nominee with those kinds of kind of Trumpian ads. But here's the other reason why. Georgia at some point is going to be a swing state on the national level. And maybe not '20, but certainly '24.
[Balz:] To that point, there are six counties in the United States that had gone at least four and probably a number more than that for Republicans. Four in a row in presidential that flipped to Hillary Clinton in 2016. Three of those are in the Atlanta suburbs. Three of those six counties across the country. So that's an indication of how that's changing. I mean, those changing demographics in those areas and the question will be, can Stacey Abrams energize that kind of vote in the fall.
[King:] It will strengthen the suburbs that gave Republicans their electoral lock in the Reagan post-Reagan years and now the suburbs
[Martin:] And one final point on Georgia. There's so much talk now about Democrats moving to the left and, you know, embracing in some cases sort of Democratic socialism. Here's the irony. [12:50 00] If Kemp is the nominee in Georgia, Stacey Abrams, who has run an unapologetic liberal campaign at least in the primary, she's going to be the quiet favorite of a lot of the business crowd, Delta, Coke. The big corporate players in Atlanta may be more comfortable with her than with somebody like Brian Kemp. If you look at those kinds of ads and demeanor, man, if you're a Fortune 500 company in Atlanta and you're trying to bring more business and employees to your state and that city, it's going to be a harder sell. So watch for that. The progressive champion, Stacey Abrams is the quiet favorite potentially of the Atlanta business crowd.
[King:] It's a great point. We'll watch that. It's another question of Trump and Trump-like effects and I think particularly
[Unidentified Male:] The year 1959 brought
[King:] That's Vice President Richard Nixon in Moscow for the American National Exhibition, showing the soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev around a model home filled with color T.Vs and other modern American gadgets. That little walk soon deteriorated into a heated argument in the kitchen over the
[Richard Nixon, Former President Of The United States:] Every word that you have said has been taken down, and I will promise you that every word that you have said here will be reported in the United States, and they will see you say it on television.

[Cuomo:] All right, two quick things. First, please keep hitting me on Twitter and on Instagram and on Facebook. Give us the information of people who you know who need help down in these affected areas and if you are someone who's waiting for rescue, that's how we're meeting the people that you're meeting on this show at night. So please, put it on our social media. It's being monitored by first responders and this Concerned Citizen Corps that is expanding all the time down there so we can get you, at least help you, get the help that you need, all right? Now, another thing is that we're staying away from numbers on this show. Why? Why aren't we giving more details about the specifics of who has been affected by Harvey and how? Because there are two main reasons. One, first responders and what we're calling this Concerned Citizen Corps, they haven't been able to get even close to everywhere, nor really coordinate information from their different grids, grids or areas of individual search responsibility. So it's hard to know, it's hard to know if the numbers are real. Then there's the bigger reason. This is not over. Harvey is re- energizing. You heard the meteorologist. That's what happens when these storm systems go over the gulf. They draw on that warm air and moisture and they get stronger. It's coming back late tonight or into the morning hours. Hopefully, hopefully east of where it's already saturated in Houston and outer communities because they simply can't take much more. So, we're going to see what happens then we'll give numbers when we know that they are real and that the worst is over. So what do we know about today? President Trump promised Texans that they're going to have the money they need to rebuild.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We're going to be working with Congress on helping out the state of Texas. It's going to be a costly proposition. Probably there's never been anything so expensive in our country's history.
[Cuomo:] We'll have to wait and see on that, right? Katrina was far more expensive than the estimates now. But again, we don't know what end tally is going to be here. And it is an important message to hear from the president of the United States that the help will be there. And again, the president does ask for relief money but it's Congress that will authorize it. And hopefully we're going to see proof of a lesson learned after Harvey. In the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, or Superstorm Sandy in 2012, Congress spent over three months debating a $50.5 billion package for federal aid. Conservative lawmakers, both Texas senators and every Texas Republican but one, ultimately voted against the bill. Why? Well, Senator Ted Cruz from Texas said there was too much pork in the bill. Money unrelated to Sandy. Paul Ryan and others insisted the emergency spending be offset by budget cuts elsewhere. Now, Ryan's office has been shy about asking for offsets this time around, but Cruz doubled down on his claim this week saying two-thirds of the money in that bill was unrelated to Sandy. Take a listen.
[Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas:] The problem with that particular bill is that it became a $50 billion bill that was filled with unrelated pork. Two-thirds of the bill had nothing to do with Sandy.
[Cuomo:] The problem. That's not true. The "Washington Post" gave Cruz three pinocchios. You want a second source? Go to the report by the Congressional Research Service, OK? You will see it all laid out there, virtually all of the money was earmarked for Sandy-related damage, up and down the coast. Some of the controversial things were repairs to the Smithsonian Institution and the Kennedy Space Center that then-Budget Committee Chairman Ryan, now Speaker of the House, insisted were non-Sandy expenses, but the runways at the Kennedy Center were damaged and the roof of the museum was also damaged, both by Sandy. You have to remember the storm ravaged the east coast. There were major disaster declarations in a dozen states. Now, the bill did wrap in funding for other 2012 disasters including those declared at a number of fisheries across the country as well as $16 billion that could be used for other disasters over three years, as well as a small amount of money for prevention. But regardless, if you take all of this funding, one, it was related to disaster relief, and even if you want to say, yes, but it wasn't related to Sandy, it's still nowhere close to two-thirds of the money that was in that bill. And you know who knows that's true? Ted Cruz. Because despite what he said and all the support he's getting from the right, he changed his statement. His office said it wasn't two-thirds of pork he was talking about. Two-thirds of the money would be spent to slowly qualify as emergency relief. That's the new position. It's a better position, but you know what? It's not good enough. Why? Because according to the Congressional Budget Office, the timing of how the money would be spent, they based that on the projection of how it has been spent in the past. There's a government reason for this and a practical one. Government does work slowly when you compare it to the private sector in certain regards. It's true. But it also takes many years to rebuild especially infrastructure. So that's what the CBO said about it. What do we see as political proof? New York Republican Peter King insists that he, "Won't abandon Texas in the aftermath of Harvey the way he felt was done to his state of New York." So the facts are clear. The question is, will the politics be different this time? Let's bring in one of the Texas congressman who voted against the Sandy bill, Republican Roger Williams. Williams represents the 25th Congressional District of Texas that includes Austin where President Trump visited today. Let's deal with the present, sir, thank you for being on the show. How are people doing, not just in your district, but beyond? What have you learned about the needs for Harvey right now?
[Rep. Roger Williams , Texas:] Well, I tell you, Chris, we've seen unbelievable things. You've touched on them a little in your show today, friends helping friends, family members, strangers helping everybody. This is a horrible situation we have down here, but, you know, we're getting it done. I mean, the president was in Austin today along with Corpus Christi along with Governor Abbott. I think they both are showing great leadership right now and the fact of beginning to talk about government resources to help. But, look, we like to think this is the Texas spirit. It's the American spirit of everybody joining together in a time of need to make something happen and make it better. So, you know, the storm is still out there. We're still seeing bad weather, but at the same time, so many volunteers, so many people have stepped up and helped many, many people, tremendous amount of rescues and so forth. So, it's a time to be thankful for the energy that we got among friends, among strangers, that have reached out to help everybody.
[Cuomo:] Well, there are no strangers in this type of struggle. Everybody gets real familiar
[Williams:] That's right.
[Cuomo:] real fast. And we said it last night, we'll say it again, we're seeing the worst of Mother Nature but the best of human nature and that is great for dealing with the present. Let me ask you, though, what are you hearing in terms of concerns about this next wave of energy from this storm? How concerned are people that even though it's going to be east of Houston, those communities are going to get clipped again and we're going to see a real increase in need?
[Williams:] Well, look, this storm is like no other storm. I know you guys have been following it where it comes to land and goes back and comes back again. So, you know, whoever is in line for this, we're going to be all of us are going to be stepping up to do what we can to help. You know, but the rain is a tremendous amount of rain. You've seen over 50 inches in Houston. Just practically unbelievable. So, look, if this storm we're going to fight it every which way we can and then when it gets out of here, then a whole new level of volunteering and concern develops in rebuilding these communities that can take actually probably several years.
[Cuomo:] Absolutely. On the inside, we've seen it with Katrina, you know that. That city of New Orleans has recovered and just about every measurable way, but the population is about 50,000 less than it was. A much, much smaller metropolitan area obviously than we're dealing with Houston. We're dealing with about 455,000 before Katrina, about 400,000 after. Here we have 6-plus million in the entire surrounding area not to mention the bedroom communities. So the need is going to be great, the money and effort has to be great as well. Let's look at the political picture here because it's easy for people to make promises right now. It will be delivering on them in months from now that will matter. You voted against the Sandy relief bill. Why?
[Williams:] Well, I voted against it for much of the reasons that you talked about. It was not totally a Sandy bill. There was funding that was going elsewhere and I voted against it because of that. At the time, we frankly didn't necessarily have the money to do it, but it wasn't a full Sandy bill. I'm hoping that when we begin to get back to Washington and talk about getting involved with Texas. That we talk about a clean bill that doesn't have things attached to it, like doesn't have a debt ceiling attached to it. We need to vote
[Cuomo:] I hear you.
[Williams:] a clean bill, get politics out of it.
[Cuomo:] I hear you.
[Williams:] begin to help these folks that need to be rebuilt.
[Cuomo:] I hear you. But, asking for a clean bill is a little bit like asking for all the water from Harvey to disappear tomorrow. It doesn't happen. Not even in energy situations. You know that. I knew you were a freshman during this first vote but you're not anymore and you know that a clean bill is unlikely. The reason I'm pushing you on this is if you don't change, you are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. The money in that bill, you can't go through it and say, well, I'm going to vote no because most of this is unrelated to Sandy. It's just not the case. I mean, if you look at the Congressional Research Service report, it's clear it was overwhelmingly Sandy- related money. There was some that was other disaster related, fine, you could have excised that, you could have cut it out. But to say the bill was wasteful and all about pork and not about Sandy, it's just not true Congressman.
[Williams:] Well, I didn't say it was wasteful. I said it had some things in there that did not pertain
[Cuomo:] Some things but you voted no for the whole thing.
[Williams:] Right. I did. And that's why I hope when we begin to talk about this next bill, with Texas, that it is a clean bill. You say you don't think we'll have a clean bill. I don't necessarily agree with you. I think that we can and we can get the politics out of it and begin to get the money flowing and to get these people back to where they can get in their homes, they can get their jobs, they can bring their lives back together. That's my goal and that's where I am.
[Cuomo:] I hear you, but that's what happened in Sandy as well. You had the first bill which was about $9 billion or so, right, which was the first wave of the emergency relief. It was voted on up and down. They got the money. But then, comes the real money where infrastructure comes into play and how you make repairs and how you prevent for the future. And that money winds up being just as important and certainly feels like an emergency to those who need it. And you have people like Peter King in your party, in New York State, saying you guys did him wrong. He won't do the same to you. What does that mean? Do you believe that you need better out of Peter King than we got out of Williams the last time around?
[Williams:] Well, look it, I don't think you can compare the two. In fact, Peter King is one of my best friends in Congress and I think a lot of him. The bottom line is this. We can talk about the past. Right now in Texas, we're looking at a serious tragedy. We want to get these people back their lives in order. I'm just saying that I think we need to focus on a clean bill. Who knows what this number is going to be. I mean, we don't have any idea. It could be double Katrina. Nobody has a true.
[Cuomo:] It's true.
[Williams:] We need to decide what we're going to do. Let's see what it begins to look like. I think we need to immediately get up there and have begin to put a down payment down so we can start seeing some clearing up of this mess.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Williams:] And then begin to see what we're going to do and there does need to be a clean bill, in my mind, and that's where I stand.
[Cuomo:] Well, even, you know, clean bill is going to become defined. One more quick point on this, and I'm pushing because it matters because I covered what happened with Sandy and saw what happened when they get that money and the politics were ugly and they created division. Nobody wants to see that again. Offsets, it sounds reasonable to somebody who's not feeling the pain of the emergency situation the way it was with Ryan and Mulvaney last time around when they said, we need offsetting cuts elsewhere to justify this money we're paying. Sometimes you need to pay and figure it out later. Are you going to fight against offsets in this bill the way they were in the Sandy bill?
[Williams:] Well, I think when we spend any more with the $20 trillion debt. We do need to have offsets. But I will say this, right now we need to out you heard me say, we need a down payment. Let's go ahead and come up with a figure and get this system going and I think this is a tragedy like we've never seen before. I do believe in offsets but there's a time for that now and a time for it later. I want to put a down payment on Harvey and I want to begin to begin the rebuild.
[Cuomo:] I hear you, congressman. And I'm just bringing it up because if you don't correct the mistakes of the past, as you know the saying, we're doomed to repeat them and this Harvey is going be the real deal for many years to come. Sir, thank you for joining us. I hope that you and yours are safe
[Williams:] Thank you, Chris.
[Cuomo:] with the next wave of the storm. You're always here to talk about what matters.
[Williams:] God bless your listeners. Thanks for having us.
[Cuomo:] Thank you, sir. All right, so, look, that's the hard reality of the politics here. Go back and look what happened during Superstorm Sandy and the funding of that. That's one part of the story. Just as important of the story are these incredible rescues that we're seeing because they're so nee need. It's a struggle l for survival. We have one woman who stood on the back of a pickup truck and waved down a helicopter to get to safety. She did it while carrying her three-year-old son. How's she doing? How is he? Find out next.

[Cooper:] Well, keeping them honest tonight, we intended to report on efforts by the White House and the president himself to spin their way out of a claim the president made at a fundraiser last night about a face-to-face conversation he had last month with Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. And as convoluted as that already sounds, it gets, well, kind of stranger, because about an hour ago, the White House continued their damage control and said the face-to- face meeting that the president talks about was actually not face to face at all and was instead a phone call. That followed a respected Canadian journalist citing his sources in the prime minister's office saying they don't remember any such specific conversation actually taking place. Like I said, weird. But it's important to keep all that in mind as we talk about it because we don't really know who said what and when. We could be fact-checking a fund-raiser fairy tale of the president's own making. So, with that disclaimer, here's what the president said at the fundraiser last night about this alleged confrontation over trade with Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Trudeau came to see me, he's a good guy, Justin. He said no, no, we have no trade deficit with you. We have none. Donald, please. Nice guy, good looking guy, comes in Donald, we have no trade deficit. He's very proud because everybody else we're getting killed with our so he's proud. I said, wrong, Justin, you do. I didn't even know. Josh, I had no idea. I just said, you're wrong. You know why? Because we're so stupid. It's impossible. And I thought they were smart.
[Cooper:] So, the president saying I didn't even know I had no idea, but I just said you're wrong. In other words, he did not know the facts so he made them up. Keeping them honest, though, it's not like talking trade with the Canadian prime minister should have taken President Trump by surprise or frankly anything else. When President Obama and Prime Minister Trudeau met for the so-called bromance summit two years ago, they talked trade, Canadian dairy and exports to be specific. George W. Bush and his Canadian counterpart wrangled over timber exports. Virtually every president, every Canadian prime minister have at some point argued over one trade issue or another, that's because Canada is one of this country's biggest trading partners, and keeping them honest, it's also one of the few countries with which the United States has a trade surplus. Not only is that a fact, it's a fact the president himself put his signature to. Just a few weeks ago, this is the economic report of the president. It's 562 pages-long. The money quote as it were is on page 228. Figure five six illustrates the distribution of goods and services balances across major U.S. trading partners in 2016, all countries show a services surplus offsetting a goods deficit with U.S. running a net bilateral surplus only with Canada and the United Kingdom. And as we said on page 11, there is the president's signature. So, when he spoke with Prime Minister Trudeau he was apparently unaware of the facts inside the report that he himself signed only a few weeks before. Now, Justin Trudeau was right. The U.S. does not have a trade deficit with Canada, yet here's what the president tweeted this morning. We do have a trade deficit with Canada as we do with almost all countries, some of them massive. PM Justin Trudeau of Canada, a very good guy, doesn't like saying that Canada has a surplus versus the U.S. negotiating, but they do, they almost all do, and that's how I know. Again, the facts the president's own facts say no, but again, it's possible we're talking about the president defending statements he never actually made during conversation that never actually happened, despite him telling an audience it did. In any event, by this afternoon, Press Secretary Sara Sanders was fielding questions on this topic.
[Reporter:] Are there other times that the president has had conversations with his counterparts around the world in which he is not accurate in terms of the conversation that he's having with them?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Well, the president was accurate because there is a trade deficit and that was the point he was making, is that he didn't have to look at the specific figures because he knew that there was a trade deficit. Whether they got down into the dollar amount or not, there is a trade deficit between the two countries. I don't have that number right in front of me but I know that we have it. We'll be happy to provide it to you.
[Cooper:] Keeping them honest, that is not factually correct, full stop. As for Ms. Sanders, having the info and providing it, she later tweeted that there's a deficit in goods only, not overall trade. And, of course, when measuring surpluses or deficits, you count everything, especially if talking to another world leader and making it clear you're counting everything. But again, that is if conversation even actually took place as the president claimed. And since we're now fully in the weeds in a hall of mirrors and perhaps down a rabbit hole, it's worth noting something else that the president said last night when talking about trade talking about the difficulties selling American cars in Japan, he talked about one vehicle that had met all the requirements, except for one. Quoting the president here, he said: And they were ready to prove it approve it and they said, no, no, we have to do one more test he's talking about the Japanese. It's called the bowling ball test. Do you know what that is? The president then explained: that's where they take your bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air and they drop it on the hood of the car and if the hood dents, then the car doesn't qualify. You know where he's going with this, I think. Again, quoting: Well, guess what, the roof dented a little bit and they said, nope, this car doesn't qualify. It's horrible the way we're treated, it's horrible. And yes, it sounds horrible and horribly unfair dropping a bowling ball from 20 feet up onto the hood of a car. But keeping him honest, no one can actually figure out what the president was actually referring to. There is apparently no bowling ball bowling ball test. There are countless standards in Japan, here and elsewhere, on collisions, airbags, emissions pedestrian safety, you name it, nothing involving bowling balls and dented hoods. Here's how Sarah Sanders dealt with that fact.
[Sanders:] Obviously, he's joking about this particular test, but it illustrates the creative ways some countries are able to keep American goods out of their markets. Thanks so much, guys. See you tomorrow.
[Cooper:] She was reading that directly from a page you could tell. Who knows what tomorrow may bring? Tonight brings CNN chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour who's joining us. She's host of the aptly named "AMANPOUR". Christiane, what message does it send to world leaders because when I mean, it comes to relationships between the U.S. and its allies, don't those leaders believe what the president says especially when it's one of our closest allies, Canada?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Chief International Correspondent:] Well, look, it is it is actually very troubling because this seems to be part of the president's and the White House sort of feeling from the gut policy. You know, he said that many times, and it also is you know, really troubling because we do deal in facts and we deal in empirical evidence, and so should world leaders expect that when they have conversations with the president the United States or his advisors. They expect him to be fully briefed on major issues of trade as you just mentioned and the like. And, of course, as we move into potential, really hard negotiations, North Korea for instance, Iran, the decision as to whether to pull out of the nuclear deal, you know, you really have to know the facts in order to make the wisest decisions.
[Cooper:] Well, it's also one thing for the president to make up facts in some sort of negotiating discussion with you know, the Canadian prime minister. But then and it's a lie about the facts but then to go in front of an audience and talk about how you've lied to the Canadian prime minister just seems doubly odd.
[Amanpour:] Well, look, I mean, look, who knows? Who really knows why if you're not the person saying it? But it does sort of, you know, bring you again back to this situation that we seem to be living in, whether it's tweets, whether it's these kinds of conversations and recorded conversations and transcripts, we hear that the president has had conversations outside the range of cameras and the like, and it does sort of kind of summon up, conjure up an alternative universe. Whatever it is, it is a flouting of the norms and the rules of the road of competent, working governance, and that's the thing that's quite dangerous and quite mystifying because then you have the White House press spokesman, the communications director going out and having to repeat these things, because that's who she works for and she's going to repeat them. And as you notice, actually reading from a page on the last one. So, people around the world have kind of factored in the Trump factor and they say, you know what he says what he tweets we're just going to really focus on what he actually does, but it's getting more complicated as the issues become much, much more complicated and even on trade I mean, Anderson a couple of whenever it was ten days ago, he decided to slap huge percentage tariffs on steel and aluminum on who? On Canada, his closest ally, on South Korea, who he needs for the North Korea negotiations, on Europe and the others. The ones he's trying to hurt, China, barely sell any steel to the United States, some 2 percent. And then it's the next day, we have this unraveling of maybe what we won't put these tariffs on our allies. So, then you ask, well, who you're going to put them on? What's the point?
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Amanpour:] And it is this sort of rabbit hole and we're trying to figure out whether there's a coherent policy. But as I keep saying, you know, in this moment when Rex Tillerson has been fired for all his failings, the world and the allies are concerned about major issues of war and peace and nuclear proliferation and the like.
[Cooper:] Well, especially, I mean, it comes you know, as the U.S. is gearing up for this meeting with North Korea. So, if Kim Jong-un doesn't believe what President Trump is saying or South Korean allies don't, we're talking about the country's nuclear program, I mean, you know, those stakes could not be higher.
[Amanpour:] Well, precisely, I mean, you've got one episode which is that they just don't have all the officials to properly engage in this major negotiation, you know, they've got hundreds and hundreds of people should be engaged from the State Department, Treasury Department, Energy Department, to make this work. It's going to take a long time. But more to the point, it's not only if Kim Jong-on doesn't believe it, it's what might the president say to Kim Jong-un, giveaway, suggests that could be on the table. And by the way, where is Kim Jong-un's answer as yet to this invitation to a meeting?
[Cooper:] Yes.
[Amanpour:] So that all these unknowns and, by the way, what happens now that you have Mike Pompeo, more like-minded, who might be secretary of state after a confirmation process, who doesn't like the Iran deal, is much more close to Donald Trump and who's very hawkish on North Korea, you know, how do you navigate these very, very important and delicate and consequential international negotiations?
[Cooper:] Yes. Christiane Amanpour, thanks very much. Coming up now, what do you want to call it executive time or spending hours in front of the television, by most accounts the president spends a lot of time watching and tweeting about TV and the people who are on it, some of whom including himself, make it all the way to the White House. A closer look, coming up next.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] Now, the French leader sometimes called Trump whisper will put his skills to test on issues ranging from the Iran nuclear deal to the Paris climate accord, to the war in Syria, as well as U.S. tariffs on European steel and aluminum. We just got a glimpse of what President Macron might be trying to do, the mind games he might be trying to play with President Trump and his opening remarks. Our Kaitlan Collins at the White House, very interesting remarks from Macron, pointing out some differences between the two countries.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Reporter:] That's right, John. Pretty much sums up this entire state visit is going to be about. There is a lot of pomp, a lot of circumstance, a lot of talk about where these two leaders agree. Of course, they both brought up that joint air strike on Syria recently in response to that chemical attack, but then we're also seeing the differences between President Trump and President Macron as well. Of course, during his remarks, just now here a few minutes ago, on the south lawn, during this very certainly a lot of pomp and this arrival ceremony. President Macron was talking about nationalism and climate change, very against nationalism, of course, speaking about climate change saying that it is a real threat. Of course, those are two things he and President Trump do agree on. And that is really what the rest of today is going to be about. They just had this very big arrival ceremony, a lot to do going on, but now they're going to go into the Oval Office and into the cabinet room and have these bilateral meetings where they get down to business and they talk about the issues that they're here to discuss, John. Of course, on the agenda here is the Iran deal, President Macron is trying to convince President Trump to stay in that deal, something that seems incredibly like a long shot that he's going to be able to convince him to do so. But that as well as the steel tariffs of the president recently imposed. Of course, the Paris climate accords, is something they're going to be discussing as well. And then they're going to hold a joint press conference here later on today around lunch here at the White House in the East Room where they're going to take questions on those very issues. They're going to be asked what kind of agreement they came to, if they had any disagreements about that. And then later on tonight, they'll get back into the more traditional things that a company, a state visit a big state dinner here tonight, of course at the White House, where they're going to have about a hundred or so guests with them and the first ladies. That will be a lot of focus on first lady Melania Trump. But right now, John, they are going to be discussing the issues that they're here to discuss.
[Berman:] Kaitlan Collins at the White House for us. Kaitlan, thank you very much. Guys, Kaitlan noted there is a formal press conference scheduled for a couple of hours from now. But very shortly we will see the two leaders inside the Oval Office and sometimes President Trump can't help himself but answer questions from reporters. So we could get some very interesting exchanges just moments from now. In the meantime, just in to CNN, the confirmation hearing for President Trump's pick to be secretary of Veterans Affairs, the confirmation hearing has been delayed indefinitely. This, as lawmakers are looking to a series of allegations against Dr. Ronny Jackson, that involve, we're told, improper conduct and various stages of his career. Specifics about the allegations are not at all clear at this point. One Republican senator has called them devastating if true. Our Ryan Nobles live on Capitol Hill with where things stand. Ryan?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, right now things are on hold for Ronny Jackson and his confirmation hearing to become the next secretary of Veterans Affairs. We just heard from Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Jon Tester of Montana. They're the two ranking members on the Veterans Committee and they came out and told us that they're going to put this hearing on hold for now, so that they can take some time to look into these allegations against Jackson. And Johnny Isakson in particular is a Republican. He said that he doesn't necessarily believe some of these allegations that are coming out about a hostile workplace environment that Jackson perhaps presided over at different points in his career. There is also some talk about alcohol use and things of that nature. And Isakson said he wants Jackson to have the full opportunity to respond to some of these claims and he frankly believes that many of them are not true. Take a listen to what Jackson and Tester had to say just a few minutes ago.
[Sen. Johnny Isakson , Georgia:] We've had a good meeting. We're going to release in just a second a joint statement and a letter that we're sending out that will speak for me and I think for will speak for John. And we're going to have a hearing at some time in the future, but not Wednesday.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Why not Wednesday?
[Isakson:] We need some time to get some more information.
[Raju:] Are you concerned
[Isakson:] I'm concerned that the press is making up far too many stories that aren't true before we even get a chance to have a meeting. So, Mr. Jackson and myself are concerned. We need to take a deep breath, give the man a chance to be heard, let's give us a chance to ask questions that need to be asked. As a chairman, I'm going to see to it the information comes to my attention that ought to be vetted. It is vetted in the appropriate way and the appropriate order.
[Nobles:] So as you can hear there, Senator Isakson wants to hear about these allegations, but he made it clear in that conversation that he doesn't necessarily believe some of them. And he also said specifically that he does not want Jackson to withdraw his nomination. That could be in part because the White House has doubled down on their support for Ronny Jackson. Hogan Gidley, White House press secretary deputy press secretary, issuing this statement earlier this morning saying, quote, "Admiral Jackson has been on the front lines of deadly combat and saved the lives of many others in service to this country. He's served as the physician to three presidents, Republican and Democrat, and been praised by all of them. Admiral Jackson's record of strong, decisive leadership is exactly what's needed at the VA to ensure our veterans receive the benefits they deserve." So even though things look rocky for Ronny Jackson right now, it appears that the White House is not ready to back away from his nomination and it appears that Johnny Isakson, who's the senator that has the most in terms of influence as to whether or not this confirmation goes forward is going to give him the benefit of the doubt and give him a few days to explain his side of the story and if this hearing ever takes place, that's when we'll know whether or not Republicans in the Senate are prepared to push forward and ultimately confirm him to this post. But, John, he's got a long way to go at this point.
[Berman:] All right. Ryan Nobles on Capitol Hill, thank you very much. Joining me from Capitol Hill as well, Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland. Senator Cardin, thanks so much for being with us. We're just getting this news that the hearing for Dr. Jackson delayed indefinitely. Do you have any sense of what the specific concerns are about his record and resume?
[Sen. Ben Cardin , Foreign Relations Committee:] First, it is good to be with you. I think that information has come to light from the committee to the committee. They don't know whether that information is accurate or not. They want to be able to vet that information and have the nominee answer these questions. So I think that's a normal process during the vetting process. We know that President Trump doesn't always have the deepest vetting procedures before he makes the nomination. So it is a responsibility of the United States Senate to make sure that all nominees are properly vetted.
[Berman:] As far as we know, Dr. Jackson really hadn't been vetted at all. That's our reporting in this case. President Trump very much liked and admired the admiral, by the way, who was well liked within the Obama White House as well, not just by President Obama by the White House staff who looked to him often for medical advice. Yet you brought up the fact that things have come to light that have caused concern for some committee members. Do you know what these are and do they cause concern for you?
[Cardin:] No, I only know what has been reported about the conditions in the workplace. So I think we need to get the facts before we respond to it. But you're correct, not only was this nominee not vetted by President Trump, it is a nontraditional route to become the head of the veterans administration. So I think all that raises serious concerns that the Congressional nomination process really carries much greater weight.
[Berman:] Something very unusual happened in one of your committees overnight, the Foreign Relations, Foreign Affairs Committee and that was the committee did approve, did pass on the nomination of Mike Pompeo to become Secretary of State, but not without some drama. It required Chris Coons of Delaware to vote present because Republican Senator Johnny Isakson couldn't make it there. It is seen by many as an act of bipartisanship. I'm wondering if you can reflect on that moment overnight.
[Cardin:] I think it is an act of courtesy. Our committee does try to work in a bipartisan manner and I think the reputation of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is that we do that. But the circumstances were such that the majority of the committee supported Mr. Pompeo, I did not. And that nomination now is going to the floor of the United States Senate.
[Berman:] Where you will once again vote against it, sir, correct?
[Cardin:] That's correct. I believe our Secretary of State needs to be the top diplomat in our country, always recognizing that we should use diplomacy certainly before we use military. And Mr. Pompeo's record on Iran, the record in regard to the Paris climate talks, gives me grave concern as to whether he can carry out that responsibility.
[Berman:] On the subject of Iran, very much at the top of the meetings between the French Leader Emmanuel Macron and President Trump, we just watched the arrival of President Macron at the White House and their opening remarks and we do expect the French leader to push President Trump on the Iran deal to get the United States to stay in. Do you have any hopes that the French leader will be successful?
[Cardin:] You know, I've talked to representatives of France on this issue, they have been in my office, I've been to France, Paris, to talk in regards to the Iran agreements. I know how strongly they feel. But I also know how the president feels. I do hope at the end of the day that the United States is working with France and working with our European allies together in regard to Iran. We don't want to isolate the United States. Iran is the actor, the bad actor. They're the ones that we need to concentrate our attention to. They still do things that are unacceptable, particularly as it relates to supporting terrorism and human rights records. And I would hope that we could come to unity with France and other European allies as to how to deal with Iran, but not for the United States to be the one that violates the Iran nuclear agreement.
[Berman:] So you brought up the issue of support of terrorism there. There is also the issue of Iran conducting missile tests. Would you support could you support side deals on missile testing, side deals on support for terrorism or side deals on the sunset provisions for the nuclear deal, could you support those to try to keep the overall framework of the nuclear deal in place?
[Cardin:] Not only support taking action against Iran for their nonnuclear violations, Congress has authorized new sanctions that the president has not used to take action against Iran for its support of terrorism and its ballistic missile violation and its human rights violations. As it relates to the sunset, there is no sunset in Iran nuclear agreement on Iran's commitment to not become a nuclear weapons state. So it is right for the parties to this agreement and the international community to say, we want to make sure that you comply with the underlying agreement, even past sunset. That's acceptable. But for us to try to modify the agreement unilaterally, that I think is going too far.
[Berman:] And I think that's one of the issues that the French Leader Emmanuel Macron has as well. CNN reported overnight, senator. That President Trump has begun using his personal cell phone much more to communicate with friends and allies. Is there anything about this that concerns you?
[Cardin:] Donald Trump's the president of the United States. Everything he does is consequential. So when he decides to go out of the norm and do things that don't have the same protections using a personal cell phone, all that would have concern to me. He certainly is entitled to communicate. He's certainly entitled to use cell phones, but I would hope that he recognizes that when he uses when he communicates. He's communicating not as Donald Trump, but as the president of the United States.
[Berman:] Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, thank you so much for being with us this day.
[Cardin:] Thank you.
[Berman:] All right, coming up, sources telling CNN new information about the driver of the man who plowed that van into the sidewalk in Toronto. Stay with us.

[Dana Bash, Anchorwoman, Inside Politics:] Welcome to Inside Politics. I'm Dana Bash. John King is off. How do you move forward on an agenda with frustration and animosity between the president and the republican majority leader? The guy who's supposed to be his partner in the senate spilling into the public? As new CNN poll, we are releasing right now, shows republicans are turning on their own. Plus, the president is huddling today with national security advisors as Kim Jong-un puts Guam in his sights. Time to target, 17 minutes. Here to share the reporting is Carl Hulse of the New York Times, The Daily Beast's Jackie Kucinich, Jack Mason of Reuters, and Mary Katharine Ham of The Federalist. Marriages of convenience are bound to hit rough patches, right? Well, that's pretty much what's going on today between President Trump and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell except they are now arguing in public with a lot of people watching and it's causing quite a scene. The president is launching tweets at Senator McConnell once again this morning blaming him for failing to repeal and replace Obamacare and the president he's never been shy about blaming congress for his stalled agenda and now we see he's got some company. We have new numbers breaking right now from our new CNN poll that shows just how much Americans dislike congress. Only 20 percent in our new poll approve of the job congress is doing. As for the republican leadership, Senator McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, they are almost equally disliked. They get a thumbs up from only 24 percent of Americans. And that number is down from 39 percent in January, when it looked like there was a real chance the republican congress could deliver on that seven-year promise to repeal and replace Obamacare. Well, some say President Trump is starting a fight with Senator McConnell is not a good idea, but the president clearly disagrees, and this could be why. He knows his approval rating, even when it's hovering around historic lows, when compared with other presidents is still stronger than his counterparts on Capitol Hill. Again, only 24 percent of Americans approve of the job, the republican leadership is doing 38 percent approve of how President Trump is doing. So he is doing better there. And among republicans, Trump gets even stronger reviews. So the republican congress is getting mixed reviews from its own party. Republicans are split right down the middle. 44 percent say it's been a success so far. 44 percent view congress right now as a failure. And when it comes to why congress has failed, why no major legislation has made it to President Trump's desk, far more republicans blame congress than the president. 32 percent say disagreement among republicans is the reason why. And only eight percent fault a lack of leadership from President Trump. And the president's advisors routinely praise his political instincts and Trump's tweet this morning is in lock step, maybe, with how his party feels. He said, "Can you believe that Mitch McConnell, who has screamed Repeal & Replace for 7 years, couldn't get it done. Must Repeal & Replace ObamaCare!" Now, the genesis of the latest spat between the president and the senate majority leader is this.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell,  Majority Leader:] Our new president of course has been in this line of work before, and I think had excessive expectations about how quickly things happen in the democratic process. And so part of the reason I think people feel like we're under underperforming is because too many kind of artificial deadlines, unrelated to the reality of the complexity of legislating.
[Bash:] So, guys, thanks for coming in. And Carl Hulse, I want to start with you because we spend a lot of time roaming the halls of the Capitol and I know you know you can get inside of Mitch McConnell's head. Let's just start there.
[Carl Hulse, New York Times:] Well, I don't know if I want be there.
[Bash:] Well you know, why not? Better than better than most of us. He was in a comfortable setting there. He was at the rotary club and he just maybe said what he thought and what he was feeling inside of what he says in private, but I've talked to sources who are sort of familiar with him and close to the president who said, you know, maybe he shouldn't have started this because he did start it with that comment.
[Hulse:] I think one thing that he was trying to do was to discourage the administration from setting these deadlines, right? Because if you say you're going to do something by a certain point and then it doesn't happen because it never happens by a certain point in congress, then you're going to get beat up. Trump wants wins. I think that a couple of things are interesting. One, that he said McConnell has been screaming. I've never heard Mitch McConnell screams. So that was kind of funny. And, you know, Trump's base of support never really liked Mitch McConnell anyway, right? They say they see him as a big part of the problem but they have this huge month coming up. And I had a republican today describe this to me, it's like if FDR was undermining ike right before D-day, right? That this is the kind of problem that it can create. So, at the same time, though, I made one last point about this. The president just endorsed McConnell's candidate in Alabama, Luther Strange. So, on the one hand, he is beating him up, on the other hand, he is helping him out. I think, you know, Mitch McConnell's probably looking at this, shrugging a bit, but also saying, you know, we have to get pass these spats.
[Bash:] Exactly. Talking about spats, Jackie, I was told that, you know, that CNN reporter first of all, that the two men had an animated conversation by phone yesterday. I was told this morning that the president put in an initial call into Mitch McConnell and then when McConnell called the president back the president took the call and had that animated conversation with him from the golf course. I guess that's a whole new version of teeing off, right?
[Jackie Kucinich, The Daily Beast:] Right.
[Bash:] I'll be here all day. I'll be here today.
[Jeff Mason, Reuters:] Doesn't like to confirm that he is playing golf.
[Bash:] Well, there is that. Well, that was already he was already added because of Instagram pictures. But, I mean, you know, again, intense conversations between a president and a leader, that's, like, you know, no big deal, but it's the fact that the president keeps going after the senate majority leader on Twitter. Last night and this morning, that's where it becomes a problem.
[Kucinich:] But that's what this president does. The problem is, Mitch McConnell's not really going to be bullied and this is actually kind of cutting off your nose to spite your face because he's going to need Mitch McConnell going forward. He can be angry at about Obamacare and you know what, he probably has a point. Republicans should have had something in place and ready because they've talking about it. I mean, Mitch McConnell, root and branch. You heard him say it over and over and over again in successive elections. That said, on tax reform, on infrastructure, on a whole host of other things that this president has identified as his priorities. He's going to need buy-in. And, you know, we saw it with Lisa Murkowski, with Susan Collins. When he kept on going after these senators, it doesn't it doesn't get him anywhere. There's that old adage, you attract more flies with honeys than vinegar. Well, he's putting vinegar on all over this relationship with Mitch McConnell at this point and it's going to come back to bite him.
[Bash:] Well, you mentioned that Senator Lisa Murkowski, our colleague Manu Raju has reporting today that the conversation that the president had with Lisa Murkowski as they were trying to get the votes for health care was so bad that it really helped to turn her off. And, in fact, I had a conversation with Senator Murkowski last week where she kind of alluded to it. Let's listen. Did you feel that he was trying to intimidate you?
[Sen. Lisa Murkowski,  Alaska:] I will just say that the president and I had a very direct call.
[Mason:] Direct. And usually code word for not a very good one.
[Bash:] Right. And I mean, so, look. You cover this White House every day. This is not a new phenomenon for this president to be very direct if we keep the diplo speak going here. And he did so on Twitter as well, but are there are there lessons learned? I mean, maybe I'm answering my own question. The answer is, no because he's still going after Mitch McConnell. The president doesn't really feel like he has anything to lose and our new poll shows that.
[Mason:] I don't think he does feel like he has anything to lose and I think it's just completely consistent with his style. Whether it's somebody he needs, whether it's somebody he doesn't need. If he feels like they haven't produced what he is looking for or feels like they've offended him in some way or in some general way has not done what he wanted, he's going to go after them and does it on Twitter. He does it in speeches. He does it in any sort of platform that he has, particularly, in social media.
[Bash:] Well, you know, Carl, you mentioned that there is a special election going on for the senate seat to replace Jeff Sessions in Alabama. And there is an inter I mean, sort of the republican fight for where they are is playing out in Alabama. You mentioned that the president endorsed the establishment figure, Lucer Luther Strange earlier this week, and on conservative radio that is not going over very well. I want you to listen to what Mark Levin said the other day.
[Mark Levin, The Mark Levin Show:] The president of the United States did something yesterday which was a stab in the back to every conservative in this country. He can't say he's an outsider when he just undermined every conservative in the state of Alabama and every conservative in this country by endorsing the worst candidate possible and empowering further Mitch McConnell, Karl Rove and this guy, Jeff Roe. Now I don't know how we're going to get change in this country when, Mr. Change is not Mr. Change. These elections have consequences. I think what he did yesterday was outrageous, absolutely outrageous. And I don't think many of you are going to forget about it.
[Mary Katharine Ham, The Federalist:] Well, this is the big like, this is the red line, the change line and that's what we see in some of his polling when people start losing fate that he can be an agent of change and I think he gets in real trouble because he wasn't elected for the other reasons, for the credibility and all these other things that people sort of gave him a pass on. I think the timeline here suggests perhaps the tweeting as a response to the grumbling on conservative radio, and there's some, in the past and the past weeks with the session and sort of travelled and where he backed off of that because there was a lot of anger in conservative circles as well. So perhaps that what's going on? But look, with this White House, with Trump himself, everything is a fight and every fight is public. So I think the idea that you're going to get a bunch of stuff done in congress because you stop having spats is like, that ship sailed. You have to get stuff down while you're having these spats and I think that's one thing that's interesting to me is why does McConnell, a little bit, poke the bear in a really not a big deal kind of way but you know who you're dealing with and then that starts this pattern.
[Bash:] And before we go to break, I just want to get your take on this. The president kind of has a point, right? I mean, the republicans in congress have been promising this for seven years. And this guy, just won the White House and should he not have expected these republicans in congress to be ready to go, to put this repeal and replace bill on the floor and move it through congress in a way that could actually pass among republicans?
[Hulse:] Yes, I think that from what I heard the White House was really seething over this. You know, here is Mitch McConnell, he couldn't deliver this, he's got the majority, and where was the plan? You promised you were going to do it. Yes, I think that the president is feeling let down by these guys. You know, it's an interesting point, just the whole, I said, you know, people used to go home at recess and they talk to their rotary and no one would know what they're saying, right? But now every comment is covered and I don't know that Mitch expected it to reverberate so quickly here in Washington, but he is, you know, he's got the president riled up.
[Bash:] They got they've got...
[Mason:] Mitch McConnell had a point, too, right? I mean, President Trump as a candidate said that Obamacare would be repealed and replaced on day one and Senator McConnell saying these were unrealistic deadlines and that is a product of not having...
[Bash:] That is true. OK, guys, we have we have to go to break, we have a lot more to discuss but as we do, I just want to remind President Trump, 38 percent in CNN's new poll republican leaders, 24 percent tells you a lot. There you see it again. Up next, the White House says President Trump is not backing down from his fire and fury threat and the threats from North Korea keep coming and they're getting more specific.

[Allen:] Welcome back. The Pentagon confirms a U.S. raid killed the leader of ISIS'Afghanistan affiliate Tuesday. A drone strike hit ISIS Khorasan headquarters in Kunar province to the east of Kabul. U.S. commanders had promised to drive the terror group out of the country by the end of this year. Two German women were killed in a knife attack Friday on a beach in Egypt on the country's Red Sea coast. Four other tourists were wounded. Investigators believe the assailant swam from a public beach to a beach resort area and attacked six women who were there. Turkey is marking a major anniversary. It has been one year since a failed coup attempt to topple Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. A state of emergency is still in effect and so is a government crackdown. There are reports that more than 7,000 police, academics and civil servants have just been dismissed. Here is what Mr. Erdogan said about the purge.
[Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Of Turkey:] They are asking how many people are dismissed from work, how their needs will be met from now on. Let them work in the private sector. Why should we care? Will we think about them? Let them work in the private sector. Will the state look after them? The state looked after them and they betrayed the state.
[Allen:] Events to mark the anniversary are planned for the coming hours. A national unity march is set for later in Istanbul, despite the country's political division. CNN's Gul Tuysuz has this report on a mother who defied soldiers during the coup.
[Gul Tuysuz, Cnn Correspondent:] Few people knew Sophia Bayat before this moment. She led a seemingly quiet and simple life. But this conservative mother of two surprised even herself. During the coup attempt last year when she stood up to tanks and soldiers, she said she made a split-second decision that night when she turned on the TV, that she would go out to confront the soldiers trying to topple the government of Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. She says, as a woman, she thought she might be able to stop the soldiers and appeal to their conscience. "But they only had anger and violence in return," she tells us. She says when she wouldn't leave, they threatened to shoot her. "I told them I wasn't afraid of them," she says. "They roughed me up but I kept saying, "I am not afraid," and that they could shoot me if they wanted to." When soldiers begin firing on the crowd, Bayat says she was shot in the leg while trying to carry away the wounded. A strong supporter of Turkey's president, Bayat is glad to see those who she believes are responsible for the coup behind bars. And while many in Turkey are united behind Turkey's president, for others, the post-coup Turkey has become an intolerably oppressive place.
[Tuysuz:] Since the coup attempt, the government has declared a state of emergency. More than 100,000 people have been detained or arrested. Tens of thousands of workers, including civil servants, teachers and journalists have been dismissed from their jobs. Critics of the government say that the post-coup crackdown has turned into a cleansing of all voices of dissent, with both the coup and the crackdown leaving scars on an already fractured nation Gul Tuysuz, CNN, Istanbul.
[Allen:] The body of Liu Xiaobo has been cremated at a private ceremony in China. The Chinese Nobel Peace Prize winner died Thursday from multiple organ failure after having cancer. He had been serving an 11-year sentence for what China ruled was inciting subversion of state power. And although he was allowed to go to hospital, he remained in custody. The human rights proponent was 61. His case was condemned internationally. In Hong Kong, hundreds of people protested against the high court's decision to disqualify four lawmakers from their post for failing to take their oaths properly. Protesters worry the court's decision gives Beijing's pro-government allies more power, violating the governing principle of one country, two systems. Breaking news from Tehran, where Iranian media is reporting that police have shot and killed a subway attacker. Three people were reportedly injured. We'll bring you more information on this as it becomes available. Well, dramatic video out of Southern China as a dashcam captures a landslide that buried cars. And Derek Van Dam is here. Is this the area where so many people have been evacuated?
[Derek Van Dam, Ams Meteorologist:] Yes, it continues and it is in the southern sections of China. This landslide was triggered by extremely heavy rainfall in a short period of time. Check out this heart-stopping moment. We've got the footage here to show you. Several vehicles, including a truck, being violently swept away by the force of this mud flow. Look at the replay here again. You see how much force is behind it. Eight vehicles in total were caught in the landslide; 16 drivers and passengers affected. One was actually left trapped inside his car, Natalie, but the rest managed to escape through the windows of their vehicles. Firefighters were sent to the scene and rescued the trapped man immediately.
[Allen:] Depending on whom you ask, it is either the biggest boxing match in years or a total farce. Whatever you think of the fight, Floyd Mayweather versus Conor McGregor has at least one thing going for it: a borderline dangerous dose of swagger. Our Nick Glass is following their promotional roadshow.
[Unidentified Male:] Here they are, ladies and gentlemen!
[Nick Glass, Cnn Correspondent:] They've been jabbering away like parrots all week. A face-off is what they like to call it. And after four different venues, began to seem a little bit repetitious though, sartorially, they did ring the changes a bit. Mayweather, on the left, got higher heels so he could face off with McGregor eye-to-eye and they traded racial and sexual insults and just a few profanities.
[Floyd Mayweather, Boxer:] I don't give a
[Conor Mcgregor, Mixed Martial Artist And Boxer:] He's in a
[Glass:] Some of the time you couldn't hear what they were saying precisely, which is probably as well. This is sport as show biz, fighters strutting their stuff, choreographed, if not scripted. Conor McGregor swaggered through it all in his own sort of simian way or was introduced first. He's never boxed professionally in his life but he knows how to promote himself.
[Mcgregor:] How's this suit look? It says
[Glass:] For his first appearance he wore a bespoke suit with a two-word expletive beginning with F and ending with you sewn down the pinstripe.
[Stephen Espinoza, Evp, Showtime Sports:] This event is sort of like a summer blockbuster movie. This is "Transformers," you know. It is fun, it is you know, it is mass market.
[Glass:] But is it sport? Well, I think, you know, when we get into the ring, I think there will be no doubt. Simply, this is all about the Benjamins, as they say, mainly the money. McGregor seemed like the kid who just won a Willie Wonka golden ticket.
[Mcgregor:] That's what I like! All y'all doing is putting money in my account. Baby, we did it!
[Glass:] Do you enjoy the promotional round?
[Mayweather:] It's grueling. It's rough. Different countries, different cities. It is rough but
[Glass:] Tougher than the fight?
[Mayweather:] No, no.
[Glass:] More competitive than the fight?
[Mayweather:] No, no.
[Glass:] More interesting than the fight?
[Mayweather:] But this is what I signed up for.
[Glass:] The bookmakers and most boxing experts make Mayweather a heavy odds-on favorite. The fight is entirely on his terms. In a boxing ring, using 10-ounce boxing gloves rather than the four-ounce more concussive martial arts gloves that McGregor usually fights with. Isn't this fight a foregone conclusion?
[Gareth Davies, "daily Telegraph":] On paper, Floyd Mayweather is an alarming favorite. This is one of the greatest mismatches in a big fight we will ever see. Yet, there's this X factor about this Irishman. He's got something about him, where he seems to make the impossible possible.
[Mayweather:] I'm 40 but I look 20.
[Mcgregor:] And you act 10.
[Mayweather:] Yes.
[Glass:] If nothing else, McGregor was the clear winner of this week's promotional circus, verbally quicker, wittier and brimming with self-belief. Both men are expecting to make fortunes out of the fight. Mayweather is talking a nice round $300 million for himself.
[Davies:] David fought Goliath, remember, all of those many centuries ago and that would have been on Pay-Per-View as well and would have done big numbers.
[Glass:] Nick Glass, CNN, on the road with Floyd Mayweather and Conor McGregor.
[Allen:] Well, please allow us a little self-promotion, just a little smidge of it. On Monday in a CNN exclusive, the Duchess of Cornwall: we'll show you the different sides of Camilla, known as the friendliest member of the royal family and she has a cordial relationship with the news media. In a rare interview, she talks with CNN's Max Foster about how she is helping victims of domestic violence.
[Camilla, Duchess Of Cornwall:] I think we can talk. It was such a taboo subject. But I think we can talk about it now. And if I can talk about it and bang the drum a bit, so can a lot of other people. So that's what I'm trying to do to help.
[Allen:] Often seen but rarely heard, more of our chat with the Duchess of Cornwall, as we follow her only on CNN. Finally, people can get into all sorts of trouble trying to take that perfect selfie like this woman in Los Angeles. She accidentally leaned against a row of art displays and watch what happens. The art tumbles like dominoes, causing about $200,000 in damage. And don't even know if she got to post her selfie. That's CNN NEWSROOM. I'm right back with the headlines.

[Richard Quest, Cnn:] Good evening, it is 10:00 at night in Barcelona. The site of a terror attack that took place just five hours ago. The Catalan president says 12 people are dead in an attack in the heart of the tourist district. Eighty people are in hospital, many of them believed to have critical injuries. And moments ago, the ISIS media wing Amaq claimed the perpetrators were soldiers of the Islamic State. We can't confirm this yet. This is just reporting that was being said at the moment, so what actually happened? Well, the van started down the Las Ramblas at high-speed. Disturbing video of the scene of the attack shows pedestrians running for safety in shops. And then I warn you, these are disturbing pictures. Wounded people laying on the ground. The Catalan police say two people have been arrested. The government activated its chair protocols and held crisis meetings that ended a short time ago. Another development to bring you, moments ago a vehicle struck two policemen at a checkpoint in another part of Barcelona. The police had restricted traffic leaving the city. Officials say the officers have only minor injuries and they're not requiring hospital treatment. Rylee Carlson is tracking all developments for us and joins me now. The first thing to establish the scale of the carnage on the Ramblas, I mean do we have an idea how great it has been?
[Rylee Carlson, Reporter:] Well part of understanding that, Richard, is also just understanding the scale of the Ramblas. This is a massive pedestrian way in Barcelona. The beating heart of the city. Very much like the Champs-Elysees in Paris. It's full of bars. It's full of cafes. Full of stores. And on any evening in August, it would have been packed with people. Now we know as you mentioned, 12 people have been killed in this attack. That's the death toll so far, 80 people at least have been injured. That's a very large number. And we know that at least 15 of those people are seriously injured. There are still concerns here that the death toll could rise as well. Police have opened a terrorism investigation. They say that is what they are operating on at the moment. And now as you mentioned, we've also heard claims from the ISIS affiliated news agency. That they say soldiers of the Islamic Caliphate carried out the attack.
[Quest:] Let me the second incident of two police officers being run over. Related? Do we know, are these the two people who are said to have been trying to get to a getaway car after the attack on the Ramblas?
[Carlson:] Well we're still trying to figure out and confirm at this point exactly if that apparent attack on these two police officers is related to what happened on the Ramblas. We know this happened in a town just outside Barcelona. Two Catalonian police officers were hit. We also know how and we can report that the police officers hit by the car have minor injuries and they will not need to be hospitalized. So that is good news from that. But we don't know at this point who the suspects were in that attack or if they are connected to what happened on the Ramblas, Richard?
[Quest:] At the moment it's not clear whether the perpetrators of this heinous attack are still at large?
[Carlson:] Exactly. And that's what's very difficult for investigators in the aftermath of this kind of attack. When there are so many people and the chaos can be so great. As people are running everywhere. People are trying to get away. And it could be conceivably quite easy for somebody to slip away into the crowd. So, we know that two people are arrested, the first person that was arrested is believed to be connected to the van. But we don't know at this point how he might be connected.
[Quest:] Rylee, we'll come back to you, when you have more report come back to us immediately. And will take you straight to air. Spain hadn't seen this type of truck and van attacks that have hit Nice, Berlin, London and Stockholm. But as Rylee was saying and is worth pointing out this is the area that we are talking about. Anybody who has been to Barcelona is well familiar with the Ramblas. It is the heart of the tourist section. It is the intersection, and this car came down the Ramblas, getting as far perhaps as the opera. Why is this so significant? The van starts at the Playa Catalonia and it's a major transit hub. That's the other thing whether you're visiting the Cathedral or going to the La Boqueria market or the Opera or going to the Gothic quarter itself. It doesn't really matter. At some point all roads, all transportation ends up going through Playa Catalunya. Now all services have been shut down. It's important to mention that all major events have been canceled. As you can see. Hotels are taking in stranded visitors at the same time. So, the death toll, the number of people dead, the number of people dead started at 13. Then it was reduced to 12. Now back up to 13. Joining me now is Peter Newman, the director of the international center for the study of radicalization and political violence. Thank you, sir. You are in London. Let's talk to you about this claim. I won't say claim of responsibility. But it's an ISIS agency, ISIS site, Amaq, that said it was Islamic State who did this even though it may not have been from the top.
[Peter Newman, Director, The International Center For The Study Of Radicalization And Political Violence:] Yes, and the claim itself is credible. It is authentic, it was disseminated in the right forums on the Internet. The question is what connection, what link exists between ISIS and these attackers? Were they fully signed up members of ISIS? Were they directed by ISIS? Or were they simply inspired by ISIS? In all of these cases, ISIS would claim responsibility, which doesn't necessarily however, mean that ISIS actually directed the attack.
[Quest:] It's interesting, but I question the significance in that sense, you know, you've got 12 people dead on the streets, 13 people dead and possibly more will die on the streets of Barcelona. Does it make a difference if it's inspired, activated or directed?
[Newman:] It makes a difference because it would tell the police for example, whether networks that exist in Barcelona are actually connected to these attacks. Whether for example this means that other people knew about it. And that perhaps other people involved in these networks are planning further attacks. It does make a difference to know whether this is connected to ISIS or whether this is a lone attacker who was simply inspired from the incident.
[Quest:] Let's go through the sort of attacks we've seen. Nice, height of the tourist season. Berlin, was at Christmas. London, hitting the major areas of Westminster Bridge and the like. Now we come to Barcelona with the Ramblas. I'm sure you're familiar with the area. One can't think of a worse area for the sheer number of tourists that would make this sort of attack so dreadful.
[Newman:] Absolutely. If anything, it demonstrates what terrorism is all about. It's about inspiring terror. It's about creating the sensation in the minds of the people that this could have been me. If you or I look at these pictures, were thinking about the times that we have been to Barcelona. We've all been on the street and we're all thinking, this might have been us. I know exactly where this was. This is exactly what terrorism is about. It's about killing a few people, but creating the sensation of terror in a whole society.
[Quest:] Many of us. Myself certainly included are getting texts and e- mails from friends saying they were in Barcelona, yesterday or the day before or they still have friends in Barcelona at the moment. So, suppose the impossible question for you, Sir, how safe is anywhere? Such as a major tourist destination at the height of the European summer season?
[Newman:] I think, I still do believe, in statistics. And I think even as someone who studies terrorism, who looks at this day in day out that statistically speaking the risk of being killed in a terrorist attack is still tiny, tiny, tiny. I would not hesitate going into any crowded space anywhere in Europe. But of course, these attacks are, half the purpose of creating the impression in your minds, that it could happen anywhere. Any time. I think if we allow ourselves to be too scared and are hiding away, we are kind of allowing terrorists to win.
[Quest:] Valid point. Thank you, sir for joining us. Don't go too far away. We may be needing more from you in a short while. Sara Canals joins me on the line. She's a reporter for 8TV in Barcelona. Sara, can you hear me, it is Richard Quest in New York.
[Sara Canals, Reporter, 8tv:] I can hear you, good evening, Richard. How are you?
[Quest:] Good evening, Sara. I need to tell you me where you are, and what you're seeing.
[Canals:] Right now, I'm at the beginning of Las Ramblas, right away in the street of Las Ramblas, in Placa de Catalonia. In this intersection, where the terrorist attack started. So, I'm here, at the beginning of Las Ramblas right now.
[Quest:] I'm looking at a map as I am talking to you. We see the direction that the car went. What is the scene tonight? How much can you see? What can you tell us of what is there now?
[Canals:] I'm here for the last three or four hours, streets are empty. Police are everywhere. Still checking the streets, there has been about 100 people confined inside, several bars and restaurants around Las Ramblas. So right now, about an hour ago, the police started to take people away from this place. So, that's what I've been seeing for the last hour. Groups of people from 10 to 20 and going out from these places. Being surrounded by police and being assisted here in the Plaza Catalonia. Where there's a lot of dozens and dozens of cars, police cars. So that's the situation right now. People are pretty's shocked. People are, there silent. There's shock. People a few people want to talk to us, people are really emotional right now. Shocked. So that's the mood.
[Quest:] When this happened, five hours ago, just over five hours ago, the car entered the Ramblas from the Placa de Catalonia, and it carried straight down. It must have been the most horrific moment for the tens of thousands of tourists, thousands. Who would have been enjoying a beautiful summer evening in August.
[Canals:] Sure, and actually Las Ramblas, you said it's a tourist spot. There's always tourist walking around Las Ramblas. But also, a lot of people here, people who have their bars, Catalunya. So, at the moment of the attack I was in the newsroom. We heard about, we heard about. We saw some videos on twitter and we right away went to the area. But we couldn't believe it. We were also shocked. Because Las Ramblas, it's never empty. There's a lot of tourists. There is a lot of people. So, it was pretty shocking.
[Quest:] How tonight, tonight and I know you say that the people that you've seen and the people you're speaking to, they are, there shocked. Is there a feeling, is there a feeling of fear in Barcelona tonight?
[Canals:] Of fear?
[Quest:] Yes,
[Canals:] Yes. Yes, it is. Because actually we still don't know what happened, exactly. For several hours, there was a local media reporting on an attacker being inside a bar. And holding hostages. But later, you know, police said it was not true. So, there's a lot of questions about the attack and people. People are scared. We still don't know what's going on. There is a helicopter, I don't know if you guys hear it. There's helicopters flying and checking the area. We cannot move from here right now. And we don't know what's going on. Police have been delivering information, but they still are sending a message of caution. People should stay home. People should or people who are leaving the restaurants where they were, they should go straight home. So, yes. There is fear in the atmosphere.
[Quest:] Sara Canals, a reporter joining us from ATV in Barcelona. Thank you, Sara and obviously when there's more to report, will come back to you. Thank you, we appreciate it, we know you've got your busy duties for your own station. Allow we just to recap as you look as you look at these pictures from Barcelona tonight where it is 10:15 at night. It's now known that 13 people have died in a van attack in the Spanish city of Barcelona, 80 people are in hospital. There have been two suspects arrested. In a separate incident, perhaps related, we don't know to policeman were run over. We're not sure whether the suspects arrested are related to that incident. But as you can tell from the pictures coming to us tonight live from Spain, second largest city. And the capital Catalunya, it is one of those days when once again, Europe is under terror attack.

[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn News Stream Show:] You're watching "News Stream." These are your world headlines. Russia and China reacting to a landmark national security speech by U.S. President Donald Trump, one in which he touted America first and called Russia and China rival powers. Russia has blasted the plan as imperial, while China is urging the U.S. to abandon its "outdated cold war mentally and zero-sum game." A plane carrying African migrants in Libya has landed in Paris. It's part of a new program to move the most vulnerable refugees to Europe. The group of 25 was freeze freed in Niger. The safe passage flight follows CNN's reporting on modern slave markets in Libya. Fans around the world are remembering K-pop star Kim Jong-hyun. The lead singer of Shinee died Monday in an apparent suicide. His sister called the police after reportedly receiving troubling text messages that read, please let me go, and final farewell. The White House is blaming North Korea for one of the year's biggest cyber attacks. The "WannaCry" malware plagued computers around the world earlier this year including critical banking and hospital networks. CNN's Samuel Burke joins me now from London with more on the story. Samuel, the White House says North Korea is behind it and it is not the only one who has pointed the finger at Pyongyang.
[Samuel Burke, Cnn Business And Technology News Correspondent:] Not just the United States back in June. U.K. security forces told me that they had concluded the U.K. government that North Korea was behind the attack and there are also private security firms like Symantec, though important to note while they've concluded that it was the Lazarus Group, which many have linked to North Korea, they're not certain that they're actually North Koreans. Even if they're doing the work of the North Koreans, they say there are linguistic footprints left behind that make them believe that they are Chinese, but other investigators have not been able to conclude the same thing. And also important to note that Microsoft has concluded that it was North Korea behind this attack. What's interesting about Microsoft and the fact that the United States government is now saying that they believe that North Korea is behind it is that every security expert whom I've spoken to, Kristie, they told me that they believe that what happened here was whatever hacking group did this, they were able to exploit a vulnerability in windows that was able to be exploited because of code that was leaked from the NSA. So, here, the United States government is pointing the finger, though not talking about some of the responsibility that they may have indirectly had. What is amazing about this hack to me still is that something happened in the cyber world that affected us in the physical world, especially here in U.K., the national health care system hospitals affected to the point that they had to cancel outpatient procedures and appointments.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, I mean, it hit at least 150 countries, hundreds of thousands of computers around the world. I remember when the story broke, we had to raced you in the program talking about it. "WannaCry" is ransomware. It holds computers ransom by refusing to unlock unless you pay a fee. And the "WannaCry" ransom was demanded in bitcoin. That's turned into quite an upside for the hackers, hasn't it?
[Burke:] They wouldn't accept dollars. They wouldn't accept pounds. At the time, it was $300 worth of bitcoin. So let's say it is the North Koreans, if the United States government is correct, that $300 worth of bitcoin has risen 955 percent, so that very same bitcoin they would be holding for each of the ransoms would be worth at a minimum $2,865 today. We talked a lot about North Korea's nuclear potential, but here their digital arms seemed to be quite strong and they affects trading as well, an incredible investment, if you look at it that way.
[Lu Stout:] Yes, absolutely, just times that to what, 230,000 computers that were infected back in the day, that's a lot of bitcoin. There we go. Samuel Burke, thank you for your reporting. Take care. Now, the governor of Puerto Rico has ordered the review of the number of people killed when Hurricane Maria hit. The death toll currently stands officially at 64, but CNN investigation found it to be much higher. Leyla Santiago has more.
[Leyla Santiago, Cnn Correspondent:] A change in tone coming from the government of Puerto Rico. The governor saying that he wants a thorough review of the deaths related to Hurricane Maria. Why the change? Well, it is because the government has stood by those numbers all along. Right now the death toll stands at 64, but when we investigated, we found that they could be much higher. We called 279 funeral homes and funeral directors reported 499 deaths that could be related to Hurricane Maria. And when we recently took a look at the number of deaths reported from the government itself, we found a spike in the number of deaths after Hurrican Maria, a significant spike compared to last year and the year before. And, of course, there are#e the cases we presented to the government, cases we thought could fall under certified death. The case of Jose Pepe Sanchez, a gentleman who died during Hurricane Maria, called 911. The family called 911 and was not able to get help. After our investigation, the government added Pepe's death to the certified count and his family is now expected to get extra help to cover funeral expenses. As many questions surround the certified deaths, Puerto Rico as an island is still struggling with power. The government says 69 percent generation when it comes to power, but many municipalities that we have spoken say distribution of power is much, much less. Leyla Santiago, CNN, Mexico City.
[Lu Stout:] The 2018 Pyeongchang winter games are drawing near and security is a major concern. So, U.S. and South Korean marines are running drills for pair with a bit short list hand-to-hand combat in the snow. Paula Hancocks has more.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] In the mountains of Pyeongchang where the Winter Olympics will be held in just a little less than two months, right now what we are seeing is a military drill between the U.S. and South Korean marines, 220 on each side in these mountains, trying to hone their combat skills in sub-zero temperatures for this winter military drill and it gets cold here. It can get as cold as minus 20 degrees Celsius, that is minus four degrees Fahrenheit. Officially, we are told there is no specific enemy in mind for these drills. North Korea is 50 miles, 80 kilometers away from here. So clearly it's not a stretch to imagine that could be one scenario that they are preparing for. Even though this is an annual drill, the Americans have been involved since 2013. That is definitely an added edge here this year, an added significance. And then there is this. Clearly, they're working on their hand-to-hand combat there. Wrestling skills. It's not 100 percent clear though why they have to take their tops off in order to do that. But bear in mind, it is incredibly cold here. I am struggling to string a sentence together so you have to have some respect for what they're doing here. North Korea, they clearly doesn't have respect for this day in the past. They have called this particular military drill "madcap" and any kind of drills between the U.S. and South Korea will annoy Pyongyang. Spectators, athletes, media from across the globe will be coming here to Pyeongchang in early February. And authorities say they just want to make sure that they have prepared for every eventuality. The Korean marines we saw here today will be part of the security detail for the games. Paula Hancocks, CNN, Pyeongchang, South Korea.
[Lu Stout:] They're ready. You're watching "News Stream." Coming up, the man who is now carrying the hopes of many in South Africa on his shoulders. Stay with us to meet the new leader of the African National Congress.

[Whitfield:] All right, welcome back. We're continuing to follow the shakeup in President Trump's communications team. Sean Spicer is out as press secretary, and there's a new communications director, Anthony Scaramucci. We did not immediately hear from Spicer about his resignation, but he did appear on FOX News last night. Here's what he had to say about his departure.
[Sean Hannity, Fox News:] You started sharing the podium with Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Anthony Scaramucci comes in. Did you feel in any way this was against you, did you feel you were pushed out in any way, or this was just totally your decision?
[Sean Spicer, Former White House Press Secretary:] No. As you mentioned, the president obviously wanted to add to the team more than anything. I just think it was in the best interest of our communications department, of our press organization to not have too many cooks in the kitchen.
[Whitfield:] Joining me right now Alice Stewart, former communications director for Ted Cruz back with us. Good to see you. She's also a CNN political commentator and Republican strategist.
[Alice Stewart, Cnn Political Commentator:] Hi, Fred.
[Whitfield:] So as a former communications director yourself, what has been your reaction to the shakeup within the communications team?
[Stewart:] Fred, I think we all realized this day was going to happen and it was just a matter of time before there was some shakeup or transition within the White House and specifically the communications team. I think Sean did a stellar job with regard to defending the president and getting the president's message out there. But the president clearly wants someone like Scaramucci who will fully support the president, as we heard many times yesterday. He loves the president. He's very energetic. He's clearly someone that looks the part. And the president trusts him to do the job moving forward of communicating the message that the White House wants to communicate. The one thing I question is whether or not he is going to serve more as a spokesperson role in addition to Sarah, who's done a phenomenal job, but we also need someone there as a communications director who works on the short and long term strategy, working with the policy team, working with the DOJ, working with the various aspects of the White House and the administration to look at their strategy and how they're going to further their legislative accomplishments, and daily and weekly and monthly laying out the communications strategy. That's something that's so critical. And a key of communications is to plan your work and work your plan. And hopefully Scaramucci will take on that role in addition to what he did yesterday speaking so supportively of the president.
[Whitfield:] So even though Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the press secretary and, you know, spokesperson you're going to see from the briefing room, you see potentially their roles will be interchangeable, that Scaramucci might be taking to the podium just as he did yesterday fairly regularly? It remains to be seen. Look, as I said, Sarah's done a phenomenal job. Clearly the new communications director is comfortable in that role. He clearly has rapport and relationships with the White House press corps. And he's done a great job on many of the talk shows. And this is someone as we've seen reports this morning that the president was really pleased with his performance at the briefing yesterday. And that's critical. At the end of the day those in the comm shop are working for and addressing and answering to an audience of one, which is the president of the United States. And Scaramucci did that yesterday, made some great brownie points with his boss. And that's important. And not only showing support for what the president does but defending his what he says on Twitter, what he says out there on television and in interviews, that is a key component of the communications job. So the relationship between, you know, the press secretary and the press corps there, I mean, words have been used like contentious and tenuous. Do you see that it may be less so or more so in the days ahead?
[Stewart:] That also remains to be seen. Look, oftentimes what happens with this president, he did a phenomenal job throughout the campaign in the general and in the primary of using social media, using Twitter in order to get his message out there and in many ways bypass the media.
[Whitfield:] Sorry to interrupt, but already we've seen Scaramucci do the same thing with tweets. He tweeted out today saying that all the full transparency, here it is, I'm deleting old tweets, past views, evolved and shouldn't be a distraction. I serve the president of the United States agenda and that's all that matters. So both in concert the president and Scaramucci saying there's a power in a tweet.
[Stewart:] And that was important for him to do that simply because as he deleted those tweets reporters would have found out about that and made a story of it. But it was important for him to be transparent as to why he did what he did. And sure people's views evolve. But while we're on the subject of Twitter, today alone the president has tweeted 11 times, and six of them have been on the Russia investigation. And that is something that the comm shop, I think it's critical for them if in any way, shape or form they can scale back the president being off message, because this week we were to be talking about made in America and working to repeal and replace Obamacare. Today he gave a phenomenal but speech at the commissioning of the USS Gerald Ford as we covered it live. Those are the great things that they should be talking about and will help ingratiate the president with not just his base but people across America. And so hopefully the comm shop can help him, the president stay on message on the key issues that people are concerned with and off continuing to further the discussion about Russia.
[Whitfield:] We're going to leave it there. Alice Stewart, always good to see you, thanks so much.
[Stewart:] Thanks, fred.
[Whitfield:] And don't miss "State of the Union" tomorrow. Anthony Scaramucci sits down with Jake Tapper at 9:00 a.m. right here on CNN. We'll be right back.

[Baldwin:] Alexa, what is my worst nightmare? This woman in Portland, Oregon is sharing this shocking story about her smart speaker. She said her Amazon Echo, aka Alexa, actually recorded a conversation she was having with her husband in the privacy of her own home and then sent the audio to one of his employees in Seattle. Yes, she did. Thank goodness it was just about buying hardwood floors. So she did what any of us would do and called Amazon to complain.
[Danielle, Former Amazon Alexa User:] He apologized about 15 times in a matter of 30 minutes. And said we really appreciate you bringing this to our attention, this is something we need to fix. I felt invaded. He said thank you for letting us know. This is something we need to fix. I felt like total privacy invasion. Immediately I am like I'm never plugging that device in again. I can't trust it.
[Baldwin:] Alison Kosik with CNN money is with me now. This is anyone's worst nightmare.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Correspondent:] Especially if you're busy doing something you don't want others to hear.
[Baldwin:] We talk about things in the privacy of our own homes. How did this happen?
[Kosik:] Amazon is saying it's a rare series of events where Alexa misheard a series of words and sent out this file. It said Echo woke up due to a word in the background conversation sounding like Alexa. When you wake up these devices, you say "Alexa." Then it heard words like send message requests and the background conversation was interpreted as a name in the contact list and bam, that audio was sent to that employee. The microphone on these devices is really sensitive and the thinking is that it heard this background conversation and that perhaps the couple kept the volume down when Alexa was responding saying to whom, they didn't hear it.
[Baldwin:] I have so many questions and we just don't have the time for it all. But number one, my take away is that it records whenever you talk to this thing, it records what you're saying.
[Kosik:] You have to assume it's recording. One thing to keep in mind, when you invite these devices into your home, you are giving up a bit of anonymity. Just like do you when you go on Facebook or Google. A little of your anonymity is going away. This thing is always recording. It's always on.
[Baldwin:] All I am saying is good thing they were just talking about hardwood floors.
[Kosik:] Exactly, hardwood floors. Real fast, I will tell you how to shut that thing off. There's a microphone mute button on top and the top of the device will turn red and we can all assume that the voice activator is turned off, but you never know. I say take a hammer to it and get it the heck out of the house.
[Baldwin:] Amazon is not loving this story today. Thank you for coming by. Appreciate it. Coming up next, things that are often shrugged off, conspiracy theories or the real beliefs of a Republican nominee for Congress. We are talking 911, believes it is an inside job, and Beyonce is part of the illuminati. You have to see what CNN dug up on this guy. Also, no summit, now possible summit, just hit another big development on President Trump's face-to-face meeting with Kim Jong Un that he had abruptly canceled. The White House is once again communicating with the North Koreans. Stay with me.

[King:] This story just in to CNN. CBS says it is investigating its own CEO, Les Moonves, that ahead of a coming New Yorker expose. Sources telling CNN, the magazine about to publish an investigation from Ronan Farrow detailing alleged sexual misconduct by Moonves. Reports of that impending piece sending CBS stock tumbling nearly five percent. Back to our big story here now in Washington. Big growth numbers from the government, a big boom for the economy. The president is saying he deserves credit and Republicans hoping in this midterm election year they get some too. Let's look at the mood of the country when it comes to the economy. Satisfaction with the economy is skyrocketing. This is George W. Bush's election. This is 911. This is the financial crisis, the Obama election. The economy, confidence in it, has been growing for quite some time. But this is Donald Trump's election, spiking since then. Sixty-six percent of American people satisfied with the direction of the economy. Here's another way to look at it. More Americans do think the economy has rebounded, and more Americans say the president deserves credit. This is last year. This is this year. You see the improvement numbers are up, including the president's, getting credit for it. Here's another way to look at it. If we asked this question a year ago, President Obama was still getting more of the credit for the growing economy. Now a majority of Americans say, no, President Trump deserves more of the credit. So if you're the Republicans running in a midterm election year, you hope the economy helps. There's some evidence that's possible. These are the last four big midterm years. Look at the negative mood of the country in 2006, 2010, and 2014. This was as the country on the right track or headed on the wrong direction decidedly negative in 2006, the president's party suffered. Negative again in 2010, the president's party suffered. Again in 2014 is the second Obama midterm, so the losses aren't as big but still losses there. Look now, yes, the country is still in a negative mood despite the good economy, but by a much smaller margin than in these prior elections. So Republicans have a path, if they can make the case you should feel better, we deserve some of the credit. That's what the president tried to do today.
[Trump:] If economic growth continues at this pace, the United States economy will double in size, more than 10 years faster than it would have under either President Bush or President Obama. But we're getting jobs. We're getting money coming in. We're respected.
[King:] It is the ultimate frustration for the president's party in this year. Four percent unemployment, 4.1 percent growth last quarter. Republicans should be dancing. But, but the prognosis today is they will at least lose the House because the president in much of the country, not all of the country, but in much of the country and places where it matters, he is politically toxic even though Americans still much better optimistic about what they now concur is the Trump economy.
[Knox:] That 2014 midterm is really an interesting one because political scientists say that that was one of the most nationalized and president-centric midterms in a long time. And so that suggests a possible echo here where booming growth didn't pay dividends ultimately for the president's party. Remember in 2014, it was just a debacle for the Democrats at every single level. Senate, House, governorships. I'm sure they're watching that closely at the White House.
[Raju:] Yes. And the 2014 was also interesting because actually the economy grew in one of the quarters at a similar rate. Actually even more I think than more than today's job numbers and what happened that year, of course the Democrats lost the Senate. It was a terrible midterm election year. Still talking to Republicans yesterday, House Republicans before they left for a month-long recess, they were looking forward to this number because they wanted this to be their argument and pitch going into the August recess. They're feeling a lot better, something to campaign on. Perhaps one reason why they keep the House. But still, so many other issues, so many other controversies drowning out their message. The president being so toxic and riling up the Democratic base. The enthusiasm still on the Democratic side. The ultimate question is, how do Americans feel? Do they feel better off at this point?
[King:] And I just as we continue the conversation, I just want to show those numbers one more time over there in the sense that this is again, right track, wrong track in the country. And you see the country in a very negative mood, 2006, 2010, 2014. Still in a negative mood. These are NBCWall Street Journal numbers. Now,
[Kucinich:] Well, when you saw what happened in Helsinki, when you the tariffs, I mean, you've got Republicans on the Hill in particular that are just saying, OK, make this stop. The announcement of the $12 billion for farmers. Well, that's good news for farmers in some ways. Republicans are saying, no, they don't want to be given money. They want to work. So the fact that the president is sort of making it harder for them to talk about the economy in a positive way, I think, is causing a lot of consternation within that party.
[Knox:] The other thing is, when we talk about the economy, you know, if you look at the list of concerns on people's minds and you look at healthcare, for example, clearly an economic issue, right? There's a lot of concern about healthcare. And so when you talk about the big job numbers and the rest which are incredibly positive, for a lot of Americans they think they're thinking their concerns their top three or four concerns are not quote unquote the economy necessarily. And that's another challenge in the messaging.
[King:] It's important there. All right. Quick break for us. When we come back, back to the big Michael Cohen news today and Rudy Giuliani saying the president feels betrayed.

[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Many moving parts in the Russia investigation including new claims of a Trump administration cover up.
[Vause:] Opening ceremonies at the Olympic Village now under way. The Winter Games just opened
[Sesay:] Actress Angelina Jolie rallies for the Rohingya refugees her powerful message to
[Nato. Vause:] Hello everybody. Welcome to our viewers all around the world. Great to have you with us. I'm John Vause.
[Sesay:] And I'm Isha Sesay. NEWSROOM L.A. starts right now.
[Vause:] We begin with troubling new claims by the top Democrat on the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. Adam Schiff accuses Republican Chairman Devin Nunes of changing a memo of alleged FBI abuses before he sent it to the White House. President Trump is expected to make the memo public but a rare public statement from the FBI has expressed grave concerns about the memo's accuracy.
[Sesay:] Also developing, the "New York Times" reports a former legal spokesman for the Trump Team was concerned that White House communications director Hope Hicks may have considered obstructing justice. Hicks allegedly told the President that Donald Trump, Jr.'s e-mails about his meeting with a Russian lawyer quote, "will never get out". Hicks' attorney denies she ever said that.
[Vause:] Juliette Kayyem is a CNN national security analyst and former assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. She joins us now from Cambridge, Massachusetts. So Juliette good to see you. It seems that the FBI and the Department of Justice are on this collision course right now with the White House, with the President who campaigned as a law and order candidate because he is ready to release this information which the man he chose as director of the FBI says is misleading, reckless and could reveal classified information. So how did we get to this point?
[Juliette Kayyem, Cnn National Security Analyst:] We got to this point because in no small part due to Devin Nunes who has sort of asserted himself, the congressman who is the chair of the Republican I mean of the House Intelligence Committee who claims that this memo that's been the subject of attention for several weeks now exposes some sort of bad behavior by the FBI and it's absolutely necessary for him to get out. The FBI and, of course, the Department of Justice know this not to be true, know that he has hand-picked certain information and wrote what can only be described as a line in the sand to the White House that if they actually did release this memo that it would cause grave harm to America security. And just to remind people this is Director Wray who was appointed by Donald Trump. This is no longer one of these hold-over games that the White House tends to play.
[Vause:] You know, he made this argument that it seems almost as if Nunes is what, working for the Russians?
[Kayyem:] You know, at this stage people say, you know, why is this happening. I think without sounding too conspiratorial, it's very difficult to know what's animating Devin Nunes but some, you know, either because he is being told by the White House to do this or because there's something compromising his good judgment. I mean he looks not only very silly but of course, he's now being undermined by the very FBI and law enforcement agencies that he has been voted into office to protect and defend and to give him the resource the need. I think also it's just worth noting there's so much noise at this stage it's hard to take a step back but at some stage I think we have to ask ourselves the White House trying so hard to cover up or to stop this investigation from going on that, you know, what is it that's underlying their fear? At this stage it's no longer about obstruction of justice. Something is compelling the White House every day to launch an attack against Mueller, against the FBI, against leadership in the FBI, against the Department of Justice, against their own attorneys at the White House counsel's office. You know maybe it's so in plain sight we're afraid to see it but it's hard to imagine that they're doing this because everything is benign at this stage.
[Vause:] You know, as the President was leaving the State of the Union he was asked on the way out if he would release the memo. That answer was caught on a hot mike. Listen to this.
[Unidentified Male:] Let's release the memo.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Don't worry 100 percent.
[Vause:] But now it seems maybe the President hasn't even read the memo.
[Kayyem:] Yes.
[Vause:] Here's White House press secretary Sarah Sanders.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn:] Has the President seen the memo yet?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Not that I'm aware of. I know he hadn't as of last night prior to and immediately after the State of the Union.
[Vause:] You know, a very it seemed a very honest answer there from Sarah Sanders. Again though, it seems that there is just this determination to put this out there regardless of the consequences.
[Kayyem:] Regardless of the consequences which we know what they are. The FBI saying that this is going to, you know, this is going to expose sources and methods of the FBI, our preeminent law enforcement agency. But it's also being done when everyone knows it's not accurate. I mean this has to be said every time we talk about the Nunes memo. He had taken particular pieces of information, shut out others and created some narrative that we are now supposed to believe simply because he says he you know this comes from important information. Nunes has no sort of validity I think now in terms of what's animating him whether it's pure politics or something else. And so there's more than one reason not to release the memo. And I hope that when it is or isn't, you know when it is or if it is released people will understand it is factually, as the FBI said, factually inaccurate. It is just a lie. And that is what this debate is about.
[Vause:] You know, on Tuesday, you know, before the State of the Union there was a lunch with the President and reporters. Republican Speaker Paul Ryan was there. He said this about the memo and the FBI. "Let it all out. Get it all out there. Cleanse the organization. I think we should disclose all this stuff. It's the best disinfectant." You know, there was a time when many Republicans like Ryan, they sort of stayed away from, you know, the President's unfounded allegations, the conspiracy theories they heard, you know, on Fox News. But clearly not now and particularly that word "cleanse the organization".
[Kayyem:] It's the word purge. It's the Stalinist type word to suggest that the FBI which, you know, is not like a liberal institution, right, that the FBI somehow has it out for Trump. But I think what you see with Ryan and many others is that once you go down the path of defending the White House given and we don't know what it is where that path is taking us, right, in terms of this investigation. It's very hard to step away and so what you're seeing is that any number of these, congressman Paul Ryan in particular, but you know, beginning with, ok I'm going to not talk about TrumpRussia slowly but surely getting sort of hooked in. And I think you know, for others who have not gone down that path it's worth noting that they don't even know what they're defending at this stage because we have no idea what is underlying Mueller's investigation, let alone what's underlying this clear evidence of obstruction of justice from Trump, the White House and now the story today that the "New York Times" is reporting that Hope Hicks, his communications director. You know it's a path it's a it's a silly path. It's a scary path for people to go down because who knows what shoe was going to drop at this stage.
[Vause:] You know, it seems that there's this 30 percent of the country which is you know locked on to Donald Trump and the administration no matter what. If you can convince that 30 percent that law enforcement is bias, take that one step further because then you get to the point where eve if Robert Mueller, the special investigator comes up with solid hard proof that the President has done is guilty of some wrong doing it seems unlikely that percent of the country is going to believe it's true.
[Kayyem:] I think that's right. I think in some ways that 30 percent is just locked in. But the significance of what Mueller is doing is not necessarily that he's going to get an indictment against Donald Trump. There may be others in the family or others in the White House. I think also what it will do, at least, it will be a political statement about what may have occurred either between either during the 2016 election or as many people suspect and certainly our reporting at CNN has shown that there might have been financial underpinnings between or financial propping by the Russians to support the Trump Organization that the Trump family wanted to hide during the campaign and after. So, you know, in some ways even if Mueller doesn't come up with a leg solution it will be a document that will be used in the public debate to discuss you know essentially, you know, what animated the Russians to do what they did in 2016 and what's animating Trump and I say it again the Trump family from trying so hard to keep whatever that truth is from all of us. And that's where I think that this is going down. I tend to be the calm one on air with you guys as a
[Vause:] You know, it seems like Trump years are like dog years. Every one every year lasts seven.
[Kayyem:] At least it's February. At least it's February now and we got through one month.
[Vause:] Thanks Juliette. Good to see you appreciate it.
[Kayyem:] Thank you.
[Vause:] Jessica Levinson is a professor of law and governance at Loyola law school and Peter Matthews is a professor of political science at Cyprus College. They're here to talk more about the today in Russia news. Ok. Here's the key part of that statement from the FBI. "We have grave concerns about material admissions of facts that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy." Jessica this would appear to be a last ditch effort to try and stop the President from releasing the memo which is very rare. If this doesn't work, how long will it be before, you know, Director Wray is the second FBI director to be fired by Donald Trump?
[Jessica Levinson, Loyola Law School:] Well, you know, potentially not that long if we just look at history and we look at his pattern of firing people and his pattern of firing people who speak out against him. I just want to pick up on one thing that you discussed with past
[Vause:] With Juliette yes.
[Levinson:] with Juliette where Speaker Paul Ryan said, you know, let's just let all this information out and let's you picked up from the word let's cleanse the organization. But I actually picked up on a different word which is that basically disclosure and sunlight is the best disinfectant. That's almost word for word putting a really famous passage from a Supreme Court opinion that Justice Brandeis wrote. And I think that Speaker Ryan may it maybe someone who was a law student or a former lawyer just wrote that but I think he may be trying to telegraph something to the judiciary of saying this information should really be out here and you judges if this gets to you then I don't think that you should do anything about it because we're all about disclosure. Now, of course disclosure is great unless you disclose lies.
[Vause:] Right.
[Levinson:] And that's what the FBI and the Department of Justice are in an entirely unprecedented move saying.
[Vause:] And they don't want to disclose, you know, the Democrat memo that goes with it
[Levinson:] Right.
[Vause:] which will be a counterpoint. But Peter the administration is arguing here the previous memo out there is all about being open and honest and transparent. Listen to this.
[Hogan Gidley, White House Deputy Press Secretary:] He absolutely wants transparency.
[Kellyane Conway, Counselor To The President:] We want it to be a deliberative process and we respect the process, the transparency and accountability.
[Sanders:] We've said all along from day one that we want full transparency in this process.
[Vause:] So everyone got their talking points, they stuck to script but given the administration's record so far here honest, open transparency is a little stretch for this administration.
[Peter Matthews, Professor, Cyprus College:] It's very strange because it's the opposite of transparency. They're putting out information that's inaccurate. It's been shown to have been altered by Nunes, not to mention his
[Vause:] And it's also been revealed that Nunes didn't even read the source material, you know. It's just basically the staffers' opinions all pulled together.
[Matthews:] Pulled together.
[Vause:] Ok. One of the biggest issues is did the White House work with Nunes in putting this memo together?
[Cuomo:] Did Devin Nunes work with anybody in the White House on that memo?
[Sanders:] Not that I know of.
[Cuomo:] He wouldn't'answer that question.
[Sanders:] Right. And I just don't know the answer. I'm not aware of any conversations or coordination with Congressman Nunes.
[Vause:] Jessica again credibility issues here when it comes to Nunes and the White House. If there was some kind of collaboration between the Congressman and the administration, what are the implications?
[Levinson:] Well, I mean I think the implications are that it just further undermines this document. So we already know that the FBI and the Department of Justice have said it's not only dangerous but it's misleading. So it will put us in a position of threatening our national security and it will give the public the wrong impression. But if you add to that that the Trump administration is potentially and it's interesting because Representative Nunes also had kind of a non-denial denial. If they're working in concert, I mean that just goes to show I think not necessarily what legal implications are but what political implications there are.
[Vause:] You know, part of the campaign to discredit the FBI and to prove there is this bias, deep state operating there against the President has been to highlight these text messages between these two agents who were having an extramarital affair and they're exchanging messages that were critical of candidate Donald Trump. CNN has obtained e-mails that show Peter Strzok one of the agents supported reopening the Clinton investigation once the e-mails were discovered on disgraced former Representative Anthony Weiner's laptop, according to a source familiar with Strzok's thinking. Peter again this seems to undermine the theory that, you know, Strzok and the woman the other agent who's having the affair, were leading, you know, the Trump resistance.
[Matthews:] It totally undermines it.
[Vause:] And the texts don't even support that anyway. What do they got here?
[Matthews:] It totally undermines this. It's contradictory and I don't think people are going to believe it once they see the texts are contrary to what they were saying. So I think that this is really an affront to the rule of law. This is much deeper than a few memos going around. The concept of the rule of law is that no one is above the law. The law should apply equally to everyone including the President. And here is inside workers like Nunes trying to get the President the inside job so to speak to let him get away with thing by changing all the evidence and information that's around. That's a complete undermining of the rule of law principle.
[Levinson:] But I mean let's be clear. This is what would be or wannabe autocrats do. So this is we're looking at someone who's not respecting the how there's a separate branch, a legislative branch, that functions who's potentially conspiring with Representative Nunes about the memo who's undermining the Department of Justice who should be serving the members of the Department of Justice serve the constitution and they serve our country, not the President. And so this kind of consolidation of power and undermining of the FBI investigation and that's to the last point that you talked about with Juliette. And that's the thing that worries me the most which is what if you have you come out with this smoking gun and a third of the country says
[Vause:] Right.
[Levinson:] I'm sorry, I saw those text messages
[Vause:] Fake news.
[Levinson:] between those two FBI agents.
[Vause:] I want to get to this reporting from the "New York Times". Mark Corallo, CNN understands that he will I received this request for an interview by Robert Mueller. He was the spokesman for the Trump legal team until he resigned in July last year. The "New York Times" is adding this. "Mr. Corallo I planning to tell Mueller about a previously undisclosed conference call with Mr. Trump and Hope Hicks, the White House communications director, according to three people. Mr. Corallo planned to tell investigators that Miss Hicks said during the call that e-mails written by Donald Trump Jr. before the Trump Tower meeting that was the one with, you know, every Russian in New York turned up including a lawyer linked to the Kremlin. This is also one where, you know, Mr. Trump was eager to receive political dirt about Mrs. Clinton from the Russian. Hope Hicks apparently said it will never out. That left Mr. Corallo with concerns that Miss Hicks could be contemplating obstructing of justice. Lawyers for Hicks deny that she ever said that. But, you know, again it seems that, you know, they keep building this very strong case from the President on down for obstruction of justice.
[Matthews:] A pattern throughout the administration at the highest levels. It's not just the President, obviously. Now, you've got Hope Hicks and many others involved in this pattern of obstructing the truth, obstructing an investigation that was ongoing and legitimate. This is very dangerous for our constitutional system.
[Levinson:] It could be very serious but I would say that statement of it will never come out, I'm not seeing oh, my God we've got obstruction of justice.
[Vause:] Right.
[Levinson:] Obstruction of Justice is a very specific statute and it requires a corrupt intent. That could say I hope I mean you could imply I hope it never gets out. I don't want it to ever get out. Or we'll make sure that we're protecting the President. Wanting to slow the investigation and wanting to ensure that things don't hit the public eye is very different from lets go down the prongs of a statute.
[Vause:] Right. Ok. Glad you added that in. So Jessica and Peter good to see you both. Thank you.
[Matthews:] Thank you.
[Sesay:] And now we turn to Afghanistan, a country reeling from a relentless string of terror attacks. In just the past couple of weeks terrorists have stormed a luxury hotel, attacked an officer of the aid group Save the Children, blown up an ambulance on a crowded street and targeted a military base. In all at least 140 people were killed, most of those in the capital of Kabul, a city now living in fear as our own Nick Paton Walsh reports.
[Nick Paton Walsh, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] The still in the air of Kabul's normally hectic rush hour speaks of the panic gripping a city that was once a safe haven and now feels like the front line. "Do you have papers," they ask, eerily targeting vehicles with vehicle with government plates, flashing police lights torn out. The focus on government vehicles or vehicles trying to look like they're part of the police or military clearly a nervousness they might be being used to bring insurgents into the capital. This one seemed suspicious yet turns out to be a regional governor's security. Who can you trust in the oncoming blizzard? Barriers restrict the height of trucks and so darkly, the amount of explosive they could. And here where an ambulance car bomb killed over a hundred, thread and debris litter the streets still. The ambulance suicide car bomb, pretty sophisticated. It came through this checkpoint saying they had an appointment in the hospital where they parked for 20 to 30 minutes and then came out again with bomb on board detonating just down the street in a devastating blast. It blew out windows meant to keep the sick warm. Even now ambulances aren't allowed to drive into the compound; the sick are hand-carried in. Hospitals are struggling across the capital from a week of savagery. But also too is the nation's confidence. Actor Massoud Hashmi was the war hero face of anti-insurgency movies telling Afghans not to flee their homeland as refugees but stay, build and fight. In the recent attack on the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul he watched as two friends were shot in front of him and he was then shot. And he still has a bullet inside of him.
[Massoud Hashmi, Afghan Actor:] We all kept silence in a corner. I was bleeding, horribly bleeding. It's very hard to see your death is coming to you and step away from you. So after three hours the Afghan Special Force entered the salon. I introduced myself, everybody know me and the soldier also know me that's ok come out. We took 14 people with myself and saved their lives.
[Walsh:] Yet his conscience means he must change his message. But now you're telling people that they should leave?
[Hashmi:] Most people want to leave, but you're encouraging people to stay in Afghanistan I'm not saying that again because I feel guilty. If I do that you know I'm a famous person if I say something people will accept. Most of the people ask me on the street, you say stay in Afghanistan what should we do? There's no hope people know. I'm not feeling secure inside my house. Now Kabul is changed into a war zone.
[Walsh:] And the hot violent summer months are still far away. Nick Paton Walsh, CNN Kabul.
[Vause:] Well, convicted sexual abuser Larry Nassar is back in court for yet another sentencing hearing. We'll have those details in just a moment.
[Sesay:] And one of his alleged victims is speaking out. Why Simone Biles said she couldn't attend Nassar's hearing.

[Sciutto:] The White House is facing a political storm now, tightening of the Russia investigation, a potentially hostile Democratic majority coming to Congress with veto with subpoena power, rather. But President Trump's allies tell "The Washington Post" that instead of hiring lawyers and building a war room to respond, the White House is winging it. They're depending on President Trump's core supporters to believe what he tells them. Joining us now is former White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci. Thanks very much for taking the time.
[Anthony Scaramucci, Former White House Communications Director:] So, I mean, just go back for one second, who is saying that? Like
[Sciutto:] Listen, we had a lot of folks on the Hill. You hear from Republicans and Democrats. It's not just it's not made up.
[Scaramucci:] Do you like New York better than Washington, Jim?
[Sciutto:] Me personally, I like them both. But I'll always be a New Yorker at heart. As a fellow New Yorker, you know that never leaves you.
[Scaramucci:] Just curious.
[Sciutto:] Let's start if we can on the president's chief of staff position, because you just said another name take his another guy take his name out of the hat, that is Mark Meadows. You had Nick Ayers over the weekend who appeared to be the frontrunner. Does this indicate that folks don't want this job?
[Scaramucci:] I don't think so. I think in Mark's case, look at what he's done with the Freedom Caucus and look at the role that he has in the Congress. And he's been unbelievably helpful to the president's agenda inside the Congress. And so, I think in Mark's situation, he's a total team player. He's trying to figure out what is the best utility for him, and he probably thinks it's to stay in Congress, which should make sense given you know how much power he's galvanized inside the House of Representatives.
[Sciutto:] But the point is you have a pattern, right? Because Nick Ayers, a young guy. You would think in the administration, a 36-year- old gets offered a job like that, he jumps at it. You got Mick Mulvaney saying he likes where he is. I mean you have to imagine that the legal questions, the president's style of management, are turning people off.
[Scaramucci:] OK, so the legal stuff, in my opinion, I think you know the next chief of staff will probably have to convince the president to start ring fencing that. He's got very good legal counsel. They've got a pretty good idea where the facts are in the case, and I think they can protect the president. So I think that will dial back some of the president's tweets on that. As it relates to the other stuff, I don't think there's any shortage of people that would come and serve the country and work for the president. You know, and so for me, he'll probably you know, I don't know what happened with Nick Ayers. So I'm not sitting there at the table, but my guess is that the president was probably going to announce him or came close or thought about announcing him. Something happened. He withdrew. And so the president picked an exceptional cabinet. He's got very smart people around him. He'll probably deliberate about this for a week or two and come up with a great guy to be his chief. But here's the thing. I want the next chief of staff to be somebody who really likes the president. I mean it's enough of like, you know I'm serving the country.
[Sciutto:] Not the KellyTrump dynamic.
[Scaramucci:] It's enough of I'm serving the country but I don't really like the president. Let's have somebody that really likes the president, recognizes that the president is the boss. Don't be a sycophant, you've got to talk to the president honestly, but recognize he's got the ball. You know you're just giving him some more offensive coordination and defensive coordination but he's the head coach and the quarterback.
[Sciutto:] Let me ask you about this because of course, you had the filings in the Cohen and the Manafort cases on Friday. The president, Rudy Giuliani, they dismissed both filings, but including the Cohen filing as being unrelated to this president, when in fact, Cohen is testifying that the president directed him to break campaign finance law. And as I always remind folks, you know the president will say it's a bunch of angry Democrats leading this, but the southern district of New York is run by a Trump appointee. How can the president and Giuliani say this is a totally unrelated to him when he's implicated?
[Scaramucci:] Well, I they probably are saying it and they're probably saying it in that way. I'm not trying to be the translator here, but I think what they really mean is that whatever went on with Paul or in the case of Michael it's probably not going to be over the line of criminality as it relates to the president. I think that's the point that Rudy is making. And so I think that's the point that the president was making on Twitter. You know, having looked at the case, I do have a legal background. You know people obviously will disagree with me. Some of this is politically charged. Let's just look at the facts. The question will be does he have a John Edwards-like defense. Is it a campaign violation or was this something that he was doing in a normal course of his business and normal course of his process? And so to me, I think that's where they're coming out on, and I think that's why they're saying it's not illegal from the president's perspective.
[Sciutto:] I want to ask you this question, and you get asked this a lot. And I saw my colleague Chris Cuomo, he pressed you on this. The president not telling the truth on things in public. You used the expression, flowered up. Sometimes he embellishes. Sometimes he flowers things up.
[Scaramucci:] things up. He flowers things up.
[Sciutto:] But sometimes, let's be fair
[Scaramucci:] I've also said to John Berman, the president has told lies. I'm not one of these sycophants where I'm going to sit out here and pretend that he hasn't said a few things that are not truthful, but let me just say this. You have to understand his operating style. You have to understand his presentation skills. The stuff that he's saying that isn't truthful, most people get the joke about it.
[Sciutto:] Is it a joke?
[Scaramucci:] Other people say, well, intellectually how could you say that? You're justifying that he's not saying the truth. I'm not. I'm not justifying it. I'm just explaining based on my observation of the president's personality and someone that's worked with him, what he's doing and why he's doing it. And it's been generally effective for him, Jim, over the last 45 years.
[Sciutto:] But this gets to core issues here.
[Scaramucci:] I'm not condoning it.
[Sciutto:] I know you're not condoning.
[Scaramucci:] So, again, I'm really not condoning it. I'm just trying to explain it. The president, I think, controls the bully pulpit. He has a voice in the debate that I think is very powerful, and there's ways that he can sit down and strategize about how to use that voice going forward. But I think it would be more effective. I have said repeatedly that some of the war with the media, some of the issues and attention there is a 5 percent to 7 percent headwind in the president's face. He could have a much higher approval rating in my opinion if he dialed back some of that.
[Sciutto:] To your credit
[Scaramucci:] I've said that
[Sciutto:] you have criticized this president for instance, for repeating the enemy, the people thing, which he repeated over the weekend.
[Scaramucci:] I don't like it.
[Sciutto:] And we appreciate that.
[Scaramucci:] I don't like it. And it's not I'm not saying that because you're in the media. I just don't like it. I understand the Constitution and the First Amendment. I understand the people in the media are there to hold people in power accountable. I mean, I didn't do that many things. I was in the White House, but I did turn the lights and cameras back on because I believe in the First Amendment, and I know the president believes in the First Amendment. By the way, the president had a great relationship with the media years ago. There's no reason why he can't have a better relationship with the media over the next two years than he did in the first two of his presidency.
[Sciutto:] Appreciated. Final question, if I can. This struck us because you were speaking at a conference this weekend, and you talk because this gets to the truth issue. You talked about this QAnon, which is the source of many of the worst you know conspiracy theories going back to Pizza Gate and a whole host of others, but you said that they're accurate about so many things.
[Scaramucci:] OK, this is what I love about the media. This is sort of what happened to me with CNN, right, where I said these guys, OK, you're being dishonest. If you're going to report that, I'm going to have to come after you. Of course, the three CNN people got fired. I don't even remember this reporter's name. And so I'm not even going to bring the guy's name up and give them
[Sciutto:] But on this issue.
[Scaramucci:] Let me say what I said. I said there was a woman there. She had a T-shirt on that had Q on it. I laughed. I said what is this whole Q thing? She started listing things for me. The reporter didn't hear the whole thing of what this guy has apparently predicted. I said wow, I didn't realize he had gotten so many things right. I'm not focused on
[Q. Sciutto:] You're not endorsing them.
[Scaramucci:] I'm not endorsing Q. I don't know anything about QAnon. The reporter thought he had me in a got you moment because that's what reporters do. He didn't declare himself as a reporter. He didn't say he was interviewing anybody. I was teasing the woman when I said wait until you find out who the guy is. I have no idea who the guy is. I'm not a quote, unquote. She went on truther. I could care less about QAnon. But that's what I don't like about the media, OK? They set me up let me finish.
[Sciutto:] I asked you the question. I'm accepting your answer.
[Scaramucci:] I appreciate you bringing it up so that I can clear it up. I'm not going to respond to this joker on Twitter or these other jokers that hang out with the guy, but this is why the American people strongly dislike elements of the media that they think are being unfair. You're a very fair guy, and I appreciate you bringing it up, but I just want to state for the record, I'm not a QAnon truther. I don't know anything about QAnon and but according to what the woman said, if it's true, some of the things that the guy put out there turned out to be true. Maybe there are 95 percent of things that turn out to be false. I have no idea. I don't even look at the stuff.
[Sciutto:] Question asked and answered. I appreciate you
[Scaramucci:] Could you understand why that would be something that would upset me?
[Sciutto:] I get it. I get it. I do.
[Scaramucci:] Ridiculous stuff that goes on.
[Sciutto:] But you also answered the question. And we're you know because I'm hearing your answer, I'm taking your answer at face value.
[Scaramucci:] This is ridiculous, Jim.
[Sciutto:] I appreciate you taking the hard questions on this and other topics, looks forward to having you back.
[Scaramucci:] Any time. Thanks for having me.
[Sciutto:] Anthony Scaramucci thanks very much. And we'll be right back after this break.

[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] So it's James Clapper. This package I'm told by sources was addressed to James Clapper. We don't know now I know James Clapper. He doesn't live in New York, so it's going to be interesting to see where it was going.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Where it was addressed.
[Prokupecz:] Was it addressed to perhaps CNN? Only why I say this was because the sorting facility is six blocks south from where our offices are. So we don't know that yet.
[Camerota:] No, of course but that's what happened to
[Prokupecz:] That's important to keep I mind.
[Camerota:] John Brennan who doesn't work here.
[Prokupecz:] Correct.
[Camerota:] But it did come to
[Cnn. Prokupecz:] Right.
[Camerota:] Because some of the the culprit thought that he
[Prokupecz:] Right.
[Camerota:] should be able to reach out here. So again, and your sources are telling you that this bears all the same hallmark.
[Prokupecz:] Yes. Very similar. And the fact that it's addressed to James Clapper, you can see why the postal inspector this morning when they saw it quickly notified the FBI once they got a hold of it and once they found it, and the FBI and obviously look, I mean, there's going to be a pretty large response now over at this sorting facility.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Just to be clear. The scope of this all just expanded before our very eyes. An 11th device, a suspicious package, presumably a bomb addressed to Cory Booker, Democrat from New Jersey, recovered in Florida. Here in New York City, you're looking at live pictures right now at a postal facility six blocks from here. Another suspicious package presumably, a bomb, addressed to James Clapper, former director of National Intelligence. And Shimon?
[Camerota:] Shimon has new reporting. Go ahead.
[Prokupecz:] It was coming to
[Cnn. Camerota:] It was addressed to
[Cnn. Prokupecz:] Yes. For James Clapper.
[Camerota:] It was for James clapper addressed to
[Cnn. Prokupecz:] Yes.
[Camerota:] That's the newest information you just got from your sources.
[Prokupecz:] That's the newest information. Yes. Yes.
[Camerota:] All right. This is obviously breaking news and a developing story. And we should hand it over now to our colleagues Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto who will pick up this breaking news.
[Announcer:] This is CNN Breaking News.
[Poppy Harlow, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Top of the hour. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. It's happening again. Yet again. Another day this week more packages targeting former officials. First the FBI has confirmed another package. 11th found last night in Florida. That, similar to the others, addressed to the current sitting New Jersey senator, Cory Booker.
[Harlow:] And happening right now, six blocks from where I am sitting, the New York Police Department is responding to a suspicious package at a postal facility at 52nd Street and Eighth Avenue in New York City. A law enforcement official says the package is similar to the others. Our Evan Perez has the latest on everything. And Evan, we have learned now very disturbing information in terms of to whom this address this package was addressed and also that it was intended to come to
[Cnn. Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] That's right, Poppy. This is now the 12th package that's been recovered and it has all of the hallmarks. It bears all the same markings as some of the as the other packages that have now been tied to what is believed to be a serial suspected bomber. And so the package that was recovered in New York just a few blocks away from CNN was addressed to CNN. And it was addressed to James Clapper, the former director of National Intelligence. Obviously, the this and the package that was recovered in Florida overnight which was addressed to Cory Booker has all of the same similarities and these are all people who are critics of the current administration. We shouldn't make any assumptions about the motivation of these people simply because they still have not arrested a suspect. This is something obviously that is not lost on all of the investigators who were working this case. And all of the attention on this case right now, all of the focus of the investigation by the FBI counterterrorism investigators is focused on Florida because they believe that at least some of these packages originated there. There is particular focus on one facility in Opa-locka, Florida. This is just north of Miami. And this is a processing facility where a lot of the packages went through. So that's a huge, huge breakthrough for this investigation. This is something that they were looking for, which is a nexus point where some of these packages were coming from because they can then from there track back to see where some of the packages were mailed from. They can look at surveillance cameras. They can even try to recover DNA. No matter how careful this bomber was, this person who was constructing these devices, even if they were using gloves, it's very likely that they left behind some DNA. And that is something that the FBI is combing through every one of these devices to try to recover. And we expect that we're going to see a lot more attention on this today simply because when you have 12 packages that means 12 devices that they can deconstruct and they can find little clues from. And so that's what I think is happening behind the scenes right now. Obviously, law enforcement, you can see the pictures there, now have another device to look through. And the fact that it obviously has not exploded is also another thing that they can work with Poppy and Jim.
[Sciutto:] Evan, let me ask you this, because, as you properly emphasized, it is early. They don't know who or who the person or persons are behind this. And they don't know the motivation. That said, you look at the list and there is a consistency in this list. The two names added today, Cory Booker, frequent critic of the president, frequent target of the president's criticism. James Clapper, frequent critic of the president as well as a target of the president's criticism. How relevant is that at this stage as the FBI and law enforcement look at this and try to build a profile of whoever is behind this now spate of 12 bombs sent to people around the country.
[Perez:] Well, it's a big data point. Obviously it's something that cannot be ignored, it cannot be lost on anyone who is doing this to see, well, look at the commonalities of who these packages were addressed to. But that said, Jim, as you know, I mean, having covered these stories over time, you know, it may well be that the person who is doing this wants them to think a certain way, wants the investigators to be thinking a certain way. It could be someone who is aligned with the right who is trying to target people on the left, people who are critics of the current president. It could also be someone on the left, someone who is politically left-leaning who wants in the run-up obviously to the midterm election wants there to be blame put on people on the right. So they cannot make any assumptions. I'm told that that is exactly what they're doing. They're making sure that they don't make any assumptions simply because of the data that is now public that we know of. They are keeping an open mind as to the motivations of this person. They once they go talk to this person, hopefully once they have arrested them and they can get an interview with them, they can maybe get a better sense of the motivation. But I can tell you one of the things that they're doing at this stage is, you know, looking through the packages, seeing if they can gather any DNA, see if they can look at cell phone records to try to identify a person. One of the things they're going to do is look at the internet history of that person. If they've identified the person. They're going to look through to see what kind of searches they made, what kind of comments they've made on the internet to try to get a sense of their mindset, which helps in their in this investigation. But at this point, I think, as you said, it is very, very clear that
[Sciutto:] Let me toss to Poppy with a thought there.
[Perez:] That there's some commonalities about this. Correct.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] Evan Perez, thanks very much. And, you know, Poppy, as you and I were speaking to Governor Cuomo yesterday.
[Harlow:] Right. Right.
[Sciutto:] What did he say to us on the air? He said the worry is there could be more packages out there, and that's exactly what we're seeing today.
[Harlow:] That's such a good point. And we heard the same thing from New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio who you can bet is being briefed on this and likely heading to the scene here as he did when this happened just a few days ago here at CNN. OK. Jason Carroll is there, our colleague on the ground. Jason, if you can hear us, what are you seeing? We see bomb-sniffing dogs. What are you hearing? What are you seeing?
[Jason Carroll, Cnn National Correspondent:] A familiar scene from what we saw earlier this week. The police came here on 52nd Street and Eighth Avenue. As you can see investigators down the street now in front of a postal facility where that package was discovered, again a package that we now learn has been addressed to James Clapper, former director of National Intelligence, addressed to CNN, discovered here at the postal facility sometime this morning. That's when we got the alert. That's when investigators descended on the scene here at Eighth Avenue and 52nd Street just six blocks south of CNN where you are right now, Poppy. So again you've got the streets cordoned off. You've got investigators descending here on the scene as they take this package excuse me, sir. As they take the package and start investigating what they have discovered here. I spoke to a postal worker this morning very quickly. I said what happened. They said it was very calm, it was very orderly. But the word had spread throughout the facility that a package had been discovered. They asked everyone to evacuate. They went across the street here at Eighth Avenue, and were told simply just to wait. So that's what's happening here at the scene at 52nd and Eighth Avenue. It's a postal facility here in Hell's Kitchen. That's what we call it here in New York City again just six blocks south of CNN headquarters here in New York City where you've got investigators again investigating yet another package Poppy.
[Harlow:] Unreal. Jason Carroll, thank you for being there. You and your crew hustle down there. Stay with me as well. Let me go to our Shimon Prokupecz, who's working his sources on all of this. Again very similar package, Shimon.
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Yes.
[Harlow:] Addressed to James Clapper, former director of National Intelligence to us.
[Prokupecz:] To us.
[Harlow:] Here at CNN. He is a contributor here to
[Cnn. Prokupecz:] That's right.
[Harlow:] What else are you learning?
[Prokupecz:] Yes, so this package was discovered by a postal inspector this morning who then directly called the FBI and then the FBI called the NYPD bomb squad which is now on scene. I'm told that the FBI is in the midtown site now. This is where the sorting facility, this postal facility, it's where they sort mail here in midtown. So it would make sense that some of that mail would come here. It's six blocks south from us. So that's something that would make sense. What I'm told is that the bomb squad is in there. They have evacuated a school, which is next door to this sorting facility, and they have also ordered people to stay inside. Significance here, obviously because of the intended target here.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Prokupecz:] And it seems like the fact that we these other packages have been out there. People know what to look for. And that's what happened in this case.
[Harlow:] And James Gagliano, who's also here with me. What is striking to me, and I know to Jim as well, and let's bring Jim into this conversation as well, is the fact that still 12 of these, and we have no suspect. And even Shimon, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, you were telling me yesterday even your sources aren't even telling you sort of on background they have whiffs of someone.
[Prokupecz:] No. Look, I think what I am going to tell you is there is significant activity that's going on in south Florida. The sorting facility certainly has changed everything. The fact that they were able to locate where some of these packages were sent from has changed the game here. I think law enforcement is very confident in that they have some good, strong leads. And we'll see what today brings.
[Harlow:] Yes. OK.
[Prokupecz:] But this is going to step up whatever it is that law enforcement is trying to do in terms of apprehending someone. This perhaps could these new discoveries could accelerate this.
[James Gagliano, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] And let's keep in mind also I'm sorry. Go ahead, Jim.
[Sciutto:] No, I was just going to say as we're watching the picture there, that is now a familiar sight on the streets of New York. NYPD bomb squad truck there, was outside CNN offices a few days ago. There it is again.
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Sciutto:] I imagine, Poppy, what we're going to see very soon is that containment vessel looks sort of like the back of a cement truck that has carried away.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sciutto:] These devices to safely carry them away to a location just north of Manhattan where they can investigate, try to glean whatever intelligence they can from it. Shimon, Evan, if you're still with us, I just want to ask this question because it's a question that we struggled with a bit this week. You have what law enforcement has consistently said are viable explosive devices inside these packages. And yet still a question as to how they would explode, how they would be triggered, whether they were intended to explode. Do we know more, Evan, at this point since they have had several of these packages to look at for several days, do we know any more at this point exactly anything about them and the degree of the threat and how they might have been detonated?
[Perez:] Yes. That was actually a still a big part of this investigation, Jim. I think one of the things that early in the week, certainly in the first couple of devices. And if you remember, they actually detonated the first ones because they were very concerned in the way of the appearance and everything, all the components made them believe that this was something that was set to go off. And certainly after testing them they found what they thought was pyrotechnic powder, something sulfuric, which again is ignitable. So the fact is now we have 12 devices and none of them have gone off. And so now the theory, the theory that law enforcement has again it's still a working theory is that this person put these together, these devices with the right components to make people be scared, to scare people but perhaps, you know, specifically not to go off. And so that's what the working theory is. Again, there is a lot of work to be done here. The FBI is deconstructing these things at the Quantico lab. Some of them are still on their way to the lab there in northern Virginia. So there is a lot more work to be done. But at this stage the fact is, you have 12 devices. None of them have gone off. I'm told that, you know, they've jostled them. They've purposefully shaken them just to see whether or not they would go off by accident, and they have not. So that tells us that perhaps not everything was done right or this person was a good enough bomb maker to know how not to set it off. So again, these are the working theories that they're going on at this point, but I think you've pointed out the right thing here.
[Harlow:] Yes. That's a really interesting nugget there of information. They're even shaking these to see if they would go off. James Gagliano, to you, what's your initial read?
[Gagliano:] So a couple of things, Poppy. First of all, important to understand that there is a difference between a post office and a mail sorting facility. There are about 250 mail sorting facilities throughout the country.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Gagliano:] I believe there were three of them within about 20 blocks of where we are right here in the CNN building. Another important thing here, the you mentioned the total containment vessel, which is the vehicle that the NYPD is going to bring to take the device out, place it inside there. It looks like a white spear or orb and potentially transport it up to Rodman's Neck up in the Bronx which is where the NYPD has an outpost. Take it out of the city. We have 8.4 million here. Want to get it out to someplace beyond the suburbs where it's safe. Now here's the thing. Those total containment vessels are designed to hold a device up to and including, and withstand the blast of 25 pounds of TNT. And the way they work, it literally is like an inside-out dive vessel. Meaning
[Harlow:] You take a submarine, you put it under water, you want to keep the pressure out. In this instance, the device goes off because it's unstable en route, we want to keep the pressure in.
[Sciutto:] James, a question for you. Because as for listen, the focus now here's one thing that's clear, is that the New York Police Department treating these as serious. You can see they've closed off the street there, they brought the bomb squad
[Harlow:] Right
[Sciutto:] They're going to take it out in that vessel you were describing. So they're not taking any chances with how they treat it. The fact is that bomb makers sometimes make mistakes. Do they not? I remember I was in London, I covered the 77 bombings a number of years ago, targeting trains and a bus. And two weeks later, they were copy-cat bombers, they did everything right, but they didn't get the detonator right. So they
[Harlow:] Yes
[Sciutto:] You know, they had little booms but it didn't ignite the larger explosive there. So in your experience, bombers can have the worst intention but make a mistake along the way that doesn't get the result they wanted, right? I mean, that's a possibility as well.
[Gagliano:] Fair point, Jim. Here is the thing that takes me to another realm, that these might be being sent just for message sake. There is 11 of them now. Now, we've heard no
[Sciutto:] Twelve
[Gagliano:] Reporting yet
[Harlow:] Wow
[Gagliano:] Twelve, I'm sorry. We've heard no reporting yet that there was an initiator blasting cap in these devices. And the type of switch that was used, it was a timer. That's not what we typically see. Historically, going back to the 60s, when bombings were much more prevalent, historically, we've not seen that type of a switch used for a package bomb, why? You want the package to open when it gets to the intended recipient. In this in this case, it was set to a timer. So you would have to set a particular ten seconds, two minutes, four hours, some type of delay on it. Also the fact that there were stickers on it, parody stickers, it's like
[Harlow: Ok -- Gagliano:] This bomber is either taunting us
[Harlow:] Can I guys, let me jump in. We have former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper joining us on the phone. Director Clapper, thank you for being with us. I'm sure you've seen all of this, but this package, this 12th package was addressed to you. It was addressed to you here at Cnn, where you are a contributor. Two days ago you said that this was domestic terrorism, and now it is targeting you, sir. Your response?
[James Clapper, Former Director, National Intelligence:] Well, first, Poppy, to you and Jim, just want to commend the great job you did on the street corner the other day when the package arrived at Cnn addressed to John Brennan. It appears at least in this case, they got the correct spelling in my name and they got the right network. I guess more seriously, I'm really not surprised and in some sense relieved. My wife and I are away from home right now, and our neighbors have been retrieving our mail, I've been very concerned about them. So in one sense, it's kind of a relief, but it's not a surprise. And, yes, this is as I said last night on with Chris Cuomo, this is definitely domestic terrorism, no question about it
[Harlow:] Yes
[Clapper:] In my mind.
[Sciutto:] Director Clapper, you were of course just to remind our viewers, the nation's senior most intelligence official. You had access to intelligence, you tracked threats to U.S. national security around the world and countered terror here at home. Place this in context for us. Have you seen a state of attempted attacks like this, if we can call it that, domestically, this kind of explosives sent to so many prominent officials. How serious do you view this?
[Clapper:] Well, it's serious, obviously. But at the same time, knock on wood, thank God, there have been no injuries or deaths from this. And I guess from what I read, there is some question about whether these things are actually functional or not. Obviously, you have to assume they are. And whether or not this is just only intended to sow fear, intimidate, that sort of thing or they are for real, and I actually don't I don't know that. I do want to just echo one thing that John Brennan said, and that is, this is not going to silence the administration's critics.
[Harlow:] To that yes, to that point, Director Clapper, and it won't stop us, you know, from doing our job every single day. The fact that we are living in this scene where, you know, Jim and I and the entire Cnn community had to evacuate from this building just two days ago and now a very eerie and similar scene playing out as we look at these aerial shots of the streets of New York six blocks away from Cnn. This is terrorizing the American the American people. What is your message to everyone at home watching, you know, thinking, you know, where could the next one come?
[Clapper:] Well, I think anyone who has in any way been a critic of publicly been a critic of President Trump needs to be on an extra alert and take some cautions precautions particularly with respect to mail. But at the same time, we shouldn't get too overblown about it to over what I guess is the right word at this point. I have a lot of confidence in all the law enforcement elements involved in this. Certainly NYPD is phenomenal. The FBI, and I'm really quite you know, it's amazing how we looked to an organization like the FBI, so professional, so dedicated. And I'm just glad that our president is not characterizing them as being in tatters because this proves once again they're not.
[Sciutto:] Yes
[Clapper:] But and I need to include ATF in that, too. And so, there is a lot of, I know, a lot of resource, a lot of dedication, a lot of energy and a lot of professionalism being dedicated to tracking down the perpetrator or perpetrators and people should take heart in that.
[Sciutto:] Well, you make a good point, Director Clapper. The listen, terrorism by definition is designed to terrorize, to strike fear as much as anything else, and you know, we're seeing that. And I will say that, having been there in New York during one of these that New Yorkers yes, they'll be blocked off their street, but the moment police open that street up, they'll be back, they'll be buying coffee, they'll be walking to work. We saw that on Wednesday. I know we'll see it again. Let me ask you this, the president was up in the middle of the night last night, and he was again taking a shot at the media's coverage of his response to this. What words in your view from the commander-in-chief would be calming, helpful, encouraging to the American people now, right now? What would you what kind of statement would you like to hear from him?
[Clapper:] Well, I thought the teleprompter statement that the president made from the White House initially sounded the right note. I think it would have been a lot more appropriate, a lot more sincere, had he actually named the targets and said something reassuring to them. And as well, I thought it was and I'm sure it was intentional, not even to mention Cnn. And in this you know, this is an assault on one of our most important institutions in this country, which is a free press. And Cnn has set the example here by continuing to exercise that important responsibility. And you serve you serve as an example to all the rest of us. We can't stop. We can't stop our lives. We have to go on.
[Harlow:] We do. We will
[Clapper:] And as far as the president is concerned, I wish and again, this is purely a fantasy because he's already made it clear that he's not going to do this. And I'm not suggesting a direct cause in effect a relationship between anything that he said or done and these and the distribution of these explosives. But I do think he bears some responsibility for the coarseness and incivility of the dialogue in this country. And that he needs to remember that his words count, his voice is the most important in this country, and then for that matter, the world.
[Harlow:] Yes
[Clapper:] And he should think about that in the way he addresses the country. And so, if he could continue what he did the other day when this first announcement and I think it would have been a lot better had he skipped the rallies because they seem to have an effect on him.
[Harlow:] Yes, look, Director Clapper, you could not be more right. Words matter and they matter the most right now. Now, what will we hear from the top? Before you go, sir again, if you're just joining us, a 12th suspicious package delivered to a mail sorting facility six blocks from Cnn, addressed to the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, addressed to him at Cnn where he is a contributor here. Director Clapper, given the prior package sent to John Brennan and other targets, do you have any additional security that people have been putting around you, et cetera? Have any other precautions been taken for you personally?
[Clapper:] Well, I probably shouldn't comment on that right now. I'll probably ought to pass on that.
[Harlow:] Understood, thank you very much, Director Clapper, and Jim, I think we're going to get a quick break in here as we gather more information, and we'll be right back.
[Sciutto:] We're going to stay on it. Welcome back, the breaking news. Two new suspicious packages discovered today, 12 in total now this week. The 11th addressed to Cory Booker, that found at a mail facility in Florida. The 12th and these are pictures you're seeing here live found at a mail-sorting facility in midtown Manhattan addressed to the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper with the address, the CNN Headquarters in New York. And what you're seeing there now is a picture that might be familiar to you. That is a
[Harlow:] Yes.

[Blackwell:] This morning crews are looking for seven people missing in Santa Barbara County, California. Now this is going on during those mudslides. People have already died, 18 people dead and officials expect that number to increase. The rivers of look at this. The mud and huge rocks, boulders flooded neighborhoods near Montecito. Trees that have fallen. Power lines are down. These roads are just impassable.
[Paul:] But listen, there are two local tourist boating companies that have found a way to help here. They're transporting people through the mudslides from Ventura to Santa Barbara. There's one company that can transport about 140 people on a boat and it's running six boats a day. So meanwhile, first responders are working around the clock trying to, you know, find and rescue the people that they believe are indeed still trapped. CNN's correspondent, Paul Vercammen, is in Montecito.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] A week of endless challenges for tireless first responders when a mountainside fell on to a community. The destruction so vast it covered 30 square miles in rock and mud.
[Rachel Ross, Grew Up In Montecito:] There are no roads. There are no houses. It's just I'm so devastated by what I'm seeing.
[Vercammen:] Rescue teams using Bearcats, brand-new unmarked SWAT vehicles to pluck people from second story windows. This family finally rescued from the upper level of their home after trying to ride it out on their own.
[Unidentified Female:] We thought about staying and then we were fine. We have we have power and we got internet going and we went to our hot spot on our phone and we have water. Then the power went out.
[Vercammen:] These Bearcats four-wheel drive and running high above the mushy ground can go where no other vehicles can. This team alone has pulled more than 30 people from danger.
[Sgt. Joe Schmidt, Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office:] That first day Tuesday morning was very surreal. We couldn't really comprehend the devastation until we got to the area and saw areas of homes that were wiped out and rubble and debris everywhere.
[Vercammen:] Look at some of the obstacles first responders had to deal with. Massive boulders that came rolling down the hills as if they were bowling balls and in some instances, you can see just over my shoulder, rocks and mud up to the rooftops. [voice-over]: The round the clock hard work of first responders not lost on residents here.
[Unidentified Male:] I was just going to put my hand out and say, I want to say thank you for your sacrifice.
[Vercammen:] The serial handshakers, John Griffith, stopped at a staging area to give thanks for the dignity first responders showed the victims.
[John Griffith, Thanked First Responders:] They stood at attention. They covered the body. They took their hats off. They shed a tear and they treated that body like it was one of their own.
[Vercammen:] The shoreline looks peaceful until a little perspective reveals muddy mayhem is everywhere. The first responders restoring paradise seems endless, sundown to sundown. Paul Vercammen, CNN, Montecito, California.
[Blackwell:] Thank you, Paul. The president's racist remark about African countries is infuriating people and their governments around the world. So why are we hearing little to no reaction in some cases from Republican leaders here in the U.S.?
[Paul:] And take a look at your screen for a second. See that map? That's how widespread the flu is this season. Yes, so expansive it has already hit 49 states. So, what does that mean for our ability to fight it? We're going to have that conversation.

[Kinkade:] Hello, I'm Lynda Kincaid. Welcome to this edition of THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. They call it a high stakes political game of beat the clock. Brexit talks between the U.K. and the European Union officially got underway in Brussels on Monday. U.K. and EU negotiators called the mood "incredibly positive." The both sides have less than two years to come up with a deal. And months of hard bargaining remain including the complex issues of EU citizens' rights, future trade agreements and U.K. financial payments to Europe. EU negotiator, Michel Barnier, says the goal is to agree on the terms of Brexit first, and then take up their future trade relationship. This appears to be a major concession from the U.K. Meantime, British Brexit secretary, David Davis, said the status of Northern Ireland and the and the Good Friday agreement took up more time today than any other subject. Despite the daunting challenges, both sides believe they can get a good agreement.
[Michel Barnier, Chief Eu Brexit Negotiator:] This first session was useful. Indeed, to start off on the right foot as the clock is ticking.
[David Davis, British Brexit Secretary:] There's more that unites us than divides us. So, while there will be undoubtedly challenging times ahead of us in the negotiations, we will do all that we can to assure that we deliver a deal that works in the best interest of all citizens.
[Kinkade:] Well, Daniel Hannan joins me now. He Is a Conservative member of the European Parliament for Southeast England and the author of the book "Why". He joins me now from Brussels. Good to have you with us. We hear today that there was a positive agreement. A good start to the talks. What did you make of it?
[Daniel Hannan, Member Of European Parliament:] Yes, I think it was. And that's to be expected. We have a continuing interest in each other's prosperity. I mean, Britain wants to have a successful and wealthy European Union next door. If for no other reason than that prosperous neighbors may good customers. And I think that the reverse applies. So, I hope that at the end of this process, instead of being the grudging tenants that we've been these past 40 years, will become the best of neighbors.
[Kinkade:] The Prime Minister called that snap election and it did backfire. She didn't get the mandate that she needed. Does she have the weaker hand here going into these negotiations?
[Hannan:] Well, it's actually the most pro-Brexit House of Commons we've ever had. In the sense that 85 percent of MPs were elected for parties promising to implement the referendum results. As a opposed to 13 percent in the last House of Commons. I don't think there's going to be any real change from the deal that was ordered. The proposed deal that was set up by the U.K. government before. We want to have the closest relationship with our European allies. We want to be they're military and trading and security partners. We want to preserve the bits of the deal that are working. But we want to live under our own laws and we want gradually to be able to reorient towards a more global trading policy anymore deregulated economic policy at home. And I think that's a process that can unfold in and agreed and cordial fashion.
[Kinkade:] There is a lot to work through over the next couple of years. What do you think will be the most complex of the negotiations?
[Hannan:] Well, you've already touched on the issues involving Ireland. All sides, London, Dublin, in Brussels agree that we do not want a hard border in Ireland. I think that's perfectly achievable. We have a common travel area at the moment that includes the U.K. and Ireland which are in the EU and that also includes the Channel Islands and the and the Isle of Man that are outside the EU. So, it's something that can be managed feasibly. But it's going to require a certain amount of finessing. And then of course, there's going to be arguments about agriculture and fisheries and so on. And of course, they'll be a big row about the budget. But I think on the big fundamentals, the continuation of a free trade area, the continuation of security and military links and so on, and indeed, reciprocal rights for each other's nationals who have already settled in each other's territory, I think the two sides are very close together.
[Kinkade:] Big businesses in the U.K. are really pushing for a softer Brexit. There's a lot of fear amongst business in the U.K. Should there be?
[Hannan:] No, I think those fears are misplaced. I think we will end up outside the single market in the literal sense that we're not bound by the European Commission and Court, because we'll be outside their jurisdiction. But having done that there's no reason why we shouldn't replicate quite a lot of the contents of the single market regulations. There are lots of non-EU states that do this very successfully, from Guernsey and Jersey to Switzerland. There are outside the single market in a legal sense, but through bilateral treaty and through domestic legislation, they mimic quite a lot of it. And you know, I help noticing that they're managing pretty well. The Swiss export nearly 5 times as much per head to the EU from the outside as we do. It's plainly not an impediment to a successful trading relationship. But this was have a huge advantage that we can now look forward to. And also, being able to sign their own free trade agreements with the United States, with China, with India, with Australia and that something that I think is going to significantly boost our economy in the years to come.
[Kinkade:] All right, Daniel Hannan. Great to get your perspective on all of that. Thanks so much.
[Hannan:] Thank you.
[Kinkade:] With Brexit negotiations officially underway, Theresa May is still working on solidifying her alliance with Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party. In his first foreign trip since taking office, the newly elected prime minister of the Republic of Ireland visited 10 Downing Street. And he said that any border that exists between the Republic and Northern Ireland after Brexit must be invisible. Speaking at a joint press conference on Monday, Mrs. May said she wants to maintain a common travel area with Ireland after Brexit.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] I'm personally committed to ensuring a practical solution that recognizes the unique economic, social, cultural and political context of the land border with Ireland which so many people pass through every day. And it will remain our priority to work closely with the Irish government to ensure a frictionless and seamless border as frictionless and seamless border as possible.
[Kinkade:] CNN's Nic Robertson joins me now from Downing Street. And Nic, Theresa May has come under a lot of criticism as she's dealt with issues on the home front. The things that come to mind are those recent tragedies. If she in a vulnerable position right now?
[Robertson:] She is. There are certain of her MPs who would like her to be removed and step down. It does seem to be impractical for the Conservative Party to do that. Number one, whoever would take over the job right now would be under huge political pressure from not just the Brexit negotiations, but all the other things that are happening in Britain at the moment. Dealing with for example, the Grenfell Tower burning last week. That has caused particular trouble for Theresa May. We've also seen her obviously, dealing with the attack, the terror attack overnight last night at Finsbury Park, most of the terror attacks over the past few weeks. There's a huge amount happening here that are major distractions from dealing with the outcome of the Brexit talks. But not the lease, on top of that was the disastrous elections that she called that have left her party in a minority. And she still yet to form an agreement with the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland to count on their votes. And the Queen's speech is on Wednesday this week. So, when you frame all of that it would be a very toxic moment for another Conservative politician to take over. So, while there's pressure on her to get this right and to show that she can get it right and to do the right things. As she did today, going to the Finsbury Park Mosque to meet some of the leaders in the community there. Something she failed or was slow to do last week with the tragedy in the tower that caught fire. She is trying to put some of that to right and lay some of the criticism that's being thrusting once again. So, she's trying to put some of that down. But it doesn't detract from the fact that there are still a lot of Conservatives out there who believe that she is not going to be able to lead them all the way through the Brexit negotiations with a weak government that doesn't have a majority and that needs to count on votes of other parties that haven't yet been secured.
[Kinkade:] All right, Nic Robertson for us live outside 10 Downing Street. Thank you very much. European stocks rose across the board on Monday after French President, Emmanuel Macron, one a substantial parliamentary majority in Sunday's final vote. The French CAC claimed its biggest rise since May 5. While the German Dax logged a fresh record high, climbing 1.1 percent by the markets close. British Prime Minister, Theresa May, says Islamophobia is a form of extremism and the U.K. has been far too tolerant over the years. Up next, I'll speak to a former police chief about the fight against extremists and hateful ideology.

[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Tuesday, June 12. Alisyn Camerota in New York. I'm John Berman here in Singapore. The summit is over. The pictures were historic. The results, they are very much in question. President Trump, he just boarded Air Force One on his way home after wrapping up a one hour and five-minute news conference, facing questions about what was actually achieved here. He called the meetings with Kim Jong-un intense and productive, yet he earned no new real language on denuclearization, and he surprised the world, announcing just moments ago a new major concession to North Korea. He announced the United States will stop what the president calls "war games," referring to the joint military exercises the U.S. conducts with South Korea regularly. The president also said he did discuss human rights with Kim he initially said briefly but he also called Kim a very talented man, Alisyn.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] John, it is great to have you on the ground there. Obviously, we'll be dissecting everything throughout the program. So President Trump's big gamble was sealed with this historic handshake and heaps of praise on the North Korean dictator. President Trump says he has, quote, "an excellent relationship" and a very special bond with Kim. Meanwhile, the totalitarian leader now vows to, quote, "leave the past behind," end quote. So what's next? Let's begin our coverage with CNN's Kaitlan Collins. She is live for us in Singapore. What a day, Kaitlan.
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Alisyn, it's been a stunning day here that has unfolded with this morning. Started with that first handshake between President Trump and Kim Jong-un to that press conference that the president just held that lasted over an hour where he took question after question on this deal. But the more he talked about this deal, the more it seemed to come into question what was the United States getting out of this. The main point coming out of that was that the president said he had agreed with Kim Jong-un to stop those joint military exercises conducted by the United States and the South Korean military, something that greatly annoys the North Koreans and Kim Jong-un. The president saying he's agreed to stop those because he believes they are very expensive and very provocative.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] We will be stopping the war games, which will save us a tremendous amount of money, unless and until we see the future negotiation is not going along like it should. We'll be saving a tremendous amount of money, plus I think it's very provocative.
[Collins:] So there is a reason those are provocative, and that is also because of the North Korea's nuclear arsenal they've been building. That was what President Trump was here to discuss with Kim Jong-un. So a stunning statement there. The president seeming to give up a very major concession with agreeing to stop those exercises to Kim Jong-un. He was asked about that, giving up something like that. The president maintained he gave up nothing during that meeting. He and Kim Jong-un met for over an hour privately, one on one. He also said during that meeting that he did bring up human rights abuses with the North Korean dictator. Here's what he had to say about that.
[Unidentified Male:] Kim Jong-un, as you know, has killed family members, has starved his own people, is responsible for the death of Otto Warmbier. Why are you so comfortable calling him very talented?
[Trump:] Well, he is very talented. Anybody that takes over a situation like he did at 26 years of age and is able to run it and run it tough.
[Unidentified Male:] What do you, President Trump, expect Kim Jong-un to do about the human rights record regarding the North Korean people?
[Trump:] It was discussed. It was discussed relatively briefly compared to denuclearization. Obviously, that's where we started and where we ended, but they will be doing things. And I think he wants to do things. I think he wants to. You'd be very surprised. Very smart. Very good negotiator. Wants to do the right thing. And I believe it's a rough situation over there. There's no question about it. And we did discuss it today pretty strongly, I mean, knowing what the main purpose of what we were doing is, denuking. But discussed it at pretty good length. We'll be doing something on it. It's rough. It's rough in a lot of places, by the way.
[Collins:] So a stunning statement from President Trump there, saying that it's rough in a lot of places while talking about specifically the human rights abuses with the North Korean dictator, someone who I should remind people executed his uncle and a dozen other officials, had his half-brother killed, starved his people in favor of building up his nuclear arsenal, as well as these death camps here in North Korea, several other things. To hear the president talk about it like that, he seemed to be ducking on the human rights issue when he was sitting there with the North Korean leader. Overall today, several meetings for the president. Certainly, an historic day. We'll wait to see what this day means for history. But it started out with that one on one meeting between the two leaders and just their translators. Then it turned into this bilateral meeting and later on into a working lunch. And then we saw the two of them come out and sign this joint statement. A joint statement that the president says was very comprehensive. He talked about it in very glowing terms. We watched both of them put their name on paper about the statement. But when you look at the statement here, Alisyn, it's hard to see what the United States is getting here. Beyond a vague commitment to denuclearization. This did not include the phrase that the president, his secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, has been parroting for months. That is CVID, complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization. That language was not included in this agreement from President Trump. So it's hard to see what the United States is getting here beyond and what they're giving up. You know, the more he talked about this, he said they'd agreed to stop these exercises. He said he eventually wanted to withdraw those 25,000 United States troops from the Korean Peninsula. He didn't say any new sanctions. So certainly, a stunning day here, Alisyn. Certainly historic. But we'll just have to see what kind of historic day it does turn out to be.
[Berman:] All right, Kaitlan, I'll take it from here. Kaitlan, thanks so much. And no doubt the world right now is trying to understand exactly what President Trump announced just a few moments ago, that the U.S. will halt these joint exercises with South Korea on the Korean Peninsula. And we do have some breaking news. We just got a statement from South Korea. Unless you wonder whether this was a concession from the United States. Listen to what South Korea says. This statement from the Blue House, their White House. It says, "At this moment we need to figure out President Trump's accurate meaning and intention of this comment. However, we believe we need to seek various measures how to efficiently move forward the dialogues during serious talks are being conducted to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and establish relations between the North Korean and the United States." "We need to figure out the president's accurate meaning and intentions." That is South Korea, the United States' partner there in these joint exercises. Joining this now to discuss all of this, CNN chief national security correspondent, Jim Sciutto; CNN global affairs specialist and former U.S. special representative for North Korea policy, Joseph Yun. He knows more about this than anybody. Also with us, CNN chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour. Christiane, I want to start with you. Just step back for a moment. The president says this is a step forward, this comprehensive agreement with North Korea as he calls it. Is it comprehensive? Is it a step forward?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Chief International Correspondent:] You know, just that breaking news you just read from the South Korean presidency, we've just been on the phone with the foreign ministry, and they're all trying to figure out exactly what that giving up of the as the president said war games, the joint military exercises exactly means. Which leads us to believe that even though he's been in consultation with his allies, it looks like this was offered without having talked to his main ally on the peninsula, and that would be President Moon Jae-in. That is what that statement seems to imply. And therefore, we're all right to be seriously concerned about how that happened and why that happened and what did President Trump get back for that. You know, it was it was amazing to see the two leaders together. It's always better for there to be a path towards talk and dialogue and a peaceful resolution to these terrible and huge nuclear issues. But, it is very, very important to state that that declaration, signed by both, did not give what the U.S. said it wanted and what the allies said they wanted, which was at least a commitment by the North Koreans to start the dismantling and denuclearization process and not one that talked about the Korean Peninsula, because that is the old formula. That is the formula by which the North Koreans, Chinese, Russians want to denuclearize the Americans and the South Koreans in the whole area. They want the U.S. out of the area. And today President Trump did a little bit to satisfy that wish from North Korea, Russia and China. So, it's going to be incredibly difficult to figure out and we're going to have to wait and see exactly what he got back from Kim Jong- un at this time. Meantime, the North Koreans are telling their people the whole point of the trip was for their leader to be taken seriously and to be recognized as an equal international, you know, figure and head of state. And that's what this summit accomplished for them John.
[Berman:] And Ambassador Yun, you know, we were sitting here, you know, and you have been in the middle of these negotiations and discussions with North Korean for decades, for years and years and years. And you yourself acknowledged that you were criticized for being soft on North Korean during the end of your tenure, yet you were surprised at what was delivered here.
[Joseph Yun, Global Affairs Specialist:] I was quite surprised. And I looked at the document. I said, is this for real? You know, because it does not meet what I call minimum requirements in terms of what we expect them to do and what they expect us to do. I mean, Christiane made a very valid point, and then you pointed out, South Korea is a little confused. What does it mean, you know, to stop war games? This has been the standard demand, that we stop joint military exercise, for decades now. We've never given that in, because it's been our right, and it means readiness for our troops. I mean, what's the point of having troops there if they're not ready? And if they're not ready, if they cannot exercise? And so that needs to be clarified with the South Koreans and also by the White House exactly what do we mean? Is this, you know, forever or while these talks are going on? Just for next month? And so we need to you know, White House needs to fill us in and, by the way, let the South Koreans know. By the way, John, you know, tomorrow very interesting regional elections in South Korea, where President Moon looked like he's going to win big. I don't know whether this is going to influence it. South Koreans have huge equity on what happened today in Singapore.
[Berman:] Let me tell you a little bit more of the president's news conference. And this issue is one he will have to deal with in the coming hours. Did he concede too much to Kim Jong-un? He says no. Listen to this.
[Trump:] We haven't given up anything other than, you're right, I agreed to meet. And I think the meeting was every bit as good for the United States as it was for North Korea. But I just wrote down some of the things we got. And they sure, they got a meeting, but only a person that dislikes Donald Trump would say that I've agreed to make a big commitment. Sure, I've agreed to take a period of time and come here and meet and that's good, but I think it's great for us as a country, and I think it's good for them.
[Berman:] Well, he agreed to a meeting. That downplays the significance of this meeting for Kim Jong-un and appearing on this stage as an equal to President Trump, the equal number of flags, the equal placement of all the delegates on the podium. It also, I think, diminishes the idea that the United States basically agreed to the North Korean version of language on denuclearization. Let me just read that. Reaffirm, "Kim Jong-un reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula." The mere word "reaffirmed" tells you it's not new.
[Jim Sciutto, Cnn Chief National Security Correspondent:] There's a clear imbalance in specifics. The U.S. has made very specific commitments to end the exercises. The president even brought up withdrawing U.S. troops from the peninsula, a security guarantee to our closest ally, the one with the most skin in the game, which is North Korea's neighbor South Korea. That's very specific. North Korea gave no specifics on time line for denuclearization. No specifics on how that will be verified over time. These are the things those are the details that folks were looking for to see what the U.S. got from this. There's a clear imbalance in specifics for what the U.S. is saying it's going to give and what North Korea is saying. And what is a test? If South Korea, again, your closest ally in this issue here, comes out of it and says, "We've got to figure out what just happened here," that shows not only that you didn't coordinate with the South Koreans on this statement on concessions, et cetera, but that South Korea has questions about how this went down. I mean, if they're saying that publicly, I have to imagine that, in private, there's a fair amount of nervousness, which I and Joseph knows them better than me, but I've spoken to South Korean diplomats prior to this. And they were concerned about what was going to be given and whether they will feel as secure afterwards. And just one more point I would make. You talk about defining things on North Korea's terms. The president called those joint U.S.South Korean military exercises provocative. Now, that's something the U.S. has never said. The U.S. has said they're never provocative to North Korea. This is about building our alliance. This is about peace in the region, et cetera. The president defined those exercises on North Korea's terms, which U.S. presidents have never done before. They've taken great care to say, "This is not about you. This is about peace in the region. It's about preparation in the region." The president just played by South by North Korea's rules on that issue.
[Berman:] You know, it's so interesting. People are going to look at the day and look at the pictures of President Trump standing side by side with Kim Jong-un. Again, it's never happened before. No sitting U.S. president has ever met with a North Korean leader. That's historic, and talking is always good and preferable to the alternative. But when you get to the specifics, Christiane, we talk about the North Korean, the exercises on South Korea, and we also talk about human rights. Really, it's fascinating what the president said. He spoke about human rights, again, on terms on terms that I would think that Kim Jong-un would love. He said sure, things are rough in North Korea. But things are rough everywhere, in a way equivocating on human rights, on a regime that has been called, you know, a wartimes committer against its own people, Christiane.
[Amanpour:] Yes. I mean, John, for sure, the human rights issue is a massive issue when it comes to North Korea. And there's no doubt about it. I mean, it has death camps and gulags. It's had a famine because of its own policies, not because of an accident of weather or or crop failure, its own policies. And that, of course, was in the '90s. But it has a very, very dire record on human rights, as we've all reported for endless, endless years. The president, as you said, sort of equivocated as he does, like, well, all sides have problems or it's one of many sides that does ugly or rough things. But the truth is, the U.N., the U.S. have it very, very high, if not the highest on their list of human right violators. Having said that, the main issue of today's summit was denuclearization. The biggest threat to the region and to the United States and to the world is the North Korea's nuclear and intercontinental ballistic capability, and on that it appears the president fell short. At a very minimum, experts have told me, they needed to have got a declaration from North Korea of what they had or a plan for, in a week, they would come back with a piece of paper and tell them, "We have this many nuclear weapons. We have this many intercontinental ballistic missiles. They're here, here and here. We're going to allow you to get the IAEA and all the other experts to verify it over a period of time. It will take a long time to disarm, but this is our start. Apparently, that did not happen. And then you have to ask, was the president's action on on ending or suspending, we're not quite sure which, the war games, the joint military exercises, was that inadvertent or was it deliberate? Because there are those who believe and the president has said it himself, that he would like the troops to come back. And there are many who believe that, you know, the U.S. out of Asia is is a presidential desire and, by the same token, it would be very good for China to fill that gap very, very quickly.
[Berman:] Yes. All right. Christiane, Ambassador Yun, Jim Sciutto, thanks very much. Alisyn, as I throw back to you, there seems to be this serious dichotomy, this split between the president's pride in what happened here, what he thinks he achieved here and the results that we're seeing, you know, on this paper before us, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] Well, the devil will be in the details, but for the moment, it's a historic day, and he's achieved more than any other U.S. sitting president, at least with this historic summit and handshake, so we will dive into those details of what comes next, John. Meanwhile back here at home, we have news to tell you about, President Trump's chief economic adviser Larry Kudlow is recovering this morning from a mild heart attack. This is according to the White House. The president announced the news in a tweet 25 minutes before that historic first handshake with Kim Jong-un. CNN's Joe Johns is live outside Walter Reed Medical Center in Maryland with more. What do we know, Joe?
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] That seems to be the message, Alisyn, that it was a very mild heart attack. We do know Larry Kudlow has been under a lot of pressure over the last three months. That's as long as he has, in fact, been on the job. As you said, the first word of this coming from the president in a tweet before that handshake and followed up a little bit later in a statement from White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, saying in part, "Kudlow experienced what had his doctors say was a mild heart attack currently here at Walter Reed. Doctors say they expect him to make a full and speedy recovery. Then the president and the administration send their prayers to him and his family. Of course, he's had a tremendous amount of work to do. He was, as you know, an opponent of tariffs, having to push through the president's tariffs plan more recently, having to take on the Canadian prime minister after that controversial G-7 meeting. Of course, at that time, Kudlow saying that Canada had, in fact, stabbed the United States in the back. A close former adviser to the president, also a close associate of Mr. Kudlow says he does expect them to make a recovery and says he needs to stop smoking. Back to you, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] That would be a good start to recovery. Joe, please keep us posted on his progress there. Thank you. So President Trump bonding with North Korea's dictator but feuding with America's long-time allies. So what happens when the president gets home?

[Sciutto:] Breaking news, you are looking at live pictures out of Phoenix, Arizona. Protesters waiting to welcome, greet President Trump he arrives for a campaign rally there tonight. Trump hoping to begin to turn things around after his much criticized response to Charlottesville. But a leading member of Congress now pushing to remove Trump from office, in part because of his response to Charlottesville. Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Speier becoming the first member of Congress to say that Trump should be removed through a never before invoked section of the 25th Amendment that lets the vice president and a majority of the cabinet declare him, quote, unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. She recently tweeted, quote: POTUS is showing signs of erratic behavior and mental instability that place the country in grave danger. Time to invoke the 25th Amendment. And Congresswoman Speier is joining me now. Thanks very much for taking the time to join us.
[Rep. Jackie Speier , Intelligence Committee:] Thank you, Jim.
[Sciutto:] So explain to us, our audience, what exactly you are basing this on? What specific examples can you cite as evidence that the president is not stable enough to fulfill his job?
[Speier:] Well, there's actually a growing mountain of evidence that the president has been very erratic, has shown a mental instability. It was crystallized last week with a combination of his comments about fire and fury that he offered up against Kim Jong-un and North Korea and how we would take him out, followed by his back and forth on Charlottesville and how he really became almost abusive in calling people out when he was really telling from his soul what he thought about the Charlottesville incident. And I think the combination of those, coupled with the fact that there has been a lot of people behind the scenes talking about his instability in Congress for some time now, if you go back in time like six years and watch interviews that he gave then where he could put a whole sentence together, but now tends to put a few words together and then goes off into another sentence unrelated to the first. It is an indication to me that there is some trouble there that is more than just a one off. And I am concerned for the American people. I am concerned about him having his finger on the button that could send nuclear warheads around the world. And
[Sciutto:] But let me ask you this because some of this can be attributed to perhaps a distasteful personality or personality, or a style that some would find distasteful. But the standard of mental instability or an incapacity, you know, to carry out the duties of office, that's quite that's quite a high standard to me.
[Speier:] Well, first of all, if it has been invoked before, George W. Bush. It was put in place when he had a colonoscopy during his presidency and then, you know, he reestablished his presidency after the test was done.
[Sciutto:] That was temporary, as opposed to
[Speier:] That was temporary.
[Sciutto:] a continuing inability to do the job.
[Speier:] Well, that's why I'm suggesting that it's really in the court of the vice president and the majority of those members of the cabinet to make that determination at this point whether or not that incapacity is preventing him from doing his job.
[Sciutto:] You mentioned there some of the requirements to meet the standards set by the 25th Amendment. Just in brief, we'll lay them out because the audience may not be aware. But you need the vice president and a majority of the president's cabinet of course, he appointed his cabinet secretaries. So you have that. Or Congress or a body appointed by Congress. And then, a later stage, to make this permanent if the president were to protest, you need a vote of two-thirds in both the Senate and the House. You have a Republican vice president, of course, in Mike Pence who's been very supportive of the president throughout. The president would have appointed his cabinet secretaries, so folks that he picked for the job. And you still have a majority in both the Senate and the House. Do you see that those as hurdles that practically could be met to reach the standards of the 25th?
[Speier:] I think that the ball is in the court of the vice president and the members of the cabinet. Clearly, the Congress is not going to move on the 25th Amendment or impeachment. The numbers aren't there and meanwhile, we are hearing members on both sides of the aisle talking with great consternation about the instability of the president of the United States. At some point, we've got to stop whispering about this and talking about it in terms we can all understand. I mean, if the emperor has no clothes, then it's time for not just the child to speak up, it's time for members of Congress who serve on behalf of the American people to speak up.
[Sciutto:] Congresswoman Speier, thanks very much for joining us tonight.
[Speier:] My pleasure. Thank you.
[Sciutto:] And OUTFRONT next, "Breitbart" editors thought they were e- mailing Steve Bannon, but they were actually writing to a prankster posing as the boss. Just what were they plotting for Jared and Ivanka? And the treasury secretary's wife showing off in a jaw-dropping Instagram post. The former actress once played Marie Antoinette. Is she the 21st century version of the queen?

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] We're covering the official memorial ceremonies for former President George H.W. Bush. Let's also go to the White House right now. Our correspondent Kaitlan Collins is joining us. Kaitlan, President Trump will be here up on Capitol Hill later this evening I understand to pay his respects?
[Kaitlan Collins, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. In the next hour or two, President Trump and the first lady, Melania Trump, are going to come up to Capitol Hill to pay their respects, and then tomorrow, they are expected to visit with the Bush family at the Blair House. That's the president's guest house that is right outside the White House that the president has invited them to stay in while they're here in Washington. And, Wolf, of course, it is no secret there's some animosity between the president and the Bush family since that 2016 campaign when it turned ugly. But since president, the former president died on Friday night, there's been nothing but praise from President Trump, who cancelled his press conference in Argentina, he said, out of respect for his predecessor, for the former president. And he also followed protocol and sent Air Force One to pick up his casket to send him here for the final flight from Texas to Washington. Now, he is going to visit with them tomorrow and then he is expected to attend the funeral on Wednesday, but, Wolf, we are told he will not be speaking during that funeral.
[Blitzer:] Kaitlan, the decorum the president is expect to display later tonight is quite different from what we've seen earlier today. Tell us about that.
[Collins:] Yes. He's had quite a different tone for the special counsel Robert Mueller. It seems he has bottled up his anger while he was in Argentina over the weekend and now he has tweeted multiple times today, going after the special counsel, saying they are trying to get people to lie instead of telling the truth, and also tweeting about his former attorney, Michael Cohen, saying he wants him to get the maximum penalty for his crimes that President Trump says are unrelated to him. He wants him to go to prison for that. And also tweeting about Roger Stone this morning as well, which some people saw as dangling a pardon in front of him. Now, as far as Michael Cohen, President Trump says he should go to jail for these crimes that he committed that he says were unrelated to him, but, of course, Wolf, we know that two of the most high-profile guilty pleas that have come from Michael Cohen have been, one, violating campaign finance laws which he says he did at the direction of President Trump and, two, lying to Congress, which he says he did out of loyalty to President Trump. So we're continuing to see him lash out and go after his former attorney Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right. Kaitlan, thank you. Kaitlan Collins over at the White House. Let's bring in CNN political correspondent Sara Murray right now. Sara, tell us a little more about what is going on in the Russia investigation that clearly provoked the president's bitter attacks earlier today.
[Sara Murray, Cnn Political Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, I think part of the president's frustration or concern is that the probe seems to be inching closer and closer to him. You know, we learned from some filings related to the Michael Cohen case, of course, the president's former personal attorney, that Michael Cohen was keeping then- candidate Trump apprised of what was going on with the Trump Tower Moscow project into June of 2016. Now, in one of the filings we got over the weekend, Cohen also pointed out that he was in touch with the president's lawyers as well as White House staff when he was crafting his congressional testimony. That testimony that he would later admit was actually a lie. We also learned that there was a period of time when Cohen actually believed that he would get a pardon from president Trump if he sort of stuck to the party line, and eventually he came to believe it was unlikely. That's why we saw the change of tone. So, obviously, these were all unsettling developments to President Trump. You need to look no further than his Twitter feed to see that, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] What could we learn from Robert Mueller later this week? There's a lot of anticipation, Sara, building right now.
[Murray:] We could potentially learn a lot, because we know that in the filings Robert Mueller puts out, he gives sort of bread crumbs, inklings of where his investigation is going and what he has learned. And on Tuesday, we're expecting to get a sentencing memo in the case that Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, this is one of Mueller's earliest cooperators and someone we know almost nothing about in terms of the information he's providing. We really haven't heard much about what he's providing to investigators or really what's going on with him since December of last year, when he decided to plead guilty. So we should get an update on that. And then on Friday, there will be an interesting filing in the case of Paul Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman, who had a plea deal going, he had this cooperation deal going, all of that went up into flames. Mueller's team said he's not being honest with us and they're supposed to explain a little bit more on Friday about why that was the case, that cause this plea deal to blow up. So, that will certainly be an interesting development as well Wolf.
[Blitzer:] We'll watch all of this very closely. Sara Murray, thank you very much. We're going to continue our special coverage. Much more on the breaking news right after this.

[Whitfield:] All right. Welcome back. This July 4th holiday, members of Congress are back in their home districts and likely hearing an earful about the ongoing battle over health care and the latest Senate proposal. There was no vote in the U.S. Senate on the health care bill and now some lawmakers are proposing the August recess be shelved so that a health care plan can be reached. New fireworks sparked when President Trump tweeted "repeal now, replace later." That option introduced and supported by Senator Ben Sasse.
[Sen. Ben Sasse , Nebraska:] We can do a combined repeal and replace over the next week, that's great. If we can't, though, then there's no reason to walk away. We should do repeal with a delay. Let's be clear. I don't want to see anybody thrown off the coverage they have now. I would want a delay so that we could get straight to work.
[Whitfield:] All right, big problem, the repeal then replace plan is not on the table for Senate Leader Mitch Mcconnell. Meanwhile, at least one Senate Democrat is proclaiming his willingness to work with President Trump.
[Sen. Joe Manchin , West Virginia:] He is our president and I want him to succeed. I want him to know there are Democrats that want to work with him. But right now, they can't even repeal it. They can't get 50 votes to repeal it because somebody is getting hurt more than what they're willing to sign on to. Then look at some of us, work with us Democrats who are willing to meet you in the middle. I'm looking everywhere I can to work with them and work with this White House and work with this president, my president, in trying to make things better.
[Whitfield:] All right. Joining me now to discuss all of this is Democratic Congressman Ted Deutsch of Florida. Welcome and happy holiday weekend.
[Rep. Ted Deutsch , Foreign Affairs Committee:] Thanks. Same to you, Fred.
[Whitfield:] Have you been receiving an earful from your constituents while home?
[Deutsch:] Sure. Absolutely, and there is just such anger over the way that this health care bill was done. The Senate crafted this thing in private behind closed doors. Then they sprung it on the American public. And it's little wonder they didn't want people to know. It would cut 22 million people off from access to health care. It guts Medicaid by 35 percent. It's going to result in people being kicked out of nursing homes. It's also going to result in people who desperately need treatment for opioid addiction, not being able to get that treatment and it's going to do away with the essential health benefits that the Affordable Care Act provides. This is a terrible bill. And the suggestion that somehow we would be better off if we simply cast aside the Affordable Care Act altogether and put insurance companies back in charge of our health care, that's even worse. So, yes, I've heard a lot about it. People don't like it. There's a reason that it's so incredibly unpopular.
[Whitfield:] So then, what do you say to your constituents who say something needs to be done to repair, fix Obamacare, even those who say replace it altogether? Are you in step with Democratic Senator Manchin who says he wants to see this president succeed? He wants to find other Democrats who are willing to assist in shaping a new plan? Are you there?
[Deutsch:] Well, Fred, I have been saying for years that instead of doing what we have been doing in Congress, which is having these meaningless votes to repeal Obamacare, we should have been working to strengthen it. And I still think the goal has to be to strengthen it to provide more competition, to bring down costs. There are a whole host of ways that we can do that but only if there's a willingness on the part of Republican leadership to actually work to accomplish that instead of trying to live up to some campaign promise to repeal Obamacare, a partisan stunt that would cost millions of Americans their access to health care.
[Whitfield:] So, it's your belief that this president and some members of Congress are too hung up on repealing, you know, as opposed to working on how to improve the existing plan?
[Deutsch:] Well, I don't think there's any question about that. All you need to look at is that the dozens of times that we've had votes to repeal the Affordable Care Act when President Obama was president, when we could have been working together to strengthen the markets, to ensure more competition, to bring prices down. Look at where we are now. Candidate Donald Trump said that we ought to give Medicare the ability to negotiate lower drug prices. Candidate Donald Trump said we would never cut Medicaid and yet here we are. And the president now, President Trump is taking the same reckless approach that Republican leadership has taken in the past. We should be working together to strengthen the Affordable Care Act, to provide more access at a lower cost instead of looking at a piece of legislation that cuts access to health care and raises costs on everyone else.
[Whitfield:] So what do you think is going to happen? The Republicans have had seven years to do away with or reshape Obamacare. There have been more than 50 votes to repeal, replace it. That didn't happen unsuccessfully. So now what? What do you see happening, particularly for people who are counting on health care right now, who are worried about what's going to happen next year? How do you see it playing out this year?
[Deutsch:] Right. Well, there are lots of millions and millions of Americans who are worried about not just whether or not they're going to continue to have coverage, but whether that coverage is going to continue to ban discrimination for pre-existing conditions. Whether that coverage is going to continue to provide access to essential benefits, like maternity care and pediatric care and emergency room care. They would like this partisan stunt to end and they would like the Republican leadership to be willing to reach out, sit down and have a conversation about strengthening what we have now. That's the approach that I hear my colleagues talking about. Let's make the Affordable Care Act stronger, not this really dangerous approach that would be so detrimental to millions of Americans.
[Whitfield:] Congressman Ted Deutsch, thanks for your time and happy Fourth weekend.
[Deutsch:] Thanks very much. Happy Fourth to you.
[Whitfield:] All right. This week, Trump and Putin will finally meet face to face, now that Donald Trump is president and might it resolve some real world problems, or will this just be a chance for the two men to size each other up? We'll discuss next.

[Christi Paul, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning to you, I'm Christi Paul.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] And I'm Martin Savidge in for Victor Blackwell.
[Paul:] President Trump is waking up in Hawaii this morning, he's going to begin at high-stakes Asia tour hear leaving for Japan today. The first stop there on his 12-day, five-nation trip, that's where he's going to be meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister. And on a the docket certainly is North Korea.
[Savidge:] But of course the President's travels come amid the ever- widening Russia probe and his mounting public criticisms of the Justice Department. But yesterday he and the First Lady paid respects at Pearl Harbor, they laid a wreath inside the USS Arizona memorial. And they tossed flower petals into the water and then, took a tour of the site. More than 60 women have made assault or harassment accusations against movie mogul, Harvey Weinstein. But now, one case, in particular, may make a difference in bringing the suspected serial predator to justice. A New York police source says the allegations from this actress Paz de la Huerta could result in the first criminal charges. That's from our Brynn Gingras who is on this case and has more about it. Brynn?
[Brynn Gingras, Cnn National Correspondent:] Christi, Martin, there are open investigation against Harvey Weinstein in New York, L.A., and London. But now the NYPD says it has a case that could actually put Weinstein behind bars.
[Gingras:] A New York Police Department source says, this is the strongest chance of bringing criminal charges against Hollywood producer, Harvey Weinstein. ROBERT BOYCE, ASSISTANT CHIEF,?
[Detective Borough Bronx:] We have an actual case here.
[Gingras:] 33-year-old actress Paz de la Huerta best known for her role in Boardwalk Empire says Weinstein raped her on two separates occasions in late 2010. Detectives say she's credible because
[Boyce:] The ability to articulate each and every movement of crime, where she was, where they met, where this happened, what he did.
[Gingras:] de la Huerta tells CNN, she first met Weinstein when she was 14 acting inside her house rules, a movie he produced. So 12 years later, when Weinstein offered to give her a ride home from a club, she says she didn't feel uncomfortable until they were in her New York City apartment. She told CNN her story on the phone.
[De La Huerta:] He pulled my slip dress up and he unzipped his pants and he yes, he raped me.
[Gingras:] de la Huerta says it happened again nearly two months later.
[De La Huerta:] The first time I was in just complete shock and it just happened so quickly. The second time, I was terrified of him, in a million ways that I knew how to say no, said no.
[Gingras:] Weinstein's representative did not respond to CNN's request for comment regarding de la Huerta's allegations. But through a spokeswoman, he has repeatedly denied any allegations of nonconsensual sex. More than 60 women have accused the movie mogul of sexual harassment or assault. And NYPD source says the department's rape hotline has fielded dozens of calls about Weinstein. But de la Huerta's case stands out because it fits within the statute of limitations.
[Boyce:] This person was still in New York and it was recent, we should make way to make the arrest, no doubt. But we're talking about 7- year-old case and we have to move forward in gathering evidence.
[Gingras:] de la Huerta says she's been working with police and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office on gathering evidence, including accounts from her friend and a therapist who she confided in after the alleged attacks. The D.A.'s office would only say, a senior sex crimes prosecutor is assigned to this investigation.
[De La Huerta:] I'd like to see him go to jail and I think he's a rapist. He's gotten away with it for too many years, it would be nice to imagine that justice exists.
[Gingras:] Earlier this week I reported the source said, they have one other open case against Weinstein in New York. Christi and Martin?
[Paul:] Brynn, thank you so much. So, let's get the legal aspect of this with CNN Legal Analyst Page Pate. Stick in around a lot of well, a lot of discussions today, I know a lot to discuss today. So, first of all, without physical evidence in this particular in this particular case, what is the most valuable element for New York prosecutors?
[Page Pate, Cnn Legal Analyst:] The testimony of the victim. A lot of people don't realize this, but in most rape prosecutions, sexual assault prosecutions, there usually isn't any physical corroborating evidence. I mean, if it's something that happened within the last 12, 24 hours, they may be able to do a rape kit at the hospital. They may be able to collect physical evidence to corroborate the victim's testimony. But especially when we're talking about a historical case, a case that goes back several years. You're usually just going to have the victim's testimony, so it's going to be a she said, he said type of situation.
[Paul:] The last we heard, Harvey Weinstein, I believe was in Arizona seeking treatment is what his people said. If he is out of State, how does New York get him back if charges are filed?
[Pate:] Well, it's simple. It takes some time. They have to first get an arrest warrant from a judge in New York, then they have to seek extradition from Arizona. So, they'll send that warrant to the authorities in Arizona. They will arrest him in Arizona, hold him there, have a brief hearing, a short hearing and then move him back to New York to face the charges.
[Paul:] We keep hearing him saying, you know, his contention is that any allegations of nonconsensual sex were wrong.
[Pate:] Sure.
[Paul:] If his defense that he thought it was consensual? Is that all he's got?
[Pate:] It sounds that way. And again, that's commonly the defense you have in these cases because you don't want to try to say, well, I wasn't with her at this time because there'll probably be witnesses or other evidence that can document that they were together. So, it is common, in fact, if not the most common one of the most common defenses is, yes, we did it, but she wanted to do it. And so, consent becomes a major issue in almost any sexual assault case.
[Paul:] Of course, that we're hearing this morning that Netflix is not going to be involved with any further production of "house of cards" that includes Kevin Spacey as all the news, a news come out about sexual harassment and assault allegations against him in the last week. He is seeking unspecified treatment. I don't know what that means. Do you have any idea what that means and does it make him vulnerable to lawsuits in some degree? Because he did get on Instagram and essentially apologize to one alleged victim this week.
[Pate:] Yes, yes, well, he is already vulnerable to lawsuits. I mean, the one protection that people like Kevin Spacey have is that most states have statutes of limitations for civil cases that are different for criminal cases. So, I believe in California the time period is like five years. So, if you don't file suit after the incident happens within that five year period, you can't ever sue him. But, some people still proceed with those cases thinking, well, he's a, you know, high profile guy, maybe he'll give me some money just to avoid having this play out in the media. A lot of times we'll see people who are in that position who think the civil suit's coming or maybe even a criminal charge trying to seek the treatment, the unspecified treatment. Which maybe he needs it, maybe it's beneficial, but I think it's more geared towards, look, if I had a problem I'm addressing it. And sometimes I can help you negotiate a criminal case as far as punishment, but not avoid it.
[Paul:] All right, Page Pate, we so appreciate your insight
[Pate:] Thank you, Christi.
[Paul:] this morning on all things today. Thank you. All ready. Well, listen now we want to tell you about more sniper teams, observation teams, thousands of officers along a route here. We're talking about New York City. And the mayor there says tomorrow's marathon will go forward as planned despite the terror attack we saw earlier this week. Stay close.

[Sen. Chris Coons, , Delaware:] if they're coming to the conclusion that they just can't put the president on the witness stand in front of Special Counsel Mueller or even have him provide written testimony, that suggests something that reinforces some of the more disturbing allegations in the recently released book by Bob Woodward that the president can't keep to a consistent line in describing the events of 2016 that are being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn:] I don't know if you listened to the one-hour- plus speech that former President Barack Obama just delivered in Illinois, but he was really tough on the president. Point after point after point, going after him. This is really the first time he's delivered a campaign-type speech like this since leaving office. I wonder if you want to give us your reaction, if you think the former president was right in slamming the current president.
[Coons:] Well, Wolf, it's unfortunate that we're in a place where President Trump routinely personally and sharply critiques, criticizes attacks of former President Obama. And for much of the last 18 months, President Obama has largely remained off the political stage. This just highlights the extent to which the upcoming midterm elections in November will largely be all about President Trump. And I wish that we could have elections that really focus on the needs and the concerns of people in our states and our districts rather than having it all be about the contest between the current and former president. That's where I suspect this is going to head. It's my concern that we're veering away from what the average American wants us to do here in Congress and in the upcoming election, which is to focus on their concerns and their needs rather than what we've learned in the last year and a half, is that we've got a president who is really adept at making the day about him, day in and day out. My concern here, Wolf, is that President Obama may simply be feeding that dynamic where it is all about President Trump.
[Blitzer:] Your Republican colleague from South Carolina, Senator Lindsey Graham, says he has a new theory on this article by this unnamed senior Trump administration official that was published in the "New York Times." Listen to this.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham, , South Carolina:] This op-ed piece about the personality of the president, suggesting that he's unhinged and is uncapable of being a good president without being minded, tells me a lot about the Mueller investigation. This, to me, is a signal that if there's there's nothing there with Russia in terms of the president working with the Russians during his campaign. The next line of attack is the man is unfit for office, he's crazy.
[Blitzer:] What do you think of Senator Graham's theory?
[Coons:] Wolf, I don't quite get the point he's making. The implication seems to be that he believes that editorial in the "New York Times" was written and placed not by a senior administration official, who while loyal to Trump's agenda, has concerns about Trump's behavior, but instead that somehow it was created by the Mueller investigation. Look, I have a lot of respect for Senator Graham. We work together well on some important foreign policy issues and some legislative issues. But I'll have to go back and listen to that again. That strikes me and more conspiratorial than I'm used to hearing from my colleague from South Carolina. The Mueller investigation has demonstrated that it's not a witch hunt, and it's not a group of unhinged Democrats. I'll remind you, Robert Mueller is a life-long Republican, a decorated Marine Corps veteran, and someone who's leading a team that has so far delivered felony convictions of the president's former campaign manager and a plea to a felony charges by the president's long-time personal lawyer. So I view the Mueller investigation as legitimate. And I think it should be left alone to reach its conclusion, whether that means there's or isn't compelling evidence of collusion.
[Blitzer:] All right. We're going to have a lot more on this. Senator Coons, I know you have a lot going on in the Senate right now. I'm going to let you go. Thank you so much for joining us.
[Coons:] Thank you, Wolf. Thank you.
[Blitzer:] We're getting some new information right now on the future of the attorney general, Jeff Sessions. We're going to update you on that. And will President Trump respond directly to former President Obama? The current president getting ready to speak live. You're looking at live pictures. Much more of our special coverage right after this.

[Lemon:] A small break today for President Trump in the lawsuit Stormy Daniels filed against him, and his lawyer Michael Cohen. A federal judge granting Cohen's request to extend the deadline for them to respond to the lawsuit, they now have a few more weeks. CNN National Correspondent, Sara Sidner has the latest on the case tonight.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn National Correspondent:] Porn actress Stormy Daniels is performing in the mid-west this weekend to counter that infamous on a St. Louis venue's Web site, and a cartoon of President Trump right next to her picture with the words alleged affair. This, as her attorney Michael Avenatti is vowing to refile his request Monday to depose President Trump, following the President's first ever comments about the hush deal.
[Unidentified Female:] Mr. President, did you know about the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels?
[Trump:] No. No. What else?
[Unidentified Female:] Then why did Michael Cohen make those if there was no truth to her allegations?
[Trump:] Well, you have to ask Michael Cohen. Michael's my attorney, and you'll have to ask Michael Cohen.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you know where he got the money to make that payment?
[Trump:] No, I don't. No.
[Sidner:] Daniels is suing to get out of the confidentiality agreement she claims is void because Donald Trump never signed the deal himself. Avenatti says Trump's claim that he knew nothing about the pay off steering reporters to his Attorney Michael Cohen instead bolsters Stormy Daniels case.
[Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' Lawyer:] It's like Christmas and Hanukkah all rolled into one. You can't have an agreement if one party claims they knew nothing about one of the principal terms of the agreement. So the President has just shot himself in the foot, thrown his attorney basically, Michael Cohen, under the bus in the process, put himself in dire straits with the State Bar of New York, because according to the President now, Mr. Cohen was negotiating this agreement, and doing this all on his own without consultation with the President.
[Sidner:] A federal judge granting Trump's attorney's request for more time to respond to Daniels' lawsuit until a decision is made on whether the case is moved out of the courtroom and into private arbitration.
[Keith Davidson, Former Attorney For Daniels And Mcdougal:] You know any subsequent phone calls...
[Sidner:] Daniels former attorney Keith Davidson represented her in that agreement. In an exclusive interview with CNN, Davidson said after he was fired from the case, Michael Cohen was encouraging him to spill his guts about the Daniels case, and the case involving Playboy playmate Karen McDougal, both of them say they had affairs with Trump.
[Davidson:] Michael Cohen called me in the last week or two.
[Sidner:] And what did he say to you?
[Davidson:] He called to offer his opinion as to whether or not Ms. Daniels and Ms. McDougal had breached the attorney client privilege, and there by waived it. And it was his assertion that each of them had. And he was encouraging me, and informing me as to his opinion. And he suggested that it would be appropriate for me to go out into the media, and spill my guts.
[Sidner:] Are you here at the behest of Michael Cohen?
[Davidson:] No. No. No, not in any way, shape or form.
[Sidner:] But he did tell you to go out on spill your guts.
[Davidson:] Right, yes.
[Sidner:] Why do you think that is?
[Davidson:] Well, you have to ask him.
[Sidner:] Now, CNN is learning, after the Daniels deal was done, Cohen referred a client to Davidson. Davidson tells us the client was Chuck LaBella, a producer on "The Apprentice," The Miss USA pageant, and Miss Universe, all involving Donald Trump. LaBella had an issue with actor Tom Arnold, who tweeted several times last fall that LaBella possessed damning information about Trump that Arnold claims involved Russian President Vladimir Putin. Davidson says he wrote a cease and desist letter to Arnold's attorney on LaBella's behalf. LaBella told CNN, a friend did call Davidson on his behalf, but LaBella never considered Davidson his attorney because he never paid him. Then just last month, Arnold commented on Twitter that Michael Cohen had Chuck LaBella hire Keith Davidson to try to keep me quiet about Trump, Russia, Miss Universe 2013. [on camera]: Chuck LaBella had said that the tweets from Tom Arnold are slanderous accusations and outright lies. Michael Cohen has not commented on the story. As for Donald Trump, the White House continues to deny that there ever were affairs with either of the women. Sara Sidner, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Lemon:] Thank you so much. I want to bring in now defense attorney Joe Tacopina and CNN legal analyst Areva Martin, the author of the best seller "Make It Rain." Good evening to both of you. So, Areva
[Areva Martin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Hi, Don.
[Lemon:] we just heard from Sara Sidner there are many twists and turns to the scandal. Did Stormy win this week? Who won?
[Martin:] It was a good week for Stormy, although the we heard about the judge's ruling today where he granted the extension that Michael Cohen's team wanted with respect to responding to this complaint. Now, we know that Stormy Daniels' team wants to go in. They want a quick trial. They want a deposition. They want to move forward with this litigation. And the federal judge is saying, wait a minute, something has to be decided. I have to make a decision about whether this matter is going to be referred to private arbitration. I'm not going to allow you to start discovery. I'm not going to set a trial date because a fundamental question has to be answered as to the validity of this arbitration agreement. Look, when they remove this matter, Cohen's team from the state court to the federal court, they did so for this very reason. They knew that federal judges are no nonsense. They play by the rules. And a federal judge doesn't like the fact that Stormy Daniels' attorney didn't make himself available for what's called meet and confer. They want lawyers, federal judges want lawyers to work out these kinds of things like extensions. They don't want you running into court every time, you know, there is a request, particularly a request like this for a simple extension of time to respond to a complaint. So the judge wasn't too happy with Stormy Daniels' attorney particularly since he found time to appear multiple times throughout the week on national television.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Martin:] So, apparently he had some time where he could have met and conferred but he did not.
[Lemon:] Well, since the judge was piqued with both sides particularly on Stormy Daniels' side with the attorney appearing on television, listen, speaking of, you know, what the federal judge did granting this request for President Trump's attorney to extend the deadline, Joe, to respond to Stormy Daniels' original lawsuit, how much of a win is this for the president, you think? Is it?
[Joe Tacopina, Defense Attorney:] No, a win? It's not a win. It's done routinely. You know, extensions are granted on a daily basis in every type of a case. But this judge made it clear, he granted the extension, but he is none too happy with either party. Understand this, a case like this makes a federal judge want to throw up in his mouth. I mean, they are intellectual for the most part, they're real jurists, they like to deal with matters of importance. And to them, this type of litigation is sickening. And then to see the lawyers on T.V., you know, going back and forth having their lawyers and lawyers on T.V. going back and forth, not doing the work but arguing, you know, their points, you know, publicly, is not what a federal judge wants to see. But granting the extension is not a win. He didn't dismiss the case or the claims.
[Lemon:] Isn't it right out of the president's playbook? Isn't he sort of fighting fire with fire? But maybe that works for the court of public opinion but not for a federal judge?
[Tacopina:] Yes, it's dangerous. It's dangerous. I mean what happened yesterday I Don, I want to make sure you understand the significance of it. He finally opened his mouth. I was shocked that the president hadn't commented on this at all. So against his character. Almost an admission obviously. But the fact that he said what he said on Air Force One yesterday just changes everything in this case. He confirmed what Michael Cohen has been had initially said
[Lemon:] Right.
[Tacopina:] when he was doing that slide, which is the whole thing about he didn't know about the lawyer paying $130,000 of of money to Stormy Daniels for this confidentiality agreement.
[Lemon:] Yes.
[Tacopina:] If that's the case, the agreement is fraudulent. It's null and void. It
[Lemon:] I got to get a break in, Joe. Let's talk about let's talk about that on the other side of the break, and then we'll play we'll play what the president said. We'll be right back.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Well, look, it's funny until people start losing their coverage. That's why it's got to get ironed out. The Senate, very important to watch.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Time for CNN NEWSROOM with John Berman. Happy Friday.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] You guys have a great weekend. You have both earned it. Thank you very, very much. We got a lot of breaking news this morning, so let's get to it. The breaking news this Friday, the lowest unemployment rate in 10 years, 4.4 percent. That is a headline and a good one for thousands of people. A brand new jobs report out just moments ago found that the U.S. economy added 211,000 jobs last month. That is well above expectations. I'm joined now by CNN's Chief Business Correspondent, star of "EARLY START," who always exceeds expectations, Christine Romans. This is a good jobs report.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Chief Business Correspondent:] It is a good jobs number, and it's double the jobs created. More than double the jobs created that economists have been expecting. Let me show you what the unemployment rate looks like first because this is really kind of the headline grabber for me 4.4 percent for the unemployment rate. It has been trending lower since 2009, but now you've got a milestone here. It is now the lowest in 10 years. May 2007 was the last time you had 4.4 percent unemployment. May 2007 was before we knew what was going to happen in the economy, subprime mortgages, the housing market, an economy that blows up, a recession, and a global economic crisis. So that is a real milestone here. Let me show you the jobs created and what the chart looks like for that, 200,011 net new jobs created. The expectation had been for more like 190. And look at March. For some reason, employers were a little more cautious in March. That was about 79,000 jobs created, but bounced back in April, John.
[Berman:] With a vengeance. Where are the new jobs?
[Romans:] We see jobs created in the financial services sector. That's banking, that's insurance. Those are office jobs. They tend to pay a little bit more money. In health care, John, 37,000 new jobs in health care. We went back, crunched these numbers. Since ObamaCare was signed into law, 1.5 million health care jobs have been created. Many of those jobs on campuses, Eds and meds, you know, university campuses where they have big teaching hospitals. They know that there are millions of new paying customers in the health care system because fewer people are uninsured, and they have been adding extensively there. That would be something to watch in the health care debate. Also manufacturing saw 6,000 jobs created. The last few months, there has been a pick up in manufacturing jobs. This time last year, you were losing manufacturing jobs. This year, they're picking up. And many economists are saying that's because of a little more enthusiasm because of President Trump's policies, at least his pro- manufacturing in America policies. So they might be ramping up a little ahead of that.
[Berman:] Do we know anything about wages?
[Romans:] Wages only 2.5 percent. And I had wanted to see that a little bit more. You know, I'd like to get that back to 3 percent or so, but just not there yet. So wages have been 2.5 percent is not bad, but this particular month-on-month wage growth was the weakest since August.
[Berman:] And just a quick point on this, when we talk about job creation and job growth, when you have unemployment at 4.4 percent, that is around or near what we call full employment. You can't get much lower than that.
[Romans:] So, no, you can't. And there are five or 6 million people who are sort of the left behinds of the financial crisis who haven't found their place back in the economy. There are also five or 6 million open jobs today, right? So there is a disconnect between skills and education and what companies want or where they can place them. So that is a big policy issue, I think, for this White House. And I know many of the business leaders who are talking to the President, who are sitting at those round tables, they are telling him, Mr. President, we have open manufacturing jobs today. We have open jobs today but we're not finding the right skill set of the workers. So that is a policy question, I think, that will have to be answered if the President wants to get his 25 million jobs added over the next 10 years.
[Berman:] Right. Although, I keep on checking Twitter to see if he has said anything about the jobs report. I assume we are minutes or seconds away from the White House taking credit or claiming credit for this.
[Romans:] Oh, you think he'll take credit for it?
[Berman:] I think he might. I think he might. Christine Romans, thank you very, very much.
[Romans:] You're welcome.
[Berman:] We'll see you again in just a little bit. Paging Dr. McConnell. That is, Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader. It is all up to him because now it's all in the Senate's hands after the House passed a measure to repeal and replace ObamaCare, a bill that even some Republicans admit has some serious flaws. Some pre-existing conditions, if you will. But in this case, the President is guaranteeing the pre-existing conditions will get full treatment.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The Senate is looking forward to getting it. Mitch McConnell knows how to do things. Well, it could change a little bit. It could get maybe even better.
[Berman:] All right. The President still in his victory lap or maybe his victory round of golf at his club in Bedminster, New Jersey, but we are going to Capitol Hill where, despite the sense of mission accomplished that we saw yesterday, the fight is really just beginning today. CNN's M.J. Lee on Capitol Hill. The Senate's turn,
[M.j. M.j. Lee, Cnn National Politics Reporter:] That's right, John. The past few months have felt very long and painful for House Republicans. Well, this process just got a whole lot longer. Here is what happens next. The bill that was passed in the House yesterday, that now moves over to the Senate. The problem is that Senate Republicans have already basically indicated that they're not really interested in the bill that the House passed, at least not in its current form. We know that there is already a working group of senators, including moderate senators and conservative senators, who are trying to figure out what could actually get through the Senate. Now, keep in mind that they are using the budget reconciliation process. So this means that everything in their bill needs to comply with the board rule so that makes things even more complicated. And the bottom line, John, is that whatever comes out of the Senate is likely to look pretty different from what came out of the House yesterday. And the two sides, at some point, will have to hammer out their differences. And this means that before President Trump sees anything on his desk, it could be months and months. Now, having said all of that, we should talk about the bill that the House passed yesterday because it fundamentally gets rid of some of the basics of ObamaCare. So for example, the subsidies that are in ObamaCare, those are out. They're replaced by refundable tax credits. The individual and employer mandates, those are also gone, replaced by penalties for people who let their coverage lapse. Older Americans could be charged more for coverage under this new plan, and Medicaid expansion also goes away by 2020. Now, John, the one issue that became the biggest political fast point in the House is the issue of pre-existing conditions. And here is what House Republicans after a lot of fighting and a lot of debating settled on. They settled on letting states ask for waivers. You know, waivers that could allow them to not cover pre-existing conditions. And this is such a big deal because so many people have pre-existing conditions. That list is very, very long. We are talking about everything from cancer to diabetes to medical disorders or mental disorders. So this is a very controversial issue in the House. They really struggle to deal with this. And now the Senate will have to figure out how to deal with pre-existing conditions all over again.
[Berman:] All right. M.J. Lee for us on Capitol Hill. Let's go to the political side of things. Let's talk about the policy side of things, the medical side. Joining me now, CNN's Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Sanjay, great to see you. M.J. just ran through, you know, what's in, what's changing, what's out. You know, what's out, individual mandate would be out in the House bill. Essential benefits would be changing or out. Pre-existing conditions, changing or out. And more choice. People should get more choice in purchasing insurance, that's in. So this effects everybody to a certain extent, but who does it affect most?
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] Well, it certainly effects people who utilize the health care system the most. And this is sort of one of those points, John. That, for a lot of us, you know, we still feel sort of a little insulated from this whole issue if you are someone who doesn't go to the doctor much or you don't go to the hospital very much. There's a 117 million in this country who have some sort of chronic illness. This is the most important issue in their lives right now. And so people who are older, people who are sicker are going to be affected the most because they can be charged more. And I just want to make one quick point to this thing you raised about the essential health benefits. You can give people more choice if you say that health care plans don't have to have essential health benefits anymore. Insurers can say, well, that means we can now offer, you know, skinny plans or really pared down plans. The problem with those sorts of plans, though, is that, for a lot of them, they don't cover many things, including things like in- hospitalization. If you're 25 years old, John, and you think you are immortal but you get in an accident and you need inpatient hospitalization and your plan doesn't cover it, all of a sudden you don't really have a health care plan. So, yes, more choice, but those plans are really cheap and useless, though, as well.
[Berman:] No, that's a great point. And you get the same situation when you talk about lowering premiums.
[Gupta:] That's right.
[Berman:] One way that anyone who takes a basic economic class, lower premiums if you stop covering sick people as much. If you don't treat or cover sick people as much, premiums will go down. It will happen that way. It's just a choice that, as a society, you know, people need to go in with open eyes before they make. We talk about pre-existing conditions, Sanjay, and that's become the hot point of the debate here.
[Gupta:] Yes.
[Berman:] I was at a charity that deals with sick kids, and the person running this charity told me she was terrified about what happens to these sick kids going forward because they will all have a pre- existing condition throughout their lives. High-risk pools, do we know the history of how well or not well they work?
[Gupta:] Yes. I mean, that's a good point because we do have some data here. We're not sort of dealing in total conjecture when it comes to high-risk pools. They have been tried before. And, you know, they are what they sound like, right? You're taking the people who are the highest risk, who have the biggest health care concerns, and lumping them all in one pool. If you think that's going to be expensive, you're right. Obviously, that is more expensive. The concern has been, you know, how much does it really cost? And what they found in the past was that states that have tried really could not afford it, and they dismantled these high-risk pools because they were very, very difficult to maintain. Both for the people administering it and for the patients as well, really expensive, didn't offer as much in terms of health care. And, again, John, these are people who actually utilize the health care system.
[Berman:] Yes.
[Gupta:] These are people who actually need the health care system. So they expect about 5 percent of people who are on the individual market to go to a high-risk pool. That's an estimate. But even if you took that low estimate, it would still be hundreds of billions of dollars that it would cost, not the $138 billion roughly that is set aside for this now.
[Berman:] And just because you have a pre-existing condition right now doesn't mean that your life or your insurance will change. Explain that aspect for us.
[Gupta:] Yes. So there is no longer guaranteed protections for those with pre-existing conditions. What that means is the states now get to decide. The states can apply for a waiver. Which if they apply for a waiver, that means they can if somebody lets their insurance lapse for more than 63 days, they can then charge those people a higher premium. Now, you say, well, look, just don't let your insurance lapse for 63 days, right? The problem is that 30 million people last year let their insurance lapse for close to three months because it is expensive, because they lost their job, because of a variety of reasons. So a lot of people would suddenly be penalized, you know, who would be diverted to this high-risk pool, no longer protected against pre-existing conditions.
[Berman:] No. And people with pre-existing conditions often go in and out of jobs.
[Gupta:] Sure.
[Berman:] Just like people often go in and out of Medicaid. So lapsing is something that does and will happen. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thanks so much.
[Gupta:] Yes.
[Berman:] The facts here and the details do matter so much going forward so we're going to try to stay on this. I'm joined now by a politician who will be at the center of this discussion going forward, Senator Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, himself opposition. Senator, thanks so much for being with us.
[Sen. Bill Cassidy , Louisiana:] Thank you, John.
[Berman:] And now I know this is a hypothetical and before you tell me you're not going to answer or decide on a hypothetical, I do think it matters so people understand how things will act going forward. If you had to vote up or down on the House bill today, how would you vote?
[Cassidy:] Well, it's not a hypothetical because I will not be. The Senate will write its own bill, that's clear. Mitch McConnell has made that clear, and others in leadership have made that clear. So we'll be writing our own bill addressing some of the issues that you and Sanjay spoke to.
[Berman:] So since, you know, I won't get an answer to that, let's break this down because you said that you want a final bill that fulfills President Trump's promises to lower premiums, maintain coverage, and protect those with pre-existing conditions. So let's break this into parts. Does the House bill, as it stands now, sufficiently protect people with pre-existing conditions?
[Cassidy:] We don't have a score in the House bill, but let's just speak to the positive because I think, if we focus on the House bill, we are totally ignoring what the process is going to be. The process is that, moving forward, the Senate will write its own bill and attempt to address those concerns that you have laid out, that President Trump laid out in the campaign. I and Susan Collins and four other co-sponsors have come up with what we call the Cassidy-Collins Bill, the Patient Freedom Act. We take care of people with pre-existing conditions. We do it by expanding the risk pool so that those who are sicker, if you will, are in a pool of those who are younger and healthier. It works. That's how every big risk pool does it. We have a plan on how to address that. I personally will be working forward to implement that plan.
[Berman:] And so, again, let's talk about, as you put it, the positive then. Let's go down that road. You have proposed a bill along with Susan Collins. I went to her website, which has a clear explanation of some of the promises that are made. She says, "This proposal keeps essential consumer protections, including prohibitions on annual and lifetime limits, prohibition of pre-existing conditions exclusions." Again, just so we understand where we're headed, in your mind, do you think allowing states to get waivers from the community rating, does that achieve your promise of protecting people with pre-existing conditions?
[Cassidy:] If you have a big pool, think about Exxon Mobile, which probably has about 50,000 employees, and they are all in this Exxon Mobile health care plan with their families, spouse, and children. If one person of 20 people get liver transplants or other expensive illnesses, it doesn't matter. Within that big 50,000 risk pool, the expense that is, you know, associated with a very expensive procedure is spread out among the many, the younger, the healthier. Now, if we can expand the risk pool, we take care of those with pre- existing conditions. I do think that we should take care of those with pre-existing conditions. There should be guaranteed issue, if you will. And the way you adjust that cost is, again, to absorb it in a large pool, just as I just described for Exxon Mobile.
[Berman:] Guaranteeing coverage or some kind of plan or they can't be excluded just because they had pre-existing conditions is different than, as you well know, guaranteeing an affordable rate. Is the idea that people with pre-existing conditions could be charged higher premiums than other folks, is that a nonstarter for you as you look forward?
[Cassidy:] In the Patient Freedom Act, we actually allow have community rating, if you will. Those of a certain age would all be charged the same amount of money. So we addressed that fact.
[Berman:] OK, so
[Cassidy:] And so we addressed that fact, again when you say nonstarter, that's kind of an absolute. For example, Maine has an invisible high risk pool. Dr. Gupta spoke about how they never work. In Maine, this one actually worked pretty well. But somebody was in an insurance plan and they actually didn't know they were in a high risk pool because what the high risk pool did, it came in the backside of their insurance plan and kind of supported the patient's extra needs within a standard insurance plan. Now, whenever you give me an absolute, there always has to be a context.
[Berman:] I understand. As you well know, sir, there are no pure absolutes in politics, but it does sound like what you are saying is that given your [inaudible], people would be more or less guaranteed the same rates, community ratings as people with pre-existing conditions or not. I think that's what I'm getting for you. If I could cover one other point.
[Cassidy:] Absolutely. Absolutely.
[Berman:] OK. Because the House bill, we don't know whether that's the case. We don't know because it hasn't been rated by the CBO. It may be that people with pre-existing conditions can be charged a lot, right?
[Cassidy:] Theoretically, yes, but we don't know because we don't have a CBO score. We will have a CBO score before we vote on the bill in the Senate.
[Berman:] Which is a luxury that you will have which no member of the House had yesterday, which is notable and I know you've been critical of. So you're not in any way responsible for that. The "Wall Street Journal" reported something very interesting about the House bill. It basically said that there is a back door out of guarantees, including employer plan guarantees of no ceiling on lifetime limits, no ceiling on annual payouts. In other words, they could cap how much they give to their customers each year and over a lifetime. This is something again that you have been very, very concerned about. Could you support a bill? Let's not talk in absolutes, but in general terms, could you support a bill that allows insurance companies to cap their pay-outs to customers?
[Cassidy:] As you present that, I ask does it pass the Jimmy Kimmel test. Was the child born with a congenital heart disease be able to get everything he or she would need in that first year of life? I want it to pass the Jimmy Kimmel test. So simple answer, I want to make sure and the bill accomplishes this, that if a child is born and has Tetralogy of Fallot, I think that's what this child had that they would receive all these services, even if they go over a certain amount. So the simple answer, I want to make sure folks get the care they need.
[Berman:] Senator, it sounds like you have your work cut out for you to craft something new, and apparently very, very different than what the House has proposed. We'll let you get to work. Senator Bill Cassidy from Louisiana. Thanks so much, Doctor. Appreciate it.
[Cassidy:] Thank you, John.
[Berman:] All right, we have breaking news out of Somalia where a U.S. service member has been killed. Two more wounded. We will have the very latest on that in just a moment. Plus, President Trump with a plan he says to push U.S. interest abroad with a very unusual travel itinerary. The first foreign trip for a president unlike anything we have ever seen. Where is he going? We'll tell you in a moment. Plus a new case of people being kicked off a plane. This time it involves children, very, very young children. Why the look of disbelief in this man's eyes? Next.

[Berman:] All right, we have live pictures from Orlando, Florida. We're expecting a press conference very shortly from the sheriff of Orange County there. There's been a shooting at a workplace. We are told there were multiple fatalities. That is all the information we have right now. We don't know the name of this office. We don't know how many people were killed. We are told the situation at this time is currently stable. And again we're minutes away from getting much more information from the sheriffs there. We'll bring you that news conference when it happens. In the meantime, a huge story coming out of the Middle East, a diplomatic crisis there, the likes of which we have not seen for some time. Six countries have cut off ties with the key U.S. ally of Qatar. Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt, the UAE, the Maldives and Yemen, all accuses Qatar of supporting terrorism. Now this morning Qatar is pushing back, calling the accusation unjustified and a fabrication. This move comes after the president was in Saudi Arabia speaking to leaders from all the Gulf nations, calling on all of them to crack down on terrorism, to work together to crack down on terrorism. That seems less likely this morning after this series of events. Joining me now, CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr. These countries are of huge significance, Barbara, to the United States.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] They are, John, and a huge significance to the United States military especially operating in the Middle East. This is posing a dilemma for the military to try and figure out very quickly what this all means for U.S. military operations, especially in the fight against ISIS because the U.S. bases a good deal of its capability in Qatar. They operate at that large air base known as Al Udeid. They run an operations center out of there that coordinates all the combat air operations across in the region in the fight against ISIS. None of this is being seen as anti-U.S., but still, you know, no one knows what the next steps may be here diplomatically that could make it more difficult for the U.S. to operate in Qatar. The secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, talking about the need for everybody to take a deep breath and sit down and talk about it a little earlier today. Here's what he had to say.
[Rex Tillerson, Secretary Of State:] I think what we're witnessing is a growing list of some irritants in the region that have been there for some time. And obviously they have now bubbled up to a level that the countries decided they needed to take action in an effort to have those differences addressed. We certainly would encourage the parties to sit down together and address these differences.
[Starr:] But these differences, what are they? This is really the key to the whole thing. Many of these countries in the Gulf simply feel that Qatar, as much as it is a U.S. ally, is not doing enough in the fight against terrorism and is a little bit closer to Iran than these other Gulf countries want anybody in the region to be. There's a lot of anti-Iranian feeling across the Gulf allies. They are pressing Qatar very hard to distance itself from Iran, and that brings us back full circle, because of course President Trump, the secretary of state, and secretary of defense Jim Mattis have been very much in the region trying to press to get Iran to back off its terrorist agenda, to back off its support for terrorism, so it's going to be a bit difficult to criticize these nations when they are saying they're trying to make the effort to pressure Iran as well John.
[Berman:] And again, with the U.S. military assets in Qatar, you know, fascinating to see what will happen to the flight, the takeoff and the war on terror in Syria and Iraq from Qatar. Do we have any sense that U.S. operations will be at all affected there, Barbara?
[Starr:] Well, you know, it's very early on. And we spoke to military officials early this morning and they acknowledged, they're still trying to figure all of this out. It's not anti-U.S., so they don't feel like they're going to get booted out of anywhere, but this is a network of U.S. operations across the region that really are intertwined. So if you can't really readily operate out of one place, let's say one of these countries says, no, you cannot land a military flight in our country because it's coming from Qatar, then you have to begin to rearrange things. Could the U.S. rebase everything somewhere else? Yes, of course it could, but this is going to be a complication unless this all gets sorted out and everybody understands exactly what it all means for the U.S. military and by all accounts right now they are not there yet John.
[Berman:] All right, Barbara Starr at the Pentagon for us. Thanks so much. Want to bring CNN law enforcement analyst and retired FBI supervisory special agent James Gagliano, and former CIA analyst Nada Bakos. You know, Nada, again, if people woke up this morning and saw that Gulf nations in the Middle East have broken ties with Qatar, I'm not sure necessarily it would have alarmed them right away but it should. I mean, this is an area of really intense and meaningful U.S. interests right now. How do you see it?
[Nada Bakos, Former Cia Analyst:] I agree with what Barbara was talking about with the U.S. base. I mean, this is a major base of operations for the United States. Yet to determine what that means as far as that asset, but at this point, I think Secretary Tillerson is on the right path, that he needs to encourage these countries to sit down and start talking this out. This is something that has been brewing, but this is something that needs a whole-of-region approach from the Trump administration. I think it could be perceived by Qatar that, you know, with Trump's recent visit to Saudi Arabia, that there was a signaling that this was OK for them to do. I think at this point, the Trump administration really does need to get involved in trying to broker some of these conversations so that we can secure our own assets, including the military base in Qatar.
[Berman:] James Gagliano, you know, you worked in the FBI obviously on the line here in the fight against terrorism. How key is it to have a unified front amongst these nations there?
[James Gagliano, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Absolutely. I think from the diplomatic perspective, when you're in the business of building coalitions, and right now the coalition we're trying to build is the fight against ISIS, you need all those nations to line up. And any fracture or fissure in that is definitely, John, going to cause problems.
[Berman:] And this is a huge fissure. This is no minor fissure. This is cutting off relations. You know, it's really a big deal and very unknown territory where we're getting into here. James, if I can shift gears here to FBI director James Comey testifying on Thursday. Obviously, you worked in the FBI. You know, as a former FBI agent, what do you think it is that James Comey wants to clear up in this public testimony?
[Gagliano:] John, I think, first of all, this is going to be a week of high theater. We're three days out from his testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The last time we saw James Comey in front of Congress was the day before he was fired, May 8th. And in that testimony, I've gone back and listened to that and read the transcripts, he's kind of boxed himself in. He answered questions specifically about whether he felt that there were any pressure on put on by the Trump administration to stand down the Russian investigation, or any depletion of resources and he answered unequivocally no. The FBI director's got to deal with that. There are also some records that were kept, they've been referred to as memos. They're actually electronic communications. Those could be subpoenaed. It's going to be interesting to see how far this goes in a public forum because I believe much of this is going to happen behind closed doors in executive session.
[Berman:] Although you do get the sense he wants to get some things off his chest, he wants to go public with information in a way maybe not to defend his firing, but to defend himself against claims by the president himself about the nature of the conversations, where the president has tweeted that James Comey told him that the investigation he was not being investigated.
[Gagliano:] John, no doubt about it, this has become personal. Now I know from hearing James Comey over the almost four years that he was the FBI director constantly speak to this he has put the institution of the FBI up front and said he is looking to protect that. That means he will testify honestly and openly, and he's a private citizen, so it's going to be interesting to see how this invocation of executive privilege is going to work because he doesn't work for the government anymore.
[Berman:] Well, we don't know that the White House will try to go down the executive privilege route. "The New York Times" is reporting they're leaning against it. It would be surprising at this point if they try to do it. Nada, aside from James Comey, there is a lot of smoke or there's a lot of interest, I should say, concerning the meeting that Jared Kushner had with a Russian banker. Now I think people will say, hey, he was meeting with a banker, what's the big deal here? But we're talking about a Russian bank that's not just a bank. Explain.
[Bakos:] Part of it is, is that he didn't have all the necessary disclosures when he went to apply for his security clearance, so it's not just that he was just meeting with a banker. And again, as you said, this isn't just a typical bank. I mean, this bank is also involved in a lot of Russian government operations, so they're working with, you know, quasi arm, or, you know, working with some funding mechanisms. But you know, at this point, when you're seeing national security disclosure forms when you're applying for a security clearance, you have to put down all of the foreign contacts that you've had, and that would be a significant one that I would think would be forefront in his mind. Russia is not one of our top five allies. This would be something that you would, you know, foresee as being a problem if you didn't disclose this. So I think that in and of itself is problematic.
[Berman:] You know, if you ever filled out a form and left that off, Nada, would you get in trouble?
[Bakos:] Absolutely. I cannot imagine maintaining my clearance at that point.
[Berman:] James Gagliano, if you misreported on a form, would you get in trouble?
[Gagliano:] I think if it can be proven. Again, the issue here is going to be intent, and that's going to be difficult to discern. But I would say, yes, as a government employee, that would be something that would be fraught with peril.
[Berman:] All right, James Gagliano, Nada Nada Bakos, thanks so much for being with us. Appreciate it. Again, that testimony from James Comey scheduled for Thursday beginning at 10:00 a.m. CNN's special coverage begins at 9:00 a.m. All right, the NBA Finals heading back to Cleveland and Cleveland finds itself in a 2-0 hole. LeBron James not happy about it. We'll hear from him in the "Bleacher Report," next.

[Cabrera:] Welcome back. On tonight's new episode of "PARTS UNKNOWN," Anthony Bourdain packs the bags for Newfoundland to brave the island's local traditions.
[Anthony Bourdain, Cnn Host, Parts Unknown:] You know what I like to do on a sausage fest themed shell like this one? I like to get liquored up and throw axes at a target, hoping, of course, they don't bounced off and sink into my groin or somebody else's groin. I hate when that happens. Have you done this before?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, yes. They throwing axe in the back of Joe beef until I realized it wasn't really safe.
[Bourdain:] All right. Try not to cut your own ear back?
[Unidentified Male:] You want to draw back. Axe slowly over your head. Lean right in. When your arm is straight out parallel with the ground
[Bourdain:] That's when you release?
[Unidentified Male:] That's it. Is there a William tell kind of story in Newfoundland with the cut of over the head and the father through the axe? Not yet, not yet. Do it proud. Go, Fred.
[Bourdain:] Watch your head there. All right. So far we kind of suck. This is not encouraging.
[Unidentified Male:] Try the double hand, yes. That was close. You know what I'm going to do? Put my ax in good use and cut that monster cheese.
[Bourdain:] Now you're talking.
[Cabrera:] I guess it keeps you humble. I recently sat down with Tony Bourdain and learn more about this adventure.
[Bourdain:] Life in Newfoundland for many, many years was built entirely around fishing for cod. Cod was king.
[Cabrera:] I love cod.
[Bourdain:] And a few years ago due to overfishing, a while back, a complete moratorium was declared on fishing of cod. This absolutely devastated the economy and really had to really require some major, major changes. I'm not an outdoorsy lumberjack sort of a guy. This is a sort of excessively bro-tastic bro-cation. I take two chef friends from Montreal, not from Newfoundland who are very enthusiastic about showing me this part of the country and introduced me to a chef friend of a really incredible restaurant in Newfoundland to introduce me to cod culture. There's some limited cod hunting permitted now. Hunting culture. I mean, this is a place we go to the supermarket and, you know, moose is available in many forms.
[Cabrera:] Wow.
[Bourdain:] It is not a backward place. It is quite a beautiful place. And among the many sights and I think what's people don't know this is a tiny island off the eastern coast of Newfoundland that's not essentially France. It is France. Meaning pay euros, French cars, French food, French people, French language. Just a short hop off the coast. Our own coastline.
[Cabrera:] Amazing. And Newfoundland, I understand there's sort of a shift happening there, though, where they are turning more inward, really, trying to get back to the roots to their own traditions, their own culture, own resources. Tell us a little bit more about this.
[Bourdain:] Well, I think that's a function of, you know, having to move away from cod but they still want to maintain their traditions. They are fiercely independent people. Very aware of the differences between them and other regions of Canada. The chef scene is kind of blowing up there a little bit. And I think that's had a lot to do with reawakening a pride of their own very different ingredients and traditions. And I think, you know, we are seeing the beginning or the early days of a renaissance I hope. You know, again, a really beautiful, rugged part of the world that I don't think has been seen a lot of on American immediate why.
[Cabrera:] You talk about moose and you talk about cod, you eat a lot of fish and meat in this episode. What do you like more?
[Bourdain:] Wow, the fish there is really good. The cod
[Cabrera:] Fresh.
[Bourdain:] After Uruguay I was ready for some fish.
[Cabrera:] Tune in for brand new "
[Parts Unknown:] Newfoundland " tonight
[At 9:] 00 p.m. eastern right here on CNN. And finally tonight, a very happy mother's day to all of the moms out there and extra special mother's day wish to my mom, Judy, and my mother-in-law Anne. My mom is there on the left, of course, my lovely mother-in-law on the right. I mean this from the bottom of my heart, you both are incredible women and such role models to me. The best moms, best grandmothers. Thank you for the deep love, your support, the joy you provide for our whole family. Motherhood, I know, is a blessing but it is not always easy. And as a mother myself, I appreciate you both more than ever. More than words can really do justice. I love you. Happy mother's day. That's going to it for me tonight. I'm Ana Cabrera. Have a great week.

[Unidentified Male:] ...where he face the tremendous opportunity others will reach. So many world leaders at the same time.
[Unidentified Female:] I personally thanks the right people. Hugs the right people and comes out with U.S. being very strong in the end.
[Christine Romans, Cnn:] Today, President Trump makes his debut at the United Nations general assembly. How will the president America first message be received by the U.N. World first mission?
[David Briggs, Cnn:] And politics taking center stage at last night's Emmy awards in a surprise cameo by Sean Spicer left the Hollywood silence, the audience stunned, they were certainly not silent. Good morning everyone. Welcome to "Early start." I'm Dave Briggs. Hollywood was divided on whether Sean Spicer should be laughed at or laughed with at this point.
[Romans:] It was a big night but Sean Spicer there. I'm Christine Romans. It is Monday September 18 4:00 a.m. President Trump headed to the United Nations on the eve of a highly anticipated address to the general assembly. There is a lot on the line for the President who has been a frequent critic of the U.N. Last December President elect Trump twitted United Nations had such a great potential, but right now it is just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time. So sad.
[Briggs:] Today the President has meetings scheduled with the French President and Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu before hosting a working dinner with Latin American leaders with all that is going on, the President still finding time to tweet often. Very often. On Sunday morning he retweeted a video that appeared to him knocking over Hillary Clinton with a golf ball. And yet another, he gave a new cute nickname to Kim Jong-un. Get more from CNN's Athena Jones.
[Athena Jones, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning Christine and Dave. This is a huge week for President Trump. He is taking his first turn on the most high profile stage in the world. We're talking about 193 member nations taking part in the U.N. general assembly this week. A lot of the world leaders are eager to take the measure of President Trump and what kind of message he delivers when he speaks before them on Tuesday. Specifically given the fact Trump has been a critic of the United Nations. He said the U.N. was not a friend of democracy, not a friend to freedom and the United States. It's not clear how much he is going to be tempering that criticism when he speaks on Tuesday. We did get a little bit of a preview from his nation security adviser H.R. McMaster speaking on "Fox News" Sunday. Watch.
[H.r. Mcmaster, National Security Adviser:] He thinks the speech is a tremendous opportunity to reach so many world leaders at same time and emphasize three themes. First, protect the American people. Promote American prosperity and the third is really to help promote accountability and sovereignty.
[Jones:] So there you heard General McMaster say this is a tremendous opportunity for the president to address so many gather of world leaders. It's also a chance for world leaders to hear from the President about how he is going to promote this America first agenda that we've heard him talk so much about. How he is going to promote that at a meeting of a global organization that is aimed at solving global challenges together. One key meeting is a lunch on Thursday with the leaders of South Korea and Japan. The key topic there, North Korea and its nuclear provocations. Christine, Dave?
[Romans:] All right Athena Jones thank you so much. A key part of the President's address to the world leaders tomorrow night will be the North Korea threat, nuclear threat, especially in light of last week's ballistic launch over northern Japan from Pyongyang. For more on this we turn to CNN Global Affairs Correspondent Elise Labott.
[Elise Labott, Cnn Global Affairs Correspondent:] Well Dave, Christine, we do expect the nuclear threat from North Korea to feature prominently in the President's address to the U.N. General assembly on Tuesday. To top the agenda during his meetings with other world leaders. This annual U.N. gathering comes on the heels as you know, of North Korea's latest missile launch last week over Japan. That was in defiance of new U.N. Security council sanctions which were imposed because of North Korea's nuclear test earlier this month. You do see the Trump administration ratcheting up the pressure and rhetoric on North Korea. On Sunday the President alluded to those fresh U.N. sanctions, taking a swipe at the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in a tweet saying, quote I spoke to President Moon on South Korea last night, asked him how rocket man is doing. Long gas lines forming in North Korea. Too bad. His top national security officials fanned out across the Sunday morning talk shows, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley told CNN's Dana Bash on state of the union that the U.S. Security Council is close to running out of options and containing North Korea nuclear program and the United States may have to turn the matter over to the Pentagon. Take a listen.
[Nikki Haley, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] I think we all know that basically if North Korea keeps on with this reckless behavior, if the United States has to defend itself or it allies in any way, North Korea will be destroyed. We all know that and none of us want that none of us want war.
[Labott:] Despite the hard line, I think this week you will see officials continuing to press up world leaders to turn up the pressure on North Korea to find a diplomatic solution. Dave, Christine.
[Briggs:] Elise thanks. President Trump keeping the lines of communication open this weekend with South Korean President Moon Jae- in. The two leaders agreed to intensify sanctions against North Korea after the latest ballistic missile test. Let's go live to Seoul. Let's us bring in CNN Ian Lee good morning to you. Diplomats from both North Korea and South Korea will be in the audience for the speech on Tuesday. What should they expect to hear?
[Ian Lee, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave. For the South Koreans, they're expecting more talk of unity and strength with their allies United States and Japan during this crisis. You'll likely hear more talk about sanctions and pressure. For the North Koreans, that is what they're going to probably be expecting as well, although they won't be as receptive to that sort of talk. And we heard from Korean state media recently saying that Kim Jong-un has called for an equilibrium of real force with the U.S. and make the U.S. rulers dare not to talk about military options against the state of North Korea. So you're having tough talk there from the north. Talking about an equilibrium would be difficult to match the U.S. pound for pound. But when it comes to the region it could be an arms race. If North Korea continues its nuclear program like that here in South Korea there's talks of either South Korea developing its own nuclear weapon or bringing in American nuclear weapons although the President has said he is still committed to a denuclearized peninsula. But it does make for a dangerous situation and the United States saying time is running out for a peaceful solution. Dave.
[Briggs:] And interesting op-ed in the New York Times solidarity against the North Korea threat, check that out on their website, Ian thanks.
[Romans:] All right the Russia investigations appears to be ramping up, President Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen tells CNN he expects to appear before the senate intelligence committee on Tuesday. Cohen under scrutiny reaching out to the Russian government about a possible Trump tower in Moscow during the presidential campaign.
[Briggs:] And the "New York times" reporting the President's legal team is wrestling with how much cooperation to give Special Counsel Robert Mueller. He is now in possession of Russian linked ads ta ran on Facebook during the election. Mueller's team obtained a search warrant to get those ads.
[Romans:] Politics taking center stage at last night's Emmy awards. Host Stephen Colbert getting some lashed that the expense of the president by poking fun of his obsession with winning.
[Stephen Colbert, Late Night:] Even during the campaign, Trump would not let it go. This actually happened. This exchange actually happened in the debate.
[Hillary Clinton, Former Secretary Of State:] There was even a time when he didn't get an Emmy for his TV program three years in a row and he started tweeting the Emmys were rigged.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Should have gotten it.
[Cohen:] But he didn't. Because unlike the presidency, Emmys go to the winner of the popular vote.
[Alec Baldwin, Actor:] I suppose I should say at long last, Mr. President, here is your Emmy.
[Briggs:] Certainly the theme of the night, Alec Baldwin jabbing Trump after winning Emmy for his portrayal of President Trump on Saturday Night Live. The award show also pulling out the major surprise, Sean Spicer stunning the audience.
[Colbert:] Unfortunately, at this point, we have no way of knowing how big our audience is. Is there anyone who can say how big the audience is? Shaun, do you know?
[Baldwin:] This will be the largest audience to witness an Emmy, period. Both in person and around the world.
[Colbert:] Wow. That really suite my fragile ego. I can understand why you'd want one of these guys around. Melissa McCarthy, everybody, give it up.
[Briggs:] I don't think Shaun expected that Melissa McCarthy jab near the end. The other winners include the hand maid's tail for best drama series. Nicole Kidman best actress and Big little lies and comedian Julia Louis-Dreyfus making history with the sixth Emmy for "v."
[Romans:] Yes most Emmy's for a single role, Lena Waithe made history for co-writing the thanksgiving episode of master of none. A really great show.
[Briggs:] Julia Louis-Dreyfus took a shot at President Trump as you might expect as well. Very political night.
[Romans:] All right executives are out in the wake of that huge security fail. Equifax's chief information officer and security officer are retiring immediately. The breach exposed the financial data are millions of Americans. They are now under federal investigation and troubling new information about how the problem was found and how it could have been prevented. A flaw in a web application tool. The maker of that tool says Equifax could have prevented the leak. Apache group discovered the flaw in March, several month before the hack and provided Equifax with a patch. Too fix it. Apache blames Equifax were not installing in a timely manner. Equifax admitted to CNN it knew about the vulnerability, but waited until it found suspicious activity to take actions. After the breach. 143 million people's information breached. Patching software in big corporations does take time. They tell us Equifax should have moved faster.
[Briggs:] We can all agree on that. No question. Second arrest has been made in the connection of the bombing of a London underground train on Friday that left 30 injured. Live to London, next.

[Blackwell:] All right. Bottom left of your screen there shows that Hurricane Harvey is over land. The eye now over land there, dumping feet of rain, we're expecting over the next several days. You see in the top left, the forecast showing it will be over land throughout the weekend. And as we're watching the storm, we're also watching what is coming out of the White House overnight. Let's start with president Donald Trump pardoning former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio. We know he was a staunch Trump supporter; still is. Arpaio was recently convicted of criminal contempt for violating a judge's order in a racial profiling case and continuing to target immigrants at traffic stops. He was awaiting sentencing when the pardon came down. Joe Arpaio has been controversial and for some a divisive figure in Arizona politics for decades. CNN's Sara Sidner takes a closer look at his legacy and his relationship with the president.
[Sara Sidner, Cnn Correspondent:] The case against Arpaio and his department's behavior began in 2007. A class action lawsuit accused him of implementing a policy of racial profiling and unlawful traffic stops of Latinos. Arpaio was sued, accused of encouraging his deputies to detain people for no other reason that they were suspected of being in the country illegally. Known for his tough speak, his department's workplace raids, the tent city where inmates were housed and the pink underwear he made inmates wear, Arpaio argued his department was simply enforcing the law.
[Joe Arpaio, Former Arizona Sheriff:] I'm the elected sheriff, I report directly to the people and I'm not going to be subservient to the federal government when they have come up with no proof.
[Sidner:] But Arpaio lost his argument in a civil lawsuit. In 2013, a federal judge put an injunction in place, ordering the department to halt unconstitutional policing practices. According to prosecutors and a federal judge, Arpaio and his deputies defied the order. Arpaio claimed the order wasn't clear and he didn't mean to violate it. But a federal judge found Arpaio showed a flagrant disregard for the court's order. His critics cheered the decision.
[Unidentified Female:] Racism in any form is wrong and Joe Arpaio, again, has been the center of racist policies and racist attitudes and he has been criminally convicted.
[Sidner:] From the start in 1999, when Sheriff Joe Arpaio was elected to office, he began an crusade against undocumented immigrants. His deputies' actions terrified not only the undocumented but anyone who looked like they could be.
[Arpaio:] Donald Trump will build a wall.
[Sidner:] Arpaio's fiery speech and immigration policies gave him a kind of celebrity status in conservative circles and a kinship with the man who would become the 45th president Sara Sidner, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Paul:] And we also this morning have to talk about what's going on with North Korea because North Korea launched three missiles overnight. This just a week after secretary of state Rex Tillerson praised North Korea for showing restraint with its weapons program. CNN's senior diplomatic correspondent Michelle Kosinski walks us through what's happened now.
[Michelle Kosinski, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Based on the assessment from U.S. Pacific Command, these are three short-range missiles that all failed, two of them in flight, one exploded almost immediately at launch. To put this in perspective, it was just last month that North Korea launched two intercontinental ballistic missiles, you know, seen as a real provocation. One of them flew more than 500 miles. After that, the U.S. president threatened "fire and fury" on North Korea, saying the U.S. was "locked and loaded" after North Korea also threatened to strike the U.S. territory of Guam. And the U.S. believes that North Korea has been steadily moving toward miniaturizing a nuclear weapon. So after all of that tough talk and threats, things quieted down. North Korea hasn't launched anything for weeks and now this. But you have to keep in mind, this comes right in the middle of a 10- day period, when the U.S. and South Korea are working together on military exercises, yes, as a counter to the North Korean threat. But North Korea always sees this collaboration as a threat. So this may well be the reason why Kim Jong-un decided to launch this now, that he wanted to do something, assert himself, express displeasure, by launching short-range missiles but not wanting to fan the flames too much Michelle Kosinski, CNN, the State Department.
[Paul:] Since that report was filed we just want to make clear, the U.S. Pacific commander, David Benham, has said the first and third missiles launched did fly approximately 250 kilometers in the northeast direction, not considered to be failures, so to speak.
[Blackwell:] Well, this morning, the U.S. military is searching for a missing service member after a Black Hawk helicopter crashed during a training exercise.
[Paul:] This happened off the coast of Yemen yesterday. Five service members who were also on board were rescued following that crash. But the military says an investigation is getting under way.
[Blackwell:] Ahead, a man in Texas rides out Hurricane Harvey at home with his family. He will tell us what it was like when it hit.

[King:] Welcome back to the world stage. Now, the U.S. military downed a Syrian fighter jet and now Russia is responding by putting crosshairs on any coalition plane that violates its air space. CNN's Barbara Starr is at the Pentagon. Barbara, the Russian military says it will now consider U.S. planes crossing into center air space as targets. U.S. commanders take that seriously and do they view it as a real escalation?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Well, tensions are rising and rising throughout this very day, John. A short time ago, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition told us that in fact, aircraft, coalition aircraft which largely means U.S. war planes are being repositioned over Syrian air space, that they will fly, they are not detailing it, but they will fly differently because of the rising threat and this is in response to what the Russians have been saying and doing and to what the regime is saying and doing. So we are now within hours of the Kremlin making that statement, that threat against the U.S. military. We are seeing the U.S. military essentially respond with a very public statement, sending a message back to the Kremlin that they will reposition their aircraft, they will be very cautious, but we are told they will continue to conduct operations against ISIS and the U.S. wants to keep that so-called deconfliction line, the communications channel, with Moscow open. So both U.S. and Russian military officials every day continue to talk about where they are flying so there is not a disaster. But this is a day when we saw the Kremlin threaten the United States and the U.S. respond. It's verbal right now but nerves are a bit frayed, John?
[King:] Nerves are a bit frayed. Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Thank you, Barbara. We'll keep an eye on that. As we come back in the room, consider what Barbara just said and what's happening over the air in Syria, I want to take you back last week, a hearing on Afghanistan. The President of the United States has given his defense secretary authority to set troop levels in Afghanistan. John McCain questioning Defense Secretary James Mattis and John McCain is not happy.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] Do you agree that we're not winning in Afghanistan?
[James Mattis, Defense Secretary:] Sir, I understand the urgency. I understand it's my responsibility. We are not winning in Afghanistan right now and we will correct this as soon as possible.
[King:] Well, that was last week. And Senator McCain also writing an op-ed saying, "Six months into the new administration, it still has not delivered a strategy. We cannot keep going like this. If the administration fails to develop a strategy for success, Congress will need to play a greater role." We are five months into the administration. Whether you're talking about the very tense situation in Syria right now or the President essentially outsourcing the decision about troop levels in Afghanistan, is it fair to say the President has not been articulated enough about how he plans to conduct all these things? Or do people think this approach of let the Pentagon, this is a general, this is a seasoned guy, it's his, is that the right approach?
[Calmes:] Well ultimately, the President has I mean, there's not a policy yet, a strategy yet, for Afghanistan or Syria. He had said there would be one for defeating ISIS on his first day in office. We haven't seen it. The you know, the military to some extent can applaud the fact the President has loosened the restrictions, has given them more freedom to make decisions. At the same time, that also has had, we've seen it already where it's had the effect of letting the President distance himself from things. When the SEAL incident went bad in Yemen, he said that was the fault of the generals. So, you know, you need the President to have buy-in and needs to be seen, he needs to be enunciating the policies for the American people. We don't have declarations of war. We don't have strategy. We need to hear from him.
[Raju:] And pressure is going to grow on him presumably to get authorization for use of military force if particularly if this becomes more U.S. involvement, may be even ground troops is potentially escalating, increasing ground troops in Afghanistan. That's going to come this will come with an increasing amount of pressure. But clearly giving Mattis this authority caught a lot of people on the Hill by surprise. Some were felt OK about it though because a lot of them trust James Mattis who was confirmed over
[King:] And candidate Trump said let's get out of Afghanistan. He been tweeted this. So this is before he was candidate, time to get out of Afghanistan way back 2012, we're building roads and schools for people who hate us. It's not in our national interest. So, in some ways this is part of learning on the job. That's not picking on the President. A lot of candidates say things or people before they run for office say things and they get the job and it gets very hard. But there are you hear Senator McCain and others saying Mr. President, you can give Jim Mattis the decision but please outline something for us so we at least know the umbrella strategy.
[Shear:] Well, and that's part of the thing that what's striking about this is that you had several previous presidents, you had a march towards more presidential power. Presidents that want to bring the decision making into the White House, into the National Security Council away from the Pentagon, away from Congress. The debate over whether or not presidents should have to go to Congress more often to conduct the military strikes that sort of fall short of all-out war. This is the first time you have seen a president sort of as Jackie says, kind of shrug off some of this responsibility, which both from a political perspective is kind of strange. And also, Congress is going to start reasserting itself if the president continues down this path.
[Ham:] I mean, he's walking a strange line here, right? Because he's got I think his sort of ethos is to show American strength but also not a ton of interventionism and that's what he promised, right? He also trusts his generals and folks on the Hill, trust them as well. But I think there's a question always in this White House of where's the message coming from and who is authorized to give it. And that's a problem when you're talking about military actions. You have to sell them to the American people.
[King:] Absolutely. And that's the commander-in-chief that's why they call him the commander-in-chief. Thanks for joining us in the Inside Politics. See you back here tomorrow. Wolf Blitzer in the chair after a quick break.

[King:] Today, questions of time and votes in Florida. The deadline to stop the machine recount, now just hours away. Palm Beach County looks certain to miss it. Also this morning, more signs of what you might call counting creep. A judge ruled Florida voters with signature discrepancies now have until Saturday to validate their ballots. The ruling adds about 4,000 total votes to over eight million cast. Now, that's a small number. So small that even if every one of those was validated and broke for the Democrat, it would be too small of a number to erase the Republican lead in the Senate race. The hope now for Democrats, though, is that the court has already shown its willingness to overlook or bend the letter of the law and that it would do so again. CNN's Ed Lavandera down in Tallahassee tracking all this play out. Ed, lawyers for the Nelson campaign in court this morning. Did the judge push back the recount deadline?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] We're still waiting to hear what's going to happen on that front. But all of these lawsuits and hearings swirling around here in Tallahassee, John. And as you mentioned, this is coming as the deadline for the end of the recount coming up here in the next couple of hours in the state of Florida, and we're hearing report of various counties across the state wrapping up. But there are a number of hearings that are still playing out this afternoon here in Tallahassee in the federal courthouse you see behind me where basically one judge is handling the bulk of all of these lawsuits and these questions and these hearings that must be sifted through here in the coming days. And, as you mentioned, that signature issue, that deadline gets pushed back to Saturday. That affects nearly more than 4,000 votes here in the state of Florida. But as you rightly mentioned, John, it doesn't really appear, even if all of those people voted for Senator Bill Nelson, which is highly unlikely, wouldn't really affect the outcome of this race. But this is just one of many cases and hearings that are continuing to play through the courts here this afternoon in Tallahassee, John.
[King:] Ed Lavandera on the ground for us. Ed, raise your hand and come back if anything comes out of the court in the rest of the hour here, obviously, and we'll keep on watching it throughout the day as the deadline approaches. Let's come into the room. These I mean unless something outside of the norm happens, and Florida recounts, we'll have to say, are inside the norm, for better or worse, it's almost impossible no one has a scenario that the Democrats overtake in the Senate race, overtake in the governor's race. This is no recount, on the record anyway, has ever erased a lead that big, and yet the president and other Republicans are so animated about this. I want to read this from the president because it's just reckless. I could use a stronger word. But, here we go. The Republicans didn't win and that's because of potentially illegal votes, which is what I've been saying for a long time. I have no doubt about it. And I've seen it. I've had friends talk about it. When people get in line that have absolutely no right to vote and they go around in circles. Sometimes they go to their car, put on a different hat, put on a different shirt, come in and vote again, nobody takes anything. It's really a disgrace what's going on. To me it's a disgrace that the president of the United States would say such stuff.
[Perry:] We do have a voting problem, which is that about half of the people in the country did not vote in this midterm, despite all of this attention, you know, we gave to it here and so on. That is a problem. I don't know anyone who wants to vote more than once. And you've seen these lines all over the country. We can't get people to vote for less than three hours. The idea that people are driving around is
[King:] Right.
[Bacon:] Look at how Jeff Flake and Martha McSally, Republicans, have handled the process. There's an honorable way to do this. It would be great if the president considered this.
[King:] There's an honorable way to do it when, you know, this happens. Now, do you want your elections counted faster? Do you want to push your state wherever you live to say, can we do this more quickly? That's fine. Do that. But there's no in Arizona, for example, right, the president was saying, what's happen, what's happening? He criticized Martha McSally in this interview with "The Daily Caller" saying why wasn't she calling out fraud? She wasn't calling out fraud because there was no evidence
[Bacon:] There wasn't any fraud.
[King:] There was no evidence of fraud. It's just how they count the votes. The president also says, and help me with this one, please. If you buy, you know, a box of cereal, if you do anything, you have a voter ID. Well, over here, the only thing you don't is if you're a voter of the United States. What?
[Lucey:] He's made versions of this comment before about going to the grocery store and the ID. I'm not sure when he's last been to a grocery store or bought a box of cereal for that matter, but there is obviously no evidence of needing an ID to do this. But this gets back into a long standing lament that we've seen from the president. He is very comfortable questioning the validity of these elections and sewing these
[King:] And when he does when he does, more often than not, almost always I would say, if not always, it's illegal immigrants, Latinos or African-Americans.
[Hulse:] I know where
[King:] You can connect the dots at home, people.
[Keith:] Yes, he is very comfortable sort of undermining democratic institutions in a way that past presidents and most politicians shy away from. You know, the reason that the 2000 recall or the 2000 recount ended, yes, the Supreme Court ruled, but it could have gone further and Al Gore conceded. He didn't claim fraud, he conceded. And often that's how elections end. You know, America doesn't do close elections particularly well. And typically you need the politicians to all agree that the process is the process.
[King:] Right. And the president makes these broad, sweeping, he lost the popular vote because five or six million illegal immigrants illegally voted. Let me flap my wings and fly. But, to be fair, to be fair, is there a distinction? This is Hillary Clinton talking about Georgia. The Democratic candidate, Stacey Abrams, for Georgia governor, has not conceded. She contends there was voter suppression. She also says there are votes still to be counted. Among those saying there's a problem in Georgia is Hillary Clinton.
[Hillary Clinton , Former Presidential Candidate:] I know Stacey well. She was one of my really strong surrogates in the campaign. If she'd had a fair election, she already would have won. She is really in the arena and she is fighting for the right to vote and have your vote counted. And I don't know what the outcome will be, but God bless her for continuing that fight and not walking away.
[King:] Now, that that language there is tame-ish, if you will, but there have been Democrats who have said stolen, who have said fraud in Georgia. Is there evidence to back it up?
[Hulse:] I don't I don't know exactly how it's playing out. I think what she is referring to, Secretary Clinton, was some of the things that happened before the election. You know, closing polling places, moving things out. And, plus, in that election, her opponent was the one running the election. So that was also, I think, sort of a troubling situation. It strikes me about the president that certain things stick with him about these elections. He's I think he's referring again to Bernard Langer, the golfer, remember that incident, where he thought he was going to be able to vote there. The signature issue is real. It's the new hanging chad. And I think people are just discovering this. I think that the Republicans are way over the line in the in the language that they're using down there, undermining these elections. But it goes to show you how worried they are. They don't want to have another election get away from them in the Senate. Now, is it a huge difference, one more in the Senate? But it's a big difference. And it's also a state that the president's probably going to needs to win
[Lucey:] Yes, the president wants control of that state for 2020.
[Hulse:] Right.
[King:] So get your monitors in the room. Be aggressive watching the vote count. Be as aggressive as you can be within the law. I'm all for that. But for the president of the United States to allege these vast conspiracies, again, taxpayer funded, you're paying, it's a lie. Up next, Nancy Pelosi's growing math problem as more House Democrats say they will not back her to be speaker.

[Keilar:] Venezuela is a country in political chaos with an international community that is taking sides and U.S. diplomats who are caught in the middle. Right now, there are two declared leaders. You have Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and self-proclaimed president, Juan Guaido, which is why there is a challenge here. You have President Trump, along with leaders from Canada, the E.U., many Latin-American governments, throwing their support behind Guaido, all Latin-American governments, we should say. Maduro, though, is still backed by the military and key countries, like Russia, Turkey, China, Mexico. Former U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Bill Richardson, has served as an election observer in Venezuela. He has met Maduro many times. In fact, he just saw him a few weeks ago. And he's joining us now. First, you saw him a few weeks ago in Mexico. Tell us about that.
[Bill Richardson, Former U.s. Ambassador To The U.n:] I did. This was the inauguration of the Mexican president, Manuel Lopez Obrador. I had known Maduro when I dealt on hostage issues with President Chavez. Maduro was a foreign minister. We had a brief interchange, Maduro, and I, because I know him. But he looked a little nervous because he had not been greeted by the Mexican public very well, in the Mexican legislature. He had been booed enormously and he had only attended this kind of VIP luncheon. I could tell he was nervous.
[Keilar:] Mexico backs him, it is clear, but clearly a lot of Mexicans do not. When he was looking at diplomats who Maduro is saying, you're not welcome here, you have two days to leave the country, because he said 72 hours a day ago, and the president is saying, you're going to stay put, what does that mean for the U.S. diplomats in Venezuela?
[Richardson:] It's risky for our diplomats. However, we have a lot of security at the embassy. I don't think Maduro would mess with our diplomats. But I think it was a bold move by the administration, for the AOS, by several Latin-American countries, a majority, to say we're not recognizing Maduro anymore. We're recognizing Guaido, even though Guaido doesn't have much power. He has a little bit of military support but enormous popular support. So I think what we need to do, the international community, is push for the military to say, let there be a free and fair election. I think that should be the diplomacy following the hardline sanctions and efforts of a number of Latin-American countries to basically isolate Maduro. Because Maduro has been he's divided the opposition, he's been skillful in keeping his power, but now, you know, this is a crucial point with this new young leader, because the opposition had been very divided. A 35- year-old guy who has captured the imagination of the Venezuelans. But there's also massive inflation, a lot of corruption, the food prices are out of control. So maybe this is going to be a sign to Maduro that he's got to compromise.
[Keilar:] You worked with AOS certifying Maduro's first election. That's important to note that you were in Venezuela for that. How do you think this leadership struggle is going to play out?
[Richardson:] Well, in the end, it's going to be up three players. One is the Cubans. The Cubans help Maduro with security, with political support. They have to recognize that there has to be a change. The second is Mexico. Mexico is supporting the government is Lopez Obrador is supporting Maduro while most Latin-American countries are not. And then third, Brianna, is the military in Venezuela. They're key. They're the biggest power center. So far, Maduro has most of their support. But that is eroding. But I think the diplomacy should be get the Venezuelan military to insist that there should be free and fair elections internationally supervised. You know Maduro will probably run, but Guaido will run, and I think the reformist candidate will win. But the opposition in Venezuela has been divided. Now it seems to be unified with this young man that we've recognize. It was a pretty bold move to do what we're doing.
[Keilar:] So many of these different roles intersect the important news of the day. While I have you here, as the former governor of New Mexico, I want to ask you about, we're in the shutdown, right? We're in day 34, second paycheck about to be missed. The president recently adopted a new slogan, which is, "Build the wall and the crime will fall." Our Ed Lavandera actually reported from a tunnel at the border and the sheriff he spoke with there does not agree with the president.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] The wall is actually the international borderline. And this black passage you see is actually an old tunnel that was used by smugglers and Mexican authorities have sealed it off. But this is what it looks like underground here.
[Tony Estrada, Sheriff, Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Department:] I think we have the world record as far as tunnels are concerned, over 100, maybe 110, 120 drug tunnels. The more difficult you make it for them, the more creative they're going to be.
[Lavandera:] That's a lot of tunnels.
[Estrada:] That's a lot of tunnels. And at some point, you wonder if there will be a huge sinkhole on this side of the border.
[Keilar:] First, crime has not been rising because of this, we should point out. But there you see the challenge against a wall. What is your reaction to all of this?
[Richardson:] Well, look, Brianna, I was a border governor. I dealt with border issues. There has not been an increase in illegal immigration through borders. It's through tunnels, it's through ports of entry, it's through the ocean, the Coast Guard. It's not through having a wall. It's overly expensive. It's not going to work. People will climb over the wall. They'll go under, as the tunnel shows. I think president and the Congress need to come to an agreement that, more what is needed is more border security. I'm for that, more detection equipment, more Border Patrol agents, more overflights. But a wall is symbolic to the president's political base. But I think now, with day 33, so many travel, TSA employees, my state is being hurt a lot, businesses, federal workers there. We're state-dependent on federal workers, so is the whole country. I'm flying out of here. I don't know if I'm going to get out with some of the TSA employees they're not getting their paychecks. These are honorable people that shouldn't be treated this way.
[Keilar:] Ambassador, thank you so much for being with us.
[Richardson:] Thank you.
[Keilar:] Bill Richardson, former ambassador to the U.N., we appreciate you being here. Just moments from now, the Senate is going to vote on two bills that are going to fail. These are live pictures of the Senate floor ahead of these votes. Plus, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi playing hardball, and she wins. Why did President Trump concede so quickly over the State of the Union address?

[Troy Balderson , Ohio Congressional Candidate:] I'd like to thank President Trump.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] The Republican candidate declares victory. The president takes credit, but the numbers show Ohio's special election still too close to call.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Anchor:] Paul Manafort's lawyers grilled the prosecution's star witness, painting Rick Gates as a cheater and a thief who can't be trusted.
[Romans:] Firefighters gained some ground in the largest wildfire in California history, but the battle is far from over.
[Mattingly:] And Tesla boss Elon Musk stuns Wall Street with a public declaration of his private ambition ambitions. Good morning and welcome to EARLY START. I'm Phil Mattingly, in for Dave Briggs.
[Romans:] And I'm Christine Romans. It is Wednesday, August 8th. It is 5:00 a.m. exactly in the east. And let's begin with this. If Ohio's 12th district is any indication, a blue wave could be coming in November. In a special election that many considered a bellwether for the midterms, the race between Republican Troy Balderson and Democrat Danny O'Connor is still too close to call this morning, an encouraging outcome for Democrats in a deep red district, no matter how it plays out. There are still more than 8,000 outstanding provisional and absentee ballots that could take days to count. Balderson currently leads O'Connor by less than one percentage point, fewer than 2,000 votes. Both candidates spoke late last night, O'Connor refusing to concede, Balderson quick to claim victory.
[Balderson:] I'd like to thank President Trump.
[Danny O'connor , Ohio Congressional Candidate:] Because we see division and discord tearing apart our country. We must remember that each and every one of us are God's children and that all of us need to be treated with dignity and respect. And I think we could use a lot more of that spirit in Washington these days.
[Romans:] President Trump, from his vacation schedule, working vacation schedule, took time to declare Balderson the winner and take credit for it, even though the outcome is not official. The president tweeting, when I decided to go to Ohio for Troy Balderson, he was down in early voting. That was not good. After my speech on Saturday night, there was a big turn for the better. Now, Troy wins a great victory during a very tough time of the year for voting. He will win big in November.
[Mattingly:] Several elements of that tweet, I'm not sure totally track with reality, but he looks like he's on the path to win. Now, we've got a couple of other primaries to tell you about. And shout out to all of the political analysts and nerds waiting for Johnson County
[Romans:] Johnson County is trending on Twitter.
[Mattingly:] It's trending on Twitter right now, congratulations. All right, another race too close to call in Kansas, Johnson County. Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a hardliner on immigration who received President Trump's endorsement, is locked in a very tight race with Governor Jeff Colyer. The official result could be announced later today. And in Missouri, CNN projects Attorney General Josh Hawley is the winner of the GOP primary for Senate. Republicans are hoping he can unseat Democrat Claire McCaskill in November. In the Michigan gubernatorial primary, CNN projects State Attorney General Bill Schuette will be the Republican candidate in November. Former state legislative leader Gretchen Whitmer will be the Democratic candidate. And CNN projects John James has captured the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate in Michigan. James, an African-American Iraq War vet endorsed by president Trump. He will face off with Democrat Debbie Stabenow in November. Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's longtime right-hand man back on the witness stand today. Manafort's defense lawyers expected to pick up where they left off yesterday, trying to undermine Rick Gates' credibility in the eyes of the jury. Gates admitted to a host of transgressions. So far, Manafort's defense team has not done much to pin the bank and tax fraud their client is charged with on Gates alone. That part of their cross examination may come later today. More now from CNN's Jessica Schneider.
[Jessica Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] Christine and Phil, Paul Manafort's lawyers went on the attack against Rick Gates on Tuesday. They hammered him with questions that even led Gates to admit on the stand that he had an extramarital affair a decade ago. But when attorneys accused him of using Paul Manafort's money to fund his so-called secret life, Gates pushed back, saying the money actually came from bonuses. Now, of course, the defense team is doing everything they can to attack the integrity of Paul Manafort's former right-hand man. Gates said he had made some mistakes, but he insisted to the jury that he is now telling the truth. And the defense team really wants to establish that Rick Gates was the one who developed that financial scheme to hide money from the U.S. government, not Paul Manafort. Paul Manafort's lawyer even asked the direct question of Gates, did you develop a scheme? And then Gates responded, no, I just added some numbers to some reports. But really, prosecutors have gone to great lengths to show that it was, in fact, Manafort in charge. At the end of Gates' direct examination, prosecutors were painstaking to show the process where Manafort asked Gates on occasion how to add information to a PDF document, and when Gates said that when he got the document back, Manafort had actually changed some of the numbers, falsifying some of their financial reports. Of course, Rick Gates was a close associate to Paul Manafort for 12 years, but now he's flipped, he pleaded guilty, and he's telling all he knows to prosecutors. So, it will be interesting when he is back on the stand for more cross examination this morning Christine and Phil.
[Romans:] All right. Jessica Schneider, thank you for that. Legal woes multiplying for Michael Cohen. "The Wall Street Journal" reporting President Trump's former lawyer and fixer is now under investigation for tax fraud. Sources tell "The Journal" the federal prosecutor in Manhattan is looking into whether Cohen underreported income from his taxi medallion business. The taxi licenses yielded hundreds of thousands of dollars over the last five years. "The Wall Street Journal" also reporting federal investigators are looking into possible fraud against the bank that financed Cohen's taxi medallion business. Cohen has not been charged with a crime, and "The Journal" reports he previously denied wrongdoing.
[Mattingly:] Firefighters are still struggling to contain the largest wildfire in California history. At this point, the Mendocino Complex Fire has scorched nearly 293,000 acres, 75 homes have been destroyed. And the fire at this point is only 34 percent contained. Firefighters are up against hot, dry, and windy conditions. CNN's Stephanie Elam has the latest from Mendocino, California.
[Stephanie Elam, Cnn Correspondent:] Christine and Phil, we are standing in the midst of some of the devastation from the Mendocino Complex Fire, which is actually two fires that started about the same time, burning near each other here. And you can see how hot this fire got. The devastation here, even in this rural community, you can see that it has really ravaged some of the properties that are here. And just to give you an idea of how bad the fire season has been, if you go down just a couple of blocks from where we are, there's another building that's burned down. You might think it's from this fire. It's actually from a different one. All in all right now, there are some 17 fires that are burning in the state. And just to give you an idea of how bad this fire season has been with this one being the largest fire in state history at this point, some 550,000 acres of land that had been burned in the last three weeks because of wildfires. And, Phil and Christine, fire season is far from over here.
[Romans:] All right. Stephanie, thank you for that. The president is claiming without evidence that California's environmental regulations have worsened the fires raging there. The president tweeted this: California wildfires are being magnified by the bad environmental laws which aren't allowing massive amounts of readily available water to be properly utilized. It is being diverted into the Pacific Ocean. Now, state and federal officials and wildfire experts say these claims are false. They say there is plenty of water to fight the flames. There is a debate in California about how much water should go to cities and how much to farmland, but officials say water is simply not being deliberately flushed into the ocean. That's not happening. We don't know where the president got that idea. Even the White House can't say. His tweets sometimes correspond to segments on Fox News. That doesn't seem to be the case in this instance.
[Mattingly:] Last night, President Trump hosted an informal dinner for some of the country's top business leaders at his Bedminster golf club. The president and first lady welcomed two dozen CEOs and their spouses, including the heads of Pepsi, Fiat Chrysler, FedEx and Boeing.
[Melania Trump, First Lady:] Welcome to Bedminster. It's great to have you here. And we're looking for a great discussion tonight and I just want to thank the president for doing an incredible job and for all of your help.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] The policies of the other administration would have been more regulation and much higher taxes. And what you're witnessing now could never have happened. And growth has taken us out of a lot of problems that have been caused, and you're going to see super growth soon when it's all said, when it's working like a fine-tuned machine. You're going to see some real growth.
[Mattingly:] That guest list also included the heads of some much smaller companies who have been very close allies to the Trump administration over the last few years.
[Romans:] All right. Elon Musk may remove Tesla from the scrutiny of Wall Street, taking it private in what would be the biggest buyout in history. Musk simply stunned investors with this casually worded tweet yesterday, writing that he's considering taking Tesla private. He's already secured the funding. He didn't say where he got the money, but going private would cost, oh, about $71 billion, by far the largest buyout ever. Musk faces pressure to turn Tesla into a profitable carmaker, but Tesla has burned through cash as it struggles to produce its first mass-market car, the Model 3. One analyst says this could be a way to strike back at Wall Street.
[David Madden, Cmc Markets:] This could be a temper tantrum by Elon Musk as a way of saying that I don't have to be bothered answering questions to market analysts or commentators or journalists or being under the scrutiny of Wall Street.
[Romans:] He's a maverick. People who love him call him a maverick. Some on Wall Street, you know, call him arrogant. And he has been contentious on conference calls. Musk told employees that going private is the best path forward, adding that being subject to wild swings in our stock price is a major distraction and going private removes incentives to attack Tesla. He often complains about short sellers, who investors who profit when the stock drops. Musk's tweet sent Tesla's stock up 9 percent. Trading was halted and later resumed, closing up 11 percent. It's really unusual to see such an outspoken CEO talking about these sorts of things. The reason why you're public is so that you have public investors, you have shares sold to the public, and you need to be very open and honest with how your company is going, and he sometimes gets angry about that.
[Mattingly:] It's this weird thing, where you actually get a view into what he's thinking in real-time, which carries a lot of value, but it is also unusual and strange and possibly irresponsible. I do think it's his war with the shorts is playing huge in this.
[Romans:] War with the shorts.
[Mattingly:] Read his Twitter. You can see what I'm talking about. All right. Iowa college student Mollie Tibbetts now missing for three weeks. Coming up, why her father believes she's still alive.
[Romans:] And why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo may be headed back to Pyongyang. A live report after this.

[Sanchez:] Embattled Senate candidate Roy Moore is now going on the offensive against his accusers. In his tweet the controversial Senate candidate says: Good morning, Alabama, day eight of Attorney Gloria Allred's refusal to turn over the yearbook for third party examination. Allred is the attorney for a woman named Beverly Young Nelson, who says that Moore signed her yearbook and then tried to push her head into his lap when the 16-year-old. During an interview on conservative radio, Moore said this about his two main accusers, including one who says she was just 14 years old at the time.
[Roy Moore , Alabama Senate Candidate:] I did not know these two women. I did not
[Host:] So you definitely didn't know Beverly Nelson?
[Moore:] I didn't know Beverly Nelson, and I didn't know
[Host:] Leigh Corfman.
[Moore:] Leigh Corfman. And I never dated underage women and I never engaged with sexual misconduct with anybody. I mean, you have to understand, I was deputy district attorney and then circuit judge. I go by the law. You don't it's very hypocritical. You know, there's law and you enforce it and then you go and violate it. You just don't do that, and I didn't do that. And that's what is being alleged. It's very hurtful.
[Sanchez:] Congressional correspondent Sunlen Serfaty is in Washington. Sunlen, Roy Moore is not backing down. In fact, he's getting more aggressive against his accusers at the days go on. He says he's considering legal action. What do you we know about that?
[Sunlen Serfaty, Cnn Congressional Reporter:] Well, he's very, very vague on this point, Boris. We only know what he said on that radio show, which frankly wasn't backed up by much of anything at all. He just said that he and his advisers are essentially gathering information right now. They're looking for any evidence to potentially take legal action against the accusers. And, of course, we also know he's threatened to take legal action against "The Washington Post" who first broke this story. But he wouldn't address any specifics at all, and frankly, not sure exactly how serious that claim is Boris.
[Sanchez:] Now, Sunlen, on that conservative radio show, Moore alluded to a conspiracy. What exactly did he say?
[Serfaty:] That's right. This is one of the eyebrow-raising moments of the interview. Judge Moore saying that the bombshell allegations were dropped when he was ahead in the polls. Here's what he had to say.
[Moore:] This was a complete shock out of left field. And it came the day after they said I was 11 points ahead.
[Host:] Ahead, ahead.
[Moore:] And this is shock to the Democrats. They saw a seat in Alabama that they could take, and they had the support of someone in the Washington establishment that doesn't really care. They want who they can handle.
[Serfaty:] And keep in mind, this was a comfort zone of force for Judge Moore, exactly where he likes to be arguing about the establishment and really attempting to refrain these allegations as something that was cooked up by his political enemies here against him. So, no doubt, Boris, intended to fire up his base.
[Sanchez:] All right. Sunlen Serfaty, thank you so much for the reporting and happy Thanksgiving as well. Once again Kellyanne Conway is in trouble over endorsements. She's being accused of breaking the law that says that members of administration can't advocate for or against a specific candidate, the Hatch Act. Here's the interview from Fox News that's in question. You be the judge.
[Kellyanne Conway, White House Counselor:] Doug Jones in Alabama folks, don't be fooled. He'll be a vote against tax cuts. He's weak on crime, weak on borders. He's strong on raising your taxes. He's terrible for property owners.
[Unidentified Male:] So, vote Roy Moore?
[Conway:] I'm telling you that we want the votes in the Senate to get this tax this tax bill through.
[Sanchez:] Here's the White House response to the allegation that she violated the Hatch Act. Quote: Ms. Conway did not advocate for or against the election of a candidate and specifically declined to encourage Alabamans to vote a certain way. Joining me now from Washington, CNN justice reporter Laura Jarrett. Laura, happy Thanksgiving. Please help us understand how this came up and take us through both sides of the argument.
[Laura Jarrett, Cnn Justice Reporter:] Well, happy Thanksgiving, Boris. So, the former head of the Office of Government Ethics Walter Shaub, filed a complaint against Kellyanne Conway yesterday, essentially saying she has violated a federal law by endorsing a candidate for office. Now, you notice she stopped short of actually endorsing Moore, but she did lay out all the reasons why one would want to vote for Moore because she's against, of course, the Democratic candidate Doug Jones. But the White House is pushing back here and saying she didn't do anything wrong, she didn't formally endorse Moore and so she should not be sanctioned.
[Sanchez:] Now, Kellyanne Conway was under fire for the same kind of thing in February, but talking about a clothing. Listen to this.
[Conway:] Go buy Ivanka's stuff is what I would tell you. I'm going to get I hate shopping, I'm going to go get some myself today. It's a wonderful line. I own some of it. I fully I'm going to give a free commercial here, go buy it today, everybody. You can find it online.
[Sanchez:] She's talking about Ivanka Trump's fashion line. What was the decision then, and are these cases any different?
[Jarrett:] Right, so two different federal laws, but they both sort of go to the same thing. The Hatch Act violation here has to do with endorsing a candidate. In that situation, it was that she was endorsing a product. And the federal ethic laws on the books explicitly say that public employees are not allowed to do that. So but they're both related to the scope of what a public employee can do in their capacity as an executive branch official. And in the ethics case, you'll remember the White House said they'd counsel her. Sean Spicer came out and said that she had been dealt with, but she did not face any discipline. And we'll have to wait and see whether she faces any in this case, Boris.
[Sanchez:] Yes, we should point out that in terms of enforcing the discipline, if the Hatch Act is violated, that has to come from the president himself. So, we'll see if Donald Trump weighs in on this. Laura Jarrett, we have to leave it there. Thank you.
[Jarrett:] Thanks, Boris.
[Sanchez:] Facebook now making a big announcement about your accounts and whether you interacted with Russian trolls during the election. Plus, the war of words escalating between the president and the father of one of those UCLA players that was imprisoned in China. Why can't either of them just let it go? And new today, tens of thousands of names purged from the FBI's background check system when it comes to buying guns. We'll explain why.

[Keilar:] We have breaking news here in THE SITUATION ROOM. President Trump has just tweeted that budget director Mick Mulvaney will be named his acting chief of staff. Let's go straight now to the White House and our chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta. Give us the details. Tell us what you know.
[Acosta:] Well, we were just saying a few moments ago, the president may be tempted to change up this news cycle, and he did. I guess temporarily speaking. He just tweeted a few moments ago that he's named Mick Mulvaney, the budget director over here, as the acting White House chief of staff. Notice that it says, "I am pleased to announce that Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, will be named acting White House chief of staff, replacing General John Kelly, who has served our country with distinction. Mick has done an outstanding job while in the administration. I look forward to working with him in this new capacity as we continue to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! John will be staying until the end of the year. He is a GREAT PATRIOT, and I want to personally thank him for his service." A couple of things on that, Brianna. Just wanted to note that we were hearing from sources that Mick Mulvaney was not interested in this job, that he was interested in perhaps being treasury secretary or commerce secretary or serving in another function in the government. But I know, you know, having dealt with Mick Mulvaney over here at the White House and talking to various officials who work with Mick Mulvaney, he is seen as one of the people over here who kind of keeps the trains running on time. And so it's not really a surprise Mick Mulvaney's name has come up before. When Reince Priebus left the White House, Mick Mulvaney's name came up. And through all of these news cycles where we thought General Kelly might not make it, Mick Mulvaney's name would pop up again. So it's not surprising that the president would make this selection. I do think it's interesting and maybe a little odd that he is being named on a temporary or acting basis, Brianna. I think it goes back to this notion that the White House just did not have a Plan B when Nick Ayers, the vice president's chief of staff, bailed on the president over the weekend and decided not to take on this job as chief of staff. And so it sounds as though, unless the president and Mick Mulvaney come to some kind of agreement and decide that he'll stay on on a permanent basis, that this is sort of a Band-Aid that has been decided on by the president here earlier today Brianna.
[Keilar:] All right. Jim, thank you so much. Let's bring in our panel to discuss more about this. Dana Bash, you heard Jim. He's reported before Mick Mulvaney did not want this job. Now, this is acting, but what do you make of this? Interim interim, right, is what you'd expect?
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] Yes, exactly. That look, the president has made clear, and people who are close to him have told him, the best thing you can do right now is somebody who has Hill experience. Or at least relationships on Capitol Hill. Now, Mick Mulvaney was a conservative firebrand. Is a conservative firebrand. But when you're a conservative firebrand on Capitol Hill, it means your relationships are mostly not entirely, but mostly with fellow Republicans. I'm not sure how this helps with the new House Democratic majority. But it is temporary. There is no question, because he is happy in what he is doing. Mick Mulvaney is a policy wonk. He likes to be the budget director. And the chief of staff job, as we have seen from the turmoil and drama and chaos around not just the first and second chiefs of staff, but trying to find somebody to fill it in, is just a thankless, thankless job, despite President Trump saying he has all these people who want it. It's just not the case.
[Keilar:] It is a job for someone, Gloria, who can make the the trains run on time. Then the request he is, only until they're discarded.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] Right.
[Keilar:] Which is what we've seen with other chiefs of staff.
[Borger:] Right. First of all, you know, nobody can make the trains run on time at this White House because there's President Trump; and he drives the train off the track half the time. Not to overuse that metaphor. But he does. Secondly, Mulvaney runs a department. He's a conservative, as Dana was saying, awash in red ink. OK? Because the budget deficit has ballooned under him. It has not shrunken under him. I think they're hoping that they can talk him into doing this, and maybe they can. And maybe they can't. And also, it's been a very bad week for the president, a really, really bad week. And they're changing the subject right now, also, as Jim was saying. So, you know, I think I'll put all of those things together. They're keeping their fingers crossed. Maybe he'll do it, maybe he won't. But, you know, at this point, what are their better choices?
[Abby Phillip, Cnn White House Correspondent:] It's also clear that this is not going the way that the president wants it to go. First of all, we started this week by talking about Nick Ayers, the vice president's chief of staff, who was the president's top pick for this job. And who basically turned it down, according to our sources, because he wanted to take it on a short-term basis. And that the president didn't want to accept a person who wouldn't commit to two full years. So now President Trump is saying, "Actually, I will take someone who will take the job -"
[Borger:] For two weeks?
[Phillip:] "- for a short-term basis." We don't even know how long the period of time is. And he's had two other people who were named as possible contenders. Mark Meadows, Republican congressman, and Chris Christie, say they don't want the job. I mean, it is so unusual for people to be taking themselves out of the running as they are being named as top contenders. And it shows you, the president is having trouble filling this position. He's having a really bad week on the legal fronts. And this is an effort to try to change the subject, make it seem like he's back in control of the situation. But I think what it reveals is that this is a huge problem. He's having a hard time finding a candidate who he wants and who also wants to be in this White House at this particular time.
[Keilar:] And we have seen the president try to change the subject before, and we know he is very unhappy with where the news cycle has been this week.
[Bash:] Oh, yes. I mean, there is I don't think any president maybe any individual on the planet, who has watched as much cable news and consumed as much news as this president does. He's well aware of how bad it has been, even if he doesn't have to hear it from a lawyer. You know, he sees it. And he likes to play with the news cycle, and he has the ability to do that, as any president does. In this case, it just so happens that he does need a chief of staff. He was telling the candidates he was talking to that he hopes to come up with a final decision by next week. Maybe that didn't happen, and he just had to convince Mick Mulvaney, obviously, to at least take it temporarily, since he's the closest thing to it already in a White House job.
[Keilar:] But I wonder I wonder, Gloria, how much this can distract from some serious headlines this week, legally for the president, implicated by Michael Cohen's felony plea. He pled guilty to two felony counts, among others. But two that implicated the president. This is just a temporary staffing assignment. It's an important position. But this does not really eclipse what happened this week.
[Borger:] No. Chiefs of staff come and go, as we learned. And it's not going to distract Bob Mueller. You know, Bob Mueller is doing his job. We saw that today in the filing on General Flynn, where he was very tough on General Flynn for lying to them. We see how how he has gotten Michael Cohen's cooperation, and it's very clear to us, who are reporting all of this, that Michael Cohen will continue to cooperate with Bob Mueller. And the president has been caught in lies by prosecutors, saying he didn't know about the payments and then, of course, now we know that he did, because his friend David Pecker told on him.
[Keilar:] Yes.
[Borger:] And they were all in the room together.
[Keilar:] A number of his friends
[Borger:] A number of his friends have turned their backs on him. So, it's been a difficult week for him.
[Keilar:] Joey Jackson, our legal mind here, in this new filing, the special counsel really fired back on Michael Flynn's lawyers, who said that, you know seemed to indicate that one of the reasons he lied to the FBI was because he was caught off guard. And this filing makes clear, no, you lied. You were committed to your lies. You said these lies over and over. What stood out to you in this filing that also came with some attachments that were so interesting?
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, here's the bottom line and I think everyone is addressing it. Everyone, right, is addressing the issue of this president who is a master brander. Yes, other presidents have the ability to push the news cycle, but now we have Twitter. And as a result of that, when you say something, immediately as the president, it becomes news. And so, this is an interim appointment before addressing your core issue, Brianna, right? It's not even this is the guy who is taking over for good and so, therefore, it takes us away from what happened earlier. What we were listening to? We were listening to clips of Michael Cohen talking about he's not going to lie for this president any more. He lied and he's covering up his dirty secrets. And then, we switched to the actual Flynn issue and what at its core was really of issue to me, when you look at that, is that the special counsel is addressing the issue of process. What they're saying is, this isn't a witch hunt. We're not acting outside the bounds of our core responsibility. We're acting properly, we're acting thoroughly, and we're acting appropriately. We went to the White House, he knew we were coming, it was a cordial interview, he was given the opportunity if he wanted to have White House counsel sit or address the issue with him. It was a jovial conversation. There's nothing untoward, there's nothing irresponsible, what we're doing. And if you look at the filing in total, I think that's what he's pushing back on. And the proof of that, Brianna, is at the end of the day they're not saying in light of this, in light of you trying to say that you lied because of us, we're going to up what we're looking for. They're still saying, hey, look, we recognize you're a respected general. You served with distinction, you were the first to cooperate, your cooperation allowed others to cooperate, as well. They're sticking with that. And so, in essence, they're saying we still want you to get the low end if any jail time. They are, the special counsel, concerned with process and to know that they are an office of integrity. So, that's what stands out in the filing in general.
[Keilar:] You're useful to us, but we're not going to let you get away with this. And Abby, the president telling Fox yesterday, this was so interesting that this happened yesterday when this filing came out today maybe they scared Flynn enough that he'll make up a story. What message? Then you have this filing today where they're saying, no, that was essentially, you read between the lines. It rebukes what the president said. What message is a special counsel sending to other people involved in the investigation who the investigation might be looking at?
[Abby Phillips, Cnn White House Correspondent:] It's clear that the special counsel understands what President Trump is trying to do, which is undermine confidence in their process. Trying to imply that they're putting the squeeze on people, forcing them to lie, forcing them to flip in order to get a lighter sentence. So, this filing is kind of them showing their work about what they did to get to this point. And rebutting not only what the president said yesterday, but what he's been saying for quite some time now. He's been saying this about Flynn, he's been saying this about Manafort. And I think you will see him say this more and more. Any time that someone is in a position where they can say something that puts the president in jeopardy, he's going to try to imply that they were forced to lie. And I think the special counsel is laying out in documents that that's not how any of this works. And that there are facts at play here. And when you lie, it is it's clear. It's on paper. It's in black and white.
[Dana Bash, Cnn Chief Political Correspondent:] And that's I totally agree with you about the process, about what Robert Mueller and his team are trying to do to send signals, not just to us, but to Donald Trump and the people who are involved in this investigation. But if you look big-picture, one of the unanswered I think the most unanswered question in this Flynn filing today is why did Michael Cohen lie? Why did he lie?
[Keilar:] Because he should have known! This is
[Bash:] OK.
[Keilar:] This is an accomplished former intel officer.
[Bash:] OK. But in terms of what he did. What did he do? What did he lie about? He lied about having a conversation with the Russian ambassador about sanctions. Why did he have that initial conversation, which he should have known about, and therefore lied about? What was the reason for that? What drove him to do something that was inappropriate to the point that he knew he had to lie about it? And that could go to a core question about collusion, more broadly, or maybe it's just about Michael Flynn.
[Borger:] I think the question that you're getting at is, did someone direct him to lie?
[Keilar:] Precisely.
[Borger:] Did someone direct him to lie or did someone direct him to do what he did? And he didn't want to talk about it? In other words, so he lied say he didn't do it. Is that clear?
[Keilar:] Yes.
[Borger:] That he didn't want to you know, he didn't want to tell the truth, because maybe he talked to Kislyak, the former Russian ambassador, about sanctions at the direction of fill in the blank.
[Keilar:] And that's the question, Joey, was he acting as an island unto himself, or as Gloria says, and this is what the special counsel wants to know, was there was he doing this with the blessing or encouragement of somebody? And who would that be?
[Jackson:] You know, that obviously is the question, right, the million-dollar question. But I think what the special counsel is saying is that, look, don't blame us, for you lying to us. You already stuck in the narrative. And you were stuck in the narrative, because before you even met with us, you had already sold your statement to the vice president; it was already out there in public. And so, you were already on the hook for this narrative that there was no discussion or issues about sanctions or anything else. So, by the time we came, says the special counsel and McCabe and the FBI to interview you, you couldn't change the story. You were looked in a box. That was the basis for your lie. Nothing we did inappropriate to you or forcing you would have told you or shifted the story.
[Keilar:] I'm going to have to have you guys stand by. We have much more on our breaking news. We'll be back in just a moment. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

[Cabrera:] The President is reportedly furious over James Comey's new tell-all book and upcoming media blitz, at least according to his Twitter feed. For more than an hour this morning, the President assaulted Comey's character in a Twitter tirade, calling him a slime ball, slippery, and predicting that he will go down as the worst FBI director in history. All of these comes just hours before a major sit down in interview with Comey, set to air an interview that at least one outlet claims will shock the President, and his team. I want to bring in my panel ahead of tonight's big interview with James Comey, joining us, CNN Political Commentator, and former Trump campaign adviser Steve Cortes, CNN Political Analyst, and Senior Political Correspondent for the Washington Examiner, David Drucker, and National Political Reporter for RealClearPolitics, Caitlin Huey- Burns. So, Caitlin, you're here with me in New York, I'll start with you. It's safe to say that the President is angry, nervous, anxious about this interview tonight?
[Caitlin Huey-burns, National Political Reporter, Realclearpolitics:] Certainly, and we have seen that in the tweets over the weekend, of course. And even before these interview were coming out, the President was tweeting about this, really denigrating James Comey, and what's interesting to me is that I think he could employ a strategy, which is to kind of let this book play out. This book has come under criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike. And so you have kind of both sides of the political aisle sparring about certain details in the book, Democrats, of course, still upset about the decision that Comey made to come out just 11 days before the election about the Clinton information. And some Republicans are saying that look, Comey is taking some personal shots at President that undermine the whole entire premise of the book. And so President could just let that all play out, and move forward talking about the decision that he made on Syria, kind of going through the next week. But remember, he stayed home this weekend from South America, to focus on Syria. This is certainly top of mind, of course, also the Cohen raid earlier this week.
[Cabrera:] There's been huge focus of name calling of liar really on both sides. What we read in these pages from the excerpts from the book, we see reference to the President being untruthful, and the loyalty pledge, operating acting like a mob boss of sort. David, a new ABC news, Washington Post poll though finds more Americans find Comey to be more believable than President Trump. What does that mean for the President?
[David Drucker, Cnn Political Analyst:] Well, look, I think that's what the President's job approval ratings that James Comey is going to be less trust worthy with Republicans, and more trust worthy with independents, and Democrats. And I think that breaks along line according to how you feel about the President personally. Look, I think that it's understandable of the President, if he feels like he's been unfairly attacked, if he's thinks that James Comey is making claims that aren't true, that he would want to fight back. It's a natural human reaction to have. And when you are President of the United States, you are better off doing your day job, people are going to respond to that better, and let a war room that you create to defend you, farm it out to them. That worked very well for Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky investigation, with Special Prosecutor Ken Starr, and I think it would work so much better for President Trump in this case, if they saw him doing things that presidents do. Whether it's from a national security perspective, as we saw within the past 48 hours or so, working on the economy, and just doing everything else, they would then be able to sort of separate, and think about the claims that Comey's making, and the way that the President is acting. But as the President is won't to do, because he feels in some ways, justifiably that it has worked for him, after all, he did get himself away for the President, and he is going to be the White House Communications Director, he's going to be his own war room, and he's going to leave it all out on the field. I think at the end of the day, what we're all going to find out is that he's really great at selling books, but the politics surrounding how people feel at the Russia investigation, and Comey, and Trump are not going to be materially changed at all based on what they're hearing from Trump on the one hand, and Comey on the other.
[Cabrera:] That's correct, we still don't have a communications director in this White House, [Inaudible]. Steve, we do have a press secretary, and White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said on Friday, one of the President's greatest achievement will go down as firing Director Comey. Do you think that would be the case? Because an argument could be made that firing Comey is exactly what led to the Mueller probe.
[Steve Cortes, Cnn Political Commentator:] Right. Well, listen, I yes and no, and I am not usually you know me, Ana, I usually come down very hard in defense of the President. He should have fired him on January 21. And if he had done so, I think it wouldn't have been a very big deal. So I think it was a big miscalculation to delay firing Comey. By the way, this was a few things in Washington, D.C., and there's not many things, whether it's bipartisan agreement. The Democrats, Leader Pelosi, Leader Schumer, agreed with President Trump, that Comey was totally discredited, was totally not believable, did not deserved the leadership of the FBI. I wish he'd fired him immediately. Now, that said you know, that's spilled milk, right? We can't cry over spilled milk. It's still good that he's gone. I think Director Comey, by the way, really in his book tour, which I think he thought would somehow be his shining moment. I think if anything is the opposite, I will see this tonight, and in coming days. He comes across as a whiney, complaining, disgruntled employee who was fired for a very good reason. And talk about majoring in the minors, the kinds of things he talks about President Trump, his tie is too long, his height is too short, his tan is too intense. You know, these are the kinds of whining again of someone who really never deserve to have the leadership of the FBI, of that incredible agency, which has so many brave people working for it, and thank goodness he is gone.
[Cabrera:] Caitlin, something that is getting a lot of attention is this confession, of sorts, that polls apparently influence Comey's decision to announce, again that that they were looking into some newly found e-mails involving Hillary Clinton. This is 11 days before the election, and Comey writes this. It is entirely possible that because I was making decisions in an environment where Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president. My concern about making her an illegitimate president by concealing the restarted investigation for a greater weight, than it would have if the election appeared closer, or if Donald Trump were ahead in all polls, but I don't know. What impact could this have on Comey's credibility?
[Huey-burn:] It is really startling, especially when the protocol had been to not intervene with information that close to the election. This is something that still continues to really rattle Democrats, who really denigrated Comey after the election. And what's interesting about the Trump presidency, is it tends to scramble different alliances, the firing led to Democrats to take Comey's side in terms of the principle of the firing. But that kind of information I think does raise some questions about partisanship, about the way in which he was engaging or monitoring the political atmosphere at the time, which again, I think that, you know, Trump could just let the criticisms of this book stand out there without himself having to engage.
[Cabrera:] Because that is adding more fuel to the fire?
[Huey-burn:] It's adding more fuel to the fire certainly. I mean, this is a remarkable situation where you have a fired FBI director, coming out with this tell-all memoir, which has pretty had some pretty salacious information in there. And details, you know, sparring with the President who fires him, which of course as you mentioned, raised all sorts of other questions, and could have led to the Mueller probe. So this is a very, you know, unique situation, a very strange situation to have these two sparring so openly at the time.
[Cabrera:] Caitlin, thank you. Gentlemen, I owe you extra questions next time. Thank you all for joining us.
[Drucker:] Thank you.
[Cortes:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] Still ahead, Starbucks under fire, accusations of racial profiling calls for a boycott, after black men a couple of black men were arrested for apparently waiting at a table at the coffee shop. Details next live in the CNN Newsroom.

[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] A new vow from Kim Jong-un. He says he will shut down North Korea's nuclear test site next month. Plus this
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Donald Trump supporters showed their vocal support, endorsing him for the Nobel. That's what they are chanting because of North Korea's actions.
[Howell:] And Correspondents' Dinner controversy: the comedian who some say took the jokes too far.
[Allen:] There are also questions about that at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Welcome to our viewers here in the U.S. and around the world. We are coming to you live from Atlanta. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Howell:] And I'm George Howell from CNN World Headquarters. NEWSROOM starts right now.
[Howell: 4:] 00 am on the U.S. East Coast. We start with new developments out of the Korean Peninsula. The North Korean leader Kim Jong-un putting forward a new timeline to denuclearize He says that his country's main nuclear test site will be shut down next month. And foreign experts and journalists will be invited into North Korea to ensure transparency of closure.
[Allen:] Mr. Kim also says he is not the kind of person to fire nuclear weapons at South Korea or the United States. All this is according to a South Korean official. Mr. Kim reportedly made the comments at the summit with South Korean president Moon Jae-in Friday.
[Howell:] Let's go live to Seoul, South Korea, CNN's Paula Hancocks live on the story this hour. Paula, these new statements from the North Korean leader, walking back some of his past war rhetoric and a timeline to shut down his nuclear test site certainly in stark contrast to what we've heard before.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes. Just a year ago, he threatened to turn Seoul into a sea of flames. It's not the first time we've heard that rhetoric from North Korea. That was the standard rhetoric up until a matter of months ago. I think there were some eyebrows that were raised when he said I'm not the kind of person to hit mainland United States with a nuclear weapon. To be fair, I think there were few that truly believed that Kim Jong-un would ever do that. But clearly he wanted that capability to be able to come to this kind of negotiation and what we saw on Friday. But it is the exact opposite really that we have seen from Kim Jong-un over the past few years. There have even been videos made from North Korea, showing Washington being destroyed in a nuclear blast. Certainly that was a move from what we were used to. We do know we have a timeframe at least for this closing of the Punggye-ri test site. We know it's May at some point, according to the Blue House spokesman that was quoting Kim having spoken to President Moon. Again, this is still not directly from Kim Jong-un himself. But he did mention that there were two extra tunnels, two deeper tunnels that were actually in very good conditions. So Kim Jong-un, according to this official, did negate the Chinese geologists' rumors that Punggye-ri was obsolete and wasn't working anymore George.
[Howell:] Paula Hancocks, live in Seoul, South Korea, with these new developments. Thank you, Paula.
[Allen:] Statements from the Korean leaders come ahead of another potential diplomatic breakthrough, a summit between the North Korean leader and U.S. President Donald Trump.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] I remember, you know, it was very rough, three or four months ago.
[Howell:] This was Mr. Trump at a rally in the state of Michigan on Saturday. Some of his supporters there chanting that he should get the Nobel Peace Prize for the talks between the Koreans and a push for denuclearization. He says he's been speaking with the South Korean President Moon and a U.S. summit with North Korea could be weeks away. The prime minister of Japan is praising the North and South Korean leaders for their announced goals of seeking a denuclearized Korean Peninsula. Shinzo Abe spoke to South Korea's President Moon on Sunday.
[Allen:] According to the South Korea Blue House, Prime Minister Abe expressed North Korea's move as "forward-looking," and hopes that this declaration will lead to concrete actions. Let's talk more about the developments, just how serious Mr. Kim is about peace and getting rid of nuclear weapons. We're joined from Seoul by Andrei Lankov. He's a professor at Kookmin University and the director of the Korea Risk Group analysis firm. Hi, there, Andrei; thank you for joining us. If Kim Jong-un is so ready and willing to toss out his nukes why taunt and threaten the world with nuclear annihilation up until the moment he said, I'm done; let's make peace, not war?
[Andrei Lankov, Korea Risk Group:] Well, there are two reasons probably. Actually, there are two possible explanations. And the exact answer is unlikely to be known maybe for many decades ahead. Some people say that he was just playing his usual trick. It's what the North Korean government has done for many years. You need something, you first create a crisis. You look dangerous. You threaten everybody. You promise to make Seoul or Tokyo, Washington, into the sea of fire. And then suddenly you change your tone, you smile broadly and you say, and let's talk. And for your willingness to essentially solve the crisis you yourself created in the first place, you are getting some concessions. Second option is slightly different, probably such a kind of diplomacy war is what the North Korean leaders initially wanted to do but they faced a completely different situation. There is Donald Trump, being the United States president. And over the last year there have been many signs, many leaks and hints that the White House was serious about a military operation. Such a military operation no doubt would become a disaster for everybody, including the Americans. But
[Allen:] I want to ask you that point you made in number 2, so do you give much credit to President Trump then for pushing Mr. Kim to this moment in his leadership? We just heard some of Mr. Trump's supporters chanting, "Nobel, Nobel," indicating they think he might be a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize if this continues along this path.
[Lankov:] Well, I would say I would credit President Trump. But it's also it's sort of disappointing to see how something which cannot be described in any way by international blackmail does work. However it is a very risky game. And I'm afraid that this success will lead to more, I would say, generous application of the same blackmail tactics. In many places in Korean current opinion so and it is likely not just backfire but bring very dangerous results. For example, if North Korea is under
[Allen:] Andrei Lankov, we so appreciate your thoughts. And we hope to have you on again with us to talk more about it. Thank you.
[Howell:] Well, here in the United States, the political divide on full display in what you could call a tale of two Washingtons. Here's the Washington, D.C., Saturday night, the White House Correspondents' Dinner is historically a place where they roast politicians. Many of the punchlines this year targeting the man right there, the U.S. president.
[Allen:] If often does. But there has been war between the media and the president for some time now. In another Washington, more specifically Washington Township, Michigan, President Trump targeted the media and Democrats. Our Boris Sanchez starts us off from the president's rally there in Michigan.
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn White House Correspondent:] The president kicked off his event here in Washington Township, Michigan, by noting that he was invited to another event in Washington, D.C., alluding to the White House Correspondents' Dinner, but saying that he would rather be here among his supporters. The president calling that event "phony" and saying that he did not want to sit there and smile as he was being insulted. The president also took aim at a number of his favorite targets, including the media and certain Democrats, like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the governor of California, Jerry Brown, before targeting Montana senator Jon Tester. Of course, Tester is the ranking Democrat on the Veterans Affairs Committee and he had some role in sinking the president's nominee, Ronny Jackson
[Sanchez:] for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. The president at one point seemed to threaten Tester. Listen to what he said during his speech.
[Trump:] Senator Jon Tester of a really great place, Montana, who voted by the way in favor of sanctuary cities, who's weak on the border, didn't vote for tax cuts. He took a gentleman, who is a truly high- quality human being, and what they said about him, what they said about this great American doctor, Ronny Jackson, an admiral in the Navy and Tester started throwing out things that he's heard. Well, I know things about Tester that I could say, too. And if I said them, he would never be elected again.
[Sanchez:] The president calling what Jon Tester did "a disgrace." One other noteworthy moment, President Trump accusing Vladimir Putin of planting Natalia Veselnitskaya, that attorney that was in a meeting at Trump Tower in June of 2016 with Paul Manafort, Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner among others, saying that Putin intentionally had her declare that she was an informant to the Kremlin this week in order to sow chaos within the United States. One of a number of claims by President Trump during his speech here. He also talked about immigration and trade, a number of his favorite topics. And the crowd ate it all up to different chants of "Build the wall" and at one point also chanting, "Nobel, Nobel," suggesting that the president should win the Nobel Peace Prize for the ongoing talks between North and South Korea, moving toward denuclearization. The president also saying that he looks forward to the potential meeting between him and North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un Boris Sanchez, CNN, traveling with the president in Washington Township, Michigan.
[Howell:] Boris, thank you. Now we're joined by Steven Erlanger. Steven the chief diplomatic correspondent in Europe for "The New York Times," live in Brussels with us this hour. Steven, always a pleasure to have you on the show. Looking ahead to next month, there is potential for a really big meeting between the U.S. president Donald Trump and the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Let's put this into context. The midterm elections are just around the corner. Could such a big possible win eclipse the controversial patterns of this president to bolster his party?
[Steven Erlanger, "the New York Times":] That may be one of the ideas. Trump is in trouble with the midterms. Everybody knows that but his advisers keep telling him about it. And he is quite confident; this other part of his characteristic. He just doesn't believe bad news. And it is possible that they will try to, you know, do the PR version of the Kim meeting to help his stature in the world. He would be better off pushing ahead to voters tax reforms, tax cuts. That's what his aides are telling him. Now on the Kim question, you had very some good discussion. But nothing's really happened. Let's be fair. And I would be shocked, shocked if Kim denuclearized. It is nuclear weapons that make him important in the world. As someone said, North Korea without nuclear weapons would be like Saudi Arabia without oil. No one would care. And it is very important that Kim keep his stature because he is running a cult-like country with deep, deep economic problems. So let's see what happens. It's better that they chat, better that they talk and better that they smile. But if Mr. Trump goes in expecting real commitments to real denuclearization, I think this could be very disappointing indeed.
[Howell:] I want to talk about two points that came up at the rally, first, the issue of border security came up when the president was speaking in Michigan. And another threat coming from the president of a possible government shutdown. Let's listen.
[Trump:] We have to have borders and we have to have them fast. We need security. We need the wall. We're going to have it all. Again, that wall has started. We are $1.6 billion. We come up again on September 28th. And if we don't get border security we'll have no choice. We'll close down the country because we need border security.
[Howell:] We have heard threats like this before, Steven. When do statements like this just become empty threats?
[Erlanger:] Well, it is an empty threat because no one's going to shut down the country. That makes no sense. You couldn't shut down the country even if you wanted to. You actually, if you look at the figures, you'll find illegal immigration for Mexico way down and the Mexican economy is doing better. More people are going home. Fewer people are actually coming. But it's a big border and even if there's a wall, there will always be a tunnel. Just look at Gaza. It's not hard to get under walls. So shut down the country? We are an open country. We are a country that believes in trade. We are a country of immigrants. We have been built as the country of immigrants. So this one does Trump very often has a point. This point seems to be simply political. You cannot shut down the country nor would it be a very good idea. This one, I think, is an empty threat.
[Howell:] All right. Also at the rally, the crowd there was chanting. Let's listen to the chant. The chant there, "Nobel, Nobel." This obviously due to the possible breakthrough with North Korea, Steven. The question though, Mr. Trump and a possible Nobel honor, your thoughts.
[Erlanger:] Well, maybe the crowd thought he should get the prize for literature. Who knows what they thought? I mean, making a joke, of course. But you know, I think we are pretty far down to road. Let's see what happens in North Korea. I mean, it's a crowd that loves him. That's why he went there. The White House Correspondents' Dinner was going on at the same time. Trump said at his rally, very honestly, why should I sit there and take shot after shot and pretend to smile? He said that seems no fun. I'm sure it is no fun. And he had much more fun where he was in that other Washington. So the crowd will love. They also were shouting things like "lock her up" about Hillary Clinton. They were shouting some of the things that marked the Trump campaign. This was a campaign rally, the people who were clearly his supporters. Now does it mean a lot? Probably not. Trump did all of his old tried and tested goodies. And they still work with a lot of people who still loved him. I'm sure he enjoyed that much more than he would have done at the other Washington.
[Howell:] Steven, you had me when you turned the corner with the word "literature." So we'll have to see how this
[Erlanger:] Well, I don't think it will be chemistry or physics or economics but maybe it'll be literature.
[Howell:] A pleasure to have you on the show, Steven, always there in Brussels. We'll stay in touch with you as we see what happens next month. Take care.
[Allen:] Maybe they need you to create a new category for President Trump, Nobel. Well, while the president skipped the White House Correspondents' Dinner, he repeatedly encouraged his staff to attend.
[Howell:] But White House officials may not have been amused with some of the jokes made at their expense, as our Kate Bennett explains.
[Kate Bennett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] The annual White House Correspondents' Dinner is wrapping up here at the Washington Hilton Hotel. The annual Nerd Prom, as people like to call it, that mash-up of journalists who cover Washington and the White House, politicians and, although no president Donald Trump was here again, several members of his administration and his staff at the White House. We were told the president personally encouraged members of his team to attend this year when last year they were told not to come. Everyone seemed to be getting along fairly well. There was Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' attorney, chatting on the red carpet with people like Kellyanne Conway and Sarah Sanders. The dinner got underway. Scholarships were handed out. There was a lot of celebration about the First Amendment and the importance of journalism. And then comedian Michelle Wolf took the stage. And that's when things got a little iffy. We always expected the comedians at this dinner to make fun of the president, to sort of joke and roast. However, about midway through her routine, Wolf got a little personal specifically when it came to press secretary Sarah Sanders, who was also sitting at the main table just a few feet away from Wolf as she was giving her routine.
[Michelle Wolf, Comedian:] I actually really like Sarah. I think she is very resourceful. But she burns facts and then she uses that ash got to create a perfect smoky eye.
[Wolf:] Like maybe she's born with it. Maybe it's lies. It's probably lies.
[Bennett:] One topic Wolf didn't avoid was the controversy with Stormy Daniels and the president and the alleged affairs and the salacious headlines. She actually made a joke, saying if we wanted her to be quiet, she might accept a similar payment to the one Michael Cohen made the porn star.
[Wolf:] I'm a woman so you cannot shut me up unless you have Michael Cohen wire me $130,000.
[Bennett:] All in all, I have to say, toward the end of the jokes we watched the room go quiet. We watched people's faces get stony-faced. I'm not just talking about the members of the White House staff or the president, I'm talking about journalists, who also felt somewhat uncomfortable that the comedian might have gone a tad too far in her personal attacks on members of the president's administration, from Kellyanne Conway, again, to Sarah Sanders, Reince Priebus. She also made jokes about Ivanka Trump. The evening, the reviews might come out a little bit differently than previous years. But still Nerd Prom 2018 is a wrap I'm Kate Bennett at the Washington Hilton for CNN.
[Howell:] Kate, thank you. And the U.S. president choosing not to be there for those jokes.
[Allen:] The first president to not attend the White House Correspondents' Dinner other than Reagan, who didn't because he had been shot.
[Howell:] Still ahead here, Mike Pompeo makes his first visit to the Middle East and the U.S. secretary of state and he is bringing a message from the U.S. president.
[Allen:] Also you may have to pay more for your favorite bottle of wine. We'll tell you why global wine we'll tell you why global wine production has hit a historic low.

[Camerota:] President Trump will get a full briefing on Hurricane Irma later this weekend. But there's a different storm brewing in on Capitol Hill. The president shocked GOP leaders by cutting a short-term deal with Democrats on the debt ceiling. CNN's Joe Johns is live at the White House with more. Hi, Joe.
[Joe Johns, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Alisyn. The president getting three important agenda items off of the list, very pressing agenda items including hurricane relief for the Gulf Coast. But in the process, he aligned himself with Democrats leaving the Republican leadership in the Congress shell-shocked.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We had a great meeting with Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and the whole Republican leadership.
[Johns:] In a stunning move, President Trump bucking his own party, cutting a deal with Democrats to provide disaster relief funding, extend the debt ceiling, and fund the government for three months. According to a senior White House official, Republican congressional leaders cautioned the president a day earlier that his tax reform plan would have to wait, given other legislative priorities in September. But President Trump, eager for a win, struck the deal to clear the busy GOP September agenda by knocking off three major issues. House Speaker Paul Ryan blasting the proposal just hours before, pushing for a more long-term solution.
[Rep. Paul Ryan , Speaker Of The House:] I think it's ridiculous and disgraceful that they want to play politics with the debt ceiling at this moment.
[Johns:] A senior Republican source described Trump as being in "Apprentice" mode, making the deal on the spot. A second source saying he cut off Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin mid-sentence. At the height of a tense meeting, sources say, first daughter Ivanka Trump entered the Oval Office to pitch her agenda on the child tax credit, throwing the meeting off topic. Republican leaders visibly annoyed by her presence and then left to answer questions on the president's unexpected deal making.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Majority Leader:] His feeling was that we needed to come together, to not create a picture of divisiveness.
[Unidentified Male:] I will tell you that I gasped when I heard it. I think he felt like this was the best deal he could get.
[Trump:] We walked out, and everybody was happy, not too happy because you can never be too happy. But they were happy enough.
[Johns:] Seemingly also on the president's mind: opening the door to working with Democrats on a DREAMers' bill as more than a dozen blue- state attorneys general threatened to file suit on his decision to rescind DACA. Trump denying he's sending conflicting messages about his plan after tweeting that he would revisit the issue in six months.
[Trump:] No mixed signal at all. Congress, I really believe, wants to take care of this situation. Chuck and Nancy would like to see something happen, and so do I.
[Johns:] The president is planning now to return to Camp David with his entire cabinet to sit down and talk about a range of issues including tax reform, and the growing crisis in the Korean Peninsula. This comes at a time when his son, Donald Jr., is headed to Capitol Hill for a closed-door meeting to answer questions before Congress about that mysterious meeting June of 2016, last year, with the Russian lawyer Chris.
[Cuomo:] Joe, thank you. Joining us now is Senator Angus King. He is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. We'll talk to you about the Russia investigation. Let me take get your take on a couple other headlines. One, the president going directly to Democrats, getting a deal on the debt ceiling and Harvey relief. Good move?
[Sen. Angus King , Maine:] Well, I think you've got to put it in a little bit of context. This wasn't going directly to Democrats. The Democrats were in the room, but so were the Republicans. It was a discussion and a negotiation. I can't read the mind of the president, but I think he wanted to clear the debts. He said, "Let's take care of these three things this the next four or five days, and then we can move on to some of the other important issues like DACA, like tax reform." And I think that was what his thinking was. And, you know, there's I think perhaps we're over-thinking this a little bit. And the president is a pragmatist. And I think in this case, he just said, "Let's make something happen here that we can clear three things and then move on." Well, then, Senator, what do you make of the Republican leadership telling, you know, reporters in abundance that they didn't like this?
[King:] Well, you know, whenever there's a deal, one side or the other isn't going to like it. I think that's that's the situation. But it enables us now to try to get these three items off the table literally, if not today, in the next two or three days, and then we can start talking about some of the other issues. There are also some bipartisan talks going on on health care. So there's plenty to do. And clearing the table on these on these three issues, at least at this moment, because of the deadlines looming we've got four or five deadlines in September. The FAA reauthorization, the Children's Health Program, the funding of the government. I mean, September 30th is a big day, and I think what the president has done has enabled us to work in a more orderly way through September and then into the fall.
[Cuomo:] All right. You bought three months on the debt ceiling. He's given you six months on DACA. What do you think of that move, giving it to Congress and saying you've got six months to save the DREAMers?
[King:] Well, you know, I think the fact that he tweeted what he did yesterday indicates that he was actually having an awfully hard time with this decision. I don't like the decision that he made. On the other hand, he has said to us, "Here is the time. You have time to work on this." He's clearly indicated that he wants to work on this. You know, Chris, there's an interesting opportunity here for him. This could be Nixon goes to China. If anyone could make a deal on comprehensive immigration reform and make it work nationally, it would be this president. And I think he's setting us up to try to get something done. Now, the question is what do we have to add to the DACA bill, to the DREAMer bill that's already pending that Lindsey Graham and Dick Durbin have in order to make it work on a bipartisan basis and sell it to the president? I suspect it's going to have something to do with border security. I suspect it's not going to have something to do with a wall.
[Cuomo:] Well, but that's not what we're hearing, right? We're hearing that it may involve the wall, and that's certainly what the president would want. Senator Markey said yesterday any bill that has DACA and the wall in it is a non-starter. How do you feel about that?
[King:] Well, I think that's probably the case. I mean, the truth is...
[Cuomo:] But why, Senator? Why is the wall so important to the left, you know, that it's just a non-starter, no matter what else is in the offing?
[King:] I don't consider it important to the left or the right. And for me it's not an ideological issue. It's a practical issue. It doesn't make sense. There are ways to secure the border. In some places, a wall may make sense. We already have a wall. I've seen it, down in McAllen, Texas. There are places where you have fences. There are places where you have sensors. There are places where you have guards. Just building a 2,000-mile wall is not practical. It's expensive. And there are a lot of there are a lot better ways to achieve the same goal, which is to provide border security.
[Cuomo:] So why don't you like the decision that the president made with DACA in the initial instance to to cancel the program, if that's the way to get Congress to act?
[King:] Well, the unfortunate part is, it's thrown hundreds of thousands of people's lives into absolute chaos, fear, uncertainty. These are people who have been here literally all their lives or since they were 6 years old. They were brought here. They had no choice in the matter. They think of themselves as Americans. They're working; they're paying taxes. And it's created this enormous uncertainty. I think, you know, there are other ways that he could have handled it. But I'm not I think Congress ought to step up and deal with this. I think the pattern of the last I don't know, you could say 30 or 40 years, has been for Congress to abdicate its responsibility to the executive. And so I don't think it's a bad thing that we have to deal with it. But the uncertainty that's been created in those people's lives is really is really unfortunate and unnecessary. But I think the good news is, I sense that there's a real opportunity here and some bipartisan interest in in solving this problem.
[Cuomo:] Well, I'll tell you what. It would be political kryptonite to anybody who is on the wrong side in terms of getting this done in six months, because if these people fall into ISIS hands, you know, we all know how that process goes. I know people is saying they're not an enforcement priority now, but if you're a law and order person, you're going to be in a tough position six months from now if you don't create law to protect the DREAMers.
[King:] And that's exactly why the decision was so so hard, because it's going to put people in that in that shadow situation, which is which is just not right.
[Cuomo:] And Senator, give us an update on the status of essential items within the Russia investigation. You've got Don Jr. before Senate staffers today, obviously being questioned again about the meeting where he went to this open solicitation to get bad news about Hillary Clinton. You have news about Facebook, saying that I guess it inadvertently sold ads to sites that wound up forwarding Russian propaganda attempts against the United States. What do you make of these two headlines?
[King:] Well, they're they're both very significant, I think, and they're both representative of what there may be more to be learned. First on that meeting, we know from that meeting that Donald Trump Jr. was anxious to have that meeting, was anxious to try to get dirt on Hillary. He knew where it was coming from. That's that, in itself is disturbing. The real question is, were there meetings? Were there follow-up meetings? And was that part of the beginning of a relationship? And we're not yet ready to determine that. But that's got to be examined. On the Facebook thing, that's also a big deal, because that verifies what we had been told by the intelligence community as far back as October of 2016, and this is that the Russians were actively trying to intervene in our election by disinformation, by fake news, by planting stories, by trying to undermine people's confidence in the election and in the candidates. Here it is. I mean, we know they did it. My suspicion is that there is going to be a lot more to that story. There are two pieces. No. 1, were there more of this kind of ad buying by these by the Russians? And No. 2 and this is the question, obviously, that our committee is going to be digging into, was there some relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russians in terms of where they planted those ads, where they put them, who they were targeting? Did the Russians have their own political consultants saying, you know, do this in a certain county in Wisconsin? Or did they get that information from somewhere else? That's an important question we've got to dig into.
[Cuomo:] The president says it's a witch hunt, and there are people saying, "We haven't heard anything about the Russia investigation. They haven't come to any conclusions. It proves that there's nothing there." What do you say to critics?
[King:] Well, No. 1, it's not a witch hunt. We know that, and we know that from the unanimous opinion of the Intelligence Committee in October. We know it from their opinion again in January. We know it from voluminous data that the Russians were involved in our elections, that they were trying to defeat Hillary Clinton, help Donald Trump, that it went all the way up to Putin. I mean, that that is well- established. What isn't well-established is whether there were indeed contacts and cooperation between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The other thing we know, Chris, is that the Russians were trying to get into state election systems and registration rolls. It appears they were unsuccessful, but they're going to come back. And I think that's the point that people are missing about all this. By focusing so much on Trump and the Russians, we're missing the fact that the Russians were doing this. They've done it in the past, and they're going to keep doing it. And we've got to be prepared for it. That's what I consider our major mission in this investigation, is to prepare the American people and things like our voting systems for what will inevitably come in 2018 and 2020 and beyond.
[Cuomo:] Regardless of the involvement with the Trump campaign, these issues matter, and they're going to matter in the upcoming elections. Senator Angus King, as always, a pleasure. Thank you for being on the show.
[King:] Thanks, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Chris. Back to Irma. The Caribbean already seeing the power of Hurricane Irma firsthand. Look at these pictures. We have a live report for you from Puerto Rico next.

[Kinkade:] You're watching CNN, and this is CONNECT THE WORLD. I am Lynda Kinkade in Atlanta filling in for Becky Anderson. Welcome back. Well a notorious conspiracy theorist in the U.S. now has a vastly smaller audience. YouTube, Facebook and Apple have removed Alex Jones' Infowars content from their sites. Jones has called the 911 attacks an inside job by the U.S. government and the Sandy Hook School massacre a hoax. Brian Seltzer is here to explain exactly why the tech giants decided to action virtually all at once. Brian, it kind of is surprising because there have been lawsuits against Infowars for some months now. So, why are Facebook and Apple and Google responding now?
[Brian Stelter, Cnnmoney Senior Media Correspondent:] Yes, there's a long, long delay here. Some reluctance to take action and then all of a sudden, these companies fell in line. Let's go back a few weeks, there's been scrutiny around Facebook and other companies giving a platform to Infowars. A scrutiny partly because reporters from CNN and other outlets have been asking about the policies of these tech giants follow. Well, these are some of the biggest companies in the world. Facebook, and Google and Amazon and Apple. They're known as FAANG, F-A-A-N-G, the collection of the biggest tech companies. And they face these really tough decisions about how to handle certain users who are abusing their services and sites. Jones you see him there on screen he's all over YouTube, he has millions of views, not any more. Over the weekend Apple's CEO, Tim Cook, decided to pull the Infowars podcasts from Apple's Podcast Store. That action apparently caused a domino effect, where we saw Facebook, Spotify and other companies take action against Infowars as well. That's according to our colleague Dylan Buyers who was reporting today that it was Apple that had started this, and then other companies fell in line. He said there was no coordination per se, but the other companies looked over at Apple, saw what Apple did, saw Apple went first and they quickly followed. So now he's off of YouTube, he's off of Facebook. The big platform Jones is still on is Twitter. And so far, Twitter says he's not violating Twitter's policies. But in terms of all of these other companies, these other platforms, they say he's violating hate speech policies. And that's why he's been removed.
[Kinkade:] Yes, certainly it must have been some of those parents of the Sandy Hook victims. I want to turn to another story now. Facebook, of course, as you mentioned cutting off Alex Jones. But asking America's big banks to share financial data of big customers. It's really a hard story to believe but "Wall Street Journal" reports that Facebook wants information such as checking account balances and credit card activity. Facebook now saying it isn't actively seeking that data. Does this report put even more scrutiny on Facebook's privacy practices?
[Stelter:] Yes, that in this "Journal" story shows exactly what Facebook is trying to do with regard to advertising sales and how that comes up against this tension involving privacy. Look, when you are using something for free on the internet, that means you are, you are the product. In this case, Facebook is selling its users, selling you, selling me to advertisers, and according to the "Journal" by layering in banking information for example if you know that I have a high credit score, you might try to pitch me luxury products, if you know I have a lower credit score, you might try to pitch me something else. I think that's what Facebook is reportedly looking at doing. Like you said, the company is denying that it's actively trying to do this. But it's an awkwardly-worded denial that makes me think there's something to this "Journal" story. And I don't think we should necessarily be surprised. I mean, this is what big companies try to do with data. They try to know as much about you as humanly possible, so they can better target you with ads. That is exactly the Facebook the business that Facebook is in. Even though the company has been under scrutiny recently for its practices. They're walking this fine line. Trying to know as much about you as possible but trying to convince you they're doing it ethically and responsibly.
[Kinkade:] We can only hope they are doing it ethically and responsibly.
[Stelter:] It's tricky.
[Kinkade:] Yes, Brian Stelter, as always, thanks for joining us from New York
[Stelter:] Thank you. In our parting shots, who among us doesn't like to be reminded of the good times? Well a new Axios report says the U.S. President is no exception in one way he relives proud moments is by watching replays of his debates and rallies, enjoying his own performance, here's our Jeannie Moos.
[Jeannie Moos, Cnn National News Correspondent:] You know who loves watching Trump rallies? Trump. The President is often portrayed as the type who likes looking at himself in mirrors.
[Nbc, "the Tonight Show Starring Jimy Fallon":] It's going to be huge.
[Moos:] And now, Axios is reporting he enjoys replaying his rallies on the TV in the ding room next to the Oval Office. Imagine reliving all that fist-pumping, finger-pointing and waving. Give yourself a hand for how you tossed out protesters.
[Trump:] Good-bye, darling.
[Moos:] Got out the vote.
[Trump:] Get your asses out tomorrow and vote.
[Moos:] And confused your critics with puzzling sound bites.
[Trump:] You see what they do? Bing, bing, right. You see what they're doing?
[Moos:] The White House wouldn't comment, but Axios reports when watching replays, Trump will interject commentary. Reveling in his most controversial lines. Wait for it see what I did there, he'll say. Whether it be using insulting nicknames.
[Trump:] Pocahontas.
[Moos:] Or imitating himself if he acted more like other Presidents.
[Trump:] I'm very Presidential.
[Moos:] There are parts the President might prefer to fast-forward through. Like the other day when he said
[Trump:] Flamingo dancer from Argentina on the Tallahassee trail.
[Moos:] Well actually it's the Appalachian Trail and they're called flamenco dancers. As someone tweeted President Trump, this is a flamingo dancer. Axios reports that in the early days of the administration, President Trump loved re-watching his debates with Hillary this was one of his favorite exchanges.
[Hillary Clinton, Former Secretary Of State:] It's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country.
[Trump:] Because you'd in jail.
[Unidentified Female:] Secretary Clinton
[Moos:] But replays don't always age well. These days, that "in jail" stuff is hitting closer to home. Jeannie Moos,
[Cnn. Trump:] Because you'd be in jail.
[Moos:] New York.
[Kinkade:] That was CONNECT THE WORLD, I'm Lynda Kinkaid, thanks for watching, I'll see you tomorrow. END

[Briggs:] In the U.K., new police raids and arrests overnight in connection with the Manchester terror attack. A total of eight people now in custody. Police targeting a terror network linked to the bomber. Now, police in Manchester keeping details of this investigation to themselves. CNN's Erin McLaughlin following developments. She is live in Manchester. Good morning to you, Erin.
[Erin Mclaughlin, Cnn International Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave, and we are hearing more details about a growing diplomatic spat betweenthe U.K. and the United States. According to British media reports, the United Kingdom has taken the decision to stop sharing intelligence with the U.S. in relation to the Manchester attack. This decision taken after a series of leaks from U.S. publications, the latest of which "The New York Times" published a series of photos of evidence from the arena attack crime scene photos that have outraged British authorities, now saying they are no longer going to be sharing intelligence with the U.S. in relationship to in relation, rather, to this attack. We understand also from British media reports that Theresa May, the British prime minister, will be discussing this issue with U.S. President Donald Trump in Brussels at a NATO meeting today. Meanwhile, this investigation is rapidly evolving. Overnight, a series of raids included a controlled explosion as well as two new arrests, bringing the total number of arrests to eight in custody. One woman was released in the overnight hours without charges what's being described as a wider terror network behind this attack. An investigation spanning at least two countries, at this point, the United Kingdom, as well as Libya. In Libya, we understand from a militia in Tripoli they've arrested the suspected suicide bomber's younger brother. The militia alleging that he had ties to ISIS and was planning an attack in Tripoli. Meanwhile, we're also hearing of more victims coming forward, families releasing statements, including the family of 14- year-old Eilidh MacLeod. She was killed in the attack the family releasing her photo, saying that she loved music. They're absolutely devastated at this huge loss.
[Briggs:] And we're learning at 11:00 your time, 6:00 a.m. here Eastern Time in New York, a national moment of silence to remember the victims of the terror attack there. Erin McLaughlin live for us in Manchester. Thank you.
[Kosik:] All right. President Obama speaking right now with German Chancellor Angela Merkel at the Brandenburg Gate. We're going to go live there, next.

[Scott Mclean, Cnn National Correspondent:] President Trump and First Lady Melania touched down along a stretch of Florida coastline left almost beyond recognition. The Trump's met residents in Lynn Haven, Florida, and surveyed the devastation left by Hurricane Michael from the air.
[Trump:] I've seen pictures, but it's hard to believe. When you're above it in a plane and to see the total devastation. To see this, personally, is it's very tough. Very, very tough.
[Mclean:] President Trump also stopped by a FEMA distribution center to pass out water.
[Trump:] Here you go man, can you hit? We are doing more than anybody would have ever done.
[Mclean:] The tour comes as authorities comb through what little is left of Mexico Beach. Looking for the three people still unaccounted for.
[Joe Bush, Resident, Mexico Beach:] How did you just fill the water in here?
[Mclean:] Joe Bush has seen his share of hurricanes and almost never left. But he did this time, he made it to Marianna, Florida, more than 50 miles inland, but still not far enough.
[Bush:] Got in a hurricane, tore my truck up. Blew my trailer on two cars. We thought it was father
[Mclean:] In Panama City, people lined up to register for FEMA assistance, and they'll need a lot of it. There's hardly a building that won't need repair even schools were badly damaged. Everett Middle School's Gymnasium looks more like a battlefield than a basketball court. All while a row of newer hurricane-proof homes sits nearly untouched nearby.
[Arthur Phillips, Resident, Panama City, Florida:] I feel good for me, but I don't feel good for anyone else, that you know, had the all the devastation.
[Mclean:] Back in Mexico Beach, they'll have to rebuild entire neighborhoods, not just the power grid. Joe Bush thinks the president can help get it done.
[Bush:] I think Trump takes care of the American people, I really do. I think I he's got a good heart.
[Mclean:] And crews searching through the rubble here using Cadaver Dogs have now found a second body. Police have not yet said the age or the gender of that person. The residents of Mexico Beach, they will be allowed back in on Tuesday morning. They won't be allowed to stay because there's simply no safe place for them to stay. But they will be allowed to pick through what's left of their homes and businesses. Scott McLean, CNN, Mexico Beach, Florida.
[Watt:] The U.S. Air Force is joining Ukraine for what could be that country's largest military air exercises ever. The drills are meant to strengthen Ukraine's ties to NATO, but there is concern that they may also provoke Russia. CNN's Matthew Chance reports.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] This is the United States ramping up its military support for Ukraine. This clear sky exercises the U.S. and Ukrainian warplanes flying wing to wing are meant as a show of solidarity. But with Ukraine fighting Russian-backed rebels in the country's east, it's also a potent message to Moscow.
[Maj. Gen. David Baldwin, Adjutant General, California National Guard:] As the Ukrainian security forces and their armed forces become more and more capable, it allows them to better defend the sovereignty of their country and to deal with the problems that they have internally.
[Chance:] But isn't that immensely provocative? Aren't you worried that, that could pool aviation fuel on the flames of the raging conflict?
[Baldwin:] We are demonstrating our resolve. And what we're doing here is not certainly not as aggressive or controversial as supporting insurgence across some other country's international boundaries.
[Chance:] But U.S. military support for Ukraine is evolving fast. In September, the country's president formally took delivery of two U.S. patrol boats to bolster Ukraine's depleted Navy. And more controversially, U.S. Javelin anti-tank missiles are now in Ukrainian hands. They've not been used in battle yet. But Moscow says their deployment crosses a line and encourages bloodshed. It's not just the sky that's clear, but the risk of escalation too. Well, these joint exercises are just the latest sign of the dramatic changes that have taken place in U.S. policy towards Ukraine. The old reservations about ramping up tensions with Moscow seem to have receded into the background. While the new policy of training and arming Ukraine has really started to take off. U.S. officials say their support is a response to Moscow's meddling. The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine posting a link to these drone images earlier this month. They showed military vehicles driving in and out Ukraine from Russia, according to international monitors. "Moscow must stop providing deadly weapons under the cover of night to its proxies in Eastern Ukraine," the embassy said on Twitter.
[Marie Yovanovitch, United States Ambassador To Ukraine:] How are you?
[Chance:] It is a diplomatic balancing act for the U.S. ambassador, grappling with what critics say is confusion in the Trump administration towards Ukraine. And on the one hand, you're arming the countries we've discussed. On the other hand, President Trump has, on occasion, spoken about spoken in what's been described as a deferential way towards Russia and towards Vladimir Putin. Do you believe that America is sending mixed messages when it comes to Ukraine?
[Yovanovitch:] Well, I look at our policy. And I think our policy is getting is a pretty good one towards Ukraine, and is getting stronger. So, we are providing assistance, as you described. And I think we're on the path to providing more assistance on the security side in this coming fiscal year.
[Chance:] More assistance, more training, more weapons. The trumpeting you could say, of a dangerous new era. Matthew Chance, CNN in Western Ukraine.
[Watt:] Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-un, and now Saudi Arabia's King Salman. They have something in common and it is the U.S. president's apparent acceptance to various claims by all three at face value. What this attitude could mean for America's reputation abroad? That's next.

[Keilar:] Another big star is speaking out against singer, R. Kelly, amid explosive claims in which he's accused of being a sexual predator who abused multiple young women. Lady Gaga has apologized for working with the star and she's pulled all of her music that features R. Kelly from streaming platforms. Kelly and Gaga made a duet that was called, "Do What You Want with My Body." And they even performed it here on "Saturday Night Live" together. But in a statement, Lady Gaga posted on Twitter, she explains this, in part, "What I am hearing about the allegations against R. Kelly is absolutely horrifying and indefensible. As a victim of sexual assault myself, I made both the song and video in a dark time in my life. I intend to remove this song off of iTunes and other streaming platforms and will not be working with him again." "Rolling Stone" reports that at least two Dallas radio stations have banned his music from their air waves. Meanwhile, R. Kelly was spotted and videotaped last night inside a Chicago nightclub with a message for a crowd.
[R. Kelly, Singer:] There's something that I must confess you all
[Keilar:] While Kelly was in that club, there were several protesters rallying outside his Chicago studios chanting, "Mute R. Kelly." Joining me to discuss, we have Lola Ogunnaike, the anchor for "People TV." Lola, as you watch all of this, do you think this is the beginning of the end for R. Kelly?
[Lola Ogunnaike, Anchor, People Tv:] Brianna, you and I were talking off-camera, I was here 17 years ago on CNN talking about a story that I'd written for the cover of "Vibe" magazine. It was a 6,000-word expose. I do finally feel like justice will prevail like this time of around. It's taken a number of years, well over a decade but justice will finally prevail.
[Keilar:] So this is something it's been on your radar for the better part of two decades. You have artists saying, I am not going to be associated with this guy. There were things that were known. What has changed?
[Ogunnaike:] I think the world at large has changed. The "Me Too" movement has been very instrumental in helping people redefine the way they look at relationships between men and women, men and men, inappropriate relationships in general. I think people are willing to have a conversation that they weren't willing to have as early as a year ago. The "Me Too" movement has been extremely instrumental in helping us have a very important conversation that had been ignored and swept under the rug for the better part of two decades. I want to talk about Lady Gaga. Interestingly enough, Lady Gaga's apology went a long way, but she had a glaring omission in that apology. There was a video that was supposed to accompany this song and it was a video that was shot by famed fashion photographer, Terry Richardson. She had also been accused for more than a decade of being a sexual predator. He was accused of preying upon young girls. "Vogue" banned him from shooting in his magazine. She worked with not one, but two sexual predators on this project. It was problematic then. She knew it. I find it interesting that now she's coming forward with her apology.
[Keilar:] What did you think of R. Kelly on just how defiant he has been, that he shows up at this club and he is singing his heart out with some support there, obviously?
[Ogunnaike:] R. Kelly is doing what he's always done. R. Kelly in the past has always been able to get away with this behavior because he was always able to produce a hit and sing away his problems. He's at the tail end of his career. People had been muting R. Kelly for years. He's no longer at the height of his career and I do think people are now saying, I don't care what music he creates, I don't care if he's a musical genius, he has a serious problem with young women and it has to stop.
[Keilar:] Lola, thank you so much. Lola Ogunnaike, we appreciate you being with us.
[Ogunnaike:] Thank you.
[Keilar:] I'm Brianna Keilar, live in Washington. And tomorrow, 800,000 federal workers won't get paid. Many are protesting today.

[Bianca Nobilo, Cnn:] Hello, everyone. Live from CNN London, I'm Bianca Nobilo and I'm sitting in for Hala Gorani tonight. Another former Trump loyalist turned on the U.S. president as a top Trump Organization official has been granted immunity in the investigation of hush money payments. Also, ahead, the family of John McCain says the senator will stop medical treatment for brain cancer. And bad news for people who love a good drink. A new study says no amount of alcohol is safe. Another day, another massive headache for the president of the United States. Yet again, a top figure in his orbit has been granted immunity in the investigation into hush money payments made to two women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump. Now, you may not know Allen Weisselberg well. But he is a huge part of the Trump administration, Organization rather. Working as its chief financial officer. He was granted immunity by federal prosecutors for providing information about Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen. So, let's take you right to the White House. Jeremy Diamond is there for us. Now, Jeremy, this administration is no stranger to controversy. But even by its own standards this has been a particularly tumultuous week. What is the reaction from the White House to this string of new flippings and disloyalties to the president?
[Jeremy Diamond, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, it certainly has been tumultuous. And we have heard the president vent frustrations and express some of his concern frankly, not doing a good job of hiding the extent to which he appears to be concerned by the legal developments that happened this we can, particularly with his longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen. We heard him lamenting this practice of flipping right after Michael Cohen pled guilty to aid felony charges and implicated the president in a felony, a campaign finance violation. And now we have the news that Allen Weisselberg, the chief financial officer for the Trump Organization, also currently still the comanager of the president's trust since he came into office and put his business interests in a trust, we learn that he got an immune deal. There is a lot of questions remaining unanswered. One of those is the extent to which Allen Weisselberg spoke about the president, offered incriminating information about the president, and the extent to which this goes beyond the hush money payments that Michael Cohen set up. And we don't know yet if it goes beyond that. But we do know he did discuss his role in the hush money payments. Remember, when we had the audio recording from Michael Cohen about those payments we had the president on tape. Michael Cohen on tape discussing the payments before they were made. And Allen Weisselberg's name was mentioned because he was involved in the transactions. And so, it appears likely that Allen Weisselberg would have corroborated Michael Cohen's account that the president knew about the payments beforehand. Of course, we know that already from the audio recording despite the president's recent denials.
[Nobilo:] And Jeremy, in your opinion, why does Weisselberg's connection to the financial element of the Trump organization present such a danger potentially to the president?
[Diamond:] Well, he as some sources told us know where the financial bodies are buried. He has been around Donald Trump and his business life for many, many years. And we know the president expressed some concern in the past about the possibility that the Mueller investigation or federal prosecutors could move into looking at his finances. One of the episodes when he considered taking action to regain control of the Mueller investigation was when there was this report that turned out to be false that Mueller was looking into a loan that the president got from Deutsche Bank. We know the president is concerned about looking into finances. He called it a redline in the past but again, we don't know at this point whether Weisselberg is getting into that or his testimony and cooperation with prosecutors is really limited to those hush money payments to two women who alleged affairs with the president.
[Nobilo:] Jeremy Diamond at the White House. Thank you. Now Donald Trump demands loyalty. But right now, wherever looks he sees former allies turn on him. So, is Trump feeling a sense of betrayal? Let's get more with the White House reporter, Steven Collinson joining me from Washington. Now Steven you have written an interesting piece. This has seen a string of betrayals for a president who prizes loyalty. How do you think he reacts? And is there increased sensitivity to the fact gnat legal circle might be tightening around President Trump.
[Steven Collinson, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Bianca, I think there is. These are people, Michael Cohen, Allen Weisselberg and other people around the president, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions and David Pecker, the owner of the organization that publishes the "National Enquirer." These are people he thought were on his side, particularly in the cases of the people that worked for the Trump Organization, Cohen and Weisselberg. These are people that not only know a great deal about the president's personal and financial life. They have information that potentially could be very, very valuable to prosecutors and to the special counsel Robert Mueller. And that is why it's not just about the Cohen case, which we have seen exploding over the last week. The president has to believe now that when people who he believed were loyal to him and close to him come under personal either political or legal jeopardy they are starting to look out for their own futures and their own sort of legal exposure rather than worrying about the impact of their actions on the president himself. As the president sits in the White House and watches these sort of the crumbling legal walls around him, that must be very, very worrying and isolating. I think it helps explain some of his volcanic tweeting and interviews of the last few days.
[Nobilo:] Stephen that's what I was asking about next. If we look at the interview on fox and friends he had harsh words for anybody who flipped. Do you think he is beginning to give away a sense of trepidation surrounding the betrayals recently from your observations of the president's behavior over the last few months and years? Do you think his behavior yesterday was particularly significant?
[Collinson:] Yes, I think that Fox interview that he gave after the conviction of Paul Manafort and the plea deal by Michael Cohen was especially interesting because it seemed as though he was testing various different ways to rationalize what happened and to sort of navigate out of a very difficult political spot. I think it's you know, if you watch the president, he has always been this domineering figure in Washington ever since taking office. What you see now for instance, in the row between the president and Jeff Sessions. The president repeated by berating Sessions because he recused himself part of the Russia investigation. Because he was part of the campaign. It's clear that the president of the United States does not have a first duty to the constitution and administration of justice but he believes he should have a first duty to the president and protecting him in the legal sense. And it's sort of the president learning that the assumptions he had when taking power that he was going to be all powerful, tell people to do what they wanted them to do just as he did when he was the head of the Trump organization, that doesn't necessarily work out in Washington. And that is I think a very grim realization, especially as week by week list hell problems seem to grow and translate I think in political problems too. As you wanted at the beginning there, it's been a really, really tumultuous week for the president. He seems in less control of his own political and legal destiny than at any point in his presidency.
[Nobilo:] Indeed, that does seem to be the case. And I wonder, what are your thoughts on the fact that I think it's fair to characterize the president's circle at the beginning of his administration was incredibly loyal and close-knit almost at the expense of the individual and their own exposure. What do you think is changing that these betrayals are now occurring?
[Collinson:] I think one of the issues is that loyalty is always pretty much of a one-way street for President Trump. He seems to demand unusual amounts of loyalty and from people below him and working with him. You see during the presidency periodic cabinet meetings where cabinet officials seem forced to almost pay homage to him as though more of a king than a president. I think that's part of it. He hasn't shone loyalty to the people below him, willing to criticize him and loyalty doesn't flow upwards as much as it did.
[Nobilo:] Stephen Collinson in Washington thank you for your insight. Now a somber update on the health of John McCain. His family says he will no longer continue treatment for cancer. The 81-year-old was diagnosed with an aggressive form of brain cancer last year. The senator is considered a powerful voice in the Republican party. One that's respected on both sides of the political divide. For more on John McCain's medical condition, let's now speak to our chief medical correspondent dr. Gupta who is at CNN center. Sanjay, thank you for joining us.
[Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] Thank you, Bianca.
[Nobilo:] What do you think prompted this decision by the senator to end the treatment.
[Gupta:] Well, at some point when you go through therapy like this and in Senator McCain's case almost 13 months, he had an operation, chemotherapy and radiation. And it's tough therapy. Can be hard on the body and constantly making a decision, is the therapy doing enough? Is the benefit of the therapy outweighing the risk and the toll it's taking on his body. I think that decision really has been made now, that he doesn't think that it's working well enough to justify continuing the therapy. I also think over the past couple weeks hearing from people close to Senator McCain, he had a tough seizure, for example, something not unexpected with brain cancer. But that's been debilitating for him as well.
[Nobilo:] Now the senator chose you specifically to break the story of his illness to last July. What do we know about this kind of tumor that Senator McCain has been suffering from and his treatment and prognosis at this point?
[Gupta:] Well, this type of brain cancer is something called glioblastoma. People may know it as GBM as well. It's often called. A type of cancer originates in the brain as opposed to somewhere else in the body appear spreading to the brain. It's an aggressive cancer. I can tell you I've either been training or practicing surgery for 25 years. And with this particular tumor we just haven't made great strides in terms of improving survival. Average survival, median survival is about 14 months. As I mentioned Senator McCain is 13 months since diagnosis. It's not a tumor that spreads outside of the brain but it's aggressive and hard to treat as a result.
[Nobilo:] And that being said, what is now next for the senator and his family?
[Gupta:] Well, you know, what we have heard from Senator McCain and certainly heard from his family in the past is he very much wants to be at home. Again, we know he is not going to go undergo further therapies. He may have what's called essentially a home hospice type care, which will be medical professionals who will help him be comfortable, do the things he needs to do. But therapy to treat the cancer. We know that that's no longer going to continue.
[Nobilo:] Well Doctor Gupta at the CNN center. Thank you so much for taking us through that sad news from the McCain family. We appreciate it.
[Gupta:] Thank you.
[Nobilo:] Both Republicans and Democrats have been paying tribute to John McCain. House Speaker Paul Ryan tweeted." John McCain personifies service to our country. The whole House is keeping John and his family in our prayers during this time." Mitt Romney said, "no man this century better exemplifies honor, patriotism, service, sacrifice and country first than Senator John McCain. His heroism inspires, his life shapes our character. I'm blessed and humbled by our friendship. And Mark Warner, vice chairman of the Senate Intel Committee tweeted, "Senator John McCain has served our country with courage and dignity. And we all owe a debt of gratitude to his life of service. A grateful nation stands with you, John." And now, to Yemen. A country around which a single deeply disturbing question is hanging. Are children becoming the deliberate targets of violence? At least 30 people, most of them children were killed by a Saudi led coalition air strike, according to the rebel-controlled health ministry. A warning, the report contains graphic images of the aftermath of the attack.
[Nima Elbagir, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Bundles in the sheets are what remains of a family. This man is gathering up the remains of his son and grandson children. He tries to show the cameraman but it's too upsetting. This footage was sent to CNN by Houthi officials. It shows the aftermath of yet another air strike in Yemen claiming the lives of dozens of children and their parents as they fled to safety. In the beleaguered port city of Hudaida. One of the pickup trucks miraculously survived the hit and was used to ferry back the dead and dying. He pulls back the sheets to show us the little feet sticking out.
[Unidentified Male:] These are all corpses some body parts were so charred we couldn't pick them up, so disintegrated.
[Elbagir:] In the hospital these images of the few remaining survivors were broadcast on Houthi backed TV. This man lost everyone in his family. Six children he says. Still in shock, his words are almost unintelligible. This morning on a tv they cast this the images of airstrikes continuing. CNN can't independently verify the images, supposedly of Saudi led coalition planes. But eye witnesses describe shouting and fear as strikes above the sky intensified. Hudaida is a strategic port and for weeks has been the sight of fierce fighting between the U.S. backed Saudi coalition and Iranian backed Houthi militias. Fighting that shows no signs of cooling down. Ali wants to find as much of his family as he can to give them a burial they deserve. It is the only dignity he says that he has left.
[Nobilo:] Nima Elbagir is here with more. Now Nima that's incredibly harrowing fantastic reporting. Have you had a response from the Saudi led coalition?
[Elbagir:] No. We have reached out to them. We haven't heard back. We haven't heard anything more on the investigation that was launched two weeks ago into the previous attack that killed children. It does seem like these incidents are beginning to pile up. And there is little forthcoming in terms of any kind of context or any explanation as to what the next step is.
[Nobilo:] And reference that attack on August 9th when 40 children died in the bus attack and more children dying in this attack. I mean can the two incidents be dismissed as accidental? What do you make of it from your investigation.
[Elbagir:] Also, these are the instances that make their way out to the outside world. We know from activists on the ground we know that there are myriad thousands of incidents of civilian casualties, it goes back to the point we have been discussing since the bus attack for the last two weeks. Which is both the U.S. and UK have consistently raised concerns about the targeting and the specificity of targeting. And at what point does the targeting and concerns over start to translate into concrete action? How sustainable is it to continue to sell weapons to a government whose targeting you have concerns over?
[Nobilo:] Do you think the U.S. and the UK, who currently sell arms to Saudi Arabia will have to address this at some point? What do you think it's going to take? Has there been a response from either of the governments to what we see here?
[Elbagir:] Speaking to activists and Yemeni civilians on the ground what's apparently there hasn't been a sufficient response neither to this incident or the prove bus attack. No condemnation which is strange because generally you expect a condemnation which there has been from the U.S. and U.K. is calls for investigation. But that does seem to be ratcheting up of the pressure both from U.S. lawmakers who are calling for greater congressional oversight of the these. And here in the UK where the arms treaty and the proviso around the arms treaty are embedded in national law.
[Nobilo:] Nima this reporting is incredible. Thank you for talking to us about it. Still to come tonight, the flags are out in Ireland for Pope Francis. But not everyone is welcoming him with open arms. We hear from survivors of horrific sexual abuse who are demanding answers. And two days ago, Australia's Malcom Turnbull said he wouldn't step down as prime minister but his political rivals had other plans.

[Bash:] Welcome back. Rudy Giuliani has been an ally of President Trump's since well before he ran for office. The former New York City mayor has gone from a campaign surrogate to a private supporter and now a highly visible member of Trump's legal team. And those years spent with President Trump have given Giuliani the gift that he used today, the gift to speak his language.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They have a witch hunt against the President of the United States going on.
[Rudy Giuliani, Former Mayor Of New York City:] This has become a witch hunt like the President said.
[Trump:] Our Justice Department should be looking at that kind of stuff not the nonsense of collusion with Russia.
[Giuliani:] This is a Justice Department completely out of control.
[Trump:] Fake news, fake news.
[Giuliani:] Russian collusion is a total fake news.
[Trump:] Comey is a liar and a leaker.
[Giuliani:] The leaker in chief.
[Trump:] With the exception of the late, great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president that's ever held this office.
[Giuliani:] I believe he's one of the best presidents we've ever had.
[Bash:] It's just so great. I mean, listening to Giuliani this morning, of course, you heard it, but the way that the I.P. team put that together, it's just so rich in how unbelievable Rudy Giuliani is at speaking Trump speak. He didn't speak like that when he was mayor.
[Michael Shear, White House Correspondent, The New York Times:] Well, true.
[Bash:] I mean, he was candid and he was New York
[Shear:] In so many ways, they're the same person, right? I mean, Rudy Giuliani is remember he is on the radio and do his mayor's radio show and have these free-willing and he knew how to use the media, manipulate the media. They both had issues with ex-wives, they both were on page 6 all the time. I mean, these And they both, you know, are bigger than life people. They're not, you know, receding into the shadows and it's the perfect I mean, if Donald Trump can't literally be his own communications director for the legal issues, then this is the next best thing.
[Bash:] And there's really it's about loyalty for the President, and Rudy Giuliani has been steadfast. He was one of the few people who went out there after the "Access Hollywood" tape came out, and even though he didn't get a couple jobs that he wanted in the Trump administration, he has still been incredibly, incredibly supportive to the President.
[Ham:] Yes. The president clearly feels a kinship with him, and it's obvious. And part of it is that he's so comfortable in this type of language because Trump speak is a New York dialect and so he's learned it easily. I also say that no Trump whisperer is really good at actually whispering. That's not really what he's at.
[Bash:] It's like how your grandparents whisper.
[Ham:] Yes.
[Kapur:] Rush, outspoken, septuagenarian, New Yorkers with a unique talent for appealing to people's aid.
[Bash:] Except OK, so I mention loyalty and they have been very close. I just want to do a little flashback to when Wolf Blitzer interviewed Donald Trump back in 2007. Watch this.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] It is Hillary Clinton versus Rudy Giuliani for president of United States
[Trump:] Well, we won't get into that now.
[Blitzer:] Where does Donald Trump stand?
[Trump:] We won't get into that now, but I do have my opinions. And we'll worry about that later.
[Bash:] Times changed a bit. A lot.
[Kapur:] They both seem to have lost their filter over the years. You know, Giuliani has not been in political office since 2001 when he left. And Trump obviously was not before, but you see his recent interviews like that one. And he did speak with a filter, they're both gone now.
[Bash:] Yes. Yes. I'm not sure how much of a filter Rudy Giuliani had. It was a New York sized filter. Thank you all so much for being with me today, and thank you for joining us on INSIDE POLITICS. John King is back here tomorrow. Be sure to subscribe to the INSIDE POLITICS podcasts on Apple iHeartRadio, TuneIn or Stitcher. Jim Sciutto is in for Wolf Blitzer. He picks up right after the break.

[Unidentified Male:] Are you intending for this to play out as it is playing out? Are you intending for parents to be separated from their children? Are you intending to send a message?
[Kirstjen Nielsen, United States Secretary Of Homeland Security:] I find that offensive.
[Rosemary Church, Host, Cnn:] The Trump administration standing firm in its defense of the controversial practice of separating families at the American border. We will break down the issues and heated rhetoric ahead. Plus a trade war is heating up between the U.S. and China with more tariffs being added to the list from each country. And it might be the last chance to save elephants from extinction by ivory poachers. Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church, and this is CNN Newsroom. Well, the pressure is mounting on U.S. President Donald Trump to end his administration's policy of separating children from their parents at the border with Mexico. The White House is falsely blaming Democrats when, in fact, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the zero-tolerance policy back in April. Since then, at least 2,000 children have been taken to detention camps. CNN's Jeff Zeleny begins our coverage.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Just remember, a country without borders is not a country at all.
[Jeff Zeleny, Senior White House Correspondent, Cnn:] President Trump facing intense fire tonight over what kind of country the U.S. is becoming when it comes to immigration.
[Trump:] The United States will not be a migrant camp, and it will not be a refugee holding facility. It won't be.
[Zeleny:] These searing images of children separated from their parents at times behind chain-link fences have sparked withering criticism from across the political spectrum. The White House not backing down from its zero-tolerance policy of separating children from their parents when apprehended at the border. It's led to the removal of nearly 2,000 children in the last six weeks. The president vented on Twitter in a flurry of messages. He blasted immigration in Europe and the U.S., finally demanding change the laws.
[Trump:] And I'll say it very honestly, and I'll say it very straight.
[Zeleny:] To be clear, the president is doing neither. He's blaming Democrats rather than accepting responsibility for his administration's actions.
[Trump:] We cannot get them even to the negotiating table, and I say it's very strongly the Democrats' fault. They're obstruction. They're really obstructionist, and they are obstructing.
[Zeleny:] Yet no matter how many times he says it, it's just not true. While Democrats and Republicans have been at odds over broader immigration laws, it's incorrect to blame family separation on Democrats.
[Nielsen:] We have to do our job. We will not apologize for doing our job. We have sworn to do this job. This administration has a simple message. If you cross the border illegally, we will prosecute.
[Zeleny:] Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen defending the practice one day after she misleadingly said on Twitter, we do not have a policy of separating families at the border, period. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who first up veiled the zero tolerance policy two months ago, argued today it was a deterrent.
[Jeff Sessions, United States Attorney General:] Anyone that brought a child with them would be given effective immunity from prosecution and would not be prosecuted. Word got out about this loophole, and the results were predictable.
[Zeleny:] But CNN has learned the new hard-line policy has not slowed the pace of migrants trying to enter the country illegally. Since the prosecution initiative as it's called inside DHS began, there's been an uptick of people trying to cross the border. Outrage pouring in from Republicans and Democrats after these scenes filled television screens over father day weekend of children and parents being separately ware housed in a former Wal-Mart and other sites across Texas. Former first lady Laura Bush taking the rare step of weighing in on a policy debate, writing in the Washington Post, "This zero tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral, and it breaks my heart. In 2018, can we not as a nation find a kinder, more compassionate and more moral answer to this current crisis? I, for one, believe we can." Michelle Obama re-tweeting those words, saying "Sometimes truth transcends party." The current first lady, Melania Trump, voicing concern but suggesting there's enough blame to go around. Her spokeswoman saying, "Mrs. Trump hates to see children separated from their families and hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration reform." Even loyal Trump allies like former communications director Anthony Scaramucci called for an urgent change, saying the controversy was damaging the president.
[Anthony Scaramucci, Former White House Communications Director:] He's a television star. He understands that this is not good for him. It's not good for the Congress if we want to win the midterm.
[Church:] CNN's Jeff Zeleny reporting there from the White House. The nonprofit investigative group ProPublica says they know what family separation at the U.S.Mexico border sounds like. They recorded disturbing audio at a U.S. Customs and Border Protection facility last week, and we should note CNN has not been able to verify the authenticity of that recording. And the upsetting images of children at the border inspired a California couple to help. Charlotte and Dave Wilner have raised more than $3 million and counting through Facebook. At one point the charity appeal was bringing in nearly $4,000 every minute. Amnesty International is among the many groups slamming the Trump administration policy on family separations. They released a statement on Monday saying this. "This is nothing short of torture. The severe mental suffering that officials have intentionally inflicted on these families for coercive purposes means that these acts meet the definitions of torture under both U.S. and international law." Joining me now to talk more about this controversial policy, our former South Carolina lieutenant governor and CNN contributor, Andre Bauer, and Mac Zilber, a Democratic political strategist and co- founder of Jacobson and Zilber Strategies. Good to have you both with us.
[Andre Bauer, Former South Carolina Lieutenant Governor:] Thank you.
[Church:] So, Andre, I do want to start with you. As a Republican, how does it make you feel when you listen to the heartbreaking audio recordings of children crying out for their parents or when you see the images of toddlers sobbing at the feet of their mothers as they watch them being cuffed at the border? Is that the policy you want your party to carry out? Is that the way to do it?
[Bauer:] It's not I hate to see a lot of things. Number one, this was carried on way before the current president is here.
[Church:] Let me just stop you there because that isn't the case. So we're not going to continually say that.
[Bauer:] That is the case.
[Church:] This is not the case. This is a zero tolerance policy that was announced by Jeff Sessions. Let's start from that point.
[Bauer:] But that's not the case. President Obama was locking people up in cages. That is a fact. That is not opinionated. And so when we try to divert this and make this a Donald Trump issue, it's not. These are law-breaking people who come into our country illegally. If I don't pay my taxes, guess what? I'm taken away from my loved ones because I get put in jail. We are a nation of laws. We have been for 241 years, and this is no different. And-
[Church:] It is the way that this Mac, I'm going to bring you in here because the problem that people have with this is not the fact yes, people don't want people coming illegally across the border. What people are objecting to, Democrats and Republicans, is the way this is being done. Mac, if you can pick up from there. This argument that this is the same thing that happened through the Bush era and through Obama era.
[Mac Zilber, Co-founder, Jacobson And Zilber Strategies:] Yes, it's just a fact that this zero-tolerance policy started two months ago. The idea that it happened in previous administrations is completely preposterous. The reality is that separating children from families is a policy that is so abhorrent and cruel that the Trump administration can't decide whether it wants to embrace it, which Stephen Miller and Jeff Sessions have done, deny it, which Secretary Nielsen has done, or blame it on the democrats, which is what Donald Trump is doing. The fact that one administration has three different positions on their own abhorrent policy just shows how much no one wants to be associated with this thing.
[Church:] And, Andre, former first lady Laura Bush says the policy of separation is cruel is immoral. She compared it to the Japanese- American internment camps of World War II. Senator John McCain and other Republicans are calling on President Trump to rescind the family separation policy, which Mr. Trump could do by just picking up the phone. So, Andre, are you worried that this could separate and split the party, that the people will say, we can't tolerate this. We're not going to treat human beings like this. It's unacceptable. The world is amazed as their watching this coming out of America.
[Bauer:] Well, again, it's a story that's driven with not whole truths. Not every family is broken up. Most of the families are broken up, they're people that can't really describe if these are their children or not, that there is some inconsistency when they're, in fact, interviewed. And so, they split them up because they in fact this is a great way to get people across the border that aren't their children. Drug dealers are now using this. There's a lot of abuses in the system. But make no mistake, this was passed during Bill Clinton. At some point in time, somebody has got to have some back bone to say because we can't just because we don't want to hurt anybody's feelings or make anybody mad. You've got to make sure that people coming into this country, what they are saying is true. A vetting system is healthy. Quite frankly, nobody should be coming into the country illegally. Look, my ancestors, my great-grandfather came over here, but he did it the right way. He came in. He took his time. He went through the channels that you had to do. Now we've got a party that just wants to let everybody in and cut all borders down. And now this-
[Church:] I don't think that's what's being suggested. Mac, if I could just bring you here to answer that. Andre was saying that you've got to vet these people. You know, we know at this point the 2,000 children have been separated from their family in the last four or six week or so. But how do you vet? How do you make sure that those children are not being brought in by people other than their parents?
[Zilber:] Right. Well there's two different pieces here, one is how do we vet, and how do we reform our immigration system, and there's a lot of good plans out there that involve people going through a process, paying back taxes, getting back in line. But regardless of all that, the reality is that right now we've got children being separated from their parents and being put in cages, and it's such an abhorrent policy that people like Donald Trump or, I'm sorry, Andre, you as well are denying the fact that it is a Trump administration policy because it's just so abhorrent to be associated with.
[Bauer:] There are pictures done under the last administration. Just a few short weeks ago when they thought they were pictures of the current administration, they let them out, and they were actually wrong. In fact, it was the former president. So, no, this is not just a Donald Trump policy. Bill Clinton actually [Technical Difficulty] this.
[Zilber:] Every administration has detention facilities. Not every administration has this zero-tolerance policy that has separated 2,000 children from their parents over the last two months.
[Church:] OK. Just be careful because as you're talking over each other, with the Skype, it's actually distorting audio. So let's just let's get back to a question here because President Trump blames the Democrats for the separation of children from their parents at the border. But it's his zero-tolerance policy that is forcing these separations. What he's hoping to achieve by doing this, apparently, is to force immigration legislation that he wants, and he wants funds for his border wall. Do you accept that, Andre?
[Bauer:] No. Number one, he's enforcing the law, and I know it's hard for some people to understand that. But we have laws, and that's why people so unbelievably want to get in this country, because we have become the land of milk and honey because we follow certain rules, guidelines that are established. And these folks, if you want to talk about a deplorable situation, to take your child at night over a border, through water, with people with guns, with drug traffickers, to take them into that situation, what kind of parent does that?
[Church:] A parent perhaps that's confronting some pretty awful circumstances. That's what would force people to leave, you know, a particular country where there are problems. Mac, you know, some people are calling this child abuse. Others suggest it is a humanitarian crisis. Is that what we're witnessing here in America?
[Zilber:] Yes, absolutely. I mean I would say this is a step above a humanitarian crisis. This rises to those rare moments in history where people have to just stand up and be counted. And the reality is that this is the second time in less than a year that undocumented children have been used as a political football to try to leverage policy concessions by this administration. And, you know, the administration can claim all it wants that this is something that was already in place, that this isn't being done for that purpose except for the fact that Stephen Miller essentially said just as much, that they were doing this because they wanted to create a deterrent at the border. They can't have their cake and eat it too, say that it's always been the policy and say that they're enacting it because they like what will happen when they enact it. It just doesn't add up and you can't square that circle. But the reality is that they have to pass policies to address this as soon as possible. And if they don't, then all the Republican senators that are saying they're going to address it are just full of hot air.
[Church:] All right. Andre, you got the first word. And Mac, you got the last. We'll have to leave it there. Unfortunately, we're out of time. Mac Zilber and Andre Bauer, thank you both of you for joining us and talking about a very controversial situation here in the United States. We'll see what happens going forward. Many thanks.
[Bauer:] Thank you.
[Zilber:] Thanks.
[Church:] And to another story we are following closely. U.S. President Donald Trump says he wants more tariffs on Chinese goods. He wants another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods to face tariffs. Both countries have just levied tariffs on $50 billion worth of goods sold by the other. The president believes the tariffs will push China to change its practices on acquiring U.S. intellectual property and technology. China's commerce ministry responded, saying "If the United States loses its senses and comes up with a new list, China will be forced to strike back hard and launch comprehensive measures that match the U.S. move in quantity and quality." Well, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un he's visiting China on Tuesday and Wednesday, and this comes one week after his first summit with the U.S. president. Our Matt Rivers is following the story from Beijing. He joins us now live. So, Matt, Kim Jong-un in Beijing on his third trip there in three months with the Singapore summit high on the agenda when he meets with Xi Jinping. Sp what all are they likely to talk about?
[Matt Rivers, Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, I mean, I think that is going to be first and foremost on the topic there is what was discussed between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un at that summit in Singapore. What was promised by the Americans? What was promised by the North Koreans? What didn't make it into that joint declaration? What's the definition of denuclearization in the eyes of Kim Jong-un, and also how do China's strategic interests play into all that? Can China convince Kim Jong-un to continue to push this line, for example, that the Americans should perhaps remove troops from the Korean peninsula? That's something that the North Koreans want. It's something the Chinese want as well. So that's certainly the kind of conversations that you can expect these two leaders to have. It's all typical, though, here in China to have a lot of secrecy surrounding any visit from a North Korean leader. The fact that we even found out that Kim Jong-un was coming here to Beijing before he left, typically what happens is the North Korean leader comes and once he leaves, then China confirms that that trip happened. So the fact that we found out that Kim Jong-un will be here in Beijing today and tomorrow is a break from protocol in China, and what several analysts though I've spoken to today have suggested is that's all part of this remarkable normalization in North Korean diplomacy over the last several months. It was less than three months ago, Rosemary, that Kim Jong-un came here to China, and that was his first ever foreign visit as leader of North Korea, his first time ever meeting another foreign leader in Xi Jinping. So the change over the last three months is really nothing short of remarkable.
[Church:] It really is extraordinary, isn't it? Matt, I do want to go back to these tariffs because of course as we've just reported, President Trump wants to apply more tariffs, $200 billion worth on Chinese goods. And of course now China, as we've reported too, is going to reply in kind. We appear to be in the midst of a trade war. Certainly that's what China thinks. America doesn't think that, though.
[Rivers:] Well, I mean I think it depends on who you ask. I think U.S. officials largely have steered clear of using that term. China's government has definitely not shied away from using that term. But in terms of how this actually really plays out moving forward, that's the big question because, yes, the Trump administration has said $200 billion more in tariffs could be coming. But what does that look like, when do they enact it. Don't forget the $50 billion in tariffs that were just made official, they were actually announced way back in March. So, it will several months for this to play out. And then assuming China doesn't back down, which we don't know what they are going to do, they'll put $200 billion of their own. However, we're not sure what they're going to tariff here, Rosemary, because don't forget America only sends about $130 billion worth of goods here to China each year. China is already going to put tariffs on $50 billion of that. So, there's not so many American exports left. So exactly how the valuation will play out in terms of how China is going to respond, it could be tariffs. It could be restricting market access. It could be kind of an informal kind of punishment such as taking Chinese tour groups and saying hey, don't go to America. There's a a lot of different ways this could play out. It's really fascinating. But yes, the trade war seems to be well, well on at this point.
[Church:] Yes. Very disturbing stuff for the markets across the globe. Everyone watching very closely to see where this goes. Matt Rivers, thanks as always. I appreciate it. Well, the U.S. and South Korea are calling off an annual military exercise that was scheduled for August. And this follows President Trump's pledge to end what he called war games during his summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Last year more than 67,000 U.S. and South Korean troops took part in the drills, though President Trump called the exercises provocative, officials insist they are defensive. And our Alexandra Field is in Seoul, South Korea, with more on the repercussions of this move. And Alexandra, you know, we talked about this last hour. It was quite a surprise for both South Korea and Washington, indeed the world when President Trump first made this announcement at the summit last week. So, what's being said now in Seoul about the official announcement that these joint drills indeed have been called off?
[Alexandra Field, Correspondent, Cnn:] Yes, and there was a lot of objection certainly from the critics of the president, who say that this was a major concession to North Korea and that the U.S. didn't get enough for it. President Trump has vociferously defended this. He says the costs are high. He says that it's not a good idea to continue with these provocative war games as he put it at a time of good faith negotiation with North Korea. So, look, South Korean counterparts, they very well may have been caught off guard by this announcement. They said just about as much when they said that they needed to work to understand what exactly the president meant. But it seems that both sides have now come to an agreement at this point it means stopping the planning for the large- scale exercises that were set to happen this August. These are exercises that have been happening for more than 40 years on the peninsula. Every year we see two major sets of exercises, some in the spring, the others that would have been scheduled for August. These are of course a joint effort. They are defensive in nature and defense officials will tell you they are about maintaining peace and stability in the region. The president seems to think they're too provocative. Pentagon officials say that they've made no decisions other than to cancel these August exercises but that there will be a meeting of high level Pentagon officials later this week to decide what happens next. South Korean officials echoing that. And Rosemary, they are also saying that they had another set of military exercises separate from the joint exercises that are scheduled around the same time, and they've got to take a look at that and decide whether or not they move forward with those exercises, scale them down, or cancel them altogether. Everyone reacting really as quickly as they can to that announcement from the president.
[Church:] Right. And of course even though they've been called off for now, President Trump has made it clear, hasn't he, that these joint military exercises could start up at any time if North Korea fails to hold up its side of the deal. What might it take for that to happen? Do we know?
[Field:] The president put it fairly succinctly in one of his tweets saying if talks break down, the war games could be started up immediately as he put it. Of course these are exercises that take a lot of planning. You mentioned 17,500 troops participating last year. Also, participation from a number of different countries. About seven other countries besides the U.S. and South Korea it appears participated last year. So certainly there is a heavy amount of planning that goes into this. But it seems that the intention of the president here is to call off these exercises for now and he says if talks break down, that you could return to these kinds of exercises. The White House has made it clear that troops will continue to engage in readiness practices, but not these large-scale, very public drills that would have happened in August. That seems to be the consensus for now. Rosemary?
[Church:] All right. Bringing us the very latest from the Korean peninsula there in Seoul, South Korea, our Alexandra Field, where it is nearly 4.30 in the afternoon. Many thanks to you. We'll take a short break here. But still to come, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has got two weeks to reach a deal on immigration or face the possible collapse of her coalition government. Plus, elephants on the brink. Despite bans on the ivory trade, the slaughter continues. We will go undercover in search of some answers. Jubilation in England over three lions opening match in the World Cup. All the highlights coming your way next.

[Harlow:] Welcome back. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. President Trump is back at the White House this morning and declaring that North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat. Joining me now is Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey. He's the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Thank you for being here this morning
[Sen. Bob Menendez , New Jersey:] Good to be with you, Poppy.
[Harlow:] So, the president writes, "There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea." Do you agree?
[Menendez:] No. The reality is North Korea still has all of the warheads it had before, the nuclear warheads it had before, it has the nuclear process to create fissile material, to create bombs. It continues to have its missile systems unfettered. And so, at the end of the day, the same exact threat that we had before the summit exists now.
[Harlow:] However and you said look, just yesterday you said, this is just a promise from more promises and we've been down that road before. I hear you. But even frequent critic of the president, James Clapper, former director of national intelligence, last night on this network to Anderson said, we're in a much better place. We're on a diplomatic path as opposed to where we were six or eight months ago. Does the president deserve some credit for getting us there, senator?
[Menendez:] Well, I think you have to take a step back to analyze that statement. Number one is, it's the president's heated rhetoric where he was exchanging with Kim Jong-un the threats of nuclear annihilation through Twitter. And so, the president ratcheted this up dramatically as well. So, to give him credit for bringing it down several decibels is something that he created of his own doing. And so, look, I think it's better that these two ultimately have a process to talk versus threaten nuclear annihilation, but at the same time it didn't h to be at a presidential level.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Menendez:] It could have been with a lot of thorough work that produced in the past much more substantive agreements with a pathway forward than this communique.
[Harlow:] Sure. Maybe more substantive agreed frameworks like '94, but that fizzled, right? That failed. And you made the point yesterday to Jake, my colleague, that you wanted to at least, out of this summit, see a definition of denuclearization because it is defined so differently by this administration than the Kim regime. We didn't get that. However, this is the first of a number of meetings to come, we're told. As we sit here today, do you believe that the United States is safer than it was on Monday with respect to North Korea?
[Menendez:] To the extent that the rhetoric that President Trump used that heightened the potential risk of a miscalculation on either side, yes. But to the extent that all of the substantive threats that North Korea poses to us in the Korean Peninsula, throughout the region, those are all still there. And what worries me is we have taken Kim from international pariah to a respected state leader, that we have actually ceased our military exercises and the president adopts the provocative language of the North, saying it is provocative and war games, and that we don't tell our allies that are critical to us to succeed in our efforts with North Korea at the end of the day.
[Harlow:] As you know, the vice president went up to the Hill yesterday and tried to sort of clean that up by saying, look, we're still going to have some joint exercises, but not these "war games." But I take your point. Quickly before I move on to immigration, the president did say that a White House invitation for Kim Jong-un could be in the cards "at the appropriate time" according to the president. What would be the appropriate time for the North Korean dictator to come to the United States, meaning what would you have to see to make you comfortable with that invitation? We'd have to see that should be towards the end of a process. We say trust, but verify. There's nothing here to verify except a promise to make more promises. We've been down this road. So, we'd have to actually see Kim Jong-un in the process of destroying and dismantling his nuclear weapons, his nuclear infrastructure, his intercontinental ballistic missile infrastructure. If he's down that process and it's verifiably so and we can determine that we're on a path to irreversibility, then that would be maybe be the possibility. I would hope the president would raise the enormous human rights violations that exist in North Korea. He says that Kim Jong-un is honorable and loves his people, but tens of thousands are in North Korean prisons, tens of thousands more are starving. I don't want that type of love from my leader. He did say that human rights came up briefly in his conversation with Kim. On immigration, what we know now is that Republican leadership is going to potentially take up these two immigration bills that would deal with DACA. One of them is still being written at this point in time. What would and the concern here is that nothing's going to get passed because no one of the reasons being that no Democrats are expected to get on board with this. I wonder for you, someone who has been so outspoken about the need for immigration reform, so outspoken about protecting DREAMers and DACA legislation, what would those bills need to include, senator, to get you on board, to get a yes vote from you?
[Menendez:] Well, there would have to be a clear pathway for DREAMers to legalize their status in the United States. In the first instance, give them a pathway where they already, to be a DREAMer, under existing regulations, they have to be a law-abiding citizen, they have to be either gainfully employed or in school, pay taxes, if they're actually employed and pass a criminal background check and then you give them a pathway towards permanent residency and later US citizen. And you look at their immediate mother or father as part of a package. That would be a pathway towards something. What the administration would require for that has been overwhelmingly unacceptable. They want to change legal immigration, as we know it, in this country, even though President Trump benefited from legal immigration by virtue of his grandfather coming to the United States, claimed under the fifth preference category. They want to change the nature of what is asylum in this country. I think that's a problem. I mean, they want to change immigration as we know it and have benefited from it for over a century.
[Harlow:] Senator, before you go, very quickly, in the primaries overnight, in South Carolina, the Democratic candidate Archie Parnell won his primary fight in the 5th district. This came a month after he admitted to assaulting and battering his ex-wife 45 years ago. She said she feared for her life, she had to obtain a restraining order. My question to you is broad. And it is, should domestic abuse ever, even 45 years ago, be disqualifying for someone to hold public office?
[Menendez:] In my view, it probably should be. Of course, the electorate always decides what is and is not disqualifying. But in my view, even if it's that long period of time, it should be.
[Harlow:] Sen. Bob Menendez, appreciate your time this morning. Thank you.
[Menendez:] Take care.
[Harlow:] Coming up, a busy primary night last night. A big lesson for Republicans. Challenge the president at your own peril. Just ask a certain congressman in South Carolina.

[Jake Tapper, Cnn:] Breaking news now on THE LEAD. A major player at the White House is out over spousal abuse allegations. THE LEAD starts right now. The White House staff secretary now resigning after his first ex-wife claims he choked her, punched her and emotionally wrecked her, and his second ex-wife has abuse allegations of her own. Both women saying they told the FBI about the attack. So why did the White House hire him? And why did they try to keep him from resigning today? With Washington running out of money and time, the Senate reaches a deal, this time a long-term deal to keep the government open, but one that leaves both House and House Republicans with a tough choice to make. Plus, sister act. In a historic move, Kim Jong-un sends his little sis south to the Winter Games. Could she come face to face with Vice President Mike Pence? Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. There are basic lines of human decency, norms to which society generally agrees and to which we adhere, and we continue to see the Trump presidency eroding these lines. Some of the people marching alongside Nazis and the Klan in Charlottesville were "very fine people," President Trump said, as he drew a line of moral equivalence between white supremacists and those who protested the white supremacists. Days after, one of those Nazis drove purposefully into a crowd and killed Heather Heyer. Or last fall after U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore was credibly accused by women of having sexually abused them when they were in high school. One of the victims as young as 14. Republicans withdrew their support for Roy Moore, except for President Trump, who doubled down. To this list of those marching alongside Nazis and those accused of sexually abusing children, the White House has now added someone accused by two ex-wives of spousal abuse. CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports that White House officials have been generally aware of the accusations that White House Staff Secretary Rob Porter has beaten his ex-wives. Today, the White House is still standing by Porter, attesting to his character and his excellence. Before we begin today's report, I just wanted to once again note a further erosion of standards for what I thought we had all agreed was not OK, not acceptable, not moral. White supremacist rallies, child molesters, domestic abusers. Another moment where the White House is sadly no longer considered a place of the highest standards in the land, but rather a place where our national standards are being degraded. This afternoon, White House Staff Secretary Rob Porter resigned, over the objections of the White House. Following reports of spousal abuse, claims by two ex-wives, Colbie Holderness and Jennifer Willoughby, who told CNN's M.J. Lee that Porter abused them while they were married to him. One of those ex-wives has photographic evidence she says proves her claim, a black eye. Both of these women shared their claims in interviews with the FBI during Porter's background check investigation. Minutes ago, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders continued to stand by Porter saying that President Trump has "full confidence" in his abilities and performance. Earlier, Sanders said Porter was not pressured to resign. In fact, far from it.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Look, I think that was a personal decision that Rob made and one that he was not pressured to do, but one that he made on his own.
[Tapper:] Porter in a statement today called the chargers against him by his two ex-wives false and vile, but he did not explain how his wife got the black eye or why two ex-wives are accusing him of abusing them. The reports first appeared in "The Daily Mail" and The Intercept. Let's begin with CNN's M.J. Lee with more on what Porter has been accused of. These are serious allegations.
[M.j. Lee, Cnn National Politics Correspondent:] Yes, these are very disturbing allegations against a senior aide to President Trump, Rob Porter, an Oval Office presence, and thought to be in the rise in the Trump administration, abruptly resigning today after two of his ex- wives accused him of years of domestic abuse. CNN interviewed both ex-wives today. And let me just walk you through what they told me. The first ex-wife, Colbie Holderness, married Porter in 2003. She tells me there was constant emotional and verbal abuse and that the physical abuse began almost immediately after their wedding. During their honeymoon in 2003, Holderness said that Porter kicked her thigh during a fight and for years she said he choked her and would throw her on the bed, put his body weight on her, yell and grind his elbow or knee into her body. Then, in the summer of 2005, Holderness says the couple was in Florence and that Porter punched her in the face. She shared photos from that alleged incidence with CNN. You can see the bruise on her face. She said this was the only time where she can remember Porter actually leaving a physical mark on her body. And Porter has denied these accusations, which we will get into a little bit later. Now, Jennifer Willoughby, this is the second ex-wife, who married Porter in 2009 2009, rather told CNN that she also endured deep emotional abuse from her ex-husband. There was an incident in 2010, for example, when Willoughby said Porter punched a glass surface on their front door and eventually the police got involved and she said the police encouraged her to take out a protective order against him. And CNN has obtained and reviewed a copy of that order. Then in December of 2010, Wilson said that and Porter had a fight and she went to take a shower. She tells me that he grabbed her from the shower by her shoulder, making her feel very frightened.
[Tapper:] So Porter is resigning, but he had a statement about these accusations. And the White House seems to be defending him?
[Lee:] That's right. Well, first of all, Porter says these allegations are simply false. Here's the statement that he released earlier today quote "These outrageous allegations are simply false. I took the photos given to the media nearly 15 years ago. And the reality behind them is nowhere close as to what's being described. I have been transparent and truthful about these vile claims. But I will not further engage publicly with a coordinated smear campaign." Now, I should note, Jake, that Holderness acknowledge that it was in fact Porter who took these photos of her bruised face. She said she made her take the photos in contrition, but she says she absolutely stands by her allegations. In terms of the fallout at the White House right now, we are told that Porter resigned over the objections of White House Chief of Staff Kelly. Kelly said in a statement that Porter is quote "a man of true integrity and honor and I can't say enough good things about him." And two things worth keeping in mind, Jake, too, as we learn more about this story, is that, one, Porter is a top aide inside the White House who had consistent contact with President Trump himself. And, two, we are told by several sources that Porter has been dating White House Communications Director Hope Hicks, one of the most influential aides in the West Wing.
[Tapper:] You're told about the ex-wives speaking to the
[Fbi. Lee:] That's right. Both of the ex-wives actually tell me that they were interviewed by the FBI regarding Porter's security clearance and bother Holderness and Willoughby tell me that they were honest with the FBI when they were being interviewed about their troubled marriages to Porter and basically shared with them, shared with the FBI details of the abuses that they say they suffered from Porter. And notably, Jake, the source tells my colleague Jim Acosta that Porter ran into trouble obtaining a security clearance because one of his ex-wives raised the issue of domestic violence with the investigators.
[Tapper:] Just to underline this, that means the White House knew about this because the FBI interviewed the ex-wives on behalf of Porter, on behalf of the White House.
[Lee:] You would assume so. We don't know right now to what extent, but you can safely assume I think that the White House would have been aware of these issues having been raised with the
[Fbi. Tapper:] All right, M.J. Lee also wrote about this on CNN.com. And there is another woman also with allegations of her own. M.J., thanks so much. Appreciate it. Let's dive into this with the panel. First of all, let me just start with Chief of Staff John Kelly's statement to "The Daily Mail" when they broke the story yesterday. "Rob Porter is a man of true integrity and honor and I can't say enough good things about him. I am proud to serve alongside him." No, he's not.
[Karine Jean-pierre, Democratic Strategist:] Yes, exactly. I think what strikes me that is so really awful, Jake, is that we are in the MeToo movement, where we're supposed to believe the women. It seems as if the Trump administration has not caught up to the movement that we're in. And it's incredibly troubling, because we're talking about the White House. We're talking about the president of the United States. Look, I worked in the White House. The job that Porter has is incredibly important. While it is not well known, it's incredibly important, because...
[Tapper:] Explain to people what a staff secretary is.
[Jean-pierre:] Because basically what they do is they spend the staff secretary makes sure that everything that comes in front of the desk of the president, they manage kind of who comes in and out, the memos. All of those things is the staff secretary's job. So they spend hours and hours with the president on a regular basis. And it is safe to assume that White House did know, if the FBI did a background check on him, if they spoke to the wives. Then that means the White House knew about this and still gave him this very important position.
[Tapper:] It's interesting, Susan, because you and I have been in this town for a while and we know people that apply to get in jobs in the White House and we hear about them going through the background check. Did they smoke a joint in college and do they do this? Anything can come back to haunt you. And anything until this administration really could block you. But apparently the FBI knew and the White House knew about these charges.
[Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief, "usa Today":] But according to the reporting that we have seen done, he did not get a security clearance. And it is interesting that he was able to continue to do this job without a security clearance, because of course I'm sure he was handling a lot of the material that goes to the president is of course classified. So, that's interesting. But he, of course, Rob Porter denies the allegations. But what surprises me about the White House says is not that they is that they accept them and not the women, as opposed to saying, we don't know what the story is, we think is a serious issue, which is where Senator Hatch, a former employer of Rob Porter, ended up saying, after putting out a very positive statement. He came back and put down one that walked back a bit and said we take these issues seriously. This should be looked at. That would be a justifiable position for the White House to say. We don't know what happened. We think it is important to look at it. But instead they went all in on the side of Rob Porter.
[Tapper:] And in fact said that he resigned over the objections of John Kelly and others. So, Kristen, let me ask you, because Susan just brought up Senator Orrin Hatch. And his original statement attacked the media for reporting these accusations, and seemed to attack the ex-wives. It said quote "It is incredibly discouraging to see such a vile attack on such a decent man. Shame on any publication that would print this and shame on the politically motivated, morally bankrupt character assassins that would attempt to sully a man's good name." Now, he has amended. And I will, in the interest of fairness, read. He wrote: "I'm heartbroken by today's allegations." This is today. "I do not know the details of his personal life. Domestic violence in any form is abhorrent." But I am perplexed by the first statement. Why issue that first statement?
[Kristen Soltis Anderson, Republican Strategist:] I am very glad that the senator amended his position and issued the second statement, because in the case of the first statement, what you're seeing is someone who doesn't know the details of someone's private life, who has maybe only interacted with them in a professional setting, thinks highly of the job they have done in that professional setting, and feels an instinct to defend someone they know and love. But I think Susan in right, in this moment, a minimum standard should be to say, let's all take a breath and actually investigate this, rather than attacking someone who has made these allegations. That's the sort of progress that theoretically we should be making in this MeToo era. It doesn't necessarily mean anyone who makes allegations is instantaneously believed 100 percent and the guy is always guilty, but that we should be in the business of taking a breath and taking things seriously.
[Tapper:] Absolutely. Everyone, stick around. We got a lot more to talk about. We have breaking news on Capitol Hill, drama on the House floor. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has been speaking for hours. But will her day of protest get any results? We will go live to Capitol Hill next. Stay with us.

[Cooper:] Lawmakers are back in town after the holiday weekend. The Republicans are focusing on one main priority, the GOP tax plan. This morning, the president tweeted about it, writing, "The Tax Cut Bill is coming along very well, great support. With just a few changes, some mathematical, the middle class and job producers can get even more in actual dollars and savings and the pass through provision becomes simpler and really works." Problem is that, it's not completely the case, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its score the bill today. They say the plan would increase the deficit by $1.4 trillion over the next 10 years. But the average health insurance premium would increase by about 10 percent most years of the next decade taking more money out of family's pockets. And earlier, I spoke from Republican Senator James Lankford about the bill. Here's part of that conversation. Sir, Republicans have been selling this bill as tax reform that will benefit the middle class. I'm wondering how you square that with what the CBO is now saying, that Americans who earned $30,000 or less a year would be worse off under in 2019 when it goes into effect that most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off by 2027 because of the losing subsidies, tax credits and premiums would rise.
[Sen. James Lankford , Oklahoma:] Yes. So, very interesting this is classic Washington math. If you take the CBO score or you lay it next to the JCT score, JCT is very, very different. Both of them are supposed to be nonpartisan. They are the two entities that we count on in Congress to be able to get a score of JCT. If you remove all the healthcare aspects, would be able to show a dramatic decrease in taxes for all those exact same people that you just talked about. CBO looks at it and says, well, if these individuals are not forced to be able to take healthcare, then the mayor may not take it, they don't use to be able to take it, then they won't have those subsidies and they count that as an increase in tax for them. It's not a matter of their taxes actually going up, it's a matter if they didn't actually take in the subsidies and so they count that in the strange way as actually removing taxes. It doesn't make sense to anyone, except for people in the Washington D.C., I would tell you, if you look at the actual score and actually what people paying taxes or don't pay in taxes, the actual amount they don't pay in taxes at this point would go down. Those individuals would pay less.
[Cooper:] But if premiums are rising for healthcare, if people are under 30,000 or under any number try to get healthcare, won't they end up paying more for it?
[Lankford:] Those premiums were still subsidized exact same way. You remove the individual mandate. It doesn't remove the subsidies that are there. So those individual that are receiving the subsidies right now under up to 400 percent poverty level will still be receiving those exact same subsidies. So we're not removing the subsidies, we're removing the mandates.
[Cooper:] The other headline from the CBO is that the tax bill would add $1.4 trillion to deficit over the next 10 years, you obviously, you know, traditionally been very concerned about the deficit, you've just put out your annual government wage report, blasting inefficient government spending and the growing national deficit, why this tax bill worth adding $1.4 trillion to deficit if you believe it does?
[Lankford:] Well, again, we go back to the same thing with the Washington math. The $1.4 trillion in additional deficit assumes there is no change in the economy. You lower taxes, people have more money in their pocket but they don't spend it and they don't save it, it just sits there. That's not true in real life. In real life, if people aren't have more money in their pockets, if businesses have more money, they buy more equipment, they hire more workers, people spend more money, they save more money, all of those things help the economy. If the economy starts to get healthy again, which is not healthy, it's stable, but it's not healthy right now. If the economy starts to get healthy again, then you have more people paying taxes and it goes up. So the and the essential thing is to look at is, what is the estimate for growth? Is it a reasonable growth estimate? Right now, it's 0.4 percent increase in the economy. If you have 0.4 percent, this is a break-even bill. Now, my proposal, and I've been very clear about it is, I want to have a backstop built into this bill that we currently don't have at this point. But, I'd like to have a backstop, so we in case we don't have a 0.4 percent growth, we have some way to be able to protect our deficit. Some way to be able to find the revenue to be able to resolve this. So, we're working through these negotiations right now as a part of this bill. But the key is, we got to get economic growth again. People lose track. We've had two percent growth for the last 10 years. We've not had a decade like that since the great depression. Every decade up until the last 10 years, we've had three percent of growth or more, except for the last 10. We can't get used to that as an American economy. We should be at three percent growth. We got to be able to nudge this economy to get healthy again.
[Cooper:] I want to ask you about the president's comment today about your colleagues Senator Elizabeth Warren, referring to her as "Pocahontas" during a ceremony honoring Navajo Code Talkers. Was it appropriate that the president of the United States to say that particularly in that moment?
[Lankford:] Yes. It seemed odd and out of place in that moment. I could definitely tell you that. I don't let my children and don't encourage my children to be able to speak that way. I think there's some good dialogue that you're going to have where you can agree or disagree without being personal. But it really did seem very out of place at that moment.
[Cooper:] Senator Lankford, appreciate your time. Thank you.
[Lankford:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] And we'll be right back.

[Tapper:] We're back with the politics lead and my panel and words I thought I would never say, President Trump just tweeted: thank you music mogul Kanye West for his support. Back up a little. Kanye had tweeted, you don't have to agree with Trump but the mob can't make me not love him. We're both dragging energy I'll just repeat that, that's not a typo. We are both dragging energy. He is my brother. I love everyone. I don't agree with everything anyone does, that's what makes us individuals and we have the right to independent thought. This comes after a week of Kanye West tweeting some controversial affirmations for opinions that maybe in the progressive community are not shared. President Trump re-tweeting it, says, thank you so much, very cool. It's interesting. This does put him at odds with his wife I can't again, once again, Kim Kardashian-West, this puts him at odds. She was a she was a Hillary Clinton supporter. Why? Why would the president want to bring attention to Kanye West saying that he doesn't hate Trump and he supports him, he's his brother, they're both dragging energy?
[Kirsten Powers, Cnn Political Analyst:] I don't know how to get into his head. I guess he likes he likes celebrities and and he wants their approval and now he has the approval of one of them.
[David Urban, Cnn Political Commentator:] Look, I think Kanye West is a cultural icon.
[Tapper:] Sure.
[Urban:] Look at the price of Yeezys, I gone online and tried to get I'll tell you, I tried with my son and tried to buy a pair actually. My son would not let me buy a pair.
[Tapper:] Yes. He's very I mean, he's incredibly talented musician. He's also a controversial public figure. But it is interesting that he has been expressing support for the president. I mean, it does show the president loves people who love him.
[Nia-malika Henderson, Cnn Senior Political Reporter:] Yes, I think that's right. And that is why you see the president saying, you know, this is a cool thing, it came up in the briefing. It's almost not surprising. I mean, Kanye did meet with the president or when he was the president-elect in New York. He also tweeted that he loves Hillary Clinton and his wife is tweeting back at people saying don't be too hard on my husband, don't necessarily make it seem like he's going through a mental break down which we know he's had mental health problems. So, yes
[Henderson:] And I think he tweeted about
[Tapper:] That was the accusation that people are making and Kim Kardashian And she said that when he expressed himself, that's when he's out of his pit. So, anyway we have a lot more to talk about. It's not Kanye related. We have some breaking news on the Hill. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in the hot seat, refusing to say moments ago if he would resign if the president desired to fire his number two Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The host of questions this raises next. Plus, we have some breaking news on Dr. Ronny Jackson. Stay with us.

[King:] Topping our political radar today, President Trump wrapping up his working vacation. Just moments from now, the president leaves New Jersey, heading to upstate New York, where he'll sign the National Defense Authorization Act. After that, he attends a fun fundraiser for New York Republican Congresswoman Claudia Tenney. She's running for re-election in one of the country's most competitive House races. CNN currently rates it a toss-up. The Republican governor of Ohio throwing some shade at the president today. The president went after John Kasich this morning on Twitter, calling him, quote, very unpopular, and accusing him of hurting Republican congressional candidate Troy Balderson. Kasich replied merely with this, a gift of the Russia president Vladimir Putin looking amused. A little context on popularity. A recent Quinnipiac poll showed Kasich's approval among Ohio voters was 52 percent. In that same poll, the president's approval below it in Ohio, just 43 percent. Here's one for you, especially if you're a Democrat. Could Senator Elizabeth Warren and "The Rock" team up in 2020? Social media are sure hoping so. The senator and star of the HBO show "Ballers" trading tweets over the weekend about the show's season premiere. On Sunday, Senator Warren tweeting, why do I love "Ballers" so much? It's "The Rock". That caught Dwayne johnson's attention. "I appreciate the love, Senator Warren. Enjoy our new season tonight, and you have a big rock-size hug coming when I see you." Not the first time, believe it or not, the senator has given the show a shout out.
[Warren:] It's actually a story about hard work. It's a story about perseverance. It's a story about having to reach within yourself and find something that you're not 100 percent sure is there.
[Unidentified Female:] We're talking about "Ballers."
[King:] All righty then. Up next for us, Nancy Pelosi gets an unlikely advocate, even as she struggles to get off the ropes.

[Baldwin:] We are learning new details about this American woman and her family freed from the Taliban after a half a decade and why her husband reportedly refusing to leave. Kaitlin Coleman and her Canadian husband were taken hostage back in 2012 while on this trip to Afghanistan. The Taliban released this video of the couple and their three children who were born under the terror group's watch. The U.S. official tells CNN that Coleman's husband, Joshua Boyle is refusing to get on the C130 in fear of being arrested in his home country of Canada. The back story is that he was previously married to a woman whose brother spent ten years at Guantanamo Bay for fighting U.S. troops in Afghanistan. So, apparently they're all still back overseas. Where do we go from here? Moments ago the State Department attempted to answer that key question.
[Unidentified Reporter:] You repeated several times coming home. Where exactly is the family now and are they in fact coming back to either the U.S. or Canada?
[Heather Nauert, State Department Spokesperson:] I'm not going to be able to confirm any of that for you. I know the family had asked for some privacy at this time and some of that will be up to the family to be able to explain where they decide to go and when they decide to go there.
[Unidentified Reporter:] When you say coming home it doesn't mean-
[Nauert:] I just mean out of captivity. I mean the family obviously was in a very dire situation. You had all seen the videos of the family, and they were in distress. So when I say coming home, it doesn't mean here necessarily.
[Baldwin:] With me now Shawn Turner, CNN National Security Analyst and former Spokesperson for U.S. Policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan and Shamila Chaudhary, Former White House Director for Afghanistan and Pakistan and a Senior Fellow at New America. So Shawn and Shamila, thank you so much for being with me. Shawn to you first, it's impossible first of all to put ourselves in their shoes and having been, who knows what it was like for the last five years, but to think the husband is not jumping on the first plane out of there is befuddling to people sitting here watching. What do you make of that?
[Shawn Turner, Cnn National Security Analyst And Former Spokesperson For Us Policy In Afghanistan And Pakistan:] Absolutely. And to your point Brooke, the first thing is that it's very fortunate this family has been freed; they have small children. As you pointed out, they have been going through this for quite some time. You know, as far as Joshua Boyle not getting on the airplane, there are a lot of questions to be answered here. We do know and I talked to officials in the community they were aware that he was questioned at some point in the past, it's unclear right now exactly what those Canadian officials were questioning him about, but there is no clear indication that there are charges pending against him. So, there are a lot of questions to be answered as to what exactly he believes he would be sought for. But the interesting thing Brooke, is at this point they really don't have to come back to the United States or Canada. It's going to be a challenge for investigators to figure out exactly what he is concerned about and I think the Canadian officials are also going to have to perhaps be a little bit more forthcoming with regards to whether or not there are some charges pending.
[Baldwin:] Shamila, you know this part of the world extraordinarily well. So I want to ask you about, especially since it was Pakistani security forces who helped secure the release of the relation with them and the U.S., but first this is what the President said earlier, praising the Pakistani Government for helping this rescue.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] They worked very hard on this-

[Gorani:] Days of bad press just got a little worse for Apple. Remember last week when we told you how the tech firm admitted to slowing down older versions of its iPhone? A lot of people weren't happy. Some are now suing. CNN's Samuel Burke is on the story. So, Apple is admitting that it slowed down some iPhones. What reason is it giving for doing?
[Samuel Burke, Cnn Money Technology Correspondent:] Yes. And CNN Money now counts five different lawsuits. Basically, what iPhone said is, yes, we slowed down these models, take a list and see if your phone is on there, the iPhone 6, 6s, SE and the relatively new iPhone 7, but they say it's not because we're trying to force you into buying the new iPhone, which costs $1,000, by the way. They say there's actually a problem in the battery. There's a surge in these batteries that cause the phone to shut off all of a sudden, which many people
[Gorani:] I've experienced that actually.
[Burke:] It has 20 percent, you think you are good and all of a suddenly it's gone. So, Apple saying we are trying to elongate the battery life by doing this, but a lot of people are upset about it.
[Gorani:] Yes. The lawsuit is alleging what that Apple is doing this to force people into buying the newer model? Is that what they are saying?
[Burke:] What we are seeing over and over again I will show you a good old portion of one of the lawsuits. This one is from Chicago. There are four in the U.S. even one in Israel. I think they're saying there's a lack of transparency. So, if we look at this lawsuit, the Chicago lawsuit is saying Apple's failure to inform consumers these updates would wreak havoc they say on the phone's performance is being deemed purposeful. They go on to say the following, "an if proven, constitutes the unlawful and decisive withholding of material information." Apple knew they were doing this obviously because now they
[Gorani:] They didn't give people a heads up.
[Burke:] Exactly. I think that's the issue here is they didn't tell people. I have spoken to two lawyers who tell me it's very easy to file these lawsuits, but to win one is very difficult.
[Gorani:] Yes. But if you are going to file a lawsuit against a company that has lots of spare cash, Apple might be a good target. So, what can you I have not experienced this, but I think part of the reason is because I don't really use that many apps. I'm not on my phone loading pictures
[Burke:] A low user.
[Gorani:] Yes. I use my phone a lot to read. I'm a consumer of material on it, but I don't really use it to input information. That could be part of it, too, the reason I'm not experiencing the slowdown. If you are experiencing a slowdown, what do you do?
[Burke:] Well, I think this is what's so difficult is people are between a rock and a hard place or one iPhone and another because a lot of people think I won't do the IOS update then, but as the tech guy at this network, I got to say, don't do that. You do want to upgrade because you get the security update and patches. So, you are stuck with a phone that's slow or turning off, like you have experienced. Apple is not even clear about whether you are getting a new battery, which costs $80 at the Apple store if you want to do it yourself it's $20. It can be a bit difficult. Some experts are saying that could help. Others aren't, and I think there's another place where Apple's lack of transparency about this is what has them receiving all these lawsuits.
[Gorani:] All right. Samuel Burke, thanks very much for joining us with that. Well, Apple shares are trading lower by more than 2 percent in New York right now. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is basically flat. Overall, U.S. markets have been on a tear this year. We've heard a lot about it on Twitter from the U.S. president himself. Alison Kosik takes a look at a remarkable run on Wall Street.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Business Correspondent:] Hi, there. Stocks are set to have their best year since 2013. There are a few more days for a Santa Claus rally, which could take the market even higher. But keep in mind, trading this time of year is usually light, which could exacerbate volatility. Still the numbers are impressive. The Dow was up 25 percent in 2017. It's been quite a year of milestones for the blue chips. The Dow first hit 20,000 on January 6th. Just 24 trading sessions later, the index hit 21,000. Then in early August, 22,000. In October, 23,000, just 30 trading days after that, mark up 24,000. It's not just the Dow that's on fire. The broader S&P 500 has jumped 20 percent this year. This is the continuation of a bull market which since 2009 hasn't really stopped moving forward. The euphoria on Wall Street is being driven by a combination of factors, a pickup in economic growth, solid corporate profits, and excitement about tax reform, especially that big tax cut that corporations will get. But going into 2018, there are some wild cards. The economy has been benefitting from goldilocks environment of low inflation and low interest rates, but analysts worry that inflation could heat up forcing the fed to hike rates faster. That could put a damper on the rally. Remember, the market has overcome a lot this year. Back to you.
[Gorani:] Alison Kosik, thanks. It's one of the busiest times of the year to travel and some airline passengers got quite a scare Christmas day in Boston. Our aviation correspondent, Rene Marsh, shows us what happened.
[Rene Marsh, Cnn Aviation And Government Regulation Correspondent:] Well, Hala, snow and ice in Boston made travel very complicated for people trying to get to their destination on Christmas night. This was a JetBlue flight from Savannah, Georgia, and it skid off of the taxiway right after touching down at Boston's Logan Airport last night. Passengers said that the plane was spinning until it was actually facing in the opposite direction. Here's what they had to say.
[Unidentified Male:] We were straight and then all of a sudden it started fishtailing and started getting rough.
[Unidentified Female:] Once I realized we were going off the runway, I was like, uh-oh.
[Unidentified Male:] All of a sudden, we started sliding and spinning and spinning and spinning and ended up in a snow bank.
[Marsh:] The good news is JetBlue says there were no injuries. Passengers were bussed to terminals. The runways were shut down briefly yesterday because of the winter weather. However, the aircraft has since been removed from the taxiway. Things are back up and running at Boston Logan Airport. The NTSB saying they won't be investigating this one since there were no injuries. Hala, back to you.
[Gorani:] Rene Marsh, thank you. This story new into CNN, an Egyptian court jailed a British woman for three years on drug charges. You see Laura Plumber here on the right. She was arrested in October. She was charged with possession of smuggling of Tramadol. This is a painkiller drug. It's legal in many countries, including her own, the U.K. as a prescription painkiller. Her lawyers say it wasn't listed as illegal in the travel advisory until November after she traveled to Egypt. She was sentenced. Her family says they are devastated and say that the sentence is harsh, and she did not know that she was carrying illegal substances. Pope Francis gave his Christmas day message at the Vatican. He touched on the IsraeliPalestinian conflict when he greeted thousands Monday in St. Peter's Square saying children are suffering because of growing tensions in the region.
[Pope Francis:] On this festive day, let us ask the Lord for peace for Jerusalem and for all the Holy Land. Let us pray that the will to resume dialogue may prevail between the parties and that a negotiated solution can finally be reached. One that would allow the peaceful co-existence of two states within mutually agreed and internationally recognized borders.
[Gorani:] Staying at the Vatican for our next story. A discovery has revealed two renaissance masterpieces not seen for 500 years. Here is Delia Gallagher.
[Delia Gallagher, Cnn Vatican Correspondent:] A 500-year-old mystery at the Vatican has just been solved. The renaissance painter, Raphael, who painted these famous frescos in three rooms at the Vatican began work on another room before his death, but those paintings had never been found, until now. [on camera]: So, coming from the three rooms that Raphael painted, we're now in the Hall of Constantin. This room was used for lavish banquets by renaissance popes. Right now, they are cleaning and restoring its frescoed walls. They made a once in a lifetime discovery. [voice-over]: Two paintings by the Master Raphael, depicting the female figures justice and friendship. Raphael planned to paint the whole wall in oil instead of the traditional frescoed technique but died before he could finish. The figures were lost amidst the frescoed paintings done after him. One of the Vatican's chief restorers, Fabio Placentini, explains the thrill of their rediscovery.
[Fabio Placentini, Vatican Restorer:] It's an amazing feeling knowing these were probably the last things he painted. You almost feel the real presence of the maestro.
[Gallagher:] A first clue to the existence of these paintings is found in this book from the 15th Century, written by the historian, Vasari, who said that Raphael began to paint two figures in a new experiment with oil. But for centuries, they remained unidentified in the Vatican until they began cleaning these walls. To the expert eye, it was clear that these two figures were not like the others.
[Placentini:] The way the paintbrush moves, even the subtlety of the point of the brushes used to create the small wisps of hair.
[Gallagher:] He says that clues that this is a genuine Raphael are seen in the confidence of the brush works, the unusual shades of color and the fact that there's no sign on these two figures of a preparatory drawing underneath. This infrared photo confirmed to the restorers that these two figures were not like the rest. The oil paintings clearly showing through in this advanced technology. For the head of the Vatican museum, Barbara Jatta, the discovery is a major one restoring the Raphaels in the whole room will take them until at least the year 2022.
[Barbara Jatta, Director, Vatican Museum:] Probably one of the most important projects last decades, apart from the chapel done in the Vatican Museum.
[Gallagher:] With so much history and artwork here, could there be yet other major discoveries?
[Jatta:] This is the beautiful thing of projects. We are still working on that. We are still searching. That's the good point of the research, it never ends.
[Gallagher:] Delia Gallagher, CNN, Vatican City.
[Gorani:] If you spent Christmas overindulging in turkey then you should have burned those calories in boxing day sales. That's what crowds did in London today. A few shoppers were after very specific items apparently. Those worn by Prince Harry's fiancee, Meghan Markle. Anna Stewart has the story.
[Anna Stewart, Cnn Journalist:] Christmas day is a day off for the royal family. They were seen as they arrived at church. Many fashionistas got to work racing to find out what Harry's fiancee was wearing. Meghan Markle wore a camel-colored coat by Canadian Branson Tyler, a pixie bag by Chloe, and boots that bloggers have identified as Stewart Weissman. Online the coat has sold out. The boots have sold out. The bag hasn't quite sold out today, but perhaps that's got something to do with the price tag, $1,400. [on camera]: [Inaudible] to Meghan Markle's outfit maybe sold out online, some shoppers here today are hoping that it might be available in store, but only if they are quick. [voice-over]: These girls told us they were inspired to buy a Chloe bag today after seeing Meghan wearing hers.
[Unidentified Female:] That's an obvious thing for everyone want to buy. Yes, I have the bag that Meghan Markle wear.
[Stewart:] The royal engagement has brought even more interest in Meghan Markle, who already had a big fan base from her acting career. "Meghan's Mirror" is one of several blogs dedicated to Meghan Markle style.
[Unidentified Female:] We had a lot of people asking where can I buy this, where can I get this? So, we created a database where people could go on the website and find pretty much anything she's worn and click to purchase it. It's turned into a great business for us.
[Stewart:] And great business for the brands that Meghan Markle wears in the months ahead. Anna Stewart, CNN, London.
[Gorani:] I will be back with a check of the headlines in a moment.

[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn:] Tonight, North Korea says it's tested its first intercontinental ballistic missile and the United States has just confirmed that. President Trump urges China to end this nonsense once and far all. The former CIA officer Bruce Klingner, one of the very few western officials to meet with North Korean diplomats will be live with us. And, Italy at the breaking point as it's buckling under an influx of migrants. The country's EU minister Sandro Gozi joins us as he pleads for others to share the burden. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the program, I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. It is July 4th, independence day in America. One of the most patriotic celebrations. And North Korea chooses this day to stake its claim to military might that could turn global security on its head. The regime in Pyongyang says that it has successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking American soil. It would be a nightmare turned reality for the Trump administration where national security and military advisers are holding an unplanned crisis meeting on this holiday. The latest the latest in to CNN is that U.S. military analysts do believe that North Korea's missile was, quote, "a probable two-stage intercontinental ballistic missile." One official tells CNN, the president is ready to approve a, quote, "measured response." This could see an increased deployment of U.S. troops, aircraft and ships to the region. The test is sending shutters through the Korean Peninsula, as well. And Paula Hancocks has the latest from Seoul.
[Paula Hancocks, Cnn International Correspondent:] Celebrated as a historic event in North Korea, raising alarm bells among its neighbors and foes. Pyongyang says this was a successful ICBM, an intercontinental ballistic missile. An excited news anchor spoke of the shining success in a special broadcast on North Korean television. A clearly delighted Kim Jong-un surveyed the scene. A test launch the North Korea leader had promise since the start of this year. But concerns in the South, a national security council meeting and a warning from President Moon Jae-in calling on the North not to cross the bridge of no return, warning of a red line without specifying what that red line was. China called for restraint from all sides urging North Korea to refrain from violating U.N. Security Council Resolutions.
[Jasper Kim, Ewha Woman's University:] As always, with North Korea it's strategic timing. I mean, here, you get a missile test and you get a wide audience focused on supposed to be on the G20 summit about trade and cooperation. Now all these party leaders from around the world are going to be talking about North Korea, North Korea, North Korea.
[Hancocks:] South Korea's military says it's now working with the U.S. to analyze the data and decide whether it was in fact an ICBM. They admit the range was longer than the May 14th launch. That test described by experts as the most significant advancement in its nuclear weapons program to date. An official assessment of this launch are worrying for the
[U.s. David Wright, Union Of Concerned Scientists:] According to my calculations, they can reach all of Alaska, but they cannot reach the lower 48 states or the large Hawaiian islands. But they have the ability to reach Alaska.
[Hancocks:] A July 4th celebration for North Korea that the United States does not want. Paula Hancocks, CNN, Seoul.
[Amanpour:] And of course, as we mentioned, just after Paula filed that report, the United States has officially confirmed that it believes that was, indeed, an ICBM test. Now Bruce Klingner of the Conservative Heritage Foundation has spent 20 years analyzing the region for the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency. And he recently was part of a small team that held a rare meeting with North Korean diplomats on neutral ground in Sweden. Mr. Klingner, welcome to the program. Thanks for joining me.
[Bruce Klingner, Conservative Heritage Foundation:] Thank you for having me.
[Amanpour:] So given that, you know, you've had your meetings with the North Koreans. I'll get you to tell me what they told you about all of this in a moment, but this is this is is this the red line that everybody is talking about?
[Klinger:] Well, people have defined red lines differently. And some have advocated that there be a military strike to prevent North Korea from completing development of an ICBM, but that kind of strike would escalate the likelihood or at least the potential of an all-out war on the peninsula. So, you know but it is a very startling development, very worrisome. Because even though this missile is estimated that it could have flown 5,700 kilometers, it could have perhaps gone even further. North Korea has done recently has constrained the trajectory so it doesn't fly over Japan by flying it to a very high altitude, but had it gone to a normal range, it could have been 6,700 kilometers, all of Alaska but perhaps even further.
[Amanpour:] Well, let me play you two assessments from weapons experts who spoke to CNN earlier today. There's Melissa Handam and David Wright. As I say speaking to CNN. This is what they're saying about it.
[David Wright, Co-director Of The Union Of Concerned Scientists Global Security Program:] Technically, that is an ICBM. It doesn't mean, of course, it has the capability to reach the lower 48 states which is sort of 8,000 to 9,000 kilometers. But still it has done what North Korea claimed to have done, which is as far as I can tell launch an
[Icbm. Melissa Hanham, Nonproliferation Expert:] Now we don't know whether they have a warhead that fit on a missile, but it's to the point where I think we probably have to start behaving from a policy standpoint as though they do. Simply because it's too risky not to.
[Amanpour:] Well, Mr. Klingner, you know, this has sort of escalated beyond people's imaginations. Do you believe you heard what Melissa said that we have to treat it as policy. That they could apply a warhead to these missiles. What do you think from your previous analysis?
[Klingner:] Exactly. Both of the analysts are superb and extremely well qualified. You know, we're trying to do our best assessment of what North Korea has given the limited information. And that's both from the outside as well as back in the intelligence community. But we've had four U.S. four-star generals who say they either think North Korea already has the capability to hit the continental U.S. with a nuclear warhead or they have to assume for planning purposes. North Korea previously tested a missile called Unha from a fixed launch site and a South Korean Navy dredge up those stages and estimates that it could have a 10,000 or 13,000-kilometer range. That's either half of the continental U.S. or the entire continental U.S. This system today is a road mobile. And based on previous assessments of photos of a static rocket engine test, outside experts think that it could be able to range New York or Washington. So, we may not know exactly where they are in the path of development, but we certainly know what their objective is, which is to be able to threaten the continental U.S. with a nuclear warhead.
[Amanpour:] So that's what their objective. What about for President Trump's reactions? You know, a few weeks or months ago, he said that North Korea would never have an ICBM. It will not happen. And then after this launch, he's tweeted, "North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything to do better with his life? Hard to believe that South Korea and Japan will put up with this much longer. Perhaps China will put a heavy move on North Korea and end this nonsense once and for all." So there are two questions there, obviously. What is a heavy move first and foremost? What could china do?
[Klingner:] Well, China could, for example, more fully implement required U.N. sanctions. They have been pulling their punches on that. They turn a blind eye to proliferation, which occurs on their soil. They turn a blind eye to North Korea's money laundering and illicit activity that's going through Chinese banks and businesses. And also, China could engage in the same kind of economic warfare that they have been pushing against South Korea for Seoul's decision to deploy the THAAD ballistic missile defense system. So there's a lot that China can do that it should be doing. But also the U.S. has its own capabilities given the centrality of the U.S. dollar and the centrality of the U.S. financial system. The vast majority of all international transactions in the world, including those of North Korea are denominated in dollars which means they go through U.S. banks. So last week's sanction against the Bank of Dandong was the first time the U.S. really taken action against a Chinese bank for the last ten years. And there's evidence for a lot more Chinese entities that should be sanctioned.
[Amanpour:] But what happens when, you know, the president of the United States, you know, just brings me to mind of Obama's red line in Syria. When the president of the United States says it will not happen, it won't happen. North Korea will not test an ICBM, and then a few weeks later, it does. What are the realistic options to make the United States a serious deterrent or to I don't know, to be serious about this?
[Klingner:] Right. Well, there's no magic Rubik's cube combination to solve the North Korean problem. It's something that has troubled successive U.S. administrations for decades and we're going to be stuck with it for sometime. We do need to make sure that we have sufficient defences for ourselves and for our allies. That includes not only the conventional forces and the what's called the nuclear umbrella, but also ballistic missile defense. That would be including deploying the THAAD tactical level system to South Korea. But, also, ensuring we have sufficient ground base interceptors in Alaska and California. We have, perhaps, 44 now. And also, reviewing the strategic missile defense systems that Obama put on hold or cut.
[Amanpour:] So
[Klingner:] But we need to increase the pressure. Yes?
[Amanpour:] No, no. Sorry. Does this keep you up at night? Are you concerned about these developments, particularly after having met with these North Korean diplomats? I mean, given what they said, explain to me did they give you any reassurances?
[Klingner:] Absolutely not. They made very clear, very emphatically clear, that denuclearization is totally off the table. There's nothing that the U.S. or Seoul could offer to induce them to abandon their nuclear arsenal. They became irritated when we tried various options of suggested things that would get them back to the negotiating table. They said quite simply accept us as a nuclear state and then we're willing to either talk about a peace treaty or fight.
[Amanpour:] Whoa. It doesn't look good. And, you know, with the president seeming to put a lot of onus on China, even though by the way China is getting angry with President Trump, you know, for the sanctions he's imposed, et cetera, it doesn't look like there's a great relationship there. What do you think they can come up with at the G20? Because Russia and China today both said there should be a simultaneous freeze of North Korea's missile and nuclear program and as you know with the U.S. abandoning military exercises and perhaps even the THAAD missile system that you were talking about.
[Klingner:] Right. China has always overpromised and underdelivered. You know, President Xi promised Trump at the Mar-a-lago summit that he would do more and we've heard that song before and we've always been disappointed. But, again, the U.S. can do a lot of things against entities including Chinese that are violating U.S. law. The Bank of Dandong really is just the tip of the iceberg of Chinese entities that should be sanctioned and we don't need Chinese permission for that because we are protecting our financial systems. We are protecting our banks from those that are misusing them. So, you know, it's not overseas enforcement. It's enforcing our own laws in our own country. You know, the freeze for freeze idea is not a good idea. It's North Korea offering something they don't legally possess because they're not allowed to test under the U.N. resolutions for U.S. and South Korean military exercises that we're allowed to do.
[Amanpour:] I mean, do you think that the west or other well, yes. The United States is getting any closer to a pre-emptive military strike? And what would that look like?
[Klingner:] Well, there has been growing advocacy in Washington and Seoul for such a strike. I think there's a bit too much flippancy in that in that I don't think people realize the consequences. Back when I was in government, we did war games or table top exercises, even before we thought North Korea had nuclear weapons. We always won. The alliance always won. But the casualties were in the hundreds of thousands and it could be much higher now that they have nuclear weapons. So although we of course always have to respond to a North Korea tactical or strategic attack and we always have to be there to deter such military action by the regime, we should not go quickly into a preventive strike because that would escalate into potentially an all-out war.
[Amanpour:] Pyongyang's July 4th surprise for the United States. Bruce Klinger, thank you very much indeed for joining us from Washington. And as America celebrates Independence Day; in Africa, Rwanda remembers it as Liberation Day, marking 23 years since the end of the 100- day genocide that left nearly a million people dead. When we come back, as the summer season heats up, the surge of migrants and refugees taking the deadly trip across the Mediterranean is also spiking. Italy is a front line destination state, and the country's EU minister joins us next. He says the migrant problem must finally be shared.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Mr. Trump's former fixer and lawyer agrees to appear before Congress and publicly give answers to the American people. How damaging could Michael Cohen's testimony be to the president he turned against? Keeping it secret. The White House's lawyering up before the release of Robert Mueller's report, exploring claims of executive privilege to try to hide big chunks of the special counsel's finding. Would the strategy work? And basis for obstruction. We're also learning that Mueller's team is focusing in on Mr. Trump's conflicting public statements, including his tweets that could be seen as part of an effort to influence witnesses and obstruct justice. Stand by for the exclusive details. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] We're following a lot of breaking news right now. President Trump is on his way back to Washington from the southern border, a trip that did nothing to end the 20-day-old government shutdown. He now seems poised to declare a national emergency to get the wall funding he's been demanding. The White House already is prepping a legal defense of the move, as we have learned that Mr. Trump rejected a compromise proposal by a small group of Republicans. Also breaking, the former fixer who knows many of Mr. Trump's secrets is now set to testify in public. Michael Cohen has agreed to appear before the House Oversight Committee on February 7, this as we're told the White House is gearing up for a fight to block the release of some or all of Robert Mueller's final report, hiring 17 new lawyers to help pursue potential claims of executive privilege. This hour, I will talk with the new House Ethics Committee chairman, Ted Deutch, and our correspondents and analysts are also standing by. First, let's go to our chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. He is in Texas. He's at the border with Mexico, where Mr. Trump visited today. Jim, there's no movement apparently on the shutdown. But we heard all sorts of wild statements from the president.
[Jim Acosta, Cnn Chief White House Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. No movement on the shutdown and no movement where we are on the border. It's almost tranquil and quiet where we're standing right here on the border with Mexico. The president went down to the border earlier today to get a look at the situation down here. He declared that the nation is under attack on the border. But that is only one of many misleading statements he's made throughout the day, as he's in hot pursuit of that wall.
[Acosta:] With an end to the government shutdown nowhere in sight, President Trump took his quest for a wall down to the Texas border, where he claimed the nation is under attack.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] If we had a barrier of any kind, a powerful barrier, whether it's steel or concrete, we would stop that cold. We're certainly under attack by criminal gangs, by criminals themselves, by the human traffickers and by drugs of all kinds. Much of it comes through the southern border.
[Acosta:] But during a roundtable discussion with law enforcement officials, Mr. Trump was told some border crossers have been digging tunnels under areas where walls are already in place.
[Melissa Lucio, U.s. Customs And Border Protection:] Here, this is just a couple of miles from here, from where we're standing. This is a tunnel. This is the second tunnel that recently that we have located. This is an area that we actually have wall.
[Acosta:] The president is also trying to rewrite history, clarifying what he meant during the campaign.
[Trump:] I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will have Mexico pay for that wall. Who's going to pay for the wall?
[Audience:] Mexico!
[Trump:] Who's going to pay for the wall?
[Audience:] Mexico!
[Trump:] When I say Mexico is going to pay for the wall, that's what I mean. Mexico's paying for the wall. And I didn't mean, please write me a check. I mean, very simply, they're paying for it in the trade deal.
[Acosta:] But that's not true. Before the election, his campaign released various proposals to force Mexico to fund the wall, stating: "It's an easy decision for Mexico. Make a one-time payment of $5 billion to $10 billion." As he was leaving for the border, the president revealed that White House lawyers have told him he could declare a state of emergency to have the military build his wall, an action that would likely be challenged in the courts.
[Trump:] I have the absolute right to declare a national emergency. The lawyers have so advised me. I'm not prepared to do that yet. But if I have to, I will. I have no doubt about it. I will.
[Acosta:] The president is trying to have it both ways, insisting the situation at the border is an emergency, while also claiming it's a crisis that started before he came into office.
[Trump:] Oh, it began a long time. Ask President Obama. Obama used to call it a crisis at the border too. I think he said it in 2014. Look, look, you can all play cute.
[Acosta:] Part of the reason for the president's frustration is that he can't seem to convince Democrats to agree to a wall. But reflecting on his meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the president argued he wasn't losing his cool.
[Trump:] I very calmly said, "If you're not going to give us strong borders, bye-bye," and I left. I didn't rant. I didn't rave, like you reported, like some of the newspapers. And then Schumer always has his standard line, he had a separate dead. I don't have temper tantrums. I really don't.
[Acosta:] Still, he said he would rather deal with China than with the Democrats.
[Trump:] I find China, frankly, in many ways to be far more honorable than crying Chuck and Nancy Pelosi. I really do. I think that China is actually much easier to deal with than the opposition party.
[Acosta:] Even though it's the president who once said he would be proud to own the shutdown, he is now offering his own take on Harry Truman's famous catchphrase, "The buck stops here."
[Trump:] The buck stops with everybody. They could solve this problem in literally 15 minutes.
[Acosta:] And, Wolf, oddly enough, the president chose one of the most secure communities in the country to make his pitch for the border wall. Here we are in McAllen, Texas, which has been consistently ranked one of the safest cities in the country. And it's one of the safest cities in the country and the people feel safe here, despite the fact that they have kind of a hodgepodge of barriers between the U.S. and Mexico. Yes, you can see some of these steel slats behind me, the kind that the president likes to talk about from time to time, but that's right next to a chain-link fence. And if you go to other portions of the border here between McAllen and Mexico, there is almost no fencing or levees or a variety of different types of fencing. And yet the people have been telling us all day long here, Wolf, they feel very secure in this community. And, by the way, they have also told us they'd like to see the federal government get back to work Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, Jim Acosta in McAllen, Texas, for us, thank you. Now let's get the latest on the shutdown standoff. Our congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly, he's up on Capitol Hill. Phil, a Republican compromise proposal appears now dead. You have some new information. What are you learning?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Wolf. And the lead senator behind that compromise with that now having imploded is now calling on the president to invoke emergency powers. He says, Lindsey Graham, the senator who is leading these negotiations, it is time for President Trump to use emergency powers to fund construction of a border wall. The reason that those deals or that negotiation fell apart was actually, according to two individuals close to the process, the president. I'm told that the skeleton deal that had been put together by a small group of Republican senators they started meeting last night and continued meeting today they met with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell they presented to Vice President Mike Pence was rejected by the president because that deal would have in the near term reopened the government, as congressional committees worked through a deal that would have provided the president money for the border wall in exchange for temporary protections for DACA recipients. The president decided, according to these sources, that that would not work, given the fact that reopening the government immediately might mean he might not get a deal in the end. How did Graham respond to that a few hours ago? Take a listen.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I have never been more depressed about moving forward than I am right now. I just don't see a pathway forward. Somebody has got to, like, get some energy to fix this.
[Mattingly:] And with that in mind, Graham coming out later tonight with a statement saying that the president needs to act unilaterally, act on his own. And I can tell you, Wolf, from talking to Republican aides up here, that is the expectation that that is eventually coming. And the reason why is, there simply nothing else on the table. There are no negotiations. There are no proposals being traded. There are no new meetings scheduled. The Senate is not expected to have any more votes for the rest of this week. Most senators already on airplanes home to their home states. The reality on Capitol Hill is the impasse is real. The impasse at this point seems borderline permanent and there is no clear legislative way out. Now, Wolf, House Democrats have continued to pass individual appropriations bills, trying to amp up pressure on Senate Republicans and House Republicans to try and reopen the government. Senate Republicans, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has continued to make clear, if President Trump does not sign off on a proposal, he is not willing to bring it to the Senate floor. President Trump has very clearly rejected where Democrats stand on this, both their individual proposals and their broader proposal to reopen the government and continue negotiations on border security in the days and weeks ahead. And because of that, the stalemate continues. Because of that, one of the president's top allies, one of the senators who was trying to figure out a last-gasp Hail Mary-ish deal to save and reopen the government, he has now decided the president needs to act unilaterally, there's nothing else that will Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes. And let's not forget 800,000 federal employees won't be getting a paycheck tomorrow; 800,000 individuals and their families will suffer. Phil Mattingly up on Capitol Hill, thanks very much. Let's turn to multiple breaking stories in the Russia investigation right now, including what's likely to be bombshell public testimony by the president's longtime lawyer and fix, Michael Cohen. I want to bring in our senior White House correspondent, Pamela Brown, and our CNN crime and justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz. Shimon, as we know Cohen, he will testify next month before the House Oversight Committee. He has flipped on the president. He's already pleaded guilty to various charges, going to begin a three-year prison sentence in March. How damaging could this public testimony be for the president?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Correspondent:] I think, given everything that we already know about what Michael Cohen has said in court, has told the Department of Justice about the president's involvement in the payments of the hush money, how he was directed by the president, how the president was part of the decision-making in how the money was going to be paid, it's going to be a big problem for the president. And they for certain know this. They knew that he would be a problem going along. So this is going to be a monumental day, I think, for this White House, for this investigation in terms of what Michael Cohen is going to say. But it's not going to be limited, as we now know, by just what his involvement in the hush payment, Michael Cohen's involvement. We just learned that Robert Mueller, the special counsel, has cleared him to testify. So that means that opens the door to all sorts of questions about Russia, the Moscow project, whether or not anyone in the White House directed Michael Cohen to lie to members of Congress. There's been some indications that people at the White House knew what Michael Cohen was going to tell members of Congress. Did anyone at the White House approve of this? Did they say, yes, go ahead, go ahead, it's OK? That's going to be a big part of this here and now as well. So it seems like nothing's off the table and that the Department of Justice and that Robert Mueller have cleared Michael Cohen to go ahead and say whatever it is that he's going to say. The other thing to keep in mind is that Michael Cohen can use this testimony to try and get more leniency for his jail sentence. He could go to a judge and say, I have cooperated with members of Congress, I have given them credible information, I'm hoping that you can give me less than three years. There is a chance that that can happen. This hearing is takes place about a month before he is set to report to prison. So he will have a month to work with the judge in New York to try and get his sentence even further...
[Blitzer:] February 7, he testifies. March 6, he's supposed to begin his three-year prison sentence. A lot of people have said potentially and I'm anxious to get your thoughts, Shimon this could be like when John Dean testified before Congress. We know how that the fallout from that, what happened to the then president of the United States, Richard Nixon.
[Prokupecz:] It's certainly the first thing that came to my mind. We have not had a time like this really since then, probably. The last time someone so significant in this investigation testified was James Comey. And you remember all the attention that he received. But this is so much bigger, because this what Michael Cohen represents goes back years, his relationship with the president, the president's business dealings, the family's business dealings. He knows a lot about Russia. He knows a lot about payments, other payments perhaps. But the key thing here is the cover-up, in terms of the cover-up of the payments, the cover-up of the contacts with Russia, the cover-up of the Moscow project. That is central to this entire investigation and what members of Congress are going to want to know about it, because that goes to the obstruction issue. And that is where the members of Congress can be key in perhaps impeachment hearings.
[Blitzer:] Pamela, you have some new reporting on the White House legal team gearing up potentially for this Mueller report and the ramifications that could bring.
[Pamela Brown, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Yes, that's right, Wolf. All indications are pointing to the special counsel nearing the end in the next few months. This is setting the stage for a new political and legal fight over the findings and who gets to see them.
[Brown:] Tonight, President Trump won't say whether he wants Robert Mueller's report on the Russia probe to be made public.
[Question:] The special counsel's final report, do you want that to be made public?
[Trump:] We will have to see. There's been no collusion whatsoever. We will have to see.
[Brown:] The president's remarks come after CNN has learned that the White House Counsel Office, under the new direction of Pat Cipollone, is gearing up for a fight to keep the report private by adding 17 more lawyers to its team. Trump's legal team is preparing to argue that a large portion of the information in Mueller's investigation should be protected by executive privilege, leaving only a heavily redacted version of the report to be released to the public. But Democrats are vowing to use their new power in the House to release it.
[Rep. Adam Schiff , California:] I'm prepared to make sure we do everything possible so that the public has the advantage of as much of the information as it can.
[Brown:] And as we await the release of the Mueller report, today, CNN has learned that Mueller interviewed Trump's campaign pollster Tony Fabrizio. The revelation comes after it was revealed that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort shared polling data with Russian national Konstantin Kilimnik, who prosecutors say has ties to the same Russian military intelligence unit that hacked the Democratic Party during the 2016 campaign. It's coordination between the campaign and the Russians that the Mueller team has been looking for. Today, the president said he had no knowledge of the information-sharing.
[Question:] Did you know that Paul Manafort was sharing polling data from your campaign with the Russians?
[Trump:] No, I didn't know anything about it. Nothing about it.
[Brown:] With Kilimnik as the go-between, Manafort's spokesman claims the data was ultimately intended for two powerful pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarchs who owed Manafort millions. And, tonight, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin on Capitol Hill facing tough questions from House lawmakers on the department's decision to ease sanctions on companies tied to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , Speaker Of The House:] It was one of the worst classified briefings we have received from the Trump administration. The secretary barely testified.
[Brown:] In a statement, Mnuchin defended his decision, stating that these companies were quote "undergoing significant restructuring and governance changes that sever Deripaska's control and significantly diminish his ownership." Democrats are now mulling over whether to formally push back against the sanctions relief for the Russian companies that was announced last month. And one of those oligarchs denies requesting or receiving polling data from Manafort. But the revelations raise questions about why Manafort shared that sensitive internal data from the campaign with pro-Russian Ukrainians Wolf.
[Blitzer:] You're also getting some significant information, Pamela, that the president's lawyers are concerned that his public statements over the past year or two, his tweets, his various lies could be used by the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and his team potentially as evidence of obstruction of justice or witness tampering.
[Brown:] Yes, that's right, Wolf. We have learned investigators have focused on conflicting public statements by President Trump and his team that could be seen as an effort to influence witnesses and obstruct justice, according to multiple people familiar with this investigation. And the line of questioning adds to indications that Mueller views false or misleading statements to the press or to the public as obstruction of justice. And that could set up a potential flash point with the White House and the Trump legal team, should that become part of any final report from the Mueller investigation. Now, Mueller's team has provided hints that it's interested in public statements as part of the obstruction probe. You may recall court filings from the plea of Michael Cohen, the president's former personal lawyer, included allegations related to false public statements. That's not usually considered illegal, since they aren't made directly to investigators. But what's clear is that Robert Mueller's interested in it as part of the obstruction probe.
[Blitzer:] Could be used potentially as evidence if they go forward in that area. Pamela, Shimon, guys, thanks very, very much. Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch. He's the chairman of the the new chairman of the House Ethics Committee. He also serves on the Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committees. He's a very busy guy. Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.
[Rep. Ted Deutch , Florida:] Good to be with you, Wolf. Thanks.
[Blitzer:] Let's begin with latest news in the Russia probe. And you have been hearing our reporters tell us about that. The president and his attorneys might be preparing to assert executive privilege, in an attempt to block Mueller's report. If the White House were to do so, were to pursue that kind of a strategy, how should your party, the Democratic majority in the House, respond?
[Deutch:] Well, first of all, Wolf, there is there are safeguards in place to make sure that the president can't cover up this entire report. But think about what he's suggesting. There's no executive privilege over presidential deliberations with respect to possible obstruction of justice, no executive privilege to hide potential witness tampering or the potential cover-up of the commission of a federal crime in order to get elected president of the United States. So what we're going to do is to make sure that the president and his lawyers, however many lawyers there are, can't be allowed to proceed with arguments that aren't permitted by law, and we will continue to stand by that.
[Blitzer:] The president's former personal attorney Michael Cohen will be testifying in public up on Capitol Hill next month. Cohen is scheduled to report to federal prison on March 7, after pleading guilty to multiple federal crimes, including lying to Congress. Do you think his testimony will be credible, given his criminal history?
[Deutch:] Well, I think it's a really important moment to have Michael Cohen come to testify, after we have seen the past over the past two years the Republican leadership, when they were in charge of the House committees, refusing to hold oversight hearings. We now have the opportunity. We will have the opportunity to question Michael Cohen, who is the president's cover-up lawyer. That's the role that he has played for Donald Trump. Remember, Wolf, Michael Cohen is the person that worked with the president, who potentially is an unindicted co-conspirator, in a case to commit a felony violation of campaign law in order to be elected president of the United States. There is an awful lot that Michael Cohen will have to tell us. Obviously,you always judge the credibility of witnesses. I'm glad that we're going to have the opportunity to ask him some very pointed questions about what the president did right before the election, covering potentially covering up a felony in order to be elected, and all of the ways that Michael Cohen might have been involved in the more than 100 connections that exist between the president and Russia. There's a lot for us to learn.
[Blitzer:] When you say 100, 100 connections, elaborate. What do you mean?
[Deutch:] Well, if you look remember, you go back to the discussion that the president the statements that the president made at the very beginning, that there were no contacts between anyone having to do with him and Russia, and you now go through what we have already learned. You look at the little that we do know from Mueller, you look at Manafort, and you look at the meeting that took place in Trump Tower, and on and on. And what's clear is that there have been meetings. What's unclear to us is how much the president may have known about, for example, Paul Manafort trying to get sensitive campaign data to someone who can transmit it to Russian officials. We don't know that. Those are the kinds of questions that we are going to ask Michael Cohen. Those are the kinds of questions, frankly, that the Oversight Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, the Intel Committee, all of us, working side by side, will finally try to get to ask the questions to get to the truth, even as we wait for Mueller to complete his investigation as well.
[Blitzer:] Let's turn to the government shutdown. Congressman, the Trump administration is exploring declaring a national emergency, using billions of dollars in what they describe as unspent Defense Department disaster recovery funding to construct a border wall. How should Democrats respond?
[Deutch:] Well, let's start with this, Wolf. Unspent they use these bureaucratic terms. The president wants to take billions of dollars earmarked for recovery from storm-ravaged Puerto Rico. He wants to take that money and use it to fulfill a campaign promise that has nothing to do with national security. There is something serious that's happening in our country right now. As you pointed out earlier, 800,000 federal workers will not be paid, many of them in the national security area. They work for the DEA. They work for CBP. They work for Secret Service. They work for TSA. These are people who keep us safe. And because the president shut down the government in order to fulfill a campaign promise, which he's not going to be able to do he's already failed on the first part, when he told us Mexico was going to pay for a wall. When he shut that down, he's wreaking havoc on the lives, not just of those 800,000, Wolf, but the contractors whose pay will never be made up, and for all of the loved ones of those 800,000, and ultimately so many others, whether it's whether it's people who will suffer because the FDA can't conduct food inspections, or the tens of millions of Americans who are at risk of losing their SNAP benefits if this goes on much longer. The president likes to talk about how he's done more in all these areas, he's been the best president, he's accomplished things that no other president has accomplished. He lies about that all the time. In this instance, he will take credit, he has taken credit, and will have to own the longest shutdown in federal government in the history of the federal government that he proudly announced he wanted to achieve.
[Blitzer:] Congressman Ted Deutch, thanks so much for joining us.
[Deutch:] Thanks for having me, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, just ahead, we're going to break down all the risks to President Trump right now, as Michael Cohen is set to testify before Congress and Robert Mueller prepares to release his final report. Our senior legal analyst and former U.S. attorney Preet Bharara, he is standing by live.

[Christine Romans, Co-host, Early Start:] Start this Monday morning, I'm Christy Romans to the region, good morning everyone, welcome to EARLY START this Monday morning, I'm Christine Romans
[Dave Briggs, Co-host, Early Start:] Very happiest Monday, good to see you my friend
[Romans:] Oh, special thanks
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs, it is Monday, August 13th, 5:00 a.m. in the East the president once called her honest, Omarosa, but now of course
[Romans:] Low life
[Briggs:] She's a low life, we'll get to that in a moment. The president though returning to the White House tonight, following a week at his New Jersey Golf Club that the White House called a working vacation. Special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, no doubt top of mind in the West Wing. Sunday, Rudy Giuliani telling Cnn that if the president sits down for questioning by Mueller, he will deny he ever directed former FBI Director James Comey to end the investigation of former National Security adviser Michael Flynn.
[Rudy Giuliani, Former Mayor Of New York City & Attorney To President Donald Trump:] The president says he never told Comey that he should go easy on Flynn, Comey says the president did, he put it in his memo. If he goes in and testifies to that under oath, instead of this just being a dispute, they can say it's perjury. If they elect to believe Comey instead of Trump.
[Romans:] Contrast that with what Giuliani told "Abc" back in July.
[Unidentified Male:] How is he a good witness for the president if he is saying that the president was asking him, directing him in his words to let the Michael Flynn investigation go.
[Giuliani:] He didn't direct him to do that. What he said to him was can you give him a break
[Romans:] Can you give him a break? Which is it? The president never asked Comey to give Flynn a break or he did? Last June, the former FBI director told a Senate committee the president told him during that fateful meeting, quote, "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go. To letting Flynn go. He is a good guy, I hope you can let this go." All right, serious concerns about security in the White House, now that we know former aide Omarosa Manigault Newman was able to sneak a recording device into the situation room. Omarosa appeared on Nbc's "Meet the Press", she claims the recording you are about to hear is chief of staff John Kelly firing her last December.
[John Kelly, White House Chief Of Staff:] I think it's important to understand that if we make this a friendly departure, we can all be you know, you can look at your time here in the White House as a year of service to the nation, and then you can go on without any type of difficulty in the future relative to your reputation.
[Omarosa Manigault Newman, Former Political Aide:] It's very obvious threat. He goes on to say that things can get ugly for you. The chief of staff of the United States under the direction of the president of the United States threatening me on damage to my reputation and things getting ugly for me. That's downright criminal. And if I didn't have these recordings, no one in America would believe me. No one.
[Briggs:] Extraordinary events. Chief of Staff Kelly went on to tell Omarosa his concerns about her job performance involved money and integrity issues. Press Secretary Sarah Sanders going on the attack with this statement: "the very idea a staff member would sneak a recording device into the White House situation room shows a blatant disregard for our national security and then to brag about it on national television further proves the lack of character and integrity of this disgruntled former White House employee. Breaking overnight. North and South Korea have agreed to hold a third inter-Korean Summit. Cnn's Will Ripley is standing live for us in Hong Kong. Will, good morning to you, sir. Is this based on any progress in terms of denuclearization or a preset schedule?
[Will Ripley, Cnn International Correspondent:] No, this is happening actually just days after North Korea blasted the United States and both the U.S. and North Korea have admitted that the denuclearization process has stalled. South Korea is calling for both sides to play ball here, they have served as an intermediary all along, the two have the two sides, North and South met along the demilitarized zone just in the last few hours, announcing that sometime in September, South Korea's President Moon Jae-in and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un will be meeting in Pyongyang. This is a big deal. It's the first time that a South Korean president will travel to the North to Pyongyang in more than a decade since 2007, and it comes at a time that the denuclearization process really could go either way, could fall apart or could get some sort of a jump start that has been South Korea's traditional role through all of this. Now, we don't know exactly when it's going to happen. Early September seems to be difficult logistically according to government officials in Seoul. But we know that it's just about a month, North Korea is planning a grandiose celebration in its capital to mark its Foundation Day. They're inviting world leaders from all over to attend that. Could that be around that time, September 9th or the week after that President Moon has his summit? Could it be later in the month, keeping in mind that the United Nations General Assembly kicks off on September 18th. And they have given their rumors of a second Trump-Kim Trump-Kim Summit happening somewhere around that time. So we'll be talking to sources, Dave, trying to figure out when this inter Korean Summit takes place and we'll see what that means for any future talks with the United States as well.
[Briggs:] Well, a lot of questions remain, Will Ripley live for us in Hong Kong, thank you my friend. Protesters against racism vastly, outnumbering the small group of white nationalists demonstrating in Lafayette Park across from the White House. About two dozen white nationalists made their way from a metro station to a small stage for what was billed as the United Right 2, it was shadowed the whole time by at least a couple of thousand counter protesters and a large contingent of D.C. police. The nationalists speeches were largely drowned out by the anti-racist group. The white nationalists ended their program early, made a quick exit back to the metro station. Organizer Jason Kessler was also behind last year's Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville that left three dead; Heather Heyer and two members of the state police. Dozens more were injured. Kessler blames the low turnout this year on logistical issues.
[Romans:] All right, in Charlottesville, anti as demonstrators gathered at the site where Heather Heyer was run over and killed last year. They paid their respects by using chalk to scrawl messages of remembrance on the street and on the walls of nearby buildings. Many of them expressing disgust with the police who were out in force throughout the city. Heather's mother Susan Bro spoke to Cnn about the tribute to her daughter.
[Susan Bro, Mother Of Heather Heyer:] I burst into tears when I first got there. There were some people there very traumatized because they had been there last year and it was very challenging for them. One young man hugged me and he just couldn't stop the tears rolling down his cheeks. Another one came up and said he had been there last year and he's having a really hard time talking to me. I saw one young lady that just finished her third or fourth and final surgery about a month ago and she walked, she walked up to hug me.
[Romans:] Yes, police arrested four people at the Charlottesville protest and there were no injuries reported.
[Briggs:] President Trump posting a tweet ahead of the protest saying the riots in Charlottesville a year ago resulted in a senseless death and division. We must come together as a nation, I condemn all types of racism and acts of violence, peace to all Americans. That's a bit of a departure from his comments last year after the United Right rally when he said there were very fine people on both sides of the conflict. Critics say that the president still has not specifically condemned white supremacists, certainly has not gone as far as his daughter Ivanka did over the weekend.
[Romans:] All right, the GOP weighing his options after New York Republican Congressman Chris Collins suspended his re-election campaign Saturday. Collins was indicted last week on charges relating to insider trading. He continues to maintain his innocence. Republican operative tells Cnn officials are thinking of nominating Collins for a town clerkship, one of the only ways he could be replaced on the ballot.
[Briggs:] Two strong Trump supporters have already indicated they'll try for the seat, one being Carl Paladino who run for governor at 2010 and lost, later coming under fire for making a racist comment about Michelle Obama. The Collins scandal puts one of the most heavily Republican district in New York suddenly in play and may impact the ability of Democrats to flip the house in November.
[Romans:] President Trump once again attacking Harley-Davidson. The president encouraging a boycott if Harley moves any production overseas. Trump tweeted Sunday that many Harley-Davidson owners plan to boycott the company if manufacturing moves overseas, great. Most other companies are moving in our direction, including Harley competitors, a really bad move. Harley-Davidson declined to comment. Trump first criticized Harley in June after it announced plans to shift some production overseas. Harley needs to avoid steep tariffs from the EU, its second largest market. The EU tariffs could cost Harley a $100 million a year. And those are in response to Trump's tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum, also raising costs for Harley by another $20 million per year. Now, Trump has threatened Harley with higher taxes, he has warned of a public backlash, in fact, many bikers do support President Trump. His tweet came after hosting a Bikers for Trump event at the White House over the weekend. Trump invited hundreds of bikers to his Bedminster Golf Club. It's so remarkable that a Republican president it's just you have to remember, this is a Republican
[Briggs:] Yes
[Romans:] President
[Briggs:] Yes
[Romans:] Who is singling out an American company for punishment.
[Briggs:] For making what amounts to smart business decision. Just imagine if a Democrat president did that on Twitter
[Romans:] That was the second
[Briggs:] What Republicans would say, imagine that
[Romans:] Just
[Briggs:] An investigation underway to determine how on earth a man in Seattle was able to steal this passenger plane prompting a military response. What he told the control tower moments before the fatal crash, the latest next.

[Cooper:] The breaking news tonight, CNN's Jim Acosta citing a source close to the White House saying that President Trump will maintain his silence on Stormy Daniels because the source says it has not hurt his poll numbers. More now on Michael Cohen who figures highly in the Daniels allegation, as you heard, came up in the last segment. CNN's chief political analyst Gloria Borger has more.
[Gloria Borger, Cnn Chief Political Analyst:] In the soap opera in which a porn star accepts a payoff to keep quiet about her affair with Donald Trump, there's got to be a guy who gets it done.
[Michael Avenatti, Attorney For Stormy Daniels:] Where is Michael Cohen? Where is Mr. Cohen? Where is this guy? Where is this guy?
[Borger:] Michael Cohen is where he's been since 2007, standing behind Donald Trump, or closer, in his back pocket.
[Unidentified Male:] Michael was, I always like to say the Ray Donovan of the office. I'm going to take care of it. He took care of what had to be taken care of. I don't know what had to be taken care of. All I know is Michael was taking care of it.
[David Schwartz, Attorney For Michael Cohen:] He's the guy that you could call up 3:00 in the morning when you have a problem.
[Borger:] Do you know stories of Donald Trump calling him at 3:00 in the morning?
[Schwartz:] Donald Trump has called him at all hours of the night. Every dinner I have been at with Michael, the boss has called.
[Borger:] But Cohen did not call the boss, he says, when he decided to pay Stormy Daniels $130,000 out of his own pocket, 11 days before the election.
[Unidentified Male:] I think it's ludicrous.
[Borger:] So you believe 100 percent Donald Trump knew?
[Unidentified Male:] One hundred percent.
[Michael D'antonio, Trump Biographer:] There's not a meeting that takes place, there's not an expenditure that is authorized that he doesn't know about it.
[Borger:] Cohen wouldn't go on the record for this piece but his friends claim it's all part of his job in Trump world, giving the boss deniability and protection.
[Schwartz:] If you know the relationship between the two people, he took care of a lot of things for Mr. Trump without Mr. Trump knowing about it. That's part of the overall structure is that Michael had great latitude to take care of matters.
[Borger:] In Michael Cohen, Trump hired his consigliore, a version of his long time mentor, the lawyer his Roy Cohn, a controversial pit bull, an aggressive defender of all things Trump, no questions asked. After D'Antonio finished his book on Trump, he got the Cohen treatment in what turned out to be an empty threat.
[D'antonio:] Then he got mad and it was, well, you just bought yourself an F-ing lawsuit, buddy. I'll see you in court.
[Borger:] In 2011, Michael Cohen described his job this way.
[Michael Cohen, Trump's Attorney:] My job is to protect Mr. Trump. That's what it is. If there's an issue that relates to Mr. Trump that is of concern to him, it's, of course, a concern to me and I will use my legal skills within which to protect Mr. Trump to the best of my ability.
[Borger:] Cohen, a sometimes Democrat, first came to Trump's attention after buying apartments in Trump developments. Then went to the mat for Trump against one of his condo boards and won.
[Schwartz:] Trump loved him for it. I mean, that was the beginning of it. And then after that, they became close. It was much more than an attorneyclient relationship. It was something much deeper, almost father and son kind of thing, always hot and cold. They Donald Trump could be yelling at him one second and saying he's the greatest person in the world the next second. Donald Trump knew that Michael always had his back.
[Borger:] For Trump, it wasn't about pedigree. Cohen, who is 51, got his degree from Western Michigan's Cooley Law School and had some initial success in the less than genteel world of New York taxicab medallions.
[Sam Nunberg, Trump Campaign Aide:] If you look where Michael came from in his legal career before he started working for Trump.org, it wasn't like he came from a white shoe law firm. He came from a hard-nosed New York trial firm. Trump has an eye for talent. This was somebody that, I mean, he used to call him his bulldog, his tough guy.
[Borger:] At the Trump Organization, he's done a bit of everything. Running a mixed martial arts company, securing real estate branding deals, and even taking care of transportation.
[Nunberg:] You know the famous Trump plane. There was an engine issue that he actually took care of and got a really good deal on.
[Schwartz:] Watching him is like a reality show. He's got three phones. He's got the hard line. He's got two lines. He's texting. He's on the computer.
[D'antonio:] You can almost say this is Donald Trump's mini me. For a guy who started really in the middle class on Long Island to now be quite wealthy himself, known internationally, and yes, he's in a bit of a jam with the Russia scandal.
[Borger:] In the eye not only of Stormy but also of interest to the special counsel, Bob Mueller, and Congress.
[Cohen:] I look forward to getting all the information that they're looking for.
[Borger:] During the campaign, when Trump said he had no contact with Russia, Cohen was privately trying to cut a deal for a Trump Tower Moscow. It never happened, but Mueller has asked about it.
[Nunberg:] The sad reality is that Michael pursuing that Trump Tower deal in December is just another factor that goes into this whole Russia narrative.
[Borger:] Cohen's name was also in the infamous dossier which alleges he traveled to Prague to meet with Russians. He's completely denied it and is suing "BuzzFeed" which published it.
[Schwartz:] It's immeasurable, the damage that has been caused to him, to his family.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I will faithfully execute
[Borger:] When Trump became president, he did not bring his brash wingman to Washington. [on camera]: Do you think he wanted to be in the White House, be White House counsel or
[D'antonio:] There must have been a part of him that was dreaming of a great job at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But he's also the guy who not only knows where all the bodies are buried, he buried a lot of them himself. And that ironically disqualified him.
[Cohen:] They say I'm Mr. Trump's pit bull, that I'm his right hand man. I have been called many different things around here.
[Borger:] Now he may be called to testify, with the Stormy Daniels case in federal court.
[Schwartz:] I know Michael Cohen for over 21 years. I know that he will not rest, he will not sleep, he doesn't sleep anyway, right, until he recovers every single penny from Stormy that's due the
[Llc. Avenatti:] I have seen a lot of attorneys use intimidation tactics. The problem is, is if that is your speed, if you are a one-trick pony and you use that in every case, when all of a sudden, you run up against somebody that doubles down and that isn't intimidated, well then you're lost.
[Borger:] Cohen flew to Mar-a-Lago to dine with the president the night before Stormy Daniels appeared on "60 Minutes", because if you're Michael Cohen, you're the ultimate loyalist.
[Cohen:] The words the media should be using to describe Mr. Trump are generous, compassionate
[Borger:] And you still believe Donald Trump will be loyal
[Cohen:] kind, humble, honest
[Borger:] to you. Anderson, we're going to have to wait and see whether Michael Cohen's faith in the president, his ultimate faith, is actually going to be returned. You know, this is a very difficult case now, with Stormy Daniels. And there are lots of people who say they wouldn't be surprised if the president turned on Michael Cohen if things don't go well. But I can tell you he doesn't believe that will happen.
[Cooper:] All right. Gloria, thanks very much. Appreciate it. Fascinating. Just ahead, more high-powered lawyers reject the opportunity to work for President Trump as the Russia investigation continues.

[Camerota:] Strong storms are expected for already- waterlogged parts of the mid-Atlantic and the southeast, meaning that flooding could get worse. CNN meteorologist Chad Myers has our weekend forecast. Uh-oh, Chad.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] Yes. I mean, three to four inches of rain in places that don't need any, like right around D.C. and Baltimore. We do have some weather today still, though, around Charlotte and Atlanta a thunderstorm or two but that's not what we're really worried about. This weather is brought to you by Green Mountain Coffee Roasters packed with goodness. Here is the rainfall event for today across the southeast. But later on this afternoon, the weather begins to shift toward D.C. and Baltimore and that's the weather that's going to be with you tomorrow and even into Sunday. And some of these places will pick up in the red zone here, that's three to four inches of rain and that's too close to the places that have already flooded. Certainly, a cooldown happens with the rain, too, Alisyn. Your high in New York will only be in the 60s by Sunday compared to where you are right now. So
[Camerota:] I don't like that, Chad. I don't like that, but thank you.
[Myers:] Well, summer's over for a day.
[Camerota:] OK. Thanks for breaking the news OK. Meanwhile, we have this incredible rescue video that is going viral to show you. This is a fire rescue crew in Latvia. Wait until you see what happens. They catch a man as he falls down the side of an apartment building, OK? Latvian media reports that the man was hanging from a fourth-floor window. That's when rescuers were trying to set up a more conventional rescue, but that's when the man's grip slipped and the video captures a firefighter catching the man as he falls by him catching him by the legs through a window and pulling him inside. I don't even under the physics of this, John Berman.
[Berman:] It's Latvian. I think
[Camerota:] Is that what explains it?
[Berman:] It's a Latvian method of rescuing right there. That's bonkers.
[Camerota:] But how can you be hanging out a window and catch a falling, however many pound man, with that kind of centrifugal force? I don't even I don't know what's happening.
[Berman:] I'm impressed.
[Camerota:] Color us impressed. Color us impressed.
[Berman:] I'm impressed. It's unbelievable. All right. A costly last-second error will haunt the Cavaliers for a long, long time. Lindsay Czarniak has more in the "Bleacher Report" boy.
[Lindsay Czarniak, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] This is a tough one, right?
[Berman:] They needed a Latvian firefighter.
[Czarniak:] That would have helped them.
[Berman:] They had J.R. Smith instead.
[Czarniak:] That's true. It's going to be so tough for J.R. Smith to go outside without hearing about or seeing something about his blunder that cost the Cavaliers the game. LeBron James had an epic performance and the Cavaliers were in great shape to win game one in Oakland. That's why this stung so much more. This was the shocking play of the night a major lapse in judgment. The game tied there. Smith grabbed the rebound there. All he had to do was shoot it but he dribbled it towards half-court. Time expires. Look at LeBron's reaction. What are you doing, man? He can't believe it. So he didn't shoot it. In overtime, the Warriors take advantage of J.R. Smith's blunder. They score the first nine points. They never looked back. Draymond Green knocking down the 3-pointer. But as the game is winding down you see here more chaos ensues. Tristan Thompson shoving Draymond who's green in the face. Thompson would be ejected. The Warriors win a wild game one 124-114 in overtime. LeBron James not thrilled with questions about his teammate.
[Unidentified Male:] Did he think that you guys had it won or did he think he was trying to make a play?
[Lebron James, Cleveland Cavaliers:] I'm not sure. Really, I'm not sure. I don't know his state of mind.
[Unidentified Male:] Did you know if he knew the score?
[James:] [Leaves press conference].
[Czarniak:] And that was that. Emotions so raw after the game. LeBron James very angry. Meanwhile, J.R. Smith maintaining he did not he did know the game was tied but he was trying to give himself room to take a shot. He also said he thought they were going to call a time-out so, wow.
[Berman:] LeBron James.
[Czarniak:] Right, Alisyn right?
[Camerota:] I mean I mean, I was just saying to John that's like something I would do except I'd shoot it in the wrong basket like the other team's basket.
[Czarniak:] At least you'd shoot it. There we go. At least you'd shoot it.
[Camerota:] Yes, oh
[Berman:] LeBron James would be less angry about that than when he
[Czarniak:] Yes, that would be OK.
[Berman:] Oh, man all right.
[Czarniak:] Thank you. It should be exciting.
[Camerota:] Indeed. Thank you very much, Lindsay.
[Czarniak:] You got it.
[Camerota:] All right, now to this story that's getting so much attention. Samantha Bee is apologizing for this vulgar comment she made about Ivanka Trump. What is the line between being provocative and being out of bounds? Where are we today with all of these comedians? Van Jones has some thoughts. He joins us, next.

[Sanchez:] With less than a week to go, Senate GOP leaders had an uphill climb to get the votes they need to pass their version of the bill to repeal and replace Obamacare. The math is not on their side right now. Majority leader Mitch McConnell can only afford to lose two votes and as it stands now five Republican senators oppose the bill outright in its current, though some say they are open to negotiations. Three of them plan to review it more over the weekend. Some of those three on the side have already expressed concerns. There's a lot at stake for this next big test for President Trump. He tweeted this out this morning, quote, "Democrats slammed GOP health care proposal as Obamacare premiums and deductibles increase by over 100 percent. Remember keep your doctor, keep your plan?" Mike Shields, Jose Aristimuno are back with us. Mike, to you first. Democrats are painting the Senate health care bill as meaner than the House version, which the president himself reportedly called mean. How can President Trump help Mitch McConnell get to 50 votes if he's handing the opposition these free attacks?
[Shields:] Well, look, this is what always happens in legislation. And we're finally seeing legislating happen again in Washington, D.C., so it's a little bit of a shock to the system to some people to see what happens. You get close to the vote and all of a sudden you're going to highlight who are the three or four senators that want to go negotiate with the leadership and get something changed in the bill. The same thing happened in the House. The House bill failed at first, and then it was dead, it couldn't pass, and suddenly, what do you know, it passed. And so I think all of these are posturing. You're going to see tweets and comments and people are going to make maneuvers and really what this is all about is negotiating behind the scenes. And look, what we know is that Obamacare is failing. We have Aetna now pulling out of more states. You have millions of people who are now losing their health care coverage. You have people because of Obamacare, because they can't afford it. Prices have skyrocketed. They've more than doubled in premiums in over a majority of the state. So the pressure of the system collapsing eventually is going to weigh on the United States Senate and they're going to get something passed. And what we're going to watch in the meantime is sort of posturing as people try to negotiate for their best position.
[Sanchez:] Jose, the balance is obviously tricky for Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell. He can only lose two votes. So pleasing any one faction of the Republicans could ultimately tank the bill, pushing it in a different direction. Who do the Democrats focus on trying to keep away from voting yes?
[Aristimuno:] Look, I think the important thing here is that the American people have a voice. The American people have been demanding, they've been calling their senators, and they've been saying, look, this bill doesn't work. This bill, it's un-American. We're talking about pushing back on women's health care. We're talking about benefits that we are no longer going to have. So the big mistake is the Republicans from the very beginning should have looked for ways and solutions to work with the Democrats to improve Obamacare. Yes, we admit it, it's not perfect. It needs work. But the fact that you just want to repeal it and start with something new, it doesn't make sense. With this, you want to talk about mean, what this bill does is not good for poor people. People who don't have as much sort of opportunities as the rest of Americans. This bill doesn't work. And it is why these five senators that you're talking about, Boris, are facing a lot of pressure back home.
[Sanchez:] Now, Mike, back to you. Republicans vowed to repeal and replace Obamacare. Some funding cuts notwithstanding. Isn't this just ultimately a tweak to Obamacare? That's the case that Ted Cruz is making.
[Shields:] Not at all. And first of all, I have to laugh at the idea that Republicans should have come to Democrats to work with this. I mean, Democrats from the very beginning created a movement called resist for President Trump where they don't even want to acknowledge that he's the rightful president of the United States. And so they've taken every single step they can to take themselves out of the process saying they're going to fight everything, they're sending people to town halls
[Aristimuno:] That's not true.
[Shields:] to say that Republicans are trying to kill people with their health care bill. But by the way why shouldn't we work with the Democrats on this? Look, here's the fact of the matter is
[Aristimuno:] That's not true.
[Shields:] Let's go back to 1996, OK. 1996 is when welfare reform was passed by a Republican House and signed by a Democratic president six weeks before the election. He actually vetoed it twice, then looked at the polls and signed it into law. At that time, Democrats are saying the same thing. John Lewis went down to the House floor and said there will be a million new children in the street, they're coming after the women, they're coming after the children. And in the end what happened was some welfare to work requirements were put in and the majority of people on welfare actually liked the welfare reform. What happened in the last administration was President Obama boosted Medicare excuse me, Medicaid beyond poor people and this bill brings it back and says we're going to have Medicaid for poor people and other people have to have work requirements. That's not a mean thing to do. That actually is
[Aristimuno:] It's un-American.
[Shields:] It's a huge benefit just like welfare reform was. You know welfare reform succeeded in the '90s because the Democrats never talk about it anymore because it was a huge success, and this bill will be the exact same thing when it's passes this time into law.
[Sanchez:] Mike, I have to cut you off because we are just about out of time, but, Jose, I do want to give you a very quick response.
[Aristimuno:] One quick thing. We've got to remember that when Obamacare became the law of the land, we had over 100 town halls, we were on C-SPAN for hours talking about this. You guys don't even invite us to debate this bill. No one saw the Senate bill until a few days ago. How are we supposed to know what's in this bill? How are we supposed to support something that we haven't seen? The whole thing was done in secrecy.
[Sanchez:] All right. Mike Shields, Jose Aristimuno, thank you so much, gentlemen, for joining us.
[Shields:] Thank you.
[Aristimuno:] Thank you.
[Sanchez:] Coming up, Democrats are reeling after four straight special election losses. So could leadership changes be in the works as the party tries to find its footing heading into 2018? But first, if you're looking to create the technology future of technology, I should say, Apple senior vice president Phil Schiller says learn how to code. Here's CNN's Laurie Segall.
[Laurie Segall, Cnn Senior Technology Correspondent:] How do you guys at Apple try to get people invested in developing apps, developing this kind of technology at an early age?
[Philip W. Schiller, Apple Senior Vp Worldwide Marketing:] The growth of the app developer economy is, I think, a potential driving force for our whole economy in America and in other countries around the world. One of the cool things that I'm really proud that we're working on is an education program. We call it "Everyone Can Code." That actually is a little play off of the anyone can cook from "Ratatouille," that movie. And it's kind of the same thing. You know, anyone can cook, not everyone will be a chef. Anybody can learn to code, not everybody will be the world's greatest app developer. We all grew up where you have to learn a foreign language. I think increasingly it's really important that people learn to code because as kids growing up, maybe they have the propensity to be a great developer. But by the time you get older and you haven't tried, then you might not be willing to start. And even if you don't become a developer later in life, chances are, you're job is going to interact with a software programmer. And you're going to be able to have a dialogue at an intelligent level because you understand where they're coming from. So one of the programs we've been launching is K-12 in United States, "Everyone Can Code," Swift Playgrounds to help kids learn and control robots and make drones fly. And I think that can have a huge change in our economy and just in the education of students around the world. That people approach it as just like a foreign language, everyone needs to code.
[Sanchez:] For more on Everyone Needs to Code, check out our Web site, CNN.comtech. We'll be right back. Stay with us.

[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] sharing detailed accounts about episodes at the core of the investigation into whether President Trump obstructed justice, including some that investigators would not have learned otherwise. Now, the paper reports McGahn submitted to at least three voluntary interviews totaling 30 hours. The first interview was last November. Describing the president's furor towards the Russia investigation and providing a clear view of the president's most intimate moments with his lawyer. CNN's Ryan Nobles is following the story from New Jersey where the president is spending the weekend at his Bedminster Golf Resort. Ryan, lawyers are rarely so open with investigators. What kind of things would McGahn be touching on?
[Ryan Nobles, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, there's no doubt, Ana, that there are few people inside the Trump White House that have as intimate knowledge of what the president has done over the past year and a half as it relates to the Russia investigation than the White House counsel, Don McGahn. And, according to this "New York Times" report, you know, we've known for some time, that Don McGahn had sat down with the special counsel's office. But we didn't know to the depths of which these interviews took place. Some 30 hours of conversations between McGahn and the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and his legal team. And what's interesting about this "Times" report is that they say that it was actually Trump's criminal lawyers who initially suggested that McGahn cooperate with the special counsel. But that it was McGahn's personal lawyer who thought that there was a chance that perhaps, that he would be that McGahn was being set up by the Trump team to be the fall guy, if they did determine that there was some level of obstruction of justice taking place. But to your point, Ana, about what Don McGahn may know. There are many things that he has intimate knowledge of. For instance, he was there in did tell the president that he would resign, if the president attempted to fire Robert Mueller. We also know that he was warned, by Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, that if the president attempted to fire the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, that Jeff Sessions would step down. And then, of course, there is his role with the firing of James Comey. He was there for the deliberation surrounding that, so he knows exactly what the president's thinking was during that time frame. Now, at this point, the White House has been very coy about a response to this report in specificity. But the chief spokesperson for the legal team, Rudy Giuliani, did tweet around the same time that the article came out. And this is what Rudy Giuliani said. He said, quote, "It's time for the Mueller investigation to file a report. We will release ours. Don't interfere with elections like Comey. The president had nothing to do with Russia. He didn't obstruct an investigation; 1.4 million documents and 32 witnesses. No privilege raised." And in terms of the tone of this article as well, Ana, I should point out that I had a conversation earlier today with someone who has direct knowledge of the legal strategy for Don McGahn. Keep in mind, he has his own private lawyer that's advising him, and this person tells me that they would not agree with the insinuation that Don provided incriminating information about Trump. He just told the truth which is what he had to do Ana.
[Cabrera:] Over the course of 30 hours and three separate interviews. Ryan Nobles, thank you very much. Joining us now, CNN National Security Analyst and former senior adviser to President Obama's national security adviser, Samantha Vinograd; and CNN Political Analyst and "New York Times" politics editor, Patrick Healy. Patrick, incredible reporting by your paper. Should the president be worried now?
[Patrick Healy, Cnn Political Analyst:] I mean, it's strange. I mean, he has questioned Don McGahn's loyalty over this time, sort of wondering basically who is on board with him, who is willing to, you know, fight to the kind of, the bitter end to defend his integrity. Don McGahn, as White House counsel, is not someone who was given to the, sort of, absolute statements the way Rudy Giuliani and President Trump insist on, on innocence, on witch-hunt and all this, sort of, you know, powerful language. But the thing that is unusual is that President Trump, unlike other presidents, has seen whether it's his White House counsel or his attorney general, these people are almost, sort of, like his personal lawyers. People who are going to defend him to the max. And what Mike Schmidt and Maggie Haberman are reporting here, in part, is that it seems like, you know, Don McGahn is going into these interviews with Robert Mueller and is, sounds like, basically, a cooperative person who's eyes and ears. He's sharing a lot of the information that he has. And from President Trump's point of view, that's not what he likes. He likes people who are going to come out swinging, who are going to defend him or even want to say things that, you know, sometimes strain credulity.
[Cabrera:] Which begs the question as to why would the president not fight having Don McGahn go in there and be so open?
[Healy:] Right. I mean, I think that was the the initial strategy was President Trump had nothing to hide. He wanted full cooperation because he thought I think he was hearing from his folks that the way to wrap this up quickly was to cooperate as fully as possible. Now, Don McGahn is a smart guy. He knew that he was going in there, not to carry water the way Rudy Giuliani keeps doing. But going in there and representing what he knows and doesn't know. And Donald Trump can't control that. He doesn't know what's been said.
[Cabrera:] And, Sam, you've worked for a different president, obviously. Are you surprised by what we're seeing with the number of people who have left this office or I guess McGahn is still there. But the people who've been part of this administration, and I think about Omarosa as well, who are or seemingly, kind of, flipping or aren't so loyal to this president.
[Samantha Vinograd, Cnn National Security Analyst:] Well, what I'm thinking when I read that story is, gosh, this is really going to do wonders for President Trump's paranoia, isn't it? You know, the world now knows that White House counsel, who, as you say, is not the president's personal lawyer, he's there to perform a variety of other functions. He is now going and meeting with the FBI, and that's probably going to make President Trump even more upset, in light of the insider threat that came to light a few days ago with the Omarosa tapes. But Don McGahn, at the White House, has a variety of functions to fulfill. He's there to advise the president on credible legal issues, like, for example, I hate to say it, whether the president should use his executive authority to arbitrarily revoke security clearances. These are the sort of things you'd want the White House counsel to be weighing in on. And so, this is going to weigh on Don McGahn's time. It's going to take time away from performing these other functions. You have to wonder if the president going to trust him as much and listen to him as much?
[Cabrera:] And you brought up the security clearances. The president is tweeting about that today. And so, I want to turn to what he is saying. In his tweet this morning, he says, has anyone looked at the mistakes that John Brennan made while serving as CIA director? He will go down as easily the worst in history. And since getting out, he has nothing less than a loud mouth, a partisan political hack who cannot be trusted with the secrets to our country. Patrick, your reaction.
[Healy:] You know, it seems like the president has a it looks like he's, sort of, compiled his enemies list, in a way. I mean, he's, sort of, looking at these 10 people and thinking about revoking their security clearances, basically because these people exercise their first amendment rights or some of them. And John Brennan, from everything that we know, served the country with distinction as CIA director. He has a great amount of knowledge about how the country works. Probably much greater than certain people in the Trump White House, in terms of national security and the way that secrets are kept and not just tweeted out and leaked, you know, left and right. And it looks like the president has, sort of, decided and this is something that concerns a lot of Washington Republicans. Has decided to basically target these individuals. Decide that they are enemies of his, because they are not parroting some kind of party line, you know, about his own popularity. About what a great, you know, leader he is. And be willing to actually, sort of, revoke security clearances which the president can do. I mean, there is not a statute against
[Cabrera:] He has the power.
[Vinograd:] He does.
[Cabrera:] So, the question is, should he use it? The power.
[Healy:] Right. It's you know, it's surprising and, for a lot of people in Washington, really disconcerting.
[Cabrera:] And there is question, though, Sam, of why does somebody who leaves the government still need a security clearance?
[Vinograd:] And that's a valid question. But President Trump likes to pretend that we're reinventing the wheel on all of this stuff. He did it with the FBI and he's doing it with the CIA. We have oversight of the Central Intelligence Agency. We have oversight of security clearance processes. There's even an executive order, 12968, that lays out, in painstaking detail, what a secure clearance violation looks like and who should have a need for access to classified information. So, if there's an issue with what John Brennan does did as the CIA director, I think the oversight committees would have seen it. And if there's an issue with a security clearance and former officials having access, let the president revise the executive order. And let's attack it in an organized fashion rather than this arbitrary drip-drip of someone going to lose a clearance now. Someone might in a few weeks. It's not conducive to the function of the intelligence community.
[Cabrera:] We know that there nine others that the president has threatened to revoke their security clearances. In fact, one of them still works for the government. The others are former. He has hinted at his political motivation. Let's listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] There's no silence. If anything, I'm giving them the bigger voice. Many people don't even know who he is and now he has the bigger voice. And that's OK with me, because I like taking on voices like that.
[Cabrera:] Patrick, is this about silencing his critics or not?
[Healy:] Well, I mean, I think when you basically threaten the you know, the security clearance, when you threaten when you say that people are, sort of, either you know, enemies or people who are can't be trusted with government secrets, I mean, it's you're making basically a direct threat to their integrity, to their honesty, to also to their livelihood, in terms of their ability to, sort of, go out and hold other jobs in the future. I mean, the president holds a lot of power. And if people are found to be disclosing classified secrets and they have a security clearance, it's very understandable why a president or administration would revoke that clearance. That's not what we're seeing from John Brennan. John Brennan has decided to exercise his first amendment rights, speak from things he knows a great deal about, in terms of the way national security is handled in the country and give his opinion. And, normally, presidents look, presidents normally think of the country as leadership and that they their role as being leaders and they can take criticism. And part of it is hearing all sides and not seeing every person who is a critic as someone who needs to be shut down and silenced and that's a
[Cabrera:] The president said that he's now giving John Brennan a greater platform by even pointing him out. Sam, do you agree with that? And if you would quick answer.
[Vinograd:] Sure. I worked with John Brennan for four years. I don't think he needs the president lambasting him on Twitter to feel like he has a voice. He's not going to stop using it. He used it the state room with President Obama when he disagreed, appropriately. And he's using it now against President Trump. That's a ridiculous thing for President Trump to say. It's a P.R. stunt.
[Cabrera:] Sam Vinograd, Patrick Healy, thank you both. Deliberations resume Monday in the trial of former Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. Coming up, does the jury's question to the judge provide any hints about the verdict as the president himself weighs in? Plus, new details in the murders of a pregnant Colorado wife and her two daughters. What court documents are now revealing about the victims, as father who pleaded for their return faces accusations he killed all of them. [COMMERCIAL BREAK] Paul Manafort's fate and Robert Mueller's future both on the line in a northern Virginia courtroom. The jury will begin a third day of deliberations on Monday, weighing 18 charges of bank and tax fraud that could send more often than not for the rest of his life. Here's the president talking his former campaign chairman as he took off for his weekend in New Jersey.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I don't talk about that now. I don't talk about that. I think the whole Manafort trial is very sad. When you look at what's going on, I think it's a very sad day for our country. He worked for me for a very short period of time. But you know what? He happens to be a very good person. And I think it's very sad what they've done to Paul Manafort.
[Cabrera:] Joining us now, former prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, Randy Zelin. Randy, great to have you with us. The jury is not sequestered, so they're at home this weekend. They could be listening to the president's comments, the very fact that he's commenting against the prosecution in a federal criminal case like this, what do you make of that?
[Randy Zelin, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Well, let's start legally. Legally, the judge has instructed the jury, as judges do in every jury trial, that they are not to watch the media. They are not to read the newspapers. Should someone say something to them about the trial, they are immediately to cut it off. Whether or not that happens in real life, we can only guess. But here's the thing. What it means to me is as follows. What it means is that for every trial going forward, if I'm the government, if I'm a prosecutor, I'm going to say to the judge, please ask those potential jurors whether or not they would be affected in their ability to be fair and impartial if they found out that the president of the United States was weighing in on this trial. If I were the government, I were the prosecutor, I would want the potential jurors to be questioned as to whether or not they can be fair and impartial to the government since the president of the United States has previously weighed in and basically said that the Department of Justice and the prosecutors are incompetent right up to the top. And if I'm the defense attorney, from this point forward, I'm going to get up and look at the jurors in my opening statement and say, ladies and gentlemen, how can you trust this prosecution? Our own president doesn't trust the prosecution.
[Cabrero:] And, in fact, Manafort's attorneys have praised the president's comments. The jury has come back with a few questions to the judge. Since they began their deliberations, we know they asked the judge to redefine reasonable doubt. Also asking what is a shelf company? Do those questions give you any indication which way they're leaning?
[Zelin:] I've been doing this for 30 years. I've given up reading tea leaves. In the old days you would say, oh, the longer are jury is out, better for the defense. Now, we've seen trials where the jury's been out a week, longer, they come back with a conviction. It used to be, if the jurors come in and their heads are down and they're not looking at the defendant, that probably means a conviction. [Crosstalk] But you don't know. But, look, the reality is reasonable doubt. It is not simply a doubt based upon reason. There is a far better definition of reasonable doubt. Because it's not easy. It's kind of, like, out there. What does it mean? What it means is that any time you have to make a very important decision in your life, like whether or not to have surgery. If the doctor says, you need surgery, Randy. And I say, you know what, doc? Let's schedule it. I don't have reasonable doubt. But if I say to the doctor, you know what? I think I need another opinion, I need more information, that means I have reasonable doubt. So, the fact that the jurors are asking about the definition of reasonable doubt, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're planning on convicting. A shelf company, whether they're asking about a shelf company which is a company basically that's put up on a shelf. So, this way, if I want to go into business, rather than telling the bank that I had a brand-new business, I'd buy a shelf company, because it's been sitting there dormant. But I can say to the bank, you know what? This company has been in business for 10 years.
[Cabrera:] Ah, gotcha. And I love that you put this in layman's terms for us. I also wonder, though, with these questions get to the heart of the fact that this is a complicated case. These are financial crimes. If I'm not a financial expert or a legal expert, it might take me a while to go through all of the charges and all the documents and all the evidence to make sure I'm dotting those Is and crossing those Ts.
[Zelin:] Here's the thing. Tax cases are paper cases, so they're really not terribly complicated. It seems daunting because of the amount of paper and the numbers and the complexity of the numbers. But, ultimately, where we talk about Rick Gates being the focal point of this case, this really is a paper case. And it's really about, did you disclose it? Did you know you were supposed to disclose it? And if you didn't disclose it, you broke the law. So, let's not spend too much time talking about destroying Rick Gates' credibility unless you want to believe that Mr. Manafort was actually victimized by Mr. Gates. And it was actually Mr. Gates that did all these terrible things, and Mr. Manafort didn't know anything about it. That's going to be, I think, a tough sell to the jury since Gates may have been the quarterback, but Mr. Manafort was Jerry Jones. He was the owner.
[Cabrera:] Thank you so much for coming in. Good to have you.
[Zelin:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] Well, they were the picture-perfect family, a doting wife, two little girls, a third child on the way, a baby boy, until a shocking crime. The mystery surrounding a husband now accused of murdering his entire family. [COMMERCIAL BREAK] New court documents filed in the case of a Colorado man supported of killing his pregnant wife and their two young daughters suggest the children may have been strangled. Shanann Watts and her daughters, Bella age four and celeste age three, were reported missing on Monday. They were found dead Thursday. A defense motion obtained by a local CNN affiliate revealed the two little girls were placed inside an oil storage tank while their mother was found nearby. The father, Chris Watts, is now under arrest for the killings, just days after making an emotional public plea to help find his family. CNN's Randi Kaye reports.
[Shanann Watts:] Guess what, girls? Mommy has a baby in her belly.
[Unidentified Female:] A baby, yay.
[Randi Kaye, Cnn Correspondent:] A moment of joy that's turned to pain and mystery. That was Shanann Watts telling her two daughters that she was pregnant again. Four-year-old Bella and three- year-old Celeste were thrilled.
[Shanann Watts:] I love you, girls.
[Unidentified Female:] I want to give the baby a hug.
[Shanann Watts:] Do you want to give the baby a hug? There's also video of her sharing the news with her husband of nearly six years, Chris Watts.
[Chris Watts:] That's awesome. I guess I guess when you want to, it happens.
[Kaye:] But not long after that video was taken, something terrible happened. On Monday of this week, Shanann and her daughters went missing. Then came Tuesday and Shanann's husband, Chris, began a series of public pleas for their safe return.
[Chris Watts:] Just come back. If somebody has her, just please bring her back. I need to see everybody. I need to see everybody again. This house is not complete without anybody here. I just want them back. I just I just want them to come back. And if they're not safe right now, that's what's that's what's tearing me apart. Authorities searched the home and canvassed the neighborhood. Two days later, a grisly discovery.
[John Camper, Director, Colorado Bureau Of Investigation:] We've been able to recover a body that we're quite certain that is Shanann Watts' body.
[Kaye:] Authorities say the woman's body was recovered on the property of a petroleum and natural gas exploration company where Chris Watts used to work. The bodies of two children were found nearby. Then, another bizarre turn. The desperate husband and father who had pleaded for his family's safe return, was now suddenly the prime suspect in their disappearance.
[Ian Albert, Sergeant, Frederick Police Department:] In the late hours of Wednesday evening, the husband, Chris Watts, was taken into custody and was transported to the Wall County Jail.
[Kaye:] He has yet to be officially charged, but police say Chris Watts faces three counts of first-degree murder and three counts of tampering with a human body.
[Unidentified Female:] Like, no, he wouldn't do anything. And then, I seen his interview, and I was, like, oh, my god, like, something's not right.
[Kaye:] On Facebook, with emotions running high, Shanann's brother directly accused Chris Watts. This piece of blank, may he rot in hell. He killed my pregnant sister and my two nieces. Police have not suggested a motive. Before his arrest, Watts told reporters that he and his wife had exchanged words.
[Chris Watts:] It wasn't, like, an argument. We had an emotional conversation. But I'll leave it at that.
[Kaye:] Still, on Shanann's Facebook page, a portrait of a happy family.
[Shanann Watts:] I got a friend request from Chris on Facebook. And I was, like, what the heck, I'm not going to meet him. Accept. Well, one thing led to another and eight years later, we have two kids. We live in Colorado and he's the best thing that has ever happened to me.
[Kaye:] Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.
[Cabrero:] Joining us to discuss, host of HLN's "Crime and Justice" Ashleigh Banfield and criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson. Good to have both of you with us. Ashleigh, what do we know about the charges?
[Ashleigh Banfield, Hln Anchor, Crime And Justice:] So, it's interesting how they're worded. And, of course, these safety needs, the latest they can file them is Monday. And there will be an appearance at that time as well. But first-degree murder. And the wording is interesting. For one count, it's after deliberation. But for the other two counts, it's position of trust which would be obvious if one were an adult and the other were the two children in a position of trust. And then, the other three counts are tampering with evidence. But they're tampering with a deceased human body which would lend very much credibility to the fact that they were found in oil, at least two of them.
[Ana Cabrera, Cnn Anchor:] So disturbing. Joey, we don't know exactly how they were killed. Investigators aren't confirming, but we are learning strangulation may have been part of this crime. What does that tell you?
[Joey Jackson, Cnn Legal Analyst:] You know, Ana, good to be with you, good to be on with Ashleigh as well. Let's talk about the human component of this. It's certainly unfathomable. I covered this with Ashleigh on her show last week. You look at a family that was seemingly happy and in love and everything's wonderful and he's speaking to the issue that is his deceased wife. He's the best thing that has ever happened to me. And then he allegedly kills all of them, and two of them are found in an oil well, his daughters. So it just shocks the conscious or imagination as to why someone would do this. From a human factor it's so compelling and difficult to talk about, now through the legal side, while there's no motive yet that's been announced, you have to wonder what was going on. What we do understand or believe we know is that there was certainly financial issues involved with the family. There was a bankruptcy filing, my understanding is, in 2015, all indications that they got over that. There's also information that collectively they made $90,000. So who knows. Maybe the essence of the whole financial difficulties got the better of him. And then you see him on the stoop talking about I just want them back, it's just so ripping. But at the end of the day, there's allegedly a confession he made as well. I think this is going to be a very compelling and difficult case to defend. But you have to wonder what was going on through his desperate and contorted mind his state of mind will be evaluated to drive him to something so final and so sinister and just so devastating.
[Cabrera:] When you think about potentially strangling his own children, it wasn't a gun. It just speaks to it being so personal. That's what gets me.
[Banfield:] I'm not so sure. I'm going to jump in here. I'm not so sure, though. The only reason anyone is suggesting strangulation might be a possibility here is because of a defense motion that was dismissed. The defense hired a DNA expert, and the DNA expert for the defense said, hey, by the way, make sure that you get DNA from the next of my children and from the neck of my wife and her finger nails because, you know, maybe there's DNA that oil for four days wouldn't wipe away. Joey, you're the attorney, but I see this as a potential strategy for a defense because if you excluded the fact that you could not find DNA on the neck or fingers, you could say we don't know the cause of death, and a murder charge becomes more difficult.
[Cabrera:] What do you think, Joey?
[Jackson:] In real life, I'm a defense attorney. I used to be a prosecutor. So let me put that hat on now. Who cares, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, whether it was a strangulation, he hit their head or something else. The fact remains that they are dead and they are dead at his hands. The fact also remains, presuming his confession is admissible, that he admitted to doing this. After admitting to doing this, an affront, he looked at everyone in the media and talked about how he wanted them back. The compelling issue here is that they're dead. I, ladies and gentlemen, don't have to prove motive at all. It is not an element of the charge. The only element is intent to kill, he told you he did it and their bodies were found. I don't want anyone to get lost on whether it was strangulation or anything else, that's irrelevant. The fact that they're no longer here
[Banfield:] I tell you, I agree with you. I agree with you, except for the fact that this is a death-penalty state. So when the chips are down, you fight with everything you have. If he only led them to the bodies, he could say, she was away on a trip and then I found out about this affair, and then he showed up and this mystery man killed them. and I was so scared that they would think it was me, I disposed of the bodies but I didn't kill them. There's all sorts of arguments they could put forward. By the way, we have no idea what he told them. It's just a report at this time. The police aren't even confirming there was a confession. But he will fight tooth and nail for every single one of these charges because that's three death penalty charges, and maybe a fourth, although that is really slim in Colorado with regard to that unborn child
[Cabrera:] I'm glad you mentioned that we have not confirmed that there was any kind of confession. We really don't know exactly what he is saying. But, Ashleigh, he was staying with some other people, and are they providing any hint as to what a possible motive could be.
[Banfield:] Yes, the affairs. Apparently, took him in need while the family is missing and now they're devastated that they were party to all of us. And they said to local affiliates on camera, A, that he had mentioned something about selling the house on Monday. There's also some reporting that suggests there's been a recent civil action against him by a homeowners' association. The financial issues may have reared their ugly heads again. But they also said there's a possibility there may have been infidelity. They don't have concrete evidence, but Shanann said it's possible he was having an affair. She didn't think he had game enough to have an affair, but at least that topic broached the zeitgeist. So who knows what motivation could cause anybody to do this if he did? Even the worst of the worst, when an affair comes into it, it's very hard to look at your own 3 and 4- year-old children and kill them over an affair.
[Cabrera:] Joey, you think those videos we've been playing will come out as part of the defense strategy to show how happy this family seemingly was?
[Jackson:] I think, absolutely. Look, as a defense attorney, you use what you have. To Ashleigh's point regarding a confession, if there's one, there will be motions made to express that so it doesn't see the light of day. How was it taken? Was it a custodial interrogation? Was he read his rights? You have the hard evidence that's there. And by all indications, they were a happy family. But I'm sure there will be other issues that come to light that may establish he did this for some motivation. I should briefly tell you, the death penalty has only been applied once in 40 years in Colorado. You might remember the Aurora shooter, he didn't get the death penalty. It may be implemented here, but it may not actually be voted upon and applied if he's found guilty.
[Cabrera:] Joey and Ashleigh, got to leave it there.
[Banfield:] Ana?
[Cabrera:] OK, real quick.
[Banfield:] Something in the fact pattern that's important here. That place where they were found, the oil tanks, not a well, this is not the kind of place you would find a body in a well. It's likely a tank. They're monitored at this company. All of them are monitored. So there may be actual forensic information that will help them on that site with regard to how and when those children and that woman were disposed of.
[Jackson:] Absolutely.
[Cabrera:] Ashleigh Banfield and Joey Jackson, thank you for joining us.
[Jackson:] Thank you.
[Cabrera:] She was a titan of music, the undisputed queen of soul. But singing wasn't her only legacy. As funeral arrangements are made for Aretha Franklin, we'll look at her unique role in the civil rights movement.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] A repeat offender deported five times has been found not guilty in the killing of a California woman in the criminal case that propelled Donald Trump's political rise. His steaming and sanctuary city critics are demanding justice.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Senate Majority Leader:] While senators in the Senate will continue to debate the bill tonight, the next roll call vote will be at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Senate Republicans are poised to advance their tax plan. But first, the party has to satisfy concerns of a key senator, one the president has squared off with before.
[Jimmy Kimmel, Host, Abc "jimmy Kimmel Live!":] So if you are challenging me to a fight, here's what we'll do. Let's find a place to do it. I'll wear a Girl Scout uniform so you can have something to get excited about.
[Briggs:] You'd think Roy Moore has bigger things to do than fight with Jimmy Kimmel, but that's what Moore did. And Kimmel, as you could her, fighting back. Thanks for getting an early start with us. Dave Briggs is here. I'm here. That's how the president described Rex Tillerson.
[Romans:] You're here, you're here.
[Briggs:] Not an overwhelming vote of confidence. We'll discuss the secretary of state, ahead.
[Romans:] I have great confidence in you that you are here.
[Briggs:] I'm here.
[Romans:] There will be no "Dexit" "Brexit" "Dexit."
[Briggs:] We'll see about Monday "Riggsit."
[Romans:] But no "Dexit."
[Briggs:] No "Dexit."
[Romans:] No Dave exit. All right, I'm Christine Romans. It is Friday. It is 32 33 minutes past the hour. Let's begin, though, in California. The stunning verdict in the murder case against a seven-times convicted, five-times deported undocumented immigrant. He was charged in the 2015 shooting death of Kate Steinle, a case Donald Trump used to propel his political rise. A San Francisco jury finding Jose Garcia Zarate not guilty of murder.
[Briggs:] Prosecutors had argued he shot Kate Steinle intentionally as she walked on the city's waterfront, but Garcia Zarate's lawyer said the gun went off accidentally and the bullet ricocheted off the ground before hitting Steinle.
[Romans:] San Francisco had released him from custody before the shooting instead of handing him over to federal immigration agents. Candidate Donald Trump decried San Francisco and other sanctuary cities which limit cooperation with immigration authorities. Now, critics of the sanctuary law say Steinle would be alive today if not for extra protection for undocumented immigrations.
[Briggs:] Sanctuary city proponents argue that immigrants are more likely to cooperate with local authorities if they don't fear it will lead to deportation. Garcia Zarate's public defender gave this blunt warning to critics of the verdict, including in Washington.
[Matt Gonzalez, Attorney For Jose Garcia Zarate:] There are a number of people that have commented on this case in the last couple of years the attorney general of the United States, the president and vice president of the United States. Let me just remind them that they are, themselves, under investigation by a special prosecutor in Washington, D.C. and they may, themselves, soon avail themselves of the presumption of innocence and the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. And so I would ask them to reflect on that before they comment or disparage the result in this case.
[Romans:] The president President Trump took three hours to reflect, then tweeted this. "A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case. No wonder the people of our country are so angry with illegal immigration." CNN's Dan Simon covered the trial. He has more from San Francisco.
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] Dave and Christine, this is really the case that made the term sanctuary city part of the American vocabulary. Before this happened nobody had really ever heard the term and they had no idea what a sanctuary city was. That all changed on July first, 2015. That's when 32-year-old Kate Steinle was taking a stroll on Pier 14 with her father Pier 14 being a popular tourist spot in San Francisco. She's enjoying the views in San Francisco and then all of a sudden a shot rings out. About an hour after the shooting police had their suspect in custody, 45-year-old Jose Ines Garcia Zarate. He's an undocumented immigrant. He had been deported to Mexico five times and he would have been deported a sixth time but San Francisco, a sanctuary city, does not comply with federal immigration detention rules and therefore, let him go. The defense said this was nothing but an? They said that the gun was found under Garcia Zarate's seat. That it was wrapped in some cloth and when he examined this object the gun just went off. And they also said that this gun, a 40-caliber pistol a Sig Sauer has a history of accidental discharges. And ultimately, the jury found enough here to declare reasonable doubt. He was found guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He'll be deported back to Mexico. And keep in mind he's already come into the country several times so some might make the argument that he might attempt to come back to the United States once again Christine and Dave.
[Romans:] All right. Dan Simon, thank you. Attorney General Jeff Sessions releasing this statement after the verdict. "I urge the leaders of the nation's communities to reflect on the outcome of this case and consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement officers."
[Briggs:] Prosecutors calling the verdict disappointing. The Steinle family expressing disgust. This statement from Kate Steinle's brother, Brad. "The system failed Kate Steinle from the start. Why would the verdict be any different? It is failure after failure. The culmination of events in an epic fail." Kate's father Jim said he was saddened and shocked, adding "Justice was rendered but it was not served."
[Romans:] Senate Republicans trying to pass a tax bill. They can see the finish line but they can also see the high hurdles remaining before a hoped-for final vote later today. Their top concern, the deficit, and there was bad news for the GOP on that front, a new report from the nonpartisan Congressional scorekeeper for taxes. The Senate bill estimated to cost more than twice as much as it generates in revenues.
[Briggs:] And that was a big problem for one of the president's loudest Republican critics in the Senate, Bob Corker. He has promised not to let the tax bill drive up the deficit so he's fighting for big changes here. Corker's stance leading to a testing huddle here on the Senate floor. Now, some Republican lawmakers are furious at Corker's tactics. One aide telling CNN it didn't need to be done publicly.
[Romans:] Joining us now, political economist Greg Valliere, chief strategist at Horizon Investments. Good morning, Greg. And your job is to translate what's happening to Washington for the people who are moving around and making money in the market. So tell me this. What are the chances that they get this thing to the finish line and what does it look like in your view?
[Greg Valliere, Political Economist, Chief Strategist, Horizon Investments:] Well, I still think it makes it to the finish line. The market, of course, had an explosive rally yesterday when John McCain announced he was going to support it. The markets really want to see this deal get done. But it could slow down. It might not get done today. And I think, more importantly, it might get watered down a bit to satisfy the deficit hawks like Corker. Maybe some of the business provisions won't be quite as generous as the president was hoping for.
[Briggs:] So, Mitch McConnell always described it as a Rubik's Cube.
[Valliere:] Yes.
[Briggs:] I've always felt that they might, instead of solving it, just move the stickers around
[Valliere:] Yes.
[Briggs:] like I did when I was kid. So what stickers do they move around? What revenue do they find to satisfy Corker, Flake, maybe even Johnson?
[Valliere:] Well, they do something to reduce the deficit estimate, first of all. Second, they probably, again, make it a little less generous. Maybe the top corporate rate will not go to 20 percent. Maybe it goes to 22 or 23 percent. Maybe the corporate alternative minimum tax stays. There are things they can do to probably satisfy Corker. The obvious question is would that antagonize others in this Rubik's Cube.
[Romans:] Greg, let me ask you this. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 6,000 points since the election. The economy I mean, I would say the economy is on fire.
[Valliere:] Yes.
[Romans:] You've got home sales, new home building, lending, consumer confidence, consumer spending. Just about every little box to tick is really doing well here right now.
[Valliere:] Right.
[Romans:] So we need tax cuts for companies?
[Valliere:] Well, that's quite a question, Christine. I mean, he went to Missouri this week and said that the economy's weak, it's not doing all that great, we've got to get tax cuts. The unemployment rate in Missouri is something like 3.5 percent
[Briggs:] Wow.
[Valliere:] so it's awfully hard to make a case that this economy is ailing. You could make a strong case we need tax reform.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Valliere:] The way we tax international companies things like that. But if you want to if you want to throw $1 trillion at a tax cut when maybe that medicine could be saved to time when we really might need it.
[Romans:] You know, that's interesting because when I look at this, how this whole debate has changed, it really did start, I think, by this real tax reform.
[Valliere:] Yes.
[Romans:] And now, this looks to me like corporate tax cuts and reform of the system to a territorial system, right, but kind of
[Valliere:] Right.
[Romans:] a mess on the personal side.
[Valliere:] Oh, I agree. And I think for corporations, which are going to do exceptionally well, you have to ask the question with an extra big pile of money are there workers out there to hire? The unemployment rate is so low. There's a shortage of labor in much of the country. I'm not sure it's going to lead to a huge, new round of hiring.
[Briggs:] All right. Well, the economy would not like a government shutdown
[Valliere:] Right.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Briggs:] and that could be just about a week away. Meanwhile, "The Washington Post" reports that President Trump is telling confidants that could be good for him politically. Would it?
[Valliere:] No, I don't think it's good for anybody. It will be a pox on all your houses if they do this. You know, now that we get the dessert first with a tax bill, then we've got a big plate of broccoli that we've got to deal with by the end of the year. And right now, they are so far apart on the budget what do you do with the Dreamers, what do you do with spending levels that there could be a shutdown. Maybe they drag it into January, but I think the chances of a shutdown have increased this week as both Pelosi, Schumer, and Trump all indicate an unwillingness to deal.
[Briggs:] Immigration at the heart of that.
[Romans:] Yes.
[Briggs:] I like broccoli, frankly.
[Romans:] I do, too, but I get the metaphor
[Briggs:] I'm unusual.
[Romans:] as well.
[Valliere:] I like I like dessert.
[Romans:] Greg Valliere, have a great weekend.
[Valliere:] All right, guys. See you later.
[Romans:] Thank you, sir.
[Valliere:] Yes.
[Romans:] All right. "The New York Times" reporting this morning President Trump pressed top Republicans over the summer to end their Russia investigation. The highly unusual intervention said to include the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee which is overseeing one investigation. According to half a dozen lawmakers and aides, the president told Intel chairman Richard Burr he was eager to see an end to the probe that has overshadowed much of his first year in office. Burr tells the "Times" he informed the president when the committee has spoken to everyone it needs to, they will finish.
[Briggs:] The chairman insists he did not feel pressured by Mr. Trump. The report also says the president urged Senators Mitch McConnell and Roy Blunt, who is on the Intel Committee, to end the Russia investigation swiftly. A White House spokesman telling CNN at no point has the president attempted to apply undue influence on committee members. Ahead, one of the more bizarre Twitter fights you've seen in recent history. Roy Moore challenging Jimmy Kimmel to face him man-to-man.
[Kimmel:] With me, he wants to go man-to-man. Maybe if you wanted man- to-man instead of man to little girl you wouldn't be in this situation allegedly.
[Briggs:] Wow. What led to the dust-up, next.

[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles.
[Isha Sesay, Cnn Anchor:] Ahead this hour, the back and forth between North Korea and the United States takes another sharp turn. Kim Jong- un's regime accuses Donald Trump of declaring war on their country.
[Vause:] Plus America's team takes a knee. Join the growing list of NFL players, described by the U.S. president as those sons of you- know-the-rest-rant of witches and they should all be fired.
[Sesay:] Also ahead, horrific devastation on Puerto Rico following Hurricane Maria, but help has been slow to arrive in the U.S. territory.
[Vause:] Hello, everybody, thank you for being with us for another hour. I'm John Vause.
[Sesay:] And I'm Isha Sesay. This is NEWSROOM L.A. Well, the fiery language between the U.S. and North Korea is reach reaching a dangerous new level.
[Vause:] And that's raising fears of some kind of miscalculation which could lead to being a military confrontation. North Korea's foreign minister says the U.S. president has declared war after a tweet claiming North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un won't be around much longer if he follows through on his threats against the U.S. or its allies.
[Ri Yong-ho, Foreign Minister, North Korea:] Since the United States declared war on our country, we will have every right to make all self-defensive countermeasures including the right to shoot down the United States strategic bombers at any time even when they are not yet inside the aerospace border of our country.
[Sesay:] Well, U.S. bombers flew in international airspace close to North Korean's coast just Saturday, but the White House insists there's been absolutely no declaration of war.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] We've not declared war on North Korea, and frankly, the suggestion of that is absurd. It's never appropriate for a country to shoot down another country's aircraft when it's over international waters. Our goal is still the same: we continue to seek the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
[Sesay:] Well, U.S. Defense official says naval exercise with South Korea will go on as scheduled next month. CNN's Ben Wedeman is in Tokyo and joins us now. So, Ben, as you speak to people here in Japan, obviously, they're well accustomed to the fiery rhetoric from North Korea. Do they do they feel that this is more of the same just bluster with this talk about the U.S. declaring war, or does it feel different?
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn International Correspondent:] It's definitely different, Isha because they are accustomed to this sort of bluster going back many years. The difference is that within the last month, North Korea has fired two missiles over Japanese territory. And in addition to that, we did hear Ri Yong-ho, the Foreign Minister of North Korea, saying that North Korea might explode a hydrogen bomb over the Pacific. And the assumption here is that that would mean that they would fit a missile with a nuclear warhead and fire it over Japan. So, as opposed to just talk, they're actually seeing real action taking place, and that is really kind of shifted the whole atmosphere. And that explains, for instance, why last night Shinzo Abe, the Japanese Prime Minister, has called for snap elections to be held on the 22nd of October because he has seen sort of the Kim Jong-un effect, so to speak, in politics of people rallying around the leader who just a few months ago had his approval that levels around the levels that President Trump is enjoying, if you can use that word. So, definitely, there has been an effect on politics and simply the state of mind of people here in Japan in the last month, Isha.
[Sesay:] Ben, you made the point of the effect on politics and state of mind. What about defensively speaking to the extent that Japan can take steps? Does this heightened rhetoric add to, of course, the actions of flying two missiles over Japan in the recent weeks? Are we seeing a focus, a renewed focus on stepping defensive efforts in Japan, and, of course, U.S. allies of South Korea?
[Wedeman:] Well, certainly, in Japan, we've seen in the last few months they've beefed up their anti-missile capability with patriot missiles deployed in Hokkaido, the Northern island of Japan where those missiles actually flew over. And of course, there is continued pressure or rather Shinzo Abe, the Prime Minister, is calling for the modification of Article 9 of the Pacifist Constitution imposed by the United States after World War II. He would like to see Japan have a proper military force. At the moment, they have what's known as the self-defense forces which are restricted by the Constitution from being deployed abroad. They have, in the past, deployed peacekeepers with the United Nations, but, as I said, their mandate is strictly limited. And that, Shinzo Abe, would like to change if, of course, he's given the mandate to do so in this election. So, definitely, the whole sort of footing of the country could change if this nuclear crisis continues to become more aggravated. Isha.
[Sesay:] Ben Wedeman joining us there from Tokyo, Japan. We appreciate it. Thank you.
[Vause:] OK. More now on the situation in North Korea. We're joined now by Maj. Gen. Mark MacCarley, Paul Carroll, Senior Adviser at N Square which aims to reduce the risk from nuclear weapons. Paul, first, to you. Here's an anecdote from a reporter with the New Yorker who was in Pyongyang, when he asked a Senior Diplomat, named Jo Chol- su, to respond to a Trump tweet about Kim Jong-un. So, "he asked me to read it out allowed and he jotted it down as I read it. When I was done, Jo looked up and said," through his translator, "'once more, please.'I read the tweet again. Jo stared at his paper." That seems to be a pretty good example of how the North Koreans are just baffled to say the least by, you know, how this U.S. president expresses himself and the sheer confusion at times among the North Koreans.
[Paul Carroll, Senior Adviser, N Square:] Yes, it's the proverbial, you know, palm to the forehead, so to speak. And I think that is the difference today in what we are seeing in the rhetorical exchanges between Pyongyang and Washington. A couple of things have changed. I mean, the North Koreans have demonstrated a greater capability and more consistency in both their rocket and their nuclear tests. You add to that a president, a U.S. president who, while surrounded by some very seasoned and measured advisers, goes off script. And the question is: will he literally will go off script with the United States military? Will he respond to a North Korean provocation with as they say kinetic response? That is the type of thing that can easily snowball into a war, and in this case, a nuclear war.
[Vause:] And, General MacCarley, on the flip side of all of this, is it fair to say that the U.S. president doesn't really understand how the North Koreans talk a well? They've been making the top threats against the United States, South Korea, or Japan for years, and most of the time, it's purely for domestic consumption.
[Maj. Gen. Mark Maccarley, Deputy Commanding General, United States Army:] John, if this were merely a, you know, war of words as North Korea and the U.S. engaged in that type of conversation for and since the Korean War, then, I don't think we have the level of concern that we are addressing tonight. But as other speakers have discussed, you have the confirmation of the ability of North Korea, really, for the first time to deliver nuclear weapons. It went forward with the nuclear test of significance on September 4th. It established, quite clearly, that it could successfully miniaturize deliverable nuclear systems that could be emplaced on intermediate-range missiles and intercontinental missile. So, you add this all together, and all the sudden, what was once a somewhat humorous, a matter of concern to some extent exchange between world leaders. Whether it was Kim Jong-un's father, his grandfather, and the then current president or that young president at that particular point in time have significantly escalated. And now, the question is: whether in this war of words, both sides understand that those words have significance. And in some senses, they are fighting words and potential is the misinterpretation and miscommunication which could be a precedent to war.
[Vause:] OK. So, to Paul, over the weekend, there was this very big anti-U.S. rally in Pyongyang. So, with that as the background here, explain, you know, the sacred position, the ruling family in North Korea has in politics you know, like Asian Emperors. So, is it possible given that President Trump could be goading the North Korea into some kind of response by insulting Kim Jong-un?
[Carroll:] I think that's precisely what he's doing. And as the general said, this is exactly what a U.S. president should not be doing. It's one thing to show that you have a determined U.S. military and allies in the region and that you've got their back. It's another to taunt a leader whose entire existence is one in the same with his state it's like Napoleon in France. And to insult Kim Jong-un personally, as reprehensible as a leader and a dictator as he may be, you're driving him into exactly the corner you don't want to drive him into. Now, I do want to offer one small beam of hope and that is this: Kim Jong-un's sole priority is survival. His own survival and the survival of his family dynasty. And so, if we think about that as a way getting out of this mess without stumbling into war, what are things that the U.S. and the allies can do to send signals to Kim Jong-un that, look, you can get out of this, but there are things that you need to do to get out of this. And if you begin to take those steps, we will take some steps. That is what is absent from this rhetoric.
[Vause:] The other thing, too, which we have at present though, is this risk of miscalculation. So, general, you know, in World War I,
[Daniel Ellsberg, Former U.s. Military Analyst:] Well, I'm glad a career came running in with a flash cable saying that American warships were under attack in the Tonkin Gulf off the coast of North Vietnam. And I was getting these because my boss was already down the hall with McNamara picking targets to retaliate against, against North Vietnam. Minute after minute, more cables came in three torpedoes have been fired. We are taking ease of action. In about 1:30, our time, comes new cable from the Commodore of the two ships hold everything in effect. All previous reports of torpedoes are in question.
[Vause:] So, general, you know, there's always this dangerous starting of war, and it often is not how people thought it could start. But it's underway, there's just no turning back.
[Maccarley:] Right. It's irreversible and you don't really know what the outcome is regardless of the enthusiasm or the interest of a nation, the nation's leader, and starting a war that should never have taken place. Look, I think that historical references have great value and there are multiple instances in history in which statements have been made with the intent my view is, with the intent to find justification for war. And since we're looking at the Gulf of Tonkin, and we have Dan Ellsberg who's made that wonderful commentary which was incorporated in the documentary we saw a couple of nights ago. You know, that was an issue. That was an instance in which we had a president of the United States who, for a lot of reasons, was committed to moving forward to, from his perspective, restoring democracy and stability in Vietnam. And whether it was this alleged attack on the USS Mattox in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, or it could have been any incident whatsoever. He needed a justification for going to Congress to secure that Tonkin Golf Resolution which justified going to war. Frankly, we went from 28,000 advisers in early '64, and by a year later we were up to almost 200,000. And we can look at any number of incidents, historically, in which there has been a misinterpretation, words have been used, words have been used to initiate action which culminates in war and horrific loss of life.
[Vause:] In Vietnam's case, it was 54,000 dead Americans when it was all said and done. General MacCarley and Paul Carroll, thank you so much for being with us. We appreciate it.
[Sesay:] Well, with us now, Democratic Strategist Matthew Littman and CNN Political Commentator and Republican Consultant John Thomas. Guys, thanks for sticking around. John, to you. I mean, the president has consistently, in recent weeks and months, really, drawn these red lines which Kim Jong-un continues to leap over. I mean, he's like high-jumping over them at this stage. At some point, doesn't this just become an issue of credibility for the president which kind of pushes him into taking some action?
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator And Republican Strategist:] I mean, it does. But I think the president, initially, his strategy was to re-define America as a powerful entity something like Barack Obama drew a literal red line that other people would step over. So, he's trying to reposition him, but, obviously, Kim Jong is as full of bluster as the president is. So, he is putting our back up against a wall. But let's not forget, there is a diplomatic component. Things are sanctions are being talked about. I thought Trump's speech at the U.N., did strike the right tone. But, look, at the end of the day
[Sesay:] Not many people in the room, judging by the commentary afterward.
[Thomas:] That may be true, but as an American, I felt it was the right tone. But I think I think the key thing here to remember is, what you were talking about earlier is North Korea is concerned about self- preservation. So, that's really the only chit we have in this process.
[Vause:] Matt.
[Matthew Littman, Democratic Strategist:] Donald Trump's staff asked him to not personally attack the leader North Korea at the U.N. Donald Trump couldn't help himself, that's what he does. So far, what is the good of what Donald Trump is doing, he keeps saying over and over again: North Korea shouldn't do this, can't-do this, we're going to destroy them if they do this, and they keep acting. Every other week there's some new test, a missile flies over Japan. The other thing is from the North Korean perspective: Saddam Hussein didn't have nuclear weapons he's dead. Gaddafi didn't have nuclear weapons he's dead. Kim Jong-un wants to stay in power, and the way that he sees himself being able to stay in power is by having nuclear weapons. So, that's what he's doing.
[Sesay:] But to add to that. Sorry, I didn't mean to cut you, but just to follow his line of thought, then you add to that the Iran deal that this administration wants to rip off. I mean, if you're North Korea
[Vause:] Why make a deal?
[Littman:] Let me just say that I don't think that a lot some people in the administration wants to rip this up. Donald Trump clearly wants to rip it up. I think there are a lot of people don't think that would be a bad idea because we're preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon for ten years. Now, getting Iran all this money, I think, is terrible. But we are preventing the situation with Iran that we're having with North Korea.
[Thomas:] Or delaying the imaginable. We'll have another North Korea on our hands.
[Littman:] Could you imagine. It's actually not necessarily inevitable, but, yes, could you imagine if we were doing right now, North Korea and Iran at the same time, which is what Donald Trump is talking about doing.
[Vause:] So, John, when the president says North Korea is developing an ICBM that will reach the United States, will not happen, and then it happens. And then, he says, if they threaten or carry out, you know, other tests, you know, there'll be fire and fury and we're locked and loaded to respond, and he doesn't follow through. How does that strengthen the U.S. position in the world, when, essentially, it's bluster with nothing to back it up?
[Thomas:] Well, it's funny. On the one hand, you're advocating that we shouldn't go in and go to war, and Trump is using restraint
[Vause:] I'm saying he shouldn't say it in the first place because it's nonsense with all the excuses.
[Littman:] You said that Obama has literally drawn a red line, which he certainly did not literally stand there and draw a red line.
[Thomas:] He did. He
[Littman:] But Barack Obama said that they talk about Syria, you're right. Donald Trump has now said 15 different things that North Korea shouldn't do, and they just keep doing it.
[Vause:] So, how does that strengthen the U.S. position, though?
[Thomas:] Well, I think just in general, the U.S. needs to project more strength.
[Vause:] Is that projecting strength, though? Listen to
[Thomas:] It is. And in a way, I like the idea that Kim Jong might think Trump is crazy enough that he might actually
[Littman:] So far, nothing has happened that we'd wanted to happen with North Korea since Trump became president. None of this has worked out so far. When Barack Obama was president, we didn't have the exact same problem. We always have problem three.
[Thomas:] They didn't have the missiles that they're testing.
[Littman:] But they're testing every week.
[Thomas:] You're right. Because Obama put us in this situation.
[Littman:] He certainly didn't put us in the situation. The situation has gone on for a long time and they're doing it more under Donald Trump. Donald Trump keeps saying we're going to
[Thomas:] You're right because it wasn't stopped earlier. So now, we're stuck in this rotten situation.
[Littman:] He hasn't acted. So, what's going to happen? How is that to the best of the world?
[Thomas:] Well, General Mattis says that we have military options that do protect Seoul and can neutralize their military
[Sesay:] OK. So
[Thomas:] isolation.
[Vause:] I can't wait to see that turn to pixie dust.
[Sesay:] Yes.
[Thomas:] I mean, I can just listen to what the general said.
[Vause:] Well, OK.
[Sesay:] All right.
[Vause:] I hope so.
[Sesay:] For everyone's sake. There are millions of people's lives at stake, so we all hope so. Gentlemen
[Vause:] Gentlemen, thanks, guys.
[Sesay:] Thank you.
[Vause:] OK. Short break. President Trump taking new shots at pro athletes who kneeled during the national anthem. How the White House is now playing defense, more on that in a moment.
[Sesay:] Plus, if you thought German politics were boring, think again. Historic breakthrough for the far-right followed by leadership walk out and a party, in total disarray. Stay with us.

[Berman:] There's some breaking news to report this morning. So, the Defense Intelligence Agency, which is part of the U.S. government, says that North Korea Kim Jong Un they see no plans that Kim has immediate plans to denuclearize. Again, Kim is not about to denuclearize. Keep that in mind when I tell you what the president wrote just moments ago. Let me read you from his Twitter account. "Many good conversations with North Korea. It is going well. In the meantime, no rocket launches or nuclear testing in eight months. All of Asia is thrilled. Only the opposition party, which include the fake news, is complaining. If not for me, we would now be at war with North Korea." Joining us now to discuss, CNN political commentator Ana Navarro and CNN legal and political commentator Ken Cuccinelli. Guys, this is breaking news. Sorry to spring this on you, Ana but the president's claim that not for me, we would now be at war with North Korea it's interesting in light of all this intelligence that's come forward in the last few days where after the president met with Kim Jong Un, saying that North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat, it turns out that threat is still very much real, Ana.
[Ana Navarro, Cnn Political Commentator:] And I you know, I think is just more confirmation of what we have read and heard in the last few days where they have a third nuclear site. Whether we would be at war or not, we don't know. I would like to think that the threshold for going into war would be greater. What is obvious though is that Donald Trump wants a win and if that means not paying attention to the intelligence information, if that means pretending that Kim is denuclearizing, that is what he's going to do. He cares about his image, he cares about his brand. He cares about scoring a win more than he cares about anything else involving national security of any other topic. We've seen that on the Russia front many times. So I think it is par for the course when it comes to Donald Trump. It reminds me of Ronald Reagan, right? Trust and verify. This guy is completely the opposite.
[Berman:] You know, Ken, again, the news we've seen in the last few days
[Ken Cuccinelli, Cnn Legal And Political Commentator, Former Attorney General, Virginia:] Yes.
[Berman:] the Defense Intelligence Agency says Kim does not have plans to fully denuclearize. We see pictures by independent groups these pictures which show that missile production has not ramped down. In some cases, it's ramped up. Yes, the president met with Kim. Yes, we are not at war with North Korea right now. But, nor are there signs that
[Cuccinelli:] Yes.
[Berman:] North Korea is doing the things the president said they would do.
[Cuccinelli:] Well, certainly, this is kind of classic Trump hyperbole. But at the same time, there are also other signs where they're taking apart one facility. The DIA's information goes in a different director. But it's only been three weeks and one of the things that was problematic leading up to the meeting between the president and North Korea was the fact that denuclearization is an extremely slow process. It isn't like you pull a plug somewhere. And the challenge with North Korea has been first, getting over the initial hump and I would say they have done that but then, it's them staying on the same path. America's been willing to stay on the same path; North Korea hasn't. It's going to take a long time before we really know if they're willing to engage constructively here. Obviously, the president is happy with how it's gone so far and that's fine and he deserves credit for that. But at the same time, we have a long way to go for this to really come to fruition in a way that's going to matter to the world in the long run.
[Berman:] You speak the truth. Denuclearization is not easy. There is a long way to go which is why when the president says
[Cuccinelli:] There is.
[Berman:] last week or the other week there is no more nuclear threat in North Korea, that is a lie. That is something that is not true and that is, in a way, misrepresenting this entire complicated process that the U.S. government is now in the middle of right now. So I just wanted to take note of where the president is on that.
[Cuccinelli:] Well, if I could comment on that.
[Berman:] OK.
[Cuccinelli:] I think that that hyperbole, I think, is explainable. I think calling that a lie is really overdoing it. I think that the nuclear threat that he's referring to there is simply Kim being poised to shoot. And there were signs that they that hair-trigger position was
[Berman:] I you know, Ken, I got you.
[Cuccinelli:] in place earlier in the year.
[Berman:] I'm just basing I'm just basing this on what we're hearing from Mike Pompeo and from the intelligence agencies, the Defense Department, and others who say
[Cuccinelli:] Sure.
[Berman:] that North Korea has not changed its posture in terms of enriching uranium, in terms of missile capacity, in terms of missile production. I do want to get you guys on a different subject which is Scott Pruitt, Ana, and as I've been saying, the magical suit of armor that he wears to avoid all scandal. If we have the full screen I just want to put up this is just today. There are three stories new stories just today. "The Washington Post" says "Pruitt aides reveal new details of Pruitt's spending and management at EPA." "The New York Times" says former EPA aide Scott Pruitt it says an aide asked Pruitt to help for help on finding work for his wife. That's in addition to the Chick-fil-A story from before. And then, CNN has a remarkable story that Pruitt really had his calendar scrubbed to remove records of controversial meetings that he had. Ana, how much longer can this go on?
[Navarro:] Until Donald Trump decides that it can't go on. Until Donald Trump says enough is enough with this guy. It's really kind of amazing. I mean, he's got 14 ongoing investigations right now. We are talking the House Oversight Committee which is led by Republicans. And with Scott Pruitt, the department has become the "explain Pruitt's actions department." That's what the EPA is right now. And you have such a menu of things to pick from, right? From the downright
[Berman:] Yes.
[Navarro:] ridiculous, like sending staff to go look for lotion that he likes the smell of at the Ritz Carlton, to doing things that are troubling as trying to find his wife a six-figure job in Washington. So, you know, it's petty, it's embarrassing. It's certainly not statesmanlike. Now the thing is, Scott Pruitt is doing things at the EPA which many conservatives like which Trump likes because he is you know, there's nothing Trump likes more than undoing something Obama did. So basically, as long as he continues doing that he keeps buying himself time. But this is
[Berman:] Yes.
[Navarro:] For Democrats, this is like the gift that keeps on giving and forget drain the swamp. They are able to look the Trump administration in the eye
[Berman:] Yes.
[Navarro:] and just talk about the hypocrisy and the corruption of the
[Berman:] Maybe there's a soft skin maybe they have a soft skin exception to draining the swamp. Ken, I want
[Cuccinelli:] Yes.
[Berman:] I want to let me ask you because you say
[Cuccinelli:] Yes.
[Berman:] In November, you said God forbid we have an administrator of the EPA who thinks it's important to obey the law and Scott does. That was back in 2017. And again, just to this new story from CNN this morning alone that
[Cuccinelli:] Yes.
[Berman:] there were EPA officials changing the calendar to remove controversial meetings, do you still think that Scott Pruitt is walking the straight and narrow path here?
[Cuccinelli:] Certainly, when you see things like that and I note in the CNN stories they're talking about the difference between public calendars and not public calendars because it isn't like these e-mails didn't exist and everything else. So I think that Scott is drawing a lot of fire because he's over the target. And, Ana gave you her EPA acronym; I'll give you mine. Under the Obama administration, it was the "Employment Prevention Agency." And the fact of the matter is Scott is relentlessly
[Berman:] Hey, but Ken but Ken, you know the deputy there. The policy
[Cuccinelli:] pursuing this agenda.
[Berman:] I imagine the policy would be same at this point no matter who filled that role. The policy the policy could be the same with someone
[Cuccinelli:] No, no, no, no. Look at
[Berman:] Well
[Cuccinelli:] Compare it to another agency.
[Berman:] But,
[I -- Cuccinelli:] Like, Ben Carson is at HUD. Very little's happening at HUD. Acosta at Labor. Very little's happening at Labor.
[Berman:] But is it worth it is it worth it
[Cuccinelli:] It is not true that someone else wouldn't be this aggressive.
[Berman:] Look, appoint Ken, why didn't they appoint you? I'm sure you would do the same thing without 14 investigations into your ethical issues right now.
[Cuccinelli:] [Laughing].
[Navarro:] Go ahead, Ken, do it. Listen, I've got a I've got a drawer full of those lotions from the Ritz Carlton so go ahead and do it. I've got you covered.
[Cuccinelli:] Yes, I'm not a I'm not a big lotion guy. I'm not a big lotion guy. But look, I'm not I'm not going to say that there aren't mistakes there.
[Navarro:] You should try it. You know, moisturizing is very underestimated.
[Berman:] I'll give you the last word, Ken.
[Cuccinelli:] But yes, look, Scott has made some mistakes. I do think this one is another example of seizing how they operate. And could it could it be better? Yes. Could it be worse? It was. He doesn't have the server in his bathroom, he doesn't have a separate e-mail like the previous EPA administrator
[Berman:] But the e-mail I do think
[Cuccinelli:] and the media didn't care about that.
[Berman:] But it is it isn't about the e-mails.
[Cuccinelli:] He is relentlessly reducing regulations
[Berman:] Yes.
[Cuccinelli:] and that is why he's taking all this fire.
[Berman:] Yes, he's changing his calendar and he's trying to get his wife multiple jobs with government employees at the same time. I think you can do what you want with the environment without the ethical issues as well. Ken Cuccinelli, great to have you with us. Ana Navarro
[Cuccinelli:] That would be ideal.
[Berman:] thank you very much. Nivea online, too, for you, Ana, as we speak.
[Navarro:] Moisturize.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, lotion
[Berman:] All right, Alisyn
[Camerota:] not overrated.
[Cuccinelli:] Ana, not me.
[Camerota:] Maybe he could use a salt scrub to clean his calendar.
[Berman:] Exfoliating
[Camerota:] Exfoliating his calendar.
[Berman:] Exfoliating
[Camerota:] Maybe he's exfoliating his calendar.
[Berman:] That's investigation number 15 on Scott Pruitt.
[John Avlon, Cnn Anchor:] Put the lotion in the basket.
[Camerota:] There you go. All right. Meanwhile, switching gears, the clock is still ticking this morning on the effort to rescue these 12 boys who are trapped in a Thailand cave. We will give you an update on what can happen next.

[Blitzer:] We're standing by for a truly historic move by the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-un. A little over an hour from now, he'll walk through the demilitarized zone dividing the Koreas, crossing to the South for talks with South Korea's president. The outcome will set the stage for a very high-stakes summit that's now in the works between Kim Jong-un and President Trump. CNN's Will Ripley is on the scene for us. He's right near the DMZ. Will, tell us what we can expect in the coming hours.
[Will Ripley, Cnn International Correspondent:] Well, just a few minutes from now, South Korea's President Moon is expected to leave the Blue House and begin the drive here to the demilitarized zone where he will cross the Unification Bridge just behind me and head to Panmunjom where we are expecting some truly extraordinary images. Kim Jong-un and President Moon, shaking hands, meeting face-to-face for the first time. Kim Jong-un crossing the military demarcation line, the first time a North Korean leader has set foot on the south side of the DMZ. He'll walk to the Peace House and they'll begin those negotiations. And while there will be a lot of photo-ops, the big question is whether the discussions will lead to the kind of change that needs to happen for the United States to be willing to engage further with North Korea. They're going to talk about the definition of denuclearization. What does denuclearization mean to North Korea? What does it mean to South Korea and the U.S.? We know that there are two very different views. North Korea doesn't want to give up their nuclear weapons. They haven't said yet that they're willing to do so, even though they have said they will freeze nuclear testing for the time being and also scale back their missile program. They're also going to be talking about potentially a peace treaty, bringing about a formal end to the Korean War, replacing that armistice deal that's been in place since 1953. But we know from past negotiations with the North Koreans, including the agreed framework back in 1994 where North Korea agreed to give up their nuclear weapons, but it turned out they were secretly enriching uranium, these things can certainly fall apart. There's a big lack of trust going into all of this. President Moon will then be getting on the phone almost immediately after his summit. He'll brief President Trump about what he learned from Kim Jong-un. And then from that, President Trump will make the decision if he wants to move forward with a summit meeting with Kim Jong-un, the first time that an American president would sit down with a North Korean leader. If it happens, we expect it could happen in late May, or early June, the location still yet to be determined Wolf.
[Blitzer:] The president said this morning there were five possible locations. We'll see if anything emerges from that. Will Ripley, thanks very much. We'll stay in close touch with you. And now, we want to tell you what's coming up on CNN this weekend. W. Kamau Bell is returning, good news, with an all-new season of the original series "UNITED SHADES OF AMERICA". In the premiere episode, the U.S.Mexican border to see what life is really like on both sides. Here's a quick preview.
[W. Kamau Bell, United Shades Of America:] Back in Nogales, Mexico, to check out a place that sees the human cost of America's immigration policy, Latino border initiative, and our meeting with one of its leaders, Father Sean Harris. Tell me where I'm at right now.
[Unidentified Male:] So this is a place where we provide two meals a day, mostly to deportees.
[Bell:] This is their first welcome back to Mexico?
[Unidentiifed Male:] It really is, essentially. We provide food, clothing, support. This is a critical work on the border.
[Bell:] Are there people who are coming here who have like been in the States for years?
[Unidentifeid Male:] Yes. We're seeing an increasing number of people who have been living in the United States for a long time, who are being deported, in comparison to last year.
[Bell:] Father, for some people, they thought their life was set up there. Then suddenly, they're deported and they find themselves in this room.
[Unidentified Male:] Sometimes almost overnight.
[Blitzer:] W. Kamau Bell is joining us right now. Kamau, you spoke to people on both sides of the southern border. What did they tell you about what life is like there right now?
[Bell:] The main thing I think I got from this is that people on all sides of the border and all sides of the issue don't believe that a wall is going to help things down there. That was the thing I was most interested to learn. We talked to border patrol agents who are like, we don't think a 30-foot wall is going to solve every problem. And we talked to white people who are like, we think there's too much security already. And then we talked to people in Mexico who say, the more security you put on the border, the more you hurt both sides of the border. We were again, we were in Nogales, Arizona.
[Blitzer:] I know you also toured parts of the wall that already exist. There are some areas that do have a wall. You went on a ride-along with members of the border patrol. What's the most important thing people don't understand right now about border security and how it actually works?
[Bell:] I think the thing that surprised me is that it is super easy to walk into Mexico from the U.S. side. There is no line. There's no anything. Coming into the United States from the Mexico side, even if you are coming with your documents and your papers, it takes a long time, because we've created a military feel down there. And what it does it slows down commerce. So, it's strange to say this, but the American side of the border in Nogales, Arizona, is having a rough go of the economy because they can't get people from Mexico to come over and spend money in America. So, we're actually hurting ourselves by putting all that security down there.
[Blitzer:] You also got enough close look at what happens when migrants try to cross the border, they either get sent back or they don't make it across in the first place. Tell us about that.
[Bell:] Yes, we actually you saw the clip, we went to the Latino border initiative, that's for people who are getting deported. But we also went to the Pima County morgue where we got to see what happens when people don't make it across the border, and don't get picked up by border patrol, end up dying in the desert. And, you know, so it's like these are real there's a real cost of life being paid down there.
[Blitzer:] What surprised you most about your visit to the border?
[Bell:] You know, the thing that surprised me most is the Mexico side of the border was way more fun and lively than the American side of the border. There's a lot of people in this country, some of them live in the White House, who act like the Mexico side is full of crime and pain and people are dying to get over here. But really, the U.S. side was really depressing and the Mexican side was a lot more fun and lively.
[Blitzer:] We're looking forward to the new season, Kamau. Thanks so much for joining us. Thanks so much for doing what you're doing. Season 3 of "UNITED SHADES OF AMERICA" premieres Sunday after "ANTHONY BOURDAIN", only here on CNN. That's it for me. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM. "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.

[Tapper:] All right. Amanda and Kirsten, thank you so much. Appreciate your being here today. That's it for "THE LEAD." I'm Jake Tapper, turning you over to Wolf Blitzer in
[The Situation Room. Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Happening now, breaking news. No knowledge. The former chairs of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee have told investigators they had no knowledge of a deal to pay for opposition research on Donald Trump. But a law firm says it hired a research firm on behalf of the Democrats. Is everyone telling the truth? Addiction emergency. With tens of thousands of Americans dying every year, President Trump declares the opioid epidemic a national public health emergency. But is he shortchanging the nation on the resources necessary to fight the addiction plague? Declassified. More than half a century after President Kennedy's assassination led to endless conspiracy theories, President Trump allows the release of thousands of secret government documents. Will they shed new light on what happened on that dark day in Dallas? And hating America, a CNN exclusive. We'll take you inside North Korea's capitol, where burning hatred of America is the theme of propaganda plastered everywhere by the regime of Kim Jong-un. Are North Koreans being prepared for war? I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in
[The Situation Room. Announcer:] This is CNN breaking news.
[Blitzer:] Breaking news. Top Democrats have denied knowing anything about payments for research that led to the dossier on Donald Trump. Multiple sources say former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and former Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz both told congressional investigators they had no knowledge about a deal to pay for opposition research, but this week a law firm which represented the Democrats said it hired the researchers. One source says the revelation may lead investigators to dig deeper into that Trump dossier. Also breaking, President Trump has just declared America's opioid epidemic a national public health emergency, saying it's time to liberate our communities from the scourge of drug addiction. Tens of thousands of Americans are dying from opioids every year, but the new declaration does not automatically open the flood gates for emergency funding, and there are still concerns about whether the president and the Congress will follow through. And more than 50 years after President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, the government is now releasing thousands of secret documents which may clear up some of the persistent questions expressed by official investigators and two generations of conspiracy theorists. A CNN exclusive. We'll go inside North Korea's capital, where Kim Jong-un's regime has launched the shocking propaganda campaign in which daily life revolves around hatred of America. I'll speak with former defense secretary and former CIA director Leon Panetta. And our correspondents, analysts and specialists, they will have full coverage of the day's top stories. Let's begin with President Trump's emergency declaration on the nation's opioid crisis. Our senior White House correspondent, Jeff Zeleny, is joining us. Jeff, there was a lot of passion in the announcement today. But will there be concrete steps to attack this truly terrible problem?
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Wolf, that is the open question then evening. The president, of course, delivering or at least speak to a long-promised campaign pledge to address this drug epidemic that is ravaging many parts of the country. But left unanswered as he signed that the memorandum today, will there be any more money to go with it? That's something Congress will have to decide.
[Donald Trump , President Of The United States:] As Americans, we cannot allow this to continue.
[Zeleny:] President Trump declaring America's opioid crisis a public health emergency.
[Trump:] It is time to liberate our communities from the scourge of drug addiction. Never been this way. We can be the generation that ends the opioid epidemic. We can do it.
[Zeleny:] In the East Room of the White House today, the president and first lady Melania Trump joining together to address a drug epidemic ravaging the country.
[Melania Trump, First Lady Of The United States:] We are here today because of your courage. The opioid epidemic has affected more than two million Americans nationwide, and sadly, the number continues to rise.
[Zeleny:] The president's speech was a long-promised effort to deliver on a campaign pledge, but the memorandum he signed today does not call for new money to combat the opioid fight.
[D. Trump:] Effective today, my administration is officially declaring the opioid crisis a national public health emergency under federal law.
[Zeleny:] By calling the crisis a public health emergency rather than a national disaster, relief funds won't immediately be directed to the epidemic, as he suggested during these remarks in August.
[Trump:] It's a national emergency. We're going to spend a lot of time, a lot of effort, and a lot of money on the opioid crisis.
[Zeleny:] The White House called it a distinction without a difference. And the president said he was committed to reigning in the abuse of painkillers and heroin. He said the government would work toward finding a nonaddictive pain killer to replace opioids and launch an advertising campaign to warn children to stay off drugs.
[Trump:] If we can teach young people and people generally, not to start, it's really, really easy not to take them.
[Zeleny:] Craig Moss, who lost his son to a heroin overdose, supported Trump's bid for the presidency on his promises to crack down on the epidemic. Today, he said the president's pledge fell short.
[Craig Moss, Lost Son To Heroin Overdose:] I commend the president and the first lady for reaching out and addressing this issue and letting the struggling addicts of this country know that that there's something's going to be happening, but I certainly wish that he had spoken more about what he how he plans to attack the epidemic by not providing additional funding.
[Zeleny:] The president also renewed his call to build a wall on the border with Mexico to help block drugs from coming into the
[U.s. Trump:] An astonishing 90 percent of the heroin in America comes from south of the border where we will be building a wall which will greatly help in this problem.
[Zeleny:] Meanwhile today, the White House is looking ahead to try to deliver on another campaign promise, cutting taxes. "Big news. Budget just passed," the president hailed on Twitter. The House passed a new budget today, following the Senate last week, now paving the way for a full debate on tax reform. And Wolf, that full debate is going to happen in the coming weeks. We are going to see the first bill exactly the specifics of this tax reform pledge released next week by the House. The president, I'm told, is going to become more involved in this to try and sell this plan. Wolf, this is the biggest priority on the president's plate here. The biggest test for what he calls a unified Republican Party. We'll see if they are unified and if they can get this tax agenda moving forward.
[Blitzer:] Good news for the president and the Republicans. Since the House passed the same budget as the Senate, they will only need 50 votes in the Senate to pass tax cuts, pass tax reform. They won't need 60. That's a major development today. All right. Jeff Zeleny over at the White House, thanks very much. There's more breaking news right now as top Democrats have denied knowing anything about those payments to affirm behind the opposition research dossier on Donald Trump. Let's go to our senior congressional correspondent, Manu Raju, who's joining us from Capitol Hill. Manu, what do we know about what the chairman of the Clinton campaign, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, told the Senate Intelligence Committee?
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Correspondent:] Yes, Wolf, for the first time we are learning that John Podesta, the former campaign chairman of Hillary Clinton's campaign, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was the chairwoman in the Democratic National Committee, both met privately with the Senate Intelligence Committee behind closed doors. And they were asked directly about Fusion GPS and whether or not they knew of any Clinton campaign or DNC ties to that firm that produced that opposition research about the Trump dossier allegations of coordination and other issues with President Trump, his associates and Russians. And they said they had no knowledge of any ties between the Trump campaign between the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Russia. And of course, what was now come to light, that the Clinton campaign and the DNC did effectively pay Fusion GPS, that firm, in advance of that dossier being published. But those two individuals, senior officials said they absolutely had no knowledge about this going forward. And they said they spoke truthfully about that; they really had no knowledge. But Wolf, this really raises the stakes considerably. They have been saying this publicly they had no knowledge. But for the first time we know they said this to Congress and, of course, you can't mislead or lie to Congress in any way. You have to tell the truth. So a significant development there, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Yes. Even if you're not under direct oath, you still have to tell the truth. Otherwise, that could be perjury. Manu, CNN has reported that the law firm of Marc Elias, a Democratic attorney, retained Fusion GPS as a client as part of its representation of both the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Has he been interviewed, as well?
[Raju:] Well, Wolf, he hasn't actually been interviewed as a witness, but what was interesting about this issue is that we have learned that Marc Elias actually was representing John Podesta at the time of his Senate Intelligence Committee interview. So he was sitting next to John Podesta when Podesta was asked directly whether or not the Clinton campaign had ties and a contractual relationship with Fusion GPS. And Podesta said he didn't. Elias was not being interviewed, because he was the attorney. Now Elias may eventually have to come back and be interviewed as a witness. We'll have to see. That remains a possibility. Now since then, Wolf, in the last couple of days, Elias's firm has put on a statement saying that it just only recently informed its clients, the DNC and the Clinton campaign, that it had retained Fusion GPS as its own client to investigate, to pay for this research, and that the clients, the DNC and the Clinton campaign, didn't know anything about it. But Marc Elias was in that room while John Podesta was asked a key question, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] It's very, very awkward indeed. I know you're working on other new developments. Stand by, Manu. We're going to get back to you very soon. Manu Raju reporting from Capitol Hill. And joining us now, someone who wore a lot of hats here in Washington. Leon Panetta is a former defense secretary, former CIA director. He was also the White House chief of staff for Bill Clinton. Mr. Secretary, thanks for joining us.
[Leon Panetta, Former U.s. Defense Secretary:] Nice to be with you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right. So it's very awkward. How can both the chair of the DNC and the Clinton campaign not know about these payments?
[Panetta:] Well, it's obviously something that the Intelligence Committee is going to have to have to look at. You know, knowing presidential campaigns, they're big operations, and somehow the left hand may not know what the right hand is doing. And that could be the case here, but I really do think that the committee is going to have to get into this, determine just exactly what happened, who knew what and when.
[Blitzer:] But if the lawyer who was representing the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, Marc Elias, is sitting next to John Podesta, he was asked, "Do you know about the funding?" He says no. Wouldn't it be his responsibility to at least whisper in his ear, "Yes, yes, you" and tell him what was going on so if he wasn't lying, John Podesta, he would be able to clarify all of that before before the committee in a sensitive issue like this?
[Panetta:] Well, it certainly makes the situation very awkward. If you're testifying and saying you have no knowledge, and the attorney sitting next to you is one of those that knew what what was involved here, I think it does raise an issue that the committee is going to have to look at and determine just exactly what knew what. But I'm going to I'm going to allow the committee to do that kind of investigation. I suspect that Bob Mueller is also looking at this issue in terms of the dossier and those connected to it.
[Blitzer:] Yes, I'm sure he is. The intelligence community, as you know, has confirmed many of the details of that very controversial dossier. By no means all of them, certainly not the salacious parts of that dossier. But it's generally, according to a lot of officials, a lot of it is pretty reliable. Does it even matter, when all is said and done, who funded this research?
[Panetta:] Well, I think it is important at least to know, you know, who was pulling the strings here in terms of the research. Whether it's on the Trump side of the campaign, and the connections with the Russians, or whether it's on the Clinton side of the campaign, you want to know who was making decisions that involved dealing with possible foreign individuals in terms of trying to determine negative research on the opposing candidate. But, in the end, the most important thing is to look at what the dossier says, and whether it's in any way verified. And also, to look at, obviously, the connections with the Russians and what they did. What we can't do here is lose sight of the fundamental objective of this investigation, which is to look at what the Russians did, how did they get about it? And what can we do to prevent it from happening again?
[Blitzer:] Yes, that's certainly the thrust of this investigation up on Capitol Hill, as well as the special counsel, Robert Mueller. I want your reaction to the latest revelations, Mr. Secretary, regarding Cambridge Analytica. That's the data firm working for the Trump campaign, which reached out to WikiLeaks about obtaining e-mails from Hillary Clinton's personal e-mail server. What red flags does that raise?
[Panetta:] Well, again, it's one of those issues where, if somebody from the campaign was in touch with WikiLeaks, and WikiLeaks was involved with the Russians in terms of determining just exactly what would or would not be revealed in terms of what they possess, again, it raises the connection issue as to just exactly how much was involved because between the Trump campaign and Russians in the form of WikiLeaks. So, it's another issue that obviously has to be looked at as part of this whole investigation into what what was the connection here between the Trump campaign and the Russians?
[Blitzer:] Mr. Secretary, we've got to take a break, but we're getting some new information on that deadly ambush in Niger that killed four American soldiers. Stand by. We'll continue our special coverage right after this.

[Nima Elbagir, Cnn:] Tonight, the violence in Myanmar that's had critics against its once face de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi. I'll hear from a man who knows her well, biographer Peter Popham. Plus, former British foreign secretary David Miliband. Also ahead, former CIA director Michael Hayden on the top security concern facing the United States and the world. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the program. I'm Nima Elbagir in for Christiane Amanpour. Nobel Prize Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi cancelled her planned appearance before the United Nation's General Assembly next week as the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar continues to spiral out of control. A government statement claims Suu Kyi the de factor leader of Myanmar is cancelling because of the possibility of further terrorist attacks in Rakhine state, where in the face of a brutal response by the military, hundreds perhaps even thousands are dead. Almost 400,000 Rohingya including more than a thousand unaccompanied children fled to Bangladesh and hundreds of homes are burned to the ground. The United Nation Security Council meets today to discuss the on going crisis. Here Secretary General Antonio Guterres.
[Antonio Guterres, United Nation's Secretary General:] The current situation is catastrophic. When we met last week, there was 125,000 Rohingya refugees who had fled into Bangladesh. That number has now tripled to nearly 380,000.
[Elbagir:] Suu Kyi, of course, has no constitutional control over the nation's military even so human rights activist find her silence baffling. Just today, a spokesman announced she will at last address the nation on the crisis early next week. David Miliband is a former British foreign secretary and now president of the International Rescue Committee. I asked him what his organization is dealing with on the ground and whether aide is reaching those who need it most.
[David Miliband, President, International Rescue Committee:] We've been the largest healthcare provider in the Rakhine state in Myanmar for a good few years now. I saw many of these services that we provide, both for Muslim and non-Muslim populations when I went there last year. Obviously, the biggest issue is that we can't get to those populations who are most in need at the moment, but all of the stories that we are hearing are of desperate fear, desperate threat to life and to livelihood, and complete bemusement that there is no proper humanitarian relief being provided because neither we nor other NGOs, nor U.N. agencies are being allowed into the north of the state.
[Elbagir:] There has, of course, been a lot of criticisms, but I think the question now is what is that criticism achieving? What do you tangibly need that pressure to be directed at.
[Miliband:] There is one big issue that is facing the populations in Rakhine estate now, and that is humanitarian access. That means we have people, medical supplies, doctors, nurses, staff ready to go into the north of the country but they are not being allowed in. And so the central demand is not a criticism, it's a demand at the moment that the government facilitates the exit access of humanitarian bona fide, humanitarian agencies both NGOs and UN agencies to allow them to do the immediate lifesaving relief work. There's obviously a very complex situation that needs to be addressed over the more medium term, but that will be 10 times harder. The greater the bloodshed, the greater the suffering over the next few days and weeks.
[Elbagir:] The government's line is that this is an extremist insurgency and it's responding to that. They say that they are cooperating. Are you optimistic that you will get the access that you need?
[Miliband:] I can't be optimistic when I have dedicated humanitarian workers desperate to go and make a difference, and then meeting a resolute wall of silence or resolute wall of nay-saying. It's vital that people understand that the humanitarian situation in Myanmar contributes to political instability is not just the Civil War set of Civil Wars that have contributed to humanitarian problem. Everyone should be unifying their call, which is for access to the besiege populations and immediate relief for the suffering of their undergoing.
[Elbagir:] Some of the recent statements from Aung Sang Suu Kyi's office have really concerned much of the humanitarian community. It has been felt that some of those sentiments about the need to investigate, where the U.N. aid workers were collaborating and working alongside extremist, that really has people worried. Are you concern for the safety of those that are waiting to go in?
[Miliband:] Well, obviously, the most important thing for any humanitarian agencies to preserve its commitment to independent help for anyone in need, I think the suggestion that U.N. workers or NGO workers are somehow colluding in some kind of insurgency doesn't match any of the experience that I have, all that we have of the work that we do. And I think that this is a moment for unified defense of the principles of humanitarian access, of humanitarian aid and is obviously tragic that this becomes focused on the person of Aung San Suu Kyi who was so much a beacon of light and hope for so many people. She is facing extremely complicated internal political situation, obviously.
[Elbagir:] You, yourself, said back in 2007 that you thought that Myanmar would be 100 times better when Aung San Suu Kyi took her place as rightful leader of a free and democratic Burma. Looking back at that statement now, how do you feel about that? How do you feel about the person who you are making those comments on?
[Miliband:] That was in a time when oppressed minorities minorities oppressed by the military, where marching cost the British Embassy in Rangoon and cheering and calling on the British government to continue his stand for opening up in Burma for democratic elections and for the release of political prisoners. It's not just about individual person, but she would be, Aung San Suu Kyi did and does represents the hopes of many Myanmar citizens of all stripes, and I think it's very important that we continue to hold on to the right standards that I think we will depend on.
[Elbagir:] Do you think she can ever kind of forge through the will of the generals to come out to the other side of this.
[Miliband:] I think that one has to have faith not just in one individual, but in the people of Myanmar. These are people who want to lead free lives. They want to lead lives that are unable to get on with their own business. There is deep and historic internal tensions within the country, and the violence that is meted out against different minorities is obviously horrific. The important thing for those of us who are outside is in addition to the obvious humility in the face of a complicated situation is to stand firm by some principles that have proved their worth over the years. Those principles include the respect for all individual rights. Those principles include the need for alleged for that to be legitimate and credible institutions of political power sharing. And they also include the responsibilities of the regional states.
[Elbagir:] And, of course, whether or not those principles continued to be embodied in the past and of Aung San Suu Kyi. Mr. Miliband, thank you so much for joining us.
[Miliband:] Thanks very much for your time.
[Elbagir:] Myanmar's de factor leader and long-time democratic icon Aung San Suu Kyi has defended her government's response to the Rohingya's crisis. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said its security forces have been instructed to avoid the harming of innocent civilians. Well, joining me now in the studio is Aung San Suu Kyi's two-time biographer Peter Popham, who wrote "The Lady and the Peacock" and "The Lady and the Generals." And who is now calling for her resignation. But before we start I want to read the following passage from Aung San Suu Kyi's famous 2012 noble lecture. "Wherever suffering is ignored, there will be the seeds of conflict. For suffering degrades and embitters and enrages". Mr. Popham, looking back on those words now, how does that feel to hear that?
[Peter Popham, Aung San Suu Kyi's Biographer:] Well, it once reminded of what an incredibly eloquent gift she had and presumably still have. I mean, she was rightfully awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. She showed incredible courage over a long period of time. And the fact that the world is so unhappy with her now just shows to me that she has got herself politically into an impossible situation where the reasons that I am sure she would explain in private, but which are mysterious to the rest of us. She cannot say what is blindingly obvious to the rest of the world.
[Elbagir:] Is it prejudice on her part, or do you believe it's political expedience.
[Popham:] I'm sure that a lot of people at this point assume that she must like many of her Buddhist compatriots have a sort of paranoid suspicion about Islam in general and about Muslims on the Bangladesh border in particular. I don't think that's true of her. She has said practically she said nothing on the record that I have seen that suggests she has prejudiced against Muslims. She has always insisted that this is a problem with two sides, the Buddhist side and the Muslim side, which is true. So I don't think that's the answer and if it was the answer, I don't think she would have taken the step of appointing Kofi Annan, a diplomat of huge stature internationally to head the inquiry commission to propose solutions for the Rakhine crisis. So I think the idea that she has actually swallowed the prejudices of many of her compatriots is reading it wrong.
[Elbagir:] But in a way, isn't that kind of worst. I mean, the reality is that the Buddhist Nationalist vote is a key one. And we understand from those within the diplomatic community, who was speaking there at the time, pre-election, that she felt that that was one of the reasons she couldn't speak out. But then she won by a landslide and yet she is still not speaking out.
[Popham:] Well, I mean, in my opinion, at some point after her release from house arrest in 2010, she underwent a terrible loss of nerve. In the old days, back in '88, '89, she was able to stand up against the the violence within the Democratic campaign and tell it to stop. This must be a non-violent campaign. In 2011, 2012, right after 2015's election, she could have stood up and said no. We are one nation. We must have citizenship for everybody who has been here for a decent length of time. These prejudices belonging in the rubbish bin of history. And the fact that she didn't find herself able to say that is tragic. And I think it's why her position is now untenable and why I called for her to quit.
[Elbagir:] I mean, your words the beauty of your words, describing her life and her work definitely contributed to the mythology that surrounds her. Do you think that we saw the world saw a beautiful woman having this beautiful start and espousing these beautiful positions and we projected perhaps too much onto her?
[Popham:] I think there's a lot of that. I was doing my best not to contribute to the myth may.
[Elbagir:] It wasn't a question.
[Popham:] There have been a lot of people because she is so sparklingly beautiful. People have led to the conclusion she must therefore be good. Both of these books I have been trying to dig deeper and to see what makes it tick, and in "The Lady and the General's," the more recent book, I have actually explain that since 2011, she has basically walked into a trap, persuaded into it, unfortunately, by the Obama administration, desperate for a good news from going.
[Elbagir:] To win.
[Popham:] And therefore win. Foreign policy win, which they got. And perhaps also by the desire to fulfill her destiny and become the head of the country and somehow she has let the courage or she's lost the courage to spell out the simple rights and wrongs to her people.
[Elbagir:] Very quickly I could talk to you all day, but unfortunately our time is limited. What do you think at heart most affect her? Is it power?
[Popham:] It's complicated. I think they the quote that you read out and it certainly motivates. She's never been corrupt him. I think fulfilling her sense of family destiny. Doing what her following on her father's footsteps. He was, of course, the founding father of independent Myanmar. I think that's been very important. And possibly that has clouded her mind to the fact that if she is not actually being effective in power, then the power itself is, it's not worth it.
[Elbagir:] So is there any chance she will stand out?
[Popham:] I think it's unlikely. I mean, she is addressing her country next week. If she were to say I've made a terrible mistake, I'm pulling out, I would be enormously surprised. But I unless she can pull some extraordinary rabbit out of the hat, I can't see what else she can do.
[Elbagir:] Peter, fascinating insights. Thank you so much for joining us. When we come back, a look ahead as world leaders prepare for the U.N. General Assembly, I asked the former head of the CIA and the NSA. What will they make of President Trump and what does it mean for global security. That's next.

[Cuomo:] All right, we're going to be talking about the California wildfires, and how could there be anything good in that? Fair criticism. But listen to this story. Jack Weaver's parents were forced to flee their home because the fires quickly surrounded their house. They had to get out in an instant, and that meant leaving their beloved Bernese mountain dog, Izzy. They couldn't find her. They didn't know where she was and they thought for sure that she didn't make it. Jack went to investigate the wreckage, filming the whole time. You have to see this.
[Jack Weaver:] Izzy? Here, pup! Izzy's here. Izzy! Izzy! Izzy, come here, baby!
[Unidentified Female:] She's alive. Oh, my God!
[Weaver:] Izzy!
[Unidentified Female:] Oh, my God!
[Weaver:] Hey, baby!
[Cuomo:] Can you imagine looking at that. And there's Jack Weaver, and there is Izzy. This I'll tell you what, boy, this really does just kind of pop up your spirit for the possible. How is the doggy doing? Tell us about that feeling of seeing that she was still there.
[Jack Weaver, Reunited With Dog After Fire:] It was extreme relief. She's doing great. Once we found her, we took her straight to a vet and had her completely checked out. And aside from being covered with soot and ash, she was in perfect health.
[Cuomo:] I mean, looking around, I know it just had to be so heartbreaking to see everything that was taken by this fire. How do you think she made it?
[Weaver:] You know, she's a miracle dog. She survived cancer twice. And we don't know where she went. The vet said perhaps her thick fur helped insulate her from the fire. There was an area that was relatively unburned. Just a very small one. Perhaps she went there. But we don't really know.
[Cuomo:] What did it mean to you folks for you to be able to bring back part of the family?
[Weaver:] It meant everything. My mom was completely devastated. And so was my dad. And my father had been injured escaping. And so everyone was feeling pretty low at that moment. And when we found her, it changed everyone's perspective. It meant everything.
[Cuomo:] Oh, man. What are you guys looking at in terms of coming back from this fire?
[Weaver:] It's going to be a long recovery. A long recovery for everyone, you know. The community has come together in an amazing way. It's been nice to see the good in people. People who lost everything helping others. It's going to be a long road. But seeing what I seeing people helping each other, I have no doubt we're going to we're going to be able to do it.
[Cuomo:] Now, we always say, when we see the worst of human of mother nature, we see the best of human nature. How is the dog? Is she any different after the experience? I know in reading about it, you said she was panting. She seemed a little stressed. But she was fine. You said you got her checked out. But how about her disposition? Is she a little bit more tied to you guys?
[Weaver:] You know, she for the first couple days, she went everywhere we went, and obviously we weren't looking to be anywhere but with her. But we've always called her nana, just like a in the movie "Peter Pan," because she loves kids. So she's been with our kids and just back to her old happy self. And it's been really wonderful.
[Cuomo:] Well, we know it's early out there. Thank you for getting up. Thank you for lifting our spirits with this story. And that is a beautiful doggie. I'm glad that she's there by your side.

[Harlow:] Welcome back. This morning we are learning more about the lives lost in the Texas church massacre. And we are hearing some firsthand accounts of what happened inside from a survivor.
[Berman:] Twenty-six people were killed spanning generations, sometimes generations in the same family, including children. CNN's Alison Kosik joins us live now with some of their stories. Alison.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Correspondent:] You know, it's just overwhelming the pain that these families are going through after learning that their loved ones were killed in this church. We learned about Richard and Theresa Rodriguez. They were married for 11 years. They were high school sweethearts. And they attended church every Sunday. Richard's daughter says she loved hanging with her dad. She had some great memories waking up on Saturday morning's and watching "Soul Train" and '80s movies with him. And now, in the wake of his death, she says her kids are having a really difficult time with this. They idolized him and looked forward to their visits with him. Listen to how she was this morning on "NEW DAY" with Alisyn Camerota.
[Regina Rodriguez, Daughter Of Victim Richard Rodriguez:] He he really looked up to my dad. And the memories that I have is, my dad was country, so my son will put on his country pants and his boots and he and I remember him going around asking me, where's my hat, mom? Where's my hat? And my dad loved wearing caps and he would always put his glasses sitting on top of his hat. And he would always be standing around the house with a hat, his glasses and his backpack and he was so excited and he was just waiting for my dad to pull up when he would come on the weekends.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor, "new Day":] I know that he liked to dress like his grandpa because he loved him so much and he was so excited to see him. And tell us about what your youngest you have a six-year-old. What has your six-year-old been saying about this?
[Rodriguez:] He just keeps on telling me he wants to go to grandpa's house. Can I call grandpa? And I just tell him where he's at now we can't call.
[Kosik:] It's just heartbreaking. We can all relate to that closeness within our own families and to lose somebody so suddenly like that. But I do have an incredible story of survival. Roseanne Solis told ABC News that she played dead to stay away from the gunman. She says she hid under a bench with a boy and a woman as she she heard the gunman just walk through indiscriminately shooting people, even people who were on the ground bleeding. But she knew to stay very quiet. And there were points in there where it got very quiet and she knew she couldn't make a move, she couldn't say anything. Here's some of what she said on "Good Morning America."
[Roseanne Solis:] I saw bodies with a lot of blood. That's all I saw, because I wasn't about to get out from where I was hiding.
[Unidentified Male:] Was anybody trying to get away? Was there anywhere to go?
[Solis:] No. There was nowhere to go.
[Kosik:] And she said that she was actually hit in the shoulder with one of the bullets and she said she didn't even feel the pain, that the pain came later. Of course, she feels very sorry for the people who lost their loved ones. And she doesn't know why she survived, but she's very thankful to be alive today.
[Berman:] A long road ahead for so many of the people down there.
[Kosik:] Absolutely.
[Harlow:] Thank you.
[Berman:] Alison, thanks so much.
[Kosik:] You got it.
[Harlow:] Right now the jury is deliberating in the corruption and bribery trial of Democratic Senator Bob Menendez. We have the latest from the courthouse, next.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] e-mails about an invitation to contact Russia through a, quote, "backdoor overture." Joining me now for more on this is CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz. So Shimon, what more can you tell us about these e- mails trying to set up this backdoor meeting, et cetera?
[Shimon Prokupecz, Cnn Crime And Justice Reporter:] Fred, so this all came to light a couple months ago, but really came back into the spotlight this week after the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Jared Kushner's lawyer requesting information on this e-mail. It's an e-mail that they already have in their possession and it's titled, we're told, "Russian backdoor overture and dinner invite." And just to explain what this email was about, it was a Russian bank official believed to be acting on behalf of the Russian government. Aleksander Torshin. He reached out to a member of a Christian organization, a man by the name of Rick Clay, there in the middle of your screen, saying that Torshin wanted to meet with then candidate Trump while Trump was in Kentucky in May of 2016. He asked also if Clay could perhaps set up a dinner, have Trump attend a dinner for military members. And also perhaps Clay could set all this up. He then, we're told, Clay, forwarded the e-mail to a Trump campaign official, Rick Dearborn. And it was also suggested, we're told in the e-mail from Clay to members of the Trump campaign that Torshin could set up a meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. That e-mail has kind of created some controversy. This entire e-mail chain was then forwarded to Jared Kushner who turned down the offer, ultimately wrote that we should pass on this. A lot of people come claiming to carry messages, few we are able to verify, and for now Kushner said I think we decline such meetings.
[Whitfield:] All right, Shimon Prokupecz, thank you so much. So let's talk more about these developments with my panel. Joining me right now CNN political analyst Nathan Gonzales, also with me Lynn Sweet, the Washington Bureau Chief for "The Chicago Sun-Times." Good to see you both. Lynn, you first. So how much trouble potentially is Jared Kushner in based on these developments?
[Lynn Sweet, Washington Bureau Chief, "chicago Sun-times":] I think the trouble remains to be seen because I think right now what the Senate is trying to do is show Abbe Lowell, Kushner's attorney who is a veteran of these Congressional investigations, and he has represented Democrats, too, who have been in trouble, is that they are going to find out things even if Kushner doesn't want to volunteer them. I think all this does at this stage is make him aware that he needs to be forthcoming because one way or the other this timeline and the story is going to come out. And maybe I think the place where the investigation right now is, that maybe Mr. Kushner, why don't you offer up information, tell the story, and fill in the blanks rather than make us go through all of this matching e-mails, which is what they do. That's how they find out these things. They have the ability to go everywhere, Fredricka.
[Whitfield:] And of course, Nathan, Kushner's defense by way of his attorney is, you know, you asked the questions, and we're going to answer them accordingly. And if it doesn't go any further, nor will their client, Kushner.
[Nathan Gonzales, Cnn Political Analyst:] I think this is significant because as the investigation goes along, it starts to get a little bit closer to the president himself. I think it's easier for the White House to dismiss Papadopoulos or Carter Page or these other names, but once you're talking about Donald Trump Jr. or Jared Kushner, and Jared Kushner is something who is currently advising the White House, the more he gets involved in this and does that impede what he's advising in his roles right now, then it starts to get a little more complicated I think for the administration.
[Whitfield:] And then, Lynn, also very close, Hope Hicks, the White House communications director. She's been with Trump even before he was a candidate. So that relationship may be filled with a lot of interesting information that Rob Mueller may want to know. Apparently Hicks is preparing to sit down with Mueller's team. What kind of information would they want out of her?
[Sweet:] What they want is that she has been the ubiquitous Hope Hicks, the White House communications director. Fredricka, she's been at everything. She should know almost everything, or be able to provide it, or, if you look at her e-mails or what she was clued in on, she is vital. And I'm not saying she did anything wrong. She's valuable just to tell the story.
[Whitfield:] An eyewitness.
[Sweet:] Yes.
[Whitfield:] The fly on the wall, so to speak.
[Sweet:] Absolutely. And she might not have known where things were leading to or she might not have known a backstory, but she is seen as so important because she was there.
[Whitfield:] And also, Nathan, Jeff Sessions, he's been scrutinized for how he has answered questions, how he hasn't. And it's a very serious matter, but he actually made light of it in a speech yesterday in Washington that was sponsored by the Federalist Society which is a group of conservatives and libertarians, a group of attorneys, and this is how he was kind of joking about the whole Russia thing in that forum. Listen.
[Jeff Sessions, U.s. Attorney General:] I just was thinking, I want to ask you, is Ambassador Kislyak in the room?
[Sessions:] Before I get started here. Any Russians? All right. Anybody been to Russia? Got a cousin in Russia?
[Whitfield:] All right, so Nathan, a lot of people in the room were laughing, but is this a laughing matter for Mueller and his team and even members of Congress who have not been able who have expressed being frustrated they don't get the right story or a consistent story out of Jeff Sessions?
[Gonzales:] The attorney general, his at the hearing earlier this week I thought it was remarkable where every Republican was asking about everything except for Russia, and the Democrats were bringing it back to Russia. And the attorney general, he commented about how it was so chaotic in the campaign and almost using that as an excuse for what he did and didn't remember.
[Whitfield:] Didn't recall.
[Gonzales:] But I think ultimately you're right, Fredricka, that the end result of this investigation will prove how much of a laughing matter this actually is and whether people have the same reaction to those jokes once people are either found to be guilty or not guilty. That will be the ultimate deciding factor.
[Whitfield:] And Lynn, I mean, he's the attorney general. You know, he's the top law enforcer, and he too is kind of making lite, poking fun at a very serious judicial process.
[Sweet:] In Washington there is a tradition when you go to some of these big dinners is using self-deprecating humor and taking a few jabs at yourself. Just think if somebody else had said that joke, it might have come off really bad or disturbing. So I think this actually humanized the attorney general and showed that a sense humor is never bad. And I think the joke was pretty good given the circumstances. If he wants to folk fun at himself for talking to Russians, I don't see any harm in this. I think everybody knows it's serious, so if he had a moment of levity at his own expense, you know, why not?
[Whitfield:] Sometimes people see a little charm in being self- deprecating, if that's what that was. All right, Lynn Sweet, thank you so much, Nathan Gonzales, good to see you both. Up next, as an eighth now accuser comes forward against Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore, the president of the United States staying relatively quite yet on that matter. Details on the White House's attempt to change the conversation.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn:] Good evening. We're following two fast moving stories tonight. Saudi Arabia admitting that journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, giving their account finally of how it happened, which may raise yet more questions of a cover-up. I'll talk to Clarissa Ward in Turkey about that. Also, a crisis unfolding on Mexico's southern border and its impacts on the American midterms. Thousands of migrants fleeing in some cases violence and poverty in Honduras, are trying to enter, some to settle, other trying to then make their way north to the United States. These so-called caravan you've been hearing about, today, there was chaos at the border crossing, a stampede, tear gas. And with things at a flashpoint, President Trump was out on the campaign trail making these migrants part of the GOP's closing argument for the midterms. We're following this closely. We're going to bring you a live report from that border crossing in just a few moments. We begin, though, with keeping them honest, with something else the president is saying on the stump. And like many things this president says, despite the blowback, he has no regrets. This is what he said last night, talking about Montana Congressman Greg Gianforte who last year physically assaulted a reporter who was asking him a policy question during his campaign.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] And, by the way, never wrestle him. Do you understand that? Never. Any guy who can do a body slam, he's my kind of he's my guy. I shouldn't say there's nothing to be embarrassed about. So I was in Rome with a lot of the leaders from other countries talking about all sorts of things. And I heard about it. And we endorsed Greg very early. But I had heard that he body slammed a reporter.
[Cooper:] So that's what he said last night and the crowd ate it up. And just to remind you, here is audio of the assault that they were cheering and that the president was admiring.
[Ben Jacobs, The Guardian:] the CBO score. As you know, you've been waiting to make your decision about health care and until we saw the bill and it just came out.
[Greg Gianforte , Then-congressional Candidate:] We'll talk to you about that later.
[Jacobs:] Yeah, but there's not going to be time. I'm just curious
[Gianforte:] Speak with Shane please. I'm tired of you guys, the last time you came here, you did the same thing. Get the hell out of here.
[Jacobs:] Jesus.
[Gianforte:] Get the hell out of here. The last guy did the same thing. Are you with "The Guardian"?
[Jacobs:] Yes, and you just broke my glasses.
[Gianforte:] The last guy did the same damn thing.
[Jacobs:] You just body slammed me and broke my glasses.
[Gianforte:] Get the hell out of here.
[Cooper:] Congressman Gianforte and his spokesman both initially gave misleading accounts of the incident. However, in the end, the congressman pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault. He also apologized to reporter he attacked. Ben Jacobs is going to join me shortly. In other words, Congressman Gianforte expressed at least some degree of regret for what he did, whether he felt it or not is impossible to get into his head, but he expressed it. President Trump on the other hand had no regrets when asked late today for using the physical assault on another human being as a stump speech applause line.
[Trump:] No, no, no. Not at all. That was a different world. That was a different league, a different world. No, he's just a great guy. He's you know Greg very well, right? That was a tremendous success last night in Montana and Greg is a tremendous person. And he's a tough cookie. And I'll stay with that. You're talking about a different world.
[Cooper:] Now, it's not exactly clear what the president of the United States meant by "a different world" or "a different league." On the other hand, he was perfectly clear about having no regrets. Keeping him honest, though, even as the president was endorsing an act of violence by a Republican candidate for Congress, he was also at the very same rally saying this.
[Trump:] The Democrats have truly turned into an angry mob bent on destroying anything or anyone in their path.
[Cooper:] That kind of sounds like the president believes that violence on the campaign trail or the threat of it is a bad thing. And at least one staunch conservative seemed to notice. Former Tea Party Republican Joe Walsh tweeting, quote: The president encourages and applauds physical violence against a journalist. Hey, Republicans, don't ever complain again about violence coming from the left. So there's that. There's also the sad and simple fact that the president of the United States is yakking it up about an assault on one reporter, while he himself is embroiled in the Khashoggi crisis, the killing, the murder, the dismemberment of a journalist. It's not like it could have slipped his mind or anything. Just a few hours before that rally, the president spoke about it on camera, conceding that Jamal Khashoggi was probably dead, possibly in the hands of a strategic ally. Dead, the Saudis now says, after a quarrel and physical altercation. Turkish officials say otherwise, citing audio and his murder and dismemberment. Now, clearly, whatever it turns out to be, it is a world away in every sense from what appears to have been an act of spontaneous violence by a hot-headed candidate and clearly, the president's love of tough cookies, as he calls them, is matched only by his antipathy for the press. The question is, at a time like this, when dozens of journalists have been killed this year, with one at the center of a strategic crisis, why didn't any of that seem to factor into the president's thinking or speaking last night and why when this president is ramping up the rhetoric against Democrats for what he says is mob-like behavior is he applauding violence, actual violence by the man he's campaigning for? Joining us now, the reporter who you heard a moment ago being assaulted by then-candidate Gianforte, Ben Jacobs of "The Guardian". This is his first time talking about the president's mention of it. Ben, thanks for being with us. I guess the first question is just, what went through your mind when you heard those comments from President Trump last night?
[Ben Jacobs, Reporter, The Guardian:] It was sort of shock and dismay, that I always, you know, knew that was a possibility, but then there is the process of how you deal with it and then how you actually call up and tell your family that the president is mocking when you've been a victim of a crime.
[Cooper:] I mean and today, the president said he had no regrets about what he said. I guess that doesn't surprise you.
[Jacobs:] No, it doesn't. As someone who actually covered this president on the campaign trail for 18 months, I'm very familiar with his M.O. You know, I've interviewed him a couple of times. And that didn't surprise me. I wish I wish he had surprised me in that. But it was it was what it was.
[Cooper:] For all the president's talk about Gianforte being a tough guy and a tough cookie, I mean, he was such a tough cookie that he was misleading initially about what he actually did to you.
[Jacobs:] Yes, no, he lied about me until he realized there's audio and eyewitnesses, that you know, that it was not the actions of a tough cookie. A tough cookie doesn't attack someone out of nowhere without provocation for asking a question about health care policy. The police asked me afterwards was there anything about the Congressional Budget Office that might have set him off and then lie about it, that that's not the action of a tough cookie. That's the action of a coward.
[Cooper:] Yes, and the coward lies about it, which is what he did and his campaign people did as well. So, I mean, I just really find it amazing that the president is praising him as a tough cookie when this is a guy who assaulted you out of nowhere and then lies about it. It's just incredible to me. Your publication, "The Guardian," said in a statement that the president should apologize for these comments. Do you want an apology?
[Jacobs:] I mean, it would be great if there was one. I'm not holding my breath. I mean, my concern is not about my situation as much as it is with Jamal Khashoggi and everything going on in the world, that the signal this sends about how the United States and how the president of the United States views journalists, when 44 journalists have been killed this year is what's really concerning. You know, what I'm going through, it's not fun, I'll get over it, but there are people reporting all across the world right now who are actually, you know, in fear of their lives. And what this does is, you know, a blank check for governments who want to crack down on a free press in places that don't have the First Amendment.
[Cooper:] Yes, I mean, it's entirely possible. I mean, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the president might, you know, at one point say, wow, MBS had a really strong reaction to Jamal Khashoggi, you know, it was a really powerful reaction. I mean, you have no idea there's no telling what this president actually thinks about what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. Steve Scalise, a Republican congressman, said the president was clearly joking at this rally. He said, quote, it's obvious he was not encouraging his supporters to engage in attacks. Is that clear to you? Because it's certainly not clear to me.
[Jacobs:] Yes, I've certainly, Steve Scalise has been through a lot and I certainly my heart goes out to him and what he's been through. But, you know, I maybe he has a better sense of humor to me because I didn't hear a punch line there. I didn't hear a joke there.
[Cooper:] He's also pointing to reporters in the back when talking about who to body slam. I don't know. I just keep going back to the fact that you were just doing your job, you were asking a question, you know, you asked it more than once, because you knew you were not going to get an answer and you knew he was going to blow you off, and all you did is ask a question, and you got body slammed, and the president of the United States celebrated that last night, celebrated a guy convicted of assaulting you.
[Jacobs:] Yes, it's still it's mind-boggling, still a little tough to wrap my head around. But this is the world we live in today. And having been through, you know, been through this for the past year and a half and how it's sort of you know, the initial shock and then this, it's it's unfortunately what may be hopefully it is only in the short term the new normal.
[Cooper:] All right. Ben Jacobs, I appreciate your time. Thank you, Ben.
[Jacobs:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] I want to get perspective from "USA Today" columnist and CNN political analyst, Kirsten Powers, also former Trump campaign adviser Steve Cortes. Steve, is it appropriate under any circumstance for the president of the United States to praise anyone, much less a congressman, for assaulting a reporter and then who also lied about it?
[Steve Cortes, Cnn Political Commentator:] Right, Anderson, no, listen, I don't like it, it's not what I would have done. But I also do think it's important, there's an important distinction here which is that he said I like the kind of guy who can do that. He didn't say specifically and I think this is important, again, I don't like it, I wish he hadn't gone there, but he said I like the kind of guy who fights back. So, to me, I think it's a metaphor. Those of us in the Trump movement, if there's one trait that I think marks the 2016 election, it was fighting back against the crony political class, against media elites. He's saying that he likes that pugnacious character and that part I understand. But agreed, I wish he hadn't gone there in terms of somebody who actually pled guilty to actually assaulting a reporter.
[Cooper:] Right. But actually what he said is "any guy who can do a body slam is my kind of guy." first of all, I don't know if the president is capable on doing a body slam on somebody physically, I'm not sure he could. But the idea that he's praising somebody who not only could do a body slam but did assault a reporter I mean, I understand he likes to punch back or punch down, but this is literally punching.
[Cortes:] Right. Well, Anderson, as I just said, it's not something it's not where I would go. And I think it was unfortunate that he went there. But again, I do think it's also a distinction, he didn't say, I'm glad he assaulted a reporter, I like that. What he said is, I like the kind of guy who can fight back. And when he says fight back too, I think this is important, too. When he's at rallies, I think it's important to take the president seriously but not literally always. Look, Donald Trump in many ways broke the mold in politics, right, in many, many ways. One of them is he doesn't speak in a scripted and lawyerly and overly careful manner. Now, at times, it gets him into trouble. I think it got him in a tiny bit of trouble in Montana. I don't think it's a big deal at all. But it got him in a little bit of trouble there. But the flip side of that is, the authenticity is really refreshing and it's the reason that he's the president of the United States today, is because he spoke with an authenticity that the people really appreciated and which they rallied toward.
[Cooper:] Kirsten, these comments come obviously at a time when the world is watching and waiting to see how the U.S. is going to respond to the dismemberment and murder of a "Washington Post" journalist in an embassy, in a consulate of a U.S. ally, Saudi Arabia. You know, I don't know if the timing could be any worse.
[Kirsten Powers, Cnn Political Analyst:] Yes, I think the timing is particularly bad. And I just I don't understand this idea, Steve, that you're putting forward, that this is something that's authentic, that this somehow makes him authentic. It's really unusual behavior for any person to be clapping for somebody who has assaulted anybody, let alone a reporter. I mean, this is not it's not in dispute what happened. And so, he was making it very clear that he supported what happened to this reporter, when in fact he should be condemning it. Let's just start there, he should have condemned it. But rather than condemning it, he is I guess you're making he's making jokes about it, ha ha, it's so funny. I don't get it, what's funny about this?
[Cooper:] Does it encourage violence do you believe? I mean, does it encourage the idea, yeah, it's great to body slam a reporter, reporters can be annoying, asking you pesky questions so body slam them?
[Cortes:] I'm against any form of political violence, any form of unneeded violence, period. But we're talking politics here. Political violence is always wrong. Whether it comes from the right, whether it's neo-Nazis in Charlottesville or whether it's Antifa coming from the left as we've seen lately in Portland and demonstration in Washington, D.C. Political violence is always wrong. In America we should solve our political differences through words, that's tantamount. But let me also say this, if we're going to go down the road of taking the president this seriously, even when he's clearly being funny and clever, are we then supposed to say, for example, people on the left call the president a racist and his supporters, by the way.
[Powers:] What people?
[Cortes:] Every single day
[Powers:] No, no. You have to no, no, but you have to make it a person. You can't just say "people." we're actually talking about the president of the United States. So is it
[Cortes:] Fine, let's personalize it. I watched Jake Tapper show today. Jen Psaki said that he said that white men were under assault, which he never said, OK? So, when you say things like that that are not true
[Powers:] You put that on the same level as talking about assaulting somebody?
[Cortes:] But when you say that, you create you demonize the president and his supporters and you create the conditions by which people feel it's then OK to be violent or at the least to be incredibly intimidating toward them, run them out of restaurants, say they're not welcome in public life. So, that's my point. Again, I'm not defending the president going there in Montana, I think that was a mistake.
[Cooper:] Steve, I would just
[Cortes:] We better be just as harsh on the left.
[Cooper:] I agree with you, Steve, it's abhorrent that any protester would scream at some politician and their family when they're trying to eat in a restaurant in their off hours because they're so filled with self righteous indignation that they feel that's appropriate. I think that's the beginnings of a mob. I think it's completely inappropriate.
[Powers:] Yes.
[Cooper:] If the president of the United States or a politician on the left was saying, you know what, I think it's great that these people are going into restaurants and screaming at Kirstjen Nielsen, I would say, why is this politician promoting this kind of behavior, and that's the question we're asking about the president right now, about somebody who didn't just yell at somebody in a restaurant, who actually did body slam a reporter.
[Cortes:] Right. Listen, I think the president should stick to metaphor, I do. I think he should stick to that. We do need to fight back with our words, with persuasion, with motivation. We need and again, the reason he's the president is because he's an amazing counterpuncher. But that should never be literal, that should always be figurative. And he should be clear about that and I think he will be.
[Cooper:] Right. I mean, the irony is he's never actually punched somebody, it seems, in his life, he just likes to talk about it and pretend that he has, and that he's a tough guy and that's it.
[Cortes:] He went to military school, he was probably fairly physical there, I would guess.
[Cooper:] Well, we'll see. I don't know. Kristen Powers, thanks very much. Steve Cortes, as well, thanks. I wouldn't hold my breath on that. It's a busy Friday night. Right now, a huge crowd of migrants is gathered on a bridge between Guatemala and Mexico. It's been chaotic there all day. And the entire crisis now part of the American election campaign. Later, more on tonight's other breaking news. The Saudi account of Jamal Khashoggi's killing, a shake-up back in the kingdom, drawing questions about whether it's just another piece of a royal cover-up.

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] that's not the only trouble overseas. We have reporters on all our top stories from the White House, Caracas, Moscow, and Beijing as we head toward crisis and confrontations around the world. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to EARLY START. I'm Dave Briggs.
[Alison Kosik, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning. I'm Alison Kosik sitting in for Christine Romans. It's Monday, July 31st. It's 5 a.m. in the east. President Trump's new chief of staff front and center at the White House. John Kelly assumes the position after what many view as the worst week of the Trump presidency. Kelly is going to be sworn in at 9:30 this morning. The retired Marine Corps general will be enlisted with trying to restore order to a White House that appears to lack direction and discipline.
[Briggs:] That, of course, no easy task for sure. Both sides of the aisle are what you might call cautiously optimistic.
[Representative Nancy Pelosi , Minority Leader:] I look forward to working with General Kelly.
[Senator Susan Collins , Maine:] I do think that General Kelly will do a good job as the White House chief of staff. I think he will bring some order and discipline to the west wing.
[Senator Richard Blumenthal , Connecticut:] If anybody can bring order and discipline to this White House, it is General Kelly.
[Representative Mark Sanford , South Carolina:] I think that in terms of a great leadership component, the White House has needs General Kelly representing it.
[Briggs:] A big early challenge for Kelly concerns chain of command issues, who reports to whom, still unclear. Typically, senior advisers report to the chief of staff, as we know, this is not your typical White House.
[Kosik:] A senior administration official tells CNN Kelly has been given full authority. The president tapped General Kelly, who was serving as homeland security secretary, to replace Reince Priebus who resigned last week.
[Briggs:] All right, let's bring in Greg Valliere, political economist and chief strategist for Horizon Investments. He's in our Washington bureau. Good to see you, sir.
[Gregory Valliere, Political Economist And Chief Strategist, Horizon Investments:] Nice to see you, guys. Good morning.
[Briggs:] All right, let's start with General John Kelly, a four-star general, former Marine general. How can he instill discipline, order in what's only described as a chaotic White House?
[Valliere:] Well, it's going to be chain of command, Dave. I think that's an area where it's still ambiguous. We'll see there. To a certain extent, I feel sorry for him. He's got a high bar to clear since you had all the sound bites from everyone saying he's going to be to do a pretty good job or he should be able to do a good job. Number two, he's got a tough boss to work for. But number three, I think the big issue as we get into the fall, which is a budget crisis that's looming, may not be his strong suit.
[Kosik:] And you talk about, Greg, what's looming. We have the debt crisis, raising the did the ceiling coming up in the fall. Wall Street is looking for tax reform. And now there's talk about, you know, forget about skinny health care reform, there's talk of skinny tax reform now.
[Valliere:] Yes, there's talk of that, Alison, and I'd say before we even get to that, we may revisit once again health care. You'd think they'd had a belly full of health care, but we may go back and look at something to bail out insurers. Not out of the question that we could get a bill there. And then as you say, there's a big budget fight coming. You've got to raise the debt ceiling. You have to come up with a budget resolution for the new fiscal year. All this comes first before you get to taxes. So, for the general who's very good, I would be the first to agree, but the issues are going to be tough ones for him to tackle.
[Briggs:] Yes. And Greg, from what we understand, the markets were hoping that it would pivot to tracks reform. It doesn't to tax reform. It doesn't appear that way, the president saying let's get back to another vote on health care, threatening to pull the rug out from under the exchanges and from the Congressional health care plan itself. What is the appetite in the Senate, do you believe, from Mitch McConnell toward sticking with health care and finding another path forward?
[Valliere:] Well, I think a lot of Republicans are saying to the Democrats, well, what ideas do you have? And there may be some bipartisan talks as we get into the fall, but time is really short with the budget issue, with tax issues. So, I'm not sure how much time they'll have to devote to that. And here we have this morning, Monday morning, a new story, and that, of course, is growing geopolitical concerns, especially when its which to U.S.China relations.
[Kosik:] And you look at these geopolitical stories that are hitting the news. We don't see the market being rattled by that. You look at how the S&P 500 is doing and the Dow. They're up more than 10 percent so far this year.
[Valliere:] Yes.
[Kosik:] What can really rattle the market? This is of particular interest to anyone who is invested in the stock market.
[Valliere:] Well, first and foremost, Alison, the fundamentals are great. Moderate growth, great labor market, low inflation, steady interest rates, good corporate earnings. So that's fine. There's only two things that I would see that could rattle the markets. Number one would be any sign that tax reform is dead. I don't think it's dead. I think it's going to plod along. It's going to take a while. The other one, though, the wild card now is geopolitical. And I think since Donald Trump loves scapegoats, since he can't get North Korea to do what he wants, he's going to make China a scapegoat. So, I worry later this week we may hear the announcement of new U.S. trade sanctions against China. For the markets, a U.S.China trade war is not a good story.
[Briggs:] Yes. You know, if there's any country on earth that's immune to Twitter diplomacy it's probably China, right, Greg? What can the president do to try and move China on doing something to stop the North Korean nuclear program?
[Valliere:] Well, he can threaten. But I think we'll see on health care, you can't threaten Congress. On China, you can't threaten them to do anything. You know, I do think that we're going to have more military exercises, maybe more of these harm missiles that could shoot down Korean missiles shipped into South Korea. There are a few things we can do. The idea that China can wave a magic wand and immediately get North Korea to behave, I think that's farfetched.
[Kosik:] You know, back to health care. You know, you talk about what the market doesn't want to see. Does the market want to see Trump try to implode Obamacare? We heard from Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price on Sunday about this. Let's first listen.
[Valliere:] Sure.
[Unidentified Female:] What about the individual mandate? Is the president considering directing his agencies not to enforce it? Have you ruled that out?
[Tom Price, Secretary Of Health And Human Services:] Well, the individual mandate is one of those things that actually is driving up the costs for the American people in terms of coverage. We're trying to make it so Obamacare is no longer harming the patients of this land. No longer driving up cost, making it so that they've got coverage but no care. The individual mandate is one of those things. All things are on the table to try to help patients.
[Kosik:] Greg, is the individual mandate driving up costs, or if you take away the individual mandate, this is like a house of cards, obviously the whole thing will just collapse.
[Valliere:] A lot of arguments pro and con to whether it's driving up costs. If you take it away, less people will be insured. And one thing that President Trump said a couple of weeks ago that simply doesn't ring right is that I don't own insurance. Yes, he does. He owns health care. Whatever party is in power usually views it as an albatross. They don't like to own it because it's such a difficult issue. I think if Obamacare really does implode this fall, the Republicans get the blame.
[Briggs:] All right. Greg Valliere from Horizon Investments. We'll ask you about the future of Jeff Sessions coming up. Thank you.
[Kosik:] Thanks, Greg. All right, insurers have until August 16th to set Obamacare rates for 2018. The president's threat to cut off subsidies could mean higher premiums. The president tweeting that if a new health care bill isn't approved soon, bailouts for insurance companies could end. Insurers hate uncertainty, and they're swimming in it now. They rely on $8 billion on cost-sharing subsidies to help pay for low-income Americans. Some carriers, they've already requested large rate hikes next year to offset costs. Nearly half of the company the plan to increase premiums by 20 percent or more. Meantime, other insurers, they're exiting the exchanges completely. Big payments that like Aetna, Humana, and Anthem. In fact, 25,000 people in three states, they're at risk of having no Obamacare options at all next year. While an additional 2.7 million Americans could have just one option for an insurance carrier. Insurers say they want to work with the administration to fix Obamacare, but Washington's actions so far have fueled instability. Besides threatening cost-sharing subsidies, the White House hasn't committed to enforcing the individual mandate, and that one is getting younger, healthier people to enroll. Offsetting the costs for more expensive customers.
[Briggs:] Not clear what the path forward is. Susan Collins said let's go back to committee and try to fix health care exchanges but
[Kosik:] It's unlikely
[Briggs:] it's unclear if anyone has the appetite for that either. OK. New trouble from a trio of global adversaries, Russia retaliates for sanctions, another missile launched from North Korea, and Venezuela in chaos after an election being called an affront to democracy. We're live on all three stories next.

[Barack Obama, Former U.s. President:] I have no more campaigns to run. My only agenda I know, because I won both of them.
[Bash:] A bit of off-the-cuff humor and maybe a reminder that if President Trump is, in his favorite word, braggadocios tonight, he won't be the first president to act that way. We are fewer than nine hours to go until President Trump delivers his first State of the Union Address, and the official theme is a safe, strong and proud America. And the White House is promising a bipartisan tone with a particular focus on immigration and infrastructure. And you can expect to hear the president tout what he sees as his economic accomplishments.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] Certainly the economy will be front and center. We've had a historic year, record- breaking moments throughout the year, in large part due to the president's leadership on deregulation and a huge capstone at the end of the year with the tax cuts and jobs act which we have seen have immediate impact with several hundred companies stepping forward and giving pay raises, bonuses, because of that tax cut and that tax reform package.
[Bash:] Now, of course, the president is going to say things like you just heard. It would be political malpractice for him not to. In fact, a lot of people are questioning why he's not doing that kind of on a loop, talking about the economy. But the notion that Jeff is hearing, that I'm hearing, I'm sure you all are hearing as well, of this big bipartisan unity message, how is that going to go? What are you hearing about the realities between the rhetoric that he's planning tonight and what he's up against, and what Democrats are up against every single day?
[Talev:] I just remember that in the inaugural address, a little bit more than a year ago, in the buildup to that there was a lot of talk about how a bipartisanship and reaching out to all Americans. But then the imagery of the speech and the tone of the speech was quite stark in and of itself. And I think we need to wait actually to see the delivery of this to understand how it plays out. On the flip side, if he doesn't do enough of a nod to the base, or if he isn't sort of what's the right word
[Bash:] Strident?
[Talev:] Victorious enough, right, that that might turn off some of his base. So I think he does have a little bit of a negotiating act himself to do. But, really, this is not about reaching widely across the aisle to bring liberals in, so much as it is to see, I think, from the White House's perspective, whether he can reach some of that middle ground that may have been lost or teetering over the course of the last several months and to bring them back on that economic message. And that's the challenge.
[Bash:] On the economic message, but also on the 2018 agenda, which they are saying is after they sort of check the boxes, which are not so easy to check, the budget, raising military caps, and, most importantly, immigration, they do want to get to inherently bipartisan ideas, like infrastructure.
[Hulse:] Right.
[Bash:] The realistic result of that is what, Carl?
[Hulse:] Well, I think that the Democrats would love to see a big infrastructure bill, but they don't expect to see one that is set up the way that they want it. I think going into tonight, there will be bipartisanship, but Democrats are bringing in dreamers, right? They're getting people from their districts who could be deported if the president doesn't fix that. They're going to be dressed in black. I think they're going to be pretty somber out there. If I was at the White House, I would be trying to keep the phone away from the president because I do think he can probably deliver this address pretty well, but the fear is, is he going to tweet before it or after it and immediately take on some issue. I don't think anybody this is not going to mend what I think are actually increasingly toxic relationships on Capitol Hill. I think it's in a really bad place right now.
[Bash:] And, yes yes, no question. And to be fair, you talked about the Democrats bringing dreamers and making very clear political statements, especially those who are already thinking about running for president against Donald Trump. But bipartisanship is a two-way street. It just is. Listen to what Chuck Schumer said again on the Senate floor this morning.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer , Minority Leader:] The Republican majority in the White House have been content to craft legislation on their own, demand Democrats support it, and then label us obstructionists. And without consultation, without compromise, we don't. That dynamic is the root of the ineffectiveness and gridlock here in Congress.
[Bash:] Well, I mean, look, he does have a point, that Republicans feel they have control of Congress, and they can kind of go their own way. But they have reached out to Democrats, and Democrats are all about pleasing the resistance right now. And you could have taken that sound bite and put a picture up of a Republican talking about President Obama
[Talev:] Yes.
[Bash:] At the beginning of his term
[Talev:] Yes, you could have.
[Bash:] And it would have been exact same rhetoric.
[Lee:] Right. And the point about unity is that it can't just be a tone that comes directly from the president. There has to be some sort of appetite from the other side of the aisle for that kind of a unity message, right? And we literally have Democratic lawmakers refusing to show up, not just bringing guests that might be a little controversial, that might be poking at the president a little bit. There are members, a number of members, who are just not going to be there. And I think in terms of, you know, just talking broadly about whether the president will stay on message and sticking to issues like infrastructure. On the other side of that, I'm really curious if he ends up slipping in some mention of repealing Obamacare, for example. Both because that obviously is a very partisan issue, but also because it's not necessarily something that I think his Republican colleagues are going to be all thrilled to hear him talk about. If he uses this huge, national address to say, hey, that thing that didn't work for us last year, maybe let's revisit that, I do think that that is going to not sit well with
[Bash:] Is that going to happen?
[Green:] It's Trump. It could, right? I think he would be on much safer ground. I mean Trump really does have a good news story to tell that could possibly unite if not Democrats in Congress and certainly viewers, and that is the economy. As somebody who writes for "Businessweek," the big fear when Trump was elected was that he was going to cause a recession. Stock market futures plummeted on election night because people were so worried about this. Instead, here we are, you know, a year later, record stock market, manufacturing jobs are growing. You know, he can produce, you know, valid data that shows that the country and the economy in particular are doing well and claiming credit for that. And what Trump seems to want more than anything else is affirmation. I think that's the one safe place where he could go out and get it and maybe not engender the hostile and negative response he would from Democrats in the audience if he speaks about, for instance, immigration or more of a hot button issue like that.
[Bash:] Thinking
[Talev:] Or he starts talking about the losers or no collusion or some of these kind of like just almost instinctive one-off lines that are real distractions from that core message about the stock market.
[Bash:] Yes, and I have to say, that speaking of producing, you don't know it, but you're actually a really good television producer because you were talked about the stock market and how he's going to talk about it, and that's actually what I'm going to talk about, which is, a look at the stock market right now. The Dow is actually falling a little bit more than it has in the past. So take a look at that on the screen right now. But before we go to break, we also want to talk about what is going on with regard to the halls of Capitol Hill and how things are playing out in really the minutes and hours before the president comes and gives his first State of the Union Address. Stand by for more of that.

[Quest:] You have seen throughout our program that Donald Trump inspires some strong opinions on both sides. Here at CNN, we always strive to bring you the facts first. The President has strong opinions himself on the press to say the very least, often denouncing work like our own as fake news before he had even taken office. Powerful voices were urging the President not to give up.
[Meryl Streep, Actress:] We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call him on the carpet for every outrage, that is why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our Constitution. So, I only ask the famously well healed Hollywood Foreign Press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the Committee to Protect Journalists. Because we'll need them going forward. And they will need us to safe guard the truth.
[Quest:] The woman who thanked him is Joel Simon from the Committee to Protect Journalists, he joins me now. Good to see you. Did you get warning of that?
[Joel Simon, Executive Director, Committee To Protect Journalists:] We didn't know that she was going to give us that shout out. We did get a very generous contribution through her family foundation last week, so we were very appreciative but we didn't know that she would mention this
[A:] others to support us.
[Quest:] We think of the committee as being involved in the issues of democracy, violence, physical threats against the press and the media. But you're asking me to think about it differently now. I'm not asking. We've always being involved in the issues of democracy, violence, physical threats against the press and the media. But you are asking me to think about it differently.
[Simon:] I don't think I'm asking you, we have always been a frontline organization. We defended journalists for 35 years when they are confronting violence and repression in the most dangerous and difficult environments around the world. But the reality is that there are enormous challenges that journalists are facing in this country and we have to stand up and defend them.
[Quest:] What are the challenges? Because a berating by the President does not really class as a threat in the same way as it's up to editors to do it.
[Simon:] Right. I think journalists know that they're going to get criticized and you confront powerful people, they are going to lash out. But I think what is alarming is the President-elect Trump every time he is criticized, lashes out. We saw that would Meryl Streep. The role of the press in his administration will be to criticize him, to hold him accountable. How is he going to react? Are these outbursts going to be transformed into policies? It is intimated that will be the case, so journalists should be concerned. We are concerning we intend to defend the rights of journalists and ensure that they are able to do their job.
[Quest:] What is your big fear here, exclusion of press from press conferences, not holding press conferences? I mean he continually finishes every tweet with dishonest media. He believes, and let's put myself into this, I'm a journalist, he believes that we do not reflect the truth of his situation.
[Simon:] Yes, he expects the media to amplify his perspective. And to the extent they do that, he is quite happy. But when they criticize him, he has a very different response. So, he said what he's going to do. He has excluded journalists. He has mocked journalists. He's incited attacks on journalists, online trolling. The environment for criticizing as a journalist or anyone else is a very intimidating on, so how will that affect the work of the President in the coming years.
[Quest:] You have an uphill struggle in one very important respect. Many of the public are not with you. It may be the chattering classes as they became known on the upper east side, upper west side of Manhattan and in L.A. might be, but middle America is likely to say a plague on the press's house
[Simon:] Look, what is the press, what is the media? It is everyone. It's Fox News, CNN, the whole constellation of information. We need that information. And the public might be critical of certain segments of the media, but as an amalgam, they want information and I think that the information will stand up for that.
[Quest:] The press was not in favor in Nixon's time. He had his list. His witch hunt against the press. Ronald Reagan liked the press. But wasn't hugely in favor then either. During the Iraq war, both Bushes were if not downright hostile to the press at least they didn't facilitate it. Why is this worse?
[Simon:] I think because we are not hearing from the President-elect a basic articulation of the role of media. What is the role? That sense that we have a first amendment. There is accountability. The U.S. has to set a standard for the world. We're not hearing that instead what we are hearing is constant disparagement, harassment, mocking, exclusion of journalists. Threats to make it easier to sue journalists. It is creating a hostile environment and the question is are these just empty words, is this angry expression, or will we see an administration that will turn this rhetoric into policies. That's what we need to be vigilant about
[Quest:] And we can ask the same question when we look at any aspect of Trumponomics in 2018. That is our look so far. Now of course let's see what the 12 months ahead brings. I'm Richard Quest in New York. Whatever you're up to in the year ahead, I hope it's profitable. END END

[Cabrera:] You have probably seen the promos, this is an incredible story. The new CNN film, three identical strangers explores an astounding true story about triplet who were separated at birth and then by coincidence reunite 19 years later. Since that film made, more twins separated at birth have now found each other. And our Dr. Sanjay Gupta has one of those who caught up the stories.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Chief Medical Correspondent:] This 54-year-old Michele Mordkoff is about to meet someone she didn't even know existed. Her twin sister, Alison Kantor. Before she caulks in here, sort of just wrapped up in your own thoughts. What are you thinking?
[Michele Mordkoff, Reunited With Twin Sister:] I almost feel like I could open my eyes and wake and it wasn't a real day. Like I really felt like it was a dream.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi.
[Gupta:] You didn't know, obviously, that you had a twin. Your parents, your adopted parents didn't know you had a twin?
[Mordkoff:] Not at all. They are just as shocked as we are.
[Gupta:] Separated at birth, there's is a story that makes you ask questions about nature versus nurture. Free will, could you have a twin unite there?
[Allison Kanter, Reunited With Twin Sister:] I never thought there would be somebody like Michelle out there. I was caught by surprise. I mean, the rug was pulled out from under me.
[Gupta:] Michele and Allison were both May 12th, 1964. When they were five months old, they were adopted by different families two days a- part.
[Unidentified Male:] His eyes, my eyes and my eyes, his eyes and it is true.
[Gupta:] By coincidence, last year Michelle saw the CNN film three identical strangers. It's about triplets who were separated by prominent Jewish New York City adoption agency, Louise Wise Services. The same agency through Michele and Allison were adopted. It made Michele wonder, could the same thing had happened to her. Last summer, Michele took a DNA test, the results life changing. It revealed an immediate family member she did not know she had.
[Mordkoff:] Who would you like to add? I'm adding a sister. Very symbolic.
[Gupta:] We don't know why Michelle and Allison were separated. But in the case of the three identical strangers, it was for the perfect of a scientific study by Dr. Peter Neubauer who had approached other agencies before finding Louise Wise.
[Mordkoff:] When Neubauer was trying to find twins to study, he went to a Catholic Church agency. The nun said to him, we don't separate what God puts together.
[Gupta:] Neubauer died in 2008 and Louise Wise Services closed in 2004. The agency that absorbed all of its records, Spence Chapin, did not respond to CNN's multiple requests for comment. It is funny, I notice the way you guys hold your hands. I don't know if you do notice, and the way your legs are crossed?
[Mordkoff:] We are noticing everything right now.
[Gupta:] Well, Ana, as I said in the piece there, this makes you ask questions about nature or nurture. And Michelle and Allison 54 years apart, they finally find each other, and you watch them, the way that they carry themselves, the way they hold their bodies, the way they speak, the way they dress, all of that so similar and it really makes you wonder how much of a role does nature play? Now, if you ask experts, they will give you some variation of the answer that it's 5050. Nature, nurture, 50-50. And also, it's starting to change, because we know now more than ever that your genes, your blueprint can change in response to how you interact with your environment. Epigenetics it is called. So it's not necessarily nature or nurture. It's more nature and nurture. And I think Michelle and Allison really make that case Ana.
[Cabrera:] Dr. Sanjay Gupta, great story. Thank you for sharing with us. And be sure to tune in, the award winning CNN original film three identical strangers premieres right here on CNN at 9:00 p.m. eastern. You don't want to miss it. OK. Based on a true story, here we go again. This year's nominees at the SAG awards draw inspiration from real life people and events, but not without some backlash.

[Melissa Mccarthy, Actress:] I'd just like to announce that I'm calm now. As long as you sons of our of out of boom, Guantanamo Bay. Radical moose lambs. Spicey finally made a mistake. You don't have a chance.
[Cabrera:] We will not soon forget Melissa McCarthy and her role as Spicey on "SNL." But the man she was portraying meantime still trying to figure out his next gig. Outgoing White House press secretary Sean Spicer has reportedly been in meetings with the heads of a number of media organizations all week. Here's the big question. Is he about to embrace the so-called fake news he once railed against?
[Sean Spicer, Former White House Press Secretary:] This kind of dishonesty in the media that challenging that bringing out our nation together is making it more difficult. I appreciate your agenda here. But the reality is no, no, hold on. No, at some point report the facts. You're shaking your head. I appreciate it. But OK, but understand this, that at some point the facts are what they are. He is frustrated like I am and like so many others to see stories come out that are patently false, to see narratives that are wrong, to see, quote-unquote, fake news. When you see stories get perpetrated that are absolutely false, that are did not based in fact, that is troubling.
[Cabrera:] Joining us now CNN senior media correspondent and host of "RELIABLE SOURCES," Brian Stelter. So, Brian, we have seen a lot of high-profile people go from the West Wing into the media, like George Stephanopoulos, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich for a while, David Axelrod. But this is a little bit different. And we just showed all those clips of Sean Spicer going after the mainstream media. Could he make the leap and still have credibility?
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Media Correspondent:] I think he will make the leap. But you're right, this time it is different from all those past administrations because of this administration's anti- media attacks. It adds a layer of intrigue to what Spicer and to what Reince Priebus might do next. Heck, any high profile Trump administration official that leaves the White House, leaves the government is going to consider or be pursued for a television job but because of all those so-called fake news attacks it makes it more curious. Spicer was in New York in the past few days, having meetings with most of the major networks. Our viewers might be interested to know CNN management pointedly said we're not interested in hiring Spicer as a contributor. The network didn't say why but I think you can probably connect the dots between those anti-media attacks, the criticism of CNN and other outlets. All of the sort of inaccurate and false statements from the podium. Between that and not wanting to hire him. But he was meeting with FOX and NBC and other networks. And I think it's likely we'll see Spicer in one of those jobs as kind of high-paid, six-figure salary talking head in the weeks to come.
[Cabrera:] Meantime, we just saw Reince Priebus also be shown the door or leave on his own
[Stelter:] Right.
[Cabrera:] On his freedom.
[Stelter:] Still quite unclear what happened.
[Cabrera:] Yes. We don't know.
[Stelter:] Love to see him talk more about it. We'll see.
[Cabrera:] But there's speculation about where he lands following this. Newt Gingrich tweeted this. "Priebus will go on to a great future either in winning office in Wisconsin or in becoming a national analyst and adviser. He knows a lot." And that last sentence, he knows a lot. I mean, that is the real reason a lot of people are interested in bringing these people on board is to have a little bit more insight. What are the chances Priebus would actually give us more of a glimpse than he did in his exit interview with Wolf Blitzer?
[Stelter:] Right. Exactly. He was still talking at the White House at that point. He was, you know. still in the building literally. Be interesting to see what he would say weeks or months down the line. Normally the options here are, you know, book deal, a television contributor deal, speeches. In the case of Reince Priebus, maybe we're going to see him run for office at some point in the future or return to the RNC, the Republican National Committee, which he was running before joining the White House administration. So he has a number of options. I think he's also going to take his time to figure out what is next. August might be a nice time to have a job change so he can relax for a little bit. Spicer seems a little bit more of a hurry to find the next gig. But it's going be interesting to see where both of those men go and how open they are about both the perils as well as the positives of working at the White House. I do think in both cases it shows how the anti-media rhetoric sort of rings hallow. It exposes this sort of emptiness of all the fake news bashing. And the president for example, he has a fundraising e-mail out this week, a bunch of end-of-month fundraising e-mails, decrying the fake news. So shtick it to CNN by donating to my re-election campaign. All of that kind of seems empty when you see folks like Spicer go out looking for a television gig.
[Cabrera:] Isn't that interesting? The irony of all of that.
[Stelter:] And by the way, what's draining the swamp? You know, there's something about the revolving door in Washington which you were describing for decades. George Stephanopoulos in the '90s being an example. Going from the White House to a top job at ABC. This is normal in Washington. But one of the president's promises is to drain the so-called swamp. Maybe decrease some of the coziness, some of the insider nature in Washington. To some extent if Reince Priebus, for example, goes out and gets a million-dollar book deal, doesn't that contradict a little bit of a drain the swamp message?
[Cabrera:] I actually really wonder what the president would think if Sean Spicer ends up on NBC or Reince Priebus gets some kind of a media gig after these attacks that they were a part of.
[Stelter:] Exactly.
[Cabrera:] Now real quick. Page Six throwing out this idea Sean Spicer on "Dancing with the Stars." It sounds maybe a little farfetched like this is just a joke but don't forget, Rick Perry, he's another member of Trump's Cabinet, and he was on "Dancing with the Stars."
[Stelter:] And I'll never forget this video. There he is. Now the secretary of Energy. He has a lot of energy in these clips from a little while back.
[Cabrera:] He actually had some pretty good moves there.
[Stelter:] So I'll go ahead and rule it out. We're not going to see Sean Spicer and Reince Priebus on "Dancing with the Stars."
[Cabrera:] All right.
[Stelter:] I'm more likely to go on "Dancing with the Stars"
[Cabrera:] Hey, I think he just let it out there.
[Stelter:] And I don't have dancing shoes.
[Cabrera:] I love to see you, Brian. Thanks for coming on.
[Stelter:] Thanks.
[Cabrera:] And coming up, some more outrage at an airport. The traveling stories. A man this time holding a baby is attacked by an employee from an airline. What happened, next. Live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

[Bolduan:] More from that remarkable interview now President Trump gave "The New York Times" laying down a warning in it for Special Counsel Robert Mueller, "Don't reach beyond Russia or he'll well, he doesn't exactly say. Here's that part.
[Unidentified Male:] Mueller was looking at your finances and your family's finances unrelated to Russia. Is that a red line?
[Unidentified Female:] Would that be a breach of what his actual charge is?
[President Trump:] I would say yes. I would say yes.
[Bolduan:] The panel is back with me. So Jeffrey, how would the president know if this council is reaching beyond and what could he do about it?
[Toobin:] Well, he could know because witnesses could come forward and say I was subpoenaed to talk about the family finances. Witnesses are free to talk about their interactions with a criminal investigation, even if Mueller, himself, does not disclose it. He could fire Mueller. I mean, he would have to tell the Justice Department, which would mean telling Rod Rosenstein because Sessions has recused. If Rosenstein refused, he would move down the chain of command to get someone to fire him. But presumably, he would get someone to fire him. He is in charge of the Justice Department, and I don't think we could rule that out. I don't think it is out of the question that Robert Mueller will wind up fired from this investigation. Donald Trump fired the FBI director, why wouldn't he fire Robert Mueller?
[Bolduan:] Well, Gloria, on this point, though, kind of the premise of what he is talking about, he says don't go beyond don't get out of your lane. Isn't that by definition what happens as we've seen just ask Bill Clinton, you know, where these investigations go. Folks around the president, they know that.
[Borger:] Absolutely. You know, I think Mueller and Ken Star are two very different people, but it's very clear to me and I agree with Jeffrey that what the president was doing was essentially, you know, what we call in politics a pre-buttle. It was sort of putting him on notice here and saying this isn't what you are supposed to do. You are supposed to cover the Russian hack, you are not supposed to delve into my family's finances and he drew a line there. And then, at some point in the interview, he started talking about, yes, maybe I sold a condo to a Russian at one point. He went off on this tangent, but it's very clear to me that that's on his mind right now and he was he was telling Mueller to be careful.
[Bolduan:] And Michael, CNN's reporting is that the investigators are looking into Donald Trump Jr.'s finances as part of their investigation. One Democratic senator, Richard Blumenthal, a critic of the president, especially on all things Russia, he says that the president after this interview, the president here is offering more evidence of obstruction of justice. Do you see that, Michael?
[Zeldin:] Two things about this. First is whether Mueller is investigating financial matters related to the Trump ecosystem. I think the answer to that is most likely yes and that is already within his mandate. The mandate that Rosenstein gave him on May 17th says all matters related to Russia and anything that may arise out of it and whether or not the financial dealings provide motive why the RussiaTrump team met is perfectly within his purview. He is not going to see that as a limitation on his swim lane. Secondly, whether or not this is an obstruction of justice, I don't think it's obstruction of justice. I think were Mueller to be fired, it would be an abuse of office, an abuse of power that would lead to consideration of Article of Impeachment. But I don't think legal indictment before a grand jury says you are going to get obstruction of justice out of that, but those things sort of conflate what is the difference between obstruction of justice or abusing your power of office, it's really much the same.
[Toobin:] But just as a matter of how criminal investigations work, if someone you are looking at, investigating says, don't look at my finances, they are absolutely fine
[Bolduan:] Don't look under this rock.
[Toobin:] There's no problem. What rational investigator wouldn't start looking at their finances? I mean, you know, the thing about the president, is that like all the emotions are out there in front. You know, it can be a problem.
[Bolduan:] Ken, what is your take on this one?
[Cuccinelli:] Well, first of all, the president didn't, you know, make a threat as you characterized it. He answered a question, and in and of itself, on paper, the question, the answer to the question were correct, accurate and appropriate. You remember that we don't have an independent council law because on a bipartisan basis, Republicans and Democrats thought that these independent operating prosecutors went too far afield. That is the main concern that continues to exist, setting aside the constitutional concerns. And that continues to this day, even though this is under a special counsel regulation of the Department of Justice. The same concern continues to exist. History has proven it a legitimate oncern. Robert Mueller will, you know, essentially define for himself by his performance whether he falls into that category or stays focused on the target and that is Russian involvement in the election.
[Bolduan:] Michael, you were
[Zeldin:] Yes, I was going to say, the president said this would be a red line if he crossed it to look into family finances. Jeffrey is right
[Cuccinelli:] No, "The New York Times" said it "The New York Times" said it, not the president. Red line is a serious phrase. "The New York Times" said that, not the president.
[Bolduan:] They asked it as a question.
[Zeldin:] Yes, they did. They asked him that question and he seemed to imply, yes, it would be a red line. That would be something that would be a bridge too far for him. But it is part of the mandate, as I read the mandate. The mandate says all matters that arise out of this investigation. It's hard to understand how the investigation of financial dealings with the same people that may be those involved in the conspiracy or the collusion wouldn't be part of this mandate. So I just see it as something that is a misunderstanding on the president's part about what Mueller's mandate is. Mueller didn't pay much attention to it.
[Bolduan:] He said no, Ken
[Cuccinelli:] I'm going to step up here and defend the president very much, but he said family finances. I completely agree with what Michael said that
[Bolduan:] The question was, Mueller was looking at your finances, your family finances unrelated to Russia, is that a red line? Would that be a breach of what his actual charges
[Cuccinelli:] Unrelated to Russia.
[Bolduan:] I would say yes. I said unrelated to Russia when I was talking about it.
[Zeldin:] Mueller will decide Mueller will decide within his prosecutorial discretion whether this is or isn't related. But in order to determine whether it is unrelated, you have to look in it. You cannot determine it's not related. You have to look into it and say this is unrelated and then he can make a referral to the Justice Department to investigate any criminal activities that may arise in that investigation that are unrelated to his mandate. It's all appropriate for Mueller to do this. It's inappropriate I think for the president to threaten Mueller, if you go there, you may be fired. That is abusive to me.
[Bolduan:] We'll see. The president asked several times, not saying what would happen if he did go that route. We will see. Thank you all. I really appreciate it. A parole board getting ready to decide whether O.J. Simpson walks free in a televised hearing. Hear what to expect and his [inaudible] that's ahead. Plus, support right now is pouring in for Senator John McCain after the shocking news of his diagnosis of an aggressive form of brain cancer. We're going to speak with one of his friends and former campaign adviser.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] As many as 40 White House administration officials still do not have full security clearances including the President's son-in-law Jared Kushner. And indeed Rob Porter who resigned last week as White House staff secretary. Well today Sarah Sanders said in fact well don't blame us.
[Sarah Sanders, Press Secretary, White House:] This is a process that doesn't operate within the White House. It's handled by our law enforcement and intelligence community. And we support that process. It's the same process that has been used for decades for other and previous administrations. And we are relying on that process at this point. I do think that it's up to that same law enforcement and intelligence agencies to determine if changes need to be made to their process.
[Cooper:] Keeping them honest that's not true. Justice correspondent Evan Perez joins me now with the facts. So, where did Sarah Sanders mislead us today, I mean how is the process really work?
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Yes, Anderson, I mean that was truly astounding. The way it works is that the FBI does the background investigation on people who are applying for security clearances and that's what happened with the Rob Porter investigation. The White House chose to basically tell the FBI keep digging, keep investigating and they came back again and presented their findings to the White House. That is how the process works. The White House decides who gets a security clearance and that's happened here with the Rob Porter investigation the FBI found this information very quickly. And so we're doing that investigation, they reported that to the White House as they were doing it. And the White House chose to basically tell the FBI keep digging, keep investigating, and then they came back again and presented their findings to the to the White House. That is how the process works. The White House decides who gets the security clearance base on the investigation that the FBI does, they provide the raw information but it's really up to the President to decide who he wants on his team at the White House Anderson. I mean the, you know, the President is frankly the ultimate classification authority, he is the ultimate authority on who gets security clearances. If he wants to have Rob Porter get a security clearance, he can do that. What's astounding today was simply that, you know, they were basically saying this is not us. You know, they were taking no ownership of what really is the function of the White House, the White House counsels office, the White House security office. These are the people who would decide based on what the FBI found whether or not Rob Porter or anybody else gets a security clearance. It's just not true the way she said it. The FBI addressed this last week by the way, they issued a statement on Thursday and I'll read part of it to you. Says the FBI, "does not grant deny or otherwise adjudicate security clearances for individuals on behalf of these agencies nor does it make any security clearance recommendations after the FBI has completed background information, it provides the information to the agency adjudicator authority who determines whether to grant or deny security clearance". That's plain simple the way the process works. This is a White House responsibility, Anderson.
[Cooper:] Amazing. Evan, thanks very much. California Democrat Jackie Speier is a member of the House Intelligence Community, I spoke to her earlier. Congresswoman, for Sarah Sanders to suggest that this investigation is ongoing, I mean that just defies how these FBI investigations work. The FBI passed along what they discovered about Rob Porter and it's left in the White House hands. When you heard her claim it is still a ongoing process, I mean does that make sense to you?
[Rep. Jackie Speier,  Intelligence Committee:] No it makes no sense to me. When the FBI does a security clearance evaluation, it is completed and handed over to the agency and the individual either gets the security clearance or doesn't get the security clearance. They're tripping all over themselves because they had knowledge and chose not to act on it. And then because it came out in a news paper, they then had to scurry around and come up with some alibi.
[Cooper:] What do you think it says about this White House? A, that this happened initially, and kept this man on, but also now that they seem to target to covering it up.
[Speier:] It would suggest to me and I think to most Americans that this is a White House that doesn't believe the rules apply to them. They have another 30 or 40 persons in the White House right now who have not received security clearances and are operating on what is called the temporary security clearance. So they have access that some of the most highly classified information, are targets potentially for, you know, any number of blackmail and other circumstances.
[Cooper:] I mean, Jared Kushner being one of those people.
[Speier:] And I would say that has a lot to do with it. That's why they're not acting on the 30 or 40 other ones because Jared Kushner can't pass a security clearance and he's been operating on a temporary security clearance. I think what they're going to do is just have everyone continue to have access and have temporary security clearances. And at some point Congress is going to have to step in and say you are violating the law.
[Cooper:] I want to ask you about the tweet that the President send over the weekend, where he said, people lives are being shattered and destroyed by a mere allegation. Some are true and some are false. Some are old and some are new. There is no recovery for someone falsely accuse, life and career are gone, is there no such thing any longer as do you process. I wonder what your reaction to that? I mean is their a difference between due process and believing someone who says they've been abuse?
[Speier:] You know, I was furious by that tweet, Anderson, and I think that virtually anyone men or women who sees the testimony and the photographs of the former wives and the former live-in girlfriend of Mr. Porter, there is a pattern of behavior here that is frightening and yet the President doesn't say one word, not one word about the lives that have been scarred by the actions of Mr. Porter. And is totally focused on the abuser. One of his ex-wives got a restraining order against him. So there is plenty of evidence.
[Cooper:] Regarding the Democratic response memo, what is the status of it now, can you say?
[Speier:] So the status of the memo is that the FBI and the Department of Justice now are going to meet with the minority members of the committee and particularly Adam Schiff is the ranking member. And the chairman what if any has to be redacted. Ironically, the President issued the memo and redacted nothing and yet there were sources and methods that were actually made public.
[Cooper:] So you're saying in the Republican memo, there actually were sources and methods, so the White House was paying attention they say they're paying attention to, you know, the FBI when it comes to Democratic memo. You're saying they didn't pay attention the FBI on the Republican one.
[Speier:] On the Republican one, you know, the FBI and the Department of Justice both said they had grave concerns that this was reckless action to make this memo public and release what is and in fact classified information. The President before even reading it said that he was going to release it. So I mean this has been a political process from the very beginning. The President have been tweets I'm vindicated because he thought this was going to be his silver bullet. That somehow the investigation would come crumbling down because of this, you know, memo that everyone basically said after every
[Cooper:] Congresswoman Speier, I appreciate your time. Thank you.
[Speier:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] Just ahead, what some female supporters the President Trump, think about his comments defending Porter, Randi Kaye finds out. And as Republicans reveal their immigration plan. Will the President get his wall in exchange for deal in DACA? I'll talk to Univision's Jorge Ramos about that.

[Sciutto:] The death toll still rising from the wildfires burning across California. Now at least 58 people are dead and more than 300 still missing.
[Harlow:] Fifty-six of the victims have died in the Camp Fire. That is the fire raging in northern California that's been burning for a week now. Crews face the very challenging search for victims, for remains and the effort to try to identify the bodies. Let's go to Scott McLean. He joins us in Paradise, California. And, Scott, every time I say that, it just sends chills up my spine because, you know, look what has happened to Paradise. What can you tell us this morning?
[Scott Mclean, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Jim and Poppy. And let's not forget that there is a wildfire that is still burning and only 35 percent contained. And that number hasn't changed since Tuesday. The focus here, though, rightly so, is on the death toll. It is now up to 56 people. And perhaps more concerning, there is a list of 300 names that the sheriff's office has compiled of those people who have not been accounted for. Now the hope is that most of those people will be found safe and sound in one way or another. But obviously the death toll is almost certain to rise despite that. Authorities, literally hundreds of them, are going through, combing through the twisted metal and the ash and debris to try to find any human remains they can. It is painstaking and very slow work. It could take several weeks. And some bodies may not be found at all. And because this fire came through here and burned so hot, well, authorities are having difficulty even identifying whether the remains are human. Listen.
[Sgt. Steve Collins, Butte County Sheriff's Investigations:] We're trying to determine the difference between human remains and non-human remains. Because it can be extremely difficult in these fires to make that differentiation for those of us that are untrained.
[Mclean:] And so the sheriff's office is asking any family that has family members who are missing to go and get their DNA swab taken at the sheriff's office in Orville. And one more thing to mention, Jim and Poppy, and that's that lawyers for 22 people who had their homes destroyed in this fire have filed a lawsuit against the local power company, Pacific Gas and Electric. Now the fire was sparked near transmission lines that they had been working on just 15 minutes earlier. The official cause hasn't been determined, but that company says that if it is indeed to blame, well, it doesn't have enough insurance to actually cover or pay for the damage that this fire has caused, which is estimated at around $7 billion.
[Harlow:] Wow.
[Sciutto:] Yes, it wouldn't be the first fire caused by transmission lines. Scott McLean, thanks for staying on top of the story for us there. Just hours away from a ruling in CNN's federal lawsuit against President Trump and several top White House aides. We're going to get new insight, next.

[Jeff Bezos, Founder And Ceo, Amazon:] It doesn't get much more explosive than this.
[Will Ripley, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Extortion and blackmail Amazon founder Jeff Bezos goes public against U.S. tabloid "The National Enquirer."
[Jeffrey Toobin, Legal Analyst, Cnn:] He feels, apparently, that there was political motivation.
[Ripley:] Escaping ISIS.
[Unidentified Male:] I am afraid, all I have left is my daughter and son.
[Ripley:] People recount horror stories of life under siege, but some remember it a little differently.
[Dura Ahmed, Canadian National Living In Syria:] You're there, you're eating Pringles and Twix.
[Ripley:] And inside Facebook.
[Alex Stamos, Former Chief Security Officer, Facebook:] The truth is, there is a bit of a "Game of Thrones" culture among the executives. Vidd2
[Ripley:] What's it like working for Mark Zuckerberg and why are some so afraid to speak out?
[Unidentified Male:] There's a career impact where you might get blacklisted and you're not going to be get hired.
[Ripley:] Hey, I'm Will Ripley in Hong Kong in for Kristie Lu Stout on this Friday. Welcome to "News Stream." The founder and CEO of Amazon, Jeff Bezos is accusing the publisher of "The National Enquirer," AMI of blackmail and extortion. In an explosive new blog post, Bezos provides what he says are e-mail threats from AMI executives. Bezos dropped this bombshell accusing the American tabloid of threatening to release his compromising photos and texts if he didn't call off his own investigation of the tabloid. The world's richest man has been sparing no expense trying to figure out how the "Enquirer" obtained other private photos and texts involving him and his alleged mistress and he wants to know why they did it. Bezos's long time security consultant told "The Washington Post," he thinks the "Enquirer's" reporting was politically motivated. Bezos is the owner of "The Washington Post" and he says the "Enquirer" was threatening further humiliation if Bezos didn't go public and state that their expose was not politically motivated. Now, his blog post is titled, "No thank you, Mr. Pecker." He is talking about this man, AMI's Chairman and CEO, David Pecker. Now, his name has become public because of his association with President Donald Trump. Pecker was granted immunity in a Federal investigation into Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen. In exchange, Pecker agreed to provide Federal prosecutors information on hush money deals. Pecker is also known on the international stage. Bezos wrote that Pecker and his company have also been investigated for various actions that they have taken on behalf of the Saudi government. So much to impact here. Joining me now from New York, CNN political analyst John Avlon and CNN's chief media correspondent and host of "Reliable Sources," Brian Stelter, and it's great to have both of you here. Brian, I want to start with you. What could make the publisher of the "National Enquirer" so nervous that they would threaten to go nuclear on Jeff Bezos and even put it in writing if he doesn't call off his private investigation?
[Brian Stelter, Chief Media Correspondent, Cnn:] Right, that's exactly the question we've asked American media, we've asked Pecker and so far they've had no response at all to these incredible claims from Bezos. Look, it is remarkable that Bezos is publishing the e-mails, at least, one side of the e-mails so you can see what American media was allegedly proposing. They wanted to shut down Bezos's investigation into the "Enquirer's" leaks, into the "Enquirer's" probes and they wanted to shut it down so badly that they said if you put out a statement saying this was not politically motivated, then we will make all of your embarrassing photos and text messages disappear. You know, we're seeing the seedy underbelly of the tabloid culture here, and how the "Enquirer" apparently works. Others have accused the "Enquirer" of blackmail in the past, but the stakes here are so much higher because this involves the richest person in the world. Apparently, Bezos believes and knows he can afford the embarrassment. He can afford the risk, and so he's exposed this blackmail attempt in pure daylight.
[Ripley:] John Avlon, I want to read you a portion of Bezos' blog post. It says, "My ownership of "The Washington Post" is a complexifier for me. It is unavoidable that certain powerful people who experience "Washington Post" news coverage will wrongly conclude that I am their enemy." You know, Bezos says AMI was blackmailing him to publicly say that "The Washington Post" reporting and the "Enquirer's" reporting was not politically motivated. So as the former editor-in-chief of the "Daily Beast," do you see a journalistic line being crossed here?
[John Avlon, Political Analyst, Cnn:] Absolutely. This is not anything that lines up with anything resembling journalistic best practices, let alone ethics. You know, what Bezos is saying that when you're a publisher, when you own a news organization, you sometimes get blamed for things that if you're good at your job and not try to interfere with the editorial process, that you have nothing to do with. But what the executives at AMI, Dylan Howard, the chief content officer who wrote the e-mail threatening Mr. Bezos.
[Avlon:] And his general counsel, Jon P. Fine, who backed it up are doing is not anything in line with journalistic ethics even though at the end of Howard's e-mail, he tries to wave out, sort of carry out a fig leaf of ethics to say, "This is an e-mail that no editor would like to send. Let's hope cooler heads prevail." But don't let the fancy words mistake you for what this is. This is a threat, this is extortion, this is blackmail and it's tied up with the President of the United States in trying to get the publisher of "The Washington Post," who happens to be the world's richest man, to deny there's any political motivation to the leaking of their text messages. This story is significant. It is going to get worse as more information comes out and it is outside the bounds of anything we've recognized. If anything deserve to be called fake news, this does, this organization does.
[Ripley:] And Brian, a lot of lawyers are now debating whether or not this fits the legal definition of extortion and blackmail, but what does this mean for the "Enquirer" and its parent company, and also for David Pecker's immunity deal?
[Stelter:] The company has been in a precarious position because of these Michael Cohen dealings, these hush money payments that were brokered during the 2016 election. So you go back to the campaign you go back to the campaign days, the "Enquirer" was one of Trump's biggest boosters, one of Donald Trump's biggest supporters. Burying bad news about Trump and promoting bad news about his rivals. That has continued after election day, the "Enquirer" continued to promote Trump up until the day Michael Cohen's office was raided and the hush money payments began to be exposed. The "Enquirer" apparently flipped on Trump. Pecker apparently flipped on Trump, so you wonder now that we've heard about Bezos and this story is, whether the "Enquirer" and Pecker were trying to get back in President Trump's good graces, or trying to investigate one of Trump's enemies, Jeff Bezos in order to show Trump that they had his back. Because that is a part of what's going on here. Bezos and Trump there has been a back and forth for years, Trump hate the fact that Bezos owns "The Washington Post" so you have to wonder about the Trump connection in this story especially given Bezos has hints about that in his blog post. He refer to what he calls the Saudi angle referring to the "Enquirer's" parent company trying to take on Saudi money, promoting the Saudi Crown Prince and of course, we all know about President Trump's cozy relationship with the Saudis. So there's a lot of layers here. Every time you peel back the onion, you see more and more to this story, but at its core, it's about an incredibly powerful man, Jeff Bezos, rejecting a blackmail attempt and revealing how this shady world sometimes works.
[Ripley:] And John, Jeff Bezos, he owns one of the world's most powerful newspapers. What do you make of his decision to go public in this way? With a personal blogpost?
[Avlon:] I think that's actually profound because he's trying to create a degree of separation between his own personal shakedown attempt that he is dealing with and the outlet he runs. And to also underscore just how much there is a separation, a legitimate news organizations between the personal lives and personal views of even the publisher and the owner and the work the journalists do day in and day out. Something that Donald Trump and other critics don't begin to understand. And I think, we sometimes lose sight of the fact how unusual it is for the President of the United States to be attacking the publisher of "The Washington Post" and the questions that are raised by this. As Brian just laid out, is it just whether or not David Pecker and AMI actually undid their agreement? But the fact they were trying to cover for the President as well as themselves, and the Saudi angle that Mr. Bezos raises with some excellent reporting about basically a supermarket tabloid glossy by promoting Saudi Arabia, that appeared suddenly, that was obviously a pay to play deal, it really raises questions about these relationships and what strings are trying to be pulled. This may be standard operating procedure inside AMI. It's not in any legitimate news organization and this deserves to have the doors blown off.
[Ripley:] John Avlon, Brian Stelter, more to come with this story. Thanks for being with us.
[Stelter:] Yes.
[Avlon:] Thanks.
[Ripley:] Acting U.S. Attorney General Matthew Whitaker will testify before the House Judiciary Committee in the next hour after a tense back and forth between Congressional Democrats and the Justice Department. Democrats want to press Whitaker on two subjects; first, his decision not to recuse himself from overseeing Robert Mueller's Russia investigation despite his past public rebuke of that probe; and second, his conversations with President Trump about the Russia investigation. CNN congressional reporter Lauren Fox joins me now live from Washington. Lauren, Congressional Democrats clearly have a lot of questions for the acting Attorney General. How do you see this showdown playing out?
[Lauen Fox, Congressional Reporter, Cnn:] Well, Will, we didn't even know if Matthew Whitaker would appear before this Committee yesterday afternoon. There was this very tense back and forth between the Committee and the Justice Department about a subpoena and whether or not it would be used if Matthew Whitaker refused to answer some of those key questions that you pointed out.
[Fox:] Now, President Trump is very confident that Matthew Whitaker is going to do a stellar job today. Here is what he said about Mr. Whitaker's testimony.
[Unidentified Female:] Should Matthew Whitaker testify tomorrow, Mr. President?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] He is an outstanding person. I would say if he did testify, he'd do very well. He is an outstanding person, a very, very fine man. Thank you all very much.
[Fox:] Now, Will, you know, one thing to be watching today is exactly how Democrats ask these questions. You know, the fireworks involved here may be more substantive than the answers that they get from Matthew Whitaker. We do know that, you know, he is concerned about answering any questions about his conversations that he's had directly with the President, whether or not he claims that executive privilege, all something worth watching today at that House Judiciary hearing.
[Ripley:] Lauren, is this a taste of things to come? I mean, this is the first high profile oversight hearing since Democrats retook the House. Clearly, it won't be the last.
[Fox:] Clearly, and I think this week has been full of some on blockbuster hearings. There is this hearing today with Matthew Whitaker. But yesterday, there were two very notable subcommittee hearings in the House of Representatives. One of them on family separation policy at the southern border, another one on the precedent of getting the President's tax returns. That is another hot button issue that Democrats are going to be pursuing up here on Capitol Hill. So I think this is a taste of things to come, and this is really just coming days after the President's State of the Union address, of course, a moment that typically tries to unify the country. So a lot of division up here on Capitol Hill and definitely more to come when it comes to probing the President Will.
[Ripley:] To say the least, Lauren Fox on Capitol Hill, thanks for joining us.
[Fox:] Thank you.
[Ripley:] I want to turn now to the escalating crisis in Venezuela. Two aid trucks have arrived on the Colombian side of the border. You can see them right there. A U.S. officials says they are carrying food. They are carrying medical supplies for Venezuela. But President Nicolas Maduro's government has been blocking international aid deliveries. Now, his rival, opposition leader, the self-proclaimed interim President, Juan Guaido wants the military to let those supplies in and that plea is echoed by the U.S. State Department.
[Eliot Agrams, Special Representative On Venezuela, U.s. State Department:] There are dire needs, and I think many people, again, in the Venezuelan Army feel those needs for themselves and their families. So we're hopeful that that at least initial decision on the part of Maduro can be turned around if he sees a real demand on the part of the people of Venezuela. Let it in. That's all we're asking. Let it in.
[Ripley:] It is one thing to hear from government officials, but CNN's Isa Soarez has been hearing directly from the people who are suffering because of this and she joins me live from Cucuta on the Colombian-Venezuela border. Isa, I have been watching your excellent reporting. You've been bringing us these stories. They are so heartbreaking. Do you see this actually getting worse?
[Isa Soarez, Senior International Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, that's really the question, Will, that so many people have been asking me day in and day out, as I stand on the main pedestrian bridge. So just to give you a sense of where we are right now, we are roughly about two minute'walk from that Simon Bolivar Bridge, the main pedestrian bridge that you've seen me talk to people the last couple of days. So what happens is, people come out of this bridge before they start doing their shopping for those groceries, for those basic staples. They come to Western Union. And this is early. It is 8:00 here. Have a look at the queue already. It starts right here. There is a bit of a gap, people queueing in already to wait, sitting down, waiting. But if I can get Jose just to turn the camera around and I'm just going to snake through here. [Speaking foreign language]. And if we snake, have a look at this queue. It's the 8:00 hour and there's already a long queue snaking around the corner on to the main road for people to try and get money. Now, what we know from speaking to people here, Will, is that the majority of them are coming here to get money from relatives really, that have deposited into the bank account. So what happens is, relatives are all over the world Spain, Argentina, Chile that's what majority have been telling me. They deposit it into their accounts. They come and pick it up in pesos and then some of them actually go and buy groceries, others actually use it to go elsewhere. Let me ask come on over here, Jose let me ask some of these people what exactly they're doing. Good morning. [Speaking foreign language]. I'm asking what she's doing with the money. To buy food. [Speaking foreign language]. How often do you do this, I'm asking her. Every 15 days. Sending her money from abroad from Peru. So she has relatives sending her money from Peru in order for her to buy food. [Speaking foreign language]. The same. Together.
[Soares:] [Speaking foreign language]. Also food. [Speaking foreign language]. Good morning. [Speaking foreign language]. Also from Peru. So it gives you a sense really how people are dependent, so dependent on family to send them money abroad because, obviously because of hyperinflation, Will, there is just not enough money very little they can buy in fact back in Venezuela. I spoke to two individuals yesterday, one was going to Chile, the other one was going to Argentina. They are coming with their suitcases packed. They collect their money and then they go, whichever way they can. Coached, taxi whatever, finding a way to get out of Venezuela which is of course, as you've been seeing, a real humanitarian crisis unfolding in front of our very eyes Will.
[Ripley:] And eventually, family members run out of money to send and then what? Isa Soarez, thank you so much for keeping us up to date and we will keep checking back with you there from the Colombian-Venezuelan border. A deadly fire at the youth training center for one of Brazil's biggest football clubs. According to state-run media, fire tore through a dormitory where players were asleep. This is the training ground for the Flamingo Football Club. At least 10 people were killed, three others injured. The cause of that fire is being investigated right now. Next on "News Stream," lured into a war zone against her will.
[Unidentified Female:] He's like, you you have to come here. He's like, it's obligatory for you to come here. You have no choice.
[Ripley:] A so-called Caliphate collapses on itself in Syria. Ben Wedeman speaks with civilians as they flee the ruins. Plus, former Facebook employees are describing a cult-like work environment and a "Game of Thrones" culture. CNN gains unprecedented access as the social media giant turns 15.

[Whitfield:] Hundreds of Federal workers forced to work without pay because of the shutdown are not showing up to work at all. CNN has learned hundreds of Transportation Security Administration officers are calling out sick at major airports across the country. Officials with the TSA say at least three major airports are being impacted. CNN correspondent Polo Sandoval is live for us in New York. So Polo, JFK is one of the major airports being impacted. To what extent are others?
[Polo Sandoval, Correspondent, Cnn:] Well, Fred, the situation is so bad that at least two government officials who have been speaking to CNN say that this is now commonly being described as the "blue flu." That's a clear reference to the blue uniforms that you see these personnel wearing and baggage and passenger inspection points. And when you hear from these unions, they say you can expect even more. As you mentioned, here in JFK alone, 170 TSA personnel reportedly called in each day this past week and this number as we mentioned will likely go up.
[Sandoval:] Union officials saying what they believe is behind this. Yes, there are some of these personnel that would be quite upset at not getting paid, but they say that this is now part of one large protest or strike as we've heard in other reports. They say really the reasons are a bit more practical. You have some single parents for example who cannot afford child care, so they stay at home with their kids. Others have to take up other nongovernment jobs that would pay cash essentially to pay their bills because even though the shutdown continues, their obligations obviously for pay or for the bills and the rent do continue. So now the question, how will this affect the traveling public? Union officials are concerned they say they could create a vulnerability, it could create possibly a less secure traveling environment because this could lead to less pat downs, potentially less random searches. But the Transportation Security Administration responding to that in a statement, Fred, I want to read you a portion of what that Federal agency had to say, essentially hoping to calm any concerns for the traveling public. They say calls out began recently over the holiday period and have increased, but they are causing, in their own words, minimal impact. The TSA went on to say that security effectiveness will not be compromised and also performance standards will not change. However, interesting note here, they also write, "Wait times may be affected depending on the number of callouts." And that's very important to keep in mind here, Fred, as we could potentially see perhaps less screening lanes. The TSA will now essentially have to do more with less personnel especially as this government shutdown continues Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right, Polo Sandoval, thank you so much.
[Sandoval:] You bet.
[Whitfield:] So this partial government shutdown is now in its 15th day, and now, it is also facing new legal challenges. This week, the American Federation of Government Employees Union filed a lawsuit against the White House. It claims the shutdown is violating the Fair Labor Standards Act by illegally forcing more than 400,000 employees to work without pay. One of those employees, Justin Tarovisky, a Federal penitentiary worker, who spoke to CNN last weekend about working during this shutdown. Listen.
[Justin Tarovisky, Vice President Afge Local 420, Hazelton Prison:] That could drive morale down, especially if you're an officer that you go into a United States penitentiary every day to protect the community, protect the inmates, and to protect staff and that's going to be on the back of your mind and that can affect you, you know, away from the prison mentally because you're not you're told you're not going to be paid. That could drive your morale down.
[Whitfield:] Joining me right now, the lead attorney representing Federal employees in this lawsuit. Heidi Burakiewicz. Heidi, thanks so much for being with me.
[Heidi Burakiewicz, Lead Attorney Representing Federal Employees:] Thank you for having me.
[Whitfield:] So we just heard your client there talking about his experience, so is this a sentiment that you're hearing from others in a similar situation?
[Burakiewicz:] Absolutely. The number of heartbreaking stories that I've heard from my clients and the Federal employees that I know and that I work with is heartbreaking. Similar to 2013, I heard so many heartbreaking stories. In addition to having to work very dangerous jobs, the employees are under a tremendous amount of stress. No one knows how long this shutdown is going to last or when they're going to get their next paycheck, how they are going to pay bills, put food open the table.
[Whitfield:] So how do you use the President's comments from just yesterday in the Rose Garden perhaps to your advantage potentially in this case where he has said he's very proud of, you know, what is happening here and he says this shutdown could last months if not years?
[Burakiewicz:] That would be devastating on a tremendously large scale for the shutdown to last that long or any longer, quite frankly. I think there's a lack of understanding about the people who are being affected, hardworking, blue-collar Americans. I think AFGE has stated that their average member salary is $500.00 a week. Employees have already received a partial paycheck in which people who worked on December 22nd weren't paid at all. The next payday is coming up soon, and if the shutdown doesn't end, there's going to be a large number of employees who receive no paycheck whatsoever. That could be devastating. I have clients around the country, people who I've worked with, who have had medical problems. As a result, they've depleted their savings. They're not able to save up money. They're living paycheck to paycheck and they don't know what they're going to do.
[Whitfield:] And for so many, they're just now starting to receive all those holiday bills that they were anticipating being able to be on top of with their next paycheck. So you won a similar case against the Federal government during the shutdown in 2013. Do you see some real parallels here in your strategy?
[Burakiewicz:] Absolutely. From my perspective, the legal issues in the 2013 case and this case are identical. The government filed a motion to dismiss in 2013 and the judge ruled in our favor, determining that the government, in fact, violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by requiring these essential employees, the people who keep our country safe, go to work and not pay them on time. The only issue left in the case was whether or not the government was liable for liquidated damages. The judge ruled in our favor on that issue as well determining that the government didn't act in good faith when it failed to pay these employees.
[Whitfield:] So while there was a win, you know, in your category, in that last lawsuit for the 2013 case, still 25,000 employees are still waiting to receive, you know, those damages. So, is there a way in which to prevent that from happening again or even does this current case give you any leverage to try to get those damages awarded to those 25,000?
[Burakiewicz:] Well, the legal issues in the Court of Federal Claims are resolved in the 2013 case. And the government's been calculating damages. Litigation unfortunately never moves very fast. And the government had delays in collecting all the payroll records that it needed for all of the employees covered who opted into the 2013 case. We're optimistic however that this case will move much faster because the legal issues have been resolved. As I said, I find them to be identical legal issues. And we have a framework for how to calculate the damages. I'm optimistic the government at the end of that process and the calculations will soon be finished in the 2013 case. Damages have already accrued now for this shutdown in 2018. As I indicated, employees who worked overtime on December 22nd haven't gotten paid for it. Payday came and went and they didn't get their money. But what's really important, what all of my clients want is for the shutdown to end so they can get back to work, so they can know when they're getting their next paycheck.
[Whitfield:] All right, we'll leave it there. Heidi Burakiewicz, thank you so much for your time. Appreciate it.
[Burakiewicz:] Thank you.
[Whitfield:] All right, meantime, a new generation of Democrats have taken office in Washington. Ahead, the impact that they're having on the party's old guard. Plus, frightening moments inside a bowling alley. Three people shot and killed. We'll have the latest on that investigation.

[Banfield:] He was once known as America`s dad. Now, he`ll be known as a sexually violent predator. Bill Cosby, sentenced to between three and 10 years in prison today. And look at that mugshot. Look at the mood on his face. All of this for drugging and assaulting Andrea Constand, a former college basketball player, and after more than four years of accusations from oh, I don`t know around 60 other women. The final nail is in the coffin for Cosby. The comedian was taken from the courtroom in handcuffs this afternoon. Let me tell you, the silence was deafening. Look at that. He is going to spend his first night of his sentence behind bars tonight. Denied bail. And at 81 years old and in poor health, that could mean Cosby, this inmate, might spend the rest of his life in prison. The next hour of "Crime & Justice" starts now.
[Chris Watts, Suspect In Murdering Wife And Family:] She wasn`t here. The kids weren`t here. Nobody was here.
[Unidentified Female:] No movement in between those times of me dropping her off, Chris leaving and then me coming back.
[Banfield:] And first he said they were missing.
[Watts:] I have no information of where she is.
[Banfield:] But then they turned up murdered. Now he`s saying his wife killed the kids.
[Watts:] We had an emotional conversation. But I`ll leave it at that.
[Banfield:] But police say he killed them all.
[Unidentified Female:] He`s a monster.
[Banfield:] And he may have just left a trail of clues behind in the rush to get out of the house.
[Unidentified Female:] Something is seriously wrong
[Banfield:] Tonight, new reports about the state of that home that became a crime scene.
[Watts:] We got canine units, the sheriff`s department is going through the house trying to get a scent and
[Unidentified Male:] Feel free to say if no if you want to.
[Watts:] No, like you`re good. Just yes, go ahead.
[Banfield:] Plus, how did the Watts girls died.
[Unidentified Male:] Strangulation involves force that can increased the amount of skin cells.
[Banfield:] Someone has the answers, why aren`t they sharing?
[Unidentified Male:] The coroner`s office doesn`t have the report. It`s possible maybe they don`t want to have the answers out there.
[Banfield:] Why the dark details are staying secret for now.
[Unidentified Male:] Is this unusual? Absolutely.
[Banfield:] Good evening Everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield and this is Crime & Justice. Tonight, the darker details of this case hang in what you could call a paper purgatory. Court documents stuck between courts and the coroner and the actual forensic pathologist who got a look at the Watts` girls corpses. We`re going to get to that in a moment. But first, we have exclusive new details tonight, from the people in Colorado who are perhaps the most impacted by the case, the family members of Shanann Watts. The family members haunted by these murders of Shanann and her babies. The family members who buried Shanann and those two daughters, just weeks ago in North Carolina but tonight find themselves back in Frederick, Colorado, the same place where Chris Watts is accused of killing them. A source close to the case telling me that not only Shanann`s mother Sandy Rzucek but also Shanann`s brother and best friend, Frankie Rzucek traveling back from North Carolina back to Colorado, the scene of the crime. It is so tragic when you think of what they`re going through every single day. After burying them and hoping for some peace in this case, instead they are back in Colorado, this family. And not only that, they are back for specific reasons. They are back to quote, "take care of things." What entails, not entirely sure. But I can tell you this. Several days both Sandy Rzucek and her son Frankie went back to Colorado. They were seen checking into the Carbon Valley Recreational Center. Why that is unclear? What that recreational center may offer them either respite or information, also unclear. Whether they met with law enforcement at this time, not clear. But Steve Moore is a former FBI Agent and Investigator. Also a CNN Law Enforcement Analyst. Perhaps you can clear up why it might be that this family now six weeks after the murder would be traveling back to Colorado, spending several days there, and doing something which I can say a source close to the case has told me is taking care of things. What do you think that means?
[Steve Moore, Cnn Law Enforcement Analyst:] Well, besides the normal normal process of possessions and things like that, there may the police may want background on the husband, and certainly Shanann spoke to her family about him, and my guess is that they do they want to do a deep debrief with the family on any and every single thing she said to them.
[Banfield:] So you think he`s you think that they may be going back there not just to take care of a few things, but also to speak again with police officers or investigators there?
[Moore:] I think so, and maybe prosecutors specifically, because the police have put together their case, and now the prosecutors have to go in court and prove it. And so the prosecutors, you know, the investigators and prosecutors work at different paces at different times. And it`s very possible that they want to meet with the family. Of course with the detectives, but they want to start building the entire case.
[Banfield:] Let me ask you something else, the source tells me that the that the Prosecutor`s Office has been in regular contact with Shanann`s family back in North Carolina. And often the communications that come from the office to the family as opposed to the other way around, getting questions answered, et cetera. But the communications from the prosecutors to this family are offering them hope. Actually suggesting the prosecutors are going to get this guy, are going to find justice for this family. Does that sound out of the norm?
[Moore:] No, because when you`re dealing with families of victims, you have to give them something. You can`t just say, this is we`re not we`re not going to get anything done here. I believe that they have reason to tell them that. They have reason to believe they`re going to get justice for them, as much justice as you can get, knowing they`re not going to bring the victims back. But it is a very delicate and painful thing for both sides for the prosecutors to work with the victim`s families, because sometimes the families want more from the prosecutors than they can give. And sometimes the prosecutors want more from the family than they have, so it`s very, very difficult.
[Banfield:] So Steve, what do you make of this that they were checking in with some friends. In fact one of Shanann`s watts best friends, long time best friends who also was in Colorado, Lauren Arnold, apparently with Shanann`s mother Sandy, and Shanann`s brother Frankie as well as Lauren Arnold`s mother, Lorie Williamson Carter, all four of them checking in at this Carbon Valley Recreational Center. Do you see that as anything potentially investigative? I mean recreational centers can be anything but they can also be places with a lot of workout facilities and we all know that Chris Watts was doing a lot of working out.
[Moore:] Yes. I don`t know if they would put the victim`s families in an area where evidence would be found. But the fact that they`re bringing people that were confidants of Shanann is indicative of something to me. It tells me they are trying to find out what was in her mind in the months previous to this, maybe in the years previous to this, maybe in the years previous to this. They`re going to try to build a case not just on the facts in evidence, but they`re going to try and build it on a profile of how Chris degenerated to a point where he was willing to kill his family.
[Banfield:] Let`s be clear, the Carbon Valley Recreational Center is right in Frederick. It is in that in that small community where Shanann and her children lived with Chris Watts, before being murdered. But we don`t know anything about it. I mean this could have been, like I said it could have been respite. It could have been them going for lunch. It could have them just going to get a quiet day. We really don`t know why these four were seen checking into the Carbon Valley Recreational Center or what exactly the several days in Colorado are all about. But I want to bring in Pat Lalama, Crime Journalist. Pat, one of the very fascinating aspects of this case which we broke on this show last flight, and then surprise, surprise started seeing motions flying around this morning, was that the prosecutor`s office had a deadline of today, to share the autopsies with the defense. The defense has been barking mad about not having discovery shared with them, understandably, right? But he prosecutors didn`t have the autopsy. They`re being ordered by the court to turn over the autopsies. But they don`t have the autopsies. So they filed a motion today telling the court, you`re barking up the wrong tree with us. But I am fascinated about this, because it seems to me that the only people who are in possession of these official reports are the people who did the forensic science. The people in the operating rooms, who actually witnessed these three bodies?
[Pat Lalama, Crime Journalist:] Well, Ashleigh, it`s really, you know, not to take the side of the coroner`s office. Everybody wants to see these details, but the prosecution is saying, at this point we don`t have everything. A lot of forensic evidence is yet to be completed, and when we do dear defense team. We know the rules of the court. And I have to tell you Ashleigh, I doubt that they`re going to mess with procedure. They`re not going to hold back something that they know the defense the defense is entitled to have. I think we have to give it a little more time. I don`t see this is shenanigans. It`s the way the game is played at this point.
[Banfield:] And I`ll tell you what. It`s not the first time we`ve witnessed this game.
[Lalama:] Yes.
[Banfield:] So here`s a very, very unfortunate coincidence. And we are not casting aspersions at all.
[Lalama:] Right.
[Banfield:] On this coroner but this particular coroner in this case was sued back in 2002 because very unfortunate for him, he took a job with the coroner`s office in Jefferson County, Colorado. It`s not this county. But it was Jefferson County Colorado. And lo and behold that was the county where the Columbine Massacre happened, and that was the county where Dylan Klebold`s body was being housed and the autopsy was being performed. Dylan Klebold one of two mass murderers along with Eric Harris killing thoe children at Columbine. His body and his autopsy was being withheld believe it or not.
[Lalama:] Right.
[Bandfield:] And that coroner was sued for not releasing the full autopsy. But again it may be the same coroner we`re talking about now, but he wasn`t the guy who did it. He joined the team later.
[Lalama:] Right.
[Bandfield:] He just happened to be named in the suit, it is fascinating now to see that the Dylan Klebold autopsy was also withheld for a very long time in that crime. Let me bring in Joseph Scott Morgan quickly here. Joe, you are a certified death investigator. You teach this stuff for God`s sake. I mean if anyone knows it as professor of forensics at Jacksonville State University. Not only that you`ve also participated, this is news to me. In about 10,000 autopsy, is that correct?
[Joseph Scott Morgan, Professor Forensics, Jacksonville State University:] Yes, yes, you`re absolutely correct. I worked in Atlanta and the coroner in New Orleans.
[Bandfield:] So you would know the ins and outs of how this works. Can you help me to sort of navigate why the delay from the person actually performing the autopsy, the medical examiner, the forensic pathologist, why that report has not been delivered in seven weeks, seven weeks. Now six and half weeks or so, to the coroner`s office so the coroner, the elected guy can actually deliver it to prosecutors? What could be the holdup?
[Morgan:] Yes. I`m not going to speak directly to the Watts case. But I will tell you based upon my experience some of the things that come into play here are cooperation with the D.A. The D.A. has asked that this not be released at this point. Sometimes the police will ask for these sort of thing, and sometimes if you have a staff of forensic pathologists, keep in mind these are highly technical people. They`re very bright, intelligent. They go over jot and tattle if you will in these cases. Sometimes they make decisions on mass. They try to come to a determination to help the primary forensic primary forensic pathologist, and sometimes they don`t agree. I would think that, you know, we talked a lot about postmortem interval in this case. We don`t know how oil actually affects bodies in a suspension like this. So, they may be going back and forth on scientific details. Then of course, people think about for instance layers of buffering that take place. You have the D.A. saying they don`t have it, the police saying they don`t have it. Then you have the coroner saying they don`t have it. And keep in mind in this particular case, the M.E.`s they have are employed as consultants. You can actually see that on their county website. They are not listed as direct employees but listed as consultants, Consultant Forensic Pathologists. So that adds another layer to this.
[Bandfield:] So let me bring in Donna Kauffmann, an Investigative Journalist. She`s also the author of Anne Rule presents Final Exams. Donna, you have covered so many of these crime stories. And you covered the JonBenet Ramsey case. And it might be that our audience doesn`t remember this one critical detail. But in that particular case as well, Jonbenet Ramsey`s autopsy was withheld from the public for how long?
[Donna Kauffmann, Investigative Journalist:] Eight Months.
[Banfield:] Eight months.
[Kauffmann:] And it was performed on December 27th. She died on the 25th or 26th in Boulder, Colorado. The 27th was the autopsy, it was very thorough. They even brought in colposcope which is the camera that can take photos of her internal injuries and they sat on it. And because
[Bandfield:] So tell me why? What was the reason ultimately because now so many years later I`m sure that that`s all had sunshine you know walked upon it. What was the reason they held on for eight months to that autopsy?
[Kauffmann:] Well first, they released it without the genital findings. And we said hey you`re missing a few pages here. And then they released the whole thing. They just wanted to get their ducks in a row while they were doing that, while we were all waiting. And believe me this was an international case. People were going to people who worked in that office with buckets of cash and saying just give me a copy of it. And they were refusing all offers of that nature. At the same time, the Boulder D.A. was meeting with other D.A.`s in the state, the FBI, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, international, national help, three pediatric gynecologists, I mean, it was a world class team
[Bandfield:] Did they also did the experts who did her autopsy also have disagreements about what ultimately killed her? We were trying to figure out if she was killed by the ligature or whether she was killed by the blow to the head. Is that also a factor in why they held the public release of Jonbenet`s autopsy for so long?
[Kauffmann:] And kept expanding their teams of experts to different opinions, what they the question, on the final exam, said asphyxia by strangulation, associated with cranial cerebral trauma.
[Bandfield:] So both? Yes, they didn`t it doesn`t sound like they decided one or the other.
[Kauffmann:] That`s means the asphyxia the ligature happened first and the blow to the head which fractured her skull eight and half inches on one side happened the second. And at the same time she had genital injuries.
[Bandfield:] Maybe maybe this is something we need to take into account. And again this is Colorado, right? Maybe this is what we have to take into account. The fact that there could be disagreements about the or there could be other injuries or other potential realities in this case and other than what Chris Watts allegedly has has confessed too. One last quick questions and this one is to Steve Moore. As a former FBI Agent, an investigator, tell me this, like I can`t get this from the D.A., they are locked tight with the information. But do you think they already know? Do you think they`ve had something called the cold read as I learned from you?
[Moore:] Yes.
[Banfield:] They already know despite having those formal reports in their hands how these women and how these two girls and these women died?
[Morgan:] The interaction between investigators and the medical examiner`s office is verbal. It`s on the phone. I mean I on my cases, I would be in the autopsy. There would be nothing surprises to me, when the report came. And I would be in touch with them every day, have you gotten the toxicology back? Have you gotten this back? So yes, the police know within minutes of the medical examiner knowing, and they might there`re reasons and we can discuss that later but one of the things you say, if you don`t want it out right away. They`ll say I`ll send you the report right now and, you say, you know, why don`t you go back and double check everything, might take you a couple days, right? OK, go back and do that, and then send it to me. So there are ways to get this done.
[Bandfield:] A little bit of time. Makes sense to me. Yes, but I just can`t imagine that they have started investigating a case without knowing the genesis of the case which is the cause of death before. I`ve seen cases go down on case of death. Steve hold your thoughts for a moment if you will because Shanann and Chris Watts home presumably had the latest in home security technology. And how do we know this? Because of the pictures on the outside of the house devices like this, a doorbell camera and a wireless smart lock. Here`s a question, might Chris Watts have been watching very closely what was going on outside his home, monitoring his security remotely the day Shanann and the girls were buried? And could investigators now themselves mind all of those electronics to potentially trip up his time line? And trip up the things he said he did at certain times? Wait until you hear what else is monitored in that home.

[Cabrera:] The Nunes memo, now is out for all to read. President Trump says it vindicates him in the investigation of possible Russian collusion. A short time ago I spoke to Republican Congressman Mike Turner, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, who wanted this memo to go public. He told me the core of the memo, that improper protocol was used to authorize a Trump aide's wiretap is what the American people need to see.
[Rep. Mike Turner , Intelligence Committee:] There is nothing at all that is going to contradict that Hillary Clinton campaign funded material were used as evidence in a court case, nothing. Now all the other information that the Democrat Party and their memorandum and the FBI might want to become public should become public and should be part of the discussion. But I believe, and I think even you and everyone who looks at this, will say Republican, Democrat, whether it's Hillary Clinton or Trump or whether it's Obama and Romney, no administration, no administration should use campaign material from another presidential campaign and use it as evidence in a court case against the other presidential campaign. It is a threat to democracy. It is wrong. We ought to be able to say that. Another thing I'd like to hear the FBI director to say is that he believes it's wrong for an official of the FBI or an FBI agent to be assigned to a case where they have a family member that has a direct interest in the outcome of that case. Those two things would go a long way I think in trying to get this resolved and that's we ought to move forward with some reforms because there are going to have to be some reforms in order for us to ensure this doesn't happen again.
[Cabrera:] OK. Let me ask you about the president's tweet this morning. He says this memo totally vindicates Trump in probe but the Russian witch hunt goes on and on. There was no collusion. There was no obstruction. And you can read the rest there on your screen. Do you agree that this memo totally vindicates Trump in the Mueller investigation?
[Turner:] No. This the memo isn't about the special counsel's investigation. It's not about Trump. It's about the one incident that is of grave concern, of Hillary Clinton campaign materials being as evidence in a court case. That's it. That's the message that is out there that we need to address. We need to reform this so that we don't have this happen again because when you blur those lines, you threaten democracy.
[Cabrera:] When you talk about reform and accountability in this, what about Rod Rosenstein? He was listed as one of the people in the memo who reauthorized the FISA warrant and surveillance against Carter Page. What do you think is his future? What if the president decides to fire him? Would you support it?
[Turner:] No. I think what needs to happen is the discussion about what the content of the memo is with the campaign materials being used. You know, Director Comey, you know, when he was director, he not only knew but believed it's OK. He tweeted out afterwards when the memo came out that that's it? He believes it's OK for Hillary Clinton campaign materials that are funded by that campaign to make their way as evidence into this court case. Now I think the American public
[Cabrera:] Let me stop you there for a second because Director Comey is not there.
[Turner:] do not believe that.
[Cabrera:] Director Comey is gone. There's a new FBI director
[Turner:] No. He tweeted that out and he said that's it.
[Cabrera:] A lot of people have been demoted, who have been called into question based on their investigation.
[Turner:] He said that's it.
[Cabrera:] What has been revealed by the inspector general's report who is looking into an independent investigation into the Hillary Clinton
[Turner:] Right. So there is a culture
[Cabrera:] Excuse me. Just a moment, please. I want to make sure we get back to it because I am very short on time here at the end of our segment.
[Turner:] Sure.
[Cabrera:] And I just want to get a quick answer. Do you stand behind Rod Rosenstein?
[Turner:] You know, I think we have to look at the whole job he's doing. I see no reason why he would not be supported. I don't think this memo has anything to do with that. I think it has to do with the crux of protecting democracy and ensuring that the culture that James Comey thought was OK, of using campaign materials as evidence in court cases stops. And I think that, you know, our current director, Director Wray, could come forward and say I think this is wrong. We will not be using campaign materials against another campaign as evidence in the future and we will not have agents or officials on cases where their spouse has an interest in the case.
[Cabrera:] Again, that was Representative Mike Turner. Coming up, in a new interview, actress Uma Thurman is accusing disgraced movie producer Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault. Why she says she's breaking her silence now. Next.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back. Five of the world's biggest aid organizations agree if the U.S. doesn't stop supporting the Saudi war in Yemen, it will be directly complicit in causing what could be the largest famine in decades.
[Cyril Vanier, Cnn Anchor:] In a scathing letter, the aid groups say 14 million Yemenis are at risk of starving to death. Three years of war have caused import restrictions, blockades, damaged infrastructure, not to mentions, of course, the fighting. And all of this is preventable. CNN's Sam Kiley explains.
[Sam Kiley, Cnn Correspondent:] An electronic pulse tracks Naziha's battle with death. Her insides were torn out in an air strike carried out by the Saudi-led coalition that's supported and armed by the U.S. and the U.K. The bombing killed three of her sisters and wounded two more in Hodeidah.
[Maged Ghaleb, Father Of Airstrike Victims:] We are calling on all the honorable people of the world, all people from all religions, anyone who has a heart to stop this bloodshed. We cannot take it. Yemenis and their children are being murdered in cold blood.
[Kiley:] A bipartisan bill that demands an immediate end to fighting and to the U.S. support for Saudi Arabia's campaign is being considered by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And it's getting support from five of the U.S. biggest charities that are working in Yemen. They published a joint letter calling for an end to support to Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. in the war.
[Abby Maxman, Ceo Oxfam America:] The U.S. has been over the course of the conflict over three and a half involved in supporting the Saudi- led, U.A.E.-backed coalition in Yemen. And it has perpetuated the war. The U.S. has been an arms broker while trying to be a peace broker which is a difficult thing to do both.
[Kiley:] At least 10,000 people have been killed in this war, many of them hit in air strikes like the Saudi attack on a bus that killed dozens of children with an American bomb. The U.N. has called for a ceasefire but there are no signs that the two biggest arms suppliers to Saudi Arabia the U.S. and the U.K. are going to join Denmark, Finland and Germany in stopping the flow of weapons. And while the war rages on, aid agencies say that 14 million people are threatened with famine and the U.N. says 400,000 children are on the brink of starvation. Sam Kiley, CNN Abu Dhabi.
[Vanier:] Now a blow to the LGBT community in Taiwan. Voters say no to legalizing same-sex marriage. And that's not all they did. We'll have the latest on the Taiwan elections when we come back.

[Cabrera:] Now we know of three payments made to prevent unflattering stories about Donald Trump from going public. One, to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, one to former playmate Karen McDougal, and now a doorman of Trump Tower. The last two both reportedly paid by "National Enquirer" publisher, AMI, a company whose boss is a friend and protector of Donald Trump. Tom Foreman has more.
[Tom Foreman, Cnn Correspondent:] "Obama Wiretapped Trump." "Hillary: Corrupt! Racist Criminal!" In lurid attacks on politicians, the "National Enquirer" hits hard, fast. But when it comes to Donald Trump, the boxing gloves come off, and the kid gloves go on. "Trump Catches Russia's White House Spy." "Trump Must Build the Wall." "Trump Takes Charge." Why such a difference? The man in charge of that tabloid, David Pecker, is a friend of Donald Trump. And Trump is a fan of Pecker's slash and burn tactics for taking down politicians and celebrities alike.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] I've always said, why didn't the "National Enquirer" get the Pulitzer Prize for Edwards and O.J. Simpson and all of these things?
[Foreman:] The mutually beneficial relationship between the two New Yorkers started in the 1990s over their shared interest in the power and value of headlines. Ever since, they've grown closer and more protective of each other's empires.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] It was mostly a one-way protection. I mean, this was it was really a kind of hero worship on the part of Pecker. I mean, Pecker really looked up to Donald Trump, still does. And he put his very important magazines to work for Donald Trump's interests.
[Foreman:] For example, when the "National Enquirer" printed a ridiculously false claim about the Kennedy assassination and the father of Ted Cruz, Trump's rival for the Republican nomination, the billionaire jumped on board.
[Trump:] On the cover of the "National Enquirer" there's a picture of him and crazy Lee Harvey Oswald having breakfast.
[Foreman:] In the general election, Pecker's paper raged at Hillary Clinton, attacking her health, her credibility, while giving Trump the tabloid's first and only political endorsement. And most importantly
[Karen Mcdougal, Former Playmate, Playboy:] I know it's wrong. Like, I'm really sorry for that. I know it's a wrong thing to do.
[Foreman:] several have now said Pecker's company bought the rights to stories potentially damaging to Trump just to keep them out of the public eye, a practice called catch and kill. And at one point, an MSNBC host claimed the White House threatened to launch a hit piece on them in the "Enquirer."
[Joe Scarborough, Msnbc:] They said, if you call the President up and you apologize for your coverage, then he will pick up the phone and basically spike the story.
[Cabrera:] Our thanks to Tom Foreman reporting there. We're back in just a moment.

[Whitfield:] All right, welcome back. Live pictures right now out of Boston as we understand demonstrations are beginning to disperse there. Hundreds if not thousands of people have descended on the city with dueling demonstrations. Police even at one moment pushing back against protesters as tensions continue to rise. The objective, we understand from Boston police, was to try to separate one group of demonstrators from another group of demonstrators so that the two did not produce any unrest by clashing. These protests come amid harsh backlash toward the president of the United States over his mixed messages on the deadly Charlottesville, Virginia, clashes last weekend. All of this as the firing of chief strategist Steve Bannon is highlighting a dramatic shift in the president's inner circle. Trump is spending the day at his New Jersey golf course with no scheduled events planned. Joining me right now is CNN's Boris Sanchez. Boris, the president is not on the scene, but apparently he has been tweeting. And what has the president been saying?
[Boris Sanchez, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey there, Fred. So far we've gotten no indication that the president is watching the events in Boston unfold. He has not tweeted about them specifically, and we've not gotten clarity on the White House as to exactly what the president is doing today, whether or not he's on the golf course or not. But his tweets earlier today, two of them specifically referenced Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist that we learned yesterday was fired by the administration. The first tweet that the president sent out, he writes, quote, "I want to thank Steve Bannon for his service. He came to the campaign during my run against crooked Hillary Clinton. It was great. Thanks, S." That "S" of course referring to Steve Bannon. The president later on several hours later went on to tweet, quote, "Steve Bannon will be a tough and smart new voice at "Breitbart News," maybe even better than before. Fake news needs the competition." So obviously Bannon is on the mind of the president, though it's interesting that in those tweets he didn't mention any of Steve Bannon's work in the White House in his position as chief strategist. Beyond that, ironically, his other tweet today focused on a major point of dissension between Steve Bannon and other top White House officials, Afghanistan. The president tweeting about his meetings yesterday with top military brass in Camp David, saying that they came to some important decisions, one of them being on Afghanistan. Though CNN did reach out to the Pentagon and got a response, saying that there was no new announcements or information from the Department of Defense, so the president obviously keeping this information close. And as you said, Fred, he has no public appearances today so the press can't ask him about this new approach in Afghanistan, the firing of Steve Bannon, or these protests that we're seeing in Boston and elsewhere in the country this weekend, Fred.
[Whitfield:] Or even ask the president any further about the president and first lady not attending the upcoming December Kennedy Center honors, which is tradition for presidents to be in attendance and also host the reception.
[Sanchez:] You're absolutely right, Fred. That's another piece of information we got from the White House this morning. This is a big deal. This is only the fourth time that a sitting president is going to miss the Kennedy Center honors gala. And the quote that we got from the White House was, quote, "The president and first lady have decided not to participate in this year's activities to allow the honorees to celebrate without any political distraction." Now interestingly enough, several of these honorees, included Norman Lear, Lionel Richie, and Carmen de Lavallade had said that they would boycott that reception at the White House that usually takes place before the Kennedy Center honors gala. This is just one more instance of backlash against the president after his comments about Charlottesville. We also saw the implosion of some of those special councils that he put together, the manufacturing council and the infrastructure council which didn't really get off the ground. We're also seeing several charities move events away from Mar-a-Lago, the Susan G. Komen foundation, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army as well. So this is clearly a trend of people moving away from the president, not limited to those within his own party. We saw several members of the GOP come out and call the president out by name, saying that he needs to apologize for his comments on Charlottesville going back to last Tuesday, Fred.
[Whitfield:] All right, Boris Sanchez in New Jersey, thank you so much. And we'll be right back.

[Camerota:] The billionaire family that helped arrange the controversial meeting between Donald Trump, Jr. and a Russian lawyer is offering their side of the story now through their new attorney. The family says at no point did they think the purpose of the meeting was to spill dirt on Hillary Clinton.
[Cuomo:] That point is counter to what we see in this e-mail chain given by Donald Trump, Jr. How so? We have CNN's Alex Marquardt with the details?
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Well, this will be a great one, there's no question, because of the fact that it's Miss Universe in Moscow.
[Alex Marquardt, Cnn Senior National Correspondent:] In November 2013, Donald Trump was in Russia to host the Miss Universe pageant. At his side, his business partner for the pageant, fellow billionaire and real estate developer Aras Agalarov. Just days before, Agalarov had been awarded one of Russia's honors by Vladimir Putin, himself. And now, Agalarov, along with his pop star son Emin, were hobnobbing with Trump who later told Russian reporters he was considering a run for president.
[Trump:] Well, a lot of people want me to run and a lot of people want to see a different approach.
[Marquardt:] The origins of Donald Trump, Jr.'s controversial meeting with lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya can all be traced back to the Miss Universe pageant. Noah Kirsch has covered Trump's business ties for "Forbes" magazine.
[Noah Kirsch, Reporter, Forbes Magazine:] Agalarov decided he wanted the most beautiful women in the world to be in his music video. That led him to a meeting with Miss Universe the Miss Universe organization which, eventually, he said led him to an invitation from Donald Trump, himself.
[Marquardt:] An invitation to the Miss USA pageant in Las Vegas where they reportedly brokered the deal to host the Miss Universe competition later that year in Moscow. The Agalarovs claimed they spent $20 million on the event.
[Trump:] So we'll be there on November ninth in Moscow and come on up here folks, where are you? Where are my partners? Where are my very powerful, very rich, very nice great people?
[Marquardt:] With them in Vegas, Emin's British publicist Rob Goldstone. A few days later, Trump wondering aloud on Twitter, "Do you think Putin will be going to the Miss Universe pageant in November in Moscow? If so, will he become my new best friend?" He didn't attend but Putin reportedly sent a present for Trump and Emin Agalarov performed. EMIN AGALAROV, POP STAR [Singing] After, Trump tweeting the Agalarov father, "I had a great weekend with you and your family. You have done a fantastic job. Trump Tower Moscow is next. Emin was wow." The relationship grew. Trump even appeared in Emin's music video.
[Trump:] Emin, wake up, come on. What's wrong with you?
[Kirsch:] We know that Emin Agalarov spent time at Trump properties, that he received a personalized video message from the president on this 35th birthday. And I know from my conversation with him that, at least according to Emin Agalarov, this relationship extended up to and past the November election.
[Marquardt:] So when the message came via Rob Goldstone that Emin Agalarov wanted Donald, Jr. to meet a Russian government attorney, he likely assumed it was coming from trusted friends. Today, the Agalarov's new lawyer claiming Goldstone's e-mail was utterly inconsistent with what our understanding was of the purpose of the meeting, telling CNN Goldstone is out of his element in writing these e-mails and having these communications. Alex Marquardt, CNN, New York.
[Cuomo:] Out of his element. What does that mean? Does that mean he made it up? Does that mean he got something wrong? We have someone who can answer those questions. The Agalarov's attorney, Mr. Scott Balber. Counselor, good to have you on the show.
[Scott Balber, Attorney For Emin And Aras Agalarov:] Good to be here, thank you.
[Cuomo:] Please answer that question. What does that mean, he was out of his element, Mr. Goldstone? And just to refresh everybody's recollection, Donald Trump, Jr. was in an e-mail chain with Goldstone about a meeting set up either with one of your clients or someone that they knew who wound up being this attorney this female attorney that they met with and with some others. So, what does that mean that Goldstone was out of his element in these e-mails?
[Balber:] Well, Rob Goldstone, as you know, is a music publicist. He was the publicist for Emin Agalarov. He's not a political guy, he's not a lawyer. And we suspect that he was trying to do a favor for his client and make this introduction to the lawyer, but this is not his realm and therefore he said things which were, quite frankly, foolish and, ultimately, false.
[Cuomo:] Do you know Goldstone?
[Balber:] I do not know him personally, no.
[Cuomo:] By reputation, is he known to be a pathological liar?
[Balber:] I don't know his reputation. I have no reason to suggest that he's a pathological liar but what I will tell you that what he says in the e-mail is not true.
[Cuomo:] But well, how do you know it's not true?
[Balber:] Well, I know it's not true because I've had communications with the people referenced in the e-mail and it's simply fiction that this was some effort to create a conduit for information from the Russian federal prosecutors to the Trump campaign. And let me just pause for a second and let's look at how absurd it would be. As I was listening to the broadcast you indicated that Mr. Trump and Mr. Agalarov had a relationship dating back to the Miss USA pageants and Miss Universe pageants. And the story here is that the Russian federal prosecutors spoke to Mr. Agalarov senior, who had his son, the pop star, reach out to his publicist to contact the Trump campaign. It's just fantasy world because the reality is if there was something important that Mr. Agalarov wanted to communicate to the Trump campaign I suspect he could have called Mr. Trump directly as opposed to having his son's pop music publicist be the intermediary.
[Cuomo:] Well, that's interesting. Let's unpack it one-by-one. The idea of any other communications between Donald, Jr. and one of the Agalarovs, which you're saying which would have been a more convenient thing. It is suggested in the e-mail chain and Donald, Jr. does indicate yes, have Emin call my cellphone. That call, what was it about?
[Balber:] That call that call didn't occur.
[Cuomo:] Well, let me ask you about that. I know that you have said that before and that's but I'm curious because if that call didn't occur, Counselor, why does Goldstone then say in a subsequent e-mail, I believe, to Don, Jr., "You are aware of the meeting and so wondered if -" and then he talks about scheduling. Why would Mr. Goldstone believe that Don, Jr. would be aware of a meeting if he hadn't communicated with somebody else and that somebody else, by dent of the nature of this loop of communication, would have to be Emin?
[Balber:] Well, I really can't speak to what Rob Goldstone was thinking or what he wrote or why, but I'll tell you again that that call didn't happen. I don't know if there was someone else who spoke to Donald Trump, Jr. about this prospective meeting but it wasn't my client. And again, I don't know where Mr. Goldstone got his information from but it's just categorically incorrect.
[Cuomo:] So, Mr. Goldstone, who's the publicist for your client, was wrong when he suggested that Donald Trump, Jr. had spoken with your client? And he was wrong when he said the crown prosecutor of Russia met with his Emin's father this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. Very high-level, sensitive part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump, helped along by your clients. That is some doozy of a lie. That's a lot of information and specificity just to pitch a meeting, is it not?
[Balber:] Again, I can't speak for Rob Goldstone. But I will tell you again, categorically, that no meeting between the Russian prosecutors and Mr. Agalarov happened in any respect relating to Hillary Clinton or the U.S. election.
[Cuomo:] When did
[Balber:] It just didn't happen.
[Cuomo:] When did your client fire Mr. Goldstone?
[Balber:] I don't know that he fired Mr. Goldstone. Why? I'm not sure what
[Cuomo:] The man told a lie like this about your client and he didn't fire him as his publicist?
[Balber:] First of all, we saw the e-mail yesterday for the first time. So what is going to happen vis-a-vis Mr. Agalarov's music career and his publicist, I don't know. But it's been less than 24 hours since we saw this e-mail chain. And yes, my clients are very concerned about what was said in these e- mails. Again, they're flatly false and we will try to find out, ultimately, what the source of Mr. Goldstone's commentary was. But I'm sure you'll be asking him and his counsel separately.
[Cuomo:] Mr. Goldstone has not wanted to come on. If you can help with that all, seeing that he does have a relationship with your client, we would very much appreciate that. He really is the only person who can put some meat on the bones of this speculation. Last question. Your clients' relationship to the lawyer involved here, the woman who took the meeting, is what?
[Balber:] Well, again, I've said this before. Natalia is an acquaintance of Emin and she has been pursuing this Magnitsky Act for some time. And as a result, Mr. Agalarov was willing to make an introduction to give her a forum to talk about this Magnitsky Act issue, and that really is the totality of our involvement.
[Cuomo:] That is something that this kind of story was made up by the publicist for your client and he's still working for him. We will want to see what happens here. Counselor, thank you very much. Appreciate your perspective on this.
[Balber:] My pleasure. Thank you.
[Cuomo:] Alisyn
[Camerota:] All right, Chris. We're obviously following a lot of news, including a live interview with President Trump's attorney, Jay Sekulow, so let's get right to it.
[Sen. Tim Kaine , Virginia:] We're now beyond obstruction of justice.
[Donald Trump, Jr., Son Of President Trump:] For me, this was opposition research so I think I wanted to hear it out.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] Any time that you're in a campaign and get an offer from a foreign government to help your campaign, the answer is no.
[Brian Fallon, Former Clinton Campaign Press Secretary:] Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think you'd see a piece of evidence that would be as much of a smoking gun as this e-mail.
[Unidentified Male:] The president was not aware of the meeting, did not attend this meeting.
[Trump, Jr:] It was such a nothing. It was literally just a wasted 20 minutes, which was a shame.
[Sen. Ron Wyden , Oregon:] This was an attempt at collusion. And so now the question is really, was it successful?
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Camerota:] Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, July 12th, 8:00 in the East. And we do begin with the top story. The White House reportedly in crisis mode, consumed by the latest Russia revelations in newly-released e-mails from Donald Trump, Jr. "The New York Times" reporting that members of the president's inner circle are embroiled in what they call a circular firing squad trying to figure out the source of the latest leaks.
[Cuomo:] The president's eldest son breaking his silence, claiming he never told his father about his meeting with a Russian lawyer and admitting he would handle things differently if he could do this all over. All this, while President Trump is calling this the greatest witch hunt in political history and blasting us for reporting on it. Remember, his son's own e-mails just acknowledged an alleged attempt by Russia to infiltrate the election and the president is saying that's not true. Joining us now is President Trump's attorney Jay Sekulow. Counselor
[Jay Sekulow, Member, President Trump's Legal Team:] Good morning.
[Cuomo:] Good to see you again.
[Sekulow:] Yes, sir.
[Cuomo:] Why would the president question the veracity of his own son's e-mails?

[Dave Briggs, Cnn Anchor:] A GOP source close to the nomination process tells CNN they are not sure they have the votes to push Kavanaugh across the finish line. But it's definitely close. CNN's Phil Mattingly reporting from Capitol Hill.
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Now, Christine and Dave, Republicans are moving forward. Obviously every one of them was staring with rapt attention at the hearing, just like pretty much everybody else in the country, to gripping testimony from both Christine Blasey Ford and from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. But after that testimony was over, more than eight hours, committee members sitting there, witnesses testifying, members, I'm told, back in their offices watching, Republicans still plan to move forward. They had a private meeting in the Capitol after the hearing to weigh their options going forward, for leaders to take the temperature of members, and they decided the Judiciary Committee will continue its plan to vote on Friday on the nomination. Now the key individual to watch on that committee, Senator Jeff Flake. He still is undecided. He still has not made up his mind. He told my colleague Kristin Wilson after the meeting today that he had more doubts than certainty about what was going to happen next. Even if they don't have the votes on the committee, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell telling members behind closed doors, I'm told, they're going to move forward to the floor. Right now a procedural vote is tentatively planned for Saturday at noon. So what does this all mean? Well, at this point in time, Republicans do not have the votes to confirm Brett Kavanaugh. Republicans could have the votes to confirm Brett Kavanaugh. There's a couple of Democrats who may vote with them as well but those votes haven't committed yet. So Republicans are basically taking a gamble. They're pushing forward with the president's support, with the vice president's support, taking what Brett Kavanaugh's testimony meant to them, at least, as a sign that it's time to push forward. Will it all work out? Well, we'll have to wait and see. We'll get our first sign at 9:30 when the Judiciary Committee meets guys.
[Romans:] All right. Washington and the entire country trying this morning to process Thursday's raw, emotional, wrenching testimony during more than four hours of questioning. We heard for the first time directly from Christine Blasey Ford. She told senators under oath there is no way this was a case of mistaken identity.
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Senate Judiciary Committee:] Dr. Ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe Brett Kavanaugh assaulted you?
[Christine Blasey Ford, Brett Kavanaugh's Accuser:] One hundred percent.
[Romans:] She grew emotional as she described the alleged assault in detail. At one point recalling her most enduring memory of the incident.
[Ford:] Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the uproarious laughter between the two and their having fun at my expense.
[Briggs:] During his afternoon testimony, Kavanaugh was visibly furious, blaming Democrats for turning the hearing into what he called a national disgrace.
[Brett Kavanaugh, Supreme Court Nominee:] This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons, and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups. This is a circus.
[Briggs:] Kavanaugh's anger softening at times as he, too, was brought to the verge of tears.
[Kavanaugh:] The other night, Ashley and my daughter Liza said their prayers, and little Liza, all of 10 years old, said to Ashley, "We should pray for the woman." It's a lot of wisdom from a 10-year-old. We mean we mean no ill will.
[Romans:] Senators quickly dug into their political trenches. Democrats hammering the nominee over his alleged behavior in high school and his failure to state whether he believes the FBI should reopen his background check.
[Durbin:] I'm asking about the FBI investigation.
[Kavanaugh:] There the committee figures out how to ask the questions. I'll do whatever. I've been on the phone multiple times with committee counsel. I'll talk to
[Durbin:] Judge Kavanaugh, will you support an FBI investigation right now?
[Kavanaugh:] I will do whatever the committee wants to
[Durbin:] Personally, do you think that's the best thing for us to do? You won't answer?
[Kavanaugh:] You know, look, Senator, I I've said I wanted a hearing and I've said I would welcome anything.
[Romans:] Republicans allowed a sex crimes prosecutor hired for the occasion to ask questions on their behalf. A few slammed Democrats for their line of questioning. Senator Lindsey Graham erupting afterward. He said his BS meter got pegged.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , Judiciary Committee:] What you want to do is destroy this guy's life, hold his seat open, and hope you win in 2020. You've said that, not me. This is the most unethical sham since I've been in politics.
[Briggs:] Wow. The second man Christine Blasey Ford says was in the room during the alleged assault is reaching out to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Judge Kavanaugh's high school friend Mark Judge sending a letter to the committee late last night. It reads, quote, "As a recovering alcoholic and cancer survivor, I have struggled with depression and anxiety. As a result I avoid public speaking. I do not recall the events described by Dr. Ford in her testimony." During the hearing, Ford told the committee it would help her to piece together her story if members could get more details from Judge. Republican chairman Chuck Grassley has refused to subpoena him.
[Romans:] All right. The American Bar Association is calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to halt the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing until the FBI completes a renewed background investigation. CNN has obtained a letter written by the Bar Association's president to the committee. It reads in part, "Each appointment to our nation's highest court as with all others is simply too important to rush to a vote. Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate's reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court." No one can claim the Bar Association is playing politics here. The organization gave Judge Kavanaugh its highest rating for the Supreme Court, well qualified. Kavanaugh even touted that rating yesterday at Thursday's hearing.
[Briggs:] Important point. Like the rest of us, President Trump was riveted to his television Thursday as this historic hearing played out. The president telling a group of Republican donors last night that it was brutal and hard to watch at times but in the end his embattled Supreme Court nominee made him proud. More now from Jeff Zeleny at the White House.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Christine and Dave, President Trump waking up in a much better feeling about his Supreme Court confirmation battle. He is urging the Senate to take an urgent vote and do it quickly. A committee vote could come as early as today. Of course many Democrats are rejecting that. But take a look at what the president sent out moments after the hearing ended. He said this on Twitter, "Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him. His testimony was powerful, honest and riveting. Democrats' search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham. An effort to delay, obstruct and resist. The Senate must vote." Of course no mention in that statement about Christine Blasey Ford. That was someone the president was also watching testify very intently. And he called her testimony, I'm told, compelling. And he found her believable. That he clearly wanted to hear from Judge Kavanaugh. He wanted to hear some anger and push back from Judge Kavanaugh. That's exactly what Judge Kavanaugh gave him. I am told he prepared the opening the statement of the speech which really turned that hearing around with an audience of one in mind. President Trump. The judge was wanting to keep the president on board, did not want him to, you know, sort of lose faith in his nomination. And that, in turn, rallied the conservative base. So of course this is not a done deal at all. But as this week ends here at the White House, President Trump certainly feeling much better about his Supreme Court nominee than he has in more than a week Dave and Christine.
[Briggs:] All right, Jeff Zeleny, great reporting. Nearly 60 people arrested among the hundreds who took to the streets of Washington to protest Kavanaugh's nomination. Women's marches and other protests, most against Kavanaugh, some in support, took place in cities across the United States. Millions more of course watched the events unfold from their homes as others watched from airplanes and some from classrooms. A North Carolina teacher tweeted this photo, saying her advanced placement students were writing history while watching history. I'm not sure if that was a positive lesson or
[Romans:] You know, it's so interesting
[Briggs:] Or not.
[Romans:] The C-SPAN switch board overwhelmed yesterday with calls-in, people talking about their own abuse and harassment. The rape and incest hotline overwhelmed 147 percent I think increase in calls. So whatever happens on the political and judicial front, there is a
[Briggs:] Something comes from it.
[Romans:] There's a moment in America here where people are starting to talk. You know, Chris Wallace talked yesterday about from FOX News on the air, talked about his daughters pulling him aside.
[Briggs:] Yes, he did.
[Romans:] Say, Dad, guess what? These are the crappy things that we've seen and happened to us. Just kind of revealing to people that we should be talking about this.
[Briggs:] Let us know how you feel about it, @earlystart on Twitter. Ahead, "Murphy Brown" back on TV with a top secret cameo. More from Hillary Clinton's surprise appearance next.

[Paul:] Forty five minutes past the hour right now. Charlottesville is marking one year since that deadly unite the right rally and the governor in the city has declared a state of emergency. The same group that organized the rally last year, holding another one in Washington now tomorrow. Last year's rally called to protest the removal of a confederate statue ended with one woman, Heather Heyer. I spoke to Heather's mother Susan Bro, and here's what he had to say about hate groups.
[Susan Bro, Mother Of Heather Heyer:] White privileges are very real thing, it's not mandatory that you think a certain way just because you live a certain way. You have the ability to still think for yourself. I often say don't drink the Kool-Aid, be aware of the fact that you don't have to believe the way you were brought up to believe.
[Paul:] Thank me. Former skinhead and founder of Harmony through Hockey with us now. Though some American history expert, was inspired by his life. Frank, it's good to see you again. I know we talked to you last year as well. I saw you kind of shaking your head or nodding your head when you listened to what Susan had to say. What struck you there?
[Frank Meeink, Former Supremacist Skinhead:] You know, it's the old bait and switch, actually, it could do for people to become white supremacist, there's an issue. And when I would go when I was trying to recruit people, I would go and I pull the greatest bait and switch ever pulled in mankind. I will tell a guy who says I need to be proud of my heritage, and I'll go to them and say, boy, you want to be proud of your heritage because if you say you're proud to be white in America, you're a racist is what I would say to this guy. And I would say, you want to be proud of your heritage, come join my group. And the guy would come join my group, we never once talked about our heritage. What we always talked about, everyone else's heritage. What are they doing? Look at their live, they're not living up to our standards like we didn't talk about our own heritage because you only talk about Aretha Erickson so much. So we just would have these conversations that would be getting more hateful and geared towards violence. I mean, that's what hate groups are formed, they're formed out of men with fear
[Paul:] Right,
[Ok -- Meeink:] Men and fear
[Paul:] And so that's what I wanted to ask you about. Let's listen together here to Sarah Sidner, she spoke to a neo-Nazi Sarah is one of our reporters, spoke to a neo-Nazi who said he's fighting a culture war. Let's listen together to this exchange.
[Unidentified Male:] The rural America spoke up when they elected Trump. Rural America. We're staring down the barrel of a gun here and wait, America, there's still 193 million white Americans, yes, the vast majority of them are in their 60s and 70s, will be in the ground in the next 20, 30 years. And therefore, we have a possibility of becoming a minority in our own country. A possibility
[Sarah Sidner, Cnn National Correspondent:] It sounds to me
[Unidentified Male:] Of becoming a minority in our own country
[Sidner:] Like you're afraid of being me and being me is
[Unidentified Male:] This is my country.
[Sidner:] Is right, this is also my country.
[Unidentified Male:] You guys didn't win the culture war.
[Paul:] OK, I saw your reaction watching that as well. Fear, I know we talked about it last time. It is it is the underlying theme of everything that is white supremacy, you say.
[Meeink:] Yes, I mean, guys who wake up and their whole thought I would wake up in the morning and say, why did they have BET? And I would think about that all day and it would drive me and it would as a 16, 17-year-old boy, I would, you know, think why don't we have white entertainment television? Again, I don't have the facts enough to say, no, you can see almost all television, white entertainment television, but I would seriously be I seriously would wake up and that would be my driving force in the morning. Is that they're getting something over me and I wasn't born with a silver spoon. You know, but when I go for a job application, I can hide that I came from the hood. People that are minorities can't hide that. And that's why they have affirmative action and groups and things now that are in place to help because, you know, I can't hide that, I grew up poor.
[Paul:] Virginia's Governor Ralph Northam said this yesterday. He said "those torches carried by white supremacists in Charlottesville a year ago shone a light on an ugly truth, but they also really wakened our commitment to fight back against the ugliness of racism and bigotry. Hatred has no home in this commonwealth." Since we talked last, last year, Frank, have you do you feel like you've seen any change?
[Meeink:] Not much. And I wish I'm one of the people I'd like to see the glass half full, but I mean, you have a president who goes to Twitter battles like he's a rapper, and you know, he constantly going after people. He even is full of fear. Again, when these hate groups started forming, it wasn't when Trump got in, it was when Obama got in. These groups got really big, but he lowered them back to sleep because he didn't really do any of the stuff they said he was going to do. He didn't come for the guns, he didn't come for all those stuff. When Trump announced his candidacy, he said the words that almost every racist in America says, and that is we make exceptions. Oh, I hate all black people except for John, John is cool because I work with John. If you remember his speech was they're all, you know, drug addicts drug, you know, drug dealers and rapists, gang members, all this stuff. And at the end, he goes and I assume some are good people. He related to so many of those home racist people who were like I hate
[Paul:] Well
[Meeink:] Them all except for one.
[Paul:] Yes, he was talking about immigrants at that point when he was saying that, but
[Meeink:] He was talking about human beings is what everybody was talking about
[Paul:] We know that he was talking about human beings, yes, but that was the group that he was speaking to, but you're right. I'm wondering, we know David Kessler, we know David Duke is going to be at this rally tomorrow. As a former skinhead, if you could be in front of them, is there anything you would want to say to them? Anything that you believe
[Meeink:] Not good
[Paul:] Could sway any of these people to think differently?
[Meeink:] Well, first, we have to reintroduce empathy into people that are full of fear and hate, they've lost empathy, they've lost humanity for the world because they got acceptance to be part of this group that tells them they shouldn't have humanity and acceptance for other people. But what I would say to them is, look, I figured out the solution and the solution is life is just about the moment I have with people. It could be from my cashier at a store to you have moments in life, and am I the guy who always brings anger and you know, hatred towards every conversation I'm in. Or am I the guy who can bring peace and resolution to something by not degrading other human beings or believing them as idiotic belief in the world is that I'm better than you because of the color of my skin. I mean, let's go over to what a lazy group. All any supremacist group goes by the color of their skin, what a lazy you didn't achieve anything, you were just born that way. You didn't go out and get a certain degree to become part of this group, you are just born that way, it's very lazy.
[Paul:] Well, Frank Meeink, we appreciate your insight and talking to you one year later just about
[Meeink:] Right, thank you
[Paul:] Where we're going and hopefully maybe what we can do to make things better. I thank you so much, Frank
[Meeink:] Thank you
[Paul:] And by the way, we're going to have more of my interview with Heather Heyer's mother, Susan Bro in the next hour as well, she had a lot to say.
[Blackwell:] All right, President Trump has not said anything on Twitter yet or anything anywhere about these pending protests that are coming to the nation's capital by these white supremacists. But he has talked about the NFL players protesting during the national anthem. Andy Scholes is here with more, Andy?
[Andy Scholes, Cnn Sports Reporter:] Yes, Victor, the president says the players should find another way to protest. And coming up, we'll hear from some of those players explain why they won't do that.

[Cuomo:] All right. So here's the latest information on the health care battle. Senate Republicans are not done with this. They're trying to get it to a vote next week. They believe they have a measure to repeal and replace. They're meeting for a lunch today. The question is: Can they get these ten remaining Republican senators who are against the current plan on board? Let's bring back the panel: David Gregory, Errol Louis, and let's bring in CNN political analyst David Drucker. David Drucker, good to have you with us. David Gregory, the urgency. How do you see this, in terms of balancing that urgency of getting something done with getting the right thing done?
[Gregory:] The political imperative is so big here, which is from, you know, conservative Republicans, grassroots Republicans who are reminding members of Congress and their senators, "Look, this is why we sent you to Washington, to get rid of Obamacare. And even what you've been talking about in the Senate is more of Obamacare Lite." And not even having that supported means they're in the position of trying to hang the repeal sign on anything they do. David Drucker and I were talking before we came on this morning. You know, in this kind of quiet period, you never want to count anything out from from being accomplished. But it seems a very difficult road. And I think that what is particularly additionally difficult, I should say, is if their fallback position is that they work with some Democrats to get something done, I don't think Democrats are going to participate, as long as it's under the guise of any kind of repeal, as opposed to just fixing. And I think that's the there are so many different interested parties here within the Republican camp. I don't see how they how they get them together in this amount of time.
[Camerota:] Errol, here are the ten Republican senators currently voting "no" on the current incarnation of the health-care bill. You see all their faces and names up there. How are they going to vote on this this week? I mean, that was you know, Reince Priebus says that the president wants them to resolve this, to have health care in place before the August recess. There's also some reporting that they're going to vote on it this week. How is that going to go?
[Louis:] Well, I think what we've seen from Mitch McConnell is that, if they don't have the votes, they're not going to hold the vote. We saw them go from needing two to needing six, now needing ten. They wait any longer, the number could conceivably even change from there. The reality is, what the White House needs, what the Senate leadership needs, what individual senators need are all sort of in different places. And the many it would be interesting to test the faces you just showed, with who's up for re-election next year? Not all of them really need this as badly as the White House seems to want it. And again, you sort of have to put the big overlay on all of this. Yes, there's the promise that they all made to their constituents when they said that they were going to repeal and replace. But there's also this lurking, really big question about how to pay for the tax reform, the tax cuts that they want. The other big piece of legislation that was going to be funded by getting rid of a lot of the Obamacare subsidies. This is going to be a compounded problem. And we're going to see this roll forward.
[Cuomo:] And some of it is also some of it is specific. So you would think they would take care of that by giving something to that particular senator. But some of it is more comprehensive, just in terms of what the basic philosophy is of who's being helped and who isn't in this. For example, Susan Collins, from Maine, the senator there, she has a bigger holistic issue with this. Listen to what she says.
[Sen. Susan Collins , Maine:] I do need a complete overhaul in order to get to "yes." My hope is that we can avoid the mistake that President Obama made when he passed a major health care reform bill, the Affordable Care Act, without a single Republican vote. I don't want us to see us make the same mistake and pass an overhaul of the of the law without a single Democratic vote.
[Cuomo:] David Drucker, is that somewhat of a clarion call to Mitch McConnell to rethink the strategy here? Because if there are more Susan Collins out there, he's got a problem.
[Drucker:] Well, yes, and I think there are some Republicans that would like this to be bipartisan, because it gives them political cover. They remember keenly what happened to Democrats after the Obamacare law was passed. Democrats had to own it. They paid for it in two different midterm elections. I think Republicans are looking over their shoulder and thinking, "I don't want that to happen to me." I think, though, Chris, the real sticking point here from a policy perspective, the thing that is really grinding the gears, is the Medicaid expansion. You know, when the Affordable Care Act was under development, under a Democratic House and Democratic Senate, among the things Republicans wholly agreed on, not just that they were opposed to the mandate to purchase insurance. They were opposed almost unanimously. In fact, they were unanimous in opposition to expanding Medicaid. For years, it's been a Republican policy that Medicaid needed to be reformed, whether it was block granted or or pared back in some fashion to account for the growth in spending and all the other entitlement programs. Now, there's a split among Senate Republicans and, in fact, among House Republicans generally, with many wanting to keep the Medicaid expansion. In some cases, it's because of the opioid abuse issue. But having said that, this is causing a real problem for them as they move forward and try to do something about this. And then on the other hand, you have the political pressure which we've been talking about from the right, the fact that. if they don't repeal Obamacare, even if it's Obamacare light and it's a partial repeal, if there's one thing that Republican strategists who monitor the base tell me could get Republicans in trouble in 2018, even in a Senate election where the map is very favorable to the GOP, it's the idea that they weren't able to use their majorities to actually get done a major priority and campaign promise on such a high level. And so that is competing with the policy concerns of how health care could blow back at them if they don't get it right.
[Camerota:] David Gregory, here's what President Trump tweeted yesterday about this, about his dream for this: "I cannot imagine that Congress would dare to leave Washington without a beautiful new health care bill fully approved and ready to go." What has President Trump's role been in trying to wrangle this together?
[Cuomo:] Seems to be just driving the bus.
[Camerota:] Is it? Or is he hands off the bus?
[Cuomo:] You're saying, like, "You're going to get thrown underneath it. Here comes the bus."
[Gregory:] And the president's behind the wheel. The image that he's got this beautiful health care bill, and it's crystal, and he's shining it up in the Oval Office. And it should just be passed. That's the image in my head. I actually think he's not that involved. I think he's he's just he's trying to urge them to do something. But from the beginning, he's never really driven this in a particular direction. And in some ways, he's upset conservatives, because he's taken a more pragmatic line about keeping enough of Obamacare. And that's what has alienated a lot of conservatives.
[Cuomo:] Yes, a Republican lawmaker said to me, "We need less "me'and more 'we" out of the White House." And that tweet is evidence of that. He's putting it all on them. And that's fair. They are the lawmakers. But he needs to be with his team.
[Camerota:] I've heard Chris Cuomo use that term. You sure that wasn't...
[Cuomo:] Surrender the "me" to the "we"?
[Camerota:] ... Chris Cuomo?
[Cuomo:] Not yet.
[Camerota:] Thank you, panel, very much. So Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting last summer with a Russian lawyer is getting a lot of attention from, now, congressional investigators. How significant is this development? We take a closer look next.

[Sesay:] Well, if you think you've heard it all from Rodrigo Duterte, the Philippines president, he's done it again, given us another statement for the history books. His plan to stop terrorists? Eat them.
[Rodrigo Duterte, Philippines President:] They are animals. If you want to me to be an animal, I can be one. I can be the same. I can dish it more than what you can. Fifty times more than you can. I can eat you. Just give me salt and vinegar. True. Make me mad. Get me a terrorist. Give me salt and vinegar. I will eat his liver.
[Sesay:] He sure has a way with words. The president has had clashes with terrorists for months now and, perhaps, outside militants since they made their way onto a popular tourist island.
[Vause:] Two down and five to go in the U.S. state of Arkansas after another two inmates were executed on Monday, Jack Howell Jones and Marcel Wayne Williams, both convicted of murder. When their last-minute legal appeals failed, they were killed by lethal injection on Monday, brining relief for the family of the woman who was killed by Jones.
[Robby Jones, Family Member Of Victim:] This has been an ongoing process that lasted over 20 years. It came close a few times. And we're glad that it's finally over with. It's been an emotional rollercoaster. No one in our family wants death for anybody, but some people deserve what they deserve.
[Vause:] Last Thursday, Arkansas executed Riddell Lee by lethal injection as well. He was the first to die after the state governor laid out an unprecedented timetable of eight executions in 11 days. The reason for the rush? Because the drugs used in those lethal injections are set to expire by the end of the month, past the use-by date. So now the clock is ticking down. Another execution scheduled for Thursday with the rest on hold while those death-row inmates exhaust their last legal appeals. For more, Jen Moreno, an attorney with the Death Penalty Clinic at the University of California, joins us now from Austin, Texas. Jen, thank you for being with us. We have this rush now to carry out so many executions, it seems to be a matter of expediency. So how does that sit legally because, unless I'm wrong, any stay which the court has issued has not looked at the timetable for so many executions in a short period that's been though a whole host of other reasons.
[Jen Moreno, Attorney, Death Penalty Clinic, University Of California, Berkeley:] Yes, certainly, the schedule the original scheduling of eight in 10 or 11 days is unprecedented and we have not seen anything other state with a schedule like that. What we've seen, the stays that have been granted, they have been further revisited, some having to do with competency, a DNA testing claim, and a couple of others. I think that shows us that in the speed of rushing executions we're really ignoring a lot of significant problems with the cases. And there hasn't been time to litigate these important issues.
[Vause:] Arkansas isn't the only state here which is having a problem getting the drugs for lethal injections. The E.U. banned sales of these drugs to death-penalty states. But why aren't U.S. pharmacies stepping in to provide these drugs?
[Moreno:] I think what we're seeing is well, first of all, the drugs that Arkansas is planning to use, it is available in manufactured form. Pharmacies have stepped in and provided drugs to states for use in other executions, Texas, Missouri, and a different drug. The pharmacy in Virginia did provided a compounded drug. But because of the circumstances surrounding the process of acquiring drugs in Arkansas and other states, we don't really know the details of who they've asked, the reasons are why they haven't been able to get other drugs. What we're seeing is we have to rely on their word that they can't get additional drugs and, therefore, have to rush through with these executions.
[Vause:] We heard from the governor of Arkansas. He says he is a reluctant executioner, he has a responsibility to the families of the victims of these men. Maybe we can sort of understand that. But it is very difficult understand that essentially all of the executions have been planned simply because the drugs are said to expire, essentially, they will pass their sell-by-date, if you like.
[Moreno:] Yeah. Certainly, that seems to be almost as arbitrary of a reason to do so many executions in such a short timeframe.
[Vause:] The critics have also called the assembly line of death. What impact do you think this would have, or is having, rather, on the debate about the death penalty in the U.S.?
[Moreno:] I think what we've seen in the commentary on this is that people seem to be pretty shocked and even appalled at this schedule and how many there are in such a short period of time. As we move further away from this and we look back and we see these prisoners were granted stays for a number of different reasons, it just highlights how many different problems there are with the death penalty. And those don't go away because you rush to execute people.
[Vause:] Yeah. This will be an ongoing story and a lot of legal issues to be resolved. A lot of ethical issues as well. Jen, great to speak with you. Thank you.
[Moreno:] Thank you, much.
[Sesay:] Time for a quick break now. Coming up in our next our, part two of our CNN Freedom Project investigation into labor trafficking on cattle ranches in Brazil's rain forest.
[Unidentified Male:] When I left there, my heart opened up. It was a pleasure to get back to my hour with my family. So many things have changed.
[Unidentified Cnn Correspondent:] A house that Louis, nearly 70, rents in town for his youngest children, paid for with his government pension.
[Sesay:] We'll have that story and more on the pursuit of traffickers in the Amazon coming up next hour on the CNN Freedom Project. We will be right back.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] We now know who stole a commercial airliner and crashed it just outside Seattle, Washington.
[George Howell, Cnn Anchor:] And later today, a city on edge. Specifically the U.S. capital, where white supremacists prepare to rally again, this one year after the deadly violence in Charlottesville, Virginia.
[Allen:] Also ahead this hour, NASA launches humanity's first-ever mission to a star. And it's our very own star, the sun.
[Howell:] It was so cool.
[Allen:] So cool.
[Howell:] Live from CNN World Headquarters in Atlanta. We want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and all around the world. I'm George Howell.
[Allen:] I'm Natalie Allen and CNN NEWSROOM starts right now.
[Howell:] At 5:01 on the U.S. East Coast, a day after a man steals and crashes a plane from Seattle's main international airport, we're learning new details about who he was and the access he had to that plane.
[Allen:] Covering the story 24 hours ago, that was the big question, who did this. This is the man, Richard Russell. His family called him Bebo. Airport officials say he worked for about three years on the ground crew. He was certified to move aircraft and he had clearance to be in secure areas. His family offered this statement through a spokesman.
[Mike Matthews, Friend Of Russell Family:] We are stunned and heartbroken. It may seem difficult for those watching at home to believe but Bebo was a warm, compassionate man. It is impossible to encompass who he was in a press release. He was a faithful husband, a loving son and a good friend.
[Howell:] This is what many people saw, watching on there in the Puget Sound. He executed several dangerous stunts as he was pursued by two military jets. Running low on fuel, he crashed on a small island about an hour after taking off. Now investigators say it could take months before they figure out exactly how these events unfolded. What we do know about Russell is that he was apparently in uniform and had worked the shift Friday before stealing the plane. People who worked with him were shocked by what he did. We get more now from CNN's Dan Simon.
[Dan Simon, Cnn Correspondent:] A law enforcement source tells CNN that the 29-year-old Horizon Airline employee has been identified as Richard Russell. We can tell you that Russell is somebody who kept a very active online presence. He recorded YouTube videos, talking about his job. He also had an online blog where he mentioned that, a few years ago, he and his wife operated a bakery somewhere in Oregon. He did work in ground support at the Seattle airport, so what does that mean? We know he loaded and unloaded luggage. He would also tidy up aircraft and it also involved riding a tractor or driving a tractor, where he would put an airplane in the right place for takeoff. That is apparently what he did yesterday before getting in the cockpit, firing up the engines and then having a successful taxi and takeoff. That is very difficult to do under normal circumstances because of the protocols in place. I want you to listen now to the CEO of Horizon Airlines, who spoke out earlier today.
[Gary Beck, Ceo, Horizon Air:] Normally you would request clearance for pushback, from either your own tower or ground control. You'd then speak with ground control all the way out to the runway. They would turn you over to the tower, who would then clear you for takeoff. And I believe in fact, I know that he did communicate on the ground frequency and all of the communications for the entire flight were conducted on that frequency. You're right, there were some maneuvers that were done, that were incredible maneuvers with the aircraft. To our knowledge, he didn't have a pilot's license. So, to be honest with you, I mean, commercial aircraft are complex machines. They're not as easy to fly as, say, a Cessna 150. So I don't know how he achieved the experience that he did.
[Simon:] I spoke to a former co-worker who worked with Russell. He's shocked that he did this. He said he had a very good sense of humor but he wasn't shocked that he had gained the knowledge in terms of how to operate the aircraft, he said, because being on the tow team, you learn certain things that other employees might not know how to do. When you heard the conversations he was having with air traffic control, what went through your mind?
[Unidentified Male:] I recognized the voice first. And it was before I could put a face to it. And then, you know, I saw some people posting "Rest in peace, Richard Russell." Then I figured out it was him. And I listened to his voice more carefully during the audio after that. And it was heartbreaking. You could tell he was in pain, kind of seemed a little delusional. And I was just shocked to see that someone who was so nice, so helpful and caring, actually, he cared about his job, to do such a thing and, you know, end his life. So it was a little sad.
[Simon:] Now as far as what is happening now, I can tell you that, over at the island where the crash occurred, there are dozens of investigators there. They're trying to retrieve those black boxes, the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder. But what evidence those boxes might yield, we don't know. We already have a ton of evidence because of the conversation between Russell and air traffic control.
[Allen:] David Soucie is a CNN safety analyst and former safety inspector for the U.S. Aviation Authority. He joins us now. David, thanks for being with us. We've had a little over one day to digest this unfortunate feat. Grounds crew airline worker backed up a plane, pointed it toward the runway, started it, took off. It still seems somewhat surreal, doesn't it? But it was very real. Do you have any more insight now into how he pulled this off?
[David Soucie, Cnn Safety Analyst:] There's a lot of processes that were overlooked and did not happen that should have happened. I've looked at to see the Seattle processes and procedures for security. And there's no possible way that that guy should have been out there by himself, towing that aircraft for a number of reasons. One is because they need to have somebody in the aircraft with their feet on the brake, ready to stop the aircraft in case anything happens. But that's just one level. And there are two or three other levels of people that should have noticed he was out there by himself.
[Allen:] So is this not a gap in just typical airport security? Was this more specific to this airline?
[Soucie:] It is. The airline's responsible for that tarmac, for a bad area where the aircraft is. And the fact that all their employees are trained, everybody knows that you don't go out there on the tarmac by yourself, this should not have happened. Even if you look at baggage handlers, if you look at everytime there's somebody driving a baggage cart, there's two people with them. That's never should be by himself like this. So there's some things that need to be looked at on that airport and at the airline.
[Allen:] So you don't see this as a systemic issue with the industry?
[Soucie:] I really don't. I think that the system, the safety system that's in place, has proven by the fact this doesn't happen very often. But I think the safety system's in place. But the fact is, there were people at three different levels that didn't do the right thing. So we first look at performance of the safety mechanisms. And if the performance isn't done properly, then you go back and you look at the individual. But systemic, as you had mentioned, I don't see a systemic problem here. But if is it isn't an individual, if it was something that could have easily been overlooked, then at that point, the system needs to be looked at as well.
[Allen:] That's very interesting. We'll wait and see what the investigation bears out there. I want to get your insights into the work of the air traffic control to try to get this young man to land that airplane. Let's listen to a bit of that conversation.
[Richard Russell, Aircraft Mechanic:] I've got a lot of people that care about me and it's going to disappoint them to hear that I did this. I would like to apologize to each and every one of them. Just a broken guy. Got a few screws loose, I guess. Never really knew it until now. You think if I land this successfully, Alaska will give me a job as a pilot?
[Unidentified Male:] I think they'll give you a job doing anything if you can pull this off.
[Russell:] Yes, right.
[Unidentified Male:] If you wanted to land, probably the best bet is that runway just ahead and to your left. That's the McChord field. If you wanted to try, that might be the best way to set up and see if you can land there. Or just like the pilot suggested, another option would be over Puget Sound into the water.
[Russell:] Dang, you talk to McChord yet? Because I don't think I'd be happy with you telling me I could land like that, because I could mess some stuff up.
[Unidentified Male:] I already talked to them and just like me, what we want to see is you not get hurt or anyone else get hurt. So like I said, if you want to land, that's probably the best place to go.
[Russell:] I want the coordinates of that orca with the the mama orca with the baby. I want to go see that guy. Hey, pilot guy, can this thing do a backflip, you think? I'm going to try to do a barrel roll and if that goes good, I'll go nose down and call it a night. Man, have you been to the Olympics? These guys are gorgeous. Holy smokes.
[Unidentified Male:] Let's try to land that airplane safely and not hurt anybody on the ground.
[Russell:] All right. Damn it, I don't know, man. I don't know. I don't want to. I was kind of hoping that was going to be it.
[Allen:] It's chilling to listen to but the controller states so measure this what they're training to do. Is a rogue pilot part of training? What's your assessment of how they handled the situation?
[Soucie:] It was amazing how they kept their cool during the whole time. They didn't get emotional about it, they didn't even raise their voice. You can tell
[Allen:] They were very measured
[Soucie:] the training they've had over the years were dealing with this has paid off in this case.
[Allen:] Right. Fighter jets were mobilized, David, they were flanking him. But he flew for one hour. One analyst said at CNN, had he wanted to crash the plane into downtown Seattle, the jets weren't going to be able to stop him. Why not? What is their role?
[Soucie:] Well, there's some protocol there. So the air the National Air Command is what it's called, the National Air Command will send they'll scramble their jets and they got out there amazingly quickly. There were there. But as far as stopping him, there's two things that happened, the first protocol is to guide. So they're guiding the aircraft, they're making sure it isn't going into a populated area. The second thing is, if he's headed towards a populated area, then the next step is to move in front of the aircraft and deploy flares. And those flares would divert the aircraft. He'd be trying to avoid flares that are deployed from that jet, is step two. And then step three is, if it is heading that way, that aircraft can be destroyed in the middle of the air. And whoever said that it couldn't be is incorrect. That any aircraft can be stopped with those two fighter jets that are up there. They're well equipped and, luckily, they didn't have to go to those extreme measures.
[Allen:] Absolutely. But that's good to know. We thank you for your information, David Soucie, CNN safety analyst. Thank you, David.
[Soucie:] Thank you, Natalie.
[Howell:] Now to the other story that we are following this day, in the hours to come, we are expecting to see rallies of racists in Washington, D.C. This one year after those racist protests that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, and it seems that these Nazis are preparing to spout their hate once again.
[Allen:] In just a few hours, far right groups and white supremacists, Nazis, are planning to gather again, this time in the nation's capital. They will meet right in front of the White House. They're calling it a white civil rights rally. They will not be alone. At least 40 counterprotest groups 40 plan to show up, too. This comes after Saturday's demonstrations in Charlottesville, Virginia. Again, no signs of white nationalists there, as hundreds of students and activists, instead, marched peacefully against racism. Though the protests in Charlottesville were peaceful, the crowds were full of emotion.
[Howell:] CNN's Kaylee Hartung was there on Saturday with a look at what she saw on how things played out.
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] For about three hours on Saturday night we saw students from the University of Virginia and members of the Charlottesville community marching through the streets. It was an eruption of the anger and outrage that so many of them feel because of the failure they perceive by the institutions that they believe should have supported them a year ago, namely the University of Virginia and law enforcement. Now this weekend there's a heavy law enforcement presence. You can see an example of that behind me. Some of these people protesting telling me they don't feel any safer this weekend than they did a year ago. They feel this increased presence, this preparation is essentially an overreaction, a remembering nix recognition of the failures last year, the law enforcement's lack of ability to control the violence and protect them, some going so far as to say they believe law enforcement protected the white supremacists that marched into this town. As I said, this march through the middle of the streets of Charlottesville but it began on the University of Virginia campus in front of the rotunda, the most iconic building on campus. But these students say they were given strict security measures that they were supposed to abide by. They did not want to abide by them, by an institution that has failed them. We're unsure where this leads next as the march conclude as they tried to get near Emancipation Park, the park where General Lee's statue still sits. They said we'll be back tomorrow.
[Howell:] Kaylee, thank you for the reporting. Now let's bring in Scott Lucas. Scott a professor of international politics at the University of Birmingham, live from Birmingham, England. Thank you for your time as always. Talking about the issue of race in America. It can be messy, can be ugly but the diversity of people, it's a key part of the formula that unites and divides. And we now know, according to Republican representative Tom Garrett, who say member of the Homeland Security and Foreign Affairs Committee, that Russia used race to sow division in Charlottesville last year. Listen to this exchange.
[Rep. Tom Garrett , Virginia:] Let me give you some breaking news here, though, back to Charlottesville. I sat in a closed session briefing probably two months ago about Charlottesville with the director of the FBI, amongst others, and asked if Russian intermeddling had to do with fomenting the flames of what happened in Charlottesville. I was told, yes, it did. I asked, "Is this information classified?" They said, "No, it's not." I've waited until today. But this is what happens. The Russian intermeddling
[Garrett:] is seeking to pit Americans against Americans.
[Howell:] Scott, this is a major headline to say the least with significant implications.
[Scott Lucas, University Of Birmingham:] It is. But, to be honest with you, George, if you watch Russian state outlets and their allies carefully, it's not new. You can go back to the presidential campaign itself in 2016 and you'd have Russian accounts that were posing as Trump supporters, on the one hand, to try to stir up animosity. And on the other you had Russian accounts that were posing as Black Lives Matter movements or even Antifa to try to stir up division. And anytime you have a Charlottesville, when it did occur last year, Russian state media are on top of this. This is a sign that America's falling apart. This is a sign that race is a dividing line and that America is weakening and that it can't live up to its values. In other words, the Russian exploitation of race is something that goes beyond its alleged support of Donald Trump during 2016 and afterwards.
[Howell:] President Trump has weighed in on Twitter. He says that he condemns all types of racism and acts of violence. You see that tweet that was posted most recently. But you'll remember, during a news conference last year, days after the violence in Charlottesville, he added the phrase "on many sides," suggesting a false equivalence between protesters and Nazis. Did this go far enough or did it leave room for him with this many sides silliness?
[Lucas:] All right. Let's do a checklist here, George. I'm not a racist but LeBron James. I'm not a racist but Don Lemon. I'm not a racist by immigrants are animals, immigrants are vermin. I'm not a racist but Chinese students are threatening the U.S. I'm not a racist but the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, who is Muslim, is supporting terrorism. In other words, Donald Trump can't just simply say I'm not a racist and sweep away what has happened the past couple of years anymore than someone who insults me or insults someone of another religion or another race can come up to you and say, hey, buddy, I'm still your friend.
[Howell:] OK. So, you know, here in the United States on this day in the coming hours, we're expecting to see Nazis march in this nation's capital, Nazis, the losers of the World War II, who were roundly defeated by brave U.S. veterans and allies around the world. This is not an issue of Right or Left here; whereas, a journalist you don't take a side. It's the difference between right and wrong and somehow the lines seem blurred now for some people.
[Lucas:] Yes. You know, George, one of my favorite films is "The Blues Brothers." You might remember it back from around 1980s. And there's a whole scene, where the characters, John Belushi and Dan Ackroyd, drive into across into a neo-Nazi rally, what we might call a white supremacist rally. And all of them scatter and jump into the water. And we all cheered back then. Now we've got white supremacist rallies on the streets and we've got no leadership from the White House. Indeed, one might say that the leader in the White House might have a secret affinity for those rallies and, indeed, that some of his advisers who I won't name for now do so as well. You know, I hate to say it, but I'd be much rather relying on John Belushi and Dan Ackroyd right now than I would Donald Trump.
[Howell:] It is important to point out if we could pull the tweet up the U.S. president did chime in on this on Twitter. He did say that he condemns all types of racism and acts of violence. Scott, the question many people will have, given what he said last year, did it go far enough? Scott Lucas, thank you so much for your time and perspective today.
[Lucas:] Thank you.
[Allen:] We'll wait and see what happens at these rallies. Again, 40 groups coming out to counter these white supremacists. California is still burning up but firefighters' latest approach battling one of the fires seems to be working. Ivan Cabrera will have the story for us coming up here.

[Sesay:] Hello, everyone! Well, voters in Catalonia, Spain begin casting ballots in the coming hours to choose new leaders. Madrid's hope here is that Thursday's vote will reaffirm national unity by squeezing out Catalan politicians who back separatism.
[Vause:] Like the former Catalan President who was ousted and fled the country after an independence referendum in October. That triggered a political crisis in Spain. CNN's Isa Soares has details.
[Isa Soares, Cnn International Correspondent:] Political rivals in Catalonia have been making a last-ditch effort to convince voters to back them in parliamentary elections. For those parties who have been in a bitter fight for an independent Catalonia, this is their chance to show Madrid, and, indeed, the rest of Europe theirs is not just a pipe dream. It's the case for the Republican left. Their leader and candidate, Oriol Junqueras, here only in spirit, is in jail on charges of rebellion,
[Marta Rovira, Catalonia Lawyer And Politician:] On December 21st, we will go out there to win, to free the political prisoners. We will say no to the repression of the state and Article 155. We will say yes to the Republic, and we will say yes to a more fair, dignified, and free country.
[Soares:] Ousted President Carles Puigdemont, he was in self-imposed exile in Belgium, is hoping his party can finally bring victory.
[Carles Puigdemont, Former President Of Catalonia:] We will not give up. We will not let the ideological confrontation generated by Article 155, make us give up on the country that we are, a free country.
[Soares:] But the battle won't be an easy one. According to the latest polls, this will be a tight and highly-contested race. In this battle, the parties who oppose independence haven't been holding back. Ines Arrimadas, seen as a champion for Spanish unity, has been warning about the risks of an independent Catalonia.
[Ines Arrimadas, Member Of Parliament:] Everything is at stake because we are risking our passports, we're risking our children's future, we're risking Catalonia's prosperity. A handful of votes can make a difference.
[Soares:] Catalonia remains under direct control by Madrid, at least until a government is formed. Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy is hoping what he calls the silent majority, those who didn't turn out for the referendum the first time around will feel compelled to vote, especially if the Spanish economy is at stake.
[Mariano Rajoy, Prime Minister Of Spain:] Tourist numbers are down, sales are down, companies are growing less, other companies are leaving. We have had to lower the growth forecast for the coming year to 2.3 percent. But if the situation is normalized, we can return in 2018 to the growth of more than three percent by 2017, creating like in 2017 more than half a million jobs.
[Soares:] But with no standout winner right now, a coalition government may be likely and that could mean another potentially protracted political mess. Isa Soares, CNN.
[Sesay:] Well, joining us now from Austin, Texas to discuss the future of Catalan independence, European Affairs Commentator, Dominic Thomas. Dominic, my friend, good to see you. So, do you foresee a clear winner emerging from this regional election?
[Dominic Thomas, Cnn European Affairs Commentator:] Well, the whole question of even deciding what a winner would be I mean, it's an extraordinary situation as the leadup story pointed out. Where you have two of the candidates, one sitting in prison and the other in exile. And of course, this is not an election over, it's not a regional election, and not a referendum, although, of course, the outcome of this will provide a very strong indication as to where folks in Catalonia stand on the question of independence. As the polls point to right now, it's extraordinarily divided. And on all sides of the political spectrum, you don't have the same kinds of alliances as you had back in 2015. And there's a sort of negative view of the way in which Puigdemont basically fled the country, and went into exile. And his former Vice President, of course, is the guy sitting in prison representing the ERC. So, it's also hard to see that if the independence parties do well, how they will be able to come together and form some kind of coalition with independence in sight.
[Sesay:] Yes, absolutely. I mean, when we look at it and we look at how fragmented the political landscape has become after that referendum I mean, it really does point to the fact that turnout is going to be key for this vote.
[Thomas:] Right. And what all the sort of research points to right now is there are an awful lot of undecided voters and a lot of voters who are really divided over the question of economic prosperity and so on, that sort of goes against their perhaps deeper feelings and in support of independence. This is an extended, protracted problem that has deeply divided people within Catalonia, and also deeply divided the country in terms of the relationship of the region to Spain in a more general manner. And it's very hard to foresee how this particular election, which is a repetition of the one that was held in 2015, is going to bring any kind of closure. Rajoy, in many ways, is going to be seen to have shaped this election in a way to try and get a desirable outcome. But that does not mean that the question of independence and the valid grievances that folks in the region have which drive this move toward independence is going to go away overnight, just because of this outcome of a regional election.
[Sesay:] And to be clear, regardless of whether it's the pro- independence or, you know, those who favor pro-unity that emerge the victors and form a coalition, is the Madrid government ready to actually get to grips with the fundamental issues that continue to roil the relationship with Catalonia?
[Thomas:] Right. Well, I think that the obviously, if the outcome produces a coalition government that is not an independent secessionist government that changes the conversation. That puts them in a dynamic where Rajoy can, from Madrid, help guide them along. If that doesn't happen or if it is extraordinarily divided as the polls are indicating at the moment, it's going to be absolutely essential for Rajoy to demonstrate a different kind of leadership than in the leadup to this particular situation. And they're going to have to engage in meaningful dialogue or this situation is really going to negatively impact the region and the broader potential political landscape in Spain. And this is where Rajoy has a deep responsibility now to start to think about and of course, it's left all kinds of negative sentiments in the region because of what is perceived as the overreaching aspect of the Madrid government.
[Sesay:] Yes. It's going to be a very important vote, and we'll just see how many people turn out. As you talk about, you know, negative impacts of landmark decisions, let's talk Brexit, shall we? The European Commission, Dominic, says it would welcome a transitional period to help Britain ease out of the E.U. but only through the end of 2020, and that leaves about a year and 34 after the final Brexit deadline which right now is March 2019. But an amendment to Britain's E.U. withdrawal bill would allow that bill to be changed which would most likely mean even later. So, Dom, even though British Prime Minister Theresa May says that you know, that's more of an emergency plan than anything else I want you to take a listen to her view of the situation.
[Thomas:] Right.
[Theresa May, British Prime Minister:] We'll be leaving the E.U. on 29th of March, 2019, at 11:00 p.m. The bill that's going through, though, does not determine that the U.K. needs these that's part of the Article 50 process, and it's a matter of international law. And it's important I think that we have the same position legally as the European Union, and that's why we've accepted the amendment. We would only use this power in exceptional circumstances for the shortest possible time, and an affirmative motion would be brought to the House.
[Sesay:] All right. Dominick, this deadline that the E.U. has set for the end of the transition period, what does it tell us about where the E.U. stands on these talks, and, you know, what's about to happen in this next round?
[Thomas:] Well, what it tells us, first of all, is that we need to not only mark our calendars for the 29th of March 2019 but to be very clear, it's 11:00 p.m., Isha, OK. Not 11:15 or quarter of
[Sesay:] Obviously.
[Thomas:] Right. So, that's important. And that's also important to point out that in addition to that, of course, the second amendment is, which is that the parliament now in what can be seen as a kind of second rebellion in just a one-week period, that's specifically said they would like the opportunity to be able to change that date and if it doesn't look like things are going very well. So, that was another sort of knockback to particular policies. But the European Union has been very clear on this. First of all, 2020 is the cutoff. So, let's not go too far down the road thinking that it's going to be possible to extend this transition. And of course, the hardcore Brexiteers in her cabinet, which are really obviously making the situation very difficult. Certainly, don't want to see it go much beyond 2019, because they, of course, are concerned that if we get into another election cycle, or if this government collapses there's a possibility this might not just go ahead in the way that they are expecting this to happen. And of course, the paradox of all of this is the longer this goes on beyond the 2019 date, the more the U.K. has to conform to European Union laws, rules, and regulations beyond that period. But also accept rules and regulations that have been passed since then in which they will have absolutely no input. So, the whole very question of sovereignty comes up again.
[Sesay:] Yes, absolutely. And with the backdrop of two rebellions, two parliamentary rebellions in a matter of days, where does this leave Theresa May as she heads into this next round of talks? Is she going into them from a position of strength or deeply wounded, deeply weakened?
[Thomas:] Well, I think that first of all the only position of strength she has really right now is that there's absolutely probably nobody on the planet that wants her job. So, for the time being, that's what's keeping them together. What's further weakened her, of course, is this other scandal, which on top of the defense minister being embroiled, Michael Fallon, in sexual harassment problems, and Priti Patel who, of course, left not long ago because of her sort of, you know, extra-office activities that she was involved with Israel, is of course, that her deputy leader today, Damian Green, has had to step down because he also got himself embroiled in all sorts of problems and with pornography on his computer and with sexual allegations. And that's a real blow to her because this was a strong ally for her in the cabinet. And she now, I think, as we enter the beginning of 2018 is going to have to think very seriously about a cabinet reshuffle so that her position is not further weakened because of these recent departures.
[Sesay:] Goodness gracious me, it's one problem after another for Theresa May. Dominic Thomas, we always appreciate the insight, though, you're always steady. Thank you.
[Thomas:] Thank you.
[Vause:] Thank you. OK. I know how Theresa May feels. OK. Ahead of an emergency session of the U.N. General Assembly on Jerusalem, a warning from the U.S., be careful who you vote for. Billions of dollars in foreign aid could be at stake.

[Cooper:] The story tonight in Mexico's earthquake zone centers on hours, minutes and lives. Yesterday's quake killed at least 225 people, many when the building they were in collapsed. That number includes 21 children killed in a Mexico City elementary school. Others may have survived but are still trapped in the rubble. That, of course, is the hope. CNN's Ed Lavandera joins us now from the scene. What's the latest there tonight, Ed?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Anderson. What you're looking over my shoulder here, that is the scene of the collapse part of the school where rescue workers are continuing to work into the night. However, it's a bit of a confusing scene here tonight. There are mixed reports about exactly what is going on inside that rubble and any kind of official account really hasn't come out. There are some reports it's and then word had spread through the crowd and cheers erupted that perhaps a couple of people have been pulled out alive and then we're also hearing from Mexican television station reporting that perhaps there was a young girl that has still in the rubble but rescue workers have made contact with her. All of that we're still trying to decipher. Nothing official yet. But it's clear that those workers continue to crawl inside of that rubble, trying to find anyone who might still be alive.
[Lavandera:] It's not until you stand this close to the collapsed school building that the horrific reality of this scene sinks in. We weave our way in and around hundreds of rescue workers who've descended on this elementary school to save anyone who might still be trapped inside the rubble. [on camera]: This is the area where crews have been frantically working for the last 24 hours, trying to pull out survivors. Just look at the impact here of the building, crushing that car there. And you can see all of the workers that have been here for more than 24 hours now, trying to find survivors. This is the school where several dozen children were killed as the building collapsed down to the ground here. I'm speaking quietly because a lot of crews have been working and they're trying to hear for sounds of people inside the building. We're told that there might be a young girl they believe is still alive inside, and that's what these efforts are for right now. [voice-over]: In the courtyard area of the school, hundreds of workers are moving debris away from the school under a banner that reads "unity creates strength". T Then a whistle cuts through the air and everyone stops. Total silence. This gives rescue teams crawling through the collapsed structure the chance to listen for survivors. [on camera]: We can hear the sound of rescue workers as they work inside the collapsed part of the building. [voice-over]: The work inside the building is treacherous, wooden pillars have been brought in to fortify what's left of the school. Hector Mendez is part of a volunteer brigade of rescue workers known as the Moles. He says his team arrived on the scene an hour after the school collapsed and the 70-year-old volunteer believes more people will be pulled out alive. [on camera]: Do you think you'll be able to find children alive in there?
[Hector Mendez, Rescue Worker:] Yes, because the children, most times, they got there they got more chance to live than we old people.
[Lavandera:] You think so? Even a day?
[Mendez:] Yes, the boys the boys, they want they want to be alive, and I know that. And that's why we are working hard.
[Lavandera:] Dramatic scenes are unfolding on the streets surrounding the school grounds. That's where we found a collection of names strung together on paper and clear tape. This is where Daniela Casals and a small team of volunteers help keep track of the names of the teachers and students who were inside the school.
[Daniel Casals, Volunteer:] These papers, the blue one and the white one, was the people dead, and this is unfortunately.
[Lavandera:] Most of the buildings surrounding the school withstood the force of the earthquake, only this portion cratered in on itself, and rescue workers vowed to continue the search as long as it takes.
[Cooper:] Ed, will the rescue efforts continue throughout the night? Do they have lights and?
[Lavandera:] Yes, Anderson. We're looking here now. In fact, the lights just came on a downpour just fell on these rescue workers as well. Hopefully, that rain stays away. You know, obviously, the great concern about and you don't get the sense that any of these people will be leaving. But we were when we were there closer tonight, Anderson, just to several hours ago, surreal to be standing in the courtyard of that school and you could hear the muffled sounds of those rescue workers as they were crawling through there, trying to talk to the whoever might have been in there. It was really hard to make out exactly what was being said, but those muffled sounds of those rescue workers crawling through the debris was clearly being heard from where we were standing in that courtyard.
[Cooper:] It's just heartbreaking and difficult work. Ed Lavandera, thanks. Shortly before airtime, I spoke with the Christopher Edwards from the humanitarian group Youth with the Mission. He rode out the quake. He's trying to help rescue efforts tonight. Christopher, explain where you are right now and what's going on.
[Christopher Edwards, Humanitarian, Youth With A Mission:] I'm in a little bit in the part south of the city, one of the main avenues called
[Cooper:] So, do they think that there are people trapped in the rubble still?
[Edwards:] They do have the suspicion that there are, that's why there's an effort. They've just been collecting some more smaller shovels or they can get into tighter places and they're just putting up another crane right now to help stabilize the roof.
[Cooper:] I heard you say that the in terms of rescue efforts, it's been what you call between chaos and hope. Can you explain what you mean by that?
[Edwards:] Yes, I think the chaos part comes because just so many people in such a large city and there's been it's not just one concentrated area. So, it's all over. So, we've been kind of I said we were playing Marco Polo earlier just because people would name a street or an area and then people just start running towards that sound or that area, and then we'd get there and they say, OK, there's too many people here so you have to go to the next place. But and in the hope comes from hearing of stories of some people getting come out, hearing stories and then just seeing the response of the Mexican people and people from other nations, different organizations, different backgrounds, just coming out and helping in full strength and everything that they do, whether it's giving food, helping for the dogs, helping get people out, moving things along. And there's just a lot of hope when you see people like that in such devastation.
[Cooper:] Christopher, if you can, could you turn your camera around just to kind of show us what you're seeing and explain what you were looking at?
[Edwards:] Yes, so just over the top of the red roof right here, you see three cranes sticking up holding our roof up, and there's a guy actually in the third cane that's just attaching some stuff to the rooftop, just sustaining it, that roof of that building holds a lot of solar powers and like solar water heaters, and then just surround us, you just see all the volunteers that are here waiting to see what they can do, a lot of them are just handing out water bringing tools and just waiting to see and what way they can respond.
[Cooper:] These volunteers, is somebody, you know, asking them to come or they just coming on their own?
[Edwards:] They're just coming on their own for the most part, and that's been one of the issues with the chaos is because I even saw some stuff early this morning on the social media sites saying, hey, wait before you come. If you're not already in this area, don't bring extra traffic because it was making everything congested. It took us close to two and a half three hours to get from an area to the south of the city when it usually would maybe take an hour. I mean, it is a large city. It would take a while to get down there on just on public transportation, but it took us almost three hours to get back.
[Cooper:] You also described the rescue efforts it's a bit like Marco Polo. How do you mean, that game?
[Edwards:] Just, in my mind, it's like you're blindfolded and you don't know exactly where to go and so you're just waiting to hear like the name of a street or a building or neighborhood, and people hear it and then they just take off running to go to try to find that area. And it's kind of a hit-and-miss whether you're actually needed there or not. We've had some false alarms even where people said, hey, go to this area and we go there and there's nothing wrong, and there's probably close to 500 or 1,000 people that have arrived to that area, and all I'm saying it's a false alarm. We actually need people in this area.
[Cooper:] Well, Christopher, I appreciate you taking the time to talk to us and wish you the best. Thank you.
[Edwards:] Thank you.
[Cooper:] A lot of people there are trying to help. Up next, breaking news out of Washington. What special counsel Robert Mueller is seeking from the Trump White House in the Russia investigation. The surprising request when we continue.

[Camerota:] So the Justice Department is suing to block AT&T's $85 billion takeover of Time Warner. That's, of course, the parent company of CNN. The U.S. government claims the deal violates anti- trust laws and would result in higher bills for American families. AT&T vowing to fight back. CNN senior correspondent Brian Stelter joins us with more. Brian, this is what was feared was going to happen, because President Trump doesn't like CNN and now, lo and behold, it's happening.
[Brian Stelter, Cnn Senior Correspondent:] Right. Parent company is Time Warner. The theory here among AT&T and Time Warner executives, including our bosses here at CNN the parent company is Time Warner the theory is that maybe President Trump has somehow interfered, has meddled in the Justice Department, which we know we all know he has complaints about. That perhaps he's gotten involved, and now his administration officials are blocking this deal as some form of retaliation or punishment against this network's coverage of his presidency. So that's a theory, and now it's going to be tested in court. The official line in this 23-page lawsuit is that the deal, as proposed a year ago, would harm consumers. The idea here is that, if AT&T is able to own HBO, and CNN, and TNT, then it's going to be able to jack up prices for all of AT&T's rivals, like Verizon and Comcast. That's the argument in the lawsuit. Now, the counter argument from AT&T is that deals like this have been approved before, that this lawsuit breaks with decades of precedent, and that this seems fishy, that something else must be going on here. Thus, the theory about President Trump. So now, Alisyn, this is before a judge. A judge will be assigned to the case today. This is going to take months to litigate, could go on for years. But at the very least it will go on for months. AT&T executives are said to be confident that they'll prevail in court. But then again, they were also confident that this deal would get approved by the government.
[Cuomo:] Let's talk about the legal issues and what the potential timing could be, because you could see a quicker resolution, then you might be right to suspect here. Let's bring in Jeffrey Toobin, CNN senior legal analyst. It's good to have you always.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Chief Legal Analyst:] Yes, sir.
[Cuomo:] And just a little bit of suggestion of the state of play here.
[Toobin:] OK.
[Cuomo:] The man that the Trump administration nominated at the DOJ, their man, has talked about this deal before. Here is what Mr. Delrahim has said. Oh, we don't have it yet. When we have it, I'll give it to you. I promise.
[Camerota:] It's good.
[Stelter:] I can tell you what he said. He said, "This isn't going to be a major anti-trust problem." That's what he said before he was in there.
[Cuomo:] Before he was in there. OK. Now we we know that the president himself has been against this. The lawsuit echoes what they are now saying. Well, this isn't a straight vertical merger. A vertical merger means that the companies are in the same supply chain. There's no real reason to see this as a combination effect that would create a monopoly.
[Toobin:] They're not AT&T and CNN are not competitors.
[Cuomo:] Right. But the DOJ says they're kind of that way. It's kind of a melding. They own Direct TV. It will increase different pricing for people. This merger would greatly harm American consumers. It would mean higher monthly television bills and fewer of the new, emerging innovative options that consumers are beginning to enjoy. Is that a specious premise or do you think it has merit with the court?
[Toobin:] Well, it certainly is not a premise or an argument that the courts have accepted so far. I mean, certainly, the closest analogy to the AT&T-CNN merger was Comcast...
[Cuomo:] Comcast.
[Toobin:] ... merger of NBC Universal, which went through with relative ease during the Obama administration, which was even tougher on mergers than Republican administrations have tended to be. So if this merger is stopped, it would seem that the courts would be taking a different view than they have historically. But under current law, it does seem like this is a merger that that should be approved.
[Cuomo:] Well, also, just as another suggestion, the DOJ has reached out to states' attorneys general to try to get them to join the suit, make this give it some substance. I think they're 0 for 18 at this point in terms of reaching out. Nobody has joined.
[Toobin:] Nobody has joined. I don't know I don't know how many they've asked.
[Cuomo:] That's the reported numbers that they've gone out.
[Stelter:] And one of the state attorney general officials I spoke to said, "We were actually concerned that, maybe because this would be political, we don't want anything to do with it." So that cloud of suspicion about the Trump administration is affecting those state-wide decisions. At the same time, there's not evidence for this Trump idea. There's only circumstantial sort of theory out there.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Stelter:] Because of all the president's tweets.
[Toobin:] I would I would call it more than circumstantial evidence when you have candidate Trump saying on the on the stump...
[Cuomo:] You're saying direct evidence?
[Toobin:] That is direct evidence.
[Camerota:] OK, let me let me submit Exhibit A of what you called direct evidence. Listen to some of these things.
[Trump:] AT&T is buying Time Warner and, thus, CNN, a deal we will not approve in my administration, because it's too much concentration of power in the hands of too few. And we'll look at breaking that deal up and other deals like that. This should never, ever have been approved in the first place.
[Cuomo:] His eyes were glued to the prompter on that, which means that maybe this is something...
[Camerota:] They're his words.
[Cuomo:] ... someone said to him. I'm saying...
[Stelter:] I always thought it was a Steve Bannon idea, to be honest.
[Cuomo:] There you go.
[Stelter:] Bannon is against media consolidation. He would view a deal like this as a bad thing.
[Camerota:] OK. Well, it's taken root. Now it's happening. He is challenging it. He is trying to block it going through.
[Toobin:] And, you know, now it's going to be before the courts. And as Brian was saying earlier, this is guaranteed now to be at least months of delay. And you can't once you're in court, you never know how things are going to go. And you certainly don't know the timing. Because once you're in front of a federal judge, you can't tell a federal judge, "Hurry it along. Decide in two weeks." They decide when they're going to decide. Plus, you're guaranteed an appeal to the D.C. circuit, which is one of the slower moving courts of appeals. And then the losing side in the D.C. circuit very may very well ask the Supreme Court to hear it. And then you're into at least a year from today of a resolution, which and, you know, you never know. Once you have a company in play like Time Warner is, once you have, you know, a deal that is not settled, other companies could come in and bid and, you know, the...
[Camerota:] After a year?
[Toobin:] No. I mean while while it's before the courts, you could have another company come in and say, "We're making a higher offer, and let's forget all this and do a different deal."
[Cuomo:] Well, the first two results of the action seem somewhat clear which is, one, AT&T has said, "We're not going to do any major spin- off move," which means "I'm not going to get rid of the Turner part. I'm not going to get rid of the Direct TV part."
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] And, secondly, they've said, "We're going to fight." So they didn't scare AT&T out of the box just with the suit.
[Toobin:] They had a press conference, actually. It was weird to cover a press conference in our own building.
[Camerota:] About our...
[Toobin:] About our company, yes.
[Camerota:] ... company.
[Toobin:] But there was a press conference here yesterday with the head of AT&T. And their lawyer, who they've hired, Dan Petrocelli, who was the lawyer for the Goldman family in the O.J. Simpson civil suit, because all roads lead to O.J., ultimately.
[Camerota:] Certainly in your life, they do.
[Toobin:] That's right.
[Camerota:] All right. Thank you both very much for explaining all of this. More news to tell you about. Charlie Rose suspended by CBS and PBS, accused by at least eight women of making unwanted sexual advances in a new "Washington Post" report. So we will speak with one of the reporters who broke this story next.
[Cuomo:] Bloomberg.

[Blitzer:] A Republican candidate wins the Montana special election 24 hours after he was charged with assaulting a news reporter. Greg Gianforte defeated Rob Quist in the race for Montana's House of Representatives seat. During his victory speech Gianforte apologized for his awful behavior.
[Greg Gianforte, , Representative-elect, Montana:] I'm not proud of what happened. I should not have responded in the way that I did. And for that, I'm sorry.
[Unidentified Female:] And you're forgiven.
[Gianforte:] Please. And I should not have treated that reporter that way. And for that, I'm sorry, Mr. Ben Jacobs. You deserve a congressman who stays out of the limelight and just gets the job done.
[Blitzer:] President Trump went out of his way to comment on Gianforte's win while he was over at the G-7 summit in Sicily.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] Great win in Montana.
[Blitzer:] He whispered to the news media, "Great win in Montana." Our congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly, is joining us with reaction from Capitol Hill. Phil, what are you hearing from lawmakers?
[Phil Mattingly, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] It's no surprise that lawmakers after they left for recess and after the charges were filed were not rushing to the cameras to defend the action. Most were very clear, it was out of line. It was uncalled for. However, they did not say it was disqualifying. That said, the speaker had very blunt words.
[Rep. Paul Ryan, , Speaker Of The House:] There is no time where a physical altercation should occur with the press or just between human beings. So that is wrong and should not have happened. Should the gentleman apologize? Yeah, I think he should apologize. I know he has his own version and I'm sure he's going to have more to say, but there's no call for this, no matter under any circumstance.
[Mattingly:] Wolf, it's notable that despite that speech the speaker made it very clear, if he won, he would be seated. It's something he echoed in his statement after the victory last night. Here's what he said. Basically, elections are about consequences. This is from Ryan's spokesman" "Selecting Gianforte to represent them in Congress, he goes on to talk about what he brought to the table but the most noteworthy line was the last one. He will bring that experience to Congress where he will be a valuable voice in the House." It's worth noting, Montana Democrats say he should not be sworn in until charges are resolved one way or the other. Speaker Ryan making it clear, they are not going to wait. Montana voted and it's a statewide election in the state of Montana and, therefore, he will be sworn in. An interesting element of this that everybody is trying to figure out is what does this mean for the national landscape of things. It's very difficult to know in this election but Gianforte won statewide and lost to a Democrat in 2016. The Democratic opponent he had didn't exactly thrill a lot of Democratic consultants, and Republicans dumped a ton of money into this. While this was a state that President Trump won by 20 points, Gianforte only won by six, it was noteworthy that the Democratic opponent very rarely mentioned President Trump's name. He's still popular in states, not surprisingly, that he won by 20 points. There's no question about it, when you look at these special elections going forward, people are trying to figure out if messages will work nationwide. Wolf, I will say this, this race is not a great indicator but, for Republicans, a victory. They are happy, despite the circumstances, that surrounded it the last 48 hours.
[Blitzer:] I hope Gianforte learned his lesson. Once he arrives where you are up on Capitol Hill, you and Manu and other congressional correspondents, you're going to be chasing him with microphones and let's hope he responds as he should.
[Mattingly:] Every day.
[Blitzer:] Phil Mattingly, thanks very much.
[Mattingly:] Thanks, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that blocks President Trump's travel ban against six Muslim-majority nations. Now the Trump administration says it's taking its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. We have details.

[Blackwell:] A new report from "The Wall Street Journal" says President Trump is planning to hit China with another round of tariffs, this time on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods and he's going to do it before the trade talks start at the end of this month.
[Paul:] Yes, and the tariffs could result in higher prices on goods because companies usually pass on the cost to consumers. And look at your calendar, the holidays are just around the corner. So, the impact could be felt by millions of American consumers. CNN White House reporter Sarah Westwood with us right now. What else do we know, Sarah, about these tariffs? And good morning.
[Sarah Westwood, Cnn White House Reporter:] Good morning, Christi. And we know that these tariffs are to increase pressure on Beijing as the U.S. and China discuss the possibility of renewing those high- level trade negotiations. The tariffs are set to be around 10 percent, although officials have discussed setting those duties as high as 25 percent. And these new tariffs will hit goods like dishwashers, food seasonings, televisions and make those products potentially more expensive for American consumers. These tariffs are designed to give Trump leverage in his efforts to end the Chinese practice of demanding American companies turn over their intellectual property in order to gain access to China's markets. And it will be on top of the $50 billion worth of Chinese imports that are already subject to tariffs, and that first round of tariffs have hurt key Republican constituencies like farmers and manufacturers. China has been matching Trump's tariffs dollar for dollar so this new move is only likely to increase economic tensions, Victor and Christi.
[Blackwell:] As President Trump was on the Twitter machine talking about his poll numbers, and why he thinks they are so low. What did he say?
[Westwood:] That's right, Victor. No surprise here but President Trump is attributing his falling poll numbers to the Russia investigation last night, saying that the Russian probe could be hurting Republicans heading into the midterms writing, while my, our poll numbers are good with the economy being the best ever, if it weren't for the rigged Russian witch hunt, they would be 20 points higher. Highly conflicted Bob Mueller and the 17 angry Democrats are using the phony issue to hurt us in the midterms. No collusion. Now, this comes on the heels of the guilty plea of President Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort. Republicans have been using the spectrum of impeachment to motivate Republicans to get to the polls so Russia has been the key factor in Republican messaging. And this comes as Trump's legal team and his allies have been railing against Mueller to try to get him to end the investigation before the November elections Victor.
[Blackwell:] Sarah Westwood for us in Washington Sarah, thank you.
[Paul:] I want to bring in Daniel Lippman, a reporter and co-author of "Politico's" "Playbook" now. Daniel, good to have you this morning. I want to circle back to
[Daniel Lippman, Reporter & Co-author Of Playbook, Politico:] Good morning.
[Paul:] Good morning to China tariffs. And we know the Secretary Treasury Mnuchin is reaching out to leaders in Russia to try to deescalate this whole thing. Where do these new tariffs leave him?
[Lippman:] It makes it much harder for Mnuchin to do that because I think the Chinese feel like Trump and the American government is going way too hard against them. And that does not breed great trust amongst the trading partners. I don't think that Trump understands the critical role that China and free trade plays in making an American economy prosperous. So this also hurts U.S. efforts to get the Chinese government to cooperate on North Korea and preventing nuclear proliferation and enforcing the sanctions.
[Paul:] I want to switch real quickly to Brett Kavanaugh, because the Senate Judiciary is expected to vote on this on Thursday, President Trump's nominee, of course, Supreme Court. And there's this new acquisition out from someone who does not want to be named, who went to high school with him and says that in high school, he assaulted her. And Senator Dianne Feinstein had this letter did not give to the Senate Judiciary Committee. There has been no discussion on it. Do you believe that a discussion can move forward or that the vote can move forward without that conversation being had?
[Lippman:] I think it all depends on what Senators Murkowski and Collins do. Whether they believe the accusations, you know, whether the woman comes out publicly. If she comes out and she doesn't want to, to defend her this allegation and say exactly what happened, then the confirmation may be in doubt. Right now, it seems like it's all steam ahead. And Republicans are kind of using the same playbook as a couple decades ago with Clarence Thomas and saying, well, these are unverifiable. You know, we don't trust this woman. You know, they have released a letter from Kavanaugh's female classmates attesting to his good character. And Democrats seem to have bugled this accusation by, you know, injecting it so late in to the game.
[Paul:] Is there going to be some political push-back against Feinstein for it?
[Lippman:] I think she's already seen as the past. And she doesn't have that credibility on the left anymore that she used to. She's been she's now part of the establishment. And it doesn't seem like she handled this well, both Republicans and Democrats say this would have been better information to have when she first received this letter and you could have protected the woman's name, but to release it now when it's become an open secret on Capitol Hill, it just feels like, I don't know, why couldn't the American people hear this before the confirmation hearing, so senators could have asked Kavanaugh on the stands?
[Paul:] All right. Daniel Lippman, we appreciate it so much. Thanks for being here.
[Lippman:] Thanks, Christi.
[Blackwell:] Let's bring in Michael Moore, former U.S. attorney for the middle district of Georgia now. I want to talk about Manafort, welcome to the show.
[Michael Moore, Former U.s. Attorney, Middle District Of Georgia:] Thanks.
[Blackwell:] All right. So, Manafort, with his new guilty plea and the cooperation agreement, he was there at the Trump Tower meeting in 2016 with the Russians. Old friend and business partner Roger Stone who says that he may be indicted by Mueller soon. He was chair of the campaign when the party changed its stance toward Ukraine at the convention. List off the value, in addition to what I just did, of Manafort in this cooperation agreement.
[Moore:] Watching last week was watching an old western movie when there's an attack in the prairie and they say the fork has fallen. Manafort fell last week. That is really what happened. What you see is we have gotten to a level so close to the president and so close to his administration, at the top of the administration, that you can't overstate that the importance of having this cooperation. You know, there's been a lot of talk about whether Manafort would hold out for a pardon, whether or not he had other information, whether or not he was just kind of getting the cues from the Trump tweets about holding some maintaining the level of confidence. But he decided that he's not going to be the sacrificial lamb at this point. So he knows what went on in the meeting, he took notes in the meeting, he knows remember, he's been a player in Ukraine and he was used to sort of eviscerating the political opponents. I think they're looking for that and they have already that information as it relates to WikiLeaks and the Clinton campaign. So, you can't overstate the value.
[Blackwell:] Well, if you asked the president's personal attorneys, they say too bad for Manafort that has nothing to do with us. Let me read this tweet from Rudy Giuliani. I'm going to read it, but there are spelling mistakes and words screwed up here. But according to sources close to Manafort's defense, the cooperation agreement I think he's trying to say does not involve the Trump campaign. There was no collusion with Russia. Let's put up a snip-it of the actual cooperation agreement. Your client shall cooperate fully, truthfully, completely, and forthrightly with the government and other law enforcement authorities identified by the government in any and all matters as to which the government deems the cooperation relevant. Reconcile those two.
[Moore:] I think Giuliani is probably getting his statements, inside information from the folks that told him that the investigation would be over by this point and I wouldn't put a lot of stock in that all. This plea agreement, this cooperation agreement was buttoned up so tightly that it locks Manafort into giving full statements about what went on the past, what went on in the campaign, not just about what he pled guilty to. But he's now under an obligation if he's going to receive the benefit of the plea bargain to come forward with all information that he knows about any possible wrongdoing that's happened, basically, in perpetuity, that he'll have to share that with Bob Mueller's team. So I think Giuliani wants to put a spin on it. I don't think he's going to be successful at that. There's no way that you can look at his tweets and the fact that he had to retract some language out of the early tweet. You look at the president's sort of rant, there's no way you can look at those things and say they don't realize just how grave the situation is at this point.
[Blackwell:] You talk about the president's rant and I assume you're talking about this tweet that came out last night in which he said that the Democrats are using this, as he calls it, rigged Russian witch hunt that's an investigation by Bob Mueller to hurt them in the midterms. You're a former Democratic state official here in Georgia, is this politically potent for the Democrats headed to November, the narrative of this investigation and the men close to the president who have now pleaded guilty but found guilty?
[Moore:] I think probably the thing for the Democrats to do is not to hang their hat on this investigation. There's enough going with the president and what happened, but they ought to be talking about things they can do positive, things they can do for the country, things they can do for their state, whatever the case may be. Here, though, I think that, you know, Trump wants to repeat the narrative to gin up his base. It's clear to me that you got a Republican deputy attorney general who's overseeing the investigation. He's allowing the thing to go on as he said he would do. That ought to tell people something. We also can talk about the credibility and the validity of the investigation, when you simply look at the number of people and the level of the people that have been charged and now pled guilty. So, we've got all these pleas, we've got all these convictions, we've got all these indictments. And the indictments are heard by a grand jury, I mean, they are handed out by a grand jury. So I think the idea to say it is a witch hunt is just a fool's errand by Trump as we move forward. He wants to spin it again to get off the midterms.
[Blackwell:] The president would have you believe that it's up to these, quote, seven angry Democrats.
[Moore:] Well, he said some things, too. But as I say, I don't have much stock in the information he's passing out either.
[Blackwell:] Mike Moore, always good to have you.
[Moore:] Glad to be with you.
[Blackwell:] And do not miss Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the Democratic congressional nominee for the 14th district in New York state. She's on "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER". That's at 9:00 a.m. Eastern, right here on
[Cnn. Paul:] So once tropical depression Florence finally gets out of the Carolinas, there are a lot of people who may be upset to discover, hey, this flood is not covered in my homeowners insurance. We have an expert in the insurance field with us next. He's got some really valuable information for you, whether you live in a floodplain or not.
[Blackwell:] Plus, a man has died after a shark bite at Cape Cod Beach. Officials have not seen this kind of an incident in about 80 years.

[Camerota:] Just one day away from the midterm elections. What should we expect tomorrow night? There's something about Harry and he's here with us, so let's get "The Forecast" with CNN's senior politics writer and analyst Harry Enten. Hi, Harry.
[Harry Enten, Cnn Senior Politics Writer And Analyst:] Hi. How you doing? We're both in the same city, but we're in different rooms, what are you going to do? So let's take a look at the forecast right now as we have it for the House. This is basically where we've been this entire campaign, right, with Democrats favored with 226, the Republicans at 209. Of course you need 218 to get a majority. We think that Democrats are going to get there. Obviously there is a margin of error so they may not. But, overall, the forecast has been pretty consistent that Democrats will gain the majority in the House. In the Senate, on the other hand, we have something entirely different. Republicans are at 51 right now, but we think they're going to get all the way up to 52 in Democrats would drop a seat to 48. Now, there is a margin of error with that, so it wouldn't be shocking to me if Democrats pick up one seat on the net, so they could end up at 50. But getting to that or getting to that 51 in order to get the majority, that seems like a longer shot at this point.
[Berman:] Harry, your forecast, so electric, they had to put you in a secured location. That's why we're not allowed to stand close to you.
[Enten:] I miss you, though.
[Berman:] What House races what House races are you looking at?
[Enten:] Yes, sure. So, on election night, I think there are going to be a number of Houses races that will give us a pretty good idea of which way the night is going. The first one is New Jersey's 7th District, which is a suburban district in New Jersey. Leonard Lance, the incumbent, is this moderate guy, not really a Trumpy at all. This is a district that went for Mitt Romney back in 2012, then flipped to Hillary Clinton in 2016. And right now this is indicative of what we're seeing overall and that is that Tom Malinowski, the Democrat, we think is going to defeat Leonard Lance by three points. Now, there's some other districts that all other districts that don't really fit this mold very, very well. One of them is Maine's second district. This is not a suburban district at all. This is not a district where Donald Trump did poorly. And, in fact, Donald Trump won this district after Mitt Romney lost it. But here, in the rural areas of Maine, we actually have Jared Golden beating Bruce Poliquin by two points, which gives you an idea that Democrats aren't just fighting in the suburbs, they're actually doing fairly well in some areas that were traditionally Democratic but then flipped to Trump in 2016. One more I'll point out, Texas' 32nd District. This is in the suburbs of Dallas. This is a district that has historically been very, very Republican and yet Hillary Clinton did fairly well here, and we think that Pete Sessions, who didn't even have a Democratic opponent in 2016, is going to lose this race to Collin Allred by one point. There was a "New York Times" poll that came out last night that had Allred up. That would probably boost this by a little bit. But, overall, we think that Democrats are going to do what they need to do in a lot of swing districts.
[Berman:] The three districts you point out, I just will say, if they do go the Democratic the Democrat's way, and we have a long way to go, we have to wait and count the votes there, then you're talking about 35 you know, 30 to 35 gain for the Democrats there, not just the 23 number, right, Harry?
[Enten:] That's exactly right. And one other thing I'll point out is, there are going to be districts that are going to surprise us on election night, ones I didn't even talk about here. That's what happens in wave elections, we're never quite sure which of the districts we can get a best estimate of what's going on, but if Democrats sweep the board in these three, it's fairly certain that they'll gain the majority.
[Camerota:] OK, Harry, what Senate races should we be focused on?
[Enten:] Yes, so I think that there are two that I would kind of point out. Early on, on election night, the eastern part of Indiana will close and all the polls will close at 7:00 p.m. And what we think right now is that Joe Donnelly is going to hold on the incumbent is going to hold on and beat Mike Braun by two points, but it's a very, very tight race. But if Democrats hold on here, then Republican gains will be kept to a minimum. One other state that I'll point out is Missouri. I think a lot of Republicans thought that they had this race in the bag a few weeks ago, but some recent polls in fact, the Marist poll came out this morning that had Claire McCaskill, the Democratic incumbent, up by a point. I think that she will probably hold on. But, look, it's just a point. It's just a point. It really could go either way. But if Democrats hold on here, and they hold on in Indiana, they're going to hold their losses to a minimum and they might even gain a seat. Of course, gaining the majority, they'd need a state like Texas. And we spoke about, on Friday, that looks like a tough road to hoe where Ted Cruz's is still favored by six points to win.
[Camerota:] OK, Harry, thanks so much. Great to have you here. Harry's "Forecast" is available each day by 9:00 a.m. at cnn.comforecast.
[Berman:] Is it true you lost all your clothes on the way here?
[Camerota:] Yes. Well, I didn't lose my clothes, they were lost in the mail.
[Berman:] Oh.
[Camerota:] On the way here. But the good news is, is that Dana Bash's closet is like just a shopping day for me. I can go in there at any time and just have all new dresses.
[Berman:] So we're not going to wear this the next three days?
[Camerota:] No, I'm going to shop in her closet unbeknownst to her, unless she's watching right now.
[Berman:] All right. "SNL" comedian Pete Davidson mocked a congressional candidate who lost an eye serving in Afghanistan. Now Republicans demanding an apology. That's next.

[Blackwell:] A 3-year-old boy in North Carolina was missing for nearly three days in rain and freezing temperatures.
[Paul:] Cnn's Brynn Gingras introduces us to the officers who went beyond the call of duty to find him.
[Brynn Gingras, Cnn Correspondent:] Deep in this swath of pine trees amongst the thorns and briars, a lost little boy was found.
[Shane Grier, Chocowinity Ems:] It took some force to get him out of it. I actually had to pull him out of the vegetation.
[Gingras:] Against all odds, 3-year-old Casey Hathaway was rescued, 55 hours after he went missing from his great grandmother's North Carolina home. It was a tip that led Grier to this very spot at the edge of the woods.
[Grier:] And that's when we heard him say mama.
[Gingras:] Clear as day?
[Grier:] Clear as day.
[Gingras:] Grier is one of hundreds of local and federal emergency responders who tirelessly searched for Casey through rain and freezing temperatures.
[Chip Hughes, Sheriff, Craven County, North Carolina:] Casey is a small child, he's cold, he's hungry.
[Gingras:] The massive operation was under the command of the Craven County sheriff Chip Hughes.
[Hughes:] We started looking at the percentages of what is the chance a 3-year-old child in the elements with the wildlife that's in the area, bears, coyotes is going to survive this. The odds were not in our favor.
[Gingras:] It's a search that captivated the nation and brought a community together.
[Hughes:] People were when they showed up, you could see the look of determination. You know, Casey is he belongs to all of us now.
[Gingras:] All the while, Hughes promised Casey's family, he'd bring their boy home.
[Hughes:] That was a tall promise I made to this lady, and we were committed to stay to the end.
[Gingras:] And you kept that in your mind, it sounds like?
[Hughes:] Exactly. And when the rescue pulled up, the doors opened and I saw this, you know, 25-pound child, 3-year-old there with his eyes open, big brown eyes, it was tear-jerking, this was when we made good on our promise. I would have stayed out there an entire year just to make that happen.
[Gingras:] Casey's body temperature was low, but he only had scratches. He told his parents he befriended a bear. His family emotionally thanked law enforcement.
[Unidentified Female:] We're very thankful that you took the time out to come search for Casey and prayed for him.
[Gingras:] As for Grier, he'll never forget that gratitude. He now keeps this picture in his office, a gift from Casey's family of Grier and the little boy he saved.
[Grier:] I think everybody at some point in time was expecting a real bad ending from this and for the ending to be so good, I mean, you know, a little boy is home because of the efforts that everybody did here.
[Gingras:] A reminder of what he humbly calls a miracle. Brynn Gingras, Cnn, Craven County, North Carolina.
[Paul:] No doubt, a big thanks to those officers. So a flight from Los Angeles to Maui ended with a lot of frustration for these passengers, why their plane was forced to turn around three times before they finally said we're cancelling.

[Blitzer:] We now know that Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign chairman, now a convicted felon, is a frequent visitor to the special counsel's office since reaching a deal with prosecutors in early September. Manafort has come to Robert Mueller's office no less than nine times over the past month or so to talk with investigators. Here to discuss, CNN legal analyst, Jack Quinn, who served as White House council during the Clinton administration, and Sara Murray, a CNN political correspondent. Jack, nine times in the last months alone, what does that say to you?
[Jack Quinn, Cnn Legal Analyst:] It says he has a lot to offer to the special counsel. And he's giving it to him. Paul Manafort, his importance is evident by the effort the special counsel has gone to with him. He can talk about the Trump Tower meeting and the president's awareness of that, if any. He can talk about the change in the party platform at the convention. All of these things are critical because they tied together these activities in Ukraine where the Russian involvement and the platform and so on.
[Blitzer:] The allegation of collusion because he worked during the campaign.
[Quinn:] Absolutely. Yes. It doesn't mean he makes the case but he can speak to those issues and tie them together and help provide clarity.
[Blitzer:] And there's indications now that he's quiet before the storm, that shortly after the midterm elections, that Robert Mueller will be releasing more indictments. Roger Stone, you're doing interviewing on that.
[Sara Murray, Cnn Political Correspondent:] That's right. We're waiting to see what Paul Manafort offers and whether there might be more players. But we know there has been this ongoing investigation surrounding Roger Stone. He has not been contacted by Mueller's team. And sources close to the investigation, close to the president say they believe once we get past the midterm there could be more criminal indictments coming. What they will say and who they will involve, we're waiting to see. And the big question is, when are we getting this report and what is Robert Mueller's report going to entail.
[Quinn:] And Stone links to Assange with links to Russia. And Stone and Manafort were business partners at one time. These folks are all tied together.
[Murray:] Right.
[Blitzer:] What do you make of this. Sara, I'll get your thoughts first. Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general of the United States, gives an interview of the "Wall Street Journal." Says very positive things, upbeat things about the Mueller investigation in contrast to the president who says it's a ruse, a witch-hunt and an awful situation.
[Murray:] I think Rod Rosenstein wants to do forecasting that we are running a legitimate investigation he says the cases we're making are based on evidence and people will see they're appropriately using the resources. So he's offering a counternarrative to the president who calls this a witch-hunt. At the same time, he knows he serves at the pleasure of the president.
[Blitzer:] How do you see that?
[Quinn:] I think, number one, he wants to ensure the American people that there's an investigation that was done fairly and independently. Secondly, it's important to bear in mind, Rod Rosenstein's future does not lie with Donald Trump. It lies elsewhere and he wants to come out of this with his integrity and credibility intact.
[Blitzer:] We'll see if he comes out after the midterms with a job and if his boss, Jeff Sessions, has a job because potentially there could be a lot of activity going on.
[Quinn:] Don't bet on it.
[Blitzer:] Don't bet on what?
[Quinn:] That either is around, come January.
[Blitzer:] I suspect you're right. Guys, thank you very much. Up next, no electricity, stagnant water, barbed fences. Refugees living in grave conditions a year after the genocide in Myanmar. We'll go there.

[Soares:] We return now to a story that is almost too strange to actually be true. You are about to hear the former head of the FBI, James Comey talk about a private conversation with President Trump and the topic of that conversation was, well, rumors that a tape exist that shows Mr. Trump watching a pair of prostitutes urinate on each other. Have a listen.
[James Comey, Former Fbi Director:] I started to tell him about the allegation was that he had been involved with prostitutes in a hotel in Moscow in 2013 during a visit for the Miss Universe Pageant and that the Russians had filmed the episode and he interrupted very defensively and started talking about it, do I look like a guy who needs hookers? And I assumed he was asking that rhetorically, didn't answer that, and I just moved on and explained, sir, I'm not saying that we credit this. I'm not saying we believe it. We just thought it very important that you know.
[Unidentified Male:] Did you tell him you thought it wasn't true or didn't know if it was true or not?
[Comey:] I never said I don't believe it, because I couldn't say one way or another.
[Unidentified Male:] How weird was that briefing?
[Comey:] Really weird. It's almost an out of body experience for me. I was floating above myself looking down saying, you're sitting here briefing and incoming president about prostitutes in Moscow.
[Soares:] Well, Comey's interview is part of an effort to promote his new book about his interactions with President Trump, as you can imagine. The president has fight back calling Comey a liar and a slime ball. Let's bring back up Stephen Collinson with more. And, Stephen, you and I were listening to the press conference from White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders who basically said that he was he's a disgraced partisan hack and he created this problem for himself, and it seems the president is tweeting back. What is he saying?
[Collinson:] Right. So the president is seizing on a report that was sent from the watchdog, internal watchdog of the justice department about the former deputy director of the FBI, Mr. McCabe. Now, he was fired because of he was accused of not showing candor to FBI investigators who were investigating his handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation. It's all very convoluted. But basically what the president is saying is that McCabe is an example of corruption and he says he's part of the den of thieves and liars at the FBI, and he's clearly using that to take a swipe at James Comey. The president argued all along argued that Comey and the intelligent services of the United States, particularly the establishment within the FBI, the leadership is corrupt and has been out to get him from day one to invalidate his election. So this is one way that he is now trying to defend himself from the accusations in the Comey book by lashing out at Andrew McCabe and lashing out at Comey himself.
[Soares:] Yes, and the book, it has been absolutely boosting have been pretty salacious and explosive and I'm sure that we'll hear more from regarding the book next week, because I know that we know that Comey is going to do a whole media blitz next week. So expect more of the semi Tweets won't we? As even from President Trump next week. Thanks very much, Stephen. Thanks for staying with us.
[Collinson:] Thanks.
[Soares:] Now, the founder of the encrypted messaging app Telegram says he will fight Moscow's attempt to ban it. Pavel Durov who is himself Russian says the app all used built-in methods to bypass the ban. Samuel Burke is here with more on why this is so significant. Before we talk about why this is significant, wow exactly are they going to bypass this ban?
[Samuel Burke, Cnn Business And Technology News Correspondent:] Well, it's going to be very difficult. He says they'll have to have VPN, virtual private networks which make it so you can log in but it looks like you're coming from another country like the United States. You and I both know that VPNs are not what they're used to be, whether you're in the U.K. trying to watch Netflix from the U.S. or whether you're more seriously in China, Iran or Russia. They've really cracked down on this. So Telegram, one of the most important, one of the largest messaging apps in the world with 200 million users. The Russians are asking them for the keys to get in to these apps.
[Soares:] Why? What are the allegations here?
[Burke:] Well, what's interesting here is basically it was not one of the big stories like we had in the United States, for instance when you had the San Bernardino terrorist attack, the whole country, if not the whole world just looking at it through the lens of this terror attack, the United States wanting to get into the iPhone. In this case, the Russian government says the laws here require companies, tech companies like Telegram to give us the keys, but experts say, listen, this is end to end encryption and only Isa and Samuel have the keys, if we're messaging each other. Nobody in between has them. So what they're asking for they cannot give them. We've seen this play out with other apps like WhatsApp in Brazil. Before it's there, eventually the service is turned back on because they don't have the keys. They would have to re- write and completely change the app for this to be changed. We'll see how that plays out in Russia.
[Soares:] But like you said, we've seen similar cases. We've seen similar cases in Brazil. So, where does this go from here?
[Burke:] Well, maybe they'll look at alternatives. I mean, even Dmitry Paskov who's the spokesperson for the kremlin said he uses the app and he'll use an alternative but he's not great with text. It'll be very difficult with him. It's interesting because a lot of leaders have stopped short of banning apps like this because they're so popular. When you have a place like Iran or Russia where secretive messaging is so important to people because they know that there's a lack of privacy in these countries. You're talking about all of a sudden millions of people being frustrated because they can't communicate the way they've become accustomed to. So in some ways, you see this become a big risk for other government. Russia is a unique situation, though.
[Soares:] What are Telegram saying?
[Burke:] Right now, they're just saying we will work around this, but it gets back to that whole issue with the VPNs. And keep in mind, the man behind this app is also the person who started Facebook. This is a message that they had sent out previously. "Since the day we launched in August 2013, we haven't disclose a single byte of our users' private data to third parties. This is a guy who created the Russian version of Facebook and eventually had to leave Russia and come to the United Kingdom. He knows how tough life can be in Russia, especially for these tight startups trying to balance privacy with a very strong government when it comes to tech issues."
[Soares:] yes. Again, we're talking about privacy data or data, as you said. Samuel Burke, thanks very much. More to come right here including he has taken the Premier League by storm. CNN sits down with Liverpool and Egypt superstar, Mo Salah, that's next.

[Bolduan:] It's a recurring theme. When do words matter? Does anyone care about facts anymore? I ask it again today because President Trump is again spreading unsubstantiated stories about former President Obama. Trump tweeting this, "Just out that the Obama administration granted citizenship during the terrible Iran deal negotiation to 2,500 Iranians, including to government officials. How big and bad is that?" President Trump doesn't offer any evidence that he would have. The source of the story, at least on FOX News, is an Iranian cleric. CNN Money senior media reporter, Oliver Darcy, is here. Oliver, first off, cut through this for me. Where exactly does this come from?
[Oliver Darcy, Cnn Money Senior Media Reporter:] This seems to be another unsettling situation where the president is parroting a conspiracy theory that he heard in the media. In this case, FOX News ran a story on Monday and the story cited an Iranian news agency that cited an Iranian newspaper, that cited a single Iranian cleric, who made this wild assertion about the Iranian nculeaer negotiations. From there, it kind of caught fire. Sean Hannity shared it on Twitter. David Clarke, another FOX News personality, shared it on Twitter. It eventually jumped to the FOX News air waves on Tuesday morning. That's where "FOX & Friends" first broadcast the story. And just I think like two hours later, the president was tweeting about it and using it as a weird way to attack Obama.
[Bolduan:] So Obama administration Obama officials are denying it. It's always like where is the burden of proof when it comes to these stories.
[Darcy:] Right.
[Bolduan:] To prove the negative or to prove the positive. Is anyone offering evidence?
[Darcy:] There's some evidence here. Jeff Prescott, the former national security counsel
[Bolduan:] Evidence to the negative?
[Darcy:] Yes.
[Bolduan:] Yes.
[Darcy:] He shared some numbers with us, immigration numbers, that show that there was relative consistency between the number of Iranians naturalized before the Iranian nuclear deal and after the Iranian nuclear deal. In fact, it actually went down a little bit. But throughout the years, from the Bush administration to the Obama administration, there's consistency across the board. And they are saying this is totally just not true. It's absurd. They call this Jake Sullivan was on CNN last night and really went after the president for tweeting this. He made the point the president could call the State Department, the government officials that he's appointed and ask, hey, is this true, and they would tell him, no, this is not true. But instead, he relies on this thin FOX News report and puts it out there. It's quite disturbing.
[Bolduan:] It comes down to, once again, who do you trust? Do you trust the numbers coming from the federal agency that's in charge of it? Do you trust a FOX News report about another report about another report from one Iranian cleric? Who do you trust?
[Darcy:] The great thing is that FOX News' own commentator, the former Obama State Department spokesperson, told FOX News, "This sounds like B.S." That's an actual quote that they included towards the bottom of their story. And FOX News still ran with it, which is just really mind numbing.
[Bolduan:] Happy Fourth of July. It's great to see you, Oliver. Really appreciate it. Thank you so much. So, wow, speaking of while you get ready to fire up the grill and prepare for fireworks, law enforcement across the country is hard at work for you. What they're doing out of today's big celebrations and parades like this one in Chicago, and one about to get under way in D.C., happening right now. We'll take you there live. That's next.

[Blitzer:] Today, the Environmental Protection Agency barred members of the news media, including CNN, from a national summit on harmful chemicals in drinking water. We're joined by CNN Money senior media reporter, Oliver Darcy. Pretty shocking stuff, Oliver. What happened?
[Oliver Darcy, Cnn Money Senior Media Reporter:] Certainly, shocking, Wolf. Several journalists, when they were trying to cover this EPA event where Scott Pruitt was speaking were blocked entry by security and told they couldn't enter the event. I'm told the A.P spokesperson provided security with a list of reporters allowed to go in and cover the event. And when other journalists, including from CNN, tried to go in, they were blocked by security. The Associated Press is saying one of their reporters, when they protested and asked to talk to a public affairs person so they could get inside the event, that they were shoved outside the building, something that our journalists even witnessed.
[Blitzer:] Physically
[Darcy:] Physically shoved by a uniformed security guard. The Associated Press, in a statement they put out, their executive editor, and it says that, "The selective barring of news organizations, including the A.P., from covering today's meeting is alarming and a direct threat to the public's right to know about what is happening inside their government. It is particularly distressing that any journalist trying to cover an event in the public interest would be forcibly removed." CNN put out a statement separately saying, "We understand the importance of an open and free press and we open the EPA does, too."
[Blitzer:] It's shocking. This is an open event. It's not classified information. Reporters were invited but they specifically told the Associated Press and CNN get out?
[Darcy:] Right, that they could not go into the event. The EPA said it's a space limitation from the venue and they provided a live stream where people could watch separately. But a journalist with "The Hill" published a story saying there were vacant seats in the press area and there was a little bit of room. We obtained a photograph from inside the press area that shows there was certainly space for additional cameras.
[Blitzer:] Very often, when some journalists are expelled from this, the other, journalists stand up and protest and they walk out as well. In this particular case, they went in?
[Darcy:] Yes. There was no walkout that I'm aware of. We did talk to one of the journalists in the room and there was room for CNN to have cameras there and for the A.P..
[Blitzer:] Pretty shocking stuff. There's a dinner tonight, reporters committee for freedom of the press. I'm on the advisory committee of that organization. It's shocking, sometimes, to see what's going on here in the
[U.s. Darcy:] You might want to extend an invite to the
[Epa. Blitzer:] Yes. Thanks very much, Oliver, for that. There's more breaking news. The president is now saying the summit with North Korea's Kim Jong-Un may not happen after all next month. You're seeing the president of South Korea, President Moon, now leaving the West Wing of the White House.

[Vause:] U.S. president Donald Trump plans to travel to Florida and will meet with the families who lost loved ones in Wednesday's shooting. But there's no official word on when that will happen.
[Sesay:] When he does meet with them he can expect many people will be looking for concrete proposals to prevent such incidents, such tragedies from happening again. Take a listen to one student who survived the nightmare.
[Hogg:] My message to lawmakers in Congress is, please, take action. Ideas are great. Ideas are wonderful and they help you get reelected and everything. But what's more important is actual action and pertinent action that results in saving thousands of children's lives. Please, take action.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you have a sense of what kind of action that would be?
[Hogg:] Any action at this point instead of just complete stagnancy and blaming the other side of the political aisle would be a step in the right direction. Working together to save these children's lives is what this country needs.
[Sesay:] Yes, focusing on the children.
[Vause:] What was really interesting was the response from all these kids from this school. It was blunt and it was direct.
[Sesay:] Absolutely. Absolutely, the ones who were literally in the line of fire. The president on Thursday framed the tragedy in terms of mental illness. He promised to tackle that, though he didn't say how.
[Vause:] Jeff Zeleny has more now on Donald Trump's response to this latest mass shooting.
[Trump:] My fellow Americans, today I speak to a nation in grief.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Sr. Washington Correspondent:] An all- too-familiar ritual unfolded across Washington today in the wake of another mass shooting in America, flags lowered to half-staff from the White House to Capitol Hill.
[Rep. Mike Thompson:] Mr. Speaker, can you tell us when the House may muster the courage to take up the issue of gun violence?
[Zeleny:] But despite cheers from Democrats, there were no signs today Washington is any closer to addressing gun violence in the wake of the deadliest school shooting since Sandy Hook. President Trump did not mention the word "gun" in his brief remarks from the White House, instead talking about mental health.
[Trump:] We are committed to working with state and local leaders, to help secure our schools and tackle the difficult issue of mental health.
[Zeleny:] While offering no specifics, the president said it was time for action.
[Trump:] It is not enough to simply take actions that make us feel like we are making a difference. We must actually make that difference.
[Zeleny:] It's the fourth major shooting he's addressed since taking office, each time he's said it's not been the right moment to talk about guns. After the massacre on the Las Vegas strip...
[Trump:] We'll be talking about gun laws as time goes by.
[Zeleny:] and the rampage inside the Texas church...
[Trump:] But this isn't a guns situation. I mean we could go into it. But it is a little bit soon to go into it.
[Zeleny:] the White House had no daily briefing today. But the question we asked press secretary Sarah Sanders 136 days ago still lingers. Does he believe that he could bring something new to the gun debate that has been, you know, I guess locked in typical politics for so many years?
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Deputy White House Press Secretary:] I think that there will be certainly time for that policy discussion to take place. But that's not the place that we are in at this moment.
[Zeleny:] That moment has not yet arrived. Trump's presidential campaign was strongly supported by the NRA. But before running for office, he criticized his party's stance on guns, writing, "The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions. I generally oppose gun control but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun." But since taking office, President Trump has not expressed any support for a gun policy or any type of gun control measures. In fact, he has only talked about it on a day when America is reeling from another horrific shooting Jeff Zeleny, CNN, the White House.
[Vause:] Let's bring in our CNN political commentators, Democratic strategist Dave Jacobson and Republican consultant John Thomas. OK, so while everyone out there is agreeing that something needs to be done and maybe background checks would be a good place to start, guess what Republicans in the Florida state house were looking to do on Thursday? Because tucked away on page 88 of an agricultural bill about oyster farming, there was this provision which would have required the approval of a concealed weapons permit to basically be issued within 90 days even if a full background check was not complete. The vote was postponed. Dave, you know, chances are this is not an end to attempts to weaken, you know, the state's gun laws and it's not just Florida.
[Dave Jacobson, Cnn Political Commentator:] Yes, I mean this is indicative of the NRA and the gun lobby's firm, iron grip over Republicans across the country. And it is it underscores the fact that Republicans will not do the will of the people; 95 of Americans, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll, want tougher background checks; 65 of them want a ban on assault weapons, like the gun that was used the other day. The fact of the matter is, any Republican who takes money from the NRA or takes money from the gun lobby and votes against common sense gun safety laws we're not saying take away the guns, just gun safety laws, has blood on their hands.
[Vause:] Yes. So John, why? If you look at the statistics, the AR-15, an AR style semiautomatic weapon,
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, because I think a lot of Republicans and Americans feel that it is not just, if they didn't have an AR they would use some other kind of weapon. In fact, wasn't it the shooting in the church in a church a couple what a month or two ago that it was an NRA instructor using an assault rifle that stopped the shooter and had he not had the same level of firepower he might not have been able to stop that shooter. So I guess the point is, we don't necessarily just blame the gun because people who want to commit harm will commit harm. This shooter had many different kinds of weapons, not just an assault rifle. He had shotguns and several others.
[Vause:] Anecdotal evidence is not empirical evidence, it's a great idea.
[Thomas:] But terrorists, if they can't get guns in Europe, what do they use, they use vans. Right? People commit violent acts when they want to.
[Vause:] If that is the theory, then let's stop all chemotherapy treatment because chemotherapy doesn't work in 100 percent of the cases, so therefore we should stop all of it, right? That's the logic. Because if there are laws on the books that wouldn't have prevented this particular shooting, they're going to use something else, then let's just
[Thomas:] Why have a law at all?
[Vause:] OK. And speaking of that, over the past 12 months, the president and Republicans in Congress, they have actually been busy working on gun laws as in rolling back gun laws. Let's take a look. So this is what happened. They've blocked a rule that made it harder for the mentally ill to obtain guns, made it easier for fugitives to buy guns. They've moved to loosen gun restrictions on federal land, advanced a bill to make it easier to buy gun silencers. The House passed a bill allowed concealed carry across state lines. They've proposed cutting millions of dollars from the background check system. This is just what we could find. Again, John, today's point, when the vast majority of Americans want sensible gun reform, especially on the issue of background checks, why are Republicans doing the complete opposite?
[Thompson:] Well, like President Trump said he wants laws that will actually make a difference, not things that will make us feel good.
[Vause:] How does this make a difference?
[Thomas:] The point is we need to look at what happened yesterday and say, what could we have done to prevent that attack? Perhaps fix the way law enforcement communicates with one another. Perhaps work to harden our soft targets. These are things that could have been done that weren't done. These are easy fixes that we can agree on. John, we can't even agree to keep the government open. How in the world are we going to agree in Congress on something as polarizing as Second Amendment issues?
[Jacobson:] Well, the issues like, for example, the AR-15 in Florida, you can actually purchase when you are 18 years old. The background check only takes minutes. But if you want to purchase a handgun in Florida, you have to be 21 years old and it's a three-day background check. So why can't we just match that up and make it 21, 21
[Vause:] prevented this from happening.
[Thomas:] Well, but the wasn't the guy bought the firearms, what, in September? but it was premeditated, I guess is my point. So a week, a month. It wouldn't have mattered. Same with Steven Paddock in Las Vegas. He purchased the firearms well in advance.
[Vause:] Listen to
[Lori Alhadett, Victim's Mother:] I just spent the last two hours putting the burial arrangements for my daughter's funeral, who is 14. President Trump, please do something. Do something. Action. We need it now. These kids need safety now.
[Vause:] Well, safety may not be coming if the president's budget is any guide. "Politico's" reporting the budget request calls for a $25 million reduction in funds designated for national school safety activities compared with 2017. Donald Trump's budget will eliminate altogether a $400 million grant program that districts can use to prevent bullying or provide mental health assistance. John, as they say, budgets are statements of values.
[Thomas:] And imagine those things are going to change.
[Vause:] This is where his head was at two days ago.
[Thomas:] You are right, yes. No.
[Vause:] And this problem with mass shootings was a problem was two days ago. It's just reoccurred now.
[Thomas:] No, it is. I mean, he is going to have to change his tune and readjust his budget on that issue. And I also think the federal government needs to come up with concrete steps beyond just gun control to help fix this challenge. And my heart breaks when you see victims' parents like that. Of course she wants she wants action. I think we can all agree that we need concrete action. The sad part is, after these shootings, we don't there is never any plan because one side says gun control. There is never any plan of easy fixes that we can do. And I think there are some perhaps, I know Dave wants to see gun control. But there are some easy fixes that can be done. These students need to be protected in the meantime before any gun control legislation can go through.
[Vause:] Dave?
[Jacobson:] Look, I think that this needs to be not a partisan issue. This is an American issue. Enough is enough. And this cannot be the new normal. Right? I mean, bottom line, 95 percent, I mean, that is virtually every American polled says that that they want tougher background checks.
[Vause:] It's only a partisan issue in Congress, it's not a partisan issue anywhere else.
[Jacobson:] Yes, precisely. And that's a reflection that Congress is not executing what the people want. And there's a severe problem with that. And I think as we head to 2018 election, voters need to internalize and digest that information and hopefully change course.
[Vause:] We're out of time but when politicians start thinking like parents, one parent said today, that's when it will change. Fair enough?
[Thomas:] Fair enough.
[Vause:] OK. Dave, John, thank you.
[Jacobson:] Thank you.
[Thomas:] Thanks.
[Sesay:] Well, former Trump campaign aide, Rick Gates, is close to a plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller. Sources familiar with the case tell CNN Gates is poised to cooperate with investigators and could help in building a case against President Trump or his team. Gates and former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort have pleaded not guilty to financial crimes unrelated to the campaign. A White House official says Gates' potential cooperation wouldn't pose any risk to the president.
[Vause:] Well, gridlock on gun reform is often blamed on the all- powerful NRA. When we come back, questions are being asked about just who is bankrolling the National Rifle Association.
[Sesay:] Plus, North Korean athletes are capturing international attention at the Winter Olympics. But North Korean defectors are not so thrilled about it.

[Berman:] All right, the president has just wrapped up a combined victory lap and sentimental journey in Iowa. I guess that makes it a sentimental lap. But he also made some news on immigration as well. The victory lap for a pair of Republicans special election wins last night. The sentiment, it was the kind of rally that candidate Trump elevated to performance hours in the immigration news. CNN's Jeff Zeleny joins us once again tonight from Cedar Rapids with more on that. Jeff, Pres. Trump had a lot to say.
[Jeff Zeleny, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] John, he had so much to say. It seemed like he's been missing these campaign rallies. Of course, these were a staple of his candidacy. He hasn't done nearly as many as president. But tonight, he talked for about twice as long as the White House advised he would. He stayed on stage for more than an hour, talking about really the whole gamut. As you said, it was a bit of a sentimental journey. But on immigration, specifically, he did float a new policy. He said that any immigrants coming here could not have access to welfare for some five years. He said they would have to show that they could actually work and not be sort of living off the government dime. But then he went on to talk about the people who have made up his Cabinet, his top advisers. He's talked about Goldman Sachs. He talked about the wealth of his advisers. And he also said he didn't want to be advised by poor people. Let's watch.
[Trump:] The legendary Wall Street genius, Wilbur Ross here, he's our secretary of commerce. We have Gary Cohn, who is the president of Goldman Sachs. In fact, somebody he's the president of Goldman Sachs. He had to pay over $200 million in taxes to take the job, right? So somebody said, why did you appoint a rich person to be in charge of the economy? I said no, it's true. And Wilbur is a very rich person in charge of commerce. I love all people, rich or poor. But in those particular positions, I just don't want a poor person.
[Zeleny:] So the president there, talking about his economic advisers. And, you know, it's something that I'm not sure, John, any other president or politician would be able to get away with saying that he does not want a poor person advising him. But that is one of the things that Donald Trump supporters liked about him, the fact that he was going to appoint successful people all around him. But the whole Goldman Sachs idea and the investment banker idea is certainly so much different than his message during the campaign, when he railed against Wall Street. Now he, obviously, is joined by Wall Street.
[Berman:] Had Lloyd Blankfein in some of the negative ads that he put up at the end there as part of his closing argument. Did he have anything to say about the health care bill tonight, Jeff?
[Zeleny:] He did, indeed, John. In fact, this is something that's actually going on right now in Washington. His White House advisers are being briefed on the details. The president did not talk about the details, but he did talk about his hope for a kinder, gentler bill in the Senate, if you will. He talked about his hope for Democratic support for it even. Let's take a listen.
[Trump:] And I think, and I hope, can't guarantee anything, but I hope we're going to surprise you with a really good plan. You know, I've been talking about a plan with heart. I said, add some money to it. A plan with heart. But Obamacare is dead.
[Zeleny:] So "Add some money to it" there, now, that is something that will certainly be controversial for some Senate conservatives. And they need Senate Republicans on this bill, of course. We'll find out tomorrow morning, John, if the president is going to get behind the specifics of this Senate bill, or if he's going to again remain on the sidelines and then bridge the differences between the House and Senate. But that health care discussion, John, was one of the more interesting ones, because the president, after, you know, launching into partisan attacks throughout his speech almost sounded wistful near the end of his remarks here, saying he wished Democrats could come along. He wished Democrats could join him with tax reform, health care, infrastructure. But, John, we are five months and one day into this presidency. We cover the White House every day. We cannot count really any examples of outreach the president has made to these Democrats here. But he was starting to say that, you know, that would be a perfect solution. He's trying, of course, to paint Democrats as obstructionists, and he's trying to go after the resist movement, saying that Republicans are trying to get things done. John, one thing that was not mentioned, Russian interference in the election. Perhaps not surprisingly, but that is a key topic here on Capitol Hill, elsewhere, not one mention of it. Not one mention of Russia at all tonight for more than an hour and about 15 minutes or so of speaking. John.
[Berman:] All right, Jeff Zeleny, thanks so much. Back in Washington, they are talking about Russia and Special Counsel Robert Mueller is meeting today with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It's part of an effort as Manu Raju reported earlier, to make sure their probe, his probe, and the two Intelligence Committee investigations, don't get all tangled up in each other. It was also increasingly clear today that not only is he, Bob Mueller, investigating possible obstruction of justice by the president, it does seem the Judiciary Committee is too. Late today, I spoke with Democratic panel member, Chris Coons of Delaware. Senator Coons, special counsel Mueller met with leadership from your committee today, which then released a statement that characterized the meeting as including the investigations, plural, into Russian interference in the 2016 election and the circumstances surrounding the role of former FBI Director James Comey. Can we deduce, then, that your committee is, in fact, looking into possible obstruction of justice in the firing of James Comey?
[Sen. Chris Coons,  Delaware:] Well, it's clear, I think, that you've got two different committees in the Senate that we'll be moving forward with investigating the details around the firing of former FBI Director Comey and whether there was inappropriate political interference into an ongoing FBI investigation. Whether that amounts to obstruction of justice is a conclusion for a prosecutor to reach, but an investigation into political interference in an ongoing investigation, that's certainly an investigation into the circumstances that would lead to an obstruction of justice charge.
[Berman:] And you're saying your committee is doing that. It is underway. What about special counsel Bob Mueller? Is that committee statement a confirmation that he is looking into possible obstruction of justice or the circumstances?
[Coons:] Well, I think the statement speaks for itself. What's encouraging about the meeting today is that there is ongoing coordination between the special counsel and the leadership of committees of the House and Senate to make sure that we're not stepping in each other's lanes and to make sure that the ongoing investigation that special counsel Mueller is meeting is able to pursue leads wherever they might go. This is an investigation that may have criminal consequences, may have counterintelligence consequences. And so I think it's important that committees of the Senate and the House operate in closed coordination, so that we don't interfere with each other's investigations.
[Berman:] A new development this afternoon. Some of your Democratic colleagues in the House Oversight Committee, you used to acknowledge, there are a lot of different committees looking into a lot of different things.
[Coons:] Yes.
[Berman:] They're concern over the idea that then National Security Adviser Michael Flynn continued to attend presidential daily briefings by CIA Director Mike Pompeo for weeks after intelligence officials became concerned that Michael Flynn had been compromised. Does that concern you?
[Coons:] It does concern me. This is something I previously asked questions about in hearings, why it is that the national security adviser was allowed to continue access to the situation room, access to the president and to highly sensitive, highly classified material long after then attorney general, Acting Atty. Gen. Sally Yates, had directly raised the issue of his vulnerability to blackmail by Russia with the White House Counsel.
[Berman:] Now, does your concern go as far as to cover Jared Kushner? I'm asking you, because these same Democrats say they're also concerned about Kushner maintaining his security clearance while the investigations continue, even though I don't think anyone has leveled the level of accusations against Kushner, as they have against Flynn. There is no proof that Kushner, at this point, did anything, you know, untoward or if he been being investigated as doing something illegal?
[Coons:] Well, I think there's a significant evidence that Mike Flynn, the former national security adviser, had very complicated relationships with foreign powers that he failed to disclose, that he had been untruthful with the vice president, which is what led to his ultimately dismissal, but he had been untruthful at the very beginning of his service with this administration. And I think that's the foundation of questions by the House Oversight Committee Democrats. I'm less certain why they're pressing the issue with Jared Kushner, but my hunch is they have good reason for raising concerns about his security clearance, given other matters that may have come before their committee.
[Berman:] Your hunch is, but as you sit here based on what you know in your committee, which would be judiciary and the senate foreign affairs, also do you have any reason to believe that Jared Kushner has been compromised?
[Coons:] I don't have direct knowledge of that. I'm not in the leadership of the committee. I'm neither the chair nor the ranking, but there's nothing that I've seen from the Senate Judiciary Committees relatively limited activities on this matter to question Jared Kushner's security clearance.
[Berman:] Understood. You each do have your lanes. I understand you only see what's in your lane there. Lastly, it's a big week in the Senate. Some time tomorrow, you may get your look at the Senate version, the Senate Republican version of the bill to repeal and replace Obamacare. Do you have any sense what's inside of it?
[Coons:] I have no idea what is in the Senate Majority bill that would repeal and replace Obamacare. And frankly, neither do many Republican senators. There's been a lot of concerns, a lot of complaints by Republican and Democratic senators that this bill which will have an impact on hundreds of millions of Americans by affecting how health insurance and health care is regulated in this country has been composed behind closed doors by a very small group of folks. I'm encouraged that it is going to be public tomorrow. There will be a CBO score, if that's what's being reported, I hope that is what happens.
[Berman:] I'll get a chance to look at it tomorrow within the clock as you say will be ticking. Senator Chris Coons, thank you so much for being with us.
[Coons:] Thank you.
[Berman:] As senator Coons mentioned, there is a secret chorus of Republican senators frustrated with the secret process to draft this bill. We'll hear from them after the break. Also North Korea could order yet another underground nuclear weapons test. How the president might react tonight on "360."

[Cuomo:] Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell faces a tough decision today. Does he go forward, does he call for a vote on the Graham-Cassidy health care bill, but probably won't go his way, or does he admit defeat? Which is also going to come a big political cost. But the reality is, they don't seem to have the votes to pass it, even with a simple majority, 50 plus one, because three Republicans have come out against him. Let's discuss with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel. He's a CNN contributor and one of the architects of Obamacare. Zeke, let me put it right to you and what we hear as a defender of GrahamCassidy. There are people not the majority but about 7 percent of this country who gets insurance through the individual market, who believes that the mandate and paying for all of the weak are rocketing their costs. The big premiums have gone up for them. The deductibility has gone up for themCassidy, that releases the onus, the responsibility of having to have my insurance be a function of everybody else's will lower their costs and they like this idea. What do you say to that group of people?
[Ezekiel Emanuel, Cnn Contributor:] Well, typically, there were a group of people who, before the Affordable Care Act and if you repeal the mandate and exchanges in the Affordable Care Act would be better off. They tend to be people who are healthy, and young and fairly well off. So, actually, making a good income. Their insurance premiums would go down because we do what's called experience rating there. They pay based on what their anticipated costs are. But the whole point of insurance is to pool a big group of people and lower everyone's costs because it's more predictable and you know what the costs are, Chris. And the best thing is not to do what GrahamCassidy tried to do, which was to slice up the pool, the group of people you insure, but to people put as many people as possible into one pool, healthy, young, and older and sicker. And that will actually lower, on average, the costs for people. But, you know, it also goes to a larger point, which is we need to keep health care costs come down. For the last six years since passage of the Affordable Care Act, health care costs have moderated. Unfortunately, lots of people have seen their deductibles go off and the employers are shifting more of the costs onto their workers. And that has to reverse.
[Camerota:] We heard that last night. So, there was a CNN town hall about health care. And you, being one of the architects, obviously, of Obamacare, I just wonder what your reaction is when you hear stand up as this one audience member talk about how much they've been hurt by Obamacare and how it was not as billed. Let me just play this for everyone.
[Unidentified Male:] Can you tell my daughter tonight how you plan to absolutely guarantee her that she will never be subject to exorbitant premiums?
[Unidentified Female:] Obamacare was a huge lie to the American people. If Medicaid expansion is cut, what protections would there be to ensure people suffering and dying from addiction would continue to have access to health insurance coverage for treatment? Considering the scant marketplace options in my state, what would you do for health insurance if you were me?
[Camerota:] Zeke, hold on a second. That was not the one I was hoping for. I want to stay here from the woman that you heard there who said Obamacare was a big lie. She goes on to talk about how it was misrepresented. So, maybe we have that one? OK, listen to this.
[Unidentified Female:] Obamacare was a huge lie to the American people. Our insurance premiums did not go down. We did not get to keep our insurance plans. We did not get to keep our doctors and our taxes did not go down. Have you taken the time to listen to us, who are trying so hard to convey our message? We can no longer afford to pay so much so that so many can pay so little.
[Camerota:] OK. So, Doc, what do you say to her about all those broken promises?
[Emanuel:] Well, first of all, about all those broken promises are accurate. The Affordable Care Act has done some remarkable things for people. First of all, it limited total out-of-pocket costs that people would have to pay. Those are high limits but it does prevent people from going bankrupt and that is, I think, an important protection. And that's true for everyone. The second thing I would say is, look, one of the problems of the affordable that has emerged after we passed the Affordable Care Act, is we needed some fixes. We recognized we needed to fix some things in the marketplace and the exchanges to bring premiums down. We needed to guarantee the cost-sharing subsidies to have reassurance so that if an insurance company had super high expensive people, it wouldn't affect everyone's premiums. We also needed to get more insurance companies in rural areas and uncovered counties by maybe reducing their taxes from the Affordable Care Act. There are a lot of fixes that can be done. Unfortunately, we could not do that because Republicans would not pass some fixes. Everyone hurts for people who are paying super high premiums and we need to keep health care costs, hospital costs, doctor costs down to actually reduce those premiums. Those are essential elements. And, hopefully, we can now focus on the very practical measures to actually save money and that will reduce premiums and address that lady's concerns.
[Camerota:] I mean, look, you know, if this fails if GrahamCassidy fails, it's up to Congress to fix the things that are broken.
[Emanuel:] My worry is they're just going to move we've got to move on now. We can't do health care. We need to do something bipartisan and not rush it. Do it behind close doors the way Mitch McConnell did. You have a total of five hours of hearings by the Republicans. Democrats had many more. We can actually work this out if we try to work in good faith. I hope that Senator Alexander and Murray actually make progress on shoring up exchanges and bringing premiums down. They have some ideas and they should push forward now.
[Cuomo:] They're working on a bipartisan basis to do exactly that.
[Emanuel:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] That was halted because they want to fight for GrahamCassidy first.
[Emanuel:] Right, the bipartisan basis can go forward.
[Camerota:] OK. Ezekiel Emanuel, thank you very much.
[Emanuel:] Thank you.
[Camerota:] OK. President Trump is facing criticism over his response of the devastation in Puerto Rico. What the president is tweeting about is under scrutiny. So, we'll show you what he's focused on this morning.

[Church:] Welcome back, everyone. The U.S. President Donald Trump has decided to end the so-called DREAMers program. It protected some 800,000 undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children shielding them from deportation and authorizing them to work. Thousands have protested the move across the country with students and one high school in Phoenix, Arizona staging a defiant walkout. Just hours after sending his attorney general allowed to make a stern announcement Trump tempered his decision, saying he would visit or revisit the issue if Congress can't fix it within six months. House Speaker Paul Ryan issued an optimistic statement saying this. "It is my hope that the House and Senate with the president's leadership will be able to find consensus on a permanent legislative solution that includes ensuring that those who have done nothing wrong can still contribute as a valued part of this great country." The democratic leaders slammed the decision one lawmaker saying this.
[Joseph Crowley,  United States Representative:] It is increasing world that we're living in today that these young lives these cultural Americans and their lives would upended in this way. The notion or idea that after six months that DACA program will end that they somehow will have to deport themselves or be deported not knowing their homeland, not knowing their relatives not having visited there since they were brought here as young children or as babies. It's just immoral and unconscionable.
[Church:] Our Jim Acosta has details now on what the president is on doing and who will be affected.
[Jim Acosta, Senior White House Correspondent, Cnn:] With the young undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children known as the DREAMers. It could be a nightmare. The Trump administration is terminating the Obama era policy that shielded the DREAMers from being deported. The White House and Attorney General Jeff Sessions are fierce immigration hardliners in the Senate to make an announcement that sounded tailor-made for the president's political baits.
[Jeff Sessions, United States Attorney General:] To have a lawful system of immigration that serves the national interest. We cannot admit everyone who would like to come. It's just that simple. That would be an open borders policy and the American people have rightly rejected that.
[Acosta:] Instead the same president who claimed he loved the DREAMers...
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] We love the DREAMers. We love everybody. We are going to deal DACA with heart.
[Acosta:] ... released a statement, "My highest duty is to defend the American people and the Constitution of the United States of America. At the same time I do not favor punishing children. Most of whom are now adults for the actions of their parents. But we must also recognize that we are a nation of opportunity because we are a nation of laws." Why is the president not some out and make this announcement himself today? Why did he leave it to his attorney general? It's his decision. These kids and their lives are on the line because of what he's doing.
[Sarah Huckabee-sanders, White House Press Secretary:] It's in large part a big part of the legal process. This was being illegal. But I think just about every legal expert that you can find in the country.
[Acosta:] Late in the day the president finally weighed in.
[Trump:] Well, I have a great heart for the folks that we're talking about. A great love for that. And people think in terms of children but they're really young adults. I have a love for these people and hopefully now Congress will be able to help them and do it properly. And I can tell you in speaking with members of Congress they want to be able to do something and do it right. And really we have no choice. We have to be able to do something and I think it's going to work out very well. And long-term it's going to be the right solution.
[Acosta:] The White House is pressing Congress still has six months to pass it fixed to protect the nearly 800,000 DREAMers and that no immigrant in the program will be impacted before March. But for the president decide the DREAMer fix he wants something in return, such as the wall. You're saying that we're going to allow the DREAMers to stay in this country we want a wall? Is that accurate?
[Sanders:] I don't think that the president has 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.
[Acosta:] Democrats are already balking at that questioning the president's motives noting he pardoned Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was convicted in federal court for defying a judge's order to stop profiling Latinos. Not to mention Mr. Trump's past statements about Mexican immigrants.
[Trump:] They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists and some I assume are good people.
[Acosta:] Here's opposition to the president's plan is coming in from all sides from a member of the president's own diversity Council.
[Javier Palomarez, President And Ceo, U.s. Hispanic Chamber Of Commerce:] I am resigning right now from that council. I don't see the point in continuing to try to work with people that clearly don't see this issue the way I do.
[Acosta:] The former President Obama who said in a statement, "To target these young people is wrong because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating because they want to start new businesses, staff or lab, serve in our military, and otherwise, contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel." Now that it's in the hands of Congress the question is, do they have time to fix this.
[Unidentified Male:] Today they say we're up to six months. Calculations of six months is to March 5th, so we plenty of time, right? Not by Senate saying which we don't.
[Acosta:] The Trump administration is not offering much comfort to DREAMers who handed over their personal contact information to the Department of Homeland Security when they receive protection from deportation. Administration officials say that information could be used by immigration authorities if and when they start carrying out this policy. Jim Acosta, CNN, the White House.
[Church:] Some 800,000 DREAMers find themselves in legal limbo at the moment and my next guest is one of them. Ambar Pinto is a DREAMer and also an activist with United we dream. She joins me now. Ambar, thank you so much for being with us.
[Ambar Pinto, Undocumented Young Immigrant:] Thank you for having me.
[Church:] Now we know of course that you were 12 years old when your parents brought you to the United States from Bolivia. What was your reaction when you heard Attorney General Jeff Sessions formally announce the end of the DREAMer program called DACA and just how worried that you feel yourself and all the other young people affected by this decision?
[Pinto:] Yes, absolutely. Thank you for having me tonight. As an undocumented immigrant and a DACA beneficiary the announcement today was cruel. There was no necessity to this program has allowed over 800,000 immigrant just like myself to live a life without the protection. We can see that this administration sides with white supremacy once again, and to terrorize immigrant youth that myself and families and communities.
[Church:] So what does this mean for you and all the other DREAMers, what advice are you giving and how do you plan to fight this decision?
[Pinto:] Yes, so DACA had been able to get me really from deportation most importantly and not just driver's license. The opportunity to pursue my career and get a job that pays me from what I'm worth and gives me access to healthcare which everything going individuals to have. Not having DACA will mean that we will again be at risk of deportation, right, 800,000 youth people will be interrupted and their life had been there no more for five years. We, this white supremacy agency is trying to put people like me and my family back in the shadows. But we're here to say we're going to take the street. We're going to have moments to heal together and come together but we will take back to streets and we will win like we have been done before.
[Church:] Does it give you any hope at all knowing that Congress now has six months to come up with legislation that will fix DACA. And President Trump tweeted that if Congress can't do that he will revisit the issue?
[Pinto:] We know that Congress in the past hasn't been able to pass permanent legislative solution for undocumented immigrant families. If President Trump really wanted to protect people like myself he would have left the job he would have let the program intact while Congress would have worked into enacting something. The fact that he just tweeted about this it's psychological abuse because you are messing the lives of 800,000 immigrant youth and not only themselves like me, but my family and my parents, my communities, my friends and my loved ones. So we will fight. We will lobby. We would do everything that is in our power to ensure that Congress understands the importance and the time sensitive how time sensitive it is to act and pass a permanent solution.
[Church:] And Ambar, just finally, why do you think the Trump Administration is getting rid of DACA at this time?
[Pinto:] The administration has been running on a white supremacist agenda since they were trying to since election, since he was a nominee running to be a president. It was the promise that he made. And again, I don't know if he realized the impact that he had on the country on American youth like myself. He's doing it as a promise, he's siding with white supremacy and he's allowing people like Jeff Sessions who has made a career out of criminalizing people like myself, immigrant youth and immigrants as a whole, right, as a whole community. And that's the reason why he's making the decision, because again, once again, he wants to side white supremacy.
[Church:] Ambar Pinto, thank you so much for sharing your perspective on this matter. We do appreciate it.
[Pinto:] Thank you so much for having me tonight.
[Church:] And another young DREAMer is already challenging the president's moving court. Hours after announcement Martin Mattia Vidal [Ph] amended a lawsuit he filed last year. Now he argues the latest decision violates the U.S. Constitution. Eight hundred thousand people will be affected by the end of the immigration program. A quarter of the DACA recipients live in California, New York, and Washington are among several states vowing to oppose the president's action in court.
[Andrew Cuomo, Governor Of New York:] President Trump is talking about DACA and rescinding DACA which is just feeding the beast of bigotry read meat. That's all this is about. And Danny's example and my father's example says you stand up and you fight this fight now because it's because it's easy but it's tough.
[Jay Inslee, Governor Of Washington State:] Well, the president is pulling the rug out from underneath our young neighbors is inhuman, it's unconscionable and it really damages the American dream. These DREAMers are called the DREAMers for a reason. They came here through no fault of their own. They're building our businesses, they're going to college, they're graduating from high school, they're being good employees and it's wrong to pull these dreams away from them.
[Church:] And though President Trump has urge U.S. lawmakers to replace the program within six months Congress hasn't been able to pass any major legislation since he took office. We'll take a short break but still to come on CNN Newsroom, adding insult to injury. DACA DREAMers left with little after hurricane Harvey and now wondering if their days in the U.S. are numbered. Plus, South Korea's president visits Russia with the nuclear threat from Pyongyang high on the agenda. We will go to live to Vladivostok for the latest. And we take you to the Korean demilitarized zone where a long time resident tells us she's the most concerned she's been in decades. We are back in just a moment.

[Romans:] All right. Don't get too excited about creative workarounds to keep your state and local tax deductions. The Treasury Department cracking down on the loophole for high-tax states preventing them from helping taxpayers avoid that new cap on state and local tax deductions. That was one of the most controversial parts of the new GOP tax law. Once unlimited, the so-called SALT deduction is now capped at $10,000. Now that disproportionately harmed high-tax states which are mostly blue. In fact, several blue states are suing the Trump administration. New York, Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey. They claim the tax law unfairly targets Democratic states. Those same states passed laws to work around the cap allowing taxpayers to make charitable contributions in lieu of state taxes in exchange for a tax credit. But a new treasury rule blocks that scenario. Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Congress limited deduction that benefited high income earners to help pay for major tax cuts for American families. Deductions help reduce your overall tax bill so in high-tax states like New York, the cap could increase resident taxes by $14 billion this year. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo calls the SALT change a political attempt to hurt Democratic states. He promised to fight that new treasury rule.
[Briggs:] California Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter and his wife pleading not guilty in federal court Thursday. The charges they illegally used a $250,000 in campaign funds to furnish their lavish lifestyle. Hunter on Fox News last night seemed to point the finger at his wife.
[Hunter:] When I went to Iraq in 2003, the first time I gave her power of attorney and she handled my finances throughout my entire military career and that continued on when I got in Congress. She was also the campaign manager. So, whatever she did, that will be looked at, too, I'm sure. But I did not do it.
[Briggs:] Interesting breakfast conversation this morning. No response yet from Hunter's wife, Margaret. The couple accused of spending campaign money for personal expenses, large and small, including a $14,000 family vacation to Italy.
[Romans:] All right. The two-person board of elections in Randolph County, Georgia, will vote this morning on a proposal to shut down seven of its nine polling places. Critics see this as a move to suppress black voters in a critical election that could result in Stacey Abrams becoming the first black female governor. Supporters in the rural Southwest Georgia County say the move will save money and they claim the seven targeted locations do not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
[Briggs:] A preliminary autopsy report on Mollie Tibbetts indicates her death was caused by multiple sharp force injuries. The 20-year-old University of Iowa student was last seen jogging on July 18th. Her body was found Tuesday buried under a pile of corn stalks. An undocumented 24-year-old immigrant from Mexico, Christhian Rivera charged with Tibbetts murder. Her funeral scheduled for Sunday.
[Romans:] Heart pounding video out of Texas where police stopped a woman from jumping off a bridge. Take a look at this dashing video from Fort Worth Police. A woman standing there on the ledge of an overpass. Her heels of her feet hanging right over it. Officers Justin Henry and Trae Cierzan inch slowly toward her. Watch what happens next.
[Unidentified Police Officer:] It doesn't matter.
[Unidentified Female:] Everybody wants me dead.
[Unidentified Police Officer:] No one wants that. No one wants that. Please get down. Please get down. Please get down. Please get down.
[Romans:] One of the officers has been heard promising to get her help. CNN affiliate KTVT says the woman is in a hospital. Her family says they are forever grateful to those officers who they hoped to one day meet.
[Briggs:] What a difficult situation for those officers not knowing when to act for the great job there. All right, ahead of preseason scare for the Cleveland Browns and their two tough quarterbacks. Lindsay Czarniak in studio for the "Bleacher Report" next.

[Sesay:] Hello everyone, the Philippine military claim it's on the verge of retaking a city besieged by militant linked to ISIS. That's according to CNN Philippines, Marawi on the southern island in Mindanao has been under Martial Law now for a week.
[Vause:] The government says the fighting has killed more than 60 terrorists, 20 troops, and nearly 20 civilians.
[Restituto Padilla, Philippine Military Spokesman:] There was a need to do surgical air strikes because of strategically emplace enemy presence so we cannot do otherwise because if we do not employ combat power as we need it and it fit, we would prolong the tearing process and we would endanger more lives, both civilian and military.
[Vause:] And military says it is still trying to weed out pockets of resistance.
[Sesay:] All right, well let's go now to Richard Heydarian in Manila. He's a professor of political science at De La Salle University, thank you so much for joining us. In your view was President Duterte's decision to declare Martial Law in Mindanao warranted?
[Richard Heydarian, De La Salle University Professor Of Political Science:] Well its seems the situation in Mindanao is really getting out of control. One of the most troubling things we're talking about here is the presence of foreign fighters on the ground. People are suggesting that not only Malaysian or Indonesian jihadists but probably even Arab jihadists were joining the Maute Group also known as the Islamic State Lanao. So there this concern that the situation is getting out of control and the President may need all the necessary legal leeway to move forward. Nonetheless, that has also raised specter Marcos dictatorship when the Philippines had a Martial Law in the 70's and 80's, so the Philippine military pre-emptively has released a set of guidelines to make sure that this is not going to be a horrific resuscitation of the past experiences and that the Philippine military will respect the basic civil liberties and rights of the citizens to its utmost. Nonetheless, we are talking about urban warfare in Marawi, we are talking about a very serious situation. So, abuses could be very much on the table that is why it's important for the Philippine Congress and for the courts to remain functional and check and balances the Philippines military in its execution of the Martial Law.
[Sesay:] Given President Duterte's support in Congress, his overwhelming support, will Congress actually act as a check and balance to his power and how things play out in Mindanao?
[Heydarian:] That's definitely a problem. I mean Duterte very popular, he has a super majority in the Congress, so I think in Mindanao he's going to get his way. In fact, 15 Philippine Senators recently released resolutions suggesting that they are supporting President Duterte Martial Law declaration in Mindanao. But I think once the declaration is extended beyond the conflict zone, let's say in Visayas and Northern Region where Manila is, I think that's where we're going to see opposition including from people within the government coalition unless the President really convinces the people that this is the only way forward. But then again, I think it's very important for the civil society groups for the international community and other institutions in the state to do their job and make sure that the President will responsibly use the additional powers and emergency powers is enjoying under Martial Law.
[Sesay:] Richard you just mentioned the possibility you raise the specter of Martial Law being extended or expanded beyond Mindanao, is this under consideration and is these raising concerns there in the Philippines?
[Heydarian:] You know, when the President Duterte just returned from Russia to the Philippines after meeting Vladimir Putin he threatened to extend it beyond Mindanao. And the reaction was quite negative even amongst some of his allies. So, because there's a sense that, the problem is in Mindanao, where Duterte comes from but to extend it beyond there is going to raise serious question about the quality in how Philippine Democracy. So, I expect the opposition to build off, I think the President goes there, and I think even within the military there's no appetite for extending this beyond Mindanao knowing that they also have to protect their integrity and I think Philippine military over the past three decades has internalized the basic Democratic rights in the constitution and remember the role of the military is to be guardians of the constitution, not to just blindly follow the President. So, I think as far as long the crisis in Mindanao Duterte will get his way but once this goes beyond Mindanao, resistance is going to build up even among his allies.
[Sesay:] Richard Heydarian we really appreciate the insight and analysis. Thank you so much for joining us.
[Heydarian:] My pleasure.
[Vause:] ISIS is claiming responsibility for deadly bombing in central Baghdad. Warning, the image from the scene of the attack are graphic and disturbing. A car bomb exploded outside an ice cream shop as families gathering there to break their fast in the holy month of Ramadan. At least 10 people were killed and 40 others wounded. ISIS says the targets was Shiites. The terror group has carried out several similar attacks across the Iraqi capitol this year.
[Sesay:] A quick break here. And former Panamanian strongman Manuel Noriega has died. We'll have a look at his notorious rein and his downfall when we come back.
[Vause:] Plus, ahead, the Baltic States say they're swamped with disinformation from their neighbor. We'll tell you how Lithuania is fighting fake news from Russia.

[Walker:] Facebook could be making big changes. Its CEO Mark Zuckerberg says the social media giant is taking on a new mission that goes beyond connecting people.
[Vause:] he explained it all to our Laura Segall in this CNN exclusive.
[Laurie Segall, Cnn Senior Technology Correspondent:] It's an incredibly big deal that Facebook is completely overhauling its mission and has a new mission. So what is the new mission of Facebook?
[Zuckerberg:] So our new mission is to bring the world closer together. And for the last decade, our mission has been to make the world more open and connected. And we've been really focused on these ideas, helping to connect people, especially with their friends and family, and we're going to keep doing them. We're not done with that mission yet. But now I just feel like we have a responsibility to do more in the world. When you look at the world today, giving people a voice and helping people connect are good and they've made the world better in a lot of ways but our society is still very divided and that means that people need to work proactively to help bring people closer to together. It's not enough to help us simply connect. We need to work to bring the world closer to together.
[Segall:] And you've always had such an interesting utopian view of things and it seems like this mission now, looking forward, is something a little bit like fakebook's grown up.
[Zuckerberg:] When I look at the greatest opportunities and challenges for our generation, things like stopping climate change, ending disease, stopping climate change, those are things he no one group or country can do by themselves. So we have to build a world where people can come together to take on these big meaningful efforts. That change won't happen top-down. There's no one in the world that can snap their fingers and make that happen. We need to empower things like church groups and neighborhood groups and groups of people who love dogs and new moms and dads. Those are the groups that bring people together. And once people are coming together in these smaller groups, that grows, and it ends up with much bigger changes in the world.
[Segall:] So how exactly do you do that?
[Zuckerberg:] If what you're trying to do is run a group that has thousands of people, you need tools to help manage that. That's what we're announcing today. We have 300 people who have built the strongest communities on Facebook. A woman here, named Lola, started the secret group called Female In. She started it. She describes it as a no judgment support group for women to talk about whatever issues matter the most to them, whether it's issues in their marriage, their job or health or anything. And what she's found is that people come and start talking about basic issues, but then it actually has given people an outlet for really important things too. And now they come and talk about domestic violence, and within minutes, she says people get thousands of messages of support, offers of places to stay, and help with child care. She didn't start off try to build a community that was going to change the culture around domestic violence, but when you give people a way to connect, that's the kind of thing this can lead to. So that's what we want to try to unlock in the world. Our view is, if we can build those tools and give more people like Lola in the world the power to build those communities, it's going to be a better place.
[Segall:] Take me inside Mark Zuckerberg's head to the moment you decided to change fakebook's core mission. Was there an event that happened or a moment you said we got to change something?
[Zuckerberg:] Well, for most of the last 10 years this idea that the world should be more connected was not very controversial but now I think there are starting to be people who question whether that is good. There's been this evolution where for me and a lot of the people I work with at Facebook, we feel like giving people a voice is a really important thing to do but it's not enough to give people a voice, you have to build common ground so that way people can move forward together and aren't sharing a lot of different opinions. You have to help reconcile that so people can come together as well. That's a lot of the responsibility we feel now, and the mission that we want to take on for the next 10 years of the company.
[Segall:] We keep hearing we've never been more divided, more polarized. Was it the political climate that led to this awakening?
[Zuckerberg:] I think it's the feeling that simply connecting the world is not enough. You have to do proactive work to bring people together. You need to do work to help build enough common ground so we can make progress as a society together. You want to help people stay connect would the people they know and care about and make it so people get access to new people and new perspectives, too. We're going to do everything we were before, to connect friends and family and help people share, but now we also want to help people build communities and other ways they can connect and help people bond and come together and spread tolerance and a lot of the values I think we all want to see in the world.
[Segall:] How do you do that, because technology, to a degree, is always promised to help us discover and help us learn? There's also the question of, does it make us more insular? Is information being hijacked and spread? As you making the community of Facebook, these communities, how do you make sure they remain a place for authenticity and real discourse?
[Zuckerberg:] People are connecting over something they have in common and there's lot of research that shows if you want to engage on issues that you disagree on, things that society is divided on, the first thing you need do is connect over your common humanity. It could be we both have families or we both like a TV show together or the Chicago Cubs or whatever it is. So bringing people together and creating these communities is a lot of what we can do to help create more civil and productive debate of the bigger issues as well.
[Segall:] What have you learned from the spread of information or what have you learned to make sure that people can really connect?
[Zuckerberg:] I mean, the biggest thing that I've learned as I've travelled around is that great communities have great leaders who are engaged and feel an ownership of taking care of the people in their groups. One of the things we can do is empower leaders and all these folks who want to start communities around the world to do this.
[Segall:] You spent a good amount of time traveling around the country, at the dinner table with people in Ohio, going to factories. Are we as divided as it seems?
[Zuckerberg:] On some political issues, I think we are. But on more things than are usually covered, we are not. People have lot of the same interests. A lot of people like the same sports teams and bond over the same things in their neighborhoods. We all want the same things for our families and the people we care about. And one of the things that has been inspiring to me is I've seen people I might disagree with but you really come away with a feeling that people genuinely do care about helping and caring for other people. And that gives me a lot of faith.
[Segall:] Facebook is nearing two billion users. So how do you insure for the next billion that Facebook is a good place for democracy?
[Zuckerberg:] We want to give everyone in the world a voice to express what matters to them and bring people to together to solve important challenges. One of the things we need do is help connect the other half of the world to the Internet and you and I probably take that for granted. But for a lot of people in a lot of parts of the world, just having access to share your opinion or send a message to your partner or your friend or learn what the prices are for products at the market. Those are important things that a lot of people don't have an equal opportunity and access to do. There are lot of things we can do to solve this. We're building technology like solar powered planes to beam down Internet access or in the middle of a rain forest. We're working on new business models to do this. This remains one of the things that I'm most excited about for the next decade and beyond, just unlocking access to the Internet for the next three or four billion people. If we can do that, all these folks who, today, don't have the tools to start businesses or create new tools, they'll now be able to make our lives better, too. And that's going to be a very powerful thing.
[Vause:] He has very grand plans and a big vision.
[Walker:] And yeah, he's doing well for himself with those visions.
[Vause:] Absolutely. We will finish now with our top story, the tale of the tapes.
[Walker:] And the president's admission there are no recordings of his conversations with the FBI director, and that has his critics and supporters all fired up. Here's our Jeanne Moos.
[Jeanne Moos, Cnn Antional Correspondent:] Tapes? What tapes? As President Trump shrugs this one off, Twitter reaction ranged from a laid back, "Oh," to, "Are you kidding? You literally threatened Comey with tapes and now you say you don't have them?" "The man's mind games are exhausting," tweeted someone else. Sorry Mr. Comey.
[Comey:] Lordy, I hope there are tapes.
[Moos:] The actual Trump tapes, according to this tweet, "are duct, scotch and masking, all misspelled." The president's supporters fired back. "Trump did what was necessary to make Lyin'Jim Comey speak the truth." Tweeted another defender, "Lordy, POTUS just bluffed one of the most powerful men in the world, and it paid off. Imagine playing poker against Trump." Actually, he revealed his hand early.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Are there tapes, sir?
[Trump:] Oh, you're going to be disappointed when you hear the answer. Don't worry.
[Moos:] Maybe disappointed isn't the right word.
[Unidentified Male:] I mean, this is nutty.
[Moos:] You've got to keep your eyes on the magician's hands at all times. "I never believed there were tapes but now Trump says there weren't any, I'm not so sure."
[Unidentified Male:] Donald Trump is a national version of Candy Crush, wasting our time whether we like it or not.
[Moos:] Some Trump critics took the president admitting the obvious in stride. "It's OK. He'll take care of it." Referring to special counsel, Robert Mueller. After the president tweeted, "I did not make and do not have any such recordings," one critic used a previous Trump tweet to reply, "What a load of covfefe." Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.
[Trump:] P, P, P. Yes?
[Vause:] Covfefe, indeed. You've been watching CNN NEWSROOM, live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.
[Walker:] And I'm Amara Walker. It's getting late. I can't even say my name. The news continues to Natalie Allen right after this.
[Vause:] This is your last night.
[Walker:] It's been lovely.
[Vause:] You're heading back.
[Walker:] Yes. Back to Atlanta.
[Vause:] OK. Safe travels.
[Walker:] Thank you.

[Carl Azuz, Cnn 10 Anchor:] Welcome back to CNN 10. Where ever you`re watching we appreciate your taking 10 minutes to get updated on news and features from around the word. I`m Carl Azuz. First report takes us to the U.S. Capitol. Republicans and Democrats there say it won`t be the same without U.S. Senator John McCain. The Republican who represented the state of Arizona passed away Saturday at the age of 81. He`d been battling an aggressive form of brain cancer for more than a year and that was many fights he took on in his lifetime. John McCain was a survivor of plane crashes, plural. One of them came in 1967 while he was serving as a decorated Navy bomber pilot during the Vietnam War. He became a prisoner of that war suffering injuries under North Vietnamese captivity that lasted the rest of his life but he did survive. And McCain eventually turned to politics serving in the U.S. House of Representatives starting in 1983 and the Senate three years later. He campaigned twice for the U.S. Presidency but lost the Republican nomination to George W. Bush in the year 2000. He won his party`s nomination in the 2008 race but lost the presidency to Barak Obama. Throughout all of it, Senator McCain defined himself as a maverick. Someone who could take an independent stand from the mainstream. He publicly spoke out against various policies from both Democratic and Republican Administrations, including those of President Obama and President Trump. But he had the respect of politicians from both sides of the aisle. McCain will lie in state at the U.S. Capitol this week. It`s an honor reserved for military officers and government officials. It means his casket will be on display at the rotunda of the capitol where the public can pay their final respects to the late Senator. His impact on Washington extended well beyond the Senators he worked with.
[John Mccain, U.s. Senator:] How are you?
[Jake Tapper:] The very last time I interviewed Senator John McCain he was blunt.
[Mccain:] But Jake, you know, every life has to end one way of another.
[Tapper:] It was the kind of straight talk that characterized the Arizona Senator`s career. I first met him aboard his campaign bus, "The Straight Talk Express" in 1999. He was an underdog Republican Presidential candidate. A bonafide war hero and a sitting U.S. Senator, when I was just a young campaign reporter. But I got to spend a lot of time with him and I learned a lot about his contempt for the phoniness of politics, about how to handle adversity and about the importance of honoring veterans.
[Mccain:] Thank you. I salute you.
[Tapper:] I got to ride on "The Straight Talk Express" again when he ran in 2008. Do you have the fire in the belly for one last - like you did last time?
[Mccain:] We didn`t have it last time?
[Tapper:] McCain described the politician-reporter relationship as adversarial and as I`ve learned that`s not a bad thing. What matters is how it`s conducted.
[Mccain:] By all means let us argue. Our differences are not petty. They often involve cherished beliefs and represent our best judgment about what is right for our country and humanity.
[Tapper:] McCain fought fiercely, knowing the disagreements did not necessarily mean disrespect.
[Mccain:] It was a good fight. And we should be very proud.
[Tapper:] He also knew that loses, even of presidential proportions were no reason for remorse.
[Mccain:] I won`t spend the moment of the future regretting what might have been. This campaign was and will remain the great honor of my life.
[Tapper:] Serving with honor. That`s something the third generation Naval Officer knew quite well.
[Mccain:] I never lived a day in good times or bad that I didn`t thank God for the privilege of serving the United States of America.
[Tapper:] His time in service included being shot down over Vietnam and held as a prisoner of war for five and a half years where he was tortured.
[Mccain:] I was on a flight over the city of Hanoi.
[Tapper:] As a son of an Admiral he was offered early release but he refused so longer held men could return home before him. Years later he was still gracious and he often joked he was invincible.
[Mccain:] I survived many near death experiences and so I think that I`m really the most fortunate person that I`ve ever known or heard of.
[Tapper:] McCain seemed happy with the life he led because it was a life of service.
[Mccain:] There is nothing more ennobling than serving a cause greater than ones self.
[Tapper:] In tough times on the campaign trail he liked to share a favorite quote.
[Mccain:] I was reminded of words of Chairman Mao who once said, "It`s always darkest before it`s totally black.", but anyway.
[Tapper:] But in his final days, Senator John McCain seems as a light with passion and purpose as ever. He spurred his fellow Senators to remember their mission to the public.
[Mccain:] We are getting nothing done my friends. We`re getting nothing done.
[Tapper:] Nearly two decades after I wrote my first story on the maverick, John McCain, my final question for him in an interview was the most difficult to ask. And oddly it was perhaps the easiest for him to answer. But how do you want the American people to remember you?
[Mccain:] He served his country and not always right. Made a lot of mistakes. Made a lot of errors. But served his country and I hope we could add honorably.
[Carl Azuz:] Police in Jacksonville, Florida are investigating a shooting that happened at a video game tournament Sunday. It took place in a restaurant at the Jacksonville Landing, an open air market place along the St. John`s River. At a qualifying event for the Madden `19 NFL Tournament at least one suspect apparently opened fire. Preliminary reports said last night that at least 11 people were injured and that four people were killed. The Jacksonville Sheriff`s Office said that one suspected shooter was also dead and there were no quote "outstanding suspects" as of yesterday afternoon. Police were asking any witnesses who might have gotten video of the event to share it with them. Details about the shooting were still coming in as we produced this show. CNN.com will have the latest information. 10 Second Trivia. In what sport would you find the terms green room, impact phone and washing machine? Caving, parasailing, surfing or cliff diving. The green room is the inside of a curling wave. The impact zone is where waves are breaking and a washing machine is when a surfer is tossed underwater by a wave. The MIX Academy is a program at New Song Church in Santa Ana, California. It offers dinner on Wednesday nights to people from all walks of life, followed by classes in everything from baking and fitness to robotics and English. One of its most famous events involves surfing lessons from a professional coach. It`s said to be available to the people most need a smile.
[Lambert Lowe, Surf Instructor):] There`s so many reason`s why I do what I do. I love surfing and I love helping people. I think if everybody found what they love to do and what they were designed to do and use that gift to help others, this world would look so different. My name is Lambert Lowe and I`m a surf instructor. I was living in Hawaii, living the dream, teaching surfing to billionaires and celebrities. At the end of the day, something was missing and I knew in my heart that I needed to come back to where it all started. I grew up in California. The ocean was where I felt the most connected. I came back and started a non-profit called The MIX Academy. One of the things that come out of the MIX Academy is this surf school. And I brought the gift of surfing here where some of the people that need the most smiles. My current class consists of a refugee from North Korea, Nathan a 9 year old who`s visually impaired and Shannon, a veteran going through alcoholism. The school of the misfits is a place where you can belong. On land, everyone looks at us a little differently but when you`re in the water, water washes all that off. Surfing, like life, is full of ups and downs. There`s waves that are coming and you can`t stop them from coming. Pain`s going to come. What you can`t control is yourself and how you`re going to react. You can choose to battle for it, embrace it, adapt to it and enjoy the ride. Or this wave`s going to come and it`s going to knock you out and it`s going to wipe you out.
[Carl Azuz:] So this bear walks into a hotel. Sounds like a start of a joke. This wasn`t a joke. It`s a black bear that somehow sauntered into a Rocky Mountain hotel. The good news is, it didn`t cause any problems for the hotel`s 300 guests. In fact, it didn`t really do any damage either. Just rearranged some furniture and eventually headed back outside. The front desk supervisor said, when you have a hotel next to a National Park wildlife is part of the gig. So he kind of dismissed it as just [inaudible] sign of the times. But will the "unbearable" guest respect the hotel`s reviews, will some folks pan the place, will it just add to the hotel`s "kodiakolaides". It`s certainly a "polarizing" patron that could cause some folks to "bearate" security. I`m Carl Azuz for CNN 10. END

[Camerota:] OK. Let's give you an update now on Tropical Storm Harvey and where it is. It has made landfall again this morning in Louisiana, right at the state border with Texas. The death toll is rising, though the numbers are very uncertain at this hour. 17,000 Harvey evacuees, though, are in shelters across Texas including the one that I am standing in that's housing about 8300. CNN's Drew Griffin is live for us in Beaumont, Texas, which his getting pummeled right now by the rain. Drew, tell us what you're seeing?
[Drew Griffin, Cnn Investigative Correspondent:] The rain has increased overnight. 26 inches fell on Beaumont, Texas, Alisyn, that was yesterday, midnight to midnight. That's a record. It has done nothing but rain since then and I mean really rain. We took just a little bit of video about a half hour ago and the area that we were standing in just yesterday which was dry is now in several inches of water. This is the problem. The water rising everywhere in the county has made any chance of rescues almost impossible. We're really in a mode where you just have to preserve life, get to a dry spot. This is not about being comfortable, this is not about being fed. This is about surviving Harvey until it finally exits. Port Arthur, Texas, seems to be a very tough place to be this morning. The shelter there, one of the shelters is being flooded and needs to be evacuated. And Chris, this is just going to continue until Harvey finally gets the heck out of here Chris, Alisyn.
[Camerota:] OK, Drew, thank you very much. Obviously we'll check back on your situation there. So what we've seen, I mean, part of the big story of Harvey here are all the citizens helping each other, neighbors helping neighbors. Even if they themselves are in a bad way, they're still stepping up to save complete strangers' lives. So we have an update for you on the unprecedented volunteer rescue effort and how it's all being coordinated next.

[Alison Kosik, Cnn Business Correspondent:] Annual joint military drill between the U.S. and South Korea are beginning today. The war games codenamed Foal Eagle have traditionally angered North Korea, but the drills will be shorter this year and apparent concessions to recent diplomatic moves between Pyongyang and Seoul. Pope Francis encouraged the talks between North and South Korea during his Easter Sunday mass. Thousands gather in the Vatican City the holiest day in Christianity. And his message of global peace, Pope Francis said he hoped the recent discussions will benefit the Korean people.
[Pope Francis, Head, Catholic Church:] We implore fruits of dialogue for the Korean Peninsula. That the discussions underway may advance harmony and peace within the region. May those who directly responsible act with wisdom and discernment to promote the good of the Korean people and to build relationships of trust within the international community.
[Kosik:] Queen Elizabeth and other members of the British Royal Family attended their annual Easter Church Service. It was held at Saint George's Chapel in Windsor Castle and that's where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will get married in May. That's your CNN NEWS NOW, I'm Alison Kosik. "CONNECT THE WORLD" is up next.
[Becky Anderson, Cnn Anchor:] Coming to you from the Dead Sea in Jordan, this CONNECT THE WORLD with me, Becky Anderson. I'm here at the Laureates and Leaders for Children Summit with a very special show to you dedicated to children, their rights, and those fighting to protect them. That is the goal of this gathering here, held in the patronage of Jordan's King Abdullah and bringing together some amazing voices. In a moment, I'll be talking to Kailash Satyarthi, who is a noble Laureate and a driving force behind this gathering. Mohamad al Jounde is a Syrian refugee helping get other kids just like him back into the classroom. And Marcus Mumford, singer, songwriter and child rights activist. But before we get to that, lest we forget this small country of Jordan host the second largest number of refugees per capita in the world. Half of whom are children. So we wanted to take a look at conditions on the ground at one of the biggest refugee camps here in Jordan. And there we saw first-hand a project that is making a difference.
[Anderson:] Zaatari Camp in Jordan, home to some 80,000 Syrian refugees living here in the middle of what is a tragic reminder of conflict. An oasis of hope, football pitch packed with children. So many of these kids will some of them would have been born here.
[Ali Bin Hussein, Prince, Jordan:] Most of the young kids are born here.
[Anderson:] All part of the project led by this man, Jordan's Prince Ali bin Hussein.
[Bin Hussein:] The kids like any other kids in the world. And if you listen to their stories and from what they've been through, I mean, it's a miracle that they are the way they are.
[Anderson:] Tell me about your passion for football. Are you really good at it?
[Bin Hussein:] Excuse me. I tend to think that I was good player. Obviously when I was younger and I played as a kid.
[Anderson:] How is it that football makes a difference?
[Bin Hussein:] Football is a universal language around the world. Everybody knows it, so it was the natural thing to start with but really it's what people around the world like. And it's a team sports and it unites.
[Anderson:] Tell us what you know about the life and lives for some of these kids. What's their biggest challenge? What are they facing?
[Bin Hussein:] Obviously a lot of them came just with the clothes on their bag. The majority of them, actually almost all of them that I have ever met have lost either a parent or another sibling, cousin, and so on. So it's not normal for them but obviously, through things like programs like football, you bring them a sense of normalcy where they actually participate. It's not that they're just sitting in classroom and so on, they're participating together especially with traumatized kids because you know, it also helps with their social skills and their abilities just to get along and it builds confidence as well.
[Anderson:] Just how big an impact has what is happening in Syria had on Jordan's economy and Jordan's society?
[Bin Hussein:] Well, that's the big issue here is we have three registered refugee camps like Zaatari and two temporary ones. But the reality is that majority of the refugees are actually in our towns and villages and cities and that is having a big impact on the economy. But having said that, it's we feel that it's our moral duty to take care of them and take care of our neighbors. They're not the first wave of refugees that we've had in this country. But again, you know, we do all this, we always need the support of the international community in dealing with it. At the same time, you do you do see a lot of parts of the world that obviously complain about a small number of refugees entering and they should also help taking
[Anderson:] You're talking about the west.
[Bin Hussein:] Yes, specifically.
[Anderson:] Let's talk about the summit. How do you think we get a serious commitment for child refugees from the world as opposed to well, I think the CEO of War Child described as these toothless statements from politicians about how conflict the problem is rather than what we should do and can do about it.
[Bin Hussein:] Yes, well, I think in this summit, in particular, it's not just you know, these are the leaders and Laureates and from and from all backgrounds participating, but most importantly the children are participating. And we need to listen to their stories and what their hopes and what aspirations are and come up with a concrete solution and recommendations. And to be honest, to pressure governments or in fact sorry to say but embarrass them getting into action and helping out the kids and refugees all over the world.
[Crowd:] Every child matters. Every child matters.
[Anderson:] #EveryChildMatters is been what we are about. And I have a line of guest this hour all bringing their own unique perspective. Mohamad al Jounde as being called the voice of a generation who knows the struggles of being a child refugee first hand. In the midst of Syria's civil war, his family fled to Lebanon where he has helped hundreds of Syrian children get an education. He builds a school in a refugee camp with his own hands and acted as teacher. All this when he was just 12 years old. Last year, he won the International Children's Peace Prize for his work. Here's what he had to say upon receiving the award.
[Mohamad Al Jounde, Youth Activist:] Children at my age who are supposed to be in high school are even less likely to be in school because they have more responsibilities like taking care financially for their parents who are often not allowed to work. We do not think one to become a lost generation.
[Anderson:] Mohamad, is then education the single biggest issue facing kids on the move?
[Al Jounde:] For me, yes. Education is the big issue that children are facing because, without education, they basically have no life as children. Their childhood is lost. They can't have friends, there's no safe place for them without the schools.
[Anderson:] You were just 12 years old when you set up a school and got kids like yourself an education. You're 17 now, you probably forgotten more than the rest of us here today on the show will ever know perhaps with the
[Al Jounde:] Well, at first were difficult in the beginning when I fled Syria to Lebanon because one of the reason build a school the school because I was out of one. I then go to Chinese school for two year because of our poor financial situation and because Baghdad, the school next at Syrian's so that's one of the main reasons I built one. I felt like I built one for myself. Even though I didn't learn in this, I only taught but it felt like home. And in the beginning, of course, it was hard to get to know all the children and to deal with them because I was inexperience of this and I was 12 years old. I wasn't the same age them so it was hard for them to like follow my words or anything. And of course, the lack of financial support back then so and after actually six months by the Lebanese government to make the decision to destroy the school and all the four camps surrounding it, so this was the more areas that it's actually really hard to achieve your dreams. But after two months, luckily we opened it again.
[Anderson:] Those closest to the problem we are told are those who can provide a solution. And that is kids like you. Standby, I'm going to come back to you. Kailash Satyarthi, you have devoted your life to protecting the rights of kids. You received the Nobel Prize alongside
[Kailash Satyarthi, Children's Rights Activist:] First of all I would salute the
[Anderson:] And you make a really good point to how we tackle those not just single issues but multi-issues is massively important. To Marcus Mumford - I'll come back to you. You are the lead singer of the band Mumford and Sons in case you've forgotten which has performed a number of charity concerts including a London show a few months ago that was an aid of War Child, an NGO working to help children in conflict and post-conflict areas. You are an ambassador for the charity and last year you traveled to Iraq to meet children who have been living under ISIS. Like Mohamad and Kailash, you have witnessed first-hand the consequences and risks of the conflict and the world's policies or lack thereof to provide help, and you've written about this. Explain.
[Marcus Mumford, Lead Singer, Mumford And Sons:] Yes, well, it's an honor to be sitting with you Mohamad and Kailash. Thank you for having me. War Child would see the main problems for children on the move as being safety, education, and a hope for livelihood in the future. So try and address those three things and the practical work that War Child does with the special emphasis on psychosocial support as well. And what they do in the field, in comfort zones I think is unique and really special working with children and their parents importantly as well to provide psychosocial support in trying to engage young people in that. We're in Gaza last year and we're engaging younger kids easier and older girls as well but young the teenage boys are very difficult to engage. We have to get them from the door at the center so we're setting up football program just to get them into focus. We all love football and we find that as a helpful tool so we're now running pilot programs in Gaza and in Central Africa Republic which we were in a year and a half ago and the same thing there. So really those three things that we focus on.
[Anderson:] All right, well, I want to take a break. But when we come back, I want to talk about how we might provide some solutions and why a summit like this with leaders and Laureates and kids, youth activist is important because as I said earlier on, Mohamad is had a problem, the problem is there. He is closest to potential solutions as well. On the shores of the Dead Sea, this is a special edition of CONNECT THE WORLD from the Laureates and Leaders for Children Summit. We'll continue this discussion after this short break. Stay with us.

[Unidentified Female:] New leaked transcripts show contentious conversations between President Trump and the leaders of Mexico and Australia.
[Unidentified Male:] I am worried about the way this president is conducting foreign policy. We need order out of chaos, and start firing some people probably would be the right signal. This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota. This is "new day" with Chris kwoem mo.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning everyone, welcome to NEW DAY. It is Friday, August 4th, 8:00 in the east. Chris is off. John Berman joins me. Great to have you here.
[John Berman, Cnn Anchor:] I win the Camerota lottery this morning.
[Camerota:] My gosh, you're so lucky.
[Berman:] Take that, Cuomo.
[Camerota:] We begin with several big developments in the Russia investigation. Special counsel Robert Mueller issuing grand jury subpoenas seeking documents and testimony from people involved in that June, 2016 meeting between Trump campaign advisers and a Russian lawyer.
[Berman:] CNN has also learned that federal investigators, they're on the money trail, zeroing in on possible financial ties between Russia and the president, his family and associates. The widening of the investigation now, it crosses what the president considers to be his red line. The president blasted the latest developments as a total fabrication. We want to begin our coverage with CNN justice reporter Evan Perez who is live in Washington. Evan, you broke a lot of these details. What have you learned?
[Evan Perez, Cnn Justice Reporter:] John, special counsel Robert Mueller is following the money as the investigation into Russia's meddling into 2016 election enters its second year. CNN has learned new details about what investigators are digging into, and that includes the finances of the president and his family.
[Perez:] In a clear sign that the Russian investigation is advancing, CNN has learned that special counsel Robert Mueller has issued grand jury subpoenas related to the June, 2016 meeting between a Russian lawyer and Trump campaign officials, seeking both documents and testimony from the people involved, according to a source familiar with the matter. This, as the probe widens with federal investigators exploring the potential financial ties of President Trump and associates to Russia. Sources tell CNN that financial links could offer a more concrete path to any potential prosecution. Investigators are looking into possible financial crimes, including some unconnected to the election. For the president, that's going too far. He's warned that delving into his businesses is a, quote, violation. Trump has maintained there's no collusion and he has no final ties to Russia.
[Donald Trump,  President Of The United States:] And I can tell you speaking for myself, I own nothing in Russia. I have no loans in Russia. I don't have any deals in Russia.
[Perez:] Now, one year into this complex probe the FBI has reviewed financial records related to the Trump Organization, the president himself as well as to his family members and campaign associates. CNN is told investigators have combed through the list of shell companies and buyers of Trump-branded real estate properties. They've scrutinized the roster of tenants at Trump Tower in Manhattan reaching back several years. And officials familiar with the investigation tell CNN Mueller's team has examined the backgrounds of Russian business associates connected to Trump dating back to the 2013 Miss Universe pageant that Trump hosted in Moscow. CNN could not determine whether the review has included Trump's tax returns. But, even investigative leads that have nothing to do with Russia, but involve Trump associates are being referred to the special counsel to encourage subjects of the investigation to cooperate. Trump's team seeking to limit Mueller's investigation.
[Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Deputy Press Secretary:] The president's point is that he doesn't want the special council to move beyond the scope and outside of its mission. And the president has been very clear as have his accountants and team that he has no financial dealings with Russia, and so I think we've been extremely clear on this.
[Perez:] CNN has learned new details about how Mueller is running his special counsel team. More than three dozen attorneys, FBI agents, and support staff, experts in investigating fraud and financial crimes, broken into groups focused separately on collusion and obstruction of justice. There is also focus on key targets like Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, and General Michael Flynn, his fired national security adviser. CNN has learned that investigators became more suspicious of Manafort when they turned up intercepted communications that U.S. intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort to coordinate information that could hurt Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House according to U.S. officials. In Flynn's case the focus is now on his lobbying work for the Turkish government which he failed to initially disclose as required by law. While both men deny any wrongdoing, the approach to the Manafort and Flynn probes may offer a template for how the focus by investigators on financial crimes could help gain leverage and cooperation in the investigation. And the president's attorney Jay Sekulow told CNN in a statement, quote, "The president's outside legal team has not received any request for documentation or information about this. Any inquiry from the special counsel that goes beyond the mandate specified in the appointment we would object to." Alisyn and John?
[Camerota:] All right, Evan, thank you very much for all of that reporting. And joining us now is a guest well versed in special investigations, Ken Starr. He is a former judge and solicitor general. He was the independent counsel who investigated President Clinton. Mr. Starr, thank you very much for being here. Do you think that the Robert Mueller investigation is now beyond the scope and mission of what it was originally stated to do, looking into collusion, possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia?
[Ken Starr, Former Judge, Solicitor General, And Independent Counsel:] It's really uncertain. The mandate that Bob Mueller received has some broad language, including "related to" type language, which tends to open the door. But there are checks and balances. The president has said here is the red line. But he has a great defense team, and what they can do is they can go to first, of course, Bob Mueller, who I think everyone agrees is a man of great integrity as well as enormous experience, and say I think you've gone too far here. And there may be litigation in the courts with respect to the scope of the grand jury subpoena. And then the defense team can go to Rod Rosenstein, the department attorney general, and say this is far beyond the mandate that you gave him. He's in business only because of your appointment. So there are checks and balances in the system, and those haven't been triggered yet.
[Berman:] Let me read you the key line in that mandate just so people know what you're talking about when Rod Rosenstein charged special counsel Robert Mueller with his mission. It included that number two, any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation. Now, our Evan Perez who has broken so many details of this story indicate that Bob Mueller and his team, they don't think they're anywhere near the outer limits of this. The financial matters that they're looking into, they say, relate to or arose from this investigation into possible Russia ties. It does seem like a fairly wide berth there, Judge Starr, with that statement, any matters that arose or may arise from the investigation.
[Starr:] It can be read in two ways, three ways. It can be read different ways. I think that the gravamen of the original complaint was, was there collusion. To the extent that you're moving beyond collusion with Russian operatives or Russian interests or the Russian government itself, and into that which doesn't seem to have a direct tie to Russia, then these questions are in fact raised. And it becomes a litigable, as we say, question that people are going to squawk about it and disagree about it. I don't think it is clear one way or the other, but I do think it is a certainly a serious matter when a special council is accused and I was accused of that of exceeding his or her authority. That's a serious matter because we do not want investigators and prosecutors out on a fishing expedition.
[Camerota:] But look, by definition, aren't you always casting a wide net? Let's say we've had other lawyers on this morning who have said if Donald Trump, before he was president, did some sort of business deal, let's say in the 90s, and it was a real estate deal with some sort of Russian millionaire, couldn't that find its way for motivation to what's happening in the campaign now?
[Starr:] Alisyn, you used a key word there. You said "Russian." And that's my point. Does this relate to Russia's activity, which I think we all agree was absolutely, unspeakably horrible in the state election efforts and so forth. So the Russians are to be condemned and the Russian government is to be condemned. Now the question is was there collusion with the Trump campaign. So if the investigation goes beyond the Russian mandate and let's just say let's just look into the financing of Trump Tower but there is no Russian connection to it, then the argument is there, as I see it, that the investigation has gone too far.
[Berman:] Judge Starr, just to be clear, what you were saying about yourself is you came under criticism during the Clinton investigation. Corey Lewandowski, who was the president's campaign manager, was referring to this just the other day. He said Bill Clinton was not impeached over a land deal. Bill Clinton was impeached by the Congress for lying about Monica Lewinsky under oath. And of course Whitewater was a land deal investigation and then it became something else. So the argument that you hear from a lot of people is look, look what happened with your investigation. If started out as one thing and then you found instances where you believe at the president broke the law, so that's where it went.
[Starr:] No. But there was a check and balance there, John, which is the Lewinsky phase of the investigation was specifically authorized by the attorney general of the United States. That's the key. The Lewinsky phase was not simply something that we thought we should look into when the information came to us. We went to the attorney general, Janet Reno, and said here's what we know, or the information that we have. And I think here we need to have the same kind of check and balance in place. The president has a terrific team of defense lawyers. They are fantastic. And they are saying they're going to cooperate. Well, part of the cooperative mode will be to go into, first, Mueller and then Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and say you're going too far. The special council has gone too far. And then it became a litigable issue. It was never contested. It became a political issue in the Lewinsky situation, but it was never a legal issue that we'd gone too far.
[Camerota:] Since you brought up the president's red line, the one that he said that if they were dealing with his financial dealings, that would be a personal red line for him. Now we know. That's happening. Bob Mueller, it's been confirmed through our reporting is dealing with the president's financial dealings before he was president. So if it's crossed a red line for the president, what's his recourse?
[Starr:] Yes. His lawyers then say to Bob Mueller, you've gone beyond t scope of your mandate.
[Camerota:] And then it's up to Bob Mueller to say, OK, I'll back off, or no, I think it is part of my mandate.
[Starr:] That's exactly right. He'll say to them, and then they may litigate in the district court. This will all be confidential because of protecting grand jury secrecy. But we'll probably find out a whole lot about the issues as they find their way into court even in terms of the grand jury process which needs to be secret, it needs to be confidential. So this is a stay tuned. We're probably going to have some real battles ahead, but a lot of them may be off camera.
[Berman:] And it's great to have you here because we can get a look behind the scenes at how these information investigations work. Phil Mudd who was at the CIA and also an FBI investigator made the point that subpoenas aren't issued like this for documents or witnesses unless the investigators already have some information, they already have some leads that they're following. So calling this a broad based fishing expedition, Phil was arguing, might not be fair here. Is that something you agree with, that you don't think Bob Mueller would be having the grand jury issue these subpoenas unless he was looking for something specific?
[Starr:] I agree with that. I think there had to be some predicate in Bob Mueller's mind, and he is an extraordinarily a careful lawyer. I've worked with him and served alongside him under President Bush 41. And so he's a total professional. So you can say, Mr. Mueller, we disagree with this expanded scope as we see it, and he will listen. He will listen to those arguments and then make a determination. But I will also say it's frequently said about grand juries they'll just do whatever the prosecutors want. That's not been my experience. I think it's not the experience of most prosecutors. Those are 23 citizens. They are there. They're asking questions. And the prosecutors are keeping them very well informed or the prosecutors aren't doing their job.
[Berman:] Maybe you can't indict a ham sandwich, as the saying goes. Judge Starr, one question, because our understanding now is that some of these subpoenas, some of the information that is now being sought has to do with the meeting that Donald Trump Jr. had with the Russian lawyer, a meeting that as far as we know, we don't believe that Robert Mueller and his investigators even knew about prior to June when this began becoming public. What does that tell you that this started being known by the investigators in June and already, he's got a grand jury issuing subpoenas, asking for documents and witness on that?
[Starr:] It means he's doing his job. And it also mean that the information that the grand jury is finding is going to come from any number of sources, including from the media. Let's also not overlook the fact that both the Senate intelligence committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee are investigating as well. And remember that in Watergate a long, long time ago, a generation ago, the great breakthrough came by virtue of the work Senator Sam Ervin and the Watergate special committee. So there's going to be information coming from various sources.
[Camerota:] Ken Starr, as you said, stay tuned. Thank you very much for sharing your expertise with us.
[Starr:] Thank you, Alisyn.
[Berman:] President Trump lashing out at the Russian investigation, he called it a total fabrication. Our panel reacts next. HERE

[John Vause, Cnn Anchor:] Telepromptered Trump calls for unity a day after the President's wild, unscripted rant widely criticized for being divisive and misleading.
[Sesay:] Exclusive CNN reporting on the Russia investigation an e- mail about an attempt to set up a meeting between Trump campaign officials and Vladimir Putin is getting a lot of attention.
[Vause:] And as confederate statues in Charlottesville are covered up, a new documentary unveils what we may never have seen during racially- charged protests in Ferguson, Missouri. Hello everybody great to have you with us. I'm John Vause.
[Sesay:] And I'm Isha Sesay. NEWSROOM L.A. starts right now.
[Vause:] Oh, what a difference a teleprompter can make. U.S. President Donald Trump back urging peace and harmony, staying on message and reading from a teleprompter on Wednesday in Reno, Nevada. It a sharp contrast to his reality-challenged rant, at a campaign rally in Phoenix just a day earlier.
[Sesay:] Well, to be fair he called for unity in his Arizona speech, too and launched into an us versus them narrative that left many wondering which is the real Donald Trump? Here's a sample of Wednesday's scripted remarks.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States:] It is time to heal the wounds that divide us and to seek a new unity based on the common values that unite us. We are one people with one home and one great flag.
[Vause:] Joining us now democratic strategist Robin Swanson, Trump supporter and host of "America Trends" Gina Loudon, and political analyst Michael Genovese. Thank you all for being with us. Ok. So this week started with the commander in chief, Donald Trump announcing his strategy for Afghanistan. That was on Monday widely praised for being presidential as he outlined this strategy to the nation. Tuesday we head to Phoenix and it's Campaign Trump dividing the country in an unscripted rant, which really left the crowd quite enthused. By Wednesday, it's professional caregiver Trump healing the wounds, bringing everyone together. So Gina will the real Donald Trump please stand up.
[Gina Loudon, Trump Supporter:] I think we get the real Donald Trump every time we see him, like it or not. And I think that's a lot of what has confused the media this entire time. I think that, you know, he is so sometimes so honest and forthright and unpackaged. He's just not that Stepford president that a lot of us came to know and expect from Republican and Democrat presidents. And so now to somehow say well, this might be disingenuous is to say then that maybe he was packaged, which he never has been packaged. And so I don't think that it's very fair to say that anything that he said is anything different than exactly what he was feeling in the moment. That's pretty much the way this president is as we know.
[Sesay:] Robin to bring you in, I think, you know, the argument is not just what is said but it is also about the expectation for the behavior of the President the man in the Oval Office.
[Robin Swanson, Democratic Strategist:] That's right. And I think we've seen a lot of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and we're never really sure which one is going to show up. And I think what we would like to see is a little bit of dignity. I think showing a moral compass, showing some stability which a lot of folks are questioning, the President's stability right now. I think that's what people are craving in America. And we've seen, you know, he's not making America great again. He's making America hate again. And we've seen that in Charlottesville. We've seen it time and again. And he really needs to step up as a leader and show dignity.
[Vause:] Ok. Well, the President used a teleprompter on Monday. He used one on Wednesday. He did not use one on Tuesday. Here is a reminder of that rally in Phoenix.
[Trump:] How about all week they are talking about the massive crowds that are going to be outside. Where are they? Well, it's hot out. They show up in the helmets and the black masks and they have clubs and they've got everything Antifa.
[Vause:] Ok. So this is what Donald Trump has said in the past about politicians who use a teleprompter.
[Trump:] Thank you. I would have teleprompters, I would have used them. I've started to use them a little. They're not bad. You never get yourself in trouble when you use a teleprompter. You know the problem is it's too easy. We have a president who uses teleprompters; it's too easy. We should have non-teleprompter speeches only when you're running for President. You find out about this. You know, the way you don't find out about anybody.
[Vause:] You find out about someone, Michael, when they're using when they're not using the teleprompter. Should we take the President at his word?
[Michael Genovese, Political Analyst:] Well, I think the teleprompter or not teleprompter Trump is a function of the battle within the White House and the battle for the heart and soul of Donald Trump. Clearly General Kelly and a lot of the Republican mainstream want him to go teleprompter mostly because he doesn't say the outrageous things that come back to haunt him. He wants to be unleashed. And I think Gina is right that is the real Trump. That's the Trump that got to be president by being Trump. And now that he's president, there are different expectations but he can't be chained in. He wants to be unleashed.
[Vause:] I just want to you know, the observation has been made, the stuff that he says on the teleprompter often is the stuff he does not believe. The stuff he says off the teleprompter is what is truly in his heart.
[Genovese:] Well clearly, the speech in Phoenix was from his heart. The attacks he felt he was a victim. He went after Republicans, Democrats; he went after the media. There is a lot off anger there and there's a lot of "Poor me, I'm always being attacked." It was 70 minutes of "poor me". And I think that's Donald Trump. He feels beleaguered. He feels that there are a lot people out there out to get him. That's the Trump that's inside. But the Trump from the teleprompter is the one that the general General Kelly and a lot of his top staff want him to be.
[Sesay:] Gina to go to you, to pick up on Michael's point that people like General Kelly want to see the President on teleprompters staying to the script and the fact that we've seen in the last couple of days that they've been unable to, does that essentially mean that they have lost that battle?
[Loudon:] No, I think that, you know, every single person who's in that White House working for this President knows that they're working for this president. That he's not going to be a perfectly-packaged controlled Stepford president; that that is what America elected. America liked this honesty and this transparency. And frankly I think that most of America is much more concerned about the one million jobs that this President has created, about the bureaucracy that's gone away, about the things that he's done for veterans and the list goes on and on than they are about whether or not he's using a prompter. I think when he has those off prompter moments, that is him saying to the United States, I'm still me. I'm still in the driver's seat. You don't have to worry. I'm going to be here and I'm not going anywhere. And I think that's very reassuring to a lot of Americans who supported him and they don't want to see him go the way of a President Bush or President Obama who was packaged and perhaps artificial to many.
[Vause:] Robin I want you to respond to Gina but first, I want to show you this new Quinnipiac poll which has just come out. 62 percent believe the President is doing more to divide the country. 68 percent believe the President is not level-headed. So Robin they are staggering numbers and the events of the last few days really seemed to be fueling that perception as well.
[Swanson:] Yes and I think, you know, what we're hearing from Gina and what we've heard from Donald Trump is all about Donald Trump. How about we care about what's happening to the American people? How about we actually focus on something other than Donald Trump's style and what he hasn't done how he hasn't performed for the American people. And I think that's what you're seeing in that poll. They don't trust him to get the job done because he's not shown good judgment. He's not shown the moral character that represents our country; that Americans thought that they elected. And so I think it time to stop talking about Donald Trump and time to start talking about what package is he going to deliver because so far he hasn't delivered much of anything for the people that elected him. I think people are going to be without their health care. People are going to be hurting for jobs. There is going to be, you know, economic packages that help
[Loudon:] There's a million jobs I mean
[Swanson:] And there's going to be economic
[Loudon:] I mean I really I want to ask you though I'd would like to hear from you
[Sesay:] One at a time one at a time.
[Loudon:] But you're making gross platitudes that are frankly untrue. A million jobs how many jobs would be satisfactory to you in the first 200 and some days? The highest consumer confidence in decades
[Swanson:] Gina all you've done is talk about Donald Trump and
[Loudon:] How much consumer confidence
[Sesay:] One at a time
[Loudon:] I'm talking about the American people actually who get those jobs. Btu you won't ever answer the questions as to what would make you happy? If Donald Trump cured cancer you would still say somehow that was about Donald Trump.
[Vause:] Gina you should have the [inaudible] come on.
[Loudon:] Donald Trump is working for the American people.
[Sesay:] But Gina you have to acknowledge just to bring you back to the polls that John just read out, you've got to admit that the polls don't back up what you're saying.
[Loudon:] Well, the stock market does. The consumer confidence does. And these, by the way, are the same polls that we all listened to right, all the way through the election cycle and guess what? They were wrong. When you really want to take the pulse of the American people, look at you know, what you do, you go to Main Street. You don't go to some Washington D.C. bubble poll taker and you don't go, I'm sorry, to all of us who are in the media, right who mostly live on the coast and don't spend a lot of time in Middle America who has an opinion too that happens to matter and they showed it in the election in November. Those are the people who matter and those are the people who came out and voted then.
[Swanson:] And those are the
[Vause:] Very quickly, I want to bring in Michael in on this guys. So Michael I mean first of all, is there a use by date to that the polls were wrong at the election so they're always going to be wrong excuse? And you know, what do you make of those numbers that we're seeing from Quinnipiac?
[Genovese:] Well, first of all, the polls at the national election were close to the outcome because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by the margin that people thought. It was in the states that the disparities occurred. And so the polls were not that wrong. They got the outcome wrong. They got the numbers right in terms of the popular vote. But Donald Trump can't continue to govern successfully if he's going to be at 36 percent. He has to broaden his base and that speech on Tuesday was to his base. His base is already with him. His base loves him. He said I could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and I wouldn't lose the vote. For his base there is some truth to that. But you can't govern with base alone. You have to expand. And his speech on Tuesday in which he attacked both Republican senators from Arizona, the commentary we're seeing about his tiff with McConnell.
[Vause:] The Senate majority leader.
[Genovese:] You can't govern with just a small base.
[Vause:] Yes. Politics they say is about addition, making friends and growing your support but that's not happening at the moment. Michael thank you so much for being us. Also Robin and Gina, as well.
[Sesay:] Thank you so much.
[Vause:] Always appreciate it.
[Sesay:] All right. Well now to an e-mail from a top Trump aide that's getting new scrutiny in the Russia campaign meddling investigation.
[Vause:] The aide sent the e-mail to campaign staffers last year informing them about an individual trying arrange a meeting between the Trump campaign and the Russian President. CNN's Manu Raju has exclusive details.
[Manu Raju, Cnn Senior Congressional Reporter:] Congressional investigators have unearthed an e-mail from a top Trump aide that referenced a previously unreported effort to arrange a meeting last year between Trump campaign officials and the Russian President Vladimir Putin according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation. Now, the aide is Rick Dearborn who is now the President's deputy chief of staff. He sent a brief e-mail to campaign officials last year relaying information about an individual who is seeking to connect top Trump officials with Putin. Now the person was only identified as being from quote "WV", which is in reference to the state of West Virginia. It's unclear who this individual is, exactly what they wanted or whether even Dearborn acted on the request. Dearborn did not respond to our request for comment. The White House would not comment but one source familiar to the matter said that this person appeared to have political connections in West Virginia. That same source actually told me that he Dearborn in the e-mail appears skeptical of the requested meeting. Now, it did occur in June of 2016 and that means that was around the same time as that Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Junior, Russian operatives, Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort. The question is whether or not this fits a pattern of efforts by the Russians to find entry points into the Trump campaign. That's a big question going forward and investigators are trying to understand at this time. Manu Raju, CNN Washington.
[Sesay:] Well, one of the recurring central figures in the Russia investigation is Sergey Kislyak who until recently was Russia's ambassador to the U.S. His diplomatic posting officially ended last month.
[Vause:] Before returning home to Russia, Kislyak met with President Trump in the Oval Office along with the Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov. U.S. reporters and photographers were barred from that meeting. It was later learned that Mr. Trump divulged classified information to the Russians.
[Sesay:] Our Matthew Chance recently caught up with the former ambassador and in a CNN exclusive asked him about his connections to the Trump White House.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi John and Isha. Sergey Kislyak as could hardly have expected to run into us here in the Russian city of Saransk, 600 kilometers or 400 miles from the Russian capital but this is a man at the center of allegations of Russian election meddling in the United States and important questions needed to be put to him. And that's exactly what we did when we finally tracked him down.
[Chance:] Hi Mr. Ambassador quick question. Did you discuss distinct sanctions with any members of the Trump team when you were in the United States?
[Sergey Kislyak, Former Russian Ambassador To The United States:] With your respect, I'm here to talk to Russian people.
[Chance:] I understand that. You say you've got no secrets.
[Kislyak:] I said everything I wanted prior to this.
[Chance:] Did you discuss opening secret channels with the Kremlin with Jared Kushner for example?
[Kislyak:] I've said many times that we do not discuss the substance of our discussions with our American interlocutors out of respect to our partners.
[Chance:] Fair enough. But when you met Donald Trump, the President, were you surprised when he disclosed secret information to you about Syria?
[Kislyak:] I'm not sure that I heard anything that would be significant but that was a good meeting and we were discussing things that were important to your country and to mine.
[Chance:] What about this allegation that you're a spy master, a spy with [inaudible] did you attempt to recruit any members of the Trump Administration.
[Kislyak:] You should be ashamed because CNN is the company that keeps up pointing to this allegation. It's nonsense.
[Chance:] U.S. security officials, intelligence officials have made it, of course.
[Kislyak:] I've heard other statements by them and also by former the FBI. I was a diplomat. I had no reasons to doubt that he knew what he said. Ok.
[Chance:] Just one last question?
[Kislyak:] Yes.
[Chance:] What's your r prediction for the future of U.S-Russian relations?
[Kislyak:] I'm afraid it's going to be difficult. And it's note because of us. It's because of the U.S. political dynamics. The anti-Russian law is not going to help Russian-American discussions
[Chance:] The sanctions?
[Kislyak:] It's the sanctions a little bit sanctions is an instrument. It's basically a statement of being anti Russia. That is the most important thing. And that's not going to be wished away. It's going to stay. It's going to spoil the ability of both countries to resume the normalcy in our relations. And normalcy in our relations is exactly what is missing.
[Chance:] Have you lost faith that Donald Trump is going to be able to do what he said during his campaign and make things better with Moscow?
[Kislyak:] I'm not sure that I operate with definitions of faith, absence of faith. We work with the United States based on the policies that we have. They are not new. We have seen so many different things about it. And we are pretty comfortable with what we do for Russian. And by the way, I'm here to do exactly what is important to us.
[Chance:] Mr. Sergey Kislyak thank you.
[Kislyak:] Thank you. Bye-bye. All right. Well Sergey Kislyak there, no longer Russian ambassador to the United States but as you can hear then he is still very capable of responding with diplomatic answers. Back to you John and Isha.
[Vause:] Matthew thank you. Matthew Chance there with that exclusive albeit brief interview with the foreign Russian ambassador in Washington.
[Sesay:] Interesting to hear from him there. Let take a quick break. If you walk around Charlottesville, Virginia right now you won't see that controversial Robert E. Lee that caused so much trouble a few weekends ago. What the city has done in the wake of the white nationalist march, ahead on
[Cnn Newsroom. Vause:] Also what you may never heard about the protest three years ago in Ferguson, Missouri after an unarmed black man was shot dead by police.

[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] All right. So, rapper Eminem had an anti-Trump rap that has gone viral and he had an ultimatum for his fans that support the president.
[Eminem, Rap Artist:] Any fan of mine who is a supporter of his, I'm drawing in the sand a line. You're either for or against. And if you can't decide who you like more and your split on who you should stand beside, I'll do it for you with this. The rest of America, stand up.
[Camerota:] All right. Here to discuss, CNN political commentator Ana Navarro, and Ben Ferguson. Nice to have both of you in studio.
[Ben Ferguson, Cnn Political Commentator, Host, "the Ben Ferguson Show":] Good morning.
[Camerota:] So, Ana, let me start with you. What do you think about what Eminem did? You know, he obviously is a huge rapper. He has sold millions and millions of records. He has a big following. Do you think that maybe and he's in Michigan which is significant, politically. Do you think that this matters and gets any traction with his, you know, fan base?
[Ana Navarro, Cnn Political Commentator, Republican Strategist:] Look, I certainly cannot speak for his fan base. I am not a member of it. I can't you know, other than "Slim Shady," I'm not sure I could recognize a single song.
[Navarro:] I come at this from a broader freedom of speech aspect, right. And I think we are in the midst of a very broad and complicated freedom of speech debate in this country, whether it's flag, anthem. You know, right-wing, white supremacist acologists. Whether it is freedom of speech like we just saw exercised by Eminem. The press you know, the President of the United States threatening the press with taking away licenses from networks that he thinks are against him. There is a very broad freedom of speech going on debate in the United States and I think we have to be so vigilant about it. I come at this also from the you know, the angle from being a political exile. I fled communism, as I said to you last night. I live in Miami. In Miami, my friend Gloria Estefan's songs, they can't be played in Cuba. It's illegal to play Gloria's songs in Cuba. Willy Chirino, illegal to play his songs in Cuba. Celia Cruz, illegal to play her songs in Cuba and they're not even profane. They're just talking about freedom. So I think it is an aspect of America that makes us great, freedom of speech, and we have to defend it whether we like the content or not.
[Camerota:] Do you think
[Ferguson:] It
[Camerota:] Well, hold on a second. Do you think that President Trump is encroaching on freedom of speech?
[Ferguson:] I don't. I think he's challenging people, which is exactly what tells us we have real freedom of speech in this country. I think Eminem and what he did, flicking off the president and telling people you're either on my team or you're not against this president, you're no longer a part of my group, is brilliant marketing by him. He's got an album coming out. But let's look at the source of this. I have no respect for Eminem. This is a guy that talks about how to rape women, how to assault women. This is a guy also, politically, that I don't put any stock in what he says because he's attacked George Bush when he had an album coming out. He attacked Hillary Clinton when he had an album coming out. He attacks now, Donald Trump when he has an album coming out. He's an opportunist and understands that if you go out there and act like this Billy bad-A and you rap about it and you give the finger to the President of the United States of America, you're going to get millions of dollars in free press.
[Camerota:] I think he might be giving the finger to his fans. But anyway
[Ferguson:] I think he's giving it to I think he's giving it to Donald Trump, too.
[Camerota:] But it also gives a moral high ground.
[Ferguson:] No, he doesn't have a moral high ground because the guy literally has made a living
[Camerota:] Right.
[Ferguson:] If you listen to his lyrics about wanting to kill people, choking women's vocal chords to the point where they can't speak while raping them. These are his new lyrics. This isn't 10 years ago lyrics.
[Navarro:] But I think that
[Camerota:] Just one more thing about like the president saying that he's going to revoke, you know, news licenses for the press.
[Ferguson:] Yes.
[Camerota:] You don't think that's an encroachment on freedom of speech?
[Ferguson:] I think the president has to be very careful to not go too far in that way. I think it's fine to point out bias or news stories that are inaccurate. I make a living off of those airwaves, right, as a talk show host
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Ferguson:] as a T.V. commentator. That's
[Camerota:] Said Sean Hannity, by the way, who's dissing the media.
[Ferguson:] But I have a I don't like it when we start talking about pulling someone's license. That
[Camerota:] That's too far.
[Ferguson:] I think that's too far, in general. But I but I also think that it's too far for a rapper to come out and to say that I'm going to give you that finger and I'm going to do this
[Camerota:] That's fine, but a rapper is different than the president. It's different than the president.
[Ferguson:] Right, but look at all the people that I mean
[Camerota:] I mean, you'd have to be more careful.
[Ferguson:] Even Ellen DeGeneres tweets out "I love Eminem." This is a woman who says that she would never have Trump on her show but says she loves a rapper whose lyrics talk about raping women. How can we not call that out as being absurd?
[Navarro:] Well, but it's equally absurd for people to support a man who talked about grabbing women and then, you know, get all holy roller when it comes to
[Ferguson:] Which, by the way
[Navarro:] a hip-hop rapper. So, you know, it's beyond too far for Donald Trump to threaten to yank licenses because that he doesn't like the content of what a network is saying. It is authoritarian, it is undemocratic, it is un-American, it is unconstitutional. And we should all be denouncing it strongly because you see, the big danger here is that we all get numb to the crazy stuff Donald Trump says and think it's not going to end up being anything, but it really may be something. And I do think that it's affecting the national psyche. Look, what Eminem said and like I tell you, I can't even talk about his former lyrics because I don't know anything about his former lyrics. I did hear what he said now and what he said now, yes, laced with a lot of profanity, is what a lot of people are saying about the wall. About, you know, how dare Donald Trump talk about patriotism when he has been beating up on John McCain, who is a patriot and who is a hero. So, a lot of the things that he was voicing are being voiced around kitchen tables, not in rap and not with profanity. But yes, the content. And when he says
[Ferguson:] But
[Navarro:] When he says to his fans, you know, here's a line in the sand, let me tell you that is very symptomatic of America right now. Certainly not in those words but it's going on in American families. It's going on in the American workplace
[Camerota:] There is division
[Navarro:] where there are lands
[Ferguson:] Yes. But I also think the left has to be very careful to not wrap their selves around just like Ellen DeGeneres did, for example a guy who is so disgusting and vile towards women
[Camerota:] OK.
[Ferguson:] Just because he's anti-Trump
[Navarro:] But Ben, I could turn that exactly around
[Ferguson:] But hold on. Wait, wait, wait. Let me finish, let me finish.
[Navarro:] I could say the right has got to be very careful not to wrap
[Ferguson:] Let me finish, let me finish.
[Navarro:] themselves around a guy
[Ferguson:] Again, let me finish. Let me finish.
[Navarro:] who is so disgusting and vile
[Ferguson:] Let me finish. Let me finish.
[Navarro:] that he talked about grabbing
[Ferguson:] Let me finish. Let me finish.
[Navarro:] women.
[Ferguson:] Again,
[I -- Navarro:] You could fake that
[Ferguson:] denounced that
[Navarro:] Right.
[Ferguson:] and I said that it was inappropriate when it happened. I never defended Donald Trump when he said that and I said it was absolutely wrong. I'm consistent in what I'm saying here about the standard. But I think what we're also seeing, and it worries me, is that we now are in a culture where it doesn't matter what your resume says, how vile, how disgusting, how sick you are and misogynist towards women, that the left will come out and wrap their arms around Eminem and send out tweets saying I love you when this is what you're selling. And remember Ellen DeGeneres should look at this.
[Camerota:] No, no, no.
[Ferguson:] Ellen comes out almost every day, though, and talks about women.
[Camerota:] The president says vile comments.
[Ferguson:] But let's look at Ellen here. She says she will not have the president on her show because of what he said, but she will tell all of her audience that she loves Eminem
[Navarro:] But, do you
[Ferguson:] which is saying go buy his lyrics, go buy his album.
[Navarro:] Do you think we should a rapper
[Ferguson:] I think you hold both them to the same standard.
[Navarro:] to the same Oh, I don't. I certainly don't.
[Ferguson:] I think you hold him to the same standards.
[Navarro:] I look, the rapper
[Ferguson: I -- Navarro:] The rapper doesn't have the nuclear code. The rapper is not an example to follow for children. The rapper is not representing me around the world.
[Ferguson:] Oh, Ellen said yesterday it was.
[Navarro:] The rapper is not is not the President of the United States.
[Ferguson:] Hollywood said it was yesterday.
[Camerota:] Hold on. Let's table let's table this for a second.
[Navarro:] I can turn the rapper off.
[Camerota:] One
[Navarro:] I can't turn Donald Trump off as President of the United States.
[Camerota:] You can't turn him off.
[Ferguson:] Many people endorsed him yesterday, and endorsed him of some sort of moral of moral leader. That's the problem we have.
[Camerota:] OK. Well, because we're approaching the weekend, what's going to happen with the NFL? What do you think is going to happen with these protests? So the president now says he expects everybody to stand.
[Ferguson:] Sure.
[Camerota:] I don't know that they're going to comply with that. And this is do you see this is a freedom of speech issue?
[Ferguson:] I don't see it as a freedom of speech issue. I think you have the right to do it. I think there's consequences for your actions. It's the same thing you teach children when they're young. You have the right to do a lot of things in this country. There are consequences and the NFL got it wrong. The NFL tried to come out and play both sides of this issue. And then they tried to say oh, we're America's team, we're America's game, we're America's sport while allowing their employees to disrespect this country. You have the right to do it there's consequences.
[Camerota:] Now, look
[Ferguson:] The NFL boycott is real.
[Camerota:] I just want to be very clear. They say they're not disrespecting the country. They say that their protest is about the treatment
[Ferguson:] That's what they say.
[Camerota:] But, they're the sources.
[Ferguson:] But I'm saying
[Camerota:] They're doing the protests. You ask the protesters.
[Ferguson:] I have the right to I have the right to disagree with them. I'll say this. I think many of the NFL players are frauds. Most of them did not go and vote in the last election including Colin Kaepernick who has never voted in an election while coming out and claiming
[Navarro:] Voting is not a requirement to protest.
[Ferguson:] Let me finish. Let me finish.
[Navarro:] Voting is not a requirement to voice a political opinion.
[Ferguson:] If you're going to be the leader of a political statement, as Colin Kaepernick was
[Navarro:] Donald Trump's children didn't vote and they are advisers in the White House.
[Ferguson:] and he's a and I criticized. And I criticized them for that. I'm consistent in my logic here.
[Navarro:] Well, fine. You'll criticize them for everything but don't tell me then that they don't have the right to protest when
[Ferguson:] Again, Colin Kaepernick comes out here and says I'm going to disrespect this country.
[Navarro:] there are team advisers in the White House who didn't vote.
[Ferguson:] Colin Kaepernick comes out and says I'm going to lead this group. When was the last time he went to a Black Lives Matter rally? This guy saw a bunch of T.V.s and said a bunch of cameras and said I'm going to kneel right now but I'm not going to back up. He has the right but it's almost means to a cross.
[Navarro:] How white of you to think that going to a Black Lives
[Ferguson:] No, no. Don't even go there.
[Navarro:] Black Lives Matter rally.
[Ferguson:] I'm sorry. That's absurd.
[Navarro:] No, no, no. Who are you to tell a black person what makes them black
[Ferguson:] It's not it's
[Navarro:] and what makes them, you know
[Ferguson:] No, it's fraud if you're
[Navarro:] half black credible.
[Ferguson:] I'm saying it has nothing to do with race. Listen.
[Navarro:] I mean, really
[Ferguson:] Listen. Listen to what I'm saying.
[Navarro:] Look at yourself in the mirror.
[Ferguson:] Listen, this is insanity.
[Navarro:] You know, what he is saying may be might be
[Ferguson:] If I go out for it every day and
[I -- Navarro:] Then go to one of their rallies.
[Ferguson:] and I champion a cause but I never do it in real life, I'm a fraud. Again
[Navarro:] Who are you? Who died and made you the judge of blackness to Colin what's his name, you know, whether
[Ferguson:] It has nothing to with blackness. This may be a great
[Navarro:] the fact that he voted or not allow him to have a political opinion.
[Ferguson:] If you go out three every day and you fight for something that you say is so dear and near to your heart, and then I find out in reality you were never involved in the issue outside of being on national
[Tv -- Navarro:] Well, the the potential
[Ferguson:] you're a fraud. You are a fraud and a fake.
[Navarro:] Talk to Ivanka Trump
[Ferguson:] Again, you were talking about Colin Kaepernick.
[Navarro:] who didn't vote. Talk to Trump's no, no, because you want
[Ferguson:] I said this. I said this.
[Navarro:] OK, then I want you to say right now
[Ferguson:] It's the same thing. I've been consistent.
[Navarro:] Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. are frauds because they didn't vote
[Ferguson:] They should have voted in the election.
[Navarro:] in the Republican primary.
[Ferguson:] I said that.
[Navarro:] Those are fake words.
[Ferguson:] You also voted for Hillary Clinton and you say the Republicans, so that's a little bit of fraud, isn't it?
[Navarro:] Oh, no, no. There's a lot of people that
[Ferguson:] You come out here and say you're a Republican
[Navarro:] You voted for a man
[Ferguson:] and you voted for Hillary Clinton.
[Navarro:] You voted for a man who
[Ferguson:] So you're not a Republican, by your standards.
[Navarro:] You voted for a man who was a Democrat, and then an Independent, and then when he saw an opportunity
[Ferguson:] Again
[Navarro:] he became a Republican. Really, don't go there for me
[Ferguson:] Again, you voted for Hillary Clinton.
[Navarro:] because I have been supporting Republican candidates for president probably while you were still in diapers.
[Ferguson:] Again, you didn't you voted for Hillary Clinton and you say you're a Republican. You're going on a
[Navarro:] I voted for Hillary Clinton.
[Camerota:] Maybe listen
[Navarro:] I voted for Hillary Clinton
[Cams:] Guys
[Navarro:] because I refused to vote for a racist misogynist, even though he was the Republican nominee.
[Ferguson:] And that and you have the right to do that.
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Navarro:] And it was the first time in my life that I did not support a Republican nominee because I found him absolutely disgusting.
[Ferguson:] And that's your and that's your right.
[Navarro:] And I was going to put country over party. And you are nobody to question Colin Packernick [sic] or what's his name's
[Ferguson:] Colin Kaepernick. I have to divide this. Again, it has nothing to do with violence. It has to do with
[Navarro:] blackness or my Republican pick. You are not judge and jury. You can do whatever you want for yourself.
[Ferguson:] authenticity.
[Navarro:] You cannot judge me, you cannot judge whether he is black enough.
[Ferguson:] I can judge Colin Kaepernick. It has nothing to do with his blackness. This is the weakest argument
[Navarro:] No, you're saying
[Ferguson:] Let me finish, though. This is the weakest argument.
[Navarro:] You're saying he's not black enough
[Ferguson:] I'm going to defend my point here. I'm going to no, no, no.
[Navarro:] because he didn't go to a Black Lives Matter rally.
[Ferguson:] Again, I'm going to finish my point here because it's really important.
[Navarro:] And you aren't black because you went to a Black Lives Matter rally.
[Ferguson:] Let me finish. Let me finish. Again, let me finish.
[Camerota:] Go ahead.
[Ferguson:] Colin Kaepernick coming out
[Camerota:] Yes.
[Ferguson:] and saying this is a big issue to him but he never goes out in the community is involved it doesn't even care enough about the issue
[Camerota:] Listen.
[Ferguson:] which he says everyone else should care about, to go register to vote and vote. That is hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with being black or white. It's called being a hypocrite. Colin Kaepernick is a hypocrite for not being
[Camerota:] I understand. I understand.
[Navarro:] Why don't you let the members of the community
[Ferguson:] They have.
[Navarro:] that he is representing or that he you know, I think he is talking for himself. Why don't you let those members of the community talk about it, not just say that?
[Ferguson:] I can have an opinion about them and it's
[Camerota:] And you both have had very compelling, interesting, and lively
[Ferguson:] We still have opinions.
[Camerota:] opinions, yes.
[Navarro:] Not so much.
[Camerota:] It's a one-way street. Ben Ferguson, Ana Navarro, thank you for the
[Ferguson:] Thanks.
[Camerota:] very spirited debate here Chris.
[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] Alrighty then. President Trump tweeting about Puerto Rico this morning. What he's saying about FEMA and how long that they will be on the island, next.

[Chris Cuomo, Cnn Anchor:] If you look at health care from a purely political perspective, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's in a tough spot. If he moves forward with a vote on the Graham-Cassidy bill, he may take another "l." That's tough for him because he's supposed to be able to deliver. But if he doesn't have the vote, he's basically admitting to defeat, and that then creates a problem for, how does he move forward? Now, the bigger problem is, he doesn't have enough Republicans here. So let's talk about that. Let's talk about where this goes from here. We have CNN senior political commentator and former senator, Rick Santorum. He's one of the architects of the GOP bill. And Kathleen Sebelius, a former Health and Human Services secretary who played a key role in Obamacare. Rick, start us off here. How do you see the state of play? Do you think Graham-Cassidy is dead? Where does it go from here, if so?
[Rick Santorum, Cnn Senior Political Commentator:] I think Graham- Cassidy will replace Obamacare, it's just a matter of when that's going to happen. You know, there there right now there's some challenges because of the timeframe and obviously changes that were made to the bill over the weekend that, you know, haven't really gotten out there to folks. So this compressed time frame has made it very, very difficult. I mean I think one of the disappointing things that the Senate did not stay in session through August and actually continue to work on this. I think had they, we'd be in a lot better shape right now. We'd have a lot more information out about the bill. This this is an approach that's going to work. Whether it works this week, I'm not I'm not 100 percent confident. But I am very confident that whether it's in the next reconciliation package, which is coming up here in a few weeks that they're going to do on taxes, whether health care could be added to that, or in 2019, which would be, you know, February of next year, we'll have another opportunity to do the same thing. This is this is the approach that that it makes the most sense. It is a centrist approach. It doesn't completely, you know, upend the apple cart. What it says is, for those states that want to keep Obamacare, they can. If you want to try something different, you can. And here are the resources to do it. It's a practical, common sense approach to solving the problem.
[Cuomo:] Kathleen, critics have not seen it as centrist or common sense. How do you see it and its reality going forward?
[Kathleen Sebelius, Former Health And Human Services Secretary:] Well, I think, Chris, at the end of the day, we've got to start with people. This is about people. It's not about Senate process. It's not about campaign promises. It's about millions and millions of Americans who now can rely on health care that they didn't have before, who are parents and pregnant moms and workers. So the focus has to stay on the people. This bill, I think, is a very dangerous approach because it really allows states to kind of make up their own rule book, figure out what it is that they think should be a package that would be available to people. Allow insurance companies, once again, to medically underwrite, to charge very different things based on your health condition and make it unaffordable for a lot of people with serious conditions to get insurance.
[Cuomo:] OK.
[Sebelius:] So I think it the focus has to stay on the millions of people the CBO has just said would lose coverage under this bill.
[Cuomo:] A testing point for each of you. First for you, Kathleen Sebelius. The most common criticism will be, not only did you do me wrong on the keep your doctorkeep your plan with the ACA, but my premiums have gone up. I know that's not people overall, but there's about 7 to 10 percent of that individual market
[Sebelius:] Sure.
[Cuomo:] In that individual market who say, man, I've skyrocket because you have attached me to everybody. My deductibles pop, my premiums pop. I don't like it. Let me get my own plans. My prices will go down. I worry about my family. What do you say to those people?
[Sebelius:] Well, I think they're right. Premiums continue to rise. And we can address that. I think the best way I'm a I'm actually an open market person. The best way to address it is competition. And this administration has an enormous bully pulpit to try and get insurance companies to play in markets where there is too little competition in the monopolies. They've done just the opposite. They have really actively worked to drive companies away. Refused to tell companies if they're actually going to follow the rules and pay the ongoing subsidies for lower income Americans. So the competition is the best way to keep prices low. And you see that in states across the country. Where there's active participation, heavy enrollment, an active governor and legislative involvement, there are many companies participating and rates have stayed relatively modest throughout the country. In states that that hasn't happened, driven a lot by the politics of the state, you see just the opposite, a monopoly marketplace and rates continue to rise.
[Cuomo:] Rick, respond and then I have a question to you.
[Santorum:] Yes. Well, the fact of the matter is, she talk about you talk about the individual market and how prices have spiked. Obamacare was about the individual market. Obamacare didn't reform the employer market, didn't reform Medicare, didn't reform Medicaid. It was all about the individual market and that's the part of the economy that's a part of the health care market that's imploding. So to say, well, it's just this little piece, but that's what Obamacare was designed to correct. And you and the secretary talks about competition. Obamacare is completely anti-competitive. It says you have to do all of these things. It doesn't provide any flexibility for insurance companies to be able to design programs and products that actually can be competitive. That's what we're trying to that's what we're trying to address here. Look, health insurance is not a nationally delivered project. You have regional health insurers. You have some statewide health insurers. But you don't have any national health insurance companies to speak of. What you have is every state has historically and even today, designs their own insurance market, now with the heavy hand of Obamacare saying you can only do certain things. What we're saying, let's get back to that where let let insurance market function and let the competition do work.
[Cuomo:] Right, but we left it for a reason.
[Sebelius:] Chris.
[Cuomo:] We left it for a reason. Rick, and the reason that we left it was that your standards were all over the place. People were getting closed out, especially as you get more sick and you have less money.
[Santorum:] And that's why the beautiful thing, Chris, the beautiful thing about our bill
[Cuomo:] That's why we moved away.
[Santorum:] Yes, I understand that.
[Cuomo:] The ACA was about insuring outcomes, not just pricing.
[Santorum:] I understand that, but I understand that.
[Cuomo:] And you're taking that away.
[Sebelius:] And and for the first time actually forcing companies to compete about service and price
[Santorum:] But let me let me just say let me let me respond to you, Chris. Right Right. Yes.
[Sebelius:] Not about who they could cherry-pick the market.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Santorum:] Yes.
[Sebelius:] Who could drive out the sickest people? Who could make money?
[Santorum:] But Graham-Cassidy, as you well know, Madame Secretary, Graham-Cassidy does make sure that preexisting people with preexisting conditions are covered.
[Sebelius:] Not not true. Absolutely not true.
[Santorum:] Yes. I wrote the bill, Madame Secretary.
[Sebelius:] Well
[Santorum:] I know what's in the bill, OK?
[Sebelius:] Congratulations. But it actually allows insurance companies to go back to medical underwriting.
[Santorum:] And what it says let me let me tell you let me tell you let me tell you exactly what it says. It says that every insurance company under Graham-Cassidy has to cover people with preexisting condition. Every state has to
[Sebelius:] Can they charge them a lot more?
[Santorum:] Has
[Sebelius:] Can they price them out of the market?
[Santorum:] Well, you can't you know what, the reality is that the state can get a waiver, just like, by the way, they can under Obamacare
[Sebelius:] To put people in different risk pools, that's what the bill says.
[Santorum:] Excuse me, Madame Secretary, if you'll allow me to finish. Under Obamacare there's a 13 there's a waiver process in Obamacare that allows people to get waivers. Now, no state has done it. But we you can get waivers under Obamacare. We provide
[Cuomo:] So, Rick, just to be clear, is your answer yes to that question, yes they can underwrite it the way they want, they can charge people with preexisting conditions what they want? Is the answer yes?
[Santorum:] If the if the state the state has to get a waiver, just like they do under Obamacare, but they have to get a waiver from the secretary. But, again, no state is
[Cuomo:] But right now you can't price it the way you want?
[Santorum:] Let me
[Sebelius:] Correct.
[Santorum:] Let me let me finish.
[Cuomo:] But it matters. You've got to answer the question, bud.
[Santorum:] I am answering the question, but you're not giving me the chance to answer it.
[Cuomo:] It's a yesno answer.
[Santorum:] Well, it's not a yesno answer. Under both laws, the states can get a waiver on the on the issue of pre-existing conditions. And under ours, if it says you get a waiver, then you have to show the secretary that you can you are providing affordable and accessible insurance.
[Cuomo:] Kathleen, how is it different than what now?
[Santorum:] So the answer is, yes, they will get affordable insurance.
[Sebelius:] Well, the waiver the senator, unfortunately
[Cuomo:] Affordable is not the same as it is now. Go ahead, Kathleen.
[Sebelius:] Well, and the and the senator is just wrong. The waiver that is in the current Affordable Care Act says, if a state can figure out a way to insure as many people and to keep prices adequate, can they use the federal money in various ways to provide that insurance
[Santorum:] That's exactly that's exactly what do under this bill. In fact, better.
[Sebelius:] Abut they don't. Senator, you said they could waive they could waive preexisting conditions. That's absolutely false. That is absolutely
[Santorum:] No, I they have to guaranteeing people with preexisting conditions affordable and accessible insurance.
[Sebelius:] They no. And they have to offer a package of benefits that guarantees if you are sick, you will have the medical care you need.
[Santorum:] That's right. And under
[Sebelius:] The Graham-Cassidy bill waives
[Santorum:] That's not true.
[Sebelius:] Allows states to waive the essential health benefits and allows states to put people in risk pools.
[Santorum:] That is that is true. They can put that in their plans.
[Sebelius:] That totally undermines the preexisting condition.
[Santorum:] As you know, Madam Secretary no it doesn't totally undermine it.
[Sebelius:] I was an insurance commissioner, senator. I also ran the Medicaid
[Santorum:] Well, Madam Secretary, again, I wrote the bill and this bill
[Sebelius:] I great.
[Santorum:] Runs the program through the CHIP program, which requires 70 percent actuarial value for the program.
[Sebelius:] It's just not accurate. It's not accurate.
[Santorum:] So you can't write, quote, cheap insurance.
[Cuomo:] Well, but, wait, hold on. But, Rick Rick Rick, well here's the
[Santorum:] If you say CHIP is cheap insurance, fine. People like the CHIP program.
[Cuomo:] Here but here's the main process. But saying it goes through the CHIP program is a little deceptive, right? Because while the mechanism is basically the same, the requirements aren't.
[Sebelius:] That's correct.
[Cuomo:] I don't understand why you just don't own the reality of what this bill is. We're going to take money out
[Santorum:] The requirements are that you have to have a 70 percent actuarial value of products. That's not cheap insurance.
[Cuomo:] We're going to take we're going to take money out of this bill. Lots and lots of money that we're going to use for something else. Less people will get covered, but we are OK with that in the interests of some people getting cheaper insurance.
[Santorum:] Let's let's talk about that, Chris. Let's talk about that for a minute. One of the criticisms we're getting from the right, in fact heavy criticism, is we spend too much money. If you look at what money is taken out of the system, we take out the individual mandate. The individual employer mandate. And, by the way, the employer mandate, which the secretary
[Cuomo:] The CBO says it's going to be savings of well over $200 billion over the course of this initial legislation.
[Santorum:] So, again, let me let me explain. $250 about $250 billion in tax reductions. And we say, oh, we're giving these tax all we're doing is removing the employer and employee mandate. That results in about $250 billion in less revenue coming in.
[Cuomo:] Right, money that's needed to fund these states' Medicaid.
[Santorum:] And, by the way, Madame Secretary, you delayed the employer mandate the employer mandates now, for the first time and everyone says Obamacare is working. It's not even in fully effect. The Obamacare mandate of an employer actually goes into effect next month and 90,000 businesses are going to get tax bills totaling over $5 billion. So we haven't even seen the full effect of Obamacare and its effect on the economy. All we're saying is, let's take that money out. If the states want to reinstate the mandate, they can. They can collect the money.
[Cuomo:] But it won't be enough.
[Santorum:] But the rest of the money, other than that employer mandate taken out, the rest of the money is going to be spent. So don't talk about all this cutting
[Cuomo:] All right.
[Sebelius:] Well, that that is absolutely not accurate.
[Santorum:] It absolutely is accurate.
[Sebelius:] It's the other cut in the bill, it's a huge cut in the bill is to Medicaid and the underlying Medicaid program, not just the expansion, Chris.
[Cuomo:] Right.
[Sebelius:] Not just the working adults who now states had an opportunity, and 31 states did, expand their Medicaid program.
[Cuomo:] Right. Look
[Sebelius:] So two-thirds of the state, including the senator's home state, expanded. But the bill also caps the traditional Medicaid program in a way that I can guarantee you every state budget in the country would see a hit. Costs have shifted to states.
[Cuomo:] All right. Let's leave it let's
[Santorum:] Chris, I have to address
[Cuomo:] All right, just a quick button and we'll leave it there. It's a bigger discussion in one segment. And we'll we'll do it again, but go ahead.
[Santorum:] The secretary talked about the secretary talked the secretary talked about a cap on Medicaid. The cap on Medicaid that is being put forth by in this bill is actually more generous than a cap on Medicaid that President Clinton and four every Democratic senator in 1995 proposed this exact same cap that was actually tougher. Our cap puts Medicaid on the future growth future
[Cuomo:] That was long time ago.
[Sebelius:] And it isn't it isn't in place now. It has never been in place. And we
[Cuomo:] Right, it's a
[Santorum:] But they proposed it. Democrats proposed it.
[Cuomo:] But it was a different time.
[Sebelius:] Excuse me.
[Santorum:] Democrats unanimously supported this and all of
[Cuomo:] It was as different time. There were different
[Sebelius:] There was a cap that doesn't exist right now and it would hurt every state in the
[Santorum:] Yes, but
[Cuomo:] And there's a reason it doesn't exist right now, Rick.
[Santorum:] OK, you think Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy were cruel and horrible when they put a cap they on Medicaid that's tougher than the cap we put in place.
[Cuomo:] But, Rick, it's a specious it's a specious argument. It's a specious argument. The times are different. They lost for a reason. The needs are greater. Just own the reality that you're going to take money out and that's your political priority. And less people will get covered.
[Santorum:] The needs are I mean the fact is the fact is that Medicaid that Medicaid
[Sebelius:] Seniors in nursing home, disabled children and adults, pregnant moms and kids, but that's in the Medicaid program.
[Santorum:] The Medicaid program
[Cuomo:] I know it's gone up. All right, Kathleen, Rick, listen, I hear you. I hear you both.
[Santorum:] It's exploding. It's exploding.
[Cuomo:] I hear you both. There's no question that there's a legitimate debate about how much money gets put into health care. There's no question. That's a debate to have.
[Santorum:] It's exploding and there's no cap. So that point
[Cuomo:] And that is going to be the argument you need to have that
[Santorum:] At some point we have to put some controls in the system.
[Cuomo:] That's fine.
[Santorum:] We thought we'd take a Democratic idea and actually make it nicer because Democrats froze it at a lower inflation rate than what Republicans were proposing and all of a sudden we're cruel.
[Cuomo:] It was it's not apples to apples.
[Santorum:] This is this is the
[Cuomo:] It's not apples to apples.
[Santorum:] This is a hypocrisy. It is exactly apples to apples.
[Cuomo:] It's not apples to apples. The situation was different.
[Santorum:] in fact, it's worse than apples to apples, Chris, because health care because health care costs are so much higher now than they were 20 years ago.
[Sebelius:] It didn't pass. It
[Cuomo:] And it didn't pass for a reason. All right, there's no question that costs are too high. They have to come down. There's a political debate to be had. But you don't want to you don't want to Honestly, it's not about what I want or don't want. Don't say what I want or don't want. You have to have the conversation with other lawmakers and get it done. Right now you're falling short. We'll leave this segment for today. You're always welcome back. Kathleen, Rick, thank you very much. Alisyn.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] A lot of conversation there about apples. It's making me hungry. Meanwhile, our other top story, President Trump just thanking the mayor of San Juan moments ago after she describe on NEW DAY the dire situation in Puerto Rico. Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz was emotional with us as she described the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding this morning on the island.
[Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz, San Juan, Puerto Rico:] Every time we find a person that is gasping for air and I'm not pointing a poetic picture. I am telling you, I have seen them. I have held them in my arms. I have helped move them into an ambulance. Every time we do that, of course we get a little frail and of course we get a little afraid. But we also get a lot more resolve to push on, to move on and to do whatever. Our bodies are so tired, but our souls are so full of strength.
[Camerota:] OK. So our Bill Weir is in Puerto Rico this morning to show us exactly what it looks like on the ground. Watch this.
[Bill Weir, Cnn Correspondent:] It is so hard to move around this island because Puerto Rico is a tangled mess of shattered trees and downed power lines and endless gas lines where the desperate can wait half a day under a blazing sun for a few precious gallons. In the rural highlands south of the capital, it looks like a bomb went off. Once lush green hillsides are now brown and broken by the power of Maria's wind. And it's up here where most of the 28,000 residents of Aguas Buenas had no choice but to shelter in place and pray as this camper was tossed like a toy. Diana and her family were huddled in their home across the street.
[Weir:] How are you? How is how is life? How are you surviving? I thank God I'm still alive, she tells me. I can't describe the storm. I've never seen anything like it in my life. It's hard to tell from the road, but the back of this house is built on concrete stilts driven into the hillside. So imagine the anxiety as Maria really picked up strength. Diana inside, she's caring for her invalid husband. She's worried that the back end of the house, his bedroom, is going to just slide into the ravine. So she moves the whole family into the living room. They hear the crash of this power tower go down on the neighbor's roof. Water is coming in through the shutters. She's trying to keep it up. And at one point she tells me they prepared to die together. Which is scarier, combat in Vietnam or Hurricane Maria? The hurricane is worse. Miguel survived a combat tour in Cambodia, and now Diana worries about the last file of his insulin at risk of spoiling in a powerless refrigerator. Yet with textbook hospitality, she takes the time to make us coffee. A few miles up the road, more kindness and much more misery. Here's a drone shot of this area before Maria and here it is today. This is what a category four hurricane will do to wood construction. The roof, who knows what happened to the roof. It's amazing the walls held the way they did. Trophies earned by Wilfrado's grandkids still stand in a room with no roof. He was released from prostate surgery the day the storm hit, holed up with his whole family in a local church, and all survived. But now he has little left but his faith. How would you describe peoples' desperation? Are you seeing looting? Are you seeing anger? There has been looting, the mayor of Aguas Buenas tells me. There have been robberies. And when it comes to the feelings of the people of this town, we are saddened because we're still looking for people. As an American, I wonder, how do Puerto Ricans feel about being an American territory in times like this? Do you do you think America will come save you? Do you hope they will? Yes, he tells me. President Donald Trump has approved a disaster declaration. We will move forward with the help of the United States.
[Gladys Hernandez, Survivor:] What they can give us, we'll receive with a lot of love. Thank you.
[Weir:] You're welcome. You're welcome.
[Hernandez:] Very much.
[Weir:] We're thinking of you. Bill Weir, CNN, Aguas Buenas, Puerto Rico.
[Camerota:] Well, look, needless to say, it's still helpful to have Bill Weir there, as well as our producer, Jennifer Revera, who you saw there translating in real time between she's Puerto Rican between the locals there and Bill. I mean that is he's giving us a glimpse into the desperate situation. That's just one small sample of people who are about to run out of medication.
[Cuomo:] Right. And the reason we're going to keep telling you the stories is I know that there could be a sameness to it. Like, all right, we get it, we get it. You don't get it. You couldn't live in those situation for a week. They're going to be living like that for months and months. Those are Americans there as well. And even if that doesn't move your spirit, it's going to move your pocket book because we have to have the federal government get involved there. The president's right, they do have infrastructure problems. They do have debt problems. That's only going to increase the need for help. So this is going to be a real situation that all of America is going to live with. So we need to keep it in our sights.
[Camerota:] Yes, and we're doing that. Thank goodness. And I know it is moving all of your spirits as well. So, President Trump, though, is not backing down against the NFL players taking a knee. Is he winning this culture war? What does his base think about it? We have "The Bottom Line" for you.
[Cuomo:] But first, a Georgia non-profit is helping refugee mothers and their young kids to get off to a good start in the United States. Their story in CNN's "Impact Your World."
[Unidentified Female:] These women share a common experience of being displaced from their home countries with young children. Refugee Family Literacy Program is a two-generation program providing education for refugee mothers and their young children. You could you get hurt surprising someone like that. Children come to our school and participate in an early childhood development program so that when they start school some day they'll hit the ground running. Mothers are upstairs learning English. Our students are from about 20 different countries.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm from Burma.
[Unidentified Female:] They didn't want to leave their home country. They left because they did not have any choice. That common experience transcends language. These women are able to support each other. I think a misconception is that most refugees were uneducated and impoverishes. Many refugees have strong education, strong skillsets and so much to offer us. If we think of them as uneducated just because they don't know English. Really it's our loss.

[Romans:] All right. Updating our breaking news from the west coast, tsunami watches in parts of Alaska and British Columbia after a powerful earthquake off Alaska. The USGS says a 7.9-magnitude quake hit southeast of Kodiak in the Gulf of Alaska. Now, the quake hit a depth of 15 miles. Ivan Cabrera, our meteorologist, assures us that's pretty shallow which is why there's a concern her. Tsunami watches are in effect up and down the west coast and Hawaii. We will have updates throughout the morning on
[Cnn. Briggs:] Meanwhile, tensions growing between the U.S. and Turkey. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson saying the U.S. is concerned about Ankara's offensive against the Kurds. The U.S. considers the Kurds allies in the fight against ISIS. Turkish President Recep Erdogan lashing back, accusing the U.S. of supporting a terrorist organization. CNN's Sam Kiley on the Turkey-Syria border with more. Good morning, Sam.
[Sam Kiley, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Good morning. I'm standing outside the mosque where the burial has just been completed for
[Briggs:] All right, Sam Kiley live for us. It's just about 2:00 p.m. there. Thank you, Sam. First on CNN, an ATF special agent suing the ATF and the Justice Department, alleging they retaliated against her for exposing sexual harassment. Special agent Lisa Kincaid was tasked with investigating another female agent's claims against a supervisor. Kincaid said she uncovered more disturbing allegations.
[Romans:] But, Kincaid says when she reported the claims she was retaliated against, her career advancement blocked.
[Lisa Kincaid, Special Agent, Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms And Explosives:] Throughout the whole process I was naive to think that the system was going work, and the system wasn't going to work. I want to I want to know that taking a stand wasn't for nothing.
[Romans:] The ATF will would not comment on personnel matters but said they take sexual harassment complaints very seriously.
[Briggs:] In the Philippines, ash from the exploding Mount Mayon volcano falling on evacuated towns nearby. Look at that. Red-hot lava spewing from the volcano Monday night, reaching nearly 2,300 feet while ash and smoke rose up to nearly two miles above the volcano. A level four threat has been issued, meaning a hazardous eruption is imminent.
[Romans:] All right, let's get a check on "CNN Money Stream" this morning. Global stock markets higher on a strong forecast for global growth, while Washington lifted Wall Street to record highs. The Dow jumped 143 points after the Senate reached that deal to end the shutdown. The Nasdaq climbed one percent. Earnings season rolling along here. Expect to hear today from Verizon, United, and Johnson & Johnson. It's been a strong quarter of the S&P 500 companies that have reported profits so far. Look at that. Eight and 10 come in better than expected, so making more money than they thought. Banks are some of the biggest winners of the corporate tax cut, but Bank of America has eliminated a free checking account popular with lower-income customers. They now have to maintain a daily balance of $1,500 or you pay a fee. Basic checking balances are expensive for banks. But many customers are not happy about this change. They're creating a change.org petition with more than 45,000 signatures. Bank of America tells CNN the new account is a great value and that it offers several ways to avoid the monthly fee. But for paycheck-to- paycheck customers, $1,500 is not going to do it. All right, Netflix'recent price hike is not denting the subscriber numbers. Look at this. A record eight million subscribers that's the strongest quarterly subscription gain ever. Netflix credits its original content flight, including "STRANGER THINGS," which returned for a second season during that quarter. But, Netflix took an unexpected $39 million charge for canceled content. What is that? A source tells CNN it was due to ending "HOUSE OF CARDS" and canceling the release of "GORE." Both projects starred Kevin Spacey who has been accused of sexual harassment. For years, Facebook's touted itself as a tool for connecting the world. Now, it is admitting social media allows people to spread misinformation and corrode democracy. Facebook wrote that in a blog post, part of a larger series about how social media effects democracy. Facebook has been criticized for letting trolls use its platform to meddle in elections. A lot of people say just too late to the realization
[Briggs:] Yes.
[Romans:] by many of the social media outlets.
[Briggs:] Big factor in the midterms.
[Romans:] Thanks for joining us. I'm Christine Romans.
[Briggs:] I'm Dave Briggs. Susan Collins and Mick Mulvaney on "NEW DAY." We pass the Native American talking stick to Chris and Alisyn. We'll see you tomorrow.
[Unidentified Male:] The businessman dealmaker was AWOL for the three days that this government was shut down.
[Sarah Sanders, White House Press Secretary:] What the president did clearly worked.
[Briggs:] President Trump claiming political victory, saying he's eager to negotiate an immigration deal.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Senate Majority Leader:] This immigration debate will have a level playing field.
[Unidentified Male:] I do not trust him at all.
[Sen. Angus King , Maine:] The question now is will the majority leader honor that commitment, and I think he's under a lot of pressure to do so.
[Romans:] A new report says FBI Director Wray threatened to quit over pressure from the attorney general to fire his deputy.
[Unidentified Male:] It's a hundred percent Donald Trump move. Tell me one thing that Andy McCabe has done in this investigation that's wrong. I don't get it.
[Announcer:] This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
[Alisyn Camerota, Cnn Anchor:] We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Tuesday

[Church:] Welcome back, everyone. Let's just recap our top story. The U.S. government shutdown is now on day three. Lawmakers have not been able to agree on a deal but the Senate is set to vote on Monday at noon to reopen the government.
[Howell:] In the meantime, thousands of non-essential federal employees will be furloughed. Our Pentagon correspondent Ryan Browne reports the U.S. military may also be affected.
[Ryan Browne, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] As the government shutdown continues, both sides have pointed to its effect on the military as a reason that it needs to come to an end. Now the military will be impacted in a variety of ways. U.S. troops, U.S. uniformed personnel, will continue to perform their duties both here at home and overseas. But if the shutdown continues to the next pay period, those troops, including those in combat, will not be paid. Death benefits to be paid potentially to fallen service members' families could potentially be affected as well by a shutdown. About 50 percent to 75 percent of the Department of Defense's civilian workforce will be furloughed, will not come in to work. That can affect contracting, can affect other maintenance programs, something of very big concern to the Secretary of Defense, James Mattis. Reserve training will be canceled as well. All these things having an effect not necessarily on active military operations but a lot of the support services, which is why Secretary of Defense Mattis said a shutdown would have a terrible impact on the United States military and the Department of Defense but U.S. troops around the world would continue performing their jobs. Back to you.
[Church:] Thanks so much. Joining us from Los Angeles, CNN political commentators, Democratic strategist Dave Jacobson and Republican consultant John Thomas. Thanks to both of you for joining us. Now on Sunday, we all watched Republicans and Democrats pointing the finger of blame at each other for this government shutdown instead of actually finding a solution toward essentially what is a very high level of dysfunction. So who's to blame for this shutdown? What do the polls tell us, Dave Jacobson?
[Dave Jacobson, Cnn Political Commentator:] Well, Rosemary, Politico and Morning Consult put out a poll just hours ago, in which they asked the American people, who do they blame for the government shutdown? Forty-one percent of respondents said it was Republicans. And only 36 percent of respondents said that it was Democrats. Why do Americans believe that Republicans are to blame? Because for the first time in modern history, you have one-party rule with a government shutdown. Donald Trump, the Republican,
[Jacobson:] is in the White House. Republicans control the United States Senate and the House of Representatives. This is unprecedented. And I think it underscores a true failure of leadership from the top down when it comes to Republicans. And the American people know it.
[Church:] John Thomas, do you agree? I suspect not.
[John Thomas, Cnn Political Commentator:] No, of course, not. But Dave's not wrong about the polling. And I think the first of all, it's almost margin of error stuff. But the reason you do see American public today believing that, in fact, Republicans are slightly more responsible is because most Americans don't understand that you have to get 60 votes to pass this budget bill. And the fact is there is no path to 60 without Democrat support. So in fact it is the Democrats that are truly to blame. And I think public opinion will begin to reflect that when they start to understand that 60-vote count. Here's the most amazing thing to me, Rosemary, is that the reason this is a bill that no one objects to the things in the bill, yet Democrats are voting to shut down the government over DACA, a policy that doesn't expire for weeks and that both Trump and the Republicans have said they want to fix and figure out.
[Howell:] Well, John, to your point, this question to you as well. So two Democratic sources say they expect that Monday's key vote will fall short of that 60 votes that's necessary. That's what we're hearing from two Democratic sources. So the question, John, to you. As this drags on, if it drags on, who will be most at risk to feel the ire of voters? Will it be Democrats or Republicans?
[Thomas:] I think everybody's a loser in this particular situation. I think some are worse off than others. I quite frankly think Democrats are backing themselves into a corner, specifically Democratic senators that are in states where Trump won. For instance, Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota, if she has to vote to keep this open, if she doesn't, it could jeopardize her re-elect. So I think the other thing is, Democrats are making saying the reason they didn't vote for this bill is simply because they want illegal immigrants to have legal status and that's contradictory to Republicans in Trump's America first message.
[Howell:] Dave, same question to you. Who stands the most to lose here as this continues?
[Jacobson:] Well, I think the polling that I alluded to earlier clearly is the latest evidence that shows the Republicans are already hurting more than Democrats. And that's because Democrats are advancing the agenda of the American people. Poll after poll consistently has shown the American people want a fix to DACA. CBS put out a poll the other day: 87 percent of Americans want a DACA fix, 79 percent of those are Republicans. When it comes to CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance Program that was part of the House bill that had the six-year extension but not a permanent solution in extension in terms of funding, that even has more support than the DACA fix does. So clearly the Democrats are advancing an agenda that the American people overwhelmingly support. And going back to John's point in terms of passing a deal, Republicans are the party in power. Republicans have had one year of the Trump presidency to pass a comprehensive budget. But what do the Republicans do? They jam through Congress a widely unpopular tax cut for millionaires and billionaires and Wall Street banks and corporations at a time when they could have been passing a comprehensive budget. And I think that really serves as fresh evidence of what the Republican agenda is and their priorities. It's looking out for the rich and kicking the middle class and poor people to the curb.
[Church:] John Thomas, to you now. I want to tackle the DACA problem because we heard from President Trump in that Tuesday bipartisan meeting, when he discussed this and he said, I will sign anything put in front of me. Then we suddenly see this backflip. This is the problem. And this is really at the core of the lack of trust on the part of the Democrats when it comes to making a decision on this. And they're using this as leverage to get what they need for the DREAMers. So do you agree that there is a problem here and the root of it appears to be President Trump and what he believes? Because Mitch McConnell himself has said he doesn't really know exactly what President Trump wants.
[Thomas:] Yes, but this fight really is between Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell. Like the president said, he would essentially sign what makes it to his desk. And it's not that President Trump does want to make a deal on DACA, Rosemary, but he also wants to keep the government open. The challenge with DACA, like to Dave's point, most Americans do want to keep DACA but the devil is in the details. DACA doesn't mean amnesty for the parents as well as the kids. Does it mean they can use welfare programs? What about chain migration? It is a complicated problem that we're not getting the answer to tonight. But we want to keep the government open. And people like Dave and Chuck Schumer are literally willing to throw 8 million children under the bus that rely on programs like CHIP and our military, grieving widows, like your reporter said, they're willing to play politics with those people to get a score on DACA but they can get it a week from now.
[Church:] Dave, this is the problem for the Democrats, isn't it, there is a vulnerability here because a lot of people could turn around and say, just open up the government and deal with DACA a little later, because it's not a problem for DACA right now.
[Jacobson:] I think John's right that the devil is in the details. At the end of the day, the American people are going to look at which party controls all different arms of the government. And that's the Republicans. They're in charge. They're not going to look at all the finite nuances when it comes to these votes. And let's not forget that four Republicans actually voted with the Democrats to shut down the government: Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, Mike Lee, Rand Paul. So this isn't purely a Democratic strategy. There's a number of key, high-profile Republicans, who lined up with the Democrats because they wanted a comprehensive solution. And it's clear that Democrats want to bring some sort of common sense consensus effort forward. And that's why they were able to partner with those four Republicans to come up with some sort of a plan. It's also why Senator Lindsey Graham and Dick Durbin presented a comprehensive deal to the president. It's on Republicans like Donald Trump, who shut down that deal, who are ultimately causing the shutdown.
[Howell:] Well, you know the one thing that is certain, here's where we are. The incendiary rhetoric, it seems to have been toned down a bit. There are thousands of people who are uncertain about what happens next. Do they get a paycheck? Do they go to work? That's where we are right now. And we'll have to see if these sides could come together to reach some sort of a deal. Dave Jacobson, John Thomas, thank you so much for your time.
[Jacobson:] Thank you.
[Church:] Thank you
[Howell:] Well, the U.S. government, again, shut down. And now we move into the work week after the Senate failed to reach an agreement over the weekend. What happens next? We look into it as CNN NEWSROOM continues.

[Holmes:] And welcome back to our continuing coverage of Hurricane Nate. The fast-moving category 1 storm making a second landfall near the U.S. Gulf Coast near Biloxi, Mississippi. This is the third hurricane to hit the U.S. mainland in just the last six weeks. Nate's first landfall coming at the mouth of the Mississippi River a few hours ago, it could be a long, anxious night for people along the Gulf Coast. A big concern is the storm surge from Nate. The rising water lapping at the doors of the Golden Nugget casino in Biloxi. Casinos and hotels there did close ahead of the storm. The people got out. And you can see that was probably a smart move. Let's get an update on Nate's strength and position. Let's get a view from the ground now. Ed Lavandera has been following all of this from Mobile, Alabama. Last time I saw you pop up it was pretty quiet. What's going on there now? How has it been?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the winds have intensified here, Michael, and the rain coming down, not heavily but steadily and you can get a sense of the storm surge as well and that power and the wind is pushing the water up north. What you see behind me might be rather hard to make out, we're up on the edge of Mobile Bay on this harbor. And just over this railing, that water is moving at a strong clip from south to north back over this way and that is that storm is moving north, pushing a lot of the water here back inland. And that is what that storm surge is about. It's what that storm surge is being monitored and watched very closely in communities all along the Gulf Coast here, not only in Alabama and Mississippi as well, even with the winds not as I don't even think we're close to experiencing hurricane force winds here in Mobile. But it is definitely strong enough to get that water pushing north. The rain fall is what creates the potential for flooding situation at least for roads to get covered up with water. Obviously, all of this taking place in the darkness of this evening. which is obviously of great concern for first responders. Throughout the day there's been a sense of complacency, perhaps but at least at the very minimum, a very relaxed sense of the need to prepare and take a whole lot of precautions for this storm. From a lot of people we saw across Mississippi and Alabama as well, so even though it is the overnight hours, there's always that concern that people might try to venture out, going to themselves into difficult situations. That's the kind of that first responders very nervous about, given that not many people were extremely worried about this storm and the magnitude of this storm coming ashore. That is what we're seeing here, rather steady winds over the last few minutes, definitely not as strong as the hurricanes we have seen over the last months. But definitely something that emergency responders here concerned about as this storm continues to push its way north and moving rather quickly Michael.
[Holmes:] Yes, and thousands of people without power as well. Ed, thanks so much. Appreciate that. Ed Lavandera there in Alabama. Let's bring in Michael Beyerstadt now. He is the fire chief of Gulfport, Mississippi. Thanks so much for being with us. First of all, just give us a situation report on what you have seen there.
[Michael Beyerstadt, Gulfport Fire Chief:] OK, well, we had storm surge and the wind gusts. We have reports of one gust up around 70 mile an hour. So it's not quite as bad as we feared, but our motto is to prepare for the worst and hope for the best. And at this point, it seems like in Gulfport here, for the most part, we have gotten that.
[Holmes:] Right, what have been your concerns and what remain your concerns?
[Beyerstadt:] You know, we had a structure fire that we had to go out and fight right in the height of the storm, when we were seeing some very there's a lot of 45, 40, 50 mile-an-hour gusts. That's a very dangerous situation to have wind-driven fire like that. We do have flooding here in Gulfport Highway 90, which is impassible for several areas, we're getting reports some of the other roads that are prone to flooding that are impassible at this time.
[Holmes:] When you compare it to the possibilities, I suppose if this storm had hung around in the Gulf and picked up some more activity from the warm waters, are you feeling something of a sense of relief at the moment?
[Beyerstadt:] Oh, definitely. We feel blessed that it looks like at this point it hasn't been near as bad as what it definitely could have been. So we're definitely feeling blessed this time.
[Holmes:] What's your message to people in your area who might be listening right now?
[Beyerstadt:] One, I'm very proud of them. The people that were in low-lying areas appear to have largely gotten out and people have obeyed the curfew and we haven't had to go out and rescue people who've gotten themselves in bad situations during the height of the storm too much. So very happy with them and just be careful. We are getting a lot of reports of wires down. And so electricity is a very dangerous thing for people to be delaying with as they go out and start looking around in the morning.
[Holmes:] Good advice. Michael Beyerstadt, the fire chief of Gulfport, Mississippi, thanks. Appreciate it. All right, coming up here on the program, a massive fireball in Ghana's night sky sends people running for their lives. We'll have a look at that. We'll have the latest on this for you after the break.

[Blackwell:] Hurricane Florence is still making a big mess in the Carolinas. Flood waters have triggered a dam breach at a power plant. This is Wilmington, North Carolina. It could be spilling coal ash into the Cape Fear River.
[Gallagher:] CNN correspondent Kaylee Hartung has been on this story since before the hurricane came. She's in Wilmington now with more details. Kaylee, what can you tell us about the situation there?
[Kaylee Hartung, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Dianne and Victor. Environmentalists fear that coal ash is entering the Cape Fear River. But Duke Energy who owns the natural gas plant that's home to two inactive coal basins says that's probably not the case, at least not yet. And that's the problem we are facing. At this point we don't yet understand the full extent of danger the people of Wilmington are in. So it was Thursday when the waters of the Cape Fear River first flooded into a cooling lake on this natural gas plant's property which was formerly a coal burning power plant. And then Friday we first learned of the breach of the dam, several breaches. I should say, the video we can show you now of this power plant was taken before the dam was breached. And so now the question is how long will it take for the coal ash basin to begin flooding into the cooling lake as well. Right now Duke Energy says there's no visible sign of coal ash in that cooling lake. We have seen helicopters overhead all morning long, monitoring the site. They tell us there are water samples being taken. Those will take days before they're back. But again, at this time Duke Energy says there's no visible coal ash in that cooling lake. But again, this is such an on-going situation, a fluid situation literally, if you will, and extent of damage people could be facing, especially downstream from the river, is not yet known. Coal ash is one of the largest forms of industrial waste, and its impact and harm could be tremendous.
[Blackwell:] So you're in North Carolina. Let's go to the Waccamaw River and flood waters in South Carolina. They spilled over into an ash pond at a separate power plant I understand.
[Hartung:] Right. Similar but different situations between Wilmington and Conway, South Carolina. At 9:00 a.m. this morning, we learned that flooding Waccamaw River had overtaken a dike at what was known as Grainger Generating Station site. This a Santee Cooper Power Company area. And they say there's no significant environmental impact at this time. But again, a very fluid situation. The danger of coal ash getting into a river and the ways in which humans can come in contact with it, obviously such a precursor to the impacts that people could feel. But these are two very serious situations that both states say they have their environmental agencies monitoring, whether it be overhead, visually, water sampling, drones are involved, helicopters are involved. These are very sensitive situations that are being monitored very carefully on a state and local level.
[Gallagher:] Kaylee Hartung in Wilmington, North Carolina, thank you for your dedication to this story.
[Blackwell:] Let's go to Texas where we know they love football, they love the tailgating.
[Gallagher:] And, as you said, Coy Wire. He is experiencing it all for us in Austin.
[Coy Wire, Cnn Sports Correspondent:] Here in Austin, the University of Texas, the Longhorns, taking on number 17 TCU. It's game day, baby. We have your sports coming up on CNN newsroom after the break.

[Cuomo:] So what's the political reality here? You've got the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell. Senator Mitch McConnell saying, I'm going to get a vote. I'm going to get this done. And he's got this reputation for being able to pull out things just when it seemed like it wasn't going to happen. Will it happen this time? Let's get "The Bottom Line" with CNN politics reporter and editor-at- large, Chris Cillizza. Mr. Cillizza, you have defined an emoji legend for a daily appraisal of whether or not this is going to happen. Will you, please, approximate the emoji face for today's prospect?
[Chris Cillizza, Cnn Politics Reporter And Editor-at-large:] Sure. How about this one?
[Cuomo:] Hmm. All right.
[Keilar:] I like it!
[Cuomo:] That seems less
[Cillizza:] Was that good?
[Cuomo:] It seems less than optimistic.
[Cillizza:] Yes. I'm glad Brianna liked it. It was really for her. Um, yes. Look, if you were a on the I mean listen to Lindsey Graham. If you're an on the fence Republican about this, the CBO report suggesting that 22 million more people would be uninsured under this bill than Obamacare is pretty much everything you need to vote against it. It's a a huge political problem. A huge a huge human cost here, obviously, in rural states, older states, a state like Maine and state like Alaska, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, two people Susan Collins is against, Lisa Murkowski very much on the fence. It would really have a significant impact there. This is caught between their base and a hard place, right? The Republican Party base wants elected, views this as essential, getting rid of Obamacare. Republicans live in fear of both parties live in fear of the base, Republicans more so more than ever, and so they want to figure out a way to appease that base. The problem is the cost, both real and political, that come with it. You're right, Chris, Mitch McConnell does have a reputation, unlike some of the House Republican leadership, of being able to pull a rabbit out of a hat. So I'm not going to say it won't happen, but I would say today, right now, it I'm skeptical.
[Keilar:] So, guys, guess who we're going to see today who we haven't seen in a while?
[Cuomo:] Who?
[Keilar:] Sean Spicer, right?
[Cuomo:] On camera?
[Keilar:] That's right.
[Cuomo:] Stop.
[Keilar:] So we just found out that we're going to be seeing the White House press briefing on camera, Chris Cillizza.
[Cillizza:] Yes.
[Keilar:] And also that Sean Spicer is going to have a guest with him, Energy Secretary Rick Perry. Not unusual for him to bring someone in to talk about an issue. But what does this mean to you that now, after days of not seeing this on camera, we're going to see it?
[Cillizza:] Right. So we had three straight days, work days at least, of off-camera gaggles as opposed to on-camera briefings. Mark Knoller, who works for CBS News, who keeps track of everything as it relates to the White House and has done for a very long time, eighteen workdays so far in June. There have been 15 briefings, 10 of those have been off-camera, five on-camera. Obviously, we'll have six after today. Look, I just think it's a bad thing. Not because I work for a television station, but because holding power to account means asking questions and having responses that people who are not in that briefing room can view. If you think that if you buy the Sean Spicer line, which is, well, the off-camera briefings are more substantive. I would urge you to go listen to one of the off-camera briefings because they are not more substantive than the on-camera briefings.
[Keilar:] That's right.
[Cillizza:] Neither are terribly substantive. But this is an attempt to have the briefing as we know it wither on the vine. I think that is a bad thing for democracy. It's certainly a bad thing for journalism. And I think we have to call it out and say, this is not how this process is supposed to work.
[Cuomo:] Well, one of the things he'll probably be asked about today is that Putin and Trump are battling it out in this think Pew poll.
[Cillizza:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] Is a battle of the barrel the bottom of the barrel.
[Keilar:] Race to the bottom.
[Cuomo:] So, Putin's at 27, Trump's at 22. There's all this negative feedback from 37 different countries' worth of polling. It will probably be dismissed by the White House as another poll that's wrong about the president. How do you see it?
[Cillizza:] Oh, it won't probably be dismissed, Chris, it will be. But that doesn't mean it's not important. Look, Donald Trump isn't going to spend a lot of time worrying about what France or or Canada to name two countries included in that 37 think about him. What their citizenry thinks about him. But there are real world implications here. When we, as the U.S., try to do something on the world stage, I think the way in which we are viewed, the way in which the president is viewed, the way in which the country is viewed, does matter. It either gives us good will or bad will to try and get things done. If you look in that poll, look deeper. Two things that Donald Trump has done in his first five months, more than seven in ten people in that poll reject. One is pulling out of the international trade deals. The other is pulling out of the Paris Accord. So, you know, it is he is redefining what America means to Americans, but also what America means in the world. And the world community, whether you think this matters or not, doesn't think much of it.
[Keilar:] Yes. So he would say it's maga, not mafa.
[Cuomo:] Yes, that's exactly what he would say.
[Cillizza:] Right.
[Keilar:] Right? That's what he would say. All right, Chris Cillizza, thank you so much for the insight on that. And next we have "The Good Stuff."
[Cuomo:] We need it. It feels like Wednesday.
[Keilar:] Yes.
[Cuomo:] But it isn't.
[Keilar:] It isn't.
[Cuomo:] An immutable fact.

[Sciutto:] Welcome back. This breaking, just seconds ago, moments ago, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein asked about the acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker. Have a listen.
[Question:] Can you tell us what since Mr. Whitaker has come in? What your role has been in overseeing the Mueller investigation?
[Rosenstein:] We'll have more for you on that later today. In terms of my role, as we have described previously, we have continued to manage the investigation as we have in the past. And it's being handled appropriately. Bob Mueller or Rod Rosenstein or Matt Whitaker or Bill Barr that investigation is going to be handled appropriately by the Department of Justice.
[Question:] Mr. Deputy Attorney General, since we have the benefit of you here today, would you mind weighing in on the memo that was revealed last night from the president's pick to lead the department, Bill Barr, that weighed in on the Mueller investigation, calling the obstruction inquiry fatally misconceived and also given the Barr nomination, should we expect that the ultimate report on the Mueller investigation would be deferred until he's confirmed?
[Rosenstein:] Bill Barr was an excellent attorney general during the approximately 14 months that he served in 1991 to 1993. Bill Barr will be an outstanding attorney general when he's confirmed next year. The memo that you may reference to reflects Mr. Barr's personal opinion. He shared his personal opinion with the department. Lots of people offer opinions to the Department of Justice, but they don't influence our own decision making. We have very experienced lawyers. And obviously, our decisions are informed by our knowledge of the actual facts of the case, which Mr. Barr didn't have. I didn't share any confidential information with Mr. Barr. He never requested that we provide any non-public information to him, and that memo had no impact on our investigation.
[Question:] Two very quick questions. Number one, can you give us a sense of the number of groups like this operating in China that are attempting to steal information? My second question is on the rule of law. The president of the United States tweeted a photograph with you behind bars, talked about a cooperating witness as being a rat. Can you assure the American public that this department will make sure it operates directly on the rule of law?
[Rosenstein:] The second question first. This department operates under the rule of law and as we make our decisions based on the facts and circumstances of each individual case and without regard to partisan political considerations. On the first question, I think it's important for people to understand this group is referred to as APT- 10, Advanced Persistent Threat 10. It's not the only one. And I think Director Wray can talk to you a bit about what the FBI does not only to prosecute perpetrators but to work with American businesses to try to deter and prevent these sorts of attacks.
[Christopher Wray, Fbi Director:] The one thing I would add to what the deputy attorney general just said is that in addition to these APT-10 groups, APT 1 through 9 or the APTs of the future, we have lots and lots and lots of criminal hackers working in varying ways in coordination with and on behalf of nation states. It's what we call a blended threat. Think of it as just outsourcing your criminal or espionage activity to mercenaries. China is not the only country, that we have seen do it, but people in this country and around the world need to understand that China is the most active and aggressive in this space. And so it's not just Chinese officials with epaulets on their uniforms. These are state-owned enterprises, ostensibly private companies. Hackers of all shapes and sizes, researchers, businessmen, people working for a variety of reasons, some witting, some unwitting, on behalf of the Chinese government. And it's a very serious threat that this country needs to take very seriously.
[Question:] Mr. Deputy Attorney General, what do you say to critics who argue the Justice Department is being used for political purposes at a time of heightened tension between the U.S. and China especially when you have a president
[Sciutto:] You have been watching the deputy attorney general there updating on a number of investigations, including seeming to telegraph an announcement on his role overseeing the Russia probe sometime later today. But we have new news into CNN. It's been that kind of day. This coming from our White House team, a senior White House official tells CNN that it's possible that President Trump will decide not to back down on the wall fight as a result of growing pressure from the freedom caucus and conservatives. We're joined by our David Gergen here. So it appears, we were talking about this a few moments ago, that the president is hearing it from the right and might decide to shut the government down.
[David Gergen, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] It's hard to believe. Just two days ago, he decided he did not want to shut the government down. He would accept gracefully no wall. And now, this sort of pushing the other way you know what this invites? It invites people to press him, keep pressing, maybe you'll get it. It's very uncertain policy.
[Sciutto:] Well, what's interesting here, he could lose on both I mean, he could both shut the government down and still not get the money for his wall, right?
[Gergen:] I totally agree. I think it's ultimately where it's probably going to come out. Conservative force his hand and he decides to do this, we were asking this question earlier, how does he then decide to call off the shutdown? What is he going to have to show for it? The Democrats are not going to give him the wall. That's just not there.
[Sciutto:] Dynamic will change as of January when the Democrats control one chamber.
[Gergen:] Yes, and you wonder, too, whether to not have you've got a lame duck chief of staff now. You wonder who is helping to guide this process.
[Sciutto:] Well, possible no one.
[Gergen:] Exactly.
[Sciutto:] David Gergen, thanks very much. Thanks so much for joining me today. We had a lot of news this hour, but a lot more to cover. I'm Jim Sciutto.

[Keilar:] Welcome back, I'm Brianna Keilar. We are seeing a major turn of break being developments between the U.S. and Turkey. An American pastor whose 2016 arrest in Turkey was condemned by President Trump has been freed and is expected to leave Turkey tonight. We have video coming to us. The release of pastor Andrew Brunson is coming as officials are revealing gruesome new details about what happened to a "Washington Post" columnist purportedly at the hands of the Saudi. We have much more on Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi in just a moment. Let's talk about the pastor. Brunson had been living in Turkey for 23 years when he was arrested in July of 2016, accused of trying to plot a coup. U.S. officials believed they were close to securing Brunson's release. Another source says Brunson is expected to leave Turkey at 9:00 tonight local time. Now, as the President celebrates the release of the pastor, he's under mounting pressure to respond to what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. A source says Turkish authorities have audio and visual evidence showing the father of four was killed inside the Saudi consulate after walking in the door as this video shows. This evidence described to the source was found to be, quote, shocking and disgusting. Two Republican senators are now pointing fingers at the Saudis as well.
[Sen. Bob Corker , Chairman Foreign Relations Committee:] Instincts say that there's no question the Saudi government did this, and my instincts say that they murdered him. It will hugely undermine that relationship, at least with Congress. The administration will have to pay attention to that.
[Sen. Lindsey Graham , South Carolina:] I've never been more concerned about his well being than I am right now. All the indicators point to Saudi Arabia. And if it turns out to be Saudi Arabia, as I've said before, there will be all hell to pay.
[Keilar:] Now Saudi Arabia says that it has no involvement in the disappearance of Khashoggi and today a Saudi team arrived in Turkey to investigate. The Saudi ambassador to the United Nations had little to say today. Check it out.
[Unidentified Cnn Reporter:] Ambassador, can you give us two seconds to explain on the Saudi view of Khashoggi, what happened to him? What is the view?
[Keilar:] That's really an image, Michelle Kosinski, our CNN senior diplomatic correspondent that says a lot about where the Saudis are on this. Tell us, though, where the evidence is leading. Michelle Kosinski, CNN Senior Diplomatic Correspondent: Well, we haven't seen this evidence. It's unclear if any U.S. officials have seen it or heard it. But what Turkish officials are saying is because that consulate, it's on their territory, it belongs to the Saudis, but the Turks have bugged it. So first it emerged of Khashoggi actually being murdered. There are sounds of a confrontation by Saudi officials with Khashoggi, that he's interrogated, there are sounds of him being beaten and then of him being murdered. They believe there have evidence of him being dismembered on the property of that Saudi consulate. Now today from the Turks, it is emerging that they also claim they have video of this. We don't know if the audio and video are of the same moments. But we've been asking U.S. allies, too, who are operating on the assumption that this evidence exists, but we haven't spoken to anyone who has said their government has seen. So, when the Turks are going to share this with the U.S. and its allies is not clear. It's unclear what are the Turks sharing. Now Saudi Arabia is coming there to have this joint investigation with the Turks. Well, how is that going to work? So, there's a lot to wait for in this case that is nothing but chilling and disturbing. It certainly is. Thank you so much for getting us up to date on this. We appreciate it. A business backlash is erupting against the Saudis since KHASHOGGI vanished. The list is growing of businesses and business leaders who are saying the future investment initiative, CNN is one of the media sponsors, no longer taking part in this event. Richard Branson has said he's pulling out of an economic development project in Saudi Arabia. Who are saying the future investment initiative, CNN is one of the media sponsors, no longer taking part in this event. Richard Branson has said he's pulling out of an economic development project in Saudi Arabia. Today the President's top treasury official said this
[Steve Mnuchin, U.s. Treasurer:] Well, first, let me just say we are concerned about what is the status of Mr. Khashoggi, although I haven't had direct conversations with the Saudis. I know other people within the executive branch have and those discussions are under way. I am planning on going at this point. If more information comes out and changes, we could look at that but I'm planning on going. Let's wait and see what information comes out in the next week.
[Baldwin:] I want to turn now to CNN business emerging markets John Defterios.
[John Defterios, Cnn Business Emerging Markets Editor:] AS one representative told me, it could take them years to recover. This is the crown prince, promising the world, going to challenge moderate Islam, allow women to drive, diversify the economy. I saw Secretary Mnuchin say he's going to stay engaged. He has no choice. I think in terms of the western know how that Saudi Arabia was looking for, not for oil because they're going to produce about 11 million barrels a day, about the same as the United States, but the diversification to open up entertainment centers, red sea island resorts, a high-tech city worth a half a trillion dollars, they needed the United States and German companies, for example. They're not going to have them there right now. It will be interesting to see companies like JPMorgan Chase and Blackstone, they're still on the agenda for Saudi Arabia. They have billions of dollars at stake. But will the shareholder and U.S. Congressional pressure force them to change their minds in the days ahead? That's going to be an interesting challenge.
[Baldwin:] And also, this line from Saudi Arabia where they're insisting that they have no involvement but you have reporting that the Turks is saying there is audio and video evidence, not just of him entering, not just of Jamal entering the consulate but of him entering and being confronted and tortured and killed. Will the Saudis have to pay a long-lasting price for this?
[Defterios:] This is a huge challenge. They remain in denial about the charges, despite all the evidence you've been presenting on the program this evening. These are the two side of the coin of the crown prince. He says he's going to open up this very conservative society and at the same time does very serious crackdowns. Less than a year ago, he arrested 300 Saudi businessmen and extracted $100 billion from them. It all leads to Turkey here. It hasn't been proven yet, but if that is the case as you're suggesting here, it's going to take years for Saudi Arabia to recover. And President Trump is trying to protect what he's earned over the last year in his view, $300 billion worth of contracts, a third of those in the military context. The U.S. Congress is going to put a lot of pressure to dampen down defense expectations, who are already complaining this evening they're at risk of losing those contracts and having competition, for example, from Russia and China.
[Keilar:] Thank you. Some in Florida are returning to their home for the first time from the storm, and some are realizing there is absolutely nothing left. We will take you there live. Plus, we'll take you to the largest hospital in Panama City that could not evacuate people from Panama City. See what they're doing now with the patients.

[Howell:] Polls have finally opened in the Afghan parliament election but not everyone is getting to cast a ballot. Thousands are unable to vote because some polling stations haven't opened and others simply don't have supplies. Some voters have given up and gone home.
[Allen:] The election was delayed for three years because of security concerns and voters in Kandahar province have to wait another week because this man you are seeing, this powerful police chief, was shot and killed Thursday. The Taliban claimed responsibility. Let's talk about these issues with Ali Lassabi from the Afghan capital, Kabul. Thanks so much for joining us. First, they have the threat of the Taliban intimidating and threatening people that would vote and now there seems to be some serious technical issues. That has to be a disappointment. What can you tell us?
[Ali Lassabi , Journalist:] So that is really the issue right now is the logistical issues. There have been definite security issues, for instance, in the northern province of Kunduz. There have been reports of rocket attacks, reports of one polling center being ransacked by the Taliban in Kabul and there are rocket attacks. But the real issue right now are these logistical matters, where people are showing up to voting centers and election commission workers aren't there, election team observers aren't there. The biometric machines aren't working. And they are essentially turned away. We're also seeing a major problem for the Kochi population, the nomad population of the country, that live across the different provinces of the country, who are being told that
[Lassabi:] their ballot boxes are not yet set up because they are given specific ballots based on their IDs that list specifically their candidates because their candidates can run all over the country, they are not just running for a single province. So it is proving to be a major issue for people.
[Allen:] And let's talk about that, the fact that this election was postponed for three years with security issues. We've had more women voting excuse me, running for office than ever before in Afghanistan. So many young people that we have interviewed said they want to go and vote, they want changes for their country. What is being stymied here, what is being prevented because of these unfortunate issues today?
[Lassabi:] This is exactly what is being prevented, the change. I went to go vote today but I was probably one of the lucky ones. And I've been talking to at least five or six young candidates throughout this campaign process. And what they are all saying is that the current parliament is a mafia network, it is corrupt, it is fraudulent. They are out for their own money and their own interests and they aren't really listening to the people. And that is the changes that they were hoping to bring. So this is what is being stymied, is the chance for people to feel like they have two representatives in their parliament.
[Allen:] It has to be such a disappointment. We'll continue to follow it and see if things turn around. Ali Lassabi, thank you so much, we appreciate it.
[Howell:] Now to allegations of Russian interference in the U.S. political system. The Justice Department has charged a Russian woman with trying to influence voters in the upcoming midterm elections.
[Allen:] This has been a fear, that there would still be some intrusion. Investigators say she was part of an online propaganda effort aimed at inflaming public opinion and sowing discord. CNN's Sara Murray has more about it.
[Sara Murray, Cnn National Political Correspondent:] Tonight the Justice Department charging a Russian woman with conspiracy for trying to manipulate voters in the 2018 midterms. As it cracks down on election meddling beyond special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Elena Kushanova of St. Petersburg, Russia, allegedly managed the financing for social media troll agency that sent out these ads and memes to fan division between racial minority groups, political radicals and disaffected voters. Soon after the Justice Department announced the charge against her, the office of the Director of National Intelligence, Department of Justice, FBI and Department of Homeland Security warned the American public of continuing efforts from countries like Russia to divide America along political lines. The coordinated show of strength against election interference coming just weeks before the November midterms. The agencies called out Russia, China and Iran for ongoing efforts to manipulate voters in the 2018 and 2020 U.S. elections and warned Americans that foreign actors use social media to amplify divisive issues, spread disinformation and sponsor content through English language media, including RTE and Sputnik. There is no evidence the interference efforts have impacted voting infrastructure to prevent voting, change vote counts or disrupt our ability to tally votes in the midterm elections, according to the joint statement. And when President Donald Trump was asked about this Russian hacking, he simply said that it had nothing to do with his campaign Sara Murray, CNN, Washington.
[Allen:] The U.S. midterm election is just 2.5 weeks away now. You can tune into see a major event leading up to the vote, the Florida governor's debate. It will be moderated by our own Jake Tapper. That is Sunday night in the United States, Monday morning in Asia and Europe.
[Howell:] And in the United States a lot of people played the lottery. And someone in the U.S. may be the lucky person to win $1 billion. It is a lot of money for sure. The Mega Millions lottery drew its winning numbers just a short time ago.
[Allen:] And we're waiting it see if there is a winner or winners for the second largest payout in U.S. history. But here is the buzz kill. A significant chunk of the winnings will go straight to federal taxes, which would seem to be affordable if you'd won $1 billion. You'll be all right, whoever won, if there is. Back to our reality, it took nearly $2 billion to get a mission to Mercury off the ground. You're probably thinking Mercury? What do we need to know about the planet?
[Howell:] That it is hot?
[Allen:] We'll have that story next.

[Kate Bolduan, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone. I'm Kate Bolduan. President Trump is getting set to face reporters once again today. This after his impromptu press conference yesterday left more questions than answers. The questions today, why did his nominee for drug czar who Trump calls a great guy, why did he just drop out and what does that mean for the ongoing opioid crisis crippling parts of the country and what does the president's newfound friendship also with the top Republican Mitch McConnell mean for the brewing tax battle on Capitol Hill? And another question, new questions about the attack on U.S. troops in Niger that left four service members dead. Why did the president claim his predecessors didn't call families of fallen U.S. soldiers and why is this a time to compare and contrast? Let's get to it. First to the White House, Congressman Tom Marino dropping just out a week before the president is set to declare the opioid crisis a national emergency and also just two days after a scathing report that Marino championed a bill that hampered DEA efforts to fight that very crisis. Joe Johns with the White House has this for us. Joe, what is the president saying about this?
[Joe Johns, Cnn Senior Washington Correspondent:] Well, you know, Kate, Tom Marino of Pennsylvania, was one of the first people to get behind the president in the campaign and when the time came for the White House to pick director of drug policy control, Marino was it. Now, he's out. The nomination has been withdrawn. The president talked about that this morning on the radio. Listen.
[Donald Trump, President Of The United States Of America:] There was a couple of articles having to do with him and drug companies and I will tell you, he felt compelled, he feels very strong about the opioid problem and the drug problem, which is a worldwide problem, but it's a problem that we have, and Tom Marino said look I'll take a pass, I have no choice, I really will take a pass, I want to do it.
[Johns:] So, the story that did all this was a "Washington Post""60 Minutes" report citing, among other things, the fact that Tom Marino in his role as a congressman from Pennsylvania, had been the key supporter, if you will, of a bill that essentially undermined the ability of the DEA to get rid of or at least control shipments of opioids. A big problem for him and a big problem for this administration. He's out now. Back to you, Kate.
[Bolduan:] All right. Joe, absolutely. Now we've got to look for another nominee. Thank you so much. Now to the next battle on Capitol hill, your taxes and does this newfound romance between the president and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell guarantee a much needed legislative win in this very big area. CNN's Sunlen Serfaty is following the very latest on this from the Hill. So, Sunlen, they stood side by side in the Rose Garden yesterday. Everything now kumbaya, rainbows and unicorns with regard to their tax reform dream?
[Sunlen Serfaty, Cnn Correspondent:] Not yet. They still have a long way to go, Kate, but I tell you what this week they will face a critical first big test to see what direction all this is going to go. Senate Republicans, they need to pass a budget. That's important for the larger issue of tax reform because if the budget passes, that paves the way for them to pass tax reform with only Republican support. Now there are still a few Republicans right now who are undecided on the budget. Many say they have concerns like Senator John McCain, who just echoed that moments ago, Senator Rand Paul, they say they're worried about this budget and want more answers before they potentially vote on it as early as Thursday of this week. But Republican leaders here in Congress are confident that they can cobble together the votes they need to pass a budget and that's certainly something President Trump echoed moments ago in this radio interview.
[President Trump:] Now we are there and, you know, I think rand will be there and let's see what happens, but we have the votes coming up starting on Thursday. Budget is phase one and the vote is phase two and if the Republicans don't do it, it's it would be disgraceful to them.
[Serfaty:] And looking forward even beyond the budget this week that move for them to have to write the legislation, get all of the T's crossed and I's dotted here in Congress, Kate, and we know that there's a lot of interparty battling going on, on what the specifics of that policy on tax reform actually will look like. So, huge obstacles ahead Kate.
[Bolduan:] Huge obstacles. Sunlen, great to see you. Thanks so much. Now the deadly attack on U.S. service members in Niger, the president is facing backlash this morning after when he was asked about this attack, his comments about how and when he makes contact with families of the fallen in comparison to his predecessors. Not to be lost here, though, there are also many more questions circling about what exactly happened in that operation that left four service members dead. For that, let's get to CNN's Barbara Starr at the Pentagon with much more. Barbara, what are you learning this morning?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Good morning, Kate. So many questions especially for the families of the fallen. The U.S. military has now opened a full review, two weeks later, still looking at this, trying to figure out exactly what did happen. This review will look at the timeline hour by hour, how it unfolded, what everybody did, what everybody knew. What was the intelligence that these military members led by Green Berets, the 12-man team, had going into a village in Niger where they were only supposed to meet with locals, and then depart? There was no indication of combat. Why didn't they have the intelligence that they were walking into an ambush of 50 ISIS fighters? When the ambush broke out, there was confusion on the ground. They had to wait 30 minutes for overhead support from French aircraft. And one of the major issues is what happened to Sergeant La David Johnson, 25 years old. He was one of the soldiers killed there. We have his picture. I know we put it up a minute ago. Let's show it again, his body was not recovered for 48 hours. It was out there in the brush, if you will. They do not know how he became separated. They don't know how they didn't find him right away and bring him back with everyone else Kate.
[Bolduan:] Key questions. Barbara, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Joining me now to discuss this and much more, Republican Senator Mike Brown of South Dakota. Senator, thank you so much for coming in.
[Sen. Mike Brown , South Dakota:] You bet.
[Bolduan:] A lot happening this morning, let's try to get to some of it at least. The president's drug czar nominee this morning, Congressman Tom Marino, withdrawn his name from consideration as we've been reporting. This came after just after this huge report by CBS and "Washington Post" over the weekend. What's your reaction to this?
[Brown:] Well, first of all the president had made a nomination, nomination has been withdrawn, I think the fact that he's actually directly in touch with legislative leaders who have discussed it with him, is a step in the right direction. The president has made some very good nominations in the past. The Senate's role on this is to advise and consent. Sometimes not to consent, simply to advise. I think that's what's happened in this particular case.
[Bolduan:] What should happen to this law that's at the center of all of this? Do you think it should be repealed?
[Brown:] Well, first of all, you go back in and see what the other items were that were within the law and whether or not there was an attempt made to begin with to modify it or was it simply one of the things that looked good to everybody, and it was passed by unanimous consent, meaning people assumed that everybody else had looked at it.
[Bolduan:] That's what happened here. I mean, everyone I've heard talking, Senator, says it went through committee, DEA pulled back any objections they had, DOJ didn't have any objections, it passed by U.C., we all moved on.
[Brown:] Yes. There is no such thing as a perfect law and when you find them, when you have identified a problem some place, you go back and fix them. You don't hide from them. You simply walk back in and look at it and say where did we make a mistake, what else is in it that should be corrected and then you move forward.
[Bolduan:] So, you're on board with changing this law repealing it as some Democrats are pushing a bill right now?
[Brown:] I think what you do is you take a look at it and you will allow it to go through committee process, you get the testimony on it, then you make a decision based upon what you learned. But you don't simply walk on in and say, gee, we have a news report here that something is wrong on it and we will totally stop in the middle. You do it through a regular process and that's the way it should be with the vast majority of the laws we've got here. There is no such thing up here as a law which is perfect and if we made a mistake, we go back in and we fix it. Same thing we should be doing in health care, same thing we should be doing in tax reform.
[Bolduan:] Yes. This one seems more flawed than your average bill, though, if we if as we are now learning, you're on board for reviewing it. You, of course, served on a Senate Armed Services Committee, you just heard Barbara Starr's reporting on the very latest on the Niger ambush that left four American service members dead. The Pentagon is investigating doing a full review, should Congress be investigating?
[Brown:] I think Congress will have a report. Any time you have the loss of life, any time you're involved in an incident in which we lose young men, lose young women, Congress has an interest in seeing what happened, why, where, were they in the right place, something we should have done differently? Was there something that has to be addressed within the system itself? But you know, we still have to go back down to one thing which is very important that is to express to those families who have now lost a loved one and our thoughts, our prayers, our support, take care of those individuals first, get the data, come back in, make changes. There is any time you have a war, any time you are in a war zone, any time you have young men and women at risk, you have the possibility of loss of life. You don't want to see it. You want to avoid it. If we can learn from this, then we should be doing that.
[Bolduan:] Senator, of course, four Americans were also killed in the Benghazi attack back in 2012 and that we well know led to a massive year's long investigations by Congress. Seven Congressional investigations, in fact. Is this not worthy of one as well?
[Brown:] It's not to say it's not worthy. It's simply a matter of, in the last one, in the Benghazi incident you had a case of where there was clear testimony, information coming out, saying there were hours and hours of activity going on. We don't have the facts on this yet. If similar facts were to be determined in this particular case, you may very well see the same type of a demand for a review. But in any case, any time, regardless of when these types of losses occur, you want to get to the bottom of it. You want to do a reasonable plan to make sure it doesn't happen again and find out what happened in this particular case, but you do it in a reasonable fashion in which you try to learn from the incident. Find out what happened. Once again, you never take any loss of life as anything other than the most serious of nature and once again, you offer complete condolences. I share with you, look, I was governor of South Dakota for eight years. We lost I went to 31 funerals for young men and women who lost lives overseas. You don't forget them. Every leader feels that. And when you go in, you can't take away the pain that families feel. You can offer your support, your prayers, you bring a community together, and you try to begin a healing process. Sometimes that takes a long, long time. But, I think that's one thing that element, that human element, is something none of us should ever forget.
[Bolduan:] Absolutely not. And with that in mind, what did you think when President Trump said yesterday that past presidents, including President Obama, didn't make contact as you're just discussing with families of fallen soldiers, what did you make of his remark?
[Brown:] I listened to his remarks and I can tell you that that's not quite what he said, not what I heard. What I heard him say, he may or may not have made them and then he may or may not have made personal contact, may have done them by letters and so forth. I can tell you that I believe that every single president, feels these, just as every governor feels the loss in their home state. I think regardless of whether you're a Republican or Democrat, if you're the president of the United States, you feel that loss. And I think President Trump felt that loss and sometimes leaders have a challenge that they're not exactly sure they're human. They're not exactly sure what they should do. They want to play a part. They want to be in that role. But they also want to they also know that sometimes they got to learn how to do it as well. None of us come built in knowing how to respond in times of need. We have to learn from it and get better with time. I fault neither Republican nor Democrat leaders. I don't wish that upon any leader. Once again this is a case of where our entire country feels the hurt but they want that leader to step forward and to express on their behalf and sometimes as leaders we're not sure that we do the greatest job in the world. That makes it more difficult to step in and do it, but we want to do that job for the American people and for those families. And that's a challenge sometimes.
[Bolduan:] Yes. Really quickly, on health care, an impossible turn out after the important conversation we've had but also an important issue that you're very much involved with on the Hill. The president yesterday, he said on the health insurance subsidies that he canceled, he said he called it a gift to the insurance companies. He's called it a payoff. He says, it's a disgrace. Do you see those subsidies as a payoff?
[Brown:] I think it was not the intent to begin with. But I think the president first of all he made the right choice to deliver it back to Congress and say, if you want these to continue, then do them legally because we didn't have the legal authorization, the courts have already indicated that to the president. It's in our court, that's where it should be.
[Bolduan:] But I feel like that's not exactly what he said. He said I canceled them because they're disgrace. That doesn't mean I like them at all. He calls them a gift to the insurance company. Why is he then asking you guys to fund that gift and payoff to the bad guy here which he thinks is the insurance company?
[Brown:] We've actually proposed and what we've been working on for several months is legislation that would prohibit what the president referred to as double dipping. One in which they may well receive the payments, but the benefit doesn't go back to the people who it's supposed to help. So, within the language that we're talking about right now, we are proposing that these resources go back to individuals that need them. Individuals under 250 percent of poverty. But in exchange for that, that we actually make the first major changes in the Affordable Care Act allowing under Section 1332 additional opportunities for the state to actually reduce premiums for their people. And there's a number of different tools that are out there. They've just been made very difficult in the past. We're trying to ease up on them and allow more flexibility for those states. I think we're getting there. And we've got legislation that is being finetuned right now by Patty Murray and Lamar Alexander.
[Bolduan:] That's the important part I want to
[Brown:] So, it's moving in the right direction, yes.
[Bolduan:] That's where I want to leave this because you are a Republican member of a bipartisan group who are working very hard to try to find a solution here and that should not be lost in this conversation. Senator, thank you so much for coming in. I really appreciate it.
[Brown:] You bet. Thank you.
[Bolduan:] We are following some breaking news we need to get to, though, right now. Breaking news on Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Index has just hit an all-time record high, passing the 23,000-mark for the first time just a short time ago. I want to get over to CNN's business correspondent, Maggie Lake. She is at the New York Stock Exchange with much more on this. Maggie, another all-time high?
[Maggie Lake, Cnn Business Correspondent:] That's right. Another one for the history books. You know what's amazing there was barely a peep down here. We are getting used to this. The market up 4,600 points since the election, 25 percent. We've gone right through 20,000, 21,000, 22,000. Just another day at work. Good earnings from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the catalyst today, but this has been a really broad based, very strong bull run. Underpinned by those good corporate profits and an improving global economy. So, a very good news if you're in the stock market. Not every American is, but if you are it's certainly helping your retirement.
[Bolduan:] All right. Important to mark this another historic day. Maggie, thank you so much. Coming up for us, the pushback growing against the president over the federal response to the hurricane ravaged Puerto Rico. I'm going to talk to a senator who just returned from the island and says more people are going to die if more is not done and done fast. Plus, this, it could be one of the biggest blows to ISIS yet. U.S. backed forces in Syria say they've liberated the de facto ISIS capital of Raqqah. We will take you live to the Syrian border.